https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EKN4qilUOfs
This is getting interesting.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EKN4qilUOfs
This is getting interesting.
Anyone who believes NIST is clearly hypnotized
I've studied conspiracy theories... at this point probably for over 10 years. Somebody introduced me to the first Zeitgeist Movie and since then I've dug deep into it. Over the years however I've learned that it's very important to maneuver very carefully through all the mess, because there are two extremes on both sides of the spectrum. Those who believe everything mainstream media dishes them and those who believe everything alternative media dishes them. I think I've somehow found a balance to be able to tell when a conspiracy theory is total bullshit and when one is actually very likely to be true. As far as 9/11 is concerned... well, having learned that people in the military, the government and intelligence agencies were willing to kill innocent people and blame others afterwards (false flag), but also stuff like Project MKUltra, those were huge warning signals for me. I mean, if they were willing to kill millions upon millions in several wars throughout history, why would they hesitate to kill thousands on American soil, if the aftermath would lead to wars in Afghanistan, Iraq, Lebanon and Syria, not to mention all the covert drone wars going on in Africa? There are some really cold-blooded, sadistic psychopaths in power who are willing to do anything and everything to keep their power and to further increase it. Everybody else is just a pawn on the chess board, "collateral damage" (such a disgusting euphemism...) as they say. And that's just one thing.
The fact that now they've actually funded an independent research of Tower 7 and its destruction, done by Dr. J Leroy Hulsey, chair of UAF's Civil and Environmental Engineering Department, and two Ph.D. research assistants, and so far they had to conclude that there are way too many inconsistencies and contradictions in the official story, further raises the likelihood of 9/11 being an inside-job. This month they will publish their final report and I'm curious of the results.
I obviously meant Lybia, my bad. I always mix them up.Quote:
Originally Posted by maxmarkov
Btw. I also forgot to mention that even though I've been deep into this stuff for so many years myself... I didn't know about the whole 2.3 trillion dollars scandal until I saw Joe's last podcast you were in. They announced on September 10th 2001, one day before 9/11, that there are 2.3 trillion (!!) dollars of year-long unaccounted military funds? We don't know where the money went, but OH we know where the money went. That's crazy... I mean, it's one of those situations where I can't say I'm surprised, but I'm still shocked that they've really done it. And yet, nothing happened. They still do whatever they want and even more and even worse.
No one will ever go to jail for 911, they are all WAY above the law
"WTC 7 Evaluation is a study at the University of Alaska Fairbanks using finite element modeling to evaluate the possible causes of World Trade Center Building 7's collapse.
Update: Tune in at 8 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, September 6, 2017, to watch the livestream of Dr. Leroy Hulsey’s presentation from the University of Alaska Fairbanks. There he will present the findings and conclusions of the study detailed in his team’s September 2017 progress report, which will be issued the same day.
A draft report of the study will be released in October or November 2017 and will be open for public comment for a six-week period, allowing for input from the public and the engineering community. A final report will then be published in early 2018."
The September 2017 evaluation report confirms: WTC7 DID NOT collapse from fire.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NJAWl8unZeA
Bioweapon. Solfolobus metallicus. Archaea. Iron Redox.
So honest, legitimate question here, looking for sincere dialogue.
We know that WTC 7 hosted the US Secret Service and we believe that it also hosted the CIA, as well as a shell company that was potentially being used to fund black ops missions. After watching video of the collapse, I'll agree that it looks to be a controlled demolition. Especially one I saw this week where it shows 4 buildings collapsing and 3 of them were controlled demolitions and the 4th was WTC7.
Given that we know who the tenants were, we can safely assume what was contained in that building. Knowing that often times after a large attack there are follow up attacks and/or recon missions, and given the current situation in the area, it's safe to assume that maintaining access control of the building would be next to impossible, which would support the decision to sanitize the building of any classified information that could cause damage to national security.
So all of that leads me to my question, which is, if the CIA/Secret Service/Etc. did make the decision to blow the building and have it demoed, why is that a big deal? It's not unprecedented to make a decision like that to protect government secrets. There were no deaths related to the collapse of WTC 7, so what really was the harm other than the cost of the building?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Robbie Carter
SEC's singular copies of evidence into the collapses of enron, worldcomm, etc - this winds up matching up with the pentagon where the navy jag had stored their investigations into the SEC on same matters. Coverup - linked to stuff like Lee Wanta and the Black Eagle trust fund, basically massive money laundering by the gov.Quote:
Originally Posted by Robbie Carter
7 *had* to come down as it was a primary target in the operation, it was that important that they pulled it without it having any legit reason to fall whatsoever. 93 was apparently the only actual passenger plane as far as I can tell, especially given that the two which hit 1 & 2 crossed their paths directly over what's that air force base (cmon, people want to believe TWO known hijacks flew directly over an airforce base almost simultaneously..?)
The older remote control that was installed in those boeings had one issue - the flight controls themselves actually had cables connecting the flight controls to the flaps and ailerons - this basically meant that the cockpit could fight the remote control - since cockpit was breached, this meant that a direct hit on 7 could not be guaranteed and it was driven or shot to the ground.
(Contrast to the 'suicide pilot' on the airbus in france - those a320s are fully fly by wire, no controls directly connected - so once the antihijack is enabled, the cockpit's done - Lufthansa even boasted about their ability to disable the cockpit at a moment's notice before that operation - I'm still kicking myself for not having taken screen shots of it when I saw it, just like when I saw all the zeroed out tax records for all those properties in Newtown, before they put some security on it and removed it from public view...of course people dont believe that shit now, but I seen both those with my own eyes.)