CBS Report On 9/11: Ground Level Explosion Caused WTC To Collapse

reply to post by Nathan-D


You say " the official explanation of WTC 7's collapse defies basic physics " but that just seems to be supported by you, a few truthers on here, and the motley collection that comprises AE 9/11t. On the other hand, to produce their final report on WTC 7 NIST engaged more PhD's than you can shake a stick at and the findings are supported by the American Society of Civil Engineers ( some 120,000 strong ) and the wider world engineering community . As a result, I am not at all persuaded by the largely amateur debate that goes on on here , particularly when it is evident that the available information is often manipulated ,( like cutting out the first few seconds of the collapse where the penthouse falls in and the roof line crumbles.)( like ignoring the fact that FDNY reported the building leaning, bulging and creaking long before collapse; which is why they pulled their men back.)

I think therefore that to keep going on and on about how WTC 7 "looked like a cd " is a largely sterile and pointless exercise and it is worth considering what other circumstances may throw some light on the matter.

I think it is worth considering, as I have already pointed out, whether the alleged perps could possibly have intended to cd WTC 7 without any cover or disguise. Which must have been the plan because the collapse of WTC 1 inflicting damage on WTC 7, starting fires, and cutting off the water was a chance happening and could not have been factored in beforehand.

I think there are other circumstantial elements that are worth considering also. E.g What was the purpose of destroying WTC 7 ? If it contained secrets what were they exactly ? If there were important secrets was collapsing the building so that papers could float over half Manhattan and hundreds of police, FBI and emergency services root around the site the best way of dealing with it ?

Since all the OS believers are giving their opinions to what happened to the WTC here’s mine. The WTC where blowing to pieces for shock and Awe to gain support by the American people to go to war, end of story. In my opinion, the government has destroyed all evidence of the demolition of the WTC. 911 was a false flag operation carried out by insiders in our government, it was the only way to get the government, military to stand down in every department for an hour, so the entire operation could be carried out. And all we got for answers for 911 by our government was lies, excuses, and in most cases was thier silence.

Originally posted by jambatrumpet
Oh...A main stream media employee retracting their original statements that conflict with the official story? how surprising...

So let me get this right. When someone from the 'main stream media' says something that you agree with, it is undeniable truth which cannot be debated.

When they tell you they were wrong, and that you are subsequently wrong, they are paid shills lying about it because they're part of the inside job?

This appears to be the logic you're using here.

reply to post by GoodOlDave


what about nanothermite on the 90th and other subsequent floors? would that possibility be legitimate?

lol@ people still arguing about 9/11 stuff. God aren't we way passed this? People who still think 9/11 was a "terrorist act" are well in the minority. Bottom line.

Originally posted by chupa-chups
1. Something like 85 security camera's covering "that" side of the pentagon, yet they can only show ONE, which DOES NOT show a commercial airliner crashing. Or are you telling me it does ?

I have not seen any reliable source for there being any additional worthwhile footage of the aircraft strike other than from the 9/11 movement. As you yourself acknowledged, there is simply too much outright bad information being put out by self serving con artists that the 9/11 conspiracy people are circulating to accept the claim at face value, and personally it doesn't make any sense for the Pentagon or anyone else to be training a camera on an empty wall. They're going to be training cameras in high trraffic areas like entrances, parking lots, and that security gate, so I don't see how footage of crowds of people staring at something off camera will be of any benefit to you. Not that it matters, as the Pentagon is in the middle of a dense industrial park and there were hordes of eyewitnesses who saw that it was a passenger jet that hit the Pentagon, so for me, this whole "what hit the Pentagon" debate is the same ridiculous "no planes hit the WTC" argument, but in different clothes.

2. WTC 7 .... Ok seriously, what can you possibly say about this ?

It is not for debate that WTC 1 collapsed and threw wreckage in every direction, and it is not for debate that WTC 7 got hit by some of it. Firefighters reported it started fires in WTC 7 which quickly burned out of control, and reliable eyewitnesses reported severe bulges in the side of the building as well as abnormal creaking. It's blatantly obvious the fires were causing at least some deterioration in the building, so if you want to insist there were controlled demolitions, fine, but I find it outright duplicious behavior for you to consistantly conceal and omit critical information like that in your suppositions, becuase you are intentionally prohibiting people from forming fair and balanced opinions

3. Firefighters and Construction workers who heard explosions in the lower levels, including two who were actually hit by the blast, and your telling me that the building collapse started on the "ninety somethingth floor",due to burning jet fuel which distorted the shape and weakened critical joints which led to the pancake effect collapse, sorry I don't buy that, thousands upon thousands of bolts and supporting girders all give way at the same time.....

Every video footage of the collapse of the buildings show an initial loss of structural integrity at the point of impact of the planes, with a cascading chain of collapse as the collapsing wreckage crushed its way down the structure. This is an established fact and it is not up for debate. If you're attempting to claim anything otherwise then you are unrepentently lying through your teeth.

So you carry on being blind, see I've had a sh!t day and I don't generally rant like this, but what you've posted has really pi$$ed me off....END

...which tells me right there that the driving force behind your involvement ISN'T a serious inetrest in discovering the truth behind anything, btu out of some emotional attachment to a personal agenda, and any attack on them is seen by you as a personal attack against you personally. I will repeat this so it becomes perfectly clear- explosions down at the ground level will NOT cause a collapse in the upper sections of the structure, regardless of how much it pi$$es you off for me to point this out. If you can't get past that then nothing else this thread can add will even get out of the gate.

the planes were actually hijacked by Xenomorphs, and when the planes hit the buildings, their acid blood seeped through all the supports and concrete in the buildings, and thats what caused their collapse

Xenomorphs. not Saudis:/ .

Originally posted by chupa-chups
1. Something like 85 security camera's covering "that" side of the pentagon, yet they can only show ONE, which DOES NOT show a commercial airliner crashing. Or are you telling me it does ?

Sigh, not this s*** again. There were never 85 security cameras covering the Pentagon, let alone one side of it.

I take it you're referring to the 85 videos recieved by the FBI, from locations around the Pentagon. Here's the list of what those videos contained:

13 videos were obtained by the Defense Protective Services (DPS) - Pentagon Police - on 9/25/2001 from individual filming Pentagon site from Boundary Channel Drive. These included footage from the WTC site in the days after the attcks.

One (1) Beta video tape - interviews in NYC
One (1) DVCAM tape labeled "Twin Towers, World Trade Center" - NYC/WTC
One (1) DVCAM tape - suburban setting, unknown individuals, dated 9/12-13
One (1) DVCAM tape - NYC/WTC, 9/21-22
One (1) DVCAM tape - NYC/WTC, 9/22-23
One (1) DVCAM tape - NYC 9/23
One (1) DVCAM tape - interviews in NYC; 10 seconds of Pentagon footage, but not crash site
One (1) DVCAM tape - no recorded video or audio information
One (1) DVCAM tape - no recorded video or audio information
One (1) DVCAM tape - no recorded video or audio information
One (1) DVCAM tape - no recorded video or audio information
One (1) DVCAM tape - no recorded video or audio information
One (1) DVCAM tape - no recorded video or audio information
8 videos were received on 10/11/2001 at Quantico. These videos were collected during consent search of residence in Avanel, New Jersey. Pending case on subject.

One (1) damaged Sony MP-120 8mm video tape
One (1) Sony MP-120 8mm video tape
One (1) Sony MP-120 8mm video tape
One (1) Sony MP-120 8mm video tape
One (1) Sony MP-120 8mm video tape
One (1) Sony MP-120 8mm video tape
One (1) Sony MP-120 8mm video tape
One (1) Sony MP-120 8mm video tape
Videos received on 10/15/2001 at Quantico. These videos were collected from surveillance cameras at multiple Kinko's in South Florida.

One (1) TDK 1-160 VHS video tape
One (1) VHS video tape
One (1) SONY T-160 VHS video tape
One (1) SONY T-160 VHS video tape
One (1) SONY T-160 VHS video tape
One (1) SONY T-160 VHS video tape
One (1) SONY T-160 VHS video tape
One (1) SONY T-160 VHS video tape
Video received on 10/22/2001 at Quantico. This video was recovered from garbage at residenced in Neenah, Wisconsin by the Neenah Police Department. Investigation on suspect has been closed.

One (1) damaged VHS video tape and housing
Received at Washington Field Office Command Post

These two video tapes included footage of post-crash Pentagon crime scene taken by DOD media pool photographers, and were obtained from Navy Rear Admiral Craig Quigley.

One (1) Betacam BCT-30G video cassette, labeled "1 of 2" & "early 6pm 9/11/01"
One (1) Betacam BCT-30G video cassette, labeled "2 of 2" & "early pm 9/11/01"
Also received at the Washington Field Office Command Post:

One (1) VHS video cassette - witness interviews near Pentagon after the attack
One (1) VHS video cassette, labeled "9/11/2001" - footage of post Pentagon crime scene, obtained from Chief Mastin, Prince William County
One (1) TDK Hi8 MP 120 video casette, wrapped in Pentagon map and labeled on back "1/29/1952 Mohan Shresesa 8/2/2018 Todoroki Japan 9/17/01 3:00 hr Fern/So. Rotary" - Home video taken from car, dated 9/17/2001,showing post-crash Pentagon crime scene very briefly from road (~10 seconds)
One (1) FujiFilm DP121 video cassette, labeled "WJLA-TV" - miscellaneous footage from news reporter, dated 9/18/2001
One (1) Sony MP120 8mm video cassette - Home video, DC sightseeing
One (1) TDK HG Ultimate TC-30 video cassette - Home video, unknown date, showing brief footage of Pentagon (not crash site)
One (1) Maxell DVM60SE mini digital video cassette - Home video, dated 9/17/2001, showing brief footage of Pentagon (not crash site)
One (1) Sony Hi8 video cassette - Home video obtained by DPS on 9/11/2001 showing ~6 seconds of Pentagon footage (not crash site)
One (1) TDK Hi8 MP 120 video cassette - Home video obtained by DPS on 9/21/2001, showing post-crash Pentagon crime scene
One (1) JVC MP120 8mm video cassette - Home video obtained by DPS on 9/21/2001, showing brief footage of Pentagon (not crash site)
Videos filmed on 9/26/2001 by FBI Forensic Audio-Visual Analysis Unit (FAVIAU) of post-crash Pentagon crime scene.

One (1) original SONY 40 min. Digital Betacam video tape
One (1) original SONY 40 min. Digital Betacam video tape
Videos submitted to FBI Laboratory in Quantico, Virginia, under cover of communication dated 2/19/2002, all depicting WTC footage.

One (1) Betacam video tape
One (1) HDCAM video tape
One (1) Betacam SP video tape
One (1) Betacam SP video tape
One (1) Mini DV video tape maked in part Antonio M.
One (1) DVC PRO video tape
One VHS video tape marked in part "1B1056 COPY 5A of 5"
One VHS video tape marked in part "1B1056 COPY 5 of 5"
One VHS video tape marked in part "1B1471 COPY 5 of 5"
One VHS video tape marked in part "1B1788 COPY 5 of 5"
One VHS video tape marked in part "1B1729 COPY 5 of 5"
One VHS video tape marked in part "1B1808 COPY 5 of 5"
One VHS video tape marked in part "1B1813 COPY 5 of 5"
One VHS video tape marked in part "1B530 COPY 5 of 5"
One VHS video tape marked in part "1B729 COPY 5 of 5"
One VHS video tape marked in part "1B1563 COPY 5 of 5"
One VHS video tape marked in part "1B1051 COPY 5 of 5"
One VHS video tape marked in part "1B1787 COPY 5 of 5"
One VHS video tape marked in part "1B2406 COPY 5 of 5"
One VHS video tape marked in part "1B1276 COPY 5 of 5"
One VHS video tape marked in part "CNN RE: BURN VICTIM..."
One VHS video tape marked in part "NIGHTLINE 2/15/2002"
Videos submitted to FBI Laboratory, Quantico, under communication dated 5/13/2002.

One (1) Sony SDX1-25C video tape
One (1) Sony SDX1-25C video tape
One (1) TDK 8mm video tape
Video obtained by FBI on 9/28/2001 and submitted to FBI Laboratory, Quantico on 5/28/2002. Home video filmed on 9/11/2001 showing footage of WTC after attacks, obtained by Suffolk County, New York Police Department.

One Hi 8mm video cassette tape from Eileen McMahon
Video obtained by FBI on 9/13/2001 and submitted to FBI Laboratory, Quantico on 5/28/2002. Home video filmed on 9/11/2001 showing footage of second plane hitting WTC and aftermath.

One Mini DV 60 video cassette tape
Video submitted to FBI Laboratory, Quantico under cover of communication dated 9/22/2001. Obtained by FBI NK from Dime Savings Bank, Nutley, New Jersey

One TDK T-160 VHS video tape
Home video filmed on 9/11/2001 by NBC4 Washington reporter, with footage of post-crash Pentagon crime scene shortly after attack. Provided to FBI on 9/12/2001.

One (1) home Video of the terrorist attack on the Pentagon.
Video from DEA HQ security camera atop 700 Army Navy Drive, Arlington, VA. Camera repositioned after attack to show post-crash footage of Pentagon. Provided to FBI on 9/12/2001.

One (1) videotape
Home video filmed on 9/11/2001 by tourist traveling past Pentagon and then by AP photographer who borrowed the camera. Footage of post-crash Pentagon crime scene shortly after attack. Provided to FBI on 9/12/2001.

One (1) videotape
Copy of home video filmed on 9/11/2001 by AP photographer using camera borrowed from nearby motorist. Footage of post-crash Pentagon crime scene shortly after attack. Provided to FBI on 9/12/2001.

One (1) duplicate video cassette tape dated 9/11/01
Video from cameras at Reagan National Airport parking garage. Both video files show smoke in the distance coming from direction of Pentagon. Obtained by FBI on 9/13/2001.

One (1) CD containing 2 video files
Video from security camera at Citgo Gas Station, 801 S. Joyce Street, Arlington, Virginia. Submitted to FAVIAU to determine if video showed impact of plane into Pentagon. Determined not to show impact. Obtained by FBI on 9/11/2001.

One (1) JVC EHG Hi-Fi videocassette, labeled Day 11 Quarters K
Video from security camera at Doubletree Hotel, 300 Army Navy Drive, Arlington, Virginia. Security video showing rotating footage from different camera locations at hotel; no camera captures impact of plane into Pentagon.

One (1) TDK video tape marked "11C"
Images captured by two separate cameras at the entrance to the Pentagon Mall Terrace parkinng lot. Images capture the impact of the plane into the Pentagon from two different cameras. Obtained from the Pentagon Force Protection Agency via USA/EDVA.

Originally posted by VonDoomen
what about nanothermite on the 90th and other subsequent floors? would that possibility be legitimate?

Of course it's legitimate. Thermite is essentially aluminum and rust, and I find it less than remarkable that you're claiming there was aluminum found in the wreckage when the WTC was sheathed almost entirely out of aluminum, and that the aluminum would have been thrown all over creation when the towers collapsed. I have yet to find a conspiracy theorist so desperate to defend his conspiracy stories that he'd likewise bicker over whether there could be rust in a steel skyscraper either.

Not that it matters, since thermite would be a horrible choice for controlled demolitions. It burns slow and you'd need a pile of sandbags of the stuff to defeat the battleship armor the support beams were made of, so this is more grasping at straws on the part of the 9/11 truthers, than it is anything else.

reply to post by Alfie1

You say " the official explanation of WTC 7's collapse defies basic physics " but that just seems to be supported by you, a few truthers on here, and the motley collection that comprises AE 9/11t. On the other hand, to produce their final report on WTC 7 NIST engaged more PhD's than you can shake a stick at and the findings are supported by the American Society of Civil Engineers (some 120,000 strong) and the wider world engineering community.

So basically, you believe NIST because they are "engaged" with more PhD's? Let's forget about evidence or thinking for ourselves, right? Let's simply just count the amount of PhD's on each side of the argument and that should help us reach a scientifically valid conclusion. What's the name of this new paradigm of evidence? Scientific scrabble? Imagine the time and money we could save by invoking this brand new form of evidence. "Does this drug work properly?" "Don't test it, let's count PhD's instead". We won't have to do experiments ever again.

Engineers (some 120,000 strong) and the wider world engineering community.

Righto. And you've surveyed all 120,000 of them? Where's the results of this survey showing all 120,000 of them unequivocally agree with NIST's findings? Even if they all did agree, unfortunately for you, consensus is not the work of science.

I think therefore that to keep going on and on about how WTC 7 "looked like a cd " is a largely sterile and pointless exercise and it is worth considering what other circumstances may throw some light on the matter.

Well, let's consider the fact that no other building has collapsed globally, spontaneously and symmetrically in history due to fire, so excuse me for being a tad bit skeptical.

You say " the official explanation of WTC 7's collapse defies basic physics "

The fact that WTC7 collapsed through itself at freefall (the rate at which an object falls through thin air with 0% resistance) means that the structural components on each floor during the period of freefall would have to have been dislodged before the upper-section encountered them and the only reasonable way that can happen is if explosives forcibly remove the columns ahead of time. Fire can't do that, unless it was some kind of super-explosive fire.

like ignoring the fact that FDNY reported the building leaning, bulging and creaking long before collapse

If WTC7 was leaning, as some say, shouldn't the building have collapsed asymmetrically?

Originally posted by exponent

Originally posted by jambatrumpet
Oh...A main stream media employee retracting their original statements that conflict with the official story? how surprising...

So let me get this right. When someone from the 'main stream media' says something that you agree with, it is undeniable truth which cannot be debated.

When they tell you they were wrong, and that you are subsequently wrong, they are paid shills lying about it because they're part of the inside job?

This appears to be the logic you're using here.

Main stream media should ALWAYS be taken with a grain of salt, and questioned, and confirmed. Period. Whether I agree with it or not.

reply to post by GoodOlDave


If they didn't blow up the lower levels, where would much of the towers gone when they brought them down?

In order for much the building to end up in the basement, as it it did, they had to had to make room, hence the explosions in the lower levels of the Towers.

A basement helps support the building
www.controlled-demolition.com...


Dave, you know all of this, why do you bother playing stupid?

NOBODY is buying your lies anymore, there WILL come a point that you will be held accountable.

When one enters into a conspiracy to commit murder after the fact, ignorance is not a defense.

With each lie you post here, you are sealing your own fate.

Originally posted by GoodOlDave

Originally posted by chupa-chups
1. Something like 85 security camera's covering "that" side of the pentagon, yet they can only show ONE, which DOES NOT show a commercial airliner crashing. Or are you telling me it does ?

I have not seen any reliable source for there being any additional worthwhile footage of the aircraft strike other than from the 9/11 movement. As you yourself acknowledged, there is simply too much outright bad information being put out by self serving con artists that the 9/11 conspiracy people are circulating to accept the claim at face value, and personally it doesn't make any sense for the Pentagon or anyone else to be training a camera on an empty wall. They're going to be training cameras in high trraffic areas like entrances, parking lots, and that security gate, so I don't see how footage of crowds of people staring at something off camera will be of any benefit to you. Not that it matters, as the Pentagon is in the middle of a dense industrial park and there were hordes of eyewitnesses who saw that it was a passenger jet that hit the Pentagon, so for me, this whole "what hit the Pentagon" debate is the same ridiculous "no planes hit the WTC" argument, but in different clothes.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ ------
CHUPA CHUPS-Yeah !! and, we're talking about one of the most, if not the most secured building on the planet, yet only one camera covering that area......ok ,me thinks they need to be readdressing their security measures.....
Look I don't particularly want to keep going back and forth.....lets just agree to disagree !!!
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ --------

2. WTC 7 .... Ok seriously, what can you possibly say about this ?

It is not for debate that WTC 1 collapsed and threw wreckage in every direction, and it is not for debate that WTC 7 got hit by some of it. Firefighters reported it started fires in WTC 7 which quickly burned out of control, and reliable eyewitnesses reported severe bulges in the side of the building as well as abnormal creaking. It's blatantly obvious the fires were causing at least some deterioration in the building, so if you want to insist there were controlled demolitions, fine, but I find it outright duplicious behavior for you to consistantly conceal and omit critical information like that in your suppositions, becuase you are intentionally prohibiting people from forming fair and balanced opinions
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ --------
CHUPA CHUPS-Why, is it not for debate ?......these "reliable" witnesses, hehehe, let me guess , the eyewitnesses that don't support your theory aren't reliable....no ?
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ --------

3. Firefighters and Construction workers who heard explosions in the lower levels, including two who were actually hit by the blast, and your telling me that the building collapse started on the "ninety somethingth floor",due to burning jet fuel which distorted the shape and weakened critical joints which led to the pancake effect collapse, sorry I don't buy that, thousands upon thousands of bolts and supporting girders all give way at the same time.....

Every video footage of the collapse of the buildings show an initial loss of structural integrity at the point of impact of the planes, with a cascading chain of collapse as the collapsing wreckage crushed its way down the structure. This is an established fact and it is not up for debate. If you're attempting to claim anything otherwise then you are unrepentently lying through your teeth.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ --------
CHUPA CHUPS-Whoa, easy boy, all this "not up for debate", thats a real easy way out for you isn't it, I have seen just as many "experts" go one way or the other on that theory of collapse....I DON'T agree with yours, ok.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ ----------

So you carry on being blind, see I've had a sh!t day and I don't generally rant like this, but what you've posted has really pi$$ed me off....END

...which tells me right there that the driving force behind your involvement ISN'T a serious inetrest in discovering the truth behind anything, btu out of some emotional attachment to a personal agenda, and any attack on them is seen by you as a personal attack against you personally. I will repeat this so it becomes perfectly clear- explosions down at the ground level will NOT cause a collapse in the upper sections of the structure, regardless of how much it pi$$es you off for me to point this out. If you can't get past that then nothing else this thread can add will even get out of the gate.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ -----------
Fire does not melt steel girders or concrete with steel reinforcement and a building that collapses at freefall speed with no resistence straight down into its own footprint after being hit by a plane, hmmm.....ok....whatever you want to believe

reply to post by roboe


So you work at the pentagon then ?, you know for a fact where every camera was located and in which direction they were facing, this list you post means nothing to me....I may be wrong about the 85 camera's, so explain to me how that one video the FBI released shows no airliner, I mean ffsake THE PENTAGON, and your seriously expecting me to believe there was no more camera's facing in that direction, not even from one of the thousands of buildings in the area....c'mon....wake up, I can't walk 2 miles without being caught over 50 cctv camera's.
You guys make me chuckle

Originally posted by samhouston1886
reply to post by GoodOlDave

 

If they didn't blow up the lower levels, where would much of the towers gone when they brought them down?

In order for much the building to end up in the basement, as it it did, they had to had to make room, hence the explosions in the lower levels of the Towers.

Of course, you are simply making this crap up off the top of your head as you go along, here. According to your fellow conspiracy theorists, it's a documented fact that much of the basement levels were relatively intact after the towers collapsed. Go to Dr. Judy Wood's website and you will see a number of photos of the sublevels. It's what she uses to base her "lasers from outer space" claims on- the upper exposed areas that the energy beams could target were destroyed but the subterranean levels inaccessible to the energy beams had (according to her) escaped with minor damage.

Since hers is a conspiracy site, I know you will find her sources credible.

Dave, you know all of this, why do you bother playing stupid?

NOBODY is buying your lies anymore, there WILL come a point that you will be held accountable.

When one enters into a conspiracy to commit murder after the fact, ignorance is not a defense.

With each lie you post here, you are sealing your own fate.

This is the signature of someone basing their position on self assured blind zealotry, rather than out of any actual review of the facts, and I will dismiss it as such. For one thing, despite your smug self assurance of the "blatantly a conspiracy" you don't know who the people even are who'd be even accountable for the "blatantly a conspiracy". You don't even have an empty candy wrapper from the guy who drove the truck of explosives to the WTC, do you? No you do not.

If you people want to convince the rest of us that there's some conspiracy going on then it's going to take more than just a hell of a lot of make believe and conjecture on your part. Ignore that at your own cost.

Originally posted by GoodOlDave

Originally posted by samhouston1886
reply to post by GoodOlDave

 

If they didn't blow up the lower levels, where would much of the towers gone when they brought them down?

In order for much the building to end up in the basement, as it it did, they had to had to make room, hence the explosions in the lower levels of the Towers.

Of course, you are simply making this crap up off the top of your head as you go along, here. According to your fellow conspiracy theorists, it's a documented fact that much of the basement levels were relatively intact after the towers collapsed. Go to Dr. Judy Wood's website and you will see a number of photos of the sublevels. It's what she uses to base her "lasers from outer space" claims on- the upper exposed areas that the energy beams could target were destroyed but the subterranean levels inaccessible to the energy beams had (according to her) escaped with minor damage.

Since hers is a conspiracy site, I know you will find her sources credible.

Dave, you know all of this, why do you bother playing stupid?

NOBODY is buying your lies anymore, there WILL come a point that you will be held accountable.

When one enters into a conspiracy to commit murder after the fact, ignorance is not a defense.

With each lie you post here, you are sealing your own fate.

This is the signature of someone basing their position on self assured blind zealotry, rather than out of any actual review of the facts, and I will dismiss it as such. For one thing, despite your smug self assurance of the "blatantly a conspiracy" you don't know who the people even are who'd be even accountable for the "blatantly a conspiracy". You don't even have an empty candy wrapper from the guy who drove the truck of explosives to the WTC, do you? No you do not.

If you people want to convince the rest of us that there's some conspiracy going on then it's going to take more than just a hell of a lot of make believe and conjecture on your part. Ignore that at your own cost.

Dave,
Why don't you ask [John Gross] why he said he saw no molten metal at the WT7 site, and that nobody else had had said same? Then tell me why the same phrase "self assured blind zealotry" should not be applied to him.

Originally posted by smurfyWhy don't you ask [John Gross] why he said he saw no molten metal at the WT7 site, and that nobody else had had said same? Then tell me why the same phrase "self assured blind zealotry" should not be applied to him.

Because John Gross wasn't asked about molten metal, he was asked about molten steel. Which, to my knowledge, noone has ever presented any evidence of.

Originally posted by aliengenes
the planes were actually hijacked by Xenomorphs, and when the planes hit the buildings, their acid blood seeped through all the supports and concrete in the buildings, and thats what caused their collapse

Xenomorphs. not Saudis:/ .

I believe that posts like this one has no place here and is one reason why many people dont return here.

reply to post by GoodOlDave


Dave regardless of our opinions we are certainly entitled to them, however what makes you think your opinions are correct?

It is not for debate that WTC 1 collapsed and threw wreckage in every direction, and it is not for debate that WTC 7 got hit by some of it.

As far as WTC 7 being hit by wreckage from WTC 1 that has never been proven.
Your opinions are wrong about eyewitness who went on record talking about experiencing explosions and seeing demolition at the WTC.

Firefighters reported it started fires in WTC 7 which quickly burned out of control, and reliable eyewitnesses reported severe bulges in the side of the building as well as abnormal creaking.

A couple of Firefighters may have reported severe bulges in WTC, however most of the firemen do not support that outrages lie. There wasn’t enough fires on each floor to bring WTC 7 down perfectly in its own footprint, without damaging the buildings on each side of WTC 7 if anything the building should have falling with the least resistance. Perhaps part of it could have falling, but not all of it, which is impossible and defies science and logic.

Every video footage of the collapse of the buildings show an initial loss of structural integrity at the point of impact of the planes, with a cascading chain of collapse as the collapsing wreckage crushed its way down the structure. This is an established fact and it is not up for debate. If you're attempting to claim anything otherwise then you are unrepentently lying through your teeth.

Everything about the OS is not up to debate according to you Dave.
Just because someone else does not support your OS opinions, does not mean his opinions is a lie. Most intelligent people know the entire OS of 911 is hogwash. Perhaps you should try and pry your head out of the “ignorance box” and have a look at reality, and face some of the scientific facts, facts that are supported by real science. Not all truthers are crackpots or delusional as you claim.
I can say anyone who defends the OS has not done any research on the topic. .

...which tells me right there that the driving force behind your involvement ISN'T a serious inetrest in discovering the truth behind anything, btu out of some emotional attachment to a personal agenda, and any attack on them is seen by you as a personal attack against you personally. I will repeat this so it becomes perfectly clear- explosions down at the ground level will NOT cause a collapse in the upper sections of the structure, regardless of how much it pi$$es you off for me to point this out. If you can't get past that then nothing else this thread can add will even get out of the gate.

Oh come on Dave, you are criticizing someone about not wanting to discover the truth.
Many posters have said the same to you in many 911 threads Dave, or are you going to deny that to? Talk about trying to discover the truth, as far as explosions at ground level Dave, do you have any proof that it did not happened?
Let me make this perfectly clear Dave, there are many credible eyewitness who went on public record who were on the ground-floor in the WTC explosions as the top of the WTC came down, and this Dave is not an opinion.

Not that it matters, since thermite would be a horrible choice for controlled demolitions. It burns slow and you'd need a pile of sandbags of the stuff to defeat the battleship armor the support beams were made of, so this is more grasping at straws on the part of the 9/11 truthers, than it is anything else.

Goes to show, you have never researched the different kinds of Thermite. Our military uses thermite in their weapons and bombs or do you deny this to?

This is the signature of someone basing their position on self assured blind zealotry, rather than out of any actual review of the facts, and I will dismiss it as such. For one thing, despite your smug self assurance of the "blatantly a conspiracy" you don't know who the people even are who'd be even accountable for the "blatantly a conspiracy". You don't even have an empty candy wrapper from the guy who drove the truck of explosives to the WTC, do you? No you do not.

Despite your blind patriotic beliefs (That my government is perfect,) we will dismiss your rude disrespectful comments. As far as a candy wrappers Dave, do you have any proof that there wasn’t a truck full of explosives driven to the WTC? No you do not.

If you people want to convince the rest of us that there's some conspiracy going on then it's going to take more than just a hell of a lot of make believe and conjecture on your part. Ignore that at your own cost.

Make believe? You need to take a good long look at what you are defending Dave.
What we all witness on the morning of 911 on television was not normal. The government tells us a story of make believe and impossibilities and presents no real evidence to their ridiculous claims, claims that defies physics and science. Now Dave, look who is pushing conspiracy theories and you are defending it with only your opinions and beliefs without even researching any of it, yet you want to insult and ridicule all truthers many who do bring the evidence to the table.