What's new
US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

I'd enjoy an intellectual discussion-

Gdjjr

Platinum Member
Joined
Oct 25, 2019
Messages
10,611
Reaction score
5,759
Points
965
Location
Texas
9/11 Controlled Demolition Debate! Niels Harrit (Chemist) vs. Denis Rancourt (Physicist)


I am neither a Chemist, or a Physicist- but, I do know that 2+2 = 4. I also know the US gov't and it's lackey presstitutes are the lyingest entities on the planet-

There is a pod cast in the link, and no, I didn't listen to it- I did read the accompanying article though, and I have followed this 9/11 stuff for years-

From the article- if anyone cares- which I doubt- the size of a gnat attention span is what liars depend on.


As I wrote then:


On my November 6 (2010) show physics professor/activist Denis Rancourt and I spent the first hour amicably discussing 9/11, and mostly agreeing with each other. During the second hour, we had a heated debate (temperatures almost high enough to vaporize steel!) about what happened to the Twin Towers: I argued that the controlled demolition hypothesis best explains the facts, while Denis, who admits that WTC-7 was a controlled demolition, claimed that the Towers could have collapsed due to plane crashes and fires as the government says.

Let me assert- 2 planes hit 2 bldg's in 2 different locations, near the tops, and brought them down in near identical fashion- in an unprecedented manner at near free fall speed- really?
 

sealybobo

Diamond Member
Joined
Jun 5, 2008
Messages
89,496
Reaction score
8,371
Points
2,045
Location
Michigan
9/11 Controlled Demolition Debate! Niels Harrit (Chemist) vs. Denis Rancourt (Physicist)


I am neither a Chemist, or a Physicist- but, I do know that 2+2 = 4. I also know the US gov't and it's lackey presstitutes are the lyingest entities on the planet-

There is a pod cast in the link, and no, I didn't listen to it- I did read the accompanying article though, and I have followed this 9/11 stuff for years-

From the article- if anyone cares- which I doubt- the size of a gnat attention span is what liars depend on.


As I wrote then:


On my November 6 (2010) show physics professor/activist Denis Rancourt and I spent the first hour amicably discussing 9/11, and mostly agreeing with each other. During the second hour, we had a heated debate (temperatures almost high enough to vaporize steel!) about what happened to the Twin Towers: I argued that the controlled demolition hypothesis best explains the facts, while Denis, who admits that WTC-7 was a controlled demolition, claimed that the Towers could have collapsed due to plane crashes and fires as the government says.

Let me assert- 2 planes hit 2 bldg's in 2 different locations, near the tops, and brought them down in near identical fashion- in an unprecedented manner at near free fall speed- really?
There has to be a way to simulate what happened on a computer.
 

Muhammed

Platinum Member
Joined
Dec 20, 2010
Messages
22,638
Reaction score
8,887
Points
910
Location
North Coast, USA
9/11 Controlled Demolition Debate! Niels Harrit (Chemist) vs. Denis Rancourt (Physicist)


I am neither a Chemist, or a Physicist- but, I do know that 2+2 = 4. I also know the US gov't and it's lackey presstitutes are the lyingest entities on the planet-

There is a pod cast in the link, and no, I didn't listen to it- I did read the accompanying article though, and I have followed this 9/11 stuff for years-

From the article- if anyone cares- which I doubt- the size of a gnat attention span is what liars depend on.


As I wrote then:


On my November 6 (2010) show physics professor/activist Denis Rancourt and I spent the first hour amicably discussing 9/11, and mostly agreeing with each other. During the second hour, we had a heated debate (temperatures almost high enough to vaporize steel!) about what happened to the Twin Towers: I argued that the controlled demolition hypothesis best explains the facts, while Denis, who admits that WTC-7 was a controlled demolition, claimed that the Towers could have collapsed due to plane crashes and fires as the government says.

Let me assert- 2 planes hit 2 bldg's in 2 different locations, near the tops, and brought them down in near identical fashion- in an unprecedented manner at near free fall speed- really?
There has to be a way to simulate what happened on a computer.
I already saw what happened. There's no need for a simulation.
 

sealybobo

Diamond Member
Joined
Jun 5, 2008
Messages
89,496
Reaction score
8,371
Points
2,045
Location
Michigan
9/11 Controlled Demolition Debate! Niels Harrit (Chemist) vs. Denis Rancourt (Physicist)


I am neither a Chemist, or a Physicist- but, I do know that 2+2 = 4. I also know the US gov't and it's lackey presstitutes are the lyingest entities on the planet-

There is a pod cast in the link, and no, I didn't listen to it- I did read the accompanying article though, and I have followed this 9/11 stuff for years-

From the article- if anyone cares- which I doubt- the size of a gnat attention span is what liars depend on.


As I wrote then:


On my November 6 (2010) show physics professor/activist Denis Rancourt and I spent the first hour amicably discussing 9/11, and mostly agreeing with each other. During the second hour, we had a heated debate (temperatures almost high enough to vaporize steel!) about what happened to the Twin Towers: I argued that the controlled demolition hypothesis best explains the facts, while Denis, who admits that WTC-7 was a controlled demolition, claimed that the Towers could have collapsed due to plane crashes and fires as the government says.

Let me assert- 2 planes hit 2 bldg's in 2 different locations, near the tops, and brought them down in near identical fashion- in an unprecedented manner at near free fall speed- really?
There has to be a way to simulate what happened on a computer.
I already saw what happened. There's no need for a simulation.
But the simulation will show if a building made the way the towers were made would collapse that way if hi5 by an airliner.
 

sealybobo

Diamond Member
Joined
Jun 5, 2008
Messages
89,496
Reaction score
8,371
Points
2,045
Location
Michigan
Intelligent conversation that starts with 9/11 was done by the U.S. Government..... that's a non starter
I’m open to the possibility. I bet Russians don’t believe Putin poisons his opponents
 

iamwhatiseem

Platinum Member
Joined
Aug 19, 2010
Messages
27,562
Reaction score
10,004
Points
900
Location
On a hill
Intelligent conversation that starts with 9/11 was done by the U.S. Government..... that's a non starter
I’m open to the possibility. I bet Russians don’t believe Putin poisons his opponents
Haha... yeah... the problem with it is you would need the cooperation of literally 100's, if not 1,000s of ordinary people to go along with killing thousands of their fellow countrymen.
It is hilarious that anyone just wants to believe that.
Funny stuff
 

Muhammed

Platinum Member
Joined
Dec 20, 2010
Messages
22,638
Reaction score
8,887
Points
910
Location
North Coast, USA
9/11 Controlled Demolition Debate! Niels Harrit (Chemist) vs. Denis Rancourt (Physicist)


I am neither a Chemist, or a Physicist- but, I do know that 2+2 = 4. I also know the US gov't and it's lackey presstitutes are the lyingest entities on the planet-

There is a pod cast in the link, and no, I didn't listen to it- I did read the accompanying article though, and I have followed this 9/11 stuff for years-

From the article- if anyone cares- which I doubt- the size of a gnat attention span is what liars depend on.


As I wrote then:


On my November 6 (2010) show physics professor/activist Denis Rancourt and I spent the first hour amicably discussing 9/11, and mostly agreeing with each other. During the second hour, we had a heated debate (temperatures almost high enough to vaporize steel!) about what happened to the Twin Towers: I argued that the controlled demolition hypothesis best explains the facts, while Denis, who admits that WTC-7 was a controlled demolition, claimed that the Towers could have collapsed due to plane crashes and fires as the government says.

Let me assert- 2 planes hit 2 bldg's in 2 different locations, near the tops, and brought them down in near identical fashion- in an unprecedented manner at near free fall speed- really?
There has to be a way to simulate what happened on a computer.
I already saw what happened. There's no need for a simulation.
But the simulation will show if a building made the way the towers were made would collapse that way if hi5 by an airliner.
Hitting the towers with airplanes already showed what happens.

Are you one of those flakes who thinks it was all a CGI animation?
 

sealybobo

Diamond Member
Joined
Jun 5, 2008
Messages
89,496
Reaction score
8,371
Points
2,045
Location
Michigan
Intelligent conversation that starts with 9/11 was done by the U.S. Government..... that's a non starter
I’m open to the possibility. I bet Russians don’t believe Putin poisons his opponents
Haha... yeah... the problem with it is you would need the cooperation of literally 100's, if not 1,000s of ordinary people to go along with killing thousands of their fellow countrymen.
It is hilarious that anyone just wants to believe that.
Funny stuff

In the beginning all bush knew was that Arab terrorist sleeper cells were in America and determined to attack. All I’m saying is bush and Chaney planned to use that attack to invade Iraq.

Did Chaney really take control of NORAD Just before the attack? That is suspicious
 

sealybobo

Diamond Member
Joined
Jun 5, 2008
Messages
89,496
Reaction score
8,371
Points
2,045
Location
Michigan
9/11 Controlled Demolition Debate! Niels Harrit (Chemist) vs. Denis Rancourt (Physicist)


I am neither a Chemist, or a Physicist- but, I do know that 2+2 = 4. I also know the US gov't and it's lackey presstitutes are the lyingest entities on the planet-

There is a pod cast in the link, and no, I didn't listen to it- I did read the accompanying article though, and I have followed this 9/11 stuff for years-

From the article- if anyone cares- which I doubt- the size of a gnat attention span is what liars depend on.


As I wrote then:


On my November 6 (2010) show physics professor/activist Denis Rancourt and I spent the first hour amicably discussing 9/11, and mostly agreeing with each other. During the second hour, we had a heated debate (temperatures almost high enough to vaporize steel!) about what happened to the Twin Towers: I argued that the controlled demolition hypothesis best explains the facts, while Denis, who admits that WTC-7 was a controlled demolition, claimed that the Towers could have collapsed due to plane crashes and fires as the government says.

Let me assert- 2 planes hit 2 bldg's in 2 different locations, near the tops, and brought them down in near identical fashion- in an unprecedented manner at near free fall speed- really?
There has to be a way to simulate what happened on a computer.
I already saw what happened. There's no need for a simulation.
But the simulation will show if a building made the way the towers were made would collapse that way if hi5 by an airliner.
Hitting the towers with airplanes already showed what happens.

Are you one of those flakes who thinks it was all a CGI animation?
I’m not the one saying it was a controlled explosion.
 

EvilEyeFleegle

Platinum Member
Gold Supporting Member
Joined
Nov 2, 2017
Messages
9,046
Reaction score
3,373
Points
375
Intelligent conversation that starts with 9/11 was done by the U.S. Government..... that's a non starter
I’m open to the possibility. I bet Russians don’t believe Putin poisons his opponents
I bet they do! He glories in it..and his people eat it up. His every denial is 'wink wink--nudge'
 

iamwhatiseem

Platinum Member
Joined
Aug 19, 2010
Messages
27,562
Reaction score
10,004
Points
900
Location
On a hill
Why would anyone secretly rig a building for demolition on the odd chance that terrorists may hijack planes and fly into them?
It is truly amazing the degree of absurdity people are willing to believe. As well as the ocean of reality they have to ignore in order for it to be true.
I expect 13 year olds to fall for this goofy shit. But grown ass adults? Jesus.
 

sealybobo

Diamond Member
Joined
Jun 5, 2008
Messages
89,496
Reaction score
8,371
Points
2,045
Location
Michigan
Intelligent conversation that starts with 9/11 was done by the U.S. Government..... that's a non starter
I’m open to the possibility. I bet Russians don’t believe Putin poisons his opponents
I bet they do! He glories in it..and his people eat it up. His every denial is 'wink wink--nudge'
Look at us. Trump obviously broke the law calling Ukraine and again when he called the governor of Georgia asking him to come up with 200,000 votes.

No wink in fact trump supporters truly believe he dindo nothin wrong.
 

sealybobo

Diamond Member
Joined
Jun 5, 2008
Messages
89,496
Reaction score
8,371
Points
2,045
Location
Michigan
Why would anyone secretly rig a building for demolition on the odd chance that terrorists may hijack planes and fly into them?
It is truly amazing the degree of absurdity people are willing to believe. As well as the ocean of reality they have to ignore in order for it to be true.
I expect 13 year olds to fall for this goofy shit. But grown ass adults? Jesus.
I’m not saying it was an inside job. But we do know bush was warned and did nothing.

We do know PNAC planned the invasion of Iraq before bush even stole the 2000 election.

We know bush lied us into Iraq. Even trump says so.

Im just saying the bush regime planned to use the next terrorist attack as a vehicle to invade Iraq.
 

EvilEyeFleegle

Platinum Member
Gold Supporting Member
Joined
Nov 2, 2017
Messages
9,046
Reaction score
3,373
Points
375
Why would anyone secretly rig a building for demolition on the odd chance that terrorists may hijack planes and fly into them?
It is truly amazing the degree of absurdity people are willing to believe. As well as the ocean of reality they have to ignore in order for it to be true.
I expect 13 year olds to fall for this goofy shit. But grown ass adults? Jesus.
I’m not saying it was an inside job. But we do know bush was warned and did nothing.

We do know PNAC planned the invasion of Iraq before bush even stole the 2000 election.

We know bush lied us into Iraq. Even trump says so.

Im just saying the bush regime planned to use the next terrorist attack as a vehicle to invade Iraq.
In the spirit of never letting a crisis go to waste, I buy that. It was clear that the Bush/Cheney team was aching for war-- look at how they destroyed Plame just to keep the false yellow cake narrative going!

But 9/11 sprang from the evil mind of Bin Laden, I do wonder if he got his inspiration from the Clancy book, Debt of Honor, that closed with a Japanese terrorist flying a plane into the Capital?
 
OP
Gdjjr

Gdjjr

Platinum Member
Joined
Oct 25, 2019
Messages
10,611
Reaction score
5,759
Points
965
Location
Texas
Im just saying the bush regime planned to use the next terrorist attack as a vehicle to invade Iraq.
And to implement the evisceration of the 4th amendment- and to, fundamentally, change America.

Results speak for themselves- beginning with; 2 planes, hitting 2 bldg's, in 2 different loactions rendering near identical collapse at near free fall speed- and people believing it-
 

iamwhatiseem

Platinum Member
Joined
Aug 19, 2010
Messages
27,562
Reaction score
10,004
Points
900
Location
On a hill
Why would anyone secretly rig a building for demolition on the odd chance that terrorists may hijack planes and fly into them?
It is truly amazing the degree of absurdity people are willing to believe. As well as the ocean of reality they have to ignore in order for it to be true.
I expect 13 year olds to fall for this goofy shit. But grown ass adults? Jesus.
I’m not saying it was an inside job. But we do know bush was warned and did nothing.

We do know PNAC planned the invasion of Iraq before bush even stole the 2000 election.

We know bush lied us into Iraq. Even trump says so.

Im just saying the bush regime planned to use the next terrorist attack as a vehicle to invade Iraq.
Bush didn't lie to us to get into Iraq. He used the same intel as did everyone else - INCLUDING the Democrats who voted to invade.
Was he itching to go there? Maybe, I don't know. But you can go to YouTube and easily find videos of Democrats who voted yes to invade based on the same intel
Also - and of course you want to forget, that there was a BUNCH of chemical weapons' found in Iraq. And Saddam DID use them against his own people. We know this as fact now. So at least that part of the intel was correct.
 
OP
Gdjjr

Gdjjr

Platinum Member
Joined
Oct 25, 2019
Messages
10,611
Reaction score
5,759
Points
965
Location
Texas
I do wonder if he got his inspiration from the Clancy book,
You think US Intelligence(?) doesn't read novels? Or watch movies? I recall Bush saying he'd like for hollywood to make a movie, or some movies, to show the bad guys for what we're supposed to believe- why? People already accept that the saints in the US gov't would never perpetrate crimes against its own people-
 

USMB Server Goals

Total amount
$350.00
Goal
$350.00

Most reactions - Past 7 days

Forum List

Top