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

[Patriot911]

what evidence do you have that proves the failure of a single column (79) would initiate the completely progress collapse of the wtc 7 in secs ?

He has nothing but the dubious guesses and theories of the NIST, who is an agency of the government.

Right, so according to truthtards afflicted with paranoid delusions, this PROVES they were lying simply because they are a government agency.... yet they've never been caught lying before. They are an investigative branch of the government with no political ties.

And again, constant claims by proven liars that the NIST is lying when the only evidence presented is the fact they are a government agency doesn't exactly win anyone over based on logic, does it.

He uses what credible experts in many relevant fields have thoroughly exposed as being flawed

You mean the ignorant fucks over at AE911? The ones pretending the towers were really boxes when they were trying to explain their theories, much to the amusement of everyone? Meanwhile, the rest of the WORLD of engineers is doing nothing but laughing at the "experts" you pretend are relevant. And considering you dismiss the lead structural engineer of the towers simply because YOU claim he contradicted himself, who are you to talk about experts?

yet because it is NIST and the government the appeal to their authority is somehow beyond reproach

Wrong yet again. The evidence points to the NIST story and directly conflicts with your bullshit. There is NO evidence to support your bullshit. Not one piece. That is what this current thread is about. Eots couldn't produce one. You can't produce one. Nobody else in the TBM has been able to produce one. So why are we suppose to believe you over all the other evidence which YOU can't refute?

NIST's models depend on stripping of insulation and fire temperatures of 1000° C.

Wrong yet again. The NIST reported maximum temperatures of 1000C, not that the collapse event required those temperatures. Way to lie your ass off yet again. BTW, you are aware other studies showed a collapse initiating without the stripping of insulation or even the impact of the planes, right? Or are international engineering firms and universities now in on the conspiracy as well?

But, there is no actual physical evidence for NIST's proposed
Structural damage, Stripping of fire–proofing material, Fire temperatures, or Sagging of floors.

Wrong yet again. All the NIST findings are based on the physical evidence found in the form of video and photographic evidence of what happened prior to and during the collapse initiation. See, unlike you truthtards, the NIST has to base their findings on the facts, not dreamed up fantasies that have no evidence to back them up.

During the public comment period, August 2008, Shyam Sunder said free fall could not occur because of resistance by the structure itself. David Chandler showed free fall did occur for a distance of about 105 feet, or a time of about 2.5 seconds.
NIST admitted to free fall in the final report, but did not examine the implications.

And? Unlike truthtards, others admit fault and correct their theories to line up with the facts. Meanwhile truthtards hang on to their precious lies regardless of what facts prove they are wrong.

There are many problems with NIST's theory that suggest fraud. See David Ray Griffin's "The Mysterious Collapse of World Trade Center 7," Olive Branch Press, 2010.

So we're suppose to believe a theologian who has been widely discredited over the true experts. Yeah right! Grow up and get a life.

NIST's Theory for WTC7 is almost pure speculation.

It is speculation based on fact, which is far more than you can claim about your bullshit fantasies, right?

There is no direct evidence for high temperature fires, expansion of girders, or failure of columns due to fire.

Sure there is. How else do you explain the complete failure of an entire vertical section of the interior as proven by the collapse of the penthouse? Oh wait. You deny anything and everything that doesn't fit your fantasies. Silly question! But then again, everyone else knows the truth.

NIST: "… we are unable to provide a full explanation of the total collapse."

In contrast to the truthtard "We know everything that happened including all the space age new stuff that still hasn't been shown to the public but we somehow know about it!"

So show us your true evidence your bullshit is correct. Then we can go to the NIST and see if they have accounted for this evidence, right? Oh wait. You HAVE no evidence. That is why you have to attack the NIST in the pathetic attempt to try and whine that they have no evidence either. Must be pretty sad to know you have nothing to back up your bullshit.

 

[Patriot911]

What Eots is telling us is that the NIST report is wrong except when it's right.

No that would actually be your logic Ollie....I am telling you if you support the official story you need to support the findings...not blend the with poular mechanics..and debwunker sites as you see fit and contradict the report you claim to support

So again I ask you, eots, for the evidence that supports your bullshit claims about the towers and WTC 7. If you support the truthtard theories, you need to support your findings, not just blindly follow the preachings of those out to fleece you and your fellow truthtards out of your money through videos and books. Or do your own words not apply to you and your fellow truthtards?

 

[eots]

what evidence do you have that proves the failure of a single column (79) would initiate the completely progress collapse of the wtc 7 in secs ?

He has nothing but the dubious guesses and theories of the NIST, who is an agency of the government.

Right, so according to truthtards afflicted with paranoid delusions, this PROVES they were lying simply because they are a government agency.... yet they've never been caught lying before. They are an investigative branch of the government with no political ties.

And again, constant claims by proven liars that the NIST is lying when the only evidence presented is the fact they are a government agency doesn't exactly win anyone over based on logic, does it.


You mean the ignorant fucks over at AE911? The ones pretending the towers were really boxes when they were trying to explain their theories, much to the amusement of everyone? Meanwhile, the rest of the WORLD of engineers is doing nothing but laughing at the "experts" you pretend are relevant. And considering you dismiss the lead structural engineer of the towers simply because YOU claim he contradicted himself, who are you to talk about experts?


Wrong yet again. The evidence points to the NIST story and directly conflicts with your bullshit. There is NO evidence to support your bullshit. Not one piece. That is what this current thread is about. Eots couldn't produce one. You can't produce one. Nobody else in the TBM has been able to produce one. So why are we suppose to believe you over all the other evidence which YOU can't refute?


Wrong yet again. The NIST reported maximum temperatures of 1000C, not that the collapse event required those temperatures. Way to lie your ass off yet again. BTW, you are aware other studies showed a collapse initiating without the stripping of insulation or even the impact of the planes, right? Or are international engineering firms and universities now in on the conspiracy as well?


Wrong yet again. All the NIST findings are based on the physical evidence found in the form of video and photographic evidence of what happened prior to and during the collapse initiation. See, unlike you truthtards, the NIST has to base their findings on the facts, not dreamed up fantasies that have no evidence to back them up.


And? Unlike truthtards, others admit fault and correct their theories to line up with the facts. Meanwhile truthtards hang on to their precious lies regardless of what facts prove they are wrong.


So we're suppose to believe a theologian who has been widely discredited over the true experts. Yeah right! Grow up and get a life.


It is speculation based on fact, which is far more than you can claim about your bullshit fantasies, right?

There is no direct evidence for high temperature fires, expansion of girders, or failure of columns due to fire.

Sure there is. How else do you explain the complete failure of an entire vertical section of the interior as proven by the collapse of the penthouse? Oh wait. You deny anything and everything that doesn't fit your fantasies. Silly question! But then again, everyone else knows the truth.

NIST: "… we are unable to provide a full explanation of the total collapse."

In contrast to the truthtard "We know everything that happened including all the space age new stuff that still hasn't been shown to the public but we somehow know about it!"

So show us your true evidence your bullshit is correct. Then we can go to the NIST and see if they have accounted for this evidence, right? Oh wait. You HAVE no evidence. That is why you have to attack the NIST in the pathetic attempt to try and whine that they have no evidence either. Must be pretty sad to know you have nothing to back up your bullshit.

it is amazing how you can talk so much and say nothing all at the same time

 

[Patriot911]

It is amazing how you can talk so much and say nothing all at the same time

Really? You still don't understand such a simple request?

Show us the evidence that backs up your theories. You demand others to do so, so man up and do the same.

Simple enough for you?

If not, take this to a kid and have them explain it to you. It isn't hard to understand. Maybe you should ask why it is so hard for you to understand.

 

[eots]

It is amazing how you can talk so much and say nothing all at the same time

Really? You still don't understand such a simple request?

Show us the evidence that backs up your theories. You demand others to do so, so man up and do the same.

Simple enough for you?

If not, take this to a kid and have them explain it to you. It isn't hard to understand. Maybe you should ask why it is so hard for you to understand.

My theory is NIST failed to correctly determine the cause of the collapse and therefore a re-investigation is required and this investigation should include a thorough controlled demolition hypothesis...an opinion in part you and Ollie seem to share at times...along with the former lead fire investigator for NIST and oddly enough, with careful reading, even the NIST report itself

my theory is there was ample prior knowledge of the events of 9/11 and the commission report was a whitewash a belief held by many participants of the commission itself

 

[SFC Ollie]

It is amazing how you can talk so much and say nothing all at the same time

Really? You still don't understand such a simple request?

Show us the evidence that backs up your theories. You demand others to do so, so man up and do the same.

Simple enough for you?

If not, take this to a kid and have them explain it to you. It isn't hard to understand. Maybe you should ask why it is so hard for you to understand.

My theory is NIST failed to correctly determine the cause of the collapse and therefore a re-investigation is required and this investigation should include a thorough controlled demolition hypothesis...an opinion in part you and Ollie seem to share at times...along with the former lead fire investigator for NIST and oddly enough, with careful reading, even the NIST report itself

my theory is there was ample prior knowledge of the events of 9/11 and the commission report was a whitewash a belief held by many participants of the commission itself

Oh don't put words in my mouth. There were no explosives and no residue of any explosives found. You want a new investigation start saving up some money to fund it. We the people aren't going to do it when you present zero evidence for your theories. But when that investigation shows that there were no explosives you'll want another investigation, and another and another.....

Some members of the commission believe that some organizations may have not told them the whole truth not to cover up any controlled demolition but to cover up mistakes that they may have made that morning during the reaction to the attacks. And they are probably right, chances are that there is some CYA going on, that and some things that are still classified. But no there was no prior knowledge by the government.

 

[eots]

Really? You still don't understand such a simple request?

Show us the evidence that backs up your theories. You demand others to do so, so man up and do the same.

Simple enough for you?

If not, take this to a kid and have them explain it to you. It isn't hard to understand. Maybe you should ask why it is so hard for you to understand.

My theory is NIST failed to correctly determine the cause of the collapse and therefore a re-investigation is required and this investigation should include a thorough controlled demolition hypothesis...an opinion in part you and Ollie seem to share at times...along with the former lead fire investigator for NIST and oddly enough, with careful reading, even the NIST report itself

my theory is there was ample prior knowledge of the events of 9/11 and the commission report was a whitewash a belief held by many participants of the commission itself

Oh don't put words in my mouth. There were no explosives and no residue of any explosives found. You want a new investigation start saving up some money to fund it. We the people aren't going to do it when you present zero evidence for your theories. But when that investigation shows that there were no explosives you'll want another investigation, and another and another.....

Some members of the commission believe that some organizations may have not told them the whole truth not to cover up any controlled demolition but to cover up mistakes that they may have made that morning during the reaction to the attacks. And they are probably right, chances are that there is some CYA going on, that and some things that are still classified. But no there was no prior knowledge by the government.

what ever gets you through the night Ollie...

 

[SFC Ollie]

My theory is NIST failed to correctly determine the cause of the collapse and therefore a re-investigation is required and this investigation should include a thorough controlled demolition hypothesis...an opinion in part you and Ollie seem to share at times...along with the former lead fire investigator for NIST and oddly enough, with careful reading, even the NIST report itself

my theory is there was ample prior knowledge of the events of 9/11 and the commission report was a whitewash a belief held by many participants of the commission itself

Oh don't put words in my mouth. There were no explosives and no residue of any explosives found. You want a new investigation start saving up some money to fund it. We the people aren't going to do it when you present zero evidence for your theories. But when that investigation shows that there were no explosives you'll want another investigation, and another and another.....

Some members of the commission believe that some organizations may have not told them the whole truth not to cover up any controlled demolition but to cover up mistakes that they may have made that morning during the reaction to the attacks. And they are probably right, chances are that there is some CYA going on, that and some things that are still classified. But no there was no prior knowledge by the government.

what ever gets you through the night Ollie...

It's called fact and truth. You really should try it sometime.

 

[Patriot911]

It is amazing how you can talk so much and say nothing all at the same time

Really? You still don't understand such a simple request?

Show us the evidence that backs up your theories. You demand others to do so, so man up and do the same.

Simple enough for you?

If not, take this to a kid and have them explain it to you. It isn't hard to understand. Maybe you should ask why it is so hard for you to understand.

My theory is NIST failed to correctly determine the cause of the collapse and therefore a re-investigation is required and this investigation should include a thorough controlled demolition hypothesis...an opinion in part you and Ollie seem to share at times...along with the former lead fire investigator for NIST and oddly enough, with careful reading, even the NIST report itself

So please present your evidence that would be needed for a nobody like you to overturn one of the most respected engineering investigative agencies in the world.

my theory is there was ample prior knowledge of the events of 9/11 and the commission report was a whitewash a belief held by many participants of the commission itself

So please present your evidence of prior knowledge and the whitewashing by the 9/11 commission.

We know what your theories are even when they change from time to time.

What I've asked for time and time again and what you continue to run away from while demanding it from everyone else is EVIDENCE YOUR BULLSHIT IS TRUE.

Is that so hard? The only reason I can think of of why this would be so hard is if you don't have any evidence to back up your bullshit.

So what say you?

 

[eots]

So please present your evidence that would be needed for a nobody like you to overturn one of the most respected engineering investigative agencies in the world.

can you provide a link to..support your claim that Shyam Sunder the most respected engineering investigator in the world ?

Former Chief of NIST's Fire Science Division Calls for Independent Review of World Trade Center Investigation
http://www.opednews.com/articles/genera_alan_mil_070820_former_chief_of_nist.htm


Dwain Deets, MS Physics, MS Eng – Former Director, Aerospace Projects, NASA Dryden Flight Research Center. Before this appointment, he served as Director, Research Engineering Division at Dryden. Recipient of the NASA Exceptional Service Award and the Presidential Meritorious Rank Award in the Senior Executive Service (1988). Selected presenter of the Wright Brothers Lectureship in Aeronautics, a distinguished speaking engagement sponsored by the American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics (AIAA) (1986). Included in "Who's Who in Science and Engineering" 1993 - 2000. Former Chairman of the Aerospace Control and Guidance Systems Committee of the Society of Automotive Engineers. Former Member, AIAA Committee on Society and Aerospace Technology. 37 year NASA career.
Statement in support of Architects and Engineers petition:

"The many visual images (massive structural members being hurled horizontally, huge pyroclastic clouds, etc.) leave no doubt in my mind explosives were involved [in the destruction of the World Trade Center]." AE911Truth.org

Patriots Question 9/11 - Responsible Criticism of the 9/11 Commission Report

my theory is there was ample prior knowledge of the events of 9/11 and the commission report was a whitewash a belief held by many participants of the commission itself

So please present your evidence of prior knowledge and the whitewashing by the 9/11 commission.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=76ZVvMU4UO4]YouTube - ‪9 11 Prior Knowledge Insider Trading 9 20 2001 ABC‬‏[/ame]


[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pYIZW959vJc]YouTube - ‪Fox News expose: Israelis had foreknowledge of 9-11.‬‏[/ame]


[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CcrgeuLb3dQ]YouTube - ‪Condi Lied Under Oath to the 9-11 Widows‬‏[/ame]


[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CFrW3j6e9AA]YouTube - ‪9/11 Truth: The 9/11 Commission Report is Fraudulent‬‏[/ame]

 

[SFC Ollie]

Opinion, we've got toms of it. What we don't have is any evidence of explosives.

 

[eots]

Opinion, we've got toms of it. What we don't have is any evidence of explosives.

and no evidence that the 9/11 commission or NIST succeeded in their mandate
and evidence to strongly suggest it did not and this failure an orchestration and by design

 

[eots]

The National Institute for Standards and Technology has been forced to admit that the total free-fall collapse of the twin towers cannot be explained after an exhaustive scientific study, implicitly acknowledging that controlled demolition is the only means by which the buildings could have come down.

In a recent letter (PDF link) to 9/11 victim's family representatives Bill Doyle and Bob McIlvaine, NIST states, "We are unable to provide a full explanation of the total collapse."

A 10,000 page scientific study only offers theories as to how the "collapse initiation" proceeded and fails to address how it was possible for part of a WTC structure to fall through the path of most resistance at freefall speed, completely violating the accepted laws of physics

http://www.911proof.com/NIST.pdf

 

[Triton]

The National Institute for Standards and Technology has been forced to admit that the total free-fall collapse of the twin towers cannot be explained after an exhaustive scientific study, implicitly acknowledging that controlled demolition is the only means by which the buildings could have come down.

In a recent letter (PDF link) to 9/11 victim's family representatives Bill Doyle and Bob McIlvaine, NIST states, "We are unable to provide a full explanation of the total collapse."[/B]

A 10,000 page scientific study only offers theories as to how the "collapse initiation" proceeded and fails to address how it was possible for part of a WTC structure to fall through the path of most resistance at freefall speed, completely violating the accepted laws of physics

http://www.911proof.com/NIST.pdf

Hahaha Truthtard! There was no free fall collapse!!!



There's just no evidence, none, not a single shred of evidence, nothing, nada!

Not even a wee bit of evidence whatsoever in any way, shape, or form that the nutjob twoofers could possibly present that is contrary to WHAT REALLY HAPPENED, which is what NIST and the 9/11 Commission report say, fucktard!




Nothing, there's just no evidence!

 

[eots]

The National Institute for Standards and Technology has been forced to admit that the total free-fall collapse of the twin towers cannot be explained after an exhaustive scientific study, implicitly acknowledging that controlled demolition is the only means by which the buildings could have come down.

In a recent letter (PDF link) to 9/11 victim's family representatives Bill Doyle and Bob McIlvaine, NIST states, "We are unable to provide a full explanation of the total collapse."[/B]

A 10,000 page scientific study only offers theories as to how the "collapse initiation" proceeded and fails to address how it was possible for part of a WTC structure to fall through the path of most resistance at freefall speed, completely violating the accepted laws of physics

http://www.911proof.com/NIST.pdf

Hahaha Truthtard! There was no free fall collapse!!!



There's just no evidence, none, not a single shred of evidence, nothing, nada!

Not even a wee bit of evidence whatsoever in any way, shape, or form that the nutjob twoofers could possibly present that is contrary to WHAT REALLY HAPPENED, which is what NIST and the 9/11 Commission report say, fucktard!




Nothing, there's just no evidence!

oh my...I believe I may of just experienced a drive by debwunking !

 

[Patriot911]

You two stupid fucks got taken in by the conspiratard sites again. NOBODY has proven the towers fell at free fall acceleration. That was WTC 7. I am sure the truth doesn't matter to you, but I think everyone else should see just how dishonest, misinformed, and disgusting you really are.

So, eots.... still no evidence? Funny that. All those claims of evidence you CONTINUE to make and you STILL can't produce a single piece of real evidence that would hold up in a court of law. Opinion and outright lies don't cut it. They just show you're stupid enough to believe anyone who says what you want to hear.

 

[Gamolon]

YouTube - ‪9/11 Physics 101; Air, Water, or WTC Steel? You decide.‬‏

Simple question for you eots about this video. Are you telling me that you believe that the ENTIRE portion of the tower shown below that 10 floor block is what any engineer should use to show how that lower portion should have resisted the upper block coming down?

 

[Gamolon]

YouTube - ‪9/11 Physics 101; Air, Water, or WTC Steel? You decide.‬‏

Explain how that video even comes close to explaining what happened.

How do these connections circled in red...

Resist this "block" circled in red...

 

[SFC Ollie]

The National Institute for Standards and Technology has been forced to admit that the total free-fall collapse of the twin towers cannot be explained after an exhaustive scientific study, implicitly acknowledging that controlled demolition is the only means by which the buildings could have come down.

In a recent letter (PDF link) to 9/11 victim's family representatives Bill Doyle and Bob McIlvaine, NIST states, "We are unable to provide a full explanation of the total collapse."

A 10,000 page scientific study only offers theories as to how the "collapse initiation" proceeded and fails to address how it was possible for part of a WTC structure to fall through the path of most resistance at freefall speed, completely violating the accepted laws of physics

http://www.911proof.com/NIST.pdf

From your link:

NIST has fully documented it's analysis approach in it's reports....and is denying your request.

Thus there is no inconsistency between the text of NCSTAR 1-6 and the information depicted in figure 9-3.

We believe this statement is correct and useful, and do not plan to make revisions as suggested.

There is no inconsistency present in these results, and therefore your request for correction is being denied.

On this basis ....... your request is being denied.

You letter further asserts that NIST failed to take into account interviews of emergency personnel that suggested the presence of bombs in the towers. NIST reviewed all the interviews conducted by the FDNY of firefighters (500 interviews) and in addition conducted it's own set of interviews with emergency responders and building occupants. Taken as a whole, the interviews did not support the contention that explosives played a role in the collapse of the WTC towers.

Finally NIST has stated that it found no corroborating to suggest that explosives were used to bring down the buildings.

( oh I love it when you guys debunk yourselves)

 

[eots]

the national institute for standards and technology has been forced to admit that the total free-fall collapse of the twin towers cannot be explained after an exhaustive scientific study, implicitly acknowledging that controlled demolition is the only means by which the buildings could have come down.

In a recent letter (pdf link) to 9/11 victim's family representatives bill doyle and bob mcilvaine, nist states, "we are unable to provide a full explanation of the total collapse."

a 10,000 page scientific study only offers theories as to how the "collapse initiation" proceeded and fails to address how it was possible for part of a wtc structure to fall through the path of most resistance at freefall speed, completely violating the accepted laws of physics

http://www.911proof.com/nist.pdf

from your link:

Nist has fully documented it's analysis approach in it's reports....and is denying your request.

Thus there is no inconsistency between the text of ncstar 1-6 and the information depicted in figure 9-3.

We believe this statement is correct and useful, and do not plan to make revisions as suggested.

There is no inconsistency present in these results, and therefore your request for correction is being denied.

On this basis ....... Your request is being denied.

You letter further asserts that nist failed to take into account interviews of emergency personnel that suggested the presence of bombs in the towers. Nist reviewed all the interviews conducted by the fdny of firefighters (500 interviews) and in addition conducted it's own set of interviews with emergency responders and building occupants. Taken as a whole, the interviews did not support the contention that explosives played a role in the collapse of the wtc towers.

Finally nist has stated that it found no corroborating to suggest that explosives were used to bring down the buildings.

( oh i love it when you guys debunk yourselves)

denial of witness testimony by nist debwunks nothing