Thread: 9/11 was an inside job

Originally Posted by Latindancer

Fire works differently in different buildings, constructed of different materials, and of different weight.

Excellent observation LD, have a biscuit

Originally Posted by terry57

So in you're first pictures Albert we see a massive gouge in the ground, so what made that if not a plane ?

Using your own reasoning Terry - I have no idea what caused it - but I can definately tell you it wasn't a plane.

Originally Posted by terry57

That picture could of been altered to show no plane.

It's an official government photo Terry - you're not proposing they're lying are you?

Originally Posted by terry57

As far as you're two building comparison goes, big deal innit.

Yes, well actually it is quite a sizeable deal - but I think you know that anyway.

Originally Posted by terry57

The examples you guys throw up are meaningless as each building reacts differently in different circumstances and different construction methods.

Yes Terry, but physics, physics doesn't act differently with different buildings.

Originally Posted by terry57

Jesus christ, I've just watched the clip which shows the high rise fires.

Originally Posted by terry57

Funny thing is that none of them where impacted by a massive fuk off jet liner loaded with fuel and they all would of had there steel frame protected to guard against fire.

err Correct Terry, NEITHER of them (The Chinese tower and WTC7) were hit by planes.

Originally Posted by terry57

Twin Towers fire protection was fuked.

How was that then Terry?, - being an ex fireman you can probably explain.

Originally Posted by Latindancer

We've posted pics of at least one of em. But you seem to be selectively blind !

If you're talking about that little engine scrap from the Pentagon or again, the little one planted on a NY street, sorry dopey, wrong size.

^^

The fire protection on the girders of the Towers was compromised.

If the fire protection was 100 % intact You could very well ask questions but steel just turns to shit when heated.

Everyone knows that except ENT.

The comparison between the other Tower fires is totally irrelevant.

Easy stuff right there.

Originally Posted by terry57

Regards the downed planes that weren't downed according to ENT. So I imagine the planes and there human cargo are hiding out in the desert somewhere ?

ENT reckons secret agents have offed all those passengers so they can't come clean with there story.

Another one of your lies.

Originally Posted by terry57

The fire protection on the girders of the Towers was compromised.

If the fire protection was 100 % intact You could very well ask questions but steel just turns to shit when heated.

Everyone knows that except ENT.

The comparison between the other Tower fires is totally irrelevant.

Easy stuff right there.

Nope, ya failed the firefighter's test on that one too.

Steel remains as steel, it can slump, melt, expand but it still stays a ferrous material.

You don't know diddly squat about firefighting or fires, you've demonstrated that time and again.

And no, heat does NOT dissipate downwards along steel girders as quickly as it goes upwards, as you've claimed once before.

Ya even called a conflagration a flagellation!!

Originally Posted by terry57

The fire protection on the girders of the Towers was compromised.

How was it compromised Terry?

Originally Posted by terry57

If the fire protection was 100 % intact You could very well ask questions but steel just turns to shit when heated.

It would have bowed, sagged, collapsed first at the worst and hottest areas of the fires and then failed asymetrically in a slow prolonged drawn out step by step collapse not imploded into its own footprint at freefall speed ignoring the laws of physics.

Just saying like.

Originally Posted by Albert Shagnastier

Tell you what LD, before you start fishing your "plant" pictures out of your handbag, where are the huge fucking holes they would have made either side of the first/central/nose cone impact hole when they smashed into the outer walls at 500mph?

In case you haven't noticed all my posts about it, the Pentagon is a specially armoured building. The "huge fucking holes" could not have been made.


And BTW, ENT....you haven't cleaned up that little turd yet.....answer my question re. that "photo" you posted.

Originally Posted by Latindancer

Originally Posted by ENT

What does that image look like then smarty?

It's NIST's representative image used in an attempt to explain how the facade broke.

If it is a representative image, then why are you commenting on it as if it is a photo of real damage ? And saying that it looks like charges cut the sections we can see in the image ? Which, even if it were a photo, is obviously untrue ? Turkey !

You are so unbelievably dull!!

Why not comment on the pic? No where did I say it was real damage!

The pic doesn't even look like one of real damage, idiot.

I stated from the first instance that the pic was NIST's attempt at explaining how the towers buckled. They claimed that the towers buckled along a STRAIGHT LINE at ONE FLOOR LEVEL in EACH TOWER to be able to sheer off at that point!

That caused by a kerosene fire in each tower of less than one hour that couldn't reach temperatures even to buckle, let alone melt steel.

A total impossibility, unless of course the pillars were cut through ........ as symmetrically as NIST claimed in their pic.

NIST was the mob who got "Popular Mechanics" to promote their bullshit, ....yup your favourite source of knowledge.

Originally Posted by Latindancer

Originally Posted by Albert Shagnastier

Tell you what LD, before you start fishing your "plant" pictures out of your handbag, where are the huge fucking holes they would have made either side of the first/central/nose cone impact hole when they smashed into the outer walls at 500mph?

In case you haven't noticed all my posts about it, the Pentagon is a specially armoured building. The "huge fucking holes" could not have been made.


And BTW, ENT....you haven't cleaned up that little turd yet.....answer my question re. that "photo" you posted.

Oh,...is that so?

How did the "huge fucking holes" appear throughout that "specially armoured building" then?

That "specially armoured building" was riddled with holes, all the wrong sizes and in the wrong places for an airliner to have caused them, of course.

Now, explain to us all about the specially armoured building, so well armoured that it collapsed.

Clever of those terrorist in knowing that if you fly a plane into the top of a skyscraper it would cause maximum damage. Me, I'd have flew it into the base. Even physics professors can't get their head round it.

Originally Posted by ENT

You are so unbelievably dull!!

Why not comment on the pic? No where did I say it was real damage!

The pic doesn't even look like one of real damage, idiot.

I stated from the first instance that the pic was NIST's attempt at explaining how the towers buckled. They claimed that the towers buckled along a STRAIGHT LINE at ONE FLOOR LEVEL in EACH TOWER to be able to sheer off at that point!

That caused by a kerosene fire in each tower of less than one hour that couldn't reach temperatures even to buckle, let alone melt steel.

A total impossibility, unless of course the pillars were cut through ........ as symmetrically as NIST claimed in their pic.

You commented on it as if it were a real photo.

Originally Posted by ENT

That line of breaks look as though they've been deliberately cut by charges, not by stress from overheated steel floor joists.

But now you are unwilling to admit you did any wrong.
You are such a self-righteous little jerk, ENT. I hope your plane ditches into the sea on your way here on Wednesday.

Originally Posted by Latindancer

Originally Posted by Albert Shagnastier

Tell you what LD, before you start fishing your "plant" pictures out of your handbag, where are the huge fucking holes they would have made either side of the first/central/nose cone impact hole when they smashed into the outer walls at 500mph?

In case you haven't noticed all my posts about it, the Pentagon is a specially armoured building. The "huge fucking holes" could not have been made.

So just to get this right, you're saying these 4 tonne lumps of metal just disappeared?

^^ No mention of a real photo in any of my posts, LD.

It's just that you're too thick to understand English.


Also too clueless to understand that the pic, a simulation, will move if you scroll up and down, so obviously not a photograph.

Let's hope a car falls off its blocks on ya, eh....

^
Hey ENT,

You know that plane you're going on, watch out it don't morph into a missile and smash into the Pentagon.

You stupid silly old fucked up tool ENT. Complete fucking Idiot ENT.

The 4 tonne lumps of metal compressed into a smaller mass in the same way an IED does when it penetrates an armoured personnel carrier.
Oh....hang on a minute.....can you believe that an uneducated, barely trained Paki, Saudi or Afghani can destroy an armoured personnel carrier and kill the Americans inside, using an imporvised device ? Well, I never !


You didn't mention whether you thought the photo was real, ENT....but you lead us to believe that by commenting on it in such a way we were lead to believe that.

You slimy little turd.

Oooooh ya poor diddums!

You really are stupid eh?

Wazzamara? Want mamma to spoonfeed ya? I never said in any way that the pic (a simulation) was real.

Read the whole post it was originally pasted into.

Your theories in physics are a total joke!

First you bang on about the plane being scattered all over the lawn, at the Pentagon, then you say it turned to semi liquid now you go on about how it all compressed into one lump!

So where's that big lump? In your head!!!

If you knew it was a simulation, then why did you comment, saying : "That line of breaks look as though they've been deliberately cut by charges, not by stress from overheated steel floor joists" ???

You are a slimy little turd, ENT.

Originally Posted by Latindancer

The 4 tonne lumps of metal compressed into a smaller mass in the same way an IED does when it penetrates an armoured personnel carrier. Oh....hang on a minute.....can you believe that an uneducated, barely trained Paki, Saudi or Afghani can destroy an armoured personnel carrier and kill the Americans inside, using an imporvised device ? Well, I never !

Nope, you definately win the most stupid fuck on the board award for that load of bollocks

How can you compare the effects of a homemade IED and a 4 tonne lump of metal flying at over 500mph?

Are you some sort of spastic - serious question?

You appear too thick to understand my paraphrasing your ilk's constant whining about how it is unbelievable that terrorists armed with only box-cutters hijacked planes and brought down the WTC towers & flew into the Pentagon.

Originally Posted by Albert Shagnastier

You definately win the most stupid fuck on the board award for that load of bollocks

Are you some sort of spastic - serious question?

There ya go ENT, Albert is asking you a serious question.

Oh don't worry ENT, I'll answer Alberts fuking Question.

Yes Albert,

ENT is the most stupid fuk on this board and is indeed a fuking Spastic.

By the way, I owe the sick foking munter 3 reds now.

Not as stupid as you posting yer pic and personal details all over the internet,....lonely "swinger"......

Where's the passengers?