Home | Community | Message Board


This site includes paid links. Please support our sponsors.


Welcome to the Shroomery Message Board! You are experiencing a small sample of what the site has to offer. Please login or register to post messages and view our exclusive members-only content. You'll gain access to additional forums, file attachments, board customizations, encrypted private messages, and much more!

Shop: Myyco.com Golden Teacher Liquid Culture For Sale   PhytoExtractum Buy Bali Kratom Powder   MagicBag.co All-In-One Bags That Don't Suck   Unfolding Nature Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order   Kraken Kratom Red Vein Kratom

Jump to first unread post Pages: < Back | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4  [ show all ]
OfflinePhred
Fred's son
Male

Registered: 10/18/00
Posts: 12,949
Loc: Dominican Republic
Last seen: 9 years, 4 months
Re: WTC 7 Help Me Understand [Re: GabbaDj]
    #6169087 - 10/14/06 01:49 PM (17 years, 7 months ago)

Quote:

Yes, yes it is. Why is it soo hard to believe?




Because it would be pretty near impossible to plant concealed demolition charges in an occupied building, for one. Which night do you think the ninjas who ripped open the walls, planted and wired the charges, then repaired, plastered, and repainted the walls so no one would notice, accomplished this task?

And of course, the big question -- what would the government-sponsored ninjas have done had there not been obvious structural damage to the building by debris falling from the tower next to it? How could they have known there would be such visibly obvious damage -- a twenty story hole ripped in the southwest edge and a growing bulge visible for all to see? If that debris had fallen another ten meters off to the side there would have been little to no damage at all, and "they" couldn't have gotten away with demolishing an unscathed building.

Can you really fool yourself into thinking the plotters just crossed their fingers and hoped the debris trajectories would go their way?

You ask what I find so hard to believe, yet you uncritically swallow an outrageous and convoluted Robert Ludlum plot no Hollywood director would try to pawn off on a studio as plausible.

I leave it to the rational readers of this thread to decide for themselves which scenario is the more likely.



Phred


--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflinePhred
Fred's son
Male

Registered: 10/18/00
Posts: 12,949
Loc: Dominican Republic
Last seen: 9 years, 4 months
Re: WTC 7 Help Me Understand [Re: Phred]
    #6169095 - 10/14/06 01:54 PM (17 years, 7 months ago)

Further, what possible benefit to the plotters would there be to adding WTC7 to the mix? You think destroying the twin towers wasn't enough for them to convince Americans to go along with their nefarious agenda?

"Gee, Maude, I don't really think we should go after those Al Qaeda fellows. After all, it was just the two towers and the Pentagon and those poor folks on Flight 93 who had some hard luck. Now, if WTC7 had been destroyed as well, I might go along with Bush and Rummie and his crew. But since it is still standing, I just can't bring myself to support those Washington fellers."




Phred


--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineSeussA
Error: divide byzero

Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 04/27/01
Posts: 23,480
Loc: Caribbean
Last seen: 3 months, 8 days
Re: WTC 7 Help Me Understand [Re: zappaisgod]
    #6169703 - 10/14/06 06:24 PM (17 years, 7 months ago)

> Jesus Christ on a crutch, man... can you not read?

I see that I am not the only one to loose patience after pounding my head against a brick wall. I think the tinfoil obscures eyesight making reading difficult.

I do want to apologize to all of those that I have offended with my lame comments. They come from frustration rather than lack of respect. This is my own failing.

> Hmmm, a tiny plane laden with fuel crashes into a building in Manhattan and 100% of the passports on board are found on the street

You mean both? (I guess 100% sounds like more when we are only talking about two!) Here is a good question: where was most of the plane's wreckage located? The wreckage wouldn't have been on the ground, along with the passports, would it? Now before somebody asks why the 737 didn't bounce off the WTC, think about weight and velocity (kenetic energy and momentum) of the two different events.

"Laden with fuel" ... thats funny... with a full tank, the Cirrus SR20 (the tiny plane we are talking about) holds a whopping 56 gallons. A 737 holds a bit more than 4700 gallons.


--------------------
Just another spore in the wind.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleGabbaDjS
BTH
 User Gallery

Registered: 04/08/01
Posts: 19,682
Loc: By The Lake
Re: WTC 7 Help Me Understand [Re: Phred]
    #6170400 - 10/14/06 11:10 PM (17 years, 7 months ago)

Common Phred...    I know your just dying to admit that you believe in a tiny way that everything seems  just a little suspicious.

Quote:

Because it would be pretty near impossible to plant concealed demolition charges in an occupied building, for one. Which night do you think the ninjas who ripped open the walls, planted and wired the charges, then repaired, plastered, and repainted the walls so no one would notice, accomplished this task?




Ninjas?  No, just a bunch of special special ops persons with engineering backgrounds who have been used for years to do bad things to both people in the US and around the world. 

Security for the entire complex was contracted to a company that G W Bushes brother was a principal of. :confused:  Yeah, I dont even buy the whole security/ Bush brother thing :grin:  +1 to you..   

Still its a bonus for conspiracy theorists.  I DO believe that security could be manipulated easily because the security company has deep ties with the pentagon and other government infrastructures.

Quote:

And of course, the big question -- what would the government-sponsored ninjas have done had there not been obvious structural damage to the building by debris falling from the tower next to it? How could they have known there would be such visibly obvious damage -- a twenty story hole ripped in the southwest edge and a growing bulge visible for all to see? If that debris had fallen another ten meters off to the side there would have been little to no damage at all, and "they" couldn't have gotten away with demolishing an unscathed building.




Even elementary school kids could tell you that debris would fall that building given the height of the towers.  Even if it only broke a few windows then it would explain why a fire broke out right?    The same fire which they say brought down the buildings..

Ask why it started???  Hell.. Maybe it was vandals..  Perhaps it was officials shredding documents that sparked a fire? Or how about just a plain old power surge in the midst of a huge catastrophe which happened to set off 12.000 gallons of diesel fuel whould pumped out into the building due to a "design flaw"...

Please dont make me come up with ways that fires could have started in that building..  Since fires account for the majority of the reason why the entire building collapsed. 

Dont even try to say that the 20 story "hole" had anything to do with it because if you remember the  federal building in Oklahoma.

You can see that a building can manage its structural integrity easily with most of its structure has been blown away.

OOoh and since their was a HUGE hole in most of the building then how did the diesel that fueled the fire not simply run out into the street?  How did it flood the floor and sit burning long enough  to weaken the structural integrity of all four corners of that building as to make them collapse within two seconds of each other?  Or simultaniously as I like to say :grin:


Huh?


--------------------
GabbaDj

FAMM.ORG             

Edited by GabbaDj (10/14/06 11:16 PM)

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleGabbaDjS
BTH
 User Gallery

Registered: 04/08/01
Posts: 19,682
Loc: By The Lake
Re: WTC 7 Help Me Understand [Re: Phred]
    #6170465 - 10/14/06 11:28 PM (17 years, 7 months ago)

Quote:

Further, what possible benefit to the plotters would there be to adding WTC7 to the mix? You think destroying the twin towers wasn't enough for them to convince Americans to go along with their nefarious agenda?

"Gee, Maude, I don't really think we should go after those Al Qaeda fellows. After all, it was just the two towers and the Pentagon and those poor folks on Flight 93 who had some hard luck. Now, if WTC7 had been destroyed as well, I might go along with Bush and Rummie and his crew. But since it is still standing, I just can't bring myself to support those Washington fellers."




While I dont buy that Silverstein was a player in this and that he played a part in order to cash in on a huge insurance settlement....  I do believe that that building held deep dark secrets..

After all the building had;
Quote:

The government agencies housed at 7 World Trade Center were the United States Secret Service, the Department of Defense, the Immigration and Naturalization Service, the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), the Mayor's Office of Emergency Management, the Internal Revenue Service Regional Council (IRS), and the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA). [2]




As well as several offices which were used to investigate government/corporate fraud, the building was a warehouse for TRILLIONS of dollars worth of lawsuit papers which were all lost.

Anyone remember Rumsfield coming foreword about the trillions of dollars missing from the coffers?  Ever wonder what happened to that money? or the documentation behind it?  Its all gone due to the collapse of WTC7.

Hmmm  How convenient that vandals broke in, destroyed all of this and saved America from the embarrassment of havint its most major companies exposed for the frauds they have committed. :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:


--------------------
GabbaDj

FAMM.ORG             

Edited by GabbaDj (10/14/06 11:33 PM)

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflinePhred
Fred's son
Male

Registered: 10/18/00
Posts: 12,949
Loc: Dominican Republic
Last seen: 9 years, 4 months
Re: WTC 7 Help Me Understand [Re: GabbaDj]
    #6170532 - 10/14/06 11:52 PM (17 years, 7 months ago)

Quote:

No, just a bunch of special special ops persons with engineering backgrounds who have been used for years to do bad things to both people in the US and around the world.




Dream on. You have obviously never done any construction or renovation work. Such work cannot be done unnoticed, no matter how skilled the team or how large. Even disregarding the time factor, fresh paint is fresh paint.

Then of course there is the impossibility of finding a large enough team of brainwashed zombies who will not only agree to unquestioningly do this bizarre task in the first place, but who will all remain silent about it even once they realize they were duped. This in a country where the government can't keep ANYTHING from leaking? Yeah, right.

Quote:

Even elementary school kids could tell you that debris would fall that building given the height of the towers.




Sure. Fall WHERE, though.

Quote:

The same fire which they say brought down the buildings.




You demonstrate your unseriousness of really wanting to find out what happened. You ignore what has been posted over and over again -- the fact that there was not just a fire, but structural damage so severe the entire fire team could see with their own eyes the ever-developing bulge in the edge of the building. The same bulge which led the leader of the team to pull his guys out before it caved in on him. Unlike some tinfoil hat wearing armchair analysts, this guy knew what he was talking about, as did most of the other fire guys on the scene. They were completely unsurprised when the building collapsed. Or are they all also being paid off by the government to say they were unsurprised? Do they all work for Bush's brother?

No one here has ever said it collapsed due to fire alone. It has been noted over and over it was a combination of structural and fire damage.

I can't help but note you have completely ignored my point about it being completely unnecessary to even bring down WTC7 at all -- that the destruction of the twin towers and the attack on the Pentagon was plenty.

You don't work from facts and draw conclusions from them, you start with your conclusion -- that the entire Bush admiistration is so corrupt -- no, corrupt is the wrong word -- so evil -- that they would happily kill thousands of innocent Americans in order to.. what? Increase the value of Cheney's stock options? And not only is the Bush administration that evil, but so are quite literally hundreds and more probably thousands of others who would necessarily have to be in on the plot in order to pull it off.

That kind of thinking is so blatantly deranged that anyone who truly believes it (rather than just pretending they do in order to troll) is beyond the reach of all rational discussion. When the NIST report on WTC7 is finalized with explanations for the mechanics of the collapse, you will ignore that, too. You will claim the NIST report writers were paid to write it that way. Or maybe that the families of the report writers were kidnapped and held as hostages to force them to write the report the way the Bushies want them to.

In other words, no evidence is good enough for you.




Phred


--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleGabbaDjS
BTH
 User Gallery

Registered: 04/08/01
Posts: 19,682
Loc: By The Lake
Re: WTC 7 Help Me Understand [Re: Phred]
    #6170581 - 10/15/06 12:08 AM (17 years, 7 months ago)

Quote:

Dream on. You have obviously never done any construction or renovation work. Such work cannot be done unnoticed, no matter how skilled the team or how large. Even disregarding the time factor, fresh paint is fresh paint.





Sure I have.. In fact me and 5 other crews spent 6 months changing the ballasts and lights in the twin towers in Sacramento. We also did the capital building and several other california government buildings.

One thing I know is that the structural supports in a major office building arent accessible to the general public and crews of people could work 24 hours unnoticed if given the proper excuse. At night we had keys that took us all over these government buildings, we even stole computer parts from several closets we stumbled across.

I used to work for the government as recently as just a few months ago and believe me that their isnt any shortage of brainwashed zombies who could be capable of doing such things.

What will it take for you to just admit even the slightest possibility?

A command from your Superior?


--------------------
GabbaDj

FAMM.ORG             

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflinePhred
Fred's son
Male

Registered: 10/18/00
Posts: 12,949
Loc: Dominican Republic
Last seen: 9 years, 4 months
Re: WTC 7 Help Me Understand [Re: GabbaDj]
    #6170875 - 10/15/06 02:56 AM (17 years, 7 months ago)

Quote:

In fact me and 5 other crews spent 6 months changing the ballasts and lights in the twin towers in Sacramento.




I didn't ask if you had changed light bulbs, I asked if you had done any renovations. To place demo charges around support beams involves tearing open walls to get at the beams. Once you have placed the charges, you have to repair -- undetectably -- the areas you tore open. This involves repairing drywall, plastering, and painting.

Even IF you were a good enough artist to make the opened area LOOK as if it were untouched -- i.e. matching the paint color perfetly and artificially "aging" it so the patch doesn't show, the SMELL of the work remains. New drywall, new plaster, and especially new paint, all have their characteristic odors, and those odors don't vanish for days afterwards, and often longer than that.

Besides, you make the same mistake all the tinfoil beanie theorists who churn out such pieces of dreck as "Loose Change" make -- you focus on what you believe to be oddities or anomalies (in this case your belief that the collapse of WTC7 strikes YOU as fishy) while ignoring completely the overall picture.

A hell of a lot more went on that day than just the collapse of a single building. Four airliners were hijacked. The financial center, military center, and government center of the USA were all targets. If Flight 93 had made it, it would have crashed into the Capitol. Any theory which doesn't address these facts is automatically a bogus theory. So let's look at your theory -- that WTC7 was prepared with demolition charges by US government agents beforehand.

It necessarily follows that if this is true, then the entire plot was engineered by the US government.

If the entire plot was engineered by the US government, it necessarily follows that the US government was willing to cripple itself to the point of no longer being able to function. Kind of tough to get Congress to authorize any miltary action when a huge chunk of the people who make up Congress have been killed by Flight 93 crashing into the Capitol. And it would be kind of tough to carry out whatever military action the surviving congresspeople claim to be able to "authorize" if many of your senior commanders have been killed when the Pentagon was hit.

And of course, it is even tougher to find people willing to kill themselves by flying hijacked airplanes into buildings.

But the biggest stumbling block of all is that this theory requires not just Bush and his cronies to be evil people, but literally hundreds (more probably thousands) of others who would necessarily have to be in on the plot. Not only do ALL the members of this vast multitude have to be utterly depraved, they have to be utterly loyal to "the cause" and possess superhuman discipline regarding continued secrecy. No leaks. No midnight attacks of conscience followed by tearful confessions. No drunken boasts or slips of the tongue. No heartfelt discussions with the wife (or husband). Ever.

You obviously haven't thought this through. Because it's not just a case of meeting some of these conditions. ALL of the above (and a lot more besides -- I am trying to be brief here) conditions must be met or your theory falls apart.

And that is just if everything goes well. The plot you envision is so complex that any of literally hundreds of the random events which make up the fabric of everyday life could scotch the entire plan -- something as simple as a couple of office workers carrying on an adulterous affair and fucking like bunnies in a closet after hours stumbling out of that closet with their clothes in disarray and coming across the team placing demo charges in one of the buildings.

Now let's look at what really happened.

A small group -- less than two dozen -- of religious fanatics hijacked some airliners. Four of those fanatics had learned just enough about flying an airliner to navigate their way back to some pretty distinctive and almost impossible to miss buildngs and fly those planes into the buildings.

No need to worry about someone spilling the beans down the road. No difficulty finding people willing to commit suicide. No need to devise some insanely complicated plot with potentially dozens of loose ends -- people have been hijacking airliners since the Sixties. Anyone can do it. As spectacular terrorist operations go, it's pretty tough to come up with a plan much simpler to carry out than hijacking a plane. It's a time-tested classic.

Anyone who attempts to convince rational people to choose your theory over the terrorist reality is going to have to come up with something a hell of a lot more compelling than yammering on and on about how it seems to YOU that the eventual collapse of a building not even on the target list looked fishy.




Phred


--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineSeussA
Error: divide byzero

Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 04/27/01
Posts: 23,480
Loc: Caribbean
Last seen: 3 months, 8 days
Re: WTC 7 Help Me Understand [Re: Phred]
    #6171029 - 10/15/06 06:42 AM (17 years, 7 months ago)

> To place demo charges around support beams involves tearing open walls to get at the beams.

It is actually more than that. You also have to CUT the beam, at least twice, to weaken it before you can use explosives to finish the job. To cut an I-beam with explosives, you first have to cut the two flanges on the I-beam leaving only the center intact. You then place shaped charges exactly opposite one another on the intact center support. When the explosives detonate, they cut the remaining center part of the beam.

It might be possible to use explosives to cut the flanges on the I-beam, but I wouldn't want to risk it. Actually, the more I think about it, the more difficult I realize the problem becomes. I guess this is why they cut the beams. *laugh*

There are three major problems that occur when the I-beams are not first cut:

1) Eight charges (minimum) must be detonated at the exact same time to cut the beam, rather than only two charges.

2) The blast wave from the flange charges will (most likely) interfere with the blast wave from the center charges resulting in loss of symmetry. Instead of cutting, the charges will blow each other apart.

3) There is a good chance that the small area of the I-beam where the sides attach to the center will not be cut. I don't have time to explain the theory of the Monroe effect, but it boils down to the lack of symmetry in the shaped charges at the intersections between the sides and center of the I-beam.

The above is required to get the nice clean cut look. You could always just fill the space up with a bunch of explosive and blow the shit out of everything in the area. Of course, then your beams are going to be all twisted and gnarly with a nice shattered/torn look, not cut nice and neat. This is also a huge waste of explosives, which is a huge waste of money, which is why this isn't done in professional demolitions. I suppose if I were trying to hide the use of explosives, this is the route I would choose. However, metal fatigued by explosives has a well known look to it, especially at the microscopic level. (I know from personal, hand on, experience.)

> What will it take for you to just admit even the slightest possibility?

I have never denied the possibility. In fact, it took a while to convince me on tower seven. However, in the case of the WTC, I think Oliver Stone summed up my feelings better than I could have done:

Quote:

I think that conspiracy-mongering on 9/11 is a waste of time. The far greater conspiracy occurred after 9/11 when basically a neo-cabal inside our government hijacked policy and went to war. That was as broad a conspiracy as we can get and it was about 20, 30 people.




--------------------
Just another spore in the wind.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleGabbaDjS
BTH
 User Gallery

Registered: 04/08/01
Posts: 19,682
Loc: By The Lake
Re: WTC 7 Help Me Understand [Re: Phred]
    #6171260 - 10/15/06 09:46 AM (17 years, 7 months ago)

Hey, I never said that it was easy. :grin:


--------------------
GabbaDj

FAMM.ORG             

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineAldous
enthusiast
Male User Gallery

Registered: 10/19/99
Posts: 980
Loc: inside my skull
Last seen: 7 days, 3 hours
Re: WTC 7 Help Me Understand [Re: Seuss]
    #6171806 - 10/15/06 01:23 PM (17 years, 7 months ago)

I haven't seen many I-beams in the WTC rubble. It looked mostly like hollow square beams to me. I'm not saying those are easier or more difficult to cut, just that they weren't I-beams.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineKamek
Male User Gallery

Registered: 01/08/05
Posts: 2,923
Last seen: 1 year, 2 hours
Re: WTC 7 Help Me Understand [Re: GabbaDj]
    #6171832 - 10/15/06 01:34 PM (17 years, 7 months ago)

Ok please look at this video, it's about a leading explosives expert commenting on the WTC 7 collapse. He is shown both videos of the WTC north and south towers and the WTC 7 building. His comment is that both WTC towers are NOT controlled demolition because it is virtually impossible to do. But when he is shown the WTC 7 collapse he has a very different response;

part1
part2
part3

edit: the subtitles aren't very good, some of the tranlations are too literal etc...
edit2: this is the raw version and it's uncut so sometimes it's a bit chaotic...

Edited by Kamek (10/15/06 01:43 PM)

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlinezappaisgod
horrid asshole

Registered: 02/11/04
Posts: 81,741
Loc: Fractallife's gym
Last seen: 7 years, 11 months
Re: WTC 7 Help Me Understand [Re: Seuss]
    #6172100 - 10/15/06 02:51 PM (17 years, 7 months ago)

Quote:

Seuss said:
> Jesus Christ on a crutch, man... can you not read?

I see that I am not the only one to loose patience after pounding my head against a brick wall. I think the tinfoil obscures eyesight making reading difficult.

I do want to apologize to all of those that I have offended with my lame comments. They come from frustration rather than lack of respect. This is my own failing.

> Hmmm, a tiny plane laden with fuel crashes into a building in Manhattan and 100% of the passports on board are found on the street

You mean both? (I guess 100% sounds like more when we are only talking about two!) Here is a good question: where was most of the plane's wreckage located? The wreckage wouldn't have been on the ground, along with the passports, would it? Now before somebody asks why the 737 didn't bounce off the WTC, think about weight and velocity (kenetic energy and momentum) of the two different events.




There was no reason to believe the instructor had his passport with him. Hell, I have no idea why Lidle had his. Do you carry yours with you regularly? Regardless, the accident was a flaming mess and yet the passport survived, which is one of the favorite nitwit points used by the 9/11 dipshits to point out the fakery at the WTC. Capisce? Or are you one of those who thinks that the passport find at the WTC was indicative of fakery? I never got that notion from your posts before.
Quote:



"Laden with fuel" ... thats funny... with a full tank, the Cirrus SR20 (the tiny plane we are talking about) holds a whopping 56 gallons. A 737 holds a bit more than 4700 gallons.




There was quite a glorious conflagration there. Certainly long enough to incinerate a passport and a couple of pilots. His passport was found in the street, it said, not his pocket. I can read quite well.


--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineAldous
enthusiast
Male User Gallery

Registered: 10/19/99
Posts: 980
Loc: inside my skull
Last seen: 7 days, 3 hours
Re: WTC 7 Help Me Understand [Re: Kamek]
    #6172111 - 10/15/06 02:53 PM (17 years, 7 months ago)

Yeah, I posted a thread about this.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineSeussA
Error: divide byzero

Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 04/27/01
Posts: 23,480
Loc: Caribbean
Last seen: 3 months, 8 days
Re: WTC 7 Help Me Understand [Re: zappaisgod]
    #6172608 - 10/15/06 05:13 PM (17 years, 7 months ago)

> I never got that notion from your posts before.

I think one of us is misreading the other... I'm not sure which. Probably me debating against myself.

My intended point was that one should not compare the Cirrus SR20 to the Boeing 737 when it comes to damage they will cause, or the debris they leave behind.

Personally, I find the passport evidence of WTC to be nothing special. If I remember correctly, it was Atta's passport that was found, one of the pilots. It would make sense that he was in possession of his passport. I always carry mine with me when I travel rather than leaving in my luggage for the airline to loose.

Being the pilot, Atta would have been the first to impact the building. One of two things are going to happen: 1) the plane starts to crumple up with him inside as it breaks into the building, or 2) the first bit of the plane is going to break off and fall to the ground as the rest of the plane crashes through the building. Either way, the area that the pilot was in would be far away from the fuel tanks of the plane. When the fuel tanks blow, stuff near them burn while stuff far away will get blown clear, for the most part.

Why didn't the passport, if it got blown clear, burn up in the buiding? Short reason: heat rises. Even if the passport is in a pool of burning jet fuel, it will burn no more than a wick in a latern will burn. Obviously, there are many more paths for the passport to be destroyed, than not... but I don't find the passport being found to be out of the ordinary. Were other passports found, or just the one? What about other papers, wallets, IDs, etc?


--------------------
Just another spore in the wind.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleGabbaDjS
BTH
 User Gallery

Registered: 04/08/01
Posts: 19,682
Loc: By The Lake
Re: WTC 7 Help Me Understand [Re: Seuss]
    #6173599 - 10/15/06 10:13 PM (17 years, 7 months ago)

I can believe that a passport could survive. I dont know how it was salvaged soo quickly out of the millions of tons of crap that fell to the ground that day but Im sure that things like that happen..

I however dont believe that on a single day several physical anomoniallys can happen within a small area to several buildings all within a small amount of time.

I believe that people want to believe in me but they are too scared.


--------------------
GabbaDj

FAMM.ORG             

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Jump to top Pages: < Back | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4  [ show all ]

Shop: Myyco.com Golden Teacher Liquid Culture For Sale   PhytoExtractum Buy Bali Kratom Powder   MagicBag.co All-In-One Bags That Don't Suck   Unfolding Nature Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order   Kraken Kratom Red Vein Kratom


Similar ThreadsPosterViewsRepliesLast post
* WTC 911 Fires - Not So Hot, Eh?
( 1 2 3 4 ... 9 10 all )
usefulidiot 10,763 189 01/27/05 11:11 AM
by CJay
* New Seismic Data Refutes Official Explanation Of WTC Collapses usefulidiot 6,466 15 05/08/06 09:28 AM
by Turn
* WTC Rescue Workers Silenced After Black Box Discovery
( 1 2 all )
usefulidiot 3,234 24 12/19/04 11:11 PM
by Rose
* Millionaire Offers $100,000 For Scientific Proof WTC Towers Collapsed As Bush Administration Claims
( 1 2 all )
ekomstop 4,975 37 12/16/04 08:29 PM
by ekomstop
* No Justification for the WTC Bombings?
( 1 2 3 4 5 all )
Ravus 4,977 83 11/12/04 02:23 PM
by Phluck
* Understanding UFO Secrecy
( 1 2 3 all )
exclusive58 3,271 43 10/26/05 12:52 AM
by _Aegis_
* WTC 7: How did it fall?
( 1 2 all )
SquattingMarmot 2,454 26 01/04/04 02:16 PM
by iamhimheisme
* 9/11 update on Silverstein's insurance claim
( 1 2 all )
Hank, FTW 2,629 24 11/06/06 03:54 PM
by zappaisgod

Extra information
You cannot start new topics / You cannot reply to topics
HTML is disabled / BBCode is enabled
Moderator: Enlil, ballsalsa
6,497 topic views. 2 members, 4 guests and 9 web crawlers are browsing this forum.
[ Show Images Only | Sort by Score | Print Topic ]
Search this thread:

Copyright 1997-2024 Mind Media. Some rights reserved.

Generated in 0.028 seconds spending 0.008 seconds on 14 queries.