National Security Alert - Sensitive Information

[Kieran]

you have much to learn grasshopper. lol.









it has also been proven that evidence of nano thermite was found in the dust from the WTC.

You have a number of quotes. They dont confirm anything. One, they got phone calls of threats from who ' "the terrorists? the goverment? One security individual says that dogs were removed on the 6th why? maybe because there was notting to find. It just a source, i like to see the man on video. People write stuff all the time that is out of context.

Who took over the security? The contract ended. Ok, but is does'nt say the staff were removed. So that suggests everything was the same. I dont get your logic here.

Next you suggestion.. that during this power down condition. If i am thinking what your trying to say. Maybe, this is when they planted the explosives. When the camera were are out of action. Ok you are going on a quote from someone who said this happened. I not sure if it did. But, were is your evidence that Explosives were planted. What you siad means notting.

your last quote means notting to the case for a conspiracy.

Nano thermite have to look that up seen if there is a plausible explanation for why that is there.

 

[pixelsmith]

i am very busy this weekend so i will do what i can. it took me 8 years to uncover a lot of this stuff. i do not expect anyone to believe a single word i say. here is a great place to start with your own research. AE911Truth

 

[Kieran]

i am very busy this weekend so i will do what i can. it took me 8 years to uncover a lot of this stuff. i do not expect anyone to believe a single word i say. here is a great place to start with your own research. AE911Truth

You could be right and i could be wrong. You could be wrong and i am right. You have right to your opinion. I just dont see anything yet that is out there that has made me change my opinion. If someone finds evidence, in the future of something i will hold my hand up and say i was wrong. I Men enough to admit i was wrong if your case was proven to be the correct one.

 

[pixelsmith]

You could be right and i could be wrong. You could be wrong and i am right. You have right to your opinion. I just dont see anything yet that is out there that has made me change my opinion. If someone finds evidence, in the future of something i will hold my hand up and say i was wrong. I Men enough to admit i was wrong if your case was proven to be the correct one.

at one time i was in the same place as you, i bought the official story. a close friend and i got into an argument about 9/11. then i decided if he was so insistent i better look a little closer. after only about a year of looking into it i was shocked at what i had found. when you look at events leading up to, during and after the event, it becomes clear, the official stories, no matter how many times they change them, are doubtful and actually impossible.

 

[skunkape]

Here's a good list of study material.

Reality Sandwich | Comprehensive 9/11 Resource and Research List
<input id="gwProxy" type="hidden"><!--Session data--><input onclick="jsCall();" id="jsProxy" type="hidden">

 

[Darkly Brooding]

You could be right and i could be wrong. You could be wrong and i am right. You have right to your opinion. I just dont see anything yet that is out there that has made me change my opinion. If someone finds evidence, in the future of something i will hold my hand up and say i was wrong. I Men enough to admit i was wrong if your case was proven to be the correct one.

Ayeyeye,..Yeyeyeye,..
I like you Irish, but man, where did this come from,...?

Perhaps you just aren't interested in knowing the truth, but if that's the case I would think that would preclude you from commenting on a very heavily investigated topic, when you yourself admit to not having examined the event closely. Much digging has been done over eight years, by many qualified individuals(architects and engineers), against the grain of the official truth sandwich being stuffed into the public's mouths.

When I saw the WTC collapse that day, my initial reaction was very clear,...demolition. Nothing else, and I mean nothing, could have taken down all three buildings in the manner in which all three buildings fell.
The fact that planes flew into them was immaterial. Who flew the planes, also immaterial.

To understand why, all one has to do is look at the motivations of those responsible, and I think it's these motivations that can most clearly open the minds of most people who are still closed to the subject.

They wanted the buildings demolished. Simple fact. Cleanly and with as little residual damage to the rest of Manhattan. They tried for years to get permits to do so, but were denied over & over. The cost would have been $2 billion(excluding incidental lost income from most of Manhattan) just to refit the buildings and bring them up to code. WTC 1&2 were both bleeding money from lack of renters and age. Building 7 contained a vast CIA database,...The area hit in the Pentagon was the accounting office responsible for the days earlier, admitted $2.3B (pennies these days-but enormously significant before last year) in 'lost' government finances.

They wanted a war. The defense budget had been shrinking for a decade, and 1/3 of the US economy was tied to defense contracting.

They needed a clearer antagonist with which to fight an endless battle against. The Bin Laden family are close personal friends to the Bush family, and now one of them is an idealized, dauntless religious icon for an entire region and population who has known nothing but war and death for generations at the hands of the western world.

Look at the tally of death from 9/11 and compare it to the verified tally of US troops alone, since 9/11. This says nothing of the countless Iraqi civilian toll(+600,000). Clearly loss of life means little more to them than the cost of doing business.

There are numerous smoking guns and inconsistencies to the official story, and National Security Alert points to one very good one.
How could the damage to the pentagon, and the light posts allegedly struck, be angled away from the witnessed flight path(contrary to the official findings) of the plane that allegedly hit the building?

If even one of the events of that day could be proven inconsistent with the officially researched reports, I think that brings into question all the officially researched reports.

Not saying the truth would be admitted, any more than the truth of why or who killed Kennedy has or ever would be admitted, but sometimes knowing the government has lied is enough for some people to start making a path away from the wrong turns they've made in the past, and start heading towards to a better future.

",...the bigger the lie, the more it is accepted by the uninformed public."

 

[Kieran]

Ayeyeye,..Yeyeyeye,..
I like you Irish, but man, where did this come from,...?

Perhaps you just aren't interested in knowing the truth, but if that's the case I would think that would preclude you from commenting on a very heavily investigated topic, when you yourself admit to not having examined the event closely. Much digging has been done over eight years, by many qualified individuals(architects and engineers), against the grain of the official truth sandwich being stuffed into the public's mouths.

When I saw the WTC collapse that day, my initial reaction was very clear,...demolition. Nothing else, and I mean nothing, could have taken down all three buildings in the manner in which all three buildings fell.
The fact that planes flew into them was immaterial. Who flew the planes, also immaterial.

To understand why, all one has to do is look at the motivations of those responsible, and I think it's these motivations that can most clearly open the minds of most people who are still closed to the subject.

They wanted the buildings demolished. Simple fact. Cleanly and with as little residual damage to the rest of Manhattan. They tried for years to get permits to do so, but were denied over & over. The cost would have been $2 billion(excluding incidental lost income from most of Manhattan) just to refit the buildings and bring them up to code. WTC 1&2 were both bleeding money from lack of renters and age. Building 7 contained a vast CIA database,...The area hit in the Pentagon was the accounting office responsible for the days earlier, admitted $2.3B (pennies these days-but enormously significant before last year) in 'lost' government finances.

They wanted a war. The defense budget had been shrinking for a decade, and 1/3 of the US economy was tied to defense contracting.

They needed a clearer antagonist with which to fight an endless battle against. The Bin Laden family are close personal friends to the Bush family, and now one of them is an idealized, dauntless religious icon for an entire region and population who has known nothing but war and death for generations at the hands of the western world.

Look at the tally of death from 9/11 and compare it to the verified tally of US troops alone, since 9/11. This says nothing of the countless Iraqi civilian toll(+600,000). Clearly loss of life means little more to them than the cost of doing business.

There are numerous smoking guns and inconsistencies to the official story, and National Security Alert points to one very good one.
How could the damage to the pentagon, and the light posts allegedly struck, be angled away from the witnessed flight path(contrary to the official findings) of the plane that allegedly hit the building?

If even one of the events of that day could be proven inconsistent with the officially researched reports, I think that brings into question all the officially researched reports.

Not saying the truth would be admitted, any more than the truth of why or who killed Kennedy has or ever would be admitted, but sometimes knowing the government has lied is enough for some people to start making a path away from the wrong turns they've made in the past, and start heading towards to a better future.

",...the bigger the lie, the more it is accepted by the uninformed public."

There was plenty of people on that day, who saw the plane that hit the Pentagon. Are they makeing it up?. Evidence exists for four planes. Are you saying that the third plane was someones imagination. Were is your evidence for something else happening to the plane? I Watched the archives of American tv of the day. Plenty of people, described seeing a commercial Airliner flying towards the pentagon.No missile or anything else other than a plane was seen.

Twin towers were hit my planes. You cant just dismiss what everyone saw. Withount the planes hitting the towers, your argument is pointless. I just dont see the evidence for a demolition job. There is no evidence of how this was done and why. Everything is just speculation on your point.Planes dont fly into skyscrapers every day. This was an unique event.Look, i open to be wrong. I go on evidence and your not showing me much evidence.

 

[Darkly Brooding]

There was plenty of people on that day, who saw the plane that hit the Pentagon. Are they makeing it up?. Evidence exists for four planes. Are you saying that the third plane was someones imagination. Were is your evidence for something else happening to the plane? I Watched the archives of American tv of the day. Plenty of people, described seeing a commercial Airliner flying towards the pentagon.No missile or anything else other than a plane was seen.

Twin towers were hit my planes. You cant just dismiss what everyone saw. Withount the planes hitting the towers, your argument is pointless. I just dont see the evidence for a demolition job. There is no evidence of how this was done and why. Everything is just speculation on your point.Planes don't fly into skyscrapers every day. This was an unique event.Look, i open to be wrong. I go on evidence and your not showing me much evidence.

Perhaps it would be better just to agree to disagree in this matter, as you seem hell-bent on ignoring the plea to research even a tid-bit of the vast amount of information available in the numerous links other people have provided here, before commenting further,...

I don't contend that two aircraft didn't hit WTC 1&2,...I watched the second myself live,...
I'm saying those building were constructed to withstand that sort of collision, and at no time was the heat in the building sufficient to melt steel the way the official report suggests.

I don't contend that there aren't people willing to testify that they saw an aircraft hit the pentagon.
I will say there are NONE who have come forward to claim this. Isn't that in itself odd? Not even the man in the heliport tower on the frickin' building actually saw anything actually hit the building,...

I didn't address the subject of what happened to flight 77 and it's passengers, and again, feel the point is immaterial to the argument.
The damage done to the building, and flight trajectory outlined in the official report, is in direct contrast to the trajectory of the eye-witnesses who saw flight 77 approach the building(including 2 cops and the heliport tower operator),...again, impossible to understand.

How did all three buildings in Manhattan fall directly in their own footprints at free-fall velocity, something that has never happened before in the history of burning steel structures, yet happened not once, but three times in the same event? It's impossible without incendiaries involved to remove all friction. That in itself is evidence of demolition.

Why was there nano-thermite(you know the kind found from nano-thermite gel) found in all of the dust in a 4km radius of WTC 1&2?

Why was all CCTV and personal video in the vicinity of the pentagon confiscated never to be returned to the owners even with FOI requests for the return of said video? That's a hell of alot of work to secure something they want people to see to enforce the tragedy of the event,...unless that's not what that video footage shows.

Why was all the steel from WTC 1&2 sold off & shipped to china within a week of the event without having it studied for the official reports?
Further, why was the CEO of the company who made the steel fired for daring to point out that the steel used wouldn't have melted the way the official report says? He was after all doing so to protect the integrity of the industry who fired him,...

I don't contend there is any evidence of the largest black-ops ever committed by any country in history, or that anyone has accumulated all the evidence to explain the execution and modus operendi involved. But there are many, far more qualified than I, that have been doing just that for the last five years, and the information available is enough to choke a cow (or even an Irish truth seeker,..).
Furthermore, the resultant 8 year war and boost to the US economy from said war, and expansion of the national security sector alone, has already justified any and all costs involved in performing such an outrageous operation, were one to exist.

There are many more contradictions to the official reports provided than evidence provided by those reports.

And most importantly, there was overwhelming amounts of motivation involved to have the events of that day happen exactly as they did, regardless of who was involved.

If you can provide any answers to any of these questions, it would be great to hear, but if your argument is, there is no evidence to contradict the official reports, you're sadly mistaken young grasshopper.

 

[Kieran]

Perhaps it would be better just to agree to disagree in this matter, as you seem hell-bent on ignoring the plea to research even a tid-bit of the vast amount of information available in the numerous links other people have provided here, before commenting further,...

I don't contend that two aircraft didn't hit WTC 1&2,...I watched the second myself live,...
I'm saying those building were constructed to withstand that sort of collision, and at no time was the heat in the building sufficient to melt steel the way the official report suggests.

I don't contend that there aren't people willing to testify that they saw an aircraft hit the pentagon.
I will say there are NONE who have come forward to claim this. Isn't that in itself odd? Not even the man in the heliport tower on the frickin' building actually saw anything actually hit the building,...

I didn't address the subject of what happened to flight 77 and it's passengers, and again, feel the point is immaterial to the argument.
The damage done to the building, and flight trajectory outlined in the official report, is in direct contrast to the trajectory of the eye-witnesses who saw flight 77 approach the building(including 2 cops and the heliport tower operator),...again, impossible to understand.

How did all three buildings in Manhattan fall directly in their own footprints at free-fall velocity, something that has never happened before in the history of burning steel structures, yet happened not once, but three times in the same event? It's impossible without incendiaries involved to remove all friction. That in itself is evidence of demolition.

Why was there nano-thermite(you know the kind found from nano-thermite gel) found in all of the dust in a 4km radius of WTC 1&2?

Why was all CCTV and personal video in the vicinity of the pentagon confiscated never to be returned to the owners even with FOI requests for the return of said video? That's a hell of alot of work to secure something they want people to see to enforce the tragedy of the event,...unless that's not what that video footage shows.

Why was all the steel from WTC 1&2 sold off & shipped to china within a week of the event without having it studied for the official reports?
Further, why was the CEO of the company who made the steel fired for daring to point out that the steel used wouldn't have melted the way the official report says? He was after all doing so to protect the integrity of the industry who fired him,...

I don't contend there is any evidence of the largest black-ops ever committed by any country in history, or that anyone has accumulated all the evidence to explain the execution and modus operendi involved. But there are many, far more qualified than I, that have been doing just that for the last five years, and the information available is enough to choke a cow (or even an Irish truth seeker,..).
Furthermore, the resultant 8 year war and boost to the US economy from said war, and expansion of the national security sector alone, has already justified any and all costs involved in performing such an outrageous operation, were one to exist.

There are many more contradictions to the official reports provided than evidence provided by those reports.

And most importantly, there was overwhelming amounts of motivation involved to have the events of that day happen exactly as they did, regardless of who was involved.

If you can provide any answers to any of these questions, it would be great to hear, but if your argument is, there is no evidence to contradict the official reports, you're sadly mistaken young grasshopper.

You claim demolitions was the cause for the towers comeing down. I Dont agree, i think the planes crashing into the towers caused the structural intregity of the towers to weaken. Which eventually led to the collapse.I did a bit of research and came up with a site. which confirms and explains my belief also what happened that day.

I also looked at your theory and looked at it from both sides of the argument.We probably wont agree on anything regarding the event.You are entitled to your opinion and so am i. Just take a look at the opposite argument to yours and see if it makes any sense to you.

http://www.tms.org/pubs/journals/JOM/0112/Eagar/eagar-0112.html
http://911research.wtc7.net/essays/pentagon/index.html

 

[jimbo83478]

There was plenty of people on that day, who saw the plane that hit the Pentagon. Are they makeing it up?. Evidence exists for four planes. Are you saying that the third plane was someones imagination. Were is your evidence for something else happening to the plane? I Watched the archives of American tv of the day. Plenty of people, described seeing a commercial Airliner flying towards the pentagon.No missile or anything else other than a plane was seen.

Irishseekers, have you watched the video I posted at the beginning of this thread?

 

[Kieran]

Irishseekers, have you watched the video I posted at the beginning of this thread?

Yes i did.They saw a plane.
The direction might have been wrong on the part of the goverment. But the pentagon is a big building. A little bit off in either direction north or south does not mean much.

There is wreckage of a plane on the lawn. You just can't dismiss the evidence that a plane hit the pentagon.

 

[MrChud]

There is wreckage of a plane on the lawn. You just can't dismiss the evidence that a plane hit the pentagon.

Why not? Troofers dismiss all the other evidence.

 

[jimbo83478]

Yes i did.They saw a plane.

Yes they all saw the plane, but note how none of them actually witnessed that plane enter the building's facade.

The direction might have been wrong on the part of the goverment. But the pentagon is a big building. A little bit off in either direction north or south does not mean much.

You are missing the point: the direction of the physical impact does not match the direction of the plane mapped by all the witnesses in the video. This is a serious problem concerning the physics of the event. I'm not saying the plane did not necessarily hit the building, but I do think this raises serious questions that need to be meticulously addressed.

There is wreckage of a plane on the lawn. You just can't dismiss the evidence that a plane hit the pentagon.

There is also a witness who says a commercial airline flew over the pentagon seconds after the impact was heard and felt. You can't dismiss that either, can you?

 

[Kieran]

Yes they all saw the plane, but note how none of them actually witnessed that plane enter the building's facade.




You are missing the point: the direction of the physical impact does not match the direction of the plane mapped by all the witnesses in the video. This is a serious problem concerning the physics of the event. I'm not saying the plane did not necessarily hit the building, but I do think this raises serious questions that need to be meticulously addressed.



There is also a witness who says a commercial airline flew over the pentagon seconds after the impact was heard and felt. You can't dismiss that either, can you?

First, you agree there was plane agreed? So people saw a plane. So we go on from there..

The direction of the physical damage does not match the direction of the plane mapped by all the witnesses. Nobody saw it go in. i don't no if that is entirely true. But, just say your right.
How do we know the plane, did not change direction before it hit?

When the second plane hit the twin towers in New york.

It came in, changed direction, did a u-turn in the sky and flew in a different direction towards the second tower from the original direction it came from.

The plane, that hit the pentagon was flying in a straight direction agreed. It was not comeing in from either a east or west point. At the speed it was going. Even a little turn in either direction North to south or South to north would move the plane a good distance.

An eyewitness saw a plane fly over. Ok were did the plane go? Seriously the plane existed. People who flew on that plane have a background that can be checked on. They have relatives, who have spoken and have evidence they flew on that day.

Are you saying this people never existed? Were they disappear to? Everyone who has been verifyed as missing simply vanished into thin air. They never boarded that plane that day are you serious.Come on Friend.

We have pictures of the day. You see quiet clearly the damage in the background. You can see very clearly parts of a plane on the lawn.

One person, i saw on a picture taken from that day. Clearly shows him carrying a piece of metal with colouring which is the same colouring as American Airlines had on their planes. They hardly with cameras looking on at the pentagon, tv crews, put this there withount anyone seeing it being done.

 

[jimbo83478]

First, you agree there was plane agreed? So people saw a plane. So we go on from there..

The direction of the physical damage does not match the direction of the plane mapped by all the witnesses. Nobody saw it go in. i don't no if that is entirely true. But, just say your right.
How do we know the plane, did not change direction before it hit?

When the second plane hit the twin towers in New york.

It came in, changed direction, did a u-turn in the sky and flew in a different direction towards the second tower from the original direction it came from.

The plane, that hit the pentagon was flying in a straight direction agreed. It was not comeing in from either a east or west point. At the speed it was going. Even a little turn in either direction North to south or South to north would move the plane a good distance.

An eyewitness saw a plane fly over. Ok were did the plane go? Seriously the plane existed. People who flew on that plane have a background that can be checked on. They have relatives, who have spoken and have evidence they flew on that day.

Are you saying this people never existed? Were they disappear to? Everyone who has been verifyed as missing simply vanished into thin air. They never boarded that plane that day are you serious.Come on Friend.

We have pictures of the day. You see quiet clearly the damage in the background. You can see very clearly parts of a plane on the lawn.

One person, i saw on a picture taken from that day. Clearly shows him carrying a piece of metal with colouring which is the same colouring as American Airlines had on their planes. They hardly with cameras looking on at the pentagon, tv crews, put this there withount anyone seeing it being done.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I haven't insinuated that anything occurred other than the official story.

I don't know where the plane that flew over the Pent went, but don't you think that ought to be investigated?

I don't know enough about aeronautics to say what may or may not have been possible regarding the flight path, but I sure would like to see a panel of pilots and aeronautic engineers discussing this objectively, wouldn't you?

I won't even bother discussing the minuscule amount of wreckage found, but if you think the photos of people holding scraps of debris is a sufficient amount of remains for a 757, then maybe you ought to image search commercial airline crashes.

If you are satisfied with the official story - great. I, for one, see evidence that significantly compromises the facts of the official story. I think there are an awful lot of questions that need to be answered and a whole lot of speculation that ought to be curbed.

 

[pixelsmith]

20 points to consider from a mock 20 minute interview between Charlie Sheen and Obama. a wealth of interesting info follows the 20 points.
20 Minutes With The President - Bibliography

 

[jimbo83478]

20 points to consider from a mock 20 minute interview between Charlie Sheen and Obama. a wealth of interesting info follows the 20 points.
20 Minutes With The President - Bibliography

Pixelsmith, this is very concise. Much appreciated!

 

[Gojira2006]

I won't even bother discussing the minuscule amount of wreckage found, but if you think the photos of people holding scraps of debris is a sufficient amount of remains for a 757, then maybe you ought to image search commercial airline crashes.

It might be instructive to compare the damage to the Empire State Building in the aftermath of the impact that it suffered on July 28, 1945 from the B-25 that was piloted by Lt. Col. William Franklin Smith, Jr. -


http://www.elevator-world.com/magazine/archive01/9603-002.htm


- In terms of materials, the Pentagon is close to the Empire State Building . . .

 

[pixelsmith]

Pixelsmith, this is very concise. Much appreciated!

IMO - the info on this link changes the theory to a probability.

 

[Xylo]

Having just viewed this video, I have to say that some evidence was presented which was very compelling, some which was not so compelling. I'm not sure that the evidence proves anything one way or the other, however I am sure that the evidence warrants additional investigation...

What information was stored in that part of the building that was destroyed?

What object impacted or caused impact and explosion on the pentagon?

More importantly, what really happened to the passengers and crew upon that ill-fated airline?