- Joined
- Dec 21, 2008
- Messages
- 2,730
- Reaction score
- 239
- Location
- Timbuktu
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Slightly Conservative
Sorry to the trojan horses like Soupnazi630 and I_Gaze_at the Blue...among others...
Your gig is up for infiltrating 9/11 petitions in an attempt to discredit them
There should be legal charges against people like Soupnazi630 and Gaze at the Blue who infiltrate 9/11 petitions in an attempt to discredit and destroy the wishes of the many legitimate licensed Architects and Engineers who are simply requesting a new investigation.
Soupnazi630, Gaze at the Blue, and others like you are nothing but a trojan horse attempting to muck up a legitimate 9/11 petition to congress and should be charged for your misrepresentation and attempt to foil an American process
If anyone is wondering, they both admitted in posts here what they have done.
Now luckily Architects and Engineers for a new 9/11 investigation are more aware of who is on their petitions...
AE911Truth.org
Verification Team Assures a Sound Foundation
Sorry to the trojan horses like Soupnazi630 and I_Gaze_at the Blue...among others...
Your gig is up for infiltrating 9/11 petitions in an attempt to discredit them
There should be legal charges against people like Soupnazi630 and Gaze at the Blue who infiltrate 9/11 petitions in an attempt to discredit and destroy the wishes of the many legitimate licensed Architects and Engineers who are simply requesting a new investigation.
Soupnazi630, Gaze at the Blue, and others like you are nothing but a trojan horse attempting to muck up a legitimate 9/11 petition to congress and should be charged for your misrepresentation and attempt to foil an American process
If anyone is wondering, they both admitted in posts here what they have done.
Now luckily Architects and Engineers for a new 9/11 investigation are more aware of who is on their petitions...
AE911Truth.org
Verification Team Assures a Sound Foundation
Actually you are wrong.
My whole point in joining this petittion was to prove that they have no verification process and they do not. I'vebeen listed as an Architect for some time now and they never verified it.
In fact the article you link to proves it. They claim they only time they ask for copies of documentation such as licensing is when the person requesting to join is a foreigner. Other than that one of their members does a websearch just to see if the individual joining the petition has a history on the web of anything which may be detrimental to the petittion.
In other words if people use their real names to discredit or argue against the twoofers in some place like a political forum they are disqualified.
And thats it for their verification process.
Playing devils advocate for a moment if the most or all of the 1303 engineers and architects were indeed engineers and architects ( we know not all are what they claim ) the fact is they are still a minescule percentage of those two professions and not enough to lend any credibility to their claims. And of course they have no evidence.
If anyone is wondering, they both admitted in posts here what they have done.
They claim they DO have evidence but you claim they do not have evidence.
How can you make such a statement?
Have you seen and examined their evidence?
If they are claiming to have evidence of tons of explosives used then it should be examined.
Did you examine their evidence in a lab and conclude it is false evidence?
"Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth" is a scientific impossibility and an oxymoron.
Like I asked Soup...Have you seen and examined their evidence?
If they are claiming to have evidence of tons of explosives used then it should be examined.
Did you examine their evidence in a lab and conclude it is false evidence?
Where is it?
That is the point, they claim to have evidence and they show.........................nothing.
"architects and engineers are presenting new evidence indicating that the Twin Towers and Building 7 were brought down by controlled demolition (AE911truth.org). One piece of evidence they cite is the discovery by a team of U.S. and international scientists that the explosive nano-thermite was present in the buildings before they collapsed. Residue of exploded nano-thermite was found in the dust from the collapse of the Towers."
Note: For those who don't know....nano thermite is simply a form of nano-aluminum powders which is a high tech explosive. By slightly changing the composition of nano-aluminum powders (nano-thermite) you get varied types of explosive reactions. Variations of nano-aluminum powders (nano-thermite) are used anywhere from solid rocket fuels to various forms of high tech explosives with various types of reactions.
Evidence & Resources
This was aired on Denmark's National News Television about the evidence...
"According to Danish science news site Videnskab.dk, a controversial article claiming that World Trade Center dust samples contained "active thermitic material" was published in the "Open Chemical Physics Journal" without the knowledge or approval of the editor in chief, Marie-Paule Pileni.
The editor in chief has resigned over the incident.
Says Pileni:
“I cannot accept that this topic is published in my journal. The article has nothing to do with physical chemistry or chemical physics, and I could well believe that there is a political viewpoint behind its publication. If anyone had asked me, I would say that the article should never have been published in this journal. Period.”
11 Settembre: "Active Thermitic Material" claimed in Ground Zero dust may not be thermitic at all
so much for thermite. CD this was hashed out months and months ago.
Like I asked Soup...Have you seen and examined their evidence?
If they are claiming to have evidence of tons of explosives used then it should be examined.
Did you examine their evidence in a lab and conclude it is false evidence?
Why would someone resign if it was such a simple topic? Think...
aWhy would someone resign if it was such a simple topic? Think...
Why would someone resign if it was such a simple topic? Think...
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?