FEMA Deceives Nation About Twin Towers Core

[Albury Smith]

So really what about the NIST report is to be now trusted as fact?

And when you think about the decisions that were made after 9-11......

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
The decision to invade Iraq was wrong. That doesn't mean that 230+ top engineers and scientists working on the NIST reports are all lying to us. More than 65% of them were from the private sector and academia, and were not government employees, and most of their explanation of the tower collapses can be seen in photos and videos.

sorry but it will take a little more than just your word for me to believe the report....and I am not the only one.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Feel free to actually READ NCSTAR1 before you criticize it.

 

[Christophera]

So really what about the NIST report is to be now trusted as fact?

And when you think about the decisions that were made after 9-11......

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
The decision to invade Iraq was wrong. That doesn't mean that 230+ top engineers and scientists working on the NIST reports are all lying to us. More than 65% of them were from the private sector and academia, and were not government employees, and most of their explanation of the tower collapses can be seen in photos and videos.

sorry but it will take a little more than just your word for me to believe the report....and I am not the only one.

I have provided hard evidence and the article by Newsweek about Robertson and it is not reasonable to suggest that when 3,000 are are killed in what is termed a collapse that Newsweek would not make sure the information was good or that Robertsons company would not demand a correction if it was in error.

So you have MORE than just my word. You have an image showing a massive piece of concrete falling into the core area on 9-11 AND the lead engineers info to Newsweek.

There is more too.

I'm just waiting to see if you have the integrity to use evidence and reason in the protection and preservation of the United States Constitution or the rights and freedoms it guarantees.

So far you are failing.

 

[Christophera]

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
The decision to invade Iraq was wrong. That doesn't mean that 230+ top engineers and scientists working on the NIST reports are all lying to us. More than 65% of them were from the private sector and academia, and were not government employees, and most of their explanation of the tower collapses can be seen in photos and videos.

sorry but it will take a little more than just your word for me to believe the report....and I am not the only one.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Feel free to actually READ NCSTAR1 before you criticize it.

I've read it and it is a joke. Such a report must refer to structural details of the actual plans. What I found was that they had no plans to work with and because they did not they have this disclaimer which basically would remove their liability for using the sunday funnies for plans.

 

[Albury Smith]

Wait what is he claiming the supports were made from?

I'm confused he said they weren't steel, what the heck were they?

Is this guy (the op) blaming shoddy construction?

I'm just lost i've really tried to read what he posted and understand his point, I'm just looking for some clarification on what the OP is getting at.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
I don't think he understands it either. His claim that NIST got faulty info from FEMA is just plain wrong, and construction documents for the WTC are just not that hard to come by.

 

[Christophera]

I always get a kick out of the fact that an entire nation can be deceived, but some chucklehead on a message board has all the answers...

I've posted evidence, you've posted nothing except support for secrecy. Are you an American?

 

[Albury Smith]

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
The decision to invade Iraq was wrong. That doesn't mean that 230+ top engineers and scientists working on the NIST reports are all lying to us. More than 65% of them were from the private sector and academia, and were not government employees, and most of their explanation of the tower collapses can be seen in photos and videos.

sorry but it will take a little more than just your word for me to believe the report....and I am not the only one.

I have provided hard evidence and the article by Newsweek about Robertson and it is not reasonable to suggest that when 3,000 are are killed in what is termed a collapse that Newsweek would not make sure the information was good or that Robertsons company would not demand a correction if it was in error.

So you have MORE than just my word. You have an image showing a massive piece of concrete falling into the core area on 9-11 AND the lead engineers info to Newsweek.

There is more too.

I'm just waiting to see if you have the integrity to use evidence and reason in the protection and preservation of the United States Constitution or the rights and freedoms it guarantees.

So far you are failing.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Please read NCSTAR1 and FEMA's WTC Building performance Study. The claims in your OP are just plain wrong.

 

[DiveCon]

Yes I did. You attempt to misrepresent the fact of what I bring.

The truth movement does not realize, as it is mislead, that FEMA totally decieved NIST in the determination of "cause of death".

If what you assert is true, you will link to some other site showing my information.

If what you assert is true, you will link to a site showing WTC 2 core at 1/2 height.

If what you assert is true, you will link to a site or source that asserts with independently verified evidence that the cause of death determination is invalidated by virtue of NIST using the wrong structural design to analyse "collapse".

Remember, evidence, ........ and reason are needed for justice which protects the Constitution and government by rule of law.

every bit of this has been shown before

You are in error and cannot provide a link to substanciate your assertion. This is now proven because you did not when asked.

This is how it goes with reason and evidence.

hey moron, did you even look at the date of the video you posted?
it was posted in dec of 2007

whats the date today?

 

[Jay Canuck]

my problem with the report is the explanation of the collapse (more like an implosion) of Building #7.

 

[Christophera]

Wait what is he claiming the supports were made from?

I'm confused he said they weren't steel, what the heck were they?

Is this guy (the op) blaming shoddy construction?

I'm just lost i've really tried to read what he posted and understand his point, I'm just looking for some clarification on what the OP is getting at.

Maybe you can detect a difference in appearances between what FEMA says the core is.

and what is seen as the core of WTC 2 on 9-11.

If you cannot do that, then you cannot protect the US Constitution. All you can do is find an immigrant who has worked in construction to help you. They take an oath to protect the Constitution.

"I hereby declare, on oath, that I absolutely and entirely renounce and abjure all allegiance and fidelity to any foreign prince, potentate, state, or sovereignty of whom or which I have heretofore been a subject or citizen; that I will support and defend the Constitution and laws of the United States of America against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I will bear arms on behalf of the United States when required by the law; that I will perform noncombatant service in the Armed Forces of the United States when required by the law; that I will perform work of national importance under civilian direction when required by the law; and that I take this obligation freely without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; so help me God."

Maybe you don't care enough.

 

[Albury Smith]

I always get a kick out of the fact that an entire nation can be deceived, but some chucklehead on a message board has all the answers...

I've posted evidence, you've posted nothing except support for secrecy. Are you an American?

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
The NIST and FEMA publications I cited are available online. There's nothing secret about them.

 

[Christophera]

my problem with the report is the explanation of the collapse (more like an implosion) of Building #7.

Look, this thread is about the Twins, it is about a deception by FEMA of the appointed investigating committee into the cause of death of 3,000 innocent people which has been used to hijack the nation and seriously compromise the Constitution. If you cannot source any evidence proving that FEMA was correct, then do not impede those that have independently verified evidence showing that FEMA decieved NIST and sabotaged the investigation.

 

[Christophera]

I always get a kick out of the fact that an entire nation can be deceived, but some chucklehead on a message board has all the answers...

I've posted evidence, you've posted nothing except support for secrecy. Are you an American?

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
The NIST and FEMA publications I cited are available online. There's nothing secret about them.

I know that and they are used to try and keep a secret. Your job, if you choose to protect the Constitution is find INDEPENDENT EVIDENCE showing that the NIST report is correct in its structural basis.

 

[Albury Smith]

my problem with the report is the explanation of the collapse (more like an implosion) of Building #7.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Read NCSTAR 1A. There are very logical reasons why WTC 7 looked like an implosion, since the initial failure point was in a lower floor and inside. There just aren't that many different ways a building can look when it collapses, given that gravity only pulls downward. Maybe you'd like to explain why these silent explosives didn't leave any severed steel in the debris. Cutter charge or incendiary signatures on columns would be like hanging a big red "Controlled Demolition" sign on the end of each column.

 

[Christophera]

every bit of this has been shown before

You are in error and cannot provide a link to substanciate your assertion. This is now proven because you did not when asked.

This is how it goes with reason and evidence.

hey moron, did you even look at the date of the video you posted?
it was posted in dec of 2007

whats the date today?

You have provided no evidence showing that the FEMA depicts the core accurately. Are you an American?

This is the west wall of WTC 1 concrete shear wall core. The photo is looking south along the line of the wall. The interior box column on the right is outside the core. Left of it is the end view of the concrete core wall.

Note that the core area left of the concrete wall is EMPTY.

 

[DiveCon]

Wait what is he claiming the supports were made from?

I'm confused he said they weren't steel, what the heck were they?

Is this guy (the op) blaming shoddy construction?

I'm just lost i've really tried to read what he posted and understand his point, I'm just looking for some clarification on what the OP is getting at.

Maybe you can detect a difference in appearances between what FEMA says the core is.

and what is seen as the core of WTC 2 on 9-11.

If you cannot do that, then you cannot protect the US Constitution. All you can do is find an immigrant who has worked in construction to help you. They take an oath to protect the Constitution.

"I hereby declare, on oath, that I absolutely and entirely renounce and abjure all allegiance and fidelity to any foreign prince, potentate, state, or sovereignty of whom or which I have heretofore been a subject or citizen; that I will support and defend the Constitution and laws of the United States of America against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I will bear arms on behalf of the United States when required by the law; that I will perform noncombatant service in the Armed Forces of the United States when required by the law; that I will perform work of national importance under civilian direction when required by the law; and that I take this obligation freely without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; so help me God."

Maybe you don't care enough.

ok, you are INSANE
nothing more to do than to ridicule you

 

[Christophera]

my problem with the report is the explanation of the collapse (more like an implosion) of Building #7.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Read NCSTAR 1A. There are very logical reasons why WTC 7

Hey, stop trying to take this discussion off topic. The infiltrators of the US government benefit too much from you not staying on topic and acknowleding evidence and reason when presented.

Are you an American? You are not acting like one.

 

[Jay Canuck]

my problem with the report is the explanation of the collapse (more like an implosion) of Building #7.

Look, this thread is about the Twins, it is about a deception by FEMA of the appointed investigating committee into the cause of death of 3,000 innocent people which has been used to hijack the nation and seriously compromise the Constitution. If you cannot source any evidence proving that FEMA was correct, then do not impede those that have independently verified evidence showing that FEMA decieved NIST and sabotaged the investigation.

gotcha!

 

[Albury Smith]

sorry but it will take a little more than just your word for me to believe the report....and I am not the only one.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Feel free to actually READ NCSTAR1 before you criticize it.

I've read it and it is a joke. Such a report must refer to structural details of the actual plans. What I found was that they had no plans to work with and because they did not they have this
which basically would remove their liability for using the sunday funnies for plans.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

The OP here is a joke, since it's so easily proved to be false. What do you find so amusing about NCSTAR 1?

 

[Albury Smith]

my problem with the report is the explanation of the collapse (more like an implosion) of Building #7.

Look, this thread is about the Twins, it is about a deception by FEMA of the appointed investigating committee into the cause of death of 3,000 innocent people which has been used to hijack the nation and seriously compromise the Constitution. If you cannot source any evidence proving that FEMA was correct, then do not impede those that have independently verified evidence showing that FEMA decieved NIST and sabotaged the investigation.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Have you read FEMA's May, 2002 WTC Building Performance Study, Chapter 2? If so, please point out the deception in it.

 

[Christophera]

Wait what is he claiming the supports were made from?

I'm confused he said they weren't steel, what the heck were they?

Is this guy (the op) blaming shoddy construction?

I'm just lost i've really tried to read what he posted and understand his point, I'm just looking for some clarification on what the OP is getting at.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
I don't think he understands it either. His claim that NIST got faulty info from FEMA is just plain wrong, and construction documents for the WTC are just not that hard to come by.

You will find that there are no official plans. You will find that the truth movement uses plans from silverstein who made $6b. You will find that the NIST report referes to none. Read their disclaimer. They basically say they had no idea of how it was constructed other than what FEMA told them.

Consider the ex mayor took the WTC docuements from the city to enable the deception, then a corrupt state court refused to compel a return of the public documents to the public offices. I have just linked to powerful circumstancial evidence showing a NYC official enabling the deception I assert has been done.

Are you helping to promote "the big lie"?