9-11 anniversary

[SFC Ollie]

The individual NIST conclusions could be erroneous to some degree in one respect or another (or in many).

Fabrications actually.

BS, Many chances since 1993 that would have given assess for such "work".


Total BS, and denial on your part.

You're a pussy and and don't want to see the very real evidence and proof that the OCT and the NIST explanations for the collapses are BS.

Every word scumbags like you post underscores what vermin you and all Twoofers are.

You are the scumbag that would rather go along with absurd explanations and highly improbable theories, that have been shown to be as such in many instances of the 9-11 OCT, instead of standing up for your country and demanding the truth when the lies have been exposed.

You are a disgrace, and a coward and resort to your "safety mode" mechanism in your feeble little brain, rather then be a man and face the facts that are presented by credible people in many fields of expertise that destroy the OCT and the NIST BS. You instead deny this and get angry about it cause you refuse to face the real world.

Drop dead you useless POS coward. You are a disgrace for an American citizen.

And yet still not an ounce of credible physical evidence of any explosives......

 

[Mr. Jones]

Fabrications actually.

BS, Many chances since 1993 that would have given assess for such "work".


Total BS, and denial on your part.

You're a pussy and and don't want to see the very real evidence and proof that the OCT and the NIST explanations for the collapses are BS.

You are the scumbag that would rather go along with absurd explanations and highly improbable theories, that have been shown to be as such in many instances of the 9-11 OCT, instead of standing up for your country and demanding the truth when the lies have been exposed.

You are a disgrace, and a coward and resort to your "safety mode" mechanism in your feeble little brain, rather then be a man and face the facts that are presented by credible people in many fields of expertise that destroy the OCT and the NIST BS. You instead deny this and get angry about it cause you refuse to face the real world.

Drop dead you useless POS coward. You are a disgrace for an American citizen.

And yet still not an ounce of credible physical evidence of any explosives......

Explosive Residues: Energetic Materials and the World Trade Center Destruction

 

[SFC Ollie]

And yet still not an ounce of credible physical evidence of any explosives......

Explosive Residues: Energetic Materials and the World Trade Center Destruction

I did say credible didn't I? Have you really read this article? And you believe this crap?

Explosives designed as part of normal building materials so even the installers wouldn't know? Really?

 

[Mr. Jones]

Explosive Residues: Energetic Materials and the World Trade Center Destruction

I did say credible didn't I? Have you really read this article? And you believe this crap?

Explosives designed as part of normal building materials so even the installers wouldn't know? Really?

1-Why are these men NOT credible?
2-WTF are you talking about "normal building materials "?

 

[SFC Ollie]

I did say credible didn't I? Have you really read this article? And you believe this crap?

Explosives designed as part of normal building materials so even the installers wouldn't know? Really?

1-Why are these men NOT credible?
2-WTF are you talking about "normal building materials "?

I knew it. You fucks don't even read your own links...............

How Could the Demolition Equipment Have Been Installed in the Twin Towers Without Tenants Noticing?

The simple answer is by disguising the equipment as normal building components, so that not even the workers installing the components are aware of the concealed pyrotechnics

 

[Mr. Jones]

1-Why are these men NOT credible?
2-WTF are you talking about "normal building materials "?

I knew it. You fucks don't even read your own links...............

How Could the Demolition Equipment Have Been Installed in the Twin Towers Without Tenants Noticing?

The simple answer is by disguising the equipment as normal building components, so that not even the workers installing the components are aware of the concealed pyrotechnics

OF course, but my question was more as to what are YOU interpreting, as in what was found in the dust compared to normal building materials. Not how it supposedly got there. Let's back up ...
You claimed there was no evidence of explosives, you are wrong, there is.
You also question the credibility, or lack there of ...why?

 

[daws101]

And yet still not an ounce of credible physical evidence of any explosives......

Explosive Residues: Energetic Materials and the World Trade Center Destruction

911 research....

 

[daws101]

Fahrenheit 2777
9/11 has generated the mother of all conspiracy theories

By Michael Shermer | May 23, 2005 | Noted French left-wing activist Thierry Meyssan 's 9/11 conspiracy book, L'Effroyable Imposture, became a best-seller in 2002. But I never imagined such an "appalling deception" would ever find a voice in America. At a recent public lecture I was buttonholed by a Michael Moore�wannabe filmmaker who breathlessly explained that 9/11 was orchestrated by Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld and the Central Intelligence Agency as part of their plan for global domination and a New World Order. That goal was to be financed by G.O.D. (Gold, Oil, Drugs) and launched by a Pearl Harbor�like attack on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon, thereby providing the justification for war. The evidence was there in the details, he explained, handing me a faux dollar bill (with "9-11" replacing the "1," a picture of Bush supplanting that of Washington) chockablock with Web sites.

In fact, if you type "World Trade Center" and "conspiracy" into Google, you'll get more than 250,000 hits. From these sites, you will discover that some people think the Pentagon was hit by a missile; that U.S. Air Force jets were ordered to "stand down" and not intercept Flights 11 and 175, the ones that struck the twin towers; that the towers themselves were razed by demolition explosives timed to go off soon after the impact of the planes; that a mysterious white jet shot down Flight 93 over Pennsylvania; and that New York Jews were ordered to stay home that day (Zionists and other pro-Israeli factions, of course, were involved). Books also abound, including Inside Job, by Jim Marrs ; The New Pearl Harbor , by David Ray Griffin ; and 9/11: The Great Illusion, by George Humphrey. The single best debunking of this conspiratorial codswallop is in the March issue of Popular Mechanics, which provides an exhaustive point-by-point analysis of the most prevalent claims.

The mistaken belief that a handful of unexplained anomalies can undermine a well-established theory lies at the heart of all conspiratorial thinking (as well as creationism, Holocaust denial and the various crank theories of physics). All the "evidence" for a 9/11 conspiracy falls under the rubric of this fallacy. Such notions are easily refuted by noting that scientific theories are not built on single facts alone but on a convergence of evidence assembled from multiple lines of inquiry.



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
No melted steel, no collapsed towers.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

For example, according to 9-11 Research: An Independent Investigation of the 9-11-2001 Attack, steel melts at a temperature of 2,777 degrees Fahrenheit, but jet fuel burns at only 1,517 degrees F. No melted steel, no collapsed towers. "The planes did not bring those towers down; bombs did," says AboveTopSecret.com - Conspiracy Theories, UFOs, Paranormal, Political Madness, and other "Alternative Topics". Wrong. In an article in the Journal of the Minerals, Metals, and Materials Society and in subsequent interviews, Thomas Eagar, an engineering professor at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, explains why: steel loses 50 percent of its strength at 1,200 degrees F; 90,000 liters of jet fuel ignited other combustible materials such as rugs, curtains, furniture and paper, which continued burning after the jet fuel was exhausted, raising temperatures above 1,400 degrees F and spreading the inferno throughout each building. Temperature differentials of hundreds of degrees across single steel horizontal trusses caused them to sag--straining and then breaking the angle clips that held the beams to the vertical columns. Once one truss failed, others followed. When one floor collapsed onto the next floor below, that floor subsequently gave way, creating a pancaking effect that triggered each 500,000-ton structure to crumble. Conspiricists argue that the buildings should have fallen over on their sides, but with 95 percent of each building consisting of air, they could only have collapsed straight down.

All the 9/11 conspiracy claims are this easily refuted. On the Pentagon "missile strike," for example, I queried the would-be filmmaker about what happened to Flight 77 , which disappeared at the same time. "The plane was destroyed, and the passengers were murdered by Bush operatives," he solemnly revealed. "Do you mean to tell me that not one of the thousands of conspirators needed to pull all this off," I retorted, "is a whistle-blower who would go on TV or write a tell-all book?" My rejoinder was met with the same grim response I get from UFOlogists when I ask them for concrete evidence: Men in Black silence witnesses, and dead men tell no tales.

 

[SFC Ollie]

I knew it. You fucks don't even read your own links...............

OF course, but my question was more as to what are YOU interpreting, as in what was found in the dust compared to normal building materials. Not how it supposedly got there. Let's back up ...
You claimed there was no evidence of explosives, you are wrong, there is.
You also question the credibility, or lack there of ...why?

It's pretty simple really, read what your sources say. The amount of explosives that it would have taken to get their so called results. Then compare that with everything we know as fact about that day. It simply didn't happen. There were no explosions from explosives, there were no cut beams. There was no preparation cuts done to weaken the buildings. The planes didn't disrupt the explosives that weren't there......

In other words, common sense.

 

[daws101]

OF course, but my question was more as to what are YOU interpreting, as in what was found in the dust compared to normal building materials. Not how it supposedly got there. Let's back up ...
You claimed there was no evidence of explosives, you are wrong, there is.
You also question the credibility, or lack there of ...why?

It's pretty simple really, read what your sources say. The amount of explosives that it would have taken to get their so called results. Then compare that with everything we know as fact about that day. It simply didn't happen. There were no explosions from explosives, there were no cut beams. There was no preparation cuts done to weaken the buildings. The planes didn't disrupt the explosives that weren't there......

In other words, common sense.

have you noticed that common sense is not common?

 

[Obamerican]

hey mister dense...I know this is a tough concept for you ,so I'll make it as simple as I can..any opinion, extrapolation,of ANY 911 truth based organization is erroneous ,as it is based on a false and unprovable premise..
any study, report or opinion based on that premise is by definition false.

but but but

what about the YouTube videos?

I didn't post any UTube videos, I posted scientific studies that counter and point out the flaws in the NIST report and official theory of building collapse, and all you idiots do is avoid responding in any intelligent manner, showing off what fucking losers you are again

And you responded to the new theory of why the towers collapsed by posting the same bullshit you always post? What are you? A sock of Eots? BTW, you seem to support Rimjob too.

 

[Mr. Jones]

but but but

what about the YouTube videos?

I didn't post any UTube videos, I posted scientific studies that counter and point out the flaws in the NIST report and official theory of building collapse, and all you idiots do is avoid responding in any intelligent manner, showing off what fucking losers you are again

And you responded to the new theory of why the towers collapsed by posting the same bullshit you always post? What are you? A sock of Eots? BTW, you seem to support Rimjob too.

I support the truth not BS and propaganda. This "new" theory is just another failed one that tries to explain the explosions assholes like you said never happened, and BTW, it also goes against the NIST theory whose ass you kiss no matter how many times they have been proven frauds.
Why are you so anti American, so anti truth, and side with the liars frauds and cheats??
Why seemingly smart people stubbornly refuse to see what's right in front of you is explained by psychologists.

 

[Liability]

I didn't post any UTube videos, I posted scientific studies that counter and point out the flaws in the NIST report and official theory of building collapse, and all you idiots do is avoid responding in any intelligent manner, showing off what fucking losers you are again

And you responded to the new theory of why the towers collapsed by posting the same bullshit you always post? What are you? A sock of Eots? BTW, you seem to support Rimjob too.

I support the truth not BS and propaganda. This "new" theory is just another failed one that tries to explain the explosions assholes like you said never happened, and BTW, it also goes against the NIST theory whose ass you kiss no matter how many times they have been proven frauds.
Why are you so anti American, so anti truth, and side with the liars frauds and cheats??
Why seemingly smart people stubbornly refuse to see what's right in front of you is explained by psychologists.

To support "the truth" you must have a handle on what IS true.

So tell us: is it your contention based on the truth as it has been revealed to you that the Twin Towers (and Bldg 7) were imploded?

• How the fuck did they get "wired" to blow?
  
• What kind of demolition explosives WERE used?
  
• When did those explosives get "planted?"
  
• Explain how explosives got planted for the alleged demolition with nobody fucking noticing anything amiss.

 

[Mr. Jones]

And you responded to the new theory of why the towers collapsed by posting the same bullshit you always post? What are you? A sock of Eots? BTW, you seem to support Rimjob too.

I support the truth not BS and propaganda. This "new" theory is just another failed one that tries to explain the explosions assholes like you said never happened, and BTW, it also goes against the NIST theory whose ass you kiss no matter how many times they have been proven frauds.
Why are you so anti American, so anti truth, and side with the liars frauds and cheats??
Why seemingly smart people stubbornly refuse to see what's right in front of you is explained by psychologists.

To support "the truth" you must have a handle on what IS true.

So tell us: is it your contention based on the truth as it has been revealed to you that the Twin Towers (and Bldg 7) were imploded?

• How the fuck did they get "wired" to blow?
  
• What kind of demolition explosives WERE used?
  
• When did those explosives get "planted?"
  
• Explain how explosives got planted for the alleged demolition with nobody fucking noticing anything amiss.

First, let the inevitable true facts involving science and physics about the collapses emerge.
Let's look at and acknowledge that the NIST report is flawed..there is plenty of evidence and proof that it is.
We should be dealing with things like the buildings falling through the paths of most resistance, and the short time they collapsed in, and how the collapses were initiated, and by what mechanism, and the molten metal that contributed to the stubborn rubble fires that lasted 3 months, once those things are looked at honestly, sincerely and objectively, we will see that the official NIST explanation does not come close to being credible,
then we can deal with the conspiracy aspects about the 9-11 attacks, like who planted anything, how they accomplished the feat without being detected, etc..

Why is it assumed that because we don't know the who, and how, and because no one has stepped forward to confess their parts, that the laws of physics can automatically be dismissed on that particular day?

The missing 'jolt" a simple refutation of the NIST Bazant collapse hypothesis-
9-11 and probability theory-Frank Legge BSc, PhD

http://www.journalof911studies.com/volume/2008/TheMissingJolt7.pdf

9-11 and probability theory-Frank Legge BSc, PhD

9-11 and the twin towers sudden collapse initiation was impossible-By Dr. Frank Legge, PhD, and Tony Szamboti,Mechanical engineer
http://www.journalof911studies.com/volume/200703/Sudden_collapse_initiation_impossible.pdf

 

[Liability]

I support the truth not BS and propaganda. This "new" theory is just another failed one that tries to explain the explosions assholes like you said never happened, and BTW, it also goes against the NIST theory whose ass you kiss no matter how many times they have been proven frauds.
Why are you so anti American, so anti truth, and side with the liars frauds and cheats??
Why seemingly smart people stubbornly refuse to see what's right in front of you is explained by psychologists.

To support "the truth" you must have a handle on what IS true.

So tell us: is it your contention based on the truth as it has been revealed to you that the Twin Towers (and Bldg 7) were imploded?

• How the fuck did they get "wired" to blow?
  
• What kind of demolition explosives WERE used?
  
• When did those explosives get "planted?"
  
• Explain how explosives got planted for the alleged demolition with nobody fucking noticing anything amiss.

First, let the inevitable true facts involving science and physics about the collapses emerge.
Let's look at and acknowledge that the NIST report is flawed..there is plenty of evidence and proof that it is.
We should be dealing with things like the buildings falling through the paths of most resistance, and the short time they collapsed in, and how the collapses were initiated, and by what mechanism, and the molten metal that contributed to the stubborn rubble fires that lasted 3 months, once those things are looked at honestly, sincerely and objectively, we will see that the official NIST explanation does not come close to being credible,
then we can deal with the conspiracy aspects about the 9-11 attacks, like who planted anything, how they accomplished the feat without being detected, etc..

Why is it assumed that because we don't know the who, and how, and because no one has stepped forward to confess their parts, that the laws of physics can automatically be dismissed on that particular day?

The missing 'jolt" a simple refutation of the NIST Bazant collapse hypothesis-
9-11 and probability theory-Frank Legge BSc, PhD

http://www.journalof911studies.com/volume/2008/TheMissingJolt7.pdf

9-11 and probability theory-Frank Legge BSc, PhD

9-11 and the twin towers sudden collapse initiation was impossible-By Dr. Frank Legge, PhD, and Tony Szamboti,Mechanical engineer
http://www.journalof911studies.com/volume/200703/Sudden_collapse_initiation_impossible.pdf

I knew you couldn't answer. And that you wouldn't. The fact that you can't is ok. But the reason you can't is largely due to the inherent implausibility of your "theories," dopey.



BTW, the WHEN question is a key to showing how absurd your twoofer "theories" are. So it's obvious why you duck that one like the plague.

 

[SFC Ollie]

What they also cannot answer is motive. The entire World Trade Center complex, the pentagon, and one failed target. And not one of the truthers think this would have been overkill for any purpose? The attack on either tower or the Pentagon would have been enough all by themselves to start the war in Afghanistan, if that's what they think the purpose was.....

 

[Mr. Jones]

To support "the truth" you must have a handle on what IS true.

So tell us: is it your contention based on the truth as it has been revealed to you that the Twin Towers (and Bldg 7) were imploded?

• How the fuck did they get "wired" to blow?
  
• What kind of demolition explosives WERE used?
  
• When did those explosives get "planted?"
  
• Explain how explosives got planted for the alleged demolition with nobody fucking noticing anything amiss.

First, let the inevitable true facts involving science and physics about the collapses emerge.
Let's look at and acknowledge that the NIST report is flawed..there is plenty of evidence and proof that it is.
We should be dealing with things like the buildings falling through the paths of most resistance, and the short time they collapsed in, and how the collapses were initiated, and by what mechanism, and the molten metal that contributed to the stubborn rubble fires that lasted 3 months, once those things are looked at honestly, sincerely and objectively, we will see that the official NIST explanation does not come close to being credible,
then we can deal with the conspiracy aspects about the 9-11 attacks, like who planted anything, how they accomplished the feat without being detected, etc..

Why is it assumed that because we don't know the who, and how, and because no one has stepped forward to confess their parts, that the laws of physics can automatically be dismissed on that particular day?

The missing 'jolt" a simple refutation of the NIST Bazant collapse hypothesis-
9-11 and probability theory-Frank Legge BSc, PhD

http://www.journalof911studies.com/volume/2008/TheMissingJolt7.pdf

9-11 and probability theory-Frank Legge BSc, PhD

9-11 and the twin towers sudden collapse initiation was impossible-By Dr. Frank Legge, PhD, and Tony Szamboti,Mechanical engineer
http://www.journalof911studies.com/volume/200703/Sudden_collapse_initiation_impossible.pdf

I knew you couldn't answer. And that you wouldn't. The fact that you can't is ok. But the reason you can't is largely due to the inherent implausibility of your "theories," dopey.



BTW, the WHEN question is a key to showing how absurd your twoofer "theories" are. So it's obvious why you duck that one like the plague.

There wouldn't be any 9-11 truth movement, or reason to doubt the OCT, if the science and physics would have matched what actually happened, not to mention all the BS NIST calls an investigation.
You insist on dodging the issues that started much of the truth movement and spawned A&E for 9-11 truth.

Also, there have been attempts to explain the who, why, and when, and it has been posted in these conspiracy forums before.
The fact is you don't want to address the real facts that science and physics proved and that showed the implausibility of the NIST report, and
dismiss those facts simply because no one confessed?

Trying to figure out all that you have asked are guesses, some of them pretty plausible, but the science that says NIST is wrong are FACTS and laws of physics that have been around and used for ages.

 

[Mr. Jones]

What they also cannot answer is motive. The entire World Trade Center complex, the pentagon, and one failed target. And not one of the truthers think this would have been overkill for any purpose? The attack on either tower or the Pentagon would have been enough all by themselves to start the war in Afghanistan, if that's what they think the purpose was.....

I strongly believe the PNAC has all the motive in it, and the writers and people involved in drafting it were in positions to implement it at the time.
The perpetrators obviously wanted to instill the terror, and shock and awe, that would make the nation yield to what they wanted to accomplish, and it worked.
The WTC complex, the Pentagon, the Anthranx, all of it at the same time made damn sure they would succeed.
Now we are able to see how everything needed to be done, and how complex the entire plan was, including the timing, and 19 Arabs with box cutters, sure as hell couldn't have done it all by themselves.
It wasn't Muslims who suspended the laws of physics that day.

 

[SFC Ollie]

The laws of Physics were never suspended, Why is it that there isn't a huge scientific outcry. instead of less than one percent? Why isn't there even 10% of the scientists and physicists out there demanding to be heard about how this is all wrong?

Because your less than 1% are the ones who are wrong.........

And now the attacks on 911 aren't big enough you want to add the nutcase with the Anthrax into the mix?

Go for it, I do so enjoy a good comedy.........

 

[eots]

The laws of Physics were never suspended, Why is it that there isn't a huge scientific outcry. instead of less than one percent? Why isn't there even 10% of the scientists and physicists out there demanding to be heard about how this is all wrong?

Because your less than 1% are the ones who are wrong.........

And now the attacks on 911 aren't big enough you want to add the nutcase with the Anthrax into the mix?

Go for it, I do so enjoy a good comedy.........

so who was responsible for the anthrax Ollie ?

http://www.usmessageboard.com/the-middle-east-general/50432-hey-anyone-remember-anthrax.html