The REAL 9/11 Truth History

[Veronica]

What actually happened. Just thought you might like to know.

[TimmyG]

this is just getting depressing

[adam1]

Hmm, so Veronica knows the Truth.
Well, that's as maybe - we, at the 9/11 uk movement, however, take the broad position that .....blah blah blah...hey Vron! don't you like our broadness?
Tchhh....
Keep going everyone, public awareness is growing.
( she does sound foxy tho doesn't she?

[Newspeak International]

I'm not going to dismiss Veronica's linked post out of hand.It does have relevance to the Truth Movement as we perceive it.
I know it's frustrating to admit there is an aweful lot speculation bandied about as fact, it's the reason I for one don't get involved in certain discussions on here for example.I do take things on board, but I guess it's an inbuilt thing to disseminate between what can be proved and therefore more readily believed,and speculation that could easily be discounted as insane ramblings.
So the no-planes theory whilst it does make sense and could be true,is logged but not mentioned in conversations.
But the CD and freefall speed of 1,2 & 7 gets pushed out in front, that is hard enough for most to believe at first.

All of course IMHO

N

[chek]

Much of Veronica's analysis does hold water.

One thing I feel sure she (and others) are right about, is that unconventional means were used, and trying to explain what happened in terms of high explosives and thermite derivatives and so on, does not provide anywhere near complete answers to even the demolition events of that day (with the possible exception of WTC7) let alone the aftermath.

However I do not completely write off those who struggle to provide an explanation within the limits of conventional means. While not providing the complete answer, they can still bring some worthwhile insights as by-products of their research. (I'm thinking of Steve Jones here). Griffin too has performed a useful service with his critique of the 911 Commission, which while offering no theory, can still serve to awaken those with eyes to see the (admittedly somewhat limited) political background.

My best guess (and I freely admit it is at this stage a guess informed by some inexplicable phenomema) is that Jones is partially right. Numerous witness descriptions of sequenced conventional explosive events and what looks remakably similar to a thermite (only seen in one video - does anyone know of more?) burning a corner perimeter column, would lead me to a hypothesis that something extraordinary took out the core (and the concrete, glass, and whatever else was in it's path) while more conventional means weakened the perimeter columns.

This very day, over in critics corner, they're posting photos of those smoking, powderising abominations as part of their 'evidence' for natural gravity collapses.
You can't awaken those pretending to be asleep.

[alwun]

Veronica,

having just read through Morgan Reynolds presentation at nomoregames.net, I believe - although of course, it pains me - that I owe you an apology. I said in an earlier post on another thread that I doubted anything that you said. Well, Mr. Reynolds has opened my eyes with his lucid and cogent arguments against the 'big passenger jets theories'. I am therefore a recent convert. Thank you.

cheers Al.

[paul wright]

Many of us were in at the start of this - I watched the event on the day live , thought they've overstepped the mark with such obviousness, watch the towers fall with incredulity at the type of technology used, posted comments referring to American Reichstag that same evening
Was in connection with Rosalee Grable through Ellis C Taylor's Yahoo group when she was doing her slow-mo analysis - agreed to the hologram thing - still do in fact
Repeatedly posted that the only way so much of the concrete steel and human bodies could have been pulverised was through Tesla-style interferometric technology
I was watching the South Park episode with my 11 year old son the other day and he couldn't believe the real clip used there of the plane crashing in to WTC2 wasn't part of the cartoon because that's exactly what it looks like, though I think not in CGI but in real time and space, which I think might be why all the add ons and flsshes and so on
But so what does it matter? if it seems all loonytoons to those out there best hold this into our breast and go with the more acceptable flow
The question is what will most provoke the wake-up call.
To the new agers, the most far out hypotheses might do the trick
To most of the population more credible evidence - things they can relate to like bombs and ordinary CD
So f*ck you Veronica for sticking to your internet-based theorising.
Much as I agree with that in part, what's really important is getting off the keyboard and out there, with things that the media-dependent have a chance of understanding

[Newspeak International]

I should have added:

It was Prof. Steven E. Jones that woke me up to the truth, so whether he was after the fact or not does not matter.

I'm sure this is the case of many truthers.

Come on DH there's no need for that kind of reaction!

Take it in and log it, that's all

[paul wright]

Of course,you're right
I do and will

[TimmyG]

The question is what will most provoke the wake-up call.
To the new agers, the most far out hypotheses might do the trick
To most of the population more credible evidence - things they can relate to like bombs and ordinary CD

exactly

[Andrew Johnson]

Thanks Veronica for this excellent summary.

Some of the facts contained are difficult for people to swallow. But as with 9/11 Truth generally, everyone should at least "taste the food" and check it out before saying "huh - yuk - I don't like it - must've been made by an idiot"

Each person seems to have had a role to play in 9/11 Truth - and in waking people up. I was initially very interested, for example, in Mike Ruppert's book and this seemed to wake a few people up, yet some of his actions are rather suspicious and his position on Peak Oil is certainly not unassailable.

There are several other examples within the movement like this (Daniel Hopsicker being another person that comes to mind)

[Disco_Destroyer]

I have only read the 1st edition of The New Pearl Harbour and yes he does state that the collapse is strange! I wouldn't read too much into that as he is not a Dr of Physics that is a long way from his profession
and taking your own advice Veronica maybe you are the bad egg?
I have said this elsewhere and I will also take it further:- we all agree its an inside job, unless we are studying each peace of evidence to take this movement forward it is pointless arguing the finer details.
We know full well the Western Governments are supporting each other to keep the people guessing! We will not see justice done while they are still in power and not likely to even when they are succeeded, unless of course it is by one of us
So in house bickering is pointless, you can say 'Nah Nah told you so' after the event anyhow
Also disinformation can be useful as the more lies are spread the harder it is to lie without stepping on your toes, I've seen aspects of the official story changed due to this ahahaha

[Disco_Destroyer]

My best guess (and I freely admit it is at this stage a guess informed by some inexplicable phenomema) is that Jones is partially right. Numerous witness descriptions of sequenced conventional explosive events and what looks remakably similar to a thermite (only seen in one video - does anyone know of more?) burning a corner perimeter column, would lead me to a hypothesis that something extraordinary took out the core (and the concrete, glass, and whatever else was in it's path) while more conventional means weakened the perimeter columns.

Why would you need to see more? It is quite likely that being near to the impact zone or due to previous wear and tear of the building, that it is only visible at all due to something being dislodged or damaged

[paul wright]

I must add apologies to Veronica for being rude, because I actually agree with a lot of her material
However, it brings to mind that our main antithesis that we're always trying to work with are the politicos and the activists, those already out there disbelieving the propaganda, but for whatever reasons in denial of the truth movement's message
I remember a little presentation I gave to a local new age/spiritual group about three years ago, incidentally on the subject of the conspiritorially-orientated orgone activism, and I faced them up with the 9/11 question and most of the people were blank - like they never heard of the idea - which was a bit of a shock because these were people who were supposedly seeking the deeper truths
On the other hand I know lots of hippies and wasters and alternative reality and therapist type people who will not get involved in conventional political processes such as meetings, demos, letters etc etc. Who are more intent on internal change or streaming in energies and so on to change the world
There are plenty of people, including many a Daily Mail reader, who have a clear insight into what's going down but won't lift a finger to help via conventional means
How do we motivate them to accept that we need to promote change both through internal and external means? perhaps the only way to exchange better ways of organising the collective whilst obviating the animal farm scenario

[chek]

My best guess (and I freely admit it is at this stage a guess informed by some inexplicable phenomema) is that Jones is partially right. Numerous witness descriptions of sequenced conventional explosive events and what looks remakably similar to a thermite (only seen in one video - does anyone know of more?) burning a corner perimeter column, would lead me to a hypothesis that something extraordinary took out the core (and the concrete, glass, and whatever else was in it's path) while more conventional means weakened the perimeter columns.

Why would you need to see more? It is quite likely that being near to the impact zone or due to previous wear and tear of the building, that it is only visible at all due to something being dislodged or damaged

You could have a point there D_D.
The main reason for asking is that during the course of a mass of reading I recall that it's been said the core and corner columns alone would be sufficient to support the upper portion of the buildings.
Other shots of corner columns being cut would be some way towards conclusive evidence.

[Pincher]

(JFK was the last Presidential incumbent to actually take the job seriously, on behalf of the American people … eventually. And he paid the ultimate price).

This semi literate ignorant cow is also a real comedienne. If nothing else 9/11 has kept the Kennedy hagiographers quiet.

Dallas was payback time for the bootlegging, gerrymandering, Bostonian upstarts...

...and no more deserving of our sympathy than the legions of other high profile victims of 'The Order' (Roosevelt & Reagan amongst them) virtually ignored by conspiracy theorists.

[ian neal]

I must add apologies to Veronica for being rude, because I actually agree with a lot of her material
However, it brings to mind that our main antithesis that we're always trying to work with are the politicos and the activists, those already out there disbelieving the propaganda, but for whatever reasons in denial of the truth movement's message
I remember a little presentation I gave to a local new age/spiritual group about three years ago, incidentally on the subject of the conspiritorially-orientated orgone activism, and I faced them up with the 9/11 question and most of the people were blank - like they never heard of the idea - which was a bit of a shock because these were people who were supposedly seeking the deeper truths
On the other hand I know lots of hippies and wasters and alternative reality and therapist type people who will not get involved in conventional political processes such as meetings, demos, letters etc etc. Who are more intent on internal change or streaming in energies and so on to change the world
There are plenty of people, including many a Daily Mail reader, who have a clear insight into what's going down but won't lift a finger to help via conventional means
How do we motivate them to accept that we need to promote change both through internal and external means? perhaps the only way to exchange better ways of organising the collective whilst obviating the animal farm scenario

Good post dh

Likewise I have had similar experiences. In both 'new agey' and 'social justice' circles, I have encountered a surprising degree of almost wilful ignorance and lack of curiosity to consider just how deep and dark the devious deeds of those in positions of power really are. In 'new agey' circles this seems in part explained by a belief that to acknowledge the dark side of life as typified by the wickedness of war and the barefaced lies and propoganda of mainstream media is to some how give energy to these dark forces. As if the power of positive thought alone can wish a new more sane future into existence. Positive thought is very powerful but less so if it is based on wilful denial.

In the social justice/'make poverty history'/anti-corporate circles it seems driven by a fear that to go into conspiracy territory is to some how loose all sense of objectivity and give up any chance of ever being taken seriously. This is based on a similar notion that if we all try that little bit harder to tackle the symptoms of poverty and war everything will come right.

Ultimately 9/11 truth is very much relevent to both the 'new age' and 'social justice' movements. Many supporters would naturally consider themselves part of these movements. The challenge is to join up the dots. To show how 9/11 is relevent to both creating a peaceful and spiritually elevated society and a society based on justice.