[W:57: 1585]Evidence that 9/11 was an inside job.

Quag · Mar 23, 2019

Re: Evidence that 9/11 was an inside job.[W:57]

Seriously Mike, Sander why bother he wont even attempt to provide any evidence and just spews the same thing over and over again he doesn't say anything t actually disprove and is not here to engage in debate so why engage at all?

ralphcdp · Mar 24, 2019

Re: Evidence that 9/11 was an inside job.[W:57]

Quag said:
Seriously ...?

The metabunkers still having trouble locating evidence for the US governments' story?

SanderO · Mar 25, 2019

Re: Evidence that 9/11 was an inside job.[W:57]

ralphcdp said:
The metabunkers still having trouble locating evidence for the US governments' story?

You need to take this over to Metabunk.org

ralphcdp · Mar 25, 2019

Re: Evidence that 9/11 was an inside job.[W:57]

SanderO said:
You need to take this over to Metabunk.org

The metabunkers here swore up and down that they didn't understand the reference and now you have "exposed" them for the gigantic baldfaced liars that everyone has long known they are.

The metabunkers at Mb.org are as full of it as the ones that hang out here.

SanderO · Mar 25, 2019

Re: Evidence that 9/11 was an inside job.[W:57]

ralphcdp said:
The metabunkers here swore up and down that they didn't understand the reference and now you have "exposed" them for the gigantic baldfaced liars that everyone has long known they are.

The metabunkers at Mb.org are as full of it as the ones that hang out here.

hahahahahahaha

You are a piece of work.

ralphcdp · Mar 25, 2019

Re: Evidence that 9/11 was an inside job.[W:57]

SanderO said:
hahahahahahaha

You are a piece of work.

metabunker stuff, Sander. Not becoming of a "professional architect".

zyzygy · Mar 25, 2019

Re: Evidence that 9/11 was an inside job.[W:57]

Is Meta Bunker related to Archie Bunker?

gamolon · Mar 25, 2019

Re: Evidence that 9/11 was an inside job.[W:57]

zyzygy said:
Is Meta Bunker related to Archie Bunker?

He certainly does have a thing for Mick West and the Metabunk (Metabunkers?) website doesn't he? I'm guessing he was banned from there and it has his panties in a bunch.

SanderO · Mar 25, 2019

Re: Evidence that 9/11 was an inside job.[W:57]

ralphcdp said:
metabunker stuff, Sander. Not becoming of a "professional architect".

Why not?

Gina · Mar 25, 2019

Re: Evidence that 9/11 was an inside job.[W:57]

Moderator's Warning:

The personal comments need to stop now. Stick to commenting towards the topic, not each other.

NWO_Spook · Mar 25, 2019

Re: Evidence that 9/11 was an inside job.[W:57]

mike2810 said:
Yet you rant on. Tell you what, I will bank the scientist, engineers, physicists, and professions against yours.
Your turn. Present your position. What scientist? Name one.

I won't stoop to your style of name calling. How about actually discussing the controlled demolition explanation

I can't believe that people still believe in this illogical story after all the failures of AE911T to prove their asinine assumptions. Controlled demolition just does not stand up to examination and it is an irrational premise.

How many times does this have to be rehashed? There is no evidence for a controlled demolition and the very idea lacks substance and credibility.

NWO_Spook · Mar 25, 2019

Re: Evidence that 9/11 was an inside job.[W:57]

gamolon said:
He certainly does have a thing for Mick West and the Metabunk (Metabunkers?) website doesn't he? I'm guessing he was banned from there and it has his panties in a bunch.

You may be right, because Mick and the others certainly know the subject.

ralphcdp · Mar 25, 2019

Re: Evidence that 9/11 was an inside job.[W:57]

NWO_Spook said:
I can't believe that people still believe in this illogical story after all the failures of AE911T to prove their asinine assumptions. Controlled demolition just does not stand up to examination and it is an irrational premise.

Everything AE911T has put forward has been proven by experiments. NIST did no experiments. NIST lied numerous times about numerous things.

How many times does this have to be rehashed? There is no evidence for a controlled demolition and the very idea lacks substance and credibility.[/QUOTE]

Your zero evidence is noted.

That's not what the FBI thinks. They wrote: "Mr Gage presents an interesting theory backed by thorough research and analysis."

The Federal Prosecutor Southern District of NY has agreed to convene a grand jury to investigate the controlled demolitions of WTCs 1, 2 & 7.

ralphcdp · Mar 25, 2019

Re: Evidence that 9/11 was an inside job.[W:57]

NWO_Spook said:
You may be right, because Mick and the others certainly know the subject.

A bunch of anonymous know nothings. West reviewed 911 Unmasked and his deceptions were so patently obvious that he was the only one who got a one out of five.

NWO_Spook · Mar 25, 2019

Re: Evidence that 9/11 was an inside job.[W:57]

ralphcdp said:
Everything AE911T has put forward has been proven by experiments.

I do not believe that is the case, unless of course you can supply evidence to the contrary.

NIST did no experiments.

They modelled the collapses based upon the data.

NIST lied numerous times about numerous things.

I've heard that line before and it does not stand up to scrutiny. They made some errors, sure, but they amended these errors in the appendices.

Your zero evidence is noted.

As is yours. What would you like me to supply?

That's not what the FBI thinks. They wrote: "Mr Gage presents an interesting theory backed by thorough research and analysis."

Do you have a link for that in context?

The Federal Prosecutor Southern District of NY has agreed to convene a grand jury to investigate the controlled demolitions of WTCs 1, 2 & 7.

Well, I don't think that will go very far, as the whole truther story is quite irrational.

Can you answer these simple questions? How did the supposed explosives survive the fires for so long until they were triggered? Why did they not trigger the supposed explosives in WTC7 when it was struck by WTC2? Why wait for hours after that?

The Nano-thermite story has been put to bed by Chris Mohr, and conventional explosives clearly were not used, as no residue was not picked up by the bomb squad dogs on site after the collapse. Furthermore, no DET cord or evidence of the Monroe effect were found in the rubble. The whole truther story appears to lack substance and seems to be more a belief system based upon faith.

NWO_Spook · Mar 25, 2019

Re: Evidence that 9/11 was an inside job.[W:57]

ralphcdp said:
A bunch of anonymous know nothings.

I would not say that.

West reviewed 911 Unmasked and his deceptions were so patently obvious that he was the only one who got a one out of five.

I would like the opportunity to view this '911 Unmasked', as I don't really believe your claim owing to the fact that you seem to be emotionally invested in this subject.

mike2810 · Mar 25, 2019

Re: Evidence that 9/11 was an inside job.[W:57]

What some are forgetting is the US Attorney had choice regarding the Grand Jury. By law they have to go through the process. So for AE911T to claim this as a big victory is a "red herring" stance.

NWO_Spook · Mar 25, 2019

Re: Evidence that 9/11 was an inside job.[W:57]

mike2810 said:
What some are forgetting is the US Attorney had choice regarding the Grand Jury. By law they have to go through the process. So for AE911T to claim this as a big victory is a "red herring" stance.

How many times have AE911T announced they're about to launch an investigation, or they were about to release a report that proved their claims? I've lost count, yet they always want more money. Tony failed and the university study never went anywhere, and there were more IIRC.

I truly doubt this new scam, er, I mean 'case' will eventuate, but what's the bet the money won't be refunded when it fails?

mike2810 · Mar 26, 2019

Re: Evidence that 9/11 was an inside job.[W:57]

NWO_Spook said:
How many times have AE911T announced they're about to launch an investigation, or they were about to release a report that proved their claims? I've lost count, yet they always want more money. Tony failed and the university study never went anywhere, and there were more IIRC.

I truly doubt this new scam, er, I mean 'case' will eventuate, but what's the bet the money won't be refunded when it fails?

The Lawyers’ Committee for 911 Inquiry has a donation drive going on for the FBI 9/11 Review Commission law suite. They want $30K by April 1, so they can proceed. Saw somewhere they have collected $19K so far. I remember a CT supporter years ago posting "follow the money". Seems like good advice. Follow the money Gage, et.al. want to produce nothing since 2001.

NWO_Spook · Mar 26, 2019

Re: Evidence that 9/11 was an inside job.[W:57]

ralphcdp said:
A bunch of anonymous know nothings. West reviewed 911 Unmasked and his deceptions were so patently obvious that he was the only one who got a one out of five.

I just finished the thread on this. Mick and the crew demolished many of the claims in the book and no one in the review thread challenged the facts presented. Griffin and co.'s other claims have been dealt with previously and repeatedly, and I think it is more accurate to state that Griffin is the individual who received 1 out if 5 (and that's generous), as is usual for his trash.

NWO_Spook · Mar 26, 2019

Re: Evidence that 9/11 was an inside job.[W:57]

Irwin Corey said:
I'll take that to mean you DON'T have an argument why 3 buildings failed into their foot print when only two were hit by airplanes. Now goodbye:2wave:!

I know this is resurrecting an old post, but I read this claim for about five pages knowing full well it was incorrect. The 'failed into their own footprint' claim is simply a truther meme of no substance. The debris field was much larger than the 'footprint' claim and damaged several buildings surrounding the site (e.g. Verizon, and the Deutsche Bank). WTC1 struck WTC7 on the face off camera from the famous footage, thus causing a massive gash in the structure. The resulting fires weakened the bulding and down it came.

The fire dept. noted that WTC7 was becoming unstable and ordered an evacuation of the area. The FDNY could not fight the fires in WTC7 owing to the fact that the tower collapses cut off the water supply to the site.

There is no evidence of foul play and Controlled Demolition is the only remotely feasible hypothesis posited among a wealth of inanities and this doesn't stand up to scrutiny for very long, for how did explosives (as many claim existed) survive the fires? No truther or individual sceptical of the NIST report ever answers this simple question. They will argue and insult all day long, but they cannot answer this question with any degree of credibility.

220px-World_Trade_Center_3_After_9-11_Attacks_With_Original_Building_Locations.jpg

SanderO · Mar 26, 2019

Re: Evidence that 9/11 was an inside job.[W:57]

Understanding is informed by ACCURATE observations and the TECHNICAL KNOWLEDGE related to the observations.

Truthers have neither accurate observations and technical knowledge hence their flawed "understanding" what they see.

gamolon · Mar 26, 2019

Re: Evidence that 9/11 was an inside job.[W:57]

SanderO said:
Truthers have neither accurate observations and technical knowledge hence their flawed "understanding" what they see.

There are also many supposed truthers who go into forums to just troll and have no intention of debating/discussing anything. Their sole purpose is to suck people in try and make them angry/get a reaction.

zyzygy · Mar 26, 2019

Re: Evidence that 9/11 was an inside job.[W:57]

gamolon said:
There are also many supposed truthers who go into forums to just troll and have no intention of debating/discussing anything. Their sole purpose is to suck people in try and make them angry/get a reaction.

Everybody needs a hobby.

Thoreau72 · Mar 26, 2019

Re: Evidence that 9/11 was an inside job.[W:57]

mike2810 said:
What some are forgetting is the US Attorney had choice regarding the Grand Jury. By law they have to go through the process. So for AE911T to claim this as a big victory is a "red herring" stance.

It is a big victory because, for however long this moment may last, the rule of law has prevailed. At least momentarily.

If the suit against the FBI for not following its congressional mandate also clears the first hurdle, it too will be a big victory.

With all manner of elected and appointed officials perjuring themselves before Congress with no punishment at all, many have begun noting that the rule of law is a joke, inside the Beltway.

The big victory is only that the first hurdle has been cleared. There are many more in the form of bureaucratic inertia and a corrupted political system entrenched inside the Beltway.