Russian Skyscraper Fire vs. 9/11

[quadzilla456]

Those are plane crash pictures, jets that lost power and fell from the sky. They flew the jet under power into the side of the building...they were aiming for the building.

But a key witness said it hit the ground first. Yet the lawn looks better than most groomed lawns??

Here's the thing, even if they aimed for the building and the pilot was top notch, they would have still crashed partially into the lawn first judging by how low the supposed airliner impact zone is in the Pentagon. The size of the Airplane would have made it impossible to not drag the lawn.

And that is what Mr. Timmerman said. Yet there was no damage to the lawn.

[quadzilla456]

This news just in!!  The sun actually isn't hot at all. The sun is only about 75 degrees. It's just a conspiracy between the government and air conditioner salesmen, to get us to buy expensive air conditioners.

That has nothing to do with the questions raised.

This is classic disinformation tactics. Drag the debate down to Mickey Mouse talk in an effort to sidestep the questions. Or post porn. I am waiting for that next. A big pussy shot perhaps?

[daddy8ball]

But a key witness said it hit the ground first. Yet the lawn looks better than most groomed lawns??

Here's the thing, even if they aimed for the building and the pilot was top notch, they would have still crashed partially into the lawn first judging by how low the supposed airliner impact zone is in the Pentagon. The size of the Airplane would have made it impossible to not drag the lawn.

And that is what Mr. Timmerman said. Yet there was no damage to the lawn.

What you see in the photos IS NOT WHERE THE PLANE CONTACTED.

I'll say it again. THE LAWN YOU SEE IN THE PHOTOS IS NOT WHERE THE PLANE CONTACTED.

Witnesses say it skipped on the helipad. Do you see a helipad in these photos? 

Is this all you have? Pointing to a section of the lawn that the plane didn't even touch?

You won't address the phone calls by the passengers.
The multiple eye witnesses.
The plane debris.
This missing plane (where is it if it wasn't a plane?)

You focus on the lawn? Which wasn't even the point of impact?

[quadzilla456]

What you see in the photos IS NOT WHERE THE PLANE CONTACTED.

I'll say it again. THE LAWN YOU SEE IN THE PHOTOS IS NOT WHERE THE PLANE CONTACTED.

Witnesses say it skipped on the helipad. Do you see a helipad in these photos? 

Is this all you have? Pointing to a section of the lawn that the plane didn't even touch?

You won't address the phone calls by the passengers.
The multiple eye witnesses.
The plane debris.
This missing plane (where is it if it wasn't a plane?)

You focus on the lawn? Which wasn't even the point of impact?

Show me where it hit first and where most of the energy was absorbed by the ground (helipad?) - according to Timmerman. I am really curious now!

[daddy8ball]

Show me where it hit first and where most of the energy was absorbed by the ground (helipad?) - according to Timmerman. I am really curious now!

Why do I have to show you? I've provided links to peer reviewed engineering journals, well-researched explanations, quotes from CNN eye witness accounts...

Nothing is good enough..and nothing ever will be. I bet you didn't read one link, or even one paper. You mind is made up. If you want to find out..read on your own. I'm done spoon feeding you.

[Twaddle]

Here's a good video about Quadzilla.   

[quadzilla456]

Here's a good video about Quadzilla.   

No! 

[Tigerblood]

This building burned far longer and was completely engulfed. Why didn't it collapse/turn to dust?

Only element missing is jet fuel.

Only element missing is a controlled demolition.

[Tigerblood]

I have a question for those dipshits skeptics that think the CIA or the .gov were the ones that made the towers collapse.  Are you contending that there were no Islamic hijackers?

Also, if you do accept that hijackers hit the WTC with planes, why would the .gov need the buildings to collapse in order to get support for their "war on terror"?  Even if they didn't collapse, wouldn't the planes hitting the WTC and the pentagon be enough?  I don't see the added benefit (for lack of a better word) in purposely making the buildings collapse.

I can understand people that are curious about the buildings collapsing the way they did.  It was odd.  What I don't get is those people that deny the mountain of evidence showing the hijacked planes hit the WTC, Pentagon and Pennsylvania.  Some people belive that it was a missile that hit the Pentagon.  It's pretty obvious what happened on 9/11.

Are the .gov, the airlines, the victims, the victims families and the terrorists all in this together?  All those people are keeping their mouths shut about the "truth"?  Doubtfull. 

Firemen and law enforcement that heard bombs and explosions going off in the morning of September 11 are keeping their mouth shut about this...

[Twaddle]

Firemen and law enforcement that heard bombs and explosions going off in the morning of September 11 are keeping their mouth shut about this...

Explosions and loud noises are very common and expected at building fires.  HTH.   

[epic_alien]

And, what's the problem with this video again?

um yes, if you can please pic out the plane in that video id thankfull

[jwb]

I love how the CTers expect a 13ft high plane (height of 757 body with wheels up) to be front and center in that security cam footage.

Take a look at aerial pics of the pentagon taken right after the incident then let the fact each side of the pentagon is 921 feet long sink into your brains.

That 13 foot high plane was 700-800 feet away from that camera.

How big does a school bus look from 700-800 feet?

[Roger Bacon]

Where the fuck is 240 or Bust?

[daddy8ball]

um yes, if you can please pic out the plane in that video id thankfull

um yes, i posted more than one link that did exactly that. um yes. if you aint gonna fucking read it it i can't help you.

um yes. hope this helps.

um yes.

[240 is Back]

Where the fuck is 240 or Bust?

LOL!  I gave up arguing this topic years ago.

It's a pointless argument.  Pointless.  When we're 70, they'll declassify everything, and we can sit around in our nursing homes and say "I told you so" LOL...

I'm more concerned with watching breaking bad on netflix than I am about this debate anymore haha.

[Roger Bacon]

LOL!  I gave up arguing this topic years ago.

It's a pointless argument.  Pointless.  When we're 70, they'll declassify everything, and we can sit around in our nursing homes and say "I told you so" LOL...

I'm more concerned with watching breaking bad on netflix than I am about this debate anymore haha.

lol...

I couldn't resist posting a few times in this thread, but I know exactly what you mean!!

[tommywishbone]

9/11 was a conspiracy.  

[Game Time]

After 20 pages this convo went no where lol.

I think a few big names hand there hands in this. But it doesn't go up to the President. Tower 7 was too suspicious.

[Ropo]

ROFL

And this is all what you can do? How pitiful is that, because it is evident that you are unable to show any evidence. That happens every time when foil hat idiot runs out of arguments. You see yourself as an hero, and everybody else see that I beat the crap out of your arguments, and I don't even speak the fucking language. Why? Because you can't beat the facts of the matter. If there would have been explosives, there would be signs of explosions, it is simple as that. If pentagon would be hit by the missile, there would be impact hole size of the missile, not size of the 757. If there would be explosives which can hang out in fire for hours, there would be some alien chemistry involved and more than that, there would be concrete evidence about these things. There is none. There is only some foil hat arguments and fake videos, fake pictures and crap like that. And how about the type of logic they use? Let's use same logic for different situation:

In one night of the each year there is obese old guy with the red suit visiting every home in the world. This fat old guy fly with the sledge, pulled by reindeers. There isn't any real evidence about him, no one has really see him, but there is one concrete evidence that he is true. He leave gifts in every house he has been. So the gifts proves that he is real, just like the collapsing proves that the WTC buildings has been victims of the controlled demolition  

[Ropo]

jet fuel is diesel fuel.  it don't won't and cannot melt steel beams.

No one even with the IQ of the German Shepherd doesn't claim that it can. That is claim of the foil hat idiots. There has been temperatures above of the 1200°C in that fire, because it is impossible there isn't, and that doesn't melt steel. What it melts easily is aluminium, the metal which they build aeroplanes. Aluminium melts in 600°C, and it boils in 2000°C, so it has quite large scale when it is in liquid form. That's why it pours out from the crash site as an yellow hot liquid, which colour indicates temperature of 900-1000°C.

[Ropo]

Ropo is getting his ass handed to him. He claims there would have been no cameras around the Pentagon. What utter horseshit. They have confiscated numerous footage. And a secure facility like the Pentagon would actually have numerous cameras for security purposes - duh! Never mind all the gas stations around the Pentagon. Bu not one video showing a plane crashing into the building. Oh, there is one video but it shows clearly a missile or smaller object flying in to the Pentagon.

Fools!

Prove there is? That is quite easy, isn't it? There has to be millions of pictures of pentagon, so please, point out the cameras from some of them? You can't, because the cameras what you see in those pictures, is aimed to doors and staircases, not all over the yard and sky. Why? They want to see who enters or leave the building, not birds which fly by.

[Radical Plato]

And this is all what you can do? How pitiful is that, because it is evident that you are unable to show any evidence. That happens every time when foil hat idiot runs out of arguments. You see yourself as an hero, and everybody else see that I beat the crap out of your arguments, and I don't even speak the fucking language. Why? Because you can't beat the facts of the matter. If there would have been explosives, there would be signs of explosions, it is simple as that. If pentagon would be hit by the missile, there would be impact hole size of the missile, not size of the 757. If there would be explosives which can hang out in fire for hours, there would be some alien chemistry involved and more than that, there would be concrete evidence about these things. There is none. There is only some foil hat arguments and fake videos, fake pictures and crap like that. And how about the type of logic they use? Let's use same logic for different situation:

In one night of the each year there is obese old guy with the red suit visiting every home in the world. This fat old guy fly with the sledge, pulled by reindeers. There isn't any real evidence about him, no one has really see him, but there is one concrete evidence that he is true. He leave gifts in every house he has been. So the gifts proves that he is real, just like the collapsing proves that the WTC buildings has been victims of the controlled demolition  

Your just an angry conformist.  Their are hundreds of accounts of explosions, you just refuse the evidence.  it's hard to argue with someone who just denies what is shown to them, if I hold up a red card, and say this is a red card, you reply by saying if there was  a red card their would be evidence of a red card.  There is absolutely no way you can debate with someone who just denies everything he is presented.  

And Santa Claus is the perfect conspiracy, a bunch of people who have power (the adults) over a bunch of other people (children) agree to make something look like reality when in fact it is complete fiction.  The people who organised the conspiracy (the adults) know the truth about the matter, but they don't tell those they rule over because they enjoy fooling others and the sense of power this gives them,  Plus, the powerless people seem to enjoy it anyway, that is, until they discover the truth, then they realise how easy it is for others to dupe those who don't know any better.  Shit! For a minute there I thought I was describing 9/11.

[Radical Plato]

No one even with the IQ of the German Shepherd doesn't claim that it can. That is claim of the foil hat idiots. There has been temperatures above of the 1200°C in that fire, because it is impossible there isn't, and that doesn't melt steel. What it melts easily is aluminium, the metal which they build aeroplanes. Aluminium melts in 600°C, and it boils in 2000°C, so it has quite large scale when it is in liquid form. That's why it pours out from the crash site as an yellow hot liquid, which colour indicates temperature of 900-1000°C.

Molten Aluminium IS Silver you Idiot. It has a dull gray appearance  Better luck next time Angry Conformist.

[Ropo]

Show me a video that "clearly" shows a missile.

And, if it's such a conspiracy like you say..why wouldn't they just FAKE crystal clear footage of a plane hitting? Jeez, they're wiring buildings for controlled demos, one would think they could fake some plane footage.

That I want to see. These guys doesn't comprehend the difference of the aeroplane and the missile. There is plenty of information about the missiles of the world in internet, and it is a fact that cruise missiles are small. Difference between them and the aeroplane is like difference between hot dog and the buss. How many eyewitness in this world can do that mistake? They see a hot dog and think it is a buss? Only foil hat idiots are stupid enough for that..

[jwb]

Molten Aluminium IS Silver you Idiot. It has a dull gray appearance  Better luck next time Angry Conformist.

That little stream of sparks out of one window is supposed to be explosives bringing down the building?