still think 9 11 was a conspiracy?

[GodIsSalvation]

Can you refute anything in that video?

Which video? If you mean Mitspa's video it's pretty simple, his video is a theory based on CGI models and other theories, its not actual proof. Aside from that the official NIST report admits they don't have evidence that the fire alone brought down WTC 7. They even admit the fire wasn't hot enough to bring the building down in such a manner. Now mind you Mitspa is on to something though. The fire would be enough to weaken the structure and when added to other factors could easily have brought WTC 7 down in its own footprint. Those other factors though you'll have to wait until tomorrow or until Mitspa digs them out of google lol.

EDIT: My bad for some reason thought Kenneth posted this lol.

 

[Mitspa]

Most physics is pure theory too. The burden of proof is actually on us to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that 9/11 was not a US government plot. I believe it possible to prove that. Indeed from the investigations put out by government sources mind you, there is absolutely no hard evidence that the fires are what brought down WTC 7. Now as I mentioned I would see the fire as a contributing factors in a compendium of factors. Like I said though I'll elaborate some more later, lol don't want to interfere between your and Bushido's challenge too much. Best hint I can give ya is that you're on the right track though, just gotta go a little further with it.

No they are clear and known laws of physics and metals and structures ..all studied and understood by those trained in that field ... In the confusion of that day..some thing may not be clear ..but what is clear gives us solid and reasonable proof that the building fell because of fire.... and I believe that there is plenty of evidence to prove to any honest person that this conspiracy stuff is just a deception ...any honest person can figure it out..if they want to be honest?

 

[Mitspa]

No you are using tunnel vision to avoid answering the other issues you can't answer, or you would answer the questions without avoiding them.

You have shown evidence of the clean up, that is all you have done !!!

That does not disprove others, it just shows yes workers cut the beams at angles to.

Like I said .. you guys cant stand the idea that your wrong..therefore you wont study out the issue to find the truth. Your a prisoner to your own pride that will not allow you to see the truth... Im trying to help you see that your wrong on the beam..so you can understand your wrong on this other stuff as well and just be set free from this deception ... Do you nit think God wants you to walk in the truth?

 

[KennethC]

Which video? If you mean Mitspa's video it's pretty simple, his video is a theory based on CGI models and other theories, its not actual proof. Aside from that the official NIST report admits they don't have evidence that the fire alone brought down WTC 7. They even admit the fire wasn't hot enough to bring the building down in such a manner. Now mind you Mitspa is on to something though. The fire would be enough to weaken the structure and when added to other factors could easily have brought WTC 7 down in its own footprint. Those other factors though you'll have to wait until tomorrow or until Mitspa digs them out of google lol.

EDIT: My bad for some reason thought Kenneth posted this lol.

Multiple experts have stated for that building to come down in the manner it did could have been in one way....Demolition.

There are a lot of other steel structured buildings in the past that have suffered around the same or more damage then WTC 7 that never collapsed or only a portion of them collapsed.

You yourself even said the video is theory based, and theories are not facts !!!

I even broke down the Purdue stance and video for Mitspa that he kept repeating, on how ridiculous and the flaws in their video as well.

I will pose the same to you go watch "911: In Plane Site"

The man who did this was not a conspiracy theorists and he did this to disprove them, it is a very good eye opener !!!

 

[blondieindahouse]

No they are clear and known laws of physics and metals and structures ..all studied and understood by those trained in that field ... In the confusion of that day..some thing may not be clear ..but what is clear gives us solid and reasonable proof that the building fell because of fire.... and I believe that there is plenty of evidence to prove to any honest person that this conspiracy stuff is just a deception ...any honest person can figure it out..if they want to be honest?

You make it sound as if there is a consensus from those who are experts in the fields of physics and metals etc.... it simply is not the case!
Plz dont go as far as calling those who disagree with you dishonest!! And dont come back and say you didnt say it because you passively aggressively did. Sometimes, you really do go too far.


Are you really going to stoop to insults? Which spirit is that coming from?

 

[KennethC]

Like I said .. you guys cant stand the idea that your wrong..therefore you wont study out the issue to find the truth. Your a prisoner to your own pride that will not allow you to see the truth... Im trying to help you see that your wrong on the beam..so you can understand your wrong on this other stuff as well and just be set free from this deception ... Do you nit think God wants you to walk in the truth?

Wow you are the one who is prideful !!!

You don't know how to move on and address the other issues at hand can you, that is what pride really does.

It pushes people and demands stuff out of them and shows no signs of being patient with them.

You claim we don't study which is a complete lie, as good study is not done in the matter of minutes. It takes time to study things out and it has been a few years since I looked into all of this.

I told you I did research and looked into a number of these video's you are putting acrossed as well as others, yet your claim is to bear false witness on others.

Yes God wants us to walk in the truth which is why HE told us to test all things, not sit back and take a few video's or a couple things others have said as facts without looking at the whole issue at hand.

Standing and walking in the truth means you address all the issues !!!

 

[GodIsSalvation]

No they are clear and known laws of physics and metals and structures ..all studied and understood by those trained in that field ... In the confusion of that day..some thing may not be clear ..but what is clear gives us solid and reasonable proof that the building fell because of fire.... and I believe that there is plenty of evidence to prove to any honest person that this conspiracy stuff is just a deception ...any honest person can figure it out..if they want to be honest?

I agree that most the conspiracy theories are bunk and they are easy enough to figure out. The problem is you have no actual evidence the fire alone brought down WTC 7. In fact the same organization that put forth that theory, the NIST, has a report that admits they don't actually have any evidence, it's just their leading theory. The fire could be a contributing factor though. In my opinion WTC 7 came down for a compendium of reasons, the fire is part of the reasons, but not the sole factor.

FAQs - NIST WTC 7 Investigation

An intriguing excerpt.
28. NIST’s entire investigation included no physical evidence. How can the investigators be so sure they know what happened?

In general, much less evidence existed for WTC 7 than for the two WTC towers. The steel for WTC 1 and WTC 2 contained distinguishing characteristics that enabled it to be identified once removed from the site during recovery efforts. However, the same was not true for the WTC 7 steel. Certainly, there is a lot less visual and audio evidence of the WTC 7 collapse compared to the collapses of the WTC 1 and WTC 2 towers, which were much more widely photographed.

Nonetheless, the NIST investigation of WTC 7 is based on a huge amount of data. These data come from extensive research, interviews, and studies of the building, including audio and video recordings of the collapse. Rigorous, state-of-the-art computer methods were designed to study and model the building's collapse. These validated computer models produced a collapse sequence that was confirmed by observations of what actually occurred. In addition to using its in-house expertise, NIST relied upon private-sector technical experts; accumulated copious documents, photographs and videos of this disaster; conducted first-person interviews of building occupants and emergency responders; analyzed the evacuation and emergency response operations in and around WTC 7; performed computer simulations of the behavior of WTC 7 on Sept. 11, 2001; and combined the knowledge gained into a probable collapse sequence.

Lol a fancy way to say they have no real evidence, just computer models. Lol if computer models are their best evidence then I guess that makes me a four star general because I played Medieval Total War a few times. Obviously though computer models are not evidence, they are theory, but I'll still take that general's pension if that's their standard of proof.

 

[blondieindahouse]

Theres really no point in continuing on in this discussion when all parties involved havent studied all the facts. It just turns into a nonsensical debate of you said and I said. Any grade school idiot can see that is not the way to go at understanding what really happened. Btw Id be given to siding with a conspiracy nut more than our crooked corrupt evil government any day! The government no longer butters my bread but in fact has been taking it away one crumb at a time!

 

[GodIsSalvation]

Multiple experts have stated for that building to come down in the manner it did could have been in one way....Demolition.

There are a lot of other steel structured buildings in the past that have suffered around the same or more damage then WTC 7 that never collapsed or only a portion of them collapsed.

You yourself even said the video is theory based, and theories are not facts !!!

I even broke down the Purdue stance and video for Mitspa that he kept repeating, on how ridiculous and the flaws in their video as well.

I will pose the same to you go watch "911: In Plane Site"

The man who did this was not a conspiracy theorists and he did this to disprove them, it is a very good eye opener !!!

There's other ways to bring it down in such manner without an intentional demolition. Again not trying to jump too deep in here, trying to give Mitspa and Bushido a chance to beat the two points on their own.

I find the controlled demolition theory to be unlikely, if not outright impossible. For one how you gonna plant bombs in one of the busiest buildings in one of the busiest cities on earth? For two the insider job theory cannot account for Bin Laden and his involvement. For three if I assume it was a controlled demolition I should be able to trace back some sort of connecting proof such as the group or individuals that planted the bombs, where they got the bomb materials, how they got access to the building, and other such evidences.

 

[blondieindahouse]

There's other ways to bring it down in such manner without an intentional demolition. Again not trying to jump too deep in here, trying to give Mitspa and Bushido a chance to beat the two points on their own.

I find the controlled demolition theory to be unlikely, if not outright impossible. For one how you gonna plant bombs in one of the busiest buildings in one of the busiest cities on earth? For two the insider job theory cannot account for Bin Laden and his involvement. For three if I assume it was a controlled demolition I should be able to trace back some sort of connecting proof such as the group or individuals that planted the bombs, where they got the bomb materials, how they got access to the building, and other such evidences.

I find the controlled demolition theory to be unlikely, if not outright impossible. For one how you gonna plant bombs in one of the busiest buildings in one of the busiest cities on earth?

Hidden in plain site !

For two the insider job theory cannot account for Bin Laden and his involvement.

9/11 - Hard Facts, Hard Truth - Bin Laden 'Confession' Tapes
For three if I assume it was a controlled demolition I should be able to trace back some sort of connecting proof such as the group or individuals that planted the bombs, where they got the bomb materials, how they got access to the building, and other such evidences.

You dont really think loose ends would be left undone do you?

 

[KennethC]

There's other ways to bring it down in such manner without an intentional demolition. Again not trying to jump too deep in here, trying to give Mitspa and Bushido a chance to beat the two points on their own.

I find the controlled demolition theory to be unlikely, if not outright impossible. For one how you gonna plant bombs in one of the busiest buildings in one of the busiest cities on earth? For two the insider job theory cannot account for Bin Laden and his involvement. For three if I assume it was a controlled demolition I should be able to trace back some sort of connecting proof such as the group or individuals that planted the bombs, where they got the bomb materials, how they got access to the building, and other such evidences.

What does the term "pull it" mean in the demolition field ???

I asked this of Mitspa already for the answer because this was said in regard to WTC 7, so what does that term mean ???

 

[blue_ladybug]

What does the term "pull it" mean in the demolition field ???

I asked this of Mitspa already for the answer because this was said in regard to WTC 7, so what does that term mean ???

Since no one else has answered this, and probably won't bother to, I will give the answer. In demolition terms, "pull it" means to bring it down through controlled means such as explosives. As to the question of how were they able to plant explosives in one of the busiest buildings, the answer is: at night, after every one had left for the day and only night security was there.

For two weeks BEFORE 911, every night there were different security vans parked outside the towers. Not the usual security, no, they had been replaced for that two weeks by this new company. Supposedly they were "fixing" repairs that the towers needed or some such lame excuse..

Question is, up until two weeks before 911, the normal security crew was there at night. So why send away the regulars, instead of having them help the ones who came in to do "repairs"?

 

[GodIsSalvation]

I find the controlled demolition theory to be unlikely, if not outright impossible. For one how you gonna plant bombs in one of the busiest buildings in one of the busiest cities on earth?

Hidden in plain site !

For two the insider job theory cannot account for Bin Laden and his involvement.

9/11 - Hard Facts, Hard Truth - Bin Laden 'Confession' Tapes
For three if I assume it was a controlled demolition I should be able to trace back some sort of connecting proof such as the group or individuals that planted the bombs, where they got the bomb materials, how they got access to the building, and other such evidences.

You dont really think loose ends would be left undone do you?

1. Be kinda hard to hide the amount of explosives that would be needed to bring down WTC 7, much moreso to actually smuggle them into the WTC 7 and properly set them up unnoticed to create such a demolition.

2. As for people trying to debunk Bin Laden's claims it is ridiculous. People that claim this are hedging their bets that the people are so ignorant that they won't go watch his tapes for themselves. I suppose it is effective seeing as according to youtube only a few thousand of us in the entire world have ever investigated Bin Laden at length. You can watch all his interviews and all his tapes right on youtube. Ain't no secret, therefore it is no conspiracy. Listen for yourself. Osama tells you pretty bluntly he did 9/11 and goes down to the details even. I recommend starting with the interview I posted on page 1, but there's many other videos or audios of Bin Laden that can be used to corroborate his involvement.

3. There's always loose ends, there is a way to figure out any conspiracy, theory, or conspiracy theory. To pull off an attack of the magnitude of 9/11 is gonna leave many trails to trace. All the roads lead back to an Islam-inspired attack masterminded or supported by Bin Laden or Saudi Arabia.

 

[Mitspa]

What does the term "pull it" mean in the demolition field ???

I asked this of Mitspa already for the answer because this was said in regard to WTC 7, so what does that term mean ???

Really? Kenneth stop repeating everything you hear on the internet..

[video=youtube;43F54hR0NW8]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=43F54hR0NW8&list=PL6HfslQ0B9FiOtqrtEe4GqoD Xwt6e5My_&index=17[/video]

 

[GodIsSalvation]

What does the term "pull it" mean in the demolition field ???

I asked this of Mitspa already for the answer because this was said in regard to WTC 7, so what does that term mean ???

Well it would depend who is saying "pull it". Was it a person that works in demolitions?

 

[GodIsSalvation]

Really? Kenneth stop repeating everything you hear on the internet..

[video=youtube;43F54hR0NW8]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=43F54hR0NW8&list=PL6HfslQ0B9FiOtqrtEe4GqoD Xwt6e5My_&index=17[/video]

Awww Mitspa, I wanted to have some fun with him first. Lol funny enough though I was gonna post the same video lol.

 

[Mitspa]

Since no one else has answered this, and probably won't bother to, I will give the answer. In demolition terms, "pull it" means to bring it down through controlled means such as explosives. As to the question of how were they able to plant explosives in one of the busiest buildings, the answer is: at night, after every one had left for the day and only night security was there.

For two weeks BEFORE 911, every night there were different security vans parked outside the towers. Not the usual security, no, they had been replaced for that two weeks by this new company. Supposedly they were "fixing" repairs that the towers needed or some such lame excuse..

Question is, up until two weeks before 911, the normal security crew was there at night. So why send away the regulars, instead of having them help the ones who came in to do "repairs"?

That's simply not true blue ... why do you guys want so bad to believe this stuff...I don't understand?

 

[KennethC]

Since no one else has answered this, and probably won't bother to, I will give the answer. In demolition terms, "pull it" means to bring it down through controlled means such as explosives. As to the question of how were they able to plant explosives in one of the busiest buildings, the answer is: at night, after every one had left for the day and only night security was there.

For two weeks BEFORE 911, every night there were different security vans parked outside the towers. Not the usual security, no, they had been replaced for that two weeks by this new company. Supposedly they were "fixing" repairs that the towers needed or some such lame excuse..

Question is, up until two weeks before 911, the normal security crew was there at night. So why send away the regulars, instead of having them help the ones who came in to do "repairs"?

Thank you for answering Blue.........

Yes "pull it" means to bring it down by controlled demolition and this was said about WTC 7 by the man in charge of the buildings owner (forgot his name and title).

Another thing I need to go dig up again since this is being brought up again !!!

The other thing that people don't know much about is that the trade center had a bombing done back in 93, and at that time a company called Securacom was put in charge of the security of the WTC.

That company which now goes by the name Stratesec in 2001 had a head person in this company by the name of Marvin P. Bush, yes that is right George Bushes younger brother.

Also from 1999 to 2002 Wirt Walker 3 (their cousin) was the companies CEO.........

Coincidence or not, you decide...........................

 

[Mitspa]

Thank you for answering Blue.........

Yes "pull it" means to bring it down by controlled demolition and this was said about WTC 7 by the man in charge of the buildings owner (forgot his name and title).

Another thing I need to go dig up again since this is being brought up again !!!

The other thing that people don't know much about is that the trade center had a bombing done back in 93, and at that time a company called Securacom was put in charge of the security of the WTC.

That company which now goes by the name Stratesec in 2001 had a head person in this company by the name of Marvin P. Bush, yes that is right George Bushes younger brother.

Also from 1999 to 2002 Wirt Walker 3 (their cousin) was the companies CEO.........

Coincidence or not, you decide...........................

Does it bother you that's a complete lie and that term has never been a term used in that industry ...watch the video Kenneth
unless all those demolition companies that deny that term are now all part of the conspiracy as well? ... lets move on to the next lie

 

[Mitspa]

Really? Kenneth stop repeating everything you hear on the internet..

[video=youtube;43F54hR0NW8]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=43F54hR0NW8&list=PL6HfslQ0B9FiOtqrtEe4GqoD Xwt6e5My_&index=17[/video]

Watch the video ...