NEW 9 11 VIDEO MISSILE STRIKE PENTAGON Video is it real?

Divorce Referendum

uprising2 wrote: »

Yes it is laughable, you havent shown 1 point, please take 1 that you think it debunks and I'll do my best to show you it doesn't.

What I bolded is "your" opinion I take it?

His 'opinion' is correct. Top down demolitions require far more explosives and cost twice as much. I am not aware of any demolition companies who love throwing money in the gutter. Thats twice as much thermite and explosives as you had originally calculated for your theory

seannash

uprising2 wrote: »

Where were the USAF?, the people who fly these, this is almost 1 hour after the first hit after all, and they knew there was an attack on the US, why didn't they intercept the first WTC hit after knowing for almost 30mins before hand that it was hijacked???

Am i gonna have to go through every point in the video with you.It seriously would be quicker for you to look at the video and itll answer those questions.

Awesome plane pic too dude,great for dramatic effect

uprising2

Divorce Referendum wrote: »

His 'opinion' is correct. Top down demolitions require far more explosives and cost twice as much. I am not aware of any demolition companies who love throwing money in the gutter. Thats twice as much thermite and explosives as you had originally calculated for your theory

Haha, ohhh Lord, so it can be done, and is done!.
Yea the cost would have been a big factor here, bush and co counting the penny's from the jar, think about it.

uprising2

seannash wrote: »

Am i gonna have to go through every point in the video with you.It seriously would be quicker for you to look at the video and itll answer those questions.

Awesome plane pic too dude,great for dramatic effect

Listen I've been argueing this same crap for years and I don't even know why I'm still doing it TBH, but nothing has been answered, the exact same questions that were there a few weeks after the event still remain.
Its because of people like you that this lie continues, its too big for you to comprehend.

Captain Chaos

uprising2 wrote: »

Where were the USAF?, this is almost 1 hour after the first hit after all, and they knew there was an attack on the US, why didn't they intercept the first WTC hit after knowing for almost 30mins before hand that it was hijacked???

The order to send fighters to intercept the first 767 was given a 8:46, just seconds before it impacted the WTC. The first pair of F-15s tasked with the intercept got off the ground at 8:53. 7 minutes is a very good response time btw.

Fighters don't carry live weapons around all the time, only regularly since 9/11 to armed flights patrol US airspace again. They stopped that practice after the end of the Cold War in the early '90s to save money as missiles are flight hour limited, and lugging them around all the time will cause them to expire much quicker than holding them in storage.

Even in that pic you posted of those F-16C Block 50s. They are carrying dummy training rounds as indicated by the blue stripes on the missiles. Live missile rounds carry a brown and yellow stripe.

Divorce Referendum

uprising2 wrote: »

Haha, ohhh Lord, so it can be done, and is done!.
Yea the cost would have been a big factor here, bush and co counting the penny's from the jar, think about it.

No it has never been done for that reason. Then you have no squibs at the WTC, no series of loud bangs/echos along the streets beforehand and no evidence of explosives. Hmm ya big holes in your theory there. It must have been that squibless non banging no trace explosives.

seannash

uprising2 wrote: »

Listen I've been argueing this same crap for years and I don't even know why I'm still doing it TBH, but nothing has been answered, the exact same questions that were there a few weeks after the event still remain.
Its because of people like you that this lie continues, its too big for you to comprehend.

Too big for me to comprehend is like me saying its too simple for you to understand.

Okay so the explosions theory
id like to ask about the rigging it would have taken to set up this controlled demolition.
For it to be done soo quick to avoid detection it would have taken a **** load of men.

None of them questioned why are we rigging the twin towers for a controlled explosion?
None of them have come forward and said we rigged it?
Its a highly skilled job,youd need years of training to do it so they couldnt have hired some regluar schmucks to do it.

Its just doesnt add up that noone came forward about the rigging either before or after

seannash

Divorce Referendum wrote: »

No it has never been done for that reason. Then you have no squibs at the WTC, no series of loud bangs/echos along the streets beforehand and no evidence of explosives. Hmm ya big holes in your theory there. It must have been that squibless non banging no trace explosives.

In that video i posted there is a chilling phone call from the floors above the crash where a person is on the phone as the building collapses and again no bangs or explosions can be heard prior to the collapse

uprising2

Captain Chaos wrote: »

The order to send fighters to intercept the first 767 was given a 8:46, just seconds before it impacted the WTC. The first pair of F-15s tasked with the intercept got off the ground at 8:53. 7 minutes is a very good response time btw.

.

Were they on their lunch break then after that?, why was the order not given 25 minutes earlier?, where were these aircraft when the 2nd plane approached?, where were they an hour later when the pentagon was hit, see what you just said has a lot more questions than answers

uprising2

Divorce Referendum wrote: »

No it has never been done for that reason. Then you have no squibs at the WTC, no series of loud bangs/echos along the streets beforehand and no evidence of explosives. Hmm ya big holes in your theory there. It must have been that squibless non banging no trace explosives.

No squibs? no loud bangs? are you for real?

[Embedded Image Removed]



Explosions
http://www.deathandtaxesmag.com/30936/huge-explosions-responsible-for-wtc-collapse/

Captain Chaos

uprising2 wrote: »

Were they on their lunch break then after that?, why was the order not given 25 minutes earlier?, where were these aircraft when the 2nd plane approached?, where were they an hour later when the pentagon was hit, see what you just said has a lot more questions than answers

Ask the USAF generals, you will only get speculative answers to those questions here. Those are questions people who lost their loved ones want to know too. Granted in saving lives they would have to take lives, they are held accountable either way. Not a decision you can just make on the spot really.

seannash

Originally Posted by uprising2
Yes it is laughable, you havent shown 1 point, please take 1 that you think it debunks and I'll do my best to show you it doesn't.

What I bolded is "your" opinion I take it?

seannash wrote: »

Look at the pentagon/no plane theory put forward by Loose change and then look at the debunking of it.

that'll do for now

Ahem

seannash

uprising2 wrote: »

No squibs? no loud bangs? are you for real?

[Embedded Image Removed]

Yes we're for real,those are not sqibs going off,3 squibs does not a demolition make

Have a look at this video of a controlled explosion.Look at the pretty squib lights

uprising2

Here's a good documentary
Architects and engineers for 9/11
Blueprint for truth

Over 1,325 architects and engineers call for a new investigation into 9-11. Learn why in this worldwide-acclaimed multimedia presentation by San Francisco Bay area architect, Richard Gage, AIA, who provides the overwhelming evidence of explosive controlled demolition of all 3 World Trade Center high-rise buildings on September 11, 2001
http://world911truth.org/911-blueprint-for-truth/

Divorce Referendum

uprising2 wrote: »

No squibs? no loud bangs? are you for real?

[Embedded Image Removed]



Explosions
http://www.deathandtaxesmag.com/30936/huge-explosions-responsible-for-wtc-collapse/

Ahem ****ing lol. You do realise that squibs dont increase in strength after they go off right? This is debris jetting out of windows from the core. The pressure of the building collpasing sending debris down the core would have been unbeliveable.

This is a video of a controlled demolition. Notice the sharp lound bangs? Notice the squibs explode in sequence not randomly and dont increase in strenght after detonation. There was loads of footage at street level or up in apartments of the second tower collapsing. Can you link me to a video with these loud distinct bangs in them before the tower collapsed?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=79sJ1bMR6VQ

seannash

snap:)

Divorce Referendum

seannash wrote: »

snap:)

Lol didnt realise you had posted the video already. Thats a pretty tall building thought it was a good example;)

seannash

uprising2 wrote: »

Here's a good documentary
Architects and engineers for 9/11
Blueprint for truth

Over 1,325 architects and engineers call for a new investigation into 9-11. Learn why in this worldwide-acclaimed multimedia presentation by San Francisco Bay area architect, Richard Gage, AIA, who provides the overwhelming evidence of explosive controlled demolition of all 3 World Trade Center high-rise buildings on September 11, 2001
http://world911truth.org/911-blueprint-for-truth/

Cool,would you like me to extend you the same courtesy you did for me and just skim over it or would you like me to watch it.

oh and those other questions i asked can you answer me on those

Ya know the rigging of the explosives or the pentagon/no plane theory

uprising2

seannash wrote: »

snap:)

I don't see the squibs lighting up here

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SaBQ3AkRetI

Divorce Referendum

Specsavers for you uprising. 0.19 secs

seannash

uprising2 wrote: »

I don't see the squibs lighting up here

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SaBQ3AkRetI

your telling me you cant see bright flashes in that video?
there very obvious

seannash

Divorce Referendum wrote: »

Specsavers for you uprising. 0.19 secs

its actually all different angles of the same explosion,there loads of clips of the squibs going off:)

Divorce Referendum

uprising2 wrote: »

Here's a good documentary
Architects and engineers for 9/11
Blueprint for truth

Over 1,325 architects and engineers call for a new investigation into 9-11. Learn why in this worldwide-acclaimed multimedia presentation by San Francisco Bay area architect, Richard Gage, AIA, who provides the overwhelming evidence of explosive controlled demolition of all 3 World Trade Center high-rise buildings on September 11, 2001
http://world911truth.org/911-blueprint-for-truth/

Interesting thing their uprising. If you go to his website and look at the undersigned professional there are none if any Structural Engineers on there. Architects know **** all about structures. Their sole role on site is to come up with a shape of building. An architect asked me once what a RSJ was :rolleyes:. I doubt they would be better qualified to determine a structure collapse compared to a structural engineer. Just an observation.

seannash

echo
echo
echo
echo
echo
echo
echo

--Kaiser--

Some workmates were going on about 'Loose Change' at lunch time and I nearly smacked them, they didn't seem to realise it had been debunked many times over

http://screwloosechange.blogspot.com/

http://www.911myths.com/html/wtc_power_down.html

uprising2

seannash wrote: »

your telling me you cant see bright flashes in that video?
there very obvious

That building has been completely stripped of its face prior to demolition.
This was not the case in the WTC's, but the evidence for explosives going off is there, take a look.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qFpbZ-aLDLY

uprising2

--Kaiser-- wrote: »

Some workmates were going on about 'Loose Change' at lunch time and I nearly smacked them, they didn't seem to realise it had been debunked many times over

http://screwloosechange.blogspot.com/

http://www.911myths.com/html/wtc_power_down.html

That crap debunks nothing, its a blogger who is in denial because he's not man enough to face reality.

--Kaiser--

uprising2 wrote: »

That crap debunks nothing, its a blogger who is in denial because he's not man enough to face reality.

LOL, great rebuttal to those well researched and cited websites.

"There's none so blind as those who will not see"

meglome

uprising2 wrote: »

That building has been completely stripped of its face prior to demolition.
This was not the case in the WTC's, but the evidence for explosives going off is there, take a look.

Leaving aside that explosives make a distinctive noise which is completely absent here and that there is no seismic record of them. I'd ask some questions.
Why would explosives be going off after the collapse is in full swing?
If it's controlled demolition the explosives would go off before the collapse, right?
We're do you think the downward pressure of the collapse is being released other than out some of the windows below the collapse?

uprising2

meglome wrote: »

Leaving aside that explosives make a distinctive noise which is completely absent here and that there is no seismic record of them. I'd ask some questions.
Why would explosives be going off after the collapse is in full swing?
If it's controlled demolition the explosives would go off before the collapse, right?
We're do you think the downward pressure of the collapse is being released other than out some of the windows below the collapse?

Ok then what force has thrown the debris UP and AWAY from the building if all the pressure is downward?

Does the downward pressure travel faster than the pieces of debris falling through the air (ie faster than gravity itself).

Your post brings up more questions than it answers, the downward force you talk about cannot throw steel many meters away from the collapse, more evidence for explosives.

The amount of energy needed to break the beams of steel alone would not show on seismographs.

''I just cried,'' said Won-Young Kim, the scientist in charge of monitoring quakes in the Northeast, knowing that the sensors were registering more than just the force of falling concrete.
http://select.nytimes.com/gst/abstract.html?res=FB0912FC395C0C718DDDA00894D9404482