user ballots
Login
Register
Add One
FAQ/Contact
Popular Ballots
Recent Popular
Recent Votes
Best
Worst
Yes or No
Choices
What If
Prediction
Advice
Would You
Crime
Recommend
Quiz
TV & Movie
Music & Radio
Political
Science
Sports
Relationship
Techonology
Culture
Philosophy
Religion
Ethics
History
Food & Health
Fashion & Beauty
Crime
FanBase
Discussion
Bug Report
|
COMMENTS:
Scientific Analysis Proves Towers Brought Down By Incendiaries
Steven Jones' analysis on WTC steel about to be released
Scientific analysis on WTC steel debris undertaken by BYU Professor Steven Jones proves that the twin towers were demolished by means of incendiary devices and the release of the conclusive evidence is imminent.
The material that was first brought into question on the back of photos and video clips of the twin towers showing a dripping molten substance and floating white ash can now be confirmed as being thermate, combining thermite which is used as an incendiary device to bring down structures and sulfur, which cuts through steel quicker and leaves a yellow residue.
Pools of molten yellow metal were also found underneath both towers and Building 7 subsequent to the collapses.
"The evidence points directly to controlled demolition which means an inside job brought these World Trade Center buildings down," Jones states.
Jones says that, "using advanced techniques we're finding out what's in these samples - we're finding iron, sulphur, potassium and manganese - these are characteristic of a variation of thermite which is used to cut through steel very rapidly, it's called thermate."
"In order to have thermite in these buildings in this way, to help bring the buildings down, that means that thermite had to be planted in the buildings which of course implies directly and inside job - someone had to have access into the buildings," said Jones.
Jones' has conducted over 40 peer reviewed scientific studies two of which were published in Nature and Scientific American.
Jones said that white phosphorous wasn't powerful enough to cause the implosion but that thermite was the likely culprit.
Alex Jones's 2005 release Martial Law 9/11 Rise of the Police State highlighted the physical evidence that the towers and Building 7 were brought down with incendiary devices.
Jones stated that thermite was a "clever" choice because its ingredients, aluminum and iron oxide do not require identifying tags by law, meaning they couldn't be traced back to their manufacturers.
Watch the following video and observe how thermite completely melts a car engine in a matter of seconds, without the addition of sulphur, and also completely resists neutralization by liquid nitrogen. Notice how the dripping substance is identical to that seen in the south tower video.
The following video highlights the fact that steaming hot molten metal was still being found at the World Trade Center site six weeks after the attack.
Jones also, "cited video pictures showing white ash rising from the south tower near the dripping, liquefied metal. When thermite burns, Jones said, it releases aluminum-oxide ash. The presence of both yellow-white molten iron and aluminum oxide ash "are signature characteristics of a thermite reaction," he said."
American Free Press writer Christopher Bollyn discusses evidence of thermite used to sever the twin tower's steel support columns in the picture below.
"In this photo, for example, the column directly above the fireman's helmet shows that it was cut with thermite. There is a substantial amount of hardened molten iron which can be seen on both the inside and outside of the box column. This is precisely what one would expect to find on a column which had been cut with thermite," says Bollyn.
White flames consistent with how thermite reacts producing molten iron and aluminum oxide are also visible in this photograph at the corner of the 81st floor of the south tower.
The USGS Spectroscopy Lab produced images which showed dense thermal hot spots days and weeks after the attacks.
ABC News reported that, "the temperature at the core of "the pile," is near 2000 degrees Fahrenheit, according to fire officials, who add that the fires are too deep for firefighters to get to."
Cool, I'll be sure to read the front page of the newspaper tomorrow to get the rest of this big breaking news story.
Alright Shill, you'll buy that with your earnings from the above post no doubt, how do you sleep at night?
I’ve given up trying to wake these people up. However I do have a question about the collapse of the twin towers. Why do all 7 towers of the wtc complex look like the same implosion when they collapsed? I can understand wtc 1 and 2 but the other towers weren’t even hit by a plane.
Just something for people who believe the governments account to ponder.
by seon on Sat Jul 29, 06 7:26pm
[+]
When I was at the grocery tonight they had proof that New Jersey was attacked by giant squid in the World Weekly News.
Al Qaeda planted the explosives.
Lol yeah al Qaeda could get into a heavily guarded building and plant explosives.
Thanks for giving me a good laugh apple.
by seon on Sun Jul 30, 06 3:30am
[+]
I have far more respect for what a respected professor has to say after two years of research than a bunch of traitor shills have to say;
Scientific analysis on WTC steel debris undertaken by BYU Professor Steven Jones proves that the twin towers were demolished by means of incendiary devices and the release of the conclusive evidence is imminent.
Those so called explosions you see in the video are actually the upper floors collasping on the lower floors causing debrit to blow out the widows.It could also be computers and other flamable objects exploding because of the intense heat.
Sure, and you can always find a professor somewhere that believes in Bigfoot, ghosts, reincarnation, UFO's with visiting aliens, witches, astrology, that the Holocaust didn't happen, and that the Jews control the world...
Really? I wouldn't like to know where you were educated then.
Anyway you would to stupid to understand the professors detailed analysis being to busy demonising people of another religion all over this website and wherever else you spread your hate promoting poison.
Here Corrupt and Jinn the Racist, seen as you obviously have the attention span of a goldfish and probably the intellect too, I'll post this esteemed professors analysis for you again, and it's backed up by hundreds of other professors, see scholars for 9/11 truth;
Watch the video too, if you can stomach it.
Scientific Analysis Proves Towers Brought Down By Incendiaries
Steven Jones' analysis on WTC steel about to be released
Scientific analysis on WTC steel debris undertaken by BYU Professor Steven Jones proves that the twin towers were demolished by means of incendiary devices and the release of the conclusive evidence is imminent.
The material that was first brought into question on the back of photos and video clips of the twin towers showing a dripping molten substance and floating white ash can now be confirmed as being thermate, combining thermite which is used as an incendiary device to bring down structures and sulfur, which cuts through steel quicker and leaves a yellow residue.
Pools of molten yellow metal were also found underneath both towers and Building 7 subsequent to the collapses.
"The evidence points directly to controlled demolition which means an inside job brought these World Trade Center buildings down," Jones states.
Jones says that, "using advanced techniques we're finding out what's in these samples - we're finding iron, sulphur, potassium and manganese - these are characteristic of a variation of thermite which is used to cut through steel very rapidly, it's called thermate."
"In order to have thermite in these buildings in this way, to help bring the buildings down, that means that thermite had to be planted in the buildings which of course implies directly and inside job - someone had to have access into the buildings," said Jones.
Jones' has conducted over 40 peer reviewed scientific studies two of which were published in Nature and Scientific American.
Jones said that white phosphorous wasn't powerful enough to cause the implosion but that thermite was the likely culprit.
Alex Jones's 2005 release Martial Law 9/11 Rise of the Police State highlighted the physical evidence that the towers and Building 7 were brought down with incendiary devices.
Jones stated that thermite was a "clever" choice because its ingredients, aluminum and iron oxide do not require identifying tags by law, meaning they couldn't be traced back to their manufacturers.
Watch the following video and observe how thermite completely melts a car engine in a matter of seconds, without the addition of sulphur, and also completely resists neutralization by liquid nitrogen. Notice how the dripping substance is identical to that seen in the south tower video.
The following video highlights the fact that steaming hot molten metal was still being found at the World Trade Center site six weeks after the attack.
Jones also, "cited video pictures showing white ash rising from the south tower near the dripping, liquefied metal. When thermite burns, Jones said, it releases aluminum-oxide ash. The presence of both yellow-white molten iron and aluminum oxide ash "are signature characteristics of a thermite reaction," he said."
American Free Press writer Christopher Bollyn discusses evidence of thermite used to sever the twin tower's steel support columns in the picture below.
"In this photo, for example, the column directly above the fireman's helmet shows that it was cut with thermite. There is a substantial amount of hardened molten iron which can be seen on both the inside and outside of the box column. This is precisely what one would expect to find on a column which had been cut with thermite," says Bollyn.
White flames consistent with how thermite reacts producing molten iron and aluminum oxide are also visible in this photograph at the corner of the 81st floor of the south tower.
The USGS Spectroscopy Lab produced images which showed dense thermal hot spots days and weeks after the attacks.
ABC News reported that, "the temperature at the core of "the pile," is near 2000 degrees Fahrenheit, according to fire officials, who add that the fires are too deep for firefighters to get to."
First of all, you Ken_from_Dublin, have no clue about what you claim to know. What you know is only what others say and write. You are not yourself a conspiracy theorist, but merely a dupe of the conspiracy theorists. Conspiracy theories cannot survive without the dupes.
Secondly, nobody here is listening to you, but you are too naive and brainwashed to realize that. But if you cant distinguish fact from fiction, how could you.
Thirdly, nobody is saying you should stop. I know I'm not. However, you must at least use a little of whatever common sense you may have left, to recognize that one cannot go about spreading the wild stories of conspiracies created by others, and not expect to be ridiculed for it. Do you honestly believe everyone is supposed to swallow the crap you dupes spread? Common, wake up! Intelligent people aren't listening to the conspiracy creators, so why should they listen too their dupes?
And lastly, arrogance is not going to help your cause. Telling people they are uneducated and stupid simply because they don't buy into the tales of the conspiracy theorists, as the dupes do, is not lending you much credibilty. No one ever said being a professor dosn't make one intelligent. However, educated people do dumb things and can have negative agendas. Some well educated people, like Doctors, professors, politicians, lawyers etc can be too lazy to look beyond their own back yard and simply react against who, or what they oppose, out of malice, envy and prejudice. They are just more clever and creative at creating negativity. Later they rely on dupes like you to carry out the rest of their dirty work.
I don't buy into the tales of the conspiracy theorists either, because why would any sane person believe in those crazy impossibilities that the "Arabs did it" conspiracy theorists keep pushing all the time. Like the insane claim that steel & concrete tower buildings can collapse atnear freefall speed straight-down without being a controlled demolition. I dare you to cite a single event in the entire history of steel & concrete tower buildings where they could do that, because IT HAS NEVER HAPPENED. The "Arabs did it" conspiracy theorists want to pretend that the WTC collapses did not involve the use of explosives, well obviously they did, and an increasing number of academics and engineers internationally are outright saying "Those were controlled demolitions". We can clearly see the explosionsof the demoition charges going off floor-by-floor, in straight lines, in the slow motion video capture.
You remind me of neothe1 who keeps trying to say "Believe me, not your eyes" with his absurd claims about that obviously fake "Osama Confession Video" where he keeps trying to tell everyone that some FAT NOSE and ROUND HEADED stocky little fat guy is really Osama bin Laden despite what people can see with their own eyes. He's a complete nutter!
Then there's the other favourite of the "Arabs did it" conspracy theorists when they keep trying to claim that cellphone calls can be made from passenger planes flying six miles up at over 450mph. Well, they can't, despite these conspiracy theory nutcases claims, in fact it's IMPOSSIBLE without the plane having a cellular basestation onboard, a technology which didn't exist on any plane prior to 2004, and even now is extremely rare. The "Arabs did it" conspiracy theory lunatics also try to claim that minutes-long cellphone calls are possible from a plane moving at over 450mph (even at low altitude), which is ridiculous because it's been scientically proven that the calls will ALWAYS drop out within a few seconds. Moving at 450mph, the cellphone is only in the "cell" of a large countryside cellular network antenna's zone for 23 seconds, subtracting time for the handshake (15-48 seconds) to make a connection, and optimistically the call can only last 8 seconds MAXIMUM before being cutoff. There is no time for the call to be passed onto the next "cell" with another handshake connection. On freeways in the USA, the cellular antennas have to be specially setup to cope with vehicles moving at 70mph, and those in other area are only designed to cope with speeds upto 55mph. Of course, this means that the cellphone calls that the "Arabs did it" conspiracy theorists claim were made from passenger planes flying at cruising altitude on Sept 11 2001, being impossible, could only be faked calls. The technology to fake other people's voices has been around for years, and if you look up the "Hi Mom, it's me" scam with google, you'll find that it's easy to lie and pretend to be a close relative, without any need for voice-faking technology.
Even if people like ken and me are kooks you cant deny that the American government was warned by Israel, who said large scale terrorist attacks were likely. Congress was warned that Osama was planning an attack 2 months before 911, the Philippines warned The FBI of a terrorist plot to hijack commercial planes and slam them into the Pentagon, the CIA headquarters and other buildings 6 years before 911, the taleban warned America that Osama was planning an attack on American soil, the Germans warned the CIA that Middle Eastern terrorists were planning to hijack commercial aircraft and use them as weapons to attack “American and Israeli symbols which stand out.”, George Tenet wrote an intelligence summary to Condeleezza Rice stating: “It is highly likely that a significant al-Qaeda attack is in the near future, within several weeks” which was shared by senior bush officials in July, the FAA were warned to increase their security measures, in june-july 2001 bush and chaney and national security attended briefings with subjects such as “Bin Laden Threats Are Real” and “Bin Laden Planning High Profile Attacks.” After Mohamed Atta returned cbs reported Egyptian intelligence said 20 al-Qaeda members had slipped into the US and four of them had received flight training on Cessnas.” Egypt passed on the message to the CIA but never received a request for further information, in august Bush received a briefing called Bin Laden Determined to Strike in US, Britain also warned America that specified multiple airplane hijackings were about to occur, Jordanian intelligence warned Washington and said that a major attack, code-named “The Big Wedding,” had been planned inside the US and that aircraft would be used. According to Newsweek, 9/17/01 On September 10, 2001, a group of top Pentagon officials received an urgent warning which prompted them to cancel their flight plans for the following morning. and lets not forget able danger or Willie browns warning. All these facts can be proven. We know from this that Bush was at least aware that some sort of attack by Osama was being planned and he did nothing to increase security or try and stop him in fact he even told the Fbi to “back of” the Binladen’s. Why? Because America needed a “new pearl harbour”
by seon on Sun Jul 30, 06 6:26pm
[+]
Yes of course the government is killing its own people and destroying its own country while framing the whole event on the arabs, so that they can take over the world. Please tell me that your joking ???
You can not possibly base facts off a video that shows absolutely nothing and a proffessor that could have very well downloaded his degree off the internet.
Absolute absurdity if you ask me.
oh and that was to jin btw
by seon on Sun Jul 30, 06 6:27pm
[+]
Whets absurd is the idea that no one in the bush administration was warned binladen was planning an attack. When the evidence clearly proves that it was.
by seon on Sun Jul 30, 06 6:47pm
[+]
warning or no warning is one matter but to state as fact that the US government blew up the twin towers, based on a video, which i will once again state shows nothing, and the ramblings of some proffesor, is in my books ridiculous.
Why one would start up such a comotion over utter nonsense is beyond me.
Do you honestly believe that this "evidence" would hold up in a court of law ?
The BYU physics department has issued a statement: "The university is aware that Professor Steven Jones's hypotheses and interpretations of evidence regarding the collapse of the World Trade Center buildings are being questioned by a number of scholars and practiitioners,including many of BYU's own faculty.Professor Jones' department and college administrators are not convinced that his analyses and hypothese have been submitted to relevant scientific venues that would ensure rigorous technical peer review."
So at best Kevin you can claim that this report is one possible theory on the collaspe but not solid,vetted proof that the trade towers were brought down by explosions.
Although I will admit that the molten metal found pooring out of the buildings and at the bottom of the S.Tower has yet to be explained by the critics of the C.Ts.One possible alertnative theory is that the molten metal is actually molten aluminium from the planes themselves.However according to Prof Jones the molten metal could not be molten aluminium because molten aluminium is a poor conductor and could not reach temperatures that would turn the aluminium yellow.
Hey folks we have a bit of history and perhaps progress, Jinn the Kafir made a comment that didn't mention Islam and all it's evils!
Now why don't you stop attacking me and Islam and address the the facts that I highlight in the ballot, shoot down the facts that the professor details and not the messenger of these facts please if you're so clever - in your next post here please -> -> ->
I believe without a doubt the most damning piece of evidence goes as follows-
I LIKE TATOR TOTS!
{Yes of course the government is killing its own people and destroying its own country while framing the whole event on the arabs, so that they can take over the world.
by babcia on Jul 30, 2006 6:26pm}
Google Operation Northwoods
Remember Waco
Remember the Gulf of Tonkin incident.
Keep in mind the fact that the USA government has sent thousands of men to Iraq who have consequently died in the cause of war based on lies abotut WMDs, and keep in mind who has profited most from this war (Dick Cheney's shares went up 3600% for example). The rich guys in the USA government don't seem to bothered, and I don't see the Bush family sending their own kids to die in Iraq, but they don't mind anyone else's dying or being crippled for life.
And despite all your excuses, the WTC buildings collapsing in the way that they did, could ONLY be from controlled demolitions, and cellphones CAN NOT makesuccessful calls from passenger jets flying six miles up at over 450mph. So, considering these things, it's plain as can be that the USA government not only lied, but some faction of it was directly involved in the carrying out of 9/11.
" Jinn the Kafir made a comment that didn't mention Islam and all it's evils!"
??? I'm in shock! 
Although lovely is just a big fat jerk he’s right. Wikipedia has a section on the northwood documents. Also maybe you should read up on operation ajax, the CIA’s own website admits it. https //www cia gov/ csi/ studies/ vol48no2/ article10 html
Just replace the spaces with dots (unless its after a /) or type it in yourself. at least babcia is is open to the warnings, I’ll give him that.
by seon on Sun Jul 30, 06 10:26pm
[+]
Lovelynice you nelegect to mention that most of the calls made from the passenger jets were made by airphone and not cell phones.So the passengers and crew could have still made those calls on 9/11.Stop watching Loose Change it is full of nonsense.
That's pure bullshit and you know it corrupt (the truth), most of those calls were claimed to be from their cell phones, which is impossible as you have just implied by stating they were from airphones, so get your facts right before trying to corrupt the truth.
Now stop using diversionary tactics and use your brilliant mind to debunk the professors findings point for point, come on!
Jinn the KafiRacist doesn't seem to have any ideas, so how about you Corrupt? -> -> ->
Corrupt, you live upto your username well.
ALL OF THESE CELLPHONE CALLS WERE IMPOSSIBLE AND THEREFORE FAKE
CeeCee Lyles: CELLPHONE - Her husband Lorne Lyles who managed to take her second call reported that he saw her ID therefore we can assume that she used a cell phone. A flight attendant using a cell phone is of course extremely strange given the fact that she should very well know that there are airphones aboard and it is much more likely to come through using this kind of phone. Call 1: Beginning: 9:47, Length: unclear as no indication what she left as a message on her answering machine. But we can assume from the fact that she managed to leave a message that the length was at least: 15’. Call 2: 9:58, Length: 1’ 00’’ (my estimation based on accounts of the call). She got disconnected.
post-gazette . com / headlines / 20011028flt93lylesbiop8 . asp
election . cbsnews . com / stories / 2001 / 09 / 12 / national / main310935 . shtml
Jeremy Glick, 31, from West Milford, New Jersey, He called his wife, Liz, and in-laws in New York on a CELLPHONE to tell them the plane had been hijacked
cnn . com / SPECIALS / 2001 / trade . center / victims / ua93.victims . html
msnbc . com / news / 627214 . asp
Elizabeth Wainio - CELLPHONE
msnbc . msn . com / id / 3067652
Thomas E. Burnett Jr - CELLPHONE 3-4 calls
usatoday . com / news / nation / 2001 / 09 / 11 /victims-capsules . htm
post-gazette . com/headlines / 20010913somersetnat 3p3 . asp
Lauren Grandcolas, her husband said his wife made a quick CELLPHONE call before the plane crashed in Pennsylvania.
usatoday . com / news / nation / 2001 / 09 / 11 / victims-capsules . htm
Sandra Bradshaw - CELLPHONE
webcache . news-record . com / legacy / photo / tradecenter / bradshaw21 . htm
Marion Britton - 13 minutes call from a CELLPHONE
post-gazette.com / headlines / 20010922 gtenat 4p4 . asp
WOW, A WHOLE THIRTEEN MINUTES!!!
What amazingly unbelievable MAGIC CELLPHONES they had on those planes back in 2001 - flying along at 500mph, at a speed where it's impossible for the phone to maintain a connection anyway for longer than a few seconds, and these amazing MAGIC CELLPHONES haven't any problems with reality at all.
BARBARA OLSON CALL
On the American Airlines Flight 77 from Washington, television reporter Barbara Olson, 46, locked herself in the lavatory to call her husband, Solicitor General Theodore Olson.
(I GUESS THAT AIRPHONE HAD AN EXTRA LONG EXTENSION CORD!!!) The cord on an airphone will not reach into the bathroom, this suggests she was using a CELLPHONE.
CELLPHONES in planes don't work over 5-10,000 ft and inside a sealed bathroom would insert an extra 3-6 dB of loss. that means signal quality, which would have been nearly impossibe anyway would have been cut to 1/3 to 1/6th strength. (Ted states that the quality of the connection was CLEAR !)
( I would be happy if someone would verify the airphone reach of the cord- to the bathroom on a 757) According to the BBC, she used a CELLPHONE news . bbc . co . uk / 1 / hi / world / americas / 1539193 . stm
EDWARD FELT CELLPHONE CALL
The alleged call (strangely not mentioned in the 9-11 Commision Report) by Edward Felt from the toilet of the aircraft of UAL 93 was answered by Glenn Cramer, the emergency supervisor in Pennsylvania who took the call.
"Local emergency officials said they received a CELLPHONE call at 9.58 am from a man who said he was a passenger aboard the flight. The man said he had locked himself in the bathroom and told emergency dispatchers that the plane had been hijacked. "We are being hijacked! We are being hijacked!" he was quoted as saying.
Glenn Cramer has now been gagged by the FBI.
pittsburghlive . com / x / tribune-review / news / s_90401 . htm
I can post a few more if you like, but they were all impossible and therefore fake anyway.
Now, let's see if you can debate properly on the evidence for controlled demolitions of the WTC buildings, and the scientific analysis which discovered traces of thermate on the steel.
From wikipedia "Though the film (Loose Change) briefly mentions that calls can be and were MADE USING THE PLANES INSTALLED GTE AIRPHONES,it does not explore this further;especially noted as lacking is the ratio of calls placed with this system as opposed to cell phones,despite the fact that many of the cited calls (including many of the calls you mentioned Lovely) were made using the in-flight phone system.
As for thermite being used to cut the columns in the WTC,since the WTC has support coulums that are both vertical and horizontal the thermite would have to be able to cut side ways which it can not.Moreover the "molten steel" we see flowing from the South tower in Prof.Jones photos is probably molten alumium from the plan itself.
'Moreover the "molten steel" we see flowing from the South tower in Prof.Jones photos is probably molten aluminium from the plan (plan instead of plane - Freudian slip? - Ken) itself.'
- Corrupt, AKA Mr.'I know more about thermodynamics and metallurgic properties than a professor who has studied it all his life'
Absolute ballsology, Aluminium does not turn yellow when molten - it just melts and stays grey/silver because it has such a low melting point!
This from the same loonies who tell us that the planes aluminium hulls vaporised on impact!
More fruit looping!
Read my homepage Corrupt, it describes the kind of circular self- contradictory arguments you Fruit looper shills get up to all over the internet.
From wikipedia by Corrupt on Jul 31, 2006 10:30am
Wikipedia, the encyclopedia that any idiot can edit.
Do you ha eva CREDIBLE source, corrupt?
And the cellphone calls that I cited were just that, ALLEGED cellphone calls, and they impossible, and therefore FAKE.
By the way, I have never seen "Loose Change"
Now, corrupt, can you debate in support of your claims about the WTC controlled demolitions, and why you couldn't recognise a controlled demolition if it fell on you (rather like neohte1 can't tell MrFatNose from Osama bin Laden and displays horrible brain damage in the area of facial recognition He's well on his to mistaking umbrellas for women and starting sexual relations with them).
Ken look carefully at the photo of the molten metal failing down out of the South Tower.If you look at the last "drops" of the metal you can see that it has turned a gray/silver color.Could this be the molten alumium that the Prof describes?
Also if thermite was used to cut the columns in the buildings why didn't we see any molten streams of metal going vertically to cut the vertical columns?After all the WTC has both vertical and horizontal support columns and if you wanted to bring the building down you would have to cut both.
I may not be a prof Ken but I know a ridiculous arguement when I hear one.The professors own department at BYU does not support his claims;doesn't that concern you?
911 Demo: BYU's
Prof Jones Has Wide
Academic Support
BYU Professor Has Plenty of Company in the Academic Community,
Including 60 Faculty Members from Two Utah Universities
Who Concur a Controlled Demolition Most Likely Brought
Down the WTC and Further Investigation Is Needed
Professor Steven E. Jones is another in the long line of conservatives in the political and academic world joining the 9/11 truth movement and asking to open up further investigations on the true cause of 9/11.
The BYU physics professor who believes the WTC collapsed from a controlled demolition isn't alone in the academic community, as a group of more than 60 colleagues from two universities also agreed with Professor Steven E. Jones' conclusions.
Jones told the Arctic Beacon Saturday in a telephone conversation from Provo, Utah, he first presented his explosive conclusions at Brigham Young University (BYU) on September 22, to 60 people from the BYU and Utah Valley State College faculties, including professors of Engineering, Electrical Engineering, Geology, Mathematics and Psychology.
After presently scientific arguments in favor of the controlled demolition theory, Jones said everyone in attendance from all backgrounds, conservative and liberal, were in total agreement further investigation was needed.
"I was quite surprised how my conclusions were received," said Jones, adding he plans to give two continue telling the public how he came to his startling conclusions essentially ripping apart the official government story that jet fuel brought down the towers, including Building 7.
"In fact, after I researched how Building 7 fell, I am certain there existed pre-positioned explosives to bring down the three buildings."
Jones added that the contingent of faculty members at the September seminar were all in agreement that the government needed to "come clean" and release more that 6,900 photographs and close to 7,000 segments of video footage, now being held from independent investigation by the FBI and other agencies.
Since day one, the Bush administration has safely guarded much of the 9/11evidence, including the WTC steel hauled away by FEMA and eye-witness testimony of basement explosions censored by the 9/11 Commission and the state sponsored press, as well as discrediting many other scientists or academics like Jones who have disagreed with the official story.
"We are calling for the release of all the data, including the videos and photos, in order that a cross-disciplinary, preferably international team of scientists and engineers can reach an independent conclusion," said Jones, adding all 60 professors in attendance agreed with this course of action.
"Since I decided to come forward with my findings, I have found the people in the 9/11 community very supportive and helpful. I hope my contribution will one day help get at the truth of what really happened and specifically how the towers collapsed."
Jones' theory on the way the towers collapsed was presented in a 9,000 word formal paper already approved for publication in an upcoming academic journal. The following is a partial explanation of how and why he came to his conclusions that the WTC most likely collapsed due to pre-positioned explosives. He writes:
"In writing this paper, I call for a serious investigation of the hypothesis that WTC 7 and the Twin Towers were brought down, not just by damage and fires, but through the use of pre-positioned explosives.
"I consider the official FEMA, NIST, and 9-11 Commission reports that fires plus damage alone caused complete collapses of all three buildings. And I present evidence for the explosive-demolition hypothesis, which is suggested by the available data, testable and falsifiable, and yet has not been analyzed in any of the reports funded by the US government.
And the reasoning behind his conclusions can be summed up as follows:
* The three buildings collapsed nearly symmetrically, falling down into their footprints, a phenomenon associated with "controlled demolition" - and even then it's very difficult, he says. "Why would terrorists undertake straight-down collapses of WTC-7 and the Towers when 'toppling over' falls would require much less work and would do much more damage in downtown Manhattan?" Jones asks. "And where would they obtain the necessary skills and access to the buildings for a symmetrical implosion anyway? The 'symmetry data' emphasized here, along with other data, provide strong evidence for an 'inside' job."
* No steel-frame building, before or after the WTC buildings, has ever collapsed due to fire. But explosives can effectively sever steel columns, he says.
* WTC 7, which was not hit by hijacked planes, collapsed in 6.6 seconds, just .6 of a second longer than it would take an object dropped from the roof to hit the ground. "Where is the delay that must be expected due to conservation of momentum, one of the foundational laws of physics?" he asks. "That is, as upper-falling floors strike lower floors - and intact steel support columns - the fall must be significantly impeded by the impacted mass. . . . How do the upper floors fall so quickly, then, and still conserve momentum in the collapsing buildings?" The paradox, he says, "is easily resolved by the explosive demolition hypothesis, whereby explosives quickly removed lower-floor material, including steel support columns, and allow near free-fall-speed collapses." These observations were not analyzed by FEMA, NIST nor the 9/11 Commission, he says.
* With non-explosive-caused collapse there would typically be a piling up of shattering concrete. But most of the material in the towers was converted to flour-like powder while the buildings were falling, he says. "How can we understand this strange behavior, without explosives? Remarkable, amazing - and demanding scrutiny since the U.S. government-funded reports failed to analyze this phenomenon."
* Horizontal puffs of smoke, known as squibs, were observed proceeding up the side the building, a phenomenon common when pre-positioned explosives are used to demolish buildings, he says.
* Steel supports were "partly evaporated," but it would require temperatures near 5,000 degrees Fahrenheit to evaporate steel - and neither office materials nor diesel fuel can generate temperatures that hot. Fires caused by jet fuel from the hijacked planes lasted at most a few minutes, and office material fires would burn out within about 20 minutes in any given location, he says.
* Molten metal found in the debris of the World Trade Center may have been the result of a high-temperature reaction of a commonly used explosive such as thermite, he says. Buildings not felled by explosives "have insufficient directed energy to result in melting of large quantities of metal," Jones says.
* Multiple loud explosions in rapid sequence were reported by numerous observers in and near the towers, and these explosions occurred far below the region where the planes struck, he says.
For Jones' full report go to www.physics.byu.edu/research/energy/htm7.html.
ccdominoes. com/ lc/ 911_loose _change _2_guide_1. doc
I watched that laughable garbage before, it's full of half truths and contradictions and fails miserably in it's attempts to debunk the truths that are at the core of Loose Change.
'Painful Deceptions' is another brilliant 9/11 truth documentary folks you can see it here at
http:// fpiarticle. blogspot. com/2006/ 04/911- painful-deceptions .html
Just remove the five spaces to view.
Don't forget to view this
youtube. com/watch? v=Ic28I IBE-V8
The camera never lies!
your eyes can decieve you, don't trust them
"History shows that even the greatest minds can construct theories that work but that have one minor flaw- -they are completely erroneous".
Brian L. Silver, The Ascent of Science
** karma **
Edmund Burke:
All that is necessary for evil to succeed is that good men do nothing.
Only difference about your irrelevant quote Jinn is that this isn't some absrtract 'theory' that these professors and academics stand over - it is a theory/conclusion based on hard evidence after two years of study, so you can stick that quote were the sun don't shine - which is your whole world.
"All that is necessary for evil to succeed is that good men do nothing."
and that's what you're counting on
This good man is exposing you shills for the lie mercenaries taht you are!
What are you doing you Judas evil shill apart from lying on behalf of PNAC for your 30 pieces of shillver?
still using that word, still not knowing that the only application of it in this coversation is your use of sockpuppet accounts.
So Bush knew in advance Neothe1, and it was because of Iraq you reckon.
Please tell everyone a bit more about these beliefs you have that you let out of the bag on one of my other ballots?
Let's debate them, would Jinn the Kafir agree with you neothe1?
i have no beliefs, murderer.
So why did you post these beliefs on the internet?
see last comment.
But that doesn't answer anything - just states you have no beliefs at all about anything which doesn't surprise dehumanised PNAC zonbie that you are,
soooooo... Again I ask you -
So you stated that Bush knew well in advance neothe1, and it was because of Iraq you reckon.
Please tell everyone a bit more about these stated beliefs of yours that you let out of the bag on one of my other ballots?
Let's debate them, would Jinn the Kafir or FiddlefaddleonLSD agree with you on that neothe1?
||
That's not good enough.
It still doesn't answer anything - just states you have no beliefs at all about anything which doesn't surprise me dehumanised PNAC zombie that you are,
soooooo... YET again I ask you neothe1-
So you stated that Bush knew well in advance neothe1, and it was because of Iraq you reckon.
Please tell everyone a bit more about these stated beliefs of yours that you let out of the bag on one of my other ballots?
Let's debate them, would Jinn the Kafir, Nipple or FiddlefaddleonLSD agree with you on that neothe1?
** karma **
annoying, isn't it? and observe how it in no way helps my argument.
That's STILL not good enough you karma block head!
It still doesn't answer anything - just states you have no karma and no beliefs at all about anything which doesn't surprise me dehumanised PNAC zombie that you are! (o:
soooooo... YET again I ask you neothe1-
So you stated that Bush knew well in advance neothe1, and it was because of Iraq you reckon.
Please tell everyone a bit more about these stated beliefs of yours that you let out of the bag on one of my other ballots?
Let's debate them, would Jinn the Kafir, Felix, Nipple or FiddlefaddleonLSD agree with you on that neothe1?
annoying, isn't it? and observe how it in no way helps my argument
EXACTLY! Now stop avoiding the question and face up to your STATED beliefs neothe!
They are down here on record!
Why do you believe Bush knew in advance and failed to act to protect his people?
Why do you believe Iraq had something to do with it neothe1? -> -
"Ignorance is preferable to error, and he is less remote from the truth who believes nothing than he who believes what is wrong." -Thomas Jefferson
EXACTLY!
All the more reason for you to stop avoiding the question and face up to your STATED beliefs neothe!
They are down here on record!
Why do you believe Bush knew in advance and failed to act to protect his people?
Why do you believe Iraq had something to do with it neothe1? ->
(By the way, I'm sure Thomas Jefferson is turning in his grave having a traitor shill like you quoting his words)
** karma **
911 Demo: BYU's
Prof Jones Has Wide
Academic Support
BYU Professor Has Plenty of Company in the Academic Community,
Including 60 Faculty Members from Two Utah Universities
Who Concur a Controlled Demolition Most Likely Brought
Down the WTC and Further Investigation Is Needed
Professor Steven E. Jones is another in the long line of conservatives in the political and academic world joining the 9/11 truth movement and asking to open up further investigations on the true cause of 9/11.
The BYU physics professor who believes the WTC collapsed from a controlled demolition isn't alone in the academic community, as a group of more than 60 colleagues from two universities also agreed with Professor Steven E. Jones' conclusions.
Jones told the Arctic Beacon Saturday in a telephone conversation from Provo, Utah, he first presented his explosive conclusions at Brigham Young University (BYU) on September 22, to 60 people from the BYU and Utah Valley State College faculties, including professors of Engineering, Electrical Engineering, Geology, Mathematics and Psychology.
After presently scientific arguments in favor of the controlled demolition theory, Jones said everyone in attendance from all backgrounds, conservative and liberal, were in total agreement further investigation was needed.
"I was quite surprised how my conclusions were received," said Jones, adding he plans to give two continue telling the public how he came to his startling conclusions essentially ripping apart the official government story that jet fuel brought down the towers, including Building 7.
"In fact, after I researched how Building 7 fell, I am certain there existed pre-positioned explosives to bring down the three buildings."
Jones added that the contingent of faculty members at the September seminar were all in agreement that the government needed to "come clean" and release more that 6,900 photographs and close to 7,000 segments of video footage, now being held from independent investigation by the FBI and other agencies.
Since day one, the Bush administration has safely guarded much of the 9/11evidence, including the WTC steel hauled away by FEMA and eye-witness testimony of basement explosions censored by the 9/11 Commission and the state sponsored press, as well as discrediting many other scientists or academics like Jones who have disagreed with the official story.
"We are calling for the release of all the data, including the videos and photos, in order that a cross-disciplinary, preferably international team of scientists and engineers can reach an independent conclusion," said Jones, adding all 60 professors in attendance agreed with this course of action.
"Since I decided to come forward with my findings, I have found the people in the 9/11 community very supportive and helpful. I hope my contribution will one day help get at the truth of what really happened and specifically how the towers collapsed."
Jones' theory on the way the towers collapsed was presented in a 9,000 word formal paper already approved for publication in an upcoming academic journal. The following is a partial explanation of how and why he came to his conclusions that the WTC most likely collapsed due to pre-positioned explosives. He writes:
"In writing this paper, I call for a serious investigation of the hypothesis that WTC 7 and the Twin Towers were brought down, not just by damage and fires, but through the use of pre-positioned explosives.
"I consider the official FEMA, NIST, and 9-11 Commission reports that fires plus damage alone caused complete collapses of all three buildings. And I present evidence for the explosive-demolition hypothesis, which is suggested by the available data, testable and falsifiable, and yet has not been analyzed in any of the reports funded by the US government.
And the reasoning behind his conclusions can be summed up as follows:
* The three buildings collapsed nearly symmetrically, falling down into their footprints, a phenomenon associated with "controlled demolition" - and even then it's very difficult, he says. "Why would terrorists undertake straight-down collapses of WTC-7 and the Towers when 'toppling over' falls would require much less work and would do much more damage in downtown Manhattan?" Jones asks. "And where would they obtain the necessary skills and access to the buildings for a symmetrical implosion anyway? The 'symmetry data' emphasized here, along with other data, provide strong evidence for an 'inside' job."
* No steel-frame building, before or after the WTC buildings, has ever collapsed due to fire. But explosives can effectively sever steel columns, he says.
* WTC 7, which was not hit by hijacked planes, collapsed in 6.6 seconds, just .6 of a second longer than it would take an object dropped from the roof to hit the ground. "Where is the delay that must be expected due to conservation of momentum, one of the foundational laws of physics?" he asks. "That is, as upper-falling floors strike lower floors - and intact steel support columns - the fall must be significantly impeded by the impacted mass. . . . How do the upper floors fall so quickly, then, and still conserve momentum in the collapsing buildings?" The paradox, he says, "is easily resolved by the explosive demolition hypothesis, whereby explosives quickly removed lower-floor material, including steel support columns, and allow near free-fall-speed collapses." These observations were not analyzed by FEMA, NIST nor the 9/11 Commission, he says.
* With non-explosive-caused collapse there would typically be a piling up of shattering concrete. But most of the material in the towers was converted to flour-like powder while the buildings were falling, he says. "How can we understand this strange behavior, without explosives? Remarkable, amazing - and demanding scrutiny since the U.S. government-funded reports failed to analyze this phenomenon."
* Horizontal puffs of smoke, known as squibs, were observed proceeding up the side the building, a phenomenon common when pre-positioned explosives are used to demolish buildings, he says.
* Steel supports were "partly evaporated," but it would require temperatures near 5,000 degrees Fahrenheit to evaporate steel - and neither office materials nor diesel fuel can generate temperatures that hot. Fires caused by jet fuel from the hijacked planes lasted at most a few minutes, and office material fires would burn out within about 20 minutes in any given location, he says.
* Molten metal found in the debris of the World Trade Center may have been the result of a high-temperature reaction of a commonly used explosive such as thermite, he says. Buildings not felled by explosives "have insufficient directed energy to result in melting of large quantities of metal," Jones says.
* Multiple loud explosions in rapid sequence were reported by numerous observers in and near the towers, and these explosions occurred far below the region where the planes struck, he says.
For Jones' full report go to-
www.physics. byu.edu/ research/energy/ htm7.html.
i
have
no
beliefs
neothe1-the-shill, if you had no beliefs then why do you spend so much effort and time defending them?
if i have no beliefs, it follows that i do not defend my nonexistant beliefs. you as a biased fuck would not understand this
Except that you do go around defending your beliefs, which follows that you have them.
no, i state and defend my opinions. i have no beliefs.
but again, you are a biased fuck and will not understand this.
Can I apologise on behalf of real men everywhere Lovelynice for this spineless creep's foul language and abuse at you.
So you claim to have no beliefs Neothe1 then, but you do have opinions...
Hmmmmm...
Please enlighten us as to why you are of the opinion that Bush knew about the 9/11 attacks in advance yet failed to protect America and it's people whom he was elected to defend - but chose to betray and allwed them to be murdered ???
And why are you of the opinion it was something to do with Iraq???
Please expand on these 'opinions' of yours please -> -> ->
i've already explained it several times, murderer.
Explained it neothe1???
Explained what?
Where have you explained your opinions neothe1?
Because I can't find your explanations anywhere....
Sure maybe you might be so kind as to outline your explanations here as to why you are of the opinion that Bush knew in advance and allowed this massacre of your countrymen to take place -
- and why you are of the opinion that his refusal to save his fellow American's lives was something to do with Iraq ->
Explain the above opinions of yours here neothe1 ->
"the hijackers did act alone, they hijacked 4 planes ad flew 3 of them into buildings while another crashed, and 2 of those buildings collapsed because of it. that is fact. it is also fact that the bush administration had recieved countless warnings from intelligence agencies all over the world warning of al-qaeda using planes as missiles to target american landmarks, yet they did nothing. they then used those attacks, when they finally happened, to justify an invasion of a third world country, and they made absolutely zero effort to pursue osama bin laden. they then used those killings as a way to get the collective american bloodstream boiling enough that they'd buy whatever bullshit they fed them about WMDs in iraq, (all of which had either been destroyed or transferred outtside of iraq, to syria as i recall, but i may be mistaken, before the invasion) so they could invade, without UN support, a country they planned to invade since before they took office, for no legitimate reason, and then they proceeded to botch the invasion and the war, which is still going on 3 years after they declared victory. those are also facts. those are the facts they are trying to mislead you from with claims of missiles and demlitions and yellow cake. ken is trying to defend the murders of thousands upon thousands of american, iraqi and afghani civilians and soldiers. that makes him a murderer in my book."
"you are supporting the peoiple who allowed thousad of THEIR OWN PEOPLE to be slaughtered just so they could head off to 2, count them, 2, third world countries and bomb the bejeezus out of them in the name of profit. those are the people you are serving! "
Thank you neothe1 - that is like manna from Heaven -
The mask has finally slipped.
You are the weakest link -
your fellow lie mercenary shills are going to metaphorically kill you for that, wait till neothe2 and 3 see this when they come on their 8 hour shifts, you are in BIG trouble neothe1.
Ask yourself - is it worth it for $12.50 an hour - the gulit and all that, there has to be an easier way to make a living son.
So you had beliefs all along - but lied, denying you believed these things, but at laest you are responding well to treatment.
i have no beliefs.
Alright traitor shill, I smoked you out of your hole, a $12.50 an hour lie prostitute - shame on you.
The most money your limited intellect would allow you to earn in your life.
i take it you don't have the slightest concept of socratic philosophy or scientific method. but as you're a right-winger, that goes without saying.
'...it is also fact that the bush administration had recieved countless warnings from intelligence agencies all over the world warning of al-qaeda using planes as missiles to target american landmarks, yet they did nothing.
they then used those attacks, when they finally happened, to justify an invasion of a third world country, and they made absolutely zero effort to pursue osama bin laden.
they then used those killings as a way to get the collective american bloodstream boiling enough that they'd buy whatever bullshit they fed them about WMDs in iraq, (all of which had either been destroyed or transferred outtside of iraq, to syria as i recall, but i may be mistaken, before the invasion) so they could invade, without UN support, a country they planned to invade since before they took office, for no legitimate reason, and then they proceeded to botch the invasion and the war, which is still going on 3 years after they declared victory. those are also facts....'
- neothe1
Your almost there - you're learning boy. (o:
yeah, almost there, almost at the truth, almost ready to bring you down. time for some smokescreen tactics, throw some bullshit at me, try and distract me.
not going to work, bushie, it's not fooling anyone
^ ^ ^ neothe1 talking about himself, as we all know that he's a shill
this is not an auction. don't use words you don't understand.
youtube. com/watch? v=Ic28I IBE-V8
"... it is also fact that the bush administration had recieved countless warnings from intelligence agencies all over the world warning of al-qaeda using planes as missiles to target american landmarks, yet they did nothing. they then used those attacks, when they finally happened, to justify an invasion of a third world country, and they made absolutely zero effort to pursue osama bin laden. they then used those killings as a way to get the collective american bloodstream boiling enough that they'd buy whatever bullshit they fed them about WMDs in iraq..."
by neothe1 on Aug 09, 2006 5:24pm
nobody cares about your propaganda films, bushie. you can't mislead us so easily. it worked on the american people, but even they can't be fooled the same way twice.
ah, maybe there's a bigger strategy at play here. maybe this isn't just the usual conservative mind-fuck, maybe you guys are building your case to go into syria and want to get us out of the way before you go public. is that what this is? 2 third world countries not good enough for ya? not rich enough from oil and opium, got to blast another dirt poor poplace to hell? you sicken me.
Are you denying you posted those pro 9/11 truth movement views now neothe1?
and you're stupid as well.
But from that post you submitted one can only come to the conclusion that 9/11 was an inside job!
If Bush knew as you admit you believe he did and allowed the attacks to happen by pretending to be more interested in a story about a goat on the morning of the attacks that he knew were coming - then it's an inside job - PERIOD!!! You can't possibly deny that -
I defy you to deny that.
one cannot form that conclusion by examination of the facts, murderer.
I want to know why you promulgate this dichotomy of on one hand proclaiming no US government conspiracy, and, then on the other hand proclaiming that Bush knew the attacks were coming and allowed them to go ahead - in other words allowed the mass murder of thousand of innocent Americans in the greatest dereliction of duty by a US president in history for ulterior motives - namely to invade Iraq as you rightly state, this is treason, plain and simple!
Is it treason or not neothe1 and should Bush be impeached?
Answer that question please.
words ken doesn't understand:
shill
scepticism
prevarication
dichotomy
Shill diversionary tactics don't work with me - so again i ask you;
I want to know why you promulgate this dichotomy of on one hand proclaiming no US government conspiracy, and, then on the other hand proclaiming that Bush knew the attacks were coming and allowed them to go ahead - in other words allowed the mass murder of thousand of innocent Americans in the greatest dereliction of duty by a US president in history for ulterior motives - namely to invade Iraq as you rightly state, this is treason, plain and simple!
Is it treason or not neothe1 and should Bush be impeached?
Answer that question please.
** karma **
Neothe1 has given up as he's lost the debate.
I want the truth paste -not the tooth paste shill neothe1,
Again I put it to you ->
I want to know why you promulgate this dichotomy of on one hand proclaiming no US government conspiracy, and, then on the other hand proclaiming that Bush knew the attacks were coming and allowed them to go ahead - in other words allowed the mass murder of thousands of innocent Americans in the greatest dereliction of duty by a US president in history - for ulterior motives - namely to invade Iraq as you rightly state, this is treason, plain and simple!
Is it treason or not neothe1 and should Bush be impeached?
Answer that question please.
Answer it now ->
Should Bush be impeached neothe1?
** karma **
you use "scepticism" to mean "faith, you use "prevaricating" to mean "clearly stating", you use "dichotomy" to mean "consistent statements", and i don't know what the hell you think "shill" means, though to be consistent with the others it must be the exact opposite of it's definition.
how do you expect anyone to debate with you if you can't even get your terminology right? never mind your falsified evidence, you can't even communicate properly.
As I said, Neothe1 has lost the debate.
"History shows that even the greatest minds can construct theories that work but that have one minor flaw- -they are completely erroneous".
Brian L. Silver, The Ascent of Science
reminds me of this one:
"Intellectual brilliance is no guarantee against being dead wrong" -David Fasold
and someday, murderer, you will learn that repeating your argument over and over until your opponent gets tired of refuting it does not constitute a victory
"Intellectual brilliance is no guarantee against being dead wrong - but it's a sure fire bet that your dead right!" - Ken O'Neill
I want the truth paste -not the tooth paste shill neothe1,
Again I put it to you ->
I want to know why you promulgate this dichotomy of on one hand proclaiming no US government conspiracy, and, then on the other hand proclaiming that Bush knew the attacks were coming and allowed them to go ahead - in other words allowed the mass murder of thousands of innocent Americans in the greatest dereliction of duty by a US president in history - for ulterior motives - namely to invade Iraq as you rightly state, this is treason, plain and simple!
Is it treason or not neothe1 and should Bush be impeached?
Answer that question please.
Answer it now ->
Should Bush be impeached neothe1?
What is your opinion on this please neothe1?
Not too much to ask is it?
** karma **
"It seems to me what is called for is an exquisite balance between two conflicting needs: the most skeptical scrutiny of all hypotheses that are served up to us and at the same time a great openness to new ideas … If you are only skeptical, then no new ideas make it through to you … On the other hand, if you are open to the point of gullibility and have not an ounce of skeptical sense in you, then you cannot distinguish the useful ideas from the worthless ones."
another you will come to understand:
"I maintain there is much more wonder in science than in pseudoscience. And in addition, to whatever measure this term has any meaning, science has the additional virtue, and it is not an inconsiderable one, of being true."
More shill diversionary tactics - you're not very bright are you neothe1?
So again, I put it to you -
I want to know why you promulgate this dichotomy of on one hand proclaiming no US government conspiracy, and, then on the other hand proclaiming that Bush knew the attacks were coming and allowed them to go ahead - in other words allowed the mass murder of thousands of innocent Americans in the greatest dereliction of duty by a US president in history - for ulterior motives - namely to invade Iraq as you rightly state, this is treason, plain and simple!
Is it treason or not neothe1 and should Bush be impeached?
Answer that question please.
Answer it now ->
Should Bush be impeached neothe1?
What is your opinion on this please neothe1?
Not too much to ask is it neothe1?
Stop avoiding the question, you are only fooling yourself - everyone reading this can see you squirming lie a slippery eel in the hands of the truth to avoid answering the question that you are duty bound to answer ->
Did Bush - as you neothe1 all but declare - commit treason and if so should he be impeached?
** karma **
repost:
"'Intellectual brilliance is no guarantee against being dead wrong - but it's a sure fire bet that your dead right!' - Ken O'Neill" that is self-contradictory, and further proves you lied during all your comments about carl sagan.
Even MORE shill diversionary tactics - you're not not fooling anyone neothe1 except yourself of course.
So YET again, I put it to you -
I want to know why you promulgate this dichotomy of on one hand proclaiming no US government conspiracy, and, then on the other hand proclaiming that Bush knew the attacks were coming and allowed them to go ahead - in other words allowed the mass murder of thousands of innocent Americans in the greatest dereliction of duty by a US president in history - for ulterior motives - namely to invade Iraq as you rightly state, this is treason, plain and simple!
Is it treason or not neothe1 and should Bush be impeached?
Answer that question please.
Answer it now ->
Should Bush be impeached neothe1?
What is your opinion on this please neothe1?
Not too much to ask is it neothe1?
Stop avoiding the question, you are only fooling yourself - everyone reading this can see you squirming like a slippery eel in the hands of the truth squirming to avoid answering a question that you are duty bound to answer ->
Did Bush - as you neothe1 all but declare - commit treason and if so should he be impeached?
** karma **
stop pasting and ask you fucking question, bushie.
^^^ No problem, but how many times do i have to ask you neothe1 before you excercise your duty to answer it?
So YET again, I put it to you -
I want to know why you promulgate this dichotomy of on one hand proclaiming no US government conspiracy, and, then on the other hand proclaiming that Bush knew the attacks were coming and allowed them to go ahead - in other words allowed the mass murder of thousands of innocent Americans in the greatest dereliction of duty by a US president in history - for ulterior motives - namely to invade Iraq as you rightly state, this is treason, plain and simple!
Is it treason or not neothe1 and should Bush be impeached?
Answer that question please.
Answer it now ->
Should Bush be impeached neothe1?
What is your opinion on this please neothe1?
Not too much to ask is it neothe1?
Stop avoiding the question, you are only fooling yourself - everyone reading this can see you squirming like a slippery eel in the hands of the truth squirming to avoid answering a question that you are duty bound to answer ->
Did Bush - as you neothe1 all but declare - commit treason and if so should he be impeached?
** karma **
Well neothe1 what's your answer to the above question?
i will not respond to pasting. either ask yor question or shut up.
NO PROBLEM, SO HERE IS THE QUESTION AGAIN FOR ALL TO SEE, AND FOR YOU NEOTHE1 THE DODGER TO AVOID ANSWERING AGAIN? -> -> ->
^^^ but how many times do I have to ask you neothe1 before you excercise your duty to answer it?
So YET again, I put it to you -
I want to know why you promulgate this dichotomy of on one hand proclaiming no US government conspiracy, and, then on the other hand proclaiming that Bush knew the attacks were coming and allowed them to go ahead - in other words allowed the mass murder of thousands of innocent Americans in the greatest dereliction of duty by a US president in history - for ulterior motives - namely to invade Iraq as you rightly state, this is treason, plain and simple!
Is it treason or not neothe1 and should Bush be impeached?
Answer that question please.
Answer it now ->
Should Bush be impeached neothe1?
What is your opinion on this please neothe1?
Not too much to ask is it neothe1?
Stop avoiding the question, you are only fooling yourself - everyone reading this can see you squirming like a slippery eel in the hands of the truth squirming to avoid answering a question that you are duty bound to answer ->
Did Bush - as you neothe1 all but declare - commit treason and if so should he be impeached?
** karma **
** karma **
** karma **
No point in pasting 'paste' ad infinitum Neothe1 - just take your medicine answer the above question -> -> ->
So YET again, I put it to you -
I want to know why you promulgate this dichotomy of on one hand proclaiming no US government conspiracy, and, then on the other hand proclaiming that Bush knew the attacks were coming and allowed them to go ahead - in other words allowed the mass murder of thousands of innocent Americans in the greatest dereliction of duty by a US president in history - for ulterior motives - namely to invade Iraq as you rightly state, this is treason, plain and simple!
Is it treason or not neothe1 and should Bush be impeached?
Answer that question please.
Answer it now ->
Should Bush be impeached neothe1?
What is your opinion on this please neothe1?
Not too much to ask is it neothe1?
Stop avoiding the question, you are only fooling yourself - everyone reading this can see you squirming like a slippery eel in the hands of the truth squirming to avoid answering a question that you are duty bound to answer ->
Did Bush - as you neothe1 all but declare - commit treason and if so should he be impeached?
** karma **
WELL?????????????
if you wanted an answer, you'd ask the question. you don't want an answer, so you continue pasting.
neothe1, you are still lying and dodging the questions
the question has not been asked, and he would ignore the answer anyway
repost:
as long as you continue to paste, i will continue to paste paste. if you honestly wanted an answer, you would stop pasting and ask your question you will now repaste your question and prove that you do not want an answer, that you are trying to cover up the truth. proceed.
repost:
what is it about the words "stop pasting" that you do not understand?
Still you refuse to answer the QUESTION!!!
So YET again, I put the question to you -
I want to know why you promulgate this dichotomy of on one hand proclaiming no US government conspiracy, and, then on the other hand proclaiming that Bush knew the attacks were coming and allowed them to go ahead - in other words allowed the mass murder of thousands of innocent Americans in the greatest dereliction of duty by a US president in history - for ulterior motives - namely to invade Iraq as you rightly state, this is treason, plain and simple!
Is it treason or not neothe1 and should Bush be impeached?
Answer that question please.
Answer it now ->
Should Bush be impeached neothe1?
What is your opinion on this please neothe1?
Not too much to ask is it neothe1?
Stop avoiding the question, you are only fooling yourself - everyone reading this can see you squirming like a slippery eel in the hands of the truth squirming to avoid answering a question that you are duty bound to answer ->
Did Bush - as you neothe1 all but declare - commit treason and if so should he be impeached?
** karma **
** karma **
neothe1, the reason you can't post is because you've managed to annoy enough people with your nearly constant posts of spam, as well as your lying all the time, that your karma weight is too low.
** karma **
it would be nice if you stopped lying, neothe1 - the - shill.
** karma **
repost:
the word "people" implies more than one. all these karma abuses were from your usernames.
repost:
you know, usually when you want someone to be wrong, you don't present evidence that proves them right tell me how likely is is that 3 different people who use the exact same tactics, and spelling, to make the same argument, would misuse the same word in the same way?
repost:
your refusal to just ask a suestion, and your attemps to silence me with a permanent karma block, prove my point.
The reason you get karma blocked all the time is because YOU KEEP SPAMMING and YOU KEEP LYING
mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mirror mi | |
