Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
LOL yeah, we are all "agents"
LOL
No not all there is the odd uniformed dupe that drops by and makes a post or two and then there are the well informed but mental ones such as yourself and then the paid trolls
yeah please stop putting words in my mouth.divecunt YOU are just a kid troll who seeks attention,then there are the Bush dupes who are afraid of the truth who cover their ears and eyes when confronted with evidence and facts such as Elvis and Toto,ect ect,then there are the paid agents like fellow attention seeker candytroll,Gomer Ollie,fizz,gamolon,moron in the hat and slackass.
Fuck off, you piece of shit.LOL yeah, we are all "agents"
LOL
No not all there is the odd uniformed dupe that drops by and makes a post or two and then there are the well informed but mental ones such as yourself and then the paid trolls
yeah please stop putting words in my mouth.divecunt YOU are just a kid troll who seeks attention,then there are the Bush dupes who are afraid of the truth who cover their ears and eyes when confronted with evidence and facts such as Elvis and Toto,ect ect,then there are the paid agents like fellow attention seeker candytroll,Gomer Ollie,fizz,gamolon,moron in the hat and slackass.
First you ignore explosions, then you ignored witnesses hearing explosions, now you admit they did hear explosions but you ignore the significance of their statements by minimizing what they actually heard and said and saw. The definition of an explosion is-according to the NFPA (National Fire Protection Agency)I didn't think eyewitnesses meant much to you? You always ignore the eyewitnesses at ground zero who heard, felt, and experienced explosions.Somewhere around 100 eye witnesses says he is wrong.
See, there you go proving that you have ADD. I never ignored any witness. I have many times tried to make you understand that what they heard was not the same thing as a controlled demolition. We all know there were secondary explosions, there had to be. But they did not bring down the buildings.
First you ignore explosions, then you ignored witnesses hearing explosions, now you admit they did hear explosions but you ignore the significance of their statements by minimizing what they actually heard and said and saw. The definition of an explosion is-according to the NFPA (National Fire Protection Agency)I didn't think eyewitnesses meant much to you? You always ignore the eyewitnesses at ground zero who heard, felt, and experienced explosions.
See, there you go proving that you have ADD. I never ignored any witness. I have many times tried to make you understand that what they heard was not the same thing as a controlled demolition. We all know there were secondary explosions, there had to be. But they did not bring down the buildings.
fire and arson testing definitions of explosions- chapter 18--"Although an explosion is almost always accompanied by the production of a loud noise, the noise itself is not, an essential element in the definition of an explosion, the generation and violent escape of gasses, are the primary criteria of an explosion.
So this specific guildline alone is reason alone to test for explosives!
During an investigation, many things must be considered. Aside from the physical evidence, and witness testimony, suspect criminal history also must be analyzed. The investigation must include past history and the Modus Operandi, M.O. for short.
Fire Fighters For 9-11 Truth Blog Archive Extremism- N.F.P.A. 921- 19.4.8.2.6
[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G1bogWhbmzk&feature=player_embedded[/ame]
"Now, lets be clear. Explosion sounds can be explained away. But, only after a thorough investigation. When there is this much witness testimony, evidence, and explosive use by terrorists on this very same complex, there is no excuse for refusing to test for explosive residue."-Firefightersfor9-11truth
First you ignore explosions, then you ignored witnesses hearing explosions, now you admit they did hear explosions but you ignore the significance of their statements by minimizing what they actually heard and said and saw. The definition of an explosion is-according to the NFPA (National Fire Protection Agency)See, there you go proving that you have ADD. I never ignored any witness. I have many times tried to make you understand that what they heard was not the same thing as a controlled demolition. We all know there were secondary explosions, there had to be. But they did not bring down the buildings.
fire and arson testing definitions of explosions- chapter 18--"Although an explosion is almost always accompanied by the production of a loud noise, the noise itself is not, an essential element in the definition of an explosion, the generation and violent escape of gasses, are the primary criteria of an explosion.
So this specific guildline alone is reason alone to test for explosives!
During an investigation, many things must be considered. Aside from the physical evidence, and witness testimony, suspect criminal history also must be analyzed. The investigation must include past history and the Modus Operandi, M.O. for short.
Fire Fighters For 9-11 Truth Blog Archive Extremism- N.F.P.A. 921- 19.4.8.2.6
[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G1bogWhbmzk&feature=player_embedded[/ame]
"Now, lets be clear. Explosion sounds can be explained away. But, only after a thorough investigation. When there is this much witness testimony, evidence, and explosive use by terrorists on this very same complex, there is no excuse for refusing to test for explosive residue."-Firefightersfor9-11truth
Ever wonder why not a single member of the FDNY who was present at ground zero on 9/11 is a member of fucktardfirefightersfor911truth?
that's not true ..why do you just make shit up ?
You stupid fuckers will NEVER get a new investigation for numerous reasons, the primary of which is that you stupid fuckers will never actually believe any investigation that doesn't say what you want to hear.
I think that would be your projections
So says the ignorant ass that can't produce an FDNY firefighter who is a member of fucktardfirefightersfor911truth. If you're going to accuse someone of making shit up, the least you can do is provide evidence. Your "good word" isn't worth shit, so just making a claim isn't going to cut it.that's not true ..why do you just make shit up ?
I think that would be your projections[/QUOTE]You stupid fuckers will NEVER get a new investigation for numerous reasons, the primary of which is that you stupid fuckers will never actually believe any investigation that doesn't say what you want to hear.
So says the ignorant ass that can't produce an FDNY firefighter who is a member of fucktardfirefightersfor911truth. If you're going to accuse someone of making shit up, the least you can do is provide evidence. Your "good word" isn't worth shit, so just making a claim isn't going to cut it.that's not true ..why do you just make shit up ?
I think that would be your projectionsYou stupid fuckers will NEVER get a new investigation for numerous reasons, the primary of which is that you stupid fuckers will never actually believe any investigation that doesn't say what you want to hear.
Really? So why is it you stupid fucks constantly ignore evidence as I pointed out in my response? Why can't you address the video that shows no explosions at WTC 7 before, during or after the collapse? Why can't you address the fact that the survivors of the North tower collapse did not hear explosives going off in the core like truthtards always claim. All they heard was the collapse.
Meanwhile, what evidence have YOU brought to the table? Absolutely none. You bring opinion, outright lies, and misinformation, but no actual evidence. So how can I be "projecting" ignoring evidence when you have yet to actually bring a piece of real evidence to the table? It doesn't take a genius to realize it is the truthtards who ignore everything they don't like
You made the statement first why don't you provide the proof ..why should i take the time to post the link ..you would just call the person a fucktard and then throw up your next smoke screen...you have just made all kinds of statements and not backed a single one with a link
What.... he thinks no videos exist of the fires? No clear shots exist of the south face because of all the smoke coming from practically the entire building. Opinions are like assholes. Everyone has one. This guy's opinion smells like the worst ass imaginable.
Pretending explosions always come from explosives is as childish as pretending smoke aways comes from fire. People with a higher than first grade education understand such simple differentiations. Why can't you?eots said:
what was false?Again the nitwit makes more false claims ..and does not acknowledge the ones he just made
