9-11….. Startling New Evidence of a Conspiracy

[gipper]

Just thinking

No skyscraper has ever survived a direct hit from a jetliner

How many times has that happened?? Did you watch the film? What are you guys so afraid of? Finding out that Republicans were involved??

It has happened twice with identical results

Show me a skyscraper hit by a jet airline that didn't collapse

Looks like you lose

Show me a skyscraper that was hit by a jet airliner besides the WTC

There have been plenty of fires in skyscrapers and not one pancaked into its footprint...except for you know.

 

[rightwinger]

Just thinking

No skyscraper has ever survived a direct hit from a jetliner

How many times has that happened?? Did you watch the film? What are you guys so afraid of? Finding out that Republicans were involved??

It has happened twice with identical results

Show me a skyscraper hit by a jet airline that didn't collapse

Looks like you lose

Show me a skyscraper that was hit by a jet airliner besides the WTC

I have a sample of two identical buildings with identical crashes yielding the same results

You have no examples of any skyscraper of any size being brought down by a controlled demo with no discernible explosions

You lose

 

[LA RAM FAN]

Just thinking

No skyscraper has ever survived a direct hit from a jetliner

How many times has that happened?? Did you watch the film? What are you guys so afraid of? Finding out that Republicans were involved??

It has happened twice with identical results

Show me a skyscraper hit by a jet airline that didn't collapse

Looks like you lose

Show me a skyscraper that was hit by a jet airliner besides the WTC

There have been plenty of fires in skyscrapers and not one pancaked into its footprint...except for you know.

why do you bother talking to this paid shill,the shill who says oswald killed JFK?

 

[gipper]

Clearly 9/11 was a conspiracy. A bunch of dumb Muslims who had never flown jumbo jets couldn't have done it alone. And where was our Air Force which had plenty of time to intercept,but didn't. And of course, burning jet fuel can't melt steel.

Government always sucks.

Awesome. One of the best.

 

[MisterBeale]

Clearly 9/11 was a conspiracy. A bunch of dumb Muslims who had never flown jumbo jets couldn't have done it alone. And where was our Air Force which had plenty of time to intercept,but didn't. And of course, burning jet fuel can't melt steel.

Government always sucks.

Awesome. One of the best.

This one is one of my favorites too. It lays out all the reasons behind the Deep State's need to pull off the massive deception, who was involved, names, motives, etc.

 

[gipper]

Just thinking

No skyscraper has ever survived a direct hit from a jetliner

How many times has that happened?? Did you watch the film? What are you guys so afraid of? Finding out that Republicans were involved??

It has happened twice with identical results

Show me a skyscraper hit by a jet airline that didn't collapse

Looks like you lose

Show me a skyscraper that was hit by a jet airliner besides the WTC

There have been plenty of fires in skyscrapers and not one pancaked into its footprint...except for you know.

why do you bother talking to this paid shill,the shill who says oswald killed JFK?

Because it is fun.

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

Note: I am aware of the fact that there are several other open treads on 9-11 However, they have long been dormant since shortly after they was started earlier this year. In addition, none of them feature the film that I recently discovered. This is different. This is compelling and worth a look!

This is an amazing, and eye opening film that may well change everything that you thought you knew or that you believed about what happened on 9.11.01.

http://thefreethoughtproject.com/physics-study-911-controlled-demolition/

It is long. Over an hour. But if you just watch the first 10 or 15 minutes, you will certainly get the idea.

Now let me be clear, I was never a conspiracy theorists. I did not consider myself a 9-11 truther and I’m yet 100% convinced that we have been lied to. However, I am leaning in that direction.

The basic premise of the film is that the two planes alone did not bring the three building, WTC 1,2, and 7 down – that the collapses were caused, at least aided, by “controlled demolitions. Indeed, no plane had hit WTC 7! It is alleged that there was deliberate destruction of evidence, explosions not caused by the planes, and a symmetrical collapse of all three buildings consistent with a controlled demolition.

The film is narrated by Richard Gaga of Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth, an organization of 2,300 professionals who are demanding an independent investigation, and features a long succession of architects, engineers, various other scientists all of whom are quite credible. It also features eye witnesses who saw and heard things that are not explained and can’t be explained by the official version of what happened.

There is no dirt to be found on this organization. They are credible. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Architects_%26_Engineers_for_9/11_Truth

Here is the official site: http://www1.ae911truth.org/en/news-section/41-articles/928-nists-wtc-7-reports-filled-with-fantasy-fiction-and-fraud-pt1.html

It is interesting to note that while it’s alleged that the plot was much wider than the hijackers, the report specifically avoids pointing any fingers or speculating on motive so as not to distract from the forensic evidence.

The film that you are about to see was published in the Free Thought Project http://thefreethoughtproject.com/

You will see that while the stories that they publish are provocative and under-reported in the main stream media, it is not “fake news” or conspiracy theories from the fringes of reality

Now to be fair, I am not without my doubts. We know that planes actually did hit the towers and that they were controlled by terrorists. But were there additional terrorists on the ground who planted explosives in all three building? Would that have even been possible? And, if they were expert enough to plant the bombs so strategically as to bring the buildings down, why did they bother to hijack planes?

Another possibility that some entity other than the terrorists- such as the Bush Administration- planted the bombs. Did they know about the plot ( as some have previously alleged ) and, rather than stopping it, planted to explosives to make certain of the outcome. Farfetched? I don’t know.

That brings me to the authors and publishers of the study and documentary. As I said Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth, appear to be highly credible. However, here is a site that says that it is all bunk. You can decide for yourself.

http://www.debunking911.com/index.html

Now not being a scientist, I will not attempt to argue the conflicting scientific theories (although I do find the evidence for a controlled demolition very compelling) . However, they also attack the credibility and credentials of the chief author of the study Professor Steven E. Jones:

To be clear, let me restate the test which makes a real scientific paper. It has to be published in a respected scientific journal. As an example, The Journal of Engineering Mechanics is a well respected scientific journal. The peer review process is tough and precise. The reviewers are well respected in their fields of expertise. The Journal of the American Chemical Society is another which Jones can submit his papers. There are many well respected journals which have an impact in the scientific community. Bentham, where Jones has submitted his latest paper, is the Wiki of Journals. They have been criticized in the past for passing "gibberish".

One editor resigned after learning Jones paper passed their review. It seems the reviewers are told of the paper AFTER they are passed! Amazing!

Though Jones may have found the perfect home for his latest attempt at peer-review, it is far from a respected scientific journal. Will Jones ever publish in a "respected scientific journal"? Do they want legitimacy or a talking points?

So where does that leave us? Deep into more uncertainty. Jones was published in Europhysics News which appears to be highly credible and widely respected:

https://billlawrenceonline.com/europhysics-news-trutherism/

Europhysics News Trutherism — Trutherism, the belief that Al-Qaeda terrorists were not entirely behind the Sept. 11, 2001 attacks, received a boost, Aug. 24, in the latest issue of Europhysics News which carries an article claiming that the World Trade Center was brought down by controlled demolition.

The magazine is published by the prestigious European Physical Society.

The authors of the piece are Steven Jones, a former full professor of physics at Brigham Young University; Robert Korol, a professor emeritus of civil engineering at McMaster University in Ontario, Canada; Anthony Szamboti, a mechanical design engineer; and Ted Walter, who holds master of public policy degree from the University of California, Berkeley.

The authors cite, among other things, the lack of heat to melt, or adequately weaken, the girders to cause the collapse.

Melted girders was widely reported as a reason immediately after the attack. This was quickly understood to be impossible, however. In fact, it was even being noted that things didn’t get hot enough to cause enough loss of structural strength.

This paper from the December 2001 issue of JOM, — the member journal of The Minerals, Metals & Materials Society , — is in full agreement with the Jones group on this point.

However, even here there is dissention:

The authors Thomas W. Eagar and Christopher Musso, however, don’t feel the need to deny what was before everyone’s eyes. Their article points out that temperature along the 18-meter long joists was certainly not uniform and that given the thermal expansion of steel, a 300 F temperature difference from one location to another will produce yield-level residual stresses hence causing distortions resulting in buckling failures

Jones et al makes the point that fire never collapsed a skyscraper before 9/11 and has yet to bring one down since.

The rebuttal to this is that jet aircraft have never been flown into skyscrapers before or since. Further, a fire, while not collapsing a skyscraper, did make One Meridan Plaza in Philadelphia unstable enough to cause its demolition.

Again, I’m not going to attempt to evaluate the science. I am just presenting what has been said. I’m not trying to sell anything here. My intention is to stimulate discussion, elicit opinions, and to get a sense of how people, in general are leaning.

Finally, the is https://www.gspellchecker.com/2016/09/debunking-conspiracies-spread-some-truth-on-the-anniversary-of-911/#more-4482

This is apparently an Atheistic leaning site and as such, I, an atheist, give a certain amount of credibility to. They support the “conventional or main stream explanation for 9-11 and reject the conspiracy- controlled demolition theory and provide a link to the aforementioned . http://www.debunking911.com/index.html. I'm just not completely convinced, but as I said, leaning towards a conspiracy.

That’s it folks! Have at it .Don’t troll me bro. I’m just the messenger!

"Controlled demolition"

Didn't need to read any more or watch the film. A controlled demolition did not and could not have occurred. That has already been debunked. How old is that film?

remember beal,you are trying to reason with a kid who belives in magic bullets and incredibly after all this time,STILL thinks oswald was the lone assassin and no conspiracy existed.

Who are you referring to as a "kid" If it's me you're stupid on two counts. 1) I'm not hardly a kid. 2) If you read the OP with comprehension, you would know that I am not taking a definitive position but rather presenting evidence. Calm the fuck down.

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

Note: I am aware of the fact that there are several other open treads on 9-11 However, they have long been dormant since shortly after they was started earlier this year. In addition, none of them feature the film that I recently discovered. This is different. This is compelling and worth a look!

This is an amazing, and eye opening film that may well change everything that you thought you knew or that you believed about what happened on 9.11.01.

http://thefreethoughtproject.com/physics-study-911-controlled-demolition/

It is long. Over an hour. But if you just watch the first 10 or 15 minutes, you will certainly get the idea.

Now let me be clear, I was never a conspiracy theorists. I did not consider myself a 9-11 truther and I’m yet 100% convinced that we have been lied to. However, I am leaning in that direction.

The basic premise of the film is that the two planes alone did not bring the three building, WTC 1,2, and 7 down – that the collapses were caused, at least aided, by “controlled demolitions. Indeed, no plane had hit WTC 7! It is alleged that there was deliberate destruction of evidence, explosions not caused by the planes, and a symmetrical collapse of all three buildings consistent with a controlled demolition.

The film is narrated by Richard Gaga of Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth, an organization of 2,300 professionals who are demanding an independent investigation, and features a long succession of architects, engineers, various other scientists all of whom are quite credible. It also features eye witnesses who saw and heard things that are not explained and can’t be explained by the official version of what happened.

There is no dirt to be found on this organization. They are credible. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Architects_%26_Engineers_for_9/11_Truth

Here is the official site: http://www1.ae911truth.org/en/news-section/41-articles/928-nists-wtc-7-reports-filled-with-fantasy-fiction-and-fraud-pt1.html

It is interesting to note that while it’s alleged that the plot was much wider than the hijackers, the report specifically avoids pointing any fingers or speculating on motive so as not to distract from the forensic evidence.

The film that you are about to see was published in the Free Thought Project http://thefreethoughtproject.com/

You will see that while the stories that they publish are provocative and under-reported in the main stream media, it is not “fake news” or conspiracy theories from the fringes of reality

Now to be fair, I am not without my doubts. We know that planes actually did hit the towers and that they were controlled by terrorists. But were there additional terrorists on the ground who planted explosives in all three building? Would that have even been possible? And, if they were expert enough to plant the bombs so strategically as to bring the buildings down, why did they bother to hijack planes?

Another possibility that some entity other than the terrorists- such as the Bush Administration- planted the bombs. Did they know about the plot ( as some have previously alleged ) and, rather than stopping it, planted to explosives to make certain of the outcome. Farfetched? I don’t know.

That brings me to the authors and publishers of the study and documentary. As I said Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth, appear to be highly credible. However, here is a site that says that it is all bunk. You can decide for yourself.

http://www.debunking911.com/index.html

Now not being a scientist, I will not attempt to argue the conflicting scientific theories (although I do find the evidence for a controlled demolition very compelling) . However, they also attack the credibility and credentials of the chief author of the study Professor Steven E. Jones:

To be clear, let me restate the test which makes a real scientific paper. It has to be published in a respected scientific journal. As an example, The Journal of Engineering Mechanics is a well respected scientific journal. The peer review process is tough and precise. The reviewers are well respected in their fields of expertise. The Journal of the American Chemical Society is another which Jones can submit his papers. There are many well respected journals which have an impact in the scientific community. Bentham, where Jones has submitted his latest paper, is the Wiki of Journals. They have been criticized in the past for passing "gibberish".

One editor resigned after learning Jones paper passed their review. It seems the reviewers are told of the paper AFTER they are passed! Amazing!

Though Jones may have found the perfect home for his latest attempt at peer-review, it is far from a respected scientific journal. Will Jones ever publish in a "respected scientific journal"? Do they want legitimacy or a talking points?

So where does that leave us? Deep into more uncertainty. Jones was published in Europhysics News which appears to be highly credible and widely respected:

https://billlawrenceonline.com/europhysics-news-trutherism/

Europhysics News Trutherism — Trutherism, the belief that Al-Qaeda terrorists were not entirely behind the Sept. 11, 2001 attacks, received a boost, Aug. 24, in the latest issue of Europhysics News which carries an article claiming that the World Trade Center was brought down by controlled demolition.

The magazine is published by the prestigious European Physical Society.

The authors of the piece are Steven Jones, a former full professor of physics at Brigham Young University; Robert Korol, a professor emeritus of civil engineering at McMaster University in Ontario, Canada; Anthony Szamboti, a mechanical design engineer; and Ted Walter, who holds master of public policy degree from the University of California, Berkeley.

The authors cite, among other things, the lack of heat to melt, or adequately weaken, the girders to cause the collapse.

Melted girders was widely reported as a reason immediately after the attack. This was quickly understood to be impossible, however. In fact, it was even being noted that things didn’t get hot enough to cause enough loss of structural strength.

This paper from the December 2001 issue of JOM, — the member journal of The Minerals, Metals & Materials Society , — is in full agreement with the Jones group on this point.

However, even here there is dissention:

The authors Thomas W. Eagar and Christopher Musso, however, don’t feel the need to deny what was before everyone’s eyes. Their article points out that temperature along the 18-meter long joists was certainly not uniform and that given the thermal expansion of steel, a 300 F temperature difference from one location to another will produce yield-level residual stresses hence causing distortions resulting in buckling failures

Jones et al makes the point that fire never collapsed a skyscraper before 9/11 and has yet to bring one down since.

The rebuttal to this is that jet aircraft have never been flown into skyscrapers before or since. Further, a fire, while not collapsing a skyscraper, did make One Meridan Plaza in Philadelphia unstable enough to cause its demolition.

Again, I’m not going to attempt to evaluate the science. I am just presenting what has been said. I’m not trying to sell anything here. My intention is to stimulate discussion, elicit opinions, and to get a sense of how people, in general are leaning.

Finally, the is https://www.gspellchecker.com/2016/09/debunking-conspiracies-spread-some-truth-on-the-anniversary-of-911/#more-4482

This is apparently an Atheistic leaning site and as such, I, an atheist, give a certain amount of credibility to. They support the “conventional or main stream explanation for 9-11 and reject the conspiracy- controlled demolition theory and provide a link to the aforementioned . http://www.debunking911.com/index.html. I'm just not completely convinced, but as I said, leaning towards a conspiracy.

That’s it folks! Have at it .Don’t troll me bro. I’m just the messenger!

The Jihad Approves of Your Message

The way you dismiss the possibility that the secondary explosions were set by Muslims is illogical. That is a typical rhetorical trick being taught by modern Sophists--pretend to cover all bases but actually give only lip service to ones you are afraid to go into deeply.

Oh Christ I didn't dismiss anything. I said it was illogical. I did not dismiss anything. I went into his with an open mind and I still have an open mind. Why are you attacking me ? WTF!!

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

Just thinking

No skyscraper has ever survived a direct hit from a jetliner

How many times has that happened?? Did you watch the film? What are you guys so afraid of? Finding out that Republicans were involved??

It has happened twice with identical results

Show me a skyscraper hit by a jet airline that didn't collapse

Looks like you lose

Show me a skyscraper that was hit by a jet airliner besides the WTC

I have a sample of two identical buildings with identical crashes yielding the same results

You have no examples of any skyscraper of any size being brought down by a controlled demo with no discernible explosions

You lose

How the fuck do I lose when I haven't taken a side? Read much?

 

[rightwinger]

Just thinking

No skyscraper has ever survived a direct hit from a jetliner

How many times has that happened?? Did you watch the film? What are you guys so afraid of? Finding out that Republicans were involved??

It has happened twice with identical results

Show me a skyscraper hit by a jet airline that didn't collapse

Looks like you lose

Show me a skyscraper that was hit by a jet airliner besides the WTC

I have a sample of two identical buildings with identical crashes yielding the same results

You have no examples of any skyscraper of any size being brought down by a controlled demo with no discernible explosions

You lose

How the fuck do I lose when I haven't taken a side? Read much?

Read your OP

 

[LA RAM FAN]

Note: I am aware of the fact that there are several other open treads on 9-11 However, they have long been dormant since shortly after they was started earlier this year. In addition, none of them feature the film that I recently discovered. This is different. This is compelling and worth a look!

This is an amazing, and eye opening film that may well change everything that you thought you knew or that you believed about what happened on 9.11.01.

http://thefreethoughtproject.com/physics-study-911-controlled-demolition/

It is long. Over an hour. But if you just watch the first 10 or 15 minutes, you will certainly get the idea.

Now let me be clear, I was never a conspiracy theorists. I did not consider myself a 9-11 truther and I’m yet 100% convinced that we have been lied to. However, I am leaning in that direction.

The basic premise of the film is that the two planes alone did not bring the three building, WTC 1,2, and 7 down – that the collapses were caused, at least aided, by “controlled demolitions. Indeed, no plane had hit WTC 7! It is alleged that there was deliberate destruction of evidence, explosions not caused by the planes, and a symmetrical collapse of all three buildings consistent with a controlled demolition.

The film is narrated by Richard Gaga of Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth, an organization of 2,300 professionals who are demanding an independent investigation, and features a long succession of architects, engineers, various other scientists all of whom are quite credible. It also features eye witnesses who saw and heard things that are not explained and can’t be explained by the official version of what happened.

There is no dirt to be found on this organization. They are credible. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Architects_%26_Engineers_for_9/11_Truth

Here is the official site: http://www1.ae911truth.org/en/news-section/41-articles/928-nists-wtc-7-reports-filled-with-fantasy-fiction-and-fraud-pt1.html

It is interesting to note that while it’s alleged that the plot was much wider than the hijackers, the report specifically avoids pointing any fingers or speculating on motive so as not to distract from the forensic evidence.

The film that you are about to see was published in the Free Thought Project http://thefreethoughtproject.com/

You will see that while the stories that they publish are provocative and under-reported in the main stream media, it is not “fake news” or conspiracy theories from the fringes of reality

Now to be fair, I am not without my doubts. We know that planes actually did hit the towers and that they were controlled by terrorists. But were there additional terrorists on the ground who planted explosives in all three building? Would that have even been possible? And, if they were expert enough to plant the bombs so strategically as to bring the buildings down, why did they bother to hijack planes?

Another possibility that some entity other than the terrorists- such as the Bush Administration- planted the bombs. Did they know about the plot ( as some have previously alleged ) and, rather than stopping it, planted to explosives to make certain of the outcome. Farfetched? I don’t know.

That brings me to the authors and publishers of the study and documentary. As I said Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth, appear to be highly credible. However, here is a site that says that it is all bunk. You can decide for yourself.

http://www.debunking911.com/index.html

Now not being a scientist, I will not attempt to argue the conflicting scientific theories (although I do find the evidence for a controlled demolition very compelling) . However, they also attack the credibility and credentials of the chief author of the study Professor Steven E. Jones:

To be clear, let me restate the test which makes a real scientific paper. It has to be published in a respected scientific journal. As an example, The Journal of Engineering Mechanics is a well respected scientific journal. The peer review process is tough and precise. The reviewers are well respected in their fields of expertise. The Journal of the American Chemical Society is another which Jones can submit his papers. There are many well respected journals which have an impact in the scientific community. Bentham, where Jones has submitted his latest paper, is the Wiki of Journals. They have been criticized in the past for passing "gibberish".

One editor resigned after learning Jones paper passed their review. It seems the reviewers are told of the paper AFTER they are passed! Amazing!

Though Jones may have found the perfect home for his latest attempt at peer-review, it is far from a respected scientific journal. Will Jones ever publish in a "respected scientific journal"? Do they want legitimacy or a talking points?

So where does that leave us? Deep into more uncertainty. Jones was published in Europhysics News which appears to be highly credible and widely respected:

https://billlawrenceonline.com/europhysics-news-trutherism/

Europhysics News Trutherism — Trutherism, the belief that Al-Qaeda terrorists were not entirely behind the Sept. 11, 2001 attacks, received a boost, Aug. 24, in the latest issue of Europhysics News which carries an article claiming that the World Trade Center was brought down by controlled demolition.

The magazine is published by the prestigious European Physical Society.

The authors of the piece are Steven Jones, a former full professor of physics at Brigham Young University; Robert Korol, a professor emeritus of civil engineering at McMaster University in Ontario, Canada; Anthony Szamboti, a mechanical design engineer; and Ted Walter, who holds master of public policy degree from the University of California, Berkeley.

The authors cite, among other things, the lack of heat to melt, or adequately weaken, the girders to cause the collapse.

Melted girders was widely reported as a reason immediately after the attack. This was quickly understood to be impossible, however. In fact, it was even being noted that things didn’t get hot enough to cause enough loss of structural strength.

This paper from the December 2001 issue of JOM, — the member journal of The Minerals, Metals & Materials Society , — is in full agreement with the Jones group on this point.

However, even here there is dissention:

The authors Thomas W. Eagar and Christopher Musso, however, don’t feel the need to deny what was before everyone’s eyes. Their article points out that temperature along the 18-meter long joists was certainly not uniform and that given the thermal expansion of steel, a 300 F temperature difference from one location to another will produce yield-level residual stresses hence causing distortions resulting in buckling failures

Jones et al makes the point that fire never collapsed a skyscraper before 9/11 and has yet to bring one down since.

The rebuttal to this is that jet aircraft have never been flown into skyscrapers before or since. Further, a fire, while not collapsing a skyscraper, did make One Meridan Plaza in Philadelphia unstable enough to cause its demolition.

Again, I’m not going to attempt to evaluate the science. I am just presenting what has been said. I’m not trying to sell anything here. My intention is to stimulate discussion, elicit opinions, and to get a sense of how people, in general are leaning.

Finally, the is https://www.gspellchecker.com/2016/09/debunking-conspiracies-spread-some-truth-on-the-anniversary-of-911/#more-4482

This is apparently an Atheistic leaning site and as such, I, an atheist, give a certain amount of credibility to. They support the “conventional or main stream explanation for 9-11 and reject the conspiracy- controlled demolition theory and provide a link to the aforementioned . http://www.debunking911.com/index.html. I'm just not completely convinced, but as I said, leaning towards a conspiracy.

That’s it folks! Have at it .Don’t troll me bro. I’m just the messenger!

"Controlled demolition"

Didn't need to read any more or watch the film. A controlled demolition did not and could not have occurred. That has already been debunked. How old is that film?

remember beal,you are trying to reason with a kid who belives in magic bullets and incredibly after all this time,STILL thinks oswald was the lone assassin and no conspiracy existed.

Who are you referring to as a "kid" If it's me you're stupid on two counts. 1) I'm not hardly a kid. 2) If you read the OP with comprehension, you would know that I am not taking a definitive position but rather presenting evidence. Calm the fuck down.

wrong assumption there dude.I wasn't calling YOU kid in the least. I was referring to predfan.

I forget you haven't been here for years as he.He has been trolling these boards years on end ignoring evidence and facts and always calls people like you trolls when you post videos or links of overwhelming evidence he cant refute or get around that the towers falling were that of a controlled demolition.

He hates hearing the truth because he is a lying paid shill that has penetrated this forum sent by his handlers to try and derail any truth discussion on the topic.same as rightwinger.I advise you not to bother with either of those two stupid fuck lying paid shills.

sorry for not making it CLEAR that I was referring to predfan as the kid troll.My bad,i guess I should have used his name to clear that up.


also I just automatically figured you would guess I was referring to predfan from my previous post I made on this moron..this one right here.Post# 34 here. 9-11….. Startling New Evidence of a Conspiracy


Looks like you did not read that one.


as you obviously missed in post#34 of mine,that stupid fuck troll PREDFAN, anytime you show him evidence and facts that Oswald was innocent and of killing JFK,that there was never any evidence against him and you prove to him that there were MULTIPLE shooters involved,he runs off with his tail between his legs and when you CHALLENGE him to refute your facts,he will just put you on ignore and start calling you names in frustration because he cant refute them. If that is not acting like a 3 year old kid,then I don't know what is.

him and rightwinger,and freewill you would be wise to not bother with.all three of those stupid fucks believe in magic bullets and that Oswald shot JFK cause they are paid shills on the governments payroll to derail threads like this one so it would be very wise of you not to bother with them.

after all,you have seen for yourself all ready what I am talking about,predfan cant refute any of your facts it was a controlled demoltion,he said himself he wont watch the vidoes you posted or read your links,so it is so obvious he is afraid of the truth and doesn't want to hear it,just wants to keep his head buriend in the same like the stupid sheep ostrich he is.

predfan will eventually put you on ignore when you post facts he cant refute and then runs off and never addresses them and when you send him a pm and tell him you are still waiting for him to address your FACTS and answer them,he will get angry and start calling you names and put you on ignore since he knows you proved his lies WRONG.just watch,you will see for yourself if you hang around here long enough.

 

[PredFan]

Let's do an experiment

Take a hundred story skyscraper and fly a jet airline into it and see if it causes the building to collapse

Then, take an identical hundred story skyscraper and fly a jet airline into it to see if the results are repeatable.

Wait a minute....we did that

It should not be difficult to get accurate data on an experiment. So it should not be difficult to get accurate data on the amount of steel and concrete on each level of the buildings.

But wait, the NIST can write a 10,000 page report without specifying the amount of concrete in the buildings. But they did it for the steel, though not the distribution.

Americans are so hilarious with their general incompetence t science.

psik

Show me where a 100 story skyscraper has ever been taken down with a controlled demo with no detectable explosions

Not only no detectable explosions, but the building was rigged to go with an untold number of charges, all without anyone seeing it (not even building security) or punching holes in dry wall, or moving furniture or equipment, or anyone seeing miles of electrical wires strung about.

 

[rightwinger]

Let's do an experiment

Take a hundred story skyscraper and fly a jet airline into it and see if it causes the building to collapse

Then, take an identical hundred story skyscraper and fly a jet airline into it to see if the results are repeatable.

Wait a minute....we did that

It should not be difficult to get accurate data on an experiment. So it should not be difficult to get accurate data on the amount of steel and concrete on each level of the buildings.

But wait, the NIST can write a 10,000 page report without specifying the amount of concrete in the buildings. But they did it for the steel, though not the distribution.

Americans are so hilarious with their general incompetence t science.

psik

Show me where a 100 story skyscraper has ever been taken down with a controlled demo with no detectable explosions

Not only no detectable explosions, but the building was rigged to go with an untold number of charges, all without anyone seeing it (not even building security) or punching holes in dry wall, or moving furniture or equipment, or anyone seeing miles of electrical wires strung about.

Given that they would have no idea where an airplane would strike or even if one EVER would strike, they would have had to wire every floor

 

[LA RAM FAN]

two farts in a row from the two stupid fuck lying paid shills I was just got done talking about.

 

[rightwinger]

two farts in a row from the two stupid fuck lying paid shills I was just got done talking about.

Smells like a stink'n Ram in here

Time to open the windows and let the stink out

 

[PredFan]

Let's do an experiment

Take a hundred story skyscraper and fly a jet airline into it and see if it causes the building to collapse

Then, take an identical hundred story skyscraper and fly a jet airline into it to see if the results are repeatable.

Wait a minute....we did that

It should not be difficult to get accurate data on an experiment. So it should not be difficult to get accurate data on the amount of steel and concrete on each level of the buildings.

But wait, the NIST can write a 10,000 page report without specifying the amount of concrete in the buildings. But they did it for the steel, though not the distribution.

Americans are so hilarious with their general incompetence t science.

psik

Show me where a 100 story skyscraper has ever been taken down with a controlled demo with no detectable explosions

Not only no detectable explosions, but the building was rigged to go with an untold number of charges, all without anyone seeing it (not even building security) or punching holes in dry wall, or moving furniture or equipment, or anyone seeing miles of electrical wires strung about.

Given that they would have no idea where an airplane would strike or even if one EVER would strike, they would have had to wire every floor

And there is a very good reason why they totally strip down buildings before they implode them. Non-load bearing walls, furniture, equipment, etc would disrupt the explosions and risk the building toppling instead of collapsing.

I also have to laugh at the memes people post saying that jet fuel can't melt steel beams. They are right but the extreme prolonged heat weakens them and they carry a whole lot of weight. Those two factors equal collapse. It's not rocket science.

 

[MisterBeale]

Let's do an experiment

Take a hundred story skyscraper and fly a jet airline into it and see if it causes the building to collapse

Then, take an identical hundred story skyscraper and fly a jet airline into it to see if the results are repeatable.

Wait a minute....we did that

It should not be difficult to get accurate data on an experiment. So it should not be difficult to get accurate data on the amount of steel and concrete on each level of the buildings.

But wait, the NIST can write a 10,000 page report without specifying the amount of concrete in the buildings. But they did it for the steel, though not the distribution.

Americans are so hilarious with their general incompetence t science.

psik

Show me where a 100 story skyscraper has ever been taken down with a controlled demo with no detectable explosions

Not only no detectable explosions, but the building was rigged to go with an untold number of charges, all without anyone seeing it (not even building security) or punching holes in dry wall, or moving furniture or equipment, or anyone seeing miles of electrical wires strung about.

 

[MisterBeale]

Let's do an experiment

Take a hundred story skyscraper and fly a jet airline into it and see if it causes the building to collapse

Then, take an identical hundred story skyscraper and fly a jet airline into it to see if the results are repeatable.

Wait a minute....we did that

It should not be difficult to get accurate data on an experiment. So it should not be difficult to get accurate data on the amount of steel and concrete on each level of the buildings.

But wait, the NIST can write a 10,000 page report without specifying the amount of concrete in the buildings. But they did it for the steel, though not the distribution.

Americans are so hilarious with their general incompetence t science.

psik

Show me where a 100 story skyscraper has ever been taken down with a controlled demo with no detectable explosions

Not only no detectable explosions, but the building was rigged to go with an untold number of charges, all without anyone seeing it (not even building security) or punching holes in dry wall, or moving furniture or equipment, or anyone seeing miles of electrical wires strung about.

Given that they would have no idea where an airplane would strike or even if one EVER would strike, they would have had to wire every floor

 

[MisterBeale]

Let's do an experiment

Take a hundred story skyscraper and fly a jet airline into it and see if it causes the building to collapse

Then, take an identical hundred story skyscraper and fly a jet airline into it to see if the results are repeatable.

Wait a minute....we did that

It should not be difficult to get accurate data on an experiment. So it should not be difficult to get accurate data on the amount of steel and concrete on each level of the buildings.

But wait, the NIST can write a 10,000 page report without specifying the amount of concrete in the buildings. But they did it for the steel, though not the distribution.

Americans are so hilarious with their general incompetence t science.

psik

Show me where a 100 story skyscraper has ever been taken down with a controlled demo with no detectable explosions

Not only no detectable explosions, but the building was rigged to go with an untold number of charges, all without anyone seeing it (not even building security) or punching holes in dry wall, or moving furniture or equipment, or anyone seeing miles of electrical wires strung about.

Given that they would have no idea where an airplane would strike or even if one EVER would strike, they would have had to wire every floor

And there is a very good reason why they totally strip down buildings before they implode them. Non-load bearing walls, furniture, equipment, etc would disrupt the explosions and risk the building toppling instead of collapsing.

I also have to laugh at the memes people post saying that jet fuel can't melt steel beams. They are right but the extreme prolonged heat weakens them and they carry a whole lot of weight. Those two factors equal collapse. It's not rocket science.

 

[MisterBeale]