WTC7, the smoking gun that just will not go away until the traitors are rounded up

Originally posted by Alfie1

Originally posted by SimontheMagus

Originally posted by Alfie1

So this woman just imagined the 82% burns she suffered in the lobby ?

today.msnbc.msn.com...

Nice try, but I said "all the explosions". It seems that the jet fuel got there before the "plane" did, according to your version of things.

WTC Eyewitness " a bomb went off in the lobby first,then a plane hit"

www.youtube.com...

edit on 28-5-2012 by SimontheMagus because: (no reason given)

Thats your prime witness ? A man visibly shocked and shaking who says " I think" ?

He's not the only one. Maybe all these people were imagining things eh? Only YOU know, because you were there, right?

Listen for yourself....

9/11 CLEAR bomb going off in WTC BEFORE first plane EVER hit

www.youtube.com...

Short version....nobody said "I think"

www.youtube.com...

Originally posted by GiodanoBruno



Um,,,You have been doing this for 6+ years. I'd say you've been employee of the month more than once. You're doing a great job.

You can keep slinging insults and baseless accusations if you like, or you can try to engage with what I'm saying. I imagine you won't though, so I won't be responding to you again.

Originally posted by Varemia


You have proof of the opposite then? I proposed an alternative to the interpretation that truthers have of the video, and it happens to align with the official story. You tell me I'm wrong because you want me to be wrong.

If you look a couple of pages back the moderators warned you lot of using the word 'truthers'.

Originally posted by kidtwist

Originally posted by GiodanoBruno

Um,,,You have been doing this for 6+ years. I'd say you've been employee of the month more than once. You're doing a great job.

6+ years! Jeez, that's some serious dedication to a government story that they vehemently say is true.
If the OS is a wrap, a clear cut case, as they say, who on this earth would dedicate so much time protecting that story?! Very, very strange behaviour don't you think!?! They get really quite hostile over it too!

I notice that 2008 is a year when a few more OS upholders popped up, some interesting stuff happened that year, and it seems a damage limitation campaign was initiated further.

If you search in google, and use the terms 'lie busters' and 'above top secret' you'll find some interesting info.

A tip. When you attack the poster and not the content of their posts you make your case look flimsy.

NIST FOIA: Cindy Weil 15-17 (WTC2 Collapse, 9:59am)



Explosive flashes seen on left hand side, just above the damage point as WTC2 collapses, there is a slow motion version on youtube too.

As you can see, WTC1 does not look that bad, certainly not bad enough to collapse.

Also, in the slow motion version you can see a broken steel column above the damage point, how could the column be damaged when nothing hit it or crushed it? In fact the top section tips to one side first, so there was even less force and weight from the top section.

Originally posted by TrickoftheShade

Originally posted by kidtwist

Originally posted by Varemia

You have proof of the opposite then? I proposed an alternative to the interpretation that truthers have of the video, and it happens to align with the official story. You tell me I'm wrong because you want me to be wrong.

If you look a couple of pages back the moderators warned you lot of using the word 'truthers'.

Sir! Sir! He did a naughty thing...

For people so proud of your anti-authoritarian credentials you guys are awfully quick to invoke it when your thin skin gets prickled.

I'm just reminding you lot what the moderator said, you lot are quick to call in the mods when it suits you.
Keep to the rules, they exist for a reason, mods post warnings for reasons, adhere to them.

Originally posted by TrickoftheShade

Originally posted by kidtwist

Originally posted by GiodanoBruno

Um,,,You have been doing this for 6+ years. I'd say you've been employee of the month more than once. You're doing a great job.

6+ years! Jeez, that's some serious dedication to a government story that they vehemently say is true.
If the OS is a wrap, a clear cut case, as they say, who on this earth would dedicate so much time protecting that story?! Very, very strange behaviour don't you think!?! They get really quite hostile over it too!

I notice that 2008 is a year when a few more OS upholders popped up, some interesting stuff happened that year, and it seems a damage limitation campaign was initiated further.

If you search in google, and use the terms 'lie busters' and 'above top secret' you'll find some interesting info.

A tip. When you attack the poster and not the content of their posts you make your case look flimsy.

Which poster did I attack? Can you be specific? I dont see anyone personally being attacked in my comment!
The evidence we present speaks for itself.

Originally posted by TrickoftheShade

Originally posted by kidtwist

Originally posted by GiodanoBruno

Um,,,You have been doing this for 6+ years. I'd say you've been employee of the month more than once. You're doing a great job.

6+ years! Jeez, that's some serious dedication to a government story that they vehemently say is true.
If the OS is a wrap, a clear cut case, as they say, who on this earth would dedicate so much time protecting that story?! Very, very strange behaviour don't you think!?! They get really quite hostile over it too!

I notice that 2008 is a year when a few more OS upholders popped up, some interesting stuff happened that year, and it seems a damage limitation campaign was initiated further.

If you search in google, and use the terms 'lie busters' and 'above top secret' you'll find some interesting info.

A tip. When you attack the poster and not the content of their posts you make your case look flimsy.

The content of their posts is exactly what is being discussed here. There is no "attack". A [SNIP] posting history is quite relevant to the discussion.

How ironic to see an OS'er using the word "flimsy" when it comes to our "case". Well at least we have a case. All YOU have is a perp-spun fairy tale that only a shrinking percentage of dumbed down Americans are stupid enough to believe.

Originally posted by SimontheMagus

Originally posted by Alfie1

Originally posted by SimontheMagus

Originally posted by Alfie1

So this woman just imagined the 82% burns she suffered in the lobby ?

today.msnbc.msn.com...

Nice try, but I said "all the explosions". It seems that the jet fuel got there before the "plane" did, according to your version of things.

WTC Eyewitness " a bomb went off in the lobby first,then a plane hit"

www.youtube.com...

edit on 28-5-2012 by SimontheMagus because: (no reason given)

Thats your prime witness ? A man visibly shocked and shaking who says " I think" ?

He's not the only one. Maybe all these people were imagining things eh? Only YOU know, because you were there, right?

Listen for yourself....

9/11 CLEAR bomb going off in WTC BEFORE first plane EVER hit

www.youtube.com...

Short version....nobody said "I think"

www.youtube.com...

edit on 28-5-2012 by SimontheMagus because: (no reason given)

edit on 28-5-2012 by SimontheMagus because: (no reason given)

No, one girl says "I believe" . Point is though these girls were obviously evacuated, after the plane strike, through a devastated lobby. Neither claims to have been in the lobby when it was damaged so they are in no position to know what came first.

Originally posted by Varemia

Originally posted by GiodanoBruno
Did you get a chance to interview these two men sometime after this video was taken?

"If anything"???? «You have no proof of a pancake-drop happening,just assumptions. Were you filming the collapse(real time) with an infrared camera?. One would think if a pancake drop did occur we would see at least 2 or 3 slaps visibly compressed in the rubble. No?


Take care

You have proof of the opposite then? I proposed an alternative to the interpretation that truthers have of the video, and it happens to align with the official story. You tell me I'm wrong because you want me to be wrong.

My proof is my signature. Take a good look at those #'s ,and ask yourself when has something so small so weak pulverized something so large so strong. Never and it will never happen.


Its simple logic. I don't use sources,videos or eyewitness accounts. The answer is right there below .

Originally posted by kidtwist

Originally posted by TrickoftheShade

Originally posted by kidtwist

Originally posted by Varemia

You have proof of the opposite then? I proposed an alternative to the interpretation that truthers have of the video, and it happens to align with the official story. You tell me I'm wrong because you want me to be wrong.

If you look a couple of pages back the moderators warned you lot of using the word 'truthers'.

Sir! Sir! He did a naughty thing...

For people so proud of your anti-authoritarian credentials you guys are awfully quick to invoke it when your thin skin gets prickled.

I'm just reminding you lot what the moderator said, you lot are quick to call in the mods when it suits you.
Keep to the rules, they exist for a reason, mods post warnings for reasons, adhere to them.

Yes sir.

reply to post by GiodanoBruno


Swallow your opinion? When the reality of the day shows just how wrong you are? Why would we do that?

reply to post by SimontheMagus


Some more eyewitnesses to fireballs exploding out of elevators, smell of kerosene, burns etc :-

sites.google.com...

Originally posted by waypastvne

Originally posted by GiodanoBruno

767's fuel distributes within the wings and fuselage main tank.

The center tank of both AA11 and UA175 were empty. AA11 had an estimated 66,100 pounds (9,664gal) total in the wing tanks

Well thank you sirb for proving me wrong. And welcome , is this your first time supporting the Truther movement. I have a feeling you will make a great addition to the movement.

Your point proves that fire really wasn't a factor. Because for fire to really be a factor ,the fuselage is the only part of the plane that "could" puncture thru the steel skin of the towers.

So if what you say is true there was no fuel really doing any damage?

I applaud you sir!! Bravo!!

Originally posted by Alfie1

Originally posted by SimontheMagus

Originally posted by Alfie1

Originally posted by SimontheMagus

Originally posted by Alfie1

So this woman just imagined the 82% burns she suffered in the lobby ?

today.msnbc.msn.com...

Nice try, but I said "all the explosions". It seems that the jet fuel got there before the "plane" did, according to your version of things.

WTC Eyewitness " a bomb went off in the lobby first,then a plane hit"

www.youtube.com...

edit on 28-5-2012 by SimontheMagus because: (no reason given)

Thats your prime witness ? A man visibly shocked and shaking who says " I think" ?

He's not the only one. Maybe all these people were imagining things eh? Only YOU know, because you were there, right?

Listen for yourself....

9/11 CLEAR bomb going off in WTC BEFORE first plane EVER hit

www.youtube.com...

Short version....nobody said "I think"

www.youtube.com...

edit on 28-5-2012 by SimontheMagus because: (no reason given)

edit on 28-5-2012 by SimontheMagus because: (no reason given)

No, one girl says "I believe" . Point is though these girls were obviously evacuated, after the plane strike, through a devastated lobby. Neither claims to have been in the lobby when it was damaged so they are in no position to know what came first.

They are very credible witnesses because they are telling us how the lobby was completely destroyed before the tower collapsed. You're telling us that the jet fuel from 90 floors up did that?



You need to find another job....it's Memorial Day for Christ's sake.....

Originally posted by kidtwist

Originally posted by GiodanoBruno

Um,,,You have been doing this for 6+ years. I'd say you've been employee of the month more than once. You're doing a great job.

6+ years! Jeez, that's some serious dedication to a government story that they vehemently say is true.
If the OS is a wrap, a clear cut case, as they say, who on this earth would dedicate so much time protecting that story?! Very, very strange behaviour don't you think!?! They get really quite hostile over it too!

I notice that 2008 is a year when a few more OS upholders popped up, some interesting stuff happened that year, and it seems a damage limitation campaign was initiated further.

If you search in google, and use the terms 'lie busters' and 'above top secret' you'll find some interesting info.

Good to know,thanks.

Originally posted by GiodanoBruno

Originally posted by Varemia

Originally posted by GiodanoBruno
Did you get a chance to interview these two men sometime after this video was taken?

"If anything"???? «You have no proof of a pancake-drop happening,just assumptions. Were you filming the collapse(real time) with an infrared camera?. One would think if a pancake drop did occur we would see at least 2 or 3 slaps visibly compressed in the rubble. No?


Take care

You have proof of the opposite then? I proposed an alternative to the interpretation that truthers have of the video, and it happens to align with the official story. You tell me I'm wrong because you want me to be wrong.

My proof is my signature. Take a good look at those #'s ,and ask yourself when has something so small so weak pulverized something so large so strong. Never and it will never happen.


Its simple logic. I don't use sources,videos or eyewitness accounts. The answer is right there below .

Your signature is a logical nonsense. You might as well say how could a 9,700 lbs bomb destroy a city of millions of tons like Hiroshima.

Originally posted by GiodanoBruno
for fire to really be a factor ,the fuselage is the only part of the plane that "could" puncture thru the steel skin of the towers.

I assume you put "could" in parentheses because there are actually some people who imagine that could be true, but it is not possible in the least. Have you seen the damage done to the nose of an airliner just from hitting a bird? Those exterior columns were not nearly far enough apart to accommodate the nose. The only way that nose is penetrating the exterior wall is if it were made out of solid steel (rendering it unable to fly) or if it contained a warhead.

Whatever hit those towers, in EACH case there was a flash just BEFORE impact. It is visible from several different angles on the south tower hit and the Naudet brothers picked it up on the north tower hit. It was later edited out in the TV versions. I wonder why......

Originally posted by TrickoftheShade

Originally posted by GiodanoBruno



Um,,,You have been doing this for 6+ years. I'd say you've been employee of the month more than once. You're doing a great job.

You can keep slinging insults and baseless accusations if you like, or you can try to engage with what I'm saying. I imagine you won't though, so I won't be responding to you again.

No please don't leave! But you can't blame to notice you've been doing this for 6 years.

When talking about "engaging", engage my signature. Please try to decipher it with only using logic.

But I am sure it would be easier to run away