9/11 World Trade Center Totally fake! But you still believe it!

Totally fake!


But you would still believe it!




[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_i5v_vioaMU"]Totally fake! But you would still believe it! - YouTube[/ame]




Those living on the official fantasy must be on some seriously good drugs!

The video makes a good case.

 

A couple of points:

I am a truther. I believe we are not being told the truth of the events of 9/11.

However, this video hurts the case of the truth movement.

Eyewitness reports said planes hit buildings in NY city. The second plane, millions of eyes were on those towers.

What few videos that have been released, have been low res home videos. The type of video that can not follow fast moving events well.

The distortions you see, most all can be reduced to video quality, and in some cases, third and forth generation videos that who knows how they have been manipulated.

From my observations, something took place that day, that softened steel, and even dustified steel (Google Judy Woods). If the towers were being made softer somehow in selected places, it is possible a plane could fly into the towers, without smashing into it, or smashing into the sides of it.

I do not know what happened that day, but 110 story office buildings did not fall to the ground, in a rubble pile 20 feet high in ten seconds, because of an explosive fire on the 89th floor.

Look, think, reason, deduce, listen, read, and follow the chain of events.

9/11 was not what we were told by the powers that ruled over this event, and reported the event to us.

You video, with the bad music, just makes the search for the real truth even harder. It is called Dis-Information, and it is disseminated by the people that are sitting on the truth, and do not want the truthers finding it.

 

Twoofer on twoofer violence....its a beautiful thing.

 

Absolutely Pathetic !!!!

 

Ever wonder if at some point some of them after hearing this stuff, would stop and say, 'you're messing with me,right?'

 

Not really, no. Comparisons with a cult are fairly apt.

 

There are some raving nutters who think the whole thing was an illusion using holograms. ROTFLMAO.

 

What definition of "cult"?

 

The academic literature on the topic does align with cults. Alternately, some journal articles have drawn closer comparisons to mass hysteria/delusion, like Haley's Comet freak outs or the War of the Worlds.

 

Yes, you are right. Hundreds of people are in on this, every video and photo taken was really made by the CIA, and every cameraman was a CIA operative.

And everybody who watched this live was in on it too.

 

Whose literature? Steven Jones'? Griffin's? And "cults" really needs to be defined so I know exactly what it is you're trying to say. cheers.

Which one's your favorite?

 

When candy shows up in my thread you know its painful! LMAO

 

you dont sound like a truther to me?


here is a blurry fox video for ya! You know when they cgi the crap out of it thats what happens.

they really screwed the timing on that job anyway by blowing out the side first LOLOL










you sure they didnt see it on tv? LOLOLOLOLOLOLOL

woods is another side show. energy beams do not completely fracture the molecular bonds in steel.
Certainly will not cause dustification like this crap.



takes a micro nuke to do that.

They had to have their fun and test out a few new toys
​

 

the ones that talked are dead ya know.

 

I am thinking that the official story spewers have a love affair with loonacy.


[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XfuBREMXxts"]I'm a Believer[/ame]

 

Just to count, here, in the last week, we've had:

1. Controlled demolition
2. Death beams from space
3. Koko's new "Micro-nuke"
4. Missile
5. "False flag"
6. and "I don't know, but I know it's not how they said it."

Sweet.

 

Question for koko,Why didn't the 'mico nuke's' EMP fry every bit of elecronics the recue workers and police had?

 

since when does an li6 nuke fry anything LOL

well except for official story tellers brains?

 

who said death beams from space, probly some ass wipe story teller.

the rest are semantics.

think about it.

nah thats asking to much.

 

EMP happens during a nuke blast...electronics have to be hardened

 

sidestep.

no electronics does not need to be hardened

 

Okay then, explain how the EMP from a nuclear bomb in the WTC wouldnt have fried all the ordinary electronic devices on 9/11

Then expllain why the survivors found in the stairwell weren't cooked as well

 

they have come a long way since the 60's.

nukes are approved demolition devices, up to 100kt.

Micro nukes have been around since the late 50s, old news.

You can get the blast pattern in several shapes, from several thousand bucks to a million or so for the larger ones.

Its purpose isnt to flatten and bow it half way across new york, its putpose is to ?fracture" on a molecular level the iron.

When that happens all you gotts do is sneeze and the whole thing steel cement, everything literally shatters to dust. like a window when you throw brick through it.

Thats what causes this kind of stuff:






If I were working ground zero and did not see one desk or toilet I would have been otta there. Mama didnt raise no foo.

 

Demolition Devices? Are you actually serious?

And yes, I am well aware of "Operation Plowshare". This was an attempt by the US government to show the uses of small atomic bombs for excavation purposes. They detonated a 105 kt atomic bomb in 1962, to see how effective it would be. And over the next decade they tried 26 more times.

Basically, it was a total failure. Because it was subsurface, it released a huge amount of radioactive fallout. And the deep round craters left were of no real use.



So here is my question. If the WTC was destroyed by a nuke, where is the radioactivity? Radioactive particles would have drifted far and wide, with a noticeable fallout pattern in Europe. And blast debris would have been found for miles around.

Do you have any proof of this?


And there are no "micro nukes". None, period. Even claiming that there is such a thing is largely ignorance.

This is because "nukes" (thermonuclear warheads) are giant explosives, detonated by an atomic warhead. The smallest atomic weapon used was the M388 warhead, attached to the Davy Crockett Recoilless Rifle. It was a 4 inch recoilless rifle, that fired an atomic warhead that was between 10 and 20 tons yield, the smallest possible.

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=khyZI3RK2lE"]M65 Recoiless Nuclear Rifle - YouTube[/ame]

And even this explosion was gigantic compared to what happened at the WTC.

 

It appears as though koko may have seen 'The Peacemaker' one too many times.
My next tack was going to be the radiation,by you beat me to it.