[extracted] New(?) 9-11 stuff

Why do you feel the need to resort to immature childish name calling (which BTW is against 2p2 policy) just because you disagree with what someone else is saying?

Dr. Judy Wood published a book called "Where did the towers go" which contains evidence of direct energy weapons being used on 9/11 which turned the towers literally into a fountain of dust in front of everyone's eyes.

And how did building 7 "free fall", which wasn't hit by an airplane? The towers fell in their own footprint they didn't fall over onto building 7 and there's plenty of video of building 7 coming down exactly like it was a controlled demolition.

https://rumble.com/v4xg960-documentary-d...

https://www.amazon.com/Towers-Evidence-D...

Dr. Wood's Biography https://www.goodreads.com/author/show/46...

But you wanna believe "no, my government would NEVER lie to me".

Childish name calling would be calling you a broke-brain dumb-dumb who can't tell fantasy from reality. Oops. Call the feds.

Excellent, we now have directed energy weapons turning the towers into fountains of dust. What does the rest of the brain trust think of this? Plausible, or too out there even for them?

Also, did you check KSM ear pictures? Are we confident we got the right guy?

Didn't you say there was some sort of patent that's relevant to your theory?

Direct energy weapons?

Cool.

You can always rely on Playbig to show up in a thread and demonstrate that the posts you thought were the nut low are not in fact the nut low. We should call him "the counterfeiter".

RFG

'Rods From God'!

Kirk is a good guy. Romulans obv.

It's trying to find valid evidence of the claims of the state regarding 9/11 which is frustrating. Don't displace that onto me. The NIST report is pure garbage hand waving over the collapse mechanism. You lazily cite a wikipedia page and, like, I'm sorry but that's not really citing anything at the source level. The burden of proof is on the state. If the claims were valid it would be nothing for you to cite a source. Then you admit you don't even know what is on the wikipedia page. You can't make this **** up.

Do you want the evidence OJ killed Nicole? I can get that for you in a matter of minutes. The shoe prints, the blood, the history of abuse as circumstantial. Motive, means, opportunity, the timeline- it's all there for the OJ case. The juice did it, no question. And I hate the fact that some racist cop was the one to deliver the news, but the facts are the facts. 9/11? You don't really have anything. Maybe you are ok with that. You have a roof and food and your units of enjoyment (God only knows what that is in your case) and you don't want anything getting in the way of that. Fine. But don't sit there and tell me you have all this proof when you've got nothing but some commercial book "The Looming Tower" and some statements made under extreme torture from KSM that clearly won't hold up in court.

You do realise that saying a source is "some commercial book", without giving any specific reason as to why it's wrong, and which appears in exactly 1/10 bibliography entries and is cited in exactly 0/121 footnotes of that Wikipedia article is you "hand waving" away evidence, right? Despite the fact I take a rather dim overall view of your intelligence, I'm pretty sure even you understand this.

In any case, as I told you, my interest in doing any further research on this subject just to have you dismiss anything I find on the grounds that it's "not challenging enough" or "a gotcha" or "some commercial book" or whatever horseshit reason you dream up next time is exactly the square root of **** all.

Dunces, what would be much more interesting is if you weighed in on the space laser theory. I think our resident truthseer Playbig might really be on to something there.

Have these "direct energy weapons" ever been used before or since 9/11? Seems like whoever has those controls the world with no issues if you can turn the towers "literally into a fountain of dust in front of everyone's eyes"

I'm open to any rational ideas as long as they explain the observations, namely the totality of the destruction, the heat blooms, the molten steel, the squibs, the explosions etc. I tend to not entertain theories which are too specific because there wasn't and, now, can never be any opportunity to apply forensics to the collapse sites. We know from video evidence the buildings were demolished but I doubt we can ever know how.

It's worth reading descriptions of the totality of the destruction of the towers and their contents which can be appreciated whatever theory you subscribe. No vanishing act I've ever seen remotely compares.

It might have been god, that's one of the tricks in his repertoire - who can forget when he turned that lady into a pillar of salt, for example.

Did you see the news guy telling people to stay away from wtc 7 like they knew it was about to collapse? I guess they hated the firefighters.

It is quite well known that the building was known to be on the verge of collapse well before it did. There was a transit placed on the building which showed it was literally LEANING. The firefighters were pulled from the building because of this.

Didn't we see signs of direct energy weapons in Maui?

For example, 3 hours before the collapse:

[quote=Deputy Chief Peter Hayden’s interview in FireHouse magazine from 2002]

"... but also we were pretty sure that 7 World Trade Center would collapse. Early on, we saw a bulge in the southwest corner between floors 10 and 13, and we had put a transit on that and we were pretty sure she was going to collapse. You actually could see there was a visible bulge, it ran up about three floors. It came down about 5 o’clock in the afternoon, but by about 2 o’clock in the afternoon we realized this thing was going to collapse.

[/quote]

Maui obv 😀 If you've ever watched any YT vids about the Maui fire and see comments with DEW mixed in that's an abbrev. for it.

Deuces, are you able to give us a rough calculation of the force exerted on the towers by the impacts of the planes?

It was a controlled demolition--some guys controlled a massive bomb to fly into the side of the bldgs. and then they fell down 😀

Deuces-1

Peanut Gallery-0

How was is possible two buildings of that size could be turned mostly into dust and into a pile of only a couple stories high? The news anchors and social media fact checkers seem to keep disagreeing with all the experts in the field we should actually be listening to...

They have the technology on both sides but luckily the good side recently took over the Yal-2 from the bad side, a specially designed 747 (which was involved with wildfires in HI and TX and earlier in Paridise, CA and possibly started the fires in eastern Canada that covered NYC in orange a while back of which I shared the video proof of dozens of major fires starting over hundreds of miles all at exactly the same time).

You draw some pretty ridiculous theories from singular pictures. What about the hundreds of other photographs that show non-pulverized debris raining down from the collapsing towers?

PB, do you think two commercial airliners with passengers hit the towers?

This picture, found on one of the victims' phones, was never followed up or investigated.

Why? What are they hiding?