• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Weakened steel, NIST report, and Dubai tower fire[W:226]

Thoreau72 said:
It's a fable Mike, just a story. No Boeing at Shanksville, no Boeing at the Pentagon, and the aircraft at WTC were not as represented by the official story.

So if you're actually curious about those questions you've asked, inform yourself by reading the official accounts. Keep in mind that the data for 77, and likely the others, is utterly fabricated.
Click to expand...

Then you are saying that the majority of information that Capt. Bob, (P4911T) is a fabrication and lies. Thank you.

Interesting when P4911T supporters were posting on this site, you didn't challenge them. :3oops:
 
mike2810 said:
Then you are saying that the majority of information that Capt. Bob, (P4911T) is a fabrication and lies. Thank you.

Interesting when P4911T supporters were posting on this site, you didn't challenge them. :3oops:
Click to expand...

No, that's what YOU are saying, not what I am saying about Balsamo. You are assassinating his character, nothing more, and making it look like debate to the untrained eye. Balsamo is one of many private individuals, fellow citizens, who spent his own money and effort to seek the truth, to better understand what had just happened. Private investigators.

And a certain amount of that phenomenon happened because of the very obvious government coverup and lack of investigation. For 2 years, Bush & Co refused to convene an investigation. They had all the answers by 5 that afternoon, but that morning they didn't have a clue, as Vigilant Guardian entered day 2 or 3.

If the government had done its job, private investigators would not be necessary. But the government did its level best to tell a story rather than seek the truth. And that story is starting to crumble for anybody who takes the time to look at it.
 
Thoreau72 said:
No, that's what YOU are saying, not what I am saying about Balsamo. You are assassinating his character, nothing more, and making it look like debate to the untrained eye. Balsamo is one of many private individuals, fellow citizens, who spent his own money and effort to seek the truth, to better understand what had just happened. Private investigators.

And a certain amount of that phenomenon happened because of the very obvious government coverup and lack of investigation. For 2 years, Bush & Co refused to convene an investigation. They had all the answers by 5 that afternoon, but that morning they didn't have a clue, as Vigilant Guardian entered day 2 or 3.

If the government had done its job, private investigators would not be necessary. But the government did its level best to tell a story rather than seek the truth. And that story is starting to crumble for anybody who takes the time to look at it.
Click to expand...

Balsamo has NO respect or character ... simple as that.

IF he were honest he would NOT be spewing his tripe in his wee controlled forum but in a proper PROFESSIONAL LEVEL MANNER to fellow professionals ... but no he prefers feeding lay believers like you idiotic lies and claims.


Also ... exercises happening in the ARCTIC CIRCLE involving nuclear BOMBERS on MILITARY RADAR had zero effect on events on CIVILIAN RADAR in New York.

Says EVERYTHING ...
 
Thoreau72 said:
No, that's what YOU are saying, not what I am saying about Balsamo. You are assassinating his character, nothing more, and making it look like debate to the untrained eye. Balsamo is one of many private individuals, fellow citizens, who spent his own money and effort to seek the truth, to better understand what had just happened. Private investigators.

And a certain amount of that phenomenon happened because of the very obvious government coverup and lack of investigation. For 2 years, Bush & Co refused to convene an investigation. They had all the answers by 5 that afternoon, but that morning they didn't have a clue, as Vigilant Guardian entered day 2 or 3.

If the government had done its job, private investigators would not be necessary. But the government did its level best to tell a story rather than seek the truth. And that story is starting to crumble for anybody who takes the time to look at it.
Click to expand...

Then explain if there was "no plane" at the Pentagon why Capt Bob made such a big issue over Vmo+?

You cannot have it both ways HD. It shows that there is no clear concise explanation coming from the 911 "truth" movement. You all cannot agree even on the basics.
 
wist43 said:
Sounds like you're determined not to watch... "official theory" people are like AGW shills - disproving the theory is out of bounds.
Click to expand...
Don't waste your time making silly comments.

If you have a point to make by sound argument the make YOUR argument.

There are many so called truthers - back in the day when the truth movement adopted the name "truther" for themselves it was an honourable term. Genuine seekers of truth who were a pleasure to assist as they gained understanding.

We have fallen a long way from those high ideals.

So - if you want to demonstrate part of YOUR claim by use of a video be clear as to what you are asserting and what aspect of video evidence you are using to support fact.

And don't play the stupid trick I identified - pre announcing that you were playing "Texas Sharpshooter". Sure it would help if all so called "truthers" presented a summary list of the debating tricks and logical flaws they relied - would save a lot of wasted time trying to identify what the person was trying to say with a video.

There is no issue of factual assertion about the main issues of 9/11 concerns that has not been answered. My own interest area is explaining WTC Twin towers collapses - the engineering varies from straight forward visually obvious in the case of progression stage to multi factor complicated in the case of the initiation stage. I enjoy explaining reality for genuine truth seeks - few that those persons are these days.

Bottom line for Twin Towers collapse is there was no need for CD. So if anyone did perform CD they wasted their time. Cannot even put it in their CV next time they apply for a job as a terrorist or "inside jobber"..."Performed totally unnecessary worlds biggest CD when it wasn't needed" sort of doesn't sell your skills and relevant experience in a job application - does it?

So as for your silly innuendo "disproving the theory is out of bounds" - the word is not "theory" - it is "hypothesis" and if you ever have one put it on show and either I or some other member will carve the nonsense into little pieces for you. alternatively find some new aspect that has not already been rebutted and post a real challenge for me or some other members.

Or - if you must pre-announce the trick(s) you intend to use - then why not make it a competition "I rely on four logical fallacies and three debating tricks in this video - see if you can identify them?"
 
I_Gaze_At_The_Blue said:
What's to watch, it is NOT something new or unique but just the same old derp recycled !!!
Click to expand...
Neatly said.

I just had a bit of fun putting it in more detail. ;)

The lazy ploy of "I cannot make a clearly stated claim backed by reasoned argument so all of you watch this video and see if you can guess what I am claiming and what my arguments are"...

...does become tedious. And - stripped to bare essentials - is is nothing more than a visual "lie by innuendo". :doh
 
The problem is kids - I haven't seen a single one of you "official theory" shills prove anything.

Steel frame buildings do not collapse due to office fires - they may crumble bit by bit, but they do not universally fall to the ground in a heep; yahoo's with no flying experience can't fly commercial airliners over VMO, hit relatively small targets, and look like the Red Baron doing it - it's a laughable assertion; the "pancake theory" is complete nonsense, b/c it violates the laws of physics; on and on with this nonsense...

NIST's assertions are absurd - and no attempts on the part of amateur know-nothings like you yahoo's can make it less implausible.

As I said in an earlier post, if it were just one miracle, or one implausible event, or one violation of the laws of physics, or one assault upon the grounds of common sense - then I I'd probably let it go and chalk it up to ***t happens - but NIST, and you guys, are saying that miracles are the norm for just about everything to do with this false flag event.

At some point, an honest, logical person has to conclude that there is something rotten in Denmark.
 
wist43 said:
The problem is kids - I haven't seen a single one of you "official theory" shills prove anything.
Click to expand...

Except you HAVE but you just PRETEND to yourself otherwise ...

wist43 said:
Steel frame buildings do not collapse due to office fires -
Click to expand...

FIRST HUGE ERROR on your part ... for on what planet is having planes SLAM in DUMPING JET FUEL that triggered INSTANT ACCELERATED FIRES across MULTIPLE FLOORS in ANY way your every day "office fire".

Way to go wist with the inane and inept SPIN that these were just "office fires" ... they were NOTHING even remotely similar to everyday wastepaper bin fires.

Seriously, do you truthers actually think through this stuff before parroting the standard truther mantras !!!

wist43 said:
they may crumble bit by bit, but they do not universally fall to the ground in a heep;
Click to expand...

Really ... so SHOULD be easy wist for you to SHOW that in ... you know ... say a FIREFIGHTER TECHNICAL MANUAL of how buildings react to fire.

Won't it !!!





What's that wist ........ you can't show it .... i wonder WHY !!!

wist43 said:
yahoo's with no flying experience can't fly commercial airliners over VMO, hit relatively small targets, and look like the Red Baron doing it - it's a laughable assertion;
Click to expand...

MORE FAIL for you wist ... for as the hijackers were all LICENCED PILOTS ... therefore fully qualified then they sure COULD easily fly into what are LARGE buildings.

Like you even know what VMO is !!!

Parroting from those morons of Balsamos is a fail you know ... the targets were NOT "relatively small" whatsoever ... they were LARGER than the RUNWAYS pilots and planes use ... so EASY then ... NOR was any of them doing Top Gun type stuff, despite what Pillocks4DaTwoof say.

wist43 said:
the "pancake theory" is complete nonsense,
Click to expand...

More HUGE fail for you ... for since the "pancake theory" is NOT the official one anyway, your complaint about it is MOOT ... utterly meaningless and pointless.

The "pancake theory" came from FEMA ... who did their OWN UNOFFICIAL study with was SUPERCEDED by the NIST ones which are the official ones ... so all the truther complaints about "pancaking" are just EMPTY HOT AIR in the end.

Good job wist ... much ado about nothing ... winning tactic fo'sure...:roll:

wist43 said:
b/c it violates the laws of physics; on and on with this nonsense...
Click to expand...

And of course you WON'T actually be able to NAME ... never mind articulate how any law of physics was so violated ... WILL YOU ???

As if such a thing is even possible in the physical realities of this universe anyhow !!!

wist43 said:
NIST's assertions are absurd -
Click to expand...

And once more, of course you WON'T actually be able to name or point out ONE single thing the reports get wrong ... WILL YOU ???

For, guaranteed, you will NOT have read a single word of them, but instead just PARROT what truther sites have TOLD you to say about them.

Nothing if not predictable are truthers.

wist43 said:
and no attempts on the part of amateur know-nothings like you yahoo's can make it less implausible.

As I said in an earlier post, if it were just one miracle, or one implausible event, or one violation of the laws of physics, or one assault upon the grounds of common sense - then I I'd probably let it go and chalk it up to ***t happens - but NIST, and you guys, are saying that miracles are the norm for just about everything to do with this false flag event.

At some point, an honest, logical person has to conclude that there is something rotten in Denmark.
Click to expand...

And the rest is just your typical truther self-soothing commenting attempt !!!
 
mike2810 said:
Then explain if there was "no plane" at the Pentagon why Capt Bob made such a big issue over Vmo+?

You cannot have it both ways HD. It shows that there is no clear concise explanation coming from the 911 "truth" movement. You all cannot agree even on the basics.
Click to expand...

Because the official story SAYS there was an airliner crash at the Pentagon, and to support its fantasy, it offered "records" from the FDR that was supposedly on the fantasy airplane, and among other fabricated information on that FDR was the note that the airplane was doing Vmo +90 as Hani flew it across the lawn in ground effect.

And that's the point Mike--all the "evidence" fabricated and introduced by the government shows it is contrived. The story is impossible in so many ways.
 
Thoreau72 said:
Because the official story SAYS there was an airliner crash at the Pentagon, and to support its fantasy, it offered "records" from the FDR that was supposedly on the fantasy airplane, and among other fabricated information on that FDR was the note that the airplane was doing Vmo +90 as Hani flew it across the lawn in ground effect.

And that's the point Mike--all the "evidence" fabricated and introduced by the government shows it is contrived. The story is impossible in so many ways.
Click to expand...

So NO actual real evidence or proof ... just YOUR unqualified opinion and personal incredulity then.

Like that counts !!!
 
Funny too how for this supposedly contrived evidence ... you truther lot CAN'T even get any FOREIGN nation to help you out to prove it ... funny that !!!

Not like the US isn't loathed and hated in much of the world, so REALLY REALLY bizarre how you CAN'T get a single one of you to host your claims ...
 
Thoreau72 said:
Because the official story SAYS there was an airliner crash at the Pentagon, and to support its fantasy, it offered "records" from the FDR that was supposedly on the fantasy airplane, and among other fabricated information on that FDR was the note that the airplane was doing Vmo +90 as Hani flew it across the lawn in ground effect.

And that's the point Mike--all the "evidence" fabricated and introduced by the government shows it is contrived. The story is impossible in so many ways.
Click to expand...

Ground effect again.

Ground effect would not have remotely deflected the aircraft's flight path.
 
wist43 said:
The problem is kids - I haven't seen a single one of you "official theory" shills prove anything.

Steel frame buildings do not collapse due to office fires - they may crumble bit by bit, but they do not universally fall to the ground in a heep; yahoo's with no flying experience can't fly commercial airliners over VMO, hit relatively small targets, and look like the Red Baron doing it - it's a laughable assertion; the "pancake theory" is complete nonsense, b/c it violates the laws of physics; on and on with this nonsense...

NIST's assertions are absurd - and no attempts on the part of amateur know-nothings like you yahoo's can make it less implausible.

As I said in an earlier post, if it were just one miracle, or one implausible event, or one violation of the laws of physics, or one assault upon the grounds of common sense - then I I'd probably let it go and chalk it up to ***t happens - but NIST, and you guys, are saying that miracles are the norm for just about everything to do with this false flag event.

At some point, an honest, logical person has to conclude that there is something rotten in Denmark.
Click to expand...

"Hit relatively small targets"

Targets substantially larger than every pilot hits every day of their lives, you mean.
 
wist43 said:
No, not satisfied... you try to make it sound like flying a 767 is easier than flying a cessna - or that it is as easy as getting your car and driving. That doesn't wash...

This video has a pilot and a novice flyer in a simulator trying to replicate the speeds. The Pentagon segment starts at about the 51:00 mark.
Click to expand...

No, I didn't suggest flying a 767 is easier than flying a Cessna. Pay attention.

I'm saying crashing is easier than landing. I'm saying what you believe is precise flying was actually quite imprecise. I'm saying what you think required expect maneuvering did not require precision at all.

And you have no rebuttal for that.

Hitting the world's largest office building isn't hard to do.
 
Last edited:
Thoreau72 said:
Because the official story SAYS there was an airliner crash at the Pentagon, and to support its fantasy, it offered "records" from the FDR that was supposedly on the fantasy airplane, and among other fabricated information on that FDR was the note that the airplane was doing Vmo +90 as Hani flew it across the lawn in ground effect.

And that's the point Mike--all the "evidence" fabricated and introduced by the government shows it is contrived. The story is impossible in so many ways.
Click to expand...

Thanks for your opinion. As you know, it is one I do not share nor does the evidence support what you just claimed. :peace

So which one is correct?, The fly over, a missile, or a bomb for the Pentagon?. Which one do you accept as the most likely to have occurred. You may have answered, but tell us again.

And you see no issues or problems with any of those three explanations?
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom