I'm about a week late on the 9/11 stuff

WarBuddha said:
I have no idea how the fuck you would demolish a 1400-1700 foot building.
Click to expand...

But you certainly know for a fact that it doesn't require or benefit from explosives based on the top. That's good to know and a very typical example of the type of idiot who believes that the equation (2 planes = three towers in the dust) is valid.
 
:lol:

I'm glad that TW's resident experts on how to commercially destroy a 1400 foot building which has never happened before are out today.

Let me ask you this.

In order to plant the explosives where they could be set off and work correctly you would have to know exactly where the planes were going to hit, correct?
 
WarBuddha said:
Let me ask you this.

In order to plant the explosives where they could be set off and work correctly you would have to know exactly where the planes were going to hit, correct?
Click to expand...

Obviously not. You could plant the explosives and have the planes ram the towers where ever just for show so that morons like you would go after dem darn terrists!!
 
absent said:
Obviously not. You could plant the explosives and have the planes ram the towers where ever just for show so that morons like you would go after dem darn terrists!!
Click to expand...

what?

You understand how demolishing a building works, right? It's a science. It's a timing of explosives in several locations at one time that create a building to fall more in on itself then out so it doesn't damage anything around it. The complications and math that would be required to bring down a 1400 foot building that was hit BY A FUCKING AIRLINER would be ridiculous.

The government had prior knowledge that the attacks were going to occur, this I have no doubt of. But this whole they planted explosives in the towers bullshit is hilarious.
 
Nash said:
Seriously tho, anyone who actually believes the official story about 9/11 is beyond retarded or rather, was successfully brainwashed.
Click to expand...

I saw two planes go into two buildings. I then saw them fall. I then saw another building next to them fall. I didn't see anything beyond that. I concluded that the two planes caused this chain of events.


Was I brainwashed? If yes, who brainwashed me? My eyes?
 
A challenge to conspiracy theorists:

1) Find a steel frame building at least 40 stories high

2) Which takes up a whole city block

3) And is a "Tube in a tube" design

4) Which came off its core columns at the bottom floors (Earthquake, fire, whatever - WTC 7)

5) Which was struck by another building or airliner and had structural damage as a result.

6) And weakened by fire for over 6 hours

7) And had trusses that were bolted on with two 5/8" bolts.
 
WarBuddha said:
what?

You understand how demolishing a building works, right? It's a science. It's a timing of explosives in several locations at one time that create a building to fall more in on itself then out so it doesn't damage anything around it. The complications and math that would be required to bring down a 1400 foot building that was hit BY A FUCKING AIRLINER would be ridiculous.
Click to expand...

What about the top explosion? Would that have been set to add a free-fall mass on top of the rest of the building after a plane hit, to stabilize the vector? I don't know, but it's plain obvious that the towers were demolished. If the planes had brought the towers down, they'd have obviously fallen to their sides instead of straight down, causing tens of thousands of casualties. The jews calculated the rough amount of casualties needed to get their intended result. 10,000+ dead would have had people demanding a real investigation. 3,000 was enough to get the idiots simply demanding blood.
 
Free fall?

Collapse3.jpg
 
This is getting carried away. The method of execution of WTC-D is irrelevant. I don't care if the bacciferous fart of a caged macaw did the trick. The real cheese is where the bread crumbs lead: who benefited? The jews did. That's where the story lies.
 
Similar to the assassination of JFK, there was many people involved and lot of evidence but to this day the official story remains on Oswald.

Pearl Harbor now has enough collaborative evidence to point to prior knowledge of the attack but it was allowed to take place to get America into the war.

9/11 is no different

Rinse and repeat
 
Dresden said:
Similar to the assassination of JFK, there was many people involved and lot of evidence but to this day the official story remains on Oswald.

Pearl Harbor now has enough collaborative evidence to point to prior knowledge of the attack but it was allowed to take place to get America into the war.

9/11 is no different

Rinse and repeat
Click to expand...

Are you saying that there was intelligence prior to 9/11 indicating such an attack would occur yet it wasn't acted upon? Or are you possibly saying that the buildings were intentionally demolished? I would believe the former...the latter seems quite ridiculous.
 
Right. Keep in mind I'm not trying to convince you - you were stupid enough to sign up for the Red White and Blue international mass murder machine, so it's not like you'd admit you worked for a criminal entity and are therefore a thug yourself. I'm just pointing out clearly observable facts to the sideliners.
 
The "logic" in that video is interesting. It's similar to many arguments supporting intelligent design. Basically some sort of mathematical model is being used to show that what just occurred couldn't have happened. Then the person concludes something else caused it. The other option, that the model itself is wrong, seems to be less often considered in these videos. For example, the guy could stop and say, "Hey I see no evidence that anything but the airplanes brought down the buildings," and then sit down and try to figure out where his previous logic went wrong.

That or he could just assume that he's always right and knows all and never makes mistakes in analysis and never has a lack of information and never misunderstands kinetic and static physics theories or that those theories might have flaws and post videos about it on youtube. It's funny the different intellectual paths people choose.
 
WarBuddha said:
That's an awesome perversion of physics right there. I like how he removes all the other factors involved.
Click to expand...
I would say that almost 1.600 verified professional architects and engineers know a bit more about this then any of us. Not counting dozens of witnesses saying they heard explosions prior of the towers collapsing.

Just saying.
 
oh, he forgot to add in the rotation of the earth and the wind. the point is that this is not a hypothetical model, these are basic laws of the universe that are not being followed. the distance between what is observed and what would occur as a result of the official explanation is not a minor error in the model.
 
absent said:
In that case we'd have to kill you for believing that two planes hitting two extremely well reinforced skyscrapers in different spots at different heights is enough to destabilize them to the point of bringing the towers down in free-fall mode. I mean, that's the height of idiocy I reckon. Must be painful to tie your shoelaces, being so fucking stupid.
Click to expand...

I am pretty sure that sums it up...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top