Wat gelooft u van 9/11?

[parcifal]

Oorspronkelijk geplaatst door democratsteve

Niet dat ik hoop hier een antwoord op te krijgen, maar vertel ons eens wie dan wel het staal van het WTC heeft gecertificeerd?
Btw, u negeert (niettegenstaande ik er 4 keer achter vroeg) nog steeds m'n vraag ivm met de Nistcomputersimulatie.

Op je vraag ivm het staal van WTC : dat is NIET gecertifieerd.
Ik kijk nog even naar die vraag ivm de Nist-simulaties.

http://wtc.nist.gov/pubs/factsheets/faqs_8_2006.htm

UL did not certify any steel as suggested. In fact, in U.S. practice, steel is not certified at all; rather structural assemblies are tested for their fire resistance rating in accordance with a standard procedure such as ASTM E 119 (see NCSTAR 1-6B). That the steel was “certified ... to 2000 degrees Fahrenheit for six hours” is simply not true.

Edit : ik zit vandaag op een trage lijn.
Niet echt werkbaar vrees ik. Ik bewaar uw vraag ivm nist-simulaties tot morgen.
P.

[exodus]

Oorspronkelijk geplaatst door parcifal

Op je vraag ivm het staal van WTC : dat is NIET gecertifieerd.
Ik kijk nog even naar die vraag ivm de Nist-simulaties.

http://wtc.nist.gov/pubs/factsheets/faqs_8_2006.htm

NIST states that it found no documents about fire resistance testing, yet it also states that the buildings were rated as Class 1B, which requires such testing. If the assemblies were tested they would have been using the standard ASTM E119. A floor assembly is tested to that standard by by placing a furnace under it and measuring the time it takes a certain temperature to be reached on its top side.
Evidence that the steel was tested include:

24:50
A. UL's comments on testing WTC steel

• September 2001
  • Loring Knoblauch, UL's CEO, told staff that UL had certified the steel used in the WTC
• November 2003
  • I asked Knoblauch in writing about UL's involvement, and he responded in December confirming details.
• "We tested the steel with all the required fireproofing on, and it did beautifully."
• "As we did not do follow-up service on this kind of product, we can given an opinion only on the test sample which was indeed properly coated."
• "We test the code requirements, and the steel clearly met [the NYC code] requirements and exceeded them."

In August of 2004, UL performed tests of WTC floor models, but the floors were barely affected and didn't collapse. Loring Knoblauch resigned suddenly.
In October of 2004, a NIST report update showed contradictions.
In November of 2004 Ryan's letter to Frank Gayle went public, causing UL to quickly backtrack, saying there was "no evidence" that any firm tested the steel, and that they played a "limited" role in the investigation.

In de video wordt er meer over gezegd.

[parcifal]

Welke bron heb je voor dat citaat? Weer webfairy?

Het enige relevante dat ik hier lees, is trouwens :
Loring Knoblauch, UL's CEO, told staff that UL had certified the steel used in the WTC

Ik zou LaChunga's commentaar over de geldigheid van quotes opnieuw kunnen maken maar je snapt het wel al ondertussen hoop ik?

[exodus]

Oorspronkelijk geplaatst door parcifal

Welke bron heb je voor dat citaat? Weer webfairy?

Het enige relevante dat ik hier lees, is trouwens :
Loring Knoblauch, UL's CEO, told staff that UL had certified the steel used in the WTC

Ik zou LaChunga's commentaar over de geldigheid van quotes opnieuw kunnen maken maar je snapt het wel al ondertussen hoop ik?

Bekijk de presentatie van Kevin Ryan eens, het komt uit de review van de presentatie, daarom dat ik dat ook zei dat er in de video meer wordt over gezegd.

[exodus]

Een getuige van 7/7 zegt dat de bus die afgeleidt werd naar Tavistock Square (officieel omdat Kings Cross gesloten was door eerdere aanslagen), afgeleid werd door een zwarte mercedes en BMW die meereden met een politieman. Na een tijdje reden deze 2 wagens met hoge snelheid weg. De getuige die dit zegt zat op het onderste dek van de bus waar de (zogezegde) zelfmoordterrorist zichzelf opgeblazebn heeft. In onderstaande artikel kan je zijn relaas lezen met commentaar.

7/7 Witness: Bus Was Diverted To Tavistock Sq. By Two Unmarked Cars
Soon to be published account will detail the plot and cover up of the number 30 bus bombing


Steve Watson
Infowars.net
Monday, December 11, 2006

A soon to be published narrative of the number 30 bus bombing on 7/7 in London claims that the Hackney bus was diverted to Tavistock Square by two unmarked cars which then left the scene at high speed after the drivers had conversed with police in the area.

The witness, named "Daniel", has a blog here and a website here. He states:

I was aboard the lower deck of the bus that was blown up on July 7th. I rang the emergency hotline to report the 2 dark cars I saw holding the bus up and diverting it towards Tavistock Square. Instead of being asked to provide a statement what followed was 7 months of police surveillance and Harassment. My experiences are contained in a book called Statement: The 4th Bomb (as yet unpublished)

The number 30 bus was diverted away from its usual route along Euston road on the morning of 7/7, reportedly because of road closures in the Kings Cross area (due to the earlier tube bombings). We personally visited the site of the bus bombing at Tavistock Place and verified that no number 30 bus usually travels down that road. This footage can be seen in Alex Jones' latest film Terrorstorm.

"Daniel" goes on to comment:

Standing by the doors I see a blue BMW 5 series and black Mercedes squeal to a halt in front of the bus, halting its progress along Euston Road. 4 minutes passed then a police motorcyclist arrived at the blockage. The BMW driver said something to the cyclist who soon sped off. 90 seconds later the BMW suddenly drives off. The Mercedes waits till the bus diverts east into Upper Woburn Place towards Tavistock Square before it speeds away.
After very slow progress the driver suddenly opens the buses central exit doors while keeping the front doors shut, right on the corner of Upper Woburn Place some 80 meters away from the only bus stop in Tavistock Square (seen here). Many passengers got off at this point because of the delay and it was heading in the wrong direction.

Were these cars unmarked police vehicles? If so what were they doing diverting traffic? Surely that would have been the job of the traffic police.

Daniel then states:

A deep boom resounded. Shattered glass flew everywhere. It was followed by an eery silence. I scrambled up off the bus floor and leapt out going along the pavement at full pelt. But over the following days and weeks the relief I felt turned to exasperation at the increasingly menacing tactics the operatives' trailing and observing me employed, confirming my worst suspicions, for some reason I was embroiled in the largest criminal investigation in UK history.

He suggests that he can be seen in video footage of the aftermath, which he has posted on his website, and also claims that in the immediate seconds after the blast, a man dressed all in black was filming him with a hand held camera.

Daniel also still has the shirt that he was wearing on the day, which was splattered with the blood of victims. He says the police have never requested it for forensics investigation, despite having questioned him.

He also states that there was never any Asian looking male on the lower deck after he bus left Euston terminal. Reports attributed to 61 year-old Richard Jones claimed there was. Investigators conveniently relocated his sighting to the upper deck in their official May 2006 report.

Daniel says "It was just me, the driver plus four females on the lower deck as it edged down Tavistock Square."

After attempting to report what he saw, Daniel was asked to call an emergency hotline, which he did. instead of asking him to go to the police station to make a statement he claims he was subjected to a program of surveillance and harassment by the police:

By September 2005 I had began receiving a string of strange phone calls which became increasingly sinister. Friends advised me to record them where possible as evidence in case I needed to bring an IPCC complaint.
After the blast I was alert enough to be out of there in seconds. Yet investigators chose to rely on 4 female witnesses, one who was out cold for 15 minutes and was extracted from the wreck onto a trolley by medics (taking care not to move her neck) another one upstairs who woke up in a daze and two others who told a nurse treating them at UCH they thought I had been the bomber!"

6 months and 3 weeks after July 7th I'm asked to attend a police station in North London to provide a statement.

Police questioned Daniel for 4 hours, a clip of the interview is on his website. they asked him to him mark points where he thought people were on a diagram of the bus layout that was totally wrong, which he believed would render his statement inadmissible.

He claims he was then followed around by the same three operatives from Enfield Town Police Station, North London, for the following six months, saying that the surveillance was more overt than covert, they were letting him know that he was being watched 24-7.

He also received calls from police apparently attempting to tie him to vehicles and a business in the Leeds area, the same place the alleged bomber originated from. One of these phone calls is posted on his site and can be heard by clicking here.

He goes on to comment:

I realised the magnitude of what I'd seen almost instantly. The operative's menacing tactics only made it undeniable. Over the months of surveillance and harassment they seemed intent on messing up my life, keeping me looking behind my back. I awaited the release of the 'official version' with some interest especially with regards to the 4th bomb in Tavistock Square. The report was generally vague, devoid of any facts consisting of speculation based upon what I knew to be blatant falsehoods.

Of course the presence of unmarked cars and the claims that they stopped the bus cannot be verified because the vehicle's CCTV cameras were conveniently not working that day.

One week after the attack we put out a report, after receiving an email from an employee of Stagecoach, the company that owns the London Buses, stating that he believed the bus bombing to be very suspicious.

Our contact works a route roughly one mile from the site of the bus bombing, he stated:

CCTV gets maintained at least 2 or 3 times a week and can digitally store up to 2 whole weeks worth of footage. this is done by a private contractor....So when I heard that the CCTV wasn't working on a vehicle that's no more than 2 years old since last June.....I'm sorry that's rubbish, I work for the company I know different.
Last saturday a contractor came to inspect the CCTV on the buses at the depot, According to my supervisor the person spent more than 20 hours over that weekend, 20 hours to see if the CCTV is working? Also that person who came was not a regular contractor, for security reasons the same few people always come to the depot to carry out work, this time it was different.

Drivers in the depot already think the so called bombers had inside help because it was to organised. Some even think it had help from the company.

Exactly why the bus would be re-routed to Tavistock Square purposefully is up for debate. Some have suggested that the location is convenient given that the British Medical Association is located there, whilst others have attempted to connect the company Fortress GB, railway security management specialists who are often contracted for security projects for London Transport.

In the upcoming book, entitled The 4th Bomb, the witness Daniel also suggests that the follow up "failed bombings" may have been a cover operation to distract police and special investigators:

The logic for the ‘failed suicide attacks’ and the authorities seemingly haphazard yet iron-fisted response didn’t become apparent to me until late January 2006, some time after my interrogation with an Anti-Terrorist branch detective. It was something he alluded to in passing, that the attacks on 21:7 had thrown awry a carefully laid ‘operational response’ to 7:7.

He led me to realise that although the attacks were devoid of explosions, they achieved their primary objective, which was to upset the Anti-Terror investigation, mess-up MI5 and put more pressure on the unsustainable 'symbolic' levels of policing in the period of 'vigilance' following 7:7.
.....the intelligence services were totally UN-aware of those responsible for the ‘failed suicide attacks’.
A term that would more accurately describe them is ‘successful dummy attacks', but a dummy attack on whom exactly… London’s already terrified public?

No, this was an attack aimed squarely at Military Intelligence themselves.

Executed by an ad-hoc bunch of sympathisers.

Daniel then suggests that his research and experience have led him to believe that the execution of Jean Charles De Menezes the day after the dummy attacks was carried out by KRATOS trained operatives in order to send a strong signal to would be copy cats.
We will continue to track this story, the publication of the book and report any further updates.

[parcifal]

Conspiracy test : http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/programmes/6161425.stm


Mijn uitslag (hum) :

26-50

Your responses indicate that you have a medium level of belief in conspiracy theories. You may well be quite trusting of your close friends, partners, those you work with and others but sometimes cannot be sure of all of them all of the time. You may also feel that your voice in terms of wider political decisions is rarely heard or acted upon, perhaps because government and big business is more concerned with their own interests than with those of the average person.

[exodus]

Haha, ik heb hetzelfde resultaat als Parcifal:

26-50

Your responses indicate that you have a medium level of belief in conspiracy theories. You may well be quite trusting of your close friends, partners, those you work with and others but sometimes cannot be sure of all of them all of the time. You may also feel that your voice in terms of wider political decisions is rarely heard or acted upon, perhaps because government and big business is more concerned with their own interests than with those of the average person.

[La Chunga]

Weliswaar moeten dergelijke 'tests' gerelativeerd worden, maar mijn uitslag komt toch in zekere mate overeen met mezelf:

15-25
Your responses suggest you have a low level of belief in conspiracy theories. You may well tend to be trusting of your close friends, partners, those you work with and others. You may also feel that you contribute to political decisions and have a voice that is heard in wider society, albeit a small one.

[exodus]

Die test trekt totaal op niets want een vertrouwen tegenover vrienden wordt meegenomen als weging in het geloof in samenzweringen. Het is duidelijk hoe die psycholoog die de test opstelde tegenover samenzweringen staat.

Btw dit hoort meer thuis in de NWO draad.

[exodus]

In onderstaande clip van een nieuwe serie "Sleeper Cell: American Terror" maken proberen ze 9/11 skeptici belachelijk te maken door de twee terroristen op een sarcastische toon de 9/11 conspiracy theorien te bepraten. http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles...21206mocks.htm

[Gun]

Oorspronkelijk geplaatst door parcifal

Conspiracy test : http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/programmes/6161425.stm


Mijn uitslag (hum) :

same same

[democratsteve]

Oorspronkelijk geplaatst door exodus

Haha, ik heb hetzelfde resultaat als Parcifal:

ik ook.

[AEvanLoon]

Oorspronkelijk geplaatst door 2004gun

Jij blijft repetetief dezelfde fouten maken ...

Voor jou is NWO gelijk aan WTC is gelijk aan 9-11 is gelijk aan pentagon is gelijk aan Norad is gelijk aan ...

Ik kan begrijpen dat jij soms niet meer weet waar de klepel hangt

Misschien bent u een inside-jobbeliever inzake 11 september die niet gelooft in de NWO-samenzwering waar de Amerikaanse conspiracymedia (meestal aartsconservatieve en/of antizionistische websites, maar er zijn er ook andere) prioritair mee schermen. Maar dan bent u een uitzondering.

De NWO-discussies op dit forum (o.a. deze: http://forum.politics.be/showthread.php?t=37513) beleven hoogdagen sinds de NWO-believers de 9/11-hypothesen van Loose Change en andere bronnen hebben ontdekt als de meest actuele bewijzen van hun NWO-geloof.

[democratsteve]

Oorspronkelijk geplaatst door AEvanLoon

Misschien bent u een inside-jobbeliever inzake 11 september die niet gelooft in de NWO-samenzwering waar de Amerikaanse conspiracymedia (meestal aartsconservatieve en/of antizionistische websites, maar er zijn er ook andere) prioritair mee schermen. Maar dan bent u een uitzondering.

.

Waaruit leidt u af dat zij een uitzondering is?
U heeft veel contacten met conspiracybelievers?
Andere bronnen misschien?

[exodus]

Oorspronkelijk geplaatst door AEvanLoon

Misschien bent u een inside-jobbeliever inzake 11 september die niet gelooft in de NWO-samenzwering waar de Amerikaanse conspiracymedia (meestal aartsconservatieve en/of antizionistische websites, maar er zijn er ook andere) prioritair mee schermen. Maar dan bent u een uitzondering.

ER zijn veel mensen die in isnide job geloven en niet in de NWO.

De NWO-discussies op dit forum (o.a. deze: http://forum.politics.be/showthread.php?t=37513) beleven hoogdagen sinds de NWO-believers de 9/11-hypothesen van Loose Change en andere bronnen hebben ontdekt als de meest actuele bewijzen van hunNWO-geloof.

Ik denk dat dit weer eens of andere bewering is van je dat uit de lucht komt vallen.

[Gun]

Oorspronkelijk geplaatst door exodus

ER zijn veel mensen die in isnide job geloven en niet in de NWO.

Ik ken een heel aantal mensen, buiten politics.be, die in één of andere NWO geloven maar het gaat om 10 verschillende NWO's, tien verschillende visies op de overkoepelende, niet zichtbare macht.

[AEvanLoon]

Oorspronkelijk geplaatst door democratsteve

Waaruit leidt u af dat zij een uitzondering is?
U heeft veel contacten met conspiracybelievers?
Andere bronnen misschien?

Ik heb het uiteraard over de believers op dit forum.
Behalve (misschien) 2004gun gelooft elke 9/11-inside-jobbeliever van politics.be in de "allesverklarende" NWO-samenzwering.
Maar als er intussen nog afvalligen zijn, mogen ze zich bekendmaken. dan weten we hoeveel er nog overblijven (waar zit trouwens Lex Blanca?).

[AEvanLoon]

Oorspronkelijk geplaatst door 2004gun

Ik ken een heel aantal mensen, buiten politics.be, die in één of andere NWO geloven maar het gaat om 10 verschillende NWO's, tien verschillende visies op de overkoepelende, niet zichtbare macht.

Volgens de ware NWO-believer (type exodus, pindar en Lex) zijn al die visies terug te brengen tot onvolledige percepties van één geheime super-NWO-elite.

[lezer]

Voor de derde keer, maar deze keer in de juiste draad:

Kevin Ryan over het NIST-rapport:

http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...ocidfeed&hl=nl

De reacties van Firestone en Parcifal spreken boekdelen.

Ik weet dat Ryan slechts een watertester was bij UL en dat hij ontslagen is.
Firestone gelooft echter nogal gemakkelijk in de reden die UL opgaf. Als je de video bekijkt is voor mij wel duidelijk wie het meest geloofwaardig is.

Maar los daarvan, en veel belangrijker: de inhoudelijke bespreking van het NIST-rapport. Daar wordt m.i. 'niets' van heel gelaten, van de essentie toch niet. (Neen, ik heb de 10000+ pagina's niet gelezen.)

Ik moet toegeven: de 'disbelievers' op dit forum zijn erin geslaagd mijn 'geloof' in allerhande 'inside job'-theorieën serieus te ondermijnen. Daar ben ik dankbaar voor.
Van de officiële theorie geloof ik nu echter nog minder dan in het begin.

Ryan toont overtuigend aan dat men na dik 5 jaar nog steeds geen plausibele wetenschappelijke verklaring van de totale instorting van de WTC-torens heeft.
De verdediging door Parcifal van het NIST-rapport is een beetje lachwekkend, zoals Democratsteve hierboven laat zien.

Maar ik wil mijn mening graag herzien, op basis van deugdelijke argumenten en interpretaties, zoals mij op dit forum wel al vaker is overkomen, door informatie van 'beide zijden'.

[jurgen79]

t'was ne film...ik zeg het u...ne film!
die gebouwen zijn gewoon afgebroken