Do you have predictions about 2017?

John Newman jnn at synfin.org
Mon Jan 9 14:14:01 PST 2017


> On Jan 9, 2017, at 4:57 PM, juan <juan.g71 at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> On Tue, 10 Jan 2017 07:40:12 +1000
> "James A. Donald" <jamesd at echeque.com> wrote:
> 
>>> On Sun, 8 Jan 2017 14:38:54 -0800
>>> Razer <g2s at riseup.net> 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 :)




More information about the cypherpunks mailing list