LDS Freedom Forum

LoveIsTruth wrote:

natasha wrote:You are ever so wrong, LIT...you see...I know Blue...you attribute attributes to him that are false. Between you and my friend Col. Flagg (and a couple of others) you seem to proclaim that you know what is in other people's hearts and minds. That is a dangerous path and will bear you no good fruit.

Are you saying I cannot have the spirit of discernment? That is a bold statement on your part. Did you receive a revelation about it? Otherwise how can you know? Seems to me you are doing exactly what you are accusing me of!

Back at ya....did you receive a REVELATION about it?

natasha wrote:

LoveIsTruth wrote:

natasha wrote:You are ever so wrong, LIT...you see...I know Blue...you attribute attributes to him that are false. Between you and my friend Col. Flagg (and a couple of others) you seem to proclaim that you know what is in other people's hearts and minds. That is a dangerous path and will bear you no good fruit.

Are you saying I cannot have the spirit of discernment? That is a bold statement on your part. Did you receive a revelation about it? Otherwise how can you know? Seems to me you are doing exactly what you are accusing me of!

Back at ya....did you receive a REVELATION about it?

About BM5 lying? I made no secret of it!

LoveIsTruth wrote:

: FREE FALL of WTC7 for 8 or 9 stories is an established, settled, and incontrovertible fact supported by multiple videotapes. It is inescapable obvious and conclusive.

Splendid, marvelous, inspiring, and--yes--true (I suggested the "true" part in my previous post). So, we have free fall for 8-9 stories. As several professional engineers--people probably as knowledgeable and experienced as you--have said, free fall is not prima facie evidence of a controlled demolition. And you cannot prove otherwise. Calling me names won't suffice.

LIT said:That is a bold statement on your part. Did you receive a revelation about it? Otherwise how can you know? Seems to me you are doing exactly what you are accusing me of![/quote]

Natasha said: Back at ya....did you receive a REVELATION about it?[/quote]

LIT said: About BM5 lying? I made no secret of it![/quote]

Natasha asked: You asked Heavenly Father if BM5 was lying and received revelation that he was?????

natasha wrote:LIT said:That is a bold statement on your part. Did you receive a revelation about it? Otherwise how can you know? Seems to me you are doing exactly what you are accusing me of!

Natasha said: Back at ya....did you receive a REVELATION about it?

LIT said: About BM5 lying? I made no secret of it!

Natasha asked: You asked Heavenly Father if BM5 was lying and received revelation that he was?????

Yep.

BlueMoon5 wrote:

LoveIsTruth wrote:

: FREE FALL of WTC7 for 8 or 9 stories is an established, settled, and incontrovertible fact supported by multiple videotapes. It is inescapable obvious and conclusive.

Splendid, marvelous, inspiring, and--yes--true (I suggested the "true" part in my previous post). So, we have free fall for 8-9 stories. As several professional engineers--people probably as knowledgeable and experienced as you--have said, free fall is not prima facie evidence of a controlled demolition. And you cannot prove otherwise. Calling me names won't suffice.

I already proved it.

Thought this was interesting...

http://pilotsfor911truth.org/ACARS-CONF ... CRASH.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Aircraft Communications Addressing and Reporting System (ACARS) is a device used to send messages to and from an aircraft. Very similar to text messages and email we use today, Air Traffic Control, the airline itself, and other airplanes can communicate with each other via this "texting" system. ACARS was developed in 1978 and is still used today. Similar to cell phone networks, the ACARS network has remote ground stations installed around the world to route messages from ATC, the airline, etc, to the aircraft depending on it's location and vice versa. ACARS Messages have been provided through the Freedom Of Information Act (FOIA) which demonstrate that the aircraft received messages through ground stations located in Harrisburg, PA, and then later routed through a ground station in Pittsburgh, 20 minutes after the aircraft allegedly impacted the South Tower in New York. How can messages be routed through such remote locations if the aircraft was in NY, not to mention how can messages be routed to an aircraft which allegedly crashed 20 minutes earlier? Pilots For 9/11 Truth have briefly touched on this subject in 9/11: Intercepted through the excellent research of "Woody Box", who initially discovered such alarming information in the released FOIA documents(1). We now have further information which confirms the aircraft (flight 175) was not in the vicinity of New York City when the attacks occurred.

Hmm. :-\

Ron Paul: Bush was 'thrilled' with 9/11:
http://rt.com/usa/news/ron-paul-bush-iran-449/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Ron Paul stopped in Ames, Iowa on the campaign trail on Thursday, and used some harsh words to explain President George W Bush’s reaction to the September 11 terrorist attacks.

Specifically, the Texas congressman said that the former president was pretty happy about the events. After all, said Paul, the attacks served as pretext to finally put American troops overseas in what instantly became a justifiable reason for war.

“Think of what happened after 9/11,” Paul told a crowd of around 1,000 in Ames this week. “The minute before there was any assessment, there was glee in the administration because now we can invade Iraq, and so the war drums beat.”

What’s more, said the presidential hopeful, is that a decade later, the current administration is creating excitement themselves over what is erupting with enemy forces overseas.

“That’s exactly what they’re doing now with Iran,” said Paul.

Tensions between Washington and Tehran have been high for years, but talks of a budding nuclear program in Iran has America and its allies up in arms over what could be developing overseas. The loss of a high-tech American drone aircraft in Iran last week has only escalated a stand-off between nations, as Washington and Tehran bicker back in forth in the days since over what the craft was doing in the skies above Iran and whether or not Iran has actually recovered the craft.

Paul has been a critic of both the Bush and Obama administrations, but speaking from the campus of Iowa State this week, revealed that the excuses that each president has used to embroil American forces in overseas skirmishes are eerily similar.

“I think extremists have taken over,” said Paul. “They’re the ones that run the foreign policy and that convinced us as a country to go along with all these wars.”

From Ames on Thursday, the National Journal reports that Paul’s audience was unperturbed by the statement. A reporter with the paper relayed the statements to the rest of the world by way of Twitter, in which one critic in particular, however, shares sentiments about the libertarian-leaning GOP candidate. Former Bush administration official Ari Fleischer fired back at Paul’s statements, saying simply, “The man is nuts.” ) =;

LoveIsTruth wrote:

: FREE FALL of WTC7 for 8 or 9 stories is an established, settled, and incontrovertible fact supported by multiple videotapes. It is inescapable obvious and conclusive.

Splendid, marvelous, inspiring, and--yes--true (I suggested the "true" part in my previous post). So, we have free fall for 8-9 stories. As several professional engineers--people probably as knowledgeable and experienced as you--have said, free fall is not prima facie evidence of a controlled demolition. And you cannot prove otherwise. Calling me names won't suffice.

Experts in controlled demolitions of buildings position explosives at the bottom of the structures--not at the top.

Yes, I understand that to accomplish freefall, the principal columns on each floor had to be severed simultaneously, floor by floor. Two thoughts about that: 1) the noise made by such simultaneous explosions would be horrendous, probably heard for miles (that wasn't the case); 2) timing the ignition of the explosives on each floor had to be flawless, and timing the ignition from floor to floor also had to be flawless.

Were those invisible CD guys good, or what?

BlueMoon5 wrote:Yes, I understand that to accomplish freefall, the principal columns on each floor had to be severed simultaneously, floor by floor. Two thoughts about that: 1) the noise made by such simultaneous explosions would be horrendous, probably heard for miles (that wasn't the case);

That's why metal cutting incendiaries (the signature of which was found in the dust and in the basements) were used, instead of conventional explosives, to keep the noise level down. We've been over this about 6 times! You cannot refute this but you keep repeating it! That is disingenuous and intellectually dishonest!

BlueMoon5 wrote:2) timing the ignition of the explosives on each floor had to be flawless, and timing the ignition from floor to floor also had to be flawless.

Were those invisible CD guys good, or what?

Yes and yes, they were experts.

BlueMoon5 wrote:Yes, I understand that to accomplish freefall, the principal columns on each floor had to be severed simultaneously, floor by floor.

Did you just admit point (3)? Sounded like it to me. Great!

You already admitted points (1),(2) and (3). Now we can move on to point (4) of the proof:

Please debunk the following sequence of Facts, if you can:

• (1) Free Fall of WTC7 for over 8 or 9 stories =
  (2) No Resistance given by the steel structure for 8 to 9 stories of the fall =
  (3) practically Simultaneous and perfectly Symmetrical and Complete failure of ALL supporting columns in the building =
  (4) Controlled Demolition =
  (5) Inside Job.

Each step necessarily follows from the other.

Can we agree on point (4)?

You cannot debunk the truth.

LoveIsTruth wrote:

BlueMoon5 wrote:Yes, I understand that to accomplish freefall, the principal columns on each floor had to be severed simultaneously, floor by floor.

Did you just admit point (3)? Sounded like it to me. Great!

Sorry, I didn't agree to point 3. Why? Because of the implausibility factor. I don't see how it could be achieved, even if (a big IF) the bombs could have been secretly planted over the course of weeks if not months.

BlueMoon5 wrote:

LoveIsTruth wrote:

BlueMoon5 wrote:Yes, I understand that to accomplish freefall, the principal columns on each floor had to be severed simultaneously, floor by floor.

Did you just admit point (3)? Sounded like it to me. Great!

Sorry, I didn't agree to point 3. Why? Because of the implausibility factor.

Point (3) NECESSARILY follows from points (1) and (2) to which you already agreed. You yourself acknowledged that:

BlueMoon5 wrote:Yes, I understand that to accomplish freefall, the principal columns on each floor had to be severed simultaneously, floor by floor.

In other words, FREE FALL that was irrefutably witnessed, physically, COULD NOT have happened unless ALL the supporting columns were severed. And the symmetry of the collapse, that was observed, COULD NOT have occurred, unless the columns were severed SYMMETRICALLY. This is not subject to debate, this is inescapable science! Thus, as I have said, point (3) AUTOMATICALLY and inescapably follows from points (1) and (2), to which points you already agreed.

BlueMoon5 wrote:I don't see how it could be achieved, even if (a big IF) the bombs could have been secretly planted over the course of weeks if not months.

Computer timed demolitions are done routinely almost every day. What is there not to "see?" It is a well developed and well documented art!

Beavis and Butt-head discover Infowars.com and find out 9/11 was an inside job.

Too funny MW. =)) Thanks!

BlueMoon5 wrote:

LoveIsTruth wrote:: Yes, I understand that to accomplish freefall, the principal columns on each floor had to be severed simultaneously, floor by floor.

Did you just admit point (3)? Sounded like it to me. Great!

Sorry, I didn't agree to point 3. Why? Because of the implausibility factor. I don't see how it could be achieved, even if (a big IF) the bombs could have been secretly planted over the course of weeks if not months, in three large buildings no less. [/quote]

You and other Truthers are sincerely convinced that your conspiracy theory is right. Col. Flagg dismisses the very idea that it is a theory; for him (and for you and for some other "true believers") it is an established fact, not a theory at all. But is it?

The steps by which you seek to convince me that a conspiracy animated the events of 9/11 are woefully inadequate. I could be converted if you were able to do the following:

1. Provide the names, nationalities, and mug shots of the bomb planters.

2. Prove that the 9/11 Commission deliberately lied--acted with malice and deceit--in composing its final report.

3. Provide security-camera footage of a bomb planter installing a bomb on a column. That failing, provide signed affidavits by three
credible eyewitnesses stating that they saw, independently of each other, a bomb planter in action.

4. Have three fully certified, independent laboratories duplicate the results of the Jones-Harrit red-gray chip experiment, and publish
their results.

5. Have three fully certified, independent laboratories analyze the composition of the "molten" metal found in GZ rubble, and publish
their results, including the percentages of steel, Al, copper, zinc, etc.

6. Identify, specifically, the source/sources of the explosives/incendiaries allegedly planted in the buildings.

7. Interview three bomb planters, independently, and have each explain, in detail, how he/she was able to plant the bombs over a span of months, in three very large buildings, without arousing the slightest suspicion. Videotape each interview and make it available to the public.

8. Interview, on video, ten survivors of the tower attacks and ask them if at any point they detected the distinctive odor of explosives.

Truthers insist they have compelling, irrefutable evidence. Do they?

Yep, they do. I do not need to do the things you listed to prove controlled demolition. All I need to do is to provide these key FACTS. That is irrefutable proof that Controlled Demolition took place.

Besides, I do not need to convert you, because you already know the truth, but because of your other priorities you will deny the truth, though you know it. I write these things for honest people, not for you.

WARNING: Some bad language in this video.

Excellent MW! Another home-run!

WTC Building #7, a 47-story high-rise not hit by an airplane, exhibited all the characteristics of classic controlled demolition with explosives:

1. Rapid onset of collapse
http://www.ae911truth.net/videos/galler ... -2-PFC.wmv

2. Sounds of explosions at ground floor – a second before the building's destruction http://www.ae911truth.net/wtc7/WTC7-eye ... -2-PFC.wmv

3. Symmetrical "structural failure" – through the path of greatest resistance – at free-fall acceleration http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rVCDpL4Ax7I

4. Imploded, collapsing completely, and landed in its own footprint
http://www2.ae911truth.org/videos/WTC7.mpg

5. Massive volume of expanding pyroclastic-like clouds
http://www.ae911truth.net/wtc7/RG-firem ... s-wtc7.avi

6. Expert corroboration from the top European controlled demolition professional
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k3DRhwRN06I

7. Foreknowledge of "collapse" by media, NYPD, FDNY
http://www.wtc7.net/foreknowledge.html

In the the aftermath of WTC7's destruction, strong evidence of demolition using incendiary devices was discovered:

8. FEMA finds rapid oxidation and intergranular melting on structural steel samples
http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/evidenc ... index.html

9. Several tons of molten metal reported by numerous highly qualified witnesses
http://nasathermalimages.com/

10. Chemical signature of the incendiary thermite found in solidified molten metal, and dust samples
http://www.journalof911studies.com/volu ... Method.pdf


WTC7 exhibited none of the characteristics of destruction by fire:

1. Slow onset with large visible deformations

2. Asymmetrical collapse which follows the path of least resistance (laws of conservation of momentum would cause a falling, to the side most damaged by the fires)

3. Evidence of fire temperatures capable of softening steel

4. High-rise buildings with much larger, hotter, and longer lasting fires have never collapsed.
http://911research.wtc7.net/talks/b7/history.html





As seen in this revealing photo, the Twin Towers' destruction exhibited all of the characteristics of destruction by explosives:

1. Destruction proceeds through the path of greatest resistance at nearly free-fall acceleration
http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/analysi ... metry.html

2. Improbable symmetry of debris distribution

3. Extremely rapid onset of destruction

4. Over 100 first responders reported explosions and flashes
http://www.journalof911studies.com/arti ... Center.pdf

5. Multi-ton steel sections ejected laterally
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=djwBCEmHrSE

6. Mid-air pulverization of 90,000 tons of concrete & metal decking
http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/analysi ... crete.html

7. Massive volume of expanding pyroclastic-like clouds
http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/analysi ... /dust.html

8. 1200-foot-diameter debris field: no "pancaked" floors found
http://www.ae911truth.org/images/fema_d ... bution.jpg

9. Isolated explosive ejections 20–40 stories below demolition front
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dtx_GcFCs6c

10. Total building destruction: dismemberment of steel frame
http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/analysi ... steel.html

11. Several tons of molten metal found under all 3 high-rises
http://nasathermalimages.com/

12. Evidence of thermite incendiaries found by FEMA in steel samples
http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/evidenc ... index.html

13. Evidence of explosives found in dust samples
http://www.benthamscience.com/open/tocp ... 7TOCPJ.pdf

And exhibited none of the characteristics of destruction by fire:

1. Slow onset with large visible deformations

2. Asymmetrical collapse which follows the path of least resistance (laws of conservation of momentum would cause a falling, intact, from the point of plane impact, to the side most damaged by the fires)

3. Evidence of fire temperatures capable of softening steel
http://911research.wtc7.net/mirrors/gua ... ow-hot.htm

4. High-rise buildings with much larger, hotter, and longer-lasting fires have never collapsed.
http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/analysi ... fires.html

source: http://www.ae911truth.org" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Excellent MW!

Now watch BM5 latch on to some minor point ignoring the main point like THIS ONE.

An e-mail I got today from a friend of a friend:

Hi XXX,

Thanks for the DVD. I just picked up the mail last night and of course it was there and had been for a day or so. Anyway, we are very aware of the truth and it is so sad. You are right, it is disturbing along with a whole lot more our so-called government is doing. I didn't get to watch it last night and Barry took it to work to watch it if he got time. I will definitely let you know what we thought of it. I really appreciate you sharing it with us. I appreciate that you too are awake to what is happening around us.

I'll let you know if there was anything in the film we were unaware of. Have a fantastic day!

Marj

Col. Flagg wrote:An e-mail I got today from a friend of a friend:

Hi XXX,

Thanks for the DVD. I just picked up the mail last night and of course it was there and had been for a day or so. Anyway, we are very aware of the truth and it is so sad. You are right, it is disturbing along with a whole lot more our so-called government is doing. I didn't get to watch it last night and Barry took it to work to watch it if he got time. I will definitely let you know what we thought of it. I really appreciate you sharing it with us. I appreciate that you too are awake to what is happening around us.

I'll let you know if there was anything in the film we were unaware of. Have a fantastic day!

Marj

Good on ya, Col! :ymapplause: :ymhug:

Rob wrote:

Col. Flagg wrote:An e-mail I got today from a friend of a friend:

Hi XXX,

Thanks for the DVD. I just picked up the mail last night and of course it was there and had been for a day or so. Anyway, we are very aware of the truth and it is so sad. You are right, it is disturbing along with a whole lot more our so-called government is doing. I didn't get to watch it last night and Barry took it to work to watch it if he got time. I will definitely let you know what we thought of it. I really appreciate you sharing it with us. I appreciate that you too are awake to what is happening around us.

I'll let you know if there was anything in the film we were unaware of. Have a fantastic day!

Marj

Good on ya, Col! :ymapplause: :ymhug:

Thanks Rob. B-)