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

[Mr. Jones]

Actually he does allude to that theory in a manner of speaking in this post:
http://www.usmessageboard.com/3781201-post1248.html

Why don't you be a man and quote me directly Ollie? You are embarrassing yourself by reaching in your ass and pulling pure shit out now.

Do you deny that you posted this as part of your argument?

United 93 Still Airborne After Alleged Crash - According To ATC/Radar
04/28/09 (PilotsFor911Truth.org) - Recently it has been brought to our attention that Air Traffic Control (ATC) transcripts reveal United 93 as being airborne after it's alleged crash. Similar scenarios have been offered with regard to American 77 and American 11 showing an aircraft target continuing past its alleged crash point in the case of American 11, or past the turn-around point in the case of American 77. However, both these issues can be easily explained by "Coast Mode" radar tracking. This is not the case with United 93.
Full Article Here
-By Gordon Ross
AE911Truth.org...

Don't doubt me numb nuts...... I certainly didn't make it up....

Poor Ollie, has to take things out of context and twist it to fit his sorry argument.
So you take something out of a huge list, that I posted in response to people wanting to see proof or evidence of problems with the OCT? And this after the discussion was on NIST and the WTC collapses? Way to make yourself look foolish
It's no surprise you would try to do an idiotic thing like this,as you have nothing useful to say in response to what had been talked about by everyone else.
Typical of you to take the time to go through previous posts to use this way instead of actually reading the given links and learning something about the issues

 

[SFC Ollie]

Why don't you be a man and quote me directly Ollie? You are embarrassing yourself by reaching in your ass and pulling pure shit out now.

Do you deny that you posted this as part of your argument?

United 93 Still Airborne After Alleged Crash - According To ATC/Radar
04/28/09 (PilotsFor911Truth.org) - Recently it has been brought to our attention that Air Traffic Control (ATC) transcripts reveal United 93 as being airborne after it's alleged crash. Similar scenarios have been offered with regard to American 77 and American 11 showing an aircraft target continuing past its alleged crash point in the case of American 11, or past the turn-around point in the case of American 77. However, both these issues can be easily explained by "Coast Mode" radar tracking. This is not the case with United 93.
Full Article Here
-By Gordon Ross
AE911Truth.org...

Don't doubt me numb nuts...... I certainly didn't make it up....

Poor Ollie, has to take things out of context and twist it to fit his sorry argument.
So you take something out of a huge list, that I posted in response to people wanting to see proof or evidence of problems with the OCT? And this after the discussion was on NIST and the WTC collapses? Way to make yourself look foolish
It's no surprise you would try to do an idiotic thing like this,as you have nothing useful to say in response to what had been talked about by everyone else.
Typical of you to take the time to go through previous posts to use this way instead of actually reading the given links and learning something about the issues

So you are posting things that you don't believe are true? OK. I think I understand. We are not to believe that you believe anything that you post unless of course you tell us that you believe it. So just what do you believe?

 

[Mr. Jones]

Oh horse shit. You want to believe that NIST says the towers fell in 9 to 11 seconds, you go right on believing that. The only person who looks like an idiot is you. If you cannot see the parts of the building falling ahead of the collapse then you truly are in need of professional help.

I believe NIST is wrong and flat out lied in many instances about the collapses. NIST has an estimate for collapse times, that you all posted, and they claim that those times occurred because the towers "provided minimal resistance" without even explaining why.
So why don't you tell us what NIST should have estimated those times to be?? Instead of making up lies about me, and begging for us to believe you about anything because in your opinion" the whole world believes NIST" and the OCT.

NIST did that for you, if you only read a little bit more than what your handlers want you to.

From video evidence, significant portions of the cores of both buildings (roughly 60 stories of WTC 1 and 40 stories of WTC 2) are known to have stood 15 to 25 seconds after collapse initiation before they, too, began to collapse. Neither the duration of the seismic records nor video evidence (due to obstruction of view caused by debris clouds) are reliable indicators of the total time it took for each building to collapse completely.

NIST's Investigation of the Sept. 11 World Trade Center Disaster - Frequently Asked Questions

Now i know you have a hard time understanding all this so I'll tell you again.

The 9 and 11 second time periods were for the first unobstructed pieces of the buildings to hit the ground. The buildings were still collapsing at this time, and didn't finish collapsing for at least another 15 to 25 seconds.....

It's soooo simple.

You can see the pieces that hit the ground first in most videos.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qhyu-fZ2nRA]YouTube - ‪9/11: South Tower "Collapse" video compilation‬‏[/ame]

So by your estimate we are supposed to take 9 secs+another 15 to 25secs? Are you that stupid..really? OMG!
I'm surprised you don't just go ahead and start your clock when pieces of the tower started to fall right after the plane impacts!!

Perhaps you could contribute to NIST, and set the 9-11 commission report straight while you're at it.
Complete collapse times vary, here one of your favorite "debunker" sites has it no more then 15-16 secs.
http://www.911myths.com/html/wtc_collapse_time_estimates.html

Again the commission excepts 10 secs, and you all rave about how no one can dispute the "9-11 commission"
It is generally excepted between 10 and 16 secs, FYI. Still over twice as fast as should have taken.

 

[SFC Ollie]

Wow, The intelligence level in here just fell by 50 points......

 

[Mr. Jones]

Do you deny that you posted this as part of your argument?



Don't doubt me numb nuts...... I certainly didn't make it up....

Poor Ollie, has to take things out of context and twist it to fit his sorry argument.
So you take something out of a huge list, that I posted in response to people wanting to see proof or evidence of problems with the OCT? And this after the discussion was on NIST and the WTC collapses? Way to make yourself look foolish
It's no surprise you would try to do an idiotic thing like this,as you have nothing useful to say in response to what had been talked about by everyone else.
Typical of you to take the time to go through previous posts to use this way instead of actually reading the given links and learning something about the issues

So you are posting things that you don't believe are true? OK. I think I understand. We are not to believe that you believe anything that you post unless of course you tell us that you believe it. So just what do you believe?

Seriously Ollie are you that dense man? There are many different things about 9-11 that researchers have doubts about, and what I posted are the many different people, places and things that are in debate, and dispute. The discussion was about NIST and the WTC, then you bring up planes and try to drag me into a side session about flight 93? wtf does that have to do with NIST and the WTC??

Please, if you wish to discuss flight 93 start a thread about that, or try to find the right time to interject that when it has relevance to the conversation at hand.
Getting back on point,
Again you are wrong about NIST, it's accuracy, and the times of collapse, would you like to explain your theories about the collapse initiations, times or kinetic forces etc or anything else that pertains to the NIST and the WTC?
I have posted many links concerning this that clearly show the vast amount of opposition, evidence they supply as proof, and the rebuttals to NIST.

 

[Mr. Jones]

Wow, The intelligence level in here just fell by 50 points......

Yes it did, thanks to your recent idiotic posts

 

[Patriot911]

Wow, The intelligence level in here just fell by 50 points......

Yes it did, thanks to your recent idiotic posts

Jones, you are a fucking douche. Always have been. Always will be. Fortunately one can always spot you in real life from the trail of slime you leave behind where ever you go.

Now why don't you grow a pair of balls for once in your pathetic life and either supply us with a piece of real evidence you claim to have, or man up and admit you've been lying your ass off the whole time.

You know.... sooner or later whatever credibility you have left is going to disappear as you continue to run like a little bitch from this very simple request..... well..... simple if you were being honest. But we both know you're not. You're only here to preach your lies in a vain attempt to overthrow the government.

Like I said. What a fucking douche. Good thing no woman would touch you. Could you imagine a mini truthtard with a bad attitude.

 

[eots]

wow, the intelligence level in here just fell by 50 points......

yes it did, thanks to your recent idiotic posts

jones, you are a fucking douche. Always have been. Always will be. Fortunately one can always spot you in real life from the trail of slime you leave behind where ever you go.

Now why don't you grow a pair of balls for once in your pathetic life and either supply us with a piece of real evidence you claim to have, or man up and admit you've been lying your ass off the whole time.

You know.... Sooner or later whatever credibility you have left is going to disappear as you continue to run like a little bitch from this very simple request..... Well..... Simple if you were being honest. But we both know you're not. You're only here to preach your lies in a vain attempt to overthrow the government.

Like i said. What a fucking douche. Good thing no woman would touch you. Could you imagine a mini truthtard with a bad attitude.

my god are you an idiot

 

[Patriot911]

yes it did, thanks to your recent idiotic posts

jones, you are a fucking douche. Always have been. Always will be. Fortunately one can always spot you in real life from the trail of slime you leave behind where ever you go.

Now why don't you grow a pair of balls for once in your pathetic life and either supply us with a piece of real evidence you claim to have, or man up and admit you've been lying your ass off the whole time.

You know.... Sooner or later whatever credibility you have left is going to disappear as you continue to run like a little bitch from this very simple request..... Well..... Simple if you were being honest. But we both know you're not. You're only here to preach your lies in a vain attempt to overthrow the government.

Like i said. What a fucking douche. Good thing no woman would touch you. Could you imagine a mini truthtard with a bad attitude.

my god are you an idiot

Well, like nearly everything else you post, you're wrong.

Speaking of dishonest idiots, I've asked you to present one real piece of evidence your bullshit theories are true. So where is it?

 

[SFC Ollie]

Poor Ollie, has to take things out of context and twist it to fit his sorry argument.
So you take something out of a huge list, that I posted in response to people wanting to see proof or evidence of problems with the OCT? And this after the discussion was on NIST and the WTC collapses? Way to make yourself look foolish
It's no surprise you would try to do an idiotic thing like this,as you have nothing useful to say in response to what had been talked about by everyone else.
Typical of you to take the time to go through previous posts to use this way instead of actually reading the given links and learning something about the issues

So you are posting things that you don't believe are true? OK. I think I understand. We are not to believe that you believe anything that you post unless of course you tell us that you believe it. So just what do you believe?

Seriously Ollie are you that dense man? There are many different things about 9-11 that researchers have doubts about, and what I posted are the many different people, places and things that are in debate, and dispute. The discussion was about NIST and the WTC, then you bring up planes and try to drag me into a side session about flight 93? wtf does that have to do with NIST and the WTC??

Please, if you wish to discuss flight 93 start a thread about that, or try to find the right time to interject that when it has relevance to the conversation at hand.
Getting back on point,
Again you are wrong about NIST, it's accuracy, and the times of collapse, would you like to explain your theories about the collapse initiations, times or kinetic forces etc or anything else that pertains to the NIST and the WTC?
I have posted many links concerning this that clearly show the vast amount of opposition, evidence they supply as proof, and the rebuttals to NIST.

I may get serious when you learn to understand English. But you have your head so screwed up you can't see fact from fiction. Once again. NIST said that the first pieces of the towers hit the ground in 9 and 11 seconds. The buildings were still collapsing when that happened....
A 3rd grader could understand this. Real shame that you can't.

 

[Rationalist1016]

ARE YOU SAYING SHYAM SUNDER WAS AT GROUND ZERO ?

No, that is not what I am saying.
Admittedly, I used a poor choice of words.

??????

I'm not sure what you didn't understand. My choice of words must of been off on this one too.

NO, WE ARE BACK TO ARE PROPER FACT DRIVEN INVESTIGATION WITH AUTHORITY NEEDS TO BE DONE
STARTING WITH THE COLLAPSE OF WTC 7

Nope..............it is YOUR CHOICE of facts that you are referring to. There is a difference between claims & facts.

 

[eots]

You have yet to clarify what constitutes evidence in our mind

 

[Trojan]

Curious, say you get a new investigation -- who should perform the investigation? I'd like to know who you think is qualified.

That is a good question. Because, apparently, there is a "vast power that the government has over the researchers who have contrary theories"(quote from Mr. Jones). So, using that premise, who could possibly do this investigation? If a committee WAS established, that had no government ties, & where all independent researchers, scientists, & engineers, would that be good enough? I don't believe it would. As soon as the committee submitted a report that didn't align with their claims, all we would hear is "the government (or some element of) derailed the investigation!!" You can't keep moving the goal post back when you don't like the answer.
I have already had this conversation with Mr. Jones. Although, I don't think he ever addressed this question.

Exactly, the members would have to have no ties to government, no ties to govenment funding, so eliminate virually the entire academic community, good lord, they best not work for a company that does or ever did government work, imagine if they worked for a company that once had ties to Marvin Bush? wow, and they would have to be individuals that had no ties to friendly governments

perhaps there are some Iranian and North Korean engineers and architects with experience in nanothermite? they would also have to be forensic investigators --- but wait, what if the CIA had infiltrated their agency

Ok, I give up

who should do the investigation -- and mind you, they should be independent of the truthers themselves

c'mon, help me out

who gets the contract for the next investigation?

 

[eots]

So you are posting things that you don't believe are true? OK. I think I understand. We are not to believe that you believe anything that you post unless of course you tell us that you believe it. So just what do you believe?

Seriously Ollie are you that dense man? There are many different things about 9-11 that researchers have doubts about, and what I posted are the many different people, places and things that are in debate, and dispute. The discussion was about NIST and the WTC, then you bring up planes and try to drag me into a side session about flight 93? wtf does that have to do with NIST and the WTC??

Please, if you wish to discuss flight 93 start a thread about that, or try to find the right time to interject that when it has relevance to the conversation at hand.
Getting back on point,
Again you are wrong about NIST, it's accuracy, and the times of collapse, would you like to explain your theories about the collapse initiations, times or kinetic forces etc or anything else that pertains to the NIST and the WTC?
I have posted many links concerning this that clearly show the vast amount of opposition, evidence they supply as proof, and the rebuttals to NIST.

I may get serious when you learn to understand English. But you have your head so screwed up you can't see fact from fiction. Once again. NIST said that the first pieces of the towers hit the ground in 9 and 11 seconds. The buildings were still collapsing when that happened....
A 3rd grader could understand this. Real shame that you can't.

ok then please tell us how many SECS is it

 

[Trojan]

You have yet to clarify what constitutes evidence in our mind

I doubt anyone wants to know what constitutes evidence in your mind ... good lord, what a frightening thought

 

[eots]

Curious, say you get a new investigation -- who should perform the investigation? I'd like to know who you think is qualified.

That is a good question. Because, apparently, there is a "vast power that the government has over the researchers who have contrary theories"(quote from Mr. Jones). So, using that premise, who could possibly do this investigation? If a committee WAS established, that had no government ties, & where all independent researchers, scientists, & engineers, would that be good enough? I don't believe it would. As soon as the committee submitted a report that didn't align with their claims, all we would hear is "the government (or some element of) derailed the investigation!!" You can't keep moving the goal post back when you don't like the answer.
I have already had this conversation with Mr. Jones. Although, I don't think he ever addressed this question.

Exactly, the members would have to have no ties to government, no ties to govenment funding, so eliminate virually the entire academic community, good lord, they best not work for a company that does or ever did government work, imagine if they worked for a company that once had ties to Marvin Bush? wow, and they would have to be individuals that had no ties to friendly governments

perhaps there are some Iranian and North Korean engineers and architects with experience in nanothermite? they would also have to be forensic investigators --- but wait, what if the CIA had infiltrated their agency

Ok, I give up

who should do the investigation -- and mind you, they should be independent of the truthers themselves

c'mon, help me out

who gets the contract for the next investigation?

I would love to see Deets and DR Quintero involved and the family steering committee

 

[eots]

You have yet to clarify what constitutes evidence in our mind

I doubt anyone wants to know what constitutes evidence in your mind ... good lord, what a frightening thought

ya nice way of avoiding the question

 

[SFC Ollie]

Seriously Ollie are you that dense man? There are many different things about 9-11 that researchers have doubts about, and what I posted are the many different people, places and things that are in debate, and dispute. The discussion was about NIST and the WTC, then you bring up planes and try to drag me into a side session about flight 93? wtf does that have to do with NIST and the WTC??

Please, if you wish to discuss flight 93 start a thread about that, or try to find the right time to interject that when it has relevance to the conversation at hand.
Getting back on point,
Again you are wrong about NIST, it's accuracy, and the times of collapse, would you like to explain your theories about the collapse initiations, times or kinetic forces etc or anything else that pertains to the NIST and the WTC?
I have posted many links concerning this that clearly show the vast amount of opposition, evidence they supply as proof, and the rebuttals to NIST.

I may get serious when you learn to understand English. But you have your head so screwed up you can't see fact from fiction. Once again. NIST said that the first pieces of the towers hit the ground in 9 and 11 seconds. The buildings were still collapsing when that happened....
A 3rd grader could understand this. Real shame that you can't.

ok then please tell us how many SECS is it

Now Eots, you know that I am not an engineer. And you also know that the NIST did not give a time for the total collapse of either tower.

From video evidence, significant portions of the cores of both buildings (roughly 60 stories of WTC 1 and 40 stories of WTC 2) are known to have stood 15 to 25 seconds after collapse initiation before they, too, began to collapse. Neither the duration of the seismic records nor video evidence (due to obstruction of view caused by debris clouds) are reliable indicators of the total time it took for each building to collapse completely.

But it was obviously longer than 9 and 11 seconds.......

 

[Patriot911]

You have yet to clarify what constitutes evidence in our mind

Already did. So far you've ignored it like you do everything you don't like and can't address.

 

[Rationalist1016]

You have yet to clarify what constitutes evidence in our mind

Physical evidence: Example, if you believe bombs or thermite where in the buildings. Evidence would be a piece that is indisputably part of a bomb or the rigging for a thermite charge. Not claims that there is something in the dust that "can only be explained by thermite use". Why? Because that is in dispute. It is not accepted across the board, that the dust contains thermite. There are so-called experts on both sides of that one.
There is "evidence" of planes hitting the buildings. There is video of it and airplane parts in the rubble.............that equals evidence.

Example, if you believe that the Bush administration orchestrated the events of that day. Evidence would be recorded conversations or official memos dated before Sept. 11, 2001 that make reference to the attacks. Not claims that because he said he saw the first plane hit the towers on TV that day, he is lying about what he knows.

Evidence is something that we can universally agree points to the same conclusion.