I have, and i've found no evidence what so ever 911 was an inside job. Do you have any? Obviously, No.

And a couple more questions 57channels which are meant specifically for YOU...

Just so that you paid molesters of the truth don't get the impression that us truthers are afraid in any way to answer your dumb assed questions, i'm gonna answer them for 57channels

If a 757 didn't hit the Pentagon what happened to it?

A guided missile hit the pentagon.NO PLANE!

Where is the aircraft now?

Maybe new ID numbers and paint job sold to 3rd world country or maybe ditched into the ocean. Who cares, not important

Where are all the passengers and crew?

Were there ever passengers or crew? If so, they are dead in the ocean as well

How did DNA from the passengers and crew get on the Pentagon?

Do you have any concrete proof of dna of the passengers or crew at the pentacon? Did you see even ONE BODY at the pentacon? Conclusion: no bodies = no DNA

Why did over a hundred eye witnesses see a passenger plane fly into the Pentagon - many of them describing details that match a 757 in the colors of American Airlines?

You are stretching the truth to the point of lying now.NOT ONE eyewitness saw a plane hit the pentacon. About 20 (so called) eyewitnesses watched, (and i quote)"for about a minute", a passenger plane heading straight for the pentagon.Almost all of them so-called eyewitnesses were driving as they "watched almost a minute as the plane was headed for the pentagon" but the problem is,how can you possibly watch a plane "for a minute" if that plane is about 200 feet off of the ground and traveling at atleast 450 miles per hour? IMPOSSIBLE. Them so called eyewitnesses are paid liars like you shills. Btw,we have a separate 20 eyewitnesses that tell a completely different story about two planes approaching the pentacon , one is military and the other flew over the pentacon.

How was that damage pattern that suits a 757 created in the building?

Have you ever heard of planted explosives? Wasn't that part of the pentacon the ONLY part under construction at the time?

How did they find so many 757 parts inside the Pentagon, including the Flight Data Recorder (FDR)?

You know for a fact these parts were found inside the pentacon? Awfully convenient that all of these so-called parts are found ONLY inside the pentacon but yet nothing outside.I find that VERY suspicious.We are to believe that a Boeing 757 passenger plane completely folded up and squeezed into a 12 foot diameter hole? Eyewitnesses inside gave testimony of NO FUEL smell inside the pentacon after the explosion.Was that plane ran on solar power?

Why do we have complete radar tracks for flight AA77 from take-off to crash?

If you have all of that then you can produce pictures of the crashed plane so lets see the photos.How many do you have?

How come those radar tracks match the FDR-derived flight path?

If that's true then why do we have eyewitnesses stating that NO commercial aircraft were in the area that morning except one white unidentified plane with no passenger windows ,and why is the flight path of that white plane totally in contradiction of norads supposed AA77 flight path?

That C30 pilot - what was he following upon ATC's request?

He was following the white plane as it flew over the pentacon, and as the guided missile was fired into the pentacon.

Why were Air Traffic Controllers thinking that a deviant airliner needed to be checked out by that C30 pilot?

Who knows, not important

What knocked down the light poles outside the Pentagon?

Damn sure not a plane.Light poles were a stage, therefore not important

Why are damage path inside and outside the Pentagon consistent with radar and FDR flight path?

Why is the supposed flight path of AA77 contradicted by many eyewitness testimony? Why were the light poles cut with oxygen/acetylene at the bases if a plane supposedly knocked them off of their supports? Why no jet fuel inside the pentacon? Why no plane wreckage outside on the lawn of the pentacon? Why not one body, not one luggage on the pentacon lawn?

Why are all three consistent with the bulk of eye witness statements?

Why are there just as many "no plane" eyewitnesses contradicting the government paid so-called eyewitnesses?

Why did American Airlines agree that they are in part responsible for deaths and injuries sustained inside the Pentagon?

I have no idea on that subject.Not important because it was IMPOSSIBLE for a Boeing 757 to COMPLETELY fit inside a 12 foot diameter hole .

Why did AA's insurers not object to AA accepting it was their plane?

Who cares.Not important since no plane caused that hole in the pentacon.

Oh, I don't know. Maybe because it pisses off ISIS?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YRMPm59L4tc

Why is it if you've concluded people should question what they've been told, you then conveniently find yourself unable to comprehend the reasons why they do? Is it possible you don't wan't anyone questioning truthers?

Scarface

could we possibly just send the money directly to your own private bank account because I think we all know any money sent is going directly to you.

ISIS is a NeoCon invention, armed funded and trained by the West.


ISIS is being used to resurrect the push for war in Syria, after most people refused to buy the Assad chemical weapons farce 2 years ago.


I want people questioning EVERYTHING!



Perhaps you should watch the video you linked I'll bet you didn't bother

57channels. What lame a** excuse can you offer up that explains how so many people, like Edna Cintron, who were in and around the impact zone, managed to survive despite their decision to jump instead of being burned to death?

Watch the video he posted to make his point. The video rips his point to shreds

I will watch it since you suggested it worthy of watching

It's satire. Get it?

Watch the video he posted to make his point. The video rips his point to shreds

Sure. I like to ask people to think for themselves. Why don't you think that has value or substance

I posted a few things on here from James Corbett. The same source you used to support your assertion.

You claim it's all nonsense, but don't refute anything. Seems more like you're trying to poison the well, while ignoring the content

Care to rephrase your answer? Because not only was Edna out there waving, but the towers did eventually collapse as a result of excessive heat exposure. There were no missiles. There were no pre-set explosives. We've already went over this throughout multitude posts.

A noted member of the truth movement distances himself from the Thermite debate:

http://jamesfetzer.blogspot.co.uk/2011/05/has-nanothermite-been-oversold-to-911.html

"Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth are heavily promoting the theory that “explosive nanothermite” was used to bring down the Twin Towers on September 11th, 2001, and that microscopic chips of a fused compound containing unignited nanothermite were found in the World Trade Center dust. This discovery is now considered a “smoking gun” by most members of the 9/11 Truth community, even though a good many serious researchers and 9/11 activists remain unconvinced.

Let’s take a look at what is supposed to be the current best evidence in the controlled-demolition theory of the World Trade Center’s tallest buildings. Steven Jones, a physicist who joined the 9/11 Truth movement from Brigham Young University during 2005, introduced the theory that thermite/thermate played a role in the destruction of the towers; and in 2006, he refined this theory to propose that nanothermite or “superthermite” – a finely granulated form of thermite – was in fact the substance used, and its high reactivity served to pulverize the steel, concrete and many additional tons of skyscraper material, including the buildings’ contents.

In an effort to confirm the claims being made about thermite and nanothermite, T. Mark Hightower, a chemical engineer from both the space program and chemical industry, decided to investigate its use as an explosive. In addition to doing his own study, he has repeatedly written to leading 9/11 researchers who champion the use of nanothermite as the principal (if not exclusive) mechanism for bringing about the destruction of the Twin Towers, probing them on the explosive capabilities of nanothermite. The replies he has received suggest that this is an issue they are unwilling to examine fully and openly.

Hightower wrote directly to Richard Gage, the founder of Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth, citing a frequently-referenced March 2005 LLNL paper on thermite, which can be downloaded from the Reference 2 link at the bottom of

http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/analysis/theories/thermitetech.html

This paper explains what nano-composites are, focusing on thermite mixtures and how they are produced. It also includes some experimental results.

As Hightower observed to Gage, however: “This paper offers no evidence to me that explosive velocities anywhere near that of TNT (22,600 feet per second) can be produced by the nanothermites as described and presented. On page 10, it states, ‘One limitation inherent in any thermite energetic material is the inability of the energetic material to do pressure/volume work on an object. Thermites release energy in the form of heat and light, but are unable to move objects.’"
What Hightower was asking Gage was: “How can a substance be an explosive and not be able to do pressure/volume work on an object – that is, move an object?” Gage responded: “The nanothermite was set in a bed of organic silica, which I believe the authors suggest may provide the explosive pressure/volume work. In addition, I believe that the authors are quite open to the possibility that other more high-energy explosives may have been used.”

Without further characterization, the “bed of organic silica” is not a sufficient explanation, so the possibility is raised that “other more high-energy explosives may have been used.” Surely thermite or nanothermite would become explosive if combined with bona fide explosives. Hightower decided to take an even closer look at the claims advanced on behalf of nanothermite, and has spent several months researching everything he could find in the open literature. Again and again, he found that thermite, even in its nano form, unless combined with high explosives or another high-explosive mechanism, cannot be a high explosive.

So if nanothermite is to be the “smoking gun” of 9/11, it would have had to have been combined with some form of high-power explosives or other high-explosive mechanism to do the job of bringing the buildings down. What was it combined with? By itself, nanothermite cannot have been the sole agent of demolition – it was only another “helper.” By itself, therefore, nanothermite cannot be “explosive evidence,” as AE911 Truth maintains.

There are reasons to believe that the 9/11 movement’s nanothermite experts are actually aware of this problem. For example, during a recent interview (“9/11: Explosive Testimony Exclusive” http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0lU-vu2JvZY), Niels Harrit explains that nanothermite is built from the atom scale up, which allows for the option of adding other chemicals to make it explosive. He states that the role played by the red-gray chips found in the dust is unknown. But he is convinced, based on observation of the towers’ destruction and the molten metal present, that both explosives and incendiaries were used. It’s just that he and his fellow researchers have not been able to prove that the nanothermitic material they found in the dust has the explosive properties he believes were necessary to accomplish the destruction.

Harrit suggests the use of “a modern military material which is unknown to the general public” as an explanation for the missing pieces to the 9/11 nanothermite puzzle. He urges a new investigation, whereby NIST will test WTC dust samples for remaining explosives and thermitic material. But he also seems to be saying that he and his fellow 9/11 researchers do not consider it worthwhile to pursue further analysis beyond their current findings."

TBC...

Fun

The kinds of things we speak of in these forums..scares the crap out of alot of people.

Yep;..all these years later..if I even begin to mention there was something fishy about WTC 9/11..they come unglued

They dont want you to wreck their FALSE BOWL OF CHERRIES world.
=========================================================
How true, how very true. Bunch of fkn cowards who would rather go vote in fixed elections rather than admit the truth about the real world.

Voting : The absolutely most unpatriotic thing a person can do.....at least here in Merica.

Evil will always prevail when good men and women do : nothing

Quote from tragicparrot:
Whats extremely unappealing here is that not a one of you's have ever offered evidence lending support to the reasons of why it is you repeatedly ask the same old questions. Your evidence of a missile? A missile, wouldn't it figure, plastered with photo shopped emblems of United Airlines. Your evidence of explosives? A concocted report created by none other than truther's who's interest couldn't be farther than the actual truth. Add a shitload of conjecture, and there you have it. Reason enough to not only avoid what evidence there actually is, but also reason enough to utilize a one sided approach whereas only you get to ask the questions here, not answer them. So, perhaps there is evidence, though you've yet show any here. But then, even if there was, who cares right? Widespread opinion =/= truth value. That is an appeal to popularity fallacy. Something truthers seem to have down to a perfection.


*************************************


Why don't you question why the Pentagon's cameras didn't get High Def shots from every conceivable angle?

Is he talking about you Class5?

I already proved that column wasn't cut by the cleanup crews you dumb shit. Go back and re-read

All your dumb papers shows is that thermite is not highly explosive.

I don't think anyone here claimed that thermite alone was used to demolish the towers.

Again, you post worthless crap. The problem is, thermite/thermate WAS used to melt thru the main support columns AND explosives WERE USED to weaken the floor/wall supports, PROVEN TO BE HEARD by many eyewitnesses as well as CLEARLY HEARD in a few of the videos.

Instead of trying to discount the CLEARLY HEARD explosions, you need to address what really caused them.

Explain away the big boulders found in the rubble that consisted of steel and concrete melted together.

Explain away the melting together of two i-beams that came from two totally different areas that formed a "cross" with a piece of molten steel draped across one of its arms. You better have a hell of allot better explanation than "office fires did it".

Say.......you mentioned something about Edna Cintron standing on one of those beams waving, waiting to get rescued. Now what was cl-ASS'es response to that??

cl-ASS......you still believe the hot fires melted the beams or buckled the beams and caused the so-called collapse?? If so........how the hell could that woman be out there waving?? She would have been burnt up or her clothes on fire or whatever???

Lets hear your lame a** excuse from some debunking 9-11 website???

Don't answer anymore of this shills questions Na. I just answered atleast 10 of his aimed at 57channels and this shill can't explain to us how AA77's magically folded up into that 12 foot mouse hole in the pentacon. I guess that shill has no convictions to his outrageous story

Class 5, Higgy, Parrot you should be given a medal for striving with these lunatics.

I mean they are on the freakin grass!

But hey on the anny of 9/11 it is especially good to keep it real.

Kudos...