Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Why some people think 9/11 was an inside job

Options
1246720

Comments

  • Registered Users Posts: 17,850 ✭✭✭✭Dohnjoe


    Boxes of nanothermite chips, wireless detonators, carried in and placed during weekends and evenings by a men posing as workmen, why is that so hard to imagine?

    (not joking, the above is CS's view)



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,245 ✭✭✭Cheerful S


    Your ideas about the collapse make no sense. Just ignore the fact that the movement of the building only occurred about six seconds after the Penthouse left the roofline.?

    Your claim that all buildings internals are collapsing from top to bottom doesn't explain why the second building remains motionless? Will provide an honest answer or simply return to accusations

    Is it possible that a single window is not breaking with the decoupling of the steel frame from the walls and collapsing according to your theory?

    Your take on building collapse ignores the obvious flaws. 



  • Registered Users Posts: 12,665 ✭✭✭✭The Nal


    The best he can come up with is "a few guys over a weekend". lol. So thoroughly researched!



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,245 ✭✭✭Cheerful S


    There is a discrepancy between what you claim and what actually happened on the day. You can't explain why the two are at odds.

    With screenshots, I showed that internals (your words) began failing. As I see it, you have nothing but opinions that for 6 to 7 seconds after Penthouse collapsed, everything inside collapsed



  • Registered Users Posts: 12,665 ✭✭✭✭The Nal


    Unless you can explain how the buildings were rigged you will always appear very silly.

    Cart before the horse.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 1,245 ✭✭✭Cheerful S


    By showing actual screenshots of building on 9/11, I proved that my theory was different from Dohnjoe's post 89

    The Dohnjoe theory states that for six or seven seconds after the first building on the roof collapsed, the rest of the building inside fully collapsed from top to bottom.

    Showed screenshots to illustrate the point. Instead of glossing over the points, take a closer look and see why it doesn't hold up. In order to prove Dohnjoe theory wrong, you only need to see the building. 



  • Registered Users Posts: 17,850 ✭✭✭✭Dohnjoe


    Its not "my idea". Open up any school textbook or encyclopedia mentioning the subject, you won't find any explaining how the buildings were blown up.

    That's your personal claim, the one with the secret Nazis, Joe Biden, etc. If you are trying to convince people on the internet it happened, you have to demonstrate it.



  • Registered Users Posts: 12,665 ✭✭✭✭The Nal


    This isn't what I'm asking you. I'm not going to bother asking again. You have no theory.

    Case closed. It wasn't a controlled demolition.



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,245 ✭✭✭Cheerful S


     This claim is not found in textbooks because it belongs to NIST and it has already been proven that the data describing what happened that day has been manipulated.

    There are no broken windows on the west side, as you can see in the GIF. During the video, pause for a seven seconds. During that time pause, there was no evidence of structural failure on every floor (there are 46 floors in total)

    After that point, the second structure collapses, causing the building to collapse internally. The steel core columns below are damaged in some way must be removed, causing the building to fall now.

    In addition, the collapse went through a gap in the building that measured more than 100 feet in height. That was at the bottom from corner to corner. It is unheard of to have all columns disappear in a second like that naturally. 



  • Registered Users Posts: 17,850 ✭✭✭✭Dohnjoe


    It doesn't "belong to the NIST" either, they just confirmed what we already knew. The buildings falling down due to fire has been around since the event happened.

    If you are saying it's all wrong, that something else happened, okay, what is that something?



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 1,245 ✭✭✭Cheerful S


    Despite the obvious problems with the official narrative, you are too stubborn to notice them. It is absurd that in the face of 7 seconds of collapse, none of the windows would break, no deformation of the walls, no dust, complete cuckoo land.

    Essentially, the Video shows the first building on the eastside of the building collapsing inward. It is most likely a column failure underneath. There is a pause, and there is no movement for 6 to 7 seconds. After that, there is some movement. clearly, that structure had failed and could no longer bear the weight of the rest of the building. The freefall of the building has begun., 



  • Registered Users Posts: 17,850 ✭✭✭✭Dohnjoe


    Acting incredulous about it doesn't dispute what happened.



  • Registered Users Posts: 12,665 ✭✭✭✭The Nal


    What about the towers? How were they brought down?

    You're the worst conspiracy theorist Ive ever seen. You have no theory whatsoever.



  • Registered Users Posts: 17,850 ✭✭✭✭Dohnjoe


    There are individuals who've just made a hobby about denying stuff.



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,245 ✭✭✭Cheerful S


    Having Mick West finally admit that truthers had valid points about column 79 we can now question how the collapse even began let alone how it ended.

    As you fail to understand, NIST's best explanation is that some heat expansion of steel girders on the eastside caused it to heat to a point when came off its bracket seat, which caused other girders to displace in the same area, causing progressive collapse.

    If that girder cant come of its seat as NIST claim that collapse on eastside happened in total different way.

    Open that was controlled demolition of a crucial column that resulted in some cascading event all the way across to bottom.

    The collapse models of NIST began with column 79. It is fascinating that evidence indicates that steel bolts, stiffner plates, and web flange plates were removed years after the final report was released. You are essentially stripping down the building for no apparent reason. Why would you do that unless you were having trouble getting the girder A2011 to pop off its seat and collapse? You gave a model that was not real world representation of the building design.

    When you remove all the nails and bolts in a door handle, what is expected to remain in place? Because of this, NIST left off the steel reinforcements to prevent failure. There was clearly something wrong with their data to make them do that, but we cannot verify it since it would jeopardize national security. It is more likely that they are afraid someone in the engineering world will notice that something isn't right and question their credibility. Due to funding concerns, they do not want to be called out.

    There is no truth in the later claims, and the start of the claim is even incorrect. Again dont expect debunkers question this part of course. 



  • Registered Users Posts: 17,850 ✭✭✭✭Dohnjoe


    Claiming all of these skyscrapers were somehow "blown up" during terrorist attacks is really, incredibly silly stuff. If someone walks into a psychologist saying stuff like that they will be immediately classified.

    You are been given the opportunity to explain what really happened and to demonstrate it, still waiting..



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,245 ✭✭✭Cheerful S


    I have already told you what I believe happened at Twin Towers. I think nanothermite was used to structurally weaken the steel to cause it to collapse. Fire alone was not enough to cause the steel to collapse.

    Iron Microspheres. These are pure iron droplets without any impurities. No one in the mainstream has ever explained how this could be achieved. RJ Lee, just says it right, it took place at extreme temperatures. There has never been an office building fire with temperatures over 1500 degrees Celsius. The main steam study of NIST shows 900 degrees Celsius at its maximum temperature. It matters a lot to find millions of iron droplets in thick WTC tower dust. Nobody in the debunker world can explain how that came about. No one talks about this key signature found in dust as if it doesn't matter. There is very low probability that someone was lighting flint or there were millions of lighters in the room or whatever theory is put forth that explains it.

    Also, we have some steel pieces that FEMA mentioned that were located at a dump. Regardless of what you call them, these steel pieces clearly show signs of evaporation or corrison. There are holes in the steel and the steel that made it up has disappeared. That's how I know firefighters and work crews were telling the truth about finding liquid steel flowing in the rubble. The runoff has got to go somewhere. Describing finding pockets of it looked like lava/ foundry. The steel melting is definately evidence that something other than fire was going on here.

    Unfortunately, the mainstream media are too afraid or do not have the investigative skills to put everything together. Something as large as 9/11 had to have some shady factions within the government to stop certain people from coming out with the truth. The event seems to have been staged by a faction of US society. You cannot tell who they are in particular by looking at the evidence. It has always been my suspicion that Rumsfield was one of them, but I do not know how true that is. 



  • Registered Users Posts: 17,850 ✭✭✭✭Dohnjoe


    And Dr Judy Wood thinks energy weapons were used. She's even written a book about it. It doesn't mean anything without credible evidence.

    You haven't explained how it was done, who did it, you don't provide any details except for stuff you imagine in your head. Inventing a personal story isn't evidence.



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,245 ✭✭✭Cheerful S


    In the absence of evidence, it does. NIST study, anomalies found, international drug flight schools, Pakistani and Saudi Arabia connections, CIA cover-ups for terrorists, terrorist drills on 9/11, FBI assets reports of hijackers living with them, hijackers going to strip clubs and drinking, government official lying to the 9/11 commission under oath, Norad official lying under oath,, an endless list of weird things. 



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,245 ✭✭✭Cheerful S


    It seems you live in a world where you think only bad guys in Russia and China would do this, but the truth is that there are factions within the US government that are responsible for attacking the NORD stream pipelines. Does Biden even know this?

    During the 1960's, it is not clear to you the joint chiefs put together a real document to stage a false flag attack on multiple US cities. Interestingly, it was given to Kennedy for approval. It cites killing American citizens. Joint chiefs actually conspired in a document to stage a false flag attack. Some of those generals were sacked by Kennedy over this.

    American would never do such a thing in you rainbow world. The right faction's gave the orders in 2000 to do it..



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 1,245 ✭✭✭Cheerful S


    We nearly had world war 3 last week because Zelensky government military went rogue and targeted a position in Poland to drag them in. Zelensky's military lied to him in a false flag operation. That is why the Americans told him to stop. A missile was fired west by someone in that country to cause a major event. Here I just wanted to highlight that Ukraine went off reservation here this time. Thankfully, the Biden administration knew what was going on and spoke up. 

    It's a mystery to me how a anti air battery moves its radar west to stop a missile coming in from east. Why don't people in the media and debunkers seem to understand that part yet?



  • Registered Users Posts: 17,850 ✭✭✭✭Dohnjoe



    "Right so what's your evidence it was a controlled demolition?"

    -"I can't believe they collapsed due to fire, it must have been a demolition!"

    "Right so what's your evidence it was a controlled demolition?"

    -"I can't believe they collapsed due to fire, it must have been a demolition!"

    Hamster wheel



  • Registered Users Posts: 12,665 ✭✭✭✭The Nal


    You have not explained how they planted the nanothermite, so, you've explained nothing.

    Also where did "Mick West finally admit that truthers had valid points about column 79"?



  • Registered Users Posts: 25,232 ✭✭✭✭King Mob


    And looking like we're going back to his usual Russian propaganda rather than just outline the conspiracy theory.


    Pretty much the only consistent theory that has any detail and coherency is the space laser stuff.



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,245 ✭✭✭Cheerful S


    My reasons for believing nanothermite was used here simple because don't understand why isn't my concern.

    Try again. When, where, and what action formed the millions of iron droplets

    How do you explain RJ Lee's claim that happened during the building fires before collapse?

    No theory, just wasting time. 



  • Registered Users Posts: 25,232 ✭✭✭✭King Mob


    But RJ Lee proved that the thermite theory was impossible though.



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,245 ✭✭✭Cheerful S


    On Metabunk a couple of years ago (video), one of his posters referenced what he said recently past month. I posted that image on here a couple of weeks ago. Where that thread and post is unsure now.

    According to him, truthers' work on column 79 was comprehensive, and NIST left some details out.

    Then he went on a tangent that would not really have mattered: collapses here and there. That's complete rubbish As Mick knows NIST theory isn't really working, he's now trying to come up with a new theory outside of NIST's work collapse.



  • Registered Users Posts: 12,665 ✭✭✭✭The Nal


    Yeah just as I thought, he didn't say what you said he did. Another lie.

    Years you've been posting here, thousands of posts across multiple accounts yet you cant propose a theory or even answer reallly basic questions like how they could have actually started putting explosives into the 3 buildings. You literally havent a clue how it couldve happened, because it didnt.



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,245 ✭✭✭Cheerful S


    You are free to believe whatever you want. This post had been saved by me and in the post the poster on Metabunk ( Mick debunking site) includes a quote from his video. It is claimed by the poster quoted that NIST has nothing to answer for, and Sauron uses Mick's quote to prove this is false.

    I'm having trouble finding that video on Mick's page. He probably removed once people noticed the truthful comments.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 12,665 ✭✭✭✭The Nal


    Yeah, he didn't say what you claimed. You lied. And you've just exposed yourself.



Advertisement