FEMA Deceives Nation About Twin Towers Core

[DiveCon]

we know the truth, fucktard

You don't even know what you are posting.

Those are the perimeter tri columns, moron.

You have no evidence, there is none for steel core columns. You are supporting a lie that conceals the secrete methods of mass murder.

LIAR

those are too big for the perimeter

 

[DiveCon]

 

[DiveCon]

the perimeter

 

[Christophera]

Yer a moron. Your first image is the lower part where a single very large column divides into 3, the second is the upper config of 14" box on 22" spaces.

You are the first moron to EVER get this wrong.

 

[Christophera]

In order to produce actual evidence of core columns you must locate the steel member inside the core area to know for certain they are core columns.

 

[Christophera]

Again, the perimeter base tri column. You are clueless.

 

[Christophera]

This is the complete core at 1/2 height of WTC 2.

NOT gypsum. Gypsum would be destroyed by the hundreds of thousands of tons crashing over it.

What is seen is a concrete tube reinforced with high tensile steel, lots of it.

Like this. WTC 1 after the spire fell. Rebar from the wall behind the interio box columns which the spire was.

 

[DiveCon]

and christophera proves he is nothing but a fucktard

 

[Christophera]

Lacking any evidence, failing completely, the perpetrators might accept that as a response, but I think they would think it just shows your glaring inadequacy.

The Twin towers had a tubular cast concrete core and this is a wall of it falling into the EMPTY core area on 9-11. The column in the background is outside the core, the spire.

These images verify each other and all of the other evdience showing a concrete core.

 

[DiveCon]

and christophera proves he is nothing but a fucktard


that also needs to learn how to RESIZE an image
or just use a LINK to it

 

[KittenKoder]

and christophera proves he is nothing but a fucktard


that also needs to learn how to RESIZE an image
or just use a LINK to it

He also needs to learn a thing or two about physics ...

 

[DiveCon]

and christophera proves he is nothing but a fucktard


that also needs to learn how to RESIZE an image
or just use a LINK to it

He also needs to learn a thing or two about physics ...

any chance you could turn his huge image into a link?

 

[KittenKoder]

and christophera proves he is nothing but a fucktard


that also needs to learn how to RESIZE an image
or just use a LINK to it

He also needs to learn a thing or two about physics ...

any chance you could turn his huge image into a link?

Naw ... just a few more posts and the page will turn ...

 

[KittenKoder]

 

[KittenKoder]

I'll just describe this thread with some of my own pics.

 

[KittenKoder]

Or ... Christophera:

 

[kyzr]

Hey Christo answer these questions. I'll keep posting them until you do.

1. Don't answer a question with a dumber question. You quoted the engineer, and that was a lie. Yes it was a lie. He said no such thing. He did not state the towers had a concrete core. You fail to show the direct quote. Your proof / evidence is a lie.
2. There was no "secret mass murder" moron. The planes caused the WTC towers' collapse. How stupid are you?
3. What is the "secret method of mass murder"??

Riddle me this:
a) if there was a "secret method of mass murder", why wait around for jets to hit the towers, why not just knock them down in a wind storm and kill 250,000?
b) You continually fail to describe the conspiracy. Who all was involved?
c) Here is the biggie....what difference would it make if there was a concrete core or not? If the buildings stood for ~35-years, however they were built was fine. What knocked them down?

 

[Christophera]

As I've said, 1 & 2 are not questions and 3 + are off topic. It's clear you have no evidence and cannot reasonably state, as no one can, that Robertson would not or did not request a correction to the Newsweek article of September 13, 2001 and that Newsweek, had the recieved a request would do so.

Meaning the information of the concrete core is correct. Which is easily verified by the evidence showing what can only be a concrete wall.

Meaning the cause of death on 3,000 death certificates is wrong.

 

[DiveCon]

As I've said, 1 & 2 are not questions and 3 + are off topic. It's clear you have no evidence and cannot reasonably state, as no one can, that Robertson would not or did not request a correction to the Newsweek article of September 13, 2001 and that Newsweek, had the recieved a request would do so.

Meaning the information of the concrete core is correct. Which is easily verified by the evidence showing what can only be a concrete wall.



Meaning the cause of death on 3,000 death certificates is wrong.

except only a delusional fucking moron like YOU sees a concrete wall there

 

[kyzr]

Hey Christo answer these questions/comments. I'll keep posting them until you do. I even re-wrote them as requested...

1. You quoted Robertson, and that was a lie. Yes it was a lie. He said no such thing, so why would he need a retraction. You're the one who mis-quoted him.
Here is the design page LERA | World Trade Center
there is no mention of any concrete walls. only viscoelastic dampers. Why would they need to add dampers if the core was concrete?

2. Do you or don't you agree that the hijacked planes hitting the towers caused the WTC towers' collapse?

3. if there was a "secret method of mass murder" what was it, and why wait around for jets to hit the towers, why not just knock them down in a wind storm and kill 250,000?

4. You continually fail to describe the conspiracy. Who all was involved?

5. what difference would it make if there was a concrete core or not? If the buildings stood for ~35-years, however they were built was fine. What knocked them down?