Lloyd England exposed was involved in 9/11 false flag event

Cheerful Spring2

King Mob wrote: »

And what is that based on?
The other secret demolitions?

Still waiting for those examples you said you had.

Compartmentalization. That's how you avoid leaks and info getting out. This group likely insulated and only hang out with themselves.

Clearly less people know about it the less chance of a leak. I suspect its small group inside the military industrial complex who carried it out, yes it my guess. 

King Mob

Cheerful Spring2 wrote: »

Compartmentalization. That's how you avoid leaks and info getting out. This group likely insulated and only hang out with themselves.

Clearly less people know about it the less chance of a leak. I suspect its small group inside the military industrial complex who carried it out, yes it my guess. 

That's not an answer to my questions. It's just waffle.
How did you arrive at that number?
How do you know they are able to secretly rig a building to be demolished?

Please produce an example form the list of secret demolitions that used thermite and show how many people they used.

Dohnjoe

Cheerful Spring2 wrote: »

Compartmentalization. That's how you avoid leaks and info getting out. This group likely insulated and only hang out with themselves.

What?

People dying of terminal diseases and on their death beds aren't going to be threatened

How does it work in 9/11 truther imaginations, does the sitting President send some goons to threaten the family of the terminally ill insider? and then other goons are sent to threaten the goons in case they ever spill?

And that garbage is still a better made-up explanation that the one you are about to create

Cheerful Spring2

Dohnjoe wrote: »

Who cares? it's not peer reviewed, no one in the academic world seems to be taking the slightest bit of notice to it. The only people who are interested are an absolutely tiny community of remaining 911 truthers (who funded it) and the community of sadists who debate with them.

AE911 reps have gone to mainstream local engineering conferences and talked with engineers about their study and many the majority who they spoke with declare they never knew a third skyscraper- building seven collapsed on 9/11. It just goes to show even the people who are trained in this field are unfamiliar with this situation. They merely remember the Twin Towers collapse. 

One local engineering chapter half the audience still turned up to listen the Hulsey presentation at another venue and were puzzled by all the mistakes NIST made.

AE911 truth also found ASCE high ups have been telling its members to not speak with the group. They clearly afraid that this may go somewhere. Even threatened to expel members from the ASCE., for speaking with the AE911 truth movement.

When you involve yourself in a cover up, that's not unusual. 

King Mob

Cheerful Spring2 wrote: »

AE911 reps have gone to mainstream local engineering conferences and talked with engineers about their study and many the majority who they spoke with declare they never knew a third skyscraper- building seven collapsed on 9/11. It just goes to show even the people who are trained in this field are unfamiliar with this situation. They merely remember the Twin Towers collapse. 

One local engineering chapter half the audience still turned up to listen the Hulsey presentation at another venue and were puzzled by all the mistakes NIST made.

AE911 truth also found ASCE high ups have been telling its members to not speak with the group. They clearly afraid that this may go somewhere. Even threatened to expel members from the ASCE., for speaking with the AE911 truth movement.

When you involve yourself in a cover up, that's not unusual. 

Lol.
Those are some very pathetic attempts to sound important.

Hulsey's report isn't going to be peer reviewed despite their claims and promises.

Dohnjoe

Cheerful Spring2 wrote: »

AE911 reps have gone to mainstream local engineering conferences and talked with engineers about their study and many the majority who they spoke with declare they never knew a third skyscraper- building seven collapsed on 9/11.

No, no, no

AE911 people are internet conspiracy theorists. Some of them have done academic studies or even worked in related fields. Dr Judy Wood also has credentials.

It's not a recognised organisation, but you know this because we've told you. We've also told you that every year the head of AE911 Richard Gage, tries to get a real organisation (AIA), of which he is a member, to vote to reinvestigate 9/11, and every year they overwhelmingly reject it.

They've distanced themselves from his views, which they reject, and they don't allow him to use their facilities for any of his 911 stuff. You also know this, because it's been explained to you.

Cheerful Spring2

King Mob wrote: »

Lol.
Those are some very pathetic attempts to sound important.

Hulsey's report isn't going to be peer reviewed despite their claims and promises.

Final report is not released. We got the draft.

We have to watch and see on that. ASCE pressuring its members to stop talking to Ae911 truth, so Hulsey going to have hard time convincing the higher ups working for an engineering journal to publish his work? He may pull off a miracle?. Inside the United States this event stirs emotions and bias. 

Dohnjoe

Cheerful Spring2 wrote: »

Inside the United States this event stirs emotions and bias. 

Lol. 9/11 truthers aren't taken seriously for obvious reasons. If an established, recognised group like ASCE are distancing themselves from AE911, it's because AE911 is a clown outfit of pseudo-science

The Nal

Cheerful Spring2 wrote: »

4 teams of 4 men= 16 trained guys- maybe a few top guys at the top- and a back up crew of watchers and spotters. That enough to get the job done pre 9/11 

Wheres the evidence for this?

Cheerful Spring2

Dohnjoe wrote: »

No, no, no

AE911 people are internet conspiracy theorists. Some of them have done academic studies or even worked in related fields. Dr Judy Wood also has credentials.

It's not a recognised organisation, but you know this because we've told you. We've also told you that every year the head of AE911 Richard Gage, tries to get a real organisation (AIA), of which he is a member, to vote to reinvestigate 9/11, and every year they overwhelmingly reject it.

They've distanced themselves from his views, which they reject, and they don't allow him to use their facilities for any of his 911 stuff. You also know this, because it's been explained to you.

Members are taking notice. Its ASCE top brass who are disrupting the communications. The rank and file members see the weaknesses, but the high ups of course don't want them believing the AE911 truth movement right, it's dangerous for them.

Cheerful Spring2

The Nal wrote: »

Wheres the evidence for this?

My guess, did not say there was evidence.

How many men would you think its takes to rig 8 floors in 47 floor building?

Skeptics claim 100s or 1000 people would know about this and how come know leaks?

Normally in a typical demolition you need upwards from 15 men to 20 men depending on the building size.

Realistically how many people would need to know?

You have your guys running the show
Your demolition crews and spotters

Cheerful Spring2

Dohnjoe wrote: »

What?

People dying of terminal diseases and on their death beds aren't going to be threatened

How does it work in 9/11 truther imaginations, does the sitting President send some goons to threaten the family of the terminally ill insider? and then other goons are sent to threaten the goons in case they ever spill?

And that garbage is still a better made-up explanation that the one you are about to create

9/11 happened 18 years ago. It very unlikely the men were in 60s and 70s, least the demolition crew.

They most likely still alive somewhere, or died doing some other rogue operation somewhere else, who knows?

Dohnjoe

Cheerful Spring2 wrote: »

Members are taking notice. Its ASCE top brass who are disrupting the communications. The rank and file members see the weaknesses, but the high ups of course don't want them believing the AE911 truth movement right, it's dangerous for them.

lol

Now an organisation representing 150,000 engineers in the US is in on your conspiracy.

There is no way you don't see how mental all this is.

Dohnjoe

Cheerful Spring2 wrote: »

They most likely still alive somewhere, or died doing some other rogue operation somewhere else, who knows?

How do you tell the difference between what you imagine and fact?

banie01

Dohnjoe wrote: »

How do you tell the difference between what you imagine and fact?

Ah c'mon DJ!
That's a bloody simple 1! He has a chart

Cheerful Spring2

Dohnjoe wrote: »

lol

Now an organisation representing 150,000 engineers in the US is in on your conspiracy.

There is no way you don't see how mental all this is.

AE911 charges are against the few at the top, not rank-and-file members..

Members have been reporting at conferences the ASCE management tellings its members to not speak with them.

Do you think nothing wrong with strong-armed tactics against its own members?

Unfortunate this world we live in and engineer head management is afraid of open debate. Fact we still waiting for NIST building seven data for 11 years is evidence of lack of transparency at the top.

Cheerful Spring2

Dohnjoe wrote: »

How do you tell the difference between what you imagine and fact?

You imagine fire contributed to the building collapse and first time in history it occurred, so it know different. 


I think the evidence supports controlled demolition. I believe the melted steel, the freefall, the NIST lies and omissions about the collapse and removal of wtc7 seven steel quickly and others things, is evidence for no fire collapse.

The Nal

Cheerful Spring2 wrote: »

My guess, did not say there was evidence.

How many men would you think its takes to rig 8 floors in 47 floor building?

Without anyone noticing, it would take the demolition team and everyone who worked in the building not to say anything.

Thousands of people.

Dohnjoe

Cheerful Spring2 wrote: »

AE911 charges are against the few at the top, not rank-and-file members..

Stop pretending to speak for engineers.

Cheerful Spring2

The Nal wrote: »

Without anyone noticing, it would take the demolition team and everyone who worked in the building not to say anything.

Thousands of people.

What there to notice if they did it at night?
What there to notice if they came in as repair or maintenance crew?
You not factor in building seven likely was not manned by heavily security crew? They likely had one person at desk at night or maybe nobody was there after dark?,
Watergate burglars, successfully broke in and did not caught inside the building. They got spotted by a security guard i believe in the opposite building. So we know the CIA have broken into buildings in the past, just that time they got caught.

Dohnjoe

Cheerful Spring2 wrote: »

What there to notice if they did it at night?
What there to notice if they came in as repair or maintenance crew?
You not factor in building seven likely was not manned by heavily security crew? They likely had one person at desk at night or maybe nobody was there after dark?,
Watergate burglars, successfully broke in and did not caught inside the building. They got spotted by a security guard i believe in the opposite building. So we know the CIA have broken into buildings in the past, just that time they got caught.

You are comparing rigging a building for demolition, which takes months, and vast amounts of loud, noisy work.. with people breaking into an office

It's like you have this cartoon image of men sneaking into the buildings at night and "sticking" some explosives to the walls like some heist movie. It's hilarious.

Dohnjoe

Oops sorry, not explosives.. mountains and mountains of thermite to "burn" the building down. But make explosions too. Lowish ones.

Cheerful Spring2

Dohnjoe wrote: »

You are comparing rigging a building for demolition, which takes months, and vast amounts of loud, noisy work.. with people breaking into an office

It's like you have this cartoon image of men sneaking into the buildings at night and "sticking" some explosives to the walls like some heist movie. It's hilarious.

Nobody can truly identifiy how long it took them ( but they had plenty of time leading up to 9/11) 

Explosives.
There is evidence for nano-thermite in the WTC dust, so obviously the demolition crew were working with unfamiliar to us- military type incendiaries/ explosive materials to take down the building.

So it very unlikely they used RDX and Dynamite for the controlled demolition, if they using nanothermite as one of the things to take down the buildings.

Dohnjoe

Cheerful Spring2 wrote: »

Nobody can truly identifiy how long it took them ( but they had plenty of time leading up to 9/11) 

Nobody can say anything because there's zero evidence for it. Nobody can tell us how many people "filmed" the fake moon landings because there's zero evidence for it

Not the other way round.

Explosives.
There is evidence for nano-thermite in the WTC dust, so obviously the demolition crew were working with unfamiliar to us- military type incendiaries/ explosive materials to take down the building.

The appeal to magic technology fallacy. Whatever magic explosives were used on 911, apparently they exploded and didn't explode at the same time, in a method completely unused (and unknown) to modern demolition experts.

Such a conveniently grey area.

Cheerful Spring2

Dohnjoe wrote: »

The appeal to magic technology fallacy. Whatever magic explosives were used on 911, apparently they exploded and didn't explode at the same time, in a method completely unused (and unknown) to modern demolition experts.

Such a conveniently grey area.

It not a deception because Harrit drafted a science paper and the samples were certified as coming from real people who collected the dust on the day 9/11 happened.
Skeptics recognize this as true, but they believe what Harrit found is a paint chip ( Le Clede primer paint flake)

They overlook the flaws with their point of view.
 This paint pigment mixture is Alumium silicate and Iron oxide- two oxides. Can't ignite.
They ignore Harrit chips have Iron molten spheres when ignited at low temp of 430c

To get Iron spheres on chip the temp after ignition has to be near 1500c. There no paint chip on earth that will flare up at 430c and make Iron spheres. 

The mere reason we can't get pass this as we have one side who can not accept evidence from the truth movement, even if its true.

I don't buy for a second Harrit and party of scientists, found paint chips and tried to pass it off as nanothermite. There no evidence for that, other then believing they had an agenda.

The Nal

Cheerful Spring2 wrote: »

What there to notice if they did it at night?
What there to notice if they came in as repair or maintenance crew?
You not factor in building seven likely was not manned by heavily security crew? They likely had one person at desk at night or maybe nobody was there after dark?,
Watergate burglars, successfully broke in and did not caught inside the building. They got spotted by a security guard i believe in the opposite building. So we know the CIA have broken into buildings in the past, just that time they got caught.

This is a very silly conversation.

Dohnjoe

Cheerful Spring2 wrote: »

It not a deception because Harrit drafted a science paper and the samples were certified as coming from real people who collected the dust on the day 9/11 happened.

A bunch of "sciencey" conspiracy theorists running around collecting bits of iron and aluminium from the rubble of a building containing a lot of iron and aluminium is infallible apparently. Doesn't take much to convince you.

Cheerful Spring2

Dohnjoe wrote: »

A bunch of "sciencey" conspiracy theorists running around collecting bits of iron and aluminium from the rubble of a building containing a lot of iron and aluminium is infallible apparently. Doesn't take much to convince you.

The chips are micro sized and embedded particles of AI, Iron oxide, Silicon are Nano-sized.

This gives you an idea of the size of the chips. 


Bits of AI and Iron forming together to make this is impossible, but you Skeptics will say anything at this stage.

The evidence clearly points to an engineered substance, especially when the particles are at nanoscale.

banie01

Dohnjoe wrote: »

A bunch of "sciencey" conspiracy theorists running around collecting bits of iron and aluminium from the rubble of a building containing a lot of iron and aluminium is infallible apparently. Doesn't take much to convince you.

The most important thing that some did on 9/11 was somehow decide to take forensic samples of dust that fell and then "certify" it's chain of custody.

Before passing it to a chemist who looked for samples.
That at least 7 years elapsed between the collection of the samples by random people with no forensic handling skills and no chain of custody and the undertaking of a study that "proved" the nano thermite isn't a problem at all ...

The study being published by a journal known to have "poor" peer review and which led to the resignation of its editor is ignored.

That the USGS published an analysis of the dust collected at 35 locations in November 2001 that showed nothing thermite"y" is ignored too.

Absolute rinse and repeat nonsense from our resident crank.
Who is just reposting bullshít over and over again in the hope that some of it sticks.

Dohnjoe

Cheerful Spring2 wrote: »

The chips are micro sized and embedded particles of AI, Iron oxide, Silicon are Nano-sized.

I am shocked, shocked! to discover that a bunch of conspiracy theorists found iron and aluminium in the rubble of buildings containing lots of iron and aluminium and other compounds