Lloyd England exposed was involved in 9/11 false flag event

Cheerful Spring

The Nal wrote: »

Have you read his book?

Bin Laden Al Qaeda did not plan the 1993 bombing, end of story. If you believe otherwise provide proof.

The Nal

Cheerful Spring wrote: »

Bin Laden Al Qaeda did not plan the 1993 bombing, end of story. If you believe otherwise provide proof.

So you haven't read his book yet you quote the contents of it as fact from a single sentence copied and pasted from Wikipedia.

hahaha

Cheerful Spring

The Nal wrote: »

So you haven't read his book.

I don't need to Dohnjoe provided a link to information about the bombing in 1993.

Al Qaeda not mentioned either is Bin Laden. If you claiming this was an act carried out by Al Qaeda provide proof. Asking me if I read a book is irrelevant.

King Mob

Cheerful Spring wrote: »

You not answering my question. group.

Yup. Cause you've never answered a single question put to you.

Like for example:
Why would someone admit to your silly conspiracy on camera?

Dohnjoe

Cheerful Spring wrote: »

Bin Laden Al Qaeda did not plan the 1993 bombing, end of story.

Who planned it? who carried it out?

Cheerful Spring

King Mob wrote: »

Yup. Cause you've never answered a single question put to you.

Like for example:
Why would someone admit to your silly conspiracy on camera?

Always answer your dumb questions.

Was the media who claimed WTC7 fell a half hour before it did. How did someone know one girder and column collapsing would collapse the entire building? Does it make sense to you?

The problem is Silverstein is covering up. The excuse does not hold up. If pull it meant pull the firefighters out then this information should be easily found online The spokesperson said seven firefighters were fighting fires in the afternoon inside WTC7 and the Silverstein told the fire chief to get them out to save lives.

According to FEMA there was no firefighting effort taking place inside WTC7 after 12pm. So Silverstein claims are untrue. There no evidence a fire chief even phoned him on the day, highly problematic.


So why did he lie Kingmob address it and then we may get somewhere?

mikekerry

"Larry Silverstein though. Casually admitting to killing 3000 people. Countless friends and colleagues amongst them"

Who are the countless friends and colleagues?
http://aneta.org/911Suspects/Silverstein/index.htm - " lost 4 people, 2 who were just recently hired as temps".
www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Fhl5h86Qq0

Not sure how many friends he had that died?
"luckily" for larry and his 2 kids they weren't at the towers that day.

Cheerful Spring

Dohnjoe wrote: »

Who planned it? who carried it out?

Bombers are named in your own link. None of them was linked to Al Qaeda and Bin Laden. Jihadists carried it out. Who funded the attacks with money unknown?

Dohnjoe

mikekerry wrote: »

"luckily" for larry and his 2 kids they weren't at the towers that day.

Bizarre comment

Are you claiming that Larry Silverstein secretly blew up a 47 story building in New York and then "admitted" it on national television?

If so, I have some serious questions

The Nal

Cheerful Spring wrote: »

Bombers are named in your own link. None of them was linked to Al Qaeda and Bin Laden.

Apart from training in an Al-Qaeda training camp before the bombings.

lol!!! This is fantastic.

mikekerry wrote: »

"Larry Silverstein though. Casually admitting to killing 3000 people. Countless friends and colleagues amongst them"

Who are the countless friends and colleagues?
http://aneta.org/911Suspects/Silverstein/index.htm - " lost 4 people, 2 who were just recently hired as temps".
www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Fhl5h86Qq0

Not sure how many friends he had that died?
"luckily" for larry and his 2 kids they weren't at the towers that day.

They were on the way to start work at 9. The interview subs say "they knew NY traffic and wouldn't have been an hour late" yet the first plane struck at 8.46am.

That makes no sense.

mikekerry

Dohnjoe wrote: »

Bizarre comment

Are you claiming that Larry Silverstein secretly blew up a 47 story building in New York and then "admitted" it on national television?

If so, I have some serious questions

What! I think you are getting ahead of yourself there!
Personally I think he had foreknowledge of the attacks that's about it.

King Mob

Cheerful Spring wrote: »

Always answer your dumb questions.

Was the media who claimed WTC7 fell a half hour before it did. How did someone know one girder and column collapsing would collapse the entire building? Does it make sense to you?

The problem is Silverstein is covering up. The excuse does not hold up. If pull it meant pull the firefighters out then this information should be easily found online The spokesperson said seven firefighters were fighting fires in the afternoon inside WTC7 and the Silverstein told the fire chief to get them out to save lives.

According to FEMA there was no firefighting effort taking place inside WTC7 after 12pm. So Silverstein claims are untrue. There no evidence a fire chief even phoned him on the day, highly problematic.


So why did he lie Kingmob address it and then we may get somewhere?

Note how again your cute little contains not a single answer to the question.
Just parroting conspiracy sound bites like a drone.

Cheerful Spring

Dohnjoe wrote: »

Bizarre comment

Are you claiming that Larry Silverstein secretly blew up a 47 story building in New York and then "admitted" it on national television?

If so, I have some serious questions

Silverstein does not have to alone. He could be a member of a wider network of rogue officials and businessmen. Silverstein could be a psychopath if all you know? It's possible he let slip what actually happened, but tried to blame on fire chief and the building was unstable. He claiming pull it was done to save lives. This statement was aired in 2002 before it was established by NIST how the building fell down ( their version) up till then nobody knew why WTC7 fell down due to fire.

Dohnjoe

Cheerful Spring wrote: »

Silverstein does not have to alone. He could be a member of a wider network of rogue officials and businessmen. Silverstein could be a psychopath if all you know? It's possible he let slip what actually happened, but tried to blame on fire chief and the building was unstable. He claiming pull it was done to save lives. This statement was aired in 2002 before it was established by NIST how the building fell down ( their version) up till then nobody knew why WTC7 fell down due to fire.

All random speculative waffle by a random person on the internet

Which is why we ask direct questions and ask for direct evidence

You weasel out of those questions and you don't provide credible evidence - it demonstrates you are talking ****

The Nal

Cheerful Spring wrote: »

Silverstein does not have to alone. He could be a member of a wider network of rogue officials and businessmen.

lol

Cheerful Spring wrote: »

Silverstein could be a psychopath if all you know?

lol

Cheerful Spring wrote: »

It's possible he let slip what actually happened, but tried to blame on fire chief and the building was unstable. He claiming pull it was done to save lives. This statement was aired in 2002 before it was established by NIST how the building fell down ( their version) up till then nobody knew why WTC7 fell down due to fire.

lol

Cheerful Spring

Dohnjoe wrote: »

All random speculative waffle by a random person on the internet

Which is why we ask direct questions and ask for direct evidence

You weasel out of those questions and you don't provide credible evidence - it demonstrates you are talking ****

WTC7 fell down due to controlled demolition. Someone must have planned on doing this pre 9/11.

If you believe Silverstein why would he lie? Was he righting in saying seven firefighters were fighting fires in the afternoon? If you believe he not lying provide proof.

Who the fire chief, told Silverstein about a firefighting effort in the afternoon. Why don't Skeptics ever address this? Why do you just ignore the lies?

King Mob

Cheerful Spring wrote: »

It's possible he let slip what actually happened, but tried to blame on fire chief and the building was unstable. He claiming pull it was done to save lives.

But he mentioned the fire chief before he said "pull it."
Did he know that he was about to blab, but couldn't stop himself, so could only preemptively deflect to another person?
Lol...

Why do you not believe him when he points to the fire chief?
He's very clearly saying that the chief made the decision.

Cheerful Spring wrote: »

This statement was aired in 2002 before it was established by NIST how the building fell down ( their version) up till then nobody knew why WTC7 fell down due to fire.

So at one point they were going to say that they secretly prepped the building for demolition?
But then Old Larry just forgot?

Again, lol. You are hilarious.

Dohnjoe

Cheerful Spring wrote: »

WTC7 fell down due to controlled demolition.

According to loonies and people like you. Likewise the world is flat according to other loonies

When asked about it they can't support it, so the world largely ignores them. The only place this type of nonsense has a home is on conspiracy forums - which is where we are now

The Nal

Cheerful Spring wrote: »

WTC7 fell down due to controlled demolition

Thats not true. It fell, like the twin towers, as a result of two fully fueled airliners flying into the world trade centre in a plot by Al Qaeda.

Cheerful Spring

King Mob wrote: »

But he mentioned the fire chief before he said "pull it."
Did he know that he was about to blab, but couldn't stop himself, so could only preemptively deflect to another person?
Lol...

Why do you not believe him when he points to the fire chief?
He's very clearly saying that the chief made the decision.

So at one point they were going to say that they secretly prepped the building for demolition?
But then Old Larry just forgot?

Again, lol. You are hilarious.

Your position is WTC7 fell due to fire. Of course, you don't find his statements suspicious at all.

The way I look at things. If the Nazis won the war the Reichstag fire would be blamed on communists still and nobody would dispute it only conspiracy theorists. Since the allies won we know now the Nazis burned the building down. There no difference in outlook here. You believe the Neocon version how 9/11 played out, I don't.

Why would you believe the Bush administration about 9/11? The neocons are compulsive liars who claimed Iraq had WMD and even Bush and Blair talked about changing the colours of US plane and make it a UN plane., and have it shot down over Iraq. They discussed in the memo carrying out a false flag event to start the war.

King Mob

Cheerful Spring wrote: »

Your position is WTC7 fell due to fire. Of course, you don't find his statements suspicious at all.

The way I look at things. If the Nazis won the war the Reichstag fire would be blamed on communists still and nobody would dispute it only conspiracy theorists. Since the allies won we know now the Nazis burned the building down. There no difference in outlook here. You believe the Neocon version how 9/11 played out, I don't.

Why would you believe the Bush administration about 9/11? The neocons are compulsive liars who claimed Iraq had WMD and even Bush and Blair talked about changing the colours of US plane and make it a UN plane., and have it shot down over Iraq. They discussed in the memo carrying out a false flag event to start the war.

Lol, and these cute little rants aren't even tangentially connected the points I made.
You seem to be loosing coherence Cheerful.

The Nal

May 23 2006: Bin Laden says he masterminded the September 11 attacks in a tape sent to Al Jazeera.

It was him. Anyone who has spent any time on conspiracy sites have completely wasted their time.

Cheerful Spring

The Nal wrote: »

May 23 2006: Bin Laden says he masterminded the September 11 attacks in a tape sent to Al Jazeera.

It was him. Anyone who has spent any time on conspiracy sites have completely wasted their time.

It took him 5 years to admit it on tape. Even though he was hunted for those 5 years? Have you heard the tape? Why do you believe it authentic?

Bin Laden is a strange terrorist who waits for 5 years to release a tape claiming responsibility?

Cheerful Spring

King Mob wrote: »

Lol, and these cute little rants aren't even tangentially connected the points I made.
You seem to be loosing coherence Cheerful.

You believe the neocon narrative about 9/11. They are Fascists and just as bad as the Nazis.

Neocons believe torture is ok, rendition flights were ok, spying on citizens was ok, fake intelligence is ok, carrying out false flags is ok, concentrations camps is ok.

This also happened recently not like it happened 50 years ago. Some people still remember Abu Ghraib and abuse and torture that went on there. It was camp run by the CIA.

Difference between me and you, I have no doubts the neocons would be involved in a false flag.

King Mob

Cheerful Spring wrote: »

You believe the neocon narrative about 9/11. They are Fascists and just as bad as the Nazis.

Neocons believe torture is ok, rendition flights were ok, spying on citizens was ok, fake intelligence is ok, carrying out false flags is ok, concentrations camps is ok.

This also happened recently not like it happened 50 years ago. Some people still remember Abu Ghraib and abuse and torture that went on there. It was camp run by the CIA.

Difference between me and you, I have no doubts the neocons would be involved in a false flag.

And another cute rant that's made cuter by the fact you swallow and spread fascist, racist propaganda.

You should seek help cheerful. You are not doing any good here, you are just making yourself a bigger and bigger joke and making conspiracy theorists ashamed to be seen with you.

Cheerful Spring

King Mob wrote: »

And another cute rant that's made cuter by the fact you swallow and spread fascist, racist propaganda.

You should seek help cheerful. You are not doing any good here, you are just making yourself a bigger and bigger joke and making conspiracy theorists ashamed to be seen with you.

If you believe the official narrative about 9/11. Then you believe Bush and his cronies are telling the truth about the event. Nobody believes Bush told the truth about Iraq. Yet they willing to believe them about 9/11.

King Mob

Cheerful Spring wrote: »

If you believe the official narrative about 9/11. Then you believe Bush and his cronies are telling the truth about the event. Nobody believes Bush told the truth about Iraq. Yet they willing to believe them about 9/11.

Mm hmm.
And you believe in holocaust denial.

You aren't some rebel researcher cheerful.
You are a crank who swallows and repeats bull**** to sound clever.

Please keep ranting as it shows the level of insanity that conspiracy theories go to. You are doing a great job.

Cheerful Spring

King Mob wrote: »

Mm hmm.
And you believe in holocaust denial.

You aren't some rebel researcher cheerful.
You are a crank who swallows and repeats bull**** to sound clever.

Please keep ranting as it shows the level of insanity that conspiracy theories go to. You are doing a great job.

I don't forget things like you do. Blair claimed to the world Iraq could strike the UK in 45 minutes with WMD. The intelligence agencies all backed this claim.

So why would you believe Blair and Bush about 9/11? It not long after 9/11 they lied about Iraq capabilities to wage war. Do you not finding it troubling they would discuss carrying out a false flag in a leaked memo?

King Mob

Cheerful Spring wrote: »

I don't forget things like you do. Blair claimed to the world Iraq could strike the UK in 45 minutes with WMD. The intelligence agencies all backed this claim.

So why would you believe Blair and Bush about 9/11? It not long after 9/11 they lied about Iraq capabilities to wage war. Do you not finding it troubling they would discuss carrying out a false flag in a leaked memo?

And more adorable ranting.

No one is listening. So go nuts.

Dohnjoe

Cheerful Spring wrote: »

I don't forget things like you do. Blair claimed to the world Iraq could strike the UK in 45 minutes with WMD. The intelligence agencies all backed this claim.

So why would you believe Blair and Bush about 9/11? It not long after 9/11 they lied about Iraq capabilities to wage war. Do you not finding it troubling they would discuss carrying out a false flag in a leaked memo?

All this breathless incredulity and whataboutery

Who planted the "charges" in WTC 7, and 1 and 2? how did they do it? how long did it take? how many beams did they cut?

If you're going to dispute historical fact, you're going to need actual evidence

Why should anyone accept your personal theory that you can't support any more than Alex Jones' personal theory (which is eerily similar) that he can't support?

Cheerful Spring

King Mob wrote: »

And more adorable ranting.

No one is listening. So go nuts.

You're claiming there no way 9/11 was a staged event a false flag. Yet i showing you after 9/11 the Iraq war was a staged event. Carrying out false flags was discussed and fake intelligence was introduced to claim Iraq had WMD. Pentagon even produced aerial photography of the alleged sites and trunks loaded with chemical and biological weapons were shown. Audio tapes were produced even where it was claimed Iraqis officials were discussing the WMD they had.

The Nal

Dohnjoe wrote: »

All this breathless incredulity and whataboutery

Who planted the "charges" in WTC 7, and 1 and 2? how did they do it? how long did it take? how many beams did they cut?

We already have his theory.

Cheerful Spring wrote: »

WTC7 fell down due to controlled demolition. Someone must have planned on doing this pre 9/11.

There you go.

"Someone".

King Mob

Cheerful Spring wrote: »

Yet i I am showing you ...

No, you're ranting until you're red in the face like Alex Jones.
You aren't any different.

I would take Alex Jones more seriously as at least he's been able to make a business out of his delusions.
And is able to write and use grammar like an adult.

King Mob

The Nal wrote: »

We already have his theory.



There you go.

"Someone".

And that someone has to be a chief in the FDNY.

Dohnjoe

Cheerful Spring wrote: »

Yet i showing you

You aren't.

Cheerful Spring

King Mob wrote: »

No, you're ranting until you're red in the face like Alex Jones.
You aren't any different.

I would take Alex Jones more seriously as at least he's been able to make a business out of his delusions.
And is able to write and use grammar like an adult.

You can't see how wrong you are. Just highlighting the hypocrisy of your position. You do not man up and correct how dumb your arguments are. You just sidestep Bush and Blair and intelligence officials blatantly lied to start a war in Iraq.

King Mob

Cheerful Spring wrote: »

You can't see how wrong you are.

Lol, I'm sure that's how you see things in your delusion.

Cheerful Spring

Dohnjoe wrote: »

All this breathless incredulity and whataboutery

Who planted the "charges" in WTC 7, and 1 and 2? how did they do it? how long did it take? how many beams did they cut?

If you're going to dispute historical fact, you're going to need actual evidence

Why should anyone accept your personal theory that you can't support any more than Alex Jones' personal theory (which is eerily similar) that he can't support?

Historical fact? You can't even find one example to support your position fire brought down building 7 on 9/11. Yet you claim its historical fact. Even when it shown NIST lied you still claim you right.

Cheerful Spring

NIST debunked their own work in 2008. Kingmob and Dohnjoe will not discuss what NIST said on this video.

For everyone else please watch and listen closely to what they said about freefall.

King Mob

Cheerful Spring wrote: »

NIST debunked their own work in 2008. Kingmob and Dohnjoe will not discuss what NIST said on this video.

For everyone else please watch and listen closely to what they said about freefall.

Lol, it's cute you think anyone else is paying attention to you.

And we did discuss it. You just didn't like the answer.
Pointing out your lack of knowledge in physics and math clashes with your delusional fantasy of being a rebel researcher who's an expert in everything.

Dohnjoe

Cheerful Spring wrote: »

Historical fact? You can't even find one example to support your position fire brought down building 7 on 9/11.

Both official investigations into the event. The case is closed.

Just because some loons like Gage, Alex Jones and Dr Judy Wood think something else happened doesn't mean anything.

This is a forum where you can rant and rave about anything you want, Holocaust denial, lizard people, you name it. It doesn't mean anything

Cheerful Spring

King Mob wrote: »

Lol, it's cute you think anyone else is paying attention to you.

And we did discuss it. You just didn't like the answer.
Pointing out your lack of knowledge in physics and math clashes with your delusional fantasy of being a rebel researcher who's an expert in everything.

You just too lazy to learn and inform yourself of the facts. No, you did not discuss it, stop lying.

NIST ruled out freefall during their own press conference in 2008. All their statements are captured on video.

They even said based on their own analysis, collapse models and work.

The collapse was not instantaneous and there was a progression of failures that had to happen first (progressive collapse) freefall never happened according to them. They debunked their own work fires collapsed the building in 2008 and only the truther community noticed it.

King Mob

Cheerful Spring wrote: »

You just too lazy to learn and inform yourself of the facts. No, you did not discuss it, stop lying.

NIST ruled out freefall during their own press conference in 2008. All their statements are captured on video.

They even said based on their own analysis, collapse models and work.

The collapse was not instantaneous and there was a progression of failures that had to happen first (progressive collapse) freefall never happened according to them. They debunked their own work fires collapsed the building in 2008 and only the truther community noticed it.

But again, as we've said to you many many times. And as you've shown many many times:
You are bad at math.
You are bad at science.
You do not know what free fall is.
You are bad at reading and writing.

Your level of knowledge is around that of a child just entering high school.

The explanation for all the points in your point is that you simply do not have the skills and knowledge to understand the topic you are attempting to discuss.
But you don't want to accept this as you enjoy your delusional fantasy of being a smarty pants expert and having secret knowledge.
You are now going around in circles and biting on anything to continue what is basically a very sad game of dressup.

Unless you really are 12, in which case, you should stay off the internet and read more science books.

Cheerful Spring

King Mob wrote: »

But again, as we've said to you many many times. And as you've shown many many times:
You are bad at math.
You are bad at science.
You do not know what free fall is.
You are bad at reading and writing.

Your level of knowledge is around that of a child just entering high school.

The explanation for all the points in your point is that you simply do not have the skills and knowledge to understand the topic you are attempting to discuss.
But you don't want to accept this as you enjoy your delusional fantasy of being and expert and having secret knowledge.
You are now going around in circles and biting on anything to continue what is basically a very sad game of dressup.

Unless you really are 12, in which case, you should stay off the internet and read more science books.

Why don't you troll somewhere else? I provided video evidence NIST speaking about freefall in 2008. You not here for genuine debate you here to troll and attack people. You're now on my ignore list I see no point wasting my time with you.

Cheerful Spring

Dohnjoe wrote: »

Both official investigations into the event. The case is closed.

Just because some loons like Gage, Alex Jones and Dr Judy Wood think something else happened doesn't mean anything.

This is a forum where you can rant and rave about anything you want, Holocaust denial, lizard people, you name it. It doesn't mean anything

Right, so you agree you have no example to show?

Reminds me of the Inquisition.

Its a forum for honest debate.

King Mob

Cheerful Spring wrote: »

Why don't you troll somewhere else? I provided video evidence NIST speaking about freefall in 2008. You not here for genuine debate you here to troll and attack people. You're now on my ignore list I see no point wasting my time with you.

Again, either because of your dishonesty or your elementary school level language ability, your claim is false. The video does not show what you think it does.

You have threatened that many times, yet you always bite as we're the only people who actually engage with you.

If that's not the case, why not put all the skeptics on ignore.
Then you can shout and rant to yourself as much as you like.

Dohnjoe

Cheerful Spring wrote: »

Its a forum for honest debate.

It's a forum for conspiracies. A place for "discussion" about lizard people, 911, aliens, moon landing hoaxes. On a par with the paranormal forum

On top of that have witnessed nothing but dishonest debate from you, endless lies, distortion, you name it. Then there's the Holocaust denial. It's extraordinary

Cheerful Spring

Dohnjoe wrote: »

It's a forum for conspiracies. A place for "discussion" about lizard people, 911, aliens, moon landing hoaxes. On a par with the paranormal forum

On top of that have witnessed nothing but dishonest debate from you, endless lies, distortion, you name it. Then there's the Holocaust denial. It's extraordinary

You claim I am dishonest. Care to elaborate where and when I posted false info about 9/11?

Be specific no waffle.

The Nal

Cheerful Spring wrote: »

You claim I am dishonest. Care to elaborate where and when I posted false info about 9/11?

Be specific no waffle.

You post lies all the time. Literally every day. Its what you do. You're a liar. I really don't know why. You so desperately want everything to be a conspiracy for some reason.

Al Qaeda (Mountains of evidence including confessions) = Innocent
Larry Silverstein (no evidence) = Guilty

Batshít crazy.

Anyway heres proof it wasn't a controlled explosion.

And this is amusing

Cheerful Spring

The Nal wrote: »

You post lies all the time. Literally every day. Its what you do. You're a liar. I really don't know why. You so desperately want everything to be a conspiracy for some reason.

Al Qaeda (Mountains of evidence including confessions) = Innocent
Larry Silverstein (no evidence) = Guilty

Batshít crazy.

Anyway heres proof it wasn't a controlled explosion.

And this is amusing

The first video supports the truther case. The guy states the building was designed to withstand a jet airliner impact? Yep true Then shows the jet breaking apart before it reached the steel central core in the middle (43 seconds) why they do not show the full simulation? Then the guy outright states NIST never studied the physics of the final collapse ( i told you this in the thread) There is a reason why NIST is avoiding this discussion about the final collapse. Dr Frank Greening is ignoring the top floors exploded and formed a giant mushroom cloud. There was nothing left to crush the bottom floors underneath.