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

[Triton]

You arent doing a very good job countering my "blatant Lies" you simply say they are such

 

[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.

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?

So you are saying the BBC lied in its article about the hijackers being alive? Just like it was pretending to report that WTC 7 had collapsed while the building astood behind them in the background?

But i'm sure you believe that it was just because it was "a chaotic" day

 

[Triton]

LOL

My "blatant lie" that the Planes were in the air for an hour and a half without being intercepted


LOL


You still havent even addressed 93's debris field, not conducive to a plane crash, sorry do not pass go!

 

[Triton]

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.

Now you are starting to sound like a tin foil hat conspiracy theorist

 

[Patriot911]

Did WTC 7 not have a total collapse?

And you wonder why I call you truthtards truthtards. It's because you're FUCKING RETARDED! You had a 47 story building with a small footprint. A prime candidate for a collapse. WTC 4 and 5 were 9 stories tall. WTC 6 was an 8 story building. Funny how you stupid fucks think all buildings should react the same despite differences in construction, materials, and circumstances.

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

And?

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.

So WTC 4, 5, 6, and 7 were specifically targeted by the terrorists? Wow! Please present your evidence of this oversight by the 9/11 commission! GOD you are one stupid fuck!

And what caused those incisions in the picture? Patriot911

What.... you couldn't read? That explains a lot!

 

[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.

Now you are starting to sound like a tin foil hat conspiracy theorist

Uh huh. That's the best you can do in response? I showed the obvious flaws in your picture and all you can do is say I am sounding like a conspiracy theorist? Pathetic!

 

[Patriot911]

You arent doing a very good job countering my "blatant Lies" you simply say they are such

Really? So prove Flight 77 took 83 minutes from the time it diverted off course to the time it hit the Pentagon.

So prove ANY flight took an hour and a half from the time it diverted until impact as you claimed.

So prove no other plane impact looked like Flight 93.

So prove no other debris field was 8 miles like Flight 93.

You're the one making the bullshit claims. You run away like a scared little bitch when confronted by the truth and then try to explain your ass getting kicked by pretending all I did was say they were lies. That's all you have left, bitch! Excuses!

 

[Patriot911]

So you are saying the BBC lied in its article about the hijackers being alive?

Nope. They reported what they heard from their office in the Middle East. Every report of "alive" hijackers by ANY credible source occured before the pictures came out of the hijackers. Once the people claiming to be the people the FBI was talking about didn't match the photographs, the jig was up.

Now go ahead and produce one of these alive hijackers. Go ahead! It would instantly disprove the entire government story. What? You can't? Nobody has even LOOKED for them? Why, that's just AMAZING!!!

Just like it was pretending to report that WTC 7 had collapsed while the building astood behind them in the background?

Lots of mistakes were made on 9/11. Remember Dan Rather reporting a car bomb going off in front of the state department?

But i'm sure you believe that it was just because it was "a chaotic" day

You have evidence to the contrary? Was 9/11 a very well ordered day with everything going smoothly? I assume you can prove every story had plenty of time for vetting to insure journalistic integrity, right? I mean, all these news agencies wanted to make sure they got everything right vs. telling everyone what was going on as it was reported, right?

I look forward to you producing a single shred of evidence to back up your bullshit. If you wish to keep going, I can dive a lot deeper. Depends on how much punishment you want to take.

 

[Patriot911]

LOL

My "blatant lie" that the Planes were in the air for an hour and a half without being intercepted


LOL


You still havent even addressed 93's debris field, not conducive to a plane crash, sorry do not pass go!

Wrong again, fucktard! I showed you an almost identical accident that produced a nearly identical crash scene INCLUDING an eight mile debris field.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ff7h7Ll8Dl4]YouTube - PSA Flight 1771: Eerily Similar To Shanksville[/ame]

Here it is again. Watch it this time. Maybe next time you won't embarass yourself so much! Well, never mind. We all know you will. BTW, start the video at the 4 minute mark. Still want to pretend the debris field of Flight 93 was impossible? Still want to pretend planes were in the air for an hour and a half after altering course? Or do you want to man up and admit you were wrong?

 

[SFC Ollie]

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.

You have got to be shitting me.

If you look hard enough you will see workers clearing the debris piles making these cuts.

Please make my day and tell me that you think this was part of your controlled demolition.

 

[SFC Ollie]

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?

So you are saying the BBC lied in its article about the hijackers being alive? Just like it was pretending to report that WTC 7 had collapsed while the building astood behind them in the background?

But i'm sure you believe that it was just because it was "a chaotic" day

Gee i wonder how many Bob Smiths live in NYC?
Probably about as many as there are Muhamad Hajii In Saudi Arabia......

 

[SFC Ollie]

Damn patriot, did you scare him off before i could get a piece?

 

[Patriot911]

Damn patriot, did you scare him off before i could get a piece?

Don't worry. He is WAAAAAY too damn stupid to know when he's had his ass kicked so hard he has to take his hat off to take a shit. He'll be back.

 

[candycorn]

-The towers fell at a rate just short of no resistance, a fraction below free fall. This is indisputable and has been demonstrated repeatedly.

So according to you, you lied earlier. How not surprising. Not accurate in this case either by the way.



Most experienced pilots are not trying to crash their plane into a building either.
The light poles prove it was a 757; the wreckage proves it was AA77. Your post proves You're full of shit.


Craters occur when heavy objects hit the earth. Not surprised by large debris fields caused by explosions...you shouldn't be either unless you're a dumbfuck. World, please meat Mr. Dumbfuck.


Bullshit. 2 years ago or so, pilots overshot MSP by an hour. Nobody shot them down or even scrambled aircraft. You're full of shit boy.

-Thermite samples were taken from ground zero and have been studied, you're statement is insane.

The samples didn't come from ground zero; there is no chain of custody.

And even the pieces of shit pulled from all over manhattan were
Not studied by real scientists with no agenda to follow

-The crater wasn't that large, nothing that indicates the plane crashed on the ground,how did debris spread 8 miles from the crater?

-At least you admitted the towers fell at near free fall speed, which is conducive of a controlled demolition.

-Who cares about a plane overshooting MSP 2 years ago. If you were referring to the one diverted by storms back in '09, this was coordinated by Air Traffic Control unlike the 4 planes on 9/11. Hows that shit taste?

-Then where did the scientists obtain the dust samples that provided evidence of a thermite reaction? Are you accusing them of falsifying their study?


You can't come up with any reasonable argument against the OVERWHELMING evidence that the buildings were brought down by controlled demolition.

Instead you will send me a PM telling me to go fuck myself. The last resort of a fool with no argument

Gee take your proof to court if you've got it. Oh wait, you're just a chickenshit cocksucker who knows full well you'll get your ass handed to you.

I would love it if just one of you dumbasses would just admit that you are only here to get attention that nobody in your real life will give to you.

What the fuck ever...

Buildings did not fall at free fall speed. Fact.
No thermite was ever found at ground zero. Fact.

Gee dumbfuck; what happened; you said within 15 minutes NORAD would have the plane surrounded. The "e-mailing pilots" overshot MSP by over an hour. Face it, you don't know what the fuck you're talking about.

Thanks for the battin' practice though.

Fuck off and die.

 

[Triton]

Patriot911, I addressed my errors concerning the time discrepancies you pointed out regarding Flight 77 in the other post. Still doesn't explain the 15 ft. hole or the confiscated and lack of video evidence that would clearly show the jet, but since you say the Pentagon is not heavily defended there must not be much surveillance there so there probably isn't any other video evidence, right?

The good thing about you debunkers is I am once again, after quite a hiatus, looking over the evidence. Sometimes memory isn't sufficient and when I am going to "debate" you I must focus on the issues that have the greatest evidence and the least speculation. That is easily by far the collapse of WTC 7, you just can't make a coherent argument against controlled demolition in the case of WTC 7.

But feel free to sling insults and use name calling instead of actually challenging the assertion that WTC 7 collapsed by controlled demolition to continue to highlight just how truly vile you are. (With the exception of Ollie who is not obscene)

Now since you all piled on with a load of bullshit I will attempt to address all your points in one post.

Showing a single plane crash similar to Flight 93 in no way disproves the plausibility that due to its debris field Flight 93 was shot down. I can show you multiple land based commercial airplane crashes that reveal a semblance of a plane

On to WTC 7

The picture, one of many. Those are textbook controlled demolition cuts found after the buildings collapsed Why? Because the buildings and the manner in which they collapsed (near free fall symmetrical total collapse into the foundation leaving pools of molten steel -NOT DISPUTABLE-) lead to the obvious conclusion of controlled demolition.

You are accusing researchers who have obtained samples from the towers that conclude with a thermitic reaction of falsifying your studies. Well who the hell are you?

You curse at me and say i'm full of it yet not a single one of you can challenge the overwhelming evidence of WTC 7's controlled demolition collapse. Pancake theory, progressive collapse, fires on a few floors melting steel, its all crap.

Why not, in your own words, explain to us all how WTC 7, not hit by a plane, with sporadic fires AND I REPEAT SPORADIC FIRES AS IN THAT WAS THE REALITY, and a gash on the south side, caused a total symmetrical near free fall collapse, (do you accept near free fall Candy?, WTF did I ever do to you do draw out such disgusting words from you)

I await your response, or I mean drivel, from you vile creatures.




Ollie, at least you haven't called me every obscene name in the book or slung insults at me.

For calling you delusional, I apologize. I merely disagree with your perspective and conclusions on the events of 9/11.

 

[SFC Ollie]

Well, if you actually have any proof let me know.

There were no "Those are textbook controlled demolition cuts" sorry but your picture showed cuts made by rescue/recovery workers.

And there is no other physical evidence that shows 7WTC was a controlled demolition. There is a picture which you cannot datestamp. And there is some off the wall opinions.

You make statement of opinions as if they were facts. Sorry but that doesn't prove anything. Physical evidence that would be presentable in court....You got none....

 

[Patriot911]

Patriot911, I addressed my errors concerning the time discrepancies you pointed out regarding Flight 77 in the other post. Still doesn't explain the 15 ft. hole or the confiscated and lack of video evidence that would clearly show the jet, but since you say the Pentagon is not heavily defended there must not be much surveillance there so there probably isn't any other video evidence, right?

Wow! You got it!

First off, the 15 foot hole is slightly larger than the diameter of a 757. Second, the hole was much larger according to the official reports. 75' in fact. Just wasn't round. Was more flattened. You know.... plane shaped.

Second, why would the Pentagon have external cameras on an unused side of the Pentagon pointed at the sky? Seriously.

The good thing about you debunkers is I am once again, after quite a hiatus, looking over the evidence.

Well, that's good because your memory isn't shit! You've gotten almost everything wrong OR you're outright lying about it. Either way, you're still a piece of shit.

Sometimes memory isn't sufficient and when I am going to "debate" you I must focus on the issues that have the greatest evidence and the least speculation.

Still waiting for you to produce an actual piece of evidence. So far you've produced zero.

That is easily by far the collapse of WTC 7, you just can't make a coherent argument against controlled demolition in the case of WTC 7.

Sure I can. The complete lack of evidence one would have if there was a controlled demolition. You claim it was a controlled demolition yet there is zero evidence other than your retarded opinion that it was a controlled demolition.

But feel free to sling insults and use name calling instead of actually challenging the assertion that WTC 7 collapsed by controlled demolition to continue to highlight just how truly vile you are. (With the exception of Ollie who is not obscene)

Want to know why I call you a piece of shit? Because I truly and honestly think you and the rest of your truthtard buddies are pieces of shit. Literally. I have zero respect for fucks like you who wish to spread lies while trying to let the real culprits of 9/11 slide. I have zero respect for little bitches like you who want to use the deaths of three thousand Americans to push your anti-American agenda and pretend anyone / everyone is guilty other than Al Qaeda. You don't like it? Tough shit. I am going to continue to expose your lies and bullshit for what they are.

Now since you all piled on with a load of bullshit I will attempt to address all your points in one post.

Really? So far all you've done is dug a deeper hole.

Showing a single plane crash similar to Flight 93 in no way disproves the plausibility that due to its debris field Flight 93 was shot down. I can show you multiple land based commercial airplane crashes that reveal a semblance of a plane

Your whole argument was based on the bullshit lie that no other plane crash was like 93, thus it was faked. The fact that there IS another crash almost identical to flight 93 proves you are full of shit. Even if it were true not a single other crash was like Flight 93 and Flight 1771, it still makes your argument pure bullshit because the crash has precidence.

On to WTC 7

The picture, one of many. Those are textbook controlled demolition cuts found after the buildings collapsed Why? Because the buildings and the manner in which they collapsed (near free fall symmetrical total collapse into the foundation leaving pools of molten steel -NOT DISPUTABLE-) lead to the obvious conclusion of controlled demolition.

Yeah, I love how you say "not disputable", yet you can't actually produce any evidence to back up your bullshit. Why is that? Yes, the fall was near freefall, AS ONE WOULD EXPECT if one understands the physics behind a collapse of that magnitude. It didn't fall into the foundation as you've already admitted. If it fell into the foundation, it wouldn't have damaged the buildings next to it. And you've yet to produce either a molten steel chunk nor a valid source that could identify any molten substance as steel.

You are accusing researchers who have obtained samples from the towers that conclude with a thermitic reaction of falsifying your studies. Well who the hell are you?

Thermitic reaction. A MATCH is a thermitic reaction, numbnuts! They proved it WASN'T thermite. The reaction occured at too low a temperature and there wasn't enough energy released. Learn how to read.

You curse at me and say i'm full of it yet not a single one of you can challenge the overwhelming evidence of WTC 7's controlled demolition collapse. Pancake theory, progressive collapse, fires on a few floors melting steel, its all crap.

According to a piece of shit proven liar like you. MEANWHILE, the experts all agree. Gee, this isn't even hard! Come on. The NIST reports are examined in great detail WORLDWIDE for accuracy because codes are changed due to the studies. Not one credible agency or group has ever claimed the NIST is full of shit. That is all on the shoulders of you stupid fucks led by an architect, not an engineer.

Why not, in your own words, explain to us all how WTC 7, not hit by a plane, with sporadic fires AND I REPEAT SPORADIC FIRES AS IN THAT WAS THE REALITY, and a gash on the south side, caused a total symmetrical near free fall collapse, (do you accept near free fall Candy?, WTF did I ever do to you do draw out such disgusting words from you)

What did you do? How about lying your ass off and using the deaths of three thousand Americans to push an anti-American agenda sound? So, yes. You deserve everything you get. Hope you like it toasty in hell! Oh right. You don't believe in Hell. How convenient!

Again, why should we believe a piece of shit liar like you when the firefighters who were there claim it was far more than 7 or 8 floors with sporadic fires? Hell, common sense tells one that a "sporadic fire" would burn itself out or spread, not stay still for eight hours. Yet you want everyone to believe nothing happened..... even though there are videos of the entire south face of the building belching smoke. How does that happen with sporadic fires on only a couple floors?

WTC7 smoke

Does this look like sporadic fires on 7 or 8 floors?

I await your response, or I mean drivel, from you vile creatures.

Really? I would think a liar like you would dread people coming along and exposing you for the piece of shit that you are. But hey. Here it is. Now run away like the little bitch you are. So far your entire argument amounts to pure denial. Real classy there, bitch!

Ollie, at least you haven't called me every obscene name in the book or slung insults at me.

For calling you delusional, I apologize. I merely disagree with your perspective and conclusions on the events of 9/11.

Awww.... the poor little bitch got his widdle feewings hurt! If you can't stand the heat in the kitchen.....

BTW, if you look back, you were the first to cast stones. Sucks to be a loser like you!

 

[Triton]

At least you acknowledge that WTC 7 fell at near free fall speed, have you admitted it was symmetrical, Patriot911?

My explanation is in line with the laws of physics, controlled demolition.

I have still yet to hear your explanation, in your own words. Patriot911.

Not just "Read the NIST" report. Nope doesn't cut it, If I can offer my explanation, controlled demoliton, which is in conjunction with the evidence, you should be able to give your explanation as easily if it is so simple and obvious.

But you won't, you will just throw another lame insult without any substance.

There was molten steel at ground zero, take a look at my response to the other post, i can provide more video, photographic, and scientific evidence if you'd like.

In the meantime, do these firefireghters testimony count? I can provide more eyewitness testimony of the molten steel if you'd like.



Molten Metal Flows at Ground Zero

Please Patriot911, I'm having fun with you and your irate insane responses. Don;t give yourself too much credit. As if I care what kind of garbage you spew at me on this messageboard. The sole purpose of me continuing the "debate" is to make you look even more like a irate, ranting, lunatic as it progresses.

You are vile though, along with Candycorn, who basically just jumped in on this thread to tell me to you know what and also claim the buildings didn't fall at free fall speed. Even though the mathematical calculation for the fall of the buildings has been repeatedly demonstrated and shows what the buildings speed of collapse would be with no resistance to it and the speed of the actual collapse was almost identical, just a fraction of a second off. Way to go genius.

 

[Triton]

um, sporadic fires on 7-8 floors do cause smoke, whats your point?

 

[Triton]

Anti-America agenda?

At what point did I ever say anything that was anti-american?


9/11 has been the justification for 2, now 3 illegal wars and the Patriot Act, which is not good for a constitutional republic.

IS there some speculation in terms of theories of 9/11? Of course. Nobody has all the answers. But there is certainly enough evidence that suggests the official story is at least not entirely accurate.


If there's even a slight possibility that 9/11 was an inside job, it requires further examination and closure. Our debate is irrelevant as there are millions and millions of americans that question the official story, in fact there are more people that do not support the official theory than there are people who support it, as i said before, you are now in the minority.