False Flag Expert Debunks 911 Arab Myth

[DiveCon]

YouTube - 911 Explosive laden van 2-3 arrests

given the fact that the last two videos you posted have false titles to them, why should i give this one a watch?

 

[Paulie]

you telling me that diesel fuel wouldnt make that kind of smoke?
you forget that that building had several tanks for emergency genorators
a 60k gal one just for the city
also the structure had been severly damaged by the tower that fell into it
and the way it was built over the power sub station also contributed to it

You must not have read up on the most current consensus about building 7. NIST released a draft report about 7's collapse back in August of this year, and they claim neither diesel, nor collateral damage from the towers, was responsible. In fact, their conclusion seems pretty fucking ridiculous if you ask me:

7 World Trade Center - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

On August 21, 2008, NIST released its draft report on the causes of the collapse of 7 World Trade Center, beginning a period for public comments.[33] In its investigation, NIST utilized ANSYS to model events leading up to collapse initiation and LS-DYNA models to simulate the global response to the initiating events.[45] NIST determined that diesel fuel did not play an important role, nor did the structural damage from the collapse of the twin towers. But the lack of water to fight the fire was an important factor. The fires burned out of control during the afternoon, including on floor 13, where a critical interior column buckled. With the buckling of that column, adjacent columns also failed along with the floor structure above. This triggered a vertical progression of floor failures to the roof. The collapse then progressed east-to-west across the structure, and ultimately the entire structure collapsed. The fires, fueled by office contents, along with the lack of water, were the key reasons for the collapse

Office contents? A steel reinforced structure collapsed primarily because of fires from office contents? As someone who's completed firefighter training, I find that to be highly insulting of my intelligence.

I realize this is something that 9/11 truthers use constantly to back their claims, but in this case I have to say it makes a lot of sense. The steel reinforced building that burned up in a raging inferno in Madrid remained standing after it was all done and over with.

That's a REAL fire. Now you compare that to the pussy ass little "office contents" fires in building 7, which from the outside looks like it hardly holds a candle to the Windsor in Madrid, how are you not left wondering WTF?

How do you reconcile that? I can't, and that's why I question it.

 

[DiveCon]

#1) the parts of that building that were of similar construction to WTC7 DID totally collapse
#2) the fires you see on ONE SIDE of WTC7 were not the total picture, those fires only were showing because the mirrored glass was knocked out
you DONT see the fires where the glass was still intact
if you look at the other side you can see the building was FULLY engaged
as to the NIST saying the structural damage and Diesel fuel were not major factors, then i agree with you they are NUTS
because adding to what they called the major factor of NO WATER to fight the fire sure made it a lot bigger deal

 

[eots]

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XUkbLaFevyg&feature=related]YouTube - 9/11 NYPD FOUND EXPLOSIVE DEVICES - MSNBC[/ame]

 

[eots]

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FT-DqWYRh9s&feature=related]YouTube - US Marines Demand 911 Truth & Justice[/ame]

 

[Paulie]

#1) the parts of that building that were of similar construction to WTC7 DID totally collapse
#2) the fires you see on ONE SIDE of WTC7 were not the total picture, those fires only were showing because the mirrored glass was knocked out
you DONT see the fires where the glass was still intact
if you look at the other side you can see the building was FULLY engaged
as to the NIST saying the structural damage and Diesel fuel were not major factors, then i agree with you they are NUTS
because adding to what they called the major factor of NO WATER to fight the fire sure made it a lot bigger deal

Do you have pictures showing those fires? I haven't seen a pic of 7 yet that showed a fully engulfed building.

And what about the AA77 hijacker Hani Hanjour? His flight instructor said he could barely control a Cessna. How did he make such expert maneuvers in a commercial airliner, most notably managing to keep the plane completely above the ground by a matter of a few feet approaching impact, without so much as a scrape to the grass much less stalling the plane out?

I have to say dude, I just have a real hard time understanding that one. When you have seasoned military pilots questioning the possibility of that, it has to at least make you wonder.

 

[DiveCon]

#1) the parts of that building that were of similar construction to WTC7 DID totally collapse
#2) the fires you see on ONE SIDE of WTC7 were not the total picture, those fires only were showing because the mirrored glass was knocked out
you DONT see the fires where the glass was still intact
if you look at the other side you can see the building was FULLY engaged
as to the NIST saying the structural damage and Diesel fuel were not major factors, then i agree with you they are NUTS
because adding to what they called the major factor of NO WATER to fight the fire sure made it a lot bigger deal

Do you have pictures showing those fires? I haven't seen a pic of 7 yet that showed a fully engulfed building.

And what about the AA77 hijacker Hani Hanjour? His flight instructor said he could barely control a Cessna. How did he make such expert maneuvers in a commercial airliner, most notably managing to keep the plane completely above the ground by a matter of a few feet approaching impact, without so much as a scrape to the grass much less stalling the plane out?

I have to say dude, I just have a real hard time understanding that one. When you have seasoned military pilots questioning the possibility of that, it has to at least make you wonder.

i posted some videos and you claimed to have watched

 

[DiveCon]

YouTube - 9/11 NYPD FOUND EXPLOSIVE DEVICES - MSNBC

more lies
they found a "suspicious device" and that has already been debunked as an early false report
just like they ALWAYS have in the media when they dont know what the fuck they are talking about

 

[eots]

#1) the parts of that building that were of similar construction to WTC7 DID totally collapse
#2) the fires you see on ONE SIDE of WTC7 were not the total picture, those fires only were showing because the mirrored glass was knocked out
you DONT see the fires where the glass was still intact
if you look at the other side you can see the building was FULLY engaged
as to the NIST saying the structural damage and Diesel fuel were not major factors, then i agree with you they are NUTS
because adding to what they called the major factor of NO WATER to fight the fire sure made it a lot bigger deal

Do you have pictures showing those fires? I haven't seen a pic of 7 yet that showed a fully engulfed building.

And what about the AA77 hijacker Hani Hanjour? His flight instructor said he could barely control a Cessna. How did he make such expert maneuvers in a commercial airliner, most notably managing to keep the plane completely above the ground by a matter of a few feet approaching impact, without so much as a scrape to the grass much less stalling the plane out?

I have to say dude, I just have a real hard time understanding that one. When you have seasoned military pilots questioning the possibility of that, it has to at least make you wonder.

i postewd some videos and you claimed to have watched

don't pretend you posted pictures of wtc 7 engulfed in flames because no such thing exist

 

[eots]

YouTube - 9/11 NYPD FOUND EXPLOSIVE DEVICES - MSNBC

more lies
they found a "suspicious device" and that has already been debunked as an early false report
just like they ALWAYS have in the media when they dont know what the fuck they are talking about

you mean it was later covered up and ignored...

 

[DiveCon]

YouTube - 9/11 NYPD FOUND EXPLOSIVE DEVICES - MSNBC

more lies
they found a "suspicious device" and that has already been debunked as an early false report
just like they ALWAYS have in the media when they dont know what the fuck they are talking about

you mean it was later covered up and ignored...

ROFLMAO
yes, and the super dome was a killing field


just keep showing what a fucking moron you are

 

[DiveCon]

Do you have pictures showing those fires? I haven't seen a pic of 7 yet that showed a fully engulfed building.

And what about the AA77 hijacker Hani Hanjour? His flight instructor said he could barely control a Cessna. How did he make such expert maneuvers in a commercial airliner, most notably managing to keep the plane completely above the ground by a matter of a few feet approaching impact, without so much as a scrape to the grass much less stalling the plane out?

I have to say dude, I just have a real hard time understanding that one. When you have seasoned military pilots questioning the possibility of that, it has to at least make you wonder.

i postewd some videos and you claimed to have watched

don't pretend you posted pictures of wtc 7 engulfed in flames because no such thing exist

yes they do exist, i posted video of it

 

[Paulie]

#1) the parts of that building that were of similar construction to WTC7 DID totally collapse
#2) the fires you see on ONE SIDE of WTC7 were not the total picture, those fires only were showing because the mirrored glass was knocked out
you DONT see the fires where the glass was still intact
if you look at the other side you can see the building was FULLY engaged
as to the NIST saying the structural damage and Diesel fuel were not major factors, then i agree with you they are NUTS
because adding to what they called the major factor of NO WATER to fight the fire sure made it a lot bigger deal

Do you have pictures showing those fires? I haven't seen a pic of 7 yet that showed a fully engulfed building.

And what about the AA77 hijacker Hani Hanjour? His flight instructor said he could barely control a Cessna. How did he make such expert maneuvers in a commercial airliner, most notably managing to keep the plane completely above the ground by a matter of a few feet approaching impact, without so much as a scrape to the grass much less stalling the plane out?

I have to say dude, I just have a real hard time understanding that one. When you have seasoned military pilots questioning the possibility of that, it has to at least make you wonder.

i posted some videos and you claimed to have watched

I did watch them. All I saw was the same amount of fires located on a few floors, and huge plumes of dark smoke which indicate oxygen-starved fires that ultimately don't burn hot enough to weaken steel. I haven't seen anything even REMOTELY synonymous with what the fire in the Madrid building looked like. Not even CLOSE.

An explanation of "no water" is just not enough to convince me. Lack of sufficient oxygen is enough to quell belief that those office contents fires could somehow have burned hot enough to weaken steel so much that en entire building collapses completely.

Too many questions, DC. I don't just want whatever answer seems to put a conspiracy theory to rest. I want something that makes SENSE, and "office contents" and "no water" do not adequately explain that as far as I'm concerned. I'm always open for the scientific community's continued research on the subject though, of course.

 

[eots]

more lies
they found a "suspicious device" and that has already been debunked as an early false report
just like they ALWAYS have in the media when they dont know what the fuck they are talking about

you mean it was later covered up and ignored...

ROFLMAO
yes, and the super dome was a killing field


just keep showing what a fucking moron you are

...superdome..? ...you Can never deal with the issue or the statements made and have to resort to trying to imply your childish made up scenarios are in anyway relevant to anything

 

[DiveCon]

wow, you really are a moron


early reports dude, early reports
you are the one that cant deal with the issue

 

[eots]

wow, you really are a moron


early reports dude, early reports
you are the one that cant deal with the issue

but in this instance we can confirm through police statements and records the facts surrounding this event...if the files where still not deemed classified...the fact evidence was seized and arrest made are not in dispute by the authority's....

 

[DiveCon]

wow, you really are a moron


early reports dude, early reports
you are the one that cant deal with the issue

but in this instance we can confirm through police statements and records the facts surrounding this event...if the files where still not deemed classified...the fact evidence was seized and arrest made are not in dispute by the authority's....

really?
and the records of those arrests and the explosive device?
and please, not from a troofer site

 

[eots]

Israel arrest 911


[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JWpW...safe=off&q=men arrested on sept 11 911 confi

 

[DiveCon]

Israel arrest 911


[YouTube - Israel spies on the USA part 1

seen that report before
it doesnt say what you claim
LOL why am i NOT surprised

 

[Godboy]

really?
and the records of those arrests and the explosive device?
and please, not from a troofer site

I think it speaks volumes about eots state of mind and what he considers as reliable sources, when in response to the question above, he provides a link to a youtube video. I havent LoLed like that in a long time. Hilarious.

Over and over again he provides links to conspiracy web sites as if thats real proof. He doesnt get it. You can tell him that not everything on the web should be believed, but he wont truly grasp the concept. Certainly not when hes faced with information that backs any of his wacky beliefs. Any tib bit he finds that backs up his conspiracy claim is instantly elevated to FACT. There is no attempt by him to check the reliability of his sources.

Early in my message board career, i made the mistake of not checking on the reliability of MY sources and i found myself in a couple embarrassing situations. I learned from that mistake and ill be damned if it ever happens again. I wont provide links to ANYTHING, unless i know for a fact its legit. With eots, he doesnt seem deterred by pride in using reliable facts, he just doesnt care.