The mossad and CIA did 9/11.overwhelming facts prove it.

[Penelope]

Um, yes it has. Quite a few of them. You simply ignore them and then pretend that if you ignore them, they cease to exist. The initial FEMA report, the 911 report, the ASCE report, the NIST report, the *other* NIST report......you pretend that none of them exist.

But why would a rational person ignore these studies just because you do? This is the part you don't get: you can ignore the mountains of evidence contradicting you. But you can't make anyone else ignore it. Which is why the truther conspiracy failed so spectacularly.

On any debate of the facts, you lose. As the evidence you ignore doesn't magically vanish because you close your eyes.



Says you. But you can't back that claim up either. You're literally making this up as you go along. You make an accusation, you can't back it up....and you run.

Keep running.



I've read it. What part do believe supports any of your conspiracy? The last time I asked you this question, you immediately abandoned your claim and started insulting posters personally.

If your argument had actual merit, you wouldn't have to abandon it so often.



Translation: you have jack shit to back up your claim. So you're going to insinuate 'evidence' that doesn't exist, that you can't possibly present, to prop up an argument you know you can't support factually.

Oh, you'll allude to evidence. You'll insinuate an argument. You'll offer us innuendo. But when someone asks you to get specific.......you run. Each time, every time. And I'm asking for specifics. What 'role of the NY and NJ Port Authority' are you claiming?

If you have an argument to make, make it. If all you're going to do is allude to an argument you know you can't support, then you've got nothing.

Man I hate for you to be my attorney if I did ever need one.

you aint kidding. got to do more than just this- to prove your case.

if he argued in court the same way he does here,the judge and jury would laugh him out of the courtroom in a hearbeat. the judge would say-skylar,you are not addressing the facts in the evidence presented in this video by your opponent,you are changing the subject evading these facts.you are not saying anything about the evidence presented.if you dont say anything and just keep changing the subject to something else instead of addressing the evidence your opponent presented in this video,then why are you here? you are wasting my time and the courts time.

He knows it we know it that thats what would happen.

 

[Penelope]

Now fires that were going in WTC7 for about 7 hours would have set off any explosive charges or Thermite/thermate charges long before the 7 hours was up.....Remember these were uncontrolled fires.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uVHuAexB83w

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Afb7eUHr64U

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dRKCSmnR3ow

Here watch this one, at least the last half.

 

[MHunterB]

"I don't believe from what I have read or seen or heard that fire brought any of the buildings down or ? planes."

And anyone else should care whether or not some anonymous bint on a chat board 'believes' about 9/11 WHY, exactly?

What can you say for yourself that could possibly make your opinion worth anything more than anyone else's opinion? What qualifications do you have that any other poster does not?

 

[Penelope]

"I don't believe from what I have read or seen or heard that fire brought any of the buildings down or ? planes."

And anyone else should care whether or not some anonymous bint on a chat board 'believes' about 9/11 WHY, exactly?

What can you say for yourself that could possibly make your opinion worth anything more than anyone else's opinion? What qualifications do you have that any other poster does not?

I probably read more about it. Anyone who thinks otherwise is well 'not read enough on topic.

That is my qualification, my brain.

 

[MHunterB]

"I don't believe from what I have read or seen or heard that fire brought any of the buildings down or ? planes."

And anyone else should care whether or not some anonymous bint on a chat board 'believes' about 9/11 WHY, exactly?

What can you say for yourself that could possibly make your opinion worth anything more than anyone else's opinion? What qualifications do you have that any other poster does not?

I probably read more about it. Anyone who thinks otherwise is well 'not read enough on topic.

That is my qualification, my brain.

That's hilarious : )) So now you're assuming that anyone who doesn't share your views is "well not read enough on topic" (sic). I was asking about YOUR qualifications in and of themselves: perhaps I didn't make that clear enough before.

 

[Penelope]

"I don't believe from what I have read or seen or heard that fire brought any of the buildings down or ? planes."

And anyone else should care whether or not some anonymous bint on a chat board 'believes' about 9/11 WHY, exactly?

What can you say for yourself that could possibly make your opinion worth anything more than anyone else's opinion? What qualifications do you have that any other poster does not?

I probably read more about it. Anyone who thinks otherwise is well 'not read enough on topic.

That is my qualification, my brain.

That's hilarious : )) So now you're assuming that anyone who doesn't share your views is "well not read enough on topic" (sic). I was asking about YOUR qualifications in and of themselves: perhaps I didn't make that clear enough before.

Yes that is exactly what I'm saying. Ever read the PNAC document, if so how many pages is it and what is it about? Who was it wrote by, and who was it signed by?

 

[SFC Ollie]

Now fires that were going in WTC7 for about 7 hours would have set off any explosive charges or Thermite/thermate charges long before the 7 hours was up.....Remember these were uncontrolled fires.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uVHuAexB83w

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Afb7eUHr64U

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dRKCSmnR3ow

I don't believe from what I have read or seen or heard that fire brought any of the buildings down or ? planes.

You need to expand your reading. And don't listen to 911shitforbrains, he's backed every conspiracy theory there has ever been even after proved wrong 100 times, and if you ever don't agree with him then you must be a paid government agent. And he'll pretend you are on ignore so he doesn't have to answer you and he'll make hs stupid fart jokes whenever you post.

 

[SFC Ollie]

Now fires that were going in WTC7 for about 7 hours would have set off any explosive charges or Thermite/thermate charges long before the 7 hours was up.....Remember these were uncontrolled fires.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uVHuAexB83w

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Afb7eUHr64U

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dRKCSmnR3ow

Here watch this one, at least the last half.

I've seen it. It lies in the first 20 seconds. It completely ignores the failings of the girders and the caving in of the west penthouse. Most truther videos do not show the first ten seconds of the collapse because it destroys their theories....
Something had to be happening before the west Penthouse fell and during the 8 seconds after it fell into the center of the building before the roofline even moved an inch.

 

[SFC Ollie]

"I don't believe from what I have read or seen or heard that fire brought any of the buildings down or ? planes."

And anyone else should care whether or not some anonymous bint on a chat board 'believes' about 9/11 WHY, exactly?

What can you say for yourself that could possibly make your opinion worth anything more than anyone else's opinion? What qualifications do you have that any other poster does not?

I probably read more about it. Anyone who thinks otherwise is well 'not read enough on topic.

That is my qualification, my brain.

And I bet everything you read is geared toward what you want to be true. That's not finding the truth. Finding the truth is listening and reading every side, as I have. And with my background touching on parts of things here and there I have made up my own mind about what is right and the government reports have not been disproven...

 

[Skylar]

While we're at it who else was housed in there, SEC, IRS, US secret service, DOD(we must remember Rumsfield had been drilled right before for misplacing? (right) loosing trillions of dollars, CIA, and NY City Office Of Emergency. (among others, banks and ins. companies.

No, Rumsfeld hadn't been drilled for losing trillions of dollars. Rumsfeld had in a speech said that the DOD couldn't adequately *track* 2.3 trillion in transactions because their computers were so old that they wouldn't talk to each other. Here's what Rumsfeld actually said:

The technology revolution has transformed organizations across the private sector, but not ours, not fully, not yet. We are, as they say, tangled in our anchor chain. Our financial systems are decades old. According to some estimates, we cannot track $2.3 trillion in transactions. We cannot share information from floor to floor in this building because it's stored on dozens of technological systems that are inaccessible or incompatible.

Donald Rumsfeld
September 10th, 2001

http://www.defenselink.mil/speeches/2001/s20010910-secdef.html

An account confirmed by audits on the topic.

In fiscal 1999, a defense audit found that about $2.3 trillion of balances, transactions and adjustments were inadequately documented. These "unsupported" transactions do not mean the department ultimately cannot account for them, she advised, but that tracking down needed documents would take a long time. Auditors, she said, might have to go to different computer systems, to different locations or access different databases to get information.

http://www.defenselink.mil/news/Apr2002/n04032002_200204033.html

The money wasn't missing. The transactions were inadequately documented making it difficulty to compile. Rumsfeld wsan't announcing 2.3 trillion were missing. He was making an argument for a billion dollar computer upgrade at the DOD to make tracking these transactions easier and more efficient.

But you didn't know that because you read the conspiracy short hand rather than fact checking any of what you were told to believe.

Fact check next time, Pen. Truthers lie....a lot. Consider their statements a jumping off point for your own investigations. But rarely a reliable source in their own right.

Now Jerome Haurer was hired by Giuliani in ( a Zionist Jew with history of bio terrorism) and he completely redone the 23 floor of the building investing 13 million bucks to make it the state of the art Emergency Operation Center, which was unveiled in 1999. They must of felt that building was very safe right??

So you've just radically upped the complexity of your conspiracy by folding in Jerome Haurer? Um, do you have any evidence whatsoever that the man played any role in the collapse of WTC 7? Of course not.

Its just your typical schtick of vaguely insinuating an argument that you know you can't factually support?

Funny how Guillani and his crew on 9-11 ran down to the Mayor office instead of in that emergency center, WHO was in there???? Command center !!!!!! which disappeared at about 5:30 pm.

Sigh.....you really don't know what you're talking about, Pen. Gulliani was at the WTC plaza until the towers actually fell. They left after the WTC 7 was damaged and their people were getting injured there.

I did not conceive of the entire tower coming down, but as he was saying that, I could see the desk shaking and I could see people in the outer office going under desks, and then all of a sudden I could see outside a tremendous amount of debris and it first felt like an earthquake, and then it looked like a nuclear cloud. So we realized very shortly that we were in danger in the building, that the building could come down. It had been damaged. It was shaking. So the police commissioner and I, and the deputy police commissioner, we jointly decided that we had to try to get everyone out of the building.

So we went downstairs into the basement, we tried two or three exits, could not get out, I don't know if they were locked or blocked, we couldn't get out. We went back up to the main floor to see if we could go out the main entrance, but at that point things were worse, there had been more damage done and it was blocked, and then two gentlemen, I believe janitors came up to us and said, there's a way out through the basement, through 100 Church Street. I knew 100 Church Street because that's where the Law Department was located, and we agreed that we would go with him.

So we all went downstairs. We walked through the hallway. We got to the door that he had selected. He opened the door and there was sort of a sigh of relief, and when we walked outside we were in the lobby of 100 Church Street. And then we wondered if we hadn't gone from bad to worse, because when you looked outside at 100 Church Street, what you saw again was a tremendous cloud, debris flying through the streets, and people being injured. And one of our deputy commissioners and one of my former security people were brought in at that point injured, bloodied and injured and obviously in a state of shock from what had happened to them, having been hit by debris.

So the Commissioner and I had to make a quick decision. Do we remain in the building and use that as a place to hold a press conference, to give people information, because there were some press right there? Do we remain here and operate here for a while until the cloud passes, or do we go outside? And the choice that we made was to go outside. And the choice that we made to go outside was because we felt we had, you know, a core of New York City government together at this point: the police commissioner, the head of Emergency Services, three of the four deputy mayors, the commissioner of public health, and that if we went outside we had a better chance of more people surviving than if we stayed in the building where if something happened and the building crashed, you'd virtually have all of city government gone.

And we could communicate better from outside, hopefully be able to get through on radio or on television. So we went outside, grabbed a member of the press. I remember Andrew Kurtzman was the reporter that was there, and I said you know, come with us. And we began making telephone calls as we were marching up, asking people to remain calm, and asking people to go north, which were the instructions that Pete Ganci had given me.

National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States

And he didn't go to the mayors office. He set up again at the police academy. That's where they had their press conferences from.

We were able to get through, and now the sequence gets very, very foggy in my own recollection, I'm not sure what happened in sequence, but very shortly after, maybe two or three blocks north of that, we heard another tremendous noise, realized that the second building had now come down, and saw the cloud from the second building come up the streets. And we're trying to determine at this point whether to return to City Hall or to set up operations of city government at the police academy. And we thought of several other sites. The police commissioner recommended that we use the police academy as our command center, because it had all of the communications equipment and it could be outfitted in minutes to be a command center.

And my chief of staff told me that City Hall had been abandoned because it had been hit very, very hard by debris. So we selected the police academy as our command center. We actually, Senator Kerrey, discussed New School as a place to come because we walked right past here, but because the communications equipment was already there, the police commissioner decided on the police academy. We walked up to the firehouse on Houston Street, which is a few blocks north of here, and decided we'd stop there so we could make telephone calls. The police department broke in, not indicating any rivalry between the police department and the fire department, it was the right thing to do, they were not trying to destroy fire department property. ....

.....We then arrived at the police academy and set up a command center at the police academy and the command center at the police academy was complete with everything that we needed, all of the facilities, and were able to have a press conference there about 2:30 in the afternoon in which we could explain to people how the whole thing would be managed from there on in.

Office of the Mayor | Contact the Mayor | City of New York

You really don't know what you're talking about. And like your claims regarding Rumsfeld on this page and Silverstein in previous pages, you're spectacularly uninformed.

We have to forget that World Com and Enron were being investigated as well. The CIA and FBI lost all their files on Bin Laden, Al Quaida etc. Lord only knows what insider trading was going on at Solomon Brothers. And the DOD never found the trillions misplaced to date.

Says who? The Word Com and Enron investigations continued. There was no indication that any evidence was lost in either investigation. And there were convictions galore. For crying out loud, Enron wouldnt even file for bankruptcy until December 2001, almost 3 months after 911. The 'Enron Scandal' didn't break until October of 2001, nearly a month after 911. The investigation was in its earliest stages. Indictments didn't come down until 2004.

And who says that the CIA and FBI 'lost all their files on Bin Laden'?The CIA doesn't say this. The FBI doesn't say this. Its just you.....quoting yourself. And as we've established above, you don't know what you're talking about.

Now lets talk security . Well it was Krolls and well Mr. Jerome Hauer worked for Krolls, but
in comes MR. John O'Neil, who was a top expert on Al Qaeda, Osama, and had been investigating the USS Cole bombing. Guess he found out to much as he soon was dismissed and was made in charge of the WTC in Aug 23, 2001, of which he lost his life.

O'Neil worked for the FBI. The FBI wasn't the center of the investigation into Bin Laden. The CIA was. O'Neil sent his people to work with the CIA for exactly this reason.

And you're alluding to a hell of a lot of nefarious shit with Hauer.....and you haven't been able to back any of it up with some much as a scintilla of actual evidence. You're simply imagining it. Which is worthless.

If you have proof that Hauer did anything improper, present it. But baseless innuendo isn't evidence. Its an excuse for evidence, meaning nothing.

The reason R. Guiliani gave for not being in the command center was Fema drills were scheduled for 9-12, How utterly convenient.

Um, you're clueless.

Read above. Gulliani was at the command center. The reason he gave for leaving was that it was dangerous after the first tower fell, had damaged the building, made communication difficult and had severely injured one of his people. They relocated to the police academy after finding a way out of WTC 7 through the basement.

For the love of God, Pen....educate yourself. Your ignorance on this topic is astonishing. Your made up fantasy version of events, delusional.

 

[Skylar]

I probably read more about it. Anyone who thinks otherwise is well 'not read enough on topic.

That is my qualification, my brain.

That's hilarious : )) So now you're assuming that anyone who doesn't share your views is "well not read enough on topic" (sic). I was asking about YOUR qualifications in and of themselves: perhaps I didn't make that clear enough before.

Yes that is exactly what I'm saying. Ever read the PNAC document, if so how many pages is it and what is it about? Who was it wrote by, and who was it signed by?

Pen, you've never read the document. You're 'quizzing' us because you don't have any evidence in the PNAC document to back any of your conspiracies. I've challenged you no less than 4 times to show us the portions of the PNAC document that you believe makes your argument....

.......and you've starkly refused every time. You haven't read the doc, you have no idea what its about, nor can you offer us any relevant quote that a thing to do with what we're discussing.

You're doing your 'insinuate an argument you can't possibly support factually' schtick. Which is meaningless. If you have an argument to make, make it. But innuendo is an excuse for a failed argument. An excuse for a lack of evidence.

Try again.

 

[Skylar]

I've seen it. It lies in the first 20 seconds. It completely ignores the failings of the girders and the caving in of the west penthouse. Most truther videos do not show the first ten seconds of the collapse because it destroys their theories....
Something had to be happening before the west Penthouse fell and during the 8 seconds after it fell into the center of the building before the roofline even moved an inch.

[/quote]

Bingo. The penthouse caves *into* the WTC 7. The structural girders were already collapsing 8 full seconds before the facade fell. In fact, if you start from the first deformation of the penthouse, its a full 19 seconds.

The truthers will only acknowledge from the moment the facade fell, and ignore the building already caving in on itself long before the facade's collapse.

Something a person interested in the truth would never do.

 

[Skylar]

Now fires that were going in WTC7 for about 7 hours would have set off any explosive charges or Thermite/thermate charges long before the 7 hours was up.....Remember these were uncontrolled fires.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uVHuAexB83w

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Afb7eUHr64U

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dRKCSmnR3ow

I don't believe from what I have read or seen or heard that fire brought any of the buildings down or ? planes.

The FDNY contradicts you. A lot.

We walked over by number Seven World Trade Center as it was burning and saw this 40-plus story building with fire on nearly all floors.

–FDNY Lieutenant Robert Larocco
http://graphics8.nytimes.com/packages/pdf/nyregion/20050812_WTC_GRAPHIC/9110081.PDF

.Just when you thought it was over, you're walking by this building and you're hearing this building creak and fully involved in flames. It's like, is it coming down next? Sure enough, about a half an hour later it came down.

–FDNY Lieutenant James McGlynn

When the building came down it was completely involved in fire, all forty-seven stories.

–FDNY Assistant Chief Harry Myers

At this point Seven World Trade was going heavy, and they weren't letting anybody get too close. Everybody was expecting that to come down.

–Firefighter Vincent Massa

The whole south side of Seven World Trade had been hit by the collapse of the second Tower, and there was fire on every floor."

– Fire Captain Brenda Berkman

"When I got out and onto a clear pile, I see that 7 World Trade Center and the customs house have serious fire. Almost every window has fire. It is an amazing site.

–Captain Jay Jonas,

7 World Trade was burning from the ground to the ceiling fully involved. It was unbelievable.

–Firefighter Steve Modica

And of course, your not actually addressing Ollie's excellent point: any bombs would have long since burned up. Explosives would have exploded or been reduced to bubbling pools of goo, relays would have melted, wires would have been ruined, timers would have melted, receivers would have melted.

As the building burned for 7 hours, getting worse as it went along. No system of demolition could have been used during these fires. And your ilk argue that the charges went all the way to the roof. So we're talking *thousands* of charges.

Which is laughably implausible.

 

[Skylar]

I thought you were going to be wise and not feed these paid shills who know it was an inside job anymore? Looks like i was wrong about you. Looks like your here just to feed the trolls like Koko does.

Translation: don't ever, ever talk or even listen to someone who doesn't already think exactly like you do.

Ignore, ignore, ignore: the mantra of the truther faithful.

 

[Penelope]

Now fires that were going in WTC7 for about 7 hours would have set off any explosive charges or Thermite/thermate charges long before the 7 hours was up.....Remember these were uncontrolled fires.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uVHuAexB83w

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Afb7eUHr64U

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dRKCSmnR3ow

I don't believe from what I have read or seen or heard that fire brought any of the buildings down or ? planes.

The FDNY contradicts you. A lot.

"When I got out and onto a clear pile, I see that 7 World Trade Center and the customs house have serious fire. Almost every window has fire. It is an amazing site.

–Captain Jay Jonas,

7 World Trade was burning from the ground to the ceiling fully involved. It was unbelievable.

–Firefighter Steve Modica

And of course, your not actually addressing Ollie's excellent point: any bombs would have long since burned up. Explosives would have exploded or been reduced to bubbling pools of goo, relays would have melted, wires would have been ruined, timers would have melted, receivers would have melted.

As the building burned for 7 hours, getting worse as it went along. No system of demolition could have been used during these fires. And your ilk argue that the charges went all the way to the roof. So we're talking *thousands* of charges.

Which is laughably implausible.

I stand by everything I say, one little point, Rudy was at command center but did leave, so he has said and also by then the command center was ruined. Well lot of good a 13 bil dollar command center does.

I stand by everything I said . All three buildings free fell. and the masterminds were some Zionist mossed and some neocons from our government. To think 19 little hijackers did this is asinine. I look forward to the new investigation. Way to many coincidences. Just having it on 9-11 is a clue.

So sorry you have not disproved anything I said, except for Rudy being at the command center so he said. What is laughable is that 13 hijackers hijacked 4 planes and did this. The buildings came down via explosives and Muslims didn't have access. I can't wait till the public all knows what Israel did to us, reading PNAC and Strategy for a Clean Break seals it. A false flag, blamed on Muslims.

Yes that is why we went to Iraq, good grief.

 

[Skylar]

I stand by everything I say, one little point, Rudy was at command center but did leave, so he has said and also by then the command center was ruined.

Um, that's a completely different story than you told before. You said he went to the Mayor's Office, not the Command Center in the WTC 7. Turns out that was a complete load of shit. Worse, you said that Guiliani claimed he didn't go to the command center because there were FEMA drills. That was a steaming pile of shit too.

Remember, Pen....and this point is fundamental: you don't actually have a clue what you're talking about.

Well lot of good a 13 bil dollar command center does.

That's 13 million. Not billion. You're off by 3 orders of magnitude. Again, you don't know what you're talking about.

I stand by everything I said . All three buildings free fell. and the masterminds were some Zionist mossed and some neocons from our government. To think 19 little hijackers did this is asinine. I look forward to the new investigation. Way to many coincidences. Just having it on 9-11 is a clue.

Pen.....you don't actually have an argument. You're *insinuating* that Hauer did something nefarious. But you can't actually back that with jack shit. You're literally offering your imagination as evidence. And it isn't. No matter how hard you want it to be, you just making nonsense up, pulled sideways out of your ass, and backed by absolutely nothing isn't evidence.

And that's why you fail.

So sorry you have not disproved anything I said, except for Rudy being at the command center so he said.

Um, Pen.... you haven't proven any of the nonsense you're insinuating. You've just typed it. You making shit up about people you don't know nor have ever met isn't evidence. Its your imagination. You have absolutely nothing to back your tale of 'Hauer', not a scintilla of evidence. Which you already know....which is why you only 'allude' to arguments you know you can't support.

Your imagination isn't evidence.

And of course, I destroyed your nonsense about Rumsfeld. You've offered us nothing to back your silly claim that 'all the evidence about Obama Bin Laden was lost' when WTC 7 fell. You literally made that shit up from nothing. Show us anything backing that claim. You can't....as your claim is pristinely evidence free.

And again, your imagination isn't evidence.

What is laughable is that 13 hijackers hijacked 4 planes and did this. The buildings came down via explosives and Muslims didn't have access.

Um, Pen.....you can't back any of that with evidence either. Nor can you fill in the enormous holes in the 'bomb' theory that simply destroy your conspiracy. And when challenged to do either.....you run.

I can't wait till the public all knows what Israel did to us, reading PNAC and Strategy for a Clean Break seals it. A false flag, blamed on Muslims.

What 'Israel' did to us? Dear God, did your silly conspiracy just get *more* fantastically elaborate?

The PNAC doc doesn't mention any false flag attack. You've never read the document. You have no idea what's in it. You're still trying to insinuate an argument you know you can't factually support.

For the 5th time, show us the portions of the PNAC document that you believe supports your argument. Every time you I ask you to actually make your argument and present your evidence......you run.

Um, why?

Yes that is why we went to Iraq, good grief.

Then why, pray tell, if the PNAC doc folks who were in the Bush Administration had perpetrated 911 as a false flag to justify the invasion of Iraq....

....did they blame Saudis? Why not blame Iraqis? It would have been a golden ticket for the invasion, with full support from the world and unlimted support domestically and a blank check to fund it. But instead, they implicate our *closest* allies in the Middle East.

Um, that makes no sense whatsoever. But like all the evidence that contradicts you, you ignore it and imagine whatever you want. What you keep failing to do is to convince us to ignore what you must. Or to accept your imagination as anything more than baseless speculation backed by absolutely nothing.

 

[Penelope]

I stand by everything I say, one little point, Rudy was at command center but did leave, so he has said and also by then the command center was ruined.

Um, that's a completely different story than you told before. You said he went to the Mayor's Office, not the Command Center in the WTC 7. Turns out that was a complete load of shit. Worse, you said that Guiliani claimed he didn't go to the command center because there were FEMA drills. That was a steaming pile of shit too.

Remember, Pen....and this point is fundamental: you don't actually have a clue what you're talking about.

Well lot of good a 13 bil dollar command center does.

That's 13 million. Not billion. You're off by 3 orders of magnitude. Again, you don't know what you're talking about.



Pen.....you don't actually have an argument. You're *insinuating* that Hauer did something nefarious. But you can't actually back that with jack shit. You're literally offering your imagination as evidence. And it isn't. No matter how hard you want it to be, you just making nonsense up, pulled sideways out of your ass, and backed by absolutely nothing isn't evidence.

And that's why you fail.



Um, Pen.... you haven't proven any of the nonsense you're insinuating. You've just typed it. You making shit up about people you don't know nor have ever met isn't evidence. Its your imagination. You have absolutely nothing to back your tale of 'Hauer', not a scintilla of evidence. Which you already know....which is why you only 'allude' to arguments you know you can't support.

Your imagination isn't evidence.

And of course, I destroyed your nonsense about Rumsfeld. You've offered us nothing to back your silly claim that 'all the evidence about Obama Bin Laden was lost' when WTC 7 fell. You literally made that shit up from nothing. Show us anything backing that claim. You can't....as your claim is pristinely evidence free.

And again, your imagination isn't evidence.



Um, Pen.....you can't back any of that with evidence either. Nor can you fill in the enormous holes in the 'bomb' theory that simply destroy your conspiracy. And when challenged to do either.....you run.

I can't wait till the public all knows what Israel did to us, reading PNAC and Strategy for a Clean Break seals it. A false flag, blamed on Muslims.

What 'Israel' did to us? Dear God, did your silly conspiracy just get *more* fantastically elaborate?

The PNAC doc doesn't mention any false flag attack. You've never read the document. You have no idea what's in it. You're still trying to insinuate an argument you know you can't factually support.

For the 5th time, show us the portions of the PNAC document that you believe supports your argument. Every time you I ask you to actually make your argument and present your evidence......you run.

Um, why?

Yes that is why we went to Iraq, good grief.

Then why, pray tell, if the PNAC doc folks who were in the Bush Administration had perpetrated 911 as a false flag to justify the invasion of Iraq....

....did they blame Saudis? Why not blame Iraqis? It would have been a golden ticket for the invasion, with full support from the world and unlimted support domestically and a blank check to fund it. But instead, they implicate our *closest* allies in the Middle East.

Um, that makes no sense whatsoever. But like all the evidence that contradicts you, you ignore it and imagine whatever you want. What you keep failing to do is to convince us to ignore what you must. Or to accept your imagination as anything more than baseless speculation backed by absolutely nothing.

Well lets see the planes? and the hijackers? didn't take the 3 buildings down nor did the fires make them free fall, so you see the problem you have?

No access, the only motive would be revenge for the Muslims and to make the USA fear them and hate them and say ok to war to protect our soil, on the other hand,

who had access,
who had the security
who had airport security
who owned the buildings
who benefitted
who had motive
who are the ones who mainly wrote PNAC
why is PM Bibl in the New American Century article
who made lots of money from this
who were the dancing Israelis in vans
Why did PM Bibi say "This is Good"

all you have is what pics of supposed hijackers, and the gov saying Osama is the mastermind. Right, unreal.

Why would they blame the Saudis (they didn't really blame the Saudi monarchy) , well lets see the hijackers were suppose to be arabs and Osama came from SA, and they sure wasn't going to blame Israel, and SA played along, they don't care, as they got rid of Hussein so they made out as well.

hey you ever meet Osama or the hijackers? what do you know about them?

what I'm using to support my theory is the above questions, as well as the coincidences and who had the main motive and means.

 

[Faun]

I stand by everything I say, one little point, Rudy was at command center but did leave, so he has said and also by then the command center was ruined.

Um, that's a completely different story than you told before. You said he went to the Mayor's Office, not the Command Center in the WTC 7. Turns out that was a complete load of shit. Worse, you said that Guiliani claimed he didn't go to the command center because there were FEMA drills. That was a steaming pile of shit too.

Remember, Pen....and this point is fundamental: you don't actually have a clue what you're talking about.



That's 13 million. Not billion. You're off by 3 orders of magnitude. Again, you don't know what you're talking about.



Pen.....you don't actually have an argument. You're *insinuating* that Hauer did something nefarious. But you can't actually back that with jack shit. You're literally offering your imagination as evidence. And it isn't. No matter how hard you want it to be, you just making nonsense up, pulled sideways out of your ass, and backed by absolutely nothing isn't evidence.

And that's why you fail.



Um, Pen.... you haven't proven any of the nonsense you're insinuating. You've just typed it. You making shit up about people you don't know nor have ever met isn't evidence. Its your imagination. You have absolutely nothing to back your tale of 'Hauer', not a scintilla of evidence. Which you already know....which is why you only 'allude' to arguments you know you can't support.

Your imagination isn't evidence.

And of course, I destroyed your nonsense about Rumsfeld. You've offered us nothing to back your silly claim that 'all the evidence about Obama Bin Laden was lost' when WTC 7 fell. You literally made that shit up from nothing. Show us anything backing that claim. You can't....as your claim is pristinely evidence free.

And again, your imagination isn't evidence.



Um, Pen.....you can't back any of that with evidence either. Nor can you fill in the enormous holes in the 'bomb' theory that simply destroy your conspiracy. And when challenged to do either.....you run.


What 'Israel' did to us? Dear God, did your silly conspiracy just get *more* fantastically elaborate?

The PNAC doc doesn't mention any false flag attack. You've never read the document. You have no idea what's in it. You're still trying to insinuate an argument you know you can't factually support.

For the 5th time, show us the portions of the PNAC document that you believe supports your argument. Every time you I ask you to actually make your argument and present your evidence......you run.

Um, why?

Yes that is why we went to Iraq, good grief.

Then why, pray tell, if the PNAC doc folks who were in the Bush Administration had perpetrated 911 as a false flag to justify the invasion of Iraq....

....did they blame Saudis? Why not blame Iraqis? It would have been a golden ticket for the invasion, with full support from the world and unlimted support domestically and a blank check to fund it. But instead, they implicate our *closest* allies in the Middle East.

Um, that makes no sense whatsoever. But like all the evidence that contradicts you, you ignore it and imagine whatever you want. What you keep failing to do is to convince us to ignore what you must. Or to accept your imagination as anything more than baseless speculation backed by absolutely nothing.

Well lets see the planes? and the hijackers? didn't take the 3 buildings down nor did the fires make them free fall, so you see the problem you have?

No access, the only motive would be revenge for the Muslims and to make the USA fear them and hate them and say ok to war to protect our soil, on the other hand,

who had access,
who had the security
who had airport security
who owned the buildings
who benefitted
who had motive
who are the ones who mainly wrote PNAC
why is PM Bibl in the New American Century article
who made lots of money from this
who were the dancing Israelis in vans
Why did PM Bibi say "This is Good"

all you have is what pics of supposed hijackers, and the gov saying Osama is the mastermind. Right, unreal.

Why would they blame the Saudis (they didn't really blame the Saudi monarchy) , well lets see the hijackers were suppose to be arabs and Osama came from SA, and they sure wasn't going to blame Israel, and SA played along, they don't care, as they got rid of Hussein so they made out as well.

hey you ever meet Osama or the hijackers? what do you know about them?

what I'm using to support my theory is the above questions, as well as the coincidences and who had the main motive and means.

And that's where your theory crumbles into non-existence ... questions don't support theories ... answers do; and you have none.

 

[Penelope]

Um, that's a completely different story than you told before. You said he went to the Mayor's Office, not the Command Center in the WTC 7. Turns out that was a complete load of shit. Worse, you said that Guiliani claimed he didn't go to the command center because there were FEMA drills. That was a steaming pile of shit too.

Remember, Pen....and this point is fundamental: you don't actually have a clue what you're talking about.



That's 13 million. Not billion. You're off by 3 orders of magnitude. Again, you don't know what you're talking about.



Pen.....you don't actually have an argument. You're *insinuating* that Hauer did something nefarious. But you can't actually back that with jack shit. You're literally offering your imagination as evidence. And it isn't. No matter how hard you want it to be, you just making nonsense up, pulled sideways out of your ass, and backed by absolutely nothing isn't evidence.

And that's why you fail.



Um, Pen.... you haven't proven any of the nonsense you're insinuating. You've just typed it. You making shit up about people you don't know nor have ever met isn't evidence. Its your imagination. You have absolutely nothing to back your tale of 'Hauer', not a scintilla of evidence. Which you already know....which is why you only 'allude' to arguments you know you can't support.

Your imagination isn't evidence.

And of course, I destroyed your nonsense about Rumsfeld. You've offered us nothing to back your silly claim that 'all the evidence about Obama Bin Laden was lost' when WTC 7 fell. You literally made that shit up from nothing. Show us anything backing that claim. You can't....as your claim is pristinely evidence free.

And again, your imagination isn't evidence.



Um, Pen.....you can't back any of that with evidence either. Nor can you fill in the enormous holes in the 'bomb' theory that simply destroy your conspiracy. And when challenged to do either.....you run.


What 'Israel' did to us? Dear God, did your silly conspiracy just get *more* fantastically elaborate?

The PNAC doc doesn't mention any false flag attack. You've never read the document. You have no idea what's in it. You're still trying to insinuate an argument you know you can't factually support.

For the 5th time, show us the portions of the PNAC document that you believe supports your argument. Every time you I ask you to actually make your argument and present your evidence......you run.

Um, why?



Then why, pray tell, if the PNAC doc folks who were in the Bush Administration had perpetrated 911 as a false flag to justify the invasion of Iraq....

....did they blame Saudis? Why not blame Iraqis? It would have been a golden ticket for the invasion, with full support from the world and unlimted support domestically and a blank check to fund it. But instead, they implicate our *closest* allies in the Middle East.

Um, that makes no sense whatsoever. But like all the evidence that contradicts you, you ignore it and imagine whatever you want. What you keep failing to do is to convince us to ignore what you must. Or to accept your imagination as anything more than baseless speculation backed by absolutely nothing.

Well lets see the planes? and the hijackers? didn't take the 3 buildings down nor did the fires make them free fall, so you see the problem you have?

No access, the only motive would be revenge for the Muslims and to make the USA fear them and hate them and say ok to war to protect our soil, on the other hand,

who had access,
who had the security
who had airport security
who owned the buildings
who benefitted
who had motive
who are the ones who mainly wrote PNAC
why is PM Bibl in the New American Century article
who made lots of money from this
who were the dancing Israelis in vans
Why did PM Bibi say "This is Good"

all you have is what pics of supposed hijackers, and the gov saying Osama is the mastermind. Right, unreal.

Why would they blame the Saudis (they didn't really blame the Saudi monarchy) , well lets see the hijackers were suppose to be arabs and Osama came from SA, and they sure wasn't going to blame Israel, and SA played along, they don't care, as they got rid of Hussein so they made out as well.

hey you ever meet Osama or the hijackers? what do you know about them?

what I'm using to support my theory is the above questions, as well as the coincidences and who had the main motive and means.

And that's where your theory crumbles into non-existence ... questions don't support theories ... answers do; and you have none.

Um, all those question can be answered by one word= Zionists.

 

[SteadyMercury]

Um, all those question can be answered by one word= Zionists.

Who trampled by pepper garden?
Who could have gotten past the fence?
Who was heavy enough to trample?
Who could have done it at night when I wasn't looking?

Um, all those questions can be answer by one word = unicorns.