Continuation: 'What about building 7?'

Tony Szamboti said:
Spanx, your willingness to say things that aren't true shows you have an agenda and on this forum that would be to cover-up and obscure the fact that the three building collapses in NYC on Sept. 11, 2001 were due to controlled demolition.

I have provided plenty of evidence to show those buildings came down via controlled demolition. The reason you simply deny it is because it goes against your obvious agenda to cover-up that fact.
Click to expand...

Ok, pick one of your posts where you have provided evidence of controlled demolition.
 
Ape of Good Hope said:
Take your time Tony, it's important that you really nail this one.
Click to expand...

I have already said that I think the regulars on here like you and Spanx are shills with an agenda to cover up and obscure the fact that the building collapses were due to controlled demolition. That is the reason you don't understand what I am saying. It is essentially because you don't want to, not that my logic is incorrect.

The only reason anyone posts on here, other than the shills, is to point out the lies of the shills and diminish their effect.
 
Last edited:
Tony Szamboti said:
I have already said that I think the regulars on here like you and Spanx are shills with an agenda to cover up and obscure the fact that the building collapses were due to controlled demolition. That is the reason you don't understand what I am saying. It is essentially because you don't want to, not that my logic is incorrect.

The only reason anyone, other than the shills, posts on here is to diminish the shill's effect.
Click to expand...

Remember Tony you are posting here, what does that make you?
 
Spanx said:
Remember Tony you are posting here, what does that make you?
Click to expand...

I said anyone other than the shills like you who are trying to cover up and obscure the fact that the three building collapses were due to controlled demolition.

I am not trying to cover up and obscure the fact that those buildings came down via controlled demolition so I don't fit that category. Unfortunately, you do and I told you what I think you should actually be doing in Post #894 and my reply to Chris Mohr later. Maybe then you can find some morally acceptable work.
 
Tony Szamboti said:
GlennB, I said Oystein couldn't show any legitimate photos to back his claims for severe south face damage on WTC 7 and that doesn't come as a surprise because heavy debris wouldn't have flown 350 feet away from the collapse of WTC 1.

The image you show here was even rejected by NIST as some sort of phony composite. If it had any legitimacy whatsoever they surely would have used it.
Click to expand...

Tony Szamboti said:
They did not use it in their model, so they did not see it as something they could count on as a scientific fact.
Click to expand...

Backtracking within minutes, on the same page. Surreal.
 
Tony Szamboti said:
I said anyone other than the shills like you who are trying to cover up and obscure the fact that the three building collapses were due to controlled demolition.

I am not trying to cover up and obscure the fact that those buildings came down via controlled demolition so I don't fit that category. Unfortunately, you do and I told you what I think you should actually be doing in Post #894 and my reply to Chris Mohr later. Maybe then you can find some morally acceptable work.
Click to expand...

Tony, this is a 911 conspiracy forum, nothing more nothing less. Anyone can post their opinion here. If your opinion is CD don't get upset if people don't agree with you.

If you make a claim then provide evidence or be treated like a BS er
 
GlennB said:
Backtracking within minutes, on the same page. Surreal.
Click to expand...

There is nothing surreal about it. You are the one dealing with the surreal as you have no basis to show there was any significant structural damage to WTC 7 like what Oystein is claiming.
 
Last edited:
Spanx said:
Tony, this is a 911 conspiracy forum, nothing more nothing less. Anyone can post their opinion here. If your opinion is CD don't get upset if people don't agree with you.

If you make a claim then provide evidence or be treated like a BS er
Click to expand...

Spanx, I think there are shills on this forum and I believe (based on your posts) that you are one.

I have provided a wealth of evidence that the buildings came down via controlled demolition, that shills cannot accept because it goes against their agenda.

I think 90% of the regulars on here are shills.
 
Last edited:
Tony Szamboti said:
Spanx, I think there are shills on this forum and I believe (based on your posts) that you are one.

I have provided a wealth of evidence that the buildings came down via controlled demolition, that shills cannot accept because it goes against their agenda.

I think 90% of the regulars on here are shills.
Click to expand...

If you say so Tony, it must be true.
 
Spanx said:
If you say so Tony, it must be true.
Click to expand...

Only you know for sure if you are a shill, but I certainly think it.

The persistent denial by regulars here of the clear evidence presented by Mirage memories, gerrycan, Ziggi, and myself is evidence of shills.
 
Last edited:
Tony Szamboti said:
Only you know for sure if you are a shill, but I certainly think it.
Click to expand...

You hit the nail on the head there, I know and you don't.

The answer being you are wrong, but you will never believe it.

Like I say you live in a fantasy land.
 
Tony Szamboti said:
I have already said that I think the regulars on here like you and Spanx are shills with an agenda to cover up and obscure the fact that the building collapses were due to controlled demolition. That is the reason you don't understand what I am saying. It is essentially because you don't want to, not that my logic is incorrect.

The only reason anyone posts on here, other than the shills, is to point out the lies of the shills and diminish their effect.
Click to expand...


Now you're just being shilly :boggled:
 
Spanx said:
You hit the nail on the head there, I know and you don't.

The answer being you are wrong, but you will never believe it.

Like I say you live in a fantasy land.
Click to expand...

No, I don't believe you aren't a shill, as you can't be that stupid. Go get a morally acceptable job.
 
Tony Szamboti said:
Only you know for sure if you are a shill, but I certainly think it.
Click to expand...


To be fair Tony, you also think WTC7 was a controlled demolition. So that's TWO daft things things you believe but have no evidence for.


Tony Szamboti said:
The persistent denial by regulars here of the clear evidence presented by Mirage memories, gerrycan, Ziggi, and myself is evidence of shills.
Click to expand...


That's quite a line-up of intellectual giants you have there. I'm in awe :)

Maybe one day you'll put your heads together and show us some evidence for CD.
 
Ape of Good Hope said:
To be fair Tony, you also think WTC7 was a controlled demolition. So that's TWO daft things things you believe but have no evidence for.





That's quite a line-up of intellectual giants you have there. I'm in awe :)

Maybe one day you'll put your heads together and show us some evidence for CD.
Click to expand...

If anyone honest were to compare the posts of Mirage Memories, gerrycan, Ziggi, and, myself to yours I am confident it wouldn't be yours they said were the superior of the two.

It is clear as to why you don't accept the evidence presented by those above and that is because it doesn't work with your agenda to cover up and obscure the fact that those three buildings were brought down with controlled demolition. You should go get a morally acceptable job.
 
Tony Szamboti said:
If anyone honest were to compare the posts of Mirage Memories, gerrycan, Ziggi, and, myself to yours I am confident it wouldn't be yours they said were the superior of the two.
Click to expand...


I'm afraid you're not qualified to make a statement like that, Tony.

Maybe Gerry can, as he's a True Scotsman ;)

Tony Szamboti said:
It is clear as to why you don't accept the evidence presented by those above and that is because it doesn't work with your agenda to cover up and obscure the fact that those three buildings were brought down with controlled demolition. You should go get a morally acceptable job.
Click to expand...


All fascinating stuff, but the idea is that you provide evidence for controlled demolition of the three buildings.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom