Indisputable proof and evidence of explosives used on 9/11

[LA RAM FAN]

What part do you not understand when I say I don't know what happened?

If you don't know what happened then why do you refer to the explanations as OCT and Bush Lies?

Sounds to me like you've made up your mind already. I don't see you vehemently debating the mistakes and crappy arguments of the other theories out there like you do the OCT.

Why is that?

I mean, you are trying to find the truth right? Why the bias? Why do you refer to something that you admit don't know what happened with terms like Bush Lies and OCT?

Where did I say "Bush Lies?" I don't remember using that term but I see you constantly attributing it to me in more than one thread. I refer to it as the OCT because that is exactly what it is. The bush admin's official explanation is 9E was a conspiracy committed by radical muslims. It is a theory because it has never been proven true as demonstrated by a huge array of experts, first responders, and many families of the victims.


Then you claim your assessment of how I spend my time discussing the issue is proof of bias? Lol. Look at my first responses in this thread where I posted videos of imploding buildings as evidence against the op claims. Who the fuck do you think you are to claim to know my mind based on your foggy ass observations? I don't need to debate every theory that's against the OCT and that is a waste of time that only impedes seeking the most reliable information.

 

[LA RAM FAN]

There are thousands of experts in a wide array of fields that doubt the OCT

experts doubting the story are NOT evidence.

show any evidence at all the the OCT is not correct.

If experts who doubt the OCT is not evidence it is incorrect then by that same logic experts who claim it is true is not evidence it is correct. Since we can't reference experts how do you suggest one investigates?


The OCT claims bin laden was responsible yet he has never been charged with anything regarding that day. When evidence of his guilt was requested the Bush admin flat out refused to provide any. That is evidence the OCT is not fully correct. Somehow I don't think you care and will try to make up some lame excuse to justify it. Where in the CR (9E commission's report) is WTC 7 addressed? Have you ever read Griffin's list of 100? Did you ever explain why the oral testimonies were kept locked up by New York? (that was a great example of how OCTAs change their standards out of convenience.

How did that go again? Oh yeah, you claimed, as evidence to the absence of explosives, that you watched videos and didn't hear anything that sounded like explosives going off. So I responded by pointing to personal testimonies of first responders showing they heard those very specific explosions. What was your response? BAM! Suddenly people hearing explosions didn't mean anything. See how that works? When you personally don't hear explosions on some random video you cite it as evidence the OCT is true but when people who were....ummmmm....actually freaking there state they heard those explosions it suddenly does not matter. OCTAs
do this ALL THE TIME.

of course he doesnt care,none of these disinformation agents that have posted here care,just the paycheck they are paid to post bullshit and lies. thats hysterical in his logic that experts opinions dont matter. the things these agents come up with. yep doesnt matter what EXPERTS in their fields of expertise say such as first responders,architects,engineers,demolition experts,firemen,military personel, only what the government funded popular mechanics ,the corporate controlle NOVA series and the corporate controlled media says. they kill me with their logic.

 

[CurveLight]

Excuse me, look at my previous posts Debunking every single Conspiracy.

How is my "Camp" Superior? well.. how do I start this off.. Look above.

Forgive me. Makes perfect sense your camp is superior since you made the declaration. Who can argue with what you say is true?

You still don't get the fact that i debunked what you and your buddy's keep talking about..

When i've kept repeating myself and all you and your buddy's could do was call me and idiot and a moron and that i'm some lying scum bag who is brainwashed by the Government and MSM.

I could care less if all you call me Idiots, me and many others know you can't provide the Real Facts to prove all your conspiracy's. If you look at how I debunked your points i used Videos that Excelntly showed how it was impossible for Explosives to have been there, it showed how the Steel snapped and that's what caused the fall of the tower.. Tell me oh, wise one.. if there was such things as bombs planted why didn't they go off when the Boeing crashed into WTC 1-2? Why when the towers were falling you couldn't hear any noise of a Explosion going off? Or even see the Flashes that explosions cause? And when shown footage of other buildings being Demo'd you could clearly see and hear the Explosion..

oh right.. you can't. Simple.

Look on the first or second page you arrogant fuck. I posted videos of known implosions and used that as evidence the op claim about explosives being used lacks evidence. If you can't follow a simple thread how the hell can you examine anything about 9E? I've never claimed explosives were used to bring the buildings down. Your face is about to turn so red from embarrassment Mars will look like the moon.

 

[Tom Clancy]

Forgive me. Makes perfect sense your camp is superior since you made the declaration. Who can argue with what you say is true?

You still don't get the fact that i debunked what you and your buddy's keep talking about..

When i've kept repeating myself and all you and your buddy's could do was call me and idiot and a moron and that i'm some lying scum bag who is brainwashed by the Government and MSM.

I could care less if all you call me Idiots, me and many others know you can't provide the Real Facts to prove all your conspiracy's. If you look at how I debunked your points i used Videos that Excelntly showed how it was impossible for Explosives to have been there, it showed how the Steel snapped and that's what caused the fall of the tower.. Tell me oh, wise one.. if there was such things as bombs planted why didn't they go off when the Boeing crashed into WTC 1-2? Why when the towers were falling you couldn't hear any noise of a Explosion going off? Or even see the Flashes that explosions cause? And when shown footage of other buildings being Demo'd you could clearly see and hear the Explosion..

oh right.. you can't. Simple.

Look on the first or second page you arrogant fuck. I posted videos of known implosions and used that as evidence the op claim about explosives being used lacks evidence. If you can't follow a simple thread how the hell can you examine anything about 9E? I've never claimed explosives were used to bring the buildings down. Your face is about to turn so red from embarrassment Mars will look like the moon.

Umm. My post was directed to every conspirator in this Forum/Thread.

I haven't seen you posting or even talking to me since yesterday, so no, i didn't see your post.

 

[CurveLight]

You still don't get the fact that i debunked what you and your buddy's keep talking about..

When i've kept repeating myself and all you and your buddy's could do was call me and idiot and a moron and that i'm some lying scum bag who is brainwashed by the Government and MSM.

I could care less if all you call me Idiots, me and many others know you can't provide the Real Facts to prove all your conspiracy's. If you look at how I debunked your points i used Videos that Excelntly showed how it was impossible for Explosives to have been there, it showed how the Steel snapped and that's what caused the fall of the tower.. Tell me oh, wise one.. if there was such things as bombs planted why didn't they go off when the Boeing crashed into WTC 1-2? Why when the towers were falling you couldn't hear any noise of a Explosion going off? Or even see the Flashes that explosions cause? And when shown footage of other buildings being Demo'd you could clearly see and hear the Explosion..

oh right.. you can't. Simple.

Look on the first or second page you arrogant fuck. I posted videos of known implosions and used that as evidence the op claim about explosives being used lacks evidence. If you can't follow a simple thread how the hell can you examine anything about 9E? I've never claimed explosives were used to bring the buildings down. Your face is about to turn so red from embarrassment Mars will look like the moon.

Umm. My post was directed to every conspirator in this Forum/Thread.

I haven't seen you posting or even talking to me since yesterday, so no, i didn't see your post.

You quoted me then even personally addressed me but now you want to pretend you didn't fuck up? OCTA to the core.

 

[Tom Clancy]

Look on the first or second page you arrogant fuck. I posted videos of known implosions and used that as evidence the op claim about explosives being used lacks evidence. If you can't follow a simple thread how the hell can you examine anything about 9E? I've never claimed explosives were used to bring the buildings down. Your face is about to turn so red from embarrassment Mars will look like the moon.

Umm. My post was directed to every conspirator in this Forum/Thread.

I haven't seen you posting or even talking to me since yesterday, so no, i didn't see your post.

You quoted me then even personally addressed me but now you want to pretend you didn't fuck up? OCTA to the core.

Read it again.. The first 2 Sentences was directed at you.. The rest well was directed at everyone else.

But enough, obviously it was a mistake to include it there.

 

[C-101]

What is very odd about WTC 7 is it took about 7 YEARS to explain how it came down.

Exactly......why did it take them 7 YEARS to explain the building collapses?

That is because they had to figure out how to re-write physics.

Even a Physicist that worked for NASA for almost 30yrs said:... "seeing the huge pyroclastic cloud of pulverized concrete dust and the massive structural members being hurled horizontally leaves no doubt in my mind the World Trade Center buildings were brought down by explosives."

Seven Senior Engineers say NIST Reprort re-writes physics:
Seven Senior Federal Engineers and Scientists Call for New 9-11 Investigation

Here is a simple comprehensive example that depicts how the NIST investigation went when Bush appointed his personal friend to head the NIST Report and collapse investigation.

The Administration specifically instructed him to NOT look at the possibility in explosives in the collapses....even though there are countless witnesses live on the news who heard many explosions.

Unless you believe that somehow charges were magically placed and exploded without notice at the impact site of the plane, this photo shows the amazing phenomenon of "pancaking". One floor fails, they all fail collapsing on top of each other.

The lean of the collapsing tower makes it clear that yes, debris can fall at an angle and hit WTC7 despite your irrefutable cartoon.

But wait, there's more! Explosives would inevitably mean free fall acceleration, right?

Shock and awe, the debris outpaces the collapse of the tower and the supposed demolition defies physics.

 

[Christophera]

Unless you believe that somehow charges were magically placed and exploded without notice at the impact site of the plane

Consider that the pilots had target elevations, and what appears as failures did not happen where perimeter shear walls were severed by planes.

Consider 61% of the shear of the north wall of WTC 1 was destroyed by flght 11, but the top of WTC 1 fell south.

Impossible.

 

[Fizz]

Consider that the pilots had target elevations

proof please.

 

[creativedreams]

What is very odd about WTC 7 is it took about 7 YEARS to explain how it came down.

Exactly......why did it take them 7 YEARS to explain the building collapses?

That is because they had to figure out how to re-write physics.

Even a Physicist that worked for NASA for almost 30yrs said:... "seeing the huge pyroclastic cloud of pulverized concrete dust and the massive structural members being hurled horizontally leaves no doubt in my mind the World Trade Center buildings were brought down by explosives."

Seven Senior Engineers say NIST Reprort re-writes physics:
Seven Senior Federal Engineers and Scientists Call for New 9-11 Investigation

Here is a simple comprehensive example that depicts how the NIST investigation went when Bush appointed his personal friend to head the NIST Report and collapse investigation.

The Administration specifically instructed him to NOT look at the possibility in explosives in the collapses....even though there are countless witnesses live on the news who heard many explosions.

Unless you believe that somehow charges were magically placed and exploded without notice at the impact site of the plane, this photo shows the amazing phenomenon of "pancaking". One floor fails, they all fail collapsing on top of each other.

The lean of the collapsing tower makes it clear that yes, debris can fall at an angle and hit WTC7 despite your irrefutable cartoon.

But wait, there's more! Explosives would inevitably mean free fall acceleration, right?

Shock and awe, the debris outpaces the collapse of the tower and the supposed demolition defies physics.

Your own picture is more proof of explosives. Look at how one side of the top is still up ......but there is a symmetrical explosion COMPLETELY around the perimeter!

A German Defense Minister has recently said he believes 9/11 was orchestrated from Building 7 on the floor that they just spent millions to uprade for a command post for Rudy.

From that vantage point an hour could have been taken to determine exactly where impact was for each tower and where to start the detonating sequence.

Everyone is caught up with wires for explosives but it doesn't take a mental giant to see the possibilities with todays wireless technology...

All I know is that there is NO WAY the THREE buildings fell like that without explosives.

Not sure how it connects but BOTH planes hit EACH Tower in the ONLY area that had the fireproofing upgrades. Yet another amazing coincidence that is insignificant.....right?

 

[Christophera]

There are thousands of experts in a wide array of fields that doubt the OCT

experts doubting the story are NOT evidence.

show any evidence at all the the OCT is not correct.

Evidence,

http://www.usmessageboard.com/1791653-post2675.html

More evidence,

http://video.google.com/videoplay?d...l=1&start=0&num=10&so=0&type=search&plindex=0

Testimony,

http://algoxy.com/psych/images/discussion_in_firehouse.mpg

 

[Fizz]

Evidence,

http://www.usmessageboard.com/1791653-post2675.html

fucking classic!!!

the guy posts to one of his own message board postings as evidence.

 

[CurveLight]

Evidence,

http://www.usmessageboard.com/1791653-post2675.html

fucking classic!!!

the guy posts to one of his own message board postings as evidence.

No. What's classic is he posted three links and you totally chose to ignore two of them. Classic OCTA style.

 

[Fizz]

No. What's classic is he posted three links and you totally chose to ignore two of them. Classic OCTA style.

everything is a huge conspiracy, right?

for your info, i am using my cell phone at the moment and dont wish to watch videos on it right now. (probably couldnt hear it even if i did).

when i get back on a laptop perhaps i will look at the other two video links (perhaps not) and see if he is presenting anything new or just regurgitating that same old wacko stuff that was already debunked.

 

[CurveLight]

No. What's classic is he posted three links and you totally chose to ignore two of them. Classic OCTA style.

everything is a huge conspiracy, right?

for your info, i am using my cell phone at the moment and dont wish to watch videos on it right now. (probably couldnt hear it even if i did).

when i get back on a laptop perhaps i will look at the other two video links (perhaps not) and see if he is presenting anything new or just regurgitating that same old wacko stuff that was already debunked.

Not a conspiracy, as I was simply pointing out a pattern. What does it matter if he linked his own post? What matters is the info within the post. Try showing why the info in his post is wrong instead of whining that he linked his own post.

 

[SFC Ollie]

So when did they have time to lay the explosives in the offices? Truthers are as dumb as birthers.

Why don't you read through the threads a little more before you spew your ignorant bullshit like the others here....READ THIS...

Tom Leppert the CEO for Turner Construction which did many months of construction renovation work on the World Trade Center buildings up to the very day of 9/11 went on to be appointed by George Bush to the President's Commission on White House Fellows.
Turner Construction Company
[url=http://georgewbush-whitehouse.archives.gov/fellows/about/commission.html]White House Fellowships: Commission Members[/URL]

Turner Construction worked hand and hand with Controlled Demolition Inc(CDI) on many demolition projects.

Look at the website for Controlled Demolition Inc and it states right in there that part of their work includes "classified" work for the U.S. Department of Defense on sensitive projects both domestically and internationally.
Controlled Demolition, Inc. | Government

Turner Construction Company AND Controlled Demolition Inc BOTH helped performed clean-up at ground zero in which all the steel (evidence) got shipped overseas mostly to China, except for a few hand picked pieces to be sent to NIST for inspection and for part of a memorial ship.

Turner Construction had a main office located in the third sub-basement of Tower 1. Turner Construction had been performing construction renovation work in various parts throughout the WTC centers and had occupied various office spaces.

A WTC property assessment described some of the renovations as work upon steel support columns within and around elevator shafts of both WTC Towers.

Turner Construction also constructed the new headquarters for the Naval Sea Systems Command (NAVSEA) which manages a laboratory for energetics, explosive materials, propellents, etc and the only reliable source of aluminum nano-powders(nano-thermite) in the United States.
http://manganaro.com/projbovt.html

Pure speculation. Not one bit of admissible evidence of any crimes.

 

[SFC Ollie]

Hi Mr. Fizz:

Hi Mr. Fizz cool with Gam cool, Ollie cool and Chris cool mentioned:

... can someone please explain to me how explosive demolitions can cause a building to lean even before they are set off?

Yes (#3). Will I? No. Why? That is easy: Only two kinds of people believe modern-day skyscrapers can collapse CD-style (my WTC-7 CD Topic) ...

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=73qK4j32iuo"] ... Like This ...[/ame]

... from 'building fires:'

1. Loyal Bushie/Obama DUPES confused:).
2. DoD Handlers/Operatives/Assets cool: = How To Spot These Govt Stooges).

All of my 911Truth posts (sampling of my work) are drafted for the benefit of unbiased third-party readers, so they can formulate 'informed' conclusions.

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cD6ibU8DaFw"]Compilation WTC Explosive Reports Demolition[/ame]

However, my job is NOT to pander to the likes of DoD Govt Cover Story Stooges (How To Spot) like you. I can show you video after video after video of WTC and Pentagon "EXPLOSIONS" ...

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WefPzgxvfS4"]Explosions At The Pentagon[/ame]

... but how many times does the plural term "EXPLOSIONS" appear in the 911Commission Report 'and' the Arlington County After-Action Report (#10)????? The answer is ZERO!!!!! Perhaps Mr. DoD Counterintelligence/Disinformation Operative would like to explain HOW the Govt provided more than A THOUSAND PAGES of Officially SWORN testimony concerning these 9/11 INSIDE-JOB Attacks 'WITHOUT' using the term "EXPLOSIONS" even one time????!!!! No. You will never provide any answer, because you cool are here to push the Official Cover Story LIES down the throats of these readers no matter what anyone says. Right??? Of course ...

Mr. Fizz and Gam and Ollie and Chris need to start 'your' Topics explaining the EMPTY HOLE outside Shanksville (my Topic) and the EMPTY HOLE in the E-Ring Pentagon Wall (my Topic) without all of the STUPID questions ...

GL,

Terral

Just continue to run your yapper cool: = ) without offering any reply to WHY the word 'explosions' was sanitized by the Govt from the 911Commission Report and the Arlington County After-Action Report (#10). Mr. Fizz is deliberately running away from the 911Truth like any typical under-trained DoD Disinformation Op.

I suppose we are to believe that these Govt Documents were corrupted by a band of these guys ...

Try sending your handler a memo . . .

GL,

Terral

Because there were no explosions to talk about. That was easy.

 

[SFC Ollie]

I've seen some people dismiss explosions by saying there are many things in offices that would explode. Surely it would have to be pretty amazing for typical office equipment to explode loud enough to be heard over all the other chaos. But the main oversight is not recognizing these testimonies are not speaking of explosions strictly in the impact area of the towers. These were witnessed several to 40 stories below the plane crash. How can that be explained?

i think most people are describing a building collapse in the best terms they have. what does a 110 story building falling down sound like? a football game? a freight train (closer, but not really), an explosion??

watch and listen to this. where are the explosions?
[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FOGI33HsiCc[/ame]

watch the corner of the building buckle with NO EXPLOSIONS.
[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NBYnUyx4kw8[/ame]

this is what REAL building demolitions sound like. do you hear any similarity at all?
[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=79sJ1bMR6VQ[/ame]

Did you offer an explanation why those testimonies were kept locked up?

Your dismissal of these testimonies as being of those who are describing a building falling overlooks a couple of things. The first is you claimed the absence of audible explosions support the claim no dem packs were used. Here it is provided first hand accounts of those audible explosions and somehow they don't matter? The second is these are survivors. That means they were able to get away fast enough to survive the collapses. By video we know how long it took for the towers to come down. How many seconds did that give for people to reach a safe zone? That means your explanation they were only hearing the towers come down is suspect. Also look closer at the testimonies...these are professionals who are aware of explosions and gave great detail. It's not like Aunt Mae from Accounting confusing it for a movie soundbite.

No one is doubting that anyone reported that they heard what to them sounded like explosions. But where are those explosions on any of the hundreds of audio and video tapes from that fateful morning? Why don't these explosives show up on audio?

 

[CurveLight]

i think most people are describing a building collapse in the best terms they have. what does a 110 story building falling down sound like? a football game? a freight train (closer, but not really), an explosion??

watch and listen to this. where are the explosions?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FOGI33HsiCc

watch the corner of the building buckle with NO EXPLOSIONS.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NBYnUyx4kw8

this is what REAL building demolitions sound like. do you hear any similarity at all?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=79sJ1bMR6VQ

Did you offer an explanation why those testimonies were kept locked up?

Your dismissal of these testimonies as being of those who are describing a building falling overlooks a couple of things. The first is you claimed the absence of audible explosions support the claim no dem packs were used. Here it is provided first hand accounts of those audible explosions and somehow they don't matter? The second is these are survivors. That means they were able to get away fast enough to survive the collapses. By video we know how long it took for the towers to come down. How many seconds did that give for people to reach a safe zone? That means your explanation they were only hearing the towers come down is suspect. Also look closer at the testimonies...these are professionals who are aware of explosions and gave great detail. It's not like Aunt Mae from Accounting confusing it for a movie soundbite.

No one is doubting that anyone reported that they heard what to them sounded like explosions. But where are those explosions on any of the hundreds of audio and video tapes from that fateful morning? Why don't these explosives show up on audio?

That's quite a claim. I look forward to clicking the link(s) supporting it. I've no doubt most OCTAs
have not examined the testimonies and still not a single person can explain why these were kept hidden and why Americans had to fight a long legal battle to get them released. They don't simply say they "heard explosions." It's a bit more detailed.


Since the State of New York was able to keep hundreds of testimonies under lock and key for years what makes you believe you have heard all of the audio? Seen all the video? Didn't the FBI confiscate over 80 video tapes from the Pentagon area? It can't be from the CR because they omitted about everything they could in order to support the Bush Admin's OCT. Plus there is a little punch list here of misinformation in the CR:

The 9/11 Commission Report: A 571-Page Lie


Do I need to post info directly from firefighters? Like those who walked out of the 9/11 Commission because they were not even allowed to state what they witnessed? Naw, it won't matter. OCTAs once again prove their hypocrisy knows no boundaries. Ollie, I believe you were one person who cited eyewitness testimony as evidence flight 77, something moving at 500 + mph, was sufficient in help proving the OCT is true. Amazing! In one case of eyewitness testimony (wtc towers) their words are only mistakes and they did not see or heard what they claimed, but in another case (flt 77) eyewitness testimony is sufficient for supporting evidence. How do you guys not curdle every time your bullshit double standards are exposed?

 

[SFC Ollie]

Did you offer an explanation why those testimonies were kept locked up?

Your dismissal of these testimonies as being of those who are describing a building falling overlooks a couple of things. The first is you claimed the absence of audible explosions support the claim no dem packs were used. Here it is provided first hand accounts of those audible explosions and somehow they don't matter? The second is these are survivors. That means they were able to get away fast enough to survive the collapses. By video we know how long it took for the towers to come down. How many seconds did that give for people to reach a safe zone? That means your explanation they were only hearing the towers come down is suspect. Also look closer at the testimonies...these are professionals who are aware of explosions and gave great detail. It's not like Aunt Mae from Accounting confusing it for a movie soundbite.

No one is doubting that anyone reported that they heard what to them sounded like explosions. But where are those explosions on any of the hundreds of audio and video tapes from that fateful morning? Why don't these explosives show up on audio?

That's quite a claim. I look forward to clicking the link(s) supporting it. I've no doubt most OCTAs
have not examined the testimonies and still not a single person can explain why these were kept hidden and why Americans had to fight a long legal battle to get them released. They don't simply say they "heard explosions." It's a bit more detailed.


Since the State of New York was able to keep hundreds of testimonies under lock and key for years what makes you believe you have heard all of the audio? Seen all the video? Didn't the FBI confiscate over 80 video tapes from the Pentagon area? It can't be from the CR because they omitted about everything they could in order to support the Bush Admin's OCT. Plus there is a little punch list here of misinformation in the CR:

The 9/11 Commission Report: A 571-Page Lie


Do I need to post info directly from firefighters? Like those who walked out of the 9/11 Commission because they were not even allowed to state what they witnessed? Naw, it won't matter. OCTAs once again prove their hypocrisy knows no boundaries. Ollie, I believe you were one person who cited eyewitness testimony as evidence flight 77, something moving at 500 + mph, was sufficient in help proving the OCT is true. Amazing! In one case of eyewitness testimony (wtc towers) their words are only mistakes and they did not see or heard what they claimed, but in another case (flt 77) eyewitness testimony is sufficient for supporting evidence. How do you guys not curdle every time your bullshit double standards are exposed?

What was the mission of the 911 commissions report? Was it to find out why the buildings fell or who attacked us and why? Do not confuse the two. And your link to David Ray Griffin's advertisement for his book simply proves that you are indeed a conspiracy nut job like the others here. I've read some of this mans statements and they have been debunked many times.

Did you know that David smith is a sculptor?
He is also a Professor at the University of California.
And he is on the Board of Directors for ITW.
David Smith works for NASA.
David Smith is the Guardian's Africa correspondent.
He is also a Doctor, Lawyer, Mechanic, Dentist, Truck Driver, Police Officer, Fireman, Marine Sergeant, Army Officer.....ETC ETC ETC......

That takes care of the claims of Mr Griffins that some of the terrorists are reportedly still alive.


I have no doubts the people heard explosions or what to them were explosions, But they did not hear demolition explosions, As a few claimed, Very few claimed. And none of these demolition explosions are on any of the Audio. Even the personal audio.....