Title 18, "Misprision of treason" filed in District Court
- Thread starter Christophera
- Start date
correction: only a ******* moron would see concrete in that photo
Christophera
Evidence & Reason Rule
- Thread starter
- #3,523
Correction, only a moron would accept that either of you are anything but agents ofthe infiltration seeking to conceal treason because you have all failed to show this core on 9-11.
Christophera
Evidence & Reason Rule
- Thread starter
- #3,525
The exact opposite from your words state this evidence,
is, generally, exactly the core of WTC 2, concrete, as the global encyclopedic authority on technology states it should be.
Oxford Illustrated Encyclopedia of Invention and Technology, of 1992
and that your text is meaningless inth way you attempt to apply it but IS meaningful evidence for conviction, in a court of law, (if we had one) for misprision of treason.
is, generally, exactly the core of WTC 2, concrete, as the global encyclopedic authority on technology states it should be.
Oxford Illustrated Encyclopedia of Invention and Technology, of 1992
and that your text is meaningless inth way you attempt to apply it but IS meaningful evidence for conviction, in a court of law, (if we had one) for misprision of treason.
Rat in the Hat
Gold Member
- Mar 31, 2010
- 21,949
- 6,023
- 198
Correction, only a moron would accept that Goof-0-phera is anything but an agent of stupidity seeking to conceal reality because he has failed to show an intact concrete core between the day the twins were built, and the day they fell.
Goof-0-phera, living the lie, one day at a time.
Goof-0-phera, living the lie, one day at a time.
Christophera
Evidence & Reason Rule
- Thread starter
- #3,529
So what do you call a psyops agent who refuses to recognize how the public lost 6,000 photo files, logically the plans and 15,000 videotapes, in an official violations of law?
Not one agent has posted an image of this core on 9-11 . . . ever.
Not one agent has explained why none of the supposed steel core columns are in this image showing the WTC 2 core on 9-11.
Christophera
Evidence & Reason Rule
- Thread starter
- #3,531
You mean your masters the infiltrators of the US government have paid Newsweek to go along with the FEMA deception to conceal treason. All you do is disinformation so that figures.
You have never shown this core on 9-11,
No one has, it did not exist.
You have never shown this core on 9-11,
No one has, it did not exist.
Christophera
Evidence & Reason Rule
- Thread starter
- #3,533
Your empty text does noting to change the fact that NO ONE has ever posted an image of that core on 9-11. If there were such images you would post them.
The facts remain. Concrete is easily separated from steel in photos. Concrete o the left, steel on the right.
The facts remain. Concrete is easily separated from steel in photos. Concrete o the left, steel on the right.
Fizz
Rookie
- Nov 20, 2009
- 4,391
- 350
- 0
- Banned
- #3,535
Your empty text does noting to change the fact that NO ONE has ever posted an image of that core on 9-11. If there were such images you would post them.
The facts remain. Concrete is easily separated from steel in photos. Concrete o the left, steel on the right.
******* moron says there are no pics of the steel core and then posts a pic of the steel core!!
Christophera
Evidence & Reason Rule
- Thread starter
- #3,536
Only part of the core is concrete on the left. The steel on the right is outside the core and you have been shown that over and over.
The steel structure has beams that were used to support the floors OUTSIDE the core.
The sloping shape behind the steel structure is concrete.
The steel structure has beams that were used to support the floors OUTSIDE the core.
The sloping shape behind the steel structure is concrete.
Christophera
Evidence & Reason Rule
- Thread starter
- #3,538
From one who has shown nothing whatsoever supporting the solitary official depiction, your text is comedic.
Here's concrete.
a bit fractured.
Bazant describes concrete core walls too, in the 2007 revision, the last one.
it is shown that the observed size range (0.01 mm – 0.1 mm) is fully consistent with this theory and is achievable by collapse driven gravity alone, and that only about 7% of the total gravitational energy converted to kinetic energy of impacts would have sufficed to pulverize all the concrete slabs and core walls (while at least 158 tons of TNT per tower, installed into many small holes drilled into each concrete floor slab and core wall, would have been needed to produce the same degree of pulverization).
A .pdf download.
http://algoxy.com/psych/images2/00 WTC Collapse - Wha#558C6.pdf
Here's concrete.
a bit fractured.
Bazant describes concrete core walls too, in the 2007 revision, the last one.
it is shown that the observed size range (0.01 mm – 0.1 mm) is fully consistent with this theory and is achievable by collapse driven gravity alone, and that only about 7% of the total gravitational energy converted to kinetic energy of impacts would have sufficed to pulverize all the concrete slabs and core walls (while at least 158 tons of TNT per tower, installed into many small holes drilled into each concrete floor slab and core wall, would have been needed to produce the same degree of pulverization).
A .pdf download.
http://algoxy.com/psych/images2/00 WTC Collapse - Wha#558C6.pdf
Rat in the Hat
Gold Member
- Mar 31, 2010
- 21,949
- 6,023
- 198
From one who has shown nothing whatsoever supporting the solitary official depiction, your text is comedic.
Here's concrete.
a bit fractured.
Bazant describes concrete core walls too, in the 2007 revision, the last one.
it is shown that the observed size range (0.01 mm – 0.1 mm) is fully consistent with this theory and is achievable by collapse driven gravity alone, and that only about 7% of the total gravitational energy converted to kinetic energy of impacts would have sufficed to pulverize all the concrete slabs and core walls (while at least 158 tons of TNT per tower, installed into many small holes drilled into each concrete floor slab and core wall, would have been needed to produce the same degree of pulverization).
A .pdf download.
http://algoxy.com/psych/images2/00 WTC Collapse - Wha#558C6.pdf
Wasn't Bazant verified by Robertson?
Oops, sorry about that. Sore subject, huh?
Christophera
Evidence & Reason Rule
- Thread starter
- #3,540
No Oxford verifies Robertson and Domel, they are veriified by evidence of 9-11 and GZ.
Robertson is verified by Oxford, verifying Domel who describes a concrete core verified by the image of WTC 2 core, verifying the top of WTC 2 core falling onto WTC 3, the WTC 1 rebar, just after the WTC 1 west core wall is seen in an end view, then, the WTC 1 east shear wall toppling, consistent with interior box columns silhouetted on WTC 1 north core wall, consistent with ground zero showing the WTC 1 north concrete core base wall, 12 foot thick, all supported as clarification of the many confused statements that do mention concrete in the core including the latest revised NIST analysis of free fall by Bazant et. al 6/21/2007, which actually provides an equivalent amount of high explosives needed to create the rate of fall they are attempting to justify with physics. It doesn't work for justifying explanation for collapse, but at least they won't go down in history as totally supporting the deceptions.
Robertson is verified by Oxford, verifying Domel who describes a concrete core verified by the image of WTC 2 core, verifying the top of WTC 2 core falling onto WTC 3, the WTC 1 rebar, just after the WTC 1 west core wall is seen in an end view, then, the WTC 1 east shear wall toppling, consistent with interior box columns silhouetted on WTC 1 north core wall, consistent with ground zero showing the WTC 1 north concrete core base wall, 12 foot thick, all supported as clarification of the many confused statements that do mention concrete in the core including the latest revised NIST analysis of free fall by Bazant et. al 6/21/2007, which actually provides an equivalent amount of high explosives needed to create the rate of fall they are attempting to justify with physics. It doesn't work for justifying explanation for collapse, but at least they won't go down in history as totally supporting the deceptions.
Similar threads
New Topics
-
-
Zone1 Is it just me or are Western europeans more restraint towards differences then Muslims?- Started by Mortimer
- Replies: 1
-
Zone1 Why orthodox often celebrate easter later then catholics and protestants?
- Started by Mortimer
- Replies: 0
-
