It's the Government-Not the Truther

[DiveCon]

People shouldn't be so quick to dismiss others as being "Twoofers." Governments lie all the time. It's what they do. I would think Wikileaks has shown this to be fact. Our own Secretary of State Hillary Clinton ordering Diplomats to spy on UN Members? No one would have known about that if Wikileaks didn't come along. There are still many valid questions about 911. Our Government did not conduct an acceptable investigation. They wrapped it up way too quickly and neatly. I stand by my belief that our Government has not told us the truth about 911. If that makes me a "Twoofer" than so be it.

The way I see it, the government created the so called "truthers" that they hate, but that wont make any sense to them

did ya see, he doesnt support your bullshit

 

[Mr. Jones]

People shouldn't be so quick to dismiss others as being "Twoofers." Governments lie all the time. It's what they do. I would think Wikileaks has shown this to be fact. Our own Secretary of State Hillary Clinton ordering Diplomats to spy on UN Members? No one would have known about that if Wikileaks didn't come along. There are still many valid questions about 911. Our Government did not conduct an acceptable investigation. They wrapped it up way too quickly and neatly. I stand by my belief that our Government has not told us the truth about 911. If that makes me a "Twoofer" than so be it.

The way I see it, the government created the so called "truthers" that they hate, but that wont make any sense to them

did ya see, he doesnt support your bullshit

Can't you read you fucking lap dog? He doesn't support your blind ignorant bullshit either, did ya see that brain dead one?

 

[DiveCon]

The way I see it, the government created the so called "truthers" that they hate, but that wont make any sense to them

did ya see, he doesnt support your bullshit

Can't you read you fucking lap dog? He doesn't support your blind ignorant bullshit either, did ya see that brain dead one?

he said basically the same thing i did you fucking idiot

 

[PhysicsExist]

did ya see, he doesnt support your bullshit

Can't you read you fucking lap dog? He doesn't support your blind ignorant bullshit either, did ya see that brain dead one?

he said basically the same thing i did you fucking idiot

I'm not sure if you realize how moronic you make yourself look every time you post things of this quality. Everyone of your posts is this worthless and pointless. It's just a bunch of words and distractions. You are the epitome of a troll. 2.25 seconds of freefall is impossible unless explosives were used. Physics do not allow for carbon based fires to melt steel. Thus there is no way to remove the resistance. Thus meaning 8 floors could of NOT been freefell through. Meaning NIST is lying, meaning there is a coverup. 2.25 seconds of freefall is impossible. Care to address this fact, troll?

 

[Rat in the Hat]

Can't you read you fucking lap dog? He doesn't support your blind ignorant bullshit either, did ya see that brain dead one?

he said basically the same thing i did you fucking idiot

I'm not sure if you realize how moronic you make yourself look every time you post things of this quality. Everyone of your posts is this worthless and pointless. It's just a bunch of words and distractions. You are the epitome of a troll. 2.25 seconds of freefall is impossible unless explosives were used. Physics do not allow for carbon based fires to melt steel. Thus there is no way to remove the resistance. Thus meaning 8 floors could of NOT been freefell through. Meaning NIST is lying, meaning there is a coverup. 2.25 seconds of freefall is impossible. Care to address this fact, troll?

Centuries of blacksmiths would tend to disagree with this.

 

[PhysicsExist]

he said basically the same thing i did you fucking idiot

I'm not sure if you realize how moronic you make yourself look every time you post things of this quality. Everyone of your posts is this worthless and pointless. It's just a bunch of words and distractions. You are the epitome of a troll. 2.25 seconds of freefall is impossible unless explosives were used. Physics do not allow for carbon based fires to melt steel. Thus there is no way to remove the resistance. Thus meaning 8 floors could of NOT been freefell through. Meaning NIST is lying, meaning there is a coverup. 2.25 seconds of freefall is impossible. Care to address this fact, troll?

Centuries of blacksmiths would tend to disagree with this.

HEAT-COLORS-for-Blacksmiths

This is the temps needed.

http://www.fema.gov/pdf/library/fema403_apc.pdf

This is the proof.

Carbon based fires cannot melt steel like this.

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zww9-AaIgrw[/ame]

 

[Rat in the Hat]

I'm not sure if you realize how moronic you make yourself look every time you post things of this quality. Everyone of your posts is this worthless and pointless. It's just a bunch of words and distractions. You are the epitome of a troll. 2.25 seconds of freefall is impossible unless explosives were used. Physics do not allow for carbon based fires to melt steel. Thus there is no way to remove the resistance. Thus meaning 8 floors could of NOT been freefell through. Meaning NIST is lying, meaning there is a coverup. 2.25 seconds of freefall is impossible. Care to address this fact, troll?

Centuries of blacksmiths would tend to disagree with this.

HEAT-COLORS-for-Blacksmiths

This is the temps needed.

http://www.fema.gov/pdf/library/fema403_apc.pdf

This is the proof.

Carbon based fires cannot melt steel like this.

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zww9-AaIgrw[/ame]

Oh, so now physics can have different qualities.

Got it, thanks.

 

[Patriot911]

I'm not sure if you realize how moronic you make yourself look every time you post things of this quality. Everyone of your posts is this worthless and pointless. It's just a bunch of words and distractions. You are the epitome of a troll. 2.25 seconds of freefall is impossible unless explosives were used. Physics do not allow for carbon based fires to melt steel. Thus there is no way to remove the resistance. Thus meaning 8 floors could of NOT been freefell through. Meaning NIST is lying, meaning there is a coverup. 2.25 seconds of freefall is impossible. Care to address this fact, troll?

Look at the ignorant troll pretending everyone else is a troll. How ironic. Your bullshit has been addressed time and time again.

How about addressing the fact audio tapes from mere blocks from the WTC 7 clearly pick up the collapse, but pick up NO EXPLOSIONS you claim had to have happened to get your precious 2.25 seconds of free fall. You also don't see anyone in the video portion reacting as though they had just heard an explosion. They look towards the building, but nobody jumps or is startled by any sound. THIS is a fact you insist on running away from like a scared little bitch. Keep running, bitch!

 

[Rat in the Hat]

I guess this dripping steel wasn't from the coal fire behind it.

Unless it was due to different physics.

 

[PhysicsExist]

I guess this dripping steel wasn't from the coal fire behind it.

Unless it was due to different physics.

U.S. Government lied about molten steel found at Ground Zero after 9/11 | 9-11 News | World for 9-11 Truth | W9T.org

You dont even try.

http://www.youtube.com/ae911truth#p/u/12/kJwE65Y32Y4

 

[Rat in the Hat]

I guess this dripping steel wasn't from the coal fire behind it.

Unless it was due to different physics.

U.S. Government lied about molten steel found at Ground Zero after 9/11 | 9-11 News | World for 9-11 Truth | W9T.org

You dont even try.

http://www.youtube.com/ae911truth#p/u/12/kJwE65Y32Y4

OK, Rosie.

 

[LA RAM FAN]

The way I see it, the government created the so called "truthers" that they hate, but that wont make any sense to them

did ya see, he doesnt support your bullshit

Can't you read you fucking lap dog? He doesn't support your blind ignorant bullshit either, did ya see that brain dead one?

thats the mind of divecunt at work here. he clearly missed THAT.

 

[LA RAM FAN]

I believe calling 9/11 an "inside job" is glib and sophomoric. What is "inside" anyway? Was Bush inside? Give me a break. He's too stupid. Was Clinton inside? He's smart enough and all of the training and preparation on both sides happened on his shift.

I don't believe the generalities of the "reports". I don't believe an Arab that cannot perform a solo in a 172 Cessna can get a commercial pilots license without some hanky panky. etc...

My working theory is if there was some kind of "inside" help there had to be something huge to gain to facilitate such a horrible plan. I believe that many in NSA, CIA..etc knew of the impending attempt, in general terms, and the training and the players involved. They wouldn't be able to cash in though. Whoever could have been involved in "helping" this thing happen needed access to the information and some authority to allow the plot to proceed. Cheney was in a pretty good position to be the top inside guy and had authority. He also was a major stockholder in a corporation on the brink of bankruptcy that made hundreds of billions on the result of 9/11. I don't believe the "inside" guys really had to do much of anything and there was plenty of time to plan to react in any way they saw as advantageous. Cheney was also a signature to the letter from the New American Century group that advocated invading Iraq and handed it to Clinton which he rejected.

thats a good point.a better term for 9/11 instead would be to say that it was a home grown plot.

 

[HUGGY]

I guess this dripping steel wasn't from the coal fire behind it.

Unless it was due to different physics.

Sorry Rat. A coal fire won't melt steel. If it did coal fired steam engine boilers on railroads would have melted.

What you are looking at is a forge. A forge takes an extreme amount of forced air to get enough oxygen into the coal to achieve temps where steel can be formed into different shapes. It would have taken a hurricane to provide enough air to get temps high enough in the WTC's. Then they wouldn't have the concentrated hydrocarbons anyway. carpet and ceiling panels burn up in seconds when doused with JetA. Notice on all the videos the bright orange flame upon impact. THAT was almost ALL of the jet fuel flashing off and burning. Then ya have to figure a way to contain the heat to have it build up to the required temps. Not possible with the windows being blown out right from the gate. A carpet/ceiling panel fire did not melt any steel.

Simple to test. Get yourself a patch of carpet...a ceiling panel and a gallon of kerosene throw em into a oil drum and light it off after ya lay a measly 1/4 inch thick piece of 2" by 2"' angle steel across the top. I gaurantee you will not be able to bend it at the maximum heat of that experiment. The dimensions of the steel that supposedly "melted" in the towers was like 2 in or 3 inch thick 2 foot by four foot I beams. There wasn't enough energy in all of the fuel available to melt ONE of them under the most perfect conditions WITH forced air.

 

[Mr. Jones]

I guess this dripping steel wasn't from the coal fire behind it.

Unless it was due to different physics.

Sorry Rat. A coal fire won't melt steel. If it did coal fired steam engine boilers on railroads would have melted.

What you are looking at is a forge. A forge takes an extreme amount of forced air to get enough oxygen into the coal to achieve temps where steel can be formed into different shapes. It would have taken a hurricane to provide enough air to get temps high enough in the WTC's. Then they wouldn't have the concentrated hydrocarbons anyway. carpet and ceiling panels burn up in seconds when doused with JetA. Notice on all the videos the bright orange flame upon impact. THAT was almost ALL of the jet fuel flashing off and burning. Then ya have to figure a way to contain the heat to have it build up to the required temps. Not possible with the windows being blown out right from the gate. A carpet/ceiling panel fire did not melt any steel.

Simple to test. Get yourself a patch of carpet...a ceiling panel and a gallon of kerosene throw em into a oil drum and light it off after ya lay a measly 1/4 inch thick piece of 2' by 2' angle steel across the top. I gaurantee you will not be able to bend it at the maximum heat of that experiment. The dimensions of the steel that supposedly "melted" in the towers was like 2 in or 3 inch thick 2 foot by four foot I beams. There wasn't enough energy in all of the fuel available to melt ONE of them under the most perfect conditions WITH forced air.

Am I missing something here? Wouldn't what is being shown in this picture have to occur at all the major support columns for it to display the symmetrical collapse the WTC buildings did? If so, how would this heat have been there at the precise crucial points?

 

[HUGGY]

I guess this dripping steel wasn't from the coal fire behind it.

Unless it was due to different physics.

Sorry Rat. A coal fire won't melt steel. If it did coal fired steam engine boilers on railroads would have melted.

What you are looking at is a forge. A forge takes an extreme amount of forced air to get enough oxygen into the coal to achieve temps where steel can be formed into different shapes. It would have taken a hurricane to provide enough air to get temps high enough in the WTC's. Then they wouldn't have the concentrated hydrocarbons anyway. carpet and ceiling panels burn up in seconds when doused with JetA. Notice on all the videos the bright orange flame upon impact. THAT was almost ALL of the jet fuel flashing off and burning. Then ya have to figure a way to contain the heat to have it build up to the required temps. Not possible with the windows being blown out right from the gate. A carpet/ceiling panel fire did not melt any steel.

Simple to test. Get yourself a patch of carpet...a ceiling panel and a gallon of kerosene throw em into a oil drum and light it off after ya lay a measly 1/4 inch thick piece of 2' by 2' angle steel across the top. I gaurantee you will not be able to bend it at the maximum heat of that experiment. The dimensions of the steel that supposedly "melted" in the towers was like 2 in or 3 inch thick 2 foot by four foot I beams. There wasn't enough energy in all of the fuel available to melt ONE of them under the most perfect conditions WITH forced air.

Am I missing something here? Wouldn't what is being shown in this picture have to occur at all the major support columns for it to display the symmetrical collapse the WTC buildings did? If so, how would this heat have been there at the precise crucial points?

It's worse than that.. The heat would have had to have been concentrated all around the exterior walls at the same temp because THAT is where the designed strength was. There would have to have been very obvious sun blinding fire for an hour or two to achieve the necessary melting all at the precise moment or one wall or corner would have HAD to collapse first sending the top part leaning over and tumbling off the building.

 

[Obamerican]

I guess this dripping steel wasn't from the coal fire behind it.

Unless it was due to different physics.

Sorry Rat. A coal fire won't melt steel. If it did coal fired steam engine boilers on railroads would have melted.

What you are looking at is a forge. A forge takes an extreme amount of forced air to get enough oxygen into the coal to achieve temps where steel can be formed into different shapes. It would have taken a hurricane to provide enough air to get temps high enough in the WTC's. Then they wouldn't have the concentrated hydrocarbons anyway. carpet and ceiling panels burn up in seconds when doused with JetA. Notice on all the videos the bright orange flame upon impact. THAT was almost ALL of the jet fuel flashing off and burning. Then ya have to figure a way to contain the heat to have it build up to the required temps. Not possible with the windows being blown out right from the gate. A carpet/ceiling panel fire did not melt any steel.

Simple to test. Get yourself a patch of carpet...a ceiling panel and a gallon of kerosene throw em into a oil drum and light it off after ya lay a measly 1/4 inch thick piece of 2' by 2' angle steel across the top. I gaurantee you will not be able to bend it at the maximum heat of that experiment. The dimensions of the steel that supposedly "melted" in the towers was like 2 in or 3 inch thick 2 foot by four foot I beams. There wasn't enough energy in all of the fuel available to melt ONE of them under the most perfect conditions WITH forced air.

Am I missing something here? Wouldn't what is being shown in this picture have to occur at all the major support columns for it to display the symmetrical collapse the WTC buildings did? If so, how would this heat have been there at the precise crucial points?

Your side says C-4 coated rebar from 1969.

 

[HUGGY]

Sorry Rat. A coal fire won't melt steel. If it did coal fired steam engine boilers on railroads would have melted.

What you are looking at is a forge. A forge takes an extreme amount of forced air to get enough oxygen into the coal to achieve temps where steel can be formed into different shapes. It would have taken a hurricane to provide enough air to get temps high enough in the WTC's. Then they wouldn't have the concentrated hydrocarbons anyway. carpet and ceiling panels burn up in seconds when doused with JetA. Notice on all the videos the bright orange flame upon impact. THAT was almost ALL of the jet fuel flashing off and burning. Then ya have to figure a way to contain the heat to have it build up to the required temps. Not possible with the windows being blown out right from the gate. A carpet/ceiling panel fire did not melt any steel.

Simple to test. Get yourself a patch of carpet...a ceiling panel and a gallon of kerosene throw em into a oil drum and light it off after ya lay a measly 1/4 inch thick piece of 2' by 2' angle steel across the top. I gaurantee you will not be able to bend it at the maximum heat of that experiment. The dimensions of the steel that supposedly "melted" in the towers was like 2 in or 3 inch thick 2 foot by four foot I beams. There wasn't enough energy in all of the fuel available to melt ONE of them under the most perfect conditions WITH forced air.

Am I missing something here? Wouldn't what is being shown in this picture have to occur at all the major support columns for it to display the symmetrical collapse the WTC buildings did? If so, how would this heat have been there at the precise crucial points?

Your side says C-4 coated rebar from 1969.

There is no "side" moron. Just a lot of unanswered questions.

 

[Mr. Jones]

Sorry Rat. A coal fire won't melt steel. If it did coal fired steam engine boilers on railroads would have melted.

What you are looking at is a forge. A forge takes an extreme amount of forced air to get enough oxygen into the coal to achieve temps where steel can be formed into different shapes. It would have taken a hurricane to provide enough air to get temps high enough in the WTC's. Then they wouldn't have the concentrated hydrocarbons anyway. carpet and ceiling panels burn up in seconds when doused with JetA. Notice on all the videos the bright orange flame upon impact. THAT was almost ALL of the jet fuel flashing off and burning. Then ya have to figure a way to contain the heat to have it build up to the required temps. Not possible with the windows being blown out right from the gate. A carpet/ceiling panel fire did not melt any steel.

Simple to test. Get yourself a patch of carpet...a ceiling panel and a gallon of kerosene throw em into a oil drum and light it off after ya lay a measly 1/4 inch thick piece of 2' by 2' angle steel across the top. I gaurantee you will not be able to bend it at the maximum heat of that experiment. The dimensions of the steel that supposedly "melted" in the towers was like 2 in or 3 inch thick 2 foot by four foot I beams. There wasn't enough energy in all of the fuel available to melt ONE of them under the most perfect conditions WITH forced air.

Am I missing something here? Wouldn't what is being shown in this picture have to occur at all the major support columns for it to display the symmetrical collapse the WTC buildings did? If so, how would this heat have been there at the precise crucial points?

It's worse than that.. The heat would have had to have been concentrated all around the exterior walls at the same temp because THAT is where the designed strength was. There would have to have been very obvious sun blinding fire for an hour or two to achieve the necessary melting all at the precise moment or one wall or corner would have HAD to collapse first sending the top part leaning over and tumbling off the building.

That's what I thought. Thanks for clearing that up for me. I mig welded and used oxyacetylene torches for years and never had a symmetrical collapse of my project happen before due to some insane heat transferring to all the critical components.

 

[HUGGY]

Am I missing something here? Wouldn't what is being shown in this picture have to occur at all the major support columns for it to display the symmetrical collapse the WTC buildings did? If so, how would this heat have been there at the precise crucial points?

It's worse than that.. The heat would have had to have been concentrated all around the exterior walls at the same temp because THAT is where the designed strength was. There would have to have been very obvious sun blinding fire for an hour or two to achieve the necessary melting all at the precise moment or one wall or corner would have HAD to collapse first sending the top part leaning over and tumbling off the building.

That's what I thought. Thanks for clearing that up for me. I mig welded and used oxyacetylene torches for years and never had a symmetrical collapse of my project happen before due to some insane heat transferring to all the critical components.

Same for me. I started welding at age 11 and have worked with metals including all types of welding and forge for almost 50 years.