Proof they blew up WTC 7

Status
Not open for further replies.
9/11 was set up by the Illuminari whose leader is a female alien going by the name of "Angel" and plans to take over Ganymede through the WAR tournament.

The entire point of 9/11 is to create a distraction so that bio weapons can be put back to full production.
We have developed a new virus and Mulder and Skully aren't here to help you know. :devilish:
 
Conspiracy theories like this a symptom of a society in which people have too much time on their hands.

You really should spend a few years in a famine-striken region of, say, Africa. Fighting from one moment to the next for enough food and water to sustain your feeble existence. This might occupy your mind a bit, and give you less time for indulge in flights of fantasy.

It'll teach you what's important and what's not.
 
Sabastian said:
Razor04 said:
duncan36 said:
This whole thing isnt helped by the fact that other than on 9/11 NO steel-frame building had ever totally collasped from fire alone.
Click to expand...
Well the big thing here was that when the aircraft slammed into the building it ripped off all the insulation on the steel beams. All the fire proofing insulation is just sprayed on and can be blown away fairly easily. As soon as this insulation is gone the amount of time a steel structure can withstand fire is greatly reduced. Oh and the building collapsed the way they did due to the nature of their structural design and losing the insulation on those floors where the firing was burning the hottest.
Click to expand...

Not only that, the planes in question basically had full fuel tanks. Anyone care to guess at the temperatures reached when Jet fuel is ignited in those quantities?

On that note I can't believe this is still being debated. No one outside the high-jackers had intensions of destroying the World Trade Center. This conspiracy theory is for lack of a better word, idiotic. Give it up FFS.
Click to expand...

Let's talk about the heat of the flames when the planes hit. If they were so hot, why are the firefighters radio logs saying that the fires were under control and not that bad? They also said it sounded like bombs were going off in those buildings. Anyway, back on topic again, if the fires were so hot then how the hell could one of the terrorists passports show up on the ground without a scuff or scratch? That is illogical, you figure, if the terrorists were wearing clothes that were made out of the same material of their passports then they'd all be alive if they survived the impact. Come on folks there are smoking guns all over the place.
 
diarrhea_splatter said:
Not only that, the planes in question basically had full fuel tanks. Anyone care to guess at the temperatures reached when Jet fuel is ignited in those quantities?

On that note I can't believe this is still being debated. No one outside the high-jackers had intensions of destroying the World Trade Center. This conspiracy theory is for lack of a better word, idiotic. Give it up FFS.
Click to expand...

Let's talk about the heat of the flames when the planes hit. If they were so hot, why are the firefighters radio logs saying that the fires were under control and not that bad? They also said it sounded like bombs were going off in those buildings. Anyway, back on topic again, if the fires were so hot then how the hell could one of the terrorists passports show up on the ground without a scuff or scratch? That is illogical, you figure, if the terrorists were wearing clothes that were made out of the same material of their passports then they'd all be alive if they survived the impact. Come on folks there are smoking guns all over the place.[/quote]
right, because you knwo that in explosions and fires, nothing can get blown clear in the initial impact.....
"Bombs"?
maybe the firefighters hear stuff blowing up, indeed - but many things will explode and make loud noises, especially while being burnt.
As for what the firefighters said - whihc building are you tlaking about now? WTC 7 or the towers?
 
Althornin said:
diarrhea_splatter said:
Not only that, the planes in question basically had full fuel tanks. Anyone care to guess at the temperatures reached when Jet fuel is ignited in those quantities?

On that note I can't believe this is still being debated. No one outside the high-jackers had intensions of destroying the World Trade Center. This conspiracy theory is for lack of a better word, idiotic. Give it up FFS.
Click to expand...

Let's talk about the heat of the flames when the planes hit. If they were so hot, why are the firefighters radio logs saying that the fires were under control and not that bad? They also said it sounded like bombs were going off in those buildings. Anyway, back on topic again, if the fires were so hot then how the hell could one of the terrorists passports show up on the ground without a scuff or scratch? That is illogical, you figure, if the terrorists were wearing clothes that were made out of the same material of their passports then they'd all be alive if they survived the impact. Come on folks there are smoking guns all over the place.
Click to expand...
right, because you knwo that in explosions and fires, nothing can get blown clear in the initial impact.....
"Bombs"?
maybe the firefighters hear stuff blowing up, indeed - but many things will explode and make loud noises, especially while being burnt.
As for what the firefighters said - whihc building are you tlaking about now? WTC 7 or the towers?[/quote]

Gee I wonder, what buildings were hit that day in NY by airplanes? It even says in the quote you quoted from me :rolleyes:
 
diarrhea_splatter said:
Here's a link to a video that Lays out all the facts,
http://www.infowars.com/print/Sept11/alex_analysis.htm

And tell me that I'm still wrong.
Click to expand...

Lol, you're still wrong. Seriously, if you have to ramble about the definition of "pull it" for several minutes like the guy does in that clip, and still make no sense, then something's just not right. In fact, if he admitted to "pull it" that way, why not just call him up to verify that this is what he meant. It should be much quicker than to do this indepth analysis.
 
Humus said:
Lol, you're still wrong. Seriously, if you have to ramble about the definition of "pull it" for several minutes like the guy does in that clip, and still make no sense, then something's just not right. In fact, if he admitted to "pull it" that way, why not just call him up to verify that this is what he meant. It should be much quicker than to do this indepth analysis.
Click to expand...
Come on humus, you dont get it do you. He has already been replaced by an identical clone (govermnent controlled). And not even his family can tell the difference. :devilish:

later,
epic
 
diarrhea_splatter said:
Here's a link to a video that Lays out all the facts,
http://www.infowars.com/print/Sept11/alex_analysis.htm

And tell me that I'm still wrong.
Click to expand...
The thing I found most amusing about that vid was all the things that he got wrong. The biggest one I noticed (and he says this several times) is that WTC 7 collapsed at 4:35 PM EST. Now I have the FEMA report open right now and it says that they collapsed at 5:20 PM EST. Who should I believe? Some rambling guy? Or an official report with facts checked over and over and confirmed by witnesses?

Let's take a little side trip here...cause I think this is pretty important. Let's say for a second that the WTC was supposed to have been blown up (which they weren't). Explain why the Pentagon was hit then at roughly the same time and in the same method? You know the US Government just wants to blow up their newly renovated portion of the Pentagon and kill a lot of their military people. It just doesn't add up at all. This guy is just twisting his facts to whatever he wants. We see stuff like this all the time on forums. My personal favorite example of this is nForceMan over at nVnews.net. Just go to the page below and scroll down to where he describes the minimum precision of DX9 and how he arrived at his conclusion. It is absolutely hilarious what he says...and is a perfect example of what this guy (Alex Jones) is doing.

4th Post from the bottom...

EDIT: I should add one important thing... If like he says in the video they did use Asbestos insulation then it is even more likely for it to have been blown away. Asbestos gets very fragile as it ages and would have crumbled to dust in a situation such as 9-11 leading to no protection of the steel which would have had a much reduced life that would lead to collapse.

EDIT 2: The only part of that vid that I actually agree with is when he says that Bush is a tele-prompter reading idiot.
 
Razor04 said:
diarrhea_splatter said:
Here's a link to a video that Lays out all the facts,
http://www.infowars.com/print/Sept11/alex_analysis.htm

And tell me that I'm still wrong.
Click to expand...
The thing I found most amusing about that vid was all the things that he got wrong. The biggest one I noticed (and he says this several times) is that WTC 7 collapsed at 4:35 PM EST. Now I have the FEMA report open right now and it says that they collapsed at 5:20 PM EST. Who should I believe? Some rambling guy? Or an official report with facts checked over and over and confirmed by witnesses?

Let's take a little side trip here...cause I think this is pretty important. Let's say for a second that the WTC was supposed to have been blown up (which they weren't). Explain why the Pentagon was hit then at roughly the same time and in the same method? You know the US Government just wants to blow up their newly renovated portion of the Pentagon and kill a lot of their military people. It just doesn't add up at all. This guy is just twisting his facts to whatever he wants. We see stuff like this all the time on forums. My personal favorite example of this is nForceMan over at nVnews.net. Just go to the page below and scroll down to where he describes the minimum precision of DX9 and how he arrived at his conclusion. It is absolutely hilarious what he says...and is a perfect example of what this guy (Alex Jones) is doing.
Click to expand...

In regards to the FEMA report, I don't believe anything FEMA says. Why you might ask, there's plenty of proof that they are corrupt as our government. Now the Pentagon, let me ask everyone, has anyone seen the picture of the airplane that hit the Pentagon? You want to know why no one has seen a picture, because it wasn't a jet from the major airlines. Witnesses have said it looked like a small prop plane to a Lear Jet, but that's neither here nor there. When it comes to the Pentagon, I believe it was a combination of explosives and some other outside factor (be it prop plane or lear jet). I mean, how convenient that the only portion of the Pentagon that blew up was the remodeled portion. Our government could've easily placed explosives in that building, proof is out already that they new way in advance that 9/11 was going to happen(from foreign countries and our own intelligence). So why not have attacks in more than one place, because it makes the American people feel hopeless and lost.
 
Let's go one step up.

9/11 never occured, neither has the bloodbaths of WW1 and WW2.
The Belgian's nor the Jews were massacred and there really is no Rome.
 
diarrhea_splatter said:
They also said it sounded like bombs were going off in those buildings.
Click to expand...
I know this doesn’t fit in with your theories but did you ever stop to think that maybe the “sounds of bombs going offâ€￾ was caused by exploding fire extinguishers? A building of that size would have a considerable number per floor and, as so happens to be he case, they would explode when exposed to fire.
 
diarrhea_splatter said:
I mean, how convenient that the only portion of the Pentagon that blew up was the remodeled portion. Our government could've easily placed explosives in that building, proof is out already that they new way in advance that 9/11 was going to happen(from foreign countries and our own intelligence). So why not have attacks in more than one place, because it makes the American people feel hopeless and lost.
Click to expand...
I still don't get why you would blow up the remodeled portion. To me it makes much more sense to blow up something that already had funds allocated for a complete renovation...not to blow up something you just spent a ton of money on remodeling. And before you say that the remodeling allowed for an easy cover to placing explosives keep in mind that place is huge...and has a ton of secret places. My friends father worked under an IBM contract for the Pentagon years ago and went to places in the building that no one had been to for years and years. And the whole thing about blowing up more sites and all...seriously man you are making yourself look like a total moron.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

W
Cagiest retraction I've ever seen...(I think)...;)
2 3
Replies
48
Views
8K
Ollo
O
D
101 Amazing earth facts! (Must read - test your IQ :))
Replies
0
Views
4K
Deepak
D
Back
Top