Hard Evidence

Discussion in '9/11' started by Shinebox, Sep 10, 2016.

You are viewing posts in the Conspiracy Theory forum. PF does not allow misinformation. However, please note that posts could occasionally contain content in violation of our policies prior to our staff intervening.

  1. ChristopherABrown

    ChristopherABrown Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 27, 2014
    Messages:
    5,149
    Likes Received:
    175
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Gender:
    Male
    In the tons of lies and omissions, we find the acceptance of the act of destruction of unalienable rights by government, absolutely in the coverup, but linked to the demolition because of the 1993 bombing. All used to further compromise the constitution and our rights.

    Your frank observance of gamo's role is appreciated. This kind of behavior related to mass murder is not something civil people entertain.

    The question of exactly where to begin is critical and gamo works to confuse that.

    Logically, the investigators priorities; 1) What happened? (in this case, what it happened to). 2) How did it happen? 3) Who did it?; prevails.
     
  2. Bob0627

    Bob0627 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2015
    Messages:
    8,576
    Likes Received:
    2,337
    Trophy Points:
    113
    The destruction of the Bill of Rights was an incremental process that started well before the 20th century. IMO it started more or less with the 1803 Marbury vs Madison Supreme Court bench decree that it had the power to "interpret" the Constitution. That's like saying an employee has the power to interpret his/her employment contract.

    Apologies for the (sort of) off topic opinion.
     
  3. Gamolon

    Gamolon Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2013
    Messages:
    2,385
    Likes Received:
    88
    Trophy Points:
    48
    So the express elevator shafts went vertically through your supposed concrete walls?!

    :eekeyes:
     
  4. Gamolon

    Gamolon Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2013
    Messages:
    2,385
    Likes Received:
    88
    Trophy Points:
    48
    This next diagram shows just how poorly thought out your concrete core fantasy actually is Chris. It proves beyond a shadow of a doubt that your concrete core is IMPOSSIBLE and that you've made it all up.

    [​IMG]

    Your supposed concrete core walls displace so much that there isn't any room to put it in the center!!! There were two express elevators per 20' bay between the outer box columns. We can push sixteen of those express elevators into the center (blue boxes), but what happens to the other seven express elevators and the freight elevator?

    Not to mention your four hallways need to be added!

    What a complete joke!

    :roflol:
     
  5. ChristopherABrown

    ChristopherABrown Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 27, 2014
    Messages:
    5,149
    Likes Received:
    175
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Gender:
    Male
    Not off topic. The topic is about acts that compromised the constitution. Small points in defense using understanding are important junctures to create motivation to possible solution.

    I think it is necessary to have the Supreme Court have authority to interpret. Notice how careful they are, and the time it takes them to misinterpret.
    They cannot efficiently do their job if they can't interpret. HOWEVER, if they screw up, which they have, that is justification to remove some interpretive authority, and and perhaps tenure as well as other perks.

    Too much immunity and authority is too great of a temptation for human beings generally.

    Most importantly, the people need to be unified enough to rationalize logically each and every constitutionally questionable action of the supremes democratically. Starting with the beginning, and 1803 might me the right place like you say.
    We are a far cry from that now, but after 5 years using the purpose of free speech we could begin.

    The sobering effect of the truth of 9/11 can act as impetus for the people to return the purpose free speech, then alter or abolish, then begin to reform government best serving our security and happiness just like the DOI states.
     
  6. ChristopherABrown

    ChristopherABrown Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 27, 2014
    Messages:
    5,149
    Likes Received:
    175
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Gender:
    Male
    Hah ha ha ha, even working to misinterpret your own corrected drawing is too much temptation for you to remain accountably logical.

    The elevator face on the outside of the elevator was just inside of the concrete core walls, logically. And of course the supporting walls that compensated for the reduced strength of the core wall at the elevator door to the lobby were outside and between the elevators.

    Intentionally drawing pictures that don't make sense exposes you.
     
  7. ChristopherABrown

    ChristopherABrown Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 27, 2014
    Messages:
    5,149
    Likes Received:
    175
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Gender:
    Male
    Did you ever post an image of the steel framed core on 9/11?

    NO!

    Did you ever post a supposed construction rating where the dimensions can be read?

    NO!

    Have you shown even 1 photo of GZ steel with gusset plates and diagonals, an ABSOLUTELY necessary part of a steel framed core.

    NO!

    Have you explains how the entire contents of the building was pulverized and shredded?

    NO!

    This means you have no credibility.
     
  8. Bob0627

    Bob0627 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2015
    Messages:
    8,576
    Likes Received:
    2,337
    Trophy Points:
    113
    There is no authority granted to the Supreme Court to interpret the Constitution and for good reason. That power was illegally seized in Marbury vs Madison. The power the Supreme Court actually has is called JUDICIAL REVIEW, it does not include the power to interpret the Constitution. For that all one needs is an English language dictionary. If the Supreme Court really had the power to interpret the Constitution, it could "interpret" it as being null and void. Or in a less (but not much less) extreme case, it "interpreted" that corporations (a paper created fiction) are the same as people and have unalienable rights protected by the Bill of Rights and that money = free speech (both already done in Citizens United vs FEC). Judicial Review is the power to interpret a law or an executive action as being compliant with a higher law, in this case the Constitution.

    The Constitution is a contract between The People (the employers) and their government (the employees). Imagine if you are an employer and you had your employees interpret their employment contract and that when your employees interpreted their contract it trumped anything you believed was your interpretation of the contract. They could decide their actual pay was triple what you thought it was and that you should do their job. The idea is insane, just like the idea that the Supreme Court could interpret the Constitution. Worse is that their interpretation becomes law (case law) and renders the Amendment process a useless joke because they are in effect amending the Constitution with each new interpretation. The proverbial fox watching the hen house.
     
  9. ChristopherABrown

    ChristopherABrown Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 27, 2014
    Messages:
    5,149
    Likes Received:
    175
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Gender:
    Male
    I can't see how a court can function if it can't interpret the law.

    The employees have a supervisor, another employee with a higher status, they take an oath. The supervisor gets to interpret job descriptions for the other lower employees.

    The people, the employer, have been deprived of their right to see free speech serve a purpose, or enable their education of each other, so they cannot correct the supervisors. This is the point I make with these inquiry.

    Do you agree and accept that the framers of the founding documents intended for us to alter or abolish government destructive to our unalienable rights?

    Do you agree and accept that the ultimate purpose of free speech is to enable the unity adequate to effectively alter or abolish government destructive to our unalienable rights?


    In many years I've not heard the supremes do not have the right to interpret. I've heard and agree they do not have the right to DEFINE constitutional intent, nor does congress. The 9th amendment gives that right to us, we need to use it. This is the basis of Lincolns statement in an 1859 Illinois speech.

    "the people are the rightful masters of the congress and the court, not to overthrow the constitution, but to overthrow the men that would pervert the constitution."

    Seems that the decision of the court was only placed over that of congress with regard to their interpretations of the constitution.
     
  10. Bob0627

    Bob0627 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2015
    Messages:
    8,576
    Likes Received:
    2,337
    Trophy Points:
    113
    That's what judicial review is, an interpretation of a law with respect to a higher law. The higher law (the Constitution) stands as supreme (the standard) and the lower law is the one that requires compliance with the superior law.

    The supervisor is also an employee. The supervisor is bound by his/her employment contract and does not get to interpret it. The ultimate decider is the employer, not the supervisor.

    They can but they don't because they've been indoctrinated/scammed into believing the Supreme Court is the ultimate decider.

    That is what our founding document (the Declaration of Independence) says (see my signature). Of course I agree.

    Free speech is only a tool, an unalienable right, it has its limitations. It does not include enforcement powers.

    In fact the Supreme Court has NO rights, it has powers granted to it by the Constitution. There is a distinction between rights and powers. Only human beings can have rights and these cannot be granted by anyone, much less a piece of paper. Powers are granted and can be taken away.

    They don't have that power but they do it anyway, all the time, all 3 branches.

    Again rights are not given, they can only be protected or abrogated. Most people have no clue that the 9th Amendment is the most powerful and most important Amendment. That it can stand by itself. It protects ALL unenumerated (unlisted) rights. It is the one Amendment that the (in)justice system wants to keep quiet and marginalize the most, for good reason.

    By way of the Supreme Court's seizure of the power to interpret the Constitution, it has effectively created an imbalance in the Constitution's design to balance the powers of the 3 branches of government, making it the most powerful branch. You see it has even determined the President of the US in Bush vs Gore, overriding The People.
     
  11. Gamolon

    Gamolon Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2013
    Messages:
    2,385
    Likes Received:
    88
    Trophy Points:
    48
    :roflol:

    And your whining above refutes my rock solid proof against your fantasy concrete core how? Your avoidance in addressing my arguments speaks volumes. Why don't you just come clean and tell everyone you made all this up?

    There is no way you can refute any of my evidence.
     
  12. ChristopherABrown

    ChristopherABrown Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 27, 2014
    Messages:
    5,149
    Likes Received:
    175
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Gender:
    Male
    Very good explanations Bob. I accept all of that and consider myself corrected. I carry a slightly refined position now. Powers v rights, good point that I will remember.

    Yes free speech is a tool, and a right vital to enforcement, because only unity empowers enforcement and logically the PURPOSE of free speech is to enable that unity.

    Because the PURPOSE of free speech is not enumerated, when State Citizens agree it is a right that must be enumerated, state legislators have the duty to hold a convention proposing an amendment to the federal constitution so 3/4 of the states can also propose what is thought too be the best way to manifest the enumeration and right.

    That is my strategy very briefly packaged. The best thing about it is that it is completely an action the people undertake in the beginning. Later on, activists using the peoples agreement upon a vital right, defining that right, petition state legislators to accept the definition in order to prepare for conventions to amend. Since it is State Citizens using the 9th amendment of the federal constitution, states have accepted along with Article V, the clause in Article V requiring all amendments have constitutional intent is pre secured.

    - - - Updated - - -

    You actually have no evidence. You have fabrications.

    If you had evidence you would post an image of the supposed steel framed core on 9/11 like I've been asking for over the last 10 years.

    LOL!
     
  13. Bob0627

    Bob0627 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2015
    Messages:
    8,576
    Likes Received:
    2,337
    Trophy Points:
    113
    This is an extremely important concept that most people don't understand. Because they don't understand, many believe rights are granted by the Constitution or more specifically, the Bill of Rights. As a result, they believe governments can grant and take away rights. They can violate rights but they can't take them away.

    The Canadian Bill of Rights lists several fundamental rights that are "recognized" and "declared" to exist specifically in Canada. That is more or less how it's worded and it is quite deceptive language. For example, what about other unalienable rights? Only in Canada? Are these protected or is that just a laundry list? In the US Constitution, the first 8 Amendments list specific rights that are protected, the 9th protects all other unenumerated (unlisted rights) and the 10th declares that all powers not granted (and therefore prohibited) to the federal government belong to the states or the people. That covers all rights and powers, unlike the Canadian Bill of Rights.
     
  14. ChristopherABrown

    ChristopherABrown Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 27, 2014
    Messages:
    5,149
    Likes Received:
    175
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Gender:
    Male
    Powers vs unity
    This has been an excellent exchange based in ending and exposing the conspiracy that took 3,000 live in a few seconds, which has remained, still, a secret method of mass murder hidden from America. And, from my POV, submission of problem without solution is deficient, but we settle for that if that is all there is. Accordingly, it supersedes with importance, the problem, it is a discussion upon exactly how, by what legal mechanisms, the citizens of American states can get the truth, only the truth, and nothing but the truth which is a part of solution, eventually.



    I see you other threads here on various misinformation that you work to debunk/address etc. Good stuff.

    You may appreciate this page,

    http://algoxy.com/psych/whatis9-11disinfo-sitemap.html

    it has an an assembly of info on the notion of nano thermite, being used for destruction beyond simple incendiary, if it practically exists:) Particularly as something developed enough for those claimed uses.

    A page devoted to exposing misinformation/disinformation. Note the flow chart of NWO origins, development, and critical points in the hijacking of America to direct world changes not benefitting humanity.

    Your last post somewhat defines what may be a model of global structure of corruption to the peoples natural intent to see the results of society not be of detriment to society, primarily in the short term, but never compromising the long term. There is a secret side, that is cloaked by political correctness that end up serving religious mores limiting knowledge.

    Seems that's what is clear, then the people have failed to generally focus on fundamental rights that protect or empower other rights. This has caused not just compromises to those rights, but perhaps mental/emotional, intellectual, social disabilities through epigentitics, inhibiting that focus genetically on natural law. Therefore, refocusing on available natural law rights as expressed in those of American law, has context with all natural beings, no one is left out, making legal standing for public focus upon the shared definitions of primary natural law, constitutionally expressed and extended through the use of the 9th and Article V.

    Along those lines, the context the framers worked for in the protection of unalienable rights, is logically a common point of social potential for establishing unity that can be lawfully effective at protecting unalienable rights.

    Did I describe why I post this all of the time?

    Do you agree and accept that the framers of the founding documents intended for us to alter or abolish government destructive to our unalienable rights?

    Do you agree and accept that the ultimate purpose of free speech is to enable the unity adequate to effectively alter or abolish government destructive to our unalienable rights?


    So in referral to your position on the 9th amendment, which is empowering; along with a sense of duty state legislatures have inherently, defined in the legal process here.

    http://algoxy.com/law/lawfulpeacefulrevolution.html

    Which all, as far as I can tell hinges on the American State Citizen's ability to define constitutional intent and use it lawfully to compel state recognition of "the people", coherently, lawfully and peacefully.
    At that that point American State Citizen's will become a force intellectually dedicated to the principles of the republic and all authority will obey to serve the State Citizen's. Seems an acceptable, available status that works using the law, the ability to define rights (Article V), as mass public, directly, upon leadership according to the oath they take to the constitution.
     
  15. Kokomojojo

    Kokomojojo Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2009
    Messages:
    23,673
    Likes Received:
    1,771
    Trophy Points:
    113
    here you go


    [​IMG]
     
  16. ChristopherABrown

    ChristopherABrown Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 27, 2014
    Messages:
    5,149
    Likes Received:
    175
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Gender:
    Male
    Okay, a fixture for holding burning, liquid thermite against a vertical column.

    But that is not "nano-thermite".

    That is really a nice animated .gif file though.
     
  17. ChristopherABrown

    ChristopherABrown Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 27, 2014
    Messages:
    5,149
    Likes Received:
    175
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Gender:
    Male
    The restrictive editing period at this forum makes posting on a phone a frequent fail at getting an error free post.

    An important statement had a typo I did not spot in the hurried editing the 20 minute period afforded.

    "Did you ever post a supposed construction DRAWING where the dimensions can be read?"

    NO
     
  18. Bob0627

    Bob0627 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2015
    Messages:
    8,576
    Likes Received:
    2,337
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Does it matter? The point is that thermite/ate can be used to cut through steel in seconds and that the technology existed before 9/11. And more importantly, that NIST deliberately failed to forensically test for ANY incendiaries.and lied when they used the pretext that they had no physical evidence to work with. Whether thermite/ate was actually used on 9/11 is debatable, although a team of experts claim it was, but deliberately not testing for it is criminal negligence.

    http://journalof911studies.com/volume/2008/Ryan_NIST_and_Nano-1.pdf
     
  19. ChristopherABrown

    ChristopherABrown Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 27, 2014
    Messages:
    5,149
    Likes Received:
    175
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Gender:
    Male
    Absolutely correct in every aspect. And the very presence of the masses of molten steel in the sub levels makes the refusal to test for incendiaries criminal.

    Debate? When any other possible way that much molten steel is found not to exist, the debate ends.

    Makes me wonder who infiltrated the NYC peace and justice groups to keep them from backing up the fire fighters that rioted against the NYPD keeping them from continuing the body searches.

    http://mobile.nytimes.com/2001/11/02/nyregion/firefighters-are-arrested-during-protest-at-ground-zero-2001110293120309587.html

    I know for a fact that NYCCAN's petition for an investigation was a designed fail by their attorney.

    The specific lines in my email to Ted Walters, their director, states almost exactly what the judge tossing out their petition wrote.

    http://algoxy.com/psych/whatis9-11disinfo-nyccan.html

    And a link to the judges order is there too.

    All this amounts to PROOF that our governments are destructive to unalienable rights.
     
  20. Gamolon

    Gamolon Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2013
    Messages:
    2,385
    Likes Received:
    88
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Do I need to go to a post you provided that says what the dimensions were between the box columns? 20' spacing Chris along the long axis! Except the dimension in the middle two box columns. I'll go find your post if you want me to.

    You're just looking for excuses now. Your concrete core is a fantasy that you made up. Your core walls displace so many things that they can't fit in the middle! You have given dimensions that agree with drawings and other information. Now you want to play dimension games?

    Refute what I have presented Chris. You CAN'T. You'll just look foolish.
     
  21. Gamolon

    Gamolon Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2013
    Messages:
    2,385
    Likes Received:
    88
    Trophy Points:
    48
    The dimensions for the outer box columns that YOU POSTED...

    http://www.breakfornews.com/forum/v...highlight=eight+columns+long+axis+faces#33999

    So where Chris, do we put all the items that have been displaced by your concrete core? Like I said, your core is a physical impossibility based on the dimensions and information YOU have provided over the years. You've made so much stuff up to cover discrepancies people have found in your fantasy that you can't keep up. No wonder you won't address my proof.
     
  22. ChristopherABrown

    ChristopherABrown Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 27, 2014
    Messages:
    5,149
    Likes Received:
    175
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Gender:
    Male
    It is reasonable that I rely on my memory because it's well supported with evidence from 9/11 and other sources. Whereas you rely on plans that have no readable dimensions while also having no evidence from 9/11 where the buildings had their cores exposed.

    [​IMG]
     
  23. Gamolon

    Gamolon Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2013
    Messages:
    2,385
    Likes Received:
    88
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Your dimensions are supported by the drawings!!!!

    :roflol:
     
  24. 7forever

    7forever Active Member

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2010
    Messages:
    1,726
    Likes Received:
    3
    Trophy Points:
    38
    I provided either the first or second best eyewitness of no plane for T2. My work puts me on at least 2B. You haven't even put the ball in play.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4yIdT4t1iHg

    "Dude, I saw the second explosion, there was no plane that hit that second building, it exploded from the inside out."

    "You said the second one was just an explosion?"

    "I didn't see a plane. I was here watching it. I couldn't believe it. It exploded, it was like a flash of white light and everything just blew out."
     
  25. 7forever

    7forever Active Member

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2010
    Messages:
    1,726
    Likes Received:
    3
    Trophy Points:
    38
    It is common sense that Clifton Cloud did not see a plane. He saw the object that chopper 4 filmed and just assumed it must've been a helicopter. It was not. He was about a mile away, making it impossible for anyone from his position to not positively identify a plane. I've gathered sustainable facts while you and others persist on proven delusions.

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

    "Ya, but I don't think it was a plane. No, because it happened like 20 minutes later. I think it was a bomb on the second building. I think they had that bomb in there and they were like alright let's maximize it. Hit it with a plane, and then hit the bomb." THE PLANE REFERENCE IS FOR T1. He did not witness that explosion.

    "It was like, I saw it in slow-motion. It like erupted. The whole like side bank, just like a slow-motion movie thing. Just like boom, just out. And there was like a white flash. And I thought it shut my camera off to be honest with you."

    "There was a police copter like near it...I swear, I don't know what happen to him, but. But when the second one exploded there was a helicopter not too far away."

    Clifton Cloud: "I was probably about a mile away and um, I didn't, didn't realize that the second explosion was going on...it was just just a quick sharp blast of white light, orange and then the sound, the shockwave hit a few minutes later."

    Lauer: "And it was while you were shooting that, that the second plane came into view, and as you said, you really didn't even realize what you had captured. What was your response when you went back and looked carefully at the tape?

    Cloud: "I thought about um, where the plane had hit in the sixties floor where one of my companies largest client's is."

    2nd plane & 1st "collapse" Clifton Cloud 9/12 11:50 am - YouTube
     

Share This Page