Jump to content
iPanda

Let's talk about 9/11 in a MATURE manner

Recommended Posts

The damage to the towers was puely speculative, they could not do a propper damage assessment, because they could not physically get to the floors to inspect them, this was by design and the access to these areas was prevented due to well placed explosives to barr access to the upper floors, if the fire crews and or teams did manage to reach the effected areas they would have been able to put the fires out and then inspect things properly.

 

It is ludicrous to think that somethin akin to a coke can could cut through a welded mesh wire fence and then cut through another set of greater section steel beams, which common sense tells you it is not possible.

 

Owing to the design and open plan floors sections any fire would quickly fade out, where as in a tighter area it would concentrate any available energy, the sheer open space would allow the fire to burn out very quickly indeed and have no effect whatsoever on the main steel structures.

 

 

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, David Stevenson said:

The damage to the towers was puely speculative, they could not do a propper damage assessment, because they could not physically get to the floors to inspect them, this was by design and the access to these areas was prevented due to well placed explosives to barr access to the upper floors, if the fire crews and or teams did manage to reach the effected areas they would have been able to put the fires out and then inspect things properly.

 

 

David....you are making up shit....and avoiding logical questions. You are now a fire safety expert and an explosives expert....in your head.

 

4 hours ago, David Stevenson said:

It is ludicrous to think that somethin akin to a coke can could cut through a welded mesh wire fence and then cut through another set of greater section steel beams, which common sense tells you it is not possible.

 

How dare you! I mean claim you have common sense in the same sentence as comparing a 500mph 757 with a fucking coke can!!

 

4 hours ago, David Stevenson said:

The damage to the towers was puely speculative, they could not do a 

Owing to the design and open plan floors sections any fire would quickly fade out, where as in a tighter area it would concentrate any available energy, the sheer open space would allow the fire to burn out very quickly indeed and have no effect whatsoever on the main steel structures.

 

 

 

And more made up shite. Fire expertythingy bloke - LMAO.

 

You know nothing about any of this. Your bare assertion claims are total crap.

 

Screen printed...cos the Eagle keeps deleting with his usual bias.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Rupert Ugo said:

 

Well, your graph went up to 2007, where you highlight it, then 2008/9/10/11 and 12 are well below this.

 

PROVE it is under CIA control!

 

The CIA were active in afghanistan. The country was under the control of the US military though

 

The production of opium increased under US control. As i illustrated in another post the CIA are heavily involved in drug operations which provides them with off the book funding for their black ops

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Rupert Ugo said:

 

I asked you this: Prove they are CIA planes and prove there is a significant number. Prove any such activity isn't for some covert objective then prove any of this relates in any way to bloody Afghanistan. Not lots of hearsay and unsubstantiated opinion and conjecture. You think those internet sources are reliable? Explain why?

 

Don't worry about the platforms the stories are mentioned on as they are mentioned on many platforms. Look into the stories themselves for example CIA plane crashes and you'll find the stories are all true

 

The CIA are involved in drug running around the world. Re afghanistan i am simply pointing to the fact that opium production went up when the US took over control of the country from the taliban

 

Former LA Police Officer Mike Ruppert Confronts CIA Director John Deutch on Drug Trafficking

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Rupert Ugo said:

@muir

 

https://www.wanttoknow.info/010917nylawyerwallstreetsecfiles

EEOC Records Destroyed

The EEOC's New York office, which was housed in 7 World Trade Center, sustained no loss of life. But all the agency's records were destroyed.

Many of the files are backed up in the computer system, but a substantial number of documents are simply gone, said Spencer Lewis, the EEOC district director. Depositions and notes were not scanned into computers and are lost. With depositions and interviews, the agency will be contacting court reporters "and hoping that they've got them so we can reconstruct files," Lewis said. This covers about 45 active cases, including a recent action against Morgan Stanley.

But employment litigators believe the effect here, too, will be transitory.

"The EEOC is decimated as far as office space goes," but any problems are "only short-term," said Michael Weber of the New York office of Littler Mendelson. "They will get back to business." The agencies will be seeking documents from the private law firms and defendants, Weber notes. "My sense is that we will cooperate," he noted. "Our goal is not to take advantage of this catastrophe."

"A lot of their records they'll have online, so they'll just reprint them out," adds Harkins. "The EEOC is in a better position than the SEC, because the SEC has a lot more confidential files."

Perhaps you can highlight any case of the suggested 45 that never got to court - THEN your claim might have some substance.

 

So the loss of the records has been disruptive to ongoing legal cases and who knows what other information was lost as:

 

The Central Intelligence Agency had a clandestine office on the 25th floor of 7 World Trade Center, which also housed the city's emergency command centre and an outpost of the U.S. Secret Service.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2020808/Mystery-lost-art-records-vanished-9-11-attacks.html

 

Who knows maybe the attacks were coordinated from those offices which were then destroyed to cover any tracks...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Rupert Ugo said:

 

Ok, what I am reading from you is that the building was completely ablaze and was not possible for anybody to enter it - is that correct? The accounts from numerous fire personnel say it was massively on fire for some considerable time, creaking and groaning. Now of course I cannot prove somebody went in and had a check around, unless they then summarised it in a witness statement, but it sounds perfectly reasonable to suggest that they would do that. It isn't some "ahah" moment if they were unable to, since a massive great chunk of the building was gouged out - a significant structural strain on the rest of the building.

 

so you can't prove that an 'assessment team' assessed the building yet the command centre was able to know that the building was about to collapse when all the ground crews around the building could not

 

7 hours ago, Rupert Ugo said:

 

Now, once again I ask you that which you completely avoid...

 

IF they knew it was coming down, and instructed everyone it was coming down, why didn't they just say they nipped in and placed some charges on the trusses for safety reasons. It seems like this enormous conspiracy "smoking gun" but the whole thing is the biggest appeal to incredulity possible.

 

Because they don't want you to believe that there were any charges in that building

 

7 hours ago, Rupert Ugo said:

 

Thank you for you "engineering" assessment. I shall dismiss it as poor opinion.

 

The debris field was way wider than the building, but for the sake of pedantics, it was close enough. Explain why that is relevant, since the structure gave way internally as seen on the video, pulling it down accordingly.

 

how very fortunate that the building collapsed in a way that wouldn't damage other surrounding buildings! Almost as if it was a controlled demolition

 

7 hours ago, Rupert Ugo said:

WTF? I don't claim they demolished it!! The whole point is if they did, what possible reason is there for them to withhold that info! WTC7 was a unique design. The trusses on floor 7 hold the whole building up.

 

Because it would look incredibly dodgy if they had any hand in demoliting the building. The whole point is that they want to blame it on the fire thereby drawing away any accusations that they demolished it themselves

 

7 hours ago, Rupert Ugo said:

The more that know the easier it is to leak. That is utter bullshit. The "TV companies" were not privy to anything at all. They were informed that it was in danger of imminent collapse or had collapsed, by people on the ground and got garbled intel. Simple. Occam's razor, not Bic!!

 

you don't know that and occams razor isn't always correct. If you apply occams razor in all situations in life you will be wrong a lot

 

7 hours ago, Rupert Ugo said:

Edit: The documents inside could be used to convict cabal members? Burn them? Move them? Shred them?

No, blow up the bloody building and spray them all around the local area! Makes no sense at all.

 

Yes destroy the trace of the documents by demolishing the building

 

This also destroys the CIA command centre in there and who knows maybe they were coordinating events from in there. Destroying the building would erase any trace of that

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, muir said:

 

The CIA were active in afghanistan. The country was under the control of the US military though

 

The production of opium increased under US control. As i illustrated in another post the CIA are heavily involved in drug operations which provides them with off the book funding for their black ops

 

NO WAY was the country under US military control. The production was not under US control. The CIA are not heavily involved in it.

 

This is a pointless side argument. You aren't even close to proving your claims are even viable hypotheses.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, muir said:

Look into the stories themselves for example CIA plane crashes and you'll find the stories are all true

 

 

It's largely hearsay.

 

30 minutes ago, muir said:

The CIA are involved in drug running around the world.

 

Nope.

 

30 minutes ago, muir said:

 Re afghanistan i am simply pointing to the fact that opium production went up when the US took over control of the country from the Taliban

 

You are claiming that the US military controlled production - that's bullshit. It went up, then it came down. Fairly irrelevant to say the least.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, muir said:

 

So the loss of the records has been disruptive to ongoing legal cases and who knows what other information was lost as:

 

Yes, let's pile even more speculation on to make this daft WTC7 collapse needing demolition. Burn it all works just as well!!

 

Perhaps you can highlight any case of the suggested 45 that never got to court - THEN your claim might have some substance.

 

30 minutes ago, muir said:

The Central Intelligence Agency had a clandestine office on the 25th floor of 7 World Trade Center, which also housed the city's emergency command centre and an outpost of the U.S. Secret Service.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2020808/Mystery-lost-art-records-vanished-9-11-attacks.html

 

Clandestine you say? Hardly, if the bloody Daily Fail know about it!

 

30 minutes ago, muir said:

 

Who knows maybe the attacks were coordinated from those offices which were then destroyed to cover any tracks...

 

Haha, yeah who knows - not you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, muir said:

 

so you can't prove that an 'assessment team' assessed the building yet the command centre was able to know that the building was about to collapse when all the ground crews around the building could not

 

 

Why would ground crews know such a thing? I cannot discount it either, it makes sense that visual exterior inspection would show enough damage to warrant prudence.

 

26 minutes ago, muir said:

Because they don't want you to believe that there were any charges in that building

 

Nonsense. Prove there were charges, and FFS, how the hell are they surviving all those bloody fires!!

 

26 minutes ago, muir said:

how very fortunate that the building collapsed in a way that wouldn't damage other surrounding buildings! Almost as if it was a controlled demolition

 

Why is it fortunate? To whom? What crazy world would they give a flying fuck what got damaged? Surely the objective would be to make it look natural.

 

The whole bloody things makes no sense whatsoever.

 

26 minutes ago, muir said:

Because it would look incredibly dodgy if they had any hand in demoliting the building. The whole point is that they want to blame it on the fire thereby drawing away any accusations that they demolished it themselves

 

It would not be dodgy in any way. Building brought down because it was precarious and causing ongoing safety issues. PERFECT reason to do so. There was no reason at all to worry about blame for the building dropping. Leave the fires going, all those records get burnt and NOT scattered all around below!!

 

 

26 minutes ago, muir said:

 

so you can't prove that an 'assessment team' assessed the building yet the command centre was able to know that the building was about to collapse when all the ground crews around the building could not

 

 

Because they don't want you to believe that there were any charges in that building

 

 

how very fortunate that the building collapsed in a way that wouldn't damage other surrounding buildings! Almost as if it was a controlled demolition

 

 

Because it would look incredibly dodgy if they had any hand in demoliting the building. The whole point is that they want to blame it on the fire thereby drawing away any accusations that they demolished it themselves

 

 

you don't know that and occams razor isn't always correct. If you apply occams razor in all situations in life you will be wrong a lot

 

 

Yes destroy the trace of the documents by demolishing the building

 

This also destroys the CIA command centre in there and who knows maybe they were coordinating events from in there. Destroying the building would erase any trace of that

 

26 minutes ago, muir said:

 

Yes destroy the trace of the documents by demolishing the building

 

Oh FFS come off it!! Leave the fires to do the job for them. Have someone going around with a flame thrower - works for me!

 

26 minutes ago, muir said:

 

This also destroys the CIA command centre in there and who knows maybe they were coordinating events from in there. Destroying the building would erase any trace of that

 

Maybe schmaybe. As if.

 

Ebil perps meeting:

Perp 1: Ok, so we are setting up the command centre for whatever....6 blocks away for security and to be away from the blast areas.

Boss perp: Don't be stupid, we'll stick it in WTC7, right next door.

Perp 2: B..b...but aren't we bringing that down to hide our evil tracks?

Boss perp: SILENCE! I know best.         Innit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I say they set the fires going in the very rooms the evidence was kept and left it burning long enough to know that the documentation was destroyed and just to make sure they destroyed them twice by pulling/exploding the building which was prepped beforehand.

 

Since when did the fire crews not try to put out a fire when its their job to do so, remember folks this building was not hit by any flying object and was not damaged other than normal fires, so access would be immediate, it does make propper sense to me, that this was an inside job to cover up those who thought they had become immune to suit once they were discovered.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, David Stevenson said:

I say they set the fires going in the very rooms the evidence was kept and left it burning long enough to know that the documentation was destroyed and just to make sure they destroyed them twice by pulling/exploding the building which was prepped beforehand.

 

 

 

Ffs...how many more times are you going to spam this thread with your repeat unsupported daft claims?

 

10 minutes ago, David Stevenson said:

 

Since when did the fire crews not try to put out a fire when its their job to do so, remember folks this building was not hit by any flying object and was not damaged other than normal fires, so access would be immediate, it does make propper sense to me, that this was an inside job to cover up those who thought they had become immune to suit once they were discovered.

 

 

 

Since the fires were out of control and the water supply was painfully inept. As for not damaged...do stop lying! It had chunks gouged out if it by falling WTC.

Edited by Rupert Ugo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The building was unsupported once they blew the columns out at its base, so why not simply let it burn out, far cheaper to let it do this.

 

Maybe it was the Judy Wood's flying red hot Cheeto's that set the fires going, get a bloody grip will you.

 

So every mode of water was out of use was it?

Edited by David Stevenson

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Rupert Ugo said:

 

Ffs...how many more times are you going to spam this thread with your repeat unsupported daft claims?

will you stop calling opposing views spam,daft ect.

 

state you counter argumen, don't make ridiculing image about  them.......please

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Screamingeagle said:

will you stop calling opposing views spam,daft ect.

 

state you counter argumen, don't make ridiculing image about  them.......please

 

Well Eagle, after I have responded to this more or less identical claim a half dozen times, the label spam seems appropriate. I labelled it daft based on my previous half dozen ignored rebuttals.

 

I am staggered that you didn't do what you nearly always do and just delete my post without justification or warning.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, David Stevenson said:

The building was unsupported once they blew the columns out at its base, so why not simply let it burn out, far cheaper to let it do this.

 

 

Prove "they" blew any columns. What floor, when, by whom, how many and in what order - how close to the point of eventual collapse. How did such explosives survive the ridiculously rampant fires for many hours?

 

Thanks for your considered response.

 

1 hour ago, David Stevenson said:

Maybe it was the Judy Wood's flying red hot Cheeto's that set the fires going, get a bloody grip will you.

 

You want to know why a building caught fire? And you think because you don't.... I need to get some grip....presumably on the weird reality you entertain?

 

1 hour ago, David Stevenson said:

So every mode of water was out of use was it?

 

Well I'm sure they could have filled some buckets up and thrown them on. High pressure hoses at maximum and a lot of them, may have made a dent....there was the problem, as reported.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Rupert Ugo said:

 

I am staggered that you didn't do what you nearly always do and just delete my post without justification or warning

bad language will be deleted,you know that very well.....so don't act like a victim.

 

post with more respect and i don't care if you say that earth is the shape of  pancake on odd days and donut  on even ones

 

16 minutes ago, Rupert Ugo said:

Well Eagle, after I have responded to this more or less identical claim a half dozen times, the label spam seems appropriate

 its not appropriate...

 

different opinions.....a round and around it goes

 

cleary you have the energy to debate,there is no need for ridiculing....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, Rupert Ugo said:

 

Prove "they" blew any columns. What floor, when, by whom, how many and in what order - how close to the point of eventual collapse. How did such explosives survive the ridiculously rampant fires for many hours?

 

Thanks for your considered response.

 

 

You want to know why a building caught fire? And you think because you don't.... I need to get some grip....presumably on the weird reality you entertain?

 

 

Well I'm sure they could have filled some buckets up and thrown them on. High pressure hoses at maximum and a lot of them, may have made a dent....there was the problem, as reported.

 

What about the dozens of fire engines and street water hydrants, air dousing and many more routes, listen if they wanted that fire out it would have been put out.

 

But they never wanted to put it out, they risked rigging it during the flames is what they want us to think, I think it was planned and rigged years before.

 

The explosives could have been hidden snug as a bug in a barn fire, inside the sealed box columns in all buildings brought down on that day.

 

Thermite can withstand high temp's and all it needs is a donkey charge to get it going, and slowly it does its trick, or faster depending on the type used.

 

Lastly, you keep asking people to proove things, when you know we cannot, we are all simply adding our ideas to how they did it, get a grip please, no more questions from now on I'm done with you on this subject.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, David Stevenson said:

 

What about the dozens of fire engines and street water hydrants, air dousing and many more routes, listen if they wanted that fire out it would have been put out.

 

 

 

The building was very tall and big, the fires were extensive and the fire chief said the water supply was not up to it. If you are claiming some sort of inside knowledge on this and saying the fire chiefs were in on it....PROVE IT!!

 

25 minutes ago, David Stevenson said:

But they never wanted to put it out, they risked rigging it during the flames is what they want us to think, I think it was planned and rigged years before.

 

 

Nonsensical argument of the worst circular nature. You are now second guessing them for your pre determined unsupported claim

 

25 minutes ago, David Stevenson said:

 The explosives could have been hidden snug as a bug in a barn fire, inside the sealed box columns in all buildings brought down on that day.

 

GTFO, what utter crap. The fires would have ignited them and caused compressive explosions.

 

25 minutes ago, David Stevenson said:

Thermite can withstand high temp's and all it needs is a donkey charge to get it going, and slowly it does its trick, or faster depending on the type used.

 

 

Rubbish...thermite is triggered by heat. And magicky triggers now? And because they wanted to "destroy some random evidence" that they coukld have burnt in 10 minutes flat in a single floor bonfire. Yeah...makes total sense!

 

30 minutes ago, David Stevenson said:

Lastly, you keep asking people to proove things, when you know we cannot, we are all simply adding our ideas to how they did it, get a grip please, no more questions from now on I'm done with you on this subject.

 

 Prove it is a problem for you? Then why is my pointing out how utterly ludicrous your claims are...a problem? I have a grip thanks. I am rightly asking for mad claims to have a semblance of evidence or at least some feasibility....not straight out of the Batshit Bible.

 

And we're done? I won't hold my breath on that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
45 minutes ago, Screamingeagle said:

bad language will be deleted,you know that very well.....so don't act like a victim.

 

post with more respect and i don't care if you say that earth is the shape of  pancake on odd days and donut  on even ones

 

 its not appropriate...

 

different opinions.....a round and around it goes

 

cleary you have the energy to debate,there is no need for ridiculing....

 

You are a biased moderator who has just deleted a response highlighting your bias.  

 

I find it beyond ironic that YOU have way too  much power over us mere non-mods....on a forum that predominantly whinges about the colossal control over the human race.

 

Screen printed just before you delete this. You just press a button and the response to what you say is gone, and nobody is any the wiser.

 

Had you deleted all the troll posts aimed at me, off topic and personal, of which there remains treble figures still remaining, most of the subsequent escalation would have been avoided.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×