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

[Fizz]

Your texting is ineffective in the face of evidence agent.

your text assertions that you have evidence are completely meaningless. you post pictures of a blue sky and claim the sky is red. thats not evidence. thats a delusion. posting pictures of a steel structure and saying it is concrete isnt evidence. its a delusion. everyone can see it.

nobody believes your bullshit.

 

[Christophera]

It's concrete agent.

Just like the engineer of record identified to Newsweek.

And no, there was no correction. You claim with text they made an error. You claim with text they lied. You have no indepedntly verified evidence to support the FEMA deception.

The concrete core has significant independently verified evidence.

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]

It's concrete agent.

no agents here, dipshit
and you have not proven that because it didnt exist

 

[Christophera]

Why then does Oxford Illustrated Encyclopedia of Invention and Technology, of 1992 describe a concrete core?

Why does August Domel, Ph.d SE. PE. describe a concrete core?

Why do we see a concrete wall in an end view on the left with structural steel on the right, that was outside the core wall?

Why has no image of this core NEVER been posted?

And of course you are a redundant liar so denial is meaningless.

D+Scanner anomalie
http://www.usmessageboard.com/2554711-post7294.html

D-You post steel columns(?)
http://www.usmessageboard.com/2547786-post7282.html

http://www.usmessageboard.com/1959274-post145.html
http://www.usmessageboard.com/1959289-post146.html
http://www.usmessageboard.com/1959580-post147.html
http://www.usmessageboard.com/1959351-post3626.html
http://www.usmessageboard.com/1959578-post3627.html

D-rebar
http://www.usmessageboard.com/2529236-post3044.html

D-claims I've posted steel core
http://www.usmessageboard.com/2525612-post3033.html

D
http://www.usmessageboard.com/2068183-post334.html

D-agent
http://www.usmessageboard.com/2104806-post4606.html

D-rebar & plan links
http://www.usmessageboard.com/2331142-post6209.html

F+D exposed
http://www.usmessageboard.com/2104963-post4610.html

D-SPIRE
http://www.usmessageboard.com/2476643-post7012.html

F+obvious image
http://www.usmessageboard.com/2117758-post842.html

F
http://www.usmessageboard.com/1966323-post158.html

F
http://www.usmessageboard.com/1992513-post3708.html

F+
http://www.usmessageboard.com/2068719-post4238.html

F+photo lie
http://www.usmessageboard.com/2093387-post4486.html

F+photo lie 2
http://www.usmessageboard.com/2094648-post4499.html

F+photoshop lie
http://www.usmessageboard.com/2097563-post650.html

F+plans lie
http://www.usmessageboard.com/2290147-post1829.html

F+mayor microfilm lie
http://www.usmessageboard.com/2429160-post6710.html

F+plan lie confirm
http://www.usmessageboard.com/2290723-post1832.html

F+buckling north tower
http://www.usmessageboard.com/2379590-post2345.html

F+buckling
http://www.usmessageboard.com/2380272-post2348.html



F+newsweek lied
http://www.usmessageboard.com/2431343-post6755.html

F+CAB trounces liar
http://www.usmessageboard.com/2431371-post6756.html

F+misinterp
http://www.usmessageboard.com/2456171-post2744.html

CAB proves it
http://www.usmessageboard.com/2458493-post2745.html

F&G-slam-plans-dimensions-spire
http://www.usmessageboard.com/2483938-post7050.html

PRETENDING
http://www.usmessageboard.com/2484417-post2891.html

http://www.usmessageboard.com/2513013-post2999.html

 

[Christophera]

Your texting is ineffective in the face of evidence agent.

your text assertions that you have evidence are completely meaningless. you post pictures of a blue sky and claim the sky is red. thats not evidence. thats a delusion. posting pictures of a steel structure and saying it is concrete isnt evidence. its a delusion. everyone can see it.

nobody believes your bullshit.

If it was just text, then it would be like your posts, meaningless. But it is not, my text has links to hard evidence that shows the evidence for the concrete core is independently verified.

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.

 

[slackjawed]

Points the chri$$y ventriloquist dummy at the audience and has him say
"my text has links to hard evidence"
while moving the dummy's hand to tap it's forehead with one finger

 

[DiveCon]

Why then does Oxford Illustrated Encyclopedia of Invention and Technology, of 1992 describe a concrete core?

it doesnt, you lack reading comprehension to actually understand it

Why does August Domel, Ph.d SE. PE. describe a concrete core?

he was WRONG

Why do we see a concrete wall in an end view on the left with structural steel on the right, that was outside the core wall?

you DONT, only someone delusional like YOU sees it

Why has no image of this core NEVER been posted?

its been done, even by YOU, you're just too fucking delusional to admit it

 

[DiveCon]

Your texting is ineffective in the face of evidence agent.

your text assertions that you have evidence are completely meaningless. you post pictures of a blue sky and claim the sky is red. thats not evidence. thats a delusion. posting pictures of a steel structure and saying it is concrete isnt evidence. its a delusion. everyone can see it.

nobody believes your bullshit.

If it was just text, then it would be like your posts, meaningless. But it is not, my text has links to hard evidence that shows the evidence for the concrete core is independently verified.

your links dont back your story, dipshit

 

[Christophera]

your text assertions that you have evidence are completely meaningless. you post pictures of a blue sky and claim the sky is red. thats not evidence. thats a delusion. posting pictures of a steel structure and saying it is concrete isnt evidence. its a delusion. everyone can see it.

nobody believes your bullshit.

If it was just text, then it would be like your posts, meaningless. But it is not, my text has links to hard evidence that shows the evidence for the concrete core is independently verified.

your links dont back your story, dipshit

One of the links looks like this,

the other links corroborate that what is seen is concrete.

Are you going to pretend again that it is reasonable to suggest that what we see is gypsum, . . . agent?

 

[DiveCon]

If it was just text, then it would be like your posts, meaningless. But it is not, my text has links to hard evidence that shows the evidence for the concrete core is independently verified.

your links dont back your story, dipshit

One of the links looks like this,



the other links corroborate that what is seen is concrete.

Are you going to pretend again that it is reasonable to suggest that what we see is gypsum, . . . agent?

no concrete, not ever seen in ANY photo you post
but in some, you CAN seen the gypsum wall planks

again, for the MASSIVELY STUPID(that's YOU) light wouldnt pass through the gypsum wall planks any more than it could concrete
so, your claim that it could "only be" concrete is total BULLSHIT

 

[Fizz]

It's concrete agent.

NOBODY looks at your pictures and sees a concrete core. NOBODY.

 

[Christophera]

I meet people on a regular basis that know the Twin Towers had a concrete core. They do not need pictures because they saw the 1990 documentary. They are not truth seekers and have the common developed social fears the social and governmental infiltrations can benefit from. You and your bizarre group of agents scare them so they will not enter this environment.

Of course the perps want nobody believing the true structure design, DUH! If people knew that they would know for sure the entire thing is a scam.

So where are the steel core columns in is image? What makes that solid image devoid of vertical and horizontal lines?

Then here, another view showing the misrepresentation you agents make of the interior box columns surrounding the cast concrete core. Agents post this and say "core columns". No, those are columns SURROUNDING the concrete core and the top photo IS the concrete core with no steel.

This is the view showing the concrete core of WTC 2 with its 2 hallways on the south side as 2 vertical slots at 9 seonds.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zhNd48qx684&feature=related]YouTube - WTC 2 collapse from the south, street level[/ame]

 

[Fizz]

I meet people on a regular basis that know the Twin Towers had a concrete core.

you also meet people that blink at you aggressively and try to hypnotize you.

 

[Christophera]

Still no image from 9-11 of this core structure.

It logically appears you are working to reinforce an obvious lie, the FEMA deception.

 

[Gamolon]

It's concrete agent.

Just like the engineer of record identified to Newsweek.

Show us the quote.

 

[Christophera]

No quote. It was information to Newsweek, not exact words that were printed. It is verified by a globally published encyclopedia. Oxford Illustrated Encyclopedia of Invention and Technology, of 1992.

Show us the Newsweek correction.

Show us the official plans.

Show us this core on 9-11.

 

[DiveCon]

No quote. It was information to Newsweek, not exact words that were printed. It is verified by a globally published encyclopedia. Oxford Illustrated Encyclopedia of Invention and Technology, of 1992.

Show us the Newsweek correction.

Show us the official plans.

Show us this core on 9-11.

lies
oxford didnt do that
it was never printed, it was only a web post
the plans have been shown to you
you have been shown the core NUMEROUS times
somehow YOU see concrete where everyone else sees STEEL

 

[Christophera]

Wow, raging liar. You've posted no plans from official story.

Here's the last fuz lie on that. I guess the perps would want you to take turns lying.
F+plans lie
http://www.usmessageboard.com/2290147-post1829.html

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

 

[DiveCon]

Wow, raging liar. You've posted no plans from official story.

Here's the last fuz lie on that. I guess the perps would want you to take turns lying.
F+plans lie
http://www.usmessageboard.com/2290147-post1829.html

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

the plans you've seen and dismissed because your fucking delusional, ARE the official plans
and Oxford did not say the WTC had a concrete core, it used the WTC as an example of a skyscraper and then went on to talk about skyscrapers in general

 

[Christophera]

No way, "steel and concrete hull and core" is what is described specifically for the Twins.

You've shown very well you cannot post an image of steel core columns on 9-11.