Do people still believe 911 wasnt a inside job?

well troofers cannot get the wtc to fail using the same data troughers used.









but then troofers didnt hold a seance and channel into all that fisics buster majik that troughers did so its understandable troughers would resort to making something out of nothing! Hey just like the federal reserve!

wow aint that something? Will you lookie at that? All the funny stuff a fuel fire can do!

 

Even assuming that the model is accurate (and we don't know that it is), identify two things wrong with this slide.

 

yeh that blip is annoying

 

Somehow I knew you'd evade the issue. Your lack of integrity is astounding.

 

Really? maybe I should get a government job huh? LOL

 

Naw. Even they have standards.

 

KeithBC: I think he's having you on, mate.

 

Oh, you think?

 

well you know how it is

 

Yes, autophobe, I get it--if the eye-witness testimonies are too damning to the official line, bring out the "witness unreliability" thing. If you had any idea how many people I've debated with who have resorted to that tactic when confronted with with the fact of the eye-witness testimonies of First Responders, you'd be laughing along with me right now. I think you need to see this:

"I guess about three minutes later you just heard explosions coming from building two, the south tower. It seemed like it took forever, but there were about ten explosions." [Craig Carlsen -- Firefighter (F.D.N.Y.)]
One eyewitness whose office is near the World Trade Center told AFP that he was standing among a crowd of people on Church Street, about two-and-a-half blocks from the South tower, when he saw "a number of brief light sources being emitted from inside the building between floors 10 and 15." He saw about six of these brief flashes, accompanied by "a crackling sound" before the tower collapsed.

Paramedic captain stated "somewhere around the middle of the world trade center there was this orange and red flash coming out initially it was just one flash then this flash just kept popping all the way around the building and that building had started to explode the popping sound and with each popping sound it was initially an orange and then red flash came out of the building and then it would just go all around the building on both sides as far as could see these popping sounds and the explosions were getting bigger going both up and down and then all around the building."

Police officer stated "you would hear a loud boom go off at the top of tower one. As the building continued to burn and emergency equipment kept on responding stirring up the dust and debris in the streets. After approximately 15 minutes suddenly there was another loud boom at the upper floors, then there was a series of smaller explosions which appeared to go completely around the building at the upper floors. And another loud earth-shattering blast with a large fire ball which blew out more debris and at that point everyone began to run north on West Broad Street."

NYC firefighter stated “It actually gave at a lower floor, not the floor where the plane hit. . . [W]e originally had thought there was like an internal detonation, explosives, because it went in succession, boom, boom, boom, boom, and then the tower came down.”

A witness heard the following, right before the collapse of one of the towers : "It sounded as if you had a hundred of those . . . firecrackers and you lit them all off at once . . . it sounded like the finale of the Fourth of July over the East River."
____________________________

Do you understand now why the 9/11 Commission omitted the testimonies of firefighters from their report? I sure hope so!
_____________________________

NY Fireman Lou Cacchioli Says 9/11 Commission Twisted His Words Fireman Cacchioli relates his experiences of that day, these are his last three paragraphs: Cacchioli was called to testify privately, but walked out on several members of the committee before they finished, feeling like he was being interrogated and cross-examined rather than simply allowed to tell the truth about what occurred in the north tower on 9/11. "My story was never mentioned in the final report and I felt like I was being put on trial in a court room," said Cacchioli. "I finally walked out. They were trying to twist my words and make the story fit only what they wanted to hear. All I wanted to do was tell the truth and when they wouldn’t let me do that, I walked out. "It was a disgrace to everyone, the victims and the family members who lost loved ones. I don’t agree with the 9/11 Commission. The whole experience was terrible experience.

 

yep thats it!

The people with the biggest guns always write the history dont they.....and history only reflects "their" version drowning the truth, because that is the only version that will be taught in the government controlled schools, just like much of the junk science we are taught today!

"we the people" my ass!


Then to really drive the point home there were virtually no fires moments before building 2 came down.

Here is all 4 sides of wtc2 moments before its demolition.











There is all 4 sides within minutes of the demolition and as the firemen reported with virtually "no fire" to speak of.

The real kick in the teeth to official liars is that the fire extinguishers were in fact WORKING and literally every one who got out said so!

There is even pictures of water flooding as it poured down the stairs.

What never ceases to amaze me is how well they blacked out this country from seeing all this.

But then they always told us thats what goes on in russia, never in a "free" counrty!










The media re-run clips showing the fire immediately after the alleged plane crash right up to the demolition giving people the impression it actually had in their words "raging" or "massive" fires right up to the point it fell when in fact the greater majority of any residual fire was extinguished by the working fire extinguishers and there was literally no substantial fire left.

With regard to your post, it is painfully clear that top levels of those claiming to be government does not work for us.

Breach of trust, fiduciary breach, misprision, WILLFUL negligence, pretty much sums it up.

 

none of the quotes you've posted are at all dissimilar to the ones i've already heard (and described) . i stand by what i said, both about it being unlikely that these eyewitness' would have been seen as particularly valuable during an inquest (just as they wouldn't be seen as particularly valuable in a criminal trial), and that nothing they say substantially invalidates the official line anyhow, as none of the noises or sights they describe are particularly anomalous to a building collapsing in the manner described. a skyscaper building pancakes, floor by floor after having its structural integrity compromised by fire. on each floor is, among other things, an electrical transformer and sealed rooms. people hearing a series of explosions or "pops" and "crackling" is hardly the world-shaking testimony that will bring the whole conspiracy crashing round around the evil-doers heads if word of it spread. people would, i think, be more likely to regard these noises as natural, which is a fairly logical conclusion. collapsing buildings don't tend to be all that quiet.

 

Yes, I get it. It took me a while to catch on. So, if you can't beat 'em, join 'em, right?

 

Does the repitition of a point make it untrue?

 

McFuddy,

I don't know. Why don't you try it and find out.

 

autophobe,

These were not random explosions. Did you not hear in the testimonies I provide that the flares and the firecraker sounds wrapped around the building like a belt. What in hell would it take for you to say, "Boy, that sure looks and sounds like controlled demolition to me?

What I find humorous is that if the First Responders had not reported anything, you would be holding that up as evidence that obviously nothing was out of the ordinary. So, you do a fine job of creating a false win/win scenario for yourself here, but you're really not that good at hiding it.

Tell me you're kidding about the pancake-effect.

 

Haha, well I'd say no it doesn't, but I have no means with which to be certain.

 

probably at least a few years of studying controlled demolitions and structural engineering in depth before i felt qualified to comment. unfortunately, i have neither the time, nor the inclination. fortunately, there are people who have spent substantially more time studying structural engineering and controlled demolitions, and received qualifications etc, so i tend to look to them instead of trusting myself, or other unqualified people, to know the difference, from glancing at a video between a controlled demolition and a collapse. They tend to support the latter.

BUT,

if you are asking for me to give an UNQUALIFIED opinion, i would say this:

a ring of explosion visible on the outside of a building would not chime with my understanding of how a controlled demolition is performed.

controlled demolitions generally attempt to use the least amount of explosives possible for the desired effect, weakening the core structure and letting the weight of the building do the rest of the work. the WTC towers had a "tube in a tube" structure with a central core, so, during a controlled demolition, this would have been attacked with a small amount of explosive, to weaken it, and then the building would have collapsed under its own weight. it would be unlikely that they would use such a surplus of explosive as to be visible on the outside of a building, and that they would only make this mistake on one floor of the building.

not really, as i've said, their testimony is largely irrelevant, but if they had seen or heard anything substantially odd and all agreed on it, then i'd have taken notice, but they didn't.

they heard and saw things which seem perfectly normal given the situation.

 

Have any of the people who gave 'testimonies' been asked if they subsequently think it was a conspiracy involving the planting of explosives and the pre-planned demolition of the buildings - or do they think it was what might have occurred if they had, with hindsight, realised planes hit the towers.
If no testimonies were taken, then surely no testimonies were taken from first responders who didn't hear 'explosions' (or did - for that matter) and subsequently don't think explosives were planted in the towers.

"NYC firefighter stated “It actually gave at a lower floor, not the floor where the plane hit. . . [W]e originally had thought there was like an internal detonation, explosives, because it went in succession, boom, boom, boom, boom, and then the tower came down.”

Key part there is: "[W]e originally had thought ..."