9/11 hero Willy Rodrigues's UK tour

[SHERITON HOTEL]

Will any of yous critics be showing your visogs at Willy's UK public appearances and perhaps show the courage of your convictions and accuse him of lying about his pre-impact explosions testimony the 9/11 commision 'ministry of truth' deleted or any of the other government complicity claims he's made post 9/11?

[Ignatz]

Will any of yous critics be showing your visogs at Willy's UK public appearances and perhaps show the courage of your convictions and accuse him of lying about his pre-impact explosions testimony the 9/11 commision 'ministry of truth' deleted or any of the other government complicity claims he's made post 9/11?

What's this? A tour of village halls? Special appearance at Orpington community centre (one day only) ?

Pre-impact explosions eh?

Were these a misfire of the Star Wars beam weapon? An accidental hologram? Some spare thermite (stuffed in a sock) self-igniting? A baby directional nuke going critical spontaneously?

Just asking questions you understand ....

[Johnny Pixels]

Apparently he used to work for a certain Amazing Randi. I don't know how true this is though.

[SHERITON HOTEL]

Will any of yous critics be showing your visogs at Willy's UK public appearances and perhaps show the courage of your convictions and accuse him of lying about his pre-impact explosions testimony the 9/11 commision 'ministry of truth' deleted or any of the other government complicity claims he's made post 9/11?

What's this? A tour of village halls? Special appearance at Orpington community centre (one day only) ?

Pre-impact explosions eh?

Were these a misfire of the Star Wars beam weapon? An accidental hologram? Some spare thermite (stuffed in a sock) self-igniting? A baby directional nuke going critical spontaneously?

Just asking questions you understand ....

I'll take that as a NO then?

[chek]

Will any of yous critics be showing your visogs at Willy's UK public appearances and perhaps show the courage of your convictions and accuse him of lying about his pre-impact explosions testimony the 9/11 commision 'ministry of truth' deleted or any of the other government complicity claims he's made post 9/11?

What's this? A tour of village halls? Special appearance at Orpington community centre (one day only) ?

Pre-impact explosions eh?

Were these a misfire of the Star Wars beam weapon? An accidental hologram? Some spare thermite (stuffed in a sock) self-igniting? A baby directional nuke going critical spontaneously?

Just asking questions you understand ....

I'll take that as a NO then?

You have to realise SH, these 'critic' guys aren't interested in anything that challenges the OCT.
Period.

[Johnny Pixels]

What's this? A tour of village halls? Special appearance at Orpington community centre (one day only) ?

Pre-impact explosions eh?

Were these a misfire of the Star Wars beam weapon? An accidental hologram? Some spare thermite (stuffed in a sock) self-igniting? A baby directional nuke going critical spontaneously?

Just asking questions you understand ....

I'll take that as a NO then?

You have to realise SH, these 'critic' guys aren't interested in anything that challenges the OCT.
Period.

You don't have anything that challenges the official account.

[chek]

I'll take that as a NO then?

You have to realise SH, these 'critic' guys aren't interested in anything that challenges the OCT.
Period.

You don't have anything that challenges the official account.

The Official Account challenges itself lol.
Building 7 - straight down, 6.5 seconds 70ft average debris field.
Explain that one smart guy.

[Johnny Pixels]

You have to realise SH, these 'critic' guys aren't interested in anything that challenges the OCT.
Period.

You don't have anything that challenges the official account.

The Official Account challenges itself lol.
Building 7 - straight down, 6.5 seconds 70ft average debris field.
Explain that one smart guy.

How long should building 7 have taken? What should the debris field have been?

[chek]

You don't have anything that challenges the official account.

The Official Account challenges itself lol.
Building 7 - straight down, 6.5 seconds 70ft average debris field.
Explain that one smart guy.

How long should building 7 have taken? What should the debris field have been?

Go do some reearch - you'll find the answer is a lot longer and a lot bigger.
Of course you won't but I'm hardly going to help you out in your all too obvious 3rd grade shilling for the OCT, now am I?

[Johnny Pixels]

The Official Account challenges itself lol.
Building 7 - straight down, 6.5 seconds 70ft average debris field.
Explain that one smart guy.

How long should building 7 have taken? What should the debris field have been?

Go do some reearch - you'll find the answer is a lot longer and a lot bigger.
Of course you won't but I'm hardly going to help you out in your all too obvious 3rd grade shilling for the OCT, now am I?

So you know the answer and you can't be bothered to tell me? Great way to spread the truth there.

[chek]

So you know the answer and you can't be bothered to tell me? Great way to spread the truth there.

Why don't you run the Official Story by us once more for old times sake?
I'm sure we could all do with a good laugh, especially the way you'd tell it.

[scubadiver]

You don't have anything that challenges the official account.

Are you saying that Norman Mineta's testimony, that was shown live on TV and later ignored by the 9/11 Comission, doesn't challenge the OCT?

[Johnny Pixels]

So you know the answer and you can't be bothered to tell me? Great way to spread the truth there.

Why don't you run the Official Story by us once more for old times sake?
I'm sure we could all do with a good laugh, especially the way you'd tell it.

Well that's the difference between the official story and your conspiracy theories. The official account has been published in a coherent, ordered way for everyone to read and understand easily. The conspiracy theory requires you to watch hours of videos, listen to hours of audio clips, read through hundreds of pages of websites.

Why can't the conspiracy theory be nailed down to one specific chain of events?

And how long should WTC 7 have taken to fall, and what should the debris radius have been, and why?

[chek]

So you know the answer and you can't be bothered to tell me? Great way to spread the truth there.

Why don't you run the Official Story by us once more for old times sake?
I'm sure we could all do with a good laugh, especially the way you'd tell it.

Well that's the difference between the official story and your conspiracy theories. The official account has been published in a coherent, ordered way for everyone to read and understand easily. The conspiracy theory requires you to watch hours of videos, listen to hours of audio clips, read through hundreds of pages of websites.

Why can't the conspiracy theory be nailed down to one specific chain of events?

Ah - attention deficit problems. That explains a lot about you.

And how long should WTC 7 have taken to fall, and what should the debris radius have been, and why?

The original was of course a trick question.
WTC7 fell down in exactly the right time and right debris pattern for the third largest Controlled Demolition ever undertaken. A partial collapse as would happen without explosive intervention would be far more messy and incomplete. Google 'collapsed buildings' and see for yourself.

Now I've gotten rather bored with your first chapter JREFfer 'turn questions around' exercises, so if you aren't capable of coming up with something interesting (and you aren't) please don't bother posting.

Your entertainment value just went down through the sub-sub basement level.

[Johnny Pixels]

Why don't you run the Official Story by us once more for old times sake?
I'm sure we could all do with a good laugh, especially the way you'd tell it.

Well that's the difference between the official story and your conspiracy theories. The official account has been published in a coherent, ordered way for everyone to read and understand easily. The conspiracy theory requires you to watch hours of videos, listen to hours of audio clips, read through hundreds of pages of websites.

Why can't the conspiracy theory be nailed down to one specific chain of events?

Ah - attention deficit problems. That explains a lot about you.

And how long should WTC 7 have taken to fall, and what should the debris radius have been, and why?

The original was of course a trick question.
WTC7 fell down in exactly the right time and right debris pattern for the third largest Controlled Demolition ever undertaken. A partial collapse as would happen without explosive intervention would be far more messy and incomplete. Google 'collapsed buildings' and see for yourself.

Now I've gotten rather bored with your first chapter JREFfer 'turn questions around' exercises, so if you aren't capable of coming up with something interesting (and you aren't) please don't bother posting.

Your entertainment value just went down through the sub-sub basement level.

So what should the debris radius and collapse time have been for a non-cd total collapse?

[chek]

Ah - attention deficit problems. That explains a lot about you.
The original was of course a trick question.
WTC7 fell down in exactly the right time and right debris pattern for the third largest Controlled Demolition ever undertaken. A partial collapse as would happen without explosive intervention would be far more messy and incomplete. Google 'collapsed buildings' and see for yourself.

Now I've gotten rather bored with your first chapter JREFfer 'turn questions around' exercises, so if you aren't capable of coming up with something interesting (and you aren't) please don't bother posting.

Your entertainment value just went down through the sub-sub basement level.

So what should the debris radius and collapse time have been for a non-cd total collapse?

As NIST admits that it cannot explain the collapse of WTC7 only telling us that “the best hypothesis has only a low probability of occurrence.”, they don't seem to want to quantify it any further.
Maybe you could?

[Johnny Pixels]

So what should the debris radius and collapse time have been for a non-cd total collapse?

As NIST admits that it cannot explain the collapse of WTC7 only telling us that “the best hypothesis has only a low probability of occurrence.”, they don't seem to want to quantify it any further.
Maybe you could?

You claim that the collapse time and debris radius show it was CD. How would it differ for a non-cd collapse? What kind of numbers are we talking?

[chek]

As NIST admits that it cannot explain the collapse of WTC7 only telling us that “the best hypothesis has only a low probability of occurrence.”, they don't seem to want to quantify it any further.
Maybe you could?

You claim that the collapse time and debris radius show it was CD. How would it differ for a non-cd collapse? What kind of numbers are we talking?

For the chances of a third building falling straight down symmetrically in almost freefall time without explosives right next door to two others that had allegedly just done the exact same thing?
Ooooh, lemme think... big ones. Big, big numbers.
Huge. Enormous.
Several orders of magnitude beyond astronomical I would think.
At least.
Maybe you disagree, or know some precedent that says different?

[Bushwacker]

For the chances of a third building falling straight down symmetrically in almost freefall time without explosives right next door to two others that had allegedly just done the exact same thing?
Ooooh, lemme think... big ones. Big, big numbers.
Huge. Enormous.
Several orders of magnitude beyond astronomical I would think.
At least.
Maybe you disagree, or know some precedent that says different?

No, there is no precedent for that happening, at least with skyscrapers. Also there is no precedent for hijackers flying jetliners at high speed into buildings or a 110 storey skyscraper falling on a 47 storey skyscraper, there is no precedent for the US government, or elements within it, demolishing occupied skyscrapers, there is no precedent for demolishing buildings with thermate, there is no precedent for demolishing buildings with high energy weapons fired from satellites. At one time there was no precedent for flying the Atlantic or the largest ship in the world being sunk on its maiden voyage by an iceberg. Would you think all these things are several orders of magnitude beyond astronomical, or if not how would you choose which ones are?

[blackcat]

Did three ships the size of the Titanic all sink on the same day then? I missed the other two.

[Bushwacker]

Did three ships the size of the Titanic all sink on the same day then? I missed the other two.

You miss a lot.

[blackcat]

You miss a lot.

So it is true. What were the names of the other ships then. Go on - make them up like everything else you type.

[Johnny Pixels]

You claim that the collapse time and debris radius show it was CD. How would it differ for a non-cd collapse? What kind of numbers are we talking?

For the chances of a third building falling straight down symmetrically in almost freefall time without explosives right next door to two others that had allegedly just done the exact same thing?
Ooooh, lemme think... big ones. Big, big numbers.
Huge. Enormous.
Several orders of magnitude beyond astronomical I would think.
At least.
Maybe you disagree, or know some precedent that says different?

DON'T change the subject.

You say the debris field is too small, and the collapse too fast. Give me numbers to back this up. You can't just say more, or bigger, because + 1 x 10 ^-99 is bigger and more.

How big should the debris field have been, and what should the collapse time have been, for non-CD total collapse?

[chek]

For the chances of a third building falling straight down symmetrically in almost freefall time without explosives right next door to two others that had allegedly just done the exact same thing?
Ooooh, lemme think... big ones. Big, big numbers.
Huge. Enormous.
Several orders of magnitude beyond astronomical I would think.
At least.
Maybe you disagree, or know some precedent that says different?

DON'T change the subject.

You say the debris field is too small, and the collapse too fast. Give me numbers to back this up. You can't just say more, or bigger, because + 1 x 10 ^-99 is bigger and more.

How big should the debris field have been, and what should the collapse time have been, for non-CD total collapse?

*Yawn*
Save it for the jury Pixels - "it only looked, acted and quacked like a CD, honest guv".

[Johnny Pixels]

Did three ships the size of the Titanic all sink on the same day then? I missed the other two.

No ship that size had ever sunk before. So by your logic it couldn't have happened. Must've been hit by a torpedo or something.

I can find you 200 examples of ships that sunk or were damaged beyond repair for the same, initially unknown reason. No ship had suffered from this before, then 200 of them failed in a 7 year period. Would you like to know more?

[Johnny Pixels]

DON'T change the subject.

You say the debris field is too small, and the collapse too fast. Give me numbers to back this up. You can't just say more, or bigger, because + 1 x 10 ^-99 is bigger and more.

How big should the debris field have been, and what should the collapse time have been, for non-CD total collapse?

*Yawn*
Save it for the jury Pixels - "it only looked, acted and quacked like a CD, honest guv".

So how are you differentiating between CD and non-CD using debris field spread and collapse time? You must have some figures that show how they would be different. What are they? How should they be different?

[chek]

*Yawn*
Save it for the jury Pixels - "it only looked, acted and quacked like a CD, honest guv".

So how are you differentiating between CD and non-CD using debris field spread and collapse time? You must have some figures that show how they would be different. What are they? How should they be different?

Your answer's in the ninth post in this thread - my third.
Now I already told you - I don't spoonfeed trolls.
But FDNY, conservatively, cleared a 600ft collapse zone which might give you a clue.

[blackcat]

No ship that size had ever sunk before. So by your logic it couldn't have happened.

By my logic it could happen but it is unlikely that three would happen in the same day as not one had happened before. It is your logic that says that scenario is reasonable. There is also the fact that there was an explanation for the sinking of the Titanic ie it hit an iceberg. If three such ships sunk because two of them had their funnels struck, that would be acceptable according to your logic. The emergency rescue services would also have to fail to respond of course. There would also be explosions going off all over the ships as well and they would have to sink in record time. No enquiry would be deemed desirable and huge insurance payouts made to new owners who just happened to have bought them knowing they were condemned floating pieces of asbestos riddled junk. Amidst the flotsam a passport would conveniently be found showing that it was the mooooooslims wot done it and back in the port of departure documents would be found showing that Moooooslims had been studying how to blow up a ship, and one would leave his will, and instructions on how to be a suicide ship sinker. All perfectly logical in the mind of a "believer" in the official fairy tale.

[chek]

>snip< Amidst the flotsam a passport would conveniently be found showing that it was the mooooooslims wot done it and back in the port of departure documents would be found showing that Moooooslims had been studying how to blow up a ship, and one would leave his will, and instructions on how to be a suicide ship sinker. All perfectly logical in the mind of a "believer" in the official fairy tale.

Bound to be a trail of waterproof Korans, inept rowing lessons, 'what the butler saw' girlfriends and faggot (with peas) loving lifestyle too, don't forget.

[A Sharp Major]

Will any of yous critics be showing your visogs at Willy's UK public appearances and perhaps show the courage of your convictions and accuse him of lying about his pre-impact explosions testimony the 9/11 commision 'ministry of truth' deleted or any of the other government complicity claims he's made post 9/11?

Can we expect violence if Ally and blackcat and their sort are there?