Getbig Bodybuilding, Figure and Fitness Forums
Getbig Misc Discussion Boards => Conspiracy Theories Board => Topic started by: ironneck on November 23, 2011, 05:33:43 PM
-
i do
there are so many videos which exactly explain that the planes are not the real reason the towers collapsed
how the fuck can so many people believe it was the القاعدة
-
I don't think it's an inside job, but I'm confindent we had a lot more knowledge on the attacks than has been announced. I go as far to say that they knew we were getting attacked the day it happened but simply couldn't do anything.
-
Looking for a culture for conspiracy nonsense!? Wow! Have you come to the right place.
-
no was not an inside job
-
i believe is has to do more with the reptilians than with al quaida
-
Reported to 240.
-
I don't think it's an inside job, but I'm confindent we had a lot more knowledge on the attacks than has been announced. I go as far to say that they knew we were getting attacked the day it happened but simply couldn't do anything.
I tend to lean towards this opinion also.
i believe is has to do more with the reptilians than with al quaida
(http://cdn.styleforum.net/4/4a/4ad90b08_Not-sure-if-serious2.jpeg)
-
By "inside" you mean CIA and not Bush, right?
-
By "inside" you mean CIA and not Bush, right?
reptilians was just a joke
but i believe in bilderberg/freimaurer/illuminati and shit
-
We'll find it in 2080 or something.
C'mon Illuminati/Bildberbergs/New World Order......give us our damn One World Government already!
-
2012 it's over
reptilians coming, baby!
-
I wanna know why GH15 hasnt come forward with information.
-
i do
there are so many videos which exactly explain that the planes are not the real reason the towers collapsed
how the fuck can so many people believe it was the القاعدة
(http://www.planetcalypsoforum.com/gallery/files/6/2/6/1/tin-foil-hat.jpg)
retard...
-
for those that believe the government is there to protect us..right.
-
(http://www.planetcalypsoforum.com/gallery/files/6/2/6/1/tin-foil-hat.jpg)
retard...
The problems ain't conspiracy theorist, it's the fact that most people don't have the attention span and general knowledge to put together a coherent idea.
Seriously just look at steroids in bbing, and cross reference it to how ignorant of it most of the population is.
-
Inside job. Look at all the info out there. Look at how the US government has behaved in the past 10 years. Are they acting like an honorable trustworthy servant of the public?
-
On video is one of the owners of the trade center building saying he told the fire department to "Pull it" )building number 7. It was supposed to take weeks to detonate the building but it went right then...lol. Big scam so we could go occupy oil rich countries. :-\
-
(http://www.planetcalypsoforum.com/gallery/files/6/2/6/1/tin-foil-hat.jpg)
retard...
(http://rlv.zcache.com/coincidence_theory_dkt_tshirt-p235525241974621937qmbd_400.jpg)
-
On video is one of the owners of the trade center building saying he told the fire department to "Pull it" )building number 7. It was supposed to take weeks to detonate the building but it went right then...lol. Big scam so we could go occupy oil rich countries. :-\
The sheep will tell you by pull it he meant pull the firefighters out of the building lol. They can spin it any way they want.
-
The sheep will tell you by pull it he meant pull the firefighters out of the building lol. They can spin it any way they want.
The catch is that to set up the explosives was supposed to take weeks or days and that someone would notice. Even if it was spun to have the fire guys leave it would still be impossible to wire the building that fast. All 4 corners have to blow-out at the same time to start the collapse and keep it in a straight down trajectory.....It was "Pulled" soon after he said that and the building was not damaged by previous bldgs. It was arranged beforehand for many weeks.
-
Why did they let the plane hit the Pentagon?
-
The catch is that to set up the explosives was supposed to take weeks or days and that someone would notice. Even if it was spun to have the fire guys leave it would still be impossible to wire the building that fast. All 4 corners have to blow-out at the same time to start the collapse and keep it in a straight down trajectory.....It was "Pulled" soon after he said that and the building was not damaged by previous bldgs. It was arranged beforehand for many weeks.
S0ME0NE W0ULD N0TICE L0L? IT'S VERY EASY F0R THE INTELLIGENCE AGENCIES T0 PULL THIS 0FF.
-
It's pretty obvious what happened on 9/11. If you think it was an inside job you need to adjust your tin foil hat. Just because some idiot makes a power point about something doesn't make it the truth. See Al Gore's An Inconvenient Truth.
-
Yep...right up there with "global warming" and muscle confusion.
-
Why did they let the plane hit the Pentagon?
They never found the plane cuz it was a misslle. A few parts were planted tho they were the wrong parts from a different plane. But it adds legitimacy to the "attack". Collateral damage is common. Whoa!! :-\
-
Of course.
-
Warhorse must be right....it only makes sense.
-
Yep...right up there with "global warming" and muscle confusion.
Can't believe I'm siding with you....
-
Ugly, BTW, I want those DB's if there still available. Was talking about it with my wife just yesterday. Do you still have them?
-
Still got em.
-
I will call you this weekend and set a time.
-
Sure thing.
-
Looking for a culture for conspiracy nonsense!? Wow! Have you come to the right place.
retard...
Yep...right up there with "global warming" and muscle confusion.
It's pretty obvious what happened on 9/11. If you think it was an inside job you need to adjust your tin foil hat.
Really? I'd love to see any one of you guys try to jump into this conversation:
http://www.getbig.com/boards/index.php?topic=408176.200
-
It's pretty obvious what happened on 9/11. If you think it was an inside job you need to adjust your tin foil hat. Just because some idiot makes a power point about something doesn't make it the truth. See Al Gore's An Inconvenient Truth.
You call them idiots when they are bringing up interesting questions in the video.
For example, how do YOU explain the molten metal that made ground zero resemble a foundry up to two weeks after the collapse? Or is that just an idiotic question? Are you saying you are being intelligent not asking any questions and accepting everything word for word that adult children in the government and media are telling you?
-
i do
there are so many videos which exactly explain that the planes are not the real reason the towers collapsed
how the fuck can so many people believe it was the القاعدة
::) Get out of your moms basement and smell the fresh air outside.
-
Really Chimps, what good would it do.
-
The killers who pulled off the actual crime were nothing more than hardcore gang members. There were 1,000's of them in LA in the 90's. They would gladly die defending whatever idiotic principles they had. No difference.
It was all they could do to pull together 19 gangsters. One idiot didn't even make the flight. Once those guys were dead that gang was done.
Not an inside job.
-
The killers who pulled of the actual crime were nothing more than hardcore gang members. There were 1,000's of them in LA in the 90's. They would gladly die defending whatever idiotic principles they had. No difference.
It was all they could do to pull together 19 gangsters. One idiot didn't even make the flight. Once those guys were dead that gang was done.
Not an inside job.
EXACTLY what i've always said, it was nothing more than 19 drugged out psychopaths who managed to hijack some planes and have enough balls/insanity/courage whatever you want to call it and fly them into buildings, no grand conspiracy on anyones part.
-
who believes 9/11 was as inside job
You need to be completely retarded to believe that 9/11 was an inside job. What would the motivation be? A pretext for Bush to start the Iraqui War and finish his daddy's job? Do you really think that Bush would kill 3,000 Americans just to get an excuse to invade Iraq? Do you have any idea of what would be the possibility of the public never discovering the culprits? Zero. Bush would instantly be impeached by the Senate and executed by lethal injection for high treason and mass homicide. And do you really think that the pilots inside would gladfully sacrifice their lives so that the President could get his war? People only sacrifice their lives for ideals or to save loved ones; doing this to make Halliburton increase it's profits is a sacrifice that is illogical. An inside job by Democrats is also illogical for the same reasons, as the danger of being discovered and the costs thereof are too great: the men involved would lose a lot and the Democratic Party as a whole might have even been charged with treason.
SUCKMYMUSCLE
-
I blame the Amish and mormons.
-
I blame the Amish and mormons.
Mormons believe in Aliens
-
Ok, then maybe they flew a flying saucer into the building? Yes?
-
You need to be completely retarded to believe that 9/11 was an inside job. What would the motivation be?
SUCKMYMUSCLE
Patriot Act. New World Order (Happening). Resource wars. And who knows what else. The future will give more insight into their evil plans.
Btw, you are bringing up moronic concepts like Bush junior went to war with Iraq because he wanted to get back at Sadam for mocking his daddy. Those are your words not those of most questioning 911. You are doing it to try and discredit those that question.
Bush is a small player in this. You do realize the world is not run by the puppet politicians. They are actors - some better than others.
-
Yes...actors. That's it!! I recognized one of them at the last SAG meeting.
-
Do you honestly believe Obama is running the world? He's a used car salesman. Do you really think "they" let Jimmy Carter take the reins of Earth...lol-Here you go Mr. Peanut farmer, here's the nuke codes for earth. Good luck.LMFAO!
http://www.getbig.com/boards/index.php?topic=403232.0
that's what's fucked up about you americans
you view your country as "the world"
it's the president of the united states, not president of the world ;D
-
Stavios, we've always been the superpower of the world, people migrate here to be like us and countries turn to us for help. Not so much now. Iran recently called us weak. Now other countries are laughing at us. Any other President would have called this un-acceptable, but not this one.
-
It is pretty obvious at this point to me that you're a stupid person.
SUCKMYMUSCLE
LOL - that's all you got. Insults. No critical thinking at all.
-
Stavios, we've always been the superpower of the world, people migrate here to be like us and countries turn to us for help. Not so much now. Iran recently called us weak. Now other countries are laughing at us. Any other President would have called this un-acceptable, but not this one.
LMAO! You still think being President means anything? It has become a joke. I thought this was so obvious by now. They are actors.
-
Stavios, we've always been the superpower of the world, people migrate here to be like us and countries turn to us for help. Not so much now. Iran recently called us weak. Now other countries are laughing at us. Any other President would have called this un-acceptable, but not this one.
I agree that since Obama is the boss, your country seems pussified
-
Stavios, we've always been the superpower of the world, people migrate here to be like us and countries turn to us for help. Not so much now. Iran recently called us weak. Now other countries are laughing at us. Any other President would have called this un-acceptable, but not this one.
you're wrong yet again ::)
the us became one of the two superpowers chiefly after ww2.
-
Patriot Act.
There is no evidence that 9/11 was an inside job. There is plenty of evidence that Arabs affiiated with Al Quaeda boarded that plane. Suppose that there really was a secret cabal who wanted the U.S to restrict personal freedom and invade the Middle East for whatever reasons...you still haven't explained why the pilots of the pane would sacrifice their lives for this. You sacrifice your life for ideals or to save loved ones. Why? Because no one would sacrifice themselves for financial or political gain since they wouldn't be around to enjoy the fruits of their labor. I consider it plausible that some groups might want an excuse to have increased access to personal information of the general population, but the plausibiity depends heavily on you telling me what group(s) you are talking about. Let's see...
New World Order (Happening).
What do you mean by this? That there are increased wars to twart tyrants and crush nationalist movements and this is a sign of a "one World government" and "New World Order"? The reason why tyrants are getting crushed as well as nationalist independance movements is because, after two World wars in which a combined 80 million people died, the civilized World grew tired of tyrants and despots who want to invade other countries or who brutalize their own population. No one wants some tyrants to develope nuclear weapons and blow up the World or see genocidal cleansing like the one done by the Nazis to the Jews. The civilized world grew tired of this and created organizations like the U.N and NATO to maintain order on a global scale just like the police maintains order in cities and countries. This has nothing to do with a "one World government". Nations are still free to do whatever they want as long as they don't brutalize their neighbors. I would much rather live in a World where tyrants and madman are not allowed to do what they want then one where they are. If this is a "new World order", then it is much better than the old one.
Resource wars.
All wars are resource wars, idiot. Except for the Trojan War, which was probably fictional, all wars are for land and resources. No different than two Paleolithic tribes shooting spears at each other to control hunting grounds.
And who knows what else. The future will give more insight into their evil plans.
What evil plans? What the frack are you talking about? Please identify who you are talking about, what these people want to do and why. Until then, you are talking in cryptic language.
Btw, you are bringing up moronic concepts like Bush junior went to war with Iraq because he wanted to get back at Sadam for mocking his daddy. Those are your words not those of most questioning 911. You are doing it to try and discredit those that question.
I am sorry. It's just that every time the 9/11 conspiracies are brought up, people bring up Bush and Halliburton and their desire to control the oil fields in the middle east. So again, I repeat: who the hell are you talking about, and why would they want 9/11?
Bush is a small player in this. You do realize the world is not run by the puppet politicians. They are actors - some better than others.
Ok. Who are the big players, and what do they want and why? Let's start with some postulations and try to deduce the plausibility of your arguments from there...
-
show one video of a plane hitting the pentagon.
-
I think Scientologists did it, with the help of alien technology and cloning
-
You call them idiots when they are bringing up interesting questions in the video.
For example, how do YOU explain the molten metal that made ground zero resemble a foundry up to two weeks after the collapse? Or is that just an idiotic question? Are you saying you are being intelligent not asking any questions and accepting everything word for word that adult children in the government and media are telling you?
It is an idiotic question and asking idiotic questions doesn't make you intellegent. It makes you an idiot.
There isn't one fucking shred of evidence supporting any of this shit. I watched a good documentary on the history channel about this and they had some pretty legit experts on there including the guy who designed the fucking buildings. Their explanations had a sound basis in scientific fact and were not just a bunch of hypothetical what ifs.
You should watch the show "Penn and Tellers Bullshit". They have an entire show devoted to conspiracy theories and I think it would shed some light on your mental disorder.
-
It is an idiotic question and asking idiotic questions doesn't make you intellegent. It makes you an idiot.
There isn't one fucking shred of evidence supporting any of this shit. I watched a good documentary on the history channel about this and they had some pretty legit experts on there including the guy who designed the fucking buildings. Their explanations had a sound basis in scientific fact and were not just a bunch of hypothetical what ifs.
You should watch the show "Penn and Tellers Bullshit". They have an entire show devoted to conspiracy theories and I think it would shed some light on your mental disorder.
Penn & Teller are Magicians who are paid to convince people that something happened, when in fact it did not. Not the most reliable source for the truth.
-
Terrorist attack + some people willfully letting something slide.
-
non believers always tend to be ignorant
open your eyes secret societies always ruled the world and they will be in the future
-
you stupid arab.
what... would the american goverment kill 3000 of their own people? you moron... you know how insulting that is to say to victims of 9/11.
btw here is a site to debunk all the bullshit the conspiracy "theorists" says whith the fires or whatever...
http://www.debunking911.com/moltensteel.htm
-
I heard that the terrorist attacks were purposely done on the 11th of September so that the date 9/11 resembles the emergency phone number of the USA. Just proves once again that Brits are more intelligent than Americans. I'd like to see someone try to attack Britain on the 9th of the 99th month.
-
The main reason I don't believe conspiracy theories is that I know for a fact that the conspiracists are after me.
-
Terrorist attack + some people willfully letting something slide.
yep. just about every attack in the last 3 decades has involved some FBI guys on the inside who miraculously stop the attack right before it happens, right?
Well, maybe this time, some preparations were made, some departments were told of some drills, some people shorted the airline stocks, some pentagon brass were told not to fly that morning, Condi called mayor willie brown personally and said "oh, don't fly tomorrow, trust me..."
Maybe they just didn't do what they usually do, and stop the attack at the last minute.
Why? Because being attacked in such a relatively small way (losing 3000 is bad, but 7000 americans die everyday on averaage already) wasn't that bad, when you consider the justification it gives us to invade 2 countries, help uprisings in many more. pass patriot acts, etc.
So yeah, it wasn't Bush with a plunger making it go boom. He was confused and scared that day too. But it was certainly some white guys in ties 'staying out of the way' and making damn sure to profit from it, financially, idoligically, and politically.
And I bet most other big terror events in history are the same way. it's how shit is, deal with it. Pet your dog, have a beer, watch football, jerk off, and have a nice life :)
-
I think Tom Cruise and John Travesty were behind it.
-
obama is killing his own people cause he is lucifers slave
-
obama is killing his own people cause he is lucifers slave
Dolmades and Moussaka weren't fresh last night?
-
yep. just about every attack in the last 3 decades has involved some FBI guys on the inside who miraculously stop the attack right before it happens, right?
Well, maybe this time, some preparations were made, some departments were told of some drills, some people shorted the airline stocks, some pentagon brass were told not to fly that morning, Condi called mayor willie brown personally and said "oh, don't fly tomorrow, trust me..."
Maybe they just didn't do what they usually do, and stop the attack at the last minute.
Why? Because being attacked in such a relatively small way (losing 3000 is bad, but 7000 americans die everyday on averaage already) wasn't that bad, when you consider the justification it gives us to invade 2 countries, help uprisings in many more. pass patriot acts, etc.
So yeah, it wasn't Bush with a plunger making it go boom. He was confused and scared that day too. But it was certainly some white guys in ties 'staying out of the way' and making damn sure to profit from it, financially, idoligically, and politically.
And I bet most other big terror events in history are the same way. it's how shit is, deal with it. Pet your dog, have a beer, watch football, jerk off, and have a nice life :)
great post.
-
It was the architect of the twin towers that sucked...
-
lucifers plan is to become god
he shall not be able to do this!
-
'LIHOP'
Let it happen on purpose, only theory that carries any weight and is fairly convincing.
The United States always needs an enemy, to justify various policies and spending decisions.
-
obama is killing his own people cause he is lucifers slave
dont you say that about the Kenyan muslim Hussein Barack Obama.
-
LOL. Yeah right. The US Government is inept. Always has been. They couldn't even cover up a simple break-in during the Watergate scandal, and yet some people think they'd be able to pull off a massive coverup in 911? ROTFLMAO!! Now that's hilarious.
-
Why go to all that trouble just to invade Iraq, then forget to plant WMDs once they got there?
-
Why go to all that trouble just to invade Iraq, then forget to plant WMDs once they got there?
Because of the inability of US techs to write "Made In Iraq" properly.
-
-
I beleive!
-
Ok. Who are the big players, and what do they want and why? Let's start with some postulations and try to deduce the plausibility of your arguments from there...
Corporations and powerful elites for one - like Rothschilds, Soros (agent of Rothschilds), Rockefeller, most that belong to Bilderberg Group and Council on Foreign Relations. A large percentage of these elites are Jewish. I am naming but a few we can make a comprehensive list if you are that lazy to look for yourself. Keyword: AIPAC
Top 20 Heavy Hitters (1989 - 2010) and the political party they gave to.
1. ActBlue $51,124,846 99% to Democrats
2. AT&T Inc $46,292,670 55% to Republicans
3. American Fedn of State, County & Municipal Employees $43,477,361 98% to Democrats
4. National Assn of Realtors $38,721,441 50% to Republicans
5. Goldman Sachs $33,387,252 61% to Democrats
6. American Assn for Justice $33,143,279 90% to Democrats
7. Intl Brotherhood of Electrical Workers $33,056,216 97% to Democrats
8. National Education Assn $32,024,610 93% to Democrats
9. Laborers Union $30,292,050 92% to Democrats
10. Teamsters Union $29,319,982 93% to Democrats
11. Carpenters and Joiners Union $29,265,808 89% to Democrats
12. Service Employees Union (SEIU) $29,140,232 95% to Democrats
13. American Federation of Teachers $28,733,991 98% to Democrats
14. Communications Workers of America $28,376,306 98% to Democrats
15. Citigroup Inc $28,065,874 50% to Democrats
16. American Medical Association $27,597,820 59% to Republicans
17. United Auto Workers $27,134,252 98% to Democrats
18. National Auto Dealers Assn $26,311,758 67% to Republicans
19. Machinists and Aerospace Workers Union $26,229,477 98% to Democrats
20. United Parcel Service $25,290,039 62% to Republicans
Read more: http://www.city-data.com/forum/politics-other-controversies/1235942-top-political-donors-who-controls-dc.html#ixzz1eeJkEakj
-
21st decembre 2012
which conspriciy do you like the most?
lucifer? reptilian? other shit?
i think it would be much more fun to see some reptilians cruising down here than satan or some shit
-
great post.
thank you. your post means even more since i'm full of merlot and cuddly. godspeed.
-
show one video of a plane hitting the pentagon.
Show one video of:
Me losing money in a casino- it happened a lot, but there is no video.
George Bush snorting coke- it happened a lot, but there is no video.
Mike Tyson sleeping- it happens all the time, but there is no video.
If you walk into your bathroom and it stinks, you know your wife was in there taking a growler. You don't need a video to prove it.
-
I think i'd rather deal with Satan. The way humans have treated reptiles is bound to come back and haunt us.
I was catching lizards as a kid and their tails came off :'( Ill sleep with one eye open.
-
Well, certainly there is A LOT more to the tale than what is told to us. Inside job? In as much as some collective (American?) planned this thing way in advance. Those planes did not bring down the towers. This is too obvious. One would have to be a complete imbecile to believe such nonsense.
-
Well, certainly there is A LOT more to the tale than what is told to us. Inside job? In as much as some collective (American?) planned this thing way in advance. Those planes did not bring down the towers. This is too obvious. One would have to be a complete imbecile to believe such nonsense.
there are lots of imbeciles out there who believe it.
They think there is no gray area between Bush with a plunger, and 19 hapless junkies doing it all.
-
Those who believe the official 9/11 story should keep doing what you're doing... go shopping, immerse yourself in your iphone and tech toys, continue to post your whole life on Facebook, watch sports, American Idol and reality tv and most importantly... keep taking your prescription meds.
-
Well, certainly there is A LOT more to the tale than what is told to us. Inside job? In as much as some collective (American?) planned this thing way in advance. Those planes did not bring down the towers. This is too obvious. One would have to be a complete imbecile to believe such nonsense.
Your proof of other forces? None of course.
You're a sheep like all others. You're just one of the slow sheep. The smart sheep figured it out. It wasn't that difficult.
In the real world, where most of us live, 200 tons moving at 500 MPH hits pretty hard. Oh, throw in 23,000 gallons of gasoline.
-
Your proof of other forces? None of course.
You're a sheep like all others. You're just one of the slow sheep. The smart sheep figured it out. It wasn't that difficult.
In the real world, where most of us live, 200 tons moving at 500 MPH hits pretty hard. Oh, throw in 23,000 gallons of gasoline.
How hard do they hit? From a physical point of view... it's impossible for a plane to bring down the twin towers as we've seen it in the news etc., because of the way they're built... according to the official report, the towers did not collapse due to mechanical damage that was caused by the planes... the fires brought it down... kerosine explosion... only problem is, the material used for the core of the twin towers can withstand much higher temperatures than a kerosine explosion could ever reach.
But this is just the physical point of view... and money is much, much more important... money makes the world go round... and if you follow the money... you'll see that the twin towers were not really profitable anymore and USA needed a reason to invade the middle east (Oil) so badly... why not hire some people from the allies in saudi arabia and later deem the whole region terroristic?
-
How hard do they hit? From a physical point of view... it's impossible for a plane to bring down the twin towers as we've seen it in the news etc., because of the way they're built... according to the official report, the towers did not collapse due to mechanical damage that was caused by the planes... the fires brought it down... kerosine explosion... only problem is, the material used for the core of the twin towers can withstand much higher temperatures than a kerosine explosion could ever reach.
But this is just the physical point of view... and money is much, much more important... money makes the world go round... and if you follow the money... you'll see that the twin towers were not really profitable anymore and USA needed a reason to invade the middle east (Oil) so badly... why not hire some people from the allies in saudi arabia and later deem the whole region terroristic?
Even though you have produced zero evidence you must be correct random internet surfer. I'm going to trust you instead of the countless experts that have analyzed this situation.
And President George W Bush proved that you really don't need a reason to invade the middle east. Nobody gives a shit if the middle east is turned into a smoking crater. It's a fucking improvment.
-
Show one video of:
Me losing money in a casino- it happened a lot, but there is no video.
George Bush snorting coke- it happened a lot, but there is no video.
Mike Tyson sleeping- it happens all the time, but there is no video.
If you walk into your bathroom and it stinks, you know your wife was in there taking a growler. You don't need a video to prove it.
a building with more cameras on it than any other building in the world, yet no videos of the plane? no videos from the freeway it flew over? no videos from the gas stations near by? no videos from the hotels near by? yes, your right, its coincidence. like when you sleep and no video.
-
a building with more cameras on it than any other building in the world, yet no videos of the plane? no videos from the freeway it flew over? no videos from the gas stations near by? no videos from the hotels near by? yes, your right, its coincidence. like when you sleep and no video.
actually fucking true
never thought of it!
no other camersa caught these planes
-
Well its hard to keep the ego at bay when over a Billion Muslims(1/5 of earths population) are burning a picture of your president as they walk the streets :-\
that muslim problem is getting a little more serious then people realise( no offense to nice non jihad muslim friends) but they are growing at a rapid rate and could be a legit threat by the time where all dead.
-
!!
-
actually fucking true
never thought of it!
no other camersa caught these planes
i dont understand why anyone hasnt thought of that. its the most important things of all the 9/11 shit to concentrate on. because its black and white. either there is a video or there isnt. and since there is no video that the public has seen, why should i believe a jetliner hit the pentagon and made a 18 foot hole in the building? with no debri? there are pictures of the hole before the building collapsed. yet you mainly see the pics of the collapse which shows a larger hole.
this is the main thing that should be asked about. where is the video? show me a plane. ive not seen one.
-
Damn this thread, I am now watching docos and surfing online to get to the bottom of this, every few months I become a 9/11 conspiracy nut - Damn you Getbig, Damn you
-
!!
He shouldn't have said "you will never convince me", it doesn't help his cause at all.
As an FBI guy, maybe he knows something about US intelligence. But for fucks sakes, stop acting like you are an authority on everything just because you've had an important job!
-
i dont understand why anyone hasnt thought of that. its the most important things of all the 9/11 shit to concentrate on. because its black and white. either there is a video or there isnt. and since there is no video that the public has seen, why should i believe a jetliner hit the pentagon and made a 18 foot hole in the building? with no debri? there are pictures of the hole before the building collapsed. yet you mainly see the pics of the collapse which shows a larger hole.
this is the main thing that should be asked about. where is the video? show me a plane. ive not seen one.
There is one grainy video and the object hitting the Pentagon is too small to be the commercial airliner. The gas station video was "confiscated" and withheld.
I am too lazy to post the video but will later if you can't find it.
The official story is bullshit and those sheep that say they'd rather trust experts need to realize many experts have come forward saying the official story is BS. Including family of the victims.
But keep sleeping sheep - ignorance is bliss.
-
there is a common theme you will notice.
Anyone who says "all of the theories have been debunked, it's just silly, anyone with a brain knows...."
Well, they don't konw about the width of the hole in the pentagon.
They don't know about the feds grabbing all the cameras from gas stations 5 minutes after attack.
They don't know about April whats-hew-name that crawled OUT of the pentagon hole from inside the building, and saw no plane.
They don't know about the NBC helicopter that beat the feds to the Penn scene, and saw the plane had been shredded in the air, not a perfect hole in the ground. We shot it down.
They don't know about WTC7.
They don't know about the controlled demo traits of WTC 1/2.
They don't know about the massive bomb crater in WTC6 - Hell, they probably have no clue that #1-7 all went down, despite closer buildings unharmed.
I was one of them. In 2005, some idiot told me about the idea of 'inside job' and I tried to start a fight with his unamerican ass. I was a single issue (gun rights) voter and I LOVED Bush2. It took a long time of watching videos and listening to experts (by the thousands) that have called for a new investigation. Oh, and the things the original 911 commission said - they called their own investigation a whitewash. All the little things that the white house deleted, and the media "accidentally" lost audio feeds/transcripts, during the hearings. Bush/cheney refusing to testify except in secret, together, with no recordings...
So yeah, anyone who thinks it's crazy should spend a few hours looking at "terrorStorm" or Loose Change 3. Then come back and tell the class that at the very least - the day doesn't smell to high heaven of something more than 19 pricks with boxcutters...
-
^ idiot with no self esteem
-
^ idiot with no self esteem
You are the idiot. The criminals that perpetrated this crime love you the way an owner loves his dog - because of your undying, unconditional belief in their word even when they are very bad at executing their scam!
-
a building with more cameras on it than any other building in the world, yet no videos of the plane? no videos from the freeway it flew over? no videos from the gas stations near by? no videos from the hotels near by? yes, your right, its coincidence. like when you sleep and no video.
If the new standard for truth is "there must be a video" then I'm afraid you've won. But in the single case of the Pentagon what about:
The 15+ people who saw a large silver commercial airliner hit the building?
And the ATC (Air Traffic Control) records that show an unknown aircraft heading towards and then descending rapidly towards the Pentagon?
And the clearly identifiable engines sitting inside the smoldering building?
And the clearly identifiable landing gear sitting in the Pentagon with multiply parts numbers that indicate the parts/engines etc came off the United plane?
-
All the conspiracy people are arguing are things that don't exist.
No Pentagon video.
No previous buildings shown on video collapsing like the towers and tower 7.
I don't have a dog in this hunt, so anyone who wishes to chase imaginary birds is welcome to do so. It doesn't make anyone mad. It's actually entertaining to watch a silly dog try and catch something that isn't there. Now if one of you nice dogs actually catches something, anything, please show it to the entire world.
-
If the new standard for truth is "there must be a video" then I'm afraid you've won. But in the single case of the Pentagon what about:
The 15+ people who saw a large silver commercial airliner hit the building?
And the ATC (Air Traffic Control) records that show an unknown aircraft heading towards and then descending rapidly towards the Pentagon?
And the clearly unidentifiable engines sitting inside the smoldering building?
And the clearly unidentifiable landing gear sitting in the Pentagon with multiply parts numbers that indicate the parts/engines etc came off the United plane?
Everything you said can be easily argued. There was a USA Today reporter on every corner who "saw the whole damn thing". It's possible that if you were able to fake at attack on pentagon, you could plant witnesses. They were standing there allr eady for the cameras.
At least 1 of the planes had no flight manifest. They were all at very low flying capacity. The most common theory is that the white plane seen above 3 minutes after the attack coasted and dropped the cruise missile that hit the room containing the accountants at a 9:30 am meeting (missile hit at 9:32) to discuss the 2.3 TRILLION that had gone missing the day before. $ never was found!
There was enough debris to fill the back of a pickup truck. Something long and missile-shaped was removed under a blue tarp.
So yeah, we can argue all day, it's really pointless. Have you see the holes thru 6 steel & concrete reinforced walls? Hole is way smaller than a plane, but a brick-head missile would do this EXACT damage. A composite nosed-plane? I doubt it...
1st pic shows the hole thru all 6 walls. No wings, just a solid small hole. Missile.
The 2nd pic shows the final punch out when the 'object' came to a rest. Perfect hole. no plane. Supposedly, it cut this PERFECT hole (1 of 6), then disintegrated.
3rd pic shows whatever it was the men carried out.
Now, to me, this looks like a white plane swooped in, dropped the concrete-head bunker buster, which sliced thru the 3 walls. It was carried out by these workers under a tarp.
4th pic shows the plane leaving pentagon airspace minutes later, caught by many video news.
You can believe anything you want, but looking at that hole - And the 911 commissioner slipping on a ccn interview and saying "missile that hit the pentagon"... well, I could go on for hours, but what's the point? It's over 10 years ago. It's a part of history now.
-
We agree to disagree.
I've never seen that blue tarp pic before. Whatever they are carrying it is extremely light relative to its large size. I have no idea what it might be. "Long and missile shaped." Oh come on. It is also shaped like a nice leather couch or perhaps a convenience store freezer containing ice cream or a really nice BBQ. Wouldn't a missile explode and be left in tiny pieces?
Stay cool R.
TWB.
-
We agree to disagree.
I've never seen that blue tarp pic before. Whatever they are carrying it is extremely light relative to its large size. I have no idea what it might be. "Long and missile shaped." Oh come on. It is also shaped like a nice leather couch or perhaps a convenience store freezer containing ice cream or a really nice BBQ. Wouldn't a missile explode and be left in tiny pieces?
Stay cool R.
TWB.
It woudn't have been an exploding missile, just a concrete head designed to put a big ass hole but not explode.
Plus, a telling sign is the pentagon reporters (on the scene and in the hole right after impact) who spent 3 straight days asking Rumsfeld "Where IS the plane?" The media, both left and right, knew that no plane hit, but they understood it was about a bigger goal. Saudis kicking us out, we needed bases and position in the middle east asap, and 911 granted that.
:) yeah, it's fun to argue it, and maybe if the 911 commission had been able to dig deep, they would have gotten to something that mattered, but IF anyone was involved beyond the 19 dead guys, they got away with it.
and thanks for not just calling me an idiot, like most others do when I post about this lol.. I try to avoid threads like these ,they raise my blood pressure. I haven't followed 911 stuff in a few years now. i preferred ignorance, it was bliuss!
-
Whats interesting to me 240 is the 2nd pic you posted of the entry hole,on a recent BBC documentary about the cospiracy theories around 911 a question was asked about why a "plane shape hole" wasn`t in that wall.The explanation was that on impact the wings would have just broke off and thats why you just have a hole.But if thats the case,and the wings just broke off why is there zero damage to any of the wall either side of the hole,not even the paint is scratched.
-
240s just mad he wasnt on any of the planes
-
I beleive!
i before e except after c
-
what... would the American government kill 3000 of their own people? you moron... you know how insulting that is to say to victims of 9/11.
http://www.debunking911.com/moltensteel.htm
It would be more insulting to the victims if the whole truth wasn't uncovered. If any of my friends are family were killed in such an event, I would want to know the truth or how they were murdered. The governments report on the events is an insult to the intelligence of the people of the world. People in the know, realise how deeply embedded corruption is in this world, and although this late in the day absolute proof is impossible to bring forward, the people know something about this isn't adding up. I also think a lot of fear is generated as people now realise how powerful governments and corporations have become, the people, they are afraid. Remember, democracy is two wolves and a lamb deciding what to have for dinner.
-
I find it rather incredible that anyone thinks the kinetic energy, and momentum imparted, by a jet liner full of fuel into one of those towers somehow "requires" an outside force.
To quote Ripley in Aliens, "Did IQs sharply drop while I was away?"
The only "evidence" that suggests it was something other than two planes ramming two towers is laughably tenuous, like, "Oh, we found *molten steel girders*." (Hello! The photos show a steel girder glowing red-orange, as in *heated by a few hundred Kelvins*. If we were dealing with a MELTED girder, the image would show mostly steam and only a brief glimpse at a WHITE-hot girder rapidly disintegrating.)
I challenge any conspiracy theorists to debate the matter with mechanical engineer Michael Wong at stardestroyer.net. Yeah, stardestroyer, hahahaha, so Wong's a a geek, hurfdurf ::) That "geek" will also eat your fucking lunch. If you can even hold your own with him I'll give you mad props :)
-S
P.S. -- 240/Rob, I'm looking at you, bro. I know you buy that Rosie O'Donnell bullshit or similar ilk. You're a sharp guy ... take it up with Mike or his forum members. They'll fix that "inside job" shit for you in short order, my friend :)
-
i dont get all involved in debates like I used to. I don't blame Bush and all that. I've given up hope we'll ever see an investigation. I usually ignore threads like these, my blood pressure always spikes lol
-
Even if there was proof that this was an inside job, Americans would NEVER believe it. They would NEVER. Far too much has happened, and the web is too tangled.
-
when damning info comes out and it will, that person will be silenced, jailed and charged with multiple crimes. rememebr julian asange? the guy from wikileaks? charged with rape and all that shit, well guess what they shut him up, and the case is gone, he isnt in jail.
when the info comes out, a video showing what really hit the pentagon, because yes there is a video, it exists, and it hasnt been seen, and there is only one reason for it not being seen. its like the old question cops ask you, well if theres nothing to hide, then show us. same principle. its not been seen for a reason. and that reason isnt because there wasnt the proper camera angle.
-
when damning info comes out and it will, that person will be silenced, jailed and charged with multiple crimes. rememebr julian asange? the guy from wikileaks? charged with rape and all that shit, well guess what they shut him up, and the case is gone, he isnt in jail.
when the info comes out, a video showing what really hit the pentagon, because yes there is a video, it exists, and it hasnt been seen, and there is only one reason for it not being seen. its like the old question cops ask you, well if theres nothing to hide, then show us. same principle. its not been seen for a reason. and that reason isnt because there wasnt the proper camera angle.
Your argument is something of a paradox. It's a claim or statement that you make, that can not be proved or disproved and appears to defend your position.
You tell me there's a video that exist but nobody has seen it. I can not prove that the video does not exist. You can not prove it does.
If that is the foundation, for your position, that a missile hit the Pentagon, fine. I can not prove to you that that video does not exist and I won't try.
-
The way the buildings fell does seem like a controlled demolition to me.
If it was an inside job, it was masterfully crafted. Bin laden and al Qaeda had been planning a similar attack for over a decade. And of course he would take credit for it when the united states blamed him, they did the work for him. Al Qaeda long desired to pull America into multiple middle east conflicts. It's a part of their plan to install a worldwide Islamic caliphate. But why America would have wanted this to happen? I can only think that it would have been for the massive war contracts to Halliburton and such, which Cheney and co could profit from. Any other reasons don't make sense to me.
-
No no. 911 will not happen again for 50-60 years. By that time enough idiots wil be come together and pull off another pigfuck. Nothing new. Nothing original.
-
i do
there are so many videos which exactly explain that the planes are not the real reason the towers collapsed
how the fuck can so many people believe it was the القاعدة
YAWN
You are late for the 10th anniversary of 9/11!!
It was Sept, 11th, 2011.
This topic is
OLD
This has ALL been said before.
PT
-
i know i know i was watching illuminati shit on youtube and you know how youtube works you start with tupac videos and within an hour your watch poppin zitz
-
Your argument is something of a paradox. It's a claim or statement that you make, that can not be proved or disproved and appears to defend your position.
You tell me there's a video that exist but nobody has seen it. I can not prove that the video does not exist. You can not prove it does.
If that is the foundation, for your position, that a missile hit the Pentagon, fine. I can not prove to you that that video does not exist and I won't try.
i didnt mention missile at all. i mentioned something that anyone with common sense would know. there is a video of whatever hit the building. if you dont think there is one based on the number of cameras in that area your insane. but it hasnt been seen. and the implications of that alone are something to think about.
-
one whistleblower who worked at the FBI sued over the videos. He claimed they were not releasing 85 total videos of the event. Sounds about right.
I can understand not releasing it if you feel our enemies would use it against us in propaganda, etc - But then why is CNN playing the plane imapcts still, 10 years later?
-
some ignorant close minded sheep in this thread afraid to think outside of what bill oreilly tells them
-
One thing is for sure: It happened.
The details will always leave doubt and be sketchy. No doubt about that either.
Bring up Waco, Texas and Ruby Ridge while you're at it. Maybe throw in a little Oklahoma....
Watch "Zeitgeist" again?
-
I never believed conspiracy either until a few months ago. Talking to my member who personally worked on reinforcing every floor with heavy steel ..between that and the original steel there is no way that building should have fell at all , never mind straight down. Some people might have applied some kind of chemical or bombs to weaken it.
the jet fuel went outwards and could not effect the way they fell. Nor would it be enough
Even the 3rd building which they said fell from flying debre fell straight down into it self like the others.
Bin Laden who claimed responsibility was an engineer was surprised they fell like that .
-
100% inside job
-
100% inside job
I agree it was an inside job- all the planes (weighing 200 tons, going 500 MPH, filled with 23,000 gallons of gasoline) exploded inside the buildings.
And I know those planes don't use gasoline- they use JET A1 aviation fuel. Let's just call it high octane gasoline.
-
THE PR0BLEM WITH THE AVERAGE DAY AMERICAN IS THAT HE WAS GR00MED T0 BE BRAINWASHED FR0M THE DAY HE WAS B0RN THAT MASS MEDIA IS ALWAYS RIGHT. IT'S HARD T0 FIX S0ME0NE'S BRAIN AFTER THEY'VE BEEN PRE PR0GRAMMED F0R 20 YEARS PLUS T0 BELIEVE WHAT THE NEWS 0R THE P0LITICANS TELL THEM. HENCE WHY ANY 0NE WH0 THINKS 0UTSIDE 0F WHAT THE MEDIA TELLS US IS CALLED A C0NSPIRACY NUT.
AND IT WASN'T THE G0VERNMENT THAT DID THIS. IT WAS A R0GUE NETW0RK WHICH CUTS ACR0SS G0VERNMENT,INTELLIGENCE AGENCIES,AND THE C0RP0RATE W0RLD.
-
Like who? The "Third World Order?" ~ or maybe the Masons?
-
THE PR0BLEM WITH THE AVERAGE DAY AMERICAN IS THAT HE WAS GR00MED T0 BE BRAINWASHED FR0M THE DAY HE WAS B0RN THAT MASS MEDIA IS ALWAYS RIGHT. IT'S HARD T0 FIX S0ME0NE'S BRAIN AFTER THEY'VE BEEN PRE PR0GRAMMED F0R 20 YEARS PLUS T0 BELIEVE WHAT THE NEWS 0R THE P0LITICANS TELL THEM. HENCE WHY ANY 0NE WH0 THINKS 0UTSIDE 0F WHAT THE MEDIA TELLS US IS CALLED A C0NSPIRACY NUT.
AND IT WASN'T THE G0VERNMENT THAT DID THIS. IT WAS A R0GUE NETW0RK WHICH CUTS ACR0SS G0VERNMENT,INTELLIGENCE AGENCIES,AND THE C0RP0RATE W0RLD.
Asbrus...... is your caps lock button broke on your comp? No need to cap everything plz.
thanks
-
I had to bump the thread to say that I didn't really buy into the whole "Inside Job" thing, until I rented a movie called Loose Change from Netflix. It definitely made me think.
-
I had to bump the thread to say that I didn't really buy into the whole "Inside Job" thing, until I rented a movie called Loose Change from Netflix. It definitely made me think.
Only an idiot would have believed the official line, it is lucky for the US Statesmen, that the population is 99% idiots!
-
Why?
-
Free Republic
Browse · Search Pings · Mail News/Activism
Topics · Post Article
Skip to comments.
Attorney Sanctions Upheld in 9/11 Conspiracy Case
New York Law Journal ^ | 02.03.12
Posted on February 3, 2012 11:10:03 PM EST by Behind Liberal Lines
Sanctions against two attorneys who insist that former Vice President Dick Cheney and former Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld caused the Sept. 11, 2001, terror attacks have been upheld by a unanimous panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit that refused to disqualify itself from the case.
Dennis Cunningham and co-counsel William W. Veale were ordered on Feb. 2 to pay a total of $15,000 in addition to double what the government spent defending against their lawsuit.
In addition, the judges in Gallop v. Cheney, 10-1241-cv, ordered Mr. Cunningham to notify federal courts in the circuit about the sanctions against him when appearing before them for the next year.
In 2011, Messrs. Cunningham and Veale were found liable for what the same judges—Ralph K. Winter (See Profile), John W. Walker Jr. (See Profile) and Jose Cabranes (See Profile)—ruled was a frivolous appeal after a decision by Southern District Judge Denny Chin (See Profile) dismissing April Gallop's complaint as "cynical delusion and fantasy" (NYLJ, April, 28, 2011).
Ms. Gallop was a member of the U.S. Army who was injured in the terrorist attack on the Pentagon.
She claimed that the Pentagon was not hit by a hijacked airliner but, rather, that she was injured by an explosion from within the building that was detonated at the behest of Messrs. Cheney and Rumsfeld and other Bush administration officials who allegedly sought to use 9/11 to justify launching a war against radical Muslims.
The most recent Second Circuit decision arose from the lawyers' motion filed in November to disqualify the judges and for a rehearing of Ms. Gallop's case.
The lawyers argued that the judges had exhibited "severe bias" against them that was motivated by "active personal emotions," in part stemming from exposure to the terror attacks.
The judges rejected that argument, as it had a previous attempt to disqualify them.
"We conclude that Cunningham acted in bad faith in demanding the recusal of the three panel members and any like-minded colleagues," the circuit panel said in an unanimous, unsigned ruling.
The panel ruled that its sanctions against Messrs. Cunningham and Veale should stand. However, based on Mr. Cunningham's claim that he was the "decider" on the Gallop legal team, the circuit ruled that co-counsel Mustapha Ndanusa of Brooklyn should not face any penalties.
Mr. Cunningham, of Walnut Creek, Calif., did not respond to calls for comment.
Mr. Veale, a former chief assistant public defender for Contra Costa County, Calif., told Thomson Reuters, "We are not delusional by any means. We have the facts, and they cannot be explained."
Assistant U.S. Attorney Alicia Simmons defended Mr. Cheney and other Bush administration officials in the case. Jerika Richardson, a spokeswoman for the Southern District U.S. Attorney's Office, said the office would have no comment.
The Second Circuit panel appointed Eastern District Judge Brian M. Cogan (See Profile) to ensure the court-ordered sanctions are complied with.
The panel ordered Messrs. Cunningham and Veale to conform to the monetary penalties within 30 days.
-
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plausible_deniability
Plausible deniability is a term coined by the CIA during the Kennedy administration to describe the withholding of information from senior officials in order to protect them from repercussions in the event that illegal or unpopular activities by the CIA became public knowledge.
The term most often refers to the denial of blame in (formal or informal) chains of command, where senior figures assign responsibility to the lower ranks, and records of instructions given do not exist or are inaccessible, meaning independent confirmation of responsibility for the action is nearly impossible. In the case that illegal or otherwise disreputable and unpopular activities become public, high-ranking officials may deny any awareness of such act or any connection to the agents used to carry out such acts. It typically implies forethought, such as intentionally setting up the conditions to plausibly avoid responsibility for one's (future) actions or knowledge.
In politics and espionage, deniability refers to the ability of a "powerful player" or intelligence agency to avoid "blowback" by secretly arranging for an action to be taken on their behalf by a third party ostensibly unconnected with the major player. In political campaigns, plausible deniability enables candidates to stay "clean" and denounce third-party advertisements that use unethical approaches or potentially libellous innuendo.
More generally, "plausible deniability" can also apply to any act that leaves little or no evidence of wrongdoing or abuse. Examples of this are the use of electric shock, waterboarding or pain-compliance holds as a means of torture or punishment, leaving few or no tangible signs that the abuse ever took place.
Plausible deniability is also a legal concept. It refers to lack of evidence proving an allegation. Standards of proof vary in civil and criminal cases. In civil cases, the standard of proof is "preponderance of the evidence" whereas in a criminal matter, the standard is "beyond a reasonable doubt." If your opponent lacks incontrovertible proof (evidence) of their allegation, you can "plausibly deny" the allegation even though it may be true.
Sociopathy is the NORM and LYING is well rewarded - The sophistication of 9/11 and the obvious planning that went into it would be hard to recreate by a team of the finest minds and engineers, yet somehow the people easily lap up the lie a bunch of barely intelligent muslims pulled it off with a few box cutters!
-
Clearly 9/11 didnt go down exactly as the feds said. But there isnt enough evidence for me to come to the conclusion it was our own government that did it.
Feds never tell the public the whole truth.
Many times the public does not NEED to know the whole truth (obviously not saying if 9/11 was executed by the feds we shouldnt know, Im just saying in many cases the general public cant handle the honest truth of what goes on behind closed doors to keep the world rolling). Others will disagree with me on that last statement, but it is true.
-
Rather than lazily and/or dishonestly saying "the feds" or "the government" or "us", we should specifically refer to individuals.
By the way, if someone knows of an appropriate site to explore this topic, please PM me.
-
By the way, if someone knows of an appropriate site to explore this topic, please PM me.
Forum or board, I mean.
-
Rather than lazily and/or dishonestly saying "the feds" or "the government" or "us", we should specifically refer to individuals.
By the way, if someone knows of an appropriate site to explore this topic, please PM me.
Pretty sure it's fairly impossible for us to speculate on the "who's".
-
Pretty sure it's fairly impossible for us to speculate on the "who's".
If not by focusing on the individuals, what other way can it be approached?
-
If not by focusing on the individuals, what other way can it be approached?
How can we possibly pretend to know who was involved and who wasnt? You can make accusations, but really, the people more than likely directly involved are people who's names you've never heard of, people that dont have names, people who reside in offices in dark corners of buildings you've never heard of. People that dont have term limits, that have their own rules and procedures, people who the politicians don't question and don't pretend to want to know about, people that they (the politicians) don't want to have to even acknowledge their existance.
Its easy to blame the President, the SecDef, the VP, etc, but in reality they had very little, if anything, to do with a scheme like this. Really, militarily speaking, they're just yes men that sit in an office and say yes/no. Ever heard of plausible deniability?
-
How can we possibly pretend to know who was involved and who wasnt? You can make accusations, but really, the people more than likely directly involved are people who's names you've never heard of, people that dont have names, people who reside in offices in dark corners of buildings you've never heard of. People that dont have term limits, that have their own rules and procedures, people who the politicians don't question and don't pretend to want to know about, people that they (the politicians) don't want to have to even acknowledge their existance.
Its easy to blame the President, the SecDef, the VP, etc, but in reality they had very little, if anything, to do with a scheme like this. Really, militarily speaking, they're just yes men that sit in an office and say yes/no. Ever heard of plausible deniability?
I'm sure you know that the President and the Secretary of Defense mutually hold the top of the command chain.
Hypothetically speaking, if you will, the holders of such power would be absolutely required as tools for such an undertaking to have its greatest chance of success. So a person cannot possibly claim to have studied the situation without looking squarely at these two individuals.
-
I'm sure you know that the President and the Secretary of Defense mutually hold the top of the command chain.
Hypothetically speaking, if you will, the holders of such power would be absolutely required as tools for such an undertaking to have its greatest chance of success. So a person cannot possibly claim to have studied the situation without looking squarely at these two individuals.
As I said, its easy to level accusations against those at the top just because theyre at the top. But in this case, I would say youre solely mistaken to blindly make the assumption that these 2 were at the head of your CT, just because of who they were. Things go on all the time behind the backs of the top people in the WH, often so that they literally dont have to know whats going on, and there is no way that either of your assumed targets were capable of dreaming up something like this.
-
As I said, its easy to level accusations against those at the top just because theyre at the top. But in this case, I would say youre solely mistaken to blindly make the assumption that these 2 were at the head of your CT, just because of who they were. Things go on all the time behind the backs of the top people in the WH, often so that they literally dont have to know whats going on, and there is no way that either of your assumed targets were capable of dreaming up something like this.
Have you studied the actions these two men took that morning, Shockwave?
-
The way the buildings fell does seem like a controlled demolition to me.
If it was an inside job, it was masterfully crafted. Bin laden and al Qaeda had been planning a similar attack for over a decade. And of course he would take credit for it when the united states blamed him, they did the work for him. Al Qaeda long desired to pull America into multiple middle east conflicts. It's a part of their plan to install a worldwide Islamic caliphate. But why America would have wanted this to happen? I can only think that it would have been for the massive war contracts to Halliburton and such, which Cheney and co could profit from. Any other reasons don't make sense to me.
T0 G0 T0 WAR IN IRAQ, AFGHANISTAN, PAKISTAN, LIBYA, SYRIA, AND EGYPT. ANY EXCUSE T0 G0 T0 WAR N0W IS EASILY JUSTIFIED BY SAYING AL QAEDA, FREED0M, AND BIN LADEN.
-
Former 9 11 Commissioner admits missile hit the Pentagon
Leaked Video of Cruise missile Hitting The Pentagon
-
Former 9 11 Commissioner admits missile hit the Pentagon
Leaked Video of Cruise missile Hitting The Pentagon
It is hard to me to understand that there really is people stupid enough for that missile -theory, because it has to be the most stupid theory in the history of mankind, and there is no doubt about that. I know I will regret this question, but do you know why that theory is insane? Let me explain:
First of all is what we has seen. There was security cam at the driving gate, which shows us glimpse about the aeroplane, and the great burst of flames while jet fuel ignite. There is lots of talk about hundreds of security cams around the pentagon area, but foil hats has never been able to point out even one of them, so there is only this one piece of video. What we really see in that? It shot frame by every four seconds or something like that, and quality is crappy, but we see pentagon wall, hit and the flames. While you know how tall building is, you are able to measure how tall the flames were, and by that you can estimate how much jet fuel burn in that burst. It is really simple, you need a x gallons of fuel to make fireball wide as xx yards. For example, like fireball like that which video frames proves to be a fact, you need few metric tons of jet fuel. Are you still with me? Have you understand, that there is laws of physic which are ruling in situations like this, and which will force things to fallow each other, because there is no other way. So, if I need to do fireball with the radius of 30 yards, I need some exact amount of jet fuel to do that, because of the laws of physics.
So, what kind of missile hit the pentagon? These foil hat morons say it was a missile, but what kind of missile? There is few hundred types of missiles, but they have one common flaw for situations like this, because most of them are really small. For example, average cruise missile is only 5 meters long, and that is like 15 feet's. These missiles are only ones which can fly like an aeroplane, while other ones are so called ballistic missiles. These you shot from the point a to point b, and they fly in their ballistic path like bullets. Some of these are quite big, like 10 to 15 meters long, meaning about 45ft. There has never been big missiles with wings, not any kind, never and nowhere.
So, what is the point of all this? 757 which eye witnesses see flying and hitting the pentagon is 47 meters long(155ft), and 14 meters high (44ft )from the ground. Cruise missile is 15ft long and 4ft high. How exactly you can mix these two, if you see one? Really? There is thousands of eye witnesses who see the passenger jet, and many of them were able to tell even the company which colours plane have.
Fuck them, who needs the witnesses? There was also 145ft wide path of fallen lamp post in the front of the impact zone, but fuck that too. Who cares, when there is more interest things to ask?
Please explain how this about 15ft long cruise missile is able to carry 8 tons of jet fuel? There is physical evidence which proves that there was about 8 tons of burning jet fuel, so there has to be a way to carry that amount to the place of impact. How that was done? Furthermore, there is bunch of high-res pictures about the pentagon, taken right after the hit, while emergency grew was in it's work. In those pictures we are able to see the impact point, and walls at the sides. There is impact marks which are same as 757 wing span, so what kind of missile we are talking about? It has 145ft wing span, it is able to carry 8 tons of jet fuel, it didn't have any warhead at all. Instead of warhead, it leaves pieces of 757 in the lawn of the pentagon, some pieces of landing gear, motor and shit like that, but there wasn't any explosion what so ever.
You see it in those pictures, there wasn't any flying debris from the building, it all went inwards, like some great force has been pushing towards the building. Outside there were only pieces of the wings etc. which burst in the pieces in the impact. In those photos is lot of interesting things, and that's why foil hats doesn't show them to you. There is pieces of the fuselage clearly visible, pieces of wings, parts of the plane, but not even a smallest sign about the missile. That is a pity, because I really want to see missile like that? 8 tons of fuel, fake wings, carrying plane parts etc. and of course pieces of the passengers which were on flight 77.
http://publicintelligence.net/911-pentagon-damage-immediate-aftermath-high-resolution-photos/ (http://publicintelligence.net/911-pentagon-damage-immediate-aftermath-high-resolution-photos/) Those pictures are exact match with this theory
-
-
Instead of this futile nonsense, name that explosive which can bring down WTC 1 & 2 without any marks or evidence of the explosions. What you guys seem to be unable to understand, there is some physics involved in any kind of explosion. 1. there has to be some explosion like burst of energy 2. there has to be some kind of shock wave 3. there has to be lot of audio evidence, because the burst of energy has to be supersonic even to call it explosion. When we look at the video about the collapse, there isn't even broken windows, so how this is possible? It is possible only if there hasn't been any shock wave, no burst of energy faster than the speed of sound, which means there can't be any explosion what so ever. There can't be any thermite, because it's massive heat which make it shine brighter than sun, and there isn't any evidence what so ever about the thermite or any kind of explosions. No columns with the marks of melting, no columns with the marks showing that they has been cut by explosives. Do you understand what it means? Towers went down because of the hit of the aeroplanes and fire made by the hits. Therefore all claims which try to tell you otherwise, is bullshit. Don't take my word for it, but please, prove that I am wrong by naming one single explosive which can lay in fire up to 56 minutes, and then detonate by the plan. Just one. No more, no less. I know you can't do it, and that is a fact. All explosives are based on chemical compounds, and all chemicals are highly reactive to fire. In fact, there isn't any explosive which doesn't react with fire, so how it could be possible install some in the area, which is going to be target of the plane crash, massive fire by the jet fuel etc. ? There simpy is no way in hell to make that happen.
-
I still don't see an plane hitting the pentagon.
How can a plane only leave damage 5m by 5m?
And what about the hole at the back of the pentagon? How was that created?
-
-
I still don't see an plane hitting the pentagon.
How can a plane only leave damage 5m by 5m?
And what about the hole at the back of the pentagon? How was that created?
Are you some kind on fuckin imbecile? 5 x 5 meters? Please, show me some evidence about those dimensions, AFTER looking this picture:
(http://publicintelligence.net/wp-content/uploads/2011/09/DM-SD-02-03900.jpeg)andf the full size version of it: http://publicintelligence.net/wp-content/uploads/2011/09/DM-SD-02-03900.jpeg (http://publicintelligence.net/wp-content/uploads/2011/09/DM-SD-02-03900.jpeg).
Doorway on the right is at least 2.1 meters high, so regarding that, this damage is at least 15 x 15 meters, and it is made by fuselage only. Marks made by wings are visible on both sides of the damage, and width of the marks is equal to the wingspan of the plane. Furthermore, if attack to the twin towers cannot possible be inside job, how this can be? There isn't even one single evidence to prove even just single fact about the conspiracy theory, so your speculation is complete bullshit.
-
pretty evident it was not done by the people the media claims.
-
pretty evident it was not done by the people the media claims.
And you prove it by what? Official theory has all the evidence it needs to be truth, but where is all the evidence from foil hat morons? There is none. Not even one, do you understand? There is 0 evidence, nothing whatsoever. Only claims and lies. For example, look at the 9/11 videos and point out just one real explosion, with the shockwave at the speed more than 1000 meters per second. Just one. You would be first man in the mankind able to do so. And still all the foil hat morons claim that twin towers were victime of controlled demolition by explosives? Explosions with no shockwave, no flash, no bang whatsoever, not even braking windows? What kind of explosion is that? All explosives make shockwave which travels supersonic speed, usually many times faster than the speed of sound, up to 15000 meters per second, and you fucking hear that sound, because debris flyes with the equal speed, braking sound barrier. Not it the WTC, where is no sound, no shockwave, not any kind of blast, no flying debris, no braking windows, not any sign about the explosion not in the building, and not in the rubble after collapse. That my friend, is against every fucking law of physics which all those visible and audio evidence are based on. Try to explain that by your own words? Thermite, nanothermite? Yes, but where is those tons of 3000°C liguid metal which is spakling like hell and brighter than sun? Where all that goes?
-
And you prove it by what? Official theory has all the evidence it needs to be truth, but where is all the evidence from foil hat morons? There is none. Not even one, do you understand? There is 0 evidence, nothing whatsoever. Only claims and lies. For example, look at the 9/11 videos and point out just one real explosion, with the shockwave at the speed more than 1000 meters per second. Just one. You would be first man in the mankind able to do so. And still all the foil hat morons claim that twin towers were victime of controlled demolition by explosives? Explosions with no shockwave, no flash, no bang whatsoever, not even braking windows? What kind of explosion is that? All explosives make shockwave which travels supersonic speed, usually many times faster than the speed of sound, up to 15000 meters per second, and you fucking hear that sound, because debris flyes with the equal speed, braking sound barrier. Not it the WTC, where is no sound, no shockwave, not any kind of blast, no flying debris, no braking windows, not any sign about the explosion not in the building, and not in the rubble after collapse. That my friend, is against every fucking law of physics which all those visible and audio evidence are based on. Try to explain that by your own words? Thermite, nanothermite? Yes, but where is those tons of 3000°C liguid metal which is spakling like hell and brighter than sun? Where all that goes?
You'll never get anywhere with these guys. It's futile.
-
Yes, gas stations have four or five cameras covering every exterior angle, yet the most secure building in the world only has one low quality/low frame rate security camera.
::)
-
And you prove it by what? Official theory has all the evidence it needs to be truth, but where is all the evidence from foil hat morons? There is none. Not even one, do you understand? There is 0 evidence, nothing whatsoever. Only claims and lies. For example, look at the 9/11 videos and point out just one real explosion, with the shockwave at the speed more than 1000 meters per second. Just one. You would be first man in the mankind able to do so. And still all the foil hat morons claim that twin towers were victime of controlled demolition by explosives? Explosions with no shockwave, no flash, no bang whatsoever, not even braking windows? What kind of explosion is that? All explosives make shockwave which travels supersonic speed, usually many times faster than the speed of sound, up to 15000 meters per second, and you fucking hear that sound, because debris flyes with the equal speed, braking sound barrier. Not it the WTC, where is no sound, no shockwave, not any kind of blast, no flying debris, no braking windows, not any sign about the explosion not in the building, and not in the rubble after collapse. That my friend, is against every fucking law of physics which all those visible and audio evidence are based on. Try to explain that by your own words? Thermite, nanothermite? Yes, but where is those tons of 3000°C liguid metal which is spakling like hell and brighter than sun? Where all that goes?
What "evidence" has the media disclosed? ::) And you're an explosives expert now? :D
-
What "evidence" has the media disclosed? ::) And you're an explosives expert now? :D
You want to talk about evidence? That's fine, because I also want to talk abut the evidence. When I google abut the matter, I find all the evidence I need to figure out, that foil hat morons are bullshitting with their conspiracy theories. I also see from the videos and pictures taken from 9/11, that their theories are fucking stupid, and impossible. I do not have acces any different information than you have, but I have a brains to evaluate the information I find, while you need bunch of foil hats explain it to you. I have ask this plenty of times: Please point out even 1 real explosion from any video material taken from 9/11. No one on this planet has been able to do that. Why? Because there is no explosions at all. Nothing what so ever. And yes, I am expert, compared to you. Why? I know that all explosives are chemical compounds and that they all are very reactive for open fire. These are plain and simple facts, which anyone should know.
There is not even one explosive, which you can leave in open fire and expect it will go of by schedule. That is complete impossible task to do, but wait, there is more: You have to install explosives in the space, which will be hit by the passenger jet, which spill there tons of kerosene and fires it. It is evident that collapse starts from the floor hit by the plane, so charges have to be in that same space. How exactly they survive the impact and the fire? Are you a member of that club of complete morons, who think that the plane were there inside the house in one piece, parked on its landing gears? How do your explosives would survive in crash which make this hole in the building? (http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/f/f6/Bijlmerramp2_without_link.jpg) Do you understand how ridiculous it is to claim, that explosives can survive after facing forces like that? And still, there is idiots who claims that the space in WTC 1 & 2 where the planes hit, was filled with hunders of tons of explosives, which maintain working and bring the tower down after the crash and 56 minutes in open fire. If someone would be trying to tell this scenario regarding anything else but 9/11, you would be laughing at him and tell he is stupid fucking moron, but with 9/11 you buy it without second thought.
-
You want to talk about evidence? That's fine, because I also want to talk abut the evidence. When I google abut the matter, I find all the evidence I need to figure out, that foil hat morons are bullshitting with their conspiracy theories. I also see from the videos and pictures taken from 9/11, that their theories are fucking stupid, and impossible. I do not have acces any different information than you have, but I have a brains to evaluate the information I find, while you need bunch of foil hats explain it to you. I have ask this plenty of times: Please point out even 1 real explosion from any video material taken from 9/11. No one on this planet has been able to do that. Why? Because there is no explosions at all. Nothing what so ever. And yes, I am expert, compared to you. Why? I know that all explosives are chemical compounds and that they all are very reactive for open fire. These are plain and simple facts, which anyone should know.
There is not even one explosive, which you can leave in open fire and expect it will go of by schedule. That is complete impossible task to do, but wait, there is more: You have to install explosives in the space, which will be hit by the passenger jet, which spill there tons of kerosene and fires it. It is evident that collapse starts from the floor hit by the plane, so charges have to be in that same space. How exactly they survive the impact and the fire? Are you a member of that club of complete morons, who think that the plane were there inside the house in one piece, parked on its landing gears? How do your explosives would survive in crash which make this hole in the building? (http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/f/f6/Bijlmerramp2_without_link.jpg) Do you understand how ridiculous it is to claim, that explosives can survive after facing forces like that? And still, there is idiots who claims that the space in WTC 1 & 2 where the planes hit, was filled with hunders of tons of explosives, which maintain working and bring the tower down after the crash and 56 minutes in open fire. If someone would be trying to tell this scenario regarding anything else but 9/11, you would be laughing at him and tell he is stupid fucking moron, but with 9/11 you buy it without second thought.
you fool lol I never claimed it was 'demolished' or even 'never happened' like these 'foiled hat' clowns you're always bibbling about , all I mean was that there were some shady dealings that went down between Mossad and cia leading up to it, and there were people employed by the state department who knew this was going to happen and simply didn't or weren't able to prevent it.
-
you fool lol I never claimed it was 'demolished' or even 'never happened' like these 'foiled hat' clowns you're always bibbling about , all I mean was that there were some shady dealings that went down between Mossad and cia leading up to it, and there were people employed by the state department who knew this was going to happen and simply didn't or weren't able to prevent it.
And how do you know this? Are you privy to the actual intelligence?
Of the thousands of threats that have to be investigated each day I don't doubt someone some where might have had clue on what was gong to happen. But if they reacted to every threat we would have been Marshall law since 1945.
It's a good suspicion to think they might have known for sure but didn't do anything. But it will NEVER be proven.
-
And how do you know this? Are you privy to the actual intelligence?
Of the thousands of threats that have to be investigated each day I don't doubt someone some where might have had clue on what was gong to happen. But if they reacted to every threat we would have been Marshall law since 1945.
It's a good suspicion to think they might have known for sure but didn't do anything. But it will NEVER be proven.
So are you saying it absolutely could not have been prevented? ??? With the amount of intelligence and the amount of close operating surveillance all of the combined agencies do overseas, how were they able to miss a planned op of this magnitude involving well known criminals at that level? And are you aware of how much an operation of that size would cost and how difficult it would be to clandestinely cover your tracks ie electronically and monetarily and pull something like this off, especially when terrorists at this level are constantly being watched and followed by police and security forces and cant make a phone call without foreign contractors sitting outside their place in a van with a gsm interceptor listening to all his incoming and outgoing calls texts ect for months if not years. Not even mentioning Bin Laden being as well known by security forces WORLDWIDE as he was, like he wasn't being watched extremely closely :D
And with the thousands upon thousands of DoD contractors and even more multinational security forces constantly investigating terrorist groups round the clock comprehensively , ironically this one (which happened to be of this size and complexity) was completely missed. out of ALL the small in comparison and easily hidden terrorism plots they foil and tips they act on daily, why did they happen to miss this, the largest and most complex terrorist operation in history...?
An act this expensive, this size and this complicated being pulled off 7000miles away would be a magnet for S.I. and set off alarms at everywhere. and blaming the all mighty airport security for this would be foolish, because we really know that it goes above and beyond that to a much higher level of government which makes proving something like this virtually impossible, and the truth sitting somewhere between my balls and madonnas crotch. This all being said you nor I will never know the real story.
your opinion stance ALL depends on where you get your news from and there is just as much conjecture on both sides of debate that conveys no vestige of facts for either stance of 'who did it and why', and i tend to take what cnn says with a grain of salt (thats being generous), so what other sources of credible intel does this leave regular civilians with?
maybe conversing with former state department contractors or anyone with a SSBI or NACLC for that matter could be a an effective way to concentrate your very own opinion using the info you gather and not one from the six oclock news. awaken your brain from your long slumber ;)
-
Of course I am not saying it couldn't have been prevented.
Your arguments carry no weight as they are based on assumption:
We should have known because of "______________"
If that's the case then there should never be any intelligence failures.
But theres more to it then your naive argument.
One of things that hindered our intelligence was how intelligence was processed and communicated between agencies prior to 911. Do some research on it. Imagine several agencies sorting through hundreds of bits of unrelated info, not talking to each other. It's been well documented and what I am talking about will be easy for you to find.
911 was a massive intelligence failure. Since then changes have been made that centralize intelligence allowing quicker interpretation and response.
-
Of course I am not saying it couldn't have been prevented.
Your arguments carry no weight as they are based on assumption:
We should have known because of "______________"
If that's the case then there should never be any intelligence failures.
But theres more to it then your naive argument.
One of things that hindered our intelligence was how intelligence was processed and communicated between agencies prior to 911. Do some research on it. Imagine several agencies sorting through hundreds of bits of unrelated info, not talking to each other. It's been well documented and what I am talking about will be easy for you to find.
911 was a massive intelligence failure. Since then changes have been made that centralize intelligence allowing quicker interpretation and response.
Intelligence failure at what level of security clearance and between which specific parties? If you believe real documents disclosing top secret investigative information and recent admitted security failures of that magnitude would be available via google search to civilians for all to see I have a bridge for sale in Brooklyn. I'm not implying you are wrong, merely showing distrust in internet sources and information that really can't be proven just speculated much like the other end of all other arguments. i'll do my own research to verify the authenticity of these sources. However, information that I highly doubt is available as to who profited from the operation and the purpose of it would be great (if you could be so kind)
-
Intelligence failure at what level of security clearance and between which specific parties? If you believe real documents disclosing top secret investigative information and recent admitted security failures of that magnitude would be available via google search to civilians for all to see I have a bridge for sale in Brooklyn. I'm not implying you are wrong, merely showing distrust in internet sources and information that really can't be proven just speculated much like the other end of all other arguments. i'll do my own research to verify the authenticity of these sources. However, information that I highly doubt is available as to who profited from the operation and the purpose of it would be great (if you could be so kind)
It's pretty well documented. Just check it out. Rivalries between agencies caused a severe lack of communication and disclosure. That's part of the intelligence failure along with with an overall cold war like approach. Not to mention the whole transponder/secondary radar push in the 90's that led to the dismantling of many primary radars in the interior of the US.
-
Of course I am not saying it couldn't have been prevented.
Your arguments carry no weight as they are based on assumption:
We should have known because of "______________"
If that's the case then there should never be any intelligence failures.
But theres more to it then your naive argument.
One of things that hindered our intelligence was how intelligence was processed and communicated between agencies prior to 911. Do some research on it. Imagine several agencies sorting through hundreds of bits of unrelated info, not talking to each other. It's been well documented and what I am talking about will be easy for you to find.
911 was a massive intelligence failure. Since then changes have been made that centralize intelligence allowing quicker interpretation and response.
Holy shit, man. You can say that again.
-
by whom....the President at the time was not aware of anything??? Unless he was playing dumb.....Not he really is just dumb!!!
-
by whom....the President at the time was not aware of anything??? Unless he was playing dumb.....Not he really is just dumb!!!
prolly had knowledge of the possibility of it happening, maybe was just told to let it go...
-
prolly had knowledge of the possibility of it happening, maybe was just told to let it go...
I start to believe this nonsense at that moment, when anyone can point out even one explosion from any original 9/11 videos to prove that it was controlled demolition. Until that moment, please shut the fuck up.
-
prolly had knowledge of the possibility of it happening, maybe was just told to let it go...
"W"...was not only dumb, but could manage the whole team...... :'(
-
I start to believe this nonsense at that moment, when anyone can point out even one explosion from any original 9/11 videos to prove that it was controlled demolition. Until that moment, please shut the fuck up.
Why did firefighters claim they saw explosions in the lower floors etc. dude you refuse to believe anything except what you are fed by government media so why even bother with you lol.
-
Why did firefighters claim they saw explosions in the lower floors etc. dude you refuse to believe anything except what you are fed by government media so why even bother with you lol.
In situation like that, there is no one who actually can swore what he saw. There were all kind of debris falling down from the point of impact, which was 300 meters above the ground. If you drop TV or computer monitor (there wasn't flat screen at that era)from that height, it seem to be an explosion, but it isn't. What you must understand about this matter is the fact, that you can't hide explosions, and it is proved fact that the collapse start at the floor which plane was hit. If collapse start from that floor, there has to be explosions at that height. Not even one foil hat idiot has been able to point out even one explosion from any video material about the 9/11, so it proves that there wasn't any. It would be easiest way to prove their clams, so why they doesn't use the opportunity? BECAUSE THERE WASN'T ANY EXPLOSIONS, and that prove they are just liars. It is simple as that. You can't prove lies to be a facts, because you don't have any evidence for the imaginary stories. ;D
-
In situation like that, there is no one who actually can swore what he saw. There were all kind of debris falling down from the point of impact, which was 300 meters above the ground. If you drop TV or computer monitor (there wasn't flat screen at that era)from that height, it seem to be an explosion, but it isn't. What you must understand about this matter is the fact, that you can't hide explosions, and it is proved fact that the collapse start at the floor which plane was hit. If collapse start from that floor, there has to be explosions at that height. Not even one foil hat idiot has been able to point out even one explosion from any video material about the 9/11, so it proves that there wasn't any. It would be easiest way to prove their clams, so why they doesn't use the opportunity? BECAUSE THERE WASN'T ANY EXPLOSIONS, and that prove they are just liars. It is simple as that. You can't prove lies to be a facts, because you don't have any evidence for the imaginary stories. ;D
:D ::)
-
:D ::)
Just take your time and prove otherwise?
Sorry, I didn't remember that foil hats are highly allergic to evidence..
-
Ropo, do you believe that the Patriots purposely deflated footballs below the allowable limit?
Ropo does not believe in conspiracies. There are no conspiracies. Humans are not capable of this.
-
Ropo does not believe in conspiracies. There are no conspiracies. Humans are not capable of this.
If you can prove conspiracy, I believe it. I have never seen that happen, and I bet I never will, because those who are cooking up these "internet conspiracies" are the most stupidest humans on earth. The easiest way to shut the mouth of the conspiracy theorist, is ask him to show the evidence. It never happens. And this you should see even by yourself, without me pointing out all those ridiculous fuck ups in the theory. Like 9/11 and the "controlled demolition" without anything which would even faintly resemble an explosion. They blasted those towers down with the hundreds of tons of explosives, but not breaking any windows while doing it? You have to understand that it isn't my fault that you guys are incapable to cook up better theories. It is your own fault, because you try to do it with the insufficient brain capacity, so all you can present is childish crap. Here is some pointers to help you:
1. "I cant believe this" is crappy argument. You cant base you case on that kind of crap.
2. You have to have some concrete evidence to build your case on. Without that is better just the shut your mouth.
3. Concrete evidence cant be some cooked up shit, it has to be real life fact.
;D
-
Anybody with a thinking brain knows this was was a NEO-CON master plan filled with holes that the Media will not talk about.
-
Anybody with a thinking brain knows this was was a NEO-CON master plan filled with holes that the Media will not talk about.
Anybody with a blind faith will believe that crap without even realizing that there is no evidence what so ever to be found in that video. It has been proved by the two different study, that the "truth seeking foil hat morons" doesn't have any kind or criticism about the source of their information, and they seek information only among their own group. This way they stop themselves to see anything but foil hat crap. That proves so overwhelming stupidity, that as I have said plenty of times, it is impossible without having some kind of mental handicap. It is waste of time to try to find a motive for conspiracy, which never have taken place. If it has, you would be able to point out some real explosions from the 9/11 videos, but in this reality where we live, there isn't any. Until you find some prove about the explosions, it is useless to continue with such a moronic arguments like that video presents.
-
If we could say for sure there were explosions, what would it show?
???
-
If we could say for sure there were explosions, what would it show?
???
To make it simple: No explosions = no controlled demolition = conspiracy theory = bullshit.
Here is the main dilemma in it's simplicity. What the foil hat morons do, instead of proving those explosions by showing them from the videos, is inventing 1000 and 1 imaginary ways to make controlled demolition without any explosion. I have seen all of that crap over and over again, but never even one real explosion at the video material about the 9/11. How this is possible?
There is no explosions, and therefore it wasn't controlled demolition. Any other tiny bit of the theory is completely futile because of this fact. In the real world it has been proved with 100% accuracy that there wasn't any ridiculous conspiracy at the 9/11, but these dorks are too stupid to realize that, so they keep stirring this bowl of shit hoping that something pops on the surface. This is called a "blind faith", because there is no such power on this earth which would make the foil hat morons change their vision about the matter. They are completely blind to any evidence, any bit of truth, if it doesn't feed their prejudices. To put it in one word, they are crazy. It is simple as that.
Let's play this bit further? What the foil hat thinks is this:
No explosions = there has to be other way = thermite = problem solved? Well the termite is liquid, and it is insanely hot, which make it glow insanely bright, so it would be overpowered the sun and make the towers look like flare torches. Did you see it in the videos?
No explosions = can't be a bomb = can't be a thermite= it has to be nuclear bomb below the building = no explosion = no radiation = no nuclear device. All the radiation at the ground zero was from the emergency door signs which are made to glow in the dark.
No explosions = can't be a bomb = can't be a thermite = can't be a nuclear device = It has to be missile hitting the buildings at the first place = missile, like cruising missile is tiny, only 5 meters long and unable to carry even enough of fuel for those kerosene flashes what we saw.
Do I need to go further? These morons are pulling these theories from their ass as fast as sane people can shot them down, so this is never ending story. Why? Because there isn't those explosions at the video. That is the main fact, and everything else is invented to avoid the situation where you have to admit, that it is a fact.
-
To make it simple: No explosions = no controlled demolition = conspiracy theory = bullshit.
Here is the main dilemma in it's simplicity. What the foil hat morons do, instead of proving those explosions by showing them from the videos, is inventing 1000 and 1 imaginary ways to make controlled demolition without any explosion. I have seen all of that crap over and over again, but never even one real explosion at the video material about the 9/11. How this is possible?
There is no explosions, and therefore it wasn't controlled demolition. Any other tiny bit of the theory is completely futile because of this fact. In the real world it has been proved with 100% accuracy that there wasn't any ridiculous conspiracy at the 9/11, but these dorks are too stupid to realize that, so they keep stirring this bowl of shit hoping that something pops on the surface. This is called a "blind faith", because there is no such power on this earth which would make the foil hat morons change their vision about the matter. They are completely blind to any evidence, any bit of truth, if it doesn't feed their prejudices. To put it in one word, they are crazy. It is simple as that.
Let's play this bit further? What the foil hat thinks is this:
No explosions = there has to be other way = thermite = problem solved? Well the termite is liquid, and it is insanely hot, which make it glow insanely bright, so it would be overpowered the sun and make the towers look like flare torches. Did you see it in the videos?
No explosions = can't be a bomb = can't be a thermite= it has to be nuclear bomb below the building = no explosion = no radiation = no nuclear device. All the radiation at the ground zero was from the emergency door signs which are made to glow in the dark.
No explosions = can't be a bomb = can't be a thermite = can't be a nuclear device = It has to be missile hitting the buildings at the first place = missile, like cruising missile is tiny, only 5 meters long and unable to carry even enough of fuel for those kerosene flashes what we saw.
Do I need to go further? These morons are pulling these theories from their ass as fast as sane people can shot them down, so this is never ending story. Why? Because there isn't those explosions at the video. That is the main fact, and everything else is invented to avoid the situation where you have to admit, that it is a fact.
I don't know much about the science, but I do know there's tons of conflict with it. So there's no way I can act like I know better.
The impossible dream of seeing it figured out (the question of explosives use), though, just won't happen. Good luck with pinning anything on anyone, even if it could happen. I can't imagine any information appearing that could be so strong, given that it isn't under investigation.
In any case it is a worthless pursuit. A waste of energy to follow that question, unless you think there's real reason to chase your tail.
-
I don't know much about the science, but I do know there's tons of conflict with it. So there's no way I can act like I know better.
The impossible dream of seeing it figured out (the question of explosives use), though, just won't happen. Good luck with pinning anything on anyone, even if it could happen. I can't imagine any information appearing that could be so strong, given that it isn't under investigation.
In any case it is a worthless pursuit. A waste of energy to follow that question, unless you think there's real reason to chase your tail.
What ever. Fact is that it has been proved over and over again that there wasn't any explosions at all. That has been written in the official report, and all that is based on real life evidence. Then there is bunch of idiots who deny these evidences, but doesn't even try to prove otherwise. If you do not see how they fool you, no one can help you. Fact is that there is plenty of evidence which prove what really happen, and there is plenty of claims about the things which has no evidence at all. Which one you are willing to believe?
-
What ever. Fact is that it has been proved over and over again that there wasn't any explosions at all. That has been written in the official report, and all that is based on real life evidence. Then there is bunch of idiots who deny these evidences, but doesn't even try to prove otherwise. If you do not see how they fool you, no one can help you. Fact is that there is plenty of evidence which prove what really happen, and there is plenty of claims about the things which has no evidence at all. Which one you are willing to believe?
No. Nobody's fooling me. That's the advantage in admitting to myself that I can't possibly know.
-
Did Osama even care if the towers fell?
No!
Flying planes into the buildings was the mission end of story. A very SYMBOLIC act which would cause many deaths but the message it would send was WAY more important than the death toll.
The towers falling was a BONUS but nothing more. They didn't know if they would fall and didn't really care. Hitting the towers was enough to call the mission a total success.
-
Did Osama even care if the towers fell?
No!
Flying planes into the buildings was the mission end of story. A very SYMBOLIC act which would cause many deaths but the message it would send was WAY more important than the death toll.
The towers falling was a BONUS but nothing more. They didn't know if they would fall and didn't really care. Hitting the towers was enough to call the mission a total success.
I think the concern is that Americans would have been the ones behind it.
-
I think the concern is that Americans would have been the ones behind it.
But only fools and incredibly stupid people think so. They are called the foil hat morons who, referring the recent study, are the scum of the earth..
-
how could anyone NOT at least question the official story based on the fact they stated phone calls were made at 30,000ft back in 2001????
WTF??? Cellphones NEVER worked at altitude..
-
But only fools and incredibly stupid people think so. They are called the foil hat morons who, referring the recent study, are the scum of the earth..
Remember we were on the subject of explosives and what that is supposed to say.
-
how could anyone NOT at least question the official story based on the fact they stated phone calls were made at 30,000ft back in 2001????
WTF??? Cellphones NEVER worked at altitude..
I think the belief is/was that it would be jumping from tower to tower, but it wouldn't necessarily mean that a call of some undetermined length couldn't be connected.
-
how could anyone NOT at least question the official story based on the fact they stated phone calls were made at 30,000ft back in 2001????
WTF??? Cellphones NEVER worked at altitude..
This is exactly what I meant when I said that "only fools and incredibly stupid people think so. They are called the foil hat morons who, referring the recent study, are the scum of the earth.." What do you think, did those hijacked aeroplanes flight at 30 000ft all the time, until they were dropped on the buildings? And who exactly say that you can't use your phone at that altitude? http://www.911myths.com/html/mobiles_at_altitude.html (http://www.911myths.com/html/mobiles_at_altitude.html)
-
Just take your time and prove otherwise?
Sorry, I didn't remember that foil hats are highly allergic to evidence..
Twin Towers insured for terrorist attacks weeks before 9/11.
Billions of dollars missing from basement vaults of Twin Towers, no monies ever recovered in the debris.
Fast tracked the Patriot Act into Law, allowing recording and analyzing of all communications within the United States.
Catalyst for Iraqi War along with confirmed reports of Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD/never found or confirmed).
Billions of dollars profited by government contractors, Halliburton being the forerunner.
NORAD never gave orders to scramble interceptors, which violates SOP when any aircraft deviates from course with no response for 1 minute.
Thousands of architects, engineers, LEOs and firefighters giving eye witness accounts and scientific proof that contradicts official story.
Tell me again how this wasn't an job?
-
This is exactly what I meant when I said that "only fools and incredibly stupid people think so. They are called the foil hat morons who, referring the recent study, are the scum of the earth.." What do you think, did those hijacked aeroplanes flight at 30 000ft all the time, until they were dropped on the buildings? And who exactly say that you can't use your phone at that altitude? http://www.911myths.com/html/mobiles_at_altitude.html (http://www.911myths.com/html/mobiles_at_altitude.html)
I flew a lot for my job back then. Just for shits and giggles I tried to make several calls with my cell phone from 20-30K feet, it NEVER worked.
-
Twin Towers insured for terrorist attacks weeks before 9/11.
Billions of dollars missing from basement vaults of Twin Towers, no monies ever recovered in the debris.
Fast tracked the Patriot Act into Law, allowing recording and analyzing of all communications within the United States.
Catalyst for Iraqi War along with confirmed reports of Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD/never found or confirmed).
Billions of dollars profited by government contractors, Halliburton being the forerunner.
NORAD never gave orders to scramble interceptors, which violates SOP when any aircraft deviates from course with no response for 1 minute.
Thousands of architects, engineers, LEOs and firefighters giving eye witness accounts and scientific proof that contradicts official story.
Tell me again how this wasn't an job?
Why all this bullshit, when all what you need to do is point out even one real explosion at the video material of the 9/11 attack? Before you do that, it is complete futile to continue with the imaginary things which follows the so called "controlled demolition". Either point out even one real explosion, or explain why it is so difficult to do so? Is this really too much for you? Really?
-
Why all this bullshit, when all what you need to do is point out even one real explosion at the video material of the 9/11 attack? Before you do that, it is complete futile to continue with the imaginary things which follows the so called "controlled demolition". Either point out even one real explosion, or explain why it is so difficult to do so? Is this really too much for you? Really?
So none of what I just fed you is factual? lol..
owned.
-
So none of what I just fed you is factual? lol..
owned.
Maybe in the childish mind of yours, because you are an idiot. In real life it is a fact, that no one has been able to point out even one real explosion from any 9/11 video. And it remains to be a fact until somebody do it, no matter what insane brats from the poor ass trailer park think about it. Exactly when you will learn that you have to prove me wrong, words of the stupid child isn't enough ;D
-
Whether it was Osama or Bush the fact is
THE TOWERS DIDNT HAVE TO FALL.THEY JUST HAD TO GET HIT BY PLANES.
The majority of those who died were above the impact zones and they still would have died if the towers didn't fall and everything that happened after the event still would of happened.
-
Whether it was Osama or Bush the fact is
THE TOWERS DIDNT HAVE TO FALL.THEY JUST HAD TO GET HIT BY PLANES.
The majority of those who died were above the impact zones and they still would have died if the towers didn't fall and everything that happened after the event still would of happened
Nothing could be further from the truth, though. Above all else, it couldn't be held as a gauge by nearly every person, for whatever reason that is, to personally conclude whether or not it was an 'inside' job.
That's huge.
-
Nothing could be further from the truth, though. Above all else, it couldn't be held as a gauge by nearly every person, for whatever reason that is, to personally conclude whether or not it was an 'inside' job.
That's huge.
It could be argued that the war in Afghanistan would have started simply from the attack on the pentagon resulting in 187 deaths.
I think bush would have started the Iraq war eventually no matter what the catalyst.
-
It could be argued that the war in Afghanistan would have started simply from the attack on the pentagon resulting in 187 deaths.
The fact that the plot existed and that the terrorists were taking actions needed to see it come alive, would have went a long way toward doing that.
I think bush would have started the Iraq war eventually no matter what the catalyst.
I agree.
-
Hey ropo the RETARD please explain this video then, RETAAAAARRRRDDOOOOOOO!!!!!
-
Where did "the buildings collapsed at freefall speed" baloney come from?
Looking at raw footage from the day it is clear that the people who jumped out fell a LOT faster than the buildings collapsed.
-
Did you even understood the video you moronic piece of shit? The video is about science, you f@#$ turd, how could 15 floors bring down 90 floors to it's base, do you understand you moron?
For the first time in recorded human history, fire, better yet, OFFICE FIRE, brought down, not one, not two but 3 buildings made of steel and concrete. How can people like you and ROPO THE RETARD keep breathing the same air as the rest of humanity and stand by the official story that mind you, it took less money to investigate that the Lewinsky case back with Bill Clinton(google it), and be so oblivious to scientific facts that it stares you in the face by just looking at the videos.
So pleeaaase ROPO show us some youtube videos where fire have brought down skyscrapers on is foot print just by fire, we will be waiting for such videos so I can chew my own words. Please ROPO prove me wrong.
-
Perhaps, by the same logic, someone can show a video where a fully fueled jet slammed into a 100 story building at the same speed and it didn't collapse.
Which.... whether it did or didn't STILL wouldn't prove anything by logic alone.
-
Did you even understood the video you moronic piece of shit? The video is about science, you f@#$ turd, how could 15 floors bring down 90 floors to it's base, do you understand you moron?
For the first time in recorded human history, fire, better yet, OFFICE FIRE, brought down, not one, not two but 3 buildings made of steel and concrete. How can people like you and ROPO THE RETARD keep breathing the same air as the rest of humanity and stand by the official story that mind you, it took less money to investigate that the Lewinsky case back with Bill Clinton(google it), and be so oblivious to scientific facts that it stares you in the face by just looking at the videos.
So pleeaaase ROPO show us some youtube videos where fire have brought down skyscrapers on is foot print just by fire, we will be waiting for such videos so I can chew my own words. Please ROPO prove me wrong.
Common sense says that isn't possible. But mainstream media tells us it is. Either way i don't buy the official story lol.
-
Again science, yes two jets, alleged full of airplane fuel torpedo against two building, burn up and set the twin towers on fire and brought them down, but please show us any youtube video of a tall building coming down on it's foot print by fire. And please explain to us retards according to you how the top 15 floors brought down 90 floors of concrete and steel, how the weigh of the 15 floors accelerated on free fall and compounded the weight to be able to push the weigh of the rest of the 90 floors that by common sense and science would had offer resistance against the merely 15 floors on it way down if it weren't blown up from the inside, and mind you again that the tower grew in diameter as those 15 floors were supposedly pushing down the rest of the 90 floors. Please explain to us in scientific term how could that be possible, we will wait.
-
Again science, yes two jets, alleged full of airplane fuel torpedo against two building, burn up and set the twin towesr on fire and brought them down, but please show us any youtube video of a tall building coming down on it's foot print by fire. And please explain to us retards according to you how the top 15 floors brought down 90 floors of concrete and steel, how the weigh of the 15 floors accelerated on free fall and compounded the weight to be able to push the weigh of the rest of the 90 floors that by common sense and science would had offer resistance against the merely 15 floors on it way down if it weren't blown up from the inside, and mind you again that the tower grew in diameter as those 15 floors were supposedly pushing down the rest of the 90 floors. Please explain to us in scientific term how could that be possible, we will wait.
Again LOGIC, specifically the LOGIC you are using, show me a video where a fuly loaded jet with passengers and fuel slam into a 100+ story building (of the exact same dimensions, construction, and materials along with the same atmospheric conditions etc.) going as fast as they did and the building doesn't come down.
OR show me using science, not rhetoric (which is what your post is) that account for the variables, known and unknown when a jet slams into a 100+ story building and why those specific buildings shouldn't have went down.
Or show actual tangible evidence, not more CT'er rhetoric, speculation or conjecture, that explosives where wired into the building and the planes where remotely controlled.
-
Here is your replica video, enjoy. ;)
[ Invalid YouTube link ]9%2F11+replica
-
Another:
Ropo waiting for yours still.
-
Is a scale model representative of exact conditions in the event? Does anyone actually believe that? Or is this just a battle of youtube vids? Or is it a battle of being over dramatic with statements like: "For the first time in recorded human history," with out taking into account NOT having another similar event to compare it to.
I guess actual science has been replaced with animation science? That's credible too?
Still waiting for actual "science"
So far i have seen attempts at common sense, science and logic all of which have failed to produce anything but rubbish.
-
Is a scale model representative of exact conditions in the event? Does anyone actually believe that? Or is this just a battle of youtube vids? Or is it a battle of being over dramatic with statements like: "For the first time in recorded human history," with out taking into account NOT having another similar event to compare it to.
I guess actual science has been replaced with animation science? That's credible too?
Still waiting for actual "science"
So far i have seen attempts at common sense, science and logic all of which have failed to produce anything but rubbish.
How could 15 floors bring down 90 to its base
-
How could 15 floors bring down 90 to its base
Do you believe that can be the only factor leading to the collapse of the WTCs?
-
What other factor collaborated then, please enlightin us, please.
And what about building 7, did a plain hit too? Oh no, it was debris from the twin towers, should I bring the video up too to show you how it came down? The 9/11 report to this day doesn't have an official explanation, but they think it came down due to OFFICE FIRES. And what about the adjacent buildings, how come they did not come down on their own foot print on the same day as the twin towers and building 7? Do you have any proof that the buildings surrounding the twin tower came down on their own foot print as well? Please show, please. Did those buildings did not catch on fire? How do you know? Is there official report stating otherwise?
You probably think you are winning this debate as well, that your argument as so astute, well written with such brilliant gramar that you must think I'm cowarding to such level of intellectual nonsense, with commom sense evidence showing the contrary.
-
What other factor collaborated then, please enlight us, please.
You still haven't addressed your inconsistencies in logic and science.
You asserted that because... how did you put it?..... "For the first time in recorded human history," a fire brought down a building and you concluded that because it hasn't happened in history it must be not true. I showed the flaw in your logic and you haven't addressed that. You even put up a video of a scale model and something about animation science.
Then you attempted to use science in your argument, but instead i showed it to be simple rhetoric.
So until you address this, there is no point in me addressing your questions. I will simply debunk your assertions over and over again and you will keep jumping to something else every time i do.
However, i am sure thebrink will ask me the same question. But i just want to make sure that you are aware that i am aware of your shortcomings at the moment.
Also there is the tangible evidence thing i alluded to in the post.
-
What flaw? are you kidding me? Three buildings came down due to fire, where is the flaw?
-
One more thing and I'm done, POST A VIDEO OF A SKYSCRAPER ON FIRE THAT HAS COME DOWN ON IT'S OWN FOOT PRINT, and I will post videos of control demolition, and we shall see who wins, ok?
-
One more thing and I'm done, POST A VIDEO OF A SKYSCRAPER ON FIRE THAT HAS COME DOWN ON IT'S OWN FOOT PRINT, and I will post videos of control demolition, and we shall see who wins, ok?
You are jumping just like I predicted. And you are now trying to have a youtube war like I tAlked about. For the most part youtube is NOT science, youtube is NOT proof.
I even asked you to cite an instance where a airliner slammed into a 100+ story building and it still stood you ran away from that. You then posted a youtube vid of a scale model. What are you some kind of youtube obsessed? Your reality resides in youtube.com? If youtube doesn't have it, it doesn't exists?
Come on dude, be serious!
Your logic is flawed. In essence, You claim that because something hasn't happened before that it cannot happen.
Can we agree thAt that is flawed logic?
BTW. Fire is not the reAson the buildings came down,.........read the report.
-
Do you believe that can be the only factor leading to the collapse of the WTCs?
It's the mains question IMO. Whole thing looked exactly like any other construction demo job. But they don't set the explosives on the 90th floor lol
-
I flew a lot for my job back then. Just for shits and giggles I tried to make several calls with my cell phone from 20-30K feet, it NEVER worked.
So those WTC towers was 20-30K Feet high? Or would it be possible that those hijacked planes didn't fly as high as that, because of their intention to hit these buildings? And teen brat flying all the time for his job? You haven't have a job in your whole life, and you are living in your mothers basement, so please, shut the fuck up.
-
It's the mains question IMO. Whole thing looked exactly like any other construction demo job. But they don't set the explosives on the 90th floor lol
It didn't look like any other demo job to me at all. It would have been a much cleaner of a demo. But even if it did, it still doesn't mean that it was.
Events can look similar but yet be completely different things.
A number of years ago i spent a great deal of time on this forum and outside of it researching 9/11 in detail. At first i bought into the truther charges. But after in depth study i concluded that it wasn't a inside job at all. It was pretty much what they said happened. I do however, suspect that some in the government may have known about it before hand, but that will never be proven so it remains an unfounded suspicion.
If you look past the rhetorical assertions, and look at the whole thing objectively, you have to ask your self what "evidence" stacks up where.
There is a lot to this event. It's very complex. So lets just take the evidence we have right now on this one part minus rhetorical assertions and emotions, and then list the facts and evidence that say The 2 WTCs falling because of the planes vs. the WTC's falling because of explosives.
You are going to find hard evidence leans greatly in one direction. If there was good hard evidence (not circumstantial or speculative) the other way, I would have a different tune about this.
-
cellphones always worked at altitude...
especially back in 2001....
seriously?? ??? ???
-
What other factor collaborated then, please enlightin us, please.
And what about building 7, did a plain hit too? Oh no, it was debris from the twin towers, should I bring the video up too to show you how it came down? The 9/11 report to this day doesn't have an official explanation, but they think it came down due to OFFICE FIRES. And what about the adjacent buildings, how come they did not come down on their own foot print on the same day as the twin towers and building 7? Do you have any proof that the buildings surrounding the twin tower came down on their own foot print as well? Please show, please. Did those buildings did not catch on fire? How do you know? Is there official report stating otherwise?
You probably think you are winning this debate as well, that your argument as so astute, well written with such brilliant gramar that you must think I'm cowarding to such level of intellectual nonsense, with commom sense evidence showing the contrary.
I am so fucking tired about this crap about the WTC 7, because this kind of stupidity literally make me sick. So here is some facts for you: PLANE DIDNT HIT IT, IT WAS HIT BY THE WTC 1, WHICH SCOOP AWAY 25% OF THE BUILDING FRONT SIDE AND 15-30% OF DEPTH OF THE BUILDING. This is proven fact. OFFICE FIRES MY ASS, IT WAS ON FIRE TO THE BOTTOM TO THE TOP, AND THROUGH THE BUILDING. This is also proven fact. IN FACT, IT WAS BURNING 8 HOURS BEFORE IT COLLAPSED, so was it a tiny little fire? Reason why you don't know this is simple. You deny the facts all together, because you have a blind fate to the foil hat theories, which doesn't include even one true word about he matter. WTC 7 collapsed in 3 seconds? No, it take a best part of 13 seconds after that fucking building were on fire 8 hours. It collapsed at the speed of free fall? No, it didn't, because the collapse take 13 seconds. Am I lying to you? Just answer this: If WTC 1 didn't hit the WTC 7, what start the fire? When WTC 1 collapsed, it take down the building between itself and the WTC 7, damaged the structures of the WTC7 and start the fire. There is even a photos where you can see bits of the WTC 1 over the rubble pile which was the WTC 7. Here is a picture of the site, if you look at it, towers didn't drop in their own footprint:
(https://publicintelligence.net/wp-content/uploads/2010/09/Air-0992.jpg)
What comes to my GRAMMAR, it is far better than your GRAMMAR in my language, even it is quite crappy. And when you start to knit picking about some ones GRAMMAR, why don't you spell check your own writings first? It is kind of sad to watch when brats like you try to play smart with the lowest possible IQ.
-
the problem with this CT is that's its based on too many logical fallacies that are used to persuade rather than prove.
For example:
Three buildings came down due to fire
What is implied is not true
For the first time in recorded human history, fire, better yet, OFFICE FIRE, brought down, not one, not two but 3 buildings made of steel and concrete.
When in recorded history did a 100+ story building get hit by a large passenger plane and stay standing?
Common sense says that isn't possible.
Based on what common sense?
but please show us any youtube video of a tall building coming down on it's foot print by fire.
As if there is no youtube vid then it couldn't have happened?
These are some examples on a few posts on just 1 aspect of 9/11. Its pretty consistent with every CT charge on every facet of 9/11
-
the problem with this CT is that's its based on too many logical fallacies that are used to persuade rather than prove.
For example:
What is implied is not true
When in recorded history did a 100+ story building get hit by a large passenger plane and stay standing?
Based on what common sense?
As if there is no youtube vid then it couldn't have happened?
These are some examples on a few posts on just 1 aspect of 9/11. Its pretty consistent with every CT charge on every facet of 9/11
Physics
-
Where to begin? So 8 hours of office fires has enough strength to debilitate a skyscraper which made the 90 floors under the 15 floors come down to it's base? are you two inherently that stoooooopid that do not understand the strength of concrete and steel? There are videos all over youtube of skyscrapers on fire for days, and the structure stood.
In that picture you posted you dupe, you are saying that the buildings did not came down to it's own footprint? There is nothing standing, everything was obliteration, but even better, we can see the small buildings, wtc 5 and 6, between the twin towers and wtc 7 missing big chunks of it's infrastructure and they stood still until they demolished them.
https://www.google.com/search?q=building+7+aerial+photos&espv=2&biw=1920&bih=993&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiKvZrOrKXLAhUK2B4KHcLLCloQ_AUIBygC&dpr=1
https://thingseverybodyshouldknow.wordpress.com/tag/collapse/
-
And what about the adjacent buildings, how come they did not come down on their own foot print on the same day as the twin towers and building 7? Do you have any proof that the buildings surrounding the twin tower came down on their own foot print as well? Please show, please. Did those buildings did not catch on fire? How do you know? Is there official report stating otherwise?
In the picture you posted ropo the retard, which other building came down on it's own footprint that day?
-
Where to begin? So 8 hours of office fires has enough strength to debilitate a skyscraper which made the 90 floors under the 15 floors come down to it's base? are you two inherently that stoooooopid that do not understand the strength of concrete and steel? There are videos all over youtube of skyscrapers on fire for days, and the structure stood.
In that picture you posted you dupe, you are saying that the buildings did not came down to it's own footprint? There is nothing standing, everything was obliteration, but even better, we can see the small buildings, wtc 5 and 6, between the twin towers and wtc 7 missing big chunks of it's infrastructure and they stood still until they demolished them.
https://www.google.com/search?q=building+7+aerial+photos&espv=2&biw=1920&bih=993&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiKvZrOrKXLAhUK2B4KHcLLCloQ_AUIBygC&dpr=1
https://thingseverybodyshouldknow.wordpress.com/tag/collapse/
Exactly. It's just physics. A fire on the 90th floor even with a couple hundred tons up there wouldn't take it down to its base just doesn't make sense from an engineering standpoint buy that's just my opinion.
-
Exactly. It's just physics. A fire on the 90th floor even with a couple hundred tons up there wouldn't take it down to its base just doesn't make sense from an engineering standpoint buy that's just my opinion.
Are you an engineer? So it is what it is, an uninformed opinion.
Couple of things to ask yourself and research:
Does steel conduct heat?
At what point does steel lose it strength when heated?
How much pressure is on the lower steel beams with 100 stories weighing down on them?
Physics
Exactly.
-
" This is proven fact. OFFICE FIRES MY ASS, IT WAS ON FIRE TO THE BOTTOM TO THE TOP, AND THROUGH THE BUILDING. This is also proven fact. IN FACT, IT WAS BURNING 8 HOURS BEFORE IT COLLAPSED"
What? From the bottom the top? Where do you get this? So you are telling us that the fire propagated from the 90th floor to the bottom of the buildings? Lol, you are some kind of stupid.
-
Where to begin? So 8 hours of office fires has enough strength to debilitate a skyscraper which made the 90 floors under the 15 floors come down to it's base?
Untrue and wrong again!
Did you read the report?
are you two inherently that stoooooopid that do not understand the strength of concrete and steel? There are videos all over youtube of skyscrapers on fire for days, and the structure stood.
Being a youtube stooge again eh?
In that picture you posted you dupe, you are saying that the buildings did not came down to it's own footprint? There is nothing standing, everything was obliteration, but even better, we can see the small buildings, wtc 5 and 6, between the twin towers and wtc 7 missing big chunks of it's infrastructure and they stood still until they demolished them.
More logical fallacies from you again: Because some buildings went down they all should have.
You are batting 1.000!
-
" This is proven fact. OFFICE FIRES MY ASS, IT WAS ON FIRE TO THE BOTTOM TO THE TOP, AND THROUGH THE BUILDING. This is also proven fact. IN FACT, IT WAS BURNING 8 HOURS BEFORE IT COLLAPSED"
What? From the bottom the top? Where do you get this? So you are telling us that the fire propagated from the 90th floor to the bottom of the buildings? Lol, you are some kind of stupid.
Ask you self these questions, research them, you might even find the answers in your video bible called youtube:
Does steel conduct heat?
At what point does steel lose it strength when heated?
How much pressure is on the lower steel beams with 100 stories weighing down on them?
-
" Does steel conduct heat?
At what point does steel lose it strength when heated?
How much pressure is on the lower steel beams with 100 stories weighing down on them?"
Please the both of you STOP!!! The more you keep posting. the more moronic you guys are seem by the rest of getbig. So heat propagated down on to the buidings? So steel lost all it's strenght? What about concrete? Does concrete looses all it's strength due to fire? there weren't 100 stories pushing down on 10. It was 15 pushing down on 95, read the report.
-
Please the both of you STOP!!! The more you keep posting. the more moronic you guys are seem by the rest of getbig.
Can you answer those questions or is all you can do is spout logical fallacies?
So heat propagated down on to the buidings? So steel lost all it's strenght? What about concrete? Does concrete looses all it's strength due to fire? there weren't 100 stories pushing down on 10. It was 15 pushing down on 95, read the report.
Lay down, take a 45 pound plate and set it on your chest, then wrap you arms around it, then have some one place 5 more plates on top of your arms. Are you telling me you and your arms won't feel pressure?
-
Ask you self these questions, research them, you might even find the answers in your video bible called youtube:
Does steel conduct heat?
At what point does steel lose it strength when heated?
How much pressure is on the lower steel beams with 100 stories weighing down on them?
Engineers don't design structures that size to be 'just strong enough'. That's ridiculous. And it's not the steel that protects the building from gravity, it's the concrete columns which have tremendous compressive strength. Steel is merely meant to keep the concrete from twisting apart and to protect its integrity from vector type forces. Any engineer will tell you that.
-
Engineers don't design structures that size to be 'just strong enough'. That's ridiculous. And it's not the steel that protects the building from gravity, it's the concrete columns which have tremendous compressive strength. Steel is merely meant to keep the concrete from twisting apart and to protect its integrity from vector type forces. Any engineer will tell you that.
Physics!!!!! ;)
Again you are wrong. You are drawing conclusions from incorrect assumptions and inaccurate information. If you don't like the wiki proof there is more i can post from actual engineers to show how wrong you are.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Construction_of_the_World_Trade_Center (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Construction_of_the_World_Trade_Center)
The World Trade Center towers included many structural engineering innovations in skyscraper design and construction, which allowed the buildings to reach new heights and become the tallest in the world. Traditionally, skyscrapers used a skeleton of columns distributed throughout the interior to support building loads, with interior columns disrupting the floor space. The tube-frame concept, earlier introduced by Fazlur Khan, was a major innovation, allowing open floor plans and more space to rent. The buildings used high-strength, load-bearing perimeter steel columns called Vierendeel trusses that were spaced closely together to form a strong, rigid wall structure. There were 60 perimeter columns, narrowly spaced, on each side of the buildings. In all, the perimeter walls of the towers were 210 feet (64 m) on each side, and the corners were beveled. The perimeter columns were designed to provide support for virtually all lateral loads (such as wind loads) and to share the gravity loads with the core columns.[48] Structural analysis of major portions of the World Trade Center were computed on an IBM 1620.[49]
The perimeter structure was constructed with extensive use of prefabricated modular pieces, which consisted of three columns, three stories tall, connected by spandrel plates. The perimeter columns had a square cross section, 14 inches (36 cm) on a side, and were constructed of welded steel plate.[50] The thickness of the plates and grade of structural steel varied over the height of the tower, ranging from 36,000 to 100,000 pounds per square inch[51] (260 to 670 MPa). The strength of the steel and thickness of the steel plates decreased with height because they were required to support lesser amounts of building mass on higher floors.[50] The tube-frame design required 40 percent less structural steel than conventional building designs.[52] From the 7th floor to the ground level, and down to the foundation, the columns were spaced 10 feet (3 m) apart.[53] All columns were placed on bedrock, which, unlike that in Midtown Manhattan, where the bedrock is shallow, is at 65–85 feet (20–26 m) below the surface.[54]
The spandrel plates were welded to the columns to create the modular pieces off-site at the fabrication shop.[55] The modular pieces were typically 52 inches (1.3 m) deep, and extended for two full floors and half of two more floors.[50] Adjacent modules were bolted together, with the splices occurring at mid-span of the columns and spandrels. The spandrel plates were located at each floor, transmitting shear stress between columns, allowing them to work together in resisting lateral loads. The joints between modules were staggered vertically, so the column splices between adjacent modules were not at the same floor.[50]
.....
The tube frame design using steel core and perimeter columns protected with sprayed-on fire resistant material created a relatively lightweight structure that would sway more in response to the wind, compared to traditional structures such as the Empire State Building that have thick, heavy masonry for fireproofing of steel structural elements
________________________ ________________________ ________________________ _________
Brink, you seem reasonable, this is what happens when you don't allow yourself to fall prey to BS rhetoric. Do some actual research and you will see there is no CT here.
-
Where to begin? So 8 hours of office fires has enough strength to debilitate a skyscraper which made the 90 floors under the 15 floors come down to it's base? are you two inherently that stoooooopid that do not understand the strength of concrete and steel? There are videos all over youtube of skyscrapers on fire for days, and the structure stood.
In that picture you posted you dupe, you are saying that the buildings did not came down to it's own footprint? There is nothing standing, everything was obliteration, but even better, we can see the small buildings, wtc 5 and 6, between the twin towers and wtc 7 missing big chunks of it's infrastructure and they stood still until they demolished them.
https://www.google.com/search?q=building+7+aerial+photos&espv=2&biw=1920&bih=993&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiKvZrOrKXLAhUK2B4KHcLLCloQ_AUIBygC&dpr=1
https://thingseverybodyshouldknow.wordpress.com/tag/collapse/
Ok. Link here some video where we can see the skyscraper which is on fire because Boeing 767 has crash in it, and which doesn't collapse? Or video about the building like WTC 7, which has been hit by another collapsing building which was 400 meters high. What you drooling morons are doing is that you take examples from the complete different situations and circumstances, and try to ignore all the fucking facts of the matter.
Both WTC towers has the footprint of 60 x 60 meters. The area what you see in the pictures, is ~700 x 600 meters. That is quite large to be a footprint, while both towers could lie on that area on their side, and there would be plenty of room around them..
-
" Does steel conduct heat?
At what point does steel lose it strength when heated?
How much pressure is on the lower steel beams with 100 stories weighing down on them?"
Please the both of you STOP!!! The more you keep posting. the more moronic you guys are seem by the rest of getbig. So heat propagated down on to the buidings? So steel lost all it's strenght? What about concrete? Does concrete looses all it's strength due to fire? there weren't 100 stories pushing down on 10. It was 15 pushing down on 95, read the report.
So you are saying that steel doesn't conduct heat? In fact, it does it quite well, even so well that humans has been able to use iron and steel from the iron-age, and manufacturing all kind of tools and products from it. Leave from your trailer park, dear child, and look around. There is steel and iron everywhere just because it is easy to work with because it would be soft as butter when it is heated. For example, the blacksmith and the horse shoe. The Blacksmith heat the steel to 8-900°C and forge it to be a shoe for the horse. What is 8-900°C in the fire which has temperature of 1400-1500°C? Steel start to loose it's strength when it is heated to the temperature of 400°C, and when temperature goes up, the strength goes down 35-40% per 100°C down to zero at the temperature of 1200°C. This is so called "common knowledge", and you can check it out from any metallurgical handbook you choose.
And the next thing you try is try to deny that fire has such heat in it. That the kerosene doesn't be able to create such heat. Heat comes from the energy in the fuel, and if the fuel hasn't that kind of energy, planes simply doesn't fly. So to make the jet engine work, they need the potent fuel. Fuel which has enough energy to keep aero planes flying. That is main reason why there is different kind of fuels for the different kind of engines.
And dear child, there was lot of everything to burn in that building, so the kerosene was only lighter for the fire. Have you ever hear a words "fire load"? From Wikipedia: "The fire loading of a building or compartment is a way of establishing the potential severity of a hypothetical future fire. It is the heat output per unit floor area, often in kJ/m2, calculated from the calorific value of the materials present". It means that any given building has it's fire load which comes from furniture etc. what is in the building. There is quite good charts about this, and if you take any of these charts and look up the fire load of the office building, you see that it has quite large fire load even without the kerosene. That is all simple mathematics, so it has been calculated that the fire of the WTC towers has plenty of energy = simply enough heat to make construction steel soft as noodles.
These are all facts, based on laws of physics, and the reason why you don't understand it, is your stupidity. Stupidity which cannot exist without serious mental handicap, meaning that you are an idiot. And that, dear child, is another proven fact. After all, it is you who are still believing to these foil hat fairy tales ;D
-
" This is proven fact. OFFICE FIRES MY ASS, IT WAS ON FIRE TO THE BOTTOM TO THE TOP, AND THROUGH THE BUILDING. This is also proven fact. IN FACT, IT WAS BURNING 8 HOURS BEFORE IT COLLAPSED"
What? From the bottom the top? Where do you get this? So you are telling us that the fire propagated from the 90th floor to the bottom of the buildings? Lol, you are some kind of stupid.
Well, there is plenty of photos which show, that there were fires through the building. Also there is lot of pictures, where whole front side of the building is covered by smoke. Then there is these competing claims:
Foil hats: There was only tiny little fire, hardly anything at all
Reality: There were severe fire in the most parts of the building
So who is right?
Reason, and only reason why there isn't loads of photos about the fire is simple: There wasn't anyone standing on the rubbles of the collapsed towers and taking pictures, in the middle of the largest man made dust cloud ever seen. All air traffic was stopped, so how there could be pictures about it? No photographers, no helicopters, everybody is running away from the dust. Question: How the foil hats could know that there was only tiny little fire, when they has to make their conclusion from the same facts what all of us have seen? Answer: they are idiots, who just imagine what happen, they just use their imagination.. Can you make up the facts just by imagination? No, you need some kind of evidence, and that they doesn't have. Quite simple, really. If you deny all the facts, anything could happen, but is it real? No, it is just imagination. Reality is all about the facts..´
-
Facts, facts, facts.....
Nasty little things for CTers
-
This two are so mentally handicapped that I'm starting to really feel sorry for their family.
Again the main point that the official story is bullshit is because is inherently impossible for 15 floors to bring down 90 floors to it's base as seen perfectly by the pictures that ropo the retard posted. On the link I posted on aerial pictures of WC7, you could see perfectly WTC5 and WTC6 half way destroy and burn and those stood, how?
https://thingseverybodyshouldknow.wordpress.com/tag/collapse/
WTC7 was between two tall building but somehow by miracle of who knows what, nothing happen to those buildings, they got hit massively by the twin towers debris as well. In the last video ropo the retard posted they are showing us proof of the devastation they caused, your own video ropo the retard is showing proof how devastating the debris of the twin tower affected adjacent buildings, but some how only WC7 which was across the street CAME DOWN ON IT'S OWN FOOT PRINT, only WC7, not the building to it's left nor the one on the right, just WC7 which was sitting in the middle,which makes it more incredible while WT5 and WT6 were in between and stood still while missing huge chunks of it's infrastructure and showing clear signs of been burn down as well.
Never again an event like this would happen guarantee, where fire would bring down buildings, yes the twin towers got hit by two planes, but they were specifically engineer to take such hit's, if anything half of the building should had stood, or at least 20 to 30 floors, but both came down to the f@#$! base; all the way down, not even 10 or 15 floors stood, and that is impossible to explain from a scientific or engineer point. Anything that came from the official report is just bullshit and lies, how could the United States government spent less money on investigating the biggest terrorist attack on it's own soil than what they spent on the investigation of the former president getting his ding dong suck by a gold digging whore? goggle it.
So is reality start to sink in for you two? Or are we are going to keep debating the same point over and over until you two realize how pathetically stupid you two really are?
-
This two are so mentally handicapped that I'm starting to really feel sorry for their family.
Again the main point that the official story is bullshit is because is inherently impossible for 15 floors to bring down 90 floors to it's base as seen perfectly by the pictures that ropo the retard posted. On the link I posted on aerial pictures of WC7, you could see perfectly WTC5 and WTC6 half way destroy and burn and those stood, how?
https://thingseverybodyshouldknow.wordpress.com/tag/collapse/
WTC7 was between two tall building but somehow by miracle of who knows what, nothing happen to those buildings, they got hit massively by the twin towers debris as well. In the last video ropo the retard posted they are showing us proof of the devastation they caused, your own video ropo the retard is showing proof how devastating the debris of the twin tower affected adjacent buildings, but some how only WC7 which was across the street CAME DOWN ON IT'S OWN FOOT PRINT, only WC7, not the building to it's left nor the one on the right, just WC7 which was sitting in the middle,which makes it more incredible while WT5 and WT6 were in between and stood still while missing huge chunks of it's infrastructure and showing clear signs of been burn down as well.
Never again an event like this would happen guarantee, where fire would bring down buildings, yes the twin towers got hit by two planes, but they were specifically engineer to take such hit's, if anything half of the building should had stood, or at least 20 to 30 floors, but both came down to the f@#$! base; all the way down, not even 10 or 15 floors stood, and that is impossible to explain from a scientific or engineer point. Anything that came from the official report is just bullshit and lies, how could the United States government spent less money on investigating the biggest terrorist attack on it's own soil than what they spent on the investigation of the former president getting his ding dong suck by a gold digging whore? goggle it.
So is reality start to sink in for you two? Or are we are going to keep debating the same point over and over until you two realize how pathetically stupid you two really are?
It is impossible, according exactly what facts? It is impossible, BECAUSE FOIL HAT MORONS SAY SO. They don't have no way to prove it, because nothing like this has happen in the history of the universe, so they just use their imagination and claim it is impossible. Exactly that that proves? NOTHING. Now take a deep breath and calm down. Then think about this: IF SOME ONE SAY THAT HE HAS SEEN A FLYING COW, IS IT A FACT OR A CLAIM? Dear fucking twat: CLAIMS DOESN'T PROVE ANYTHING. By your logic the following argument has to be a fact: You are an imbecile, child of the inbreeding, the drooling idiot from the basement of your parents. Am I right? By all the evidence you have provide, it has to be.. ;D
-
Ropo the retard attacking like the retarded inbreed that he is, insulting when he can't defend his point because no defensible explanation can be pointed to my flaws, lol. Watch the youtube videos of the twin towers again and just look where the planes hit, and just think for a second, and think hard you retard. HOW COULD BE POSSIBLE FOR 15 FLOORS PUSH DOWN THE REST OF THE 95 FLOORS TO IT'S BASE IN A DISINTEGRATED WAY?
And it's not tin foil morons saying so, OVER 1500 ENGINEERS AND ARCHITECTS ARE SAYING SO, YOU RETARDED PIECE OF SHIT.
-
This two are so mentally handicapped that I'm starting to really feel sorry for their family.
Again the main point that the official story is bullshit is because is inherently impossible for 15 floors to bring down 90 floors to it's base
Once more that's not why the WTC's came down. Did you read the report or watch a youtube vid?
-
Ropo the retard attacking like the retarded inbreed that he is, insulting when he can't defend his point because no defensible explanation can be pointed to my flaws, lol. Watch the youtube videos of the twin towers again and just look where the planes hit, and just think for a second, and think hard you retard. HOW COULD BE POSSIBLE FOR 15 FLOORS PUSH DOWN THE REST OF THE 95 FLOORS TO IT'S BASE IN A DISINTEGRATED WAY?
Oh look more vids from the youtube monkey
did you go to the gym and do what i told you to do yet?
And it's not tin foil morons saying so, OVER 1500 ENGINEERS AND ARCHITECTS ARE SAYING SO, YOU RETARDED PIECE OF SHIT.
considering that there are 1.9 million (approx) people graduating with engineering degrees every year from just 10 countries in the world, makes your 1500 crackpots look pretty insignificant.
there are probably at least 10 million engineers in the world making that 1500 represent .015% of them. :D
Try again youtube monkey
-
Facts, facts, facts.....
Nasty little things for CTers
Lol what the hell is a CTer?
I'm starting to think you are merely desperate to protect the integrity of your government.
-
Lol what the hell is a CTer?
I'm starting to think you are merely desperate to protect the integrity of your government.
No I hate my government. It's ran by big corps not the people. It's no longer a representative government. I would love nothing better for my government to change because of a scandal or better yet a civil movement of change. But 9/11 CT didn't happen the way you seem to suggest. Use your head brink.
A CTer is short for a conspiracy theorist.
Now back to your woefullyy incorrect assumptions about how the WTCs where built and how any engineer is supposed to tell me about.
Care to comment on what I posted showing how wrong you were?
Like so many CTers it seems you are running from it when you get debunked.
-
"considering that there are 1.9 million (approx) people graduating with engineering degrees every year from just 10 countries in the world, makes your 1500 crackpots look pretty insignificant.
there are probably at least 10 million engineers in the world making that 1500 represent .015% of them". Cheesy
That's because the rest of the world could give a flying rats about 9/11 you dimwit, proven fact if you look around, most of the population are like sheep, specially here in the United States, where the every day citizen is only worry about their job, paying their mortgage and looking for punani. The rest of the engineers like you say with your retarded assumption, could really care less what happen that day, you know why? Because they make really good money and are enjoying the fruits of their hard work. And why would engineers of around the world would care about 9/11?, the ones that have come out have spoken clearly against the official story.
And all you have to do is the experiment for your self, ask any real engineer if what happened on 9/11 in his own personal opinion makes any sense? how could 15 floors of steel and concrete had enough weight to crash down 95 floors to it's base just because some steel was weaken by office fire which is no more than wood fire? And then come back and let us know what they told you, OK?
One more thing, what groups of engineers that do not work for the government have come out defending the official story then? Do you know any? put up some links then, and please don't show us the bullshit article of popular mechanic which have been debunked really easily on the videos I posted. Tick for tock. Your turn now
Even this absurd article makes more sense than the official story as crazy it may sound:
http://weshapelife.org/2016/03/04/russias-evidence-makes-us-uk-israel-the-real-911-terrorist/
Falling man – 911
The primary purpose of the nuclear weapon used on 911 was to produce a massive Gamma ray / neutron flux that would vaporize about 150 to 300 feet of 6 inch thick steal I-beams that constituted the central core of the WTC buildings. This created a free fall event as seen on TV that day. (Editor’s note: Critical information here.)
The flash would be hidden from sight due to the underground detonation. Most of the light was in the non-visible light spectrum any way. Over pressure would be reduced to 6 psi due to the blast traveling up the central core and neutron radiation vaporizing the TV antenna at the top of the building as see on TV.
The fallout would be mainly vaporized concrete cement and iron oxide. This is why after 911 they told everyone on TV that the beta radiation burns that people were getting were due to the caustic cement dust and not due to the radiation effects from the radioactive cement fallout. (Editor’s note: Fully confirmed)
The iron oxide found all over the place was what was left of the steel I beams. This was the so called Nano Thermite that was found everywhere. Fallout was limited to a 1 mile area around down town NYC. See charts. (Editor’s note: Received)
Radiation decay was reduced to safe low levels after 72 hrs., (Editor’s note: Fully confirmed) outside of ground zero its self. This is why the area was blocked off from the public for 3 days after the event, in order to let the radiation drop to safe levels.[1]
-
-
"No I hate my government. It's ran by big corps not the people. It's no longer a representative government. I would love nothing better for my government to change because of a scandal or better yet a civil movement of change. But 9/11 CT didn't happen the way you seem to suggest. Use your head brink."
But hey you two keep the retardation coming, the more you two keep posting, the easier it gets, the more inbreed you look, and what's obvious the lies in which we live. But hey Benghazi is still going strong on congress, lol. 3 deaths vs 3000, but republican conspiracy theory must be truth, but the peoples conspiracy is just loonies and tin foil idiots, yup, with the weak democrats like our president Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton going along with the murder republicans.
-
Let the sheep keep drinking the cool aid, the f@@#ing irony!
-
"considering that there are 1.9 million (approx) people graduating with engineering degrees every year from just 10 countries in the world, makes your 1500 crackpots look pretty insignificant.
there are probably at least 10 million engineers in the world making that 1500 represent .015% of them". Cheesy
That's because the rest of the world could give a flying rats about 9/11 you dimwit,
No they do. They are just smarter than those .015% of idiots who found a way to get an engineering degree. Also, its a written about phenomena regarding CTer's in that CT's suck in even smart people in to believing some wild fantasy based on zero facts.
proven fact if you look around, most of the population are like sheep, specially here in the United States, where the every day citizen is only worry about their job, paying their mortgage and looking for punani. The rest of the engineers like you say with your retarded assumption, could really care less what happen that day, you know why? Because they make really good money and are enjoying the fruits of their hard work.
Oh yeah the sheeple attack LMAO. If there is credible evidence then herders will appear to lead them that way. The problem is for you, is the thuthers theories aren't credible.
And why would engineers of around the world would care about 9/11?, the ones that have come out have spoken clearly against the official story.
No because it only takes few minutes of examination to see if what was reported makes science sense. That's why, 10 million engineers which is low, there is probably much more, have dismissed the Thruthers and complete idiots.
And all you have to do is the experiment for your self, ask any real engineer if what happened on 9/11 in his own personal opinion makes any sense?
I have talked with several.
how could 15 floors of steel and concrete had enough weight to crash down 95 floors to it's base just because some steel was weaken by office fire which is no more than wood fire?
I won't ask them that question because that's not what happened. Maybe if you actually knew what happened, you know... actually be in "the know", by reading the report you would know and stop being incorrect.
And then come back and let us know what they told you, OK?
I did, we went over the report and he should me quite a few things, backed up by real science.
One more thing, what groups of engineers that do not work for the government have come out defending the official story then?
Its not on anyone to defend the official story, it on you the nut job CTer's to show where it isn't true. And in 15 yours you have all failed time and time again. NOT 1 piece of good evidence stacking in your favor have been validated. You have only live in mis-truths and rhetoric like i have exposed you to have on this thread. You are the laughing stock of the world. Almost like a group of flat worlders.
You run away from science and facts every time your little CT gets exposed like little cowards.
Do you know any? put up some links then, and please don't show us the bullshit article of popular mechanic which have been debunked really easily on the videos I posted. Tick for tock. Your turn now
I am not a youtube monkey like you. There much more than the Popular mechanics out there and its not on youtube, monkey boy.
Here is another report which makes more sense than the official story as crazy it may sound:
http://weshapelife.org/2016/03/04/russias-evidence-makes-us-uk-israel-the-real-911-terrorist/
Falling man – 911
The primary purpose of the nuclear weapon used on 911 was to produce a massive Gamma ray / neutron flux that would vaporize about 150 to 300 feet of 6 inch thick steal I-beams that constituted the central core of the WTC buildings. This created a free fall event as seen on TV that day. (Editor’s note: Critical information here.)
The flash would be hidden from sight due to the underground detonation. Most of the light was in the non-visible light spectrum any way. Over pressure would be reduced to 6 psi due to the blast traveling up the central core and neutron radiation vaporizing the TV antenna at the top of the building as see on TV.
The fallout would be mainly vaporized concrete cement and iron oxide. This is why after 911 they told everyone on TV that the beta radiation burns that people were getting were due to the caustic cement dust and not due to the radiation effects from the radioactive cement fallout. (Editor’s note: Fully confirmed)
The iron oxide found all over the place was what was left of the steel I beams. This was the so called Nano Thermite that was found everywhere. Fallout was limited to a 1 mile area around down town NYC. See charts. (Editor’s note: Received)
Radiation decay was reduced to safe low levels after 72 hrs., (Editor’s note: Fully confirmed) outside of ground zero its self. This is why the area was blocked off from the public for 3 days after the event, in order to let the radiation drop to safe levels.[1]
Now you are saying it was a gamma ray neutron flux?
Dude, you are insane and stupid.
Get a life.
-
Didn't the top 15-20 floors pretty much fall 50 feet onto the rest of the building since at least 5 floors were significantly damaged?
Dropping that amount of weight 50 feet onto something would create an enormous amount of force,
-
Didn't the top 15-20 floors pretty much fall 50 feet onto the rest of the building since at least 5 floors were significantly damaged?
Dropping that amount of weight 50 feet onto something would create an enormous amount of force,
Not to mention everything else that was going on at the time in the building.
-
"The perimeter structure was constructed with extensive use of prefabricated modular pieces, which consisted of three columns, three stories tall, connected by spandrel plates. The perimeter columns had a square cross section, 14 inches (36 cm) on a side, and were constructed of welded steel plate.[50] The thickness of the plates and grade of structural steel varied over the height of the tower, ranging from 36,000 to 100,000 pounds per square inch[51] (260 to 670 MPa). The strength of the steel and thickness of the steel plates decreased with height because they were required to support lesser amounts of building mass on higher floors.[50] The tube-frame design required 40 percent less structural steel than conventional building designs.[52] From the 7th floor to the ground level, and down to the foundation, the columns were spaced 10 feet (3 m) apart.[53] All columns were placed on bedrock, which, unlike that in Midtown Manhattan, where the bedrock is shallow, is at 65–85 feet (20–26 m) below the surface.[54]"
Did they fall in free fall so the floors below didn't offer any resistance on it's way to the base? According to the article above the columns grew in thickness as it went down, more thickness more strength, but somehow the pancake effect grew in kinetic strength for 95 floors all the down to it's base? Did you not see the videos? Did you not see the portion of the building below the fire that was offering resistance to the merely to 15 floors above is a huge difference?
"Didn't the top 15-20 floors pretty much fall 50 feet onto the rest of the building since at least 5 floors were significantly damaged?
Significantly damaged, but offering resistance, key note.
-
Just to summarize some of the lunacy and ignorance in this CT:
For the first time in recorded human history, fire, better yet, OFFICE FIRE, brought down, not one, not two but 3 buildings made of steel and concrete.
Completely incorrect and has been shown to be incorrect.
Also, a logical fallacy as that a passenger jet hasn't hit a 100+ story building and that biulding still stood.
please explain to us retards according to you how the top 15 floors brought down 90 floors of concrete and steel, \
Again that's not what happened and it shows that CTer didn't bother to research the report but instead got all his information from youtube vids produced by amateurs and based rhetoric and persuasive techniques.
One more thing and I'm done, POST A VIDEO OF A SKYSCRAPER ON FIRE THAT HAS COME DOWN ON IT'S OWN FOOT PRINT, and I will post videos of control demolition, and we shall see who wins, ok?
It was shown conclusively that its didn't comedown on its own foot print.
Engineers don't design structures that size to be 'just strong enough'. That's ridiculous. And it's not the steel that protects the building from gravity, it's the concrete columns which have tremendous compressive strength. Steel is merely meant to keep the concrete from twisting apart and to protect its integrity from vector type forces. Any engineer will tell you that.
this one was ran from, becuase it was shown that Brink said "any engineer" he didn't bother to look up how the WTC were constructed showing he was 100% WRONG.
Did they fall in free fall so the floors below didn't offer any resistance on it's way to the base? According to the article above the columns grew in thickness as it went down, more thickness more strength, but somehow the pancake effect grew in kinetic strength for 95 floors all the down to it's base? Did you not see the videos? Did you not see the portion of the building below the fire that was offering resistance to the merely to 15 floors above is a huge difference?
"Didn't the top 15-20 floors pretty much fall 50 feet onto the rest of the building since at least 5 floors were significantly damaged?
Significantly damaged, but offering resistance, key note.
Once again M4tad0r still can't get it right. Why? I think its beyond his capacity to understand.
http://weshapelife.org/2016/03/04/russias-evidence-makes-us-uk-israel-the-real-911-terrorist/
Falling man – 911
The primary purpose of the nuclear weapon used on 911 was to produce a massive Gamma ray / neutron flux that would vaporize about 150 to 300 feet of 6 inch thick steal I-beams that constituted the central core of the WTC buildings. This created a free fall event as seen on TV that day. (Editor’s note: Critical information here.)
And now the icing on the cake this one shows just how nuts a Thruther can be. Now it was nuke!!
(http://utbblogs.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/tinfoil-hat-guy.jpeg)
-
"For the first time in recorded human history, fire, better yet, OFFICE FIRE, brought down, not one, not two but 3 buildings made of steel and concrete.
Completely incorrect and has been shown to be incorrect.
Also, a logical fallacy as that a passenger jet hasn't hit a 100+ story building and that building still stood."
Then, where are your evidence you fuking retard, show us examples, not bullshit pull out your ass.
You keep saying that it's proven incorrect, by who? You? Fuck sake, if you're going to argue, bring up evidence, videos, articles, pictures, something to back up your stupidity.
You keep trying to twist my answers and bring nothing to the table, I been destroying you with just videos of YOUTUBE, but somehow you keep coming back for more. I sense the retardation is strong within you.
You said that the government lies to you, but you think they were telling you the truth on this one? The event that unleashed the most abusive form of power of the state on the people like the patriot act, giving free reign to spy on everybody. When you had General Clark told us numerous times they(Republican neocons) had plans to destabilize the middle east since the 90's, prove is that the United States is still stuck in the middle east, Iraq, Syria, talking of going back to Libya now, Afghanistan. Wasted trillions dollars of tax payers dollars to fat up the corrupt cronies in Washington through war, on nothing but lies sense the Afghanistan war started.
But you think the government told you the truth on what happened on 9/11? F@#$k!!! Talking about having your head up your ass, please stop posting for the love of God. They lie to you man, to every body, because they knew they could manipulate the people through the media and have the whole country sing -America Fuck Yeah!!! Like they did, the population wouldn't care as long we killed some goat hoarders and sand people on the other side of the world to make them pay for being brown people. Do you get it? THEY LIE TO YOU, RETARD!!!!
-
"For the first time in recorded human history, fire, better yet, OFFICE FIRE, brought down, not one, not two but 3 buildings made of steel and concrete.
Completely incorrect and has been shown to be incorrect.
Also, a logical fallacy as that a passenger jet hasn't hit a 100+ story building and that building still stood."
Then, where are your evidence you fuking retard, show us examples, not bullshit pull out your ass.
You keep saying that it's proven incorrect, by who? You? Fuck sake, if you're going to argue, bring up evidence, videos, articles, pictures, something to back up your stupidity.
You keep trying to twist my answers and bring nothing to the table, I been destroying you with just videos of YOUTUBE, but somehow you keep coming back for more. I sense the retardation is strong within you.
You said that the government lies to you, but you think they were telling you the truth on this one? The event that unleashed the most abusive form of power of the state on the people like the patriot act, giving free reign to spy on everybody. When you had General Clark told us numerous times they(Republican neocons) had plans to destabilize the middle east since the 90's, prove is that the United States is still stuck in the middle east, Iraq, Syria, talking of going back to Libya now, Afghanistan. Wasted trillions dollars of tax payers dollars to fat up the corrupt cronies in Washington through war, on nothing but lies sense the Afghanistan war started.
But you think the government told you the truth on what happened on 9/11? F@#$k!!! Talking about having your head up your ass, please stop posting for the love of God. They lie to you man, to every body, because they knew they could manipulate the people through the media and have the whole country sing -America Fuck Yeah!!! Like they did, the population wouldn't care as long we killed some goat hoarders and sand people on the other side of the world to make them pay for being brown people. Do you get it? THEY LIE TO YOU, RETARD!!!!
Hes even used the term conspiracy theorist LOL which was created by government specifically to make disbelievers seem crazy.
-
No I hate my government. It's ran by big corps not the people. It's no longer a representative government. I would love nothing better for my government to change because of a scandal or better yet a civil movement of change. But 9/11 CT didn't happen the way you seem to suggest. Use your head brink.
A CTer is short for a conspiracy theorist.
Now back to your woefullyy incorrect assumptions about how the WTCs where built and how any engineer is supposed to tell me about.
Care to comment on what I posted showing how wrong you were?
Like so many CTers it seems you are running from it when you get debunked.
Bump for Brink. Lol
Or should I say run brink run?
-
"For the first time in recorded human history, fire, better yet, OFFICE FIRE, brought down, not one, not two but 3 buildings made of steel and concrete.
Completely incorrect and has been shown to be incorrect.
Also, a logical fallacy as that a passenger jet hasn't hit a 100+ story building and that building still stood."
Then, where are your evidence you fuking retard, show us examples, not bullshit pull out your ass.
You keep saying that it's proven incorrect, by who? You? Fuck sake, if you're going to argue, bring up evidence, videos, articles, pictures, something to back up your stupidity.
You keep trying to twist my answers and bring nothing to the table, I been destroying you with just videos of YOUTUBE, but somehow you keep coming back for more. I sense the retardation is strong within you.
You said that the government lies to you, but you think they were telling you the truth on this one? The event that unleashed the most abusive form of power of the state on the people like the patriot act, giving free reign to spy on everybody. When you had General Clark told us numerous times they(Republican neocons) had plans to destabilize the middle east since the 90's, prove is that the United States is still stuck in the middle east, Iraq, Syria, talking of going back to Libya now, Afghanistan. Wasted trillions dollars of tax payers dollars to fat up the corrupt cronies in Washington through war, on nothing but lies sense the Afghanistan war started.
But you think the government told you the truth on what happened on 9/11? F@#$k!!! Talking about having your head up your ass, please stop posting for the love of God. They lie to you man, to every body, because they knew they could manipulate the people through the media and have the whole country sing -America Fuck Yeah!!! Like they did, the population wouldn't care as long we killed some goat hoarders and sand people on the other side of the world to make them pay for being brown people. Do you get it? THEY LIE TO YOU, RETARD!!!
Not twisting your answers. Just applying truth, facts and logic. And you can't handle it.
You can't even grasp your failure in logic over your first time in recorded history assertion. Lol.
And as preidcted you have jumped to another facet like brink did.
COWARDS. Lol
PS, I have plenty of links, documentation etc.to debunk your BS but you can't even get pass simple logic. Hahahahahahahahahahahaha haha. And brink runs away from facts. Ahahahahahahahahahahaha
-
There's no evidence to support your theory of what happened either.
-
There's no evidence to support your theory of what happened either.
There is plenty.
Care to comment on what I posted showing how wrong you were? :D
-
Ropo the retard attacking like the retarded inbreed that he is, insulting when he can't defend his point because no defensible explanation can be pointed to my flaws, lol. Watch the youtube videos of the twin towers again and just look where the planes hit, and just think for a second, and think hard you retard. HOW COULD BE POSSIBLE FOR 15 FLOORS PUSH DOWN THE REST OF THE 95 FLOORS TO IT'S BASE IN A DISINTEGRATED WAY?
And it's not tin foil morons saying so, OVER 1500 ENGINEERS AND ARCHITECTS ARE SAYING SO, YOU RETARDED PIECE OF SHIT.
You mean that there is over 1500 anonym internet teenagers who claim they are engineers and architects, because you haven't bother to do any kind of background checking at all? Any engineer or architect who admits that he believes these foil hat fairytales, he is out of work for the rest of his life, because no one hire imbeciles. That is a fact.
What comes to these claims, let me ask you: How the hell they know? What happen was the first this kind of event in the history of this universe, so how they can know for sure what should have happen? FACT: THERE IS NO WAY TO KNOW IT. Whether they are predictors or liars, it doesn't change anything, because what they are saying is still bullshit. No one on this planet could know how these buildings will collapse, all they can do is guess, and that doesn't prove anything. How this is so hard to understand? Because of the insufficient brain matter in your empty head.
-
"For the first time in recorded human history, fire, better yet, OFFICE FIRE, brought down, not one, not two but 3 buildings made of steel and concrete.
Completely incorrect and has been shown to be incorrect.
Also, a logical fallacy as that a passenger jet hasn't hit a 100+ story building and that building still stood."
Then, where are your evidence you fuking retard, show us examples, not bullshit pull out your ass.
You keep saying that it's proven incorrect, by who? You? Fuck sake, if you're going to argue, bring up evidence, videos, articles, pictures, something to back up your stupidity.
You keep trying to twist my answers and bring nothing to the table, I been destroying you with just videos of YOUTUBE, but somehow you keep coming back for more. I sense the retardation is strong within you.
You said that the government lies to you, but you think they were telling you the truth on this one? The event that unleashed the most abusive form of power of the state on the people like the patriot act, giving free reign to spy on everybody. When you had General Clark told us numerous times they(Republican neocons) had plans to destabilize the middle east since the 90's, prove is that the United States is still stuck in the middle east, Iraq, Syria, talking of going back to Libya now, Afghanistan. Wasted trillions dollars of tax payers dollars to fat up the corrupt cronies in Washington through war, on nothing but lies sense the Afghanistan war started.
But you think the government told you the truth on what happened on 9/11? F@#$k!!! Talking about having your head up your ass, please stop posting for the love of God. They lie to you man, to every body, because they knew they could manipulate the people through the media and have the whole country sing -America Fuck Yeah!!! Like they did, the population wouldn't care as long we killed some goat hoarders and sand people on the other side of the world to make them pay for being brown people. Do you get it? THEY LIE TO YOU, RETARD!!!!
What make you morons think that this is a first time when this kind of conversation is going on in the internet, or even on this forum? Every fucking claim which you have learned from the foil hat sites, has been shot down over and over again, and most of them has been proved to be just futile crap. And here you are, screaming like an imbecile about these same things, because you are a child and just learned about this crap. It is a waste of time to answer your screaming because you are an imbecile, and you are proving that fact by yourself by repeating these same claims over and over again, without even reading the comments which has given to you. Only thing what you are destroying is your credibility, because all these stupid videos has been seen already, and they all are just crap. You can't prove anything just by saying over and over again, that it didn't happen. You have to fucking prove it by concrete evidence, and copy/paste and linked bullshit videos doesn't really help you at all.
What comes to proving facts, the official investigation is full of them, and if you need them, just read it from there. These facts are based on reality, in real world evidence, and that is something what foil hats has never have. What they do is just denying these facts without even try to prove that they are incorrect. In real world that isn't enough, but you need some counterevidence. So why don't you start from that? Prove that there were explosions at the WTC 1 & 2. It has never been proven, so why don't you do it? Just 15 years has past by, and no one has been able to prove even single explosion from all of the video material about the attack. Show me just one real explosion from any original video about the 9/11 attack, or shut the fuck up. Here you have example of the real explosion. Rednec's play with 50lb of home made tannerite:
So what is the point? 50 pounds is chicken shit, and still this explosion shows much faster and violent burst of energy, than anything you ever find from any 9/11 videos. In the WTC they have to detonate truckloads of high energy explosives, and they cannot even brake the fucking windows? With your own words, please explain that? ;D
-
Here is the video showing clearly what happens when the bottom part of the building fails and what happens to the top, the building comes down whole to one side, you two retarded imbeciles. I show you extreme clear video or images of evidence proven the fallacy on the governments lies, but you two keep pounding in, like Gorge Carlin used to say: I love this country, but we got some dumb motherfukers living among us.
"So what is the point? 50 pounds is chicken shit, and still this explosion shows much faster and violent burst of energy, than anything you ever find from any 9/11 videos. In the WTC they have to detonate truckloads of high energy explosives, and they cannot even brake the fucking windows? With your own words, please explain that? Grin"
Hey Ropo the retard post the videos of the twin towers coming down that you are watching, because most videos posted all over the internet show extremely clear concrete been vaporized into dust exactly like explosions do, you dimwit, the buildings did not just crumble to the base, the twin towers were disintegrating as they went down as clear show in the videos posted above.
-
Here is the video showing clearly what happens when the bottom part of the building fails and what happens to the top, the building comes down whole to one side, you two retarded imbeciles. I show you extreme clear video or images of evidence proven the fallacy on the governments lies, but you two keep pounding in, like Gorge Carlin used to say: I love this country, but we got some dumb motherfukers living among us.
"So what is the point? 50 pounds is chicken shit, and still this explosion shows much faster and violent burst of energy, than anything you ever find from any 9/11 videos. In the WTC they have to detonate truckloads of high energy explosives, and they cannot even brake the fucking windows? With your own words, please explain that? Grin"
Hey Ropo the retard post the videos of the twin towers coming down that you are watching, because most videos posted all over the internet show extremely clear concrete been vaporized into dust exactly like explosions do, you dimwit, the buildings did not just crumble to the base, the twin towers were disintegrating as they went down as clear show in the videos posted above.
Pretty clear to me. But they have been weaned on media since they were very young so you'll have to do better than that to change their minds lol. Whatever cnn , CBS, fox says goes.
-
Pretty clear to me. But they have been weaned on media since they were very young so you'll have to do better than that to change their minds lol. Whatever cnn , CBS, fox says goes.
Care to comment on what I posted showing how wrong you were? :D
Maybe they can believe what "any engineer" believes. L
-
Here is the video showing clearly what happens when the bottom part of the building fails and what happens to the top, the building comes down whole to one side, you two retarded imbeciles. I show you extreme clear video or images of evidence proven the fallacy on the governments lies, but you two keep pounding in, like Gorge Carlin used to say: I love this country, but we got some dumb motherfukers living among us.
"So what is the point? 50 pounds is chicken shit, and still this explosion shows much faster and violent burst of energy, than anything you ever find from any 9/11 videos. In the WTC they have to detonate truckloads of high energy explosives, and they cannot even brake the fucking windows? With your own words, please explain that? Grin"
Hey Ropo the retard post the videos of the twin towers coming down that you are watching, because most videos posted all over the internet show extremely clear concrete been vaporized into dust exactly like explosions do, you dimwit, the buildings did not just crumble to the base, the twin towers were disintegrating as they went down as clear show in the videos posted above.
If you read the report in detail, and have a basic understanding of physics and you are not a nut job, you would understand why the WTC's went down and why some of what you saw happened.
But you if you believe it was gamma rays or whatever, you are just a complete nut job.
-
Engineers don't design structures that size to be 'just strong enough'. That's ridiculous. And it's not the steel that protects the building from gravity, it's the concrete columns which have tremendous compressive strength. Steel is merely meant to keep the concrete from twisting apart and to protect its integrity from vector type forces. Any engineer will tell you that.
Physics!!!!! ;)
Again you are wrong. You are drawing conclusions from incorrect assumptions and inaccurate information. If you don't like the wiki proof there is more i can post from actual engineers to show how wrong you are.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Construction_of_the_World_Trade_Center (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Construction_of_the_World_Trade_Center)
The World Trade Center towers included many structural engineering innovations in skyscraper design and construction, which allowed the buildings to reach new heights and become the tallest in the world. Traditionally, skyscrapers used a skeleton of columns distributed throughout the interior to support building loads, with interior columns disrupting the floor space. The tube-frame concept, earlier introduced by Fazlur Khan, was a major innovation, allowing open floor plans and more space to rent. The buildings used high-strength, load-bearing perimeter steel columns called Vierendeel trusses that were spaced closely together to form a strong, rigid wall structure. There were 60 perimeter columns, narrowly spaced, on each side of the buildings. In all, the perimeter walls of the towers were 210 feet (64 m) on each side, and the corners were beveled. The perimeter columns were designed to provide support for virtually all lateral loads (such as wind loads) and to share the gravity loads with the core columns.[48] Structural analysis of major portions of the World Trade Center were computed on an IBM 1620.[49]
The perimeter structure was constructed with extensive use of prefabricated modular pieces, which consisted of three columns, three stories tall, connected by spandrel plates. The perimeter columns had a square cross section, 14 inches (36 cm) on a side, and were constructed of welded steel plate.[50] The thickness of the plates and grade of structural steel varied over the height of the tower, ranging from 36,000 to 100,000 pounds per square inch[51] (260 to 670 MPa). The strength of the steel and thickness of the steel plates decreased with height because they were required to support lesser amounts of building mass on higher floors.[50] The tube-frame design required 40 percent less structural steel than conventional building designs.[52] From the 7th floor to the ground level, and down to the foundation, the columns were spaced 10 feet (3 m) apart.[53] All columns were placed on bedrock, which, unlike that in Midtown Manhattan, where the bedrock is shallow, is at 65–85 feet (20–26 m) below the surface.[54]
The spandrel plates were welded to the columns to create the modular pieces off-site at the fabrication shop.[55] The modular pieces were typically 52 inches (1.3 m) deep, and extended for two full floors and half of two more floors.[50] Adjacent modules were bolted together, with the splices occurring at mid-span of the columns and spandrels. The spandrel plates were located at each floor, transmitting shear stress between columns, allowing them to work together in resisting lateral loads. The joints between modules were staggered vertically, so the column splices between adjacent modules were not at the same floor.[50]
.....
The tube frame design using steel core and perimeter columns protected with sprayed-on fire resistant material created a relatively lightweight structure that would sway more in response to the wind, compared to traditional structures such as the Empire State Building that have thick, heavy masonry for fireproofing of steel structural elements
________________________ ________________________ ________________________ _________
Brink, you seem reasonable, this is what happens when you don't allow yourself to fall prey to BS rhetoric. Do some actual research and you will see there is no CT here.
(http://whatdo-eat.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/12/What-Do-Crickets-Eat-2.jpg)
-
The crazy part about this, is CT'ers are actually right.
The WTC's didn't comedown because of and office fire or 15 floors crashed down on 90.
Maybe they should see a shrink, get on meds and then read the report.
-
Here is the video showing clearly what happens when the bottom part of the building fails and what happens to the top, the building comes down whole to one side, you two retarded imbeciles. I show you extreme clear video or images of evidence proven the fallacy on the governments lies, but you two keep pounding in, like Gorge Carlin used to say: I love this country, but we got some dumb motherfukers living among us.
"So what is the point? 50 pounds is chicken shit, and still this explosion shows much faster and violent burst of energy, than anything you ever find from any 9/11 videos. In the WTC they have to detonate truckloads of high energy explosives, and they cannot even brake the fucking windows? With your own words, please explain that? Grin"
Hey Ropo the retard post the videos of the twin towers coming down that you are watching, because most videos posted all over the internet show extremely clear concrete been vaporized into dust exactly like explosions do, you dimwit, the buildings did not just crumble to the base, the twin towers were disintegrating as they went down as clear show in the videos posted above.
So you are saying that you aren't just stupid, but rather completely insane? Sorry to say, but I haven't learn how to follow the brain farts of the insane people. What fucking bottom part? What the fuck you mean? I was under the impression that we are talking about the 9/11, not some random demolition which has nothing to do with the 9/11? There is lot of original videos where you see how the collapsing of the towers start: Top of the building fall and split the bottom of the building like banana. This is a fact, so why you are still linking that crap here?
As always, the foil hat moron is unable to answer any questions? I ask you to explain how it is possible to detonate hundreds of pounds of explosives without even breaking the windows, and you start to talk about vaporized concrete? There isn't such thing nowhere else than in the foil hat imagination. Do you understand what the dust is? When building is collapsing, no matter what is the reason, there will be dust. Dust doesn't require explosions, or prove there were some, so why don't you try again? Why those hundred of kilos of explosives didn't even break the windows? Like in this video: No explosions, no flying pieces of glass, top of the building just fall's down and that's it.
WTC 2
WTC 1
And here is little sample of the real explosion:
Even if you are stupid up to level of insanity, you have to realize that first two videos doesn't present anything which even remotely resembles an explosion, which you see in the third video where is quite ordinary explosion. Again, there is that violently fast burst of energy what you never see in 9/11 videos. Why don't you start to think with your own brains and try to fucking understand this simple truth? You see, in this universe everything happens by the laws of nature, and your mentors, the foil hat morons doesn't know this. That's why they talk about explosions while there isn't any. It is simple as that ;D
-
Engineers don't design structures that size to be 'just strong enough'. That's ridiculous. And it's not the steel that protects the building from gravity, it's the concrete columns which have tremendous compressive strength. Steel is merely meant to keep the concrete from twisting apart and to protect its integrity from vector type forces. Any engineer will tell you that.
So you doesn't know fuck about the construction of the steel frame buildings? Well, that isn't surprise. Exactly why they build that steel frame first, and then cover it with the concrete? Because weight supporting structure is always made first. And what the engineers do, is exactly just strong enough + few % for safety. This is a fact and common knowledge. Just as it is common knowledge that WTC towers was build with these common rules and safety margins. But what kind of engineer can predict in the 70ties, that at the 2001 some terrorist group would crash passenger jets to these buildings? It the 70ties Americans made cars without the safety belt, they claim that smoking is just healthy and good for you, and they didn't know anything about terrorist acts like this.
-
So you are saying that you aren't just stupid, but rather completely insane? Sorry to say, but I haven't learn how to follow the brain farts of the insane people. What fucking bottom part? What the fuck you mean? I was under the impression that we are talking about the 9/11, not some random demolition which has nothing to do with the 9/11? There is lot of original videos where you see how the collapsing of the towers start: Top of the building fall and split the bottom of the building like banana. This is a fact, so why you are still linking that crap here?
As always, the foil hat moron is unable to answer any questions? I ask you to explain how it is possible to detonate hundreds of pounds of explosives without even breaking the windows, and you start to talk about vaporized concrete? There isn't such thing nowhere else than in the foil hat imagination. Do you understand what the dust is? When building is collapsing, no matter what is the reason, there will be dust. Dust doesn't require explosions, or prove there were some, so why don't you try again? Why those hundred of kilos of explosives didn't even break the windows? Like in this video: No explosions, no flying pieces of glass, top of the building just fall's down and that's it.
In the video posted above,
-
The crazy part about this, is CT'ers are actually right.
The WTC's didn't comedown because of and office fire or 15 floors crashed down on 90.
Maybe they should see a shrink, get on meds and then read the report.
So I guess this guy should go see a shrink too lol. As well as many other prolific politicians worldwide who believe the same thing..
-
So you doesn't know fuck about the construction of the steel frame buildings? Well, that isn't surprise. Exactly why they build that steel frame first, and then cover it with the concrete? Because weight supporting structure is always made first. And what the engineers do, is exactly just strong enough + few % for safety. This is a fact and common knowledge. Just as it is common knowledge that WTC towers was build with these common rules and safety margins. But what kind of engineer can predict in the 70ties, that at the 2001 some terrorist group would crash passenger jets to these buildings? It the 70ties Americans made cars without the safety belt, they claim that smoking is just healthy and good for you, and they didn't know anything about terrorist acts like this.
Concrete= compressive strength.
Steel is used because of its ability to twist and not break.
How much construction experience do you even have??
-
So I guess this guy should go see a shrink too lol. As well as many other prolific politicians worldwide who believe the same thing..
you mean like how "any engineer" would say? PS: If you are trusting the word of a anti-Semitic politician, i have a bridge to sell to you, oh wait, you are a CT'er who is afraid of the truth just like you have demonstrated below so you probabaly are already making payments on your bridge.
Engineers don't design structures that size to be 'just strong enough'. That's ridiculous. And it's not the steel that protects the building from gravity, it's the concrete columns which have tremendous compressive strength. Steel is merely meant to keep the concrete from twisting apart and to protect its integrity from vector type forces. Any engineer will tell you that.
Physics!!!!! ;)
Again you are wrong. You are drawing conclusions from incorrect assumptions and inaccurate information. If you don't like the wiki proof there is more i can post from actual engineers to show how wrong you are.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Construction_of_the_World_Trade_Center (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Construction_of_the_World_Trade_Center)
The World Trade Center towers included many structural engineering innovations in skyscraper design and construction, which allowed the buildings to reach new heights and become the tallest in the world. Traditionally, skyscrapers used a skeleton of columns distributed throughout the interior to support building loads, with interior columns disrupting the floor space. The tube-frame concept, earlier introduced by Fazlur Khan, was a major innovation, allowing open floor plans and more space to rent. The buildings used high-strength, load-bearing perimeter steel columns called Vierendeel trusses that were spaced closely together to form a strong, rigid wall structure. There were 60 perimeter columns, narrowly spaced, on each side of the buildings. In all, the perimeter walls of the towers were 210 feet (64 m) on each side, and the corners were beveled. The perimeter columns were designed to provide support for virtually all lateral loads (such as wind loads) and to share the gravity loads with the core columns.[48] Structural analysis of major portions of the World Trade Center were computed on an IBM 1620.[49]
The perimeter structure was constructed with extensive use of prefabricated modular pieces, which consisted of three columns, three stories tall, connected by spandrel plates. The perimeter columns had a square cross section, 14 inches (36 cm) on a side, and were constructed of welded steel plate.[50] The thickness of the plates and grade of structural steel varied over the height of the tower, ranging from 36,000 to 100,000 pounds per square inch[51] (260 to 670 MPa). The strength of the steel and thickness of the steel plates decreased with height because they were required to support lesser amounts of building mass on higher floors.[50] The tube-frame design required 40 percent less structural steel than conventional building designs.[52] From the 7th floor to the ground level, and down to the foundation, the columns were spaced 10 feet (3 m) apart.[53] All columns were placed on bedrock, which, unlike that in Midtown Manhattan, where the bedrock is shallow, is at 65–85 feet (20–26 m) below the surface.[54]
The spandrel plates were welded to the columns to create the modular pieces off-site at the fabrication shop.[55] The modular pieces were typically 52 inches (1.3 m) deep, and extended for two full floors and half of two more floors.[50] Adjacent modules were bolted together, with the splices occurring at mid-span of the columns and spandrels. The spandrel plates were located at each floor, transmitting shear stress between columns, allowing them to work together in resisting lateral loads. The joints between modules were staggered vertically, so the column splices between adjacent modules were not at the same floor.[50]
.....
The tube frame design using steel core and perimeter columns protected with sprayed-on fire resistant material created a relatively lightweight structure that would sway more in response to the wind, compared to traditional structures such as the Empire State Building that have thick, heavy masonry for fireproofing of steel structural elements
________________________ ________________________ ________________________ _________
Brink, you seem reasonable, this is what happens when you don't allow yourself to fall prey to BS rhetoric. Do some actual research and you will see there is no CT here.
(http://whatdo-eat.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/12/What-Do-Crickets-Eat-2.jpg)
-
Concrete= compressive strength.
Steel is used because of its ability to twist and not break.
How much construction experience do you even have??
still denying the truth eh?
Engineers don't design structures that size to be 'just strong enough'. That's ridiculous. And it's not the steel that protects the building from gravity, it's the concrete columns which have tremendous compressive strength. Steel is merely meant to keep the concrete from twisting apart and to protect its integrity from vector type forces. Any engineer will tell you that.
Physics!!!!! ;)
Again you are wrong. You are drawing conclusions from incorrect assumptions and inaccurate information. If you don't like the wiki proof there is more i can post from actual engineers to show how wrong you are.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Construction_of_the_World_Trade_Center (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Construction_of_the_World_Trade_Center)
The World Trade Center towers included many structural engineering innovations in skyscraper design and construction, which allowed the buildings to reach new heights and become the tallest in the world. Traditionally, skyscrapers used a skeleton of columns distributed throughout the interior to support building loads, with interior columns disrupting the floor space. The tube-frame concept, earlier introduced by Fazlur Khan, was a major innovation, allowing open floor plans and more space to rent. The buildings used high-strength, load-bearing perimeter steel columns called Vierendeel trusses that were spaced closely together to form a strong, rigid wall structure. There were 60 perimeter columns, narrowly spaced, on each side of the buildings. In all, the perimeter walls of the towers were 210 feet (64 m) on each side, and the corners were beveled. The perimeter columns were designed to provide support for virtually all lateral loads (such as wind loads) and to share the gravity loads with the core columns.[48] Structural analysis of major portions of the World Trade Center were computed on an IBM 1620.[49]
The perimeter structure was constructed with extensive use of prefabricated modular pieces, which consisted of three columns, three stories tall, connected by spandrel plates. The perimeter columns had a square cross section, 14 inches (36 cm) on a side, and were constructed of welded steel plate.[50] The thickness of the plates and grade of structural steel varied over the height of the tower, ranging from 36,000 to 100,000 pounds per square inch[51] (260 to 670 MPa). The strength of the steel and thickness of the steel plates decreased with height because they were required to support lesser amounts of building mass on higher floors.[50] The tube-frame design required 40 percent less structural steel than conventional building designs.[52] From the 7th floor to the ground level, and down to the foundation, the columns were spaced 10 feet (3 m) apart.[53] All columns were placed on bedrock, which, unlike that in Midtown Manhattan, where the bedrock is shallow, is at 65–85 feet (20–26 m) below the surface.[54]
The spandrel plates were welded to the columns to create the modular pieces off-site at the fabrication shop.[55] The modular pieces were typically 52 inches (1.3 m) deep, and extended for two full floors and half of two more floors.[50] Adjacent modules were bolted together, with the splices occurring at mid-span of the columns and spandrels. The spandrel plates were located at each floor, transmitting shear stress between columns, allowing them to work together in resisting lateral loads. The joints between modules were staggered vertically, so the column splices between adjacent modules were not at the same floor.[50]
.....
The tube frame design using steel core and perimeter columns protected with sprayed-on fire resistant material created a relatively lightweight structure that would sway more in response to the wind, compared to traditional structures such as the Empire State Building that have thick, heavy masonry for fireproofing of steel structural elements
________________________ ________________________ ________________________ _________
Brink, you seem reasonable, this is what happens when you don't allow yourself to fall prey to BS rhetoric. Do some actual research and you will see there is no CT here.
(http://whatdo-eat.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/12/What-Do-Crickets-Eat-2.jpg)
-
Concrete= compressive strength.
Steel is used because of its ability to twist and not break.
How much construction experience do you even have??
BRINK=
(http://chrisbrauns.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/09/iStock_000023825828Large.jpg)
See Brink you can't acknowledge how wrong you were because your theory starts to fall apart.
-
So you are saying that you aren't just stupid, but rather completely insane? Sorry to say, but I haven't learn how to follow the brain farts of the insane people. What fucking bottom part? What the fuck you mean? I was under the impression that we are talking about the 9/11, not some random demolition which has nothing to do with the 9/11? There is lot of original videos where you see how the collapsing of the towers start: Top of the building fall and split the bottom of the building like banana. This is a fact, so why you are still linking that crap here?
As always, the foil hat moron is unable to answer any questions? I ask you to explain how it is possible to detonate hundreds of pounds of explosives without even breaking the windows, and you start to talk about vaporized concrete? There isn't such thing nowhere else than in the foil hat imagination. Do you understand what the dust is? When building is collapsing, no matter what is the reason, there will be dust. Dust doesn't require explosions, or prove there were some, so why don't you try again? Why those hundred of kilos of explosives didn't even break the windows? Like in this video: No explosions, no flying pieces of glass, top of the building just fall's down and that's it.
In the video posted above,
The video compares demolitions of much smaller buildlngs that don't look at all like what happened to the WTC's.
but its a youtube vid so you consider it the word of the lord.
You probably think the USS Enterprise is a real intergalactic space ship too. Because its look real.
-
9/11 Truther convention at the beach!
(https://news-images.vice.com/images/articles/meta/2014/11/13/australian-protesters-bury-their-heads-in-the-sand-to-protest-government-climate-policies-1415899909.jpg?crop=0.6608187134502924xw:1xh;0xw,0xh)
At the bottom of each hole was a iPad set to only play youtube vids.
Their chant was "And it's not the steel that protects the building from gravity, it's the concrete columns which have tremendous compressive strength"
the convention was sponsored by Sheeple Programming Inc.
-
So you are saying that you aren't just stupid, but rather completely insane? Sorry to say, but I haven't learn how to follow the brain farts of the insane people. What fucking bottom part? What the fuck you mean? I was under the impression that we are talking about the 9/11, not some random demolition which has nothing to do with the 9/11? There is lot of original videos where you see how the collapsing of the towers start: Top of the building fall and split the bottom of the building like banana. This is a fact, so why you are still linking that crap here?
As always, the foil hat moron is unable to answer any questions? I ask you to explain how it is possible to detonate hundreds of pounds of explosives without even breaking the windows, and you start to talk about vaporized concrete? There isn't such thing nowhere else than in the foil hat imagination. Do you understand what the dust is? When building is collapsing, no matter what is the reason, there will be dust. Dust doesn't require explosions, or prove there were some, so why don't you try again? Why those hundred of kilos of explosives didn't even break the windows? Like in this video: No explosions, no flying pieces of glass, top of the building just fall's down and that's it.
In the video posted above,
There is exactly what? In what fucking timestamp, so we would have a little hint what the fuck you mean? You see, that video is a piece of crap and it doesn't prove anything about anything, it is made just to fool drooling idiots like you. If we don't know what we should see in it, we see just crap.
PS. How about showing your brilliant intelligence by learning how to quote and link youtube- videos? I mean how hard is that for real?
-
There is exactly what? In what fucking timestamp, so we would have a little hint what the fuck you mean? You see, that video is a piece of crap and it doesn't prove anything about anything, it is made just to fool drooling idiots like you. If we don't know what we should see in it, we see just crap.
PS. How about showing your brilliant intelligence by learning how to quote and link youtube- videos? I mean how hard is that for real?
Maybe there is a youtude vid for him to learn from.
-
still denying the truth eh?
Physics!!!!! ;)
Again you are wrong. You are drawing conclusions from incorrect assumptions and inaccurate information. If you don't like the wiki proof there is more i can post from actual engineers to show how wrong you are.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Construction_of_the_World_Trade_Center (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Construction_of_the_World_Trade_Center)
The World Trade Center towers included many structural engineering innovations in skyscraper design and construction, which allowed the buildings to reach new heights and become the tallest in the world. Traditionally, skyscrapers used a skeleton of columns distributed throughout the interior to support building loads, with interior columns disrupting the floor space. The tube-frame concept, earlier introduced by Fazlur Khan, was a major innovation, allowing open floor plans and more space to rent. The buildings used high-strength, load-bearing perimeter steel columns called Vierendeel trusses that were spaced closely together to form a strong, rigid wall structure. There were 60 perimeter columns, narrowly spaced, on each side of the buildings. In all, the perimeter walls of the towers were 210 feet (64 m) on each side, and the corners were beveled. The perimeter columns were designed to provide support for virtually all lateral loads (such as wind loads) and to share the gravity loads with the core columns.[48] Structural analysis of major portions of the World Trade Center were computed on an IBM 1620.[49]
The perimeter structure was constructed with extensive use of prefabricated modular pieces, which consisted of three columns, three stories tall, connected by spandrel plates. The perimeter columns had a square cross section, 14 inches (36 cm) on a side, and were constructed of welded steel plate.[50] The thickness of the plates and grade of structural steel varied over the height of the tower, ranging from 36,000 to 100,000 pounds per square inch[51] (260 to 670 MPa). The strength of the steel and thickness of the steel plates decreased with height because they were required to support lesser amounts of building mass on higher floors.[50] The tube-frame design required 40 percent less structural steel than conventional building designs.[52] From the 7th floor to the ground level, and down to the foundation, the columns were spaced 10 feet (3 m) apart.[53] All columns were placed on bedrock, which, unlike that in Midtown Manhattan, where the bedrock is shallow, is at 65–85 feet (20–26 m) below the surface.[54]
The spandrel plates were welded to the columns to create the modular pieces off-site at the fabrication shop.[55] The modular pieces were typically 52 inches (1.3 m) deep, and extended for two full floors and half of two more floors.[50] Adjacent modules were bolted together, with the splices occurring at mid-span of the columns and spandrels. The spandrel plates were located at each floor, transmitting shear stress between columns, allowing them to work together in resisting lateral loads. The joints between modules were staggered vertically, so the column splices between adjacent modules were not at the same floor.[50]
.....
The tube frame design using steel core and perimeter columns protected with sprayed-on fire resistant material created a relatively lightweight structure that would sway more in response to the wind, compared to traditional structures such as the Empire State Building that have thick, heavy masonry for fireproofing of steel structural elements
________________________ ________________________ ________________________ _________
Brink, you seem reasonable, this is what happens when you don't allow yourself to fall prey to BS rhetoric. Do some actual research and you will see there is no CT here.
(http://whatdo-eat.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/12/What-Do-Crickets-Eat-2.jpg)
What's strange is you think you are absolutely true you know the truth when you can't possibly.
-
What's strange is you think you are absolutely true you know the truth when you can't possibly.
Can you dispute this with something credible or is desperate drivel all you have?
-
Can you dispute this with something credible or is desperate drivel all you have?
It's not desperate at all lol. Pull claim you know 100 the 'official' story is truth when you have no evidence to prove it, merely theory like everyone else has. You thinking you are without a doubt correct is what's worry some.
-
It's not desperate at all lol. Pull claim you know 100 the 'official' story is truth when you have no evidence to prove it, merely theory like everyone else has. You thinking you are without a doubt correct is what's worry some.
that's not what i am talking about. And its a lame attempt by you to change the context of our conversation.
You said: "And it's not the steel that protects the building from gravity, it's the concrete columns which have tremendous compressive strength." regarding the WTC's claiming "any engineer" would tell me that
And i showed how wrong you were because the WTC's weren't constructed that way:
....The perimeter columns were designed to provide support for virtually all lateral loads (such as wind loads) and to share the gravity loads with the core columns....
....The tube frame design using steel core and perimeter columns protected with sprayed-on fire resistant material created a relatively lightweight structure that would sway more in response to the wind, compared to traditional structures such as the Empire State Building that have thick, heavy masonry for fireproofing of steel structural elements.
________________________ _____________________
Now are you gonna man up and address this or are going to continue to dodge and play dumb with desperate drivel?
Because if this is what you got to do to defend your 9/11 CT you should be ashamed of yourself.
-
Concrete= compressive strength.
Steel is used because of its ability to twist and not break.
How much construction experience do you even have??
Hey dumb ass, try to guess? What ever I write here, it is quite easy to claim to be lie, so let say none, and it is still more than you ever have. Exactly why all of the skyscrapers are made with the steel frame? Because concrete isn't strong enough, and it is too heavy, so instead of making supporting structure from the concrete they make it from steel, and you get more support with less weight. This you can check out from any engineering handbook you choose. Try the "Skyscrapers for Dummies" ;D
-
What's strange is you think you are absolutely true you know the truth when you can't possibly.
Well...let me think...just like YOU DO? Oh well, there is something you should know by now: THOSE FOIL HAT MORONS ARE LYING TO YOU! Are you truly as blind that you can't see it? Let me help you a bit with that:
1. Evidences to prove their claims = 0 = zero = nil = nada = nothing
2. They can't even prove that there were explosions at the 9/11 attack
3. They don't even try to prove it, because they know they are lying
This all is proved so many times in here and in any fucking forum, so you must be just about only human on earth who doesn't fucking realize it. Foil hats lack of evidences comes from the fact, that they are full of shit. You are just a lamb in their flock, and they direct your tiny little brains by lying. It is simple as that.
-
Well...let me think...just like YOU DO? Oh well, there is something you should know by now: THOSE FOIL HAT MORONS ARE LYING TO YOU! Are you truly as blind that you can't see it? Let me help you a bit with that:
1. Evidences to prove their claims = 0 = zero = nil = nada = nothing
2. They can't even prove that there were explosions at the 9/11 attack
3. They don't even try to prove it, because they know they are lying
This all is proved so many times in here and in any fucking forum, so you must be just about only human on earth who doesn't fucking realize it. Foil hats lack of evidences comes from the fact, that they are full of shit. You are just a lamb in their flock, and they direct your tiny little brains by lying. It is simple as that.
There were firefighters who say they saw explosions on their way up the stairs in the lower floors.
-
There were firefighters who say they saw explosions on their way up the stairs in the lower floors.
Yes, and like all other bullshit, it has to be proved. Just watch those videos which I linked and tell me if you see any explosions? If there was some, it would be visible.
-
It's not desperate at all lol. Pull claim you know 100 the 'official' story is truth when you have no evidence to prove it, merely theory like everyone else has. You thinking you are without a doubt correct is what's worry some.
that's not what i am talking about. And its a lame attempt by you to change the context of our conversation.
You said: "And it's not the steel that protects the building from gravity, it's the concrete columns which have tremendous compressive strength." regarding the WTC's claiming "any engineer" would tell me that
And i showed how wrong you were because the WTC's weren't constructed that way:
....The perimeter columns were designed to provide support for virtually all lateral loads (such as wind loads) and to share the gravity loads with the core columns....
....The tube frame design using steel core and perimeter columns protected with sprayed-on fire resistant material created a relatively lightweight structure that would sway more in response to the wind, compared to traditional structures such as the Empire State Building that have thick, heavy masonry for fireproofing of steel structural elements.
________________________ _____________________
Now are you gonna man up and address this or are going to continue to dodge and play dumb with desperate drivel?
Because if this is what you got to do to defend your 9/11 CT you should be ashamed of yourself.
BUMP for BRINK :D
MAN up boy lol
-
Yes, and like all other bullshit, it has to be proved. Just watch those videos which I linked and tell me if you see any explosions? If there was some, it would be visible.
A fully fueled jet slams into a skyscraper causing a huge fire that spreads. There are bound to be things that Heat up and explode.
Breaker boxes, hot water tanks, soda cans, bottles, oxygen tanks, natural gas, boilers, tv tubes, comp monitors , batteries, etc.
But no, firemen say they heard explosions so it must be thermite. ::)
-
A fully fueled jet slams into a skyscraper causing a huge fire that spreads. There are bound to be things that Heat up and explode.
Breaker boxes, hot water tanks, soda cans, bottles, oxygen tanks, natural gas, boilers, tv tubes, comp monitors , batteries, etc.
But no, firemen say they heard explosions so it must be thermite. ::)
As I have point out over and over again, any loud and relatively sharp noise is easily perceived as an explosion, if you don't see the source of the noise. In USA they have hundred of calls at the 911 every fucking day because of that, because people think they have heard the explosion while it really is a sound of the car crash etc. At the 9/11 there were things falling down from 300 yards, and it miraculously make loud noises. For example, lets drop a 1.5 ton elevator from that height, what do you think it sounds near to elevator shaft? 1. A whisper 2. A donkeys fart 3. An explosion?
And let me clarify this little detail: Thermite is a burner, it isn't explosive material, it doesn't detonate, it just burns with very high temperature forming a liquid which eat it's way trough things like metals, wood etc. non ceramic materials.
-
BRINK=
(http://chrisbrauns.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/09/iStock_000023825828Large.jpg)
See Brink you can't acknowledge how wrong you were because your theory starts to fall apart.
How To Destroy a 9/11 Truther: Coincidence!!!
Ozmo "The legend on his own mind"
Government dick rider's logic 101: Coincidence!!!
Who's been debunking CT's for 9 years!!!
That's what you have been doing this whole time, getting exposed.
Man up & shut da fuck up!!!
All you been doing is getting:
(http://www.buymarsproperty.com/owned/owned01.jpg)
-
How To Destroy a 9/11 Truther: Coincidence!!!
Ozmo "The legend on his own mind"
Government dick rider's logic 101: Coincidence!!!
Who's been debunking CT's for 9 years!!!
That's what you have been doing this whole time, getting exposed.
Man up & shut da fuck up!!!
All you been doing is getting:
(http://www.buymarsproperty.com/owned/owned01.jpg)
These are things YOU claimed and they have been shown to be WRONG:
Fact: Bush wasn't talking about WTC's being pre-wired with explosives
Fact: it wasn't 19 goat shephards
Fact: There are discussions and studies art colleges of why the WTCs failed on 9/11
this is not going away Cheesy
-
These are things YOU claimed and they have been shown to be WRONG:
Fact: Bush wasn't talking about WTC's being pre-wired with explosives
Fact: it wasn't 19 goat shephards
Fact: There are discussions and studies art colleges of why the WTCs failed on 9/11
this is not going away Cheesy
Fact: too stupid to understand when you are been trolled.
Fact: too stupid to understand when you are been trolled.
Fact: Doesn't present any studies, facts or links of professors at places like MIT, Northwestern and Purdue universities discussing on why WTC's failed on 9/11.
Ozmo "The cheesy american" full of rubbish.
"The legend on his own mind"
Government dick rider's logic 101: Coincidence!!!
Who's been debunking CT's for 9 years!!!
That's what you have been doing this whole time, getting exposed!!!
Man up & shut da fuck up!!!
All you been doing is getting:
(http://i381.photobucket.com/albums/oo256/jebusjack/random%20stuff/owned-subaru.jpg)
-
Fact: too stupid to understand when you are been trolled.
Fact: too stupid to understand when you are been trolled.
Fact: Doesn't present any studies, facts or links of professors at places like MIT, Northwestern and Purdue universities discussing on why WTC's failed on 9/11.
Ozmo "The cheesy american" full of rubbish.
"The legend on his own mind"
Government dick rider's logic 101: Coincidence!!!
Who's been debunking CT's for 9 years!!!
That's what you have been doing this whole time, getting exposed!!!
Man up & shut da fuck up!!!
All you been doing is getting:
(http://i381.photobucket.com/albums/oo256/jebusjack/random%20stuff/owned-subaru.jpg)
These are things YOU claimed and they have been shown to be WRONG:
Fact: Bush wasn't talking about WTC's being pre-wired with explosives
Fact: it wasn't 19 goat shephards
Fact: There are discussions and studies art colleges of why the WTCs failed on 9/11
this is not going away :D