28th Kingdom
Unregistered
- Joined
- Dec 9, 2006
- Messages
- 947
Hello all,
I KNOW there has been a tremendous debate over the subject of 9/11, and from the few threads I have read it looks like most believe the, "Official Story." Well, here's what I can assure you. If you engage me in this debate, than you will NOT leave this thread without KNOWING that 9/11 was an inside job and brought down by controlled demolitions.
Of course, WTC 7 is and will forever be the smoking gun. I am, of course, referring to 47 story steel-structured building, that dissolved to the ground in mere seconds. I say - DISSOLVED into nothingness, in a mere few seconds. Whether it was 6 or 7 or 8 9 10 seconds...that's not at debate. We've all seen the video, and the fact remains...this 47 story steel-structured building literally DISSOLVED in just the blink of an eye....apparently due to a couple fires that were so LARGE they were virtually invisible from the outside. Remember...there is no official report on the cause of WTC 7's collapse. The 911 commission didn't even address it, and if you know anything about a pancake collapse...WTC 7 was NOT a pancake collapse. All 47 stories simply turned into jello all at once. And magically at that. No wait...I mean because of those small fires that melted the entire infrastructure all at once. Yea, that's what I meant to say.
Now, I think one of the main problems people encounter when analyzing an event like this is that they OVER analyze it. Especially since politics are often brought (kicking and screaming) into this discussion...it's easy for one to loose track of the real issues by dismissing another as a, "Liberal! or NeoCON!" Please, don't be blinded by political bias. In fact, let's just check that at the door. This debate has NOTHING to do with what political party you like to associate yourself with.
In conjunction: We're NOT debating WHO is responsible for 9/11 in this thread. So, regardless if you do decide to open your mind up to THE truth...it doesn't mean that you're saying or agreeing to who is actually responsible for the demolition of the WTC. The only fact about this event that we shall discuss, is whether or not FIRE was the chief cause of the collapse of WTC 1, 2, 7 or if a controlled demolition is to blame.
See, I think the main problem with the, 'Debunkers.' is that they never actually debunk this main issue i.e. the buildings came down via a demolition. And the reason they probably haven't presented any actual hard evidence (I'm not talking about an "expert's" commentary or analysis) I'm talking about actual evidence you could present in a court of law that PROVES unequivocally, that demolitions we're NOT used on the WTC buildings. And, really this is the only point worth discussing. Sorry, but calling someone a, "Nutjob!" isn't gonna work. I'm only looking for something that could be presented as evidence in a court of law. Let's get REAL left-brained and linear about this...oki doki! You know like Skeptics are SUPPOSE to be!
There is really no point in getting distracted with the small side issues and theories...because it only serves to dilute the whole point of this investigation...and that is to irrefutably prove what caused the buildings to collapse.
So if we could...I would like to pose a series of simple questions...and all I want for everyone to do is simply respond to the question at hand. If everyone can follow these simple guidelines, than it shouldn't take too long before you will have to accept the fact that the buildings collapsed because of explosives and NOT a fire that melted steel wherein initiating an improbable pancake collapse.
Question 1: Is it possible to prove whether or not (irrefutably) that in the history of the world...a steel-structured building has collapsed as a direct result of a fire? I know we've all heard that this has never happened before 9/11, but is it possible to prove that statement true or false - without a shadow of doubt? And if we can prove whether or not that statement is true, than please give your answer - yay or nay, and present your evidence.
I KNOW there has been a tremendous debate over the subject of 9/11, and from the few threads I have read it looks like most believe the, "Official Story." Well, here's what I can assure you. If you engage me in this debate, than you will NOT leave this thread without KNOWING that 9/11 was an inside job and brought down by controlled demolitions.
Of course, WTC 7 is and will forever be the smoking gun. I am, of course, referring to 47 story steel-structured building, that dissolved to the ground in mere seconds. I say - DISSOLVED into nothingness, in a mere few seconds. Whether it was 6 or 7 or 8 9 10 seconds...that's not at debate. We've all seen the video, and the fact remains...this 47 story steel-structured building literally DISSOLVED in just the blink of an eye....apparently due to a couple fires that were so LARGE they were virtually invisible from the outside. Remember...there is no official report on the cause of WTC 7's collapse. The 911 commission didn't even address it, and if you know anything about a pancake collapse...WTC 7 was NOT a pancake collapse. All 47 stories simply turned into jello all at once. And magically at that. No wait...I mean because of those small fires that melted the entire infrastructure all at once. Yea, that's what I meant to say.
Now, I think one of the main problems people encounter when analyzing an event like this is that they OVER analyze it. Especially since politics are often brought (kicking and screaming) into this discussion...it's easy for one to loose track of the real issues by dismissing another as a, "Liberal! or NeoCON!" Please, don't be blinded by political bias. In fact, let's just check that at the door. This debate has NOTHING to do with what political party you like to associate yourself with.
In conjunction: We're NOT debating WHO is responsible for 9/11 in this thread. So, regardless if you do decide to open your mind up to THE truth...it doesn't mean that you're saying or agreeing to who is actually responsible for the demolition of the WTC. The only fact about this event that we shall discuss, is whether or not FIRE was the chief cause of the collapse of WTC 1, 2, 7 or if a controlled demolition is to blame.
See, I think the main problem with the, 'Debunkers.' is that they never actually debunk this main issue i.e. the buildings came down via a demolition. And the reason they probably haven't presented any actual hard evidence (I'm not talking about an "expert's" commentary or analysis) I'm talking about actual evidence you could present in a court of law that PROVES unequivocally, that demolitions we're NOT used on the WTC buildings. And, really this is the only point worth discussing. Sorry, but calling someone a, "Nutjob!" isn't gonna work. I'm only looking for something that could be presented as evidence in a court of law. Let's get REAL left-brained and linear about this...oki doki! You know like Skeptics are SUPPOSE to be!
There is really no point in getting distracted with the small side issues and theories...because it only serves to dilute the whole point of this investigation...and that is to irrefutably prove what caused the buildings to collapse.
So if we could...I would like to pose a series of simple questions...and all I want for everyone to do is simply respond to the question at hand. If everyone can follow these simple guidelines, than it shouldn't take too long before you will have to accept the fact that the buildings collapsed because of explosives and NOT a fire that melted steel wherein initiating an improbable pancake collapse.
Question 1: Is it possible to prove whether or not (irrefutably) that in the history of the world...a steel-structured building has collapsed as a direct result of a fire? I know we've all heard that this has never happened before 9/11, but is it possible to prove that statement true or false - without a shadow of doubt? And if we can prove whether or not that statement is true, than please give your answer - yay or nay, and present your evidence.
