What part of my statement made you think I cared what you believe? Okay, I'll repeat....this issue has been debated repeatedly here for years. If you haven't seen anything posted that led you to question the official story then that's fine. No worries. Like I said, I'm here to show support to those that are laughed at. I no longer care to debate this issue. To those who want more information I say "start googling". You'll have to figure it out for yourself. If you don't see any reason to look into it, or you have looked into it and you still believe the official story, okay, no reason to continue to discussing it.

See people always ignore simple questions. How do you think the tower should have fallen and why. Any CT feel free to chime in.

Nobody's ignoring the question. It's been answered in dozens of threads that I know you have participated in over the years. I've seen this debate with you in it before so why are you pretending that this has never been discussed? The links have been posted, the debate has been done....many times.

Of course, I don't understand why the CT bother to keep posting either. But, I'm sure you'll find someone here to debate this for the millionth time. Have fun.

By discussed do you mean they have said what this official story said is impossible? That is not what I am asking. I am asking to pretend you are giving a report to the government saying this is how the tower should have fallen and at least with basic high-school science give a credible explanation. I have yet to see anyone do this and welcome it. I mean if you think it should have fallen over you have some basic scientific reasoning to believe this don't you? So Let's hear it. It would take you less time to just answer then it would to argue about whether or not it's been discussed.

No, it wouldn't. Because it's not just a few sentences worth of information. These links have been posted before, but I'll post one again. I'm sure they will be laughed at and dismissed, but I'll post them for anyone who really wants to take the time to go through the information. It's a lot of information and you have to read all the differing opinions on the subject to get to the truth. It actually took me about a month to go through everything both "for" and "against" the official story. I don't agree with everything these websites present, but only because I don't have enough information to make a definite determination. But, there is enough there to convince me that the official story is a cover up. How much of a cover up and what was planned and what was simply allowed to happen, I don't know. I don't need to know.

The reason I will no longer debate this subject is it is labor intensive and most people have no interest in finding the truth. But, should you decide you want to do the work and find out the truth....the information is out there. It can't be posted in a thread. It's a lot of information. If you want, take the time to go through it. If you're not interested, fine. Let it go.

http://www.911truth.org/article.php?story=20050827011535140

So you can't even explain your simple belief of Why you think the tower should have fallen a different way? This is not a difficult question. I can give my reason for it galling the way it did very simply. There were no other external forces that were powerful enough to overcome the buildings inertia except gravity.

Well, there ya go. No need to look at the links.

How about the external forces of concrete and steel?

That would have slowed it down unless.... the the concrete and steel had been blown up by explosives.

Pancake collapse at very near free fall speed... impossible!!!



..but not according to the official report.... and the paid off "scientists" who manipulate computer simulations to get the results they were told to get...

The answer is: The tower should NOT have fallen at all.

But near free fall speed? Not possible unless explosives were involved.

The twin towers were taken down on purpose... and blamed on Islamic terrorists on purpose. They were so full of asbestos it would have cost too much money to fix that. There were other reasons they had to come down by a terrorist act.

1. A False flag to get the patriot act passed.
2. So insurance would pay off.
3. To advance the fake "war on terror."
4. To get people mad enough to go to war... with anyone who even looks like a terrorist.
5. A good distraction for the mystery of the missing gold claimed to be stored under the towers. (Maybe it was carted away.. maybe it never existed at all..)
7. The destruction of CIA records and files and other files and evidence.

There are many reasons why the Towers had to come down, and many reasons why it had to be a "terrorist attack" and not done on purpose as a demolition, and many reasons why it had to be blamed on Islamic terrorists.

So, all in all, except for the lives lost, it was a good thing for the Criminal Cabal. Of course they probably don't care about the lives lost.

Business is business after all.

Unless of course the force is exponentially greater than the resistance. If I put a semi truck above your head and drop it do you think you will slow it down or get squished?

the way i see it, anytime anything this big happens, there is always some kind of cover-up going on. I mean, you can make a CT out of anything that happens, because there is someone that doesn't want the truth told for some reason. but that doesn't mean there there is a "grand conspiracy" afoot, and the CT'ers seem to make stuff up, exaggerate, and just plain lie. there are even CT's about the mars lander now.... just to name a few more, Hurricane Katrina, the nuke plant in japan thats making weird monsters now, obama has about a million CT's about now, latest is a false flag event to stop the election, planet x, nasa, anything that happens, there is a CT about it... If you people want to go on believing these outright lies, you should at least stop with the obvious stupid crap that is thrown out there. but having an open mind is the best way, at least yall could look at it logically...

Actually there is no need to make fun of anybody. The people are
alright, even well-intentioned. Unfortunately, those who don't
accept the scientific and engineering analyses are simply wrong.

Has nothing to do with governments. Has nothing to do with secret
plots. Has nothing to do with back door deals.

It has to do with Physics, Engineering and forensic science.
It is a matter of the money trail and public acknowledgement
of the attacks. It has to do with the organization which supported
the terrorists and trained the terrorists - Al-Qaida.

And, these disciplines weighed in during the weeks and months
following the attacks. The money trail and organization structure
was determined swiftly surely and uncontestably. It is a no-brainer.
And the other ridiculously far-fetched and asinine theories cannot
explain the science, engineering, money trail or organizational
support at all.



That's why knowledgeable people laugh at these things!

The "truthers" have a complete disconnect with reality and still
insist on ever more crazy and unsupported wild theories for
which there is no proof whatsoever all the time denying the
existence and credibility of all the actual verified evidence!

It's comedic!!

Better than the circus. Belongs in the realm of extreme
dysfunctional Psychology!

Alright - I am ready for the swift and cutting rebuttal!!

This is where I disagree. Loud and stupid people deserve open ridicule.

Ridicule is used when you have no valid argument or are too lazy to get one.

For you perhaps, I do it to get a laugh. You could have it round the wrong way. One may laugh at those without a valid argument, or those too lazy to get one.

Why do you bother hot rod even the 911 commission denies its own report. This has been proven over and over, wake up.



he 9/11 Commission now tells us that the official version of 9/11 was based on false testimony and documents and is almost entirely untrue. The details of this massive cover-up are carefully outlined in a book by John Farmer, who was the Senior Counsel for the 9/11 Commission.

Farmer, Dean of Rutger Universities' School of Law and former Attorney General of New Jersey, was responsible for drafting the original flawed 9/11 report.

Does Farmer have cooperation and agreement from other members of the Commission? Yes. Did they say Bush ordered 9/11? No. Do they say that the 9/11 Commission was lied to by the FBI, CIA, Whitehouse and NORAD? Yes. Is there full documentary proof of this? Yes.

Farmer states...“at some level of the government, at some point in time…there was an agreement not to tell the truth about what happened... I was shocked at how different the truth was from the way it was described …. The [Norad air defense] tapes told a radically different story from what had been told to us and the public for two years. This is not spin.”

http://www.salem-news.com/articles/september112009/911_truth_9-11-09.php

Who cares if there were a couple of typos or the jets didn't
scramble fast enough or the fbi screwed up and didn't talk to
the cia or the whitehouse or some other such problem?

NO CREDIBLE PERSON QUESTIONS THAT IT WAS AN AL-QAEDA TERRORIST ATTACK - SUPPORTED BY ALL AVAILABLE VOLUMINOUS EVIDENCE



The rest of it concerns how we might have prevented it or
responded more effectively to such threats.

Really? I find few people in the "real world" who buy all that.

Yep. I have to agree with this one. I have posted the science and math, explained it detail, and got nothing back from some but buffoonery. The posts still exist if anyone cared to research them but after multiple explanations of why explosives could not have been used, it still comes back from the CTs as the "obvious choice" for how the buildings went down. Some people are just stupid and should be treated as such if they combine obnoxiousness with it. Some people are just trolls looking for attention because it is impossible to be that stupid.