Proof the cover story for 9/111 began immediately after the attacks

[Crackerjack]

fires emitting black smoke are not serious fires and can be put out easily.

Seriously, where do you come up with this shit?

the fires where not reported to be very large by first response and eyewitnesses near the impact area .testing of the steel shows no evidence of the temp required to cause failure of structural steel

The point rimjob was attempting to make is that black smoke = weak fire, when, in actuality, black smoke usually indicates, if anything, a well-established fire. There is also such a thing as a "black fire" in which the smoke heats up enough to do damage a fire would do, and could possibly reach up to and beyond 1000° F, which is within the range that structural steel may weaken.

But rimjob is too stupid to understand any of that, naturally.

 

[Liability]

Seriously, where do you come up with this shit?

the fires where not reported to be very large by first response and eyewitnesses near the impact area .testing of the steel shows no evidence of the temp required to cause failure of structural steel

The point rimjob was attempting to make is that black smoke = weak fire, when, in actuality, black smoke usually indicates a well-established fire. There is also such a thing as a "black fire" in which the smoke heats up enough to do damage a fire would do, and could possibly reach up to and beyond 1000° F, which is within the range that structural steel may weaken.

But rimjob is too stupid to understand any of that, naturally.

and too dishonest to admit it even if he could figure it out.

 

[eots]

Seriously, where do you come up with this shit?

the fires where not reported to be very large by first response and eyewitnesses near the impact area .testing of the steel shows no evidence of the temp required to cause failure of structural steel

nonsense. Nonsense. And for a refreshing change of pace, nonsense.

Black smoke doesn't mean diddly dick: black smoke

and the conclusion that the fires caused the joints to give way leading to the collapse has never come close to being scientifically refuted.

no ,they are facts ,firefighters that reached the impact zone reported small containable fires as did survivors,,,and there is no forensic evidence or testing of remaining steel that shows fires reached anything close to temperatures predicted as required for failure

 

[Toro]

Wow, I just noticed that this "9/11 inside job" lists the people he puts on his ignore list. How stupid is THAT!! So, you log onto a discussion board and put people with apposing viewpoints on "ignore"? So you only want to talk to people that don't challenge your intellect? That is jaw-dropping idiocy.

Thats just scratching the surface.

 

[Liability]

the fires where not reported to be very large by first response and eyewitnesses near the impact area .testing of the steel shows no evidence of the temp required to cause failure of structural steel

nonsense. Nonsense. And for a refreshing change of pace, nonsense.

Black smoke doesn't mean diddly dick: black smoke

and the conclusion that the fires caused the joints to give way leading to the collapse has never come close to being scientifically refuted.

no ,they are facts ,firefighters that reached the impact zone reported small containable fires as did survivors,,,and there is no forensic evidence or testing of remaining steel that shows fires reached anything close to temperatures predicted as required for failure

No. It's nonsense.

We all already KNOW -- without question -- that the very intense fires raged and that it was more than just jet fuel that burned. We know the perimeter walls bowed outward as a consequence of the structural weakening from the crashes and as a result of the very intense heat.

It takes a special brand of dishonest imbecility to try to force fit into the honest scientifically based analysis your baseless rancid conspiracy horseshit.

You have a sick and twisted mind. You twoofers are dishonest fucks and pieces of shit one and all.

 

[eots]

nonsense. Nonsense. And for a refreshing change of pace, nonsense.

Black smoke doesn't mean diddly dick: black smoke

and the conclusion that the fires caused the joints to give way leading to the collapse has never come close to being scientifically refuted.

no ,they are facts ,firefighters that reached the impact zone reported small containable fires as did survivors,,,and there is no forensic evidence or testing of remaining steel that shows fires reached anything close to temperatures predicted as required for failure

No. It's nonsense.

We all already KNOW -- without question -- that the very intense fires raged and that it was more than just jet fuel that burned. We know the perimeter walls bowed outward as a consequence of the structural weakening from the crashes and as a result of the very intense heat.

We know no such thing..the forensic evidence does not indicate these temperatures existed ..there is no proof..it is the NIST collapse theory

It takes a special brand of dishonest imbecility to try to force fit into the honest scientifically based analysis your baseless rancid conspiracy horseshit.

You have a sick and twisted mind. You twoofers are dishonest fucks and pieces of shit one and all

and this is just more of your crude meaningless drivel.. that does that does nothing to address the fact that...this is the NIST theory and there is no proof it is correct

 

[Liability]

* * * *
We know no such thing..the forensic evidence does not indicate these temperatures existed ..there is no proof..it is the NIST collapse theory

Yeah. We DO know it. You merely lie about it.

The forensic evidence clearly establishes that the structural damage coupled with the heat DID cause the outer perimeter wall to bow outward and for the joints to fail.

You can lie to the contrary all you want, but your lies -- in the end -- are just lies. You have zero persuasive power because you lie all the fucking time. You are a sick fuck. Period. End of story.

All twoofers should be institutionalized.

 

[eots]

* * * *
We know no such thing..the forensic evidence does not indicate these temperatures existed ..there is no proof..it is the NIST collapse theory

Yeah. We DO know it. You merely lie about it.

The forensic evidence clearly establishes that the structural damage coupled with the heat DID cause the outer perimeter wall to bow outward and for the joints to fail.

You can lie to the contrary all you want, but your lies -- in the end -- are just lies. You have zero persuasive power because you lie all the fucking time. You are a sick fuck. Period. End of story.



All twoofers should be institutionalized.

you can provide no evidence that the temperatures required for failure where present at the wtc collapses...thats why you ramble on so with the swear words and inane insults...end of story

Former Chief of NIST's Fire Science Division Calls for Independent Review of World Trade Center Investigation


although the key elements of the core steel were demographically labeled. A careful reading of the NIST report shows that they have no evidence that the temperatures they predict as necessary for failure are corroborated by findings of the little steel debris they have.

OpEdNews - Page 2 of Article: Former Chief of NIST's Fire Science Division Calls for Independent Review of World Trade Center Investigation

 

[eots]

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uor8NhUr_90]Fire Fighter Erik Lawyer Slams NIST And The 9/11 "Investigation" - YouTube[/ame]

 

[eots]

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HjrpKV_mI18]WTC - Fire Fighters's Radio Communications In South Tower - YouTube[/ame]

 

[Liability]

Citing a couple of fubars doesn't constitute proof.

The very notion is fucking ridiculous.

But you twoofers are too fucked up to even grasp how moronic you all are.

 

[Rat in the Hat]

Seriously, where do you come up with this shit?

the fires where not reported to be very large by first response and eyewitnesses near the impact area .testing of the steel shows no evidence of the temp required to cause failure of structural steel

The point rimjob was attempting to make is that black smoke = weak fire, when, in actuality, black smoke usually indicates, if anything, a well-established fire. There is also such a thing as a "black fire" in which the smoke heats up enough to do damage a fire would do, and could possibly reach up to and beyond 1000° F, which is within the range that structural steel may weaken.

But rimjob is too stupid to understand any of that, naturally.

Actually, black smoke is not an indication of the temperature of a fire, it is an indication of what is burning.

A fire rich in hydrocarbons will burn with a black smoke, indicating how much carbon soot is rising with the heat and fumes.

A fire that does not contain much or any hydrocarbon (such as a wax candle or alcohol) will emit either white smoke, or no smoke at all.

 

[Rat in the Hat]

the fires where not reported to be very large by first response and eyewitnesses near the impact area .testing of the steel shows no evidence of the temp required to cause failure of structural steel

nonsense. Nonsense. And for a refreshing change of pace, nonsense.

Black smoke doesn't mean diddly dick: black smoke

and the conclusion that the fires caused the joints to give way leading to the collapse has never come close to being scientifically refuted.

no ,they are facts ,firefighters that reached the impact zone reported small containable fires as did survivors,,,and there is no forensic evidence or testing of remaining steel that shows fires reached anything close to temperatures predicted as required for failure

The firefighters only reached the lowest floor of the impact area, so they only saw small pockets of fire. The largest fire zones were at the fuselage impact area and above, and had much larger areas that were engulfed with flames.

But, you knew that, didn't you?

 

[eots]

nonsense. Nonsense. And for a refreshing change of pace, nonsense.

Black smoke doesn't mean diddly dick: black smoke

and the conclusion that the fires caused the joints to give way leading to the collapse has never come close to being scientifically refuted.

no ,they are facts ,firefighters that reached the impact zone reported small containable fires as did survivors,,,and there is no forensic evidence or testing of remaining steel that shows fires reached anything close to temperatures predicted as required for failure

The firefighters only reached the lowest floor of the impact area, so they only saw small pockets of fire. The largest fire zones were at the fuselage impact area and above, and had much larger areas that were engulfed with flames.

But, you knew that, didn't you?

but there were people in the impact hole waving for help ??? and still there is the fact of no forensic evidence of such temperatures

 

[Light]

Fighters's Radio Communications In South Tower - YouTube

I'm not sure what that video is supposed to prove. The firemen only made it to lowest floor below the impact point. The dishonesty (or ignorance) of the narration is quite obvious. He takes the statement of Orio Palmer, "multiple 10-45 code 1's" and then claims that "10-45" means injured people. He leaves off the "code 1" which means DEAD.

10-45 D.O.A. OR SERIOUS INJURY
Transmitted IMMEDIATELY upon the discovery of a fatality
or serious injury at a fire or emergency. This shall be
followed as soon as possible with the appropriate Code
and the number of victims.

CODE 1 Victim Deceased

CODE 2 Victim suffering serious injury. (Apparently
life threatening)

CODE 3 Victim suffering serious injury. (Apparently
NOT life threatening.)

NOTE: Do not transmit this signal for minor
injuries.

REF. nyfd.com/radio.html



So how are there are dead people below the point of impact if the fires and damage were not severe??

At the end of the video, he makes reference to the office fire that is "said to of destroyed 110 stories of structural steel".......................REALLY!!?? Who said that!? That is not at all the official version of events. That has to be the stupidest thing I've heard in a long time. That is an extremely dishonest video and anyone who takes it for "evidence" is not looking for the TRUTH.
The truth is that these firemen made it up to the 78-79th floor, which was the lowest point of the impact. They could not precede any further due to the damage. And before they could take any action to get higher, the building collapsed............killing them. So, using there voices to try and prove a ridiculous series of events is just vile!

 

[eots]

Fighters's Radio Communications In South Tower - YouTube

I'm not sure what that video is supposed to prove. The firemen only made it to lowest floor below the impact point. The dishonesty (or ignorance) of the narration is quite obvious. He takes the statement of Orio Palmer, "multiple 10-45 code 1's" and then claims that "10-45" means injured people. He leaves off the "code 1" which means DEAD.

10-45 D.O.A. OR SERIOUS INJURY
Transmitted IMMEDIATELY upon the discovery of a fatality
or serious injury at a fire or emergency. This shall be
followed as soon as possible with the appropriate Code
and the number of victims.

CODE 1 Victim Deceased

CODE 2 Victim suffering serious injury. (Apparently
life threatening)

CODE 3 Victim suffering serious injury. (Apparently
NOT life threatening.)

NOTE: Do not transmit this signal for minor
injuries.

REF. nyfd.com/radio.html



So how are there are dead people below the point of impact if the fires and damage were not severe??

At the end of the video, he makes reference to the office fire that is "said to of destroyed 110 stories of structural steel".......................REALLY!!?? Who said that!? That is not at all the official version of events. That has to be the stupidest thing I've heard in a long time. That is an extremely dishonest video and anyone who takes it for "evidence" is not looking for the TRUTH.
The truth is that these firemen made it up to the 78-79th floor, which was the lowest point of the impact. They could not precede any further due to the damage. And before they could take any action to get higher, the building collapsed............killing them. So, using there voices to try and prove a ridiculous series of events is just vile!

it would of been the explosions witnesses reported throughout the building
the vile dishonesty here is claiming temperatures existed when there is no evidence in the steel tested of such temperatures

 

[eots]

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tQ5qVkJ0-hs]9/11: Three WTC survivors in explosive interview - YouTube[/ame]

 

[eots]

 

[Light]

Fighters's Radio Communications In South Tower - YouTube

I'm not sure what that video is supposed to prove. The firemen only made it to lowest floor below the impact point. The dishonesty (or ignorance) of the narration is quite obvious. He takes the statement of Orio Palmer, "multiple 10-45 code 1's" and then claims that "10-45" means injured people. He leaves off the "code 1" which means DEAD.

10-45 D.O.A. OR SERIOUS INJURY
Transmitted IMMEDIATELY upon the discovery of a fatality
or serious injury at a fire or emergency. This shall be
followed as soon as possible with the appropriate Code
and the number of victims.

CODE 1 Victim Deceased

CODE 2 Victim suffering serious injury. (Apparently
life threatening)

CODE 3 Victim suffering serious injury. (Apparently
NOT life threatening.)

NOTE: Do not transmit this signal for minor
injuries.

REF. nyfd.com/radio.html



So how are there are dead people below the point of impact if the fires and damage were not severe??

At the end of the video, he makes reference to the office fire that is "said to of destroyed 110 stories of structural steel".......................REALLY!!?? Who said that!? That is not at all the official version of events. That has to be the stupidest thing I've heard in a long time. That is an extremely dishonest video and anyone who takes it for "evidence" is not looking for the TRUTH.
The truth is that these firemen made it up to the 78-79th floor, which was the lowest point of the impact. They could not precede any further due to the damage. And before they could take any action to get higher, the building collapsed............killing them. So, using there voices to try and prove a ridiculous series of events is just vile!

it would of been the explosions witnesses reported throughout the building
the vile dishonesty here is claiming temperatures existed when there is no evidence in the steel tested of such temperatures

Could that be because they didn't have EVERY SINGLE piece of steel available to them? That this wasn't an "in a perfect world" situation? Do you think they know exactly what columns were impacted by the bearing hub on the starboard engine? This was a huge catastrophe. And to assume that every detail can be found................you would have to be a "conspiracy theorist" of the most delusional level.

And sense you brought up having "no evidence", there is no evidence of bombs, C4, thermite or whatever explosive device you believe. People hearing explosions in a building that is on fire does not equal bombs. Finding physical evidence of a bomb...........equals a bomb. So how does your theory stack up against any other theory, let alone the official one?
Do you actually believe EVERY video put on YouTube!? Damn....what is the weather like on your planet?

 

[eots]

I'm not sure what that video is supposed to prove. The firemen only made it to lowest floor below the impact point. The dishonesty (or ignorance) of the narration is quite obvious. He takes the statement of Orio Palmer, "multiple 10-45 code 1's" and then claims that "10-45" means injured people. He leaves off the "code 1" which means DEAD.

10-45 D.O.A. OR SERIOUS INJURY
Transmitted IMMEDIATELY upon the discovery of a fatality
or serious injury at a fire or emergency. This shall be
followed as soon as possible with the appropriate Code
and the number of victims.

CODE 1 Victim Deceased

CODE 2 Victim suffering serious injury. (Apparently
life threatening)

CODE 3 Victim suffering serious injury. (Apparently
NOT life threatening.)

NOTE: Do not transmit this signal for minor
injuries.

REF. nyfd.com/radio.html



So how are there are dead people below the point of impact if the fires and damage were not severe??

At the end of the video, he makes reference to the office fire that is "said to of destroyed 110 stories of structural steel".......................REALLY!!?? Who said that!? That is not at all the official version of events. That has to be the stupidest thing I've heard in a long time. That is an extremely dishonest video and anyone who takes it for "evidence" is not looking for the TRUTH.
The truth is that these firemen made it up to the 78-79th floor, which was the lowest point of the impact. They could not precede any further due to the damage. And before they could take any action to get higher, the building collapsed............killing them. So, using there voices to try and prove a ridiculous series of events is just vile!

it would of been the explosions witnesses reported throughout the building
the vile dishonesty here is claiming temperatures existed when there is no evidence in the steel tested of such temperatures

Could that be because they didn't have EVERY SINGLE piece of steel available to them? That this wasn't an "in a perfect world" situation? Do you think they know exactly what columns were impacted by the bearing hub on the starboard engine? This was a huge catastrophe. And to assume that every detail can be found................you would have to be a "conspiracy theorist" of the most delusional level.

And sense you brought up having "no evidence", there is no evidence of bombs, C4, thermite or whatever explosive device you believe. People hearing explosions in a building that is on fire does not equal bombs. Finding physical evidence of a bomb...........equals a bomb. So how does your theory stack up against any other theory, let alone the official one?
Do you actually believe EVERY video put on YouTube!? Damn....what is the weather like on your planet?

No testing for explosive residue was ever done
[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uor8NhUr_90&feature=player_embedded]Fire Fighter Erik Lawyer Slams NIST And The 9/11 "Investigation" - YouTube[/ame]