Debunking the WTC 9/11 Molten Steel Argument

[BrianH]

all you do is make short ,stupid ,vague little statements of no substance what so ever..do you have anything specific to address

Your statements and questions aren't very long or coherent either....their short little retarded statments followed by a giant load of goat turds ("evidence")

Review your posts to see what I mean.

 

[Paulie]

Maybe so, but I'm not quoting Stephen Colbert either, or trying to convince people of Stephen Colbert's philosophy on our government. Big difference between my statement and yours.

Well, you said because he has an avatar of a Guy Fawkes mask, that he's watched too many movies about government conspiracy. An illogical conclusion to come to considering his avatar only represents 1 movie.

So by your logic, your Colbert avatar tells me that you watch too much TV, because clearly that avatar represents more than just the one TV show it depicts.

 

[BrianH]

Well, you said because he has an avatar of a Guy Fawkes mask, that he's watched too many movies about government conspiracy. An illogical conclusion to come to considering his avatar only represents 1 movie.

So by your logic, your Colbert avatar tells me that you watch too much TV, because clearly that avatar represents more than just the one TV show it depicts.

Ok, I'm sorry that I was not extemely correct in my statement. The majority of posts from eots involves government conspiracy and the brainwashing of the American people by the government. My conclusion, juding from his avatar, is correct...he has a specific interest in government conspiracies and seems to think they are everywhere.
Your concentrating on the AMOUNT of movies and the AMOUNT of TV that he/I watch, which either means that you agree with the fact that he's a governmetn conspiracy nut, and you're just finding something to contradict my post with. Or you actually believe everything he says and you think that your post is actually addressing the main idea of my post.

 

[cbi0090]

all you do is make short ,stupid ,vague little statements of no substance what so ever..do you have anything specific to address

Well, I've tried being more concise and specific but you've demonstrated an inability to absorb more than a short sentence or two. You want something specific? Which material has the greatest fire resistance? Steel or wood?

 

[eots]

again your question is stupid..do you have anything to say in regards to the steel involved in the wtc,molten metal or the weakening that would occur at the temps recorded...do you have any point what so ever ?

 

[Paulie]

Ok, I'm sorry that I was not extemely correct in my statement. The majority of posts from eots involves government conspiracy and the brainwashing of the American people by the government. My conclusion, juding from his avatar, is correct...he has a specific interest in government conspiracies and seems to think they are everywhere.
Your concentrating on the AMOUNT of movies and the AMOUNT of TV that he/I watch, which either means that you agree with the fact that he's a governmetn conspiracy nut, and you're just finding something to contradict my post with. Or you actually believe everything he says and you think that your post is actually addressing the main idea of my post.

Nah, I just like fucking with you now since we had beef. But it's all in good fun.

 

[cbi0090]

again your question is stupid..do you have anything to say in regards to the steel involved in the wtc,molten metal or the weakening that would occur at the temps recorded...do you have any point what so ever ?

No, it's not. It's actually a question few people would answer correctly and it does have a great deal of bearing. Do you think the steel at WTC is different in some way than any other steel used at that time? I'm asking you to think instead of mimick, as you have been doing.

 

[BrianH]

Nah, I just like fucking with you now since we had beef. But it's all in good fun.

Alright, cool as long as it's for that reason.lol

 

[eots]

No, it's not. It's actually a question few people would answer correctly and it does have a great deal of bearing. Do you think the steel at WTC is different in some way than any other steel used at that time? I'm asking you to think instead of mimick, as you have been doing.

no your trying to play little riddle me this games instead of addressing specifics

 

[eots]

Ok, I'm sorry that I was not extemely correct in my statement. The majority of posts from eots involves government conspiracy and the brainwashing of the American people by the government. My conclusion, juding from his avatar, is correct...he has a specific interest in government conspiracies and seems to think they are everywhere.

no..there is one conspiracy that is systemic and is controlled from a relatively small cabal, of individuals and organizations that operate within the government .....a view shared by many including ex-presidents

Your concentrating on the AMOUNT of movies and the AMOUNT of TV that he/I watch,

I rarely watch or read fiction or drama

which either means that you agree with the fact that he's a governmetn conspiracy nut,

I think in denial..cant blame you tho..its important for you to believe your defending your country as opposed to joining a force that is being used as a weapon of terror and mass destruction in support of criminals and their criminal agenda

and you're just finding something to contradict my post with. Or you actually believe everything he says and you think that your post is actually addressing the main idea of my post[/QUOTE

 

[cbi0090]

no your trying to play little riddle me this games instead of addressing specifics

It wouldn't be a riddle if you knew anything about what you claim you know. I think it's obvious you don't have enough of that first clue or understanding to have any business disussing this issue. I knew that from the beginning but since you can't even be truthful enough with yourself to acknowledge it, it's obvious your wasting everyone's time.

 

[eots]

It wouldn't be a riddle if you knew anything about what you claim you know. I think it's obvious you don't have enough of that first clue or understanding to have any business disussing this issue. I knew that from the beginning but since you can't even be truthful enough with yourself to acknowledge it, it's obvious your wasting everyone's time.

your argument has no substance except for the bullshit you are full of





New 9/11 Investigation Reaches Crescendo

Paul Joseph Watson
Prison Planet
Friday, March 28, 2008

Calls for a new 9/11 inquiry are reaching a crescendo, with well-respected authorities and celebrities alike adding their voices to the cause, as the official 9/11 story crumbles under the weight of revelations of White House ties to the 9/11 Commission, and other cover-ups on behalf of authorities staffed with investigating the attacks.

The corporate media’s insistence on ignoring hundreds of professional experts who are calling for a new 9/11 investigation has spurred many celebrities to use their public platforms to speak out, knowing that the press will at least have to address the issue.





The latest to do so is top comedian Margaret Cho, who told the Alex Jones Show yesterday that the public were going to become very angry when it was fully disclosed that the attacks were a conspiracy, concurring with fellow comedian George Carlin who also questioned the official story last year.

The path was trailblazed by Charlie Sheen in March 2006 when he spoke of his doubts about the official story and questioned the collapse of WTC Building 7. Sheen was endlessly smeared for weeks after but he prompted a national debate about 9/11 and the 9/11 Truth Movement enjoyed what many consider to be its most productive year.

In September 2006, former Governor, actor and wrestling star Jesse Ventura questioned 9/11 during an on-camera interview with Alex Jones and also cited Operation Northwoods and the Gulf of Tonkin as examples of how the government has planned and carried out staged war provocations in the past.

In July 2007, popular film maker Michael Moore told WeAreChange.org reporters that he had many more questions about 9/11 than at the time of making Fahrenheit 9/11 and did not believe the public had been told "half the truth" about what really happened.

Martin Sheen echoed his son’s comments in October 2007 along with rising actor Mark Ruffalo, following in the footsteps of Rosie O’Donnell, who caused shockwaves when she brought 9/11 truth to national prominence during her stint as The View host.

The View was also used as a platform for actor James Brolin to raise 9/11 truth, who questioned the official version of events in the same week that acclaimed director David Lynch spoke out.

Lynch told Dutch television he thought WTC Building 7 was brought down via controlled demolition and that the Pentagon and Pennsylvania crash sites were suspicious due to the absence of evidence that a plane crashed at either location.

Other notable public figures speaking out at the same time included Ed Asner, Matthew Bellemy of Muse and director Richard Linklater.




American icon Willie Nelson threw his hat in the ring last month, when he told The Alex Jones Show that he thought the twin towers were imploded like condemned Las Vegas casino buildings.

Nelson’s comments were almost universally blackballed by the corporate media, who had patently learned from the Sheen controversy that smear campaigns were only leading to more people being exposed to the information and beginning the wake-up process.

Of course, the really important advocates of 9/11 truth are the hundreds of architects, scholars, engineers and other expert professionals who are demanding a fresh inquiry, but they are habitually ignored by the media as the 9/11 Truth Movement is smeared as a fringe interest fad populated by kooks and imbeciles.

In reality, doubts about the official 9/11 story are shared by a myriad of well-respected figures.

The Japanese Parliament were recently a captive audience to a 9/11 truth presentation by Fujita Yukihisa - a member of the House of Councillors in the Diet.

Andreas von Buelow, the former German Defense Secretary, was perhaps the first most prominent individual to go on the record back in 2004, when he blamed the CIA for orchestrating the attacks.

He was followed by former environment minister in Tony Blair’s government Michael Meacher, who questioned the stand down of NORAD on 9/11 and dismissed the entire war on terror as a hoax.
Veteran CIA agent and respected geopolitical expert Robert Baer said that "all the evidence points to" 9/11 having had elements of an inside job during a radio apperance in June 2006.

Late last year, former Italian President Francesco Cossiga told Italy’s most respected newspaper that the attacks were run by the CIA and Mossad and that this was common knowledge amongst global intelligence agencies. Former Wall Street Journal editor, U.S. Treasury Secretary and founder of Reaganomics Paul Craig Roberts questioned the susupicious collapse of the twin towers and Building 7 in February 2006. Headed up by Richard Gage, the Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth organization lists hundreds of experts in their field who all concur that the implosion of the buildings is not consistent with the official story and needs to be investigated.

Scholars For 9/11 Truth & Justice, headed by Professor Steven Jones, counts amongst its ranks hundreds of physicists, scientists and academic professionals who all share doubts about 9/11.

Another website, Patriots For 9/11 Truth, lists hundreds more former government, military, air force, and navy officials who have all spoken out about 9/11.
With the impartiality of the 9/11 Commission having been blown wide open by revelations of White House ties with Philip Zelikow, allied to the fact that the Pentagon knowingly lied to the Commission during testimony, the call for a new independent inquiry, armed with subpoena powers, is amplifying to a crescendo.
Allegations of a cover-up in regard to the organization responsible for investigating the collapse of the twin towers on behalf of FEMA this week also increased the pressure.

The more prominent figures that add their voice to that call, be they captains of culture or respected authorties in their discipline, can only increase the eventual likelihood of a new investigation.

 

[cbi0090]

Oh,oh. Movie stars, singers, wrestlers! Oh, my! Now there's an informed bunch if there ever was one. So I guess every in those buildings that day was blind. How do you make invisible explosives???

 

[eots]

Oh,oh. Movie stars, singers, wrestlers! Oh, my! Now there's an informed bunch if there ever was one. So I guess every in those buildings that day was blind. How do you make invisible explosives???

the point of the article was clear these celebrity's can get some media coverage as opposed to well credentialed individuals from patriots question 911..so never mind your weak straw man argument..."everyone in those buildings" why do you try to make to false statement that everyone who was a witness to 911 agrees with the white house version or did not testify to bombs in the building... there are many first responders, eyewitnesses, and family members of victims that are in fact the heart of the petition for a investigation..and believe this was in fact a controlled demolition

 

[Shattered]

your argument has no substance except for the bullshit you are full of





New 9/11 Investigation Reaches Crescendo

Paul Joseph Watson
Prison Planet
Friday, March 28, 2008

Calls for a new 9/11 inquiry are reaching a crescendo, with well-respected authorities and celebrities alike adding their voices to the cause, as the official 9/11 story crumbles under the weight of revelations of White House ties to the 9/11 Commission, and other cover-ups on behalf of authorities staffed with investigating the attacks.

The corporate media’s insistence on ignoring hundreds of professional experts who are calling for a new 9/11 investigation has spurred many celebrities to use their public platforms to speak out, knowing that the press will at least have to address the issue.





The latest to do so is top comedian Margaret Cho, who told the Alex Jones Show yesterday that the public were going to become very angry when it was fully disclosed that the attacks were a conspiracy, concurring with fellow comedian George Carlin who also questioned the official story last year.

The path was trailblazed by Charlie Sheen in March 2006 when he spoke of his doubts about the official story and questioned the collapse of WTC Building 7. Sheen was endlessly smeared for weeks after but he prompted a national debate about 9/11 and the 9/11 Truth Movement enjoyed what many consider to be its most productive year.

In September 2006, former Governor, actor and wrestling star Jesse Ventura questioned 9/11 during an on-camera interview with Alex Jones and also cited Operation Northwoods and the Gulf of Tonkin as examples of how the government has planned and carried out staged war provocations in the past.

In July 2007, popular film maker Michael Moore told WeAreChange.org reporters that he had many more questions about 9/11 than at the time of making Fahrenheit 9/11 and did not believe the public had been told "half the truth" about what really happened.

Martin Sheen echoed his son’s comments in October 2007 along with rising actor Mark Ruffalo, following in the footsteps of Rosie O’Donnell, who caused shockwaves when she brought 9/11 truth to national prominence during her stint as The View host.

The View was also used as a platform for actor James Brolin to raise 9/11 truth, who questioned the official version of events in the same week that acclaimed director David Lynch spoke out.

Lynch told Dutch television he thought WTC Building 7 was brought down via controlled demolition and that the Pentagon and Pennsylvania crash sites were suspicious due to the absence of evidence that a plane crashed at either location.

Other notable public figures speaking out at the same time included Ed Asner, Matthew Bellemy of Muse and director Richard Linklater.




American icon Willie Nelson threw his hat in the ring last month, when he told The Alex Jones Show that he thought the twin towers were imploded like condemned Las Vegas casino buildings.

Nelson’s comments were almost universally blackballed by the corporate media, who had patently learned from the Sheen controversy that smear campaigns were only leading to more people being exposed to the information and beginning the wake-up process.

Of course, the really important advocates of 9/11 truth are the hundreds of architects, scholars, engineers and other expert professionals who are demanding a fresh inquiry, but they are habitually ignored by the media as the 9/11 Truth Movement is smeared as a fringe interest fad populated by kooks and imbeciles.

In reality, doubts about the official 9/11 story are shared by a myriad of well-respected figures.

The Japanese Parliament were recently a captive audience to a 9/11 truth presentation by Fujita Yukihisa - a member of the House of Councillors in the Diet.

Andreas von Buelow, the former German Defense Secretary, was perhaps the first most prominent individual to go on the record back in 2004, when he blamed the CIA for orchestrating the attacks.
Blah Blah Blah Blah...

Don't you know you're supposed to post a paragraph or two of that shit, and then link to the rest of it?

Moron.

 

[BrianH]

Don't you know you're supposed to post a paragraph or two of that shit, and then link to the rest of it?

Moron.

He also doesn't know the difference between actual PROOF/EVIDENCE and speculation based on information.

 

[eots]

He also doesn't know the difference between actual PROOF/EVIDENCE and speculation based on information.

that was not shattereds point..AND I understand fully the difference between proof and evidence and the different types of evidence..and it is through evidence that a reasonable case is established and through a full disclosure and examination of this evidence with sworn testimony and subpoena power that the proof or truth is established beyond a reasonable doubt..and there is a mountain of circumstantial evidence, eyewitness testimony ,those that claim direct knowledge but will speak no further under the chain of command without authorization..that a rational person knowing all the facts would support and demand a investigation under the terms of the petition

 

[BrianH]

that was not shattereds point..AND I understand fully the difference between proof and evidence and the different types of evidence..and it is through evidence that a reasonable case is established and through a full disclosure and examination of this evidence with sworn testimony and subpoena power that the proof or truth is established beyond a reasonable doubt..and there is a mountain of circumstantial evidence, eyewitness testimony ,those that claim direct knowledge but will speak no further under the chain of command without authorization..that a rational person knowing all the facts would support and demand a investigation under the terms of the petition

So people with direct knowledge who were not present when the towers collapsed have more say than those who are qualified and have direct knowledge from actually experiencing it? You still don't have proof. If those people that you suspect have direct knowledge actually did, and were as "patriotic" as they claimed, they would find a way and not be restricted by the chain of command. George Washington didn't let the British chain-of-command keep him from doing what he thought was right.

You have no proof.

 

[eots]

So people with direct knowledge who were not present when the towers collapsed have more say than those who are qualified and have direct knowledge from actually experiencing it?

you make no sense..those with direct knowledge have not testified we have no idea if there where there or not and you imply that the survivors of 911 are the source of information on which the white house story is based ..this could not further from the truth their testimony was ignored and omitted from the report because it didn't fit the story.. you are full of assumptions but you have not looked into these details at all

You still don't have proof. If those people that you suspect have direct knowledge actually did, and were as "patriotic" as they claimed, they would find a way and not be restricted by the chain of command. George Washington didn't let the British chain-of-command keep him from doing what he thought was right.

You have no proof.

this is easy for you to say but the fact its outside of the proper channels it would be a meaningless sacrifice they have made there public statement they have signed a petition and stated they stand ready to do there part there is not much more you can ask from them as individuals..and I am sure it is not without much soul searching and courage that they made the decision to do so..and you slander the intent and tell little George Washington story's..on one hand rank ,service to your country, awards ,reaching the top levels of military expertise and experience ..means nothing and you will slander and abandon such individuals in a heart-beat ...it the next breath its a group who's actions motives and ability's you defend to no end ..which one is it ? ..your repetitive you have no proof argument has grown completely ridiculous .."I" HAVE A ORGY OF EVIDENCE
AND THIS EVIDENCE EXAMINED UNDER THE TERMS OF THE PETITION..WOULD DETERMINE AND PROVIDE WHAT YOU CALL PROOF

 

[Paulie]

So people with direct knowledge who were not present when the towers collapsed have more say than those who are qualified and have direct knowledge from actually experiencing it? You still don't have proof. If those people that you suspect have direct knowledge actually did, and were as "patriotic" as they claimed, they would find a way and not be restricted by the chain of command. George Washington didn't let the British chain-of-command keep him from doing what he thought was right.

You have no proof.

Why do you spend so much time trying to debate this? I've always found it interesting that so many people are willing to have debate ad nauseum with people they see as "kooks".

If you think the other side is so crazy, why do you even bother?