I am tuned in but it will be the same BS that has already been hashed and rehashed over and over.

what time???

now..started 10 mins ago

7:00pm CST

Until 9/11. Because something 'has never happened' is not a guarantee or evidence that it 'will never happen'.

And stop screaming hysterically. Its a sign of a nut job.

thanks for the heads up on the time.


lots of sheeple in this thread! LOL

Anyone see loose change? :)

Sheeple indeed! :)

What kind of breath bait do you use? I prefer shrimp or worms, but I hear flies work as well. :1orglaugh

(The term is bated breath) ... as in abated, suppressed... quiet.

*sighs* Ok, one last time MORON. Building #7 does NOT EQUAL the WTC. The WTC towers were hit by jets, ok and read CLOSE ATTENTION HERE, I'll give them that the WTC TOWERS fell due to a combination of structural damage and intense heat from the jet fuel. I give them that. Now, Building #7, which was MUCH FUTHER AWAY from the WTC than several other buildings somehow collapsed. Read this one more time you piece of shit: Building #7, which was MUCH FURTHER AWAY from the WTC than several other buildings somehow collapsed. Why did it collapse from fire? *why*? Commissioned studies by FEMA were essentially inconclusive as to why it fell because 97% of the steel was already sold and removed from the site by the time the studies took place. Some claim that the building took severe structural damage -- from what? What hit the building? Jets certainly didn't hit Building #7, so how did it suffer such significant damage from falling debris (when again, buildings MUCH CLOSER TO THE WTC did not), so significant in fact that a fire managed to bring it down? Also, since when is CAPITALIZING certain words for EMPHASIS considered SCREAMING you fucking RETARD? Last time I checked, that was to make your point a bit clearer to stupid fucks who can't read. =)

50.........

Obviously the design sucked. Back to the drawing board.

Take a coat hanger and hold it under a candle for about 10 minutes.As metal heats it loses tensile strength.The steel used in framing a modern skyscraper is one grade above 1008crs(coat hanger materiel).Most buildings that are steel framed will fail in an intense fire.Obviously the load increases as you add multiple stories to a structure.It was entirely predictable from an engineering standpoint that the towers would collapse from a fire.

I am sure the roof of the "Big Dig" was not intended to cave in but it did.

*sighs* Ok... please... for the love of your respective god... please READ... I accept, and I will give that the WTC succumbed to intense fire from jet fuel + structural damage. Ok, you got that, good, great, eat a cookie, masturbate, whatever. Building #7 however did NOT get hit by a jet, and did NOT suffer intense fires caused directly from jet fuel. There have been MODERN SKYSCRAPERS that have burned intensely for more than twenty four hours, huge skyscrapers bigger than Building #7. Guess how many of those fell buddy? Zero. What's that number again, didn't quite catch it. Oh yeah, ZERO. Considering #7 did not get struck by a jet, and that buildings closer to the WTC did NOT fall from the 'intense fires', we have a little problem with that statement.

Have you even read the multiple probable reasons why #7 collasped. I find it much easier to believe the probable in place of the improbable. As someone once said, extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof.

Jet fuel ... which is basically well filtered KEROSINE .... like in kerosine heaters does not burn hot enough to melt steel! Or the cheap aluminum in heaters. How many kerosine heaters melt? How many jet engines melt?

But the steel in a skyscraper did .... lol .....

Like Silverstein saying "PULL" :2 cents:

NOT ...........

Weird... terrorists blow up rest of the world, but its impossible in US :thumbsup And even if they take responsibility for it, they must be lying :thumbsup
And of course... the "best" way to cover up a conspiracy is in daylight :thumbsup :error

Never said it did.

Thats big of you.


Because it was hit by debris and caught fire perhaps? You may have noticed that there were planes crashing into nearby buildings spraying allsorts all over the place. Pretty sure the whole thing was on TV. You must have seen it.

It probably collapsed from fire because it was on fire. Just a wild guess.

Inconclusive. So no conclusion was drawn therefore no help to your argument or anyones elses for that matter.

Am going with earlier answer. You know jets crashing, shit flying around, hit by debris etc etc

Because explosions, fires etc are not logical or ordered. Building B is damaged whereas Building A remains unscathed. Its called random chance; sods law; lifes a bitch. For most people random chance is a scary thing. Its why people invented relegion and conspircacy theories. Makes them feel better to know that there is a dark force controlling everything.


For people who cannot read CAPITALIZING a word will not make a blind bit of difference. For people who can read it makes you look like a hysterical nut job.

Yes, I have read it and considering that 97% of the evidence was removed during the time which they were 'investigating' its collapse, anything they have found cannot be that accurate. #7 was almost completely ignored during the time they were investigating the WTC. The investigators claim that the building suffered a great amount of structural damage which weakened its integrity, and then when it caught fire due to the WTC's intense heat, fell seven hours later. The 'great structural damage' is the main thing in question about #7. Where did such horrendous structural damage come from? No jet hit it; falling debris did much less damage to buildings closer to the WTC than evidently than the debris did to #7.

Building #7 is the *only* skyscraper in modern history to fall to fire, that suffered NO direct explosions, NO direct attacks, NO direct damage whatsoever. It supposedly suffered horrendous amounts of damage from falling WTC debris, even though buildings much closer to the WTC did not. The intense heat from the WTC eventually made several buildings close to it catch fire, including Building #7. The rest of the buildings somehow magically managed to avoid the structural damage that #7 magically obtained. #7 falling isn?t proof of government conspiracy; I never said it was. I just believe that #7 falling is proof that not everything is peachy when it comes to a ?case-closed? 9-11. If it was destroyed intentionally, whoever responsible needs to be brought to justice.

At what temperatures do the various materials on an airplane and the various materials inside a building and the materials of the building itself burn at? What role does oxegyn and drafts play in increasing the temperature of burning materials? I assume you are an expert on fire and temperatures etc.?

Who really gives a fuck why Building #7 fell? It fell. Get over it.

Various structures fail, for various reasons, every year, in the US and around the world, that should not have failed, but they do.

Some people cannot see the wood for the trees.

in 30 yrs the truth will come out

what about 30 days? the truth is out there!

Yes it is and is not being provided by these clowns on C-Span. They are more humorous than Moore is. Good comedy here.

That sounds pretty right to me...... the gas prices and muslims part

O RLY? Check out the official 9/11 comission report. Bigger comedy.

I beleive that our gov had something to do with this. Too much dan evidence from building owners and too many facts to make me thing otherwise. FUCK BUSH

"Well then my dear faggot"

I luv this guy

LOL
I could only take about 15 or 20 mins of these ass clowns but I have learned some new things.
The Spain bombing was not done by terrorists, nor was the train bombing in the UK, the 17 arrested in Canada, all staged to further the cause of the globalists.

Why is it that they are the only ones who know what really happened?

Sure you did FetishTom, sure you did. You stated "Until 9/11. Because something 'has never happened' is not a guarantee or evidence that it 'will never happen'.", clearly implying that until 9/11, jets had never struck any large commercial modern building, which is true. However, Building #7 does NOT equal the WTC =)


Thanks FetishTom, was just trying to clear it up for people who have trouble reading such as yourself, I think I made it easier! Maybe not for you though :winkwink:


Hi again FetishTom! Here's the thing my dear gullible fellow: Buildings closer to the WTC than #7 did not suffer a similar fate. Some caught on fire, none suffered the 'horrendous' amounts of structual damage necessary to bring down a modern skyscrapper. Again, the other buildsing that caught fire were closer than #7, and did NOT suffer said needed horrendous damage. :thumbsup


Hi FetishTom, you see, the problem there is that *no* modern skyscraper in history has collapsed from fire! Some of which burned with the same intensity that #7 did, for much longer periods. Several skyscrapers (taller than #7 as well) have burned for over 24 hours with the same intensity, and none fell.


Can?t really say anything here, with 97% of the evidence removed by the time the commissioned study was completed I really can?t blame them here. I?m just stating that anything they say as ?proof? is probably bunkus as with 97% of the evidence removed, that 3% must be the blood of Christ or some shit.


Already answered earlier FetishTom, I?m sure you read that though. Maybe not, so I?ll paste it again just for you buddy! Buildings closer to the WTC than #7 did not suffer a similar fate. Some caught on fire, none suffered the 'horrendous' amounts of structual damage necessary to bring down a modern skyscrapper. Again, the other buildsing that caught fire were closer than #7, and did NOT suffer said needed horrendous damage. :thumbsup


People invented religion mainly as a way to explain things that they couldn't understand. You see a lightning bolt? That?s Zeus saying he didn?t like the way you just fucked that goat so you better stop it. Religion as a whole is a bad thing because they all seem to evolve with one purpose in mind: Taking advantage of the believers faith system. But that?s another debate for another day. Anyways, no explosions hit Building #7, it caught fire from the WTC?s heat, as did several other buildings closer to the WTC. Some buildings close to the WTC also suffered damage from falling debris, yet none managed to fall. That?s because building #7 was a magic building designed out of playdough instead of STEEL!


No tom, I CAPITALIZE my words for people like YOU, who can?t spend the necessary time to READ what has been written. People like YOU skip over many words and sentences and just pick up certain words that they want to see, which is why I?ve had to type out this whole paragraph just for your benefit. Maybe you?ll have read everything I?ve typed out JUST FOR YOU this time. Or maybe you?ll just go suck some more cock you stupid faggot*.

*just making sure that you?re still reading little buddy!

All these theories sound very plausible, except for one thing that COMPLETELY blows them all out of the water: Bin Laden himself said that he was responsible for the attacks, not the US. How do you explain that?

When in the history of Al Qaeda have they EVER claimed responsibility for something that they didn't do?

hmm it says ccn at 7 pm PT is Cnn Staurday night(60 min). No story title

you can see it aired here http://www.c-span.org/watch/cspan_wm.asp?Cat=TV&Code=CS

Just part of the plan he's in on it.

Or.
Neither OBL or Al Qaeda exist.
Just part of the 'script'

Silly person, don't you know that the President and Bin Laden are the best of friends and Bin Laden is hidden safely away on the President's ranch enjoying bar-b-q'ed pork ribs, for dinner and good pork sausage and eggs for breakfast, with some pork roast and mashed potatoes for lunch while laughing at all of us sheeple.