Chinese "Demolition" Proves 9-11 was an Inside Job
in [Physics]
|
Prev: FR Bending of Light = GR 1919 Eddington Experiment
Next: Solutions manual to Intermediate Accounting 13e Kieso
From: Iarnrod on 9 Jan 2010 22:53 On Jan 9, 7:30 pm, knews4u2c...(a)yahoo.com wrote: > On Jan 9, 4:56 pm, john <vega...(a)accesscomm.ca> wrote: > > > > > On Jan 9, 6:10 pm, Iarnrod <iarn...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > > > > On Jan 9, 1:08 pm, knews4u2c...(a)yahoo.com wrote: > > > > > On Jan 9, 5:24 am, "AllYou!" <ida...(a)conversent.net> wrote: > > > > > > Innews:71a5f425-4a11-4dbe-a074-84fa63909636(a)s3g2000yqs.googlegroups.com, > > > > > knews4u2c...(a)yahoo.com <knews4u2c...(a)yahoo.com> mused: > > > > > > > On Jan 8, 11:48 am, Robert Higgins > > > > > > <robert_higgins...(a)hotmail.com> > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > >> I don't understand exactly what the video is supposed to > > > > > >> "prove". > > > > > > > That even given a "start" with demolition charges an old > > > > > > building does > > > > > > NOT "globally collapse" like the WTC towers and building 7 did > > > > > > without > > > > > > even more help than the failed demolition shows. > > > > > > >> This > > > > > >> is certainly a "controlled demolition", yet looks nothing like > > > > > >> 9/11. > > > > > > > The point exactly. > > > > > > You're so comletely whacked that you're actually posting proof that > > > > > the WTC buildings collapsd nothing like a controlled demonlition, > > > > > and then claiming that they did. > > > > > > LOL! > > > > > You are lost as usual. > > > > Lost? He proved you wrong, as did I. YOU are the one who is lost. > > > Q.E.D. > > > > > You are drunk. > > > > Projection.- Hide quoted text - > > > > - Show quoted text - > > >http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=9056 > > Stop bothering them with facts. Oh, so sorry, but you don't have any facts to bother anyone with, knowsknothing. > They claim they have all the facts by decree. Nope. By factual proof. Something you can never have for your physically impossible claims. > Do you want to be called every name in the book for denying that the > government's conspiracy "theory" is false? BWAHAHAHAAAHHAAAA!!! It is what it is, fuckwad. When you're proven wrong and still persist, what do you expect?
From: Peter Webb on 10 Jan 2010 18:48 Funny thing about you 9/11 cranks. You always complain that the official story must be wrong, but you provide no alternative explanation. Do you have a better explanation of 9/11 than the official one? If so, lets hear it.
From: Darwin123 on 10 Jan 2010 21:30 On Jan 10, 1:26 am, knews4u2c...(a)yahoo.com wrote: > On Jan 8, 4:48 pm, Iarnrod <iarn...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > > > > > On Jan 8, 12:02 pm, knews4u2c...(a)yahoo.com wrote: > > > > On Jan 7, 9:33 pm, Iarnrod <iarn...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > > > > > On Jan 7, 9:10 pm, knowsknoth...(a)yahoo.com wrote: > > > > > > On Jan 7, 7:48 pm, Iarnrod <iarn...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > > > > > > > On Jan 7, 6:33 pm, knowsknoth...(a)yahoo.com wrote: > > > > > > > > On Jan 7, 5:27 pm, Iarnrod <iarn...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > >Denial, spew, lie, denial, spew, lie, arm wave, denial, claim of proof without proof, >arm wave, lie, denial, spew, arm wave, lie, spew, ad infinitum... > > > > > > > From you, of course, since you cannot confront the TRUTH that all of > > > > > > your psychically impossible claims have been proven FALSE!!! > > > > > > > <sips Victory Iced Tea> > > The Port > Authoritys engineering consultant Buro Happold, helping with > evaluation of the > fireproofing upgrades, suggested the use of alternative > materials (NIST 2005). Such > alternative materials could have been spray-on nano-thermites > substituted for intumescent > paint or Interchar-like fireproofing primers (NASA 2006). It seems > quite possible that > this kind of substitution could have been made with few people > noticing. I am still waiting for the explanation as to who actually was driving the airplanes that hit the towers, and why these people decided to coordinate their plans with the U.S. government. It's the coincidence of the airplanes hitting the towers, and the "planned demolition" of towers, that troubles me. 1) Who were flying the airplanes, and why? 2) How did they coordinate so well with the people who sprayed this thermite in the right places? 3) Are we suggesting that the terrorists who took over the airplanes were fanatical CIA agents, ready to die for George Bush, Jr.? 4) Are we suggesting that these same people are quietly working for Obama, or that Obama is covering up for the Bush administration? Since it is so easy to spray thermite onto steel beams covertly, I have a final question: 5) How do you know it wasn't Arab terrorists who sprayed thermite onto the steel beams in the towers? Doesn't have to be Bush or the CIA, you know. Anyone with a spray can could have done it. Look at all the graffiti on subways.
From: Iarnrod on 10 Jan 2010 22:53 On Jan 10, 7:30 pm, Darwin123 <drosen0...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > On Jan 10, 1:26 am, knews4u2c...(a)yahoo.com wrote: > > > > > On Jan 8, 4:48 pm, Iarnrod <iarn...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > > > > On Jan 8, 12:02 pm, knews4u2c...(a)yahoo.com wrote: > > > > > On Jan 7, 9:33 pm, Iarnrod <iarn...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > > > > > > On Jan 7, 9:10 pm, knowsknoth...(a)yahoo.com wrote: > > > > > > > On Jan 7, 7:48 pm, Iarnrod <iarn...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > On Jan 7, 6:33 pm, knowsknoth...(a)yahoo.com wrote: > > > > > > > > > On Jan 7, 5:27 pm, Iarnrod <iarn...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > >Denial, spew, lie, denial, spew, lie, arm wave, denial, claim of proof without proof, >arm wave, lie, denial, spew, arm wave, lie, spew, ad infinitum... > > > > > > > > From you, of course, since you cannot confront the TRUTH that all of > > > > > > > your psychically impossible claims have been proven FALSE!!! > > > > > > > > <sips Victory Iced Tea> > > > The Port > > Authoritys engineering consultant Buro Happold, helping with > > evaluation of the > > fireproofing upgrades, suggested the use of alternative > > materials (NIST 2005). Such > > alternative materials could have been spray-on nano-thermites > > substituted for intumescent > > paint or Interchar-like fireproofing primers (NASA 2006). It seems > > quite possible that > > this kind of substitution could have been made with few people > > noticing. > > I am still waiting for the explanation as to who actually was > driving the airplanes that hit the towers, and why these people > decided to coordinate their plans with the U.S. government. It's the > coincidence of the airplanes hitting the towers, and the "planned > demolition" of towers, that troubles me. > 1) Who were flying the airplanes, and why? > 2) How did they coordinate so well with the people who sprayed this > thermite in the right places? > 3) Are we suggesting that the terrorists who took over the > airplanes were fanatical CIA agents, ready to die for George Bush, > Jr.? > 4) Are we suggesting that these same people are quietly working > for Obama, or that Obama is covering up for the Bush administration? > Since it is so easy to spray thermite onto steel beams covertly, > I have a final question: > 5) How do you know it wasn't Arab terrorists who sprayed thermite > onto the steel beams in the towers? > Doesn't have to be Bush or the CIA, you know. Anyone with a > spray can could have done it. Look at all the graffiti on subways. Knowsknothing also ignores the FACT that thermite is physically incapable of producing what happened on 9/11. He believes thermite can defy gravity,
From: Curly Surmudgeon on 10 Jan 2010 22:56
On Sun, 10 Jan 2010 18:30:56 -0800, Darwin123 <drosen0000(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > I am still waiting for the explanation as to who actually was > driving the airplanes that hit the towers, and why these people decided > to coordinate their plans with the U.S. government. It's the coincidence > of the airplanes hitting the towers, and the "planned demolition" of > towers, that troubles me. Without consulting the fringe my take on 9/11 is that the perps are pretty much as described however the puppeteers have remained hidden. It is not necessary that those responsible be in the terrorist trenches only that they have means to direct the weapon. For instance the three middle-eastern men celebrating atop their office building as the towers fell were later found to be Mossad agents who escaped to Israel. How did 19 different men gain access simultaneously? That is not going to happen, especially when some were on watch lists, without the path being cleared before them. Read up on the Reichstagg fire. Nor is it possible for an airliner to be out of communication for so long in the Washington-New York corridor without interceptors being launched. It is simply not possible for so many failures to simultaneously occur. -- Curly ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Who's God Do You Kill For? ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ |