A Sad Day for Truthers......Another 9-11 Aniversary

[eots]

Biggest waste of 3 minutes.

Ordinary office fire? This is what your video claimed.

Even you have to admit there was nothing ordinary about that day.

the day.. no.. the office fire was unremarkable compared to many

How many office fires are allowed to burn un fought?

The sprinkler system required manual initiation of the electrical fire pumps, rather than being a fully automatic system; the floor-level controls had a single connection to the sprinkler water riser; and the sprinkler system required some power for the fire pump to deliver water. Also, water pressure was low, with little or no water to feed sprinklers.

Fires burned into the afternoon on the 11th and 12th floors of 7 World Trade Center, the flames visible on the east side of the building.[30][31] During the afternoon, fire was also seen on floors 6–10, 13–14, 19–22, and 29–30.[4] In particular, the fires on floors 7 through 9 and 11 through 13 continued to burn out of control during the afternoon.[32] At approximately 2:00 p.m., firefighters noticed a bulge in the southwest corner of 7 World Trade Center between the 10th and 13th floors, a sign that the building was unstable and might collapse.[33] During the afternoon, firefighters also heard creaking sounds coming from the building.

And all this is unremarkable and normal to office building fires? Really? Are you sure that's what you want to go with here?

yes the fires were random and concentrated on a few floors and there have been many fires that burned out of control fully engulfed for days with no collapse

 

[eots]

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

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

 

[SFC Ollie]

Once again, comparing different buildings of different construction to each other is just like apples and oranges. When you can produce physical evidence of a controlled demo we can talk. But you've got nothing but some secondary explosions which are normal, and you've got opinion. Which is great, we've all got at least one of those.

 

[eots]

once again, comparing different buildings of different construction to each other is just like apples and oranges. When you can produce physical evidence of a controlled demo we can talk. But you've got nothing but some secondary explosions which are normal, and you've got opinion. Which is great, we've all got at least one of those.

so you concede the fires to unremarkable compared to others then..so now you blame the design of the wtc 7 so would it not be logical to assume that all buildings of similar design are at risk of collapse due to office fires and major building code changes would be required ?

 

[georgephillip]

No dumb fuck, to bring down a building that is larger than any other controlled demo in history it would take engineers to place charges in specific spots and fire them at specific intervals. If they didn't the building wouldn't drop nearly straight down. What we see here is a pancaking effect without the sound of those synchronized explosions. Not sporadic explosions but synchronized, as in a real controlled Demo.

Are we in agreement a crime was committed on 9/11/01?

"The normal procedure to discover the truth about any crime involves asking these two questions.

* Who benefited from the crime?
* Who had the capacity to carry out the crime?

Every legitimate investigation of a crime asks these questions. Answers are used to obtain a list of suspects. These questions were not publicly asked following the attack. Instead, one suspect was provided on the day of the attack, and no other suspects were ever considered."

It's probably worth asking why that one suspect still hasn't been charged for the 911 attacks?

It seems to me patriots would be calling for that investigation immediately, if not sooner.

9-11 Research:

 

[SFC Ollie]

once again, comparing different buildings of different construction to each other is just like apples and oranges. When you can produce physical evidence of a controlled demo we can talk. But you've got nothing but some secondary explosions which are normal, and you've got opinion. Which is great, we've all got at least one of those.

so you concede the fires to unremarkable compared to others then..so now you blame the design of the wtc 7 so would it not be logical to assume that all buildings of similar design are at risk of collapse due to office fires and major building code changes would be required ?

I don't concede shit. there is nothing unremarkable about the fire in wtc7. It was not just an ordinary office building fire. I said secondary explosions were normal. And they are.

 

[SFC Ollie]

No dumb fuck, to bring down a building that is larger than any other controlled demo in history it would take engineers to place charges in specific spots and fire them at specific intervals. If they didn't the building wouldn't drop nearly straight down. What we see here is a pancaking effect without the sound of those synchronized explosions. Not sporadic explosions but synchronized, as in a real controlled Demo.

Are we in agreement a crime was committed on 9/11/01?

"The normal procedure to discover the truth about any crime involves asking these two questions.

* Who benefited from the crime?
* Who had the capacity to carry out the crime?

Every legitimate investigation of a crime asks these questions. Answers are used to obtain a list of suspects. These questions were not publicly asked following the attack. Instead, one suspect was provided on the day of the attack, and no other suspects were ever considered."

It's probably worth asking why that one suspect still hasn't been charged for the 911 attacks?

It seems to me patriots would be calling for that investigation immediately, if not sooner.

9-11 Research:

There have been several investigations, and at least one well known trial.

 

[eots]

YES JUST LOOK AT THAT BUILDING ABLAZE !!

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VTy3RYDj0lk&feature=PlayList&p=FC2C98C8C8AEA63C&index=0&playnext=1]YouTube - WTC7 Demolition on 9/11 - Zoomed View from NW[/ame]

 

[Tom Clancy]

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_kSq663m0G8&feature=player_embedded]YouTube - 9/11 Debunked: WTC 7's Collapse Explained[/ame]

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IwdD6ERutEI&feature=player_embedded]YouTube - But WTC 7 Wasn't Hit By A Plane![/ame]

 

[georgephillip]

Why hasn't the FBI charged bin Laden with the attacks of 9/11?

 

[SFC Ollie]

Why hasn't the FBI charged bin Laden with the attacks of 9/11?

Why don't you ask them?

 

[DiveCon]

Why hasn't the FBI charged bin Laden with the attacks of 9/11?

why didnt the FBI charge Admiral Isoroku Yamamoto for Pearl Harbor?

 

[SFC Ollie]

YES JUST LOOK AT THAT BUILDING ABLAZE !!

YouTube - WTC7 Demolition on 9/11 - Zoomed View from NW

Yes just look at it from the other side. The side the conspiracy sites never show you.

 

[Flopper]

What happened?

Nine years and the truthers have not unearthed a single smoking gun. Where are the millions of people they promised who would join their movement?

How many pathetic souls will be out protesting on 9-11?

Truthers will not get a single media story

In regards to "No Smoking Gun", why hasn't the FBI charged Osama with the attacks of 9/11/2001?

Millions of people around the planet have expressed a desire for an independent investigation into 9/11 with public testimony under oath and subpoena power to compel testimony.

Do you think Dick and Dubya are hiding anything about the mass murder of nearly 3000 Americans that occurred on their watch?

"Pathetic souls" like these are protesting the coverup every day of the year.

Do you honestly believe all questions surrounding the attacks have been asked, much less answered adequately?

Conspiracy theories make for good movies, however they are rather poor subjects for intelligent discussion. I will stick with Occam's razor, the simplest explanation is usually the correct one.

 

[eots]

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IwdD6ERutEI&feature=player_embedded[/ame]



AGAIN ACASE OF A DENIER NOT EVEN KNOWING THE CONCLUSIONS OF THE OFFICIAL STORY HE CLAIMS TO SUPPORT..NIST CONCLUDED THAT DAMAGE TO WTC 7 PLAYED NO SIGNIFICANT ROLE IN THE COLLAPSE OF THE WTC 7..IT WAS THE ONLY WAY TO GET THE COMPUTER MODEL TO CREATE A SYMMETRICAL CTOLLAPSE...GOOFBALL




The Federal Emergency Management Agency released a report in 2002 that noted, "The performance of WTC 7 is of significant interest because it appears the collapse was due primarily to fire, rather than any impact damage from the collapsing towers

NIST report likewise notes, "This was the first known instance of the total collapse of a tall building primarily due to fires." It adds, "WTC 7 was unlike the WTC towers in many respects. It was a more typical tall building in the design of its structural system. It was not struck by an airplane. The fires in WTC 7 were quite different from those in the towers. Since WTC 7 was not doused with thousands of gallons of jet fuel, large areas of any floor were not ignited simultaneously. Instead the fires in WTC 7 were similar to those that have occurred in several tall buildings where the automatic sprinklers did not function or were not present. These other buildings did not collapse, while WTC 7 succumbed to its fires."
OpEdNews - Article: NIST Releases Long-Awaited Report on WTC7

 

[georgephillip]

Why hasn't the FBI charged bin Laden with the attacks of 9/11?

Why don't you ask them?

Lack of evidence is the last official FBI response I'm aware of.

 

[georgephillip]

YouTube - 9/11 Debunked: WTC 7's Collapse Explained

YouTube - But WTC 7 Wasn't Hit By A Plane!

These videos don't mention the 2.25 seconds of free fall acceleration WTC7 displayed "for a distance of over 100 feet - at least eight stories that even NIST was eventually forced to acknowledge.

"In its final report NIST reversed itself on its denial of free-fall, but it
couched its revised statement in deceptive language and failed to address
how free-fall could be compatible with its fire-induced progressive collapse
analysis.

"For the observed straight-down collapse, a thick network of heavy steel columns and beams, had to be forcibly removed and more than 400 structural steel connections had to fail per second,
evenly all across each of the eight floors involved.

"These failures had to occur ahead
of the collapsing section – NOT caused by it
– because a free-falling object cannot exert
force on anything in its path without slowing
its own fall."

Republic Magazine #16 P.23

 

[SFC Ollie]

So anyone have that audio tape yet?

 

[rightwinger]

So anyone have that audio tape yet?

If you play it backwards it says......"Inside Job...Inside Job"

either that or it says

"Truthers are morons...truthers are morons"

 

[candycorn]

YES JUST LOOK AT THAT BUILDING ABLAZE !!

YouTube - WTC7 Demolition on 9/11 - Zoomed View from NW

Yes just look at it from the other side. The side the conspiracy sites never show you.

And it's so fucking hilarious that every one of the creeps loves to play "gotcha" with their easily debunked "evidence"