Uncles, don't you ever get tired of licking thermate man's balls? Coming out of denial is tough....but imo lickin thermate man's balls is about 7668 times worse. The link below is by a psychiatrist, an MD who is not quite as smart as you Uncles. OKay, OKay, sorry about the sarcasm, maybe he is smarter than you...He seems to think that if there are no arabs on board flight 77, then it is kinda HARD to say that arabs hijacked the plane... strange but true Uncles....you cant have al qaeda people hijackin the plane if there are NO AL QAEDA people on the plane. http://www.rense.com/general38/77.htm OH WAIT! I FORGOT! you only believe eyewitnesses right? Go here: it is the website of William Rodriguez, the last survivor in the north tower. here's a couple of movies for you to watch, but don't piss your pants, one shows molten iron ((dont let anyone tell you its aluminum, when aluminum melts it is a silvery colour, not bright orange at all.) this is thermate man's personal favorite too )) thermate man's personal favorite uhhh, i don't see anything unusual here, lmfao DEAL WITH IT: In two speeches to overflow crowds in New York last weekend, notable theologian David Ray Griffin argued that recently revealed evidence seals the case that the Twin Towers and WTC-7 were destroyed by controlled demolition with explosives. Despite the many enduring mysteries of the 9/11 attacks, Dr. Griffin concluded, "It is already possible to know, beyond a reasonable doubt, one very important thing: the destruction of the World Trade Center was an inside job, orchestrated by terrorists within our own government." On Oct. 15th and 16th, New Yorkers filled two venues to hear the prominent theologian and author of two books on 9/11 give a presentation entitled "The Destruction of the Trade Towers: A Christian Theologian Speaks Out." Dr. Griffin has continued to blaze a trail of courage, leading where most media and elected officials have feared to tread. His presentation went straight to the core of one of the most powerful indictments of the official story, the collapse of the towers and WTC 7. Dr. Griffin included excerpts from the firemen's tapes which were recently released as a result of a prolonged court battle led by victim's families represented by attorney Norman Siegel and reported in the NY Times. He also included statements by many witnesses. These sources gave ample testimony giving evidence of explosions going off in the buildings. A 12 minute film was shown for the audiences, who saw for themselves the undeniable evidence for controlled demolition. Dr. Griffin listed ten characteristics of the collapses which all indicate that the buildings did not fall due to being struck by planes or the ensuing fires. He explained the buildings fell suddenly without any indication of collapse. They fell straight into their own footprint at free-fall speed, meeting virtually no resistance as they fell--a physical impossibility unless all vertical support was being progressively removed by explosives severing the core columns. The towers were built to withstand the impact of a Boeing 707 and 160 mile per hour winds, and nothing about the plane crashes or ensuing fires gave any indication of causing the kind of damage that would be necessary to trigger even a partial or progressive collapse, much less the shredding of the buildings into dust and fragments that could drop at free-fall speed. The massive core columns--the most significant structural feature of the buildings, whose very existence is denied in the official 9/11 Commission Report--were severed into uniform 30 foot sections, just right for the 30-foot trucks used to remove them quickly before a real investigation could transpire. There was a volcanic-like dust cloud from the concrete being pulverized, and no physical mechanism other than explosives can begin to explain how so much of the buildings' concrete was rendered into extremely fine dust. The debris was ejected horizontally several hundred feet in huge fan shaped plumes stretching in all directions, with telltale "squibs" following the path of the explosives downward. These are all facts that have been avoided by mainstream and even most of the alternative media. Again, these are characteristics of the kind of controlled demolitions that news people and firefighters were describing on the morning of 9/11. Those multiple first-person descriptions of controlled demolition were hidden away for almost four years by the City of New York until a lawsuit finally forced the city to release them. Dr. Griffin's study of these accounts has led him beyond his earlier questioning of the official story of the collapses, to his above-quoted conclusion: The destruction of the three WTC buildings with explosives by US government terrorists is no longer a hypothesis, but a fact that has been proved beyond a reasonable doubt. It's important to note that Dr. Griffin is one of many prominent intellectuals--including the likes of Gore Vidal, Howard Zinn, Peter Dale Scott, Richard Falk, Paul Craig Roberts, Morgan Reynolds and Peter Phillips--who have seen through the major discrepancies of the official explanation of 9/11 and have risen to challenge it. These brave individuals represent the tip of an ever-growing iceberg of discreet 9/11 skeptics. Indeed, 9/11 skepticism appears to be almost universal among intellectuals who have examined the evidence, since there has not yet been a single serious attempt to refute the case developed by Dr. Griffin and such like-minded thinkers as Nafeez Ahmed and Mike Ruppert. As for the general public, polls have shown that a strong majority of Canadians (63%, Toronto Star, May '04) and half of New Yorkers (Zogby, August 2004) agree that top US leaders conspired to murder nearly 3,000 Americans on 9/11/01. How, then, can the mainstream US media continue to ignore the story of the century? Perhaps the best answer was given by Dr. Griffin himself in the conclusion of his talk, and is worth quoting at length: "The evidence for this conclusion (that 9/11 was an inside job) has thus far been largely ignored by the mainstream press, perhaps under the guise of obeying President Bush's advice not to tolerate "outrageous conspiracy theories." We have seen, however, that it is the Bush administration's conspiracy theory that is the outrageous one, because it is violently contradicted by numerous facts, including some basic laws of physics. "There is, of course, another reason why the mainstream press has not pointed out these contradictions. As a recent letter to the Los Angeles Times said: "'The number of contradictions in the official version of . . . 9/11 is so overwhelming that . . . it simply cannot be believed. Yet . . . the official version cannot be abandoned because the implication of rejecting it is far too disturbing: that we are subject to a government conspiracy of "X-Files" proportions and insidiousness.' "The implications are indeed disturbing. Many people who know or at least suspect the truth about 9/11 probably believe that revealing it would be so disturbing to the American psyche, the American form of government, and global stability that it is better to pretend to believe the official version. I would suggest, however, that any merit this argument may have had earlier has been overcome by more recent events and realizations. Far more devastating to the American psyche, the American form of government, and the world as a whole will be the continued rule of those who brought us 9/11, because the values reflected in that horrendous event have been reflected in the Bush administration's lies to justify the attack on Iraq, its disregard for environmental science and the Bill of Rights, its criminal negligence both before and after Katrina, and now its apparent plan not only to weaponize space but also to authorize the use of nuclear weapons in a preemptive strike. "In light of this situation and the facts discussed in this lecture---as well as dozens of more problems in the official account of 9/11 discussed elsewhere---I call on the New York Times to take the lead in finally exposing to the American people and the world the truth about 9/11. Taking the lead on such a story will, of course, involve enormous risks. But if there is any news organization with the power, the prestige, and the credibility to break this story, it is the Times. It performed yeoman service in getting the 9/11 oral histories released. But now the welfare of our republic and perhaps even the survival of our civilization depend on getting the truth about 9/11 exposed. I am calling on the Times to rise to the occasion. Dr. Griffin's speech given at the University of Wisconsin earlier this year, entitled "9/11 and the American Empire," was broadcast twice on C-SPAN. In late September Dr. Griffin was asked to give expert testimony at hearings sponsored by Cynthia McKinney and the Congressional Black Caucus investigating the 9/11 Commission Report. He is currently Professor Emeritus at Claremont College in California.
Ohhhhhhhhhhh, here's what you were wondering about, yeah I was at MIT for this little brew-ha-ha. Sat in the front row. My research at MIT See you in your dreams Uncles, sleep tight.
Ahhh, legitimate University levels? You mean, as opposed to illegitimate University levels? Well it's a good thing you specified that.. 430 licensed Architects and engineers say controlled demolition brought down 3 buildings in New York, but "Uncles" knows better, lmao
He studied physics at MIT, which isn't the same as engineering. Then he goes on how he did eight years of electrical engineering. And had some practical engineering experience. The point is, he's no structural engineer, so what he presents there, is presented with a false feeling of authority. It would be like he was going to teach me Material Sciences, or Treatment of Materials, or whatever. He's not qualified. What he says however, seems acceptable. But still, it's easy to say something, and make it sound convincing, but a lot harder to prove it sc ientifically, and make that proof sound convincing. There's evidence, and then there's proof. Anyway, I thought we went over Loose Change before already? -Z
Yeah, he studied physics. He says the official story about jet fuel bringing down the buildings is PHYSICALLY IMPOSSIBLE, because it violates the laws of physics. Plus, if you demand structural engineers to tell you the same thing, there are many structural engineers at ae911truth.org who will tell you the same thing, that the official story about jet fuel bringing down the buildings is bullshit. It violates the laws of physics. 430 Licensed architects, structural engineers, civil engineers, you name it, they all say the same thing, controlled demolition brought down all three wtc buildings. But alas, there are some high school kids and ball lickers in this place that will never figure it out. It's called denial. structural engineers say 911 a controlled demolition
Can you name a website or organisation of architects and engineers (who DONT have guns to their heads) that say that jet fuel brought down the WTC buildings? While you're at it, maybe you can explain how al qaeda hijacked the 4 jet airliners involved in sept 11, when their were no arabs whatsoever on any of the flight manifests.
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-3135892053682639810 There were about 6 local TV station reporters reporting live and interviewing firefighters leaving the building that said there were explosions every few seconds CONTINUOUSLY since the plane hit. Reporters themselves spoke of feeling and hearing the explosions. Firefighters were interviewed saying the massive freight elevator doors in the basement were blown out. The importance of this is that the freight elevators are in the inner core of the building that were free from fire dozens and dozens of floors from the fire and impact zone. ONLY explosives can do that kind of damage. Anybody with a minimum study of physics and reviewing controlled demolitions of large structures and also films of failed controlled demolitions can understand when a building is taken down (PULLED is the professional term) by controlled demolition. If people want to believe, go ahead and let them believe. For people who want and are able to think, they will read and research. .... and of course there are those who must like to lick !
