patrick.net

coriacci1 says

it was'n hit by anything

Of course it was ("was'n"?), that's been documented many times. The final report has been available on line for years. Google NIST building 7 collapse.

Of course if you feel the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), the Structural Engineering Institute of the American Society of Civil Engineers (SEI/ASCE), the Society of Fire Protection Engineers (SFPE), the National Fire Protection Association (NFPA), the American Institute of Steel Construction (AISC), the Council on Tall Buildings and Urban Habitat (CTBUH), and the Structural Engineers Association of New York (SEAoNY) who did the report are all involved in a vast conspiracy then no amount of facts are of any use to you.

Pretty amazing that it's impossible to keep a blowjob while locked in the oval office quiet but it's perfectly pluasable to some people that thousands of people could be involved in blowing up the two most famous buildings in America while killing 3000 citizens and it can be done it total secrecy with no one involved letting anything at all out.

The only way 2 people can keep a secret is if one is dead.

Ruki says

coriacci1 says

no discussion? no counter arguments?

Why should anyone treat this bullshit seriously enough to waste their time.

Hey, let's talk about how the Moon Landings were faked instead! Got any dirt on that? :)

Libtard! Libtard! Libtard! So many Libtards!

I love the fake moon landings. Do you think it was speilburg or lucas that did the films.

building 7 wasn't hit by anything is what i said.

coriacci1 says

name em.

All of them? My fingers would hurt. Why not google it? Just don't include the word conspiracy in your search criteria.

the 911 families still think we should treat this stuff seriously.

coriacci1 says

the 911 families still think we should treat this stuff seriously.

Yes, but don't let that stop you from the other important work you need to do!

coriacci1 says

building 7 wasn't hit by anything is what i said.

So debris from the North Tower doesn't count?

coriacci1 says

building 7 wasn't hit by anything is what i said.

Your proof of this is?????

coriacci1 says

the 911 families still think we should treat this stuff seriously.

You sure are persistent aren't you?
I think you can make a lot of money selling real estate.
your'e hired.

larry silverstein

coriacci1 says

larry silverstein

Yes, and he...

http://ae911truth.org/ architects and engineers for 911 truth

coriacci1 says

http://ae911truth.org/ architects and engineers for 911 truth

Architects and engineers are human beings. 911 conspiracy theorists are also human beings. Just.

eppure si muove!

I agree. Anyone who cannot believe it was a controlled demolition is just another media brainwashed human bot controlled by tv. It is common knowledge that buildings do not burn and completely collapse straight down to pure ash without the use of coordinated controlled explosives. Government used it to control people further and justify the murder of all those who died in the war aftermath. Many connected companies profited. The country is in shit shape after the Bush years. Go figure. O but obama is the antichrist? Of course. Whynot. And my grandma is superman. No really.

coriacci1 says

http://ae911truth.org/ architects and engineers for 911 truth

OMG 1706 Architects and Engineers have signed a petition. That must be at least .01% of them don't you think?

Cool, I just signed up with 9/11 truth as an structrural engineer, last week I couldn't spell it (still can't), now I are one. Now there are 1707. Proof positive, case closed.

And BLDG 7 fell because it felt left out. Yup.

coriacci1 says

eppure si muove

Galileo belongs to 911truth.org? Amazing.

Obama doesn't enter into my question.

coriacci1 says

Obama doesn't enter into my question.

Didn't Apocalypse just give you the explanation?

http://www.youtube.com/embed/FMEe7JqBgvg

why not give the crazy arabs some credit for having the ability to use the planes AND have some explosives ready to explode??? Why think "inside job" all of a sudden?? It makes no sense to give anyone else any credit. If the buildings were razed, and I happen to think #7 was, (insurance job) then why not let OBL have some credit for it?? Dude was quite the organizer.

Besides, if the crazy arabs did pull all that off, I would bet the saving-of-face issue would force the CIA to sit quiet and pretend. Maybe?

Anyone who cares to think realizes that building 7 came down in a controlled demolition. Unfortunately, knowing that building 7 was rigged for a demolition before the twin towers came down would force such people to logically conclude that the whole thing was rigged, and people just aren't psychologically equipped to handle that. That's why some pretty smart people will ridicule you on here about what is pretty plain and obvious if you just think about it. Human psych and defense mechanisms (e.g., accusing people of being conspiracy theorists) is so interesting, I think.

KILLERJANE says

I agree. Anyone who cannot believe it was a controlled demolition is just another media brainwashed human bot controlled by tv. It is common knowledge that buildings do not burn and completely collapse straight down to pure ash without the use of coordinated controlled explosives. Government used it to control people further and justify the murder of all those who died in the war aftermath. Many connected companies profited. The country is in shit shape after the Bush years. Go figure. O but obama is the antichrist? Of course. Whynot. And my grandma is superman. No really.

Saw this video: http://www.youtube.com/embed/ho6DCYggFKo

Which shows the steel buckling where the aircraft hit... agreeing with the NIST...

However, it still looks like the building collapsed at the bottom and went straight down - instead of the top buckling over and falling to the side.

Buildings this tall, falling perfectly straight down?

coriacci1 says

no discussion? no counter arguments?

Oh, I'm sorry - did you make an argument that someone could counter? I sure haven't seen anything. You haven't said much of anything.

Many people still do not Realize Building 7 dropped in a free fall demolition at 5 thirty in the Afternoon in a classic Controlled Fashion.

No it didn't. If you believe it did, then prove it to our satisfaction.

Why did building 7
come down? it was'n hit by anything

Yes it was. It was hit by falling pieces of the North tower. It burned, and then it collapsed. If you believe otherwise, then prove it.

Why are these the only steel structure building in the world to have collapsed from fire at free fall speed?

They're not. If you believe otherwise, prove it.

Finished. The ball is in your court.

KILLERJANE says

It is common knowledge that buildings do not burn and completely collapse straight down to pure ash without the use of coordinated controlled explosives.

"Common knowledge"? That's your proof?

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!!!!

proffer says

Anyone who cares to think realizes that building 7 came down in a controlled demolition.

Because why?.........

Homeboy says

proffer says

Anyone who cares to think realizes that building 7 came down in a controlled demolition.

Because why?.........

Perhaps because he's a dim-witted 911 conspiracy theorist?

Homeboy, To answer your question, because I saw the news footage. There was no visible damage to the exterior of the building from any debris. Also in the news video are barely visible spots of fire in only a few of the building's windows. Then you see it collapse in freefall from top to bottom in a completely controlled fashion. What did you think of the news footage, Homeboy? Did it look to you as if fire ravaged the building? Or that pieces of the towers compromised any part of the building?

proffer says

Homeboy, To answer your question, because I saw the news footage. There was no visible damage to the exterior of the building from any debris. Also in the news video are barely visible spots of fire in only a few of the building's windows. Then you see it collapse in freefall from top to bottom in a completely controlled fashion. What did you think of the news footage, Homeboy? Did it look to you as if fire ravaged the building? Or that pieces of the towers compromised any part of the building?

That may fit your requirements but directly contradicts the known facts.

coriacci1 says

Who dunnit? Who benefits? How did those towers come down?

Well Agent Mulder its a mystery to me !

The Kennedy assassination conspiracy books dried up.. so the same people have a new gig, a new conspiracy to pound on, new way of making a living
... but they still use the same questions. Yes.. idiots with nothing else to do benefit.

proffer says

Homeboy, To answer your question, because I saw the news footage. There was no visible damage to the exterior of the building from any debris. Also in the news video are barely visible spots of fire in only a few of the building's windows. Then you see it collapse in freefall from top to bottom in a completely controlled fashion. What did you think of the news footage, Homeboy? Did it look to you as if fire ravaged the building? Or that pieces of the towers compromised any part of the building?

If there was no damage, then why was the building burning? How do you know how much fire was inside the building? Why would you expect to see all the flames OUTSIDE of the building? Can you scientifically prove that there wasn't a big enough fire to weaken the structure of the building and cause it to collapse? What's your evidence of that? Just your gut feeling? Firefighters reported that the building was damaged long before it collapsed. Are we supposed to take your word, based on some grainy news footage you saw 11 years ago, over that of professional firefighters? I don't think so.

What is your scientific basis for your pronouncement of what constitutes a "controlled" collapse vs. a non-controlled collapse? Are you an expert on the physics of building collapses? You are comparing this "controlled" collapse to what? Have you seen other attacks where terrorists flew planes into skyscrapers and they didn't fall down vertically? Since gravity works vertically, wouldn't you expect heavy objects to fall vertically, as opposed to up or sideways? You are taking a unique event you saw on television and claiming it "should" have happened differently. You skipped a step. First, prove what it "should" have done. Prove that steel buildings behave a certain way when their structural members are damaged and weakened by fire, prove that this is true in ALL cases, and then demonstrate how WTC 7 did not behave in this way. Otherwise, you're just talking out of your ass.

please name steel structure building which collapsed after fire.

http://www.youtube.com/embed/e-wE2yppTDI

joshuatrio says

Buildings this tall, falling perfectly straight down?

They didn't fall perfectly straight down. The video you posted shows nothing, only smoke, but there is another video that clearly shows the tower tilting to the side as it falls.

Contrary to popular conspiracy-theorist beliefs, tall buildings do not "topple" over to the side when they fall. They are very heavy and they fall not exactly, but essentially in a vertical direction. The towers failed near the top, and the immense weight of the structure caused each floor to successively collapse as all that weight bore down on it. That's how they fell. If you believe they "should have" fallen a different way, then you need to prove that. I don't see any reason to believe it just because you say so.

coriacci1 says

please name steel structure building which collapsed after fire.

Please answer all my questions. I thought you wanted a discussion. Or are you just a troll? As far as I'm concerned, your claims have no credibility until you answer all the questions I posted and prove all the points I brought up. And don't just post links to videos; use your words.

You do understand the expression, "the ball is in your court", don't you?

coriacci1 says

please name steel structure building which collapsed after fire.

was it 2 or 3 shots? did the magic bullet go through and turn twice at right angles?

One thing is sure...gravity sucks!

thomaswong.1986 says

was it 2 or 3 shots? did the magic bullet go through and turn twice at right angles?

More importantly, why did the CIA invent A.I.D.S.?

San Francisco, CA

... and someone wants to pay $1M for a shit shack in "that city", so they can go to some Lefty Meetings at a Coffee shop in North Beach... Smoke Pot (i mean medicine!) and argue how Bush was guilty of some crazy shit that created the attack on our nation.

Welcome to San Franpsycho ... when is the BIG One going to happen!

which steel structure building ever collapsed after fire was my question. simple, non techie. you gotta answer for me?

thomaswong.1986 says

and argue how Bush was guilty of some crazy shit that created the attack on our nation.

poor bush was as shocked as we all were!