Comments by "Dirk Diggler" (@dirkdiggler8260) on "JRE Clips"
channel.
-
1
-
1
-
@Michaelangelo S I'm sorry that you've managed to convince yourself of something you clearly have no understanding of whatsoever, just because it fits with your agenda, but a delusion is a delusion nonetheless. A plane coming over international waters is a different ball-game altogether from an internal flight in terms of being able to track it by radar. NORAD simply wasn't prepared to track threats of such attacks internally. Switch the transponder off and primary radar is lost which meant those planes were merely a 1 of 4500 blips on the ATC radar. This happened on 3 of the 4 hijacked planes with the 4th had it's transponder code changed by the hijackers. You can have your own opinions but facts remains facts regardless sorry 🤷🏽♂️
Regarding the size of the hole, once again facts remain facts regardless of what you claim. The hole on impact, PRIOR to the collapse you mention, WAS indeed approx 96ft wide as i said (it was actually about 75ft strictly speaking, but the impact damage was 96ft across). The collapse of the top of hole would obviously have no bearing whatsoever on the width of the entry hole. I'd happily send you a link categorically proving this but youtube won't allow me to do so. I can however guide you to a website showing this if you like, but in my experience you guys aren't overly concerned with reality and prefer to choose wilful ignorance. Let me know.
For the record, the exit hole you guys are so confused about was about 12ft in diameter so i really do have no idea where you get 20ft from. I'm sure you lot just make it up as you go.
Yes volunteers from fire departments and other emergency services, serving and retired. Sorry, i assumed that was fairly obvious as opposed to simply dragging civilians off the street. There was approx. 125 volunteers who took part in this and it's all documented. I'm afraid i don't have a list of their names but i do know the Somerset County Coroner Wallace Miller was amongst them so there's the one that you requested. Again, ignorance is not a defence and if you really wanted to, you could easily find all of this information out for yourself, but as with the vast majority of truthers (and conspiracy theorists in general), you've already made up your mind and no amount of evidence or conflicting facts will ever change that. This is why nobody of worth takes a blind bit of notice of you guys, or ever will. Here's to another 20yrs of crying conspiracy and achieving absolutely nothing 🍻
1
-
@Michaelangelo S Why would you expect to see pictures of people (who said anything about volunteers at the Pentagon anyway?) pulling debris and body parts from the Pentagon?? Not going to happen. There are however plenty of images of plane debris and the inside of that particular crash site, they're really not difficult to find.
The site you want to look on for a pretty concise body of evidence dealing with the Pentagon crash, including the dimensions and images of the impact (and exit) hole along with much more (including a zoomed in image of what is quite obviously a large airliner displaying the American Airlines livery on approach, prior to impact), is one you should find by googling the words 'right blogger bastard Pentagon'. You'll find everything you need right there and if you take the time to go through it all, i would be very surprised if you still didn't believe Flight 77 hit that building that day.
You claim flights that veer off course or turn off their transponders are intercepted all the time, so can you give me any example from around that time period to compare response times etc.? I can't take your word for that sorry, especially since i know better. Again, NORAD was not prepared or expecting to be attacked in this way from internal flights. You can look this up and see for yourself. You can easily find the precise details of what occurred that day in terms of attempts to intercept the planes. The standard procedure was to rv at a coastal location to form a donut of defence. When the transponders were deactivated they were invisible to primary radar and became 1 of 4500 blips on the ATC screen. They had no clue as to where they were or what their targets were until it was too late. This is all documented in detail by the pilots, ATC staff and those in command. You're demonstrably wrong on this.
I didn't see any comment or questions regarding any papers on thermatic material being found, but if it included any links then it has probably been picked up by the YouTube algorithm and deleted. If i had seen it then i would have highlighted that this is what's known as junk science. Peer reviewed?? I don't think so. It was the work of Niels Harrit (known as a bit of a kook in his native country of Denmark) and the religious fundamentalist Stephen Jones who once wrote a paper on the travels of Jesus Christ around America 🙄 They fraudulently tried to bypass the scientific process by purposely choosing to publish in a pay-to-publish journal made famous by the infamous C.R.A.P. paper. If you aren't aware of that, look it up, it's hilarious and exposes the kind of wrag we're dealing with here. To say this journal holds zero credibility in academia would be putting it lightly. They will literally publish anything you like if you pay. Scientists tend to turn to using such vanity jounrals as they're aware that their work won't survive the peer-review process.
In reality, what Harrit and Jones found were red/grey paint chips from the primer paint used during the construction of the towers. The shop primer paint used by the LeClede steel manufacturer who supplied the steel for the towers, has been shown to be an excellent match for Harrit and Jones samples; enough said.
To show how bad a paper/study this was, the editor-in-chief of Bentham Press resigned over the matter. All this so-called study was meant to do was fool the layman but no serious or credible scientist take this with any credence. The conclusions of Harrit and Jones are simply wrong. They not only do not follow from the data presented, they are actually contradicted by the data. Even Harrit et.al. themselves saw immediately what every forensic expert would immediately see: The chips are paint. They look like paint not just from visual appearance but also in microstructure and nothing about them say 'thermite'.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@prism8289 A "top demolitions man in the country", named who? I can't find ONE single demolitions expert who believes the twin towers were demoed so I'd love to hear who you're referring to.....or do we just have to take your word for it? 🤔
Oh wow, an engineer from the MIT said it was a demolition?? Well i guess that settles it!! 🤣 Have you got a name for this guy too so we can check out his credentials and see what he's basing this EASILY debunked claim on?
Hundreds of engineers and architects you say? So what about the MILLIONS who seem to have no issue with the ofifcial stance? Why blindly beleive the absolute fringe who have utterly failed to back up their claims and proven themselves to be a bunch of devious charlatans who purposely tried to fraudulently circumnavigate the scientific processs in a desperate attempt to bolster their claims? There are in fact around 3,500 signatories from architects and engineers over at ae911truth, which is still a pathetically feeble number of which has taken them over a decade to collate 🤣 If this wasn't tragic enough, it gets worse when you realise that around 80% of those signatories have ZERO knowledge, experience or understanding of high-rise construction, structural engineering or controlled demolition. I mean, who cares what say, a software engineer thinks about such topics?? This takes the number of RELEVANT signatures down to around 800. 800 names out of several million out there. Really?? 🙈 This has to be THE weakest argument from authority imaginable, you really are scraping the bottom of that barrel.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@prism8289 Rigggghhtttt, already addressed that bogus bunch of fringe crackpots in my comment above in my comment that starts with, 'A top demolitions expert....'. One of the many points I've made thst you've chosen to ignore. I don't care what electrical engineers, software engineers, or a a bunch of other engineers or architects from completely unrelated backgrounds. That might sound like a good argument from authority to a simple-minded dullard like yourself, but not to me. I'll stick with the actual evidence as accepted by the 99.9% of experts from RELEVANT backgrounds thanks. You might want to try and familiarise yourself with the trie nature of scientific enquiry and the processes by which it proceeds instead of relying on pathetic, feeble arguments from authority backed by NOTHING. If those crooks were genuine, why publish in a pay-to-publish rag that holds ZERO weight in academia and made the headlines for the infamous C.R.A.P. paper? Is that your idea of real science?? 🤣 There's good reason why you guys have to come on to youtube to look for an echo-chamber because in the real world, experts who subscribe to the lunacy you do are very far and few.
Tell me, why did the AIA publicly denounce this cprrupt organisation? What was the vote tally amongst them requesting another investigation of WTC7? lol, get a grip. Let me know when you're able to back up your beliefs using REAL science you uneducated cretin.
1
-
@prism8289 Nice try but the cameras on the interstate weren't inatalled until 2003 🤣 Still burying your head to the 136 direct eye-witnesses who ALL saw a large plane, some identifyingit specifically as a Boeing 757. Not one report of a missile, drone or small plane but hey, don't concern yourself with any facts that oppose your crackpot conspiracy 😉👉🏽 Let's face it, we could have 100 videos of the plane in 4K UHD and you'd still claim it was fake or simply ignore it just like you ignore the actual image of the plane which is OBVIOUSLY a large airliner displaying the American Airlines livery; the mass of 757 wreckage (including the black box from AA Flight 77 that details the planes last 11 flights), the damage to surrounding structures hit on approach that confirm perfectly the wingspan and engine separation of a 757; all the physical remains and personal belongings of those known to have been on board, the ATC evidence, the blatant kerosene explosion, the fact there was an exit hole, etc. etc. etc. When are you going to acknowledge all of this and stop with this shameless display of wilful ignorance and desperate gish-galloping?
No security was shut down prior, that's an outright lie and you know, just like you've lies about demolitions experts who believe the twin towers were demoed......shame you can't name a single one hey 🤔😂 Show me ONE camera that was facing the direction of approach or jog on with your silly strawman argument.
The "green berets" (or SBS or American special forces) let Bin Laden escape, that's another outright lie.
So what about Rumsfeld? If this was merely an excuse to invade Iraq, why blame it on Saudi's instead if Iraqi's? Makes as much sense as the rest of your lunatic beliefs.
1
-
1
-
1
-
@prism8289 Are you for real? So after everything i put to you, THAT is the best you can come up with??? 🙈 Christ, talk about being up against the ropes 🤣 Why won't you name the demolitions expert YOU LIED about? Why won't you name the MIT professor YOU LIED about? Why won't you acknowledge all the evidence i listed found at the Pentagon and deflect with your usual whack-a-mole tactic used mostly by flat earthers and creationists? Anyone reading will see your cowardice and head burying so keep up this shameless behaviour as it only serves to expose your wilful ignorance even more. I'll keep calling you out until you address the fundamental facts I've raised ie. The mass of 757 wreckage, the black box, the physical remains and personal belongings of those on board retrieved at the crash site, the damage to surrounding structures hit on approach that PERFECTLY mirror the dimensions of a 757, the 136 direct eye-witnesses who all saw a large plane, the pilot witnesses who identified it as a 757, the ATC evidence and so on.
In respect to your latest feeble attempt at a valid response, there are plenty of videos of those direct eye-witnesses at the Pentagon here on YouTube. The fact you don't know this or haven't bothered to look speaks for itself. So by your own standards, these interviews and personal accounts (which all tally up) prove you're wrong. Look them up and see for yourself. There were even 2 fire fighters who literally had to dive out of the way out of fear of being hit! Seriously, if you don't believe a 757 crashed there, what the hell do you believe it was?? The amount of evidence you choose to ignore in order to cling on to your ridiculous, easily refuted conspiracy theory is insane.
The rest of what you've stated isn't worth addressing as it's tantamount to personal opinons or conjecture and nothing more. If Bush was behind it all, why would they publish anything and disclose things that exposed their guilt? Don't be ridiculous lol. It's like when you whackjobs claim they exposed themselves stealing 2.3 trillion that was, in reality, never actually missing in the first place, or certainly not in the way your sort like to pretend.
The 'man who knew'? So what? It's hardly like there was no warning or nobody knew an attack was coming. He didn't know what they would do or when they would do it. He also knew it was Al Qaeda headed up by Osama Bin Laden so that's a bit if an own goal for you there considering what you believe. If he knew so much, how was he killed in the collapse? Surely he wouldn't have been anywhere near 🤷🏽♂️ Again, hardly something that points guilt to government involvement. You believe Gary Webb was murdered which i say once again, you're nuts. If that is the best you can come up with to prove your kooky conspiracy crap, then what a poor show. Now give me those names and address the evidence i listed you bed-wetting fact-dodger 🤨
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@ritchieaustin5451 Passports have a large surface to mass ratio regardless so no idea why you're comparing it to a sheet of A4, that's irrelevant.
Severed steel? What are you talking about? Surely not the columns at the base cut during the clean-up that a minority of truthers try to claim were cut prior? Lol, that myth was debunked immediately and no serious truther would use such a flawed argument. Why on earth would they severe columns at the base?? Both towers collapsed at the impact zones, they did NOT collapse from the bottom up like a controlled demolition would.
Again, conjectural claims of molten steel are meaningless. How would anybody possibly know what it was without chemical analysis? They wouldn't and anybody claiming steel is assuming so. Given the temperatures weren't hot enough, we can rule it out as being steel. The temperatures were however plenty hot enough to melt other metals that were present in HUGE quantities throughout the structures, so it stands to reason it was those metals, not steel.
Reharding the cores, without the surrounding tube in tube structure, there was nothing to hold them up, so once the towers collapsed, the cores finally droppes, as we would expect. This fully supports a fire-induced collapse but does not support a controlled demo.
Are you really going to repeat the lie that no buildings have evwr fallen from fire before? Try the Plasco building in Tehran, the Kader Toy factory in Thailand or the Sight and Sound theatre in Pennsylvania for 3 examples. There are many more but i think 3 are enough to make my point. As for none collapsing from plane crashes, can you offer me a single comparable even? Obviously not, making this a moot point. This was a first therefore you have nothing to compare it with.
1
-
@ritchieaustin5451 Sorry, would you like me to explain the meaning of 'conjecture'? How would a news reporter, fire fighter, or demolitions guy know the chemical composition of a molten metal without chemical analysis???? I don't care who or how many people completely unqualified to make that claim say it, it doesn't make it true. But let's humour you for a moment and pretend it could possibly have been steel. What could possibly have created such widespread heat to create such a vast quantity? Please don't say thermite because apart from that myth being completely refuted, it would take tons and tons to create such volume. So what's your theory and if they all truly believe it, why doesn't Mark Loizeaux believe it was a controlled demolition and why can't you name a single demolitions expert who believes the towers were demoed? Are you suggesting you know better than the entire demolitions community on this topic? Evidently you are.
The video link you've sent shows what is almost certainly contaminated molten aluminium alloy and it's coincidentally emanating from the precise location the compacted remains of the aircraft would have come to rest with kerosene ignited fires raged, thus melting the many tons of aluminium present at the location.
Ok so you're just going to ignore the fundamental fact the fire fighters who assessed WTC7 publicly stated it was "definitely" going to collapse? You clearly have a genuine concern for truth 🤨 In answer to your poorly thought out question is quite simple. The BBC had a Reuters feed in their office as do all the other major news channels. On that feed, a report came in that it had collapsed. This was one of several key mistakes reported that day, as is the nature of live reporting. Journalists race to the scene to try and be the first to 'get the scoop', it's how they make a name for themselves and progress their career. By doing so, things sometimes get reported wrong. In this case, BECAUSE the fire fighters had stated a collpase was inevitable, chinese whispers brought the news back to the news desks that it had collapsed as opposed to saying it was about to. I hope you're not suggesting they were fed inside information because as with your passport argument, that is totally irrational and makes zero sense. Why would 'they' take another HUGE pointless risk? What benefit would be gained from doing so? None whatsoever. All 'they' would have to do is wait for it to come down and then allow them to report it as it happened, risk free.
Other buildings have collapsed from fire as I've already demonstrated. Repeating the lies of other truthers don't make such claims true, no matter how many times you repeat them. Any other building that have burned for longer and remained standing were concete reinforced, unlike the buildings that collapsed that day. ANY steel framed structure left to freeburn will eventually collapse, it's the reason we use fire-proofing. Now can you please address the FACT fire fighters predicted the collapse of WTC7 several hours prior? Mark Loizeaux also tried to warn the authorities when he saw the planes hit the towers, telling them that he believed they would eventually collapse. If only they'd have listened to him....
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1