2
   

Experts Claim Official 9-11 Story is a Hoax ! FINALLY!

 
 
blueflame1
 
  1  
Reply Tue 7 Feb, 2006 07:47 pm
0 Replies
 
blueflame1
 
  1  
Reply Tue 7 Feb, 2006 07:51 pm
Two More WTC Workers Claim Bombs In North Tower Basement

Greg Szymanski | July 13 2005

Two more WTC workers have come forward with eye-witness testimony that a huge explosion ripped apart the lower levels of the north tower at about the same time a jetliner rammed into the top floors.

The pair not only reported hearing an underground blast, but were both injured, one suffering severe burns to the face, arms and hands and the other cuts and bruises after being trapped in a stalled basement elevator.

Burn victim, Felipe David, employed by Aramark Co. and Salvatore Giambanco, a WTC office painter trapped in a basement elevator, were both unavailable for comment, but made their explosive testimony â€" never before released in America â€" to a Colombian television station in 2002 on the first anniversary of 9/11.

Their comments eventually aired in Colombia in Spanish on the Red Continental De Noticias (RNC) as a part of an in depth 9/11 documentary after the foreign station spent a month in New York in 2002 shooting the project.

A copy of the original interview tapes with RCN reporter Claudia Gurisatti questioning the WTC workers was made available this week by WTC maintenance worker William Rodriguez, the first eye-witness to go public about the north tower basement explosions.

(snip)

Besides the trio, the taped statements of Jose Sanchez, another WTC maintenance worker, recently came forward, saying he heard an underground explosion at the same time the others reported it while working in a small sub-level 4 workshop.

“What really upsets me is that we have all these people coming forward with credible testimony about explosions and we have been completely ignored by the 9/11 Commission and the major media,” said Rodriguez in a telephone conversation from his New Jersey apartment about what he calls an obvious media and government blackout on any information contrary to the official story that only jet fuel brought down the towers, a theory adopted by the 9/11 Commission.

“They concluded jet fuel brought down the towers without even considering the testimony of people like David, Giambanco and Sanchez. Why would they do that unless they are covering up something?
http://www.surfingtheapocalypse.net/cgi-bin/forum.cgi?noframes;read=86940
0 Replies
 
OCCOM BILL
 
  1  
Reply Tue 7 Feb, 2006 08:12 pm
farmerman wrote:
The pix showed melted Aluminum , not steel. I had a picture from the security cam but couldnt post it for some damn reason
Try saving it to your computer in an easily retrieved place and then post it at http://www.imageshack.net
This is a free pic hosting service.
0 Replies
 
Magginkat
 
  1  
Reply Fri 10 Feb, 2006 04:23 pm
OCCOM BILL wrote:
farmerman wrote:
The pix showed melted Aluminum , not steel. I had a picture from the security cam but couldnt post it for some damn reason
Try saving it to your computer in an easily retrieved place and then post it at http://www.imageshack.net
This is a free pic hosting service.



www.PhotoBucket.com is another freebie hosting service that seems to work quite well.
0 Replies
 
mysteryman
 
  1  
Reply Fri 10 Feb, 2006 06:30 pm
Photobucket is what I use.I store all of my pics on there,in an album anyone can look at.

I hate to agree with Mags,but it is a good site,and easy to use.
0 Replies
 
farmerman
 
  1  
Reply Fri 10 Feb, 2006 06:36 pm
Im getting my OS updated and my browser and a few other things. Im leaving for some work in 2 weeks and Im gonna get updated while Im away. My present OS/browser combo is not friendly with things like pdf's with color graphics, photosharing , and some file transfers.
0 Replies
 
mysteryman
 
  1  
Reply Fri 10 Feb, 2006 06:51 pm
I have to ask.

The left on here thinks that the govt either planned,knew about,allowed,or was otherwise involved in 9/11.

They claim it was a giant conspiracy and that the people "in the know" are just being silent.
If that were true,it means the govt was smart enough to pull off a massive conspiracy and coverup.

That takes some brilliance from the govt.
These same people are also saying that the govt is corrupt,full of idiots,and that they arent smart enough to get out of the rain.

So,which is it?
Are they stupid,or extremely smart to be able to pull off a coverup this massive?
They cant be both!!!

http://www.able2know.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=37997&start=6930
0 Replies
 
OCCOM BILL
 
  1  
Reply Fri 10 Feb, 2006 08:07 pm
farmerman wrote:
Im getting my OS updated and my browser and a few other things. Im leaving for some work in 2 weeks and Im gonna get updated while Im away. My present OS/browser combo is not friendly with things like pdf's with color graphics, photosharing , and some file transfers.
Save the link anyway for when you're up to snuff. It's as simple as locating a file and the Cut/Paste some HTML that already has the appropriate code for A2K built in.
0 Replies
 
Lightwizard
 
  1  
Reply Fri 10 Feb, 2006 08:07 pm
Okay, mysteryman, this can't be. I'm going to agree with you -- while it's not impossible, it's as hard to believe as Brad Pitt remarrying Jennifer Aniston.
0 Replies
 
Amigo
 
  1  
Reply Fri 10 Feb, 2006 08:10 pm
I hear wedding bells.
0 Replies
 
Lightwizard
 
  1  
Reply Fri 10 Feb, 2006 08:34 pm
Naw, not even a ligit engagement. I'm afraid he wouldn't be worth a ring out of a Cracker Jack box (whoops--they don't even have cheap plastic rings anymore).

That bunch in Washington are too inept to even possible concoct such a scheme and before anyone can point out that they could hire someone smart enough, they're too stupid to even accomplish that. There was a method to my madness in agreeing with MM.
0 Replies
 
Amigo
 
  1  
Reply Fri 10 Feb, 2006 08:47 pm
Put a fork in this thread........
0 Replies
 
mysteryman
 
  1  
Reply Fri 10 Feb, 2006 10:20 pm
Lightwizard wrote:
Naw, not even a ligit engagement. I'm afraid he wouldn't be worth a ring out of a Cracker Jack box (whoops--they don't even have cheap plastic rings anymore).

That bunch in Washington are too inept to even possible concoct such a scheme and before anyone can point out that they could hire someone smart enough, they're too stupid to even accomplish that. There was a method to my madness in agreeing with MM.


Damn,
I already bought the ring and rented the hall.
Now what am I gonna do...LOL

Seriously though,LW and I dont see eye to eye on much,and I accept that
I know LW doesnt like Bush,but unlike some people on here,LW is at least willing to look at things logically,instead of thru a cloud of hate.

But,for the govt to pull off 9/11,it would have taken a cover up including the FBI,CIA,NSA,FAA,NY Port Authority,and DoD.

We are talking about thousands of people.There is no way that many people in Washington DC can keep a secret like that.
So,was the govt brilliant for pulling it off,or were they stupid for allowing it?
They cant be both.

http://www.able2know.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=37997&start=6930
0 Replies
 
Lightwizard
 
  1  
Reply Fri 10 Feb, 2006 10:39 pm
The truth is I don't have much faith in any politician and my latest Mencken quote in my signature line pretty much sums it up. I understand they are a necessary evil and attempt to, however sloppily, follow Machiavellian principles. It is the epitome of the Peter Principal working in our government from the city to the county to the state to the federal level.
0 Replies
 
OCCOM BILL
 
  1  
Reply Fri 10 Feb, 2006 10:50 pm
Huh, Nimh, Farmerman, LW, MM and I all on the exact same page on a political issue. 1,000 to 1 we're right sound about fair?
0 Replies
 
Amigo
 
  1  
Reply Fri 10 Feb, 2006 11:29 pm
How many people don't talk about their suspicions. Alot of the things discussed on this thread should have been addressed by the original 9/11 Commision but they weren't. Why?

WTC7 had 24 huge interior support columns as well as well as huge trusses and 57 perimeter columns. WTC1 collapsed 350 ft away and WTC7 was never hit by a plane. It fell symmetrically into it's own footprint in 6.6 seconds from fire. They say it fell from fuel in the building and from damage from WTC1.

I question the collapse of WTC7 the same way I questioned the 2004 election, the WMD story and "MISSION ACCOMPLISHED". Why don't you punch up 9/11 and see how many whacos are out there. Then brush up on your history and ask yourself what men are capable of.

The verdict is still out on 9/11
0 Replies
 
Amigo
 
  1  
Reply Sat 11 Feb, 2006 02:29 am
mysteryman wrote:
As I understand it,WTC 7 was intentionally demolished because of damage caused from getting hit by debris from the collapse of the WTC.

What is the controversy there?
It was unsafe and condemned.
I am also hearing something like this? Weird. Mcgentrix also comments on this and I've seen some footage recording people talking about people "pulling" the building. Whats the deal?

www.whatreallyhappened.com/cutter.html

I'm living in the twilight zone.

When did they plant the explosives? and what about all the experts that said WTC7 was not a controlled demo?

I'm not endorsing any website this is just the first one that came up and it looks like the same story thats everywhere else.
0 Replies
 
farmerman
 
  1  
Reply Sat 11 Feb, 2006 06:38 am
OC BILL_ Yeh I did save it, and I will do the transfer. Its a security cam shot that snapped the jet just as it enetered the Pentagon. Its a weird picture with a jet plane just about 20 feet off the ground.
0 Replies
 
Ticomaya
 
  1  
Reply Sat 11 Feb, 2006 06:58 am
farmerman wrote:
OC BILL_ Yeh I did save it, and I will do the transfer. Its a security cam shot that snapped the jet just as it enetered the Pentagon. Its a weird picture with a jet plane just about 20 feet off the ground.


Is this it?

http://img482.imageshack.us/img482/2475/sozenpentagon9hb.jpg

Razz
0 Replies
 
Ticomaya
 
  1  
Reply Sat 11 Feb, 2006 07:18 am
Seriously, here is a photo from a post at this site (it's a conspiracy theorist site), which appears to be from a security camera. Not sure if it's the one FM is referring to. (This one has obviously been tweaked by the author of the post.)

http://img139.imageshack.us/img139/6720/camera1b7le.gif

The caption for the photo reads:

Quote:
The Gate Camera
Some people don't seem to see perspective correctly. I've zoomed in, and compared the two frames over and over - here is what I see as the airplane. I will repeat, however, that this is terrible evidence due to the horrible quality of the original images. I do believe, however, that the white smoke in the images is caused by one or more damaged engine from the impact with the multiple light poles on the way in.

I stuck in a 757 that was at relatively the same angle - except it's banking slightly to starboard instead of to port - hence the ONE wing is out of place. If it was banking slightly to port it would fit perfectly... However, once again - this is entirely subjective and the image quality from the released surveillance camera is not good enough to form a factual opinion.


There is a lot more evidence in that post that is a lot more conclusive.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.06 seconds on 12/23/2024 at 10:47:34