revisiting 911 truth in the Obama days...

[philh 0]

Really? have the conspiracy nut jobs published their evidence in a peer reviewed engineering journals? (oh and not some conspiracy nut journal that they publish themselves).

[DJL 232]

Quote

You are supposed to be an engineer, yet all your arguments are simply attacks on those that at least have the knowledge and integrity to present their argument in a scientific and professional manner.

On the other hand you don't have anywhere near the experience, knowledge, or professional background to formulate an opinion or make a statement about what EITHER side says. You're just eating what you get shoveled. Hey Rhys: THIS IS YOU!

"I encourage all awesome dangerous behavior." - Jeffro Fincher

[billvon 2,478]

>Get a fucking grip.

Your one warning. Cut it out.

[Trae 1]

in reply to "You have been duped, it is obvious and you are in denial! "
.........................

It just seems SO obvious that the whole thing was a set -up.
Controlled demolition with multiple red herrings attached.

People are so dumb they don't realise steel doesn't burn or melt in an open fire. There must have been a blast furnace in those buildings somewhere.

The apocalyptic horse has long bolted and is running free enjoying its wars and huge incomes from arms deals and other unaccountable sources, fooling all us dumbies as usual..

Peace president Obama presides happily over increased warfare in Afganistan. Business as usual.

Who got all the financial advantage from this?
Perhaps the same people who own the largest industrial complexes on the planet ... just perhaps.


For me the unanswered/unanswerable questions are :-
Why did the steel get shipped overseas (china and india) so quickly before examination ? Capitalism?
Why so many reports of explosions in the buildings before collapse? Imagination?
Why prior knowledge (of collapses) was demonstrated by various officials and newsreports.? Bad timing?

Has any-one noticed how amateurish just about every other terrorist attack appears compared to 911 ?

Even the psycho pro's that carried out this operation made many mistakes as is typical in any warped military operation.
The beauty of the whole thing is how it didn't really matter. The brainwashed minions willingly helped their masters.

All this happened more than 8years ago.
Since then the people who did this have planned and carried out many more attacks against humanity.

The current one appears to be bio-warfare experiments against eastern european countries. Bit of insecticide followed by another engineered flu epidemic. Nice combination eh?
Forced vaccinations anyone? Especially if you're black, poor , african or asian these shots will be made freely available to you. Just line up and take it.

What could be easier than tricking and poisoning us stupid humans? Its just the things rulers do.

[rhys 0]

Quote

Simple question. I would love a one word answer, but realize I probably won't get it.

Here it is: Did passenger planes impact both the North and South Towers of the World Trade Center on 9-11-01?

It seem they did, there is ample evidence for this and we have untold different angles of thm doing so.

I have read about theories of holographic blah blah but I have no reason to think that this is a reasonable assertion.

People that are willing to kill thousands of people, would likely be willing to have an airplane fly into the towers to make the collapses seem viable.

why do you ask?

I will try to answer any reasonable question. I will not answer it 58 times because the person that asked it failed to acknowldge the answer the first, second or eighth time.

"When the power of love overcomes the love of power, then the world will see peace." - 'Jimi' Hendrix

[rhys 0]

Quote

Are you going to hold YOURSELF to that standard, as well?

I am sure going to try my best to.

"When the power of love overcomes the love of power, then the world will see peace." - 'Jimi' Hendrix

[philh 0]

Why would they need to fly the planes into buildings to make it seem more viable? why not just say it was a bomb or serious of bombs? that would invovle less conspirators, an important issue if they dont want to get caught?
Again perhaps you will provide a reaosnable asnwer to why no Iraqis on the planes if the US govt organsied it?

[philh 0]

You know what I really cant tell whether your thread is a parody or is serious

[Belgian_Draft 0]

For me the unanswered/unanswerable questions are :-
Why did the steel get shipped overseas (china and india) so quickly before examination ? Capitalism?

Most of the steel sat in piles for months before being sent to recyclers. Some of the steel is still being kept as evidence and for furure examination.

Why so many reports of explosions in the buildings before collapse? Imagination?

Actually, yes, it was imagination. Virtually all the reports were from people who had never even heard an explosion before and what they heard was actually objects within the towers falling between floors.

Why prior knowledge (of collapses) was demonstrated by various officials and newsreports.? Bad timing?

There was much confusion caused when some of the media broadcasts used prerecorded footage as a backdrop to their anchors.

HAMMER:
Originally employed as a weapon of war, the hammer nowadays is used as a
kind of divining rod to locate the most expensive parts adjacent the
object we are trying to hit.

[pirana 0]

Quote

People are so dumb they don't realise steel doesn't burn or melt in an open fire. There must have been a blast furnace in those buildings somewhere.

It did not need to melt like butter in a microwave. It just needed to soften a bit - which it does quite readily in a hot enough fire. That is just another line of uninformed BS thrown out there and expected to be accepted as gospel by the sheeple. Kinda like their claim that there was no way cell phones work at cruising altitude. They finally had to admit that was a completely conjured lie. This one is no different.

" . . . the lust for power can be just as completely satisfied by suggesting people into loving their servitude as by flogging them and kicking them into obedience." -- Aldous Huxley

[billvon 2,478]

>Controlled demolition . . .

>Peace president Obama presides . . .

>huge incomes from arms deals and other unaccountable sources . . .

>Forced vaccinations anyone? Especially if you're black, poor , african or asian . . .

Bravo sir! Nicely played. Something for everyone.

[pirana 0]

Quote

>Controlled demolition . . .

>Peace president Obama presides . . .

>huge incomes from arms deals and other unaccountable sources . . .

>Forced vaccinations anyone? Especially if you're black, poor , african or asian . . .

Bravo sir! Nicely played. Something for everyone.

He left out the faked Moon landing, Planet X, 2012, and his horoscope.

" . . . the lust for power can be just as completely satisfied by suggesting people into loving their servitude as by flogging them and kicking them into obedience." -- Aldous Huxley

[rhys 0]

Quote

Why would they need to fly the planes into buildings to make it seem more viable? why not just say it was a bomb or serious of bombs? that would invovle less conspirators, an important issue if they dont want to get caught?
Again perhaps you will provide a reaosnable asnwer to why no Iraqis on the planes if the US govt organsied it?

I try to avoid speculation these days, I have learned it can lead you way from you cause. but I will suggest a reason why they didn't 'just plant bombs'.

You do realise what facilities were in building 7 don't you? the fact they have denied the possibility of explosives is aginst the rules of investigting such a disaster, if the public were to find out/be told that terrorists can infltrate the CIA headquarters and other government secret spots without detection and carry out the attack, then the fear mongering wouldn't work because the american pulic wouldn't feel very well protected.

Shyam Sunder and John Gross will go down for drylabbing and 'serious movements' are being made at present to make sure this is fast tracked.

Once this has happened, then we can get the real answers to your questions.

"When the power of love overcomes the love of power, then the world will see peace." - 'Jimi' Hendrix

[rhys 0]

Quote

Kinda like their claim that there was no way cell phones work at cruising altitude. They finally had to admit that was a completely conjured lie.

That is false and misleading, you need to do your reaserch a bit better.

"When the power of love overcomes the love of power, then the world will see peace." - 'Jimi' Hendrix

[airdvr 200]

Quote

then the fear mongering wouldn't work because the american pulic wouldn't feel very well protected.

McFly!...Hello McFly!

The reason fear mongering works is FEAR! On 9/11 I wasn't feeling particularly well protected.

Please don't dent the planet.

Destinations by Roxanne

[billvon 2,478]

>That is false and misleading, you need to do your reaserch a bit better.

It was a lie. Cellphones do work in airplanes; if anyone had asked an expert they could have told them that. It's like saying "cypreses can't misfire" - and then deciding that a two-out fatality was the work of evil government agents, and everyone who ignores that is a sheep.

(In their defense, they have just been ignorant of the facts, in which case it makes them a) simply mistaken and b) typical truthers.)

[pirana 0]

Quote

Quote

Kinda like their claim that there was no way cell phones work at cruising altitude. They finally had to admit that was a completely conjured lie.

That is false and misleading, you need to do your reaserch a bit better.

So, do you think cell phones do not work up there?

Are you stating that as a fact you believe to be true?

" . . . the lust for power can be just as completely satisfied by suggesting people into loving their servitude as by flogging them and kicking them into obedience." -- Aldous Huxley

[jakee 1,281]

Quote

but I will suggest a reason why they didn't 'just plant bombs'.

You do realise what facilities were in building 7 don't you?

Dude, why did they 'demolish' Building 7 at all? What is the mileage?




(And speaking of explosives, you went very, very quiet after everyone explained to you just how sensitive and sophisticated modern seismographic equipment is. Have you got an updated reason why you don't believe the conclusion of one of the top controlled demolision firms in New York, or should we just assume that they're lying because they're also part of the onspiracy?)

Do you want to have an ideagasm?

[rhys 0]

Quote

It was a lie. Cellphones do work in airplanes; if anyone had asked an expert they could have told them that.

They work until about 9k then they don't work anymore.

How about the feefall anomoly Bill, you and old belgium boy still have not answered the simple question. Yet you claim to be so sure of the NIST report being so true and complete, it now says freefall of building 7 occured for at least 2.5 seconds.



Was the freefall accelerartion of WTC7's colapse an anomoly in you mind, and if not where has the precedent been set for this before?

"When the power of love overcomes the love of power, then the world will see peace." - 'Jimi' Hendrix

[mnealtx 0]

Quote

Quote

It was a lie. Cellphones do work in airplanes; if anyone had asked an expert they could have told them that.

They work until about 9k then they don't work anymore.

*gets bowl of popcorn*

This oughta be fun....

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

[Belgian_Draft 0]

Quote

Quote

It was a lie. Cellphones do work in airplanes; if anyone had asked an expert they could have told them that.

They work until about 9k then they don't work anymore.

How about the feefall anomoly Bill, you and old belgium boy still have not answered the simple question. Yet you claim to be so sure of the NIST report being so true and complete, it now says freefall of building 7 occured for at least 2.5 seconds.



Was the freefall accelerartion of WTC7's colapse an anomoly in you mind, and if not where has the precedent been set for this before?

I have asked you many, many times to explain how the debris from the top of the towers hit the ground well before the buildings finished collapsing even though they fell, according to you, at free-fall speed.
As far as building 7, it is entirely possible due to a combination of the nature of the collapse and physics for a small area to not just fall but to be pulled down and briefly accelerate faster than 1 G. It can happen briefly but it cannot be sustained for any substantial length of time. To help you understand how this can be, think of a lever with a heavy weight on a short arm leveraging a smaller weight on a longer arm.
I'm not saying this is exactly what happened, but it is a possibility and not the only one.

HAMMER:
Originally employed as a weapon of war, the hammer nowadays is used as a
kind of divining rod to locate the most expensive parts adjacent the
object we are trying to hit.

[champu 1]

You:

Quote

A question for anyone that is willing to contribute to a reasonable debate to the contrary of controlled demolition hypothesis.

Do you acknowledge as fact that building 7, actually managed to obtain freefall acceleration for ‘an amount of time’ during is collapse, as pointed out in the Latest NIST report published on the 20th of November 2008.

If so, do you consider this an anomaly?

Billvon:

Quote

>Do you acknowledge as fact that building 7, actually managed to obtain
>freefall acceleration for ‘an amount of time’ during is collapse, as pointed
>out in the Latest NIST report published on the 20th of November 2008.

No. However, it was likely close to freefall speed due to the nature of the collapse.

>If so, do you consider this an anomaly?

No.

You:

Quote

How about the feefall anomoly Bill, you and old belgium boy still have not answered the simple question. Yet you claim to be so sure of the NIST report being so true and complete, it now says freefall of building 7 occured for at least 2.5 seconds.

You (earlier):

Quote

I will try to answer any reasonable question. I will not answer it 58 times because the person that asked it failed to acknowldge the answer the first, second or eighth time.

[billvon 2,478]

>They work until about 9k then they don't work anymore.

Wrong again. American Airlines and my company ran a lot of tests in preparation for a cellphone picocell service in an airplane. With the system off we could indeed make calls from above that altitude, depending on phone location, type of service, frequency etc.

>Was the freefall accelerartion of WTC7's colapse an anomoly in you
>mind.

See my previous answer. I will try to answer any reasonable question. I will not answer it 58 times because the person that asked it failed to acknowledge the answer the first, second or eighth time.

>and if not where has the precedent been set for this before?

The I-35 bridge collapse. A steel framed structure collapsing at nearly freefall speeds.

[rhys 0]

Quote

I have asked you many, many times to explain how the debris from the top of the towers hit the ground well before the buildings finished collapsing even though they fell, according to you, at free-fall speed.

It is 'Natural' for a building to 'not' fall at freefall speed, and for periods of time they did not do so, but for other periods of time they did. It is quite easy to answer your quesstion as the buildng stood for decades due to thier design. thery are quite simply too strong for gravity alone to take them down at that speed, or at all.

What is difficult to explain is how they can manage to accelerate at freefall speed due to random fires and structural weakness.

Quote

As far as building 7, it is entirely possible due to a combination of the nature of the collapse and physics for a small area to not just fall but to be pulled down and briefly accelerate faster than 1 G. It can happen briefly but it cannot be sustained for any substantial length of time. To help you understand how this can be, think of a lever with a heavy weight on a short arm leveraging a smaller weight on a longer arm.
I'm not saying this is exactly what happened, but it is a possibility and not the only one.

digging deep for that one bro, how about you explain it and use a building as an example, and answer my question;

Do you think it is an anomoly that the freefall occurred for at least 2.5 seconds, and if not where has the precedent been set for this before.

"When the power of love overcomes the love of power, then the world will see peace." - 'Jimi' Hendrix

[rhys 0]

Quote

You (earlier):
Quote
I will try to answer any reasonable question. I will not answer it 58 times because the person that asked it failed to acknowldge the answer the first, second or eighth time.

i will answer a question, saying he thinks it is not an anomoly is one thing, it is easy to say no.

but explaining it will be very difficult indeed.

It will be intersting to see if he or 'belgium guy' tries, NIST didn't, and now they will be investigated for drylabbing, serious movements are taking place to make sure this process goes ahead as soon as possible.

"When the power of love overcomes the love of power, then the world will see peace." - 'Jimi' Hendrix