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.
1. You quoted Robertson, and that was a lie.
except only a delusional fucking moron like YOU sees a concrete wall thereAs 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.
if there was concrete in the core it wouldnt be empty, you idiotexcept only a delusional fucking moron like YOU sees a concrete wall thereAs 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.
The wall is clearly visible, steel core columns are not.
The core is empty. In this photo huge, super strong rebar is seen where the north core wall wa before the spire went down.
if there was concrete in the core it wouldnt be empty, you idiotexcept only a delusional fucking moron like YOU sees a concrete wall there
The wall is clearly visible, steel core columns are not.
The core is empty. In this photo huge, super strong rebar is seen where the north core wall was before the spire went down.
and thats NOT rebar
it is IMPOSSIBLE for it to be rebar, asswipe, since NONE was used in the core and no concrete above gradeif there was concrete in the core it wouldnt be empty, you idiotThe wall is clearly visible, steel core columns are not.
The core is empty. In this photo huge, super strong rebar is seen where the north core wall was before the spire went down.
and thats NOT rebar
The core is an empty tube except for elevator guide rails, elevators, stairs and hallwyas, and you know that is my claim.
You have never stated what those fine vertical elements are IF they are not rebar.
Technically, ONLY a high tensile steel rod can stand like we see, so it is quite conclusive that it is rebar when considering the information of the Newsweek article about Robertson on September 13, 2001 or the safety report of August Domel, Ph.d SE. PE..
Then there is the scan of the photocopy of the Oxford encyclopedia of Technology and Innovation, published in 1992.
• The development of the concept for "Shaftwall", a lightweight fire-rated wall system that now dominates the construction industry.
it is IMPOSSIBLE for it to be rebar, asswipe, since NONE was used in the core and no concrete above gradeif there was concrete in the core it wouldnt be empty, you idiot
and thats NOT rebar
The core is an empty tube except for elevator guide rails, elevators, stairs and hallwyas, and you know that is my claim.
You have never stated what those fine vertical elements are IF they are not rebar.
Technically, ONLY a high tensile steel rod can stand like we see, so it is quite conclusive that it is rebar when considering the information of the Newsweek article about Robertson on September 13, 2001 or the safety report of August Domel, Ph.d SE. PE..
Then there is the scan of the photocopy of the Oxford encyclopedia of Technology and Innovation, published in 1992.
wrong, you fucking LIARit is IMPOSSIBLE for it to be rebar, asswipe, since NONE was used in the core and no concrete above gradeThe core is an empty tube except for elevator guide rails, elevators, stairs and hallwyas, and you know that is my claim.
You have never stated what those fine vertical elements are IF they are not rebar.
Technically, ONLY a high tensile steel rod can stand like we see, so it is quite conclusive that it is rebar when considering the information of the Newsweek article about Robertson on September 13, 2001 or the safety report of August Domel, Ph.d SE. PE..
Then there is the scan of the photocopy of the Oxford encyclopedia of Technology and Innovation, published in 1992.
Evidence is contrary and it is impossible you are correct because you have no evidence.
Hey Christo answer these questions/comments. I'll keep posting them until you do.
1. Here is the design page LERA | World Trade Center
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? (nice job editing the Robertson mis-quote out of the Newsweek article)
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?
stop being a complete fucking idiot christopheraHey Christo answer these questions/comments. I'll keep posting them until you do.
1. Here is the design page LERA | World Trade Center
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? (nice job editing the Robertson mis-quote out of the Newsweek article)
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?
The fact of the article only 2 days after 9-11, September 13, 2001, over shadows all later subterfuge.
The fact of the corroborating information of a structural engineer, August Domel, Ph.d SE. PE., certified in 12 states destroys your assertion.
The fact of 9-11 images showing what can only be concrete obliterates your effort.
The fact of usenet messages corroborating the concrete core information proves you can only be a disinformation agent.
http://cosmicpenguin.com/911/chrisbrown/corerefs/ConcreteCore.001.txt
Excerpt that mentions the reinforced-concrete core of each WTC tower:
"We studied the Trade Towers extensively when I was in
school. They were one of the first examples of an innovative and
efficient structural concept called "tube" restraint. The Sears
Towers are a variation called "bundled tube construction" and the
idea is based on a minimum of interior columns, with the exterior
facade having more numerous exterior perimeter columns. In
the case of the WTC, there are no interior columns. Only a
central concrete core roughly 60-80 feet square comprised of
several vertical voids that house exit stairs, hoistways for
the elevators, utility raceways and mechanical chases; and also,
significantly, the sprinkler system main lines. The floors were
prefabricated broad cellular panels of parallel trusses and main
decking that had a light weight concrete topping applied after
they were installed. They spanned a distance of roughly 60 feet
from the concrete core to the exterior gridwork of columns and
horizontal beams."
Stop supporting secrecy in the methods of mass murder, ....... agent kaiser
WRONG, againUh, you have no evidence, so have no standing to make any statement whatsoever with any credibility.
The cause of death is invalid. Period, ....... and you have produced no evidence showing the cause of death on 3,000 death certificates is valid.
th Twin towers had a concrete core. NIST analysed a tower with steel core columns, that did not exist.
WRONG, againUh, you have no evidence, so have no standing to make any statement whatsoever with any credibility.
The cause of death is invalid. Period, ....... and you have produced no evidence showing the cause of death on 3,000 death certificates is valid.
th Twin towers had a concrete core. NIST analysed a tower with steel core columns, that did not exist.
evidence has been posted
you just stay in your delusions and dont accept it
you have yet to prove they misrepresented ANYTHINGWRONG, againUh, you have no evidence, so have no standing to make any statement whatsoever with any credibility.
The cause of death is invalid. Period, ....... and you have produced no evidence showing the cause of death on 3,000 death certificates is valid.
th Twin towers had a concrete core. NIST analysed a tower with steel core columns, that did not exist.
evidence has been posted
you just stay in your delusions and dont accept it
Your evidence was not what you said it was. Totally inconsistent and very poorly presented.
FEMA misrepresented the towers structure to NIST. Period and you cannot prove otherwise.
Your efforts to support the secret methods of mass murder for the purpose of compromising the Constitution are irrational with no logic in the attempt. Maybe gamolon will tutor you.
I've proven that FEMA presents this as the core.you have yet to prove they misrepresented ANYTHINGWRONG, again
evidence has been posted
you just stay in your delusions and dont accept it
Your evidence was not what you said it was. Totally inconsistent and very poorly presented.
FEMA misrepresented the towers structure to NIST. Period and you cannot prove otherwise.
Your efforts to support the secret methods of mass murder for the purpose of compromising the Constitution are irrational with no logic in the attempt. Maybe gamolon will tutor you.
it's YOU that has the burden of prove fucktard
first, you CLAIM thats what FEMA said the core wasI've proven that FEMA presents this as the core.you have yet to prove they misrepresented ANYTHINGYour evidence was not what you said it was. Totally inconsistent and very poorly presented.
FEMA misrepresented the towers structure to NIST. Period and you cannot prove otherwise.
Your efforts to support the secret methods of mass murder for the purpose of compromising the Constitution are irrational with no logic in the attempt. Maybe gamolon will tutor you.
it's YOU that has the burden of prove fucktard
and on 9-11 this is seen.
and by presenting that, and evoking your explantion of 3" "gypsum" firewall, I've proven you are a disinformation agent, judging by your lack of appropriate cognition, a mind controlled agent, or, .......... a complete moron that is too afraid to believe anything but a comfortable lie.
