John Kerry confronted about World Trade Center 7

Skull & Bonehead

It is important to rate and share videos like this so that that we can get this information out to the widest audience possible. Please rate this video and share it. (& Subscribe if you haven't already : )

Thanks for watching, find more at:
http://www.toastedmojo.com/

Category:

News & Politics

Tags:

• John
• Kerry
• 9/11
• 911
• Truth
• World
• Trade
• Center
• Pull
• It
• Larry
• Silvestein
• PBS
• America
• Rebuilds
• trade center
• world trade
• wtc

[PoetryHound]

@DarkDragon187II So your opinion of Jowenko is that he's an expert. Wait! No he's not! LOL!

BTW, you still haven't cited a single demo expert who agrees with you that the ejections were caused by explosives. So you fail on that.

And you fail on showing that Silverstein pocketed any insurance payouts. There's no evidence of it.

And you fail on presenting any demo experts from CDI who agree with you.

Got anything besides unsubstantiated assertions?

[DarkDragon187II]

@PoetryHound Jowenko says WTC7 was a demo and he is a demolitions EXPERT.

He said WTC 1 and 2 were not but HE IS WRONG. This is why.

a Parameter wall unit weighing 4 tons and 30 feet long falling faster than the acceleration of gravity on WTC demo.

watch?v=xvw0_i1rGns

get off Silversteins nuts, again you fail to realize you agree with Jowenko on WTC7 being a demo, along with other demo experts from CDI.

Again, who are you to say who is expert and who is not???? You lost. Sorry

[PoetryHound]

@DarkDragon187II So now that you're caught red-handed making a baseless claim about Silverstein pocketing the insurance payout, you tell me to prove he didn't. LOL! You made the claim. You back it up. Claiming "it's obvious" isn't a substitute for backing it up.

You're the one who says Jowenko is credible. He said WTC 1 & 2 were not demos.

"If one is demo they all are demos"

Yet another in an endless series of unsubstantiated assertions from you. LOL!

[DarkDragon187II]

@PoetryHound I did back up my claims, and its you that has to provide proof that he didnt get any money, you have to be pretty retarded to believe that he didnt. You again hide behind your silverstein rant and forget what started this convo in the first place ,WTC7.

You told me to support my WTC7 demo and I presented you Jowenko, you then stated his 2 towers theory, and me saying I disagree with him, keep hiding little man, you fucking flip flop. If one is demo they all are demos

[PoetryHound]

@DarkDragon187II As for Silverstein, you have repeatedly failed to provide a single shred of evidence that he pocketed a penny from the insurance payouts. There's plenty of evidence that the insurance payouts were not enough to cover the rebuilding costs and there's plenty of evidence that he has had to borrow money to pay for rebuilding because the insurance payouts were insufficient. You're the one who's living in a fairy tale world. You can't back up any of your claims.

[PoetryHound]

@DarkDragon187II But the projectile ejections weren't caused by explosives. You have failed to identify a single demo expert who agrees with you.

Jowenko wasn't given all the information about WTC 7. He wasn't told that the firefighters said the building was unstable & likely to collapse. So no, I don't agree with him about WTC 7. But since YOU think he's credible, note that he says WTC 1 & 2 were not brought down with explosives. So that's yet another strike against you.

[DarkDragon187II]

@PoetryHound so if he says that no explosives were used there is still evidence of projectile ejections from the building, so he is wrong.

So you agree with him about WTC7??? is that what your trying to say??

No strikes, and your Silverstien not pocketing anything is a bunch of bull that you yourself cant prove, everyone knows that when you lose property and insurance pays for it you get something in return, and he got well over the amount that he invested and you living in a fairy tale.

[PoetryHound]

If you think Jowenko is credible, note that he says WTC 1 & 2 were NOT demo jobs.

And no, he never said the rapid ejections at WTC 1 & 2 were caused by explosives.

And no, he never said thermite was used.

And no, not one demo expert at CDI says explosives brought down any of the WTC buildings.

Three strikes. You lose.

Strike four: You've presented no evidence that Silvetstein pocketed the insurance payout. Absolutely none.

BTW, misinterpreting the laws of physics doesn't help you.

[DarkDragon187II]

I always forget to mention Danny Jowenko as a Demolition Explosives expert that you can also bash on, because your text box comments over excel The Laws of Physics and Scientific Theories, and modern architectural design that constructed a building in the 1980s that can withstand the forces of nature, in which fires caused from office furniture on few floors brought down

watch?v=sURmDpC3qxg

[PoetryHound]

@DarkDragon187II

Nope, not even one demo expert says your fast ejections indicate explosive. If you claim there is more than one, then name them. You can't do it.

Not one single demo expert at CDI says explosives were used on 9/11. That's why you can't name any. All you have is an explosives loader who has no expertise.

Not one single demo expert says thermite was used either. But I admit I enjoy watching you jump back & forth between claiming explosives & then thermite.