Barbara Olsen 9/11 phone calls 0 minutes.

[eots]

liarabilty

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s8Vod1N11VY[/ame]

 

[CurveLight]

"The passengers could be a group of college students off on a holiday . . ."

Yes, that's how Americans talk about going away on vacation.

That's it exactly!

You're a fucking super loser. Do you know who the source of that "Americans don't say off on a holiday" justification is? Holy shit you're retarded! Look:


Author: Carol Valentine

"Study the last sentence in that quote.* "The passengers could be a group of college students off on a holiday ....."* See anything wrong with here? *Well, Americans don't use the expression "off on a holiday."* That is a British expression.* Americans say "on vacation."
Operation Northwoods: The Counterfeit



That same person said in October 2001 all 9E planes were never hijacked by terrorists but were robotic remote controlled mock ups:

"There were no "suicide" pilots on those September 11 jets.* The jets were controlled by advanced robotics and remote-control technology, not hijackers."
Operation 911: NO SUICIDE PILOTS


So you're following the lead of clearly one of the craziest twoofers out there!

ROTFL! I'd say take your head out of your ass but clearly you don't know where one ends and the other begins. HAHA!

 

[Liability]

liarabilty

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s8Vod1N11VY

id-eots:

We all already know what the bogus document pretends to say.

You remain vapid and pointless.

 

[DiveCon]

NIST didn't say fires did it? Cows on jupiter are laughing! How in the fuck is it possible OCTAs are the most vocal and at the same time the most incredibly ignorant about that day? Hell, being the least informed is probably exactly why they do accept it.

because they didnt say FIRES ALONE you dumbfuck

What the fuck is wrong with you? Even when NIST says it's the first time fire is known to have caused the collapse you try to say it wasn't? Fucking classic OCTA!

it NEVER SAYS FIRE ALONE
what is it with troofers and the lack of reading comprehension?????

 

[CurveLight]

I didn't GET pwnd and certainly not by anything your pety little retarded mind came up with, you pussy fucktard.

There is a difference (one an asshole such as you is unlikely to ever grasp) between claiming you are right (as you always do) and BEING right (which you almost never are).

Operation Northwoods is a bogus piece of shit. Someday, with luck, Bamford might even own up.

But nice way to dodge the POINT of what I had previously posted. Clever girl, ya slimey fucktard.

Well let's look at this for evidence from both sides.

Evidence it is bogus:

Some random queen on a message board says it is bogus.


Evidence it is genuine:


http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/news/20010430/northwoods.pdf

Pentagon Proposed Pretexts for Cuba Invasion in 1962

Gee...tough call.

This just proves shit stains like you don't give a fuck about honesty.

Hey fucktard:

Scenario: a bunch of shit lying in file cabinets in the Pentagon get unsealed and released as per a FOIL request and a document review. Inserted into the shit is a fraudulent document. Those folks unsealing and declassifying and releasing and disseminating the shit in the file cabinets may not even be aware that some person or persons conspired together to plant the bogus document in with all the other genuine documents.

Did that happen? I dunno. I wasn't there that day. BUT there is at least one great clue: The document on its faces seems to provide a hint that it is bogus. Happy holiday!

Further evidence that mindless shitstains such as you and the other Troofers don't give a rat's ass about such things. If a document even SEEMS to put the US in a bad light and if it supports in ANY way the fantasy conspiracy shit you love to espouse, then it's GREAT and GENUINE and that's all she wrote.

You fucktard shitstain asslickers are all the same.

ROTFL!!! Thank you for showing how pathetic you become when facts prove you wrong. You are actually claiming the ON documents are a CONSPIRACY FRAUD???? And you make fun of people who question the OCT? The Northwoods documents were de-classified long BEFORE 9E!

ROTFL!!!! You have to be the biggest fucking loser. No, wait. You're always neck in neck with divecon, fizz, ollie, etc.

 

[DiveCon]

No diveconmoron building fires are the official collapse theory and for good reasons if the structural damage was factored into the computer model a symmetrical collapse was impossible to simulate so it became not a factor because it did not fit...that's called NIST science

following an extensive, three-year scientific and technical building and fire safety investigation. This was the first known instance of fire causing the total collapse of a tall building, the agency stated as it released for public comment its WTC investigation report and 13 recommendations for improving building and fire safety.
Our study found that the fires in WTC 7, which were uncontrolled but otherwise similar to fires experienced in other tall buildings, caused an extraordinary event,”

computer simulations show that neither explosives nor fuel oil fires played a role in the collapse of WTC 7,” Sunder said. The NIST



Finally, the report notes that “while debris impact from the collapse of WTC 1 initiated fires in WTC 7, the resulting structural damage had little effect in causing the collapse of WTC 7.” NIST WTC 7 Investigation Finds Building Fires Caused Collapse, 08/21/08


The investigation team considered the possibility of other factors playing a role in the collapse of WTC 7, including the possible use of explosives, fires fed by the fuel supply tanks in and under the building, and damage from the falling debris of WTC 1.

The team said that the smallest blast event capable of crippling the critical column would have produced a “sound level of 130 to 140 decibels at a distance of half a mile,” yet no noise this loud was reported by witnesses or recorded on videos.

so this is the sole reason given for rejection of the controlled demolition theory...what if the critical column was treated with thermite paint and super heated how much of an explosion would it take then ? and there were indeed massive explosions witnessed..so if it can be done at a lower decibel level it must then become a more viable theory..

DOES NOT SAY NO EFFECT

dumbfuck

dumbfuck,,,it goes on to say its the only building in history to collapse due to fire ..the little effect line is only because it is considered to cause of the fire nothing more...A dumbfuck is someone that accept the removing this damage from computer models to achieve a symmetrical collapse..

because the FIRE DID CAUSE IT

dumbfuck
had the building not had the fires it likely wouldnt have collapsed
but, the building damage PLUS the fires is what made it possible TO collapse
NIST NEVER claims the building damage didnt contribute to the collapse and in fact, the building damage(started the fires) is what CAUSED the collapes due to the FIRES being started by it

 

[DiveCon]

liarabilty

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s8Vod1N11VY

which proves NOTHING
a plan that was never carried out is NOT proof that such a plan was carried out

 

[DiveCon]

liarabilty

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s8Vod1N11VY

id-eots:

We all already know what the bogus document pretends to say.

You remain vapid and pointless.

i have no doubts that Op Northwoods was a plan that was submitted but rejected
and since it WAS rejected and the originator was FIRED for even suggesting it, that is not proof that such a plan was ever carried out
the moronic fucking troofer morons seem to think that because some fuckup submitted a plant(which was REJECTED) somehow means that such a plan was actually carried out

 

[eots]

dumbfuck,,,it goes on to say its the only building in history to collapse due to fire ..the little effect line is only because it is considered to cause of the fire nothing more...A dumbfuck is someone that accept the removing this damage from computer models to achieve a symmetrical collapse..

....and your proof of explosives is where, again??

That would be


nowhere.

and your evidence of temperatures predicted necessary for collapse is....where ?

that would be nowhere

 

[eots]

DOES NOT SAY NO EFFECT

dumbfuck

dumbfuck,,,it goes on to say its the only building in history to collapse due to fire ..the little effect line is only because it is considered to cause of the fire nothing more...A dumbfuck is someone that accept the removing this damage from computer models to achieve a symmetrical collapse..

because the FIRE DID CAUSE IT

dumbfuck
had the building not had the fires it likely wouldnt have collapsed
but, the building damage PLUS the fires is what made it possible TO collapse
NIST NEVER claims the building damage didnt contribute to the collapse and in fact, the building damage(started the fires) is what CAUSED the collapes due to the FIRES being started by it

lol ...the computer model is the proof offered by and damage is not a factor in the collapse model..that's why they made the statement ..it was the first time in history a steel frame building collapsed due to fire..idiotboy

 

[DiveCon]

dumbfuck,,,it goes on to say its the only building in history to collapse due to fire ..the little effect line is only because it is considered to cause of the fire nothing more...A dumbfuck is someone that accept the removing this damage from computer models to achieve a symmetrical collapse..

because the FIRE DID CAUSE IT

dumbfuck
had the building not had the fires it likely wouldnt have collapsed
but, the building damage PLUS the fires is what made it possible TO collapse
NIST NEVER claims the building damage didnt contribute to the collapse and in fact, the building damage(started the fires) is what CAUSED the collapes due to the FIRES being started by it

lol ...the computer model is the proof offered by and damage is not a factor in the collapse model..that's why they made the statement ..it was the first time in history a steel frame building collapsed due to fire..idiotboy

but not due to "FIRE ALONE" as you idiot asswipes keep saying

now whos the dumbfuck?
YOU

 

[Liability]

....and your proof of explosives is where, again??

That would be


nowhere.

and your evidence of temperatures predicted necessary for collapse is....where ?

that would be nowhere

Actually, as you know but remain too totally dishonest to admit, the temperatures reached would NOT be required to be so high as to cause the metal to melt.

All that would be required is that the metal reach a point where it could start to buckle.

And there was a great deal of information about what the probable temepratures inside were and for how long of a duration. The conclusion, as you know but remain too fucking edishonest to ever admit, was that the temperatures most certainly could cause the structural integrity of the beams to be lost. And once a collapse started under those circumstances, what on Earth could possibly have stopped all that followed?

* * * * If the fuel and the oxidant start at ambient temperature, a maximum flame temperature can be defined. For carbon burning in pure oxygen, the maximum is 3,200°C; for hydrogen it is 2,750°C. Thus, for virtually any hydrocarbons, the maximum flame temperature, starting at ambient temperature and using pure oxygen, is approximately 3,000°C.

This maximum flame temperature is reduced by two-thirds if air is used rather than pure oxygen. The reason is that every molecule of oxygen releases the heat of formation of a molecule of carbon monoxide and a molecule of water. If pure oxygen is used, this heat only needs to heat two molecules (carbon monoxide and water), while with air, these two molecules must be heated plus four molecules of nitrogen. Thus, burning hydrocarbons in air produces only one-third the temperature increase as burning in pure oxygen because three times as many molecules must be heated when air is used. The maximum flame temperature increase for burning hydrocarbons (jet fuel) in air is, thus, about 1,000°C—hardly sufficient to melt steel at 1,500°C.

But it is very difficult to reach this maximum temperature with a diffuse flame. There is nothing to ensure that the fuel and air in a diffuse flame are mixed in the best ratio. Typically, diffuse flames are fuel rich, meaning that the excess fuel molecules, which are unburned, must also be heated. It is known that most diffuse fires are fuel rich because blowing on a campfire or using a blacksmith’s bellows increases the rate of combustion by adding more oxygen. This fuel-rich diffuse flame can drop the temperature by up to a factor of two again. This is why the temperatures in a residential fire are usually in the 500°C to 650°C range.2,3 It is known that the WTC fire was a fuel-rich, diffuse flame as evidenced by the copious black smoke. Soot is generated by incompletely burned fuel; hence, the WTC fire was fuel rich—hardly surprising with 90,000 L of jet fuel available. Factors such as flame volume and quantity of soot decrease the radiative heat loss in the fire, moving the temperature closer to the maximum of 1,000°C. However, it is highly unlikely that the steel at the WTC experienced temperatures above the 750–800°C range. All reports that the steel melted at 1,500°C are using imprecise terminology at best.

Some reports suggest that the aluminum from the aircraft ignited, creating very high temperatures. While it is possible to ignite aluminum under special conditions, such conditions are not commonly attained in a hydrocarbon-based diffuse flame. In addition, the flame would be white hot, like a giant sparkler. There was no evidence of such aluminum ignition, which would have been visible even through the dense soot.

It is known that structural steel begins to soften around 425°C and loses about half of its strength at 650°C.4 This is why steel is stress relieved in this temperature range. But even a 50% loss of strength is still insufficient, by itself, to explain the WTC collapse. It was noted above that the wind load controlled the design allowables. The WTC, on this low-wind day, was likely not stressed more than a third of the design allowable, which is roughly one-fifth of the yield strength of the steel. Even with its strength halved, the steel could still support two to three times the stresses imposed by a 650°C fire.

The additional problem was distortion of the steel in the fire. The temperature of the fire was not uniform everywhere, and the temperature on the outside of the box columns was clearly lower than on the side facing the fire. The temperature along the 18 m long joists was certainly not uniform. Given the thermal expansion of steel, a 150°C temperature difference from one location to another will produce yield-level residual stresses. This produced distortions in the slender structural steel, which resulted in buckling failures. Thus, the failure of the steel was due to two factors: loss of strength due to the temperature of the fire, and loss of structural integrity due to distortion of the steel from the non-uniform temperatures in the fire.

* * * *

Why Did the World Trade Center Collapse? Science, Engineering, and Speculation

No fucking "super-thermite," no explosives, no retarded conspiracy theory required.

 

[CurveLight]

because they didnt say FIRES ALONE you dumbfuck

What the fuck is wrong with you? Even when NIST says it's the first time fire is known to have caused the collapse you try to say it wasn't? Fucking classic OCTA!

it NEVER SAYS FIRE ALONE
what is it with troofers and the lack of reading comprehension?????

You're right. I do believe they said something about gravity.

 

[CurveLight]

liarabilty

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s8Vod1N11VY

id-eots:

We all already know what the bogus document pretends to say.

You remain vapid and pointless.

i have no doubts that Op Northwoods was a plan that was submitted but rejected
and since it WAS rejected and the originator was FIRED for even suggesting it, that is not proof that such a plan was ever carried out
the moronic fucking troofer morons seem to think that because some fuckup submitted a plant(which was REJECTED) somehow means that such a plan was actually carried out

All the Joint Chiefs approved of the plan as well. ON proves a couple of points but they would require dialogue above your ability to be honest. I do agree the existence of the ON documents do not prove 9E was a false flag but only a blind fucking mouse pussy licking reject would look at 9E and ON and say there is no comparison.

 

[Liability]

id-eots:

We all already know what the bogus document pretends to say.

You remain vapid and pointless.

i have no doubts that Op Northwoods was a plan that was submitted but rejected
and since it WAS rejected and the originator was FIRED for even suggesting it, that is not proof that such a plan was ever carried out
the moronic fucking troofer morons seem to think that because some fuckup submitted a plant(which was REJECTED) somehow means that such a plan was actually carried out

All the Joint Chiefs approved of the plan as well. ON proves a couple of points but they would require dialogue above your ability to be honest. I do agree the existence of the ON documents do not prove 9E was a false flag but only a blind fucking mouse pussy licking reject would look at 9E and ON and say there is no comparison.

bent tight thinks that licking a pussy is a negative thing.

He must prefer to suck dick!

 

[DiveCon]

id-eots:

We all already know what the bogus document pretends to say.

You remain vapid and pointless.

i have no doubts that Op Northwoods was a plan that was submitted but rejected
and since it WAS rejected and the originator was FIRED for even suggesting it, that is not proof that such a plan was ever carried out
the moronic fucking troofer morons seem to think that because some fuckup submitted a plant(which was REJECTED) somehow means that such a plan was actually carried out

All the Joint Chiefs approved of the plan as well. ON proves a couple of points but they would require dialogue above your ability to be honest. I do agree the existence of the ON documents do not prove 9E was a false flag but only a blind fucking mouse pussy licking reject would look at 9E and ON and say there is no comparison.

wrong again
only that would say there IS a connection

 

[CurveLight]

i have no doubts that Op Northwoods was a plan that was submitted but rejected
and since it WAS rejected and the originator was FIRED for even suggesting it, that is not proof that such a plan was ever carried out
the moronic fucking troofer morons seem to think that because some fuckup submitted a plant(which was REJECTED) somehow means that such a plan was actually carried out

All the Joint Chiefs approved of the plan as well. ON proves a couple of points but they would require dialogue above your ability to be honest. I do agree the existence of the ON documents do not prove 9E was a false flag but only a blind fucking mouse pussy licking reject would look at 9E and ON and say there is no comparison.

bent tight thinks that licking a pussy is a negative thing.

He must prefer to suck dick!

It is impossible for you to be honest eh? I clearly said "mouse pussy licking...."

You will ignore that just like you will ignore I totally fucking exposed how you worship one of the craziest twoofers out there. You couldn't be any more pathetic.....oops. That's not true. Everyday you get more pathetic. Take your fat ass and do something for once instead of being such a fucking sloth.

 

[CurveLight]

i have no doubts that Op Northwoods was a plan that was submitted but rejected
and since it WAS rejected and the originator was FIRED for even suggesting it, that is not proof that such a plan was ever carried out
the moronic fucking troofer morons seem to think that because some fuckup submitted a plant(which was REJECTED) somehow means that such a plan was actually carried out

All the Joint Chiefs approved of the plan as well. ON proves a couple of points but they would require dialogue above your ability to be honest. I do agree the existence of the ON documents do not prove 9E was a false flag but only a blind fucking mouse pussy licking reject would look at 9E and ON and say there is no comparison.

wrong again
only that would say there IS a connection

I didn't say there was a connection you fucking idiot. You are forever complaining people don't know how to read then you do this? It's just like how you ignored NIST saying the wtc was the first known incident of fire causing the total collapse of high rise buildings. Your the Mayor of Loserville. If you ever bring your punk ass to Boston send me a PM so I can buy you a pint.

 

[Liability]

All the Joint Chiefs approved of the plan as well. ON proves a couple of points but they would require dialogue above your ability to be honest. I do agree the existence of the ON documents do not prove 9E was a false flag but only a blind fucking mouse pussy licking reject would look at 9E and ON and say there is no comparison.

bent tight thinks that licking a pussy is a negative thing.

He must prefer to suck dick!

It is impossible for you to be honest eh? I clearly said "mouse pussy licking...."

You will ignore that just like you will ignore I totally fucking exposed how you worship one of the craziest twoofers out there. You couldn't be any more pathetic.....oops. That's not true. Everyday you get more pathetic. Take your fat ass and do something for once instead of being such a fucking sloth.

OH. Ok. Good point. I see the subtlety of it now. Quite clear. Yes.

You wish to suck MOUSE dick.

 

[CurveLight]

because the FIRE DID CAUSE IT

dumbfuck
had the building not had the fires it likely wouldnt have collapsed
but, the building damage PLUS the fires is what made it possible TO collapse
NIST NEVER claims the building damage didnt contribute to the collapse and in fact, the building damage(started the fires) is what CAUSED the collapes due to the FIRES being started by it

lol ...the computer model is the proof offered by and damage is not a factor in the collapse model..that's why they made the statement ..it was the first time in history a steel frame building collapsed due to fire..idiotboy

but not due to "FIRE ALONE" as you idiot asswipes keep saying

now whos the dumbfuck?
YOU

NIST clearly says fire was the main cause so your "Not fire alone" strawman needs to be put to bed you lying fuck.