100% FREE ONLINE DATING
sponsored links
Previous
| Topic: Flight 11 ? or -- a plane or drone with a missile -- videos | |
|---|---|
|
|
|
Note the reasoning process: Did you know that billions of dollars worth of gold and silver went missing from the vaults under the World Trade Center? Posited as fact. Only a mere few million dollars worth of gold and silver were recovered. A petty tribute to what was supposed to have been there. Again, quoted as fact. Either it was there, and was stolen, or it was not there, and there was another lie being sold to people holding gold and silver contracts from Monex. Now, there are several possibilities. Note the lack of reliable links to support and check the claims. Moving along: If the official story is the truth, then there should be no problem with the government revealing the evidence. Instead, they decided to "classify" everything. This is not entirely accurate, but presented as fact and again, no supporting evidence supplied. Some of the official story 'may' be the truth. Most of it is creatively rewritten. None of it would actually stand up in court. Note the poor reasoning: If some of the OS may be true, and some of it may be creatively written, it stands to reason that some, or more, may be accurate. This is an unknown and unspecified quantity, and yet none of it would stand up in court. This is obviously a logical fallacy, because an unknown quantity of fact would stand up in court owing to its accuracy. Again, this is merely unsubstantiated opinion and not to be given much credence. But there will never be a court. Well, there would be a new enquiry if there was a convincing body of evidence to justify said enquiry, however, this 'evidence' has never been presented in a coherent and irrefutable manner. There will only be theories, stories, speculation, lies, and propaganda for the sake of keeping myth alive and for protecting negligence, dishonesty, and corruption. An accurate description of the 'Twoofer' movement.  So, the conclusion has been reached and the anomolies are manipulated to fit the hypothesis-not a hypothesis developed from the anomolies. stop trying to cover up the truth with logic. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Note the reasoning process: Did you know that billions of dollars worth of gold and silver went missing from the vaults under the World Trade Center? Posited as fact. Only a mere few million dollars worth of gold and silver were recovered. A petty tribute to what was supposed to have been there. Again, quoted as fact. Either it was there, and was stolen, or it was not there, and there was another lie being sold to people holding gold and silver contracts from Monex. Now, there are several possibilities. Note the lack of reliable links to support and check the claims. Moving along: If the official story is the truth, then there should be no problem with the government revealing the evidence. Instead, they decided to "classify" everything. This is not entirely accurate, but presented as fact and again, no supporting evidence supplied. Some of the official story 'may' be the truth. Most of it is creatively rewritten. None of it would actually stand up in court. Note the poor reasoning: If some of the OS may be true, and some of it may be creatively written, it stands to reason that some, or more, may be accurate. This is an unknown and unspecified quantity, and yet none of it would stand up in court. This is obviously a logical fallacy, because an unknown quantity of fact would stand up in court owing to its accuracy. Again, this is merely unsubstantiated opinion and not to be given much credence. But there will never be a court. Well, there would be a new enquiry if there was a convincing body of evidence to justify said enquiry, however, this 'evidence' has never been presented in a coherent and irrefutable manner. There will only be theories, stories, speculation, lies, and propaganda for the sake of keeping myth alive and for protecting negligence, dishonesty, and corruption. An accurate description of the 'Twoofer' movement. So, the conclusion has been reached and the anomolies are manipulated to fit the hypothesis-not a hypothesis developed from the anomolies. stop trying to cover up the truth with logic. Oops! My bad! 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Why is there this huge discrepancy between the value of gold and silver reported recovered, and the value reported to have been stored in the vaults? There are a number of possible explanations, from outright theft using the attack as cover, to insurance fraud. Until there is a genuine investigation that probes all the relevant facts and circumstances surrounding the attack, we can only speculate. You want a link? (Apparently you don't know how to google.) http://www.focusonfacts.com/forums/view_topic/158 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
HotRodDeluxe
on
Mon 08/27/12 05:20 PM
|
|
Why is there this huge discrepancy between the value of gold and silver reported recovered, and the value reported to have been stored in the vaults? There are a number of possible explanations, from outright theft using the attack as cover, to insurance fraud. Until there is a genuine investigation that probes all the relevant facts and circumstances surrounding the attack, we can only speculate. So, how is this relevant to the OP? Clearly it must be, or you're just throwing it in as a distraction? You want a link? (Apparently you don't know how to google.) I do actually as you've seen me supply a link for all my claims, so save your ad hominem. It is only common courtesy to supply a link for evidence in this arena-please tell me you're aware of that? http://www.focusonfacts.com/forums/view_topic/158 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
Jeanniebean
on
Mon 08/27/12 05:20 PM
|
|
So, how is this relevant to the OP? Clearly it must be, or you're just throwing it in as a distraction? points to a possible motive. Gold, silver, derivatives, banks, money... most crimes are usually about money. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
HotRodDeluxe
on
Mon 08/27/12 05:35 PM
|
|
Ok, your link goes to a twoofer site that sourced this info from another twoofer site which posted this:
Missing Gold Precious Metals in WTC 4 Vault: Only a Fraction Recovered? The basement of 4 World Trade Center housed vaults used to store gold and silver bullion. Published articles about precious metals recovered from the World Trade Center ruins in the aftermath of the attack mention less than $300 million worth of gold. All such reports appear to refer to a removal operation conducted in late October of 2001. On Nov. 1, Mayor Rudolph Giuliani announced that "more than $230 million" worth of gold and silver bars that had been stored in a bomb-proof vault had been recovered. A New York Times article contained: Two Brinks trucks were at ground zero on Wednesday to start hauling away the $200 million in gold and silver that the Bank of Nova Scotia had stored in a vault under the trade center ... A team of 30 firefighters and police officers are helping to move the metals, a task that can be measured practically down to the flake but that has been rounded off at 379,036 ounces of gold and 29,942,619 ounces of silver . Reports describing the contents of the vaults before the attack suggest that nearly $1 billion in precious metals was stored in the vaults. A figure of $650 million in a National Real Estate Investor article published after the attack is apparently based on pre-attack reports. Unknown to most people at the time, $650 million in gold and silver was being kept in a special vault four floors beneath Four World Trade Center. An article in the TimesOnline gives the following rundown of precious metals that were being stored in the WTC vault belonging to Comex. Comex metals trading - 3,800 gold bars weighing 12 tonnes and worth more than $100 million Comex clients - 800,000 ounces of gold with a value of about $220 million Comex clients - 102 million ounces of silver, worth $430 million Bank of Nova Scotia - $200 million of gold The TimesOnline article is not clear as to whether the $200 million in gold reported by the Bank of Nova Scotia was part of the $220 million in gold held by Comex for clients. If so, the total is $750 million; otherwise $950 million. There appear to be no reports of precious metals discovered between November of 2001 and the completion of excavation several months later. Assuming that the above reports described the value of precious metals in the vaulst before the attack, and that the $230 million mentioned by Giuliani represented the approxmiate value of metals recovered, it would seem that at least the better part of a billion dollars worth of precious metals went missing. (It is not plausible, of course, that whatever destroyed the towers vaporized gold and silver, which are dense, inert metals that are extremely unlikely to participate in chemical reactions with other materials.) An article in The Sierra Times suggests that gold was recovered from two trucks in a tunnel under 5 World Trade Center, giving rise to suspicions that the trucks were being used to remove the gold from the vaults before the South Tower fell. However, this report may have been based on an erroneous reading of other reports that describe the removal of crushed vehicles from a tunnel under 5 WTC in order to gain access to the vaults under 4 WTC to remove their contents. Why is there this huge discrepancy between the value of gold and silver reported recovered, and the value reported to have been stored in the vaults? There are a number of possible explanations, from outright theft using the attack as cover, to insurance fraud. Until there is a genuine investigation that probes all the relevant facts and circumstances surrounding the attack, we can only speculate. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- References 1. Below Ground Zero, Silver and Gold, New York Times, 11/1/2001 2. Thanksgiving at Ground Zero, National Real Estate Investor, [cached] 3. Crushed towers give up cache of gold ingots, TimesOnline, 11/1/02 [cached] 4. Cache of Gold Found at WTC Two truckloads retrieved through a tunnel in rubble2, [cached] 5. , Reuters and New York Daily News, [cached] http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/evidence/gold.html This is highy speculative and it is not a given that there is a discrepancy to contest in the first place. If + maybe + possibly = conspiracy? This 'evidence' is not limited to truther sites and if it's correct, it would be of interest to media outlets who would be trampling over each other to expose this heist. Funny, it's not all over the news. I know the twoofer response will be 'the media is controlled by the government', but that is erroneous and evinces ignorance regarding the workings of the media. When I have time, I'll go through the original sources cited in the biblography. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
Jeanniebean
on
Mon 08/27/12 05:46 PM
|
|
There were billions of missing dollars being investigated when the Pentagon was struck too. Suddenly that investigation disappeared.
Money doesn't just disappear. Gold just doesn't disappear. Or does it? Evidence, however, does disappear. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
There were billions of missing dollars being investigated when the Pentagon was struck too. Suddenly that investigation disappeared. Money doesn't just disappear. Gold just doesn't disappear. Or does it? Evidence, however, does disappear. I see the droning still persists however!!  How exactly do you think evidence "disappears" - alakazam and poof? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
There were billions of missing dollars being investigated when the Pentagon was struck too. Suddenly that investigation disappeared. Money doesn't just disappear. Gold just doesn't disappear. Or does it? Evidence, however, does disappear. I see the droning still persists however!! How exactly do you think evidence "disappears" - alakazam and poof? In the case of JP Morgan's fiasco, it was probably in two office fires. The Pentagon's accounting deparment had all the evidence concerning billions of missing dollars, then it was hit by a plane. Or missile. or something. Up in smoke. Evidence. Gone. No more investigation. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Business is business.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I do find it odd that in the case of the Pentagon there is no visible evidence of any aircraft that may have crashed into it. Besides its no secret how the pentagon is built so terrorists already know that flying a plane into it is futile. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I do find it odd that in the case of the Pentagon there is no visible evidence of any aircraft that may have crashed into it. Besides its no secret how the pentagon is built so terrorists already know that flying a plane into it is futile. It was a precision strike directly into the accounting department. Business is business. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
A precision strike.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Imagine how this planning session between Bush, Rummy and Cheney must have gone: BUSH: So, what's the plan again? CHENEY: Well, we need to invade Iraq and Afghanistan. So what we've decided to do is crash a whole bunch of remote-controlled planes into Wall Street and the Pentagon, say they're real hijacked commercial planes, and blame it on the towelheads; then we'll just blow up the buildings ourselves to make sure they actually fall down. RUMSFELD: Right! And we'll make sure that some of the hijackers are agents of Saddam Hussein! That way we'll have no problem getting the public to buy the invasion. CHENEY: No, Don, we won't. RUMSFELD: We won't? CHENEY: No, that's too obvious. We'll make the hijackers al-Qaeda and then just imply a connection to Iraq. RUMSFELD: But if we're just making up the whole thing, why not just put Saddam's fingerprints on the attack? CHENEY: (sighing) It just has to be this way, Don. Ups the ante, as it were. This way, we're not insulated if things go wrong in Iraq. Gives us incentive to get the invasion right the first time around. BUSH: I'm a total idiot who can barely read, so I'll buy that. But I've got a question. Why do we need to crash planes into the Towers at all? Since everyone knows terrorists already tried to blow up that building complex from the ground up once, why don't we just blow it up like we plan to anyway, and blame the bombs on the terrorists? RUMSFELD: Mr. President, you don't understand. It's much better to sneak into the buildings ourselves in the days before the attacks, plant the bombs, and then make it look like it was exploding planes that brought the buildings down. That way, we involve more people in the plot, stand a much greater chance of being exposed, and needlessly complicate everything! CHENEY: Of course, just toppling the Twin Towers will never be enough. No one would give us the war mandate we need if we just blow up the Towers. Clearly, we also need to shoot a missile at a small corner of the Pentagon to create a mightily underpublicized additional symbol of international terrorism -- and then, obviously, we need to fake a plane crash in the middle of nowhere somewhere in rural Pennsylvania. RUMSFELD: Yeah, it goes without saying that the level of public outrage will not be sufficient without that crash in the middle of ****ing nowhere. CHENEY: And the Pentagon crash -- we'll have to do it in broad daylight and say it was a plane, even though it'll really be a cruise missile. BUSH: Wait, why do we have to use a missile? CHENEY: Because it's much easier to shoot a missile and say it was a plane. It's not easy to steer a real passenger plane into the Pentagon. Planes are hard to come by. BUSH: But aren't we using two planes for the Twin Towers? CHENEY: Mr. President, you're missing the point. With the Pentagon, we use a missile, and say it was a plane. BUSH: Right, but I'm saying, why don't we just use a plane and say it was a plane? We'll be doing that with the Twin Towers, right? CHENEY: Right, but in this case, we use a missile. (Throws hands up in frustration) Don, can you help me out here? RUMSFELD: Mr. President, in Washington, we use a missile because it's sneakier that way. Using an actual plane would be too obvious, even though we'll be doing just that in New York. BUSH: Oh, okay. RUMSFELD: The other good thing about saying that it was a passenger jet is that that way, we have to invent a few hundred fictional victims and account for a nonexistent missing crew and plane. It's always better when you leave more cover story to invent, more legwork to do, and more possible holes to investigate. Doubt, legwork, and possible exposure -- you can't pull off any good conspiracy without them. BUSH: You guys are brilliant! Because if there's one thing about Americans -- they won't let a president go to war without a damn good reason. How could we ever get the media, the corporate world, and our military to endorse an invasion of a secular Iraqi state unless we faked an attack against New York at the hands of a bunch of Saudi religious radicals? Why, they'd never buy it. Look at how hard it was to get us into Vietnam, Iraq the last time, Kosovo? CHENEY: Like pulling teeth! RUMSFELD: Well, I'm sold on the idea. Let's call the Joint Chiefs, the FAA, the New York and Washington DC fire departments, Rudy Giuliani, all three networks, the families of a thousand fictional airline victims, MI-5, the FBI, FEMA, the NYPD, Larry Eagleburger, Osama bin Laden, Noam Chomsky and the fifty thousand other people we'll need to pull this off. There isn't a moment to lose! BUSH: Don't forget to call all of those Wall Street hotshots who donated $100 million to our last campaign. They'll be thrilled to know that we'll be targeting them for execution as part of our thousand-tentacled modern-day bonehead Reichstag scheme! After all, if we're going to make martyrs -- why not make them out of our campaign paymasters? ****, didn't the Merrill Lynch guys say they needed a refurbishing in their New York offices? RUMSFELD: Oh, they'll get a refurbishing, all right. Just in time for the "Big Wedding"! ALL THREE: (cackling) Mwah-hah-hah! The Idiocy Behind the '9/11 Truth' Movement Why the "9/11 Truth" movement makes the Left Behind series read like Shakespeare. http://www.alternet.org/story/42181?page=3 I read this somewhere before.. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I guess this thread was created to combat my Newtons Law..
Did weren't planes.. Dem dwas mizziles.. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
What ever hit the pentagon, (I doubt it was a plane) it was a precision strike and only demolished THE ACCOUNTING DEPARTMENT.
BUSINESS IS BUSINESS. I understand that now. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Or, as they say in Texas, bidness eh bidness.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I do find it odd that in the case of the Pentagon there is no visible evidence of any aircraft that may have crashed into it. Besides its no secret how the pentagon is built so terrorists already know that flying a plane into it is futile. No visible evidence in the handful of pictures you see online? I already posted a link with multiple witnesses who saw the plane. I have seen a photo with a landing gear in it as well. But Let's ignore all that. Which is flying a plane into it futile? The Pentagon is a symbol of power. It's like burning a flag. It's about the mental effect. Hence terrorism. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Or, as they say in Texas, bidness eh bidness. They say that here too.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I do find it odd that in the case of the Pentagon there is no visible evidence of any aircraft that may have crashed into it. Besides its no secret how the pentagon is built so terrorists already know that flying a plane into it is futile. No visible evidence in the handful of pictures you see online? I already posted a link with multiple witnesses who saw the plane. I have seen a photo with a landing gear in it as well. But Let's ignore all that. Which is flying a plane into it futile? The Pentagon is a symbol of power. It's like burning a flag. It's about the mental effect. Hence terrorism. The 'no plane' into the Pentagon theory was debunked years ago. 'Twoofers' ignore any evidence that contradicts their cult's dogma. |
|
|
|
|
