Who's Philip Zelikow & what does he have to do with 911?

[daws101]

3 buildings collapsed at near freefall speeds? Really? You still want to go with that even though it's been proven time and time again that you are wrong?

And yes it has been said that certain offices lied to the 911 Commission. And I have no doubt that they did. But what did they lie about? I can promise you that their lies does nothing to prove or even promote in the vaguest way your controlled demo theories.

It proves THEY LIED you nitwit! That the 9-11 report is NOT entirely accurate, that there is a STRONG POSSIBILITY OF A COVER UP!
How you can view this revelation as being inconsequential is beyond words.

And WTC 7 achieved free fall acceleration, so sue me, the fact remains the buildings came down at speeds faster then the damage and temps indicated.
It has not ever been proven that the descent speeds were consistent with the damage, nor the mass of the buildings. You want to go around this again, despite it being shown that they collapsed through the path of MOST RESISTANCE?

The report was compromised because the NORAD officials did not tell the truth, and changed their version 3 times. How can you insist on having faith in it, or for that matter, anything that was said given these facts? You asked what did they lie about?
You admit to not knowing this, yet ridicule people who point to the fact that they DID lie?
Good grief, Ollie....

What did they lie about? What did Norad say that could even remotely back up your version of the attacks?

And it has been proven that both towers fell at speeds way slower than freefall, you can even see this in the films.

And we all know that truthers want us to forget about the collapse of the east penthouse something like 7 seconds before the west penthouse and that was just before the roofline of the north facade. It was the north facade which reached freefall speed for a whole 2 seconds, not the building, just the facade. Maybe you guys don't know what a facade is?

sure they do! their whole philosophy is based on a false front AKA a facade.
Definition of FACADE
1: the front of a building; also : any face of a building given special architectural treatment <a museum's east facade>
2: a false, superficial, or artificial appearance or effect
See facade defined for English-language learners »
See facade defined for kids »
Variants of FACADE
fa·cade also fa·çade \f&#601;-&#712;säd\
Examples of FACADE
the facade of the bank
the windowless façade of the skyscraper
They were trying to preserve the facade of a happy marriage.
I could sense the hostility lurking behind her polite facade.
“I mean, don't you find yourself being extra careful about what you say and how you say it? As if you have to be this phony, put on a facade, because you don't want to give them the wrong impression?” —Terry McMillan, Waiting to Exhale, 1992

 

[Mr. Jones]

3 buildings collapsed at near freefall speeds? Really? You still want to go with that even though it's been proven time and time again that you are wrong?

And yes it has been said that certain offices lied to the 911 Commission. And I have no doubt that they did. But what did they lie about? I can promise you that their lies does nothing to prove or even promote in the vaguest way your controlled demo theories.

It proves THEY LIED you nitwit! That the 9-11 report is NOT entirely accurate, that there is a STRONG POSSIBILITY OF A COVER UP!
How you can view this revelation as being inconsequential is beyond words.

And WTC 7 achieved free fall acceleration, so sue me, the fact remains the buildings came down at speeds faster then the damage and temps indicated.
It has not ever been proven that the descent speeds were consistent with the damage, nor the mass of the buildings. You want to go around this again, despite it being shown that they collapsed through the path of MOST RESISTANCE?

The report was compromised because the NORAD officials did not tell the truth, and changed their version 3 times. How can you insist on having faith in it, or for that matter, anything that was said given these facts? You asked what did they lie about?
You admit to not knowing this, yet ridicule people who point to the fact that they DID lie?
Good grief, Ollie....

What did they lie about? What did Norad say that could even remotely back up your version of the attacks?

And it has been proven that both towers fell at speeds way slower than freefall, you can even see this in the films.

And we all know that truthers want us to forget about the collapse of the east penthouse something like 7 seconds before the west penthouse and that was just before the roofline of the north facade. It was the north facade which reached freefall speed for a whole 2 seconds, not the building, just the facade. Maybe you guys don't know what a facade is?

NORAD officials "lied to the American people, they lied to Congress and they lied to your 9/11 commission to create a false impression of competence, communication and protection of the American people."

He told Kean and Hamilton that if the commission's report is correct, President Bush "should fire whoever at FAA, at NORAD ... betrayed their public trust by not telling us the truth."--Sen. Mark Dayton, D-Minn.,

Dayton, a former Minnesota state auditor, called the FAA's and NORAD's failures "the most gross incompetence and dereliction of responsibility and negligence that I've ever, under those extreme circumstances, witnessed in the public sector."

If 9-11 was a LIHOP scenario, these guys would have greatly facilitated it, that's why it's important. Like has been suggested before, it wouldn't take thousands of individuals to pull off a false flag attack of this magnitude, just some well placed people in positions of power, and authority.

2nd-the towers and WTC7 fell at speeds not consistent with the mass and damage of the buildings, again they collapsed right through the path of MOST RESISTANCE.
The WTC7 building, NIST concluded, fell at free fall acceleration for about 8 story's.

The facade example is just that..a facade. The internal collapse and
saying that only the facade collapsed is pure BS, AND A REAL STRETCH OF THE IMAGINATION WHEN INCLUDING ALL THE HIGHLY IMPROBABLE CRAP OF THE NIST REPORT IS TAKEN INTO ACCOUNT.

 

[SFC Ollie]

It proves THEY LIED you nitwit! That the 9-11 report is NOT entirely accurate, that there is a STRONG POSSIBILITY OF A COVER UP!
How you can view this revelation as being inconsequential is beyond words.

And WTC 7 achieved free fall acceleration, so sue me, the fact remains the buildings came down at speeds faster then the damage and temps indicated.
It has not ever been proven that the descent speeds were consistent with the damage, nor the mass of the buildings. You want to go around this again, despite it being shown that they collapsed through the path of MOST RESISTANCE?

The report was compromised because the NORAD officials did not tell the truth, and changed their version 3 times. How can you insist on having faith in it, or for that matter, anything that was said given these facts? You asked what did they lie about?
You admit to not knowing this, yet ridicule people who point to the fact that they DID lie?
Good grief, Ollie....

What did they lie about? What did Norad say that could even remotely back up your version of the attacks?

And it has been proven that both towers fell at speeds way slower than freefall, you can even see this in the films.

And we all know that truthers want us to forget about the collapse of the east penthouse something like 7 seconds before the west penthouse and that was just before the roofline of the north facade. It was the north facade which reached freefall speed for a whole 2 seconds, not the building, just the facade. Maybe you guys don't know what a facade is?

NORAD officials "lied to the American people, they lied to Congress and they lied to your 9/11 commission to create a false impression of competence, communication and protection of the American people."

He told Kean and Hamilton that if the commission's report is correct, President Bush "should fire whoever at FAA, at NORAD ... betrayed their public trust by not telling us the truth."--Sen. Mark Dayton, D-Minn.,

Dayton, a former Minnesota state auditor, called the FAA's and NORAD's failures "the most gross incompetence and dereliction of responsibility and negligence that I've ever, under those extreme circumstances, witnessed in the public sector."

If 9-11 was a LIHOP scenario, these guys would have greatly facilitated it, that's why it's important. Like has been suggested before, it wouldn't take thousands of individuals to pull off a false flag attack of this magnitude, just some well placed people in positions of power, and authority.

2nd-the towers and WTC7 fell at speeds not consistent with the mass and damage of the buildings, again they collapsed right through the path of MOST RESISTANCE.
The WTC7 building, NIST concluded, fell at free fall acceleration for about 8 story's.

The facade example is just that..a facade. The internal collapse and
saying that only the facade collapsed is pure BS, AND A REAL STRETCH OF THE IMAGINATION WHEN INCLUDING ALL THE HIGHLY IMPROBABLE CRAP OF THE NIST REPORT IS TAKEN INTO ACCOUNT.

OH you silly child. The Military is not going to ever tell you the truth if the truth will break some classification. Having spent so many years in Communication Security I can promise you this.

And do tell us why the east penthouse fell into the building? Could it be there was an internal collapse and therefore there was nothing left behind the facade to slow it down? Because looking at the real videos, you know, the ones that actually start filming before the penthouse disappears, you can see that there is obviously some serious shit going on behind that facade.

 

[TakeAStepBack]

A lie is a lie. Usually lies are used to cover up the truth. This is not the case of complacent white lies. These are flat out falsifications. Not "that's classified." Sorry you cant figure out the difference Ollie. Your opinion is clearly bias in favor of your once, or still, handlers.

As for building 7. You can run around screaming facade and penthouse all day and night. But when a building achieves free fall acceleration, that is a conclusion that there was absolutely no resistance in its path. Are we to believe the building simply disappeared for 8 floors allowing for this to happen?
Again, Im sorry you don't understand science. But the official account is grossly negligent, high improbable and most of all, riddled with lies and holes.

If it looks like a duck, and it quacks like a duck, then it is certainly NOT a lizard.

 

[SFC Ollie]

A lie is a lie. Usually lies are used to cover up the truth. This is not the case of complacent white lies. These are flat out falsifications. Not "that's classified." Sorry you cant figure out the difference Ollie. Your opinion is clearly bias in favor of your once, or still, handlers.

As for building 7. You can run around screaming facade and penthouse all day and night. But when a building achieves free fall acceleration, that is a conclusion that there was absolutely no resistance in its path. Are we to believe the building simply disappeared for 8 floors allowing for this to happen?
Again, Im sorry you don't understand science. But the official account is grossly negligent, high improbable and most of all, riddled with lies and holes.

If it looks like a duck, and it quacks like a duck, then it is certainly NOT a lizard.

What lies did they tell? You haven't any clue, stretching for anything you can to cast doubts on the official investigations. Our military is not going to give away anything that will compromise national security. Get used to it.

Again, you cannot look at the videos of this building from the beginning of the collapse and not know that there is a lot of things happening inside and behind the facade for 8 or 9 seconds before you see the facade start to fall. You can pretend that it is the entire building all you want, we understand you need to desperately hang on to something..... The nurse should be by with your meds shortly.........

You don't even have an alternate explanation for the collapse of building 7, Building 3, or the St. Nicholas Greek Orthodox Church. You don't really have any alternative theories for WTC 1 and 2............

So when you can give us your complete theories with who how why what and when, let us know....

 

[Mr. Jones]

A lie is a lie. Usually lies are used to cover up the truth. This is not the case of complacent white lies. These are flat out falsifications. Not "that's classified." Sorry you cant figure out the difference Ollie. Your opinion is clearly bias in favor of your once, or still, handlers.

As for building 7. You can run around screaming facade and penthouse all day and night. But when a building achieves free fall acceleration, that is a conclusion that there was absolutely no resistance in its path. Are we to believe the building simply disappeared for 8 floors allowing for this to happen?
Again, Im sorry you don't understand science. But the official account is grossly negligent, high improbable and most of all, riddled with lies and holes.

If it looks like a duck, and it quacks like a duck, then it is certainly NOT a lizard.

What lies did they tell? You haven't any clue, stretching for anything you can to cast doubts on the official investigations. Our military is not going to give away anything that will compromise national security. Get used to it.

Again, you cannot look at the videos of this building from the beginning of the collapse and not know that there is a lot of things happening inside and behind the facade for 8 or 9 seconds before you see the facade start to fall. You can pretend that it is the entire building all you want, we understand you need to desperately hang on to something..... The nurse should be by with your meds shortly.........

You don't even have an alternate explanation for the collapse of building 7, Building 3, or the St. Nicholas Greek Orthodox Church. You don't really have any alternative theories for WTC 1 and 2............

So when you can give us your complete theories with who how why what and when, let us know....

I've explained the lies and the repercussions they represent, and again the WTC7 collpase, as is explained by NIST is..if you stop and think about it, quite possible the explanation of how the building was imploded. It would obviously have to start inside the building, taking out all the main supporting structure to allow it to achieve the free fall acceleration that it did.
The building had most all the classic example of a CD, but the one obvious problem is the way NIST tells their dubious tale, and blames it on a "new phenomenon" the "thermal expansion" crap that any real scientists has already looked at and debunked as absurdities.

I posted and explained the problems with their version, along with the many inconsistencies and lies about the fuel loads on certain floors, the missing shear studs, and other things that make NIST out to be the liars that they are for the government.

 

[candycorn]

A lie is a lie. Usually lies are used to cover up the truth. This is not the case of complacent white lies. These are flat out falsifications. Not "that's classified." Sorry you cant figure out the difference Ollie. Your opinion is clearly bias in favor of your once, or still, handlers.

As for building 7. You can run around screaming facade and penthouse all day and night. But when a building achieves free fall acceleration, that is a conclusion that there was absolutely no resistance in its path. Are we to believe the building simply disappeared for 8 floors allowing for this to happen?
Again, Im sorry you don't understand science. But the official account is grossly negligent, high improbable and most of all, riddled with lies and holes.

If it looks like a duck, and it quacks like a duck, then it is certainly NOT a lizard.

What lies did they tell? You haven't any clue, stretching for anything you can to cast doubts on the official investigations. Our military is not going to give away anything that will compromise national security. Get used to it.

Again, you cannot look at the videos of this building from the beginning of the collapse and not know that there is a lot of things happening inside and behind the facade for 8 or 9 seconds before you see the facade start to fall. You can pretend that it is the entire building all you want, we understand you need to desperately hang on to something..... The nurse should be by with your meds shortly.........

You don't even have an alternate explanation for the collapse of building 7, Building 3, or the St. Nicholas Greek Orthodox Church. You don't really have any alternative theories for WTC 1 and 2............

So when you can give us your complete theories with who how why what and when, let us know....

I've explained the lies and the repercussions they represent, and again the WTC7 collpase, as is explained by NIST is..if you stop and think about it, quite possible the explanation of how the building was imploded. It would obviously have to start inside the building, taking out all the main supporting structure to allow it to achieve the free fall acceleration that it did.
The building had most all the classic example of a CD, but the one obvious problem is the way NIST tells their dubious tale, and blames it on a "new phenomenon" the "thermal expansion" crap that any real scientists has already looked at and debunked as absurdities.

I posted and explained the problems with their version, along with the many inconsistencies and lies about the fuel loads on certain floors, the missing shear studs, and other things that make NIST out to be the liars that they are for the government.

Wow, you should do something about that. Too bad nobody believes or likes you.

 

[Mr. Jones]

You don't even have an alternate explanation for the collapse of building 7, Building 3, or the St. Nicholas Greek Orthodox Church. You don't really have any alternative theories for WTC 1 and 2............

So when you can give us your complete theories with who how why what and when, let us know....

You really should look into getting a memory cognitive test, and some Ginko Boloba or an MRI to see if you have massive plaque on the brain for your memory loss!
I have posted countless topics regarding the alternative theory and where the NIST and OCT VERSIONS ARE WRONG!

http://www.usmessageboard.com/4111999-post224.html



You are a classic case of a person in denial.

 

[daws101]

A lie is a lie. Usually lies are used to cover up the truth. This is not the case of complacent white lies. These are flat out falsifications. Not "that's classified." Sorry you cant figure out the difference Ollie. Your opinion is clearly bias in favor of your once, or still, handlers.

As for building 7. You can run around screaming facade and penthouse all day and night. But when a building achieves free fall acceleration, that is a conclusion that there was absolutely no resistance in its path. Are we to believe the building simply disappeared for 8 floors allowing for this to happen?
Again, Im sorry you don't understand science. But the official account is grossly negligent, high improbable and most of all, riddled with lies and holes.

If it looks like a duck, and it quacks like a duck, then it is certainly NOT a lizard.

but it could be a goose.
if it's all a lie then prove it...you've had 10 years and all you can say is the government did it and you can't even prove that.

 

[daws101]

A lie is a lie. Usually lies are used to cover up the truth. This is not the case of complacent white lies. These are flat out falsifications. Not "that's classified." Sorry you cant figure out the difference Ollie. Your opinion is clearly bias in favor of your once, or still, handlers.

As for building 7. You can run around screaming facade and penthouse all day and night. But when a building achieves free fall acceleration, that is a conclusion that there was absolutely no resistance in its path. Are we to believe the building simply disappeared for 8 floors allowing for this to happen?
Again, Im sorry you don't understand science. But the official account is grossly negligent, high improbable and most of all, riddled with lies and holes.

If it looks like a duck, and it quacks like a duck, then it is certainly NOT a lizard.

What lies did they tell? You haven't any clue, stretching for anything you can to cast doubts on the official investigations. Our military is not going to give away anything that will compromise national security. Get used to it.

Again, you cannot look at the videos of this building from the beginning of the collapse and not know that there is a lot of things happening inside and behind the facade for 8 or 9 seconds before you see the facade start to fall. You can pretend that it is the entire building all you want, we understand you need to desperately hang on to something..... The nurse should be by with your meds shortly.........

You don't even have an alternate explanation for the collapse of building 7, Building 3, or the St. Nicholas Greek Orthodox Church. You don't really have any alternative theories for WTC 1 and 2............

So when you can give us your complete theories with who how why what and when, let us know....

I've explained the lies and the repercussions they represent, and again the WTC7 collpase, as is explained by NIST is..if you stop and think about it, quite possible the explanation of how the building was imploded. It would obviously have to start inside the building, taking out all the main supporting structure to allow it to achieve the free fall acceleration that it did.
The building had most all the classic example of a CD, but the one obvious problem is the way NIST tells their dubious tale, and blames it on a "new phenomenon" the "thermal expansion" crap that any real scientists has already looked at and debunked as absurdities.

I posted and explained the problems with their version, along with the many inconsistencies and lies about the fuel loads on certain floors, the missing shear studs, and other things that make NIST out to be the liars that they are for the government.

no... you've posted a cobbled together highly speculative mishmash of fantasy, pseudo science, straight up lies, no provable linkage, all based on ASSumption.

 

[SFC Ollie]

You don't even have an alternate explanation for the collapse of building 7, Building 3, or the St. Nicholas Greek Orthodox Church. You don't really have any alternative theories for WTC 1 and 2............

So when you can give us your complete theories with who how why what and when, let us know....

You really should look into getting a memory cognitive test, and some Ginko Boloba or an MRI to see if you have massive plaque on the brain for your memory loss!
I have posted countless topics regarding the alternative theory and where the NIST and OCT VERSIONS ARE WRONG!

http://www.usmessageboard.com/4111999-post224.html


You are a classic case of a person in denial.

One more time. Forget what NIST said or did or did not say or do.

You have no hope of disproving their tests and their conclusions.

But please give us your testing methods and your conclusions.

The Official conclusions is that Al Quaeda used 19 individuals to take over 4 airliners. They crashed two of them into the WTC towers, one into the Pentagon, And one failed it's mission and crashed into a field in PA.
The Official conclusions is that the crashing of the 2 jetliners into the twin towers caused their destruction, and the destruction of at least 3 other buildings and the heavy damage of several more.

Now without telling us that they were wrong, tell us in your words what happened.

 

[daws101]

You don't even have an alternate explanation for the collapse of building 7, Building 3, or the St. Nicholas Greek Orthodox Church. You don't really have any alternative theories for WTC 1 and 2............

So when you can give us your complete theories with who how why what and when, let us know....

You really should look into getting a memory cognitive test, and some Ginko Boloba or an MRI to see if you have massive plaque on the brain for your memory loss!
I have posted countless topics regarding the alternative theory and where the NIST and OCT VERSIONS ARE WRONG!

http://www.usmessageboard.com/4111999-post224.html


You are a classic case of a person in denial.

One more time. Forget what NIST said or did or did not say or do.

You have no hope of disproving their tests and their conclusions.

But please give us your testing methods and your conclusions.

The Official conclusions is that Al Quaeda used 19 individuals to take over 4 airliners. They crashed two of them into the WTC towers, one into the Pentagon, And one failed it's mission and crashed into a field in PA.
The Official conclusions is that the crashing of the 2 jetliners into the twin towers caused their destruction, and the destruction of at least 3 other buildings and the heavy damage of several more.

Now without telling us that they were wrong, tell us in your words what happened.

I'd better break out the mre's this may take a while...

 

[TakeAStepBack]

You presume I have the patience to run in your circle. Sorry. This has been explained over. Ten fold. Again and again.

Check out the Stockholm Syndrome.

 

[SFC Ollie]

You presume I have the patience to run in your circle. Sorry. This has been explained over. Ten fold. Again and again.

Check out the Stockholm Syndrome.

Oh Please Indulge us with your very own version of what really happened that morning 10 years ago. Just go ahead and type it out for us........We are so anxious and waiting to read it.

 

[daws101]

You presume I have the patience to run in your circle. Sorry. This has been explained over. Ten fold. Again and again.

Check out the Stockholm Syndrome.

an explaination based on ASSumption is not a valid explaination....what the fuck does the Stockholm Syndrome have to do with this?

 

[Obamerican]

You presume I have the patience to run in your circle. Sorry. This has been explained over. Ten fold. Again and again.

Check out the Stockholm Syndrome.

I did some research and found the LEGAL definition of people of your ilk:

brainless, dazed, deficient, dense, dim, dodo, doltish, dopy, dotterel, dull, dumb, dummy, foolish, futile, gullible, half-baked, half-witted, idiotic, ill-advised, imbecilic, inane, indiscreet, insensate, irrelevant, irresponsible, laughable, loser, ludicrous, meaningless, mindless, moronic, naive, nonsensical, obtuse, pointless, puerile, rash, senseless, short-sighted, simple, simple-minded, slow, sluggish, stolid, stupefied, thick, thickheaded, trivial, unintelligent, unthinking, witless

Go fuck yourself, shit stain.

 

[Mr. Jones]

an explaination based on ASSumption is not a valid explaination...

It's spelled EXPLANATION
ex·pla·na·tionNoun/&#716;ekspl&#601;&#712;n&#257;SH&#601;n/
1. A statement or account that makes something clear.
2. A reason or justification given for an action or belief.

That is why the NIST explanation, and for that matter the governments version of events on the rest of the 9-11 attack is being questioned. You seem to hold to a double standard when it comes to how the theories for the collapse of the buildings and the OCT of 9-11 came about.

If you hold true to your comment, then surly you have to doubt the NIST theories as they came about by unscientific assumptions in the first place, and this has been proven by people who have done the calculations and studies that NIST fell short on.

 

[Dante]

scary

 

[eots]

scary

for cowards...

 

[daws101]

scary

for cowards...