• 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.

Guys, he's not a kook.

anticonspiracy911

Critical Thinker
A
Joined
Jan 15, 2007
Messages
356
I got this brand new insight in my YouTube inbox a few days ago. Guys, he's not a kook. He swears!

There are many morons in the 9/11 Truth Movement. If its true that 9/11 was an inside job then you would expect the CIA to plant idiots to spread stupid ideas. I actually suspect Loose Change are such idiots.

They are an emabrassment to the 9/11 Truth Movement.

Look, there are many many many crackpot theories in the 9/11 Truth wilderness. Most of them are seeded by CIA ops.

Can you lend me 10 minutes and then talk to me about this evidence:

Just watch these few 3 minute vids about molten steel:

This guy De Martini went missing on 9/11 - (they say he died in the towers trying to save people):
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bDGInaB0eQM

Then watch this the chief engineer of NIST WTC investigation denying Molten steel was at ground zero:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v36bkCB8sTY

Then see this heavily censored and desperately covered up 2002 PBS doco (note the second half is what you havn't seen yet)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oM7HI4kjtvA

Then watch my video about the forensic engineer for WTC7 and his investigation being obstructed:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IVGD_mFVY6I

So you see mate? You can't call me a kook for thinking something stinks about those NIST ****ers. They are lying. Why are they lying?
Click to expand...

I've been converted! :D
 
Funny, why would that guy deny molten metal in the rubble?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v36bkCB8sTY

It was hot under there for months, and pieces were being pulled out still dripping. Is the overall story that there was NO molten metal in the rubble under those 3 towers?

Sounds to me like the guy who sent you the videos may not be a kook after all.
 
Zlaya: First, how do you know it's metal? Second, if it's metal, how do you know it's steel? Also a topic which has been discussed to death already. Maybe someone can post a link, otherwise you'll have use the forum's search function.
 
Zlaya said:
Funny, why would that guy deny molten metal in the rubble?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v36bkCB8sTY

It was hot under there for months, and pieces were being pulled out still dripping. Is the overall story that there was NO molten metal in the rubble under those 3 towers?

Sounds to me like the guy who sent you the videos may not be a kook after all.
Click to expand...

That big red lump is not liquid, its not dripping and doesn't effect the grappler(eg.the paint doesn't burn) it's probably aluminum cladding.



he doesn't deny molten metal, only molten steel.

now lets have a look at steven jones

 
re.Frank A. DeMartini, may he rest in peace, it is in bad taste to use that video because he is talking about a 707 lost in the fog,low on fuel flying at 180mph looking for the airport and we can't ask him what he thinks of 767 with 1000s of gallons of fuel impacting at 490/570 mph.

And the kooks own wtc 7 is wrong, it didn't collapse in 10 seconds,or fall in to its own footprint and why would wtc7 be a crime scene? no one died in it and no planes hit it.

FOCOIST911 IS A KOOK!
 
Zlaya said:
It was hot under there for months, and pieces were being pulled out still dripping. Is the overall story that there was NO molten metal in the rubble under those 3 towers?

Sounds to me like the guy who sent you the videos may not be a kook after all.
Click to expand...

Actually, he sounds like a stupid kook.

There were no pigs of solidified iron found when the fires were out.

Im sure there was a lot of melted aluminum, copper and lead, though. It would look WIERD if there were not.

The stuff dripping off what Judy woo-woo calls the "Cheetos" is probably just sand or sawdust from crushed furniture. I've personally pulled red hot metal out of trash dump and wood duff fires that looked like that.
 
cyclonic said:
re.Frank A. DeMartini, may he rest in peace, it is in bad taste to use that video because he is talking about a 707 lost in the fog,low on fuel flying at 180mph looking for the airport and we can't ask him what he thinks of 767 with 1000s of gallons of fuel impacting at 490/570 mph.
*snip*
Click to expand...

I have always thought this part to be a bit funny. Now, the CTers claim that hundreds of engineers at NIST are fradulent, The goverment is criminally and murderously corrupt, thousands of people are spineless frills, etc. etc. etc.

But because the constructors of the WTC, decades ago, claimed that the buildings could withstand a plane collision, then the collapse must be due to foul play.

Excuse me, but this would hardly be the first time that the claims of constructors (a claim that there was no way of testing) would not have held true. .... The Titanic comes to mind.

Hans
 
MRC_Hans said:
Excuse me, but this would hardly be the first time that the claims of constructors (a claim that there was no way of testing) would not have held true. .... The Titanic comes to mind.

Hans
Click to expand...

[truther] no comparison the titanic wuz a boat so the sea wud have puts teh fires owt. u looz!!11!!! [/truther]
 
Brainster said:
Who's "he"?
Click to expand...

He is da twoof! And you god damn sheeple are ruining his precious arguments. Those god damn towers came down into its own footprint. And now that I've been converted I will continue to say god damn in a debate just like Jason Bermas. If I add it in every sentence then this gives my argument more validity. Oh yeah, and don't forget sheeple. WTC7 came down 5x faster than free fall speed you god damn sheeple! It came down in 0.5 seconds. Just watch it with your own eyes! Ask questions and ignore answers. We are da twoof!
 
Zlaya said:
Funny, why would that guy deny molten metal in the rubble?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v36bkCB8sTY

It was hot under there for months, and pieces were being pulled out still dripping. Is the overall story that there was NO molten metal in the rubble under those 3 towers?

Sounds to me like the guy who sent you the videos may not be a kook after all.
Click to expand...


Welcome to a couple of years ago were this argument was only half beaten to death. The search engine is your friend, and learn the difference between metal and steel.

I think the Wooscouts are handing out their molten steel badges this week.
 
Zlaya said:
Funny, why would that guy deny molten metal in the rubble?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v36bkCB8sTY

It was hot under there for months, and pieces were being pulled out still dripping. Is the overall story that there was NO molten metal in the rubble under those 3 towers?

Sounds to me like the guy who sent you the videos may not be a kook after all.
Click to expand...
What does this mean?
I've been involved with controlled demolitions and you could go into the site within minutes. Nothing was ever hot.

Why do YOU think this point is significant?
 
Zlaya said:
Funny, why would that guy deny molten metal in the rubble?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v36bkCB8sTY

It was hot under there for months, and pieces were being pulled out still dripping. Is the overall story that there was NO molten metal in the rubble under those 3 towers?

Sounds to me like the guy who sent you the videos may not be a kook after all.
Click to expand...


Purely out of curiosity, do you ever get anything right? Do you ever take the trouble to read anything not posted on a brain-dead twoofer site?

Molten metal remained in the debris pile for weeks, insulated and cooking, so to speak. Conspiracy liars have pretended that the metal was molten STEEL. There is no evidence to support this claim. The liars have fake-quoted Mark Loizeaux of Controlled Demolition, Inc. as identifying the metal, but Loizeaux denies it. He says that he didn't actually see any molten metal and isn't qualified to identify it as steel.
 
DGM said:
What does this mean?
I've been involved with controlled demolitions and you could go into the site within minutes. Nothing was ever hot.

Why do YOU think this point is significant?
Click to expand...

Some truthers claim :
MELTED STEEL IN THE BASEMENTS -- A SMOKING GUN

when asked why, they claim its proof of the use of thermite,when asked do you really think thermite burns for 6 weeks, they either abuse you, change the subject or start spamming.
i then tell them:

the 5 miracles of

MELTED STEEL IN THE BASEMENTS -- A SMOKING GUN

1 the thermite survived the planes impact and fire
2 the pools of melted steel survived the collapse and were not dispersed/scattered with the debris
3 the molten steel stayed molten for 6 WEEKS !
4 that cts believe in the 1&2&3 miracles
5 they know its steel from looking at pics.
 
cyclonic said:
when asked do you really think thermite burns for 6 weeks, they either abuse you, change the subject or start spamming.
Click to expand...
Kind of surprising. From what I've seen of the tr00thers, therm*te is anything and everything they want or need it to be to fit their theory, so I'd think they'd claim it could burn for weeks. The other day, a troofer on reddit was claiming that WTC had a whole floor of thermite, but also that a "dripping sparks" effect is a signature burn of thermite, that melts and drips as it fuels its own reaction. It can also burst out of the sides of floors near the top moments before collapse. So, if it can fuel its own reaction, surely it can do so for weeks.

They can do this with therm*te, of course, because they're therm*te experts... and 99.9% of the world has no idea what it even is or how it relates in any way to 9/11, or intentionally demolishing a building, nor would they believe it if they heard the tr00thers' shape-shifting arguments about it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom