• NEW! LOWEST RATES EVER -- SUPPORT THE SHOW AND ENJOY THE VERY BEST PREMIUM PARACAST EXPERIENCE! Welcome to The Paracast+, 11 years young! For a low subscription fee, you can download the ad-free version of The Paracast and the exclusive, member-only, After The Paracast bonus podcast, featuring color commentary, exclusive interviews, the continuation of interviews that began on the main episode of The Paracast. We also offer lifetime memberships! Flash! Take advantage of our lowest rates ever! Act now! It's easier than ever to susbcribe! You can sign up right here!

    Subscribe to The Paracast Newsletter!

9/11 Experiments: The Great Thermate Debate

Forums New posts

Free episodes:

It 's Lance, alright ;) How about none of these hypotheses are true ? You're telling me that I should not believe in anything other then what is fed to me, if I get your comment correctly ? Yeah, let's not talk or entertain different opinions, I love living in medieval europe as well. Did you turn 'professional' skeptic, or what is it with this piss and vinegar attitude ? Out of vinegar I guess...
 
I haven't even 'clicked' the link, but sometimes you go 'full guns a'blazing' (or whatever you dudes call it over there) on something that (was about to type not important..) is interesting, just to shut the whole discussion down (this it was it seems like to me, welcoming another perspective ;) ) Anyhow, how is not entertaining any possible option of what could have happened, not a good thing ?
Yes, I apparently like ( )...
 
George W. Bush and Barack Obama have had many years to call a press conference and release the unedited Pentagon attack videos---all of them---to Congress and the American people. The fact that they have not done so is tacit admission that this key evidence would destroy the government's version of 9/11 events and incriminate all those in government who have perpetuated the false narrative.
 
lancemoody said:
"George W. Bush and Barack Obama have had many years to call a press conference and release the unedited Pentagon attack videos---all of them"...that I imagine exist and therefore must exist because I imagined them.

Yes DS...I do think think that some things are too dumb to discuss....I also make rude noises when someone wants to discuss Justin Bieber or Duran Duran (but both those topics are infinitely more valuable than the sad silly crap screamed by 9/11 Truthers):)


Lance
Click to expand...
so says Lance the 9/11 Liar
 
lancemoody said:
Jesus! The link that Goggs posted is a video by some moron that doesn't even understand how some security cameras work (taking stills in sequence at a slow frame rate so that much motion is missed between frames). Seriously the whole video is this genius showing how stupid he is.

I love how this thread is full of posters imagining that they are thinking about this stuff for the first time! There is is plenty of stuff online that should satisfy your need to know (or more likely amongst most here, feed your silly conspiracy theories).

I love how Goggs implies that now TWO planes must be involved! Yeah, that's probably more likely...lets go with your layperson knowledge of things...that's how we put a man on the moon. There is no limit to the dumb ideas proffered by committed conspiracists....and all apparently on the authority of some guy in his rundown apartment posting YouTube videos......

Lance
Click to expand...


Lance I implied no such thing. The footage released shows an object that looks nothing like a large jet and the impact on the side of the building is tiny. Let's just suppose for a moment, if you can Lance, that 9/11 was a conspiracy - and we are just pretending Lance so don't get your knickers in a twist - so if large buildings can be brought down, don't you think knocking over lamp-posts would be about the simpletest thing the conspiracy would have to accomplish?

The most heavily guarded military HQ in the world and we have one set of crappy stills supposedly showing something hitting? If that satisfies you Lance, fine. Considering the magnitude of the events of that day, it does not satisfy me.
 
as someone with a self described name of spookymulder and an admitted capacity to have an open mind to nearly anything, i will say that i have always thought that the 911 conspiracy meme was overplayed, at least certain elements of it but i'm just not going to be belligerent about it . it does seem that for every bit of evidence one can come up with to fortify or repudiate a claim, someone else can counteract that claim with similarly...even occasionally dubious...evidence.

I will say the truth whatever the truth may be does likely lay somewhere in between. I think the government did get caught with its pants down, WAY DOWN. they probably knew something may turn up but was miles away in their evaluation of it and certainly it seems some people took advantage of the event before it happened like it was already foretold. Given our state of intelligence at the time i'm not terribly surprised the government was the odd man out.

Having said all that i'm bothered by several things (sometimes contradictory) that have nothing to do with thermite or missles or hijacked planes with the caveat that a dozen years down the road they may be false memories.

a. I wonder why did OBL initially deny any knowledge of it. It's not like he would have been worried about the US coming down on him, they already were out canvassing for him. Against that the timing of 9/11 coming as it did on top of the assassination of Ahmad Shah Massoud in which there is supposedly a connection, is intriguing because while i do seem to remember (see disclaimer above) that after Massouds killing, there was increased calls for vigilance as it seemed that Al Qaeda was up to something and OBL did from what i understand order the hit, there is an element of this connection that bothers me. The thing is i think OBL was likely more afraid of The Lion of Punjabi than the US, as the US had already missed a couple of times. But certainly if Massoud had not been killed and 911 attacks had happened instead of a US invasion (remember history US?) the military probably would have given Massoud all he arms and weapons(along with hundreds of advisors and spooks) he desired to wipe OBL off the face of the earth and he would have done it a lot sooner than the US would have. In theory with Massoud out of the way that would have emboldened OBL to go ahead with 911 yet at first he denied it. also considering the logistics needed behind 911 the go-ahead would have probably been done before the assassination, so OBL must have had a lot of faith in the assassins.

b. i've always been quite skeptical that Al Qaeda could have pulled off as something as massive and tactically overwhelming as 911 and follow up with such mundane things as toner cartridge bombs, shoe bombs and underwear bombs. because of increased vigilance and security? Please.

c. also i live in Los Angeles and i could have sworn that on the front page of the LA Times the very next day was pictures of the "accomplices" "That was quick !" was my first reaction and how forthcoming. Usually any info would be coming out in bits and pieces after a certain period and in this case we had complete pics and bios in less than 24 hours. i have yet to ever look into this alleged tidbit so again my recall could be wrong.

d. on a related note i also, with 100% certainty,recall another group of accomplices that were caught the very next day at the customs border in Plattsburg NY trying to get into Canada and stopped because they were persons of interest. Again my thought was "That was quick"
 
Last edited:
Can someone explain how flight 93, the plane that crashed in Pennsylvania, only made a gouge in the ground about 10' wide and some 40' long, with virtually no recognisable wreckage? Witnesses who were on site very soon after said that there wasn't even smoke or fire, and nothing that looked like it came from a large jet?

You can investigate many plane crashes and there is always plenty large pieces of wreckage. It seems 9/11 didn't produce the kind of physical evidence normally seen in plane crashes?

Despite what Lance may think, I don't swallow any and all conspiracies regarding 9/11 but the questions that bother me are why WT7 came down, how the towers came down as if brought down by controlled demolition, why there is no decent footage of the Pentagon strike and why the flight 93 impact seemed to almost vapourise a whole plane?

I'm not the only one with problems. A former major-General of Army intelligence does not believe a large jet hit the Pentagon, and hundreds and hundreds of engineers, pilots and architects have major problems with the official story.

Lots of physical evidence was destroyed almost immediately - maybe investigations work differently in America but elsewhere in the world, you don't destroy evidence before all facts can be gleaned from it. Something stinks about the whole deal.
 
Whatever you think happened on the 9/11 crashes, one thing is certain. Government officials used those incidents to ratchet up national security oversight one hundred notches higher than it previously was. These events also led to the invasion of Iraq. Those crashes have made everyone on this planet pay by intruding into our personal lives ever since.
 
WTC7 came down because hundreds of tons of debris hit it from hundreds of feet above, setting off a near-global unfought fire, and destroying its wonky skeletal frame. After it collapsed, nothing held up the skin, and it fell.

The Towers did not come down as if by controlled demolition- they came down from the top area that had been struck, not from the base, as in controlled demolition. It's not as though the buildings could tip over without disintegrating- there are those who think it is suspicious that the towers and debris fell straight down- as though gravity played favorites.

Flight 93, unlike "normal" crashes, came straight in. In any "normal" crash, the pilot tries to bring it in on the shallowest possible angle, to minimize damage. Nothing was farther from the minds of those subhumans, as the "let's roll" folks were at their door.

The FBI, as I said before, undoubtedly has better footage- but it does not belong to them, and in any case, the investigation is not yet considered complete. It is not uncommon for evidence not to be made public for many decades. Since this is normal behavior, you'd be stretching to call it suspicious. And their are security reasons not to reveal it, too- no one needs to know where all the cameras are, or were, so they can smash them the way they have started doing, or vandalizing the business places involved... If you were patriotic to contact the FBI and turn over footage, the least you could ask for in return is that they not *give* it away, as it is worth money, or reveal details about it until people have calmed down enough that they wouldn't be taking their lives into their own hands... "Their camera backs up the available hard evidence! Burn their store down!"... that sort of thing. Don't tell me it wouldn't happen.
 
Goggs Mackay said:
Can someone explain how flight 93, the plane that crashed in Pennsylvania, only made a gouge in the ground about 10' wide and some 40' long, with virtually no recognisable wreckage? Witnesses who were on site very soon after said that there wasn't even smoke or fire, and nothing that looked like it came from a large jet?

You can investigate many plane crashes and there is always plenty large pieces of wreckage. It seems 9/11 didn't produce the kind of physical evidence normally seen in plane crashes?

Despite what Lance may think, I don't swallow any and all conspiracies regarding 9/11 but the questions that bother me are why WT7 came down, how the towers came down as if brought down by controlled demolition, why there is no decent footage of the Pentagon strike and why the flight 93 impact seemed to almost vapourise a whole plane?

I'm not the only one with problems. A former major-General of Army intelligence does not believe a large jet hit the Pentagon, and hundreds and hundreds of engineers, pilots and architects have major problems with the official story.

Lots of physical evidence was destroyed almost immediately - maybe investigations work differently in America but elsewhere in the world, you don't destroy evidence before all facts can be gleaned from it. Something stinks about the whole deal.
Click to expand...


One of your points above goggs illistrates a point that Muadib made earlier. Which is. a group of witnesses in PA. say they saw no signs of a plane crash at the site...which I wouldn't deny not being there...and many people who report seeing a large passenger jet in D.C. albeit there were some who report something other than a 757 I understand they were a definite minority.

The thing is details aside we can all agree that SOMEONE got away with mass murder and my feeling that someone was not found in abbottabad. My feeling is that it was a rogue body within the saudi royal family that had gobs of money...no. not that scapegoat osama...and fundamentalist leanings that was probably well placed snd ensconced in the US and because of the relationship between the US and Saudi Arabia had been privy as to when the military maneuvers would take place.
 
Last edited:
[quote="Goggs Mackay, post: 168130, member: 4654"Lance so don't get your knickers in a twist -[/quote]

I don't think Lance ever gets his knickers in a twist. His objective is usually to twist ours. ;)
 
Los Angeles Times -

CIA closes office that declassifies historical materials
LINK: CIA closes office that declassifies historical materials - latimes.com

WASHINGTON — The budget ax has fallen on a CIA office that focused on declassifying historical materials, a move scholars say will mean fewer public disclosures about long-buried intelligence secrets and scandals.

The Historical Collections Division, which has declassified documents on top Soviet spies, a secret CIA airline in the Vietnam War, the Cuban missile crisis and other major operations, has been disbanded. The office that handles Freedom of Information Act requests will take over the work.
 
I post vids of witnesses of evidence I even tried to produce pics of the plane that hit the pentagon. facts don't change! there is a mountain of evidence that a plane hit the pentagon! yet some insist on more..
 
vesvehighfolk said:
I post vids of witnesses of evidence I even tried to produce pics of the plane that hit the pentagon. facts don't change! there is a mountain of evidence that a plane hit the pentagon! yet some insist on more..
Click to expand...
"more" as in all the confiscated video of this plane? yes that would be nice.
 
vesvehighfolk have you read what they said about WTC 7 in the Official 9/11 Commission Report?
 
Back
Top