# Proof the cover story for 9/111 began immediately after the attacks



## LA RAM FAN (Mar 19, 2012)

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BVFZu97fWbU&feature=related]9 11 THE BIG CLUE EVERYONE MISSED - YouTube[/ame]

Here is this disinformation agent automatically concluding before ANYBODY has even NIST,that the towers fell due to structural failure from the fires saying the intense heat caused it. Intense heat? yeah thats why in one of the famous pics posted many times over  the years we see a woman leaning against the towers even though the flames are allegedly so intense.

 even though the films show the majority of the explosion took place outside the towers the fires are really intense.

Even though there was black smoke emitting from the towers proving the fires were oxygen starved and not serious at all just like the firefighters are recorded saying before they collapsed and there have been many cases over the years of towers such as the one in philadelphia where it was lit up like a torch unlike the twin towers, and did not collapse,these twin towers heat was so intense it caused strutural failure and for them to collapse. good one.

In somehow,immediately these newscasters had physic powers to declare that very day shortly after the attacks,  that Osama Bin Laden was behind the attacks.

Best fairy tale ever created by the government and many blind sheep americans,many of them being here at this site as well,bought this fairy tale hook,line and sinker.

Boy our school systems are failing.either that or many people here  in the states,slept through junior high school science classes.

These fires were not hot enough to melt a marshmellow,let along cause structural failure.

good one.it would have been great comedy material for a comedy routine if it wasnt such a tragedy.

Oh and disinfo agents,yes I know I said 9/111 in the thread instead of 9/11,yes I just realised that, but I cant change the title,only a mod can.


----------



## Rat in the Hat (Mar 19, 2012)

9/11 inside job said:


> 9 11 THE BIG CLUE EVERYONE MISSED - YouTube
> 
> Here is this disinformation agent automatically concluding before ANYBODY has even NIST,that the towers fell due to structural failure from the fires saying the intense heat caused it. Intense heat? yeah thats why in one of the famous pics posted many times over  the years we see a woman leaning against the towers even though the flames are allegedly so intense.
> 
> ...





> Even though there was black smoke emitting from the towers proving the fires were oxygen starved



*Stop LYING!!!!!*

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iV1jhYRT1qA]Schianto jet a Bever (GR) 19.12.2010 - YouTube[/ame]

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RTFq4kYVliE]Large Tire Fire Seen From Illinois At 22nd And Missouri In Gary Indiana - YouTube[/ame]


----------



## LA RAM FAN (Mar 19, 2012)

Like clockwork,so predicatable.There was never any doubt in my mind that  the FIRST Poster who would post on this thread would be a paid disinformation agent troll.so sad you guys are so predictable that I can predict you all so well.

I knew it wouldnt be just a loyal Bush dupe in denial and afraid of the truth such as Godboy or Toto for instance.Like I said,I knew it would be a paid disinfo agent troll because you guys are so predictable its so sad and pathetic.


----------



## Light (Mar 19, 2012)

I noticed that you didn't address the point he was trying to make.
Is it that he showed his work and with two small videos discredited your claim SOUNDLY? Which by the way, was discredited YEARS ago!
Which left you with no course of action except to attack his character!?
Or are you too dumb to understand what was being shown to you?


----------



## Obamerican (Mar 19, 2012)

Light said:


> I noticed that you didn't address the point he was trying to make.
> Is it that he showed his work and with two small videos discredited your claim SOUNDLY? Which by the way, was discredited YEARS ago!
> Which left you with no course of action except to attack his character!?
> Or are you too dumb to understand what was being shown to you?


Go back and check his "character" out and see who you're siding with before making an ass out of yourself. Or you're just a sock of Rimjob. Are you?


----------



## Obamerican (Mar 19, 2012)

So far the only backer of Rimjob is a sock he just created. Fucking beautiful!!


----------



## Liability (Mar 19, 2012)

Who can ever forget 9/111?

Or 999/11111111111 for that matter?


----------



## Rat in the Hat (Mar 19, 2012)

Obamerican said:


> Light said:
> 
> 
> > I noticed that you didn't address the point he was trying to make.
> ...



And exactly what is wrong with Light siding with me that the OP is lying??


----------



## Obamerican (Mar 19, 2012)

Liability said:


> Who can ever forget 9/111?
> 
> Or 999/11111111111 for that matter?


----------



## Obamerican (Mar 19, 2012)

Wasn't Rimjob the one that didn't know what year 9/11 happened?


----------



## eots (Mar 19, 2012)

*Former Chief of NIST's Fire Science Division Calls for Independent Review of World Trade Center Investigation*


although the key elements of the core steel were demographically labeled. A careful reading of the NIST report shows that they have *no evidence that the temperatures they predict as necessary for failure are corroborated by findings* of the little steel debris they have.

OpEdNews - Page 2 of Article: Former Chief of NIST's Fire Science Division Calls for Independent Review of World Trade Center Investigation


----------



## Obamerican (Mar 19, 2012)

Rat in the Hat said:


> Obamerican said:
> 
> 
> > Light said:
> ...


DAMN!! Missed a post in my scrolling. Sorry, Light!!


----------



## Light (Mar 19, 2012)

Wow, I just noticed that this "9/11 inside job" lists the people he puts on his ignore list.  How stupid is THAT!!  So, you log onto a discussion board and put people with apposing viewpoints on "ignore"?  So you only want to talk to people that don't challenge your intellect?  That is jaw-dropping idiocy.


----------



## Rat in the Hat (Mar 19, 2012)

Light said:


> Wow, I just noticed that this "9/11 inside job" lists the people he puts on his ignore list.  How stupid is THAT!!  So, you log onto a discussion board and put people with apposing viewpoints on "ignore"?  So you only want to talk to people that don't challenge your intellect?  That is jaw-dropping idiocy.



The funny part is that he claims we are on ignore, yet references our posts in his replies.


----------



## eots (Mar 19, 2012)

Light said:


> Wow, I just noticed that this "9/11 inside job" lists the people he puts on his ignore list.  How stupid is THAT!!  So, you log onto a discussion board and put people with apposing viewpoints on "ignore"?  So you only want to talk to people that don't challenge your intellect?  That is jaw-dropping idiocy.



there is no  intellectual challenge presented , there are only inane little picture , homosexual imaginings and projections


----------



## Obamerican (Mar 19, 2012)

Light said:


> Wow, I just noticed that this "9/11 inside job" lists the people he puts on his ignore list.  How stupid is THAT!!  So, you log onto a discussion board and put people with apposing viewpoints on "ignore"?  So you only want to talk to people that don't challenge your intellect?  That is jaw-dropping idiocy.


Rimjob has no intellect to challenge.


----------



## Light (Mar 19, 2012)

Obamerican said:


> Rat in the Hat said:
> 
> 
> > Obamerican said:
> ...



No problem!

I would have said the same thing if I thought someone was agreeing with the OP.


----------



## Obamerican (Mar 19, 2012)

eots said:


> Light said:
> 
> 
> > Wow, I just noticed that this "9/11 inside job" lists the people he puts on his ignore list.  How stupid is THAT!!  So, you log onto a discussion board and put people with apposing viewpoints on "ignore"?  So you only want to talk to people that don't challenge your intellect?  That is jaw-dropping idiocy.
> ...


What's with you and homosexuals? You gay?


----------



## eots (Mar 19, 2012)

Obamerican said:


> Light said:
> 
> 
> > Wow, I just noticed that this "9/11 inside job" lists the people he puts on his ignore list.  How stupid is THAT!!  So, you log onto a discussion board and put people with apposing viewpoints on "ignore"?  So you only want to talk to people that don't challenge your intellect?  That is jaw-dropping idiocy.
> ...



more projection..


----------



## Obamerican (Mar 19, 2012)

eots said:


> Obamerican said:
> 
> 
> > Light said:
> ...


Once again Eots will not challenge Rimjob. You seem smarter than Rimjob but I'm beginning to change my mind.


----------



## eots (Mar 19, 2012)

Obamerican said:


> eots said:
> 
> 
> > Light said:
> ...



more homosexual imagings and projection ..can the inane picture be far behind ?


----------



## Obamerican (Mar 19, 2012)

eots said:


> Obamerican said:
> 
> 
> > eots said:
> ...


You're gay and use the word "behind"? Project much?


----------



## Light (Mar 19, 2012)

Obamerican said:


> Light said:
> 
> 
> > Wow, I just noticed that this "9/11 inside job" lists the people he puts on his ignore list.  How stupid is THAT!!  So, you log onto a discussion board and put people with apposing viewpoints on "ignore"?  So you only want to talk to people that don't challenge your intellect?  That is jaw-dropping idiocy.
> ...



I've been reading some other posts that he has made.  And lack of intellect is a serious understatement.
The guy has an unhealthy fascination with feces doesn't he?


----------



## Crackerjack (Mar 19, 2012)

Light said:


> Obamerican said:
> 
> 
> > Light said:
> ...


That's what happens when one is as full of shit as he, apparently.


----------



## eots (Mar 19, 2012)

Light said:


> Obamerican said:
> 
> 
> > Light said:
> ...



I've been reading your post and you could could probably take OBAs place as the lamest debwunker on the board


----------



## eots (Mar 19, 2012)

Crackerjack said:


> Light said:
> 
> 
> > Obamerican said:
> ...



I see you are also vying for the position


----------



## Obamerican (Mar 19, 2012)

eots said:


> Light said:
> 
> 
> > Obamerican said:
> ...


Lame is you backing a fucking obvious moron such as Rimjob. Idiot.


----------



## Crackerjack (Mar 19, 2012)

eots said:


> Crackerjack said:
> 
> 
> > Light said:
> ...


Nah, I could never match the sort of self-immolation 9/11 rimjob does to himself on a daily basis.


----------



## Liability (Mar 19, 2012)

Obamerican said:


> eots said:
> 
> 
> > Light said:
> ...



That is the definition of lame.

Well, it qualifies as one definition of lame, anyway.


----------



## eots (Mar 19, 2012)

Crackerjack said:


> eots said:
> 
> 
> > Crackerjack said:
> ...



sure you could


----------



## Liability (Mar 19, 2012)

eots said:


> Crackerjack said:
> 
> 
> > eots said:
> ...



Could?

Maybe.

But id-eots, you actually do it.


----------



## Obamerican (Mar 19, 2012)

eots said:


> Crackerjack said:
> 
> 
> > eots said:
> ...


Keep defending the Shit Eater. You're losing what ever credibility you ever had.


----------



## Light (Mar 19, 2012)

eots said:


> Light said:
> 
> 
> > Wow, I just noticed that this "9/11 inside job" lists the people he puts on his ignore list.  How stupid is THAT!!  So, you log onto a discussion board and put people with apposing viewpoints on "ignore"?  So you only want to talk to people that don't challenge your intellect?  That is jaw-dropping idiocy.
> ...



Really?  The claim was made that black smoke is proof of an oxygen starved fire.  Two videos were posted showing open air fires producing black smoke.  At this point the OP needs to use their "intellect" to weigh their claim against the evidence shown and make a conclusion.
This was THE definition of an intellectual challenge.


----------



## Crackerjack (Mar 19, 2012)

eots said:


> Crackerjack said:
> 
> 
> > eots said:
> ...


eots, you're smarter than this.  9/11 rimjob and his like keep repeating bullshit because they are ass-sucking idiots who don't even know what day it is.  There's no need to hitch your wagon to their very dim star.


----------



## eots (Mar 19, 2012)

Light said:


> eots said:
> 
> 
> > Light said:
> ...



Former Chief of NIST's Fire Science Division Calls for Independent Review of World Trade Center Investigation


although the key elements of the core steel were demographically labeled. A careful reading of the NIST report shows that they have no evidence that the temperatures they predict as necessary for failure are corroborated by findings of the little steel debris they have.
Former Chief of NIST's Fire Science Division Calls for Independent Review of World Trade Center Investigation


although the key elements of the core steel were demographically labeled. A careful reading of the NIST report shows that they have no evidence that the temperatures they predict as necessary for failure are corroborated by findings of the little steel debris they have.

http://www.opednews.com/articles/2/genera_alan_mil_070820_former_chief_of_nist.htm


----------



## Crackerjack (Mar 19, 2012)

Oh my God ...

The subject is "Proof the cover story for 9/111 began immediately after the attacks."

Looks like a typo, right?  Well September 111th actually works out to be December 21, 2001, *which is exactly eleven years to the day before the end of the Mayan calendar!!!!!!!11!!!1!*

Somebody call up the prophet Alex Jones ASAP to clarify what this means.


----------



## Light (Mar 19, 2012)

eots said:


> Light said:
> 
> 
> > Obamerican said:
> ...



Ohhh...............that stung!


----------



## eots (Mar 19, 2012)

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3151MqXu52s&feature=endscreen]Fire Weakens Steel but not Woman Waving in WTC North Tower - YouTube[/ame]


----------



## eots (Mar 19, 2012)

*9/11 Audiotape of firefighters last moments*


----------



## Liability (Mar 19, 2012)

Crackerjack said:


> Oh my God ...
> 
> The subject is "Proof the cover story for 9/111 began immediately after the attacks."
> 
> ...



You bastard!  You killed Kenny!  AND THE WORLD!


----------



## Light (Mar 20, 2012)

Ok, back to the OP claims.
The video shows a guy being interviewed about what he witnessed.  He saw planes crash into the towers...............the resulting fires.............and then the collapse of both towers.  He then makes the GIANT LEAP OF LOGIC that the crashes and fires caused the structural failure of the buildings.  How is that "Proof of a Cover Story"?  Anyone on those streets that day, (with 2 brain cells to rub together), made the same conclusion.  Do you think that everybody witnessing this horrible event, got out their personal copy of the WTC construction plans and starting dissecting the damage to the building?! 

I will agree that the guy says all this with a certain amount of arrogance in his voice...............like he knows "exactly" what happened.  Then again, there are a lot of know-it-all's in the world that think they have all the answers.

NOW................if you happen to be the sole possessor of the irrefutable evidence that proves that those building came down by something other than structural failure, PLEASE post it.


----------



## LA RAM FAN (Mar 20, 2012)

Light said:


> Wow, I just noticed that this "9/11 inside job" lists the people he puts on his ignore list.  How stupid is THAT!!  So, you log onto a discussion board and put people with apposing viewpoints on "ignore"?  So you only want to talk to people that don't challenge your intellect?  That is jaw-dropping idiocy.



certain people yeah.unlike with you,I have a long history with these trolls.I just listed my reason in the sig,they are simply seeking attention and are paid government disinformation agent trolls.they lie and post disinformation all the time in their posts to try and save face when they are defeated,they have been sent here by their handlers to try and derail truth discusions on government corruption,they defend ALL  the governments version of events no matter how pathetic their version of events is so I am not about ti give them the attention they seek and feed the trolls.

THAT would be idiocy.

agent MORON IN THE HAT that you have allowed to brainwash you with,was caught red handed in a debate i had with him one time making up lies watching a video i asked him to saying things the people in that video never said,of course you will listen that troll when he denies it.


----------



## LA RAM FAN (Mar 20, 2012)

eots said:


> Light said:
> 
> 
> > Wow, I just noticed that this "9/11 inside job" lists the people he puts on his ignore list.  How stupid is THAT!!  So, you log onto a discussion board and put people with apposing viewpoints on "ignore"?  So you only want to talk to people that don't challenge your intellect?  That is jaw-dropping idiocy.
> ...



amen to that.see I am talking with you because your not a paid agent troll like they are,you dont spend your life coming here making up pathetic lie after lie ignoring evidence and facts.You are just a brainwashed Bush dupe in denial and afraid of the truth so your kind I will try to reason with.there is no shame in admitting you are,for three years I was a brainwashed Bush dupe but unlike you,I started doing research on it around that time and I woke up. so far you are doing what all Bush dupes do,ignoring the evidence in that video and not watching it.


----------



## LA RAM FAN (Mar 20, 2012)

Light said:


> I noticed that you didn't address the point he was trying to make.
> Is it that he showed his work and with two small videos discredited your claim SOUNDLY? Which by the way, was discredited YEARS ago!
> Which left you with no course of action except to attack his character!?
> Or are you too dumb to understand what was being shown to you?



post to me what agent moron in the hat said and i will discuss it with you.HIM I wont satisfy and give the troll the attention he seeks.


----------



## LA RAM FAN (Mar 20, 2012)

eots said:


> Light said:
> 
> 
> > Wow, I just noticed that this "9/11 inside job" lists the people he puts on his ignore list.  How stupid is THAT!!  So, you log onto a discussion board and put people with apposing viewpoints on "ignore"?  So you only want to talk to people that don't challenge your intellect?  That is jaw-dropping idiocy.
> ...



exactly,could not have said it better myself.


----------



## LA RAM FAN (Mar 20, 2012)

eots said:


> *Former Chief of NIST's Fire Science Division Calls for Independent Review of World Trade Center Investigation*
> 
> 
> although the key elements of the core steel were demographically labeled. A careful reading of the NIST report shows that they have *no evidence that the temperatures they predict as necessary for failure are corroborated by findings* of the little steel debris they have.
> ...



that sums it up right there,the trolls and the Bush dupes always ignore this little detail of course.


----------



## Crackerjack (Mar 20, 2012)

9/11 inside job said:


> eots said:
> 
> 
> > Light said:
> ...





9/11 inside job said:


> eots said:
> 
> 
> > Light said:
> ...


Replying twice to the same post.  Must be off his meds again.


----------



## LA RAM FAN (Mar 20, 2012)

Light said:


> Obamerican said:
> 
> 
> > Light said:
> ...



Ive been reading your posts and all YOU have done is kiss the asses of these agents and run away from the points brought up in this video like all Bush dupes always do.nice.


----------



## Rat in the Hat (Mar 20, 2012)

9/11 inside job said:


> Light said:
> 
> 
> > Wow, I just noticed that this "9/11 inside job" lists the people he puts on his ignore list.  How stupid is THAT!!  So, you log onto a discussion board and put people with apposing viewpoints on "ignore"?  So you only want to talk to people that don't challenge your intellect?  That is jaw-dropping idiocy.
> ...





9/11 inside job said:


> Light said:
> 
> 
> > I noticed that you didn't address the point he was trying to make.
> ...



It's just unbelievable how deep in rimjob's brain I am. I just pull a string, and he comes running. 

And now for my next trick, I will revive another old thread and he will reply like a good little drone.


----------



## eots (Mar 20, 2012)

moron in a hat...


----------



## daws101 (Mar 20, 2012)

eots said:


> Light said:
> 
> 
> > Obamerican said:
> ...


how clever .. what next the badass hotel pic or pile of shit for 911tuuf?


----------



## daws101 (Mar 20, 2012)

9/11 inside job said:


> eots said:
> 
> 
> > Light said:
> ...


----------



## Crackerjack (Mar 20, 2012)

daws101 said:


> 9/11 inside job said:
> 
> 
> > eots said:
> ...


I can't remember, is it your turn to fly the black helicopter around his house tonight or is it mine?


----------



## Rat in the Hat (Mar 20, 2012)

Crackerjack said:


> daws101 said:
> 
> 
> > 9/11 inside job said:
> ...



You seem to have missed our orders from NWO high command.

Daws flies the black helicopter.
You are running the eavesdropping van.
I'm on wiretaps and keyboard logging.

Then we all meet up at "the place" for beers and a lingerie show.


----------



## Crackerjack (Mar 20, 2012)

Rat in the Hat said:


> You seem to have missed our orders from NWO high command.
> 
> Daws flies the black helicopter.
> You are running the eavesdropping van.
> ...


Ah, that's right.

I had to miss the last NWO meeting because that was league night with the Illuminati boys at the bowling alley.


----------



## eots (Mar 20, 2012)

why dont you loser start your own inane threads and post all the childish pictures and unfunny . witless pointless quips there ?..you clearly are incapable of discussing 9/11 or
 anything to do with the unwarranted influence of the military industrial complex in any kind of honest or rational manner


----------



## daws101 (Mar 20, 2012)

Crackerjack said:


> daws101 said:
> 
> 
> > 9/11 inside job said:
> ...


lets look: order # 12390 daws101 to replace non operational shitter cam in handjob's out house..
crackerjack to fly black chopper no more the 10 times over that same location.
crackerjack is then ordered to retrieve daws 101..dustoff return to base.... end....



[destroy after reading }


----------



## eots (Mar 20, 2012)

daws101 said:


> Crackerjack said:
> 
> 
> > daws101 said:
> ...



good thing you have a fantasy life to make up for your meaningless wasted existence as an agent internet troll


----------



## Rat in the Hat (Mar 20, 2012)

daws101 said:


> Crackerjack said:
> 
> 
> > daws101 said:
> ...



While we're on the subject of flying, Bobby (11.6G) Balsamo and Jim (No damaged grass) Fetzer are having a meltdown on Pilots for Truth over the plane/no plane argument.


The movement is collapsing, and they are starting to eat their own.


----------



## daws101 (Mar 20, 2012)

eots said:


> daws101 said:
> 
> 
> > Crackerjack said:
> ...


jealousy rears it's misshapen head


----------



## Light (Mar 21, 2012)

9/11 inside job said:


> Light said:
> 
> 
> > I noticed that you didn't address the point he was trying to make.
> ...



My post WAS to you.
You made the claim that black smoke means oxygen starved.  Two videos were posted showing that black smoke is not caused by lack of oxygen.
What is your response to this?


----------



## whitehall (Mar 21, 2012)

What cover story? WE SAW THE FREAKING PLANES HIT THE TOWERS.


----------



## Light (Mar 21, 2012)

whitehall said:


> What cover story? WE SAW THE FREAKING PLANES HIT THE TOWERS.



Exactly!  Somehow the government faked and/or covered up what thousands of people experienced first hand!?


----------



## Douger (Mar 21, 2012)

Light said:


> 9/11 inside job said:
> 
> 
> > Light said:
> ...


I can't speak for the OP.
 I can say. Mission accomplished !
P.S. wash your ass before you fly and dontcha dare say a bad word about IsNtReal. OK ?


----------



## x0Maximilian0x (Mar 21, 2012)

9/11 inside job said:


> 9 11 THE BIG CLUE EVERYONE MISSED - YouTube
> 
> Here is this disinformation agent automatically concluding before ANYBODY has even NIST,that the towers fell due to structural failure from the fires saying the intense heat caused it. Intense heat? yeah thats why in one of the famous pics posted many times over  the years we see a woman leaning against the towers even though the flames are allegedly so intense.
> 
> ...



Interesting how the story was put out so fast...before any tower even collapsed and only 33 minutes after the second tower got hit was an elaborate story being aired on who's responsible...

Well it certainly brings to question if the "official story" for 9/11 was prewitten before the attacks...

If nothing else it sure looks bad for the investigation into who was responsible for 9/11 being completed so fast... let alone the investigation on who was responsible having to make its way to the media with an elaborate story written... 

The story being out so fast is incriminating enough let alone if you think about...was the investigation done before the attacks even happened...I think the answer is quite clear.

Another interesting fact is the first guy who promoted the story was Jerome Hauer who just happened to be...

*Bio Warfare expert...which brings to mind the anthrax attacks right after 9/11 targeting Senate and Media

*Drug Company Director...which brings to mind the fact that the White House staff was taking the medication for anthrax before the first anthrax attack even occured...(fact if you are not too lazy to check for yourself)

*Commissioner for Office of Emergency Management...which brings to mind how it was being reinforced as a sky bunker just before 9/11 on the 23rd floor of World Tade Center 7, Building 7...with its floors, walls, windows all being reinforced making it some type of tree fort within sight of the World Trade Center twin towers...

*Bush Administration Insider...last but not least


----------



## Light (Mar 21, 2012)

Douger said:


> Light said:
> 
> 
> > 9/11 inside job said:
> ...



Mmmmmm..........WHAT!?


----------



## daws101 (Mar 21, 2012)

Light said:


> Douger said:
> 
> 
> > Light said:
> ...


douger speaks a language that only he understands.


----------



## daws101 (Mar 21, 2012)

Light said:


> 9/11 inside job said:
> 
> 
> > Light said:
> ...


handjob will respond with any of these: someone farted in here ,bush dupe ,agent.


----------



## eots (Mar 21, 2012)

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1rSJZqMwNoY&feature=g-all-u&context=G2e1fc8aFAAAAAAAAHAA]The Toronto Hearings on 9/11: Uncovering 10 Years of Deception - Trailer - YouTube[/ame]


----------



## eots (Mar 21, 2012)

whitehall said:


> What cover story? WE SAW THE FREAKING PLANES HIT THE TOWERS.



are you really so dimwitted that you believe because people saw planes hit the towers that there can not be a cover up in regards to the event of 9/11???


----------



## daws101 (Mar 21, 2012)

eots said:


> The Toronto Hearings on 9/11: Uncovering 10 Years of Deception - Trailer - YouTube


 same bullshit....glad all fifty people enjoyed it,. most of them were cast and crew!


----------



## eots (Mar 21, 2012)

daws101 said:


> eots said:
> 
> 
> > the toronto hearings on 9/11: Uncovering 10 years of deception - trailer - youtube
> ...



pulling made up facts out of your ass again I see...why do you do that ?


----------



## daws101 (Mar 21, 2012)

eots said:


> whitehall said:
> 
> 
> > What cover story? WE SAW THE FREAKING PLANES HIT THE TOWERS.
> ...


are you so addled
that if there was a cover up and the twoofers knew anything they would cease to exist..

so you think the planes were a diversion?


----------



## daws101 (Mar 21, 2012)

eots said:


> daws101 said:
> 
> 
> > eots said:
> ...


sorry but no, the attendance was dismal...there were more people running the hearings then attending them.
if you are an actual musician then you know what that's like.


----------



## eots (Mar 21, 2012)

daws101 said:


> eots said:
> 
> 
> > daws101 said:
> ...



I play to nothing but packed venues at least of several hundreds or I would not play at all


----------



## daws101 (Mar 22, 2012)

eots said:


> daws101 said:
> 
> 
> > eots said:
> ...


thats the best line of bullshit I've heard today.
it's also dodging the question...
show some proof that the Toronto shindig  had higher attendance the I said it did.


----------



## eots (Mar 22, 2012)

daws101 said:


> eots said:
> 
> 
> > daws101 said:
> ...




you made to statement low attendance in Toronto  ..you prove it...


----------



## daws101 (Mar 22, 2012)

eots said:


> daws101 said:
> 
> 
> > eots said:
> ...


that's not the way it works, gage dupe...you said I was pulling facts out of my ass.
that makes it your responsiblity to prove different. 
anything else is just more proof you are a non credible cowardly white trash pile of shit .


----------



## Rat in the Hat (Mar 22, 2012)

OK, I looked it up, and Daws was incorrect. (maybe) 

They had "about" 80 spectators vs. "about" 20 presenters for a total of "about" 100 people at the hearings. 



> Sponsored by the U.S.-based International Center for 9/11 Studies, the event brought about 20 expert witnesses to explain alleged technical and scientific reasons to doubt the official story. The experts included former U.S. senator Mike Gravel and former U.S. congresswoman Cynthia McKinney.
> 
> About 80 people came to watch  mainly from Canada and the U.S., but as far afield as Switzerland and Israel  each reserving a spot with a $200 donation. The event was also streamed live on the Internet, at one point reaching about 70,000 viewers.



9/11 truth seeking event held at Ryerson University :: Ryersonian.ca

Throwing in the "about" 70,000 online viewers ads up to "about" 70,100 vs. the total population of the USA & Canada, (347,337,187 people) that means the hearings reached a total of "about" 0.0002018% of it's target audience.

Damn, there's just no stopping this juggernaut.  




"about"


----------



## Montrovant (Mar 22, 2012)

eots said:


> daws101 said:
> 
> 
> > eots said:
> ...



Ugh, the same riff is playing through the whole song!  Mix it up a little.


----------



## daws101 (Mar 22, 2012)

Rat in the Hat said:


> OK, I looked it up, and Daws was incorrect. (maybe)
> 
> They had "about" 80 spectators vs. "about" 20 presenters for a total of "about" 100 people at the hearings.
> 
> ...


I was ballparking it. left out the online viewers (they dont buy hot dogs or hotel rooms)....thanks


----------



## Rat in the Hat (Mar 22, 2012)

daws101 said:


> Rat in the Hat said:
> 
> 
> > OK, I looked it up, and Daws was incorrect. (maybe)
> ...



Are you sure "about" them not buying hotdogs?


----------



## daws101 (Mar 22, 2012)

Rat in the Hat said:


> daws101 said:
> 
> 
> > Rat in the Hat said:
> ...


well, not at the venue anyway...


----------



## LA RAM FAN (Mar 22, 2012)

Light said:


> 9/11 inside job said:
> 
> 
> > Light said:
> ...



fires emitting black smoke are not serious fires and can be put out easily.I believe Eots already posted the tape recordings of the firemen saying that just before the collapse that there were not serious and they had them under control.damn your dense.those fires contrary to what that agent in that video said,were not serious fires,only someone on drugs would believe that bullshit.  and I see your still evading all the facts and points brought up in the video.nice.btw since you mentioned my sig,its funny that you wont talk about the much more important part of that sig,the video I have listed under MUST SEE VIDEh and that video so you know, has nothing to do with 9/11 just so you know.

oh and a mere collapse of a building doesnt cause body parts to be found several blocks away on rooftops or throw steel beams 600 feet in the air and land in other buildings or make them fall at free fall speed either.

either you ditched junior high school science class,or you dont remember a single thing what you were taught and have totally forgotten eveything.thats something every 7th grader learns at that age.


----------



## LA RAM FAN (Mar 22, 2012)

eots said:


> why dont you loser start your own inane threads and post all the childish pictures and unfunny . witless pointless quips there ?..you clearly are incapable of discussing 9/11 or
> anything to do with the unwarranted influence of the military industrial complex in any kind of honest or rational manner


----------



## LA RAM FAN (Mar 22, 2012)

eots said:


> Fire Weakens Steel but not Woman Waving in WTC North Tower - YouTube



this fire is so intense like that agent said that this lady has no problem leaning against it even though the fire is very intense and really hot.


----------



## Rat in the Hat (Mar 22, 2012)

9/11 inside job said:


> Light said:
> 
> 
> > 9/11 inside job said:
> ...





> fires emitting black smoke are not serious fires and can be put out easily



Tire fires can be put out easily?? 



> SACRAMENTO  On a hot, windy day last August, a tiny spark from a farm machine set fire to the dry grass along the edge of a huge tire pile near the town of Tracy. Within minutes, 7 million discarded tires were ablaze and a cloud of putrid smoke enveloped a vast agricultural area in the San Joaquin Valley.
> 
> "It was like a storm was coming in. I had never seen anything like it," recalled Casey Foley, who was eight miles away in Manteca when the fire started. "When I got up close it looked like the crater of a volcano, black and crispy piles of rubber with flames spewing out."
> *
> Now, eight months later, the fire is still burning*, propelling itself into the record books as one of the nation's longest and largest tire blazes. *But its impact has reached much further than the farming belt it blanketed for months with stinking smoke.*



Longest Burning Tire Fire | Tire Fire Sets Legislative Wheels Turning - Los Angeles Times

More oxygen starved black smoke...

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9sfmE_eY6oA]Tire Fire 1996 Grawn Michigan EPA - YouTube[/ame]


----------



## Rat in the Hat (Mar 22, 2012)

9/11 inside job said:


> eots said:
> 
> 
> > Fire Weakens Steel but not Woman Waving in WTC North Tower - YouTube
> ...



I would explain the chimney effect, and why the woman is in cooler air, but it would probably be time wasted on you.


----------



## daws101 (Mar 22, 2012)

posts #84 thru 86 should  be laughed at numerous times for maximum pleasure


----------



## daws101 (Mar 22, 2012)

Rat in the Hat said:


> 9/11 inside job said:
> 
> 
> > eots said:
> ...


you mean to say she wasn't fire proof!


----------



## Rat in the Hat (Mar 22, 2012)

Why look, Boeing aircraft burn with black smoke in open air too...

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-qyZFASOAe0]INCENDIO FIRE BOEING 737 CHINA AIRLINES NAHA OKINAWA JAPAN 1 - YouTube[/ame]

I wonder why rimjob thinks they burn a different color when they crash into something??


----------



## LA RAM FAN (Mar 22, 2012)

Light said:


> Ok, back to the OP claims.
> The video shows a guy being interviewed about what he witnessed.  He saw planes crash into the towers...............the resulting fires.............and then the collapse of both towers.  He then makes the GIANT LEAP OF LOGIC that the crashes and fires caused the structural failure of the buildings.  How is that "Proof of a Cover Story"?  Anyone on those streets that day, (with 2 brain cells to rub together), made the same conclusion.  Do you think that everybody witnessing this horrible event, got out their personal copy of the WTC construction plans and starting dissecting the damage to the building?!
> 
> I will agree that the guy says all this with a certain amount of arrogance in his voice...............like he knows "exactly" what happened.  Then again, there are a lot of know-it-all's in the world that think they have all the answers.
> ...



for once you actually said something intelligent because yes it IS a  giant leap of logic saying that the crashes and the fire caused the structural failure because again,anybody who knows anything about the laws of physics know they were violated that day,that fires dont cause buildings to collapse at free fall speed.

also you cripple your arguments here in a major way cause even if you accept the collapse of the towers then you cant explain the collapse of building 7.surely you know about that one? bld 7 is the crux of the 9/11 coverup commission you or nobody can get around because bld 7 WASNT hit by an airplane but it also collapsed and there is no logical explanation for it whatsoever because it was much further away from the other buildings even buildings next door to the towers.

the buildings much closer to the towers including its neighbors next to them were damaged far more extensively and had far more severe fires as the photos prove yet all those buildings remained standing but bld 7 collapsed.all three were owned by jew larry silverstein and all three not only collapsed in the same freefall speed the way buildings do in a controlled demolition,but they also demonstrated the same characterics.
face it,you fell for this fairy tale hook,line, and sinker and are quite one funny coincidence theorist if you still accept the version of the governments. since this was the first time in history buildings collapsed due to fire and again,they all three just happened to owned by silverstein.Major coincidence there.oh and these trolls posting here which btw  just so you know,they all KNOW it was an inside job just as much as me and eots do.again they are just here to try and derail truth discussions cause thats what their handlers pay them to do so this is  the wisest thing anybody can do with them.


----------



## LA RAM FAN (Mar 22, 2012)

five farts in a row recently from the trolls.


----------



## Rat in the Hat (Mar 22, 2012)

9/11 inside job said:


> Light said:
> 
> 
> > Ok, back to the OP claims.
> ...





> all three just happened to owned by silverstein



*Stop LYING!!!!*

The Port Authority of New York and New Jersey owned the buildings, and LS only leased them.



> In 1998, the Port Authority decided to privatize the World Trade Center, leasing the buildings to a private company to manage, and awarded the lease to Silverstein Properties in July 2001.



World Trade Center - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


And while you're trying to make the implication that only the buildings Larry rented were the ones to collapse, maybe you can explain why buildings 4 & 5 didn't collapse.


> On April 26 of 2001 the Board of Commissioners for the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey awarded Silverstein Properties and mall-owner Westfield America a 99-year-lease on the following assets: The Twin Towers, World Trade Center Buildings 4 and 5, two 9-story office buildings, and 400,000 square feet of retail space.



9-11 Research: Controlling Interests


----------



## Crackerjack (Mar 22, 2012)

9/11 inside job said:


> fires emitting black smoke are not serious fires and can be put out easily.




Seriously, where do you come up with this shit?


----------



## daws101 (Mar 22, 2012)

9/11 inside job said:


> Light said:
> 
> 
> > Ok, back to the OP claims.
> ...



fuck me! not the old "laws of physics were violated shit again"
Anybody WHO knows anything about physics knows  they cannot be violated ..
handjob is regurgitating...   
if.... you handjob are going to make that debunked argument ,you could start out by listing what laws were"violated" and how they were violated.


----------



## daws101 (Mar 22, 2012)

Crackerjack said:


> 9/11 inside job said:
> 
> 
> > fires emitting black smoke are not serious fires and can be put out easily.
> ...


it's those damn comic books he looks at!


----------



## Crackerjack (Mar 22, 2012)

daws101 said:


> Crackerjack said:
> 
> 
> > 9/11 inside job said:
> ...


Excellent choice of words.

Based upon his posts, it's safe to say that he's incapable of much reading.


----------



## eots (Mar 22, 2012)

Crackerjack said:


> 9/11 inside job said:
> 
> 
> > fires emitting black smoke are not serious fires and can be put out easily.
> ...



the fires where not reported to be very large by first response  and eyewitnesses near the impact area .testing of the steel shows no  evidence of the temp required to cause failure of structural steel


----------



## Liability (Mar 22, 2012)

eots said:


> Crackerjack said:
> 
> 
> > 9/11 inside job said:
> ...



Nonsense.  Nonsense.  And for a refreshing change of pace, nonsense.

Black smoke doesn't mean diddly dick:  Black Smoke

And the conclusion that the fires caused the joints to give way leading to the collapse has never come close to being scientifically refuted.


----------



## Crackerjack (Mar 22, 2012)

eots said:


> Crackerjack said:
> 
> 
> > 9/11 inside job said:
> ...


The point rimjob was attempting to make is that black smoke = weak fire, when, in actuality, black smoke usually indicates, if anything, a well-established fire.  There is also such a thing as a "black fire" in which the smoke heats up enough to do damage a fire would do, and could possibly reach up to and beyond 1000° F, which is within the range that structural steel may weaken.

But rimjob is too stupid to understand any of that, naturally.


----------



## Liability (Mar 22, 2012)

Crackerjack said:


> eots said:
> 
> 
> > Crackerjack said:
> ...



and too dishonest to admit it even if he could figure it out.


----------



## eots (Mar 22, 2012)

liability said:


> eots said:
> 
> 
> > crackerjack said:
> ...



no ,they are facts ,firefighters that reached the impact zone reported small containable fires as did survivors,,,and there is no forensic evidence or testing of remaining steel that shows fires reached anything close to temperatures predicted as required for failure


----------



## Toro (Mar 22, 2012)

Light said:


> Wow, I just noticed that this "9/11 inside job" lists the people he puts on his ignore list.  How stupid is THAT!!  So, you log onto a discussion board and put people with apposing viewpoints on "ignore"?  So you only want to talk to people that don't challenge your intellect?  That is jaw-dropping idiocy.



Thats just scratching the surface.


----------



## Liability (Mar 22, 2012)

eots said:


> liability said:
> 
> 
> > eots said:
> ...



No.  It's nonsense.  

We all already KNOW -- without question -- that the very intense fires raged and that it was more than just jet fuel that burned.  We know the perimeter walls bowed outward as a consequence of the structural weakening from the crashes and as a result of the very intense heat.  

It takes a special brand of dishonest imbecility to try to force fit into the honest scientifically based analysis your baseless rancid conspiracy horseshit.  

You have a sick and twisted mind.  You twoofers are dishonest fucks and pieces of shit one and all.


----------



## eots (Mar 22, 2012)

Liability said:


> eots said:
> 
> 
> > liability said:
> ...


----------



## Liability (Mar 22, 2012)

eots said:


> * * * *
> We know no such thing..the forensic evidence does not indicate these temperatures existed ..there is no proof..it is the NIST collapse theory



Yeah.  We DO know it.  You merely lie about it.

The forensic evidence clearly establishes that the structural damage coupled with the heat DID cause the outer perimeter wall to bow outward and for the joints to fail.  

You can lie to the contrary all you want, but your lies -- in the end -- are just lies.  You have zero persuasive power because you lie all the fucking time.  You are a sick fuck.  Period.  End of story.

All twoofers should be institutionalized.


----------



## eots (Mar 22, 2012)

Liability said:


> eots said:
> 
> 
> > * * * *
> ...



you can provide no evidence that the temperatures required for failure where present at the wtc collapses...thats why you ramble on so with the swear words and inane insults...end of story

*Former Chief of NIST's Fire Science Division Calls for Independent Review of World Trade Center Investigation*


although the key elements of the core steel were demographically labeled. A careful reading of the NIST report shows that they have no evidence that the temperatures they predict as necessary for failure are corroborated by findings of the little steel debris they have. 

OpEdNews - Page 2 of Article: Former Chief of NIST's Fire Science Division Calls for Independent Review of World Trade Center Investigation


----------



## eots (Mar 22, 2012)

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uor8NhUr_90]Fire Fighter Erik Lawyer Slams NIST And The 9/11 "Investigation" - YouTube[/ame]


----------



## eots (Mar 22, 2012)

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HjrpKV_mI18]WTC - Fire Fighters&#39;s Radio Communications In South Tower - YouTube[/ame]


----------



## Liability (Mar 22, 2012)

Citing a couple of fubars doesn't constitute proof.

The very notion is fucking ridiculous.

But you twoofers are too fucked up to even grasp how moronic you all are.


----------



## Rat in the Hat (Mar 23, 2012)

Crackerjack said:


> eots said:
> 
> 
> > Crackerjack said:
> ...



Actually, black smoke is not an indication of the temperature of a fire, it is an indication of what is burning.

A fire rich in hydrocarbons will burn with a black smoke, indicating how much carbon soot is rising with the heat and fumes.

A fire that does not contain much or any hydrocarbon (such as a wax candle or alcohol) will emit either white smoke, or no smoke at all.


----------



## Rat in the Hat (Mar 23, 2012)

eots said:


> liability said:
> 
> 
> > eots said:
> ...



The firefighters only reached the lowest floor of the impact area, so they only saw small pockets of fire. The largest fire zones were at the fuselage impact area and above, and had much larger areas that were engulfed with flames.

But, you knew that, didn't you?


----------



## eots (Mar 23, 2012)

Rat in the Hat said:


> eots said:
> 
> 
> > liability said:
> ...



but there were people in the impact hole waving for help ??? and still there is the fact of no forensic evidence of such temperatures


----------



## Light (Mar 23, 2012)

eots said:


> Fighters's Radio Communications In South Tower - YouTube



I'm not sure what that video is supposed to prove.  The firemen only made it to lowest floor below the impact point.  The dishonesty (or ignorance) of the narration is quite obvious.  He takes the statement of Orio Palmer, "multiple 10-45 code 1's" and then claims that "10-45" means injured people.  He leaves off the "code 1" which means DEAD.

*10-45     D.O.A. OR SERIOUS INJURY
                  Transmitted IMMEDIATELY upon the discovery of a fatality
                  or serious injury at a fire or emergency.  This shall be
                  followed as soon as possible with the appropriate Code
                  and the number of victims.

                  CODE 1    Victim Deceased

                  CODE 2    Victim suffering serious injury.  (Apparently
                            life threatening)

                  CODE 3    Victim suffering serious injury.  (Apparently
                            NOT life threatening.)

                  NOTE:     Do not transmit this signal for minor
                            injuries.*

REF. *nyfd.com/radio.html
*


So how are there are dead people below the point of impact if the fires and damage were not severe??

At the end of the video, he makes reference to the office fire that is "said to of destroyed 110 stories of structural steel".......................REALLY!!??  Who said that!?  That is not at all the official version of events.  That has to be the stupidest thing I've heard in a long time.  That is an extremely dishonest video and anyone who takes it for "evidence" is not looking for the TRUTH.
The truth is that these firemen made it up to the 78-79th floor, which was the lowest point of the impact.  They could not precede any further due to the damage.  And before they could take any action to get higher, the building collapsed............killing them.  So, using there voices to try and prove a ridiculous series of events is just vile!


----------



## eots (Mar 23, 2012)

Light said:


> eots said:
> 
> 
> > Fighters's Radio Communications In South Tower - YouTube
> ...



it would of been the explosions witnesses reported throughout the building
the vile dishonesty here is claiming temperatures existed when there is no evidence in the steel tested of such temperatures


----------



## eots (Mar 23, 2012)

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tQ5qVkJ0-hs]9/11: Three WTC survivors in explosive interview - YouTube[/ame]


----------



## eots (Mar 23, 2012)




----------



## Light (Mar 23, 2012)

eots said:


> Light said:
> 
> 
> > eots said:
> ...



Could that be because they didn't have EVERY SINGLE piece of steel available to them?  That this wasn't an "in a perfect world" situation?  Do you think they know exactly what columns were impacted by the bearing hub on the starboard engine? This was a huge catastrophe.  And to assume that every detail can be found................you would have to be a "conspiracy theorist" of the most delusional level.

And sense you brought up having "no evidence", there is no evidence of bombs, C4, thermite or whatever explosive device you believe.  People hearing explosions in a building that is on fire does not equal bombs.  Finding physical evidence of a bomb...........equals a bomb.  So how does your theory stack up against any other theory, let alone the official one?
Do you actually believe EVERY video put on YouTube!?  Damn....what is the weather like on your planet?


----------



## eots (Mar 23, 2012)

Light said:


> eots said:
> 
> 
> > Light said:
> ...


*No testing for explosive residue was ever done*
[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uor8NhUr_90&feature=player_embedded]Fire Fighter Erik Lawyer Slams NIST And The 9/11 "Investigation" - YouTube[/ame]


----------



## Rat in the Hat (Mar 23, 2012)

eots said:


> Rat in the Hat said:
> 
> 
> > eots said:
> ...



The fires in the building were drawing cool air from outside through the impact hole, so it's only logical that any survivors would head to the hole where the temperature would be far cooler than the fire zone.


----------



## eots (Mar 23, 2012)

Rat in the Hat said:


> eots said:
> 
> 
> > Rat in the Hat said:
> ...



wow, this blazing fire zone gets smaller and smaller all the time..so where is this hot spot exactly ??


----------



## 7forever (Mar 23, 2012)

Rat in the Hat said:


> eots said:
> 
> 
> > Rat in the Hat said:
> ...



You stupid fucking ****. Fires did not bring down the towers because there were no planes.


----------



## Rat in the Hat (Mar 23, 2012)

eots said:


> Rat in the Hat said:
> 
> 
> > eots said:
> ...



Three and four floors above her.






In case you don't know, the orange stuff you see in the picture is fire. You may notice there is none in her immediate vicinity.


----------



## Rat in the Hat (Mar 23, 2012)

7forever said:


> Rat in the Hat said:
> 
> 
> > eots said:
> ...



Go away, Chri*$$*y.


----------



## eots (Mar 23, 2012)

Rat in the Hat said:


> eots said:
> 
> 
> > Rat in the Hat said:
> ...



any evidence of this ??? the fire seems to be in the general impact area only


----------



## Light (Mar 23, 2012)

9/11 inside job said:


> Light said:
> 
> 
> > Ok, back to the OP claims.
> ...



HOLY CRAP!!  Do you have that "script" written on the inside of your helmet?
Laws of physics violated?..........Fires can't cause a building to collapse?..............Free fall speed?...........Building 7 is the smoking gun?
It's obvious that you believe EVERYTHING on the internet.  And that people with opinions apposing yours are trolls that KNOW the truth and are trying to cover it up.................WOW!  Because the fight for "truth" is going to be won on message boards.....huh?!
You obviously have no concern with finding the "truth".  Because everything that you just posted has been thoroughly discussed over the past decade.  And all of it  has been debunked and tossed in the garage were it belongs.  Because if there was any truth to any of it, it would be the largest story in history, and the media would be falling all over themselves to get a peace of it.


----------



## Light (Mar 23, 2012)

7forever said:


> rat in the hat said:
> 
> 
> > eots said:
> ...



Ha! Ha! Ha!
Earlier today I made the statement that something in another post was "the stupidest thing I have heard in a long time".
Oh boy!!.........you have now topped it!!


----------



## Liability (Mar 23, 2012)

Planes crash into two of the largest building on Earth.  Witnessed live by thousands.  Recorded on videotapes for posterity.  Leave gaping holes corresponding roughly with the expected imprint of planes crashing into the materials used to construct the towers.  Fires and smoke issue from the buildings.  Human beings fall to their deaths to escape the smoke and fires and heat.  The buildings eventually collapse.

And in light of all of that, and the scientific studies establishing that it was the plane crashes that caused the holes and the fires that led to the collapses, and despite the planes having been reported as hijacked, and despite the fact that none of the folks who DID get on those flights (alive) at the time prior to their take-offs were ever found alive again (but their remains have been identified in many cases)  -- nevertheless, scumbag rat fuckers like 9/11 Rimjob, id-eots and IQof7forever insist on claiming that it was all an orchestrated fraud.

Yeah.

We didn't SEE it as it happened.  It was orbs.  It was special effects.  It was long-dormant thermite demolitions in occupied buildings.

Fucking twoofers are rancid pieces of shit.  One and all of them.  They need to be closely monitored.


----------



## Obamerican (Mar 23, 2012)

7forever said:


> Rat in the Hat said:
> 
> 
> > eots said:
> ...


Look, it's Chrissy, you little fucking shit stain.


----------



## eots (Mar 23, 2012)

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3OEkDZTldt8]Patriots Question 9/11 - YouTube[/ame]
Patriots Question 9/11 - Responsible Criticism of the 9/11 Commission Report


*Lt. Col. Robert Bowman, PhD, U.S. Air Force (ret) &#8211; Director of Advanced Space Programs Development under Presidents Ford and Carter.  U.S. Air Force fighter pilot with over 100 combat missions. (PhD in Aeronautics and Nuclear Engineering, Cal Tech).*   Former Head of the Department of Aeronautical Engineering and Assistant Dean at the U.S. Air Force Institute of Technology.  22-year Air Force career.  Also taught Mathematics and English at the University of Southern California, the University of Maryland, and Phillips University.
Member: Political Leaders for 9/11 Truth Association Statement: 

"Scholars and professionals with various kinds of expertise---including architects, engineers, firefighters, intelligence officers, lawyers, medical professionals, military officers, philosophers, religious leaders, physical scientists, and pilots---have spoken out about radical discrepancies between the official account of the 9/11 attacks and what they, as independent researchers, have learned. 

*They have established beyond any reasonable doubt that the official account of 9/11 is false and that, therefore, the official &#8220;investigations&#8221; have really been cover-up operations. *

I think the very kindest thing that we can say about George W. Bush and all the people in the U.S. Government that have been involved in this massive cover-up, the very kindest thing we can say is that they *were aware of impending attacks and let them happen. *Now some people will say that&#8217;s much too kind, however even that is high treason and conspiracy to commit murder."* *http://video.go



*Raymond L. McGovern &#8211; 27-year CIA veteran. Former Chairman, National Intelligence Estimates (NIE), the consensus reports of all U.S. intelligence agencies. According to the Office of the Director of National Intelligence, NIE's "are the Intelligence Community&#8217;s most authoritative written judgments on national security issues." Responsible for preparing and presenting the President&#8217; Daily Brief (PDB) to Presidents Ronald Reagan and George H.W. Bush and for providing intelligence briefing to their Vice Presidents*, Secretaries of State, the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and many other senior government officials.  Upon retirement in 1990, McGovern was *awarded the CIA&#8217;s Intelligence Commendation Medallion and received a letter of appreciation from then-President George H. W. Bush. Former U.S. Army Intelligence Officer.*

It has long been clear that the Bush-Cheney administration cynically exploited the attacks of 9/11 to promote its imperial designs. But the present volume confronts us with compelling evidence for an even more disturbing conclusion: *that the 9/11 attacks were themselves orchestrated by this administration* precisely so they could be thus exploited. If this is true, it is not merely the case, as the Downing Street memos show, that the stated reason for attacking Iraq was a lie. It is also the case that the whole 'war on terror' was based on a prior deception. This book hence confronts the American people---indeed the people of the world as a whole---with an issue second to none in importance and urgency. I give this book, which in *no way can be dismissed as the ravings of &#8216;paranoid conspiracy theorists,&#8217;* my highest possible recommendation."


----------



## eots (Mar 23, 2012)

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ek9IHY2086g]Robert Bowman - WTC 7 smoking gun - Credits - Gravel pt 8 - YouTube[/ame]


----------



## eots (Mar 23, 2012)

*Dwain Deets, MS Physics, MS Eng &#8211; Former Director, Aerospace Projects, NASA Dryden Flight Research Center.  Before this appointment, he served as Director, Research Engineering Division at Dryden.  Recipient of the NASA Exceptional Service Award and the Presidential Meritorious Rank Award in the Senior Executive Service (1988)*.  Selected presenter of the Wright Brothers Lectureship in Aeronautics, a distinguished speaking engagement sponsored by the American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics (AIAA) (1986).  Included in "Who's Who in Science and Engineering" 1993 - 2000.  Former Chairman of the Aerospace Control and Guidance Systems Committee of the Society of Automotive Engineers.  Former Member, AIAA Committee on Society and Aerospace Technology.  37 year NASA career.
Statement in support of Architects and Engineers petition:

*"The many visual images (massive structural members being hurled horizontally, huge pyroclastic clouds, etc.) leave no doubt in my mind explosives were involved [in the destruction of the World Trade Center*]."  AE911Truth.org


[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EPqckKXn-gg]Dwain Deets in Ventura on Building 7 (Part 1 of 4).m4v - YouTube[/ame]


Signatory: Petition requesting a reinvestigation of 9/11, signed by more than 1,500 Architects and Engineers:


----------



## Liability (Mar 23, 2012)

Derp-ideots cannot even convince folks who post at USMB that the 9/11 "investigation must be re-opened."

Making quite a dent in the whole real world, though.

Ching Chong Potato, derp-ideots.


----------



## eots (Mar 23, 2012)

Liability said:


> Derp-ideots cannot even convince folks who post at USMB that the 9/11 "investigation must be re-opened."
> 
> Making quite a dent in the whole real world, though.
> 
> Ching Chong Potato, derp-ideots.



thats the rebuttal to these highly qualified experts...thats the debwunkers
debwunking  ??...my god what a pathetic little man you must be


----------



## LA RAM FAN (Mar 23, 2012)

eots said:


> Crackerjack said:
> 
> 
> > 9/11 inside job said:
> ...



crackertroll is living in denial as usual. the trolls get taken to school as always.


----------



## LA RAM FAN (Mar 23, 2012)

eots said:


> Liability said:
> 
> 
> > eots said:
> ...


----------



## LA RAM FAN (Mar 23, 2012)

eots said:


> 9/11: Three WTC survivors in explosive interview - YouTube



thats the other fact the agent trolls cant get around and always ignore is shortly aftert the aircraft hit the towers, a man came out of the basement  elevaters yelling "explosions, explosions" and had critical severe burns on him and his co workers took him out of the basement and put him in an ambulance and was taken to the hospital.yep no explosives.


----------



## LA RAM FAN (Mar 23, 2012)

Light said:


> 9/11 inside job said:
> 
> 
> > Light said:
> ...



No  "YOU" are lying and  have no interest in finding the truth,again you prove that you slept through junior high school science classes and your making up lies also because you are extremely ignorant about science,you have proven that in spades.

your lying also because unlike you,I look at opposing views and dont ignore them such as yourself and you lie as well saying i get my information from the net.again unlike you,I listen to an opposing view which is why I have read many books on it which you obviously havent. .You wouldnt know the truth if it bit you in the ass.your putting words in my mouth also.I never called you a troll,I was calling these agent trolls on my ignore list trolls who AGAIN KNOW it was an inside job .

the same ones you ignorantly listen to. and where did i say the truth would be won on a message board? you keep ignoring evidence and facts that prove you wrong because your obviously in denial and close minded and are putting words in my mouth.I never said you were a troll.I just said you were brainwashed just like "I" was at one time till unlike you,I kept an open mind and realised the facts of the case dont fit the explanation given by the government which is why there is such a huge controvery over this. not to mention that to accept the governments version,your being an idiot saying that the laws of physics no longer apply anymore,get a clue.

Im not the one being stupid ignoring what experts such as firemen,architects and engineers say and worshipping what these corrupt government instituitons such as NIST and the corporate media tell me.you are obviously dense in the fact that the media is nothing more that a TOOL for the government.  bullshit as usual,it hasnt been debunked,the only thing that been debunked is your pitiful ramblings and these agents as well liar.

You are a chickenshit coward,you wont even try and address my points I brought up because you know you cant counter them.Like all Bush dupes,you have no debating skills whatsoever,you make b.s claims these points have been debunked without proving your b.s you sprout off,without addressing them.No surprise,you Bush dupes always go off on these rants and make up lies when you know  you are defeated.You would be laughed out of a debating hall in five minutes with your debating skills and lose because of your failure to try and counter these facts.lol

With the help of Eots videos he posted that you ran away from,you lost this debate.You obviously have too much pride and too much arrogance to admit you are a Bush dupe who has been brainwashed and too afraid to look at the evidence as you have proven in spades here.you REALLY need to go back and take some science classes in junior high,I have had more intelligent conversations about science easily over the laws of physics with those kinds of students than I have had with you with your  ignrorance you have displayed here.

they dont run away from these points and throw tantrems when defeated and are mature enough to admit so because unlike you,they are not close minded.


----------



## LA RAM FAN (Mar 23, 2012)

Light said:


> eots said:
> 
> 
> > Light said:
> ...



if you knew the true facts instead of the bullshit you have been told by the media and NIST you would know this post is pure bullshit as well and that you are rambling like a fool and lying.


----------



## LA RAM FAN (Mar 23, 2012)

eots said:


> Light said:
> 
> 
> > eots said:
> ...



Hey Light,you prove like all Bush dupes afraid of the truth do,that you have no interest in  the truth and that you are a hypocrite as well since you wont look at an opposing viewpoint here from an expert who shoots down your pitiful ramblings.Eots had  to post it for you twice becuse you keep ignoring it.nice.


----------



## eots (Mar 23, 2012)

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cEUcnCh7n_E&feature=g-vrec&context=G2d5ec54RVAAAAAAAADg]9/11 BOMB when 1st plane hit - YouTube[/ame]


----------



## LA RAM FAN (Mar 23, 2012)

x0Maximilian0x said:


> 9/11 inside job said:
> 
> 
> > 9 11 THE BIG CLUE EVERYONE MISSED - YouTube
> ...



Yes I noticed that loyal Bush dupe Light ignored that little tidbit,kinda the same way he ignored my facts that he wants to believe has been debunked.


----------



## LA RAM FAN (Mar 23, 2012)

eots said:


> Light said:
> 
> 
> > eots said:
> ...



He gets owned again as always.


----------



## LA RAM FAN (Mar 23, 2012)

eots said:


> Liability said:
> 
> 
> > Derp-ideots cannot even convince folks who post at USMB that the 9/11 "investigation must be re-opened."
> ...





or in the case of a certain loyal Bush dupe afraid of the truth,wont watch the video and listen to an expert since it doesnt go along with his  warped views.


----------



## x0Maximilian0x (Mar 23, 2012)

9/11 inside job said:


> x0Maximilian0x said:
> 
> 
> > 9/11 inside job said:
> ...



Yes...nobody can reasonably defend the investigation being completed and spoonfed to mass media so quickly and then an elaborate written news cast put on the air claiming who is responsible, before the first tower even fell...


----------



## eots (Mar 23, 2012)

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jSvOyUHvDgw&feature=results_video&playnext=1&list=PL8236C59F8A887A06]Man claims black SUVs fled New York hour before first plane hit on 9/11 - YouTube[/ame]


----------



## Montrovant (Mar 23, 2012)

eots said:


> Man claims black SUVs fled New York hour before first plane hit on 9/11 - YouTube



That's a new one.

So, what does this guy's supposed train of black SUVs indicate, do you think?


----------



## Rat in the Hat (Mar 23, 2012)

eots said:


> Man claims black SUVs fled New York hour before first plane hit on 9/11 - YouTube



Interesting video, but it prompts 2 questions.

First, why did he wait 8 years to tell his story?

Second, why does he first say 10 SUV's, then change his mind to say 8?


----------



## eots (Mar 23, 2012)

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e-Of50l77YQ]New 9/11 Eyewitness Evidence of Bombs at WTC - YouTube[/ame]


----------



## Liability (Mar 24, 2012)

eots said:


> Liability said:
> 
> 
> > Derp-ideots cannot even convince folks who post at USMB that the 9/11 "investigation must be re-opened."
> ...



id-eots still thinks complete idiot terminology like "debwunking [sic]" makes his "arguments" more sophisticated.

 @ id-eots.

No wonder he can't convince anybody of anything -- ever.


----------



## LA RAM FAN (Mar 24, 2012)

x0Maximilian0x said:


> 9/11 inside job said:
> 
> 
> > x0Maximilian0x said:
> ...



exactly,you nailed it.


----------



## daws101 (Mar 24, 2012)

eots said:


> Crackerjack said:
> 
> 
> > 9/11 inside job said:
> ...


BULLSHIT:

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CGsOkT__M7Y]National Geographic Science & Conspiracy Part 3 - YouTube[/ame]


----------



## LA RAM FAN (Mar 24, 2012)

and Dawgshit just farted in my thread after Liar ability did.


----------



## daws101 (Mar 24, 2012)

eots said:


> Liability said:
> 
> 
> > Derp-ideots cannot even convince folks who post at USMB that the 9/11 "investigation must be re-opened."
> ...


THOSE CLIPS WERE BULLSHIT THE FIRST TIME YOU POSTED THEM AND THEY'RE  STILL BULSHIT 1,000,000,000 TIMES LATER there is no corroborating evidence to prove them valid!


----------



## eots (Mar 24, 2012)

although the key elements of the core steel were demographically labeled. A careful reading of the NIST report shows that they have no evidence that the temperatures they predict as necessary for failure are corroborated by findings of the little steel debris they have
OpEdNews - Page 2 of Article: Former Chief of NIST's Fire Science Division Calls for Independent Review of World Trade Center Investigation


----------



## Light (Mar 24, 2012)

9/11 inside job said:


> Light said:
> 
> 
> > 9/11 inside job said:
> ...



Ok......................which point would you like to start with?  Pick one and lets discuss it.


----------



## daws101 (Mar 24, 2012)

Light said:


> 9/11 inside job said:
> 
> 
> > Light said:
> ...


this shoud be interesting..


----------



## LA RAM FAN (Mar 24, 2012)

Light said:


> 9/11 inside job said:
> 
> 
> > Light said:
> ...



Ok this is really the ONLY one that needs to be discussed because its the point nobody has ever been able to debunk which is again building 7 the crux of the 9/11 coverup commission they couldnt get around and nobody has ever been able to get around.

again Building 7 was a couple blocks away from the towers.again this is where you crippled your argument mentioniong the combination of the jet and the fires causing the collapse.well bld 7 WASNT hit by an airliner and the fires were not anywhere near as severe as the fires in the buildings that were next door neighbors to the towers which were also damaged FAR MORE EXTENSIVELY as these photos that Pualitican posted on this thread prove.Its the 9th post on this page.you going to deny those buildings next to the towers were not damaged far worse than bld 7? the first two pics are buildings that are not part of world trade center,they are posted because THEY are serious fires unlike the twin towers or bld 7 yet those towers remained standing is why he posted those two pics first.

so WHY did THEY not collapse genius? could it be possible because they were not owned by jew Larry Silverstein? think, you can do it.oh thats right,your in denial and a coincidence theorist so you dont want to think.

http://www.usmessageboard.com/consp...question-for-the-911-conspiracy-buffs-16.html


----------



## Light (Mar 26, 2012)

9/11 inside job said:


> Light said:
> 
> 
> > 9/11 inside job said:
> ...



So, your theory is that Building 7 couldnt possibly have fallen due to being on fire ALL DAY?  Even though the FDNY was expecting it to fall at any time.:

*We walked over by number Seven World Trade Center as it was burning and saw this 40-plus story building with fire on nearly all floors.  FDNY Lieutenant Robert LaRocca
http://graphics8.nytimes.com/packages/pdf/nyregion/20050812_WTC_GRAPHIC/9110081.PDF*

J*ust when you thought it was over, you're walking by this building and you're hearing this building creak and fully involved in flames. It's like, is it coming down next? Sure enough, about a half an hour later it came down.  FDNY Lieutenant James McGlynn
http://graphics8.nytimes.com/packages/pdf/nyregion/20050812_WTC_GRAPHIC/9110447.PDF*

*When the building came down it was completely involved in fire, all forty-seven stories. 
FDNY Assistant Chief Harry Myers (Smith, Dennis, 2002. Report From Ground Zero: The Heroic Story of the Rescuers at the World Trade Center. New York: Penguin Putnam. p. 160)*

*Building #7 was still actively burning and at that time we were advised by a NYFD Chief that building #7 was burning out of control and imminent collapse was probable. PAPD P.O. Edward McQuade  www.thememoryhole.org / server maintenance  page 48.*

*There was a huge gaping hole and it was scattered through there. It was a huge hole. I would say it was probably a third of it, right in the middle of it. And so after Visconti came down and said nobody goes in 7, we said all right, well head back to the command post.&#8232; Capt. Chris Boyle  http://tinyurl.com/e7bzp*

*They were saying building Seven was going to collapse, so we regrouped and went back to our rig. We waited for building Seven to come down. Firefighter James Wallace  http://graphics8.nytimes.com/packages/pdf/nyregion/20050812_WTC_GRAPHIC/9110409.PDF*

Now that is just a small fraction of the quotes by fireman that I have found.  Here is a link to the full accounts of the FDNY.
*FDNY accounts are here: About.com: http://216.185.112.5/presenter.jhtml?identifier=4535*2l

Sounds to me like the FDNY was fully expecting it to come down.   They were literally waiting for it to come down so they could continue their rescue efforts.  They had been pulled back because by all estimates, that building was in danger of collapse.  Are you claiming that all these men knew that the building was going to be brought down by some means other than the damage that they all witnessed? 

Its easy to sit here now, 10 years later, watching a video of the north side of that building as it falls and saying that looks like a controlled demolition.  The problem with that are all the actual people, mainly firefighters, which were ACTUALLY THERE.  They know what they saw and they know what a building in danger looks like.  They reacted by getting away from it.  These are men that know how to deal with fire and what it does to a building if it is not fought.  

I realize you didnt make this claim YET, but please dont claim that the FDNY has been silenced in some waythat would be ridiculous.  If these men felt that the events of that day were caused by something other than two aircraft collisionskilling many of their brothers..do you think they are going to keep silent!?  Firefighters are not timid men.
Are you claiming that ALL these firefighters are mistaken?  That they dont know what a building in danger of falling looks like.BUT YOU DO!?
Can you find an organization of FDNY firefighters that are demanding that the case be reopened?  NO.  Why?  Because they know what happened..they lived it!

As for the buildings next to the towers, WTC4,5 &6, they were undoubtedly severely damaged.  But you do realize that these buildings were 6 to 8 stories tall.  Far different dynamics in those short of buildings compared to a skyscraper when they are damaged and on fire.  In fact, there was fear the WTC 5 WAS going to collapse during the same time the firefighters were expecting WTC7 to collapse.  Read the following reports.  WTC4,5 & 6 did suffer varying levels of partial collapse.  Many pictures in these reports show large steel supports that have failed or begun to fail due to the fires.  Something that you apparently think cant happen. 

*http://www.wpi.edu/Pubs/ETD/Available/etd-042907-214619/unrestricted/LaMalva.pdf*
*http://mceer.buffalo.edu/publications/wtc/02-SP02Screen.pdf
*
As for the comment on the Jew Larry Silverstein owning the property, that just makes you ignorant!  Please explain why him being Jewish as anything to do with what you are claiming.  As for the owning of the property, that is incorrect also.  He is the lease holder to the property owned by the Port Authority of New York.



> While the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey is often identified as the owner of the WTC site, the ownership situation is actually somewhat complex and ambiguous.[3] The Port Authority indeed owns a "significant" internal portion of the site of 16 acres (65,000 m2), but has acknowledged "ambiguities over ownership of miscellaneous strips of property at the World Trade Center site" going back to the 1960s. It is unclear who owns 2.5 acres (10,000 m2) of the site, being land where streets had been before the World Trade Center was built.



Also, Silverstein was not the sole lease holder.  He was partnered up with Westfield America for the bid on the WTC complex.  So he has in no way, shape or form the unilateral power to do whatever he wants with that property.

Now that the "crux" of your argument lay in waste, what else you got!?


----------



## eots (Mar 26, 2012)

Light said:


> 9/11 inside job said:
> 
> 
> > Light said:
> ...


----------



## eots (Mar 26, 2012)

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fM9e-4yQJfE]9/11 First Responder Speaks: WTC 7 Exposed - YouTube[/ame]


----------



## eots (Mar 26, 2012)

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-IfgYhjQ9fE]WTC Building 7 Explosions First Responder Craig Bartmer Interview - YouTube[/ame]


----------



## eots (Mar 26, 2012)

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Db6JrFjwL8M]9/11 First Responder David Miller Speaks about 9/11 - Pt.II - YouTube[/ame]


----------



## eots (Mar 26, 2012)

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HgCoV7phKa8&feature=results_main&playnext=1&list=PL1F1B1F5906BB03D9]Jonathan Barnett - forensic engineer for WTC7 collapse - YouTube[/ame]


[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KsbbpUA9FHM]Erik Lawyer - Firefighter - AE911Truth.org - YouTube[/ame]


----------



## Light (Mar 26, 2012)

eots said:


> Light said:
> 
> 
> > 9/11 inside job said:
> ...


----------



## eots (Mar 26, 2012)

Light said:


> eots said:
> 
> 
> > Light said:
> ...


----------



## Light (Mar 26, 2012)

eots said:


> Light said:
> 
> 
> > eots said:
> ...


----------



## eots (Mar 26, 2012)

Light said:


> eots said:
> 
> 
> > Light said:
> ...


----------



## eots (Mar 26, 2012)

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Afb7eUHr64U]WTC 7 fires and south side hole - YouTube[/ame]


[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=65Qg_-89Zr8]Bad Ass Skyscraper Fires and Destruction!! Awesome!! - YouTube[/ame]


----------



## Light (Mar 26, 2012)

eots said:


> Light said:
> 
> 
> > eots said:
> ...


----------



## eots (Mar 26, 2012)

The building was not compromised.by damage...the NIST claim is the failure of column 79...UNDER ANY CIRCUMSTANCE...would of resulted in initiation of the NIST collapse scenario ...(for example an a single explosion...or a kid with a pack of matches could cause the complete collapse of a 47 story steel framed building)


----------



## daws101 (Mar 26, 2012)

eots said:


> The building was not compromised.by damage...the NIST claim is the failure of column 79...UNDER ANY CIRCUMSTANCE...would of resulted in initiation of the NIST collapse scenario ...(for example an a single explosion...or a kid with a pack of matches could cause the complete collapse of a 47 story steel framed building)


not this intentional misinterpretation again this is what nist said: Did debris from the collapse of WTC 1 cause damage to WTC 7's structure in a way that contributed to the building's collapse?
The debris caused structural damage to the southwest region of the building-severing seven exterior columns-but this structural damage did not initiate the collapse. The fires initiated by the debris, rather than the structural damage that resulted from the impacts, initiated the building's collapse after the fires grew and spread to the northeast region after several hours. The debris impact caused no damage to the spray-applied fire resistive material that was applied to the steel columns, girders, and beams except in the immediate vicinity of the severed columns. The debris impact damage did play a secondary role in the last stages of the collapse sequence, where the exterior façade buckled at the lower floors where the impact damage was located. A separate analysis showed that even without the structural damage due to debris impact, WTC 7 would have collapsed in fires similar to those that occurred on Sept. 11, 2001. None of the large pieces of debris from WTC 2 (the south tower) hit WTC 7 because of the large distance between the two buildings.

Would WTC 7 have collapsed even if there had been no structural damage induced by the collapse of the WTC towers?
Yes. Even without the structural damage, WTC 7 would have collapsed from the fires that the debris initiated. The growth and spread of the lower-floor fires due to the loss of water supply to the sprinklers from the city mains was enough to initiate the collapse of the entire building due to buckling of a critical column in the northeast region of the building.

 so eot's is bullshiting again! http://www.nist.gov/public_affairs/factsheet/wtc_qa_082108.cfm


----------



## eots (Mar 26, 2012)

daws101 said:


> eots said:
> 
> 
> > The building was not compromised.by damage...the NIST claim is the failure of column 79...UNDER ANY CIRCUMSTANCE...would of resulted in initiation of the NIST collapse scenario ...(for example an a single explosion...or a kid with a pack of matches could cause the complete collapse of a 47 story steel framed building)
> ...



oh really..


----------



## daws101 (Mar 26, 2012)

What are the major differences between "typical" major high rise building fires that have occurred in the United States and the fire in the WTC 7 building on September 11, 2001?
There are more similarities than differences between the uncontrolled fires that burned in WTC 7 and those that occurred in the following buildings: First Interstate Bank Building (1988), One Meridian Plaza Building (1981), One New York Plaza (1970), and WTC 51 (2001).

The following factors describe the fire events that occurred in both WTC 7 and the referenced buildings: 1) the fuel for the fires was ordinary office combustibles at ordinary combustible load levels; 2) there was no use of accelerants; 3) the spread of fire from combustible to combustible was governed by ordinary fire physics; 4) fire-induced window breakage provided ventilation for continued fire spread and growth; 5) there were simultaneous fires on multiple floors; 6) the fires on each floor occupied a substantial portion of the floor; 7) the fires on each floor had passed the point of flashover and the structure was subjected to typical post-flashover temperatures; 8) the sprinklers were inoperative or ineffective; and 9) the fires burned for sufficient time to cause significant distortion and/or failure to the building structure.

There were some differences between the fires in WTC 7 and those in the referenced buildings, but these differences were secondary to the fire factors that led to the collapse of WTC 7: 1) Fires in high rise buildings typically have a single point of origin on a single floor, whereas the fires in WTC 7 likely had a single point of origin on multiple (10) floors; 2); fires in other high rise buildings were due to isolated events, whereas the fires in WTC 7 followed the collapse of WTC 1; 3) water was available to fight fires in the other high rise buildings, but the water supply to fight fires in WTC 7 was impaired; and 4) while the fires in the other buildings were actively fought by fire fighters to the extent possible, in WTC 7, no efforts were made to fight the fires.

The differences in the fires were not meaningful for the following reasons. By the time that WTC 7 collapsed, the fires in WTC 7 had advanced well beyond the likely points of origin on multiple floors (i.e., south and west faces) and originating points of fire origin had no bearing on the fire conditions when the building collapsed (i.e., in the northeast quadrant). Additionally, in each of the other referenced buildings, the fires burned out several floors, even with available water and fire fighting activities (except for WTC 5). Thus, whether the fire fighters fought the WTC 7 fires or not is not a meaningful point of dissimilarity from the other cited fires.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Questions and Answers about the NIST WTC 7 Investigation


----------



## daws101 (Mar 26, 2012)

eots said:


> daws101 said:
> 
> 
> > eots said:
> ...


yes really.....this is your failed attempt to take this:  "A separate analysis showed that even without the structural damage due to debris impact, WTC 7 would have collapsed in fires similar to those that occurred on Sept. 11, 2001. None of the large pieces of debris from WTC 2 (the south tower) hit WTC 7 because of the large distance between the two buildings.

Would WTC 7 have collapsed even if there had been no structural damage induced by the collapse of the WTC towers?
Yes. Even without the structural damage, WTC 7 would have collapsed from the fires that the debris initiated." out of context and make it more important the it actually is...
that's why it's bullshit... and there is the pesky fact you have no evidence of any other cause....
 witnesses hearing explosions completely debunks your thermite fairy tale. 
as to explosions  I could name a hundred things that exploded that day ,none of them explosives.
BTW most people can't tell the difference between a blowout and a backfire,
that's why earwittness testimony alone is not evidence.


----------



## eots (Mar 26, 2012)

daws101 said:


> eots said:
> 
> 
> > daws101 said:
> ...



so you are claiming what... a kid with a pack of matches or one single explosion could not have caused the collapse


----------



## eots (Mar 26, 2012)

because according to The NIST theory...it would


----------



## daws101 (Mar 26, 2012)

eots said:


> daws101 said:
> 
> 
> > eots said:
> ...


no you are! since there was no kid and no single explosion(to be more accurate no evidence of the use of explosives) that you ARE illiterate or making false claims or both....


----------



## daws101 (Mar 26, 2012)

eots said:


> because according to The NIST theory...it would


in 11 years you've not come up with better one


----------



## eots (Mar 26, 2012)

daws101 said:


> eots said:
> 
> 
> > because according to The NIST theory...it would
> ...



wow I have been...debwunked with ol 11 yrs line...way to dodge the facts


----------



## Liability (Mar 26, 2012)

eots said:


> daws101 said:
> 
> 
> > eots said:
> ...



Wow.  id-eots just used the non-word "debwunked" in an utterly unoriginal and non-persuasive line yet again.


----------



## eots (Mar 26, 2012)

daws101 said:


> eots said:
> 
> 
> > daws101 said:
> ...



according nist either scenario would of resulted in a progressive collapse...no testing for explosive residue was ever done


----------



## daws101 (Mar 26, 2012)

eots said:


> daws101 said:
> 
> 
> > eots said:
> ...


how can I dodge what you don't have?
you've presented no facts just specious speculation and a steaming plie of bullshit.
 your answer is a dodge....and not even original...


----------



## eots (Mar 26, 2012)

liability said:


> eots said:
> 
> 
> > daws101 said:
> ...



I coined the term debwunker fucker ...it means someone like you that tries to debunk facts by using insults and strawmen only


----------



## eots (Mar 26, 2012)

daws101 said:


> eots said:
> 
> 
> > daws101 said:
> ...



are you now claiming NIST did not say,,, similar fires under any circumstance or the failure of column 79 would of initiated the progressive collapse sequence


----------



## daws101 (Mar 26, 2012)

eots said:


> daws101 said:
> 
> 
> > eots said:
> ...


yes I know that the report goes in to great detail about it. your point?
no tests for explosives were done because there was no evidence of there use...no det cord or receivers no explosive residue, no blast wave, no audio or video.
why waste time and money chasing nothing....


----------



## Liability (Mar 26, 2012)

eots said:


> liability said:
> 
> 
> > eots said:
> ...



You may have "coined" it but that only confirms that you are simpleton scumbag dishonest twoofer shithead, you cocksucker.  

You offer nothing of value.  Debunking *your* bullshit requires only pointing to an occasional actual fact -- which a lowlife piece of filth like you cannot even recognize.


----------



## eots (Mar 26, 2012)

or are you claiming NIST for explosives or accelerants


----------



## daws101 (Mar 26, 2012)

eots said:


> daws101 said:
> 
> 
> > eots said:
> ...


no you are..but again you're attempting to spin it into something else and failing.


----------



## Liability (Mar 26, 2012)

daws101 said:


> eots said:
> 
> 
> > daws101 said:
> ...



Indeed.  Why would it be necessary to waste any time or resources to "investigate" such a rabidly ridiculous DELUSION?

If one has a brain (this excludes morons and filth like id-eots, of course) one can see how FACIALLY ridiculous it is to even pretend that the conspiracy in their fevered nightmares could possibly exist.  ALL that would HAVE TO BE true in order for their absurd conspiracy blather to be even remotely possible is so staggeringly impossible, that it doesn't even pass a giggle test.

Twoofers need to be under observation.


----------



## daws101 (Mar 26, 2012)

eots said:


> or are you claiming NIST for explosives or accelerants


english please ?!


----------



## eots (Mar 26, 2012)

daws101 said:


> eots said:
> 
> 
> > daws101 said:
> ...



what an idiot...


----------



## eots (Mar 26, 2012)

daws101 said:


> english please ?!



 or are you claiming NIST for TESTED for explosives or accelerants


----------



## Liability (Mar 26, 2012)

eots said:


> daws101 said:
> 
> 
> > eots said:
> ...



Finally.  You admit what you are.

A good first step id-eots.


----------



## eots (Mar 26, 2012)

if you only had to take out on column you would not need all these items you list


----------



## x0Maximilian0x (Mar 26, 2012)

Still no response to the below information from the full time O.J. Simpson defense attorneys attempting to defend the "official story" through wits end...

Interesting how the story was put out so fast...before any tower even collapsed and only 33 minutes after the second tower got hit was an elaborate story being aired on who's responsible...

Well it certainly brings to question if the "official story" for 9/11 was prewitten before the attacks...

If nothing else it sure looks bad for the investigation into who was responsible for 9/11 being completed so fast... let alone the investigation on who was responsible having to make its way to the media with an elaborate story written... 

The story being out so fast is incriminating enough let alone if you think about...was the investigation done before the attacks even happened...I think the answer is quite clear.

Another interesting fact is the first guy who promoted the story was Jerome Hauer who just happened to be...

*Bio Warfare expert...which brings to mind the anthrax attacks right after 9/11 targeting Senate and Media

*Drug Company Director...which brings to mind the fact that the White House staff was taking the medication for anthrax before the first anthrax attack even occured...(fact if you are not too lazy to check for yourself)

*Commissioner for Office of Emergency Management...which brings to mind how it was being reinforced as a sky bunker just before 9/11 on the 23rd floor of World Tade Center 7, Building 7...with its floors, walls, windows all being reinforced making it some type of tree fort within sight of the World Trade Center twin towers...

*Bush Administration Insider...last but not least


----------



## daws101 (Mar 26, 2012)

eots said:


> The building was not compromised.by damage...the NIST claim is the failure of column 79...UNDER ANY CIRCUMSTANCE...would of resulted in initiation of the NIST collapse scenario ...(for example an a single explosion...or a kid with a pack of matches could cause the complete collapse of a 47 story steel framed building)



this line is bullshit.:"UNDER ANY CIRCUMSTANCE.."
 what was actually said Would WTC 7 have collapsed even if there had been no structural damage induced by the collapse of the WTC towers?
Yes. Even without the structural damage, WTC 7 would have collapsed from the fires that the debris initiated. The growth and spread of the lower-floor fires due to the loss of water supply to the sprinklers from the city mains was enough to initiate the collapse of the entire building due to buckling of a critical column in the northeast region of the building.


----------



## eots (Mar 26, 2012)

Liability said:


> eots said:
> 
> 
> > daws101 said:
> ...



so you can't comprehend what you read I see


----------



## eots (Mar 26, 2012)

daws101 said:


> eots said:
> 
> 
> > The building was not compromised.by damage...the NIST claim is the failure of column 79...UNDER ANY CIRCUMSTANCE...would of resulted in initiation of the NIST collapse scenario ...(for example an a single explosion...or a kid with a pack of matches could cause the complete collapse of a 47 story steel framed building)
> ...



blah blan blah..NIST CLEARLY SAYS THE LOSS OF COLUMN 79 UNDER ANY CIRCUMSTANCE WOULD HAVE RESULTED IN A PROGRESSIVE COLLAPSE...THAT SIMPLE


----------



## eots (Mar 26, 2012)

> *this line is bullshit.:"UNDER ANY CIRCUMSTANCE.."*




The investigation team concluded that the column&#8217;s failure *under any circumstance* would have initiated the destructive sequence of events.

NIST Releases Final WTC 7 Investigation Report

*idiot...*


----------



## daws101 (Mar 26, 2012)

eots said:


> daws101 said:
> 
> 
> > eots said:
> ...


right....if there had been residue (there always is) it's not hard to spot if you know what you're looking for.
if someone had found residue then it would have been tested to find out what type of explosive/accelerant was used....
the only idiots here are you and your pal MAX for not know that little fact.
btw it'S called SOP.


----------



## daws101 (Mar 26, 2012)

eots said:


> daws101 said:
> 
> 
> > eots said:
> ...


yes it does but not the way you're trying to spin it..


----------



## daws101 (Mar 26, 2012)

eots said:


> > *this line is bullshit.:"UNDER ANY CIRCUMSTANCE.."*
> 
> 
> 
> ...


not the way you're trying to spin it...  no matter how many times you size up the font,it does not mean what you wish it to mean.


----------



## eots (Mar 26, 2012)

daws101 said:


> eots said:
> 
> 
> > daws101 said:
> ...



now you pretended to be an expert on explosive/accelerants and make up a little story about how easy they are to spot with the eye in the destruction of wtc 7,,,you just made this up..what a joke,,and you failed to recognize that   without question NIST said...
*
The investigation team concluded that the column&#8217;s failure under any circumstance would have initiated the destructive sequence of events.*


*debwunker*


----------



## eots (Mar 26, 2012)

Anything these usmb debwunkers actually know about the nist report they learned from...me


----------



## daws101 (Mar 26, 2012)

eots said:


> daws101 said:
> 
> 
> > eots said:
> ...


  not pretending anything you can't beat the logic. besides:     

 Did investigators consider the possibility that an explosion caused or contributed to the collapse of WTC 7?
Yes, this possibility was investigated carefully. NIST concluded that blast events inside the building did not occur and found no evidence supporting the existence of a blast event.

In addition, no blast sounds were heard on the audio tracks of video recordings during the collapse of WTC 7 or reported by witnesses. According to calculations by the investigation team, the smallest blast capable of failing the building's critical column would have resulted in a sound level of 130 decibels (dB) to 140 dB at a distance of at least half a mile, if unobstructed by surrounding buildings. This sound level is consistent with a gunshot blast, standing next to a jet plane engine, and more than 10 times louder than being in front of the speakers at a rock concert.

For the building to have been prepared for intentional demolition, walls and/or column enclosures and fireproofing would have to be removed and replaced without being detected. Preparing a column includes steps such as cutting sections with torches, which produces noxious and odorous fumes. Intentional demolition usually requires applying explosive charges to most, if not all, interior columns, not just one or a limited set of columns in a building.

Is it possible that thermite or thermate contributed to the collapse of WTC 7?
NIST has looked at the application and use of thermite and has determined that its use to sever columns in WTC 7 on 9/11/01 was unlikely.

Thermite is a combination of aluminum powder and a metal oxide that releases a tremendous amount of heat when ignited. It is typically used to weld railroad rails together by melting a small quantity of steel and pouring the melted steel into a form between the two rails.

To apply thermite to a large steel column, approximately 0.13 lb of thermite would be needed to heat and melt each pound of steel. For a steel column that weighs approximately 1,000 lbs. per foot, at least 100 lbs. of thermite would need to be placed around the column, ignited, and remain in contact with the vertical steel surface as the thermite reaction took place. This is for one column . presumably, more than one column would have been prepared with thermite, if this approach were to be used.

It is unlikely that 100 lbs. of thermite, or more, could have been carried into WTC 7 and placed around columns without being detected, either prior to Sept. 11 or during that day.

Given the fires that were observed that day, and the demonstrated structural response to the fires, NIST does not believe that thermite was used to fail any columns in WTC 7.

Analysis of the WTC steel for the elements in thermite/thermate would not necessarily have been conclusive. The metal compounds also would have been present in the construction materials making up the WTC buildings, and sulfur is present in the gypsum wallboard used for interior partitions.

An emergency responder caught in the building between the 6th and 8th floors says he heard two loud booms. Isn't that evidence that there was an explosion?
The sound levels reported by all witnesses do not match the sound level of an explosion that would have been required to cause the collapse of the building. If the two loud booms were due to explosions that were responsible for the collapse of WTC 7, the emergency responder-located somewhere between the 6th and 8th floors in WTC 7-would not have been able to survive the near immediate collapse and provide this witness account.



and this :The investigation team concluded that the columns failure under any circumstance would have initiated the destructive sequence of events"-NIST
this is an extremely ambiguous statement for most people but for you it means some nefarious act committed by the government....you have no evidence to back up that claim..so every time you use it you are lying..


----------



## daws101 (Mar 26, 2012)

eots said:


> Anything these usmb debwunkers actually know about the nist report they learned from...me


wrong! what we learned was you do your best to intentionally misrepresent that document...


----------



## eots (Mar 26, 2012)

daws101 said:


> eots said:
> 
> 
> > daws101 said:
> ...


----------



## x0Maximilian0x (Mar 26, 2012)

Still no response to the below information from the full time O.J. Simpson defense attorneys attempting to defend the "official story" through wits end...

Interesting how the story was put out so fast...before any tower even collapsed and only 33 minutes after the second tower got hit was an elaborate story being aired on who's responsible...

Well it certainly brings to question if the "official story" for 9/11 was prewitten before the attacks...

If nothing else it sure looks bad for the investigation into who was responsible for 9/11 being completed so fast... let alone the investigation on who was responsible having to make its way to the media with an elaborate story written... 

The story being out so fast is incriminating enough let alone if you think about...was the investigation done before the attacks even happened...I think the answer is quite clear.

Another interesting fact is the first guy who promoted the story was Jerome Hauer who just happened to be...

*Bio Warfare expert...which brings to mind the anthrax attacks right after 9/11 targeting Senate and Media

*Drug Company Director...which brings to mind the fact that the White House staff was taking the medication for anthrax before the first anthrax attack even occured...(fact if you are not too lazy to check for yourself)

*Commissioner for Office of Emergency Management...which brings to mind how it was being reinforced as a sky bunker just before 9/11 on the 23rd floor of World Tade Center 7, Building 7...with its floors, walls, windows all being reinforced making it some type of tree fort within sight of the World Trade Center twin towers...

*Bush Administration Insider...last but not least


----------



## x0Maximilian0x (Mar 26, 2012)

Still no response to the below information from the full time O.J. Simpson defense attorneys attempting to defend the "official story" through wits end...

Interesting how the story was put out so fast...before any tower even collapsed and only 33 minutes after the second tower got hit was an elaborate story being aired on who's responsible...

Well it certainly brings to question if the "official story" for 9/11 was prewitten before the attacks...

If nothing else it sure looks bad for the investigation into who was responsible for 9/11 being completed so fast... let alone the investigation on who was responsible having to make its way to the media with an elaborate story written... 

The story being out so fast is incriminating enough let alone if you think about...was the investigation done before the attacks even happened...I think the answer is quite clear.

Another interesting fact is the first guy who promoted the story was Jerome Hauer who just happened to be....

*Bio Warfare expert...which brings to mind the anthrax attacks right after 9/11 targeting Senate and Media

*Drug Company Director...which brings to mind the fact that the White House staff was taking the medication for anthrax before the first anthrax attack even occured...(fact if you are not too lazy to check for yourself)

*Commissioner for Office of Emergency Management...which brings to mind how it was being reinforced as a sky bunker just before 9/11 on the 23rd floor of World Tade Center 7, Building 7...with its floors, walls, windows all being reinforced making it some type of tree fort within sight of the World Trade Center twin towers...

*Bush Administration Insider...last but not least


----------



## Liability (Mar 26, 2012)

x0Maximilian0x said:


> Still no response to the below information from the full time O.J. Simpson defense attorneys attempting to defend the "official story" through wits end...
> 
> Interesting how the story was put out so fast...before any tower even collapsed and only 33 minutes after the second tower got hit was an elaborate story being aired on who's responsible...
> 
> ...



Ladies and gentlemen:

He may be rambling and incoherent and babbling, but at least he's verbose.


----------



## daws101 (Mar 27, 2012)

eots said:


> daws101 said:
> 
> 
> > eots said:
> ...


----------



## daws101 (Mar 27, 2012)

eots said:


> daws101 said:
> 
> 
> > eots said:
> ...


----------



## eots (Mar 27, 2012)

daws101 said:


> eots said:
> 
> 
> > daws101 said:
> ...


----------



## daws101 (Mar 27, 2012)

eots said:


> daws101 said:
> 
> 
> > eots said:
> ...


----------



## eots (Mar 27, 2012)

* NIST does not believe that thermite was used to fail any columns *


 words matter...NIST used the words * believes*... instead of knows or has conclusvely proven for a reason it took 8 yesrs to produce this document they  chose their words carefully and purposefully


*NIST has looked at the application and use of thermite and has determined that its use to  
sever columns in WTC 7 on 9/11/01 was unlikely.*

not impossible...not conclusively disproven...but unlikely...which just happens to be the same word NIST uses for describing the risk of a fie initiated progressive collapse also reffering to it as an "extremely rare event"..and having a "low probability of occurrence"

*
testing for thermite/thermate would not necessarily have been conclusive.*

this statement does not exclude that testing could possibly be conclusive pos or neg
if it was intended to exclude this possibility the words ..*not necessarily*...would not of been utilized


----------



## candycorn (Mar 27, 2012)

x0Maximilian0x said:


> Still no response to the below information from the full time O.J. Simpson defense attorneys attempting to defend the "official story" through wits end...
> 
> Interesting how the story was put out so fast...before any tower even collapsed and only 33 minutes after the second tower got hit was an elaborate story being aired on who's responsible...
> 
> ...



Nobody cares:

Austin Powers: Daddy wasn&#39;t there music video - YouTube​


----------



## daws101 (Mar 27, 2012)

eots said:


> * NIST does not believe that thermite was used to fail any columns *
> 
> 
> words matter...NIST used the words * believes*... instead of knows or has conclusvely proven for a reason it took 8 yesrs to produce this document they  chose their words carefully and purposefully
> ...


another bullshit rationalization  as explained before, they did  chose carefully and as always you've chosen to misinterpret them:
1,believes, you've chosen to make it mean: they don't really have answer.
but in reality they used believes to mean this:to consider to be true or honest <believe the reports)

2.unlikely... another word you chosen to misrepresent 
it was highly unlikely that fires started the collapse it was also unlikely that a jet liner would crash into the wtc and the wtc would in turn crash into wtc7 but it happened.
your attempt to use it as a way to slip in your unprovable false theory would be sad if it weren't so fucking laughable.  
3.conclusive wrong again I guess I have to repeat myself as you are slow on the uptake:Analysis of the WTC steel for the elements in thermite/thermate would not necessarily have been conclusive. The metal compounds also would have been present in the construction materials making up the WTC buildings, and sulfur is present in the gypsum wallboard used for interior partitions.
what they are saying is that the same metal compounds and sulfur found in thermite /thermate are ALSO IN GYPSUM MAKING IT ALMOST IMPOSSIBLE TO TELL THEM APART (GYPSUM and thermite) so the results were not conclusive.   

  btw where did you get that article it's obvious you didn't write yourself 
and you left out the link


----------



## eots (Mar 28, 2012)

daws101 said:


> eots said:
> 
> 
> > * NIST does not believe that thermite was used to fail any columns *
> ...


----------



## Fizz (Mar 28, 2012)

9/11 inside job said:


> the FIRST Poster who would post on this thread would be a paid disinformation agent troll.



proof of being a paid disinfo agent please...


otherwise we will just assume that you are completely paranoid moron that we all already know you are.

thats what i love about you fucking idiots. you make completely unsubstantiated claims with absolutely no facts to back anything up. you will bite anything that remotely resembles an antigoverment position hook, line and sinker.

totally insane


----------



## Crackerjack (Mar 28, 2012)

Fizz said:


> 9/11 inside job said:
> 
> 
> > the FIRST Poster who would post on this thread would be a paid disinformation agent troll.
> ...


Good luck with that.  He's as full of shit about that as everything else.  Big shock, I know.


----------



## daws101 (Mar 28, 2012)

eots said:


> daws101 said:
> 
> 
> > eots said:
> ...


----------



## LA RAM FAN (Mar 28, 2012)

Fizz said:


> 9/11 inside job said:
> 
> 
> > the FIRST Poster who would post on this thread would be a paid disinformation agent troll.
> ...



Hey hey fellow disinformation agent troll fizzle is back.guess your handlers must have determined there is enough of your  fellow paid agents trolls  sent here so they must have sent you to another site to try and derail truth discussions that didnt have as many agents there as there are here. meanwhile i see in my absense Eots as always has taken to the trolls to school and given them some major ass beatings.they sure pay you agents well for them,no way as we know you would come back for them for free all the time.lol.


----------



## daws101 (Mar 28, 2012)

9/11 inside job said:


> Fizz said:
> 
> 
> > 9/11 inside job said:
> ...


un·like·ly adj \-&#712;l&#299;-kl&#275;\
Definition of UNLIKELY
1: not likely : improbable <an unlikely outcome> 
2: likely to fail : unpromising


----------



## LA RAM FAN (Mar 28, 2012)

x0Maximilian0x said:


> Still no response to the below information from the full time O.J. Simpson defense attorneys attempting to defend the "official story" through wits end...
> 
> Interesting how the story was put out so fast...before any tower even collapsed and only 33 minutes after the second tower got hit was an elaborate story being aired on who's responsible...
> 
> ...



yep the trolls can only fling shit in defeat like the monkeys they are.they wont even touch it since they know they are licked.

they wont address many of the videos eots has posted either because they know it shoots down their ramblings.

that being said,will be back tomorrow.Been busy with work in all lately,will have a little bit of freetime tomorrow though to finally  read through the official conspiracy theorys ramblings grasping at straws in defeat like they do here everyday.That much I can tell just by quickly scanning through their posts. must be frustrating being taken to school by Eots constantly.thats why you guys get are paid so well for your ass beatings  from him constantly.


----------



## Crackerjack (Mar 28, 2012)

9/11 inside job said:


> that being said,will be back tomorrow.Been busy with *work in all* lately,will have a little bit of freetime tomorrow though to finally  read through the official conspiracy *theorys* ramblings grasping at straws in defeat like they do here everyday.That much I can tell just by quickly scanning through their posts. must be frustrating being taken to school by Eots constantly.thats why *you guys get are paid so well* for your ass beatings  from him constantly.


Male prostitution must be lucrative these days.

Speaking of schooling, you should look into it.  Whatever minimum wage job you have obviously doesn't require being literate in any way.


----------



## daws101 (Mar 28, 2012)

9/11 inside job said:


> x0Maximilian0x said:
> 
> 
> > Still no response to the below information from the full time O.J. Simpson defense attorneys attempting to defend the "official story" through wits end...
> ...


----------



## eots (Mar 28, 2012)

Crackerjack said:


> 9/11 inside job said:
> 
> 
> > that being said,will be back tomorrow.Been busy with *work in all* lately,will have a little bit of freetime tomorrow though to finally  read through the official conspiracy *theorys* ramblings grasping at straws in defeat like they do here everyday.That much I can tell just by quickly scanning through their posts. must be frustrating being taken to school by Eots constantly.thats why *you guys get are paid so well* for your ass beatings  from him constantly.
> ...



you would likely know more about homosexual prostitution than anyone else but it is irrelevant to the discussion of building 7.. perhaps you should start a thread for your homosexual imaginings I am sure daws and OBA would be happy join in as it is one of their fave pastimes too


----------



## daws101 (Mar 28, 2012)

Crackerjack said:


> 9/11 inside job said:
> 
> 
> > that being said,will be back tomorrow.Been busy with *work in all* lately,will have a little bit of freetime tomorrow though to finally  read through the official conspiracy *theorys* ramblings grasping at straws in defeat like they do here everyday.That much I can tell just by quickly scanning through their posts. must be frustrating being taken to school by Eots constantly.thats why *you guys get are paid so well* for your ass beatings  from him constantly.
> ...


 easy now, he was burger kings employee of the month  in 1999..
 speaking of years  why hasn't handjob reveled the cover story for the year 9111. him being psychic and all .


----------



## eots (Mar 28, 2012)

daws101 said:


> Crackerjack said:
> 
> 
> > 9/11 inside job said:
> ...



daws lost the debate on wtc 7 hands down so they resort to little imaginings of the posters that defeated them and inane pictures..._flinging shit like monkeys in defeat_...once again


----------



## daws101 (Mar 28, 2012)

eots said:


> Crackerjack said:
> 
> 
> > 9/11 inside job said:
> ...


funny how every time somebody brings up homosexuality even in jest, eot's is johnny on the spot seems kinda gay to me!
BTW this thread did not start as a discussion of wtc7  btw eot's pulled it that way and there is no rule that states it must remain that way.


----------



## eots (Mar 28, 2012)

daws101 said:


> eots said:
> 
> 
> > Crackerjack said:
> ...



your spell check not working today ?...lol


----------



## daws101 (Mar 28, 2012)

eots said:


> daws101 said:
> 
> 
> > Crackerjack said:
> ...


right.....only in your dreams ....you claiming a totally imaginary victory is just more evidence of your shining ignorance,     

resorting to using this line"flinging shit like monkeys in defeat" is one more fold in your tin hat! 
please post where I lost .....


----------



## daws101 (Mar 28, 2012)

eots said:


> daws101 said:
> 
> 
> > eots said:
> ...


 not at all but you must be hitting bottom though.


----------



## daws101 (Mar 28, 2012)

eots said:


> daws101 said:
> 
> 
> > eots said:
> ...


 just fixed that, on the other hand,their is no repairing your multitude of malfunctions


----------



## eots (Mar 28, 2012)

> just fixed that, on the other hand,their is no repairing your multitude of malfunctions



*WALK ON HOME ...BOY*
[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DpMbR8jWZ6A]Pantera - Walk - YouTube[/ame]


----------



## daws101 (Mar 28, 2012)

eots said:


> > just fixed that, on the other hand,their is no repairing your multitude of malfunctions
> 
> 
> 
> ...


eot's favorite dodge.... when his ass is in a crack post a utube video!


----------



## eots (Mar 28, 2012)

Actually it was you that lost the wtc 7 debate and where proven wrong on several points..then started your dodge posting homo sexual imaginings and inane pics ..as usual


----------



## Montrovant (Mar 28, 2012)

daws101 said:


> eots said:
> 
> 
> > > just fixed that, on the other hand,their is no repairing your multitude of malfunctions
> ...



But this is a GOOD youtube video!  

Great album.


----------



## daws101 (Mar 28, 2012)

eots said:


> Actually it was you that lost the wtc 7 debate and where proven wrong on several points..then started your dodge posting homo sexual imaginings and inane pics ..as usual


what points? 
never posted any homosexual (BTW that's one word) imaginings and my pics are never inane. it's no surprise you say that, as you are as pictorially illiterate as you are literature  illiterate.
so stop makin'shit up. you're not very good at that either.


----------



## Montrovant (Mar 28, 2012)

9/11 inside job said:


> x0Maximilian0x said:
> 
> 
> > Still no response to the below information from the full time O.J. Simpson defense attorneys attempting to defend the "official story" through wits end...
> ...



There are a lot of silly insults that go back and forth in these threads....but really, you should try some more variety.  You keep using the same lines over and over.


----------



## daws101 (Mar 28, 2012)

Montrovant said:


> daws101 said:
> 
> 
> > eots said:
> ...


shot in the dark...it is a good album!


----------



## eots (Mar 29, 2012)

> Originally Posted by eots
> The building was not compromised.by damage...the NIST claim is the failure of column 79...UNDER ANY CIRCUMSTANCE...would of resulted in initiation of the NIST collapse scenario ...(for example an a single explosion...or a kid with a pack of matches could cause the complete collapse of a 47 story steel framed building)





> Originally Posted by daws101
> this line is bullshit.:"UNDER ANY CIRCUMSTANCE.."





> Originally Posted by eots
> The investigation team concluded that the columns failure under any circumstance would have initiated the destructive sequence of events.
> NIST Releases Final WTC 7 Investigation Report




[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qFpbZ-aLDLY]NIST Report on WTC7 debunked and exposed! - YouTube[/ame]


----------



## Light (Mar 29, 2012)

Light said:


> 9/11 inside job said:
> 
> 
> > Light said:
> ...



So................no response?


----------



## eots (Mar 29, 2012)

> Now that the "crux" of your argument lay in waste, what else you got!?





> so................no response?


your debwunker cut and paste was answered...these reports 
mostly say we were informed by some nameless they ...that the building would come down...ignore all conflicting testimony and continually contradict the nist report by citing the hole as major factor in the collapse when nist says it was not



> now that the "crux" of your argument lay in waste, what else you got!?



I got another debwunker that does not even know what the nist report on wtc 7 claims and ignores the of all first responders that speak of explosions and that they saw no reason that building would come down


----------



## LA RAM FAN (Mar 29, 2012)

eots said:


> > Originally Posted by eots
> > The building was not compromised.by damage...the NIST claim is the failure of column 79...UNDER ANY CIRCUMSTANCE...would of resulted in initiation of the NIST collapse scenario ...(for example an a single explosion...or a kid with a pack of matches could cause the complete collapse of a 47 story steel framed building)
> 
> 
> ...



as always,dawgshit gets his ass handed to him on a platter. there is also this video out there as you know where the lead investigater says they found no pools of molten metal which is a well known fact among many that were there was nothing but pools of molten metal reported everywhere.there is a video out there i have posted many times where a firefighter says that.would post it but dawgsit and  his fellow trolls will ignore it,they always do.even Leslie Robertson who participated in the coverup carelessly opened his mouth initially saying there were pools of molten metal everywhere.

they sure show offf what trolls they are constantly ignoring these little facts.ignoring that NIST was caught
lying red handed constantly.


----------



## LA RAM FAN (Mar 29, 2012)

eots said:


> > Now that the "crux" of your argument lay in waste, what else you got!?
> 
> 
> 
> ...



that cracks me up to no end when they are getting their asses handed to them on a platter,they get desperate and refer to debunked deb wunker links.


----------



## LA RAM FAN (Mar 29, 2012)

Montrovant said:


> 9/11 inside job said:
> 
> 
> > x0Maximilian0x said:
> ...



maybe if their repeated enough to people like agent dawgshit,it'll get through to him that its the truth.

guess you want  me to be  like agent dawgshit or crackerjack kid and say -you are a male prostitute?

sorry,dont want to be kiddie like,just will continue to speak the truth that the trolls  can only sling shit in defeat like they always do.


----------



## Rat in the Hat (Mar 29, 2012)




----------



## LA RAM FAN (Mar 29, 2012)

Light said:


> Light said:
> 
> 
> > 9/11 inside job said:
> ...



all you have done in your ramblings is prove as always you only see what you want to see and prove you are one wacky coincidence theorist. if you had done any research into this case other than seeing only what you want to see,then you would know the evidence that the mossad was a major player involved in this is overwhelming and that  jew silverstein proffited immensely in these attacks.Thats Silversteins connection to this.

oh and dont defer to a webwunker like saying silverstein did not profit,its a well known fact he did as did Cheney and Bush.you keep hurting your credibility as well  in being a weird coincidence theorist in that the only three blds that collapsed that day were owed by Silverstein and again,the other buildings next door did not.

oh and the rest of your drivel is irrelevent as well  because like I said,NIST was caught lying and Eots video proved that they never had a serious investigation.Its obvious you are not watching any of these videos he posts so your proving in spades your in denial and only see what you want to see so no sense in going any further with you on this.

do this,go back to junior high school and ask them to let you sit on some science classes and ask them to stress to talk about the laws of physics and come back here in a few years from now and pm me and THEN we'll talk again.not till then though.and more imporantly,when your ready to stop being afraid of the truth as well and want to be objective instead of only seeing what you WANT to see,we'll  talk again.not till then though.


----------



## LA RAM FAN (Mar 29, 2012)

eots said:


> daws101 said:
> 
> 
> > Crackerjack said:
> ...



amen to that.Dawgshit,Moron In the hat,crackerkid and the rest of the OCTA's really lost this debate back here on this thread running away from the many facts in these two videos you posted failing to address them 

http://www.usmessageboard.com/consp...11-began-immediately-after-the-attacks-8.html


and you really took them to school major big time in that last video you posted as well.plus they never could counter that video I posted in the very beginning that a cover story was obviously put out that very day before any kind of an investigation was done.the agents are getting desperate in the fact they wont touch the points brought up in thse videos we keep posting. everything else they have posted is irrelevent because all those facts in the three videos you posted recently and mine as well prove there was a conspiracy and coverup.


----------



## Rat in the Hat (Mar 29, 2012)




----------



## Rat in the Hat (Mar 29, 2012)




----------



## LA RAM FAN (Mar 29, 2012)

x0Maximilian0x said:


> Still no response to the below information from the full time O.J. Simpson defense attorneys attempting to defend the "official story" through wits end...
> 
> Interesting how the story was put out so fast...before any tower even collapsed and only 33 minutes after the second tower got hit was an elaborate story being aired on who's responsible...
> 
> ...



every single official conspiracy theory apologist poster i see has run off from this fact and not tried to counter it along wih dodging all the facts brought up in the last three videos Eots has posted as well as failing to counter the points brought up in my video I posted in the very beginning that a coverup began and as always,cant get around the collapse of bld 7 ,seeing that they all have no interest in the truth and only maintaning the lies of the governments version and refuse to admit defeat on building 7 and refuse to admit NIST lied from the very beginning and that thanks to people like dawgshit and crackerkid referring to comments like male prostitution,this thread has gone to hell and the OCTA trolls are not mature enought to admit defeat,this thread has run its course and nto worth posting in anymore.its been over run by trolls.


----------



## LA RAM FAN (Mar 29, 2012)

I see there have been two farts in a row from agent MORON IN THE HAT since my last post as well.


----------



## LA RAM FAN (Mar 29, 2012)

9/11 inside job said:


> eots said:
> 
> 
> > > Originally Posted by eots
> ...



again since the trolls ignored the last two videos that shot down the 9/11 coverup commission,they will ignore this one as well and not debate it since it shoots down their ramblings when they refer to their deb wunker links. so no sense in doing this anymore with them-


----------



## Liability (Mar 29, 2012)

It's pretty funny that 9/11 Rimjob keeps reading the posts of all the folks he has on ignore.



The ORBS make him do it.


----------



## Rat in the Hat (Mar 29, 2012)

Liability said:


> It's pretty funny that 9/11 Rimjob keeps reading the posts of all the folks he has on ignore.
> 
> 
> 
> The ORBS make him do it.


----------



## eots (Mar 29, 2012)

Liability said:


> It's pretty funny that 9/11 Rimjob keeps reading the posts of all the folks he has on ignore.
> 
> 
> 
> The ORBS make him do it.




your inane and irrelevant pictures only prove you have lost the intellectual debate..and that would be clear to anyone other than your fellow agents and debwunkers


----------



## Liability (Mar 29, 2012)

eots said:


> Liability said:
> 
> 
> > It's pretty funny that 9/11 Rimjob keeps reading the posts of all the folks he has on ignore.
> ...





id-eots thinks I posted a picture.


----------



## eots (Mar 29, 2012)

Liability said:


> eots said:
> 
> 
> > Rat in the Hat said:
> ...



This represents the totality of liarabilitys ability to address the facts of the failed NIST investigation and report


----------



## Liability (Mar 29, 2012)

eots said:


> Liability said:
> 
> 
> > id-eots thinks I posted a picture.
> ...





id-eots thinks that highlighting his stupidity somehow involves any effort to "discuss" the NIST investigation and report.


----------



## Rat in the Hat (Mar 29, 2012)

eots said:


> your inane and irrelevant pictures only prove you have lost the intellectual debate..and that would be clear to anyone other than your fellow agents and debwunkers



I'm not going to bother to debate you anymore. Your movement is irrelevant, as proved by the failure to present your wondrous petition to Congress, and the fact that your fearless leaders are leaving to pursue other revenue streams.

All that's left is to mock the few stragglers that are still denizens of The Land of Woo.

So that's what I'm going to do.


----------



## Liability (Mar 29, 2012)

id-eots is so massively retarded that he actually follows scum like IQof7forever.


----------



## Liability (Mar 29, 2012)

Hey, id-eots:

Have your leader, IQof7forever, tell us all MORE about 

ORBS!


----------



## eots (Mar 29, 2012)

Rat in the Hat said:


> eots said:
> 
> 
> > your inane and irrelevant pictures only prove you have lost the intellectual debate..and that would be clear to anyone other than your fellow agents and debwunkers
> ...



TRANSLATION-.."I can not debate you so I will just fling shit like a monkey in defeat".

lol.....you lose !.. moron in a hat


----------



## daws101 (Mar 29, 2012)

eots said:


> > Originally Posted by eots
> > The building was not compromised.by damage...the NIST claim is the failure of column 79...UNDER ANY CIRCUMSTANCE...would of resulted in initiation of the NIST collapse scenario ...(for example an a single explosion...or a kid with a pack of matches could cause the complete collapse of a 47 story steel framed building)
> 
> 
> ...


more desperation ,,


----------



## Rat in the Hat (Mar 29, 2012)

eots said:


> Rat in the Hat said:
> 
> 
> > eots said:
> ...



Dylan Avery and the death of the 911 Truth Movement - YouTube!


----------



## eots (Mar 29, 2012)

Liability said:


> Hey, id-eots:
> 
> Have your leader, IQof7forever, tell us all MORE about
> 
> ORBS!



I have little interest in the subject ,I am still looking for a factual investigation and a reasonable explanation on the issues surrounding prior knowledge and for the collapses and especially in the case of wtc 7


----------



## daws101 (Mar 29, 2012)

eots said:


> > Now that the "crux" of your argument lay in waste, what else you got!?
> 
> 
> 
> ...


explosions don't automatically mean explosives..also the first responders did not see all of the damage nor could they.
so their testimony does not fit the evidence!


----------



## Rat in the Hat (Mar 29, 2012)

> Avery has even backed away from the stance that it was a missile and not a plane that hit the Pentagon. "It's easy to come to conclusions when a) you don't have a lot of information at your disposal and b) you haven't had a chance to actually talk to people who were there," Avery says.
> 
> ***
> 
> What does Avery think of 9/11 conspiracy theories now? He thinks that while orchestrating the attacks was beyond the scope of the Bush administration, there was "considerable foreknowledge" within the government so that it should have been able to prevent them



9/11 conspiracism: How the Iraq war contributed to its rise. - Slate Magazine


----------



## eots (Mar 29, 2012)

Rat in the Hat said:


> > Avery has even backed away from the stance that it was a missile and not a plane that hit the Pentagon. "It's easy to come to conclusions when a) you don't have a lot of information at your disposal and b) you haven't had a chance to actually talk to people who were there," Avery says.
> >
> > ***
> >
> ...



I have little interest in the subject ,I am still looking for a factual investigation and a reasonable explanation on the issues surrounding prior knowledge and for the collapses and especially in the case of wtc 7


----------



## Rat in the Hat (Mar 29, 2012)

eots said:


> Rat in the Hat said:
> 
> 
> > > Avery has even backed away from the stance that it was a missile and not a plane that hit the Pentagon. "It's easy to come to conclusions when a) you don't have a lot of information at your disposal and b) you haven't had a chance to actually talk to people who were there," Avery says.
> ...



Then quit JAQing around and present that petition.


----------



## Liability (Mar 29, 2012)

eots said:


> Rat in the Hat said:
> 
> 
> > > Avery has even backed away from the stance that it was a missile and not a plane that hit the Pentagon. "It's easy to come to conclusions when a) you don't have a lot of information at your disposal and b) you haven't had a chance to actually talk to people who were there," Avery says.
> ...




There was an investigation.  Its conclusions just don't match up with your idiotic conspiracy-nut musings, so you reject it.   

You truly are an idiot.

You can't even handle the fact that your lunatic "hypothesis" would absolutely require you to accept, as true, so many bizarre notions that anybody with an honest brain and the first glimmers of logic would reject them summarily at first sight.


----------



## daws101 (Mar 29, 2012)

eots said:


> Liability said:
> 
> 
> > It's pretty funny that 9/11 Rimjob keeps reading the posts of all the folks he has on ignore.
> ...


once again eot's claims an imaginary victory...


----------



## Liability (Mar 29, 2012)

daws101 said:


> eots said:
> 
> 
> > Liability said:
> ...



But he used the sub-moronic fake word "debwunker" again, so it's all good!


----------



## eots (Mar 29, 2012)

daws101 said:


> eots said:
> 
> 
> > > Now that the "crux" of your argument lay in waste, what else you got!?
> ...



saying a building is dangerous for firefighters to be in because there could be a collapse commonly means parts of the structure falling ,roof or walls ,floors falling within the structure ..not the complete collapse and destruction of a 47 story building being reduced to a pile of ruble and dust in seconds


----------



## Liability (Mar 29, 2012)

eots said:


> daws101 said:
> 
> 
> > eots said:
> ...



And there was so much "common" and every day work-a-day "normal" about 9/11/2001.


----------



## Rat in the Hat (Mar 29, 2012)

eots said:


> daws101 said:
> 
> 
> > eots said:
> ...



So the remains of WTC 7 looked like this??


----------



## daws101 (Mar 29, 2012)

eots said:


> Liability said:
> 
> 
> > id-eots thinks I posted a picture.
> ...


you have no credible evidence that NIST failed at anything
in fact you have no evidence at all.
so again your use of a word is intentionally misleading.


----------



## eots (Mar 29, 2012)

Liability said:


> eots said:
> 
> 
> > daws101 said:
> ...



buildings and building fires do not care about the events of 9/11..they are buildings and building fires and should respond the same to fire as they would on any other day


----------



## eots (Mar 29, 2012)

the NIST report essentially says a kid with a pack  of matches could cause a 47 story steel framed building to collapse in this manner...this makes no sense

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LD06SAf0p9A]wtc 7 collapse - YouTube[/ame]


The investigation team concluded that the column&#8217;s failure under any circumstance would have initiated the destructive sequence of events.


----------



## daws101 (Mar 29, 2012)

eots said:


> daws101 said:
> 
> 
> > eots said:
> ...


 but the whole structure was failing! and your answer is twoofer Babel... it's like a line from a 70's disaster movie..


----------



## Rat in the Hat (Mar 29, 2012)

Oh no, we just had another 9/11 



> A preliminary city investigation found that workers cut a structural beam supporting the remains of what had been a two-story warehouse on West 131st Street. The section crumpled, burying the men in a cascade of steel beams, bricks and reinforced concrete.
> 
> "Once they cut that structural beam, the site became unstable," Department of Buildings Commissioner Robert LiMandri said.





> Willy Katende, who lives across the street from the site, said he was in his kitchen when heard a loud noise. "I saw bricks just falling on the workers," he said. "It sounded like a bomb. It came down so fast."



Collapse Kills Worker - WSJ.com



> *It sounded like a bomb.*



It must have been loaded with pre-planted demolition charges.



> *It came down so fast.*



Free fall!!!!!!!


And just look at the cut on the red & white beam.






*
ThermXte!!!!!!!!*

And further proof of the inside job is that the plastic trash can was not damaged.


----------



## Liability (Mar 29, 2012)

eots said:


> Liability said:
> 
> 
> > eots said:
> ...



Physics does NOT care about the events of 9/11/2001 EXCEPT that those events resulted in physical manifestations in the real world, like the collapse of massive towers causing a gaping hole in Bldg 7 which was then also subjected to the effects of fires.

Support structures deprived of proper support -- and gravity acts accordingly.

No kooky conspiracy shit required.

All of your kooky conspiracy shit is founded upon utterly irrational and baseless presuppositions.

Physics and logic alone inform us that there is nothing to support your idiot rambling nonsense.


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Mar 29, 2012)

9/11 inside job said:


> 9 11 THE BIG CLUE EVERYONE MISSED - YouTube
> 
> Here is this disinformation agent automatically concluding before ANYBODY has even NIST,that the towers fell due to structural failure from the fires saying the intense heat caused it. Intense heat? yeah thats why in one of the famous pics posted many times over  the years we see a woman leaning against the towers even though the flames are allegedly so intense.
> 
> ...



Yeah, you're right, you never see an idiot "man on the street" interview unless the man is an agent of the government.

And why would anyone think that a high speed jet, full of fuel, crashing into the side of a building would cause structural damage? It's ridiculous!

Meanwhile, in the world of the 3 digit IQs, we wonder, how do you survive with such minimal brain function?


----------



## daws101 (Mar 29, 2012)

eots said:


> the NIST report essentially says a kid with a pack  of matches could cause a 47 story steel framed building to collapse in this manner...this makes no sense
> 
> wtc 7 collapse - YouTube


no it does not, stop making shit up!
if you follow your line of lunacy, that "kid" would have to start multiple large scale fires,disable most of the sprinkler system do structural damage to the building etc..
 it's almost a silly as  a team of saboteurs breaking in and carrying 100 pound bags of thermite or 60 gallons of paintable thermite, setting the thermite months or years in advance..
 then setting sound dampened explosive charges as plan B.
THEN WAITING HOURS WHILE THE BUILDING BURNED TO SET THEM OFF.
ONLY TO HAVE THESE SOUND DAMPENED EXPLOSIVES FAIL (THEY WERE HEARD)  AND EXPOSE THEIR NEFARIOUS PLAN...


----------



## eots (Mar 29, 2012)

liability said:


> eots said:
> 
> 
> > liability said:
> ...



NIST determined your gaping hole was not a factor and even without any structural damage similar fires would have resulted in a collapse


----------



## eots (Mar 29, 2012)

daws101 said:


> eots said:
> 
> 
> > the NIST report essentially says a kid with a pack  of matches could cause a 47 story steel framed building to collapse in this manner...this makes no sense
> ...



no he would simple need to start a fire in the area of column 79


----------



## eots (Mar 29, 2012)

The investigation team concluded that the column&#8217;s failure under any circumstance would have initiated the destructive sequence of events.

NIST Releases Final WTC 7 Investigation Report


----------



## eots (Mar 29, 2012)

Column 79&#8212;the structural component identified as the one whose failure on 9/11 started the progressive collapse&#8212;would still have led to a complete loss of the building if fire or damage from the falling debris of the nearby WTC 1 tower were not factors. The investigation team concluded that the column&#8217;s failure under any circumstance would have initiated the destructive sequence of events.


NIST Releases Final WTC 7 Investigation Report


----------



## eots (Mar 29, 2012)

> it's almost a silly as a team of saboteurs breaking in and carrying 100 pound bags of thermite or 60 gallons of paintable thermite, setting the thermite months or years in advance..
> then setting sound dampened explosive charges as plan B.



[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LNOM_U5UM6Q&feature=player_embedded]THERMITE CUTTING STEEL - VALIDATED - EXPERIMENTALLY DEMONSTRATED - YouTube[/ame]


----------



## daws101 (Mar 29, 2012)

eots said:


> daws101 said:
> 
> 
> > eots said:
> ...


STILL WRONG 
he would have to make sure that the fire would be hot enough and burn long enough to weaken 79 to the point of failure.
again you're intentionally misrepresenting the report...


----------



## eots (Mar 29, 2012)

daws101 said:


> eots said:
> 
> 
> > daws101 said:
> ...



So are you saying on 9/11  at wtc 7 someone made sure that the fire would be hot *enough *and burn long enough to weaken 79 to the point of failure.??


----------



## Rat in the Hat (Mar 29, 2012)

eots said:


> daws101 said:
> 
> 
> > eots said:
> ...


----------



## daws101 (Mar 29, 2012)

eots said:


> > it's almost a silly as a team of saboteurs breaking in and carrying 100 pound bags of thermite or 60 gallons of paintable thermite, setting the thermite months or years in advance..
> > then setting sound dampened explosive charges as plan B.
> 
> 
> ...


in your assclowneness you fail to see how this video debunks it's self. 

1. it's done in the open air not in the almost inaccessible areas of a building where the joints are fitted. this could not have been done without being seen.

btw since no evidence of thermite or expolsives was found in any of the 911 sites  this guy demo is based on speculation not fact!


----------



## daws101 (Mar 29, 2012)

eots said:


> daws101 said:
> 
> 
> > eots said:
> ...


no, but you wish I was, stop assuming facts not in evidence

the fires burned for 7hours enough said!


----------



## Liability (Mar 29, 2012)

eots said:


> liability said:
> 
> 
> > eots said:
> ...



That's a lie.  When you have to lie to "make your case," id-eots, you have already lost.

NIST recognized that what caused the fires to burn -- which is what led to the collapse -- was (among other things) a failed sprinkler system.

Gee, why did the sprinkler system not work?

Hm.

There's a real poseur.

And with that gaping hole on the floors where the fires were raging, what effect would a gaping hole have on the ability to rush oxygen to the fire?

Hm.

Another major puzzler.

It is also significant that to account for a "blast" taking-out a support structure adequate to cause the global collapse, the SOUND would have had to have been 130 to 140 dB *half a mile away.*  No such explosive sound was reported or recorded.

So, your whack-a-doo stupid conspiracy theory idicocy has zero support.

You know what it was?

Orbs.

No doubt.

It hadda be those fucking Orbs.


----------



## Light (Mar 29, 2012)

9/11 inside job said:


> Light said:
> 
> 
> > Light said:
> ...



So, like I said............no response.  You didn't even address what I said.  All you did was make all the same claims over again.  Except this time you through in the Mossad.  Try showing that my claims are wrong or try to prove your claims right...............either one would be a vast improvement in your debating skills.

You are the one that made the derogatory statement about my debating skills. 





> You are a chickenshit coward,you wont even try and address my points I brought up because you know you cant counter them.Like all Bush dupes,you have no debating skills whatsoever,you make b.s claims these points have been debunked without proving your b.s you sprout off,without addressing them.No surprise,you Bush dupes always go off on these rants and make up lies when you know you are defeated.You would be laughed out of a debating hall in five minutes with your debating skills and lose because of your failure to try and counter these facts.lol


So, I asked you to pick a point for us to discuss.  You made a claim, I showed you why your claim is wrong and all you can do is make the SAME CLAIM again.  So, maybe YOU need to go back to Junior High and look up the definition of DEBATE.
Come on..............show me where the proof of your claims are.  Where is the proof that Silverstein profited from the attacks?  Show me what evidence has been found that WTC7 was brought down on purpose.  Show me why I should ignore the rescue works that where THERE and saw the condition of the building and knew it was in trouble.
Oh, and this time, try not to wait for Eots to do your answering for you.


----------



## LA RAM FAN (Mar 29, 2012)

Toddsterpatriot said:


> 9/11 inside job said:
> 
> 
> > 9 11 THE BIG CLUE EVERYONE MISSED - YouTube
> ...



thats something you should consider since you slept junior high school science classes. again your being an idiot ignoring how this bozo concluded before an investigation ever happened what really happend and if you were aware of witness testimonys like him,you would see your being an idiot as well. Lets see,who wins? your ramblings  or the laws of physics? you lose like all bush dupes always do.


----------



## LA RAM FAN (Mar 29, 2012)

Light said:


> Light said:
> 
> 
> > 9/11 inside job said:
> ...


something else I forgot to mentioned before was again you sure  cripple your arguments constantly.Here you are talking about the combination of a jet and the fire causing the collapse of the towers and when cornered that bld 7 was not hit by an airliner, you backpeddle talking about a huge hole hit in the building and all these fires being on the floors yet at the same time according to your logic,those neighbor buildings next door to the towers ALSO should have collapsed because they ALSO had huge holes in them,far more extensive damage  as those photos prove-and those are not fake photos either,had far worse burning severe fires in them and yet those buildings did not collapse.oh and you constantly prove you have done no research into this other than what you want to see because there were some mistimed explosions that took place earlier in the day which is what caused the big hole. and like always you ignore that NIST was caught lying.

as i said before,you need to go back to junior high school science classes because a fire induced collapse with a hole like that doesnt make it fall at free fall speed,they would GRADUALLY fall down.god your ignorant as hell. not to mention close minded that you forgot everything you learned at that age,seriously,as i said before,I have had far more inteeligent conversations with htis with junior high school kids and thats because they dont ignore the laws of physics they learned. so like i said,till you get that education,your not worth my time anymore.your too afraid obviously to look at videos as you have proved in spades.


----------



## LA RAM FAN (Mar 29, 2012)

9/11 inside job said:


> Toddsterpatriot said:
> 
> 
> > 9/11 inside job said:
> ...



Parrot your obviously an idiot who slept through junior high school science classes like I told the previous Bush dupe because as any architect will tell you who is not afraid of the government,they will tell you that those towers should never have come strait down by a fire induced building dumbfuck.congrats on your ignorance. like I told him come back after you take some science classes in junior high that you obviously  slept through.


----------



## Liability (Mar 29, 2012)

Rimjob just exhaled in here.

P.U.!


----------



## eots (Mar 29, 2012)

> Hm.
> 
> There's a real poseur.
> *
> ...



the loss of WTC 7&#8217;s Column 79&#8212;the structural component identified as the one whose failure on 9/11 started the progressive collapse&#8212;would still have led to a complete loss of the building if fire or damage from the falling debris of the nearby WTC 1 tower were not factors. The investigation team concluded that the column&#8217;s failure under any circumstance would have initiated the destructive sequence of events.





> Another major puzzler.
> 
> It is also significant that to account for a "blast" taking-out a support structure adequate to cause the global collapse, the SOUND would have had to have been 130 to 140 dB *half a mile away.*  No such explosive sound was* reported *or recorded.



[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LNOM_U5UM6Q&feature=player_embedded]THERMITE CUTTING STEEL - VALIDATED - EXPERIMENTALLY DEMONSTRATED - YouTube[/ame]


----------



## Liability (Mar 29, 2012)

9/11 Rimjob, IQof7forever, CriscoPHEARa, id-eots and the rest of the scumbag twoofers endlessly loop the same drivel.

They collectively are *The Fountain of Shit!*


----------



## eots (Mar 29, 2012)

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CIIF6P8zBG8]9/11: Sound Evidence for WTC 7 Explosions and NIST Cover Up - YouTube[/ame]


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Mar 29, 2012)

9/11 inside job said:


> Toddsterpatriot said:
> 
> 
> > 9/11 inside job said:
> ...



Your BS has nothing to do with physics.
You never answered my question.


----------



## eots (Mar 29, 2012)

Toddsterpatriot said:


> 9/11 inside job said:
> 
> 
> > 9 11 THE BIG CLUE EVERYONE MISSED - YouTube
> ...



you mean this retarded question  ?..The answer would be  that a high speed jet, full of fuel, crashing into the side of a building would cause most likely cause some kind of structural damage..why do you ask ????


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Mar 29, 2012)

eots said:


> Toddsterpatriot said:
> 
> 
> > 9/11 inside job said:
> ...



This one.....Meanwhile, in the world of the 3 digit IQs, we wonder, how do you survive with such minimal brain function?


----------



## eots (Mar 29, 2012)

Toddsterpatriot said:


> eots said:
> 
> 
> > Toddsterpatriot said:
> ...



that question is even more retarded ...and sounds like the words of someone who can not defend their position on the collapse of building 7 or the twin towers


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Mar 29, 2012)

eots said:


> Toddsterpatriot said:
> 
> 
> > eots said:
> ...



Why did the government hide explosives in WTC7?
What was the motive?


----------



## daws101 (Mar 29, 2012)

eots said:


> > Hm.
> >
> > There's a real poseur.
> > *
> ...


once again you pull the clip from your ass and try to say it's evidence.
then you yammer on about explosions being heard so they cancel each other out.
you're trying to have it both ways.
also there is no evidence of either being used...


----------



## daws101 (Mar 29, 2012)

eots said:


> 9/11: Sound Evidence for WTC 7 Explosions and NIST Cover Up - YouTube
> 
> Barry Jennings&#39; account of WTC 7 explosions - YouTube


Barry Jennings account has no relevance to the collapse as he and Mr.Hess were rescued hours before.
their stories contradict each other and do no march the forensic evidence.
so the odds that he was telling the truth are about the same as being mauled by a polar and a black bear in the same day..
in other words it's highly UNLIKELY.
BTW since he's dead and can't be cross examined his testimony is invalid


----------



## eots (Mar 29, 2012)

daws101 said:


> eots said:
> 
> 
> > 9/11: Sound Evidence for WTC 7 Explosions and NIST Cover Up - YouTube
> ...


----------



## Liability (Mar 29, 2012)

daws101 said:


> eots said:
> 
> 
> > 9/11: Sound Evidence for WTC 7 Explosions and NIST Cover Up - YouTube
> ...




Barry Jennings?

Pfft.

Let's talk Barry White!

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v8Hw6yAaeBw]Barry White Love´s Theme - YouTube[/ame]


----------



## Liability (Mar 29, 2012)

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ypyiAT1RelU&feature=related]Barry White - Can&#39;t get enough of your love baby - YouTube[/ame]


----------



## Liability (Mar 29, 2012)

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BtwOeoeWhoo&feature=related]Barry White - My First My Last My Everything - Lyrics - YouTube[/ame]


----------



## eots (Mar 29, 2012)




----------



## Rat in the Hat (Mar 29, 2012)

Liability said:


> daws101 said:
> 
> 
> > eots said:
> ...



Barry White?

PfT

Let's really talk Barry Manilow.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GK8-gZVkYsk]Mandy 1978 - YouTube[/ame]


----------



## Rat in the Hat (Mar 29, 2012)

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R4GxUKYQ258]Barry Manilow - Copacabana + Lyrics - YouTube[/ame]


----------



## Rat in the Hat (Mar 29, 2012)

Or we can talk Barry Bonds.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ljIr3fWT16s&feature=related]BARRY BONDS (HR 756) - YouTube[/ame]


----------



## Liability (Mar 29, 2012)

eots said:


> WTC7: NIST Finally Admits Freefall (Part I) - YouTube



Nobody "admits" free fall.  Nobody can "admit" pure fiction.

And reality says it did not fall at free fall speeds.

That YouBoob bullshit distorts (deliberately) what NIST did conclude.

More Twoofer dishonesty.

What a shock.



> In a video, it appears that WTC 7 is descending in free fall, something that would not occur in the structural collapse that you describe. How can you ignore basic laws of physics?
> 
> In the draft WTC 7 report (released Aug. 21, 2008; available at WTC Disaster Study), NIST stated that the north face of the building descended 18 stories (the portion of the collapse visible in the video) in 5.4 seconds, based on video analysis of the building collapse. This time period is 40 percent longer than the 3.9 seconds this process would have taken if the north face of the building had descended solely under free fall conditions. During the public comment period on the draft report, NIST was asked to confirm this time difference and define the reasons for it in greater detail.
> 
> ...


 Questions and Answers about the NIST WTC 7 Investigation

In short, the YouBoob bullshit linked by id-eots is a lie and, knowing this, id-eots is a liar.

That stage 2 rate of collapse = roughly 2.25 seconds' worth of "free fall" which is completely expected and having nothing at all to do with any intentional demolition of anything.

Why do Twoofers insist on being fucking complete, abject, lying sacks of shit?


----------



## eots (Mar 29, 2012)

as the monkeys fling shit in defeat...sad but true


----------



## Liability (Mar 29, 2012)

eots said:


> as the monkeys fling shit in defeat...sad but true



Yes.  I see you and your filthy ilk still doing that.

Completely expected from a lying twoofer.


----------



## eots (Mar 29, 2012)

Liability said:


> eots said:
> 
> 
> > WTC7: NIST Finally Admits Freefall (Part I) - YouTube
> ...



what a moron...


----------



## Rat in the Hat (Mar 29, 2012)

eots said:


> as the monkeys fling shit in defeat...sad but true



Didn't you mean to post this using your "9/11 inside job" sock account???


----------



## Rat in the Hat (Mar 29, 2012)




----------



## eots (Mar 29, 2012)

> liability
> 
> nobody "admits" free fall. Nobody can "admit" pure fiction.
> 
> And reality says it did not fall at free fall speeds.





> eots
> stage 2 (1.75 to 4.0 seconds): Gravitational acceleration (free fall)






> liability
> in short, the youboob bullshit linked by id-eots is a lie and, knowing this, id-eots is a liar.
> 
> That stage 2 rate of collapse = roughly 2.25 seconds' worth of "free fall" which is completely expected and having nothing at all to do with any intentional demolition of anything. Questions and Answers about the NIST WTC 7 Investigation




*lol...*


----------



## Liability (Mar 29, 2012)

eots said:


> > liability
> >
> > nobody "admits" free fall. Nobody can "admit" pure fiction.
> >
> ...



^ the expected answer of a twoofer when facts and reality get in the way of his lies.

Or, it could have been the 









orbs.


----------



## Liability (Mar 29, 2012)

eots said:


> Liability said:
> 
> 
> > eots said:
> ...



That does constitute an honest sign-off for your posts.


----------



## eots (Mar 29, 2012)

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jnWurIl5m9s&feature=autoplay&list=FLyX4yaCqm1tU1H-T0Y_hHVw&lf=plcp&playnext=1]DATSIK - RETREAT - YouTube[/ame]


----------



## Light (Mar 30, 2012)

9/11 inside job said:


> Light said:
> 
> 
> > Light said:
> ...



You obviously didn't bother reading my post explaining the difference between WTC7 and WTC4,5&6.  Maybe the difference between a 47 story skyscraper and an 8 story building escaped your junior high education.



> because there were some mistimed explosions that took place earlier in the day which is what caused the big hole


Who's ass did you pull that out of!?  Where is the evidence for THIS claim?



> fire induced collapse with a hole like that doesnt make it fall at free fall speed,they would GRADUALLY fall down


Please show ANY skyscraper that has ever "gradually" collapsed!!

I notice that you don't actually want to discuss this subject.  You just want to yell out your claims and call those that don't agree trolls.  You can't validate these things you say, so out comes the ranting!!

And I like this one:


> your not worth my time anymore


This is another way of you saying "I can't prove your position wrong nor can I prove my position right..............so I am just going to quit!"
I would like to quote one of your "one liners" here about running away in defeat................but I just can't bring myself to type something that stupid.


----------



## LA RAM FAN (Mar 30, 2012)

eots said:


> WTC7: NIST Finally Admits Freefall (Part II) - YouTube
> 
> 
> WTC7: NIST Finally Admits Freefall (Part II) - YouTube



four farts in a row from the agent trolls since this last post of yours. You might post for the agents those videos again how NIST was caught lying about no molten steel found.if you post those videos often enough,maybe it will sink into their warped brains.

although I highly doubt it since they are obviously on drugs.

I love how according to the logic of a certain official conspiracy theory apologist afraid of the truth,that according to his logic,the next door neighbor buildings much closer to the towers and had far more extensive damage to it and far more extensive fires,that according to his logic,they should have collapsed as well yet they did not.then when cornered on this that, he cripples his arguments,has to fling shit in defeat to avoid admitting defeat cause the truth scares him.

try to reason with him on this sense YOU are still discussing this with the paid trolls and the loyal Bush dupe afraid of the truth.I can see none of that has sunk in with him.well not surprising since they only see what they want to see.

amazing how they worship the 9/11 commission and  live in denial with their coincidence theorys that only the buildings owned by Jew silverstein that day collapsed and the others with far more extensive damage as the photos prove-guess they never looked at them on that link I supplied,thats a given obviously,that THEY never collapsed which again according to a loyal Bush dupes logic ,SHOULD have as well. but didnt because a fact he is afraid of,they did not because they were not owned by silverstein.guess thats a point he doesnt want to tackle since it shoots down his ramblings.

more importantly since you are STILL trying to get them unbrainwashed,explain to the loyal Bush dupe afraid of the truth,that if he did not have such a bad memory, and could actually remember what  was taught to him in junior high school science classes,those three buildings should never have come down at free fall speed like they did defying the laws of physics scientists have gone by for thousands of years.

It will go ignored of course  but try to to explain that if he knew one iota about the laws of physics that every junior high school kid knows and learns at that age,those towers should never have fallen straight down at freefall speed,that they should have GRADUALLY came down and tipped over and came down around 97 seconds or so.

Good luck,you cant reason with someone who only sees what they want to see,wont watch your videos that have shot down their ramblings and wont be open minded enough to ask to go ask a junior high school teacher to explain to him the laws of physics.


thats about as best as dummies style I know of on  how to explain it to the people worshipping the 9/11 coverup commission.do you know any better way? good luck.I have tried as best as I could but cant have a rational discussion with someone who wont watch the evidence you show in videos like you have or only selectively reads what they want to read as you well now,thats why I wish you luck trying to reason with them since you choose to continue with them on this.


----------



## Toro (Mar 30, 2012)

9/11 inside job said:


> eots said:
> 
> 
> > WTC7: NIST Finally Admits Freefall (Part II) - YouTube
> ...



Why does it matter if he's Jewish?


----------



## LA RAM FAN (Mar 30, 2012)

Toro said:


> 9/11 inside job said:
> 
> 
> > eots said:
> ...



as I tried to explain to Light earlier Toto,Silverstein is the jew connection to the mossads involvement in it. there is plenty of overwhelming evidence out there that proves the mossad had a heavy hand in this  but as we both know,your just like him, afraid of the truth and only see what you WANT to see as you have proven in spades so many times over the years that I would show it to you if you wanted to learn, but since your  like him,only want to live in denial and be afraid, and only see what you want to see, I wont bother since talking to you about this is like talking to a wall.
oh and silverstein just like Bushwacker and Cheney,proffited very handsomely from these attacks that you would know if you stopped listening to the idiot box in your living room that you have allowed to brainwash you. you might try what Mad Scientist did,he was for along time a brainwshed Bush dupe in denial for a long time on this as well but then unlike you,he finally stopped being afraid and started listening to the alternative media tat reports real news they suppress and is finally awake.something I never thought would haappen with him.

I have seen this happen quite a few times over the years actually,that someone like MS who defends the official version,cross over and no lonver believe it anymore where I have never seen someone such as Eots or Paulitician cross over and be a Bush dupe.you never will either because the truth wins out in the end.


----------



## Obamerican (Mar 30, 2012)

This coming from the same stupid fucker that doesn't know how many years it's been since 9/11 occurred.


----------



## LA RAM FAN (Mar 30, 2012)

someone farted in here.

you can only sling shit in defeat candyass as always.


----------



## LA RAM FAN (Mar 30, 2012)

since only Eots and Max are the only intelligent posters to come on here and post this will have to be my last post here for a while since all this thread does is attract the trolls and OCTAS afraid of the truth.

You OCTA'S make yourselves look like idiots more and more so by constantly defending that paid agent in that video at the beginning.If you all were not such idiots you see that he is just like the paid agents on my ignore list that have penetrated this site.Hired to spread the lies and he was obviously hired long before the attacks to memorize that script like an actor and have his speech ready to go.You are being complete idiots accepting that he knew what had already caused it to collapse before the government even concluded so and you know it.stop living in denial.

That guy unlike the other people in the streets is not one bit at all broken up about it all,a fact you idiots ignore.He actually sounds more happy than sad about it if anything.guess all that money paid off to him made him so happy.all that money being paid to him,he doesnt give a shit about all those people in our government that they  murdered.money will do that to you  you idiots.

Also those firefighters never would have stayed as long as they did if they thought there was any kind of a chance those towers would collapse.Give me a break with your pitiful ramblings the combination of the airliner and the fires caused it to collapse.we know the fires were not serious because thanks to the family members who had to fight for the release of the tapes that were not released until years later,you hear on them the firefighters saying the fires are not that serious,that they would have them put out shortly.they would have evacuated a long time ago and never have stayed that long if they were serious.

you can forget your ramblings that the airliner along with the fires caused it to collapse because as any serious researcher like Eots,myself and Max all know,those towers were OVER designed to take a hit from an airliner.The designers anticipated this designing it in mind with multiple airliners striking it at speeds up to 600mph.One of them said so in an interview about 9 months before it happened. again that guy is an agent saying the fires induced the collapse and your a complete idiot if you  believe that and of course you will try and fool yourself and saying none of these points are true as well.Go ahead,you just prove what stupid idiots you are be doing so. so by all means,go ahead and make idiot asses out of yourselfs,thats your problem.


----------



## Toro (Mar 30, 2012)

9/11 inside job said:


> Toro said:
> 
> 
> > 9/11 inside job said:
> ...


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Mar 30, 2012)

9/11 inside job said:


> since only Eots and Max are the only intelligent posters to come on here and post this will have to be my last post here for a while since all thsi thread does is attract the trolls and OCTAS afraid of the truth.
> 
> You OCTA'S make yourselves look like idiots more and more so by constantly defending that paid agent in that video at the beginning.If you all were not such idiots you see that he is just liek the paid agents on my ignore list that have penetrated this site.Hired to spread the lies and he was obviously hired long before the attacks to memorize that script like an actor and have his speech ready to go.You are being complete idiots accepting that he knew what had already caused it to collapse before the government even concluded so and you know it.stop living in denial.
> 
> ...



Paid agents, right.


----------



## eots (Mar 30, 2012)

Toddsterpatriot said:


> 9/11 inside job said:
> 
> 
> > since only Eots and Max are the only intelligent posters to come on here and post this will have to be my last post here for a while since all thsi thread does is attract the trolls and OCTAS afraid of the truth.
> ...



[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hc6J5rlKhIc]Yo my name is tod, I don&#39;t give a fuck. - YouTube[/ame]


----------



## Mr. Jones (Mar 31, 2012)

Toro said:


> 9/11 inside job said:
> 
> 
> > eots said:
> ...


I think he is stating what has become a curious coincidence.
 that the only people arrested on 9-11 were Jewish.
There is talk that 9-11 may have been helped along by certain Israeli
factions, who happen to be Jewish.
Actually when this is looked at closer, it seems that 9-11 had more ties to Israeli sympathizers that were Jewish then any Muslims.
Just passing along what has been documented.


----------



## Mr. Jones (Mar 31, 2012)

Toddsterpatriot said:


> 9/11 inside job said:
> 
> 
> > since only Eots and Max are the only intelligent posters to come on here and post this will have to be my last post here for a while since all thsi thread does is attract the trolls and OCTAS afraid of the truth.
> ...



Israel Hires Internet Soldiers to Penetrate American Forums, Chatrooms : Deadline Live With Jack Blood

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HYedTmaHt1A&feature=player_embedded]provocateurs,shills and disinfo agents - YouTube[/ame]


----------



## Liability (Mar 31, 2012)

Mr. Jones said:


> Toddsterpatriot said:
> 
> 
> > 9/11 inside job said:
> ...


----------



## LA RAM FAN (Mar 31, 2012)

eots said:


> 9/11: Sound Evidence for WTC 7 Explosions and NIST Cover Up - YouTube
> 
> Barry Jennings&#39; account of WTC 7 explosions - YouTube



thanks for posting that.Barry Jennings testimony is another part of the crux of the 9/11 coverup commission of bld 7 that not only the 9/11 coverup commission could not get around,but these agent trolls on my ignore list have always failed to do and everybody else that defended it here on this thread failed to do as well.

Barry Jennings testimony was so overwhelming that explosives went off,thats why they killed him later in disguised his death later on as something else.they could not afford to have him around anymore telling the truth.

The agents on my ignore list always have to fling shit in defeat like the monkey trolls they are.they hate hearing it all the time but its the truth so it needs to constantly be repeated. Maybe the loyal brainwashed Bush dupe on here  living in denial Light,that that  will seek in with them.

It cracks me up to no end how  the commission themselves could never get around that fact yet this brainwashed Bush dupe Light and the agent trolls that have penetrated this site somehow think they possibly could.

Rolls on floor laughing.


----------



## LA RAM FAN (Mar 31, 2012)

eots said:


> Toddsterpatriot said:
> 
> 
> > 9/11 inside job said:
> ...



retarded question is right in the fact that as any grade school graduate knows,it would have tipped over sideways and GRADUALLY over a long period of time collapsed.cant help someone who ditched junior high school science classes.

Parrot troll of course will live in denial that any architect will tell you the same thing.


----------



## Liability (Mar 31, 2012)

9/11 inside job said:


> eots said:
> 
> 
> > Toddsterpatriot said:
> ...



Wrong.

Unlike you, you lying hack piece of twoofer shit, even grade schoolers recognize that gravity tends to pull straight down, you moron.


----------



## LA RAM FAN (Mar 31, 2012)

Toro said:


> 9/11 inside job said:
> 
> 
> > Toro said:
> ...



how convient for you as always toto.Like the chickenshit coward you are,as always you run off and try and laugh it off knowing your defeated.as always,you show off you have the most pathetic debating skills of all the brainwashed Bush dupes on here.congrats on that.these agents here love you for being afraid like you are.thank you for proving that AGAIN as always.


----------



## LA RAM FAN (Mar 31, 2012)

Toddsterpatriot said:


> 9/11 inside job said:
> 
> 
> > since only Eots and Max are the only intelligent posters to come on here and post this will have to be my last post here for a while since all thsi thread does is attract the trolls and OCTAS afraid of the truth.
> ...



yeah your too much of a dumbfuck troll afraid of the truth who has always  been brainwashed by the media and government to know they are everywhere on message boards.they are simple as hell to spot how they lie and make up shit to avoid defeat.

 with you and Toto, its obvious you two are just idiot dumbfucks in denial and afraid of the truth who only see what you want to see.you guys dont fit the pattern they do.Mad Scientist as I said before,used to always be like you two as well.

I never thought he would become awake, but he finally is and crossed over and now sees how corrupt our government really is and that 9/11 was an inside job. I always knew he was like you two,just afraid of the truth and in denial and brainwashed because again,he never fit the pattern that the agents trolls on my ignore list do of a paid agent.He did not lie and make things up like they do when confronted with evidence and facts they cant refute.

He just made pitiful comments like you two do when defeated.everytime he talks to me now on the moronic posts that you guys make,I have to remind him all the time how he used to sound as stupid as you both do.


----------



## LA RAM FAN (Mar 31, 2012)

Mr. Jones said:


> Toro said:
> 
> 
> > 9/11 inside job said:
> ...



Thanks,you put it in dummies style to Toto as best as possible but your wasting your breath.with Toto,that kind of thing is too complicated for him to grasp.its also too complicated for him to grasp that Silverstein proffited HUGE from the attacks and that his buildings were the only ones to collapsed.Him proffiting from these attacks and his buildings being the only ones that collapsed is one major weird coincidence.But thats a little bit too much of a complicated fact for coincidence theorists such as Toto,Parrot and Light to comprehend or understand no matter how you try and explain it to them in dummies style the way you did.

thanks for coming on here.great to see someone else on here finally besides Eots and Max that have intelligence and understand the laws of physicss that every grade school graduate learns. something they all somehow forgot.


----------



## LA RAM FAN (Mar 31, 2012)

Mr. Jones said:


> Toddsterpatriot said:
> 
> 
> > 9/11 inside job said:
> ...





Like i said,your wasting your breath on them,they are too afraid of the truth and only see what they want to see so I can tell you right now,they wont watch that video but thanks for posting it anyways.


----------



## LA RAM FAN (Mar 31, 2012)

I see agent troll LIAR ABILITYS handlers are getting worried on all this information thats being put out on this thread and that  his handlers quickly sent him here  to try and derail this thread which he will fail like he does everyday in his pitiful life.


----------



## Liability (Mar 31, 2012)

9/11 inside job said:


> I see agent troll LIAR ABILITYS handlers are getting worried on all this information thats being put out on this thread and that  his handlers quickly sent him here  to try and derail this thread which he will fail like he does everyday in his pitiful life.



Paid agents!

Yeah.   A great job.  Very high pay.   Lots of sight seeing opportunities.  The view from the Orbs can be astounding!

And those side benefits!  I mean, the extra income from contract hits on you VITs (very important Twoofers) is enough to keep me living large.

Thanks for keeping me employed!

Special Disinformation Agent Liability
Federal Top Secret Bureau Debwunkers M Us!


----------



## LA RAM FAN (Mar 31, 2012)

someone is shitting on the floor here and stinking up my thread. I got to leave and get away from that horrible smell.


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Mar 31, 2012)

9/11 inside job said:


> someone is shitting on the floor here and stinking up my thread. I got to leave and get away from that horrible smell.



That's your breath.


----------



## Toro (Mar 31, 2012)

Liability said:


> 9/11 inside job said:
> 
> 
> > I see agent troll LIAR ABILITYS handlers are getting worried on all this information thats being put out on this thread and that  his handlers quickly sent him here  to try and derail this thread which he will fail like he does everyday in his pitiful life.
> ...



Hey Liability

You going to the DIA (that's Disinformation Agent) convention this year?  Last year's convention was a blast!!


----------



## x0Maximilian0x (Mar 31, 2012)

Here is more to the cover story for 9/11 being spoonfed to pitty little American's...

American's are such a tool...no pun intended...LOL...

It was Jerome Hauer who advised the White House staff to start taking "CIPRO" - the anti-biotic effective against Anthrax - a week prior to the Anthrax mailings attack

Hauer is an 'expert' in Bio-Terrorism and was the one who was in charge of the NIH response to the anthrax attacks. His reactions to the anthrax mailings were, at best, slow and he took every opportunity to invoke "Osama Bin Laden" in the rhetoric he employed in his public utterances about them


Interesting how the story was put out so fast...before any tower even collapsed and only 33 minutes after the second tower got hit was an elaborate story being aired on who's responsible...

Well it certainly brings to question if the "official story" for 9/11 was prewitten before the attacks...

If nothing else it sure looks bad for the investigation into who was responsible for 9/11 being completed so fast... let alone the investigation on who was responsible having to make its way to the media with an elaborate story written... 

The story being out so fast is incriminating enough let alone if you think about...was the investigation done before the attacks even happened...I think the answer is quite clear.

Another interesting fact is the first guy who promoted the story was Jerome Hauer who just happened to be...

*Bio Warfare expert...which brings to mind the anthrax attacks right after 9/11 targeting Senate and Media

*Drug Company Director...which brings to mind the fact that the White House staff was taking the medication for anthrax before the first anthrax attack even occured...(fact if you are not too lazy to check for yourself)

*Commissioner for Office of Emergency Management...which brings to mind how it was being reinforced as a sky bunker just before 9/11 on the 23rd floor of World Tade Center 7, Building 7...with its floors, walls, windows all being reinforced making it some type of tree fort within sight of the World Trade Center twin towers...

*Bush Administration Insider...last but not least

https://wikispooks.com/wiki/9/11:Israel_did_it#Pre-Knowledge_of_Anthrax_Mailings


----------



## Liability (Apr 1, 2012)

Toro said:


> Liability said:
> 
> 
> > 9/11 inside job said:
> ...




"You won't see me there!" -- _official motto of the DIA Convention_

And the pay is just GREAT!


----------



## Liability (Apr 1, 2012)

x0Maximilian0x said:


> Here is more to the cover story for 9/11 being spoonfed *to pitty little American's...*



I stopped reading right there.

x0MaxyPad0x is as brain dead as TDM.  But one doesn't expect intelligence from any twoofer and one is never surprised when they always turn out to be lying idiots.

It's a pity that little twoofer dipshits are so pitiable.  

ALL twoofers should be constantly monitored.


----------



## Rat in the Hat (Apr 1, 2012)

x0Maximilian0x said:


> Here is more to the cover story for 9/11 being spoonfed to pitty little American's...
> 
> American's are such a tool...no pun intended...LOL...
> 
> ...


----------



## eots (Apr 1, 2012)

Rat in the Hat said:


> x0Maximilian0x said:
> 
> 
> > Here is more to the cover story for 9/11 being spoonfed to pitty little American's...
> ...



wow ,you posted a childish picture,you are good at posting childish ,inane pictures aren't you ?..what an empty mind and empty life you must have ..its sad but at least you have have your lil pictures to draw comfort from...


----------



## Rat in the Hat (Apr 1, 2012)

Somebody farted on here.


----------



## Liability (Apr 1, 2012)

eots said:


> Rat in the Hat said:
> 
> 
> > x0Maximilian0x said:
> ...



And you?

You seem to derive satisfaction from positing one of the most self-evidently absurd "theories" ever imagined.

Hey, but all YOU want is an investigation to "answer" meaningless questions (which in turn are premised on the most imbecile of notions).  

So go eat another shit sandwich you lowlife vile scumbag twoofer.

And wash it down with a mug of STFU.

Nobody with a brain buys any of the idiocy you and the other asshole twoofers always spew.

Fucking orbs.  Thermite.  Planted thermite.  Hadda be planted when the fucking building was constructed.  There wasn't any thermite back in those days, either.  Conspiracies:  To go to war.  Or to get oil.  Or to demo the building.  Yeah yeah.  The Joooos.  

You are rancid beyond words.

Fuck off.


----------



## Liability (Apr 1, 2012)

Rat in the Hat said:


> x0Maximilian0x said:
> 
> 
> > Here is more to the cover story for 9/11 being spoonfed to pitty little American's...
> ...



EXCELLENT use of imagery!


----------



## eots (Apr 1, 2012)

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3OEkDZTldt8]Patriots Question 9/11 - YouTube[/ame]

Patriots Question 9/11 - Responsible Criticism of the 9/11 Commission Report


----------



## Liability (Apr 1, 2012)

eots said:


> Patriots Question 9/11 - YouTube
> 
> Patriots Question 9/11 - Responsible Criticism of the 9/11 Commission Report



id-eots goes into "loop" mode.

Fucking scumbag twoofer asshole.


----------



## Rat in the Hat (Apr 1, 2012)

eots said:


> Patriots Question 9/11 - YouTube
> 
> Patriots Question 9/11 - Responsible Criticism of the 9/11 Commission Report



[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QC_FqIXH_Xk&feature=related]Hitler Plans To Watch Family Guy - YouTube[/ame]


----------



## Light (Apr 1, 2012)

9/11 inside job said:


> eots said:
> 
> 
> > 9/11: Sound Evidence for WTC 7 Explosions and NIST Cover Up - YouTube
> ...



LOL! 





> agent trolls that have penetrated this site


 Oh my GOD!  How does one "penetrate" a free discussion forum setup for people with different opinions to converse?  Again, you talk as if there is some organized effort to disprove your opinions.  Could you possibly be more diluted?  We are all just people with opinions.  Some of us can show how we come to our opinions by showing the evidence and logic that we use.  Others, like yourself, just like to make claims.  Try "showing your work".  Instead of saying things like "there is plenty of evidence for" or "it's obvious"..............prove it!..........show some real evidence.  Show SOMETHING.  Just parroting the same old claims is just sad.  You can't actually defend your position, so you start calling people idiots for not taking your word for it.  And now you are starting to refuse to continue speaking with someone that you are disagreeing with?  Really!?  That will "show them" that you are right!!

As for Barry Jennings, he has spoken about being unhappy with his interview being used to "prove" there were explosives and dead people in the building.
[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nyKtNHPeKxg]Barry Jennings: Dead Bodies? - YouTube[/ame]
And as for his death...............please show some evidence that he was murdered.  The only people claiming he was killed, are the people trying to push an "inside job" theory.  And what is the logic behind killing someone that has already shared their story?
People are killed to prevent them from talking.  He has already "talked". Nothing is gained by eliminating him.  That is just the tip of the iceberg of your "logic fallacies".


----------



## Obamerican (Apr 1, 2012)

eots said:


> Rat in the Hat said:
> 
> 
> > x0Maximilian0x said:
> ...


At least you have your YouTube videos.


----------



## eots (Apr 1, 2012)

Obamerican said:


> eots said:
> 
> 
> > Rat in the Hat said:
> ...



yes and they are from some of the top retired military veterans and government research scientist...not pictures of crying children with inane captions on the level of lol cats and that about says it all


----------



## eots (Apr 1, 2012)

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3OEkDZTldt8]Patriots Question 9/11 - YouTube[/ame]


----------



## Rat in the Hat (Apr 1, 2012)

eots said:


> Patriots Question 9/11 - YouTube



[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SvzrWo7i668&feature=player_embedded]911 Truther Fail - YouTube[/ame]


----------



## eots (Apr 1, 2012)

Rat in the Hat said:


> eots said:
> 
> 
> > Patriots Question 9/11 - YouTube
> ...



absolutely pointless video void of any facts and serves only to hi-light the fact that debwunkers like to focus on people like dylan avery so they can distract from the impeccable men and woman of service and expertise featured at patriotsquestion911

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3OEkDZTldt8]Patriots Question 9/11 - YouTube[/ame]


----------



## Liability (Apr 1, 2012)

eots said:


> Rat in the Hat said:
> 
> 
> > eots said:
> ...



Looping.  Looping.  Looping.

It fits.  All twoofers are pretty fucking loop-y.

On the other hand, not one thing id-eots has ever posted has ever withstood critical analysis. 

This explains why he finds it so necessary to repeat himself.  He's run out of plumb stupid unpersuasive shit.   So he just rinses and mindlessly repeats.

And forever, he will fail.


----------



## Rat in the Hat (Apr 1, 2012)

eots said:


> Rat in the Hat said:
> 
> 
> > eots said:
> ...



[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nu9KsfHOC-A&feature=related]Bill Maher Goes into Audience to Kick Out 9/11 Truther - YouTube[/ame]


----------



## eots (Apr 1, 2012)

Liability said:


> eots said:
> 
> 
> > Rat in the Hat said:
> ...



talk about looping...same repetitive shit from you over and over so lets see it don't just yap about it... show me this critical thinking,explain to deets why his science is wrong not yours


*Dwain Deets, MS Physics, MS Eng &#8211; Former Director, Aerospace Projects, NASA Dryden Flight Research Center.  Before this appointment, he served as Director, Research Engineering Division at Dryden.  Recipient of the NASA Exceptional Service Award and the Presidential Meritorious Rank Award in the Senior Executive Service (1988)*.  Selected presenter of the Wright Brothers Lectureship in Aeronautics, a distinguished speaking engagement sponsored by the American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics (AIAA) (1986).  Included in *"Who's Who in Science and Engineering" 1993 - 2000.*  Former Chairman of the Aerospace Control and Guidance Systems Committee of the Society of Automotive Engineers.  Former Member, AIAA Committee on Society and Aerospace Technology. * 37 year NASA career.*

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EPqckKXn-gg]Dwain Deets in Ventura on Building 7 (Part 1 of 4).m4v - YouTube[/ame]


----------



## eots (Apr 3, 2012)

*Moscow Skyscraper Goes Up in Flames But Does Not Collapse*


----------



## LA RAM FAN (Apr 3, 2012)

Toro said:


> 9/11 inside job said:
> 
> 
> > Toro said:
> ...



Run Toto Run.


----------



## LA RAM FAN (Apr 3, 2012)

eots said:


> Rat in the Hat said:
> 
> 
> > x0Maximilian0x said:
> ...



typical ploy of an agent when beaten and cant think up anymore lies to post to get around the facts.


----------



## LA RAM FAN (Apr 3, 2012)

eots said:


> Liability said:
> 
> 
> > eots said:
> ...


----------



## LA RAM FAN (Apr 3, 2012)

Light said:


> 9/11 inside job said:
> 
> 
> > eots said:
> ...



you have already proven in spades too many times your an idiot who cant remember anything taught to you in junior high school science classes,its not my fault you have a terrible memory and dont know anything about the laws of physics and only see what you WANT to see. 

now your REALLY being ignorant beyond belief with this latest ramble about Barry Jennings.

sorry unlike you I dont go by opinions,I go by facts and evidence you have proven you constantly ignored throughout  this entire thread.Its not my fault you only see what you want to see and wont look at the evidence.thats all you have is warped opinions that dont stand up to the facts and evidence.again since you refuse to learn what the laws of physics are that were violated that day and keep dodging everything thats brought up constantly,its impossible to have kind of rational discussion with you.

that being the case,you want top reply to me again.your just going to show that you like to talk to yourself because there is plenty of information throughout this thread from the posts of myself,eots,maximillian and mr jones it was an inside job.for the hundreth time,you refused to watch the videos that Eots posted that proved all this or addressed maximilliand post he posted THREE times for all you to answer,its not my fault your scared of the truth.


----------



## LA RAM FAN (Apr 3, 2012)

9/11 inside job said:


> Light said:
> 
> 
> > 9/11 inside job said:
> ...


----------



## LA RAM FAN (Apr 3, 2012)

eots said:


> Liability said:
> 
> 
> > eots said:
> ...



Hey Light-actually you REALLY should change your user name to I CANT SEE THE LIGHT. since its so much the truth,funny how according to your logic,this guy Eots is talking about and thousands of architects and engineers are wacked out nuts and Bush and Cheney our looking out for our best interests.


----------



## daws101 (Apr 3, 2012)

eots said:


> daws101 said:
> 
> 
> > eots said:
> ...


----------



## daws101 (Apr 3, 2012)

eots said:


> *Moscow Skyscraper Goes Up in Flames But Does Not Collapse*
> 
> Federation Tower in Moscow on Fire - YouTube


another non comparison comparison by eot's


----------



## daws101 (Apr 3, 2012)

9/11 inside job said:


> eots said:
> 
> 
> > Liability said:
> ...


i THOUGHT YOU WERE LEAVING ....


----------



## eots (Apr 3, 2012)

daws101 said:


> 9/11 inside job said:
> 
> 
> > eots said:
> ...



wow.. you sure  showed us why deets is wrong


----------



## eots (Apr 3, 2012)

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jazdG3-ZETM&feature=g-vrec&context=G2f36945RVAAAAAAAAAg]2012 - NEWEST 9/11 DOCUMENTARY - PROOF 9/11 WAS AN INSIDE JOB.mp4 - YouTube[/ame]


----------



## x0Maximilian0x (Apr 3, 2012)

eots said:


> 2012 - NEWEST 9/11 DOCUMENTARY - PROOF 9/11 WAS AN INSIDE JOB.mp4 - YouTube



Quite disturbing information yet Very Excellent documentary with many things I have not seen about 9/11. Most of the world knows 9/11 was an inside job....don't take my word for it....just look at the many polls for many countries. 

Plus it is quite disturbing to see what so many prominent people say world wide about America and 9/11

Now let the O.J. Simpson defense attorney's begin their tactics...

Israel Hires Internet Soldiers to Penetrate American Forums, Chatrooms : Deadline Live With Jack Blood

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HYedTmaHt1A&feature=player_embedded]provocateurs,shills and disinfo agents - YouTube[/ame]


----------



## Liability (Apr 3, 2012)

x0Maximilian0x said:


> 2012 - NEWEST 9/11 DOCUMENTARY - PROOF 9/11 WAS AN INSIDE JOB.mp4 - YouTube



x0-MAXIPAD-0x is busy looping as paid disinformation agents do. 

All twoofers are sick fucking scumbags and all twoofers should be under constant observation.


----------



## x0Maximilian0x (Apr 3, 2012)

Liability said:


> x0Maximilian0x said:
> 
> 
> > 2012 - NEWEST 9/11 DOCUMENTARY - PROOF 9/11 WAS AN INSIDE JOB.mp4 - YouTube
> ...



Your intelligence is clearly quite low and lacks ability to comprehend indisputable facts and information. The real reason you want to constantly observe people is to get to see them in the shower you sicko....now let the intelligent people of the world see the evidence and decide for themselves without having to put up with your tactics...



eots said:


> 2012 - NEWEST 9/11 DOCUMENTARY - PROOF 9/11 WAS AN INSIDE JOB.mp4 - YouTube



[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jazdG3-ZETM&feature=g-vrec&context=G2f36945RVAAAAAAAAAg]2012 - NEWEST 9/11 DOCUMENTARY - PROOF 9/11 WAS AN INSIDE JOB.mp4 - YouTube[/ame]

Quite disturbing information yet Very Excellent documentary with many things I have not seen about 9/11. Most of the world knows 9/11 was an inside job....don't take my word for it....just look at the many polls for many countries. 

Plus it is quite disturbing to see what so many prominent people say world wide about America and 9/11

Now let the O.J. Simpson defense attorney's begin their tactics...

Israel Hires Internet Soldiers to Penetrate American Forums, Chatrooms : Deadline Live With Jack Blood

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HYedTmaHt1A&feature=player_embedded]provocateurs,shills and disinfo agents - YouTube[/ame]


----------



## x0Maximilian0x (Apr 3, 2012)

Liability said:


> x0Maximilian0x said:
> 
> 
> > 2012 - NEWEST 9/11 DOCUMENTARY - PROOF 9/11 WAS AN INSIDE JOB.mp4 - YouTube
> ...




Liar-disability is busy ignoring indisputable information and attacking the messengers like disinformation agents do.


----------



## Liability (Apr 3, 2012)

x0Maximilian0x said:


> Liability said:
> 
> 
> > x0Maximilian0x said:
> ...



You twoofer asshole lying nitwit cocksuckers have ALWAYS evaded answering the most basic of questions.

It's obvious why.

You are pussies.  Cowards.  Dishonest.  Stupid,  Venal.  Petty.  Useless.

All twoofers should be under constant scrutiny.


----------



## x0Maximilian0x (Apr 3, 2012)

Liability said:


> x0Maximilian0x said:
> 
> 
> > Liability said:
> ...



Remember the Anthrax attacks which just happen to occur right after 9/11? Likely not with such a low I.Q.

The white house staff began taking the anti-biotic for anthrax *BEFORE *the first anthrax attack even occured.

The O.P. documentary in this thread who first put out the story for 9/11 to mass media is....

It was Jerome Hauer who advised the White House staff to start taking "CIPRO" - the anti-biotic effective against Anthrax - a week prior to the Anthrax mailings attack

Hauer is an 'expert' in Bio-Terrorism and was the one who was in charge of the NIH response to the anthrax attacks. His reactions to the anthrax mailings were, at best, slow and he took every opportunity to invoke "Osama Bin Laden" in the rhetoric he employed in his public utterances about them


More about the O.P...


Interesting how the story was put out so fast...before any tower even collapsed and only 33 minutes after the second tower got hit was an elaborate story being aired on who's responsible...

Well it certainly brings to question if the "official story" for 9/11 was prewitten before the attacks...

If nothing else it sure looks bad for the investigation into who was responsible for 9/11 being completed so fast... let alone the investigation on who was responsible having to make its way to the media with an elaborate story written... 

The story being out so fast is incriminating enough let alone if you think about...was the investigation done before the attacks even happened...I think the answer is quite clear.

Another interesting fact is the first guy who promoted the story was Jerome Hauer who just happened to be...

*Bio Warfare expert...which brings to mind the anthrax attacks right after 9/11 targeting Senate and Media

*Drug Company Director...which brings to mind the fact that the White House staff was taking the medication for anthrax before the first anthrax attack even occured...(fact if you are not too lazy to check for yourself)

*Commissioner for Office of Emergency Management...which brings to mind how it was being reinforced as a sky bunker just before 9/11 on the 23rd floor of World Tade Center 7, Building 7...with its floors, walls, windows all being reinforced making it some type of tree fort within sight of the World Trade Center twin towers...

*Bush Administration Insider...last but not least


----------



## candycorn (Apr 3, 2012)

x0Maximilian0x said:


> Liability said:
> 
> 
> > x0Maximilian0x said:
> ...


----------



## Liability (Apr 3, 2012)

x0Maximilian0x said:


> * * * *
> 
> Remember the Anthrax attacks which just happen to occur right after 9/11? Likely not with such a low I.Q.
> 
> ...


----------



## Light (Apr 4, 2012)

9/11 inside job said:


> 9/11 inside job said:
> 
> 
> > Light said:
> ...


----------



## x0Maximilian0x (Apr 4, 2012)

Liability said:


> x0Maximilian0x said:
> 
> 
> > * * * *
> ...



Liar-disability...we already know your brain is scrambled...no need for sign language to show us.

You display text book forms of denial when presented indisputable facts and information too hard to comprehend.

Look up the definition of denial and see how well it fits you...


----------



## daws101 (Apr 4, 2012)

eots said:


> daws101 said:
> 
> 
> > 9/11 inside job said:
> ...


why do you always answer for handjob?.....
besides his(deets)speculation is based on a false premise as he has no evidence...so he was finished before he started...you make this sooo easy!


----------



## daws101 (Apr 4, 2012)

x0Maximilian0x said:


> Liability said:
> 
> 
> > x0Maximilian0x said:
> ...


 ahh... MAX BRAIN DAMAGE  THIS SO CALLED "indisputable information" IS NOT INDISPUTABLE. IF IT WERE THEN WE WOULD NOT BE HAVING THIS CONVERSATION...ASSCLOWN!
ALSO YOU ARE NOT THE MESSENGERS, A MESSENGER DELIVERS THE MESSAGE  HE OR SHE DOESN'T PONTIFICATE ON IT...
YOU DO MUCH PONTIFICATING BUT TAKE NO RESPONSIBILITY FOR IT !
 IN OTHER WORDS YOUR "indisputable information" IS IN REALITY, A STEAMING PILE!


----------



## Liability (Apr 4, 2012)

x0Maximilian0x said:


> Liability said:
> 
> 
> > x0Maximilian0x said:
> ...



No no.  My brain is fine.  When I see a jet airliner crashing into buildings, I don't say "look at the orbs!"

Scumbag rancid idiot lying twoofers do that kind of shit.


----------



## x0Maximilian0x (Apr 4, 2012)

Liability said:


> x0Maximilian0x said:
> 
> 
> > Liability said:
> ...



You avoid these facts like a text book form of denial...

Again these are indisputable facts, among many others, which your text book form of denial avoids to comprehend...........

Remember the Anthrax attacks which just happen to occur right after 9/11? Likely not with such a low I.Q.

The white house staff began taking the anti-biotic for anthrax BEFORE the first anthrax attack even occured.



Yes I agree there are some wierd theories about 9/11....like the no plane theory getting a lot of attention.

These wierd theories create a huge smokescreen around the core indisputable facts.

People with a higher I.Q. can see right through it....people with a low I.Q. get confused and tend not to believe the indisputable facts because of other false information thrown in the mix.

Is there intentional disinformation, deflection, divide and conquer tactics going on?

Fact is there are many disturbing facts and many wierd postings that deflect from the core indisputable facts...


----------



## Obamerican (Apr 5, 2012)

x0Maximilian0x said:


> Liability said:
> 
> 
> > x0Maximilian0x said:
> ...


I find it laughable that the twofer movement likes to think that they have a higher IQ yet the majority of them are incapable of typing at a level higher than 5th grade. Even if they really can't spell most seem ignorant of the fact that spell check exists. I personally think most of them live in their mother's basement and don't date much.


----------



## eots (Apr 5, 2012)

Obamerican said:


> x0Maximilian0x said:
> 
> 
> > Liability said:
> ...



_right..._

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3OEkDZTldt8]Patriots Question 9/11 - YouTube[/ame]


Patriots Question 9/11 - Responsible Criticism of the 9/11 Commission Report


----------



## LA RAM FAN (Apr 5, 2012)

x0Maximilian0x said:


> Liability said:
> 
> 
> > x0Maximilian0x said:
> ...



of course,like many here,he wont get paid if he defends the offical version.


----------



## LA RAM FAN (Apr 5, 2012)

x0Maximilian0x said:


> Liability said:
> 
> 
> > x0Maximilian0x said:
> ...



what I think is so hysterical about Liar ability and the other agent trolls that have penetrated this site and the brainwashed Bush dupes such as Toto,Todd is a parrot, and I Cant See The Light,is that they are ignorant about the laws of physics and could not comprehend explosives brought the towers down like that junior high school son of a friend of mine could at that time. 

amazing how people are too embarrassed to admit they know nothing whatsoever about the laws of physics isnt it? there was this one poster here that used to have the appropriate  user name called PHYSICS EXIST which they dont seem to think so.


----------



## Montrovant (Apr 5, 2012)

Do you truthers REALLY believe multiple people on this board are paid to come post in the conspiracy theory forum against you?  Or is it just an insult that caught on, in the vein of calling Tea Party members teabaggers?


----------



## LA RAM FAN (Apr 5, 2012)

x0Maximilian0x said:


> Liability said:
> 
> 
> > x0Maximilian0x said:
> ...





Liar ability has come in handy for one thing,he is a useful troll who helps keep these threads alive.lol.


----------



## Liability (Apr 5, 2012)

These silly small-minded and generally dishonest twoofers actually think that they are important enough for somebody to PAY others to refute.


----------



## LA RAM FAN (Apr 5, 2012)

eots said:


> Obamerican said:
> 
> 
> > x0Maximilian0x said:
> ...



somehow Bush dupes like I Cant See The Light find all these incredible experts in that link of yours  such as these architects,engineers,scientists,expert pilots,former high ranking government officials such as Generals and former CIA people who say the governments version is b.s.

somehow they find THEM as  laughable sources but instead our government institutions and the Neocons in the Bush administration credible sources even though they were caught lying on many counts such as Nist saying there was no molten metal being found at the site.

they kill me everytime with that logic.


----------



## Liability (Apr 5, 2012)

LOOP the same old nonsense.

It didn't work the first time, orthe second, orthe third ... or the ninetieth.  

But loop it some more, bitches!


----------



## LA RAM FAN (Apr 5, 2012)

Montrovant said:


> Do you truthers REALLY believe multiple people on this board are paid to come post in the conspiracy theory forum against you?  Or is it just an insult that caught on, in the vein of calling Tea Party members teabaggers?



damn your ignorant.They got these paid shills on message boards EVERYWHERE. are you that dense that if they were not paid agents they would not troll these boards  posting lies and ignoring evidence and facts constantly day and night everyday  like they do?

 a couple of them go to several message boards and post day and night all hours on end  posting lies and propaganda.are you that dense in that you cant see that unless they were paid shills they would not devote their entire days and nights going to sites posting lies and propaganda like they do constantly? Obviously so.I barely have time to go to more than a couple others and post unlike them.If they were not paid shills,they would be like you and not care about these topics being discussed and not come here every single day defending the absurd fairy tales of the governments.


----------



## Rat in the Hat (Apr 5, 2012)

9/11 inside job said:


> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> > Do you truthers REALLY believe multiple people on this board are paid to come post in the conspiracy theory forum against you?  Or is it just an insult that caught on, in the vein of calling Tea Party members teabaggers?
> ...





> go to several message boards and post day and night all hours on end  posting lies and propaganda.


----------



## Light (Apr 5, 2012)

9/11 inside job said:


> eots said:
> 
> 
> > Obamerican said:
> ...



Looks like SOMEONE is living "rent free" inside your head!!  Sense you singled me out in that post.

As for that video that has been posted 100 times, how does the fact that some military and ex-military personnel opinions PROVE anything?  I have been to the website and read almost all of their statements.  They prove very little.  Many of them are speaking to elements outside their expertise.  Doctors saying that the buildings shouldn't fall "that way".  Air traffic controllers saying that there should have been more wreckage.  Which means their opinion carries no more weight than mine does. There are some who's statements are purely talking about "intelligence" information.  Should they have seen this coming and was someone asleep at the wheel type of questions?  Those people have a legitimate case to make.  There was an intelligence failure and people were asleep at the wheel.
For those few that ARE speaking to their area of expertise, the onus is on them to prove it.  If they are such patriots and have all the "real" facts on their side, they should be able to get some real action taken on this subject.  Problem is, they haven't and won't.  Because they've got NOTHING!  Nothing of real substance.  They've got all the "it doesn't look right" and "that's not supposed to happen" arguments.  And the fact that it has been almost 11 years and nothing has happened, tells me how much of a case they have.


----------



## LA RAM FAN (Apr 5, 2012)

someone is back to talk to himself I see.man that is some scary shit that someone feels they need to talk to themselves.

 thats what these paid shills that have posted on this thread just recently on this page  do all the time cause thats their job.
I only needed to look at the first sentence which is all i read by the way to see my hunch was right.i can tell just from that first sentence as usual I CANT SEE THE LIGHT,your still afraid of the truth and dont want to go back to junior high school and learn about the laws of physics that all 7th graders know.congrats.


oh and thanks for admitting thats your warped logic  you have about those experts,that they are wrong and the neocons in the Bush administration and our corrupt institutions are looking out for us and that your  living in denial as usual.


----------



## Liability (Apr 5, 2012)

ORBS.  

That word, alone, conveys the essential befuddlement of so many twoofers.

Orbs.



This is hysterical.

I wish USMB had a wider audience.  The entire nation could use a laugh.

Orbs...


----------



## LA RAM FAN (Apr 5, 2012)

back so soon to shit on the floor some more I see LIAR ABILITY. Funny how you paid trolls get back on these threads the SECOND a truther posts.  well no surprise since your handlers would get pissed if you did not as we both know.


----------



## Rat in the Hat (Apr 5, 2012)

*ORBS!!!!​*......


----------



## Liability (Apr 5, 2012)

Rimjob smelled his own foul breath again in here Today, 05:27 PM !


----------



## LA RAM FAN (Apr 5, 2012)

two farts in a row from the paid trolls.

got to get out now since they are shitting all over the floor stinking the place up.

I love how they are so quick to get on here just like their handlers ask them to.

They sure are going after that paycheck today.


----------



## Rat in the Hat (Apr 5, 2012)

9/11 inside job said:


> two farts in a row from the paid trolls.got to get out now since they are shitting all over the floor stining the place up.



WTF is "stining" ?


----------



## Liability (Apr 5, 2012)

9/11 inside job said:


> two farts in a row from the paid trolls.
> 
> got to get out now since they are shitting all over the floor stinking the place up.
> 
> ...



Actually, that's just your breath, Rimjob.

If I send you a toilet bowl brush, (used or not wouldn't matter in your case) use it on your teeth.


----------



## Liability (Apr 5, 2012)

Rat in the Hat said:


> 9/11 inside job said:
> 
> 
> > two farts in a row from the paid trolls.got to get out now since they are shitting all over the floor stining the place up.
> ...



As close as a twoofer can come to spelling a word?


----------



## Rat in the Hat (Apr 5, 2012)

9/11 inside job said:


> two farts in a row from the paid trolls.
> 
> got to get out now since they are shitting all over the floor stinking the place up.
> 
> ...



Damn. Rimjob edited this post more times then Ropey usually does.


----------



## Obamerican (Apr 5, 2012)

Rat in the Hat said:


> 9/11 inside job said:
> 
> 
> > two farts in a row from the paid trolls.
> ...


The little shit stain can't spell.


----------



## Liability (Apr 5, 2012)

Obamerican said:


> Rat in the Hat said:
> 
> 
> > 9/11 inside job said:
> ...



Sure he can.

He spells "reality" as "YouTube."

He just can't spell correctly!


----------



## Rat in the Hat (Apr 5, 2012)

9/11 inside job said:


> two farts in a row from the paid trolls.
> 
> *got to get out now* since they are shitting all over the floor stinking the place up.
> 
> ...



*Little Rimjob ran away. 
(Rimjob: "No!") 
Bravely ran away away. 
(Rimjob: "I didn't!") 
When reality reared it's ugly head, 
He bravely turned his tail and fled. 
(Rimjob: "no!") 
Yes, little Rimjob turned about 
(Rimjob: "I didn't!") 
And gallantly he chickened out. 

****Bravely**** taking to his feet, 
(Rimjob: "I never did!")
He beat a very brave retreat. 
(Rimjob: "all lies!") 
Bravest of the braaaave, Little Rimjob! 
(Rimjob: "I never!")*


----------



## Light (Apr 5, 2012)

9/11 inside job said:


> someone is back to talk to himself I see.man that is some scary shit that someone feels they need to talk to themselves.
> 
> thats what these paid shills that have posted on this thread just recently on this page  do all the time cause thats their job.
> I only needed to look at the first sentence which is all i read by the way to see my hunch was right.i can tell just from that first sentence as usual I CANT SEE THE LIGHT,your still afraid of the truth and dont want to go back to junior high school and learn about the laws of physics that all 7th graders know.congrats.
> ...



I see, as usual, you can't address anything that I've said.  Why don't you try something new.............and attack my argument instead of attacking me.


----------



## Montrovant (Apr 5, 2012)

9/11 inside job said:


> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> > Do you truthers REALLY believe multiple people on this board are paid to come post in the conspiracy theory forum against you?  Or is it just an insult that caught on, in the vein of calling Tea Party members teabaggers?
> ...



First, I don't go to any other message boards currently, so I have no way to know if anyone here posts elsewhere.

Second, even if I DID frequent other boards, there is no reason they would need to use the same user names, so I STILL would have no way to know if anyone here posts elsewhere.

Third, the people you are calling paid agents post elsewhere on this board, and always have as far as I have seen.  If they are spending so much time doing this as a job, why would they also spend their free time posting here?

Fourth, if I didn't care about these subjects, I wouldn't bother reading the threads, let alone post replies in them.

Fifth, I have spent plenty of time reading truther and birther threads in this forum.  I often check threads multiple times a day; I look at my subscribed threads fairly often.  So the idea that no one would be reading these or posting here who isn't paid to do so is ridiculous.

Lastly, your entire argument seems to hinge on the idea that anyone who disagrees with you MUST be lying, therefore anyone who replies with any frequency is lying often, and no one would ever lie a lot on a message board, so they must be paid to do so.  That is so staggeringly arrogant and idiotic I have a hard time believing anyone believes it.  Haven't you READ things on USMB outside this forum?  People disagree on any subject, often and loudly.  People argue in the face of any amount of evidence.  Are they all paid, as well?

Just because everyone isn't convinced by a bunch of youtube videos and badly written posts filled with horrible spelling, punctuation and grammar doesn't mean they are paid disinformation agents.  Your need to believe they are speaks more to your own self-esteem and warped world view than to any kind of logical conclusion.


----------



## daws101 (Apr 5, 2012)

eots said:


> Obamerican said:
> 
> 
> > x0Maximilian0x said:
> ...


since they have noting but speculation and no standing in the scientific realm it's another :


----------



## daws101 (Apr 5, 2012)

Montrovant said:


> Do you truthers REALLY believe multiple people on this board are paid to come post in the conspiracy theory forum against you?  Or is it just an insult that caught on, in the vein of calling Tea Party members teabaggers?


with some they absolutely believe there are paid agents.
BTW the tea baggers called themselves tea baggers until someone clued them in on what "tea bagging" is only then  they start calling  it the tea party,


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Apr 5, 2012)

Montrovant said:


> Do you truthers REALLY believe multiple people on this board are paid to come post in the conspiracy theory forum against you?  Or is it just an insult that caught on, in the vein of calling Tea Party members teabaggers?



You'd be surprised how much you can make by mocking the ramblings of unemployed idiots.


----------



## x0Maximilian0x (Apr 5, 2012)

Liability said:


> 9/11 inside job said:
> 
> 
> > two farts in a row from the paid trolls.
> ...



Perhaps you should just keep it and use it for a hair brush after you pull your head out...


----------



## daws101 (Apr 5, 2012)

x0maximilian0x said:


> liability said:
> 
> 
> > 9/11 inside job said:
> ...


ironic you showing that pic, as your head is so far up your ass that you're inside out!


----------



## Liability (Apr 5, 2012)

x0Maximilian0x said:


> Liability said:
> 
> 
> > 9/11 inside job said:
> ...



My head is not up MY ass, ya diseased moron.  I'm not a fucking robotic liberal NOR a mindless dishonest scumbag twoofer.

The reason you can't see clearly is because your head is permanently stuck up your asshole.  You think the whole world smells like that.   But it's just you.  

Fucking twoofers should be under constant scrutiny.

Go play with an orb, you idiot.


----------



## LA RAM FAN (Apr 7, 2012)

Light said:


> 9/11 inside job said:
> 
> 
> > someone is back to talk to himself I see.man that is some scary shit that someone feels they need to talk to themselves.
> ...



cant address anything you have said? Oh the irony. such hypocrisy being displayed.

congrats on proving you have a reading comprehension problem.  what is so hard and difficult to understand this down here I posted previously except for this first paragraph here I just posted today ?

 Yeah I know as usual you cant addresss anything that me,Eots, or Max posted that shot down all your ramblings throughout this thread.No need to brag about that. thats obvious.

someone is back to talk to himself I see.man that is some scary shit that someone feels they need to talk to themselves.

thats what these paid shills that have posted on this thread just recently on this page do all the time cause thats their job.
I only needed to look at the first sentence which is all i read by the way to see my hunch was right.i can tell just from that first sentence as usual I CANT SEE THE LIGHT,your still afraid of the truth and dont want to go back to junior high school and learn about the laws of physics that all 7th graders know.congrats.


oh and thanks for admitting thats your warped logic you have about those experts,that they are wrong and the neocons in the Bush administration and our corrupt institutions are looking out for us and that your living in denial as usual.

Gee I thought I made it PERFECTLY clear in this previous post that I did not  read anything past your first sentence? How dense are you to not understand what I made perfectly clear at LEAST twice previously? That I'm done with you and your pathetic ramblings since you only see what you want to see,wont watch videos,have proven you have extreme warped logic, and after I made it perfectly clear HUNDREDS of times,till you go back to junior high school science class and learn about the laws of physics THEY all know about ,that I wont debate with you anymore?  Do you have a hard time understanding english or something? I guess so. congrats on proving that.

since you kept your ramblings down to just one sentence this time,THAT was the only reason i decided to reply this time.

Since you seem to have a hard time understanding english I dont know if this will do any good with you or not but I'll try ONE MORE TIME DUMMIES STYLE FOR YOU.

SINCE YOU DONT KNOW HOW TO DEBATE PROPERLY,WHICH IS NOT ONLY READ PARTS OF A POST BUT THE ENTIRE THING,REFUSE TO WATCH VIDEOS,RUN AWAY FROM OTHER POSTS PEOPLE POST THAT AGREE WITH ME ON HERE HAVE REFERRED YOU TO, AND DONT KNOW ANYTHING AT ALL ABOUT THE LAWS OF PHYSICS THAT EVERY GRADE SCHOOL GRADUATE LEARNS BY THEN,EVADE FACTS AND EVIDENCE BROUGHT UP TO YOU,TILL YOU GO BACK TO JUNIOR HIGH SCHOOL AND LEARN ABOUT THE LAWS OF PHYSICS AND CAN ACKNOWLEDGE YOUR LOGIC IS WARPED, IGNORING THOSE CREDIBLE DISTINGUISED EXPERTS, BUT INSTEAD LISTENING TO OUR CORRUPT GOVERNMENT INSTITUTIONS AND THE NEOCONS IN THE BUSH ADMINISTRATION,I AM DONE WITH YOU ON THIS.

FIND SOMEBODY ELSE TO SHOW OFF YOUR STUPIDITY TO.I DONT DEBATE WITH PEOPLE LIKE THAT WHO DONT KNOW ANYTHING ABOUT THE LAWS OF PHYSICS AND ONLY SEE WHAT THEY WANT TO SEE AND REFUSE TO WATCH VIDEOS.


there,i posted it for you dummies style as best I could.Now if you still cant grasp that,then your even more hopeless than I ever thought to be possible.

got to give you kudos for one thing though in my farewell to you on this thread though.Not only are you hysterical in your warped logic that I have proved you have throughout this entire thread with that point that you ignored and did not want to tackle about the other buildings, but you are really hysterical as well that you have THIS logic also in these two threads.

Dont know why I bother to post these two threads since as we both know,you wont watch that video or read the contents in that link.

http://www.usmessageboard.com/consp...911-conspiracy-theory-in-under-5-minutes.html

Idaho Observer: The looniest of all 9/11 conspiracy theories


----------



## LA RAM FAN (Apr 7, 2012)

x0Maximilian0x said:


> Liability said:
> 
> 
> > 9/11 inside job said:
> ...



You hit the nail right on the head.They sure cant get their heads out of their asses alright.

I see Liar ability just shit all over the floor again starting this page.


----------



## Liability (Apr 7, 2012)

9/11 inside job said:


> x0Maximilian0x said:
> 
> 
> > Liability said:
> ...



9/11 Rimjob is aptly named.  He cannot get ENOUGH of shit.

He flings it like a monkey.  He wallows in it.  He revels in the smell of it.

And of course, he loves to suck-out all manner of asshole.


----------



## LA RAM FAN (Apr 7, 2012)

still another shit laid here from LIAR ABILITY.


----------



## Liability (Apr 7, 2012)

9/11 inside job said:


> still another shit laid here from LIAR ABILITY.



More proof of 9/11 Rimjobs love of shit.


----------



## LA RAM FAN (Apr 7, 2012)

9/11 inside job said:


> still another shit laid here from LIAR ABILITY.



and still another one from the troll. the sad kid is seeking attention cause nobody else will give it to him.


----------



## Liability (Apr 7, 2012)

9/11 inside job said:


> 9/11 inside job said:
> 
> 
> > still another shit laid here from LIAR ABILITY.
> ...





9/11 Rimjob quotes ITSELF and attributes the quote to another poster.  

In love with shit and stupid as shit.

Terrific.

Must be narcissism.


----------



## LA RAM FAN (Apr 7, 2012)

9/11 inside job said:


> still another shit laid here from LIAR ABILITY.



again he did it.

His handlers must be very pleased with him today.

cant give the troll anymore attention.already have given him too much as it is.Got to  leave for the day now.I know that will make him sad that he no longer has anybody to play with anymore and will now cry.poor baby.well gotta run now.


----------



## x0Maximilian0x (Apr 7, 2012)

Liability said:


> 9/11 inside job said:
> 
> 
> > 9/11 inside job said:
> ...


No Liar-disability it's just a case of being smarter...



You still never address any points brought up...you only have intelligence high enough to sling crap and throw insults instead of comprehending indisputable facts and information...

Remember the Anthrax attacks which just happen to occur right after 9/11? Likely not with such a low I.Q.

The white house staff began taking the anti-biotic for anthrax *BEFORE *the first anthrax attack even occured.

The O.P. documentary in this thread who first put out the story for 9/11 to mass media is....

It was Jerome Hauer who advised the White House staff to start taking "CIPRO" - the anti-biotic effective against Anthrax - a week prior to the Anthrax mailings attack

Hauer is an 'expert' in Bio-Terrorism and was the one who was in charge of the NIH response to the anthrax attacks. His reactions to the anthrax mailings were, at best, slow and he took every opportunity to invoke "Osama Bin Laden" in the rhetoric he employed in his public utterances about them


More about the O.P...


Interesting how the story was put out so fast...before any tower even collapsed and only 33 minutes after the second tower got hit was an elaborate story being aired on who's responsible...

Well it certainly brings to question if the "official story" for 9/11 was prewitten before the attacks...

If nothing else it sure looks bad for the investigation into who was responsible for 9/11 being completed so fast... let alone the investigation on who was responsible having to make its way to the media with an elaborate story written... 

The story being out so fast is incriminating enough let alone if you think about...was the investigation done before the attacks even happened...I think the answer is quite clear.

Another interesting fact is the first guy who promoted the story was Jerome Hauer who just happened to be...

*Bio Warfare expert...which brings to mind the anthrax attacks right after 9/11 targeting Senate and Media

*Drug Company Director...which brings to mind the fact that the White House staff was taking the medication for anthrax before the first anthrax attack even occured...(fact if you are not too lazy to check for yourself)

*Commissioner for Office of Emergency Management...which brings to mind how it was being reinforced as a sky bunker just before 9/11 on the 23rd floor of World Tade Center 7, Building 7...with its floors, walls, windows all being reinforced making it some type of tree fort within sight of the World Trade Center twin towers...

*Bush Administration Insider...last but not least

*Now Get to Work!!!   LOL...*


----------



## Liability (Apr 7, 2012)

x0Maximilian0x said:


> Liability said:
> 
> 
> > 9/11 inside job said:
> ...





9/11 Rimjob, the nitwit, can post nothing but *poop* lines and smileys and that makes him "smarter."  Bwahahaha!

Smarter than YOU, perhaps, but that wouldn't take anything special.

As for addressing the "points," it is you scumbag idiot twoofers who cannot address the point.

There is only one real point.

You have no ability and no willingness to address the almost infinite set of "things" that WOULD HAVE TO BE TRUE in order for you lunatic notions to have any chance of being possible.  

They have been brought up repeatedly, and you fucking useless disease carrying vermin ALWAYS deflect and evade.

If we don't hear about ORBS 

(excuse me a second ...)



(ok, that's passed)

then we're hearing about top secret thermite that had to have been planted before it was ever even invented.

And not one of you pieces of 9/11's favorite play-toy have ANY ability to address who would POSSIBLY be involved in the "conspiracy" who would be willing to murder thousands of people.  

You are mindless simpleton shitheads.

Suck on it, bitch.  I have no respect for crap like you.  MaxiPad, drek like you and 9/11 Rimjob are here purely for my amusement.


----------



## x0Maximilian0x (Apr 7, 2012)

Liability said:


> x0Maximilian0x said:
> 
> 
> > Liability said:
> ...



Yet again you do not address the many indisputable facts and information only to resort to throwing insults....a lashing out of sorts which feeble minds tend to do when information is too disturbing to comprehend

All wars are a case of sacrificing many of your own and your enemies military people for strategic goals on the worlds chessboard

All wars are also a case of sacrificing many of your own and your enemies citizen people for strategic goals on the worlds chessboard


----------



## LA RAM FAN (Apr 7, 2012)

x0Maximilian0x said:


> Liability said:
> 
> 
> > x0Maximilian0x said:
> ...



thats a little too much for the troll to understand but at least you tried.I love how he always runs off when you corner him with these facts.  Notice how he tried to laugh off his embarrassement of defeat when he was cornered on this like he always does?


----------



## x0Maximilian0x (Apr 7, 2012)

9/11 inside job said:


> x0Maximilian0x said:
> 
> 
> > Liability said:
> ...



Liar-disability shows textbook stages of denial when faced with disturbing facts....never address the information and only resorts to attacking the messanger with insults

A good analogy is its like a mother sitting through a trial with disturbing evidence showing her son is a monster...yet the mothers feeble brain refuses to comprehend it and goes on grasping the belief her beloved son is innocent...


----------



## Liability (Apr 7, 2012)

As 9/11 Rimjob and MaxiPad engage in 69, the fact remains:

They are completely unable to address the most obvious of questions.

All twoofers should be under constant monitoring.


----------



## LA RAM FAN (Apr 7, 2012)

x0Maximilian0x said:


> 9/11 inside job said:
> 
> 
> > x0Maximilian0x said:
> ...



could not have said it better word for word.


----------



## Liability (Apr 7, 2012)

9/11 inside job said:


> x0Maximilian0x said:
> 
> 
> > 9/11 inside job said:
> ...



We all know that YOU can't say anything better.

Or even as well.

Or intelligent.

Or useful.

Or worthwhile.


----------



## x0Maximilian0x (Apr 7, 2012)

Liability said:


> 9/11 inside job said:
> 
> 
> > x0Maximilian0x said:
> ...



You still never address any points brought up...you only have intelligence high enough to sling crap and throw insults instead of comprehending indisputable facts and information...

Remember the Anthrax attacks which just happen to occur right after 9/11? Likely not with such a low I.Q.

The white house staff began taking the anti-biotic for anthrax *BEFORE *the first anthrax attack even occured.

The O.P. documentary in this thread who first put out the story for 9/11 to mass media is....

It was Jerome Hauer who advised the White House staff to start taking "CIPRO" - the anti-biotic effective against Anthrax - a week prior to the Anthrax mailings attack

Hauer is an 'expert' in Bio-Terrorism and was the one who was in charge of the NIH response to the anthrax attacks. His reactions to the anthrax mailings were, at best, slow and he took every opportunity to invoke "Osama Bin Laden" in the rhetoric he employed in his public utterances about them


More about the O.P...


Interesting how the story was put out so fast...before any tower even collapsed and only 33 minutes after the second tower got hit was an elaborate story being aired on who's responsible...

Well it certainly brings to question if the "official story" for 9/11 was prewitten before the attacks...

If nothing else it sure looks bad for the investigation into who was responsible for 9/11 being completed so fast... let alone the investigation on who was responsible having to make its way to the media with an elaborate story written... 

The story being out so fast is incriminating enough let alone if you think about...was the investigation done before the attacks even happened...I think the answer is quite clear.

Another interesting fact is the first guy who promoted the story was Jerome Hauer who just happened to be...

*Bio Warfare expert...which brings to mind the anthrax attacks right after 9/11 targeting Senate and Media

*Drug Company Director...which brings to mind the fact that the White House staff was taking the medication for anthrax before the first anthrax attack even occured...(fact if you are not too lazy to check for yourself)

*Commissioner for Office of Emergency Management...which brings to mind how it was being reinforced as a sky bunker just before 9/11 on the 23rd floor of World Tade Center 7, Building 7...with its floors, walls, windows all being reinforced making it some type of tree fort within sight of the World Trade Center twin towers...

*Bush Administration Insider...last but not least

*Now Get to Work!!!   LOL...*


----------



## Liability (Apr 7, 2012)

x0Maximilian0x said:


> Liability said:
> 
> 
> > 9/11 inside job said:
> ...



A wall of words, MaxiPad, ^ doesn't change the fact that you idiot lying twoofer pussies evade all the time.  You can't answer the most basic and most obvious of questions.


----------



## x0Maximilian0x (Apr 7, 2012)

Liability said:


> x0Maximilian0x said:
> 
> 
> > Liability said:
> ...



You are the one incapable of addressing any facts and information...here's more you can sling insults about...

How about all those Israeli Mossad arrested during 9/11 time frame...even on the very day of 9/11 with evidence of explosives, etc that were held in jail only to be released from the top of the pyramid scheme?

How about the Israeli Mossad posing as Muslims dancing and taking pictures that were arrested on 9/11 only to be released by the top of the pyramid scheme?

Are you Israelli Mossad?...LOL...there were and likely still are a lot in New York...LOL...in fact I wouldn't be surprised if you blog out of an office in one of Silverstein's buildings...LOL

*Now Get Back to Work!!!   LOL...*


----------



## Liability (Apr 7, 2012)

If the Twin Towers were intentionally demo'd as the 9/11 twoofer vermin claim, then (among millions of other inferences) we would HAVE to assume that EITHER it was wired with hundreds of miles of demo cord to various and sundry stockpiles of explosives which were "planted" inside the building with effectively none of the tenants noticing it 

OR 

the place had been rigged to blow much much earlier (i.e., according to the thermite crowd), it was painted at all the crucial load bearing beams with thermite pretty much at the time the buildings weres fucking constructed.  

Even the thermite crowd appears to recognize that the former option is silly beyond words.  *So, that only leaves the painting of the support beams with thermite-paint, at all the right spots, at the time of the construction of the building.*

Homework assignment number one for the twoofers:  WHEN was this thermite invented and developed in a way where it could be applied in PAINT?

NOTE WELL, I am not asking for the history of thermite.  That goes back to the late 1800s.  I am asking for the development of the KIND of alleged super-thermite (spoken of reverentially by many a twoofer) which can be painted on a building's support beams buried within its walls, and then used to demo the building many years later.

Go.


----------



## Liability (Apr 7, 2012)

EVERYthing said by the twoofers has been debunked.

EVERY single solitary hare-brained thing.

Debunking 911 Conspiracy Theories and Controlled Demolition Homepage


----------



## x0Maximilian0x (Apr 7, 2012)

Liability said:


> If the Twin Towers were intentionally demo'd as the 9/11 twoofer vermin claim, then (among millions of other inferences) we would HAVE to assume that EITHER it was wired with hundreds of miles of demo cord to various and sundry stockpiles of explosives which were "planted" inside the building with effectively none of the tenants noticing it
> 
> OR
> 
> ...



You brought to mind more interesting facts and information...

Not going to get into exactly what type of wireless technology may have been used or exactly what type of developed explosives may have been used...

The World Trade Centers underwent many months of construction renovations in and around the elevator shafts where all the *vertical* support columns were located that ran from bedrock to the top floor

The World Trade Centers even underwent construction renovation right on the *vertical* support columns 

World Trade Center 7 or Building 7 underwent strange and odd construction renovations too...the 23rd floor in which the Office of Emergency Management was located was completely reinforced with ONLY its floors, walls, windows, etc reinforced to withstand impacts of sorts. 

This literally made a tree fort in Building 7 within sight of Twin Towers.

The sky bunker built within World Trade Center 7 had the office for counter terrorism in it too.

Just before 9/11 it was slipped into the news that a Boeing Passenger Plane was successfully tested, flown with remote control.

This remote control technology of Boeing Passenger Planes was developed for someone in counter terrorism to be able to take over a Boeing Plane if it was to be hijacked by terrorists...

The construction company that did the many months of construction renovations on the WTC Buildings, some of which were on the *vertical* support columns that ran from bedrock to the top floor, just happen to of had its CEO appointed by President Bush to the Commission White House Fellows

Note: deflected by the debunking propaganda is the many *VERTICAL* support columns that ran from bedrock to the top floor.

All these *VERTICAL* support columns somehow removed themselves fast enough *ALL THE WAY DOWN* so that if a bowling ball were dropped right beside the top floor at the same time...the top floor still hit the ground almost as fast as the bowling ball would even though the top floor had to work its way *ALL THE WAY DOWN* through these many *VERTICAL* support columns that ran from bedrock to the top floor...

Yet another interesting fact is the Pentagon too underwent construction renovation exactly on the section involved on 9/11 

The part of the Pentagon that underwent construction renovation also just happened to be the only part of the building reinforced for a possible impact and was the exact spot involved in 9/11...


----------



## Liability (Apr 7, 2012)

x0Maximilian0x said:


> Liability said:
> 
> 
> > If the Twin Towers were intentionally demo'd as the 9/11 twoofer vermin claim, then (among millions of other inferences) we would HAVE to assume that EITHER it was wired with hundreds of miles of demo cord to various and sundry stockpiles of explosives which were "planted" inside the building with effectively none of the tenants noticing it
> ...



Or whether a visiting interstellar alien race MIGHT have been involved or if a time machine with radically new technologies was employed to confound everyone but for the eagle-eyes twoofers . . . .



x0Maximilian0x said:


> The World Trade Centers underwent many months of construction renovations in and around the elevator shafts where all the *vertical* support columns were located that ran from bedrock to the top floor
> 
> The World Trade Centers even underwent construction renovation right on the *vertical* support columns



Oh NOZIES!  A building underwent renovations!  So it MUST be a conspiracy!   Notice that idiots such as you use "data" of that variety to say idiotic crap by which you identify only WHEN something MIGHT (theoretically) have taken place but nothing about whether there is ANY credible evidence that anybody actually DID anything at that time ....



x0Maximilian0x said:


> World Trade Center 7 or Building 7 underwent strange and odd construction renovations too...the floor in which the Office of Emergency Management was located was completely reinforced with ONLY its floors, walls, windows, etc reinforced to withstand impacts of sorts.
> 
> This literally made a tree fort in Building 7 within sight of Twin Towers.



Oh good.  More of your stupidity using the same meaningless playbook.  That's convincing.



x0Maximilian0x said:


> The sky bunker built within World Trade Center 7 had the office for counter terrorism in it too.



And?  So what?



x0Maximilian0x said:


> Just before 9/11 it was slipped into the news that a Boeing Passenger Plane was successfully tested, flown with remote control.



Slipped in?  Are you suggesting that the very folks who allegedly "used" this technology went about the business of REVEALING hints of what they might do in the future?  WHY on Earth would they do that?



x0Maximilian0x said:


> This remote control technology of Boeing Passenger Planes was developed to be able to take over a Boeing Plane if it was to be hijacked by terrorists.



And?



x0Maximilian0x said:


> The construction company that did the many months of construction renovations on the WTC Buildings, some of which were on the *vertical* support columns that ran from bedrock to the top floor, just happen to of had its CEO appointed by President Bush to the Commission White House Fellows



Ok.  And?


----------



## x0Maximilian0x (Apr 7, 2012)

Liability said:


> x0Maximilian0x said:
> 
> 
> > Liability said:
> ...



There you go again resorting to insults instead of comprehending disturbing information and facts...

Be a man and logically address the facts and information instead of displaying text book forms of denial when presented them...

You brought to mind more interesting facts and information...

Not going to get into exactly what type of wireless technology may have been used or exactly whay type of developed explosives may have been used...

The World Trade Centers underwent many months of construction renovations in and around the elevator shafts where all the* vertical* support columns were located that ran from bedrock to the top floor

The World Trade Centers even underwent construction renovation right on the *vertical* support columns 

World Trade Center 7 or Building 7 underwent strange and odd construction renovations too...the 23rd floor in which the Office of Emergency Management was located was completely reinforced with ONLY its floors, walls, windows, etc reinforced to withstand impacts of sorts. 

This literally made a tree fort in Building 7 within sight of Twin Towers.

The sky bunker built within World Trade Center 7 had the office for counter terrorism in it too.

Just before 9/11 it was slipped into the news that a Boeing Passenger Plane was successfully tested, flown with remote control.

This remote control technology of Boeing Passenger Planes was developed for someone in counter terrorism to be able to take over a Boeing Plane if it was to be hijacked by terrorists...

The construction company that did the many months of construction renovations on the WTC Buildings, some of which were on the vertical support columns that ran from bedrock to the top floor, just happen to of had its CEO appointed by President Bush to the Commission White House Fellows

Note: deflected by the debunking propaganda is the many *VERTICAL *support columns that ran from bedrock to the top floor.

All these *VERTICAL *support columns somehow removed themselves fast enough *ALL THE WAY DOWN *so that if a bowling ball were dropped right beside the top floor at the same time...the top floor still hit the ground almost as fast as the bowling ball would even though the top floor had to work its way *ALL THE WAY DOWN *through these many *VERTICAL *support columns that ran from bedrock to the top floor...

Yet another interesting fact is the Pentagon too underwent construction renovation exactly on the section involved on 9/11 

The part of the Pentagon that underwent construction renovation also just happened to be the only part of the building reinforced for a possible impact and was the exact spot involved in 9/11...


----------



## Liability (Apr 7, 2012)

x0Maximilian0x said:


> Liability said:
> 
> 
> > x0Maximilian0x said:
> ...



Let us note what YOU did, Chumley.

I asked you a couple of questions.  You spun off of that and went right back to your own stupid oft-repeated drivel.

As I noted earlier, you fuckwits are far too much a bunch of dishonest pussies to ever honestly address difficult questions.


----------



## x0Maximilian0x (Apr 7, 2012)

Liability said:


> x0Maximilian0x said:
> 
> 
> > Liability said:
> ...



Your feeble mind must be spinning from all the disturbing, indisputable facts presented because you seem to be replying incoherently...

Was your fragile mind disturbed and thrown into spewing insults in avoidence of comprehending many indisputable facts and information?


----------



## Liability (Apr 7, 2012)

x0Maximilian0x said:


> Liability said:
> 
> 
> > x0Maximilian0x said:
> ...



LOL.

MORE deflection from the pussy twoofer.

Now, there's no surprise.


----------



## Obamerican (Apr 8, 2012)

x0Maximilian0x said:


> Liability said:
> 
> 
> > 9/11 inside job said:
> ...


"Sling crap and throw insults"? Now you sound like Rimjob. There's a fast track to being stupid.


----------



## Iplaynaked (Apr 8, 2012)

Rat in the Hat said:


> 9/11 inside job said:
> 
> 
> > Here is this disinformation agent automatically concluding before ANYBODY has even NIST,that the towers fell due to structural failure from the fires saying the intense heat caused it. Intense heat? yeah thats why in one of the famous pics posted many times over  the years we see a woman leaning against the towers even though the flames are allegedly so intense.
> ...



I can't add links yet.


Shit I know 9/11 was an inside job just off one key fact FEMA was there the day before the attack and then immediately after the interview the guy had they tried to dismiss him and said he was "confused about the dates." Just like anything anyone says about 9/11 being an inside job, even though it totally was, they're "confused" about it. So people can believe a magic mans in the sky because thousands of years ago these "people" existed from these stories yet a demolition of WTC 1, 2, or 7 is IMPOSSIBLE! Preposterous I say!


----------



## Light (Apr 9, 2012)

9/11 inside job said:


> Light said:
> 
> 
> > 9/11 inside job said:
> ...



Yep, attacking the messenger NOT the message.  That whole post was nothing but an attack on me and not my argument.  Not a word about the SUBJECT we are supposed to be debating.  Way back..........I asked you to pick a point and we can debate it.  You picked WTC7 because it is the "crux of the 9/11 argument."  You posted all your claims and I posted what I see as evidence to the contrary to your claims.  And instead of showing me why I am wrong, with the evidence that you fell makes your point............you have done nothing but attack ME, not my argument.
And now you are whining that I don't know how to debate.  Maybe by YOUR definition of debate, your right.  I'm not the one that just throws the same claims out over and over and declares I'm right.
I actually want a debate.  Show me where I am wrong.  Show me that the evidence that I am basing my decision on is flawed.  Man-up and make your case.
Cutout the bullshit, 600 word, rant about how dumb you think I am......................and address the subject that YOU picked!


----------



## daws101 (Apr 9, 2012)

x0Maximilian0x said:


> Liability said:
> 
> 
> > 9/11 inside job said:
> ...


----------



## LA RAM FAN (Apr 9, 2012)

x0Maximilian0x said:


> Liability said:
> 
> 
> > x0Maximilian0x said:
> ...



Liar ability can only sling shit in defeat like the monkey troll he is. Liar here as always get OWNED. get out the crying towel for him to weep in defeat.


----------



## LA RAM FAN (Apr 9, 2012)

Iplaynaked said:


> Rat in the Hat said:
> 
> 
> > 9/11 inside job said:
> ...



whats really hysterical is that these loyal Bush dupes here have such hysterical logic and worship this hysterical loony conspiracy theory talked about in these two links here below. they also dont remember anything they were taught in junior high school science class about the laws of physics any grade school graduate understands.

when you can look at these two links below and watch that video there and the facts in the other one,you will fall over laughing in your chair how they worship those two hysterical explanations given to us to know end despite how absurd and ludicrous they are.

http://www.usmessageboard.com/consp...911-conspiracy-theory-in-under-5-minutes.html

Idaho Observer: The looniest of all 9/11 conspiracy theories

The Idaho Observer hit the nail on the head.the governments version of events is the looniest conspiracy theory of them all.

they have the hysterical logic that all these high creditial experts in their fields are loonys and dont know what they are talking about and that the Neocons in the Bush administration,the corporate controlled media,and our proven corrupt government institutions who have a long history of corruption of lying,are telling the truth.It cracks me up to no end their logic.

Patriots Question 9/11 - Responsible Criticism of the 9/11 Commission Report

they somehow find these people to be loony and not the neocons in the Bush administration and somehow think that the neocons in the Bush administration and congress has our best interests at heart.Their logic so much kills me.they should start a comedy club.


----------



## Toro (Apr 9, 2012)

Light said:


> 9/11 inside job said:
> 
> 
> > Light said:
> ...



9/11 inside nutjob's entire argument is "Watch these videos.  Read this book."

Seriously.  I don't think I've ever seen him make an actual argument.

But he can be damn funny sometimes.


----------



## Obamerican (Apr 9, 2012)

Toro said:


> Light said:
> 
> 
> > 9/11 inside job said:
> ...


He is funny in a Three Stooges shit eating sort of way.


----------



## Toro (Apr 10, 2012)

Obamerican said:


> Toro said:
> 
> 
> > Light said:
> ...



That's what I mean.


----------



## daws101 (Apr 10, 2012)

Obamerican said:


> Toro said:
> 
> 
> > Light said:
> ...


don't diss the stooges!


----------



## Obamerican (Apr 10, 2012)

daws101 said:


> Obamerican said:
> 
> 
> > Toro said:
> ...


I regretted it after I posted it. I have always been a 3 Stooges fan.


----------



## LA RAM FAN (Apr 11, 2012)

five farts in  row from the trolls.


----------



## LA RAM FAN (Apr 11, 2012)

I see the loyal Bush dupe liar here who started off this new page here clearly has a problem understanding english and likes to talk to himself.that seems to be a wacked out quality among most Bush dupes. Dawgshit and Candyass more so than anybody.Looks like he has followed their footsteps.


----------



## LA RAM FAN (Apr 11, 2012)

x0Maximilian0x said:


> Liability said:
> 
> 
> > 9/11 inside job said:
> ...



amazing that everybody on this thread ran away with their tail between their legs when you posted this and did not try to refute it since they knew they could not with the exception of troll Liar ability who as always,got his ass handed to him on a platter and was owned by you and like always,had to resort to propaganda to try and avoid defeat.yep definetely an agent he has revealed,no way would he constantly come back all the time for his constant ass beatings he gets here for free and post so much propaganda and disinformation to try and save face in his posts.


----------



## Liability (Apr 11, 2012)

9/11 inside job said:


> x0Maximilian0x said:
> 
> 
> > Liability said:
> ...







There's not a single thing to "refute."

Bullshit claims made with no supporting evidence don't qualify as "points," you stupid bitches.


----------



## Rat in the Hat (Apr 11, 2012)

9/11 inside job said:


> five farts in  row from the trolls.


----------



## Light (Apr 11, 2012)

9/11 inside job said:


> I see the loyal Bush dupe liar here who started off this new page here clearly has a problem understanding english and likes to talk to himself.that seems to be a wacked out quality among most Bush dupes. Dawgshit and Candyass more so than anybody.Looks like he has followed their footsteps.





> loyal Bush dupe liar


First of all, I couldn't stand Bush.  One of the worst presidents ever.  If there was ANY proof that he was behind 9/11, I would be the last person to defend him.
Second.............."liar"?  Please post these "lies" that I have told.  I'm sure this is just another "claim" that you can't backup.
And third, good to see that you STILL can't address the subject matter.  Just gripping about all the posters that disagree with you.
You seem to be one of the biggest "followers" I've ever seen.  Can't hold your own ground?


----------



## daws101 (Apr 11, 2012)

Obamerican said:


> daws101 said:
> 
> 
> > Obamerican said:
> ...


DON'T LET IT HAPPEN AGAIN ! or you're out of the disinfo agents club!


----------



## Obamerican (Apr 11, 2012)

Light said:


> 9/11 inside job said:
> 
> 
> > I see the loyal Bush dupe liar here who started off this new page here clearly has a problem understanding english and likes to talk to himself.that seems to be a wacked out quality among most Bush dupes. Dawgshit and Candyass more so than anybody.Looks like he has followed their footsteps.
> ...


Rimjob (9/11 Inside Job) has lost all grip on reality. 90% of his posts are in reference to shit. Yes, shit. Fecal matter. Go figure. He will always post that everyone runs away "in fear" when he posts. He will also talk about all the "facts" that he posts but never posts anything. I don't either but I don't go around claiming that I do. He seems to think that we are all "paid agents" to refute the facts. He also likes to say that the "agents" have PENETRATED this web site!! How do you penetrate an open web site that ANYONE can join?

He seems to be the dumbest individual I have ever come across on the net and there have been a bunch but he takes the #1 slot. How can he "win" all of these debates when he has all of the ones he disagrees with on ignore? Oh, and I have always been a sock of CandyCorn. Proved he was wrong and now he just says as government agents we have the ability to change our IP address at will. LOL

In short, he's a fucking moron. I don't even address the asshole anymore. It's a waste of bandwidth.


----------



## eots (Apr 11, 2012)

Obamerican said:


> Light said:
> 
> 
> > 9/11 inside job said:
> ...



He keeps you employed and busy..what the fuck would you do with all this time without him ..you would be lost and lonely ,face it...you are the coyote to his roadrunner...beep beep...


----------



## Light (Apr 11, 2012)

eots said:


> Obamerican said:
> 
> 
> > Light said:
> ...



He DOES keep things entertaining, I will give him that.


----------



## Obamerican (Apr 11, 2012)

eots said:


> Obamerican said:
> 
> 
> > Light said:
> ...


There are times when I think that you're above the level of Rimjob and his ilk. But there are days, like today, when you are no better than the little shit eater. If your day job is being a musician then your opinion of political events in general is meaningless. Your fascination with your own self worth is disgusting. So, one last time: I'm not working for the government and I'm not a sock of CC. You spend way more time on this web site than I do. What, no gigs? Without YouTube, you're nothing. Whatever.......................


----------



## Obamerican (Apr 11, 2012)

Light said:


> eots said:
> 
> 
> > Obamerican said:
> ...


Who, Rimjob?


----------



## daws101 (Apr 11, 2012)

eots said:


> Obamerican said:
> 
> 
> > Light said:
> ...


wow look how rides in to rescue handjob....


----------



## Light (Apr 11, 2012)

Obamerican said:


> Light said:
> 
> 
> > 9/11 inside job said:
> ...



Yeah, I've never understood the "paid agent" logic (or lack there of).
The idea that some agency or organization has only the purpose of steering conversations on a message board in a certain direction is just asinine and paranoid.  As if someone is sitting in the Pentagon, reading this stuff and just shaking in their boots that "9/11 Inside Job" is going to expose the whole conspiracy!
We're just opinionated people debating other opinionated people!


----------



## Light (Apr 11, 2012)

Obamerican said:


> Light said:
> 
> 
> > eots said:
> ...



Yeah, well, it always makes me grin when I see his posts that revolve around fecal matter.
The idea that an adult refutes an argument by using poop jokes...........is just too funny to ignore.
My 5 year old has better come backs than that!

That guy must have 2 brain cells............and they're FIGHTING!


----------



## LA RAM FAN (Apr 11, 2012)

Light said:


> eots said:
> 
> 
> > Obamerican said:
> ...



Im not the entertaining guy posting paragraphs talking to myself. 

you sir, are ready for the nuthouse because of that scary little thing as well as needing to go back to junior high school and take science classes again. cause for the hundreth time,you would not last one minute in a debate against a grade school grad on the laws of physics.

You are now starting to pick up the habits of these agents like that one you just spoke with.congrats.


----------



## LA RAM FAN (Apr 11, 2012)

eots said:


> Obamerican said:
> 
> 
> > Light said:
> ...


----------



## Rat in the Hat (Apr 11, 2012)

9/11 inside job said:


> Light said:
> 
> 
> > eots said:
> ...



Congratulations Eots, you have just joined the ranks of the agents.

We'll let your know the details of our next meeting, as soon as they firm up.


----------



## LA RAM FAN (Apr 11, 2012)

someone farted in here.


----------



## Light (Apr 11, 2012)

9/11 inside job said:


> Light said:
> 
> 
> > eots said:
> ...



Really?  I shut you down in the 9/11 debate!
Oh wait, you meant someone that made it PAST grade school!!
You see, in grade school, people learn how to put sentences together properly.


----------



## LA RAM FAN (Apr 11, 2012)

Light said:


> 9/11 inside job said:
> 
> 
> > Light said:
> ...



yeah in your warped little fairy tale dreamland you did.In the real world here you got your ass handed to you on a platter.oh yeah  i see you dont do that,put proper sentences together.Like you troll buddy Obamerican does?thats a good one.

I should have spotted you off from the beginning.You are more cleaver than these trolls I give you that,you had me fooled at first that you were interested in a logicical  discussion but your clearly here just to troll.good acting job I'll say that much.


----------



## LA RAM FAN (Apr 11, 2012)

9/11 inside job said:


> Light said:
> 
> 
> > 9/11 inside job said:
> ...



that being said,maybe you should take a job as an actor,at least you wouldnt embarrass yourself like you do here in a debate running away from videos and posts that shoots down your ramblings.

I can see since you like talking to yourself and I am giving you the attention you seek so I really need to stop.cant educate someone who is afraid of the truth and only sees what he wants to see and ditched junior high school science class and doesnt want to learn about the laws of physics.


----------



## Light (Apr 11, 2012)

9/11 inside job said:


> Light said:
> 
> 
> > 9/11 inside job said:
> ...



How did I get my ass handed to me?  You never addressed my points.  Calling me names after I posted my rebuttal to your claims?  That's winning an argument to you?  Again, a grade school approach.


----------



## LA RAM FAN (Apr 11, 2012)

translation of Lights last unread post-yeah you are right 9/11,I am a fool to listen that agent troll Obamerican and yeah your right,he has horrible grammar skills I should not have ignored and you are so correct. I got my ass handed to me on a platter by you and the other truthers on this thread and never watched any of those videos or looked at any links you provided because like you said so many times,I only see what I want to see and they shot down my pathetic ramblings.

More importantly,you are right,I am a troll seeking attention and afraid of the truth which is why I only see what I want to see and wont look at those videos or links provided throughout this thread you so kindly gave me.that being the case,I will strongly consider what you said and take a job as an actor since I suck at debating 9/11 and more importantly,I will contact the junior high school right down the street from me and enroll there and ask them to leat me enroll in some science classes so I can leanr about the laws of physics that I ditched throughout that whole time.


----------



## Light (Apr 11, 2012)

9/11 inside job said:


> 9/11 inside job said:
> 
> 
> > Light said:
> ...





> doesnt want to learn about the laws of physics



Well, being a Mechanical Engineer, I have a pretty good grasp on the laws of physics.  Seeing how I have to apply them to what I design.
And nothing that I have designed as ever collapsed.  But then again, a jetliner going 500 mph has never crashed into something that I have designed.


----------



## LA RAM FAN (Apr 11, 2012)

9/11 inside job said:


> 9/11 inside job said:
> 
> 
> > Light said:
> ...



Thanks for telling me that Light.I will see you back here in a year from now after you graduated from 7th grade science class when you have learned about the laws of physics.see ya then.oh and good luck on your new acting gig,I know you will succeed much better than you ever did here.glad to hear you will be doing something your actually good at.


----------



## Obamerican (Apr 11, 2012)

Light said:


> 9/11 inside job said:
> 
> 
> > Light said:
> ...


Rimjob is totally clueless. I swear he never made it past 4th grade and yet he will always tell people how uneducated they are. Let's all hope the piece of shit hasn't found a woman stupid enough to breed with him.


----------



## Light (Apr 11, 2012)

9/11 inside job said:


> translation of Lights last unread post-yeah you are right 9/11,I am a fool to listen that agent troll Obamerican and yeah your right,he has horrible grammar skills I should not have ignored and you are so correct. I got my ass handed to me on a platter by you and the other truthers on this thread and never watched any of those videos or looked at any links you provided because like you said so many times,I only see what I want to see and they shot down my pathetic ramblings.
> 
> More importantly,you are right,I am a troll seeking attention and afraid of the truth which is why I only see what I want to see and wont look at those videos or links provided throughout this thread you so kindly gave me.that being the case,I will strongly consider what you said and take a job as an actor since I suck at debating 9/11 and more importantly,I will contact the junior high school right down the street from me and enroll there and ask them to leat me enroll in some science classes so I can leanr about the laws of physics that I ditched throughout that whole time.



Amazing how you can write so much, yet SAY so little.
And you are the last person that should attack someones "grammar" skills.  If there wasn't already enough evidence of your lack of education, your grammar is the prime piece!
Just trying to get through those hieroglyphics that you call reply's, is just bone numbing.

I can give you some time to look up "hieroglyphics".


----------



## daws101 (Apr 11, 2012)

Light said:


> 9/11 inside job said:
> 
> 
> > translation of Lights last unread post-yeah you are right 9/11,I am a fool to listen that agent troll Obamerican and yeah your right,he has horrible grammar skills I should not have ignored and you are so correct. I got my ass handed to me on a platter by you and the other truthers on this thread and never watched any of those videos or looked at any links you provided because like you said so many times,I only see what I want to see and they shot down my pathetic ramblings.
> ...


naw he'd be disappointed that it wasn't a porn comic.
he's the Stephen Hawking of stupid...


----------



## Light (Apr 13, 2012)

We must have hurt "Inside Job's" feelings.  He has taken his non-debating skills elsewhere.  Now that we should expect no more "fart" posts, let me ask a question. (for anyone)
What is the piece of evidence that has most convinced you that there was NOT a controlled demolition of the Twin Towers or WTC 7?  Other than the LACK OF EVIDENCE for it.

Also, even if you feel there was not an inside job, are there things that you still feel like you don't understand?


----------



## Liability (Apr 13, 2012)

Light said:


> We must have hurt "Inside Job's" feelings.  He has taken his non-debating skills elsewhere.  Now that we should expect no more "fart" posts, let me ask a question. (for anyone)
> What is the piece of evidence that has most convinced you that there was NOT a controlled demolition of the Twin Towers or WTC 7?  Other than the LACK OF EVIDENCE for it.
> 
> Also, even if you feel there was not an inside job, are there things that you still feel like you don't understand?



No one thing. 

But for it to have been a controlled demolition as the assholes claim, the place would have had to have been wired with miles and miles of det cord and plastered with explosives ALL without ANYBODY even fucking noticing.  Completely silly.

The fuckwits "answer" is to claim some mystical magical super thermite (Painted on the support structures at the time of the construction of the towers no less) and wireless detonators but there's exactly zero evidence of any of that bullshit.  

And for their absurd conspiracy mindlessness to have any chance of being "true," there would have to be thousands upon thousands of co-conspirators ALL remaining PERFECTLY secretive about it -- and I have never seen any group in or out of government keep such a secret as that for long.  

And the co-conspirators would have to have all been perfectly ok with committing mass murder of their fellow innocent helpless civilian Americans.  

There aint no evidence of THAT, either.

The entire thing is utterly without even a shred or a speck of plausibility.

It's ridiculous, it's asinine, it's insulting, it's specious, it's fucking insane.

That's not even the half of it.


----------



## cooky (Apr 14, 2012)

9/11 inside job said:


> Light said:
> 
> 
> > 9/11 inside job said:
> ...



You continually argue that that the laws of physics are unequivoval proof that controlled demolition of the WTC building occurred. However, you have thus far not provided any credible scientific discourse to support your claims. On the contrary, not one article published in the numerous journals published by the American Society of Civil Engineers supports any of your claims about the WTC collapses. I have not found one article in a credible scientific or academic journal that supports the controlled demolition hypothesis. If you are going to go around insulting the intelligence of forum members I would hope you have actual scientific discourse that supports your position. The truth of the matter is that there aren't any academic or scientific periodical articles that support your position. How do you rationalize the fact the the ASCE hasn't published one article that supports your position?


----------



## eots (Apr 14, 2012)

Liability said:


> Light said:
> 
> 
> > We must have hurt "Inside Job's" feelings.  He has taken his non-debating skills elsewhere.  Now that we should expect no more "fart" posts, let me ask a question. (for anyone)
> ...


----------



## daws101 (Apr 14, 2012)

eots said:


> Liability said:
> 
> 
> > Light said:
> ...


----------



## LA RAM FAN (Apr 14, 2012)

someone farted in here. happened at 12:18 pm today.


----------



## LA RAM FAN (Apr 14, 2012)

cooky said:


> 9/11 inside job said:
> 
> 
> > Light said:
> ...



Hey frady cat,stop showing how your also afraid of the truth by ignoring these credible people throughout this whole thread of Max's 

http://www.usmessageboard.com/consp...-say-bad-things-about-america-and-9-11-a.html


 like I CANT SEE THE LIGHT CONSTANTLY does that he has shown and these people as well. Patriots Question 9/11 - Responsible Criticism of the 9/11 Commission Report

there you go again,clinging to that  old tiresome constant pathetic logic you bring up everytime  that holds no water.you obviously have alzheimers diseace cause I have told you a million times on this in past discussions,those people will lose their jobs like many have for speaking out and saying the truth and wont get further work.
come back when you have something new instead of this constant rambling of yours.


 as always,you ignore those experts and listen to  the corporate owned media,the corrupt neocons in the Bush administration,NIST which was caught lying on MULTIPLE OCCASSIONS, and firemen experienced in explosives constantly clinging to that pathetic logic of yours. oh and you might want to do what I CANT SEE THE LIGHT  "REFUSED" to do throughout this entire thread,read the links posted here and watch videos that Eots posted.They shoot down and address all your ramblings.

again,you as well obviously ditched junior high school science class.as I told him,go back and take those science classes again and I'll talk to you a year from now after you learned something.

You guys constantly show that you take drugs all the time clinging to the logic in these two links.http://www.usmessageboard.com/consp...911-conspiracy-theory-in-under-5-minutes.html

Idaho Observer: The looniest of all 9/11 conspiracy theories


 even a grade school graduate can see right through that b.s. 

they would acknowledge it as  b.s as well because unlike you official conspiracy theory apologists,they are open minded and dont go into it only seeing what they want to see.

and congrats on proving that like him, you also wont look at the those two links posted I posted at the very bottom that proves only someone on drugs would believe their version.instead,choosing to post your old tiresome ramblings that I have addressed and given the same anser to you before a hundred times before in the past that you always ignored.congrats. on avoiding that and changing the subject back tto your old tiresome ramblings No surprise.


----------



## Toro (Apr 14, 2012)

Just watch the 347 youtube videos!


----------



## LA RAM FAN (Apr 14, 2012)

Toro said:


> Just watch the 347 youtube videos!



they appear to be chickenshit cowards like you Toto who like you,are experts at running away from them and not addressing any of the information in there that shoots down your pitiful ramblings.


----------



## Obamerican (Apr 14, 2012)

Here's Rimjob's monument:


----------



## Liability (Apr 14, 2012)

id-eot is the master of this conspiracy bullshit.

But he can't even manage to master the very simple quote function.

Kinda undercuts his longed-for dream of someday having any  stature.


----------



## LA RAM FAN (Apr 14, 2012)

two farts in a row from the shills.


----------



## Liability (Apr 14, 2012)

9/11 Rimjob expresses his love of feces more and more.


----------



## LA RAM FAN (Apr 14, 2012)

someone farted in here.


----------



## Liability (Apr 14, 2012)

9/11 inside job said:


> someone farted in here.



9/11 Rimjob expresses his love of feces more and more.


----------



## LA RAM FAN (Apr 14, 2012)

someone farted in here.


----------



## Rat in the Hat (Apr 14, 2012)

9/11 inside job said:


> cooky said:
> 
> 
> > 9/11 inside job said:
> ...


----------



## Liability (Apr 14, 2012)

9/11 inside job said:


> someone farted in here.



Rimjob's love of all things fecal is also evidenced by his romantic attachment to even the smell of shit!


----------



## Obamerican (Apr 14, 2012)

9/11 inside job said:


> Toro said:
> 
> 
> > Just watch the 347 youtube videos!
> ...


----------



## Obamerican (Apr 14, 2012)

9/11 inside job said:


> someone farted in here.


----------



## LA RAM FAN (Apr 16, 2012)

four farts in a row from the trolls.


----------



## candycorn (Apr 16, 2012)

obamerican said:


> 9/11 inside job said:
> 
> 
> > someone farted in here.



bump!


----------



## LA RAM FAN (Apr 16, 2012)

candyass you just had the last fart on that page.congrats.


----------



## Obamerican (Apr 16, 2012)

9/11 inside job said:


> candyass you just had the last fart on that page.congrats.


Here's your memorial, *SHIT FOR BRAINS!!!!*


----------



## eots (Apr 16, 2012)

obamerican said:


> 9/11 inside job said:
> 
> 
> > candyass you just had the last fart on that page.congrats.
> ...



whY do you debwunkers keep posting stuff from onion ? It has no relevance it just makes you look even more idiotic,,you paid trolls do a horrible job and should be fired


----------



## daws101 (Apr 16, 2012)

eots said:


> obamerican said:
> 
> 
> > 9/11 inside job said:
> ...







wrong again! it make you look stupid by commenting on what everybody else knows is fiction and you fail every time.


----------



## eots (Apr 16, 2012)

daws101 said:


> eots said:
> 
> 
> > obamerican said:
> ...



not one word of that even makes sense troll..why are you posting stuff from onoin was the question ..you fucking nitwit


----------



## daws101 (Apr 16, 2012)

eots said:


> obamerican said:
> 
> 
> > 9/11 inside job said:
> ...


btw you did not coin the phrase "debwunkers".... unless you were on the bill maher site 9years ago..


----------



## daws101 (Apr 16, 2012)

eots said:


> daws101 said:
> 
> 
> > eots said:
> ...


yep just as dumb as you seem!


----------



## eots (Apr 16, 2012)

> originally posted by daws101
> wrong again! it make you look stupid by commenting on what everybody else know is fiction and you fail every time.





fuck ..this should be my new sig line


----------



## eots (Apr 16, 2012)

daws101 said:


> eots said:
> 
> 
> > obamerican said:
> ...



Yes Indeed ..I did


----------



## daws101 (Apr 16, 2012)

eots said:


> daws101 said:
> 
> 
> > eots said:
> ...


then answer the question were you on the bill maher site 9 years ago?


----------



## daws101 (Apr 16, 2012)

eots said:


> > originally posted by daws101
> > wrong again! it make you look stupid by commenting on what everybody else knows is fiction and you fail every time.
> 
> 
> ...


fixed...must be desperate  you hang on every letter !


----------



## daws101 (Apr 16, 2012)

eots said:


> > originally posted by daws101
> > wrong again! it make you look stupid by commenting on what everybody else know is fiction and you fail every time.
> 
> 
> ...


debwunkers:Your search for who coined the phrase debwunkers did not match with any Web results.


----------



## Obamerican (Apr 16, 2012)

eots said:


> obamerican said:
> 
> 
> > 9/11 inside job said:
> ...


Your ass buddy, Rimjob, thought it was real. But, hey, you won't call him out for that, will you? Moron.


----------



## LA RAM FAN (Apr 17, 2012)

four farts in a row from dawgshit and his lover troll candyass.


----------



## candycorn (Apr 17, 2012)

Obamerican said:


> 9/11 inside job said:
> 
> 
> > candyass you just had the last fart on that page.congrats.
> ...



Bump.


----------



## LA RAM FAN (Apr 17, 2012)

wow your handlers sure sent you back real soon to fart again candyass.they sure are getting desperate. tell them for me they are doing me a favor by sending you back to troll by helping me keep this thread alive.


----------



## LA RAM FAN (Apr 17, 2012)

eots said:


> obamerican said:
> 
> 
> > 9/11 inside job said:
> ...



Hey agent candyass,I see your getting very mad and upset that the word is getting out  around the country. You sure are funny when you have your meltdowns and blow a gasket that your lies your handlers pay you to post are being seen by so many people. keep up the entertainment for us.

Now I can understand why the other truthers such as eots dont put you on ignore,you guys provide priceless entertainment when you get angry and have your meltdowns and sling shit in defeat like the monkey trolls you are.


----------



## Montrovant (Apr 17, 2012)

It's not enough that there was a huge conspiracy to perpetrate the 9/11 attacks, apparently there is also a conspiracy to 'infiltrate' all the political websites on the web in order to discredit truthers.  Sounds reasonable!  

Let's be clear : no one needs to get paid to come here and reply to your posts in disagreement.  There are plenty of people who don't believe 9/11 was an inside job who also like to post on message boards.  This insistence that the people arguing against the idea are being paid to do so is either an overdone bad joke, or a clear indication of your need to try and make yourselves seem more important than you are.

Not that I expect to change any minds, but sometimes you just get a really strong urge to respond to crazy.  Hell, that's probably how you truthers feel as well, just from the other side.


----------



## daws101 (Apr 17, 2012)

Montrovant said:


> It's not enough that there was a huge conspiracy to perpetrate the 9/11 attacks, apparently there is also a conspiracy to 'infiltrate' all the political websites on the web in order to discredit truthers.  Sounds reasonable!
> 
> Let's be clear : no one needs to get paid to come here and reply to your posts in disagreement.  There are plenty of people who don't believe 9/11 was an inside job who also like to post on message boards.  This insistence that the people arguing against the idea are being paid to do so is either an overdone bad joke, or a clear indication of your need to try and make yourselves seem more important than you are.
> 
> Not that I expect to change any minds, but sometimes you just get a really strong urge to respond to crazy.  Hell, that's probably how you truthers feel as well, just from the other side.


(cue winner intro) " a clear indication of your need to try and make yourselves seem more important than you are."-Montrovant


----------



## LA RAM FAN (Apr 18, 2012)

someone farted in here.


----------



## Rat in the Hat (Apr 18, 2012)

Hey 9/11 Gage-Dupe, why don't you make another fart post for us.


----------



## LA RAM FAN (Apr 18, 2012)

9/11 inside job said:


> someone farted in here.



It just occured again.


----------



## Rat in the Hat (Apr 18, 2012)




----------



## Light (Apr 18, 2012)

Rat in the Hat said:


>



He obviously likes "showing off" that double digit IQ.


----------



## LA RAM FAN (Apr 18, 2012)

Montrovant said:


> It's not enough that there was a huge conspiracy to perpetrate the 9/11 attacks, apparently there is also a conspiracy to 'infiltrate' all the political websites on the web in order to discredit truthers.  Sounds reasonable!
> 
> Let's be clear : no one needs to get paid to come here and reply to your posts in disagreement.  There are plenty of people who don't believe 9/11 was an inside job who also like to post on message boards.  This insistence that the people arguing against the idea are being paid to do so is either an overdone bad joke, or a clear indication of your need to try and make yourselves seem more important than you are.
> 
> Not that I expect to change any minds, but sometimes you just get a really strong urge to respond to crazy.  Hell, that's probably how you truthers feel as well, just from the other side.



Man are you ever dense.Thanks for proving like all Bush dupes in denial and afraid of the truth that you only see what you want to see.Because if you had bothered to read throughout this whole thread,you would notice videos Eots had posted of how the goverment in fact has paid shills everywhere on message boards.thanks for showing you ignored that little detail and you only see what you want to see.

Its not an overdone bad joke,its just that your ignorant and in denial is all.

You obviously forgot what i said earlier that of course not ALL people that come on here and argue it are paid shills.Many of them are like you,Just brainwashed Bush dupes afraid of the truth and only see what they want to see.

You forgot where I said only posters that come on here and defend the fairy tales of the government night and day constantly everyday like they always do are paid shills.You obviously are not one of them.They are the same cast of characters that come here everyday and post non stop bullshit and lies day after day,week after week,month after month.

That seems to be a common trait that both you Bush dupes and the paid shills have is alzhemiers diseace,you cant never remember anything told to you.

Dawgshit and Moron In the hat are paid trolls.They are constantly coming back here seeking attention trying to derail these threads EVERYDAY posting lies and propaganda and the most absurd nonsense ignoring credible experts in their fields.Only paid shills have THAT mush time on their hands to devote themselves to come on here and seek attention constantly like they do and troll constantly month after month like they do.they have a common denonimater,gang tackler the messenger,its a typical tactic they use contantly just like they are taught and paid to do.yep no paid trolls here.


----------



## Rat in the Hat (Apr 18, 2012)

And now, Agent Gage-Dupe will perform that single brain cell trick again.


----------



## Liability (Apr 18, 2012)

9/11 inside job said:


> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> > It's not enough that there was a huge conspiracy to perpetrate the 9/11 attacks, apparently there is also a conspiracy to 'infiltrate' all the political websites on the web in order to discredit truthers.  Sounds reasonable!
> ...




A video posted by id-eots said that the government has paid disinformation agents everywhere -- so that makes it true?



Damn.

If you ever needed concrete proof that 9/11 Rimjob is too fucking stupid to breathe, there you have it.


----------



## Light (Apr 18, 2012)

9/11 inside job said:


> Dawgshit and Moron In the hat are paid trolls.They are constantly coming back here seeking attention trying to derail these threads EVERYDAY posting lies and propaganda and the most absurd nonsense ignoring credible experts in their fields.Only paid shills have THAT mush time on their hands to devote themselves to come on here and seek attention constantly like they do and troll constantly month after month like they do.they have a common denonimater,gang tackler the messenger,its a typical tactic they use contantly just like they are taught and paid to do.yep no paid trolls here.



That reminds me, you accused me of posting lies also.  I called you on it and asked you to produce these "lies" that I told.  I am still waiting.
Or is that too much to ask..............you backing up what you claim?


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Apr 18, 2012)

Light said:


> Rat in the Hat said:
> 
> 
> >
> ...



Low double digit.


----------



## daws101 (Apr 18, 2012)

Light said:


> Rat in the Hat said:
> 
> 
> >
> ...


the right side of the decimal point double digit I.Q...000.01


----------



## daws101 (Apr 18, 2012)

9/11 inside job said:


> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> > It's not enough that there was a huge conspiracy to perpetrate the 9/11 attacks, apparently there is also a conspiracy to 'infiltrate' all the political websites on the web in order to discredit truthers.  Sounds reasonable!
> ...


----------



## Montrovant (Apr 18, 2012)

9/11 inside job said:


> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> > It's not enough that there was a huge conspiracy to perpetrate the 9/11 attacks, apparently there is also a conspiracy to 'infiltrate' all the political websites on the web in order to discredit truthers.  Sounds reasonable!
> ...



I guess you forgot me mentioning that the posters you call paid agents also post in other forums on this site.  Is this unrelated posting also something they are being paid for?  Or is it just possible they have these threads on subscribe, and don't mind spending 5 minutes reading and maybe making a quick reply a few times a day?

I come to USMB multiple times a day.  I have a couple of threads in the conspiracy forum on subscribe.  The main difference between me and these supposed paid agents is I don't usually post quick little one-liners or short insults.  It doesn't mean I believe your ridiculous posts, nor does it mean I don't often think the same things.  

I haven't noticed these supposed paid agents posting on these 9/11 threads any more than you do.  I have also seen you posting on other threads.  So, your hypothesis that "Only paid shills have THAT mush time on their hands to devote themselves to come on here and seek attention constantly like they do and troll constantly month after month like they do.".  I guess that makes YOU a paid shill as well, huh?  

Everyone who disagrees with you is not lying.  Everyone who disagrees with you regularly is not paid by the government to do so.  It is your own issue that you can't believe anyone can honestly disagree with you.  It is your own issue that you can't come up with any of the myriad reasons (retired, unemployed, stay-at-home parent, work from home, post from work, etc.) that someone might be on this message board a lot.  It is your own issue that you somehow think your constant posting in this thread, very often much longer posts than the people you complain about, does not indicate a lot of time spent here.  And it is your own issue that you believe the government is paying multiple people to shadow you around the conspiracy theory section of a message board, presumably so you don't get 'the truth' out to the masses (who, apparently, are likely to accept the ramblings and youtube videos of some anonymous posters with poor writing skills in the conspiracy section of a message board).

And you think *I* am crazy?


----------



## daws101 (Apr 18, 2012)

Montrovant said:


> 9/11 inside job said:
> 
> 
> > Montrovant said:
> ...


mush


----------



## Light (Apr 19, 2012)

Montrovant said:


> 9/11 inside job said:
> 
> 
> > Montrovant said:
> ...



I'm glad to see another rational thinking person on here.  I have posted similar statements about the whole "paid shill" accusations.  I don't understand the mindset that the government, or anybody for that matter, is trolling these forums to prevent somebody from "getting the truth out".
And thank you for pointing out the hypocrisy of someone that is on this board all the time, claiming that other people that are here all time, are being paid, simply because they disagree. 
I thought that was the whole point of a message board, to share ideas and opinions.  Even when those opinions are opposing others opinions.
There are people on here, that once you disagree with them enough, they put you on their "ignore" list.  That action alone, tells you that they have no interest in a discussion that may challenge their stance on an issue.  They only want to talk to like-minded people and not have to answer any questions.


----------



## daws101 (Apr 19, 2012)

Light said:


> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> > 9/11 inside job said:
> ...


spot on .
the twoofers are like a club...strike that....a pity party!


----------



## Light (Apr 19, 2012)

daws101 said:


> Light said:
> 
> 
> > Montrovant said:
> ...



LOL.
All kidding aside, there does seem to be a club mentality.  When an inside job believer defends their position or supplies evidence of their claims, they point to another inside job believers statements or claims.  The concept of CLAIM doesnt equal EVIDENCE escapes most conspiracy theorists.   So, no matter how large the club gets, they are still just a group of story tellers.  And some of the bigger names in the story telling, Griffin, Fetzer, Marrs, etc., see this as nothing more than a business.  In all of these books, and there are A LOT, there is no evidence provided.  There are a lot of claims and a lot of projections, but no jaw dropping evidence.

The fact that it could have happened or it looks like doesnt mean that it did.  The lack of evidence is the reason that the Truth Movement never had any traction.  If there was some real, irrefutable evidence, a new investigation could be made to happen.   And what is sad, is there are legitimate questions that get drowned out by the crap pot claims.  Questions about our government intelligence and militarys readiness and ability to react to the attacks are grouped in with no planes and controlled demolition claims. 

I would love to have a rational discussion with someone that has an opposing opinion on 9/11.  Its becoming clear that its not going to happen on this message board, but I still hold out hope.  I am still able to be convinced that I am wrong.  In the couple years following 9/11, I was becoming convinced that something beyond the official story did occur.  Films like Loose Change had me believing in its version of events.  Then in the following years, I looked closer at the actual evidence that was out there.  Thus I became a NON-believer in the inside job theory.  So, I didnt automatically fall on one side or the other.


----------



## LA RAM FAN (Apr 19, 2012)

Montrovant said:


> 9/11 inside job said:
> 
> 
> > Montrovant said:
> ...



yep your crazy alright,you have already proven that too many times here.your crazy because just like the other Bush dupe afraid of the truth and only sees what he wants to see I CANT SEE THE LIGHT,you got to be on drugs to accept the governments version and  like him,you obviously forgot everything you learned in junior high school science classes about the laws of physics.for the hundreth time,to accept the governments version of events for the collapse of the towers,then you are saying the laws of physics that scientists have gone by for thousands of years,no longer applies anymore and are just like these trolls posting.

thats something that none of you have ever been able to get around and never will.

See NOW your putting words in my mouth.You obviously dont agree with me and I have not called you a liar,just that your dense.and for the hundreth time,MORON IN THE HAT,DAWGSHIT,CANDYASS,LIAR ABILITY are paid trolls,THEY constantly lie all the time.you just dont want to acknowledge that.No its not my issue and its not my problem that people like you and I CANT SEE THE LIGHT are in denial and afraid of the truth and only see what you want to see.that YOUR issue and problem,not mine.

No their not any of those people of those kinds of jobs that you think they might have,unemployed or whatever,those kind of people would not be such losers like these moron trolls are that come on here all the time.

see my time is well worth it,because I am getting the truth out.these trolls here are doing nothing but trolling spreading lies and disinformation.oh and of course my posts are longer most the time because I address the facts and dont answer with just one liner insults and name calling like they do which is why they are all on ignore.

I only start insullting when they start ignoring the facts that prove their ramblings wrong that they are always too arrogant to admit they have been proven wrong on.

again its not  my issue or my problem that you cant deal with the truth about 9/11 and that we got paid trolls here at this site.thats your issue and problem.

again people like you and these agents are not going to look at any you tube videos with credible people on them that ANY truther like Eots has posted many times on this thread,because for the hundreth time,in the case of you and I CANT SEE THE LIGHT,you both are in denial and only see what you want to see,so of course your not going to look at them.you have no interest in looking at an opposing view.

with these paid trolls,their not about to look at them.they never do.

of course they are going to take a break and go to another section and post.after their contant ass beatings they get here everyday,they got to take a break from it once in a while.

they have these threads on subscribe of course because their handlers send them here to quickly try and disrupt truth discussions.

well then you havent observed them very well that they come on here much more than I do.the ones that I have on ignore come on all hours of the night and post all hours of the day and night and come on and reply immediately to these threads.

Nope that doesnt make me a paid shill because unlike these trolls,I dont spend countless hours a day here on this site which THEY do whether you realise it or not.Your just not very observant which is no surprise.

see now your putting words in my mouth,did I ever say that you are lying? No I did not.so thats a mute point.those people on my ignore list are paid shills,your just too ignorant to figure that out. for the hundreth time,those paid trolls on my ignore list,all they ever do is come here and lie and post propaganda and again,they tag team and come after anybody who speaks the truth,thats how they operate,you are just too dense to understand any of this.thats the sign of a shill.

ah and if you bother to look at their posts,they are clearly seeking attention and are ready for the nuthouse,thats why they are not any of those people that you meantioned before like stay at home mom or unemployed or have not because those kind of people are not nutcases ready for the nuthouse which they clearly are.

they have made that clear in if you look at their posts,they address me as though they actually think I read their moronic posts
when I have made it perfectly clear hundreds of times before in the past they are on my ignore list.someone who keeps replying talking to themselves like that the way they do constantly addressing someone that has them on ignore,is a dumbfuck lunatic that belongs in a mental institution.lol.

I know when someone puts ME on ignore like a couple people at this site have before have  in the past,I did not keep replying to them when they talked about topics like this because thats a clear sign of someone clealry seeking attention.would YOU do that with someone if they decided to put you on ignore and made it clear MANY times they have you on ignore?  if so,your ready for the nuthouse as well.and you think I am the nutty one here and their not? 

you are one funny dude. I can see I am clearly getting nowhere with you and you cant be reasoned with so unless you want to be an idiot who likes to talk to himself like these trolls  do and want to come back and address this post,you will show that you are a nutcase as well .that you like talking to yourself just like these trolls do. Because I am done with you on this thread.I tried as best as I could to explain it to you but again,I can see that just like I CANT SEE THE LIGHT,you obviously cant be reasoned with on this.


----------



## candycorn (Apr 19, 2012)

daws101 said:


> 9/11 inside job said:
> 
> 
> > Montrovant said:
> ...



Bump.


----------



## Liability (Apr 19, 2012)

The pay is EXCELLENT.

And the best part is that completely whacked out goobers like 9/11 Rimjob actually believe that.


----------



## Montrovant (Apr 19, 2012)

Well, that sure was a rambling, half-incoherent diatribe of idiocy and/or insanity.  I especially like the part about having various posters on ignore, not reading their posts, yet knowing the content of their posts.


----------



## daws101 (Apr 19, 2012)

Montrovant said:


> Well, that sure was a rambling, half-incoherent diatribe of idiocy and/or insanity.  I especially like the part about having various posters on ignore, not reading their posts, yet knowing the content of their posts.


 handjob is a bundle of contraindicative fun.


----------



## daws101 (Apr 19, 2012)

9/11 inside job said:


> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> > 9/11 inside job said:
> ...



might wanna back off on the starbucks or the meth....!


----------



## Obamerican (Apr 19, 2012)

Montrovant said:


> Well, that sure was a rambling, half-incoherent diatribe of idiocy and/or insanity.  I especially like the part about having various posters on ignore, not reading their posts, yet knowing the content of their posts.


Yeah, Rimjob takes stupid to a whole new level. He thinks we've "penetrated" a web site open to the public. He also thinks that he's important enough for the government to "debate" him on 9/11. If you check his posting history over 90% of his posts are, "someone farted in here". He thinks that other posters are "on his side" yet, rarely, do ANY of them reply to him directly. If you post a farce from the Onion, without even checking, he will think it's a "real article". His English and basic grammar skills are third grade, at best, yet he will lecture people on how they must have dropped out of school.
He's sort of like the court jester. Too stupid to do anything else.


----------



## Light (Apr 19, 2012)

Obamerican said:


> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> > Well, that sure was a rambling, half-incoherent diatribe of idiocy and/or insanity.  I especially like the part about having various posters on ignore, not reading their posts, yet knowing the content of their posts.
> ...



He's more like our very own "village idiot".


----------



## Light (Apr 19, 2012)

Montrovant said:


> Well, that sure was a rambling, half-incoherent diatribe of idiocy and/or insanity.  I especially like the part about having various posters on ignore, not reading their posts, yet knowing the content of their posts.



I particularly liked the "you can't be reasoned with", so "I am done with you".  That's incredible!  When was the last post that he actually addressed the subject of this thread?

Although, he pulled the same thing with me after only a few posts.  I wasn't agreeing with his claims and I was asking him to defend his position.  At that point, I "couldn't be reasoned with" and he claimed that he was "done talking to me".
I believe it is called ........tuck and run.


----------



## kirkuki (Apr 20, 2012)

so it was or wasnt an inside job ?


----------



## Liability (Apr 20, 2012)

kirkuki said:


> so it was or wasnt an inside job ?



Inside!

Formed and put into place INSIDE the pinhead world of Islamo-jihadist shitheads.


----------



## LA RAM FAN (Apr 21, 2012)

Montrovant said:


> Well, that sure was a rambling, half-incoherent diatribe of idiocy and/or insanity.  I especially like the part about having various posters on ignore, not reading their posts, yet knowing the content of their posts.



yeah when your afraid of the truth thats what you Bush dupes always do.Dismiss it,Nice.oh and hate to break the news to you scardy cat, those paid trolls have been caught lying on multiple occassions so many times in the past changing the subject and evading the evidence too many times to remember that their a sad joke right now and your sad as well that you actually listen to them.lol  I see that you did not answer my question about how they are delusional in the fact that they talk to themselves,nice dodge.Looks like your too much of  coward to admit Im right.great job evading that.

one of them in the  past  after I challenged them to watch a video  and address the evidence in there, was caught red handed making up lies saying those witnesses said things in that video  those witnesses never said in that video .

All they ever do is  ignore credible experts but instead listen  to proven liars.He is the ONLY poster on this site that EVER took me up on that challenge I always issue people to watch just one video out of 47 of them  that I used to always link constantly here all the time to posters.

since he was the only one that ever did over 50 plus people that I have talked with before in ther past on this,I finally got tired of posting that link since nobody would ever take me up on that challenge and would always run away from those facts and evidence in them. 

I found out then why back then, why  they always run away and wont watch those videos when I ask them to in the fact that they  are forced to lie when they cant counter or refute the evidence and facts in them.

congrats,you just proved like all Bush dupes do that you are afraid of the truth dismissing everything i said not even trying to refute it.Your debating skills are almost as big a joke as I CANT SEE THE LIGHTS are. 

I know it so much hurts you to know you cant remember anything from junior high school science class. any one of them would laugh their ass off at you if you tried to tell them the fires caused the towers to collapse at freefall speed downwards. 

as I was saying with I CANT SEE THE LIGHT earlier.I have had far more intelligent discussions with junior high school kids than I have had on here on this thread with these trolls that you have allowed to brainwash you on besides the corporate media as well.

Thats because unlike you,they are open minded and dont go into it only seeing what they want to see and unlike you all,remember everything they were taught about the laws of physics and they actually look at the facts and evidence and see the truth everytime that it was an inside job because of that.


you guys kill me to no end with the way you constantly show you dont know anything at all about the laws of physics.the entertainment you give to me on that is priceless.

"falls out of chair laughing."

this thread is obviously not getting any intelligent people  on here  since Eots and Max left so it has run its course. congrats on one thing,you were the ONLY poster that came on here that defended the official b.s of the governments story who did not lie or has in the past many times.That I WILL give you credit for.

oh and your obviously too stupid to figure out no way in hell would they constantly come back here everyday for their constant ass beatings and lies they have to resort to for free.They would never be willing to take all these ass beatings here for free frady cat.


----------



## LA RAM FAN (Apr 21, 2012)

kirkuki said:


> so it was or wasnt an inside job ?



It was definetely an inside job.after all someone would have to be in complete denial and afraid of the truth and close minded to believe this fairy tale here below in these two links. 

http://www.usmessageboard.com/consp...911-conspiracy-theory-in-under-5-minutes.html

http://www.usmessageboard.com/consp...911-conspiracy-theory-in-under-5-minutes.html

please watch that video in that 2nd link there and also read through the stuff mentioned in that first one as well.anybody would have to be on drugs to ignore all that information these trolls always do.

Also,please read throught the posts of Max right here on this thread.

http://www.usmessageboard.com/consp...-say-bad-things-about-america-and-9-11-a.html

That was something else all these trolls ignored as well.

Plus as I have said many times before on this thread,any grade school graduate would understand that it was an inside job when you told them the facts and the evidence because unlike many posters here,they actually know something about the laws of physics and understand that its impossible for  fires to cause buildings to fall downwards at freefall speed like they did.

The laws of physics that scientists have gone by for thousands of years that these Bush dupes always ignore dictate that the towers SHOULD have tipped over sideways and fell GRADUALLY.not at freefall speed in 11 seconds.

as i have said many times before on this thread,any 7th grade junior high school kid knows this.

Ignore what any of the  trolls come on here and say.If you want to learn the truth about 9/11 and how it was an inside job,read through the posts of mine,Eots,Mr Jones and Maximillian on this thread and you'll learn about it.You'll really learn a lot if you watch the videos that Eots has posted throughout this thread in particular.

What these trolls always ignore that say it wasnt an inside job  is that Larry Silverstein was the owner of the three towers that collapsed and that he proffited from the attacks HUGE and thet they were the only towers that collapsed and that there were other buildings much closer to the towers than bld 7 was that were damaged far more extensively and had much worse fires than bld 7 did but they did not collapse.

they of course did not collapse because they were not owned by Silverstein and because of that,he did not profit from those buildings being damaged.Oh and Bush and Cheney proffited HUGE as well from the attacks.another fact these trolls ignore.


----------



## Liability (Apr 21, 2012)

Those fucking Orbs!


----------



## x0Maximilian0x (Apr 21, 2012)

kirkuki said:


> so it was or wasnt an inside job ?


 You tell us...

Many disturbing facts and information in this thread:
*Indisputable Facts 9/11: Quite disturbing information *
http://www.usmessageboard.com/conspiracy-theories/217738-indisputable-facts-9-11-quite-disturbing-information.html


*9/11 Disturbing and Indisputable Facts:*

While learning the indisputable and disturbing facts below...ask yourself if you are experiencing any of the common thought process reactions explained here by Sigmund Freud...

*Denial *(also called abnegation) is a defense mechanism postulated by Sigmund Freud, in which a person is faced with a fact that is too uncomfortable to accept and rejects it instead, insisting that it is not true despite what may be overwhelming evidence. 

The subject may use:
*simple denial: *deny the reality of the unpleasant fact altogether
*minimisation: *admit the fact but deny its seriousness (a combination of denial and rationalization)
*projection: *admit both the fact and seriousness but deny responsibility
Denial - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

-------

The "official story" was spoonfed to mass media before either tower even fell. That in istself shows the "official investigation" was done before 9/11 even bagan.

Only 33 minutes after the second tower got hit, and before either tower even fell, was the elaborately written "official story" being aired on who's responsible...was this elaborately written news cast "official story" prewritten before the attacks...

How about the "official investigation" before the elaborately written "official story"...was the "official investigation" done before 9/11 even occured...

I think the answer is quite clear.

-------

Remember the Anthrax attacks which just happen to occur right after 9/11 and targeted Media and Senate...

The white house staff began taking the anti-biotic for anthrax *BEFORE* the first anthrax attack even occured...

-------

This documentary shows Jerome Hauer being interviewed on 9/11...just happened to be interviewed...let's see who he really is... 

It was Jerome Hauer who advised the White House staff to start taking CIPRO,  the anti-biotic effective against Anthrax, *BEFORE* the first anthrax attack even occured... 

Jerome Hauer was Commissioner for Office of Emergency Management located in Building 7 or World Trade Center 7...

Jerome Hauer was Bush Administration Insider...

The Office of Emergency Management was located on the 23rd floor of Building 7, or World Trade Center 7 and was also where the Office of Counter Terrorism was...

World Trade Center 7 or Building 7 underwent strange and odd construction renovations just before 9/11...

Some of the strange and odd construction renovations in Building 7  consisted of where only the 23rd floor was reinforced with its floors, walls, windows all being strengthened making it some type of tree fort or sky bunker within sight of the World Trade Center twin towers...

Just before 9/11 it was slipped into the news that a Boeing Passenger Plane was successfully tested, flown with remote control...

This remote control technology of Boeing Passenger Planes was developed for someone in Office of Counter Terrorism to be able to take over a Boeing Passenger Plane, by remote control flying, if it was to be hijacked by terrorists...

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BVFZu97fWbU&feature=related]9 11 THE BIG CLUE EVERYONE MISSED - YouTube[/ame]

-------

Both the Twin Towers or World Trade Centers 1 & 2 underwent many months of construction renovations before 9/11 and up to the very day of 9/11...

Some of the construction renovations in WTC 1, WTC 2 were in and around the elevator shafts... where all the vertical support columns were located that ran from bedrock to the top floor...

The World Trade Centers even underwent construction renovations directly on the vertical support columns that happened to fail on 9/11...

The construction company that did the many months of construction renovations on the WTC Buildings, some of which were on the vertical support columns that ran from bedrock to the top floor, just happen to of had its CEO appointed by President Bush to the Commission White House Fellows...

The Pentagon too underwent construction renovations before 9/11 and up to the very day of 9/11...

The construction renovations on the Pentagon happened to be exactly on the section of the building involved on 9/11... 

The part of the Pentagon involved on 9/11 also just happened to be the only part of the building reinforced for a possible impact...

-------

The many *vertical* support columns in the World Trade Center buildings, that ran from bedrock to the top floor, were fastened and welded together all the way up...

Not going to get into exactly what type of wireless technology may have been used or exactly whay type of developed explosives may have been used...but...

All these *VERTICAL* support columns somehow removed themselves fast enough *ALL THE WAY DOWN* so that if a bowling ball were dropped right beside the top floor at the same time...the top floor still hit the ground almost as fast as the bowling ball would even though the top floor had to work its way *ALL THE WAY DOWN* through these many *VERTICAL* support columns that ran from bedrock to the top floor...

-------

There were Israeli Mossad proven to be working in and around the World Trade Center buildings...

There were many Israeli Mossad spies arrested during 9/11 time frame...

Some of the Israeli Mossad spies were proven to be active in the Israeli military and explosive experts...

There were Israeli Mossad even arrested on the very day of 9/11 with evidence of explosives, etc that were held in jail, only to be released by the top of the pyramid scheme...

There were even Israeli Mossad dressed like and posing as Muslims, dancing and taking pictures,  that were arrested on 9/11, only to be released by the top of the pyramid scheme...

-------

If you did not experience any of the symptoms of Denial explained by Sigmund Freud at the top of this page, then ask yourself if this fits you at the bottom of this page...

-------

Israel Hires Internet Soldiers to Penetrate American Forums, Chatrooms : Deadline Live With Jack Blood

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HYedTmaHt1A&feature=player_embedded]provocateurs,shills and disinfo agents - YouTube[/ame]


----------



## Liability (Apr 21, 2012)

x0Maximilian0x said:


> * * * *
> *Indisputable Facts 9/11: Quite disturbing information *
> * * * *



[MaxiPad's wall of meaningless oft-repeated words snipped for the sake of brevity.]

The FACT is that for ALL of the words in his oft-repeated wall of words,  MaxiPad still offers not one single solitary indisputable fact.

He doesn't offer facts.


----------



## Light (Apr 22, 2012)

9/11 inside job said:
			
		

> The laws of physics that scientists have gone by for thousands of years that these Bush dupes always ignore dictate that the towers SHOULD have tipped over sideways and fell GRADUALLY.not at freefall speed in 11 seconds.



If physics predicts this and you are such a physics expert, then you should be able to explain how they should have fallen over instead of down.  Please show what law of physics was broken by the buildings falling DOWN.  And sense I am VERY confident that you can't do this,  I would settle for a reference to a study that predicts a "fall over" collapse.  
Many universities have done studies on how those buildings performed.  I would give you some names, but I don't want to do your research for you.





			
				9/11 inside job said:
			
		

> Plus as I have said many times before on this thread,any grade school graduate would understand that it was an inside job when you told them the facts and the evidence because unlike many posters here,they actually know something about the laws of physics and understand that its impossible for fires to cause buildings to fall downwards at freefall speed like they did.



So, can you explain why the Delft University of Architecture Building collapsed from a "normal" office fire?  Did that fall down at free fall speed?
LiveLeak.com - Delft University of Technology in Holland on fire and collapsing


----------



## Mr. Jones (Apr 23, 2012)

Light said:


> 9/11 inside job said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Wow thanks for that video. It shows what an inferior building _that _was compared to the massive steel reinforced WTC7. 
I didn't see any kink, nor that building fall straight down with any semblance of symmetry compared to WTC7, NOR ANYTHING AT ALL AKIN TO A TOTAL GLOBAL COLLASPE..What a miserable fucking fail that was 
The building you compare to WTC7, most likely was another concrete reinforced building. 
Have you ever taken an oxy -acetylene 
torch to concrete?  If you do, put your fucking safety glasses on before the concrete splatters and explodes in your face from the small amounts of moisture trapped in it when poured...That appears the likely cause of these types of buildings falling over..Hardly collapsing like any of the WTC buildings on 9-11.

And many credible people have very well thought out positions of the 
physics involved that destroy the NIST fantasy.
You claim many universities have done studies on how those WTC buildings performed..link them and I'll link you what I have on the physics that conclude the WTC units should have fallen differently..If at all.


----------



## Light (Apr 23, 2012)

Mr. Jones said:


> Light said:
> 
> 
> > 9/11 inside job said:
> ...



The point of the link was to refute the idea that fire cannot case collapse in a steel framed building.  In this case it caused collapse in a steel frame & steel reinforced concrete building.  So, to say it was an inferior design is purely conjecture on your part.
To argue that the entire building didn't collapse exactly like WTC7 is asinine and misses the point.  The point is steel framed and steel reinforced concrete buildings ARE effected by fire.
I take it you think a concrete reinforced building is inferior to steel alone?
I'm not sure what your point is on the acetylene torch.  Those burn up to 6000 deg. F.  I think we can agree that a normal office fire doesn't reach those temperatures.  Thus not having the effect on the concrete that you are describing.
As for the studies on the building performance, I didn't link them because of the challenge to the specific person that was posted to.
If you have a conclusion on what SHOULD have happened, I'd be glad to read it.


----------



## LA RAM FAN (Apr 23, 2012)

Mr. Jones said:


> Light said:
> 
> 
> > 9/11 inside job said:
> ...



You'll find that trying to reason with I CANT SEE THE LIGHT on this that he knows nothing at all about the laws of physics that every junior high school kid learns at that age,and doesnt understand that buildings dont fall downwards at free fall speed in 11 seconds due to structural failure. that they come down GRADUALLY over a period of time. He also ignores that NIST was caught lying saying there was no molten pools of metal found when many credible people spoke of finding molten pools of metal. 

excellent point,well said.I did not see any kind of kink in there  on that inferiour building either  and like you said,did not see it fall with any semblance of symmetry that the towers fell either.I also did not see any squibs in that building indicating charges were planted nor did I see any steel girders with immense weight being thrown out and landing several blocks away . Nor do you have firemen experienced and familair with explosives being used in buildings saying there that explosives were planted like they did on 9/11.  

Most importantly,all that did was prove that Im right that buildings dont fall downwards at freefall speed.from that pitiful video,all I CANT SEE THE LIGHT proved,was that PARTS of  a building can come down but not the entire structure at the same time in the fact that at least half of that building was still standing,the entire structure did not collapse and dissapear.you can still see part of the structure still standing after that.Boy you hit the nail right on the head,miserable fucking fail is right. See how he always fails and desperatly starts grasping at straws when getting his ass handed to him on a platter?
 see what Im talking about now about  this character?


He also of course ignores the facts that Bush and Cheney proffited immensely from these attacks as did Silverstein and doesnt want to believe it that professors in universitys that if they dont go along with the coverup,they'll get fired like Steven Jones did for speaking the truth.None of this stuff registers with him as you will find out if you try and reason with him.You'll find out that that he only see's what he wants to see.

you would think that after all the ass beatings he has got on this thread he would be too embarrased to come back here when all he does is help prove my point for me in his posts.


----------



## LA RAM FAN (Apr 23, 2012)

x0Maximilian0x said:


> kirkuki said:
> 
> 
> > so it was or wasnt an inside job ?
> ...



I hope he decides to come back and look at that information you posted and what I just posted in reply to him as well.At least he isnt closed minded and only going into it only seeing what he wants to see like I CANT SEE THE LIGHT AND MONTROVENT who as you can see for yousrself,are in that denial mode that you so well explained and mentioned in this post of yours..He at least seems open minded about it that poster that asked that question.


----------



## candycorn (Apr 23, 2012)

daws101 said:


>



Bump.


----------



## LA RAM FAN (Apr 23, 2012)

someone farted in here.


----------



## Liability (Apr 23, 2012)

9/11 inside job said:


> someone farted in here. * * * *



Yes.  You do post frequently.


----------



## Mr. Jones (Apr 23, 2012)

Light said:


> Mr. Jones said:
> 
> 
> > Light said:
> ...



You do understand that the WTC buildings experienced total and global collapse..right? That they were massive and robust structures and 2 of them were designed to withstand extreme forces and even a plane crashing into them?
So your building video is no comparison, and I challenge you to find a structure that under similar circumstances experienced a complete and total global collapse, in such a short time after collapse initiation..like the WTC.

The torch example is something I have experienced at work, you heat the concrete, in time, depending on the temp and proximity to the concrete, concrete will gall and explode and fall away, because it is a POOR  conductor of heat. I have applied heat from a torch, on separate occasions to concrete, and steel and the concrete will gall and pop before a steel channel/beam will reach the temp required to melt.
Concrete is a good insulator against fire, _because_ it is a poor conductor of  heat/flame that may spread to other combustibles, don't get me wrong, but this very same property of poor heat conductibility,
will cause it to gall and explode, revealing whatever steel, or re-barb is encased within it,* depending on temperature and duration of the fire.*
So in some building fires, when this concrete blows off, the usually smaller, thinner and inferior steel components, compared to the WTC, are exposed and depending on temp and duration can cause tensile strength failure of the then exposed steel and perhaps cause a PARTIAL collapse, especially if the concrete is being used to bare the load ALONG with the steel components, but has not ever produced a total, global, symmetrical collapse as witnessed on 9-11, because of steels ability to spread the heat of a fire and channel it to other parts of the buildings steel. 
Thus the only plausible way for the WTC buildings to come down like they did, would be if there was no place left for the steel to dissipate the heat and the initial heat source remained constant and increased, thus increasing the overall temp to all the steel and that did not happen.

And the temps at the WTC are questioned and rightfully scrutinized as being the sole cause of such collapses that were witnessed that day.

Not once in history of modern skyscrapers, has that happened, but we are to believe there is nothing wrong or peculiar about 3 buildings coming down in this fashion in one day?


----------



## Light (Apr 23, 2012)

9/11 inside job said:


> Mr. Jones said:
> 
> 
> > Light said:
> ...



Nice DODGE!
Can't respond to me directly, huh?

Obviously Mr Jones and I disagree about what happened.  But at least he is offering up some information to back-up his opinion.

What have you got?...........oh right........"someone farted in here".......very applicable to the conversation.


----------



## Light (Apr 23, 2012)

Mr. Jones said:


> Light said:
> 
> 
> > Mr. Jones said:
> ...



I do understand that they suffered a global collapse and that they were designed to withstand extreme wind loads.  But as for being designed for a plane impact, they were designed for a much slower impact than they received on 9/11.  Leslie Robertson, one of the designers, has stated that it was designed for a "slow flying" airplane impact.  The difference in a 200mph impact versus a 500mph impact is considerable.  And there is no question that those impacts caused severe structural damage.  That in addition to the fires caused the collapse.  The fires were not the SOLE cause of the collapse in WTC1 & 2.  That's not to say that the fires couldn't have been enough, given enough time without being fought.
It seems that whenever the fire is talked about in relation to the structure, the large core columns and perimeter columns are mentioned as if they were the collapse mechanism.  The floor trusses, which are down right puny compared to supporting structure, are the collapse mechanism.  They sagged, pulling the perimeter columns in.  Once those columns are no longer standing true (can be seen in video of south tower, east side) they have lost structural integrity.  That coupled with perimeter and core column damage done by the impacts, it unreasonable to assume that those buildings could withstand that.
As for WTC7, I understand that no plane struck that building.  And NIST claims that the damage done by the North Tower collapse didn't directly cause the collapse.  But those fires DID burn all day.  They burned all through that building on multiple floors.  And by what I have seen, fires can cause buildings to fail.  I think the Delft building is a good example of that.  As is the building in Madrid that is usually used to show that buildings don't collapse in a fire.  But if you look at all the photos of that, you'll see that the unprotected structural steel collapsed while the steel reinforced concrete was left supporting the building.
So, as far as WTC7 goes, until there is proof that something other than fires did it, that's what I am going to believe.  If evidence ever comes to light that something else occurred, I'll change my stance.


----------



## candycorn (Apr 23, 2012)

Light said:


> 9/11 inside job said:
> 
> 
> > Mr. Jones said:
> ...



Obviously you're wasting your time with paulitician/rimjob.  

Mr. Jones is also a lost cause and cannot synthesize a defense for his beliefs beyond "watch the video" which is no defense at all.

The official pictures taken by the NYPD show building 7 missing up to 18 floors at one corner due to the collapse of the World Trade Centers as well as a raging fire profile.  Obviously the building would have not stood regardless of the fires but the weakened structure fell more quickly due to the fires in the building.

As for WTC 1 and 2, you're spot on correct; they withstood the building impact but the exposed steel and the fires caused the collapse of the structure.  All of this has been explained time and again to the pair of fools you're addressing.  You can lead a horse to water but you can't make them think.


----------



## daws101 (Apr 23, 2012)

Mr. Jones said:


> Light said:
> 
> 
> > 9/11 inside job said:
> ...


----------



## Mr. Jones (Apr 23, 2012)

Light said:


> I do understand that they suffered a global collapse and that they were designed to withstand extreme wind loads.  But as for being designed for a plane impact, they were designed for a much slower impact than they received on 9/11.  Leslie Robertson, one of the designers, has stated that it was designed for a "slow flying" airplane impact.


WARNING!! LONG ASS REPLY POST.

 Leslie E. Robertson, an engineer who helped design the WTC. He is currently a partner at Leslie E. Robertson Associates, a structural consulting firm that was under contract to the WTC at the time of the tragedy. In a keynote address Robertson reportedly told the Structural Engineers Association of Utah that: "...as of 21 days after the attack the fires were still burning and* molten steel still running.*"[3] 
So how did the fires get hot enough to melt steel and continue to burn for months despite using thousands of gallons of Pyrocool?
Despite the strong possibility that combustibles like "paper, carpet and other combustibles packed down the elevator shafts by the tower floors as they 'pancaked' into the basement." And "that cars left in parking garages under the WTC contained gasoline that may have fueled the fires."
"none of these fires were hot enough to melt steel. Indeed, none of the combustibles in the wreckage burned anywhere near the melting point of construction grade steel beams (2800 °F). ...the smoldering fires for the most part were oxygen-starved. 
There is no way to avoid the conclusion that the molten materials under the wreckage, as well as the smoldering fires, were a residual product of whatever caused the collapse of the WTC. Something on September 11, 2001 burned hot enough to melt steel in the basement of both towers."
Hint-It wasn't run of the mill office fires doing that melting, even NIST admitted that most of the Kerosene was consumed by the initial fireball after impact of the planes.
"But as serious as these explosions and fires were, jet fuel simply does not burn with sufficient energy to melt steel***not even close."

"The fact is that jet fuel, which is essentially kerosene, will not burn in air in excess of about 1,000°C (1,832°F)***nowhere near the 2,800°F melting point of steel. Even this 1,000°C upper limit is very difficult to achieve, since, as Thomas Eagar pointed out, it requires the optimal mixing of fuel with oxygen during combustion, which can only be achieved in a laboratory."



> The difference in a 200mph impact versus a 500mph impact is considerable.  And there is no question that those impacts caused severe structural damage.


Back to the design for plane impact-
"Although the WTC's soaring lines gave the impression of a relatively light frame, in fact, the towers were extremely rugged, engineered to withstand hurricane-force winds and to survive a direct hit by a Boeing 707, the largest commercial jetliner of the day. In a 1993 interview the WTC's principal structural engineer, John Skilling, stated that prior to construction he performed an impact analysis of a 600 mph Boeing 707 impact, and concluded "that the building structure would still be there."[28] 

"Frank A. Demartini, onsite manager during the construction of the WTC, seconded this view during a January 25, 2001 interview, in which he noted that the study involved "a fully loaded 707." Demartini even declared that *"the building probably could sustain multiple impacts of jetliners *because this structure is like the mosquito netting on your screen door, this intense grid, and the jet plane is just a pencil puncturing that screen netting."[30] Demartini kept an office in the North Tower and was last seen on 9/11 assisting evacuees on the 78th floor.[31] "



> That in addition to the fires caused the collapse.  The fires were not the SOLE cause of the collapse in WTC1 & 2.  That's not to say that the fires couldn't have been enough, given enough time without being fought.


 Sure there were multiple examples of erroneous reporting and speculation of how the steel turned into "licorice" or spaghetti or whatever but that has been shown to be false.
And you still don't comprehend that these fires were not hot enough to cause this huge tower to go from stable to instantaneous total descent ..fire does not work that way. Even FDNY firefighters radioed that they weren't that bad and in one instance called for 2 hoses to 'knock it down"
And explain the people standing in the gaping whole where the airliner entered? Were there fires? You bet your ass, but NOT enough to cause the rapid global descent in just a little over free fall acceleration.
So if the fires DID reach the temp point to cause this melting and pooling that burned for 3 months, it wasn't from normal office fire combustibles, and the melted steel Leslie Robertson and others talked about could not have come from that.




> It seems that whenever the fire is talked about in relation to the structure, the large core columns and perimeter columns are mentioned as if they were the collapse mechanism.


 It seems people forget just how fucking massive they really were, and how the further down they went ..the bigger they got! Some people act like they should not have provided _some_ resistance, and forget they only provided minimal resistance that resulted in the towers falling way faster then, given the physics, should have.
"In fact, the WTC had tremendous reserve capacity. An early article about the project in the Engineering News-Record declared that "live loads on these [perimeter] columns can be increased more than 2,000 percent before failure occurs."[33]" 
The top structure descending into the lower portion would have been met with equal force initially, thus slowing the descent, and there was none! It collapsed just short of freefall.
The top portion fell right through the more robust lower portion almost unimpeded. Even a lowly high school physics teacher called NIST out on that.


> The floor trusses, which are down right puny compared to supporting structure, are the collapse mechanism.  They sagged, pulling the perimeter columns in.  Once those columns are no longer standing true (can be seen in video of south tower, east side) they have lost structural integrity.  That coupled with perimeter and core column damage done by the impacts, it unreasonable to assume that those buildings could withstand that.


"Because the NIST did not have the necessary facilities, it contracted Underwriter Laboratories to conduct a series of fire endurance tests on trusses like those in the WTC. (The recovered truss samples were too badly deformed during the collapse to test them directly, so NIST fabricated new trusses identical in design.) The purpose of the tests was to establish a baseline, and the results were surprising. Not one of the truss assemblies failed during a series of four tests, not even the truss sprayed with the minimum amount of fireproofing. "The floors continued to support the full design load without collapse for over two hours."[52]
The UL tests not only laid to rest the theory that the trusses were the cause of the collapse on 9/11, if anything, the tests demonstrated the fundamental soundness of the WTC truss design." 

 Even if they could not withstand that, you must still take into account the resistance the lower floors that were not structurally compromised at the time, and take into account the time it should have taken to achieve this total global collapse, compared to what we witnessed. 
Each truss assembly-concrete floor behaved as a single unit. 
NIST has neglected the law of conservation of momentum by not explaining how the huge mass of the building provided virtually no resistance at all to the upper part of the building.
Also the problem with the puny truss theory is that one can clearly see "that during each collapse, perimeter columns and other structural members didn't simply fall to the ground. In many cases they were ejected up and out of the disintegrating structure at nearly a 45 degree angle: a cascade that hurled steel beams weighing 20 tons or more as much as 600 feet from the base of the buildings."

You can't even add those massive pieces of the towers that were ejected and PULVERIZED and claim they contributed to the weight smashing down on the lower portion..because they were...ejected away from them and fucking turned to dust!



> As for WTC7, I understand that no plane struck that building.  And NIST claims that the damage done by the North Tower collapse didn't directly cause the collapse.  But those fires DID burn all day.  They burned all through that building on multiple floors.


Have you bothered to watch any videos of the WTC7 before it fell down in a heap? Seriously "multiple fires" on " multiple floors"?
"Enough to cause such an implosion like collapse? BS.
Besides omitting and otherwise falsifying evidence, NIST also committed the type of scientific fraud called fabrication, which means simply &#8220;making up results.&#8221;[49]
They lied about the shear studs, and the fires and what floors they were on and what time the 12th floor fire went OUT. They also lied about the lack of freefall acceleration until called out on it and still haven't had the balls to come back and try to explain THAT, nor give up their computer data for others to try and replicate!



> And by what I have seen, fires can cause buildings to fail.  I think the Delft building is a good example of that.  As is the building in Madrid that is usually used to show that buildings don't collapse in a fire.  But if you look at all the photos of that, you'll see that the unprotected structural steel collapsed while the steel reinforced concrete was left supporting the building.


Of course fires can cause buildings to fail, but not fucking implode in on themselves producing 2.25 secs of fucking freefall!
Have you read about the Madrid fire? Do you realize how long the motherfucker burned? And yet..still DID NOT IMPLODE OR COLLAPSE TOTALLY TO THE FUCKING GROUND.
NIST has not explained anything, in fact they lied their asses off and distorted facts, and data. Have you not read ANY rebuttals that counter NISTS claims?



> So, as far as WTC7 goes, until there is proof that something other than fires did it, that's what I am going to believe.  If evidence ever comes to light that something else occurred, I'll change my stance.


The people that were charged with finding out let you me and everyone else down miserably. I'm not out to convince you only to recommend that you seriously read with an open mind and some courage what many credible experts, FDNY and other witnesses say about the events of that day, in particular the physics experts explain the various laws that NIST did not take into account, and  how steel loses its strength and how long it takes.

Dead On Arrival
Official theory of 9/11 WTC tower near-free-fall collapses violates Laws of Physics - a knol by Michael Fullerton
Building What? How SCADs Can Be Hidden in Plain Sight: The 9/11 "Official Story" and the Collapse of WTC Building Seven
http://www.journalof911studies.com/volume/2008/TheMissingJolt7.pdf


----------



## daws101 (Apr 23, 2012)

Mr. Jones said:


> > Light said:
> >
> >
> > > I do understand that they suffered a global collapse and that they were designed to withstand extreme wind loads.  But as for being designed for a plane impact, they were designed for a much slower impact than they received on 9/11.  Leslie Robertson, one of the designers, has stated that it was designed for a "slow flying" airplane impact.
> ...


----------



## Mr. Jones (Apr 23, 2012)

daws101 said:


> Mr. Jones said:
> 
> 
> > > Dead On Arrival
> ...


----------



## Mr. Jones (Apr 24, 2012)

candycorn said:


> Light said:
> 
> 
> > 9/11 inside job said:
> ...



I provided the poster with valuable links that describe the basis that formed the opposition to the OCT (official conspiracy theory) as told to us about the attacks of 9-11. Simply because you have your head still up your ass and refuse to pull it out, does not always mean others do.
The OCT is based on a false premise that 19 Muslims commandeered planes, that they infiltrated the worlds most heavily defended air space, and achieved a 75% success rate in hitting their targets, all while the nation was coincidentally running war games, AND the only people arrested on 9-11 were Israeli in a van with explosives.
Most of 9-11 story as told by your leaders and those covering their asses is and has been shown to be mostly a fabrication, with many dubious and disingenuous parts of the fable proven to be lies.
All one has to do is look around them and see the world they live in for what it is, a control grid and 9-11 was the taser used to manipulate the US and the worlds populations to accept authoritative control methods, for the purpose of controlling world resources, and economies, and people like you are one of the biggest
threats as you use a human beings natural and conditioned instincts to lead them or keep them manipulated and blind to reality.
You have used every imaginable fallacy here on USMB and elsewhere on the internet to spread disinformation, and ridicule those who think for themselves instead of relying on conditioned, manipulative thought.


----------



## Light (Apr 24, 2012)

Mr. Jones said:


> Dead On Arrival
> Official theory of 9/11 WTC tower near-free-fall collapses violates Laws of Physics - a knol by Michael Fullerton
> Building What? How SCADs Can Be Hidden in Plain Sight: The 9/11 "Official Story" and the Collapse of WTC Building Seven
> http://www.journalof911studies.com/volume/2008/TheMissingJolt7.pdf




Lolyou were right.that was a LONG reply.  But I appreciate the detail.

The molten metal evidence doesnt seem to go anywhere.  By all accounts, there was indeed molten metal in the debris pile.  But what metal was it?.......steel, aluminum, or any combination of many different materials in those buildings?  And the fact that the debris pile was a least 6-8 stories deep, fires burning under there would undoubtly get hot enough to melt metals.  And dont forget that there were cars, generators and transformers in the basement of those buildings.  All of those have combustible materials in and/or attached to them.   So, all of these combustible materials, covered by tons of steel and concrete to insulate it, would turn into pretty efficient oven.
And what is the implication that you believe the molten metal indicates?  An incendiary device cutting the core columns?  If that is the implication, you HAVE seen that the cores stood until after the buildings had collapsed around them.  That and the fact that a few people survived the North Tower collapse in the core, proves that the cores were not cut at the bottom.  And if the implication is that the incendiary was used at the initial collapse zone, then there is the obvious problem of the device surviving the airplane impacts.

As for the buildings collapse, I cant believe the free fall fallacy is still a subject for discussion.  They clearly didnt fall at free fall.  There was debris hitting the ground with the building still visible.  Thus the debris was clearly out pacing the collapse of the building.  The best evidence of time it took is a video that was filmed from within the North tower during the South tower collapse.  You can hear the collapse for approx. 18 seconds.  And thats not considering that the actual moment of collapse would have been just before they could hear it.
And the 2000 percent increase in live load before failure is obviously inaccurate.  No building carries that kind of reserve capacity.  3-4 times the live load is a more standard figure. 
There seems to be a large misunderstanding of how these buildings were constructed.  That would be my first suggestion to anyone that wants to understand how they fell, is to learn how they went up.  Yes they had massive core columns.  But there were no massive beams that connected these columns to the perimeter columns.  The floor trusses are what connected the two.  The size of the core columns is irrelevant.  They were only holding the floors at the ends, not providing support under them.  The core columns could have been 16 sq. & solid..it wouldnt have changed how the floors disconnected from them.  Now if the perimeter columns had been about twice the thickness and the truss seats had been considerable larger, then that might have made some difference.  Although, that would probably make the build TOO rigid and not respond well to wind loads.

As for the plane impacts, there seems to be a conflicting statements on what was considered regarding the speed of the planes.  Robertson says slow flying or landing speed.  Skilling says 600mph impact with the fuel being dumped into the building being the major problem.  Demartini, who was not a designer of the building, but the building construction manager, doesnt reference the speed of the aircraft.  And his assertion that it could take multiple impacts is purely a guess on his part.  He is not making a statement based on what was considered in the design of the building.  He is stating his opinion of the sturdiness of the building.  The building wasnt DESIGNED to take multiple impacts.  The designers did not consider planes being intentionally flown into them.  The bomber that crashed into the Empire State Building is what spurred the consideration for aircraft impacts.

WTC7 IS a difficult one to understand.  And I dont pretend to understand it completely.  The build was on fire ALL day.  I have read dozens of firemans quotes stating the condition of the building after the towers collapsed and up until it itself collapsed.  The large majority state that the building was damaged by the fall of WTC1 and that there were fires all through the building.  The words fully involved were used repeatedly.  Firemen stated that the building was creaking and groaning very early on.  And that there was a bulge on the (I believe) west side at approx. the 12th floor.  They state that they were staying away from it because they, in their professional opinion, felt the build was unstable.
As for NISTs report, I dont believe that they got everything right.  But it would be pretty damn hard to write a perfect report on something like that.  Too many unknowns considering the building was empty all day and nobody can testify as to what was going on inside.

I appreciate the links.  One of them I had not read before.


----------



## daws101 (Apr 24, 2012)

Mr. Jones said:


> candycorn said:
> 
> 
> > Light said:
> ...


quit spamming the thread with bullshit,


----------



## Liability (Apr 24, 2012)

daws101 said:


> Mr. Jones said:
> 
> 
> > candycorn said:
> ...




It wasn't "orbs."

It was "gerbils."

Richard Gere started the coverup.

It started with an empty roll of toilet paper.

You could look it up.


----------



## LA RAM FAN (Apr 24, 2012)

Hey I CANT SEE THE LIGHT,thanks for showing that you have pathetic memory problems as bad as Candyass does.You clearly dont understand english and what the phrase "-im done with you means." that I mentioned several pages back.That I stopped reading your ramblings several pages back and got tired of your nonsense like that pathetic video as your latest dodge. alzheimers diseace is something that seems to be common with you agents.

Your obviously the newest agent to have penetrated this site.The ones in denial dont keep coming back with pathetic ramblings like yours and for constant ass beatings.You have exposed you are the newest agent to come here.You guys handlers sure are getting desperate.

better check  into that memory course program sometime.Your so stupid you dont get it that the farting thing was aimed at your fellow agent Candyass that I have had on ignore for years now.Guess it escaped you that i did it soon after he posted.have fun talking to yourself.Thats something you obviously love to do here on this thread with me.


----------



## LA RAM FAN (Apr 24, 2012)

Mr. Jones said:


> Light said:
> 
> 
> > I do understand that they suffered a global collapse and that they were designed to withstand extreme wind loads.  But as for being designed for a plane impact, they were designed for a much slower impact than they received on 9/11.  Leslie Robertson, one of the designers, has stated that it was designed for a "slow flying" airplane impact.
> ...



as always,I CANT SEE THE LIGHT gets his ass handed to him on a platter and can only sling shit in defeat like the monkey troll he is and is doing now. They sure pay these agents well the way they constantly keep coming back for their constant ass beatings.


----------



## candycorn (Apr 24, 2012)

candycorn said:


> Light said:
> 
> 
> > 9/11 inside job said:
> ...




Bears Repeating.


----------



## Montrovant (Apr 24, 2012)

Aww, I'm gone for 4 days and this is all I get?  I was hoping for more fun.


----------



## Liability (Apr 25, 2012)

Montrovant said:


> Aww, I'm gone for 4 days and this is all I get?  I was hoping for more fun.



Nah.

This is the place where certified loons gather to inform the world that they have uncovered another exciting YouTube video which conclusively establishes that there is a real problem with the NIST explanation and that, accordingly, the 9/11/2001 attacks against us must have been (I mean "were") an insider job.

Hilarity ensues.


----------



## Light (Apr 25, 2012)

9/11 inside job said:


> as always,I CANT SEE THE LIGHT gets his ass handed to him on a platter and can only sling shit in defeat like the monkey troll he is and is doing now. They sure pay these agents well the way they constantly keep coming back for their constant ass beatings.



You know, these discussions/debates can be looked at like a game.  Team CT vs. Team OS.  And you have officially become the CHEERLEADER for Team CT.  You dont have the balls or the brains to play the game.but you DESPERATELY want to be on the field.  So you have a choice.  You can sit there like a good girl, while the men are talking.  Or you can take the skirt off and grab a fucking helmet!
We both know which one YOU are going to do.


----------



## Toro (Apr 25, 2012)

Light said:


> 9/11 inside job said:
> 
> 
> > as always,I CANT SEE THE LIGHT gets his ass handed to him on a platter and can only sling shit in defeat like the monkey troll he is and is doing now. They sure pay these agents well the way they constantly keep coming back for their constant ass beatings.
> ...



No, no. Without 9/11 inside nutjob, who else would supply us with such blinding insights and towering intellectual arguments such as "watch these 347 YouTube videos?"


----------



## LA RAM FAN (Apr 25, 2012)

Toro said:


> Light said:
> 
> 
> > 9/11 inside job said:
> ...



Translation-I Toto am a chickenshit coward like all Bush dupes are afraid to take 9/11 up on his challenge he gives me everytime when he asks me to look at videos because I know I cant refute the facts and evidence in them so like the troll I am,I make pathetic posts like this instead of admiiting i cant counter any of the information in there so i can feel good about myself cause I realise I would not last one minute in against a grade school graduate with my pathetic debating skills I have.


----------



## LA RAM FAN (Apr 25, 2012)

Montrovant said:


> Aww, I'm gone for 4 days and this is all I get?  I was hoping for more fun.



By thanking Toto for his patheitc post,you Just prove like him and all Bush dupes in denial and afraid of the truth like he is,that you only see what you want to see and close your eyes and cover your ears when vidoes are shown to you.congrats.

See Montrovant,thats how its easy as hell to see that you and Toto are not agents like I CANT SEE THE LIGHT AND CANDYASS.You two do the smart thing and dont come back and embarrasss yourselfs constantly all the time and constantly come back for ass beatings in your posts all the time like those two trolls do and constantly exposing you dont know anything at all about the laws of physics.You both do the smart thing in your posts and pretty much prove in them that you cant think up of any ramblings to try and get around the evidence,facts and witness testimonys by just coming back admitting that you wont watch videos instead of lying saying you watched them.

You guys dont get paid to troll like they do,so you dont try and counter anything knowing you are defeated.Knowing that you wont get paid to embarrass yourselfs,you two dont come back for any ass beatings.


----------



## Toro (Apr 25, 2012)

9/11 inside job said:


> Toro said:
> 
> 
> > Light said:
> ...



lol

This is 9/11 inside nutjob's best argument!


----------



## Toro (Apr 25, 2012)

FTR 9/11 inside nutjob once thought a clip from The Onion was the real thing.


----------



## Light (Apr 25, 2012)

Toro said:


> FTR 9/11 inside nutjob once thought a clip from The Onion was the real thing.



That was one of the funniest damn things I have ever seen one here!!


----------



## LA RAM FAN (Apr 25, 2012)

Toro said:


> 9/11 inside job said:
> 
> 
> > Toro said:
> ...



This is Toto admitting like always, he is a chickenshit coward who wont watch videos.


nuff said.


----------



## daws101 (Apr 25, 2012)

9/11 inside job said:


> toro said:
> 
> 
> > light said:
> ...



put me in coach!!


----------



## Mr. Jones (Apr 25, 2012)

> Lolyou were right.that was a LONG reply.  But I appreciate the detail.


 It's difficult to research something like this with so many variables, conflicting facts and tons of info from both camps that one must dig into the details. It's like opening a door that leads to another and so on...



> The molten metal evidence doesnt seem to go anywhere.  By all accounts, there was indeed molten metal in the debris pile.  But what metal was it?.......steel, aluminum, or any combination of many different materials in those buildings?  And the fact that the debris pile was a least 6-8 stories deep, fires burning under there would undoubtly get hot enough to melt metals.  And dont forget that there were cars, generators and transformers in the basement of those buildings.  All of those have combustible materials in and/or attached to them.   So, all of these combustible materials, covered by tons of steel and concrete to insulate it, would turn into pretty efficient oven.


Correct by all accounts there was a shitload of combustibles, but the thermal imaging that recorded temps, and witnesses on the ground including Robertson and others and the difficulty using Pyrocool, suggests something much hotter then these things could produce by themselves. Also, most fires go out in time as it needs oxygen, and
"all of these combustible materials,* covered by tons of steel and concrete to insulate it,* would turn into pretty efficient oven." Doesn't cut it, as it would have smoldered and gone out sooner then 3 months..like covering a fire with something impeding oxygen flow.



> And what is the implication that you believe the molten metal indicates?  An incendiary device cutting the core columns?  If that is the implication, you HAVE seen that the cores stood until after the buildings had collapsed around them.  That and the fact that a few people survived the North Tower collapse in the core, proves that the cores were not cut at the bottom.  And if the implication is that the incendiary was used at the initial collapse zone, then there is the obvious problem of the device surviving the airplane impacts.


This is the crutch of the problem, As you know some claim to have found the thermitic materials that could certainly explain this, especially since thermitic materials can burn underwater and can burn with out the aid of oxygen since it had its own.



> As for the buildings collapse, I cant believe the free fall fallacy is still a subject for discussion.  They clearly didnt fall at free fall.  There was debris hitting the ground with the building still visible.  Thus the debris was clearly out pacing the collapse of the building.  The best evidence of time it took is a video that was filmed from within the North tower during the South tower collapse.  You can hear the collapse for approx. 18 seconds.  And thats not considering that the actual moment of collapse would have been just before they could hear it.


It is said the buildings fell _close_ to freefall speed, not actually _at_ freefall speed, with the exception of WTC7 that has been calculated to have fallen for 2.25 secs at freefall, which NIST initially denied, then it seems excepted, but not ever explained.
NIST spokesmen went to great lengths to explain its impossibility, correctly saying the buildings collapse would be met with resistance, but then as they said " a miracle happened" and I guess we can't explain miracles eh? Or 2.25 secs of freefall as measured from the corner roofline.



> And the 2000 percent increase in live load before failure is obviously inaccurate.  No building carries that kind of reserve capacity.  3-4 times the live load is a more standard figure.


 I always felt that statement was an exaggeration as well, but he said it and I've yet to be introduced to anything countering what he said, or any corrections made on his part...Still it's all about the resistance that gets me doubting, that and the molten metal rubble fires...



> There seems to be a large misunderstanding of how these buildings were constructed.  That would be my first suggestion to anyone that wants to understand how they fell, is to learn how they went up.  Yes they had massive core columns.  But there were no massive beams that connected these columns to the perimeter columns.  The floor trusses are what connected the two.  The size of the core columns is irrelevant.  They were only holding the floors at the ends, not providing support under them.  The core columns could have been 16 sq. & solid..it wouldnt have changed how the floors disconnected from them.  Now if the perimeter columns had been about twice the thickness and the truss seats had been considerable larger, then that might have made some difference.  Although, that would probably make the build TOO rigid and not respond well to wind loads.


Funny when the things were built they were state of the art and ruggedly built, then when they fall down in just under free fall times they were POS 



> As for the plane impacts, there seems to be a conflicting statements on what was considered regarding the speed of the planes.  Robertson says slow flying or landing speed.  Skilling says 600mph impact with the fuel being dumped into the building being the major problem.  Demartini, who was not a designer of the building, but the building construction manager, doesnt reference the speed of the aircraft.  And his assertion that it could take multiple impacts is purely a guess on his part.  He is not making a statement based on what was considered in the design of the building.  He is stating his opinion of the sturdiness of the building.  The building wasnt DESIGNED to take multiple impacts.  The designers did not consider planes being intentionally flown into them.  The bomber that crashed into the Empire State Building is what spurred the consideration for aircraft impacts.


 Again, the high speed impacts of the planes and they still withstood that long enough for people to get out, but then they are still called inferior and expected to collapse at just over freefall speeds. So which is it?
The Empire State indeed was the reason for designing plane impacts into them, and the speed would have been less at cruising or landing, not necessarily takeoff I'd imagine, but anyway I thought about that as well, and realized that the plane was basically an aluminum rocket can  against all that steel....and figure that is why they stood then... something happened.



> WTC7 IS a difficult one to understand.  And I dont pretend to understand it completely.


 Thank NIST for that, hell they can't explain it honestly without opening up some very severe implications, and possibly folks losing their jobs...or perhaps they were told that "due to reasons of national security" were to explain as best they could with fire as the only permissible explanation? Why wont they release the computer data for replication?


> The build was on fire ALL day.  I have read dozens of firemans quotes stating the condition of the building after the towers collapsed and up until it itself collapsed.  The large majority state that the building was damaged by the fall of WTC1 and that there were fires all through the building.


I have no doubt it was on fire all day, but doubt the intensity and locations, again thanks to NIST.



> The words fully involved were used repeatedly.


In what context tho? A fully involved fire meaning all personnel available? One part of the building? I've also heard the term " fully involved" when it comes to Luck Larry.. All videos and pics don't
reveal a "fully involved" building on fire if that's what you mean.



> Firemen stated that the building was creaking and groaning very early on.  And that there was a bulge on the (I believe) west side at approx. the 12th floor.  They state that they were staying away from it because they, in their professional opinion, felt the build was unstable.


Well the NIST report most people point to as the best explanation clearly states that physical damage by the tower/s was not the cause of collapse, they were on stuck on the fire scenario for reasons unknown.


> As for NISTs report, I dont believe that they got everything right.  But it would be pretty damn hard to write a perfect report on something like that.  Too many unknowns considering the building was empty all day and nobody can testify as to what was going on inside.


 Millions in taxpayer funds went into the biggest investigation in the nations history and they fucked it up pretty bad IMO.
Check one of the links I posted regarding SCADS, it contains some valid points criticizing the NIST.
Sadly one of the persons "died" who was inside and contradicted the tower collapse times and explosions etc.



> I appreciate the links.  One of them I had not read before.


 No problem, link whatever you got as well, I like different views of this shit. It's a good way to learn more about it, and prove or disprove "facts" and exercise the mind a bit


----------



## Mr. Jones (Apr 25, 2012)

daws101 said:


> 9/11 inside job said:
> 
> 
> > toro said:
> ...



Naw you just continue cheerleading with your turd gifs and wotnot kid..That's what your best at anyway..


----------



## daws101 (Apr 25, 2012)

Mr. Jones said:


> daws101 said:
> 
> 
> > 9/11 inside job said:
> ...


excellent retort pottsie


----------



## Montrovant (Apr 25, 2012)

9/11 inside job said:


> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> > Aww, I'm gone for 4 days and this is all I get?  I was hoping for more fun.
> ...



The difference, of course, is that I don't think you are giving any 'ass beatings' to anyone.  If anyone is embarrassing themselves, it would be you.  Your inability to coherently put together sentences regularly, your terrible writing skills, your insistence that anyone who disagrees with you is ignoring the 'truth' or doesn't understand the laws of physics or any of the other phrases you spout over and over don't, in my mind, constitute any sort of 'ass beatings'.

Even should 9/11 have been perpetrated by the US government, your posts do little to make the idea seem credible.  You come off as so ridiculous it makes it hard to take anything you might say seriously, however true it may be.


----------



## Obamerican (Apr 26, 2012)

9/11 inside job said:


> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> > Aww, I'm gone for 4 days and this is all I get?  I was hoping for more fun.
> ...


----------



## eots (Apr 27, 2012)

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BVFZu97fWbU&feature=g-vrec]9 11 THE BIG CLUE EVERYONE MISSED - YouTube[/ame]


----------



## Rat in the Hat (Apr 27, 2012)

eots said:


> 9 11 THE BIG CLUE EVERYONE MISSED - YouTube


----------



## Rat in the Hat (Apr 27, 2012)

eots said:


> 9 11 THE BIG CLUE EVERYONE MISSED - YouTube



[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VoIFUJxJwcQ&mode=related&search=]DS9: Sacrifice of Angels Fleet Battle - YouTube[/ame]


----------



## Rat in the Hat (Apr 27, 2012)

eots said:


> 9 11 THE BIG CLUE EVERYONE MISSED - YouTube



[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D7FNGWsjj_Y&feature=related]Nuclear destruction of the WTC - YouTube[/ame]


----------



## Rat in the Hat (Apr 27, 2012)

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ulYzZ0r7sHY&feature=related]HOW IS BABBY FORMED - YouTube[/ame]


----------



## daws101 (Apr 27, 2012)

eots said:


> 9 11 THE BIG CLUE EVERYONE MISSED - YouTube


guess eot's is in loop mode again.


----------



## Liability (Apr 27, 2012)




----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Apr 27, 2012)

eots said:


> 9 11 THE BIG CLUE EVERYONE MISSED - YouTube



Find that guy at 1:05 and get his tax forms! 
See who he works for!
Of course, he's probably already dead.


----------



## LA RAM FAN (May 8, 2012)

eots said:


> Man claims black SUVs fled New York hour before first plane hit on 9/11 - YouTube



wow that is some interesting stuff.Thanks for posting that Eots.I finally had a chance to go back and watch this video.I didnt before because I was spending too much time arguing with the trolls which I am done with now since its only been the same ones over and over again coming on here.so that being the case,I now have time to go back and watch these videos.

You always find some excellent ones out there and this one is no exception.I sure would like to have been  a fly on the window in one of those black SUV cars that he described to know what all that was about.That is some interesting shit there.Thats a red flag like the Israeli dancers dancing on the cars celebrating the towers going down that were amazingly released and able to return home. Thats a new one that I had not heard about before.thanks again.


----------



## LA RAM FAN (May 8, 2012)

Toddsterpatriot said:


> eots said:
> 
> 
> > 9 11 THE BIG CLUE EVERYONE MISSED - YouTube
> ...



This is a post showing that you are clearly in denial that this kind of stuff goes on in america with your stupid smiley there.Yeah nobody ever gets killed off for knowing too much.Your too much in denial and afraid to come to grips that thats exactly what they did to the guy,kill him off and make him disappear Todd is a parrot..

That guy was obviously paid very well to come on there and sprout off his propaganda speech they rehearsed with him and had him memorzie the lines just like an actor dumbfuck,then after he did what he was paid for,they obviously killed him off.


----------



## LA RAM FAN (May 8, 2012)

eots said:


> 9 11 THE BIG CLUE EVERYONE MISSED - YouTube



great idea,maybe if you show it to the trolls enough times it will register with them.

Doubt it though,cant reason with someone who only sees what they want to see and is in denial.Thats why I hope someone new for a change comes on instead of the usual trolls that have posted on this thread.


----------



## Rat in the Hat (May 8, 2012)

It's time for 9/11 Rimjob to make another post about poop.


----------



## LA RAM FAN (May 8, 2012)

eots said:


> New 9/11 Eyewitness Evidence of Bombs at WTC - YouTube



another great video you posted Eots that I notice all the trolls ignored as usuaul. They ignore it since it exposes the 9/11 coverup of course.

I see that agent Moron In The Hat has quickly come here to fart as well  like his handlers pay him to.

Funny how quickly the troll got back on this thread after I acknowledged Eots excellent videos.

His handlers sure are worried about all these videos Eots has been putting out that someone like that one poster that came on  a few pages back who was open minded and asked if it was an inside job,they are obviously worried that someone like them will see these videos Eots has posted and worried they will get convinced the fact they sent him here so quickly. You sure do an excellent job exposing that your an agent Rat. seems like any other government thing that someone talks about that happened a long time ago,your not worried about them talking about that,only the truth on 9/11.


----------



## Liability (May 8, 2012)

Rat in the Hat said:


> It's time for 9/11 Rimjob to make another post about poop.



And then 9/11 Rimjob promptly took another shit in this ridiculous thread.

RITH called it!


----------



## Rat in the Hat (May 8, 2012)

9/11 inside job said:


> eots said:
> 
> 
> > New 9/11 Eyewitness Evidence of Bombs at WTC - YouTube
> ...


----------



## LA RAM FAN (May 8, 2012)

still ANOTHER fart from the troll. Yep,your handlers sure are worried the fact they sent you here so quickly agent.


----------



## Rat in the Hat (May 8, 2012)

9/11 inside job said:


> still ANOTHER fart from the troll. Yep,your handlers sure are worried the fact they sent you here so quickly agent.



Behold! I am the...


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (May 8, 2012)

9/11 inside job said:


> Toddsterpatriot said:
> 
> 
> > eots said:
> ...



Why are we supposed to give anymore credence to an "idiotic man on the street" remarks than we do to you and the other "idiotic man in the forum" remarks?

Yeah, I'll be convinced when you produce proof of his death.
Hurry up now, moron.


----------



## Obamerican (May 8, 2012)

9/11 inside job said:


> eots said:
> 
> 
> > Man claims black SUVs fled New York hour before first plane hit on 9/11 - YouTube
> ...


This is a prime example of why I still read this little worm's posts.
#1. The stupid fuck always accuses others of not watching video links that are posted and then admits he hasn't watched this one. And why? Because he's "been too busy" handing ass beatings to everyone. Would someone please post a link to any post where this stupid fuck has beat anyone's ass at anything?
#2. He is now done with handing out those so-called ass beatings yet he will continue to say that that is what he's been doing.
#3. This stupid pole smoker constantly talks about all of the information and videos that he has and watched and researched and this is the first time he's heard about the "dancing Israelis"?

Once again the KING of the SHIT EATERS is caught being himself: A fucking fool.

Go fuck yourself, Rimjob.


----------



## LA RAM FAN (May 8, 2012)

two farts in a row from the trolls.


----------



## LA RAM FAN (May 8, 2012)

eots said:


> 9/11 First Responder Speaks: WTC 7 Exposed - YouTube



another smoking gun that the agent trolls ignored because they cant refute it.I love how they dodge these videos.


----------



## LA RAM FAN (May 8, 2012)

eots said:


> Jonathan Barnett - forensic engineer for WTC7 collapse - YouTube
> 
> 
> Erik Lawyer - Firefighter - AE911Truth.org - YouTube



still more evidence the trolls ignored.no surprise.


----------



## daws101 (May 8, 2012)

9/11 inside job said:


> eots said:
> 
> 
> > Jonathan Barnett - forensic engineer for WTC7 collapse - YouTube
> ...


nothing to ignore, shit eater
as it's not evidence, but a an 11years old story the proves nothing.


----------



## LA RAM FAN (May 8, 2012)

eots said:


> WTC 7 fires and south side hole - YouTube
> 
> 
> Bad Ass Skyscraper Fires and Destruction!! Awesome!! - YouTube





Great video.No wonder the trolls did not comment about this video or made up shit to avoid defeat like that one new disinfo agent did,because they cant get around the fact those buildings unlike bld 7 were lit up like a torch and burned for hours but did not collapse. the trolls always like to ignore the fact that the other bulidings MUCH closer to the towers had far more extensive damage done to it and had far worse fires yet they remained standing.


the one I'll NEVER live down though is when that new agent troll came on here and tried to defend the fairy tales of the government after i said that buildings emitting black smoke dont fall at freefall speed all he did was prove my case true for me and crippled his arguments HELPING me prove my case by posting this video here.

LiveLeak.com - Delft University of Technology in Holland on fire and collapsing

Comedy gold since like i said,all he did was cripple his arguments and prove me right  with his OWN post that buildings dont collapse at free fall speed.part of the structure falling doesnt count. The structure itself remained standing,only a PART fell. Like Mr Jones said so well and hit the nail on the head on,MAJOR FAIL. and a major dodge as well. I'll never live that one down.Boy what these agents will do when grasping at straws to try and save face in their posts.


----------



## Rat in the Hat (May 8, 2012)

9/11 inside job said:


> eots said:
> 
> 
> > WTC 7 fires and south side hole - YouTube
> ...



[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eEhDZN0RFjw&feature=rec-exp_fresh+div-1f-46-HM]You fail - YouTube[/ame]


----------



## LA RAM FAN (May 8, 2012)

and here comes an agent sent by his handler to shit all over the floor again to try and avoid defeat like the monkey troll he is.


----------



## daws101 (May 8, 2012)

9/11 inside job said:


> eots said:
> 
> 
> > WTC 7 fires and south side hole - YouTube
> ...


----------



## Rat in the Hat (May 8, 2012)

9/11 inside job said:


> and here comes an agent sent by his handler to shit all over the floor again to try and avoid defeat like the monkey troll he is.



And another fact filled post from 9/11 Rimjob, living proof that there is no evil conspiracy.

After all, if there were all powerful organizations that could kill 3,000 people in complete secrecy, what's to stop them from killing one more?


----------

