Re: Do you have predictions about 2017?

[Ben Mezger]

can't predict what has already happened

On 1 January 2018 at 10:21, Georgi Guninski  wrote:
> Which predictions came true?
>
> IIRC grarpamp made bold financial prediction which was outperformed by a
> factor of about 10.
>

Re: Do you have predictions about 2017?

[Georgi Guninski]

Which predictions came true?

IIRC grarpamp made bold financial prediction which was outperformed by a
factor of about 10.

Re: Do you have predictions about 2017?

[Mirimir]

On 08/23/2017 08:00 AM, grarpamp wrote:
>>> I wonder what really happened in that Bangkok jail cell to Alexandre Cazes.
> 
> Politically Assassinated.
> 
>> And whatever happened to Thomas Clark aka Variety Jones? Has he been
>> extradited from Thailand yet? I find nothing since a tweet in March.
> 
> Free Talk Live 2015 09 27
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r9q0Ffvrh4c
> https://web.archive.org/web/20150906004929/https://keybase.io/varietyjones
> https://web.archive.org/web/20151004133310/http://varietyjones.com/
> https://twitter.com/blockOperator

This is all old. There's a tweet from March 2017, saying that
extradition to the US is immanent. But nothing since.

Re: Do you have predictions about 2017?

[grarpamp]

>> I wonder what really happened in that Bangkok jail cell to Alexandre Cazes.

Politically Assassinated.

> And whatever happened to Thomas Clark aka Variety Jones? Has he been
> extradited from Thailand yet? I find nothing since a tweet in March.

Free Talk Live 2015 09 27
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r9q0Ffvrh4c
https://web.archive.org/web/20150906004929/https://keybase.io/varietyjones
https://web.archive.org/web/20151004133310/http://varietyjones.com/
https://twitter.com/blockOperator

Re: Do you have predictions about 2017?

[juan]

On Fri, 18 Aug 2017 07:49:37 -0500
Steven Schear  wrote:

> I predict a coup, perhaps using a major false flag or the 25th
> Amendment, to unseat Trump before the end of the year.


I take it you are joking?

Re: Do you have predictions about 2017?

[Steven Schear]

I predict a coup, perhaps using a major false flag or the 25th Amendment,
to unseat Trump before the end of the year.

On Sun, Jan 1, 2017 at 6:38 AM, Georgi Guninski <gunin...@guninski.com>
wrote:

> Niels Bohr allegedly said "Predictions are difficult, especially about
> the future".
>
> Do you have predictions about 2017?
>
> Being certified optimist, I predict fuckups, fuckups and more fuckups.
>



-- 
Creator of the Warrant Canary and the Street Performer Protocol. Wi-Fi
standard spec. creation participant and co-developer of eCache. Director at
MojoNation and Cylink. Founding member of IFCA and GNU Radio.

Shameless self-promoter :)

Re: Do you have predictions about 2017?

[Steven Schear]

I predict Bitcoin Core (what most people are calling Bitcoin since the
recent fork) will crash and Bitcoin Cash, the new fork, will take over its
mantle as Bitcoin.

On Sun, Jan 1, 2017 at 6:38 AM, Georgi Guninski <gunin...@guninski.com>
wrote:

> Niels Bohr allegedly said "Predictions are difficult, especially about
> the future".
>
> Do you have predictions about 2017?
>
> Being certified optimist, I predict fuckups, fuckups and more fuckups.
>



-- 
Creator of the Warrant Canary and the Street Performer Protocol. Wi-Fi
standard spec. creation participant and co-developer of eCache. Director at
MojoNation and Cylink. Founding member of IFCA and GNU Radio.

Shameless self-promoter :)

Re: Do you have predictions about 2017?

[Mirimir]

On 08/17/2017 06:20 AM, John Newman wrote:
> 
> 
>> On Aug 17, 2017, at 11:41 AM, Georgi Guninski <gunin...@guninski.com> wrote:
>>
>> On Sun, Jan 01, 2017 at 05:30:50PM -0500, grarpamp wrote:
>>>> Do you have predictions about 2017?
>>>
>>> Bitcoin will hit $2017.
>>
>> Bitcoin is over $4 500 now and passed $2 000 in early summer.
>>
>> I wish I had enough brain to follow smart punky hints...
> 
> You and me both. 
> 
> I wonder what really happened in that Bangkok jail cell to Alexandre Cazes. 

And whatever happened to Thomas Clark aka Variety Jones? Has he been
extradited from Thailand yet? I find nothing since a tweet in March.

Re: Do you have predictions about 2017?

[John Newman]

> On Aug 17, 2017, at 11:41 AM, Georgi Guninski <gunin...@guninski.com> wrote:
> 
> On Sun, Jan 01, 2017 at 05:30:50PM -0500, grarpamp wrote:
>>> Do you have predictions about 2017?
>> 
>> Bitcoin will hit $2017.
> 
> Bitcoin is over $4 500 now and passed $2 000 in early summer.
> 
> I wish I had enough brain to follow smart punky hints...

You and me both. 

I wonder what really happened in that Bangkok jail cell to Alexandre Cazes. 

Re: Do you have predictions about 2017?

[Georgi Guninski]

On Sun, Jan 01, 2017 at 05:30:50PM -0500, grarpamp wrote:
> > Do you have predictions about 2017?
> 
> Bitcoin will hit $2017.

Bitcoin is over $4 500 now and passed $2 000 in early summer.

I wish I had enough brain to follow smart punky hints...

Re: WTC [WAS] Do you have predictions about 2017?

[Razer]

On 01/27/2017 05:35 PM, booty wrote:
> > On Thu, Jan 19 2017 08:31:04 -0800
> > "Razer"  wrote:
> >
> > the white middle-class way of life is responsible for terror attacks
>
> /Blames victims/
> /Feels better about self/
>
> Self-hatred is for cucks.
>
> > the computer industry (this list)
>
> Feel free to throw that computer you write this list on in the fucking
> trash.
>
>


Got a better Idea. JunkFile you at the server, with malice, and keep
using 'this ol box'.

BuhBye

WTC [WAS] Do you have predictions about 2017?

[booty]

> On Thu, Jan 19 2017 08:31:04 -0800
> "Razer"  wrote:
>
> the white middle-class way of life is responsible for terror attacks

/Blames victims/
/Feels better about self/

Self-hatred is for cucks.

> the computer industry (this list)

Feel free to throw that computer you write this list on in the fucking trash.

Re: WTC [WAS] Do you have predictions about 2017?

[grarpamp]

On Sat, Jan 21, 2017 at 3:21 PM, jim bell  wrote:
>  >   You might have more luck with some sort of 'hight latency'
>   >  mixing network and a crpytocurrency with built in
>   >  'anonimity' (that is NOT bitcoin)
>
>
> Zerocoin...https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zerocoin

There's now a handful of 'more anonymous than bitcoin' currencies
out there. Some of them are linked to from within page collections
such as...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zerocoin
http://zerocoin.org/
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zcash
http://zerocash-project.org/
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CryptoNote
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cryptocurrency
http://zcoin.finance/language/en/zcoin-and-zcash/

Re: WTC [WAS] Do you have predictions about 2017?

[juan]

On Sat, 21 Jan 2017 20:21:14 + (UTC)
jim bell  wrote:


> 
> >   tor and bitcoin are obviously not the proper tools to use
> >    against the state. Especially tor, the pentagon's cyberweapon.

> I read, months ago, that one of the military's uses for TOR is to
> control aerial drones from around the world.  Presumably, the reason
> for using TOR is to prevent systems in the link from identifying the
> traffic as "controlling an aerial drone" and cutting it off.


That's funny. That's something I was about to mention in the
tor-talk mailing list a couple of times, but somehow didn't. I
should have, before the pentagon scumbags (dingledine, syverson
and their psycho-lapdogs) banned me.

It sounds plausible, although I'm not sure if it's really true.
No doubt murdering children for the benefit of the US empire
is a core value of the tor project, but I would guess that
drone control requires a more reliable link (but maybe not).


http://www.spiegel.de/international/germany/ramstein-base-in-germany-a-key-center-in-us-drone-war-a-1029279.html


Anyway, the official explanation is plausible too. The
alleged reason why the pentagon wants a 'low latency' network
is that the typical web 'surfer' can't tolerate any delays and
won't use tor if it's slow. So their shitty 'low latency'
network is both easy to attack by its owners (the pentagon),
and 'popular'. Win win.



> 
> That use explains why they want the ability to have a low-latency
> link.  What it DOESN'T explain is why that low-latency link isn't
> merely one way to use the system:  Why can't the packets themselves
> decide how they are to be routed?  Why can't they have an
> arbitrarily-large number of hops, 

You can have more (or less) than three hops - it's just a
matter of configuration. But more hops inside the network solve
nothing if the 'attacker' can watch packets entering and
leaving the network. Something the pentagon can do.



> of course at the expense of higher
> latency. Why can't hops fork?  Why isn't dummy traffic inserted?  All
> explained by the military's need to make TOR good, but not TOO GOOD!


Yes. Here's another datapoint

"zero-knowledge inc vs cryptoanarchy" 

https://cryptome.org/zks-v-tcm.htm

Looks like the gov't friendly scammers behind "zero knowledge"
are the same scammers who now work for the pentagon, like ian
goldberg for instance. It's also funny to see how austin hill
uses the same lame excuses that the tor clowns use today. 

" we need to make sure that we get millions of people on the
system," 

"we need every AOL user, ICQ user, Disney loving parent and
child"  - disney, LOL.



> 
>     
>  >   You might have more luck with some sort of 'hight latency'
>   >  mixing network and a crpytocurrency with built in
>   >  'anonimity' (that is NOT bitcoin)
> 
> Zerocoin...    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zerocoin  


Or something based on cryptonote. 

https://cryptonote.org/


> >> Silk Road 
> 
> >    silk road clearly illustrates the shortcomings of using garbage
>  >   like tor. Jusk ask Ulbricht.
> 
> Quite true.  Nevertheless, SR did have the salutory effect of showing
> how such a secret system could operate, for months and even years,
> despite flawed tools.  It was a data-point.  People will continue to
> construct and operate SR-2's, SR-3's, etc, hopefully with increasing
> levels of success.  They will learn.  
> 


I guess time will tell and we'll see how the arms race evolves.




> 
> 
> >    Or perhaps your analysis is simplistic AP advertising, not
> >   a serious look into the nature of state rule.

> Should I have to be doing all the work, here?  

No, certainly not. Indeed it's not something a single person
can do because the problem is a cultural problem.



> I would argue that if
> a person proposes a plausible idea to eliminate war and militaries
> (what everyone has always said would be an excellent idea) it thereby
> becomes a obligation of the (interested) public to either credit or
> discredit it.  

I agree. On the other hand I'd guess that many of the people
who say they want to eliminate war think that the way to do
so is to have a world state (either fascist american or
commie flavor). Or 'good' politicians. Or any other statist
nonsense. So AP won't appeal too much to them...




> 
> >    AP may be a means for a libertarian defense system, but AP by
> >    itself isn't necesarily libertarian

> A gun isn't necessarily libertarian, either:  It can be used to shoot
> attacking, guilty people, or shoot innocent people. 

Yep. That would be my point =P


> That's not an
> argument to make ownership of guns impossible.


> 
>            

Re: WTC [WAS] Do you have predictions about 2017?

[Razer]

On 01/21/2017 11:57 PM, grarpamp wrote:
> Mechanical properties of structural steels at elevated temperatures
> and after cooling down (2006)
> http://www.civil.canterbury.ac.nz/sif/documents/paper19.pdf
>
> Fire safety design of building structures has received greater
> attention in recent times due to continuing losses of properties and
> lives in fires.

Oddly that 'greater attention' doesn't seem to have been paid in the UAE
where insurance fires in skyscrapers are how the Afghan elite who
invested in their construction with US pallets of cash (KabulBank etc)
launder their money.
http://auntieimperial.blogspot.com/2010/02/all-this-money-magically-appears-from.html

No building is indestructible when there's a concerted attempt to
destroy . Get over it and admit your bloated 5 planet lifestyle is why
the WTC collapsed.

Rr

Re: WTC [WAS] Do you have predictions about 2017?

[grarpamp]

https://www.reddit.com/r/videos/comments/5pcwd6/this_is_insane_does_anyone_know_if_this_guy_lived/

Re: WTC [WAS] Do you have predictions about 2017?

[grarpamp]

Mechanical properties of structural steels at elevated temperatures
and after cooling down (2006)
http://www.civil.canterbury.ac.nz/sif/documents/paper19.pdf

Fire safety design of building structures has received greater
attention in recent times due to continuing losses of properties and
lives in fires. However, the structural behaviour of thin-walled
cold-formed steel columns under fire conditions is not well understood
despite the increasing use of light gauge steels in building
construction. Cold-formed steel columns are often subject to local
buckling effects. Therefore a series of laboratory tests of lipped and
unlipped channel columns made of varying steel thicknesses and grades
was undertaken at uniform elevated temperatures up to 700°C under
steady state conditions. Finite element models of the tested columns
were also developed, and their elastic buckling and nonlinear analysis
results were compared with test results at elevated temperatures.
Effects of the degradation of mechanical properties of steel with
temperature were included in the finite element analyses. The use of
accurately measured yield stress, elasticity modulus and stress-strain
curves at elevated temperatures provided a good comparison of the
ultimate loads and load-deflection curves from tests and finite
element analyses. The commonly used effective width design rules and
the direct strength method at ambient temperature were then used to
predict the ultimate loads at elevated temperatures by using the
reduced mechanical properties. By comparing these predicted ultimate
loads with those from tests and finite element analyses, the accuracy

http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/search?q=steel+columns
http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/search?q=steel+trusses

Re: WTC [WAS] Do you have predictions about 2017?

[jim bell]

 From: juan 
jim bell  wrote:

>  From: grarpamp 
 
> >Rather amazed AP hasn't yet risen (publicly) to affect things.

>> No disagreement from me on that!  When I proposed AP almost 22 years
>> ago, https://cryptome.org/ap.htm, I believed that the possibilities
>> and advantages of the system would be immediately debated and decided
>> upon.  A lot of debate did indeed occur, but even today the average
>> person remains unaware that there is a solution to militaries and
>> war, to government and tyranny.  How long until freedom breaks out
>> and lives? Most of the initial objection to AP was either dishonest
>> or uninformed.  Perhaps many people could not imagine that a complex
>> system of software could exist that would maintain anonymity, but two
>> decades of software development (TOR, Bitcoin,


>   tor and bitcoin are obviously not the proper tools to use
>    against the state. Especially tor, the pentagon's cyberweapon.
I read, months ago, that one of the military's uses for TOR is to control 
aerial drones from around the world.  Presumably, the reason for using TOR is 
to prevent systems in the link from identifying the traffic as "controlling an 
aerial drone" and cutting it off.

That use explains why they want the ability to have a low-latency link.  What 
it DOESN'T explain is why that low-latency link isn't merely one way to use the 
system:  Why can't the packets themselves decide how they are to be routed?  
Why can't they have an arbitrarily-large number of hops, of course at the 
expense of higher latency.  
Why can't hops fork?  Why isn't dummy traffic inserted?  All explained by the 
military's need to make TOR good, but not TOO GOOD!

    
 >   You might have more luck with some sort of 'hight latency'
  >  mixing network and a crpytocurrency with built in
  >  'anonimity' (that is NOT bitcoin)

Zerocoin...    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zerocoin  
>> Silk Road 

>    silk road clearly illustrates the shortcomings of using garbage
 >   like tor. Jusk ask Ulbricht.

Quite true.  Nevertheless, SR did have the salutory effect of showing how such 
a secret system could operate, for months and even years, despite flawed tools. 
 It was a data-point.  People will continue to construct and operate SR-2's, 
SR-3's, etc, hopefully with increasing levels of success.  They will learn.  

> and its
> successors, Ethereum, and Augur) should prove to everyone that we are
> up to the task.  I claimed that AP would eliminate both war an
> militaries.  People have claimed they want to end both for centuries.
>  Well, finally they actually get the promise of such an outcome, and
> a plausible mechanism to do so, and they fail or refuse to address
> the issue.  Maybe they don't really want peace:  They merely want the
> continuation of the status quo.  


>    Or perhaps your analysis is simplistic AP advertising, not
>   a serious look into the nature of state rule.
Should I have to be doing all the work, here?  I would argue that if a person 
proposes a plausible idea to eliminate war and militaries (what everyone has 
always said would be an excellent idea) it thereby becomes a obligation of the 
(interested) public to either credit or discredit it.  

>    AP may be a means for a libertarian defense system, but AP by
>    itself isn't necesarily libertarian
A gun isn't necessarily libertarian, either:  It can be used to shoot 
attacking, guilty people, or shoot innocent people.  That's not an argument to 
make ownership of guns impossible.

           Jim Bell   

Re: WTC [WAS] Do you have predictions about 2017?

[juan]

On Fri, 20 Jan 2017 20:04:20 + (UTC)
jim bell  wrote:

> 
> 
>  From: grarpamp 
> 
> >Rather amazed AP hasn't yet risen (publicly) to affect things.

> No disagreement from me on that!  When I proposed AP almost 22 years
> ago, https://cryptome.org/ap.htm, I believed that the possibilities
> and advantages of the system would be immediately debated and decided
> upon.  A lot of debate did indeed occur, but even today the average
> person remains unaware that there is a solution to militaries and
> war, to government and tyranny.  How long until freedom breaks out
> and lives? Most of the initial objection to AP was either dishonest
> or uninformed.  Perhaps many people could not imagine that a complex
> system of software could exist that would maintain anonymity, but two
> decades of software development (TOR, Bitcoin,


tor and bitcoin are obviously not the proper tools to use
against the state. Especially tor, the pentagon's cyberweapon.

You might have more luck with some sort of 'hight latency'
mixing network and a crpytocurrency with built in
'anonimity' (that is NOT bitcoin)

> Silk Road 

silk road clearly illustrates the shortcomings of using garbage
like tor. Jusk ask Ulbricht.


> and its
> successors, Ethereum, and Augur) should prove to everyone that we are
> up to the task.  I claimed that AP would eliminate both war an
> militaries.  People have claimed they want to end both for centuries.
>  Well, finally they actually get the promise of such an outcome, and
> a plausible mechanism to do so, and they fail or refuse to address
> the issue.  Maybe they don't really want peace:  They merely want the
> continuation of the status quo.  


Or perhaps your analysis is simplistic AP advertising, not
a serious look into the nature of state rule.

AP may be a means for a libertarian defense system, but AP by
itself isn't necesarily libertarian



> They want their kind of people in
> control.  And when they get upset, it is only because they are losing
> control. Jim Bell
> 
>

Re: WTC [WAS] Do you have predictions about 2017?

[Steve Kinney]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1



On 01/20/2017 03:04 PM, jim bell wrote:
> 
> 
> *From:* grarpamp 
> 
>> Rather amazed AP hasn't yet risen (publicly) to affect things.
> 
> No disagreement from me on that!  When I proposed AP almost 22
> years ago, https://cryptome.org/ap.htm, I believed that the
> possibilities and advantages of the system would be immediately
> debated and decided upon. A lot of debate did indeed occur, but
> even today the average person remains unaware that there is a
> solution to militaries and war, to government and tyranny.  How
> long until freedom breaks out and lives?

It seems to me that AP has not been implemented due to one deficit:
We have no means of implementing AP with adequate safeguards to
protect the operators and participants from the combined resources of
military and law enforcement agencies from numerous jurisdictions
worldwide.

AP may be "perfectly legal" for every participant except the prize
winners, but in the view of a targeted ruling class and its servants,
it is perfectly legal to kill the operators on discovery as long as
they do not get caught doing so.  If they do get caught, they can
simply change the laws.  Their propaganda capabilities would assure
broad public approval of any such changes.

AP is a novel means of waging class warfare, but if and when it gets
implemented the "enemies of the people" will not surrender or sit
quietly waiting to die, constrained by rule of law from striking back
with every means available to them.  As these means include already
established surveillance and manipulation capabilities spanning the
networks AP communications must hide in to be successful, early
implementations of AP would trigger an arms race.  Maybe the AP side
can win, but the lessons learned along the way to that victory would
be paid for in the blood of failed operators.  So far no one has shown
up with the necessary technical capabilities and confidence to take
the risk and pay the price.

A fully distributed network protocol for AP, with no single or
higher-value points of failure, clever enough to offer a credible (if
false) promise of security to early adopters, might someday get off
the ground.  But given that the global industrial economy will most
likely collapse first and take most of today's ruling class down with
it, I think it makes more sense to wait for the laws of physics to do
the job.

The more hard-headed anarchistic technologists we have when that
happens, the sooner a world (more) worth living in can replace the one
we have.  Since trying to make AP work in today's real would motivate
today's ruling class to thin that particular herd, I would not
encourage them to implement AP... just yet.

:o)







-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux)

iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJYgpVtAAoJEECU6c5Xzmuqk28IAMFMvy0gue8nrBCxFmsuGVQv
wNRoowrToMg+oA25yYuXriw0ZJ9SHba6EkkbekSKVBWQ2Be9Sq4hRi2bus/22dl4
4piYfxI/Paps2OyuvbhkPWc2HhEpIMUzzNSZONpCE6mwj8Py1LIXJHjhurnnJIoV
WpTCkmzB0La31EbjBubaUB8VF6/+I03+cNOMMN4kI4360+AQjoy1ydgu7pa2lUto
A2yUttyYEm8v3x1Q3c9QdjlNnO8hZ4CmhWe5yr2QX7sQ+MMiyI1EnG2oiMTjz89f
GH5D5AILVz7ApFTbkU/GgikifOb4uR45Y2iJD+0zWOmVq6pD4vNgzw3hrLCdiCU=
=B5lY
-END PGP SIGNATURE-

Re: WTC [WAS] Do you have predictions about 2017?

[jim bell]

 From: grarpamp 

>Rather amazed AP hasn't yet risen (publicly) to affect things.
No disagreement from me on that!  When I proposed AP almost 22 years ago, 
https://cryptome.org/ap.htm, I believed that the possibilities and advantages 
of the system would be immediately debated and decided upon.  A lot of debate 
did indeed occur, but even today the average person remains unaware that there 
is a solution to militaries and war, to government and tyranny.  How long until 
freedom breaks out and lives?
Most of the initial objection to AP was either dishonest or uninformed.  
Perhaps many people could not imagine that a complex system of software could 
exist that would maintain anonymity, but two decades of software development 
(TOR, Bitcoin, Silk Road and its successors, Ethereum, and Augur) should prove 
to everyone that we are up to the task.  I claimed that AP would eliminate both 
war an militaries.  People have claimed they want to end both for centuries.  
Well, finally they actually get the promise of such an outcome, and a plausible 
mechanism to do so, and they fail or refuse to address the issue.  Maybe they 
don't really want peace:  They merely want the continuation of the status quo.  
They want their kind of people in control.  And when they get upset, it is only 
because they are losing control.
        Jim Bell








   

Re: [offlist] Re: WTC [WAS] Do you have predictions about 2017?

[grarpamp]

Rather amazed AP hasn't yet risen (publicly) to affect things.
After all, we have bounties to murder the murderers (via the state)...
http://www.whokilledseth.com/
And some would say there are a lot of culpable murder ordering
murderers at the top to be murdered.
Would not surprise to see should wanton disparity and difference
and vacuuming resources, natural and human, continue increasing.
When things are not distributed evenly, such things become targets.

Re: [offlist] Re: WTC [WAS] Do you have predictions about 2017?

[Razer]

On 01/18/2017 10:45 PM, grarpamp wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 18, 2017 at 12:14 AM, Razer  wrote:
>> All that stuff was subject to collapse and other terminal damage by the
>> shock wave of those 255,000 lb planes that weigh more 3-48 foot tractor
> As people said similarly earlier, if you're asking re wtc7, not sure
> if 1 and 2 would
> have been enough to seriously kick at 7 outside the bathtub when 1 and 2
> were anchored in 'bedrock', only seismographs would show that, and even
> then perhaps only vertically, as opposed to laterally. Though yes, absorptive
> torquing of 1 and 2 would definitely contributed to doing them both in, like
> the flexing of parallel pixie sticks. Cryptome was prompted to respond on
> architecture issues but hasn't yet. Caveat architecture isn't necessarily
> engineering.
>
> And try the colorimetry and max heat boiling point vs whatever was
> pouring out the windows. Unfortunately the materials overlap there.
> As before, you decide, more investigation needed before any can be said.
> Were there to be conspiracy, it's the 'explosions' that need more detailing.
> And do you really think 'flower pots' of thermite could be delivered to 8x'th
> floors unnoticed, and who were the tenants? Though yes, 'elevator
> maintenance' could cut the core. And basements are free conjecture.
>
> One might also look into the four 'cleanup' contractors background.
> And to any (unfortunately top secret) BATF / OST or demo types
> operating in the area. I've no opinion. Any top [secret] level strategic
> foreknowledge would be more damning than situ tactical ops, though
> not unrelated.
>
> So many fun questions to benefit both sides :) That is the point
> of answering the science. And if it's not answered, don't give up.


Simply, and a statement of why I'm as disgusted by the ongoing nonsense
as I am about that other trash topic who killed JFK

Focusing on the How and Who instead of Why, IS giving up. Giving in to
terrorism.

But it's better that way. It diverts a mass of OCD nutjobs who would
otherwise be in the way of every attempt at Social Justice for anyone
but them(white middle-class)selves. The ranks of 911 truthers is just as
white and affluent as the Republican Party. There's a reason for that.
Because 'them(white middle-class)selves' ARE the reason (or should I say
'them(white middle-class)selves' way of life is...) for terror attacks
on the US. They ENABLE terrorism... No matter who actualizes it.

If the CIA was committing, or attempting to set-up terrorist acts in a
vacuum where the victims of extractive resources wars and it BLOWBACK
didn't exist. Without a mass of angry disaffected Muslims willing to die
because they feel they had nothing to live for, War on the Middle East
JUST WOULD NOT be a viable plan for the fallout to be used social
control in the 'terrorized' country, would it?

But I HONESTLY don't expect legitimate answers from people who make
their living off the end product of that resource extraction
terrorism... People who make their money from the computer industry.

Buy a bigger touch screen Dee-Vice. Kill more Congolese. Ever seen what
a lithium mining op in China looks like? Do you give a fuck? When the
planes fly into 'Merica's buildings it does... and the rationalizations,
and the denials, and the SHEEP start bleating saying the have the
'truth'. Because it's impossible for them to admit their culpability.

Rr

Re: [offlist] Re: WTC [WAS] Do you have predictions about 2017?

[grarpamp]

On Wed, Jan 18, 2017 at 12:14 AM, Razer  wrote:
> All that stuff was subject to collapse and other terminal damage by the
> shock wave of those 255,000 lb planes that weigh more 3-48 foot tractor

As people said similarly earlier, if you're asking re wtc7, not sure
if 1 and 2 would
have been enough to seriously kick at 7 outside the bathtub when 1 and 2
were anchored in 'bedrock', only seismographs would show that, and even
then perhaps only vertically, as opposed to laterally. Though yes, absorptive
torquing of 1 and 2 would definitely contributed to doing them both in, like
the flexing of parallel pixie sticks. Cryptome was prompted to respond on
architecture issues but hasn't yet. Caveat architecture isn't necessarily
engineering.

And try the colorimetry and max heat boiling point vs whatever was
pouring out the windows. Unfortunately the materials overlap there.
As before, you decide, more investigation needed before any can be said.
Were there to be conspiracy, it's the 'explosions' that need more detailing.
And do you really think 'flower pots' of thermite could be delivered to 8x'th
floors unnoticed, and who were the tenants? Though yes, 'elevator
maintenance' could cut the core. And basements are free conjecture.

One might also look into the four 'cleanup' contractors background.
And to any (unfortunately top secret) BATF / OST or demo types
operating in the area. I've no opinion. Any top [secret] level strategic
foreknowledge would be more damning than situ tactical ops, though
not unrelated.

So many fun questions to benefit both sides :) That is the point
of answering the science. And if it's not answered, don't give up.

Re: WTC [WAS] Do you have predictions about 2017?

[grarpamp]

On Tue, Jan 17, 2017 at 11:28 PM, Razer  wrote:
> Metals weaken significantly and permanently long before they ever reach
> melting point.

Of course, that obvious engineering should be considered...
any degree of heat causes progressive degree of weakness
in metals and other materials such as concrete. The links
in this thread should direct science not bogus armchair analysis.
Ref color temperature vs. 8x'th floor liquid flow out the windows
and ground zero glowing/dripping/molten excavations. And evaluation
as to 'secondary explosions' and 'liquid glowing metal'. That will be
hard to prove out without investigation and non-leading interviews,
let alone 15 years later. Respecting those evidences, really don't have
opinion on that, or time. And frankly, once initiated, tubular pancaking
makes physical science sense. It's the initiate that people question.
Was the basement structure / etc cut? If the 'lobby' blew, why
didn't floors 2, 3, 5, 10... etc. I've no idea, you decide.

Re: WTC [WAS] Do you have predictions about 2017?

[juan]

On Tue, 17 Jan 2017 22:31:31 -0600
"Shawn K. Quinn"  wrote:

> On 01/17/2017 06:32 PM, grarpamp wrote:
> > iron melts 1811k 1538c boils 3134k 2862c
> > steel melts 1100-1538c depending on alloy content
> > aluminum melts 933k 660c boils 2473k 2470c
> > jet fuel open air burn 1030c to 2500k 2230c
> > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Color_temperature
> 
> Metal doesn't have to melt to be flexible enough to bend. 1030°C is
> plenty hot enough to make iron or steel bend enough for a building to
> collapse the way the WTC did.


Quinn, yet another piece of US military shit. Exactly like the
rayzer pentagon bot. 

Now a basic fact : Steel structures used in buildings are
designed taking into account that they might just get hot during
a fire. So, all this talk about 'melting' steel or even 'softening' it 
is sheer stupidity. No, the fires were not hot enough to 'melt'
steel NOR TO WEAKEN IT. Plus there isn't any evidence nor
reason to believe that the fires in the wtc were especially
'hot'. Rahter the opposite. 


Another basic fact. A steel structure with a mass of tens of
thousands of tons is a BIG heat sink. Even a retarded
'faux''engineer' should see what follows from that. 





> 

Re: WTC [WAS] Do you have predictions about 2017?

[Shawn K. Quinn]

On 01/17/2017 06:32 PM, grarpamp wrote:
> iron melts 1811k 1538c boils 3134k 2862c
> steel melts 1100-1538c depending on alloy content
> aluminum melts 933k 660c boils 2473k 2470c
> jet fuel open air burn 1030c to 2500k 2230c
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Color_temperature

Metal doesn't have to melt to be flexible enough to bend. 1030°C is
plenty hot enough to make iron or steel bend enough for a building to
collapse the way the WTC did.

-- 
Shawn K. Quinn 
http://www.rantroulette.com
http://www.skqrecordquest.com



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Re: Do you have predictions about 2017?

[juan]

On Thu, 12 Jan 2017 07:33:14 +1000
"James A. Donald"  wrote:

> On 1/9/2017 8:44 AM, juan wrote:
> > Indeed. It clearly shows a building falling on its footprint
> > exactly as if it had been the target of controlled
> > demolition, something that EVEN the government acknowledges.
> 
> It clearly shows the building falling beside its footprint.


So tell me pentagon troll, did you bother to check the other
examples of controlled demolition I linked in which the
buildings fall in a less orderly fashion than WTC7 did? 

What's wrong? You can't handle reality? 

And did you post the link(s) to the video(s) that 'prove(s)'
 this claim? 

"There is a video of the last couple of guys inside the WTC 7,
" 

Where's the F U C K I N G video?














> 
> 

Re: Do you have predictions about 2017?

[James A. Donald]

On 1/9/2017 8:44 AM, juan wrote:

Indeed. It clearly shows a building falling on its footprint
exactly as if it had been the target of controlled demolition,
something that EVEN the government acknowledges.


It clearly shows the building falling beside its footprint.

Re: Do you have predictions about 2017?

[juan]

On Wed, 11 Jan 2017 12:46:18 +1000
"James A. Donald"  wrote:

> On 1/11/2017 11:51 AM, juan wrote:
> > The bombs must obviously have been planted weeks before.
> > Why do you even bother asking that.
> 
> Thousands of bombs planted in the middle of New York, sit there for 
> weeks, and no one notices.



OK - At this point you are just trolling. 

So why is it that you, supposedly some sort of 'libertarian',
are parroting propaganda straight out from the pentagon? What
the FUCK is wrong with you.

You are worse than rayzer, a lefty fascist who trolls this list
only for destruction's sake.  

Re: Do you have predictions about 2017?

[James A. Donald]

On 1/11/2017 11:51 AM, juan wrote:

The bombs must obviously have been planted weeks before. Why do
you even bother asking that.


Thousands of bombs planted in the middle of New York, sit there for 
weeks, and no one notices.

Re: Do you have predictions about 2017?

[juan]

On Tue, 10 Jan 2017 13:06:27 +1000
"James A. Donald"  wrote:

> On 1/10/2017 7:34 AM, juan wrote:
> > I addressed that in another post. As a matter of fact the
> > collapse of WTC7 is very ordered, ESPECIALLY when compared
> > to other unambiguous examples of controlled demolition. "It
> > seems like the team responsible for WTC7's demolition was
> > especially skilled." (copypasting myself)
> 
> There is a video of the last couple of guys inside the WTC 7, 


So where's the link to the video? So far you provided zero
evidence for your claims. 

But thanks for giving me the chance to point out that the
collapse of WTC7 was even more controlled than ordinary
controlled demolition. Flatly contradicting anything you
imagined.



> There is rubble everywhere, because the building is disintegrating 
> slowly around them, 

Link the video. Otherwise the only thing you are showing is
your literary skills for the creation of fiction.



> They clearly expect the building to fall soon. Do you suppose that
> they were in on the conspiracy and were planting demolition charges?
> 
> 

The bombs must obviously have been planted weeks before. Why do
you even bother asking that.
 

Re: WTC [WAS] Do you have predictions about 2017?

[grarpamp]

On Mon, Jan 9, 2017 at 10:06 PM, James A. Donald  wrote:
> There is a video of the last couple of guys inside the WTC 7, a newsman and
> a secret service guy.
> Do you suppose that they were in on the conspiracy
> and were planting demolition charges?

What if, Neo, there was an actual link to the video, complete
with full description and long comments regarding what some
people think the SS guy was doing there...

# SS Office of Secure Transportation - William Bennette (Mark LaGanga, CBS)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m8kic9Iyu2k

... and to the Russian mentioned therein ...

# 9/11 The Third Truth Dimitri Khalezov
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cUnjbCxhXh4

... he explains everything ;)

Office of Stolen Transportation...
http://nypost.com/2005/10/27/judge-rips-911-case/
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/04/14/nyregion/prosecutors-say-rescuer-stole-cars-recovered-at-ground-zero.html

# Architects / Engineers
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gjZy1oFHlvA

# Pentagon Auditors Inspectors Office Destroyed
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SqHIPzTACrM

# WTC Gold Au Missing / Stolen
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qs022aKCZxk
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m3f2U75qCZo
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n3xgjxJwedA
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BsDtvu2uTuA
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9SlAKSZHsNA
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R0F9nPGKrJI

# WTC Hard Drives decrypted top secret Stock Trading
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WiG4vAOIhbA
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PIs9gtRBd20

# 102 minutes - in the flow
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RJIyNSUGM20

# Artifacts
https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=9/11+scrapyard
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zRSY9MW08nQ
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=clxCKJxoEd4

# JPMorgan (freespeech assholes) safe deposit Paul Renda HOPE X
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9RZlW6mdy1Q

# Letterman monologue
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DBLgp1qTCTg

# BOATLIFT, An Untold Tale of 9/11 Resilience
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MDOrzF7B2Kg

Controversial theory survey aside, lots more
good stories about people and humanity out there.

Wonder what consensus will be in 2051, 2101.
And what will be left for those looking to see the
history for their first time, unedited, unfiltered.
Or even their news in real time as it happens...

WTC [WAS] Do you have predictions about 2017?

[grarpamp]

Say Building 7 one more time motherfucker, lol.


# Explosions at the base / elsewhere
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8UfRbsM7LQ4
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KLJ1c9VVSH0
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wgwn5L592yA
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XvUIQZ7t7Ak

# Rudy Giuliani on Natural Gas
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3tpqsxQeymE

# High Temps etc
http://journalof911studies.com/articles/WTCHighTemp2.pdf
http://www.journalof911studies.com/volume/200609/Why_Indeed_Did_the_WTC_Buildings_Completely_Collapse_Jones_Thermite_World_Trade_Center.pdf
http://rethink911.org/evidence/twin-towers/extrene-temperatures-and-incendiaries/
http://ae911truth.org/

# Pictures - Inside Twins and Ground Zero
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YXsDwKYz1bA

# Naudet / Sauret Docu
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MAHTpFhT5AU
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2muXB07WaYQ

# Secret History / Inconvenient Truth
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MVh9WgGxuIY
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B4WJb35o8o4
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V1LPoz2f3Gc

# Sibel Edmonds
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7pTBJmWVXhA

# Debris Removal, Mapping, Structures, FBI, etc
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oFmbgAMkYNM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_fZ8qROHED8
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r_qCo_xhgIM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mcaz6N75mjM

# Audio / Editing in Footage Important
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VmokIGGvSrw

# Bush Admits Explosives
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fpcJyn3N5ks

# Heat and Pressure effects
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QA9r9sHXs8A
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CtkWNHSG3MY

# FOIA'd fulls
https://www.youtube.com/user/WTCFOIAVideos/videos
https://plus.google.com/u/0/116036321075719719626

# Donald Trump on WTC / Elections / CIA / Old Polits Afraid?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0STS7HBi5Cw
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PcKlPhFIE7w
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dad175SC8Js

# Stranger Than Fiction
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PFoarqaNjL8

It's all STF bros, seek your own truth.
Fill us in when you find something ;-)

Re: Do you have predictions about 2017?

[James A. Donald]

On 1/10/2017 7:34 AM, juan wrote:

I addressed that in another post. As a matter of fact the
collapse of WTC7 is very ordered, ESPECIALLY when compared
to other unambiguous examples of controlled demolition. "It
seems like the team responsible for WTC7's demolition was
especially skilled." (copypasting myself)


There is a video of the last couple of guys inside the WTC 7, a newsman 
and a secret service guy.  They are searching for wounded who might need 
evacuation - because large parts of the building have already fallen 
down, and they expect the rest to come down shortly.


There is rubble everywhere, because the building is disintegrating 
slowly around them, and after a bit they realize it is not so slow any 
more and they decide it is past time to get the hell out.


They clearly expect the building to fall soon. Do you suppose that they 
were in on the conspiracy and were planting demolition charges?

Re: Do you have predictions about 2017?

[Cecilia Tanaka]

On Tue, Jan 10, 2017 at 12:31 AM, Shawn K. Quinn 
wrote:

>
> This is far from a country-specific joke; I've heard/seen it quite a bit
> in the US and US-specific forums.


​Nobody likes lawyers, la la la...  There are a lot of jokes and bizarre
conspiracy theories about us.  Fortunately, they say the rats made holes in
the Bulding 7, not the lawyers, hahaha!!  ;D  ​

Re: Do you have predictions about 2017?

[Shawn K. Quinn]

On 01/09/2017 08:21 PM, Cecilia Tanaka wrote:
> ​ Here, in Brazil, they say the same about lawyers...  Several years
> ago, the biggest School of Biology of my country made a prank, saying
> that they would use lawyers instead rats in their experiences because
> there are more lawyers than rats here and the researchers think rats are
> much cuter...  Ouch, it hurts!  (>_<)*

This is far from a country-specific joke; I've heard/seen it quite a bit
in the US and US-specific forums.

-- 
Shawn K. Quinn 
http://www.rantroulette.com
http://www.skqrecordquest.com

Re: Do you have predictions about 2017?

[Cecilia Tanaka]

On Mon, Jan 9, 2017 at 11:55 PM, juan  wrote:

>
> Are you saying that politicians belong to a particular,
> distinct race? =P
>
> I'd say they belong to a non-human species, like, for instance,
> rats. Except rats are cuter and less harmful.
>

​Here, in Brazil, they say the same about lawyers...  Several years ago,
the biggest School of Biology of my country made a prank, saying that they
would use lawyers instead rats in their experiences because there are more
lawyers than rats here and the researchers think rats are much cuter...
Ouch, it hurts!  (>_<)*


> > ​Well, I still prefer cats.  I can live with lots of cats without
> > becoming crazy, but I can't say the same about lawyers...  You know,
> > all the jokes about lawyers are not jokes, they are true!  :P​
>
> Ahaha! Yes, I was about to mention a couple of jokes about
> lawyers. You read my mind...
>

​Years ago, because one of my friends, a famous troll and lawyer  (no, the
words are not synonyms!),  I made a ​bet with hundreds of people.  Nobody
told me a joke that I never had listen about lawyers and I won a dinner.
The guy is a real troll and took me to have a dinner with him in a pub
where they had no soft drinks or juices and the menu just had meat
sandwiches.  I did not eat anything and drunk only water the whole night,
bwaaah!!!  :'(

Re: Do you have predictions about 2017?

[juan]

On Mon, 9 Jan 2017 23:41:21 -0200
Cecilia Tanaka  wrote:

> On Mon, Jan 9, 2017 at 11:21 PM, juan  wrote:
> 
> >
> > I doubt I could help you. My 'law' might be something like
> >
> > "In order to solve any real or imaginary problems with the
> > IoT, two steps must be taken :
> >
> > 1) Kill all politicians
> > 2) Kill all the CEOs of internet companies
> > "
> >
> > ^-^  Hm, no that's not going to be popular among VIPs...
> 
> 
> ​Err...  I live in Brasil, not in the USA, Juan.  Here, racism and
> hate speech are serious crimes and killing people is not considered a
> good thing...  :P

Are you saying that politicians belong to a particular,
distinct race? =P

I'd say they belong to a non-human species, like, for instance,
rats. Except rats are cuter and less harmful. 

At any rate legislation to 'regulate' politicians out of
existence would certainly be based on universal human rights
and wouldn't be concerned with national borders =)


> 
> Some people don't like cats. Other people don't like lawyers.
> I
> > don't know why some people don't like laywers =)
> >
> 
> ​Well, I still prefer cats.  I can live with lots of cats without
> becoming crazy, but I can't say the same about lawyers...  You know,
> all the jokes about lawyers are not jokes, they are true!  :P​

Ahaha! Yes, I was about to mention a couple of jokes about
lawyers. You read my mind...

Re: Do you have predictions about 2017?

[Cecilia Tanaka]

On Mon, Jan 9, 2017 at 11:21 PM, juan  wrote:

>
> I doubt I could help you. My 'law' might be something like
>
> "In order to solve any real or imaginary problems with the IoT,
> two steps must be taken :
>
> 1) Kill all politicians
> 2) Kill all the CEOs of internet companies
> "
>
> ^-^  Hm, no that's not going to be popular among VIPs...


​Err...  I live in Brasil, not in the USA, Juan.  Here, racism and hate
speech are serious crimes and killing people is not considered a good
thing...  :P

Some people don't like cats. Other people don't like lawyers. I
> don't know why some people don't like laywers =)
>

​Well, I still prefer cats.  I can live with lots of cats without becoming
crazy, but I can't say the same about lawyers...  You know, all the jokes
about lawyers are not jokes, they are true!  :P​

Re: Do you have predictions about 2017?

[Cecilia Tanaka]

On Mon, Jan 9, 2017 at 10:10 PM, juan  wrote:

> On Mon, 9 Jan 2017 22:00:01 -0200
> Cecilia Tanaka  wrote:
> >
> > ​I did not send any picture, Juan.  I was just answering to the
> > person who sent the pic.​
>
>
> I profusely apologize. The person who sent the pic is no other
> than rayzer then...
>
> It seems that somehow the picture got attached to your message,
> plus(or again my client is playing up). Also,  I can't find your
> message dated " Wed, 4 Jan 2017 02:38:48 -0200"  in the
> archive. I'm pretty sure it's not here :
>
>
> https://lists.cpunks.org/pipermail/cypherpunks/2017-
> January/date.html
>
> There's this message from you dated Jan 3
> https://lists.cpunks.org/pipermail/cypherpunks/2017-
> January/034745.html
>
> and then this one  Jan 6
> https://lists.cpunks.org/pipermail/cypherpunks/2017-
> January/034783.html
>
> but nothing for Jan 4.
>
> Weird.
>

​I will forward​

​it for you, then.  Hey, instead trying to kick my poor butt, don't want to
help me with a future law, which will (try to) regulate the IoT in Brazil?
 :)

I am almost dying with a pretty annoying pain, but these are the last days
of the public consulting about this theme and it's great to have an
opportunity to avoid more legislative disasters, brrr...  I need to tell
you some news too.  We are trying to "hack" some institutions, which
regulate the Brazilian Internet.  Political hacking, Juan.  Much better
than kicking me is kicking other lawyers, less 'cute-cute' and colorful
than me, haha!  ;)

Re: Do you have predictions about 2017?

[juan]

On Mon, 9 Jan 2017 22:00:01 -0200
Cecilia Tanaka  wrote:


> 
> 
> ​I did not send any picture, Juan.  I was just answering to the
> person who sent the pic.​


I profusely apologize. The person who sent the pic is no other
than rayzer then...

It seems that somehow the picture got attached to your message,
plus(or again my client is playing up). Also,  I can't find your
message dated " Wed, 4 Jan 2017 02:38:48 -0200"  in the
archive. I'm pretty sure it's not here : 


https://lists.cpunks.org/pipermail/cypherpunks/2017-January/date.html

There's this message from you dated Jan 3
https://lists.cpunks.org/pipermail/cypherpunks/2017-January/034745.html

and then this one  Jan 6
https://lists.cpunks.org/pipermail/cypherpunks/2017-January/034783.html

but nothing for Jan 4. 

Weird. 

Re: Do you have predictions about 2017?

[Cecilia Tanaka]

On Mon, Jan 9, 2017 at 9:58 PM, juan  wrote:

> On Mon, 9 Jan 2017 21:44:31 -0200
> Cecilia Tanaka  wrote:
>
>
> > ​Uff, let's go again...  Juan, please, read the thread again, slower,
> > with calm and patience, instead being agressive and unfair.  I did
> > NOT send any pic, d'oooh!  :(((
>
>
> You didn't? My sincere apologies if that's the case. Although
> the picture is attached to a message coming from your address.
> (Unless my email client is messed up)
>
> (and let me check the archives...)


​I did not send any picture, Juan.  I was just answering to the person who
sent the pic.​

Re: Do you have predictions about 2017?

[juan]

On Mon, 9 Jan 2017 21:44:31 -0200
Cecilia Tanaka  wrote:


> ​Uff, let's go again...  Juan, please, read the thread again, slower,
> with calm and patience, instead being agressive and unfair.  I did
> NOT send any pic, d'oooh!  :(((


You didn't? My sincere apologies if that's the case. Although
the picture is attached to a message coming from your address.
(Unless my email client is messed up)

(and let me check the archives...)


> 
> You want to attack me so much that you are always waiting for an
> opportunity and is always being unfair with me.​..  It sucks a lot!
> Please, less drama!  Be more rational and less troll, please.  :(

Re: Do you have predictions about 2017?

[Cecilia Tanaka]

On Mon, Jan 9, 2017 at 9:31 PM, juan  wrote:

> On Wed, 4 Jan 2017 02:38:48 -0200
> Cecilia Tanaka  wrote:
>
>
> [Building7.bmp  image/bmp (620125 bytes)]
>
>
> So that picture, which is supposed to be some sort of  'joke',
> is an even worse 'joke' than rayzer's vomit about libertarians
> and regulations.
>
> In the case of the picture, what is being implied is that
> people who keep talking about stuff that bothers the
> authorities and the main stream fascists, are to be shot.
>
> If anything, the joke is on the person who posted the picture,
> since it's a 'jokingly' invitation to murder people who speak
> the truth - no doubt a first cypherpunk principle...or
> something.
>

​Uff, let's go again...  Juan, please, read the thread again, slower, with
calm and patience, instead being agressive and unfair.  I did NOT send any
pic, d'oooh!  :(((

You want to attack me so much that you are always waiting for an
opportunity and is always being unfair with me.​..  It sucks a lot!
Please, less drama!  Be more rational and less troll, please.  :(

Re: Do you have predictions about 2017?

[juan]

On Wed, 4 Jan 2017 02:38:48 -0200
Cecilia Tanaka  wrote:


[Building7.bmp  image/bmp (620125 bytes)]  


So that picture, which is supposed to be some sort of  'joke',
is an even worse 'joke' than rayzer's vomit about libertarians
and regulations. 

In the case of the picture, what is being implied is that
people who keep talking about stuff that bothers the
authorities and the main stream fascists, are to be shot.

If anything, the joke is on the person who posted the picture,
since it's a 'jokingly' invitation to murder people who speak
the truth - no doubt a first cypherpunk principle...or
something.

Re: Do you have predictions about 2017?

[John Newman]

> On Jan 9, 2017, at 5:26 PM, juan  wrote:
> 
> On Mon, 9 Jan 2017 17:14:01 -0500
> John Newman  wrote:
> 
>> 
>> 
>> Fucking hilarious watching faux-engineers argue about the pedantic
>> details of shit they don't understand 
> 
>OK John, I thought there might be some hope for you  but
>sadly you are indeed a fucking retard =) 
> 


LOL. Right back at you, Juan :). 

Keep on fighting for the truth! You and DJT and the rest of the republican 
party can get to the bottom of the chinese climate hoax if you just keep 
digging, i know it!!!

I won't bother responding to any other nonsense ;). Conspiratard amongst 
yourselves.


>You got a couple of point for rejecting the JESUS CONSPIRACY
>THEORY, but I guess you don't reject it because of any
>principled stand on anything. it's just an intellectual
>accident on your part.
> 
> 
>
> 
> in the advance of a conspiracy
>> theory that is such a dramatic over explanation of what really
>> happened, it's just fucking absurd...
>> 
>> I watched the second plane fly into the tower live on television.
> 
> 
>That's why you are a Great Philospher kindly enlightening us.
>You watched something on TV...and?
> 
> 
> 
>> US
>> foreign policy came home to roost. You don't need to be a "truther"
>> to make the US the bad guy.
> 
>> 
>> But, i should expect such theories from people who think anthropic
>> climate change is a hoax. 
> 
> 
>And in turn I should expect an ignorant enviro like you to
>parrot government propaganda, while preteding to be 'un
>american'.
> 
>
>> Which, hilariously, is now the CONSENSUS
>> view of the US republican government :)
> 
>Assuming that was true, so what? Isn't the 'consensos' among
>lefty fascist that global reheating ISNT'T a hoax? Since you
>believe in the global reheating religion, I must conclude
>that you are a card carrying democrat who voted for hitlery? 
> 
> 
> 

Re: Do you have predictions about 2017?

[juan]

On Mon, 9 Jan 2017 17:14:01 -0500
John Newman  wrote:


> 
> Fucking hilarious watching faux-engineers argue about the pedantic
> details of shit they don't understand

Also, your typically fascist mindset must  be underscored.

What you are saying is that only allegedly 100%
certified 'experts' can talk about any particular 'technical'
subject . Experts certified by the government of course (oh yes,
you are a rayzer-like 'anarchist' it seems)

You want a bunch of fascist Scientific Expert Overlords to tell
the unwashed masses what to think.

ANd of course, your fascist system must not be applied to
yourself. You are free to babble about the 'science' of
'global warming' although you are not a Certified
Climate Scientist. Well, everything is fine as long as you
parrot what Your Government and the Scientific Aristocracy tell
you to parrot. 

Last but not least 

"details of shit they don't understand" 

So are you a True Engineer? Cause if you are not a True
Engineer - and you actually are not - how on earth can you tell
whether other people understand something or not? 

Tsk tsk.

Re: Do you have predictions about 2017?

[juan]

On Mon, 9 Jan 2017 17:14:01 -0500
John Newman  wrote:

> 
> 
> Fucking hilarious watching faux-engineers argue about the pedantic
> details of shit they don't understand 

OK John, I thought there might be some hope for you  but
sadly you are indeed a fucking retard =) 

You got a couple of point for rejecting the JESUS CONSPIRACY
THEORY, but I guess you don't reject it because of any
principled stand on anything. it's just an intellectual
accident on your part.




in the advance of a conspiracy
> theory that is such a dramatic over explanation of what really
> happened, it's just fucking absurd...
> 
> I watched the second plane fly into the tower live on television.


That's why you are a Great Philospher kindly enlightening us.
You watched something on TV...and?



> US
> foreign policy came home to roost. You don't need to be a "truther"
> to make the US the bad guy.

> 
> But, i should expect such theories from people who think anthropic
> climate change is a hoax. 


And in turn I should expect an ignorant enviro like you to
parrot government propaganda, while preteding to be 'un
american'.


> Which, hilariously, is now the CONSENSUS
> view of the US republican government :)

Assuming that was true, so what? Isn't the 'consensos' among
lefty fascist that global reheating ISNT'T a hoax? Since you
believe in the global reheating religion, I must conclude
that you are a card carrying democrat who voted for hitlery? 

Re: Do you have predictions about 2017?

[John Newman]

> On Jan 9, 2017, at 4:57 PM, juan  wrote:
> 
> On Tue, 10 Jan 2017 07:40:12 +1000
> "James A. Donald"  wrote:
> 
>>> On Sun, 8 Jan 2017 14:38:54 -0800
>>> Razer  wrote:
 The footage speaks for itself.
>> 
>>> On 1/9/2017 8:44 AM, juan wrote:
>>>Indeed. It clearly shows a building falling on its footprint
>> 
>> Liar
>> 
>...is what you are =)
> 
>As to the rest of your message, I already addressed the point
>two times. But I'll do it again...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
>> Because WTC 7 was falling sideways before it fell downwards, it did
>> not fall on its own footprint.
>> 
>> 
>> The building was falling apart, piece by piece, in an irregular and 
>> uneven fashion, until it finally collapsed downwards all at once
>> 
>> First the fuel tank fell down demolishing much of the building's
>> interior.
> 
> 
>Oh really? The fuel tank "demolished the building"? Perhaps
>it had some help from giant mutant rats that crawled out of
>manhattan mud? 
> 
>Anyway, the collapse of the roof is indeed, again, mostly
>symmetrical. You can clearly see a dent in the MIDDLE of the
>roof. Which happens to be another characteristical feature of
>CD.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
>> 
>> Then a while after that, quite a while after that, the roof buckles. 
>> With the roof losing rigidity, there is nothing to stop the building 
>> from leaning to one side.  
> 
> 
>Indeed BOTH (shorter) sides of the building lean INWARDS A FEW
>DEGREES, and that's what controlled demolition is all about.
> 
>Aa I already mentioned 2 times, and I'll mention again, WTC7 is
>an especially clean example of controlled demolition. 
> 
>Compare to other buildings blown up here and report back.
> 
>staring at  13:20
> 
>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OQgVCj7q49o
> 
> 
>
> 
>> It proceeds to lean to one side, very
>> slowly at first, then faster and faster, like a tree falling over,
>> then collapses downwards all at once, no longer like a tree but like
>> a building.
>> 
>> Yes, the final fall, collapsing downwards all at once is just like a 
>> controlled demolition -
> 
> 
>And so is the onset of the collapse. Also, it is painfully
>obvious that tens of thousands of tons of steel and the
>rest of the building can't fall at free fall speed unless
>columns are cut AT REGULAR INTERVALS.
> 
> 
> 
> 
>> but the half hour leading up to that was
>> things falling apart in a way totally unlike controlled demolition,
>> and the few seconds leading up to collapsing downwards all at once
>> was the building falling to one side, the complete opposite of a
>> symmetric collapse.
>> 
> 



Fucking hilarious watching faux-engineers argue about the pedantic details of 
shit they don't understand in the advance of a conspiracy theory that is such a 
dramatic over explanation of what really happened, it's just fucking absurd...

I watched the second plane fly into the tower live on television. US foreign 
policy came home to roost. You don't need to be a "truther" to make the US the 
bad guy.

But, i should expect such theories from people who think anthropic climate 
change is a hoax. Which, hilariously, is now the CONSENSUS view of the US 
republican government :)

Re: Do you have predictions about 2017?

[juan]

On Tue, 10 Jan 2017 07:40:12 +1000
"James A. Donald"  wrote:

> > On Sun, 8 Jan 2017 14:38:54 -0800
> > Razer  wrote:
> >> The footage speaks for itself.
> 
> On 1/9/2017 8:44 AM, juan wrote:
> > Indeed. It clearly shows a building falling on its footprint
> 
> Liar
> 
...is what you are =)

As to the rest of your message, I already addressed the point
two times. But I'll do it again...





> Because WTC 7 was falling sideways before it fell downwards, it did
> not fall on its own footprint.
> 
> 
> The building was falling apart, piece by piece, in an irregular and 
> uneven fashion, until it finally collapsed downwards all at once
> 
> First the fuel tank fell down demolishing much of the building's
> interior.


Oh really? The fuel tank "demolished the building"? Perhaps
it had some help from giant mutant rats that crawled out of
manhattan mud? 

Anyway, the collapse of the roof is indeed, again, mostly
symmetrical. You can clearly see a dent in the MIDDLE of the
roof. Which happens to be another characteristical feature of
CD.





> 
> Then a while after that, quite a while after that, the roof buckles. 
> With the roof losing rigidity, there is nothing to stop the building 
> from leaning to one side.  


Indeed BOTH (shorter) sides of the building lean INWARDS A FEW
DEGREES, and that's what controlled demolition is all about.

Aa I already mentioned 2 times, and I'll mention again, WTC7 is
an especially clean example of controlled demolition. 

Compare to other buildings blown up here and report back.

staring at  13:20

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OQgVCj7q49o




> It proceeds to lean to one side, very
> slowly at first, then faster and faster, like a tree falling over,
> then collapses downwards all at once, no longer like a tree but like
> a building.
> 
> Yes, the final fall, collapsing downwards all at once is just like a 
> controlled demolition -


And so is the onset of the collapse. Also, it is painfully
obvious that tens of thousands of tons of steel and the
rest of the building can't fall at free fall speed unless
columns are cut AT REGULAR INTERVALS.




> but the half hour leading up to that was
> things falling apart in a way totally unlike controlled demolition,
> and the few seconds leading up to collapsing downwards all at once
> was the building falling to one side, the complete opposite of a
> symmetric collapse.
> 

Re: Do you have predictions about 2017?

[juan]

On Tue, 10 Jan 2017 07:27:25 +1000
"James A. Donald"  wrote:

> On 1/9/2017 7:49 AM, juan wrote:
> > The very first seconds of the video show MINIMAL damage to
> > the building and rather small fires. And then we have all
> > the MSM bots repeating propaganda. Telling the audience that the
> > building 'will' collapse...because that's exactly what your
> > government planned.
> 
> You are just lying about what the video shows.  It shows a building
> that took a heavy physical beating and is on fire.  Of course it is
> going to collapse.

> 
> And whatever happened to your original claim that the collapse was 
> symmetric?



I can repeat what I said about that for the THIRD TIME, but
I'll let you do your homework and read my replies to you, which
you actucally seem to be ignoring.








> 

Re: WTC [WAS] Do you have predictions about 2017?

[grarpamp]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticism_of_the_9/11_Commission
http://www.bing.com/search?q=geological+map+of+lower+manhattan

Re: WTC [WAS] Do you have predictions about 2017?

[juan]

9_11 - Blueprint for Truth-The Architecture of Destruction

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OQgVCj7q49o


starting at 13:20 lots of examples of controlled demolition in
which the buildings tip and tilt in various directions A LOT
MORE than WTC7 did. The way they fall and fragment looks 
less 'controlled' than WTC7's  demolition did.  It seems like
the team responsible for WTC7's demolition was especially
skilled.

Re: WTC [WAS] Do you have predictions about 2017?

[grarpamp]

> http://www.slideshare.net/HolyYeshua/solving-the-radioactive-riddle-of-9-11-a-simple-explanation-of-ground-zero

Try un-jumping links to original before posting

http://www.911history.de/
http://www.911history.de/pdfs/911_Analysis_en.pdf

Re: WTC [WAS] Do you have predictions about 2017?

[juan]

On Sun, 8 Jan 2017 21:01:22 -0800
Razer  wrote:
 
> 
> On 01/08/2017 08:54 PM, "juan" Kill-listed at the server.
> 

mommy mommy. I'm being treated like the despicable piece of shit
that I am and I DON"T LIKE IT. Too bad I can't actually KILL
people who disrespect my authority! But at least I can 'kill
list' them.  Which is the equivalen of a two year old retard
covering his ears. 

Re: WTC [WAS] Do you have predictions about 2017?

[Razer]

On 01/08/2017 08:54 PM, "juan" Kill-listed at the server.

Re: WTC [WAS] Do you have predictions about 2017?

[juan]

On Sun, 8 Jan 2017 20:49:25 -0800
Razer  wrote:

> I predict it will be the year of the renegades... of funk...


Why is a trolling shitbag like you subscribed tho this list? 

Re: WTC [WAS] Do you have predictions about 2017?

[grarpamp]

# Secret World of Mohamed Atta
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0LULV1gicJs
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NJIqtwW1kR0
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V01Ol2Nk-Tk
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Able_Danger
https://fas.org/sgp/news/2010/09/dark-contrast.pdf
https://fas.org/sgp/jud/dark-contrast2.pdf
https://fas.org/sgp/news/2010/09/dark-index.pdf

# Zero: An Investigation Into 9/11
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hWiusdy1miI

# Bring the Power Back - Public Enemy Vs Rage Against the Machine
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rsqF6urwj3A

# Fahrenheit 9/11 - Michael Moore
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yg-be2r7ouc

# America Rebuilds: A Year at Ground Zero
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8hRPpva1ujE

https://www.youtube.com/results?sp=CAM%253D=9%2F11+truth
https://www.youtube.com/results?sp=CAM%253D=9%2F11+conspiracy
https://reddit.com/r/911/


You could spend months clicking around all the related sidebars
and stuff out there, some full of shit, some real.

Re: WTC [WAS] Do you have predictions about 2017?

[juan]

On Sun, 8 Jan 2017 19:04:32 -0800
Razer  wrote:

> This entirely lost me. Convo over.


What convo. This was just me wasting time with an absolute
shitbag like you. 


11
> 
> >
> >> If there are they didn't all show up last week you know? The guy I
> >> share camp space with is from El Salvador and has been in the US
> >> for more than forty fucking years.
> > And he's the youngest illegal immigrant there is. The
> > majority of them entered the US in the 19th century and they are
> > still mowing your lawn. Capitalism keeps them alive.
> >
> >
> 
> 
> That paragraph made no sense whatsoever 


for fucking retards who don't realize that they are being
thoroughly mocked and  laughed at.

Hey, you should try to polish your english. Here's a new word
for you : 


http://www.dictionary.com/browse/sarcasm?s=t

Re: WTC [WAS] Do you have predictions about 2017?

[juan]

On Sun, 8 Jan 2017 18:43:21 -0800
Razer  wrote:

> 
> 
> On 01/08/2017 06:37 PM, juan wrote:
> > The ~15 million 'ilegal' immigrants who
> > can't cross the border
> 
> DUDE! There MIGHT BE "~15 million 'ilegal' immigrants" in the country.

This is how stupid your trolling is 

"the only 'illegals' that make it into the US over
the southern border are the ones who pay well-connected coyotes" 

That's something  a bunch of cheap mexican mafiosos can do and
at the same time it's well beyond the abilities of "sand
niggers".  Puzzling eh.



> If there are they didn't all show up last week you know? The guy I
> share camp space with is from El Salvador and has been in the US for
> more than forty fucking years.

And he's the youngest illegal immigrant there is. The majority
of them entered the US in the 19th century and they are still
mowing your lawn. Capitalism keeps them alive.



> 
> 

Re: WTC [WAS] Do you have predictions about 2017?

[Razer]

On 01/08/2017 06:40 PM, juan wrote:
> On Sun, 8 Jan 2017 18:30:49 -0800
> Razer  wrote:
>
>>
>> On 01/08/2017 06:17 PM, juan wrote:
>>> By the way, I didn't even bother fully reading that
>>
>> I know that. You're a functional illiterate.
>
>   Tell me rayzer, like a good american fascist, how many
>   languages do you understand, apart from Imperial English? 
>
>
>   Three languages? Trilingual. Two? Bilingual. One? amerikunt.
>

In my life I've learned four. English, Spanish, Hebrew, and Yiddish.
Five if you count morse code. Six if you consider computer language.
Multiple varieties of Basic. From V 1.1 to BasicA and the variety used
on the tandy color computer which I can't recall the name of. I was also
pretty good with OS9 v.1 and II for the coco, and I know enough jscript
to get into trouble with.

Only one spoken language is still with me. Mostly due to disuse.
Spanish. Taxi Spanish.

Comprede piojo?

Rr

Re: WTC [WAS] Do you have predictions about 2017?

[Razer]

On 01/08/2017 06:37 PM, juan wrote:
> The ~15 million 'ilegal' immigrants who
>   can't cross the border

DUDE! There MIGHT BE "~15 million 'ilegal' immigrants" in the country.
If there are they didn't all show up last week you know? The guy I share
camp space with is from El Salvador and has been in the US for more than
forty fucking years.

Re: WTC [WAS] Do you have predictions about 2017?

[juan]

On Sun, 8 Jan 2017 18:30:49 -0800
Razer  wrote:

> 
> 
> On 01/08/2017 06:17 PM, juan wrote:
> > By the way, I didn't even bother fully reading that
> 
> 
> I know that. You're a functional illiterate.


Tell me rayzer, like a good american fascist, how many
languages do you understand, apart from Imperial English? 


Three languages? Trilingual. Two? Bilingual. One? amerikunt.

Re: WTC [WAS] Do you have predictions about 2017?

[juan]

On Sun, 8 Jan 2017 18:30:11 -0800
Razer  wrote:

> 
> 
> On 01/08/2017 06:27 PM, juan wrote:
> > More truly crazy, fact-free commentary.
> That's because you aren't looking out the window of the cafe I sit in
> at the moment or you could see them. 


What would I see? The ~15 million 'ilegal' immigrants who
can't cross the border, but they do anyway? 

Did I mention that tne only thing you do here is parrot
propaganda from your nazi government? 

But the gov't you love so much rayzer is lying to you, It
wasn't the arab terrists and their box cutters. 

Re: WTC [WAS] Do you have predictions about 2017?

[Razer]

On 01/08/2017 06:16 PM, Zenaan Harkness wrote:
> Here's the photographic proof of the post-liquified rock layers at
> ground zero:

That's schist. It's a lot like what's called "Chert" in California.
Looks A LOT like rock doesn't it?

It isn't. It crumbles when you touch it, and Schist is mica-based. It
does melt under heat and pressure and liquefy, and it's layered into the
mud.

There is no bedrock below 14th st. It was Peter Stuyvesant's sheep graze
and oyster mud flats.

This is what I mean about the total ignorance and twisting of facts to
match their non-reality by 'truthers'

Rr

Re: WTC [WAS] Do you have predictions about 2017?

[Razer]

On 01/08/2017 06:27 PM, juan wrote:
> More truly crazy, fact-free commentary.
That's because you aren't looking out the window of the cafe I sit in at
the moment or you could see them. Better look like you have money
though. They're the 'shopping police' and if you aren't shopping they'll
harass you until you move.

Re: WTC [WAS] Do you have predictions about 2017?

[Razer]

On 01/08/2017 05:49 PM, Zenaan Harkness wrote:
>
> Ground zero showed no building submersion:
>
> http://www.slideshare.net/HolyYeshua/solving-the-radioactive-riddle-of-9-11-a-simple-explanation-of-ground-zero

Didn't need to be 'submerged' just undermined. And We were discussing
WTC 7. Not the towers.

>
> Along with numerous reports of explosions by first responders who
> brought out the first survivors from the WTC lobbies.
>
> Thermite flakes in the dust
>

So? Thermite is mostly aluminum, or should I say "metal powder, fuel and
metal oxide". There literally thousands of combinations of dusts that
could fit that description, especially when mixed with jet fuel from a
disintegrated, partly aluminum composited aircraft.

> , explosions heard from the elevators,

The fucking building was creaking, and swaying in the breeze (see the
earlier post with the construction dilemmas posed by the WTC's
construction. High winds was one of the problems), and slowly
collapsing. and the floors pancaking on each other.

What do you suppose that sounds like? Crickets chirping?

> lots more links and info on the above page.

Anyone with a name like "Yeshua" is most likely a White Identity Xtian
and is unlikely to be providing any worthwhile information on the
subject because most of them can't even read no less subject what they
read to anything resembling critical analysis.

Rr

Re: WTC [WAS] Do you have predictions about 2017?

[juan]

On Sun, 8 Jan 2017 18:10:25 -0800
Razer  wrote:

> 
> 
> On 01/08/2017 05:37 PM, juan wrote:
> > Notice also the if 'terrists' attacks were retaliation for what
> > you joo-amerikunts do all the time, then there would be at
> > least a real, big, terrist attack every week. Yet there are none.
> 
> There are three police agencies patrolling the downtown shopping
> district, and all they really do is keep tabs on the homeless
> population. You can extrapolate on that as to the manpower assigned to
> the 'war on terra' in 'Merica.


More truly crazy, fact-free commentary. 


> 
> The reason there's no terrorist attack every week is because the US
> borders are buttoned down so tight you couldn't get a tube of hair gel
> into the states 

Sure. That's also the reason why there are more than ten
million  'illegal' immigrants in the US.

Ten million ordinary people can cross the US borders, but arab
terrists are too stupid to do it. So who's the anti-arab
("sand niggers") racist here? 



> without spending a day in the 'green room' at the
> airport 

Ah yes. No doubt the only way for 'terrists' to enter the US is
by plane. And they only would travel in first class. Because
terrists like luxury.


> or border and the only 'illegals' that make it into the US
> over the southern border are the ones who pay well-connected coyotes


Something that brain dead arab terrists could never do. They
wouldn't have the money to do it either if they could read this
list and get the idea.


Keep trolling rayzer. 






> to bring them in and a few who try it on their own. Most of them end
> up dead and vulture-picked on Tohono O'Odham land in Arizona with the
> Border Patrol watching them die
> http://censored-news.blogspot.com/2007/09/spy-towers-on-tohono-oodham-land-map.html

Re: WTC [WAS] Do you have predictions about 2017?

[juan]

On Sun, 8 Jan 2017 16:39:00 -0800
Razer  wrote:


> I have proved
> that (at least) the shock wave of a 255,000 lb 'tuning fork' striking
> the buildings nearby caused a resonance in the ground below which is
> mud with wood 

By the way, I didn't even bother fully reading that. Now I did
and it turns our that you are embarrasing yourself in your usual
cosmic way, like when you showed you know fuck about
pharmacology. So, let's see : 

"the shock wave of a 255,000 lb 'tuning fork' striking the
buildings" 

No, a plane or missile striking a building has nothing to do
with a tuning fork. If anything, the object that would
have to resonate like a fork would be the struck building. So
your ramblings are just nonsense from the very start. When you
hit a tuning fork, what resonates is the fork, not your finger,
retard. 

Plus, the analogy between a building with a mass of 500,000
tons and a tuning forks goes only so far. How much energy from
the alleged plane was transmited to the building and caused the
structure to oscillate (and at what frequency?) ? And how much
energy at a specific frequency then magically travelled 
demolished wtc7?

Then you vomit something about "resonance in the ground" -
Too bad the ground is if anything  a sink for mechanical
energy - it doesn't have any specific resonant frequency. 

To sum up : the idea that mechanical energy from a plane could
be transferred to a SMALL AREA, a couple of blocks away,  by
means of waves in the ground, and  affect the 'mud' where a
building rests is so fucking crazy that only a troll like you
would advance it. Not to mention again that you got the
elements of your 'theory' mixed up from the begining.













 

Re: WTC [WAS] Do you have predictions about 2017?

[Zenaan Harkness]

On Sun, Jan 08, 2017 at 09:30:14PM -0300, Juan wrote:
> On Sun, 8 Jan 2017 16:22:36 -0800
> Razer  wrote:
> 
> > On 01/08/2017 03:35 PM, juan wrote:
> > >
> > >   If some sort of magical mud magically liquified under a
> > >   building, then the building would magically sink in a
> > >   pool of mud. Especially when there are 'a couple' of videos
> > >   showing a building that indeed seems to be 'sinking'.
> > >
> > >   
> > 
> > Ok class. Here we have a tuning fork (A440) and a glass of water. 
> 
>   I know what resonance is, you motherfucking scumbag. 
> 
>   Now prove that 
> 
>   "the shock wave from the WTC tower hits liquefied the
>  mud, and undermined the (shoddily constructed) building 7." 
> 
> 
>   Since that is what 'really' happened, it must be documented
>   everywhere. Even in places like wikimierda. So go ahead, post
>   the link  : 
> 
>   
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WTC7_SUNK_IN_BROWN_SHIT_POOL_RAYZERZZ_SAYZ_ZO
> 
>   Or are you claiming that you are a truther whose TRUE THEORY is
>   BEING SUPPRESSED by a BURGEOIS CONSPIRACY?

Oh oh oh! I know, I know - pick me! Pick me!  That razonance didn't
liquify the mud, IT LIQUIFIED THE ROCK LAYER under the towers, which
sunk through the rock and the rock de-liquified, leaving no trace
(conspiracy theories and documentaries of 3 days of rapid cleanup of
ground zero to the contrary) of the SUNK TOWERS!

Here's the photographic proof of the post-liquified rock layers at
ground zero:
https://www.metabunk.org/claim-picture-shows-rock-formation-under-wtc-caused-by-nuclear-device.t4595/

(Come on! At least this variant of borderline-Razer-therapy includes
 photographic PROOF of the post-liquiefied rock layer...)

Well color me pre-glacial sandstone.

Re: WTC [WAS] Do you have predictions about 2017?

[Razer]

On 01/08/2017 05:37 PM, juan wrote:
> Notice also the if 'terrists' attacks were retaliation for what
>   you joo-amerikunts do all the time, then there would be at least
>   a real, big, terrist attack every week. Yet there are none.

There are three police agencies patrolling the downtown shopping
district, and all they really do is keep tabs on the homeless
population. You can extrapolate on that as to the manpower assigned to
the 'war on terra' in 'Merica.

The reason there's no terrorist attack every week is because the US
borders are buttoned down so tight you couldn't get a tube of hair gel
into the states without spending a day in the 'green room' at the
airport or border and the only 'illegals' that make it into the US over
the southern border are the ones who pay well-connected coyotes to bring
them in and a few who try it on their own. Most of them end up dead and
vulture-picked on Tohono O'Odham land in Arizona with the Border Patrol
watching them die
http://censored-news.blogspot.com/2007/09/spy-towers-on-tohono-oodham-land-map.html

Re: Do you have predictions about 2017?

[Cecilia Tanaka]

Very bizarre
​ ​
and weird, just for fun!  :)

"Nostradamus predictions for 2017: Terrifying forewarnings of 16th century
prophet revealed
​.​
"

http://www.express.co.uk/news/weird/740011/nostradamus-predictions-2017-prophecies


Brrr...
​"​
10 Terrifying Predictions For 2017
​!"​  :P

http://listverse.com/2016/12/31/10-terrifying-predictions-for-2017/


​"​
What 2017 will look like
​."​


http://www.quantumrun.com/future-timeline/2017

-- 
​"The future cannot be predicted, but futures can be invented."​

Re: WTC [WAS] Do you have predictions about 2017?

[Zenaan Harkness]

On Sun, Jan 08, 2017 at 08:35:01PM -0300, Juan wrote:
> On Sun, 8 Jan 2017 15:19:15 -0800
> Razer  wrote:
> 
> 
> > 
> > Reality bites (people making shit up ... on the ass). the fact that
> > the subterranean structures in MUD under the buildings were
> > undermined by the shock wave of a 255,000 lb aircraft
> 
> 
>   Perhaps a poll would be in order? How many people would think
>   rayzer is a troll making shit up as ge goes? 
> 
>   If some sort of magical mud magically liquified under a
>   building, then the building would magically sink in a
>   pool of mud. Especially when there are 'a couple' of videos
>   showing a building that indeed seems to be 'sinking'.
> 
>   But then you'd find most of the intact building inside
>   the 'mud'. Not a pile of rubble above ground. 
> 
>   But hey razer, you are either literally deranged or a full time
>   government troll. Or both. But your mud fantasies are waaayyy
>   beyoend stupid. Why don't you go troll other fascists like you
>   in shitter? That's your natural enviroment.

Ground zero showed no building submersion:

http://www.slideshare.net/HolyYeshua/solving-the-radioactive-riddle-of-9-11-a-simple-explanation-of-ground-zero

Along with numerous reports of explosions by first responders who
brought out the first survivors from the WTC lobbies.

Thermite flakes in the dust, explosions heard from the elevators,
lots more links and info on the above page.

Re: WTC [WAS] Do you have predictions about 2017?

[juan]

On Sun, 8 Jan 2017 17:28:45 -0800
Razer  wrote:


> You're probably are racist enough to think "Sand Niggers" (note the
> quotes) aren't smart enough to coordinate an attack like 9-11.

The fact that they can do it doesn't mean that they actually
did it. You joo-amerikunts did it. 

Notice also the if 'terrists' attacks were retaliation for what
you joo-amerikunts do all the time, then there would be at least
a real, big, terrist attack every week. Yet there are none. 

What we see is a false flag attack every some years, to keep
the sheep in line. 



> Did I
> mention that 9-11 truthers are typically also very very white, and
> very very closet racist?

that coming from a theocrayic joo  - did I ever mentioned that
you are your own, sorry, self parody? 





> 
> Rr

Re: WTC [WAS] Do you have predictions about 2017?

[Razer]

On 01/08/2017 05:10 PM, juan made some shit up as if he knows how I feel
about Arab people:

> the evil arab terrists did it eh

"Terrorists? Why they're people lacking identity. They're seeking to be
noticed." ~Marshall McLuhan interviewed after the very first airliner
hijacking in the 60s.

He didn't mention, or wasn't aware of the fact that their identity,
culturally, was being intentionally destroyed by the terror tactics of
nation-states. Terrorism is a tactic, and nation-states excel at it.
"Double-tap" drone strikes alone have killed more innocent people in the
years since the first Predator flew than all the independent terrorists
seeking revenge that ever existed on Earth have killed over the
millennial, including 9/11. The combatant:civilian kill ratio according 
to stats Pakistan kept are 50:1. The same as carpet bombing. That
assumes thet nation state engaged in drone strikes doesn't comsider
anyone in an area they deem strategic, a combatant. Afghanistan has it's
version of 'strategic hamlets' Somalia? A free-fire zone.

You're probably are racist enough to think "Sand Niggers" (note the
quotes) aren't smart enough to coordinate an attack like 9-11. Did I
mention that 9-11 truthers are typically also very very white, and very
very closet racist?

Rr

Re: WTC [WAS] Do you have predictions about 2017?

[juan]

On Sun, 8 Jan 2017 17:04:04 -0800
Razer  wrote:

> On 01/08/2017 04:49 PM, juan wrote:
> 
> > It's funny how you ranted against 'science'
> 
> I don't rant against science. I rant against it's rigidness in the
> face of facts that should be altering it's formulation of facts, in
> the interests of the people who write their grants and paychecks.
> Industrial crapitalism.

Oh, I see that the burgeois conspiracy is really getting at you.


On the other hand you are quite willing to use True Science to
advance american corp-pentagon propaganda like you are doing
here.  (the evil arab terrists did it eh)


I'm waiting for all the papers you and other lunatics like you
wrote about the true cause of WTC7 collapse - JOO MUD MAGICAL
RESONANCE. 


Come on rayser, share your science. Your discoveries are so
amazing, you surely can get a few millions in grants which you
can then send to cuba. 

Re: WTC [WAS] Do you have predictions about 2017?

[Razer]

On 01/08/2017 04:32 PM, Zenaan Harkness wrote:
> excessively reinforced central column

...and floor supports at the corners but NOT in the middle of the spans
on the building's outside edges. So when the buildings had  torsionally
flexed a few times too often as it WAS NOT designed to do, the corner
supports let go and the floors slid down the central support column.

Thanks for pointing out why the two WTC towers collapsed straight down.

Rr

Re: WTC [WAS] Do you have predictions about 2017?

[juan]

On Sun, 8 Jan 2017 16:39:00 -0800
Razer  wrote:


> 
> Because resonance is a universal physical principle. I have proved
> that (at least) the shock wave of a 255,000 lb 'tuning fork' striking
> the buildings nearby caused a resonance in the ground below which is
> mud with wood 


The only thing you've proven so far is tha you are either a
literal lunatic, or a very trolling troll.

It's funny how you ranted against 'science' a while back but
now are vomiting a string of lunatic, pseudo scientific
nonsense. That would suggest that every single word you are
spweing here is...trolling. 

So we have magical joo-kristian resonance generated because a
planet hit a building. 

But, the hit buildings didn't magicall sink in magical joo mud
themselves. Another building a couple of blocks away,
magically sunk after a couple of hours. Is that how magical
joo resonance works eh rayzer? 




> or metal sticks vertically inserted (pilings) and it
> affected the building's (the piece of paper or stir stick) stability,
> and the building we're discussing, already seriously damaged and
> unstable from that shock wave, eventually fell down, sort of like the
> piece of paper or stir stick would eventually bump the side of the
> glass.
> 
> No go fap yourself.
> 
> Rr
> 
> >
> >
> > Since that is what 'really' happened, it must be documented
> > everywhere. Even in places like wikimierda. So go ahead,
> > post the link  : 
> >
> > 
> > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WTC7_SUNK_IN_BROWN_SHIT_POOL_RAYZERZZ_SAYZ_ZO
> >
> > Or are you claiming that you are a truther whose TRUE
> > THEORY is BEING SUPPRESSED by a BURGEOIS CONSPIRACY?
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > 
> 

Re: WTC [WAS] Do you have predictions about 2017?

[Zenaan Harkness]

On Sun, Jan 08, 2017 at 05:39:52PM -0500, grarpamp wrote:
...
> # Incontrovertible - New 9/11 Documentary by Tony Rooke
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y5UyynjxAyw
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KDQJscd5ba0
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qirWUviaZuo
> http://incontrovertible911evidence.co.uk/
> 
> Were you aware that any steel-framed building is now susceptible
> to sudden and total collapse? Official US findings have concluded
> that normal office fires burning over only a few floors and for
> only 6 hours, can cause total and catastrophic collapse leaving no
> time for evacuation. The building featured in this film fell from
> 47 storeys into just a few piles of rubble within 7 seconds. The
> cause is cited as thermal expansion acting upon connections around
> composite beams. What is more disturbing is the fact very few
> firefighters are aware of this problem. Not only that, hardly
> anything has been changed with building codes and regulations to
> prevent such a catastrophic failure again. Training has not been
> modified for fire crews, engineering has not been corrected. The
> silence has been deafening... How fast can you run?

Come on! Surely you jest? EVERYone knows that a little fire causes total
structural collapse of such buildings - especially those of the design
of the WTC buildings with excessively reinforced central column which
also simultaneously structurally collapses. Because ... pancake theory,
yeah, that's it!

(Great links grarpamp - thanks.)

Re: WTC [WAS] Do you have predictions about 2017?

[Razer]

On 01/08/2017 04:30 PM, juan wrote:
> On Sun, 8 Jan 2017 16:22:36 -0800
> Razer  wrote:
>
>> On 01/08/2017 03:35 PM, juan wrote:
>>> If some sort of magical mud magically liquified under a
>>> building, then the building would magically sink in a
>>> pool of mud. Especially when there are 'a couple' of videos
>>> showing a building that indeed seems to be 'sinking'.
>>>
>>> 
>> Ok class. Here we have a tuning fork (A440) and a glass of water. 
>   I know what resonance is, you motherfucking scumbag. 
>
>   Now prove that 
>
>   "the shock wave from the WTC tower hits liquefied the
>  mud, and undermined the (shoddily constructed) building 7." 


Because resonance is a universal physical principle. I have proved that
(at least) the shock wave of a 255,000 lb 'tuning fork' striking the
buildings nearby caused a resonance in the ground below which is mud
with wood or metal sticks vertically inserted (pilings) and it affected
the building's (the piece of paper or stir stick) stability, and the
building we're discussing, already seriously damaged and unstable from
that shock wave, eventually fell down, sort of like the piece of paper
or stir stick would eventually bump the side of the glass.

No go fap yourself.

Rr

>
>
>   Since that is what 'really' happened, it must be documented
>   everywhere. Even in places like wikimierda. So go ahead, post
>   the link  : 
>
>   
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WTC7_SUNK_IN_BROWN_SHIT_POOL_RAYZERZZ_SAYZ_ZO
>
>   Or are you claiming that you are a truther whose TRUE THEORY is
>   BEING SUPPRESSED by a BURGEOIS CONSPIRACY?
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>   

Re: WTC [WAS] Do you have predictions about 2017?

[juan]

On Sun, 8 Jan 2017 16:22:36 -0800
Razer  wrote:

> On 01/08/2017 03:35 PM, juan wrote:
> >
> > If some sort of magical mud magically liquified under a
> > building, then the building would magically sink in a
> > pool of mud. Especially when there are 'a couple' of videos
> > showing a building that indeed seems to be 'sinking'.
> >
> > 
> 
> Ok class. Here we have a tuning fork (A440) and a glass of water. 

I know what resonance is, you motherfucking scumbag. 

Now prove that 

"the shock wave from the WTC tower hits liquefied the
 mud, and undermined the (shoddily constructed) building 7." 


Since that is what 'really' happened, it must be documented
everywhere. Even in places like wikimierda. So go ahead, post
the link  : 


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WTC7_SUNK_IN_BROWN_SHIT_POOL_RAYZERZZ_SAYZ_ZO

Or are you claiming that you are a truther whose TRUE THEORY is
BEING SUPPRESSED by a BURGEOIS CONSPIRACY?

Re: Do you have predictions about 2017?

[Cecilia Tanaka]

http://xkcd.com/1013  :P

-- 
​"The future cannot be predicted, but futures can be invented."​

Re: WTC [WAS] Do you have predictions about 2017?

[Razer]

On 01/08/2017 03:35 PM, juan wrote:
>
>   If some sort of magical mud magically liquified under a
>   building, then the building would magically sink in a
>   pool of mud. Especially when there are 'a couple' of videos
>   showing a building that indeed seems to be 'sinking'.
>
>   

Ok class. Here we have a tuning fork (A440) and a glass of water. I will
strike the tuning fork against a hard object ... like Juan's head ...
(Get you hands out of your pants Juan and come here to the front of  the
class... Don't bother to wipe the stain on your trousers. We ALL know
what you were doing back there Juan) and now I will put the end of the
tuning fork I'm holding in a glass of water.

Even with the damping effect of my fingers squeezed tight around it like
you might hold your own cock when ur fapping Juan, (PAY ATTENTION JUAN!)
you will still see ripples in the water. If there's solid material
added, like Juan's teeny load of pubescent jizz, the net effect is a
lowering of the frequency of the ripples due to change of mass, but the
amplitude will approximately remain the same and if you let a piece of
paper or light wood like a chunk of coffee stir stick float in the
water, the objects will move up, down, and sideways, in relation to the
ripples.

That's your physics lesson for today children.

Rr

Re: Do you have predictions about 2017?

[Zenaan Harkness]

On Sun, Jan 08, 2017 at 05:14:52PM -0300, Juan wrote:
> On Sun, 8 Jan 2017 21:56:35 +1000
> "James A. Donald"  wrote:
> 
> > On 1/8/2017 12:12 PM, Steve Kinney wrote:
> > > The official excuse for WTC 7's symmetrical collapse is that the
> > > side of the building /not/ shown clearly in photos was "scooped
> > > out" by falling debris.  (The photos I have seen do indicate
> > > substantial damage to the facade from falling debris.)  This is not
> > > consistent with a symmetrical collapse as observed - the support
> > > columns destroyed by the "scoop" provided no vertical support, so
> > > the load was distributed unevenly and the building would have
> > > sagged in that direction when it lost global structural integrity.
> > 
> > 
> > I have watched videos of the collapse of WTC 7 frame by frame.  It
> > did not collapse symmetrically - it sagged on one side.  Hence no
> > need for any official excuse.
> 
> 
>   Funnily enough, even the government psychos clearly admit the
>   nature of the collapse, whereas James takes the trouble to
>   blatanly lie for them.

That's "James" to you, thank you very much.

Seems the memetic is, if you -really- want to shill for da govt., ya
gotta have a middle name initial to sound more "formal" or something.

And if you're so bold as to actually use your real name, well tough
titties when Juan calls you out on your bullshit :D

Re: WTC [WAS] Do you have predictions about 2017?

[Zenaan Harkness]

On Sun, Jan 08, 2017 at 08:17:26AM -0800, Razer wrote:
> On 01/08/2017 05:42 AM, Georgi Guninski wrote:
> 
> > On Sun, Jan 08, 2017 at 09:56:35PM +1000, James A. Donald wrote:
> >> I have watched videos of the collapse of WTC 7 frame by frame.  It did not
> >> collapse symmetrically - it sagged on one side.  Hence no need for any
> >> official excuse.
> >>
> >> The building looked as if it had been chewed on by giant rats, with great
> >> big holes all over the place, and was on fire, hence its collapse is no
> >> great mystery.
> > No matter what color of the hats of the "terrists" was/is, why the
> > 'mericans celebrate Patriot Day(tm) exactly on this day?
> >
> > Their sickyourity was fucked and the wikipedia page about this is
> > unparseble for me.
> >
> > Is there other conspiracy theory besides "inducing fear in sheeple"?
> >
> 
> The real fear for US society's 'planners' and the people who reap almost
> all the wealth from those plans is that Americans will come to
> understand that their lifestyles, based on extractive resource looting
> and wars that further that looting when an amenable strongman ruler
> can't be installed, is responsible, with few to zero 'degrees of
> separation', for people who have nothing left to live for and given a
> plane ticket/box-cutters, flying airplanes into US skyscrapers as
> revenge. Charismatic figure like Osama entirely optional. Just ask the
> Muslim who drives his truck into a crowd of people if anyone actually
> instructed him or cajoled him to do that.
> 
> BigPharma couldn't pump out enough mood meds to keep US citizens going
> to work everyday like nothing was going on if that little bit of
> personal responsibility-related information spread like a meme in the
> American consciousness.

Indeed.

(Although I don't buy the box-cutter meme, it's clear that millions
of Murricans are sleep walking.)

Re: WTC [WAS] Do you have predictions about 2017?

[juan]

On Mon, 9 Jan 2017 09:51:52 +1000
"James A. Donald"  wrote:

> On 1/9/2017 5:59 AM, Steve Kinney wrote:
> > In their position paper Rebuilding America's Defenses, the PNAC
> > folks said that their plan for global domination could not be
> > effectively implemented absent a "galvanizing event" like a new
> > Pearl Harbor.
> 
> The globalists made hay out of 9/11, just as the Nazis made hay out
> of the burning of the Reichstag.
> 
> Nonetheless, Stalin, not Hitler, really did torch the Reichstag.


Yep. And giant rats ate wtc7. 

'We' are waiting for the evidence you are supposed to provide
James. You made a claim, now prove it. 


Meanwhile, even your government acknowledges the fact that they
need to provide an 'excuse' for the way wtc7 'imploded'. And
the exuse is not "eaten by giant rats".








 

Re: WTC [WAS] Do you have predictions about 2017?

[juan]

On Sun, 8 Jan 2017 15:19:15 -0800
Razer  wrote:


> 
> Reality bites (people making shit up ... on the ass). the fact that
> the subterranean structures in MUD under the buildings were
> undermined by the shock wave of a 255,000 lb aircraft


Perhaps a poll would be in order? How many people would think
rayzer is a troll making shit up as ge goes? 

If some sort of magical mud magically liquified under a
building, then the building would magically sink in a
pool of mud. Especially when there are 'a couple' of videos
showing a building that indeed seems to be 'sinking'.

But then you'd find most of the intact building inside
the 'mud'. Not a pile of rubble above ground. 

But hey razer, you are either literally deranged or a full time
government troll. Or both. But your mud fantasies are waaayyy
beyoend stupid. Why don't you go troll other fascists like you
in shitter? That's your natural enviroment.

Re: WTC [WAS] Do you have predictions about 2017?

[Razer]

On 01/08/2017 03:23 PM, juan wrote:
> FIDEL CASTRO SAYS SO. QOD

He did? Then I'm in good company.

Rr

Re: WTC [WAS] Do you have predictions about 2017?

[juan]

On Sun, 8 Jan 2017 15:19:15 -0800
Razer  wrote:

> On 01/08/2017 02:56 PM, juan wrote:
> > On Sun, 8 Jan 2017 14:50:25 -0800
> > Razer  wrote:
> >
> >
> >> Because all these so-called 'experts' are affluent middle-class 
> > that's how commie shitbags 'think' - if reality doesn't fit
> > their deranged 'theories', then it's all a 'burgeois'
> > 'conspiracy'
> 
> Bourgeoisie denial and rationalization.


Yes, like I said. Anything that doesn't go along with your
mudering commie dogma is burgeois conspiracy. 

FIDEL CASTRO SAYS SO. QOD.

Re: WTC [WAS] Do you have predictions about 2017?

[Razer]

On 01/08/2017 02:56 PM, juan wrote:
> On Sun, 8 Jan 2017 14:50:25 -0800
> Razer  wrote:
>
>
>> Because all these so-called 'experts' are affluent middle-class 
>   that's how commie shitbags 'think' - if reality doesn't fit
>   their deranged 'theories', then it's all a 'burgeois'
>   'conspiracy'

Bourgeoisie denial and rationalization.

There's a difference. Idiot.


>
>   And of course they love official conspiracy theories.
>   Whatever the gov't says, it must be right. Especially
>   regarding mud. 
>
>
>

Reality bites (people making shit up ... on the ass). the fact that the
subterranean structures in MUD under the buildings were undermined by
the shock wave of a 255,000 lb aircraft (max takeoff weight) hitting a
tall building 2/3s (or so) of the way up causing a 'tuning fork' effect
in the ground below, or 'shear stress' for that matter, is reality and
can be verified by the simplest of experiments.

Saying there was a planned controlled demolition because it 'looked
like', is speculative and without substance of fact.

Moron.

Rr

Re: WTC [WAS] Do you have predictions about 2017?

[juan]

On Sun, 8 Jan 2017 14:50:25 -0800
Razer  wrote:


> Because all these so-called 'experts' are affluent middle-class 

that's how commie shitbags 'think' - if reality doesn't fit
their deranged 'theories', then it's all a 'burgeois'
'conspiracy'

And of course they love official conspiracy theories.
Whatever the gov't says, it must be right. Especially
regarding mud. 

Re: WTC [WAS] Do you have predictions about 2017?

[Razer]

Correction: believing there are consequences] go their complicity in
Genocide.


Should read 'believing there are no consequences to their complicity in
Genocide.'


On 01/08/2017 02:39 PM, grarpamp wrote:
> In part regarding flavor of WTC 7 that started this thread...
>
> # 9/11: Decade of Deception / The Toronto Hearings
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xqqelDq4P48
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kpiVv8tQdmY
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1rSJZqMwNoY
> https://pressfortruth.ca/
>
> On the tenth anniversary of the Attacks of September 11th, 2001,
> expert witnesses gathered at Ryerson University in Toronto, Canada
> to provide evidence-based research that called into question the
> official story of 9/11. This was known as The Toronto Hearings on
> 9/11. Over a period of four days, these experts in Structural
> Engineering, Physics, Chemistry, and History gave researched and
> professional testimony to an international panel of distinguished
> judges. The panel of judges, in conjunction with the steering
> committee would go on to publish their final analysis of the evidence
> provided, which called for a new investigation into the Attacks of
> September 11th, 2001.
>
>
> # Incontrovertible - New 9/11 Documentary by Tony Rooke
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y5UyynjxAyw
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KDQJscd5ba0
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qirWUviaZuo
> http://incontrovertible911evidence.co.uk/
>
> Were you aware that any steel-framed building is now susceptible
> to sudden and total collapse? Official US findings have concluded
> that normal office fires burning over only a few floors and for
> only 6 hours, can cause total and catastrophic collapse leaving no
> time for evacuation. The building featured in this film fell from
> 47 storeys into just a few piles of rubble within 7 seconds. The
> cause is cited as thermal expansion acting upon connections around
> composite beams. What is more disturbing is the fact very few
> firefighters are aware of this problem. Not only that, hardly
> anything has been changed with building codes and regulations to
> prevent such a catastrophic failure again. Training has not been
> modified for fire crews, engineering has not been corrected. The
> silence has been deafening... How fast can you run?
>
> # What If the Official 9/11 Story Were True?
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PGkDQuL-1Gk
>
> Two planes crashed, 3 buildings collapsed on 9/11 according to the
> official story. If true, how would it affect the risks to to public
> and to firefighters from burning buildings if minor fires alone
> could cause a steel building to collapse? Why has there been no
> change in firefighting procedures, no change in building codes, and
> no lawsuits if the official story is true?
>
> # Conspiratus Xendrius Channel 9/11- Irrefutable Evidence for the Demolitons
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q3v4QUQpYjc
>
> # Rapid Debris / Evidence Liquidation
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IsHZj6MGxRs
>
> # Larry Silverstein - Controlled Demo HE ADMITS THEY PULLED wtc7
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZeuQqP-NLnE
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wJsEGgc5L2c
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Fhl5h86Qq0
>
>
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/7_World_Trade_Center#9.2F11_and_collapse
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_Trade_Center_(1973-2001)#Design_and_construction
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rescue_and_recovery_effort_after_the_September_11_attacks_on_the_World_Trade_Center#Debris_removal
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Construction_of_the_World_Trade_Center
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/B-25_Empire_State_Building_crash

Re: WTC [WAS] Do you have predictions about 2017?

[Razer]

On 01/08/2017 02:39 PM, grarpamp wrote:
> expert witnesses

You mean like the Phud  in sheet metal for the computer industry who
speculated on the melting temp of the steel in the buildings? A foundry
worker or machinist knows more about the melting temperature of
construction steel than he does. However foundry workers and machinists
weren't asked about it.

Because all these so-called 'experts' are affluent middle-class and
bought into the American execeptionalist narrative and don't trust the
people who actually know what they're talking about to support their
narrative that allows them the rationale to go on living off the looted
resources of other nations believing there are consequences] go their
complicity in Genocide.

Re: Do you have predictions about 2017?

[juan]

On Sun, 8 Jan 2017 14:41:13 -0800
Razer  wrote:

> 
> 
> On 01/08/2017 02:04 PM, juan wrote:
> > 'We' are all waiting for your proof. 
> >
> 
> When you provide proof of 'controlled demolition'.

It's no doubt the best explanation. The proofs are everywhere
including in your own video. But of course, you don't believe
what you see. You bewlieve what your joo-kristian gov't tells
you to believe. Such a 'progressive' 'anarchist' you are.

Now what about your lunatic vomit regarding "mud"? And why does
a piece of pro-government shit like you troll this list? 

Re: Do you have predictions about 2017?

[juan]

On Sun, 8 Jan 2017 14:38:54 -0800
Razer  wrote:

> 
> 
> On 01/08/2017 02:12 PM, the fed said:
> > You didn't watch your own fucking video.
> > The video is meant to show that the media "magically" knew
> > beforehand that the building would collapse, 
> 
> 
> 
> I watched it. I've seen the footage before and a bunch of it at the
> time in real time. Doesn't matter what the poster meant it to prove.
> The footage speaks for itself. 


Indeed. It clearly shows a building falling on its footprint
exactly as if it had been the target of controlled demolition, 
something that EVEN the government acknowledges.


"The collapse of WTC 7 had a small debris field as the façade
was pulled downward, suggesting an internal failure and
implosion." 


Now die, motherfucker.

Re: WTC [WAS] Do you have predictions about 2017?

[grarpamp]

In part regarding flavor of WTC 7 that started this thread...

# 9/11: Decade of Deception / The Toronto Hearings
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xqqelDq4P48
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kpiVv8tQdmY
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1rSJZqMwNoY
https://pressfortruth.ca/

On the tenth anniversary of the Attacks of September 11th, 2001,
expert witnesses gathered at Ryerson University in Toronto, Canada
to provide evidence-based research that called into question the
official story of 9/11. This was known as The Toronto Hearings on
9/11. Over a period of four days, these experts in Structural
Engineering, Physics, Chemistry, and History gave researched and
professional testimony to an international panel of distinguished
judges. The panel of judges, in conjunction with the steering
committee would go on to publish their final analysis of the evidence
provided, which called for a new investigation into the Attacks of
September 11th, 2001.


# Incontrovertible - New 9/11 Documentary by Tony Rooke
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y5UyynjxAyw
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KDQJscd5ba0
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qirWUviaZuo
http://incontrovertible911evidence.co.uk/

Were you aware that any steel-framed building is now susceptible
to sudden and total collapse? Official US findings have concluded
that normal office fires burning over only a few floors and for
only 6 hours, can cause total and catastrophic collapse leaving no
time for evacuation. The building featured in this film fell from
47 storeys into just a few piles of rubble within 7 seconds. The
cause is cited as thermal expansion acting upon connections around
composite beams. What is more disturbing is the fact very few
firefighters are aware of this problem. Not only that, hardly
anything has been changed with building codes and regulations to
prevent such a catastrophic failure again. Training has not been
modified for fire crews, engineering has not been corrected. The
silence has been deafening... How fast can you run?

# What If the Official 9/11 Story Were True?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PGkDQuL-1Gk

Two planes crashed, 3 buildings collapsed on 9/11 according to the
official story. If true, how would it affect the risks to to public
and to firefighters from burning buildings if minor fires alone
could cause a steel building to collapse? Why has there been no
change in firefighting procedures, no change in building codes, and
no lawsuits if the official story is true?

# Conspiratus Xendrius Channel 9/11- Irrefutable Evidence for the Demolitons
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q3v4QUQpYjc

# Rapid Debris / Evidence Liquidation
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IsHZj6MGxRs

# Larry Silverstein - Controlled Demo HE ADMITS THEY PULLED wtc7
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZeuQqP-NLnE
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wJsEGgc5L2c
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Fhl5h86Qq0


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/7_World_Trade_Center#9.2F11_and_collapse
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_Trade_Center_(1973-2001)#Design_and_construction
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rescue_and_recovery_effort_after_the_September_11_attacks_on_the_World_Trade_Center#Debris_removal
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Construction_of_the_World_Trade_Center
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/B-25_Empire_State_Building_crash

Re: Do you have predictions about 2017?

[Razer]

On 01/08/2017 02:04 PM, juan wrote:
>   'We' are all waiting for your proof. 
>

When you provide proof of 'controlled demolition'.

Re: Do you have predictions about 2017?

[Razer]

On 01/08/2017 02:12 PM, the fed said:
> You didn't watch your own fucking video.
>   The video is meant to show that the media "magically" knew
>   beforehand that the building would collapse, 



I watched it. I've seen the footage before and a bunch of it at the time
in real time. Doesn't matter what the poster meant it to prove. The
footage speaks for itself. Only an idiot wouldn't know it was going to
collapse, and as I said you're an idiot so I'll spell it out

It had already internally collapsed which is why the fuel storage tank
IN the building (because the construction was cheapskate like the towers
and the builders didn't want to pay for the permits necessary for an
outdoor tank) fell through a number of floors and burned the fucking
thing out. Until the roof... The thing that keeps torsional forces from
affecting the frame of the building, fell in. That, combined with the
internal structural damage and the undermining off it's substructure,
was the end.

That whole area of downtown Manhattan had to have a few taller buildings
torn down because of the undermining of the building substructures. The
East side of the tip of Manhattan at the time was mostly low-slung
buildings with not so much to damage. You and your idiot friends make it
sound like  the WTC buildings were the only ones affected. Because
you're mental midgets.

> that the collapse
>   looks exactly like controlled demolition,

Looky looky "looks exactly like"

There's damning evidence. Idiot.


>  that a non
>   'controlled' collapse looks different (pic at the end) and that
>   salomon jakobo from wall street was babbling about "pulling" the
>   building. 
>
>
>

Re: Do you have predictions about 2017?

[juan]

On Sun, 8 Jan 2017 13:57:55 -0800
Razer  wrote:

> 
> 
> On 01/08/2017 01:46 PM, juan wrote:
> > On Sun, 8 Jan 2017 13:37:32 -0800
> > Razer  wrote:
> >
> >> This page intentionally left blank
> >
> > ""the shock wave from the WTC tower hits liquefied the
> >  mud, and undermined the (shoddily constructed) building 7." "
> >
> >
> > " 
> 
> 
> That's what I typed Unh hunh, yup.
> 

This is what you typed you worthless piece of dishonest shit 

"""the shock wave from the WTC tower hits liquefied the
 mud, and undermined the (shoddily constructed) building 7.""" 

Now type the proof. 


'We' are all waiting for your proof.