@racer280465 Just been reading some of your comments posted here. It seems to me that you are obsessed in trying to convince so-called "truthers" that 911 beyond any reasonable doubt WASN'T AN INSIDE JOB. Now, why would that be, eh? I hope they don't pay you too much, coz you are a SHITE debunker... 911 INSIDE JOB...& millions of people know it
@martinavizcomm people died that day.... do you have any respect? it was an attack by terrorist. not bin laden...not the president. it was by some brainwashed people who thought they would get into heaven by doing it. because of their stupidity they killed thousands of people. My uncle was supposed to be there that day but they changed the meeting. if he did go there that day and passed away and i saw this comment, then one word would describe you.... CUNT
@martinavizcomm it doesn't matter when you posted it... your a fucking self centered cunt who cant understand just how much peoples family's are left scared by this. seriously you need to get a grip
@racer280465 Just been reading some of your comments posted here. It seems to me that you are obsessed in trying to convince so-called "truthers" that 911 beyond any reasonable doubt WASN'T AN INSIDE JOB. Now, why would that be, eh? I hope they don't pay you too much, coz you are a SHITE debunker... 911 INSIDE JOB...& millions of people know it
I refuse to debate 'shills"" George Bush is a fool, couldn't agree more, probably the only thing we do agree on, and i think we are all lucky that he didn't nuke somesome by the end of the day!
But does this prove a comspiracy theory, no, not in any way shape or form.
@racer280465 An exaggerated amount of electricians were sent in prior to to 9/11. The towers needed no major electrical work at the time... answer me that, heh...?
@BreadStoneburn i concur with your comment to racer28045.....they do a BLACK OUT a month or so before the attacks.....they ordered to REWIRE all of the internet and im not sure if they did phone lines.....and then also ran "Evacuation drills" months before this attack.....very coincidental
If you believe that the firemen or the filmaker had prior knowledge then sir you are a fool, and a twat!
My apparant reason for calling you names is because you make stupid comments. Make stupid comment, you will be treated as the fool you are.
If i choose to post then delete (done to correct a mistake) and you don't like it, tough shit. If it annoys you, then don't say things that could only be said with an iq close to that of a foolish TWAT!
So are you suggesting that an independant film maker, with prior knowledge of a conspiracy to bring down WTC, went about his normal business making a film about the NYFD, and by some miracle they went to a point, during the course of their normal day (assuming they to weren't in on it, as they rushed to WTC and died there i believe), from where the impact (that the film maker KNEW was coming) could be perfectly filmed?
Oh your pricelss! So are you suggesting that an independant film maker, with prior knowledge of a conspiracy to bring down WTC, went about his normal business making a film about the NYFD, and by some miracle they went to a point, during the course of their normal day (assuming they to weren't in on it, as they rushed to WTC and died there i believe), from where the impact (that the film maker KNEW was coming) could be perfectly filmed? Are you serious? TWAT
WTF is your problem? Insulting me in a needless comment and then deleting this comment?
Listen here, Mr. Assface: we're talking about the Naudet brothers here, they didn't die during the collapse. Do YOUR research, capisce? All I was implying that if they had prior knowledge, then it is understandable that they knew where to stand and when to point the cam where. That would explain, what hunnet01 was wondering about.
Put the plug out out your butt and stop calling people names without any apparent reason and whlie you're at it, stop posting and deleting your comments, that is fucking annoying.
If you believe that the firemen or the filmaker had prior knowledge then sir you are a fool, and a twat!
My apparant reason for calling you names is because you make stupid comments. Make stupid comment, you will be treated as the fool you are.
If i choose to post then delete (done to correct a mistake) and you don't like it, tough shit. If it annoys you, then don't say things that could only be said with an iq close to that of a foolish TWAT!
WORK IT OUT! a plane hit WTC, with slightly under 90TONS of fuel thats slightly under 20,000GALLONS onboard at 500knts! No surprise that the resulting fire burn't at over 1800 degrees weakening the steel to the point where it was to weak to support the structure and it fell! Thats it, end,
Thermite?
CD?
No planes?
Military planes?
If you REALLY believe the thremite/cd/no planes/military planes/missiles then you need serious professional help, your barking f*****g MAD!
If you are correct, why were people able to stand in the openings of the buildings waving clothing, while black smoke "oxygen starved fire" was coming out of the buildings.
Most of the fuel was burned up in the fire balls at impact?
How did the heat spread bring down the structures when people were able to make their way down from above the strike areas?
What about build # 7 that was not hit by a airplane?
black smoke does not equal oxygen starved fire, simply a "dirty" fire. People were at windows at that point not affected by heat/smoke, shortly after they were jumping due to the heat and smoke. 90 TONS of fuel does not burn in seconds for all sorts of reasons, let alone flamble items actualy in the tower.
The way the building came down is obvious in every vid i've ever seen, the steel loses strength in the area of the fire, buckles, and the buildings weight does the rest.
Building 7 failed in the same way after intense fire, closely followed by HUGE LUMPS OF THE WTC HITTING IT!
I assume your going to tell me that it was a CD? Tell me how then it was the CD rigged, before the event without ANYONE noticing the miles of det cord that would have been needed, and the many workers req to rig the buiding?
Presumably your going to tell me that all 3 buildings were CD's? Do you have a SHRED of evidence that that is the case, apart from "it looks like it"?
I certainly am no shill nor ignorant. I have looking at the "evidence" and in all honesty, it's laughable! You people can't even agree with each other over which ridiculous theory you believe!
just so i know, are you from the "planes don't exist", or the "they are military planes" camp? Military grade nanothermite, can you hear yourself? Nobody can even prove that it exists, let alone the points that you people ignore, How was it rigged, and why did nobody notice?
In three buildings? You people NEVER answer these questions, you simply accuse the person asking them of being a shill because you have no rational arguement!
You and your ilk are dangerous fools, you very willing to believe that your country would attack you whilst looking at every frame of every video to find things that simply aren't there!
The "evidence" to which you refer is laughable, as are those foolish enough to believe it. I would happily debate points with you if you would
You wrote: "If you believe that the firemen or the filmaker had prior knowledge then sir you are a fool, and a twat!"
When and where did I say, that I believe that the fireman or the filmmaker had prior knowledge? Again: all I said is, that if the fucking Naudet brothers had prior knowledge, then this would explain that they knew where to stand and where to point the camera. And what are you doint here anyway? You don't debate, you just insult people without any reason.
Not worthy a debate is one thing. Another is just calling people names without any apparent reason. That's the problem with all you "non-truthers": if someone does not believe what you believe, you insult them without actually know what they stand for and you assume, what this someone thinks or means or insinuates. I already explained to you twice, what I actually meant. You still don't get it or is it like you don't wanna get it?
Unfortunately, anyone with a reasonable out look (non truthers as you call us) is immediately condemed as ignorant/a shill/blind as soon as we ask reasonable questions that nobody is willing to provide a believable answer to.
You state "that if the fucking Naudet brothers had prior knowledge, then this would explain that they knew where to stand and where to point the camera", a suposition that has NO evidence what so ever!
I've been insulted numerous time on here, thats what i expect
Yeah, you are so great, because only you are capable of asking reasonable questions! And what you believe in is true, everythin g else is a lie, huh? Other people are just twats to you, right?
You seem not to realize, that the very first sentence works the other way around. I will ignore you from now on, since you are talking nonsense and still dont get, what I mean. You are just be mentally dull, you poor brainwashed soul.
I have posed many question on here over the lst couple of days, and some facts to correct assumpsions that others have put up as fact.
NOT ONE ANSWER TO A QUESTION AS YET, APART FROM A LINK TO A DODGY DANISH SCIENTIST WITH SOME VERY DODGY SCIENCE, WHO CAN'T ANSWER SOME VERY IMPORTANT QUESTIONS.
So come on MajorBuckSnort, instead of saying i'm ignorant or a shill, or "dumb fuck" answer questions, or has the dumb fuck asked things you can't answer?
I dont get something..the guy with the camera was filming the fireman and suddenly turns toward WTC.HOw comes? Did he know somethings gonna hit there?
Well, maybe just a weird coincidence. But... Who knows... If it was all a big conspiracy, and this guy would knew what is going to happen, it is imaginable, that he pointed the cam to the WTC that quickly.
@whiterottenrabbit If you took a little time to do some research, you would have found that the cameraman was shooting a documentary about the fire dept.
THEY heard a "low plane" and looked up, the cameraman followed when he to saw the plane. And before the say the firefighters were "in on it" from memory, i believe they were one of the 1st crews at the scene, and all died as a result.
And what exactly is your point? That it cannot possibly be a conspiracy because the fireman looked up first? That doesn't mean that the camera man didn't had prior knowledge of something that would happen.
So are you suggesting that an independant film maker, with prior knowledge of a conspiracy to bring down WTC, went about his normal business making a film about the NYFD, and by some miracle they went to a point, during the course of their normal day (assuming they to weren't in on it, as they rushed to WTC and died there i believe), from where the impact (that the film maker KNEW was coming) could be perfectly filmed?
ask any psychologist, and they will tell you that at least 70% of the people involved in the demo alone would have come forward.
dont come that "scared to lose their jobs", or "they were threatened with death" bullshit, cos the JFK insiders had the same, yet came forward anyway.
if there were explosives in the buildings, they would HAVE to have been visible, and FDNY would have seen them, and known them for what they were, even if the civilians didnt.
we went to iraq, because we were STILL AT WAR with iraq.
we only signed a ceasefire agreement, NOT a peace accord. and the caesefire would stay in place as long as saddam did not make certain weapons, including weapons capable of firing outside iraqs borders, and he let in UN inspectors to make sure.
they stopped the inspectors, AND had scuds firing into kuwait city. both of these violated the ceasefire, making it void
ok, they HAVE seen planes flown into buildings, especially in afghanistan and iraq. LARGE, commercial airliners, flown into them at full speed, with almost full tanks of fuel.
its been seen all over the world before 9/11, into towers IDENTICAL to the WTC, so thats how we know it shouldnt have happened like th...
... right at the start of the collapse, which would have been caught on all footage, and EVERYONE within a couple mile radius would have heard, which they didnt. people hearing the odd explosion isnt unusual for a fire this size, especially considering the cars on fire in the streets having their gas tanks go up.
what you have to see is the CD is impossible without the entire city of new york lying abou those explosions, while the collapse after impact is merely a little unlikely.
for those of you who haven't seen the full footage of the days after 911 the other buildings were on fire and didn't fall, steel buildings fell on those buildings and they still didn't fall, that right there proves that fire can't bring down a building
you think you are so smart because of such comments ? Who said a "Fire" cans bring down A building, we are talking about the Wolrd trade center, not all buildings are alike, and besides, it had just been hit by a plane. People like you making comment about structural integrity know nothing about mechanical engineering it takes years of hard study to be able to analyses such accident you just saw a video or two and too many CSI shows, pleaase make youtube a favor STOP pretending to be an expert
hes right. wtc1 and 2 were not built to proper regulation. they were a death trap in the making. Im surprised this wasn't thought of before. Also wtc7 was built, basically to collapse. all it took was a few fires and a chunk out of the back. Thats why fema and the cia and the mayers office were in there. However from the NIST report you can see they can be brought down by a fire, a plane hitting it. but explosives? no way that would take way too much. and a government agency to implement it.
buidings don't fall at free fall speed. whitch was about 6 to 10 secs. making the buildings colape at about 11 floors per second. it doesn't take a rocket scientist to figer it was a demolition. WTC 7 did not even get hit by a plane.
when you pause at 1:05 its just frightening and disgusting because you know at that point theres no turning back for anyone on board that plane, its so unfair its untrue. words cant describe how unfair this is to all those on board apart from the fuckers who hi-jacked it. R.I.P all who lost their lives in this tragedy and may our thoughts go out to all their families and friends. XXX
some people are either extremely paranoid or muslim sympathizers. enough to believe every act against america was perpetrated by its own government. how retarded.
and also, NONE of the steel structures in this vid have been hit by a high speed 767, with almost full tanks of fuel, head-on, with no attempt to divert the impact, like there was with the (wood and canvas, remember) b-52 that hit empire state.
the b-52 would be like hitting a house with a kite with a small bucket of gasoline, if you think about it. a 767 is a VERY different aircraft, much larger, faster and heavier, and also uses JET fuel, not gasoline like old prop planes did
Twoofahs use the "reverse scientific method"... they determine what happened, throw out all the data that doesn't fit their theories, and then hail their findings as the only possible conclusion.
What is amusing is watching them invent theories, stampede in a herd to support that theory with religious zeal. And then when that theory is demonstrated to be outside the realm of sanity (holographic planes? directed energy weapons?), the herd stampedes to the next silly theory.
I completely agree. The entire notion that 9/11 was a fake and a government inside job must come from the same people that think Big Foot sold them groceries this morning. Planes were real, Bin Laden is real, WTC 7 fell b/c the diesel fuel tanks in the basement caught fire due to inadequate fireproofing of the pipes, ergo it fell. And for all those who said that it was a controlled demo, no blasting cap, wire, etc that is typically found at a controlled demo site was ever found
maybe if they had been looking for it there may have been a different story. If you think your government are all good solid truth telling folks, then WWF wrestling must be a sport..
1st two guys have not even taken the time to understand the finer points of all the debate surrounding this. I have never heard anyone claiming the planes were not real, its so far off the point, you guys just pull this crap out your ass to make the people really wondering what happened look like fools, and you cant even take the time to fully see both sides of the story and then make a decision, your mind was made up from day one.
Regardless of your decision, i doubt its what the victims want.
All anyone has ever tried to point out is that a very select few corrupt people may have purposefully let this happen to further their own business or political agenda's. Is that so fucking hard to believe? And again, if you would take the time to look at all the points and think about it, you would easily see that is plausible. And that warrants further investigation, which you assholes are so gladly cock-blocking.
the people in the "truth" movement ARE fools. the first statement here is exactly right.
there are thousands of claims by "scientific professionals" who claim there were NO planes on 9/11, and the less crazy theories are just as ludicrous when you look into it further.
just do some further research and you find that people are lying to sell books and DVD's
i think you should look into it. only 3 steel structures in HISTORY have ever collapsed because of fire. all on 9/11. one wasnt even hit by a plane and only burned for a few hours. steel structures have burned for literally days and remained standing. also, the empire state was hit by a B-52 or B-25 bomber in the 40s. its still up. and i'd bet not as efficiently designed to withstand that impact forget why but how do you ignore all this? that plus witnesses claiming explosions. u look further
i dont, i did my research, found the claims of NO steel structures collapsing from fire are false, and many have done so. the argument isnt relevent anyway. a building on fire hasnt also had a significant portion smashed away by a jet, have they? IN FACT, NONE OF THEM HAVE.
a b-52 is mostly wood and canvas, not NEARLY as big, and nowhere near as fast as a 767. and also the b-52 pilot was flying very slowly, trying to avoid the impact. the opposite was true on 9/11
Tell me about your research. What did you find? Can you quote your sources? Many steel structures collapsing from fire(?) Even the 9/11 Commission Report avoided the claim that the buildings collapsed from fire. They cautiously claimed that the strength of the steel was compromised by about half (50%), which if it is so, put a whole other spin on things....so please enlighten me.
look at RKOwens4. he has some footage of steel framed structures colapsing due to fire.
and NONE of them had been hit by a 500+mph 767.
and yes, if you check, steel loses over 50% of its strength at just over 1000 degrees. recorded temps in the towers before collapse were up to about 1800 degrees.
i dont source the 9/11 report, as it was done rapidly, as they never thought people would be so stupid as to claim conspiracy. it was an open and shut case, so why go crazy?
What you speak of man?.....RKOwens4? refer with a web address plz. "The 9/11 report was done rapidly.....never thought people would claim conspiracy.." ?? I don't know about you but the rhetoric of the report was in the tone of refuting the claims of 'conspiracy theorists'. Did you read the report? It's an open & shut case for those who are too lazy to think for themselves and do proper research, view facts objectively. Not with emotions. Avoid nonsensical abusive word like "stupid...crazy"
the temps wee recorded on thermal image statellite, by NASA. if you search RKOwens4 on youtube, you will find his channel. if you cant be bothered to type, you obviously cant be bothered to find out what happened, and just want a conspiracy, as its more interesting.
i told you to CHECK for yourself.
i was interested in the conspiracy idea, and looked into it. i did checks on all claims, from BOTH sides, and found there is little to no credibility in these claims.
those thermal temperature readings were after the collapse and were in excess of 1800degrees on the surface. this means that the temperatures were even hotter under the rubble. also this makes us wonder exactly how this came about. also reports of "molten metal pouring like a foundry" down to a pool. this in itself is very strange. To have temperatures like that lasting 3 months or so. Its all very strange and not consistent with reality.
but they DEFINITELY arent consistent with any kind of CD, are they?
is it more likely that this would happen from an event that we had never experienced before, or from something that is very controlled, and people are very knowledgable about?
Again I am befuddled by your assertions. "and yes, if you check, steel loses over 50% of its strength at just over 1000 degrees. recorded temps in the towers before collapse were up to about 1800 degrees."
Yes 1000 what degrees Farnheit,Centigrade(Celsius) ....temperatures were 'RECORDED'??? by whom? were those readings taken... before/during/after the collapse?
please look up thermal inertia and conductivity of heat in steal framed buildings. The great thing about steel framed buildings is, when theres a fire, that heat is transfered down the entire frame. Its a massive heat sink. Great huh? only problem with nist is. they forgot to include that data in their report...hence the rub for alot of us. And by the way even bush said "we will not tolerate conspiracy theories" so you are saying the 911 commission were dumber than him? tough sell m8.
so what youre saying is that when i cook my heroin in a spoon, it wont get hot in one place AT ALL, but get hot slowly, until its all too hot to touch?
im sorry, but that has never happened to me. i know steel conducts heat, but not all at once.
thats just common sense, i dont even need a scientist to point that out, as any junkie will tell you that they can cook heroin in a spoon without too much fear of being burned by the spoon being too hot to touch.
thanks for letting me know who im dealing with:) your spoon is not a steel girder. That also means it has a different thermodynamic properties. you know that thin bit between your hand and the large surface area on the spoon? almost all that heat gets dissipated from the head of the spoon. right next oh..that was it. erm ok imagine putting the lighter under the spoon for an hour. how hot will the spoon be now? oh it ran out of gas:) You DO need a scientist to explain a great many things to you:)
im not trying to upset you m8. but you dont seem to understand thermodynamics. And no it doesn't "fuck up" anyone's arguments. if you look into the nist report their modeling decided to "forget" this fact completely. I mean completly. they jsut took each individual piece and used them. so no dissipation AT ALL. and for some reason they managed to get hot as hell. The models they use don't even remotely link with reality.
I can see where you are going with your comment. however you seem to think that the heat would just stay there if its in big thick steel. this is not the case. This is where thermal inertia comes in. the hotter the substance in one side. the faster it will travel to the cooler side. hot goes to cold.
but no matter how fast it travels, unless the building remains standing, and the fires keep burning, for hours and horus and horus, the area around the impact will be hotter than anywhere else, right?
the heat will spread over the course of time, which there wasnt much of.
i know the nist report is shit, but they didnt put too much effort into it, because its just common sense what happened. and its just common sense that to drop a buioding this size would have been incredibly loud explosions
Yeah but thats because the heroin in the spoon is absorbing most of the heat. If you have ever worked around a grill with tongs you would find that if you were to touch the tongs to the grill for a while you would find that the handle of the tongs is warm to the touch. And if you are cooking heroin then i am sorry for you and maybe you should get off youtube trying to discredit people with your "concrete arguments" and get into rehab.
the tongues would be WARM. a spoon gets WARM at the other end. but a spoon/tongues are much shorter and thinner than the beams in these buildings, and it still takes time for them to even get warm, never mind the same temperature as the point where the flame is at.
its just common knowledge, even kids can figure it out.
and because i am an addict, that doesnt automatically mean i know nothing, or have a lower I.Q than you.
some of the most intelligent people i know are addicts
By the way. NOONE from a scientific background has EVER contested to there being "no planes" although many kiddies with no proper knowledge of video compression have. Please take your context correct. do you really think the no-planers even AGREE with those who look to controlled demo? also controlled demolition doesn't mean explosives. lets make this clear. There are many ways to fell a building.
I think you will find its the same people who think that the USAF are top guns. IF this was a terrorist act and not a false flag op, the USAF must be the worst in the world. If russia attacks you'd be screwed. all the money in the world on air defence and, according to reports. NOT ONE PLANE GOT SHOT DOWN! By the way if you think your government only lies to you in times of piece and is all very honest when its wartime, well, can you find the logic. is that the sound of you waking up? morning...
some french people were doin a documentary on "the average new york fireman", they happened to to be on the street at the time. the documentary ended up bein' about the rescue effort in the towers.
WTC 7 is the smoking gun, reported by the BBC 20 minutes too early. The reporter at the scene has 7 in shot behind her as she reports it's collapse. WTF???
The US government did not plan 9/11. It was those coward terrorists. damn you people are ignorant. You just want a reason to gossip, cause you can't take things for what they really are.
On SOME footage there's JUST explosion but NO plane. I gues that was from before the special effects were added to make a Govt DEMOLITION JOB look like a terrorist attack. Larry Silverstein JUST happened to coincidentally insure the buildings a couple of weeks before.
They JUST happened to need to BOMB millions of Iraqi kids for oil.
Do you think the SAME people who can SLAUGHTER MILLIONS of innocent Iraq kids, COULDNT kill 3,000 of their own AMericans JUST to get to THE BIG Iraq KILL?
If no plane, what happened to the actual plane that should have been there, and where is it and the poeple now?
Do you work in insurance? it was insured a couple fo weeks before an incident, yea, and? would it have been less suspecious if it had been 2 months, 6 months, a year?
Millions have NOT been slaughtered in iraq or anywhere else. Both US an UK forces do everthing they can to minimise casulaties. More kids are killed by iraqe terrorists, FACT!
Shows us how our educational system has royally failed us...when a large percentage of U.S. citizens buy the propaganda the Bush regime sold us about 9/11.
wtc7 was brought down deliberetly because that is where they(government within a government) planned the 911 attacks. dont be fooled people, im with you guys, im helping here!
All you are doing is engaging in really childish insults, and banter like a school child. I am bored shitless, off to debate with someone with a few more brain cells, bye idiot.
Bink you are so fuckin thick. Talk about deluded. I have watched this video the plane atomised by there own desciption. If your going to post a link to support your claim at least try to understand what is happening in it. So effectively you have supported my argument.
So obvious you have not bothered to learn how the twin towers were erected. It is not a queation of playing a pretend achitect it is a qestion of learning about what you are spouting off about.
its funny how people can not see the truth when its right INFRONT of you. all you need to know is wt7. wt7...hmmmmmmmmm... now that doesnt make anysense... like wtf man! how da fuck did that tower collapse and why?!?! maybe its because it was diliberetly brought down because that is where "they" planned 911, that makes sense, bring down the building, destroy the evidence!! i got it!!
I think flight 93 was supposed to hit WTC7 and like the other buildings it had already been pre rigged with explosives, so the was no alternative other than to pull it ,and hope that people are to dumb to realise that small fires or even large fires do not cause steel frame building to collapse. Looks like they got away with it to.
Isn't it obvious that you are not familiar with the way the building was constructed at all, or how a plane is built. So how can you call anyone else ignorant when you have not even bothered to find out the basics.
I will tell you. I know a lot more that you! as someone who has taken the time to research unlike you as someone who has not. The beams are not that slim they were 10 inch square solid steel followed by 3 ft of concrete. plus There are 50x 1 sq metre central steel collumns that were not solid but were designed not to act as chimleys. Come on then give me some links where it explains how the plane penetrated the building I bet you can't!
Fuckin hilarious perforate ha fuckin ha. I have taken the trouble to read and learn about the how planes are made what metal is used and where it is used and how strong they are when compared to structual steel and concrete. Having said that I have never met anyone stupid enough to believe otherwise.
BTW You still are avoiding the question. Do you believe that a plane structure is made to be stronger that Solid structual steel collumns followed by 3ft of concrete? Do you know the answer to that question? agentstink!
Are you trying to change the subject? I would not blame you. What is the answer do you think the aluminum plane is stronger in struture than solid structual steel collumns and 3 ft worth of concrete? come on shill007 answer, just how dumb are you? Oh yes it was cold forged plane grade aluminum. Total uneducated shill fuk wit. Insulted enough?
you are the one with the pre molded brain who can't see anything beyond your own little version of how you see the world, no matter how contary the evidence.
So are you trying to tell me you believe the aluminum plane was stronger than solid steel collumns and 3 ft worth of concrete, do you know what a ridiculous statement that is even by shill standads, Your the blithering idiot.
First of all there is no such word as cowsick or how you have spelt it calssic. Aluminium cannot be made to be as strong as steel in any cicumstances, that is just a idiotic statement. Are you sure you did not read that in a superheros comic book. It amazes me that you call other people deluded and then post a comment like this. Come on get real shill.
Mallable means flexible. Your right I do have a flexible mind, thanks I will take that as compliment. One of the nicest things anyone has ever said to me geez:D
You are also a typical example of a shill not to bright and trained not to think for yourself or question official-dom, and blindly towing the line no matter how obvious the lies are.
Yes, you amount to the perfect NWO drone, and that makes you a traitor to mankind and a GWB and co brown nosed arse licker.
Are you infact the riddler from Batman cleverly digusing yourself as agent bink007. Is the chicken or the egg a cry for hypocrisy lol. Wouldn't all dellusion be an individual opinion or are you refering to the 49% of new yorkers who also believe in Government involvement in 9/11 in which case my opinion would not be that individual. Let me paint you a picture you are enough to make a cat laugh.
Still no answers?
racer280465 1 year ago
@racer280465 I was wondering what your answers would be... posed from experienced professionals in this series?
watch?v=ofXKiXNDDYA&feature=related
view all 10 if you can...agreed - a lot of circumstantial evidence, however bundled together...something smells rotten. What say you?
omertia 1 year ago
@racer280465 Just been reading some of your comments posted here. It seems to me that you are obsessed in trying to convince so-called "truthers" that 911 beyond any reasonable doubt WASN'T AN INSIDE JOB. Now, why would that be, eh? I hope they don't pay you too much, coz you are a SHITE debunker... 911 INSIDE JOB...& millions of people know it
martinavizcomm 1 year ago
@martinavizcomm Don't speak on shit you don't know, you dumbass "troofer".
GUMMYBEAYUH 1 year ago
@martinavizcomm people died that day.... do you have any respect? it was an attack by terrorist. not bin laden...not the president. it was by some brainwashed people who thought they would get into heaven by doing it. because of their stupidity they killed thousands of people. My uncle was supposed to be there that day but they changed the meeting. if he did go there that day and passed away and i saw this comment, then one word would describe you.... CUNT
DrumsConnor 9 months ago
@DrumsConnor
My comment was posted 10 months ago & you reply to it NOW?
Weirdo.
911 INSIDE JOB
martinavizcomm 9 months ago
@martinavizcomm it doesn't matter when you posted it... your a fucking self centered cunt who cant understand just how much peoples family's are left scared by this. seriously you need to get a grip
DrumsConnor 9 months ago
@DrumsConnor
Whatever.
Great channel you have by the way! LOL!!!
martinavizcomm 9 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@racer280465 Just been reading some of your comments posted here. It seems to me that you are obsessed in trying to convince so-called "truthers" that 911 beyond any reasonable doubt WASN'T AN INSIDE JOB. Now, why would that be, eh? I hope they don't pay you too much, coz you are a SHITE debunker... 911 INSIDE JOB...& millions of people know it
martinavizcomm 1 year ago
To summarise the questions;
1. How was 100's of tons of "nanothermite" got into WTC without anyone noticing
2. how were the rest of the explosives got into WTC without anyone noticing
3. how was it rigged (det cord etc) without anyone noticing
4. why has EVERYONE who has anything to do with ACTUAL CD stated it's not CD
5.which conspiracy do you subscribe to MajorBuck
6.why have 0 of the 1000's of people who must have been involved surfaced
So, where are the answers? You must have some?
racer280465 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
"As to George Bush
/watch?v=Sm73wOuPL60&NR=1
I refuse to believe liars.
I refuse to debate 'shills"" George Bush is a fool, couldn't agree more, probably the only thing we do agree on, and i think we are all lucky that he didn't nuke somesome by the end of the day!
But does this prove a comspiracy theory, no, not in any way shape or form.
racer280465 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
All this "As to public opinion in the US
/watch?v=eV99AVpI2f8" proves is that people who have an axe to grind waste time voting in pointless tv polls.
racer280465 1 year ago
As to George Bush
/watch?v=Sm73wOuPL60&NR=1
I refuse to believe liars.
I refuse to debate 'shills"
MajorBuckSnort 1 year ago
@MajorBuckSnort
Didn't I tell you, he's a real dumb fuck? XD
whiterottenrabbit 1 year ago
As to public opinion in the US
/watch?v=eV99AVpI2f8
MajorBuckSnort 1 year ago
As to nano thermite.
/watch?v=8_tf25lx_3o
MajorBuckSnort 1 year ago
And you call that evidence........lol
Question remains, 100TONS!
1. How did "they" get it in the buildings un-noticed
2. How were the trigger mechanisms rigged so nobody noticed
3. The professor said it was used with other explosives, same questions as above in relation to these extra explosives.
Anyone brave enough to have a stab at answering those issues?
racer280465 1 year ago
@racer280465
-Estimations @ 30,000 tons.
-Marvin Bush with Securacom.
-September 6, bomb-sniffing dogs were abruptly removed.(NY Newsday).
-9/8, 9/9 there was a 'power down' no security cameras, no security locks on doors and many, many 'engineers' coming in and out of the tower
-remote control
However I cannot personally confirm or deny the above information..but neither can you.
omertia 1 year ago
@omertia
Are they supposed to be answers to my questions?
-Estimations of 30,000 of what?
-Marvin Bush with Securacom - what?
-so you contend that 3 building were rigged with 30,000tons of explosive in 2.5 days, and nobody noticed afterwards?
-Remote control? yea right.
Tell this this Einstien, how did they rig the towers in advance to start to collapse from EXACTLY where the planes went in?
racer280465 1 year ago
@racer280465 An exaggerated amount of electricians were sent in prior to to 9/11. The towers needed no major electrical work at the time... answer me that, heh...?
BreadStoneburn 1 year ago
@BreadStoneburn i concur with your comment to racer28045.....they do a BLACK OUT a month or so before the attacks.....they ordered to REWIRE all of the internet and im not sure if they did phone lines.....and then also ran "Evacuation drills" months before this attack.....very coincidental
RYNO4880 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@whiterottenrabbit
If you believe that the firemen or the filmaker had prior knowledge then sir you are a fool, and a twat!
My apparant reason for calling you names is because you make stupid comments. Make stupid comment, you will be treated as the fool you are.
If i choose to post then delete (done to correct a mistake) and you don't like it, tough shit. If it annoys you, then don't say things that could only be said with an iq close to that of a foolish TWAT!
racer280465 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@whiterottenrabbit
Oh your pricelss!
So are you suggesting that an independant film maker, with prior knowledge of a conspiracy to bring down WTC, went about his normal business making a film about the NYFD, and by some miracle they went to a point, during the course of their normal day (assuming they to weren't in on it, as they rushed to WTC and died there i believe), from where the impact (that the film maker KNEW was coming) could be perfectly filmed?
Are you serious?
TWAT
racer280465 1 year ago
Man sees low plane, man films low plane, no more, no less.
racer280465 1 year ago
@racer280465
Your comment was:
Oh your pricelss! So are you suggesting that an independant film maker, with prior knowledge of a conspiracy to bring down WTC, went about his normal business making a film about the NYFD, and by some miracle they went to a point, during the course of their normal day (assuming they to weren't in on it, as they rushed to WTC and died there i believe), from where the impact (that the film maker KNEW was coming) could be perfectly filmed? Are you serious? TWAT
whiterottenrabbit 1 year ago
WTF is your problem? Insulting me in a needless comment and then deleting this comment?
Listen here, Mr. Assface: we're talking about the Naudet brothers here, they didn't die during the collapse. Do YOUR research, capisce? All I was implying that if they had prior knowledge, then it is understandable that they knew where to stand and when to point the cam where. That would explain, what hunnet01 was wondering about.
whiterottenrabbit 1 year ago
@racer280465
Put the plug out out your butt and stop calling people names without any apparent reason and whlie you're at it, stop posting and deleting your comments, that is fucking annoying.
whiterottenrabbit 1 year ago
Comment removed
racer280465 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@whiterottenrabbit
If you believe that the firemen or the filmaker had prior knowledge then sir you are a fool, and a twat!
My apparant reason for calling you names is because you make stupid comments. Make stupid comment, you will be treated as the fool you are.
If i choose to post then delete (done to correct a mistake) and you don't like it, tough shit. If it annoys you, then don't say things that could only be said with an iq close to that of a foolish TWAT!
racer280465 1 year ago
WORK IT OUT! a plane hit WTC, with slightly under 90TONS of fuel thats slightly under 20,000GALLONS onboard at 500knts! No surprise that the resulting fire burn't at over 1800 degrees weakening the steel to the point where it was to weak to support the structure and it fell! Thats it, end,
Thermite?
CD?
No planes?
Military planes?
If you REALLY believe the thremite/cd/no planes/military planes/missiles then you need serious professional help, your barking f*****g MAD!
racer280465 1 year ago
@racer280465
If you are correct, why were people able to stand in the openings of the buildings waving clothing, while black smoke "oxygen starved fire" was coming out of the buildings.
Most of the fuel was burned up in the fire balls at impact?
How did the heat spread bring down the structures when people were able to make their way down from above the strike areas?
What about build # 7 that was not hit by a airplane?
911 REINVESTIGATE NOW PLEASE!
MajorBuckSnort 1 year ago
@MajorBuckSnort
black smoke does not equal oxygen starved fire, simply a "dirty" fire. People were at windows at that point not affected by heat/smoke, shortly after they were jumping due to the heat and smoke. 90 TONS of fuel does not burn in seconds for all sorts of reasons, let alone flamble items actualy in the tower.
The way the building came down is obvious in every vid i've ever seen, the steel loses strength in the area of the fire, buckles, and the buildings weight does the rest.
racer280465 1 year ago
Building 7 failed in the same way after intense fire, closely followed by HUGE LUMPS OF THE WTC HITTING IT!
I assume your going to tell me that it was a CD? Tell me how then it was the CD rigged, before the event without ANYONE noticing the miles of det cord that would have been needed, and the many workers req to rig the buiding?
Presumably your going to tell me that all 3 buildings were CD's? Do you have a SHRED of evidence that that is the case, apart from "it looks like it"?
racer280465 1 year ago
well do you have a SHRED of evidence it was an innocent muslim, still alive, whos never seen a plane that did this? fuckhead
k1ngpolo 1 year ago
Oh please the evidence is overwhelming you knob! How would the pilot still be alive you idiot!
racer280465 1 year ago
it wasn't him. the fucking CIA did it.
k1ngpolo 1 year ago 2
lol lol lol yea yea yea, you really are a fool aren't you
racer280465 1 year ago
can you stop being american and think about it.
k1ngpolo 1 year ago
@racer280465 You are a goddamn retard.
Seriously,what the fuck
ipimees 1 year ago
And please please please don't say thermite, i may die laughing.
racer280465 1 year ago
@racer280465 "Obvious Shill"
Well then me say
"milatary grade nanothermate"
I have read some of your post and you are either a shill or totally ignorant!
I am betting on shill.
The total evidence on 911 being a "inside job" is overwhelming and irrefutable.
It was a false flag operation by elements in the US government, and Israel.
Everyone, instead of reading what this shill, or I have to say about 911, investigate for yourselves. And THINK!
patroitsquestion911 com
MajorBuckSnort 1 year ago
@MajorBuckSnort
I certainly am no shill nor ignorant. I have looking at the "evidence" and in all honesty, it's laughable! You people can't even agree with each other over which ridiculous theory you believe!
just so i know, are you from the "planes don't exist", or the "they are military planes" camp? Military grade nanothermite, can you hear yourself? Nobody can even prove that it exists, let alone the points that you people ignore, How was it rigged, and why did nobody notice?
racer280465 1 year ago
In three buildings? You people NEVER answer these questions, you simply accuse the person asking them of being a shill because you have no rational arguement!
You and your ilk are dangerous fools, you very willing to believe that your country would attack you whilst looking at every frame of every video to find things that simply aren't there!
The "evidence" to which you refer is laughable, as are those foolish enough to believe it. I would happily debate points with you if you would
racer280465 1 year ago
@racer280465
You wrote: "If you believe that the firemen or the filmaker had prior knowledge then sir you are a fool, and a twat!"
When and where did I say, that I believe that the fireman or the filmmaker had prior knowledge? Again: all I said is, that if the fucking Naudet brothers had prior knowledge, then this would explain that they knew where to stand and where to point the camera. And what are you doint here anyway? You don't debate, you just insult people without any reason.
whiterottenrabbit 1 year ago
Comment removed
racer280465 1 year ago
Not worthy a debate is one thing. Another is just calling people names without any apparent reason. That's the problem with all you "non-truthers": if someone does not believe what you believe, you insult them without actually know what they stand for and you assume, what this someone thinks or means or insinuates. I already explained to you twice, what I actually meant. You still don't get it or is it like you don't wanna get it?
whiterottenrabbit 1 year ago
Unfortunately, anyone with a reasonable out look (non truthers as you call us) is immediately condemed as ignorant/a shill/blind as soon as we ask reasonable questions that nobody is willing to provide a believable answer to.
You state "that if the fucking Naudet brothers had prior knowledge, then this would explain that they knew where to stand and where to point the camera", a suposition that has NO evidence what so ever!
I've been insulted numerous time on here, thats what i expect
racer280465 1 year ago
Yeah, you are so great, because only you are capable of asking reasonable questions! And what you believe in is true, everythin g else is a lie, huh? Other people are just twats to you, right?
You seem not to realize, that the very first sentence works the other way around. I will ignore you from now on, since you are talking nonsense and still dont get, what I mean. You are just be mentally dull, you poor brainwashed soul.
whiterottenrabbit 1 year ago
I have posed many question on here over the lst couple of days, and some facts to correct assumpsions that others have put up as fact.
NOT ONE ANSWER TO A QUESTION AS YET, APART FROM A LINK TO A DODGY DANISH SCIENTIST WITH SOME VERY DODGY SCIENCE, WHO CAN'T ANSWER SOME VERY IMPORTANT QUESTIONS.
So come on MajorBuckSnort, instead of saying i'm ignorant or a shill, or "dumb fuck" answer questions, or has the dumb fuck asked things you can't answer?
What a fool.
racer280465 1 year ago
What is this video supposed to show or prove?
racer280465 1 year ago
the answers are in the film september clues by simon shack
ttimothymurphy 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
911
WAS
IN
INSIDE
JOB!!!!!
Jdabomb93 2 years ago
I dont get something..the guy with the camera was filming the fireman and suddenly turns toward WTC.HOw comes? Did he know somethings gonna hit there?
hunnet01 2 years ago 2
did u not hear the loud bang
KingKong6912 2 years ago
Well, maybe just a weird coincidence. But... Who knows... If it was all a big conspiracy, and this guy would knew what is going to happen, it is imaginable, that he pointed the cam to the WTC that quickly.
whiterottenrabbit 2 years ago
@whiterottenrabbit If you took a little time to do some research, you would have found that the cameraman was shooting a documentary about the fire dept.
THEY heard a "low plane" and looked up, the cameraman followed when he to saw the plane. And before the say the firefighters were "in on it" from memory, i believe they were one of the 1st crews at the scene, and all died as a result.
racer280465 1 year ago
@racer280465
And what exactly is your point? That it cannot possibly be a conspiracy because the fireman looked up first? That doesn't mean that the camera man didn't had prior knowledge of something that would happen.
whiterottenrabbit 1 year ago
Comment removed
racer280465 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@whiterottenrabbit Oh your pricelss!
So are you suggesting that an independant film maker, with prior knowledge of a conspiracy to bring down WTC, went about his normal business making a film about the NYFD, and by some miracle they went to a point, during the course of their normal day (assuming they to weren't in on it, as they rushed to WTC and died there i believe), from where the impact (that the film maker KNEW was coming) could be perfectly filmed?
Are you serious?
TWAT
racer280465 1 year ago
that was ( is ) an independent film maker, he was doing a documentary on nyfd
pzmtuthcvpvl 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
the best part is wen the plane hits
eire32anois 2 years ago
Yes, the wing does disapear. Bad cgi effects.
Electrorules 2 years ago
at 1.45 the wing on the plane just dissapears before the impact, play it over and over again, its crazy
giddygiddy85 2 years ago 2
You mean when it goes behind a building? Right...
jcolby519 2 years ago
Comment removed
racer280465 1 year ago
@giddygiddy85 @Electrorules
It flies behind a building you cock!
racer280465 1 year ago
As I've seen on Discovery channel, USA sponsored Al Qaeda in 1980 to resist Soviet Union in Afganistan, but nowadays Al Qaeda fight with USA.
Dmitrytln 2 years ago
you know they make ovens and heaters with brick in them, dont you?
or with concrete?
thats because concrete is an EXCELLENT insulator.
it was strange that temps were so high for so long, but not impossible.
the basic fact is that when something new happens, it rarely, if ever, happens the way people would expect.
thats one rule of scientific investigation.
i suppose it was space beams, as steven jones claims?
or remote control planes with some kind of long lasting flammable material in them?
w0bbl3r 2 years ago
name one building, even 70% the size of WTC 1 and " that has been felled by thermite or thermate?
its not stable enough to be used on buildings this size. its NEVER been used for CD like this.
if you looked into it that much, you would know that though, right?
w0bbl3r 2 years ago
ask any psychologist, and they will tell you that at least 70% of the people involved in the demo alone would have come forward.
dont come that "scared to lose their jobs", or "they were threatened with death" bullshit, cos the JFK insiders had the same, yet came forward anyway.
if there were explosives in the buildings, they would HAVE to have been visible, and FDNY would have seen them, and known them for what they were, even if the civilians didnt.
that means FDNY in on it, which is stupid
w0bbl3r 2 years ago
impossible versus unlikely = unlikely is the winner
and this is before getting into the fact that there would STILL have to be thousands of people in on the conspiracy, which is not possible.
it is basic human nature to tell people if you know a secret, no matter what. the bigger the secret, the quicker you tell.
look at the JFK assasination; dozens of people came forward within a few months. 9/11; not one person has come forward after almost 8 years.
thats not just improbable, its impossible
w0bbl3r 2 years ago
You`re probably right,however the 2 illegal wars started under the pretence of catching those responsible?
I reckon that Bin Laden did it :)
albytatlock 2 years ago
neither of those wars were illegal.
and iraq had nothing to do with 9/11.
we went to iraq, because we were STILL AT WAR with iraq.
we only signed a ceasefire agreement, NOT a peace accord. and the caesefire would stay in place as long as saddam did not make certain weapons, including weapons capable of firing outside iraqs borders, and he let in UN inspectors to make sure.
they stopped the inspectors, AND had scuds firing into kuwait city. both of these violated the ceasefire, making it void
w0bbl3r 2 years ago
Who the fucks we?
albytatlock 2 years ago
human beings. people. the world in general.
duh
w0bbl3r 2 years ago
"Human beings,people the world in general", does that include Afghan and Iraqi civilians?
Answer this comment if you want ,but I will not be bothering corresponding with you,you fuckin bellend
albytatlock 2 years ago
ok, they HAVE seen planes flown into buildings, especially in afghanistan and iraq. LARGE, commercial airliners, flown into them at full speed, with almost full tanks of fuel.
its been seen all over the world before 9/11, into towers IDENTICAL to the WTC, so thats how we know it shouldnt have happened like th...
oh, wait... hang on.
it HASNT happened before, has it?
just as i said before, moron
w0bbl3r 2 years ago
Yes right, we?
Rawlinson18 2 years ago
... right at the start of the collapse, which would have been caught on all footage, and EVERYONE within a couple mile radius would have heard, which they didnt. people hearing the odd explosion isnt unusual for a fire this size, especially considering the cars on fire in the streets having their gas tanks go up.
what you have to see is the CD is impossible without the entire city of new york lying abou those explosions, while the collapse after impact is merely a little unlikely.
w0bbl3r 2 years ago
for those of you who haven't seen the full footage of the days after 911 the other buildings were on fire and didn't fall, steel buildings fell on those buildings and they still didn't fall, that right there proves that fire can't bring down a building
99mees 2 years ago
you think you are so smart because of such comments ? Who said a "Fire" cans bring down A building, we are talking about the Wolrd trade center, not all buildings are alike, and besides, it had just been hit by a plane. People like you making comment about structural integrity know nothing about mechanical engineering it takes years of hard study to be able to analyses such accident you just saw a video or two and too many CSI shows, pleaase make youtube a favor STOP pretending to be an expert
Mcmanaman85 2 years ago
hes right. wtc1 and 2 were not built to proper regulation. they were a death trap in the making. Im surprised this wasn't thought of before. Also wtc7 was built, basically to collapse. all it took was a few fires and a chunk out of the back. Thats why fema and the cia and the mayers office were in there. However from the NIST report you can see they can be brought down by a fire, a plane hitting it. but explosives? no way that would take way too much. and a government agency to implement it.
rsolgtp 2 years ago
Subliminal Message at 1:17?
ColIateralMusic 2 years ago
buidings don't fall at free fall speed. whitch was about 6 to 10 secs. making the buildings colape at about 11 floors per second. it doesn't take a rocket scientist to figer it was a demolition. WTC 7 did not even get hit by a plane.
coolcorbin 3 years ago
when you pause at 1:05 its just frightening and disgusting because you know at that point theres no turning back for anyone on board that plane, its so unfair its untrue. words cant describe how unfair this is to all those on board apart from the fuckers who hi-jacked it. R.I.P all who lost their lives in this tragedy and may our thoughts go out to all their families and friends. XXX
ryan1moss 3 years ago
aaron brown was in the studio, not on the roof.
That breeze is from a fan. In the studio.
CNN911Fakes 3 years ago
some people are either extremely paranoid or muslim sympathizers. enough to believe every act against america was perpetrated by its own government. how retarded.
blameYTandvoteObama 3 years ago
and also, NONE of the steel structures in this vid have been hit by a high speed 767, with almost full tanks of fuel, head-on, with no attempt to divert the impact, like there was with the (wood and canvas, remember) b-52 that hit empire state.
the b-52 would be like hitting a house with a kite with a small bucket of gasoline, if you think about it. a 767 is a VERY different aircraft, much larger, faster and heavier, and also uses JET fuel, not gasoline like old prop planes did
w0bbl3r 3 years ago
Twoofahs use the "reverse scientific method"... they determine what happened, throw out all the data that doesn't fit their theories, and then hail their findings as the only possible conclusion.
What is amusing is watching them invent theories, stampede in a herd to support that theory with religious zeal. And then when that theory is demonstrated to be outside the realm of sanity (holographic planes? directed energy weapons?), the herd stampedes to the next silly theory.
conotoxin 3 years ago
I completely agree. The entire notion that 9/11 was a fake and a government inside job must come from the same people that think Big Foot sold them groceries this morning. Planes were real, Bin Laden is real, WTC 7 fell b/c the diesel fuel tanks in the basement caught fire due to inadequate fireproofing of the pipes, ergo it fell. And for all those who said that it was a controlled demo, no blasting cap, wire, etc that is typically found at a controlled demo site was ever found
mrcablc07 3 years ago 2
maybe if they had been looking for it there may have been a different story. If you think your government are all good solid truth telling folks, then WWF wrestling must be a sport..
rsolgtp 3 years ago 3
1st two guys have not even taken the time to understand the finer points of all the debate surrounding this. I have never heard anyone claiming the planes were not real, its so far off the point, you guys just pull this crap out your ass to make the people really wondering what happened look like fools, and you cant even take the time to fully see both sides of the story and then make a decision, your mind was made up from day one.
Regardless of your decision, i doubt its what the victims want.
SexskillAndEbert 3 years ago
No one fucking thinks it was 'a government job'.
No one is blaming america.
All anyone has ever tried to point out is that a very select few corrupt people may have purposefully let this happen to further their own business or political agenda's. Is that so fucking hard to believe? And again, if you would take the time to look at all the points and think about it, you would easily see that is plausible. And that warrants further investigation, which you assholes are so gladly cock-blocking.
SexskillAndEbert 3 years ago
the people in the "truth" movement ARE fools. the first statement here is exactly right.
there are thousands of claims by "scientific professionals" who claim there were NO planes on 9/11, and the less crazy theories are just as ludicrous when you look into it further.
just do some further research and you find that people are lying to sell books and DVD's
w0bbl3r 3 years ago
i think you should look into it. only 3 steel structures in HISTORY have ever collapsed because of fire. all on 9/11. one wasnt even hit by a plane and only burned for a few hours. steel structures have burned for literally days and remained standing. also, the empire state was hit by a B-52 or B-25 bomber in the 40s. its still up. and i'd bet not as efficiently designed to withstand that impact forget why but how do you ignore all this? that plus witnesses claiming explosions. u look further
NeverEnoughBall 3 years ago
"how" do i ignore this?
i dont, i did my research, found the claims of NO steel structures collapsing from fire are false, and many have done so. the argument isnt relevent anyway. a building on fire hasnt also had a significant portion smashed away by a jet, have they? IN FACT, NONE OF THEM HAVE.
a b-52 is mostly wood and canvas, not NEARLY as big, and nowhere near as fast as a 767. and also the b-52 pilot was flying very slowly, trying to avoid the impact. the opposite was true on 9/11
w0bbl3r 3 years ago
could you please point me to the proof of these claims being false?
NeverEnoughBall 3 years ago
Tell me about your research. What did you find? Can you quote your sources? Many steel structures collapsing from fire(?) Even the 9/11 Commission Report avoided the claim that the buildings collapsed from fire. They cautiously claimed that the strength of the steel was compromised by about half (50%), which if it is so, put a whole other spin on things....so please enlighten me.
MachoKokoa 3 years ago
look at RKOwens4. he has some footage of steel framed structures colapsing due to fire.
and NONE of them had been hit by a 500+mph 767.
and yes, if you check, steel loses over 50% of its strength at just over 1000 degrees. recorded temps in the towers before collapse were up to about 1800 degrees.
i dont source the 9/11 report, as it was done rapidly, as they never thought people would be so stupid as to claim conspiracy. it was an open and shut case, so why go crazy?
check RKOwens4's channel.
w0bbl3r 3 years ago
What you speak of man?.....RKOwens4? refer with a web address plz. "The 9/11 report was done rapidly.....never thought people would claim conspiracy.." ?? I don't know about you but the rhetoric of the report was in the tone of refuting the claims of 'conspiracy theorists'. Did you read the report? It's an open & shut case for those who are too lazy to think for themselves and do proper research, view facts objectively. Not with emotions. Avoid nonsensical abusive word like "stupid...crazy"
MachoKokoa 3 years ago
the temps wee recorded on thermal image statellite, by NASA. if you search RKOwens4 on youtube, you will find his channel. if you cant be bothered to type, you obviously cant be bothered to find out what happened, and just want a conspiracy, as its more interesting.
i told you to CHECK for yourself.
i was interested in the conspiracy idea, and looked into it. i did checks on all claims, from BOTH sides, and found there is little to no credibility in these claims.
do your OWN research.
w0bbl3r 3 years ago
those thermal temperature readings were after the collapse and were in excess of 1800degrees on the surface. this means that the temperatures were even hotter under the rubble. also this makes us wonder exactly how this came about. also reports of "molten metal pouring like a foundry" down to a pool. this in itself is very strange. To have temperatures like that lasting 3 months or so. Its all very strange and not consistent with reality.
rsolgtp 2 years ago
but they DEFINITELY arent consistent with any kind of CD, are they?
is it more likely that this would happen from an event that we had never experienced before, or from something that is very controlled, and people are very knowledgable about?
hmmm, i wonder?
w0bbl3r 2 years ago
Again I am befuddled by your assertions. "and yes, if you check, steel loses over 50% of its strength at just over 1000 degrees. recorded temps in the towers before collapse were up to about 1800 degrees."
Yes 1000 what degrees Farnheit,Centigrade(Celsius) ....temperatures were 'RECORDED'??? by whom? were those readings taken... before/during/after the collapse?
MachoKokoa 3 years ago
please look up thermal inertia and conductivity of heat in steal framed buildings. The great thing about steel framed buildings is, when theres a fire, that heat is transfered down the entire frame. Its a massive heat sink. Great huh? only problem with nist is. they forgot to include that data in their report...hence the rub for alot of us. And by the way even bush said "we will not tolerate conspiracy theories" so you are saying the 911 commission were dumber than him? tough sell m8.
rsolgtp 2 years ago
so what youre saying is that when i cook my heroin in a spoon, it wont get hot in one place AT ALL, but get hot slowly, until its all too hot to touch?
im sorry, but that has never happened to me. i know steel conducts heat, but not all at once.
thats just common sense, i dont even need a scientist to point that out, as any junkie will tell you that they can cook heroin in a spoon without too much fear of being burned by the spoon being too hot to touch.
the water boils, but the hand stays cool
w0bbl3r 2 years ago
thanks for letting me know who im dealing with:) your spoon is not a steel girder. That also means it has a different thermodynamic properties. you know that thin bit between your hand and the large surface area on the spoon? almost all that heat gets dissipated from the head of the spoon. right next oh..that was it. erm ok imagine putting the lighter under the spoon for an hour. how hot will the spoon be now? oh it ran out of gas:) You DO need a scientist to explain a great many things to you:)
rsolgtp 2 years ago
oh, so you ARE a scientist?
i was just makinga comparison, i never said it was exact, but its close enough to fuck up your argument, and you know it is.
it takes time for heat to spread thru steel. the thicker and longer the peice, the longer it will take.
from what youre saying, the steel on the ground floor would have been jst as hot as the steel at the impact area.
the bottom lineis that this has never happened before, so you cant say that it wouldnt happen like that
w0bbl3r 2 years ago
im not trying to upset you m8. but you dont seem to understand thermodynamics. And no it doesn't "fuck up" anyone's arguments. if you look into the nist report their modeling decided to "forget" this fact completely. I mean completly. they jsut took each individual piece and used them. so no dissipation AT ALL. and for some reason they managed to get hot as hell. The models they use don't even remotely link with reality.
rsolgtp 2 years ago
I can see where you are going with your comment. however you seem to think that the heat would just stay there if its in big thick steel. this is not the case. This is where thermal inertia comes in. the hotter the substance in one side. the faster it will travel to the cooler side. hot goes to cold.
rsolgtp 2 years ago
but no matter how fast it travels, unless the building remains standing, and the fires keep burning, for hours and horus and horus, the area around the impact will be hotter than anywhere else, right?
the heat will spread over the course of time, which there wasnt much of.
i know the nist report is shit, but they didnt put too much effort into it, because its just common sense what happened. and its just common sense that to drop a buioding this size would have been incredibly loud explosions
w0bbl3r 2 years ago
Yeah but thats because the heroin in the spoon is absorbing most of the heat. If you have ever worked around a grill with tongs you would find that if you were to touch the tongs to the grill for a while you would find that the handle of the tongs is warm to the touch. And if you are cooking heroin then i am sorry for you and maybe you should get off youtube trying to discredit people with your "concrete arguments" and get into rehab.
turok4lyfe 2 years ago
exactly my point.
the tongues would be WARM. a spoon gets WARM at the other end. but a spoon/tongues are much shorter and thinner than the beams in these buildings, and it still takes time for them to even get warm, never mind the same temperature as the point where the flame is at.
its just common knowledge, even kids can figure it out.
and because i am an addict, that doesnt automatically mean i know nothing, or have a lower I.Q than you.
some of the most intelligent people i know are addicts
w0bbl3r 2 years ago
Comment removed
racer280465 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@NeverEnoughBall
You people really don't have a clue do you!
It was a B25 that hit the Empire State at approx 150knts, lost in fog, and low fuel. A B25 was a medium bomber, which had a max weight of 45000lbs.
WTC was designed to withstand a 707 hitting it in the same circumstances, at 150knts, max weight 707, 336000lbs!
The WTC were actualy hit by FULLY FUELED 767's at approx 500knts, their weight would have been in the region of 412000lbs, of which 198000 was fuel!
racer280465 1 year ago
By the way. NOONE from a scientific background has EVER contested to there being "no planes" although many kiddies with no proper knowledge of video compression have. Please take your context correct. do you really think the no-planers even AGREE with those who look to controlled demo? also controlled demolition doesn't mean explosives. lets make this clear. There are many ways to fell a building.
rsolgtp 2 years ago
I think you will find its the same people who think that the USAF are top guns. IF this was a terrorist act and not a false flag op, the USAF must be the worst in the world. If russia attacks you'd be screwed. all the money in the world on air defence and, according to reports. NOT ONE PLANE GOT SHOT DOWN! By the way if you think your government only lies to you in times of piece and is all very honest when its wartime, well, can you find the logic. is that the sound of you waking up? morning...
rsolgtp 3 years ago
lol...right..nice one dude..rofl...but hey..back to topic.
WorldRebooter 3 years ago
whats the point of this video?
frEbase1 3 years ago 5
This has been flagged as spam show
damn muslims
beamerZ 3 years ago
lol, you mean damn U.S. government
Search the internet for a video called "loose change". It's the facts
creid100 3 years ago 3
its not the facts..its a bunch of questions.
feedmecoolshit 3 years ago
Yeah but it answers the questions.
And look for september clues.
Another good vid.
kingsofcarnage 3 years ago 2
why the fuck is there a firefighter already on the street before the first plane even crashed (0:09)
mirel41 3 years ago 3
some french people were doin a documentary on "the average new york fireman", they happened to to be on the street at the time. the documentary ended up bein' about the rescue effort in the towers.
enrsjon2 3 years ago
oh. how do u kno
mirel41 3 years ago
well when it was aired on the news they said who made the video. i think its on the documentary they released as well in 2002 called "9/11"
enrsjon2 3 years ago
I know,Its so convenient isnt it!
kingsofcarnage 3 years ago
i just dont see how the other world trade center, (not the twin towers managed) wtc7, collapsed when it never got hit by anything,
soulsonicinc 3 years ago 4
They demolished it.Only thing is,they forgot to empty it of all the documents abou how the building was built etc.
So any evidence that could have been in there was also destroyed.Delibrately.
kingsofcarnage 3 years ago
the seconds between 4:36 and 4:39 are very interesting..
mankato86 3 years ago
WTC 7 is the smoking gun, reported by the BBC 20 minutes too early. The reporter at the scene has 7 in shot behind her as she reports it's collapse. WTF???
darthstarwarsgeek 3 years ago
The US government did not plan 9/11. It was those coward terrorists. damn you people are ignorant. You just want a reason to gossip, cause you can't take things for what they really are.
sidekickrazr 3 years ago
a plastic robot, thats what YOU are
mankato86 3 years ago
said the man who really don;t know anything at all...
Start to think by yourself sidekickrazr and ask yourself whe there were no Jews during 9/11 in WTC...
oranger12 3 years ago
The US Government DID.
We are certainly Not being told everything,even if it wasnt the government.
The Plane videos were FAKED.
Open your eyes to see what they want you to see.Close them to work out the truth for yourself.
Watch the news reports!
kingsofcarnage 3 years ago
On SOME footage there's JUST explosion but NO plane. I gues that was from before the special effects were added to make a Govt DEMOLITION JOB look like a terrorist attack. Larry Silverstein JUST happened to coincidentally insure the buildings a couple of weeks before.
They JUST happened to need to BOMB millions of Iraqi kids for oil.
Do you think the SAME people who can SLAUGHTER MILLIONS of innocent Iraq kids, COULDNT kill 3,000 of their own AMericans JUST to get to THE BIG Iraq KILL?
Dream ON
idasputem 3 years ago
@idasputem what drugs are you on?
If no plane, what happened to the actual plane that should have been there, and where is it and the poeple now?
Do you work in insurance? it was insured a couple fo weeks before an incident, yea, and? would it have been less suspecious if it had been 2 months, 6 months, a year?
Millions have NOT been slaughtered in iraq or anywhere else. Both US an UK forces do everthing they can to minimise casulaties. More kids are killed by iraqe terrorists, FACT!
racer280465 1 year ago
Shows us how our educational system has royally failed us...when a large percentage of U.S. citizens buy the propaganda the Bush regime sold us about 9/11.
sharonafox1 3 years ago
How any sane person can look at 4:26 to 4:56
and think this is pancakes.....?
Beyond me.
wisjoh 3 years ago
Just watch "Terrorstorm". WAKE THE F@*K UP!
jj128 3 years ago
holy crap, pause at 1 16
TheJamMan69 4 years ago
What is it?
Dicecube78 3 years ago
dunno, a really creepy guy
TheJamMan69 3 years ago
yeah what is it?
hermano55 3 years ago
dunno a really creepy guy
TheJamMan69 3 years ago
wtc7 was brought down deliberetly because that is where they(government within a government) planned the 911 attacks. dont be fooled people, im with you guys, im helping here!
JUKIO01 4 years ago 2
what the heck was that that flew in fron of the WTC at 3:03. If that was a bird that was the fastest bird I have ever seen!!!
ezplayer21 4 years ago
All you are doing is engaging in really childish insults, and banter like a school child. I am bored shitless, off to debate with someone with a few more brain cells, bye idiot.
JenkleJ 4 years ago 2
yawn, yawn.
JenkleJ 4 years ago
Bink you are so fuckin thick. Talk about deluded. I have watched this video the plane atomised by there own desciption. If your going to post a link to support your claim at least try to understand what is happening in it. So effectively you have supported my argument.
JenkleJ 4 years ago
Stop being so childish agentstink007.
JenkleJ 4 years ago
So obvious you have not bothered to learn how the twin towers were erected. It is not a queation of playing a pretend achitect it is a qestion of learning about what you are spouting off about.
JenkleJ 4 years ago
its funny how people can not see the truth when its right INFRONT of you. all you need to know is wt7. wt7...hmmmmmmmmm... now that doesnt make anysense... like wtf man! how da fuck did that tower collapse and why?!?! maybe its because it was diliberetly brought down because that is where "they" planned 911, that makes sense, bring down the building, destroy the evidence!! i got it!!
JUKIO01 4 years ago 4
I think flight 93 was supposed to hit WTC7 and like the other buildings it had already been pre rigged with explosives, so the was no alternative other than to pull it ,and hope that people are to dumb to realise that small fires or even large fires do not cause steel frame building to collapse. Looks like they got away with it to.
JenkleJ 4 years ago 3
No I have not seen this footage. Please post a link!
JenkleJ 4 years ago
I have seen this footage and the plane lost!
JenkleJ 4 years ago
Isn't it obvious that you are not familiar with the way the building was constructed at all, or how a plane is built. So how can you call anyone else ignorant when you have not even bothered to find out the basics.
information?
JenkleJ 4 years ago
I will tell you. I know a lot more that you! as someone who has taken the time to research unlike you as someone who has not. The beams are not that slim they were 10 inch square solid steel followed by 3 ft of concrete. plus There are 50x 1 sq metre central steel collumns that were not solid but were designed not to act as chimleys. Come on then give me some links where it explains how the plane penetrated the building I bet you can't!
JenkleJ 4 years ago
P.s You still have avoided answering the question do you believe the plane was structualy stronger than the steel collumns and concrete structure?
JenkleJ 4 years ago
Fuckin hilarious perforate ha fuckin ha. I have taken the trouble to read and learn about the how planes are made what metal is used and where it is used and how strong they are when compared to structual steel and concrete. Having said that I have never met anyone stupid enough to believe otherwise.
JenkleJ 4 years ago
BTW You still are avoiding the question. Do you believe that a plane structure is made to be stronger that Solid structual steel collumns followed by 3ft of concrete? Do you know the answer to that question? agentstink!
JenkleJ 4 years ago
Are you trying to change the subject? I would not blame you. What is the answer do you think the aluminum plane is stronger in struture than solid structual steel collumns and 3 ft worth of concrete? come on shill007 answer, just how dumb are you? Oh yes it was cold forged plane grade aluminum. Total uneducated shill fuk wit. Insulted enough?
JenkleJ 4 years ago
On this occasion agent shill. I am unable to decipher your shit! To what change of leadership are you refering?
JenkleJ 4 years ago
you are the one with the pre molded brain who can't see anything beyond your own little version of how you see the world, no matter how contary the evidence.
JenkleJ 4 years ago
So are you trying to tell me you believe the aluminum plane was stronger than solid steel collumns and 3 ft worth of concrete, do you know what a ridiculous statement that is even by shill standads, Your the blithering idiot.
JenkleJ 4 years ago
First of all there is no such word as cowsick or how you have spelt it calssic. Aluminium cannot be made to be as strong as steel in any cicumstances, that is just a idiotic statement. Are you sure you did not read that in a superheros comic book. It amazes me that you call other people deluded and then post a comment like this. Come on get real shill.
JenkleJ 4 years ago
Mallable means flexible. Your right I do have a flexible mind, thanks I will take that as compliment. One of the nicest things anyone has ever said to me geez:D
JenkleJ 4 years ago
You are also a typical example of a shill not to bright and trained not to think for yourself or question official-dom, and blindly towing the line no matter how obvious the lies are.
Yes, you amount to the perfect NWO drone, and that makes you a traitor to mankind and a GWB and co brown nosed arse licker.
JenkleJ 4 years ago
Are you infact the riddler from Batman cleverly digusing yourself as agent bink007. Is the chicken or the egg a cry for hypocrisy lol. Wouldn't all dellusion be an individual opinion or are you refering to the 49% of new yorkers who also believe in Government involvement in 9/11 in which case my opinion would not be that individual. Let me paint you a picture you are enough to make a cat laugh.
JenkleJ 4 years ago
There was a secret agent called bink who wasn't able to think.... when you get through with the nursery books perhaps you could lend them on.
JenkleJ 4 years ago
Most of the tim