Youtube comments of Dirk Diggler (@dirkdiggler8260).
-
60
-
53
-
Literally every single thing you say is false. Rumsfeld did mention they were having difficulty tracking that money (why incidentally would he even do this if they wanted to cover it up??), but it was originally announced publicly back in 1999 and several times after, so was old news. It was never actually missing in the way truthers like to claim. It was simply a case of having outmoded, incompatible computer systems making it very difficult to track money between departments. It has since been accounted for which truthers obviously don't like to acknowledge. All the documents affiliated to the missing money wasn't destroyed in the crash and such documentation was almost certainly backed up for obviously reasons. How else were they finally able to track it?
As for proving with 100% certainty, i assure you we most definitely can and have using various, independent lines of evidence. There was mever any chance of getting any clear footage of an object travelling on excess of 500mph on a CCTV camera set at 1 frame per second and it's absurd to think otherwise. Work out how many meters that aircraft would have neen covering each second then you'll see what i mean. Besides, even if we had a 4k UHD video of the crash, truthers would only claim it to be fake, CGI. For the record, the security camera footage wasn't the only footage released and it was NOT spliced in any way, other than maybe on conspiracy websites in what i can only assume is an attempt to deceive. The fact is, we don't need any footage to know categorically that AA Flight 77 hit the Pentagon that day. Enter the word 'right blogger bastard' into your search bar and take a look at the mountain of evidence we have confirming this. I'm sure if you take the time to go through it, you will be left with no doubts either.
Regarding the theory it was a missile, this has to be the easiest conspiracy theory of all to refute. Firstly, how could a missile with a 9ft wingspan take out lampposts either side of a street and slice the tops off trees? The explosion on impact was quite obviously a hydrocarbon explosion and a missile would not have left an exit hole. 136 people from all walks of life, who were mostly sat in traffic on their morning commute witnessed the approach and impact and EVERY one of them said it was a plane. Some of those witnesses were even pilots who flew 757's and they'd identified the plane model at the scene prior to details being released. The wreckage was from a 757, including the black box which when decoded, provided details if AA Flight 77's last 11 flights. The physical remains of everyone on board along with their personal belongings, all retrieved at the crash site; the damage caused to surrounding structures on approach confirm perfectly the dimensions of a 757. There is simply no way whatsoever 136 people could possibly mistake a 22ft missile with a 9ft wingspan for a 155ft aircraft with a 125ft wingspan.
26
-
23
-
20
-
19
-
19
-
18
-
17
-
@pamelajohnson2815 Biden has struggled with a speech impediment all of his life, but he has delivered with demonstrable, tangible, observable results. Is that really your standard for picking a good president, one that doesn't have a speech impediment? How about wanting a president that doesn't lie literally every time he speaks, or one that doesn't brag about sexually assaulting women, or one that doesn't actually sexually assault or rape women, or one that doesn't admit to finding his own daughter sexually attractive, or one that doesn't admit to intruding into the changing rooms at his creepy, teen-beauty pageants so that he can leer at them naked, or one that hasn't been accused of rape & sexual assault TWENTY FIVE times, or one that wasn't friends with Geoffrey Epstein & a regular on Epstein Air, or one that doesn't steal classified & top secret documents & then shows them to literally ANYBODY who'll listen; or one that pays his taxes, or one that doesn't try to overthrow the government or overturn a free & fair election or invite a violent insurrection using lies of election fraud that he said he'd do if he lost prior to the election. How about one that actually does things he runs his campaign on, & one whoo doesn't just give massive tax breaks to the rich, or one that doesn't grift hundreds of millions off the American people using aforementioned lies or election fraud & other outright scams. Those are some of my standards of somebody being fit to serve as president. Sadly Trump fails on all of those, so he won't be getting my vote sorry.
16
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
14
-
13
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
@treatb09 Not true. Mark Loizeaux from CDI Inc. knew the moment he saw the planes hit that they would eventually collapse and tried frantically to warn the authorities but unfortunately, in all the panic and confusion going on, his warning fell on deaf ears. The designers even said the fact they remained standing for so long was nothing short of a miracle which enabled many to escape with their lives. Yes they were designed to withstand a plane strike, but the scenario imagined was them being hit by a smaller, lighter aircraft with all its fuel spent, lost in fog whilst coming into land and therefore travelling at around 160-180mph. They were NOT designed to withstand a hit from a 757 sized plane, fully laden with fuel travelling in excess of 500mph. Such scenarios are incomparable. That said, both towers stood up amazingly well to the plane impacts and remained standing for 60 and 90 minutes. It wasn't the impacts that brought them down, it was the ensuing fires. The way they fell were the only way they could have fallen in line with the physical laws that govern our planet. The top sections toppled at the impact zones before gravity corrected the angular momentum, bring them crashing down through the path of least resistance ie. through the remaining structure below. The fact both towers collapsed from the impact zones alone PROVE these were not controlled demolitions as any explosive devices located anywhere near those locations would have been destroyed instantly by the impacts and ensuing fires. Such devices are extremely sensitive to heat and geometry and controlled demolition go from the bottom up, not two thirds of the way up, down. Show me one demolition that even remotely resembles it. Also, try and find ONE demolitions expert who believes the twin towers were demoed. Just one name will do. In reality there aren't any because anybody with any knowledge of CD's knows to drop them in that way would be impossible.
8
-
8
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
@jeremiahjohnson6082 A plane is made from "almost paper"? Lol, you really need to think before you speal because that statement right there is insane. Aircraft grade aluminium is actually stronger than structural steel, but in terms of the forces at play when a 150 ton mass slams into an immovable object (like say, the planet fkng earth) at full throttle, there really isn't going to be much left. I already explained to you VAST difference between a typical crash site where the pilot is doing everything in his power to keep the aircraft airborne, and one the nose dives at full throttle into the ground, but this seemingly went over your head. Its akin to throwing a bulllet at the ground and firing a bullet from a gun at the ground, the extent of the forces at play are slightly different.
Like i said previously which you also ignored, is that 95% of the aircraft was recovered along with everyone on board. Are you suggesting this was all planted? They buried the engines and other wreckage from AA93 several meters underground, scattered thousands of other pieces of wreckage and human remains over such a large distance all without anybody seeing? You can't possibly be that deranged as to believe that to be possible, surely not?
As far as the Pentagon goes, watch the video right here on youtube of a Phantom F4 sled test where they slammed it into a heavily reinforced (as was the Pentagon perimeter wall) wall at 500mph and look what happened to it. After watching that, it's a miracle any of AA77 was left at all. There was plenty of wreckage however retrieved, including again (like AA93), the black box which when decoded showed the data from AA77's final 11 flights. On top of this, 136 people directly observed it and all confirm it to be a plane; radar evidence showing a radar track from Dulles airport to the Pentagon before abruptly stopping. The damage to surrounding structures hit on approach confirm the wingspan and engine separation of a Boeing 757 too. There really is no doubts whatsoever that this plane crashed there that day as ALL evidence confirms. If not then what exactly do you believe did??
For the record, there are other crash sites that have similarly left very little debris in respect to large pieces that you assume should always remain regardless of the circumstances (which is nothing more than an argument from incredulity). I've seen images of them that were presented over on the Metabunk forum, but i can't remember the full details as this was quite a long back. They are there though if you bother to search.
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
@jebidiahnewkedkracker1025 Appreciate you taking the time to respond in such depth and keeping it civil. And yes, 9/11 was no doubt a conspiracy in that radicalised, Islamic fundamentalists conspired to attack the US in the way we witnessed that day. However, we all know the context in which i was referring to.
I believe that it's highly likely that I've viewed all of the evidnece you've seen myself, but in my experience, having looked into the claims in detail, being sure of staying well clear of using notoriously unreliable conspiracy websites and the like as sources, i am yet to see any of the claims stand up when scrutinised. I myself jumped on the conspiracy bandwagon quite early on I'm jot afraid to say, hence my reason for investing so much of my time to it. The difference between us though is that i see no truth to any of it when embracing the full body of evidence we have available to us. Of course in an event of this magnitude and complexity, there will be coincidences we can shoehorn into the narrarive, but coincidences happen all the time and none are enough to convince me of any foreknowledge or involvement by the US government. Again, by all means show me any you believe shows otherwise and I'd be more than happy to disuss it with you.
To address your reasoning for people not wanting to believe, i kinda get that but struggle to comprehend how anybody could choose to take such a stance if that wasn't their true feeling. I mean, who would they be trying to fool other than themselves? For me personally that would be impossible. I don't think foe one minute we can trust our political leaders and there is no doubt corruption at play all the time in such circles. But to think they would come up with such an insanely risky, eloborate and complex plan to me, requires intellectual suicide. Why hijack 4 planes instead of 1 for instance? Hijacking 1 plane and flying it into a building would have been enough to warrant the reaction of the US government. Why accuse Saudi nationals if this was an excuse to invade Iraq? There are so many fundamental issues, i find it incomprehensibly irrational to think they'd take such needless risks over and over and over again. The number of people required to be complicit with this is enormous, yet not a single whistle-blower. It couldn't happen, no way.
The 'i already got my mind made up so....' reasoning is exactly how i feel when talking to the vast majority of conspiracy theorists. Most are way too much emotionally invested in this to accept they're wrong. Have a look around these threads and you will notice that every single thread on any video i have ever spoken to such sorts, they run away when faced with evidence that opposes their view. This is no exaggeration and i find it quite infuriating how many people purposely and publicly choose wilful ignorance over reality. For me personally, if you or anybody else were to show me sufficient, credible evidence that the US government were behind this attack, i would change my opinion in a heartbeat without question. I have no bias whatsoever, I'm not even from the US or have any affiliation whatsoever.
Lastly, you stated that building 7 was the smoking gun, but i could not diagree more and fail to understand why people get so hung up on this. The fire fighters knew that building was going to collapse several hours before it fell. They stated it publicly and even pulled everybody away to create a safe collapse zone. This shows there was no mystery and it was no shock when it fell, unless of course such people believe the fire fighters who lost hundreds of their brothers that day, were also in on this alleged conspiracy. The reality is that any and every steel-framed structure (non-concrete reinforced) will collapse if left to freeburn. There can be no other outcome. Wtc7 was left to freeburn and was a non-concrete reinforced steel-framed structure which implemented the use of longspan beam, leaving it even more susceptible to fire. It burned for 2 or 3hrs (i remember exactly off-hand sorry) beyond what it's fire-proofing was rated at so again, collapse was inevitable.
Anyway, thanks again for the civil response and I'd be happy to carry on the discussion and get into more detail if you so wish to do so?
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
@jimbobalob2491 There were plentynof CCTV cameras but, as per the nature of CCTV, they were set up to monitor the perimeter of the building (eg. people coming and out/exits and entrances) and were OBVIOUSLY not set up, pointing away from the structure down the street. Why would they?? Believe it or not, they never envisaged somebody flying a 757 into the building and for such a camera to capture an object travelling over 500mph, it isn't very likely when they're set at such a low value f.p.s. It's such a naive, ignorant argument made in desperation. Who cares if we don't have footage?? Are you just going to ignore all if the witnesses, wreckage, or any of the other evidence we have that categorically proves AA Flight 77 crashed there that day? For the record, there is a still from one of the CCTV camera's that, when zoomed in, shows what is obviously a large plane displaying the American Airlines livery. But don't concern yourself with the actual evidence and reality of the situation because for you guys, it's all about conspiracy and nothing more, and that's why nobody of worth takes any notice.
5
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
@triggerhappydad65 1) War games go on all the time where many scenarios are carries out, i fail to see why this is an issue sorry.
2) And?
3) Those amateur pilots with minimal training and zero flight hours had gained commercial pilot licences so where more than capable of steering and crashing a plane; any plane. Steering a plane really is simple and crashing one is even easier. Nothing they did that day was difficult nor suggests they were great pilots by any stretch of the imagination. Those who flew into the twin towers had miles and miles of clear skies to line themselves up, and almost perfect flying conditions. You could literally draw a line in the cockpit window with a sharpie and just line it up with one of the towers, it could be that simple and easy. The difficult parts of flying are taking off and landing, neither of which these guys had to concern themselves with.
Regarding Flight 77, thr fact Hanjour came in way too fast and way too high, forcing him to make a turn to lose altitude,.is evidence of his poor piloting skills and lack of experience. There are plenty of pilots who've stated this and voiced how silly the arguments of truthers are in this respect. I'd send links but Youtube won't allow them and whenever i try, my comments won't publish, but if you search the words 911myths giulio bernacchia and see what the experts say, you'll hopefully understand there was nothing special about what he did and this is just a typical argument from incredulity.
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
@danielchoritz1903 What's crazy Daniel is the fact you believe bombs were planted at the bottom of the towers yet both collapses were CLEARLY initiated at the impact zones. Care to explain that one champ? And if there were bombs at the bottom, how did almost everyone in the lower floors survive?
As for first skyscrapers to collapse from fire, can you show me ONE single comparable event? No you can't because in all the history of high-rise fires, not one has ever been hit with a plane traveling 500 miles an hour and had its fire proofing removed from its trusses. In all the history of high-rise fires, not one has ever had its steel columns which hold lateral load sheared off by a 767. In all the history of high-rise fires, not one has ever been a building which had its vertical load bearing columns in its core removed by an airliner. For Building 7, in all the history of high-rise fires, not one has ever been left for 6-7 hours with its bottom floors on fire with structural damage from another building collapse. In all the history of high-rise fires, not one has ever been without some fire fighters fighting the fires. In reality however, steel-framed structures have been collapsing from fire ever since steel has been used to construct. Why do you think we coat steelwork in fire-proofing? There was the Plasco high-rise in Tehran, the Sight and Sound theatre in Pennsylvania and the Kader Toy factory in Thailand to name 3 off the top of my head. Once again we have somebody who's clueless about any related topic, talking like they're an expert. Stop believing everything you read in the internet.
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
@mlb805 "The biggest decision we had to make on the first day was to clear the area and create a collapse zone around the severely damaged WTC 7 a 47-story building heavily involved in fire. A number of fire officers and companies assessed the damage to the building. The appraisals indicated that the building's integrity was in serious doubt. I issued the orders to pull back the firefighters and define the collapse zone. It was a critical decision." - Dan Nigro
Chief of Department FDNY
"we were pretty sure that 7 World Trade Center would collapse. Early on, we saw a bulge in the southwest corner between floors 10 and 13, and we had put a transit on that and we were pretty sure she was going to collapse. You actually could see there was a visible bulge, it ran up about three floors. It came down about 5 o’clock in the afternoon, but by about 2 o’clock in the afternoon we realized this thing was going to collapse." - Deputy Chief Peter Hayden
"There was a huge gaping hole and it was scattered throughout there. It was a huge hole. I would say it was probably about a third of it, right in the middle of it.....On the north and east side of 7 it didn’t look like there was any damage at all, but then you looked on the south side of 7 there had to be a hole 20 stories tall in the building, with fire on several floors. Debris was falling down on the building and it didn’t look good.
That was the first time really my stomach tightened up because the building didn’t look good......Then this other officer I’m standing next to said, that building doesn’t look straight. So I’m standing there. I’m looking at the building. It didn’t look right, but, well, we’ll go in, we’ll see. So we gathered up rollups and most of us had masks at that time. We headed toward 7. And just around we were about a hundred yards away and Butch Brandies came running up. He said forget it, nobody’s going into 7, there’s creaking, there are noises coming out of there, so we just stopped." - Captain Chris Boyle NYFD
"they were worried about 7 World Trade Center, which is right behind it, coming down. We were up on the upper floors of the Verizon building looking at it. You could just see the whole bottom corner of the building was gone. We could look right out over to where the Trade Centers were because we were that high up. Looking over the smaller buildings. I just remember it was tremendous, tremendous fires going on. Finally they pulled us out." - Richard Banaciski NYFD Firefigher
How many more would you like?
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
Still shouting? 🙉 Makes you look even more mental, i don't think you quite realise that.
Anyway......
1. Wrong. What IS impossible was both towers collapsing at the impact zones. This could NOT be achieved via a controlled demolition hence why there doesn't seem to be a single demolitions expert on the planet who agrees the twin towers were demoed. But hey, if you want to appear even more mental and pretend you know about demolition than the ENTIRE demolitions community, so be it. Just know you're only fooling yourself.
2. As well as the twin towers, WTC7, you have the Plasco building in Tehran, the Sight and Sound theatre in Pennsylvania, the Kader Toy factory and all the other non-concrete reinforced, steel-framed structures that have collapsed befote and since 9/11 PURELY from fire without sustaining the huge structural damage those buildings did on 9/11 which you conveniently fail to acknowledge.
No need for any steel to melt as I'm pretty sure you've already been informed. Merely soften of which the temperatures were WAY hot enough to do. The fact you compare a brick house to a non-concrete reinforced, steel-framed skyscraper speaks volumes. This alone makes me think you mught just be trolling as nobody could possibly be that dumb.
3. No they did not turn to dust. There was naturally a lot of dust, as we'd expect from a collapsing skyscraper over a 1000ft in height, but all the debris was accounted for and tallies up just fine. I think you need to take your meds and get yourself an early night son.
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
@godbyone I will have to respond here as the other thread has no reached its comment limit.
We know the full story behind thaylt of the art students who rented offices in the towers, and these claims of them being the demo crew who wired the towers with magical, heat/blast resistant, silent explosives that left zero trace of the miles of det cord required, or the fact they somehow managed to evade the bomb detection dogs present in the towers the entire time, have been completely debunked. Those 'fuse holders' you mention in reality are electrical trip switches, I've personally fitted hundreds of them. I'm sure if i remember rightly those pictured were all 32amp fuses used to protect the likes of socket, ring circuits. Don't quote me on that last fact as I'm only going on memory. Without seeing the photo again, i couldn't be certain. Whatever, the argument is also refuted by the fact both towers collapsed at the impact zones, something that would be impossible to do via a controlled demolition as stated by the worlds leading authority on demolition.
No art students were arrested, that's a lie. 5 Israeli's were arrested after a report they were acting strangely (or rather inappropriately) during the attacks, but they were detained, questioned, photos examined and mobile phones searched through before being released without charge. Hardly corroborates your story sorry.
You're mistaking me of claiming victory when all im doing is allowing the facts to do the talking and running away/refusing to address the evidence means you lose the argument irrespective of anything else. People with the confidence to stand by their convictions and knowledge to back them up don't run away or bury their heads to evidence that opposes their view. You lose because you run away and fail to back up your long refuted claims rejected by the overwhelming consensus of experts in every related field.
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
@coolk3dat754 Once again setting yourself up for another massive fail lol. Aside from the fact you've just done precisely what you've accused me of and literally ignored those direct eye-witnesses whilst accepting those that fit with your agenda, the problem you've got there is that contrary to what you've just said, i fully accept that people heard explosions/loud bangs in the towers. In fact you've already pulled this one on me before and like i told you then, there are a hundred reasons i could give you to explain those explosions/loud bangs eg. Entire floor slabs droppjng on to one another, elevators freefalling into the ground, ignited jet fuel flowing down elevator and service shafts, huge studs shearing, fractured gas lines, oil-filled generators, diesel tanks, LNG, exothermic reactions of water coming into contact with molten aluminum, the list goes on and on. The point being, explosions/loud bangs don't usually equate to explosives in the demolition sense. Besides, the majority of those ear-witnesses (given they saw nothing, only heard, which hardly the same as somebody literally seeing a huge Boeing 757 flying past!! 🤣) heard explosions from the momebts the planes hit, throughout the 60-90 minutes until they collapsed. That is NOT how demolitions work you fkng dolt 🙈 Go watch a controlled demolition. You'll notice there is a series of HUGE bangs, in sequence at the moment of collapse. Not an hour before the collapse!! Why also would they set off demo charhes in the basement or lobby when the towers collapsed at the impact zones??? Oh you fail so hard, time and time again 🤣 Now let's try again, i have addressed your 'eye-witnesses' who simply heard bangs and assumed they were bombs due to them knowing full well at this point that it was a terrorist attack. Now it's your turn to address the 136 DIRECT eye-witnesses at the Pentagon who ALL reported SEEING a plane. Don't keep me waiting cupcake 😉
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
Possibly THE dumbest sh!t I've ever read. I feel dumber for reading it 😕
Now for the reality. WTC7 was LEASED by Larry Silverstein who made the comment you're speaking of AFTER the attacks during a pre-recorded interview in a studio. This was NOT the same day and he was OBVIOUSLY speaking about pulling the operation and pulling the fire fighters out and away from the building as it had been determined a collapse was inevitable. Incidentally, this was not Silverstein's decision to make and the order came directly from Chief of Department FDNY Dan Nigro. The term 'pull' in demolition terms refers SOLELY to a structure being rigged up with cables attached to excavators which then proceed to pull it down in a manner so as not to damage other, surrounding structures. Never does it refer to an explosive demolition.
You also said that WTC7 only had fires on 3 floors but according to fire fighters who's job is was to assess, the whole building was hevaily involved with fire and we KNOW there were fires on at least 15 floors. The fire fighters at the scene had literally stated publicly that a collapse was inevitable due to it being non-concrete reinforced, steel-framed structure that had sustained a huge amount of structural damage, and was left to freeburn. It's pretty well known that ANY non-concrete reinforced, steel-framed structure will eventually collapse if allowed to continue burning. It's the reason we use fire-proofing. In this case, the fires continued for 2hrs beyond what its fire-proofing was rated at.
Next you say it came down in textbook fashion which is again, completely false. Watch a video, or better still go and watch an actual demolition if you get chance and listen just how loud it is. Where was the huge blasts we hear right before the building drops? The collapse was also highly asymmetrical and fell like it did due to the implementation of longspan beams, used to create a large open atrium, leaving it more susceptible to fire.
You go on to say the towers were demoed also, so why doesn't there appear to be ANY demolitions experts agreeing with you? Not one. If you believe otherwise, name one.
Can you also explain how both towers managed to collapse at the impact zones 60-90 minutes after the impacts? If there were explosives planed there, how did the planes hit those precise locations and how did the explosives survive the impacts and ensuing fires?
For the record, the official stance doesn't say the planes brought the towers down, it was the fires hence why they remained standing so long.
Finally, and possibly the most ridiculous thing you say is trying to compare a plane hitting a flimsy, steel-framed skyscraper that was 95% air, to one hitting a heavily reinforced, kevlar-lined, concrete wall several feet thick. Do you really need that one explaining to you?? It's akin to you driving a car at speed in to a cardboard box or driving flat out into the side of a cliff.
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
@coolk3dat754 "tell everyone who your resource is"
Mt reasource? You mean my source? 🤔
"Point out where it states that the laws of physics depends on the design of a building"
Nope, never said that and never would. You might want to go back and check what i said. Whilst you're at it, take a look at how many times you've failed to even acknowledge my request for the name of just ONE SINGLE DEMOLITIONS EXPERT who agrees with you that the towers were demoed. Countless times because you know as well as i do, there aren't any which means you have convinced yourself you know more about their line of work than them 🤪👈🏽 I can give the name of one of the world's leading authorities on demolition, who stated that it would have been, and i quote, "impossible" to have brought those towers down in that manner we saw via a controlled demolition. Face it, you do not know more about demolition than the entire demolitions community, don't be so ridiculous lol. Anyone reading this are laughing at you claiming you know better than every demolitions expert on earth, you know that right? That is not the workings of a sound mind, you're suffering serious delusions of grandeur, you need help champ.
3
-
3
-
@coolk3dat754 No need to take my word, it's right here in this very thread for all to see. I told you to stack several sheets of glass with spacers between creating gaps of a few inches. Take a grapefruit sized rock and lay it on the top sheet. The glass will easily hold up the static load of the rock. Next take the rock, raise it above the top of the stack then drop it, then watch how the now dynamic load of the same rock smashes straight through the glass with ease. This perfectly demonstrates how the SAME mass that once rested on a greater mass is able to destroy the greater mass below when it becomes a dynamic load that GREATLY exceeds the dynamic load limit of the each pane of glass it smashes through. This is opposed to your truly fkng ridiculous strawman argument using solid blocks of ice and if i need to explain this on any further detail then you're beyond help and dumber than i could ever imagine.
Wow, you've almost acknowledged the incontrovertible fact there isn't a singpe demolitions expert who agree with you that the towers were demoed!! 🤣🤣 Weak arsed argument though, desperately trying to turn it back on me to deflect from the fact you've looked and failed, but hey ho, try Mark Loizeaux, the CEO of CDI Inc., the world's leading experts in demolition who stated that it would have been "impossible" to have brought those towers down in such a manner (ie. collapsing at the impact zones rather than from the bottom up as controlled demolition do) via a controlled demo. Well that backfired didn't it champ? 😏🖕🏽 Your turn! Have you got a name of a single demo expert who agrees with you yet champ? Still no?? Feeling brave enough to acknowledge the fire fighters assertions that WTC7 was inevitably going to collapse hours before it fell? Still no on that one too huh? Still incapable of explaining how demolition charges managed to survive the plane impacts and ensuing fires when such devices are so extremely sensitive to things like heat and geometry? Still unable to explain how the both towers managed to collapse at the impact zones as opposed to a controlled demolition which come down from the bottom up? Still unable to explain how 136 direct witnesses at the Pentagon ALL report seeing a plane (some, even pilots, identifying it as a Boeing 757) without a single report of a missile, drone or anything other than a plane? 🤔
3
-
3
-
@FievelJ69 I've been debating the 9/11 crackpots for years now after once, initially falling for the conspiracy lies (briefly!), and then realising how the claims ALL fail under scrutiny, and have been calling out these kooks ever since. For me it's just an amusing way to pass a little time and promote truth in the process.
In all the years I've done this, I've never encountered anybody as broken, lost, deceitful, dishonest, repugnant, deluded, gullible and wilfully ignorant as that weirdo. I'm done trying now, it's literally THE most pointless exercise. You point him to evidence that opposes his claims and he just deflects. His words do more to hang himself than anything we can say. Clearly a very lonely individual who's so far detached from reality, if he wasn't such a d!ck, I'd probably pity him.
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@FievelJ69 I've given up even replying to him. I set him up the other day and literally predicted exactly what he'd do, twice and he still did it 🙈🤣 He tried telling me the hijackers were still alive and that they weren't on the flight manifest, so i literally gave him words to copy and paste into a search bar (as I cant post links for some reason) and he not only refused to do it, he acted as though i hadn't provided the linked evidence lol. I iust said i was going tonleave the discussion at that point so everybody could see what a shamelessly, wilfully ignorant, deceitful, fact-dodging bed-wetter he is. You can lead a horse to water but if that horse doesn't actually give two fks about drinking it, there's not much more you can do. I tried to spoonfeed him but all he cares about is conspiracy and being right. No fks given about truth whatsoever. Even his fellow truthers must read his posts and cringe. Don't you just love it too when he tries to use common turns of phrases and completely fks them up? 🤣 He kept asking me once for MY scientific method as opposed to the scientific method, demonstrating a complete lack of understanding of what the scientific method is and how science actually works. He once gave me an experiment that was supposed to be an analogy for the twin towers, telling me to stack solid blocks of ice on top of one another and dropping one on top of them to see if crushed the stack below 🙈😂 When i informed him that the towers were hollow md 95 air, he said if that was true then they would have popped and flown away like a balloon, i sh!t you not 🤣🤣 His latest one is telling everyone he "stands correct" as opposed to the actual saying, 'stand corrected'. I love him, he's funny as fk lol.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@coolk3dat754 So let's just get this right, you expected a cartoon silhouette of a plane to have been created in a highly reinforced concrete wall? 🙈🤣 And this ladies and gentlemen is the mentality and level of intellect we're dealing with here, hence why nobody of worth takes anything they say seriously.
The windows hit smashed. The windows that weren't hit didn't because they could withstand a blast, being blast-proof windows and all 🙄 But hey, keep denying the undeniable, it's not like you have any credibility to lose 🤷🏽♂️
Newton's third law of motion? You're clearly too fkn dense to understand we're not dealing with 2 solid objects here which is a fundamental flaw in your feeble grasp of Newtonian physics. The twin towers were hollow and around 95% air. If what you wrongly believe were true, why aren't any actual physicists using this argument when, if true, the entire physics community would be screaming it from the rooftops? lol, why do this to yourself? 🤣 Not only is it a mostly hollow structure, the very act of the upper portion falling indicates conclusively that the columns of the upper and lower blocks are no longer aligned. The only possible way that they could be is if this were a verniage type collapse. There is no "jolt" so this is not verniage. Instead it is a failing of columnar support.
THEREFORE, the impact forces of the falling block MUST be impinging primarily on the floorspace of the lower block which is a dynamic load orders of magnitude greater than anything they were designed for. To claim 'we' have no answer is again an outright, shameless lie because i assure you, anybody who has any remote understanding of Newton's third law knows full well how this doesn't apply in the way you believe it should. You've never lost a debate???? 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣 You've literally list EVERY debate I've seen you engaged in you fkn clown! 😂 Ignoring evidence doesn't equate to winning an argument, just look how many questions my reponses on the other thread you've blatantly ignored!! lol, brilliant.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@jayabacromby675 Black smoke was expected and completely justified. Experiments have shown how black smoke was expected sue to differing levela of heat and fires/smouldering debris etc. That isn't unusual to me, nor to the experts it seems. Some fires raged whilst others fizzled out depending on what was fueling the fires.
Newton's second law would apply in the way you say IF the structure was a solid, jenga style tower. In reality it was a tube in tube structure that was designed specifically to create huge, acre sized floor spaces. What you need to understand is that these towers were around 95% open space. What happened was, the planes hit and took out many structural columns from this tube in tube designed structure so the load the striken columns relinquished was transferred to the remaining columns. These columns weren't designed to withstand such load but in testament to those who designed it, they withstood that extra load remarkably well until the heat from the fires weakened the remaining columns at the location. As i stated in a previous comment, at around 550 degrees C, structural steel loses literally 50% of its initial strength. Given the hige, additional load bearing down on them, they gave way which resulted in those top sections above the impact zones tilted and closed that gap, falling to the path of least resistance. Once those top sections dropped on to the floor directly below them, what occurred was that the DYNAMIC load of those top sections WAY exceeded the STATIC load limit of thay floor. Given how much they exceeded those static load limit, the top sections smashed through those floors directly below with ease, they offered negligible resistance. Next, that mass that just smashed through the floor directly below became a larger mass after picking the floor they just smashed through, which was then a greater mass dropping on to thw next floor. This became an increasingly larger mass with each floor it smashed through, hence the acceleration. It's quite simple once you break it down to individual floors as opposed to a solid structure. Each floor had a static load limit that easily resisted the static load placed on it. Once that static load became a dynamic load, the game changed. Imagine several layers of glass panes plaved on top of one another with spacers between them say aroind 6 inches. (I'm plucking these figures from my ass i admit, butnyou get the idea hopefully). You could take a decent sized rock and place it on the top of them without any issue. However, if you picked up the rock and raid it say, a foot above the glass panes, and droppes it, that rock would smash clean through the panes of glass with eass with minimal resistance. It was the same mass that was sitting quite happily on top of the stack, but when that static load became a dynamic load, it became much greater than what the static load limit could resist, and so became the onset of an unstoppable, progressive collapse, floor by floor with an ever increasing mass that MASSIVELY exceeded the static load limit.
In the case of the towers, the floors sagged and columns buckled which led to thebout columns being pulled inwards until finally giving way and peeling outward which greatly assisted the progressive collapse. This is why the truth community say the pancake or piledriver theory has been debunked. They have, thats correct. But then they fail to acknowledge the outer columns spraying which resulted in the pancaking. They twist the facts to suit their agenda. Pancaking occurred, how could it not? I'm hoping this makes sense as i will ve honest, i can't take my drink and i am pretty drunk right now lol. Whatever, I'm glad we can discuss this civilly and rationally which is a breath of fresh air around these parts lol. If you want me to expand on anything I've said i will gladly do so. Unfortunately, youtube has made it increasingly difficult to post links which ive always relied on to back up my claims. Some links publish, others don't for some reason 🤷🏽♂️
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@tryksta7247 Coming from somebody who has fitted hundreds of CCTV systems, then yes i know what I'm talking about. The CCTV was there to monitor the perimeter of the structure ie. Windows, doors, fire escapes, low roofs etc. Basically any vulnerable areas where entry could possibly be gained and monitoring people entering and leaving the building. Why the hell would you point a camera away from the structure, down the street?? What purpose would that possibly serve?? Your argument is entirely one from incredulity and ignorance, hence why it holds no weight in the real world. The fact we have footage from 2 cameras at the security gate, the Citadel gas station and one other (if i remember rightly) that have been released to the public kinda punches a pretty big hole in your paranoid delusions. You're also conveniently ignoring the mountain of other evidence that categorically proves AA Flight 77 crashed into the Pentagon that day, focusing entirely on a fundamentally flawed argument that has no bearing on anything. We could literally have 4k UHD footage with Hani Hanjour waving as they flew past, and you'd simply claim it to be fake. We don't need any footage. For the record however, one of those from the security gate DOES indeed show, when zoomed in on a single still, what is obviously a large plane with the American Airlines livery emblazoned across it, just as ALL other evidence (ie. Wreckage, black box, 135 direct eye-witnesses, ATC evidence, radar track, damage to surrounding structures hit on approach confirming the precise dimensions of a 757's wingspan and engine separation, remains of the passengers on board retrieved at the crash site etc. etc. etc.) confirms. Those CCTV cameras incidentally, were set at 1 frame per second so I'm sure even somebody as moronic as you can work out how much distance an object travelling around 500mph covers each second, so work it out and then tell me again how we should expect to see a clear image of the plane you clown. And yes, i am most definitely saying that a 757 could travel that speed at that altitude over that distance without "falling apart". Boeing have no issue with it, so why the hell do you?? The turn was a standard manoeuvre used by pilots to lose altitude when coming in to land and the fact he was forced to make that turn only serves to show how poor his piloting skills were as he'd come in too high and way too fast. A crackpot dullard you are, an aeronautical engineer you are not. How exactly have i cherrypicked my arguments when all I've done is address and rebuked EVERY dumb claim you've made? Unlike truthers, i don't bury my head to any facts and embrace the full body of evidence. Just look at how much evidence you choose to ignore! Hypocrisy, much?? Lying about me ignoring Lloyd England doesn't do much for your credibility either. I clearly stated your claim that he admitted lying was BS and the burden of proof lies with you to back that claim up, not i. I also addressed your claim about how you've quote-mined reporters and even asked you to provide the name of a single reporter there that day who doesn't believe AA Flighrb77 hit that building that day and you failed. The date on the camera footage is less than meaningless as you acknowledge. I've messed with the wrong one??? 🤣🤣🤣 Oh you silly boy, I'm going to enjoy handing you your backside. I've listed SOME of the fundamental evidence above that you choose to ignore, so how about we get into the evidence we have and let's see how you go shall we little one? Let's start with the 135 direct eye-witnesses who ALL reported seeing a plane, some of whom were pilots who dlew 757's and identified it specifically as an American Airlines 757. Are you saying they're all lying or simply mistaken? Can you also tell me what you believe hit the Pentagon if not a plane?
Ps. I left you TWO replies to your previous comment. It seems you only read one. Either that or you're even more of a shameless liar than i initially perceived.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@NoLefTurnUnStoned. None? You mean except for the Plasco building in Tehran, the Sight and Sound theatre in Pennsylvania, the Kader Toy factory and all the other steel framed structure that have collapsed ENTIRELY from fire without having thousands of tons of debris dropping on them from a collapsing skyscraper, resulting in massive structural damage? 🤔 Why truthers keep saying repeating this myth baffles me. It shows you just repeat what you hear on conspiracy websites without actually qualifying the claims made. This is the difference between us. I did, hence why i know full well the claims of conspiracy simply do not stand up to scrutiny. Aside from all the steel-framed structures that HAVE collapsed from fire, can you offer me a single comparable event? If not then your 'only ever time' argument doesn't stand. Comparing a concrete high-rise to a non-concrete reinforced, steel-framed structure is absurd. Concrete deals with heat much, MUCH better than steel. It's that simple. The Grenfell tower also hadn't sustained any structural damage and had fire fighters trying to put out the blaze. Incomparable for many reasons sorry. Wonder no more.
Back to the fire fighters tending to WTC7, so what are you saying? We have four choices. They were either in on this alleged conspiracy; they made an exceptionally lucky guess; they were psychic; it was simply that obvious as they were fully aware that ANY non-concrete reinforced, steel-framed structure will ALWAYS collapse if left to freeburn long enough. It's the reason we use fire-proofing. Incidentally, the fires freeburned 2hrs longer than the fireproofing was rated it. There really is no mystery here and no requirement for invisible, silent, heat-proof demolition devices........or space laser 🙄
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@immachine1565 No, I'm not a demolitions expert but unlike you, I'm willing yo admit it. Saying something is a fact doesn't make it so and given how there aren't any actual demolitions experts claiming it was demoed, I'd say that doesn't really bode well for your assertions. Just be honest and admit, you have no experience or knowledge of controllee demolition.
As I said, controlled demolitions start from the bottom whereas both towers collapsed at precisely where the planes struck. Now that is a fact and one that alone refutes any claims of controlled demolitions. I'm not a CD expert but I do know that demolitions devices are extremely sensitive to things like heat and geometry, so can you explain how they managed to survive the plane impacts and ensuing fires that raged for 60-90 minutes before collapsing? This is a huge problem for anybody claiming demolition so how do you reconcile this fact with your theory?
In respect to you claiming into it's own footprint, this isn't true unless you believe its footprint was SIX times its perimeter area. If it fell neatly into itz own footprint, why so much damage to surrounding buildings?
Regarding the link to the video you sent, the "huge explosion" was clearly just the actual sound of the collapse. Watch a video of a real controlled demolition and you'll see they're incomparable. Not only do they fall from the bottom up (unlike either tower), you'll hear a very loud series of explosions in sequence at the collapse initiation. In the footage you linked me to, you can't even rrally hear any explosion. They're incomparable to a real controlled demolition. They didn't look like CD's, nor did sound like CD's. You're essentially claiming to know more about CD's than seemingly the entire demolitions community and I'm sure you realise how absurd that would be, right?
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@vodking Well i know there were literally thousands of people who directly witnessed the planes hit the towers, and i know there was plenty of independent, civilian footage of the second plane hitting, and i know there was 757 wreckage found at the crash site, and i know there were people hit by pieces of wreckage after it exited the tower.......but how can we be sure when we can't trust the governments MSM, d'illuminate, reptilian overlords? 🤪 lol, there's no way of reasoning with whackjobs like TI Joe. They see only what they want. Conspiracy theories make the stupid and dumb feel smart, and they're not readily willing to relinquish that feeling in hurry. Certainly not when they can find an echo chamber on forums like this, simply running away when challenged by evidence they can't justify in terms of their kooky beliefs, of which we both know there to be much. Still, it's all good fun right? 😁👍🏼
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@wellifthemediasaysit So let me get this right. Its ok for people like you to spout their kooky, failed conspiracy theories online to strangers, but people who actually care about truth and reality like me and M Fitz here, we're not allowed to counter the lies you spread? Got it 🤪👍🏼 As for nobody seeing a large plane, i think you'll find that EVERY SINGLE direct eye-witness kost definitely reported it as being a plane. Not a single report of anything other than a plane, as confirmed by the 757 wreckage, remains of the passengers, the black box FDR data, the damage, radar/ATC evidence, and literally every other piece of available evidence we have. Sorry the facts don't support your crazy conspiracies but they remain facts regardless.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@davepowell7168 No, that's not exactly what happened but you are correct in saying velocity is of great importance being that there really isn't much that will stop a mass weighing the best part of 200 tons, travelling at around 500mph, certainly not a few steel columns a quarter inch thick, which is what the steel was at that height if i remember correctly. Force = mass x acceleration and the math shows those planes struck with a force equivalent to 1.35 tons of TNT. The plane was shredded and destroyed on impact, but not without smashed through several steel columns. If a piece of 2x4 can punch through solid concrete just being propelled by the wind, I'm pretty certain those planes cut through those columns like butter. I'm yet to hear a physicist making this argument and they won't because the math is verifiable and conclusive. For the record, aircraft grade aluminium is stronger than A36 structural steel, obviously the aluminium used on the planes fuselage is relatively thin gauge, but then it is a pressurised container.
In terms of velocity, Flight 11 was travelling at 495mph when it struck the tower and Flight 175 was travelling at around 587mph. Speeds easily achieved during a dive.
2
-
@federalreservebrown2507 Wow. I have nothing to say to that sorry lol, what a bizarre response. You're clearly batsh!t crazy with zero concern for truth. Look how you've blatantly ignored key facts just because they oppose your view, choosing to ignore what the fire fighters who assessed WTC7 said, instead focusing on some fictional, booze soaked farmers 🙈 lol. Sheer lunacy.
Personal friend Alan Sabrosky?? Lol, I'm sure he is 🙄😂 Quit with the bs, how gullible do you think i am? Besides, why would anybody admit to being friends with that Jew hating crackpot?? I certainly wouldn't. What do you think about him saying the 911 truth movement has "utterly failed"? Not quite what you're claiming is it? 🤔 Now have you got anything other than arguments from incredulity and the personal opinion of people completely unqualified to be talking about such matters? Try finding me a demolitions expert who believes the towers were demoed and when you fail doing that, grow a set of balls and address what i asked you in my previous comment you fact-dodging blowhard. You have two fundamental problems i want you to address in that the fire fighters knew WTC7 was going to collapse hours before it fell, and how the hell would a demolition possibly bring the twin towers down precisely at the impact zones when it's pretty obvious any demolition devices located anywhere near those areas would have been instantly destroyed by the impacts and ensuing fires? Ignore this too, just like you ignore the fact Danny Jowenko (a personal friend too by any chance? 🙄) wasn't experienced in demolition structures anywhere near rhat magnitude and stated the towers were NOT demoed? Why are you burying your head to these facts if you have a genuine concern for truth? Rhetorical question as it's clear to all you have no interest in anything other than conspiracy, hence why nobody takes anything you say seriously.
2
-
2
-
@davepowell7168 I don't profess to know the answer to this but a quick search suggests they were indeed visible. I don't know in all honesty as i have no knowledge of such things. I fail to see the argument here though when we literally watched the planes hit. The only people seemingly making this argument are no-planers. You do accept planes crashed into the towers that day right?
Physicists say those planes most definitely could and did cut through those relatively thin columns like butter and they have shown the math to back it up. If a paper thin ping-pong ball can smash through a ping-pong paddle, and a piece of 2x4 can punch through a solid concrete wall or curb, then I'm pretty sure a 200 ton mass travelling 500mph can severe relatively thin steel columns, I really can't understand why/how anybody could possibly question this. Mass and velocity is key here and we had a large mass travelling very fast so it stands to reason. If you were so confident in this argument, why haven't you or anybody else done the math to demonstrate it? The physics community would be shouting it from the rooftops. If you want me to dig out the math demonstrating how easily they smashed through them, i will do so if needs be. I do vividly remember thought that it was shown that the planes could have been travelling much slower and would still have struck with enough force to smash through them. As i said, there really is not much that is going to stop a plane travelling those speeds, amd certainly not a few thin steel columns.
Oc course firemens axes aren't made of aluminium, but then they don't use axes 155ft in length weighing the best part of 200 ton, swinging them at 500mph making it a completely incomparable analogy.
The planes never severed the core columns so that's again, irrelevant.
Yes the towers were constructed to withstand a strike from a 707, but NOT at take off weight as you claim. The scenario imagined by the designers was a 707 (the heaviest plane in service at that time which was smaller and lighter than the 767's that hit) that was coming into land whilst lost in fog, and therefore having very little fuel onboard left. The imagined scenario also meant they'd have been travelling 3 times less than what the planes that hit were travlling at, so we have a smaller mass travelling much slower and therefore striking with much, MUCH less force. Again, easily calculable should you wish to do the math. It should also be noted that the towers withstood the plane impacts amazingly well and is testament to their design and construction which enabled thousands of people to escape with their lives. It was the ensuing fires that brought them down, not the plane impacts.
Can i ask what exactly it is you believe as I'm confused by your arguments. First off, do you accept planes hit the towers, and do you believe the twin towers were demoed?
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@ritchieaustin5451 Ok so you're now moving the goalposts. You started off claiming no building has ever collapsed from fire before. After being provided 3 examples of the many available, you've changed tact. That's fine because using your own standards, you refute your own argument in that the Meridian was a concrete reinforced structure with a granite curtain wall facade and didn't implement the use of long span beams, as WTC7 did in order to create a large, open atrium. It also had a sprinkler system that was still functional. The fire fighters however did abandon internal fire fighting due to fear of it collapsing. The Meridian also hadn't sustained a huge amount of structural damage after having thousands of tons of debris crashing down onto it from a collapsing sky-scraper. All in all, an incomparable example. In all the history of high-rise fires, not one has ever had 47 stories of weight on its supports after having the lower 10 floors scooped out 25% into the depth of the building by falling debris, whilst being left for 6-7 hours with its bottom floors on fire. In all the history of high-rise fires, not one has ever been without some fire fighters fighting the fires. When you can provide me with another building that meets the above criteria, then your question is relevant. Unless that criteria is met, it's a redundant argument. In terms of the twin towers, in all the history of high-rise fires, not one has ever been hit with a plane traveling 500 miles an hour and had its fire proofing removed from its trusses. In all the history of high-rise fires, not one has ever had its steel columns which hold lateral load sheared off by a 767. In all the history of high-rise fires, not one has ever been a building which had its vertical load bearing columns in its core removed by an airliner. Shall i continue or do you get the picture? This was an incomparable event.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@godbyone I think you're a little delirious because you've not given me any videos whatsoever. Let's pretend though that you have, it really does not matter because there WAS tons of identifiable plane wreckage removed from the crash site that again, included the black box, pieces of fuselage, engines and landing gear. We have many images from that day showing all of this and hundreds of eye witnessss and guess what, that wreckage still exists. We also have a plethora of other independent evidences that categorically PROVE AA Flight 77 crashed into the Pentagon that day eg. remains of everyone on board retrieved from the scene, damage to surrounding structures confirming the dimensions of a 757's wingspan and engine separation, images of the impact damage to the Pentagon facade from where the wings and vertical stabiliser hit, a radar track from Dulles airport to the crash site, 136 direct eye-witnesses who ALL witnessed a plane, some being pilots who even identified it specifically as a Boeing 757, and much, much more. Your highly edited, purposely misleading notoriously unreliable conspiracy videos don't cut it in the real world sorry and you saying what we KNOW is false, won't wash. You're clearly very unlearned on this subject so why you feel as though you're in a position to debate it i don't know. Such misplaced arrogance.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@coolk3dat754 Nope, you're just putting words in my mouth yet again. Regarding identifiable wreckage, it's ALL been identified, piece by piece. Let's face it, you've purposely created an argument where as unless you yourself could be sent back in time to witness it, gather wreckage and have it verified by you yourself that it came from AA Flight 77, you will not accept any other evidence. Lol, way to go champ 🤪👍🏼 In reality, i direct you to an overwhelming amount of various independent evidences we do have ALL of which proves AA Flight 77 crashed there thay day, but instead of looking at and acknowledging it, you deflect, making claims you can't back up, about me allegedly lying lol. If I'm a pathological liar, why can't you quote a single thing I've said then present evidence to prove im lying? All just a deflection tactic because you know full well you have no comeback to the evidence I've directed you to. You're only fooling yourself though my little troll whipping boy 🤷🏽♂️
2
-
@godbyone Riiiiiiiight, sure you have buddy, i believe you 🤣 If you'd been to even just ONE you'd understand just how loud they are, yet that day, silent 🤔 You've also just stated out of the 32 demo's you've allegedly seen, not one came down the way WTC7 came down ie. You've just refuted your own argument. Tell me, as i'm assuming given what you've just said, that you have worked out how long it should have taken to collaspe? Of course you haven't because people like you just make it up as you go and say things purely for effect. It didn't come down like a controlled demolition because it fell due to fire, just like the fire fighters who assessed the structure said several hours before it collapsed. Another inconvenient yet fundamental truth you choose to ignore. Any chance or do you just assume fire fighters have psychic abilities?
Many steel framed structures have collapsed before and since 9/11 ENTIRELY from fire, without suggering ANY structural damage from having a thousand foot skyscraper falling on it, so no idea whay you're rambling on about with that one.
Well done by the way for once again completely ignoring everything i said to you regarding the crooked frauds and unqualified nobody's over at ae911twoof. A clear sign you genuinely seek truth lol.
One last thing for you to deflect and ignore, where are all the demolition experts who believe any buildings were demoed that day? Are you saying you know better than the entire demolitions community?
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@coolk3dat754 Are you drunk? Are you currently taking some heavy prescription medicines? When the hell did i say anything like "modern State high-rise do not apply to the laws of physics"?? Your English comprehension is beyond dreadful by the way. Almost as poor as your grasp of basic physics 🙄 To break it down for your broken, fragile mind, your physics would indeed apply to the twin towers, had they been constructed as solid Jenga towers. Instead however, they were mostly open space and 95% air. The information on how the smaller top sections of the towers managed to plough through the larger lower sections so easily, has been out there for a number of years and not in question in academic circles. Why haven't you read the studies which explain it all without any physical laws being violated whatsoever? To try and ridicule others based on nothing more than your own lack of knowledge, which to your detriment they possess, makes you look pretty fkng stupid. To put it simply for your dumb ass, each individual floor had a set, static load limit. This limit was MASSIVELY exceeded by the dynamic load of the top sections when they dropped on to them. With each floor the mass smashed through, it picked up more mass and therefore smashed through the proceeding floor with even greater ease. There was indeed resistance, but it was negligible.
Now about the name I've been constantly asking you for, of ANY demolitions expert who agrees with you that the towers were demoed using magical, impact resistant, blast resistant, fire resistant, silent explosives that survived the plane crashes, ensuing fires then detonated 60 and 90 minutes later. Have you managed to find me one or are you still looking? 🤨
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@coolk3dat754 You really are thick as 2 short planks aren't you? You have ZERO grasp of basic physics and science in general and twist reality to suit yourself. I have even given you an experiment to demonstrate what happened you dumb c#@t!!! This PERFECTLY demonstrates the difference between a static and dynamic load and what happens when the dynamic load far exceeds the static load limit of what's below. Apologies if that simple experiment went way over you head you drooling dullard, but still, facts remain facts regardless of whether you accept them or not and the world's physics community stand against you, and as we've established, the ENTIRE demolitions community which you actually have the audacity to pretend to you know more than 🤣🤣😂
What arr you talking about, a theory is "wrong" if you don't have an experiment to prove it?? No it isnt your fkng dolt!!! It just means it hasn't been tested experimentally!!! That doesn't make it wrong 🙈😂😂 I think you'll find the laws of physics have been well and truly tested and the officoal studies arr FULLY compliant with those laws as I've explaonedto you. If you bothered your uneducated, lazy, crackpot ass to read the studies, you'd realise this. Also, the steelwork redundancy, weld strength, shear strength of studs etc. etc. etc. had most definitely all been tested. Your understanding of experimental evidence is that of a child and has no bearing on science or reality as a whole. I'll ask you AGAIN, give me an example of the kind of experiment you're speaking of. You eont because you cant because your pseudoscientific buIIsh!t doesn't make any sense in the real world. Give me an experiment you'd accept so i can ridocule you some more 😋
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@coolk3dat754 Sorry, didn't have the inclination to read your diatribe of verbal diarrhea, i got to where you accused me of lying, denying, ignoring and omiitting in a truly mind-blowing display of hypocrisy and gave up given how you've failed to show how I've done a single one of those things. On the other hand, i have consistently exposed you for all of thse things. Lying (eg. you've lied about imaginary violations pf the laws of physics that no actual physicists seem to agree with you on), denying (eg. denying the fire fighters publicly asserting WTC7 was definitely going to collapse several hours before it fell), ignoring (eg. Ignoring my request for a single demo expert who agrees with you and ignorig the experiment i gave you that you requested).
I did however catch the words 'path of most resistance which got my attention because, as i predicted the moment i saw those words, you don't understand what is meant by the path of least resistance and fail to grasp the absolute, incontestable FACT the the towers collapsed straight down through the structure below and THAT was the path of LEAST resistance, not the most you stupid, inept fkng brain donor!!! 🤣🤣🤣 Claims to know more about physics than the physics community yet doesn't even understand the difference between the path least and most resistance!!! 🤣🤣🤣 You truly are one breathtaking example of poor parenting and a tragically failed education you simple-minded inbred.
Have you got a name of a demo expert who agrees with you yet champ? Still no?? Feeling brave enough to acknowledge the fire fighters assertions that WTC7 was inevitably going to collapse hours before it fell? Still no on that one too huh? Still incapable of explaining how demolition charges managed to survive the plane impacts and ensuing fires when such devices are so extremely sensitive to things like heat and geometry? Still unable to explain how the both towers manahed to collapse at the impact zones as opposed to a controlled demolition which come down from the bottom up? Still unable to explain how 136 direct witnesses at the Pentagon ALL report seeing a plane (slme, even pilots, identifying it as a Boeing 757) without a single report of a missile, drone or anything other than a plane? So much more i could add that you choose to bury your head to but i think I've made my point. Now how about you provide examples of things i've lied, ignored, denied etc. or I'll just assume that yet again, all just more lies to desperately try to deflect from the utter trouncing and ass fkng you've taken from me.
2
-
@coolk3dat754 Sorry stupid but i don't care if you don't understand basic physics and you can shout and scream your failed pseudoscience all you like, it doesn't matter lol. Nobody is listening and nobody ever will. The path of least resistance was straight down. Once the fires sufficiently weakened the stricken steel, the top sections toppled sideways to the path of least resistance. What happened next was gravity corrected the angular momentum, bringing those huge masses STRAIGHT DOWN through what was now the psth of least resistance due to there being NO lateral force to push those top sections sideways. Please highlight, in detail what part of that i (and the entire physics community) have got wrong and be specific. This is going to ve hilarious 😬
Well done also for once again shamelessly and completely ignoring the fundamental questions put to you that you're too afraid to acknowledge, knowing full well they alone destroy your whacky, tinfoil hat buIIsh!t conspiracy theories 🤣
You can't even give me ONE example of the lies you claim I've told, just like you cant give ONE example of anything I've ignored or denied. You are a psychologists wet dream you really are.
Have you got a name of a single demo expert who agrees with you yet champ? Still no?? Feeling brave enough to acknowledge the fire fighters assertions that WTC7 was inevitably going to collapse hours before it fell? Still no on that one too huh? Still incapable of explaining how demolition charges managed to survive the plane impacts and ensuing fires when such devices are so extremely sensitive to things like heat and geometry? Still unable to explain how the both towers managed to collapse at the impact zones as opposed to a controlled demolition which come down from the bottom up? Still unable to explain how 136 direct witnesses at the Pentagon ALL report seeing a plane (slme, even pilots, identifying it as a Boeing 757) without a single report of a missile, drone or anything other than a plane? 🤔
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@coolk3dat754 So where exactly does the experient show the theory wrong? 🤔 That's right, it doesn't 😏 You don't even understand what a scientific theory is you fkng dolt!! lol. Never have i met anybody with such a poor grasp in what science is and the process by which it proceeds. The studies were carried out BY scientists and engineers who have an INFINITELY greater grasp on science than some illiterate, cowardly kook who failed so hard in life like you, and once again, here you go pretending to know better than the overwhelming consensus of experts in EVERY related field of expertise. In no way does ANY experiment oppose the incontrovertible FACT that heat weakens steel, or that a dynamic load FAR exceeding a static load limit WILL smash through it and the resistance will be negligible. Do you disagree with any of those two stayements, yes or no?? The experiment i proposed (of which you have also shamelessly chosen to ignore (as we as EVERY other question I've put to you! 🤣) PROVES it. I know this, you know this, anybody reading this know this, so who exactly do you think you're fooling with your brazen lies and display of academic failings? If you were as clued up as you have deluded yourself to be, ask yourself why you're resigned to screaming at strangers on Youtube comment threads, achieving literally nothing and generally failing at life so bad? Ask yourself why you continually fail to gain full time employment, and why is it only the scourge of the internet seem to side with your lunacy whilst the scientific consensus stands against you? You literally epitomise the proverbial chess-playing pigeon used to analogise creationists who love to falsely claim victory. Only you believe this because as we've established, you're mentally ill. Now I hate to do it but.......
Have you got a name of a single demo expert who agrees with you yet champ? Still no?? Feeling brave enough to acknowledge the fire fighters assertions that WTC7 was inevitably going to collapse hours before it fell? Still no on that one too huh? Still incapable of explaining how demolition charges managed to survive the plane impacts and ensuing fires when such devices are so extremely sensitive to things like heat and geometry? Still unable to explain how the both towers managed to collapse at the impact zones as opposed to a controlled demolition which come down from the bottom up? Still unable to explain how 136 direct witnesses at the Pentagon ALL report seeing a plane (slme, even pilots, identifying it as a Boeing 757) without a single report of a missile, drone or anything other than a plane? 🤔
Ps. I left NOTHING frome my 5 steps of the scientific method because as i already explained, the 5 steps were DIRECTLY COPIED AND PASTED from the Royal Academy's website who surprise surprise, you're now claiming to know better than!! 🤣🤣 I purposely did this because you're so predictable and i knew you'd challenge it. Sorry d!ckhead but I'll stick with the Royal Academy on this one Mongo 🤗 lol
2
-
2
-
2
-
@coolk3dat754 Yes, 95% d!ckhead, this is we well known fact denied by nobody, it was how they were designed using a tube in tube design in orser to create large open floors an acre each in size!! Look at the famous photo of the sun shining through the towers which illustrate perfectly just how hollow they were and no, it was OBVIOUSLY not the air that smashed through the floors below you dumb fk 🤣🤣🤣 It was the mass of all the floors above that MASSIVELY exceedes the static load limit of the floor it fell on to. Fk me, this is so painfully simple that a small child can understand it 🤪👈🏽 Thick as fk lol. Drop a rock on to a sheet of glass and see how much resistance it offers.
Reinforced structural steel??? Reinforced by what???? LIAR!!!!
In regards to your link to the so-called experiment, you/they fail to grasp some key, fundamental factors such as YOU CAN'T SCALE GRAVITY!!!! 🙈🤣🤣🤣 And also, none of the experiments mirror what the official stance is ie. How the floors sagged, pulling in the outer columns until the connections broke. In fact it fails on so many levels it's just laughable and so childlike. Why hasn't this clown presented his findings to the MIT or the like and rightly taken his place in history for blowing the lid off what would be the biggest conspiracy in human history? No, instead he chooses to upload it to youtube which will achieve absolutely nothing. I wonder why? 🤔
Now hate to do this to you yet again but...... Have you got a name of a single demo expert who agrees with you yet champ? Still no?? Feeling brave enough to acknowledge the fire fighters assertions that WTC7 was inevitably going to collapse hours before it fell? Still no on that one too huh? Still incapable of explaining how demolition charges managed to survive the plane impacts and ensuing fires when such devices are so extremely sensitive to things like heat and geometry? Still unable to explain how the both towers managed to collapse at the impact zones as opposed to a controlled demolition which come down from the bottom up? Still unable to explain how 136 direct witnesses at the Pentagon ALL report seeing a plane (slme, even pilots, identifying it as a Boeing 757) without a single report of a missile, drone or anything other than a plane? 🤔
2
-
2
-
@coolk3dat754 So you're now claiming i said that building should have pop like a balloon or flown away on impact?? 🙈 Holy fk, what kind of mental midget and i talking to here??? Why the hell would it do that???? Your living room is mostly open space right Mongo? And that open space is filled with what? That's right, air!!! Now if we were to drill a hole through the wall from outside into your living room, would your livinf room "pop" or fly away???? 🤣🤣🤣 And you have the audacity to call others out on their knowledge of physics when what you know of physics could be written on a postage stamp you fkng ret@rd!!! 🤣🤣🤣 You'd deny up was up if your conspiracy required it you fkng desperado 😂 I take it you didn't look at the image i sent you PROVING the obvious, just as i said? No, why would you look at something that might destroy tour pathetic, conspiratorial delusions? I mean, what the hell would you do all day every day if not spreading your pseudoscientific lunacy all over the youtube, achieving literally nothing and getting your ass handed to you at every turn? 🤷🏽♂️
I also notice it isn't only my questions you run away from. You've done exactly the same to Ryan here and everyone else who had the misfortune of encountering your uneducated ass. You're a coward and a crackpot who has been utterly bent over on every thread I've seen you comment on. Naturally you claim victory because you're mentally ill and lost all grasp of reality, actually claiming you know more about demolition than EVERY DEMOLITION expert on earth. That fact alone higjlights your mental instability. Anyway, just to expose your cowardice once again.......
Have you got a name of a single demo expert who agrees with you yet champ? Still no?? Feeling brave enough to acknowledge the fire fighters assertions that WTC7 was inevitably going to collapse hours before it fell? Still no on that one too huh? Still incapable of explaining how demolition charges managed to survive the plane impacts and ensuing fires when such devices are so extremely sensitive to things like heat and geometry? Still unable to explain how the both towers managed to collapse at the impact zones as opposed to a controlled demolition which come down from the bottom up? Still unable to explain how 136 direct witnesses at the Pentagon ALL report seeing a plane (some, even pilots, identifying it as a Boeing 757) without a single report of a missile, drone or anything other than a plane? 🤔
You ⬇️
🏃💨 FACTS
Keep running Mongo!!! 🤣
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@ramzichouk4080 "We were pretty sure that 7 World Trade Center would collapse. Early on, we saw a bulge in the southwest corner between floors 10 and 13, and we had put a transit on that and we were pretty sure she was going to collapse. You actually could see there was a visible bulge, it ran up about three floors. It came down about 5 o’clock in the afternoon, but by about 2 o’clock in the afternoon we realized this thing was going to collapse." - Deputy Chief Peter Hayden
"There was a huge gaping hole and it was scattered throughout there. It was a huge hole. I would say it was probably about a third of it, right in the middle of it.....On the north and east side of 7 it didn’t look like there was any damage at all, but then you looked on the south side of 7 there had to be a hole 20 stories tall in the building, with fire on several floors. Debris was falling down on the building and it didn’t look good.
That was the first time really my stomach tightened up because the building didn’t look good......Then this other officer I’m standing next to said, that building doesn’t look straight. So I’m standing there. I’m looking at the building. It didn’t look right, but, well, we’ll go in, we’ll see. So we gathered up rollups and most of us had masks at that time. We headed toward 7. And just around we were about a hundred yards away and Butch Brandies came running up. He said forget it, nobody’s going into 7, there’s creaking, there are noises coming out of there, so we just stopped." - Captain Chris Boyle NYFD
"They were worried about 7 World Trade Center, which is right behind it, coming down. We were up on the upper floors of the Verizon building looking at it. You could just see the whole bottom corner of the building was gone. We could look right out over to where the Trade Centers were because we were that high up. Looking over the smaller buildings. I just remember it was tremendous, tremendous fires going on. Finally they pulled us out." - Richard Banaciski NYFD Firefigher
"The biggest decision we had to make on the first day was to clear the area and create a collapse zone around the severely damaged WTC 7 a 47-story building heavily involved in fire. A number of fire officers and companies assessed the damage to the building. The appraisals indicated that the building's integrity was in serious doubt. I issued the orders to pull back the firefighters and define the collapse zone. It was a critical decision." - Dan Nigro
Chief of Department FDNY
How many more would you like?
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@wellifthemediasaysit There are literally images showing of plenty of wreckage including pieces of fuselage with the American Airlines livery clearly visible!! 🤣🤣🤣 Fkkkkkk, how can anyone be this messed up?? 🙈 As well as the mass of wreckage, of which has been identified independently as coming from a 757 (namely the engine components everybody except you seems to have seen, wheel and pieces of landing gears), we have the black box of which the FDR data was recoverable. When decoded, it detailed AA77's last ELEVEN flights. All fake though right? Just like somebody went around scattering the physical remains of all the passengers throughout the inside of the Pentagon 😂👍🏽 You fkng imbecile, you're quite possibly the most demented, delusional and dishonest twoofer I've ever encountered in all the years I've been schooling you pr!cks. I imagine even other twoofer must cringe at your comments and claims. You certainly don't do their cause many favours denying things so easily refuted with a 10 second G00gle search 🙈
As I directed you to previous, the following website will show you the damage to Pentagon facade right after the fire crews etc. arrived, prior to the impact hole collapsing, and it CLEARLY shows damage that only a plane could have caused. It also features the wreckage you deny was present, as well as interviews that day from direct eye-witnesses plus much, much more. All of which utterly decimate your loony-toon beliefs. Are you going to be brave enough to look at it this time, or are you still too scared to have your desperate need for conspiracy shattered like you were last time I publicly spanked your dumb, uneducated a55?
Just search the words 'right blogger ba5tard Pentagon' and click on t.he first link. It's so simple even a brain-dead dolt like you can manage it.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@jason8952 Go and watch the video here on YouTube of a Phantom F4 slamming into an equally reinforced wall at 500mph and then tell me you'd expect to find the same weight in wreckage you absolute clown. Besides, I can't find any reference to 19 tons and whereas I'm not saying that isn't true given the truly immense force the plane struck with, I'm certainly not going to take the word of a twoofer on that.
Engine components from TWO engines were recovered at the crash site and have been independently identified as being from the engines used on that particular plane. There is no doubt whatsoever about that and you can easily verify this for yourself, as I have. Also, damage to structures hit on approach confirm the precise engine separation of a 757, and there was damage to the Pentagon where the engines struck. Search 'right blogger b@stard Pentagon' and you can see this for yourself, no need to take my word.
If course it's been identified 😂 I'd say the radar track, FDR data from the black box and the remains of everyone on board are a pretty significant means of identifying the aircraft to name but a few! And no, it would be impossible to have 'planted' all of those people sat in traffic on their morning commute, don't be so fkng absurd! We have these people's names, we know who they are and they include fire fighters, clergymen, airline pilots and other members of the public of similar stature. How is anybody meant to have a rational debate with somebody who says sh!t like that?? Who did the CIA "lean on" and for what? No idea what you're talking about there sorry, sounds like BS to me.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@ryansmurda1552 Or maybe it's because Trump is an adulterous, lying grifting, tax-dodging, draft-dodging, document stealing, insurrection inciting, anti-democratic, malignantly narcissistic, serial sex offender who failed to do a single thing he ran his campaign on, made hundreds of millions of dollars knowingly telling lies about election fraud, gave massive tax cuts to the rich, added an unbelievable TWENTY FIVE percent to the national debt, failed America with his abysmal, deadly & very costly Covid response & has literally no redeeming qualities whatsoever 🤔 You're part of a cult.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@MegaDavyk We went to the moon mainly to get one over on the Russians as we were embroiled in the Cold War. Although no physical conflict, the 2 countries flexed their might by technological advancements, political expansion and proxy wars like Vietnam. America had suffered a couple of major setbacks to the Russians in that they'd successfully sent the first man into space, and America had also suffered a crushing defeat to the Cubans in the Bay of Pigs invasion. Beating the Russians to the moon was seen as a way of gaining back that edge. That was what is was really all about. Without this competition, it is very likely it would not have happened, or certaibly not when it did. That said, humanity has always had a natural compulsive desire for exploration and expansion and man had pondered it from the dawn of humanity. There were many scientists at the time however who thought it to be a waste of time. I don't personally believe it was but to POINTLESSLY continue going back with such huge risk to human life and incurring such immense costs, what would be the point? Why can't you answer this simple, yet pertinent question? For what purpose???
You can't compare lunar missions to individuals climbing Everest lol, don't be ridiculous. Up until now there has been no drive or valid, rational reason to go back, but since the discovery of water up there and with us furthering our exploration of Mars, we now have reason to go back. And we will. I'm afraid your rationale to say we've never been is just dumb to put it bluntly. Your argument makes no sense and couldn't be weaker. If that's all you have then this is a nonestarter. It would have been more difficult to fake the landings than to actually go there.
As for 9/11, how did i know? 🤣 Too predictable. It would probably have been easier asking are there any kooky conspiracy theories you don't subscribe to? lol.
So what you're saying is, Larry Silverstein somehow managed to persuade the US government to carry out this insanely risky plot to murder thousands of their own innocent civilians, all so that he could save a few dollars by pulling off an elaborate insurance scam, ine that he in reality, lost a fortune? 🤔 Sounds likely 🤣 You're clearly mental and in serious need of a psychiatric evaluation to discern the best way to help you become a normal, functioning member of society. How can you possibly beleive what you believe, it's beyond lunacy.
Firstly, what the hell is a "cohen-cidence"? Also, it's spelled 'insured'. The word 'ensured' has a different meaning altogether. It comes as no surprise you're painfully uneducated, yet here you are claiming to be smarter than EVERY SCIENTIST in human history. You realise how crazy that makes you appear to others right?
Moving on. I'm not sure how you concluded he bought the World Trade Complex for cheap. The 99yr lease he took out wasn't cheap by any standard, so can only assime you say this for effect to help bolster your truly, truly absurd conspiracy theory. He had no say whatsoever in insuring the complex so why you say this with suspicion makes no sense either. It is standard practice in ANY commercial property and was a stipulation enforced by the Port Authority as part of the lease contract. Nothing whatsoever unusual about this. He did NOT double his insurance against terroism, that is an outright lie! In reality, ALL commercial insurance policies sold in the U.S. before 9/11 covered terrorist incidents as a matter of course. They were insured back in 93 before the previous terrorist attack on the towers, you know this right? It was simply a STANDARD, 'all-risk' policy. Where do you get off shamelessly lying like this?
As for you claiming he "ensured them to the max", in reality he underinsured them, opting to pay THE very bare minimum his lenders insisted in them being insured for in an attempt to save money and do it on the cheap, and he hadn't even finalised the policies at the time of the attacks! Does that sound like somebody who had foreknowledge of the attack?? Obviously not. This led to several years of court battles and he and his consortium of investors getting paid out HALF of his claim, and a total of 4.55 billion dollars. The estimated cost of the rebuild was 9 billion and he was losing hundreds of millions in rent whilst still having to continue paying millions on the lease. This would have to make it THE worst insurance scam in history lol. As with everything else you say and believe, it makes zero sense and it's for reasons like these that nobody of worth takes a blind bit of notice of you or ever will. It's why you comment on youtube, desperately seeking affirmation and echo-chamber of fellow, socially inept crackpots who gravitate to such forums, seeking like-minded morons in an attempt to offer you a sense of worse. You need to get out more and step away from the computer before it's too late.
As for you claiming he "ensured them to the max", in reality he underinsured them in an attempt to save money and do it on the cheap, and he hadn't even finalised the policies at the time of the attacks! Does that sound like somebody who had foreknowledge of the attack?? Obviously not. This led to several years of legal battles and he and his consortium of investors getting paid out HALF of his claim, and a total of 4.55 billion dollars. The estimated cost of the rebuild was 9 billion and he was losing hundreds of millions in rent whilst still having to continue pay 10 million in lease payments of which he couldn't recoup a single cent. This would have to make it THE worst insurance scam in history lol. As with everything else you say and believe, it makes zero sense. It's for reasons like these that nobody of worth takes a blind bit of notice of you or ever will. It's why you comment on youtube, desperately seeking affirmation and echo-chamber of fellow, socially inept crackpots who gravitate to such forums, seeking like-minded morons in an attempt to offer you a sense of worse. You need to get out more and step away from the computer before it's too late.
1
-
1
-
1
-
@beyondnow1600 Which only goes to show you've never read the studies and have no understanding whatsoever of what the official story is. That os NOT what the official studies say, and we're supposed to listen to a deranged, unlearned crackpot like you?? Get a grip man lol. Controlled demolitions are done from the bottom up, whereas both towers collapsed at the impact zone's, a fact that alone utterly destroys all claims of controlled demolition. Any demo devices located anywhere near those impact zones would have been instantly destroyed by the plane impacts and ensuing fires. You obviously aren't aware of just how sensitive demo devices are to things like heat and geometry.
Regarding builidng 7, it wasn't hit by a plane which is pretty much the only correct claim you've made so far. It was however hit by thousands of tons of debris from the collapsing south tower which resulted in massive structural damage and fires across many floors, of which were allowed to freeburn and thus making a collapse inevitable. The firefighters tending to the builidng literally stated publicly it was going to collapse several hours before it fell. Are you suggesting they were in on this alleged conspiracy that killed hundreds of their brothers?? Im case you hadn't noticed too, it wasn't the plane impacts that brought the towers down, it was the fires, just like what brought down building 7. As for building 7 falling in the exact same way as the towers, once again all this does is expose your blinding ignorance as they couldn't have been any different. The twin towers fell from the top down, whereas builidng 7 collapsed from the bottom up.
20yrs of research and you don't even understand the basics or recognise the vacuous, fundamental flaws in your logic?? Wow, what a waste of 2 decades 🙈 Imagine what you could have achieved in that time, you could literally be a professor had you focused your efforts elsewhere. That's pretty tragic.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@tlqueck9534 That's why you support a repugnant, misogynistic, megalomaniacal, billionaire bully-boy born with a silver spoon in his mouth, believing he gives a flying fk about the working man or anybody other than himself; who lies on a level never before witnessed throughout documented history, who caused an insurrection with bogus claims of election fraud that was planned prior to the results even being announced; who thinks its perfectly acceptable to swxually assault women, who......you know what, i can't even be bothered going on, I'll be here all day. You get the picture. You can pretend to KNOW the poles are false but you don't. It's your baseless opinion based entirely on your own, deluded, highly subjective political bias. Thank your imaginary friend all you like, it won't change the reality.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@shostako1284 Stop claiming it's the most protected space in the world, that's utter sh!te, no it is not. It was/is well protected but believe it or not, not only did they not expect somebody to fly a plane into it, there really isn't much that will stop a 150 ton mass full of kerosene travelling at 500mph.
As for your claim of the 136 eye witnesses are all lying and paid off, you really are seriously deluded beyond reason. Would you take money to help cover up the mass nutder of thousands of your fellow countrymen?? Like hell you would, yet you think all those 136 people were so morally bankrupt that they'd do such a heinous thing? Get real. The risk involved would be immense and no way would they take such a chance. It's all about risk to reward. There were airline pilots, doctors, clergymen, fire fighters and many other credible people who witnessed it, and you actually believe they're all lying and not one honest person witnessed it whilst sat in traffic on that busy highway??? Put the crackpipe down, you're insane. Now a single witness to anything other than a plane. On top of this, a mass of 757 wreckage including the black box, the remains of all the passengers and their personal belongings, ATC evidence detailing a radar track from Dulles airport to the impact site, damage to surrounding structures hit in approach which confirm perfectly the dimensions of a 757 wingspan and engine separation. The list goes on but hey, you keep clutching those straws and burying your head to all this incontestable evidence to try and keep your kooky, failed conspiracy theory alive 😏👍🏼
Ps. Your claim about the Mexican drug cartels in as ludicrous and unhinged as the rest of what you said. Just more baseless, naive hogwash. You've clearly been watching too much TV.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@jamestee8852 Yes, you were wrong. VERY wrong. In fact, that's one of the dumbest things I've heard from a truther, and I've hear some pretty dumb sh!t from you guys over the years to say the least.
It wasn't a 50 ton plane, more like double that and it was mostly the heavier parts of the plane that buried itself (as expected) and the lightweight skin mostly confettied into small pieces which we then scattered far and wide in the blast. The vast majority of that plane was recovered and hundreds of volunteers scoured the area retrieving wreckage, remains of the passengers and their personal belongings. Are you suggesting all of this was planted without anybody seeing, or that the hundreds of volunteers, first response, emergency services, the clergyman, the county coroner and all the others who helped out were all just lying? It's beyond absurd and highly disrespectful to those who died that day. Your ridiculous conspiracy theory fail's under scrutiny many times over whether you accept that or not.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@brutalyzedbytv Short of time? Is that your excuse for being so ignorant of the facts surrounding this subject? Maybe I'll still be here? This isn't a 'place' in the physical world you know, it's an online forum that can be easily accessed by a mobile phone anywhere you can obtain a signal. So yes, I'll still be 'here', waiting for your next shockingly shameless display of fact dodging.
I've read all of your above comments and no, nowhere have you addressed what i asked. Just more deflection. The 136 people who witnessed the event ALL reported seeing a plane. These included fire fighters, clergymen, airline pilots, doctors and many more from all walks of life. Some (including the airline pilots on their morning commute to Reagan airport, who've literally flown 757's) identified it specifically as a Boeing 757. The wreckage has been independently identified as coming from a 757 and the black box data details the last 11 flights of AA77. Another fundamental fact you ignore is the first responder accounts and images used in court during the Moussaoui trial of which the defence was quite happy with their authenticity. If there were any doubt, the defence would have objected. They didn't. I suppose you believe Moussaoui's defence lawyers were all part of the plot too right? 🙄 And what about the damage caused to structure that were hit on approach, structures over 100ft apart? They tally up perfectly with the wingspan and engine separation of a 757. Like I said, there is no amount of evidence that can change the mind of somebody so dishonest and emotionally invested in these kind of crazy conspiracy theories. Just the same old strawman arguments claiming anybody who doesn't believe what you believe automatically trusts the government and obtains all of their information from mainstream media. Demonstrably wrong. Unlike you, we can back up our claims. You don't see us cherrypicking what we address, or running away when the going gets tough. You're just a typical, delusional truther who's beyond reason. So long sucker 👋🏼🤪
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@carforumwanker You're right, i make a point of staying away from crackpot weirdos the likes of which you associate yourself with. I prefer those with a slightly highly calibre of sanity, rationale and intellectual capacity. YOU made the claim therefore the burden of proof lies with YOU, and the fact you make such a claim whilst refusing to back it up means we can dismiss it without question. I think the fact you don't even understand the simple concept of burden of proof speaks for itself. As Christopher Hitchens rightly once said, 'what can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence'. Learn how debate works and you might find people may choose to take your a little more seriously.
You claiming hitting the side was the most difficult way in which to bring the aircraft in doesn't wash either sorry. In reality, to nose dive vertically on top of the Pentagon would be immeasurably more difficult and a FAR greater chance of missing the building altogether. To come in at the angle Hanjour came in at was the EASIEST way to attack the building regardless of yoyr pigeon understanding of aeronautical aviation. All you do is continue to expose your lack of knowledge so act as arrogantly as you like, the facts speak for themselves and remain facts whether you accept them of not.
I'm also afraid that your shocking, shameless display of hand-waving away EVERY direct eye-witness account, accusing them of assisting the cover-up of the cold-blooded murder of thousands of their fellow countrymen, just 'to get on tv' doesn't quite cut it in the real world, but it does spectacularly expose the depths to which you'll sink to desperately try and keep your pathetic, failed conspiracy theory alive. Firemen were amongst those witnesses, as were serving pilots, a member of the clergy, solicitors, doctors and other people of equal calibre. I trust them INFINITELY more than i trust the easily refuted opinion of some trumped up, cowardly whackjob on youtube.
1
-
1
-
1
-
@carforumwanker Said no real pilot, ever 😂 This point was discussed in great detail by REAL pilots over on the metabunk forum and it was unanimously agreed witbout doubt that it would be vastly more difficult to nose dive a 757 vertically on to a target, increasing the risk of missing much, much greater and the easiest way in which to strike would be exactly how he did it. It's pretty much what pilots do when coming in to land, he just came way too hot because guess what, he didn't exactly have safety in mind and then he crashed. A few weeks training? His flying was pretty poor as any real pilot would tell you, but he had trained long enough to gain a commercial pilots licence As any real pilot will tell you, all he had to do was steer the plane, and steering a plane is, like you, pretty fkn simple 🤪
Keep repeating your lies but you and i both know, as im sure anybody reading this does, you're full of sh!t and making it up as you go. Look how you've so readily dismissed EVERY direct eye-witness with what has to be THE most ridiculous excuse I've heard to date ie. They just wanted to be on tv. I mean, really??? 🤣🤣🤣 Is that really the best you can come up with?? Weak sauce. You're just a lying coward who lacks the confidence to stand by his convictions. You refuse to acknowledge any opposing evidence; you lie about your credentials in an attempt to make an argument from authority, and you refuse to back a single claim you make because you know full well your claims don't stand up to scrutiny. If that wasn't the case, you'd be shooting my evidence down in flames and ramming the name of your imaginary military guy down my throat like daddy used to do when he used to come and tuck you in at night. Man up princess!
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@dojocho1894 So 136 people couldn't tell the difference between a 155ft jet airliner with a 125ft wingspan, and a 22ft cruise missile with a 9ft wingspan? Lol, ol buddy 😂👍🏼
To compare a plane crash to this is just stupid. When a plane is in trouble and in danger of crashing, the pilot is almost always trying desperately to keep the plane in the air. In this instance, the pilot was suicidal and dived into a heavily reinforced, concrete wall throttled up to 500mph. It is OBVIOUSLY not going to look like your average plane crash site. The fact is, there was plenty of 757 wreckage (including the black box) and the remains of all those on board. Where did all this come from, are you suggesting it was all planted without anybody noticing or blowing the whistle?? Lol, that's insane.
For the record, there were 85 CCTV cameras, not 131. None pointing in the direction of the planes approach. Why would there be?
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@jason8952 lol, wow what a great imagination you have! And gullible doesn't come close. When that bogus, corrupt, pseudoscientific organisation ae911twoof made yp of a tiny, insignificant number of fringe lunatic, 80% of whom have ZERO relevant knowledge or experience decide to follow the same rules EVERY scientist MUST follow, then maybe the academic world might think about taking them more seriously. Until then they're about as revered by the scientific community as the geological community are with the flat earth society. There isn't a shred of evidence to back up ANYTHING you claim and what can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence as the Mr Hitchens once rightly said. Nano-thermite indeed 🤣 Those crooks literally invented that theory after realising their explosive demolition fell apart under the smallest amount of scrutiny. They target uneducated dolts like you who are dumb enough to just lap it up and accept absurdities without any evidence to back it up.
Again, you compared a brick building to a steel-framed structure so you telling me i don't know anything about constructions (not true by the way, but in terms of skyscrapers, obviously not and neither do you) really doesn't hold much weight. Those who DO understand about skyscraper construction and controlled demolition however are very much with me on this one.
Any names of those demolition experts you claim agree the twin towers were demoed for me yet champ?
And yes, a never before done type of demolition being showcased on the world stage and set to be scrutinised globally for many years would be a MASSIVE risk. Your claims contradict what other truthers say so much, it's hilarious. You can't even agree with each other lol.
1
-
@jason8952 Oh wow, you're a mechanic who can turn his hand to fabricating and welding?? Well that sure makes you expert in controlled demolition and high rise construction, i take it all back! 🙄 Except most of that is BS as somebody with such a degree would understand path of least resistance, which you blatantly don't. Those towers DID collapse through the path of least resistance you clown. The path of least resistance was straight down and to topple sideways which I'm assuming you believe should have happened, would have required a lateral force to be applied which simply wasn't there. In fact the top sections of the towers did topple sideways to start with due to the plane impacts severing structural columns. The load from thise severed columns was transferred to the remaining columns until the sustained heat weakened them sufficiently for them to give way. The 'gap' then closed when the top sections toppled but the angular momentum was corrected by gravity, bringing them straight down through the path of least resistance. Please don't lie about having an engineering degree when you BLATANTLY don't and display the logic of a child on such matters. The fact you claim the top sections couldn't destroy the bottom sections either exposes your lack of understanding also. It's quite simple so allow me to spoonfeed you as you're too lazy to read the actual studies you're desperately trying to dismiss (and likely too dumb to understand them if you did). Each floor had a static load limit. When the top sections above the impact zones tilted and came crashing down to the floor immediately below, this now dynamic load MASSIVELY exceeded the static load limit of that floor. This resulted in an even greater mass dropping down on to the next floor of which it smashed through with even more ease, etc. etc. This continued all the way down with an ever increasing mass that way exceeded the static load limits of the floors below. But you're telling me this couldn't happen right? Riiiight lol. There was a little more to it than that but it's not overly relevant to the point being made.
No risk?? Not only did they have to pull off a "one of a kind" demolition that has never been done before, they had to hope and pray the demo devices survived the impacts and heat, but they couldn't be certain it would fall in the way they did as this had never before been done, and they had the arduous task of flying both planes PRECISELY in the right side and height of the towers where these magical demo devices were located. Yeah, no risk whatsoever lol.
Ps. As for your NWO Illuminate quotes lol, there's no reasoning with paranoid whackjobs like you. Your David Rockefeller quote for example, completely taken out of context to suit your kooky agenda. The key line is to "build a more integrated global political and economic structure - one world, if you will", and he freely admits to that. He's also gently mocking that some people characterise that as "a secret cabal" and "a conspiracy", which it is only in the loosest sense. Rockefeller is an internationalist, he made no secret of it. Many people have similar political views, but you've changed it to fit with your whacky conspiracy buIIsh!t. Get a grip.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@tuck6464 Says some clueless jerk0ff on youtube who's watcjed a bunch of conspiracy videos 😏 Go speak with the likes of Giulio Bernacchia, pilot of 30+yrs, much of it in the military, then captain for a commercial airline, flight simulator instructor and examiner who flew NATO AWACS planes as Aircraft Commander (air refuelling qualified) and low altitude maritime patrol captain. He says otherwise sorry. All Hanjour did was royally fkd up the approach to show what a poor pilot he was, then came in recklessly from 4 miles out, at 2000ft altitude, dipped the nose amd throttled up, crashing into THE world's largest offices. Stop trying to hype up his achievements, ALL evidnece PROVES you wrong eg. 757 wreckage, direct eye-witnesses, the remains of all the passengers, the black box and so on. Jog on fool.
1
-
1
-
1
-
@tuck6464 136 people saw that jet, EVERY eye-witness reporting it being a plane, not a single report of anything other than a plane. The wreckage strewn throughout the crashsite has been independently confirmed as coming from a 757 and the radar track, the black box and the remains of those on board each independently PROVE that 7 was AA77. The amount of evidence you choose to ignore in order to make your conspiracy fly is insane. ZERO evidnece whatsoever of a missile and there is a mountain of conflicting evidence that categorically proves it could not possibly have been a missile eg. Damage to structures hit on approach over 100ft apart, the impact hole, the impact marks from the wing and vertical stabiliser, the fact there is an exit hole 3 rings in, the blatant hydrocarbon explosion, the toral absence of missile debris, all eye-witness testimonies, the radar/ATC evidence, the list goes on. Why are you so desperate to dismiss the official stance? I find it all extremely bizarre.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@jeremiahjohnson6082 Did you really just advise somebody else to "listen to scientists, architects, pilots and physicists" (who I'm pretty sure fall under the umbrella of 'scientists')? You do realise that the number of experts you refer to equate to less than 0.1% of their respective communities and many, MANY others feel very differently and don't share their fundamentally flawed, utterly refuted beliefs? So in reality, it is YOU who should try listening to the experts instead of the tiny, insignificant, fringe lunatics who happen to hold some academic credentials in some (half the time very loosely) affiliated field of expertise.
Lying about being an aerospace engineer too, that's pretty shameful. You literally just told me on another thread that planes are made from "almost paper", and we're meant to believe you have knowledge of aerospace engineering?? I don't think so. To say those planes couldn't have achieved those speeds at sea level without "destroying themselves" is lunacy and easily debunked by 100 videos here on youtube of large aircraft (some being the same model planes as were used that day) achieving similar speeds during extremely low passes without any issues at all. Test pilots take them beyond their V-limits all the time. What you're seemingly confused by is that you believe the second a plane exceeds these limits, it instantly breaks up which is so easily debunked by literally thousands of examples. Those limits are simply what Boeing will guarantee the structural integrity of the airframe. What you're also failing to recognise is that those planes DIVED to achieve those speeds and only exceeded any limits momentarily before crashing. I'm afraid this is what happens when you obtain all of your information from notoriously unreliable conspiracy websites whilst refusing to look at the actual scientific studies that actually hold weigh in the academic community, NOT like that pseudoscientific study of Hulsey's that was paid for by truthers who insisted he began with the presupposition that fire didn't bring WTC7 down. If that were true, can you please explain to me how the fire fighters tending to 7 had managed to predict the collapse several hours before it fell?
Can you also tell me at what speed a 757 at sea level will instantly break up or do you admit you have no clue as to what you're talking about?
I'll await your deflective answers and failure to address what I've asked, just as you failed to acknowledge the fundamentals of what i said in my previous comment on the other thread here.
Ps. Hitting those towers was easy, stop making it to be something difficult when it so wasn't. They had about 200 miles of clear skies to line themselves up in near perfect flying conditions. They could have literally just put a mark on the windscreen with a sharpie and lined it up with the towers lol.
Pps. No buildings collapsed at freefall and there isn't a single demolitions expert who agrees with you that the twin towers were demoed. By all means name one and prove me wrong.
1
-
@jeremiahjohnson6082 I've been watching too many movies?? 🤣 You're completely and utterly detached from reality so i find that pretty rich. Like I said, there's literally videos here on youtube of the same model planes and other similar aircraft, doing up to 500mph low passes. You're just repeating the lies you've read on truther websites, twisting reality to suit your/their agenda. This myth has been utterly refuted and you seem to be forgotting, we KNOW those plane hit those buildings and we KNOW what speed they were flying. The FACT it actually happened alone kinda refuses your spurious buIIsh!t.
Your "superhuman feats" were in fact pretty fkng easy and many people (some complete novices) have done exactly what they did in flight simulators without issue.
You say they become uncontrollable, but what exactly do you think was going to happen?? Do you think the planes would suddenly jump off course, change direction, nose dive instantly into the ground or what? Planes can EASILY reach those speeds during a dive and anybody who claims otherwise doesn't know what the hell they're talking about. Again, Boeing have no issues and the fact it happened in front of many witnesses and we have thr wreckage and remains of those on board, as well as much more independent evidence, your arguments from incredulity don't really cut it. Keep repeating your lies but facts remain facts regardless sorry.
What are you talking about Top Gun pilots?? Hanjour made a STANDARD TURN, coming out of it at 2000ft over 4 miles from the Pentagon. He simply then dipped the nose and lined himself up, throttled up to gain speed. There really is NOTHING difficult whatsoever about it, as several pilots have confirmed. You want a name? Just one? Try Giullio Bernacchia, a pilot in the Italiam airforcefor 27yrs before becoming an airliner Captain, dligjt instructor and examiner who flew NATO AWACS as a Commander.. Let me know if you want any others.
The fact you also say WTC7 is a "proven demolition" again exposes just how readily you'll lie. Proven by whom and how?? LIAR!! Explain to me how the fire fighters managed to predict the collapse several hours before it fell? Lucky guess? 🤔
Years from now truth will come out you say? You've been saying this for over 20yrs lol, keep dreaming you crackpot.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@jayabacromby675 Sorry but i have to respond to another of your ridiculously obtuse comments, i can't help myself. You claim that no steel structure has ever collapsed from fire before or since 9,/11 which, like everything else you've claimed is utter horsesh!t and what happens when you blindly believe the notoriously unreliable sources you clowns insist on using. The Plasco building in Tehran, the Sight and Sound theatre in Pennsylvania, the Kader Toy factory in Thailand all collapsed PURELY from fires without taking HUGE structural damage from a 200 ton mass slamming into them at around 500mph, striking with the force of around 1.35 tons of TNT. How many more examples would you like, or is this where you move the goalposts to deflect from how very wrong you are?
Next you claim jet fuel can't produce heat anywhere near hot enough to soften the steel which is again, pure, unadulterated horsesh!t. First off, it wasn't the jet fuel that created the heat that resulted in the collapse. The jet fuel simply ignited the fires which were then sustained by the contents of the towers. At around 550 degrees, steel has lost FIFTY PERCENT of it's initial strength. Temperatures exceeding this are easily reached during standard office/hydrocarbon fires, are you seriously saying otherwise? 🤨 Another fundamental factor you've failed to acknowledge is that the steel that gave way and led to the collapse was under load. WAY greater load than it was designed to withstand due to the load from the columns taken out by the plane impacts was transferred to those remaining columns that eventually buckled from the heat. You should also be aware that we literally have footage from the choppers of entire floor slabs sagging and columns buckling under the heat and load. But no, let's ignore such empirical facts and invent magical explosives immune to blasts, heat and geometry 🤪👍🏼
You then go on to claim the towers should have toppled and not falling straight down and even try to invoke Newtonian physics into your argument, thus demonstrating a total misunderstanding of either the design of the towers, or the physical laws you're referring to. Can you specify which laws you claim were violated so we can discuss this in further detail? In regards to the way they collapsed, both towers DID topple sideways as we can see quite clearly in the footage and images available. Due to the design of the towers (ie. A tube in tube, non-concrete reinforced, steel framed tower that was mostly open space), the ONLY way they could have collapsed was straight now which was the path of least resistance. As i said, the top sections toppled greatly during the onset of the collapse, closing the gaps created by the plane strikes as that was the path of least resistance. What happenes then however was that something called gravity corrected the angular momentum. To continue on a sideways trajectory would require a huge lateral force that simpy wasn't present. Unless BSME in your case is an acronym for BuIISh!t MErchant, no you are not given how weak your grasp of basic physical principles. Like other dumb twoofers around here, you mistakenly apply Newtonian law to solid towers which OBVIOUSLY have different outcome to a tower which is mostly air, designed specifically to create acre sized open office space.
Finally you resort to an argument from authority and a pathetically feeble one at that. Thousands of engineers and architects? Sounds impressive until you realise there are several MILLION engineers and architects out there who seemingly have no issue with the official studies and other independent studies of WTC7 of which all concluded it feel due to fire. There is one exception that is the pseudoscientific study of Leroy Hulsey which was funded by twoofers who insisted the study begins with the presupposition that fire didn't bring it down. That my friend is NOT how science works which I'm sure even you will admit.
It gets worse when you realise that it's taken long over a decade to collect those 3000 signatures and 80% percent of them have ZERO experience or understanding of structural engineering, high-rise construction or controlled and come from completely unrelated backgrounds. I mean, who cares what say, a softwate engineer or an electrical engineer think on such matters?? Their opinions count for nothing. The number of relevant architects and engineers then falls.to around 600. That's 600 out of several million and they have failed time and time again at providing ANY reliable evidence to support their claims. They purposely tried to fraudulently bypass the scientific process and even sacked the organisations founder for being too much of a crackpot even for them! 🤣🤣 Weakest argument from authority I've ever heard.
Tell me, if it was such a shock that builidng 7 fell, how is it the fire fighters tending to it predicted its collapse several hours prior to it falling? 🤔 Lucky guess work? Psychic premonitions? They were in on the alleged conspiracy? Or was it simply the fact that the building had sustained MASSIVE structural damage and had fires raging across several floors of which were left to freeburn for several hours beyond what the fireproofing was rated at? Another fact you the beIIend brain-donor 'CoolLikeDat' that you've befriended has shamelessly ignored on 18 occasions 🙄 Are you going to show him how it's done or will you just shamelessly ignore this fundamental fact too?
1
-
@jayabacromby675 Aw diddums, i didn't realise you were such a snowflake that words hurt you. I'm sorry, i won't cuss any more. Funny how you're happy to insult others who disagree with your inane, pseudoscientific lunacy but the second somebody treats you in the same manner, you act all butthurt and offended. Obviously this is just a blatant deflection tactic you're using due to you being faced with facts that blow your ridiculous conspiracy theories and absurd, unscientific claims out of the water. You won't answer because you know full well you have no rational comeback. This is why after 20yrs of crying about conspiracy, you're still resigned to youtube comment threads achieving absolutely nothing. You're part if a dying cult and you, like every other twoofer I've encountered are a fact-dodging coward. But hey, don't bother responding, I'm only using you to highlight to others how evasive, cowardly, uneducated, bigoted and dishonest you are. If you were honest and genuinely seeling truth, you'd embrace the full body of evidence like we do, rather than burying your head to any conflicting facts. Keep running for all i care, you've served you purpose regardless.
1
-
1
-
There WAS a "full investigation". One that has stood up to the most intense scrutiny and one that is backed up by all the available data. You've made claims about violated physical laws, failed to acknowledge how any demo devices could possibly have survived the impacts causing the towers to collapse precisely at the impact zones; you failed to acknowledge how steel is reduced to 50% of its initial strength at 550 degrees of which we KNOW temperatures reached that day; you failed to address how the fire fighters predicted the collapse of WTC7 hours before it fell; you failed to acknowledge the other steel-framed structures that have collapsed prior to and since 9/11; you've failed to respond to the fact the towers couldn't physically have toppled sideways once the angular momentum was corrected by gravity, without amy external, lateral force; you failed to acknowledge we can literally observe the floors sagging, pulling the outer columns inwards as well as the columns buckling moments prior to collapse; Finally you failed to acknowledge the tragically poor argument of a few hundreds fringe architects and engineers make up less than 0.01% of their respective communities have failed to conform to the implicit route every scientist and engineer MUST follow if they wish to be taken seriously. Can you see how much you've failed to address in just 2 comments? You're sadly all the same, it's exactly like debating creationists on evolution, you guys use the EXACT same devilishly dishonest tactics. Again, if you cared about truth then you would want and actively search for answers to the above. People like me will NEVER run away from the evidence or facts and will address any claim made with the capabilities to back them up. If you or anybody else were to show me sufficient, credible evidence of any discrepancies, cover-ups, inside knowledge or the like, i would change my opinion in a heartbeat because to put it bluntly, o couldn't give a damn who was behind it, I'm only interested in reality and truth.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@jayabacromby675 Poker night drinking whiskey sours? Sounds like the making of a good evening 😋👍🏼
Going back to the towers, i have just tried to quickly find the figures that show the designed load limits of the lower floors but struggling to put my finger on them. I used to have a file on my old laptop that contained links to all my sources regarding this subject but it gave up the ghost and completely died on me, thus i lost everything on it. I do know though that the math checks out just fine because like you, this is exactly what i initially thought. When checking the figures though and realising how VASTLY greater the dynamic load of the ever-increasing mass falling through floor by floor, it became obvious that even the lower floors stood zero chance of resisting such a mass. It wasn't just slightly more than their limit, it exceeded it by a huge amount meaning the resistance really was negligible. I will try again to find the figures because i am certain once you see them for yourself that you will agree and this will no longer be an aread of contention for you. A major factor also was that the outer columns that played a massive part of hildingnthe floors up, splayed away from the structure and therefore the floors had bery little holding them up, meaning there would have been even less resistance in those lower floors.
In respect to WTC7, this was a completely different ball game as the design was vastly different to that of the towers. Building 7 implemented the use of longspan beam in order to create a large, open atrium. Such beams are naturally more susceptible to fires due to their length. I have to disagree with you that was very little damage to the building as the fire fighter reports say very differently. They reported a huge gash right through the structure that covered a third of its floors and stretched from the perimeter wall through to the centre of the builidng. There was also a large bulge on one of the walls signifying a great deal of damage along with having one of its bottom corners taken out. The entire structure was leaning. The problem is that we only have footage from the North side whereas all the main damage was the opposite, South side. This makes people think there was little damage but those who's job it was to assess the structure were very clear that the damage was great and that a collapse was inevitable. The fire fighters concluded this several hours before it fell which gave them time to pull everybody out and away from there, creating a safely distanced collapse zone. They simply allowed the fires (which we know raged across at least 14 floors) to freeburn without any attempts to put them out. We know that any non-concrete reinforced, steel-framed structure will eventually collapse if left to burn. This will literally happen 100% of the time simply because heat weakens steel and without concrete reinforcement, it will eventually give way. As i think i mentioned to you before, at around 550°C, structural steel's strength is reduced by around 50% and with it being under load, this brings forth the onset of a collapse even sooner. People also seem to think WTC7 collapsed symmetrically which simply isn't true. What they don't realisenis that the footage only shows the collapse of the outer, more rigid facade once it had become detached from the internal structure. Internally the collapse was highly asymmetrical. We can see this from the way the Penthouse drops into the building before the facade comes down, and we can observe daylight in the top left windows. There is just so much disinformation being spread on these kinds of forums but i would highly recommend you take a look at the Metabunk website where you'll find many highly educated, qualified and experienced engineers and pilots who've converged to discuss all of this in great detail. I think you'll find the conversations there pretty interesting. They weed out the trolls like plague youtube forums like CoolLikeDat here who refuses to acknowledge any opposing evidence and has quite obviously no desire for truth whatsoever. They have strict etiquette guidelines where moderators will ban those shouting abuse or failing to abide by forum rules. It makes the quality of debate on there so much better and they insist all claims are backed up with cited sources. Check it out if you're not familiar with them.
1
-
@coolk3dat754 Sorry stupid, do i really need to explain the difference between a SMALLER, LIGHTER plane carrying MUCH LESS fuel (not "no fuel you beIIend lol) crashing into something at around 180mph, and a LARGER, HEAVIER plane FULLY LADEN with fuel travelling THREE TIMES FASTER? facepalm
Shame Leslie Robertson and all othets involved in the design have no issue with the official stance. In fact they've been praised as it was because of the design, the towers remained standing for so long after the planes hit, resulting in thousands of people escaping and being rescued. Now i thought I'd seen you off by exposing how cowardly you are, refusing to address any evidence that flies in the face of your truly, TRULY ridiculous tinfoil hat lunacy, but it seems you've got drunk again and STILL won't flush 🙈 So....... have you got the name of ONE SINGLE demolition expert who believes the towers were demoed yet? STILL NO???? 🤣🤣🤣🤣
Are you able to explain the fire fighters publicly stating WTC7 was definitely going to collapse hours before it fell? What, no to that one either?? 😂😂😂 Love exposing cowardly kooks like you lol, you make it all worthwhile, thank you 🤗
1
-
1
-
@coolk3dat754 No problem, just as soon as you show me ANY demolition that does ANYTHING other than set off ALL charges in sequence, one after the other as opposed to 15 fkng minutes apart like NO DEMOLITION IN HISTORY, EVER you fkng dunce!! 🤣🤣 Maybe you can show me one that starts from two thirds of the way up as opposed from the bottom up as with every other controlled demolition? Oh i forgot, magical explosives that can withstand an airliner slamming into them at 500mph and all the heat from the ensuing fires. Silly me 🙄🤣🤣 Fire causes explosions in buildings. This has been known ever since buildings have been catching fire. It stands to fkng reason. What doesn't stand to reason is why on earth would they set of charges every 15 minutes all over the building??? 🤣 There's good reason ZERO demolitions experts are making the claims you make; talk about delusions of grandeur!
Now let me explain this for you in the simplest terms. No evidence of explosives whatsoever and no reason whatsoever to invoke them in order to justfiy the collapse means no explosives were used. It would have taken hundreds of people MONTHS to rig those towers ready for demo, with large sections peeled back to reveal the steelwork. All without a single person seeing ir detection by the bomb detection dogs present in the towers right up until the attacks. No remains of the miles and miles of detcord requiresld, no detonator caps found, no demo equipment found whatsoever and again, it would be IMPOSSIBLE to have brought the towers down at the impact zones via a controlled demolition. Using your logic, we should investigate space lasers, alien attack, invisible metal munching monsters and who knows what else. How can anybody be this dumb and get to this point in their life? 🙈 Tragic.
Name a controlled demolitions expert who disagrees with you, you ask? Well, i could name EVERY demo expert on the planet and I'd be right, but if you want an actual name try Brent Blanchard of Protec, or better still, Mark Loizeaux, the CEO of the world's leading authority on controlled demolitions, CDI Inc. who said to bring the twin towers down in that manner via a controlled demolition would be, and i quote, "impossible". But hey, you know better 😏 lol. If you any more names then you be sure to let me know sweet cheeks 😉 Now how about you give me the name of ONE SINGLE name that agrees with you, then explain how both towers collapsed at the impact zones, how the fire fighters knew WTC7 was going to collapse so long before it did. Twenty eight times you've now ignored these fundamental questions, and counting 🖕🏽🤣🖕🏽
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@diannawilson1329 Diane you are so wrong about many things here. There was plenty of gold located in their vaults which was removed after. Yes people certainly used the event to make money, as is always the case, but Larry Silverstein who leased the complex didn't get a double payout, in fact he got paid out only half of his claim. He tried to claim it as two separate events, as would anybody in his position, but they paid it as one, leaving him way out of pocket. His claim didn't even cover the cost of the rebuild let alone all the money he lost in revenue and 100 million lease he still had to pay each year to the Port Authority. The Put Options claim has been debunked and isn't how truthers like to claim it. If you search '911myths Put Options' then you should find the full details of this there.
It isn't true that an unusually large number of people didn't turn into work and by ethnic group, I'm assuming your referring to the mythical 'Jew call' that was made as a joke by a comedian, that truthers ran with as being genuine. There were hundreds of Jews in those towers that day, and a number of the victims who perished were Jewish.
Zero evidence whatsoever of thermite of any kind present, that was proven to rubbish. All they found were red paint chips from the red oxide paint used to prime the steel, and iron microspheres which were present in huge quantities in the materials used in construction, which were liberated in the collapse. There were also huge numbers created during the actual collapse as they're simply the result of sparking.
Never heard of the image of Bush on Epstein island so can't comment on that. Seems a bit silly that one to me but whatever. You are right in that the US government weren't behind it as there's no doubts it was Al-Qaeda, the evidence is overwhelming.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@StinkyCashFlatEarth Ok so once AGAIN you shamelessly ignore any questions put to you simply because the answers blow your beyond ridiculous, religiously motivated, easily refuted, faith-based beliefs out of the water. Yet still you expect others to take you seriously. You literally redefine science to suit your agenda and disagree with EVERY SINGLE SCIENTIST YOU ever on pretty much everything, including, and yet you expect others to take you seriously. You fail miserably at presenting a shred of evidence to support you religiously inspired BELIEFS regarding your physically impossible flat earth, yet you expect others to take you seriously. Delusional, much? 🤨
Low earth orbit? So please define what you SPECIFICALLY believe space to be. Those on board are weightless and surrounded by the vacuum of space.. Can you explain that? Besides, i didn't think you kooky crackpots believed in 'orbits'?? Can you explain how orbits work without gravity? And again, for the fourth time, can you explain how the moon controls our tidal system? AGAIN, how does refusing to needlessly waste HUGE amounts of money and risking people's lives by pointlessly sending people back to the moon, act as evidence the earth is flat???? 🤣 AGAIN, why are all other celestial bodies spherical yet earth has managed to somehow circumnavigate physical law that dictate how planets form? Enough deflecting and pretending to understand what science is or that it somehow supports your stance when everybody (including you) knows what you believe epitomises pseudoscience. Just put down the crackpipe, man the fk up and get a grip. Address what I've asked you fact-dodging coward.
Ps. Feel free to disclose any observations you claim I'm ignoring because all empirical data confirms a globe. Ask Bob Knodel and Jeranism 😂🖕🏽
1
-
1
-
1
-
But he doesn't deny his bias. Given a choice between Trump & Biden, it's a no-brainer. Nobody in their right mind would choose a lying, grifting, anti-democratic, traitorous, tax-dodging, document stealing, threat to national security, authoritarian, sex offender as POTUS. Biden is far from perfect but he's brought results, unlike Trump who failed to achieve a single thing he ran on. Trump literally tried to overthrow the government with lies of election fraud which was his plan from the outset. Turns out, the only election fraud committed was by Trump! 🙈
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@liukang3545 Ok stupid, first off I'm not American so as per usual, wrong from the outset. Secondly, the fact you have managed to convince yourselves that you know more about demolition than the ENTIRE demolitions community speaks for itself and exposes your delusions of granduer and general mental instability. The world's leading authority on controlled demolition literally stated it would be "impossiblecl" to have brought those towers down in that manner via a controlled demolition, but once again you know better because you looked at the footage and concluded with your ZERO knowledge of demolition that it was a demolition. Anybody with the first clue of demolition would know that it would be impossible to bring to the towers down at the impact zone. Demolitions start from the bottom up you tool, not from two thirds up 🤣 Any demo devices located anywhere near those locations would have been instantly destroyed by the plane impacts, let alone manage to survive 60-90 minutes if raging fires! Demo devices are EXTREMELY sensitive to things like heat and geometry, which demo experts understand and which is why there aren't ANY who agree with you 😏🖕🏽 Finally, NO beams exploded you freaking crackpot, what footage are you looking at?? You're such a liar lol. The only thing i can possibly think you're referring to is the air being violently expelled as entire floor slabs are slamming down on to one another. We observe the exact same thing during verinage demolitions which don't use any explosives. You are demonstrably wrong and you have nothing, literally NOTHING to back up your kooky conspiracy claims. And you know it 😉
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@mariacarie5933 When it comes to Russia's invasion of Ukraine then it IS simple. Russia have no right and Putin is NOT invading the Ukraine because of nazism. If you believe that blatant BS then you are insanely gullible and open to all kinds of manipulation. Of course I do not share the same twisted, primitive-minded ideologies that SOME members (approx. 10%-20% according to one spokesperson im 2015) of Ukrainian's Azov battalion hold, (neither does the vast majority of Ukrainian people) and neo-nazism is a problem within the organisation i agree (although not all members share this ideology and there are even Jewish members within it's ranks) but right now the Ukraine is being invaded and they must defend themselves from Russian oppression. In this position they are hardly going to decline anybodies help. Let's assume your belief that all Azov battalion members are nazi's is true, your claim that they now make up 10% of the Ukrainian military doesn't really stack up. According to Wikipedia (your only cited source so far), they now have approx. 900 members (a decline from around 2500 in 2017), whereas the Ukrainian army have a little under 200,000 soldiers. The reality is that the neo-nazi aspect you're basing your entire reasoning on and trying to justify the invasion of an entire country and the indiscriminate bombing of civilian buildings (including maternity hospitals, apartments blocks and movie theatres being used as safe-houses for civilians), makes up a tiny, insignificant proportion of the army, let alone population of Ukraine. There is no justification for this invasion and Putin is a despicable, highly-corrupt individual. You're either breathtakingly gullible or your moral compass is well and truly fkd.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@DFMMei Whatever you say Dee, you clearly believe you're smarter than the ENTIRE scientific community (ie. The world's intellectual elite) and therefore beyond reasoning with. Just explain to me why the Russians conceded defeat and went along with it during the Cold War, and how people were ableto point their directional antennae towards the moon and pick up the radio transmissions of the Apollo astronauts? All the other world's space agencies in on this hoax also right? A man travels up a mountain every single day since the missions, to bounce lasers off mirrors that don't really exist up there, all just to keep the hoax going right? That trans lunar injection thousands of people witnessed in Hawaii and nearby, all just part of the elaborate hoax also? Just like all the rocks studied by thousands of geologists across the globe (and yes, the earth IS a globe 🤨) of which are CLEARLY not from earth, all fake. I could go on and on but like i said, trying to reason with a kook with nothing more than a youtube education, who believes he knows better than the entire scientific community, is akin to trying to teach algebra to a chimp. It's like somebody who can't subtract running into a maths department screaming 'Calculus is a lie!' You're an idiot mate. I have leather shoes displaying higher mental functions.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@ElevateMindVibrateHigh They can make a ballistic missile 155ft long with a 125ft wingspan, that explode TWICE in a blatant kerosene explosion, whilst distributing piece of 757 wreckage as well as the physical remains of all the passengers from AA Flight 77? If believing such baseless, unfounded, faith-based, batsh!t lunacy wasn't enough, you actually believe the government pay people to come on to youtube to counter the utterly debunked, scientifically rejected, kooky buIIs!t spread by you whackjob, of which no rational, critically thinking, sane human being believes anyway, in an attempt to help them cover up the mass murder of their own fellow civilians? Riiiiiight 🤪👍🏼 lol, you're a fkng basket case mate, jog on 🤣🤣🤣
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@thenightstalker6165 So, after you having the audacity to accuse me of "not understanding science" (even though i was the senior tech in a QCMT laboratory in a blue chip company for many years), you fail to understand the difference between a plane going through aluminium sheet cladding and another slamming into a heavily reinforced concrete wall several feet thick. Oh how I love it when you dullards try to invoke science into your arguments, immediately falling flat on your face and exposing your failure to grasp even a basic, high-school level of understanding of forces. A simple experiment for you to try which will demonstrate my point would be to throw a brick at a window and then throw a brick at a wall. You will see how different materials offer differing degrees of resistance. My 5yr old son could grasp this yet you somehow fail to.
REAL experts who specialise in this very topic bave done the math and the impact hole is exactly what we'd expect it to be. But tell me, how big do you believe that hole was? I bet you can't even get this right, thus exposing your blinding ignorance of this topic yet again.
As for the video footage showing a missile, it seems you're hallucinating and not even your fellow twoofers believe such hogwash. 136 people directly witnessed the event and EVERY SINGLE ONE reported seeing a plane. Not a single report of ANYTHING other than a plane. Some of those witnesses were pilots on their morning commute to the airport next door to the Pentagon, who identified it specifically as a Boeing 757. But you're telling me, a 757 pilot couldn't tell the difference between a 155ft jet airliner with a 125ft wingspan that they themselves fly or have flown, and a Cruise missile which are 22ft in length and have a wingspan of 9ft? 🤣 Ever wondrler why nobody takes anything you say seriously? 🤔 On top of this we have 757 wreckage including engines, wheels and landing gear, pieces of fuselage amd the blacl box of which was decoded to show the details of AA77's final 11 flights. We also have the remains of all the passengers on board along with their personal belongings, ATC/radar evidence showing the journey from Dulles airport to the Pentagon which is where the radar track ends. The damage caused to surrounding structure hit on approach confirm perfectly both the wingspan and engine separation of a 757, unless you believe cruise missile zigzag their way to their targets? And how would a cruise missile explode on impact with what was blatantly a hydrocarbon explosion which is very different visually to a missile strike, and how the hell wpuld it leave an exit hole 3 rings in??? 🤣 Sit down little one and stay in your lane.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Compared to Trump, Biden is way more in touch with reality. Trump believes he ran against Obama in 2016, that Biden is going to get us into WW2 & that Jeb Bush got us into Iraq! Don't talk to me about senility 🤣 As for incontinence, he's known as Diaper Don for good reason! Biden is old & showing it, but given a choice between them two, it's a no-brainer. How could anyone in their right mind choose a crooked, lying, anti-democratic, grifting, tax-dodging,, document stealing, authoritarian, sex offender who failed to achieve a single thing he ran on the first time? 🤷
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@jcreature11 So hang on, you actually believe that everybody sat in traffic in their morning commute, including doctors, firemen, clergymen etc. etc. were approached by government officials and asked to lie about what they saw, on the most horrific day in modern, American history, to help them cover up the mass murser of thousands of their fellow American citizens??? 🙈 Jesus christ, you're clearly deranged lol. So you believe all the first responders were paid off, ATC staff, every single eye-witness, all the remains of everyone on board along with plane wreckage from AA Flight 77, all planted without anybody seeing or blowing the whistle???? 🤣🤣🤣 Ok pal, whatever you say 🤪👈🏽
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@Redman680 If you're going to question other people's intellect then you'd better get your facts straight your fkng brain donor. 12 billion?? You mean 2.3 trillion. And why would i just mention that when there was no context to do so?? Yes, he did speak the about it the day prior to the attacks but as usual, you beIIends only offer half a story and completely take it out of context. In reality, this missing money was never actually missing in the way you dullards claim as you aren't actually aware, given that all you've done is parrot the same lies the dumbass twoofer you heard it off. It was simply a case of them having difficulty tracking it between departments due to the them using incompatible, outmoded software. It was made public back in 1999 and spoken of publicly several times up to and after the 9/11 attacks, so to say it was never spoken of again simply highlights how tragically feeble your research efforts have been. The money was later tracked and accounted for so once again, epic fail. Stop talking about things you CLEARLY have no knowledge of.
In respect to using 4 planes in the attack to warrant going to war, just one single plane flown into the towers, the Pentagon, the Capital builidng, Whitehouse or any other prominent structure in the US would have offered the EXACT same level of justification. There would be no need whatsoever to take the insanely high and pointless risk of hijacking 4 planes and doing what they did. And I'm the clown?? Get to fk you window-licking simpleton, stop wasting my time and come back when you've familiarised yourself a little better with the facts. Idiot.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@Michaelfourfour Are you fkn kidding me??? How about tax evasion, trying to coerce the Ukraine president into digging up dirt on his political adversaries, trying to coerce US officials into 'finding votes' that we all know didn't exist, telling THOUSANDS of PROVEN lies during his presidency, his equally corrupt family making millions from his presidency, dividing the nation moreso than ever since the civil war, knowingly lying about election fraud and inciting an insurrection, grifting millions from his cult supporter who in reality he doesn't give two fks about, all based on his lies of election fraud, the list goes on and on and obviously the latest in his long list of criminal activity, stealing hundreds of highly classified and top secret documents whilst crying for the past 7yrs for Clinton to be incarcerated for having just THREE classified documents that don't come close to the level of deceit and danger to national security Trump's has shown himself to be. Seriously, what the fk does that bully-boy, self-proclaimed billionaire (whilst officially being THE worst businessman in the country) have to do for you MAGA cultists to disavow him?? He was right when he said he could literally shoot somebody dead on 5th Avenue and he still wouldn't lose his support from gullible dullards like you. What has he done indeed 🤣 We wont mention all the sexual assault allegations as he couldn't possibly be guilty of those when he openly admits to just 'grabbing women by the pu55y'.....🙄 lol
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Ok cultists, it's this simple. Trump is a serial sex offender/rapist who has lied, cheated & grifted his way through EVERY aspect of his life from education, military service, business, his many marriages, the election, he can't evem play golf without cheating. He has posed a HUGE risk to national security, tried to destroy democracy, lied about election fraud that only HE is guilty of & he literally tried to overthrow the US government. He's guilty of tax fraud of which hes committed his entire business life. He's a terrible businessman who bankrupt not one, but TWO casinos 😂 He is an accused pedophile who hung out with Epstein & Ghislaine, taking advantage of the young girls they trafficked. He runs teen beauty pageants where hes admitted to lurking backstage so that he can watch them getting naked. I could go on all week listing the sickening & highly disturbing actions of this malignant narcissistic, wannabe dictator but trying to reason with a MAGA cultist simply isn't possible. The guy lied over 35 THOUSAND times whilst in office, yet still you believe him. Democrats have come up with the most conservative border bill in decades, one that has the backing of Border Patrol Union & acting CBP chief as well as some republicans, yet Trump has told the GOP to block it PURELY for political gain. Andnyou expect ajyvody of fair mind to believe this pathetic excuse for a man gives a damn about America?? He has called for the termination of the Constitution & wants the economy to crash, crippling millions of American families in the process, again PURELY for points gain. But America first right?? 🤪👍🏽 Anti-democratic, anti-constitution, anti-American traitors, every last one of you 🖕🏽
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@adamallen3365 The military run exercises all the time, nothing whatsoever unusual about that.
I call buIIshit on the guy interviewed u speak of & have no idea who u mean. But yeah, total buIIshit. This tells me you're in the high end of the crackpot scale to believe all this crisis actor boIIocks that the lunatic Alex Jones spreads.
Even if it's true that you were in the Air Force (which so many people like on here but will give you the benefit of the doubt for arguments sake), how in the hell does that qualify you to speak on such issues?? How is being in the Air Force make you an expert in the physics of such an event? Don't be ridiculous. The fact you don't understand how a 120 ton mass (or whatever it was, I can't remember exactly now) can EASILY smash through a few relatively thin steel columns highlights your painfully poor grasp of basic physics. This really is high-school level. The greater the mass & the greater the velocity, the greater the force, or Force = Mass x Acceleration. Do the math & you'll see that the planes could have been travelling less than a third of the speeds they were & would still have struck with enough force to break through them with ease. As it was, those planes struck with a force equivalent to 1.35 tons of TNT. Show me a single physicist who is making this argument & when you realise there aren't any, ask yourself if you seriously believe you've discovered something obvious that they've failed to.
Ok, so claiming the STANDARD manoeuvre Hanjour used to make his final descent provea to me you weren't in the Air Force at all. If you were then it most certainly wasn't in a position that required any understanding of aviation in any way. How the hell is it impossible??? What would make it impossible? Boeing have no issue with it & again, it was a standard manoeuvre used by pilots to lose altitude when coming into land. There was very limited stress in the airframe & planes can EASILY withstand MUCH greater stresses.
No thermite was found in any dust samples, that's been utterly debunked. All they found were red paint chips from the red oxide paint used to prime the steel prior to it being erected, along with iron microspheres which were in the materials used in the construction, liberated in the collapse. They were also formed in huge numbers during the collapse itself as they're simply the result of sparking.
9 trillion dollars did NOT go missing the day before. I think what you're referring to (whilst highlighting the shallow knowledge of this event) is the 2.3 trillion dollars that Rumsfeld mentioned again (it had been made public YEARS prior) there was 2.3 trillion dollars they were struggling to track due to the fact they were using outmoded computer systems which made it very difficult to track between departments. It was never actually missing as it was stolen & was eventually accounted for. Why would they bother announcing it at all if it was all part of a government conspiracy to attack their own people?? Makes zero sense.
Hang on, you're claiming to have been in the Air Force whilst saying it was a missile that struck the Pentagon?? 🤣 Now I am calling buIIshit on your claims of military service. There were tons of wreckage recovered, we have plenty of images of some from the day. Please explain how a missile explodes with an OBVIOUS hydrocarbon explosion which is very different to a missile strike? How would a missile take out lamposts either side of a street over 100ft apart? How would a missile leave an exit hole? How could all 136 direct eyewitnesses report it being a plane & not be able to tell the difference between a 155ft screaming airliner with 125ft wingspan, & a 22ft missile with a 9ft wingspan? How would a missile Alice the tops off trees? Where did all the plane wreckage (including the black box) come from? Where did all the remains of the passengers get there? I could go on but you get my point. Anybody who believes a missile did that really is in no position to be talking in this subject.
Larry Silverstein was FORCED to take out insurance on the World Trade Complex by the Port Authority he leased the complex from. It was in the contract & is standard for businesses to be insured. This is not in the slightest bit suspicious in any way. He actually lost a fortune in the attacks as the claim didn't even cover the cost of the rebuild, let alone all the lost revenue whilst still having to pay the Port Authority 100 million a year in rent.
Other passports were found but yes, one of the hijackers passports was found but to say it was unblemished is just false. It wasn't badly damaged, but there was damage. Passports survive plane crashes all the time & such items are easily expelled in a blast due to their high surface to mass ratio. It was found amongst THOUSANDS of pieces of paper & other debris that survives the blast. There were plenty of the passengers personal items recovered, wtf are you talking about? Go to the 911 memorial museum & you'll see some of them right there, donated by the families. Your knowledge on this subject is clearly very poor & your arguments invalid, all debunked a thousand times.
1
-
1
-
Wow, explosions in a building that was hit hy a plane which spewed thousands of gallon of ignited jetfuel into it, creating uncontrolled fires left to burn for 60-90 minutes. How odd 🤔 Explosions occurring in a collapsing skyscraper, so peculiar! 🙄🤣 Please explain how you've concluded why bombs would used 60 to 90 minutes prior to bringing the building down? How do you account for the fact both towers fell at the impact zones when demo devices are so extremely sensitive to things like heat and geometry? How did such huge buildings get wired for demo without ANYBODY seeing them? It would have taken hundreds of people several months to strip back the towers to their steelwork and wire for demolition. All without detection from the countless people in them each and every day, nor the bomb detection dogs who patrolled daily. All you're doing is exposing your complete and utter ignorance of how controlled demolitions work. To back this up and give you opportunity to humilate me and prove me wrong, please provide the name of just ONE SINGLE demolitions expert who agrees the twin towers were demoed. If what you believe is true, this would be the easiest thing in the world to do, unless of course you believe the entire demolitions community are also in on this alleged conspiracy too lol.
Just for the record, explosions are common place and expected in building fires, even small houses. In the twin towers there were many electrical transformers going pop, debris hitting the floor agter falling a thousand feet, oil-filled generators, LNG, diesel tanks, gas lines fracturing, huge studs shearing, bolts breaking, entire floor slabs slamming on to one another, elevators freefalling into the ground, exothermic reactions of water coming into contact with molten aluminum, the list goes on and on. Will you acknowledge ANY of the incontrovertible facts I've stated? No of course not because you're a tinfoik hat wearing membernof the lunatic fringe and will therefore just label me a 'shill', dish out a load of verbal abuse before running away to claim victory. It's what you guys do and the reason why you're forced to desperately seek an echo chamber on youtube comment sections. I sincerely hope you prove me wrong.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@brianaspeelman9540 Nice deflection Briana lol, what a cop-out. Unlike you, and unfortunately for you, i can back up my claims but then you'd need a genuine concern for truth for that to matter to you, which you clearly lack.
For the record, what you're saying is that all of those witnesses sat in traffic on their morning commute, were paid actors yes? Why not a single account of a missile? How do you explain the fact we can take the security footage ourselves and pause it, zoom in and see what is OBVIOUSLY a large commercial jet? No need to believe the media, which i find such accusations hilarious given that all you do is blindly believe everything you read on notoriously unreliable conspiracy websites, compiled by crackpots as unlearned and gullible as yourself. Carry on with your kooky delusions and pretend you know better than the rest of us when you're so painfully ignorant of even a fraction of the mass of evidence we have available to us, of which categorically PROVES AA Flight 77 crashed into the Pentagon that day. To believe all these people required to be involved and complicit with helping to cover up the mass murder of thousands of their fellow citizens, have kept quiet for all this time without a single one blowing the whistle, it really is the height of lunacy. You are out of your tiny mind and just telling us that 'we will soon see', after 20+yrs of failed conspiracy claims, is pretty weak. I'm afraid you're going to have to do a bit better than that sorry Briana.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@youtube_chaplain I GUARANTEE you've not converted a single individual by spamming youtube videos with primitive ramblings. Not one. Why don't you be more like a real Christian and get out and help people instead of wasting your time doing what you're doing and annoying everyone else?
And no, it isn't about free will as many people (me included) couldn't believe what you believe even if we wanted to. Many people NEED evidence to believe in things, and rightly so. Believing in something without evidence is madness and leaves you open to all kinds of manipulation as history has specifically proven many times. No omnipotent, omniscient deity would ever make blind faith a requirement, and no omnibenevolent deity would ever condemm us to eternal damnation for not being physically capable of believing in something so absurd without ANY evidence whatsoever. If i told you there were invisible unicorns grazing in my back garden, would you believe me or would you need evidence? I rest my case. Another incontrovertible fact worth noting that is also very inconvenient for religion to deal with is that we are simply all products of our environment. If you were born on the bamks of the river Ganges of Hinidi parents for instance, you would bow to Shiva and Ganesh. Are you telling me that BILLIONS of people, through no fault of their own are now burning in hell for the crime of being born in the wrong place, at the wrong time, of the wrong parents? I don't wish to be part of that sorry, not could i if i wanted to. Believe whatever you like, just stop ramming it down the throats of the rest of us who you have literally ZERO chance of converting just by copying and pasting bible verses om every damn thread.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@runnyhunny786 Ah, the old intellectually redundant and desperately deflective 'whataboutism' defence hey? lol Hunter Biden isn't and never has been the president of the United States and it does NOT have ANY impact whatsoever on the fact that Trump is a crook who has knowingly lied and purposely tried to deceive the FBI in his bizarre theft of classified and top secret documents he stored at his golf resort. What his intentions for doing so is anybody's guess, but I'm pretty sure his old buddy Putin would pay a hefty price for some of those documents. Who knows where the documents from the empty files have ended up, and that is frightening. You can play his crimes down all you like, as you bottom-feeding MAGA cultists always do, but history will record Trump and his crooked family for what they are ie. A huge stain on American democracy. For cultists like you, Trump can do no wrong no matter what he does. Thankfully, most decent people aren't so mortally bankrupt or delusional as your kind.
You call his mishandling of top-secret documents a "LITTLE THING', whilst calling for Hilary Clinton to be incarcerated for far less? 🤔 Hmm....typical MAGA cultists double standards. You probably see inciting an insurrection at the Capital builidng a 'little thing' too right? Or sexually assaulting women, stoking up insane conspiracy theories, lying about election fraud, trying to get other congressmen to lie, allowing his family to make hundreds of millions of dollars off the back of his presidency, scamming his cult followers out of millions of dollars in his grift scams, massive tax fraud, or wanting to fk his own daughter, all just "LITTLE THINGS" right? 🤪👍🏼
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@astrofarmer9350 Ok, firstly well done for ignoring the actual fundamentals and glaring holes in your argument. Secondly, google isnt a website, it's a search engine. What actual site did you get thise figures from, give me the name? Of course it's a truther site because ONLY truther sites makes such ridiculously irrelevant comparisons.
Thirdly, we've already proven those attacks were orchestrated by Islamic radicals and ignorance doesn't quite cut it in the real world. You may be able to get away with this sh!t in the court of youtube, public opinion, but in a court of law, not quite so much.
Finally, the passport wasn't fireproof nor did it need to be. Passports often survive plane crashes as paper and the like are easily ejected by a blast due to their large surface to mass ratio. This is nothing new and nothing whatsoever unusual about it. The passport was found prior to the collapse, on the street surrounded by thousands of other pieces of paper that survived unscathed and ejected by the blast. Are you suggesting they were all planted also? And what would be the purpose of planting a passport of somebody who was on the flight manifest which proves he was on the plane? It would be an utterly needless risk.
1
-
@astrofarmer9350 Redone?? No. That had some maintenance work done, they were NOT "redone", whatever that means lol. Is this your evidence for foul play? If so then please explain why both towers collapsed precisely at the impact zones? How does that fit in with this theory? It doesn't, not that it matters to the tinfoil hat wearing lunatic fringe that you're part of. Care to explain how explosives managed to evade the bomb detection dogs present? To rig a tower of that magnitude would take many people many months and according to the world's leading experts in demolition, they wouldn't know where to begin with such a task. They also said that it would be "impossible" to have brought those towers down in that manner via a controlled demolition.......but you know better 😉 In fact there doesn't seem to be a single demolitions expert on earth who agrees with you that the twin towers were demoed. Mainly because they OBVIOUSLY weren't. Any devices located anywhere near the impact zones would have been instantly destroyed by the plane impacts and ensuing fires, yet you believe they managed to survive the plane strikes and without 60-90 of intense heat from the fires thay raged prior to collapse. In reality, we literally have footage of collumns and beams buckling and entire floor slabs sagging from heat in that area prior to collapse.
In respect to the ignited jet fuel flowing down the elevator shafts causing an explosion in the lobby, i assure you this could most definitely have happened and did. You're clearly unaware of the service shafts and the express elevator that was a continuous elevator shaft from top to bottom......and I'm the one who doesn't know anything about this topic you say? 🤔 You've not even read the reports or studies and uet you expect me or anyone else to take you seriously?? Reading those would be far too much like real research and would require a genuine concern for truth which you simply do not have. For you itsall just about conspiracy and you'll happily bury your head to any conflicting evidence which speaks for itself.
Larry Silverstein was just one of a large consortium of investors of which ALL maor decisions required their agreement. He was NOT the sole lease holder as you crackpots would have everyone believe.
The reasoning that they were demoed because of asbestos is beyond absurd and clearly something you've not thought through lol. Tell me, why would they need to strip out all of the asbestos and if it was such a major issue, why lease the buildings in the first place?
Benjamin Netanyahu wasn't even in power in 2001 🙈 lol. And who told you they are such close friends?? I can't seem to find any evidence for this whatsoever, but you just keep clutching those straws you antisemitic scumbag.
1
-
@astrofarmer9350 NO molten steel was found anywhere, feel free to provide any non-conjectural evidence to show otherwise. Molten metal doesn't necessarily equate to molten steel. Was molten metal present? Yes, lots of, just as we'd expect there to be given the temperatures and metals present in such vast quantities, namely aluminium. But no molten steel. A fireman saying he saw molten steel doesn't quite cut it sorry. Without chemical analysis, this is just pure guesswork and assumption. We now know better given the information we have and we can say with the utmost confidence, no molten steel was found.
Nope, dust tested has never shown any traces of thermite and the only ones making this claim is the pair of crackpot conspiracy kooks who purposely tried to fraudulently circumnavigate the scientific process, knowing full well their pseudoscientific buIIsh!t wouldn't stand up to actual scientific scrutiny. This really does expose your blinding ignorance and breathtaking credulity. So desperate to believe the conspiracy. All those two clowns found were red paint chips that came from the red oxide paint used to prime the steelwork st the time of construction, and iron microspheres which were not only present in HUGE quantities in the materials used in the construction that were liberated during the collapse, but were also created in HUGE quantities during the fires and collapse. I cannot believe how easily truthers are duped, it's truly mind-numbing.
Secret societies like who, and what exactly do you believe their purpose to be? Be specific. There's no such thing as the Illuminati if that's what you're suggesting, just like there is no group of wealthy, evil Jews plitting world domination. I do hope this isn't the path you're taking me down because i already think you're an idiot, i don't need it confirming any further. This is what happens when you get your new from places like InfoWars 🙈
Fox news interviewed Bin Laden? Are you sure about that?? Lol, you're literally just making this up as you go. Are you referring to the ABC interview back in 1998? You really are all over tha place and clearly well out of your depth here.
As for Sadam, we KNOW he had been stockpiling WMD's and he'd even used them on his own people, therefore we had very good reason to believe he had them. He had plenty of time to get rid of them however, but that said, we did find his plans for nuclear armament. Last time i checked, nuclear weapons fall into the category of WMD's. Let's just pretend though you're right about America using the attacks to invade Iraq, firstly, why blame the attacks on Saudi nationals? Secondly, using the attacks as an excuse to invade Iraq doesn't mean they orchestrated the attacks. You do realise this right?
1
-
1
-
@astrofarmer9350 You can make these outlandish, baseless claims, but that doesn't make them true. Putting blame using the most flaky, utterly debunked reasoning on a man just because he's of Jewish heritage is most definitely antisemitic. Your remarks about an entire nation being "evil" confirm this. You're an antisemite, own it instead of denying it.
Silverstein and his conglomerate of investors, were victims of this attack, not the purportrators. They lost a fortune in the event which hardly indicates him having any involvement. The asbestos argument is a nonestarter on several grounds, it's utterly absurd beyond reason. To think the best solution they came to would be to hijack civilian planes and convince somebody to commit suicide by flying them into skyscrapers, covering Manhattan in a cloud of toxic dust just to save a few quid on asbestos removal is insane on so many levels, i struggle to take anything you say seriously on this basis alone.
Keep repeating the lie that there was molten steel, but your failure to do as i asked and offer ANY non-conjectural evidence demonstrates otherwise. If you knew of any, you'd be ramming it down my throat, but your only defence seems to be 'nu-huh, yeah there was' which doesn't really hold much weight in the real world. This again serves to show how readily you'll accept erroneous claims with zero evidence as long as it supports your theory; but you immediately reject facts you can easily verify for yourself purely because they oppose your version of events. You're so clearly not somebody who cares for truth.
How would you know it wasn't accounted for in the NIST report when you've not read it?? It wasn't accounted for because there wasn't any, it's that simple. Prove me wrong and show me on what grounds you take it on. Conjectural claims of fire fighters and the like, nothing more. Not good enough sorry.
Your next falsehood is again, your dismissal of another easily verified fact, that there was an express elevator and service shafts from lobby to the top. Yes there were 3 others which weren't connected, but ignoring the express elevator and service shafts again doesn't work in the real world. Take a few seconds to image search 'twin towers elevator system' and you'll see a diagram right there.
60% of the fuel evaporated on impact? Lol, are you serious??? 🙈 Where do you get this inane cr@p from? Cite your source for that little gem. Most exploded in a fireball whilst the rest (difficult to put a figure on how much for obvious reasons) flowed into the structure and caused flash fires whichbwere then sustained by the contents of the buildings. Some without doubt flowed down those shafts as evidence shows.
Again, having work done on the elevator system doesn't mean they were using this as a ruse to plant bombs. That's one hell of an assumption to make to say the least. Have you got ANYTHING whatsoever in the way of evidence to back that up? Of course not, because people like you don't care about evidence. If you did then you wouldn't be a truther. As I said the last time you made this ridiculous claim, how did the bombs go past the detection of the detection dogs? How and why did both towers collapsed precisely at the impact zones? How would any devices located there survive the impacts and 60-90 minutes of intense heat when they're so sensitive to such things? The other thing you fail to acknowledge here is.......the work did get done on the elevators. Those guys were quite obviously elevator engineers. You also ignored what i said about ZERO demolitions experts agreeing with you. Is that not a concern for you?
I'm not even going to acknowledge your Benjamin Netanyahu remark. Show me ANY evidence of his involvement and I'll entertain you. Again, he wasn't even in power at the time.
I know nothing about the secret dealings of the United States? And neither do you!!! At least i admit it rather than deluding because I've watched a couple of episodes of InfoWars!
The towers didnt collapse at the impact zones? 🤯 Wow. You must be THE only individual on either side of the fence making this DIRECTLY OBSERVABLE fact. I mean, have you not even watched the collapse footage?? Evidently not. There's nothing i can say to that. It's like denying the sky is blue whilst refusing to look up. Those towers CLEARLY collapsed at the impact zones; the truth community accept this without question because it cannot be denied.
Your next insane claim tht they turned to dust is again, which is sheer lunacy. Firstly that would completely contradict your explosive/thermite demolition argument, and this is solely the argument of Judy Woods (a proven fraud, liar and general whackjob who's claims were debunked by truthers) and her kooky cronies. The debris pile was as expected and all steel and concrete was accounted for.
Many ironworkers said that did they?? LIAR!!!!!!! Name ONE! That is a shameless lie and shows you for what you really are. The ONLY claims made about steel being cut was by moronic truthers like yourself on the grounds of a single photograph showing a steel column cut at 45 degrees at the base of the towers. The fact this would have done ZERO to assist the collapse, the steel column in question was cut DURING the clean up using an oxy-acetylene torch. By all means prove me wrong but we both know you won't do anything i've asked, because you've proven in spectacular fashion that truth has no meaning to you. All you care about is your intensely stupid conspiracy theories. I guarantee you won't provide a single name or shred of evidence I've requested. Your next response will be to shout abuse to deflect before running away, that's my prediction.
1
-
@astrofarmer9350 As predicted, you failed to answer a single thing i asked you. And with that we can dismiss your bogus claims of molten steel, ironworkers reports of cut columns and all the othet things you've failed to acknowledge and address as more lies you've failed to back up with evidence. Still refusing to acknowledge the existence of the express elevator and service shafts?
As i already told you, the bomb detection dogs were present prior to the attacks and part of the security at the towers. How would all those demo experts who seemingly moonlight as elevator engineers (doing a sterling job of the elevator overhaul, whilst allegedly rigging the place for demolition) got the demo devices past the dogs? What if the dogs had of caught them? A very real and high chance of happening, WAY too risky.
Regarding Israel, I'm not getting into that argument. This is regarding 911, so if you have any actual evidence of them being behind the attacks, let's hear it. If not then I'm not interested as i, unlike you, only follow the evidence.
So Bin Laden was a friend of Bushes and worked for the CIA now too?? 🤣🤣 You're mental. Fox news never interviewed Bin Laden before or after the attacks. Again a 10 second browser search would prove this quite easily. Just search 'Fox News Bin Laden interview' and see what comes up. Nada. Stop repeating lies and LOOK FOR YOURSELF!! It really isn't difficult.
Yes, that image of that one column that forms the basis of all claims of columns being cut, and of which you've created your lie about ironworkers (hence why you can't provide a single name), was at ground level. No need for scaffolding of any sort, you really are just clutching at straws. The image was taken on October 29th 2001 and a separate image from earlier that day literally shows THAT EXACT COLUMN prior to being cut! Send me an email address and I'll send you the before and after photos along with links to back up anything else I've claimed. And contrary to your again, baseless assumptions of my background, i was involved in construction for many years. Why would you presume such things? You just continually set yourself up to fail.
No there are most definitely not secret societies controlling the world lol, get a grip. Your ridiculous conspiracy theories take away from the real corruption going on. You really are straight from the Alex Jones school of crackpots.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@kevdadd1976 What the hell are you taking about Kev?? Jones has been from on pretty much everything from the buIIsh!t Clinton pizzagate nonsense, to the government turning frogs gay, to claiming the moon landing was a hoax, to the goverment causing tornadoes, to Obama being a Kenyan born Muslim, to lies about election fraud, to Lady Gaga's Superbowl performance being a satanic ritual, the list is long lol. He relies on, and purposely targets people like you. Paranoid, delusional, insanely gullible crackpots who believe everything they read on the internet. You probably believe Trump is our saviour, 911 was an inside job and the earth's flat. Jones is a conman, how the hell can you believe a word that lying, grifting scumbag says what's wrong with you?? 🙈
You'll 'pray to god'?? You may as well pray to your toaster for all the good it'll do you, at least your toaster exists.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@shillhunter4380 It's been reviewed and detailed what each and every video showed ie. Fk all. This is just a stupid, desperate, redundant argument that has ZERO bearing whatsoever on anything. You can't show me a single camera located anywhere that should have captured the planes approach making this dumb argument. We don't need footage to know that plane hit, and the fact you choose to bury your head to this mountain of evidence that overwhelmingly confirms it speaks for itself. 136 direct eye-witnesses, identifiable wreckage including the black box, damage to structures and objects hit on approach confirming the dimensions of a 757 perfectly, damage to the Pentagon facade showing where the wing and vertical stabiliser hit, the remains of the passengers on board, their personal belongings, ATC evidence, the list goes on. We don't need footage so why are you dwelling on this bogus argument instead of focusing on the actual evidence we do have that categorically proves beyond all reasonable doubt that AA Flight 77 crashed there that day?
1
-
@shillhunter4380 Nope, can't see any evidence of such a camera and AGAIN as i asked you on another thread which direction was this camera pointing? OBVIOUSLY it would be directed towards the building as its purpose would be to monitor the entrances, exits, windows, fire escapes and the like. It would NOT be pointing away from the building, pointing down the fkng street. Are you that dumb to not realise this? And where was the DVR located? Isn't there a very good chance it was somewhere near the crash site, and therefore destroyed in the event like the camera would? But hey, don't let things like logic, common sense and rationale get in the way of a good conspiracy right? Once again you focus on something irrelevant instead of the actual evidence we do have, of which categorically PROVES AA Flight 77 crashed there? How is anybody meant to take you people serious when this is how you approach things? Even if we have perfectly clear footage, you'd only claim it was fake, CGI, or some other kooky crap. No, what evidence we do have FAR outweighs any footage that could easily be faked. You don't want to acknowledge this purely because it doesn't fit with your agenda.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@jason8952 Pilots for truth, the only pilots on earth who brag about not being able to hit the WTC towers or the Pentagon 🤣 You keep listening to freaks like John Lear and I'll stick with honest pilots who don't have an agenda. I dont care what some truther pilot claims about what a 757 can do when the facts, figures and examples of other aircraft pulling even greater g for longer periods and thus putting the aircraft under more stress and still landing safely PROVE you and those kooks wrong. There are many pilots who have zero issue with any of what we observed that day so we can go back an forth on this one all day. The fact is we saw it happen and we have the evidence to prove what planes they were and who was flying them.
Regarding Leslie Hazzard, she's a "Communications Manager" at that company with a bachelor's degree in Public Relations and a minor in Political Science and she stated in the call that "we don't have much on that". Hardly conclusive Jason lol. I find it most telling also that you are ascribing to her aerospace engineer status given her actual field of expertise. Desperation, much?
Once again, zero evidence just more arguments from incredulity and a couple of names of truthers thrown in for good measure. There are more pilots who accept the official story of 911 than don't, so hardly the most compelling argument you could be making champ. Those planes could EASILY reach those speeds in a dive, deny this all you like for what good it will do you.
And yes, i directed you to a site (right blogger b@stard Pentagon) that provides all the evidence you deny, and you've not bothered to look. That tells me all i need to know, as does your truly fkng moronic claims of numerology 🙈 I'd have as much chance of having a rational discussion with a crranderthal, flat earther. Go try your buIIsh!t with somebody more gullible than because a delusional dullard like you making such seriously deranged arguments as the ones you make, really doesn't have much hope of changing my mind. I go on evidence whilst you deny any evidence that opposes your view. You invent THE most truly absurd reasoning and make such ludicrous, unfounded and baseless claims that simply cannot be tested (eg. One of a kind, never before seen, bunker busting missiles; although this is refuted independently, several times over by the actual evidence we have), and lying through your teeth when it suits. Any evidence that doesn't fit with your agenda you claim as fake. Sorry princess but such handwaving away of such fundamental evidence doesn't quite cut it in the real world and wouldn't make it through the legal process if what you believe were true. But then you'll just say the judges were in on it, threatened, paid off, yada yada yada. I'll ask you again, why are you wasting your time on youtube if you're so confident in your convictions? Why aren't you presenting your findings down the MIT or the like? A riskless position that would actually further your case and potentially even allow you yourself to blow the lid off this entire alleged conspiracy? Why sit arguing with people who don't take you seriously on youtube, achieving literally nothing? Again, it's because you're full of sh!t and know as well as i do that your arguments fail under scrutiny and you'd be laughed out of town. Save your breath, I'm done wasting my time with a dishonest crackpot like you who thinks numerology is a legitimate argument.
1
-
1
-
@jason8952 Except the engines, wheels, landing gear, blacl box, chunks of fuselage and all the other many components recovered from the crash site along with the physical remains of all the passengers? Get the fk out of here you fisting whackjob lol. I know u love to stalk me but do you seriously expect me to change my opinion based on the ludicrous, kooky buIIsh!t some numerology crank is claiming in light of a mountain of evidence that opposes said claims? You're clearly even more delusional than i thought. The level of insanity you've sank to is breathtaking.
Direct eye-witnesses - you just claim fake
Wreckage confirmed as coming from a 757 - you just claim fake
Black box data - you just claim fake
Damage caused on approach that people also witnessed - you just claim fake
Provide you with a website that lists a ton of irrefutable evidence, data and verifiable facts - you just claim as fake.......and so on. I see a pattern forming here 🤔
Yes, Hazzard is NOT an expert in ANY relevant field, you may as well be asking the receptionist on the front desk you clown. Seriously Jason, just fk off and do us both a favour, you're boring the hell out of me now.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@mitsulang So what you're saying is, you expected to see a plane shaped, cartoon silhouette of a plane in a heavily reinforced concrete wall? 🤣 I'm sorry but thats just stupid and nothing more than an argument from incredulity. Watch the video on YouTube of the Phantom F4 jet Sled Test where it hits a wall of similar structure at 500mph and then come back and tell me that again. The "round hole" incidentally you speak was actually the exit hole which most truthers bizarrely believe to be the impact hole. Just goes to show how seriously you take your research. I'd love to hear how you believe a missile would leave such an exit hole by the way lol.
Contrary to what you say, there WAS impact damage from the wings in the walls, as well as damage from the vertical stabiliser.
Next you mention the engines, and no they did not disintegrate and can clearlu be seen in some of the images of the wreckage. The entire engines aren't made of titanium, you know this right?
Regarding Flight 93, that plane nose dived into the ground at 500+mph at full throttle so yes, OBVIOUSLY it broke apart into a million pieces, some of which buried several meters into the ground. Are you telling me this was planted? 95% of the aircraft was recovered from the crash site and surrounding areas by HUNDREDS of volunteers who scoured the area retrieving it all. All planted yes? Lol, come on.
You then claim we know it was the named terrorists because of the "perfectly intact ID found on the ground at WTC" which i can only assume you're talking about the passport found prior to the collapse of the towers. Again, another argument from incredulity. Firstly, that is NOT how we know it was them. We know it was them from several lines of intelligence collated and the fact they were on the flight manifest which would make planting this passport (which is what you're suggesting) utterly pointless and nothing but a needless risk. In reality, passports often survive plane crashes and paper products often survive explosions due the high surface to mass ratio. This is well understood science so your arguments simply don't stand up to scrutiny sorry. This is the same with literally every truther argument made which is why the overwhelming consensus of experts reject there ridiculous conspiracy theories.
1
-
1
-
@BrianD1961 Jesus Christ, that was enough to send a glass eye to sleep, it really was 🥱 Superfluous hogwash with zero substance. Do you not understand the simple concept of burden of proof? Seemingly not. You're clearly so lost in your delusion and balls deep down your imaginary rabbit hole, you've gone full Tonto and subscribed to the breathtaking insanity of Judy Woods. In answer to your question, who refuted her work, as i stated previously, this was done quite magnificently by a member of the so-called 'truth' community; a physicist by the name of Greg Jenkins who critiqued her work and calculated the energy required to do what that crooked whackjob Wood's claims, would be equivalent to the power output 5x that of planet earth. It's lunacy of the highest order. She has been exposed and proven to be a snakeoil salesman who has manipulated data and outright lied to try and bolster her deranged pseudoscience. In terms of truthers, you rank alongside the no-planers and make up the just a tiny percentage of the truth community. You are the fringe of the fringe. I on the other hand, simply follow the data and have no bias. If somebody were to show me sufficient, credible evidence of a conspiracy, i would change my opinion in a heartbeat. So far nobody has been able to and whether you accept it or not, the official stance backed by much science, has so far stood up to intense scrutiny. What i believe is believed also by the overwhelming consensus of experts in every related field. The burden of proof is yours.
1
-
1
-
@Bogsyism You mean squibs? How ironic you correct other people's spelling. In reality they weren't squibs at all. What we can see is air violently being expelled as entire floor systems are slamming down on to one another. That air has to go somewhere, you accept this right? Drop a heavy book on to a dusty table and watch what happens. We observe the exact same thing in verinage demolitions of which don't use explosives. There isn't a single demolitions expert claiming the twin towers were demoed. Does that alone not tell you something? If it was as you believe, the entire demolitions community would be all over it.
As for "building 3", i can only assume you're talking about WTC7 of which the fire fighters predicted the collapse several hours prior to it falling. It was that obvious a collapse was imminent as ANY non-concrete reinforced, steel-framed structure will collapse if left to freeburn, as WTC7 was. It hadn't been hit by a plane, but it was hit by thousands of tons of debris from one of the collapsing towers. This resulted in widesprrad fires across a number of floors of which the fire department decided to leave burn, save risking any further loss of life. For the record, the planes didn't the towers down; fire did, just as with WTC7. The fact both towers collapsed at the impact zone is proof they weren't demoed as any explosive devices would have been destroyed instantly by the immense impacts and ensuing fires.
Next you jump to an argument from authority, yet fail to realise just how weak that argument is. 80% of those so-called experts have NO experience or knowledge of high-rise construction, structural engineering or controlled demolition. They are comprised of people from completely unrelated backgrounds such as software engineers, electrical engineers etc. etc. That brings the total who have any experience or knowledge on anything remotely related down to around 600 people. That's 600 out of the MILLIONS of architand engineers out there ie. They're the lunatic fringe, nothing more. Its taken over a decade to gather such a tragically, feeble following and in that time they've completely failed in everything they've done and exposed as lying, cheating scumbags who have fraudulently tried to bypass the scientific process to cash in on their whacky conspiracy claims. The AIA even came forward to state that they do NOT share their views in any way shape or form, so the AIA members alone far outnumber those crooked crackpots over at ae911truth. So much for your argument from authority 🤷🏽♂️
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@Bogsyism I was going yo leave it at that but i feel you need publicly shaming to make an example of. If what you're saying were true, why can't you provide the name of this imaginary demolitions expert you speak of? Guess we'll just have to take your word for it 🙄 Given how you've shown yourself to be a fact-dodging, bare faced liar, that isn't going to happen. Provide names or we can safely assume you're just lying again. If youtube allowed links still i would take great pleasure in destroying your brazen lies with video footage of a fire fighter that day, HOURS before the WTC7 collapsed stating publicly that it was, and i quote "definitely" going to collapse. Because of the issue with sending links, the best i can do is provide direct quotes from the very fire fighters who tended to and assessed WTC7 and made the decision to pull the operation, allow it to freeburn and create a safe collapse zone to wait for the inevitable collapse. Here's a few of many for you to bury your thick head to.
"The biggest decision we had to make on the first day was to clear the area and create a collapse zone around the severely damaged WTC 7 a 47-story building heavily involved in fire. A number of fire officers and companies assessed the damage to the building. The appraisals indicated that the building's integrity was in serious doubt. I issued the orders to pull back the firefighters and define the collapse zone. It was a critical decision." - Dan Nigro
Chief of Department FDNY
"we were pretty sure that 7 World Trade Center would collapse. Early on, we saw a bulge in the southwest corner between floors 10 and 13, and we had put a transit on that and we were pretty sure she was going to collapse. You actually could see there was a visible bulge, it ran up about three floors. It came down about 5 o’clock in the afternoon, but by about 2 o’clock in the afternoon we realized this thing was going to collapse." - Deputy Chief Peter Hayden
"There was a huge gaping hole and it was scattered throughout there. It was a huge hole. I would say it was probably about a third of it, right in the middle of it.....On the north and east side of 7 it didn’t look like there was any damage at all, but then you looked on the south side of 7 there had to be a hole 20 stories tall in the building, with fire on several floors. Debris was falling down on the building and it didn’t look good.
That was the first time really my stomach tightened up because the building didn’t look good......Then this other officer I’m standing next to said, that building doesn’t look straight. So I’m standing there. I’m looking at the building. It didn’t look right, but, well, we’ll go in, we’ll see. So we gathered up rollups and most of us had masks at that time. We headed toward 7. And just around we were about a hundred yards away and Butch Brandies came running up. He said forget it, nobody’s going into 7, there’s creaking, there are noises coming out of there, so we just stopped." - Captain Chris Boyle NYFD
"they were worried about 7 World Trade Center, which is right behind it, coming down. We were up on the upper floors of the Verizon building looking at it. You could just see the whole bottom corner of the building was gone. We could look right out over to where the Trade Centers were because we were that high up. Looking over the smaller buildings. I just remember it was tremendous, tremendous fires going on. Finally they pulled us out." - Richard Banaciski NYFD Firefigher
Don't talk to me about denial you mental fkn midget. I'm not the fact dodging coward who refuses to address the facts, you are 🖕🏽😉🖕🏽
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@xKNO1x Sorry stupid but the fact you think a fireman is capable of discern the chemical composition pf molten metal in those circumstances by site speaks volumes. You're clearly an idiot so your opinon doesn't really count sorry. I will ask you the same question again just to highlight your cowardice and reluctance to accept any conflicting that oppose your tinfoil hat lunacy. You refuse to answer because you know full well the only logical answer debunks your unlearned, kooky hogwash. The fire fighters who assessed the structure stated publicly that a collapse was inevitable. You lose.
Ps. Thermite isn't used in demolition and was only invented by the bogus organisation of crooks and whackjobs that go by the name of ae911truth, because their initial assertions of explosive demolitions were utterly refuted. No evidence whatsoever of any thermite or controlled demolition in general.
Just for good measure, here's the fire fighters themselves speaking about WTC7 to shut you up once and for all:
"The biggest decision we had to make on the first day was to clear the area and create a collapse zone around the severely damaged WTC 7 a 47-story building heavily involved in fire. A number of fire officers and companies assessed the damage to the building. The appraisals indicated that the building's integrity was in serious doubt. I issued the orders to pull back the firefighters and define the collapse zone. It was a critical decision." - Dan Nigro
Chief of Department FDNY
"we were pretty sure that 7 World Trade Center would collapse. Early on, we saw a bulge in the southwest corner between floors 10 and 13, and we had put a transit on that and we were pretty sure she was going to collapse. You actually could see there was a visible bulge, it ran up about three floors. It came down about 5 o’clock in the afternoon, but by about 2 o’clock in the afternoon we realized this thing was going to collapse." - Deputy Chief Peter Hayden
"There was a huge gaping hole and it was scattered throughout there. It was a huge hole. I would say it was probably about a third of it, right in the middle of it.....On the north and east side of 7 it didn’t look like there was any damage at all, but then you looked on the south side of 7 there had to be a hole 20 stories tall in the building, with fire on several floors. Debris was falling down on the building and it didn’t look good.
That was the first time really my stomach tightened up because the building didn’t look good......Then this other officer I’m standing next to said, that building doesn’t look straight. So I’m standing there. I’m looking at the building. It didn’t look right, but, well, we’ll go in, we’ll see. So we gathered up rollups and most of us had masks at that time. We headed toward 7. And just around we were about a hundred yards away and Butch Brandies came running up. He said forget it, nobody’s going into 7, there’s creaking, there are noises coming out of there, so we just stopped." - Captain Chris Boyle NYFD
"they were worried about 7 World Trade Center, which is right behind it, coming down. We were up on the upper floors of the Verizon building looking at it. You could just see the whole bottom corner of the building was gone. We could look right out over to where the Trade Centers were because we were that high up. Looking over the smaller buildings. I just remember it was tremendous, tremendous fires going on. Finally they pulled us out." - Richard Banaciski NYFD Firefigher
1
-
1
-
1
-
@stevesherman1743 Ok stupid, the fact you can't even spell 'dumb' tells me everything i need to know, let alone the fact you can't tell the difference between a bottom up collapse and a top down collapse you utter fkn moron. Wtc7 wasn't hit by a plane correct, well done. It was however hit by THOUSANDS of tons of debris from the collapsing north tower which caused HUGE structural damage and fires across many floors which the fire department decided to let freeburn, meaning a collapse was inevitable. The fire fighters who assessed it stated a collapse was inevitable so unless you believe they were part of this mental conspiracy you believe in, you're flat out wrong.
Regarding your imagjnary "squibs", in reality what we were observing was air being violently expelled as floors slammed down on to one another internally, EXACTLY as qe observe in a verinage demolition if which don't use explosives. Stop talking about things you CLEARLY have no understanding of, pretending to know more about demolition than the entire demolitions community given how there isn't seemingly a single demolitions experts claiming the twin towers were demoed. What a clown you are.
As for people carrying pieces of aircraft wing at the Pentagon, it's made from sheet aluminium, ie. it's light as a feather!!! What kind of feeble fk are you?? Not a Boeing you say? Airliner pilots on their morning commute to the airport next door who fly 757's for a living and watched the aircraft approach and impact said it was most definitely WAS a Boeing, so i think I'll go with those professionals who were actually there as opposed to some illiterate, tinfoil hat wearing whackjob on an intellectual par with fkng mildew.
1
-
@432b86ed Mick West is INFINITELY more honest and unbiased than Tony fkn Szamboti, and West and others have utterly decimated those crooks over that bogus organisation ae911truth truth who actively and fraudulently tried to bypass the scientific process in an attempt to cash in on the credulous. Ae911truth are as crooked as can be and make up the most insignificant bunch of nobodies, 80% of which have no relevant backgrounds or experience. They make up less than 0.01% if their respective communities and are commonly known as the luntic fringe. Regardless of details within the the NIST studies, there have been several key studies and whereas they may differ in the smaller details, they ALL concluded fire to be the cause of collapse........except of course, the one funded by the whackjobs over at ae911truth who not only funded it, but insisted it began with the presupposition that fire was NOT the cause. That's as far removed from scientific enquiry as you can get! Pseudoscientific hogwash, nothing more. Do you believe the fire fighters tending to WTC7 were in on this alleged conspiracy? I'm going to assume not, in which case, how do you account for their insistence that a collpase was "definitely" gojng to happen and was therefore inevitable, several hours prior to it falling? Either they were psychic or it was that obvious. Which is it?
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@kenhasibar2450 Ok Ken, let's first punch a vacuous hole in your bizarre claim that fire has never brought down a steel structure by giving you examples such as the Plasco building in Tehran, the Sight and Sound theatre in Pennsylvania and the Kader Toy Factory in Thailand. How many more would you like? Yet more evidence that truthers will lie through their teeth in order to try and validate their lunacy.
Secondly, the entire premise of your ridiculous conspiracy theory and overall argument is false, in that no steel needed to melt, only weaken. At around 550 degrees, steel has lost about 50% of its initial strength. Such temperatures are easily reached in standard office/hydrocarbon fires and given how this steel was under such immense lpad, it's nothing short of a miracle they remained standing as long as they did. The plane's didn't bring the towers down so that's just another strawman argument, well done.
Ps. I notice you failed at naming a single demolitions expert who agrees that the twin towers were demoed. I rest my case lol, but you know better 😉👍🏼
Pps. I couldn't possibly be less of a Trump fan (in my experience the majority of ReTrumplicans are firmly in your conspiracy camp, champ. I'm an atheist although how that's relevant i don't know. Being a gullible sort like yourself, I'd have said you were more likely to have an imaginary friend than i. As for 'knowing science', I'm the lead technician in a QCMT laboratory so am guessing I'm probably a little more clued up on such subjects than yourself. The fact you don't understand how no steel required to melt and that fire weakens steel kinda speaks for itself. You've not even bothered to read the actual scientifoc studies yet have the audacity to call others scientifically illiterate and claim ultimate knowledge on the subject. You're clearly a very deluded individual suffering delusions of grandeur.
1
-
@kenhasibar2450 So again, you can't name ONE demolitions expert who agrees the twin towers were demoed? Speaks for itself.
1000+ engineers?? Wow! What about the millions who have no issue with the official studies? You might also want to learn how science works and then you'll understand how irrelevant that feeble number of crackpots are until they follow the rules and go down the implicit route of peer-review. For the record, out of the 3000 signatories, over 80% of them have no background, knowledge, experience ir understanding of structural engineering, high-rise construction or controlled demolition. That brings the total down to around 600, all of which have seemingly forgotted how science works. The opinions of say, a software engineer or an electrical engineer arr meaningless, so you cling on to your 0.01% of the engineering community and I'll stick with what the real experts say and have backed up with actual studies. That has to be THE weakest argument from authority I've ever heard and highlights the desperation of your argument.
Truthers are ironically all liars who would rather ignore any opposing facts before running away, hence why nobody of worth takes a blind bit of notice of you people. You will no doubt do the same, in fact you already have. Like i said, fire weakens steel and in STANDARD OFFICE/HYDROCARBON FIRES, temperatures of 600 degrees are common. Again, at around 550 degrees, steel has lost around 50% of its initial strength. What part of that are you failing to comprehend? This isn't open for debate, these are simply facts which remain facts whether you accept them or not. We literally have footage of entire floor slabs sagging from the heat and columns and beams buckling prior to collapse.
To designers of the twin towers have no issues with the fact they collpased so it's pretty dishonest of you insinuating otherwise. Your argument is also a strawman given that the towers didn't collapse from the plane impacta so did their job. They fell because of FIRE. They remained standing for 60-90 minutes after the impacts and both collapsed precisely at the impact zones which I would love you to explain to me. How exactly did any explosives of fictional thermite charges survive the plane imapcts and ensuing fires?? Impossible. Literally, impossible which is the word used by the world's leading authority in controlled demolitions when asked how they would go about bringing down those towers in the manner they fell. But hey, you know better because you've watched a conspiracy video by Michael Moore 🙈 lol.
And yes, weakened steel DOES explain how the entire towers came down which you'd know if you hadn't lazily watched conspiracy videos rather than reading the actual studies which explain the how. Allow me to enlighten you the simple concept that explains what happened. The planes severed a number of structural supports when they struck with the force equivalent to that of 1.35 tons of TNT. The load those columns were under was transferred to the remaining columns which were heavily involved in fire due to them being situated in the location the ignited jet fuelled flowed, igniting everything in its path. Once this steel that was under an immense load (greater than it was designed to take) got hot enough and sufficiently weakened, they gave way which led to a chain reaction of events that brought them to the ground. Each floor had a set static load limit of which was MASSIVELY exceeded by the dynamic of the floor above. With each floor, the mass became greater which was the reason there was acceleration. The resistance was negligible.
Thermite isn't used in demolition because it isn't a reliable or efficient means to cut steel and there is NO evidence whatsoever of any such means being used. The only reason the crooks over at ae911truth invented this outlandish theory is because their claims of explosives failed under scrutiny.
Next you claim the steel qas immediately removed which simply isn't true. NO steel was taken away until it was reviewed and deemed to have no bearing on the collapse. Any that was of interest was put aside, taken to Fresh Kills and studied. No evidence found whatsoever of any explosives or thermite.
Regarding the passport, this was found BEFORE the collpase and was picked up by a passer-by. If you're insinuating it was planted, feel free to explain the purpose of taking this needless risk when we know full well he was on board as he was on the flight manifest? This made planting it completely pointless. Passports often survive plane crashes and paper often survives explosions due to its high surface to mass ratio. Literally hundreds of thousands pieces of paper survived and were all over the ground where the passport was found. The fact you tell me i need to do some research when you've done literally NONE yourself is laughable. Watching conspiracy films is in no way, shape or form classed as research sorry. Try reading the actual studies, how about that?? You're simply part of the tinfoil hat wearing lunatic fringe of whom deserve all the ridicule they receive. Please don't pretend your movement holds any weight because in academia, you're a laughing stock, don't deluded yourself otherwise.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@swilsonmc2 Well to most people that isn't how it sounds at all, and again, to think this very intelligent individual would out himself like this in a pre-recorded interview is insane. Get real. Even if he did slip up, it was pre-recorded and not live and would have INSTANTLY realised and cut the interview to start again. His words make sense to most and fits perfectly with what the fire department have stated, so again, are you suggesting the fire fighters were in on this alleged conspiracy? And how has he backpedaled? Not to my knowledge he hasn't so can you clarify what you mean by that? Do you believe the fire fighters were in on this alleged conspiracy??
Quit lying about Jowenko, he made his feeling quite clear on this so why you're lying so shamelessly on this I don't know. You're either very confused or very dishonest. He detailed how any demolition devices would have burned up way before the collapse and to have brought them down from where the planes hit would have been "IMPOSSIBLE".
How on earth do demolitions teams try to bring buildings down at impact zones??? By impact zone I'm referring to the location the planes struck. Demolitions happen from the bottom up, not two thirds of the way up. The world's leading authority on demolition (Mark Louizou of CDI Inc.) publicly stated it would be "IMPOSSIBLE" to achieve this via a controlled demolition, hence why there isn't seemingly a single demolitions expert on earth who believes the twin towers were demoed. But hey, you know better right? 🙄 So that's 2 demo experts who literally used the word impossible, and not a single one claiming the towers were demoed.
You don't see much evidence for it collapsing?? Who cares what you see, you're no expert in anything related and are clearly very conspiratorial minded and therefore have no concern for truth. It looks very much like a collapse to the experts and sorry, but it's their opinions that count on such matters, not yours. The way the penthouse drops shows how the structure is COLLAPSING internally and being as you're obvious unaware, demolitions are EXTREMELY loud. Yet this was silent 🤔 No evidence whatsoever of any demolition yet we do have a scientific study that's stood up to global scrutiny explaining the how and why, as well as assertions on the day from the fire fighters that the building was "DEFINITELY" going to collapse. How desperate are you to believe this conspiracy? Bizarre.
And no, the twin towers did in no way, shape or form turn to dust, that's a ridiculous claim and one that hold zero weight whatsoever. The amount of debris removed from that site tallied up just fine. I take it you're a Judy Woods fan? THE kookiest of all the crackpot conspiracy theorists out there pushing this lunacy. She's a liar, fraud and con-merchant.
What do you mean you don't see much evidence they collapsed from office fires??? What exactly would you expect to see in your expert opinion?? We literally have footage from the choppers of entire floor slabs sagging and beams and columns buckling from the heat at the impact zones, prior to collapse!! I'd say that's pretty strong evidence for most personally. Steel weakens when heated, that's why we use fire-proofing. When the planes hit, they stripped that fire-proofing (which prior photos show was poorly applied in the first place) so it was nothing short of a miracle they remained standing as long as they did.
At 550 degrees, steel has lost HALF of its initial strength. Those temperatures are easily reached in standard office/hydrocarbon fires so, no mystery whatsoever.
As for how the top sections took the larger bottom sections out, if you bothered to actually read the studies then you'd understand perfectly. It's quite simple. The planes hit and smashed through a number of steel columns. Those columns were load bearing therefore the load was transferred to the remaining columns. Obviously there were huge fires located at the impact zones due to all the ignited fuel that spewed from the planes, and those fires weakened the remaining steel columns that were now under way more load than they were designed to withstand. Once they were sufficiently weakened, they buckled and the top sections came toppling down on to the floor immediately below. Each floor had a static load limit of which, the dynamic load of those top sections HUGELY exceeded when it came slamming down on to them. With every floor it smashed through, it picked up mass and therefore became an even greater dynamic load with every floor it picked up, hence the acceleration. Truthers tend to see the lower structure as one solid mass rather than individual floors with expanses of space between them. The towers were 95% air as opposed to being solid Jenga towers that truthers try to apply the physics to. The dynamic load exceeded the static load limits by so much, although there was measurable resistance, it was negligible.
The towers did NOT collapse at freefall so why you're saying this I don't know. We can clearly see debris falling alongside the collapsing towers which are falling at a faster rate. Where are you getting your information from?? Try reading the actual studies instead of using your own unlearned reasoning on matter you have zero understanding of.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@TIJoe-te9qu What 'half of the thinking population' who've never done a days proper study on the topic believe, doesn't matter. Over 99% of experts in all relative fields, who seemingly have no issue with the official studies whatsoever, its their opinions that matter. I'm yet to encounter a single truther who's read the studies, that's how serious you people take your research. And no, I'm not relying on mainstream media, there are many independent sources to draw from, but you wouldn't know having only watched a bunch of conspiracy videos, believing now you're some kind of expert. You're not. Far from it. Look how you've claimed 'pull it' is an industry term in demolition, yet you have no clue as to what it refers to. It refers specifically to a structure being rigged up with cables attached to excavators, which in turn pull the structure down in a manner that doesn't cause damage to surrounding structures. Is that what you believe happened? If not then this makes no sense. It also makes no sense that a property developer would use that term when speaking with the fire department. In reality, it waa SOLELY the decision of Chief of Department FDNY Dan Nigro, who's decision it was, and he was referring to pulling the operation and pulling his men out and away from WTC7 in order to save risking more lives, allowing it to freeburn until it collapsed. They literally set up a safe collapse zone to pull everyone back to then sat back and waited for it to fall. How else do you explain the fire fighters tending to building 7 saying that it was "definitely" going to collapse, several hours before it fell? A question truthers usually choose to ignore.....
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@johnschomer7790 This 'missing' money was announced publicly as far back as 1999. Is that your idea of "right before" Sept 2001?? It was missing before Bush even got elected!
Like all conspiracy kooks, you naturally believe the nonsensical lunacy you spout to be true, hence the "conspiracy realist" trope, but like all conspiracy kooks, you're demonstrably wrong, have no clue what you're talking about and simply repeat the same, long debunked lies of other truthers. The money was never missing in the way you people like to insinuate. It was simply a case of there being outmoded, incompatible computer systems which made it extremely difficult to track between departments from an auditing point of view. Why the hell would Rumself mention it all and implicate themselves like that if what you believe were true?? Lol, it makes zero sense whatsoever. If what you believe were true, we simply wouldn't have heard about it. He most certainly wouldn't have announced it publicly, don't be so absurd lol.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@MapleLeafistan Very rarely are controlled demolitions wired for a top down collapse and never is if due to "aesthetic purpose". Who cares what a CD looks like?? But let's say for arguments sake the twin towers were. How did the explosives survive the plane strikes and ensuing fires for 60-90 minutes? That is impossible. Demo devices are extremely sensitive to things like heat and geometry and there is ZERO percent chance of them survived those hits from the planes. The worlds leading authority on demolition have literally said it would be impossible to have brought them down like that via a CD. I think they know a little better than you or i. In fact, try and find ONE demolitions expert who agrees with you that the twin towers were demoed.
The core columns weren't 'eliminated', they were the last thing to fall and remained standing to the end. Where are you getting this nonsense from?
William Rodriguez was mistaken and claims of explosions before the plane hit have been well and truly debunked. The audios alone refute this, as does the absence of any corroborating seismic data. Why on earth would they set bombs off in the basement (ie. the OPPOSITE side of the towers the collapses were initiated from!) an HOUR to NINETY minutes prior to them coming down?? That makes no sense whatever and never, EVER is this how controlled demolitions work. Yes there were explosions reported in the basement but they were AFTER the planes hit and were thr result of ignited jet fuel spewing down elevator and service shafts, debris hitting the ground from a thousands foot in the air, elevators freefalling into the ground, electrical transformers going pop etc. They were NOT caused by bombs. How would bombs in the basement assist a top down collapse?? How would bombs in the basement go undetected by bomb-sniffing dogs present? No, we can safely say with the utmost confidence that the twin towers were CLEARLY not demoed.
You saying the official story doesn't make any sense doesn't wash sorry. It makes sense to me and most other people and has stood up to 2 decades of intense, global scrutiny. One thing for sure, it makes infinitely more sense than the truly ridiculous claims that it was all orchestrated by the government. There was a proper investigation and even if there was another, unless it fitted with your agenda, you people would just say it was set-to-fail etc. It wouldn't change nothing and truthers would remain truthers regardless. You need to understand that there is no mystery or doubts in academia. The overwhelming consensus of experts in EVERY related field accept the official studies, so a bunch of fringe lunatics completely unqualified to be speaking on the subject, using arguments from incredulity really doesn't warrant another investigation.
The fact you say the NIST report doesn't include WTC7 says it all. Of course it does!!! NIST did an entire study dedicated solely to it!!! 🙈 I'm yet to meet a truther who's even bothered to read the official studies, so how can you expect anybody to take you seriously when you're all so lazy and inept in your research? Shambolic report indeed, how would you know???
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@kennethbarnhouse8489 Wow. Can i take my initial remark back and change it to THIS right here that you just spewed is now THE dumbest sh!t I've ever heard 🙈 It was more like 500mph, not 300mph, just to get that out of the way first. Secondly, what does the weight of the plane have to do with anything other than increasing the force in which it would have struck?? Please explained that one for me.
A few feet of kevlar?? Is that what i said? No, i CLEARLY said it was a reinforced concrete wall several feet thick, CONCRETE. It was LINED with kevlar which to be fair, can stop a bullet so is pretty strong stuff. Watch the video here on youtube of a Phantom F4 sled test where they plough it into a similarly constructed wall at 500mph and it will give you an idea of the forces we're dealing with here. The F4 basically atomised. So yes, that wall didn't stop Flight 77 as such, but it did a pretty good job.
A plane full of people armed with box cutters cable of horrific injuries, of which they would simply have had to held one the throat of a passenger and full compliance would be gained. You're forgetting they also claimed to have bombs on board. No way would any passenger in their right mind take such a risk, especially since they all likely believed they would land safely and eventually be released, as with almost every plane hijacking in history.
No i don't think Biden is the president the US has ever had, but he's a hell of a lot better than Diaper Don, that's for sure.
The official stance does NOT say that any jet fuel melted any steel whatsoever. Nice strawman. You're either dishonest or don't know what the hell you're talking about.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
I can see this comment isn't going to age well 🙄 lol. Talk about premature? lol. Do you have any idea how much heat Trump has on him right now, and you seriously think he's getting off with it all?? You can't do what he's done and get away with it sorry, and the net draws in closer by the day 🤗 LOCK HIM UP!! LOCK HIM UP!! You might have no issue with his sexual assaults, cheating his way through life, inciting an insurrection with false claims of election fraud and single handedly destroying American democracy, refusing to do anything to stop it, shamelessly conning millions from the American public, allowing his equally crooked family to make millions from his presidency, lying more documented times than any individual in human history, stealing hundreds of classified, top secret government documents for what reason we can only guess, and I've not even scratched the surface. Calling you cultists deluded doesn't come close. Now come give me your MAGA tears my little cultist crackpots, i cannot get enough of them ☕😋
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@jordanemede lol, so many clichés in one statement, it really is like day one of conspiracy school with you hey buddy? Well obviously i can't possibly cover every point you've just cluste-rbombed me with, but we can go through them individually by all means. Some we can maybe skip past fairly quickly as there's nothing to actually be refuted, eg. No steel melted. If you can provide me with ANY non-conjectural evidence for molten steel, then we can continue this one.
Next you mention the "an entire group of building engineers and architects", by which i assume you refer to that bogus, corrupt organisation of fringe crackpots that go by the name ae911truth. Building engineers you say? You might want to check that. In reality, out of the measly 3000+ members, around 80% of them have no background, knowledge or understanding of any related field ie. Structural engineering, high-rise construction and controlled demolition. This brings the total of relevant engineers and architects to around the 600+ mark. Out of the millions out there. That's pitiful. They're just fringe lunatics who all seem to have conveniently forgotten the scientific process. This is why they remain a joke in academic circles and always will. It should also be noted that the AIA have even publicly denounced them, making it quite clearly they do not share their views.
Do you want to comment on any of the above, or shall i continue to your next point?
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@petercallinicos Election fraud, undervaluing the value of his businesses and properties (ie. tax fraud), no collision with Russia, Covid, Mexico paying for his failed border wall, not having any classified & top secret documents, declassifying the documents he 'didn't' have with his mind, not sleeping with Stormy Daniels; not knowing about the hush money payment made to Stormy Daniels; that it didn't rain on his inauguration; that the staff at the courthouse he was recently a 'visitor' of, were crying over the travesty of his arrest; Obama's birth certificate, noise from windmills cause cancer, ingesting bleach might treat Covid, bonespurs & thousands upon thousands more lies. 30,573 of them whilst in office alone. Officially THE biggest bullsh!t merchant in history.
Edit. Had to add the latest to the list as news broke literally as I was writing the above. Lying that he didn't sexually abuse E. Jean Carroll of which he's just been found guilty of in court. Isn't that pu55y-grabbing, tax-dodging, traitorous, grifting rapist just everything you want in a president? What a guy 😉👍🏽
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@ludachad05 Never said they clearly showed a plane, u just said any footage showing anything was released, which is true. This included 2 separate cameras from the security gate, and footage from the Citago has station. Again, we don't need any footage to know what hit the Pentagon. 136 direct eye-witnesses who ALL saw a plane, some (including serving pilots) even identifying it as a 757. We have the wreckage that's confirmed to be from a 757. We have the black box which when decoded details AA Flight 77's final 11 flights. We have the remains of all the passengers and their belongings, ATC/ radar evidences, etc. etc. etc. Truthers get hung up on footage which only serves to expose their ignorance of CCTV systems (ie. their purpose, how they record and how they're installed), reality in general and dishonesty in burying their heads to the mountain of evidence that proves incontrovertibly that AA77 crashed there that day. Anybody with a genuine concern for truth would embrace the full body of evidence rather than focusing on what we don't have and quite frankly, don't need. I'm not asking you to believe me, i really couldn't care less. You either want truth or you choose conspiracy regardless of the truth. That's your choice. I'm just here to call people out on spreading lies and misleading others.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@TroyChewning EVERY shred of evidence PROVES you wrong sorry pal eg. 136 direct eye-witnesses, 757 wreckage including the black box, the remains of all on board, radar/ATC evidence etc. etc. etc.
Collecting CCTV footage of a crime scene is standard practice, nothing whatsoever unusual about that. As you rightly said though, the cameras were there specifically for Pentagon security ie. monitoring people coming in and out. They were not however installed facing away from the structure in order to capture jet airliners slamming into the place at 500mph. The mountain of evidence you purposely choose to bury your head to in orser to keep your dumb conspiracy theory afloat, and I'm insane you say? 🤔
250 cameras?? Try 86, and every one that showed anything has been released. But hell, we don't need ANY footage given the overwhelming evidence we have to show AA77 crashed there that day. Your truly, truly ridiculous conspiracy theory fails on so many levels but keep clinging on, you never know, maybe in another 20yrs of crying conspiracy you might actually come up with ANY evidence to back it up 😏
🤪👈🏽
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@1961-v9k A sniffle to you yes, deadly to your poor parents, but then you just don't give a fk, being the self-serving, chin-slapping, disappointment you are to your them. You really are the most compelling argument for abortion I've ever seen. Did you not read what i said about my equally selfish c#@t of a neighbour? Mild symptoms which he passed to his father who died within days. What part of that are you struggling with Mongo? Just because it didn't hit you hard, doesn't mean it won't kill the next person you transmit it to, it really isn't that difficult to grasp. Had it twice myself, did fk all. Knowing how it can kill the next person though, i took the relevant steps to protect others. But then I'm not a dumb, selfish c#@t and care about people other than myself u fkng 🤌🏼💦
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@ritawjoyce Hardly wide scale, they had a party and yes some did breach their rules, but that doesn't negate the reasoning for the rules, they were just hypocritical ar5eholes for doing it. Again, they followed the advice of their medical experts and they did not know the full potential of what could unfold so that HAD to air in the side of caution, that's common sense how can you possibly not see that?? Viruses have the potential to all but wipe out humanity, you are aware of this right?
No they did not lie about the number of deaths, that's just typical conspiracy boIIocks that shows a misunderstanding of the criteria and figures. Silenced dissenting voices?? You mean they stopped people going on marches and spreading the virus, or took down conspiracy posts on Facebook spreading lethal lies that would lead to more deaths?? It's because of people like you with NO critical thought who believe this sh!te in Facebook they were forced to take it down! So easy for you to say it wasn't dangerous to everyone and that it only affected the elderly and those with underlying illness, which in reality is buIIsh!t. Yes, you were way more at risk but it has the potential to kill ANYONE, regardless. A girl I've known all my life, no underlying illness whatsoever, 36yrs old, died within days. An old friend of mine had stupidly attended a Christmas party at a friend's house, again no underlying illnesses, not overweight, young and as far as we know was healthy. He ended up having 3 strokes, his lungs collapsed and he was Inna coma for weeks. He'll never be the same again. My friend lost his mother and father, no underlying illnesses, my neighbour gave it to his dad and killed him, can't forgive himself. The list goes on and on. There's more chance of suffering the older you are, but it's a game of roulette and it can fk anyone, ANYONE up. There are athletes it's fkd up so don't give me your Facebook science buIIsh!t, I know first hand what it can do and it's largely because of selfish fks like you who refuse to adhere to the rules to help keep others safe even if you have no concern for your own health.
The fact you use the word 'sheeple' tells me precisely the kind of kook you are and the irony is, you conspiracy dullards are THE biggest sheep around, blindly following each others militant views and believing everything you read on the internet that fits with your agenda. You're offended by cuss words yet happy to potentially kill others with your pig-headed insolence and self-centeredness. Plandemic?? Oh please, you really are as dumb as a rock and seriously need to raise the bar on your standards of proof. Take the tinfoil hat off and get a grip Riga you fkng crackpot, there is no 'NWO' or rich families intent on depopulation, poisoning with us fluoride, spraying us with chemtrails etc. 911 wasn't an inside job, the world is t flat, Sandyhook was real, Elvis IS dead and Paul McCartney isn't. The government got some things wrong in hindsight, but not to the degree you believe and they most certainly didn't do it to try and 'control' us, how the hell does crippling the economy do them any good??? They did what they did because they believed it to be the safest option at that time. Left to you and your reasoning, millions more would without doubt have died. It takes a special kind of sociopathic narcissist to be so cold towards other human beings in that way. What a sick world we live in.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@propagandakiller632 Just readinf a few of your comments and man, have you anything original that hasn't LONG been debunked? Same, tired old rhetoric about you THINKING there should be more video footage whilst disregarding the actual purpose of CCTB cameras. Why on earth would they set up CCTV cameras on that building pointing away, down the street? Those cameras were there to monitor people coming in and out of the building and covered the building's perimeter. Given the fps settings on those CCTV cameras, to pick up a clear image of an object travelling such speeds would be all but impossible. Your logic is fundamentally flawed on several counts.
How about you explain to me how 136 people from all walks of life, mostly sat in traffic on their morning commute, could mistake a 155ft airliner with a 125ft wingspan, for a 22ft missile with a 9ft wingspan and then tell me how a missile could take out lamppost on either side of the street, slice the tops off trees, explod with what was CLEARLY a kerosene explosion (something that's visually VERY different to an explosive warhead) and leave an exit hole on the internal ring of the building? Where did all the plane debris come from, including the black box? Where did the remains of all the passengers and crew come from? Were the ATC staff also in on this alleged conspiracy? Anybody who denies American Airlines Flight 77 hit that building that day does so in ignorance of the available evidence. There is no way you'd dispute this incontestable fact if you were aware of the overwhelming mountain of evidence we have available to us.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@Gonewthewind210 Blah, blah, blah. What a load of hot air. Again, no plane tail was recovered 7 miles away, that's a total lie, as is the tail was riddled with bullet holes. You're either a terrible liar or delusional as fk. Back up those claims with evidence we can verify for ourselves because you claiming you saw it on TV that day, never to be seen again is doing ludicrous and obviously buIIsh!t. As if such footage wouldn't have resurfaced by now! We were all glued to out TV's that day, but only you seem to have viewed this footage 🤔
Contrary to your claims, older mobile phones actually worked better at altitude as they had stronger transmitters, operated on analog networks, can be used at a maximum altitude of 10 miles, while phones on newer digital systems can work at altitudes of 5 to 6 miles. A typical airline cruising altitude would be 35,000 feet, or about 6.6 miles. As I've already told you, you can read many counts of passengers being fined for being caught on their mobiles at altitude, and many accounts of pilots calling their wives etc. from the air using their cell phones. The Moussaoui trial detailed all calls made and almost all of them were made using the Airphones located on the backs of the seats fitted on that particular aircraft, which the airline have verified were most definitely on that aircraft. But don't let facts get in the way of your silly, little conspiracy theory hey 🤪👍🏼
1
-
@Gonewthewind210 Nope, reTrumplican, MAGA cultists are almost all exclusively 911 truthers like you, so please don't tar me with that brush, they're part of your clan not mine. Unlike you, I'm a firm believer in evidence. Something you don't seem to care about.
Only one report of the tail section? Yet nobody else saw it and you took it as gospel from a media source you and yours always claim to be part of the cabal. Doesn't really make much sense sorry. No evidence whatsoever to back your claims and with that we can safely dismiss it as the bullsh!t it is.
No I didn't answer your question about whether I was a flight attendant because it has no bearing whatsoever on this argument. To answer you, no I've never been a trolly dolly. I'm an electrical engineer. Unlike you, I've done actual research rather than trying to glorify a menial position you held, pretending it makes you some kind of expert. It doesn't. I've been on countless flights if that helps? Or do I need to have served people food and drinks to make me an expert on the matter? D!ckhead.
As I stated previously, we can easily verify if those planes had Airphones and unlike you, I have done so. Deny it all you like, it is an incontrovertible fact that Airphones were on Flight 93. This has been confirmed by the airline themselves with the data of the calls presented in a court of law, standing as evidence of which the defence had no issue with. Do you seriously believe the defence would have just let this go or not bothered checking if there were any doubt?? Idiot, of course not!! It would have been a glaring hole that would have caused serious, serious doubt to the integrity of the entire investigation. Search the website I told you on the other thread and you can verify this yourself. Until you admit that the plane had Airphones on the seats, I can't take anything you say seriously sorry.
95% of Flight 93 was recovered by HUNDREDS of volunteers so we know who found what and where. Whereas there was debris found several miles away, as I've already explained, only very small pieces of lightweight, aircraft skin was found at any distance. ALL heavy parts were naturally found within a relatively close distance to the crash site with ALL human remains located within an acre sized area directly around the impact zone. All evidenced in a court of law with no areas of issue with the defence. You need to stop watching so much TV, cut your interest time down and get out of the house more.
For the record, I'm not American and if I was, I would most certainly not be a Republican. You really are a very confused and gullible individual. Let me know when you're able to provide evidence and admit you're wrong about the Airphones and we can continue.
1
-
1
-
@Gonewthewind210 You really are THE biggest fantasist on YouTube. We both know you had no clue whether those planes had Airphones or not. You just repeat this lie purely because twoofers can never admit they're wrong. You're easily proven a liar though which you know, yet you've somehow convinced yourself to think I'd believe a word you say about your alleged playboy lifestyle that you've been gifted simply because you underachieved in life and spent your entire career serving others. Others who could actually afford to fly to exotic locations, like me 😏
Going back to the topic in hand that you're so blatantly trying to deflect from, American Airlines have provided the call logs from the Airphones the calls were made from, and they were again presented in a court of law, with zero objections from the defence during the Moussaoui trial of which, you or anyone else can easily verify. Give me an email address and I'll send you the copies if you're too lazy, it'd be my pleasure. I can literally provide you the CSC Id's, the GS Id's, the handset Id's, literally every detail of each and every call made on them. The fact you still deny the undeniable shows how deceitful, dishonest and desperate you are, hence why I couldn't believe your buIIsh!t about your alleged jetset lifestyle if I wanted to. Besides, a retired old man ligging freebies and trying to impose yourself on topless young girls (who would not doubt not want you around for reasons obvious to most), would only show you to be the seedy old cu#t you clearly are. In your reality however, instead of hanging out with scantily clad beauties, you likely spend your evenings w@nking into sock whilst shovelling fried chicken from a bucket into your mouth, sat in squalor in your shabby old trailor. Jog the fk on, liar 🖕🏽
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@tiffanydebruyn2375 Erm, maybe because Biden told them he had them and handed them right back the moment he realised. Diaper Don however refused to admit he ahd them, denied, denied and denied, failing to comply with the subpoena, still initiating he didn't have any. How many chances did you want them to give him??? Once caughts, he lied again and tried to claim they were planted amd he was being set up. Once that lie was uncovered he literally said he declassified them with his mind!!! 🙈 Trump had thousands of these document, some highly classified, top-secret documents of which Biden had a mere handful of which weren't of the same calibre. How the hell can you compare you deluded, cultist fool?? Trump broke the law, Biden didn't, it's that fkng simple! You support a tax-dodging, insurrection inciting, pu55y grabbing rapist who's grifted and conned hundreds of millions of dollars from thr American public.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@elizabethstanley7137 Ok first off, he is BOT the favourite to win & even if he was, that wouldn't mean he's not a corrupt, lying, serial rap!st who failed to achieve a single thing he ran on, plunged the country into debt, destroyed the economy, killed millions with his truly awful Covid response, stole military secrets, lies about election fraud,try to cheat the election himself & disinfranchise millions of American voters with his fake electors scam, enriched himself & his family whilst in power & tried to overthrow the government. You're a traitor Elizabeth. History will remember.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@johnlopera6972 lol, the fact you believe federal agents are actively trying to cover up the mass murder of thousands of their fellow civilians citizens, with literally zero evidence whatsoever, speaks for itself. What would have to be hundreds, if not thousands of agents tasked with doing this, you believe not a single one has a conscience and blown the whistle. Seems likely 🙄 You're quite clearly deranged and utterly divorced from reality, and for the record, I'm not American and have no stake in the game. Unlike you, all i care about it truth regardless of whether i like it or not. For you however, it's all about conspiracy regardless of the facts. It's the reason you're forced to come on to youtube to desperately seeking an echo-chamber for your lunacy. You stick with burying your head to the evidence and massaging the egos of your fellow twoofers, and I'll stick to following the evidence 😉👍🏼 If ever you decide to come back to earth, let me know and i will gladly destroy your already failed, scientifically rejected nonsense once again.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
From the other side of the pond, this is better than any soap opera or TV show I know of. US politics is fkng mental and makes ours look pretty dull in comparison. Don't get me wrong, I prefer my politics to be dull when it's my government in question, it's how it should be, but from the outside looking in, it makes for great viewing and I for one have been obsessively keeping up with US politics ever since Diaper Don took the helm, and the Republican party have been keeping me thoroughly entertained ever since. I was embarrassed for my nation when Boris Johnson came into power, but Trump has made Bumbling Boris look like a good leader and a fkng saint! 😂 If it wasn't for the detrimental impact Don the Con has on the rest of the world, i would love him to regain power just for sh!ts and giggles, but sadly his lunacy has repercussions felt across the globe. Biden is far from perfect but it's clear for all but MAGA cultists, he has the best interests of his nation at heart and the figures and facts prove it. Trump however, made the US a global laughing stock and his band of merry men continue to do so.
1
-
1
-
1
-
@1323lobo Box cutters are lethal and used to mug people all over the world. Football hooligans used to use them and they can inflict truly horrific injuries. All the hijackers had to do was out one to the throat of a passenger and they'd have gained total compliance from everyone else. In addition to this, the hijackers claimed to have a bomb on board which alone would have stopped any passengers from trying to be a hero.
The comments from the flight school instructor were from prior to them gaining much more experience and gaining their commercial pilots licences. You do need a reasonable level of competence to gain those licenses, you do accept that right? And lets not forget, all those guys had to do was steer the planes which any fool could do with ease. Steering a plane couldn't be easier, it's the take off and landing which are the tricky parts, of which, those guys didn't concern themselves with. Steering a light aircraft is no different to steering a large airliner, it's exactly the same.
As somebody here informed you, a baggage handler with ZERO experience of flying managed to take off in a passenger plane much larger than a Cessna and proceeded to do barrel rolls and all kinds of acrobatic manoeuvres which just goes to show how easy it is. The fact it was a prop plane has zero bearing on anything, you're clutching at straws.
Please stop saying it would be impossible to navigate without air traffic control, that is NOT true! You can literally input the coordinates of your destination and have no requirement for any guidance from ATC staff. Where are you getting this from?
Box cutters can NOT be taken through airport security. They could prior to 9/11 but BECAUSE of that event, any blades whatsoever are no longer allowed.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@jamescameron277 I'm sorry, i didn't realise i was dealing with such a sensitive soul. I won't use any more naughty words, just for you.
As confirmed by the fire fighters tending yo that building, which we KNOW widespread fires were left to freeburn across at least 13 floors (if I remember rightly, maybe more) and they burned for over 2hrs beyond what the fire-proofing was rated at.
Dr Leroy Hulsey is a fraud and a disgrace to his profession. He has allowed himself to be manipulated and corrupted by a bogus and corrupt organisation of which funded the entire study, INSISTING it began with the presupposition that fire DIDN'T bring down the building. That is NOT how science works. His study is a joke, fundamentally flawed and holds zero weight in academia. There have however been several other studies on building 7, by far more credible and respected organisations, ALL of which (although differing in detail) concluded the collapse was the result of fire.
Please explain to me why, if it was such a shock and mystery, how did the fire fighters know it was going to happen? They publicly stated a collpase was inevitable several hours prior to it falling. They even established a collapse zone knowing full well it was just a matter of time because as i told you previously, EVERY non-concrete reinforced, steel-framed structure will eventually collapse if left to burn. It's the reason we use fire-proofing, to offer extended time for fires to be extinguished. Without it WTC7 would have collapsed much sooner. You claim it's never happened before but in reality, it has happened prior to that day and since. 3 example off the top of my head would be the Plasco building in Tehran, the Sight and Sound theatre in Pennsylvania and the Kader Toy factory in Thailand. There are more.
In respect to your theory that it was brought down on purpose in order to destroy some paperwork, have you ever heard of paper shredders? Would it not be easier to dump it in the sea or just burn it? It's just all so ridiculous. Your conspiracy theory fails under scrutiny whether you accept it or not.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@coolk3dat754 Oh dear, so you've clung on to your paranoid delusions all this time? Poor you. Engineering wannabe? lol, i am actually an engineer but irrespective of my credentials, you seem to be unaware that the vast majority of experts in all related fields have no issues with the official studies. But hey, you've watched a bunch of conspiracy videos on the internet so who needs university? Have you even bothered to read the studies you're so desperately trying to dismiss? Rhetorical question, of course you haven't, you're a truther and that would be far too much like proper research.
You believe a missile hit the Pentagon so explain how a misisle could take out lampposts either side of the street, slice the tops off trees, explode in a blatant hydrocarbon explosion before detonating again to create an exit hole, whilst somehow managing to trick ATC staff and the other 136 direct eye-witnesses who ALL reported it to be a plane, some of whom were airline pilots on their morning commute who flew 757's. I mean, it's quite tricky to differentiate between a 22ft cruise missile with a 9ft wingspan and a 155ft Boeing 757 with a 125ft wingspan 😂👍🏼 We won't mention the distribution of identifiable 757 wreckage (including the black box that was decoded to show details of Flight 77's final 11 flights) and physical remains of everybody known to have been on board.....🙄
Here's to another 20+yrs of truthers crying conspiracy and failing miserably 🤪🍻
1
-
@coolk3dat754 Clean up all debris? 🙈 Dear oh dear lol. I'm pretty certain first responders found plenty of wreckage. They even reported the scorched remains of passengers still strapped into their seats, images of which stood as evidence in a court of law during the Moussaoui trial. Speaking of which, has he just given up his life to aid with the government cover up the mass murder of thousands of American citizens? 🤔 Sounds legit lol. As for Hani Hanjour being unable to fly a Cessna, is this where you quote his first flight instructor speaking of his lack of skills PRIOR to him gaining a commerical pilots licence and receiving simulator training to familiarise himself with the controls of large airliner? You're seemingly unaware of just how easy it is to steer a plane, regardless of its size. Even a mental midget such as yourself could steer/crash a 757 with less than an hours training. The only tricky parts are the landing and taking off which these guys didn't really have to concern themselves with. That "miraculous manoeuvre" was actually a pretty standard manoeuvre used by pilots to lost altitude when coming into land. Basically, he came in way to high and fast, being the poor pilot he was, so was forced to make a simple turn to line himself up and try again. Ridiculous speeds? You means speeds within the capabilities of the aircraft in question? I love how you people are such sensationalists, always exaggerating to desperately try and validate your kooky beliefs lol.
So you're saying the lampposts were planted there on a busy highway without anybody noticing, then those who saw the ane hit them were just lying? Again, sounds likely 🤪👍🏼
You might too feeble to lift a flimsy aluminium lampposts specifically designed to be lightweight and buckle in a way so as to protect anybody slamming into in a car crash to reduce impact. Yet another ridiculously obtuse, painfully ignorant and easily refuted argument.
As for your pigeon understanding of physics, I'm afraid that doesn't quite cut it in the real world. Engines were found and proven to have been from a 757 although I'm sure you imagine the large, aluminium casing to be the actual engine in another breathtaking display of blinding ignorance. You should watch the video here on youtube of a Phantom F4 slamming into a similarly constructed, highly reinforced wall at a similar speed and see how much of the aircraft survives. It literally vaporises on impact and that was a MUCH lighter aircraft and therefore hit with MUCH less force yet here you are, insinuating we should have found huge pieces of wings, fuselage and engines all over the front lawn, even with the immense inertia involved that would have dragged most surviving wreckage into the building itself 🙈 I swear i have leather shoes with higher mental functions than yourself. In regards to that large wingspan and engines, it should be noted that the damage caused to structure hit on approach perfectly line up with the dimensions and engine separation of a 757 and i would love to hear how you reconcile this damage with your 22ft missile with a 9ft wingspan 🤔 Of course you won't though because people like you prefer to bury their tiny heads to any opposing evidence, choosing wilful ignorance instead of embracing the full body of evidence. The fact you compare a plane crash site where in almost all cases, the pilot is desperately trying to keep the aircraft in the air, to a plane crash where the pilot intentionally plows into a heavily reinforced, bomb resistant, kevlar lined wall, throttled up only confirms the level of intellect and rationale we're dealing with here. I mean, you literally just stated you expected the nose cone of the aircraft to have survived such an impact 🤣🤣🤣 Jesus christ lol.
Fighters jets WERE scrambled to intercept but by the time they knew where they were, it was too late as they'd turned the plane's transponders off. What no fly zone? You do realise the Pentagon is situated right next to a major airport right? One of the most secure buildings in the world you say? So what exactly could have been done to stop a 200 ton mass slamming into it at speeds in excess of 500mph? You're probably one of those clowns who believes the Pentagon has S.A.M. that pop up out of the ground, firing on any aircraft that stray. Hindsight is a wonderful thing but the reality was that nobody knew where those planes were or what their intended targets were. But hey, don't let facts get in the way of a good conspiracy.
Ah, the old chestnut that they purposely hit the section investigating the alleged missing 2.3 trillion that was never actually missing in the way you guys like to claim? Announced the day before you say? In reality announced publicly back in 1999 and mentioned several times up until that day? Lol, you literally know less than nothing about this topic. Type into your search engine the words 'right blogger bastard' and take a look at the amount of evidence you choose to bury your head to and ignore in order to cling on to your pathetic conspiracy theory you fact-dodging, feckless dullard.
1
-
@coolk3dat754 Nice strawman Mongo, only you are the claiming the nose and fuselage pierced that reinforced wall lol. Obviously that didn't, and couldn't happen. Your understanding of basic physics is shocking, truly. We're dealing with the best part of a 200 ton pressurised mass that contained heavy parts such as the landing gear which punched clean through to Ring C (that's THREE of its walls, not five you moron lol) and could be seen amongst the rubble. Again, only you are claiming the engines couldn't break through the windows which is course is fkng stupid and not what happened at all. Strawman after strawman, is there no end to your stupidity and deceit? Tango webs?? Do you mean tangled webs? Calling you stupid is an issult to stupid people worldwide. No idea what you're talking about with Lloyd England, but so what his wife wirked for yhe FBI?? What does that have to do with anything? Are yoy suggesting they recruited him to lie and that his wife is such a high ranking FBI official that she in on this alleged conspiracy??
No breakdown in standard protocol, just as i already explained, they had no idea where the planes were and what their intended targets were. By the time they did, it was too late. It's that fkng simple, what part of that are your struggling with?
What Bush would have been referring to is being attacked in this way by internal flights. They always assumed it would be an international flight if any, that would be used in such an attack. They just got caught with their pants down.
Now i have addressed EVERY ridiculous, specious claim you've made yet you've failed to address any of what I've put to you. Speaks volumes of the confidence you lack to stand by your convictions. Did you even bother to look at the website i mentioned? All you have are lies and half truthes at best, and that's why nobody outside of your youtube echo chamber of tinfoil hat wearing members of the lunatic fringe takes anything you say serious nor ever will. Now answer my previous questions you fact dodging, bed-wetting simpleton.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@coolk3dat754 You might want read my previous responses again cupcake, because i most definitely did address those points as anyone reading will see. The fact you think ANYTHING penetrated the 5 rings of the Pentagon highlights how shockingly poor your knowledge of this subject it. The thing that penetrated furthest into the building was the heavy landing gear and that only penetrated THREE rings. The official stance does NOT say the fuselage penetrated anything more than the first wall, and that was only the back end of it as the majority of the fuselage all but vapourised in impact, just as we'd expect and as we can observe happening in the footage of the Phantom F4 slamming into a similarly constructed wall at 500mph. Something you choose to ignore. The difference is, the 757 struck with an even greater force. The only reason any of it survived was due to it's much greater size. AGAIN, we literally have images of the engines being retrieved so it's like you denying the sky is blue whilst refusing to look up. You remind me of a creationist lol. Titanium engines by the way are NOT indestructible you fkn clown 🤣 AGAIN, any windows hit were broken. Those that weren't hit, didn't break because they were blast proof designed to withstand the blast from a bomb. Now how may more times do i need to repeat this before you acknowledge it? Your arguments are meaningless and don't purport to reality, which is why nobody takes anything you say seriously. I take it you're not feeling brave enough to get into Newtonian physics that you previously professed to being your trump card that nobody can counter? 🤣 You're so full of shIt lol. Why won't you address ANYTHING I've said? What are you so scared of? 136 direct eye-witnesses, why are you ignoring these? Why are you failing to acknowledge the black box data or the damage to surrounding structures on approach that PERFECTLY match the dimensions of a 757? There was a wall and an electric transformer hit which perfectly match the engine separation of a 757. Are you calling the fire fighters who literally dived out of the way in fear of being hit by the plane, liars? Why won't you acknowledge Zach Moussaoui's confession and lifetime incarceration? Has he just sacrificed his freedom to help the government cover up the mass murder of American citizens? Why do you refuse to look at the website i linked you to that features a mountain of evidence of which proves beyond all reasonable doubt that Flight 77 hit the building? Man up bed wetter, you don't see me running from the evidence and the fact you do exposes how little confidence you have to debate this topic. I'm right here, addressing every claim you make without exception. You on the other hand deflect and run and then emulate perfectly the proverbial chess playing pigeon lol. God i love exposing little pr!cks like you 😂
1
-
1
-
@coolk3dat754 Oh here's my favourite whipping boy! Where'd you go princess?? I thought the reptilian overlords had got you taken away for getting too close to exposing their illuminate plan for global domination 🤪👍🏼 You just couldn't resist coming back for more public humiliation, you little sado you 🤗 Given that you just ran away last time and haven't addressed a thing from where we left it, I'll just paste my previous, unaddressed comment so we can all watch you squirm, deflect and run again 😂👍🏼Here you go cupcake, lets see if you've got your big boy pants on today.....
You might want read my previous responses again cupcake, because i most definitely did address those points as anyone reading will see. The fact you think ANYTHING penetrated the 5 rings of the Pentagon highlights how shockingly poor your knowledge of this subject it. The thing that penetrated furthest into the building was the heavy landing gear and that only penetrated THREE rings. The official stance does NOT say the fuselage penetrated anything more than the first wall, and that was only the back end of it as the majority of the fuselage all but vapourised in impact, just as we'd expect and as we can observe happening in the footage of the Phantom F4 slamming into a similarly constructed wall at 500mph. Something you choose to ignore. The difference is, the 757 struck with an even greater force. The only reason any of it survived was due to it's much greater size. AGAIN, we literally have images of the engines being retrieved so it's like you denying the sky is blue whilst refusing to look up. You remind me of a creationist lol. Titanium engines by the way are NOT indestructible you fkn clown 🤣 AGAIN, any windows hit were broken. Those that weren't hit, didn't break because they were blast proof designed to withstand the blast from a bomb. Now how may more times do i need to repeat this before you acknowledge it? Your arguments are meaningless and don't purport to reality, which is why nobody takes anything you say seriously. I take it you're not feeling brave enough to get into Newtonian physics that you previously professed to being your trump card that nobody can counter? 🤣 You're so full of shIt lol. Why won't you address ANYTHING I've said? What are you so scared of? 136 direct eye-witnesses, why are you ignoring these? Why are you failing to acknowledge the black box data or the damage to surrounding structures on approach that PERFECTLY match the dimensions of a 757? There was a wall and an electric transformer hit which perfectly match the engine separation of a 757. Are you calling the fire fighters who literally dived out of the way in fear of being hit by the plane, liars? Why won't you acknowledge Zach Moussaoui's confession and lifetime incarceration? Has he just sacrificed his freedom to help the government cover up the mass murder of American citizens? Why do you refuse to look at the website i linked you to that features a mountain of evidence of which proves beyond all reasonable doubt that Flight 77 hit the building? Man up bed wetter, you don't see me running from the evidence and the fact you do exposes how little confidence you have to debate this topic. I'm right here, addressing every claim you make without exception. You on the other hand deflect and run and then emulate perfectly the proverbial chess playing pigeon lol. God i love exposing little pr!cks like you 😂
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@coolk3dat754 I have literally addressed EVERY SINGLE claim you made and countered EVERY SINGLE argument you've made to myself AND to everybody else on that thread that wasn't addressed as everybody there can see, and you have the audacity to call ME a liar??? 🤣🤣 What you're hoping to achieve from doing this baffles me but whatever, it's not like you're fooling anybody but yourself 🤷🏽♂️ Is it because i called you out in Newton's third law?? You clearly don't understand it but after all the bravado, i can only think that's why you're running scared 🤔 Tell me again how the official stance says the nose of the plane crashed right through 5 rings of the Pentagon 🤣
Show you a plane at the Pentagon? Jesus christ, will these strawman arguments never cease?? 🙈 How can anybody do that when the plane all but vapourised on impact, just as we'd expect it to?? This really is wilfully ignorance of unparalleled proportions, you are fkn shameless lol. There was plenty enough wreckage to identify the plane, but about the black fkn box??? Could there possibly be a better piece of wreckage used to identify a plane???? 🤣 I even linked you to a website that provides everything you ask and much more and you've chosen to ignore it in order to cling on to your kooky, tinfoil hat lunacy you subscribe to. What a dull life you must lead. I'm going to copy and paste my response from the other thread just to show anybody reading this thread what a devious, deranged little bltch you are. Love watching you squirm you little maggot lol.
Ps. The engines were found and images are in the public domain. Again, any windows directly hit broke. Windows that weren't hit, didn't. They were blastproof glass, you do acknowledge that right, or is that yet another incontrovertible fact you deny and lie about? 🙄
1
-
@coolk3dat754 Oh dear, so you've clung on to your paranoid delusions all this time? Poor you. Engineering wannabe? lol, i am actually an engineer but irrespective of my credentials, you seem to be unaware that the vast majority of experts in all related fields have no issues with the official studies. But hey, you've watched a bunch of conspiracy videos on the internet so who needs university? Have you even bothered to read the studies you're so desperately trying to dismiss? Rhetorical question, of course you haven't, you're a truther and that would be far too much like proper research.
You believe a missile hit the Pentagon so explain how a misisle could take out lampposts either side of the street, slice the tops off trees, explode in a blatant hydrocarbon explosion before detonating again to create an exit hole, whilst somehow managing to trick ATC staff and the other 136 direct eye-witnesses who ALL reported it to be a plane, some of whom were airline pilots on their morning commute who flew 757's. I mean, it's quite tricky to differentiate between a 22ft cruise missile with a 9ft wingspan and a 155ft Boeing 757 with a 125ft wingspan 😂👍🏼 We won't mention the distribution of identifiable 757 wreckage (including the black box that was decoded to show details of Flight 77's final 11 flights) and physical remains of everybody known to have been on board.....🙄
Here's to another 20+yrs of truthers crying conspiracy and failing miserably 🤪🍻
1
-
@coolk3dat754 Clean up all debris? 🙈 Dear oh dear lol. I'm pretty certain first responders found plenty of wreckage. They even reported the scorched remains of passengers still strapped into their seats, images of which stood as evidence in a court of law during the Moussaoui trial. Speaking of which, has he just given up his life to aid with the government cover up the mass murder of thousands of American citizens? 🤔 Sounds legit lol. As for Hani Hanjour being unable to fly a Cessna, is this where you quote his first flight instructor speaking of his lack of skills PRIOR to him gaining a commerical pilots licence and receiving simulator training to familiarise himself with the controls of large airliner? You're seemingly unaware of just how easy it is to steer a plane, regardless of its size. Even a mental midget such as yourself could steer/crash a 757 with less than an hours training. The only tricky parts are the landing and taking off which these guys didn't really have to concern themselves with. That "miraculous manoeuvre" was actually a pretty standard manoeuvre used by pilots to lost altitude when coming into land. Basically, he came in way to high and fast, being the poor pilot he was, so was forced to make a simple turn to line himself up and try again. Ridiculous speeds? You means speeds within the capabilities of the aircraft in question? I love how you people are such sensationalists, always exaggerating to desperately try and validate your kooky beliefs lol.
So you're saying the lampposts were planted there on a busy highway without anybody noticing, then those who saw the ane hit them were just lying? Again, sounds likely 🤪👍🏼
You might too feeble to lift a flimsy aluminium lampposts specifically designed to be lightweight and buckle in a way so as to protect anybody slamming into in a car crash to reduce impact. Yet another ridiculously obtuse, painfully ignorant and easily refuted argument.
As for your pigeon understanding of physics, I'm afraid that doesn't quite cut it in the real world. Engines were found and proven to have been from a 757 although I'm sure you imagine the large, aluminium casing to be the actual engine in another breathtaking display of blinding ignorance. You should watch the video here on youtube of a Phantom F4 slamming into a similarly constructed, highly reinforced wall at a similar speed and see how much of the aircraft survives. It literally vaporises on impact and that was a MUCH lighter aircraft and therefore hit with MUCH less force yet here you are, insinuating we should have found huge pieces of wings, fuselage and engines all over the front lawn, even with the immense inertia involved that would have dragged most surviving wreckage into the building itself 🙈 I swear i have leather shoes with higher mental functions than yourself. In regards to that large wingspan and engines, it should be noted that the damage caused to structure hit on approach perfectly line up with the dimensions and engine separation of a 757 and i would love to hear how you reconcile this damage with your 22ft missile with a 9ft wingspan 🤔 Of course you won't though because people like you prefer to bury their tiny heads to any opposing evidence, choosing wilful ignorance instead of embracing the full body of evidence. The fact you compare a plane crash site where in almost all cases, the pilot is desperately trying to keep the aircraft in the air, to a plane crash where the pilot intentionally plows into a heavily reinforced, bomb resistant, kevlar lined wall, throttled up only confirms the level of intellect and rationale we're dealing with here. I mean, you literally just stated you expected the nose cone of the aircraft to have survived such an impact 🤣🤣🤣 Jesus christ lol.
Fighters jets WERE scrambled to intercept but by the time they knew where they were, it was too late as they'd turned the plane's transponders off. What no fly zone? You do realise the Pentagon is situated right next to a major airport right? One of the most secure buildings in the world you say? So what exactly could have been done to stop a 200 ton mass slamming into it at speeds in excess of 500mph? You're probably one of those clowns who believes the Pentagon has S.A.M. that pop up out of the ground, firing on any aircraft that stray. Hindsight is a wonderful thing but the reality was that nobody knew where those planes were or what their intended targets were. But hey, don't let facts get in the way of a good conspiracy.
Ah, the old chestnut that they purposely hit the section investigating the alleged missing 2.3 trillion that was never actually missing in the way you guys like to claim? Announced the day before you say? In reality announced publicly back in 1999 and mentioned several times up until that day? Lol, you literally know less than nothing about this topic. Type into your search engine the words 'right blogger bastard' and take a look at the amount of evidence you choose to bury your head to and ignore in order to cling on to your pathetic conspiracy theory you fact-dodging, feckless dullard.
1
-
@coolk3dat754 Nice strawman Mongo, only you are the claiming the nose and fuselage pierced that reinforced wall lol. Obviously that didn't, and couldn't happen. Your understanding of basic physics is shocking, truly. We're dealing with the best part of a 200 ton pressurised mass that contained heavy parts such as the landing gear which punched clean through to Ring C (that's THREE of its walls, not five you moron lol) and could be seen amongst the rubble. Again, only you are claiming the engines couldn't break through the windows which is course is fkng stupid and not what happened at all. Strawman after strawman, is there no end to your stupidity and deceit? Tango webs?? Do you mean tangled webs? Calling you stupid is an issult to stupid people worldwide. No idea what you're talking about with Lloyd England, but so what his wife wirked for yhe FBI?? What does that have to do with anything? Are yoy suggesting they recruited him to lie and that his wife is such a high ranking FBI official that she in on this alleged conspiracy??
No breakdown in standard protocol, just as i already explained, they had no idea where the planes were and what their intended targets were. By the time they did, it was too late. It's that fkng simple, what part of that are your struggling with?
What Bush would have been referring to is being attacked in this way by internal flights. They always assumed it would be an international flight if any, that would be used in such an attack. They just got caught with their pants down.
Now i have addressed EVERY ridiculous, specious claim you've made yet you've failed to address any of what I've put to you. Speaks volumes of the confidence you lack to stand by your convictions. Did you even bother to look at the website i mentioned? All you have are lies and half truthes at best, and that's why nobody outside of your youtube echo chamber of tinfoil hat wearing members of the lunatic fringe takes anything you say serious nor ever will. Now answer my previous questions you fact dodging, bed-wetting simpleton.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@bigbobno11 Nope, utterly false myth being propagated by lunatic truthers with no clue. Countless pilots have come forward and said otherwise, test pilots take them beyond their V-limits all the time; we have footage of such aircraft reaching such speeds at extremely low altitude fly-bys and Boeing themself have no issue with ANYTHING those planes did that day. To believe a plane just falls apart the second it creeps beyond it's V-limits only serves to show how your 20yrs of alleged study have been limited entirely to conspiracy websites amd the reason why nobody takes anything you people say seriously.
No wreckage??? 95% of Flight 93 was recovered and there was plenty of wreckage found at all crash sites. ALL plane parts most definitely came from the planes claimed so what the hell you're talking about there i do not know. Must more truther lies.
All footage that captured anything at the Pentagon was released. The purpose of CCTV cameras however are to monitor the perimeter, as in people coming in and out and protecting fire exits, windows and other potentail entry points. They do NOT install them facing away from a structure, pointing down the street. Why would they?? That isn't their purpose. They were also set at 1 frame per second and im sure even you can work out the distance coveres by an object travelling at 500mph each second. There's no way a CCTV camera set at such low fps would capture an object travelling those speeds, you're being ridiculous once again.
The "whole" in the Pentagon facade was plenty big enough (between 80 and 90ft wide if I remember rightly) but if you expected a cartoom silhouette, road runner style then you're gravely mistaken. Of course that wouldn't be the case, impossible! The wings would have naturally flowed into the structure given the forces at play but they did impact the builidng and we have images showing the damage they caused. You'd think after 20yrs studying this you'd have known this, but then this is what happens when you don't know how to conduct proper research and rely on notoriously unreliable conspiracy websites compiled by people as equally ignorant as yourself.
Back to Flighr 93, like i said, 95% of the plane was recovered including the black box, and the physical remains of those on board were recovered throughout the crash site and retrieved by HUNDREDS of volunteers who searched, often on hands and knees the entire locality. All planted though right? 🤣 Get real. You clearly have no concern for truth and are only interested in conspiracy.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@ScheerMagic For the most part, yes i accept the evidence that shows it to be true. If you know of any actual evidence that opposes it, let's hear it.
What do you need explaining about WTC7?? It had thousands of tons of debris drop on to it which resulted in huge structural damage and widespread fires across many floora that were left to freeburn. As the fire fighters said that day, hours before it fell, a collapse was inevitable. No mystery, no need for bombs, thermite or magic space lasers, just fire. It was a non-concrete reinforced, steel-framed structure of which had sustained much damage and was allowed to freeburn for 2hrs beyond what it's fire-proofing was rated at. If you think it was so unusual, i guess you must believe the fire fighters tending to the building that day were in on this alleged conspiracy?
Edit: If you're genuinely concerned for truth, why haven't you bothrred reading the official study? Too much like real research for you huh?
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
What difference does it make where the hijackers were from in terms of them being able to fly & crash a plane?? 😂 What election fraud??? The only one guilty of election fraud is Donald Trump, you do realise this right?
No, both planes that hit the towers were Not grey military drones at all lol. Witnesses, wreckage, ATC evidence, there's plenty that proves that false. What would be the purpose of "explosive pods", whatever they are? 🤣 "Neither towers needed to be removed", you're just making it up as you go I swear, its madness!
WTC7 houses no such documents & COLLAPSED due to uncontrolled fires across many of its floors. It burned for several hours beyond it's fire proofing was rated at. Nothing unusual about a non-concrete reinforced, steel-framed structure collapsing after being left to freeburn, hence how the fire fighters knew it would fall. The 2.3 trillion was made public 2 years before 911 & has since been tracked. Again, where are you getting your information from, can you cite any sources? The last bit of what you said is just paranoid nonsense with nothing to debunk. As with election fraud, the only ine guilty of wanting to destroy democracy & do away with the constitution is Trump. It's not going to happen.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@PrivateSi That's great, except all you've done so far is offer a highly irrational opinion and made several demonstrably false claims without providing a shred of credible evidence to back it up, whilst also failing to even acknowledge (let alone refute) any rebuttals made. And you're accusing me of being gullible? You're the one blindly believing everything you read on the internet whereas i not only know how to conduct proper research, but also have the vast consensus of experts stood firmly behind me. Unlike you, i can back up my arguments and easily debunk yours. Hell, you even claimed the hijackers were still alive which was totally debunked 20yrs ago! Your misplaced bravado doesn't quite cut it in the real world sorry champ. I've asked you for evidence and you've failed. You've made several claims I've debunked and you refuse to address them. I even pointed you towards a source that provides a mountain of evidence that shows AA Flight 77 crashing into the Pentagon to be an incontrovertible fact and you haven't even bothered to look. These aren't the actions of somebody with a genuine desire for truth and if anybody is getting suckered into buying a bridge, it is you. One thing i am not is gullible, far from it. Unlike you, I've read the actual studies and don't run away or bury my head to facts simply because they don't support my agenda. I embrace the full body of evidence, you should try it.
I don't "believe" 9 Saudi's with fake passports" pulled this attack off; i simply accept the overwhelming evidence which proves beyond all reasonable doubt that 15 Saudi nationalists (plus 2 from the UAE, 1 from Egypt and another from Lebanon) carried out the attacks. You don't even know how many hijackers there were or where they were from 🙈 Why talk so arrogantly about something you clearly know very little about? Why pretend it's a mystery when we have all the facts and evidence to back it up? If you (or anybody else) were to furnish me with sufficient, credible evidence of an 'inside job', i would happily change my opinion in a heartbeat. You can not say the same which speaks for itself.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@luisgarcia-vd9ei Sorry what, the 'firmament'??? So you're telling me you actually believe the world is flat and has a dome over it??? 🤣 You can't be serious surely? It's exploding space shuttles??? 🙈 No, we KNOW why the space shuttle Challenger blew up (Discovery blew up on re-entry due to compromised heat tiles after a piece of the foam lagging hit it on take-off) and it had nothing to do with a dome over the earth, that's insane! It exploded due to a failure of the O ring on one of the solid fuel rocket boosters. If it hit this dome you believe in, how was it some of the rocket carried on vertically after the explosion rather than bouncing off? How can anybody in today's age possibly believe such easily refuted, primitive hogwash is beyond me, you're clearly religiously indoctrinated beyond reason and incapable of thinking critically. Thousands of videos proving this fictional, physically impossible dome?? I guarantee you there isn't. Not a single one. You seriously need to raise your bar in terms of your standards of proof. Tell me, what is this dome make of and why hasn't anybody travelled to it? Why haven't you gone there, taken photos and rightly claimed your place in history for making THE biggest discovery in human history??
And no, of course i don't believe what's written in the bible as it's nothing more than the ramblings of primitive minded, highly superstitious, tent-dwelling goat herders who were completely ignorant of the natural world beyond their region. I have science so have no need to believe such superannuated literature that's been shown to be wrong on so many things from beginning to end. Are you going to tell me the universe is 6000yrs old and man didn't evolve from apes too?? 🙈 People like you blow my mind. I'm assuming you're American right? We rarely encounter your sort in my country thankfully.
As for radiation, please don't pretend to know about things you're blatantly utterly ignorant of. And no, we never 'lost the tech' and it's so dishonest of you guys who make this claim. You just purposely take things out of context to force things to fit with your presupposed agenda. Thank you but intellectual suicide isn't on my agenda and i think I'm going to stick with reality 👍🏼
1
-
@luisgarcia-vd9ei Great, so you COMPLETELY ignored everything i said and asked, and you expect anybody to take anything you say seriously?? You're clearly a very dishonest and equally confused individual who was seemingly starved of oxygen at birth.
First off, we do NOT take the shape of the earth or space travel on the word of the government 🤣 That's almost as ridiculous as your claims of the earth being flat. People worked out the shape of the earth thousands of years ago which makes you more ignorant than those living back then, which is truly shocking and shameful. In reality, we don't have to take ANYBODY'S word for it as we can all conduct simple experiments to easily prove it either way. We can also observe the curvature with our own eyes, look at Lake Ponchartrain Causeway for one obvious example. I was lucky enough to fly on Concorde and observed the curvature with my own eyes on that also. There are many experiments we can do, EVERY one confirming the earth is a ball.
As for the earth spinning on its axis, your own brethren scored THE biggest only goal when Bob Knodel and Jeranism spent 20k on a laser gyroscope to prove the earth wasn't spinning, but instead confirmed a 15° per hour drift 🤣👍🏼 You can buty your head to that one too of you like, because all you are is an uneducated, wilfully ignorant, religous nutjob who couldn't possibly be failing harder in life. Only your sorts care so strongly about the shape of the earth, desperately denying incontrovertible evidence in a futile attempt to prop up your feeble, presupposed, faith-based beliefs. If the earth was shown to be flat, it would have no major impact on me. You guys on the other hand, if you accepted the evidence PROVING it's a spinning globe, your faith would be in tatters and your entire world would fall apart. That is the reason you insist on maintaining such a breathtaking level of wilful ignorance. You're too emotionally invested in this, you have too much to lose if you're wrong. I personally couldn't give a damn either way and simply folllow the evidence.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@crangonvulgaris9820 As usual, it all sounds very compelling.......but then we look at the reality and see it isn't compelling at all. Just a typical truther smokescreen. You're talking about ae911truth who are a bogus organisation comprised mostly of crackpots and misfits, around 80% of which have ZERO knowledge, experience or understanding of controlled demolition, structural engineering or high-rise construction. Who cares what say, a software engineer or an electrical engineer thinks about such matters?? It's taken them all these years to collect less than 3500 signatures which make up less than 0.01% of their respective communities. It's a pathetic, puny attempt of an argument from authority. They have been shown to be exceptional dishonest, untrustworthy and corrupt to the core. The AIA actually took a vote as to whether their members believed there should be another investigation and 97% overwhelmingly voted against. So you see, it's YOU who believes he's more knowledgeable and has found something out that the vast consensus of experts have somehow missed, not i..... punk.
You guys keep claiming demolition experts agree the twin towers were demoed yet not one of you can name a single one! Either name one or admit you're lying. No excuses, it should be a simple task but I guarantee you won't. You people don't give a damn about truth.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@Apiaman1 Oh Mel 🙈 You really aught to check your sources because wherever you're getting your information from has to be one ridiculously unreliable source. I swear you've made most of your claims up yourself because I've never heard such nonsense before and I've been calling you kooks out on and off for quite some time.
First off, who is this professor you allege Bush had struck off, have you got a name or do we have to just take your word for this? I can't find any mention of such a person anywhere so I'm sorry, without a name or source to check, i call buIIshit.
Next, you say the pancake theory is buIIshit which, is true in the way that they ruled this out as the reason for collpase although, the floors DID pancake, obviously. They had to, there could be no other outcome as those floors DID pancake as the towers collapsed. You're simply confused because you've never took the time to read the studies you're clearly so desperate to dismiss. Always a sign of somebody with a genuine concern for truth 🙄
So who owns Popular Mechanics
Finally you make out as though a team of demolition workers (that's what you're implying right? Correct me if I'm wrong) entered the towers every night for a week to wire them up for demolition. This is also completely untrue and once again, if you think anybody should just take your word for such ridiculous claims, you're crazy. Burden of proof is on you and before you tell everyone to do some research, i have; plenty. FAR more than you ever will in fact which is why i can say with confidence, you're full of sh!t and will literally believe anything you read on the internet without ever checking its validity. That's the problem with most truthers and one of the key factors in why nobody of worth takes anything you people say, or ever will. For the record, one of those towers would take months to wire for demolition, and then there's the bomb detection dogs that were present in the towers, of do you believe they were in on it too? And then possibly your biggest problem of explaining how the hell both towers managed to collapse at the impact zones which would be IMPOSSIBLE to do in a controlled demolition. That sole fact utterly destroys any claims of controlles demolition, there's simply no getting around that. Any devices located anywhere near those zones would have been instantly destroyed by the plane impacts and ensuing fires. Can you name ONE demolition expert who agrees with you that the twin towers were demoed. Just one will do and when you fail to do so, ask yourself why that is and then ask if you genuinely believe you have a greater knowledge of demolition than the entire demolitions community 🤔
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@wildcardartsent I've read all of your replies to me and addressed them so why you say this i have no idea. As for me not reading much, far more than you it seems as you've clearly not even bothered to read the studies detailing the event.
And yes, by definition you are a truther. I'm not classing you as the same kind of truther as many others (who give zero fks about truth and run away as soon as they have any conspiracy busting facts posed upon them) I've spoken with as we've not spoken long enough for that to be established. I reserve judgement on that one for now and sincerely hope you're not one of those.
To address the questions you've asked me, explosions are common place and completely expected in building fires and even more so in one of this magnitude. There are many, many reasons for this such as electrical transformers going pop, oil filled generators, gas lines, diesal tanks, LNG, huge studs and bolts shearing, elevators freefalling into the ground, debris hitting the ground from a thousand foot up, entire floor slabs slamming down on to one another etc. etc. etc. There were no explosions prior to the plane impacts, that's just conjecture and isn't corroborated by anbody else, nor does the seismic data show anything of the sort. Besides, why on earth would there be bombs in the basement levels when the towers collapsed an hour to ninety minutes (depending which tower we're talking about) after the impacts and both towers collapsed at the impact zones, NOT from the bottom up? That makes no sense whatsoever and how on earth would they have evaded the bomb detection dogs present prior to the attacks? The guy you speak of who was burned and the explosions in the basement were from the ignited jet-fuel that spewed down the elevator and service shafts. All of this has been explained in rational terms using factors we know happened. This makes infinitely more sense than the alternative the conspiracy theorists propose.
In respect to the allegations of insider trading, if you google the words 911myths Put Option then you will find a break down of this and see the reality for yourself. Not quite as the diehard truthers would have you believe. These people are dishonest and twist the facts to suit their agenda. Try finding a demolitions expert who believes the twin towers were demoed and then ask yourself why there aren't any. The very fact both towers collapsed at the impact zones alone utterly refutes any notion of controlled demolition.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@Apiaman1 Mel, you clearly live on a fantasy world and have no issues lying to try and validate your pathetic, failed, kooky conspiracy theories. He lost millions which is easily verified. His payout didn't even cover the cost of the rebuild whilst losing millions in rent, whilst still having to fork out milliona for his lease contract. So Mel, please explain to everyone here how you've concluded he made money from this or admit you're just a lying whackjob.
Again, 'pull' is NOT a demolition term that refers to an explosive demolition, EVER. How dull your life must be to need such conspiracies in it irrespective of the evidence. Changed his tune?? Lol, he changed nothing. If it was as you say, why the hell would he have allowed that interview to be broadcast?? It wasn't live, he could easily have stopped the interview, made his excuses and asked to go again but no, dumb fks like you actually believe an extremely intelligent, savvy individual outed himself in such a way 🤣 Here's the reality Mel, straight from the horse's mouth:
"The biggest decision we had to make on the first day was to clear the area and create a collapse zone around the severely damaged WTC 7 a 47-story building heavily involved in fire. A number of fire officers and companies assessed the damage to the building. The appraisals indicated that the building's integrity was in serious doubt. I issued the orders to pull back the firefighters and define the collapse zone. It was a critical decision." - Dan Nigro
Chief of Department FDNY
I suppose you'll now claim the fire fighters tending to the strucure were all in on this alleged conspiracy too right? 🤪👈🏽 lol
How fo you explain the lack if audible explosions at the moment of collapse? You've clearly never witnessed a controlled demolition because if you had, you'd know just how deafeningly loud they are, yet no such bangs in any of the audios, nor corroborating seismic signature from seismometers located around that area. In fact, it was calculated that the smallest blast capable of failing the building's critical column would have resulted in a sound level of 130 to 140 dB at a distance of at least half a mile, so where was it? I guarantee you won't address any of the fundamental facts put to you because as we both know, there is no rational justification to explain away the above. Just do the inevitable and run away now, just like every other dumb twoofer does when faced with uncomfortable facts they can't reconcile with their feeble-minded delusions. I'd love to have a proper debate with one of you guys but you're all spineless, fact-dodging cowards which is partly why you guys will never be taken seriously. That and the fact you literally have ZERO evidence whatsoever that stands up to scrutiny to support your tinfoil hat buIIsh!t. Now run along and save yourself further humiliation.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@hazelkagey6739 More lunacy spouted as fact when all your claims have been thoroughly, and utterly debunked long ago, even by your own fellow truthers eg. Dr Greg Jenkins. Judy Woods is a proven liar and conmerchant and i don't care if you claim to have been wandering around ground zero in the days that followed (obviously total buIIsh!t), we know full well why the heat remained and it doesn't take a genius to work it out. It's called 'insulation'. Heat was was of the main byproducts of the collapses which I'm sure i don't need to explain. Then all the debris covered it and insulated the area, thus keeping the heat trapped. There were also basement levels which would have served to supply oxygen to these areas and create almost like a furnace type scenario. No need to invent whacky theories about space lasers and magic thermite, of which there is ZERO evidence to support which if true, would be abundant. Vehicles damaged were due to falling, flaming debris, NOT Jewish space lasers 🙈 You're clearly bot wired right Hazel if you truly believe the lunacy you're spouting. Your theory is even more crazy than Judy Woods which is the pseudoscientific theory you seem to be building upon.
Planned demolition you say? Strange how there isn't a single demolitions expert on earth who seems to agree with you, but yes, im the one claiming to be an expert right? 🙄
The fact you actually believe people are getting paid to come on to youtube to counter the insane claims of the tinfoil hat wearing members of the lunatic fringe speaks volumes about the state of your mental health. Seriously, you actually believe that happens?? 🙈 Can you imagine how morally bankrupt somebody would need to be to help cover up the mass murder of thousands of their fellow citizens? Yet not a single whistle-blower 🤔 Sounds likely lol. Get a grip Hazel, is it really that difficult to comprehend that most people simply don't believe the easily debunked madness you do?
What your point about birds hitting and damaging the nose cones of planes is i have no idea. How is that relevant? Do you think the official stance is the planes survived?? No, they were shredded on impact but that doesn't mean they didn't cause immense damage when they hit! Did you skip you high school physics classes? Your painfully poor understanding of basic physics isn't an excuse sorry. Again, not a single physicist on the planet making this argument ...... but you know best, right Hazel? 🤪👈🏽
Regarding the "explosions" in the floors below as the towers are collapsing, as everyone with a shred of knowledge of this event knows, all we're observing is air being violently expelled as floor slabs slam down on to one another. Drop a heavy book on to a dusty table and you'll see what i mean. That air has to go somewhere, how can you not understand something so simple? We observe the EXACT same thing during a verinage demolition which don't use ANY explosives. Please explain to me how both towers managed to collapse precisely at the impact zones?
Ps. You say the public aren't dumb and i agree. That doesn't however make them experts in high-rise construction, structural engineering, controlled demolition, metallurgy, aviation, aeronautical engineering and all the other fields related to this event. In terms of what the experts do think, the overwhelming consensus of experts in every related field stand firmly behind me.
Pps. Just look how yoh congratulate somebody for spreading lies which are easily verified as utter garbage. You have zere concern for truth and are only interested in finding an echo chamber, even though the guy your congratulating on his lies almost certainly thinks your theory is absolute hogwash. I don't think you quite realise how you really are the fringe of the fringe and if you're here looking for confirmation bias, good luck with that.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@davidmusial1611 As for "no science, no logic, just say what someone else said", you mean exactly what you're doing, or did you come up with your fantasy insurance scam reasoning all by yourself? That couldn't possibly be a better example of no science, no logic, just saying what someone else said .......and looking pretty fkng stupid by doing so.
You don't seem to be aware of the scientific studies conducted that detail this event. WE are the ones with the science behind up, that's tha fundamental problem truthers have, zero science to support their lunacy. Try reading those studies, how anout that for a novel idea. You'd probably be the first truther to do so if you did. Tell me David, how would a controlled demolition bring both towers down at the precise locations the towers collapsed? Why aren't there any demolition experts who agree with you the twin towers came down via a controlled demo? 🤔 I'll await your excuses not to answer these fundamental questions. You're all way too predictable 😏
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@jpmonin7429 Jesus, every 9/11 cliché going; all of which long refuted meaning, you don't know how to conduct proper research. Let me help you out a little.
Eye witness accounts of "hearing explosions in the basement", so what? Explosions/loud bangs arr common place and expected in building fires, especially in ones of this magnitude. There are many, many reasons for hearing such things, In the basement what happened was ignited jetfuel flowed down elevator and service shafts. We KNOW this happened so deny it if you like, it won't change the reality. Just ask yourself, why on earth would anybody plant explosives in the basement?? It makes zero sense. In case you hadn't noticed, both towers collapsed at the impact zones. That fact alone refutes any claims of controlled demolition hence why you can't name a single demolitions expert who believes the twin towers were demoed, but hey, if you want to delude yourself that you know better than the entire demolitions community, that's up to you. Just don't expect anybody to take anything you say seriously.
Regarding claims of molten steel, all conjecture sorry. It was assumed it was steel but in reality it was molten aluminum contaminated with a few other metals with lower melting points. There were thousands of tons of aluminium present and we KNOW temperatures were high enough to melt it. If you have any non-conjectural evidence of molten steel (eg. a chemical analysis of the molten metal found) lets hear it. If not it's a moot point.
Regarding WTC7, the studies showed they were not diesel fires so well done for not even bothering to read the actual studies, you clearly have a genuine concern for truth and take the matter very seriously 🙄 Tell me, if it was such a shock and unexpected to collapse, why were the fire fighters publicly asserting a collapse was inevitable several hours before it fell? Why did they pull everyone out and away from the building and create a collapse zone if it wasn't expected to fall? Again, the reality is they know full well that ANY non-concrete reinforced, steel-framed structure left to freeburn will inevitably collapse 100% of the time. There can be no other outcome and WTC7 was especially prone to fire due to the implementation of longspan beams to create an open atrium.
What is your issue with Flight 77 all but disintegrating after slamming into a heavily reinforced concrete structure at 500mph?? You can see footage of a plane much smaller and lighter than a 767 vapourising on impact when hitting a similar wall at the same speed. It's physics and easily verified. That said, plebty of identifiable wreckage of Flight 77 remained, including the black box.
Flight 93 nose-dived into the ground at high speed with its engines throttled up, and you expected that to remain intact?? 🙈 That's absurd. Again though 95% of that plane was recovered (including the black box) by hundreds of volunteers who scoured the area picking it uo, scattered far and wide. All in on the conspiracy along with the fire fighters yeah? Lol, get a grip.
It's also quite common for passports to survive plane crashes and the passport in question was found along with literally thousands of pieces of paper that was also ejected as the planes hit. It's due to paper having a large surface to mass ratio meaning it is far more likely to survive a blast and be ejected. You're obviously suggesting it was planted which is again, ludicrous and would be a needless risk given the guy was on the flight manifest so we know he was on board. What would be the point in planting it? It'd be pointless.
I cannot believe you're still claiming the hijackers are still alive when that was debunked and put to bed within 2 weeks of the event! lol. No serious truther uses that one any more and haven't done for 20yrs. You seriously need to start checking your sources.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@davidmcdonald7298 Ok stupid, clearly reality is an issue for you because neither of the twin towers looked ANYTHING like a controlles demolition which is why there isn't a demolitions expert on earth who seemingly believes otherwise. In fact Mark Loizeaux who heads up CDI Inc. (the world's leading authority on controlled demolition) has stated publicly that it would be impossible to have brought those towers down in that manner via a controlled demolition for several reasons. The fact both towers dropped at the impact zone alone PROVES they were not demoed because what you're failing to understand is that demolition devices are EXTREMELY sensitive to things like heat and geometry, yet you're here telling me that they somehow managed to survive the plane impacts and ensuing fires for 60 and 90 minutes??? Gtfo of here you clown. You blindly believe the utter lunacy spouted by other members of the tinfoil hat wearing lunatic fringe, and you have the audacity to call others sheep?? Hypocrisy, much? 🤔 For the record, all 3 buildings collapsed from fire, not the plane impacts.
Regarding builidng 7, the collapse was anything but perfect and was highly asymmetrical. It was predicted to collapse HOURS before it fell by the fire fighters who were tending it and who assessed it. It burned for 2hrs beyond what its fire-proofing was rated at and as anybody who knows anything about such things would tell you, ANY steel structure (non-concrete reinforced) WILL eventually collapse if left to burn, 100% of the time. The audio tapes and seismic signature prove it wasn't demoed. You're just another deluded, crackpot twoofer who believes everything he hears on the internet whilst refusing to acknowledge any of the fundamental problems like the ones I've just highlighted, desperately tryinfnto cling on to your beliefs because it makes you feel special, figuring out something the rest of us are apparently oblivious to. I'll just stick with the facts and side with the experts thanks 🤪👍🏼
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@davepowell7168 Leslie Robertson who designed the twin towers said on numerous occasions they were designed to withstand strikes from 707's, but one low on fuel in the scenario i previously stated, specifically '‘A low-flying, slow-flying 707 heading for Idlewild.’
'According to Mr. Robertson, the buildings had been designed to withstand the impact of a Boeing 707, but the planes flown into the towers were heavier 767s. And his calculations had been based on the initial impact of the plane; they did not take into account the possibility of what he called a “second event,” like a fire. When the planes struck the towers, they sliced through the steel frames, but the buildings remained standing. Many engineers concluded that conventionally framed buildings would have collapsed soon after impact. The twin towers stood long enough to allow thousands of people to escape. But the fire ignited by the burning jet fuel raged on. The floor trusses lost strength as they heated up, and they began to sag. The floors eventually began pulling away from the exterior columns before the buildings fell.' Being lost in fog whilst coming in to land is the only real way in which a plane like that could potentially hit the towers. Under what other scenario could it realistically happen?
What are the inexplicable effects you're speaking of? We literally have footage of entire floor slabs sagging and beams and columns buckling from the heat near the impact zones, i fail to see any issues here, to me it's blindly obvious how this occurred. Where is the mystery? Steel weakens when heated and steel under such immense load is always going to succumb even quicker. The official studies stand up to scrutiny and are accept by the vast consensus of engineers in relative fields. Anybody who serious issue with them only have to submit their findings to the MIT or the likes and if their claims stand up, they overturn the official stance. Why hasn't anybody managed to do this in over 20yrs?
Would you mind answering what i asked you in my last comment please?
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@davepowell7168 Did you delete your comment David? I managed to read it before it disappeared and find it funny how you have the audacity to question other people's ability to think critically, whilst claiming the government are paying people to comment on youtube in order to counter the already debunked arguments, that hold no weight whatsoever in academia. Paying people to literally assist in the cover-up of the murder of thousands of their fellow countrymen, without a single individual's conscience getting the better of them and blowing the whistle on such a heinous crime. I mean, you clearly haven't thought this through. Do you have any evidence of this going on, or is it all just based on you irrationally believing anyone with an opposing view and a voice, is automatically being paid by the government to fend off people like yourself, to help keep the conspiracy going? Twenty years later and it's still going on? Quite the long con, I wonder how long they'll keep paying all these unscrupulous creatures to do their treacherous work? I wonder what the recruitment process is? 🤔 If you can't see how utterly absurd such a belief to be, then you have no place questioning the cognitive abilities of others.
Happy at least that you now accept the openess of the floors of the twin towers. Quite like yourself, they were pretty much full of hot air. And farts.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
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
-
1
-
@johnlively819 Moving on because, that's not where your dishonesty ends. You being up Silverstein's interview where he stated they decided to pull it to save risking any more lives, of which he was OBVIOUSLY referring to pulling the operation and pulling everybody out and away from a building they had assessed and deemed to be structurally unsound and about to collapse. Contrary to your typical BS, the term 'pull' in demolition does NOT refer to an explosive demolition, EVER. It is a rarelynused term that refers to a structure being rigged up with cables attached to excavators which then pull the structure down in a way so as not to damage surrounding buildings. A term a property mogul would very unlikely know, as would the fire chief who was actually the one who made that call, NOT Silverstein as you claim. To even suggest Silverstein would out himself in such a way on a pre-recorded interview that he could easily have just scrapped and started again the second he realised he'd let the cat out of the bag, once again highlights just how mental you people are. I mean, AS IF!!!! 🤣 As i said, this was NOT Silverstein's call to make and he gave zero orders that day. It was in fact the sole decision of Chief of Department Dan Nigro who has publicly corrected your lies and stated that he was referring to pulling the operation and pulling everyone back to create a safe collapse zone as a collapse was inevitable.
Yes the BBC did prematurely report the buildings demise as a result of the fire fighters publicly stating the building was about to collapse. The BBC simply made the mistake of saying it had, as opposed to saying it was. A simple error and one of several fundamental errors reported that day, as is often the case in live news reports. You clowns simply seize on this because again, you feel it supports your agenda. I should say, wrongly feel it supports your agenda because it doesn't and you've clearly not thought this through. Explain to me why they would give the BBC inside information? What possible benefit would they gain from this? NONE WHATSOEVER!! All they would do is create an utterly pointless risk and a HUGE risk at that. All they would have had to do is wait for it to collapse and they'd have reported it as it happened without any risk whatsoever. You're seemingly too dumb to have worked that one out, or simply more dishonesty?
1
-
@johnlively819 Unfortunately the depths of your depravity doesn't end there and you go on to claim nothing hit WTC7 when every man and his dog knows full well it sustained a HUGE amount of structural damage from thousands of tons of falling debris dropping on to it from as high as a thousands foot. I'd hardly say that was nothing. This led yo widespread fires on many floors that the fire department decided to let freeburn, and thus willingly allowing it to collapse because there could be no other outcome given the design of the structure. They knew this when they made this decision, hence why they stated it would "DEFINITELY" collapse several HOURS before it fell. As i told you previously, leave ANY non-concrete reinforced, steel-framed structure to freeburn and it will collapse 100% of the time. Heat weakens steel, it's that simple.
You then ask why the debria didn't make other buildings collapse that were hit, and the simple answer to that is, because they were all concrete reinforced and of completely different, incomparable design. And no, Silverstein didn't own WTC7, he leased it. In fact he leased the entire World Trade complex, including all those other buildings that got hit that didn't collapse so, WRONF AGAIN!!!
You and your 19hr documentary lol, try conducting some proper research for a change you lazy, uneducated crackpot. Perhaps then you won't be made to look so stupid. Spread lies like this and there will always be somebody who will call you out and expose you. You cant even use the excuse of ignorance as you've read the statements from Chief Dan Nigro confirming what I've said, along with statements from the other fire fighters who tended to building 7, all detailing the immense structural damage and fires of WTC7. You're just an outright, shameless liar, no excuses.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@unknowngentile419 Of course you're an architect, i believe you ......honest 🙄 An architect who hasn't even bothered to read the actual studies that would no doubt be very interesting to an actual architect. The fact you say it wasn't hit by anything speaks for itself, you clearly know NOTHING about this topic, yet here you are, being an arrogant arsehoIe trying to lord it over me with your bogus claims of imaginary career paths. If you really are an architect, going on what you've said, i wouldn't let you design me a bird bath. Of course WTC7 was hit! It sustained HUGE structural damage from THOUSANDS of tons of falling debris from the collapsing North tower! How do you not know this? As well as all the structural damage, there were widespread fires across many floors of which were left to freeburn. Being an architect, you're no doubt aware of the purpose and importance of fire-proofing, though you're somehow unable to grasp that this building had freeburned without any attempt to stem the blaze, for 2hrs beyond what it's fire proofing was rated at. Another key factor was the implementation of longspan beams used to create a large open atrium which as you will know, are more susceptible to heat than shortspan beams for obvious reason. This is what gave the impression that the building fell in on itself.
Well done for completely deflecting my previous response and changing the subject. Is that because you couldn't refute the verifiable facts i put to you, or find a single demolitions expert who agrees with you? You couldn't even justify your stupid claim that the towers couldn't have come down in the time they came down! You're just a typical, lying, fact-dodging truther who will no doubt run away rather than address the fundamental problems with your reasoning or acknowledge any evidence or facts that oppose your kooky conspiracy theories. That's not the actions of somebody with a genuine concern for truth.
Regarding your claim the attack was "put into movies and videogames before it even happened", i truly and honestly cannot even think what you possibly mean by this. Care to explain exactly what you're saying here because to suggest they would do this purposely is beyond lunacy and if that's what you believe then i can smell the reek of mental instability emanating from yourself from here.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Michael Hoffman
"There was a huge gaping hole and it was scattered throughout there. It was a huge hole. I would say it was probably about a third of it, right in the middle of it.....On the north and east side of 7 it didn’t look like there was any damage at all, but then you looked on the south side of 7 there had to be a hole 20 stories tall in the building, with fire on several floors. Debris was falling down on the building and it didn’t look good.
That was the first time really my stomach tightened up because the building didn’t look good......Then this other officer I’m standing next to said, that building doesn’t look straight. So I’m standing there. I’m looking at the building. It didn’t look right, but, well, we’ll go in, we’ll see. So we gathered up rollups and most of us had masks at that time. We headed toward 7. And just around we were about a hundred yards away and Butch Brandies came running up. He said forget it, nobody’s going into 7, there’s creaking, there are noises coming out of there, so we just stopped." - Captain Chris Boyle NYFD
"they were worried about 7 World Trade Center, which is right behind it, coming down. We were up on the upper floors of the Verizon building looking at it. You could just see the whole bottom corner of the building was gone. We could look right out over to where the Trade Centers were because we were that high up. Looking over the smaller buildings. I just remember it was tremendous, tremendous fires going on. Finally they pulled us out." - Richard Banaciski NYFD Firefigher
How many more would you like? Ignorance is not a defence sorry stupid 🤷🏽♂️
1
-
1
-
Michael Hoffman There was no countdown, that myth was well and truly shut down and the fact you still believe this speaks volumes about your ability to conduct proper research. This only serves to prove categorically how easily duped and gullible you are. To say this fictional countdown was captured on film just highlights how readily you're will to lie. If you're going to continue with this ludicrous, buIIsh!t claim then send a link/cite your source and show everyone how easily fooled you are.
Next you try and explain to me how demolitions work with your pigeon understanding based on BS you've heard on conspiracy videos. In reality however, the audio tapes and seismic data alone PROVE WTC7 wasn't an explosive demolition. If you've ever witnessed an actual demolition, then you'd know how loud they are. What magical, silent explosives do you believe were used exactly? 😂 The smallest blast required to take the critical column of WTC7 would result in an explosion with a sound level of 130 decibels. No such blast is on any of the audios. How do you reconcile that fact with your kooky conspiracy beliefs?
WTC7 did NOT collapse into it's footprint and the reason it appeared to 'implode' is quite simple due to the building's design, with the implementation of longspan beams used to create a large open atrium. How do you not know this? How do you expect anybody to take anything you say seriously when you are less than clueless regarding the basics? Yet here you are, trying to pretend you're some kind of demolitions expert lol, it's quite hilarious. If these "teams" you speak of that you allege wired WTC7 with explosives, how come nobody saw anything? The building was occupied and it would have taken weeks to wire and it would have required access to key places and peeles back to the supports in order to drop it with any kind of precision. Another huge problem for your bizarre theory is, this building was randomly hit by debris from the towers. Nobody couldnhave predicted that building would have been hit for sure or sustained such huge, structural damage. So do you not think that would have raised a few eyebrows had it not been hit and just suddenly collapsed?? And why would they need to demolished WTC7?? Any records contained in there were no doubt backed up, and besides, would it not be easier to just incinerate any paperwork etc. or dump it in the sea, rather than going to such lengths? A demolition is hardly the most secure or reliable means to destroy paperwork to say the least. What you're suggesting is sheer, unadulterated lunacy of the highest order.
Name ONE other non-concrete reinforced, steel framed structure that you claim burned for 12hrs without collapsing and I'll gladly explain to you just how wrong you are.
Finally you appeal to one of the most weakest arguments from authority I've ever heard. Ae911truth are a tiny, insignificant number of whackjobs that make up less the 0.01% of their respective communities. It's took them 2 decades to collect just 3500 signatures which is just pathetic lol. Out of those 3500, around 80% of them have ZERO experience, knowledge or understanding of structural engineering, high-rise construction or controlled demolition. Who cares what a software engineer and the like think on this matter?? Most of them are as clueless as you. So that's 600 out of the millions of engineers out there. Wow 😂 What makes this even worse is that they have all seemingly forgotten how the scientific process works and even tried to fraudulently bypass it. The organisation is a joke. The AIA even spoke out to say they do not agree with their opinions. Again, this just goes to expose how easily you are conned.
Your final, fundamentally flawed argument regarding Silverstein, is once again easily refuted as more absurd nonsense. First off, what he said was that "they" decided to pull, referring to pulling the operation and pulling the fire fighters out and away to save risking any more lives. It was a pre-recorded interview so let's pretend he slipped up, he would have immediately realised and stopped the interview and asked to do a retake, obviously lol. And no, 'pull' is a rarely used term used only by demolition professionals which refers PURELY to a structure being rigged up with cables attached to excavators which then pull the structure down to avoid damaging surrounding structures. Never, EVER does it refer to an explosive demolition so wrong again. Silverstein never made that call either, it was entirely the decision of Chief of Department Dan Nigro. How do you explain the fire fighters tending to WTC7, publicly stating a collapse was inevitable several hours prior to it falling? Why did they set up a collapase zone? Are you seriously suggesting the fire fighters were in on this alleged conspiracy?? You're out of your mind lol.
Now if you have any actual evidence to support your crazy notions, then present it because so far you've given nothing and just repeated arguments that have been long debunked.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@joshngu6631 You see your problem is that because you don't trust the government (which, for the record i don't either), you automatically assume they're behind everything bad that happens which is just irrational. I follow the evidence, it's that simple. In the case of 911, although the conspiracies initially sound very compelling after watching things like Zeitgeist, Loose Change and all the other awful, specious conspiracy movies, but when you take the time to properly research each claim made, it soon becomes clear there's no truth to them whatsoever. How about you show me what you believe to be the most compelling evidence of a conspiracy and let's see. In fact, just show me ANY evidence of conspiracy, that would be start because so far, all I'm hearing are the same, parroted lies/half-truthes that were debunked years ago. If you can show me sufficient, credible evidence of a conspiracy, I'll gladly change my opinion in a heartbeat.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@shilohwehrmacht2947 Ok first off show me your evidence that WTC7 had ANYTHING whatsoever to do with the so-called 'missing 2.3 trillion' dollars that was never actually missing and later accounted for, because i call buIIsh!t. You saying it doesn't make it true and i can't find ANY evidence whatsoever to back that up. And you seriously don't think such information would have been backed up??? 🤣 Get real. Most of you clowns claim it was rhe Pentagon office that was hit that was investigating it, so which was it? Evidence please because in the words of the mighty Hitchens, 'what can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed withour evidence'. In fact i will say now, i guarantee you will dodge this because as you know, you've just taken that claim on blind faith after hearing some other tinfoil hat wearing whackjob saying it. It's BS mate, no truth to it whatsoever. It's common knowledge and no secret whatsoever that the CIA had an office in there and set up a command point after the 93 bombing of the twin towers, but beyond that, there's no link whatsoever. Prove me wrong.
Secondly, heat weakens steel. It's that simple. They were non-concrete reinforced structures which made them far more susceptible to heat, hence why we use fire-proofing. The fire-proofing incidentally was blasted off by the impacts so the fact they remained standing as long as they did was nothing short of a miracle. It should also be noted that we literally have footage of emtire floor slabs sagging and beams buckling from heat prior to collapse. Theres no mystery here, we know why they collapsed and we have no need to invent crazy-arsed conspiracy theories to justify any of it.
In respect to building 7, how am i meant to take you seriously when you claim it wasn't hit by anything?? 🙈 In reality it was hit by thousands of tons of debris from the collapsing towers which resulted in huge structural damage and widespread fires across many floors, of which were left to freeburn. Any non-concrete reinforced structure left to freeburn will eventually collapse, every time. Wtc7 burned for 2hrs beyond what its fire-proofing was rated at. Again, no mystery at all, and the fire fighters who tended to it even publicly stated that a collapse was inevitable. Why talk about things you clearly know nothing about??
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@Buildinc1 Ok well first off there is literally ZERO evidence whatsoever of a missile strike. None. Nada. There IS however an ton of evidence that shows it was AA Flight 77. 136 DIRECT eye-witnesses, all confirming a plane. Some of those eye-witnesses were airline pilots on their morning commute who identified the aircraft as a 757 displaying the American Airlines livery. Are you trying to tell me that highly experienced pilots who literally flew those planes, could not tell the difference between a Cruise missile which is 22ft in length with a 9ft wingspan, and a 155ft jet airliner with a 125ft wingspan?? Lol, come on Bill, are you serious?
You say every pilot under the sun has said the manoeuvre was impossible which is obviously an outright lie. Only a small, tiny insignificant number of pilots under that direction of the lunatic that is John Lear, have said such a thing. The VAST majority of pilots have no issue with it whatsoever and have explained how that was just a standard manoeuvre used by pilots to lose altitude when coming in to land. In fact it shows what a poor pilot Hanjour was by coming in way too fast and way too high, forcing him to make this move. It wasn't that he was a good pilot, he was simply reckless with no concern for safety. The footage confirms the eye-witness reports as well as the black box data and damage to surrounding structures hit on approach of which also confirm perfectly the wingspan of a 757 as well as the engine separation. How the hell would a missile take out light posts either side of a road with a 9ft wingspan?? The hole in ring D you mentioned was actually ring C and again only serves to debunk your missile theory given how cruise missiles detonate on impact. They dont detonate, then continue through another wall before detonating again. This hole was created by the heavy landing gear of which we can even see in the images taken by first responders. The wreckage you mentioned i am assuming you're referring to the piece of engine that was imaged, as opposed to the pieces of fuselage that still bore the American Airlines livery? This piece of an engine has been proven categorically to have come from the very engine used on that particular airliner. Your claims and silly conspiracy theories have all been utterly debunked whether you accept that or not. I can send links confirming anything I've said vu youtube isn't liking me sending links any more for some reason. I am however happy to try if you wish.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@touqeerahmed4032 No, unlike you i actually do understand as I've fitted hundreds of them, some actually in government buildings, and NEVER have i installed any pointing away from the building unless it's covering a car park. Yes, MONITORING people coming and going. Basically what you're saying is, you DON'T know of ANY pointing away from the Pentagon, specifically in the direction of the plane's approach. No need for any bluster, let's just say it how it is.
As for camera quality, this was standard back in 2001, set at 1 - 5 fps because believe it or not, whek that system was installed, never did they ever imagine somebody would steal a passenger airliner and fly it into the Pentagon. To expect something set at 1fps to capture an object travelling around 500mph is pretty naive. Work out how much ground an object travelling at 500mph covers per second amd you'll see what i mean. As i said previously, any footage would only be classed as fake by you guys regardless so it's a pointless argument anyway. ALL evidence confirms a Boeing 757 crashed into the Pentagon, show me ANY that shows otherwise. I notice you also seem reluctant to state what you actually believe. Why is that? I'll ask you again, do you accept AA Flight 77 crashed into the Pentagon that day, and if not then what do you believe it was?
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@markasmith194 Ok first off, search 'Phantom F4 sled test' here in youtube and watch what happens to a smaller, lighter aircraft with less mass slams into a wall at 500mph and then come back and tell me you seriously expected ANY wing debris to survive or that we should have been able to piece the plane back together 🤣🤣🤣 The fact we have so much debris was due only to the size of a 757.
Secondly, a cruise missile is 22ft long with a wingspan of 9ft. A Boeing 757 is 155ft long with a wingspan of 125ft. So what you're saying is, 136 direct eye-witnesses (some of whom were pilots who flew those model aircraft), on their morning commute to work, couldn't tell the difference between those 2 things? You're insane lol.
Next, please explain how a 9ft wide missile takes out lamppost on either side of a street, slice tops off trees, hit an electrical generator and clipped a wall without detonating, before detonating on impact and then again after it had entered the building to create an exit hole? Please explain where all the 757 debris came from (including the black box), the personal belongings of the passengers as well as their physical remains? Were the ATC staff all in on this alleged conspiracy too? There's many more hugely fundamental flaws in your logic but i think I've made my point. Now let's see how much you genuinely seek truth......
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
There was nothing extraordinary about any manoeuvres made by Flight 77 that day. In fact the fact he came in too fast and too high, forcing him to make the final turn, showed his lack of experience. He wasn't a good pilot, just reckless. Structures were hit on approach and confirm the wingspan and engine separation of a Boeing 757. It would be impossible for a missile to hit structures that distance apart, unless you know of ones that zigzag to their targets? 136 people watched that plane approach and hit, every one saying they saw a plane. There were even pllots amongst the eye witnesses who confirmed it to be a 757, as does the wreckage, including the black box. The blast you mention is clearly a kerosene explosion and nothing like a missile detonation.
Building 7 didn’t collapse at freefall, the facade of the structure did after it had become detached from the building. The actual collapse of the building itself was already well underway at this point as we can observe from the Penthouse collapsing first. Contrary to truther belief, freefall can and does occur from buckling. The difference between that and freefall created by demolition, is almost instant, not midway through the collapse.
Your anecdotal tale of structural engineers isn't really offering much. Have you got any names at least, or any of their actual arguments against the NIST investigation?
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@makguy1280 The traffic cameras on the highway weren't installed until after the attacks and CCTV cameras on shops would obviously have been directed towards the shops entrances and not randomly pointing down the street looking for hijacked airliners.
You obviously didn't bother to look at all the evidence on that website because if you had, there would be no way on earth you would still reject the incontestable fact AA77 crashed there that day. 136 direct eye-witnesses, EVERY one confirm seeing a plane. Not a single witness saw anything other than a plane. Some witnesses were pilots on their morning commute to Reagan airport who specifically identified it as a 757. Two fire fighters literally dived out of the way, fearing for their lives thinking the plane was going to hit them. The objects and structures struck on approach also confirm the wingspan and engine separation of a 757. The wreckage including engines, wheels, landing gear, pieces of fuselage displaying the AA livery and the black box of which was decoded to show the data from AA77's final 11 flights, all confirm that plane crashed there that day, as does the physical remains of all those on board that were recovered in what was THE biggest forensic investigation in history. There were literally images and personal accounts from first responders of the scorched remains of passengers still strapped into their seat, of which stood up as evidence in court without any objection from the defence, during the Moussaoui trial. The evidence is overwhelming and conclusive and anybody who denies it does so through in ignorance of the available evidence. In your case, a breathtaking display of wilful ignorance given how you've dismissed the evidence put to you after a mere glance. If only you gave the actual evidence as much time and effort as you've put in to watching conspiracy videos online.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@ramzichouk4080 Yes they did, but then explosions are common and expected in building fires. You had electrical transformers going pop, huge studs shearing, oil-filled generators, LNG, gas lines fracturing, elevators freefalling into the ground, huge pieces of debris hitting the ground after falljng a thousand feet, exothermic reactions of water coming into contact with molten aluminum, entire floor slabs slamming down on top of one another, the list is endless. Demolitions however, explosions happen at the moment of collapse, NOT throughout 60-90 periods leading up to collapse. There isn't a single demolitions expert on the planet claiming the twin towers were demolished, so now you're claiming to know more about demolition than the entire demolitions community. Funny though how you accept fire fighters saying things you THINK support your agenda whilst shamelessly ignoring those who say things which oppose it. You're a fraud mate; a fact dodging coward.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@ramzichouk4080 And just in case you're still confused by what Chief Nigro said and meant, here's another statement from him. You will also find video footage of him directly addressing your insane conspiracy claims regarding WTC7. Look it up and see what he has to say about whackjobs like you spreadin such lies:
"Early on the afternoon of September 11th 2001, following the collapse of WTC 1 & 2, I feared a collapse of WTC 7 (as did many on my staff).
The reasons are as follows:
1 - Although prior to that day high-rise structures had never collapsed, The collapse of WTC 1 & 2 showed that certain high-rise structures subjected to damage from impact and from fire will collapse.
2. The collapse of WTC 1 damaged portions of the lower floors of WTC 7.
3. WTC 7, we knew, was built on a small number of large columns providing an open Atrium on the lower levels.
4. numerous fires on many floors of WTC 7 burned without sufficient water supply to attack them.
For these reasons I made the decision (without consulting the owner, the mayor or anyone else - as ranking fire officer, that decision was my responsibility) to clear a collapse zone surrounding the building and to stop all activity within that zone. Approximately three hours after that order was given, WTC 7 collapsed.
Conspiracy theories abound and I believe firmly that all of them are without merit.
Regards, Dan Nigro
Chief of Department FDNY
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@thethree60five Ok so cutting through all the superfluous, deranged buIIsh!t, I'll get straight to your claims.
You rightly say it's the opinions of experts (eg. engineers from relevant backgrounds etc.) that matter, rather than the opinions of the unlearned, wanna be experts on youtube. Unfortunately for you, the overwhelming consensus of experts in ALL related fields have no issue with the official studies. Only a tiny, insignificant number of fringe lunatics say otherwise and their reasoning has been utterly debunked and scientifically rejected, hence why they refuse to go the implicit route of peer-review, choosing instead to release their 'work' in pay-to-publish journals which will literally publish anything for a price. This hold zero weight in academia so going by your own standards, your beliefs fail.
The melting point of steel is irrelevant given how NO steel melted nor needed to. Feel free to provide ANY non-conjectural evidence of molten steel but we both know you have none. At around 550 degrees, structural steel has lost 50% of its initial strength. That steel was under immense load therefore losing that much of its strength would obviously invoke a collapse. We literally have footage of the steel columns and beams buckling from heat at the collapse zone prior to collapse, as well as entire floor slabs sagging, pulling in the perimeter columns which is what led to the collapse.
The difference between a missile engine and a jet engine used kn a 757 is vastly different. The engines found however have been identified and verified by aerospace engineers as coming from the specific model of 757 engine used on AA77. We have images of the exact parts found coupled up with images of those parts being installed during production. It seems as though you were expecting to see the complete engines, complete with engine casings etc. lol. That obviously wasn't going to happen and the engine casing, blades and lighter parts were naturally stripped and obliterated on impact. The missile theory has to be one of the easiest theories to debunk on many grounds eg. 136 people who saw it ALL report seeing a plane; damage to surrounding structures confirm the dimensions of a 757's wingspan and engine separation (how could a missile take out lampposts over 100ft apart??); the blatant kerosene explosion which is completely different to a missile strike; the mass of wreckage identifiable to a 757 including engines, landing gear and black box; the remains of the passengers all found at the crash site; the fact there was an exit hole; radar track from Dulles airport to the Pentagon, and much more.
The cctv footage wasn't confiscated, it was handed in willingly and viewed as is standard practice for a crime scene. Any footage that showed anything was released. The fact is, there were no security cameras pointing away from the building, pointing down the street facing the direction of approach. Why would there be when cctv cameras are there to protect the perimeter and monitor people entering and leaving the building. It's just a strawman argument used to divert from the mountain of proof we have. The fact you people focus on the lack of footage whilst ignoring the actual evidence speaks for itself.
Next you say there were no impact marks from the wings which isn't true. We have images of a wing impact mark as well as the where the vertical stabiliser hit. Ignorance of the evidence isn't absence of evidence. Search the words 'right blogger b@stard Pentagon' and you'll find those images plus much more.
Regarding Flight 93, yes i have indeed seen images of wreckage, how have you not?? We have images of a large piece of fuselage and of enginsles and landing gear being dug out of the ground. You think was planted? Just goes to show how poor your research skills are, but then you believe Loose Change to be a reliable source when it's even rejected by many truthers as garbage. Alex Jones most definitely produced it, maybe not the original, but the original was forced to be amended due to the number of falsehoods made. 95% of Flight 93 was recovered at and around the crash site, retrieved by hundreds of volunteers who scoured the area. All in on this alleged conspiracy, is that what you believe? As with AA77, the black box was also recovered along with the remains of all the passengers whos fragmented remains were found within an acre sized area of the crash site. Again, the missile theory has been well and truly debunked and the evidence simply does not support this theory. Everything's I've said is verifiable and i can back it al up, so let's see just how much you do actually believe "facts matter" as I'm pretty certain you're going to just hand-wave away everything I've said without a seconds thought. The only 'facts' conspiracy theorists care about are those that support their theories, immediately rejecting any that conflict.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@tek3311 What do you mean it doesn't add up?? Of course it does. The last recording on the CVR qas 10:03.
Again, what smoke amd explosions? If the plane was taken down by a missile, there would be no reports of smoke or missiles, the plane would have had a huge hole ripped through it and would have broken up midair, which we know it didn't.
Claiming the government admitted the 'let's roll' remark was a lie is a total fabrication, cite your source because I'd love to know where you're getting this information from. I can only assume a notoriously unreliable conspiracy website.
Of course it wasn't on the CVR, do you know what the CVR is?? How would a comment made in the fuselage be recorded on the cockpit voice recorder? Your argument makes no sense.
The transcript is quite clear and the hijackers knew they had no chance against the revolt because they were outnumbered, so they made the decision to ditch the plane. They mpst certainly did breach the cockpit door by repeatedly smashing the heavy food trolley into it. No i dont speak Arabic an don't need to. Millions of people do and could easily translate it word for word. We're not talking ancient Hebrew here, this is momern dialect EASILY translated by any Arabic speaking individual.
Oh p!ss off the coroner lied 🤣 You really are plucking this right out of your backside. Wallace Miller was a highly respected county coroner who you are accusing of helping cover up mass murder, that's disgusting. Show me ANY evidence of body parts found further afield. You won't because there isn't any. Only small, light pieces of the aircraft was found in the lake and the myths that form the basis of your ridiculous beliefs have been long debunked.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@bradd188 So your argument is one of incredulity, and that's why nobody takes you clowns seriously. Regardless of your unsurpassed intuitive reasoning, they most definitely did NOT foresee such an attack coming from an internal flight. I don't care if you believe that or not, facts remain facts irrespective of your unlearned, baseless opinion.
As for why the towers collapsed, the fact you're unaware exposes your lazy, inept research skills. Try reading the actual, unrefuted studies you're so desperate to dismiss and you might actual learn something and save yourself further embarrassment. Can you name ONE single demolitions expert who agrees with you that the twin towers were demoed? Or do you believe you know better than the ENTIRE demolitions community? Please explain how a controlled demolition would bring both towers down precisely at the impact zones because the world's leading authority on demolition say that would have been, and i quote, "impossible". In reality, the collapses looked NOTHING like controlled demolitions as controlled demolitions go from the bottom up.
And yes, they were designed to withstand plane strikes, but what you fail to recognise is the strikes they were designed to withstand were the scenario of a smaller, lighter aircraft (a 707) getting lost in fog as it was coming into land and therefore travelling around 150mph, with all its fuel spent. They were NOT designed to withstand stand strikes from larger aircraft travelling 3 times that speed, fully laden with fuel. Those are incomparable circumstances and vastly different forces at play. For the record, both towers withstood the strikes exceptionally well in case you hadn't noticed. They collapsed long after due to the fires. Please stop talking about things you are clearly so utterly ignorant of and spreading demonstrably false lies.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1