Which 9-11 theory you believe?

[eots]

this pretty much sums up lil Ollies intellect...No wonder he took a job thats almost impossible to get fired from and they tell you how to eat ..sleep and shit

 

[SFC Ollie]

Actually, I sent many home to mommy. I feel confident that you would have been one of them.

And the point is that those 2 words are about all the intellect that you can understand. Anything any more complicated than that you get lost on.

 

[eots]

Actually, I sent many home to mommy. I feel confident that you would have been one of them.

And the point is that those 2 words are about all the intellect that you can understand. Anything any more complicated than that you get lost on.

so thats your excuse for your lack...stop projecting li Ollie...

 

[SFC Ollie]

You so funny.


I lack nothing.

 

[Fizz]

nist did say fires alone...they wrote the NIST fact Sheet.no one else and they do not refute the question they posed, they confirm it....with the admission that similar fires ignited by any other means would of created the same result ...you continue to describe the process of failure and the structures that failed as cause

you fucking moron. go learn the difference between a QUESTION and a STATEMENT then come back and tell us all again how the NIST says "fires alone" caused the collapse.

 

[CurveLight]

nist did say fires alone...they wrote the NIST fact Sheet.no one else and they do not refute the question they posed, they confirm it....with the admission that similar fires ignited by any other means would of created the same result ...you continue to describe the process of failure and the structures that failed as cause

you fucking moron. go learn the difference between a QUESTION and a STATEMENT then come back and tell us all again how the NIST says "fires alone" caused the collapse.

You're calling others names when you can't comprehend basic english? Nist said 7 would have collapsed even without any structural damage. That means fire alone caused the collapse. Why is it you OCTAs have to be taught the official version every single time you try to discuss the issue?

 

[CurveLight]

Let's see how deep the sea of OCTA stubborn stoopidity goes.

The beloved OCTA source of Popular Mechanics pointed out over two years ago:

"Fire alone brought down the building, the report concludes..."


NIST lead investigatorShyam Sunder told journalists at this morning's press conference in Gaithersburg, Md. "WTC 7 collapsed because of fires fueled by office furnishings. It did not collapse from explosives or from diesel fuel fires."

So the lead NIST dude even says fire caused the collapse.
World Trade Center 7 Report Puts 9/11 Conspiracy Theory to Rest - Popular Mechanics

OCTAs are usually 6-8 years behind on information so maybe around 2015 they will learn the conclusion of the NIST report.

 

[SFC Ollie]

Glad to see you finally accept the truth that there was no planned demolition.....

 

[Fizz]

Nist said 7 would have collapsed even without any structural damage.

right.

That means fire alone caused the collapse.

wrong.

Why is it you OCTAs have to be taught the official version every single time you try to discuss the issue?

why is it that you need to change what the NIST says? they said fire was the primary cause. they then listed other factors. so why do you keep ignoring that? you do know what "primary" means, dont ya?


by the way.... find any evidence of explosives yet?

 

[CurveLight]

Glad to see you finally accept the truth that there was no planned demolition.....

I never claimed there was a planned demo.

 

[CurveLight]

Nist said 7 would have collapsed even without any structural damage.

right.

That means fire alone caused the collapse.

wrong.

Why is it you OCTAs have to be taught the official version every single time you try to discuss the issue?

why is it that you need to change what the NIST says? they said fire was the primary cause. they then listed other factors. so why do you keep ignoring that? you do know what "primary" means, dont ya?


by the way.... find any evidence of explosives yet?

Let's see how deep the sea of OCTA stubborn stoopidity goes.

The beloved OCTA source of Popular Mechanics pointed out over two years ago:

"Fire alone brought down the building, the report concludes..."


NIST lead investigatorShyam Sunder told journalists at this morning's press conference in Gaithersburg, Md. "WTC 7 collapsed because of fires fueled by office furnishings. It did not collapse from explosives or from diesel fuel fires."

So the lead NIST dude even says fire caused the collapse.
World Trade Center 7 Report Puts 9/11 Conspiracy Theory to Rest - Popular Mechanics

OCTAs are usually 6-8 years behind on information so maybe around 2015 they will learn the conclusion of the NIST report.

 

[Fizz]

Nist said 7 would have collapsed even without any structural damage.

right.

wrong.

Why is it you OCTAs have to be taught the official version every single time you try to discuss the issue?

why is it that you need to change what the NIST says? they said fire was the primary cause. they then listed other factors. so why do you keep ignoring that? you do know what "primary" means, dont ya?


by the way.... find any evidence of explosives yet?

Let's see how deep the sea of OCTA stubborn stoopidity goes.

The beloved OCTA source of Popular Mechanics pointed out over two years ago:

"Fire alone brought down the building, the report concludes..."


NIST lead investigatorShyam Sunder told journalists at this morning's press conference in Gaithersburg, Md. "WTC 7 collapsed because of fires fueled by office furnishings. It did not collapse from explosives or from diesel fuel fires."

So the lead NIST dude even says fire caused the collapse.
World Trade Center 7 Report Puts 9/11 Conspiracy Theory to Rest - Popular Mechanics

OCTAs are usually 6-8 years behind on information so maybe around 2015 they will learn the conclusion of the NIST report.

holy fuck, you twoofers are fucking idiots!! why is this so difficult for you? what part of this are you having trouble understanding? EOTS claimed the NIST said "fires alone" caused the collapse. thats a lie.

i dont give a fuck about popular mechanics unless you are going to claim that popular mechanics is part of the NIST.

idEOTS claimed somebody said something they didnt. he lied. end of story.

 

[CurveLight]

right.

wrong.

why is it that you need to change what the NIST says? they said fire was the primary cause. they then listed other factors. so why do you keep ignoring that? you do know what "primary" means, dont ya?


by the way.... find any evidence of explosives yet?

Let's see how deep the sea of OCTA stubborn stoopidity goes.

The beloved OCTA source of Popular Mechanics pointed out over two years ago:

"Fire alone brought down the building, the report concludes..."


NIST lead investigatorShyam Sunder told journalists at this morning's press conference in Gaithersburg, Md. "WTC 7 collapsed because of fires fueled by office furnishings. It did not collapse from explosives or from diesel fuel fires."

So the lead NIST dude even says fire caused the collapse.
World Trade Center 7 Report Puts 9/11 Conspiracy Theory to Rest - Popular Mechanics

OCTAs are usually 6-8 years behind on information so maybe around 2015 they will learn the conclusion of the NIST report.

holy fuck, you twoofers are fucking idiots!! why is this so difficult for you? what part of this are you having trouble understanding? EOTS claimed the NIST said "fires alone" caused the collapse. thats a lie.

i dont give a fuck about popular mechanics unless you are going to claim that popular mechanics is part of the NIST.

idEOTS claimed somebody said something they didnt. he lied. end of story.

NIST lead investigator:

"WTC 7 collapsed because of fires fueled by office furnishings."

 

[candycorn]

On this topic...

I believe 180 degrees opposite of whatever curvelight (aka bent tight) believes.

 

[SFC Ollie]

Doesn't curvelight all of a sudden sound exactly like Id eots?

 

[eots]

Doesn't curvelight all of a sudden sound exactly like Id eots?

says cuntycorns sock puppet

 

[SFC Ollie]

Sure I am. What ever you want to believe.....

 

[eots]

hey lil Ollie what caused the wtc 7 to collapse ? other than the fires ??

 

[eots]

hey lilollie if there was no damage to the wtc 7 and no stored fuel..if it was in pristine condition and you started the same fires what would of happened to the building according to NIST ?

 

[SFC Ollie]

Oh just little things like 110 stories falling on it knocking out the water mains and starting the fires. You know, little shit like that. It builds up into all the little reasons that fire was able to take out a building....

For instance, if you were to sneak into the building and started a fire in an office, the building would not have fallen from that fire. Why? because you wouldn't take out the sprinklers and the water mains... For starters..... But to your way of thinking that doesn't matter..... So neither does anything else......It's OK, we understand.....