FEMA Deceives Nation About Twin Towers Core

[Christophera]

You have no evidence, that is your fault. You refuse to recognize the violations of law that deprive the public of the buildings plans and photo files of construction, that is your fault.

Here you are refusing to recognize the fact that public documents were taken violating laws then trying to use the fact I don't have them as an argument in your favor.

http://www.usmessageboard.com/2650122-post3371.html
http://www.usmessageboard.com/2651311-post3372.html

My evidence recognizes laws, the violation of them and works for justice with facts.

It does so in support and defense of the US Constitution.

 

[DiveCon]

again, your paranoid delusions do NOT equal evidence

 

[Christophera]

The perpetrators would like you have posted that. The fact is your text is meaningless.

When the engineer of record describes a concrete core, and so does Oxford Illustrated Encyclopedia of Invention and Technology, of 1992.

Then on 9-11 this is seen for the core of WTC 2.

These material facts demonstrate reality. Your behavior with no facts and text demonstrates concealment of treason.

 

[DiveCon]

the perpetrators are dead, dipshit
they died when they crashed the planes

 

[Christophera]

The planes crashed into something different than the true perpetrators want people to think. I prove this with independently verified evidence of the concrete core.

Robertson is verified by Oxford, verifying Domel who describes a concrete core verified by the image of WTC 2 core, verifying the top of WTC 2 core falling onto WTC 3, the WTC 1 rebar, just after the WTC 1 west core wall is seen in an end view, then, the WTC 1 east shear wall toppling, consistent with interior box columns silhouetted on WTC 1 north core wall, consistent with ground zero showing the WTC 1 north concrete core base wall, 12 foot thick, all supported as clarification of the many confused statements that do mention concrete in the core including the latest revised NIST analysis of free fall by Bazant et. al 6/21/2007, which actually provides an equivalent amount of high explosives needed to create the rate of fall they are attempting to justify with physics. It doesn't work for justifying explanation for collapse, but at least they won't go down in history as totally supporting the deceptions.

Agents can only prove they work to destroy the US Constitution with violations of law and treason.

 

[DiveCon]

again, your paranoid delusions do NOT equal evidence

 

[Christophera]

That is what the perpetrators of mass murder would want you to post in aid of concealment of methods of mass murder.


People have noticed you have never posted an image of the FEMA core.

And that the evidence for a concrete, tubular cast core is very good.

engineer of record

 

[Christophera]

That is what the perpetrators of mass murder would want you to post in aid of concealment of methods of mass murder.


People have noticed you have never posted an image of the FEMA core.

 

[DiveCon]

what people have noticed is that your paranoid delusions do not equal evidence

 

[Christophera]

They have certainly seen that the evidence for the concrete core is huge.

Independently verified evidence of the concrete core.

Robertson is verified by Oxford, verifying Domel who describes a concrete core verified by the image of WTC 2 core, verifying the top of WTC 2 core falling onto WTC 3, the WTC 1 rebar, just after the WTC 1 west core wall is seen in an end view, then, the WTC 1 east shear wall toppling, consistent with interior box columns silhouetted on WTC 1 north core wall, consistent with ground zero showing the WTC 1 north concrete core base wall, 12 foot thick, all supported as clarification of the many confused statements that do mention concrete in the core including the latest revised NIST analysis of free fall by Bazant et. al 6/21/2007, which actually provides an equivalent amount of high explosives needed to create the rate of fall they are attempting to justify with physics. It doesn't work for justifying explanation for collapse, but at least they won't go down in history as totally supporting the deceptions.


They have noticed you refuse to recognize violations of law.

 

[Christophera]

They have certainly seen that the evidence for the concrete core is huge.

Independently verified evidence of the concrete core.

Robertson is verified by Oxford, verifying Domel who describes a concrete core verified by the image of WTC 2 core, verifying the top of WTC 2 core falling onto WTC 3, the WTC 1 rebar, just after the WTC 1 west core wall is seen in an end view, then, the WTC 1 east shear wall toppling, consistent with interior box columns silhouetted on WTC 1 north core wall, consistent with ground zero showing the WTC 1 north concrete core base wall, 12 foot thick, all supported as clarification of the many confused statements that do mention concrete in the core including the latest revised NIST analysis of free fall by Bazant et. al 6/21/2007, which actually provides an equivalent amount of high explosives needed to create the rate of fall they are attempting to justify with physics. It doesn't work for justifying explanation for collapse, but at least they won't go down in history as totally supporting the deceptions.


They have noticed you refuse to recognize violations of law.

 

[DiveCon]

again, your paranoid delusions do NOT equal evidence

 

[Christophera]

That is what the perps would want people to believe. The fact is, text does not equal evidence and this is independently verified evidence of the concrete core.

Robertson is verified by Oxford, verifying Domel who describes a concrete core verified by the image of WTC 2 core, verifying the top of WTC 2 core falling onto WTC 3, the WTC 1 rebar, just after the WTC 1 west core wall is seen in an end view, then, the WTC 1 east shear wall toppling, consistent with interior box columns silhouetted on WTC 1 north core wall, consistent with ground zero showing the WTC 1 north concrete core base wall, 12 foot thick, all supported as clarification of the many confused statements that do mention concrete in the core including the latest revised NIST analysis of free fall by Bazant et. al 6/21/2007, which actually provides an equivalent amount of high explosives needed to create the rate of fall they are attempting to justify with physics. It doesn't work for justifying explanation for collapse, but at least they won't go down in history as totally supporting the deceptions.

Now you post an image of the FEMA core.

 

[DiveCon]

again, your paranoid delusions do not equal evidence

 

[Rat in the Hat]

They have certainly seen that the evidence for the concrete core is huge.

 

[Christophera]

Yes, this big and this real.,

And the engineer of record described a concrete core in the days after 9-11.

 

[Christophera]

The core is always empty on 9-11,

Those very fine vertical elements are too small to be structural steel. They are rebar.

This is structural steel, a little taller seconds before, standing just outside the concrete core.

 

[DiveCon]

Paranoid delusions are NOT evidence

 

[Christophera]

The FEMA deception is a number of pieces of evidence creating a circumstance that you try to exploit. You have no evidence and you fail to recognize the violations of law depriving the public of the buildings plans and 6,000 photo files. That can only serve the perpetrators of mass murder.

No matter, there is a great deal of independently verified evidence of the concrete core.

Robertson is verified by Oxford, verifying Domel who describes a concrete core verified by the image of WTC 2 core, verifying the top of WTC 2 core falling onto WTC 3, the WTC 1 rebar, just after the WTC 1 west core wall is seen in an end view, then, the WTC 1 east shear wall toppling, consistent with interior box columns silhouetted on WTC 1 north core wall, consistent with ground zero showing the WTC 1 north concrete core base wall, 12 foot thick, all supported as clarification of the many confused statements that do mention concrete in the core including the latest revised NIST analysis of free fall by Bazant et. al 6/21/2007, which actually provides an equivalent amount of high explosives needed to create the rate of fall they are attempting to justify with physics. It doesn't work for justifying explanation for collapse, but at least they won't go down in history as totally supporting the deceptions.

 

[DiveCon]

no FEMA deception
you are just a delusional paranoid