Releaselog | RLSLOG.net » Zero An Investigation Into 9 11 2008 DVDRiP XviD Repack-SoSISO

Zero An Investigation Into 9 11 2008 DVDRiP XviD Repack-SoSISO

Posted on 26.11.2008 at 21:09 in DVDRiP, Movies by Martin

It’s slightly unusual to see an ISO group to release dvdrips, but why not if the quality is okey. SoSISO pred a repack of documentary Zero: An Investigation Into 9/11. There’s no reason mentioned in the NFO. It’s also interesting to see that even years after the actual event, there are still new movies being filmed about the topic. I am sure this one will spur a bit of controversy as most of the others did.

ZERO: An Investigation into 9/11, has one central thesis – that the official version of the events surrounding the attacks on 9/11 can not be true. This brand new feature documentary explores the latest scientific evidence and reveals dramatic new witness testimony, which directly conflicts with the US Government’s account. Featuring presentations from intellectual heavy weights; Gore Vidal, and Noble Prize winner Dario Fo, the film challenges assumptions surrounding the attacks. In the words of the Italian daily newspaper, Il Corriere de da Sera, “What results is a sequence of contradictions, gaps, and omissions of stunning gravity.” The importance of this film can not be overstated, if its thesis is correct, the justification for declaring the war on terror is built on a series of outrageous lies.

Zero_An.Investigation.Into.9.11.2008.DVDRiP.XviD.Repack-SoSISO

1 CD, 700 MB, sos0911a
104 min, 640×352, 192 AC3
IMDB (5.8), Trailer, NFO, Torrent search

Comments(220)

Previous post: Take That – The Circus (2008)
Next post: Microsoft Flight Simulator FSX 737 Pilot In Command-EPH

Comments (220)

Feel free to post your Zero An Investigation Into 9 11 2008 DVDRiP XviD Repack-SoSISO torrent, subtitles, samples, free download, quality, NFO, rapidshare, megashares, sendspace, megaupload, filefactory, netload, crack, serial, keygen, requirements or whatever-related comments here. Don't be rude (permban), use only English, don't go offtopic and read FAQ before asking a question. Owners of this website aren't responsible for content of comments.

Pages: « 1 [2] 3 » Show All

I believe

November 27th, 2008 | 10:14

“in no where in that article does it explain the presence of molten steel found in the lower levels of the towers.”

Nor does it explain the way beams were sheared off, just like those in a controlled demolition. Or how a passport managed to survive a fire hot enough to weaken a steel building. Or why WTC7 came down. Or why Bush was able to see live footage of the first plane hitting the Nth tower.

All it does is support the possibility that fire caused the buildings to collapse, but that’s meaningless in light of the overwhelming evidence that suggests this was not the cause and that there’s far more to the story.
shingon

November 27th, 2008 | 10:22

Plane collision tests on buildings have never used fully fuel laden aircraft, a KNOWN weakness in the testing procedure.

As for the engineer above, he should relise every building design is different, but mainly should look at the structual analsys of WTC. If the intial impacts had not smashed of a lot of the protective foam, if the fires had not been so hot accross multiple floors and possibly if the design of the building (unlike MOST skyscrapers where the strength is in the corners) whose support was around the center, the story may of been different.

The combined pressue of multiple floors, extreme heat on multiple floors and damage to fire protection caused fatal falures.

Lastly has anyone seen a building before controlled demolition, it would of been blindling obvious to all concerned who entered the building that it was rigged up, think some people have seen too much hollywood films when a claymore takes out an area the size of a city block or 2.
george

November 27th, 2008 | 10:22

molten steel photo
http://www.arsenalofhypocrisy.com/…/image034.jpg
molten steel
http://tropicaldreamscapes.com/WTC-7-Steel-from-the-911-Memorial-International-Peace-Garden-ND-Manitoba-office-fires-do-not-do-this-to-steel-but-Thermate-and-Thermite-do-produce-molten-steel.jpg
More molten steel, all from 9/11
http://i204.photobucket.com/albums/bb181/slimpimpinstb/WTC20Molten20Steel20Photos20Fact-1.jpg
zysterx

November 27th, 2008 | 10:23

well…..it’s been interesting. i have to bow out myself, but do appreciate the lively discussion.

all the causes and explainations on the pentagon have only shown again that people are pretty ignorant (not saying stupid but un-informed and that’s no insult either) of the data behind the questions that we should be asking those in government to explain.

i too was not informed on the pentagon angle and have great gaps in the towers. so i looked for my own self at what the data showed and there are many conflicts (some glaring) with what the official position is.

i hope at least some of you will check the pilots forum. those are credible professional informed on aviation people who know how to interpret flight data and they say what our government is putting out as an explaination conflicts with the data they themselves have offered and true.

i’m not a true believer (christianity) but find truths in the bible and there is one passage that i recall that fits nder these circumstances.

“I will see Him for myself…and not for another.”

see it for yourselves and don’t just mouth the official line.

i went looking into the pentagon facts as someone who knew little of the details and what i’ve found is that our government has given us facts which are in conflict with their own released data.

look with an open mind and no preconceived verdicts and see what is there.

those pilots are credible people. if they make claims not supported by the facts it soon becomes apparent and shown to be so. what more can a person ask that to have that from those who look into such complicated—special trained analysis?

wish you all well.

no insults intended on my part towards anyone. i only attack ideas and not people.

peace@
george

November 27th, 2008 | 10:31

well said mate…
jimbo

November 27th, 2008 | 10:40

s3n loves jerking off
mandias

November 27th, 2008 | 11:22

both towers fell over like a controlled explosion we all see in old buildings,

there was no physic resistance from concrete -as it should- from lower levels,

towers collapsed at aproximately 10 secs with the same velocity that a stone was thrown out of the window, thats insane!
Sam

November 27th, 2008 | 12:37

Oh boy ! “if its thesis is correct, the justification for declaring the war on terror is built on a series of outrageous lies” . . . even if this thesis is incorrect, this “war on terror” that started on a big lie on Irak is wrong ! You want the truth about the 9/11 but you accepted all the lies of this stupid government just because you wanted to hear YOUR truth, not THE truth, and that’s the point of this documentary. If you want to see a good documentaru, try “911 the towers and the pentagone”. The point about thinking that it was an “inside job” is to think that people were manipulated, so they haven(t accepted to go to war in purpose. But it was the point. They did. They wwere happy to go to war and kick these terrorists asses. This is what we call responsability. You’ve got to live with that.
hahcling

November 27th, 2008 | 13:33

It never ceases to amaze me what kind of people you can find over the net.
People who are more willing to believe the propaganda of extremist organizations who oppose freedom, are backed by countries who censor and kill their own citizens, than believe the government of the united states.
A democratic country with a government organization composed of thousands of people, normal people like you and me. Considering an event that killed over 3000 people, when the second plane hitting the second tower was broadcasted live in CNN, FOX and more.
you are more willing to believe that CNN, FOX, the US government (literally thousands of people) banded together to perform a hoax, kill their own brothers and sisters in order to go to war?
unbelievable!!
RU

November 27th, 2008 | 13:34

If this was all BS then why did Norman Metena, the transportation secretary, reported under oath that Cheney was already in the Presidential Emergency Operations Center 9:25 AM on 9\11 and he ordered that interceptor jets be called-off. If he’s a person who has worked so many years in a career establishing a reputation that he has this kind of government clearance, why would he lie? Look it up yourself if you don’t believe me.
When you put all that accounts together it doesn’t make sense. This is as lame as the lone gunman theory for JFK. Only a moron would believe there was one bullet, and on 911 only a moron would accept the evidence as is.
Joe

November 27th, 2008 | 13:43

hi i’m joe.
the official version is false because some guys said contradicting things on the news immediately after the attack.
buy my dvd (spooky background music included)!
Jeff

November 27th, 2008 | 13:47

hi i’m jeff.
i’m no physicist or structural engineer but from the tv footage it clearly looks like a planned demolition (not that i have seen one before).
buy my dvd (angry teenager voiceover included)!
setan

November 27th, 2008 | 14:05

jews did 9/11
hachling

November 27th, 2008 | 14:18

@114
i thought that jews were responsible for global warming.
Oh, and putting the fat in the Mcdonalds burger.
Oh, and the sky being blue.
Oh, and they are in charge of all the media and banking.
Oh, don’t forget WW2. (maybe even WW3)
gwaggwa

November 27th, 2008 | 14:31

@zysterx 105

you sir are very polite.

I’d just call them stupid and idiots.

In the beginning I wouldn’t, but now I do.

Because at some point I realized one thing. When it takes that much effort to even convince people that there are very reasonable doubts to the official story. Then that person is an idiot.

If that person isn’t stupid, then it wouldn’t take that much effort.

The best part is always watching how these idiots mind freeze when they’re faced with the build 7 collaspe.

it goes like this:

stupid people: “OH YOU TIN FOIL HAT CONSPIRACY NUTS, THE PLANE WEAKEN THE STEEL THAT’S WHY 1&2 COLLASPED!’

smart people: “ok… now why WTC7 fell the same way? no plane hit it”

stupid people: “……..(mind freeze)…….it was eer.. oh yes, SHOCK WAVE or HEAT from the WTC1/2 that caused WTC7 to fall!”

smart people: “ok then why everything around WTC7 wasn’t affected? if the shock wave was so strong and heat was so strong then all the traffic lights/trees/small objects would be affected first, the windows on the WTC7 didn’t even break until the whole thing went down”

stupid people: “…….(mind freeze)… just shut up you nut”

LOL
I believe

November 27th, 2008 | 14:45

#110 / hahcling
“People who are more willing to believe the propaganda of extremist organizations who oppose freedom, are backed by countries who censor and kill their own citizens, than believe the government of the united states.”

Are you suggesting that pilots and engineers are terrorists, and that the US does not have the death penalty? I’m pretty sure the first one is just trolling, and the second one is ridiculous.
hachling

November 27th, 2008 | 15:12

#117 I believe
I believe you believe – everything.
You are the worst kind – a spreader.
A guy who stays at home, feeds off the net in regards to data on how the world moves and how things happen. you allow yourself to be fed “facts” from web sites where you have no idea who is writing the data, where is it taken from.
you see propaganda media and take it as fact. you would rather believe sexy mysterious conspiracies instead of the simple plain truth.
In addition, you didn’t respond to anything I said, you just said – look what these other people are saying.
How come there was live showing of the second plane?
Why would so many people band together to make this conspiracy happen?
Be real and stop copying “facts” from the web. the web is anything other then a reliable source of facts.
BTW, as far as i know, the death penalty in the US is for criminals. not for your simple civilians.
ha

November 27th, 2008 | 15:25

and now we add hachling @188 to the list of stupid people.

all hachling offered are pathetic arguments made by those who lack logic

why? money and power that’s why.

moron
gwkjg

November 27th, 2008 | 15:26

and now we add hachling @188 to the list of stupid people.

all hachling offered are pathetic arguments made by those who lack logic

why? money and power that’s why.

lol morons
hachling

November 27th, 2008 | 15:33

@119 and 120
I seem to be missing the content of you response. again i can ask you a simple question which you can’t seem to answer.(”money and power” ? – what are you? 3 years old)
how and why can so many people come together and plan to kill so many of their fellow countrymen? how is it that the second plane was shone live on several stations.
“money and power” – that’s your answer?
I bet you are probably some bored 15 year old staying at home.
you should get out more.
setan

November 27th, 2008 | 16:14

@115 is a jews!
hachling

November 27th, 2008 | 16:18

@122 setan – it was my nose that gave me in, wasn’t it?
Kamona

November 27th, 2008 | 16:23

You can see this one streaming here: http://www.esoterictube.com/zero-an-investigation-into-911.html

It’s pretty good.
blah

November 27th, 2008 | 16:52

blah blah, i bet you’re a 3 yr old slamming keys randomly while your mum changes your diaper, blah blah

yawn, cut the lame act and bring some proper arguments to the table, not 3yrs old questions like “why is people bad? why people do bad things?”

if you want to act like a know-it-all, explain why WTC7 went down.

oh wait, you can’t? then S-T-F-U and stop pretending you already have an answer.
Hmmmm

November 27th, 2008 | 17:10

Government was in on it….

less talky more linky.
jharek

November 27th, 2008 | 17:14

more shameless profiteering from leftist ‘truther’ charlatans, & frankly disengenious to the people that died on that horrible day
amb

November 27th, 2008 | 17:19

@@hachling

fked if i know, I am not the guy who started this mess.
you asked the wrong question to the wrong person, and you’re proud?

why do people have wars? why do we have criminals? why do we have prisons?

pfft, wake up and face reality.

your question:”how is it that the second plane was shone live on several stations.”
what? what are you on about? if someone filmed it then it’d be shown live
it’s shown live, so? and? your point?

if you want to massage your own ego by acting like a smartarse online, atleast construct an argument that has a logical ground.
throwing random lame questions mix with kintergarden insults doesn’t cut it, not here on rlslog.

this is sad, so many flaws in the offical story and all hachling can come up with is “why would small group of people kill many people”
here is a flash, it has always been like this in human history

hachling, wake up and face reality
kkk

November 27th, 2008 | 17:23

here is hachling’s logic:

a plane was shown live on tv, therefor the government had nothing to do with 911.

brilliant!
bush

November 27th, 2008 | 17:26

for those who’ve been wondering who is stupid enough to vote for bush twice and still thinks he’s right.

hachling is your answer.
common sense

November 27th, 2008 | 17:32

Hey abc the NUMBNUTS, I would say that people who work with these items on a DAILY FREAKIN BASIS are experts, not some dope smoking jackarse who sits behind a keyboard and believes that there are some big mysterious cabals that are out to get them.
——————————–
zysterx the ONLY thing that is absurd is some know nothing like you trying to imply that you know more then the film experts at Kodak, a company that has been dealing with film since before you were a thought in your daddy’s fantasy about your momma.
———
Then Kreotropic, you are a liar. Any Iron worker will tell you flat out that adding heat to any steel or Iron WILL cause it to soften and lose strength. How the F#$K do you think they bend these for cripes sake? They ADD HEAT you mental moron.
————-
And your caretaker, Don’t ignore the truth; should be slapped stupid for allowing you to neglect your education. Check with your local fire department you dumbarse…and they will tell you about large house and factory fires that blazed out of control and yet they found papers and books and so on inside the area that were not even touched. Or how about the fire from the train wreck in NY where bodies were burned so badly that they could not tell one from another, yet could identify them by dental records? ANY fire hot enough to do this kind of damage would also burn bone…ever hear of cremation? So explain how the fire could be so hot that it burned everything around it to ashes, yet left teeth for dental ID?

All of you conspiracy fruitcakes need to get a life. Experts in film-metalurgy=construction-and even the pilots of the freaking planes you have included in your f$#ked-up fantasy have all come forword and explained what happened and how it happened and in the pilots case they even explained how they came to be there…and yet you numbnuts dismiss ALL these confirmed statements and PROVEN actions (like adding heat weakens steel..and it makes no damn difference if it weakened it a little or a lot, when you have over 600 tons riding on the fact that your steel needs to be 100% strength and it is weakened to 80% or less, then it is NOT GOING TO BE STRONG ENOUGH TO HOLD THE WEIGHT IT WAS DESIGNED TO HOLD and will collapse! ANY Physics instructor will document that. So educate yourselves you ignorant conspiracy morons, and then JUST MAYBE someone might take you seriously. And if you are what the Schools and Universities and Colleges are turning out these days, I fear for the future of mankind with simpletons like you in charge.
orly?

November 27th, 2008 | 17:42

@common sense 131

everything has been explained by experts? oh really?
what was the “experts” explaination of the collaspe of WTC7?

i suppose those firefighters were all lying too then.

as someone said earlier, there are 2 different groups of “experts” calling each other liars.

NEXT!
NATEDOGG

November 27th, 2008 | 17:46

Check out http://www.algoxy.com for info as to how the towers were taken down.
MrAngry

November 27th, 2008 | 17:54

ATTENTION do not download from the links provided by user Lieu7enant (post 2) as I believe he is trying to steal your rapidshare password. Ther links go to an address other than rapidshare and even though I am already a premium member it still asks for my password etc and looks very suspicious.
george

November 27th, 2008 | 18:20

The “believers” are a nasty bunch eh!!

Reading thru these socalled comments its amazing how many people argue(troll??) when clearly they havent got a f!@#ing clue about the subject matter…
…the truth seems to hurt them or their egos..then they resort to namecalling…pathetic….
zysterx

November 27th, 2008 | 19:21

common sense

——————————–
zysterx the ONLY thing that is absurd is some know nothing like you trying to imply that you know more then the film experts at Kodak, a company that has been dealing with film since before you were a thought in your daddy’s fantasy about your momma.
———

well apparently all you know how to do is hurl insults. deride others when they post credible information from informed professionals. people who’s very sources were the NTSB.

you call me a know nothing. what do you know sir. come-on dazzle us with your knowledge?

you say the experts at Kodak?

what do the experts at kodak say?

do they go step by step in the flight 77 path and reconstruct it according to what the NTSB itself has released?

what knowledge do they have or what evidence did they have other than that 5 frames from a gas station across the street?

please answer that if you’re so well informed?

why hasn’t the pentagone released even one excerpt from all those security cameras at the pentagon showing flight 77 slamming into their building?

and don’t say there were none…..that is just plain stupid.

you sir know how to hurl insults but that’s about all i see. someone gave the excuse it’s an on-going investigation and therefore is secret?

they found a way around that secrecy to release that absurd video from a gas station that proves nothing.

did they give Kodak the footage from their video cameras?

of course not! and you haven’t seen any either and as a matter of fact none in the public sector have.

they used the excuse of the terrorist going on trial as a reason to not release it. and that they didn’t want to hurt the families of the victims. but they released the gas station footage.

and when the trial was over—-did anyone see any footage? of course not and why? it’s been 7 years and where is the investigation? in non-existence land—that’s where.

you need to change your nic common sense cause obviously you have none.

that pilots site has the data to back up what they question. what is your source that you feel so confidant to insult those who post something other than what you say is truth?

explain how the data from the black box released by the NTSB isn’t in conflict with what the official version of what happened?

i don’t think you can. but you certainly can insult others.

which is one of the tactics already posted by someone else here that’s used against those who actually question their government’s veracity.

explain how molten steel was found in the lower levels of the towers?

when nothing in the plane or in the building or any combination of them was capable of producing it?

tell us what amazing data Kodak had access to that they said it was flight 77 that hit the pentagon.

i’d like to see the enhanced photo capabiltity they have and what the results were. i do recall seeing what they put out and brother it aint much.

now put that in comparisions of what the pilots put out from the flight recorders.

who’s more credible?

a few (oh so very few) frames of grainy video ahowing an object that appears to be a plane (and probably was) hitting the pentagon and that’s
proof it was a 757?

that is absurd!

insult us some more with your oh-so erudite knowledge
Kreotropic

November 27th, 2008 | 20:37

@131 common sense

Hey i didn’t call any name to anyone!!!
I can tell you’re an american just by reading your comment!!!( not to all of you i know there’s good people there )

Do you want to teach me my work??? I’ve been studying this shi*** for some years…but you’re the expert ok?? and the mental moron too…

This is how we evolve asking questions, not beliving in all that is said, critical thinking!!!

Some of us just don’t want to think…its too hard…

Another thing we have all to agree is that if it wasn’t a inside job then american security is by far not what they make us think it is!!! was NORAD sleeping that day???mmmmmmmmmm funny lol

I love to exchange ideas!!! Its a petty that some think they are masters of the truth and just want to call names to everyone and be STUPID!!

Keep the comments coming but please respect everyone that thinks diferently from you!! BE HUMBLE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
zysterx

November 27th, 2008 | 22:35

common sense:

“and yet you numbnuts dismiss ALL these confirmed statements and PROVEN actions (like adding heat weakens steel..and it makes no damn difference if it weakened it a little or a lot, when you have over 600 tons riding on the fact that your steel needs to be 100% strength and it is weakened to 80% or less, then it is NOT GOING TO BE STRONG ENOUGH TO HOLD THE WEIGHT IT WAS DESIGNED TO HOLD and will collapse! ANY Physics instructor will document that. So educate yourselves you ignorant conspiracy morons, and then JUST MAYBE someone might take you seriously. And if you are what the Schools and Universities and Colleges are turning out these days, I fear for the future of mankind with simpletons like you in charge.”

=====

thank you for the physics lesson.

i personally have not formulated an opinion on the towers collapse. what you say about the heat causing the steel to weaken sufficiently that it’s load bearing capabilites being weakened and then to fail and drop pancaking all the floors below it from the weight is perfectly logical and i don’t dispute it in the least.

the puffs coming from the floors is consistent with the air and weight pressures. cannot dispute that either. i don’t know if there were demolitions involved that dropped the towers.

but this i do know….

what does physics say about creating molten steel with temperatures less than it takes to cause it?

is that possible?

i’ve yet to hear any of the experts address how the molten steel could have been present without some outside force.

the plane and the fuel could not cause it. nothing in the building could have generated the heat required. so how did the molten steel get there?

if you can explain that i will call you a physics god.

until then your post remind me of something from MacBeth

“a poor player That struts and frets his hour upon the stage And then is heard no more: it is a tale
Told by an idiot, full of sound and fury,
Signifying nothing.”
fwa

November 27th, 2008 | 22:40

@131 common sense:

hey idiot, we can tell just from your text you are the typical american that has less IQ than an ape.

i know about idiots, i can look at a bunch of people and immediatly I can spot the idiots from the rest. yes that’s right, i am the FRIGGIN EXPERT on idiots.

and let me tell you, YOU ARE AN IDIOT.

what that means is you have no ability to think, you will buy, believe, defend and REPEAT any sort of bullshiit, as long as it’s on main stream tv you’ll be tame and greatful while the rest of us shove bull shiit down your gasping maw.

yes that’s right, you’ll be fooled and you will be proud
I believe

November 27th, 2008 | 22:47

#118 / hachling
“In addition, you didn’t respond to anything I said, you just said – look what these other people are saying.
How come there was live showing of the second plane?”

Well that’s ironic, because you didn’t respond to anything I said either. I asked how Bush could have seen the first plane hit the tower, if there was no live footage of it happening, and the only footage of it at all didn’t appear to the following day. Are you disputing that he made that claim? Youtube would disagree with you.
I believe

November 27th, 2008 | 22:57

#120 / hachling
“how and why can so many people come together and plan to kill so many of their fellow countrymen? how is it that the second plane was shone live on several stations.”

What? Bush and his admin wouldn’t kill US citizens just for money and power? What do you call the war in Iraq moron? Or are you one of those 2 braincelled Neanderthals that actually believes that Saddam had WMDs? It wouldn’t surprise me. After all, you believe what your government tells you, don’t you.

And what does the second plane being shown live prove? Nobody is disputing whether their was a second plane. The dispute is whether a plane could bring down a tower that’s designed to withstand such an impact; not once, but twice.

hachling, what is that anyway? Is that like hatchling? As in “born yesterday”?
european

November 27th, 2008 | 23:00

lol these american are so brainwashed they’ll react to the slightest hint of truth going their way

appareantly americans are allergic to logic

not that i am complaining, i’d love to watch americans burn and die and we need professional morons to make that happen
euro

November 27th, 2008 | 23:03

lol these americans are so brainwashed they’ll react to the slightest hint of truth going their way

appareantly americans are allergic to logic

not that i am complaining, i’d love to watch americans burn and die and we need professional morons to make that happen
ryey

November 27th, 2008 | 23:10

lol these brain dead americans suffer from a rare type of genetic defects

like some color blind person they’ll swear grass has the same color as the sky when it’s obvious to the rest of us.

don’t get too worked up over it, it’s not that they’re lying on purpose, they’re just genetically not capable of processing a certain set of information.
I believe

November 27th, 2008 | 23:22

#135 / george
“The “believers” are a nasty bunch eh!!

Reading thru these socalled comments its amazing how many people argue(troll??) when clearly they havent got a f!@#ing clue about the subject matter…
…the truth seems to hurt them or their egos..then they resort to namecalling…pathetic….”

Well if that’s not the pot calling the kettle black… Try posting an argument rather than insults. Try explaining how bush was able to see the first plane hit the Nth tower live, as he claimed to, when there was no live footage of that. He obviously knew it was going to happen. Why else would he have been looking at a TV monitor of the WTC prior to the first plane hitting if he wasn’t expecting it?
FtonDavid

November 28th, 2008 | 02:23

I only got through about 38 comments before giving up, thanks for the file, and thanks for continued Rapidshare support (maybe next year when my account is up I’ll look to another provider, but RS is good for now).

w/re to ‘The Two Towers’, we have an asbestos filled, sick building, not up to accessibility code, that has a steel structure. It burns with a yellow flame for a few hours then collapses. Yellow flame is good for campfires, but won’t structurally compromise a steel structure. This kicked up so much crap into the air that the toll on the local populace won’t be known for decades.

Sure it put Florida to rest and paved the way for the populace to readily give up personal freedoms, but the pain it has caused, felt globally, is beyond criminal.
common sense

November 28th, 2008 | 02:24

orly are you really that stupid or are you trying really hard? Tell me you mental midget, you have something that falls on you from 80 stories in the air adn weighs well over 60 tons. Are YOU going to now say that it is not going to cause damage to the object it hits? Hmmm, maybe then we should tell the people at Tugunsta that the trees should not be laying down for over 30 miles in every direction as the weight and blast wave could not do what it did. And let us tell the historians that the Chicago Fire and the earthquakes in LA and in Alaska should not be able to knock down buildings or shear off metal all because you numbnuts say it cannot and that metal sheared off can only be caused by an explosion. As I said before my MOS in the military was explosives and DOD and I have delt with these for over 30 Freaking years and have forgot more about explosives then you brain dead jerkoffs will ever so DONT TRY and tell me about explosives and what it can and cannot do child. When you get 30 years of dealing with them THEN we can talk.

As for this stupid arsed statement of Bush seeing the plane hit the tower live, ever hear of repeats on film that CNN and Fox and MSNBC and others do every fricking day?? I have seen CNN broadcast the same damn film with the caption “live” plastered on it, yet they have shown the same film every 15 mihnutes for the last 2 hours. EVERY news channel has done this, even the BBC and Alquida central.

Jeeze you stupid arses, use your freaking brains for something other then to cover the empty spaces between your ears. And you have to wonder just WHY every person out there except for you reality challenged morons; does not believe a word you are saying. It all comes down to a single point..either every one else in the fricking world is lying, or you conspiracy morons are.

Wanna guess who we are going to believe? “Hint” It AINT YOU!
george

November 28th, 2008 | 02:34

#145
Pot /kettle?? No one was referring to you…..

Your Q re. bush….??
who cares!rather focus your efforts on wtc7, thermite, molten metal, the explosions during the evacuation…etc
I believe

November 28th, 2008 | 03:19

“Your Q re. bush….??
who cares!”

What do you mean, “who cares”? The president had a slip of the tongue which clearly indicates that he had prior knowledge of the attacks, and you ask “who cares”? Clearly the bush administration was lying when it claimed it had no prior warnings over 911. “Who cares” is hardly and appropriate reaction to that revelation.
I believe

November 28th, 2008 | 03:28

#147 / common sense
“As for this stupid arsed statement of Bush seeing the plane hit the tower live, ever hear of repeats on film that CNN and Fox and MSNBC and others do every fricking day??”

You appear to be missing the point. Bush claims he saw this while he was waiting to go into the classroom. He was in the classroom when the second plane hit the Sth tower. The only plane he could have seen hit anything prior to going into the classroom was the first plane, as it was the only one at that stage.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CCtb9nlV_20

Bush is quite clear, he saw the plane hit the tower “before” he went into the classroom, which is “before” the second plane hit the tower.
ko

November 28th, 2008 | 03:37

Lieu7enant’s post (#2) is a rapidpass stealer, don’t use his links.
Daniel Rastor

November 28th, 2008 | 03:48

Megashare linkages?

Megashares linkages?

Popular Mechanics can suck on my balls.
or1y

November 28th, 2008 | 04:30

lol now this “common sense” mor0n claims WTC7 was knocked down by debris from WTC1/2

@common sense 147

hey moron, learn to read between the lines, I asked u to explain why WTC7 went down coz you claimed “experts” already explained everything

and what was your asnwer? —> “”"”"Are YOU going to now say that it is not going to cause damage to the object it hits?”"”"”"

what are u stupid? i asked a simple question, keep the fck quiet if you don’t have an answer

“causing damage” is one thing, having the whole WTC7 fall down demolition style is another, if something hit wtc7 it’ll take a chunk off wtc7 from the top or the side, it won’t cause near perfect destruction at free fall speed.

That’s why there is a demolition business, you don’t destory buildings just by throwing crap at it, a slight miss calculation is enough to cause a build to fall to the side and damage nearby structures.

you don’t know this and you claim to be an expert? FU#%CK 0FF

wtc7 didn’t lose a chunk of materal, didn’t have corners broken off, it wasn’t knocked down or knocked sideway,
the whole building fell straight into dust at free fall speed, starting from the ground level

what kind of magic debris will make a building fall down demolition style?

if you can’t explain what happened on WTC7, ST-F-U

nobody gives a rat’s arse how important you think you are,
if your explaination S-ucks, you S-uck
orly

November 28th, 2008 | 04:33

lol now this “common sense” mor0n claims WTC7 was knocked down by debris from WTC1/2

@common sense 147

hey moron, learn to read between the lines, I asked u to explain why WTC7 went down coz you claimed “experts” already explained everything

and what was your asnwer? —> “”"”"Are YOU going to now say that it is not going to cause damage to the object it hits?”"”"”"

what are u stupid? i asked a simple question, keep the f u-c k quiet if you don’t have an answer

“causing damage” is one thing, having the whole WTC7 fall down demolition style is another, if something hit wtc7 it’ll take a chunk off wtc7 from the top or the side, it won’t cause near perfect destruction at free fall speed.

That’s why there is a demolition business, you don’t destory buildings just by throwing crap at it, a slight miss calculation is enough to cause a build to fall to the side and damage nearby structures.

you don’t know this and you claim to be an expert? FU#%C K 0FF

wtc7 didn’t lose a chunk of materal, didn’t have corners broken off, it wasn’t knocked down or knocked sideway,
the whole building fell straight into dust at free fall speed, starting from the ground level

what kind of magic debris will make a building fall down demolition style?

if you can’t explain what happened on WTC7, ST-F-U

nobody gives a rat’s arse how important you think you are,
if your explaination su cks, you su ck
george

November 28th, 2008 | 04:42

Sorry..should have been clearer re. “who cares…”…

I suggest you dont worry to much about this revelation…
I say this because GW “slipping up” can be easily argued away as a “genuine ” mistake, insofar as what he actually meant was the second plane he watched on
TV, as we all did….and you cant prove him incorrect…..his word against your opinion..
My other points raised previously are impossible to be “excused”….none of “opinion”…physics stands up to better scrutiny than opinion…
Can you now see why i suggest you channel your admirable efforts in other directions….??
I believe

November 28th, 2008 | 05:11

#155 / george
“Can you now see why i suggest you channel your admirable efforts in other directions….??”

I think both areas are worthy of investigation. I’m not disagreeing with any of the theories regarding molten steel. I’m simply supporting them with bush’s own comments, that clearly indicate he saw the first plane hit. He’s quite specific about where he was, and we know that when he was where he claimed to be, the only tower that was hit by a plane was the first one.

The molten steel is another dead give away. There’s no doubts that it was there, and yet there’s no explanation from anyone who supports the official story as to how it got there.

Clearly, when the result contains parameters that can only be realised through a limited number of causes, then all other causes must logically be eliminated. Jet fuel does not burn hot enough to melt steel, so something else must have caused this.

If you eliminate the impossible, then what ever remains, however improbable, must be the truth. The existence of molten steel (not to mention fires that burned for weeks) eliminates jet fuel as a possibility. So what’s left?
mm

November 28th, 2008 | 05:39

@I believe

let me guess, the fukwits that insist the jet fuel caused everything will just ignore you

they lack the capability to think beyond the obvious, when the obvious explaination is flawed and is challenged by facts their pea sized brains shut down

to all you fukwits out there, here is a question for ya:
“if the steel was weaken by heat that is too hot for jet fuel to generate. what else could be heating the steel?”

i know your answer is still going to be “jet fuel”, because you guys are re_tar_ds.
a

November 28th, 2008 | 06:55

this “common sense” guy is clearly a fake.

WTC7 crumbled starting from the first floor.

and somehow this self proclaimed “30 years demolition expert” call “common sense” thinks WTC7 fell because something dropped on top of it?

ARE YOU KIDDING ME?

last time I check, we’re not talking about smart bombs here. so if something drops on top of a building, the top floor gets damaged first, not the ground floor.

a “30 years demolition expert” trying to reverse physics online?

LAME

if “common sense” is a 30 years expert then I am the president.
a

November 28th, 2008 | 06:56

this “common sense” guy is clearly a fake.

WTC7 crumbled starting from the first floor.

and somehow this self proclaimed “30 years demolition expert” call “common sense” thinks WTC7 fell because something dropped on top of it?

ARE YOU KIDDING ME?

last time I check, we’re not talking about smart bombs here. so if something drops on top of a building, the top floor gets damaged first, not the ground floor.

a “30 years demolition expert” trying to reverse physics online?

L.A.M.E

if “common sense” is a 30 years expert then I am the president.
I believe

November 28th, 2008 | 08:39

If common sense is indeed a demolition expert, perhaps he could explain what the key difference are between the WTC7 collapse, and a controlled demolition. Because they look pretty similar to me, and it’s not hard to find real, confirmed demolition experts that say it is a controlled demolition.

So, why are the confirmed demolition experts wrong? What are they missing? There’s obviously something you’ve spotted that these other experts haven’t, which indicates that damage to the exterior of the building caused the collapse, so what is it?
jim

November 28th, 2008 | 11:33

WOW

there’s obviously still a lot of confusion about this topic.

I guess everybody who has watched movies like this, loose Change and others will know by now that the “official” story that we have been fed through the media is complete BS – as was the 9/11 commission report.

It’s sad that even 7 years later our legislation still shows no interest in discovering the actual truth and that worries me. Every year that passes wihtout the bush administration confessing that 9/11 didn’t quite happen the way they told us only further strengthens the possibility of an inside job.

If the gov. would NOT know the truth there would still be an ongoing investigation. The fact that from the official side there is NO investigation any more + that they are still sticking to that completely ridiculous story worries me.

It will probably take another 10-15 years before the real story about 9/11 is published – I’ll be here waiting…
zysterx

November 28th, 2008 | 12:20

well after all that it turns out you wouldn’t be watching that movie anyway

cause it’s fake

it’s a nicholas cage movie

lol
Jad

November 28th, 2008 | 12:41

I tried to watch this with all the willingness in my mind to shun off “Conspiracy Theories”… BUT i cannot say no to science!!! I am not retarted science is in my opinion more true that the Bush Administration, and those of you who find this ridiculous are hypocrites.
Kreotropic

November 28th, 2008 | 14:58

So…No links!!!????

Megaupload would be great!!!
common sense

November 28th, 2008 | 17:13

If common sense is indeed a demolition expert, perhaps he could explain what the key difference are between the WTC7 collapse, and a controlled demolition. Because they look pretty similar to me, and it’s not hard to find real, confirmed demolition experts that say it is a controlled demolition.

So, why are the confirmed demolition experts wrong? What are they missing? There’s obviously something you’ve spotted that these other experts haven’t, which indicates that damage to the exterior of the building caused the collapse, so what is it?
—————–
Simple. The “explosions” you see are NOT controlled and are nothing more then a build up of air pressure from the collapsing parts of the upper towers. If you will watch this in slow mo, you will see that at best you only have maybe 10 floors between the windows being blown out to weak or worn seals on same and the collapsing floors. To show you what I mean place your hand on a flat surface. Now Take a fan and hold it above your hand and then slam it down at your hand stopping short of hitting it. Feel the pressure? That is the Air displacement of the fan forcing the air down on your skin. Same thing happens in a collapse, you have all the weight following the law of gravity and air, like water; will seek the weakest point to escape. In an explosion, you would have not only the weak windows being blown out, but EVERY FRICKING OTHER ONE AROUND IT AS WELL!! That mean instead of one window, you would have 10 to 20 wondows being blow out at the dame time due to the concussion blast. That alone proves that this was NOT done with explosives.

And your WTC 7? PUH-LEAZE… you CANNOT be that obtuse. Let me place you within half a block of a collapse like this and then after it is over and we dig you out, you then can tell us if you were hit with any falling metal or concrete or steel. It does not take a rocket scientist to know that you take 60 tons of building material and drop it due to a collapse, and EVERYTHING within a 4 block radius of this is going to get hammered, hence the buildings that were two blocks away that received structure damage and the concussion wave from the collapse blowing out windows 15 blocks away and knocking people down 8 blocks away.

I just have to wonder about the mentality of some of these posters who believe that 2 billion people in the world are wrong, and less then 10,000 are the only ones that “know the truth” Do they even begin to think of how conceited and thick headed that is? You have well over 1000 experts saying it did happen from the planes hitting, for every one that says it did not. Even the lying jerks from Lose Change had to change the film when it was shown by scientific evidence that they were lying at worst and misleading at best (the lie that no telephone calls could have been made from the planes at that altitude, when they had been making calls from planes for over six years BEFORE 9-11, is one lie that comes to mind) yet you have morons that would rather believe this kind of BS then the truth.

The “gub’ment did it” crowd here just clearly shows that the vast majority of these twits are kids who still live at home with their parents and never had to face reality, and if something does not fit their warped view…then it could not possibly be real. And what do you want to bet they still think that the Tooth fairy and the Easter Bunny are real and that Santa climbs down their chimney every year? They need to pack the computer back up and return it to the store as they are too damn stupid to even own one.
truth man

November 28th, 2008 | 17:40

if you want know the real story and get smart well its not onley inside job by bush criminal goverment no man do not forgite jews israeli mosad secret service had the biggest hand in that dirty job …why there are more reasons than you think they are the onley people who winned by killing more than 3000 american inesent in two towers they winned many many things by doing 11/9 so for more truth if you do not want to keep stupid go to http://www.prothink.org and see more reality that can shock you about jews and zionist and more inside job stuffs and for sure 11/9 see a film called missing links in prothink.org and open yours eyes its now or never kind smart people of america who want teh real change of a devil rooooooooooling since long time your country
zysterx

November 28th, 2008 | 18:35

Kreotropic

apparently you missed it but it’s not the films listed

it’s a nicholas cage movie

or am i the only one to get it downloaded instead?

or am i the only one to actually start to watch it?

that’s sort of funny if you think about it?

implacable positions without even viewing what they’d said

LOL
boon

November 28th, 2008 | 20:08

this “common sense” guy is funny, fcked in the head but funny none the less

soon you’ll see him claim to be a 30 years time travel expert explaining how BBC/CNN reported WTC7 collapsed 20 minutes before it actually happened
Jaxon

November 28th, 2008 | 21:00

glad to see this type of material posted…
hachling

November 28th, 2008 | 21:02

@ i believe
first of all i want to apologize for insulting you i shouldn’t have.
second, i my nick is indeed from “hatchling” since i always feel like i have a lot to learn.
but, to the point, i only made a couple of points:
1. in order for this conspiracy to be true, hundreds if not thousands of people needed to be involved. this is impossible.
2. the live footage of the second plane means that either the broadcasting networks were also involved and faked the footage (unlikely) or that the footage is real but was not the cause for the collapse (also unlikely).
3. No building is designed to sustain the impact of a passenger plane, it’s simple, why should it be? it doesn’t happen so often that it’s worth the money to build a building which can stand to that kind of impact.
4. you take a small point in the story like WTC7, the time George bush said what and base a whole theory on it to explain the entire event.
5. Everyone who is pro conspiracy keeps posting this site or that site. all these site are propaganda sites with unknown people saying that the FBI said this or that. No official or recognizable person appears in these films.
i have more to say but i don’t think there is actually a point.
thetruth

November 28th, 2008 | 21:16

When you all are done with this 9/11 case, try thinking the bigger picture. I would strongly recommend watching all that dudes videos in youtube http://www.youtube.com/profile?user=AlienScientist&view=videos

but be adviced, those wideos requires some basics knolegde of physics and electronics, so that one might get even I slight idea what that “scientist” is talking about.
orly

November 28th, 2008 | 21:43

lmao, “common sense” is acting like an expert when the fcking OWNER OF WTC7 already proved him wrong.

Larry Silverstein, owner of the WTC buildings, admits that WTC building 7 was pulled:
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-6455428412411043437
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z9b4D-aO3zY

OOPS, so much for “30 years expert”
orly

November 28th, 2008 | 21:45

poor little “experts” can’t think outside his little box

http://killtown.911review.org/wtc7.html

Silverstein: “and I said…’maybe the smartest thing to do is, is pull it’…and they made that decision to pull and then we watched the building collapse.”

“Silverstein signed a 99-year lease for the twin towers just six weeks before the attack.”

“…Insurers is set to pay around $861 million to Silverstein for the lost building…debt on the property is around $383 million…”

“Silverstein is reported in some quarters to have spent as much as $200 million on lawyers, as he pursues demands for as much as $7 billion from his insurers.”

“The [WTC 7's] fire alarm system was placed on TEST for a period of 8 h beginning at 6:47:03 a.m. on September 11, 2001… any alarms that are received from the system are considered the result of the maintenance or testing and are ignored.”
orly!

November 28th, 2008 | 22:00

oh wait!

what if THE OWNER was wrong because some “expert” on rlslog thinks he knows more than the owner about what happened to HIS OWN FCKING BUILDING?

LMFAO

this is classic
hey

November 28th, 2008 | 22:14

@hachling

oh so humble now? what you finally took your meds? maybe now we can drop the insult bs and point straight to your errors.

“2. the live footage of the second plane means that either the broadcasting networks were also involved and faked the footage (unlikely) or that the footage is real but was not the cause for the collapse (also unlikely).”

here’s where you’re wrong, just because the footage is real it doesn’t automatically mean it’s the cause of the collapse. you got a major logic error right there.

or, if you’re so logical, why don’t you explain the cause of molten steel? the plane had nothing that could burn hot enough to melt steel

(note they keyword MELT, not weaken, not soften, not bend, but MELT, look it up if you don’t understand what MELT means)

November 28th, 2008 | 21:02

@ i believe
first of all i want to apologize for insulting you i shouldn’t have.
second, i my nick is indeed from “hatchling” since i always feel like i have a lot to learn.
but, to the point, i only made a couple of points:
1. in order for this conspiracy to be true, hundreds if not thousands of people needed to be involved. this is impossible.
3. No building is designed to sustain the impact of a passenger plane, it’s simple, why should it be? it doesn’t happen so often that it’s worth the money to build a building which can stand to that kind of impact.
4. you take a small point in the story like WTC7, the time George bush said what and base a whole theory on it to explain the entire event.
5. Everyone who is pro conspiracy keeps posting this site or that site. all these site are propaganda sites with unknown people saying that the FBI said this or that. No official or recognizable person appears in these films.
i have more to say but i don’t think there is actually a point.
F16

November 28th, 2008 | 22:46

156 mm

that’s correct, and the “fuk wits” as you put it,
ignore the facts there wouldn’t be much jet fuel left after the initial explosion, and what’s left wouldn’t last more than 10 minutes, the rest is just normal fire

there’s just no way the jet fuel caused the melting of the steel. this is a scientific proven FACT.

FFS, the engine is made of steel
hachling

November 28th, 2008 | 23:25

#174
not humble, just trying to get back to polite conversation (again).
if you see my second point – i do refer to the assumption that the collapse wasn’t caused by the plane crash by saying it is unlikely. the fuel they use for flight is highly combustible and reaches a very high temperature. i admit that i am not an avionic expert or a physicist but i guess it is a safe assumption you are neither as well. i have a hard time understanding how you reach your conclusions. the simple scenario was that a plane (quite a big one actually) crashed in each of the towers. i assume that this caused the towers to collapse after some time when enough collateral damage was done to the building from the actual impact and the heat inside the elevator shafts etc. you assume it had to be something else because…well just because. and all my other points are left yet again sadly ignored.
I believe

November 29th, 2008 | 00:37

#164 / common sense

What a load of cr@P. Compare the demolition of WTC7 with that of other know demolitions. These thing you say we see that we should, well they’re in the known demolitions as well.

Then of course there’s Larry Silverstein admission that the building was demolished. I suppose he’s lying too?

I think it’s fairly safe to say, you’re not nearly the expert you make yourself out to be.
I believe

November 29th, 2008 | 00:55

#176 / hachling
“you assume it had to be something else because…well just because. and all my other points are left yet again sadly ignored.”

Just because? And then you make claims of ignorance. You haven’t even tried to explain the presence of molten steel the WTC, which jet fuel will not burn nearly hot enough to create. When you can explain that, then you’ll be in a position to call other ignorant without looking like a hypocrite.

As planes hitting the towers alone will not create molten steel, there must be another cause.
common sense

November 29th, 2008 | 03:55

I believe, your statements ARE a load of cr@P.

It’s fairly safe to say that I have over 25,000 demolitions experts worldwide that agree with me on this, and you have what? One pathetic twit that almost got someone killed becuase he overloaded the blast hole and now the only people that will work with him are low pay cut rate “shadies” that cut corners in their construction and demolition.

“As planes hitting the towers alone will not create molten steel, there must be another cause.”

No stupid, no other cause, Metal gets hot and sparks fly as well as molten parts of it drip off. You can see this in any fricking steel mill in the country as it happens every day. Contact the US Steelworkers Unions and ask them what happens when jet fuel burns around steel, it gets hot and loses strength and thus collapses. So now I guess that the hundreds of thousands of steelworkers that will tell you this to your face are now lying because YOU say so?

THIS is the sources that you are using for an experts? How pathetic it is to be you and the best you can come up with is a discraced person who had his licenses to use explosives taken from him and only recently was able to get it back, and completely ignore steelworkers who back what I am saying and what was said by thousands of demo experts all over the world. But ALL of them are lying because you say so… So go along and play with your “moon is made out of green cheese” and the “earth is flat” friends of yours and reality will do very well without you as we dont need your stupidity and ignorance in the real world.
common sense

November 29th, 2008 | 04:04

orly!
November 28th, 2008 | 22:00
oh wait!

what if THE OWNER was wrong because some “expert” on rlslog thinks he knows more than the owner about what happened to HIS OWN FCKING BUILDING?

LMFAO

this is classic

No Orly, YOU are a classic moron as the owner of the building went on camera and stated word for word what he said and showed the video that was taken in the room when he said it…video that has not been tampered with according to Kodak. So that either means that you and your pathetic little cabal of moronic liars are twisting his words to suit your end, or that you have just proven that you could not find your arse with both hands, a flashlight and a road map in a dark room.

what if THE OWNER never said what you say he said and can prove it but you have some moronic “comspiracy experts” on rlslog who thinks they know more than the owner about what happened to HIS OWN FCKING BUILDING? And This vodeo was shown on national TV clearly showing what the owner actually said is NOT what you conspiracy twits claim?

LMFAO

You are pathetic Orley.
hey

November 29th, 2008 | 04:12

176 hachling

FFS

if you saw me hitting someone with a baseball bat and that person later died, and the cops found bullet holes in the guy’s skull, and the guys at the morgue said the bat wound wasn’t severe enough to be fatal

now:
are you still going to go around telling people I killed him with a bat?

or, are you going to be the idiot that ignore the bullet hole and insist the baseball bat killed him?
I believe

November 29th, 2008 | 05:11

#179 / common sense
“No stupid, no other cause, Metal gets hot and sparks fly as well as molten parts of it drip off.”

Excuse me? Are you suggesting that a jet fuel fire with a yellow flame will burn hot enough to melt steel? You’re kidding right? Is that why you spend most of you posts throwing insults? Because your arguments are based on rubbish?
In the Water

November 29th, 2008 | 06:59

There is something wrong with you people
Two pages of this s**t
Go And Buy A Life
common sense

November 29th, 2008 | 07:13

Wait. You’re absolutely correct In the Water. I take back what I’ve said. I am the pathetic, angry moron that I claim everyone else is. I’m obviously very sad since I have to argue in abusive terms rather than having an adult discussion. I just need to get over myself and grow a pair. I’ve been lying to everyone for so long that only my mirror is reflecting the truth, and what I see in it is disturbing. I apologize to everyone for showing my v@gina on the internet.
hachling

November 29th, 2008 | 07:24

I believe,
my point is that i don’t need to explain anything related to molten steel simply because you want me to. for some reason you say this is a fact or that is a fact. why? because you say so? if you say that it’s a fact that the sky is green doesn’t necessarily make it so. i have no idea where you came up with these “facts” that you so want me to disprove.
also, #181, when you use a story to make a point is only because you can’t use the facts of the case to prove the same point. the holes is your story are there were never bullet holes found by anyone, only claimed to be found by people on the net.
i know i can’t persuade you of my point. at least you won’t admit it here. i at least hope that the next time someone tries to convince you of some crap by saying “the FBI didn’t deny this”, some agent said that, how can you explain this, without actually explaining his theory or bringing facts of his own, you will use your head and not take it as an absolute truth.
Jaxon

November 29th, 2008 | 08:16

check this out:

http://torrents.thepiratebay.org/4461380/Alex_Jones_caller_disagrees.4461380.TPB.torrent
I believe

November 29th, 2008 | 08:50

#185 / hachling
Well, steel melts at around 2500 deg F.

http://education.jlab.org/qa/meltingpoint_01.html

The 911 official report says that the core temp of the fire was much lower than that. There was molten steel in the debris. Work it out logically.

“when you use a story to make a point”

It wasn’t a story, it was an analogy. Huge difference there.

“i know i can’t persuade you of my point.”

You have a point? I would hardly call ignoring the fact that don’t support your theory “making a point”.
hachling

November 29th, 2008 | 09:58

#187
actually, the official report doesn’t mention the core temperature of the fire, look it up in the official report, i did just to make sure.
You always keep getting back to the same bogus fact and not respond to all the other points i mentioned. you build a whole theory on a basis of a bogus fact and things you can’t explain. but you don’t have any proof or facts supporting your theory. nothing at all.
I believe

November 29th, 2008 | 10:32

#188 / born yesterday
“actually, the official report doesn’t mention the core temperature of the fire, look it up in the official report, i did just to make sure.”

It most certainly did. You’re making this up as you go now. Do you know how silly is sounds to suggest a report which concludes that the WTC came down as a result of fire would not give any indications of how hot that fire was. So even though they don’t know how hot the fire was (according to you), you’re satisfied they know it was hot enough to weaken steel? Give me a break.
Panzu

November 29th, 2008 | 10:56

Good documentary film promotes discussion – I think the Zero Investigation delivered, no matter how controversial the topic at hand.

Surprisingly good documentary about the hole in the ground.
hachling

November 29th, 2008 | 10:59

#188
look it up yourself ans we will see who is making what up.
give me a quote. i have the report open in front of me.
show me where they say anything about the temp’ of the fire core fire or anything about the molten steel.
TwistedTimes

November 29th, 2008 | 12:04

The most fascinating are people arguing on the internet, on a website full of pirates. ^^

I don’t believe in the official theory of neither 9/11 nor JFK. But I’m not going to spend my time trying to prove the provocating, ignorant, lazy, apathetic *********** of RLSLOG wrong, because what an idiot believes, is completely irrelevant, ’cause he’s still an idiot.

On-Topic: Interesting movie, good audio and video.
I believe

November 29th, 2008 | 12:20

I fail to see how a report that claims to show that the temperature of the fire weakened the steel without first showing what the temperature of the fire actually was could have any credibility at all.
common sense

November 29th, 2008 | 13:42

I believe
November 29th, 2008 | 12:20
I fail to see how a report that claims to show that the temperature of the fire weakened the steel without first showing what the temperature of the fire actually was could have any credibility at all.

And that is why none of you claiming it did not happen like this have any credibility in the first place. ANYONE that works with steel knows that to first bend it or shape it, you MUST HEAT IT TO MAKE IT SOFTEN IE WEAKEN IT!!! Your basic shop teacher in High school and trade schools knows this. Any Auto worker or welder knows this. Any metal worker knows this. Any metalurgy degreed person knows this and you obviously dont. The maximum burning temp of jet fuel is 980 °C (1796 °F) Iron, out of the ground, melts at around 1510 degrees C (2750°F). Steel often melts at around 1370 degrees C (2500°F). so moron, that means that the temps in this building where the planes hit, reached a temp of 800 or 900 degrees BELOW MELTIN POINT. Did you conspiracy nuts catch that? At this temp, the metal WAS in a weakened state and as such it COULD NOT have had the strength to hold up a section of the building that it was made to hold at full strength. Like a house of cards, when you remove one of the middle or bottom cards, the whole thing collapses as the support that was there is no longer there. That I believe, is basic physics 101, something you should have learned in middle school in your science classes.

And that is why not one of you conspiracy nutcases who say that this was done with controlled explosions have ANY credibility in any way as nature and reality all say you are full of crap! And you also seemingly are ignoring the thousands of people who actually saw the planes hit the towers and the Pentagon, as well as CNN/NBC/ABC/CBS and a host of others who also saw it and showed video to prove it…are all liars because you say so?

Are you listening to yourselves?!!?
hachling

November 29th, 2008 | 14:02

#193 i believe
so now the report you are basing your facts on is not relevant anymore because it doesn’t suit your needs?
BTW,next time there is a terror attack i will make sure they will stick a thermometer in there so you can have the exact temp.
I believe

November 29th, 2008 | 14:47

#194 / common sense
“a temp of 800 or 900 degrees BELOW MELTIN POINT.”

I agree completely, a jet fuel fire is not hot enough to melt steel.

You realise that proves that the molten steel could not have been cause by the fire, and therefore there must have been another accelerant, don’t you? You’ve just proved the point us so called conspiracy nuts have been making. So who’s the moron?
I believe

November 29th, 2008 | 14:50

#195 / born yesterday
“so now the report you are basing your facts on is not relevant anymore because it doesn’t suit your needs?”

I didn’t say that. I said if what you’re saying is true, the report wouldn’t have any credibility, yet you’re still saying it does. Either way, it proves your wrong.
orly

November 29th, 2008 | 17:21

about fck faces:

there are atleast 2 major contradicting versions of what happened on 911, one made by giant cooperations, the government and the military
the other one made by statements from policeman and firefighters who were there to save lives and studies from professionals who weren’t on main stream media for the money.

when these fck faces label people who question the government as “conspiracy nuts thinking the super-rich and powerful is lying”,

They’re actually also labeling the policeman and firefighters who where there not for the money but to save lives as some sort of stupi_d lying fcks.

it is the “expert symdrom”, talk to ANY fat, ugly no-life insecure experts of any field and immediatly you’ll get this attitude where these fck face thinks it’s their job to constantly remind they’re smarter than everyone else and their job is to educate and insult anyone who knew less than they do in the field.

Their head is so far up their arse they can’t tell the difference between logical and illogical when the situation doesn’t boost their ego.
Orly

November 29th, 2008 | 17:25

These insecure, ignorant and arrogant small-d1ck know-it-all “experts” with no life and inflated egos create their own little reality to pretend being better than everyone else, and when people start to question their little happy place with basic logic they become afraid and have this knee-jerk reaction to defend their ego with more BS.

These are the same type of know-it-all “experts” who:
1. made reports claiming JFK was killed by a lone gunman who shot and reloaded 3 times within seconds from a location that had no possible line of sight.
2. made diagrams and pretty powerpoint presentations to “prove” there was WMD in iraq.
3. made pretty little graphs with numbers of studies, theories and formulas while running the financial system to the ground.

These fck faces never, and i mean NEVER admit they MAYBE wrong, until it’s too fcking late, or not even then.
Orly

November 29th, 2008 | 17:32

This insecure fck face self proclaimed expert called “common sense” gets on this site, put on his little “know-it-all” attitude and decided to educate the mass about the obvious fact that “heat weaken steel”, he chants “heat weaken steel” like it’s the answer to everything, a religion that’s the meaning of his pathetic little life.

Now to the fck face “common sense” self-proclaimed “expert” on rlslog:

##

LISTEN FCK FACE, just because you spent most of your pathetic little live studying a piece of sh1t in a cave doesn’t give you the right to ignore logic and reality while still pretending to be the “expert”

Heat weaken steel… Heat weaken steel… Heat weaken steel…

OMFG OH SH1T REALLY? fck, thank you CAPTAIN OBVIOUS, we’re glad you spent 30 years to figure that out for us. coz WE DID’T FCKING ALREADY KNOW THAT.

now flip to the next page of your little happy place comic book that sates the fact:
in all the history of high-rise fires, none had ever resulted in a collapse

In 1975 the North tower was burned for 3 hours and no damaged was caused to the steel. somehow WTC1/2 burned for about an hour and the steel melted? and still melted after 6 weeks?

!!!!!

This fck face “common sense” also thrown numbers around and claim debris shockwave of WTC1 collasped WTC7.
HELLO fck face, WTC6 stood directly between WTC1 and WTC7 and absorbed most of the damage.
WTC6 stood for months after and WTC7 collasped within hours?

HELLO? ARE YOU THAT FCKING STUPID?

!!!!!

Pages: « 1 [2] 3 » Show All

Zero An Investigation Into 9 11 2008 DVDRiP XviD Repack-SoSISO

Comments (220)

Leave a reply

Categories

Pages

Archives

Links

Most rated

Most popular

Zero An Investigation Into 9 11 2008 DVDRiP XviD Repack-SoSISO

Comments (220)

Leave a reply

Search

Categories

Pages

Archives

Links

Most rated

Most popular