MovieChat Forums > United 93 (2006) Discussion > Dam...same OCT'ers on here from like EIG...

Dam...same OCT'ers on here from like EIGHT YEARS AGO


Here I am, casually checking on this forum around 9/11 and I'm SHOCKED to see the same diehards that were trolling this board with their anti-conspiracy propaganda YEARS AND YEARS AGO. Look at that USAFMXOfficer dude go. Damn. Unbelievable.

Get busy livin' or get busy dyin'...
...That's god damn right.

reply

"9/11 Conspiracy Theories are so 2005...." - USAFMXOfficer_2015, http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0469641/board/nest/259134036


Still waiting for actual evidence but it appears JSSTyger is only capable of ad hominems.

reply

Still waiting for actual evidence...


Evidence never meant anything. NIST didn't test for explosive residues because to them, terrorists wouldn't use explosives and we should just assume that, despite the accounts of several first-responders, fire did it all. (In reality, they probably didn't do it because they didn't want people to think they were considering "crazy" theories.)

NIST doesn't even try with Tower 7, saying "meh" to 100+ feet of unimpeded fall.

That's odd. F science...?

They gave up so hard on that one...they admittedly can't understand why the classic demo "kink" happened...saying their computer models couldn't make it happen because it was too complex. Well...then the model doesn't work!

They also say that fire and fire alone brought down 7...and would have brought down an UNDAMAGED 7. They didn't blame long span floor trusses or gas tank explosions or anything. Fire.

If it doesn't fit, use it anyhow! Sign it off with a professional engineer who doesn't want a publicity nightmare and all that questionable "science" becomes fact.

Get busy livin' or get busy dyin'...
...That's god damn right.

reply

Tower 7? Even the likes of Dylan Avery backed off that one. In 2007.

reply

Yes...too many anomalies with WTC 7, the "mistake" of the whole thing. It didn't go down when expected.

It threw CNN and BBC off.

It threw Larry Silverstein off, which is why he was on the phone with his insurance carrier regarding demolition of the building. This is something we learned like TEN YEARS (?) after it happened. That seems important in light of things like "pull it" from that PBS interview to show us the things that were on Silverstein's mind that day. Most likely, his insurance carrier told him NO DEAL and so they could not say it was demo'd OR he was informed by his buddies that could lead to lots of questions.

Barry Jennings attested both towers still up when his explosion happened. BTW, The British Brainwashing Corporation re-enacted his story as if it happened DURING the collapse of tower 1. When asked about this discrepancy, they simply said they came to their conclusion because of other facts. They substituted witness testimony with their own story. If I were that witness, I'd be damn pissed.

The veoh1 video submitted by Gldbr couldn't make it more obvious. It had no sound but you could see the verticality of the windows breaking out. That is a LEGITIMATE video that...I'm sorry...CAN'T BE EXPLAINED. The columns on every floor failed within milliseconds of eachother for that to happen.

Get busy livin' or get busy dyin'...
...That's god damn right.

reply

The real truth here is your movement is shrinking and you're being left behind.

reply

The real truth here is EVERYONE doesn't care as much...and you're still here on the internet fighting over it.

Get busy livin' or get busy dyin'...
...That's god damn right.

reply

[deleted]

see the same diehards that were trolling this board with their anti-conspiracy propaganda YEARS AND YEARS AGO. Look at that USAFMXOfficer dude go. Damn. Unbelievable.


....said by one of the same CTers from years and years ago.....

Actually I only pop in and out here every now and again. My new quest is arguing with a group that is far more lunatic than even 9/11 CTers....yes....CHEMTRAILERS!!!!

reply