Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth Part 3 of 13 - Presentation by Richard Gage

[terrymanning1]

Gage's first line about a shock wave ripping through the building, as seen by the emergency worker, was actually the failure of column 79 and the fall of the east penthouse a couple of seconds before the main perimeter fell (which was as a result of multiple column failures as the penthouses fell through it.) All Gage is doing is lying. He knows full well there was no demo, but he's trying to force a new investigation that would see Bush in the dock. That's all he care about.

[terrymanning1]

@stuartvthomas And you're a truther moron

[7humper]

Terrymanning1, how about you provide an equally unbiased and objective explanation as to why you think he is he is lying, we need a good laugh. His research is based on using all available facts using proven research methods to present a systematic way of viewing the events, like most research does. Which is a polar opposite to your not so highly scientific method of throwing pathetic value judgments around. Give me facts that counter his research. Use his methods to disclaim him. Can you?

[arsenalrule2001uk]

@7humper Mate, this gimp is beyond convincing. You can lead a horse to water, you can't make it realise it's water lol :)

[terrymanning1]

@7humper Gage is a lying POS end of.

[terrymanning1]

Gage is a lying POS

[arsenalrule2001uk]

@terrymanning1 lmao, yeh of course. Because lies can't be disproven can they lol Go on, disprove him, disprove common sense :)

[terrymanning1]

@arsenalrule2001uk Gaga Gage has been fully debunked by the NIST report and by common sense. WTC7 a demo? lolololololololololol

[arsenalrule2001uk]

@terrymanning1 'Debunked'? lmao Dude, if you have done any research from any source you'll know NIST is a gimp group of the bush administration. Gage is full of shit is he?! lol As well as the 600 plus other INDEPENDENT architects and engineers, most of whom have built similar structures. Have you actually ever seen what a controlled demolition looks like? lol Or seen ANY building 'collapse' like all three on 9/11? If you can quote me ONE i shall accept my incorrection.

[terrymanning1]

@arsenalrule2001uk lolol as if ae911twoof have any credibility! They're still claiming wtc7 collapsed at free fall speed... lololol....

Now watch some real controlled demos and listen to the pattern of detonations heard..... can you hear any pattern of explosions on any 9/11 footage? No? Well there's your answer dipshit! No explosions = no demo = no inside job. Now fuck off retard.

[arsenalrule2001uk]

@terrymanning1 lmao Of course you can hear explosions! So did the hundreds if not thousands of public, fire service etc that have said the same. You're embarassing yourself now. It's one thing to believe something, it's another to believe it in the face of undeniable scenes. That's what you 'debunkers' are, in denial. True believer syndrome i believe it's called. I've seen many demos, and the one generic characteristic? Falling into its own footprint, pulverised. Disagree?

[terrymanning1]

@arsenalrule2001uk Go listen to any live footage of the towers and wtc7 collapsing. NO explosions can be heard. You can't bring down a building without explosives and demo explosives are very loud and always in a characteristic sequence that's unmistakeable. The only people embarrassing themselves are pathetic truthtard morons like you. And what do you expect a building to do when it collapses? Tip over like a tree? Of course it falls down. It's called gravity dipshit.

[arsenalrule2001uk]

@terrymanning1 What's that i hear? Baaaah Baaaah lol I was actually referring to towers 1 and 2. Building 7 is too absurd to even debate, like crashing a horse and cart and having it explode lol If i'm pathetic for wanting the truth i don't know what the fuck that makes you! Do you want me to embarass you lol I expect a building to PARTIALLY collapse, or yes 'fall like a tree'! The reason you don't fall through the ground you're standing on is something called resistance lmao

[terrymanning1]

@arsenalrule2001uk Like I said you are the one embarrassing yourself. There were no demos on 9/11. No visual, audible or physical proof whatsoever. Can you hear the characteristic sequenced booms typical of a demo in any of the live footage of the collapses? Towers or B7? No you can't.

Also, the towers were were not designed to withstand the weight of 15 - 20 stories collapsing onto the rest of the building. These are facts, but truthtard scum like you don't care about facts.

[arsenalrule2001uk]

@terrymanning1 Denial lmao Yes you can! Get your eyes tested and watch the twin towers footage again. Visual proof by all the bystanders and anyone watching any footage. Audible, yes, by the bystanders and also on footage but not as obvious. Physical proof, everywhere. Implosions, obvious detonations, pulverised concrete, collapse into footprint. Every characteristic is distinctly CD. I won't disput the floor theory, that would mean huge core colums left standing.

[terrymanning1]

@arsenalrule2001uk It's hopeless discussing 9/11 with you because you clearly have no clue.

[arsenalrule2001uk]

@terrymanning1 But they weren't because they were cut! And that is fact as the pictures reveal core colums cut at an angle, just like CD lol That is a fact you yankee buttplug. Molten metal, where did that come from? The sky? lol Please create a 'fact' to explain that one FACT :)

[terrymanning1]

@arsenalrule2001uk The pictures of columns cut at an angle were taken during the clean up operation. Jeez you truthers will believe anything. Idiot.

[arsenalrule2001uk]

@terrymanning1 And your point is? lol They were cut, FACT! You've just compounded that fact. Ignoring the molten metal issue, because that doesn't fit your fairytale. Oh yeh, the 'clean up' operation, what conclusions were reached from the investigations carried out on remains of the biggest 'terrorist attack' of our time? No investigation at all, not suspicious is it lmao You're failing my friend but it's ok, it's never to late to shake off that denial and suck on some logic.

[terrymanning1]

@arsenalrule2001uk The remaining upright columns in the debris pile were cut during the clean up, not by explosives in a demo. There are pictures and video here on YT showing the guys carrying out the work! Tell me what molten metal proves? How is molten metal an indication of a demo? There were many investigations post 9/11. FEMA were the first. The 9/11CR compiled the info in these into the report which has not been proven false by any truther.

[arsenalrule2001uk]

@terrymanning1 The most logical explanation for your blindly naive perspective is that you are a disinfo agent or just a straight up 'troll' who likes to blindly argue. Your profile picture speaks volumes! So, if they were cut for the clean up, that would mean they were hundreds of feet high beforehand. I can't recall that. If they were cut after, why did they cut them at an angle?! Lies have generic symptoms, one being a constant changing of synopsis and 'creation' of facts where possible.

[terrymanning1]

@arsenalrule2001uk Hilarious mate. Your stupidity is entertaining though. That tired old shill crap again! Real original! The pics of columns cut at an angle were of the few remaining upright outer columns still standing after the collapse. They were cut during the clean up operation at an angle so that they fell where the clean up crew wanted them to fall. It's not difficult to understand, well for anyone who isn't a retard anyway.

Facts debunk truthtard scum every time.

[arsenalrule2001uk]

@terrymanning1 It's very easy to understand, it's just very difficult to believe because it's fucking stupid! lol I asked you a question, what does the CR say about building 7? You can't answer because that also doesn't fit your fairytale lol I was referring to the CORE columns, ya know, the strongest ones! If you have any evidence to corroborate your idea that ANY colums were left standing i'd be happy to review it. As i'm open minded and follow logic :)

[terrymanning1]

@arsenalrule2001uk Typical truthtard behaviour. Ask them a question they can't answer and they change the subject!

The 9/11CR doesn't say anything about wtc7 (that answers your question) but do YOU know why? (Now answer mine.)

The core columns all collapsed. The photos of columns cut at an angle are perimeter columns. Watch this YT vid: "WTC Angle Cut Columns during cleanup" and it shows you what the clean up guys were doing and how. Pay attention about 1.30 into it.

[arsenalrule2001uk]

@terrymanning1 If you are quoting the 9/11CR, you are instantly discrediting yourself. Tell me, what does the CR say about building 7? ;) lol Because you don't know i'll tell you lol Molten metal is MELTED metal! Go on, please, blame it on the jet fuel lmao FYO there was never any FEMA investigation! Did they crawl amongst the pulverised concrete or something lol because the wreckage was briskly shipped to China before anyone could smell the rat! Only your government could make this up lol

[terrymanning1]

@arsenalrule2001uk The 9/11CR didn't mention wtc7 that's true, but do you know why? It didn't mention wtc 3, 4, 5, 6 or St. Nicholas church either. Do you know why?

Again I will ask you what molten metal under the debris pile proves? How is this linked to a demo?

You're wrong about all the steel being shipped off to China without being checked over first. FEMA studied it first.

You're out of your depth arguing with me but keep trying! It's highly amusing reading your shit.

[arsenalrule2001uk]

@terrymanning1 None of those other buildings fell! Yes, WTC7 wasn't hit by a plane but you would think that if it FELL (not collapsed) just like the 1 & 2, you'd think there might be a mention! The CR can spout their bullshit 'jet fuel weakened the structure' malarky on 1 & 2 but that pathetic hypothesis is obviously impossible for 7 and they know they can't provide a credible 'official' narrative. Because you can't think for yourself, i'll explain! Molten metal means something

[terrymanning1]

@arsenalrule2001uk Wrong. They weren't mentioned in the 9/11CR because they were not targeted by the terrorists. The damage to buildings around the towers was collateral damage inc B7. The 9/11CR was also not an engineering report.

Structural steel loses half it's load bearing strength at 500c. The fires were way hotter than that in all the buildings which is why columns and support beams lost their ability to hold up. The NIST reports make perfect sense.

[arsenalrule2001uk]

@terrymanning1 amazingly hot has melted the beams! Or would you disagree with science lol Your explanation for that would be?.... lmao What exactly, in your magical 'floors falling on each other' idea causes the strongest part of the structure to fail?! And what question did i not answer?! I wish someone else was actually paying attention to this lol I'm just waiting for you to state, 'Bin Laden' did it lmao

[terrymanning1]

@arsenalrule2001uk You failed to answer what molten metal proves other than it was very hot under the debris pile? How is molten metal a sign of demolition as truthers keep saying?

Have you studied the construction methods employed in the towers? Or the unusual construct of wtc7, which was built over a Con Ed sub station? For example, did you know that the core and outer columns of the towers could only remain vertical with the floor trusses in place?

[drumidiot777]

I hope they show an interview with Barry Jennings. He was actually in the Building 7 before it collapsed and the interview with him gives me goosebumps. He died not long after giving that interview.

[WinduChi6]

The War on Terrorism is a DECEPTION !