Was 911 an Inside Job

Was 911 an Inside Job

Created by inquiring minds on Jan 4, 2013

17,792 votes

Click on an option to vote

YES

No

Don't know

Possibly

“DECEPTION = MOST POWERFUL ”

Since: Jul 11

POLITICAL FORCE ON THE PLANET

#3820 Apr 3, 2013
WasteWater wrote:
<quoted text>
I believe the tangible evidence and testimony of the firefighters and those who were there.
NEXT
Many other half-wits believe the testimony of the FDNY.
.
waste of water for one half-wit shill bwunker believes everything the FDNY had to say about 9/11!
.
I challenge him to step up and tell us why he believes what the FDNY personnel said about what they saw on 9/11.
.
Will he answer the challenge or not?
.
My bet is on the negative. Because he is a yellow bellied coward. Sitting on this forum only to spread lies and dis-information.
.
Do You Believe In MilShillSpec MarkIV Dis-Information Bulletins or Magik like waste of water. Huh Eh !
.
Or is he another lying bwunker here only to spread dis-information about the big govie fuhk up on 9/11!?!?!?!?!?
.
To save face for the govie!?!?!?!?!?

“DECEPTION = MOST POWERFUL ”

Since: Jul 11

POLITICAL FORCE ON THE PLANET

#3822 Apr 3, 2013
LOL roflmao

“DECEPTION = MOST POWERFUL ”

Since: Jul 11

POLITICAL FORCE ON THE PLANET

#3823 Apr 3, 2013
ROFLMAO

“ reality, what a concept”

Since: Nov 07

this one

#3824 Apr 3, 2013
Evora wrote:
As a matter of fact WTC7 dropped symmetrically at gravitational acceleration (not "speed") for more than 100 feet. This is evident from the videos, and even the government agency NIST responsible for the fraudulent "failure investigation" has been forced to concede a period of free fall, although NIST does not explain how this period of free fall is consistent with their theory of fire-induced failure.
The reason why NIST's computer generated model doesn't show a period of free fall is because free fall requires the simultaneous and complete destruction of many structural elements, which could NEVER be a consequence of naturally progressing office fires. Symmetric free fall of the visible WTC7 structure is PROOF of demolition.
Sweetie, correct the moron who gave me the speed of gravity in the first place. Oh wait, that would be you. wouldn't it. You've got your hand up so many muppet backsides its hard to tell you sheep apart sometimes. By the by pumpkin, part of one structure falling approximately 100 feet at that rate, ain't quite the same as the original statement that I was addressing in which it was quite falsely claimed that they had all collapsed at that rate, which would have been incredibly suspicious, but did happen.

“ reality, what a concept”

Since: Nov 07

this one

#3825 Apr 3, 2013
Yes dear, there were reports of explosions and the sound of explosions reported by a number of people and a lot of them said it sounded like bombs going off. What there are no reports of, FDNY personnel who saw any actual bombs, Besides, if they were using thermite to bring the towers down, why would there be a need for bombs?

“Twoof, a true act of ignorance”

Since: Jun 09

Olds, Canada

#3826 Apr 4, 2013
Rick in Kansas wrote:
Dear, none of the buildings collapsed at anywhere near the speed of gravity in a vacuum and whoever taught you that silly little meme should be sued for malpractice, he's making you look like a moron.
Oh he doesn't necessarily believe that. It's just that anything that supports his bias is something he'll shill for free!

Veracity be damned.

“Twoof, a true act of ignorance”

Since: Jun 09

Olds, Canada

#3827 Apr 4, 2013
Evora wrote:
<quoted text>As a matter of fact WTC7 dropped symmetrically at gravitational acceleration (not "speed") for more than 100 feet. This is evident from the videos, and even the government agency NIST responsible for the fraudulent "failure investigation" has been forced to concede a period of free fall, although NIST does not explain how this period of free fall is consistent with their theory of fire-induced failure.
The reason why NIST's computer generated model doesn't show a period of free fall is because free fall requires the simultaneous and complete destruction of many structural elements, which could NEVER be a consequence of naturally progressing office fires. Symmetric free fall of the visible WTC7 structure is PROOF of demolition.
They were never forced to do anything.

The draft report spells out the free fall portion in table 3-1 pg. 39.

The collapse was not symmetrical either...although if it was, there's still no precedent saying symmetry can only be attained by nefarious means.

Your charlatan masters gave you a talking point, not a complete argument rooted in sound logic or scientific fact.

Sorry.

“The Biggest Liar on Topix”

Since: Jan 11

Pittsfield, MA

#3828 Apr 4, 2013
I have half a brain and know 9/11 was an inside job

“ reality, what a concept”

Since: Nov 07

this one

#3829 Apr 4, 2013
Porkpie Hat wrote:
Oh he doesn't necessarily believe that. It's just that anything that supports his bias is something he'll shill for free!
Veracity be damned.
Think of it as building a house from the top of the chimney down, everything is theoretically possible until they have to actually prove they can build it. So until they actually get there in the construction, it's possible to have three mutually exclusive speculations for the same space. After all, they are absolutely convinced that it HAS to be one of them, it's just us not seeing their keen eye, sharp mind and absolute cleverness to reveal the most ingenious blueprint ever conceived.

“ reality, what a concept”

Since: Nov 07

this one

#3830 Apr 4, 2013
Timeten wrote:
I have half a brain and know 9/11 was an inside job
Are you bragging or crying out for help?

Since: Aug 11

Location hidden

#3832 Apr 4, 2013
Dr_Zorderz wrote:
So what about those FDNY that waste of water believes in?
.
Will he answer the challenge or not?
.
My bet is on the negative.
.
Cause I don't believe in MilShillSpec MarkIV Dis-Information or Magik. Huh Eh !
"A little north of Vesey I said, we’ll go down, let’s see what’s going on. A couple of the other officers and I were going to see what was going on. We were told to go to Greenwich and Vesey and see what’s going on. So we go there and on the north and east side of 7 it didn’t look like there was any damage at all, but then you looked on the south side of 7 there had to be a hole 20 stories tall in the building, with fire on several floors. Debris was falling down on the building and it didn’t look good.

But they had a hoseline operating. Like I said, it was hitting the sidewalk across the street, but eventually they pulled back too. Then we received an order from Fellini, we’re going to make a move on 7. That was the first time really my stomach tightened up because the building didn’t look good. I was figuring probably the standpipe systems were shot. There was no hydrant pressure. I wasn’t really keen on the idea. Then this other officer I’m standing next to said, that building doesn’t look straight. So I’m standing there. I’m looking at the building. It didn’t look right, but, well, we’ll go in, we’ll see.

As for Building 7 and the evidence for Controlled Demolition, let's review the evidence...

What we do have for sure.

1) Fireman saying there was "a hole 20 stories tall in the building, with fire on several floors." "I would say it was probably about a third of it".

2) A laymen officer the fireman was standing next to said, "that building doesn’t look straight." He then says "It didn’t look right".

3) They put a transit on it and afterward were "pretty sure she was going to collapse."

4) They "saw a bulge in the southwest corner between floors 10 and 13".

5) Photographic evidence of a fire directly under the penthouse which collapsed first.

6) The penthouse fell first, followed by the rest of the building shortly after.

7) The collapse happened from the bottom.

8) Photographic evidence of large smoke plumes against the back of B7. Plumes of smoke so large you can't see the entire rear of the 47 story office building.

9) Silverstein is not a demolition expert and was talking to a fire fighter and not a demolition expert. Why would he use the word "Pull" to describe the demolition to a fire fighter?

10) Silverstein denies "Pull" means "Controlled demolition". He said it means "Pull" the teams out of the building.

11) Silverstein did not make the decision to "Pull".(Whatever that means) "they made that decision to pull and then we watched the building collapse"

12) Another fire fighter used "Pull" to describe the decision made to get him out of the building.

What we don't have...

1) Clear view of the large hole

2) Number of columns and location of columns taken out by the tower impact

3) Clear view of all the fires seen on the south side

4) Any sign of an actual explosive.

Maybe none of these things by themselves mean anything but together it means there is no case. The person who said "Pull" and started this cascade later clarified. Fireman use the word "Pull" to describe getting out of a building and the person who made the order was not Silverstein according to the same first interview.

9/11 conspiracy sites are being dishonest. You have to ask yourself why?

There is no doubt "Pull" means pull the firemen out.

http://www.debunking911.com/pull.htm
Freud

Hereford, UK

#3833 Apr 4, 2013
Rick in Kansas wrote:
<quoted text>Are you bragging or crying out for help?
YellowPiss/Timeten/Radekt is always crying out for help

and he wants mates for his socks

Since: Aug 11

Location hidden

#3834 Apr 4, 2013
Dr_Zorderz wrote:
<quoted text>
Many other half-wits believe the testimony of the FDNY.
.
waste of water for one half-wit shill bwunker believes everything the FDNY had to say about 9/11!
.
I challenge him to step up and tell us why he believes what the FDNY personnel said about what they saw on 9/11.
.
Will he answer the challenge or not?
.
My bet is on the negative. Because he is a yellow bellied coward. Sitting on this forum only to spread lies and dis-information.
.
Do You Believe In MilShillSpec MarkIV Dis-Information Bulletins or Magik like waste of water. Huh Eh !
.
Or is he another lying bwunker here only to spread dis-information about the big govie fuhk up on 9/11!?!?!?!?!?
.
To save face for the govie!?!?!?!?!?
Of course I would believe the NYFD. They were there. They took a hard hit.

Why would I believe a twoofer shill like you who has nothing more than speculation to go on?

Since: Aug 11

Location hidden

#3835 Apr 4, 2013
Dr_Zorderz wrote:
<quoted text>
.
It won't fall down like American buildings because its built to the shoddy and lax fire safety standards in post Communist Russia.
.
Not like here in America. We have the luxury of the most technologically advanced building practices in the world.
.
Our buildings only fall down at the speed of gravity in a vacuum when we want them to.
.
If we can get those pesky explosives right. Huh Eh !
No comparison. It never got hit by fully fueled airliners.

Only a half-witted twoofer shill would make such a claim.

“ reality, what a concept”

Since: Nov 07

this one

#3836 Apr 4, 2013
WasteWater wrote:
No comparison. It never got hit by fully fueled airliners.
Only a half-witted twoofer shill would make such a claim.
Did you watch his video? I haven't seen anything go up in flames that fast since I went to Burning Man. That fire moved up that amazingly flammable plastic trim so fast, that I doubt that the steel underneath even had the chance to get warm to the touch, let alone heated to the point of weakening.
Adam

Lund, Sweden

#3837 Apr 4, 2013
Rick in Kansas wrote:
Yes dear, there were reports of explosions and the sound of explosions reported by a number of people and a lot of them said it sounded like bombs going off. What there are no reports of, FDNY personnel who saw any actual bombs, Besides, if they were using thermite to bring the towers down, why would there be a need for bombs?


Fireman - "People don't understand! There may be more! Any one of these buildings can blow up! This ain't done yet!"

(Fireman was filmed on September 11, after an explosion in the lobby of one of the Towers, before either Tower fell)

Since: Aug 11

Location hidden

#3838 Apr 4, 2013
Adam wrote:
<quoted text>
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v =G1zED8dy63wXX
Fireman - "People don't understand! There may be more! Any one of these buildings can blow up! This ain't done yet!"
(Fireman was filmed on September 11, after an explosion in the lobby of one of the Towers, before either Tower fell)
FAIL

That's taken completely out of context. It is an example of biased editing.
who

Reading, UK

#3839 Apr 4, 2013
WasteWater wrote:
<quoted text>
FAIL
That's taken completely out of context. It is an example of biased editing.
LOL!!
Jessica

Anonymous Proxy

#3840 Apr 4, 2013
WasteWater wrote:
<quoted text>
FAIL
That's taken completely out of context. It is an example of biased editing.
You agree that the video is authentic? In what context would the words mean anything other than "people don't understand! There may be more! Any one of these fkn buildings can blow up! This ain't done yet!" (said a dust-covered, bloody fireman who just escaped from an explosion in a Tower lobby)

Ricardo

Anonymous Proxy

#3841 Apr 4, 2013
WasteWater wrote:
<quoted text>
No comparison. It never got hit by fully fueled airliners.
Only a half-witted twoofer shill would make such a claim.
I'm especially impressed with the construction techniques of the east Europeans during the communist period. Take a look at the Usce Tower in Belgrade, in the former Yugoslavia (now Serbia). It was built in 1964, about the same time as the WTC towers. It's only a quarter as tall as the Towers (imagine the top quarter, since it doesn't need to be strong enough to hold 75 floors above it).

During the NATO bombing of Belgrade in April 1999, the USCE Tower withstood twelve (12) Tomahawk cruise missile strikes!! The Serbs went on to repair the damage and even added two floors to the existing structure!

Who would have thought that "Made in Yugoslavia" could have as much (or more?) market place value as "Made in the USA"?

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Top Stories Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Kürtaj Turizm 6 min bilgiuzmani 1
Prove there's a god. (Mar '08) 7 min lightbeamrider 864,483
News Roman Catholic church only true church, says Va... (Jul '07) 7 min USA Born 599,584
QUEERZ 4 FEARZ: the DARK WORLD of the HOMOSEXUA... 8 min andet1987 12
Something blocking my vaginal entrance...? 12 min andet1987 3
how to get self-confidence? 35 min alin 1
The Christian Atheist debate 57 min dGo mDaedn lyHo i... 1,986
Poll If you're Christain what kind are you? (Oct '07) 3 hr -Stray Dog 6,456
Why Should Jesus Love Me? (Feb '08) 3 hr Epiphany2 612,903
More from around the web