PDA

View Full Version : Geraldo Rivera discuss the THIRD collapse of 9/11 on FOX!



Sertes
11-18-2010, 04:31 AM
Geraldo Rivera (Geraldo at large, fox news) interviews Bob McIlvaine (who lost his son on 9/11) and mechanical engineer Tony Szamboti about the "Building What" Ad campaign which points the lights to the third high-rise collapsed on 9/11:

kP0Hs-v-uJ0

Note n.1 : Mechanical engineer Tony Szamboti makes a reference to "free-fall" collapse of WTC7, which is not a conspiracy theory, but it is a well documented fact written in the Official Version, the document NIST NCSTAR1A:

http://www.luogocomune.net/site/modules/news/library/6-1b.jpg
(http://wtc.nist.gov/NCSTAR1/PDF/NCSTAR%201A.pdf)

Note n.2 : Geraldo Rivera is well known for being the first one to show Zapruder Film on television, back in 1975:
4DwKK4rkeEM

revelarts
11-18-2010, 09:41 AM
interesting Sertes.

thanks for posting.
I didn't know the NIST report said 7 fell at free fall speed too.

What the heck is going on here?
Siliversten the owner in the early in the report says "Pull it" a demolition term.
"MAybe the smartest thing to do is pull it"
"They made the decision to pull it."
"ANd we watched it collapse"

He says he was talking about Pulling the firemen. But many say the firemen where out of the building much earlier in the day.

jimnyc
11-18-2010, 10:07 AM
interesting Sertes.

thanks for posting.
I didn't know the NIST report said 7 fell at free fall speed too.

What the heck is going on here?
Siliversten the owner in the early in the report says "Pull it" a demolition term.
"MAybe the smartest thing to do is pull it"
"They made the decision to pull it."
"ANd we watched it collapse"

He says he was talking about Pulling the firemen. But many say the firemen where out of the building much earlier in the day.

The firemen were not out of the building earlier. If you took the time to do the research, and read what I posted here many times, there are actual reports of firemen who received the "pull" command and why - in their actual words. They were outright told to "pull" their men from the building as the gauges they had there showed the entire building was slowly shifting and was in severe danger of collapsing.

I bolded where you say "but many say" - who are these many? And did you actually read the reports from the firemen in charge that day or are you running with a few Youtube clips again?

jimnyc
11-18-2010, 10:13 AM
Start here:

http://www.debunking911.com/quotes.htm

jimnyc
11-18-2010, 10:17 AM
And here:

http://www.debunking911.com/pull.htm

revelarts
11-18-2010, 12:44 PM
glad you found something here you think you can refute. Go talk to the Engineer and the the Father.

jimnyc
11-18-2010, 02:49 PM
glad you found something here you think you can refute. Go talk to the Engineer and the the Father.

I don't need to "refute" anything, the firemen and their words are already entered as evidence. If there were anything at all to this "pull" bullshit it would be all over congress and those involved in the 9/11 investigation. Again, there are people who would give their limbs to have any direct evidence at all of an inside job - and yet this "pull" shit with Silverstein was put to rest years ago.

Sure, "someone" pulled of perhaps the largest secret undertaking in the nations history, but one guy slipped and just happened to talk about it on TV. The only people left taking any of this shit seriously are the loons. :rolleyes:

jimnyc
11-18-2010, 02:50 PM
glad you found something here you think you can refute. Go talk to the Engineer and the the Father.

BTW, I noticed you refuted absolutely nothing of what the actual firemen there on the scene and in the building stated about that day and the pull command. - Nor have you listed who these people are you refer to who all say that the firemen were out earlier in the day.

Sertes
11-19-2010, 06:41 AM
@Revelarts:
what we learnt in the last two years is this: pay attention to burden of proof.
If you decide to make an assumption on what 'pull it' acually means, you're assuming the burden of proof upon yourself, and others can doubt until and unless you can demonstrate 100% he meant 'demolish'. And you cannot 100%. I can agree that for the common man the phrase is 90% sure to have ONE meaning, because contrary to what Jim told us, there were no firemans in the building at the time of the phone call Silverstein is recalling. But that's not the point. The point is not be dragged into debating side issues while assuming the burden of proof.

If you stop at showing the Official Version is false, and why, and put up the actual page 48 of NIST NCSTAR1A, Jim cannot pretend it's your invention. And when he checks debunking911 he will find nothing, because debunking911 closed down because they had no answer to that!

You may say it's a side issue, but NIST NCSTAR1A is the Official Version of the collapse. When it was released many "debunking" websites just closed down, because they built up in the years their own version on why WTC7 collapsed (i.e.: the building collapsed because of the damage from debris... WRONG! NIST NCSTAR EXCLUDES THAT TOO)

Ok, i dragged it too much, point is when you keep showing the Official Version is false, where, and why, you have higher ground.

jimnyc
11-19-2010, 07:24 AM
And neither of you beanheads can refute what the actual firemen on the scene state, both about being in the building and the pull command. You'd both rather enjoy conspiracies. Sertes, you say "the common man the phrase is 90% sure to have ONE meaning" - do you just make this shit up? Speak to a demolition crew and you'll get one answer - speak to the men that were actually in and out of the building all day long on the scene and you'll get another.

Do you fools actually believe a conspiracy of the existence of time was pulled off, but one of those involved just happened to forget he was involved and decided to discuss it on TV?

But don't let me tread on your good times here! I see you conspiracy nuts are picking up traction after nearly 100 years! LOL Call on me again when you have any proof. Poor little conspiracy theorists, 9+ years and not one single shred of hard proof to prove anything at all. :lol:

jimnyc
11-19-2010, 07:31 AM
If you stop at showing the Official Version is false, and why, and put up the actual page 48 of NIST NCSTAR1A, Jim cannot pretend it's your invention. And when he checks debunking911 he will find nothing, because debunking911 closed down because they had no answer to that!

They "closed down" because they couldn't answer that? Can you provide proof of that?

Anyway, this doesn't "prove" jack shit other than scientific details into the fall of the building. Thousands of inspectors on the ground and again, not a shred of proof to show it fell for any other reason than explained. NOT ONE PIECE OF PROOF FOUND. Why haven't they found anything, not even one wire or blasting cap or ANYTHING AT ALL? Unless you'll get even wackier and claim of course that all the inspectors were involved.

You know what, don't even bother answering. I don't have time to get into a debate with loons right now. You guys believe what you will. Nothing I say will change the mind of a loon, and I'm the type of person that actually likes proof before I start to believe in fairy tales. Have fun, gentlemen! :)

Sertes
11-19-2010, 07:32 AM
And neither of you beanheads can refute what the actual firemen on the scene state, both about being in the building and the pull command. You'd both rather enjoy conspiracies. Sertes, you say "the common man the phrase is 90% sure to have ONE meaning" - do you just make this shit up? Speak to a demolition crew and you'll get one answer - speak to the men that were actually in and out of the building all day long on the scene and you'll get another.

Do you fools actually believe a conspiracy of the existence of time was pulled off, but one of those involved just happened to forget he was involved and decided to discuss it on TV?

But don't let me tread on your good times here! I see you conspiracy nuts are picking up traction after nearly 100 years! LOL Call on me again when you have any proof. Poor little conspiracy theorists, 9+ years and not one single shred of hard proof to prove anything at all. :lol:

You're boring sometimes. That was a comment on debate tactics, not on the issue itself.

If you are so eager to debate 9/11, explain the 2.25 seconds. It's the front issue now, not the 'pull it'. I was explaining just that to Revelarts.

Sertes
11-19-2010, 07:36 AM
Btw Jim, what's your catch on JFK? And did you feel that the Zapruder film changed people perception of that event? (I am not asking if changed yours, if you believe that showing "back and to the left" on tv changed people thoughts about JFK assassination, for right or wrongs, that's it.)

jimnyc
11-19-2010, 07:40 AM
You're boring sometimes. That was a comment on debate tactics, not on the issue itself.

If you are so eager to debate 9/11, explain the 2.25 seconds. It's the front issue now, not the 'pull it'. I was explaining just that to Revelarts.

Ok, you convinced me! We certainly have a breakthrough here! Who doe we bring this newest revelation to? Surely there has to be someone other than Geraldo interested. Can we run to the 9/11 commission? Can we run to congress? I'm sure these people never saw the endless videos before and it's doubtful anyone in the government has read the nist.GOV reports.

Shit, maybe all of congress is complicit in this and that's why they won't properly investigate? What do we do to get people to finally listen to us? Why won't they take our stories seriously?

jimnyc
11-19-2010, 07:42 AM
Btw Jim, what's your catch on JFK? And did you feel that the Zapruder film changed people perception of that event? (I am not asking if changed yours, if you believe that showing "back and to the left" on tv changed people thoughts about JFK assassination, for right or wrongs, that's it.)

Dude, that was over a 1/4 century ago. We have cold hard evidence now of a much newer conspiracy and we need to be heard by leaders aroudn the world. We have all the evidence in hand which you have shown to us many times over. Why won't anyone in any official capacities listen to us? Maybe we should chain ourselves to the White House fence like the homosexuals until Obama takes action?

Sertes
11-19-2010, 08:17 AM
Dude, that was over a 1/4 century ago. We have cold hard evidence now of a much newer conspiracy and we need to be heard by leaders aroudn the world. We have all the evidence in hand which you have shown to us many times over. Why won't anyone in any official capacities listen to us? Maybe we should chain ourselves to the White House fence like the homosexuals until Obama takes action?

Ok, you're not obliged to answer my questions, of course.

I just wanted to know if you don't believe in conspiracies at all, or if you can concede something weird happened around JFK assassination.

The link with the topic is that after Geraldo showed Zapruder film on television people DEMANDED a second investigation on JFK assassination, and they DID THAT, the second commission concluded there probably was more than one shooter in dallas. Just a remainder.

revelarts
11-19-2010, 08:22 AM
Geraldo Rivera (Geraldo at large, fox news) interviews Bob McIlvaine (who lost his son on 9/11) and mechanical engineer Tony Szamboti about the "Building What" Ad campaign which points the lights to the third high-rise collapsed on 9/11:

kP0Hs-v-uJ0

Note n.1 : Mechanical engineer Tony Szamboti makes a reference to "free-fall" collapse of WTC7, which is not a conspiracy theory, but it is a well documented fact written in the Official Version, the document NIST NCSTAR1A:

http://www.luogocomune.net/site/modules/news/library/6-1b.jpg
(http://wtc.nist.gov/NCSTAR1/PDF/NCSTAR%201A.pdf)

...

Jimmy already knows what happened he's read thousands of pages from the non loon experts and there's nothing else to see here. move along. Pay no attention to the free fall speed. move along.

jimnyc
11-19-2010, 08:27 AM
Sertes - don't change the subject, this thread is about WTC7 and 9/11.

Now that we have solid proof, who do we go to next? Why won't anyone in official capacities believe us? Why are the thousands of investigators that were involved not backing us up with all the evidence they must have found through years of investigations. I'm with you now, buddy, but it's frustrating that 95% of the world just dismisses us and our evidence. It's so obvious that WTC7 was blown up by a demolition crew, and they even have Silverstein admitting it on tape! I just can't understand that with all this proof why the entire government is basically ignoring us. Democrats, Republicans, foreign governments - I guess they all just hope we'll go away.

So again, what can we do to force them to listen to us and see the mounds of proof we have that WTC7 came down differently than we were told? With even the government report in hand, for some reason they still ignore us. What do we do next to get them to listen?

jimnyc
11-19-2010, 08:28 AM
Jimmy already knows what happened he's read thousands of pages from the non loon experts and there's nothing else to see here. move along. Pay no attention to the free fall speed. move along.

Brain dead boy is back! LOL

revelarts
11-19-2010, 08:31 AM
Brain dead boy is back! LOL

"the time has come for name calling , Pay no attention to freefall speed. move along."

jimnyc
11-19-2010, 08:38 AM
"the time has come for name calling , Pay no attention to freefall speed. move along."

Dude, probably every other post of yours on this board is nothing more than a Youtube clip. It's sad one someone needs others to do their thinking for them. Try being original and use your own brain sometimes!

Now, do you think anyone else involved in the 9/11 coverup will accidentally give an interview anytime soon and reveal details of their diabolical plot?

revelarts
11-19-2010, 08:44 AM
Dude, probably every other post of yours on this board is nothing more than a Youtube clip. It's sad one someone needs others to do their thinking for them. Try being original and use your own brain sometimes!

Now, do you think anyone else involved in the 9/11 coverup will accidentally give an interview anytime soon and reveal details of their diabolical plot?

Milder name calling and extra insults now a misdirection off the point of FREEFALL SPEED, move along.

Sertes
11-19-2010, 08:44 AM
Sertes - don't change the subject, this thread is about WTC7 and 9/11.

Now that we have solid proof, who do we go to next?

I told you already: we show it on prime-time tv. For JFK it made the difference


Why won't anyone in official capacities believe us? Why are the thousands of investigators that were involved not backing us up with all the evidence they must have found through years of investigations. I'm with you now, buddy, but it's frustrating that 95% of the world just dismisses us and our evidence. It's so obvious that WTC7 was blown up by a demolition crew, and they even have Silverstein admitting it on tape! I just can't understand that with all this proof why the entire government is basically ignoring us. Democrats, Republicans, foreign governments - I guess they all just hope we'll go away.

Maybe! That would be just wonderful, direct

So again, what can we do to force them to listen to us and see the mounds of proof we have that WTC7 came down differently than we were told? With even the government report in hand, for some reason they still ignore us. What do we do next to get them to listen?

I told you twice already: we show it on prime-time tv. For JFK it made the difference

jimnyc
11-19-2010, 08:46 AM
Milder name calling and extra insults now a misdirection off the point of FREEFALL SPEED, move along.

Dipshits have been also claiming freefall speed about WTC 1 & 2 as well for 9 years now and have been soundly defeated at every corner. You have nothing. Go back to Youtube and masturbate with your leaders.

jimnyc
11-19-2010, 08:50 AM
I told you already: we show it on prime-time tv. For JFK it made the difference

The falling of all 3 buildings has been shown on TV here in the states from the beginning. Contrary to YOUR cute Youtube flick, WTC7 was not hidden from the public and has been discussed and aired on TV from the beginning. People just took a larger interest in the other 2 towers. Stop making it sound like this is the first time people have ever heard or saw that WTC7 went down. It's also well documented right from the beginning all over the internet and has also been discussed right from 9/11 on.


I told you twice already: we show it on prime-time tv. For JFK it made the difference

And WTC7 falling has been on prime time TV as well. Hell, you yourself have posted clips showing it falling and proclaiming it as proof. Where the hell do you think the footage came from, revelarts' ass? LOL No, it was all over the news already and that's where all the damn clips came from!

Sertes
11-19-2010, 08:50 AM
Dipshits have been also claiming freefall speed about WTC 1 & 2 as well for 9 years now and have been soundly defeated at every corner. You have nothing. Go back to Youtube and masturbate with your leaders.

Respect is not one of your stronger points. The small relief is that you distribute insults to everyone doesn't completely agree with you, not only me.

Back on topic: in your country people have the power, if they fully and strongly ask for a second investigation the political body has only one option: comply.

Sertes
11-19-2010, 08:53 AM
The falling of all 3 buildings has been shown on TV here in the states from the beginning. Contrary to YOUR cute Youtube flick, WTC7 was not hidden from the public and has been discussed and aired on TV from the beginning. People just took a larger interest in the other 2 towers. Stop making it sound like this is the first time people have ever heard or saw that WTC7 went down. It's also well documented right from the beginning all over the internet and has also been discussed right from 9/11 on.

And WTC7 falling has been on prime time TV as well. Hell, you yourself have posted clips showing it falling and proclaiming it as proof. Where the hell do you think the footage came from, revelarts' ass? LOL No, it was all over the news already and that's where all the damn clips came from!

Yes, then it was hidden from view from 9/12 on.

Try this: stop the common man and ask him: how many high-rises were destroyed on 9/11 again?? Ten tell me how many answer you three.

jimnyc
11-19-2010, 08:54 AM
Respect is not one of your stronger points. The small relief is that you distribute insults to everyone doesn't completely agree with you, not only me.

Back on topic: in your country people have the power, if they fully and strongly ask for a second investigation the political body has only one option: comply.

I have no reason to respect either one of you, respect is EARNED, not granted automatically. I don't cater, bow or coddle to idiots.

So are you saying the entire political body has no interest in 10 years worth of evidence brought forth to them from those who think the official story is false? So many websites and so many loons - why do you think they aren't listening and taking action?

jimnyc
11-19-2010, 08:58 AM
Yes, then it was hidden from view from 9/12 on.

Try this: stop the common man and ask him: how many high-rises were destroyed on 9/11 again?? Ten tell me how many answer you three.

Hidden my ass! I live right here in NY and must have saw the replay of WTC7 falling at least 1,000 times!!! It's also been all over CNN and a few other stations that are national and not local to just NYC. You have no idea what you are talking about.

And of course people will answer 2, as they see the 2 main towers as high rises in a loaded question. Ask people if they are aware that more than just WTC1 & 2 fell that day and most will acknowledge that.

A dipshit from Italy is going to tell us Americans what we DIDN'T see on TV all these years? LOL

Sertes
11-19-2010, 09:00 AM
A dipshit from Italy is going to tell us Americans what we DIDN'T see on TV all these years? LOL

Yes, a "dipshit from Italy" is teaching you what is to be a patriot.

Your whole nation was built over the notions of power to the people and of questioning rulers.

Until next time, cya. :salute:

jimnyc
11-19-2010, 09:34 AM
Yes, a "dipshit from Italy" is teaching you what is to be a patriot.

Your whole nation was built over the notions of power to the people and of questioning rulers.

Until next time, cya. :salute:

So I'm not patriotic because I don't believe in your conspiracy, or because I won't show you respect?

I have a few questions for both of you guys:

to both of you: you are both acting as if the NIST report stating that the building fell at near free fall speed is some sort of "smoking gun". I mean, after all, it IS the authority on such investigations for the US government. Now, instead of taking pictures of a few sentences from the report - can either of you link us to the report AND where it states anything about the building being brought down by anything other than what we were told by investigators? You both surely read the entire report and have it handy, so I expect you'll show me this very quickly!

@ Revelarts - you still haven't told me who all these people are that refute the firemens claims on the scene and state that they were out of the building earlier in the day. Can you please finally answer this question I have asked you several times?

jimnyc
11-19-2010, 09:35 AM
Until next time, cya. :salute:

When is next time? After you find another cool Youtube flick like Rev? Don;t run so quickly, I want to discuss the NIST stating that the building was brought down by demolition!

revelarts
11-19-2010, 10:04 AM
Dipshits have been also claiming freefall speed about WTC 1 & 2 as well for 9 years now and have been soundly defeated at every corner. You have nothing. Go back to Youtube and masturbate with your leaders.

Name calling toward more people, misdirection on Freefall info. Assertion of lack of data in the face of facts. Parting insults sexual and otherwise.

Jimmy quite a debating style you got there.


Geraldo Rivera (Geraldo at large, fox news) interviews Bob McIlvaine (who lost his son on 9/11) and mechanical engineer Tony Szamboti about the "Building What" Ad campaign which points the lights to the third high-rise collapsed on 9/11:

kP0Hs-v-uJ0

Note n.1 : Mechanical engineer Tony Szamboti makes a reference to "free-fall" collapse of WTC7, which is not a conspiracy theory, but it is a well documented fact written in the Official Version, the document NIST NCSTAR1A:

http://www.luogocomune.net/site/modules/news/library/6-1b.jpg
(http://wtc.nist.gov/NCSTAR1/PDF/NCSTAR%201A.pdf)
...



Freefall speed in the Nist Report,
FREEFALL SPEED of Building 7

All your insults won't erase the fact Jimmy.

jimnyc
11-19-2010, 10:07 AM
Jimmy quite a debating style you got there.

Freefall speed in the Nist Report,
FREEFALL SPEED of Building 7

All your insults won't erase the fact Jimmy.

And you consider throwing out made up facts to be "debating" why do you continually ignore my request to backup your statement about the firemen?

Also, are you going to post the rest from the NIST where they state the "free fall" was from something other than what the investigators told us?

Is this what you consider debating, avoiding questions?

jimnyc
11-19-2010, 10:08 AM
BTW - you 2 twist will notice it stated it was at a free fall descent for only 8 floors. I guess it wasn't "free fall" anymore once it met resistance! LOL

jimnyc
11-19-2010, 10:51 AM
Rev? Sertes? I'm looking since you guys haven't responded, but I can't find anything yet in the NIST's report, even with their addition of the "free fall descent for 8 floors", about the building coming down by demolition or anything like that. Maybe you 2 would be polite enough to point me in the right direction to find the NIST's data on that?

Also, Rev, doing a ton of searching and can't find anything reputable reporting that the firemen lied about their whereabouts, or not "many" people who state they were out earlier in the day. Maybe you can share that too?

jimnyc
11-19-2010, 11:05 AM
Poor little Rev busted making shit up and now wants to hide. He just looked at this thread and knows I called him on his lame made up statements about


He says he was talking about Pulling the firemen. But many say the firemen where out of the building much earlier in the dayOther than loony tune sites - I would love to see Rev backup this statement, so I've repeatedly asked him in this thread. But all I got was him viewing my question yet again and moving on.

Another round to me. NEXT!

1998

jimnyc
11-19-2010, 04:21 PM
Ok, you guys want to go on with this "free fall" crap and won't take no for an answer. You keep posting the picture from the NIST report over and over as if it's your proof, even though I already corrected you guys and showed it clearly states the free fall was for 8 floors.

At any rate, you guys obviously consider the NIST to be a good source or you wouldn't be so adamant about it right now. They are the government authority on the subject and you therefore think this is "shove it in your face" proof that the building didn't fall as we were told.

Well, the following is from page 48 of the document you guys are fawning over. It's the part cropped out of the original picture to make it seem like some sort of smoking gun. So let's see what the NIST states about the actual collapse. After that, let's watch you guys jump though hoops to make it look like the NIST doesn't know what they're talking about, even though you guys just fell over backwards relying on their word:

http://i52.tinypic.com/vcsyg4.jpg

This is just too easy!

jimnyc
11-20-2010, 07:25 AM
Hey Rev, why'd you run? Don't you want to address the NIST and the free fall speed that you thought you were being cute by keep quoting it to me? And I'm sure you want to toss it in my face about "many people"!!! C'mon Rev, don't be a baby and claim you're "insulted" just so that you don't have to come back here and wipe the egg off your face!! :laugh2: :laugh2: :laugh2:

revelarts
11-20-2010, 11:14 AM
Jim we've gone back and forth before on issues. you know it's not because it's too tough for either of us. I just didn't' want to get into a long drawn out deal over 9-11. Sertes made an extremely interesting post and I commented on the post. It wasn't my intention to get into a long debate over the whole 9-11 issue ONLY to acknowledge and establish the 1 point that has been PooPooed by "many" like yourself, over and over again.
The Freefall speed of Building 7.
It's been a point I've seen batted back and forth over the past couple of years I've been open to questioning 9-11 info. It's a point that, at least in my mind, seriously opens the door to the likelihood of something else going on besides what was told us in the original official stories.

So Nist finally admits to Freefall Speed, for many floors.
A few thousand working Engineers and Architects Agree that it's impossible to fall that way from a "collapse".
Some Family members, at least as well acquainted with the facts as yourself, Don't believe the official stories.
it seems to me that there's a real debate to had, on the facts, evidence and science that doesn't include Loons, Crazies and Hookum.

You are Convinced otherwise. I'm well aware.

To your point on the Firemen "Pulled" from the building. It's been a while since I read that info. I'd have go back and find it. I haven't taking the time, and I'm not really encouraged to do so.
When i do find it you'll say they are lying, mistaken, crazy or have a book deal.
So where will we go from there?

As far as the conclusion of the report goes.
OK, their conclusion is supposed to be based on the evidence reviewed.
One part of that evidence is the free fall collapse speed of many floors.
Which is impossible in an unaided or natural collapse.
So their conclusion doesn't match ALL the facts.
Why would they do that? I don't know.
But that they have done it, is a question that's seem apparent to many independent engineers.

I'm not an engineer,
And just as you doubt that the NIST researchers would Lie about the Conclusion. I doubt that A few thousand engineers and architects would just up and openly question the reports conclusion AND join a group to sign there names to that idea.
They, Based on the facts available, come to a different conclusion.
Are they all crazy?
are they all incompetent idiots?
are they are all in it for a book deal?

If you step back, it seems, to me, that there's at least a real debate to be had here.

there's my reply.
Should I expect the name calling and insults to begin again?

Pagan
11-20-2010, 11:21 AM
Jim we've gone back and forth before on issues. you know it's not because it's too tough for either of us. I just didn't' want to get into a long drawn out deal over 9-11. Sertes made an extremely interesting post and I commented on the post. It wasn't my intention to get into a long debate over the whole 9-11 issue ONLY to acknowledge and establish the 1 point that has been PooPooed by "many" like yourself, over and over again.
The Freefall speed of Building 7.
It's been a point I've seen batted back and forth over the past couple of years I've been open to questioning 9-11 info. It's a point that, at least in my mind, seriously opens the door to the likelihood of something else going on besides what was told us in the original official stories.

So Nist finally admits to Freefall Speed, for many floors.
A few thousand working Engineers and Architects Agree that it's impossible to fall that way from a "collapse".
Some Family members, at least as well acquainted with the facts as yourself, Don't believe the official stories.
it seems to me that there's a real debate to had, on the facts, evidence and science that doesn't include Loons, Crazies and Hookum.

You are Convinced otherwise. I'm well aware.

To your point on the Firemen "Pulled" from the building. It's been a while since I read that info. I'd have go back and find it. I haven't taking the time, and I'm not really encouraged to do so.
When i do find it you'll say they are lying, mistaken, crazy or have a book deal.
So where will we go from there?

As far as the conclusion of the report goes.
OK, their conclusion is supposed to be based on the evidence reviewed.
One part of that evidence is the free fall collapse speed of many floors.
Which is impossible in an unaided or natural collapse.
So their conclusion doesn't match ALL the facts.
Why would they do that? I don't know.
But that they have done it, is a question that's seem apparent to many independent engineers.

I'm not an engineer,
And just as you doubt that the NIST researchers would Lie about the Conclusion. I doubt that A few thousand engineers and architects would just up and openly question the reports conclusion AND join a group to sign there names to that idea.
They, Based on the facts available, come to a different conclusion.
Are they all crazy?
are they all incompetent idiots?
are they are all in it for a book deal?

If you step back, it seems, to me, that there's at least a real debate to be had here.

there's my reply.
Should I expect the name calling and insults to begin again?

You're talking to a brick wall, he's too concerned with what he believes is the real threat, fags.

jimnyc
11-20-2010, 11:28 AM
Rev - I'll just pick on a few points of yours:


So Nist finally admits to Freefall Speed, for many floors.

Finally admits? As if they lied about something previously? "Many floors", as if 8 floors out of 47 is a huge amount (when added to the explanation from NIST).


To your point on the Firemen "Pulled" from the building. It's been a while since I read that info. I'd have go back and find it. I haven't taking the time, and I'm not really encouraged to do so.
When i do find it you'll say they are lying, mistaken, crazy or have a book deal.
So where will we go from there?

I gave you actual quotes from many firemen on the scene at WTC7 on 9/11, up until the point the pull command was given and they fully evacuated the area. YOU say there are many who say they left earlier in the day. It should be VERY simple to backup that statement of yours and refute what the firemen and their brass say.


As far as the conclusion of the report goes.
OK, their conclusion is supposed to be based on the evidence reviewed.
One part of that evidence is the free fall collapse speed of many floors.
Which is imposable in an unaided or natural collapse.
So their conclusion doesn't match ALL the facts.
Why would they do that? I don't know.
But that they have done it, is a question that's seem apparent to many independent engineers.


And you stated this in a prior post:


Freefall speed in the Nist Report,
FREEFALL SPEED of Building 7

All your insults won't erase the fact Jimmy.

So you were trying to rub in the fact about the free fall speed of the building collapse, as if it was definitive and proven data. You don't touch on the subject of the fact that it was only for 8 floors. Why do you think it would free fall for only 8 floors? Maybe something prevented it from free falling anymore - and that's called more of the building and resistance?

And lastly, and I laugh when I write this but don't want to insult you - how can you "run" with the comments from the NIST when you thought it was irrefutable proof that the building fell in a "free fall" - but when shown that it was only 8 floors and they still stated the building fell in the manner we were originally told by investigators - now all of a sudden they aren't the greatest authority any more and let's not assume what they say is fact?

This is EXACTLY why I tell people to read stuff before jumping to conclusions over Youtube clips and images taken from reports containing only a portion of the story. I have read it, and nothing will change my mind as I think you never read the report discussed in this thread. I believe you knew nothing of page 48 and commented without even knowing exactly what was written in the rest of the report.

jimnyc
11-20-2010, 11:29 AM
You're talking to a brick wall, he's too concerned with what he believes is the real threat, fags.

Why don't you go fuck yourself and stop derailing threads?

Pagan
11-20-2010, 12:04 PM
Why don't you go fuck yourself and stop derailing threads?

Already did this a.m., I was wiping my ass and my finger broke through the toilet paper :lol:

jimnyc
11-20-2010, 12:17 PM
Already did this a.m., I was wiping my ass and my finger broke through the toilet paper :lol:

That's wonderful to hear. I'm sure Sertes and Revelarts would agree you did so at free fall speed too.

Sertes
11-24-2010, 05:23 AM
Just passing by, things are happening faster than I anticipated:

Geraldo follow up on "Freedom Watch" with Judge Andrew Napolitano

-HcliJUk0VY

jimnyc
11-24-2010, 09:33 AM
Just passing by, things are happening faster than I anticipated:

Geraldo follow up on "Freedom Watch" with Judge Andrew Napolitano



I stopped listening to the video a few seconds in when this guys referred to Geraldo as "one of the most respected journalists in America". That's laughable and shows this guy knows about as much of Geraldo as you do. Geraldo and his "Men in Lace Panties and the Women Who Love Them" or when he got into a fight on his lame show with skinheads or when he had special reports on satanic rituals. In other words, he "might" have had a career at one point, but he flushed it and has very little respect of the community now.

Maybe when Geraldo is done with this "15 minutes of fame" he can go find another dead gangster who has a vault he can open? LOL

Sertes
11-24-2010, 10:41 AM
Maybe when Geraldo is done with this "15 minutes of fame" he can go find another dead gangster who has a vault he can open? LOL

:lame2:

Being the first to air full Zapruder film on television he's far past 15 minutes of fame, thank you.

Until next, cya.

jimnyc
11-24-2010, 10:47 AM
:lame2:

Being the first to air full Zapruder film on television he's far past 15 minutes of fame, thank you.

Until next, cya.

And how does him "airing" something make him any better or respected of a reporter? And what does what he did over 40 years ago matter today, when he's gone batshit crazy since then? Being that you live in a shithole a million miles away, it's safe to say that those of us here who watched his career spin out of control know him a little better.

BTW - still no response from you as to why you cut out the relevant portions of page 48 of the NIST report. You came here so happy as if you had a smoking gun from the NIST report, but then go out of your way to hide the relevant portion where they state how the building actually fell. In other words, AGAIN, you look like a dumbass!

Sertes
11-24-2010, 11:23 AM
And how does him "airing" something make him any better or respected of a reporter?

Because he dared to, while all other were too scared to touch the issue.
The first Official Version of JFK shooting is FALSE, we know that because people asked for a second investigation, after seeing Zapruder film on tv.


Being that you live in a shithole a million miles away

Italy a shithole!! LOL! This is the best so far! We got 2 wonders of the world and countless World Heritage areas. There's absolutely no need to respond to your puny insults, you do it all by yourself! Please continue.


BTW - still no response from you as to why you cut out the relevant portions of page 48 of the NIST report. You came here so happy as if you had a smoking gun from the NIST report, but then go out of your way to hide the relevant portion where they state how the building actually fell. In other words, AGAIN, you look like a dumbass!

Ok smartmouth, since you ask so nicely you convinced me to translate my article on this forum format. So you won't be able to pretend not to know what happened after debunking911 closed down.

jimnyc
11-24-2010, 11:48 AM
And make sure your "article" explains why you can be so adamant that the NIST is an authoritative figure who we should all listen to - and how they backup the official version which is that a "pancake collapse" brought down the building.

n0spam4me
05-25-2011, 06:53 PM
Please note that the OFFICIAL taxpayer funded report on WTC7
uses terms like "PROGRESSIVE COLLAPSE" & "SEQUENTIAL COLLAPSE"

HOWEVER if you accept that the observation of 2.25 sec of free fall acceleration is true. then the "Progressive" or "Sequential" nature of said collapse can NOT be true, ONLY if mass quantities of bolts, welds (etc...)
within the structure let go at exactly the same moment, would you observe the building descending at free fall acceleration for 2.25 sec.
There is NOTHING "Sequential" about this, in that structural elements would have to not only disengage, but remove material out from under said falling mass because at free fall acceleration, the structure is ONLY falling, NOT pushing anything out of the way.

THEREFORE NIST LIES! BUST THEM FOR FRAUD!

Little-Acorn
05-25-2011, 07:05 PM
It's good to see people discussing the collapse of WTC7.

It keeps the nuts and whackos busy and safely out of the way, where they can't hurt themselves and/or get in the adults' ways.