Thread: 9/11 was an inside job

Originally Posted by harrybarracuda

Originally Posted by ENT

Originally Posted by MrG

Originally Posted by ENT

resembled molten steel,

Oh. Resembled molten steel....

Has anybody tested it?
Anybody that wasn't in on the conspiracy, I mean.

NIST refused to test it.

They didn't refuse to test it. They said it was pointless testing it because it wouldn't tell them what state it was in at the time of collapse

So, they refused to test it because they said it was pointless.

And?

Originally Posted by ENT

Originally Posted by harrybarracuda

Originally Posted by ENT

Originally Posted by MrG

Originally Posted by ENT

resembled molten steel,

Oh. Resembled molten steel....

Has anybody tested it?
Anybody that wasn't in on the conspiracy, I mean.

NIST refused to test it.

They didn't refuse to test it. They said it was pointless testing it because it wouldn't tell them what state it was in at the time of collapse

So, they refused to test it because they said it was pointless.

And?

There is no "and" you dumb shit, the whole thing was detailed in the bits you edited out.

Your pathetic, paranoid implication that they were attempting to cover up something is fucking bollocks.

Originally Posted by ENT

Slag and cinders, burning organic detritus from the impact, could not have created the bright orange glow in the falling metal, and temperatures were nowhere near hot enough in the affected floors to melt aluminium

And you know this presumably because you are a trained metallurgist, fire expert and were in the towers at said point at the time.

Originally Posted by Dapper

Very good documentary this

Watch the super slow motion collapse of wtc7 that starts at 35.50

Tell me what's very disturbing about the image?

Originally Posted by Dapper

Tell me what's very disturbing about the image?

That you're too stupid too understand it?

Originally Posted by Dapper

Tell me what's very disturbing about the image?

It was a senseless act of violence that took the lives of many innocent people, disturbing.

Also disturbing, they and their loved ones are the same people nutters like you continue to disrespect with your nutter prattling and cuckoo theories.

WTC7 fell during 9/11, you tinfoiled hatted multinicking loon.

And that's indicative of your problem: you're simply not even intelligent enough to realise how loopy and offensive you are with your whackjob theories.

Originally Posted by Dapper

Originally Posted by AntRobertson

Originally Posted by Dapper

Tell me what's very disturbing about the image?

It was a senseless act of violence that took the lives of many innocent people, disturbing.

Also disturbing, they and their loved ones are the same people nutters like you continue to disrespect with your nutter prattling and cuckoo theories.

That's WTC7 you utter, utter, utter tosser - it was empty

You really are a little out of your depth here as an irritating [at][at][at][at] of an ankle biting troll.

And your last little bit about being disrespectful really takes the biscuit you utter sack of shit.

You're such a c u n t you haven't even worked out how much of a c u n t you are.

Was the lady in the picture an hoax?







The photo, with the obituary embedded in it, was last edited more than 6 months prior to 911. This can ONLY mean that the Edna Cintron hoax was prepared more than half a year prior to the events of 911.

Think about what you're saying...

Someone had the power and intent to pull off a conspiracy that would've required the involvement and complicity of so many people in so many different areas, none of whom have talked, and planning to the nth degree...

... And yet they slip up by allegedly forgetting to date a photograph correctly.

Does that really make sense to you.

Originally Posted by harrybarracuda

You're such a c u n t you haven't even worked out how much of a c u n t you are.

Go fuck your mother you corporate mercenary slag

Originally Posted by AntRobertson

WTC7 fell during 9/11, you tinfoiled hatted multinicking loon.

And that's indicative of your problem: you're simply not even intelligent enough to realise how loopy and offensive you are with your whackjob theories.

And as for you you "madder than a box of frogs" fruit loop - you can go fuck your mother too.

Q.E.D.

There's a definite causal link between some posters and their whackjob theories and a demonstrable lack of intellect.

^You're a window-licking autistic fuck-up son.

And you keep displaying your utter lack of wit and intellect.

Originally Posted by AntRobertson

Think about what you're saying...

Someone had the power and intent to pull off a conspiracy that would've required the involvement and complicity of so many people in so many different areas, none of whom have talked, and planning to the nth degree...

... And yet they slip up by allegedly forgetting to date a photograph correctly.

Does that really make sense to you.

Many many people have "talked", but they have been ignored by the mainstream media and their sheep (yourself).

Here's the fucking Mayor of Shanksville - first on the scene - saying "NO FUCKING PLANE"



But hey, you're an utterly retarded sheep - so why the fuck am I replying to you??? (slaps himself on the head)

You're kinda like a petulant child who thinks stamping his feet and throwing tantrums achieves anything other than showing that you're churlish and childish.

Originally Posted by AntRobertson

Think about what you're saying...

I'm not saying anything. My question was

Originally Posted by Pragmatic

Was the lady in the picture an hoax?

Okay you brush it aside as being

forgetting to date a photograph correctly.

Probably the biggest disaster in US history and they get the date wrong.

You can claim it as a question if you like but I think that's quite disingenuous of you.

It's pretty clear that you're proffering it as more 'evidence' of the conspiracy you believe in.

Who was the woman in this picture?

The photograph shows the area where the plane struck the North Tower. A woman is visible near the bottom edge - on about the 97th floor. She is holding on to a severed pillar, waving. The picture conveys the utter despair of those trapped inside.

Numerous websites identified the woman as Edna Cintron (46), an employee with the insurance brokers Marsh & McLennan. Cintron's husband reportedly confirmed her identity.

Because Cintron was standing at the point of impact, some bloggers have assumed that the heat couldn't have been sufficiently intense to melt the steel inside the building. Cintron's photo ostensibly supports the hypothesis that the towers were intentionally blown up.

This is, of course, nonsense. Telephone calls made by victims show that not all the offices on the floors hit by the planes were destroyed immediately. Nor was the temperature consistent throughout each floor. Some of the trapped reported that they had fled to cooler areas - and the areas where the fire was sucking in fresh air were coolest of all, i.e. at the points where the aircraft had breached the walls.

Most likely, hardly anything about this story is accurate, even the woman's name; there is no evidence to substantiate her identity. Her husband, who reportedly recognized her, has discussed his wife's death in several interviews without ever referring to the picture. None of her colleagues, including the company's own memorial site on the Internet, has mentioned the photo. The only certainty is that the real Edna Cintron was not among the survivors. Nobody knows if she is the mystery woman in the picture.

Originally Posted by Pragmatic

Was the lady in the picture an hoax?







The photo, with the obituary embedded in it, was last edited more than 6 months prior to 911. This can ONLY mean that the Edna Cintron hoax was prepared more than half a year prior to the events of 911.

Yeah, you see it's called metadata. And it's editable.

So essentially I could take a picture of you right now and edit all of that to be anything I want it to be.

Fuck me you lot are so GULLIBLE.

Was the lady in the picture an hoax?

Of course it was.

And digitally altered as well.

Originally Posted by harrybarracuda

Originally Posted by ENT

Slag and cinders, burning organic detritus from the impact, could not have created the bright orange glow in the falling metal, and temperatures were nowhere near hot enough in the affected floors to melt aluminium

And you know this presumably because you are a trained metallurgist, fire expert and were in the towers at said point at the time.

^ A stupid question from a stupid person.



You don't need to be any of those to see the difference in colour.

A trained metallurgist? WTF?
Hard to find.

Does a BA in geo-archaeo-forensic bio-anthropology help?

Mind I've played with fire since a child,....... would ya call a blacksmith a metallurgist?

Now piss off.



PS I can argue the hind legs off ya till the cows come home, if ya like....

Originally Posted by AntRobertson

WTC7 fell during 9/11, you tinfoiled hatted multinicking loon.

And that's indicative of your problem: you're simply not even intelligent enough to realise how loopy and offensive you are with your whackjob theories.

Poor bobo on a rAnt. again,....