The Storm/The Great Awakening Trump Theory

Level of Belief in "The Storm" Theory

  • I'm all in.

    Votes: 5 10.2%

  • It has legs.

    Votes: 3 6.1%

  • I'm curious.

    Votes: 8 16.3%

  • No, please.

    Votes: 6 12.2%

  • WTF is wrong with people?

    Votes: 27 55.1%
  • Total voters
    49
#207
#207
Wafflestomper said:
Why do you think this is molten steel?
Click to expand...

I've been trying to come up with what else it could be. The way in which it appears to be spewing or gushing is weird. And keep in mind the perspective. Each window is 10 to twelve feet. That means the cascading portion of red molten looking material is 50 to 60 feet long. Just bizarre to see.
 
#209
#209
SamRebel35 said:
I've been trying to come up with what else it could be. The way in which it appears to be spewing or gushing is weird. And keep in mind the perspective. Each window is 10 to twelve feet. That means the cascading portion of red molten looking material is 50 to 60 feet long. Just bizarre to see.
Click to expand...
Seems like steel would be among the last things to suspect given its high melting point. The plane was presumably mostly made of aluminum, which melts at a lower temperature. It could also be another metal, such as copper from pipe or wire. Hell, maybe it's not even metal at all.
 
#211
#211
ClearwaterVol said:
Here is my question for all of the 9/11 conspiracy theorists... Why bring the buildings down? We would have had the same response to two 747s that terrorists hijacked and crashed in to the WTC.
Click to expand...
7.2 b $ for Silverman but i think he only cleared 3.6b because the court agreed it was only 1 attack.
 
#212
#212
NurseGoodVol said:
7.2 b $ for Silverman but i think he only cleared 3.6b because the court agreed it was only 1 attack.
Click to expand...

I assume you are talking about Silverstein. So, was it a government conspiracy or just a business scam by Silverstein to rebuild the WTC? Even without the collapse they might have had to raze those buildings.
 
#213
#213
ClearwaterVol said:
Here is my question for all of the 9/11 conspiracy theorists... Why bring the buildings down? We would have had the same response to two 747s that terrorists hijacked and crashed in to the WTC.
Click to expand...

Devil's advocate here, but with the mysterious way in which wtc 7 imploded under strange conditions, maybe the intent was to create a plausible scenario in which to destroy building 7 and make it look like collateral damage. CIA and Secret Service were tenenats in that building. May be a convenient way to dispose of records that were problematic. Devil's advocate. I don't believe that to be the case, but stranger things...
 
  • Like
Reactions: NurseGoodVol
#214
#214
ClearwaterVol said:
Here is my question for all of the 9/11 conspiracy theorists... Why bring the buildings down? We would have had the same response to two 747s that terrorists hijacked and crashed in to the WTC.
Click to expand...
For more government control. What better way to scare the public into passing new unconstitutional laws and gaining unlimited power?
 
  • Like
Reactions: NurseGoodVol and Big Gucci Sosa
#216
#216
If you look at the close proximity of the north tower in relation to building 7, the collapse tends to make more sense.

EEB7DB70-9F2D-4AD7-B421-F2EA8C0AC023.jpeg
 
#218
#218
SamRebel35 said:
Devil's advocate here, but with the mysterious way in which wtc 7 imploded under strange conditions, maybe the intent was to create a plausible scenario in which to destroy building 7 and make it look like collateral damage. CIA and Secret Service were tenenats in that building. May be a convenient way to dispose of records that were problematic. Devil's advocate. I don't believe that to be the case, but stranger things...
Click to expand...

Shredding seems easier that the conspiracy theory method. JMO
 
#219
#219
DEFENDTHISHOUSE said:
If you look at the close proximity of the north tower in relation to building 7, the collapse tends to make more sense.

View attachment 171676
Click to expand...

It didn't fall on top of building 7, and as far as I can tell, no reports have claimed that building 7's foundations were undermined. They state that building 7 collapsed due to thermal expansion of floor beams framing into a carrying girder which in turn failed they girder at its connection to the critical column. This all occurred due to relatively localized fires on two floors. This is where most of the skeptics balk. Ordinary high rise buildings have experienced more extraordinary fire events and have not had similar collapses. This is a first. That, in my opinion, makes the theory a little hard to believe.
 
  • Like
Reactions: NurseGoodVol and Big Gucci Sosa
#225
#225
Good job people, you just solved the case of George W's and the Deep state's diabolical conspiracy to spy on Americans.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top