Suscipe Domine Traditional Catholic Forum

At one time skepticism about 9/11 was considered "fringe" behavior.
The government still acts like only lone conspiracy nuts question the official narrative.

I wonder how mainstream it has become to doubt the 9/11 story?

Do I "believe in" 9/11.  I remember the lingering smell, the sirens, grown men crying in the streets.

I believe the accounts of what happened as it unfolded on that day were correct. It's hard to forget watching with your own eyes people jumping from skyscrapers and splattering across the street in preference to choking, burning or being crushed to death.

I find the audio files from the last desperate calls on the flight that was re-taken by the passengers were also genuine.

The only point I would question is how involved the Saudi's were. They absolutely were, and I think they could be far more deeply involved than any Western government would have liked to admit back when they had far more clout with the oil prices. It came out over time they were behind it, that's hardly a secret. I think efforts have been made to hide what else went on there.

"Vengeance is Mine sayeth the Lord; I will repay".

This work continues. The story goes on. And an angel still rides in the whirlwind, and directs this storm.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rXzgMdj5urs

I don't believe the official gov't story.  I think there's a lot more out there that we don't know. 

Controlled demolition was definitely used. Building 7 which was a 47 story skyscraper fell hours after the twin towers went down supposedly due to office fires. The problem is that it fell at free fall for 8 stories or for about 100 feet or 2.25-2.5 seconds. That means 8 stories  loss all "structural resistance" at the same time or in a synchronized way. That doesn't happen due to fire. The official story is absurd.

https://www.ae911truth.org/evidence/free-fall-acceleration

No, Muslims couldn't and didn't destroy the world trade center with airplanes. We're smart so we're naturally super skeptical of any bat**** crazy explanation of anything that is without evidence, precedent, or logical coherence. Therefore it was all masterminded by George Bush who planted C4 at the base of building 7 and then covered it up by hiring muslims to fly airplanes into the other two buildings, in hopes that by hitting those other two buildings it would cause that building to collapse too. The plan failed, but luckily he placed those charges that he was trying to cover up, so by detonating those charges he both succeeded and failed at the same time. It's the perfect crime. He obviously did it because he wanted all of that oil that we never got out of the middle east after we spent 15 years effectively accomplishing nothing there. So in hindsight it was all a pretty good plan. I mean, if anybody wanted to blow things up for no apparent reason, for which we've still attained nothing, that is clearly the best way to do it. Therefore that IS how it actually went down.

And yes, David Hogg is a paid government actor, freemasons control everything, the government is reading your mind, and Qanon is legit. Or maybe he's not and he's actually a government psy op. Frankly, if it doesn't have the word "paid actor" "jew"  "government" or "freemason" in the explanation, it's probably a false flag. Like I said, we only believe thigs that are supported by evidence and are logical.

Here. Let me teach you to logic. Take David Hogg. David Hogg is incredibly articulate. Therefore he cannot possibly be a high school student and the only possible explanation is not that he is just a smart kid, but he's REALLY a 25 year old paid government actor.

Qanon? Well, if you look back at his post 6 weeks ago, he once posted "58295". There's a 9 in that series of numbers. Well did you NOTICE what Trump said on the NINTH day of the NINTH month? BOOM.

If you're still having difficulty it's because you're taking the blue pill. You gotta take the red pill bro. The red one.

Steel doesn't melt. Therefore demolitions. It's the only possible explanation. And did you notice that the WORLD trade center and the WORLD bank both have the word "WORLD" in them? Yeah, that's right, it was the Jews all along.

Welcome to Traditional Catholicism, where logical progressions are just a formality.

Quote from: Lambda Phage on September 11, 2018, 09:00:30 PM
No, Muslims couldn't and didn't destroy the world trade center with airplanes. We're smart so we're naturally super skeptical of any bat**** crazy explanation of anything that is without evidence, precedent, or logical coherence. Therefore it was all masterminded by George Bush who planted C4 at the base of building 7 and then covered it up by hiring muslims to fly airplanes into the other two buildings, in hopes that by hitting those other two buildings it would cause that building to collapse too. The plan failed, but luckily he placed those charges that he was trying to cover up, so by detonating those charges he both succeeded and failed at the same time. It's the perfect crime. He obviously did it because he wanted all of that oil that we never got out of the middle east after we spent 15 years effectively accomplishing nothing there. So in hindsight it was all a pretty good plan. I mean, if anybody wanted to blow things up for no apparent reason, for which we've still attained nothing, that is clearly the best way to do it. Therefore that IS how it actually went down.

And yes, David Hogg is a paid government actor, freemasons control everything, the government is reading your mind, and Qanon is legit. Or maybe he's not and he's actually a government psy op. Frankly, if it doesn't have the word "paid actor" "jew"  "government" or "freemason" in the explanation, it's probably a false flag. Like I said, we only believe thigs that are supported by evidence and are logical.

Here. Let me teach you to logic. Take David Hogg. David Hogg is incredibly articulate. Therefore he cannot possibly be a high school student and the only possible explanation is not that he is just a smart kid, but he's REALLY a 25 year old paid government actor.

Qanon? Well, if you look back at his post 6 weeks ago, he once posted "58295". There's a 9 in that series of numbers. Well did you NOTICE what Trump said on the NINTH day of the NINTH month? BOOM.

If you're still having difficulty it's because you're taking the blue pill. You gotta take the red pill bro. The red one.

Steel doesn't melt. Therefore demolitions. It's the only possible explanation. And did you notice that the WORLD trade center and the WORLD bank both have the word "WORLD" in them? Yeah, that's right, it was the Jews all along.

Welcome to Traditional Catholicism, where logical progressions are just a formality.

I haven't and probably never will look into The Who done it and why aspect of 911. Why? Not because there is no evidence one way or an other, but because it would be a waste of my time. Take 20 minutes of your time and look into building 7. There is zero chance that natural fires caused more or less all beams across 8 floors to be taken out at the same time and that's what was needed to get a symmetrical free fall of 2.25 seconds. Honestly, you just need a little bit of high school physics to understand how insane this is.

People just put there heads in the sand because it conflicts with their world view. The argument I set forth is very simple. If it's not true, then surely the smartest government scientists and public relations officials would have refuted it right?

Also, fires of hot enough could weaken steel or even melt it. But with a natural fire you would expect:

1. A progression of getting bigger/hotter and the smaller.

2. Random/asymmetrical concentration

Which naturally might lead to a building slowly buckling in an asymmetrical way.

Quote from: Lambda Phage on September 11, 2018, 09:00:30 PM
. . . . Steel doesn't melt. Therefore demolitions. . . . .

. . . Welcome to Traditional Catholicism, where logical progressions are just a formality.

That's almost right.  Steel doesn't melt at the temperatures caused by burning jet fuel.  What's more, it doesn't even weaken. 

In fact. according to those who design and build high-rise steel framed buildings for a living - architects and engineers - steel framed buildings never collapse because of fire. 

The only way those towers could have collapsed as a result of those planes alone, was if the laws of physics were temprarily suspended on that day.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ddz2mw2vaEg

Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth - they don't say who they think caused the demolition of the twin towers.  They offer no conspiracy theories.  They just maintain that the planes couldn't have done it. 

Like the rest of you, I was impacted by the day. I joined the military in '05 because of a sense of patriotism inspired by those events.

For years I believed and promoted the government story.

I don't think I do anymore. At one point, years ago, I watched the architects and engineers video. It's very well done and I think if I were to rewatch it now it would conclusively make my mind up. I just haven't had much time in recent years to spend thinking about it.

It takes a lot of btus focused on a small area over a short time interval to heat steel enough to bend it.  It's also impossible to believe that an uncontrolled fire arranged itself to focus equally on all the supporting elements at the same time.  It is impossible to believe that a dirty fire could reach forging temperatures.  It is impossible to believe that falling floors hit the lower floors in a manner that caused 100% failure on all the supports at the same time.

I never believed the airplanes took down the buildings from day one.

I believe most of it, but I think Flight 93 was shot down by the Air Force. I believe the "Let's Roll" where the passengers overpowered the jihadis story was concocted because it was a feel good story to have some heros in the attack and the government didn't want backlash from shooting down Americans.

Responses here prove that the SSPX/FSP movement is nothing other than made up of conspiracy followers.

Quote from: King Wenceslas on September 12, 2018, 01:21:13 PM

Responses here prove that the SSPX/FSP movement is nothing other than made up of conspiracy followers.

And yet you continue to post here.

Did anyone read the article I posted?

Quote from: Heinrich on September 12, 2018, 01:47:12 PM
Did anyone read the article I posted?

Yeah I read it.

http://www.unz.com/article/911-was-an-israeli-job/

I've read most if not all of it before on other sites.  I don't doubt it.

Quote from: King Wenceslas on September 12, 2018, 01:21:13 PM

Responses here prove that the SSPX/FSP movement is nothing other than made up of conspiracy followers.

Um, did you look at the poll results? Secondly even if true so what? If the official story is wrong, then that's a mark of intelligence for the trad movements (or at least it's not a negative).

So here's my challenge: provide a viable ulternative contrary to demolition use on building 7. The government couldn't do it with the best scientists out there. They were even caught on tape saying a free fall due to natural fires was impossible. When confronted with the evidence, it magically became possible and consistent with their models. Except they never tell you how.

Here is another challenge: I don't think you have a basic knowledge of the pros and cons to the official story concerning building 7. If you do and it is irrational to not believe the official story then surely you can demonstrate or at least argue your point.

Otherwise this is just prejudice and should be scorned as such.

Quote from: King Wenceslas on September 12, 2018, 01:21:13 PM

Responses here prove that the SSPX/FSP movement is nothing other than made up of conspiracy followers.

I think there's some truth to this. The question is what you take away from it.

To me it says that if you want to be a traditional Catholic and save your soul, then you cannot mindlessly follow the propaganda of the world. Those who don't want to be seen as "conspiracy followers" will never be able to see the truth.

I know that many of the first traditional Catholic chapels in the US started out as chapters of the John Birch Society. To those who were already outcasts was brought the good news of salvation. Those who wanted to go with the crowd were all lost.

It reminds me of "The Poseidon Adventure."
(Clip should start at 1:19 with Gene Hackman saying "That's the way out. That's our only chance.")

[yt]https://youtu.be/dd03qev59Jo?t=1m18s[/yt]

I think the official account is mostly true but there are a lot of things that don't add up. Building 7 is a real stumbling block.

Horrible things happened at 9/11 and many families and individuals suffered grievously. Neither Islamists nor Zionists are let off the hook for it. Both have their share of blame. But most important to avoiding events like that again, imho is to know and acknowledge it's proof of a shadow government working from within to destabilize the united states of america. Can we begin with some related more recent facts, documented in the public domain: it was Zionists who wanted war in Iraq (have the skeptics forgotten the sacrifices of heroic soldiers and their families, forgotten Bibi's shameless promotion of a needless war that cost so much American blood and treasure?), something that had nothing to do with Bin Laden anyway. It was Zionists again that wanted a false war against Assad that would have benefited ISIS (and do your homework on why an ISIS terrorist "apologized" for mistakenly shooting at Israel). It was Zionists who hoped to spark military confrontation between the U.S and Russia leading to World War III in Syria. Heaven and Our Lady defeated these plans, showing they are still fighting at great cost to show us the path to peace.

I believe Trump is well aware of the shadow government - people who hate Christianity and civilization - international agents working on every side to drive the world to confusion and war - no single individual or group is to blame for them except they themselves for what they do - and is trying to fight against it and bring it down. That's why they want to defeat him at all costs also. Link (https://maryrefugeofholylove.com/2018/08/05/jesus-christ-please-pray-hard-until-october-1st-prophecy-about-freedom-tower-collapse-june-2018/) Islamic terrorists are bad. Then there are even worse people who want to use them for their own ends.

It was the neocons in the Dubya administration that pushed for the war in Iraq after 9/11.  Most of the neocons are dual citizen US/Israelis, but not all of them.  Some of the neocons are Christian Zionists, like John Bolton.  What troubles me is that Trump moved the US embassy to Jerusalem and hired the neocon John Bolton as his National Security Advisor.  Bolton is a former senior fellow at the American Enterprise Institute and is also involved with a number of politically conservative think tanks, policy institutes and special interest groups, including the Institute of East-West Dynamics, the National Rifle Association, the U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom, Project for the New American Century, Jewish Institute for National Security of America (JINSA), Committee for Peace and Security in the Gulf, the Council for National Policy, and the Gatestone Institute.  Bolton has been called a "war hawk" and is an advocate for regime change in Iran and North Korea and repeatedly called for the termination of the Iran deal.

Quote from: mikemac on September 13, 2018, 09:08:25 AM
It was the neocons in the Dubya administration that pushed for the war in Iraq after 9/11.  Most of the neocons are dual citizen US/Israelis, but not all of them.  Some of the neocons are Christian Zionists, like John Bolton.  What troubles me is that Trump moved the US embassy to Jerusalem and hired the neocon John Bolton as his National Security Advisor.  Bolton is a former senior fellow at the American Enterprise Institute and is also involved with a number of politically conservative think tanks, policy institutes and special interest groups, including the Institute of East-West Dynamics, the National Rifle Association, the U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom, Project for the New American Century, Jewish Institute for National Security of America (JINSA), Committee for Peace and Security in the Gulf, the Council for National Policy, and the Gatestone Institute.  Bolton has been called a "war hawk" and is an advocate for regime change in Iran and North Korea and repeatedly called for the termination of the Iran deal.

https://twitter.com/AmbJohnBolton/status/869287810603384833

Quote from: Xavier on September 13, 2018, 06:45:20 AM
...
It was Zionists again that wanted a false war against Assad that would have benefited ISIS (and do your homework on why an ISIS terrorist "apologized" for mistakenly shooting at Israel).
...

I didn't know that so I did my homework.

https://www.timesofisrael.com/ex-defense-minister-says-is-apologized-to-israel-for-november-clash/

QuoteEx-defense minister says IS 'apologized' to Israel for November clash
Moshe Ya'alon's office refuses to elaborate after alluding to contact with terror group
24 April 2017


Former defense minister Moshe Ya'alon on Saturday said the Islamic State terrorist group in the Syrian Golan Heights "apologized" for attacking an Israeli unit.

"There was one case recently where Daesh opened fire and apologized," Ya'alon said, using the terror group's Arabic nickname.

This was an apparent reference to a clash that took place near the Syrian border last November, in which IDF troops exchanged fire with members of the Islamic State affiliate. After a brief gun battle, the Israeli military attacked the terrorist group with airstrikes and tank fire, killing four of them.

Israel and much of the Western world considers the Islamic State affiliate in the Syrian Golan Heights, known as the Khalid ibn al-Walid Army, to be a terrorist group. Communication with them is technically illegal under Israeli law, constituting contact with an enemy agent.

Ya'alon was speaking at an event in the northern city of Afula. He was interviewed on stage by Eli Levi, a Channel 10 news correspondent.

His comment about the Islamic State's apology was made as part of a broader point about Israel's policy for Syria, which is largely non-interventionist.

Ya'alon was explaining that Israel carries out strikes against Syrian President Bashar Assad's forces in retaliation when spillover fire hits the Israeli Golan Heights.

Ya'alon's officer refused to elaborate on how exactly the Islamic State expressed its apology to Israel after the attack. The IDF also declined to comment.

Syrian officials have accused Israel of directly aiding the Islamic State and other rebel groups, a claim Jerusalem vociferously denies.

Quote from: dellery on September 13, 2018, 09:13:57 AM

Quote from: mikemac on September 13, 2018, 09:08:25 AM
It was the neocons in the Dubya administration that pushed for the war in Iraq after 9/11.  Most of the neocons are dual citizen US/Israelis, but not all of them.  Some of the neocons are Christian Zionists, like John Bolton.  What troubles me is that Trump moved the US embassy to Jerusalem and hired the neocon John Bolton as his National Security Advisor.  Bolton is a former senior fellow at the American Enterprise Institute and is also involved with a number of politically conservative think tanks, policy institutes and special interest groups, including the Institute of East-West Dynamics, the National Rifle Association, the U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom, Project for the New American Century, Jewish Institute for National Security of America (JINSA), Committee for Peace and Security in the Gulf, the Council for National Policy, and the Gatestone Institute.  Bolton has been called a "war hawk" and is an advocate for regime change in Iran and North Korea and repeatedly called for the termination of the Iran deal.

https://twitter.com/AmbJohnBolton/status/869287810603384833

Yeah, 'Guardian of Zion' Bolton certainly is.

Quote from: mikemac on September 13, 2018, 09:08:25 AM
It was the neocons in the Dubya administration that pushed for the war in Iraq after 9/11.  Most of the neocons are dual citizen US/Israelis, but not all of them.  Some of the neocons are Christian Zionists, like John Bolton.  What troubles me is that Trump moved the US embassy to Jerusalem and hired the neocon John Bolton as his National Security Advisor.  Bolton is a former senior fellow at the American Enterprise Institute and is also involved with a number of politically conservative think tanks, policy institutes and special interest groups, including the Institute of East-West Dynamics, the National Rifle Association, the U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom, Project for the New American Century, Jewish Institute for National Security of America (JINSA), Committee for Peace and Security in the Gulf, the Council for National Policy, and the Gatestone Institute.  Bolton has been called a "war hawk" and is an advocate for regime change in Iran and North Korea and repeatedly called for the termination of the Iran deal.

Wolfowitz and Perlman.

Quote from: red solo cup on September 13, 2018, 10:08:51 AM

Quote from: mikemac on September 13, 2018, 09:08:25 AM
It was the neocons in the Dubya administration that pushed for the war in Iraq after 9/11.  Most of the neocons are dual citizen US/Israelis, but not all of them.  Some of the neocons are Christian Zionists, like John Bolton.  What troubles me is that Trump moved the US embassy to Jerusalem and hired the neocon John Bolton as his National Security Advisor.  Bolton is a former senior fellow at the American Enterprise Institute and is also involved with a number of politically conservative think tanks, policy institutes and special interest groups, including the Institute of East-West Dynamics, the National Rifle Association, the U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom, Project for the New American Century, Jewish Institute for National Security of America (JINSA), Committee for Peace and Security in the Gulf, the Council for National Policy, and the Gatestone Institute.  Bolton has been called a "war hawk" and is an advocate for regime change in Iran and North Korea and repeatedly called for the termination of the Iran deal.

Wolfowitz and Perlman.

Yeah Paul Wolfowitz, Richard Perle and a bunch of others.  Here's a list of neocons.

https://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Neo-conservatives/list

Quote from: An aspiring Thomist on September 11, 2018, 08:13:17 PM
Controlled demolition was definitely used. Building 7 which was a 47 story skyscraper fell hours after the twin towers went down supposedly due to office fires. The problem is that it fell at free fall for 8 stories or for about 100 feet or 2.25-2.5 seconds. That means 8 stories  loss all "structural resistance" at the same time or in a synchronized way. That doesn't happen due to fire. The official story is absurd.

https://www.ae911truth.org/evidence/free-fall-acceleration

And what has been forgotten over the years is that Building 7 housed the Records and HQ of the Securities and Exchange Commission. For those that may not have been paying attention at the time there was still much to be investigated in 2001 concerning fraud in the markets. Enron, Worldcomm, some company that installed fiber optics under the Atlantic connection North America to Europe, and many other companies whose stocks crashed faster than Building 7 in the late '90s.

It also housed the Command and Control Center for the City of NY to investigate and track terrorist activity.

Quote from: awkwardcustomer on September 12, 2018, 05:31:38 AM

Quote from: Lambda Phage on September 11, 2018, 09:00:30 PM
. . . . Steel doesn't melt. Therefore demolitions. . . . .

. . . Welcome to Traditional Catholicism, where logical progressions are just a formality.

That's almost right.  Steel doesn't melt at the temperatures caused by burning jet fuel.  What's more, it doesn't even weaken. 

In fact. according to those who design and build high-rise steel framed buildings for a living - architects and engineers - steel framed buildings never collapse because of fire. 

The only way those towers could have collapsed as a result of those planes alone, was if the laws of physics were temprarily suspended on that day.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ddz2mw2vaEg

Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth - they don't say who they think caused the demolition of the twin towers.  They offer no conspiracy theories.  They just maintain that the planes couldn't have done it.

It's not really about melting, it more that sufficient heat made the beams unable to do the job of holding up a building which creaked in high winds. After a failure close to the aircraft impact, floor after floor would pancake. That being said Building 7 cannot be explained that way. It's loss was perhaps opportune given its content.

I don't spend much time trying to find the truth but 9/11 is so obvious you don;t even have to look much farther after watching building 7 go down so evenly.
I also don't understand why some people find it so unacceptable and don't even allow an idea that it might have been an inside job. Whether it was or not there is just too many holes in the official story.

Quote from: Prayerful on September 13, 2018, 04:01:01 PM

Quote from: awkwardcustomer on September 12, 2018, 05:31:38 AM

Quote from: Lambda Phage on September 11, 2018, 09:00:30 PM
. . . . Steel doesn't melt. Therefore demolitions. . . . .

. . . Welcome to Traditional Catholicism, where logical progressions are just a formality.

That's almost right.  Steel doesn't melt at the temperatures caused by burning jet fuel.  What's more, it doesn't even weaken. 

In fact. according to those who design and build high-rise steel framed buildings for a living - architects and engineers - steel framed buildings never collapse because of fire. 

The only way those towers could have collapsed as a result of those planes alone, was if the laws of physics were temprarily suspended on that day.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ddz2mw2vaEg

Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth - they don't say who they think caused the demolition of the twin towers.  They offer no conspiracy theories.  They just maintain that the planes couldn't have done it.

It's not really about melting, it more that sufficient heat made the beams unable to do the job of holding up a building which creaked in high winds. After a failure close to the aircraft impact, floor after floor would pancake. That being said Building 7 cannot be explained that way. It's loss was perhaps opportune given its content.

Wouldn't a massive skyscraper act like a sort of giant bellows or wind tunnel, sucking air rapidly up to the fire, making the heat rise to steel bending temperatures?  Think of the way those chimney's work for starting charcoal for grilling, its a far stretch though between that and a skyscraper.

(https://i.imgur.com/ks0CbiG.jpg)

...that building 7 tho...

Quote from: drummerboy on September 14, 2018, 12:24:06 AM
Wouldn't a massive skyscraper act like a sort of giant bellows or wind tunnel, sucking air rapidly up to the fire, making the heat rise to steel bending temperatures?  Think of the way those chimney's work for starting charcoal for grilling, its a far stretch though between that and a skyscraper.

Fire code addresses that issue.  Take a look at the stairwells and elevators of any multi-story public building and you'll find self-closing fire doors on all floors.  I takes stretch of the imagination to believe that two airplanes managed to knock out enough fire doors on the lower floors of three buildings.

Does this video explain best how building 7 collapsed?

[yt]https://youtu.be/4LUDXpMhkNk[/yt]

Quote from: Prayerful on September 13, 2018, 04:01:01 PM
It's not really about melting, it more that sufficient heat made the beams unable to do the job of holding up a building which creaked in high winds. After a failure close to the aircraft impact, floor after floor would pancake. That being said Building 7 cannot be explained that way. It's loss was perhaps opportune given its content.

The twin towers were designed to creak, or sway slightly, in high winds.  All buildings move, to some extent, depending on temperature mostly, hence the need for expansion joints to accommodate this, especially in larger buildings.

There were 100,000 tonnes of structural steel in each of those towers.  The fires from the burning jet fuel were oxygen starved, hence the volumes of smoke.  This meant that they were burning at low temperatures. Steel doesn't even weaken at such temperatures.

The impact of the planes, would have had no effect whatsoever of the strucural integrity of those buildings.  The planes were basically hollow tubes of alumimium, a much softer metal than steel.  Whatever effect they had at the impact points would have been contained by the sheer force of the remaining steel.

But let's say that the planes, by some miracle, did indeed cause the top floors of the towers to collapse.  For every action there is an equal and opposite reaction, isn't there?  If, say, the top 20 (or so) floors collapsed downwards, this would create a downward force on the floors below.  But as Newton pointed out, the downward force exterted by the falling floors would be met by the upward resisting force of the 80 (or so) floors below.

The only way the towers could have collapsed at free fall speed is if the upward resisting force of the lower floors, which were most of both towers, was removed. And the only way this could be achieved was by controlled demolition.

The Architects and Engineers for 911 Truth video explains all this.

Quote from: Sempronius on September 14, 2018, 08:01:33 AM
Does this video explain best how building 7 collapsed?

[yt]https://youtu.be/4LUDXpMhkNk[/yt]

No, it doesn't.  Oxygen starved fires supposedly caused by burning office furniture could never have caused the collapse of WTC 7.

They're lying.

Office furniture has to meet all kinds of fire resistance and safety standards, for a start.

This video gives a wonderful illustration of the controlled demolition of two tower blocks

The Top Gear team a trying to destroy a Toyota pickup truck.  After many attempts, they place it at the top of a multi-storey building that is about to go the same way as the twin towers.  The results are practically identical.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kFnVZXQD5_k

Also where did all of that steel go? I will try to find a podcast on 9/11 from NY public radio station. It was an hour long broadcast. But you can just google Dr Judy Wood or find her on youtube. She is a former professor of engineering mechanics.

Quote from: Kaesekopf on September 12, 2018, 01:33:58 PM

Quote from: King Wenceslas on September 12, 2018, 01:21:13 PM

Responses here prove that the SSPX/FSP movement is nothing other than made up of conspiracy followers.

And yet you continue to post here.

Thanks for pushing me over the edge. I really don't belong here.

Quote from: Kirin on September 11, 2018, 03:30:31 PM
I believe the accounts of what happened as it unfolded on that day were correct. It's hard to forget watching with your own eyes people jumping from skyscrapers and splattering across the street in preference to choking, burning or being crushed to death.

you were there?

Jumpers from an on-fire building != necessity of planes hitting towers or at least being the primary cause of their collapse.

That's like saying because I can vividly describe certain instances in Iraq, that Saddam definitely had yellow cake uranium.

QuoteJumpers from an on-fire building != necessity of planes hitting towers or at least being the primary cause of their collapse.

i was ever so gently leading up to the same point, but i first wanted to establish if "watching with [his] own eyes" meant that he was physically present or if he was watching the entire thing on tv

for someone who makes it a point to advertise his skepticism, kirin's comment came across -- to me, at least -- as astoundingly credulous

Kirin clearly suffers from a Duning/Krugeresque hypercredulity. He's only sceptical of the things that limit his unrestricted system of beliefs.

When men choose not to believe in God, they do not thereafter believe in nothing, they then become capable of believing in anything. --G.K. Chesterton