9/11, structural steel.

[MorningGlory]

6 minutes ago, SINNERSAVED said:

okay , for the sake of debate, you say the building is all glass, I say it is large steel beams surrounded by glass, and so , these beams would take a high impact , and bend and sway , and cause  a lot of damage, but it would not be enough , to bring the tower all the way down to dust,  and to have this repeated twice,  on both towers, is impossible , this is not reasonable, and is not correct,

in fact if you look at the pictures that they have of the buildings, exploding, it is not from the plane, it is setting off at all four sides at one time on different floors,  a plane is not going to  that,  and besides , where is the pieces of the two large planes ? there is no pieces , but they find a terrorist passport in mint condition, so what about that , they find this with all the explosions going on and people dying , and they have it with in the time before this is all coming down ?

Total rubbish; I SAW the planes go into those buildings, along with thousands of other people.  And pieces of the planes were found all over Manhattan.  Where do you get the outright lies that you post here?  And, in case I'm wrong, can you post proof of what you posted above?  Remember, spreading rumors and gossip is totally unchristian.

[SINNERSAVED]

3 minutes ago, MorningGlory said:

Total rubbish; I SAW the planes go into those buildings, along with thousands of other people.  And pieces of the planes were found all over Manhattan.  Where do you get the outright lies that you post here?  And, in case I'm wrong, can you post proof of what you posted above?  Remember, spreading rumors and gossip is totally unchristian.

calling a believer in Christ a liar is not Christian like ? , what parts of the plane did they find ? you don't know , because you have not researched this , I know  , and if I showed you proof, you would dismiss it anyway , so , you can take my word for it , and you can believe that planes hit those buildings,  but take a look at the pentagon , for it also was hit by one of those planes, and look at the hole it left in the side of the building, ? I will  place this to rest for now, any more of 9/11 for I don't want to debate what I know is truth and you don't want to even hear what I have to say , so lets just let it go , and stop , because I don't think this is good at all,

  

[MorningGlory]

27 minutes ago, SINNERSAVED said:

calling a believer in Christ a liar is not Christian like ? , what parts of the plane did they find ? you don't know , because you have not researched this , I know  , and if I showed you proof, you would dismiss it anyway , so , you can take my word for it , and you can believe that planes hit those buildings,  but take a look at the pentagon , for it also was hit by one of those planes, and look at the hole it left in the side of the building, ? I will  place this to rest for now, any more of 9/11 for I don't want to debate what I know is truth and you don't want to even hear what I have to say , so lets just let it go , and stop , because I don't think this is good at all,

  

As I figured; you have nothing and this is what you say every time you are asked for proof or sources for anything. I'm not going to post proof of YOUR statements.  You have lost all credibility.  Once again, show me where I called you a liar.; I most certainly didn't.

[The_Patriot21]

56 minutes ago, SINNERSAVED said:

calling a believer in Christ a liar is not Christian like ? , what parts of the plane did they find ? you don't know , because you have not researched this , I know  , and if I showed you proof, you would dismiss it anyway , so , you can take my word for it , and you can believe that planes hit those buildings,  but take a look at the pentagon , for it also was hit by one of those planes, and look at the hole it left in the side of the building, ? I will  place this to rest for now, any more of 9/11 for I don't want to debate what I know is truth and you don't want to even hear what I have to say , so lets just let it go , and stop , because I don't think this is good at all,

  

you havent shown any proof. you cant. There were thousands of eye witnesses to the planes that hit the two towers, that much is UNDENIABLE. The only thing that is up for debate, is whether they could have taken the buildings down or not. As the above video showed, it is indeed, scientifically possible that they did. Now, the video doesnt prove that they did, but it does show that it is indeed possible. Yet, your still using the argument, that it was not scientifically possible to do so. 

 

There were hundreds of eye witnesses who saw the plane hit the pentagon, as well as security footage. Again, another undeniable fact.

 

In fact, you just got mad at morningglory for calling you a liar, but she just stated that she herself was a eyewitness to the twin towers, and in this quote you just called her a liar. Im sorry, isnt that being hypocritcal? Just because you got proved wrong, doesnt give you the right to call someone a liar-and then accuse them of doing that to you. 

 

Now, if you want us to "believe" your conspiracy-youd best come up with some actual evidence that doesnt contradict the facts. Like how a team of demolition experts managed to sneak in truckloads of high explosives and plant them over a 2-3 week period, without anyone noticing. I was in the twin towers 3 weeks before 9/11, security there was almost as tight as ft Knox. Armed gaurds, metal detectors, x-ray machines, you name it they had it. Not to mention all the people in the building. To do a professional demolition of a building that size, even with thermite, would take a large team, probably at a minimum, a week (probably closer to 2-3) nad they would have to be tearing apart drywall to get to the supports. While some im sure they could get to using hard to access maintenance areas, im sure many would have to be placed in areas youd have to rip out walls to get to, not to mention all the wiring and detonators, and over 2-3 floors. Yet, there are no reports of any construction or remodeling, or even any out of the ordinary maintenaince. 

 

So, instead of trying to change the facts, why dont you present some actual evidence that works with the facts-ok, if the planes hit but didnt take the buildings down, then how did they get the explosives past security and setup without anyone noticing?  

 

Without and answer of that one, very simple question, what we have is, 2 planes that DID hit the towers, scientific proof that they COULD have taken the buildings down, and absolutly ZERO evidence of any other methods of taking the buildings down.

[SINNERSAVED]

1 hour ago, The_Patriot2016 said:

you havent shown any proof. you cant. There were thousands of eye witnesses to the planes that hit the two towers, that much is UNDENIABLE. The only thing that is up for debate, is whether they could have taken the buildings down or not. As the above video showed, it is indeed, scientifically possible that they did. Now, the video doesnt prove that they did, but it does show that it is indeed possible. Yet, your still using the argument, that it was not scientifically possible to do so. 

 

There were hundreds of eye witnesses who saw the plane hit the pentagon, as well as security footage. Again, another undeniable fact.

 

In fact, you just got mad at morningglory for calling you a liar, but she just stated that she herself was a eyewitness to the twin towers, and in this quote you just called her a liar. Im sorry, isnt that being hypocritcal? Just because you got proved wrong, doesnt give you the right to call someone a liar-and then accuse them of doing that to you. 

 

Now, if you want us to "believe" your conspiracy-youd best come up with some actual evidence that doesnt contradict the facts. Like how a team of demolition experts managed to sneak in truckloads of high explosives and plant them over a 2-3 week period, without anyone noticing. I was in the twin towers 3 weeks before 9/11, security there was almost as tight as ft Knox. Armed gaurds, metal detectors, x-ray machines, you name it they had it. Not to mention all the people in the building. To do a professional demolition of a building that size, even with thermite, would take a large team, probably at a minimum, a week (probably closer to 2-3) nad they would have to be tearing apart drywall to get to the supports. While some im sure they could get to using hard to access maintenance areas, im sure many would have to be placed in areas youd have to rip out walls to get to, not to mention all the wiring and detonators, and over 2-3 floors. Yet, there are no reports of any construction or remodeling, or even any out of the ordinary maintenaince. 

 

So, instead of trying to change the facts, why dont you present some actual evidence that works with the facts-ok, if the planes hit but didnt take the buildings down, then how did they get the explosives past security and setup without anyone noticing?  

 

Without and answer of that one, very simple question, what we have is, 2 planes that DID hit the towers, scientific proof that they COULD have taken the buildings down, and absolutly ZERO evidence of any other methods of taking the buildings down.

Patriot, you know I like you and I love it when you get all excited to prove me wrong,?

 so if you want to hear and know of what I have , for you only assume that I have nothing, so , lets put that aside ?

okay , back when on this, I told you to give me a  answer to a question I brought up , and you avoided me , so lets start from the beginning, if you are willing, to come forth , and put the rubber to the road,

but first let me clear the air , I am not a liar, ? and I have nothing to prove to anyone, for even if I show you facts and evidence you will try to dismiss it anyway , due to the hostile attitudes that you and m.g are giving ,me, , I am not mad , and I am not upset , I am a little disappointed , but I will forgive you, for that is the right thing to do, but we need to play nice, ? agree ?

okay , lets get down to the brass tax first of all , and lets get some answers to some questions or conspiracy theories ?

I asked you a question Patriot ? that you have avoided, so lets start with that ? first .

the lady giving the live report, on the towers being Hit by planes, also said in real time that building #7 was hit and destroyed also ,

Now while she was saying what was already scripted, on her report, live on the news, that building was still standing and was not going to come down until after the second building was hit and time still went by , it was still in tack, and shown off of her left shoulder,

now , why was she telling a news report that was for her to tell the world,   in real time, and that building is still standing ?

how can this be,? it is all written out, and the building is not damaged yet, would that seem to be a little problem , ?

this needs to be checked out, and what happened to this reporter, has anyone found out what really happened ,with her ?

I think we start with her, and then we will build a case to the real big stuff, , thank you Patriot , you make me really work for my money ,  and I love it, but its not nice to be hating , this is not a fruit of the spirit . blessings my brother

and for the record, I don't want to be the subject or the attention here, we are to give all the glory to Yahweh for He is God and we are not , and we are to give all glory ,honor and praise to him and Him alone, I cannot do anything with out Yahweh ,

[The_Patriot21]

I have heard that argument about the whole news article, and let me debunk that. First off, it is a BBC station. BBC. let me repeat that. British Broad Casting Company. BRITISH. So now, you have a huge conspiracy, with all kids of loose ends and hundreds of people involved, and now, your going to give a advance script, to a news agency from an entirely DIFFERENT country? Am I the only one that sees the lunacy behind that logic? First off, whats your motive? I mean, if your attack goes off like you want it to, there IS NO NEED to give anyone advance scriptus. The news media, naturally, will report an attack. Telling them about it, ahead of time, just creates more holes for a conspiracy theory, and anyone smart enough to pull of a conspiracy this big, won't be STUPID enough, to tell every single media agency, what to say. I mean, the chances of someone telling the world the truth are astronomical, at best, and anyone with half a brain knows that. For someone to get away with this, the only way to do so, is to tell as few people as possible, not every news agency on the planet. Thats just plain stupid. So, obviously, there has to be a legit explanation.

 

And there is. There was fires burning in the building all day, it was hit by one of the columns from the two towers collapsing. The firefighters around it, knew the structure was compromised and a collapse was imminent. This is fact, there are reports as well as video and picture evidence, of the building being damaged. They probably reported it up the line, and the reporter got whiff of it, and being a BBC reporter from ENGLAND did not actually know which building was WTC7 and heard this information second hand (which we all know isnt always reliable) and mistakenly reported it as already collapsed when it was not. That theory, actually makes sense, unlike some moron, who was good enough to smuggle demo crews into 3 buildings without anyone noticing, being stupid enough to tell several hundred news agencies his plan before it actually happened.

 

Now, that I have addressed, and debunked your argument, how about you answer my question, which you have been artfully dodging/ignoring. How did they manage to sneak demolitions teams past all the security, and how did they manage to set up all the explosives without ANYONE noticing.

 

as far as your far out hate comments, I dont hate you. But I do hate all the lies and myths spread by C/Ts. Im sure your just repeating what youve read, and that you genuinely believe it, but that doesnt make what your teaching any less false.

[SINNERSAVED]

27 minutes ago, The_Patriot2016 said:

I have heard that argument about the whole news article, and let me debunk that. First off, it is a BBC station. BBC. let me repeat that. British Broad Casting Company. BRITISH. So now, you have a huge conspiracy, with all kids of loose ends and hundreds of people involved, and now, your going to give a advance script, to a news agency from an entirely DIFFERENT country? Am I the only one that sees the lunacy behind that logic? First off, whats your motive? I mean, if your attack goes off like you want it to, there IS NO NEED to give anyone advance scriptus. The news media, naturally, will report an attack. Telling them about it, ahead of time, just creates more holes for a conspiracy theory, and anyone smart enough to pull of a conspiracy this big, won't be STUPID enough, to tell every single media agency, what to say. I mean, the chances of someone telling the world the truth are astronomical, at best, and anyone with half a brain knows that. For someone to get away with this, the only way to do so, is to tell as few people as possible, not every news agency on the planet. Thats just plain stupid. So, obviously, there has to be a legit explanation.

 

And there is. There was fires burning in the building all day, it was hit by one of the columns from the two towers collapsing. The firefighters around it, knew the structure was compromised and a collapse was imminent. This is fact, there are reports as well as video and picture evidence, of the building being damaged. They probably reported it up the line, and the reporter got whiff of it, and being a BBC reporter from ENGLAND did not actually know which building was WTC7 and heard this information second hand (which we all know isnt always reliable) and mistakenly reported it as already collapsed when it was not. That theory, actually makes sense, unlike some moron, who was good enough to smuggle demo crews into 3 buildings without anyone noticing, being stupid enough to tell several hundred news agencies his plan before it actually happened.

 

Now, that I have addressed, and debunked your argument, how about you answer my question, which you have been artfully dodging/ignoring. How did they manage to sneak demolitions teams past all the security, and how did they manage to set up all the explosives without ANYONE noticing.

 

as far as your far out hate comments, I dont hate you. But I do hate all the lies and myths spread by C/Ts. Im sure your just repeating what youve read, and that you genuinely believe it, but that doesnt make what your teaching any less false.

you have dismissed  a international news clip that the world saw, and you say you have proved me wrong, , come on Patriot you have to do better then that, now , you are ready to shoot any and everything I got, and you have just proved it,  so why should we go any further brother ? lets go t Gods word ,and scripture and leave the games to the game players, we are to study Gods word, and so , lets learn about the agape love of God and salvation that we do not deserve, but it is given to all that calls upon the name of God and follows His commandments,

we will let the secular and conspiracies news and events in the other forums, . have a great day Patriot,

[The_Patriot21]

Sinner I did not dismiss it. I answered it with a legitimate explanation. Just because you don't like it doesn't mean I dismissed it. I answered it, your argument has been debunked. Now why don't you answer my question which you've ignored repeatedly.

 

That is the issue. You are ignoring my question because you can't answer it. And instead of answering it, your falsely accusing me of dismissing your arguments. You need to man up, I did answer your argument with a legitimate explanation-one that makes more sense then your half crazed conspiracy theory. You dismissed mine, not the other way around.

 

Your argument that the planes couldn't do it was proven false by this video. Your argument about the BBC reporter, I just supplied a logical explanation. And your only comeback against it is to falsely accused me of doing what you just did. That tells me you know your wrong. So either man up and answer my question I've asked you repeatedly, or just admit that your wrong because it's plain to the rest of us at this point.

[simplejeff]

Either way is possible.  Instead of looking at the event isolated, or even without looking at the event at all,  look to Scripture,  seeking Yahweh  , His Plan, His Purpose in Yahshua.  YAHWEH IS TRUSTWORTHY.  YAHSHUA IS FAITHFUL.

[SINNERSAVED]

17 minutes ago, The_Patriot2016 said:

Sinner I did not dismiss it. I answered it with a legitimate explanation. Just because you don't like it doesn't mean I dismissed it. I answered it, your argument has been debunked. Now why don't you answer my question which you've ignored repeatedly.

 

That is the issue. You are ignoring my question because you can't answer it. And instead of answering it, your falsely accusing me of dismissing your arguments. You need to man up, I did answer your argument with a legitimate explanation-one that makes more sense then your half crazed conspiracy theory. You dismissed mine, not the other way around.

 

Your argument that the planes couldn't do it was proven false by this video. Your argument about the BBC reporter, I just supplied a logical explanation. And your only comeback against it is to falsely accused me of doing what you just did. That tells me you know your wrong. So either man up and answer my question I've asked you repeatedly, or just admit that your wrong because it's plain to the rest of us at this point.