• Forums
  • Best Betting Sites
  • Sportsbook Promos
  • Best Sports Betting Apps
  • NFL Betting Forum
  • NBA Betting Forum
  • MLB Betting Forum
  • NHL Betting Forum
  • NCAAF Betting Forum
  • NCAAB Betting Forum
  • Soccer Betting Forum
  • Tennis Betting Forum
  • General Discussion
  • Help Forum
  • Guidelines
  • FAQ
  • Forum Updates
    Covers Logo
    Covers App
    Faster picks. Smarter bets.
    All in the NEW Covers App
    Download on the App Store Download on the Google Play Store
    • Sports
      • NFL
        • Back
        • NFL
        • NFL Home
        • Scores & Matchups
        • Prop Projections
        • NFL Picks
        • Weather
        • Injuries
      • NCAAF
        • Back
        • NCAAF
        • NCAAF Home
        • Scores & Matchups
        • Prop Projections
        • NCAAF Picks
        • Weather
        • Injuries
      • NBA
        • Back
        • NBA
        • NBA Home
        • Scores & Matchups
        • Prop Projections
        • NBA Picks
        • Injuries
      • NCAAB
        • Back
        • NCAAB
        • NCAAB Home
        • Scores & Matchups
        • NCAAB Picks
        • Injuries
      • MLB
        • Back
        • MLB
        • MLB Home
        • Scores & Matchups
        • Prop Projections
        • MLB Picks
        • Weather
        • Injuries
      • NHL
        • Back
        • NHL
        • NHL Home
        • Scores & Matchups
        • Prop Projections
        • NHL Picks
        • Injuries
      • Soccer
      • UFC
      • WNBA
        • Back
        • WNBA
        • WNBA Home
        • Scores & Matchups
        • WNBA Picks
        • Injuries
      • CFL
        • Back
        • CFL
        • CFL Home
        • Scores & Matchups
        • CFL Picks
      • Golf
        • Back
        • Golf
        • Golf Home
        • Golf Odds
        • Masters Odds
        • PGA Championship Odds
        • US Open Odds
        • British Open Odds
        • Ryder Cup Odds
        • Golf Picks
    • Odds
      • All Odds
      • NFL
      • NCAAF
      • NBA
      • NCAAB
      • MLB
      • NHL
      • Golf
      • Soccer Odds
        • Back
        • Soccer Odds
        • MLS Odds
        • Champions League Odds
        • Premier League Odds
      • UFC
      • WNBA
      • CFL
      • Election Odds
      • Futures
        • Back
        • Futures
        • NFL
        • NBA
        • MLB
        • NHL
        • NCAAB
        • NCAAF
      • Sports Odds History
    • Picks
      • All Picks
      • NFL
      • NBA
      • NHL
      • MLB
      • NCAAF
      • NCAAB
      • Golf
      • WNBA
      • CFL
      • User Picks
      • Team User Picks
      • Consensus Picks
        • Back
        • Consensus Picks
        • All Consensus Picks
        • NFL
        • NBA
        • NHL
        • MLB
        • NCAAF
        • NCAAB
        • CFL
        • WNBA
        • Consensus FAQ
        • Public Money
    • Prop Projections
      • NFL
      • NBA
      • MLB
      • NHL
    • Betting
      • US Betting Sites
      • Canada Betting Sites
      • Sportsbook Reviews
      • States
        • Back
        • States
        • US Legal Tracker
        • Revenue Tracker
        • Arizona
        • Arkansas
        • California
        • Colorado
        • Connecticut
        • DC
        • Florida
        • Georgia
        • Illinois
        • Indiana
        • Iowa
        • Kansas
        • Kentucky
        • Louisiana
        • Maine
        • Maryland
        • Massachusetts
        • Michigan
        • Mississippi
        • Missouri
        • Nevada
        • New Hampshire
        • New Jersey
        • New York
        • North Carolina
        • Ohio
        • Oregon
        • Pennsylvania
        • Tennessee
        • Texas
        • Vermont
        • Virginia
        • West Virginia
        • Wyoming
      • Provinces
        • Back
        • Provinces
        • Alberta
        • British Columbia
        • Manitoba
        • New Brunswick
        • Newfoundland and Labrador
        • Northwest Territories
        • Nova Scotia
        • Nunavut
        • Ontario
        • Prince Edward Island
        • Quebec (English)
        • Quebec (francais)
        • Saskatchewan
        • Yukon
      • By Sport
        • Back
        • By Sport
        • Baseball
        • Basketball
        • Boxing
        • College Football
        • F1
        • Football
        • Super Bowl
        • Golf
        • Hockey
        • Horse Racing
        • March Madness
        • Soccer
        • UFC
        • World Cup
      • Betting Apps
        • Back
        • Betting Apps
        • Best Sports Betting Apps USA
        • Ontario Sports Betting Apps
      • Rest of World
        • Back
        • Rest of World
        • UK Betting Offers
          • Back
          • UK Betting Offers
          • UK Betting Sites
          • bet365 Bonus Code UK
          • 888Sport Promo Code UK
          • William Hill Sign up Offer
          • Betway Sign up Offer
          • BetVictor Bonus Code UK
      • Betting Guides
        • Back
        • Betting Guides
        • All Guides
        • Glossary
        • Betting Calculators
          • Back
          • Betting Calculators
          • Odds Converter
          • Parlay Calculator
        • Futures Betting Guide
        • Moneyline Betting Guide
        • Over/Under Betting Guide
        • Parlay Betting Guide
        • Point Spread Betting Guide
        • Prop Betting Guide
        • Sports Betting Guides
          • Back
          • Sports Betting Guides
          • How To Bet On Sports Guide
          • NFL Betting Guide
          • NHL Betting Guide
          • NBA Betting Guide
          • MLB Betting Guide
          • NCAAB Betting Guide
          • NCAAF Betting Guide
          • Golf Betting Guide
          • Tennis Betting Guide
        • Teaser Betting Guide
      • Betting News
        • Back
        • Betting News
        • All News
        • Industry News
        • Podcasts
        • Covers Videos
        • Covers Writers
        • Offers & Boosts
    • Promos
      • Sportsbook Promos
      • Canada Sportsbook Promos
      • Bonuses By Sportsbook
        • Back
        • Bonuses By Sportsbook
        • bet365 Bonus Code
        • BET99 Promo Code
        • BetMGM Bonus Code
        • BetRivers Bonus Code
        • Caesars Sportsbook Promo
        • DraftKings Promo Code
        • Fanatics Sportsbook Promo
        • FanDuel Promo Code
        • Hard Rock Bet Promo Code
        • Sports Interaction Promo
        • Stake Promo Code
        • theScore Bet Promo Code
        • TonyBet Promo Code
      • Bonuses By Region
        • Back
        • Bonuses By Region
        • Arkansas Promos
        • Arizona Promos
        • Colorado Promos
        • Connecticut Promos
        • DC Promos
        • Illinois Promos
        • Indiana Promos
        • Iowa Promos
        • Kansas Promos
        • Kentucky Promos
        • Louisiana Promos
        • Maine Promos
        • Maryland Promos
        • Massachusetts Promos
        • Michigan Promos
        • Missouri Promos
        • New Jersey Promos
        • New York Promos
        • North Carolina Promos
        • Ohio Promos
        • Pennsylvania Promos
        • Tennessee Promos
        • Vermont Promos
        • Virginia Promos
        • West Virginia Promos
        • Wyoming Promos
    • Forum & Contests
      • All Forums
      • NFL Betting Forum
      • MLB Betting Forum
      • NCAAB Betting Forum
      • NCAAF Betting Forum
      • NBA Betting Forum
      • NHL Betting Forum
      • Soccer Betting Forum
      • Contests
        • Back
        • Contests
        • Contests Home
        • Streak Survivor
        • King of Covers
        • My Contests
    • Casino
      • Sweepstakes Casino
        • Back
        • Sweepstakes Casino
        • Sweepstakes Casino
        • Sweepstakes No-Deposit Bonuses
        • Sweepstakes Promos
          • Back
          • Sweepstakes Promos
          • Card Crush
          • Casino.click
          • Chanced Casino
          • Crown Coins Casino
          • FreeSpin Casino
          • LoneStar
          • McLuck
          • Mega Bonanza Casino
          • PlayFame
          • Pulsz
          • Stake.us
      • US Casinos
        • Back
        • US Casinos
        • US Online Casinos
        • US Online Casino Bonuses
        • Casino Promos
          • Back
          • Casino Promos
          • bet365 Casino Promo Code
          • BetRivers Casino Promo
          • Borgata Casino Bonus Code
          • Caesars Casino Bonus Code
          • DraftKings Casino Promo
          • Fanatics Casino Promo
          • FanDuel Casino Promo Code
          • Golden Nugget Casino Promo
          • Hard Rock Bet Casino Promo
          • Hollywood Casino Promo Code
      • Canada Casinos
        • Back
        • Canada Casinos
        • Canada Online Casinos
        • Provinces
          • Back
          • Provinces
          • Alberta Online Casino
          • BC Online Casino
          • Ontario Online Casinos
        • Casino Promos
          • Back
          • Casino Promos
          • BC.GAME Bonus Code
          • Cloudbet Promo Code
          • RainBet Promo Code
          • Roobet Promo Code
          • Shuffle Promo Code
          • Thrill Promo Code
    • Prediction Markets
      • Prediction Markets
      • Prediction Market Apps
      • Prediction Market Promos
      • Kalshi Promo Code
      • Polymarket Promo Code
      • DraftKings Predictions Promo Code
      • Novig Promo Code
      • ProphetX Promo Code
      • Underdog Promo Code
      • OG Promo Code
      • Fanatics Markets Promo Code
      • Plus500 Promo Code
    Covers Account
    Log in Create account
    Join free Log in
    All Forums | General Discussion

    September 11, 2001 (long read)

    «First Previous 262728 ... 616263 Next Last»
    shootzbra
    reillym32
    dl36
    dopalicous
    smdio
    ...
    Participants:
    Search model icon
    Views: 50324
    Posts: 1555
    «First Previous 262728 ... 616263 Next Last»
     
    shootzbra
    shootzbra
    Prospect
    Participation Meter
    Joined: Nov, 2008
    Posts: 138
    Posted: Oct. 30, 2010 - 4:00 PM ET #626

    I dont believe any of this ,yet why cant any pics of plane hitting pentagon be made public?This does bother me a bit.......If there is,i have not seen them,my bad!!!

    Reply
    Quote Post
    0
    Report User

    I dont believe any of this ,yet why cant any pics of plane hitting pentagon be made public?This does bother me a bit.......If there is,i have not seen them,my bad!!!

     
    reillym32
    reillym32
    Prospect
    Participation Meter
    Joined: Oct, 2008
    Posts: 55
    Posted: Oct. 30, 2010 - 4:04 PM ET #627

    Once again you're full of sh*t.  My comments are below your comments in bigger letters.  Get real smdio.

    3. 3000 people died

    ** Can't argue with ya there either, GREAT WORK. **

    ****You should be arguing with me in this one.  3,000 people didn't die for you, 2 of the planes didn't crash that day in your theory.****


    4.  The buildings didn't fall at free fall speed (I don't care what the fuck you say smdio, you have already discredited yourself.)

    ** You don't care what I say?  Then why are you debating?  You're simply afraid of the truth, just like most others.  I showed you a report from NIST that agrees to Free Fall speed.  Did they "discredit themselves" too? **

    **** NIST didn't admit to anything.  Post where they said that the building fell at free fall speed.  Not some stupid David Chandler Theory on there calculations proved the free fall theory with out them admitting to it.  Please Post there actual admission of Free Fall.  I would like to see the words FREE FALL in it.****


    5.  Remains of the deceased were found and identified from both the Pentagon and Flight 93 in Pennsylvania.

    ** And you believe them?  I don't.  If I told you I was 9'11'', would you believe me?  No, you'd want proof, right?  Is a list of bodies on a sheet of paper enough proof for you?  Because -that- is what the government released to satisfy the "identifying" of bodies on 9/11 **

    ****Again pure speculation.  This is called "I don't trust the government and I have no actual proof so I'm just going to say that the government controlled it*****


    6. Parts from both Flight 93 and Flight 77 were found at the scene and can be clearly seen in pictures from the pentagon and Flight 93 crash site.

    ** You're just naive.  Plain and simple. **

    **** Good answer when you have nothing else to say.  You should of went with your "government planted that there" theme, it works good for an overall answer when you can't say anything else.  It's a good way out.****

    7.  David Chandler is a High School physics teacher and was wrong in his analysis.  Remember this guy is no Professor and he is no respected physicist.  They quote this guy because he is the only one supporting there view and his video is deceptive enough to make their version of what happened sound good.  Here is a video debunking this high school teacher.  I'll let the video speak for itself.
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1rhY9c_iemA
    smdio and his buddy David Chandler like to show you a video well after the collapse actually started to occur.
    The building itself went down well after the events of 9/11 took place and was barely noticed by anyone until conspiracy theorists brought it up.  No one died in it and there was absolutely no reason to bring it down.

    ** Oh, Let's use Pseudoscience to disprove a logical claim by Chandler!  Using Pseucoscience, I can actually claim that Mars will be colliding with Earth in the next 7 days.  Would you believe me?  Anything debunking Chandler is ridiculous.  The only video's I've ever seen trying to do so are using false calculations and input to try and DEBUNK his claims, NOT to prove the truth.  If you cared enough to open your eyes, you would see that.  But your comfortable living in your world of lies.  Fine with me. **

    ****Let me see here David Chandler uses a video to do his calculations, and starts his calculations at point after the building already started to fall, yeah thats some good scientific facts right there. ****

    Reply
    Quote Post
    0
    Report User
    Once again you're full of sh*t.  My comments are below your comments in bigger letters.  Get real smdio.

    3. 3000 people died

    ** Can't argue with ya there either, GREAT WORK. **

    ****You should be arguing with me in this one.  3,000 people didn't die for you, 2 of the planes didn't crash that day in your theory.****


    4.  The buildings didn't fall at free fall speed (I don't care what the fuck you say smdio, you have already discredited yourself.)

    ** You don't care what I say?  Then why are you debating?  You're simply afraid of the truth, just like most others.  I showed you a report from NIST that agrees to Free Fall speed.  Did they "discredit themselves" too? **

    **** NIST didn't admit to anything.  Post where they said that the building fell at free fall speed.  Not some stupid David Chandler Theory on there calculations proved the free fall theory with out them admitting to it.  Please Post there actual admission of Free Fall.  I would like to see the words FREE FALL in it.****


    5.  Remains of the deceased were found and identified from both the Pentagon and Flight 93 in Pennsylvania.

    ** And you believe them?  I don't.  If I told you I was 9'11'', would you believe me?  No, you'd want proof, right?  Is a list of bodies on a sheet of paper enough proof for you?  Because -that- is what the government released to satisfy the "identifying" of bodies on 9/11 **

    ****Again pure speculation.  This is called "I don't trust the government and I have no actual proof so I'm just going to say that the government controlled it*****


    6. Parts from both Flight 93 and Flight 77 were found at the scene and can be clearly seen in pictures from the pentagon and Flight 93 crash site.

    ** You're just naive.  Plain and simple. **

    **** Good answer when you have nothing else to say.  You should of went with your "government planted that there" theme, it works good for an overall answer when you can't say anything else.  It's a good way out.****

    7.  David Chandler is a High School physics teacher and was wrong in his analysis.  Remember this guy is no Professor and he is no respected physicist.  They quote this guy because he is the only one supporting there view and his video is deceptive enough to make their version of what happened sound good.  Here is a video debunking this high school teacher.  I'll let the video speak for itself.
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1rhY9c_iemA
    smdio and his buddy David Chandler like to show you a video well after the collapse actually started to occur.
    The building itself went down well after the events of 9/11 took place and was barely noticed by anyone until conspiracy theorists brought it up.  No one died in it and there was absolutely no reason to bring it down.

    ** Oh, Let's use Pseudoscience to disprove a logical claim by Chandler!  Using Pseucoscience, I can actually claim that Mars will be colliding with Earth in the next 7 days.  Would you believe me?  Anything debunking Chandler is ridiculous.  The only video's I've ever seen trying to do so are using false calculations and input to try and DEBUNK his claims, NOT to prove the truth.  If you cared enough to open your eyes, you would see that.  But your comfortable living in your world of lies.  Fine with me. **

    ****Let me see here David Chandler uses a video to do his calculations, and starts his calculations at point after the building already started to fall, yeah thats some good scientific facts right there. ****

     
    dl36
    dl36
    Banned
    Participation Meter
    Joined: Jul, 2003
    Posts: 27850
    Posted: Oct. 30, 2010 - 4:21 PM ET #628

    Can we get Buzz Killington the "thread killer" to start cutting and pasting links on this thread?

     
    Reply
    Quote Post
    0
    Report User
    Can we get Buzz Killington the "thread killer" to start cutting and pasting links on this thread?

     
     
    dopalicous
    dopalicous
    Veteran
    Participation Meter
    Joined: Dec, 2007
    Posts: 3468
    Posted: Oct. 30, 2010 - 4:51 PM ET #629

    Quote Originally Posted by dl36:

    Can we get Buzz Killington the "thread killer" to start cutting and pasting links on this thread?

     


     

    I hate having to act like a good funny guy to get into the ladies draws......ohhh of course your a good girl.......of course your college Degree means your smart.......No you very interesting...... but in the end...If you can close the door..        

    I also live in south Florida and there  seems to be alot of young men with a undeserved sense of self accomplishments, complete douchebags, only care about money. Affliction clothes. and acting metrosexual. 
    Reply
    Quote Post
    0
    Report User
    Quote Originally Posted by dl36:

    Can we get Buzz Killington the "thread killer" to start cutting and pasting links on this thread?

     


     

    I hate having to act like a good funny guy to get into the ladies draws......ohhh of course your a good girl.......of course your college Degree means your smart.......No you very interesting...... but in the end...If you can close the door..        

    I also live in south Florida and there  seems to be alot of young men with a undeserved sense of self accomplishments, complete douchebags, only care about money. Affliction clothes. and acting metrosexual. 
     
    smdio
    smdio
    Veteran
    Participation Meter
    Joined: Oct, 2010
    Posts: 1094
    Posted: Oct. 30, 2010 - 6:22 PM ET #630

    Quote Originally Posted by reillym32:


    4.  The buildings didn't fall at free fall speed (I don't care what the fuck you say smdio, you have already discredited yourself.)

    ** You don't care what I say?  Then why are you debating?  You're simply afraid of the truth, just like most others.  I showed you a report from NIST that agrees to Free Fall speed.  Did they "discredit themselves" too? **

    **** NIST didn't admit to anything.  Post where they said that the building fell at free fall speed.  Not some stupid David Chandler Theory on there calculations proved the free fall theory with out them admitting to it.  Please Post there actual admission of Free Fall.  I would like to see the words FREE FALL in it.****


    Out of all that rubbish that you posted and made so friggin big that you probably turned almost -everyone- away from this thread by acting like a 15 year old (again), I did pull this statement out.

    In the NIST report, which you obviously have not read, they clearly state that just over 2.5 seconds of WTC7 fell in freefall speed.  They furthermore claim that the towers fell in just under 5 seconds, although this claim is widely debated by many people who are NOT conspiracy theorists.

    You can see the page of NIST's report that talks about freefall here:

    https://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/regions/world/2008/12/415719.html

    They even use the word freefall for you, Reilly!

    Oh and I'll also offer you an apology for incorrectly identifying you as the "idiot" and not tpjw on page 25.

    But I'll now retract that apology since you ranted on the very same page. I'll also remind you that you've given not a single, solid arguement to this debate, and that is why you're acting like a 16 year old punk who just got dumped by his girlfriend.

    Either take your "smart" pills, or leave this debate entirely.

    Reply
    Quote Post
    0
    Report User
    Quote Originally Posted by reillym32:


    4.  The buildings didn't fall at free fall speed (I don't care what the fuck you say smdio, you have already discredited yourself.)

    ** You don't care what I say?  Then why are you debating?  You're simply afraid of the truth, just like most others.  I showed you a report from NIST that agrees to Free Fall speed.  Did they "discredit themselves" too? **

    **** NIST didn't admit to anything.  Post where they said that the building fell at free fall speed.  Not some stupid David Chandler Theory on there calculations proved the free fall theory with out them admitting to it.  Please Post there actual admission of Free Fall.  I would like to see the words FREE FALL in it.****


    Out of all that rubbish that you posted and made so friggin big that you probably turned almost -everyone- away from this thread by acting like a 15 year old (again), I did pull this statement out.

    In the NIST report, which you obviously have not read, they clearly state that just over 2.5 seconds of WTC7 fell in freefall speed.  They furthermore claim that the towers fell in just under 5 seconds, although this claim is widely debated by many people who are NOT conspiracy theorists.

    You can see the page of NIST's report that talks about freefall here:

    https://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/regions/world/2008/12/415719.html

    They even use the word freefall for you, Reilly!

    Oh and I'll also offer you an apology for incorrectly identifying you as the "idiot" and not tpjw on page 25.

    But I'll now retract that apology since you ranted on the very same page. I'll also remind you that you've given not a single, solid arguement to this debate, and that is why you're acting like a 16 year old punk who just got dumped by his girlfriend.

    Either take your "smart" pills, or leave this debate entirely.

     
    smdio
    smdio
    Veteran
    Participation Meter
    Joined: Oct, 2010
    Posts: 1094
    Posted: Oct. 30, 2010 - 6:33 PM ET #631

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4dgJTR6ZR24

    Enough said about WTC7, you all must absolutely admit that it fell for over 100 meters and over 2.5 seconds at freefall speed. 

    NIST said it.  Video shows it. 

    My question then becomes:

    If WTC7 feel at freefall speed, how is it physically possible that the official explanation to the collapse was fire?

    And if that was a lie, what else are they lying to us about?

    Reply
    Quote Post
    0
    Report User

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4dgJTR6ZR24

    Enough said about WTC7, you all must absolutely admit that it fell for over 100 meters and over 2.5 seconds at freefall speed. 

    NIST said it.  Video shows it. 

    My question then becomes:

    If WTC7 feel at freefall speed, how is it physically possible that the official explanation to the collapse was fire?

    And if that was a lie, what else are they lying to us about?

     
    tpjw44
    tpjw44
    Captain
    Participation Meter
    Joined: Sep, 2004
    Posts: 7920
    Posted: Oct. 30, 2010 - 6:38 PM ET #632

    Quote Originally Posted by smdio:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4dgJTR6ZR24

    Enough said about WTC7, you all must absolutely admit that it fell for over 100 meters and over 2.5 seconds at freefall speed. 

    NIST said it.  Video shows it. 

    My question then becomes:

    If WTC7 feel at freefall speed, how is it physically possible that the official explanation to the collapse was fire?

    And if that was a lie, what else are they lying to us about?



    It was most likely because Captain Jack Sparrow's gold and silver was stored there.  Larry SILVERstein???????  Don't you see the connection?
    Reply
    Quote Post
    0
    Report User
    Quote Originally Posted by smdio:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4dgJTR6ZR24

    Enough said about WTC7, you all must absolutely admit that it fell for over 100 meters and over 2.5 seconds at freefall speed. 

    NIST said it.  Video shows it. 

    My question then becomes:

    If WTC7 feel at freefall speed, how is it physically possible that the official explanation to the collapse was fire?

    And if that was a lie, what else are they lying to us about?



    It was most likely because Captain Jack Sparrow's gold and silver was stored there.  Larry SILVERstein???????  Don't you see the connection?
     
    smdio
    smdio
    Veteran
    Participation Meter
    Joined: Oct, 2010
    Posts: 1094
    Posted: Oct. 30, 2010 - 6:52 PM ET #633

    In that video in post #634, I want to point out that an "elevator modernization" had occured at WTC7 approximately 9 months before 9/11/2001. You can read about ACE's entire project here:

    https://911research.wtc7.net/cache/wtc/arch/wtc_elevator_renovation.pdf

     

    Was it ACE that planted the Nano-Thermite that was found at WTC7 amongst the debris?  Well, if it was, someone on the "inside" must have let them into the building with it.  I would suggest an investigation be done on the Security Company that handled anything WTC related, which was Stratesec. So lets do that:

    https://www.commondreams.org/views03/0204-06.htm

    Interesting that Stratesec not only provided security for the WTC complex, but also for Dulles International Airport and United Airlines.

    Are you telling me that this doesn't REEK of a coverup guys?!?!?!!?  SERIOUSLY?!?!

    Reply
    Quote Post
    0
    Report User

    In that video in post #634, I want to point out that an "elevator modernization" had occured at WTC7 approximately 9 months before 9/11/2001. You can read about ACE's entire project here:

    https://911research.wtc7.net/cache/wtc/arch/wtc_elevator_renovation.pdf

     

    Was it ACE that planted the Nano-Thermite that was found at WTC7 amongst the debris?  Well, if it was, someone on the "inside" must have let them into the building with it.  I would suggest an investigation be done on the Security Company that handled anything WTC related, which was Stratesec. So lets do that:

    https://www.commondreams.org/views03/0204-06.htm

    Interesting that Stratesec not only provided security for the WTC complex, but also for Dulles International Airport and United Airlines.

    Are you telling me that this doesn't REEK of a coverup guys?!?!?!!?  SERIOUSLY?!?!

     
    tpjw44
    tpjw44
    Captain
    Participation Meter
    Joined: Sep, 2004
    Posts: 7920
    Posted: Oct. 30, 2010 - 7:02 PM ET #634

    Your posts are all very deceptive.  There is a big difference between fell at free fall speed and free fall acceleration. 
    Reply
    Quote Post
    0
    Report User
    Your posts are all very deceptive.  There is a big difference between fell at free fall speed and free fall acceleration. 
     
    tpjw44
    tpjw44
    Captain
    Participation Meter
    Joined: Sep, 2004
    Posts: 7920
    Posted: Oct. 30, 2010 - 7:09 PM ET #635

    It's funny what terms up when you look at the WHOLE PICTURE

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G86yuunRBIw&feature=player_embedded
    Reply
    Quote Post
    0
    Report User
    It's funny what terms up when you look at the WHOLE PICTURE

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G86yuunRBIw&feature=player_embedded
     
    tpjw44
    tpjw44
    Captain
    Participation Meter
    Joined: Sep, 2004
    Posts: 7920
    Posted: Oct. 30, 2010 - 7:09 PM ET #636

    what TURNS up is important too
    Reply
    Quote Post
    0
    Report User
    what TURNS up is important too
     
    smdio
    smdio
    Veteran
    Participation Meter
    Joined: Oct, 2010
    Posts: 1094
    Posted: Oct. 30, 2010 - 7:14 PM ET #637

    Quote Originally Posted by tpjw44:

    It's funny what terms up when you look at the WHOLE PICTURE

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G86yuunRBIw&feature=player_embedded

    There is no difference between the terms "freefall" and "gravitational acceleration"

    And I don't have to look at any more video of WTC7 falling.  NIST claims it fell in 5.2 seconds, and 2.25 seconds of freefall were experienced. The only time that freefall stopped was when the building started collapsing on top of itself.

    Are you now saying NIST is being deceptive?!?!  That's what I've been saying all along.

    Reply
    Quote Post
    0
    Report User

    Quote Originally Posted by tpjw44:

    It's funny what terms up when you look at the WHOLE PICTURE

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G86yuunRBIw&feature=player_embedded

    There is no difference between the terms "freefall" and "gravitational acceleration"

    And I don't have to look at any more video of WTC7 falling.  NIST claims it fell in 5.2 seconds, and 2.25 seconds of freefall were experienced. The only time that freefall stopped was when the building started collapsing on top of itself.

    Are you now saying NIST is being deceptive?!?!  That's what I've been saying all along.

     
    tpjw44
    tpjw44
    Captain
    Participation Meter
    Joined: Sep, 2004
    Posts: 7920
    Posted: Oct. 30, 2010 - 7:16 PM ET #638

    Quote Originally Posted by smdio:

    There is no difference between the terms "freefall" and "gravitational acceleration"

    And I don't have to look at any more video of WTC7 falling.  NIST claims it fell in 5.2 seconds, and 2.25 seconds of freefall were experienced. The only time that freefall stopped was when the building started collapsing on top of itself.

    Are you now saying NIST is being deceptive?!?!  That's what I've been saying all along.



    NIST also ruled out explosives.  You can't have it both ways pal.

    You still owe the Burlingames an apology
    Reply
    Quote Post
    0
    Report User
    Quote Originally Posted by smdio:

    There is no difference between the terms "freefall" and "gravitational acceleration"

    And I don't have to look at any more video of WTC7 falling.  NIST claims it fell in 5.2 seconds, and 2.25 seconds of freefall were experienced. The only time that freefall stopped was when the building started collapsing on top of itself.

    Are you now saying NIST is being deceptive?!?!  That's what I've been saying all along.



    NIST also ruled out explosives.  You can't have it both ways pal.

    You still owe the Burlingames an apology
     
    tpjw44
    tpjw44
    Captain
    Participation Meter
    Joined: Sep, 2004
    Posts: 7920
    Posted: Oct. 30, 2010 - 7:19 PM ET #639

    Quote Originally Posted by smdio:

    There is no difference between the terms "freefall" and "gravitational acceleration"

    And I don't have to look at any more video of WTC7 falling.  NIST claims it fell in 5.2 seconds, and 2.25 seconds of freefall were experienced. The only time that freefall stopped was when the building started collapsing on top of itself.

    Are you now saying NIST is being deceptive?!?!  That's what I've been saying all along.



    I also said free fall SPEED and free fall ACCELERATION.  You left a word out Captain Deceptive.

    You still owe the Burlingames an apology
    Reply
    Quote Post
    0
    Report User
    Quote Originally Posted by smdio:

    There is no difference between the terms "freefall" and "gravitational acceleration"

    And I don't have to look at any more video of WTC7 falling.  NIST claims it fell in 5.2 seconds, and 2.25 seconds of freefall were experienced. The only time that freefall stopped was when the building started collapsing on top of itself.

    Are you now saying NIST is being deceptive?!?!  That's what I've been saying all along.



    I also said free fall SPEED and free fall ACCELERATION.  You left a word out Captain Deceptive.

    You still owe the Burlingames an apology
     
    tpjw44
    tpjw44
    Captain
    Participation Meter
    Joined: Sep, 2004
    Posts: 7920
    Posted: Oct. 30, 2010 - 7:22 PM ET #640

    AND NIST, when they mention free fall is only talking about a PORTION of the building, not the entire structure.
    Reply
    Quote Post
    0
    Report User
    AND NIST, when they mention free fall is only talking about a PORTION of the building, not the entire structure.
     
    smdio
    smdio
    Veteran
    Participation Meter
    Joined: Oct, 2010
    Posts: 1094
    Posted: Oct. 30, 2010 - 7:27 PM ET #641

    Quote Originally Posted by tpjw44:

    AND NIST, when they mention free fall is only talking about a PORTION of the building, not the entire structure.

    If I apologize to the Burlingame's, will you stop saying that?  It's incredibly annoying.

    And no, NIST referred to a "portion of the fall" was in freefall speed

    And don't try to argue semantics with me.  NIST said the building fell for 2.5 seconds at freefall speed i.e. gravitational acceleration i.e. freefall acceleration.  They are saying that there was no resistance in the buildings collapse for 2.5 seconds.  That is impossible without the aid of explosive and/or thermite.

    Oh, did I mention that billions of particals of thermite were found in the debris of 9/11?

    Reply
    Quote Post
    0
    Report User

    Quote Originally Posted by tpjw44:

    AND NIST, when they mention free fall is only talking about a PORTION of the building, not the entire structure.

    If I apologize to the Burlingame's, will you stop saying that?  It's incredibly annoying.

    And no, NIST referred to a "portion of the fall" was in freefall speed

    And don't try to argue semantics with me.  NIST said the building fell for 2.5 seconds at freefall speed i.e. gravitational acceleration i.e. freefall acceleration.  They are saying that there was no resistance in the buildings collapse for 2.5 seconds.  That is impossible without the aid of explosive and/or thermite.

    Oh, did I mention that billions of particals of thermite were found in the debris of 9/11?

     
    smdio
    smdio
    Veteran
    Participation Meter
    Joined: Oct, 2010
    Posts: 1094
    Posted: Oct. 30, 2010 - 7:29 PM ET #642

    I'm going to be honest with you guys, I've actually changed my view on some things in the past 26 pages of this thread. Would you care to know how?
    Reply
    Quote Post
    0
    Report User
    I'm going to be honest with you guys, I've actually changed my view on some things in the past 26 pages of this thread. Would you care to know how?
     
    tpjw44
    tpjw44
    Captain
    Participation Meter
    Joined: Sep, 2004
    Posts: 7920
    Posted: Oct. 30, 2010 - 7:29 PM ET #643

    "In stage 2 THE NORTH FACE descended at gravitational acceleration as the buckled columns provided negligible support to the upper portion of THE NORTH FACE.  The free fall continued for approximately 8 stories..."

    Strike 3.  You're out!!!!  Please leave your Truther Decoder Ring and Dylan Avery coffee mug at the door.  Thank you.
    Reply
    Quote Post
    0
    Report User
    "In stage 2 THE NORTH FACE descended at gravitational acceleration as the buckled columns provided negligible support to the upper portion of THE NORTH FACE.  The free fall continued for approximately 8 stories..."

    Strike 3.  You're out!!!!  Please leave your Truther Decoder Ring and Dylan Avery coffee mug at the door.  Thank you.
     
    smdio
    smdio
    Veteran
    Participation Meter
    Joined: Oct, 2010
    Posts: 1094
    Posted: Oct. 30, 2010 - 7:34 PM ET #644

    Quote Originally Posted by tpjw44:

    "In stage 2 THE NORTH FACE descended at gravitational acceleration as the buckled columns provided negligible support to the upper portion of THE NORTH FACE.  The free fall continued for approximately 8 stories..."

    Strike 3.  You're out!!!!  Please leave your Truther Decoder Ring and Dylan Avery coffee mug at the door.  Thank you.

    That's in Stage 2, which is only part of the collapse.

    You can't even read properly?

    Reply
    Quote Post
    0
    Report User

    Quote Originally Posted by tpjw44:

    "In stage 2 THE NORTH FACE descended at gravitational acceleration as the buckled columns provided negligible support to the upper portion of THE NORTH FACE.  The free fall continued for approximately 8 stories..."

    Strike 3.  You're out!!!!  Please leave your Truther Decoder Ring and Dylan Avery coffee mug at the door.  Thank you.

    That's in Stage 2, which is only part of the collapse.

    You can't even read properly?

     
    tpjw44
    tpjw44
    Captain
    Participation Meter
    Joined: Sep, 2004
    Posts: 7920
    Posted: Oct. 30, 2010 - 7:39 PM ET #645

    Quote Originally Posted by smdio:

    That's in Stage 2, which is only part of the collapse.

    You can't even read properly?



    That's the only stage that free fall occurred cupcake.  The problem for you is I have actually read everything we discuss.   I'm quite sure most of the people you debate have not.  I'm done for the night. 
    Reply
    Quote Post
    0
    Report User
    Quote Originally Posted by smdio:

    That's in Stage 2, which is only part of the collapse.

    You can't even read properly?



    That's the only stage that free fall occurred cupcake.  The problem for you is I have actually read everything we discuss.   I'm quite sure most of the people you debate have not.  I'm done for the night. 
     
    ABooksNightmare
    ABooksNightmare
    Hall of Fame
    Participation Meter
    Joined: Jul, 2004
    Posts: 26633
    Posted: Oct. 30, 2010 - 7:39 PM ET #646

    COVERS allows u to tell someone they are sexually frustrated so long as ur hands are clean
    Reply
    Quote Post
    0
    Report User
     
    smdio
    smdio
    Veteran
    Participation Meter
    Joined: Oct, 2010
    Posts: 1094
    Posted: Oct. 30, 2010 - 7:55 PM ET #647

    Reply
    Quote Post
    0
    Report User
     
    CountNo_Account
    CountNo_Account
    Captain
    Participation Meter
    Joined: Dec, 2004
    Posts: 7738
    Posted: Oct. 30, 2010 - 8:33 PM ET #648

    Quote Originally Posted by smdio:



    Nothing shameful about admitting defeat to superior reasoning.Just forget it, move on, hopefully somewhere besides Covers...


    Reply
    Quote Post
    0
    Report User
    Quote Originally Posted by smdio:



    Nothing shameful about admitting defeat to superior reasoning.Just forget it, move on, hopefully somewhere besides Covers...


     
    smdio
    smdio
    Veteran
    Participation Meter
    Joined: Oct, 2010
    Posts: 1094
    Posted: Oct. 30, 2010 - 8:36 PM ET #649

    Admitting defeat?  Not even close
    Reply
    Quote Post
    0
    Report User
    Admitting defeat?  Not even close
     
     
    reillym32
    reillym32
    Prospect
    Participation Meter
    Joined: Oct, 2008
    Posts: 55
    Posted: Oct. 30, 2010 - 10:42 PM ET #650

    smdio, this is no longer your post, actual common sense thinking people have taken over your post.  Go back to eating your cheetos and looking at porn.
    Reply
    Quote Post
    0
    Report User
    smdio, this is no longer your post, actual common sense thinking people have taken over your post.  Go back to eating your cheetos and looking at porn.
    All Forums | General Discussion
    «First Previous 262728 ... 616263 Next Last»

    Hot Forums IconHot Forum Topics

    • 🤢🥴💩_ Fubah's risky baseball bets _🥶😲🥵 445,781 Covers arrow
    • Tuesday 09/08/2026 975 Covers arrow
    • 🏈🏈🏈 Fubah2's risky CFB bets 253,229 Covers arrow
    • Couple thoughts 3,919 Covers arrow
    • 9/8 POD 🔥🔥???? 3,334 Covers arrow
    • Tuesday 2,813 Covers arrow
    • Breathtaking ....truly 20,479 Covers arrow
    • We have picked a terrible time to have the stupidest president ever 26,698 Covers arrow
    • Obviously the true face of the republican party 30,558 Covers arrow
    • PART DEUX 209 Covers arrow

    Warning - External Link

    Report User

    Thank you for reporting
    This content is abusive or harmful
    This post is spam
    An error has occurred
    This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

    Delete Post

    Are you sure you would like to remove this post?

    Remove Thread

    Are you sure you would like to remove this thread?

    Scan Results

    Login/Register

    Happy to have you join the conversation. To do so, please login or create an account.
    Accounts are free and easy to create.

    Search


    Loading…

    Loading…

    About Us
    Contact Us
    Careers
    Our Team
    Brand
    Testimonials
    Betting Guides
    Sportsbook Reviews
    Betting News
    Podcasts
    Responsible Gambling
    Betting Sites
    US Betting Sites
    Canada Betting Sites
    Canada Casinos
    Best Betting Apps
    Contests
    Streak Survivor
    King of Covers
    Ultimate Race
    Office Pools
    The Covers community has
    810,221
    lifetime members worldwide
    Join our community today
    Covers 30 Years Logo Established in 1995,
    Covers is the world
    leader in sports
    betting information.
    21+
    Gambling problem? Call 1-800-GAMBLER
    Help Privacy Terms of Service Cookies Sitemap Forum
    YouTube logo
    Facebook logo
    Twitter logo
    Instagram logo
    LinkedIn logo
    Google News logo
    Covers is verified safe by:
    Evalon Logo Logo GPWA Logo GDPR logo Logo GeoTrust logo Logo PCI DSS logo Logo
    Copyright © 1995 - 2026 CS Media Ltd. All Rights Reserved.
    If you choose to make use of any information on this website including online sports betting services from any websites that may be featured on this website, we strongly recommend that you carefully check your local laws before doing so.It is your sole responsibility to understand your local laws and observe them strictly.Covers does not provide any advice or guidance as to the legality of online sports betting or other online gambling activities within your jurisdiction and you are responsible for complying with laws that are applicable to you in your relevant locality.Covers disclaims all liability associated with your use of this website and use of any information contained on it.As a condition of using this website, you agree to hold the owner of this website harmless from any claims arising from your use of any services on any third party website that may be featured by Covers.