View Active Topics          Latest 100 Topics          View Your Posts          Mobile Version



Zero - An Investigation into 9/11 (Irrefutable, MUST SEE!)

Share or recommend interesting films and videos about paranormal phenomena, awakening topics, skepticism, spirituality, metaphysics, science, conspiracies, etc.

Re: Zero - A New Italian film debunking 9/11 (Artful, MUST SEE!)

Postby NinjaPuppy » 22 Aug 2009, 22:17

brett wrote:any one who is too lazy to watch this video or too stupid to see the implications - would be unwise to opine here in my view - they cant debunk this evidence - but they will try of course :roll: - the question you ALL now have to ask yourself is just how "expendable " you are ??

frightening ......................... :? :?


At this point in my life, watching this video is not an option for me. The recall of what happened that day and for many months following is too upsetting for me and may very well be for the remainder of my life. I was living in the area at the time and watched the towers fall (on TV) in total disbelief. I lived close enough to see the horror (by walking about 12 blocks) with my own eyes as the black smoke billowed into the sky and then I couldn't avoid smelling it for I don't know how long.

I can't even count how many people I know who lost loved ones that day.
User avatar
NinjaPuppy
 
Posts: 3941
Joined: 28 Jul 2009, 20:44






Re: Zero - A New Italian film debunking 9/11 (Artful, MUST SEE!)

Postby brett » 22 Aug 2009, 23:16

NinjaPuppy wrote:
brett wrote:any one who is too lazy to watch this video or too stupid to see the implications - would be unwise to opine here in my view - they cant debunk this evidence - but they will try of course :roll: - the question you ALL now have to ask yourself is just how "expendable " you are ??

frightening ......................... :? :?


At this point in my life, watching this video is not an option for me. The recall of what happened that day and for many months following is too upsetting for me and may very well be for the remainder of my life. I was living in the area at the time and watched the towers fall (on TV) in total disbelief. I lived close enough to see the horror (by walking about 12 blocks) with my own eyes as the black smoke billowed into the sky and then I couldn't avoid smelling it for I don't know how long.

I can't even count how many people I know who lost loved ones that day.


yea fair do's NP - i was of course referring to the rampant skeptics who will say "i don't need to watch it as i know the truth "

your actually living near by must have been very harrowing - so can fully appreciate your sentiments
LIFE - just filling the bits between birth, death and taxes
User avatar
brett
 
Posts: 436
Joined: 06 Aug 2009, 22:23
Location: Plymouth UK

Re: Zero - A New Italian film debunking 9/11 (Artful, MUST SEE!)

Postby NinjaPuppy » 23 Aug 2009, 01:43

brett wrote:yea fair do's NP - i was of course referring to the rampant skeptics who will say "i don't need to watch it as i know the truth "
your actually living near by must have been very harrowing - so can fully appreciate your sentiments


Understood. Just lamenting over not being able to comment on a topic that I find to be of interest as well as personal experience.
User avatar
NinjaPuppy
 
Posts: 3941
Joined: 28 Jul 2009, 20:44

Re: Zero - A New Italian film debunking 9/11 (Artful, MUST SEE!)

Postby Scepcop » 23 Aug 2009, 13:26

ProfWag, if you can't be bothered watching the 2 hour film "9/11 Blueprint for Truth", then see this 10 minute segment from it. It will show you an example of how GOOD it really is.



Also see this enticing trailer for it. It will show you just how AWESOME and CREDIBLE the film is!

“Devotion to the truth is the hallmark of morality; there is no greater, nobler, more heroic form of devotion than the act of a man who assumes the responsibility of thinking.” - Ayn Rand, Atlas Shrugged
User avatar
Scepcop
Site Admin
 
Posts: 3218
Joined: 16 May 2009, 07:29

Re: Zero - A New Italian film debunking 9/11 (Artful, MUST SEE!)

Postby ProfWag » 24 Aug 2009, 00:40

Wow, amazing! Yes I am now a believer! A believer that you people are so full of crap and hate that it's ridiculous. You really have issues that I can't help with.
Oh, and that Zero film. That heavyweight in government and science, Gore Vidal, really lends credibility. If it wasn't such a serious topic, this film would be laughable.
The only further comments I will make to 9/11 threads will be to post websites showing how completely uninformed the truthers for this stupid theory are.
Deep down, I couldn't care less what a few of you think about 9/11. It's when someone who doesn't know sees this crap may start to think irrationally. All of you who don't look at the real facts should be ashamed of yourself. You're quick to point out potential fallacies, but slow or non-existant to state the obvious: That planes collided into two buildings on the morning of 9/11. These planes had 19 terrorists. They killed thousands of innocent people. That you "truthers" have to much time on your hands and spread nonsense.
All of your "truthers" should get out from under your umbrella and do something that benefits society rather than tries to destroy it.
User avatar
ProfWag
 
Posts: 3800
Joined: 05 Aug 2009, 03:54

Re: Zero - A New Italian film debunking 9/11 (Artful, MUST SEE!)

Postby brett » 24 Aug 2009, 02:38

ProfWag wrote:Wow, amazing! Yes I am now a believer! A believer that you people are so full of crap and hate that it's ridiculous. You really have issues that I can't help with.
Oh, and that Zero film. That heavyweight in government and science, Gore Vidal, really lends credibility. If it wasn't such a serious topic, this film would be laughable.
The only further comments I will make to 9/11 threads will be to post websites showing how completely uninformed the truthers for this stupid theory are.
Deep down, I couldn't care less what a few of you think about 9/11. It's when someone who doesn't know sees this crap may start to think irrationally. All of you who don't look at the real facts should be ashamed of yourself. You're quick to point out potential fallacies, but slow or non-existant to state the obvious: That planes collided into two buildings on the morning of 9/11. These planes had 19 terrorists. They killed thousands of innocent people. That you "truthers" have to much time on your hands and spread nonsense.
All of your "truthers" should get out from under your umbrella and do something that benefits society rather than tries to destroy it.


to quote from your post " I couldn't care less what a few of you think about 9/11 " this sums it up - you are not prepared to consider evidence found by qualified people - using scientific technique ( the holy grail of the skeptic ) - experts in their fields no less who earn their livings designing these buildings ,or give ANY credence to eyewitness testimony from people who where there - fire fighters - police - etc people who know their stuff ( especially in the case of fire fighters about what or not fire will do to a building ) - controlled demolition experts - who blow up buildings for a living and obviously know their stuff also - plus footage taken from all sorts of sources and angles

jeez wag - how blind are you ?? - i too would not have believed or even given credence to this until i saw the evidence presented in the 2 hour video ( did you watch that by the way ?? - i have twice - just to make sure i understood what is being suggested here ) - and don't forget as a former fire fighter of 22 years + experience and one time officer in charge of a station - i have SEEN what fire does to steel framed buildings on many occasions - fires involving combustibles - fuels - chemicals etc - and i never saw destruction of steel components like those shown - even after many many hours of continuous exposure to flame !! and intense heat

yes 2 planes hit the towers but in my honest opinion (note this ) OPINION , those planes did NOT bring those towers down - and what of WTC 7 ?? - not even HIT by a plane - so what caused its rapid collapse - fires - yea right - look at the footage - some of those fires where on the side facing AWAY from the towers - and NOT of sufficient severity to cause even partial collapse of a 44 story building - in less than 12 seconds - time and time again EXPERTS ( not me ) in building design - fire resistance and fire fighting are saying NOT POSSIBLE given the circumstances at the time

need i go on - BUT FIRST I have to ask where do YOU get your "expertise " to be able to debunk at a stroke all of these people ?? - OK you don't want to believe this new evidence - i was skeptical too - but the logic of the arguments and evidence presented has changed my mind - i too accepted the official story for 6 years - that terrorists did this with 2 planes ( to say nothing of the pentagon one and the other involved ) - i too was blinkered with outrage that all these people where killed - i too supported the strikes on and subsequent wars - until NOW - and now i am asking questions - questions that the answers to may be too horrible to contemplate !! - answers that could mean we are ALL expendable !! do you NOT think that outrages me ??

i am not a "truther " as you call us - i just want the TRUTH - and if that truth is that some faction of the government had a hand in this - then i and many more want them brought to justice !!

and don't forget prof - i am a Brit - our people are fighting and dieing over in iraq and afghanistan the same as your guys !! - brits died on 9/11 !! - if nothing else the relatives of them and ALL the people killed on 9/11 - the London bombings - and other outrages deserve the TRUTH however unpalatable that truth may be to some !!

forget all the politics and loyalties to governments and parties and ideology - these are people we are talking about - people like you and I - like your family , like your friends - are they NOT worth delving beyond your current beliefs to find the truth ??
LIFE - just filling the bits between birth, death and taxes
User avatar
brett
 
Posts: 436
Joined: 06 Aug 2009, 22:23
Location: Plymouth UK

Re: Zero - A New Italian film debunking 9/11 (Artful, MUST SEE!)

Postby Nostradamus » 24 Aug 2009, 12:38

Sounds like you're in denial and refuse to look at all the evidence. Where is the evidence for the officlal story and why do you defend it as gospel truth? Simply because it's "official"? Gee that's critical thinking, NOT!

Watch the 9/11 Blueprint for Truth video I linked above.

There is no proof that a plane hit the Pentagon. No debris, no video, etc. People who believe the official version do so on faith only.


It is a matter of denial. The deniers are the twoofers. And I have looked over lots of proposals and data and presentations.

My response is simple:
1. There is no official story.
2. There are photos of plane debris at the Pentagon

Image
Scimitars were not available - beware January 19, 2038 is upon us.
User avatar
Nostradamus
 
Posts: 1761
Joined: 08 Aug 2009, 14:08

Re: Zero - A New Italian film debunking 9/11 (Artful, MUST SEE!)

Postby Nostradamus » 24 Aug 2009, 12:49

Zero is a zero of a movie. It is a list of twoofer nonsense that has been rehashed for years. There is nothing new in that film.

There are some extreme errors in the claims made on this forum.

For example:
and NOT of sufficient severity to cause even partial collapse of a 44 story building - in less than 12 seconds


The collapse was considerably longer than 12 seconds.

The list of so-called experts on the Twoofer side is short. Take a gander at the NIST report to see how many experts worked on that document.
Scimitars were not available - beware January 19, 2038 is upon us.
User avatar
Nostradamus
 
Posts: 1761
Joined: 08 Aug 2009, 14:08

Re: Zero - A New Italian film debunking 9/11 (Artful, MUST SEE!)

Postby Nostradamus » 24 Aug 2009, 12:50

My biggest question is why this twoofer nonsense is on a forum that states at the top:
The Scientific Committee Exposing Pseudo-Skeptical Cynicism of the Paranormal


Is there a paranormal angle to this issue?
Scimitars were not available - beware January 19, 2038 is upon us.
User avatar
Nostradamus
 
Posts: 1761
Joined: 08 Aug 2009, 14:08

Re: Zero - A New Italian film debunking 9/11 (Artful, MUST SEE!)

Postby brett » 24 Aug 2009, 14:22

Nostradamus wrote:
Sounds like you're in denial and refuse to look at all the evidence. Where is the evidence for the officlal story and why do you defend it as gospel truth? Simply because it's "official"? Gee that's critical thinking, NOT!

Watch the 9/11 Blueprint for Truth video I linked above.

There is no proof that a plane hit the Pentagon. No debris, no video, etc. People who believe the official version do so on faith only.


It is a matter of denial. The deniers are the twoofers. And I have looked over lots of proposals and data and presentations.

My response is simple:
1. There is no official story.
2. There are photos of plane debris at the Pentagon

Image


well if there is no official story what have we been listening to for 6 years then ?? - and if you watch the videos carefully they are not denying that some sort of plane hit the pentagon - just questioning if it was an airliner as per the official story
LIFE - just filling the bits between birth, death and taxes
User avatar
brett
 
Posts: 436
Joined: 06 Aug 2009, 22:23
Location: Plymouth UK

Re: Zero - A New Italian film debunking 9/11 (Artful, MUST SEE!)

Postby brett » 24 Aug 2009, 14:51

Nostradamus wrote:Zero is a zero of a movie. It is a list of twoofer nonsense that has been rehashed for years. There is nothing new in that film.

There are some extreme errors in the claims made on this forum.

For example:
and NOT of sufficient severity to cause even partial collapse of a 44 story building - in less than 12 seconds


The collapse was considerably longer than 12 seconds.

The list of so-called experts on the Twoofer side is short. Take a gander at the NIST report to see how many experts worked on that document.



was it ?? - er go look at all the videos of the collapse of WTC 7 and the towers - and time them with a stop watch - or better still go and watch the full presentation - and see the frame by frame analysis - even if it took 30 -40 -60 seconds ( which it did not ) the fact still remains that they came down way faster than the fire scenario could explain and far too completely - + you ignore "experts" in fire fighting and building construction that plainly state - that NO steel frame hi rise building involved in fire has ever collapsed due to fire - as is the "supposed " cause of these incidents - and don't forget again WTC7 was NOT hit by any plane - so what caused its rapid collapse then ?? - eh ??
LIFE - just filling the bits between birth, death and taxes
User avatar
brett
 
Posts: 436
Joined: 06 Aug 2009, 22:23
Location: Plymouth UK

Re: Zero - A New Italian film debunking 9/11 (Artful, MUST SEE!)

Postby brett » 24 Aug 2009, 15:48

to save any of you struggling - here are links to 3 videos - that may change your minds about the NIST experts pronouncements :

http://www.ae911truth.org/flashmov13.htm

http://www.ae911truth.org/flashmov14.htm

http://www.ae911truth.org/flashmov15.htm

also my comment about 12 seconds has been dismissed - well again watch the analysis - 18 floors fall in 5.8 seconds ( free fall ) therefor for a 44 floor building in free fall ?? - go do the maths yourselves - and don't forget that things that fall from height accelerate ! - to terminal velocity ( assuming no resistance ) - so 12 seconds for total collapse ?? near enough for the ordinary person - and STILL way too fast for the official scenario that fires caused the collapse - buildings that catch fire collapse progressively - i have seen them do so - don't forget i have 22+ years experience of fighting fires - and have been in one or two that have been collapsing - NON steel framed buildings AND steel framed ones with considerable fires in them - and i am still here to tell the tale - NONE of them dropped like those buildings did - if they HAD i would not be typing this ;)

come on guys LOOK at the evidence - not just your long held views - as i have commented else where i believed the official line up till now - and its a hell of a thing to have to face up to the idea that all is NOT as first presented
LIFE - just filling the bits between birth, death and taxes
User avatar
brett
 
Posts: 436
Joined: 06 Aug 2009, 22:23
Location: Plymouth UK

Re: Zero - A New Italian film debunking 9/11 (Artful, MUST SEE!)

Postby ProfWag » 24 Aug 2009, 21:18

brett wrote: - and if you watch the videos carefully they are not denying that some sort of plane hit the pentagon - just questioning if it was an airliner as per the official story

So you support the people who question whether it was commercial aircraft that flew into the buildings? What about those people that were on the planes, do they and their families that were left behind deserve that? That's real classy.
User avatar
ProfWag
 
Posts: 3800
Joined: 05 Aug 2009, 03:54

Re: Zero - A New Italian film debunking 9/11 (Artful, MUST SEE!)

Postby ProfWag » 24 Aug 2009, 21:25

Mr. Fireman, since you are so knowledgable and interested in the firman's side of the story, here is some more reading for you.

“I saw a flash flash flash [at] the lower level of the building. You know like when they demolish a building?”--Assistant Fire Commissioner Stephen Gregory

Now the WHOLE QUOTE without the taking out of context...

I know I was with an officer from Ladder 146, a Lieutenant Evangelista, who ultimately called me up a couple of days later just to find out how I was. We both for whatever reason -- again, I don't know how valid this is with everything that was going on at that particular point in time, but for some reason I thought that when I looked in the direction of the Trade Center before it came down, before No. 2 came down, that I saw low-leve] flashes. In my conversation with Lieutenant Evangelista, never mentioning this to him, he questioned me and asked me if I saw low-level flashes in front of the building, and I agreed with him because I thought -- at that time I didn't know what it was. I mean, it could have been as a result of the building collapsing, things exploding, but I saw a flash flash flash and then it looked like the building came down.

Q.: Was that on the lower level of the building or up where the fire was?

A: No, the lower level of the building. You know like when they demolish a building, how when they blow up a building, when it falls down? That's what I thought I saw. And I didn't broach the topic to him, but he asked me. He said I don't know if I'm crazy, but I just wanted to ask you because you were standing right next to me. He said did you see anything by the building? And I said what do you mean by see anything? He said did you see any flashes? I said, yes, well, I thought it was just me. He said no, I saw them, too.

I don't know if that means anything. I mean, I equate it to the building cowing down and pushing things down, it could have been electrical explosions, it could have been whatever.

http://www.nytimes.com/packages/html/ny ... TC_GRAPHIC
/Gregory_Stephen.txt

Let me guess why they left that important part out..

“t was [like a] professional demolition where they set the charges on certain floors and then you hear 'Pop, pop, pop, pop, pop'."--Paramedic Daniel Rivera

SO WE WERE PRETTY MUCH-MOST OF THE WORKERS WERE INSIDE THIS BUILDING. I LIKE SAID, I DON'T KNOW IF ITS FIVE WORLD TRADE CENTER OR FOUR WORLD TRADE CENTER. MOST OF THEM WERE IN THE BUILDING BECAUSE THE CHIEF OR THE CAPTAIN SAID IF YOU WANT YOU CAN STAY INSIDE THAT BUILDING. BUT I DIDN'T FEEL SAFE BECAUSE I KNEW IT WAS TERRORIST ATTACK SO I WAS SCARED. EVERY TIME YOU HEAR PLANE EVERYONE WOULD RUN. SO I PRETTY MUCH STOOD AROUND HERE SOMEWHERE. I WOULD SEE TRIAGE, BUT I WAS PRETTY MUCH IN BETWEEN THE TWO BUILDINGS.

THEN THAT'S WHEN-I KEPT ON WALKING CLOSE TO THE SOUTH TOWER, AND THAT'S WHEN THAT BUILDING COLLAPSED.

Q: HOW DID YOU KNOW THAT IT WAS COMING DOWN?

A: THAT NOISE .IT WAS NOISE.

Q: WHAT DID YOU HEAR? WHAT DID YOU SEE?

A: IT WAS A FRIGGING NOISE. AT FIRST I THOUGHT IT WAS-DO YOU EVER SEE PROFESSIONAL DEMOLITION WHERE THEY SET THE CHARGES ON CERTAIN FLOORS AND THEN YOU HEAR "POP, POP, POP, POP, POP"? THAT'S EXACTLY WHAT-BECAUSE I THOUGHT IT WAS THAT WHEN I HEARD THAT FRIGGING NOISE, THAT'S WHEN I SAW THE BUILDING COMING DOWN.

http://graphics8.nytimes.com/packages/p ... TC_GRAPHIC
/9110035.PDF

First, notice he and everyone else was scared of TERRORISTS. What do TERRORIST DO? So it's not unreasonable for someone who is thinking TERRORIST to hear the sound of huge concrete floors falling one on top of the other to think "BOMB" first. As I said, No one has ever seen an airplane hit buildings constructed like this and the collapse of this odd combination.

“There was what appeared to be at first an explosion. It appeared at the very top, simultaneously from all four sides, materials shot out horizontally. And then there seemed to be a momentary delay before you could see the beginning of the collapse." --Chief Frank Cruthers

there was what appeared to be at first an explosion. it appeared at the very top, simultaneously from all four sides

http://www.nytimes.com/packages/html/ny ... TC_GRAPHIC
/Cruthers.txt

And why wouldn't floors falling around the building NOT APPEAR to be an EXPLOSION... :blink:

"I started walking back up towards Vesey Street. I heard three explosions, and then we heard like groaning and grinding, and tower two started to come down.” --Paramedic Kevin Darnowski

Again, just more sounds like explosions as floors ram into each other. Note he doesn't say he SAW three explosions.

http://graphics8.nytimes.com/packages/p ... TC_GRAPHIC
/9110202.PDF

And here is the outright LIE...

“ we heard explosions coming from building two, the south tower. It seemed like it took forever, but there were about ten explosions. . . . We then realized the building started to come down.” -- Firefighter Craig Carlsen

Note where these liars put the "...."

Now for the REAL quote...

I guess about three minutes later you just heard explosions coming from building two, the south tower. It seemed like it took forever, but there were about ten explosions. At the time I didn't realize what it was. We realized later after talking and finding out that it was the floors collapsing to where the plane had hit.

http://graphics8.nytimes.com/packages/p ... TC_GRAPHIC
/9110505.PDF

With that alone I should rest my case. ;) These CT sites are dishonest.

Here is the other lie, they split up those quotes to make it seem like there are more people hearing explosions than there really are. You have paramedic Daniel Rivera's interview split in two and Stephen Gregory's interview split in two, as if there are different people hearing different explosions. They flood you with quotes hoping you won't notice. What other reason would they have for splitting them up???

“Then this flash just kept popping all the way around the building and that building had started to explode. The popping sound, and with each popping sound it was initially an orange and then a red flash came out of the building and then it would just go all around the building on both sides as far as I could see. These popping sounds and the explosions were getting bigger, going both up and down and then all around the building." -- Captain Karin Deshore

MY BACK WAS TOWARDS THE BUILDING, TRYING TO PUSH EVERYBODY UP.

GRASSY HILL WAS THERE AND UP UNDERNEATH THAT OVERPASS, WHEN SOMEBODY JUST SIMPLY SHOUTED AND I HAVE NO IDEA WHO IT WAS, "IT'S BLOWING".

I HAD NO CLUE WHAT WAS GOING ON. I NEVER TURNED AROUND BECAUSE A SOUND CAME FROM SOMEWHERE THAT NEVER HEARD BEFORE. SOME PEOPLE COMPARED IT WITH AN AIRPLANE. IT WAS THE WORST SOUND OF ROLLING SOUND, NOT A THUNDER CAN'T EXPLAIN IT, WHAT IT WAS. ALL I

KNOW IS -- AND FORCE STARTED TO COME HIT ME IN MY BACK. I CAN'T EXPLAIN IT. YOU HAD TO BE THERE. ALL I KNOW IS -- HAD TO RUN BECAUSE I THOUGHT THERE WAS AN EXPLOSION.

...I WAS UNAWARE WHAT WAS HAPPENING. I THOUGHT

IT WAS JUST MAJOR EXPLOSION I DIDN'T KNOW THE BUILDING WAS COLLAPSING

SOMEWHERE AROUND THE MIDDLE OF THE WORLD TRADE CENTER, THERE WAS THIS ORANGE AND RED FLASH COMING OUT. INITIALLY IT WAS JUST ONE FLASH. THEN THIS FLASH JUST KEPT POPPING ALL THE WAY AROUND THE BUILDING AND THAT BUILDING HAD STARTED TO EXPLODE. THE POPPING SOUND, AND WITH EACH POPPING SOUND IT WAS INITIALLY AN ORANGE AND THEN RED FLASH CAME OUT OF THE BUILDING AND THEN IT WOULD JUST GO ALL AROUND THE BUILDING ON BOTH SIDES AS FAR AS COULD SEE. THESE POPPING SOUNDS AND THE EXPLOSIONS WERE GETTING BIGGER GOING BOTH UP AND DOWN AND THEN ALL AROUND THE BUILDING.

It's time to see a transformer explosion.

http://www.stupidcollege.com/items/Elec ... -Explosion

All these buildings had transformers and transformer vaults.

SO HERE THESE EXPLOSIONS ARE GETTING BIGGER AND LOUDER AND BIGGER AND LOUDER AND I TOLD EVERYBODY IF THIS BUILDING TOTALLY EXPLODES, STILL UNAWARE THAT THE OTHER BUILDING HAD COLLAPSED, IM GOING IN THE WATER.

http://graphics8.nytimes.com/packages/p ... TC_GRAPHIC
/9110192.PDF

“I took a quick glance at the building and while I didn't see it falling, I saw a large section of it blasting out, which led me to believe it was just an explosion.” -- Captain Jay Swithers

When I was giving her the oxygen, setting up the tank, you could hear a loud rumble. Somebody said run for your life. I turned to see who was yelling "run".

At that point I looked back and most of the people who were triaged in that area with the triage tags on them got up and ran. I took a quick glance at the building and while I didn't see it falling, I saw a large section of it blasting out, which led me to believe it was just an explosion. I thought it was a secondary device, but I knew that we had to go.

But one thing that did happen was an ambulance pulled up which was very clean. So I assumed that the vehicle had not been in the - what I thought was an explosion at the time, but was the first collapse.

http://graphics8.nytimes.com/packages/p ... TC_GRAPHIC
/9110172.PDF

First he heard the rumble. Not the so called "Explosion" which he never saw. Then he thought he heard an explosion because he saw the debris falling away from the building. He had TERRORIST on his mind and jumped to the conclusion that it was a bomb. You don't have to be a psychologist here.

Fire officer Paul Isaac Jr. asserted that 9-11 was an inside job last September 11 at ground zero where mourners and protesters were gathered; “I know 9-11 was an inside job. The police know it’s an inside job; and the firemen know it too”, said Isaac.

"there were definitely bombs in those buildings,” Isaac added that “many other firemen know there were bombs in the buildings, but they’re afraid for their jobs to admit it because the ‘higher-ups’ forbid discussion of this fact.” --Auxiliary Lieutenant Fireman Paul Isaac

Paul Isaac never said anything of the kind. Another Conspiracy Theorist deception.

A video is shown on just about every conspiracy web site which shows a few fireman discussing what they heard and saw.


fireman2: We made it outside, we made it about a block.
fireman1: We made it at least 2 blocks.
fireman2: 2 blocks.
fireman1: and we started runnin'
fireman2: poch-poch-poch-poch-poch-poch-poch
fireman1: Floor by floor it started poppin' out …
fireman2: It was as if as if they had detonated, det…
fireman1: yea detonated yea
fireman2: as if they had planned to take down a building,
boom-boom-boom-boom-boom-boom-boom-boom…
In the context of reading it off a conspiracy site, this may sound like damning evidence. They are saying “detonated” and “they had planned to take down a building”. They even say “Boom” to describe the sound. But if you hear the other things they’re saying, their body language and context outside the conspiracy theory setting, something else emerges. Before or after every description is “As if”. “As if they had planned to take down a building”. “It was as if as if they had detonated”. They also use body language to show it was the sound of the floors crashing into one another.



boom- (hand moves down)

boom- (hand moves down)

boom- (hand moves down)

boom- (hand moves down)

boom- (hand moves down)

boom- (hand moves down)

boom- (hand moves down)

boom…

This could be just as powerful evidence of pancaking as the use of explosives. But the real evidence isn’t so much examining the video as examining the actions taken, or NOT taken, by the NYC Fire Department after the event. The NYC Fire Department hasn’t rallied its members to force an investigation into the possible murder of over 300 of its members. Some sites offer an explanation of this saying there was a gag order placed on the Fire Department. The only place you will find this is on conspiracy theory sites. No mention from main stream press about the hundreds if not thousands of fireman on the scene not being allowed to talk.

A glaring example of picking and choosing what to focus on is the interview with Mary Baldizzi... They point to a BBC article that says

The jet fuel caused the fire to spread so far and so fast that it effectively cut the building into two. For the 6,000 people below where the plane had hit the staircases still offered a means of escape, but for the 950 caught above the point of impact and the fire there was no way out.

The argument is made that towers fell because of separate detonations. As proof, they offered the case of Mary Baldizzi who supposedly had escaped the 104th floor of the World Trade Center's North Tower by elevator. Thus, the only way she could have escaped via elevator was if the core was intact at least to the 104th floor.

When I watched the video, I thought, if there had been a survivor from above the impact zone in Tower 1, it would have been widely broadcast. So, logically, I searched online for either confirmation or repudiation. I found neither. What I did find was the repeated use of Ms. Baldizzi's story as evidence in various alternative theories (i.e., other than fire) for the collapse of the towers.

Returning to the original video, I watched it several more times. After listening closely to Ms. Baldizzi's interview, I came to the conclusion that Mary Baldizzi was not on the 104th floor of the North Tower (WTC1) but was on the 104th floor of the South Tower (WTC2) and that this was a misrepresentation of her escape as having been from WTC1. Here are the reasons I came to this conclusion:

1. Although the newswomen began the interview stating that Mary Baldizzi had come down the elevators from the 104th floor and was in the "first tower when it was struck," at no time during the interview does Ms. Baldizzi state that she was in the North Tower. In addition, none of the graphics that accompany the interview claim that Ms. Baldizzi was in the North Tower. When Ms. Baldizzi is asked if she felt the impact, she says "Oh yeah." But the effects she describes -- feeling the heat, experiencing the shaking, hearing the explosion -- are all effects experienced by those who were in the South Tower on the floors adjacent to the impact zone (see:
http://www.usatoday.com/news/sept11/200 ... usat_x.htm ). If she had been in the North Tower when it was hit then she would have described the impact in much less casual terms.

2. Around 5 minutes and 20 seconds into the interview, the interviewers ask about Ms. Baldizzi's coworkers. Ms. Baldizzi's states that she does not know the whereabouts of her fellow employees and proceeds to state, around 5:55 of the interview, that she has no way of contacting them other than to "call [the] main office in Illinois." Now, the offices on the 104th floor of the North Tower were occupied exclusively by Cantor Fitzgerald, while offices on the 104th floor of the South Tower were occupied by Sandler O'Neill (see: http://www.cnn.com/SPECIALS/2001/trade. ... ants1.html). Cantor Fitzgerald does not have a main office in Illinois (see: http://www.cantor.com/contact/). Sandler O'Neill, on the other hand, does have a central office in Chicago (see: http://www.sandleroneill.com/). This suggests that Ms. Baldizzi was an employee of Sandler O'Neill (in the South Tower) rather than Cantor Fitzgerald (in the North Tower).

3. Finally, and conclusively, at 6:15 in the interview Ms. Baldizzi begins a discussion about what she and her coworkers did when they exited the building. She clearly says: "There were police officers, thank God, that were aiming us towards Liberty St. because we stupidly walked towards One World Trade because we didn't know; we had no idea it was a terrorist attack." Now, if Ms. Baldizzi had been in One World Trade Center (i.e., the North Tower) there is no way she would have described her egress as "towards One Word Trade" because no matter in which direction she walked she would have been going away from One World Trade. This point proves, beyond any doubt, that Ms. Baldizzi exited from the South Tower and that the mistaken announcement at the beginning of the interview that she was in the North Tower was just one of the miscommunications and misunderstandings in the chaos of those early days.

I concluded that Ms. Baldizzi exited Tower 2 at the same time many others in the building did: after the North Tower was hit but before the South Tower was hit. If she was "dragged" into the elevator within seconds after the first tower was hit, and if the elevator ride took about 4 minutes, she would've been out of the building well before the South Tower was hit.



USA Today

As you can see the South Tower core was not damaged as much because of large, heavily constructed elevator equipment which protected it anyway.

There were two freight elevators that serviced the 104th floor.

Cars #6 and #50 serviced the 104th floor, lobby and basement levels.

----------

• Car #5: B1-5, 7, 9-40, 44
• Car #6: B1-5, 44, 75, 77-107 *
• Car #17: B1-1, 41, 43-78
• Car #48: B1-7, 9-40
• Car #49: B1-5, 41-74
• Car #50: B6-108 *
• Car #99: 107-110

There were two express elevators to Windows on the World (and related conference rooms and banquet facilities) in WTC 1 and two to the observation deck in WTC 2.

pg 34 (adobe pg 72)

NIST NCSTAR 1-7 (Draft)

Federal Building and Fire Safety Investigation of the World Trade Center Disaster
Occupant Behavior, Egress, and Emergency Communications (Draft)

There were firemen who radioed in after being stuck in the elevator moments before the south tower collapsed.

http://www.firehouse.com/terrorist/wtca ... udio8.html

So there were elevators working in the south tower AFTER the impact. But what's important here is that the interview is being taken out of context. A theme which seems to run strong with these conspiracy theorists.
User avatar
ProfWag
 
Posts: 3800
Joined: 05 Aug 2009, 03:54

Re: Zero - A New Italian film debunking 9/11 (Artful, MUST SEE!)

Postby Nostradamus » 25 Aug 2009, 00:22

well if there is no official story what have we been listening to for 6 years then ?? - and if you watch the videos carefully they are not denying that some sort of plane hit the pentagon - just questioning if it was an airliner as per the official story


The term official story is a term used by pseudoskeptics such as truthers to give them something to attack.

There is no proof that a plane hit the Pentagon. No debris, no video, etc. People who believe the official version do so on faith only.


I responded to this claim which states quite clearly that there is no proof that a plane hit the Pentagon. This is not a claim that some type of plane hit the Pentagon, but no plane.


was it ?? - er go look at all the videos of the collapse of WTC 7 and the towers - and time them with a stop watch - or better still go and watch the full presentation - and see the frame by frame analysis - even if it took 30 -40 -60 seconds ( which it did not ) the fact still remains that they came down way faster than the fire scenario could explain and far too completely - + you ignore "experts" in fire fighting and building construction that plainly state - that NO steel frame hi rise building involved in fire has ever collapsed due to fire - as is the "supposed " cause of these incidents - and don't forget again WTC7 was NOT hit by any plane - so what caused its rapid collapse then ?? - eh ??


The times taken by NIST do not correspond to the times by the Truthers because NIST began the times when the collapses initiated, not when some part of the building's exterior began to fall. Very important difference. The speed and severity of collapse are red herrings. The claims that this has never happened before are correct. These buildings were the only ones ever built using that construction method. Do you think that method will be used again or were hard lessons learned?

WTC7 was not hit by a plane - correct. The collapse was due to the fires which were severe. What the videos. Watch the penthouse drop. It drops because of catastrophic failure within the building. Read the NIST report to understand how the failures came about.

also my comment about 12 seconds has been dismissed - well again watch the analysis - 18 floors fall in 5.8 seconds ( free fall ) therefor for a 44 floor building in free fall ?? - go do the maths yourselves - and don't forget that things that fall from height accelerate ! - to terminal velocity ( assuming no resistance ) - so 12 seconds for total collapse ?? near enough for the ordinary person -


Folks start your timers when the penthouse begins to move. The collapse has already begun at that point. So the collapse has begun inside of the building before the vertical exterior surfaces begin to collapse.
Scimitars were not available - beware January 19, 2038 is upon us.
User avatar
Nostradamus
 
Posts: 1761
Joined: 08 Aug 2009, 14:08

PreviousNext

Return to Share Interesting Videos and Films

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests