Do You believe 9/11 was staged or really a terrorist attack ? (poll) (srs)

[DocHol1day]

Actually the firefighters were removed from the building before noon because the water lines were broken. The fire chief Silverstein claimed he spoke to denies talking to him on 9/11.

http://firefightersfor911truth.org/

Coincidentally Silverstein, his daughter, and his son didn't show up to work on 9/11. Also coincidentally, Silverstein placed a large insurance policy on the building 6 months prior to 9/11.

he always had insurance on the building you half wit. thats when the policy needed to be renewed. half truths and complete lies, thats the CTard way!

[riptor]

Lot of new people all of a sudden... Why do I get the feeling that voodoo ran over to prisonplanet and put out a call for backup?

I guarantee that's what happened. Truthers seem to troll the Internet looking for anything dealing with 9/11. I recently made a post on a friend's blog where I mentioned 9/11. The post was set upon by Truthers in less than 24 hours. And this is an obscure blog with at best two hundred followers. These people are pathetic.

[Foe1605]

Why would hundreds of military officers and fighter and commercial pilots say the official story is false?

Military Officers Question 911:
http://patriotsquestion911.com/


As far as whether planes hit the buildings, of course they did, just like we saw. There is nothing tin foil about the kind of technology you see over the skies in Afghanistan every day, drone aircraft flown by remote from Creech AFB in Nevada. We also know that Bush lied about the US having the technology to seize control of planes from hijackers from the ground. Why would he lie about it?

Global Hawk, largest remote controlled aircraft on public record, flown to Australia in one test:




Call it tin foil or whatever you want. Someone walked away with $8 trillion for the 911 wars (it wasn't the GIs) and is laughing with your money all the way to the bank.

Information at 911: Venturing a Theory of the Crime

Wait... are you suggesting remote controlled commercial airliners were flown into WTC?

[kneeonbelly]

i believe 9/11 was a false flag. used to have public support to invade other countrys which without would have been illegal and not justified

[MURDR]

i believe 9/11 was a false flag. used to have public support to invade other countrys which without would have been illegal and not justified

Explain. Don't just made dumb statements because you read it on some nutjob conspiracy site. Let's see your proof.

[ijjy]

Explain. Don't just made dumb statements because you read it on some nutjob conspiracy site. Let's see your proof.

what more proof do u need then iraq and afghanistan. u rly think they cud convince ppl to invade both those countries if they hadnt had an excuse like 9/11, which built hatred towards the middle east and it made ppl think stuff happening there is justified now

[MURDR]

what more proof do u need then iraq and afghanistan. u rly think they cud convince ppl to invade both those countries if they hadnt had an excuse like 9/11, which built hatred towards the middle east and it made ppl think stuff happening there is justified now

So us reacting to terrorists attacking us is proof that terrorists weren't behind the attacks? Wow, you've convinced me, I am now a believer!

[ijjy]

So us reacting to terrorists attacking us is proof that terrorists weren't behind the attacks? Wow, you've convinced me, I am now a believer!

Ask yourself why this is, 9/11 deaths are 1/10000 of the number of ppl dead in the middle east today from this so called "war on terror". Its clear no1 wants them their and many of the atk in the middle east are because of americans forces present. But i guess no1 will leave untill all resources are tapped into.

[nutsy54]

Coincidentally Silverstein, his daughter, and his son didn't show up to work on 9/11. Also coincidentally, Silverstein placed a large insurance policy on the building 6 months prior to 9/11.

- Out of context data: How often was Siverstein not in his office at 9am on a weekday? Where else did he routinely work? How often did he have off-site meetings or commitments? Unless you know that, you have no idea if this was routine, or a never-before-seen event.

- There was no "coincidence" in him purchasing an insurance policy several months prior: He purchased the insurance when his lease on the buildings started. So, this is just another misrepresented fact, framed as something sinister, even though it was a standard business transaction.

[nutsy54]

what more proof do u need then iraq and afghanistan. u rly think they cud convince ppl to invade both those countries if they hadnt had an excuse like 9/11, which built hatred towards the middle east and it made ppl think stuff happening there is justified now

You only cited a result - how about some actual proof that the Cause was perpetrated by Americans, working on behalf of the government to murder thousands of their fellow countrymen. You know... Something which every conspiracy believer has utterly failed to provide throughout this huge thread.

By your "proof", every homeowner who receives an insurance payment after a fire... Must have committed arson.

[rsnnh12]

i believe 9/11 was a false flag. used to have public support to invade other countrys which without would have been illegal and not justified

So why didn't the 9/11 masterminds just plant some WMDs in Iraq? They were willing to destroy the towers and kill thousands of Americans to gain public support for the wars (and profit for them), but they wouldn't put WMDs there to justify the whole thing, ensuring them massive profits with full public support?

Yea, that makes sense

[dlaliberte]

Quote Originally Posted by ImRepairMan View Post
WTC 7 collapsed at 5:20 PM EST, that BBC broadcast was at 4:57 PM EST, you ignorant fool.

They made a mistake, you twit. I guarantee you every single news agency covering 9/11 made mistakes that day.

You ignorant fool (are we required to denigrate each other in this forum? can we standardize on "you ignorant fool" or are we supposed to be creative?), ...

... if it was merely a mistake, how is it that there were dozens of other similar mistakes by people who appeared to know that Building 7 was "about to come down" or, in two or three cases, already had come down? That would seem to suggest there really was some kind of knowledge that a collapse was highly likely. Certainly people were willing to believe it because WTC 1 and 2 already fell. But it was much stronger than mere belief: it was a matter of certainty. People had been told that Building 7 was definitely coming down, not just maybe, not just a hunch or a concern, but definitely!

But, there is a contradiction: NIST had to work very hard for a couple years trying to figure out how it could possibly have happened, what bizarre sequence of improbable events led to sufficiently weakening the structure such that it could fall at all (and they didn't bother to explain the free fall part of the collapse but merely claimed it was consistent with their model, which they did not release). This very unlikely sequence of events, which NIST admitted was unlikely, means that there is no way that anyone could have actually known that it really was about to collapse.

NIST admitted that this event was exceedingly unlikely, and yet somehow dozens of people did, in fact, know about it before it happened. How is that possible?

Moreover, even if there was some way for all these people to know that there might be a flaw in the design of the building that would allow the catastrophic and complete failure with free fall collapse, how is it that anyone would know *when* this collapse would occur with a fairly high degree of accuracy, not just within hours, but within minutes???

Sorry I can't refer to this link directly. This is about an hour long talk, but well worth your time: "Foreknowledge of Building 7's Collapse : Dr. Graeme MacQueen" at youtube: watch?v=bfwJMRgcLs0

[nutsy54]

... if it was merely a mistake, how is it that there were dozens of other similar mistakes by people who appeared to know that Building 7 was "about to come down" or, in two or three cases, already had come down?

Well, maybe seven hours of fires burning throughout the building, with significant exterior damage, and visible structural damage, was their first clue... Your position seems to believe that firefighters are utterly shocked whenever a building collapses.

If we're to believe the world press had a script of the day's events in their hands (which is laughable since not a single person has come forward with that massively damning evidence), then why was the original WTC impact simply reported as an accident, with "a small plane, like a Cessna" hitting the tower? If everyone knew what was going on, why not immediately drum up the hysteria?

By the way - In your earlier post, you claimed to have actual, factual, researched evidence. I'll politely ask again that you provide some of it. Because jumping into this massive & baseless conjecture that thousands of additional people, all around the world, were complicit in the day's events - "proven" because of a reporting error during an enormously chaotic breaking news story, really doesn't live up to that claim.

[MURDR]

Ask yourself why this is, 9/11 deaths are 1/10000 of the number of ppl dead in the middle east today from this so called "war on terror". Its clear no1 wants them their and many of the atk in the middle east are because of americans forces present. But i guess no1 will leave untill all resources are tapped into.

That's not proof, that's you drawing misinformed conclusions without any factual evidence to back it up.

[rsnnh12]

Quote Originally Posted by ImRepairMan View Post
WTC 7 collapsed at 5:20 PM EST, that BBC broadcast was at 4:57 PM EST, you ignorant fool.



You ignorant fool (are we required to denigrate each other in this forum? can we standardize on "you ignorant fool" or are we supposed to be creative?), ...

... if it was merely a mistake, how is it that there were dozens of other similar mistakes by people who appeared to know that Building 7 was "about to come down" or, in two or three cases, already had come down? That would seem to suggest there really was some kind of knowledge that a collapse was highly likely. Certainly people were willing to believe it because WTC 1 and 2 already fell. But it was much stronger than mere belief: it was a matter of certainty. People had been told that Building 7 was definitely coming down, not just maybe, not just a hunch or a concern, but definitely!

But, there is a contradiction: NIST had to work very hard for a couple years trying to figure out how it could possibly have happened, what bizarre sequence of improbable events led to sufficiently weakening the structure such that it could fall at all (and they didn't bother to explain the free fall part of the collapse but merely claimed it was consistent with their model, which they did not release). This very unlikely sequence of events, which NIST admitted was unlikely, means that there is no way that anyone could have actually known that it really was about to collapse.

NIST admitted that this event was exceedingly unlikely, and yet somehow dozens of people did, in fact, know about it before it happened. How is that possible?

Moreover, even if there was some way for all these people to know that there might be a flaw in the design of the building that would allow the catastrophic and complete failure with free fall collapse, how is it that anyone would know *when* this collapse would occur with a fairly high degree of accuracy, not just within hours, but within minutes???

Sorry I can't refer to this link directly. This is about an hour long talk, but well worth your time: "Foreknowledge of Building 7's Collapse : Dr. Graeme MacQueen" at youtube: watch?v=bfwJMRgcLs0

Firehouse magazine: Did that chief give an assignment to go to building 7?
Boyle: He gave out an assignment. I didn’t know exactly what it was, but he told the chief that we were heading down to the site.
Firehouse: How many companies?
Boyle: There were four engines and at least three trucks. So we’re heading east on Vesey, we couldn’t see much past Broadway. We couldn’t see Church Street. We couldn’t see what was down there. It was really smoky and dusty." "A little north of Vesey I said, we’ll go down, let’s see what’s going on. A couple of the other officers and I were going to see what was going on. We were told to go to Greenwich and Vesey and see what’s going on. So we go there and on the northand east side of 7 it didn’t look like there was any damage at all, but then you looked on the south side of 7 there had to be a hole 20 stories tall in the building, with fire on several floors. Debris was falling down on the building and it didn’t look good. But they had a hoseline operating. Like I said, it was hitting the sidewalk across the street, but eventually they pulled back too. Then we received an order from Fellini, we’re going to make a move on 7. That was the first time really my stomach tightened up because the building didn’t look good. I was figuring probably the standpipe systems were shot. There was no hydrant pressure. I wasn’t really keen on the idea. Then this other officer I’m standing next to said, that building doesn’t look straight. So I’m standing there. I’m looking at the building. It didn’t look right, but, well, we’ll go in, we’ll see. So we gathered up rollups and most of us had masks at that time. We headed toward 7. And just around we were about a hundred yards away and Butch Brandies came running up. He said forget it, nobody’s going into 7, there’s creaking, there are noises coming out of there, so we just stopped. And probably about 10 minutes after that, Visconti, he was on West Street, and I guess he had another report of further damage either in some basements and things like that, so Visconti said nobody goes into 7, so that was the final thing and that was abandoned.
Firehouse: When you looked at the south side, how close were you to the base of that side?
Boyle: I was standing right next to the building, probably right next to it.
Firehouse: When you had fire on the 20 floors, was it in one window or many?
Boyle: There was a huge gaping hole and it was scattered throughout there. It was a huge hole. I would say it was probably about a third of it, right in the middle of it. And so after Visconti came down and said nobody goes in 7, we said all right, we’ll head back to the command post. We lost touch with him. I never saw him again that day.


Another account-
Hayden: Yeah. There was enough there and we were marking off. There were a lot of damaged apparatus there that were covered. We tried to get searches in those areas. By now, this is going on into the afternoon, and we were concerned about additional collapse, not only of the Marriott, because there was a good portion of the Marriott still standing, but 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 magazine: 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.

So 2 firefighters, who were actually there, could tell that WTC7 and other buildings didn't look good. They could tell the building was in trouble... are you saying that you know better than they do? Are you saying there wasn't a bulge in 1 corner of the building? Or that there werent massive fires inside? There are many more firefighter accounts of WTC7, if you'd like to research them.

[mickey89]

this thread is laughable. 67%? this just shows misc R/P is a pretty ****ty forum, we're amongst a bunch of retards

[iabs]

this thread is laughable. 67%? this just shows misc R/P is a pretty ****ty forum, we're amongst a bunch of retards

everyone is different, there's people that sit down to watch the news, listen to their political candidates and take their word for it, they BELIEVE THEM, and there's people that do their own research, analyze and investigate and come up with their own conclusions.



which one are you?

[rsnnh12]

everyone is different, there's people that sit down to watch the news, listen to their political candidates and take their word for it, they BELIEVE THEM, and there's people that do their own research, analyze and investigate and come up with their own conclusions.



which one are you?

I'm one of the ones who doesn't believe laughably stupid conspiracy theories... which one are you?

[nutsy54]

this thread is laughable. 67%? this just shows misc R/P is a pretty ****ty forum, we're amongst a bunch of retards

I'm losing track of how many times this has been said:

Anyone with cookies disabled in his browser can vote as many times as he wants to.

The poll "results" are a complete fraud - Did you even notice that we're supposed to believe over 9,000 different people have voted? On a forum where polls generally get a few hundred votes? Hell, it's been almost 3,000 new votes since yesterday - but a severe lack of the "people" actually making a post. Interdasting, huh?

[voodoo101]

riginally Posted by kneeonbelly View Post
i believe 9/11 was a false flag. used to have public support to invade other countrys which without would have been illegal and not justified

Explain. Don't just made dumb statements because you read it on some nutjob conspiracy site. Let's see your proof.

Why don't you talk with some respect for people, you treasonous *******? You should be allowed to state an opinion without being called "dumb." Oh right, the ""25 Rules of Disinformation and Truth Suppression," Number 5: Mock, ridicule.

Here's another piece of evidence you don't like, I notice you guys buried it faster than sh!t goes through a goose. If there was no molten steel, as you maintain, only "molten metal" like aluminum (like that should have been there either,) then what were these gobs of melted then cooled steel, fused with concrete dust doing in the rubble pile? Were they modern art in someone's office? Why don't we go test them so we can see if they are really just "aluminum."

Want to bet on how long before they disappear from the 911 Museum?

FROM Molten Steel & Extreme Temperatures at WTC


Are we going around the block again on all that HOT HOT JET FUEL now that everyone knows jet fuel is only kerosene?

Moving forward again to the WHO and WHY, I notice your silence on the interesting information I presented to you about Marvin Bush and his company Securacom holding the security contract for the WTC complex. Aren't you the guys who say "Hey nutjobs! How are all those people going to sneak into the building with all those explosives?"

FROM: http://whatreallyhappened.com/WRHART...1security.html

9/11 Security
Courtesy of Marvin Bush

Marvin P. Bush, the president’s younger brother, was a principal in a company called Securacom that provided security for the World Trade Center, United Airlines, and Dulles International Airport. The company, Burns noted, was backed by KuwAm, a Kuwaiti-American investment firm on whose board Marvin Bush also served. [Utne] According to its present CEO, Barry McDaniel, the company had an ongoing contract to handle security at the World Trade Center "up to the day the buildings fell down."

The company lists as government clients "the U.S. Army, U.S. Navy, U.S Air force, and the Department of Justice," in projects that "often require state-of-the-art security solutions for classified or high-risk government sites."

Stratesec (Securacom) differs from other security companies which separate the function of consultant from that of service provider. The company defines itself as a "single-source" provider of "end-to-end" security services, including everything from diagnosis of existing systems to hiring subcontractors to installing video and electronic equipment. It also provides armored vehicles and security guards.

The Dulles Internation contract is another matter. Dulles is regarded as "absolutely a sensitive airport," according to security consultant Wayne Black, head of a Florida-based security firm, due to its location, size, and the number of international carriers it serves.

Black has not heard of Stratesec, but responds that for one company to handle security for both airports and airlines is somewhat unusual. It is also delicate for a security firm serving international facilities to be so interlinked with a foreign-owned company: "Somebody knew somebody," he suggested, or the contract would have been more closely scrutinized.

As Black points out, "when you [a company] have a security contract, you know the inner workings of everything." And if another company is linked with the security company, then "What's on your computer is on their computer." American Reporter

a heightened security alert was lifted...

The World Trade Center was destroyed just days after a heightened security alert was lifted at the landmark 110-story towers, security personnel said yesterday [September 11]. Daria Coard, 37, a guard at Tower One, said the security detail had been working 12-hour shifts for the past two weeks because of numerous phone threats. But on Thursday [September 6], bomb-sniffing dogs were abruptly removed. NY Newsday

...there was a power down in WTC 2 the weekend before 9/11...

On the weekend of 9/8, 9/9 there was a 'power down' condition in WTC tower 2, the south tower. This power down condition meant there was no electrical supply for approx 36 hrs from floor 50 up... "Of course without power there were no security cameras, no security locks on doors and many, many 'engineers' coming in and out of the tower." [WingTV]

...Bush's cousin had a fortunate change of venue for a September 11 business conference...

President Bush's cousin should have been in the World Trade Centre when it was attacked. Jim Pierce, managing director of AON Corporations, had arranged a business conference on the 105th floor of the South Tower where its New York offices were based. But his group was too large so they decided to move across the street to the Millennium Hotel. Annova

...and it just so happens that Marvin was in New York on 9/11.

Both WTC 6 and WTC 7 were evacuated within minutes of Flight 11 striking WTC 1, but this did not happen in the twin towers. There were no evacuation announcements in WTC 1 following the plane strike, and workers were encouraged to stay in their building...

FROM: http://whatreallyhappened.com/WRHART...1security.html

Possible list of conspirators, presumed innocent until found guilty: http://WhoDidIt.org

[MURDR]

I'm one of the ones who doesn't believe laughably stupid conspiracy theories... which one are you?

This.

[rsnnh12]

Why don't you talk with some respect for people, you treasonous *******? You should be allowed to state an opinion without being called "dumb." Oh right, the ""25 Rules of Disinformation and Truth Suppression," Number 5: Mock, ridicule.

Here's another piece of evidence you don't like, I notice you guys buried it faster than sh!t goes through a goose. If there was no molten steel, as you maintain, only "molten metal" like aluminum (like that should have been there either,) then what were these gobs of melted then cooled steel, fused with concrete dust doing in the rubble pile? Were they modern art in someone's office? Why don't we go test them so we can see if they are really just "aluminum."

Want to bet on how long before they disappear from the 911 Museum?

FROM Molten Steel & Extreme Temperatures at WTC


Are we going around the block again on all that HOT HOT JET FUEL now that everyone knows jet fuel is only kerosene?

Moving forward again to the WHO and WHY, I notice your silence on the interesting information I presented to you about Marvin Bush and his company Securacom holding the security contract for the WTC complex. Aren't you the guys who say "Hey nutjobs! How are all those people going to sneak into the building with all those explosives?"

FROM: http://whatreallyhappened.com/WRHART...1security.html

9/11 Security
Courtesy of Marvin Bush

Marvin P. Bush, the president’s younger brother, was a principal in a company called Securacom that provided security for the World Trade Center, United Airlines, and Dulles International Airport. The company, Burns noted, was backed by KuwAm, a Kuwaiti-American investment firm on whose board Marvin Bush also served. [Utne] According to its present CEO, Barry McDaniel, the company had an ongoing contract to handle security at the World Trade Center "up to the day the buildings fell down."

The company lists as government clients "the U.S. Army, U.S. Navy, U.S Air force, and the Department of Justice," in projects that "often require state-of-the-art security solutions for classified or high-risk government sites."

Stratesec (Securacom) differs from other security companies which separate the function of consultant from that of service provider. The company defines itself as a "single-source" provider of "end-to-end" security services, including everything from diagnosis of existing systems to hiring subcontractors to installing video and electronic equipment. It also provides armored vehicles and security guards.

The Dulles Internation contract is another matter. Dulles is regarded as "absolutely a sensitive airport," according to security consultant Wayne Black, head of a Florida-based security firm, due to its location, size, and the number of international carriers it serves.

Black has not heard of Stratesec, but responds that for one company to handle security for both airports and airlines is somewhat unusual. It is also delicate for a security firm serving international facilities to be so interlinked with a foreign-owned company: "Somebody knew somebody," he suggested, or the contract would have been more closely scrutinized.

As Black points out, "when you [a company] have a security contract, you know the inner workings of everything." And if another company is linked with the security company, then "What's on your computer is on their computer." American Reporter

a heightened security alert was lifted...

The World Trade Center was destroyed just days after a heightened security alert was lifted at the landmark 110-story towers, security personnel said yesterday [September 11]. Daria Coard, 37, a guard at Tower One, said the security detail had been working 12-hour shifts for the past two weeks because of numerous phone threats. But on Thursday [September 6], bomb-sniffing dogs were abruptly removed. NY Newsday

...there was a power down in WTC 2 the weekend before 9/11...

On the weekend of 9/8, 9/9 there was a 'power down' condition in WTC tower 2, the south tower. This power down condition meant there was no electrical supply for approx 36 hrs from floor 50 up... "Of course without power there were no security cameras, no security locks on doors and many, many 'engineers' coming in and out of the tower." [WingTV]

...Bush's cousin had a fortunate change of venue for a September 11 business conference...

President Bush's cousin should have been in the World Trade Centre when it was attacked. Jim Pierce, managing director of AON Corporations, had arranged a business conference on the 105th floor of the South Tower where its New York offices were based. But his group was too large so they decided to move across the street to the Millennium Hotel. Annova

...and it just so happens that Marvin was in New York on 9/11.

Both WTC 6 and WTC 7 were evacuated within minutes of Flight 11 striking WTC 1, but this did not happen in the twin towers. There were no evacuation announcements in WTC 1 following the plane strike, and workers were encouraged to stay in their building...

FROM: http://whatreallyhappened.com/WRHART...1security.html

Possible list of conspirators, presumed innocent until found guilty: http://WhoDidIt.org

So there was melted steel in rubble piles, which were burning for weeks on end? Surely the temperature didn't increase in those piles, right?

So now you're claiming that in 1 week, the thermite and other explosives were placed? You're joking, right? As a matter of fact, you saying that they were encouraged to stay in the buildings proves that it wasn't a demolition. You've brought up Barry Jennings before, right? And how he claimed he got a call while in WTC7 and was told to leave. Why would some people be encouraged to stay in a building about to be demo'd, but others urgently told to leave? Were they trying to prevent deaths, or ensure more people died?

Once again, logic makes you look like the joke that you are.

[dlaliberte]

If you read the rest of your quote, the northern facade fell for a period of 2.25 seconds. It then encountered increased resistance again and slowed down. The remaining parts of the building behind the facade had already collapsed. Why do you people think the entire building collapsed at once? Haven't you seen the sunlight in the windows? Did you notice the penthouse collapsing "first"? The penthouse only fell after everything underneath it fell.

Here is what the NIST final report on building 7 actually says:

For discussion purposes, three stages were defined, as denoted in Figure 3-15:
• In Stage 1, the descent was slow and the acceleration was less than that of gravity. This stage corresponds to the initial buckling of the exterior columns in the lower stories of the north face. By 1.75 s, the north face had descended approximately 2.2 m (7 ft).
• In Stage 2, the north face descended at gravitational acceleration, as the buckled columns provided negligible support to the upper portion of the north face. This free fall drop continued for approximately 8 stories or 32.0 m (105 ft), the distance traveled between times t = 1.75 s and t = 4.0 s.
• In Stage 3, the acceleration decreased somewhat as the upper portion of the north face encountered increased resistance from the collapsed structure and the debris pile below. Between 4.0 s and 5.4 s, the north face corner fell an additional 39.6 m (130 ft).

Read it again carefully and note that there is no mention of the south face or the penthouse in this version of the three stage collapse. So should we conclude that NIST believed the penthouse and south face did not collapse at all, or that they collapsed before or after these three stages? Or maybe something else happened.

So does NIST believe the south face, and everything else behind the northern facade, collapsed before the northern facade did, as you seem to believe? Is there anywhere in their report where they say that? I couldn't find it, but maybe you can. You can get the report at www nist gov /manuscript-publication-search.cfm?pub_id=861610

It seems clear that the correct interpretation of this part of the report is just that the measurements of the north face falling showed that there was free fall occurring at least for this portion of the building during their "Stage 2".

I also couldn't find anything in the report about seeing sunlight *through* the windows. If you are talking about brief moments where there is a flash of light in a couple windows, you'd have to prove those weren't reflections, and were not due to explosive flashes.

[Bushmaster]

Are we going around the block again on all that HOT HOT JET FUEL now that everyone knows jet fuel is only kerosene?

Well since you ignored this from two pages ago, why not??

Fast forward to ~2:00



Edit: In before the National Geographic channel "is in on it" too.

[ijjy]

You only cited a result - how about some actual proof that the Cause was perpetrated by Americans, working on behalf of the government to murder thousands of their fellow countrymen. You know... Something which every conspiracy believer has utterly failed to provide throughout this huge thread.

By your "proof", every homeowner who receives an insurance payment after a fire... Must have committed arson.

whatever proof i will give u, u will find something that will prove that wrong, some1 else will prove you wrong. neverending cycle of back and forth arguments

[nutsy54]

whatever proof i will give u, u will find something that will prove that wrong, some1 else will prove you wrong. neverending cycle of back and forth arguments

Actually, that chain generally stops at the bolded part

That's when the Conspiracy believer ignores being called out on his current lie, then jumps into a completely new subject.

[DriftParty]

Well since you ignored this from two pages ago, why not??

That is the exact show I was citing in my post haha. brb scientific proof is irrelevant because science doesn't support idiotic claims. "This test does not refute or even address the overwhelming evidence for explosive demolition" How so? First you claim the fires could NOT burn hot enough to melt or weaken the steel, when proved wrong somehow this doesn't refute anything? Okay chief.

You know what I've learned in this thread? That Voodoo101 is a nutjob and mostlikely a terrorist. Ayeee you see what I did thar?

[tonschk]

The NIST was forced to ADMIT that a few seconds of FREE FALL ACCELERATION actually happened on 9/11 on the WTC Building seven , this mean that the World Trade Center building SEVEN Fell at FREE FALL ACCELERATION for 105 feets (32m), FREE FALL ACCELERATION only can happen when the vertical strenght of ALL the vertical support columns is removed instantly to ALLOW the building to fall at FREE FALL ACCELERATION, THIS FACT AUTOMATICALLY AUTOMATICALLY AUTOMATICALLY prove controlled DEMOLITION brought down the WTC building SEVEN, the US government is in despair trying to Cover-UP the controlled Demolition of WTC Building seven

[nutsy54]

The NIST was forced to ADMIT that a few seconds of FREE FALL ACCELERATION actually happened on 9/11 on the WTC Building seven , this mean that the World Trade Center building SEVEN Fell at FREE FALL ACCELERATION for 105 feets (32m), FREE FALL ACCELERATION only can happen when the vertical strenght of ALL the vertical support columns is removed instantly to ALLOW the building to fall at FREE FALL ACCELERATION, THIS FACT AUTOMATICALLY AUTOMATICALLY AUTOMATICALLY prove controlled DEMOLITION brought down the WTC building SEVEN, the US government is in despair trying to Cover-UP the controlled Demolition of WTC Building seven

The bolded statement: Is false.

The force & momentum of the already-moving upper 18 floors simply needs to significantly exceed the weakened/failed support structure below it.

"Shocking" that a brand-new member jumps in, and his first post contains a blatant lie to "prove" the endlessly disproven Conspiracy claims

PS: Even if you absolutely proved that explosives were installed in a building who's destruction would be absolutely useless to the Conspiracy agenda (and explosives which magically survived seven hours of fires to perform perfectly at a completely useless time)... You still haven't proven who installed & detonated them. Oops again.

[tonschk]

The 105 feet (32m) of FREE FALL ACCELERATION of building Seven will place a tight rope around the neck of george bush And around the Neck of cheney