Do you just want another one to start? Why not keep the discussion in one place.

Sadly, today a plane hit an IRS building, a direct hit, big flames and everything. I sure hope that building wasn't made of steel and concrete! The 'probability' of it completely collapsing into rubble is pretty high, right Nick? Let's see...

The IRS building is wired by special ops to collapse at free fall speed.

FASTER THAN the free fall speed we know is allowed by simple physics.

Oh, and no steel and concrete building has EVER collapsed due to fire before.

EVER.

That was even posted on www.whatwevebeentoldtothinkhappenedon9-1...ereparanoid.com

also on the
www.youshouldonlylookatonephotoofanexten...einyourlife.com

website.

It's on the internet so it simply MUST be true.

At some point, like when there's over 100 replies, a thread is beaten to death. I'm just trying to help move the forum as a whole along. You can loiter here all you want but please, don't go on and on and on in the same thread endlessly, let it die so other threads can develop.

Could you explain this joke? The documented collapse time of the wtc towers, verified by your 'experts', was 10 seconds. 12 seconds to complete rubble. You have specifically pointed that out yourself, as well. I realize you don't know enough about "simple physics" to debate that, but it is the accepted collapse time.

The documented collapse time of the IRS building was...oh wait...why it didn't collapse into rubble!?!? Why didn't the frame of the building disintegrate, like building 7? This physics stuff is so finicky. That's WAY longer than free fall.



Please stop with the jokes. Are you serious?

Stop trying to justify who, why, or how they got away with it. You have no way of know whether or not it was Special Ops. You say the probability of the conspiracy being more complicated than what the official story tells you is low, but probability of the physics defying collapses was lower than that, because you don't understand the physics.

You are basing your assertions on a complete void of knowledge of physics or any sort of military operations whatsoever.

Realistically, the probability that the conspiracy was more complicated than what you were told is pretty high, unless you believe it's OK to defy the Laws of Physics that have been widely accepted for hundreds of years. THEN, it's low.

Contrary to what I want to believe, the probability that the story is incomplete is higher than the probability that the story is complete. You guys proudly claim, while beating your chest, that no one will ever know what really happened. Yet you then mysteriously rule out any other possibility. Now, to back up your leap of faith, you are debunking the official story.

Here's another quick, easy question:

Why didn't the IRS tower collapse into rubble?

This should be good.

Oooh .. I know .. because it wasn't as tall?

Nah ... probably since it wasn't preplanned, they didn't have time to get the explosives in it. They didn't even have time to lock people in the building to up the death count.

The internet is a perfectly acceptable source of information, as long as it supports your view of the event, right?

You yourself have relied on photos and quotes from "the internet" (unless you took those shots yourself) to make your case for the 'expert' story. I got the official reports from the internet, too, so maybe that set of reports is bogus.

So your (very weak) argument here is apparently that internet based information is unreliable, as you simultaneously quote some guy on the internet debunking your 'expert' official story, and somehow, after that irony, you actually expect someone to take your arguments seriously.

Get it?