• Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more

Top Ten Photos 9/11 Conspiracy Nuts Hate

jaydeehess said:
Say what??
Falling debris generated by a collapsing building is not the same as a collapsing building in what world?
Click to expand...

You do know what debris looks like and what a building looks like?

Which one is bigger the debris or the building?
 
johnny karate said:
If only the defense attorneys in the Moussaoui trial had thought of the brilliant legal strategy of proving the crime of which their client was accused never actually took place!
Click to expand...


Sorry but you are so wrong again.

The offical story was not on trial, Moussaoui was.
 
ULTIMA1 said:
The burden of proof is on the person that states something as a fact.
Click to expand...
That essentially means that it's your burden to show that all of the available evidence -- the debris, the passenger identification, the radar data, Pentagon damage, and crash footage all were either fabricated or insufficient to prove the identity in the absence of what you requested. God forbid if anyone asks you to do that.
 
ULTIMA1 said:
The burden of proof is on the person that states something as a fact.

If i need to post proof of what i post then you guys must do the same.
Click to expand...

so you're saying that it may actually be equipment from flight 77. you're just not sure?

the burden of proof is on you if you disagree with my statement here
PROVE IT ISN'T FROM FLIGHT 77

don't just give a vague answer
 
ULTIMA1 said:
8. Too bad firemen in the building reported only small fires.
Click to expand...

They also reported that WTC7 was loosing integrity and was going to collapse.

But I guess you ignored that part. How convenient.

Are you for real U1? This surely must be a joke.
 
Last edited:
ULTIMA1 said:
UM we were talking about the towers not building 7.

Please learn how to read.
Click to expand...

from http://graphics8.nytimes.com/packages/pdf/nyregion/20050812_WTC_GRAPHIC/9110154.PDF

WORLD TRADE CENTER TASK FORCE INTERVIEW
CHIEF OF THE DEPARTMENT DANIEL NIGRO
Interview Date: October 24, 2001

"Q. Stepping back for a moment to when you were
coming over the Brooklyn Bridge, could you make a
determination based on a visual from that distance how
involved or fully involved the fire was and how many
floors?
A. It looked to me like it was involving about
10 floors of the building, and the way it was burning,
14
D. NIGRO
I stated to Chief Ganci on the way there that I didn't
believe we could extinguish the fire.
Q. That was based on what?
A. The number of floors I think. The volume of
fire on the number of floors. To my recollection, we
had never put out a fire that involved that many floors
in a high rise building in this city before. I think
more or less the direction of - in both towers ended
up, evacuation was the main, the initial concern. Get
as many people out of the building as we could."

--

"To my recollection, we
had never put out a fire that involved that many floors
in a high rise building in this city before. " - shows the uniqueness of the events of 9/11 in relation to high rise fires in NYC
 
Last edited:
Justin39640 said:
" shows the uniqueness of the events of 9/11 in relation to high rise fires in NYC
Click to expand...

Thats funny according to the 9/11 commission report none of the fire chiefs at the WTC believed the towers would collapse.

http://www.9-11commission.gov/report/911Report_Ch9.htm
To our knowledge, none of the chiefs present believed that a total collapse of either tower was possible. One senior chief did articulate his concern that upper floors could begin to collapse in a few hours, and that firefighters thus should not ascend above floors in the 60s.
 
Last edited:
ULTIMA1 said:
Thats funny according to the 9/11 commission report none of the fire chiefs at the WTC believed the towers would collapse.

http://www.9-11commission.gov/report/911Report_Ch9.htm
To our knowledge, none of the chiefs present believed that a total collapse of either tower was possible. One senior chief did articulate his concern that upper floors could begin to collapse in a few hours, and that firefighters thus should not ascend above floors in the 60s.
Click to expand...

That applies only to WTC1 and WTC2. As far as I can see, we are speaking of WTC7
 
Last edited:
BigAl said:
That applies only to WTC1 and WTC2. As far as I can see, we are speaking of WTC7
Click to expand...

And the NYC building department engineers warned immanent of collapse JUST before it actually happened, the information was being relayed to the commanders when the first collapse occurred. Also a couple of demolitions experts tried to contact NYC emergency personnel with the same warning, based on their understanding of building failures, and were unable to get through the confusion that was happening that morning with their warning.
 
Several posts have been moved to the AAH mirror for bickering. Please try to discuss the topic and not each other.
Replying to this modbox in thread will be off topic  Posted By: Tricky
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom