4 votes

Concrete evidence shows US government nuked WTC towers on 9/11

This is from a reliable canadian website. The canadians have been leading the way on 9/11 truth. I know this will be moved to off-topic but as I have said many times...9/11 is the key to the awakening of the masses.

Article:
Foreign terrorists and hijackers didn't attack the US on September 11, 2001 and bring down the World Trade Center Towers – the U.S. government did that using remote controlled military aircraft and planted tactical nukes.

Terrorists didn't take away the freedom, liberty and justice of the American people – the U.S. government did that.

Terrorists didn't draw up the Patriot Act, create the Department of Homeland Security, spy illegally on Americans, launch 3 unprovoked armed attacks against 3 foreign states, abolish habeas corpus, kidnap, deport, torture and murder U.S. and foreign civilians – the U.S. government did that.

Terrorists didn't loot $trillions from US Federal Tax Revenue and give it to the Wall Street bankers – the U.S. government did that.

Terrorists didn't bankrupt the U.S. – the U.S. government did that.

Terrorists didn't create the $15.6 trillion national debt – the U.S. government did that ($13 trillion added by just the last 4 of the 44 presidents of the United States – George HW Bush, Bill Clinton, George W Bush and Barrack Obama – Obama added $5 trillion in just 3 years, George W Bush added $5 trillion over 2 terms, Bill and Hillary Clinton added $1.5 trillion, George HW Bush added $1.5 trillion) .

Terrorists didn't force millions of Americans out of work and onto the street – the U.S. government did that.

Terrorists didn't develop and release the Avian Flu and the Swine Flu – the U.S. government did that.

Terrorists didn't drop nuclear bombs on civilian cities – the U.S. government did that.

Terrorists didn't murder 3 million civilians in Iraq – the U.S. government did that.

Now tell me who is a greater threat to the American people and to the World – a phantom terrorist group called al Qaeda or the U.S. government? Tell me why would you travel thousands of miles to a foreign country to fight and even give your life to protect and restore their rights and freedoms when your own rights and freedoms are being stripped away at home, on US soil, by your government? Who is a greater threat to mankind? Those who have used nukes against foreign and US civilian cities or those seeking to develop nuclear energy.

The American people went off to war to remove by force the leadership of foreign states that were allegedly a threat to their own people and to mankind. The US government justified their murder of those leaders by claiming they eliminated the threat they posed to the US and to the World. However, after the fact, the evidence showed that none posed any imminent or future threat to their people or to any other foreign state. In fact, the evidence clearly shows the World that it is the US leadership who are the greatest threat to mankind and to the American people. Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, Syria, Somalia, and Iran have not and have never attacked the US. It was and is the US government who has attacked or is planning to wage war with Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, Syria, Somalia, and Iran. The US government is the only leadership in the World to use nukes against civilian cities – not just once but 4 times and twice against it own people, on US soil.

http://presscore.ca/2011/?p=68#comment-559




Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

My 3 year old says a herd of

My 3 year old says a herd of cows knocked them down. My child is more credible.

"Timid men prefer the calm of despotism to the tempestuous sea of liberty." - Thomas Jefferson
"Annoyance is step one of thinking"
"We're all in the same boat, it doesn't matter if you like me"

you must be 2 then

... your powers of observation are clearly undeveloped

Republic Broadcasting best talk radio in the truthosphere

Even as a 2-year, I was more

Even as a 2-year, I was more logical than you are.

"Timid men prefer the calm of despotism to the tempestuous sea of liberty." - Thomas Jefferson
"Annoyance is step one of thinking"
"We're all in the same boat, it doesn't matter if you like me"

No Kidding...Now You Are Ready....

..For this:
http://www.911essentials.com/

BTW:I was there...digging...probably got exposure-related issues from "silica-dust"....Christie Whitman lied, and said air-quality was safe...and the first step to disrupting a crime scene is to make all the evidence(the forensics) disappear.
Remember the quick exit of the tangled steel?
One of the trucking firms that made it disappear has a connection to that, and was told to "do a favor" to remain in business, having just lost an appeal in Sotomeijer Apellate Court(Brooklyn), and having been previously convicted in a Fed "sting" operation that jailed him years before...he kept his mouth shut, they gave him a dump, and an environmental concern...got smart and became connected politically...got rich amd now they're after his daughter.
An insurance tactic.Insures secrecy.

BTW: Thermite was used.

"Beyond the blackened skyline, beyond the smoky rain, dreams never turned to ashes up until.........
...Everything CHANGED !!

I'm going with the evidence at hand.

Nanothermite, thermate, and conventional explosives brought the buildings down. This evidence can not be ignored, nor should we be distracted from it by another theory like tactical nukes. (Disinformation?) As for the planes, of course there were planes, not video editing, holograms, etc. The technology for remote controlled planes existed at the time Operation Northwoods was planned.

No planes and no holograms -

No planes and no holograms - look into it. The only evidence available now is the video record, which is why they don't want us looking there. All the physical evidence is pretty-much gone and won't point to the perps. But if videos were made to fool the public through the media propaganda machine then there is evidence of who was involved. The evidence is there if you are willing to consider it.

Really, I've looked into it.

I've been on this topic for over six years. There are just too many people who saw the planes hit---especially the second one. Now the Pentagon, that's a different story.
This issue and the Federal Reserve are my top two political motivators. Believe me, I've looked into it.

Who are these people?

Who are these people?

Which people? On this post? Or the witnesses?

If you mean on this post, I'm not sure. Looks like a mixed bag.
If you mean the witnesses, then everyone who was in the area that morning. Many witnesses claim the planes were not commercial airliners, but looked like military jets. I've poured through every witness testimony I could possibly find on the internet--- both on the scene while it happened & histerical, and after the fact & calm. I have no doubt that jets hit the two towers. What kind of jets they were, I don't know. I suspect they were military jets controlled remotely. Operation Northwoods gave a fairly detailed explanation as to how they would pull up a false flag like this. I think a variation of it was used on 911, especially given the fact that we were entering into the drone aircraft phase of the military. Is this what you meant?

No, I mean give me links to

No, I mean give me links to withness testimony. You claimed "many witnesses claim the planes...", "everyone in the area that morning..." - who are all these people? How do you know how many people were in the area or that they saw planes? did you go and talk to all these people? The people interviewed on TV that morning weren't all claiming a 757, most of them weren't. So, where are you getting your info?

Look at a JASSM cruise missile and tell me that most people who would see that flying at 500 mph only catching a quick glimpse might be fooled into thinking they saw a plane. You have no proof of 757s.

What are you doing? This is only friction.

I never, ever, claimed a 757 hit the towers. Read my comment again. I claim I don't know what hit the towers, but I believe they were planes, probably military from what many of the witnesses said. They said it didn't look like a commercial jet, that it looked military.
Just for the heck of it I googled "witness no plane hit towers" and the first video that came up was "911 Witness: No Plane hit South Tower Cloud Clifton from NIST release". He was saying on the phone that he saw no plane hit the tower. It was a clip I hadn't seen, and there was a plane running into the tower if you look closely--- yet another video of a plane hitting the tower.
Let's say a missle did hit the first tower, don't you think people had their eyes glued on the towers after that? And no, I'm not going to send you all the clips of witnesses. And no I didn't talk to all those people.
What's your point here? Isn't the mission to bring to light the fallacy of the official story? Why would you want to fight with people here on the side of the truth? What's with all the friction on this post? I don't get it. If you want to say they were missles, or nukes, or whatever, fine. As I said in my very first comment, I'm going with the evidence at hand. Have a nice day.

I'm not trying to fight you.

I'm not trying to fight you. Like I said before. If they faked the videos, the evidence of an inside job is indefinitely engrained within the videos - it is the ONLY remaining evidence that can lead to who the perpetrators are. That is why it is so important that people don't realize this. They don't care if you think it was an inside job because there is nothing to trace it back to them, but the videos can.

http://defense-update.com/images/jassm.jpg

Do you think that most people, if they caught a glimpse of that and later saw a video of a 757 hitting the towers that they would just assume that they saw a 757?

Additionally, it exposes their real weapon, i.e., the media. It is their psychological weapon wereby they can make people believe anything by showing them images on TV. They can do anything with that box and people believe it. The box has to be shattered.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M5-xcvv_fRQ

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GIfMw7mEDNk

Take a look at this video and start getting real familiar with this stuff. Its clear that they tried to hide the "nose out" on later airings of the clip around the world.

No sarcasm or hostility here, okay?

There appear to be two events. 1. Planes hitting towers. 2. Towers falling. Your focus is on 1., mine on 2. Either way we hope to end at the same point, correct? I am familiar with chemistry and physics. My emphasis is on these:
http://beyondthecurtain.wordpress.com/2010/10/27/911-chemica...

http://www.ae911truth.org/news/41-articles/348-previously-mo...

I watched you clip. I've seen it before. Yes, I agree there are anomalies. Additionally, I have seen this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ovXy_enhxG4&NR=1&feature=ends...
Which gives credence to your arguement.
However, I have no proof that videos were NOT doctored AFTER airing. Anyone can do anything with a video it seems. Producing stoichiometrically precise nano-thermite?--- that is something your hobbyist can not do at home. That said, I know next to nothing about video editing. What I do know, is that video evidence is not "the ONLY remaining evidence". Chemistry also offers "fingerprints", i.e. material can be traced to it's source--- and there are only a handful of sources that can produce that kind of material.

There is no reason for division on this event among us (unless or course one's purpose IS to divide). In fact, this friction and fighting only makes us look bad. I would like very much that as many experts as possible, from as many applicable disciplines as possible, get on this. Wish me luck with 2., and I wish you luck with 1.

I agree that some type of

I agree that some type of explosive was used or multiple types. I had many long discussions with a welding engineer and we wen over details of where the explosives were placed, etc.

The videos are not edited afterwards - they are on the TV archives. You can watch them yourself. Although FOX took out one of their videos and replaced it a few years ago.

Where is the evidence?

"Nanothermite, thermate, and conventional explosives brought the buildings down."

That's an unsubstantiated assertion, not evidence.

"This evidence can not be ignored, ..."

You lose credibility right away when you refer to an unsubstantiated assertion as "this evidence".

You can never be persuasive to critical thinkers if your own thinking, as reflected in your language, is so sloppy.


"Know what you know, know what you don't know, and understand and appreciate the distinction."

Minarchism
track

Thermite was indeed used as was stated "factually".....

per the Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth. They stated in their evidential report that the burn temperatues could never have reached the astronomical numbers that were indeed reached without the use of thermite and that jet fuel alone as an ignition component alone would never have reached the super-high temperature(s) that were believed to have been reached. Not to mention, scientific evidence revealed that thermite was in fact present in the analyzed post crash debris.

Not to mention the fact that people still have samples.

Actual unignited material is still available for further analysis.
It's just incredible how people don't want to look for what they don't want to find, isn't it?

What meets your criteria for substantiation?

Three labs tested the debris. All three came back with both reactant and product of thermitic material. I'm going with the scientists' analysis, i.e., evidence.

scroll down this page for the article.

http://www.planetization.org/angelsandthecoup.htm

Then you have to take key phrases out of the article and Google for images and other pssible materials to cross reference the info.

Pure hydrogen bombs leave different trails behind.

“Give a man a gun, he can rob a bank. Give a man a central bank, and he can rob a country and the world.”
www.dailypaul.com/donate

Not saying it wasn't planned

but nukes? Wouldn't you be able to take a Geiger counter around ground zero to confirm this?

not subterrranean nukes; they did find, however,

elevated levels of tritium on site. Plus, the workers died from disorders and diseases that are more similar to nuclear metallics exposure than asbestosis or silicosis.

Nukes may explain why

Nukes may explain why electronics stopped working in the immediate area.

Planes were not remote

Planes were not remote controlled - there were NO PLANES. It would have been too risky to use real planes. What everyone saw were videos with digital images of aircraft.

Absurd

"What everyone saw were videos with digital images of aircraft."

Including the eyewitnesses?

What are you smoking?


"Know what you know, know what you don't know, and understand and appreciate the distinction."

Minarchism
track

What eyewitnesses? On the

What eyewitnesses? On the news that morning people were reporting missiles, aircraft like they hadn't seen before, small planes without windows, etc. The only people who said they saw 757s were people who worked for the news channels and there were only a couple. Some reported not seeing anything. All the videos of planes released much time after the fact are confirmed fakes, and the news videos can also be shown to be fake and have editing done to them. There are various documentaries which detail these findings in the videos - most of them rather convincingly. But you really have to pay attention to understand the points they are making. I don't agree with all their points but most of them are hard to deny. Septemberclues is a good place to start or here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sy4h5Kxu1Vg

It is a known fact that if a person who is an eyewitness to a particular event later sees a video supposedly of the same event and that video contradicts what they saw, they assume that what they saw was the result fo their imagination and conform to the video.

It is also known that when a person who is a witness to something is surrounded by people who claim to have seen something else, they will change their story to conform to what everyone else is saying - in this case, there are maybe a billion or more people who saw planes on TV. How many people are going to say, "No, you guys are wrong, it was a missile" especially when it is on video? Everyone will think they are crazy - they won't subject themselves to that.

FTS system was used

... prior to the attacks. Dov Zackheim was CEO of the company manufacturing the FTS remote-control system. Fully operational, this system was likely used to remotely commandeer the planes and guide them into the targets using triple-redundant homing systems ( radio, GPS, FLIR pod ). The perps ( rogue elements inside our CIA ) aired the entire op on Fox TV show "The Lone Gunman" episode "Pilot" 6 months prior to the attacks. Dov Zackheim was also one of several high-level dual-citizenship ( Israel / US ) moles in the Pentagon and also the "think tank" called Project for a New American Century which stated that absent a "new Pearl Harbor" type event the groups goals would take a long time to achieve.

http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Project_for_the_N...

" ... PNAC's policy document, "Rebuilding America's Defences," openly advocated for total global military domination. Many PNAC members held highest-level positions in the George W. Bush administration. ..."

http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article1665.htm

http://www.prisonplanet.com/analysis_louise_010603_pnac.html

Republic Broadcasting best talk radio in the truthosphere

Too many amateur cell phone

Too many amateur cell phone videos of the incident are out there for that theory to be viable... Not to mention thousands of on the spot eye witnesses.

Let it not be said that no one cared, that no one objected once it’s realized that our liberties and wealth are in jeopardy. -Ron Paul 7/10/03

amateur cell phone videos? in

amateur cell phone videos? in 2001? wtf

links?

Please :)

NOT a "nuke"

The Bombs in the WTC
(Schematic Provided by Anonymous “Insider)

The Ground Zero here is in the original sense of the word, a nuclear blast site. The thermal energy may absorb heat at a rate of 10 E 23 ergs / cm2 sec and near the bomb all surfaces may heat to 4000 °C or 7200 °F igniting or vaporizing violently. Sources: US Department of Defense & US Department of Energy, Glasstone – Dolan: ‘The Effects of Nuclear Weapons’ (1980).

The thermonuclear bomb used was a “pure” hydrogen bomb; no uranium or plutonium was used at all. The basic nuclear reaction is Deuterium + Tritium > Alpha + n. The ignition of this is the tricky part, either a powerful beam array or antimatter detonator was likely used (a very certain way to get the necessary effect of directed energy in order not to level the adjacent blocks of high-rise buildings as well).
Scroll down to bottom of page for diagram.
http://www.wordsandwar.com/2009/06/11/nazis-of-a-tether-goos...

“Give a man a gun, he can rob a bank. Give a man a central bank, and he can rob a country and the world.”
www.dailypaul.com/donate