But in this case they didnt!! Ah come on, they didnt... If they did, please link me to the exact excerpt. Don't simply tell me to read through all that again.
Again the above is about the twin towers.
Yes pretty much detailed. But still they tried to reproduce or produce a model in which the fires COULD bring down building 7 like a controlled demolition without being a controlled demolition. Of course this is possible, especially by hiding some data where IT MAY CONTAIN disputable pieces of data or scientific conclusions or premises.
That said, the focus of the NIST study was not forensic. It was an investigation for the purposes of building safety...go read their mission statement for the investigation.
TAM
Yes like I said above. While it needed forensic investigation it didnt get any. Is it time for it now? 9 years after when all the debris of evidence are destroyed? It was not an accidental office fire event. It was the most cruel crime in human history (I consider it worst or par with the holocaust). It seemed that they already knew who was behind it even before it happened, this is so irritating and annoying. Then afterwards they come in and say : "well theres no evidence linking bin laden to 911". Let alone Saddan Hussein...
Its incredible how people simply cant accept even the remotest possibility that some international criminal organization might have people infiltrated in high posts of inteligence agencies, security firms and etc. I find it equally astonishing as what the most mindless truther you can find around you keeps parroting.
Sorry Carlitos, I often commit typos and english errors. Congratulations for the strength on your arguments.
1. The FBI conducted the forensic investigation.
2. I did not say they looked for or found residue or det cord. What I said was they might have...I don't know. I do not presume they did, you should not presume they didn't.
3. NIST would not have looked for it, anyway, as their investigation was conducted well after clean up, IIRC. The FBI would have.
TAM
2. I did not say they looked for or found residue or det cord. What I said was they might have...I don't know. I do not presume they did, you should not presume they didn't.
3. NIST would not have looked for it, anyway, as their investigation was conducted well after clean up, IIRC. The FBI would have.
TAM
You still talk about the twin towers. Those are not as controvertial as building 7.
but can it ever be used or is it impossible to use it in demolitions? I'm not talking about what is easier or not.
Thats for me to answer as I was the devils advocate of the conspiracy? If yes, there are a few reasons why. If you want me to speculate , tell me and I do so in the next post. I doubt it will be useful though.
That is beyond my knowledge. Jones et al claims they did. But that I know that no one in here agrees with him. Fine let`s take your words as true then.
Isnt that enough to be a lil skeptical then?
NIST study was much much later, not right after...not right away.
TAM
Bingo. Did the NIST have it all in their hands? No. So we can conclude that the outcome may be ________?
a)correct;
b)ultimately inconclusive;
c)false.
What would they do (nist)? Come in and say: "No, we dont have enough to work on all the hypothesis, so we will not work in any report, because we are scientists and we will not do this with so many missing evidence". No they would never do it. All they had to do is to build a premise based on the already reached conclusion that we only had office fires and conveniently enough, only the part no one could see of the building was "severely damaged" by fallen debris.
Thanks for the conversation and insights TAM. I have to go now, I may be back later this week. Have a good one.
We've seen thermite, super-thermite, thermate, nano-thermite, therminite, and, in a short-lived comedic video, termites. One never can tell.
Do you have a hypothesis that explains the 9/11 events, or are you just asking questions?
got any evidence of this international criminal organization?
got any evidence of these infiltrators?
no? come back when you do.
until then, spare us the lecture.
we at JREF, unlike Prisonplanet, Pilots for 9-11 Truth, Loose Change, and all the other truther groups, we require EVIDENCE.
evidence my friend. you remember what it is right?
show it to us, or try another forum.
Sorry, you can't have one without the other. Unless you believe the perps didn't collapse WTC1/2, and were just so lucky that they both collapsed, and then slipped in WTC7 as an extra.
If you want to get into the realm of what is "possible", then why stop at thermite. Judy Woods and her Space Beams are "possible". Anders Lindman and his "CGI no plane" theories are "possible".
Speculate, explain, whatever...indulge me.
No, no, if Jones presented such an applicator, then by all means, show us who has produced it...oh, wait, you don't mean they designed a theoretical one, do you? We are not talking theoretical applicators are we, cause I got some ideas...
Why would it make me skeptical that the FBI, the legal authority, did the forensic investigation first, then FEMA, then after the fact NIST. Explain to me WHY that should make me skeptical.
As a independently functioning (arms length) scientific body, I would suspect that had there been any overt deficiencies in evidence needed, or data missing for their investigation, while not asking for it or complaining, would have made mention of such in their reports. As a matter of fact, I think they did, IIRC.
You are welcome....see you later this week...perhaps.
TAM
Fonebone
persona non grata
Let me get this straight.
According to the truthers the NIST is either in on it or covering it up so one of their big ideas to expose this is to ask the NIST for more information.
Did they not think this through, obviously the NIST is stalling to get enough time to whip up a fresh batch of fake evidence.
According to the truthers the NIST is either in on it or covering it up so one of their big ideas to expose this is to ask the NIST for more information.
Did they not think this through, obviously the NIST is stalling to get enough time to whip up a fresh batch of fake evidence.
Last edited:
No, because no specific target is mentioned. However, though I think in reality he meant it as drama more then threat, the comment made was specifically aimed at an organization...a group of people, real people...NIST. That is why it could be misconstrued as a threat.
TAM
triforcharity
Banned
- Joined
- Jun 23, 2009
- Messages
- 13,961
The hilited is what I would like to address.
Has thermite ever been shown to be able to do what you think it COOOOUUULLLLDDDDD do? Meaning, can thermite even cut a core column simmilar to those found in 7WTC?
The answer is actually a resounding........No.
triforcharity
Banned
- Joined
- Jun 23, 2009
- Messages
- 13,961
fallout,
With all due respect, I understand what you are saying. But, I just would like some clarification about the above quoted post.
Are you talking about specifically, 7WTC, or is this all encompassing?
Thanks.
~Tri
#1. all the evidence is NOt destroyed. I saw some myself just two weeks ago.
#2. saying 9-11 was equal to or worse than the Holoccaust, is outrageously disgusting.
the deaths of 3,000 people (died instantly) is equal to or worse than the miserable and horrible deaths of 12 million????
wow.
Cl1mh4224rd
Philosopher
- Joined
- Dec 27, 2006
- Messages
- 9,778
cmatrix is just throwing himself a pity party. It must be unbelievably frustrating for an entire movement to be so full of angst and so very impotent.
Like others have pointed out, though, he hasn't quite grasped the idea that whining about his lot in life does nothing to improve the situation.
Fonebone
persona non grata
Listen-up !
Per contra, anyone that threatens to abrogate the citizen's inalienable rights
would be a threat to liberty including our elected or civil or appointed public servants
and Thomas Jefferson , in his own words, explains the eternal price of liberty - bic ?
No, because no specific target is mentioned. However, though I think in reality he meant it as drama more then threat, the comment made was specifically aimed at an organization...a group of people, real people...NIST. That is why it could be misconstrued as a threat.
TAM
Per contra, anyone that threatens to abrogate the citizen's inalienable rights
would be a threat to liberty including our elected or civil or appointed public servants
and Thomas Jefferson , in his own words, explains the eternal price of liberty - bic ?
CHF
Illuminator
- Joined
- Oct 12, 2006
- Messages
- 3,871
Hello??? It's therMATE! No wait....super-dooper nano-thermite!
The stuff that only the government has, so we can't test it or really say for sure what it can do.
WildCat
NWO Master Conspirator
- Joined
- Mar 23, 2003
- Messages
- 59,856
Why do you need the data? I thought you guys already had proven inside jobby job?
Sounds like Tim McVeigh when you add the delusions you have on 911.
You don't need the data, you have Gage, he has hundreds of experts who can study 7 with out the data! You don't need the data you have the "nose out" stuff, you have real delusions, you don't need reality based data.
Last edited: