World Trade Center - 15 years - Who did it? - Page 410 - Survivalist Forum
Survivalist Forum

Advertise Here

Go Back   Survivalist Forum > >
Articles Classifieds Donations Gallery Groups Links Store Survival Files


Notices

Controversial News and Alternative Politics The conspiracy theory section

Advertise Here
Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
United States Flag That was Flying On the World Trade Center. mastersergeant General Discussion 3 08-06-2017 07:43 AM
Eerie sound heard coming from One World Trade Center.. Renegade Ziggy Controversial News and Alternative Politics 2 12-10-2013 03:34 PM
World Trade Center Tower To Be Made With Glass From China And Steel From Germany oxi General Discussion 25 09-25-2011 11:04 AM
new world trade center SEND IT General Discussion 11 09-02-2011 05:01 PM
The Apocalypse, one world government and the 2012 alignment to the center of the gala oobymach Controversial News and Alternative Politics 64 08-05-2011 02:30 PM
Active Thermitic Material Discovered in Dust from the 9/11 World Trade Center Catastr Sweeper Controversial News and Alternative Politics 4 04-04-2009 01:51 PM
One-World Trade Center kajunman1 Political News and Discussion 0 03-27-2009 06:37 PM
Freedom Tower Will Be Called One World Trade Center m4shadow General Discussion 0 03-27-2009 06:52 AM
Michiganders: Gibraltar Trade Center. Lady Falconessa General Discussion 2 11-08-2008 03:58 PM

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 09-17-2019, 03:18 PM
Exarmyguy Exarmyguy is offline
Survivor
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Within view of the Pacific Ocean
Posts: 4,118
Thanks: 4,582
Thanked 8,110 Times in 2,687 Posts
Default



Advertise Here

Quote:
Originally Posted by Central Scrutinizer View Post
A lot of materials survived the fires because the crash propelled debris from the planes and the buildings out onto the street. Paperwork from offices littered the streets.

Sent from my SM-T350 using Tapatalk
Maybe in of itself but there are just too many coincidences involved it this tragedy.
Quick reply to this message
The Following User Says Thank You to Exarmyguy For This Useful Post:
Old 09-17-2019, 04:18 PM
Revmgt Revmgt is offline
Survivor
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: South florida
Posts: 5,071
Thanks: 8,554
Thanked 13,842 Times in 3,724 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by leadcounsel View Post
Here's a challenge for the truthers here. It's an honest intellectual challenge. Something a true investigator, scientist, or critical thinker does:

Go through your own inventory of beliefs about 9/11/01 and why YOU believe or why the "truthers" believe it to be an inside job. Catalogue and then attempt to offer alternative reasonable explanations for your sides widely held beliefs.

For instance
* free fall
* explosions heard
* why did the buildings fall
* could explosives have been planted
* why the elaborate multi-pronged attack versus something that would have been simplier and easier and directly tied the attacks to the end goals
* were flight rosters made public
* is the PA crash consistent with a missile or more consistent with a jet
* explain all the DNA and personal effects found at the correct crash scenes
* explain the number of people necessary to plan, execute, and coverup the insider attacks
* 2 out of 2 110 story buildings of that design when struck and allowed to burn fell. explain that.

And so forth. And admit that there are fabrications, lies, fiction, hidden agenda, and alternate explanations for many of your teams beliefs.

I doubt a single truther wants the truth nor will accept such a critical thinking challenge.
You’re using a debate brain ****, most of the time people who use it are out of gas. Google Gish Gallop.
You’re assigning a homework assignment to people but the answers you have given have been explained to you multiple times.
Quick reply to this message
Old 09-17-2019, 04:37 PM
Revmgt Revmgt is offline
Survivor
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: South florida
Posts: 5,071
Thanks: 8,554
Thanked 13,842 Times in 3,724 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Exarmyguy View Post
One of my favorites was finding the passport of one of the terrorist that died in the crash . A bit of paper survives a fire so hot it collapses the towers.
Agree 100%.
From the first impact there millions of sheets of paper fluttering around the wtc site.
According to the 9/11 commission report the passport was found by a guy in his thirties, wearing a business suit. It was given to a cop named Yuk H. Chin before the first tower fell, and they report it was “soaked in diesel fuel”.
So they are selling the story that they had the passport of one of the “perpetrators” before the first building even came down. So where was the passport? Was it in his pocket where it magicked it’s way through his pants, through the fireball, floating down through millions of sheets of paper to fall at the feet of an unknown man who happened to give it to a cop who worked for the corrupt Bernard Kerik?
Gimme a ****ing break!
Quick reply to this message
The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to Revmgt For This Useful Post:
Old 09-17-2019, 04:44 PM
Revmgt Revmgt is offline
Survivor
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: South florida
Posts: 5,071
Thanks: 8,554
Thanked 13,842 Times in 3,724 Posts
Default

One thing to bear in mind. The internet as we know it did not exist in 2001. Of course it existed, but it was nothing like what it is today. YouTube didn’t even exist until 4 years after the attack. When this happened they were still operating under the old guard, they knew they could control the narrative. They didn’t count on a tool that could be used by an individual to reach millions of people in seconds, or a tool that would let people slow down, examine and replay video footage that could contradict whatever narrative they chose to feed us.

The story of the discovery of the passport should have faded away and been lost in the echoes of all the other claims from that day, but here, almost 20 years later, we can share the info between ourselves and even link to old news reports of the day to illustrate our point.
Quick reply to this message
Old 09-17-2019, 04:46 PM
Justme11's Avatar
Justme11 Justme11 is online now
French Prometheus unbound
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Houston
Posts: 27,300
Thanks: 29,969
Thanked 65,092 Times in 19,999 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Revmgt View Post
Agree 100%.
From the first impact there millions of sheets of paper fluttering around the wtc site.
According to the 9/11 commission report the passport was found by a guy in his thirties, wearing a business suit. It was given to a cop named Yuk H. Chin before the first tower fell, and they report it was “soaked in diesel fuel”.
So they are selling the story that they had the passport of one of the “perpetrators” before the first building even came down. So where was the passport? Was it in his pocket where it magicked it’s way through his pants, through the fireball, floating down through millions of sheets of paper to fall at the feet of an unknown man who happened to give it to a cop who worked for the corrupt Bernard Kerik?
Gimme a ****ing break!
If I was going to be a firefighter, I would make a safety suit from those magic passports sewn together. Able to survive a plane crash, jet fuel immersion and atomic fireball, fall 2000 feet and land in an official's hand.

I would be nigh invulnerable. Like "The Tick".


Quick reply to this message
The Following User Says Thank You to Justme11 For This Useful Post:
Old 09-17-2019, 04:58 PM
Revmgt Revmgt is offline
Survivor
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: South florida
Posts: 5,071
Thanks: 8,554
Thanked 13,842 Times in 3,724 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Exarmyguy View Post
Maybe in of itself but there are just too many coincidences involved it this tragedy.
Agree again. There comes a point when there are so many coincidences that it’s impossible for any of the events to be called a coincidence anymore.
- military drills conducted where pilots have to respond to a simulation of airplanes being hijacked and flown into buildings while airplanes are actually being hijacked and flown into buildings.
- more than half of the people in the chain of command to respond to such an event are unable to perform their job for one reason or another
- 3 overbuilt steel structures fall at near freefall speed directly down through the area of greatest resistance into their own footprints
- Larry Silverstein just happened to sign a 99 year lease on a complex knowing it needed AT LEAST a half a billion dollars worth of asbestos abatement and upgrades, only to be paid 7 billion dollars in insurance settlements.
- the most secure building in the world (arguably) in the age of surveillance was hit and the only images we have of the attack are three unclear images of an object striking the building.

These are just the first coincidences that fell out of my mind, there are dozens more, and they’re all listed in this thread.
Quick reply to this message
The Following User Says Thank You to Revmgt For This Useful Post:
Old 09-17-2019, 04:59 PM
Revmgt Revmgt is offline
Survivor
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: South florida
Posts: 5,071
Thanks: 8,554
Thanked 13,842 Times in 3,724 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Justme11 View Post
If I was going to be a firefighter, I would make a safety suit from those magic passports sewn together. Able to survive a plane crash, jet fuel immersion and atomic fireball, fall 2000 feet and land in an official's hand.

I would be nigh invulnerable. Like "The Tick".

The Tick - Intro - YouTube
I’d buy one
Quick reply to this message
The Following User Says Thank You to Revmgt For This Useful Post:
Old 09-17-2019, 05:06 PM
leadcounsel's Avatar
leadcounsel leadcounsel is offline
Comic, not your lawyer!
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 10,373
Thanks: 23,707
Thanked 31,991 Times in 7,731 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Snuggle Monkey View Post
Tower 7 wasn't struck by a plane, so how or why was it "burning out of control for 7+ hours?"
Quote:
Originally Posted by Snuggle Monkey View Post
Okay that's feasible but, why was it on fire to begin with?
Do you have a genuine interest or just want to listen to the lies from the "truthers?"

It was struck by falling building debris, much on fire, and widespread fire in the WTC 7 burned out of control for 7+ hours. No water and no water pressure to stem the blaze. This is all widely known and reported. Billowing black smoke all day from WTC 7.

But you won't get that from the "truthers."
It's all explained and widely known here: https://www.nist.gov/topics/disaster...-investigation

"4. What caused the fires in WTC 7?

Debris from the collapse of WTC 1, which was 370 feet to the south, ignited fires on at least 10 floors in the building at its south and west faces. However, only the fires on some of the lower floors—7 through 9 and 11 through 13—burned out of control. These lower-floor fires—which spread and grew because the water supply to the automatic sprinkler system for these floors had failed—were similar to building fires experienced in other tall buildings. The primary and backup water supply to the sprinkler systems for the lower floors relied on the city's water supply, whose lines were damaged by the collapse of WTC 1 and WTC 2. These uncontrolled lower-floor fires eventually spread to the northeast part of WTC 7, where the building's collapse began.

5. How did the fires cause WTC 7 to collapse?

The heat from the uncontrolled fires caused steel floor beams and girders to thermally expand, leading to a chain of events that caused a key structural column to fail. The failure of this structural column then initiated a fire-induced progressive collapse of the entire building.

According to the report's probable collapse sequence, heat from the uncontrolled fires caused thermal expansion of the steel beams on the lower floors of the east side of WTC 7, damaging the floor framing on multiple floors.

Eventually, a girder on Floor 13 lost its connection to a critical column, Column 79, that provided support for the long floor spans on the east side of the building (see Diagram 1). The displaced girder and other local fire-induced damage caused Floor 13 to collapse, beginning a cascade of floor failures down to the 5th floor. Many of these floors had already been at least partially weakened by the fires in the vicinity of Column 79. This collapse of floors left Column 79 insufficiently supported in the east-west direction over nine stories.

The unsupported Column 79 then buckled and triggered an upward progression of floor system failures that reached the building's east penthouse. What followed in rapid succession was a series of structural failures. Failure first occurred all the way to the roof line—involving all three interior columns on the easternmost side of the building (79, 80, and 81). Then, progressing from east to west across WTC 7, all of the columns failed in the core of the building (58 through 78). Finally, the entire façade collapsed.

The probable collapse sequence is described in NIST NCSTAR Report 1A, Section 2.4 and NIST NCSTAR Report 1-9, Chapter 13.

6. What is progressive collapse?

Progressive collapse is defined as the spread of local damage from a single initiating event, from structural element to element, eventually resulting in the collapse of an entire structure or a disproportionately large part of it. The failure of WTC 7 was an example of a fire-induced progressive collapse.

Progressive collapse did NOT occur in the WTC towers, for two reasons. First, the collapse of each tower was not triggered by local damage or a single initiating event. Second, the structures were able to redistribute loads from the impact and fire-damaged structural components and subsystems to undamaged components and to keep the building standing until a sudden, global collapse occurred. Had a hat truss that connected the core columns to the exterior frame not been installed to support a TV antenna atop each WTC tower after the structure had been fully designed, it is likely that the core of the WTC towers would have collapsed sooner, triggering a global collapse. Such a collapse would have some features similar to that of a progressive collapse.

7. How did the collapse of WTC 7 differ from the collapses of WTC 1 and WTC 2?

WTC 7 was unlike the WTC towers in many respects. WTC 7 was a more typical tall building in the design of its structural system. It was not struck by an aircraft. The collapse of WTC 7 was caused by a single initiating event—the failure of a northeast building column brought on by fire-induced damage to the adjacent flooring system and connections—which stands in contrast to the WTC 1 and WTC 2 failures, which were brought on by multiple factors, including structural damage caused by the aircraft impact, extensive dislodgement of the sprayed fire-resistive materials or fireproofing in the impacted region, and a weakening of the steel structures created by the fires.

The fires in WTC 7 were quite different from the fires in the WTC towers. Since WTC 7 was not doused with thousands of gallons of jet fuel, large areas of any floor were not ignited simultaneously as they were in the WTC towers. Instead, separate fires in WTC 7 broke out on different floors, most notably on Floors 7 to 9 and 11 to 13. The WTC 7 fires were similar to building contents fires that have occurred in several tall buildings where the automatic sprinklers did not function or were not present.
8. Why did WTC 7 collapse, while no other known building in history has collapsed due to fires alone?

The collapse of WTC 7 is the first known instance of a tall building brought down primarily by uncontrolled fires. The fires in WTC 7 were similar to those that have occurred in several tall buildings where the automatic sprinklers did not function or were not present. These other buildings, including Philadelphia's One Meridian Plaza, a 38-story skyscraper that burned for 18 hours in 1991, did not collapse due to differences in the design of the structural system (see the answer to Question 9).

Factors contributing to WTC 7's collapse included: the thermal expansion of building elements such as floor beams and girders, which occurred at temperatures hundreds of degrees below those typically considered in current practice for fire-resistance ratings; significant magnification of thermal expansion effects due to the long-span floors in the building; connections between structural elements that were designed to resist the vertical forces of gravity, not the thermally induced horizontal or lateral loads; and an overall structural system not designed to prevent fire-induced progressive collapse.

9. What are the major differences between "typical" major high-rise building fires that have occurred in the United States and the fire in the WTC 7 building on Sept. 11, 2001?

There are more similarities than differences between the uncontrolled fires that burned in WTC 7 and those that occurred in the following buildings: First Interstate Bank Building (1988), One Meridian Plaza Building (1991), One New York Plaza (1970), and WTC 51 (2001).

NIST NCSTAR Report 1-9, Section 8.5, provides details about these building fires.

The following factors describe the fire events that occurred in both WTC 7 and the referenced buildings:

The fuel for the fires was ordinary office combustibles at ordinary combustible load levels.
There was no use of accelerants.
The spread of fire from combustible to combustible was governed by ordinary fire physics.
Fire-induced window breakage provided ventilation for continued fire spread and growth.
There were simultaneous fires on multiple floors.
The fires on each floor occupied a substantial portion of the floor.
The fires on each floor had passed the point of flashover and the structure was subjected to typical post-flashover temperatures.
The sprinklers were inoperative or ineffective; and 9) the fires burned for sufficient time to cause significant distortion and/or failure to the building structure.
There were some differences between the fires in WTC 7 and those in the referenced buildings, but these differences were secondary to the fire factors that led to the collapse of WTC 7:

Fires in high-rise buildings typically have a single point of origin on a single floor, whereas the fires in WTC 7 likely had a single point of origin on multiple (10) floors.
Fires in other high-rise buildings were due to isolated events, whereas the fires in WTC 7 followed the collapse of WTC 1.
Water was available to fight fires in the other high rise buildings, but the water supply to fight fires in WTC 7 was impaired.
While the fires in the other buildings were actively fought by firefighters to the extent possible, in WTC 7, no efforts were made to fight the fires because of the lack of a water supply.
The differences in the fires were not meaningful for the following reasons. By the time WTC 7 collapsed, the fires in WTC 7 had advanced well beyond the likely points of origin on multiple floors (i.e., south and west faces), and points of fire origin had no bearing on the fire conditions when the building collapsed (i.e., in the northeast quadrant). Additionally, in each of the other referenced buildings, the fires burned out several floors, even with available water and firefighting activities (except for WTC 5). Thus, whether the fire fighters fought the WTC 7 fires or not is not a meaningful point of dissimilarity from the other cited fires."

And it goes on...
Quick reply to this message
Old 09-17-2019, 05:17 PM
leadcounsel's Avatar
leadcounsel leadcounsel is offline
Comic, not your lawyer!
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 10,373
Thanks: 23,707
Thanked 31,991 Times in 7,731 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Exarmyguy View Post
One of my favorites was finding the passport of one of the terrorist that died in the crash . A bit of paper survives a fire so hot it collapses the towers.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Exarmyguy View Post
Maybe in of itself but there are just too many coincidences involved it this tragedy.
And yet, looking back at videos and images a LOT of "fragile" paper survived the impacts and explosions and collapses. Paper itself is actually relatively rugged and doesn't burn or destroy or pulverize easily. Having burned a lot of paper in my days, as a way of destroying documents vs. shredding, it doesn't burn easily as you may think. Also, passports tend to be more fiber type material and typically carried in a heavy pocket or otherwise shielded. A passport in a back pocket of someone in the cockpit (a terrorist) could easily theoretically survive an impact and explosion and be propelled thru the building and land harmlessly on the ground. Very feasible. And it apparently occurred.

Look at all this paper that survived at ground zero ... I recall watching it and it looked like a ticker-tape parade with all the paper floating through the air.








Quick reply to this message
Old 09-17-2019, 05:27 PM
Revmgt Revmgt is offline
Survivor
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: South florida
Posts: 5,071
Thanks: 8,554
Thanked 13,842 Times in 3,724 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by leadcounsel View Post
Do you have a genuine interest or just want to listen to the lies from the "truthers?"

It was struck by falling building debris, much on fire, and widespread fire in the WTC 7 burned out of control for 7+ hours. No water and no water pressure to stem the blaze. This is all widely known and reported. Billowing black smoke all day from WTC 7.

But you won't get that from the "truthers."
It's all explained and widely known here: https://www.nist.gov/topics/disaster...-investigation

"4. What caused the fires in WTC 7?

Debris from the collapse of WTC 1, which was 370 feet to the south, ignited fires on at least 10 floors in the building at its south and west faces. However, only the fires on some of the lower floors—7 through 9 and 11 through 13—burned out of control. These lower-floor fires—which spread and grew because the water supply to the automatic sprinkler system for these floors had failed—were similar to building fires experienced in other tall buildings. The primary and backup water supply to the sprinkler systems for the lower floors relied on the city's water supply, whose lines were damaged by the collapse of WTC 1 and WTC 2. These uncontrolled lower-floor fires eventually spread to the northeast part of WTC 7, where the building's collapse began.

5. How did the fires cause WTC 7 to collapse?

The heat from the uncontrolled fires caused steel floor beams and girders to thermally expand, leading to a chain of events that caused a key structural column to fail. The failure of this structural column then initiated a fire-induced progressive collapse of the entire building.

According to the report's probable collapse sequence, heat from the uncontrolled fires caused thermal expansion of the steel beams on the lower floors of the east side of WTC 7, damaging the floor framing on multiple floors.

Eventually, a girder on Floor 13 lost its connection to a critical column, Column 79, that provided support for the long floor spans on the east side of the building (see Diagram 1). The displaced girder and other local fire-induced damage caused Floor 13 to collapse, beginning a cascade of floor failures down to the 5th floor. Many of these floors had already been at least partially weakened by the fires in the vicinity of Column 79. This collapse of floors left Column 79 insufficiently supported in the east-west direction over nine stories.

The unsupported Column 79 then buckled and triggered an upward progression of floor system failures that reached the building's east penthouse. What followed in rapid succession was a series of structural failures. Failure first occurred all the way to the roof line—involving all three interior columns on the easternmost side of the building (79, 80, and 81). Then, progressing from east to west across WTC 7, all of the columns failed in the core of the building (58 through 78). Finally, the entire façade collapsed.

The probable collapse sequence is described in NIST NCSTAR Report 1A, Section 2.4 and NIST NCSTAR Report 1-9, Chapter 13.

6. What is progressive collapse?

Progressive collapse is defined as the spread of local damage from a single initiating event, from structural element to element, eventually resulting in the collapse of an entire structure or a disproportionately large part of it. The failure of WTC 7 was an example of a fire-induced progressive collapse.

Progressive collapse did NOT occur in the WTC towers, for two reasons. First, the collapse of each tower was not triggered by local damage or a single initiating event. Second, the structures were able to redistribute loads from the impact and fire-damaged structural components and subsystems to undamaged components and to keep the building standing until a sudden, global collapse occurred. Had a hat truss that connected the core columns to the exterior frame not been installed to support a TV antenna atop each WTC tower after the structure had been fully designed, it is likely that the core of the WTC towers would have collapsed sooner, triggering a global collapse. Such a collapse would have some features similar to that of a progressive collapse.

7. How did the collapse of WTC 7 differ from the collapses of WTC 1 and WTC 2?

WTC 7 was unlike the WTC towers in many respects. WTC 7 was a more typical tall building in the design of its structural system. It was not struck by an aircraft. The collapse of WTC 7 was caused by a single initiating event—the failure of a northeast building column brought on by fire-induced damage to the adjacent flooring system and connections—which stands in contrast to the WTC 1 and WTC 2 failures, which were brought on by multiple factors, including structural damage caused by the aircraft impact, extensive dislodgement of the sprayed fire-resistive materials or fireproofing in the impacted region, and a weakening of the steel structures created by the fires.

The fires in WTC 7 were quite different from the fires in the WTC towers. Since WTC 7 was not doused with thousands of gallons of jet fuel, large areas of any floor were not ignited simultaneously as they were in the WTC towers. Instead, separate fires in WTC 7 broke out on different floors, most notably on Floors 7 to 9 and 11 to 13. The WTC 7 fires were similar to building contents fires that have occurred in several tall buildings where the automatic sprinklers did not function or were not present.
8. Why did WTC 7 collapse, while no other known building in history has collapsed due to fires alone?

The collapse of WTC 7 is the first known instance of a tall building brought down primarily by uncontrolled fires. The fires in WTC 7 were similar to those that have occurred in several tall buildings where the automatic sprinklers did not function or were not present. These other buildings, including Philadelphia's One Meridian Plaza, a 38-story skyscraper that burned for 18 hours in 1991, did not collapse due to differences in the design of the structural system (see the answer to Question 9).

Factors contributing to WTC 7's collapse included: the thermal expansion of building elements such as floor beams and girders, which occurred at temperatures hundreds of degrees below those typically considered in current practice for fire-resistance ratings; significant magnification of thermal expansion effects due to the long-span floors in the building; connections between structural elements that were designed to resist the vertical forces of gravity, not the thermally induced horizontal or lateral loads; and an overall structural system not designed to prevent fire-induced progressive collapse.

9. What are the major differences between "typical" major high-rise building fires that have occurred in the United States and the fire in the WTC 7 building on Sept. 11, 2001?

There are more similarities than differences between the uncontrolled fires that burned in WTC 7 and those that occurred in the following buildings: First Interstate Bank Building (1988), One Meridian Plaza Building (1991), One New York Plaza (1970), and WTC 51 (2001).

NIST NCSTAR Report 1-9, Section 8.5, provides details about these building fires.

The following factors describe the fire events that occurred in both WTC 7 and the referenced buildings:

The fuel for the fires was ordinary office combustibles at ordinary combustible load levels.
There was no use of accelerants.
The spread of fire from combustible to combustible was governed by ordinary fire physics.
Fire-induced window breakage provided ventilation for continued fire spread and growth.
There were simultaneous fires on multiple floors.
The fires on each floor occupied a substantial portion of the floor.
The fires on each floor had passed the point of flashover and the structure was subjected to typical post-flashover temperatures.
The sprinklers were inoperative or ineffective; and 9) the fires burned for sufficient time to cause significant distortion and/or failure to the building structure.
There were some differences between the fires in WTC 7 and those in the referenced buildings, but these differences were secondary to the fire factors that led to the collapse of WTC 7:

Fires in high-rise buildings typically have a single point of origin on a single floor, whereas the fires in WTC 7 likely had a single point of origin on multiple (10) floors.
Fires in other high-rise buildings were due to isolated events, whereas the fires in WTC 7 followed the collapse of WTC 1.
Water was available to fight fires in the other high rise buildings, but the water supply to fight fires in WTC 7 was impaired.
While the fires in the other buildings were actively fought by firefighters to the extent possible, in WTC 7, no efforts were made to fight the fires because of the lack of a water supply.
The differences in the fires were not meaningful for the following reasons. By the time WTC 7 collapsed, the fires in WTC 7 had advanced well beyond the likely points of origin on multiple floors (i.e., south and west faces), and points of fire origin had no bearing on the fire conditions when the building collapsed (i.e., in the northeast quadrant). Additionally, in each of the other referenced buildings, the fires burned out several floors, even with available water and firefighting activities (except for WTC 5). Thus, whether the fire fighters fought the WTC 7 fires or not is not a meaningful point of dissimilarity from the other cited fires."

And it goes on...
And somehow a 69 story hotel in Dubai burned, involving many floors, and did not collapse.
Gauge this building against what we saw on 9/11 with wtc7, not even close.

http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=e9C9VFUBFoI

The overbuilt bunker-like wtc7 collapsed from common office fires?
The excuse used by the shills is the twin towers didn’t experience regular fires. Even though almost all of the jet fuel burned off during the initial fireball they maintain the fuel increased the temps to a point the towers couldn’t take.
They say that and then tell you wtc7 collapsed from the burning of commonnoffice contents.

Another thing to google is the fuel load. People say because they were long distance flights they were carrying their maximum capacity of fuel, that’s not true.
It can be researched and anyone will see both planes took off with a little more than half of their potential load of fuel.
Quick reply to this message
The Following User Says Thank You to Revmgt For This Useful Post:
Old 09-17-2019, 05:28 PM
leadcounsel's Avatar
leadcounsel leadcounsel is offline
Comic, not your lawyer!
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 10,373
Thanks: 23,707
Thanked 31,991 Times in 7,731 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Revmgt View Post
Agree 100%.
From the first impact there millions of sheets of paper fluttering around the wtc site.
According to the 9/11 commission report the passport was found by a guy in his thirties, wearing a business suit. It was given to a cop named Yuk H. Chin before the first tower fell, and they report it was “soaked in diesel fuel”.
So they are selling the story that they had the passport of one of the “perpetrators” before the first building even came down. So where was the passport? Was it in his pocket where it magicked it’s way through his pants, through the fireball, floating down through millions of sheets of paper to fall at the feet of an unknown man who happened to give it to a cop who worked for the corrupt Bernard Kerik?
Gimme a ****ing break!
Quote:
Originally Posted by Revmgt View Post
One thing to bear in mind. The internet as we know it did not exist in 2001. Of course it existed, but it was nothing like what it is today. YouTube didn’t even exist until 4 years after the attack. When this happened they were still operating under the old guard, they knew they could control the narrative. They didn’t count on a tool that could be used by an individual to reach millions of people in seconds, or a tool that would let people slow down, examine and replay video footage that could contradict whatever narrative they chose to feed us.

The story of the discovery of the passport should have faded away and been lost in the echoes of all the other claims from that day, but here, almost 20 years later, we can share the info between ourselves and even link to old news reports of the day to illustrate our point.
Wrong yet again Columbo. Or Mr. "Truther." The government has made no effort to conceal or hide this fact not relying on "Youtube" to circulate information. Hearings and investigations and trials have been held and this information is widely publically available.

You make FAR too much of alleged "coincidences" which are not coincidences. In spite of big explosions, a lot of small effects survived. Personal effects of many passengers, including 4 passports (1 recovered from a non-crashed plane on luggage that didn't make a connecting flight).

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

"Passports recovered
According to testimony by Susan Ginsberg, a staff member of the National Commission on Terrorist attacks upon the United States, in the January 26, 2004, Public Hearing:

Four of the hijackers' passports have survived in whole or in part. Two were recovered from the crash site of United Airlines flight 93 in Pennsylvania. These are the passports of Ziad Jarrah and Saeed al Ghamdi. One belonged to a hijacker on American Airlines flight 11. This is the passport of Satam al Suqami. A passerby picked it up and gave it to a NYPD detective shortly before the World Trade Center towers collapsed. A fourth passport was recovered from luggage that did not make it from a Portland flight to Boston on to the connecting flight which was American Airlines flight 11. This is the passport of Abdul Aziz al Omari.
In addition to these four, some digital copies of the hijackers passports were recovered in post-9/11 operations. Two of the passports that have survived, those of Satam al Suqami and Abdul Aziz al Omari, were clearly doctored. These passports were manipulated in a fraudulent manner in ways that have been associated with al Qaeda.
WTC site
The passport of hijacker Satam al-Suqami was found a few blocks from the World Trade Center.[7][8]

Flight 93
According to the 9/11 Commission, the passports of two of the Flight 93 hijackers were also found intact in the aircraft's debris field.[9]

Atta's luggage
The doctored passport of hijacker Abdulaziz Alomari was found in Mohamed Atta's left-behind luggage.[9]

When examining Mohamed Atta's left-behind luggage, the FBI found important clues about the hijackers and their plans. His luggage contained papers that revealed the identity of all 19 hijackers, and provided information about their plans, motives, and backgrounds.[10] The FBI was able to determine details such as dates of birth, known and/or possible residences, visa statuses, and specific identities of the suspected pilots. None of these documents have been scrutinized by independent legal experts.[11]"

PS in case you were wondering, the alleged cruise missile your "truther" team promotes that hit Shanksville would not have left passports at the wreckage site.
Quick reply to this message
Old 09-17-2019, 05:30 PM
leadcounsel's Avatar
leadcounsel leadcounsel is offline
Comic, not your lawyer!
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 10,373
Thanks: 23,707
Thanked 31,991 Times in 7,731 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Revmgt View Post
And somehow a 69 story hotel in Dubai burned, involving many floors, and did not collapse.
Gauge this building against what we saw on 9/11 with wtc7, not even close.

http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=e9C9VFUBFoI

The overbuilt bunker-like wtc7 collapsed from common office fires?
The excuse used by the shills is the twin towers didn’t experience regular fires. Even though almost all of the jet fuel burned off during the initial fireball they maintain the fuel increased the temps to a point the towers couldn’t take.
They say that and then tell you wtc7 collapsed from the burning of commonnoffice contents.

Another thing to google is the fuel load. People say because they were long distance flights they were carrying their maximum capacity of fuel, that’s not true.
It can be researched and anyone will see both planes took off with a little more than half of their potential load of fuel.
In spite of your repeated conjecture, your OPINION is trumped by:
* science (gravity wins, fire is hot and damages steel, etc.)
* facts (different circumstances, design, damage patterns, fire patterns, etc.)
* the event actually occurred in reality (it did in fact occur).

Sorry but you don't seem to be living in reality.
Quick reply to this message
Old 09-17-2019, 05:41 PM
Justme11's Avatar
Justme11 Justme11 is online now
French Prometheus unbound
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Houston
Posts: 27,300
Thanks: 29,969
Thanked 65,092 Times in 19,999 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Revmgt View Post
Agree again. There comes a point when there are so many coincidences that it’s impossible for any of the events to be called a coincidence anymore.
- military drills conducted where pilots have to respond to a simulation of airplanes being hijacked and flown into buildings while airplanes are actually being hijacked and flown into buildings..

And after the event, Bush and Rice saying that "Noone, could have imagined using commercial jets as a weapon".

I guess they thought Americans were pretty gullable.
Quick reply to this message
The Following User Says Thank You to Justme11 For This Useful Post:
Old 09-17-2019, 05:56 PM
leadcounsel's Avatar
leadcounsel leadcounsel is offline
Comic, not your lawyer!
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 10,373
Thanks: 23,707
Thanked 31,991 Times in 7,731 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Justme11 View Post
And after the event, Bush and Rice saying that "Noone, could have imagined using commercial jets as a weapon".

I guess they thought Americans were pretty gullable.
And there you have it. Casual statements from politicians are the smoking gun. It must have been Professor Plum in the Study with the Candlestick.

Good grief you all are desperate.

What should they say: "We've been planning for both offense and defense on this sort of attack for 5 decades, but we got caught off guard and committed total malfeasance in protecting you. Oops. My bad. Sorry about that...".
Quick reply to this message
Old 09-17-2019, 06:36 PM
Revmgt Revmgt is offline
Survivor
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: South florida
Posts: 5,071
Thanks: 8,554
Thanked 13,842 Times in 3,724 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by leadcounsel View Post
And yet, looking back at videos and images a LOT of "fragile" paper survived the impacts and explosions and collapses. Paper itself is actually relatively rugged and doesn't burn or destroy or pulverize easily. Having burned a lot of paper in my days, as a way of destroying documents vs. shredding, it doesn't burn easily as you may think. Also, passports tend to be more fiber type material and typically carried in a heavy pocket or otherwise shielded. A passport in a back pocket of someone in the cockpit (a terrorist) could easily theoretically survive an impact and explosion and be propelled thru the building and land harmlessly on the ground. Very feasible. And it apparently occurred.

Look at all this paper that survived at ground zero ... I recall watching it and it looked like a ticker-tape parade with all the paper floating through the air.








Apparently it occurred? Apparently it’s bull****.
You just said a passport in someone’s pocket in the cockpit of an airplane that hit a building and exploded could easily make it through the explosion and fireball, “be propelled” through the exploding building with the plane being ripped to shreds and land harmlessly on the ground.
Do you realize how ridiculous that sounds? Part of me thinks you do, part of me thinks you are laughing at what you just wrote.
So the steel columns shredded the airplane in such a way that it ripped open the heavy pocket of the terrorist in the exact way it needed to release the passport. Ripped the plane, the terrorist, all the passengers, all the contents of the plane, to shreds, and a warm puff of breeze lifted the passport and set it down on the street below.

Man, i’m Speechless
Quick reply to this message
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Revmgt For This Useful Post:
Old 09-17-2019, 06:59 PM
leadcounsel's Avatar
leadcounsel leadcounsel is offline
Comic, not your lawyer!
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 10,373
Thanks: 23,707
Thanked 31,991 Times in 7,731 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Revmgt View Post
Apparently it occurred? Apparently it’s bull****.
You just said a passport in someone’s pocket in the cockpit of an airplane that hit a building and exploded could easily make it through the explosion and fireball, “be propelled” through the exploding building with the plane being ripped to shreds and land harmlessly on the ground.
Do you realize how ridiculous that sounds? Part of me thinks you do, part of me thinks you are laughing at what you just wrote.
So the steel columns shredded the airplane in such a way that it ripped open the heavy pocket of the terrorist in the exact way it needed to release the passport. Ripped the plane, the terrorist, all the passengers, all the contents of the plane, to shreds, and a warm puff of breeze lifted the passport and set it down on the street below.

Man, i’m Speechless
Look guy, it happened. So I'm right and you are wrong. Objects survive plane crashes. It's a fact. Every plane crash has objects that survive. Heck, humans have survived seemingly unsurvivable plane crashes.

It also apparently happened that 2 passports survived the PA crash.

You can scream, pout, name call, hold your breath, mock, or be speechless all you want. Weird things happen in life. Among them, it's really not that odd that a passport would survive a plane crash - even a firey explosion - when it's clear that much of the explosion was THRU the building and out the other side. Other historic catastrophic plane crashes have had survivors, and surviving items (clothing, IDs, shoes, jewelry, paper documents, etc.) that in the aggregate are not that unusual.

I don't pretend to know how it did happen. But it did. As evidenced by the facts. I've merely theorized that the passport was probably protected in a heavy bag, or a pocket, or similar. And propelled right thru the explosion and inferno to drift down to earth. Why would a 1-2 second explosion necessarily destroy a protected document? It wouldn't necessarily. The passport didn't really impact anything, and it was probably shielded for the 1-2 second explosion by several layers of shielding materials.

The "truthers" simply cannot by some odd mental block accept reality.

You refusing to accept proven, repeatable facts which aren't really that unusual when compared to other crashes is entirely without merit and has no bearing on the event.
Quick reply to this message
Old 09-17-2019, 10:06 PM
Revmgt Revmgt is offline
Survivor
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: South florida
Posts: 5,071
Thanks: 8,554
Thanked 13,842 Times in 3,724 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by leadcounsel View Post
Look guy, it happened. So I'm right and you are wrong. Objects survive plane crashes. It's a fact. Every plane crash has objects that survive. Heck, humans have survived seemingly unsurvivable plane crashes.

It also apparently happened that 2 passports survived the PA crash.

You can scream, pout, name call, hold your breath, mock, or be speechless all you want. Weird things happen in life. Among them, it's really not that odd that a passport would survive a plane crash - even a firey explosion - when it's clear that much of the explosion was THRU the building and out the other side. Other historic catastrophic plane crashes have had survivors, and surviving items (clothing, IDs, shoes, jewelry, paper documents, etc.) that in the aggregate are not that unusual.

I don't pretend to know how it did happen. But it did. As evidenced by the facts. I've merely theorized that the passport was probably protected in a heavy bag, or a pocket, or similar. And propelled right thru the explosion and inferno to drift down to earth. Why would a 1-2 second explosion necessarily destroy a protected document? It wouldn't necessarily. The passport didn't really impact anything, and it was probably shielded for the 1-2 second explosion by several layers of shielding materials.

The "truthers" simply cannot by some odd mental block accept reality.

You refusing to accept proven, repeatable facts which aren't really that unusual when compared to other crashes is entirely without merit and has no bearing on the event.
Let’s do a quick integrity check, no bull****, I just want to see where your head is.

The north tower was struck at 8:46, the south tower at 9:03. When the first tower was struck it sent debris scattering all over lower Manhattan, including what had to be millions of sheets of paper.
When the second tower was struck it sent even more debris and papers out into the air, falling down onto the street below.
We’re told the passport was found by a man and given to detective Chin just before the collapse of the south tower at 9:59. That means that in an hour or less after the first impact the cops were in possession of the passport of one of the terrorists.
We didn’t even touch on how, during all that, a man found a passport on the street, found a cop to give it to, and that cop gave it to none other than Bernard Kerik.
We’re told that passport was most likely in the pocket of a man who was sitting in the cockpit of an airplane that, according to you was traveling 500 mph, and in the cockpit only had a few feet of airplane in front of him.
So he’s basically sitting at the tip of this airplane and it enters the building and gets ripped to shreds by the steel outer support columns and the interior core columns. The plane is shredded, the owner of the passport was shredded, and the fuel onboard the plane exploded into a fireball.
So we have the passport owner being shoved through the building by the entirety of the airplane behind him, but as that was happening something amazing happened, the passport got through all that intact.

So, does that sound like a reasonable explanation? Does that sound like horse****? Do you know how many constellations would have to line up to make that series of events happen?
Truthfully, do you accept that as the official explanation?
Quick reply to this message
Old 09-17-2019, 11:59 PM
leadcounsel's Avatar
leadcounsel leadcounsel is offline
Comic, not your lawyer!
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 10,373
Thanks: 23,707
Thanked 31,991 Times in 7,731 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Revmgt View Post
Let’s do a quick integrity check, no bull****, I just want to see where your head is.

The north tower was struck at 8:46, the south tower at 9:03. When the first tower was struck it sent debris scattering all over lower Manhattan, including what had to be millions of sheets of paper.
When the second tower was struck it sent even more debris and papers out into the air, falling down onto the street below.
We’re told the passport was found by a man and given to detective Chin just before the collapse of the south tower at 9:59. That means that in an hour or less after the first impact the cops were in possession of the passport of one of the terrorists.
We didn’t even touch on how, during all that, a man found a passport on the street, found a cop to give it to, and that cop gave it to none other than Bernard Kerik.
We’re told that passport was most likely in the pocket of a man who was sitting in the cockpit of an airplane that, according to you was traveling 500 mph, and in the cockpit only had a few feet of airplane in front of him.
So he’s basically sitting at the tip of this airplane and it enters the building and gets ripped to shreds by the steel outer support columns and the interior core columns. The plane is shredded, the owner of the passport was shredded, and the fuel onboard the plane exploded into a fireball.
So we have the passport owner being shoved through the building by the entirety of the airplane behind him, but as that was happening something amazing happened, the passport got through all that intact.

So, does that sound like a reasonable explanation? Does that sound like horse****? Do you know how many constellations would have to line up to make that series of events happen?
Truthfully, do you accept that as the official explanation?
I agree, it is a bizarre event. On that we are in total agreement.

But I've lived nearly 5 decades. I've explained before I have personally experienced bizarre 1 in several tens of millions of chance events. Many times. I've read about others experiencing astronomically unlikely events. I've experienced unlikely coincidences and read about others.

9/11/01 was a day when a trillion pieces of science, physics, human stories, etc. collided within a couple of hours. There are simply mathematically GOING TO BE coincidences. There were a lot of them that day. I recall reading many stories of coincidences and oddities that had nothing to do with any conspiracy that day.

That day, there were scores of stories of small seemingly inconsequential events that resulted in total heroism or dumb luck or tragedy and loss and bad luck. Missed planes saved some lives, including celebrities. I recall stories of siblings or relatives dying - something like a sibling in a plane hit the tower and killed a sibling in a tower and similar totally unlikely events.

Here's a somewhat related oddity. A baby was born last week on 9/11/19 who was born at 9:11pm and weighed 9 pounds 11 ounces. And the date 9/11/19 is the same forwards and backwards, 9-11-19. Amazing series of totally unlikely coincidence, but the world is full of them.

https://people.com/human-interest/te...nds-11-ounces/

If you study history as I casually do, the world is FULL of totally unlikely events that resulted in good or sometimes bad outcomes. For instance, a nurse named Violet Jessop survived the 2 sinkings and single collision of the sister ships, the Titanic (sunk, killing roughly half, but a 74% survival rate for women), Britannic (sunk, but high survival rate), and Olympic (no fatalities). The odds of her having been aboard all 3 at that precise time, I think she's the only person in history, and also surviving were unlikely. Yet it all happened in actual recorded history.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Violet_Jessop

Plane crashes have very high fatality rates, yet sometimes people survive. In extremely unlikely survival crashes, sometimes there is a sole survivor. Unlikely but true. Here's a list. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_o..._and_incidents

People survive unlikely events at sea where death is a near certainty. Unlikely but true. Happens from time to time.

I have visited historic war museums and saw this one at Gettysburg, and a quick look on the internet shows many similar examples. The odds against two linear traveling objects traveling against each other for about 1-2 second travel duration hitting and fusing together must be astronomical; yet it happens in battle.

I digress. The point is there are endless examples of really odd events in life that really did in fact occur. Screaming they didn't doesn't make it so.

Back to the 9/11/01 event: If you're pinning the conspiracy on what amounts to an unlikely coincidence, that's pretty thin and weak compared to the MOUNTAIN of verifiable, proven, repeatable scientifically explained occurrences.
Quick reply to this message
Old 09-18-2019, 12:14 AM
Justme11's Avatar
Justme11 Justme11 is online now
French Prometheus unbound
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Houston
Posts: 27,300
Thanks: 29,969
Thanked 65,092 Times in 19,999 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by leadcounsel View Post
And there you have it. Casual statements from politicians are the smoking gun. It must have been Professor Plum in the Study with the Candlestick.

Good grief you all are desperate.

What should they say: "We've been planning for both offense and defense on this sort of attack for 5 decades, but we got caught off guard and committed total malfeasance in protecting you. Oops. My bad. Sorry about that...".
I am reminded of a quote from Star Trek on the planet Organia.

"CLAYMARE: Your emotions are most discordant. We do not wish to seem inhospitable, but gentlemen, you must leave.
AYELBORNE: Yes, please leave us. The mere presence of beings like yourselves is intensely painful to us.
KIRK: What do you mean, beings like yourselves?"

http://www.chakoteya.net/StarTrek/27.htm
Quick reply to this message
Old 09-18-2019, 07:13 AM
Revmgt Revmgt is offline
Survivor
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: South florida
Posts: 5,071
Thanks: 8,554
Thanked 13,842 Times in 3,724 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by leadcounsel View Post
I agree, it is a bizarre event. On that we are in total agreement.

But I've lived nearly 5 decades. I've explained before I have personally experienced bizarre 1 in several tens of millions of chance events. Many times. I've read about others experiencing astronomically unlikely events. I've experienced unlikely coincidences and read about others.

9/11/01 was a day when a trillion pieces of science, physics, human stories, etc. collided within a couple of hours. There are simply mathematically GOING TO BE coincidences. There were a lot of them that day. I recall reading many stories of coincidences and oddities that had nothing to do with any conspiracy that day.

That day, there were scores of stories of small seemingly inconsequential events that resulted in total heroism or dumb luck or tragedy and loss and bad luck. Missed planes saved some lives, including celebrities. I recall stories of siblings or relatives dying - something like a sibling in a plane hit the tower and killed a sibling in a tower and similar totally unlikely events.

Here's a somewhat related oddity. A baby was born last week on 9/11/19 who was born at 9:11pm and weighed 9 pounds 11 ounces. And the date 9/11/19 is the same forwards and backwards, 9-11-19. Amazing series of totally unlikely coincidence, but the world is full of them.

https://people.com/human-interest/te...nds-11-ounces/

If you study history as I casually do, the world is FULL of totally unlikely events that resulted in good or sometimes bad outcomes. For instance, a nurse named Violet Jessop survived the 2 sinkings and single collision of the sister ships, the Titanic (sunk, killing roughly half, but a 74% survival rate for women), Britannic (sunk, but high survival rate), and Olympic (no fatalities). The odds of her having been aboard all 3 at that precise time, I think she's the only person in history, and also surviving were unlikely. Yet it all happened in actual recorded history.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Violet_Jessop

Plane crashes have very high fatality rates, yet sometimes people survive. In extremely unlikely survival crashes, sometimes there is a sole survivor. Unlikely but true. Here's a list. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_o..._and_incidents

People survive unlikely events at sea where death is a near certainty. Unlikely but true. Happens from time to time.

I have visited historic war museums and saw this one at Gettysburg, and a quick look on the internet shows many similar examples. The odds against two linear traveling objects traveling against each other for about 1-2 second travel duration hitting and fusing together must be astronomical; yet it happens in battle.

I digress. The point is there are endless examples of really odd events in life that really did in fact occur. Screaming they didn't doesn't make it so.

Back to the 9/11/01 event: If you're pinning the conspiracy on what amounts to an unlikely coincidence, that's pretty thin and weak compared to the MOUNTAIN of verifiable, proven, repeatable scientifically explained occurrences.
Ok, another question.
You’re talking about events where there was come unusual coincidence.
Three ships sank and other than all three of them being owned by JP Morgan’s White Star Line, the other coincidence is a woman who worked for the white star line had the misfortune of being on all three of those ships when they “lost buoyancy”.
That IS quite a coincidence.
Do you agree there are more coincidental situations in the events surrounding 9/11 than normal?
Quick reply to this message
Reply

Bookmarks



Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now

In order to be able to post messages on the Survivalist Forum forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.
User Name:
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.
Password:
Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.
Email Address:
Gender
Insurance
Please select your insurance company (Optional)

Log-in

Human Verification

In order to verify that you are a human and not a spam bot, please enter the answer into the following box below based on the instructions contained in the graphic.



Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:12 AM.


Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Search Engine Optimisation provided by DragonByte SEO (Lite) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2019 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
vBulletin Security provided by vBSecurity v2.2.2 (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2019 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Copyright © Kevin Felts 2006 - 2015,
Green theme by http://www.themesbydesign.net