Why do "debunkers' devote so much time to defending the Official 9/11 Story?

[7forever]

AND THE BIGGEST OF ALL, SINCE HUNDREDS OF PEOPLE WERE INVOLVED AT LEAST IN THE COVER UP, HOW HAVE THEY BEEN KEPT QUIET FOR 11 YEARS?

I'll start with this question first.
If building 7 was a controlled demolition how did intricate explosives get placed with out being seen and survive 8 hours of raging fires?

You sound like you really have doubts that Building 7 was rigged with explosives, prior to the attack. A moron could tell just by looking at the way the building collapsed that it was a controlled demolition. Just because work on Building 7 was not seen, does not mean that it did not happen.

You have questions for me, I have questions for you. Why did BBC report Building 7 had fell 20 minutes before it actually collapsed? Can you explain how the BBC knew that Building 7 was going to collapse?

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ltP2t9nq9fI]ENHANCED VERSION: News Reports WTC7 Fell Before It Happens! - YouTube[/ame]

The Mysterious Demolition of Building 7

Many Americans are still unaware that for years Larry Silverstein owned only one building near the World Trade Center complex: Building 7. A mere two months before 9/11, he bought the entire complex; all seven of the buildings. Then he immediately took out a record insurance policy on them for over $3.5 billion, which he has since been paid. Interesting timing, to say the least.

(Note: Mr. Silvertstein later went to court and fought to receive a much higher monetary reward. He said that because each plane hit was a separate attack, he wanted to be awarded $3.5 billion for both plane strikes. He won his court case and has now been awarded over twice the amount of his original insurance sum; approximately $7.3 billion.)

Why is Building 7 so important? Because the official story is that two hijacked planes hit the Twin Towers, caught them on fire, and caused them to collapse—even though a modern steel building has never before in history collapsed from fire. But then we have Building 7 that was further away than any other building in the complex, and later that afternoon got a few small fires in it and mysteriously "collapsed." However, buildings that were closer to the destruction of the Twin Towers, but were not owned by Mr. Silverstein, went left unscathed. Strangely enough, only the buildings owned by Larry Silverstein were destroyed.
In a PBS documentary, Larry Silverstein commented on the demolition of Building 7 by saying:

"I remember getting a call from the fire department commander telling me that they weren't sure they were going to be able to contain the fire. And I said, 'You know, we've had such terrible loss of life, maybe the smartest thing to do is pull it.' And then they made that decision to pull, and then we watched the building collapse."

.

wtc 7 is the best proof that only morons think wtc was a CD.

WTC 7 is the best proof that only morons could think 7 was NOT a controlled demolition.

 

[daws101]

I'll start with this question first.
If building 7 was a controlled demolition how did intricate explosives get placed with out being seen and survive 8 hours of raging fires?

You sound like you really have doubts that Building 7 was rigged with explosives, prior to the attack. A moron could tell just by looking at the way the building collapsed that it was a controlled demolition. Just because work on Building 7 was not seen, does not mean that it did not happen.

You have questions for me, I have questions for you. Why did BBC report Building 7 had fell 20 minutes before it actually collapsed? Can you explain how the BBC knew that Building 7 was going to collapse?

ENHANCED VERSION: News Reports WTC7 Fell Before It Happens! - YouTube

The Mysterious Demolition of Building 7

Many Americans are still unaware that for years Larry Silverstein owned only one building near the World Trade Center complex: Building 7. A mere two months before 9/11, he bought the entire complex; all seven of the buildings. Then he immediately took out a record insurance policy on them for over $3.5 billion, which he has since been paid. Interesting timing, to say the least.

(Note: Mr. Silvertstein later went to court and fought to receive a much higher monetary reward. He said that because each plane hit was a separate attack, he wanted to be awarded $3.5 billion for both plane strikes. He won his court case and has now been awarded over twice the amount of his original insurance sum; approximately $7.3 billion.)

Why is Building 7 so important? Because the official story is that two hijacked planes hit the Twin Towers, caught them on fire, and caused them to collapse—even though a modern steel building has never before in history collapsed from fire. But then we have Building 7 that was further away than any other building in the complex, and later that afternoon got a few small fires in it and mysteriously "collapsed." However, buildings that were closer to the destruction of the Twin Towers, but were not owned by Mr. Silverstein, went left unscathed. Strangely enough, only the buildings owned by Larry Silverstein were destroyed.
In a PBS documentary, Larry Silverstein commented on the demolition of Building 7 by saying:

"I remember getting a call from the fire department commander telling me that they weren't sure they were going to be able to contain the fire. And I said, 'You know, we've had such terrible loss of life, maybe the smartest thing to do is pull it.' And then they made that decision to pull, and then we watched the building collapse."

.

wtc 7 is the best proof that only morons think wtc was a CD.

WTC 7 is the best proof that only morons could think 7 was NOT a controlled demolition.

thanks again for proving my point !

 

[daws101]

And what does the douchbag with a bad perm believe? Did fire bring down Building 7?

If that's what you believe than you should be put down like a sick animal.

Fire and the fact that a huge chunk of the building was taken out by the falling Towers.

Now put your head back up your ass, no one wants to look at your stupid face anymore.

The falling debris did not weaken the building according to NIST the failure of column 79 due to fire was the initiation of the collapse...you should try reading it sometime

ATTENTION ALL posters.. the above is a typical not really true statement by eots, when reading his posts, take care as he has a talent for misrepresentation. THAT IS ALL....

 

[LA RAM FAN]

I'm going to assume you actually want an answer to your question.

The reason I defend the official 9-11 report is because it's the closest to the truth we'll ever get. Is it 100% correct? Of course not. The reason it hasn't dotted all the "i"s and crossed all the "t"s is because they had to piece it together from scratch after the fact.

It fits what we know to be true, but because it doesn't cover all the bases, and because a great deal of evidence has been lost or destroyed in the event, it has holes in the story. The people who don't believe the official report can list all of those holes in the story and make any kind of claim they want to but the one thing they cannot do is come up with any other story that in any way resembles the truth or fits what we know to be true.

The reason you defend the official 9-11 report is because you want it to be true. The reason it hasn't dotted all the "i"s and crossed all the "t"s is because they couldn't if they tried against an opposition showing them why they can't. THEY DON'T HAVE TO. They sold a hoax on that day and most believed it.

It fits what you accept as true, but because a hoax could never be proven and a great deal of evidence proves no planes and demos that turned the towers to dust, the official myth is just that. The people who disprove the official report can list all of those holes in the story and prove that idiots who support the official story could not ever prove it in the real world.

as i said earllier.predfan troll STILL thinks oswald was the lone assassin.this despite the fact that even the government themselves concluded in the 70's the warren commission was wrong.that there was a second shooter.ask him. but just stick to the evidence that there were multiple gunman though.please dont talk about that subject you talk about so much with him okay?

 

[LA RAM FAN]

A moron could tell just by looking at the way the building collapsed that it was a controlled demolition.

We agree on one thing, you are a moron.

And what does the douchbag with a bad perm believe? Did fire bring down Building 7?

If that's what you believe than you should be put down like a sick animal.

Fire and the fact that a huge chunk of the building was taken out by the falling Towers.

Now put your head back up your ass, no one wants to look at your stupid face anymore.

i see the frady cat deniar is still dodging the FACT we have to keep posting that there were other buidlings s in the area much closer with far more severe damage done to them than bld 7 but did not collapse.nice game of dodgeball you play.

 

[LA RAM FAN]

Just like the image above, it's how so-called 9/11 debunkers really are. AFRAID OF THE TRUTH.

stands up and gives standing ovation.Terral used to post that funny pic all the time here with the loyal Bush dupes here afraid to look at the evidence.

 

[LA RAM FAN]

Hey Wildcard,

You are mistaken. They don't really defend it, but insist it's true because the goverment and mass fake media told us it was.

thats how they have bene conditioned and brainwashed their whole lives.that if the media and the government says its true,,that makes it a fact.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

A moron could tell just by looking at the way the building collapsed that it was a controlled demolition.

We agree on one thing, you are a moron.

And what does the douchbag with a bad perm believe? Did fire bring down Building 7?

If that's what you believe than you should be put down like a sick animal.

douchbag? bad perm? you don't even know"WHO" that is! lol!

He's not too bright.....

 

[LA RAM FAN]

I'll start with this question first.
If building 7 was a controlled demolition how did intricate explosives get placed with out being seen and survive 8 hours of raging fires?

You sound like you really have doubts that Building 7 was rigged with explosives, prior to the attack. A moron could tell just by looking at the way the building collapsed that it was a controlled demolition. Just because work on Building 7 was not seen, does not mean that it did not happen.

You have questions for me, I have questions for you. Why did BBC report Building 7 had fell 20 minutes before it actually collapsed? Can you explain how the BBC knew that Building 7 was going to collapse?

ENHANCED VERSION: News Reports WTC7 Fell Before It Happens! - YouTube

The Mysterious Demolition of Building 7

Many Americans are still unaware that for years Larry Silverstein owned only one building near the World Trade Center complex: Building 7. A mere two months before 9/11, he bought the entire complex; all seven of the buildings. Then he immediately took out a record insurance policy on them for over $3.5 billion, which he has since been paid. Interesting timing, to say the least.

(Note: Mr. Silvertstein later went to court and fought to receive a much higher monetary reward. He said that because each plane hit was a separate attack, he wanted to be awarded $3.5 billion for both plane strikes. He won his court case and has now been awarded over twice the amount of his original insurance sum; approximately $7.3 billion.)

Why is Building 7 so important? Because the official story is that two hijacked planes hit the Twin Towers, caught them on fire, and caused them to collapse—even though a modern steel building has never before in history collapsed from fire. But then we have Building 7 that was further away than any other building in the complex, and later that afternoon got a few small fires in it and mysteriously "collapsed." However, buildings that were closer to the destruction of the Twin Towers, but were not owned by Mr. Silverstein, went left unscathed. Strangely enough, only the buildings owned by Larry Silverstein were destroyed.
In a PBS documentary, Larry Silverstein commented on the demolition of Building 7 by saying:

"I remember getting a call from the fire department commander telling me that they weren't sure they were going to be able to contain the fire. And I said, 'You know, we've had such terrible loss of life, maybe the smartest thing to do is pull it.' And then they made that decision to pull, and then we watched the building collapse."

.

wtc 7 is the best proof that only morons think wtc was a CD.

WTC 7 is the best proof that only morons could think 7 was NOT a controlled demolition.

yep,they can only sling shit in defeat like the monkey trolls they are. Notice that most of them except one hasnt even tried to answer it? they know they are cornered and wont listen to Barry Jennings testimony because they are so much in denial. the ONLY poster that has tried was that one that came up with that hysterical explanation it had a big chunk out of it.true to form,they evade the FACTS that me and wildcard mentioned earlier that other buildings much closer to the towers had far more extensive damage done to them with far more severe extensive fires but did not collapse yet that is the ONLY lameass explanation they can come up with?????

as i said earlier,nice game of dodgeball they keep playing isnt it? they will ignore the fact as well that zionist jew larry silverstein proffited in the millions from these attacks and all three were owned by him but none of the others buildings were owned by him and they all remained standing.You just got to love the logic of the coincidence theorists dont you?


thats how you can tell these guys are all just afraid and in denial.they evade the facts and change the subject.they dont post blatant lies here everyday like paid trolls gomer ollie and dawgshit do.like i said,they just eavde the facts and change the subject as evidenced throughout this whole thread.lol.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

I'm going to assume you actually want an answer to your question.

The reason I defend the official 9-11 report is because it's the closest to the truth we'll ever get. Is it 100% correct? Of course not. The reason it hasn't dotted all the "i"s and crossed all the "t"s is because they had to piece it together from scratch after the fact.

It fits what we know to be true, but because it doesn't cover all the bases, and because a great deal of evidence has been lost or destroyed in the event, it has holes in the story. The people who don't believe the official report can list all of those holes in the story and make any kind of claim they want to but the one thing they cannot do is come up with any other story that in any way resembles the truth or fits what we know to be true.

The reason you defend the official 9-11 report is because you want it to be true. The reason it hasn't dotted all the "i"s and crossed all the "t"s is because they couldn't if they tried against an opposition showing them why they can't. THEY DON'T HAVE TO. They sold a hoax on that day and most believed it.

It fits what you accept as true, but because a hoax could never be proven and a great deal of evidence proves no planes and demos that turned the towers to dust, the official myth is just that. The people who disprove the official report can list all of those holes in the story and prove that idiots who support the official story could not ever prove it in the real world.

as i said earllier.predfan troll STILL thinks oswald was the lone assassin.this despite the fact that even the government themselves concluded in the 70's the warren commission was wrong.that there was a second shooter.ask him. but just stick to the evidence that there were multiple gunman though.please dont talk about that subject you talk about so much with him okay?

this despite the fact that even the government themselves concluded in the 70's

The government did that? Every single employee of every level of government?
Or did you have someone more specific in mind?

 

[Montrovant]

Just like the image above, it's how so-called 9/11 debunkers really are. AFRAID OF THE TRUTH.

stands up and gives standing ovation.Terral used to post that funny pic all the time here with the loyal Bush dupes here afraid to look at the evidence.

Because Terral is someone to hold up as admirable for his ability to separate truth from fantasy.

That you would stand behind Terral and his end of the world predictions (which, clearly, have not come true ) or 7forever with his orbs (because all the people in NYC on 9/11 that say they saw planes hit the towers are clearly lying, just as all the video evidence was obviously doctored!) says pretty much all anyone needs to know about you.

You believe all too easily as long as it fits your preconceived notions. The irony of you going on about others being programmed by the government and media is astounding, considering the sources you seem to listen to without question.

Queue fart comment and loyal Bush dupe comment....

 

[Wyld Kard]

I seem to recall seeing something about firefighters being concerned building 7 was going to collapse before it did, perhaps because of the unchecked fires inside. Could it be that BBC got reports mixed up, maybe hearing reports that the building was likely to collapse rather than it already had?

It seems monumentally stupid to make a claim about a building collapsing as part of some conspiracy and then show that same building still standing in the background.

Could it be that BBC got reports mixed up, maybe hearing reports that the building was likely to collapse rather than it already had?

LOL. On a live report they got the report mixed up, yeah sure whatever you say. Excuses, excuses, excuses. Was that supposed to be your feudal weak assed attempt at debunking? If that's what you believe than tell me something. Why when the BBC was questioned about that footage about Building 7 being reported to have collapsed 20 minutes before it actually did, they made the ridiculous statement that all live coverage on 9/11 had been lost. What stupid answer could you give this time, maybe they misplaced them you would probaly say.

 

[Wyld Kard]

A moron could tell just by looking at the way the building collapsed that it was a controlled demolition.

We agree on one thing, you are a moron.

And what does the douchbag with a bad perm believe? Did fire bring down Building 7?

If that's what you believe than you should be put down like a sick animal.

douchbag? bad perm? you don't even know"WHO" that is! lol!

Am I supposed to care who toddsterpatriot is? Am I supposed to show some respect to toddsterpatriot?

I don't give a fuck who toddsterpatriot is! To me he is a dilusional, ignorant, lying piece of shit just like you.

 

[Wyld Kard]

 

[daws101]

And what does the douchbag with a bad perm believe? Did fire bring down Building 7?

If that's what you believe than you should be put down like a sick animal.

douchbag? bad perm? you don't even know"WHO" that is! lol!

He's not too bright.....

 

[daws101]

The reason you defend the official 9-11 report is because you want it to be true. The reason it hasn't dotted all the "i"s and crossed all the "t"s is because they couldn't if they tried against an opposition showing them why they can't. THEY DON'T HAVE TO. They sold a hoax on that day and most believed it.

It fits what you accept as true, but because a hoax could never be proven and a great deal of evidence proves no planes and demos that turned the towers to dust, the official myth is just that. The people who disprove the official report can list all of those holes in the story and prove that idiots who support the official story could not ever prove it in the real world.

as i said earllier.predfan troll STILL thinks oswald was the lone assassin.this despite the fact that even the government themselves concluded in the 70's the warren commission was wrong.that there was a second shooter.ask him. but just stick to the evidence that there were multiple gunman though.please dont talk about that subject you talk about so much with him okay?

this despite the fact that even the government themselves concluded in the 70's

The government did that? Every single employee of every level of government?
Or did you have someone more specific in mind?

speaking of not to bright the award goes to handjob.

 

[daws101]

And what does the douchbag with a bad perm believe? Did fire bring down Building 7?

If that's what you believe than you should be put down like a sick animal.

douchbag? bad perm? you don't even know"WHO" that is! lol!

Am I supposed to care who toddsterpatriot is? Am I supposed to show some respect to toddsterpatriot?

I don't give a fuck who toddsterpatriot is! To me he is a dilusional, ignorant, lying piece of shit just like you.

funny how all you guys think everyone else is delusional or in on it.
you did know that that is a major indicator of mental illness..
only topped by your ignorance of WHO the man in the picture is....

 

[Wyld Kard]

You asked the questions and I gave you answers. You don't recall that YOU ASKED? Now you are attacking me for answering your questions?

That's how mental illness works.

No what's mental is how so-called 'debunkers' like Daws 101 aka Dawgshit, Predfan, Gomer Ollie, Turdersterpatriot, Crap-in-the-hat, to name a few actually believes the OS to be true and factual.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

You asked the questions and I gave you answers. You don't recall that YOU ASKED? Now you are attacking me for answering your questions?

That's how mental illness works.

No what's mental is how so-called 'debunkers' like Daws 101 aka Dawgshit, Predfan, Gomer Ollie, Turdersterpatriot, Crap-in-the-hat, to name a few actually believes the OS to be true and factual.

Tell me, who took down WTC-7? Why?

 

[daws101]

You asked the questions and I gave you answers. You don't recall that YOU ASKED? Now you are attacking me for answering your questions?

That's how mental illness works.

No what's mental is how so-called 'debunkers' like Daws 101 aka Dawgshit, Predfan, Gomer Ollie, Turdersterpatriot, Crap-in-the-hat, to name a few actually believes the OS to be true and factual.

look guys it's handjob's fractionally smarter brother..!