On 6/8/26 2:22 PM, Dude wrote:
On 6/8/2026 12:51 PM, olcott wrote:
On 6/8/2026 1:08 PM, dart200 wrote:So, it looks like a consensus has been reached on these boards:
On 6/8/26 9:46 AM, olcott wrote:
On 6/8/2026 11:31 AM, dart200 wrote:
On 6/8/26 9:22 AM, olcott wrote:
On 6/8/2026 11:02 AM, dart200 wrote:
On 6/8/26 7:27 AM, olcott wrote:
On 6/8/2026 8:52 AM, Noah Sombrero wrote:
On Mon, 8 Jun 2026 08:10:53 -0500, olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> >>>>>>>>>> wrote:
On 6/8/2026 1:07 AM, dart200 wrote:Because, you see, the original plan was to hit all buildings with >>>>>>>>>> planes, but that one got missed.-a So it became necessary to >>>>>>>>>> bomb that
On 6/7/26 8:58 PM, olcott wrote:
On 6/7/2026 10:35 PM, dart200 wrote:
On 6/7/26 8:29 PM, olcott wrote:
On 6/7/2026 10:06 PM, Noah Sombrero wrote:
On Sun, 7 Jun 2026 20:19:32 -0500, olcott
<polcott333@gmail.com>
wrote:
On 6/7/2026 8:12 PM, dart200 wrote:
On 6/7/26 5:52 PM, olcott wrote:
On 6/7/2026 7:29 PM, dart200 wrote:
On 6/7/26 4:30 PM, olcott wrote:
On 6/7/2026 5:49 PM, dart200 wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 6/7/26 12:34 PM, olcott wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 6/7/2026 12:37 PM, dart200 wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 6/7/26 8:07 AM, Noah Sombrero wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sun, 7 Jun 2026 16:44:14 +0200, Moebius >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <moebius@example.invalid>
wrote:
Am 07.06.2026 um 15:23 schrieb dart200: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 6/6/26 7:04 PM, Dude wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
The 9/11 fall of WTC-7 was not an inside >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> planted
destruction
job.
fires don't cause near-simultaneous failure >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of _every_
column
in the
building
Hint: This was not just an ordinary "fire". >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> This has to be
taken in
consideration.
WTC7 involved a fairly normal office fire, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> unlike WTC1/2 it
was
not hit by a jet
Sophisticated Computer-simulations have SHOWN >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that the
course
of events
is totally "plausible" i.e. possible in this >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> case.
uhhh ... no computer simulation has shown how a >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> fairly normal
office fire can cause near-simultaneous failure >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> across *all*
structural columns
there is an incredibly weak, "official" argument >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> from NIST
that:
-a-a-a-a- (a) didn't show near-simultaneous failure >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of all
structural
columns
-a-a-a-a- (b) didn't result in a progression that >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> remotely
matches the
videos
-a-a-a-a- (c) didn't model column-girder connections >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> correctly
-a-a-a-a- (d) didn't model shear studs bolting the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> girders to
the floor
above
they left out details and didn't produce >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> anything that
looks like
the videos. it is incredible how unwilling most >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> people are in
doing just a modicum of critical thinking, and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> witnessing it
really has made me question the nature of human >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> intelligence...
it is worth noting that WTC7 is the *only* >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> example of an
type-1
fire- safe skyscraper proposed to have collapsed >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> due to
fire as
the primary and sole cause. there are in fact >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> _very_ few
examples
of skyscrapers collapsing at all, let alone >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> fully, let
alone due
to fire, across the entire history of building >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> large
buildings.
which is really quite amazing considering our >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> safety
standards in
building these things even penetrates the 3rd >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> world quite
well.
The alternative back in Sept 2011 that the US >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> government would murder thousands of US citizens >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> for political advantage is (at that time) too >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> unreasonably implausible.
it was zionists in the US govt, not the US govt >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> overall
I personally know a guy that honestly believes that >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the
airplanes that crashed into the twin towers never >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> existed
and were planted in the minds of witnesses through >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> CIA mind
control devices. What about the video tapes? What >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> about
the airplane wreckage?
It is possible that a giant purple space alien that >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> is living inside the hollow Moon did it. It is not >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> reasonable plausible.
this is called a nut-picking fallacy, in an attempt >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to form a
guilt-
by- association fallacy, which falls under the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> larger umbrella
of red
herrings,
i assure you that nothing about 9/11 truth breaks >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> known laws of
conventional physics,
and rather unexplained physics is a contention i >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> have with the
official narrative
Believing that it is an inside job ignores the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> airplanes.
Believing that the airplanes never existed resolves >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> this.
WTC1 and WTC2 were hit by airplanes, but getting hit >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> by airplanes
does
_not_ contradict the subsequent demolitions... >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
WTC7, a 47 story skyscraper, was not even hit by an >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> airplane, yet
it was
_also_ demolitioned, to collapse at free fall into >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> it's footprint
Believing that the whole thing was an inside job >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> is totally nuts, are you totally nuts?
oooh, good one.-a Now all you need to do is convince him >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that the
experts who spent three years analyzing what happened >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and concluded
the building was not destroyed by a bomb actually might >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> know something
he does not.
Not at all.
We use Socratic Questioning and ask him:
How the Hell do you explain the airplanes in any >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "inside job" narrative?
BZZZTT Bing short-circuit !!!
because airplanes hit the buildings to put all the >>>>>>>>>>>>>> attention and
blame on muzzies ...
and then zionist warhawk joos blew up the buildings to >>>>>>>>>>>>>> seal the deal
for the _wAr On TeRrOR_
neither of these fact contradict each other, u've short- >>>>>>>>>>>>>> circuited
nothing
You just showed the short-circuit.
You cannot coherently explain the airplanes
within the frame-of-reference of an "inside job".
yes you can. the cia, saudis, and mossad had already
funneled billions
of USD and weapons to mujahideen in the 80s to fight the >>>>>>>>>>>> soviets. they
already knew they way around funding afgan bushmen. which >>>>>>>>>>>> they helped
covertly train and execute for the 911 job. and i mean >>>>>>>>>>>> covertly, so they
did this using assets who didn't come off as westerners >>>>>>>>>>>> dummy, and the
muzzies were ofc happy to oblige.
the point was to enter america into the _wAr On TeRrOR_ >>>>>>>>>>>>
Some Mulsim jihadists were hired by the CIA to give
up their lives to promote a war against their own
countries? This plan was executed so poorly that
someone else had to also plant explosives in the buildings? >>>>>>>>>>
one separately immediately in concert with the other buildings >>>>>>>>>> being
hit.
Got that?-a Simple, right?
The only way the "inside job" notion works is if they knew
in advance that the planes would not work, thus plant bombs
inside the building before this.
yes, they knew the jets weren't gunna cause the buildings to
shred themselves into oblivion like what we saw. heck the
buildings were designed to withstand such impacts
furthermore: not only were the buildings leased to and run by a >>>>>>>> zionist joo with direct personal ties to bibi, the security
contract for the buildings was also to a zionist joo
Getting Muslim Jihadists to give up their lives for
the political interests of the USA is the impossible part.
like i said: they didn't waltz in and just ask if the muzzies >>>>>>>> would love to suicide for the sake of bring the weight of
america into the _wAr On TeRrOR_ ...
Yes that would be nuts.
they obviously found an extremist cell and supported it
Still nuts.
zionist warhawk joos _are_ nuts...
You can't even pay attention that Muslim Jihadists are not Zionists. >>>>>
correct. zionists are _not_ muslim jihadists, keep up the good
observations there polcott EfaiEfaiEfai
zionist warhawks worked to provide keystone support that was
necessary for an extremist muzzie cell to fly several civilian
airplanes into several buildings,
Yes and they also snuck into the buildings late at night
and planted explosives in every stairwell because they
already knew that the planes would be ineffective.
So that the bombs would not be noticed in the stairwell they
cloaked them with magic invisibility cloaks from Harry Potter.
Nick's words on a screen inside a chat room; punctilious pedestal
pedantic protestations that pale in comparison to the poetic plinth
upon which we perch in the cloud.
bro i get ur paid to cut off as much truthful discourse as possible, but
the treasonous disservice u do ur country is almost as disgusting as how many children u've buried
because they wanted the american military to help restructure the
middle east around ethno-states they thought would be more stable in
the long run (which didn't work out) ...
the zionists are the ones who actually blew up the buildings in
order to seal the deal in what looked like the largest foreign
strike on american soil ever
do u have something more to say other than either blatant fallacy,
or facts that don't actually contradict the truth i'm explaining
On 6/8/2026 5:08 PM, dart200 wrote:
On 6/8/26 2:22 PM, Dude wrote:This should be a wrap up:
On 6/8/2026 12:51 PM, olcott wrote:
On 6/8/2026 1:08 PM, dart200 wrote:So, it looks like a consensus has been reached on these boards:
On 6/8/26 9:46 AM, olcott wrote:
On 6/8/2026 11:31 AM, dart200 wrote:
On 6/8/26 9:22 AM, olcott wrote:
On 6/8/2026 11:02 AM, dart200 wrote:
On 6/8/26 7:27 AM, olcott wrote:
On 6/8/2026 8:52 AM, Noah Sombrero wrote:
On Mon, 8 Jun 2026 08:10:53 -0500, olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> >>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
On 6/8/2026 1:07 AM, dart200 wrote:Because, you see, the original plan was to hit all buildings >>>>>>>>>>> with
On 6/7/26 8:58 PM, olcott wrote:
On 6/7/2026 10:35 PM, dart200 wrote:
On 6/7/26 8:29 PM, olcott wrote:
On 6/7/2026 10:06 PM, Noah Sombrero wrote:
On Sun, 7 Jun 2026 20:19:32 -0500, olcott
<polcott333@gmail.com>
wrote:
On 6/7/2026 8:12 PM, dart200 wrote:
On 6/7/26 5:52 PM, olcott wrote:
On 6/7/2026 7:29 PM, dart200 wrote:
On 6/7/26 4:30 PM, olcott wrote:
On 6/7/2026 5:49 PM, dart200 wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 6/7/26 12:34 PM, olcott wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 6/7/2026 12:37 PM, dart200 wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 6/7/26 8:07 AM, Noah Sombrero wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sun, 7 Jun 2026 16:44:14 +0200, Moebius >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <moebius@example.invalid>
wrote:
Am 07.06.2026 um 15:23 schrieb dart200: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 6/6/26 7:04 PM, Dude wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
The 9/11 fall of WTC-7 was not an inside >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> planted
destruction
job.
fires don't cause near-simultaneous failure >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of _every_
column
in the
building
Hint: This was not just an ordinary "fire". >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> This has to be
taken in
consideration.
WTC7 involved a fairly normal office fire, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> unlike WTC1/2 it
was
not hit by a jet
Sophisticated Computer-simulations have SHOWN >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that the
course
of events
is totally "plausible" i.e. possible in this >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> case.
uhhh ... no computer simulation has shown how a >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> fairly normal
office fire can cause near-simultaneous failure >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> across *all*
structural columns
there is an incredibly weak, "official" >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> argument from NIST
that:
-a-a-a-a- (a) didn't show near-simultaneous failure >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of all
structural
columns
-a-a-a-a- (b) didn't result in a progression that >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> remotely
matches the
videos
-a-a-a-a- (c) didn't model column-girder >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> connections correctly
-a-a-a-a- (d) didn't model shear studs bolting the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> girders to
the floor
above
they left out details and didn't produce >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> anything that
looks like
the videos. it is incredible how unwilling most >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> people are in
doing just a modicum of critical thinking, and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> witnessing it
really has made me question the nature of human >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> intelligence...
it is worth noting that WTC7 is the *only* >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> example of an
type-1
fire- safe skyscraper proposed to have >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> collapsed due to
fire as
the primary and sole cause. there are in fact >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> _very_ few
examples
of skyscrapers collapsing at all, let alone >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> fully, let
alone due
to fire, across the entire history of building >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> large
buildings.
which is really quite amazing considering our >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> safety
standards in
building these things even penetrates the 3rd >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> world quite
well.
The alternative back in Sept 2011 that the US >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> government would murder thousands of US citizens >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> for political advantage is (at that time) too >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> unreasonably implausible.
it was zionists in the US govt, not the US govt >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> overall
I personally know a guy that honestly believes >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that the
airplanes that crashed into the twin towers never >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> existed
and were planted in the minds of witnesses through >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> CIA mind
control devices. What about the video tapes? What >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> about
the airplane wreckage?
It is possible that a giant purple space alien that >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> is living inside the hollow Moon did it. It is not >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> reasonable plausible.
this is called a nut-picking fallacy, in an attempt >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to form a
guilt-
by- association fallacy, which falls under the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> larger umbrella
of red
herrings,
i assure you that nothing about 9/11 truth breaks >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> known laws of
conventional physics,
and rather unexplained physics is a contention i >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> have with the
official narrative
Believing that it is an inside job ignores the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> airplanes.
Believing that the airplanes never existed resolves >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> this.
WTC1 and WTC2 were hit by airplanes, but getting hit >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> by airplanes
does
_not_ contradict the subsequent demolitions... >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
WTC7, a 47 story skyscraper, was not even hit by an >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> airplane, yet
it was
_also_ demolitioned, to collapse at free fall into >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> it's footprint
Believing that the whole thing was an inside job >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> is totally nuts, are you totally nuts?
oooh, good one.-a Now all you need to do is convince him >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that the
experts who spent three years analyzing what happened >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and concluded
the building was not destroyed by a bomb actually might >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> know something
he does not.
Not at all.
We use Socratic Questioning and ask him:
How the Hell do you explain the airplanes in any >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "inside job" narrative?
BZZZTT Bing short-circuit !!!
because airplanes hit the buildings to put all the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> attention and
blame on muzzies ...
and then zionist warhawk joos blew up the buildings to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> seal the deal
for the _wAr On TeRrOR_
neither of these fact contradict each other, u've short- >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> circuited
nothing
You just showed the short-circuit.
You cannot coherently explain the airplanes
within the frame-of-reference of an "inside job".
yes you can. the cia, saudis, and mossad had already >>>>>>>>>>>>> funneled billions
of USD and weapons to mujahideen in the 80s to fight the >>>>>>>>>>>>> soviets. they
already knew they way around funding afgan bushmen. which >>>>>>>>>>>>> they helped
covertly train and execute for the 911 job. and i mean >>>>>>>>>>>>> covertly, so they
did this using assets who didn't come off as westerners >>>>>>>>>>>>> dummy, and the
muzzies were ofc happy to oblige.
the point was to enter america into the _wAr On TeRrOR_ >>>>>>>>>>>>>
Some Mulsim jihadists were hired by the CIA to give
up their lives to promote a war against their own
countries? This plan was executed so poorly that
someone else had to also plant explosives in the buildings? >>>>>>>>>>>
planes, but that one got missed.-a So it became necessary to >>>>>>>>>>> bomb that
one separately immediately in concert with the other
buildings being
hit.
Got that?-a Simple, right?
The only way the "inside job" notion works is if they knew >>>>>>>>>> in advance that the planes would not work, thus plant bombs >>>>>>>>>> inside the building before this.
yes, they knew the jets weren't gunna cause the buildings to >>>>>>>>> shred themselves into oblivion like what we saw. heck the
buildings were designed to withstand such impacts
furthermore: not only were the buildings leased to and run by a >>>>>>>>> zionist joo with direct personal ties to bibi, the security >>>>>>>>> contract for the buildings was also to a zionist joo
Getting Muslim Jihadists to give up their lives for
the political interests of the USA is the impossible part. >>>>>>>>>>
like i said: they didn't waltz in and just ask if the muzzies >>>>>>>>> would love to suicide for the sake of bring the weight of
america into the _wAr On TeRrOR_ ...
Yes that would be nuts.
they obviously found an extremist cell and supported it
Still nuts.
zionist warhawk joos _are_ nuts...
You can't even pay attention that Muslim Jihadists are not Zionists. >>>>>>
correct. zionists are _not_ muslim jihadists, keep up the good
observations there polcott EfaiEfaiEfai
zionist warhawks worked to provide keystone support that was
necessary for an extremist muzzie cell to fly several civilian
airplanes into several buildings,
Yes and they also snuck into the buildings late at night
and planted explosives in every stairwell because they
already knew that the planes would be ineffective.
So that the bombs would not be noticed in the stairwell they
cloaked them with magic invisibility cloaks from Harry Potter.
Nick's words on a screen inside a chat room; punctilious pedestal
pedantic protestations that pale in comparison to the poetic plinth
upon which we perch in the cloud.
bro i get ur paid to cut off as much truthful discourse as possible,
but the treasonous disservice u do ur country is almost as disgusting
as how many children u've buried
So, Nick thinks the Jews hired the Saudis to use hijacked planes flying
into the WTC, as a cover for the Jews to blow up the WTC-7, from within, with hidden explosives, because the lease on the building was held by a
Jew named Silver Stein or Gold Man, thus proving that the Jews were
behind the 9/11 WTC attack, from the inside, in the deep state, which is controlled by Jews under the supervision of Jared Kushner and his
mother, Ivanka Trump.
But, Olcott is treasonous and buried all the native school children at native schools in Canada?
Alright then, that's a wrap.
because they wanted the american military to help restructure the
middle east around ethno-states they thought would be more stable
in the long run (which didn't work out) ...
the zionists are the ones who actually blew up the buildings in
order to seal the deal in what looked like the largest foreign
strike on american soil ever
do u have something more to say other than either blatant fallacy,
or facts that don't actually contradict the truth i'm explaining
On 6/8/26 6:45 PM, olcott wrote:
On 6/8/2026 6:58 PM, dart200 wrote:
On 6/8/26 12:51 PM, olcott wrote:
On 6/8/2026 1:08 PM, dart200 wrote:
On 6/8/26 9:46 AM, olcott wrote:
On 6/8/2026 11:31 AM, dart200 wrote:
On 6/8/26 9:22 AM, olcott wrote:
On 6/8/2026 11:02 AM, dart200 wrote:
On 6/8/26 7:27 AM, olcott wrote:
On 6/8/2026 8:52 AM, Noah Sombrero wrote:
On Mon, 8 Jun 2026 08:10:53 -0500, olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> >>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
On 6/8/2026 1:07 AM, dart200 wrote:Because, you see, the original plan was to hit all buildings >>>>>>>>>>> with
On 6/7/26 8:58 PM, olcott wrote:
On 6/7/2026 10:35 PM, dart200 wrote:
On 6/7/26 8:29 PM, olcott wrote:
On 6/7/2026 10:06 PM, Noah Sombrero wrote:
On Sun, 7 Jun 2026 20:19:32 -0500, olcott
<polcott333@gmail.com>
wrote:
On 6/7/2026 8:12 PM, dart200 wrote:
On 6/7/26 5:52 PM, olcott wrote:
On 6/7/2026 7:29 PM, dart200 wrote:
On 6/7/26 4:30 PM, olcott wrote:
On 6/7/2026 5:49 PM, dart200 wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 6/7/26 12:34 PM, olcott wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 6/7/2026 12:37 PM, dart200 wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 6/7/26 8:07 AM, Noah Sombrero wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sun, 7 Jun 2026 16:44:14 +0200, Moebius >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <moebius@example.invalid>
wrote:
Am 07.06.2026 um 15:23 schrieb dart200: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 6/6/26 7:04 PM, Dude wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
The 9/11 fall of WTC-7 was not an inside >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> planted
destruction
job.
fires don't cause near-simultaneous failure >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of _every_
column
in the
building
Hint: This was not just an ordinary "fire". >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> This has to be
taken in
consideration.
WTC7 involved a fairly normal office fire, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> unlike WTC1/2 it
was
not hit by a jet
Sophisticated Computer-simulations have SHOWN >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that the
course
of events
is totally "plausible" i.e. possible in this >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> case.
uhhh ... no computer simulation has shown how a >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> fairly normal
office fire can cause near-simultaneous failure >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> across *all*
structural columns
there is an incredibly weak, "official" >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> argument from NIST
that:
-a-a-a-a- (a) didn't show near-simultaneous failure >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of all
structural
columns
-a-a-a-a- (b) didn't result in a progression that >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> remotely
matches the
videos
-a-a-a-a- (c) didn't model column-girder >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> connections correctly
-a-a-a-a- (d) didn't model shear studs bolting the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> girders to
the floor
above
they left out details and didn't produce >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> anything that
looks like
the videos. it is incredible how unwilling most >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> people are in
doing just a modicum of critical thinking, and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> witnessing it
really has made me question the nature of human >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> intelligence...
it is worth noting that WTC7 is the *only* >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> example of an
type-1
fire- safe skyscraper proposed to have >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> collapsed due to
fire as
the primary and sole cause. there are in fact >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> _very_ few
examples
of skyscrapers collapsing at all, let alone >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> fully, let
alone due
to fire, across the entire history of building >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> large
buildings.
which is really quite amazing considering our >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> safety
standards in
building these things even penetrates the 3rd >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> world quite
well.
The alternative back in Sept 2011 that the US >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> government would murder thousands of US citizens >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> for political advantage is (at that time) too >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> unreasonably implausible.
it was zionists in the US govt, not the US govt >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> overall
I personally know a guy that honestly believes >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that the
airplanes that crashed into the twin towers never >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> existed
and were planted in the minds of witnesses through >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> CIA mind
control devices. What about the video tapes? What >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> about
the airplane wreckage?
It is possible that a giant purple space alien that >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> is living inside the hollow Moon did it. It is not >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> reasonable plausible.
this is called a nut-picking fallacy, in an attempt >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to form a
guilt-
by- association fallacy, which falls under the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> larger umbrella
of red
herrings,
i assure you that nothing about 9/11 truth breaks >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> known laws of
conventional physics,
and rather unexplained physics is a contention i >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> have with the
official narrative
Believing that it is an inside job ignores the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> airplanes.
Believing that the airplanes never existed resolves >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> this.
WTC1 and WTC2 were hit by airplanes, but getting hit >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> by airplanes
does
_not_ contradict the subsequent demolitions... >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
WTC7, a 47 story skyscraper, was not even hit by an >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> airplane, yet
it was
_also_ demolitioned, to collapse at free fall into >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> it's footprint
Believing that the whole thing was an inside job >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> is totally nuts, are you totally nuts?
oooh, good one.-a Now all you need to do is convince him >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that the
experts who spent three years analyzing what happened >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and concluded
the building was not destroyed by a bomb actually might >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> know something
he does not.
Not at all.
We use Socratic Questioning and ask him:
How the Hell do you explain the airplanes in any >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "inside job" narrative?
BZZZTT Bing short-circuit !!!
because airplanes hit the buildings to put all the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> attention and
blame on muzzies ...
and then zionist warhawk joos blew up the buildings to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> seal the deal
for the _wAr On TeRrOR_
neither of these fact contradict each other, u've short- >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> circuited
nothing
You just showed the short-circuit.
You cannot coherently explain the airplanes
within the frame-of-reference of an "inside job".
yes you can. the cia, saudis, and mossad had already >>>>>>>>>>>>> funneled billions
of USD and weapons to mujahideen in the 80s to fight the >>>>>>>>>>>>> soviets. they
already knew they way around funding afgan bushmen. which >>>>>>>>>>>>> they helped
covertly train and execute for the 911 job. and i mean >>>>>>>>>>>>> covertly, so they
did this using assets who didn't come off as westerners >>>>>>>>>>>>> dummy, and the
muzzies were ofc happy to oblige.
the point was to enter america into the _wAr On TeRrOR_ >>>>>>>>>>>>>
Some Mulsim jihadists were hired by the CIA to give
up their lives to promote a war against their own
countries? This plan was executed so poorly that
someone else had to also plant explosives in the buildings? >>>>>>>>>>>
planes, but that one got missed.-a So it became necessary to >>>>>>>>>>> bomb that
one separately immediately in concert with the other
buildings being
hit.
Got that?-a Simple, right?
The only way the "inside job" notion works is if they knew >>>>>>>>>> in advance that the planes would not work, thus plant bombs >>>>>>>>>> inside the building before this.
yes, they knew the jets weren't gunna cause the buildings to >>>>>>>>> shred themselves into oblivion like what we saw. heck the
buildings were designed to withstand such impacts
furthermore: not only were the buildings leased to and run by a >>>>>>>>> zionist joo with direct personal ties to bibi, the security >>>>>>>>> contract for the buildings was also to a zionist joo
Getting Muslim Jihadists to give up their lives for
the political interests of the USA is the impossible part. >>>>>>>>>>
like i said: they didn't waltz in and just ask if the muzzies >>>>>>>>> would love to suicide for the sake of bring the weight of
america into the _wAr On TeRrOR_ ...
Yes that would be nuts.
they obviously found an extremist cell and supported it
Still nuts.
zionist warhawk joos _are_ nuts...
You can't even pay attention that Muslim Jihadists are not Zionists. >>>>>>
correct. zionists are _not_ muslim jihadists, keep up the good
observations there polcott EfaiEfaiEfai
zionist warhawks worked to provide keystone support that was
necessary for an extremist muzzie cell to fly several civilian
airplanes into several buildings,
Yes and they also snuck into the buildings late at night
and planted explosives in every stairwell because they
already knew that the planes would be ineffective.
stairwells??? nah, the elevator shafts bro. the 1999 they started a
several year long elevator overhaul for the twin towers, and by the
time of 9/11 several had been out of commission for months. u have to
understand that the towers had a framed tube design. the outer facade
was a major structural system that supported at least 40% of the
vertical load plus resisted the variable lateral wind loads, while
the inner tube concentrated /around the elevator shafts/ carried 60%
of the vertical building load.
as for WTC7 - floor 14 was confirmed entirely vacant, while floors
5-7 featured only electrical equipment for the electrical substation
built beneath the building.
bruh they spend years planning this, including the R&D for the kinds
of novel thermitic explosives they'd need to reduce the sound/
pressure signatures enough for plausible deniability
So that the bombs would not be noticed in the stairwell they
cloaked them with magic invisibility cloaks from Harry Potter.
honestly the way this was treated after is such a goddamn giant
glaring neon sign for conspiracy. in a normal building investigation,
you know where the govt wasn't trying to force a premeditated
conclusion... investigators would be given unrestricted access to the
debris field.
in 911 the steel was almost entirely shipped off for scrap as soon as
possible. by the time NIST was formally commissions to lead the full-
scale investigation in August of 2002 (a year late), they ended up
only 236 specific structural artifacts to do testing with from WTC1/
WTC2 ... and exactly 0 for WTC7
nvm the fact they never released the collapse simulations for any of
them. the WTC7 excuse is especially egregious as they claim it was
caused by a fire. instead of releasing it so engineers can learn how
to engineer around the problem of a single column failed caused
progressive and catastrophic collapse of the building, and like
ensuring current designs aren't susceptible for it ... they withheld
the simulation on grounds they wouldn't want it to become a blueprint
for further terrorist fire-induced collapse incidents.
It makes sense that they would not seriously consider planes not
flying into buildings as an alternative.
actually giving that this killed 3000 people, ensuring we consider and
rule out all possible alternatives such that we're _absolutely_ sure why everything happened before smelting _almost all_ the evidence /and then spending trillions on decades of war/
...would make the _most_ sense, no?
If you see and feel a fist punch you in the face it seems to
make no sense to retroactively consider maybe it was not a fist
at all.
Your idea flunks https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Occam%27s_razor
by too much. It is just too convoluted.
i'm always cautious with occam's razor because applying it wantonly can
lead to fallacy of simplicity, but actually the choice for causes of collapse are:
a) explosives (plane crashes were misdirection)
b) plane crashes that the building was engineered to handle + novel unintentional fire induced progressive collapse that no one is actually treating as a meaningful threat even 25 years later...
strictly from a physical simplicity point of view i'm pretty sure
explosives wins out
Bottom line is that It seems too implausible to me that even
the most evil US-a operatives would be evil enough to knowingly
murder thousands of US citizen civilians for political and/or
financial gain.
i'm pretty sure it would be mossad operatives planting and pushing the buttons, not americans. the zionists are currently busy committing a genocide in their end of the world, so i wouldn't put it past them to
commit such an act, tbh
and yes i could see religious zealotry committing such an act: sincethat is what zionism is. the joos try sanity-wash that story as much as possible, and they're quite good at it, the _best_ even...
but lies won't stand the test of time
#god
tbh in my view, given the geopolitical consideration, we either take
this one apart, or it may just take us apart to be frank. we really need
to drain the epstein class swamp before it starts a ai-psychosis induced nuclear war
Conspiracy theory minded people never seem to be able to accurately
assess the distinction between reasonably plausible and unreasonably
implausible. They generally use their "in group" as a poor proxy
for this.
i don't have much an "in group" dud. u've seen me push back against the halting problem here in comp.theory for almost a year now mostly on my
own for the most part. i push for 9/11 mostly on my own as well. heck i landed here on usenet cause i just end up getting banned elsewhere for whatever the fuck reasons...
censorship based moderation was such goddamn a mistake
#god
if there's one thing i could use on this planet: it's some kind of in- group.
i feel so alone most of the time--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
So, you came here for enlightenment.
On 6/7/26 11:07 PM, dart200 wrote:
On 6/7/26 8:58 PM, olcott wrote:
On 6/7/2026 10:35 PM, dart200 wrote:
On 6/7/26 8:29 PM, olcott wrote:
On 6/7/2026 10:06 PM, Noah Sombrero wrote:
On Sun, 7 Jun 2026 20:19:32 -0500, olcott <polcott333@gmail.com>
wrote:
On 6/7/2026 8:12 PM, dart200 wrote:
On 6/7/26 5:52 PM, olcott wrote:Believing that the whole thing was an inside job
On 6/7/2026 7:29 PM, dart200 wrote:
On 6/7/26 4:30 PM, olcott wrote:
On 6/7/2026 5:49 PM, dart200 wrote:
On 6/7/26 12:34 PM, olcott wrote:
On 6/7/2026 12:37 PM, dart200 wrote:
On 6/7/26 8:07 AM, Noah Sombrero wrote:
On Sun, 7 Jun 2026 16:44:14 +0200, Moebius
<moebius@example.invalid>
wrote:
Am 07.06.2026 um 15:23 schrieb dart200:
On 6/6/26 7:04 PM, Dude wrote:
The 9/11 fall of WTC-7 was not an inside planted >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> destruction
job.
fires don't cause near-simultaneous failure of _every_ >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> column
in the
building
Hint: This was not just an ordinary "fire". This has to be >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> taken in
consideration.
WTC7 involved a fairly normal office fire, unlike WTC1/2 >>>>>>>>>>>>>> it was
not hit by a jet
uhhh ... no computer simulation has shown how a fairly normal >>>>>>>>>>>>>> office fire can cause near-simultaneous failure across *all* >>>>>>>>>>>>>> structural columns
Sophisticated Computer-simulations have SHOWN that the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> course
of events
is totally "plausible" i.e. possible in this case. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
there is an incredibly weak, "official" argument from NIST >>>>>>>>>>>>>> that:
-a-a-a- (a) didn't show near-simultaneous failure of all >>>>>>>>>>>>>> structural
columns
-a-a-a- (b) didn't result in a progression that remotely >>>>>>>>>>>>>> matches the
videos
-a-a-a- (c) didn't model column-girder connections correctly >>>>>>>>>>>>>> -a-a-a- (d) didn't model shear studs bolting the girders to >>>>>>>>>>>>>> the floor
above
they left out details and didn't produce anything that >>>>>>>>>>>>>> looks like
the videos. it is incredible how unwilling most people are in >>>>>>>>>>>>>> doing just a modicum of critical thinking, and witnessing it >>>>>>>>>>>>>> really has made me question the nature of human
intelligence...
it is worth noting that WTC7 is the *only* example of an >>>>>>>>>>>>>> type-1
fire- safe skyscraper proposed to have collapsed due to >>>>>>>>>>>>>> fire as
the primary and sole cause. there are in fact _very_ few >>>>>>>>>>>>>> examples
of skyscrapers collapsing at all, let alone fully, let >>>>>>>>>>>>>> alone due
to fire, across the entire history of building large >>>>>>>>>>>>>> buildings.
which is really quite amazing considering our safety >>>>>>>>>>>>>> standards in
building these things even penetrates the 3rd world quite >>>>>>>>>>>>>> well.
The alternative back in Sept 2011 that the US
government would murder thousands of US citizens
for political advantage is (at that time) too
unreasonably implausible.
it was zionists in the US govt, not the US govt overall >>>>>>>>>>>>
I personally know a guy that honestly believes that the
airplanes that crashed into the twin towers never existed >>>>>>>>>>> and were planted in the minds of witnesses through CIA mind >>>>>>>>>>> control devices. What about the video tapes? What about
the airplane wreckage?
It is possible that a giant purple space alien that
is living inside the hollow Moon did it. It is not
reasonable plausible.
this is called a nut-picking fallacy, in an attempt to form a >>>>>>>>>> guilt-
by- association fallacy, which falls under the larger umbrella >>>>>>>>>> of red
herrings,
i assure you that nothing about 9/11 truth breaks known laws of >>>>>>>>>> conventional physics,
and rather unexplained physics is a contention i have with the >>>>>>>>>> official narrative
Believing that it is an inside job ignores the airplanes.
Believing that the airplanes never existed resolves this.
WTC1 and WTC2 were hit by airplanes, but getting hit by
airplanes does
_not_ contradict the subsequent demolitions...
WTC7, a 47 story skyscraper, was not even hit by an airplane, >>>>>>>> yet it was
_also_ demolitioned, to collapse at free fall into it's footprint >>>>>>>
is totally nuts, are you totally nuts?
oooh, good one.-a Now all you need to do is convince him that the
experts who spent three years analyzing what happened and concluded >>>>>> the building was not destroyed by a bomb actually might know
something
he does not.
Not at all.
We use Socratic Questioning and ask him:
How the Hell do you explain the airplanes in any
"inside job" narrative?
BZZZTT Bing short-circuit !!!
because airplanes hit the buildings to put all the attention and
blame on muzzies ...
and then zionist warhawk joos blew up the buildings to seal the deal
for the _wAr On TeRrOR_
neither of these fact contradict each other, u've short-circuited
nothing
You just showed the short-circuit.
You cannot coherently explain the airplanes
within the frame-of-reference of an "inside job".
yes you can. the cia, saudis, and mossad had already funneled billions
of USD and weapons to mujahideen in the 80s to fight the soviets. they
already knew they way around funding afgan bushmen. which they helped
covertly train and execute for the 911 job. and i mean covertly, so
they did this using assets who didn't come off as westerners dummy,
and the muzzies were ofc happy to oblige.
i'm not denying that the muzzies didn't play their part. not every
religion is it so easy to put together a plane full of fucking suicide terrorists...
my prescription there is the same prescription everyone:
-a > free speech or get glassed
-a >
-a > #god
the point was to enter america into the _wAr On TeRrOR_
| Sysop: | Amessyroom |
|---|---|
| Location: | Fayetteville, NC |
| Users: | 70 |
| Nodes: | 6 (0 / 6) |
| Uptime: | 01:21:18 |
| Calls: | 949 |
| Calls today: | 1 |
| Files: | 1,325 |
| Messages: | 280,983 |