New Yorkers are totally ignorant about what happened on 9/11.

[BackAgain]

You're the one in denial my friend.
You're not smart enough to not be lying.

Your new name is Wrong again as usual.

I am the one that spoke the truth. This is what confuses you.

 

[BackAgain]

I'm a bit confused. . .








How do YOU know what is, and what is not, legitimate science and physics, when you already posted, you want something for "laymen?"

Not exactly a tough question. I learned how to read a long time ago. And I learned a bit about science too. It actually isn’t difficult to recognize that objects tend to fall not just down but, unless acted upon by some outside force, straight down.

A denial of that is a denial of physics.

Indeed, the burden here is in those who claim that it is “improbable” that the buildings would fallen primarily within their own footprints. Who says that? What’s the basis for it? Is there an argument that there were some outside forces acting on the building as it collapsed?

 

[LA RAM FAN]

Some of what you state is accurate, but much isn’t. Oswald wasn’t a leftist. He was a fanatical right winger/cold warrior playing a part for his handlers, who all had ties to Allen’s grandpa Allen “Killer” Dulles.

Also I doubt there was any collusion between the deep state of the USSR and USA.

Exactly,well said,see sage at least while we don’t agree with him in being reasonable unlike nazi idiot,rowshawn fag and John belushi wanna be dumbass.

 

[LA RAM FAN]

Right winger, CIA, and The Patsy. Your grandpa told you.

Stop lying.

 

[BackAgain]

Exactly,well said,see sage at least while we don’t agree with him in being reasonable unlike nazi idiot,rowshawn fag and John nelushi wane be dumbass.

The unreasonable ones include you, little la la fan. Facts just wreck you.

 

[LA RAM FAN]

You're the one in denial my friend.
You're not smart enough to not be lying.

Your new name is Wrong again as usual.

I should have been more polite like you but I just came right out and called him a lying bitch.

I don’t think so,don’t apologize,braindead here believes in magic bullets and ignores the overwhelming evidence multiple shooters were there and the photo I posted that exonerates oswald was innocent the fact that photo was taken seconds before and after the assassination and clearly shows oswald is not in the sixth floor window,he keeps trolling same as nazi always does ignoring evidence like that so you weren’t hard on him at all.

Bld 7 is the crux of the 9/11 coverup grandson Allen Dulles and all other paid shills have never been able to debunk thst proves beyond a doubt explosives were used as well as what witnesses in the basement said that proves beyond a doubt explosives were used,but if he keeps trolling about jfk refusing to look at the evidence I gave in thst photo thst exonerates oswald and the overwhelming evidence of multiple shoooters,you haven’t been hard on him in the least,he is trolling same as nazi,he isn’t showing any signs of looking at anything that doesn’t support his warped opinions like sage has a little so you weren’t hard on him in the least,you were way too nice actually.

 

[LA RAM FAN]

He isn't. He is a good guy, just like you. With a different POV.

You would probably have more luck convincing the Pope to give up Roman Catholicism though.

No matter how much evidence you present that priests and bishops have been corrupted, or that the IOR is corrupt, the Pope isn't going to.

Wrong,unlike sage he keeps trolling refusing to address the evidence I posted of that pic that exonerates oswald that he was innocent.he doesn’t want to look at any evidence all these years later that proves him wrong that there were multiple shooters and doesn’t want to listen to what witnesses in the towers said,therefore he is not a good guy as you believe the fact he is clearly here just to troll the fact he stoops to lies same as nazi when cornered..nothing but a trollboy.

 

[Soupnazi630]

No he wasn’t. He was a right wing nut job just like you.

No he was not.

He conssitently identified as a marxist.

Now prove your claim with eviidence

 

[Soupnazi630]

I don’t think so,don’t apologize,braindead here believes in magic bullets and ignores the overwhelming evidence multiple shooters were there and the photo I posted that exonerates oswald was innocent the fact that photo was taken seconds before and after the assassination and clearly shows oswald is not in the sixth floor window,he keeps trolling same as nazi always does ignoring evidence like that so you weren’t hard on him at all.

Bld 7 is the crux of the 9/11 coverup grandson Allen Dulles and all other paid shills have never been able to debunk thst proves beyond a doubt explosives were used as well as what witnesses in the basement said that proves beyond a doubt explosives were used,but if he keeps trolling about jfk refusing to look at the evidence I gave in thst photo thst exonerates oswald and the overwhelming evidence of multiple shoooters,you haven’t been hard on him in the least,he is trolling same as nazi,he isn’t showing any signs of looking at anything that doesn’t support his warped opinions like sage has a little so you weren’t hard on him in the least,you were way too nice actually.

Blah blash blah from a proven liar

 

[Soupnazi630]

No. Not “as would be expected.”

Expected would be massive damage. The one in question was all but pristine.

View attachment 697343

View attachment 697344

The ammo was:


Wiki article: John F. Kennedy assassination rifle - Wikipedia


Compare the above photos of the so-called “magic bullet” to a bullet tested on bone (with enough velocity to shatter the bone):

Oswald in the doorway: the blog of the Oswald Innocence Campaign, by Ralph Cinque

One of the most dishonest and annoying mouthpieces for the official story is the soft-spoken James Lambert. He has written this hit-pi...

oswaldinthedoorway.blogspot.com

The one which shattered the bone did not pass through soft tissue first.

It was damaged as would be expected.

 

[Soupnazi630]

Wrong,unlike sage he keeps trolling refusing to address the evidence I posted of that pic that exonerates oswald that he was innocent.he doesn’t want to look at any evidence all these years later that proves him wrong that there were multiple shooters and doesn’t want to listen to what witnesses in the towers said,therefore he is not a good guy as you believe the fact he is clearly here just to troll the fact he stoops to lies same as nazi when cornered..nothing but a trollboy.

You never posted ay evidence exonerating Oswald boy

You are the most worthless troll on the forum

 

[BackAgain]

The one which shattered the bone did not pass through soft tissue first.

It was damaged as would be expected.

Of course it passed through soft tissue in addition to shattering the wrist. That’s when it proceeded into the Governor’s thigh.

Do you even recall the injuries it caused to the two men?

 

[Soupnazi630]

Of course it passed through soft tissue in addition to shattering the wrist. That’s when it proceeded into the Governor’s thigh.

Do you even recall the injuries it caused to the two men?

I was referring to the one used in comparison

The one which hit Kennedy would NOT have smashed it;s nose in when hitting the wrist of Connally

 

[MisterBeale]

Not exactly a tough question. I learned how to read a long time ago. And I learned a bit about science too. It actually isn’t difficult to recognize that objects tend to fall not just down but, unless acted upon by some outside force, straight down.

A denial of that is a denial of physics.

Indeed, the burden here is in those who claim that it is “improbable” that the buildings would fallen primarily within their own footprints. Who says that? What’s the basis for it? Is there an argument that there were some outside forces acting on the building as it collapsed?

The basis, is according to the official story, the planes hit on one side of the building, thus, there would have been asymmetrical fires.

Asymmetrical fires, would have led to asymmetrical floor weakening, and asymmetrical floor walk-offs.

(As I previously quoted in another post on building seven.)


If you have a force applied unevenly to the tower, and the structure is weakened in an uneven manner, which is what NIST trying to otherwise convince the public?


Then, no, it is NOT a denial of physics to claim the building collapses in an uneven manner.

We would have expected, if this is the official explanation for the collapse, something more in-line like;

Highland Towers collapse - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Or this;

2012 collapse of Rio de Janeiro buildings - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

All folks are saying, is irregular causes, have irregular collapses.

 

[MisterBeale]

No. Not “as would be expected.”

Expected would be massive damage. The one in question was all but pristine.

View attachment 697343

View attachment 697344

The ammo was:


Wiki article: John F. Kennedy assassination rifle - Wikipedia


Compare the above photos of the so-called “magic bullet” to a bullet tested on bone (with enough velocity to shatter the bone):

Oswald in the doorway: the blog of the Oswald Innocence Campaign, by Ralph Cinque

One of the most dishonest and annoying mouthpieces for the official story is the soft-spoken James Lambert. He has written this hit-pi...

oswaldinthedoorway.blogspot.com

I find a lot of similarities in folks credulity toward the magic bullet hypothesis, and the magic passport hypothesis. When the deep state gets away with a whopper of a lie, they tend to do that shit over and over again.

 

[Soupnazi630]

I find a lot of similarities in folks credulity toward the magic bullet hypothesis, and the magic passport hypothesis. When the deep state gets away with a whopper of a lie, they tend to do that shit over and over again.

They never told a lie about the magic bullet.

They never made any claim at all about a magic bullet. The naive fools are the ones who claim that the government described a bullet zig zagging pausing and twisting etc in mid air.

The whopper of a lie you refer to never happened.

 

[NewsVine_Mariyam]

You know, I can kind of understand.

You watch a plane slam into a building, watch it smoulder a few hours, boom, it collapses. And then, the rescue operation that continued for weeks after was pretty damn traumatic.

What right do outsiders have to question such a terrible day on your city?



OTH? Building 7?

Office fires. . . Are you seriously going to buy that shit?



Wake the fuck up folks.

What government/CIA etc. does really well, with help of the MSM Mockingbird, is how they infiltrate the so called conspiracy and take it to extremes. They often place their own people into it and push the most extreme aspect of it. Whoever came up with the planes really didn't hit the buildings is probably a government stooge.

They did this in the early stages of the UFO craze in the late 70's and early 80's. They find the people making the most noise and who have the best evidence....then they befriend those folks, act like a whistleblower and they leak to them phony intel and then expose it later to discredit said person.
They are still doing it with Luis Elizondo. He never ran the AATIP program for the Pentagon...the super secret program that Harry Reid pushed through, AATIP never existed...AAWSAP did exist and Elizondo never worked on it. He did work in intelligence though.

Have you ever tried to have a conversation with anyone who states definitively that the reason that the towers fell is because they each got hit by a fully fueled passenger jet and that the fuel then spilled down into the building allowing the floors below to catch fire and weaken the underlying structure causing the entire building to collapse in it's own footprint a few hours after being hit?

That explanation actually sound like it makes plenty of sense and is easy to visualize especially if you don't know anything about construction and steel temperatures, and the laws physics, etc.

But the first time I ever heard of WTC7 I had this horrifying feeling of panic, which I now understand was cognitive dissonance. I kept insisting that there were only two towers that collapsed on 9/11 BECAUSE we all saw it on TV and I couldn't understand how there could have possibly been a third building collapse without me having known about it or having seen the footage of it since everyone was glued to their T.V.s that day, leaving me to conclude that I had either forgotten something very monumental (how was that even possible) or I never knew about it to begin with which also frightened me that something so significant had somehow escaped my attention. I felt completely discombobulated and had to research WTC7 myself. What I discovered was very disconcerting.

It is not our fault that our generation and those following us grew up watching T.V. and have witnessed what a controlled demolition looks like. Even the first news commentators mentioned that the collapse of the buildings looked just like a controlled demolition but then that got shut down in fairly short order.

So the question remains, at least for me, is that if the towers collapsed due to being hit by the planes, the fuel running down to the lower floors, those lower floors catching on fire, the steel softening and then the whole thing collapsing, then why did WTC7 collapse in what appears to the naked eye, in exactly the same manner, in what looked like a control demolition in spite of not being hit by an airplane, no jet fuel running down the building, softening the steel structure which subsequently caused the building to collapse into it's own footprint just like the other two buildings?

So WTC1 & 2 fell because they got hit by a passenger jet, while WTC7 fell in exactly the same manner because it didn't?!?

Asking questions doesn't constitute believing in a conspiracy theory.

Oh and by the way, insurance companies are notorious for weaseling out of having to pay out to policy holders on their often valid claims yet the person who held the lease on the towers Larry Silverstein, who obtained the 99 year lease just six weeks before the events, got them to pay out double on the claim by alleging that the two separate hits were two separate claims, not just a single "terrorist" attack. He then tried to sue the airlines alleging having lax security that allowed the events to occur.
Silverstein Loses Battle Over 9/11 Payouts

 

[BackAgain]

I was referring to the one used in comparison

The one which hit Kennedy would NOT have smashed it;s nose in when hitting the wrist of Connally

The one that hit Connolly did shatter his wrist (in addition to causing other wounds of entry and exit); and with that much force it would absolutely have caused much more deformation to the round.

 

[gipper]

They never told a lie about the magic bullet.

They never made any claim at all about a magic bullet. The naive fools are the ones who claim that the government described a bullet zig zagging pausing and twisting etc in mid air.

The whopper of a lie you refer to never happened.

Why must you always lie?

Dumb question uh? You’re Allen Dulles’ grand baby.

 

[Soupnazi630]

The one that hit Connolly did shatter his wrist (in addition to causing other wounds of entry and exit); and with that much force it would absolutely have caused much more deformation to the round.

No it would have caused any more deformation as the round had slowed down drasticallly affter passing through two bodies. It also tumbled which is why the damade was on the back end of the bullet,
'
there is nothing abnormal about it