The ongoing 9/11 cover-up.

Status
Not open for further replies.

Soupnazi630

Gold Member
Joined
Dec 9, 2013
Messages
8,576
Reaction score
1,423
Points
265
You are a liar.

You did not say it as a quote and therefore could not misquote you stated
If I might interject here, I do recall hearing about steel that had melted sometime that day.
And jet fuel cannot melt steel.

And I'm pretty sure that some guy said that he had seen the melting of girders, too.
No one saw any of that or any melted steel.

Funny story though
Before I prove to you that such things as a handgun melted into a blob are a reality, I'd like to hear you say one more time that no one saw any such thing.

When you do, I'll show you that it's true, and you can maybe for the first time in hour life ask yourself why you make statements before finding out if they're true or not. And then I'll be asking myself why I would engage you in debate when I'll have to fact check everything you say to make sure you're not lying.

So, why don't you say that there's no such thing? Go ahead . . . fish.
Fire ahead and prove it. Even if someone did see it such a thing would be absolutely irrelevant. The picgture you showed of molten sgteel was NOT specifically steel. Any number of flammable materials could burn that way and such buildings as the towers would have endless flammable materials.

You have nothing.
You're a fukcing hair-trigger, ain't ya? If you slow down just a little, you'll recall that I have put forth no theory. Nor did I post any pictures. That's all in your mind. Your problem is that when you are angry, you become incapable of making a point, and you even recall things that didn't happen.

Anyway, one of the lead investigators into the collapses said he saw melting of girders at the WTC. Wonder why he would say such a thing unless . . .
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Here's something from a guy named Gerry Fornino. He was an FBI bomb technician.

"The things of interest that we'd find would be some of the parts of the plane embedded in the cars and in places in which you just wouldn't expect. Um, a part of the fins off one of the turbines off one of the engines was actually found embedded in one of the engine blocks of one of the cars. But I think the most unique thing about this investigation has just been the unbelievable damage; the levels of heat in which in certain instances firearms were found in some of the vehicles that had completely melted down, and the temperatures that we were told were in the area of three to four thousand degrees, that they melted a steel revolver down into a blob of metal again . . ."
No I am not.

You are an overly sensitive fool who is supporting idiiotic theories even if you never stated one.

You stated you would offer proof. You did not. A quote which YOU typed is worthless.

Anyways no one said any such thing LIAR
Wow! You just deny everything and then hope no one can back up what they say. You should have researched what I had told you. Now you're stuck in a corner.

Here is a video of a lead investigator saying that he saw melting of girders at WTC:

9/11: FEMA investigator Abolhassan Astaneh says, "melting of girders" in WTC - Bing video

So, now that you've made a fool of yourself, are you still going to deny it?

Hey, did you happen to google Gerry Fornino? Do you believe he exists? Do you really doubt that he said exactly what I quoted him as saying? Be careful, you could lose what's left of your credibility.
LOLOL. He wasn't a "lead investigator".
Do you believe that if he is not the lead investigator, nothing he said is correct?
It proves you are lying as he was no such thing,
Abolhassan Astaneh-Asl (Persian: ابوالحسن آستانه‌اصل ‎; born 1947 in Tabriz) is an Iranian -American academic, structural engineer and professor at University of California, Berkeley. He was one of the leading structural engineers to investigate the collapse of the World Trade Center towers on the September 11 attacks.

What was he?

And are you, too, going to deny the existence of Gerry Fornino and what he said?
Just another of many engineers who helped investigate.

He was not a lead investigator.

One stupid lie from you at a time do not try to distract from your idiotic spin by naming someone else.
Okay, let's say he was not a lead investigator. Now, do you believe that an academic, structural engineer and professor at University of California, Berkeley did not know what melt means?

And what about Gerry Fornino? I get the feeling that if he wasn't the "lead" FBI bomb technician, you'd use that as proof that he didn't say what he said, or that it wasn't true. Am I right?
Do you under stand that the building was a willow reed? It was NOT brick and mortar... The floors were cantilevered off central core like spokes.. Like the ribs of an umbrella... and it had an aluminum skin. I knew as soon as the planes hit the buildings would collapse.
Hmm. Someone said that there was evidence of melted steel. Another poster said there was none. I found a statement from a structural engineer and professor, and an FBI bomb technician who saw a handgun melted into a blob.

What does telling me about the "skin" of the building have to do with this?

Do you believe that an academic, structural engineer and professor at University of California, Berkeley did not know what melt means?

And what about Gerry Fornino? I get the feeling that if he wasn't the "lead" FBI bomb technician, you'd use that as proof that he didn't say what he said, or that it wasn't true. Am I right?
Steel girders don't melt, but their integrity is compromised when they get hot enough to sag.
They CAN melt but did not on that day. Whether it was girders or some other pieces of steel some melted steel was found at the bottom of the rubble once the clean up neared the end.

Of course it was still hot. Because it was melted from being at tne bottom of that pit covered with debris. Some what similar to a kiln or blacksmiths forge.

Twoofers ignore the details and scream endlessly about jet fuel not being hot enough to melt steel which is true. They ignore that the jet fuel only started a fire and it grew hot enough to cause the steel supports to lose over half of their strength and sag as you pointed out. When they could no longer support the weight they collapsed exactly as physics dictates that they should
Are you the one who started out saying that no steel melted?
You mean a week later underneath all the debris? Do you have a college education?
First you said that no steel had melted, and now you want to amend that statement? Okay, so how hot did it get in the pile of rubble? And how much melted steel was found?
You are feeding a sock puppet shill.
Yeah, and it's choking on the feed as we speak.
You are the shill and yes choking on facts.

whenever LARAM weighs in it is proof positive you have been humiliated and crushed with facts,
You forgot to make a point. I guess I should first ask you whether or not you believe Gerry Fornino exists. So, how about it? Does he exist?
No I did make a point and it was a factual point. LARAM is by definition the proof you are wrong and defeated when he comes in on your side.

Since you are so determined to change the subject you acknowledge that your stupid claim of people seeing melting steel has been crushed and debunked.
I see.

Anyway, do you believe that Gerry Fornino exists?
So you acknowledge that your stupid claim of people seeing mdelting steel was a lie and proven so
No, what's been proven is that in order for you to maintain your ignorance, you have to pretend that Gerry Fornino doesn't exist. When you fail to acknowledge the existence of someone who proves my point, that means that you're in denial.

So just for the record, do you think Gerry Fornino is a figment of my imagination?
I never said he does not exist,

You are lying and of course yoy wish to hide from the fact that you have been proven wrong about people seeing melting steel.

You KNOW that your first claim of people seeing melting steel has been debunked and proven a lie. Acknowledge that fact and then we can move on.
Alright! So now that we've established that you understand that Gerry Fornino exists, let's find out whether or not you believe he has said what he said.

"The things of interest that we'd find would be some of the parts of the plane embedded in the cars and in places in which you just wouldn't expect. Um, a part of the fins off one of the turbines off one of the engines was actually found embedded in one of the engine blocks of one of the cars. But I think the most unique thing about this investigation has just been the unbelievable damage; the levels of heat in which in certain instances firearms were found in some of the vehicles that had completely melted down, and the temperatures that we were told were in the area of three to four thousand degrees, that they melted a steel revolver down into a blob of metal again . . ."

If you have reason to doubt that that's exactly what he said, make your case.

Also, you're going on about how my first claim was that people saw melting steel. You're editing the past again. But in case you think I'm kidding about that, show me where I said that anyone saw melting steel.
No you are lying.

I edited nothing and proved that you lied about people seeing melting steell which no one did.

That is trhe issue at hand and you do not get to bury your humilation and failure by trying to swtich to something else.

You acknowledsge and admit you lkied like a coward and got proven so by me.

That is fact and everyone knwos it
You're editing the past again. Show me where I claimed that anyone saw melting steel. And when you are unable to produce that, consider what that means.

Anyway, what about Gerry Fornino? You believe he exists, but do you believe that he said this:

"The things of interest that we'd find would be some of the parts of the plane embedded in the cars and in places in which you just wouldn't expect. Um, a part of the fins off one of the turbines off one of the engines was actually found embedded in one of the engine blocks of one of the cars. But I think the most unique thing about this investigation has just been the unbelievable damage; the levels of heat in which in certain instances firearms were found in some of the vehicles that had completely melted down, and the temperatures that we were told were in the area of three to four thousand degrees, that they melted a steel revolver down into a blob of metal again . . ."

Simple yes or no will do.
You are lying again. I am in no way editing the past. You got caught in an outright lie and that is a proven fact.

You do not get to evade that fact by burying it.

Go ahead and admit you were proven wrong and caught in a lie and we ca move on to your next failed effort
Noooooooo, I caught you in a lie.

You said I claimed that people saw steel melting. I challenged you to produce the post in which I made that claim. You couldn't find one. So let's get back to where we were.

Anyway, what about Gerry Fornino? You believe that Gerry Fornino exists, but do you believe that he said this:

"The things of interest that we'd find would be some of the parts of the plane embedded in the cars and in places in which you just wouldn't expect. Um, a part of the fins off one of the turbines off one of the engines was actually found embedded in one of the engine blocks of one of the cars. But I think the most unique thing about this investigation has just been the unbelievable damage; the levels of heat in which in certain instances firearms were found in some of the vehicles that had completely melted down, and the temperatures that we were told were in the area of three to four thousand degrees, that they melted a steel revolver down into a blob of metal again . . ."

Simple yes or no will do.
You are a proven liar you caught no such thing and that is FACT.
In post 229 you said someone saw the melting of girders ( which asre steel )

You trhen went on to create a fictitious lie about a person who was NOT a lead investigator and who saw NO MELTING of steel.

You are the one absolutely proven to be a liar and that us fact you cannot refute.


You do not get to cover up your lie by moving on to others. Address the FACT that i proved you a liar and destroyed your argument
This is probably going to be my last post to you because you have no idea what has happened to you.

You are calling Astaneh-Asl a liar because you refuse to acknowledge that when he said that he saw melting of girders, he was talking about what he saw eight days after the attack. That should have given you a clue that he was talking about girders that had been melted. How in hell could he have witnessed girders melting if he wasn't there?

And it would appear that you have failed to locate any post of mine in which I claimed that anyone saw melting girders.

Here's what I've said:

". . . steel that had melted . . ."
". . . that had melted down into blobs . . ."
". . . a handgun melted into a blob . . ."
". . . a melted handgun . . ."
". . . a handgun melted into a blob . . ."
". . . steel had melted . . ."
". . . no steel had melted . . ."
". . . evidence of melted steel . . ."
". . . FBI bomb technician who saw a handgun melted into a blob . . ."
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

If you don't understand the difference between melting and melted, just try to remember that melting indicates present tense, and melted indicates past tense.

Anyway, what about Gerry Fornino? You believe he exists, but do you believe that he said this:

"The things of interest that we'd find would be some of the parts of the plane embedded in the cars and in places in which you just wouldn't expect. Um, a part of the fins off one of the turbines off one of the engines was actually found embedded in one of the engine blocks of one of the cars. But I think the most unique thing about this investigation has just been the unbelievable damage; the levels of heat in which in certain instances firearms were found in some of the vehicles that had completely melted down, and the temperatures that we were told were in the area of three to four thousand degrees, that they melted a steel revolver down into a blob of metal again . . ."

Simple yes or no will do.
I already said that stupid.

I pointed out to you that his command of english was poor and when he said he saw melting of steel he meant melted steel after the fact,.

You continued to lie about it until you could not anymore.

YOU ARE A LIAR.

I linked to the quote where you said someone saw MELTING OF STEEL

MELTING OF STEEL

Read those words and eat igt because I have proven you a liar and thjat you are the one who edited history.

Acknowledgew that facf NOW
Dude, when I said someone had seen "melting of girders," I used those words because I didn't want to misquote the guy who said it. So yeah, he saw girders that had melted. So your contention that there was no melted steel isn't accurate, is it?

And what about . . .

"The things of interest that we'd find would be some of the parts of the plane embedded in the cars and in places in which you just wouldn't expect. Um, a part of the fins off one of the turbines off one of the engines was actually found embedded in one of the engine blocks of one of the cars. But I think the most unique thing about this investigation has just been the unbelievable damage; the levels of heat in which in certain instances firearms were found in some of the vehicles that had completely melted down, and the temperatures that we were told were in the area of three to four thousand degrees, that they melted a steel revolver down into a blob of metal again . . ."

Simple yes or no will do.
You are a liar who is now backpedaling and trying to weasel out of it

You do not get to evade and change the subject until you acknoledge that you are a liar many times over.

You made a declarative statement about what someoone saw you did not try to quote them and are now lying again like a coward. Yoyu are clearly becoming as much of a coward and liar as LARAM and Anglelo my bitch

Address the lie AND THEN you may move on to your next one
 

Soupnazi630

Gold Member
Joined
Dec 9, 2013
Messages
8,576
Reaction score
1,423
Points
265
IDIOTS I HAVE KNOWN-----usually failed both high school geometry and highschool chemistry. ---aka
intro to baby science. I tutored the town idiots in these subjects-----one became a lawyer
You're on the dark side.
Fuck off loser.
Present some evieence which you have never done.

Irosie is correct you do not know shit about science.
 

justinacolmena

Gold Member
Joined
Oct 9, 2017
Messages
6,035
Reaction score
1,880
Points
210
Location
alaska, usa
Thats true and no one claimed it did.
It doesn't matter. Obviously the planes weakened the steel enough to create the initial collapse. But that in no way explains how either tower collapsed against the force of the inner columns in accelerated freefall. Neither you, nor NIST or anyone else has tried to explain it.
I have military surplus camp stove that burns jet fuel. It doesn't get hot enough to melt the steel.

Why did the whole structure give way in an accelerated free fall?

Did the engineers really build something that precarious with no margin of safety for earthquake or other natural disaster?

Plane hits the building, things break on impact at that point, sure, but why should anything below that level be at risk?

The ancient Egyptians built pyramids with a solid base to support higher structures.

Those buildings still exist to this day.
 

Soupnazi630

Gold Member
Joined
Dec 9, 2013
Messages
8,576
Reaction score
1,423
Points
265
Thats true and no one claimed it did.
It doesn't matter. Obviously the planes weakened the steel enough to create the initial collapse. But that in no way explains how either tower collapsed against the force of the inner columns in accelerated freefall. Neither you, nor NIST or anyone else has tried to explain it.
I have military surplus camp stove that burns jet fuel. It doesn't get hot enough to melt the steel.

Why did the whole structure give way in an accelerated free fall?

Did the engineers really build something that precarious with no margin of safety for earthquake or other natural disaster?

Plane hits the building, things break on impact at that point, sure, but why should anything below that level be at risk?

The ancient Egyptians built pyramids with a solid base to support higher structures.

Those buildings still exist to this day.
No one ever claimed jet fuel melted steel.

None of the structures gave way at fre fall speed THAT IS FACT.

The WTC was not a pyramid.

Ther WTC was well designed but no building is invulnerable making your question worthless and meaningless.
 
OP
Angelo

Angelo

Platinum Member
Joined
Jan 5, 2019
Messages
28,474
Reaction score
13,990
Points
1,100
Location
_Arkansas~_The Natural State_
Say whatever you want disinformation trolls because people can see with their own eyes what happened. Nothing you can say can change anything....... we will never stop asking questions until the truth comes out.
 

Soupnazi630

Gold Member
Joined
Dec 9, 2013
Messages
8,576
Reaction score
1,423
Points
265
Say whatever you want information trolls because people can see with their own eyes what happened.
Yes they saw me own you and prove you a liar.

No one saw the shit you lie about the world knows yoiu are an ass clown who has been shredded and crushed.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Most reactions - Past 7 days

Forum List

Top