Liberal Forum

GHETTOBLASTER » 27 Sep 2023, 7:36 pm » wrote: ↑

27 Sep 2023, 7:36 pm

NEO..I think the planes were capable of destroying everything from where they hit the building and everything else on up. Heat tracels upward. If you know anything about house fires...everything about  3 feet on down is the very last to be destroyed and very often things at floor level just get singed.
To remotely detonate the building in a few key locations while all of this other stuff is going on utilizes the same technology I'm  talking about is no more sophisticated than the 100s of times that copper penetrator IEDs were detonated via cell phone link against our boys in Iraq and Afghanistan

Melting and catastrophic collapse. Thousands of tons of potential energy would predictably fall straight down unless met with a force greater than gravity. Thermite certainly could have brought the buildings down. Possible but not plausible when coordinated with a very public airshow. Had this been truck bombs I would have had strong false flag suspicions.
 

Neo » 27 Sep 2023, 7:45 pm » wrote: ↑

27 Sep 2023, 7:45 pm

Melting and catastrophic collapse. Thousands of tons of potential energy would predictably fall straight down unless met with a force greater than gravity. Thermite certainly could have brought the buildings down. Possible but not plausible when coordinated with a very public airshow. Had this been truck bombs I would have had strong false flag suspicions.

Concrete encased steel columns wont melt more than a few floors below impact.
 There just isn't enough fuel left at that point to melt concrete encased steel columns and girders.



You seriously don't think that charges connected to a telecom link could have been detonated at the same moment the planes hit...?
​​​​​​​Some guy standing on a roof a few blocks away with a cell phone could have triggered a sequential detonation with one push of a button.

Neo » 27 Sep 2023, 5:55 pm » wrote: ↑

27 Sep 2023, 5:55 pm

Bbc got advanced intelligence that a building was about to be taken down and mistakenly broadcast as if it already happened, with the target building standing intact visible in the background. Neither the talking head or the on scene reporter corrected the narrative in real time. 

Or

The building in the broadcast wasn't wtc7. Or this was digitally manipulated after the fact. 

Prove it's authentic and it's case closed. I really don't see an alternative.

You're using drugs and alcohol.

The news is scripted - end of story. All that "advanced intelligence" **** is ****.

They get their script from the agencies creating the news. They read their **** scripts. This is has been going on since AT LEAST the Spanish American War, where we sunk our own **** battle ship in Havana Harbor as a false flag to drag Spain into a war it was bending over backwards to avoid. 

If you are unaware of the Maine scandal, which preceded the gulf of tonkin incident, they planted the story a day early in australia due to the international date line. It was discovered decades later by a grad student doing research, if memory serves - made quite the juicy story.
 

Neo » 27 Sep 2023, 4:51 pm » wrote: ↑

27 Sep 2023, 4:51 pm

Her focus and notes were on the two main buildings that fell. She strangely never said anything about wtc7. Her comments were focused on the towers.

Look, I don't know what the **** you are watching - certainly not the link that I provided.

Rocks are hard. Water is wet. The link that I provided is exclusively about tower 7 - soup to nuts.
 

Neo » 27 Sep 2023, 4:50 pm » wrote: ↑

27 Sep 2023, 4:50 pm

Northwoods led to the gulf of Tonkin and Iraqi wmds. Reichstag proved wildly successful for Hitler, not surprising we would adopt it.

Yeah, no.

Operation Northwoods was about flying jets into buildings as a false flag to start a war.

I suggest you google gulf of tonkin incident. There weren't any buildings involved. Or jets.

Neo » 27 Sep 2023, 4:50 pm » wrote: ↑

27 Sep 2023, 4:50 pm

My dispute with 911 truthers has nothing to do with the naive belief our government would never do anything evil. I doubt their competency to pull off 911 as a false flag.

Oh, trust me. I am only too well aware of the hubris on the right which makes "you people" insist that your overlords are stupid, rather than brilliantly manipulative.

I get it.

The problem with you telling me how stupid the people that run your **** are is what that tells me about you. You're governed and manipulated by retards - and not because I say so. I DON'T say so. YOU say that retards run your **** and stay a step ahead of you.

I say they're smarter than you. You insist they're not. I just winder how the stupid people got on top and stay on top - it's a bloody **** mystery.
 

Cannonpointer » 27 Sep 2023, 9:04 pm » wrote: ↑

27 Sep 2023, 9:04 pm

Yeah, no.

Operation Northwoods was about flying jets into buildings as a false flag to start a war.

I suggest you google gulf of tonkin incident. There weren't any buildings involved. Or jets.

Oh, trust me. I am only to well aware of the hubris on the right which makes them insist that their overlords are stupid, rather than brilliantly manipulative.

I get it.

The problem with you telling me how stupid the people that run your **** are is what that tells me about you. You're governed and manipulated by retards - and not because I say so. I DON'T say so. YOU say that retards run your **** and stay a step ahead of you.

I say they're smarter than you. You insist they're not. I just winder how the stupid people got on top and stay on top - it's a bloody **** mystery.

Cui Bono....who benefited ...profited.  Its that simple

Z09 » 26 Sep 2023, 4:53 pm » wrote: ↑

26 Sep 2023, 4:53 pm

No...
That's where the airplane that didn't hit the Pentagon supposedly flew to..

​​According to one of your buddies

Oh no...

Not this crap again

Don't try to divert attention from your silly conspiracy theories, this is about Building 7, not the Pentagon, you suggested a missile from area51 hit that and made it implode, I clearly remember that..

 


 

Z09 » 28 Sep 2023, 4:23 am » wrote: ↑

28 Sep 2023, 4:23 am

No I didn't
You're a liar..

How about showing us the post?

A lot of people saw it, are you saying all those witnesses lied?

It was you that said that the plane that hit the Pentagon was actually flown to Area 51..

Wanna see your post?

That should be good, especially the bold part..

 



 
 

Z09 » 28 Sep 2023, 5:32 am » wrote: ↑

28 Sep 2023, 5:32 am

I never said a missile hit the building from Area 51

However, you did in fact say that a plane never hit the Pentagon and the missing plane that day flew to Area 51...

We both know you're lying.
Christ
Grow up
 

lol.. you're the one lying and you know it, otherwise you would show my post where I said that..

But if you never said a missile from Area51 hit Building7 how come a lot of people say they saw it, got a good explanation for that?

 
 

Z09 » 28 Sep 2023, 5:50 am » wrote: ↑

28 Sep 2023, 5:50 am

Here you go....

Jante saying the airplane that never hit the Pentagon that day actually flew to Area 51...

Another who the **** cares, the deep state is good at making things disappear, maybe they dumped it in the ocean, maybe it went to area 51..
 

So, you admit that you are lying, I never actually said that the plane flew to area51..


 
 
 


 

Z09 » 28 Sep 2023, 7:02 am » wrote: ↑

28 Sep 2023, 7:02 am

So you said "maybe it flew to Area 51"

So you lied..

Jante saying the airplane that never hit the Pentagon that day actually flew to Area 51...

How about an apology?

 



 

Z09 » 28 Sep 2023, 7:28 am » wrote: ↑

28 Sep 2023, 7:28 am

So you say the plane that hit the Pentagon actually flew to Area 51?

Here's your quote...
Another who the **** cares, the deep state is good at making things disappear, maybe they dumped it in the ocean, maybe it went to area 51..
 

So, you really are retarded?

I know you don't answer questions but I'm curious how you draw that conclusion from my quote... my conclusion makes more sense..


 


 

Jantje_Smit » 28 Sep 2023, 4:01 am » wrote: ↑

28 Sep 2023, 4:01 am

Oh no...

Not this crap again

Don't try to divert attention from your silly conspiracy theories, this is about Building 7, not the Pentagon, you suggested a missile from area51 hit that and made it implode, I clearly remember that..

me too

Z09 » 28 Sep 2023, 8:42 am » wrote: ↑

28 Sep 2023, 8:42 am

Take a hike
You're lying with your friends

Cause ..
That's what you do....

ask Vegas 

Neo » 27 Sep 2023, 4:55 pm » wrote: ↑

27 Sep 2023, 4:55 pm

Needed to fall after an airshow witnessed by hundreds of millions. Not plausible.

Why wouldn't it be plausible? You aren't making a case here. 

If I believed it were true and those in control were capable of such a perfect deception, the last thing I would do would be to post about it on a pseudo anonymous political discussion forum.

Again, why? Are you afraid you will become one of the Clinton's body count or something? 

Vegas » 28 Sep 2023, 8:51 am » wrote: ↑

28 Sep 2023, 8:51 am

Why wouldn't it be plausible? You aren't making a case here. 

 

Building would have had to have been rigged on the exact same floors the planes crashed into. The explosives would have had to been undamaged and intact after the impact. That removes the use of most conventional explosives, which would have been melted and neutralized by the fires. Also would have required piloting skills not held by any of the hijackers.  So fantastic (see non existent) explosives were used and the planes weren't flown by inexperienced terrorists.  

Simple answer is better. Angry Muslims attacked some buildings. 

Neo » 28 Sep 2023, 10:41 pm » wrote: ↑

28 Sep 2023, 10:41 pm

Building would have had to have been rigged on the exact same floors the planes crashed into. The explosives would have had to been undamaged and intact after the impact. That removes the use of most conventional explosives, which would have been melted and neutralized by the fires. Also would have required piloting skills not held by any of the hijackers.  So fantastic (see non existent) explosives were used and the planes weren't flown by inexperienced terrorists.  

Simple answer is better. Angry Muslims attacked some buildings.

why were they angry??  

Sumela » 28 Sep 2023, 10:44 pm » wrote: ↑

28 Sep 2023, 10:44 pm

why were they angry??

We had American military next to their unholy meteorite in Saudi. 
 

Z09 » 28 Sep 2023, 7:28 am » wrote: ↑

28 Sep 2023, 7:28 am

So you say the plane that hit the Pentagon actually flew to Area 51?

Here's your quote...
Another who the **** cares, the deep state is good at making things disappear, maybe they dumped it in the ocean, maybe it went to area 51..

If he had said maybe king kong caught it or maybe sasquatch flew it home to the swamps, would you have taken the same tack?

Asking for a friend...
 

Z09 » 28 Sep 2023, 7:52 am » wrote: ↑

28 Sep 2023, 7:52 am

You said the plane that hit the Pentagon that day really didn't hit the Pentagon
You said it might have been flown to Area 51.

Are you this **** up?

Your words .."it might have been flown to Area 51".

How about this one?
"a missile hit the Pentagon and it was sent from a military base..."
Yeah...
On a morning where everyone is looking up on the sky no one noticed a missile headed to DC...???

Christ
Turn off the Sci Fi channel

​​​​

Well which one WAS it?

Did he claim it was a missile, or a plane that went to area 51?

As far as people "looking up," is that REALLY your idea of how events get confirmed? Eye witness testimony - in a relentless propaganda state? That is mighty **** analog, Granny.

Fun fact: There are at least three cameras that would have caught the airplane hitting the pentagon. There was an ATM camera across the street, a traffic camera with a fish eye lens a thousand feet away, and a kid with a Polaroid Swinger who hangs around there selling photos to the tourists. 

Oh - and maybe a couple two or three that the military security state might have hired ADT to install.

Those guys do good work - and they monitor. They'd have called emergency services right after the plane hit and took off for area 51. Or the swamps, depending on your narrative.