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

[eots]

You gotta be shitting me...................

You have a handful of people, a very small percentage of architects and engineers (like 0.01%) who actually believe there were explosives, and you want to call that proof?

Take it to court, I want to see this....

I don't know what kind of idiots you want to believe but if those buildings were blown there would have been evidence. And no, there wasn't some super secret silent explosives involved either......

You aren't addressing anything they say. You aren't showing us where NIST has all this indisputable proof. I have shown that NIST is FOS. Denying they aren't by opinion only is no evidence to back their theory up.
There is vast amount of reasonable doubt concerning the OCT and NIST. Now you all can shut up about it, and move on to explain why despite the credible objections to the OCT story, you insist on running from what has been in your faces all this time.

Shut up? You are telling me to shut up? I don't think I will. What I will do is remind you that the official investigation still stands as the official investigation. I don't have any need to prove it is right.

well thats fortunate for you because you couldn't if your life depended on it

You believe it to be wrong; prove it.

you believe it to be kinda sort of right...prove it

And no so far you don't have any credible objections that say you are right. If you did it would have already gone to court.

right... sure it would of.

What has happened is that your 911 support groups sent a letter to NIST asking them to change their report on several different points and on each point they were shot down and told NO....
Why? Because they were wrong.

....

NIST constantly adapted its report to counter debunking through out the so called investigation

So when you do have something credible, take it to court. Because as long as you are just talking trash on the internet, you got nothing....

sure he does..the court of public opinion and he is winning

 

[SFC Ollie]

LOL you funny...............

 

[Mr. Jones]

You aren't addressing anything they say. You aren't showing us where NIST has all this indisputable proof. I have shown that NIST is FOS. Denying they aren't by opinion only is no evidence to back their theory up.
There is vast amount of reasonable doubt concerning the OCT and NIST. Now you all can shut up about it, and move on to explain why despite the credible objections to the OCT story, you insist on running from what has been in your faces all this time.

well thats fortunate for you because you couldn't if your life depended on it





you believe it to be kinda sort of right...prove it



right... sure it would of.

....

NIST constantly adapted its report to counter debunking through out the so called investigation

So when you do have something credible, take it to court. Because as long as you are just talking trash on the internet, you got nothing....

sure he does..the court of public opinion and he is winning

People are trying, I'm thankful for that.
8 House Members to Mull 2nd Draft Bill on Science/Tech Probe of WTC Destruction Causes « WTC RESEARCH ALLIANCE

Draft Bill to Reinvestigate Collapse of World Trade Center: 2010 « WTC RESEARCH ALLIANCE

 

[eots]

LOL you funny...............

ya great rebuttal there maestro

 

[Mr. Jones]

You gotta be shitting me...................

You have a handful of people, a very small percentage of architects and engineers (like 0.01%) who actually believe there were explosives, and you want to call that proof?

Take it to court, I want to see this....

I don't know what kind of idiots you want to believe but if those buildings were blown there would have been evidence. And no, there wasn't some super secret silent explosives involved either......

You aren't addressing anything they say. You aren't showing us where NIST has all this indisputable proof. I have shown that NIST is FOS. Denying they aren't by opinion only is no evidence to back their theory up.
There is vast amount of reasonable doubt concerning the OCT and NIST. Now you all can shut up about it, and move on to explain why despite the credible objections to the OCT story, you insist on running from what has been in your faces all this time.

Shut up? You are telling me to shut up? I don't think I will. What I will do is remind you that the official investigation still stands as the official investigation. I don't have any need to prove it is right.

You believe it to be wrong; prove it. And no so far you don't have any credible objections that say you are right. If you did it would have already gone to court. What has happened is that your 911 support groups sent a letter to NIST asking them to change their report on several different points and on each point they were shot down and told NO....
Why? Because they were wrong.....

So when you do have something credible, take it to court. Because as long as you are just talking trash on the internet, you got nothing.....

Deny deny deny, without even trying to rebuke the evidence presented by the researchers, nor have you presented any indisputable evidence from NIST. Your argumentative points are all circular, and you have no reasonable responses that make any sense. only your opinion based on an appeal to authority that have been proven the best of liars
Your appeal to authority is baseless, and unfounded, as has been shown to you over and over again.
You are a most irrational person Ollie. Bye bye now, there is a breach at one of the NE. NUKE PLANTS I'm going to look at for a while but feel free to post any reasonable rebuttals to the things we have mentioned to you, and I'll get back to you.

 

[SFC Ollie]

well thats fortunate for you because you couldn't if your life depended on it





you believe it to be kinda sort of right...prove it



right... sure it would of.

....

NIST constantly adapted its report to counter debunking through out the so called investigation




sure he does..the court of public opinion and he is winning

People are trying, I'm thankful for that.
8 House Members to Mull 2nd Draft Bill on Science/Tech Probe of WTC Destruction Causes « WTC RESEARCH ALLIANCE

Draft Bill to Reinvestigate Collapse of World Trade Center: 2010 « WTC RESEARCH ALLIANCE

Trying what? I urge everyone who wants a good laugh to read these two links. Absolutely hilarious.

 

[eots]

People are trying, I'm thankful for that.
8 House Members to Mull 2nd Draft Bill on Science/Tech Probe of WTC Destruction Causes « WTC RESEARCH ALLIANCE

Draft Bill to Reinvestigate Collapse of World Trade Center: 2010 « WTC RESEARCH ALLIANCE

Trying what? I urge everyone who wants a good laugh to read these two links. Absolutely hilarious.

you are all the chuckles we need...

 

[SFC Ollie]

Glad to be of service...........................................

 

[Patriot911]

People are trying, I'm thankful for that.
8 House Members to Mull 2nd Draft Bill on Science/Tech Probe of WTC Destruction Causes « WTC RESEARCH ALLIANCE

Draft Bill to Reinvestigate Collapse of World Trade Center: 2010 « WTC RESEARCH ALLIANCE

So two pretend bills than never made it to the floor are suppose to be your evidence? Of what? The massive incompetence of the TBM?

How about some real, actionable evidence that proves your bullshit paranoid delusions are real. You keep claiming you have the evidence. Post it. Or run away once again and prove just what a scared little impotent ***** you are.

 

[Obamerican]

LOL you funny...............

ya great rebuttal there maestro

It's better than most of the drivel you post, moron. Go ahead and give me neg rep. It's been at least three days since the last time. Still wearing that dick sucking hat you use to have in your avatar, little man?

 

[Mr. Jones]

Take it to court, I want to see this....

The problem is getting a federal judge to have the balls to except the evidence that is presented and conducting a proper hearing of it.

An example of justice being denied is the case of April Gallup. They tried testing the waters, and to no great surprise no judge had the guts to let it proceed, despite having sufficient merit to the plaintiffs allegations. Now there are some parts of it I might have a problem with in a criminal trial, but those parts are there because it was a civil suit they were trying to pursue.
Even when they presented a huge conflict of interest in that one of the judges is related to GWB.
What people don't seem to want to understand is that -
The defendants are men of power, with resources, financial, legal, and political, beyond most people's ability to comprehend.
Were an inquiry into a crime of this magnitude to be properly conducted, by an arm of government or special prosecutor, it would require legions of lawyers and investigators, not to mention the support those people would have to rely on. Our aim is to conduct the lawsuit as our resources permit, appealing to the public to help us to replicate what a similarly disposed arm of government would bring to the task.

The attacks of September 11th were part of a complex and elaborate psychological operation that created in each citizen to a greater or lesser degree a fortress of denial, which has prevented many from any forthright attempt to investigate the truth about 9/11.
I believe that even if any insider actually confessed, no AG would be allowed to go after them either, we would hear BS reasons like "matters of national security" being tossed about.
Center for 9/11 Justice

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

Again the problem isn't the lack of evidence, or proving that evidence even exist at all. It truly is a David vs Goliath type of fight when it comes to taking on a government, especially a corrupt one like the one that we allow ourselves to be governed by.

 

[Patriot911]

Take it to court, I want to see this....

The problem is getting a federal judge to have the balls to except the evidence that is presented and conducting a proper hearing of it.

Yeah, especially since you have no evidence. It is REALLY hard to convince anyone based on your lameassed opinions that are not backed up by facts.

An example of justice being denied is the case of April Gallup. They tried testing the waters, and to no great surprise no judge had the guts to let it proceed, despite having sufficient merit to the plaintiffs allegations. Now there are some parts of it I might have a problem with in a criminal trial, but those parts are there because it was a civil suit they were trying to pursue.

Gee. I wonder why? She was accusing people with zero evidence they were behind the attack or acted improperly. Evidence provided? Bullshit truthtard claims like nobody can agree on the flight path taken. What does that prove other than truthtards will cling to any retarded theory regardless of the facts? I am surprised she found a lawyer retarded enough to bring this piece of bullshit before a judge.

Even when they presented a huge conflict of interest in that one of the judges is related to GWB.

Bush wasn't one of the defendants in the case. Cheney and Rumsfeld were. How is it a conflict of interest when you're listening to an appeal when you're not related to the defendants?

What people don't seem to want to understand is that -
The defendants are men of power, with resources, financial, legal, and political, beyond most people's ability to comprehend.

OR Judges are actually doing their job and throwing out bullshit cases with no evidence.

Were an inquiry into a crime of this magnitude to be properly conducted, by an arm of government or special prosecutor, it would require legions of lawyers and investigators, not to mention the support those people would have to rely on.

But first you need evidence your bullshit theories are in any way, shape or form true. Opinions don't cut it.

Our aim is to conduct the lawsuit as our resources permit, appealing to the public to help us to replicate what a similarly disposed arm of government would bring to the task.

In other words, they want to bilk you silly saps out of your money to keep bringing up frivolous lawsuits. You've been duped again!

The attacks of September 11th were part of a complex and elaborate psychological operation that created in each citizen to a greater or lesser degree a fortress of denial, which has prevented many from any forthright attempt to investigate the truth about 9/11.

Pretty pathetic excuse, even for a bunch of truthtards.

I believe that even if any insider actually confessed, no AG would be allowed to go after them either, we would hear BS reasons like "matters of national security" being tossed about.

Yeah, right. Yet another really pathetic excuse for something that STILL hasn't happened almost ten years later.

Again the problem isn't the lack of evidence, or proving that evidence even exist at all.

Bull ******* shit. It is ALL about the evidence when you're dealing with justice. Who the **** are you to pretend you can re-write the judicial system just because it rejects your bullshit claims based on a complete and total lack of evidence? Oh, we all know you like to CLAIM you have evidence, but it is glaringly obvious you are lying your ass off given the fact you STILL haven't been able to produce a single piece of real evidence.

It truly is a David vs Goliath type of fight when it comes to taking on a government, especially a corrupt one like the one that we allow ourselves to be governed by.

Wrong yet again. It is the insane vs. the rational. On the insane side you have a bunch of disgruntaled pricks pretending that their paranoid delusions deserve a day in court. On the sane side, you have a judicial system correctly throwing the case out based on a complete lack of evidence. Why do you think you truthtards should get special treatment in the eyes of the law besides the fact you don't have a snowball's chance in hell of actually producing any evidence to prove your case?

 

[Gamolon]

You gotta be shitting me...................

You have a handful of people, a very small percentage of architects and engineers (like 0.01%) who actually believe there were explosives, and you want to call that proof?

Take it to court, I want to see this....

I don't know what kind of idiots you want to believe but if those buildings were blown there would have been evidence. And no, there wasn't some super secret silent explosives involved either......

You aren't addressing anything they say. You aren't showing us where NIST has all this indisputable proof. I have shown that NIST is FOS. Denying they aren't by opinion only is no evidence to back their theory up.
There is vast amount of reasonable doubt concerning the OCT and NIST. Now you all can shut up about it, and move on to explain why despite the credible objections to the OCT story, you insist on running from what has been in your faces all this time.

Mr. Jones.

What do you think of Richard Gage's research?

 

[Mr. Jones]

Take it to court, I want to see this....

The problem is getting a federal judge to have the balls to except the evidence that is presented and conducting a proper hearing of it.

Yeah, especially since you have no evidence. It is REALLY hard to convince anyone based on your lameassed opinions that are not backed up by facts.


Gee. I wonder why? She was accusing people with zero evidence they were behind the attack or acted improperly. Evidence provided? Bullshit truthtard claims like nobody can agree on the flight path taken. What does that prove other than truthtards will cling to any retarded theory regardless of the facts? I am surprised she found a lawyer retarded enough to bring this piece of bullshit before a judge.


Bush wasn't one of the defendants in the case. Cheney and Rumsfeld were. How is it a conflict of interest when you're listening to an appeal when you're not related to the defendants?


OR Judges are actually doing their job and throwing out bullshit cases with no evidence.


But first you need evidence your bullshit theories are in any way, shape or form true. Opinions don't cut it.


In other words, they want to bilk you silly saps out of your money to keep bringing up frivolous lawsuits. You've been duped again!


Pretty pathetic excuse, even for a bunch of truthtards.


Yeah, right. Yet another really pathetic excuse for something that STILL hasn't happened almost ten years later.

Again the problem isn't the lack of evidence, or proving that evidence even exist at all.

Bull ******* shit. It is ALL about the evidence when you're dealing with justice. Who the **** are you to pretend you can re-write the judicial system just because it rejects your bullshit claims based on a complete and total lack of evidence? Oh, we all know you like to CLAIM you have evidence, but it is glaringly obvious you are lying your ass off given the fact you STILL haven't been able to produce a single piece of real evidence.

It truly is a David vs Goliath type of fight when it comes to taking on a government, especially a corrupt one like the one that we allow ourselves to be governed by.

Wrong yet again. It is the insane vs. the rational. On the insane side you have a bunch of disgruntaled pricks pretending that their paranoid delusions deserve a day in court. On the sane side, you have a judicial system correctly throwing the case out based on a complete lack of evidence. Why do you think you truthtards should get special treatment in the eyes of the law besides the fact you don't have a snowball's chance in hell of actually producing any evidence to prove your case?

All about the evidence eh? Well what about the indisputable NIST evidence I keep asking you to produce?

What about the evidence to actually charge OBL, that the FBI said didn't exist but the goverment and people like you were quick to scream OBL was the "mastermind" and he was responsible for such a sophisticated attack that "only AlQaeda could pull off" according to all the "experts" on terrorism that came out of the woodwork starting that very same day?
What about the tortured "evidence" used to convict Zacarias Moussaoui?
See it is only classified as "justice" or "proof" or "evidence" when THEY say it is. They who "run" the system and basically own it and use it the way THEY want to protect their associates and themselves.
It is the realist vs the deniers. It is about those that want to change this country from the facisim police state it was allowed to evolve into, vs the fascist that are comfortably in power and control.
It is not a level playing field in the least.

 

[Mr. Jones]

You gotta be shitting me...................

You have a handful of people, a very small percentage of architects and engineers (like 0.01%) who actually believe there were explosives, and you want to call that proof?

Take it to court, I want to see this....

I don't know what kind of idiots you want to believe but if those buildings were blown there would have been evidence. And no, there wasn't some super secret silent explosives involved either......

You aren't addressing anything they say. You aren't showing us where NIST has all this indisputable proof. I have shown that NIST is FOS. Denying they aren't by opinion only is no evidence to back their theory up.
There is vast amount of reasonable doubt concerning the OCT and NIST. Now you all can shut up about it, and move on to explain why despite the credible objections to the OCT story, you insist on running from what has been in your faces all this time.

Mr. Jones.

What do you think of Richard Gage's research?

IMO Gage is more of a spokesman for A&E. I read the work of many of the members, and feel they make valid points, to which NIST has not responded. Though Gage has credentials in building construction, and he makes valid observations about the NIST flaws.

 

[Rationalist1016]

See it is only classified as "justice" or "proof" or "evidence" when THEY say it is.

Wow............almost rendered speechless.
You seem to be lost in the difference between "facts" and "claims". Facts are always facts. Claims may or may not be factual. Those require some corroborating "evidence".

And the "THEY" conspiracy.....................REALLY!?
We live in a police state now? Your freedoms are evenly slightly different than they were on 9/10/01?

 

[Gamolon]

You aren't addressing anything they say. You aren't showing us where NIST has all this indisputable proof. I have shown that NIST is FOS. Denying they aren't by opinion only is no evidence to back their theory up.
There is vast amount of reasonable doubt concerning the OCT and NIST. Now you all can shut up about it, and move on to explain why despite the credible objections to the OCT story, you insist on running from what has been in your faces all this time.

Mr. Jones.

What do you think of Richard Gage's research?

IMO Gage is more of a spokesman for A&E. I read the work of many of the members, and feel they make valid points, to which NIST has not responded. Though Gage has credentials in building construction, and he makes valid observations about the NIST flaws.

Valid observations huh?

Let's discuss his "valid" observations. You continually try and show NIST's mistakes and how they invalidate their theory.

Answer a few questions about Gage's research will you? Since you consider him to make "valid" observations of the NIST flaws.

1. Here is a quote from Gage.

What was the energy source, and through what mechanism was it applied, that pulverized 400,000 cubic yards of concrete into a fine powder that blanketed Manhattan? Calculations show that the energy requirement for this was greater than the available gravitational potential energy of the structures. Is this the same energy source that is responsible for the complete obliteration of more than 1,100 human bodies that were never found?

If anyone finds errors in my math below, please point it out.

Can you tell me how Gage got 400,000 cubic yards of concrete? Tell you what. You tell me how many cubic yards of concrete were contained above ground between both towers. See if you come up with 400,000 cubic yards.

My math. 208' x 208' x 4" = 12979.2 cubic feet. MINUS the core area of 3471.3 (87' x 137' x 4") cubic feet gives us 9507.9 cubic feet or 352.122 cubic yards of 4" concrete per floor. So 220 (floors) x 352.122 = 77466.84 cubic yards of concrete above ground in BOTH towers. That's 322533.16 cubic yards off!

2.Another quote from Gage.

Why were virtually no floors found at the base of either Twin Tower? There were originally 110 floors – each of them one acre in size. What explains the disappearance of 220 acres of four-inch thick concrete and steel decking?

220 acres of 4" thick concrete and steel decking? Really? Was he aware the the core of the towers had elevators in them? The core of each tower was 87' x 133'. That makes each floor about .7275 acres, which gives us 160 acres, not 220. How did he mess up by 60 acres in his calculation?

3. Gage says that WTC7's facade came down in 6.6 seconds. Can you explain how he came up with that time frame? What video did he use to come up with this since there is no video showing the facade AFTER it disappeared behind the building. Compare Gage's 6.6 seconds for complete collapse to Chandler's video. Interesting isn't it? Chandler kind of makes Gag'es time frame a little impossible?

 

[Gamolon]

Mr. Jones.

Can you also explain something else to me.

If explosives were used to make the facade immediately fall at free fall by blowing out 8 floors worth of 57 columns, why does Chandler's video show that the free fall collapse did not start immediately upon the roof-line's descent?

 

[Mr. Jones]

Wow............almost rendered speechless.
You seem to be lost in the difference between "facts" and "claims". Facts are always facts. Claims may or may not be factual.

The difference is that the OCT "facts" regarding 9-11 and WTC collapses do not stand up to scrutiny, and many "facts" used in the NIST hypothesis are from altered data to fit their hypothesis. They have admitted as such in their report, that they do not know exactly what happened and only examined the events prior to collapse initiation. 10,000 pages to tell us what we saw put together in a fancy worded report, that screams "believe us , we're NIST!" We're the authority! Same for the government reports about 9-11, "we're the government, you must trust and believe us"
It is the same when individuals side with NIST and the government, they have people brainwashed into thinking they are such a benevolent entity, that they couldn't possibly be involved in such horrendous activities, but an honest objective researcher will find that to not be the case.
For the record, I do not blame the entire government, but people who worked within the government in positions of authority and power, all the way up to the president himself.

Those require some corroborating "evidence".

And just where is NISTs corroborating evidence? Evidence that can't be disputed and found to be without alternative explanations? NIST has used every thing at their disposal, to make their guess be more believable, but that included leaving out much that counters their hypotheses. A proper study would have taken ALL available evidence and witnesses, and done so with proper calculations. Come to think of it a proper investigation would not have included shipping out most of the available evidence, so the fix was in from the getgo, make evidence vanish, but they still had the eutectic steel to answer to, and apparently didn't.
Why don't people want to open their minds and honestly view and study the alternative evidence that counters NIST? Because it would destroy their perceptions of America, and the betrayal is more then they can handle, there wouldn't be enough Soloft to go around either. Denial is the worst form of ignorance.

And the "THEY" conspiracy.....................REALLY!?
We live in a police state now? Your freedoms are evenly slightly different than they were on 9/10/01?

Absolutely, read how the laws have changed in favor of more government control and less personal freedoms and how the constitution and rights of American citizens have been ignored.
Evidence of this is everywhere! Even in MSM headlines.
You can start with the Patriot act, and the Geneva convention also. Are you going to say that torture and the targeting of American citizens for assassination have always been something the USA has endorsed?

 

[Mr. Jones]

Mr. Jones.

What do you think of Richard Gage's research?

IMO Gage is more of a spokesman for A&E. I read the work of many of the members, and feel they make valid points, to which NIST has not responded. Though Gage has credentials in building construction, and he makes valid observations about the NIST flaws.

Valid observations huh?

Let's discuss his "valid" observations. You continually try and show NIST's mistakes and how they invalidate their theory.

Answer a few questions about Gage's research will you? Since you consider him to make "valid" observations of the NIST flaws.

1. Here is a quote from Gage.

What was the energy source, and through what mechanism was it applied, that pulverized 400,000 cubic yards of concrete into a fine powder that blanketed Manhattan? Calculations show that the energy requirement for this was greater than the available gravitational potential energy of the structures. Is this the same energy source that is responsible for the complete obliteration of more than 1,100 human bodies that were never found?

If anyone finds errors in my math below, please point it out.

Can you tell me how Gage got 400,000 cubic yards of concrete? Tell you what. You tell me how many cubic yards of concrete were contained above ground between both towers. See if you come up with 400,000 cubic yards.

My math. 208' x 208' x 4" = 12979.2 cubic feet. MINUS the core area of 3471.3 (87' x 137' x 4") cubic feet gives us 9507.9 cubic feet or 352.122 cubic yards of 4" concrete per floor. So 220 (floors) x 352.122 = 77466.84 cubic yards of concrete above ground in BOTH towers. That's 322533.16 cubic yards off!

2.Another quote from Gage.

Why were virtually no floors found at the base of either Twin Tower? There were originally 110 floors – each of them one acre in size. What explains the disappearance of 220 acres of four-inch thick concrete and steel decking?

220 acres of 4" thick concrete and steel decking? Really? Was he aware the the core of the towers had elevators in them? The core of each tower was 87' x 133'. That makes each floor about .7275 acres, which gives us 160 acres, not 220. How did he mess up by 60 acres in his calculation?

3. Gage says that WTC7's facade came down in 6.6 seconds. Can you explain how he came up with that time frame? What video did he use to come up with this since there is no video showing the facade AFTER it disappeared behind the building. Compare Gage's 6.6 seconds for complete collapse to Chandler's video. Interesting isn't it? Chandler kind of makes Gag'es time frame a little impossible?

Could you post a link of the article you are getting your quotes from?That would be where I would want to start.