Why don't people want to know the truth about 9/11?

[eots]

according to the theory, bush did it.

1. He had unlimited access to more explosives that anyone on earth.
2. He could have gotten the explosives and disposed of the people who gave it to him
3. Put in in a truck in the basement, wait a couple of day and boom no more building. Why
4. Blame it on sadamm.

There is no need to work up the airplane show just to throw us off.

I don't see how anyone can even remotely believe that bush did this.

this explains the collapses how ?

 

[Mr. Jones]

did they know this was going to happen, is that why they 'pulled" the fdny and told guiliani? I enjoy learning something new.

wow, what a stupid response.

You mean to tell me that firefighters never deem a building unstable with a possibility to collapse?

I suppose creaking coming from the building isn't a dead giveaway right? Or a transit on the building?

I see. You would get warning signs, but leave your guys in there anyways.

Brilliant.

creaking ?

Oh I see, they heard creaking but not audible explosions?

 

[Gamolon]

did they know this was going to happen, is that why they 'pulled" the fdny and told guiliani? I enjoy learning something new.

wow, what a stupid response.

You mean to tell me that firefighters never deem a building unstable with a possibility to collapse?

I suppose creaking coming from the building isn't a dead giveaway right? Or a transit on the building?

I see. You would get warning signs, but leave your guys in there anyways.

Brilliant.

creaking ?

You don't think loud creaking is possible evidence of structural instability????

Jesus eots...

 

[Gamolon]

wow, what a stupid response.

You mean to tell me that firefighters never deem a building unstable with a possibility to collapse?

I suppose creaking coming from the building isn't a dead giveaway right? Or a transit on the building?

I see. You would get warning signs, but leave your guys in there anyways.

Brilliant.

creaking ?

Oh I see, they heard creaking but not audible explosions?

They didn't hear explosions?

 

[Mr. Jones]

Fire at Former AC Delco Plant Ruled Arson - YNN, Your News Now

Uh oh Mr. Jones.

Firefighters "pulled" from this building because it was unstable? I guess it's a conspiracy!!!!!

Do you even read the nonsense you post?
"Just this past week, City Council voted to spend nearly a half million dollars in state and federal funding to clean up the long vacant building......
"Previous fires in this complex the buildings have collapsed at least in some portion,” said Chief John Caufield of the Rochester Fire Department. “Little to be gained here in terms of saving anything of value, so we don't want to put our firefighters at any undue risk."
http://rochester.ynn.com/content/to...t-former-ac-delco-plant-ruled-arson/?ap=1&MP4

How you can compare a run down, long vacant and dilapidated building to the WTC7 building is another total fail on your part Stop it please, my side hurts from laughing at you!
Now what were you saying about the stress factors and the .8 tenths of a second again?

 

[BrianH]

I would like to look into this, if you don't mind, what in your opinion is the significance of the .8 tenths of a second when discussing the decent? I mean doesn't that compare to a blink, or half blink or something just as fast?

It doesn't matter if it was "in the blink of an eye". The fact is that the claim being made here was that ALL the columns for the perimeter facade were blown at the same time to create the simultaneous descent of the roof line at free fall.

The problem is this, when the roof line starts its descent is when the columns were all supposedly blown, thus creating the "no resistance" scenario. That means that free fall should have ensued IMMEDIATELY, not .8 seconds after that.

exactly. Watch the roof of any demolished building... And the .8 seconds of non-freefall also comes after several seconds of the pentousse collapsing before anything else.

 

[Gamolon]

Did they know this was going to happen, is that why they 'pulled" the FDNY and told Guiliani? I enjoy learning something new.

Wow, what a stupid response.

You mean to tell me that firefighters never deem a building unstable with a possibility to collapse?

I suppose creaking coming from the building isn't a dead giveaway right? Or a transit on the building?

I see. You would get warning signs, but leave your guys in there anyways.

Brilliant.

I thought you were going to show me something on building stresses and maybe how it relates to this .8 tenth of a second you are constantly posting on here? Is this why they were told to move away and abandon the building and call off the FDNY?
And what exactly were the reasons warning signs/ why the "pulled" WTC7? Can you please elaborate?

For the love of God....

If you don't understand, read SLOWER. Here is the claim in order of sequence.

1. 8 floors are detonated which IMMEDIATELY/INSTANTLY starts the symmetrical roofline descent
2. Building collapses at free fall speed for 2.25 seconds.
3. Collapse continues at non free fall speed

Do you see points 1 and 2?

If the descent of the roofline started with the supposed demolition of the 8 floors, why did it take .8 seconds for free fall to start.

My reference to loads and structural design was to explain why it was possible for fire to cause such a collapse. Then again you believe the demolition theory so must completely understand structural design to a point that you can refute it correct?

 

[PhysicsExist]

Wow, what a stupid response.

You mean to tell me that firefighters never deem a building unstable with a possibility to collapse?

I suppose creaking coming from the building isn't a dead giveaway right? Or a transit on the building?

I see. You would get warning signs, but leave your guys in there anyways.

Brilliant.

I thought you were going to show me something on building stresses and maybe how it relates to this .8 tenth of a second you are constantly posting on here? Is this why they were told to move away and abandon the building and call off the FDNY?
And what exactly were the reasons warning signs/ why the "pulled" WTC7? Can you please elaborate?

For the love of God....

If you don't understand, read SLOWER. Here is the claim in order of sequence.

1. 8 floors are detonated which IMMEDIATELY/INSTANTLY starts the symmetrical roofline descent
2. Building collapses at free fall speed for 2.25 seconds.
3. Collapse continues at non free fall speed

Do you see points 1 and 2?

If the descent of the roofline started with the supposed demolition of the 8 floors, why did it take .8 seconds for free fall to start.

My reference to loads and structural design was to explain why it was possible for fire to cause such a collapse. Then again you believe the demolition theory so must completely understand structural design to a point that you can refute it correct?

Investigate Building 7 | A Call to Reexamine the Most Important Event of Our Time - Home

 

[SFC Ollie]

I think the doubt is in your loyalty to the oath that one takes to the constitution and to protect the nation from enemies foreign and DOMESTIC. Why is it so many who served, and I know some who still do, realize they have been lied to, but not you? Will you shoot into a crowd of patriots protesting the Wall street swindle, 9-11, the illegal wars, the Fed Reserve etc, gov forced health care?? If so you are an enemy of the American people.

When you have raised your hand and sworn the oath as many times as I have then and only then can we discuss it. Until then just kick back and enjoy the freedoms that so many like myself have fought to make sure you have.

You mean the freedoms that you say are not being taken away with the passage of police state legislation like the Patriot Act. You are delusional..and why wont you answer if you would shoot your fellow Americans if they should protest and finally stand up to the ever increasing tyrannical BS or not? Would you stand with the people or support forces trying to suppress the constitutional rights you say you fought for?
I suppose you'll say just sit back and enjoy.

I support the Constitution dumbass.

What you and your ilk forget is that the world changed on 9-11-01 and you refuse to accept the facts that we as a country have to change a little bit with it if we are to survive. So if that means that some computer is going to listen to my phone calls to my sons in Germany then fine with me. If for some reason some federal agent thinks they need to see who I'm talking to on line, they have my blessings.

I understand the reasons, and I don't see the right to privacy the way you want me to.

Oh well. Not my problem that you can't accept the truth.

 

[PhysicsExist]

When you have raised your hand and sworn the oath as many times as I have then and only then can we discuss it. Until then just kick back and enjoy the freedoms that so many like myself have fought to make sure you have.

You mean the freedoms that you say are not being taken away with the passage of police state legislation like the Patriot Act. You are delusional..and why wont you answer if you would shoot your fellow Americans if they should protest and finally stand up to the ever increasing tyrannical BS or not? Would you stand with the people or support forces trying to suppress the constitutional rights you say you fought for?
I suppose you'll say just sit back and enjoy.

I support the Constitution dumbass.

What you and your ilk forget is that the world changed on 9-11-01 and you refuse to accept the facts that we as a country have to change a little bit with it if we are to survive. So if that means that some computer is going to listen to my phone calls to my sons in Germany then fine with me. If for some reason some federal agent thinks they need to see who I'm talking to on line, they have my blessings.

I understand the reasons, and I don't see the right to privacy the way you want me to.

Oh well. Not my problem that you can't accept the truth.

You are a disgraceful human being. Your service was worthless IF YOU MAKE SUCH STATEMENTS LIKE THIS. What kind of contradicting statement is this? You are so ignorant and so disgusting I am saddened types like you protect our Constitution. Go MIA next time please, you are a TRAITOR, NOT a soldier with such DISGUSTING COMMENTS LIKE THIS.

If for some reason some federal agent thinks they need to see who I'm talking to on line, they have my blessings

Unbelievable. So uneducated and uninformed. So ignorant. SO ignorant.

They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety. - Benjamin Franklin

 

[eots]

Wow, what a stupid response.

You mean to tell me that firefighters never deem a building unstable with a possibility to collapse?

I suppose creaking coming from the building isn't a dead giveaway right? Or a transit on the building?

I see. You would get warning signs, but leave your guys in there anyways.

Brilliant.

I thought you were going to show me something on building stresses and maybe how it relates to this .8 tenth of a second you are constantly posting on here? Is this why they were told to move away and abandon the building and call off the FDNY?
And what exactly were the reasons warning signs/ why the "pulled" WTC7? Can you please elaborate?

For the love of God....

If you don't understand, read SLOWER. Here is the claim in order of sequence.

1. 8 floors are detonated which IMMEDIATELY/INSTANTLY starts the symmetrical roofline descent
2. Building collapses at free fall speed for 2.25 seconds.
3. Collapse continues at non free fall speed

Do you see points 1 and 2?

If the descent of the roofline started with the supposed demolition of the 8 floors, why did it take .8 seconds for free fall to start.

My reference to loads and structural design was to explain why it was possible for fire to cause such a collapse. Then again you believe the demolition theory so must completely understand structural design to a point that you can refute it correct?

as the demolition expert said a slight delay is not unexpected

 

[eots]

When you have raised your hand and sworn the oath as many times as I have then and only then can we discuss it. Until then just kick back and enjoy the freedoms that so many like myself have fought to make sure you have.

You mean the freedoms that you say are not being taken away with the passage of police state legislation like the Patriot Act. You are delusional..and why wont you answer if you would shoot your fellow Americans if they should protest and finally stand up to the ever increasing tyrannical BS or not? Would you stand with the people or support forces trying to suppress the constitutional rights you say you fought for?
I suppose you'll say just sit back and enjoy.

I support the Constitution dumbass.

What you and your ilk forget is that the world changed on 9-11-01 and you refuse to accept the facts that we as a country have to change a little bit with it if we are to survive. So if that means that some computer is going to listen to my phone calls to my sons in Germany then fine with me. If for some reason some federal agent thinks they need to see who I'm talking to on line, they have my blessings.

I understand the reasons, and I don't see the right to privacy the way you want me to.

Oh well. Not my problem that you can't accept the truth.

they did need your blessings in a police state ...but you bending over and taken it sure makes it easier

 

[eots]

When you have raised your hand and sworn the oath as many times as I have then and only then can we discuss it. Until then just kick back and enjoy the freedoms that so many like myself have fought to make sure you have.

You mean the freedoms that you say are not being taken away with the passage of police state legislation like the Patriot Act. You are delusional..and why wont you answer if you would shoot your fellow Americans if they should protest and finally stand up to the ever increasing tyrannical BS or not? Would you stand with the people or support forces trying to suppress the constitutional rights you say you fought for?
I suppose you'll say just sit back and enjoy.

I support the Constitution dumbass.

What you and your ilk forget is that the world changed on 9-11-01 and you refuse to accept the facts that we as a country have to change a little bit with it if we are to survive. So if that means that some computer is going to listen to my phone calls to my sons in Germany then fine with me. If for some reason some federal agent thinks they need to see who I'm talking to on line, they have my blessings.

I understand the reasons, and I don't see the right to privacy the way you want me to.

Oh well. Not my problem that you can't accept the truth.

what is it like to live in such fear ???

 

[SFC Ollie]

Isn't it wonderful to have such a loving nation.

I support the constitution of the United States. You guys are now telling me that the Patriot Act is Unconstitutional.

Well I guess you had better give the Supreme court a call and instruct them on the error of their ways.

Thankfully we have some people in Washington (though at times it is hard to believe) who know more about what is going on and about the law and our beloved constitution than any of you losers.

There isn't one of you who can tell me how to think. Not one of you has ever had an original thought of their own.

So go ahead and attack my service to this great country and live with the fear that some computer is listening to your phone calls. Or that some federal agent is checking your library records..

LOL, none of you are worth the trouble.

By the way, not only did I serve on Active duty for 22 years but I have been the Vice Commander of my local American Legion post for the last 3 years and will probably be Commander later this summer. And I have turned down the Vice Commander position at the county level. And just this evening I attended the county United Veteran Council meeting....

Yep I'm still as active in Veterans affairs as I can be..... I hope that gives you all nightmares.

 

[eots]

isn't it wonderful to have such a loving nation.

I support the constitution of the united states. You guys are now telling me that the patriot act is unconstitutional.

Well i guess you had better give the supreme court a call and instruct them on the error of their ways.

Thankfully we have some people in washington (though at times it is hard to believe) who know more about what is going on and about the law and our beloved constitution than any of you losers.

There isn't one of you who can tell me how to think. Not one of you has ever had an original thought of their own.

So go ahead and attack my service to this great country and live with the fear that some computer is listening to your phone calls. Or that some federal agent is checking your library records..

Lol, none of you are worth the trouble.

By the way, not only did i serve on active duty for 22 years but i have been the vice commander of my local american legion post for the last 3 years and will probably be commander later this summer. And i have turned down the vice commander position at the county level. And just this evening i attended the county united veteran council meeting....

Yep i'm still as active in veterans affairs as i can be..... I hope that gives you all nightmares.

double think at its finest young ollie...you will do well in the party

 

[BrianH]

Did they know this was going to happen, is that why they 'pulled" the FDNY and told Guiliani? I enjoy learning something new.

Wow, what a stupid response.

You mean to tell me that firefighters never deem a building unstable with a possibility to collapse?

I suppose creaking coming from the building isn't a dead giveaway right? Or a transit on the building?

I see. You would get warning signs, but leave your guys in there anyways.

Brilliant.

I thought you were going to show me something on building stresses and maybe how it relates to this .8 tenth of a second you are constantly posting on here? Is this why they were told to move away and abandon the building and call off the FDNY?
And what exactly were the reasons warning signs/ why the "pulled" WTC7? Can you please elaborate?

Surely even you can attempt to understand what he's talking about. He made no claims that building 7 specifically was creaking. (Though it's very probable.) He's addressing your nonsense claims about the FDNY being pulled from the area. You're claiming they were pulled from the building because it was going to be demolished. He's telling you that firefighters are pulled from buildings all of the time because they're are warning signs that the building may collapse,therefore, it's more than possible that they were pulled from this building because it was deemed unstable. IN FACT, you have firefighter statements that say that they thought the building was coming down, therefore, they were pulled from the building. If you've ever spoken to a firefighter (or even watched a firefighting movie) you'd know this. The roof caving in, the supports creaking and cracking, the building swaying, an uncontainable fire, are all warning signs of possible collapse. And don't get a hardon about the building swaying, most buildings that sway do so un-noticed. Buildings sway from the wind...

 

[eots]

wow, what a stupid response.

You mean to tell me that firefighters never deem a building unstable with a possibility to collapse?

I suppose creaking coming from the building isn't a dead giveaway right? Or a transit on the building?

I see. You would get warning signs, but leave your guys in there anyways.

Brilliant.

i thought you were going to show me something on building stresses and maybe how it relates to this .8 tenth of a second you are constantly posting on here? Is this why they were told to move away and abandon the building and call off the fdny?
And what exactly were the reasons warning signs/ why the "pulled" wtc7? Can you please elaborate?

surely even you can attempt to understand what he's talking about. He made no claims that building 7 specifically was creaking. (though it's very probable.) he's addressing your nonsense claims about the fdny being pulled from the area. You're claiming they were pulled from the building because it was going to be demolished. He's telling you that firefighters are pulled from buildings all of the time because they're are warning signs that the building may collapse,therefore, it's more than possible that they were pulled from this building because it was deemed unstable. In fact, you have firefighter statements that say that they thought the building was coming down, therefore, they were pulled from the building. If you've ever spoken to a firefighter (or even watched a firefighting movie) you'd know this. The roof caving in, the supports creaking and cracking, the building swaying, an uncontainable fire, are all warning signs of possible collapse. And don't get a hardon about the building swaying, most buildings that sway do so un-noticed. Buildings sway from the wind...

big difference between a roof or ceiling falling or even a partial collapse and progressive collapse of the entire structure in secs collapse in seconds

 

[BrianH]

I thought you were going to show me something on building stresses and maybe how it relates to this .8 tenth of a second you are constantly posting on here? Is this why they were told to move away and abandon the building and call off the FDNY?
And what exactly were the reasons warning signs/ why the "pulled" WTC7? Can you please elaborate?

For the love of God....

If you don't understand, read SLOWER. Here is the claim in order of sequence.

1. 8 floors are detonated which IMMEDIATELY/INSTANTLY starts the symmetrical roofline descent
2. Building collapses at free fall speed for 2.25 seconds.
3. Collapse continues at non free fall speed

Do you see points 1 and 2?

If the descent of the roofline started with the supposed demolition of the 8 floors, why did it take .8 seconds for free fall to start.

My reference to loads and structural design was to explain why it was possible for fire to cause such a collapse. Then again you believe the demolition theory so must completely understand structural design to a point that you can refute it correct?

as the demolition expert said a slight delay is not unexpected

All you have to do is watch a video of ANY building that is being demolished. Compare it to building 7 and you'll find that it's not the same. You see MANY visible explosions in a controlled demolition.






You tell me what's missing at WTC 7

 

[Gamolon]

I thought you were going to show me something on building stresses and maybe how it relates to this .8 tenth of a second you are constantly posting on here? Is this why they were told to move away and abandon the building and call off the FDNY?
And what exactly were the reasons warning signs/ why the "pulled" WTC7? Can you please elaborate?

For the love of God....

If you don't understand, read SLOWER. Here is the claim in order of sequence.

1. 8 floors are detonated which IMMEDIATELY/INSTANTLY starts the symmetrical roofline descent
2. Building collapses at free fall speed for 2.25 seconds.
3. Collapse continues at non free fall speed

Do you see points 1 and 2?

If the descent of the roofline started with the supposed demolition of the 8 floors, why did it take .8 seconds for free fall to start.

My reference to loads and structural design was to explain why it was possible for fire to cause such a collapse. Then again you believe the demolition theory so must completely understand structural design to a point that you can refute it correct?

as the demolition expert said a slight delay is not unexpected

A slight delay for what?

Are you saying that the laws of physics are like those in a cartoon where the character runs of a cliff, hangs in the air for a bit, waves at the audience, then starts to fall?

Are you a complete ass? Let me answer that for you. Yes you are.

Let me explain this to you dipshit. Look at the video. The roofline starts to DESCEND which means the columns ALL COLUMNS have supposedly been cut at the same time. That means NO RESISTANCE and free fall should ensue IMMEDIATELY. Do you understand what your idiot counterparts are actually saying?

There is no delay once the support is removed which is why the perimeter starts to fall.

What a fucking moron you are.

You guys have been proven WRONG yet again and you try and say that there is a delay in the start of free fall when the resistance has been removed?

You guys are nuts!

 

[Gamolon]

i thought you were going to show me something on building stresses and maybe how it relates to this .8 tenth of a second you are constantly posting on here? Is this why they were told to move away and abandon the building and call off the fdny?
And what exactly were the reasons warning signs/ why the "pulled" wtc7? Can you please elaborate?

surely even you can attempt to understand what he's talking about. He made no claims that building 7 specifically was creaking. (though it's very probable.) he's addressing your nonsense claims about the fdny being pulled from the area. You're claiming they were pulled from the building because it was going to be demolished. He's telling you that firefighters are pulled from buildings all of the time because they're are warning signs that the building may collapse,therefore, it's more than possible that they were pulled from this building because it was deemed unstable. In fact, you have firefighter statements that say that they thought the building was coming down, therefore, they were pulled from the building. If you've ever spoken to a firefighter (or even watched a firefighting movie) you'd know this. The roof caving in, the supports creaking and cracking, the building swaying, an uncontainable fire, are all warning signs of possible collapse. And don't get a hardon about the building swaying, most buildings that sway do so un-noticed. Buildings sway from the wind...

big difference between a roof or ceiling falling or even a partial collapse and progressive collapse of the entire structure in secs collapse in seconds

What the fuck are you talking about???? Eots, you're either high again or just stupid.

Creaking of a building structure is one sign of structural instability. The firefighters were also talking about the damage suffered by WTC7 as another reason. Not to mention a transit was put on the building per chief Haydens quote below:

Deputy Chief Peter Hayden
Division 1 - 33 years

...also we were pretty sure that 7 World Trade Center would collapse. Early on, we saw a bulge in the southwest corner between floors 10 and 13, and we had put a transit on that and we were pretty sure she was going to collapse. You actually could see there was a visible bulge, it ran up about three floors. It came down about 5 o’clock in the afternoon, but by about 2 o’clock in the afternoon we realized this thing was going to collapse.

Firehouse: Was there heavy fire in there right away?
Hayden: No, not right away, and that’s probably why it stood for so long because it took a while for that fire to develop. It was a heavy body of fire in there and then we didn’t make any attempt to fight it. That was just one of those wars we were just going to lose. We were concerned about the collapse of a 47-story building there. We were worried about additional collapse there of what was remaining standing of the towers and the Marriott, so we started pulling the people back after a couple of hours of surface removal and searches along the surface of the debris. We started to pull guys back because we were concerned for their safety.

http://www.firehouse.com/terrorist/911/magazine/gz/hayden.html

Do you understand what the warning signs of structural instability is to a firefighter or are you just making asinine assumptions? I guess the latter. Maybe you should talk to a firefighter and ask him.

Tell you what asshole. I KNOW some firefighters. I'll ask them myself. I'll let you know what they say.