9-11, 19 insanely motivated Saudis with pocket knives, nothing else

[SFC Ollie]

I have always maintained that the 911CR and the NIST got the main parts correct.

Nothing there that is difficult to understand.

And the only part of 7 WTC that fell at anything near free fall was the Facade, for a whole 2 seconds. I suppose that is rather easy when the interior of the building has already collapsed.

 

[Triton]

I wonder how molten steel found its way into wtc 7.

hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm?

Surely sporadic fires on 7-8 floors melted the steel, right Ollie et al?

 

[Triton]

Where exactly in the 9/11 commission report does it mention WTC 7?

 

[Patriot911]

Be careful what you wish for Patriot911



Let's start with WTC 7, the most obvious

The Second Law of Thermodynamics implies that the likelihood of complete and symmetrical collapse due to random fires is very small as asymmetrical failure is far more likely.

Only a fucking joke like you can get that out of the movement of energy from a high to a low!

The building had only 7-8 floors with sporadic fires on it, this is not sufficient to cause a total symmetrical free fall collapse of a 47 story steel framed building.

According to who? A known proven liar like yourself? Let's see. The NIST, a world wide recognized expert on investigative engineering says it is. Not one credible organization or agency has questioned their findings in any material way in regards to WTC 7. There are several reports that disagree with the NIST findings on the towers though. They found through their calculations that the fires alone were enough in that circumstance to bring down the towers.

So who do we listen to? Known, proven liars like you and the rest of the truthtards who are NOT experts? Or the known experts in the field? That isn't a hard one.

HOWEVER, a controlled demolition is sufficient in causing a total symmetrical free fall collapse of a 47 story steel framed building

So why don't you have any evidence of a controlled demolition? Where are the explosions? Where is the evidence? Where are the beams and structures cut by all the explosives? Come on. Not even a simpleton of your massive ignorance can ignore the complete lack of evidence to back up your claim! Oh wait. Sorry. Forgot the type of person I was talking to. Of COURSE you can ignore it! You're not after the truth! You're out to push your anti-American agenda!

There's one, ready for another?

Bring it on. So far you've failed miserably.

Unless of course you don't believe the building had a total symmetrical free fall collapse 8 hours after not being impacted by a plane, which you probably don't.

It burned for 8 hours. What is the rating of most structural fire retardant that prevents collapse due to steel being exposed to heat? Answer that question and maybe you will understand why everyone points at you and laughs.

 

[Mr. Jones]

Is this clown for real?

Do we really have to back up and debunk all this BS again?

There is no overwhelming evidence of a controlled Demolition.

You and the other trolls have NEVER debunked ANYTHING, you are a delusional fool.

 

[Patriot911]

Where exactly in the 9/11 commission report does it mention WTC 7?

Why would a report on the attack mention the collapse of a building that was not part of the attack? WTC 7 was no more a target than WTC 4, 5 or 6. Why doesn't the 9/11 commission report mention WTC 4, 5, or 6? They were all destroyed as well.

 

[Patriot911]

Is this clown for real?

Do we really have to back up and debunk all this BS again?

There is no overwhelming evidence of a controlled Demolition.

You and the other trolls have NEVER debunked ANYTHING, you are a delusional fool.

Keep writing from La la land you fucking joke! Still waiting on just one piece of evidence you claim to have tons of.

 

[Patriot911]

I wonder how molten steel found its way into wtc 7.

hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm?

Surely sporadic fires on 7-8 floors melted the steel, right Ollie et al?

Prove there was molten steel. No steel was ever recovered that was in the shape of a molten pool of steel. Or are you going to pretend that everyone at ground zero is a trained metalurgist so good they can determine the composition of a molten metal from a single glance?

 

[Mr. Jones]

Where exactly in the 9/11 commission report does it mention WTC 7?

These trolls ignore facts and believe the unsupported theories of agents of an entity that has a track record of lying, while discrediting the findings of scientists with no connections to the lying entity, and nothing to gain but everything to lose including having to endure slanderous accusations, and in some cases losing their jobs, and risking their own lives.
They say that the WTC 7 "burned" for 8 hrs. however they ignore the sporadic placement of the fires that are alleged to have caused the building to come down in such a uniform and straight down manner.
They continue to believe a government agency and employees of the defendant, even after they were forced to retract, and change their "official accounts" numerous times.
These "coincitards" are truly either the dumbest bunch of assholes, or the most loyal of agent plants, thank God they are in the minority.


Stop The Lie - The 9/11 lie is in critical condition

Also only a dimwit would believe that the interior of a massive building will collapse with much havoc, while the outside visible part of the structure shows no sign of this at all, as if the interior components were not connected to the rest of the building.
They also ignore the witnesses and evidence that counters the official fantasy to such a degree that looks like a mental defect or cognitive dissonance disorder.
I had one idiot write page long diatribes saying that the WTC 7 did not fall straight down because the penthouse fell first!

 

[Triton]

Since painfully obvious photographic and video evidence is not sufficient for the esteemed Patriot911

Why don't you read the FEMA report for yourself.

You see, that report at least mentions the collapse of WTC 7 unlike the 9/11 commission report.

"Would you like to hear some more?"

 

[Triton]

Trolls or not, by continuing to make them look foolish a more neutral observer will be able to examine the evidence and see for themselves just how ridiculous they, and their support of theories without any basis in reality, truly are.

 

[Triton]

Here Patriot 911

Please Explain the reason for these cuts in the WTC rubble.

I'll give you a hint, it wasn't caused by the "Pancake" Theory.

 

[Triton]

Oh wait, YOU, PAtriot911, do not accept observable photographic evidence as legitimate.

NEVERMIND

 

[Patriot911]

Since painfully obvious photographic and video evidence is not sufficient for the esteemed Patriot911

Why don't you read the FEMA report for yourself.

You see, that report at least mentions the collapse of WTC 7 unlike the 9/11 commission report.

"Would you like to hear some more?"

The FEMA report, like the NIST reports, were made about the collapses. The 9/11 commission report was about the attack, the events that led up to it, and what can be done to prevent more attacks. Until you are able to recognise this very VERY simple fact, you will never be more than a truthtard.

 

[Godboy]

Since painfully obvious photographic and video evidence is not sufficient for the esteemed Patriot911

Why don't you read the FEMA report for yourself.

You see, that report at least mentions the collapse of WTC 7 unlike the 9/11 commission report.

"Would you like to hear some more?"

Im with you. I believe we should only look at this picture and ignore all other evidence. This is the most logical way of investigating things.

 

[Patriot911]

Here Patriot 911

Please Explain the reason for these cuts in the WTC rubble.

I'll give you a hint, it wasn't caused by the "Pancake" Theory.

So when was the picture taken? Why is it you dishonest fucks have to pretend everything was taken RIGHT AFTER THE COLLAPSE and nothing else could have possibly been done to anything. Those photographs have been gone over time and time again. The diagonal cut is a textbook plasma cutter torch job.

Explosives don't cut like that. See the molten slag at the bottom? Explosives cut via pressure, NOT heat.

Thermite doesn't cut like that. See that precise cut? Thermite cuts by MELTING steel. Not even close.

You lose. AGAIN.

 

[Patriot911]

Oh wait, YOU, PAtriot911, do not accept observable photographic evidence as legitimate.

NEVERMIND

Wrong again. When will you stop with the bullshit lies? What I WON'T do is just accept a photograph is what you say it is without actually LOOKING at the photograph and using common sense.

Do we know when the picture was taken? We know it wasn't taken right after the collapse. That means demolition crews could have been in there working.

Now, if demolition crews hadn't been there, don't you think all those people standing around wouldn't have looked at that and questioned it? Of course they would have! You don't see something like that at the base of a collapse.

But you think everyone but you truthtards are idiots and can't think things through. Unfortunately for you, we can.

 

[Patriot911]

Trolls or not, by continuing to make them look foolish a more neutral observer will be able to examine the evidence and see for themselves just how ridiculous they, and their support of theories without any basis in reality, truly are.

Really? Like your blatant lie about no other accident looking like Flight 93 in Shanksville? You ran away from that debate like the scared little bitch that you are.

How about your blatant lie that the planes were in the air for an hour and a half without being intercepted? Ran away from that debate too as soon as you saw you got your ass handed to you yet again.

Or how about the "alive" hijackers? That's always good for a laugh! If you stupid fucks actually believed that you would have been all over the Middle East looking for them. Did anyone even TRY? Nope. Why not? Because you stupid fucks KNOW they aren't alive, yet insist on repeating the same tired old lies time and time again. What... you think nobody notices these things?

 

[Triton]

Did WTC 7 not have a total collapse?

The other buildings suffered much greater structural damage yet did not collapse.

EXACTLY, its omission from the 9/11 report suggesting it was not part of the attack and all the years spent by NIST trying to come up with some way to support its version of science which contradicts the FEMA report are all the reasons why you and you're ilk are now the fringe minority standing alone by the fable.

And what caused those incisions in the picture? Patriot911

 

[Triton]

Since painfully obvious photographic and video evidence is not sufficient for the esteemed Patriot911

Why don't you read the FEMA report for yourself.

You see, that report at least mentions the collapse of WTC 7 unlike the 9/11 commission report.

"Would you like to hear some more?"

Im with you. I believe we should only look at this picture and ignore all other evidence. This is the most logical way of investigating things.

As if this one picture is the only piece of evidence. Please