Thread Rating:
  • 2 Vote(s) - 3.5 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
September Clues Addendum. Chapter 1
08-29-2010, 05:48 PM,
RE: September Clues Addendum. Chapter 1
(08-29-2010, 04:28 PM)nik Wrote:
(08-29-2010, 04:18 PM)JFK Wrote:
(08-29-2010, 06:25 AM)nik Wrote:
(08-28-2010, 09:51 AM)JFK Wrote:
(08-28-2010, 08:00 AM)nik Wrote: same place Atta's two passports came from

Except for the black boxes found were not officially recognized and in fact covered up.

Why do you suppose they did that ?

possibly to make us think they existed. it was a direct question, so i am just making a reply..

You didn't watch that episode... Did you ? Icon_rolleyes

LOL JFK I don't know if I would have thought it was a necessarily factual even if I had "watched the episode"...I don't recall if I watched it or not, I remember thinking after the first one - " this is limited hangout co-option bullshit pap" though. So there is a good chance I didn't tune in for it, yes.

That explains alot nik... FYI Ventura did track down an eyewitness to the black boxes at the towers and did interview him in that episode.

It is too bad that you base your judgements on incomplete information.

Keep on laughing out loud nik.
[Image: Signature2.gif]
Reply
08-29-2010, 06:00 PM,
RE: September Clues Addendum. Chapter 1
(08-29-2010, 05:48 PM)JFK Wrote:
(08-29-2010, 04:28 PM)nik Wrote:
(08-29-2010, 04:18 PM)JFK Wrote:
(08-29-2010, 06:25 AM)nik Wrote:
(08-28-2010, 09:51 AM)JFK Wrote: Except for the black boxes found were not officially recognized and in fact covered up.

Why do you suppose they did that ?

possibly to make us think they existed. it was a direct question, so i am just making a reply..

You didn't watch that episode... Did you ? Icon_rolleyes

LOL JFK I don't know if I would have thought it was a necessarily factual even if I had "watched the episode"...I don't recall if I watched it or not, I remember thinking after the first one - " this is limited hangout co-option bullshit pap" though. So there is a good chance I didn't tune in for it, yes.

That explains alot nik... FYI Ventura did track down an eyewitness to the black boxes at the towers and did interview him in that episode.

It is too bad that you base your judgements on incomplete information.

Keep on laughing out loud nik.

I am sorry, JFK. I wasn'ttrying to be rude in my reply. Please forgive me my clumsy use of English.

The point I was making is that a highly dubious limited hang out TV show such as the one cited..and then an interview with an "eye witness" within it don't really make something beyond incontrovertible proof, is what I meant.

Basically, the entire premise of such an interview ...whether Jesse Ventura was witting to it, is not the issue...could have been part of tv magic simply to bolster the highly dubious "official truther version".

But what is this "keep on laughing out loud" silliness? Are you now also implying I am mentally unstable and exhibiting a major flaw in critical faculties?

If so, please leave any personally based undermining comments as to my judgement and or mental condition aside, Jazzroc, h3rm35 and yeti in his new bizarre disguise are making quite enough of them, as it is.
Reply
08-29-2010, 06:07 PM,
RE: September Clues Addendum. Chapter 1
Hey, You are the one who posted "LOL" as a reply to my post...

The last time I checked it meant "Laughing out loud".

I imply absoutely nothing.
[Image: Signature2.gif]
Reply
08-29-2010, 06:39 PM,
RE: September Clues Addendum. Chapter 1
(08-29-2010, 06:07 PM)JFK Wrote: Hey, You are the one who posted "LOL" as a reply to my post...

The last time I checked it meant "Laughing out loud".

I imply absoutely nothing.

Good. Yes, I was aware I had posted a LOL...my point about the not necessarily assured credibility of the weekly TV show: "conspiracy theory with Jesse Ventura", that you cited as proof of something, I did mean in all seriousness though.

Reply
08-29-2010, 06:45 PM, (This post was last modified: 08-29-2010, 07:38 PM by kevlar.)
RE: September Clues Addendum. Chapter 1
I thought they never found the black boxes at all four sites.

IF we can at least all agree that there was definitely no plane at the pentagon and at shankesville then we are half the way there.

The pentagon and now i am substantiating looked like a missile attack, but i can not say it if it was from a helicopter from the near by air force base, another plane (air to surface)* or surface to surface. Based on the hole that it made before they destroyed the building with explosives it looked like a powerful missile. They took advantage of the situation and some how the amount killed at the pentagon was surprisingly high, if you just consider the initial impact area.

Shankesville looked like a trailer that was blown up with a missile or explosives based on the reports of the debris and the photos of the impact site. I go with missile in this case because it looks like there was a trailer there (1) and based on the impact hole (2) it fits that of a missile impact. But it could have just been a bomb for all i know. I do think the larger pieces if any remained were removed before the photos were taken. I can only speculate as to why they choose to blew it up and if they were potentially taking out some one who was involved in the operation. It could have also been explosives in a farm house.

But how they passed either of those instances off as having an air plane in them is just as ridiculous as convincing everyone in the world that three buildings collapsed that day into their own foot print in 10 seconds.

check the first post: http://www.theapricity.com/forum/showthread.php?p=83161 please note that the user is now banned. We find this everywhere.

* There has been discussion before about another plane seen flying over the pentagon at the time of the attack, now that would explain a plane attack of some kind, but i am only speculating here.

(1) gov exibit 1
(2) gov exibit 2
Reply
08-30-2010, 02:14 PM,
RE: September Clues Addendum. Chapter 1
im not sure about shanksville. but i can be almost certain about the pentagon. shanksville has so little evidence it very difficult to be sure.

The reason i think the shanksville plane "was" the terrorist plane as it never hit anything. IF i was to use a terrorist for my own plans id rather be in control of what he is blamed for.
Reply
08-30-2010, 05:00 PM, (This post was last modified: 08-30-2010, 05:32 PM by kevlar.)
RE: September Clues Addendum. Chapter 1



So yeti is canadian intelligence, if that even exists... well interesting none the less.

Quote:Then you do not trust my ability to judge the truthfulness of 2 personal friends who say they saw the 2nd plane.

Sorry to hear you threw common sense out the window and decided to drink the kool-aid. Congratulations, you are now officially a liability to the 9/11 truth movement.

Occam's Razor states that the most likely possibility is almost always correct. So please explain why the perps of 9/11 would bother faking the jets when they could quite easily use them?

Please give me the information of these two friends i would like to personally validate your claims and investigate the authenticity of your friends sightings of planes. They would bother to fake the jets because manoeuvring two jet planes in to the wtc towers was more difficult to pull off than faking it.
Reply
08-30-2010, 06:21 PM, (This post was last modified: 08-30-2010, 06:24 PM by yeti.)
RE: September Clues Addendum. Chapter 1
(08-30-2010, 05:00 PM)kevlar Wrote: So yeti is canadian intelligence, if that even exists... well interesting none the less.

That sounds like it might be an accusation. Cite your evidence please.

(08-30-2010, 05:00 PM)kevlar Wrote: Please give me the information of these two friends i would like to personally validate your claims and investigate the authenticity of your friends sightings of planes. They would bother to fake the jets because manoeuvring two jet planes in to the wtc towers was more difficult to pull off than faking it.

Do you actually think I would subject my friends to interrogation by a no-planer I've never met who has just accused me of being "Canadian Intelligence"?

If I'm a spook, would I admit that I've done contract work for the Canadian military? Wouldn't that be blowing my own cover?

If I am a spook, why are you here?
[Image: randquote.png]
Reply
08-30-2010, 09:20 PM,
RE: September Clues Addendum. Chapter 1
For the record...My friend Adrian, his father was a victim on 9-11. He had some kind of technician job in the towers for CBS

http://edition.cnn.com/SPECIALS/2001/memorial/people/2732.html

That link was taken from the list on CNN that these September Clues guys say "Anyone armed with a little patience and a discerning attitude should be able to realize that the CNN Victim Memorial is a preposterous list of counterfeit identities."

You gotta be fucking kidding me.
This is an obvious, not to mention astronomically dumb assumption, and severely discredits them imo.

Id also like to mention, my fiances cousin was supposed to be on one of those planes. She was a stewardess for either United or AA, I forget. She got a call from a co-worker who wanted to fly out on the earlier flight, and so she switched with her. Obviously, her co-worker was on the plane and killed. She was traumatized by this and hasnt worked for the airlines since. The narrative that the victims are fake as well is just retarded and serves no legit purpose.
"Listen to everyone, read everything, believe nothing unless you can prove it in your own research"
~William Cooper

DTTNWO!
Reply
08-30-2010, 09:24 PM,
RE: September Clues Addendum. Chapter 1
(08-29-2010, 04:41 PM)deathstickboy Wrote:
(08-28-2010, 11:58 PM)nik Wrote: it isn't about "no planes", deathstickboy

and threatening me with violence is not the way forward

Oh stop being so dramatic, its just cartoon violence..... Icon_biggrin

Msnslap <--- so' that! Icon_biggrin

Reply
08-30-2010, 11:14 PM, (This post was last modified: 08-30-2010, 11:14 PM by countdown.)
RE: September Clues Addendum. Chapter 1

(08-28-2010, 09:09 AM)yeti Wrote: The Lord is coming soon!...in an unmarked helicopter accompanied by faceless humanoids wearing black riot armor brandishing weapons of love.

Congratulations, you've been chosen!

Are you ready?

Reply
08-30-2010, 11:39 PM,
RE: September Clues Addendum. Chapter 1
an email Wrote:Hi Nic,
For some reason I can not post on **** or the **** Forum . .
But You can take the stuff below to the engineers and common sense giants
Boeing 767 - 200 - the type of passenger plane responsible for destroying the WTC towers

According to the story only ONE plane per tower was used but it was plenty as seen on TV

Passenger Seating Configuration
Typical 3-class
Typical 2-class
Typical 1-class
181
224
up to 255
Cargo 3,180 cu ft (90.1 cu m)
Engines
maximum thrust Pratt & Whitney PW4000
60,200 lb

GE CF6-80C2
62,100 lb
Maximum Fuel Capacity 23,980 U.S. gal (90,770 L)
Maximum Takeoff Weight 395,000 lb (179,170 kg)
Maximum Range 6,385 nmi (12,195 km)

Typical city pairs:
New York to Beijing
Typical Cruise Speed at 35,000 feet Mach 0.80 (530 mph, 851 kph)
Basic Dimensions
Wing Span
Overall Length
Tail Height
Interior Cabin Width
156 ft 1 in (47.6 m)
159 ft 2 in (48.5 m)
52 ft (15.8 m)
15 ft 6 in (4.7 m)

The TOWERS

Basic Dimensions :

208' long

208 ' wide

1,380' high

- Innovative Tube in Tube design was used in construction to maximize the useful office space.
Outer Tube consisted of 256 perimeter box columns (14" x 14" with 2" thick walls and those columns were spaced 22" apart . - Those spaces between the columns created adequate amount of windows .

- INNER CORE consisted of 48 massive rectangular box columns with dimensions of 46" x 28" and 5 1/2" thick walls placed at 8 rows of 6 columns creating a rectangular shape 'inner tube' (130' x 80' ) where all the elevators , wiring and piping were located.

- The Perimeter Core or outer 'tube' was braced by by a steel plate 1" thick and 3 feet wide from inside the core
every 12 feet on the center (for each floor ) to which the trusses were attached and steel reinforced 6" thick concrete slob was poured on 3/8" thick corrugated steel plate connecting Inner and outer core .

The weight of each tower - 500,000 tons .

- 250,000 tons of structural steel per tower !
- The remaining 250,000 tones was those 110 concrete slobs , widow glass, sheet rock, wires ,pipes, carpets, tiles,
ceramic urinals, sinks toilet seats and other non-structural stuff.

- Notice that 1 half of MAXIMUM TAKE OFF weight of that particular plane is FUEL . .

90 tons or 23,000 gallons delivered to the tower might sound very impressive . .

- When it exploded in 700 feet diameter fire ball on television it was so devastating that nobody ever wondered how the same load of 'jet' fuel that exploded on delivery managed to keep on burning for another hour weakening the steel structure to the point of 'pancake' collapse . .
- First of all there would not have been 90 tons of fuel delivered since both the planes that hit the buildings , officially , were bound for LA (3,000) - not Beijing (6,000) miles away. . . - So , 45 tons of 'jet' fuel ONLY !

- I don't believe the Airlines did use B- 767 for a coast to coast flights before or after 9/11 when B757 is perfect for that . . and here is WHY : if a 757 flying from Boston to LA has to make an emergency landing , say , in Chicago , it has to dump the extra fuel before doing so because it's a no-no to try to land a plane with 10 of tons of fuel . .

- BTW , there is NO substantial difference between 'jet' fuel ,kerosene or diesel . - You can use either of them
in an attempt to melt an aluminum beer can. - Go for hours and the can won't even 'buckle' . .

- So the 'keywords' of selling the story are 'jet fuel' and "thousands of gallons"
Since those "thousands of gallons" knock out common sense of most people, let's make the whole mind boggling encounter easier to comprehend by reducing both involved objects ( the tower and the plane)

- If we reduce the tower by 100 in all three linear dimensions , we roughly get a flimsy steel cage 2 feet wide,
2 feet long and 14 feet high .
- The VOLUME and MASS of our scale model becomes 1,000.000 times smaller than the real tower.
- The total weight of our model will be 0.5 of a ton or 500 kg.
- To have our scale model as close as possible to real thing we have to use 250 kg of steel and that would include the scaled inner core tied to perimeter core at every inch and 3/8 all the way up ,110 times . . - To compensate for non structural junk we will fill up the model with flammable plastics, paper and rugs . .

- It would be fare to argue that I am ignoring 220,000 cubic yards of concrete what would be 66 kg for our scale model but let's give our model plane a better chance . .

- When we reduce our 767 by 100 in all 3 dimensions we will get a model :

18" long ,
wingspan 18"
Fuselage diameter - 1 3/4"

and with the VOLUME and the MASS of the model reduced by 1,000.000 (one million )times
we will 180 gram speeding monster to hit our scaled model cage

- We would have to use real light stuff to make our 18" long model out of 90 grams because the other 90 grams of total weight is FUEL !
- 90 grams of fuel that's slightly over 3 oz.

- Let's accelerate our model plane to 540 mph ,
- let's see the fireball 6 feet in diameter generated by 3 oz. of kerosene . .

BTW , 3 oz of fuel would be allowing that the "Arabs" had connections at Logan Airport and manage to talk the service crew to fill it up to capacity!!
Reply
08-31-2010, 12:47 AM, (This post was last modified: 08-31-2010, 12:58 AM by kevlar.)
RE: September Clues Addendum. Chapter 1
Quote:I have done contract work for the Canadian Department of National Defence since 1995, almost 15 years. I also worked for Atomic Energy Canada, Corrections Canada, and "a few other government agencies".

So this site's server is run by a spook, I guess, huh? Then WHAT THE FUCK ARE YOU DOING HERE???

You said this on the first page, i was only making a joke.

I understand that you don't want to disclose their details, i don't blame you, but then you must realize from my perspective that does not realy hold weight. Not that i don't believe you, it is just not verifiable and i can only base my opinions on verifiable evidence.

As for the victims, i only agree that there was problems with the passengers on the planes, i have never said anything about or investigated the victims from the towers and other locations. I do not take the opinion that no one died, to the contrary i believe a lot of people died but i think the victim lists are not 100% correct. I think there was probably more people that were not on the lists that died and people that died that were added to the lists, that did not die directly from the incidents, but were added later. But i have not looked in to the victims. They apparently have and that is why they have those opinions but i can not agree because i have not looked in to it myself. Knowing someone that has a story about knowing someone who died in 9/11 is not exactly proof that the victim lists were 100% accurate.
Reply
08-31-2010, 01:01 AM, (This post was last modified: 08-31-2010, 03:45 AM by nik.)
RE: September Clues Addendum. Chapter 1
I agree. Fully.
I do not think people dieing will have presented as much of a problem to the planning as is seemingly taken as a given on sept clues.
There is a lot of discrepancy in the official stats and apparently something has been exposed which definitely merits actual attention,in order to be talked about but I haven't read all yet and to say no one was a killed on 9 11, if that is what they are saying, is clearly unreasonable in the extreme. I would believe it a nonsense to say that personally, tbh, but am not so clear on what claims are being made. Is it an intentional over-provocation of the idea eg. "maybe the prime [working] directive was zero casualties" to draw attention to what they have exposed or do they actually contend it could possibly be that black and white??
I think having people die during such an event helps the people who planned it not the other way round in many respects.
Reply
08-31-2010, 09:19 PM, (This post was last modified: 08-31-2010, 09:23 PM by kevlar.)
RE: September Clues Addendum. Chapter 1
Ok i will tell you what i think happened on 9/11

The training exercises that day were used as a smoke screen to allow for the confusion that would enable such an attack to occur without the proper defensive capability. This means there was an internal operation, i personally think that a lot of the systems were hacked on 9/11 and that it was the greatest hack of all time. Norad and the faa had to have been hacked/infiltrated for an attack like this to occur. How people could just pretend to believe the official story at such high levels of the intelligence community is only proof of a cover up in the least. The media was also hacked and i can speculate as to how they did that based on the technology as the time that was probably five years a head of what was main stream at least. They used multi track sequences to intercept the live footage and intercepting all the witnesses testimonies and then displaying a very well defined package to the world via the main live stream but all a long they were chopping and changing the audio and playing it over a looped image of the wtc sequence. Of course the anchors had TelePrompTers that would have dictated what they were going to say to a point. This and the way they changed the audio to say what they wanted it to say allowed them to trick the world. The controlled demo had to be done in the months prior to the event but the whole operation probably was years if not decades in planning with many people involved at different levels. That had to have been a double cross, so people knew that something was going to happen and that they should do nothing to prevent it. But they did not know the full extent of the situation. So for example they might have known that planes were going to fly into buildings but they did not know it was going to be controlled demolition as well. This allowed for such a terrible plan to be carried out because it would be more difficult to convince a lot of people that they were going to kill a lot of people, than if they just said it was not going to be that bad. To blow up a building like that they could have used a roll on type of nano thermite a gel or a paint that was connected up to a computer that displayed a perfect 3d computer animated version of the building with each charged and the ability to set off any explosive within the building. The owners of the buildings had to have been involved as well as the port authority. I know a lot of people from the port authority died but they had to be involved at some level because they would not have missed something like that. Building 7 was apparently wired up to explode as a self destruct mechanism years prior to the attack. This is how i thought that event could have been pulled off if i realy used my imagination. It definitely was not pulled off how the official story says it was.
Reply


Possibly Related Threads...
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  Which nation rates the top prize as the stupidest country on Earth? 27th September Plutarcus 3 2,562 10-02-2011, 04:37 PM
Last Post: Dunamis
  September 22, 2005 "Lost" and "The Third Policeman"? Apocalypso Now! 3 1,094 05-27-2010, 07:08 PM
Last Post: mastermg
  Zeitgeist: Addendum - by Peter Joseph 2008 TheTruth 37 4,051 10-12-2008, 06:28 AM
Last Post: Weyland
  Serious indications of something happening on september 14 OWN-the-NWO 29 3,245 09-14-2007, 02:14 PM
Last Post: Archie1970
  Where was Osama the night before September 11, 2001? In Pakistan, at a US-backed military hospital MikeWB 3 574 09-13-2007, 05:12 PM
Last Post: Ognir
  140 arrested in Chile for 11th September MrBS 2 549 09-11-2007, 06:09 PM
Last Post: MrBS
  HUGE event happening in September - Someone bought a TON of calls! MikeWB 4 683 08-26-2007, 09:08 AM
Last Post: MrBS
  Reuters: French official suggested Bush was behind September 11 MikeWB 1 525 07-07-2007, 07:17 PM
Last Post: Infowarrior
  Kate Middleton - The Final Chapter Conspiracy Dave 9 1,371 01-15-2007, 01:08 AM
Last Post: kjvtrue
  Chapter 5 - Towers Of Deception, Barrie Zwicker blove8. 52 5,069 11-13-2006, 11:25 PM
Last Post: deathstickboy

Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)