None of that nonsense you cut and pasted addresses the direct question I asked. I just wasted precious minutes reading it. Ug.

Stop wasting my time.

Are you deliberately being obtuse? this was covered pages ago, so stop wasting my time.

I'm sorry that your attention span is so short that the facts bore you, but I suggest you try to focus and comprehend the material. You call it nonsense, but you haven't even read it? It's difficult to take you seriously.

About the pancake collapse? Try again.

Answer the questions.

That white stuff on top of the building does not look like "burning debris" to me. It looks like white paper or dust.

It is not hot enough to set the roof on fire, but yet it toasted a bunch of car engines and the heat was so intense that they rusted in a matter of hours?

Yeh .... right.

..don't think so.

Save your bullying. I've covered this several pages back and I'm not playing your stupid games. How dare you ignore material and then attempt to bully people. Who the phuck do you think you are?

Look who is being obtuse. It could not have been covered "pages ago" because I just NOW posted these links to these pictures to show you the car lot, and you JUST NOW inferred that some burning debris must have fallen on the cars because you see some white paper you call "debris" on the roof.




It is not my attention span that is the problem it is the useless crappy stuff you are cutting and pasting that has nothing to do with the questions I am asking you to answer.


It is difficult to take you seriously at all. You are avoiding my questions and posting crap.

Running for cover because you have no answers?

Please ANSWER THE QUESTIONS if you can. What debris started the cars on fire, and why didn't the same hot burning debris start the roof of that building on fire?

Also if intense HEAT caused the cars to rust so fast, why didn't this alleged intense heat kill those nice still living GREEN TREES AND BUSHES?

Please read the previous material before you make wild accusations. The burning cars issue was covered several pages back.



So, you disagree with the points about the collapse made in that post. Why?



*sigh* Please re-read the material. You NEVER answer a single question I ask of you and then you have the temerity to accuse me of avoiding questions when I posted the material several pages back.

No, I'm actually tired of your inane drivel.



It would have been falling burning debris (as pointed out several pages back) and your next point ASSUMES that this material fell universally across the entire area. Do you know how bushfires spread?



Because the cars were on fire and not the trees. What a dumb question.
Furthermore, as I asked you several pages ago on more than one occasion, if the firefighter's testimony is false, what do you suggest caused this?

1. The question I asked was concerning how the cars caught on fire. What debris fell on the cars? It was not about the specifics on how we may or may not agree or disagree with how the collapse happened.

2. You implied that the white things on the building next to the parking lot (in the picture) indicated that debris had fallen in that area because you are claiming that roof has debris on it.

And yet the debris that fell on the roof did not start a fire. In fact, it looks like paper or just dust.

But the alleged debris that fell in the parking lot was hot flaming debris, hot enough start cars on fire, melt the engines, tires, explode out the windows, melt the door handles etc.

And yet I did not see any of this flaming hot debris anywhere else in that parking lot laying around. (I'm sure some of it must have missed the cars and just would be lying around..still on fire.. but I don't see any of that.)

So the claim is that some very hot and flaming debris hit these cars, missed the building, and only hit these cars, missed the trees and surrounding area, only hit these cars.... right?

You free not to read it!

IR from the Fire is quite enough!
Get close to a Bonfire some days!
Might teach you the physics of Infrared Radiation!

It's called thread hijacking.

All that heat and radiation didn't seem to hurt the trees.

Conrad:




How is this for a bonfire? It took up a half of a block and was across the street from my house.

A large building that was all wood, and was once a lumber company burned down right across the street from where I live and it was very hot. Much larger than any bonfire I've ever been to.

It was a two story restaurant. Three people died.

It took four area fire departments to put it out. I could feel the heat, but not a block away. You had to be in the street in front of the fire to really feel the heat.

And the wind was blowing towards my house. I had to wet down my roof and lawn to protect it from sparks.

But no cars anywhere rusted.

AND SOME TREES BURNED UP COMPLETELY.

I took loads of pictures.

NO RUSTED CARS, NO CAR FIRES. But some dead trees.





Note the car in this picture. At one point, a fireman got in it and backed it out of that spot so it would not get burned up.
In doing so, he backed into my alley and almost hit a propane tank.

If he would have hit that tank, my house would have probably blown up. Then we would have really had a mess on our hands.

Also, if the wind had been blowing the opposite direction, the entire block would have been burned down.






This is it. The entire place burnt down, both buildings..all the trees etc.

Is that bon fire big enough?

This is anyone's thread. Is this not a public forum?

He was wasting my time insisting I read his meaningless cut and paste responses insisting that they were a proper answer to my questions, ---which they were not.---which is a waste of my time.

Seriously Metal? Gee...You didn't tell me this was a private twoofer bashing party.

If those two small statements made by some fireman are what you are calling the "firefighter's testimony" all I can say is that they were very brief and incomplete. According to Insurance records, around 3000 vehicles were destroyed because of that attack.

Also that "firefighter's testimony" does not answer any questions about the strange damage to so many vehicles.

To answer your question, "What do I suggest caused this..." I don't suggest anything.

I am simply asking questions because the official report does not have the answers. Oh they have "answers" but they are answers that distract and ignore strange anomalies.

Many times I have focused in on very specific points and questions that for me have not been answered, and I get bombarded with piles of rhetoric and insults.

But rhetoric and insults is what it seems like this thread is all about.

No, I pointed out that you were thread hijacking like you are so prone to do. You tell lies, bring up endless irreverent data, ignore anything true and accept anything false no matter how crazy. The whole discussion of noiseless, lightless explosives went completely over your head as you proved with your response.

You could learn a lesson taught in acting school. "A genius actor can play a great moron, but a moron actor can never play a genius."

Seriously? This entire thread is not even about a "serious discussion" (with me or anyone here) about 9-11.

It seems to be a thread clearly meant for bashing random "twoofer theories" that Hotrodelux finds all over the Internet, then he cuts and pastes them here, so he can rant, rave and ridicule them - as if he knows the truth about what really happened on 9-11.

No one can "hijack" a thread that is a pointless bashing thread from the very beginning.

The nasty term "twoofer" says it all about his intent and attitude.

It seems from the beginning (the O.P.) to be sarcastic and very childish.

If you want evidence or proof, I can repost some of if for you all to see. ... but forget it just reread the intire ridiculous thread for yourself.

Obviously some people can't get over it that there are so many people who don't believe the official government propaganda.

So what if some of them have crazy ideas? The official conspiracy theory is about the craziest one I've ever heard and 9-11 being blamed on Al-Qaeda, a fake made up group created by the CIA, says it all.