16 parralle similarities between the 9/11 and covid ops hoax.

[Soupnazi630]

the thing that I find incredible is there are at least two idiot morons at this site,one of them being a former mod,that can accept it that covid is a hoax but they cant accept the official story of 9/11 is complete bs either even after all this time and all the excellent threads out there in this section that have exposed it

• THE STORY:
  There are numerous striking 9/11 COVID similarities, ranging from before the operation/event happened (foreknowledge) to how it was covered up afterwards.

9/11 COVID Similarities: Glaring Parallels Between the 2 Ops

Take a close look at the 9/11 COVID similarities; there are glaring parallels between these 2 operations of ritualistic trauma.

thefreedomarticles.com

You mean those pathetic threads which have been massively debunked and disproven

Still waiting for you to debunk anything, dipshit. I hate to inform ya but the ol "U-uhh?!?!?!?!? tactic doesn't debunk or disprove a thing.....

Dismissed.

That is a lie.

All of the 911 conspieracy threads havebeen massively debunked by irrefutable evidence.

LARAM has been massively pwned repeatedly

Talk to him with his constant denial of fact and constant whining about shills.

 

[johngaltshrugged]

Personally, I never put much stock in the 9/11 conspiracy stuff for a number of reasons.
#1- No way could an operation that intricate get carried out without us finding & Murphys Law taking effect.
#2- The main idea a jet fuel fire won't compromise steel completely ignores the other sources of fuel packed into the buildings. Wood, paper, fabrics, plastics, oxygen, etc... would increase the heat tremendously.

Evidence and facts mean nothing to you?- but, let's keep it simple- ALL office material is and was "fire retardant", except paper, which means it would melt, not burn- all real wood products would be minimal to be in compliance with building/fire code ordinances- it would make white smoke at best- most of the smoke was black which is an oil based fire- jet fuel is oil based-
Jet fuel burns at approximately 425 deg fahrenheit- the steel beams supporting the structures had 5 inch thick flanges- at approximately 425 degrees the time it would require to weaken 5 inch thick flanged steel beams would be days, at best, of (now this is important) *continued* temperature sustained- initial ignition of the fuel is due to contacting *hot* engines- ignition temp is more than sustained temp and immediate- sustained temp is far less and decreases with fuel burned away- ignition burns away a lot of fuel *immediately* - 3 bldgs collapsed in near identical fashion at near free fall speed into their own foot print= UNPRECEDENTED in structure *failure* and happens only with "controlled demolition" - on the scene fire fighters heard "explosions"- torch like steams of molten steel were visible coming from the twin towers, which lends credence to thermite use- there were pictures of perfectly sliced beams in the rubble- ignition of nor sustained temp of jet fuel will slice steel- jet fuel will not turn 5 inch thick flanged steel molten under any circumstances it just doen't burn hot enough- only 2 were hit by airplanes- oxygen goes away at ignition and is replaced with fresh oxygen- fuel burned is gone- up in smoke, literally-

The office furniture etc would make white smoke, not black-

there is an abundance of information available IF one wants to educate themselves- it's at the finger tips and knowledge is not biased in it's origin- all counter points to the "official lies" are easily verifiable-

World Trade Center Building 7 Demolished on 9/11?

action.ae911truth.org

"Facts are stubborn things; and whatever may be our wishes, our inclinations, or the dictates of our passion, they cannot alter the state of facts and evidence."~ John Adams

Dude, if you think all those plastics in those offices, copy machines, computers, staplers, desk & work stations, chairs, wiring coatings, etc..., weren't burning with heavy black smoke you have never been around big fires. Not to mention all the carpeting, fabrics & other flammable materials in every office.
Look, you're entitled to your opinion. I have no problem with that but I reserve the right as well. I haven't seen anything that would lead me to change my position.
Claims the impact and fires resulting from 2 fuel loaded airliners hitting a building full of combustible material can't get hot enough to compromise the structural integrity of the building framing is not credible as far as I am concerned.

 

[Soupnazi630]

Personally, I never put much stock in the 9/11 conspiracy stuff for a number of reasons.
#1- No way could an operation that intricate get carried out without us finding & Murphys Law taking effect.
#2- The main idea a jet fuel fire won't compromise steel completely ignores the other sources of fuel packed into the buildings. Wood, paper, fabrics, plastics, oxygen, etc... would increase the heat tremendously.

Evidence and facts mean nothing to you?- but, let's keep it simple- ALL office material is and was "fire retardant", except paper, which means it would melt, not burn- all real wood products would be minimal to be in compliance with building/fire code ordinances- it would make white smoke at best- most of the smoke was black which is an oil based fire- jet fuel is oil based-
Jet fuel burns at approximately 425 deg fahrenheit- the steel beams supporting the structures had 5 inch thick flanges- at approximately 425 degrees the time it would require to weaken 5 inch thick flanged steel beams would be days, at best, of (now this is important) *continued* temperature sustained- initial ignition of the fuel is due to contacting *hot* engines- ignition temp is more than sustained temp and immediate- sustained temp is far less and decreases with fuel burned away- ignition burns away a lot of fuel *immediately* - 3 bldgs collapsed in near identical fashion at near free fall speed into their own foot print= UNPRECEDENTED in structure *failure* and happens only with "controlled demolition" - on the scene fire fighters heard "explosions"- torch like steams of molten steel were visible coming from the twin towers, which lends credence to thermite use- there were pictures of perfectly sliced beams in the rubble- ignition of nor sustained temp of jet fuel will slice steel- jet fuel will not turn 5 inch thick flanged steel molten under any circumstances it just doen't burn hot enough- only 2 were hit by airplanes- oxygen goes away at ignition and is replaced with fresh oxygen- fuel burned is gone- up in smoke, literally-

The office furniture etc would make white smoke, not black-

there is an abundance of information available IF one wants to educate themselves- it's at the finger tips and knowledge is not biased in it's origin- all counter points to the "official lies" are easily verifiable-

World Trade Center Building 7 Demolished on 9/11?

action.ae911truth.org

"Facts are stubborn things; and whatever may be our wishes, our inclinations, or the dictates of our passion, they cannot alter the state of facts and evidence."~ John Adams

Dude, if you think all those plastics in those offices, copy machines, computers, staplers, desk & work stations, chairs, wiring coatings, etc..., weren't burning with heavy black smoke you have never been around big fires. Not to mention all the carpeting, fabrics & other flammable materials in every office.
Look, you're entitled to your opinion. I have no problem with that but I reserve the right as well. I haven't seen anything that would lead me to change my position.
Claims the impact and fires resulting from 2 fuel loaded airliners hitting a building full of combustible material can't get hot enough to compromise the structural integrity of the building framing is not credible as far as I am concerned.

Probably a waste of time. SInce 9/12/2001 conspiracy kooks have ignored such facts. They donw play the significance of the MASSIVE amounts of flammables which added to the fire and the heat it generated. They ignore the closets and maintenance facilities filled with combustables and even equipment such as welding gear. The towers and buildings nearby had huge amounts of things which would burn at a very high temperature or explode. Which is why so many claimed they heard explosions. Explosions are normal in a building fire.

There is no evidence of controlled demo period and there never has been.

 

[candycorn]

parralle
....is that a new form of pasta?

 

[LA RAM FAN]

Why not include 11/22? ...

Meh ... part and parcel of the Old World Order ... John Wilkes Booth had help too ...

Very good point on 11/22,we had a chance to be a free country again back then with the chance of having the people control the government as they are suppose to as the constitution states and that would be the case today had he lived instead of all these corporations controlling it as they do,all that hope of getting back to the constitution of the United States all changed and the world changed for the worse starting on 11/22,1963.

I notice one of langleys shills hated this truthful post.lol

 

[LA RAM FAN]

Personally, I never put much stock in the 9/11 conspiracy stuff for a number of reasons.
#1- No way could an operation that intricate get carried out without us finding & Murphys Law taking effect.
#2- The main idea a jet fuel fire won't compromise steel completely ignores the other sources of fuel packed into the buildings. Wood, paper, fabrics, plastics, oxygen, etc... would increase the heat tremendously.

Evidence and facts mean nothing to you?- but, let's keep it simple- ALL office material is and was "fire retardant", except paper, which means it would melt, not burn- all real wood products would be minimal to be in compliance with building/fire code ordinances- it would make white smoke at best- most of the smoke was black which is an oil based fire- jet fuel is oil based-
Jet fuel burns at approximately 425 deg fahrenheit- the steel beams supporting the structures had 5 inch thick flanges- at approximately 425 degrees the time it would require to weaken 5 inch thick flanged steel beams would be days, at best, of (now this is important) *continued* temperature sustained- initial ignition of the fuel is due to contacting *hot* engines- ignition temp is more than sustained temp and immediate- sustained temp is far less and decreases with fuel burned away- ignition burns away a lot of fuel *immediately* - 3 bldgs collapsed in near identical fashion at near free fall speed into their own foot print= UNPRECEDENTED in structure *failure* and happens only with "controlled demolition" - on the scene fire fighters heard "explosions"- torch like steams of molten steel were visible coming from the twin towers, which lends credence to thermite use- there were pictures of perfectly sliced beams in the rubble- ignition of nor sustained temp of jet fuel will slice steel- jet fuel will not turn 5 inch thick flanged steel molten under any circumstances it just doen't burn hot enough- only 2 were hit by airplanes- oxygen goes away at ignition and is replaced with fresh oxygen- fuel burned is gone- up in smoke, literally-

The office furniture etc would make white smoke, not black-

there is an abundance of information available IF one wants to educate themselves- it's at the finger tips and knowledge is not biased in it's origin- all counter points to the "official lies" are easily verifiable-

World Trade Center Building 7 Demolished on 9/11?

action.ae911truth.org

"Facts are stubborn things; and whatever may be our wishes, our inclinations, or the dictates of our passion, they cannot alter the state of facts and evidence."~ John Adams

Dude, if you think all those plastics in those offices, copy machines, computers, staplers, desk & work stations, chairs, wiring coatings, etc..., weren't burning with heavy black smoke you have never been around big fires. Not to mention all the carpeting, fabrics & other flammable materials in every office.
Look, you're entitled to your opinion. I have no problem with that but I reserve the right as well. I haven't seen anything that would lead me to change my position.
Claims the impact and fires resulting from 2 fuel loaded airliners hitting a building full of combustible material can't get hot enough to compromise the structural integrity of the building framing is not credible as far as I am concerned.

Your warped opinion does not measure up to the facts.many witnesses including epfirefughters experienced in the sound of explosives heard explosions going on,those firefighters were insulted by the conclusions of the investigation and rightly so calling the investigation a half baked farce,plus one demolition expert came out and said thst it was a controlled demolition and guess what,shortly after that he died,same with some other witnesses who died shortly afterwards when giving their testimony’s,to deny reality any further after this,you are just going to have egg all over your face.

 

[ReinyDays]

The first question we must ask of any conspiracy is who gained the most? ...

It certainly wasn't the Rich ... we paid through our noses for that ... Saudi terrorists did very well, we invaded Iraq for them ... sold them $108 billion worth of military equipment ... economic embargo on Iran ... I'd say it was the Saudis who gained the most ... ISIS did it, clear and plain ...

 

[Soupnazi630]

Personally, I never put much stock in the 9/11 conspiracy stuff for a number of reasons.
#1- No way could an operation that intricate get carried out without us finding & Murphys Law taking effect.
#2- The main idea a jet fuel fire won't compromise steel completely ignores the other sources of fuel packed into the buildings. Wood, paper, fabrics, plastics, oxygen, etc... would increase the heat tremendously.

Evidence and facts mean nothing to you?- but, let's keep it simple- ALL office material is and was "fire retardant", except paper, which means it would melt, not burn- all real wood products would be minimal to be in compliance with building/fire code ordinances- it would make white smoke at best- most of the smoke was black which is an oil based fire- jet fuel is oil based-
Jet fuel burns at approximately 425 deg fahrenheit- the steel beams supporting the structures had 5 inch thick flanges- at approximately 425 degrees the time it would require to weaken 5 inch thick flanged steel beams would be days, at best, of (now this is important) *continued* temperature sustained- initial ignition of the fuel is due to contacting *hot* engines- ignition temp is more than sustained temp and immediate- sustained temp is far less and decreases with fuel burned away- ignition burns away a lot of fuel *immediately* - 3 bldgs collapsed in near identical fashion at near free fall speed into their own foot print= UNPRECEDENTED in structure *failure* and happens only with "controlled demolition" - on the scene fire fighters heard "explosions"- torch like steams of molten steel were visible coming from the twin towers, which lends credence to thermite use- there were pictures of perfectly sliced beams in the rubble- ignition of nor sustained temp of jet fuel will slice steel- jet fuel will not turn 5 inch thick flanged steel molten under any circumstances it just doen't burn hot enough- only 2 were hit by airplanes- oxygen goes away at ignition and is replaced with fresh oxygen- fuel burned is gone- up in smoke, literally-

The office furniture etc would make white smoke, not black-

there is an abundance of information available IF one wants to educate themselves- it's at the finger tips and knowledge is not biased in it's origin- all counter points to the "official lies" are easily verifiable-

World Trade Center Building 7 Demolished on 9/11?

action.ae911truth.org

"Facts are stubborn things; and whatever may be our wishes, our inclinations, or the dictates of our passion, they cannot alter the state of facts and evidence."~ John Adams

Dude, if you think all those plastics in those offices, copy machines, computers, staplers, desk & work stations, chairs, wiring coatings, etc..., weren't burning with heavy black smoke you have never been around big fires. Not to mention all the carpeting, fabrics & other flammable materials in every office.
Look, you're entitled to your opinion. I have no problem with that but I reserve the right as well. I haven't seen anything that would lead me to change my position.
Claims the impact and fires resulting from 2 fuel loaded airliners hitting a building full of combustible material can't get hot enough to compromise the structural integrity of the building framing is not credible as far as I am concerned.

Your warped opinion does not measure up to the facts.many witnesses including epfirefughters experienced in the sound of explosives heard explosions going on,those firefighters were insulted by the conclusions of the investigation and rightly so calling the investigation a half baked farce,plus one demolition expert came out and said thst it was a controlled demolition and guess what,shortly after that he died,same with some other witnesses who died shortly afterwards when giving their testimony’s,to deny reality any further after this,you are just going to have egg all over your face.

Explosions are typical in all fires especially in large office buildings witrh massive combustables on every floor.
No they were not insulted the firefighters overwhelmingly know the investigation was correct and view you, and ogthers like you, with contempt.

No expert in controlled demo said that crap. There is no evidence of controlled demo

try some new lies

 

[LA RAM FAN]

Another CIA shill has penetrated and farted in my thread Posting just a second ago right after reiny days

 

[LA RAM FAN]

the thing that I find incredible is there are at least two idiot morons at this site,one of them being a former mod,that can accept it that covid is a hoax but they cant accept the official story of 9/11 is complete bs either even after all this time and all the excellent threads out there in this section that have exposed it

• THE STORY:
  There are numerous striking 9/11 COVID similarities, ranging from before the operation/event happened (foreknowledge) to how it was covered up afterwards.

9/11 COVID Similarities: Glaring Parallels Between the 2 Ops

Take a close look at the 9/11 COVID similarities; there are glaring parallels between these 2 operations of ritualistic trauma.

thefreedomarticles.com

You mean those pathetic threads which have been massively debunked and disproven

Still waiting for you to debunk anything, dipshit. I hate to inform ya but the ol "U-uhh?!?!?!?!? tactic doesn't debunk or disprove a thing.....

Dismissed.

He gets desperate year after year trying to get me to read his propaganda and babble.

 

[Soupnazi630]

the thing that I find incredible is there are at least two idiot morons at this site,one of them being a former mod,that can accept it that covid is a hoax but they cant accept the official story of 9/11 is complete bs either even after all this time and all the excellent threads out there in this section that have exposed it

• THE STORY:
  There are numerous striking 9/11 COVID similarities, ranging from before the operation/event happened (foreknowledge) to how it was covered up afterwards.

9/11 COVID Similarities: Glaring Parallels Between the 2 Ops

Take a close look at the 9/11 COVID similarities; there are glaring parallels between these 2 operations of ritualistic trauma.

thefreedomarticles.com

You mean those pathetic threads which have been massively debunked and disproven

Still waiting for you to debunk anything, dipshit. I hate to inform ya but the ol "U-uhh?!?!?!?!? tactic doesn't debunk or disprove a thing.....

Dismissed.

He gets desperate year after year trying to get me to read his propaganda and babble.

You do read it. Then run from it

 

[LA RAM FAN]

Personally, I never put much stock in the 9/11 conspiracy stuff for a number of reasons.
#1- No way could an operation that intricate get carried out without us finding & Murphys Law taking effect.
#2- The main idea a jet fuel fire won't compromise steel completely ignores the other sources of fuel packed into the buildings. Wood, paper, fabrics, plastics, oxygen, etc... would increase the heat tremendously.

Evidence and facts mean nothing to you?- but, let's keep it simple- ALL office material is and was "fire retardant", except paper, which means it would melt, not burn- all real wood products would be minimal to be in compliance with building/fire code ordinances- it would make white smoke at best- most of the smoke was black which is an oil based fire- jet fuel is oil based-
Jet fuel burns at approximately 425 deg fahrenheit- the steel beams supporting the structures had 5 inch thick flanges- at approximately 425 degrees the time it would require to weaken 5 inch thick flanged steel beams would be days, at best, of (now this is important) *continued* temperature sustained- initial ignition of the fuel is due to contacting *hot* engines- ignition temp is more than sustained temp and immediate- sustained temp is far less and decreases with fuel burned away- ignition burns away a lot of fuel *immediately* - 3 bldgs collapsed in near identical fashion at near free fall speed into their own foot print= UNPRECEDENTED in structure *failure* and happens only with "controlled demolition" - on the scene fire fighters heard "explosions"- torch like steams of molten steel were visible coming from the twin towers, which lends credence to thermite use- there were pictures of perfectly sliced beams in the rubble- ignition of nor sustained temp of jet fuel will slice steel- jet fuel will not turn 5 inch thick flanged steel molten under any circumstances it just doen't burn hot enough- only 2 were hit by airplanes- oxygen goes away at ignition and is replaced with fresh oxygen- fuel burned is gone- up in smoke, literally-

The office furniture etc would make white smoke, not black-

there is an abundance of information available IF one wants to educate themselves- it's at the finger tips and knowledge is not biased in it's origin- all counter points to the "official lies" are easily verifiable-

World Trade Center Building 7 Demolished on 9/11?

action.ae911truth.org

"Facts are stubborn things; and whatever may be our wishes, our inclinations, or the dictates of our passion, they cannot alter the state of facts and evidence."~ John Adams

Man you did an even better job than Even I did of taking him to school checkmating him that explosives brought the towers down with that John adams link. I checkmated him. But you did it ten times even better than I did it,people like him who buy into the fairy tale of the governments that jet fuel caused the collapse of the towers,are clueless about bld 7, it is the crux of the 9/11 coverup commission and Langley shills candyass and soupnazi boy,can only sling shit in defeat in their desperate lies like the monkey trolls they are

 

[Dale Smith]

Personally, I never put much stock in the 9/11 conspiracy stuff for a number of reasons.
#1- No way could an operation that intricate get carried out without us finding & Murphys Law taking effect.
#2- The main idea a jet fuel fire won't compromise steel completely ignores the other sources of fuel packed into the buildings. Wood, paper, fabrics, plastics, oxygen, etc... would increase the heat tremendously.

Evidence and facts mean nothing to you?- but, let's keep it simple- ALL office material is and was "fire retardant", except paper, which means it would melt, not burn- all real wood products would be minimal to be in compliance with building/fire code ordinances- it would make white smoke at best- most of the smoke was black which is an oil based fire- jet fuel is oil based-
Jet fuel burns at approximately 425 deg fahrenheit- the steel beams supporting the structures had 5 inch thick flanges- at approximately 425 degrees the time it would require to weaken 5 inch thick flanged steel beams would be days, at best, of (now this is important) *continued* temperature sustained- initial ignition of the fuel is due to contacting *hot* engines- ignition temp is more than sustained temp and immediate- sustained temp is far less and decreases with fuel burned away- ignition burns away a lot of fuel *immediately* - 3 bldgs collapsed in near identical fashion at near free fall speed into their own foot print= UNPRECEDENTED in structure *failure* and happens only with "controlled demolition" - on the scene fire fighters heard "explosions"- torch like steams of molten steel were visible coming from the twin towers, which lends credence to thermite use- there were pictures of perfectly sliced beams in the rubble- ignition of nor sustained temp of jet fuel will slice steel- jet fuel will not turn 5 inch thick flanged steel molten under any circumstances it just doen't burn hot enough- only 2 were hit by airplanes- oxygen goes away at ignition and is replaced with fresh oxygen- fuel burned is gone- up in smoke, literally-

The office furniture etc would make white smoke, not black-

there is an abundance of information available IF one wants to educate themselves- it's at the finger tips and knowledge is not biased in it's origin- all counter points to the "official lies" are easily verifiable-

World Trade Center Building 7 Demolished on 9/11?

action.ae911truth.org

"Facts are stubborn things; and whatever may be our wishes, our inclinations, or the dictates of our passion, they cannot alter the state of facts and evidence."~ John Adams

Man you did an even better job than Even I did of taking him to school checkmating him that explosives brought the towers down with that John adams link. I checkmated him. But you did it ten times even better than I did it,people like him who buy into the fairy tale of the governments that jet fuel caused the collapse of the towers,are clueless about bld 7, it is the crux of the 9/11 coverup commission and Langley shills candyass and soupnazi boy,can only sling shit in defeat in their desperate lies like the monkey trolls they are

I sincerely doubt that the Souper Douche is a real person but rather an A.I bot created to disrupt discussions. This entity is robotic like when responding and has no punctuation skills. We know what we know and I don't need "validation" from government paid gas-lighters. I have gotten waaaaay past when it comes to reaffirmation. I come to my own conclusions.

 

[Soupnazi630]

Personally, I never put much stock in the 9/11 conspiracy stuff for a number of reasons.
#1- No way could an operation that intricate get carried out without us finding & Murphys Law taking effect.
#2- The main idea a jet fuel fire won't compromise steel completely ignores the other sources of fuel packed into the buildings. Wood, paper, fabrics, plastics, oxygen, etc... would increase the heat tremendously.

Evidence and facts mean nothing to you?- but, let's keep it simple- ALL office material is and was "fire retardant", except paper, which means it would melt, not burn- all real wood products would be minimal to be in compliance with building/fire code ordinances- it would make white smoke at best- most of the smoke was black which is an oil based fire- jet fuel is oil based-
Jet fuel burns at approximately 425 deg fahrenheit- the steel beams supporting the structures had 5 inch thick flanges- at approximately 425 degrees the time it would require to weaken 5 inch thick flanged steel beams would be days, at best, of (now this is important) *continued* temperature sustained- initial ignition of the fuel is due to contacting *hot* engines- ignition temp is more than sustained temp and immediate- sustained temp is far less and decreases with fuel burned away- ignition burns away a lot of fuel *immediately* - 3 bldgs collapsed in near identical fashion at near free fall speed into their own foot print= UNPRECEDENTED in structure *failure* and happens only with "controlled demolition" - on the scene fire fighters heard "explosions"- torch like steams of molten steel were visible coming from the twin towers, which lends credence to thermite use- there were pictures of perfectly sliced beams in the rubble- ignition of nor sustained temp of jet fuel will slice steel- jet fuel will not turn 5 inch thick flanged steel molten under any circumstances it just doen't burn hot enough- only 2 were hit by airplanes- oxygen goes away at ignition and is replaced with fresh oxygen- fuel burned is gone- up in smoke, literally-

The office furniture etc would make white smoke, not black-

there is an abundance of information available IF one wants to educate themselves- it's at the finger tips and knowledge is not biased in it's origin- all counter points to the "official lies" are easily verifiable-

World Trade Center Building 7 Demolished on 9/11?

action.ae911truth.org

"Facts are stubborn things; and whatever may be our wishes, our inclinations, or the dictates of our passion, they cannot alter the state of facts and evidence."~ John Adams

Man you did an even better job than Even I did of taking him to school checkmating him that explosives brought the towers down with that John adams link. I checkmated him. But you did it ten times even better than I did it,people like him who buy into the fairy tale of the governments that jet fuel caused the collapse of the towers,are clueless about bld 7, it is the crux of the 9/11 coverup commission and Langley shills candyass and soupnazi boy,can only sling shit in defeat in their desperate lies like the monkey trolls they are

The government never claim ed.Her fuel caused the collapse.

As.usually you have been owned and are in denial

 

[Soupnazi630]

Personally, I never put much stock in the 9/11 conspiracy stuff for a number of reasons.
#1- No way could an operation that intricate get carried out without us finding & Murphys Law taking effect.
#2- The main idea a jet fuel fire won't compromise steel completely ignores the other sources of fuel packed into the buildings. Wood, paper, fabrics, plastics, oxygen, etc... would increase the heat tremendously.

Evidence and facts mean nothing to you?- but, let's keep it simple- ALL office material is and was "fire retardant", except paper, which means it would melt, not burn- all real wood products would be minimal to be in compliance with building/fire code ordinances- it would make white smoke at best- most of the smoke was black which is an oil based fire- jet fuel is oil based-
Jet fuel burns at approximately 425 deg fahrenheit- the steel beams supporting the structures had 5 inch thick flanges- at approximately 425 degrees the time it would require to weaken 5 inch thick flanged steel beams would be days, at best, of (now this is important) *continued* temperature sustained- initial ignition of the fuel is due to contacting *hot* engines- ignition temp is more than sustained temp and immediate- sustained temp is far less and decreases with fuel burned away- ignition burns away a lot of fuel *immediately* - 3 bldgs collapsed in near identical fashion at near free fall speed into their own foot print= UNPRECEDENTED in structure *failure* and happens only with "controlled demolition" - on the scene fire fighters heard "explosions"- torch like steams of molten steel were visible coming from the twin towers, which lends credence to thermite use- there were pictures of perfectly sliced beams in the rubble- ignition of nor sustained temp of jet fuel will slice steel- jet fuel will not turn 5 inch thick flanged steel molten under any circumstances it just doen't burn hot enough- only 2 were hit by airplanes- oxygen goes away at ignition and is replaced with fresh oxygen- fuel burned is gone- up in smoke, literally-

The office furniture etc would make white smoke, not black-

there is an abundance of information available IF one wants to educate themselves- it's at the finger tips and knowledge is not biased in it's origin- all counter points to the "official lies" are easily verifiable-

World Trade Center Building 7 Demolished on 9/11?

action.ae911truth.org

"Facts are stubborn things; and whatever may be our wishes, our inclinations, or the dictates of our passion, they cannot alter the state of facts and evidence."~ John Adams

Man you did an even better job than Even I did of taking him to school checkmating him that explosives brought the towers down with that John adams link. I checkmated him. But you did it ten times even better than I did it,people like him who buy into the fairy tale of the governments that jet fuel caused the collapse of the towers,are clueless about bld 7, it is the crux of the 9/11 coverup commission and Langley shills candyass and soupnazi boy,can only sling shit in defeat in their desperate lies like the monkey trolls they are

I sincerely doubt that the Souper Douche is a real person but rather an A.I bot created to disrupt discussions. This entity is robotic like when responding and has no punctuation skills. We know what we know and I don't need "validation" from government paid gas-lighters. I have gotten waaaaay past when it comes to reaffirmation. I come to my own conclusions.

Not sure who you are referring to

but in fact you do not know any thing

You and laram have been crushed owned and proven wrong every time and You know this is true

 

[Gdjjr]

Explosions are typical in all fires especially in large office buildings witrh massive combustables on every floor.
No they were not insulted the firefighters overwhelmingly know the investigation was correct and view you, and ogthers like you, with contempt.

No expert in controlled demo said that crap. There is no evidence of controlled demo

No- they are typical IF and when fire reaches electrical boards- MOST EVERYTHING in an office bldg HAS to meet fire code-i.e., be flame retardant- I would strongly suggest you educate yourself- whatever education you have is failing you- big time-

 

[Gdjjr]

The government never claim ed.Her fuel caused the collapse.

As.usually you have been owned and are in denial

I don't like picking on he weak and small- I'll leave you to your own devices with a bit of advice- there is, literally, a world of knowledge at your finger tips-

 

[LA RAM FAN]

Personally, I never put much stock in the 9/11 conspiracy stuff for a number of reasons.
#1- No way could an operation that intricate get carried out without us finding & Murphys Law taking effect.
#2- The main idea a jet fuel fire won't compromise steel completely ignores the other sources of fuel packed into the buildings. Wood, paper, fabrics, plastics, oxygen, etc... would increase the heat tremendously.

Evidence and facts mean nothing to you?- but, let's keep it simple- ALL office material is and was "fire retardant", except paper, which means it would melt, not burn- all real wood products would be minimal to be in compliance with building/fire code ordinances- it would make white smoke at best- most of the smoke was black which is an oil based fire- jet fuel is oil based-
Jet fuel burns at approximately 425 deg fahrenheit- the steel beams supporting the structures had 5 inch thick flanges- at approximately 425 degrees the time it would require to weaken 5 inch thick flanged steel beams would be days, at best, of (now this is important) *continued* temperature sustained- initial ignition of the fuel is due to contacting *hot* engines- ignition temp is more than sustained temp and immediate- sustained temp is far less and decreases with fuel burned away- ignition burns away a lot of fuel *immediately* - 3 bldgs collapsed in near identical fashion at near free fall speed into their own foot print= UNPRECEDENTED in structure *failure* and happens only with "controlled demolition" - on the scene fire fighters heard "explosions"- torch like steams of molten steel were visible coming from the twin towers, which lends credence to thermite use- there were pictures of perfectly sliced beams in the rubble- ignition of nor sustained temp of jet fuel will slice steel- jet fuel will not turn 5 inch thick flanged steel molten under any circumstances it just doen't burn hot enough- only 2 were hit by airplanes- oxygen goes away at ignition and is replaced with fresh oxygen- fuel burned is gone- up in smoke, literally-

The office furniture etc would make white smoke, not black-

there is an abundance of information available IF one wants to educate themselves- it's at the finger tips and knowledge is not biased in it's origin- all counter points to the "official lies" are easily verifiable-

World Trade Center Building 7 Demolished on 9/11?

action.ae911truth.org

"Facts are stubborn things; and whatever may be our wishes, our inclinations, or the dictates of our passion, they cannot alter the state of facts and evidence."~ John Adams

Man you did an even better job than Even I did of taking him to school checkmating him that explosives brought the towers down with that John adams link. I checkmated him. But you did it ten times even better than I did it,people like him who buy into the fairy tale of the governments that jet fuel caused the collapse of the towers,are clueless about bld 7, it is the crux of the 9/11 coverup commission and Langley shills candyass and soupnazi boy,can only sling shit in defeat in their desperate lies like the monkey trolls they are

I sincerely doubt that the Souper Douche is a real person but rather an A.I bot created to disrupt discussions. This entity is robotic like when responding and has no punctuation skills. We know what we know and I don't need "validation" from government paid gas-lighters. I have gotten waaaaay past when it comes to reaffirmation. I come to my own conclusions.

I think you are onto something there,makes sense. Especially considering that it’s been proven IT never reads the evidence of what you post the fact many times I have noticed over the years that the I bot posts within seconds after you make a thread with a post that’s long with many paragraphs,proof IT never reads posts so yeah I think you are onto something that this is an I bot considering like you said,the punctuation skills.

 

[LA RAM FAN]

The government never claim ed.Her fuel caused the collapse.

As.usually you have been owned and are in denial

I don't like picking on he weak and small- I'll leave you to your own devices with a bit of advice- there is, literally, a world of knowledge at your finger tips-

It’s best to ignore IT. Like the old saying goes

That could not possibly be anymore true in this case the fact you are just giving it the attention it seeks unless of course dale is right that it’s an I bot which would make it even more wise not to reply.

 

[LA RAM FAN]

The first question we must ask of any conspiracy is who gained the most? ...

It certainly wasn't the Rich ... we paid through our noses for that ... Saudi terrorists did very well, we invaded Iraq for them ... sold them $108 billion worth of military equipment ... economic embargo on Iran ... I'd say it was the Saudis who gained the most ... ISIS did it, clear and plain ...

I’m not sure on Covid but with 9/11 it follows the same pattern of the jfk assassination that there were several put options made in the prior days to the event,the fact those people were not even investigated proves what a joke of an investigation both cases were.