Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
I love farce!Cool,you posted it. Now watch it. You're almost there. Enjoy.
The farce is you believing everything you were told about 911. So yes,you do love farce.
i love farce!
the farce is you believing everything you were told about 911. So yes,you do love farce.
yet you believe everything that the disgraced professor jones tells you to believe.....
Him and less than .01% of the architects and engineers.....
yes dear!"they told us to get out of there because they were worried about 7 world trade center, which is right behind it, coming down. We were up on the upper floors of the verizon building looking at it. You could just see the whole bottom corner of the building was gone. We could look right out over to where the trade centers were because we were that high up. Looking over the smaller buildings. I just remember it was tremendous, tremendous fires going on. Finally they pulled us out. They said all right, get out of that building because that 7, they were really worried about. They pulled us out of there and then they regrouped everybody on vesey street, between the water and west street. They put everybody back in there. Finally it did come down. From there - this is much later on in the day, because every day we were so worried about that building we didn't really want to get people close. They were trying to limit the amount of people that were in there. Finally it did come down." - richard banaciskiupdate:
Here is an e-mail from chief daniel nigro
regarding wtc 7: The long-awaited us government nist (national institute of standards and technology) report on the collapse of wtc 7 is due to be published at the end of this year (although it has been delayed already a few times [ adding fuel to the conspiracy theorists fires!]). That report should explain the cause and mechanics of the collapse in great detail. Early on the afternoon of september 11th 2001, following the collapse of wtc 1 & 2, i feared a collapse of wtc 7 (as did many on my staff).
The reasons are as follows:
the nist report damge played no significant role in the collapse
nist determined damage was not a significant factor in the collapse
nist determined the atrium played no role in the collapse
regards, dan nigro
chief of department fdny (retired)
the okc federal building wasn't constructed the same as wtc7 and did not have its lower floors on fire for 6 hours. We can see clear as day that the building was not a tube in a tube design. We can see its lower floors weren't on fire. We can see the columns are covered in concrete. All from the same photo the conspiracy theorists use to show us how incredibly intelligent they are.
the farce is you believing everything you were told about 911. So yes,you do love farce.
yet you believe everything that the disgraced professor jones tells you to believe.....
Him and less than .01% of the architects and engineers.....
do you have a link to these tens of thousands you claim support the theories of nist !!!!..I would love to see it
yet you believe everything that the disgraced professor jones tells you to believe.....
Him and less than .01% of the architects and engineers.....
do you have a link to these tens of thousands you claim support the theories of nist !!!!..I would love to see it
Don't need a link, we know that less than .01% have signed on with your guys........ That's good enough for me........
do you have a link to these tens of thousands you claim support the theories of nist !!!!..I would love to see it
Don't need a link, we know that less than .01% have signed on with your guys........ That's good enough for me........
Well it shouldn't be good enough for you. Have you watched the movie '911: Explosive Evidence - Experts Speak Out?' If you haven't,you really should. These people are not "Crazy Twoofers" or wearing "Tin Foil Hats." These are highly decorated award-winning Architects & Engineers. Pay close attention to the last segment of the film. That may be the most important part of the film. Check it out.
Don't need a link, we know that less than .01% have signed on with your guys........ That's good enough for me........
Well it shouldn't be good enough for you. Have you watched the movie '911: Explosive Evidence - Experts Speak Out?' If you haven't,you really should. These people are not "Crazy Twoofers" or wearing "Tin Foil Hats." These are highly decorated award-winning Architects & Engineers. Pay close attention to the last segment of the film. That may be the most important part of the film. Check it out.
I'm so sorry, I've probably watched more truther videos than you've even heard about, I don't need to watch yet another one put out by the same crowd.
The facts are that less than one one hundred of one percent of the "highly decorated award-winning Architects & Engineers" in the country have signed on to your arguments. Think about that, less than one out of a thousand. Now if Mr Obama had one vote out of a thousand would you believe he should be President?
Of course they lied. Different sections of the Government told different lies.... But that is normal. And it doesn't prove that there was any controlled demolition. Show me the audio of a controlled demolition that day and maybe we can talk....
yes dear!"they told us to get out of there because they were worried about 7 world trade center, which is right behind it, coming down. We were up on the upper floors of the verizon building looking at it. You could just see the whole bottom corner of the building was gone. We could look right out over to where the trade centers were because we were that high up. Looking over the smaller buildings. I just remember it was tremendous, tremendous fires going on. Finally they pulled us out. They said all right, get out of that building because that 7, they were really worried about. They pulled us out of there and then they regrouped everybody on vesey street, between the water and west street. They put everybody back in there. Finally it did come down. From there - this is much later on in the day, because every day we were so worried about that building we didn't really want to get people close. They were trying to limit the amount of people that were in there. Finally it did come down." - richard banaciskiupdate:
Here is an e-mail from chief daniel nigro
the nist report damge played no significant role in the collapse
nist determined damage was not a significant factor in the collapse
nist determined the atrium played no role in the collapse
the okc federal building wasn't constructed the same as wtc7 and did not have its lower floors on fire for 6 hours. We can see clear as day that the building was not a tube in a tube design. We can see its lower floors weren't on fire. We can see the columns are covered in concrete. All from the same photo the conspiracy theorists use to show us how incredibly intelligent they are.
no link dipsht
lol! "once more into the breach!Of course they lied. Different sections of the Government told different lies.... But that is normal. And it doesn't prove that there was any controlled demolition. Show me the audio of a controlled demolition that day and maybe we can talk....
Audio can be very tricky. Thermite does not necessarily create a loud explosive sound. But i'm no expert. Check out what some experts do say though. The films '911: Explosive Evidence - Experts Speak Out' and 'Improbable Collapse: The Demolition Of Our Republic' really are very interesting.
"NIST concluded that the source of the molten material was aluminum alloys from the aircraft, since these are known to melt between 475 degrees Celsius and 640 degrees Celsius (depending on the particular alloy), well below the expected temperatures (about 1,000 degrees Celsius) in the vicinity of the fires. Aluminum is not expected to ignite at normal fire temperatures and there is no visual indication that the material flowing from the tower was burning.Whiteness said that the North Tower turned after the plane hit. The view from the office they had been looking out for the past 5 years was much more East than before it hit. Structural damage must have been sever to cause this.
1700 Degree Aluminum Pour
Don't forget the FDNY had many that heard, and experienced explosions, that were denied to have been heard or existed by NIST. They were present at the scene too.Those buildings were left standing. They resembled what large buildings should look like after extensive damage. WTC 7 did not. I have posted photos of these buildngs and others like the Murrah Building which clearly show WTC 7 was very unusual to say the least. Fire did not cause that perfectly symmetrical rapid collapse.
That was not the point of that picture. The point was to argue the claim that "normal fire with only office material as combustibles, steel would not weaken, nor melt to cause damage to the steel". The picture shows that it DOES damage steel.
As for comparing WTC 7 to the Murrah building...............why? They were constructed completely different and damage done to them was completely different. I'm not sure what your comparison is supposed to point out.
As for the collapse of WTC 7, it was FAR from symmetrical. The east penthouse fell into the building far ahead of the exterior walls. So the interior was failing first, which is completely consistent with interior columns failing due to fire.
And don't forget, that the FDNY had many people survey that building in the hours before it fell. It was no surprise to them when it fell. They had been expecting it all afternoon.
Please post where this is so historically consistent, due to fire?So the interior was failing first, which is completely consistent with interior columns failing due to fire.
Fire attacks steel, and then the steel dissipates throughout the building, meaning that if by chance the load bearing steel supports fail, it would fail towards the weakest points first, causing a very uneven collapse, not the straight down demolition we all have seen.
Your comments are indicative of someone that has not studied in detail just how steel reacts to fire, nor how the NIST testing failed to prove what you and they are claiming indeed happened.
NIST has only a theory, a weak and improbable one at that, that does not fit with the observed results, and as a government agency needed a narrative that corresponded with the governments.
Planes, jet fuel, fires, but leave out much important, relevant facts, and even witnesses. Barry Jennings is first that comes to mind.
If NIST is so sure about its hypothesis then why wont they allow independent study of their computer model data for replication purposes? Why deny 2.25 secs. of freefall.
Why did they deny the shear studs, then change the story again?
Why did they change the floors the fires were on and their temps?
Because they were caught red handed lying, and these facts were pointed out to them.
But NIST being the top dog with top people doing the study had to be
checked on these things, and made to acknowledge real facts.
They tried to lie and were caught, and can not be trusted.
How the hell can anybody not expect to see the facade distort while all this internal collapsing was taking place?
Was the outside of the building NOT attached to the rest of the internal parts?
Why was the lobby destroyed prior to the collapse of the tower that
allegedly caused damage to WTC 7?
The penthouse is proof that the internal structure was taken out like would occur in a CD, NOT BY RANDOM FIRES.
Fire can not by its very nature remove all the support at the precise time to cause a straight down collapse for the first 2.25 seconds unless it stays put in one place and achieves the required temps, which NIST has no proof that it did, and if it did it would have collapsed to that side first in a staggered manner.
Steel-framed skyscrapers have never collapsed from fire, since theyre built from steel that doesnt melt below 2750 degrees Fahrenheit. No fuel, not even jet fuel, which is really just refined kerosene, will burn hotter than 1500 degrees Fahrenheit.
To understand this, one must familiarize themselves with the nature of fire, and its effect on steel, and the conservation of energy and momentum as well.
The assumption of constant velocity of the falling mass ignores the immediate deceleration which would be felt by the falling mass, unless the falling mass had no resistance, which of course NIST said there was.
So why did the buildings fall so fast, and just short of the time it would take to drop a billiard ball from the tops?
Reply to NIST
Three large bulidings collapsing perfectly symmetrically into their own footprints on the same day within hours of each other is pretty hard to accept as reality. It just doesn't happen. Those kinds of collapses are unheard of except in cases of controlled demolition. Yet three buildings collapsed that way on the same day within hours of each other? No,fire alone cannot be the explanation. Call me a "Crazy Twoofer",but i still think the Government's story on 911 is Bullshit.
Three large bulidings collapsing perfectly symmetrically into their own footprints on the same day within hours of each other is pretty hard to accept as reality. It just doesn't happen. Those kinds of collapses are unheard of except in cases of controlled demolition. Yet three buildings collapsed that way on the same day within hours of each other? No,fire alone cannot be the explanation. Call me a "Crazy Twoofer",but i still think the Government's story on 911 is Bullshit.
You are the one believing bullshit. the facts have been laid out here for you and you ignore them. So tell me, whose sock are you?
Any audio of those explosions yet?
Any proof of any type of controlled demo yet? You know like det cord or blasting caps? Maybe a witness who saw the people preparing these three buildings for demolition? You know, just any old thing that would stand up in court.........
