Probably because most of them smashed into an edifice at about 600mph, OM
and another was long since captured and executed?
That is reality but truthers are not interested in reality.
Who are the supposed Muslim hijackers and what is the evidence against them? NONE The rest of your OP is moot until these questions have been answered.
Ok, you're not interested in actually discussing the subject. Please stop wasting my time with this sort of silly noise.
Yes, I am. My question is,
Who are the supposed Muslim hijackers and what is the evidence against them? Where are the time/date stamped CCTV camera photos from 9/11?
Seriously, I'm becoming bored with your noise and I am considering placing you on ignore.
You threatened this many posts ago. Typical of your evidence.
Who are the supposed Muslim hijackers and what is the evidence against them? Where are the time/date stamped CCTV camera photos from 9/11?
You talk of manners
yet you have been part of a grand conspiracy that has for 18 years been falsely accusing people of things they never did plus, offering material support and encouragement to war criminals and terrorists who illegally invaded nations based on these USA 9/11 lies that you can't offer one particle of evidence as support.
That is absurd. For the fourth time, nominate a particular topic and I will discuss it accordingly. I can supply mountains of evidence, but without a particular topic, it is a waste of time.
There is no need to debate anything with you because you have illustrated that you know little to nothing of the science/events/evidence/facts of 9/11.
"in the atrium of WTC7", dear dog almighty!!!
In case you haven't figured it out, I'm giving you a chance because I actually want to debate the subject.
Again, please have the decency to reply to my question first.
Yes, you appear to lack them.
That is absurd. For the fourth time, nominate a particular topic and I will discuss it accordingly. I can supply mountains of evidence, but without a particular topic, it is a waste of time.
Prove the NIST wrong. You can make all the silly noises you like but it only serves to make you look like you are avoiding any debate of the subject.
You have read the NIST's report I take it? Do you know about the column walk off near the atrium, which initiated the progressive collapse?
You must be joking!
Sorry, did I get it wrong? It has been a few years since I discussed this subject with anyone and I may have made a mistake.
I meant expecting that he would discuss the subject with you.
Probably because most of them smashed into an edifice at about 600mph, and another was long since captured and executed?
OM
You have read the NIST's report I take it? Do you know about the column walk off near the atrium (column 79), which initiated the progressive collapse?
Wow, the 9-11 conspiracy continues, just like the Russian collusion conspiracy claims continue.
That NIST pretend walk off never happened.
Every idiot knows that a single columnar collapse cannot, as in it is impossible, for a free fall, symmetrical collapse to occur.
NIST has proved themselves wrong with their lies - some 12 lies about the drawings/plans for WTC7; NIST lied about shear studs, web stiffeners, the distance of the supposed walk off, ... .
The chance of NIST's fable about walk off happening is ZERO. A comprehensive forensic study done by the UofA Fairbanks, done to give NIST all the benefit of the doubt found that the chance of NIST being right is ZERO.
Look at NIST's computer simulation. They actually have the gall to suggest that it looks like reality,
that is the videos of the actual controlled demolition.
All metabunkers know full well that it looks nothing like reality. Reality, which is not at all metabunkers long suit,
clearly illustrates what the science and the evidence shows, WTC7 was a controlled demolition, just like the twin towers.
All this means that there never were any Muslim hijackers, there never was any OBL involvement.
Awesome sophistry, approved by the US Government.
You don't know that.
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?