Title 18, "Misprision of treason" filed in District Court

[Fizz]

Since the only core that can be shown on 9-11 appears to be concrete,

your words must be wrong.

no concrete in your picture.

null post.

 

[Liability]

HERE it is.

The DEFINITIVE picture of a CONCRETE CORE at the WORLD TRADE TOWER!



---------->

.​

If you look closely, you can even see evidence of rust.






Oh. Wait.

 

[DiveCon]

Since the only core that can be shown on 9-11 appears to be concrete,



your words must be wrong.

you lie once again, dipshit

 

[Christophera]

That cannot be because images do not lie.

CONCRETE
A portion of the top of the WTC 2 concrete core is about to land on WTC 3.

The west wall of WTC 1. The narrow end. The north concrete core wall has already fallen and we can see into the core.

The engineer of record AND Oxford Illustrated Encyclopedia of Invention and Technology, of 1992 both identify a concrete core.

 

[DiveCon]

That cannot be because images do not lie.

CONCRETE
A portion of the top of the WTC 2 concrete core is about to land on WTC 3.



The west wall of WTC 1. The narrow end. The north concrete core wall has already fallen and we can see into the core.

yes, images don't lie, but YOU do
you don't know what the fuck you are talking about
the only concrete in the WTC was in the FLOORS
what you see falling in that image is a FLOOR
you can be certain of this because you can see a FLOOR TRUSS in the concrete
you dumb fucking moronic idiot

 

[Fizz]

here is a bunny with a concrete core on his head.

 

[Liability]

here is a bunny with a concrete core on his head.

That Bunny looks silly!

"SHOULDA used Inviscrete!" Smart bunnies always do.

Inviscrete. Clearly superior.

 

[Fizz]

That Bunny looks silly!

"SHOULDA used Inviscrete!" Smart bunnies always do.

Inviscrete. Clearly superior.

thats what the perps would want you to say.

 

[Gamolon]

Why does the BBC think there was a concrete core?

Even tho it is the wrong concrete core, obvious because there is no room for elevators.

Let's count the mistakes in this picture shall we? After all these mistakes, you still try and use that picture as a credible source.

1. They show the impact on the wrong side of the north tower based on the core's orientation in the picture. The plane in the above picture is shown to have impacted the short axis core side which would put it on the east or west face. The plane struck the north face.

2. The fires were NOT hot enough to melt steel beams.

3. The north tower was 417m. The south tower was 415m.

4. The core is not correct.

yet you want to use THAT mistake ridden picture as part of your proof?

 

[Gamolon]

That cannot be because images do not lie.

CONCRETE
A portion of the top of the WTC 2 concrete core is about to land on WTC 3.

How come that piece of the core is attached to the outside perimeter column facade?

 

[DiveCon]

That cannot be because images do not lie.

CONCRETE
A portion of the top of the WTC 2 concrete core is about to land on WTC 3.

How come that piece of the core is attached to the outside perimeter column facade?

dont forget its OUTSIDE the facade
and if you look close on it you can see a piece of the steel floor truss

 

[Gamolon]

That cannot be because images do not lie.

CONCRETE
A portion of the top of the WTC 2 concrete core is about to land on WTC 3.

How come that piece of the core is attached to the outside perimeter column facade?

dont forget its OUTSIDE the facade
and if you look close on it you can see a piece of the steel floor truss

Interesting video I found that proves Chris is yet again (big surprise here) full of shit.
[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lhv4C6HFsc4]YouTube - WTC2 "Collapse" on WTC3 - Veoh anonymous new 2008[/ame]

Watch at about :09 to about :14. I see the same piece of debris with DUST trailing of it. It is NOT a piece of concrete.

Proof again Chris is making shit up.

 

[DiveCon]

How come that piece of the core is attached to the outside perimeter column facade?

dont forget its OUTSIDE the facade
and if you look close on it you can see a piece of the steel floor truss

Interesting video I found that proves Chris is yet again (big surprise here) full of shit.
[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lhv4C6HFsc4]YouTube - WTC2 "Collapse" on WTC3 - Veoh anonymous new 2008[/ame]

Watch at about :09 to about :14. I see the same piece of debris with DUST trailing of it. It is NOT a piece of concrete.

Proof again Chris is making shit up.

yup, but then i knew he was full of shit with his first post

 

[Gamolon]

dont forget its OUTSIDE the facade
and if you look close on it you can see a piece of the steel floor truss

Interesting video I found that proves Chris is yet again (big surprise here) full of shit.
[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lhv4C6HFsc4]YouTube - WTC2 "Collapse" on WTC3 - Veoh anonymous new 2008[/ame]

Watch at about :09 to about :14. I see the same piece of debris with DUST trailing of it. It is NOT a piece of concrete.

Proof again Chris is making shit up.

yup, but then i knew he was full of shit with his first post

We ALL did.

 

[DiveCon]

Interesting video I found that proves Chris is yet again (big surprise here) full of shit.
YouTube - WTC2 "Collapse" on WTC3 - Veoh anonymous new 2008

Watch at about :09 to about :14. I see the same piece of debris with DUST trailing of it. It is NOT a piece of concrete.

Proof again Chris is making shit up.

yup, but then i knew he was full of shit with his first post

We ALL did.

if he had actually seen the PBS documentary he claims he did, then he would KNOW there was NO CONCRETE in the core
since that was one of the main selling points of the design
without the concrete they had more floor space per floor
the sheer weight of the concrete would have made the lower floors pretty much useless as it would have made the core so huge at the base(to support the weight of the concrete above) that they wouldn't have been able to rent those lower floors

 

[Christophera]

Without the concrete core the towers are laying horizontal after a 110 mph wind because of sway and torsion creating oscillation just like the Tacoma Narrows bridge in a 42 mph wind.

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-3932185696812733207&q=tacoma+narrows+bridge&total=103&start=0&num=10&so=0&type=search&plindex=7"

 

[DiveCon]

Without the concrete core the towers are laying horizontal after a 110 mph wind because of sway and torsion creating oscillation just like the Tacoma Narrows bridge in a 42 mph wind.

wrong again, dipshit
btw, that bridge had concrete in it

 

[Fizz]

Without the concrete core the towers are laying horizontal after a 110 mph wind because of sway and torsion creating oscillation just like the Tacoma Narrows bridge in a 42 mph wind.

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-3932185696812733207&q=tacoma+narrows+bridge&total=103&start=0&num=10&so=0&type=search&plindex=7"

let's see.....

should we believe the structural engineers that actually designed the thing, the structeral engineers that actually studied it... the engineers that analyzed the collapse.... or....

should we believe chrissypoo, who was kicked out of school in the 8th grade??

 

[Christophera]

Believe the buildings engineer of record 2 days after 9-11 on September 13, 2001 when he describes the structure.

Still, Robertson, whose firm is responsible for three of the six tallest buildings in the world, feels a sense of pride that the massive towers, supported by a steel-tube exoskeleton and a reinforced concrete core, held up as well as they did-managing to stand for over an hour despite direct hits from two massive commercial jetliners.

 

[DiveCon]

Believe the buildings engineer of record 2 days after 9-11 on September 13, 2001 when he describes the structure.

too bad he never actually said that
you fucking moronic piece of shit deadbeat