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

[Fizz]

There were no steel core columns in the core area and you cannot post an image of them and have not . . . ever.

there were only steel columns in two places. the perimeter columns and the core columns. unless you are claiming these are perimeter columns then they are core columns.

where did you get the information that this is the northwest corner of the core? i think you said northwest, but not important. i want to see your evidence before i prove you wrong.

or is this just something else you completely fabricated?

The perimeter columns stand in the background, and the columns of the inner framed wall that supported the floors with the perimeter columns is left of a 12 foot thick concrete wall with a 3x7 hallway running the length of it.

The box column is the largest of all and the spire below is one of the same.

so you agree they are core columns. thanks.

now stop asking for pictures of core columns when even you admit they are core columns.

 

[Liability]

There were no steel core columns in the core area and you cannot post an image of them and have not . . . ever.

there were only steel columns in two places. the perimeter columns and the core columns. unless you are claiming these are perimeter columns then they are core columns.

where did you get the information that this is the northwest corner of the core? i think you said northwest, but not important. i want to see your evidence before i prove you wrong.

or is this just something else you completely fabricated?

The perimeter columns stand in the background, and the columns of the inner framed wall that supported the floors with the perimeter columns is left of a 12 foot thick concrete wall with a 3x7 hallway running the length of it.

The box column is the largest of all and the spire below is one of the same.

ChristoFEARa:

Thank you, you fucking retard, for again posting an image of steel core above grade at the collapsed Trade Tower site. In the image of the collapse one can make out the steel core. One can make out smoke. It is even possible that one might see dust from crumbled concrete -- flooring. But what one absolutely CANNOT see in the images you post, you scumbag lying sick bastard Troofer, is ANY hint of vertical concrete.

 

[Christophera]

there were only steel columns in two places. the perimeter columns and the core columns. unless you are claiming these are perimeter columns then they are core columns.

where did you get the information that this is the northwest corner of the core? i think you said northwest, but not important. i want to see your evidence before i prove you wrong.

or is this just something else you completely fabricated?

The perimeter columns stand in the background, and the columns of the inner framed wall that supported the floors with the perimeter columns is left of a 12 foot thick concrete wall with a 3x7 hallway running the length of it.

The box column is the largest of all and the spire below is one of the same.

ChristoFEARa:

Thank you, you fucking retard, for again posting an image of steel core.

The "interior box column" (columns of the inner framed wall opposing the perimeter walls) forming the spire is outside the concrete core wall, on the right. The empty core area is left of the concrete core wall the interior box column comprising the spire is fastened to.

Just as the interior box column here of the north side of WTC 1 is outside the 12 foot thick concrete base wall. It is so massive it has a hallway running the length of it. Note, there are no columns to the right and closer of the WTC 1 core remanant. That is the core area.

 

[DiveCon]

The perimeter columns stand in the background, and the columns of the inner framed wall that supported the floors with the perimeter columns is left of a 12 foot thick concrete wall with a 3x7 hallway running the length of it.

The box column is the largest of all and the spire below is one of the same.

ChristoFEARa:

Thank you, you fucking retard, for again posting an image of steel core.

The "interior box column" (columns of the inner framed wall opposing the perimeter walls) forming the spire is outside the concrete core wall, on the right. The empty core area is left of the concrete core wall the interior box column comprising the spire is fastened to.

Just as the interior box column here of the north side of WTC 1 is outside the 12 foot thick concrete base wall. It is so massive it has a hallway running the length of it. Note, there are no columns to the right and closer of the WTC 1 core remanant. That is the core area.

there is no vertical concrete in either photo

 

[Liability]

ChristoFEARa:

Thank you, you fucking retard, for again posting an image of steel core.

The "interior box column" (columns of the inner framed wall opposing the perimeter walls) forming the spire is outside the concrete core wall, on the right. The empty core area is left of the concrete core wall the interior box column comprising the spire is fastened to.

Just as the interior box column here of the north side of WTC 1 is outside the 12 foot thick concrete base wall. It is so massive it has a hallway running the length of it. Note, there are no columns to the right and closer of the WTC 1 core remanant. That is the core area.

there is no vertical concrete in either photo

Exactly. And the ever-dishonest ChristoFEARa damn well knows it, too.

ChristoFEARa is just too much of a filthy scumbag Troofer rat-asshole liar to ever admit that obvious truth.

 

[Fizz]

The "interior box column" (columns of the inner framed wall opposing the perimeter walls) forming the spire is outside the concrete core wall, on the right. The empty core area is left of the concrete core wall the interior box column comprising the spire is fastened to.

Just as the interior box column here of the north side of WTC 1 is outside the 12 foot thick concrete base wall. It is so massive it has a hallway running the length of it. Note, there are no columns to the right and closer of the WTC 1 core remanant. That is the core area.

the "interior box columns" are the steel core. there is no concrete walls inside the world trade center towers. you claim the interior box columns are fastened to the concrete core.

so where are they in these pictures? your concrete core doesnt exist!!!!!

 

[Christophera]

The "interior box column" (columns of the inner framed wall opposing the perimeter walls) forming the spire is outside the concrete core wall, on the right. The empty core area is left of the concrete core wall the interior box column comprising the spire is fastened to.

Just as the interior box column here of the north side of WTC 1 is outside the 12 foot thick concrete base wall. It is so massive it has a hallway running the length of it. Note, there are no columns to the right and closer of the WTC 1 core remanant. That is the core area.

the "interior box columns" are the steel core. there is no concrete walls inside the world trade center towers. you claim the interior box columns are fastened to the concrete core.

so where are they in these pictures? your concrete core doesnt exist!!!!!

The columns look too wide and the spaces too narrow to be the Twins.

However, if it were, at the very top 10 floors, there was quite a bit of space between the interior box columns and the concrete core. Meaning the core could be six inches to the right of the image taken closest to the interior box columns.

Most importantly, where are the supposed core columns when the images are nearer the ground on 9-11? The core appears empty.

 

[Fizz]

The "interior box column" (columns of the inner framed wall opposing the perimeter walls) forming the spire is outside the concrete core wall, on the right. The empty core area is left of the concrete core wall the interior box column comprising the spire is fastened to.

Just as the interior box column here of the north side of WTC 1 is outside the 12 foot thick concrete base wall. It is so massive it has a hallway running the length of it. Note, there are no columns to the right and closer of the WTC 1 core remanant. That is the core area.

the "interior box columns" are the steel core. there is no concrete walls inside the world trade center towers. you claim the interior box columns are fastened to the concrete core.

so where are they in these pictures? your concrete core doesnt exist!!!!!

The columns look too wide and the spaces too narrow to be the Twins.

However, if it were, at the very top 10 floors, there was quite a bit of space between the interior box columns and the concrete core. Meaning the core could be six inches to the right of the image taken closest to the interior box columns.

Most importantly, where are the supposed core columns when the images are nearer the ground on 9-11? The core appears empty.

complete bullshit. the photos are from FEMA and from a video documentary of the WTC aired on the history channel. they are most certainly the WTC towers.

you just said yesterday the box columns were fastened to the concrete core. WHERE"S THE FUCKING CONCRETE CORE, CHRIS?!!!

 

[Christophera]

9-11-misprision of treason, Title 18, part I, chapter 115, §2382

The design of the structures blamed for the deaths of nearly 3,000 innocent people has been misrepresented and the cause of death on death certificates is erroneous for the reason of the deception documented here. Constitutional due process or equal protection of law has not been provided in these capital crimes. Forensic engineering analysis of collapse cannot be accurately completed without building plans or the exact design and construction of buildings such as the Twin Towers.

The National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) volunteered to analyze collapse but did not have the actual structural plans of the Towers. Seven years of research fails to show that NIST had such plans and there are numerous signs that this was a problem years after the plans should have been available to the public.

REQUEST FOR JUDICIAL NOTICE

“10/05/01 The American Institute of Architects reports that a number of firms have been receiving requests for building plans that have raised some concern. . . .” WTCTragedy
and EXHIBITS “A through E” with PANELS 1 through 6 as indicated in the following.​

The NIST disclaimer was all that was found when seaching their report for mention of the plans or sheets and details of it.

That disclaimer would allow them to take the incoherent mumblings of a traitor along with the sunday funnies, use them as building plans and be free of liability.

 

[Fizz]

That disclaimer would allow them to take the incoherent mumblings of a traitor along with the sunday funnies, use them as building plans and be free of liability.

so you are saying that they could have used your concrete core hoax, which you have no plans for, no pictures of and cant even explain exactly where it was without changing your story.... without having any liability.

ok. thanks for that insignificant piece of info.

 

[Christophera]

so you are saying that they could have used your concrete core hoax, which you have no plans for, no pictures of and cant even explain exactly where it was without changing your story.... without having any liability.

No, you say that.

I say that their disclaimer makes it so they don't have to use plans or just used what someone told them and they have no liability.

Do you think someone told them about the concrete core?

http://algoxy.com/psych/images/nist.disclaimer3_4.jpg

 

[Liability]

so you are saying that they could have used your concrete core hoax, which you have no plans for, no pictures of and cant even explain exactly where it was without changing your story.... without having any liability.

No, you say that.

I say that their disclaimer makes it so they don't have to use plans or just used what someone told them and they have no liability.

Do you think someone told them about the concrete core?

http://algoxy.com/psych/images/nist.disclaimer3_4.jpg

Do we think that some asshole Troofer (like you, for instance) CLAIMED to them that there "WAS" A CONCRETE CORE?

WHO CARES?

Asshole liars like you can CLAIM that you have walked on the moon in bare feet, but your claim doesn't make anything true.

Especially YOUR claim.

You probably once claimed to love your own children, too.

You fucking lowlife.

 

[Christophera]

so you are saying that they could have used your concrete core hoax, which you have no plans for, no pictures of and cant even explain exactly where it was without changing your story.... without having any liability.

No, you say that.

I say that their disclaimer makes it so they don't have to use plans or just used what someone told them and they have no liability.

Do you think someone told them about the concrete core?

http://algoxy.com/psych/images/nist.disclaimer3_4.jpg

Do we think that some asshole Troofer (like you, for instance) CLAIMED to them that there "WAS" A CONCRETE CORE?

Of course, the perps make you care because I proved the concrete core with independently verified evidence like these items.

Oxford encyclopedia of Technology and Inovation that was published in 1992 identifies a concrete core.

and these frames of a video showing the east wall of WTC 1 toppling into the core.

 

[Fizz]

no concrete core in your animation.

 

[Liability]

No, you say that.

I say that their disclaimer makes it so they don't have to use plans or just used what someone told them and they have no liability.

Do you think someone told them about the concrete core?

http://algoxy.com/psych/images/nist.disclaimer3_4.jpg

Do we think that some asshole Troofer (like you, for instance) CLAIMED to them that there "WAS" A CONCRETE CORE?

Of course, the perps make you care because I proved the concrete core with independently verified evidence like these items.

Oxford encyclopedia of Technology and Inovation that was published in 1992 identifies a concrete core.

and these frames of a video showing the east wall of WTC 1 toppling into the core.

Repeating your disinformation, inaccuracies and lies (no matter how endlessly you try that ploy) STILL doesn't make any of the shit you cite of any value, asshole.

The Oxford reference discussed how building like the Twin Towers had been made. To the extent it CLAIMS to state that the Twin Towers were constructed with a concrete core, it is un-sourced and quite simply wrong. That YOU place such stock in a second or third hand bit of "reporting," only shows how desperate YOU are to find some support (however weak) to buttress your erroneous belief. Indeed, the Twin Towers were NOT built with a concrete core.

The image you always loop STILL does NOT show a concrete core wall. It never showed any such thing. No matter how often you loop it, it still shows no such thing.

Your "evidence" is not evidence and has never been "verified." That claim you always make is just you lying again.

Here's the real rule: When a filthy treasonous scumbag 9/11 Troofer makes a claim, it's almost always just another fucking lie.

 

[Christophera]

Repeating your disinformation, inaccuracies and lies (no matter how endlessly you try that ploy) STILL doesn't make any of the shit you cite of any value, asshole.

The Oxford reference discussed how building like the Twin Towers had been made. To the extent it CLAIMS to state that the Twin Towers were constructed with a concrete core, it is un-sourced and quite simply wrong.

Oxford is a source. It is verified. Your text is not. Robertson in Newsweek is corroborated by another engineer who was at ground zero, August Domel, Ph.d SE. PE. and both are absolutely consistent with images on 9-11 that show concrete core walls surrounding the core area.

Whereas you have neve even posted an image from 9-11 showing steel core columns in the core area. It is sooooooooo obvious you have no evidence and are just "texting for traitors".

 

[DiveCon]

Repeating your disinformation, inaccuracies and lies (no matter how endlessly you try that ploy) STILL doesn't make any of the shit you cite of any value, asshole.

The Oxford reference discussed how building like the Twin Towers had been made. To the extent it CLAIMS to state that the Twin Towers were constructed with a concrete core, it is un-sourced and quite simply wrong.

Oxford is a source. It is verified. Your text is not. Robertson in Newsweek is corroborated by another engineer who was at ground zero, August Domel, Ph.d SE. PE. and both are absolutely consistent with images on 9-11 that show concrete core walls surrounding the core area.




Whereas you have neve even posted an image from 9-11 showing steel core columns in the core area. It is sooooooooo obvious you have no evidence and are just "texting for traitors".

YOU post images of steel core every time
but in your delusions, you think its concrete

 

[Fizz]

Whereas you have neve even posted an image from 9-11 showing steel core columns in the core area. It is sooooooooo obvious you have no evidence and are just "texting for traitors".

chris, we have already shown you that the picture above is the middle two rows of columns of the steel core.

 

[Liability]

Repeating your disinformation, inaccuracies and lies (no matter how endlessly you try that ploy) STILL doesn't make any of the shit you cite of any value, asshole.

The Oxford reference discussed how building like the Twin Towers had been made. To the extent it CLAIMS to state that the Twin Towers were constructed with a concrete core, it is un-sourced and quite simply wrong.

Oxford is a source. It is verified.

Oxford is not a valid source on the topic, and the mistaken shit it said in the excerpt you quoted has never been verified.

Your text is not.

And neither is yours, dumbass.

Robertson in Newsweek is corroborated by another engineer who was at ground zero,

No. Robertson didn't SAY it. The reporter "said" it and the reporter was wrong.

August Domel, Ph.d SE. PE. and both are absolutely consistent with images on 9-11 that show concrete core walls surrounding the core area.

Domel is wrong and nothing he says in error is at all consistent with the 9/11/2001 images which absolutely do NOT show any concrete core wall whatsoever.

Whereas you have neve even posted an image from 9-11 showing steel core columns in the core area. It is sooooooooo obvious you have no evidence and are just "texting for traitors".

YOU have posted images of the steel columns, stupid. And several others have been posted here REGULARLY. YOU then, dishonestly as is your way, dismiss them out of hand without basis in reality. Because you cannot debate honestly. You are a Troofer. All Troofers are scumbag liars.

It is apparent that even YOU don't believe the bullshit you perpetually disseminate. You are a thoroughly vile, dishonest, treasonous, scumbag Troofer. Go out. Get a job. Support your own flesh and blood instead of wasting your time trying to convince folks that your bullshit is champagne. You are a roach.

 

[Christophera]

Clearly, your text STATING that the evidence of the concrete core should somehow be diminished, is strictly inadequate compared tp the actual array of corroborating and consistent facts there are.

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 contracted 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.