patrick.net

AmericanKulak says

Those Israels were interviewed later on TV and said they danced for the exact same reason Churchill did - that now the US and they shared the same enemy and US strength would now be on their side.

I could definitely see thinking something like that inside, but I still wouldn't dance when innocent people get blown up, that's fucking psycho.

NuttBoxer says

I could definitely see thinking something like that inside, but I still wouldn't dance when innocent people get blown up, that's fucking psycho.

It was very stupid and good evidence that while they may have been reporting to the Israel Gov on Arab activity in NYC, they sure as shit weren't Mossad agents who are too smart to do that dumb shit. Especially if they were involved in any way or they must be the dumbest Jews in history. hahah

Churchill did it in his own office, with his own aides who understood the context.

Patrick says

Why not both the planes and a little assistance from explosives?

Wasn't the first time. There could have been a repeat of the first WTC attack where they had explosives in a vehicle in the basement to give it an extra knock.

Some of the highlights I remember from the Corbett series:

The guy who instrumental to everything surrounding 9/11 who was Middle Eastern had was a huge CIA asset.
The supposed pattern the planes took would have been nearly impossible for even expert military pilots to pull off with the size of aircraft mentioned.
The guys who got pegged as the pilots could barely fly Cessna's.
The part of the Pentagon destroyed was investigating several trillion dollars of missing money that had just been announced by Rumsfeld a few days prior.
The outcome of 9/11 was the DHS, TSA, "terrorist" watchlists, NSA spying on all citizens communication, destruction of much of the Middle East, and the Scamdemic.

Yes, on that last one without 9/11 to set the table and curtail our freedoms at a whole new level, the Scamdemic would have been impossible. So when you speculate who was behind it, if you look at the losers, it wasn't the common US citizen, and it definitely fucking wasn't the Middle East. The biggest winners, those who would usher us into the bio-digital surveillance state, and our own government.

RayAmerica says

Do You Still Think 9/11 Was the Result of 17 Arabs Flying Planes into Buildings?

Of course... didn't they find the passports scattered around in the rubble? And Rachel Maddow verified it.

A few funny facts about 9/11 that just don't add up:

The 47 story skyscraper building 7 collapsed in its own footprint, due to a minor fire that started in a corner of the building.

A lot of molten metal was found amongst the debris literally days after 9/11. Nano-thermite is often used in the demolition of buildings and is known to cause molten metal. Jet fuel does not burn hot enough to melt metal.

The Pentagon's security cameras just happened to have malfunctioned on that fateful day. Trained, experienced airline pilots are on record saying that no one would have the skill to fly a commercial jet airliner manually into the Pentagon. Also, the wings of the supposed plane each had titanium jet engines, yet, there is only one hole in the Pentagon with no damage where the wings would have been located. It gets worse. The jet's engines were never found among the debris.

The plane that went down in Shankland, PA: none of the standard debris was found at the site of flight 93. Why?

I remember my Mom bought that book Let's Roll. And it was all a farce...

If Saudi Arabia was responsible for 9/11, how exactly did they benefit?

On the other hand, what nation actually benefitted from the removal of Saddam Hussein?

Why was Iraq blamed for 9/11, when in fact, Iraq had nothing to do with the attacks?

Why was Afghanistan invaded when it didn't play any direct part in the attacks, ushering in a war that lasted 18 years?

Prior to 9/11, and since, never in the history of the world has a skyscraper collapsed due to the following:

A fire.

A plane hitting the building.

On 9/11, THREE buildings collapsed all in one day in their own footprint, just as is accomplished by a controlled, professional demolition.

FLASHBACK: Trump Calls in LIVE on 9/11/01: 'How Could It (a Plane) Possibly Go Through the Steel?'

https://rumble.com/v3gt0d4-flashback-trump-calls-in-live-on-91101-how-could-it-a-plane-possible-go-thr.html

RayAmerica says

Jet fuel does not burn hot enough to melt metal.

True, as that would make it useless in a metal turbine engine.

AmericanKulak says

Guessing. Not proof.

Here is the guy that did all the heavy lifting to pick up all the data, including FOIA requests. He was able to unredact the documents, he shows the documents, this is currently live as I write this.


original link

If you can ignore the DEEPLY RETARDED sound effects and so on. Dawson is basically blanket banned he's surfing on top of "Fresh and Fit" which is geared to a much younger and superficial audience. That pretty much covers the whole thing, including the Anthrax hoax, which was planted by Israel. Remember the Anthrax panic? Remember the "art students"? Probably not. People seem not to remember all the stories of that time, that disappeared, but I do. Remember the Israelis selling toys in malls? They were all intelligence. They all disappeared after 9/11.

IF you want to know what is happened, THERE IT IS. Lots of people have put in the heavy lifting and legwork to descramble this, but it's now a decade old.

I don't have this burning need to convince you. Speaking to somebody with deaf ears I LONG ago realized is a useless effort. We know what happened on 9/11, the problem is, the public doesn't care. Our government did it with help of Israeli and Saudi intelligence. It was done to justify 20 years of fucking war. Saudi Arabia, the US, and Israel have common enemies there.

The Champlain Towers on Miami Beach collapse should dispel the notion that there's no way the towers collapse without explosives.
I'll sit here and entertain the who, where and why's they did what they did, who financed it, and who was involved all up for discussion.. But when people try to tell me, that the people I know in NYC at the time, that saw the planes fly into the buildings, saw a hologram or didn't see them fly into it. That's when they lose me. Also it takes a lot to wire up a building for a demolition, it would have been uncovered the first day they started cutting up beams and tying in explosives. The whole building would have known something was up.

The Champlain Tower collapse and there wasn't one single distinguishable particle of any object from any of those 14 floors. No mattress pieces, no couch pieces, no television plastic cases, no bed sheets no underwear, nothing! Just rubble. I would not have believed it if I didn't see it for my self.

So yea planes flew into the World Trade Towers and they pancaked and look like a bomb went off. But that's just how the Cookie crumbles.

Tenpoundbass says

Also it takes a lot to wire up a building for a demolition, it would have been uncovered the first day they started cutting up beams and tying in explosives. The whole building would have known something was up.

Aside from the Twin Towers, how do you explain the 47 story Building 7 collapsing from a small fire without explosives?

Rumsfeld ran to the top floor and sat every file cabinet alight. Or debris from the Towers spread to Tower 7.
It didn't need the added drama of saying explosives did it. .If every resource was working on the Towers, triage and recovery, they could let the mother burn to the ground.. Like they did. I think it would be interesting if an office building in the digital age would collapse from a fire, like an office buildings pre 2008 ish when Paperless Offices became a thing now I don't' think they would. You do realize all of the paper and wood furniture and high end wooden deco trim those offices had?

Today it seems office furniture is less substantial, aside from making noxious toxic gases from smoldering plastics and resin, and treated particle boards. There's probably not much to burn in a modern office like then. Even if you factor in the exploding laptop batteries, the paper I think is what really got the fires hot.

Yesterday I went out to Highway 27, they have pretty good live music from 2 to 6 on Sundays.. When we were leaving, right as I'm pulling out on 27 right accross from me, a motorcycle hit the guard rail exploded, sent the large frame tumbling in the air, doing about 5 full summersaults before landing about 30 feet straight down the guard rail just on the other side, from where he crashed. The gas tank came off and landed about 15 feet down, and was spinning around doing a fire rainbird sprinkler over the whole crash site. The wheels went on the other side of the street and rear end license plate ended up in the street, still attached to the tail light and rack. I thought for sure I just saw someone die. .I was shocked when a guy stood up somewhere in the fire and smoke and walked out of the flames visibly pissed his motor cycle got trashed.

It was a spectacular motorcycle fireball explosion, and if you have only seen that in the movies. Those are controlled, I can tell you from what I saw, no Tom Cruise action movie ever had display so spectacular that just seemed different than how motorcycle crashes look in the movies.

People rushed out to extinguish the fire, they were concentrating on the main bike 30 feet up the street, but there was a line of fire leading from the impact all the way to the main bike frame. The closest item to the impact was the battery, it was still on fire, and so was the pavement near where it landed. The gas tank was still on fire and most of the ground in between. It looked like to me, the battery exploded on impact and as the bike broke apart from impact that battery explosion ignited the gas that the tank was spewing out as it spun through the air. .The visual was this fire ball explosion, then a fire whirly traveling as fast as the bike was going down along the guard rail. It looked more like a war movie mapom and a missle detonation at the same time rather than just a plain movie crash explosion.

I'm telling you all of this because if that Rice Burner Nija motor cycle with just a few gallons of gas, could generate that much fire and heat, and still be burning on the asphalt pavement some five minutes later before folks started showing up with fire extinguishers, there were about 5 people with extinguishers and it took them all emptying them before it was put out. Me pointing out the battery I was looking at. The guy with the last extinguisher not exhausted put it out with what little bit he had. Just imagine what a Jet full of fuel could do. Even if intentionally.

Tenpound,

That's quite a story, but, scientifically, jet fuel cannot reach a burn point temperature that is required to melt steel beams. It just isn't possible, let alone for molten metal to continue to burn literally days after the attacks. IMO, one of the reasons they were in such a hurry to remove the all of the debris from the Towers was to tamper with the obvious evidence.

You mean burning motorcyles actually brought down the twin towers? I always suspected so.

Patrick says

https://twitter.com/libsoftiktok/status/1701224468343836693

They are exactly the same thing. False flag attacks by clandestine operators on our own citizens to justify more war, power grabs, excessive surveillance and bigger government.

AmericanKulak says

Kamala compares Jan 6 to 9/11. A better comparison, though still very poor, would be the M19 bombing of the Senate Buildings and Navy Offices to 9/11.

original link

What a fucking dumb bitch cunt. Stupid cunts like this were the original reason for creating The Patriarchy in the first place. How far would human civilization advanced with dumb cows like her in charge?

RayAmerica says

. It just isn't possible, let alone for molten metal to continue to burn literally days after the attacks. IMO, one of the reasons they were in such a hurry to remove the all of the debris from the Towers was to tamper with the obvious evidence.

I think everyone is looking at it from the wrong angle.. Perhaps it wasn't' the fire that brought it down, but the lateral sheering of the support columns at the ground and basement level from 900,000 lbs hitting it at no less than 150mph,

Perhaps had it hit at lower floors it would not have collapsed and the jet fuel would have just burned out eventually. .Or the fire would have spread all the way up the building burning everyone like those above the floors that were struck. And even then they wouldn't have collapsed because the panes didn't hit high enough to exert those lateral sheering forces that compromised those beams and columns.

What most of us know about explosions are from what we've seen on TV for a given scenario, but we don't realize. Those are controlled detonations and carefully crafted wreckage the end result of careful planning and creating a prop that will behave the way expected on camera. The rest of what we know comes from watching building demolitions. And there's always sparks going all the way down the building to the bottom floor before it all comes down. Like the Champlain Towers the bottom must be compromised before the top floors pancaked just like the WTC.

I mean before yesterday, I was under the impression a car or motorcycle explosions happens on impact, but that's not what happened. The guard rail where the impact happened, bowed in about 3 to 4 feet, they really are designed now to to absorb as much of impact as possible. But there wasn't any fire happening there, just a slight scuff mark, perhaps that's what saved the guys life. And that's what I saw, first I saw a debris cloud,(I didn't actually see the motorcycle on impact. My friend was talking to me, and I was looking straight ahead and just saw motor cycle parts going air born. Then the explosions happened.
That's what we saw on 9-11, the planes hit the breach was created, then second or milliseconds after impact the fireball erupted and the inertia of the momentum of the plane, the flames and debris came out the other side.

On 9-11 the buildings came from the top down, so we assumed it must have been because the steel melted, and everyone is testing the time and heat from jet fuel. But if the foundations is compromised then the whole structure is doomed. And I would say 900,000 lbs of force at 150mph on WTC sized Lever, would be enough to bend or compromise your leverage.

A short piece of rebar is very mighty for prying, but get a longer piece and your liable to bend it before the thing you're trying to move will budge.

Alqeda's intentions in 1997 was to bring the Towers down. Their plan of attack was to place a van in the parking garage. They were successful in doing so, but it malfunctioned and was only a fraction of the blast they needed. They or/and the people that put them up to it, knew then, a building doesn't fall because the top got cut off or caught on fire. They collapse when the foundation get's compromised. That was their intention to break the columns and support at the base of the Towers. They sat on a hole with a honey comb of parking garages. Like the Champlain Towers, perhaps they knew then what should be evident now.

I bet you could demolish buildings just by under cutting the basement or lower floors. It will all pancake like both instances. The debris and dust field might be larger, that's why they gut them and cut up the walls.

Tenpoundbass,

So what was it exactly that brought down the 47 story Building 7? Just a reminder; it did not get hit by any plane and only suffered a relatively minor fire in a corner of the building. What brought it down?

https://twitter.com/The_Real_Fly/status/1701102149411717305

I seem to be having a memory lapse.

Recall the dancing celebrators on top of their rented van as they watched the Twin Towers collapse?

What country were they from again? It seems I recall it was located somewhere in the Middle East, and that it wasn't an Arab country.

Tenpoundbass says

But when people try to tell me, that the people I know in NYC at the time, that saw the planes fly into the buildings, saw a hologram or didn't see them fly into it. That's when they lose me.

So you're unaware of how perspective can warp perception? Meaning if you're a human on the ground not expecting a plane to hit anything, then you are surprised by something thousands of feet above you traveling at very fast speed, and you haven't spent your whole life judging planes from that angle, or knowing much about them other than what the passenger section looks like, you may mistake what you see?

Tenpoundbass says

Also it takes a lot to wire up a building for a demolition, it would have been uncovered the first day they started cutting up beams and tying in explosives. The whole building would have known something was up.

Apparently you've never looked into OKC. And your hotel or whatever wasn't built as one of the strongest steel structures in the world, not even remotely apples-to-apples.

Tenpoundbass says

Or debris from the Towers spread to Tower 7.
It didn't need the added drama of saying explosives did it.

So why do they have on air voices saying to blow tower 7? Ohh, guessing you never listened to that...
Or what about the news anchors who reported 7 fell 5-15 minutes before it actually collapsed?
And 7 wasn't some rinky dink popsicle stick tower, "debris" ain't doing it.

Tenpoundbass says

Just imagine what a Jet full of fuel could do.

So according to you, if this motorcycle hit say a two story steel workshop capable of housing say five cars, and no one put it out, eventually the workshop would collapse, at free fall speed, by itself?

Let's give this opinion some visible scale...

RayAmerica says

IMO, one of the reasons they were in such a hurry to remove the all of the debris from the Towers was to tamper with the obvious evidence.

Not opinion, they literally followed the same playbook from OKC.

Tenpoundbass says

I think everyone is looking at it from the wrong angle.. Perhaps it wasn't' the fire that brought it down, but the lateral sheering of the support columns at the ground and basement level from 900,000 lbs hitting it at no less than 150mph,

You don't need to do all this "I think", and "perhaps". It's been researched, extensively, by very thorough people. Engineers who have disavowed every letter of the 9/11 report. Journalists who have tied all the strings together. You can either keep to your opinions, because you don't want to know at this point, or because you choose to believe government(not a great choice), or you can put aside your ego and world view for a minute, and honor the people who died by following so many who have sought the truth.

You owe them more than five minutes of opinionated rambling, don't you agree?

Tenpoundbass says

Alqeda's intentions in 1997 was to bring the Towers down. Their plan of attack was to place a van in the parking garage. They were successful in doing so, but it malfunctioned and was only a fraction of the blast they needed.

They dis-avowed, the attack, you know, cuz terrorists are always turning down credit for what would look like a spectacular success...

And the CIA's fingerprints are ALL OVER both incidents. But if you researched this at all, you'd know that. Especially since they created and trained Al Queda. The only thing those guys have ever done to really hurt the US is decimate the CIA's poppy production, twice now...

RayAmerica says

Tenpoundbass says

Also it takes a lot to wire up a building for a demolition, it would have been uncovered the first day they started cutting up beams and tying in explosives. The whole building would have known something was up.

Aside from the Twin Towers, how do you explain the 47 story Building 7 collapsing from a small fire without explosives?

Don't be silly, building 7 collapsed because of global warming, I mean interior warming.

NuttBoxer says

And the CIA's fingerprints are ALL OVER both incidents. But if you researched this at all, you'd know that. Especially since they created and trained Al Queda. The only thing those guys have ever done to really hurt the US is decimate the CIA's poppy production, twice now...

^^^ This ^^^

This is true. Ever check out opium production of Afghanistan under US military occupation?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opium_production_in_Afghanistan




How odd that under US military occupation, opium production DRASTICALLY increased. Oh, and by coincidence, the US had an opioid addiction problem, in no small part due to the Sackler family of assholes.

The US invaded Afghanistan for several reasons, Dickhead Cheney wanted to run a pipeline through Afghanistan through the Caspian sea. Wars aren't done for a single reason, they happen when several MAFIAS agree on a course of action for their own reasons. Our government is just a criminal syndicate. Opium was one of them, oil transport from the Caspian sea was another. I'm positive there's 1/2 dozen I missed - I know the MIC loves war, the Offense Industry makes bank when they are killing people.

Hey @AmericanKulak

This is what ChatGPT reports about Israeli involvement:



It will be censored in time.