FAQ   Search   Memberlist   Usergroups   Register   Profile   Log in to check your private messages   Log in 
9/11 Audio: Twin Towers Built for Demo
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 438, 439, 440, 441  Next
 
Post new topic   This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies.    The Next Level Forum Index -> 9/11 HardCorps Specifics Investigation
  ::  Previous topic :: Next topic  
Author Message
Fintan
Site Admin


Joined: 18 Jan 2006
Posts: 6510

PostPosted: Tue Dec 30, 2008 7:31 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

We have had more than 400 pages of discussion
extending over a period of eighteen months.

I am inviting closing comments from all, as
this thread is not going to make it into 2009.

Sure, some dust clouds just might be concrete walls.
But on the other hand they might also simply be dust.

That's not enough, when there is serious doubt that a
concrete core with 17 foot walls could fit in the Towers.

That's not enough, in the absence of the documentary,
and in the absence of evidence there ever was one.

That's not enough, because despite Chris' claims about a
concrete core, not a single piece of clearly unambiguous
evidence has yet emerged.

It think it was worth looking at this, because Chris had a
theory which was unique and outside the 9/11 consensus.

But it remains an interesting theory. Lacking any positive
evidence and now facing a wall of contradictory evidence.


I am unconvinced, but that is not why the thread is closing.

It is closing because regardless of my own feeling about this,
I have enough experience to make the call that this theory
would fail to convince serious 9/11 researchers.

If new substantive information comes to hand I will consider
re-opening the thread, but with the limited time available to 9/11
Truth researchers, we have to ensure that the time is spent in
fruitful lines of inquiry.

Thanks to all who have contributed. We have learned a great
deal about the Towers in the discussion and hopefully this
will be useful in our further research.

A new forum section called "The Verdict" is opening on BFN.
The objective is to toss out all insubstantial and diversionary
9/11 issues and identify the remaining vital evidence that the
attacks were not as they are claimed to be by the official story.

It's over seven years after the attacks, and after a mass of often
poor arguments by 9/11 Truthseekers, it's time to cut to the chase.

I posted this earlier this month about the concrete core theory:

Quote:
Fintan - Posted: 12 Dec 2008 02:18 am

I'd like to address the question of
what constitutes substantial evidence?


And I think that the basis is different now, than when we started.

Back then, any sign whatsoever of a concrete core was valuable.
After all, it might indicate an unexplored and valuable line of inquiry.

So, for example, a comment which might be from Leslie Robertson,
or an article which mentions a concrete core, are indications that
this is an area worth investigating. And so we investigate....

But at this point the criteria have tightened.

Now, we are looking for unequivocal proof.

And so, a lot of stuff goes to the wall.

For example, the Leslie Robertson 'post' which was interesting as a
possible pointer, is now useless as substantial evidence. There's
absolutely no proof it was Robertson.

The same applies to the MSNBC article by a journalist, which mentions a
concrete core. The concrete core is not a direct quote from Robertson.
It is quite likely to simply be a padding sentence added by the journalist.
And journalists get things wrong.

In fact, all sorts of people get things wrong. About.com or other reference
websites get things wrong. Urban legends or mistaken 'facts' abound.
Articles or reference sites by non-professionals which mention a concrete
core, may simply be wrong, confounded by a shift from concrete to steel
in buildings.

Even semi-professionals like Deborah Snoonian(who has an engineering
degree), writing in Architectural Record can legitimately get it wrong --
especially with wrong information already out on the internet. Such
mistakes are not substantive evidence.

Neither is the report by the National Council of Structural Engineers
Associations -which also mentions a concrete core. That report was
not a structural engineering report about the WTC collapses.

It was a report about the preparedness of structural engineers to respond
to future disasters and to work with federal and other agencies --based
on their experience of such issues on 9/11 . It mentioned the structure of
the Twin Towers in passing in a preamble to the report. Those paragraphs
could well have been copied from online sources. Despite the fact that
professionals prepared the report, because the main thrust was entriely
peripheral to the issue of the structure of the core, that 'error' is yet again
an insubstantial issue when looking for hard evidence.

Then there's the question of the TV documentary from which Chris draws
much of the impetus for his investigation. We have no TV Times pages
listing such a feature for transmission. We have no documentary.

We have only an -as yet- unverified statement from one other person
who saw the documentary. And so the entire issue is no good as evidence
to reach a firm conclusion.

Similar problems affect the pictorial indications of a concrete core.

The photo of core remains at Ground Zero may well show a piece of
rebar, but that could easily be a utility pipe. One grey-shaded area may
be remains of concrete, but the photo could have been retouched to give
that impression. Even if it is 100% legitimate, the gray-shaded area is
insubstantial and too vague to prove anything.

Again, the photo seeming to show a crumbling core area during the
collapse of one Tower could just be a thick pall of dust which soon
dissipated -as seen in subsequent photos in that series. Admittedly,
if a rigorous analysis of that photo sequence was able to conclusively
show that the dark area was definitely a concrete core, then that
might carry some weight --but no such analysis has yet been done.

In conclusion, all the issues I have mentioned were in the early stages
all possible indications of there perhaps being a concrete core, but these
issues not only fail the test of proof beyond a reasonable doubt, but
also fail as proof on the balance of probability.

The final determination of this issue must rest mainly on conclusive
analysis of the structure of the buildings to determine if there was room
for a concrete core, and on analysis of the highest-quality available
photo and video records, etc..

http://breakfornews.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=52901#52901

_________________
Minds are like parachutes.
They only function when open.


Last edited by Fintan on Tue Dec 30, 2008 8:46 pm; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
hawkwind



Joined: 19 Jan 2006
Posts: 699

PostPosted: Tue Dec 30, 2008 8:08 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Fintan wrote:
We have had more than 400 pages (450 on the way soon) of discussion
extending over a period of eighteen months.


Thank You ... Wink

- Hawk

_________________
"It's no wonder that truth is stranger than fiction. Fiction has to make sense." - Mark Twain
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
aAzzAa



Joined: 03 Sep 2007
Posts: 1140

PostPosted: Tue Dec 30, 2008 9:07 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:

A new forum section called "The Verdict" is opening on BFN.
The objective is to toss out all insubstantial and diversionary
9/11 issues and identify the remaining vital evidence that the
attacks were not as they are claimed to be by the official story.



I'll make an effort to contribute along the lines of what is being said here:


Quote:
Evidence about the September 11th attacks can be divided into three categories: destroyed, missing, and surviving. The missing category includes officially secret information, since the existence of secret evidence and what it indicates cannot be verified.

A great deal of the evidence about the crimes of September 11th has either been destroyed or is unaccounted for. Indeed the event was and continues to be used to justify a campaign of secrecy never before seen in the United States, virtually eliminating public accountability of the very agencies who were entrusted to handle the evidence.

A review of the evidence shows a strong pattern of destruction or suppression of evidence, and the blocking of effective investigations, by the authorities. This is evident whether one looks at the flights, the World Trade Center, or the Pentagon.

http://911research.wtc7.net/sept11/evidence.html



My interest specifically in 9/11 was not that strong until last year, due to this thread mainly. I'd already concluded 9/11 was part of the ever nearing agenda for a one world order. Rightly or wrongly, the reality of that agenda was born from my reading "the late great planet earth", back in the 80's. So when I saw the planes on tv hit the towers , it took me a fraction of a second to realize I was witnessing the next push for a one world order and further human slavery and loss of freedom. There is no doubt in my mind that this is the case, and that we have no choice but to make an attempt to fight it.

So, give me a chance Fintan, delete all you like, but I'll attempt to follow your guidelines, and concentrate on the attempts made by the perpetrators to destroy and block evidence. Forcing these people to comply with public pressure will be worth the effort.
The link I've provided above already lists some of the evidence we are dealing with.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
S.N.A.F.U.



Joined: 30 Nov 2008
Posts: 71

PostPosted: Tue Dec 30, 2008 9:25 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Final comments?? Ok, how about...this is total, unadulterated horse crap!!

It is 100% WRONG to close a thread on a potentially valid theory where there is no clear evidence one way or the other. Especially one where such vigorous attacks are coming over such a long period of time like this.

It is a complete cop out just to say that dust might be solid concrete...that's just plain bull! The fact is....if it is dust...then it is DUST....if it is solid concrete, then it is SOLID CONCRETE, but it's up to us to DISCERN and figure out what is REALLY in those images. Just closing the book because there is some uncertainty and active dispute is POINTLESS!! Just throw up our hands and quit, eh?? Nice...

You may own this forum...but you don't own 9/11. We ALL own it...and like it or not, we share a common responsibility (even if only because we just happen to still be alive and not dead) to resolve the issues, investigate the facts, and help bring the perps to justice.

Unproven or not, this theory provides the best and most comprehensive explanation for the totality of what we observed on 9/11. It is just WRONG to put an ADMIN rubber stamp of disapproval on an issue that is still in flux. By doing that, you are basically pre-deciding what issues and theories are valid or invalid in advance for anyone new coming into your forum. If you're gonna do that, why even have a FORUM at ALL?? Just send me a friggin' NEWSLETTER and let me know what to believe and what is BUNK, ok? Gimme a freakin' BREAK... Instead, why don't you just make and ADMIN post at the end and lock the thread. Your post could read something like this:

Quote:
As ADMIN, I alone have power to make decrees. As such, I hereby declare this issue is INVALID and warrants no further consideration on your part. This thread is now closed and you may now resume your normal activity. We'll alert you to any NEW final decisions we make should any new evidence turn up in this matter.


Fintan, if you already have all the answers and you call all the shots about what is valid and what is not....then count me out. I'm sorry...but I can think for MYSELF. I'm sure Gam and Stann will be most pleased though....mission accomplished guys!

PERPS: 1
Victims: 0

_________________
Justice for the victims...
Punishment for the PERPS...
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Fintan
Site Admin


Joined: 18 Jan 2006
Posts: 6510

PostPosted: Tue Dec 30, 2008 10:38 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
S.N.A.F.U.
It is a complete cop out just to say that dust might be solid concrete...
that's just plain bull! The fact is....if it is dust...then it is DUST....if it is solid
concrete, then it is SOLID CONCRETE, but it's up to us to DISCERN and
figure out what is REALLY in those images.


Unfortunately, it's not possible to figure out what is in those images.

It happens with CCTV stills too. Sometimes they are simply to blurred
or distant to be of any use. Tough, but not my fault or yours.

Quote:
S.N.A.F.U.
It is 100% WRONG to close a thread on a potentially valid theory
where there is no clear evidence one way or the other.


Potentially valid just about sums it up. All potential and no actual.
And there is clear evidence against the theory.

Find the documentary. Find an eyewitness who validates the core.
Find a clear image of some concrete and rebar in all that debris.
Find a WTC building worker who laid concrete in the core.

Find some actual evidence and I'll consider reopening.

It's rare to close a thread here on BFN.
But warranted in the absence of even one piece of unarguable evidence.

_________________
Minds are like parachutes.
They only function when open.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Christophera



Joined: 06 Aug 2006
Posts: 1851
Location: Santa Barbara

PostPosted: Wed Dec 31, 2008 12:27 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Ta da, .......... the evidence for steel core columns from FEMA, ......... AND the only official depiction of the core of the Twin Towers ever made public.



That was the evidence of the steel core column group. All of it.

Now the substancial evidence for a steel reinforced cast concrete rectangular tubular core.

WTC 2 core standing at + 400 feet.



A corner of the top of the WTC 2 concrete core, the brownish surfaces, surrounded by broken perimeter walls falling onto the roof of WTC 3



WTC 1 spire with sloping concrete silhouetted behind the interior box columns located outside the north side of the core as seen at ground zero outside, to the left of the concrete core wall at its base. Note, no steel core columns to the right of the spire in the core area.



The spire from the north with an end view of the broken western concrete core wall. Note, no steel core columns to the left of the concrete wall.



From the north east with the concrete core walls sloping and silhouetting the interior box columns. Note, no steel core columns behind in the core area.



Static Annotation of Triangular Concrete portion of WTC 1 east core wall:


Slower animation sequence of WTC1 core wall destruction:


Below see the guide rail support steel, (misrepresented as "core columns) just inside the concrete core wall get dragged down as the wall falls between 13 and 14 seconds. Note the bottom of the guide rail support still connected to rounded pieces of concrete wall.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nIZp6aOibiM



Okay, let's see the substancial evidence for the steel core columns.

_________________
"If you always do what you've always done you'll always get what you've always got"

Info specific to WTC 1 via the documentary, "The Engineering and Construction of the Twin Towers". WTC 2 had differences in its concrete core.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Christophera



Joined: 06 Aug 2006
Posts: 1851
Location: Santa Barbara

PostPosted: Wed Dec 31, 2008 12:34 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Oops, that WTC core piece onto WTC 3 image didn't make it. I'm still looking for the image from a chopper taken looking down into the hole created in WTC 3 that shows a pile of gravel in the center.


_________________
"If you always do what you've always done you'll always get what you've always got"

Info specific to WTC 1 via the documentary, "The Engineering and Construction of the Twin Towers". WTC 2 had differences in its concrete core.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Fintan
Site Admin


Joined: 18 Jan 2006
Posts: 6510

PostPosted: Wed Dec 31, 2008 1:59 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

These are the same inconclusive images you
have been posting over and over and over again.

Always asserting that the dust hides a concrete wall.
Always asserting steel core columns are just guide rails.

Quote:
Now the substantial evidence for a steel reinforced cast concrete rectangular tubular core.

WTC 2 core standing at + 400 feet.


Sorry, that's not proof the core has solid walls of concrete.

Quote:
A corner of the top of the WTC 2 concrete core, the brownish surfaces, surrounded by broken perimeter walls falling onto the roof of WTC 3


I see the perimeter walls and the brownish stuff.
Sorry, brownish stuff is not proof the core has solid walls of concrete.

Quote:
WTC 1 spire with sloping concrete silhouetted behind the interior box columns located outside the north side of the core as seen at ground zero outside, to the left of the concrete core wall at its base.


Sorry, I see sloping dust - not solid a concrete wall.

Quote:
Note, no steel core columns to the right of the spire in the core area.

Possibly because the rest of the building has fallen down.

Quote:
The spire from the north with an end view of the broken western concrete core wall. Note, no steel core columns to the left of the concrete wall.


I don't see a broken concrete wall.
I just see concrete dust still falling..

Quote:
From the north east with the concrete core walls sloping and silhouetting the interior box columns. Note, no steel core columns behind in the core area.


Sorry, I see sloping dust - not solid a concrete wall.
Again, has it occurred to you that the steel columns are
missing because the rest of the building has fallen down?

I could go on, but I will end by saying that the main reason
you have failed to persuade is the over-reliance on these
images that are totally inconclusive.

The other reasons are the lack of firm evidence, the lack of a valid
explanation of how the concrete cores could fit in the floor area,
and a constantly-changing story which has destroyed credibility.

_________________
Minds are like parachutes.
They only function when open.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
S.N.A.F.U.



Joined: 30 Nov 2008
Posts: 71

PostPosted: Wed Dec 31, 2008 2:31 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I believe this is LEGITIMATE EVIDENCE of a CONCRETE CORE at least in WTC1:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-dWBBEtA5bI

This large section of the concrete core wall can be viewed in three different pieces of film (I found it in a 2nd series in the above video tonight)...one still aerial image and two motion videos, one shot from behind the Woolworth Building and the other shot directly behind WTC7. The exact location of this large piece of the concrete core can clearly be seen and verified by analyzing all three pieces of corroborating EVIDENCE.

VIEW #1:
A HUGE piece of what can ONLY be concrete...NOT DUST...NOT A CLOUD...is clearly visible at 0.17-0.18 seconds, viewed from an angle behind the Woolworth Building which is roughly about 45 degrees to the east off the north face of WTC1. Here it is marked inside a red rectangle.


VIEW #2:
This very same piece of concrete core wall is also captured at 0.42 - 0.44 seconds of that same video as the Woolworth shot. The view is from directly behind and just off the western corner of the WTC7 building, at approximately the same height as the roof of that building and also roughly the same elevation as the Woolworth shot, nearly horizontal with the top of the core section being filmed. Here it is marked inside a red rectangle. Note the exact same toppling motion as was seen in VIEW #1:


VIEW #3:
This is a still aerial photo which is also marked to show the angles of the other two views mentioned above for correlation. There is CLEAR correlation of the position, movement, size, shape, and location of this massive object which displays properties of being a SOLID FORM that holds it's shape and has distinct edges that are maintained during motion. There is NO WAY this can be construed as "smoke"...or "dust" and it can't be anything other than concrete. To deny this is beyond logic...IMHO.

_________________
Justice for the victims...
Punishment for the PERPS...
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Christophera



Joined: 06 Aug 2006
Posts: 1851
Location: Santa Barbara

PostPosted: Wed Dec 31, 2008 4:19 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

The stairwell notion cannot stand with the proportions of what is seen. That triangular piece falling into the core is way too big to be a stairwell, the wrong shape, and visibly far too structural to be a set of stairs.
_________________
"If you always do what you've always done you'll always get what you've always got"

Info specific to WTC 1 via the documentary, "The Engineering and Construction of the Twin Towers". WTC 2 had differences in its concrete core.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Christophera



Joined: 06 Aug 2006
Posts: 1851
Location: Santa Barbara

PostPosted: Wed Dec 31, 2008 4:27 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Fintan wrote:
These are the same inconclusive images you
have been posting over and over and over again.


What is conclusive is that there are no images from 9-11 showing the steel core columns and logically the core of columns is the strongest part with many cross braces. All never seen, not even as wreakage at GZ.

So perhaps the choise is to percieve no conclusive evidence, but at least there is evidence and we know there was a core.

If espousing demo, a detailed explanation of how the supposed steel core columns was cut so that NONE are seen is an obligation of reason. Feasibility must be shown.

Or, aliens did it, and it was all in our head. No planes, no TV, no towers, . nada. This text doesn't even exist.

_________________
"If you always do what you've always done you'll always get what you've always got"

Info specific to WTC 1 via the documentary, "The Engineering and Construction of the Twin Towers". WTC 2 had differences in its concrete core.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Hombre



Joined: 07 Jan 2008
Posts: 967

PostPosted: Wed Dec 31, 2008 7:00 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Fintan writes:

Quote:
It is closing because regardless of my own feeling about this,
I have enough experience to make the call that this theory
would fail to convince serious 9/11 researchers.


My only closing comment comes in the form of a question:

Who are, and where are all of these SERIOUS 9/11 RESEARCHERS?

I have many other questions but have been reluctant to ask them for personal reasons, I've been low to the ground so to speak.

My Father passed away this month, He's accounted for much of my time, especially these past two months. Did I ever mention that he began his working career with the FBI? Sorry another question.

I've an Uncle 30 plus year, career Army Intelligence. 3 Masters+ 1 or 2 PHD's I forget, Blah blah blah, not important in the grand scheme of things, but when it comes to being serious about something maybe we should define the word serious in terms all can grasp.

Hombre'
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
tellytell



Joined: 12 Jul 2007
Posts: 52

PostPosted: Wed Dec 31, 2008 8:57 am    Post subject: 9/11 - The Verdict Reply with quote

......the posting of the negative energy toward conscious truth seeking through secrecy and destruction of evidence reveals its own clue!

The hiding and rejection of people sincere about truth and research is its own clue, and should be recognized as progress...

After having thus struggled, and sweat “blood,” we now lie exhausted and at the same time blissfully free. For we have come to realize, through this process itself, that if the message of Hip Hop is to be perfected (which actually means wholly completed), it will only be so in that moment where “all possible expression of the infinite range of human experience” happens simultaneously.

We have been blessed with the guidance of seeing that this seemingly impossible moment is actually the reality of our happening, all of our happenings; and although at the beginning of our search for truth we viewed our attempt to achieve the perfect Hip Hop message as a problem, we now see, through the miracle of life itself, that not only is the medium the message, but the problem is the solution.

Marshall McLuhan also said that the “answers are always inside the problem, not outside.” We have learned that the “problem” or the “question” is the solution or answer, in a form, the main import of which, is signifying that the person or persons facing the problem or asking the question are qualified or ready to see the solution or receive the answer.

In this case, the question was asked by Chris, and he IS qualified to see the solution, his right views have to do with a "truth process". And in this situation where the truth has been blown up,
hidden and oddly rejected unordinarily motivated people who show no respect for truth process and present no sincere effort to connect the dots while only
destroying the positive environment of those true efforts doing good....

Closing the forum is the wrong move for many many reasons... because when can anyone evere do anything about "the timing".... The results of
this effort here have produced great change in the lives of all who have seen it......

THE TRUE TRUTH SEEKERS HERE (CHRIS AND THOSE SUPPORTING) serve as an ever arising and expanding foundation upon which PEOPLE can involve THEMSELVES IN to better come together AS A TRUTH PROCESS NOT OF THE SPACE ATOMIC BEEM CROWD WHCH HAS BEEN MISLED. And the tactics they use to mislead ARE a big clue!

THESE CONCRETE CORE TRUTH SEEKERS HAVE practiced kind and professional actions of body, speech and mind; and HAVE aimed to add value to your current process directly or indirectly.

When we view the generations before us, and their building of America, we see that "getting there," was all the fun. What’s left is the
cultural and artistic ashes of that endeavor. We want to build the new continent, alive from within,
never forgetting that all conclusions are provisional, and as such are only working models.
Corporations are not persons, they are groups of people using the social contract to gain advantage to exploit the rest of the people and they should not have a right to free speech and they should not be assumed innocent until proven guilty. Truth and accountability is the least that can be demanded.

_________________
NMSTZY RECORDS
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Gamolon



Joined: 26 Sep 2007
Posts: 1408

PostPosted: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:04 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

S.N.A.F.U. wrote:
I believe this is LEGITIMATE EVIDENCE of a CONCRETE CORE at least in WTC1:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-dWBBEtA5bI

This large section of the concrete core wall can be viewed in three different pieces of film (I found it in a 2nd series in the above video tonight)...one still aerial image and two motion videos, one shot from behind the Woolworth Building and the other shot directly behind WTC7. The exact location of this large piece of the concrete core can clearly be seen and verified by analyzing all three pieces of corroborating EVIDENCE.

VIEW #1:
A HUGE piece of what can ONLY be concrete...NOT DUST...NOT A CLOUD...is clearly visible at 0.17-0.18 seconds, viewed from an angle behind the Woolworth Building which is roughly about 45 degrees to the east off the north face of WTC1. Here it is marked inside a red rectangle.


VIEW #2:
This very same piece of concrete core wall is also captured at 0.42 - 0.44 seconds of that same video as the Woolworth shot. The view is from directly behind and just off the western corner of the WTC7 building, at approximately the same height as the roof of that building and also roughly the same elevation as the Woolworth shot, nearly horizontal with the top of the core section being filmed. Here it is marked inside a red rectangle. Note the exact same toppling motion as was seen in VIEW #1:


VIEW #3:
This is a still aerial photo which is also marked to show the angles of the other two views mentioned above for correlation. There is CLEAR correlation of the position, movement, size, shape, and location of this massive object which displays properties of being a SOLID FORM that holds it's shape and has distinct edges that are maintained during motion. There is NO WAY this can be construed as "smoke"...or "dust" and it can't be anything other than concrete. To deny this is beyond logic...IMHO.


So you think that Chris' concrete walls are legit huh? From those blurry photos and movie shots?

I'll ask you a couple of questions.

Here is a photo of the two columns that Chris says "sandwiched" the concrete wall between them.


Can you please explain to me how that gypsum planking in the red rectangle got there? Was it encased in the concrete? Lastly, how in the world did that weak gypsum planking survive the detonated concrete let alone the falling debris. Notice the other planking pointed out by the red arrows that went around the stairwell.

Yeah, there was concrete there.

Laughing

I just love how Chris says he supposedly gets all his information from the documentary that he cannot find, yet that same information changes as people find evidence against his so-called theory. Did the information in that documentary change since he saw it last? How is that possible?

What about the Mr. Hill "little white lie"? In the beginning of Chris' theory, Mr. Hill saw the same documentary. Then all of a sudden, when he was questioned/back into a corner about it, it comes out that it was a DIFFERENT documentary and NOT the same one. Funny that.

What about the fact that Chris was all about the tower cores being the same in the beginning of his preaching and then when the heat was turned up and evidence came out against his theory (express elevator location), he comes up with the redesign aspect. When was this redesigned information found out? From what source? Obviously he didn't know that in the beginning because he never mentions it at all. Not one word about the towers being different. Why did he all of a sudden add the documentary disclaimer to his posts about the documentary being about WTC1 only? His reasons in the beginning for the delay in construction was because of the mechanics of pouring the concrete walls and that they changed them because they found a better, faster way to pour them. NOT because the folks renting the towers found the access of WTC1 bad.

How many times are we going to change the wall thickness dimensions Chris?

How many times are we going to find you changing your story as to the concrete encasing the columns at the base of the towers? One minute they were encased, the next miute they aren't.

How many mistakes have you admitted to? You've made mistakes in your photo examinations, dimensional mistakes, you've contrdicted yourself NUMEROUS times. All because you've told so many lies over the years that you can't keep your story straight. It's so PAINFULLY obvious. All anyone need to do is go back to when you started and see the evolution of your story. It's sad really.

Fintan, thanks for the sounding board and putting up with us for such a long time.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
tellytell



Joined: 12 Jul 2007
Posts: 52

PostPosted: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:09 am    Post subject: the message of Hip Hop.... Reply with quote

the message of 911 truth is that unity and respect for truth seeking from ALL points of view is not going to happen.

Ever since hip hop became, artists have never bought into the abuse and protection of secrecy by those like we see on these forums. Who want exactness from truth seekers but never expect an end to secrecy and hiding by the powers that be who are manipulating everything into the ground!

Is hip hop the only community that has been so involved in the true investigation that things like the concrete core are just another example of what these powers are up to, and the evidence that we have is really everything that ever happened?

<object><param></param><param></param><param></param></object>

What do you think the human cry out to stop the killing will look like?

Keep the Forum Open!

_________________
NMSTZY RECORDS
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies.    The Next Level Forum Index -> 9/11 HardCorps Specifics Investigation All times are GMT - 5 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 438, 439, 440, 441  Next
Page 439 of 441

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group

Theme xand created by spleen.