911 WTC 7 Silent Thermate Demolition, Debunkers Grab Your Ankles!

[SAYIT]

Right you are.... and It's particularly significant when it comes to WTC7, which wasn't even hit by a plane.

Or "chaotic fires" started by thousands of gallons of a powerful accelerant (like jet fuel) which weakened that which supported the building. 13 years later NO EVIDENCE OF EXPOSIVES or of preparation for an explosive demo have been found which should lead any rational "truther" - no matter how invested in his CT - to understand those buildings were not brought down by explosives. Even the desperately silly NoSpAm doesn't cling to your silliness but rather has more than enough silliness of his own ... like mighty morphin' thermal cutters & fireproof ninjas with invisibility cloaks all of which, like your non-existent explosives, could not have survived those "chaotic fires."

See what I mean? All talk, no useful empirically verifiable information. I made it clear I was talking about WTC7. It wasn't hit by a plane, there were no "chaotic fires" from any "powerful accelerant".... agitation, distraction and fabrication.

What a dope.

Wait ... so you are admitting WTC 1 & 2 were destroyed by the planes that slammed into them and the ensuing fire damage but claiming WTC 7 was felled by silent explosives that no one planted, that survived hours of raging fires in order to be triggered by some shadowy figure and which left no evidence? Yeah ... I'm the dope.

zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

Typical non-response by the lame "Truther" who adamantly refuses to accept the obvious about his Swiss cheese 9/11 scenarios.
He will once again slither away, tail between legs, only to post the same silliness elsewhere or return here in a few months to again post it as though it suddenly has new found value.

 

[n0spam4me]

"WTC 1 & 2 were destroyed by the planes that slammed into them and the ensuing fire damage but claiming WTC 7 was felled by silent explosives that no one planted, that survived hours of raging fires in order to be triggered by some shadowy figure and which left no evidence? Yeah ... I'm the dope."

do try to think about the real scene, the alleged scene has WTC7 a raging inferno, when in fact less than a quarter of the floors were showing fire and that fire was most probably a bit of theater, that is fires that had been intentionally set up in advance to look like the whole floor was on fire however only the part near the windows was involved...

Before I waste my time reading the rest of your silliness, please post some proof of what you have said so far. Your failure to do should prove once again to all rational peeps (relax ... I'm not referring to you, Spammy) that the "Truther" Movement is just like the Bowel Movement ... flushable.

Also, note that getting the exact same result as a carefully planned and executed controlled demolition ( 3X ) is a good trick with fire and asymmetrical damage.

 

[SAYIT]

"WTC 1 & 2 were destroyed by the planes that slammed into them and the ensuing fire damage but claiming WTC 7 was felled by silent explosives that no one planted, that survived hours of raging fires in order to be triggered by some shadowy figure and which left no evidence? Yeah ... I'm the dope."

do try to think about the real scene, the alleged scene has WTC7 a raging inferno, when in fact less than a quarter of the floors were showing fire and that fire was most probably a bit of theater, that is fires that had been intentionally set up in advance to look like the whole floor was on fire however only the part near the windows was involved. The inside of the building were the cutter charges had been set, was still cool.
Also, note that getting the exact same result as a carefully planned and executed controlled demolition ( 3X ) is a good trick with fire and asymmetrical damage.
The alleged airliner strikes to WTC1 & 2 had to have been either missiles or something else, but NOT commercial airliners, it simply doesn't work, the idea that two hits from commercial airliners would produce gashes in the sides of WTC1 & 2 ( oh but we all saw it happen.... ) REALLY PEOPLE, were is the hard evidence? there isn't any!
Somebody produce PROOF that there was any airliner at ground zero.......(?)

"WTC 1 & 2 were destroyed by the planes that slammed into them and the ensuing fire damage but claiming WTC 7 was felled by silent explosives that no one planted, that survived hours of raging fires in order to be triggered by some shadowy figure and which left no evidence? Yeah ... I'm the dope."

do try to think about the real scene, the alleged scene has WTC7 a raging inferno, when in fact less than a quarter of the floors were showing fire and that fire was most probably a bit of theater, that is fires that had been intentionally set up in advance to look like the whole floor was on fire however only the part near the windows was involved. The inside of the building were the cutter charges had been set, was still cool.
Also, note that getting the exact same result as a carefully planned and executed controlled demolition ( 3X ) is a good trick with fire and asymmetrical damage.
The alleged airliner strikes to WTC1 & 2 had to have been either missiles or something else, but NOT commercial airliners, it simply doesn't work, the idea that two hits from commercial airliners would produce gashes in the sides of WTC1 & 2 ( oh but we all saw it happen.... ) REALLY PEOPLE, were is the hard evidence? there isn't any!
Somebody produce PROOF that there was any airliner at ground zero.......(?)

This looks like a missile to you, does it?

I don't see no stinkin' missile.

 

[Faun]

and so for "FLT11" or "FLT175" there was only bits of metal to be found, no flight recorders, no pieces of wing or tail, no documented inventory of bits to ascertain exactly how much of either aircraft could be found, only some nebulous "we found enough to be certain that it was the airliner" but what constitutes enough? Where is the documentation on this?

You didn't answer the question ... does this look like a "missile" to you?



And you see in that video where the wings, tail and the black box went. Where are they? You think they're easy to find after a million tons of debris collapsed on and around them? There's no shortage of videos and eyewitnesses to help any rational person understand what happened that day.

 

[n0spam4me]

"He will once again slither away, tail between legs, only to post the same silliness elsewhere or return here in a few months to again post it as though it has value."

Have you actually read the post explaining why free fall acceleration is indicative of an engineered event rather than the result of asymmetrical damage & fire.?

 

[SAYIT]

"WTC 1 & 2 were destroyed by the planes that slammed into them and the ensuing fire damage but claiming WTC 7 was felled by silent explosives that no one planted, that survived hours of raging fires in order to be triggered by some shadowy figure and which left no evidence? Yeah ... I'm the dope."

do try to think about the real scene, the alleged scene has WTC7 a raging inferno, when in fact less than a quarter of the floors were showing fire and that fire was most probably a bit of theater, that is fires that had been intentionally set up in advance to look like the whole floor was on fire however only the part near the windows was involved...

Before I waste my time reading the rest of your silliness, please post some proof of what you have said so far. Your failure to do should prove once again to all rational peeps (relax ... I'm not referring to you, Spammy) that the "Truther" Movement is just like the Bowel Movement ... flushable.

Also, note that getting the exact same result as a carefully planned and executed controlled demolition ( 3X ) is a good trick with fire and asymmetrical damage.

Please post any info you have on any 100 story buildings - other than the WTC - which have been felled by a controlled demo initiated from the upper middle floors after hours of "chaotic fires."
When the attack was viewed by the most experienced demo guys on the planet the thought occurred to one that they would be called upon to demo what was left after the fires. One admitted to having "no idea how" they were going to do it. As it turned out, they didn't have to worry about it but you would have us believe that GWB (or Cheney or Silverstein) and a troop of Girl Scouts wired those buildings on a long weekend.
Silliness ... just plain "Truther" silliness.

 

[Faun]

"WTC 1 & 2 were destroyed by the planes that slammed into them and the ensuing fire damage but claiming WTC 7 was felled by silent explosives that no one planted, that survived hours of raging fires in order to be triggered by some shadowy figure and which left no evidence? Yeah ... I'm the dope."

do try to think about the real scene, the alleged scene has WTC7 a raging inferno, when in fact less than a quarter of the floors were showing fire and that fire was most probably a bit of theater, that is fires that had been intentionally set up in advance to look like the whole floor was on fire however only the part near the windows was involved...

Before I waste my time reading the rest of your silliness, please post some proof of what you have said so far. Your failure to do should prove once again to all rational peeps (relax ... I'm not referring to you, Spammy) that the "Truther" Movement is just like the Bowel Movement ... flushable.

Also, note that getting the exact same result as a carefully planned and executed controlled demolition ( 3X ) is a good trick with fire and asymmetrical damage.

You're lying again. It was not the same result as a controlled demolition. A controlled demolition has loud explosions within seconds of a building coming down. WTC7 did not have that. A controlled demolition brings an entire building down. WTC7 came down in stages; first the interior of the structure collapsed and then the exterior came down. A controlled demolition is done on buildings not on fire. WTC7 was burning uncontrollably as sprinkler lines were severed and firefighters gave up trying to put the blaze out.

The only aspect of WTC7's collapse which shared commonality with a controlled demolition is that a building fell.

 

[SAYIT]

and so for "FLT11" or "FLT175" there was only bits of metal to be found, no flight recorders, no pieces of wing or tail, no documented inventory of bits to ascertain exactly how much of either aircraft could be found, only some nebulous "we found enough to be certain that it was the airliner" but what constitutes enough? Where is the documentation on this?

You didn't answer the question ... does this look like a "missile" to you?



And you see in that video where the wings, tail and the black box went. Where are they? You think they're easy to find after a million tons of debris collapsed on and around them? There's no shortage of videos and eyewitnesses to help any rational person understand what happened that day.

The words "rational" and "Truther" do not fit together in the same sentence. They are diametrically opposed.

 

[n0spam4me]

"And you see in that video where the wings, tail and the black box went. Where are they? You think they're easy to find after a million tons of debris collapsed on and around them? There's no shortage of videos and eyewitnesses to help any rational person understand what happened that day."

In the aftermath of 9/11/2001 - workers sorted through the rubble looking for human remains & personal items such as ID, ( etc.... ) and they found some watches and wallets and other things, so in the case of the sturdy metal boxes that the flight recorders had been, and sturdy metal boxes designed to survive a crash, why then not so much as an identifiable piece of a flight recorder found at ground zero, or in the sorted rubble that was not only checked at ground zero, but then gone over again at fresh-kills ......
The logical explanation is that the flight recorders were not there, because "FLT11" & "FLT175" didn't crash into the towers. The Hezikani video proves beyond any doubt that "FLT175" is bogus. There is something else going on here and speculating upon HOW it was done before we have a clear picture of what was done is futile.

 

[SAYIT]

"He will once again slither away, tail between legs, only to post the same silliness elsewhere or return here in a few months to again post it as though it has value."

Have you actually read the post explaining why free fall acceleration is indicative of an engineered event rather than the result of asymmetrical damage & fire.?

Have you read anything in this thread which renders all of your rationalizations moot?

 

[SAYIT]

"And you see in that video where the wings, tail and the black box went. Where are they? You think they're easy to find after a million tons of debris collapsed on and around them? There's no shortage of videos and eyewitnesses to help any rational person understand what happened that day."

In the aftermath of 9/11/2001 - workers sorted through the rubble looking for human remains & personal items such as ID, ( etc.... ) and they found some watches and wallets and other things, so in the case of the sturdy metal boxes that the flight recorders had been, and sturdy metal boxes designed to survive a crash, why then not so much as an identifiable piece of a flight recorder found at ground zero, or in the sorted rubble that was not only checked at ground zero, but then gone over again at fresh-kills ......
The logical explanation is that the flight recorders were not there, because "FLT11" & "FLT175" didn't crash into the towers. The Hezikani video proves beyond any doubt that "FLT175" is bogus. There is something else going on here and speculating upon HOW it was done before we have a clear picture of what was done is futile.

You have the fight to cover your eyes and ears and pretend your "Truther" silliness outweighs what actually happened (and I support your right) but the chances of you convincing any rational person of your fantasies are slim and none (and slim just left town). You are just pissing into the wind and getting wet.

 

[n0spam4me]

"He will once again slither away, tail between legs, only to post the same silliness elsewhere or return here in a few months to again post it as though it has value."

Have you actually read the post explaining why free fall acceleration is indicative of an engineered event rather than the result of asymmetrical damage & fire.?

Have you read anything in this thread which renders all of your rationalizations moot?

Quite frankly NO, there have been arguments that include bits like "WTC7 collapsed in silence" ..... etc.... and all sorts of totally undocumented and unsupported crap!
The fact that there were no flight recorders recovered from WTC1, or 2
the fact that for none of the 4 alleged hijacked airliners is there any accounting for the wreckage in the quantity of bits recovered or the validation of any of the bits as having been from the aircraft in question. I'm talking DOCUMENTATION here not a few random snap-shots. The problem here is that the difference between the scientific argument that WTC7 fell in the manner that it did because of a pre-planned Controlled Demolition rather than the result of asymmetrical damage & fire, the debate about how much fire was actually burning in WTC7 ..... and other bits are really an indication of the gulf between the "truther" faction and the people who insist on supporting the official fiasco.

Just the Hezikani video alone is a show-stopper for the argument that allegedly, hijacked airliners were used as weapons ..... NOT!

 

[Faun]

"And you see in that video where the wings, tail and the black box went. Where are they? You think they're easy to find after a million tons of debris collapsed on and around them? There's no shortage of videos and eyewitnesses to help any rational person understand what happened that day."

In the aftermath of 9/11/2001 - workers sorted through the rubble looking for human remains & personal items such as ID, ( etc.... ) and they found some watches and wallets and other things, so in the case of the sturdy metal boxes that the flight recorders had been, and sturdy metal boxes designed to survive a crash, why then not so much as an identifiable piece of a flight recorder found at ground zero, or in the sorted rubble that was not only checked at ground zero, but then gone over again at fresh-kills ......
The logical explanation is that the flight recorders were not there, because "FLT11" & "FLT175" didn't crash into the towers. The Hezikani video proves beyond any doubt that "FLT175" is bogus. There is something else going on here and speculating upon HOW it was done before we have a clear picture of what was done is futile.

Absence of evidence is not evidence. Again, a million tons of debris collapsed on and around them. As far as your claim of a "hezikani video" proving flight #175 is "bogus," do you have a link to that video? A Google search on it produced only one hit and there was no video.

 

[n0spam4me]

"the chances of you convincing any rational person of your fantasies are slim and none"

If this is what it means to be a RATIONAL person these days, then I want no part of it!
Thank U very much. The false flag of 9/11/2001 has been turned to yet another sick & twisted purpose, that is to negate common sense. so sad really.......

 

[n0spam4me]

Michael Hezarkhani Video CNN Best Angle - The WTC 2 Media Hoax

Sorry about misspelling the name the first time..... This and many other links
have INFORMATION about the totally fake "FLT175".

Ace Baker on YOUTUBE "THE KEY"

 

[SAYIT]

"the chances of you convincing any rational person of your fantasies are slim and none"

If this is what it means to be a RATIONAL person these days, then I want no part of it!
Thank U very much. The false flag of 9/11/2001 has been turned to yet another sick & twisted purpose, that is to negate common sense. so sad really.......

Of course you don't and, I would add, for obvious reasons. You, like Paulie and 9/11Shit4Brains, have an agenda (the Jooos did it) which drives you to reject out of hand anything and everything which dispels your twisted POV.

 

[n0spam4me]

"the chances of you convincing any rational person of your fantasies are slim and none"

If this is what it means to be a RATIONAL person these days, then I want no part of it!
Thank U very much. The false flag of 9/11/2001 has been turned to yet another sick & twisted purpose, that is to negate common sense. so sad really.......

Of course you don't and, I would add, for obvious reasons. You, like Paulie and 9/11Shit4Brains, have an agenda (the Jooos did it) which drives you to reject out of hand anything and everything which dispels your twisted POV.

When & where is the quote from me as in "the j0000z did it" REALLY people?
I am NOT speculating as to the actual identity of the perpetrators, getting clarification as to exactly WHAT happened comes before rounding up suspects!
also your use of "9/11Shit4Brains" shows gross bias and attitude. this is really not necessary here. are we not all grown-ups on this forum?

& who is "Paulie" Please define, I do not know ALL of the 9/11 pundits by nick-names.

 

[Faun]

Michael Hezarkhani Video CNN Best Angle - The WTC 2 Media Hoax

Sorry about misspelling the name the first time..... This and many other links
have INFORMATION about the totally fake "FLT175".

Ace Baker on YOUTUBE "THE KEY"

So it's a faker because the person who posted that on youtube couldn't exactly match the results with flight simulator??

As far as "the key," it's long so I'll watch it later after football.

 

[n0spam4me]

what fight simulator bit are you referring to? I thought we were talking about Video evidence of the alleged "FLT175"? The problem with all of this is that the commentary about how an airliner crashed into the WTC tower is not consistent with the video, the aircraft would have to defy the laws of physics to do what was shown in the video.

 

[Skylar]

"the chances of you convincing any rational person of your fantasies are slim and none"

If this is what it means to be a RATIONAL person these days, then I want no part of it!
Thank U very much. The false flag of 9/11/2001 has been turned to yet another sick & twisted purpose, that is to negate common sense. so sad really.......

You certainly don't burden yourself with rationality. Your theory has no physical evidence, is overwhelming contradicted by overlapping, utterly compelling evidence, and is based in you ignoring every picture, every quote, every video, every expert, every eye witness that contradicts you. And they are legion. If you were interested in the truth, you wouldn't ignore any evidence. In order to hold your beliefs, you have to ignore almost all of it.

Worse, your theory fails any test of logic. As you've imagined the most convoluted, wildly elaborate, fantastically complicated conspiracy that simply doesn't match the evidence. While ignoring explanations that are much simpler that match the evidence much better.

That's completely irrational. Your willful ignorance is irrational. Your elaborate fantasies are irrational. And both are void of logic.

No thank you.