what happened on 9/11/2001?

[Faun]

No, but you were presented with several. And ran exactly like I said you would for one very simple reason:

People like you don't want the truth. They want their story. And if anyone asks them any question that doesn't ape their story, notes any hole ...no matter how enormous...in their reasoning, your ilk straight up ignore them.

No one actually interested in truth ever would.

OK, Corky. Keep swing that whiffle ball bat around.

Translation: I really don't care about the truth so I'll just make some snarky comment about whiffle ball and everyone will think I'm cool.

The fact is you and Daws haven't proven shit in here to me. Nothing. Nathan. Nadda. Zero.

There were no fires in that building. And in this thread, besides what I already said i was wrong over ( the NIST report vs. the Commission) that's the only point I've made in here. And you can't come up with an explanation regarding how steel gets mangled in that manner without sufficient heat/energy.

That's all! You're still losing!

I've nothing to lose, Princess. I just enjoy getting you "Truther" types all riled up.

I'm not riled up at all. What I am is exposing you as the moron that you are. Its entertaining to do every few years. You're the first morons in the door to criticize anyone who should speak outside the 9/11 official narrative and you're the first one to look like a fucking retard when you try.

What's your point about the Banker's Trust building?

 

[TakeAStepBack]

My point at this time is that it was never on fire. That's all i need to show that Daws is a fuckin' loser of this forum.

 

[daws101]

what about them? banker trust had fire /heat damage just like all the other structures in the wtc complex.

No, it did not. you're making shit up you can not prove. Furthermore, you're unwilling to relent that you're fucking wrong. Which makes you not only ignorant of the subject, but bullheaded. Lastly you should be embarrassed for putting it on display for all to see.

since I'm neither there is nothing to be embarrassed about or to relent.

Then prove it and quit typing like you did. Because you havent. You're lying and digging a whole because you're THAT bullheaded.

There were no fires in Banker's Trust. It was hit by falling debris. End of story.

Or PROVE IT.

all ready have! besides, I have to prove nothing to you.

Yeah, no you didn't. Once again I provide the facts and you deflect. THERE WERE NO FIRES IN BANKER'S TRUST.

http://www.fema.gov/media-library-data/20130726-1512-20490-2084/403_ch6.pdf

No, fires. The entire sprinkling system remained in tact, along with pressure to the building except in the area of debris impact. ANOTHER LOSING POST, DAWS.

false! I've lost nothing ..the point of the exercise was to get you to cough up your source, a thing you 've sworn you would never do. Matter of fact I have the same pdf and yes there were no fires in the bankers trust
on the other hand that fact does not in any way support your nuttjobbery.
like all twoofers, you will inevitably pick a piece of minutia and blow it out of all proportion to the actual event.
there is no actual evidence of any other conspiracy then the one we all saw that day!

 

[TakeAStepBack]

No, it did not. you're making shit up you can not prove. Furthermore, you're unwilling to relent that you're fucking wrong. Which makes you not only ignorant of the subject, but bullheaded. Lastly you should be embarrassed for putting it on display for all to see.

since I'm neither there is nothing to be embarrassed about or to relent.

Then prove it and quit typing like you did. Because you havent. You're lying and digging a whole because you're THAT bullheaded.

There were no fires in Banker's Trust. It was hit by falling debris. End of story.

Or PROVE IT.

all ready have! besides, I have to prove nothing to you.

Yeah, no you didn't. Once again I provide the facts and you deflect. THERE WERE NO FIRES IN BANKER'S TRUST.

http://www.fema.gov/media-library-data/20130726-1512-20490-2084/403_ch6.pdf

No, fires. The entire sprinkling system remained in tact, along with pressure to the building except in the area of debris impact. ANOTHER LOSING POST, DAWS.

false! I've lost nothing ..the point of the exercise was to get you to cough up your source, a thing you 've sworn you would never do. Matter of fact I have the same pdf and yes there were no fires in the bankers trust
on the other hand that fact does not in any way support your nuttjobbery.
like all twoofers, you will inevitably pick a piece of minutia and blow it out of all proportion to the actual event.
there is no actual evidence of any other conspiracy then the one we all saw that day!

I gave you the fucking pdf mirrored yesterday and you still insisted the building was on fire and even today say it was damaged by fire. You're a fucking LOSER, Daws!



Fucking idiot. You're officially dismissed as not credible on this subject.

 

[daws101]

Translation: I really don't care about the truth so I'll just make some snarky comment about whiffle ball and everyone will think I'm cool.

The fact is you and Daws haven't proven shit in here to me. Nothing. Nathan. Nadda. Zero.

There were no fires in that building. And in this thread, besides what I already said i was wrong over ( the NIST report vs. the Commission) that's the only point I've made in here. And you can't come up with an explanation regarding how steel gets mangled in that manner without sufficient heat/energy.

That's all! You're still losing!

I've nothing to lose, Princess. I just enjoy getting you "Truther" types all riled up.

I'm not riled up at all. What I am is exposing you as the moron that you are. Its entertaining to do every few years. You're the first morons in the door to criticize anyone who should speak outside the 9/11 official narrative and you're the first one to look like a fucking retard when you try.

bullshit ! everyone of your posts in the last few days are tantrums...

So, about those fires in Banker's Trust, Daws.....

Fuckin loser.

yeah I'm a loser !
I've had you by the balls since the start .

 

[TakeAStepBack]

Sure fella. You just keep talking all big, you abject failure.

 

[daws101]

since I'm neither there is nothing to be embarrassed about or to relent.

Then prove it and quit typing like you did. Because you havent. You're lying and digging a whole because you're THAT bullheaded.

There were no fires in Banker's Trust. It was hit by falling debris. End of story.

Or PROVE IT.

all ready have! besides, I have to prove nothing to you.

Yeah, no you didn't. Once again I provide the facts and you deflect. THERE WERE NO FIRES IN BANKER'S TRUST.

http://www.fema.gov/media-library-data/20130726-1512-20490-2084/403_ch6.pdf

No, fires. The entire sprinkling system remained in tact, along with pressure to the building except in the area of debris impact. ANOTHER LOSING POST, DAWS.

false! I've lost nothing ..the point of the exercise was to get you to cough up your source, a thing you 've sworn you would never do. Matter of fact I have the same pdf and yes there were no fires in the bankers trust
on the other hand that fact does not in any way support your nuttjobbery.
like all twoofers, you will inevitably pick a piece of minutia and blow it out of all proportion to the actual event.
there is no actual evidence of any other conspiracy then the one we all saw that day!

I gave you the fucking pdf mirrored yesterday and you still insisted the building was on fire and even today say it was damaged by fire. You're a fucking LOSER, Daws!



Fucking idiot. You're officially dismissed as not credible on this subject.

like I said I've had that pdf for a very long time.
can anybody say tantrum..

 

[daws101]

Sure fella. You just keep talking all big, you abject failure.

calling in damage control!

 

[TakeAStepBack]

Then prove it and quit typing like you did. Because you havent. You're lying and digging a whole because you're THAT bullheaded.

There were no fires in Banker's Trust. It was hit by falling debris. End of story.

Or PROVE IT.

all ready have! besides, I have to prove nothing to you.

Yeah, no you didn't. Once again I provide the facts and you deflect. THERE WERE NO FIRES IN BANKER'S TRUST.

http://www.fema.gov/media-library-data/20130726-1512-20490-2084/403_ch6.pdf

No, fires. The entire sprinkling system remained in tact, along with pressure to the building except in the area of debris impact. ANOTHER LOSING POST, DAWS.

false! I've lost nothing ..the point of the exercise was to get you to cough up your source, a thing you 've sworn you would never do. Matter of fact I have the same pdf and yes there were no fires in the bankers trust
on the other hand that fact does not in any way support your nuttjobbery.
like all twoofers, you will inevitably pick a piece of minutia and blow it out of all proportion to the actual event.
there is no actual evidence of any other conspiracy then the one we all saw that day!

I gave you the fucking pdf mirrored yesterday and you still insisted the building was on fire and even today say it was damaged by fire. You're a fucking LOSER, Daws!



Fucking idiot. You're officially dismissed as not credible on this subject.

like I said I've had that pdf for a very long time.
can anybody say tantrum..

Still digging that hole, I see. I'm done with you, Daws. You're a failure on this subject as has been shown. No more credibility will be given to anything you say from here on out for me. You're an idiot, or like you're now trying to claim - a troll.

Either way, you've lost this debate.

 

[daws101]

all ready have! besides, I have to prove nothing to you.

Yeah, no you didn't. Once again I provide the facts and you deflect. THERE WERE NO FIRES IN BANKER'S TRUST.

http://www.fema.gov/media-library-data/20130726-1512-20490-2084/403_ch6.pdf

No, fires. The entire sprinkling system remained in tact, along with pressure to the building except in the area of debris impact. ANOTHER LOSING POST, DAWS.

false! I've lost nothing ..the point of the exercise was to get you to cough up your source, a thing you 've sworn you would never do. Matter of fact I have the same pdf and yes there were no fires in the bankers trust
on the other hand that fact does not in any way support your nuttjobbery.
like all twoofers, you will inevitably pick a piece of minutia and blow it out of all proportion to the actual event.
there is no actual evidence of any other conspiracy then the one we all saw that day!

I gave you the fucking pdf mirrored yesterday and you still insisted the building was on fire and even today say it was damaged by fire. You're a fucking LOSER, Daws!



Fucking idiot. You're officially dismissed as not credible on this subject.

like I said I've had that pdf for a very long time.
can anybody say tantrum..

Still digging that hole, I see. I'm done with you, Daws. You're a failure on this subject as has been shown. No more credibility will be given to anything you say from here on out for me. You're an idiot, or like you're now trying to claim - a troll.

Either way, you've lost this debate.

in reality I've won. since you and your minions had no credibility to start with. I've lost nothing.
as to trolling" I do this every couple of years to get you riled up" TASB.
THATS TROLL AT IT'S FINEST.

 

[Faun]

My point at this time is that it was never on fire. That's all i need to show that Daws is a fuckin' loser of this forum.

Ok, so there were no fires in that building. I believe that's cleared up. Why did you mention that building to begin with?

 

[TakeAStepBack]

I'm not buying what you're selling. You're not that intelligent. Have a fun time as a self proclaimed troll of the board, Daws.

 

[TakeAStepBack]

My point at this time is that it was never on fire. That's all i need to show that Daws is a fuckin' loser of this forum.

Ok, so there were no fires in that building. I believe that's cleared up. Why did you mention that building to begin with?

Because I was discussing what happened on 9/11 as that is what the thread is about. So, this is the picture I have hanging in my office:

It shows a flange mid-photo that is mangled in a highly unusual way.

 

[Faun]

My point at this time is that it was never on fire. That's all i need to show that Daws is a fuckin' loser of this forum.

Ok, so there were no fires in that building. I believe that's cleared up. Why did you mention that building to begin with?

Because I was discussing what happened on 9/11 as that is what the thread is about. So, this is the picture I have hanging in my office:

It shows a flange mid-photo that is mangled in a highly unusual way.

Ok, so what about it?

 

[orogenicman]

My point at this time is that it was never on fire. That's all i need to show that Daws is a fuckin' loser of this forum.

Ok, so there were no fires in that building. I believe that's cleared up. Why did you mention that building to begin with?

Because I was discussing what happened on 9/11 as that is what the thread is about. So, this is the picture I have hanging in my office:

It shows a flange mid-photo that is mangled in a highly unusual way.

Ok, so what about it?

That was my question as well.

 

[TakeAStepBack]

My point at this time is that it was never on fire. That's all i need to show that Daws is a fuckin' loser of this forum.

Ok, so there were no fires in that building. I believe that's cleared up. Why did you mention that building to begin with?

Because I was discussing what happened on 9/11 as that is what the thread is about. So, this is the picture I have hanging in my office:

It shows a flange mid-photo that is mangled in a highly unusual way.

Ok, so what about it?

How did that flange get into that condition?

 

[orogenicman]

Maybe you can repost that picture with an arrow pointing to whatever it is you are concerned with.

 

[TakeAStepBack]

Maybe you can repost that picture with an arrow pointing to whatever it is you are concerned with.

It's very evident which flange I am referring to in the photo. If you can not see it, you probably wont get it. No offense intended.

 

[daws101]

My point at this time is that it was never on fire. That's all i need to show that Daws is a fuckin' loser of this forum.

Ok, so there were no fires in that building. I believe that's cleared up. Why did you mention that building to begin with?

in a photo he post ad nausm there is a single steel been /floor joist that is bowed out just below what appears to be the weld, his clam is that something other than conventional means had to have been employed to do that kind of damage.
he further states that the photo encapsulates all that he views as wrong or cover up about the 911 investigations.
what I find funny is the fema report makes no special mention of the damaged beam.
any time anyone takes a guess at what could have done the damage besides space beams /dustfication rays or mini nukes he laughs and says were all brain dead.

 

[TakeAStepBack]

Don't feed the troll.