• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

DC: Why do you think WTC7 was a CD?

i know you dont like to hear from experts that they belive its a CD :)
im sorry, but i dont regret it :)
 
They have no evidence to substantiate their opinions, as they are just as uninformed as you are, looking at blurry videos of a partially obscured building falling down.
As you have said, their opinions are irrelevant to your position.
 
how do you know they are only informed by watching youtube videos?
you got evidence?
im pretty sure that Bachman and Schneider atleast readed FEMA report, and maybe even other stuff.
 
Dictator Cheney said:
how do you know they are only informed by watching youtube videos?
you got evidence?
im pretty sure that Bachman and Schneider atleast readed FEMA report, and maybe even other stuff.
Click to expand...

In which case they are being very reticent about telling anyone, normally people who make such claims and have any evidence to support them are quite keen to show such evidence.
Noticeably this is not the case with them and not the case with you either.
Maybe you should ask them, DC.
In fact, why havent you?
 
its you that speculates that they are not informed, you claimed they just watched blurry videos, you can backup that claim? cause now im indeed interested how much they was informed.
you seem to know, or is it just your prejudice?
 
You need to ask them DC, Im not doing your work for you.
Maybe they have some secret evidence that they just arent telling anyone?
Until then its safe to assume they have looked at some blurry youtube videos of a partially obscured building collapsing and decided it "looks like a CD".
Just like you did.:)
 
so its just your speculations backed up by nothing :) thats ok for me, but dont try to sell it as a fact.

you specualte about them instead of asking them lol, but you ask why i didnt ask them, di you ask them?
 
Dictator Cheney said:
well before i would consider the CD of WTC 7 a fact, i would like to read the official theory to it first.

maybe they have a good and convincing explenation for the collapses. especially i am looking into investigations to the steel column 81 and the columns nearby.
Click to expand...

There's the backtrack we were all waiting for.

Kudos, DC. Make claim, pretend no evidence is necessary, and then move the goalposts and slide in a retraction hoping no one will notice.

:thumbsup: You the man.
 
"so its just your speculations backed up by nothing thats ok for me, but dont try to sell it as a fact."
Click to expand...

Thats fairly ironic considering your behaviour throughout this thread.
If they have any secret evidence then it is basically up to them to divulge it to support their claim, same goes for you.
They havent divulged anything and neither have you.
Therefore I am satisfied they havent got any.
Have you got any evidence that wtc7 was a CD?
Or are you just interested in playing your dishonest little game?
 
Last edited:
what do you think triggered collapse? and can you prove it?
 
and very early i already said several times that i have no evidence. so i ask my self who is playing games here? why do you keep asking for something i already told you i dont have it, several times?

now we gonna turn it, what triggered collapse and pls provide evidence to backup your oppinion in case you have evidence.
 
Dictator Cheney said:
and very early i already said several times that i have no evidence. so i ask my self who is playing games here? why do you keep asking for something i already told you i dont have it, several times?

now we gonna turn it, what triggered collapse and pls provide evidence to backup your oppinion in case you have evidence.
Click to expand...

We know that WTC7 was damaged severely by the collapse of the second tower.
We know that it burned uncontrolled for at least 7 hours.
We know that firefighters at the scene said it was going to collapse based on their observations.
We know that there were no loud series of explosions immediately preceding the collapse which would indicate a demolition.
We know that it had an unusual design due to the cantilever support over the pre-existing Con Ed power station.

Now you want us to accept that the only reason that it fell down is because some covert ops decided to blow it up and you can't even offer a plausible reason why, let alone any kind of coherent theory of how it was done.

Why the hell should anyone listen to you?
 
Dictator Cheney, a quick question:

Would it be correct to say you are unsure on the issue of the collapse of WTC 7 (agnostic, if you will) but leaning towards the idea of it being a controlled demolition?
 
[X] said:
Dictator Cheney, a quick question:

Would it be correct to say you are unsure on the issue of the collapse of WTC 7 (agnostic, if you will) but leaning towards the idea of it being a controlled demolition?
Click to expand...

i think agnostic is not correct anymore.
i hang very far into CD, but i am still convincable that it collapsed do to damage and fire. but therefor NIST has to do a very very good job.
i really think it was a CD, but im not that kind of human that thinks everything i think is a fact.

im not the Alex Jones type of truther that will say, I dont belive it was a CD i know it was a CD, i dont say that, because i dont know it, but i suspect it.

sure it was not a good idea for me to say "it still was a CD" here on JREF. cause i knew that would trigger this topic :)
i should have sayd i still belive it was a CD. you have to be carefull when posting on JREF :) misstakes are considered lies here.
 
Dictator Cheney said:
I think agnostic is not correct anymore.
I hang very far into CD, but I am still convinceable that it collapsed do to damage and fire. but therefor NIST has to do a very very good job.
I really think it was a CD, but I'm not that kind of human that thinks everything I think is a fact.

I'm not the Alex Jones type of truther that will say, I don't believe it was a CD I know it was a CD, I don't say that, because I don't know it, but I suspect it.
Click to expand...


Okay. You're a CDist willing to consider alternatives. Better than some...



Dictator Cheney said:
Sure it was not a good idea for me to say "it still was a CD" here on JREF. 'Cause I knew that would trigger this topic :)
I should have said I still believe it was a CD. you have to be careful when posting on JREF :) Mistakes are considered lies here.
Click to expand...


Not lies. People were just trying to get you to back up your statement, or admit that you shouldn't have made it without evidence. You've done the latter, so kudos to you.
 
WildCat said:
Of course you don't, no one in the truth movement does. That's why you're a laughingstock to 95% of the population in the western world.

Over 6 and a half years, and no evidence!
Click to expand...

can you backup that 95%? or is it just what you think? :D
 
Tweeter:
What are the qualifications to become a fireman? Most of the ones from my town are barely literate, firebugs and followers. I wouldnt trust their version of events if you paid me.
theauthor:
That's actually a good point. Fireman are without doubt brave and committed but they are not in any sense experts on building collapse, especially in a situation that had never been encountered before.

These are singularly ignorant (and offensive) comments, made by two individuals who clearly have no understanding whatsoever about firefighting.

Firefighters are taught to recognize building collapse indicators because their lives depend on it. Certainly, such training varies among departments; a small rural VFD which runs only a few calls annually, involving small structures, may require very little of it. But FDNY firefighters, who run many, many calls in tall buildings, are recognized as among the elite. Their experience and training is very good, and the competition for admission as a cadet is fierce.

Tweeter:
Id like to ask the firemen that said "there were a few small fires and they could take it down with a hose or two" a few questions. I already know enough firefighters that couldnt chew gum and walk at the same time, but im sure the ones in NY are all college educated with doctorates.

I'm college-educated with a couple of master's degrees and 16 years in space engineering, and hundreds of hours of firefighting training which includes recognizing the signs of building collapse - the same ones unambiguously observed by FDNY hours before WTC 7 collapsed. But you don't need advanced degrees for that - just ordinary intelligence coupled with training and experience. You manifestly have neither of the latter two qualities, and judging from your shrill, fact-free posts, which are full of silly drive-by claims (Jesse Ventura, anyone?), you are seriously deficient in the first as well.

By the way, the brothers who made those reports gave their lives on that day. So you can't ask them any questions, even if you had enough of a clue to ask them intelligent questions, which you don't. But you have a standing invitation to talk that smack about them to my face. Let me know and we can arrange it.

But, yes, I'd love to see you bring your act to an actual FDNY firehouse. I'd even chip in for your transportation there if I could be there with some popcorn.

Tweeter, asked his experience:

Life outside of the internet.

Translation: "None." Excepting talking big on the Internet.

Coward. Ingoramus. Troll.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom