WTC-7 Was A Controlled Demolition Inside Job

[eots]

we found out what we already knew ?...who is we ?...how did we know this ?...what source did we get this knowing from ?

WHO? ??? The entire world. The planes were observed. They weren't the magic Wonder Woman invisible planes. They were real world passenger jet-liners.

The second passenger jet, in particular, got viewed by horrified witnesses on television as it happened. (The first one WAS observed by fewer live witnesses, but it did get captured on video all the same.)

all this proves is planes hit the buildings ...not who was behind it...or why three buildings collapsed into nothing more than rubble and dust

Now, YOU make the unproved and irrational claim that the buildings didn't really come down because of all that. No no no. According to you and your imbecile ilk , the "real truth" is that those building fell because somebody (domestic conspirators in ora ligned with OUR government) had planted explosives at God knows how many secret but crucial locations within the two towers and building 7, wired them (unless some science-fiction brand version of military explosives that didn't require wiring somehow got planted instead with timing mechanisms or radio controlled detonators) ALL without anybody noticing the work or the other surrounding evidence of such an enormous effort, and then detonated them (timed to coordinate, apparently, with the acts of the al qaeda terrorist efforts -- so our home grown conspirators had to have been IN ON IT somehow with al qaeda!).

Yeah. You have a highly realistic vision. Very persausive.

9/11 Troofers are one sick-ass, depraved, stupid lot of irrational motherfuckers.

if nist can not explain the free fall collapse or molten metal then other theory's are required and controlled demolition..would explain both these facts...and to someone of limited understanding the thought that the u.s military may posses some forms of classified technology may seem a like sci-fi....but i am sure that is what you would of said about planes that don't appear on radar before stealth technology was declassified

 

[DiveCon]

we found out what we already knew ?...who is we ?...how did we know this ?...what source did we get this knowing from ?

WHO? ??? The entire world. The planes were observed. They weren't the magic Wonder Woman invisible planes. They were real world passenger jet-liners.

The second passenger jet, in particular, got viewed by horrified witnesses on television as it happened. (The first one WAS observed by fewer live witnesses, but it did get captured on video all the same.)

all this proves is planes hit the buildings ...not who was behind it...or why three buildings collapsed into nothing more than rubble and dust




Now, YOU make the unproved and irrational claim that the buildings didn't really come down because of all that. No no no. According to you and your imbecile ilk , the "real truth" is that those building fell because somebody (domestic conspirators in ora ligned with OUR government) had planted explosives at God knows how many secret but crucial locations within the two towers and building 7, wired them (unless some science-fiction brand version of military explosives that didn't require wiring somehow got planted instead with timing mechanisms or radio controlled detonators) ALL without anybody noticing the work or the other surrounding evidence of such an enormous effort, and then detonated them (timed to coordinate, apparently, with the acts of the al qaeda terrorist efforts -- so our home grown conspirators had to have been IN ON IT somehow with al qaeda!).

Yeah. You have a highly realistic vision. Very persausive.

9/11 Troofers are one sick-ass, depraved, stupid lot of irrational motherfuckers.

if nist can not explain the free fall collapse or molten metal then other theory's are required and controlled demolition..would explain both these facts...and to someone of limited understanding the thought that the u.s military may posses some forms of classified technology may seem a like sci-fi....but i am sure that is what you would of said about planes that don't appear on radar before stealth technology was declassified

ah, so you think its more likely that some UNKNOWN tech was used to do it


Occam's Razor

 

[Liability]

we found out what we already knew ?...who is we ?...how did we know this ?...what source did we get this knowing from ?

WHO? ??? The entire world. The planes were observed. They weren't the magic Wonder Woman invisible planes. They were real world passenger jet-liners.

The second passenger jet, in particular, got viewed by horrified witnesses on television as it happened. (The first one WAS observed by fewer live witnesses, but it did get captured on video all the same.)

all this proves is planes hit the buildings ...not who was behind it...or why three buildings collapsed into nothing more than rubble and dust




Now, YOU make the unproved and irrational claim that the buildings didn't really come down because of all that. No no no. According to you and your imbecile ilk , the "real truth" is that those building fell because somebody (domestic conspirators in ora ligned with OUR government) had planted explosives at God knows how many secret but crucial locations within the two towers and building 7, wired them (unless some science-fiction brand version of military explosives that didn't require wiring somehow got planted instead with timing mechanisms or radio controlled detonators) ALL without anybody noticing the work or the other surrounding evidence of such an enormous effort, and then detonated them (timed to coordinate, apparently, with the acts of the al qaeda terrorist efforts -- so our home grown conspirators had to have been IN ON IT somehow with al qaeda!).

Yeah. You have a highly realistic vision. Very persausive.

9/11 Troofers are one sick-ass, depraved, stupid lot of irrational motherfuckers.

if nist can not explain the free fall collapse or molten metal then other theory's are required and controlled demolition..would explain both these facts...and to someone of limited understanding the thought that the u.s military may posses some forms of classified technology may seem a like sci-fi....but i am sure that is what you would of said about planes that don't appear on radar before stealth technology was declassified

It may have been aliens from outer space!

But there's no evidence of THAT either.

You = still FAIL.

 

[eots]

crime n. a violation of a law in which there is injury to the public or a member of the public and a term in jail or prison, and/or a fine as possible penalties. There is some sentiment for excluding from the "crime" category crimes without victims, such as consensual acts, or violations in which only the perpetrator is hurt or involved such as personal use of illegal drugs. (See: felony, misdemeanor)


act of war 
–noun an act of aggression by a country against another with which it is nominally at peace.


the events of Sept 11 are clearly a criminal act and warrant a criminal investigation

 

[Liability]

crime n. a violation of a law in which there is injury to the public or a member of the public and a term in jail or prison, and/or a fine as possible penalties. There is some sentiment for excluding from the "crime" category crimes without victims, such as consensual acts, or violations in which only the perpetrator is hurt or involved such as personal use of illegal drugs. (See: felony, misdemeanor)


act of war 
–noun an act of aggression by a country against another with which it is nominally at peace.


the events of Sept 11 are clearly a criminal act and warrant a criminal investigation

There is nothing "clear" about your attempted distortion. An act of war is not the same as a crime.

When Japan bombed Pearl Harbor, it never dawned on anybody that "gee, we gotta put that Emperor fellow in an American prison."

That didn't occur to anybody for a reason which YOU cannot begin to grasp: it's stupid as all hell. Only one as dumb as you would now say, "Wait! Why not??!"

What a maroon.

 

[eots]

WHO? ??? The entire world. The planes were observed. They weren't the magic Wonder Woman invisible planes. They were real world passenger jet-liners.

The second passenger jet, in particular, got viewed by horrified witnesses on television as it happened. (The first one WAS observed by fewer live witnesses, but it did get captured on video all the same.)

all this proves is planes hit the buildings ...not who was behind it...or why three buildings collapsed into nothing more than rubble and dust




Now, YOU make the unproved and irrational claim that the buildings didn't really come down because of all that. No no no. According to you and your imbecile ilk , the "real truth" is that those building fell because somebody (domestic conspirators in ora ligned with OUR government) had planted explosives at God knows how many secret but crucial locations within the two towers and building 7, wired them (unless some science-fiction brand version of military explosives that didn't require wiring somehow got planted instead with timing mechanisms or radio controlled detonators) ALL without anybody noticing the work or the other surrounding evidence of such an enormous effort, and then detonated them (timed to coordinate, apparently, with the acts of the al qaeda terrorist efforts -- so our home grown conspirators had to have been IN ON IT somehow with al qaeda!).

Yeah. You have a highly realistic vision. Very persausive.

9/11 Troofers are one sick-ass, depraved, stupid lot of irrational motherfuckers.

if nist can not explain the free fall collapse or molten metal then other theory's are required and controlled demolition..would explain both these facts...and to someone of limited understanding the thought that the u.s military may posses some forms of classified technology may seem a like sci-fi....but i am sure that is what you would of said about planes that don't appear on radar before stealth technology was declassified

ah, so you think its more likely that some UNKNOWN tech was used to do it


Occam's Razor

not necessarily I do however know with certainty the military holds several patents pending on demolition technology's and explosives and if this was a government quasi-military operation it is reasonable to theorize they may of used technology's more advanced than the standard demolition company..but a top demolition firm in Holland when asked how long it would take the wire building 7 with no prep work and no more than 20 men..estimated only 3-4 hours

 

[Liability]

if nist can not explain the free fall collapse or molten metal then other theory's are required and controlled demolition..would explain both these facts...and to someone of limited understanding the thought that the u.s military may posses some forms of classified technology may seem a like sci-fi....but i am sure that is what you would of said about planes that don't appear on radar before stealth technology was declassified

ah, so you think its more likely that some UNKNOWN tech was used to do it


Occam's Razor

not necessarily I do however know with certainty the military holds several patents pending on demolition technology's and explosives and if this was a government quasi-military operation it is reasonable to theorize they may of used technology's more advanced than the standard demolition company..but a top demolition firm in Holland when asked how long it would take the wire building 7 with no prep work and no more than 20 men..estimated only 3-4 hours

Anf if this was an alien from outers space operation, it's reasonable to theorize that marshmallows can be toasted without a flame!

Thus, I have presented a perfect justification for a new or re-newed gubmint investigation!

Yeah baby!

 

[eots]

ah, so you think its more likely that some unknown tech was used to do it


occam's razor

not necessarily i do however know with certainty the military holds several patents pending on demolition technology's and explosives and if this was a government quasi-military operation it is reasonable to theorize they may of used technology's more advanced than the standard demolition company..but a top demolition firm in holland when asked how long it would take the wire building 7 with no prep work and no more than 20 men..estimated only 3-4 hours

anf if this was an alien from outers space operation, it's reasonable to theorize that marshmallows can be toasted without a flame!

Thus, i have presented a perfect justification for a new or re-newed gubmint investigation!

Yeah baby!

wow all this brain thikin and word stuff must be gettin yer head all silly

 

[Liability]

not necessarily i do however know with certainty the military holds several patents pending on demolition technology's and explosives and if this was a government quasi-military operation it is reasonable to theorize they may of used technology's more advanced than the standard demolition company..but a top demolition firm in holland when asked how long it would take the wire building 7 with no prep work and no more than 20 men..estimated only 3-4 hours

anf if this was an alien from outers space operation, it's reasonable to theorize that marshmallows can be toasted without a flame!

Thus, i have presented a perfect justification for a new or re-newed gubmint investigation!

Yeah baby!

wow all this brain thikin and word stuff must be gettin yer head all silly

Just demonstrating how slovenly your "logic" has been and remains.

You have failed, still, to offer any rational argument to support a new or re-newed investigation. For "it might have been some hi-tech military grade super secret boom-boom material that did it!" is not even close to rational or reasonable.

 

[DiveCon]

if nist can not explain the free fall collapse or molten metal then other theory's are required and controlled demolition..would explain both these facts...and to someone of limited understanding the thought that the u.s military may posses some forms of classified technology may seem a like sci-fi....but i am sure that is what you would of said about planes that don't appear on radar before stealth technology was declassified

ah, so you think its more likely that some UNKNOWN tech was used to do it


Occam's Razor

not necessarily I do however know with certainty the military holds several patents pending on demolition technology's and explosives and if this was a government quasi-military operation it is reasonable to theorize they may of used technology's more advanced than the standard demolition company..but a top demolition firm in Holland when asked how long it would take the wire building 7 with no prep work and no more than 20 men..estimated only 3-4 hours

those bolded words means you have NOTHING to warrant a new investigation

and that company from Holland is LYING

 

[eots]

ah, so you think its more likely that some UNKNOWN tech was used to do it


Occam's Razor

not necessarily I do however know with certainty the military holds several patents pending on demolition technology's and explosives and if this was a government quasi-military operation it is reasonable to theorize they may of used technology's more advanced than the standard demolition company..but a top demolition firm in Holland when asked how long it would take the wire building 7 with no prep work and no more than 20 men..estimated only 3-4 hours

those bolded words means you have NOTHING to warrant a new investigation

and that company from Holland is LYING

the bold words have no relevance on a re-investigation..the failure of the commission is all the justification required...and in a real investigation with subpoena powers it would be possible to determine who is lying...as it stands now it comes down to opinions of news magazines and private contractors and this is not acceptable

 

[Liability]

not necessarily I do however know with certainty the military holds several patents pending on demolition technology's and explosives and if this was a government quasi-military operation it is reasonable to theorize they may of used technology's more advanced than the standard demolition company..but a top demolition firm in Holland when asked how long it would take the wire building 7 with no prep work and no more than 20 men..estimated only 3-4 hours

those bolded words means you have NOTHING to warrant a new investigation

and that company from Holland is LYING

the bold words have no relevance on a re-investigation..the failure of the commission is all the justification required...and in a real investigation with subpoena powers it would be possible to determine who is lying...as it stands now it comes down to opinions of news magazines and private contractors and this is not acceptable

the bold words have no relevance on a re-investigation..the failure of the commission is all the justification required.

Wrong. That is just your reason for WANTING a new or renewed investigation. It is not anything close to a justification FOR any such thing.

And there is nothing to suggest that the commission "failed" in anything. There are merely some conclusions they reached with which you disagree. So what? Your disagreement is irrelvant.

What you are STILL saying is that not only do you find the commission conclusions "wrong," but that the "real truth" is that the buildings came down because of your hypothetical super secret sci-fi invisible unwired explosives.

There is NOT one shred of evidence supporting your fantasy, and thus there remains NO justification for any renewed or new investigation.

You are quite plainly nuts.

 

[DiveCon]

not necessarily I do however know with certainty the military holds several patents pending on demolition technology's and explosives and if this was a government quasi-military operation it is reasonable to theorize they may of used technology's more advanced than the standard demolition company..but a top demolition firm in Holland when asked how long it would take the wire building 7 with no prep work and no more than 20 men..estimated only 3-4 hours

those bolded words means you have NOTHING to warrant a new investigation

and that company from Holland is LYING

the bold words have no relevance on a re-investigation..the failure of the commission is all the justification required...and in a real investigation with subpoena powers it would be possible to determine who is lying...as it stands now it comes down to opinions of news magazines and private contractors and this is not acceptable

and anyone that is lying wouldnt change the facts about what happened
all it would change is the political CYA that was done to cover the mistakes made that allowed the highjackers to go unstopped

 

[eots]

anf if this was an alien from outers space operation, it's reasonable to theorize that marshmallows can be toasted without a flame!

Thus, i have presented a perfect justification for a new or re-newed gubmint investigation!

Yeah baby!

wow all this brain thikin and word stuff must be gettin yer head all silly

Just demonstrating how slovenly your "logic" has been and remains.

You have failed, still, to offer any rational argument to support a new or re-newed investigation. For "it might have been some hi-tech military grade super secret boom-boom material that did it!" is not even close to rational or reasonable.

I don't believe you have a grasp om what is reasonable and could not begin to substantiate the nist theory..your argument is so weak you nust resort to taking my reasonable words and replacing them with gibberish childish words of your own

 

[Liability]

wow all this brain thikin and word stuff must be gettin yer head all silly

Just demonstrating how slovenly your "logic" has been and remains.

You have failed, still, to offer any rational argument to support a new or re-newed investigation. For "it might have been some hi-tech military grade super secret boom-boom material that did it!" is not even close to rational or reasonable.

I don't believe you have a grasp om what is reasonable and could not begin to substantiate the nist theory..your argument is so weak you nust resort to taking my reasonable words and replacing them with gibberish childish words of your own

Nobody really cares what you "believe" or claim to "believe."

And the richness of the irony in YOU, of all people, commenting about reasonable words is quite amusing.

The gibberish has been and remains all yours.

You have posited the "possibility" of super military secret classified eyes only explosives being used which would ALSO not have required wired detonators to create the timed implosions necessary to demolish the two world trade towers and WTC Building 7.

Furthermore, implicit in the balance of your argument (premised on the existence of this hypothetical material for which there remains zero evidence here in the real world) is that ALL of such hypothetical explosives could have been somehow planted in all three buildings -- in some unknown period of time -- at very precise crucial locations within the buildings -- all without causing ANYONE to "notice" that explosives had been planted in fully occupied office buildings.

And finally, you offer exactly ZERO explanation of how anything along these impossible lines COULD even theoretically have been accomplished.

But you persist in claiming, despite these massive glaring failures by you in even addressing your burden of persuasion, that your personal doubts, about the fullness and accuracy of the prior Commission's analysis and the conclusions in the Commission's report, is sufficient to require a new investigation.

Sorry, dopey. But nobody with a working brain is going to take YOUR word for what is or isn't "reasonable," since that is one of many things in life about which you have not even the first clue.

 

[eots]

Just demonstrating how slovenly your "logic" has been and remains.

You have failed, still, to offer any rational argument to support a new or re-newed investigation. For "it might have been some hi-tech military grade super secret boom-boom material that did it!" is not even close to rational or reasonable.

I don't believe you have a grasp om what is reasonable and could not begin to substantiate the nist theory..your argument is so weak you nust resort to taking my reasonable words and replacing them with gibberish childish words of your own

Nobody really cares what you "believe" or claim to "believe."

And the richness of the irony in YOU, of all people, commenting about reasonable words is quite amusing.

The gibberish has been and remains all yours.

You have posited the "possibility" of super military secret classified eyes only explosives being used which would ALSO not have required wired detonators to create the timed implosions necessary to demolish the two world trade towers and WTC Building 7.

Furthermore, implicit in the balance of your argument (premised on the existence of this hypothetical material for which there remains zero evidence here in the real world) is that ALL of such hypothetical explosives could have been somehow planted in all three buildings -- in some unknown period of time -- at very precise crucial locations within the buildings -- all without causing ANYONE to "notice" that explosives had been planted in fully occupied office buildings.

And finally, you offer exactly ZERO explanation of how anything along these impossible lines COULD even theoretically have been accomplished.

But you persist in claiming, despite these massive glaring failures by you in even addressing your burden of persuasion, that your personal doubts, about the fullness and accuracy of the prior Commission's analysis and the conclusions in the Commission's report, is sufficient to require a new investigation.

Sorry, dopey. But nobody with a working brain is going to take YOUR word for what is or isn't "reasonable," since that is one of many things in life about which you have not even the first clue.

you talk a lot but say nothing and have this strange belief that your shit ass opinion some how constitutes...we...and..everyone...I have given the only reasons needed to investigate 9/11...the opinions of the majority participants of the commission that they failed in their investigation...

 

[Liability]

I don't believe you have a grasp om what is reasonable and could not begin to substantiate the nist theory..your argument is so weak you nust resort to taking my reasonable words and replacing them with gibberish childish words of your own

Nobody really cares what you "believe" or claim to "believe."

And the richness of the irony in YOU, of all people, commenting about reasonable words is quite amusing.

The gibberish has been and remains all yours.

You have posited the "possibility" of super military secret classified eyes only explosives being used which would ALSO not have required wired detonators to create the timed implosions necessary to demolish the two world trade towers and WTC Building 7.

Furthermore, implicit in the balance of your argument (premised on the existence of this hypothetical material for which there remains zero evidence here in the real world) is that ALL of such hypothetical explosives could have been somehow planted in all three buildings -- in some unknown period of time -- at very precise crucial locations within the buildings -- all without causing ANYONE to "notice" that explosives had been planted in fully occupied office buildings.

And finally, you offer exactly ZERO explanation of how anything along these impossible lines COULD even theoretically have been accomplished.

But you persist in claiming, despite these massive glaring failures by you in even addressing your burden of persuasion, that your personal doubts, about the fullness and accuracy of the prior Commission's analysis and the conclusions in the Commission's report, is sufficient to require a new investigation.

Sorry, dopey. But nobody with a working brain is going to take YOUR word for what is or isn't "reasonable," since that is one of many things in life about which you have not even the first clue.

you talk a lot but say nothing

There's no way a brainless fart like you can know, either way.

Your evasions and deflections, transparent though they are, still don't work.

You are STILL relying on some hypothetical secret military explosives that do not require wiring, but have offered no evidence that anything like that exists which could be planted inside all three buildings in sufficient quantityt to account for the effects we saw.

It WOULD still require that such explosives BE planted, and they'd have to be planted at precise locations to create the demo effect taht can implode a building. But you are unable to even BEGIN to explain HOW that could have been done in occupied office buildings.

Thus, everything you say "must have" happened requires an infantile refusal to account for the facts in the real world, like physics, like the capacity of humans to observe such minor things as walls having been opened to plant explosives on load bearing beams, etc., and like the astronomical odds against all those witnesses ignoring all that evidence but instead blithely reporting to work (and to their doom) without ever reporting the suspicious holes and bombs to people working for building management to law enforcement authorities.

Since you cannot explain ANY of that, you mindlessly repeat your fantasy to us and demand that it be taken so seriously that it should lead to a new investigation.

 

[eots]

Bush/Cheney failed to prove their theory of the events of 9/11 even with control of the investigative panels...it is an unsolved case...deemed a cover-up by the majority of commission members and lead investigators at NIST...and needs a real criminal investigation with subpoena power

 

[Terral]

Hi Lia:

Perhaps Lia does not realize how stupid he looks in this WTC debate. :0)

Nobody really cares what you "believe" or claim to "believe."

And the richness of the irony in YOU, of all people, commenting about reasonable words is quite amusing.

The gibberish has been and remains all yours.

Attacking your debating opponent adds nothing to your Official Cover Story Case that building fires/debris took down WTC-7 in 6.6 seconds.

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t2oAsgzXXdw"]Many People 'Predicted' The Collapse[/ame]

A steel-framed skyscraper has NEVER burned down before of after 9/11, but these people actually predicted the collapse amid many explosions.

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PbbZE7c3a8Q"]Many Explosions 'Before' WTC-7 Collapse[/ame]

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SXD3bAbZCow"]These Firefighters Were There On 9/11!!![/ame]

Lia is supposed to be proving that WTC-7 collapsed from 'building fires and debris,' but instead he plays the fool cuckoo by attacking his debating adversaries. :0)

GL,

Terral

 

[Liability]

Hi Lia:

Perhaps Lia does not realize how stupid he looks in this WTC debate. :0)

Nobody really cares what you "believe" or claim to "believe."

And the richness of the irony in YOU, of all people, commenting about reasonable words is quite amusing.

The gibberish has been and remains all yours.

Attacking your debating opponent adds nothing to your Official Cover Story Case that building fires/debris took down WTC-7 in 6.6 seconds.

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t2oAsgzXXdw"]Many People 'Predicted' The Collapse[/ame]

A steel-framed skyscraper has NEVER burned down before of after 9/11, but these people actually predicted the collapse amid many explosions.

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PbbZE7c3a8Q"]Many Explosions 'Before' WTC-7 Collapse[/ame]

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SXD3bAbZCow"]These Firefighters Were There On 9/11!!![/ame]

Lia is supposed to be proving that WTC-7 collapsed from 'building fires and debris,' but instead he plays the fool cuckoo by attacking his debating adversaries. :0)

GL,

Terral

Princess Turd:

You might have the hope of someday getting a tiny hint of cred if you'd heed your own advice.

In any case, you remain obtuse.

The buildings were not struck by jetliners only to collapse and fall 6.6 seconds later.

Plus, in case you think you are succeeding in your absurd effort to deflect, I will pull the conversation back into the realm of reality no matter how much you whine like a beyotch.

It is YOUR claim (you and the other 9/11 Troofer nuts) that the buildings went down due to some massive conspiracy. The collapses were not the result of the crashes, etc. Oh no. To you loons, the collapses were the result of planned, coordinated, criminal and highly complicated but very deliberate demolition.

Since your buddy id-eots can't answer the question, maybe you think you can do so.

Why did nobody see the walls broken to get the bombs planted at the structural points on all the floors where all the explosives had been set?

Why did nobody see the detonator wires. Wait. Don't tell me. These were those super secret special invisible military high explosives that also magically require no detonator cords.

Ah. What's the use?

You loons are beyond hope of reason.

There is, however, a good reason the entire world laughs at you imbeciles. Your position is one that only a raving lunatic could hold. And you are utterly unaware of how impossible your scenario is.

Post more often. You are amusing lots of people.