Reply With Quote
I have yet to see any evidence that the "truth" movement has watched any of these videos.
That says volumes about their ultimate motives and rationality.
WTC - No Pools of Molten Steel
This is a good one. It shows the truth movement actively faking evidence.
I have yet to see any evidence that the "truth" movement has watched any of these videos.
That says volumes about their ultimate motives and rationality.
"Bush's brother was in charge of security" debunked.
WTC "Pre-Collapse Explosions" Identified
Who WAS in charge of security, and why was the alarm system in WTC 7 turned off at 6:47 A.M. on the morning of 9/11?
"No video of a plane hitting the pentagon" debunked.
This is another one where the "truth" movement is shown to be demonstrably faking evidence AND profiting from selling videos of the faked evidence.
Such is probably how mouse got suckered by someone for his "WTC demolition tapes".
While I do not try to take advantage of the gullible, it seems some in the truth movement aren't so ethical.
The alarm system wasn't turned off. It was set to test mode because -- wait for it -- they were testing it. It sent a fire signal to the fire department when fire broke out -- just not a detailed one.
And the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey was in charge of security.
Duh.
This is, I think my favorite out of all of them.
Putting it on TEST STATUS is the same thing as turning it off. Either way, no alarms were received. Of course, not long after it was turned off, a huge explosion almost killed Barry Jennings and Mike Hess, then the building fell down. Smells like arson.
When someone turns off a fire alarm just before a building "burns" down, that's arson. Given that no arson investigation has occurred, that's evidence that WTC 7 did not come down from fire.
Let me know when you have finished watching it.
False. A fire signal was sent. And really, it's not like there weren't any firefighters in the area.
Arson means fire.When someone turns off a fire alarm just before a building "burns" down, that's arson. Given that no arson investigation has occurred, that's evidence that WTC 7 did not come down from fire.
You need to make up your mind and get your lies straight before you post them.
I noticed you haven't answered where the charges were placed in any of the buildings.
Here's a link to all the architectural blueprints of the North Tower. Since your four-year math degree has made you an expert on explosive building demolition, I expect you to be specific.
http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/evid...ans/index.html
very sloppy with facts, WTC 7 was 355 feet from the Twin Towers at the closest point.
Just because a truss fails, or all three trusses, doesn't make a giant building fall. All the columns hold it up, too. This movie is plain stupid.
None of the BS in this video will make the final NIST report, scheduled for release 75 years after the JFK files are released.
Any of you twoofers subscribe to the energy beam theory?
http://noplanes911.blogspot.com/2007...y-weapons.html
Ok then, link?
This should be easy enough to find.
what's that? Do believe in the radio waves theory? The cell phone theory?
wtc maps
--------------
(begin edit)
heh, this was meant to go into a search engine for the distance between wtc7 and the towers. I don't expect Galileo to actually be able to provide some actual proof. That doesn't seem to be his forte...
Last edited by RandomGuy; 04-14-2008 at 04:50 PM. Reason: too quick on the draw, wrong browswer window... didn't mean to post
Your video made the "less than 300 feet" claim.
Link?
Rense?
PrisonPlanet?
This is not neutral proof of the distance between buildings. This is simply copy and pasted articles and people quoting each other.
I would like some link to a verifiable neutral source.
Honestly, I have run out of time.
I can find no evidence to support either distance as of now. I will continue looking later.
Let me know when you find it.
Jim Hoffman says its 355 feet. He's the best source for 9/11 and never makes a mistake. That's good enough for me. From the videos, 355 feet looks about right.
And? All the building surrounding the twin towers sustained major damage. The towers were over three times the largest distance mentioned and there is all manner of photographic and eyewitness evidence proving 7 WTC suffered major damage from north tower debris. There is no debate here.
No luggage body parts seats or engine parts that match up to a large plane and you go by some painted logo on a some small parts carried off by one person?
who's the real sucker here? I guess i can run your ass over in a large van as long as I paint AA in red and blue you sue the airlines?
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
