Wednesday, November 16, 2011

Architects and Engineers for Paranoid Texans

They like to pretend that they are scientists and engineers, but after over 5 years, they have yet to produce anything even remotely scientific, unless you consider it a study on logical fallacies. Things are getting so bad, however, that they are not only producing their own unscientific material, but posting frontpage articles from Alex Jones' Infowars. Yeah, I go to them for all of my science and engineering reporting.


UK’s Daily Mail newspaper claims weakening of ‘exterior beams’ caused WTC 7 collapse
Editor’s note: In this incisive article, Infowars journalist Paul Joseph Watson refutes the illogical claims of an overambitious reporter from the UK Daily Mail, who asserts that video footage confirms the destruction of WTC Building 7 by office fires. The Daily Mail article comes in stark contrast to the easily accessible and understandable evidence of the controlled demolition of WTC 7 on the afternoon of 9/11.


But hey, remember, they are architects and engineers...

Labels: ,

98 Comments:

At 16 November, 2011 18:42, Blogger snug.bug said...

I think the subtext is that the Daily Mail article (that SLC so breathlessly featured) is so silly that even Alex Jones's team can effectively rebut it.

 
At 16 November, 2011 20:14, Blogger Ian said...

I think the subtext is that the Daily Mail article (that SLC so breathlessly featured) is so silly that even Alex Jones's team can effectively rebut it.

So we're back to babbling about controlled demolition? So what was all that dumbspam about Saudi's learning Pashto in US schools about? Do you even read your own posts?

Also, Alex Jones is a successful media personality and esteemed truther while you're a failed janitor and sex stalker who was expelled from the movement. It's funny to see how bitter you are about that.

 
At 16 November, 2011 20:26, Blogger snug.bug said...

Ian, your belief that there is some contradiction between controlled demolition and teaching Pashto at DLI only shows how you insist on molding reality to fit your stoopid paradigms.

 
At 16 November, 2011 20:53, Blogger Ian said...

Ian, your belief that there is some contradiction between controlled demolition and teaching Pashto at DLI only shows how you insist on molding reality to fit your stoopid paradigms.

Poor Brian, he's so desperate for his 9/11 truth fantasies to be true that he'll post dumbspam about controlled demolition and follow that up with dumbspam about the hijackers who flew the planes into the towers.

And he'll split the controlled demolition into two categories, thermite and explosives.

Brian, all this dumbspam may seal your mind off from the harsh realities of what a failure you are, but it's not going to convince any normal people.

 
At 16 November, 2011 21:07, Blogger snug.bug said...

Ian, your belief that there is some contradiction between hijackers flying airplanes into buildings and controlled demolition only shows how simple-minded you are.

Guess what. My car can have a dead battery AND a flat tire. It doesn't have to be one or the other.

 
At 16 November, 2011 22:30, Blogger roo said...

Brian,

Your 9/11 logic flows over into other areas of life.

It is pretty near impossible to have a flat tire and a dead battery at the same time. In order to acquire a flat tire, your car has to be moving. It can't move with a dead battery.

Unless you get a flat tire and then you leave your car somewhere for a long enough period of time until the battery dies. Which is a good analogy of your life.

I hope this helps you understand that your thinking is flawed on all levels.

 
At 16 November, 2011 23:42, Blogger snug.bug said...

Roo, it is by no means impossible to have a dead battery and a flat tire at the same time. One need only be poor and running an old battery in last-stage degeneration at the same time as being poor and living in a lousy neighborhood where some nutjob is likely to stick a nail in one's tire to warn one to stay away from his crack-whore girlfriend who thinks one is cute.

If you had any experience in life you would know this.

 
At 17 November, 2011 06:21, Blogger Ian said...

Ian, your belief that there is some contradiction between hijackers flying airplanes into buildings and controlled demolition only shows how simple-minded you are.

Right, because the conspirators want to make it as needlessly complicated as possible so that more people are involved, and the likelihood of something going wrong increases.

Brian, what about the possibility that death ray beams from space were also used? How come you never bring that up? Judy Wood, a respected engineering professor believes this, and I'll take her word over that of a failed janitor and liar like you.

Guess what. My car can have a dead battery AND a flat tire. It doesn't have to be one or the other.

And Brian is back with the idiotic analogies.

 
At 17 November, 2011 06:26, Blogger Ian said...

Roo, it is by no means impossible to have a dead battery and a flat tire at the same time. One need only be poor and running an old battery in last-stage degeneration at the same time as being poor and living in a lousy neighborhood where some nutjob is likely to stick a nail in one's tire to warn one to stay away from his crack-whore girlfriend who thinks one is cute.

This isn't the only possibility. You could live in a rich neighborhood down the street from Dick Cheney, and he could send modified attack baboons to spray invisible nanothermite on your car battery and the use radio detonators to set off the thermite, causing your engine block to collapse in a baffling manner: with symmetry, speed, totality, and with molten steel.

And just as that happens, you could run over a nail.

 
At 17 November, 2011 09:53, Blogger Ian said...

On another note, I just saw a comment on Brian's Scholars for 9/11 Truth page:

http://911scholars.ning.com/profile/BrianGood

"hey brian notallthat good, do you have any further use for this group? because if not, please find the thingie at the bottom of your page that allows to you exit and begone. some of us here are rather fond of Kevin Barrett, and think of he as a great and wondrous truther, including Jim and myself, etc. we don't all have to agree on everything, but being an ass to a respectable, likeable truther doesn't jive well here. could you please exit this group if you are done with your badmouthing of Kevin, etc. we could really use your space. see ya."

Brian's been kicked out of yet another truther group whose members are embarrassed to have the perverted liar and lunatic in their group.

HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA!!!!

 
At 17 November, 2011 09:55, Blogger Ian said...

How pathetic can you get, Brian? You've been banned from a group that keeps Kevin Barrett in high esteem! You've been expelled from a group led by Jim Fetzer, a guy who believes in chemtrails!

HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA!!!!!

 
At 17 November, 2011 11:05, Blogger WhyAskQuestions said...

There's so much evidence to counter the controlled demolition theories that it makes the CD theory look rather stupid & boring.

1: When they removed debris from Ground Zero & transported it to Fresh Kills Landfill. They began to shift through the wreckage. They didn't find any detenation cords nor copper residue on the steel beams & columns. So that rules out explosives.

2: If radio frequency bombs were used, the wreckage @ Fresh Kills never had any radio detenators or unexploded bombs to be found. But of course NYC is chock full of radio frequencies that any frequency would've set off the bomb prematurely. So that rules that out.

3: Now we're onto thermite. According to historical records thermite was used to WELD steel rails together in the 1850's. So if Truthers are suggesting that a WELDING tool be used in demolition is irrelevent to their case. Since when is any welding tool ever used in demolition?

 
At 17 November, 2011 15:06, Blogger Sevenirok said...

Packed like herrings

 
At 17 November, 2011 15:26, Blogger Joseph Nobles said...

It's November and still no 2010 Form 990 for AE911Truth available at Guidestar. I'm beginning to think they didn't file one. That would be an interesting kettle of fish, if so. If anyone lives in the Lafayette, California area, maybe they could go to the office and request a copy of it? Non-profits are supposed to have those available for anyone who asks.

The address:

3527 Mt Diablo Blvd 370
Lafayette, CA 94549

That's from the other Form 990s.

 
At 17 November, 2011 16:34, Blogger roo said...

Holy crap, Gage's gaggle of morons operates down the street from me!!

I thought they were in Berkeley.

What would you need me to do? Just request that form? I'm going to imagine their operation is a one man operation and I doubt anyone will be at the office. But I could try.

 
At 17 November, 2011 17:39, Blogger Mike Rosefierce said...

Does AE911Truth even have a real office?

3527 Mt Diablo Blvd is a UPS Store. Gage probably has a mailbox there.

The contact address on the AE911Troof site (2342 Shattuck Ave., Berkeley) is also a UPS Store.

 
At 17 November, 2011 18:06, Blogger Ian said...

Does AE911Truth even have a real office?

Why would it? There's nobody active in the group but Gage, who uses it to sucker people out of money. I'm sure he can just operate out of his living room.

 
At 17 November, 2011 20:27, Blogger Richard Gage's Testicles said...

It's November and still no 2010 Form 990 for AE911Truth available at Guidestar. I'm beginning to think they didn't file one.

Looks like they filed their annual whatever for the state on November 4. It may turn up yet.

 
At 17 November, 2011 22:23, Blogger Pat said...

Bolo, I check Guidestar about once a week for that myself. Just dying to find out how much Box Boy paid himself in 2010.

 
At 18 November, 2011 01:18, Blogger snug.bug said...

WAQo, why would you expect to find "detentation" cords?

Why would you expect to find radio "detenators"?

I've explained many times that the use of insensitive radio receivers and very powerful radio transmitters would do away with any chance of false triggers.

Thermite was used to demolish 600 foot tall steel towers in Chicago in 1935, says Popular Mechanics. Its use to weld rails continues today.

An oxy-acetylene torch can as easily cut steel as weld it. You don't know what you're talking about.

 
At 18 November, 2011 02:21, Blogger GuitarBill said...

The goat fucker prevaricates, "...WAQo, why would you expect to find "detentation" cords?"

Because real explosives' experts tell us that "det cord, shock tube, blasting cap remnants, copper backing from explosive charges, burn marks along clean-cut edges of columns, etc" are hallmarks of controlled demolition operations.

For example,

"...Our team, working at ground zero, including myself, never saw indication of explosive use that would have been evident after the event. You just can't clean up all that det cord, shock tube, blasting cap remnants, copper backing from explosive charges, burn marks along clean-cut edges of columns, etc., nor is there any evidence in the thousands of photos taken by the press and dozens of agencies over the following days." -- Brent Blanchard, Demolition Expert; International Society of Explosives Engineers.

The goat fucker squeals, "...Why would you expect to find radio 'detenators'?"

For the same reason that you'd expect to find "det cord, shock tube, blasting cap remnants, copper backing from explosive charges, burn marks along clean-cut edges of columns, etc" on the pile. Remnants would surely survive the controlled demolition.

The goat fucker pontificates, "...I've explained many times that the use of insensitive radio receivers and very powerful radio transmitters would do away with any chance of false triggers."

Says the insane, unemployed janitor who wears women's underwear. Get back to us when you can pass a formal examination in elementary mathematics, logic, physics or chemistry. Okay, goat molester?

So where's your evidence for the presence of "radio receivers" at Ground Zero, Mr. Bogus "scientific reputation"?

You'll find your evidence for "radio receivers" right next to your evidence for "det cord, shock tube, blasting cap remnants, copper backing from explosive charges, burn marks along clean-cut edges of columns, etc." ZIP, NADA, ZILCH, ZERO.

The goat fucker whines, "...Thermite was used to demolish 600 foot tall steel towers in Chicago in 1935, says Popular Mechanics. Its use to weld rails continues today."

So what? How did the "conspirators" manage to set up the demolition in one of the World's most secure and heavily guarded buildings while escaping detection?

We're talking about the real world, goat fucker, not Hollywood.

The goat fucker squeals, "...You don't know what you're talking about."

That goes without saying, but you're no better.

So do you have anything more than wild-speculation and chickenshit, worthless anecdotal evidence?

I won't hold my breath waiting for your evidence.

 
At 18 November, 2011 02:32, Blogger GuitarBill said...

Continued...

Goat fucker,

So now you're babbling about "insensitive radio receivers and very powerful radio transmitters"?!?!?!?!?!?!

Question: What happened to the nefarious Saudi Arabian conspirators, homicidal elevator mechanics, spray-on thermite technicians, magic thermite elves, US government controlled-and-operated modified attack baboons and their super incendiary smoking fur?

And what do wise men say about ever-shifting rationales and liars?

And remember, I'm just askin' questions...

 
At 18 November, 2011 04:55, Blogger Grandmastershek said...

LMAO!!! I love the ever slipping evidence of truthers:

Its was a CD! (Where's the det cord, blast caps, etc?)

It was a wireless CD! (Where's the detonators?)

It was a wireless CD using insenstive radio receivers! (Where are they?)


I am surprised Bri hasn't tried the "everything was painted with thermite" escape. Fact is that no matter what you would have some element of the rigging that would be impervious to thermite for it to work.

This just like the kooks who think aliens built the pyramids and Machu Picchu. Their own incredulity says that it couldn't happen without the aid of some form of high end technology. Their evidence is both "it looks like" (eg- Dendera "lightbulb") & the ramblings of pseudo experts (eg- Zechariah Sitchin, Erich Von Daniken, etc). And similarly none of the peripheral evidence exists.

 
At 18 November, 2011 06:20, Blogger Ian said...

WAQo, why would you expect to find "detentation" cords?

Why would you expect to find radio "detenators"?


We wouldn't, as there was no controlled demolition.

I've explained many times that the use of insensitive radio receivers and very powerful radio transmitters would do away with any chance of false triggers.

Of course. The convenient thing about invisible magic nanothermite is that Brian can give it any characteristics he wants at any given time.

Thermite was used to demolish 600 foot tall steel towers in Chicago in 1935, says Popular Mechanics. Its use to weld rails continues today.

That's nice, Brian.

An oxy-acetylene torch can as easily cut steel as weld it. You don't know what you're talking about.

Squeal squeal squeal!

 
At 18 November, 2011 06:23, Blogger Ian said...

Also, Brian, you still haven't told us why Scholars for 9/11 Truth keeps Kevin Barrett in high esteem while throwing you out of the group.

You can't name a single truther who considers you a member in good standing. Not one.

 
At 18 November, 2011 08:45, Blogger snug.bug said...

GB, thanks for proving my point. Why would you expect the perps of a covert demolition job to leave behind "hallmarks of controlled demolition operations" remnants of radio "detenators"? You'd think people who devised radio "detenators" would be able to make them self-destructing. You're not very bright, are you?

Your lying ad hominems only embarrass your cause.

I've many times discussed the practicability of setting up demolition. Many of the floors in the WTC were vacant. Charges could be placed above the false ceiling panels or in the utility shafts. Take a look at the blueprints.


GMS, what expertise allows you to confidently proclaim that "you would have some element of the rigging that would be impervious to thermite for it to work"? You haven't demonstrated that.

Ian, Scholars for 9/11 Truth keeps Kevin Barrett in high esteem because Barrett is just about the only friend Dr. Fetzer has. If I was thrown out of their group it's news to me. I haven't been to that site in years.

I can name many truthers who consider me a member in good standing. I have participated in many of the local truth group activities on the last several months, including leafleting outside the Opera House, propagandizing at Golden Gate Park, and tabling at the Green Festival. I sometimes attend the regular meetings, but since 50 miles is a long way to drive I rarely do. You make up your facts.

 
At 18 November, 2011 09:10, Blogger Ian said...

GB, thanks for proving my point. Why would you expect the perps of a covert demolition job to leave behind "hallmarks of controlled demolition operations" remnants of radio "detenators"? You'd think people who devised radio "detenators" would be able to make them self-destructing. You're not very bright, are you?

So now we've got invisible detonators to go along with invisible engineers, invisible widows, and invisible elevator repairmen.

Very interesting, Brian.

I've many times discussed the practicability of setting up demolition. Many of the floors in the WTC were vacant. Charges could be placed above the false ceiling panels or in the utility shafts. Take a look at the blueprints.

Yes, you have discussed this. And as with the above babbling about self-destructing detonators, you make it clear that you're an ignorant lunatic who has no idea what he's talking about every time you discuss these things.

That's why we just laugh at you, Brian.

 
At 18 November, 2011 09:13, Blogger Ian said...

Ian, Scholars for 9/11 Truth keeps Kevin Barrett in high esteem because Barrett is just about the only friend Dr. Fetzer has. If I was thrown out of their group it's news to me. I haven't been to that site in years.

Exactly. You've been banned by esteemed scholars like Barrett and Fetzer because they want nothing to do with a failed janitor and pervert like you.

I can name many truthers who consider me a member in good standing. I have participated in many of the local truth group activities on the last several months, including leafleting outside the Opera House, propagandizing at Golden Gate Park, and tabling at the Green Festival. I sometimes attend the regular meetings, but since 50 miles is a long way to drive I rarely do. You make up your facts.

Thanks for proving my pojnt. You can't name a single truther who considers you a member in good standing. Not one.

All that goes to show is even a tiny crackpot fringe has its limits on who it will admit. Ignorant insane lying sex stalkers in women's underwear like you are not welcome.

 
At 18 November, 2011 09:43, Blogger WhyAskQuestions said...

WAQo, why would you expect to find "detentation" cords?

Because there would be pieces of them laying everywhere, which there were none on 9/11.

Why would you expect to find radio "detenators"?

Sometimes when radio frequencies jam another frequency it usually results in no detenation. Hence the lack of evidence for radio bombs @ Fresh Kills.

I've explained many times that the use of insensitive radio receivers and very powerful radio transmitters would do away with any chance of false triggers.

And you've explained this in what way?

Thermite was used to demolish 600 foot tall steel towers in Chicago in 1935, says Popular Mechanics. Its use to weld rails continues today.

Whatever may be the case, if any thermite would be present it would be in small amounts & the possibility of there being any would be slim considering that thermite in any amount can burn off completely.

An oxy-acetylene torch can as easily cut steel as weld it. You don't know what you're talking about.

Actually you would need a welding rod to do that job. And I know WTF I'm talking about so stop squealing cause you know I'm right & you're wrong.

 
At 18 November, 2011 09:44, Blogger Max said...

... leafleting, propagandizing, and tabling...but no debating, thinking or understanding.

Classic you phucktard!

btw - the Form 990 due date for the IRS (including extensions) was 11/15 - takes a few weeks for it show up on Guide Star.

If indeed they are using a mail drop location as their physical address the IRS should know about that. That is a violation of the public disclosure regulations - unless they hang out there all day.

 
At 18 November, 2011 09:59, Blogger WhyAskQuestions said...

I found this post over @ the JREF forum concerning Astaneh-Asl. Also read the bolded line.

http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?p=7770351#post7770351

Post #18:

Dear Mr. Bollyn: As I clearly stated in our phone conversation a few minutes ago, I am very disturbed by the people such as yourself , who are part of this "Conspiracy theorist" regarding World Trade Center collapse. These people have used my name and research results in totally incorrect way , and in completely opposite way of what the research results had indicated. By doing so, you and all others have implied that our research somehow support your totally incorrect theories. 

I hereby officially notify you in writing that if you use my name or the results of our research in any publication implying that the data that we have collected on the WTC somehow supports or provides you with evidence in support of your totally base less conspiracy theories, I reserve the right to take any legal action necessary to protect my reputation as well as integrity of my research. Let me state again that after 6 years of studying the collapse of World Trade Center, I have not found any evidence to support any of the claims of "conspiracy theorists".
In my opinion, and based on scientific facts, the only cause of collapse was the structural and fire damage to the towers that had many unusual features and were not designed according to the buildings codes, standards and the practice.

A. Astaneh, Professor

 
At 18 November, 2011 10:02, Blogger Richard Gage's Testicles said...

If indeed they are using a mail drop location as their physical address the IRS should know about that. That is a violation of the public disclosure regulations - unless they hang out there all day.

Funny you mention that. I was also thinking that a registered agent's address was supposed to be either a permanent residence or permanent office location, so you can physically hand a summons over. Maybe that's not required in California.

 
At 18 November, 2011 10:25, Blogger GuitarBill said...

The goat fucker squeals, "...GB, thanks for proving my point. Why would you expect the perps of a covert demolition job to leave behind 'hallmarks of controlled demolition operations' remnants of radio 'detenators' [SIC]"?

Talk about circular logic.

Are logical fallacies all you have, goat molester?

 
At 18 November, 2011 10:26, Blogger snug.bug said...

Ian, your dumbspam doesn't even fool you. It's only good enough to fool lamos like WAQo.

WAQo, you wouldn't find det cord if they used radio detonators. A weak signal can not jam a strong one. You don't need welding rod to cut steel with a torch. You don't know what you're talking about.

Max, I debate, think, and understand every day. Besides, if you knew anything about tabling and leafletting and propagandizing, you'd know they often involve debate and thinking and understanding.

When you expose your opinions to 10,000 people, you've got to expect that some of them will share theirs.

 
At 18 November, 2011 10:39, Blogger WhyAskQuestions said...

WAQo, you wouldn't find det cord if they used radio detonators. A weak signal can not jam a strong one. You don't need welding rod to cut steel with a torch. You don't know what you're talking about.

I never said anything about finding det. cord for radio detenators, you did that. Brian, you forget, 1 of the Towers had an antenna on top of it. DUH! And you don't need explosives or thermite to bring down a building. Keep on lying cause it's funy watching you have a mental breakdown.

Also Brian, since you managed to ignore the post I made about Astaneh-Asl I'll let you read it again:

"Dear Mr. Bollyn: As I clearly stated in our phone conversation a few minutes ago, I am very disturbed by the people such as yourself , who are part of this "Conspiracy theorist" regarding World Trade Center collapse. These people have used my name and research results in totally incorrect way , and in completely opposite way of what the research results had indicated. By doing so, you and all others have implied that our research somehow support your totally incorrect theories. 

I hereby officially notify you in writing that if you use my name or the results of our research in any publication implying that the data that we have collected on the WTC somehow supports or provides you with evidence in support of your totally base less conspiracy theories, I reserve the right to take any legal action necessary to protect my reputation as well as integrity of my research. Let me state again that after 6 years of studying the collapse of World Trade Center, I have not found any evidence to support any of the claims of "conspiracy theorists".
In my opinion, and based on scientific facts, the only cause of collapse was the structural and fire damage to the towers that had many unusual features and were not designed according to the buildings codes, standards and the practice."

A. Astaneh, Professor

 
At 18 November, 2011 10:45, Blogger WhyAskQuestions said...

I find it extremely funny that Dr. Astaneh-Asl said this:

"I am very disturbed by the people such as yourself , who are part of this "Conspiracy theorist" regarding World Trade Center collapse. These people have used my name and research results in totally incorrect way , and in completely opposite way of what the research results had indicated. By doing so, you and all others have implied that our research somehow support your totally incorrect theories."

skip

"Let me state again that after 6 years of studying the collapse of World Trade Center, I have not found any evidence to support any of the claims of "conspiracy theorists"."


Dr. Astaneh-Asl said this though (not reguarding molten steel, Brian):

"In my opinion, and based on scientific facts, the only cause of collapse was the structural and fire damage to the towers that had many unusual features and were not designed according to the buildings codes, standards and the practice."

Brian got pwned!

 
At 18 November, 2011 10:47, Blogger WhyAskQuestions said...

When you expose your opinions to 10,000 people, you've got to expect that some of them will share theirs.

I wonder why you're spending time on here & not going to those Occupy marches in L.A.?

Too fucking lazy to get out of your house & actually do something?

 
At 18 November, 2011 11:08, Blogger WhyAskQuestions said...

Come on Brian, tell me how I'm "lying" about Dr. Astaneh-Asl when it actually came from his mouth when he was talking to Chris Bollyn on the phone & through e-mail.

You call me a liar, then you're calling Dr. Astaneh-Asl a liar. Admit, you were lying about Dr Astaneh-Asl the whole fucking time you talked about him.

 
At 18 November, 2011 12:18, Blogger WhyAskQuestions said...

Just as I thought, Brian doesn't want to challenge Dr. Astaneh-Asl's remark to Cris Bollyn cause he knows that he's telling lies about Dr. Astaneh-Asl & is continuing to lie about 9/11 in general.

And let me remind Brian that Dr. Astaneh-Asl has the right to sue his ass:

"I hereby officially notify you in writing that if you use my name or the results of our research in any publication implying that the data that we have collected on the WTC somehow supports or provides you with evidence in support of your totally base less conspiracy theories, I reserve the right to take any legal action necessary to protect my reputation as well as integrity of my research."

 
At 18 November, 2011 12:25, Blogger Ian said...

Ian, your dumbspam doesn't even fool you. It's only good enough to fool lamos like WAQo.

Poor Brian. He's been pwn3d so all he can do is squeal and squeal.

WAQo, you wouldn't find det cord if they used radio detonators. A weak signal can not jam a strong one. You don't need welding rod to cut steel with a torch. You don't know what you're talking about.

See what I mean?


Max, I debate, think, and understand every day.

Brian, you don't debate. You run squealing and crying from anyone who challenges you to debate. Also, you don't think either. You just mindlessly repeat what Richard Gage says.

And you still haven't named a single truther who considers you part of the group. Not one.

 
At 18 November, 2011 15:44, Blogger Billman said...

Welcome to all the new guys we've been seeing pop up the last few days.

 
At 18 November, 2011 16:38, Blogger M Gregory Ferris said...

"Thermite was used to demolish 600 foot tall steel towers in Chicago in 1935, says Popular Mechanics. "

It was used ONCE in 76 years. There's probably a good reason why.

"Why would you expect the perps of a covert demolition job to leave behind "hallmarks of controlled demolition operations""...

When in the history of black-ops has there been a "covert demolition" where no evidence of explosives were found?

Isn't the whole point to blame the explosion on someone else? Why use explosives and not use them as evidence? You don't think the Bush White House wouldn't have loved to have some Iraqi detonators to show the press?








"You'd think people who devised radio "detenators" would be able to make them self-destructing."

It would be stupid to make a self-destructing detonator. You'd have to design it so that it survives the explosion so it can self-destruct.

You're not very bright, are you?

 
At 18 November, 2011 17:10, Blogger snug.bug said...

MGF, you really need to get away from Watsonville and widen your horizons.

If Iraqi detonators had been found at the WTC, everyone would wonder how the Iraqis got past Marvin Bush's security company. Very bad politics for the Bushcists.

No, you'd have to design them so that whatever survived the explosion would self-destruct. I'm bright enough.

 
At 18 November, 2011 17:49, Blogger M Gregory Ferris said...

"If Iraqi detonators had been found at the WTC, everyone would wonder how the Iraqis got past Marvin Bush's security company. Very bad politics for the Bushcists."

Yet risking planting your imaginary, super-secret explosives made perfect sense why?

There is a healthy percentage of explosives used in CD that fail to detonate. That ratio would climb as the charge becomes more exotic, which is why nobody would use them for an important job.

Not that any of this makes any difference. There were no charges, no controlled demo at the WTC on 9/11.

No, you'd have to design them so that whatever survived the explosion would self-destruct.

 
At 19 November, 2011 09:59, Blogger snug.bug said...

MGF, we've been over this a dozen times. To terrorize, the buildings had to fall. Had they stood with Christ-like wounds they would have been symbols of endurance. What was needed was a symbol of civilization's helplessness in the face of determined fanatics armed with boxcutters.

Your assumption that exotic charges would necessarily be unreliable is not justified. Besides, the discovery of unreacted nanothermite in the dust suggests that some of the charges did fail to go off.

Your conclusion that there were no charges is not justified. The authorities never tested for explosives, even though the NFPA 921 standard called for such tests in the case of such an event.

 
At 19 November, 2011 10:20, Blogger WhyAskQuestions said...

I think this video pretty well sums it up:

NIST Explosives Test

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VTV26RlB1vw

They used explosives, but nothing happenedto the steel. Again Brian is wrong!

 
At 19 November, 2011 10:29, Blogger snug.bug said...

That sums you up, all right. Some anonymous youtuber slaps NIST's name on an unintelligible video and you think it's proof that explosives can not hurt steel. You really are a WAQo.

 
At 19 November, 2011 10:34, Blogger WhyAskQuestions said...

That sums you up, all right. Some anonymous youtuber slaps NIST's name on an unintelligible video and you think it's proof that explosives can not hurt steel. You really are a WAQo.

Why comlain about it Brian? NIST tested for explosives and the result is no damage to the steel.

You're just pissed off that they tested for it & you didn't.

 
At 19 November, 2011 10:43, Blogger WhyAskQuestions said...

The pictures provided by this blog is evidence of the video that I provided its authenticity:

http://conspiraciesrnotus.blogspot.com/2010/12/nist-tested-bomb-demolition-hypotheses.html

Brian's goose is cooked.

 
At 19 November, 2011 10:47, Blogger WhyAskQuestions said...

Brian should look at NIST archives for "42A0016". It refutes everything that jackass claims or says.

 
At 19 November, 2011 11:15, Blogger Richard Gage's Testicles said...

The authorities never tested for explosives, even though the NFPA 921 standard called for such tests in the case of such an event.

Erik Lawyer says that, but it's untrue. NFPA standards leave it to the investigator's discretion.

 
At 19 November, 2011 15:38, Blogger M Gregory Ferris said...

"To terrorize, the buildings had to fall. Had they stood with Christ-like wounds they would have been symbols of endurance. What was needed was a symbol of civilization's helplessness in the face of determined fanatics armed with boxcutters."


...which is why AQ selected large commercial jetliners to fly into each target.


"Your assumption that exotic charges would necessarily be unreliable is not justified."

...unless you know anybody who works with explosives...

"Besides, the discovery of unreacted nanothermite in the dust suggests that some of the charges did fail to go off."

No, just like your imaginary DLI claim the troofers are pointing to chemical residue that is common in many things that are not thermite.


"Your conclusion that there were no charges is not justified. The authorities never tested for explosives, even though the NFPA 921 standard called for such tests in the case of such an event."

No need to check for explosives as no signs of their use was observed before during or while clearing the site.

 
At 19 November, 2011 15:51, Blogger Ian said...

Bushcists, Christ-like wounds, magic thermite elves, meatballs, rakes, Willie Rodriguez.

It's quite hilarious getting a look inside the mind of someone as deranged as Brian.

 
At 19 November, 2011 15:53, Blogger Ian said...

If Iraqi detonators had been found at the WTC, everyone would wonder how the Iraqis got past Marvin Bush's security company. Very bad politics for the Bushcists.

No, you'd have to design them so that whatever survived the explosion would self-destruct. I'm bright enough.


Invisible detonators to set off invisible explosives planted by invisible elevator repairmen. Yup, this makes perfect sense.

MGF, we've been over this a dozen times. To terrorize, the buildings had to fall. Had they stood with Christ-like wounds they would have been symbols of endurance. What was needed was a symbol of civilization's helplessness in the face of determined fanatics armed with boxcutters.

Yup, because kamikaze civilian airliners would not have been terrorizing enough.

Actually, bin Laden didn't expect the towers to fall. You'd know this if you ever actually, you know, researched the topic of 9/11.

 
At 19 November, 2011 15:55, Blogger Ian said...

Your assumption that exotic charges would necessarily be unreliable is not justified. Besides, the discovery of unreacted nanothermite in the dust suggests that some of the charges did fail to go off.

Your conclusion that there were no charges is not justified. The authorities never tested for explosives, even though the NFPA 921 standard called for such tests in the case of such an event.


Hey, if an unemployed lunatic and liar who wears women's underwear makes evidence-free assertions that explosives were never tested for and that "nanothermite" was in the dust, who are we to argue?

 
At 20 November, 2011 10:39, Blogger snug.bug said...

RGT: "NFPA standards leave it to the investigator's discretion."

Says who? NFPA or some lying propaganda website?

 
At 20 November, 2011 11:09, Blogger Ian said...

By the way, Brian. You still haven't named a single truther who considers you a member in good standing with the movement. Not one.

 
At 20 November, 2011 11:58, Blogger Richard Gage's Testicles said...

Says who? NFPA or some lying propaganda website?

You can browse NFPA 921 online. It does not mandate testing for explosives.

 
At 20 November, 2011 12:09, Blogger GuitarBill said...

Well, I see the goat fucker has managed to hijack another thread.

When will you guys learn?

 
At 20 November, 2011 15:21, Blogger M Gregory Ferris said...

" GuitarBill said...
Well, I see the goat fucker has managed to hijack another thread.

When will you guys learn?"

You know...you've got a bat...you've got a Pinata with an attitude...

 
At 20 November, 2011 19:16, Blogger Grandmastershek said...

GMS, what expertise allows you to confidently proclaim that "you would have some element of the rigging that would be impervious to thermite for it to work"? You haven't demonstrated that.

Oh the irony! Try 2 years of technical school in metal fabrication & 6 years in the field.

Curious Brian, what mechanism simultaneously enables thermite to cut in a straight line and is also consumable by thermite?

 
At 20 November, 2011 20:37, Blogger snug.bug said...

RGT, you did not answer the question. Where did you get your information about NFPA 921?

Where can I browse NFPA 921 online? All I find is a website where they offer to sell me a paper copy for many dozens of dollars.

GMS, Jon Cole's thermite cutter charges clearly allow the thermite to cut in a straight line and be consumed themselves in the reaction.

 
At 20 November, 2011 20:40, Blogger Ian said...

GMS, Jon Cole's thermite cutter charges clearly allow the thermite to cut in a straight line and be consumed themselves in the reaction.

That's nice, Brian. What does this have to do with 9/11?

 
At 20 November, 2011 23:41, Blogger GuitarBill said...

Ian wrote, "...That's nice, Brian. What does this have to do with 9/11?"

The short answer: Absolutely nothing.

But, then again, when your goal is to hijack every thread, why is relevance to the topic of the OP an issue?

BAN!

 
At 21 November, 2011 07:27, Blogger Richard Gage's Testicles said...

RGT, you did not answer the question. Where did you get your information about NFPA 921?

From reading it. You can read NFPA publications at nfpa.org. You'll need to register and use their online browser, which sucks.

I don't recall the section or the precise wording, but the essence was that the investigator determines which tests to carry out. There's nothing that requires testing for explosives.

 
At 21 November, 2011 10:23, Blogger WhyAskQuestions said...

GMS, Jon Cole's thermite cutter charges clearly allow the thermite to cut in a straight line and be consumed themselves in the reaction.

A little bit of thermite mixed with C-4 explosives will not leave traces of thermite behind. Also cutter charges of any kind require copper to cut through steel. None of which were found @ Ground Zero.

I think Brian likes building strawmen, perhaps the creators of the Wizard of Oz should sue his ass.

 
At 21 November, 2011 11:30, Blogger snug.bug said...

So RGT, does NFPA 921 say that in the case of high-order damage testing for explosives is recommended but not required?

WAQo, as usual you're just blathering. Copper is not required for Jon Cole's thermate cutter charges.

 
At 21 November, 2011 11:34, Blogger Ian said...

Brian still hasn't told us why we should care about Jon Cole's little experiment.

 
At 21 November, 2011 11:52, Blogger WhyAskQuestions said...

WAQo, as usual you're just blathering. Copper is not required for Jon Cole's thermate cutter charges.

Can you prove that ALL cutter charges doesn't require copper to cut through steel?

Put up or shut up!

 
At 21 November, 2011 11:58, Blogger WhyAskQuestions said...

I found this funny over @ A&E for 9/11 Truth:
http://www.ae911truth.org/news/41-articles/317-correction-and-clarification-article-explosive-evidence-at-wtc-cited-by-former-cdi-employee.html

"We incorrectly identified the thermite device illustrated in this article as a "cutter charge.” But, the device as described in the patent is only an igniter heat source only used to ignite larger charges. It does not in and of itself have the capability of cutting structural steel.

We would like to also note that neither the authors nor the interviewee, Tom Sullivan, intended to imply that this particular device was used in the WTC destruction."


LOL, looks like Brian's theory is slipping between his fingers. What na epic fail!

 
At 21 November, 2011 12:03, Blogger WhyAskQuestions said...

From same url as above from A&E fro 9/11 Truth:

We do not have much evidence to conclude that they were used in the Twin Towers – whose debris pile was fairly extensively photographed.

Meaning thermite cutting charges.

Brian got pwned big time.

 
At 21 November, 2011 12:51, Blogger Grandmastershek said...

GMS, Jon Cole's thermite cutter charges clearly allow the thermite to cut in a straight line and be consumed themselves in the reaction.

Wrong.

http://s8.photobucket.com/albums/a19/grnadmastershek/?action=view&current=thermite-1.png


His charges cut nothing on the order of the WTC.The apparatus was far thinner than the WTC columns & couldn't even cut that.

 
At 21 November, 2011 13:00, Blogger Grandmastershek said...

This comment has been removed by the author.

 
At 21 November, 2011 15:19, Blogger Richard Gage's Testicles said...

So RGT, does NFPA 921 say that in the case of high-order damage testing for explosives is recommended but not required?

That's more or less what I recall. Feel free to correct me if you find out otherwise.

 
At 21 November, 2011 20:54, Blogger snug.bug said...

WAQo, Jonathan Cole's experiments have
proven that thermite cutting charges do not require copper in order to work, and if you had bothered to watch the 5-minute Youtube "Incendiaryu Experiments" you wouldn't be so ignorant.

GMS, many of the box core columns in the upper part of the towers were built of 1/4" plate steel. Jon Cole's devices could certainly cut that. It's only through your ignorance that you can maintain your erroneous opinions.
If you had bothered to watch the 5-minute Youtube "Incendiaryu Experiments" you wouldn't be so ignorant.

So RGT, you admit that NIST was defying the recommendations of NFPA 921 when they refused to test for incendiaries and explosives? If so, why did you then imply that it was OK by NFPA that they not test?

 
At 21 November, 2011 22:08, Blogger Richard Gage's Testicles said...

If so, why did you then imply that it was OK by NFPA that they not test?

None of the buildings sustained high-order damage from explosions. That's what triggers the recommendation to test for explosives.

 
At 22 November, 2011 04:34, Blogger Grandmastershek said...

GMS, many of the box core columns in the upper part of the towers were built of 1/4" plate steel. Jon Cole's devices could certainly cut that. It's only through your ignorance that you can maintain your erroneous opinions.
If you had bothered to watch the 5-minute Youtube "Incendiaryu Experiments" you wouldn't be so ignorant.


I see and your extensive expertise is good enough to makes such claims via your opinions? Right...sadly for you Brian the picture I provided is from Cole's video and shows that his device was not consumed by the thermite. Again you and reality are at odds. My opinions at least come from a relevant education & experience; something you repeatedly demonstrate you are devoid of.

So all we have is your claim and thats it.

 
At 22 November, 2011 04:50, Blogger Grandmastershek said...

And surprise, surprise Brian is lying by omission again.

Column plate thickness varied from 1/4 inch to 5/8 inch in the impact zone of WTC 1 for floors 89-101, and from 1/4 inch to 13/16 inch in the impact zone of WTC 2 for floors 77-87...The core columns were box sections fabricated from A36 steel plate and were 36 inches x 14-16 inches with plate thickness from 3/4 inch to 4 inches. (FEMA Part B)

 
At 22 November, 2011 08:10, Blogger Ian said...

WAQo, Jonathan Cole's experiments have proven that thermite cutting charges do not require copper in order to work, and if you had bothered to watch the 5-minute Youtube "Incendiaryu Experiments" you wouldn't be so ignorant.

Still hasn't told us why this has any relevance to what happened on 9/11....

GMS, many of the box core columns in the upper part of the towers were built of 1/4" plate steel. Jon Cole's devices could certainly cut that. It's only through your ignorance that you can maintain your erroneous opinions.

Oh, now I see. Well, I'm sure you have tons of evidence that thermite was used to destroy the towers, right?

I mean, the Trinity test vaporized the steel tower the bomb was placed on, and you babble about evaporated steel all the time, so I guess Dr. Bill Deagle's claim that nuclear weapons were used at the WTC has a lot of validity, huh?

 
At 22 November, 2011 10:29, Blogger snug.bug said...

RGT, the shattering of the structure is high-order damage.

GMS, I don't know where you got that silly picture (probably some lying propaganda website), which was obviously from a very early stage of Jon Cole's work, but you obviously have not watched the later videos, which clearly show the capabilities of thermate charges to cut structural steel.

Consuming the cartridges is merely a matter of experimentation. The "can't-do" attitudes of debunkers is a symbol of the decline of this once-great nation from a nation of tinkerers to a nation of accountants.

 
At 22 November, 2011 10:56, Blogger WhyAskQuestions said...

WAQo, Jonathan Cole's experiments have
proven that thermite cutting charges do not require copper in order to work, and if you had bothered to watch the 5-minute Youtube "Incendiaryu Experiments" you wouldn't be so ignorant.


Actually its a FACT that ALL cutting charges require copper in order to cut through steel.

You still haven't proven it to me or anyone else that it doesn't require copper. So in reality you're ignorant to the facts Brian.

 
At 22 November, 2011 11:39, Blogger Ian said...

Consuming the cartridges is merely a matter of experimentation. The "can't-do" attitudes of debunkers is a symbol of the decline of this once-great nation from a nation of tinkerers to a nation of accountants.

A better indication of decline is a failed janitor acting as if he's more qualified to speak about science and technology than actual scientists and engineers.

Brian, nobody cares what you have to say because you're a failed janitor, liar, and lunatic. The sooner you accept this, the quicker you'll get the psychiatric treatment you need.

 
At 22 November, 2011 12:52, Blogger Grandmastershek said...

GMS, I don't know where you got that silly picture (probably some lying propaganda website), which was obviously from a very early stage of Jon Cole's work, but you obviously have not watched the later videos, which clearly show the capabilities of thermate charges to cut structural steel.

LMAO!!! I got it directly from the video. Of course instead of Brian crying he could provide evidence but as usual his word is supposed to be good enough.

 
At 22 November, 2011 13:16, Blogger Grandmastershek said...

My first problem is finding a container that could hold the thermate & melt the steel while not melting itself John Cole, The Great Thermate Debate

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5d5iIoCiI8g

So Brian where is this later research?

 
At 22 November, 2011 13:32, Blogger WhyAskQuestions said...

Watching Brian fail miserably is rather quite amusing.

I thought that some people would be senile around age 70, but it looks like Brian might have set the record for being senile at age 50+.

 
At 22 November, 2011 13:46, Blogger Ian said...

I thought that some people would be senile around age 70, but it looks like Brian might have set the record for being senile at age 50+.

I think Brian's an acid casualty. He did too much around about 1972 and it wrecked his mind, and thus we have him babbling as if Nixon is still bombing Cambodia while unable to do anything more than menial manual labor (which he can't even hold down).

 
At 22 November, 2011 14:20, Blogger snug.bug said...

WAQo, either you're making stuff up or you're relying on the authority of a lying propaganda website that makes stuff up.

Jonathan Cole's cutting charges do not require copper.

GMS, "the video"? What video? I've never seen that picture before. It's obviously a small-scale prototype, and you are trying to claim he never did anything bigger. See the 5 minute youtube "Incendiary Experiments" and you'll see that you're wrong.

Ian, Nixon stopped bombing Cambodia long ago, but Obama continues to bomb Afghanistan and Pakistan and has lately been bombing Libya and Yemen as well.

 
At 22 November, 2011 14:28, Blogger Ian said...

Ian, Nixon stopped bombing Cambodia long ago, but Obama continues to bomb Afghanistan and Pakistan and has lately been bombing Libya and Yemen as well.

See what I mean? You actually think there's something analogous between what Nixon did and what Obama is doing. That shows just how much of a burnt-out paranoid lunatic lost in 1972 you are.

Try living in this century, Brian.

 
At 22 November, 2011 16:37, Blogger M Gregory Ferris said...

"The "can't-do" attitudes of debunkers is a symbol of the decline of this once-great nation from a nation of tinkerers to a nation of accountants."

This goes to the root of your failure of character.

We were never a nation of "tinkers", we were a nation of get it done, get it done right, get the hell out of our way, ass-kicking mo-fos.

Then we started listening to people like you.

Your disdain for accountants is typical for a man who's lousy with numbers. The reason the country is in the economic situation it's in is because we stopped listening to the accountants...and started to listen to people like you.

 
At 22 November, 2011 17:08, Blogger Ian said...

We were never a nation of "tinkers", we were a nation of get it done, get it done right, get the hell out of our way, ass-kicking mo-fos.

Actually, I think we should give credit to the tinkerers. I mean, I'm sure many of our great innovators started as tinkerers. I just don't understand why the Wright Brothers didn't use cardboard to make their airplane. I don't understand why Edison didn't use a cardboard filament in his lightbulb. Why didn't Ford make the Model T out of cardboard? Why didn't John Roebling build the Brooklyn Bridge out of cardboard?

After all, cardboard obeys the laws of physics, so it should be useful in making cars, airplanes, electronics, bridges, etc.

 
At 22 November, 2011 20:02, Blogger M Gregory Ferris said...

I think it was cardboard which lead to the downfall off the USA

 
At 22 November, 2011 21:07, Blogger snug.bug said...

Ian, what makes you think there's no analogy between Nixon's war on Cambodia and Obama's wars on Afghanistan and Pakistan? Both are cases of illegal techno-terrorism against nations with which we were not at war and which are no threat to us.

MGF, where did you get the idea that I'm lousy with numbers?

Ian, cardboard could certainly be used to make cars, airplanes, electronics, and bridges. The reason it isn't used for that is because other materials serve those functions more economically.

 
At 22 November, 2011 21:29, Blogger Ian said...

Ian, what makes you think there's no analogy between Nixon's war on Cambodia and Obama's wars on Afghanistan and Pakistan? Both are cases of illegal techno-terrorism against nations with which we were not at war and which are no threat to us.


They're not analogous, Brian. You think they are because you're an ignorant paranoid lunatic who still thinks its 1972. Thanks for proving my point.

MGF, where did you get the idea that I'm lousy with numbers?

Brian, you think 85% of the American population are truthers. You obviously are terrible with numbers, which is why you're a failed janitor and not a scientist or engineer.

Ian, cardboard could certainly be used to make cars, airplanes, electronics, and bridges. The reason it isn't used for that is because other materials serve those functions more economically.

I've said this many times before, but it's utter idiocy like this that keeps me coming back to this blog. Thanks, Brian. You really are wildly hilarious.

Now I await the first cardboard jet engine and the first cardboard semiconductor.

 
At 22 November, 2011 22:49, Blogger GuitarBill said...

"...Ian, cardboard could certainly be used to make cars, airplanes, electronics, and bridges. The reason it isn't used for that is because other materials serve those functions more economically."

I've heard it all now.

Have you been sniffing model airplane glue again, goat fucker?

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

So goat fucker, how will anyone manage to produce "cardboard" semiconductors when the substrates must survive high temperature epitaxial deposition, diffusion, ion implantation, thin-film deposition, plasma etching, SiO2 deposition, gold backlapping, etc?

How is it possible to produce "cardboard" semiconductor substrates that are sufficiently flat to ensure that the multi-layer sub-micron photolithographic images meet the demanding tolerances necessary for the "cardboard" semiconductors to function?

And, finally, how will the "cardboard" semiconductors manage to function when they typically reach temperatures of 70 to 90 ºC (158 ºF to 194 ºF) under normal operating conditions?

(This should be a hoot).

Go for it, Mr. Bogus "scientific reputation."

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

 
At 23 November, 2011 05:00, Blogger Grandmastershek said...

GMS, "the video"? What video? I've never seen that picture before. It's obviously a small-scale prototype, and you are trying to claim he never did anything bigger.

The you obviously haven't been following his work. Go here (The Great Thermate Debate, John Cole, AE911Ttruth, 12/3/10):

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qamecech9m4

and see what you find at 9:18. Well would you look at that! The very same picture I posted over a day ago that Brian likes to pretend is "propaganda.

See the 5 minute youtube "Incendiary Experiments" and you'll see that you're wrong.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RXlC2TlNgEU

^^^LMAO!!!

That video is a synopsis of the work I am referencing. Sadly as usual you are parroting another moron. If you actually looked at Cole's original work, the one I referenced, you would have seen that the idiot youare blindly following left out the parts where Cole shows you the devices after the fact (see again 9:18, then 9:48, 10:40, 11:55, 13:10-13:20) ; which are not self consuming.

Another giant fail for big Bri.

Let the mental gymnastics begin!

 
At 23 November, 2011 05:03, Blogger Grandmastershek said...

I think the best part of all this is that the "incendiary experiments" video links to a copy of John Cole's work in its entirety. I guess thats just to much for our naked emperor.

 
At 23 November, 2011 07:41, Blogger Ian said...

Hey Brian, do you know what you can make out of cardboard? A life-size cutout of that "strutting, bragging lying, hot sexy Latin dreamboat" Willie Rodriguez so you can always look at him and dream of the day that he finally accepts your sexual advances.

 
At 23 November, 2011 13:32, Blogger M Gregory Ferris said...

"Ian, what makes you think there's no analogy between Nixon's war on Cambodia and Obama's wars on Afghanistan and Pakistan?..."

'Cuz we're winning? 'Cuz we're not killing anywhere near the number of folks are killed in Cambodia?


"Both are cases of illegal techno-terrorism against nations with which we were not at war and which are no threat to us."

Last week you were going on about the ISI's involvement with AL Qaeda and 9/11. Before that you were oinking on an on about how Richard Clake had military strikes ready to go on day one of the Gore Administration.

Those missing Twin Towers in NYC are proof you're wrong. So suck it.

 

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home