Do people still believe 911 wasnt a inside job?

It is a momentary 'flash' that you can barely see while watching a crash at slow speed, and not particularly clearly at that.
And you want to make a big issue of it?
You can refer to it as what ever you want because I'm wasting no further time over it.
If you answered a few of my questions maybe I could bore you with a few pointless questions about the minutia.
Oh, that's right, you don't like answering questions, do you?

 

Odon, you want to turn the focus of discussion onto theories concerning the method of demolition. Wouldn't you have an easy go of it, sitting back and demanding evidence and not having to defend a thing?

No matter what is placed before you, you write it off as a trick of light. Significant core-structues you write off as insignificant despite the fact that it is the heaviest and strongest part of the building.

I would want to change the discussion to one of theories, too, if I were you.

 

What do you mean 'turn it into'? I know it is easier for you to sit back and demand evidence and not defend a thing - I was gracious enough to let you till you just started asking silly questions, and refused to answer ANYTHING.

Take a look in the mirror.

It's only a theory because you think: No planes hit anything - A group of mysterious people rigged three buildings and then blew them up.
Not the best theory in the world, is it?
I'm not surprised you don't want to answer any questions.

 

I've explained this so many times already > <

 

Well your memory must be failing you, Odon. I distinctly remember producing eyewitness and ear-witness accounts of First Responders. I also produced info concerning the 911 Commission's decision to not only omit all of their testimonies, but to also harass a real hero in the process.
I also proved that the authorities agreed to let the families of those firefighters listen to the last words of their loved ones only on condition that they don't tell anyone what they heard.

I also recall producing an audio-taped transmission of firefighters on the higher floors of the WTC just before collapse. They were only concerned about knocking a couple of small fires down and getting someone up there to help some survivors. I produced this in response to your idea that the steel of the core-structure was so hot that it was compromised enough to collapse. It simply wasn’t.

In fact, it had to be proven to you in several languages that the core-structure was not an insignificant part of the buildings, but in fact the most significant part of the building.

I also proved that the authorities agreed to let the families of those firefighters listen to the last words of their loved ones only on condition that they don't tell anyone what they heard.
________________________________________________________

Ben Fountain, a financial analyst who worked in the 47th floor of the South Tower, told People Magazine that in the weeks before 9/11 there were numerous unannounced and unusual drills where sections of both the twin towers and building 7 were evacuated for quote “security reasons.” [104]

Victor Thorn of Wing TV has reported the WTC 9-11 security concerns of Scott Forbes, a senior database administrator for Fiduciary Trust, Inc., with offices in the former WTC. Forbes reported that his company was notified three weeks in advance that New York's Port Authority would take out power in the South Tower from the 48th floor up on the weekend prior to 9-11, ostensibly to implement a computer cabling upgrade. Forbes noted that Fiduciary Trust was one of the WTC's first occupants after it was erected, and that a "power-down" had never been initiated prior to this occasion.

Forbes recalled the power was out approximately 36 hours between early Saturday morning (September 8th) and mid-Sunday afternoon (September 9th) As a result of the power outage, the WTC's security cameras, ID systems, and elevators to the upper floors were rendered inoperative. Forbes noted that many "engineers" going in- and-out of the WTC had free access throughout the building due to its inoperative security system. Forbes also noted other security related anomalies: Video cameras positioned atop the World Trade Center which were used to feed daily images to local television stations were inexplicably inoperative that morning.

Also, a Fiduciary employee who was on one of the lower floors and escaped immediately after the first (North) tower was struck, reported that he was amazed by the large number of FBI agents that were already on the streets surrounding the WTC complex only minutes after the initial strike.

Forbes said that even though these disclosures could jeopardize his current employment, he has stepped forward because, "I have mailed this information to many people, including the 9/11 Commission, but no one seems to be registering these facts." [105] Soon after Forbes’ appearance on Wing TV, he was marginalized by 9/11 truth debunkers because he seemed to vanish.

Between 2005 and 2006 he has been remotely interviewed at least three times from his home in England. In a Killtown interview, Forbes observed that both main stream and progressive media of other countries have been much more interested in his story than in America. He also noted that, being British, he was eventually interviewed by London police, “but none of my American colleagues were contacted by police or FBI or any agency. Kind of weird.” [106].

Most recently, Forbes’ statements, which are reasoned and dispassionate, have been used by 9/11 truth debunkers against Ben Fountain [107]. Forbes also stated in an interview that 4-6 weeks before 9/11, there was lots of noise coming from floor 98, above his office. Aeon was moved out, and the floor was vacant. He heard what sounded like heavy machinery work going on; drilling and hammering; like something very heavy being moved and dumped, the force of which was enough to cause his office to shake. On one occasion Forbes said he opened the door to the 98th floor to see what was going on, but the entire office space was empty.

This correlates with the experience of William Rodriguez in the North Tower, who, as he was climbing stairs to unlock doors on 9/11, “heard strange noises on the 34th floor.” Rodriguez noted that there was
“nothing on this floor”. No one was supposed to be there, and you can’t even get there without a special key. Rodriguez heard heavy equipment being moved around, it sounded to him like dumpsters with metal wheels. Rodriguez was afraid to open the door to floor 34 with his master key.
The week before9/11, Forbes noticed lots of dust in the building “The dust was incredible; it was filthy; dirty gray dust.
_____________________________________

Now, just as a matter of inquiry, what was going on there?

 

I have not mentioned anything about the temp' of the steel - other than to say (paraphrase): Are you suggesting the entire central core was a particular temp'?
I certainly did not say anything like: "the steel of the core-structure was so hot that it was compromised enough to collapse."
You are quite welcome to try and find my comments regarding that.

As for below/78th floor - we can have some evidence for what might have been occurring there - but what about the 79th and beyond?
Are you saying because some firefighters were not concerned with fires on the 78th floor - there were no fires above that floor?
Please provide some evidence there were not.

I've basically said - if the floors and a large section of the building is falling down the central core isn't going to stop it from doing so.

It seems you think that if a section is damaged and a floor was too weakened the floors above would just fall down and be 'saved' by the rest of the central core. Similar to this...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y-wrvDcUycQ"]WTC Collapse - Experiment 02 (More weight!!!) - YouTube


or this

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lBuH8NNIBys&feature=related"]9/11 Simple Experiment - YouTube

I'm sure even you can see some flaws in the above videos.
Please explain more than: it is the heaviest and strongest part of the building.
You can re-post previous comments if you wish.

...and?

What about my question about if you thought a plane hit both towers...or the testimony of those that saw a plane hit both towers? Where is your answers to that?

 

why are you hung up on that question when I already proved it is worthless?

some people said NO PLANE, others said BLACK PLANE, others said BIG PLANE, others said, SMALL PLANE, others said, GRAY PLANE, others said, MISSILE.

So just like the government you want to pick the testimony that firs YOUR theory?



Well since you are not satisfied with the paper bins how about a several story steel building being dropped.





you have a real problem when you stick to ANY POSITION the government purports because invariably you will always find a plausible lie at the root of it, I dont give a shit what the subject matter is.




How about if we have a little demolition quiz? How about you tell us why the bottom section for this collapse did not support the falling top portion.



if you do not know lets see if you even know the correct questions to ask.

 

yes those pesky momentary flashes.

Oddly enough buildings always seem to "collapse" after that.

I wonder if there is some kind of connection there?





NAH ITS JUST A COINCIDENCE!

 

Because I think it is key to what 'scorch' believes.

What are YOU saying again?

I'm picking what I have heard and seen, and evidence for that.
It is harder to stand by a theory based on what somebody heard.
And as you say: SO YOU WANT EVERYONE TO ARGUE AGAINST SOME GHOST NAMED OTHERS?

The taller buildings did not sustain damage at the base - so would not lean over like that. The wider building (WTC 7) did not, either (as far as I am aware). If it did you seemed to suggest it would roll over. It clearly didn't.
So you have to ask yourself why It didn't. If you are suggesting explosive charges - how and when were they set up?

That's a question for 'scorch' not me.

 

We have been through this before. Heck start on the Pentagon if you have to.

 

yes I agree, and you have ducked it every time.

No lets not start with the pentagon lets finish what we have here.

you dont have any idea why that building collapses, and ducking the question is not a sufficient answer so you can expect to be going through it ad infinitum until you do come up with a sufficient answer.

 

You are right, I have no idea why WTC 7 collapsed the way it did.
I do know speculating that there were bombs/explosives in the lobby/basement is a non starter.
I do think there was significant damage and fires raging.
Beyond that - no clue.

 

no its a question for you. you believe planes hit regardless of all the contradictory testimony, you pick and choose what you want to hear when at that point the only choice is to look at the evidence, and that is videoes that have all been faked.

I have not been able to find any real clips that had a plane crashing yet you seem to think that is pivotal, it is not.

Then how come 2 did lean over like that and it sustained "damage" near the top? How is the base relevant?

 

I spotted one small flash in one of the WTC's above - enough to bring the building down?

 

were they MASSIVE too?

I bet they were like an INFERNO too?

Wait they were a RAGING MASSIVE INFERNO!

mine sounds better.

Again you duck commenting on 1 and 2. LOL

YOU are rapidly proving yourself to be a total fake yourself you know.

You have ducked or given complete meaningless answers to every one of my challenges to you.

Good luck selling that.

 

I've said hearing something is not really evidence. Seeing something is. I even posted the same person you posted saying WTC 1/2 were not CDs. What did you do? Ignored him.
Your stack of testimonies is basically what people heard. Mine isn't.

It actually is.

What?

Where the 'damge' occurred regarding WTC 1/2 the area above leaned over. There were not enough floors for it to topple over.
That is different if the 'damage' is at the base.

 

I have said more than enough about 1 and 2.

 

on that point we agree

dooood you are going wayyyyyyy too far over the top now.

this is pointless

 

Well sure, Odon, I would be happy to answer the question of why the top of that building held together all the way to the bottom part of the building. It's because its core had been neutralized.

 

How do you know? What is the building called? Where is it?