Loose Change 9/11 An American Coup trailer

[Alex Jones]

BUXlfBCbRP8



download it.


http://btjunkie.org/torrent/Loose-Change-911-An-American-Coup-2009-XviD-DVDRip-NTX/3262e3b8fec0127db3d1c4cd1c27881db36a92a8ff89

[Cant_Be_Faded]

Chumpdumper expects better steel girder scientifics and higher metallurgic theory to any alternative comprehensive 9/11 story.

[Alex Jones]

ChumpDumper is just another Glenn Beck no one takes him serious anymore!

[Cant_Be_Faded]

Need more girder specifics i saidddd

[Blake]

download it.




why?

[Cry Havoc]

Welcome to 4 years ago.

[thispego]

Need more girder specifics i saidddd

crofl!

[Alex Jones]

why?

To open your eyes.

[Blake]

To open your eyes.

to what?

who was behind 9/11 and why?

[tlongII]

Mouse I like you. I really do. But you need to get over this bullshit.

[EricB]

to what?

who was behind 9/11 and why?

Terrorists took planes and rammed em into buildings.

I guess those were paper planes and the explosions and then collapsing buildings were fake.


Fucking christ.

[mouse]

Mouse I like you.

Lie#1


I really do.

Lie#2


But you need to get over this bullshit.

You want to tell that to the families of 9/11?

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/data?pid=avimage&iid=i7bV5SOvVmT4

what happened to never forget? nice going TlongII

http://pibillwarner.files.wordpress.com/2009/06/9-11-2001-to-9-11-2008.jpg

[ChumpDumper]

to what?

who was behind 9/11 and why?Don't bother.

[Bukefal]

Terrorists took planes and rammed em into buildings.

I guess those were paper planes and the explosions and then collapsing buildings were fake.


Fucking christ.

I dont understand how people can be so naive. :(

[Col. Sam Daniels]

Why can't you people just STFU and watch the movie? afraid you might learn something?

Look if some kids around your home like your car and tried to already break into it, and you don't buy a fancy car alarm or move it into your garage chances are they will try again only this time they will bring the right tools. That is what took place at the WTC buildings, after 93 when they tried to bring them down with a bomb in the underground parking lot, Bush knew it was a matter of time before they try again.

So when people say Bush was behind 9/11 it doesn't mean he was part of planting the bombs in the WTC buildings it just means he knew it was going to happen and used the opportunity to go to Iraq and change many laws.

It's a known fact the NSA had two of the main hijackers phone numbers,addresses, and was listening in on all conversations, and recorded their calls to Bin laden two years before 9/11 and did not share the information with anyone. And we could have avoided 9/11 all together. you can see that in this documentary.

j4BItquziNI

It saddens me to see people like TPark and TlongII get so upset over a topic .you would think they lost a loved one during 9/11 and if they did why wouldn't they want the truth?

[xellos88330]

I like watching movies involving conspiracy theories. I am also pretty darn sure that the towers came down due to the plane crashes.

[Dr. Gonzo]

Planes flew into a building?

[MiamiHeat]

Why did World trade center building 7 collapse, though?

Nothing crashed into it

[BacktoBasics]

Seen it. Drags on a little.

[mouse]

Seen it. Drags on a little.

I agree, I was hoping they would use this opportunity to knock this one out of the park but they seem to go a bit stale in a few frames. I may have just ruined a good connection emailing Dylan Avery with my comments.

But he can take a little criticism I know he is getting it on a daily basis.

As soon as BigZax gets that cam corder hopefully I can send in my short film in time for the SA film festival. It's called September beach its a very intriguing movie about 9/11

At least in this new film it's confirmed explosives were found in the dust of WTC buildings I wonder what Chump will say to De-Bunk it.

[lefty]

That shit is getting old

We all know that the American government is behind 9/11


What's so new?

[ChumpDumper]

Why can't you people just STFU and watch the movie? afraid you might learn something?I watched it the first three times it came out. Last time around it was called The Final Cut. I guess they lied then too.

[ChumpDumper]

Why did World trade center building 7 collapse, though?

Nothing crashed into itWTC 1 crashed into it.

[mouse]

That shit is getting old

We all know




Hip Hop is old and yet you force us to see your cheesy sig 24/7 .

Back2Basics is old and yet his topics go two pages.

The Alamo is old and yet it's the biggest money maker San Antonio has.

Hooters is old and yet every man who goes there to eat acts like it's his first time seeing breast.

Steroids is old and yet it still dominates Barry Bonds lifestyle.

U2 is old and yet every time they make a new LP it's in the news.

Fox news is old and yet they dominate the airwaves.

The Spurs are old and yet your lame ass is posting at ST 24/7 after every game.

JFK is old and yet the conspiracy books fly off the shelf.

9/11 is not old and those people didn't have to die like that, so any new info is appreciated by the families and people like me.

So change the channel, turn the other way, bury your head in the sand.... I hope you never have to bury a loved one due to a cover up and lies.

7fXIoaK2a7g

[BacktoBasics]

When was this made? 06?

[BacktoBasics]

Back2Basics is old and yet his topics go two pages.

I try to keep it fresh.

[mouse]

I try to keep it fresh.

2001 was only 9 years ago and some people still think it's old? These are the same people who have no problem bringing up Darwin that was what 1800's?
And these same people hate when others bring up Derek Fisher's 0.4 Shot claiming that was ancient history only 4 years ago?

you people need to re-install your time zone clocks before you make outlandish statements.

[hater]

yeah why ppl get so upset about this. It's good to ask questions.

[Strange Love]

people are still asking if we really landed on the moon what's wrong with a 9/11 question?

[hater]

I sometimes think I am adopted. Am I a conspiracy theorist?

[Desert Plains]

conspiracy theorist is are nut bags when they bring up JFK or 9/11

conspiracy theorist are GOD's when they talk about Darwin or Evolution.

do the math.

[Blake]

Don't bother.

can't help myself when threads like this pop up. too much fun.


WTC 1 crashed into it.

uh huh......

Im thinking you can't help it either

[Blake]

you people need to re-install your time zone clocks before you make outlandish statements.

since you are the main resident multiple-personality poster, should I refer to you as "you people" as well?

[Blake]

people are still asking if we really landed on the moon what's wrong with a 9/11 question?

what's your question?

[mouse]

since you are the main resident multiple-personality poster, should I refer to you as "you people" as well?


it's always been ....http://yglesias.thinkprogress.org/wp-content/uploads/2009/03/q_photo_we_the_people_american_constitution_1.jpg
or at least until Bush fucked it all up.

[Strange Love]

what's your question?

Why was wtc7 not in the 9/11 report?

[mouse]

what's your question?

How come not one jet fighter was scrambled during the worst attack in US history and yet a year earlier over 129 jet fighters were?

[Blake]

it's always been ....http://yglesias.thinkprogress.org/wp-content/uploads/2009/03/q_photo_we_the_people_american_constitution_1.jpg
or at least until Bush fucked it all up.


Why was wtc7 not in the 9/11 report?


How come not one jet fighter was scrambled during the worst attack in US history and yet a year earlier over 129 jet fighters were?

I think all of you know the standard response by now.

Not sure why you ignore the truth.

[mouse]

So you go into a 9/11 topic ask posters "what is your question?" and when they ask one you tell them they should know all this already?

Is that the worst cop out in ST history or your way of saying I have no fucking idea I wish I had never asked the question?

Just for shits and giggles why not answer the questions for those reading who may not be so knowledgeable on the lies of 9/11?

Try to do so by Thursday morning as I have a few more I would like you to answer.

[Blake]

So you go into a 9/11 topic ask posters "what is your question?" and when they ask one you tell them they should know all this already?

if another poster other than you asks a question, I'll be glad to answer it.

YOU [mouse] and your cronie troll split personality freak troll names already have received the answer to these questions ad nauseum.


Is that the worst cop out in ST history or your way of saying I have no fucking idea I wish I had never asked the question?

no. it's saying you are an idiot that is regurgitating the same crap over again.

this time it just happens to be in the club instead of the poli forum.


Just for shits and giggles why not answer the questions for those reading who may not be so knowledgeable on the lies of 9/11?

CD already beat me to answer miami heat's question.

I will give you that you are definitely an expert regarding lying about 9/11.


Try to do so by Thursday morning as I have a few more I would like you to answer.

Naw, you would just answer my answer with another stupid question that you already know the answer to.

Don't get me wrong though. This is still fun.

[mouse]

Well Blake why even join in on the conversation if your going to make excuses about who you will only answer too? And props for not telling me to go fuck my Mother like you did in the past your making progress! :tu

[Alex Jones]

how come not one jet fighter was scrambled during the worst attack in us history and yet a year earlier over 129 jet fighters were?

+1

[ChumpDumper]

How come not one jet fighter was scrambled during the worst attack in US history and yet a year earlier over 129 jet fighters were?Jets were scrambled.

[NZ Spurs]

yeah why ppl get so upset about this. It's good to ask questions.

Because these kids with a 3 chip camera and final cut pro don't have reliable sources. And besides conspiracy theorists tend to have psychological issues....

[mouse]

Because these kids with a 3 chip camera and final cut pro don't have reliable sources. And besides conspiracy theorists tend to have psychological issues....



So anyone who has a question about 9/11 is a conspiracy theorists?
Nice little narrow mind you have going there. I can't wait till you visit San Antonio and ask a question about the Alamo.

[mouse]

Jets were scrambled.

Really? In all the time I stared at the TV that day I didn't see not one fighter jet what show was you watching?


Failures to Scramble
No plausible explanation has been provided for failing to scramble interceptors in a timely fashion from bases within easy range to protect the September 11th targets. Fighters that were dispatched were scrambled from distant bases. Early in the attack, when Flight 11 had turned directly south toward New York City, it was obvious that New York City and the World Trade Center, and Washington D.C. would be likely targets. Yet fighters were not scrambled from the bases near the targets. They were only scrambled from distant bases. Moreover there were no redundant or backup scrambles.
New York City

Flight 11 had been flying south toward New York City from about 8:30 AM. Yet no interceptors were scrambled from nearby Atlantic City, or La Guardia, or from Langley, Virginia. Numerous other bases were not ordered to scramble fighters.
Washington D.C.

No interceptors were scrambled from Andrews Air Force Base to protect the capital, at least not before the Pentagon was hit. Andrews Air Force Base had two squadrons of fighters on alert, and is only about 10 miles from the Pentagon.

NORAD Stand-Down
The Prevention of Interceptions of the Commandeered Planes

It is standard operating procedure (SOP) to scramble jet fighters whenever a jetliner goes off course or radio contact with it is lost. Between September 2000 and June 2001, interceptors were scrambled 67 times. 1 In the year 2000 jets were scrambled 129 times. 2

There are several elements involved in domestic air defense. The air traffic control system continuously monitors air traffic and notifies NORAD of any deviations of any aircraft from their flight-paths or loss of radio contact. NORAD monitors air and space traffic continuously and is prepared to react immediately to threats and emergencies. It has the authority to order units from the Air National Guard, the Air Force, or other armed services to scramble fighters in pursuit of jetliners in trouble.

Routine interception procedures were not followed on September 11th, 2001.

[ChumpDumper]

How come not one jet fighter was scrambled during the worst attack in US history and yet a year earlier over 129 jet fighters were?
Fighters that were dispatched were scrambled from distant basesWhy did you lie about jets' not being scrambled?

[mouse]

Because I like millions of others did not see any. Your point is like saying your dying at a ST gtg and no one cares to help you. And I say that is not true we all wanted to help you.
Your going to go by what really took place and that is you saw no one came up to you.
the rest is all talk.

facts are no jets were ever seen in any area of any of the shit that was taking place. Not one by the Pentagon the most so called protect spot on earth? Not one by Washington where one plane supposedly crashed to the ground, and not one by the WTC which already had been hit by a plane? You have a case where a man falls asleep in his plane and 10 minutes later there is a Fighter plane to see why, and yet the WTC gets hit by a large passenger plane that was hijacked and no sign of a fighter pilot? If you can't question that your one easy to convince American.

You can say all these so called jets were scrambled but that's is all hearsay if not one actually showed up where the shit was. And besides your going to harp on one portion of the topic to avoid the meat of all the lies? You rather find some small portion of the topic to dwell on instead of saying why WTC7 is not in the 9/11 report? Your bias and one sided on all the 9/11 issues and you really have nothing to ad since your happy with everything you have been told.

Which amazes me since you seem to be able to question Bush in the past but not 9/11
I find that odd where you draw the lines.

[PM5K]

So this is the thread that got B2B panties all up in a wad?

I haven't read it and probably won't, cliffs?

[BacktoBasics]

I find that odd where you draw the lines.Question of the day.

[ChumpDumper]

Because I like millions of others did not see any.But they were scrambled and you lied when you said they were not. This is why nothing ever comes of these conversations.

You lie.

You just repeat lie after lie and when one lie is exposed, you quickly change the subject (which may or may not mean spouting out more lies), then repeat the original lies again sometime later like it was never dealt with before.


You can say all these so called jets were scrambled but that's is all hearsay if not one actually showed up where the shit was.Um, no. The scrambled jets are a matter of fact -- a fact you just posted above.

And besides your going to harp on one portion of the topic to avoid the meat of all the lies?I think it's very instructive for anyone reading to see how you kicked your own ass right off the bat. It's not my fault you lied in one post and then exposed your own lie in another shortly thereafter.


You rather find some small portion of the topic to dwell on instead of saying why WTC7 is not in the 9/11 report?Ah, this is where you try to change the subject. I will stipulate that WTC7 was not mentioned in the 9/11 Commission Report -- but there is a 130-page report solely committed to the collapse of WTC7, so I don't quite understand why you are bitching about that anymore.


Your bias and one sided on all the 9/11 issues and you really have nothing to ad since your happy with everything you have been told.Not everything, but nothing you or any other truther has come up with has convinced me of anything different from the basic official story.


Which amazes me since you seem to be able to question Bush in the past but not 9/11
I find that odd where you draw the lines.I thought Bush was incompetent in many areas. The basic official story more or less confirms my thoughts.

[mouse]

Well since your obviously the most educated person in dealing with 9/11 I will just approach you with any questions i have in the future. I find it ironic how you don't have your own website that can debunk the millions of 9/11 websites out there.

Hell who knew ST had it's own Huffington post right here in the club? You think because you have proof that pig ass is put inside each wiener they make I am going to not taste it for myself? I said where were all the jets you say had been scrambled?

You find some document that shows 120 miles away private Pyle jumped in his jet 30 minutes after the fact as evidence? If your going to call me out for lies then do the same to all the links I posted go to the sites and have them remove there postings!

The facts are your just out to kill the messenger your whole point is to provide proof I'm full of shit instead of providing proof what really took place on 9/11 and I don't care i am not about to take your word for it that those buildings came down at free fall speed due to jet fuel. So go ahead and try and twist everything I post as lies I am just one person your talent is really being wasted on me, why not venture out to the real world and have that Loose Change movie pulled from public viewing?Why not share your stone cold hard evidence with the the victims of 9/11? They could use your ground breaking information more than I can.

You won't you know why?
because you can only get away with your refried bullshit here at ST where you have a very simple minded audience.

[ChumpDumper]

Well since your obviously the most educated person in dealing with 9/11 I will just approach you with any questions i have in the future.Don't you do that already?


I find it ironic how you don't have your own website that can debunk the millions of 9/11 websites out there.No need -- there are several sites that do a great job of that already. Would you like a list of links to them?


Hell who knew ST had it's own Huffington post right here in the club? You think because you have proof that pig ass is put inside each wiener they make I am going to not taste it for myself? I said where were all the jets you say had been scrambled?You said no jets were scrambled.


You find some document that shows 120 miles away private Pyle jumped in his jet 30 minutes after the fact as evidence? If your going to call me out for lies then do the same to all the links I posted go to the sites and have them remove there postings!I can't prevent people from lying. I can choose to counter their claims if I like. I like doing that here.


The facts are your just out to kill the messenger your whole point is to provide proof I'm full of shit instead of providing proof what really took place on 9/11 and I don't careIf you don't care, why do you respond? I already said I cared enough to respond. I actually have people like you to thank for my acceptance of the basic official story of 9/11. People like you asked questions -- I took the time to look up the answers. I answered them to my satisfaction.


i am not about to take your word for it that those buildings came down at free fall speed due to jet fuel.Well they didn't fall that fast, so you don't have to.


So go ahead and try and twist everything I post as liesNot everything -- but you certainly did lie about the scrambling of jets. After several years of this, I have little patience for lies.


I am just one person your talent is really being wasted on me, why not venture out to the real world and have that Loose Change movie pulled from public viewing?Why not share your stone cold hard evidence with the the victims of 9/11? They could use your ground breaking information more than I can.Nothing I have posted about 9/11 is groundbreaking. It's all out there in books, magazines, newspapers, documentaries and floating about the internets. It's all been done.

The question I have is why have you never bothered to look?


You won't you know why?
because you can only get away with your refried bullshit here at ST where you have a very simple minded audience.I actually cleared something up on the Loose Change forums using my real name.

See if you can find it!

[mouse]

But they were scrambled and you lied when you said they were not. This is why nothing ever comes of these conversations.

You lie.

Re-read my quotes!

Failures to Scramble

No plausible explanation has been provided for failing to scramble interceptors in a timely fashion from bases within easy range to protect the September 11th targets. Fighters that were dispatched were scrambled from distant bases. Early in the attack, when Flight 11 had turned directly south toward New York City, it was obvious that New York City and the World Trade Center, and Washington D.C. would be likely targets. Yet fighters were not scrambled from the bases near the targets. They were only scrambled from distant bases. Moreover there were no redundant or backup scrambles.


Maybe I worded it wrong, is this better?


Failures to Intercept

Even though the interceptors were not dispatched from the most logical bases, the ones that were scrambled still had adequate time to reach their assigned planes. Why didn't they? Because they were only flying at a small fraction of their top speed. That is the conclusion implicit in NORAD's timeline.
Otis to the WTC

here is a link something your not in a habit of providing.

http://911research.wtc7.net/planes/analysis/norad/




You just repeat lie after lie and when one lie is exposed, you quickly change the subject (which may or may not mean spouting out more lies), then repeat the original lies again sometime later like it was never dealt with before.

How does one know he or she is lying unless someone like you shows them different? When did I say I was a 9/11 expert?
I will address each lie individually to satisfy you as I hope you do the same.


Um, no. The scrambled jets are a matter of fact -- a fact you just posted above.
I think it's very instructive for anyone reading to see how you kicked your own ass right off the bat. It's not my fault you lied in one post and then exposed your own lie in another shortly thereafter.

Sorry I was going by what was on my TV I am sure in the secret underground Basement you live in on one of your many tv monitors you saw the jets, I didn't. Am I wrong to bring it up?


Ah, this is where you try to change the subject.

Acully it's called moving on. I figure if I am not 100% dead on with a subject why dwell on it as there are many other questions about 9/11 not just jets not being scambled. I could turn this around and say you like to harp on one subject to avoid talking about the others. Don't I get a chance to rethink my postings and do another search on the matter?

Unlike you I am open minded enough to see if there is evidence i may have overlooked.



I will stipulate that WTC7 was not mentioned in the 9/11 Commission Report -- but there is a 130-page report solely committed to the collapse of WTC7, so I don't quite understand why you are bitching about that anymore.


Maybe your off base with what i was saying. I don't mean the letters WTC and the number 7 is not in the 9/11 report. I am talking about the report avoiding talking about WTC7. I can have the letters SEX in a 500 page report I make and never actually talk about what sex is of if i have it on a daily basis.

Things not mentioned in the 9/11 report on WTC7

WTC7 Security Official Details Explosions Inside Building

testimony from maintenance workers there during the attacks.

listen to the clips here .
http://prisonplanet.com/audio/190607clips2.mp3

Avery and Burmas, who played the two short clips of the interview prior to further analysis and more clips to be played on their own GCN radio show later tonight at 7pm CST, further described how the individual had witnessed dead bodies in the lobby of 7 and was told by the police not to look at them.

This is vital information be cause it is in direct conflict with the official claim that no one was killed inside building 7. The 9/11 Commission report did not even mention building, yet here we have a key witness who told them he saw dead people inside the building after explosions had gutted the lower level.

What makes all this information even more explosive is the fact that this individual was interviewed by the 9/11 Commission as they conducted their so called investigation.

The fact that the building was not even mentioned in the report in light of this information thus becomes chilling and indicates that officials have lied in stating that they have not come into contact with evidence of explosive devices within the buildings.



Not everything, but nothing you or any other truther has come up with has convinced me of anything different from the basic official story.


How do you feel about Omissions and Distortions?

Most of what has been omitted from the Commission Report, particularly the contents of the analysis section. Indeed, the omissions are so numerous they could fill a book, and do -- David Griffin's 339-page Omissions and Distortions. Here we list only some of the more egregious omissions, falsehoods, and contradictions in the Report. In the following we use 'Report' to refer to the entire Report including the Notes section.
Omissions


* The Report fails to acknowledge that no steel-framed high-rise building has ever collapsed due to fires.
* The Report fails to mention the total collapse of 47-story steel-framed skyscraper Building 7 at 5:20 on the day of the attack.
* The Report contains no mention of the interview in which the owner of Building 7 states that he and the Fire Department decided to "pull" Building 7 -- an apparent admission of a conspiracy to destroy the building and its contents.
* The Report fails to mention the rapid removal and recycling of the structural steel from the collapsed World Trade Center buildings, even to make excuses for it.
* The Report makes no mention of a statement by then-Mayor Rudolph Giuliani to Peter Jennings indicating he had foreknowledge of the collapses: "We were operating out of there when we were told that the World Trade Center was gonna collapse, and it did collapse before we could get out of the building."
* The Report contains no mentions of eyewitness accounts of explosions preceding the collapse of South Towers.
* The Report fails to mention that George W. Bush's brother, Marvin Bush, and his cousin, Wirt Walker III, were principals in the company that had the contract to provide security for the World Trade Center, Stratesec, nor does it mention the company.
* The Report makes no mention of the fact that a new lessor took control of the World Trade Center complex just six weeks before the attack, obtained an insurance policy covering terrorist attacks, and successfully sued the insurance companies to obtain twice the multi-billion-dollar value of the policy.
* The Report repeats the list of 19 suspects identified by the FBI within days of the attack, while failing to mention that six of them reported themselves alive after the attack.
* The Report fails to mention any of the reports of behavior by the alleged hijackers before the attack that belie the official story that they were devout Muslims on a suicide mission for Allah.
* The Report fails to mention that the published passenger lists contained no Arab names -- a fact publicized by skeptics of the official story.
* The Report fails to ask why the plane that crashed into the Pentagon was not stopped by anti-aircraft missile batteries that presumably ring the building.
* The Report fails to mention that no credible footage of the Pentagon attack has been made public, despite public knowledge that the FBI seized footage of the attack from nearby businesses.
* The Report does not ask why the Secret Service did not obtain air cover for the President's motorcade from the Sarasota school to the airport, nor for Air Force One, which took off at about 9:54, until about 11:10.
* The Report avoids mentioning several reports that government officials and business leaders received warnings and avoided targets of the attacks, including:
o A warning by the FBI advising Attorney General John Ashcroft to avoid flying on commercial airlines.
o The report that Pentagon officials suddenly canceled travel plans the evening before the attack.
o The cancellation of plans by Ariel Sharon to attend an event in New York City on 9/11/01.
o A warning to San Francisco Mayor Willie Brown to avoid flying.
o The grounding of Salman Rushdie by Scotland Yard.
* The Report avoids mentioning a warning received by employees of Odigo hours before the attack.
* The Report does not mention that letters with weaponized anthrax were sent to the two most powerful senators attempting to slow the passage of the 9/11/01 attack-predicated USA PATRIOT Act.
* The Report states that the Commission was "chartered to prepare a full and complete account of the circumstances surrounding the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks, including preparedness for and the immediate response to the attacks," but fails to mention that it makes no attempt to meet its charter.




I thought Bush was incompetent in many areas. The basic official story more or less confirms my thoughts.

You seem so pleased with all that took place I wish I had your peace and wisdom to share with others.

[mouse]

I actually cleared something up on the Loose Change forums using my real name.

See if you can find it!

As soon as you find a 9/11 family member who supports your bitterness on this topic.

[mouse]

Another thing get off your high horse about lying your no saint. How can you call someone a lier if they are saying something they saw or read? To me lying is knowing you know the real truth and you lie anyway. That is like me saying there is no TRoll forum and I know there is one. Just because you point out where someone was misquoted doesn't mean they lie.

look at this screen shot and tell me how you can call me a lier after I only posted what I have read.

http://i125.photobucket.com/albums/p55/RackTheMouse/911-lies.jpg

[ChumpDumper]

Re-read my quotes!Ok.
How come not one jet fighter was scrambled during the worst attack in US history and yet a year earlier over 129 jet fighters were?That was easy.


How does one know he or she is lying unless someone like you shows them different?Actually you showed that you lied.


Sorry I was going by what was on my TV I am sure in the secret underground Basement you live in on one of your many tv monitors you saw the jets, I didn't. Am I wrong to bring it up?You were wrong to lie about no jets' being scrambled.



Acully it's called moving on.People do that when they get owned around here. Especially if they own themselves.


I figure if I am not 100% dead on with a subject why dwell on it as there are many other questions about 9/11 not just jets not being scambled.then why ask the question in the first place?


I could turn this around and say you like to harp on one subject to avoid talking about the others. Don't I get a chance to rethink my postings and do another search on the matter?You certainly had the opportunity to expose your own lie. Congratulations for taking that opportunity.


Unlike you I am open minded enough to see if there is evidence i may have overlooked.Not really. It's been my experience that you ignore any arguments that someone opposing your views might present, either changing the subject or resorting to ad hominems such as saying one such person with opposing viewpoints sits in a basement watching multiple monitors. The phrase "man sauce" is used quite often.


Maybe your off base with what i was saying. I don't mean the letters WTC and the number 7 is not in the 9/11 report. I am talking about the report avoiding talking about WTC7. I can have the letters SEX in a 500 page report I make and never actually talk about what sex is of if i have it on a daily basis.

Things not mentioned in the 9/11 report on WTC7

WTC7 Security Official Details Explosions Inside Building

testimony from maintenance workers there during the attacks.

listen to the clips here .
http://prisonplanet.com/audio/190607clips2.mp3

Avery and Burmas, who played the two short clips of the interview prior to further analysis and more clips to be played on their own GCN radio show later tonight at 7pm CST, further described how the individual had witnessed dead bodies in the lobby of 7 and was told by the police not to look at them.

This is vital information be cause it is in direct conflict with the official claim that no one was killed inside building 7. The 9/11 Commission report did not even mention building, yet here we have a key witness who told them he saw dead people inside the building after explosions had gutted the lower level.

What makes all this information even more explosive is the fact that this individual was interviewed by the 9/11 Commission as they conducted their so called investigation.

The fact that the building was not even mentioned in the report in light of this information thus becomes chilling and indicates that officials have lied in stating that they have not come into contact with evidence of explosive devices within the buildings.Did you know there was a cameraman running through the lobby of WTC7 after the South Tower fell? He spoke to a man in the lobby. No bodies anywhere.

I said there was no mention of WTC7 in the 9/11 Commission Report -- wht more do you want me to say about that?

It's kind of silly to focus on that when there is a separate report dedicated solely to WTC7.


How do you feel about Omissions and Distortions?

Most of what has been omitted from the Commission Report, particularly the contents of the analysis section. Indeed, the omissions are so numerous they could fill a book, and do -- David Griffin's 339-page Omissions and Distortions. Here we list only some of the more egregious omissions, falsehoods, and contradictions in the Report. In the following we use 'Report' to refer to the entire Report including the Notes section.
OmissionsI believe that David Griffin is mostly full of shit. It's easy to pick out his distortions in that list.


You seem so pleased with all that took place I wish I had your peace and wisdom to share with others.I am neither pleased nor terribly wise. I merely learned that thruthers usually aren't ultimately interested in the truth.

[ChumpDumper]

Another thing get off your high horse about lying your no saint. How can you call someone a lier if they are saying something they saw or read? To me lying is knowing you know the real truth and you lie anyway. That is like me saying there is no TRoll forum and I know there is one. Just because you point out where someone was misquoted doesn't mean they lie.

look at this screen shot and tell me how you can call me a lier after I only posted what I have read.

http://i125.photobucket.com/albums/p55/RackTheMouse/911-lies.jpgFighters did not scramble from Andrews. They scrambled from Otis AFB as that was their mission for the Northeast Air Defense Sector.

You said not a single plane was scrambled.

Planes were indeed scrambled.

You lied.

[mouse]

Fighters did not scramble from Andrews. They scrambled from Otis AFB as that was their mission for the Northeast Air Defense Sector.

You said not a single plane was scrambled.

Planes were indeed scrambled.

You lied.

I meant to say from Andrews! is that better you happy?
two can play your games.
keep calling me a lier what ever keeps you away from exposing the 9/11 cover ups go for it I will be your whipping boy for the day.

I hope you have fun like some snitch in the 3rd grade that pointed out to the teacher little Johnny is cheating on his test. I hope you feel all warm and fuzzy inside you deserve it.


Looks like you still have a few more websites to correct....


http://i125.photobucket.com/albums/p55/RackTheMouse/RTM-2/chump-sucks-2.jpg

[ChumpDumper]

I meant to say from Andrews! is that better you happy?
two can play your games.
keep calling me a lier what ever keeps you away from exposing the 9/11 cover ups go for it I will be your whipping boy for the day.

I hope you have fun like some snitch in the 3rd grade that pointed out to the teacher little Johnny is cheating on his test. I hope you feel all warm and fuzzy inside you deserve it.


Looks like you still have a few more websites to correct....


http://i125.photobucket.com/albums/p55/RackTheMouse/RTM-2/chump-sucks-2.jpgThat website confirms what I said.

Planes were scrambled from the Northeast Air Defense Sector bases. Planes there are ready to scramble.

Trying to make a big deal out of the fact that they came from Langley and not Andrews is pretty stupid. Planes from Langley that are already prepared to scramble can be over Washington faster than planes at Andrews can be prepared to scramble.

They were supposed to come from Langley and Otis.

Not Andrews.

[mouse]

That website confirms what I said.

Planes were scrambled from the Northeast Air Defense Sector bases. Planes there are ready to scramble.

Trying to make a big deal out of the fact that they came from Langley and not Andrews is pretty stupid. Planes from Langley that are already prepared to scramble can be over Washington faster than planes at Andrews can be prepared to scramble.

They were supposed to come from Langley and Otis.

Not Andrews.

Are we going to split hairs on every point? The truth is I saw more than once (No jets Scrambled) and I posted it. You can't call people lairs because they pass on what someone else has said in a book or TV.

That is like me saying your gay just because I let you suck my cock. maybe your not gay just very lonely.

[ChumpDumper]

Are we going to split hairs on every point? The truth is I saw more than once (No jets Scrambled) and I posted it. You can't call people lairs because they pass on what someone else has said in a book or TV.OK, you are propagating lies.

I find that details are very important in these discussions. Maybe you don't, but that won't stop me from addressing your lies or those of others you choose to ignorantly repeat.


That is like me saying your gay just because I let you suck my cock. maybe your not gay just very lonely.
It's been my experience that you ignore any arguments that someone opposing your views might present, either changing the subject or resorting to ad hominems

[PM5K]

that is like me saying your gay just because i let you suck my cock. Maybe your not gay just very lonely.


lol.....

[mouse]

I find that details are very important in these discussions. Maybe you don't, but that won't stop me from addressing your lies or those of others you choose to ignorantly repeat.

If your so Mr. I only report the truth my shit don't stink I only expose lies type of fella? then why aren't you the one bringing up the 9/11 report?

Why should I do your job?


Sep-11-2009 23:46printcomments
The 9/11 Commission Rejects own Report as Based on Government Lies
http://www.salem-news.com/articles/september112009/911_truth_9-11-09.php

[PM5K]

Hey Mouse, my computer is acting funny, what do you think it is?

[mouse]

Hey Mouse, my computer is acting funny, what do you think it is?

User error

:wakeup

[ChumpDumper]

If your so Mr. I only report the truth my shit don't stink I only expose lies type of fella? then why aren't you the one bringing up the 9/11 report?I never said it was perfect. I said it was a political document designed to cover various asses.

That said, the basic narrative outlined in it hasn't really been disproved by any truther anywhere. I have found that once you try to get a truther to say what he really thinks happened on 9/11, they never give an answer. Instead, they get angry, try to change the subject and/or insult me. They are allowed to "just ask questions" but they are very intolerant of the queries of others.


Why should I do your job?This isn't my job.



Sep-11-2009 23:46printcomments
The 9/11 Commission Rejects own Report as Based on Government Lies
http://www.salem-news.com/articles/september112009/911_truth_9-11-09.phpWow, that was really in-depth. The author says it's all lies and then -- nothing.

Par for the course.

[mouse]

I never said it was perfect. I said it was a political document designed to cover various asses.

would you ever call them liars?


That said, the basic narrative outlined in it hasn't really been disproved by any truther anywhere. I have found that once you try to get a truther to say what he really thinks happened on 9/11, they never give an answer.

How can you get an answer when the truther is in the process of finding the truth? Do you ask your parents if your going to have a brother or a sister if their not done fucking yet?



Instead, they get angry, try to change the subject and/or insult me. They are allowed to "just ask questions" but they are very intolerant of the queries of others.

You may want to back tract to old 9/11 topics in the politics forum you get just as upset and you have many insults to share.


This isn't my job.

I know your Job is to single out one poster in all of the www.



Wow, that was really in-depth. The author says it's all lies and then -- nothing.

Par for the course.

You really want me to post longer screen caps and links?

[ChumpDumper]

would you ever call them liars? Already have.


How can you get an answer when the truther is in the process of finding the truth?Not even a working theory? Surely you have worked out some possibility that fits the facts that are available to you. It's been eight years.


Do you ask your parents if your going to have a brother or a sister if their not done fucking yet?I can ask a writer what his book is about while he's writing it.


You may want to back tract to old 9/11 topics in the politics forum you get just as upset and you have many insults to share.I actually say what I think happened on 9/11.


I know your Job is to single out one poster in all of the www.That is not my job.


You really want me to post longer screen caps and links?The ones you have posted so far suck. If you don't have the patience to read more than a couple of paragraphs, your parents will never finish fucking.

[mouse]

The ones you have posted so far suck. If you don't have the patience to read more than a couple of paragraphs, your parents will never finish fucking.

what was that again about getting upset and using insults you despise?

[ChumpDumper]

what was that again about getting upset and using insults you despise?I'm far from upset. I was just repeating your metaphor.

Does that upset you?

[mouse]

Does that upset you?


What upsets me is how you can stomp on the graves of the poeple who died on 9/11 and smile about it. I have to report to probation be back later....

[ChumpDumper]

What upsets me is how you can stomp on the graves of the poeple who died on 9/11 and smile about it. I have to report to probation be back later....I have the greatest sympathy for the victims. I don't understand why you have to resort to such personal attacks when your errors and lies are exposed and corrected. If you don't like it you should refrain from lying or repeating the lies of others in the future.

[BacktoBasics]

User error

:wakeup:lmao

[xellos88330]

Alot of people think that scrambling an aircraft is an easy task. It really isn't and takes massive coordination. Pilots need to be informed of what the objective/target(s) are, weapons need to be loaded and armed (I was a weapons loader in the USAF and know that it takes approx. 4-10 minutes depending on how much ordnance/munitions are needed for the mission) aircraft needs to be fueled, flight plans need to be set, skies need to be clear, weather can also play a factor as well. The military is nothing like the movies. So with everything combined scrambling an aircraft could very well take anywhere 5-10 minutes depending on the readiness of the unit. By the time NORAD was warned of the suspected hijackings it was too late no matter how close the base was. And on another note, if the fighters were there in time, it would be quite difficult to distinguish the correct aircraft considering commercial airlines fly through the area.

[JoshO501]

who cares the more important question is who crapped in the urinal!

[Cant_Be_Faded]

Here we go again..

Mouse just give it up, brah. You're never going to provide the air tight five thousand page report, rife with girder engineering specifics that chumpdumper requires to change his mind. And he has two smart ass comments for every retort. Just give it up.

[mouse]

if you don't like this country...........









YEW CAN GITTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTT OUTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTT



have you forgotten?

And go where?

[mouse]

Here we go again..

Mouse just give it up, brah. You're never going to provide the air tight five thousand page report, rife with girder engineering specifics that chumpdumper requires to change his mind. And he has two smart ass comments for every retort. Just give it up.


What is there to give up? I made a topic to show people there is another 9/11 movie out there in case they wish to view it. I never said I wanted to prove ChumpDump is really the nephew of Donald Rumsfeld.

You would think smart people get that way by asking questions Chump acts like he was the one who orchestrated the whole thing when he spits out his one sided views and his "lier lire pants on fire" comments.

You may want me to give up, and Chump may want me to forget but those people who died that day may say different they may be saying your all we got mouse keep up the fight, a fight for truth.............

CTAxHVN-VSQ

[mouse]

some 3rd-world countries.

If I want 3rd world country lifestyle I can just move to the west side of SA.

rBlxb9pXwu8

[mouse]

D_s9CIJvx0I

[The Franchise]

I have no idea what happened on 911, but I don't believe those planes brought the buildings down either. It goes against common sense. I don't care to sway anyone to my way of thinking, but I can tell by some of the posts in this thread that a lot of you seem to accept what you're told blindly. Ask all the questions you want mouse, I'd like an answer acceptable someday. :toast

[mouse]

If your sister died in a bus crash and the police say it was greyhound and the sheriff department says it was trail ways wouldn't you want to know what bus she was on?

Well the 9/11 commission is saying what bus? She was on a train.

WrPivJQOUZk

[mouse]

LWE58Z5evgw

[NZ Spurs]

Paranoid schizophrenics are prone to delusions, tales in which random events become deeply meaningful. Some believe in complex conspiracies; others think they are Jesus Christ.

These stories sound crazy, but they may be the brain's efforts to make sense of its own internal messages, suggests Shitij Kapur, professor of psychiatry at the University of Toronto and vice president of research at the Canadian Centre for Addiction and Mental Health.

[xellos88330]

Sheep!!! All of you are sheep.

The REAL conspiracy is the fact that the government knows that people can buy into so called 'conspiracies' and will watch the television shows that talk all about it while showing everyone ads to buy prescription drugs. It is a way to get money into the economy. Everyone is blind!!!!









PS: I was being sarcastic.

[NZ Spurs]

I have no idea what happened on 911, but I don't believe those planes brought the buildings down either. It goes against common sense.

Common sense implies that the majority of people have an understanding of an experience so as to have a collective knowledge. I don't know about you but that's the first time I have ever seen a building (as unique in its construction as the twin towers) brought down by plane or any other means. So how then can we have common sense?

Why do people continue to question expert opinion based on actual science. Is it because the answers aren't "sexy" enough.

[Alex Jones]

Why do people continue to question expert opinion based on actual science. Is it because the answers aren't "sexy" enough.


Question expert opinion? Please post some links!

I hope your not talking about the so called experts that said jet fuel melted the steel beams in the WTC. when you meed temperatures of

1535ºC (2795ºF) - melting point of iron
~1510ºC (2750ºF) - melting point of typical structural steel
the temperature of the fires.

~825ºC (1517ºF) - maximum temperature

vxcucTLkWtY


The experts once said RBGH was good for your milk. And now many are dying!

3SXVpvgXo9Q


Wasn't Colin Powel an expert in matters of War?

Look how Iraq ended up.

feel free to use the word expert some more. I have more to teach you.

[ChumpDumper]

Question expert opinion? Please post some links!

I hope your not talking about the so called experts that said jet fuel melted the steel beams in the WTC. when you meed temperatures of

1535ºC (2795ºF) - melting point of iron
~1510ºC (2750ºF) - melting point of typical structural steel
the temperature of the fires.

[FONT=sans-serif][FONT=sans-serif][SIZE=+2] ~825ºC (1517ºF) - maximum temperatureStill beating up that poor straw man you made years ago? The accepted theory of the collapse did not require the steel to melt, only to weaken and subsequently deform under it's own weight and everything it was supporting. The fires were hot enough to make that happen.


"Melted" Steel
Claim: "We have been lied to," announces the Web site AttackOnAmerica.net. "The first lie was that the load of fuel from the aircraft was the cause of structural failure. No kerosene fire can burn hot enough to melt steel." The posting is entitled "Proof Of Controlled Demolition At The WTC."

FACT: Jet fuel burns at 800° to 1500°F, not hot enough to melt steel (2750°F). However, experts agree that for the towers to collapse, their steel frames didn't need to melt, they just had to lose some of their structural strength — and that required exposure to much less heat. "I have never seen melted steel in a building fire," says retired New York deputy fire chief Vincent Dunn, author of The Collapse Of Burning Buildings: A Guide To Fireground Safety. "But I've seen a lot of twisted, warped, bent and sagging steel. What happens is that the steel tries to expand at both ends, but when it can no longer expand, it sags and the surrounding concrete cracks."

"Steel loses about 50 percent of its strength at 1100°F," notes senior engineer Farid Alfawak-hiri of the American Institute of Steel Construction. "And at 1800° it is probably at less than 10 percent." NIST also believes that a great deal of the spray-on fireproofing insulation was likely knocked off the steel beams that were in the path of the crashing jets, leaving the metal more vulnerable to the heat.

But jet fuel wasn't the only thing burning, notes Forman Williams, a professor of engineering at the University of California, San Diego, and one of seven structural engineers and fire experts that PM consulted. He says that while the jet fuel was the catalyst for the WTC fires, the resulting inferno was intensified by the combustible material inside the buildings, including rugs, curtains, furniture and paper. NIST reports that pockets of fire hit 1832°F.

"The jet fuel was the ignition source," Williams tells PM. "It burned for maybe 10 minutes, and [the towers] were still standing in 10 minutes. It was the rest of the stuff burning afterward that was responsible for the heat transfer that eventually brought them down."

http://www.popularmechanics.com/technology/military_law/1227842.html?page=4#steel

But you already know this.

You've been told this.

Several times.

I await your ad hominem and change of subject.

[Alex Jones]

Facts:CumpDumper avoids.


In February 2005, The Windsor building in Madrid (pictured) burned for over 24 hours as shooting flames engulfed almost the entire structure and yet the building did not collapse. The core of the WTC was exponentially more robust (http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/wtc1_core.html) than the Windsor building. So we have one building that burned incessantly for over 24 hours and did not fall, compared to two buildings which were structurally far superior, burned briefly from limited fires, and yet both collapsed within an average time of 79 minutes - and Meigs claims they should have collapsed sooner!
http://www.prisonplanet.com/images/august2006/100806windsor.jpg

[xellos88330]

About the melting steel... the steel doesn't have to 'melt' to become structurally unsound. The heat WILL weaken it, it is science fact! It is also a fact that jet fuel can burn hot enough to bend the steel.

[NZ Spurs]

When did you become a structural engineer Mouse?

[Alex Jones]

IRoONuSQgGE

http://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=david+ray+griffin+&search_type=&aq=f

[Alex Jones]

About the melting steel... the steel doesn't have to 'melt' to become structurally unsound. The heat WILL weaken it, it is science fact! It is also a fact that jet fuel can burn hot enough to bend the steel.

Then why are there kerosene heaters? Do you not watch any of the videos?


vxcucTLkWtY

[Alex Jones]

When did you become a structural engineer Mouse?


Right around the time ChumpDumper wrote the 9/11 Commission report.

When did Kori become a spokes person for the Spurs?

When did Angel_luv become the first female disciple of Christ?

When did Manny become the weather God?


When did NZ Spurs become the douche of the topic?

the list goes on brah!

[NZ Spurs]

Hey Mouse check this out:


Matthys Levy, the chairman of Weidlinger Associates and one of the engineers on the study team, says, “The buildings had tremendous reserve capacity and that was reflected in all of the elements we analyzed. In fact, because there were so much excess capacity, the columns even in the impact floors did not buckle immediately, but failed as the result of the fire.” The report states that failure of the WTC’s steel floor supports (“trusses”) did not contribute to the collapses. Instead, the collapses were caused by the failure of steel structural columns that were either destroyed when the planes hit or lost fireproofing, leaving them vulnerable to the weakening effects of the ensuing fires.

Matthys Levy, The same guy from your "youtube" video.

Try doing some research that involves actual reading.

[NZ Spurs]

I will give you the courtesy of reading your next reply, and then thats it for me. Ive got more important things to do. Its been fun though Mouse.

[mouse]

Hey Mouse check this out:



Matthys Levy, The same guy from your "youtube" video.

Try doing some research that involves actual reading.



Why shouldn't Matthys Levy comments be posted? Why should I have to screen every quote before it's posted. I am not Chump where I can't see both sides of an issue. He pointed out Jets were scrambled (even though none were within where the hijackers were,) And I accepted it.

You don't think I want all views as long as they are truthful?

I am not here to post "ha ha told you so!" quotes and videos. unlike you this is not a game for me. If you think jet fuel can bend steel and a huge steel frame structure can fall to the ground at nearly free fall speed and turn into dust?
Then more power to you. I as an American have the right to think differently.

And if you want only scientific research on the matter then I call your Mattys Levy a raise you a Rosie O'Donnell

O'Donnell wrote :


• The fires in WTC 7 were not evenly distributed, so a perfect collapse was impossible.
• Silverstein said to the fire department commander “the smartest thing to do is pull it.”
• Firefighters withdrawing from the area stated the building was going to “blow up”.
• The roof of WTC 7 visibly crumbled and the building collapsed perfectly into its footprint.
• Molten steel and partially evaporated steel members were found in the debris.

[mouse]

Why don't you and your 9/11 grave stomping pals watch a movie tonight?

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=3979568779414136481#

[mouse]

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=8797525979024486145#

[mouse]

iEuJimaumW4

[xellos88330]

Then why are there kerosene heaters? Do you not watch any of the videos?


vxcucTLkWtY

Do kerosene heaters hold as much fuel as an aircraft? Is there as much fuel ignited as an aircraft fire? I don't think so.

"Melted" Steel
Claim: "We have been lied to," announces the Web site AttackOnAmerica.net. "The first lie was that the load of fuel from the aircraft was the cause of structural failure. No kerosene fire can burn hot enough to melt steel." The posting is entitled "Proof Of Controlled Demolition At The WTC."
FACT: Jet fuel burns at 800° to 1500°F, not hot enough to melt steel (2750°F). However, experts agree that for the towers to collapse, their steel frames didn't need to melt, they just had to lose some of their structural strength — and that required exposure to much less heat. "I have never seen melted steel in a building fire," says retired New York deputy fire chief Vincent Dunn, author of The Collapse Of Burning Buildings: A Guide To Fireground Safety. "But I've seen a lot of twisted, warped, bent and sagging steel. What happens is that the steel tries to expand at both ends, but when it can no longer expand, it sags and the surrounding concrete cracks."

"Steel loses about 50 percent of its strength at 1100°F," notes senior engineer Farid Alfawak-hiri of the American Institute of Steel Construction. "And at 1800° it is probably at less than 10 percent." NIST also believes that a great deal of the spray-on fireproofing insulation was likely knocked off the steel beams that were in the path of the crashing jets, leaving the metal more vulnerable to the heat.

But jet fuel wasn't the only thing burning, notes Forman Williams, a professor of engineering at the University of California, San Diego, and one of seven structural engineers and fire experts that PM consulted. He says that while the jet fuel was the catalyst for the WTC fires, the resulting inferno was intensified by the combustible material inside the buildings, including rugs, curtains, furniture and paper. NIST reports that pockets of fire hit 1832°F.

"The jet fuel was the ignition source," Williams tells PM. "It burned for maybe 10 minutes, and [the towers] were still standing in 10 minutes. It was the rest of the stuff burning afterward that was responsible for the heat transfer that eventually brought them down."

http://www.popularmechanics.com/technology/military_law/1227842.html?page=4

[xellos88330]

On another note... the ejection of the debris outwards, think of this.

I have a straight stick, I bend it in half, it breaks, debris shoots outwards from the snapping point. Now imagine that, but only with entire building floors and equipment providing the pressure. Do the math.

[mouse]

After your stick broke did it turn into powder or dust? Were you not left with part of the stick that was solid?
Did the stick test positive for sulfur and thermite? Did someone come along and take the rest of the stick away and ship it to China before anyone could test it?

I must admit I like your passion and you did a good job digging for some facts. Unlike ChumpDumper you made your point w/o trying to belittle the messenger.

But I must warn you if your going to use any popular mechanic links and quotes keep in mind they have an agenda and have been exposed for having to say what they say.

Popular Mechanics Exposed: Tool of Propaganda against 911 Truth
Bookmark and Share

Popular Mechanics has been exposed as the fraud it is, intellectually bankrupt rubbish of "errors and omissions" in it's attempt to put down the 9/11 Truth from emerging on what really happened on September 11, 2001.

Editors of this propaganda magazine (propaganda in regards to 9/11) are continually made to look foolish and ridiculous.

Listen here to a radio interview that seemed to be the reason for the cancellation of many others from the editors of this propaganda, who need to stay out of the 911 Truth Kitchen, for they just can't stand the heat.

The Charles Goyette Show", Wed Aug 23. The question arises if this is the cause for the cancellation of more interviews that never happened.


Crowd laughing at Popular Mechanics while its being exposed

http://www.debunkingskeptics.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=12&t=416




mp3 Size: 3MB 24 Minutes, from the Charles Joyette show.

Another great interview is that which Jack Blood of GCNlive.com radio network gave, where yet another Popular Mechanics editor was made to look the fool, as he attempted to defend the indefensible, intellectually bankrupt methodology and lies, with much disinformation. Listen to that interview here:

mp3 Size: 3MB 24 Minutes from Jack Blood radio show.

Popular Mechanics, and all the rest of those seeking to prop up the wicked and perverse"government conspiracy theory" of that day will continue to slide into derision by those capable to discern propaganda and detect fraudulence masquerading as journalism and objective reporting. Clearly, no one will defend the wholly inadequate 9/11 Commission report, with it's "errors" and "omissions" as well as "distortions" as Dr. David Ray Griffin brilliantly states it.

[mouse]

Do kerosene heaters hold as much fuel as an aircraft? Is there as much fuel ignited as an aircraft fire? I don't think so.

"Melted" Steel
Claim: "We have been lied to," announces the Web site AttackOnAmerica.net. "The first lie was that the load of fuel from the aircraft was the cause of structural failure. No kerosene fire can burn hot enough to melt steel." The posting is entitled "Proof Of Controlled Demolition At The WTC."
FACT: Jet fuel burns at 800° to 1500°F, not hot enough to melt steel (2750°F). However, experts agree that for the towers to collapse, their steel frames didn't need to melt, they just had to lose some of their structural strength — and that required exposure to much less heat. "I have never seen melted steel in a building fire," says retired New York deputy fire chief Vincent Dunn, author of The Collapse Of Burning Buildings: A Guide To Fireground Safety. "But I've seen a lot of twisted, warped, bent and sagging steel. What happens is that the steel tries to expand at both ends, but when it can no longer expand, it sags and the surrounding concrete cracks."

"Steel loses about 50 percent of its strength at 1100°F," notes senior engineer Farid Alfawak-hiri of the American Institute of Steel Construction. "And at 1800° it is probably at less than 10 percent." NIST also believes that a great deal of the spray-on fireproofing insulation was likely knocked off the steel beams that were in the path of the crashing jets, leaving the metal more vulnerable to the heat.

But jet fuel wasn't the only thing burning, notes Forman Williams, a professor of engineering at the University of California, San Diego, and one of seven structural engineers and fire experts that PM consulted. He says that while the jet fuel was the catalyst for the WTC fires, the resulting inferno was intensified by the combustible material inside the buildings, including rugs, curtains, furniture and paper. NIST reports that pockets of fire hit 1832°F.

"The jet fuel was the ignition source," Williams tells PM. "It burned for maybe 10 minutes, and [the towers] were still standing in 10 minutes. It was the rest of the stuff burning afterward that was responsible for the heat transfer that eventually brought them down."

http://www.popularmechanics.com/technology/military_law/1227842.html?page=4



This is very good work! :tu

Now answer me one question......WT7 was a steel framed building also that came down at almost free fall speed it had no jet crash into it and did not have gallons of jet fuel burning inside so explain to me how it came down.



owyqt-8RnKI

AwV5amOxcv8

[xellos88330]

I would have to look more into WTC7, I only looked at the towers. Do you have the time of the collapse?

[mouse]

I would have to look more into WTC7, I only looked at the towers. Do you have the time of the collapse?

About the same speed ChumpDumper used to bail out of this topic,

NIST has now officially accepted that WTC7 came down with the acceleration of gravity, but they still couch it as a phase in a 5.4 second interval they claim matches the 5.4 seconds required for their model to collapse 18 floors.



V0GHVEKrhng

5ArcMOkuoK0

[ChumpDumper]

Facts:CumpDumper avoids.


In February 2005, The Windsor building in Madrid (pictured) burned for over 24 hours as shooting flames engulfed almost the entire structure and yet the building did not collapse. The core of the WTC was exponentially more robust (http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/wtc1_core.html) than the Windsor building. So we have one building that burned incessantly for over 24 hours and did not fall, compared to two buildings which were structurally far superior, burned briefly from limited fires, and yet both collapsed within an average time of 79 minutes - and Meigs claims they should have collapsed sooner!
http://www.prisonplanet.com/images/august2006/100806windsor.jpgThat has already been addressed several times. The construction of the that building was completely different than that of the WTC towers, so it would have been impossible for it to fail in the same way the towers did.


A survey of the fire damaged structure of the Windsor Tower, Madrid, has concluded that the concrete structure “performed extraordinarily well in a severe fire”. The study, ‘Fire in the Windsor building, Madrid: Survey of the fire resistance and residual bearing capacity of the structure after the fire’ was carried out by the Spanish Instituto Technico de Materiales y Construcciones (INTEMAC). It underlined the need for fireproofing structural steel concluding that the “need for fireproofing of steel members to guarantee their performance in the event of fire was reconfirmed”.

The Windsor Tower fire started on the 21st floor of the 32 storey building in February 2005. The fire quickly spread due to a lack of fire stops between the curtain wall façade and the concrete floor slabs. Designed and built in the 1970s, the tower was built using traditional design methods. Extensive refurbishment was underway at the time of the fire. Ironically, part of the refurbishment programme was to bring the building’s fire standards up-to-date with the installation of active fire prevention and resistance measures.

Structural failure happened with the collapse of the steel perimeter columns which resulted with the floor slabs collapsing as the edge support was taken away. The massive concrete transfer slab at the 20th floor prevented further progressive failure

http://www.debunking911.com/madrid.htm

So the steel actually failed from the heat of the fire. Fortunately in this case there was much more structural concrete in the building than in the WTC towers.

Seriously, why do you keep bringing up the same tired arguments like they've never been dealt with before?

[mouse]

Seriously, why do you keep bringing up the same tired arguments like they've never been dealt with before?

Psssst! it's called.....

http://abinitioadinfinitum.files.wordpress.com/2007/09/never-forget.jpg

In redneck terms so you can understand......

http://unitedstates.fm/pics/alamo.jpg


the truth never sleeps..................


http://www.emetministries.com/site/images/finding_truthLOGO.jpg



XJubMIjKqBM

[ChumpDumper]

Psssst! it's called.....Actually, doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results is the definition of insanity.

Tell me mouse -- is concrete the same as steel?

[mouse]

Tell me mouse -- is concrete the same as steel?

Lets see....

they do share a common trait they are both hard like your head.

F6QV6LK8j1Q

[ChumpDumper]

Lets see....

they do share a common trait they are both hard like your head.Is concrete the same as steel?

I see we have gotten to the point where you won't actually discuss anything but instead are posting YouTube after YouTube without ever saying anything yourself.

I guess I'll just post a link to debunking sites after every one since you can't even bring yourself to admit a simple fact like concrete is not the same as steel. This is the mindset of the truther. I find it to be quite dishonest; it certainly helped to remove doubts about the veracity of the basic official story.

http://wtc7lies.googlepages.com/home?authtoken=7cc4bb0a34f9b3beb19a513be64903cdf94 03d9e#Main%20links%20section

[E-1101]

Chump face it you hate America you always have you always will!

[mouse]

ok Chump I will meet you half way! I will stop posting links and videos as soon as you show me where any steel framed building besides the three on 9/11 that has collapsed due to fire into a huge pile of dust and rubble.

[ChumpDumper]

ok Chump I will meet you half way! I will stop posting links and videos as soon as you show me where any steel framed building besides the three on 9/11 that has collapsed due to fire into a huge pile of dust and rubble.Glad to.
Contrary to popular belief September 11, 2001 was not the first time a steel framed building collapsed due to fire. Though the examples below are not high rise buildings, they make the point that fire alone can collapse a steel structure.

The McCormick Center in Chicago and the Sight and Sound Theater in Pennsylvania are examples of steel structures collapsing. The theater was fire protected using drywall and spray on material. A high rise in Philly didn't collapse after a long fire but firefighters evacuated the building when a pancake structural collapse was considered likely. Other steel-framed buildings partially collapsed due fires one after only 20 minutes.

The steel framed McCormick Center was at the time the World's largest exhibition center. It like the WTC used long steel trusses to create a large open space without columns. Those trusses were unprotected but of course much of the WTC lost it's fire protection due to the impacts.

"As an example of the damaging effect of fire on steel, in 1967, the original heavy steel-constructed McCormick Place exhibition hall in Chicago collapsed only 30 minutes after the start of a small electrical fire."

http://www.wconline.com/CDA/Archive/
24ae78779d768010VgnVCM100000f932a8c0____

[Note this article has several comments from engineers who back the
WTC collapse theory.]

"The unprotected steel roof trusses failed early on in the fire"

http://www.chipublib.org/004chicago/disasters/mccormick_fire.html


The McCormick Place fire "is significant because it illustrates the fact that steel-frame buildings can collapse as a result of exposure to fire. This is true for all types of construction materials, not only steel." wrote Robert Berhinig, associate manager of UL's Fire Protection Division and a registered professional engineer. He also discusses UL's steel fire certification much more knowledgably than Kevin Ryan. He is an example of one more highly qualified engineer who supports the collapse theory.

http://www.iaei.org/subscriber/magazine/02_d/berhinig.htm

From the FEMA report of the theater fire, my comments in [ ]
www.interfire.org/res_file/pdf/Tr-097.pdf

On the morning of January 28, 1997, in the Lancaster County, Pennsylvania township of Strasburg, a fire caused the collapse of the state-of-the-art, seven year old Sight and Sound Theater and resulted in structural damage to most of the connecting buildings.
The theater was a total loss, valued at over $15 million.

pg 6/74

The theater was built of steel rigid frame construction to allow for the large open space of the auditorium, unobstructed by columns... The interior finish in the auditorium was drywall.

The stage storage area, prop assembly building, and prop maintenance building were protected with a sprayed-on fire resistant coating on all structural steel. The plans called for the coating to meet a two-hour fire resistance assembly rating. The sprayed-on coating, which was susceptible to damage from the movement of theater equipment, was protected by attaching plywood coverings on the columns to a height of eight feet.

The walls of the storage area beneath the stage were layered drywall to provide a two-hour fire protection rating for the mezzanine offices [the WTC used drywall as fire protection in the central core] , and sprayed-on fire-resistant coatings on the structural
steel columns and ceiling bar joists supporting the stage floor.
pg 15/74

The two theater employees told the State Police Fire Investigator that when they first discovered the fire they noticed that the sprayed-on fire proofing had been knocked off the underside of the stage floor bar joists and support steel. The fire proofing was hanging on the wire mesh used to hold the coating to the overhead. The investigation revealed that the construction company's removal of the stage floor covering down to the corrugated decking involved striking the floor hard enough to knock off the sprayed-on protection, exposing the structural steel and bar-joists in the storage area. [The theater's spray-on fireproofing was newer and more modern than at the WTC, The theater was only seven years old. If striking the floor during renovations was enough to dislodge it imagine the impact of a 767]

pg 16/74

Temperatures of 1000° F can cause buckling and temperatures of 1500° F can cause steel to lose strength and collapse. When the heat and hot gases reached the stage ceiling they extended horizontally into the auditorium, causing the roof to fail all the way to the lobby fire wall. The fire also extended horizontally from the stage to the elevated hallway, causing the structural steel to fail and buckle in the prop assembly and prop maintenance buildings

pg 17/74

Once the heat of the fire caused the structural steel to fail in the storage area (aided by the damage to the sprayed-on fire protection during renovation), interior firefighting became too hazardous to continue. The truck crews ventilating the roof noted metal
discoloration and buckling steel.

pg. 21/74

The two hour fire resistance-rated assembly in the storage area beneath the stage was damaged during the stage floor renovation, leaving the structural members unprotected from the ensuing fire.

pg. 26/74

Buildings constructed of steel should, in effect, be considered unprotected and capable of collapse from fire in as few as ten minutes. Fire resistant coatings sprayed onto structural steel are susceptible to damage from construction work.

The impact of fire and heat on structural steel members warrant extreme caution by firefighters.

pg. 36/74
Unless the steel members are cooled with high-volume hose streams, the fire's heat can rapidly cause steel to lose its strength and contribute to building collapse.
pg. 37/74

Other Fires

In February 1991, a fire broke out in One Meridian Plaza - a 38 story office building in Philadelphia. The building was built during the same period as the WTC and had spray-on fire protection on its steel frame. Despite not suffering impact damage, authorities were worried it might collapse.

"All interior firefighting efforts were halted after almost 11 hours of uninterrupted fire in the building. Consultation with a structural engineer and structural damage observed by units operating in the building led to the belief that there was a
possibility of a pancake structural collapse of the fire damaged
floors."

http://www.usfa.fema.gov/downloads/txt/publications/tr-049.txt

About 2 years later, the NYFD was concerned that a steel framed building that partially collapsed during after a gas explosion might collapse entirely due to the resulting fire.

http://www.usfa.fema.gov/downloads/pdf/publications/TR-068.pdf


Part of a floor of an unprotected steel frame building collapsed in Brackenridge, Pennsylvania on, December 20, 1991, Killing 4 volunteer firemen
http://www.usfa.fema.gov/downloads/pdf/publications/TR-061.pdf


Part of the roof of a steel framed school in Virginia collapsed about 20 minutes after fire broke out


http://www.usfa.fema.gov/downloads/pdf/publications/tr-135.pdf

http://www.debunking911.com/firsttime.htm

So you're going to stop now, right?

[ChumpDumper]

Hey mouse -- I also have a YouTube for you.

It shows the results of several steel framed structures collapsing from fire and, at the 2:30 mark, it shows rather dramatic footage the steel-only top section of the Windsor Tower in Madrid collapsing while the rest of the building reinforced by concrete remains standing.

_MRSr1MnFuk

So you're going to stop now, right?

[Col. Sam Daniels]

If it bothers you that much you must really hate NY.

[ChumpDumper]

If it bothers you that much you must really hate NY.Ad hominem.

In fact....

http://weblogs.amny.com/entertainment/urbanite/blog/iloveny.jpg

Only been once, but I really enjoyed it.

[mookie2001]

just to get it on record because i havent in a year or so

im with mouse, it doesnt help his case that he posts youtubes and talks about loosechange all the time but september 11th has about 1000 questions and 1000 holes in the official story, one only needs to look as far as building 7 and the 9/11 commission report to see the official story is just a story

[ChumpDumper]

I guess if there was a reason to protect buildings from being attacked by other buildings, WTC7 might have been mentioned in the 9/11 commission report.

Did you read the NIST report dedicated to building 7?

[mouse]

http://i125.photobucket.com/albums/p55/RackTheMouse/66.jpg

A bridge, and elementary school and an Oil Rig are hardly even close the the size of WTC7. In fact they are not even 'high rise' buildings.

The building in Spain collapsed 11 Floors and not the whole building. Also note that it never crumbled to the ground in a pile of dust in its own footprint now did it?

Also WTC building only had fire damage to the upper half (like the building in Spain - why did the whole building collapse then?

You did post in a way what I had asked for so I will honor my words and not post anymore links or videos in this topic again! :tu

I just hope one day you don't end up like this guy did,

VKFiGfW6aGY

[mookie2001]

building 7.

The 9/11 commission report













yeah you linked it to me


remember the simpsons where bart became a genius and he could anticipate questions before hand


-question

[ChumpDumper]

http://i125.photobucket.com/albums/p55/RackTheMouse/66.jpg

A bridge, and elementary school and an Oil Rig are hardly even close the the size of WTC7. In fact they are not even 'high rise' buildings.

The building in Spain collapsed 11 Floors and not the whole building. Also note that it never crumbled to the ground in a pile of dust in its own footprint now did it?Because the rest of the building was reinforced with concrete. That's why I asked if you thought if there was any difference between steel and concrete.

There is.


Also WTC building only had fire damage to the upper half (like the building in Spain - why did the whole building collapse then?Because the sections above the fires in each WTC building were both larger than the entire Windsor building.


You did post in a way what I had asked for so I will honor my words and not post anymore links or videos in this topic again! :tu

I just hope one day you don't end up like this guy did,

VKFiGfW6aGYYou just posted another video.

[Laker Lanny]

Dude you got Dumped!

Chump 10
mouse 0

:lmao

[El Jefe]

Common sense implies that the majority of people have an understanding of an experience so as to have a collective knowledge. I don't know about you but that's the first time I have ever seen a building (as unique in its construction as the twin towers) brought down by plane or any other means. So how then can we have common sense?

Why do people continue to question expert opinion based on actual science. Is it because the answers aren't "sexy" enough.

This. One thousand times this.

Even without an event as extraordinary as 9/11, so called common sense is often wrong. Now confronted with a unique event, there are going to be some parts that confuse us at first. I know everyone wants to come up with a fantastical explanation for these things (there was a bomb! The CIA did it!) When the answer is much more mundane (as mundane as "Islamic Extremists hijacked and crashed a plane into the building, causing a fire that weakened the structure enough to cause collapse" can be)

I have yet to see a single piece of evidence that makes me question the preponderance of evidence that supports the official version. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence, so those claiming some other version of the truth better have some amazing evidence to back it up. Accepting anything less is the true disservice to those that lost their lives that day.

[xellos88330]

This simplest answer is most often the right answer.

[nuclearfm]

Israel is responsible for the 9/11 attacks

[mouse]

We are kinda past that what we want to know is why a building would fall down so fast in a pile of rubble from a small office fire.

(insert video of WTC7 coming down)

[ChumpDumper]

It wasn't neat

[insert pictures of damage to neighboring buildings from collapse of WTC7]

and it wasn't a small office fire.

[insert pictures of WTC7 engulfed in flame]

[mouse]

How about if I just PM you my post and you can edit it before i post it save us some time arguing.

(insert picture of ChumpDumper smiling while high fiving Dick Cheney)

[ChumpDumper]

[ad hominem]

[mouse]

[insert pictures of WTC7 engulfed in flame]

Come on brah , engulfed ? I thought we agreed to keep it real?

[ChumpDumper]

Come on brah , engulfed ? I thought we agreed to keep it real?You can look at the firefighters' statements if you really care to. They say WTC7 was fully involved.

Haven't you read the firefighters' statements?

[mouse]

Now we can read statements? You wanted no part of William Rodriguez's testimony and how it was not in the 9/11 report.

[ChumpDumper]

Now we can read statements? You wanted no part of William Rodriguez's testimony and how it was not in the 9/11 report.I have read Willie's statements. I am certainly willing to discuss them and all his subsequent actions if you like.

Do you want to go there?

In the meantime, have you read the firefighters' statements concerning WTC7?

[mouse]

Not as much as you have but I did notice a few firefighters statements........

WTC 7 Collapse Foreknowledge

Reports of Foreknowledge of the Collapse of Building 7 in the Oral Histories

The oral histories released on August 12, 2005 contain many reports of warnings of the collapse of WTC Building 7 at various times during the day. Most of the warnings were from after about 4 PM.

Joseph Cahill -- Paramedic (E.M.S.)
The reason we were given for why we were moving was that 7 World Trade Center was going to collapse or was at risk of collapsing. So we must have been somewhere in this area where we would have had a problem with that. But I honestly don't remember.
...
They wanted us to move the treatment sector because of 7 World Trade Center was imminently to collapse, which, of course, it did.
Interview, 10/15/2001, New York Times

Tiernach Cassidy -- Firefighter (F.D.N.Y.), Engine 3
Then, like I said, building seven was in eminent collapse. They blew the horns. They said everyone clear the area until we got that last civilian out. We tried to give another quick search while we could, but then they wouldn't let us stay anymore. So we cleared the area. ... So yeah, then we just stayed on Vesey until building seven came down.
Interview, 12/30/2001, New York Times

Pete Castellano -- Firefighter (F.D.N.Y.), Ladder 149
We were ordered down from the tower ladder because of a possible collapse at Tower 7.
Interview, 12/28/2001, New York Times

Jason Charles -- E.M.T. (E.M.S.), Battalion 13
So we started heading over to where Building 7 was at and they were like Building 7 is going to collapse, you can't go over there, this and that, and there was another building that they thought was going to collapse that was like right behind the triage center, the building that we were in.
Interview, 1/23/2002, New York Times

Frank Congiusta -- Battalion Fire Chief (F.D.N.Y.)
While we were searching the subbasements, they decided that Seven World Trade Center, which was across the street, was going to collapse. So they called us out.
...
When I came out, they were calling us on the radio to tell us to get out. Then I reported that the search was negative, and then they wouldn't let anybody near the site pretty much, because Seven World Trade Center was going to come down.
Interview, 1/8/2002, New York Times

Louis Cook -- Paramedic (E.M.S.)
We got to Chambers and Greenwich, and the chief turns around and says, 'There's number Seven World Trade. That's the OEM bunker.' We had a snicker about that. We looked over, and it's engulfed in flames and starting to collapse.
...
We hear over the fire portable, 'Everybody evacuate the site. It's going to collapse.' Mark Steffens starts yelling, 'Get out of here! Get out of here! Get out of here! We've got to go! We've got to go! It's going to collapse.'
...
We pulled the car over, turned around and just watched it pancake.
Interview, 10/17/2001, New York Times

Frank Cruthers -- Fire Chief (F.D.N.Y.)
Early on, there was concern that 7 World Trade Center might have been both impacted by the collapsing tower and had several fires in it and there was a concern that it might collapse. So we instructed that a collapse area --
...
-- be set up and maintained so that when the expected collapse of 7 happened, we wouldn't have people working in it. Thre was considerable discussion with Con Ed regarding the substation in that building and the feeders and the oil coolands and so on. And their concern was of the type of fire we might have when it collapsed.
Interview, 10/31/2001, New York Times

Roy David -- Fire Lieutenant (F.D.N.Y.), Battalion 8
At Pace University we had -- we set up -- I'm sorry, we set up in that lobby of that building, the lobby and the actual whole first floor. There was a threat of collapse of building number seven, so 225, we had to evacuate it.
Interview, 10/12/2001, New York Times

Frank Fellini -- Fire Chief (F.D.N.Y.)
The major concern at that time at that particular location was number Seven, building number seven, which had taken a big hit from the north tower. When it fell, it ripped steel out from between the third and sixth floors across the facade on Vesey Street. We were concerned that the fires on several floors and the missing steel would result in the building collapsing.
So for the next five or six hours we kept firefighters from working anywhere near that building, which included the whole north side of the World Trade Center complex. Eventually around 5:00 or a little after, building number seven came down.
Interview, 12/3/2001, New York Times

Brian Fitzpatrick -- Firefighter (F.D.N.Y.), Ladder 22
We were then positioned on Vesey Street between North End and the West Side Highway because there was an imminent collapse on 7 World Trade, and it did collapse.
Interview, 12/6/2001, New York Times

Joseph Fortis -- E.M.T (E.M.S.), Battalion 13
When the third building came down, we were on that corner in front of the school, and everybody just stood back. They pulled us all back at the time, almost about an hour before it, because they were sure -- they knew it was going to come down, but they weren't sure. So they pulled everyone back, and everybody stood there and we actually just waited and just waited and waited until it went down, because it was unsafe.
Interview, 11/9/2001, New York Times

Ray Goldbach -- Fire Captain (F.D.N.Y.), Executive Assistant to the Fire Commissioner
There was a big discussion going on at that point about pulling all of our units out of 7 World Trade Center. Chief Nigro didn't feel it was worth taking the slightest chance of somebody else getting injured. So at that point we made a decision to take all of our units out of 7 World Trade Center because there was a potential for collapse.
...
Made the decision to back everybody away, took all the units and moved them all the way back toward North End Avenue, which is as far I guess west as you could get on Vesey Street, to keep them out of the way.
Interview, 10/24/2001, New York Times

George Holzman -- Firefighter (F.D.N.Y.), Ladder 47
We stayed there for quite sometime when I don't even know who, I think it was someone, Lieutenant Lowney spoke to, asked us to leave the area, they were concerned about 7 World Trade Center collapsing.
Interview, 1/17/2002, New York Times

Edward Kennedy -- Firefighter (F.D.N.Y.), Engine 44
That was the only Mayday that I remember, and to tell you the truth, the only guy that really stands out in my mind that I remember being on the radio was Chief Visconti.
...
I remember him screaming about 7, No. 7, that they wanted everybody away from 7 because 7 was definitely going to collapse, they don't know when, but it's definitely going to come down, just get the hell out of the way, everybody get away from it, make sure you're away from it, that's an order, you know, stuff like that.
Interview, 1/17/2002, New York Times

Matthew Long -- Firefighter (F.D.N.Y.), Ladder 43
And at that point they were worried that 7 was coming down so they were calling for everyone to back out.
So I waited for -- we waied for the boss, Lieutenant Rohan, in the middle of the rubble and we all walked out together back to the West Side Highway and pretty much hung out by the marina when 7 came down.
...
Because they were just adamant about 7 coming down immediately. I think we probably got out of that rubble and 18 minutes later is when 7 came down.
Interview, 10/9/2001, New York Times

Thomas McCarthy -- Fire Chief (F.D.N.Y.)
So when I get to the command post, they just had a flood of guys standing there. They were just waiting for 7 to come down.
...
I made it down Vesey Street to just in front of the overpass of 7 World Trade. People were saying don't stand under there, it's going to come down.
...
So at that point we were a little leery about how the bridge was tied in, so no one was really going onto it, and then they were also saying 7 was going to come down. They chased everyone off the block.
Interview, 10/11/2001, New York Times

Kevin McGovern -- Firefighter (F.D.N.Y.), Engine 53
At that time Seven World Trade Center was burning and was in danger of collapsing. After a while the lieutentant said, "Let's move, let's get out of here, let's take a break."
Actually I think at that point just as we were leaving, guys -- I don't know who it was. I guess it was a chief was saying clear the area, because they were worried about number Seven World Trade Center coming down and burying guys who were digging.
So we basically went back to the rig, because they were clearing that area out. It took about three hours for Seven World Trade Center to actually come down. So we were off to the side.
Interview, 12/11/2001, New York Times

Vincent Massa -- Firefighter (F.D.N.Y.), Engine 64
At this point Seven World Trade Center was going heavy, and they weren't letting anybody get too close. Everybody was expecting that to come down.
...
I remember later on in the day as we were waiting for seven to come down, they kept backing us up Vesey, almost like a full block. They were concerned about seven coming down, and they kept changing us, establishing a collapse zone and backing us up.
Interview, 12/4/2001, New York Times

Daniel Nigro -- Department Cheif (F.D.N.Y.)
The most important operational decision to be made that afternoon was the collapse had damaged 7 World Trade Center, which is about a 50 story building, at Vesey between West Broadway and Washington Street. It had very heavy fire on many floors and I ordered the evacuation of an area sufficient around to protect our members, so we had to give up some rescue operations that were going on at the time and back the people away far enough so that if 7 World Trade did collapse, we wouldn't lose any more people.
We continued to operate on what we could from that distance and approximately an hour and a half after that order was given, at 5:30 in the afternoon, 7 World Trade Center collapsed completely.
Interview, 10/24/2001, New York Times

Christopher Patrick Murray -- Firefighter (F.D.N.Y.), Engine 205
Probably about 4:00 o'clock, 5:00 o'clock, our radios went dead, because we heard reports all day long of 7 World Trade possibly coming down and I think at 5:30 that came down.
Interview, 12/12/2001, New York Times

William Ryan -- Fire Lieutenant (F.D.N.Y.)
Then we found out, I guess around 3:00 o'clock, that they thought 7 was going to collapse. So, of course, we've got guys all in this pile over here and the main concern was get everybody out, and I guess it took us over an hour and a half, two hours to get everybody out of there.
...
So it took us a while and we ended up backing everybody out, and that's when 7 collapsed.
Interview, 10/18/2001, New York Times

Thomas Smith -- Firefighter (F.D.N.Y.)
They backed me off the rig because seven was in dead jeopardy, so they backed everybody off and moved us to the rear end of Vesey Street. We just stood there for a half hour, 40 minutes, because seven was in imminent collapse and finally did come down.
Interview, 12/6/2001, New York Times

Robert Sohmer -- Fire Captain (F.D.N.Y.)
As the day went on they started worrying about 7 World Trade Center collapsing and they ordered an evacuation from that area so at that time, we left the area with the other companies, went back to the command post on Broadway
...
We were about to proceed our operation there and this was in the afternoon, I would say approximately maybe 2:00 roughly, where we started to operate and then they asked us to fall back again due to the potential of 7 World Trade Center collapsing.
Interview, 1/17/2002, New York Times

James Wallace -- Firefighter (F.D.N.Y.)
They were saying building seven was going to collapse, so we regrouped and went back to our rig. We went to building four or three; I don't know. We were going to set up our tower ladder there. They said no good because building seven is coming down.
Interview, 12/29/2001, New York Times

Rudolf Weindler -- Fire Lieutenant (F.D.N.Y.)
I ran into Chief Coloe from the 1st Division, Captain Varriale, Engine 24, and Captain Varriale told Chief Coloe and myself that 7 World Trade Center was badly damaged on the south side and definitely in danger of collapse. Chief Coloe said we were going to evacuate the collapse zone around 7 World Trade Center, which we did.
Interview, 1/15/2002, New York Times

Decosta Wright -- E.M.T. (E.M.S.)
They said -- we were like, are you guys going to put that fire out? I was like, you know, they are going to wait for it to burn down and it collapsed.
...
Yes, so basically they measured out how far the building was going to come, so we knew exactly where we could stand.
...
5 blocks. 5 blocks away. We still could see. Exactly right on point, the cloud just stopped right there. Then when that building was coming down, the same thing, that same rumbling.
Interview, 10/11/2001, New York Times

[ChumpDumper]

Come on brah , engulfed ? I thought we agreed to keep it real?



Louis Cook -- Paramedic (E.M.S.)
We got to Chambers and Greenwich, and the chief turns around and says, 'There's number Seven World Trade. That's the OEM bunker.' We had a snicker about that. We looked over, and it's engulfed in flames and starting to collapse.
...
We hear over the fire portable, 'Everybody evacuate the site. It's going to collapse.' Mark Steffens starts yelling, 'Get out of here! Get out of here! Get out of here! We've got to go! We've got to go! It's going to collapse.'
...
We pulled the car over, turned around and just watched it pancake.
Interview, 10/17/2001, New York TimesConsider the realness kept.

[mouse]

Thank you for making my point everyone has a different view. I find firefighters saying small fires, you find fire fighters saying large fires,You're presuming we have other firefighters out there ready to agree with you. Well as a truth seeker that I am I must assume there are firefighters out there that agree with me.
We can play these games all night Mr Dumper but I don't have the luxury of your presumptions. Mr Dumper, we have scientific laws that are not open to interpretation, personal intuition, gut feelings, hairs on the back of your neck, little devils or angels sitting on your shoulder. We're all very well aware of what your agenda is, and what your replies mean. They come down from your Commander in Chief. They contain no ambiguity.
Mr CumpDumper I've made my points .
I am the original topic starter of this subject.
NOW SHUT THE FUCK UP!

http://i125.photobucket.com/albums/p55/RackTheMouse/STFU.jpg

[ChumpDumper]

Thank you for making my point everyone has a different view. I find firefighters saying small fires, you find fire fighters saying large firesActually, you found the firefighters saying large fires and none saying small fires.


You're presuming we have other firefighters out there ready to agree with you. Well as a truth seeker that I am I must assume there are firefighters out there that agree with me.Let me know when you do, because you haven't.


We can play these games all night Mr Dumper but I don't have the luxury of your presumptions. Mr Dumper, we have scientific laws that are not open to interpretation, personal intuition, gut feelings, hairs on the back of your neck, little devils or angels sitting on your shoulder. We're all very well aware of what your agenda is, and what your replies mean. They come down from your Commander in Chief. They contain no ambiguity.
Mr CumpDumper I've made my points .
I am the original topic starter of this subject.
NOW SHUT THE FUCK UP!Nice little meltdown.

Do you always become a forum police nazi when you get pantsed online like this?

[Blake]

Well Blake why even join in on the conversation if your going to make excuses about who you will only answer too? And props for not telling me to go fuck my Mother like you did in the past your making progress! :tu

I've never said such a thing.

why are you lying again?

[mouse]

Nice little meltdown.
Do you always become a forum police nazi when you get pantsed online like this?

You call that a meltdown? That was a Movie quote from Crimson tide and I think I did hell of a job. The mere fact that you don't know that shows me your out of touch. Maybe you should stop searching the net for reasons to defend what took place on 9/11 and see a movie perhaps get laid?

And if you did know it was movie quote then your lack of sense of humor shows your a real dick head. Your not here to prove points or have a debate your here to just start shit, maybe you lost your job at kinkos maybe your wife left you after 2 months.

What ever the case may be you need to back off before I get medieval on your ass.

I played your game I stop postings youtube links and now your going to act like you run my life?

Bitch the only thing you run are the salad tossing homos in the politics forum when your man enough we can meet in the troll forum if you really want to get down.

I think I may just start posting more Youtube links just to get your lame ass goat.

[ChumpDumper]

You call that a meltdown? That was a Movie quote from Crimson tide and I think I did hell of a job. The mere fact that you don't know that shows me your out of touch. Maybe you should stop searching the net for reasons to defend what took place on 9/11 and see a movie perhaps get laid?Ad hominem.

I knew it was from that movie, but you were indeed telling me to STFU.


And if you did know it was movie quote then your lack of sense of humor shows your a real dick headIt just wasn't all that funny, dude.

Sorry.


Your not here to prove points or have a debate your here to just start shit, maybe you lost your job at kinkos maybe your wife left you after 2 months.Ad hominem. I actually thought we were having the closet thing to a discussion we've ever had on this subject before this latest tantrum.


What ever the case may be you need to back off before I get medieval on your ass.I'm not really scared of that.


I played your game I stop postings youtube links and now your going to act like you run my life?Actually you were trying to run my life by telling me what to do more than once.


Bitch the only thing you run are the salad tossing homos in the politics forum when your man enough we can meet in the troll forum if you really want to get down.Ad hominem and the troll forum sucks.


I think I may just start posting more Youtube links just to get your lame ass goat.You already did.

[NZ Spurs]

Anyone else get the feeling that Chump has won the battle, but mouse won the war?

mouse goes against the grain to get attention. He did the same thing when he decided to become a Mavs fan on a Spurs board. Chump bit and continues to bite. mouse is a professional troll.

Well played sir.

[ChumpDumper]

We do this with some frequency.

Mouse has surrendered the actual discussion phase and is trying to get some traffic to the the troll forum.

As I said, we actually seemed to be getting somewhere for once, but it was not meant to be.

I'll bite on most 9/11 conspiracy threads because I've read too much about them to resist. I haven't quite figured out where mouse is coming from on this subject since he seems to have also read too much to just be trolling about it. He's gone through a lot of trouble in a lot of posts in the past, so if it is a troll job it is very well played indeed. I like his consistency -- that would probably explain his repetition of several points, but other truther posters do the same and they are definitely serious about it.

[The Final Countdown]

So Chump wins a 9/11 debate after telling others they can't post youtube links?

[Blake]

Anyone else get the feeling that Chump has won the battle, but mouse won the war?

mouse goes against the grain to get attention. He did the same thing when he decided to become a Mavs fan on a Spurs board. Chump bit and continues to bite. mouse is a professional troll.

Well played sir.

I've seen enough to know that mouse really believes in the 9/11 conspiracies

[JudynTX]

I watched this last night.

I came away with the same doubt I've always had. :tu

[mouse]

I watched this last night.

I came away with the same doubt I've always had. :tu

And what were some of those doubts?

[JudynTX]

And what were some of those doubts?

Where the fuck did Flight 93 go?

[JudynTX]

Oh and another thing. A witness that was in Building 7 dies days before the NIST releases their report on Bldg. 7 Hmmmmmmmmmm

kRaKHq2dfCI

[Blake]

Where the fuck did Flight 93 go?

what do you mean?

[mouse]

why was WTC7 not explained in the 9 11 commission report?

[Blake]

why was WTC7 not explained in the 9 11 commission report?

ugh.

[JudynTX]

what do you mean?

Blake,

I am not convinced that Flight 93 crashed in Shanksville, PA. :td

[ChumpDumper]

Blake,

I am not convinced that Flight 93 crashed in Shanksville, PA. :tdWhy not?

[MiamiHeat]

I remember watching the news live during the incident

and they showed fighter jets flying in the sky, away from the area..... and the news said that the flight over pennsylvania was shot down

then this changed immediately after.....


I suspect it was shot down, and that the whole passenger story is uplifting moral bullshit bedtime story for the public to feel good about

and that the White House used their emergency media blackout they use when they have a legitimate claim to national security issues. the white house can dictate to news media what NOT to report when they use it

[mouse]

ugh.


That sums up the whole 9/11 commission.