Victims' Families Want To Air New 9/11 Truth Ad

[SFC Ollie]

What they are referring to is different agencies and the military holding back on certain classified material, and some things that they may not have told the complete truth about because of CYA. There were mistakes made that day by our leadership in different agencies and parts of the military. I don't know what they were nor do I have any clue what part of which stories were embellished or ignored to protect those agencies and divisions. Chances are we'll never know.

But the report is still as close to the truth as we can get.

Now can you tell us how a building fell on WTC 7?

Not difficult we all saw it happen. A 110 story building fell on it. What else do we need to know? There was no evidence of a controlled demolition. There were fires that raged through the building for 7 hours. And the Firemen reported creaking and bulging....
It fell down......

 

[eots]

What they are referring to is different agencies and the military holding back on certain classified material, and some things that they may not have told the complete truth about because of CYA. There were mistakes made that day by our leadership in different agencies and parts of the military. I don't know what they were nor do I have any clue what part of which stories were embellished or ignored to protect those agencies and divisions. Chances are we'll never know.

But the report is still as close to the truth as we can get.

Now can you tell us how a building fell on WTC 7?

Not difficult we all saw it happen. A 110 story building fell on it. What else do we need to know? There was no evidence of a controlled demolition. There were fires that raged through the building for 7 hours. And the Firemen reported creaking and bulging....
It fell down......

fire was the reported cause of the collapse Ollie...according to nist falling debris started the fires and thats it and the same fires ignited any other way would still of resulted in a collapse..so wtf are you talking about ????

 

[Rat in the Hat]

Those stupid twooftard fuckers!!! hahahaha., only 2000 people in a decade disprove of the official conspiracy theory and 1500 of them signed onto A&E for 9/11 truth!!

Way to go Nutjobs!!

The debunker movement has made great strides in convincing people that the WTC towers did not fall symmetrically, nor anywhere near free fall speed! Fires, especially on a few floors, do indeed have enough power to cause a total collapse to steel framed skyscrapers!

Aerosolized steel in the dust, HA!!! That means nothing because the building was collapsing so of course the steel would be aerosolized!


NIST is a reuptable agency who cares is some stupid school teacher pointed out a flaw, even the experts make mistakes after taking several years after the event to offer an explanation.


and of course no explosions


YouTube - ‪Audible Explosion at WTC‬‏

Just as info, there are people on another site I visit checking on the 1500 signatories on that AE911 petition. They have already found 18 people who have passed away since signing it.

Why won't the AE911 group keep track of this, and update their numbers as needed? Oh, that's right, they don't want it to be known that their numbers are actually going down.

If they were to present their petition to try to get a new investigation, the fact that some signers are dead will keep it from being accepted.

 

[Patriot911]

The supposed nano thermite find is pure BS. Just had to let you know that.

How do you know this. If it is a lie and made up why isn't it addressed and proven false and charges brought against those that claim to have found it, there's got to be a law about that somewhere isn't there?

It isn't nano thermite because nobody has found nano thermite. Jones et. al. found what they described as an "active thermitic compound". They were unable to identify exactly what it was, but lots of things can be an "active thermitic compound". A match head is an excellent example of an active thermitic compound.

As for laws against claiming you found something you haven't, someone has to be hurt by your actions. So who was demonstrably hurt by Jones et. al. pretending they found an "active thermitic compound"?

Jones can get away with claiming he found an active thermitic compound. I am sure he did. Lots of things will ignite sooner or later when you apply heat. So how do Jones et. al. get away with it? Because while they're not exactly lying, the people who read their crap are going to read into it whatever they want like nano thermite was found. They rely on the ignorance of their readers to cover up their bullshit findings.

 

[SFC Ollie]

That and the statement that the dust was made up of .1% of this so called nano thermostatic material. Think about that. There would have to be tons of this stuff unburnt for that to be true. And if there were tons unused, then how many hundreds of tons would have been planted?

It is impossible.

 

[Vindicator]

Could someone please explain to me why "the government" would blow up any of the WTC buildings?

 

[eots]

Could someone please explain to me why "the government" would blow up any of the WTC buildings?

a prelude to wars of conquest and invasion of sovereign nations..and it worked very well

 

[SFC Ollie]

Could someone please explain to me why "the government" would blow up any of the WTC buildings?

They wouldn't. No reason to have 4 planes hijacked and take the risk of discovery by having tons of explosives planted in three buildings. Wonder why if they were doing that then why didn't they plant explosives in the pentagon too. Of course now we'll hear about how it wasn't a plane that hit the pentagon....And we all know that there couldn't have been a plane in PA either.....

 

[eots]

Could someone please explain to me why "the government" would blow up any of the WTC buildings?

They wouldn't. No reason to have 4 planes hijacked and take the risk of discovery by having tons of explosives planted in three buildings. Wonder why if they were doing that then why didn't they plant explosives in the pentagon too. Of course now we'll hear about how it wasn't a plane that hit the pentagon....And we all know that there couldn't have been a plane in PA either.....

no need to destroy the pentagon a hit on a symbolic military target was good enough and it could be repaired and continue in service .. but once the towers were hit they were the cost of repair and shut down made it much more efficient to just completely destroy them and makes for a much more spectacular display to incite the masses

 

[eots]

Could someone please explain to me why "the government" would blow up any of the WTC buildings?

They wouldn't. No reason to have 4 planes hijacked and take the risk of discovery by having tons of explosives planted in three buildings. Wonder why if they were doing that then why didn't they plant explosives in the pentagon too. Of course now we'll hear about how it wasn't a plane that hit the pentagon....And we all know that there couldn't have been a plane in PA either.....

the question I have about PA is ..why do no less than two former presidents of the U.S air crash investigation board and several military crash investigators call the shanksville crash investigation a cover -up ???

 

[SFC Ollie]

Could someone please explain to me why "the government" would blow up any of the WTC buildings?

They wouldn't. No reason to have 4 planes hijacked and take the risk of discovery by having tons of explosives planted in three buildings. Wonder why if they were doing that then why didn't they plant explosives in the pentagon too. Of course now we'll hear about how it wasn't a plane that hit the pentagon....And we all know that there couldn't have been a plane in PA either.....

the question I have about PA is ..why do no less than two former presidents of the U.S air crash investigation board and several military crash investigators call the shanksville crash investigation a cover -up ???

Opinion.

 

[eots]

They wouldn't. No reason to have 4 planes hijacked and take the risk of discovery by having tons of explosives planted in three buildings. Wonder why if they were doing that then why didn't they plant explosives in the pentagon too. Of course now we'll hear about how it wasn't a plane that hit the pentagon....And we all know that there couldn't have been a plane in PA either.....

the question I have about PA is ..why do no less than two former presidents of the U.S air crash investigation board and several military crash investigators call the shanksville crash investigation a cover -up ???

Opinion.

expert opinion.. that has been the gold seal in their field on many many other crash investigations...I think it is incumbent on us to take such opinions very seriously and recognize the courage of commitment it took to go on record and make them

 

[Mr. Jones]

What they are referring to is different agencies and the military holding back on certain classified material, and some things that they may not have told the complete truth about because of CYA. There were mistakes made that day by our leadership in different agencies and parts of the military. I don't know what they were nor do I have any clue what part of which stories were embellished or ignored to protect those agencies and divisions. Chances are we'll never know.

But the report is still as close to the truth as we can get.

What is forgotten in all of this, is that, this government is accountable to the people, and like you say we still may never know, at least not in our lifetime. That has to change.
Also, no one is held responsible and reprimanded, instead many get promotions. That is BS and has to change. Bottom line is it seems that the report is dishonest...but accurate. WTF?

Now can you tell us how a building fell on WTC 7?

Not difficult we all saw it happen. A 110 story building fell on it. What else do we need to know? There was no evidence of a controlled demolition. There were fires that raged through the building for 7 hours. And the Firemen reported creaking and bulging....
It fell down......

Ollie, you are arguing from a launching pad of ignorance, or out rite deceit. We know a 100 ten story tower did not fall on WTC 7. NIST has said that the falling debris was not a factor in the collapse. Now if you want to see the effects of the tower falling on a building, look no further then the other WTC complex buildings that were damaged a lot worse, but yet suffered no global collapse. NIST said cause of WTC 7 collapse was fire, and specifically fire damage to column 79. We are supposed to believe in a highly improbable series of random events led to the first ever total collapse of a hirise (fortified hirise at that), that made the "inside collapse first" .
BTW, the building would appear to collapse the same way if it was brought down by CD. ...The inside structure would be taken out, followed by the remaining outside of the building. So it is possible NIST is describing the way it really was brought down..Just change "fire" as the cause to "CD".
Just thinking out loud here, but..I have often wondered, given the highly sensitive and important agencies that had offices in that building, would it be reasonable to have a building like that, or any other important building that perhaps held information or secrets, that if in the wrong hands could be detrimental to national security, prewired to blow the shit out of it so its contents and state secrets could not be used by an enemy?

There are reports of Siverstein allegedly on the phone with the insurance company asking for permission to bring the building down.

Anyway no...the TOWERS DID NOT fall ON IT. They aren't even sure what started the sporadic fires in WTC 7, again NIST has to resort to guessing, and with hardly any pieces to examine, made it more difficult. The problem is that once the buildings were felled, the immediate OCT started pointing the blame to Al Qaeda and 19 hijackers, so the "guessing" revolved around that scenario and left other possibilities out of their theories.

 

[SFC Ollie]

'The most important thing we found was that there was, in fact, physical damage to the south face of building 7,' NIST's Sunder tells PM. 'On about a third of the face to the center and to the bottom--approximately 10 stories--about 25 percent of the depth of the building was scooped out.'NIST also discovered previously undocumented damage to WTC 7's upper stories and its southwest corner.

detailsofdamagetowtc7 - wtc7lies

Anyway no...the TOWERS DID NOT fall ON IT. They aren't even sure what started the sporadic fires in WTC 7

You keep telling yourself that.

 

[Rat in the Hat]

Could someone please explain to me why "the government" would blow up any of the WTC buildings?

Because there were paper records inside WTC7 that they needed to destroy, and it was easier to blow up the buildings than to use a paper shredder from Office Max.

 

[eots]

'The most important thing we found was that there was, in fact, physical damage to the south face of building 7,' NIST's Sunder tells PM. 'On about a third of the face to the center and to the bottom--approximately 10 stories--about 25 percent of the depth of the building was scooped out.'NIST also discovered previously undocumented damage to WTC 7's upper stories and its southwest corner.

detailsofdamagetowtc7 - wtc7lies

Anyway no...the TOWERS DID NOT fall ON IT. They aren't even sure what started the sporadic fires in WTC 7

You keep telling yourself that.

In response to comments from the building community, NIST conducted an additional computer analysis. The goal was to see if the loss of WTC 7’s Column 79—the structural component identified as the one whose failure on 9/11 started the progressive collapse—would still have led to a complete loss of the building if fire or damage from the falling debris of the nearby WTC 1 tower were not factors. The investigation team concluded that the column’s failure under any circumstance would have initiated the destructive sequence of events...

http://www.nist.gov/public_affairs/techbeat/tbx2008_1120_wtc7.htm

 

[Triton]

'The most important thing we found was that there was, in fact, physical damage to the south face of building 7,' NIST's Sunder tells PM. 'On about a third of the face to the center and to the bottom--approximately 10 stories--about 25 percent of the depth of the building was scooped out.'NIST also discovered previously undocumented damage to WTC 7's upper stories and its southwest corner.

detailsofdamagetowtc7 - wtc7lies

Anyway no...the TOWERS DID NOT fall ON IT. They aren't even sure what started the sporadic fires in WTC 7

You keep telling yourself that.

This damage could not have caused the total free fall, yes, free fall collapse that WTC 7 experienced.


I believe WTC 7 was an emergency management office and there is speculation that at least some portion of the operation may have been carried out there so the building was demolished.

Regardless, the building was deliberately brought down via a manner of controlled demolition.


For the neutral observer, who are you to believe?

Credentialed scientists, engineers, pilots, and researchers with expertise and an advanced degree or some guy on a messageboard named SFC Ollie?

 

[Patriot911]

This damage could not have caused the total free fall, yes, free fall collapse that WTC 7 experienced.


I believe WTC 7 was an emergency management office and there is speculation that at least some portion of the operation may have been carried out there so the building was demolished.

Regardless, the building was deliberately brought down via a manner of controlled demolition.


For the neutral observer, who are you to believe?

Credentialed scientists, engineers, pilots, and researchers with expertise and an advanced degree or some guy on a messageboard named SFC Ollie?

They sure as hell wouldn't believe a piece of shit fucktard named Triton who continuously lies his sorry ass off. Free fall collapse? What... you think if you repeat a lie often enough someone might be brain dead enough to actually believe you? I don't think so.

Face it. You ******* losers called truthtards are nothing but a blight on humanity. You want to use the deaths of 3000 people to push your bullshit anti-whatever agendas depending on who you hate today. The very fact you losers can't even agree on who did it, how they did it, what was done, or when it was done should be a big assed red flag showing you sorry sons of bitches are nothing but trash.

 

[SFC Ollie]

'The most important thing we found was that there was, in fact, physical damage to the south face of building 7,' NIST's Sunder tells PM. 'On about a third of the face to the center and to the bottom--approximately 10 stories--about 25 percent of the depth of the building was scooped out.'NIST also discovered previously undocumented damage to WTC 7's upper stories and its southwest corner.

detailsofdamagetowtc7 - wtc7lies

Anyway no...the TOWERS DID NOT fall ON IT. They aren't even sure what started the sporadic fires in WTC 7

You keep telling yourself that.

This damage could not have caused the total free fall, yes, free fall collapse that WTC 7 experienced.


I believe WTC 7 was an emergency management office and there is speculation that at least some portion of the operation may have been carried out there so the building was demolished.

Regardless, the building was deliberately brought down via a manner of controlled demolition.


For the neutral observer, who are you to believe?

Credentialed scientists, engineers, pilots, and researchers with expertise and an advanced degree or some guy on a messageboard named SFC Ollie?

No child, WTC 7 did not experience free fall, the facade did for roughly 2 seconds.

And there is no one denying that there was an EOC in the building. But it was not used to direct the attacks, only people like you believe that.

There is still zero evidence of a controlled demolition. other than you claim it looked just like one, which in itself isn't even true. Wheres the flashes and bangs?

Now who would the casual viewer believe? Probably the guy who doesn't hide behind a fake name on a message board but clearly shows he is a Retired Army Sergeant First Class and uses his actual name. Most of the people I talk with even know where I live. Of course, most of the people I talk with are sane.

Oh and in case you haven't noticed, I normally give a link to something that a credited expert says or make certain that you know it's me talking. Right now, it's just my opinion. You're nuts!

 

[eots]

'The most important thing we found was that there was, in fact, physical damage to the south face of building 7,' NIST's Sunder tells PM. 'On about a third of the face to the center and to the bottom--approximately 10 stories--about 25 percent of the depth of the building was scooped out.'NIST also discovered previously undocumented damage to WTC 7's upper stories and its southwest corner.

detailsofdamagetowtc7 - wtc7lies

You keep telling yourself that.

This damage could not have caused the total free fall, yes, free fall collapse that WTC 7 experienced.


I believe WTC 7 was an emergency management office and there is speculation that at least some portion of the operation may have been carried out there so the building was demolished.

Regardless, the building was deliberately brought down via a manner of controlled demolition.


For the neutral observer, who are you to believe?

Credentialed scientists, engineers, pilots, and researchers with expertise and an advanced degree or some guy on a messageboard named SFC Ollie?

No child, WTC 7 did not experience free fall, the facade did for roughly 2 seconds.

And there is no one denying that there was an EOC in the building. But it was not used to direct the attacks, only people like you believe that.

There is still zero evidence of a controlled demolition. other than you claim it looked just like one, which in itself isn't even true. Wheres the flashes and bangs?

Now who would the casual viewer believe? Probably the guy who doesn't hide behind a fake name on a message board but clearly shows he is a Retired Army Sergeant First Class and uses his actual name. Most of the people I talk with even know where I live. Of course, most of the people I talk with are sane.

Oh and in case you haven't noticed, I normally give a link to something that a credited expert says or make certain that you know it's me talking. Right now, it's just my opinion. You're nuts!

so how long did it take the inside to fall ?