Victims' Families Want To Air New 9/11 Truth Ad

[Triton]

Raging fires! raging fires! it doesn't matter if a plane did not hit this building because a building fell on top of it! RIght, Ollie!


[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tYEY0x1Yedw&feature=channel_video_title]YouTube - ‪9/11: Enhanced WTC7 Video (NIST FOIA - CBS-Net Dub6 23)‬‏[/ame]

 

[SFC Ollie]

Those stupid twooftard fuckers!!! hahahaha., only 2000 people in a decade disprove of the official conspiracy theory and 1500 of them signed onto A&E for 9/11 truth!!

Way to go Nutjobs!!

The debunker movement has made great strides in convincing people that the WTC towers did not fall symmetrically, nor anywhere near free fall speed! Fires, especially on a few floors, do indeed have enough power to cause a total collapse to steel framed skyscrapers!

Aerosolized steel in the dust, HA!!! That means nothing because the building was collapsing so of course the steel would be aerosolized!


NIST is a reuptable agency who cares is some stupid school teacher pointed out a flaw, even the experts make mistakes after taking several years after the event to offer an explanation.


and of course no explosions


YouTube - ‪Audible Explosion at WTC‬‏

Most explosions do not sound like a rumble. Do we really need to show you what a controlled Demo sounds like for the 500th time?

 

[SFC Ollie]

no audio either, those stupid truthtards, no audio of explosions, what are they thinking!




YouTube - ‪South Tower Exploding‬‏

Again, do you think hundreds of tons of steel and concrete will fall silently?

 

[SFC Ollie]

Yep, fires did this, no symmetry or free fall here, just a bunch of fucktard twoofer bullshit claiming otherwise






YouTube - ‪North Tower Spire‬‏

No dumb ass, fire did not do this. a 757 flying at full speed did this, then the fire finished it off.

 

[SFC Ollie]

Fires eject debris and make explosions like this, oh wait there were no explosions


YouTube - ‪Explosions During North Tower Collapse‬‏

Ever heard the Phrase "path of least resistance"?

 

[SFC Ollie]

Nothing is exploding here, its not falling symmetrically nor anywhere near at free fall speed. This is due to fires, duh, a "progressive" collapse


YouTube - ‪9/11: Enhanced WTC1 Video (NIST FOIA - CBS-Net Dub6 04)‬‏






Just a bunch of Twooftard Twoofers Twoofing stupid nonsense.

That's right no explosions, and free fall speed would be those huge chunks of the building that fell to the outside and had zero resistance, notice how they are way ahead of the actual collapse?

 

[SFC Ollie]

Raging fires! raging fires! it doesn't matter if a plane did not hit this building because a building fell on top of it! RIght, Ollie!


YouTube - ‪9/11: Enhanced WTC7 Video (NIST FOIA - CBS-Net Dub6 23)‬‏

Another truthtard video that is edited to not show the first 7 or 8 seconds of the collapse.

Really, you are getting boring, now do you have any real proof?

 

[Triton]

Way to go Ollie, just say

"nope, not an explosion"

"nope, not free fall"


But, oh the penthouse collapsed first so WTC 7's 40 + stories didn't fall symmetrically or at free fall, it fell because.....


"a building fell on it"


and



The "raging" fires




We have given plenty of evidence to disprove the official theory, your evidence is simply saying its not valid evidence without providing any evidence yourselves to support the official theory because its a load of BS and you know it.

Others on your side of this "debate" mention the laws of physics without addressing the actual manner of collapse, just a lot of typed words filling up space.


At least you don't use alot of typed words to fill up space. You make no sense in about a sentence or two.

 

[Mr. Jones]

no audio either, those stupid truthtards, no audio of explosions, what are they thinking!




YouTube - ‪South Tower Exploding‬‏

Again, do you think hundreds of tons of steel and concrete will fall silently?

You mean like the inside of WTC 7? The big guess of an internal collapse that NIST assumes happened, based on their computer "inputs", that they wont let anybody test?
It is just as far fetched a scenario, as you who say that it could not possibly have been orchestrated by other means.
When you weigh both theories they are a stretch, you then have to appeal to the authorities and experts, and their credibility, and calculations.
When that argument is stalemated, and fails to be resolved, in peoples minds, we go back to the other parts of 9-11 and the prior events and (in)actions that preceded this event and round it goes again.
We all know that the NIST theories are just that, theories, and assumptions, that the inside of WTC 7 collapsed because of a series of highly improbable and undocumented, and still unproven events.

 

[SFC Ollie]

When you jokers can find some real evidence that the 911 CR and the NIST reports are in error, please let the world know about it.

You see if you did actually have any valid evidence then it would be all over the MSM, they would love to find something on Bush or Cheney. Anything that can be proven would do.

You've had over 9 years and you still got nothing.

Remember also that I don't have to prove the 911CR or the NIST report; you claim they are wrong, disprove them. With real evidence.

 

[Mr. Jones]

When you jokers can find some real evidence that the 911 CR and the NIST reports are in error, please let the world know about it.

You see if you did actually have any valid evidence then it would be all over the MSM, they would love to find something on Bush or Cheney. Anything that can be proven would do.

You've had over 9 years and you still got nothing.

Remember also that I don't have to prove the 911CR or the NIST report; you claim they are wrong, disprove them. With real evidence.

OMG, Man..WTF are you talking about? Ther IS a shitload of counter arguments and refutations of many of the things stated in both the NIST and 9-11 CR!
You act as though what the NIST and 9-11 CR say are absolutely without refute! Because the PTB wont allow fair and impartial proceedings?
Nothing is further from the truth.
Your point of view is that since the government or PTB declare something is not considered worthy of evidence, it isn't.
The government and its agencies ARE the defendants in this case, and they determine what can or can't be brought against them?
Think about that for a while, and how if this allowed to be applied in other criminal conspiracy cases?
There is a problem with the truth movement being able to present their cases, because the government is huge and powerful, and controls what they deem is credible or not. It's a one way uphill battle, and they are being blocked, not because their arguments or evidence is wrong or without merit.
The best way to prove that the truth movement is wrong is to look at what they want to present in a new impartial, unbiased investigation in front of the whole world, not by ignoring it.
Why do you refuse to see this? It's so obvious. But you probably figure if the gov and PTB can do it it is perfectly fine to follow suit.

9-11 has been exposed by hundreds of researchers, validated by the 1,400 architects and engineers who have signed the AE911Truth petition calling on Congress for a new investigation. These researcher/activists have been assiduously ignored and lambasted by the US corporate and alternative media.
Rather than seeing consistent balanced criticisms in all instances, where hard evidence for or against a conspiracy assertion is fairly tested, the Skeptics will often employ the types of underhanded and invalid attacks (disinformation strategies) that we have seen being used against 911 Truth - ie ad hominem attacks, distortions, omissions, false explanations, unjustified dismissals of evidence etc..
http://spookyweather.blogspot.com/2011/01/skeptical-inquirer-attacks-911-truth.html

Like many other things, that people have protested about in the past about the gov, it is ignored..
Do you know how many things are kept from the public and sealed for decades?
This is not a fair way to dispel accusations...by running away from it.

 

[Mr. Jones]

When you jokers can find some real evidence that the 911 CR and the NIST reports are in error, please let the world know about it.

You see if you did actually have any valid evidence then it would be all over the MSM, they would love to find something on Bush or Cheney. Anything that can be proven would do.

You've had over 9 years and you still got nothing.

Remember also that I don't have to prove the 911CR or the NIST report; you claim they are wrong, disprove them. With real evidence.

So you think you can hide under their skirt, and show your face only to mock?
You have to prove that they are right. Where is your proof they are? All they have are what amounts to guesses, and use their authoritative powers to demand we believe their guesses are better.

The NIST and 9-11 CR are supposed to prove that what they guess correct, and according to many credible intelligent sources they have concurred that they are not, and NIST guessed wrong.


"It is not power that corrupts, but fear -- fear of losing power and fear of the scourge of those who wield it." ---- Aung Sung Suu Kyi

 

[SFC Ollie]

They are guessing? Really?

One word, do some studying on it.

PENTTBOM

It's a little bit more than a guess.

 

[Mr. Jones]

They are guessing? Really?

One word, do some studying on it.

PENTTBOM

It's a little bit more than a guess.

Study the guessing that NIST does, and stop referring to the PENTTBOM, the 9-11 Commission clearly MENTIONED IN THEIR MISSION STATEMENT, what the reason they were assembled was, and fell short. You are again evading the facts every which way you can instead of facing them head on.

 

[SFC Ollie]

They are guessing? Really?

One word, do some studying on it.

PENTTBOM

It's a little bit more than a guess.

Study the guessing that NIST does, and stop referring to the PENTTBOM, the 9-11 Commission clearly MENTIONED IN THEIR MISSION STATEMENT, what the reason they were assembled was, and fell short. You are again evading the facts every which way you can instead of facing them head on.

So you cannot refute the evidence. Or even the statements. Not a problem. You see, everything you have posted about what was wrong with the actual investigation someone has shown that you were wrong. You will not accept it because you want the government to be lying so badly. I would see someone on a professional level about that.

You (meaning the truthers in general) deny that a plane crashed in PA, but we have witnesses and the debris, and the black boxes. You deny that flight 77 hit the pentagon, yet there are over 100 eye witnesses, and the debris. You insist that there were explosives planted, yet can present no evidence that says there was.

Please continue.

 

[Mr. Jones]

So you cannot refute the evidence. Or even the statements. Not a problem.

We have many times and you know it you just want to continue to deny this as always.

You see, everything you have posted about what was wrong with the actual investigation someone has shown that you were wrong.

Just because you don't agree with alternative views from credible sources that we post, does not make them wrong.

You will not accept it because you want the government to be lying so badly. I would see someone on a professional level about that.

I will not accept the theories and guesses you believe because frankly they have not been proven to be infallible. Whether one wants to say the government is lying or mistaken it doesn't change the fact they are supplying only theories and guesses, that have been scientifically and reputably refuted.

You (meaning the truthers in general) deny that a plane crashed in PA, but we have witnesses and the debris, and the black boxes. You deny that flight 77 hit the pentagon, yet there are over 100 eye witnesses, and the debris.

You should not generalize truthers and lump us all in together. There are parts to the OCT that are more hotly contested then others, by different people, just like not all military veterans adhering to the OCT does not make them all truthers.

There are many instances about the OCT narrative and theory that are disputed. Again there is no solid proof of the theory you believe in or my theory I believe in, the only sure thing is that those that don't believe as you do have made good cases, specifically with respect to the NIST report and the 9-11 commission which is what we were specifically talking about, how about sicking to that for now instead of trying to change the topics?

You insist that there were explosives planted, yet can present no evidence that says there was.

You insist there was nothing other then fires and planes that caused the collapses, yet there is no evidence solid enough to support this, especially since there wasn't even a proper investigation into these claims that there might have been, even after Scientists Discovered Both Residues And Unignited Fragments Of Nano-Engineered Thermitic Pyrotechnics in Debris From the Twin Towers.
These are pretty strong claims that NIST doesn't respond to.
Explosive Residues: Energetic Materials and the World Trade Center Destruction

Again the NIST report is only a theory, and the 9-11 commission report is not entirely accurate, as admitted to by its panelists.
Is NIST guessing? Yes. So why do you not like admitting this?
So tell us again how a building fell on WTC 7?

 

[SFC Ollie]

So you cannot refute the evidence. Or even the statements. Not a problem.

We have many times and you know it you just want to continue to deny this as always.

You see, everything you have posted about what was wrong with the actual investigation someone has shown that you were wrong.

Just because you don't agree with alternative views from credible sources that we post, does not make them wrong.

I will not accept the theories and guesses you believe because frankly they have not been proven to be infallible. Whether one wants to say the government is lying or mistaken it doesn't change the fact they are supplying only theories and guesses, that have been scientifically and reputably refuted.

You (meaning the truthers in general) deny that a plane crashed in PA, but we have witnesses and the debris, and the black boxes. You deny that flight 77 hit the pentagon, yet there are over 100 eye witnesses, and the debris.

You should not generalize truthers and lump us all in together. There are parts to the OCT that are more hotly contested then others, by different people, just like not all military veterans adhering to the OCT does not make them all truthers.

There are many instances about the OCT narrative and theory that are disputed. Again there is no solid proof of the theory you believe in or my theory I believe in, the only sure thing is that those that don't believe as you do have made good cases, specifically with respect to the NIST report and the 9-11 commission which is what we were specifically talking about, how about sicking to that for now instead of trying to change the topics?

You insist that there were explosives planted, yet can present no evidence that says there was.

You insist there was nothing other then fires and planes that caused the collapses, yet there is no evidence solid enough to support this, especially since there wasn't even a proper investigation into these claims that there might have been, even after Scientists Discovered Both Residues And Unignited Fragments Of Nano-Engineered Thermitic Pyrotechnics in Debris From the Twin Towers.
These are pretty strong claims that NIST doesn't respond to.
Explosive Residues: Energetic Materials and the World Trade Center Destruction

Again the NIST report is only a theory, and the 9-11 commission report is not entirely accurate, as admitted to by its panelists.
Is NIST guessing? Yes. So why do you not like admitting this?
So tell us again how a building fell on WTC 7?

The supposed nano thermite find is pure BS. Just had to let you know that.

Please answer this, because I have asked it many times and never received an answer. What part of the 911 CR that the panel put their name on do they now disagree with?

 

[eots]

So you cannot refute the evidence. Or even the statements. Not a problem.

We have many times and you know it you just want to continue to deny this as always.

Just because you don't agree with alternative views from credible sources that we post, does not make them wrong.

I will not accept the theories and guesses you believe because frankly they have not been proven to be infallible. Whether one wants to say the government is lying or mistaken it doesn't change the fact they are supplying only theories and guesses, that have been scientifically and reputably refuted.

You should not generalize truthers and lump us all in together. There are parts to the OCT that are more hotly contested then others, by different people, just like not all military veterans adhering to the OCT does not make them all truthers.

There are many instances about the OCT narrative and theory that are disputed. Again there is no solid proof of the theory you believe in or my theory I believe in, the only sure thing is that those that don't believe as you do have made good cases, specifically with respect to the NIST report and the 9-11 commission which is what we were specifically talking about, how about sicking to that for now instead of trying to change the topics?

You insist that there were explosives planted, yet can present no evidence that says there was.

You insist there was nothing other then fires and planes that caused the collapses, yet there is no evidence solid enough to support this, especially since there wasn't even a proper investigation into these claims that there might have been, even after Scientists Discovered Both Residues And Unignited Fragments Of Nano-Engineered Thermitic Pyrotechnics in Debris From the Twin Towers.
These are pretty strong claims that NIST doesn't respond to.
Explosive Residues: Energetic Materials and the World Trade Center Destruction

Again the NIST report is only a theory, and the 9-11 commission report is not entirely accurate, as admitted to by its panelists.
Is NIST guessing? Yes. So why do you not like admitting this?
So tell us again how a building fell on WTC 7?

The supposed nano thermite find is pure BS. Just had to let you know that.

Please answer this, because I have asked it many times and never received an answer. What part of the 911 CR that the panel put their name on do they now disagree with?

the statements are the report is incomplete it hard to agree or disagree with
incomplete....candycorn

 

[Mr. Jones]

So you cannot refute the evidence. Or even the statements. Not a problem.

We have many times and you know it you just want to continue to deny this as always.

Just because you don't agree with alternative views from credible sources that we post, does not make them wrong.

I will not accept the theories and guesses you believe because frankly they have not been proven to be infallible. Whether one wants to say the government is lying or mistaken it doesn't change the fact they are supplying only theories and guesses, that have been scientifically and reputably refuted.

You should not generalize truthers and lump us all in together. There are parts to the OCT that are more hotly contested then others, by different people, just like not all military veterans adhering to the OCT does not make them all truthers.

There are many instances about the OCT narrative and theory that are disputed. Again there is no solid proof of the theory you believe in or my theory I believe in, the only sure thing is that those that don't believe as you do have made good cases, specifically with respect to the NIST report and the 9-11 commission which is what we were specifically talking about, how about sicking to that for now instead of trying to change the topics?

You insist that there were explosives planted, yet can present no evidence that says there was.

You insist there was nothing other then fires and planes that caused the collapses, yet there is no evidence solid enough to support this, especially since there wasn't even a proper investigation into these claims that there might have been, even after Scientists Discovered Both Residues And Unignited Fragments Of Nano-Engineered Thermitic Pyrotechnics in Debris From the Twin Towers.
These are pretty strong claims that NIST doesn't respond to.
Explosive Residues: Energetic Materials and the World Trade Center Destruction

Again the NIST report is only a theory, and the 9-11 commission report is not entirely accurate, as admitted to by its panelists.
Is NIST guessing? Yes. So why do you not like admitting this?
So tell us again how a building fell on WTC 7?

The supposed nano thermite find is pure BS. Just had to let you know that.

Please answer this, because I have asked it many times and never received an answer. What part of the 911 CR that the panel put their name on do they now disagree with?

We don't know they aren't exactly saying, we have to go by these statements.
Thomas Kean, was the Republican governor of New Jersey. He had the following to say... “We to this day don’t know why NORAD [the North American Aerospace Command] told us what they told us, it was just so far from the truth. . . "

Farmer states...“at some level of the government, at some point in time…there was an agreement not to tell the truth about what happened...
What do these statements mean to you? Does it inspire confidence in them getting accurate information, does it inspire confidence everything could have been correct? They both allude to dishonesty, do they not?
It seems that the panelist agreeing with the report and the panel speaking out like they did in the above statements is double speak.

Bob Kerrey, another member of the federal 9/11 Commission, added, “It might take “a permanent 9/11 commission” to end the remaining mysteries of September 11 and called for “a permanent 9/11 Commission.--Newsweek

"Well, let me just say that I think the report is, uh, extremely accurate, and- and sets forth the facts of 9/11."-Farmer

So he writes a book suggesting that different levels of government gave them false information, and were dishonest, but when pressed to elaborate he says the above statement...
Looks like members of the truth movement aren't the only ones making money by selling books.

Farmer is not saying that 9-11 was an inside job, however, Farmer’s testimony, along with that of his fellow 9-11 Commission members, demonstrates that, whatever really happened on 9-11, may not be accurate. He is talking about some of the details provided after the attacks by NORAD and the FAA, for example that NORAD knew about Flight 93 before it crashed, and the governments reaction to warnings etc.. Bottom line is that many people still don't believe the OCT.
'We should never be seen as answering all the questions"-
Bob Kerry at about 3:30 into the video
It's a 30 year old conspiracy" he goes on to say, at 6:47


[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gtJWBcWAeAw&feature=player_embedded]YouTube - ‪9/11 Commissioner Bob Kerrey finally confesses 9-11 Commission could not do it's job - Part 3 of 3‬‏[/ame]

Now can you tell us how a building fell on WTC 7?

 

[Mr. Jones]

The supposed nano thermite find is pure BS. Just had to let you know that.

How do you know this. If it is a lie and made up why isn't it addressed and proven false and charges brought against those that claim to have found it, there's got to be a law about that somewhere isn't there?