Never Forget... 9-11

[Las Vegas]

Just like the stuff involving physics etc.

Waste of time on thread like this.  Might as well grow a tail and start chasing it.

[Simple Simon]

I don't have an opinion on it, to be totally honest.

have cup of tea and a biscuit hand have a little think, report back any time.  

[Las Vegas]

have cup of tea and a biscuit hand have a little think, report back any time.  

 

But no, it wouldn't make sense to think all the reporters and such were "in on it" as I've seen some go so far to say.

Closest thing I could even imagine, to try to hand an assist to such a person, would be to say this:

Reports can be prepared as a juggling act (which is standard business when a major event is happening, or when one is being expected) to the point that potential reports are sometimes written in advance.  The idea is to immediately present the already-prepared report in order to keep our attention, being that it was presented so quickly versus its subject.

So, from that, maybe a person could create something if s/he thinks about it.

But none of that is terribly interesting, IMHO.

[Las Vegas]

^ No offense to Trev.  That video WAS/IS fully legit to post.

[Simple Simon]

But no, it wouldn't make sense to think all the reporters and such were "in on it" as I've seen some go so far to say.

Closest thing I could even imagine, to try to hand an assist to such a person, would be to say this:

Reports can be prepared as a juggling act (which is standard business when a major event is happening, or when one is being expected) to the point that potential reports are sometimes written in advance.  The idea is to immediately present the already-prepared report in order to keep our attention, being that it was presented so quickly versus its subject.

So, from that, maybe a person could create something if s/he thinks about it.

But none of that is terribly interesting, IMHO.

During the Iraq war one of the UK tabloids had photos of 99 fallen soldiers on a double page waiting for the 100th to die for over a week before they published a 100 soldiers dead special...

 

[Dave D]

Yes, I'll be glad to take the time to do that.  In case you haven't seen it (but I think you have, because you were on the "rare footage" thread from what I recall) that's fine.

He did.

Thanks man. I was on that thread.

I sometimes enjoy conspiracy theories and how in depth people are willing to go.

All that said Be There does an excellent job debunking the theories with simple logic and providing explanations to this logic (if the buildings were rigged with explosives who set them and how were they unnoticed) is usually where the theorists fall short.

[delta9mda]

And yet many of your fellow countrymen believe the Bush administration brought the towers down with controlled explosions in order to invade Iraq (after blaming Bin Laden for the attacks whilst living in Afghanistan  )

So convince me jet fuel melted steel and that no nanothermite was discovered in all samples tested. Jus sayn

[delta9mda]

9/11 - Anatomy of a Great Deception - Complete Version

It will scare the shit out of you regardless buddy

I've watched it several times. 3000 Americans died for 240 billion dollars.

[delta9mda]

Read the "collateral damage, black eagle war trust" paper.

[Ropo]

Leave this tool alone.  It's totally useless to try and convince him of anything.  Damming evidence doesn't matter, he pretends like it doesn't exist.  He's just a brainwashed shill that believes and pushes all government narratives.

All you need to convince anyone who has some kind of brains is evidence. You don't have any, just that same old bullshit year after year..

[Ropo]

The beams ended up on the ground dude and showed evidence of having been melted!
There were also tiny balls of steel in the dust which is what you get when melted by thermite

So what you are saying is that there were some tin foil hat morons taking samples from the ground zero while dust clouds were still flying around the Manhattan, and police & rescue workers let them go there without asking any questions? Truth about the matter? 100% of people were running away from Manhattan, and all samples has been taken while they were clearing the ruins = that means after rescue workers has stop to look for victims. What those rescue workers did was cut the steel out of the way, and that is the real reason why there is tiny balls of steel..



Every one of those sparks in the picture  forms a tiny ball of steel, and and when you don't have any kind of proof when the samples was taken, this is the real reason. Only morons and imbeciles are stupid enough to believe that tons of thermite doesn't leave any mark at the video recordings or in the ruins.

[Ropo]

Yes, I'll be glad to take the time to do that.  In case you haven't seen it (but I think you have, because you were on the "rare footage" thread from what I recall) that's fine.

He did.

And can you explain why tin foil hats are rubbing your nose to that BBC broadcast? Why it is so important? Because it was only broadcast with that kind of errors, but at that time there were multiple live news aired without same errors, so what is your point? BBC make an error, and has admit it years back.

[Ropo]

...

translated: moron has no answers..

[Ropo]

^ No offense to Trev.  That video WAS/IS fully legit to post.

You mean that video, where you have text and narrator from the foil hat industry? It somehow rules out that these same people try to force feed this crap to you, while it is complete meaningless piece of crap and doesn't prove anything. " BBC reporting on the collapse of WTC Building 7 over twenty minutes before it fell at 5:20pm on the afternoon of more 9/11" and you see the building standing at the picture, so it can't be mistake, it has to be conspiracy? Brilliant logic..

[Ropo]

So convince me jet fuel melted steel and that no nanothermite was discovered in all samples tested. Jus sayn

What you mean when you say melted? There seem to be some misunderstandings about the matter among teenagers: in real life it means that melted material becomes liquid. What happen when you melt ice from your drink in your glass? Same thing. If metal is heated but below the melting point, it is just soft, not at the liquid form. Point is that the steel start to loose it's structural strength at quite low temperatures(-20% @ 450°C), and in 1000°C there is only 40% of it. What can happen if temperatures reach ~1200°C:


Nanothermite? There were no such thing at 2001, just because there were no means to make it. Let me try to explain: The word "nano" means the particle size, which is 1/1000 000 000 of the millimetre, meaning one billionth of the millimetre, which is quite small. It is very difficult to do such small particles in large quantity(meaning tons of material), so what to do? In these days they use plasma to blow materials to the dust which have nano particles, but that was invented later, years after the 9/11.You get better view at the matter by this picture from Niels Harrit:


Just look at the scale in the picture 20µm = 20 micrometers = 20/1 000 000 of millimetre. So he is trying to prove presence of the nanothermite using 20 000 times too big particles, so do you think he really knows what he is talking about? He is a Danish professor but he doesn't know SI standard -prefixes? What he is doing is trying to prove you that there is a mouse by showing you the picture of the elephant 

[Simple Simon]

So convince me jet fuel melted steel and that no nanothermite was discovered in all samples tested. Jus sayn

Why does jet fuel have to melt steel for the building to collapse?

Go and read the links with the evidence I provided.

[Ropo]

Why does jet fuel have to melt steel for the building to collapse?

Go and read the links with the evidence I provided.

How you would understand this when you are unable to understand even the most basic things? Why do you talk about the jet fuel while it is just a little part of the fire load? Jet fuel ignite the fire, and fire load at the building burn until collapse. What the fuck is fire load? Furnitures, office machines, textiles, papers, all burning material IN the building itself. If measured by office building average, there were tera joules of burning material in that fire. Did you understand this simple fact?

[Simple Simon]

How you would understand this when you are unable to understand even the most basic things? Why do you talk about the jet fuel while it is just a little part of the fire load? Jet fuel ignite the fire, and fire load at the building burn until collapse. What the fuck is fire load? Furnitures, office machines, textiles, papers, all burning material IN the building itself. If measured by office building average, there were tera joules of burning material in that fire. Did you understand this simple fact?

why are you having a go at me you dumbo?

Learn to comprehend what you are reading and who Im responding to before you jump down my throat.

[Las Vegas]

why are you having a go at me you dumbo?

Learn to comprehend what you are reading and who Im responding to before you jump down my throat.

Love to jump down your throat, Stud.

[Las Vegas]

Here's that information.  It can be seen on any YT video, at 1:26 (from memory) on most of those copies that aren't of the liftgate recording.

If you don't want to trust that, though, then here's what you need to look at.  It's in the download on this page, at the turn of the 4:59 to 5:00 mark.

http://www.vaed.uscourts.gov/notablecases/moussaoui/exhibits/prosecution/P200022.html

Times are all from memory atm.

[Las Vegas]

So.  To those who invest themselves in popular CT culture, a product of MSM:

IF the "contributors" to that culture are as interested and well-researched as they claim, and IF they so intend to provide a person with factual and complete information, then how do you explain it?  How do you explain the inconsistency?

 

[Trev]

Here's that information.  It can be seen on any YT video, at 1:26 (from memory) on most of those copies that aren't of the liftgate recording.

If you don't want to trust that, though, then here's what you need to look at.  It's in the download on this page, at the turn of the 4:59 to 5:00 mark.

http://www.vaed.uscourts.gov/notablecases/moussaoui/exhibits/prosecution/P200022.html

Times are all from memory atm.

Pentagon was forced to release but despite there being over 20 cameras pointing at this area, they released a 5 second clip that shows an explosion and no plane. I wonder why?!!!   

[Twaddle]

Pentagon was forced to release but despite there being over 20 cameras pointing at this area, they released a 5 second clip that shows an explosion and no plane. I wonder why?!!!   

I don't know.  Why?   

[Las Vegas]

But anyhow, it should be very difficult for someone (on this thread, anyway) to say no plane.

Because not only must the video be broken down to do that, but it requires giving an explanation to say how using "a missile" or whatever's claimed, could pay on the difficulty and risk against using what's claimed in the official story: a plane. 

It couldn't, it doesn't, and it didn't need to.  Flight 77 hit the Pentagon and it cannot be denied.

So.  To those who invest themselves in popular CT culture, a product of MSM:

IF the "contributors" to that culture are as interested and well-researched as they claim, and IF they so intend to provide a person with factual and complete information, then how do you explain it?  How do you explain the inconsistency?

 

Again to the CTers who've acquired their beliefs from popular culture, the sources immediately found on Gabbler or Goobler or whatever it's called: WHY do you think the breakdown hasn't been discussed, introduced, or so much as mentioned?

[Darren Avey]

In the UK you cant really mention 9-11 in case it offends Muslims.