On 09/24/2018 11:58 AM, juan wrote:
On Mon, 24 Sep 2018 00:04:09 -0700 Mirimir <mirimir@riseup.net> wrote:
On 09/23/2018 05:47 PM, jamesd@echeque.com wrote:
On Sun, 23 Sep 2018 21:13:36 +1000 jamesd@echeque.com wrote:
None of which changes the fact the building was designed to withstand only three hours of uncontrolled fire
On 2018-09-24 05:34, juan wrote:
that is a fuckingly stupid lie that neither you nor agent fairbrother can provide a source for.
You are lying about sources, as you lied about the fall of building seven.
Well, it's not usually fun to argue with Juan. But I doubt that he "lies", per se.
Did you see the pictures I posted? Who is 'lying' about building 7 'toppling like a tree' ?
Yes, I looked at all the pictures. And in my opinion, it's really hard to tell exactly what's happening. Also, as I've said, I don't really care. I strongly suspect that the US government was somehow actively involved. Or at least, that it was a rogue operation, involving such (maybe not really former) CIA assets as Usama bin Mohammed bin Awad bin Ladin and his associates. That is, it was fundamentally a false-flag attack. And if that's the case, it doesn't really matter what mix of planes, missiles and demolition charges ended up doing the damage. That's rather a distraction. What's interesting is who did it, and why.