Was 9/11 a conspiracy??

Was 9/11 a conspiracy??

Created by djhixx on Oct 13, 2007

55,132 votes

Click on an option to vote

yes

no

well, im not sure

Since: Aug 11

Location hidden

#271418 May 30, 2014
Charlie Sheen wrote:
<quoted text>
WOW,(A Quote from 9-11 myths, WHY DID YOU LEAVE THIS OUT FROM LATTER IN THE TRAINING, TO BUSY NAILING YOUR WORTHLESS SON?
----------
As I've explained in at least one prior column, HANI HANJOUR'S FLYING WAS HARDLY THE SHOW-QUALITY DEMONSTRATION OFTEN DESCRIBED. IT WAS EXCEPTIONAL ONLY IN ITS RECKLESSNESS. IF ANYTHING, HIS LOOPS AND TURNS AND SPIRALS ABOVE THE NATION'S CAPITAL REVEALED HIM TO BE EXACTLY THE SHITTY PILOT HE BY ALL ACCOUNTS WAS. TO HIT THE PENTAGON SQUARELY HE NEEDED ONLY A BIT OF LUCK, AND HE GOT IT, POSSIBLY WITH HELP FROM THE 757'S AUTOPILOT. STRIKING A STATIONARY OBJECT -- EVEN A LARGE ONE LIKE THE PENTAGON -- AT HIGH SPEED AND FROM A STEEP ANGLE IS VERY DIFFICULT. TO MAKE THE JOB EASIER, HE CAME IN OBLIQUELY, TEARING DOWN LIGHT POLES AS HE ROARED ACROSS THE PENTAGON'S LAWN.
It's true there's only a vestigial similarity between the cockpit of a light trainer and the flight deck of a Boeing. To put it mildly, the attackers, as private pilots, were completely out of their league. However, they were not setting out to perform single-engine missed approaches or Category 3 instrument landings with a failed hydraulic system. For good measure, at least two of the terrorist pilots had rented simulator time in jet aircraft, but striking the Pentagon, or navigating along the Hudson River to Manhattan on a cloudless morning, with the sole intention of steering head-on into a building, did not require a mastery of airmanship. The perpetrators had purchased manuals and videos describing the flight management systems of the 757/767, and as any desktop simulator enthusiast will tell you, elementary operation of the planes' navigational units and autopilots is chiefly an exercise in data programming. YOU CAN LEARN IT AT HOME. YOU WON'T BE GOOD, BUT YOU'LL BE GOOD ENOUGH.
"THEY'D DONE THEIR HOMEWORK AND THEY HAD WHAT THEY NEEDED," SAYS A UNITED AIRLINES PILOT (NAME WITHHELD ON REQUEST), WHO HAS FLOWN EVERY MODEL OF BOEING FROM THE 737 UP. "RUDIMENTARY KNOWLEDGE AND FEARLESSNESS."
"AS EVERYONE SAW, THEIR FLYING WAS SLOPPY AND AGGRESSIVE," SAYS MICHAEL (LAST NAME WITHHELD), A PILOT WITH SEVERAL THOUSAND HOURS IN 757S AND 767S. "THEIR SKILLS AND EXPERIENCE, OR LACK THEREOF, JUST WEREN'T RELEVANT."
"THE HIJACKERS REQUIRED ONLY THE SHALLOW UNDERSTANDING OF THE AIRCRAFT," AGREES KEN HERTZ, AN AIRLINE PILOT RATED ON THE 757/767. "IN MUCH THE SAME WAY THAT A PERSON NEEDN'T BE AN EXPERIENCED PHYSICIAN IN ORDER TO PERFORM CPR OR SET A BROKEN BONE."
THAT SENTIMENT IS ECHOED BY JOE D'EON, AIRLINE PILOT AND HOST OF THE "FLY WITH ME" PODCAST SERIES. "IT'S THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN A DOCTOR AND A BUTCHER," SAYS D'EON.
Indeed.

Since: Aug 11

Location hidden

#271419 May 30, 2014
Dr_Zorderz wrote:
WTC Building #7, a 47-story high-rise not hit by an airplane, exhibited all the characteristics of classic controlled demolition with explosives:
Rapid onset of collapse
Sounds of explosions
Symmetrical structural failure
Free-fall acceleration through the path of what was greatest resistance
Imploded, collapsing completely, landing almost in its own footprint
Massive volume of expanding pyroclastic-like clouds
Expert corroboration from the top European controlled demolition professional
Foreknowledge of "collapse" by media, NYPD, FDNY
In the aftermath of WTC7's destruction, strong evidence of demolition using incendiary devices was discovered:
FEMA finds rapid oxidation and intergranular melting on structural steel samples
Several tons of molten metal reported by numerous highly qualified witnesses
Chemical signature of the incendiary thermite found in solidified molten metal, and dust samples
WTC7 exhibited none of the characteristics of destruction by fire:
Slow onset with large visible deformations
Asymmetrical collapse which follows the path of least resistance (laws of conservation of momentum would cause a falling, to the side most damaged by the fires)
No evidence of jet fuel fire temperatures capable of softening steel
Steel framed high-rise buildings with much larger, hotter, and longer lasting fires have never collapsed
.
Uh Huh Eh !
... Another goofy rant

Proves complete idiocy.
Charlie Sheen

Lincoln, NE

#271421 May 30, 2014
No thermite son of onemale, your so called expert said that 1 & 2 were NOT CD's because the charges would not survive the fire, then when told 7 burned for hours could not explain how the charges survived.

The only foreknowledge was the 7 was creaking, groaning and leaning for hours.

No trace of any explosives were found, the rest of your rant minimale means nothing one way or the other.
Dr_Zorderz wrote:
<quoted text>
A goofy rant filled with fun facts that YOU can not disprove. Your only refute is to dismiss with disdain and ridicule. Doesn't change a thing.
Dr_Zorderz wrote:
WTC Building #7, a 47-story high-rise not hit by an airplane, exhibited all the characteristics of classic controlled demolition with explosives:
Rapid onset of collapse
Sounds of explosions
Symmetrical structural failure
Free-fall acceleration through the path of what was greatest resistance
Imploded, collapsing completely, landing almost in its own footprint
Massive volume of expanding pyroclastic-like clouds
Expert corroboration from the top European controlled demolition professional
Foreknowledge of "collapse" by media, NYPD, FDNY
In the aftermath of WTC7's destruction, strong evidence of demolition using incendiary devices was discovered:
FEMA finds rapid oxidation and intergranular melting on structural steel samples
Several tons of molten metal reported by numerous highly qualified witnesses
Chemical signature of the incendiary thermite found in solidified molten metal, and dust samples
WTC7 exhibited none of the characteristics of destruction by fire:
Slow onset with large visible deformations
Asymmetrical collapse which follows the path of least resistance (laws of conservation of
momentum would cause a falling, to the side most damaged by the fires)
No evidence of jet fuel fire temperatures capable of softening steel
Steel framed high-rise buildings with much larger, hotter, and longer lasting fires have never collapsed
Uh Huh Eh !
Charlie Sheen

Lincoln, NE

#271422 May 30, 2014
Dr_Zorderz wrote:
<quoted text>
Asymmetrical collapse which follows the path of least resistance (laws of conservation of
momentum would cause a falling, to the side most damaged by the fires)
False onemalelicker, true for a tree, with a building that is mostly air and not brick, stone or the like, they can only lean so far before all the bolts start snapping, on WTC7 the amount of lean before it came apart and straight down is estimated at 5 to 7 degrees.
Charlie Sheen

Lincoln, NE

#271423 May 30, 2014
Dr_Zorderz wrote:
<quoted text>
Free-fall acceleration through the path of what was greatest resistance
11. In a video, it appears that WTC 7 is descending in free fall, something that would not occur in the structural collapse that you describe. How can NIST ignore basic laws of physics?

In the draft WTC 7 report (released Aug. 21, 2008; available at http://www.nist.gov/el/disasterstudies/wtc/wt... ), NIST stated that the north face of the building descended 18 stories (the portion of the collapse visible in the video) in 5.4 seconds, based on video analysis of the building collapse. This time period is 40 percent longer than the 3.9 seconds this process would have taken if the north face of the building had descended solely under free fall conditions. During the public comment period on the draft report, NIST was asked to confirm this time difference and define the reasons for it in greater detail.

To further clarify the descent of the north face, NIST recorded the downward displacement of a point near the center of the roofline from first movement until the north face was no longer visible in the video. Numerical analyses were conducted to calculate the velocity and acceleration of the roofline point from the time-dependent displacement data. The instant at which vertical motion of the roofline first occurred was determined by tracking the numerical value of the brightness of a pixel (a single element in the video image) at the roofline. This pixel became brighter as the roofline began to descend because the color of the pixel started to change from that of the building façade to the lighter color of the sky.

The approach taken by NIST is summarized in NIST NCSTAR Report 1A, Section 3.6, and detailed in NIST NCSTAR Report 1-9, Section 12.5.3.

The analyses of the video (both the estimation of the instant the roofline began to descend and the calculated velocity and acceleration of a point on the roofline) revealed three distinct stages characterizing the 5.4 seconds of collapse:

Stage 1 (0 to 1.75 seconds): acceleration less than that of gravity (i.e., slower than free fall).
Stage 2 (1.75 to 4.0 seconds): gravitational acceleration (free fall)
Stage 3 (4.0 to 5.4 seconds): decreased acceleration, again less than that of gravity

This analysis showed that the 40 percent longer descent time—compared to the 3.9 second free fall time—was due primarily to Stage 1, which corresponded to the buckling of the exterior columns in the lower stories of the north face. During Stage 2, the north face descended essentially in free fall, indicating negligible support from the structure below. This is consistent with the structural analysis model, which showed the exterior columns buckling and losing their capacity to support the loads from the structure above. In Stage 3, the acceleration decreased as the upper portion of the north face encountered increased resistance from the collapsed structure and the debris pile below.
Charlie Sheen

Lincoln, NE

#271424 May 30, 2014
Dr_Zorderz wrote:
<quoted text>
Rapid onset of collapse
Did you expect it to be slow?
Charlie Sheen

Lincoln, NE

#271425 May 30, 2014
Dr_Zorderz wrote:
<quoted text>
Sounds of explosions
Uh Huh Eh !
13. Did investigators consider the possibility that an explosion caused or contributed to the collapse of WTC 7?

Yes, this possibility was investigated carefully. NIST concluded that blast events inside the building did not occur and found no evidence supporting the existence of a blast event.

In addition, no blast sounds were heard on the audio tracks of video recordings during the collapse of WTC 7 or reported by witnesses. According to calculations by the investigation team, the smallest blast capable of failing the building's critical column would have resulted in a sound level of 130 decibels (dB) to 140 dB at a distance of at least half a mile, if unobstructed by surrounding buildings. This sound level is consistent with a gunshot blast, standing next to a jet plane engine, and more than 10 times louder than being in front of the speakers at a rock concert.

For the building to have been prepared for intentional demolition, walls and/or column enclosures and fireproofing would have to be removed and replaced without being detected. Preparing a column includes steps such as cutting sections with torches, which produces noxious and odorous fumes. Intentional demolition usually requires applying explosive charges to most, if not all, interior columns, not just one or a limited set of columns in a building.
Charlie Sheen

Lincoln, NE

#271426 May 30, 2014
Dr_Zorderz wrote:
<quoted text>
Chemical signature of the incendiary thermite found in solidified molten metal
Total LIE, it was never even tested to know what kind of metal it was!
Charlie Sheen

Lincoln, NE

#271427 May 30, 2014
Dr_Zorderz wrote:
<quoted text>
WTC7 exhibited none of the characteristics of destruction by fire:
Slow onset with large visible deformations
FALSE MiniMale!

It was hit by a huge chunk of the North Tower.

Rapid?

[Shortly after the tower collapses] I don‚t know how long this was going
on, but I remember standing there looking over at building 7 and realizing that
a big chunk of the lower floors had been taken out on the Vesey Street side. I
looked up at the building and I saw smoke in it, but I really didn't see any
fire at that time. Deputy ƒƒChief Nick Visconti http://tinyurl.com/paqux

A few minutes after that a police officer came up to me and told me that
the façade in front of Seven World Trade Center was gone and they thought there
was an imminent collapse of Seven World Trade Center. FDNY Lieutenant William
Melarango
http://graphics8.nytimes.com/packages/pdf/nyr ...

I think they said they had seven to ten floors that were freestanding and
they weren't going to send anyone in.[/red] FDNY Chief Thomas McCarthy
http://graphics8.nytimes.com/packages/pdf/nyr ...

So we go there and on the north and east side of 7 it didn‚t look like
there was any damage at all,[red]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.[/red] But they had a
hose line 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.
Charlie Sheen

Lincoln, NE

#271428 May 30, 2014
Dr_Zorderz wrote:
<quoted text>
WTC7 exhibited none of the characteristics of destruction by fire:
Slow onset with large visible deformations
Are you sure?

So we gathered up rollups and most of us had masks at that time. We headed to-
ward 7. And just around we were about a hundred yards away and Butch Brandeis
came running up.

He said forget it, nobody‚s going into 7, there’s creaking,
there are noises coming out of there, so we just stopped. And probably about 10
minutes after that, Visconti, he was on West Street, and I guess he had another
report of further damage either in some basements and things like that, so Vis-
conti said nobody goes into 7, so that was the final thing and that was aban-
doned.

Firehouse Magazine: When you looked at the south side, how close were you to
the base of that side?

Boyle: I was standing right next to the building, probably right next to it.
Firehouse: When you had fire on the 20 floors, was it in one window or many?
There was a huge gaping hole and it was scattered through there. It was a huge
hole. I would say it was probably a third of it, right in the middle of it. And
so after Visconti came down and said nobody goes in 7, we said all right, we‚ll
head back to the command posT.„ Capt. Chris Boyle http://tinyurl.com/e7bzp

After the initial blast, Housing Authority worker Barry Jennings, 46, re-
ported to a command center on the 23rd floor of 7 World Trade Center. He was
with Michael Hess, the city's corporation counsel, when they felt and heard an-
other explosion. First calling for help, they scrambled downstairs to the
lobby, or what was left of it. "I looked around, the lobby was gone. It looked
like hell," Jennings said.
http://www.record-eagle.com/2001/sep/11scene ....

Anyway, I was looking at WTC7 and I noticed that it wasn’t looking like it
was straight. It was really weird. The closest corner to me (the SE corner) was
kind of out of whack with the SW corner. It was impossible to tell whether that
corner (the SW) was leaning over more or even if it was leaning the other way.
With all of the smoke and the debris pile, I couldn’t exactly tell what was going
on, but I sure could see the building was leaning over in a way it certainly
should not be. I asked another guy looking with me and he said “That
building is going to come down, we better get out of here.” So we did.–M.J.,
Employed at 45 Broadway.
Charlie Sheen

Lincoln, NE

#271429 May 30, 2014
Dr_Zorderz wrote:
<quoted text>
WTC7 exhibited none of the characteristics of destruction by fire:
Slow onset with large visible deformations
Uh Huh Eh !
Really onemalelicker!

On scene report of WTC 7 leaning.

http://www.youtube.com/watch ...

“See where that white smoke is?
See this thing leaning like this?
It’s definitely coming down. There’s no way to stop it. Cause ya have to go up in there to put it out…and its already… The structural integrity is not there. Its tough.”
Charlie Sheen

Lincoln, NE

#271430 May 30, 2014
Dr_Zorderz wrote:
<quoted text>
No evidence of jet fuel fire temperatures capable of softening steel
So poly products such as carpet burn hotter, much like the burning lust in your heart for your father onemale!

Since: Aug 11

Location hidden

#271432 May 30, 2014
Charlie Sheen wrote:
<quoted text>
Are you sure?
So we gathered up rollups and most of us had masks at that time. We headed to-
ward 7. And just around we were about a hundred yards away and Butch Brandeis
came running up.
He said forget it, nobody‚s going into 7, there’s creaking,
there are noises coming out of there, so we just stopped. And probably about 10
minutes after that, Visconti, he was on West Street, and I guess he had another
report of further damage either in some basements and things like that, so Vis-
conti said nobody goes into 7, so that was the final thing and that was aban-
doned.
Firehouse Magazine: When you looked at the south side, how close were you to
the base of that side?
Boyle: I was standing right next to the building, probably right next to it.
Firehouse: When you had fire on the 20 floors, was it in one window or many?
There was a huge gaping hole and it was scattered through there. It was a huge
hole. I would say it was probably a third of it, right in the middle of it. And
so after Visconti came down and said nobody goes in 7, we said all right, we‚ll
head back to the command posT.„ Capt. Chris Boyle http://tinyurl.com/e7bzp
After the initial blast, Housing Authority worker Barry Jennings, 46, re-
ported to a command center on the 23rd floor of 7 World Trade Center. He was
with Michael Hess, the city's corporation counsel, when they felt and heard an-
other explosion. First calling for help, they scrambled downstairs to the
lobby, or what was left of it. "I looked around, the lobby was gone. It looked
like hell," Jennings said.
http://www.record-eagle.com/2001/sep/11scene ....
Anyway, I was looking at WTC7 and I noticed that it wasn’t looking like it
was straight. It was really weird. The closest corner to me (the SE corner) was
kind of out of whack with the SW corner. It was impossible to tell whether that
corner (the SW) was leaning over more or even if it was leaning the other way.
With all of the smoke and the debris pile, I couldn’t exactly tell what was going
on, but I sure could see the building was leaning over in a way it certainly
should not be. I asked another guy looking with me and he said “That
building is going to come down, we better get out of here.” So we did.–M.J.,
Employed at 45 Broadway.
Yep. He admitted he didn't even read the report, much less other reports and testimony of people who were there. The goofy Dr. Z relies on YouRube videos.

“9/11 Twoof = STUPID ”

Since: Jun 07

Manhattan, New York

#271433 May 30, 2014
Imploded, collapsing completely, landing almost in its own footprint

DIDN'T YOU SAT THAT STEEL BEAMS WERE SHOT OUT 600FT PROVING A CD !?!?!?!!?!

SO COLLAPSING INTO ITS OWN FOOTPRINT PROVES A CD
AND
BEAMS BEING SHOT OUT 600FT ALSO PROVES A CD !?!!?!?!?!

I THINK YOU NEED TO COME UP WITH A COHESIVE NARRATIVE DUMB ASS
Dr_Zorderz wrote:
<quoted text>
A goofy rant filled with fun facts that YOU can not disprove. Your only refute is to dismiss with disdain and ridicule. Doesn't change a thing.
Dr_Zorderz wrote:
WTC Building #7, a 47-story high-rise not hit by an airplane, exhibited all the characteristics of classic controlled demolition with explosives:
Rapid onset of collapse
Sounds of explosions
Symmetrical structural failure
Free-fall acceleration through the path of what was greatest resistance
Imploded, collapsing completely, landing almost in its own footprint
Massive volume of expanding pyroclastic-like clouds
Expert corroboration from the top European controlled demolition professional
Foreknowledge of "collapse" by media, NYPD, FDNY
In the aftermath of WTC7's destruction, strong evidence of demolition using incendiary devices was discovered:
FEMA finds rapid oxidation and intergranular melting on structural steel samples
Several tons of molten metal reported by numerous highly qualified witnesses
Chemical signature of the incendiary thermite found in solidified molten metal, and dust samples
WTC7 exhibited none of the characteristics of destruction by fire:
Slow onset with large visible deformations
Asymmetrical collapse which follows the path of least resistance (laws of conservation of
momentum would cause a falling, to the side most damaged by the fires)
No evidence of jet fuel fire temperatures capable of softening steel
Steel framed high-rise buildings with much larger, hotter, and longer lasting fires have never collapsed
Uh Huh Eh !
Cops are Heros

Lincoln, NE

#271436 May 30, 2014
Dr_Zorderz wrote:
Both the image above and the image to the right are contained in NIST's slide presentation entitled: Project 6: WTC 7 Structural Fire Response and Collapse Analysis. They are the only two images provided to support NIST's conclusion that Building 7 sustained severe structural damage from the collapse of the North Tower. The first shows a large gash in the building's southwest corner extending from the 18th floor downward, and the second shows damage to the parapet wall at the top of the south-facing facade.
The admittedly minor damage to the parapet wall appears to be the only evidentiary basis for NIST's claim of a huge gash in the middle of the south facade, since no photographs show this damage.
SURE MINIMALE!

From there, we looked out at 7 World Trade Center again. You could see smoke, but no visible fire, and some damage to the south face. You couldn’t really see from where we were on the west face of the building, but at the edge of the south face you could see that it was very heavily damaged.

http://www.firehouse.com/terrorist/911/magazi...

Chris Boyle expands on what he saw when he viewed the south side, not just the corner.
Captain Chris Boyle
Engine 94 - 18 years

Boyle:...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.[

Firehouse: When you looked at the south side, how close were you to the base of that side?

Boyle: I was standing right next to the building, probably right next to it.

Firehouse: When you had fire on the 20 floors, was it in one window or many?

Boyle: There was a huge gaping hole and it was scattered throughout there. It was a huge hole. I would say it was probably about a third of it, right in the middle of it.And so after Visconti came down and said nobody goes in 7, we said all right, we’ll head back to the command post. We lost touch with him. I never saw him again that day.
http://www.firehouse.com/terrorist/911/magazi...

Since: Aug 11

Location hidden

#271440 May 30, 2014
Dr_Zorderz wrote:
Both the image above and the image to the right are contained in NIST's slide presentation entitled: Project 6: WTC 7 Structural Fire Response and Collapse Analysis. They are the only two images provided to support NIST's conclusion that Building 7 sustained severe structural damage from the collapse of the North Tower. The first shows a large gash in the building's southwest corner extending from the 18th floor downward, and the second shows damage to the parapet wall at the top of the south-facing facade.
The admittedly minor damage to the parapet wall appears to be the only evidentiary basis for NIST's claim of a huge gash in the middle of the south facade, since no photographs show this damage.
The alleged southwest corner damage is interesting because there are no known photographs that show this corner of the building from the 18th story down. In fact, it is the only corner of the building whose 8- to 18th-floor span is not shown by other public photographs. See, for example, post-North-Tower-collapse photographs of the building archived on 9-11 Research.
In the following three video captures, smoke obscures the portion of WTC 7's southwest corner below about the 18th floor.
Gee where's the damage?
http://www.wtc7.net/damageclaims.html
Uh Huh Eh !
Twoofer nonsense. The firemen who were there talked about the fact the building was collapsing due to damage.

Since: Aug 11

Location hidden

#271441 May 30, 2014
Dr_Zorderz wrote:
But you can dismiss it as just another nonsensical yourube video. Remark that the FDNY are lying. Talk about onemales member. Whine for a cohesize narrative. Post cat food commercials.
But you can't deny the fact that these FDNY were there and they're telling you how it was.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v =G1zED8dy63wXX
Uh Huh Eh !
Edited nonsense. You are the only liar.

Try again.

Since: Aug 11

Location hidden

#271442 May 30, 2014
Boyle:...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.

NO DAMAGE?

ROTFLMAO
Charlie Sheen

Lincoln, NE

#271443 May 30, 2014
WasteWater wrote:
<quoted text>
Twoofer nonsense. The firemen who were there talked about the fact the building was collapsing due to damage.
For 4 hours before it came down.
Charlie Sheen

Lincoln, NE

#271444 May 30, 2014
Dr_Zorderz wrote:
Uploaded on Oct 22, 2010
Newly obtained video that was reluctantly released by NIST after a lawsuit by the International Center for 9/11 Studies shows two firefighters on 9/11 discussing how secondary explosions occurred immediately before the collapse of the twin towers, providing damning new evidence that explosive devices were used to bring down the buildings.
Firemen discuss how bombs were going off in the lobby of WTC1 as they were staging to move up the building.
They explain how the building had already been hit by the plane and fires were already burning.
After two explosions in the lobby, a third went off and the whole lobby collapsed.
I'm sorry 9/11 truth deniers, you now have another smoking gun that you can't deny!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v =G1zED8dy63wXX
Uh Huh Eh!
Jet fuel fireball in the elevator shaft.

And explosions do not mean explosives, half of NYC would have heard this!

http://www.youtube.com/watch...

Sorry, You lose son of onemale.

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
The Future of Politics in America 1 min Insults Are Easier 120
The Christian Atheist debate (Jun '15) 2 min Jedi Mind Master 87,819
Christians cannot debate with ATHEISTS 5 min Peter Ross 408
News Roman Catholic church only true church, says Va... (Jul '07) 7 min New Age Spiritual... 665,069
Bush is a hero (Sep '07) 9 min WildWeirdWillie 184,648
Prove there's a god. (Mar '08) 19 min Jedi Mind Master 977,162
I. .My Somali husband and the impending second ... (Feb '14) 33 min Sir didi 9
More from around the web