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

WILLOW

Lincolnton, NC

#278360 Aug 18, 2014
WasteWater wrote:
The fires at Ground Zero burned for 99 days, until Dec. 19.
http://www.wtc911.us/wtc_911_facts.html
That is true as well into December 2001 but these lorries with blasted out windows and melted handles were destroyed on the day of Sept. 11 2001 so your response is not related at all.
Thank you for trying even though you still fail to provide the answer to my initial question.
I suppose you actually do not know,but that is ok, at least you did give it your best fail.
Thank you.
WILLOW

Lincolnton, NC

#278361 Aug 18, 2014
***Interesting orders to stand down from REEDS and NORAD>>>
"Published on Feb 3, 2012
41:43 min - War Games, Simulated radar tracks, aircraft exceeding their max operating limits by more than 130-150 knots, inaccurate aircraft position reports, false aircraft target reports, aircraft converging -- flying virtually in formation with -- and then diverging from reported 9/11 aircraft, fighters launched in the wrong direction, aircraft seemingly still airborne after the alleged attack, poor communications, phones not working.... What happened on the morning of September 11, 2001? Why were our defenses ineffective? Pilots For 9/11 Truth analyze NORAD response, Audio recordings as well as Radar data provided by government agencies."
http://youtu.be/vUdJ41J_L8o

“Twoof, a true act of ignorance”

Since: Jun 09

Canada

#278362 Aug 18, 2014
WILLOW wrote:
<quoted text>That is true as well into December 2001 but these lorries with blasted out windows and melted handles were destroyed on the day of Sept. 11 2001 so your response is not related at all.
Thank you for trying even though you still fail to provide the answer to my initial question.
I suppose you actually do not know,but that is ok, at least you did give it your best fail.
Thank you.
Well sock, it's actually up to you and your fellow losers to present a plausible theory and provide evidence to support it if you're arguing for magic pixie dust.

Here in the real world it's quite easy to understand how windshields were broken out and plastic car parts melted when flaming debris from a 400+ jet liner crash and a fire engulfed building hit them.

Btw, google car fires and you'll see damage wholly consistent with the cars found around ground zero....but then as a brain dead twoofer you'd never do anything to burst your little bubble of stupid.
WILLOW

Lincolnton, NC

#278363 Aug 18, 2014
WasteWater wrote:
<quoted text>
Look douche-bag. The fires were up in the towers. The towers collapsed bringing the fires down to the street level.
Go play in your sand box junior.
Now,now,now-no need to call names and act like a kindergartner bloke is there?
Your comments reflect a Bot so thanks for playing although your inept nonexistence of intelligence does show :)

September 11 - The New Pearl Harbor - Full version (1/3)

(2/3)
http://www.youtube.com/watch...
(3/3)
http://www.youtube.com/watch...
INTRODUCTION
0.01:02 - 12 parallels between Pearl
Harbor and September 11
0.14:10 - The debate: main issues
PART 1 - AIR DEFENSE
0.14:55 - Where are the interceptors?
0.16:12 - The incompetence theory
(radars, transponders)
0.22:00 - The military drills
0.29:40 - Specific warnings
0.33:08 - The chain of command
0.38:10 - Promotions, not punishments
0.39:50 - The Mineta case
0.47:38 - Debunkers: "Mineta was mistaken
0.53:18 - The Mineta case - A summary
PART 2 - THE HIJACKERS
0.57:15 - Piss-poor student pilots
0.59:38 - Marwan al-Sheikki (UA175)
1.01:52 - Ziad Jarrah (UA93)
1.03:06 - Hani Hanjour (AA77)
1.04:00 - The debunkers' positions
1.06:00 - 2 simulations of the Pentagon attack
1.13:10 - Someone knew?
1.16:40 - Airport security cameras
1.20.15 - The missing black boxes
PART 3 - THE AIRPLANES
1.26:50 - Passenger planes or military drones?
1.28:20 - Impossible speeds
1.37:30 - What happened to the passengers?
1.38:35 - The cellphone calls
1.48:30 - The debunkers' position
1.50:38 - If not from the planes, from where?
September 11 - The New Pearl Harbor - Full version (2/3)
http://www.youtube.com/watch...
PART 4 - THE PENTAGON
0.02:35 - Downed light poles
0.03:30 - The missing plane
0.04:30 - The official version
0.05:24 - Problems with the official version
(wing, ailerons, tail, engines)
0.13:09 - The mystery hole
0.14:10 - The debunkers' explanations
0.16:20 - Conclusions on damage analysis
0.17:00 - The missing tapes
0.18:30 - Security video analysis
0.23.40 - Pentagon summary
PART 5 - FLIGHT 93
0.24.15 - The empty hole
0.28.00 - The debunkers' explanations
0.33:00 - Plane crash or bomb explosion?
0.34:50 - The debris field
0.37.20 - The shootdown hypothesis
0.38:50 - The small white plane
0.41:40 - Let's roll
0.44:25 - Summary of Flight 93
PART 6 - THE TWIN TOWERS
0.45:10 - Introduction
0.47:45 - The Towers' small dirty secret
0.53:10 - Larry Silverstein
0.56:15 - NIST vs. Architects & Engineers
0.58:00 - Robust or fragile buildings?
1.04:45 - The initial collapse - Explanation #1
1.05:45 - The initial collapse - Explanation #2
1.07:35 - Problems with the official explanation
1.18:00 - The full collapse - No official explanation
1.18:50 - Law of physics violated
1.20:50 - The Twin Towers and freefall
1.27:50 - Debunkers' response to A&E
September 11 - The New Pearl Harbor - Full version (3/3)
http://www.youtube.com/watch...

0.00:20 - The hypothesis of controlled demolitions
0.01:08 - Debunkers:Impossible to place explosives
0.07:34 - Explosions in the Twin Towers (witnesses)
0.15:00 - "Fuel in elevators shafts" theory
0.23:25 - Debunkers: "Explosions not recorded by tv cameras"
0.30:26 - Squibs
0.33:00 - Explosive force (montage)
0.35:00 - Ejecta
0.38:00 - Diagonal cuts
0.40:15 - What happened to the hat trusses?
0.42:20 - Extreme temperatures
0.45:30 - Debunkers' explanations
0.46:45 - Twisted and mangled beams
0.47:40 - Molten steel
0.51:05 - Molten concrete
0.53:50 - Pulverization
0.57:40 - Victims vaporized
1.02:20 - Conclusion on the Twin Towers
PART 7 - BUILDING 7
1.05:10 - Introduction
1.06:35 - Official version by NIST
1.09:36 - Collapse computer simulation
1.11:00 - Fire computer simulation
1.12:20 - Debunkers: "Building 7 weaker
1.14:25 - Preknowledge
1.19:00 - Symmetry
1.20:00 - Freefall

http://www.luogocomune.net/site/modules/secti... …
WILLOW

Lincolnton, NC

#278364 Aug 18, 2014
Porkpie Hat wrote:
<quoted text>
Well sock, it's actually up to you and your fellow losers to present a plausible theory and provide evidence to support it if you're arguing for magic pixie dust.
Here in the real world it's quite easy to understand how windshields were broken out and plastic car parts melted when flaming debris from a 400+ jet liner crash and a fire engulfed building hit them.
Btw, google car fires and you'll see damage wholly consistent with the cars found around ground zero....but then as a brain dead twoofer you'd never do anything to burst your little bubble of stupid.
Are your feet cold?
Surely you do not speak wisdom but visions of grandeur do seem to stroke your very own ego.

Calm down Missy and provide some fact based evidence. Until then, you are just toting the blasphemous lies told to the masses.

And thank you for playing also. You may go now :)
WILLOW

Lincolnton, NC

#278365 Aug 18, 2014
I'll leave you mates to continue to twiddle your thumbs as you shake your heads.

Now, I will invite you to sneak peak into my world if you dare :)

Google my link, as 'YOU' say so your paranoia doesn't get you ready to jump from a high rise-such a tragedy eh mate?
http://www.luogocomune.net/site/modules/secti...

Since: Aug 11

Location hidden

#278366 Aug 18, 2014
WILLOW wrote:
<quoted text>
That is true as well into December 2001 but these lorries with blasted out windows and melted handles were destroyed on the day of Sept. 11 2001 so your response is not related at all.
Thank you for trying even though you still fail to provide the answer to my initial question.
I suppose you actually do not know,but that is ok, at least you did give it your best fail.
Thank you.
I already told you. The fires were blown outward during the collapse. Those vehicles give an idea of how big the fires actually were. What is the point of your idiotic question?

Since: Aug 11

Location hidden

#278367 Aug 18, 2014
WILLOW wrote:
<quoted text>
Now,now,now-no need to call names and act like a kindergartner bloke is there?
Your comments reflect a Bot so thanks for playing although your inept nonexistence of intelligence does show :)
September 11 - The New Pearl Harbor - Full version (1/3)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v =O1GCeuSr3MkXX
(2/3)
http://www.youtube.com/watch...
(3/3)
http://www.youtube.com/watch...
INTRODUCTION
0.01:02 - 12 parallels between Pearl
Harbor and September 11
0.14:10 - The debate: main issues
PART 1 - AIR DEFENSE
0.14:55 - Where are the interceptors?
0.16:12 - The incompetence theory
(radars, transponders)
0.22:00 - The military drills
0.29:40 - Specific warnings
0.33:08 - The chain of command
0.38:10 - Promotions, not punishments
0.39:50 - The Mineta case
0.47:38 - Debunkers: "Mineta was mistaken
0.53:18 - The Mineta case - A summary
PART 2 - THE HIJACKERS
0.57:15 - Piss-poor student pilots
0.59:38 - Marwan al-Sheikki (UA175)
1.01:52 - Ziad Jarrah (UA93)
1.03:06 - Hani Hanjour (AA77)
1.04:00 - The debunkers' positions
1.06:00 - 2 simulations of the Pentagon attack
1.13:10 - Someone knew?
1.16:40 - Airport security cameras
1.20.15 - The missing black boxes
PART 3 - THE AIRPLANES
1.26:50 - Passenger planes or military drones?
1.28:20 - Impossible speeds
1.37:30 - What happened to the passengers?
1.38:35 - The cellphone calls
1.48:30 - The debunkers' position
1.50:38 - If not from the planes, from where?
September 11 - The New Pearl Harbor - Full version (2/3)
http://www.youtube.com/watch...
PART 4 - THE PENTAGON
0.02:35 - Downed light poles
0.03:30 - The missing plane
0.04:30 - The official version
0.05:24 - Problems with the official version
(wing, ailerons, tail, engines)
0.13:09 - The mystery hole
0.14:10 - The debunkers' explanations
0.16:20 - Conclusions on damage analysis
0.17:00 - The missing tapes
0.18:30 - Security video analysis
0.23.40 - Pentagon summary
PART 5 - FLIGHT 93
0.24.15 - The empty hole
0.28.00 - The debunkers' explanations
0.33:00 - Plane crash or bomb explosion?
0.34:50 - The debris field
0.37.20 - The shootdown hypothesis
0.38:50 - The small white plane
0.41:40 - Let's roll
0.44:25 - Summary of Flight 93
PART 6 - THE TWIN TOWERS
0.45:10 - Introduction
0.47:45 - The Towers' small dirty secret
0.53:10 - Larry Silverstein
0.56:15 - NIST vs. Architects & Engineers
0.58:00 - Robust or fragile buildings?
1.04:45 - The initial collapse - Explanation #1
1.05:45 - The initial collapse - Explanation #2
1.07:35 - Problems with the official explanation
1.18:00 - The full collapse - No official explanation
1.18:50 - Law of physics violated
1.20:50 - The Twin Towers and freefall
1.27:50 - Debunkers' response to A&E
September 11 - The New Pearl Harbor - Full version (3/3)
http://www.youtube.com/watch...
0.00:20 - The hypothesis of controlled demolitions
0.01:08 - Debunkers:Impossible to place explosives
0.07:34 - Explosions in the Twin Towers (witnesses)
0.15:00 - "Fuel in elevators shafts" theory
0.23:25 - Debunkers: "Explosions not recorded by tv cameras"
0.30:26 - Squibs
0.33:00 - Explosive force (montage)
0.35:00 - Ejecta
0.38:00 - Diagonal cuts
0.40:15 - What happened to the hat trusses?
0.42:20 - Extreme temperatures
0.45:30 - Debunkers' explanations
0.46:45 - Twisted and mangled beams
0.47:40 - Molten steel
0.51:05 - Molten concrete
0.53:50 - Pulverization
0.57:40 - Victims vaporized
1.02:20 - Conclusion on the Twin Towers
PART 7 - BUILDING 7
1.05:10 - Introduction
1.06:35 - Official version by NIST
1.09:36 - Collapse computer simulation
1.11:00 - Fire computer simulation
1.12:20 - Debunkers: "Building 7 weaker
1.14:25 - Preknowledge
1.19:00 - Symmetry
1.20:00 - Freefall
http://www.luogocomune.net/site/modules/secti... …
Goofy meaningless rubbish.

Since: Aug 11

Location hidden

#278368 Aug 18, 2014
WILLOW wrote:
<quoted text>
Now,now,now-no need to call names and act like a kindergartner bloke is there?
Your comments reflect a Bot so thanks for playing although your inept nonexistence of intelligence does show :)
September 11 - The New Pearl Harbor - Full version (1/3)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v =O1GCeuSr3MkXX
(2/3)
http://www.youtube.com/watch...
(3/3)
http://www.youtube.com/watch...
INTRODUCTION
0.01:02 - 12 parallels between Pearl
Harbor and September 11
0.14:10 - The debate: main issues
PART 1 - AIR DEFENSE
0.14:55 - Where are the interceptors?
0.16:12 - The incompetence theory
(radars, transponders)
0.22:00 - The military drills
0.29:40 - Specific warnings
0.33:08 - The chain of command
0.38:10 - Promotions, not punishments
0.39:50 - The Mineta case
0.47:38 - Debunkers: "Mineta was mistaken
0.53:18 - The Mineta case - A summary
PART 2 - THE HIJACKERS
0.57:15 - Piss-poor student pilots
0.59:38 - Marwan al-Sheikki (UA175)
1.01:52 - Ziad Jarrah (UA93)
1.03:06 - Hani Hanjour (AA77)
1.04:00 - The debunkers' positions
1.06:00 - 2 simulations of the Pentagon attack
1.13:10 - Someone knew?
1.16:40 - Airport security cameras
1.20.15 - The missing black boxes
PART 3 - THE AIRPLANES
1.26:50 - Passenger planes or military drones?
1.28:20 - Impossible speeds
1.37:30 - What happened to the passengers?
1.38:35 - The cellphone calls
1.48:30 - The debunkers' position
1.50:38 - If not from the planes, from where?
September 11 - The New Pearl Harbor - Full version (2/3)
http://www.youtube.com/watch...
PART 4 - THE PENTAGON
0.02:35 - Downed light poles
0.03:30 - The missing plane
0.04:30 - The official version
0.05:24 - Problems with the official version
(wing, ailerons, tail, engines)
0.13:09 - The mystery hole
0.14:10 - The debunkers' explanations
0.16:20 - Conclusions on damage analysis
0.17:00 - The missing tapes
0.18:30 - Security video analysis
0.23.40 - Pentagon summary
PART 5 - FLIGHT 93
0.24.15 - The empty hole
0.28.00 - The debunkers' explanations
0.33:00 - Plane crash or bomb explosion?
0.34:50 - The debris field
0.37.20 - The shootdown hypothesis
0.38:50 - The small white plane
0.41:40 - Let's roll
0.44:25 - Summary of Flight 93
PART 6 - THE TWIN TOWERS
0.45:10 - Introduction
0.47:45 - The Towers' small dirty secret
0.53:10 - Larry Silverstein
0.56:15 - NIST vs. Architects & Engineers
0.58:00 - Robust or fragile buildings?
1.04:45 - The initial collapse - Explanation #1
1.05:45 - The initial collapse - Explanation #2
1.07:35 - Problems with the official explanation
1.18:00 - The full collapse - No official explanation
1.18:50 - Law of physics violated
1.20:50 - The Twin Towers and freefall
1.27:50 - Debunkers' response to A&E
September 11 - The New Pearl Harbor - Full version (3/3)
http://www.youtube.com/watch...
0.00:20 - The hypothesis of controlled demolitions
0.01:08 - Debunkers:Impossible to place explosives
0.07:34 - Explosions in the Twin Towers (witnesses)
0.15:00 - "Fuel in elevators shafts" theory
0.23:25 - Debunkers: "Explosions not recorded by tv cameras"
0.30:26 - Squibs
0.33:00 - Explosive force (montage)
0.35:00 - Ejecta
0.38:00 - Diagonal cuts
0.40:15 - What happened to the hat trusses?
0.42:20 - Extreme temperatures
0.45:30 - Debunkers' explanations
0.46:45 - Twisted and mangled beams
0.47:40 - Molten steel
0.51:05 - Molten concrete
0.53:50 - Pulverization
0.57:40 - Victims vaporized
1.02:20 - Conclusion on the Twin Towers
PART 7 - BUILDING 7
1.05:10 - Introduction
1.06:35 - Official version by NIST
1.09:36 - Collapse computer simulation
1.11:00 - Fire computer simulation
1.12:20 - Debunkers: "Building 7 weaker
1.14:25 - Preknowledge
1.19:00 - Symmetry
1.20:00 - Freefall
http://www.luogocomune.net/site/modules/secti... …
Proves your gullibility that you would go off on such a tangent.

Since: Aug 11

Location hidden

#278369 Aug 18, 2014
Porkpie Hat wrote:
<quoted text>
Well sock, it's actually up to you and your fellow losers to present a plausible theory and provide evidence to support it if you're arguing for magic pixie dust.
Here in the real world it's quite easy to understand how windshields were broken out and plastic car parts melted when flaming debris from a 400+ jet liner crash and a fire engulfed building hit them.
Btw, google car fires and you'll see damage wholly consistent with the cars found around ground zero....but then as a brain dead twoofer you'd never do anything to burst your little bubble of stupid.
Exactly. They just love out of context baloney.

Since: Aug 11

Location hidden

#278370 Aug 18, 2014
WILLOW wrote:
***Interesting orders to stand down from REEDS and NORAD>>>
"Published on Feb 3, 2012
41:43 min - War Games, Simulated radar tracks, aircraft exceeding their max operating limits by more than 130-150 knots, inaccurate aircraft position reports, false aircraft target reports, aircraft converging -- flying virtually in formation with -- and then diverging from reported 9/11 aircraft, fighters launched in the wrong direction, aircraft seemingly still airborne after the alleged attack, poor communications, phones not working.... What happened on the morning of September 11, 2001? Why were our defenses ineffective? Pilots For 9/11 Truth analyze NORAD response, Audio recordings as well as Radar data provided by government agencies."
http://youtu.be/vUdJ41J_L8o
YouRube......ROTFLMAO

Since: Aug 11

Location hidden

#278371 Aug 18, 2014
WILLOW wrote:
<quoted text>
That is true as well into December 2001 but these lorries with blasted out windows and melted handles were destroyed on the day of Sept. 11 2001 so your response is not related at all.
Thank you for trying even though you still fail to provide the answer to my initial question.
I suppose you actually do not know,but that is ok, at least you did give it your best fail.
Thank you.
Let's hear you Bull Shit theory.

Since: Aug 11

Location hidden

#278372 Aug 18, 2014
WILLOW wrote:
I'll leave you mates to continue to twiddle your thumbs as you shake your heads.
Now, I will invite you to sneak peak into my world if you dare :)
Google my link, as 'YOU' say so your paranoia doesn't get you ready to jump from a high rise-such a tragedy eh mate?
http://www.luogocomune.net/site/modules/secti...
Total projection. If you believe is your conspiracy fantasy, then it is you who is paranoid.

“ad victoriam”

Since: Dec 10

arte et marte

#278373 Aug 18, 2014
WasteWater wrote:
<quoted text>
Total projection. If you believe is your conspiracy fantasy, then it is you who is paranoid.
Let's see ...they used to call themselves intoreality., but it was a Muslim compound,
I would think it is changed very little.

“Twoof, a true act of ignorance”

Since: Jun 09

Canada

#278374 Aug 18, 2014
WILLOW wrote:
<quoted text>Are your feet cold?
Surely you do not speak wisdom but visions of grandeur do seem to stroke your very own ego.

Calm down Missy and provide some fact based evidence. Until then, you are just toting the blasphemous lies told to the masses.

And thank you for playing also. You may go now :)
No dummy, you support twoof or just stand there like a baffoon drooling on the floor.

So far all you've done is mindlessly regurgitate idiot opinion pieces that don't contain any evidence.

Start with the mythical stand down order....and if you cite Minetas testimony, don't be the typical moronic twoofsheep and cherry pick it.

Oh socky! Like you fool anyone!

“Truth is unthinkable.”

Since: May 12

Location hidden

#278375 Aug 18, 2014
WILLOW wrote:
I'll leave you mates to continue to twiddle your thumbs as you shake your heads.

Now, I will invite you to sneak peak into my world if you dare :)

Google my link, as 'YOU' say so your paranoia doesn't get you ready to jump from a high rise-such a tragedy eh mate?
http://www.luogocomune.net/site/modules/secti...
Thats a good vid filled with interviews from people who were there on 9/11. Of course, Porky's hats don't think so, but they don't do a lot of thinking anyways.

Denial is easy, but

Insults Are Easier

“Twoof, a true act of ignorance”

Since: Jun 09

Canada

#278377 Aug 18, 2014
Almost 14 years and to date twoof has accomplished nothing aside from being the butt of what's become an old, stale joke.

go
twoof
go

“Twoof, a true act of ignorance”

Since: Jun 09

Canada

#278378 Aug 18, 2014
WILLOW wrote:
I'll leave you mates to continue to twiddle your thumbs as you shake your heads.

Now, I will invite you to sneak peak into my world if you dare :)

Google my link, as 'YOU' say so your paranoia doesn't get you ready to jump from a high rise-such a tragedy eh mate?
http://www.luogocomune.net/site/modules/secti...
*yawn*

“Turn left at pub Number 42”

Since: Dec 08

Homehill,QLD

#278379 Aug 18, 2014
WILLOW wrote:
<quoted text>
Now,now,now-no need to call names and act like a kindergartner bloke is there?
Your comments reflect a Bot so thanks for playing although your inept nonexistence of intelligence does show :)

INTRODUCTION
0.01:02 - 12 parallels between Pearl
Harbor and September 11
0.14:10 - The debate: main issues
PART 1 - AIR DEFENSE
0.14:55 - Where are the interceptors?
0.16:12 - The incompetence theory
(radars, transponders)
0.22:00 - The military drills
0.29:40 - Specific warnings
0.33:08 - The chain of command
0.38:10 - Promotions, not punishments
0.39:50 - The Mineta case
0.47:38 - Debunkers: "Mineta was mistaken
0.53:18 - The Mineta case - A summary
PART 2 - THE HIJACKERS
0.57:15 - Piss-poor student pilots
0.59:38 - Marwan al-Sheikki (UA175)
1.01:52 - Ziad Jarrah (UA93)
1.03:06 - Hani Hanjour (AA77)
1.04:00 - The debunkers' positions
1.06:00 - 2 simulations of the Pentagon attack
1.13:10 - Someone knew?
1.16:40 - Airport security cameras
1.20.15 - The missing black boxes
PART 3 - THE AIRPLANES
1.26:50 - Passenger planes or military drones?
1.28:20 - Impossible speeds
1.37:30 - What happened to the passengers?
1.38:35 - The cellphone calls
1.48:30 - The debunkers' position
1.50:38 - If not from the planes, from where?
PART 4 - THE PENTAGON
0.02:35 - Downed light poles
0.03:30 - The missing plane
0.04:30 - The official version
0.05:24 - Problems with the official version
(wing, ailerons, tail, engines)
0.13:09 - The mystery hole
0.14:10 - The debunkers' explanations
0.16:20 - Conclusions on damage analysis
0.17:00 - The missing tapes
0.18:30 - Security video analysis
0.23.40 - Pentagon summary
PART 5 - FLIGHT 93
0.24.15 - The empty hole
0.28.00 - The debunkers' explanations
0.33:00 - Plane crash or bomb explosion?
0.34:50 - The debris field
0.37.20 - The shootdown hypothesis
0.38:50 - The small white plane
0.41:40 - Let's roll
0.44:25 - Summary of Flight 93
PART 6 - THE TWIN TOWERS
0.45:10 - Introduction
0.47:45 - The Towers' small dirty secret
0.53:10 - Larry Silverstein
0.56:15 - NIST vs. Architects & Engineers
0.58:00 - Robust or fragile buildings?
1.04:45 - The initial collapse - Explanation #1
1.05:45 - The initial collapse - Explanation #2
1.07:35 - Problems with the official explanation
1.18:00 - The full collapse - No official explanation
1.18:50 - Law of physics violated
1.20:50 - The Twin Towers and freefall
1.27:50 - Debunkers' response to A&E
0.00:20 - The hypothesis of controlled demolitions
0.01:08 - Debunkers:Impossible to place explosives
0.07:34 - Explosions in the Twin Towers (witnesses)
0.15:00 - "Fuel in elevators shafts" theory
0.23:25 - Debunkers: "Explosions not recorded by tv cameras"
0.30:26 - Squibs
0.33:00 - Explosive force (montage)
0.35:00 - Ejecta
0.38:00 - Diagonal cuts
0.40:15 - What happened to the hat trusses?
0.42:20 - Extreme temperatures
0.45:30 - Debunkers' explanations
0.46:45 - Twisted and mangled beams
0.47:40 - Molten steel
0.51:05 - Molten concrete
0.53:50 - Pulverization
0.57:40 - Victims vaporized
1.02:20 - Conclusion on the Twin Towers
PART 7 - BUILDING 7
1.05:10 - Introduction
1.06:35 - Official version by NIST
1.09:36 - Collapse computer simulation
1.11:00 - Fire computer simulation
1.12:20 - Debunkers: "Building 7 weaker
1.14:25 - Preknowledge
1.19:00 - Symmetry
1.20:00 - Freefall
http://www.luogocomune.net/site/modules/secti... …
Will you
a)address each claim
b)No,if its on youtube its true

“Twoof, a true act of ignorance”

Since: Jun 09

Canada

#278380 Aug 18, 2014
JudgeNJury wrote:
<quoted text>Sheen is like the old tired stand up comic guy that just keeps doin the same old tired jokes he's done a hundred times already ...... what a clown
JudgeNJury wrote:
<quoted text>Thats right Govie Shill , I was one of the founders of a BioTech company called Fougera Pharmaceuticals, it was bought by Novartis Pharmaceuticals in 2012
JudgeNJury wrote:
<quoted text>Yes PieSHill, I was working 18 hour days .... that happens when you are trying to develope an skin cancer vaccine
JudgeNJury wrote:
<quoted text>The division we started was called PharmaDerm which worked on dermatology products and skin cancer Sheen
JudgeNJury wrote:
<quoted text>I'm going to type this slow because I know you can't read fast I worked for Fougera , started a division with Zeineb El Ghali and several others called PharmaDerm, Fougera was bought for it's PharmaDerm division that made Novartis the world leader in dermatology products
JudgeNJury wrote:
<quoted text>You guys make me laugh .... because a Google search will tell you all the inside information about the company
JudgeNJury wrote:
<quoted text>What the hell are you talking about ....... I'm a retired haberdasher
Fougera!

Hahahahaha!!!!

How does pathologically lying for twoof help you?

Go TEAM TWOOF!

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
News Plurality of Americans think Trump is failing 2 min NutSo HL 30,658
Prove there's a god. (Mar '08) 8 min Bobby Bobson 987,099
News Roman Catholic church only true church, says Va... (Jul '07) 38 min Robert F 687,159
I LOVE my new LG V20 smartphone!!! 1 hr LG Sucks 2
BING keeps DOMINATING with "Homepage Magic" 1 hr Doctor REALITY 1
Why Should Jesus Love Me? (Feb '08) 9 hr Here For Now 619,788
News Costa Mesa man, 50, sentenced to 25 years to li... 10 hr Voice of Reason 3
More from around the web