Activism Discussion: After 7 Years, Govt Finally "explains" WTC7 Collapse - It Was The Fire!!!!!

After 7 Years, Govt Finally "explains" WTC7 Collapse - It Was The Fire!!!!!
Posts: 236

Report Abuse

Use this form to report abuse or request takedown.
The requests are usually processed within 48 hours.

Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11   Next  (First | Last)

Speeders & Drunk Drivers Are MURDERERS
2008-08-21 12:19:40 EST





http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/26331842/

Federal report refutes 9/11 conspiracy theory
Investigators say fire \ufffd not explosives \ufffd brought down nearby skyscraper

updated 17 minutes ago

GAITHERSBURG, Md. - Government investigators have issued a report refuting
conspiracy theories that a skyscraper next to the twin towers was brought
down by explosives during the September 11, 2001, attacks on the United
States. The report said that fires destroyed World Trade Center 7.

Scientists with the National Institute of Standards and Technology said
their three-year investigation of the collapse of the 47-story building was
the first known instance of fire causing the total failure of a skyscraper.

The investigators also concluded that the collapse of the nearby twin
towers broke the city water main, leaving the sprinkler system in WTC 7
without water.

The collapse of building 7 has long been the subject of conspiracy theories
that something else brought down the tower

********************************************

Absolutely no surprise here. Everybody knew they would say this - that
barely observable fires would cause the 600 foot skyskraper to collapse
straight down like a perfect demolition job.!!!!

Government Shill #2
2008-08-21 12:24:36 EST
On Thu, 21 Aug 2008 11:19:40 -0500, "Speeders & Drunk Drivers are
MURDERERS" <xeton2001@yahoo.com> wrote:

>
>
>
>
>
>http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/26331842/
>
>Federal report refutes 9/11 conspiracy theory
>Investigators say fire — not explosives — brought down nearby skyscraper
>
>updated 17 minutes ago
>
>GAITHERSBURG, Md. - Government investigators have issued a report refuting
>conspiracy theories that a skyscraper next to the twin towers was brought
>down by explosives during the September 11, 2001, attacks on the United
>States. The report said that fires destroyed World Trade Center 7.
>
>Scientists with the National Institute of Standards and Technology said
>their three-year investigation of the collapse of the 47-story building was
>the first known instance of fire causing the total failure of a skyscraper.
>
>The investigators also concluded that the collapse of the nearby twin
>towers broke the city water main, leaving the sprinkler system in WTC 7
>without water.
>
>The collapse of building 7 has long been the subject of conspiracy theories
>that something else brought down the tower
>
>********************************************
>
>Absolutely no surprise here.

Because sane people have always known this was the case.


>Everybody knew they would say this - that

Because sane people have always known this was the case.

>barely observable fires would cause the 600 foot skyskraper to collapse

Sane people disagree with your claim of "barely observable fires".

>straight down like a perfect demolition job.!!!!

Sane people disagree with your claims of "straight down" and "perfect
demolition job".

--
Shill #2

Roses are red,
violets are blue,
one of us is a moron,
I think that it's you.

Iarnrod
2008-08-21 12:25:09 EST
Speeders & Drunk Drivers are MURDERERS wrote:
> http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/26331842/
>
> Federal report refutes 9/11 conspiracy theory
> Investigators say fire � not explosives � brought down nearby skyscraper
>
> updated 17 minutes ago
>
> GAITHERSBURG, Md. - Government investigators have issued a report refuting
> conspiracy theories that a skyscraper next to the twin towers was brought
> down by explosives during the September 11, 2001, attacks on the United
> States. The report said that fires destroyed World Trade Center 7.
>
> Scientists with the National Institute of Standards and Technology said
> their three-year investigation of the collapse of the 47-story building was
> the first known instance of fire causing the total failure of a skyscraper.
>
> The investigators also concluded that the collapse of the nearby twin
> towers broke the city water main, leaving the sprinkler system in WTC 7
> without water.
>
> The collapse of building 7 has long been the subject of conspiracy theories
> that something else brought down the tower
>
> ********************************************
>
> Absolutely no surprise here. Everybody knew they would say this - that
> barely observable fires would cause the 600 foot skyskraper to collapse
> straight down like a perfect demolition job.!!!!

Too bad for you that's not at all what happened.

Zasochimti
2008-08-21 12:26:17 EST

"Government Shill #2" <gov.shill@gmail.com> wrote in message news:ii5ra4h5th3pi3ugb5dmakehc2te6g4pnv@4ax.com...
> On Thu, 21 Aug 2008 11:19:40 -0500, "Speeders & Drunk Drivers are
> MURDERERS" <xeton2001@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/26331842/
>>
>>Federal report refutes 9/11 conspiracy theory
>>Investigators say fire - not explosives - brought down nearby skyscraper
>>
>>updated 17 minutes ago
>>
>>GAITHERSBURG, Md. - Government investigators have issued a report refuting
>>conspiracy theories that a skyscraper next to the twin towers was brought
>>down by explosives during the September 11, 2001, attacks on the United
>>States. The report said that fires destroyed World Trade Center 7.
>>
>>Scientists with the National Institute of Standards and Technology said
>>their three-year investigation of the collapse of the 47-story building was
>>the first known instance of fire causing the total failure of a skyscraper.
>>
>>The investigators also concluded that the collapse of the nearby twin
>>towers broke the city water main, leaving the sprinkler system in WTC 7
>>without water.
>>
>>The collapse of building 7 has long been the subject of conspiracy theories
>>that something else brought down the tower
>>
>>********************************************
>>
>>Absolutely no surprise here.
>
> Because sane people have always known this was the case.

Have any scientific evidence which prove that no explosives have been used, GovShit?

>>Everybody knew they would say this - that
>
> Because sane people have always known this was the case.

Have any scientific evidence which prove that no explosives have been used, GovShit?

>>barely observable fires would cause the 600 foot skyskraper to collapse
>
> Sane people disagree with your claim of "barely observable fires".

Have any scientific evidence which prove that no explosives have been used, GovShit?

>>straight down like a perfect demolition job.!!!!
>
> Sane people disagree with your claims of "straight down" and "perfect
> demolition job".

Have any scientific evidence which prove that no explosives have been used, GovShit?



Government Shill #2
2008-08-21 12:28:13 EST
On Thu, 21 Aug 2008 18:26:17 +0200, "zasochimti" <zasochimti@gmail.com>
wrote:

>
>"Government Shill #2" <gov.shill@gmail.com> wrote in message news:ii5ra4h5th3pi3ugb5dmakehc2te6g4pnv@4ax.com...
>> On Thu, 21 Aug 2008 11:19:40 -0500, "Speeders & Drunk Drivers are
>> MURDERERS" <xeton2001@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/26331842/
>>>
>>>Federal report refutes 9/11 conspiracy theory
>>>Investigators say fire - not explosives - brought down nearby skyscraper
>>>
>>>updated 17 minutes ago
>>>
>>>GAITHERSBURG, Md. - Government investigators have issued a report refuting
>>>conspiracy theories that a skyscraper next to the twin towers was brought
>>>down by explosives during the September 11, 2001, attacks on the United
>>>States. The report said that fires destroyed World Trade Center 7.
>>>
>>>Scientists with the National Institute of Standards and Technology said
>>>their three-year investigation of the collapse of the 47-story building was
>>>the first known instance of fire causing the total failure of a skyscraper.
>>>
>>>The investigators also concluded that the collapse of the nearby twin
>>>towers broke the city water main, leaving the sprinkler system in WTC 7
>>>without water.
>>>
>>>The collapse of building 7 has long been the subject of conspiracy theories
>>>that something else brought down the tower
>>>
>>>********************************************
>>>
>>>Absolutely no surprise here.
>>
>> Because sane people have always known this was the case.
>
>Have any scientific evidence which prove that no explosives have been used, GovShit?

Yes "nut job".

http://wtc.nist.gov/pubs/factsheets/faqs_8_2006.htm

NIST’s findings also do not support the "controlled demolition" theory
since there is conclusive evidence that:

the collapse was initiated in the impact and fire floors of the WTC towers
and nowhere else, and;

the time it took for the collapse to initiate (56 minutes for WTC 2 and 102
minutes for WTC 1) was dictated by (1) the extent of damage caused by the
aircraft impact, and (2) the time it took for the fires to reach critical
locations and weaken the structure to the point that the towers could not
resist the tremendous energy released by the downward movement of the
massive top section of the building at and above the fire and impact
floors.

Video evidence also showed unambiguously that the collapse progressed from
the top to the bottom, and there was no evidence (collected by NIST, or by
the New York Police Department, the Port Authority Police Department or the
Fire Department of New York) of any blast or explosions in the region below
the impact and fire floors as the top building sections (including and
above the 98th floor in WTC 1 and the 82nd floor in WTC 2) began their
downward movement upon collapse initiation.

In summary, NIST found no corroborating evidence for alternative hypotheses
suggesting that the WTC towers were brought down by controlled demolition
using explosives planted prior to Sept. 11, 2001. NIST also did not find
any evidence that missiles were fired at or hit the towers. Instead,
photographs and videos from several angles clearly show that the collapse
initiated at the fire and impact floors and that the collapse progressed
from the initiating floors downward until the dust clouds obscured the
view.



>>>Everybody knew they would say this - that
>>
>> Because sane people have always known this was the case.
>
>Have any scientific evidence which prove that no explosives have been used, GovShit?

Yes "nut job".

http://wtc.nist.gov/pubs/factsheets/faqs_8_2006.htm

NIST’s findings also do not support the "controlled demolition" theory
since there is conclusive evidence that:

the collapse was initiated in the impact and fire floors of the WTC towers
and nowhere else, and;

the time it took for the collapse to initiate (56 minutes for WTC 2 and 102
minutes for WTC 1) was dictated by (1) the extent of damage caused by the
aircraft impact, and (2) the time it took for the fires to reach critical
locations and weaken the structure to the point that the towers could not
resist the tremendous energy released by the downward movement of the
massive top section of the building at and above the fire and impact
floors.

Video evidence also showed unambiguously that the collapse progressed from
the top to the bottom, and there was no evidence (collected by NIST, or by
the New York Police Department, the Port Authority Police Department or the
Fire Department of New York) of any blast or explosions in the region below
the impact and fire floors as the top building sections (including and
above the 98th floor in WTC 1 and the 82nd floor in WTC 2) began their
downward movement upon collapse initiation.

In summary, NIST found no corroborating evidence for alternative hypotheses
suggesting that the WTC towers were brought down by controlled demolition
using explosives planted prior to Sept. 11, 2001. NIST also did not find
any evidence that missiles were fired at or hit the towers. Instead,
photographs and videos from several angles clearly show that the collapse
initiated at the fire and impact floors and that the collapse progressed
from the initiating floors downward until the dust clouds obscured the
view.


>>>barely observable fires would cause the 600 foot skyskraper to collapse
>>
>> Sane people disagree with your claim of "barely observable fires".
>
>Have any scientific evidence which prove that no explosives have been used, GovShit?

Yes "nut job".

http://wtc.nist.gov/pubs/factsheets/faqs_8_2006.htm

NIST’s findings also do not support the "controlled demolition" theory
since there is conclusive evidence that:

the collapse was initiated in the impact and fire floors of the WTC towers
and nowhere else, and;

the time it took for the collapse to initiate (56 minutes for WTC 2 and 102
minutes for WTC 1) was dictated by (1) the extent of damage caused by the
aircraft impact, and (2) the time it took for the fires to reach critical
locations and weaken the structure to the point that the towers could not
resist the tremendous energy released by the downward movement of the
massive top section of the building at and above the fire and impact
floors.

Video evidence also showed unambiguously that the collapse progressed from
the top to the bottom, and there was no evidence (collected by NIST, or by
the New York Police Department, the Port Authority Police Department or the
Fire Department of New York) of any blast or explosions in the region below
the impact and fire floors as the top building sections (including and
above the 98th floor in WTC 1 and the 82nd floor in WTC 2) began their
downward movement upon collapse initiation.

In summary, NIST found no corroborating evidence for alternative hypotheses
suggesting that the WTC towers were brought down by controlled demolition
using explosives planted prior to Sept. 11, 2001. NIST also did not find
any evidence that missiles were fired at or hit the towers. Instead,
photographs and videos from several angles clearly show that the collapse
initiated at the fire and impact floors and that the collapse progressed
from the initiating floors downward until the dust clouds obscured the
view.


>>>straight down like a perfect demolition job.!!!!
>>
>> Sane people disagree with your claims of "straight down" and "perfect
>> demolition job".
>
>Have any scientific evidence which prove that no explosives have been used, GovShit?

Yes "nut job".

http://wtc.nist.gov/pubs/factsheets/faqs_8_2006.htm

NIST’s findings also do not support the "controlled demolition" theory
since there is conclusive evidence that:

the collapse was initiated in the impact and fire floors of the WTC towers
and nowhere else, and;

the time it took for the collapse to initiate (56 minutes for WTC 2 and 102
minutes for WTC 1) was dictated by (1) the extent of damage caused by the
aircraft impact, and (2) the time it took for the fires to reach critical
locations and weaken the structure to the point that the towers could not
resist the tremendous energy released by the downward movement of the
massive top section of the building at and above the fire and impact
floors.

Video evidence also showed unambiguously that the collapse progressed from
the top to the bottom, and there was no evidence (collected by NIST, or by
the New York Police Department, the Port Authority Police Department or the
Fire Department of New York) of any blast or explosions in the region below
the impact and fire floors as the top building sections (including and
above the 98th floor in WTC 1 and the 82nd floor in WTC 2) began their
downward movement upon collapse initiation.

In summary, NIST found no corroborating evidence for alternative hypotheses
suggesting that the WTC towers were brought down by controlled demolition
using explosives planted prior to Sept. 11, 2001. NIST also did not find
any evidence that missiles were fired at or hit the towers. Instead,
photographs and videos from several angles clearly show that the collapse
initiated at the fire and impact floors and that the collapse progressed
from the initiating floors downward until the dust clouds obscured the
view.


--
Shill #2

Some drink at the fountain of knowledge...others just gargle.

Zasochimti
2008-08-21 12:33:23 EST

"Government Shill #2" <gov.shill@gmail.com> wrote in message news:sq5ra4luvtdjng7os8i08bh2st0vftp3n5@4ax.com...
> On Thu, 21 Aug 2008 18:26:17 +0200, "zasochimti" <zasochimti@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>>
>>"Government Shill #2" <gov.shill@gmail.com> wrote in message news:ii5ra4h5th3pi3ugb5dmakehc2te6g4pnv@4ax.com...
>>> On Thu, 21 Aug 2008 11:19:40 -0500, "Speeders & Drunk Drivers are
>>> MURDERERS" <xeton2001@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/26331842/
>>>>
>>>>Federal report refutes 9/11 conspiracy theory
>>>>Investigators say fire - not explosives - brought down nearby skyscraper
>>>>
>>>>updated 17 minutes ago
>>>>
>>>>GAITHERSBURG, Md. - Government investigators have issued a report refuting
>>>>conspiracy theories that a skyscraper next to the twin towers was brought
>>>>down by explosives during the September 11, 2001, attacks on the United
>>>>States. The report said that fires destroyed World Trade Center 7.
>>>>
>>>>Scientists with the National Institute of Standards and Technology said
>>>>their three-year investigation of the collapse of the 47-story building was
>>>>the first known instance of fire causing the total failure of a skyscraper.
>>>>
>>>>The investigators also concluded that the collapse of the nearby twin
>>>>towers broke the city water main, leaving the sprinkler system in WTC 7
>>>>without water.
>>>>
>>>>The collapse of building 7 has long been the subject of conspiracy theories
>>>>that something else brought down the tower
>>>>
>>>>********************************************
>>>>
>>>>Absolutely no surprise here.
>>>
>>> Because sane people have always known this was the case.
>>
>>Have any scientific evidence which prove that no explosives have been used, GovShit?
>
> Yes "nut job".
>
> http://wtc.nist.gov/pubs/factsheets/faqs_8_2006.htm
>
> NIST's findings also do not support the "controlled demolition" theory
> since there is conclusive evidence that:
>
> the collapse was initiated in the impact and fire floors of the WTC towers
> and nowhere else, and;
>
> the time it took for the collapse to initiate (56 minutes for WTC 2 and 102
> minutes for WTC 1) was dictated by (1) the extent of damage caused by the
> aircraft impact, and (2) the time it took for the fires to reach critical
> locations and weaken the structure to the point that the towers could not
> resist the tremendous energy released by the downward movement of the
> massive top section of the building at and above the fire and impact
> floors.
>
> Video evidence also showed unambiguously that the collapse progressed from
> the top to the bottom, and there was no evidence (collected by NIST, or by
> the New York Police Department, the Port Authority Police Department or the
> Fire Department of New York) of any blast or explosions in the region below
> the impact and fire floors as the top building sections (including and
> above the 98th floor in WTC 1 and the 82nd floor in WTC 2) began their
> downward movement upon collapse initiation.
>
> In summary, NIST found no corroborating evidence for alternative hypotheses
> suggesting that the WTC towers were brought down by controlled demolition
> using explosives planted prior to Sept. 11, 2001. NIST also did not find
> any evidence that missiles were fired at or hit the towers. Instead,
> photographs and videos from several angles clearly show that the collapse
> initiated at the fire and impact floors and that the collapse progressed
> from the initiating floors downward until the dust clouds obscured the
> view.
>
>
>
>>>>Everybody knew they would say this - that
>>>
>>> Because sane people have always known this was the case.
>>
>>Have any scientific evidence which prove that no explosives have been used, GovShit?
>
> Yes "nut job".
>
> http://wtc.nist.gov/pubs/factsheets/faqs_8_2006.htm
>
> NIST's findings also do not support the "controlled demolition" theory
> since there is conclusive evidence that:
>
> the collapse was initiated in the impact and fire floors of the WTC towers
> and nowhere else, and;
>
> the time it took for the collapse to initiate (56 minutes for WTC 2 and 102
> minutes for WTC 1) was dictated by (1) the extent of damage caused by the
> aircraft impact, and (2) the time it took for the fires to reach critical
> locations and weaken the structure to the point that the towers could not
> resist the tremendous energy released by the downward movement of the
> massive top section of the building at and above the fire and impact
> floors.
>
> Video evidence also showed unambiguously that the collapse progressed from
> the top to the bottom, and there was no evidence (collected by NIST, or by
> the New York Police Department, the Port Authority Police Department or the
> Fire Department of New York) of any blast or explosions in the region below
> the impact and fire floors as the top building sections (including and
> above the 98th floor in WTC 1 and the 82nd floor in WTC 2) began their
> downward movement upon collapse initiation.
>
> In summary, NIST found no corroborating evidence for alternative hypotheses
> suggesting that the WTC towers were brought down by controlled demolition
> using explosives planted prior to Sept. 11, 2001. NIST also did not find
> any evidence that missiles were fired at or hit the towers. Instead,
> photographs and videos from several angles clearly show that the collapse
> initiated at the fire and impact floors and that the collapse progressed
> from the initiating floors downward until the dust clouds obscured the
> view.
>
>
>>>>barely observable fires would cause the 600 foot skyskraper to collapse
>>>
>>> Sane people disagree with your claim of "barely observable fires".
>>
>>Have any scientific evidence which prove that no explosives have been used, GovShit?
>
> Yes "nut job".
>
> http://wtc.nist.gov/pubs/factsheets/faqs_8_2006.htm
>
> NIST's findings also do not support the "controlled demolition" theory
> since there is conclusive evidence that:
>
> the collapse was initiated in the impact and fire floors of the WTC towers
> and nowhere else, and;
>
> the time it took for the collapse to initiate (56 minutes for WTC 2 and 102
> minutes for WTC 1) was dictated by (1) the extent of damage caused by the
> aircraft impact, and (2) the time it took for the fires to reach critical
> locations and weaken the structure to the point that the towers could not
> resist the tremendous energy released by the downward movement of the
> massive top section of the building at and above the fire and impact
> floors.
>
> Video evidence also showed unambiguously that the collapse progressed from
> the top to the bottom, and there was no evidence (collected by NIST, or by
> the New York Police Department, the Port Authority Police Department or the
> Fire Department of New York) of any blast or explosions in the region below
> the impact and fire floors as the top building sections (including and
> above the 98th floor in WTC 1 and the 82nd floor in WTC 2) began their
> downward movement upon collapse initiation.
>
> In summary, NIST found no corroborating evidence for alternative hypotheses
> suggesting that the WTC towers were brought down by controlled demolition
> using explosives planted prior to Sept. 11, 2001. NIST also did not find
> any evidence that missiles were fired at or hit the towers. Instead,
> photographs and videos from several angles clearly show that the collapse
> initiated at the fire and impact floors and that the collapse progressed
> from the initiating floors downward until the dust clouds obscured the
> view.
>
>
>>>>straight down like a perfect demolition job.!!!!
>>>
>>> Sane people disagree with your claims of "straight down" and "perfect
>>> demolition job".
>>
>>Have any scientific evidence which prove that no explosives have been used, GovShit?
>
> Yes "nut job".
>
> http://wtc.nist.gov/pubs/factsheets/faqs_8_2006.htm
>
> NIST's findings also do not support the "controlled demolition" theory
> since there is conclusive evidence that:
>
> the collapse was initiated in the impact and fire floors of the WTC towers
> and nowhere else, and;
>
> the time it took for the collapse to initiate (56 minutes for WTC 2 and 102
> minutes for WTC 1) was dictated by (1) the extent of damage caused by the
> aircraft impact, and (2) the time it took for the fires to reach critical
> locations and weaken the structure to the point that the towers could not
> resist the tremendous energy released by the downward movement of the
> massive top section of the building at and above the fire and impact
> floors.
>
> Video evidence also showed unambiguously that the collapse progressed from
> the top to the bottom, and there was no evidence (collected by NIST, or by
> the New York Police Department, the Port Authority Police Department or the
> Fire Department of New York) of any blast or explosions in the region below
> the impact and fire floors as the top building sections (including and
> above the 98th floor in WTC 1 and the 82nd floor in WTC 2) began their
> downward movement upon collapse initiation.
>
> In summary, NIST found no corroborating evidence for alternative hypotheses
> suggesting that the WTC towers were brought down by controlled demolition
> using explosives planted prior to Sept. 11, 2001. NIST also did not find
> any evidence that missiles were fired at or hit the towers. Instead,
> photographs and videos from several angles clearly show that the collapse
> initiated at the fire and impact floors and that the collapse progressed
> from the initiating floors downward until the dust clouds obscured the
> view.

That's not scientific evidence, GovShit. That's just a bunch of conclusions.
I am talking about an investigation, which methods were used, which pieces
of debris from WTC7 were used, who conducted such an investigation etc.

But, primarily: which methods were used, which evidence was used in such
an investigation.

Have any of that info, GovShit?

" and there was no evidence (collected by NIST, or by
> the New York Police Department, the Port Authority Police Department or the
> Fire Department of New York) of any blast or explosions in the region below
> the impact and fire floors as the top building sections"

Where did they look to draw such a conclusion? Which methods have been used?
Which agents conducted such an investigation? Upon which pieces of debris was
such an investigation conducted upon etc, etc, etc.

Sooooo, do speak, GovShit. I mean, if I am "nuts" and you are "sane" and I am
"completely wrong" and you are "absolutely right", it shouldn't be too difficult for
you to provide me, and everyone here also, with such information. About methods
used, agencies involved, scientific evidence etc.

GO, GovShit.

[this should be extremely amusing]



Government Shill #2
2008-08-21 12:36:59 EST
On Thu, 21 Aug 2008 18:33:23 +0200, "zasochimti" <zasochimti@gmail.com>
wrote:

>
>"Government Shill #2" <gov.shill@gmail.com> wrote in message news:sq5ra4luvtdjng7os8i08bh2st0vftp3n5@4ax.com...
>> On Thu, 21 Aug 2008 18:26:17 +0200, "zasochimti" <zasochimti@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>"Government Shill #2" <gov.shill@gmail.com> wrote in message news:ii5ra4h5th3pi3ugb5dmakehc2te6g4pnv@4ax.com...
>>>> On Thu, 21 Aug 2008 11:19:40 -0500, "Speeders & Drunk Drivers are
>>>> MURDERERS" <xeton2001@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/26331842/
>>>>>
>>>>>Federal report refutes 9/11 conspiracy theory
>>>>>Investigators say fire - not explosives - brought down nearby skyscraper
>>>>>
>>>>>updated 17 minutes ago
>>>>>
>>>>>GAITHERSBURG, Md. - Government investigators have issued a report refuting
>>>>>conspiracy theories that a skyscraper next to the twin towers was brought
>>>>>down by explosives during the September 11, 2001, attacks on the United
>>>>>States. The report said that fires destroyed World Trade Center 7.
>>>>>
>>>>>Scientists with the National Institute of Standards and Technology said
>>>>>their three-year investigation of the collapse of the 47-story building was
>>>>>the first known instance of fire causing the total failure of a skyscraper.
>>>>>
>>>>>The investigators also concluded that the collapse of the nearby twin
>>>>>towers broke the city water main, leaving the sprinkler system in WTC 7
>>>>>without water.
>>>>>
>>>>>The collapse of building 7 has long been the subject of conspiracy theories
>>>>>that something else brought down the tower
>>>>>
>>>>>********************************************
>>>>>
>>>>>Absolutely no surprise here.
>>>>
>>>> Because sane people have always known this was the case.
>>>
>>>Have any scientific evidence which prove that no explosives have been used, GovShit?
>>
>> Yes "nut job".
>>
>> http://wtc.nist.gov/pubs/factsheets/faqs_8_2006.htm
>>
>> NIST's findings also do not support the "controlled demolition" theory
>> since there is conclusive evidence that:
>>
>> the collapse was initiated in the impact and fire floors of the WTC towers
>> and nowhere else, and;
>>
>> the time it took for the collapse to initiate (56 minutes for WTC 2 and 102
>> minutes for WTC 1) was dictated by (1) the extent of damage caused by the
>> aircraft impact, and (2) the time it took for the fires to reach critical
>> locations and weaken the structure to the point that the towers could not
>> resist the tremendous energy released by the downward movement of the
>> massive top section of the building at and above the fire and impact
>> floors.
>>
>> Video evidence also showed unambiguously that the collapse progressed from
>> the top to the bottom, and there was no evidence (collected by NIST, or by
>> the New York Police Department, the Port Authority Police Department or the
>> Fire Department of New York) of any blast or explosions in the region below
>> the impact and fire floors as the top building sections (including and
>> above the 98th floor in WTC 1 and the 82nd floor in WTC 2) began their
>> downward movement upon collapse initiation.
>>
>> In summary, NIST found no corroborating evidence for alternative hypotheses
>> suggesting that the WTC towers were brought down by controlled demolition
>> using explosives planted prior to Sept. 11, 2001. NIST also did not find
>> any evidence that missiles were fired at or hit the towers. Instead,
>> photographs and videos from several angles clearly show that the collapse
>> initiated at the fire and impact floors and that the collapse progressed
>> from the initiating floors downward until the dust clouds obscured the
>> view.
>>
>>
>>
>>>>>Everybody knew they would say this - that
>>>>
>>>> Because sane people have always known this was the case.
>>>
>>>Have any scientific evidence which prove that no explosives have been used, GovShit?
>>
>> Yes "nut job".
>>
>> http://wtc.nist.gov/pubs/factsheets/faqs_8_2006.htm
>>
>> NIST's findings also do not support the "controlled demolition" theory
>> since there is conclusive evidence that:
>>
>> the collapse was initiated in the impact and fire floors of the WTC towers
>> and nowhere else, and;
>>
>> the time it took for the collapse to initiate (56 minutes for WTC 2 and 102
>> minutes for WTC 1) was dictated by (1) the extent of damage caused by the
>> aircraft impact, and (2) the time it took for the fires to reach critical
>> locations and weaken the structure to the point that the towers could not
>> resist the tremendous energy released by the downward movement of the
>> massive top section of the building at and above the fire and impact
>> floors.
>>
>> Video evidence also showed unambiguously that the collapse progressed from
>> the top to the bottom, and there was no evidence (collected by NIST, or by
>> the New York Police Department, the Port Authority Police Department or the
>> Fire Department of New York) of any blast or explosions in the region below
>> the impact and fire floors as the top building sections (including and
>> above the 98th floor in WTC 1 and the 82nd floor in WTC 2) began their
>> downward movement upon collapse initiation.
>>
>> In summary, NIST found no corroborating evidence for alternative hypotheses
>> suggesting that the WTC towers were brought down by controlled demolition
>> using explosives planted prior to Sept. 11, 2001. NIST also did not find
>> any evidence that missiles were fired at or hit the towers. Instead,
>> photographs and videos from several angles clearly show that the collapse
>> initiated at the fire and impact floors and that the collapse progressed
>> from the initiating floors downward until the dust clouds obscured the
>> view.
>>
>>
>>>>>barely observable fires would cause the 600 foot skyskraper to collapse
>>>>
>>>> Sane people disagree with your claim of "barely observable fires".
>>>
>>>Have any scientific evidence which prove that no explosives have been used, GovShit?
>>
>> Yes "nut job".
>>
>> http://wtc.nist.gov/pubs/factsheets/faqs_8_2006.htm
>>
>> NIST's findings also do not support the "controlled demolition" theory
>> since there is conclusive evidence that:
>>
>> the collapse was initiated in the impact and fire floors of the WTC towers
>> and nowhere else, and;
>>
>> the time it took for the collapse to initiate (56 minutes for WTC 2 and 102
>> minutes for WTC 1) was dictated by (1) the extent of damage caused by the
>> aircraft impact, and (2) the time it took for the fires to reach critical
>> locations and weaken the structure to the point that the towers could not
>> resist the tremendous energy released by the downward movement of the
>> massive top section of the building at and above the fire and impact
>> floors.
>>
>> Video evidence also showed unambiguously that the collapse progressed from
>> the top to the bottom, and there was no evidence (collected by NIST, or by
>> the New York Police Department, the Port Authority Police Department or the
>> Fire Department of New York) of any blast or explosions in the region below
>> the impact and fire floors as the top building sections (including and
>> above the 98th floor in WTC 1 and the 82nd floor in WTC 2) began their
>> downward movement upon collapse initiation.
>>
>> In summary, NIST found no corroborating evidence for alternative hypotheses
>> suggesting that the WTC towers were brought down by controlled demolition
>> using explosives planted prior to Sept. 11, 2001. NIST also did not find
>> any evidence that missiles were fired at or hit the towers. Instead,
>> photographs and videos from several angles clearly show that the collapse
>> initiated at the fire and impact floors and that the collapse progressed
>> from the initiating floors downward until the dust clouds obscured the
>> view.
>>
>>
>>>>>straight down like a perfect demolition job.!!!!
>>>>
>>>> Sane people disagree with your claims of "straight down" and "perfect
>>>> demolition job".
>>>
>>>Have any scientific evidence which prove that no explosives have been used, GovShit?
>>
>> Yes "nut job".
>>
>> http://wtc.nist.gov/pubs/factsheets/faqs_8_2006.htm
>>
>> NIST's findings also do not support the "controlled demolition" theory
>> since there is conclusive evidence that:
>>
>> the collapse was initiated in the impact and fire floors of the WTC towers
>> and nowhere else, and;
>>
>> the time it took for the collapse to initiate (56 minutes for WTC 2 and 102
>> minutes for WTC 1) was dictated by (1) the extent of damage caused by the
>> aircraft impact, and (2) the time it took for the fires to reach critical
>> locations and weaken the structure to the point that the towers could not
>> resist the tremendous energy released by the downward movement of the
>> massive top section of the building at and above the fire and impact
>> floors.
>>
>> Video evidence also showed unambiguously that the collapse progressed from
>> the top to the bottom, and there was no evidence (collected by NIST, or by
>> the New York Police Department, the Port Authority Police Department or the
>> Fire Department of New York) of any blast or explosions in the region below
>> the impact and fire floors as the top building sections (including and
>> above the 98th floor in WTC 1 and the 82nd floor in WTC 2) began their
>> downward movement upon collapse initiation.
>>
>> In summary, NIST found no corroborating evidence for alternative hypotheses
>> suggesting that the WTC towers were brought down by controlled demolition
>> using explosives planted prior to Sept. 11, 2001. NIST also did not find
>> any evidence that missiles were fired at or hit the towers. Instead,
>> photographs and videos from several angles clearly show that the collapse
>> initiated at the fire and impact floors and that the collapse progressed
>> from the initiating floors downward until the dust clouds obscured the
>> view.
>
>That's not scientific evidence, GovShit. That's just a bunch of conclusions.
>I am talking about an investigation, which methods were used, which pieces
>of debris from WTC7 were used, who conducted such an investigation etc.
>
>But, primarily: which methods were used, which evidence was used in such
>an investigation.
>
>Have any of that info, GovShit?

Yeah. I gave it to you days ago. Didn't you read it? Same page as quoted
above.

http://wtc.nist.gov/pubs/factsheets/faqs_8_2006.htm

NIST conducted an extremely thorough three-year investigation into what
caused the WTC towers to collapse, as explained in NIST’s dedicated Web
site, http://wtc.nist.gov. This included consideration of a number of
hypotheses for the collapses of the towers.

Some 200 technical experts—including about 85 career NIST experts and 125
leading experts from the private sector and academia—reviewed tens of
thousands of documents, interviewed more than 1,000 people, reviewed 7,000
segments of video footage and 7,000 photographs, analyzed 236 pieces of
steel from the wreckage, performed laboratory tests and sophisticated
computer simulations of the sequence of events that occurred from the
moment the aircraft struck the towers until they began to collapse.


>" and there was no evidence (collected by NIST, or by
>> the New York Police Department, the Port Authority Police Department or the
>> Fire Department of New York) of any blast or explosions in the region below
>> the impact and fire floors as the top building sections"
>
>Where did they look to draw such a conclusion? Which methods have been used?
>Which agents conducted such an investigation? Upon which pieces of debris was
>such an investigation conducted upon etc, etc, etc.

http://wtc.nist.gov/pubs/factsheets/faqs_8_2006.htm

NIST conducted an extremely thorough three-year investigation into what
caused the WTC towers to collapse, as explained in NIST’s dedicated Web
site, http://wtc.nist.gov. This included consideration of a number of
hypotheses for the collapses of the towers.

Some 200 technical experts—including about 85 career NIST experts and 125
leading experts from the private sector and academia—reviewed tens of
thousands of documents, interviewed more than 1,000 people, reviewed 7,000
segments of video footage and 7,000 photographs, analyzed 236 pieces of
steel from the wreckage, performed laboratory tests and sophisticated
computer simulations of the sequence of events that occurred from the
moment the aircraft struck the towers until they began to collapse.

>Sooooo, do speak, GovShit. I mean, if I am "nuts" and you are "sane" and I am
>"completely wrong" and you are "absolutely right", it shouldn't be too difficult for
>you to provide me, and everyone here also, with such information. About methods
>used, agencies involved, scientific evidence etc.

http://wtc.nist.gov/pubs/factsheets/faqs_8_2006.htm

NIST conducted an extremely thorough three-year investigation into what
caused the WTC towers to collapse, as explained in NIST’s dedicated Web
site, http://wtc.nist.gov. This included consideration of a number of
hypotheses for the collapses of the towers.

Some 200 technical experts—including about 85 career NIST experts and 125
leading experts from the private sector and academia—reviewed tens of
thousands of documents, interviewed more than 1,000 people, reviewed 7,000
segments of video footage and 7,000 photographs, analyzed 236 pieces of
steel from the wreckage, performed laboratory tests and sophisticated
computer simulations of the sequence of events that occurred from the
moment the aircraft struck the towers until they began to collapse.

>GO, GovShit.

http://wtc.nist.gov/pubs/factsheets/faqs_8_2006.htm

NIST conducted an extremely thorough three-year investigation into what
caused the WTC towers to collapse, as explained in NIST’s dedicated Web
site, http://wtc.nist.gov. This included consideration of a number of
hypotheses for the collapses of the towers.

Some 200 technical experts—including about 85 career NIST experts and 125
leading experts from the private sector and academia—reviewed tens of
thousands of documents, interviewed more than 1,000 people, reviewed 7,000
segments of video footage and 7,000 photographs, analyzed 236 pieces of
steel from the wreckage, performed laboratory tests and sophisticated
computer simulations of the sequence of events that occurred from the
moment the aircraft struck the towers until they began to collapse.


>[this should be extremely amusing]

Your responses are *always* extremely amusing.

--
Shill #2

A stupid man's report of what a clever man says can
never be accurate, because he unconsciously translates
what he hears into something he can understand.
Bertrand Russell (1872 - 1970)

Zasochimti
2008-08-21 12:42:43 EST

"Government Shill #2" <gov.shill@gmail.com> wrote in message news:g86ra4tku56p5945s2uvsp919o7c6jch3f@4ax.com...
> On Thu, 21 Aug 2008 18:33:23 +0200, "zasochimti" <zasochimti@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>>
>>"Government Shill #2" <gov.shill@gmail.com> wrote in message news:sq5ra4luvtdjng7os8i08bh2st0vftp3n5@4ax.com...
>>> On Thu, 21 Aug 2008 18:26:17 +0200, "zasochimti" <zasochimti@gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>>"Government Shill #2" <gov.shill@gmail.com> wrote in message news:ii5ra4h5th3pi3ugb5dmakehc2te6g4pnv@4ax.com...
>>>>> On Thu, 21 Aug 2008 11:19:40 -0500, "Speeders & Drunk Drivers are
>>>>> MURDERERS" <xeton2001@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/26331842/
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Federal report refutes 9/11 conspiracy theory
>>>>>>Investigators say fire - not explosives - brought down nearby skyscraper
>>>>>>
>>>>>>updated 17 minutes ago
>>>>>>
>>>>>>GAITHERSBURG, Md. - Government investigators have issued a report refuting
>>>>>>conspiracy theories that a skyscraper next to the twin towers was brought
>>>>>>down by explosives during the September 11, 2001, attacks on the United
>>>>>>States. The report said that fires destroyed World Trade Center 7.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Scientists with the National Institute of Standards and Technology said
>>>>>>their three-year investigation of the collapse of the 47-story building was
>>>>>>the first known instance of fire causing the total failure of a skyscraper.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>The investigators also concluded that the collapse of the nearby twin
>>>>>>towers broke the city water main, leaving the sprinkler system in WTC 7
>>>>>>without water.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>The collapse of building 7 has long been the subject of conspiracy theories
>>>>>>that something else brought down the tower
>>>>>>
>>>>>>********************************************
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Absolutely no surprise here.
>>>>>
>>>>> Because sane people have always known this was the case.
>>>>
>>>>Have any scientific evidence which prove that no explosives have been used, GovShit?
>>>
>>> Yes "nut job".
>>>
>>> http://wtc.nist.gov/pubs/factsheets/faqs_8_2006.htm
>>>
>>> NIST's findings also do not support the "controlled demolition" theory
>>> since there is conclusive evidence that:
>>>
>>> the collapse was initiated in the impact and fire floors of the WTC towers
>>> and nowhere else, and;
>>>
>>> the time it took for the collapse to initiate (56 minutes for WTC 2 and 102
>>> minutes for WTC 1) was dictated by (1) the extent of damage caused by the
>>> aircraft impact, and (2) the time it took for the fires to reach critical
>>> locations and weaken the structure to the point that the towers could not
>>> resist the tremendous energy released by the downward movement of the
>>> massive top section of the building at and above the fire and impact
>>> floors.
>>>
>>> Video evidence also showed unambiguously that the collapse progressed from
>>> the top to the bottom, and there was no evidence (collected by NIST, or by
>>> the New York Police Department, the Port Authority Police Department or the
>>> Fire Department of New York) of any blast or explosions in the region below
>>> the impact and fire floors as the top building sections (including and
>>> above the 98th floor in WTC 1 and the 82nd floor in WTC 2) began their
>>> downward movement upon collapse initiation.
>>>
>>> In summary, NIST found no corroborating evidence for alternative hypotheses
>>> suggesting that the WTC towers were brought down by controlled demolition
>>> using explosives planted prior to Sept. 11, 2001. NIST also did not find
>>> any evidence that missiles were fired at or hit the towers. Instead,
>>> photographs and videos from several angles clearly show that the collapse
>>> initiated at the fire and impact floors and that the collapse progressed
>>> from the initiating floors downward until the dust clouds obscured the
>>> view.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>>>Everybody knew they would say this - that
>>>>>
>>>>> Because sane people have always known this was the case.
>>>>
>>>>Have any scientific evidence which prove that no explosives have been used, GovShit?
>>>
>>> Yes "nut job".
>>>
>>> http://wtc.nist.gov/pubs/factsheets/faqs_8_2006.htm
>>>
>>> NIST's findings also do not support the "controlled demolition" theory
>>> since there is conclusive evidence that:
>>>
>>> the collapse was initiated in the impact and fire floors of the WTC towers
>>> and nowhere else, and;
>>>
>>> the time it took for the collapse to initiate (56 minutes for WTC 2 and 102
>>> minutes for WTC 1) was dictated by (1) the extent of damage caused by the
>>> aircraft impact, and (2) the time it took for the fires to reach critical
>>> locations and weaken the structure to the point that the towers could not
>>> resist the tremendous energy released by the downward movement of the
>>> massive top section of the building at and above the fire and impact
>>> floors.
>>>
>>> Video evidence also showed unambiguously that the collapse progressed from
>>> the top to the bottom, and there was no evidence (collected by NIST, or by
>>> the New York Police Department, the Port Authority Police Department or the
>>> Fire Department of New York) of any blast or explosions in the region below
>>> the impact and fire floors as the top building sections (including and
>>> above the 98th floor in WTC 1 and the 82nd floor in WTC 2) began their
>>> downward movement upon collapse initiation.
>>>
>>> In summary, NIST found no corroborating evidence for alternative hypotheses
>>> suggesting that the WTC towers were brought down by controlled demolition
>>> using explosives planted prior to Sept. 11, 2001. NIST also did not find
>>> any evidence that missiles were fired at or hit the towers. Instead,
>>> photographs and videos from several angles clearly show that the collapse
>>> initiated at the fire and impact floors and that the collapse progressed
>>> from the initiating floors downward until the dust clouds obscured the
>>> view.
>>>
>>>
>>>>>>barely observable fires would cause the 600 foot skyskraper to collapse
>>>>>
>>>>> Sane people disagree with your claim of "barely observable fires".
>>>>
>>>>Have any scientific evidence which prove that no explosives have been used, GovShit?
>>>
>>> Yes "nut job".
>>>
>>> http://wtc.nist.gov/pubs/factsheets/faqs_8_2006.htm
>>>
>>> NIST's findings also do not support the "controlled demolition" theory
>>> since there is conclusive evidence that:
>>>
>>> the collapse was initiated in the impact and fire floors of the WTC towers
>>> and nowhere else, and;
>>>
>>> the time it took for the collapse to initiate (56 minutes for WTC 2 and 102
>>> minutes for WTC 1) was dictated by (1) the extent of damage caused by the
>>> aircraft impact, and (2) the time it took for the fires to reach critical
>>> locations and weaken the structure to the point that the towers could not
>>> resist the tremendous energy released by the downward movement of the
>>> massive top section of the building at and above the fire and impact
>>> floors.
>>>
>>> Video evidence also showed unambiguously that the collapse progressed from
>>> the top to the bottom, and there was no evidence (collected by NIST, or by
>>> the New York Police Department, the Port Authority Police Department or the
>>> Fire Department of New York) of any blast or explosions in the region below
>>> the impact and fire floors as the top building sections (including and
>>> above the 98th floor in WTC 1 and the 82nd floor in WTC 2) began their
>>> downward movement upon collapse initiation.
>>>
>>> In summary, NIST found no corroborating evidence for alternative hypotheses
>>> suggesting that the WTC towers were brought down by controlled demolition
>>> using explosives planted prior to Sept. 11, 2001. NIST also did not find
>>> any evidence that missiles were fired at or hit the towers. Instead,
>>> photographs and videos from several angles clearly show that the collapse
>>> initiated at the fire and impact floors and that the collapse progressed
>>> from the initiating floors downward until the dust clouds obscured the
>>> view.
>>>
>>>
>>>>>>straight down like a perfect demolition job.!!!!
>>>>>
>>>>> Sane people disagree with your claims of "straight down" and "perfect
>>>>> demolition job".
>>>>
>>>>Have any scientific evidence which prove that no explosives have been used, GovShit?
>>>
>>> Yes "nut job".
>>>
>>> http://wtc.nist.gov/pubs/factsheets/faqs_8_2006.htm
>>>
>>> NIST's findings also do not support the "controlled demolition" theory
>>> since there is conclusive evidence that:
>>>
>>> the collapse was initiated in the impact and fire floors of the WTC towers
>>> and nowhere else, and;
>>>
>>> the time it took for the collapse to initiate (56 minutes for WTC 2 and 102
>>> minutes for WTC 1) was dictated by (1) the extent of damage caused by the
>>> aircraft impact, and (2) the time it took for the fires to reach critical
>>> locations and weaken the structure to the point that the towers could not
>>> resist the tremendous energy released by the downward movement of the
>>> massive top section of the building at and above the fire and impact
>>> floors.
>>>
>>> Video evidence also showed unambiguously that the collapse progressed from
>>> the top to the bottom, and there was no evidence (collected by NIST, or by
>>> the New York Police Department, the Port Authority Police Department or the
>>> Fire Department of New York) of any blast or explosions in the region below
>>> the impact and fire floors as the top building sections (including and
>>> above the 98th floor in WTC 1 and the 82nd floor in WTC 2) began their
>>> downward movement upon collapse initiation.
>>>
>>> In summary, NIST found no corroborating evidence for alternative hypotheses
>>> suggesting that the WTC towers were brought down by controlled demolition
>>> using explosives planted prior to Sept. 11, 2001. NIST also did not find
>>> any evidence that missiles were fired at or hit the towers. Instead,
>>> photographs and videos from several angles clearly show that the collapse
>>> initiated at the fire and impact floors and that the collapse progressed
>>> from the initiating floors downward until the dust clouds obscured the
>>> view.
>>
>>That's not scientific evidence, GovShit. That's just a bunch of conclusions.
>>I am talking about an investigation, which methods were used, which pieces
>>of debris from WTC7 were used, who conducted such an investigation etc.
>>
>>But, primarily: which methods were used, which evidence was used in such
>>an investigation.
>>
>>Have any of that info, GovShit?
>
> Yeah. I gave it to you days ago. Didn't you read it? Same page as quoted
> above.
>
> http://wtc.nist.gov/pubs/factsheets/faqs_8_2006.htm
>
> NIST conducted an extremely thorough three-year investigation into what
> caused the WTC towers to collapse, as explained in NIST's dedicated Web
> site, http://wtc.nist.gov. This included consideration of a number of
> hypotheses for the collapses of the towers.
>
> Some 200 technical experts-including about 85 career NIST experts and 125
> leading experts from the private sector and academia-reviewed tens of
> thousands of documents, interviewed more than 1,000 people, reviewed 7,000
> segments of video footage and 7,000 photographs, analyzed 236 pieces of
> steel from the wreckage, performed laboratory tests and sophisticated
> computer simulations of the sequence of events that occurred from the
> moment the aircraft struck the towers until they began to collapse.
>
>
>>" and there was no evidence (collected by NIST, or by
>>> the New York Police Department, the Port Authority Police Department or the
>>> Fire Department of New York) of any blast or explosions in the region below
>>> the impact and fire floors as the top building sections"
>>
>>Where did they look to draw such a conclusion? Which methods have been used?
>>Which agents conducted such an investigation? Upon which pieces of debris was
>>such an investigation conducted upon etc, etc, etc.
>
> http://wtc.nist.gov/pubs/factsheets/faqs_8_2006.htm
>
> NIST conducted an extremely thorough three-year investigation into what
> caused the WTC towers to collapse, as explained in NIST's dedicated Web
> site, http://wtc.nist.gov. This included consideration of a number of
> hypotheses for the collapses of the towers.
>
> Some 200 technical experts-including about 85 career NIST experts and 125
> leading experts from the private sector and academia-reviewed tens of
> thousands of documents, interviewed more than 1,000 people, reviewed 7,000
> segments of video footage and 7,000 photographs, analyzed 236 pieces of
> steel from the wreckage, performed laboratory tests and sophisticated
> computer simulations of the sequence of events that occurred from the
> moment the aircraft struck the towers until they began to collapse.
>
>>Sooooo, do speak, GovShit. I mean, if I am "nuts" and you are "sane" and I am
>>"completely wrong" and you are "absolutely right", it shouldn't be too difficult for
>>you to provide me, and everyone here also, with such information. About methods
>>used, agencies involved, scientific evidence etc.
>
> http://wtc.nist.gov/pubs/factsheets/faqs_8_2006.htm
>
> NIST conducted an extremely thorough three-year investigation into what
> caused the WTC towers to collapse, as explained in NIST's dedicated Web
> site, http://wtc.nist.gov. This included consideration of a number of
> hypotheses for the collapses of the towers.
>
> Some 200 technical experts-including about 85 career NIST experts and 125
> leading experts from the private sector and academia-reviewed tens of
> thousands of documents, interviewed more than 1,000 people, reviewed 7,000
> segments of video footage and 7,000 photographs, analyzed 236 pieces of
> steel from the wreckage, performed laboratory tests and sophisticated
> computer simulations of the sequence of events that occurred from the
> moment the aircraft struck the towers until they began to collapse.
>
>>GO, GovShit.
>
> http://wtc.nist.gov/pubs/factsheets/faqs_8_2006.htm
>
> NIST conducted an extremely thorough three-year investigation into what
> caused the WTC towers to collapse, as explained in NIST's dedicated Web
> site, http://wtc.nist.gov. This included consideration of a number of
> hypotheses for the collapses of the towers.
>
> Some 200 technical experts-including about 85 career NIST experts and 125
> leading experts from the private sector and academia-reviewed tens of
> thousands of documents, interviewed more than 1,000 people, reviewed 7,000
> segments of video footage and 7,000 photographs, analyzed 236 pieces of
> steel from the wreckage, performed laboratory tests and sophisticated
> computer simulations of the sequence of events that occurred from the
> moment the aircraft struck the towers until they began to collapse.
>
>
>>[this should be extremely amusing]
>
> Your responses are *always* extremely amusing.

Methods which were used?
Upon which debris were those methods applied?

Seem to me that you still haven't come up with an answer to these two questions, GovShit.

So, the amusing idiot here is - you.

Not me.

Sorry, GovShit. Grow a brain an learn how to lie properly.



BDK
2008-08-21 12:49:14 EST
In article <Xns9B01690E9D6DEriemann1850yahoocom@216.168.3.70>, xeton2001
@yahoo.com says...
>
>
>
>
>
> http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/26331842/
>
> Federal report refutes 9/11 conspiracy theory
> Investigators say fire =3F not explosives =3F brought down nearby skyscraper
>
> updated 17 minutes ago
>
> GAITHERSBURG, Md. - Government investigators have issued a report refuting
> conspiracy theories that a skyscraper next to the twin towers was brought
> down by explosives during the September 11, 2001, attacks on the United
> States. The report said that fires destroyed World Trade Center 7.
>
> Scientists with the National Institute of Standards and Technology said
> their three-year investigation of the collapse of the 47-story building was
> the first known instance of fire causing the total failure of a skyscraper.
>
> The investigators also concluded that the collapse of the nearby twin
> towers broke the city water main, leaving the sprinkler system in WTC 7
> without water.
>
> The collapse of building 7 has long been the subject of conspiracy theories
> that something else brought down the tower
>
> ********************************************
>
> Absolutely no surprise here. Everybody knew they would say this - that
> barely observable fires would cause the 600 foot skyskraper to collapse
> straight down like a perfect demolition job.!!!!
>

Absolutely no surprise you kookers would say something like the above.

It looked nothing like a demolition, except to the kooktardish.

Your take on the world is amazing..

--
BDK

BDK Klan leader?
kOOk Magnet!
NJJ CLUB #1
Shillmaster

Speeders & Drunk Drivers Are MURDERERS
2008-08-21 12:52:38 EST
BDK <Shillkill@silentexplosions.com> wrote in
news:MPG.231766924986c18a989b5c@news.buckeye-express.com:


>>
>
> Absolutely no surprise you kookers would say something like the above.
>
> It looked nothing like a demolition, except to the kooktardish.
>
> Your take on the world is amazing..
>

HAHA The board notes that all you govt shills have is namecalling.

Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11   Next  (First | Last)


2021 - UsenetArchives.com | Contact Us | Privacy | Stats | Site Search
Become our Patron