What really happened on 9/11 ?

[Rat in the Hat]

The lateral force, referring to the Jet's penetration of the perimeter columns, of which there were 59 on each face of the building. We don't really know if the lateral force, the Jet's impact, "disconnected" any of the core columns. Engineering experts have stated that given the thickness, tinsel strength and amount of the core columns (47), that lateral force wasn't responsible for the collapse of the twin towers into it's own footprint at near free fall speed. It would have required the lower part of the 47 columns to give way simultaneously all the way down as a number of videos show the buildings collapsing without any resistance all the way down into it own footprint.
The reason that all three buildings, WTC 1,2 & 7, looked like a controlled demolition is because it was. Knowledge of Physics & common sense helps.

I'm not talking about the force from the jets. What I'm talking about is once the collapse started, and the core columns of the upper block separated from the core columns in the lower block, what lateral force would have been imparted to push the upper block past the side of the building.

Gravity would have pulled it downward through the floors. In order for it to not collapse the rest of the building it would have to have been pushed over the side. What force would have done that pushing?

How much lateral force did they allow for in it's design? Winds blow unobstructed 110 stories up, and the buildings actually swayed in strong winds. Would the lateral force of a 5 MPH wind over the top 20 floors be enough?

Maybe, but since the fucking thing didn't fall that way, what fucking difference does it make?

OK, let's try this a different way. The core columns were 54 inches x 22 inches. In order for the top block to topple over the side instead of collapsing the rest of the building, the core would have had to pass the perimeter face.

Once the columns above the collapse zone moved 54 inches laterally past the columns below the zone, gravity will drag them downward unless another force was acting on them to move them sideways at least 100 feet. What force would this have been?

 

[Rat in the Hat]

The lateral force, referring to the Jet's penetration of the perimeter columns, of which there were 59 on each face of the building. We don't really know if the lateral force, the Jet's impact, "disconnected" any of the core columns. Engineering experts have stated that given the thickness, tinsel strength and amount of the core columns (47), that lateral force wasn't responsible for the collapse of the twin towers into it's own footprint at near free fall speed. It would have required the lower part of the 47 columns to give way simultaneously all the way down as a number of videos show the buildings collapsing without any resistance all the way down into it own footprint.
The reason that all three buildings, WTC 1,2 & 7, looked like a controlled demolition is because it was. Knowledge of Physics & common sense helps.

I'm not talking about the force from the jets. What I'm talking about is once the collapse started, and the core columns of the upper block separated from the core columns in the lower block, what lateral force would have been imparted to push the upper block past the side of the building.

Gravity would have pulled it downward through the floors. In order for it to not collapse the rest of the building it would have to have been pushed over the side. What force would have done that pushing?

The perimeter columns, not core columns, gave way as a result of the Jet's penetration and the sagging down of the top portion of the building was, yes, gravity, but the core columns still had enough integrity and tinsel strength to hold the building up.
If you're working with the assumption that the fires weakened the tinsel strength and gravity caused the separation of the upper 47 columns from the lower 47. That would be false assumption.
The collapse was the result of linear thermal cutting charges placed on the core columns set to go off simultaneously at each designated floor and micro-nukes in the basement. This would be the explosions everyone around the towers heard. A controlled demolition. Plenty of thermite was found at ground zero.

I have question for you
Why was molten steel still found at ground zero weeks after the attack?

Where is there a metallurgy report or photographic proof of molten steel? Surely someone should have some.

And don't try to use any YouTubeys of firemen or cops saying it was molten STEEL unless you can provide evidence that they are qualified to identify molten metal types by sight alone.

 

[ERGO]

I'm not talking about the force from the jets. What I'm talking about is once the collapse started, and the core columns of the upper block separated from the core columns in the lower block, what lateral force would have been imparted to push the upper block past the side of the building.

Gravity would have pulled it downward through the floors. In order for it to not collapse the rest of the building it would have to have been pushed over the side. What force would have done that pushing?

The perimeter columns, not core columns, gave way as a result of the Jet's penetration and the sagging down of the top portion of the building was, yes, gravity, but the core columns still had enough integrity and tinsel strength to hold the building up.
If you're working with the assumption that the fires weakened the tinsel strength and gravity caused the separation of the upper 47 columns from the lower 47. That would be false assumption.
The collapse was the result of linear thermal cutting charges placed on the core columns set to go off simultaneously at each designated floor and micro-nukes in the basement. This would be the explosions everyone around the towers heard. A controlled demolition. Plenty of thermite was found at ground zero.

I have question for you
Why was molten steel still found at ground zero weeks after the attack?

Where is there a metallurgy report or photographic proof of molten steel? Surely someone should have some.

And don't try to use any YouTubeys of firemen or cops saying it was molten STEEL unless you can provide evidence that they are qualified to identify molten metal types by sight alone.

You must be kidding me, you must live in Denialville. There are plenty of reports from eyewitnesses working at ground zero that stated they were still finding molten metal/steel weeks after the false flag attack.

At ground zero, steel was still found in liquid form weeks after 9/11.
Yet sooty, black burning jet fuel (basically diesel) cannot melt any kind of steel, especially fire resistant, structural steel.

WTC Ground Zero Molten Steel (Part One)
[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=Cx33GuVsUtE]WTC Ground Zero Molten Steel (Part One) - YouTube[/ame]

WTC Ground Zero Molten Steel (Part Two)
[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KglmMbprfkw&feature=relmfu]WTC Ground Zero Molten Steel (Part Two) - YouTube[/ame]

 

[LA RAM FAN]

The perimeter columns, not core columns, gave way as a result of the Jet's penetration and the sagging down of the top portion of the building was, yes, gravity, but the core columns still had enough integrity and tinsel strength to hold the building up.
If you're working with the assumption that the fires weakened the tinsel strength and gravity caused the separation of the upper 47 columns from the lower 47. That would be false assumption.
The collapse was the result of linear thermal cutting charges placed on the core columns set to go off simultaneously at each designated floor and micro-nukes in the basement. This would be the explosions everyone around the towers heard. A controlled demolition. Plenty of thermite was found at ground zero.

I have question for you
Why was molten steel still found at ground zero weeks after the attack?

Where is there a metallurgy report or photographic proof of molten steel? Surely someone should have some.

And don't try to use any YouTubeys of firemen or cops saying it was molten STEEL unless you can provide evidence that they are qualified to identify molten metal types by sight alone.

You must be kidding me, you must live in Denialville. There are plenty of reports from eyewitnesses working at ground zero that stated they were still finding molten metal/steel weeks after the false flag attack.

At ground zero, steel was still found in liquid form weeks after 9/11.
Yet sooty, black burning jet fuel (basically diesel) cannot melt any kind of steel, especially fire resistant, structural steel.

WTC Ground Zero Molten Steel (Part One)
[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=Cx33GuVsUtE]WTC Ground Zero Molten Steel (Part One) - YouTube[/ame]

WTC Ground Zero Molten Steel (Part Two)
[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KglmMbprfkw&feature=relmfu]WTC Ground Zero Molten Steel (Part Two) - YouTube[/ame]

actually the troll lives in MORONVILLE.He really should change his user name to Moron In The Hat since thats whats underneath that hat he wears all the time

 

[Mr. Jones]

Really??????????

Please show me the posts where I've commented on:

yellow cake,

Pat Tillman,
Jessica Lynch,
Iraq throwing baby's out of incubators in Kuwait,
Iran Contra,
, Vietnam,
CIA OPs in South America,
secret medical testing on American civilians,
the Federal Reserve that isn't "Federal"
flouride and GMO's being "good" in our water and food supply,

Don't have to. I said you are one of these types of people who subscribes to government lies and coverups as being truthful, as evidenced by your bone headed ignorance about 9-11. Christ you actually believe that WTC 7 collapsed because of fire, despite the huge inconsistencies and out right lies by NIST.
The fact is something had to remove the massive steel structures and columns to achieve such a rapid descent, and fire can not do that. It burns too cold to melt steel connections of the WTC type. Any moron should have the common sense to put this together. Especially after watching the video of its collapse. 108 ft of free fall acceleration in 2.25 seconds...because of sporadic fire?
Steel spreads the heat of fires to its cooler sections ass hat. The building should have at least come down in a staggered manner with the "weakened" melted parts going first, just like the towers.
This is what I mean when I say you would believe anything they put in your trough.

So you admit that fire brought down the towers, that's a good start. Now go watch the full videos again of WTC 7, you know, the ones that show the first 9 seconds instead of the ones on the truther sites. Look at the initial collapse of the first penthouse. See how it's suddenly staggered? And what will melt steel other than fire? Besides the fact that steel loses it's strength as it heats up. But you know all this, we've told you hundreds of times....

How the fuck you can conclude I think fire caused these massive structures demise, makes me think your a fucking retard, and it aint attributed to your meds Gomer.
You don't know shit about what fire does to steel, or even the fact that the buildings were constructed in a tapered fashion with the more robust parts near the middle and lower parts. The top parts had the thinnest steel, how you can fathom this top part crushing the more sturdier bottom sections in near free fall times, makes you an idiot.

Steel can not be melted or distorted until IT REACHES VERY HIGH TEMPS. It melts at about 2700 degrees depending on the carbon content you silly goat! Good God you remind me of of the old folks in an Alzheimer unit.
What I said, and to be clear was that IF fire WAS to blame, the buildings would have come in a staggered manner, as the fires were asymmetrical, and concentrated in various places. The things don't go from standing to blowing up in an instant because the steel turns to spaghetti.
Hows about you show us proof that the fires achieved severe enough temps to cause an immediate global collapse? Cause NIST sure can't!
See for yourself-

Melting Point Chart, Alloys

 

[SFC Ollie]

Don't have to. I said you are one of these types of people who subscribes to government lies and coverups as being truthful, as evidenced by your bone headed ignorance about 9-11. Christ you actually believe that WTC 7 collapsed because of fire, despite the huge inconsistencies and out right lies by NIST.
The fact is something had to remove the massive steel structures and columns to achieve such a rapid descent, and fire can not do that. It burns too cold to melt steel connections of the WTC type. Any moron should have the common sense to put this together. Especially after watching the video of its collapse. 108 ft of free fall acceleration in 2.25 seconds...because of sporadic fire?
Steel spreads the heat of fires to its cooler sections ass hat. The building should have at least come down in a staggered manner with the "weakened" melted parts going first, just like the towers.
This is what I mean when I say you would believe anything they put in your trough.

So you admit that fire brought down the towers, that's a good start. Now go watch the full videos again of WTC 7, you know, the ones that show the first 9 seconds instead of the ones on the truther sites. Look at the initial collapse of the first penthouse. See how it's suddenly staggered? And what will melt steel other than fire? Besides the fact that steel loses it's strength as it heats up. But you know all this, we've told you hundreds of times....

Claiming that fires alone brought down the WTC 1,2 and & 7 as witnessed in videos of the collapse is unscientifically sound. Take building 7...fires were sporadic and limited. Even if the fires managed to get hot enough to weaken a few steel columns, which they didn't. The way building 7 collapsed, which was at near free fall speed and into it's own footprint, would have required all of the columns to give way simultaneously at every two or three floors and this goes for WTC 1 & 2, which had 47 core columns and the odds of that are at least a trillion to one. The fires in twin towers were at the top of the building, even if the fires managed to get hot enough to weaken all 47 core columns just at the top of the building we would have seen the top of the building topple over because the strength of the core columns underneath that weren't exposed to the fires would have maintained their integrity.

Are you in Grade School? No one has claimed that fires alone brought down the towers. There was also that little thing about jet liners slamming into them with full loads of fuel...
And WTC 7 went down in a progressive collapse if you were smart enough to watch a video of the entire collapse. Oh and your sporadic fires? The ones that burned for 7 hours and had the entire rear of the buiolding covered in smoke the entire time? Those sporadic fires?

 

[SFC Ollie]

Claiming that fires alone brought down the WTC 1,2 and & 7 as witnessed in videos of the collapse is unscientifically sound. Take building 7...fires were sporadic and limited. Even if the fires managed to get hot enough to weaken a few steel columns, which they didn't. The way building 7 collapsed, which was at near free fall speed and into it's own footprint, would have required all of the columns to give way simultaneously at every two or three floors and this goes for WTC 1 & 2, which had 47 core columns and the odds of that are at least a trillion to one. The fires in twin towers were at the top of the building, even if the fires managed to get hot enough to weaken all 47 core columns just at the top of the building we would have seen the top of the building topple over because the strength of the core columns underneath that weren't exposed to the fires would have maintained their integrity.

What was the lateral force that would have pushed the top block past the perimeter walls after the core columns disconnected at the collapse point?

The lateral force, referring to the Jet's penetration of the perimeter columns, of which there were 59 on each face of the building. We don't really know if the lateral force, the Jet's impact, "disconnected" any of the core columns. Engineering experts have stated that given the thickness, tinsel strength and amount of the core columns (47), that lateral force wasn't responsible for the collapse of the twin towers into it's own footprint at near free fall speed. It would have required the lower part of the 47 columns to give way simultaneously all the way down as a number of videos show the buildings collapsing without any resistance all the way down into it own footprint.
The reason that all three buildings, WTC 1,2 & 7, looked like a controlled demolition is because it was. Knowledge of Physics & common sense helps.

Near freefall speed, for the towers? Really? I think that's been debunked as often as 911 shitforbrains has used a fart or poop entry on this forum.....

 

[SFC Ollie]

The lateral force, referring to the Jet's penetration of the perimeter columns, of which there were 59 on each face of the building. We don't really know if the lateral force, the Jet's impact, "disconnected" any of the core columns. Engineering experts have stated that given the thickness, tinsel strength and amount of the core columns (47), that lateral force wasn't responsible for the collapse of the twin towers into it's own footprint at near free fall speed. It would have required the lower part of the 47 columns to give way simultaneously all the way down as a number of videos show the buildings collapsing without any resistance all the way down into it own footprint.
The reason that all three buildings, WTC 1,2 & 7, looked like a controlled demolition is because it was. Knowledge of Physics & common sense helps.

I'm not talking about the force from the jets. What I'm talking about is once the collapse started, and the core columns of the upper block separated from the core columns in the lower block, what lateral force would have been imparted to push the upper block past the side of the building.

Gravity would have pulled it downward through the floors. In order for it to not collapse the rest of the building it would have to have been pushed over the side. What force would have done that pushing?

The perimeter columns, not core columns, gave way as a result of the Jet's penetration and the sagging down of the top portion of the building was, yes, gravity, but the core columns still had enough integrity and tinsel strength to hold the building up.
If you're working with the assumption that the fires weakened the tinsel strength and gravity caused the separation of the upper 47 columns from the lower 47. That would be false assumption.
The collapse was the result of linear thermal cutting charges placed on the core columns set to go off simultaneously at each designated floor and micro-nukes in the basement. This would be the explosions everyone around the towers heard. A controlled demolition. Plenty of thermite was found at ground zero.

I have question for you
Why was molten steel still found at ground zero weeks after the attack?

Damn you're stupid......There was no thermite found at ground zero. Once thermite is lite it burns until it is gone. And your picture is of a beam that was cut with a torch during the cleanup operations..... Do play again.....

 

[SFC Ollie]

Don't have to. I said you are one of these types of people who subscribes to government lies and coverups as being truthful, as evidenced by your bone headed ignorance about 9-11. Christ you actually believe that WTC 7 collapsed because of fire, despite the huge inconsistencies and out right lies by NIST.
The fact is something had to remove the massive steel structures and columns to achieve such a rapid descent, and fire can not do that. It burns too cold to melt steel connections of the WTC type. Any moron should have the common sense to put this together. Especially after watching the video of its collapse. 108 ft of free fall acceleration in 2.25 seconds...because of sporadic fire?
Steel spreads the heat of fires to its cooler sections ass hat. The building should have at least come down in a staggered manner with the "weakened" melted parts going first, just like the towers.
This is what I mean when I say you would believe anything they put in your trough.

So you admit that fire brought down the towers, that's a good start. Now go watch the full videos again of WTC 7, you know, the ones that show the first 9 seconds instead of the ones on the truther sites. Look at the initial collapse of the first penthouse. See how it's suddenly staggered? And what will melt steel other than fire? Besides the fact that steel loses it's strength as it heats up. But you know all this, we've told you hundreds of times....

How the fuck you can conclude I think fire caused these massive structures demise, makes me think your a fucking retard, and it aint attributed to your meds Gomer.
You don't know shit about what fire does to steel, or even the fact that the buildings were constructed in a tapered fashion with the more robust parts near the middle and lower parts. The top parts had the thinnest steel, how you can fathom this top part crushing the more sturdier bottom sections in near free fall times, makes you an idiot.

Steel can not be melted or distorted until IT REACHES VERY HIGH TEMPS. It melts at about 2700 degrees depending on the carbon content you silly goat! Good God you remind me of of the old folks in an Alzheimer unit.
What I said, and to be clear was that IF fire WAS to blame, the buildings would have come in a staggered manner, as the fires were asymmetrical, and concentrated in various places. The things don't go from standing to blowing up in an instant because the steel turns to spaghetti.
Hows about you show us proof that the fires achieved severe enough temps to cause an immediate global collapse? Cause NIST sure can't!
See for yourself-

Melting Point Chart, Alloys

And what part of the conspiracy idiots are the only idiots who think the steel melted do you not understand? Steel weakens and bends stretches all kinds of things under pressure. I am not an engineer but I've seen all the videos and read all the reports, from both sides unlike you. And i have the life experiences to tell truth from Bullshit. Morons can't tell me it's raining while pissing on my shoe...... Oh and don't forget I do have some experience with Thermite. Powder, plates, and grenades. So I do know just a little from first hand experience. Probably a fucking genius on the subject compared to most truthers.......

 

[GuyPinestra]

I'm not talking about the force from the jets. What I'm talking about is once the collapse started, and the core columns of the upper block separated from the core columns in the lower block, what lateral force would have been imparted to push the upper block past the side of the building.

Gravity would have pulled it downward through the floors. In order for it to not collapse the rest of the building it would have to have been pushed over the side. What force would have done that pushing?

The perimeter columns, not core columns, gave way as a result of the Jet's penetration and the sagging down of the top portion of the building was, yes, gravity, but the core columns still had enough integrity and tinsel strength to hold the building up.
If you're working with the assumption that the fires weakened the tinsel strength and gravity caused the separation of the upper 47 columns from the lower 47. That would be false assumption.
The collapse was the result of linear thermal cutting charges placed on the core columns set to go off simultaneously at each designated floor and micro-nukes in the basement. This would be the explosions everyone around the towers heard. A controlled demolition. Plenty of thermite was found at ground zero.

I have question for you
Why was molten steel still found at ground zero weeks after the attack?

Damn you're stupid......There was no thermite found at ground zero. Once thermite is lite it burns until it is gone. And your picture is of a beam that was cut with a torch during the cleanup operations..... Do play again.....

There is no torch that will cut that steel leaving the slag on the OUTSIDE of the cut.

 

[SFC Ollie]

The perimeter columns, not core columns, gave way as a result of the Jet's penetration and the sagging down of the top portion of the building was, yes, gravity, but the core columns still had enough integrity and tinsel strength to hold the building up.
If you're working with the assumption that the fires weakened the tinsel strength and gravity caused the separation of the upper 47 columns from the lower 47. That would be false assumption.
The collapse was the result of linear thermal cutting charges placed on the core columns set to go off simultaneously at each designated floor and micro-nukes in the basement. This would be the explosions everyone around the towers heard. A controlled demolition. Plenty of thermite was found at ground zero.

I have question for you
Why was molten steel still found at ground zero weeks after the attack?

Damn you're stupid......There was no thermite found at ground zero. Once thermite is lite it burns until it is gone. And your picture is of a beam that was cut with a torch during the cleanup operations..... Do play again.....

There is no torch that will cut that steel leaving the slag on the OUTSIDE of the cut.

Yeah, OK, you go with that..........

 

[Godboy]

The director of the CIA can't keep an affair secret, but I'm supposed to believe in a flawless cover up of 9/11? Get a clue morons.

 

[GuyPinestra]

Damn you're stupid......There was no thermite found at ground zero. Once thermite is lite it burns until it is gone. And your picture is of a beam that was cut with a torch during the cleanup operations..... Do play again.....

There is no torch that will cut that steel leaving the slag on the OUTSIDE of the cut.

Yeah, OK, you go with that..........

I will, I've been around welding and cutting torches most of my life.

Oxy-acetylene will blow the vast majority of the slag entirely away from the cut area, that's pressurized gas for ya.

And I don't think there's a portable plasma cutter that will accommodate 5 inch thick steel, either.

 

[GuyPinestra]

The director of the CIA can't keep an affair secret, but I'm supposed to believe in a flawless cover up of 9/11? Get a clue morons.

Flawless?? It's a total CLUSTERFUCK!

 

[SFC Ollie]

There is no torch that will cut that steel leaving the slag on the OUTSIDE of the cut.

Yeah, OK, you go with that..........

I will, I've been around welding and cutting torches most of my life.

Oxy-acetylene will blow the vast majority of the slag entirely away from the cut area, that's pressurized gas for ya.

And I don't think there's a portable plasma cutter that will accommodate 5 inch thick steel, either.

 

[Mr. Jones]

Yeah, OK, you go with that..........

I will, I've been around welding and cutting torches most of my life.

Oxy-acetylene will blow the vast majority of the slag entirely away from the cut area, that's pressurized gas for ya.

And I don't think there's a portable plasma cutter that will accommodate 5 inch thick steel, either.

Still no response from you with any proof that the temps at the attack sites concluded steel could be influenced by fire to the point it turned into linguini and the massive steel components went from stable to total global destruction and collapse, in under 30 seconds.... and exploded into fine dust.
Kerosene (jet fuel) does not burn at the required temps needed to do that, so what did?
And what caused the intense heat and melting in the rubble piles for 3 months? It was so hot that the rubber soles of the boots/shoes of people on site melted, despite thousands of gallons of Pyro-Cool being applied.
How many other skyscrapers burned for LONGER periods of time and DID NOT COLLAPSE
DUE TO THE EXPLANATION THAT NIST GAVE, THAT BEING FIRE?

As a matter of fact no other building exploded due to fire in history, while its inner core
disintegrated and appeared to vaporize.

 

[SFC Ollie]

And no other buildings were built the same way as the towers or WTC7....... We've been through this before....

You have nothing but opinion. The facts and physical evidence prove you wrong.

 

[Mr. Jones]

And no other buildings were built the same way as the towers or WTC7....... We've been through this before....

You have nothing but opinion. The facts and physical evidence prove you wrong.

I have opinion backed up by science, physics, and facts, while you have nothing but the proven lies of the absurd conspiracy theory that is your dogma.

What facts do you have that support the position you adhere to? I've asked you to post em up, like proof that the WTC fires were hot enough to distort the massive steel components, proof that fires caused the WTC buildings to explode, how about proof that there were no molten metal rubble piles that lasted for 3 months.... but you refuse.

You have nothing but a wild conspiracy theory, with unprovable scientific data that is espoused from a historically deceitful entity, that has 19 jihadists (one whose passport miraculously avoided incineration in your "massive fire") with a leader in a cave on dialysis
who infiltrated the worlds most heavily guarded nation on Earth, at the SAME TIME it was running terror drills, as the main culprits.
You're a fucking brain dead loon!

 

[SFC Ollie]

And no other buildings were built the same way as the towers or WTC7....... We've been through this before....

You have nothing but opinion. The facts and physical evidence prove you wrong.

I have opinion backed up by science, physics, and facts, while you have nothing but the proven lies of the absurd conspiracy theory that is your dogma.

What facts do you have that support the position you adhere to? I've asked you to post em up, like proof that the WTC fires were hot enough to distort the massive steel components, proof that fires caused the WTC buildings to explode, how about proof that there were no molten metal rubble piles that lasted for 3 months.... but you refuse.

You have nothing but a wild conspiracy theory, with unprovable scientific data that is espoused from a historically deceitful entity, that has 19 jihadists (one whose passport miraculously avoided incineration in your "massive fire") with a leader in a cave on dialysis
who infiltrated the worlds most heavily guarded nation on Earth, at the SAME TIME it was running terror drills, as the main culprits.
You're a fucking brain dead loon!

I'm sorry did you say that the towers exploded? Really? I say again that the 911 commissions Report and NIST got all the main points right. You disagree with that yet you don't have any facts or proof to back it up that hasn't been debunked by other experts. Most of the conspiracy theorists can't even agree on one single theory. We've seen everything from planted bombs to mini-nukes to nanothermite painted on. Sorry but excuse me while I go laugh again......

BTW, UBL wasn't living in a cave until after the attacks, just sayin.......

Oh, BTW being an expert on Military operations, the Military is always running exercises....On a daily basis........And who lied to you about us being the most heavily guarded nation on earth? Hell bells man Juan comes and goes at his pleasure....... And I doubt that Juan or Pedro left behind the Quran that was found along the Mexican border......

You are living in a fools paradise.........

 

[LA RAM FAN]

agent Gomer Pyle Ollie is back to fling shit in defeat like the monkey troll he is.amazing this disgraceful roach does not care that he is a disgrace to his fellow military officers.He'll pay for it in the future though with his karma participating in this coverup.