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

[Christophera]

Just a matter of time agents, then your activity will be known for what it is. You support the FEMA deception which is misprision of treason and misinformation to the truth movement.

Elevator guide rail support steel is misrepresented as "core columns". Butt plates on the tops of vertical steel in the core show the massive structural inadequacy.

 

[DiveCon]

Just a matter of time agents, then your activity will be known for what it is. You support the FEMA deception which is misprision of treason and misinformation to the truth movement.

Elevator guide rail support steel is misrepresented as "core columns". Butt plates on the tops of vertical steel in the core show the massive structural inadequacy.

where is your proof of this so called "elevator guide rail support steel"?
you never show ANY proof of it

and you have already been proven wrong on the "butt plate" bullshit

you remain a delusional retard

 

[Christophera]

If the steel in the core was fastened together like core columns it would have been visible on 9-11. It was not. The core is empty.

You've just made a text assertion like the text assertion where you pretend that the butt plates on the elevator guide rail support steel are pad eyes, or lifting lugs. Lifting lugs are seen in the foreground of the lower image of the preceding link. They are ALWAYS on the side of any steel to be assembled vertically.

Proof that the steel in the core was elevator guide rail support steel.

 

[DiveCon]

If the steel in the core was fastened together like core columns it would have been visible on 9-11. It was not. The core is empty.

it was, dipshit, RIGHT IN THAT PHOTO

you moronic fucking dipshit

 

[Christophera]

That is not inside the core, it is within the wall surrounding the core, below the steel structure superimposed over the intact building.

No, the angle between the 2 shots, one by Aman Zafar, and the other at Audry Zapp drive are not significantly deflecting from each other.

 

[DiveCon]

That is not inside the core, it is within the wall surrounding the core, below the steel structure superimposed over the intact building.

yes it is, dipshit
they are the central 2 core columns
you fucking moron

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Just asking again.... What is the status of this supposed case?

 

[DiveCon]

Just asking again.... What is the status of this supposed case?

DOA
the judge rejected it

 

[Gamolon]

No, I've posted evidenc eof the concrete core and agents have worked to misinterpret and misrepresent.

For example. This agents try to call a floor.

On the left is concrete, and it looks like concrete, not steel. On the right is steel, and it looks like steel.

Please provide the quote or page from an engineer that says that photo shows what you say it shows.

Given the fact that you've screwed up so MANY photo interpretations, you can't be trusted as the only source to make said claim about that photo.

Who else agrees with you?

 

[Gamolon]

And the concrete wall looks about like what the engineer of record identified to a global magazine.

Chris.

Show me the quote from Robertson in that article in which he describes what the concrete core looked like as you claim he did above.

I'd like to see his quote.

 

[Christophera]

And the concrete wall looks about like what the engineer of record identified to a global magazine.

Chris.

Show me the quote from Robertson in that article in which he describes what the concrete core looked like as you claim he did above.

I'd like to see his quote.

The reporter certainly recorded the statement of the engineer and used that to be sure the article is correct although with not exact working.

Show me the correction to the article if you assert it is wrong

I can verify with another source of authority.

Oxford Illustrated Encyclopedia of Invention and Technology, of 1992

Finniston, Monty; Williams, Trevor; Bissell, Christopher, eds (1992). "Skyscraper". Oxford Illustrated Encyclopedia of Invention and Technology. Oxford University Press. p. 322. ISBN 0-19-869138-6

 

[Christophera]

No, I've posted evidence of the concrete core and agents have worked to misinterpret and misrepresent.

For example. This agents try to call a floor.

On the left is concrete, and it looks like concrete, not steel. On the right is steel, and it looks like steel.

Please provide the quote or page from an engineer that says that photo shows what you say it shows.

Given the fact that you've screwed up so MANY photo interpretations, you can't be trusted as the only source to make said claim about that photo.

Who else agrees with you?

See chapter 2.1 for the passage where the structural engineer who is certified in 12 states identifies the concrete core.

August Domel, Ph.d SE. PE.​

Now explain where the "floor" fell from if you try to presnt it as such.

 

[Christophera]

Just asking again.... What is the status of this supposed case?

The judge and court essentially rejected their duty and reassigned it to us.

Notice the errors of the docket statements.

LODGED COMPLAINT

We did not lodge a complaint. What we filed with the criminal clerk was disclosure of treason pursuant to TITLE 18, PART I , CHAPTER 115, §2382 U.S. Code.

http://algoxy.com/psych/9-11title_18.disclosure.html

Disclosure of treason.

Then the docket takes the errors further in the judicial evasion of duty with the statement,

DISCREPANCIES WITH LODGING OF COMPLAINT

No fee was paid because U.S. Code simply states the disclosure must be iven to a judge and we did not submit a civil complain to the civil clerk.

 

[Gamolon]

And the concrete wall looks about like what the engineer of record identified to a global magazine.

Chris.

Show me the quote from Robertson in that article in which he describes what the concrete core looked like as you claim he did above.

I'd like to see his quote.

The reporter certainly recorded the statement of the engineer and used that to be sure the article is correct although with not exact working.

Show me your proof that it was recorded directly from Robertson. Show me the proof that the reporter was not using her own description from what she thought was correct.

It is common practice to use "quotes" around a statement being "quoted" directly from a person.

Tell me why there are no quotes around the statement which you claim came directly from Robertson, yet every other statement coming directly from him uses quotes?

So again, prove to me that the statement in question came directly from Robertson and NOT from the reporter herself.

 

[Gamolon]

And the concrete wall looks about like what the engineer of record identified to a global magazine.

Chris.

Show me the quote from Robertson in that article in which he describes what the concrete core looked like as you claim he did above.

I'd like to see his quote.

The reporter certainly recorded the statement of the engineer and used that to be sure the article is correct although with not exact working.

Show me the correction to the article if you assert it is wrong

Show me that proof that it's a direct quote from Robertson. Why did the reporter not put that statement in "quotes" like she did everything else?

 

[Gamolon]

No, I've posted evidence of the concrete core and agents have worked to misinterpret and misrepresent.

For example. This agents try to call a floor.

On the left is concrete, and it looks like concrete, not steel. On the right is steel, and it looks like steel.

Please provide the quote or page from an engineer that says that photo shows what you say it shows.

Given the fact that you've screwed up so MANY photo interpretations, you can't be trusted as the only source to make said claim about that photo.

Who else agrees with you?

See chapter 2.1 for the passage where the structural engineer who is certified in 12 states identifies the concrete core.

August Domel, Ph.d SE. PE.​

Now explain where the "floor" fell from if you try to presnt it as such.

I don't see Domel's analysis of that photo in his paper saying that the photo contains a concrete wall like you say it does. Who backs your analysis of that photo other than yourself? As I have shown before and you've admitted, you make WAY too many mistakes when analyzing photos and what they supposedly show. WAY TOO MANY.

So who else analyzed that photo other than you and reached the same conclusion that it shows a concrete wall?

 

[DiveCon]

Please provide the quote or page from an engineer that says that photo shows what you say it shows.

Given the fact that you've screwed up so MANY photo interpretations, you can't be trusted as the only source to make said claim about that photo.

Who else agrees with you?

See chapter 2.1 for the passage where the structural engineer who is certified in 12 states identifies the concrete core.

August Domel, Ph.d SE. PE.​

Now explain where the "floor" fell from if you try to presnt it as such.

I don't see Domel's analysis of that photo in his paper saying that the photo contains a concrete wall like you say it does. Who backs your analysis of that photo other than yourself? As I have shown before and you've admitted, you make WAY too many mistakes when analyzing photos and what they supposedly show. WAY TOO MANY.

So who else analyzed that photo other than you and reached the same conclusion that it shows a concrete wall?

and funny how you can see STEEL CORE COLUMNS in the gif
and the so called wall is OUTSIDE of them
which is why i came to the conclusion that it is a section of floor
one end got hung up on his infamous spire and the other end had dropped

 

[Christophera]

The columns seen are the spire on the opposite side, not in the core.

Stop supporting secret methods of mass murder agent.

The Twins had a concrete core.

Robertson is verified by Oxford, verifying Domel who describes a concrete core verified by the image of WTC 2 core, verifying the top of WTC 2 core falling onto WTC 3, the WTC 1 rebar, just after the WTC 1 west core wall is seen in an end view, then, the WTC 1 east shear wall toppling, consistent with interior box columns silhouetted on WTC 1 north core wall, consistent with ground zero showing the WTC 1 north concrete core base wall, 12 foot thick, all supported as clarification of the many confused statements that do mention concrete in the core including the latest revised NIST analysis of free fall by Bazant et. al 6/21/2007, which actually provides an equivalent amount of high explosives needed to create the rate of fall they are attempting to justify with physics. It doesn't work, but at least they won't go down in history as totally supporting the deceptions.

 

[Christophera]

The columns seen are the spire on the opposite side, not in the core.

Stop supporting secret methods of mass murder agent.

The Twins had a concrete core.

Robertson is verified by Oxford, verifying Domel who describes a concrete core verified by the image of WTC 2 core, verifying the top of WTC 2 core falling onto WTC 3, the WTC 1 rebar, just after the WTC 1 west core wall is seen in an end view, then, the WTC 1 east shear wall toppling, consistent with interior box columns silhouetted on WTC 1 north core wall, consistent with ground zero showing the WTC 1 north concrete core base wall, 12 foot thick, all supported as clarification of the many confused statements that do mention concrete in the core including the latest revised NIST analysis of free fall by Bazant et. al 6/21/2007, which actually provides an equivalent amount of high explosives needed to create the rate of fall they are attempting to justify with physics. It doesn't work, but at least they won't go down in history as totally supporting the deceptions.

 

[DiveCon]

delusional bullshit removed

still totally fucking delusional