| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
johndoe
Wrecker
Joined: 03 Mar 2007
Posts: 181
|
 Posted: Sun Mar 25, 2007 12:46 am Post subject: |
 |
|
| simply post a picture of it "waisting" |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Bushwacker
Relentless Limpet Shill
Joined: 07 Sep 2006
Posts: 1628
|
| Posted: Mon Mar 26, 2007 7:44 am Post subject: |
|
|
| chek wrote: |
| Bushwacker wrote: | | Why has Implosion World no credibility, is it just because it will not fall for your particular fantasy? Or is it because the girl who sells the advertising once went out with the second cousin of the ex-wife of a man who services the boilers at Langley? I am sure you have found some straw to grasp to preserve your comic book view of the world. |
Ever wonder about how Implosion World stays afloat? Those handful of CD companies round the world must have a scores of subsciptions for each employee doncha think? Maybe all the staff send each other a few hundred subscriptions for Christmas.
Other than that, Editor Brett Blanchard (international man of mystery?) was pretty much taken apart here:
http://911research.wtc7.net/reviews/blanchard/index.html
|
Ah, so what you are saying is that the CIA founded and propped up Implosion World in case they ever wanted an authoritative sounding demolition "expert" to say something useful to them.
I can understand why you would think that!
You seem to be easily pleased by Sunny Jim Hoffman's ineffectual effort at casting doubt on the article.
| chek wrote: |
| Bushwacker wrote: | | No comment on "If it was CD its collapse would be unexpected, whereas we know it was widely predicted by those on the scene, the firemen and others."? Surely there must be an approved conspiracist answer to this, which is an improvement on immediately trying to switch the discussion to the firemen in the towers, the best that has been done up until now? If not, I shall be very disappointed. |
Except we saw warnings being given that the building was about to blow up. We know they cleared a 600ft collapse zone. There is no doubt some collapse was expected - nothing suspicious about that.
It's the straight down, vertical symmetrical drop, roof to ground in six and a bit seconds and all within 70ft of the building perimeter bit that none of your ineffectual explanations and justifications can ever expain. |
That's interesting, you now accept that it was obvious to those at the scene that the building would collapse by itself because of the damage and fires, but nevertheless you say that the way it collapsed indicates to you that it was CD.
I wonder why the CIA/Israelis/Neocons/Lizards didn't just let it collapse by itself but set off their mysteriously planted fire-proof explosives/thermite/thermate anyway? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
chek
Mega Poster
Joined: 12 Sep 2006
Posts: 3889
Location: North Down, N. Ireland
|
| Posted: Mon Mar 26, 2007 8:27 am Post subject: |
|
|
[quote="Bushwacker"] | chek wrote: |
| Bushwacker wrote: | | Why has Implosion World no credibility, is it just because it will not fall for your particular fantasy? Or is it because the girl who sells the advertising once went out with the second cousin of the ex-wife of a man who services the boilers at Langley? I am sure you have found some straw to grasp to preserve your comic book view of the world. |
Ever wonder about how Implosion World stays afloat? Those handful of CD companies round the world must have a scores of subsciptions for each employee doncha think? Maybe all the staff send each other a few hundred subscriptions for Christmas.
Other than that, Editor Brett Blanchard (international man of mystery?) was pretty much taken apart here:
http://911research.wtc7.net/reviews/blanchard/index.html
|
| Bushwacker wrote: | Ah, so what you are saying is that the CIA founded and propped up Implosion World in case they ever wanted an authoritative sounding demolition "expert" to say something useful to them.
I can understand why you would think that! |
It's Implosion World BW, not the Oracle at Delphi and the sum of all human knowledge combined. And judging by the Romero comments, they're none too bothered about alienating half their readership.
| Bushwacker wrote: | | You seem to be easily pleased by Sunny Jim Hoffman's ineffectual effort at casting doubt on the article. |
He certainly did a good job of showing the petty Brent Barsteward up.
Bet he gives waiters hell.
| chek wrote: |
| Bushwacker wrote: | | No comment on "If it was CD its collapse would be unexpected, whereas we know it was widely predicted by those on the scene, the firemen and others."? Surely there must be an approved conspiracist answer to this, which is an improvement on immediately trying to switch the discussion to the firemen in the towers, the best that has been done up until now? If not, I shall be very disappointed. |
Except we saw warnings being given that the building was about to blow up. We know they cleared a 600ft collapse zone. There is no doubt some collapse was expected - nothing suspicious about that.
It's the straight down, vertical symmetrical drop, roof to ground in six and a bit seconds and all within 70ft of the building perimeter bit that none of your ineffectual explanations and justifications can ever expain. |
| Bushwacker wrote: | | That's interesting, you now accept that it was obvious to those at the scene that the building would collapse by itself because of the damage and fires, but nevertheless you say that the way it collapsed indicates to you that it was CD. |
As stated many times previously, some partial collapse would not have been suspicious - complete and total collapse through 'natural causes'?
Never in a million years, no matter how many thousands of RPM of spin you try to put on it.
| Bushwacker wrote: | | I wonder why the CIA/Israelis/Neocons/Lizards didn't just let it collapse by itself but set off their mysteriously planted fire-proof explosives/thermite/thermate anyway? |
Essentially because steel frame buildings don't just totally and utterly collapse by themselves.
You'd think at least that much would be clear to you after all this time.
_________________
Dissolution of the Global Corporations.
It's the only way.
It's them or us. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
pepik
Banned
Joined: 08 Oct 2006
Posts: 591
Location: The Square Mile
|
| Posted: Mon Mar 26, 2007 12:29 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | | Essentially because steel frame buildings don't just totally and utterly collapse by themselves. |
Ah, so it was "by itself", it wasn't hit by a collapsing 110 story building or on fire.
_________________
"could it be that ww2 and the extermination of jewish people was planned as a way of creating a race of people who it would be difficult to blame for anything, a cover race for the illuminati?" - a quote NOT from the 'controversial theories' section. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
chek
Mega Poster
Joined: 12 Sep 2006
Posts: 3889
Location: North Down, N. Ireland
|
| Posted: Mon Mar 26, 2007 3:06 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| pepik wrote: | | Quote: | | Essentially because steel frame buildings don't just totally and utterly collapse by themselves. |
Ah, so it was "by itself", it wasn't hit by a collapsing 110 story building or on fire. |
Don't go getting all excited Pepik, the context of my reply is related to the context of responding to BW's comment.
I think we can both agree that WTC7 didn't fall down 'by itself'.
_________________
Dissolution of the Global Corporations.
It's the only way.
It's them or us. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Chat
Usergroups
Calendar
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
