Vanguard News Network
VNN Media
VNN Digital Library
VNN Reader Mail
VNN Broadcasts

Old September 13th, 2021 #1
spoon!
Somewhere in Zog World....
 
spoon!'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Midwest USA
Posts: 1,162
Smile MAGA Kids PUNK Clueless Joe Biden at Shanksville, PA Stop on 9-11

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/202...dured-taliban/

Quote:
Hah! Based MAGA Kids PUNK Clueless Joe Biden at Shanksville, PA Stop on 9-11 After He Surrendured to Taliban
September 12, 2021

Poor Joe Biden.
So out to lunch and clueless.

During his stop in Shanksville, Pennsylvania on Saturday on the 20th Anniversary of the 9-11 Islamist attacks on America he decided to take a photo with a group of children. Joe loves the kids.

His handlers didn’t even notice these were based MAGA kids in pro-Trump T-shirts.
__________________
Kikes make better fuel than they do human beings!
 
Old September 13th, 2021 #2
Ray Allan
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2014
Posts: 15,170
Default

Have they found any wreckage from Flight 93 in that big hole in the ground yet?
__________________
"Military men are dumb, stupid animals to be used as pawns for foreign policy."

--Henry A. Kissinger, jewish politician and advisor
 
Old September 14th, 2021 #3
joeylowsac
RaHoWarrior-SKINHEAD
 
joeylowsac's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Shingletown, CA
Posts: 1,625
Blog Entries: 59
Woodpecker

__________________
卐 White ⊕ Power 卐
 
Old September 15th, 2021 #4
Douglas Kennedy
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2021
Posts: 33
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by spoon! View Post
You know The Gateway Pundit is run by homosexual Jews right?



Are you a fan of Trump and his gay Jewish MIGA movement?
 
Old September 15th, 2021 #5
zoomcopter
Senior Member
 
zoomcopter's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: The goyim reservation
Posts: 5,944
Blog Entries: 4
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by spoon! View Post
Clueless is exactly how our Jewish overlords want our Commander-in-Chief.

A blank slate where "Is it good for the Jews" can be permanently tattooed.
__________________
Vladimir Putin's Russia is being attacked by the very same forces that attacked Hitler's Germany, namely the Jews. The fate of the world hangs on Putin defeating the Jews.
 
Old September 15th, 2021 #6
zoomcopter
Senior Member
 
zoomcopter's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: The goyim reservation
Posts: 5,944
Blog Entries: 4
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by joeylowsac View Post
And WTC building number 7 fell into the exact same hole.

Anyone viewing the video of WTC #7 collapsing into it's own footprint is a litmus test of one's cognitive abilities.

Either one becomes a conspiracy theorist or one remains forever dumb.
__________________
Vladimir Putin's Russia is being attacked by the very same forces that attacked Hitler's Germany, namely the Jews. The fate of the world hangs on Putin defeating the Jews.
 
Old September 15th, 2021 #7
Gladiatrix
Senior Member
 
Gladiatrix's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2017
Location: In a dystopian nightmare
Posts: 4,808
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Douglas Kennedy View Post
You know The Gateway Pundit is run by homosexual Jews right?
I knew there was a reason they banned me from commenting. And here I thought they were cucks. Silly me!
__________________
Political correctness is oppression disguised as good manners.
 
Old September 15th, 2021 #8
steven clark
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 2,277
Default MAGA kids PUNK Clueless Joe Biden

I was at a Labor Day picnic in my hometown, 65 miles south of St. Louis. No masks, and lots of people having a good time. I saw one teenage girl wearing a t-shirt: F**k Biden Trump is my president.
They still fly Trump flags down there.

I agree with Gateway Pundit critics: the guy who runs it is a fag and he's 'married' to a Filipino guy.
 
Old September 15th, 2021 #9
George Witzgall
Senior Member
 
George Witzgall's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 8,645
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by zoomcopter View Post
And WTC building number 7 fell into the exact same hole.

Anyone viewing the video of WTC #7 collapsing into it's own footprint is a litmus test of one's cognitive abilities.

Either one becomes a conspiracy theorist or one remains forever dumb.
There was a design "flaw" in WTC 7 in its use of long span beams that made it vulnerable to fire; the near free-fall collapse was a consequence of the thermal expansion of the long support beams used in the design. As a result of NIST's computer simulations and analysis, new building codes and recommendations were implemented in high-rise building design. Engineers and architects worldwide build high-rises based on this knowledge. They're not dumb.

Here's a three minute video explaining NIST's findings (you can skip to 1:15 to get to the heart of it):

There is no need to invoke a theory of controlled demolition to explain the collapse of WTC 7. Occam's Razor suggests the collapse was most likely due to the particular constellation of factors as described in the NIST simulation (uncontrolled fires on ten floors burning for 7 hours due to a break in the water main disabling sprinklers in the building, long support beams undergoing thermal expansion and failing).
__________________
Blood & Soul Aryan
 
Old September 15th, 2021 #10
Crowe
Senior Member
 
Crowe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 8,089
Default

Tony Szamboti debunked the NIST report as fraudulent:

https://www.scribd.com/document/3543...-911-truth-pdf

So Georgie, you might want to give that a look, because it's a debunking by an engineer, not a random keyboard on the internet.

Quote:
Tony Szamboti is a former Lockheed Martin and BAE Systems mechanical design engineer who has been very vocal about the discrepancies in the World Trade Center collapses of 9/11. A relatively prominent member of Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth, Szamboti focuses purely on the mechanical and structural aspects of the event.
__________________
Low-IQ bible scholars are legion, the big book o' bullshit is catnip to the underbrained. --ALEX LINDER

Last edited by Crowe; September 15th, 2021 at 09:42 PM.
 
Old September 16th, 2021 #11
George Witzgall
Senior Member
 
George Witzgall's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 8,645
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Crowe View Post
Tony Szamboti debunked the NIST report as fraudulent:

https://www.scribd.com/document/3543...-911-truth-pdf

So Georgie, you might want to give that a look, because it's a debunking by an engineer, not a random keyboard on the internet.
What if fires hadn't started in WTC7 and burned throughout the day? Then, assuming WTC7 was rigged for demolition, how are you going to demo it without it being obvious?

Why were no loud explosions consistent with all controlled demolitions recorded in the moments before the collapse (there were cameras with mikes all around the site when it collapsed)?

You're asking me to believe that somehow the "Jews" knew that fires would burn on ten floors of the building at locations and for long enough that it would lead the vast majority of architects and engineers who actually build high-rises to be convinced that a thermal design vulnerability was to blame for the collapse, but NO, in truth that special constellation of factors was all just a planned ruse and the Jews actually set off ultra high tech undetectable silent explosives right under our noses?

I'm not going to get in with some aircraft engineer who couldn't publish a peer-reviewed paper (there was only one peer-reviewed paper to ever come from the Truthers, that was from Steven Jones a physics prof at Brigham Young who is the only Truther I even respect, and it was a milquetoast paper not even published in a hard science journal); I'm sure many Truthers have written "white papers", but the vast majority of architects and engineers who actually build high-rises rightly see these dudes as crackpots.
__________________
__________________
Blood & Soul Aryan
 
Old September 16th, 2021 #12
joeylowsac
RaHoWarrior-SKINHEAD
 
joeylowsac's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Shingletown, CA
Posts: 1,625
Blog Entries: 59
Woodpecker

Quote:
Originally Posted by George Witzgall View Post
There was a design "flaw" in WTC 7 in its use of long span beams that made it vulnerable to fire; the near free-fall collapse was a consequence of the thermal expansion of the long support beams used in the design. As a result of NIST's computer simulations and analysis, new building codes and recommendations were implemented in high-rise building design. Engineers and architects worldwide build high-rises based on this knowledge. They're not dumb.

Here's a three minute video explaining NIST's findings (you can skip to 1:15 to get to the heart of it):
NIST Video: Why the Building (WTC7) Fell

There is no need to invoke a theory of controlled demolition to explain the collapse of WTC 7. Occam's Razor suggests the collapse was most likely due to the particular constellation of factors as described in the NIST simulation (uncontrolled fires on ten floors burning for 7 hours due to a break in the water main disabling sprinklers in the building, long support beams undergoing thermal expansion and failing).
I read the NIST's reports. Garbage. There is no structural flaw that results in a steel frame building falling into itself neatly and uniformly, all at once from end to end at freefall acceleration. What the NIST did was not an investigation.

Silverstein

This was a fire!


Thousands of architects and engineers disagree with the NIST.
https://www.ae911truth.org/
__________________
卐 White ⊕ Power 卐
 
Old September 16th, 2021 #13
George Witzgall
Senior Member
 
George Witzgall's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 8,645
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by joeylowsac View Post
I read the NIST's reports. Garbage. There is no structural flaw that results in a steel frame building falling into itself neatly and uniformly, all at once from end to end at freefall acceleration. What the NIST did was not an investigation.

Silverstein
9 11 - WTC7 - Larry Silverstein says 'PULL IT'

This was a fire!


Thousands of architects and engineers disagree with the NIST.
https://www.ae911truth.org/
I wouldn't characterize it as a structural flaw, since in the absence of uncontrolled fires burning for hours, heating the long span beams, it wouldn't be a problem. I would characterize it as a vulnerability.

Look, the vast majority of architects and engineers who design and build high-rises consider the NIST analysis to be a convincing explanation for the collapse. There will always be a small but vocal minority who disagree, but most of these dudes don't actually design and build high-rises so they don't have fat in the fire; in fact, show me one mf Truther* who actually designs high-rises? No one has shown me that. Otherwise, their words on this subject are about as pointless as your own.

*with peer-reviewed research
__________________
Blood & Soul Aryan

Last edited by George Witzgall; September 16th, 2021 at 07:31 AM.
 
Old September 16th, 2021 #14
joeylowsac
RaHoWarrior-SKINHEAD
 
joeylowsac's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Shingletown, CA
Posts: 1,625
Blog Entries: 59
Woodpecker

Quote:
Originally Posted by George Witzgall View Post
There is no need to invoke a theory of controlled demolition to explain the collapse of WTC 7. Occam's Razor suggests the collapse was most likely due to the particular constellation of factors...
Occam's Razor (i.e., entities should not be multiplied beyond necessity) counsels the exact opposite of the notion of a "constellation of factors", even if those factors were more than unsubstantiated conjecture.

MEET THE EXPERTS - https://www.bitchute.com/video/vRPOLOX0718e/
__________________
卐 White ⊕ Power 卐
 
Old September 16th, 2021 #15
joeylowsac
RaHoWarrior-SKINHEAD
 
joeylowsac's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Shingletown, CA
Posts: 1,625
Blog Entries: 59
Exclamation

Quote:
Originally Posted by George Witzgall View Post
I wouldn't characterize it as a structural flaw, since in the absence of uncontrolled fires burning for hours, heating the long span beams, it wouldn't be a problem. I would characterize it as a vulnerability.

Look, the vast majority of architects and engineers who design and build high-rises consider the NIST analysis to be a convincing explanation for the collapse. There will always be a small but vocal minority who disagree, but most of these dudes don't actually design and build high-rises so they don't have fat in the fire; in fact, show me one mf Truther* who actually designs high-rises? No one has shown me that. Otherwise, their words on this subject are about as pointless as your own.

*with peer-reviewed research
First, that's is how you characterised it:


Again, literally hours of qualified men can be found here - https://www.bitchute.com/video/vRPOLOX0718e/

Are you joking? "peer-reviewed research"?! The NIST's report is not only NOT peer-reviewed, their alleged data is not even available via FOIA. Which you would know if you tried to verify what you're being fed.
__________________
卐 White ⊕ Power 卐
 
Old September 16th, 2021 #16
George Witzgall
Senior Member
 
George Witzgall's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 8,645
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by joeylowsac View Post
First, that's is how you characterised it:
Not to belabor the point, but, in view of the new information gained from the NIST analysis, I would regard it as a design vulnerability or "flaw", although I still wouldn't characterize it as a STRUCTURAL flaw.

Quote:
Originally Posted by joeylowsac View Post
Again, literally hours of qualified men can be found here - https://www.bitchute.com/video/vRPOLOX0718e/

Are you joking? "peer-reviewed research"?! The NIST's report is not only NOT peer-reviewed, their alleged data is not even available via FOIA. Which you would know if you tried to verify what you're being fed.[/COLOR][/SIZE][/B]
Taste the peer review in these three companion papers:
Structural Response of World Trade Center Buildings 1, 2 and 7 to Impact and Fire Damage

Structural Analysis of Impact Damage to World Trade Center Buildings 1, 2, and 7

Overview of the Structural Design of World Trade Center 1, 2, and 7 Buildings
__________________
Blood & Soul Aryan
 
Old September 16th, 2021 #17
George Witzgall
Senior Member
 
George Witzgall's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 8,645
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by joeylowsac View Post
Occam's Razor (i.e., entities should not be multiplied beyond necessity) counsels the exact opposite of the notion of a "constellation of factors", even if those factors were more than unsubstantiated conjecture.

MEET THE EXPERTS - https://www.bitchute.com/video/vRPOLOX0718e/
Hey Joey, let me repeat myself here:

Quote:
What if fires hadn't started in WTC7 and burned throughout the day? Then, assuming WTC7 was rigged for demolition, how are you going to demo it without it being obvious?

Why were no loud explosions consistent with all controlled demolitions recorded in the moments before the collapse (there were cameras with mikes all around the site when it collapsed)?

You're asking me to believe that somehow the "Jews" knew that fires would burn on ten floors of the building at locations and for long enough that it would lead the vast majority of architects and engineers who actually build high-rises to be convinced that a thermal design vulnerability was to blame for the collapse, but NO, in truth that special constellation of factors was all just a planned ruse and the Jews actually set off ultra high tech undetectable silent explosives right under our noses?
Occam's Razor is on my side. The fires in WTC 7 were the ultimate reason for its collapse, not secret silent rigged explosives.
__________________
Blood & Soul Aryan
 
Old September 16th, 2021 #18
Crowe
Senior Member
 
Crowe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 8,089
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by George Witzgall View Post
What if fires hadn't started in WTC7 and burned throughout the day? Then, assuming WTC7 was rigged for demolition, how are you going to demo it without it being obvious?

Why were no loud explosions consistent with all controlled demolitions recorded in the moments before the collapse (there were cameras with mikes all around the site when it collapsed)?

You're asking me to believe that somehow the "Jews" knew that fires would burn on ten floors of the building at locations and for long enough that it would lead the vast majority of architects and engineers who actually build high-rises to be convinced that a thermal design vulnerability was to blame for the collapse, but NO, in truth that special constellation of factors was all just a planned ruse and the Jews actually set off ultra high tech undetectable silent explosives right under our noses?

I'm not going to get in with some aircraft engineer who couldn't publish a peer-reviewed paper (there was only one peer-reviewed paper to ever come from the Truthers, that was from Steven Jones a physics prof at Brigham Young who is the only Truther I even respect, and it was a milquetoast paper not even published in a hard science journal); I'm sure many Truthers have written "white papers", but the vast majority of architects and engineers who actually build high-rises rightly see these dudes as crackpots.
__________________
All Tony Szamboti did was call out the NIST report/simulations. Anyone can read the report and see that the points being made are intelligent and reasonable. And you call him a crackpot, and hide behind the "peer reviewed" label as if you're not allowed to criticize "official" reports without them being "peer reviewed" .

That's not Occam, Gigi, that's Macco.

Also, aerospace engineers like Tony Szamboti are overqualified on these matters. Any aerospace engineer could apply their skill set to high rise buildings. Only the best go into aerospace, because it's a higher tier position.

Quote:
WTC 7 – THE THIRD SKYSCRAPER
1. OMISSION OF GIRDER STIFFENERS SHOWN ON FRANKEL DRAWING #9114
Technical Statement: NIST maintains that WTC 7 collapsed due to fire acting upon the 13th
floor A2001 girder between columns 79 and 44 and the beams framing into it from the east.
They said that the beams expanded by 5.5” (revised in June 2012 to 6.25”), broke the girder
erection bolts, and pushed this girder off its column 79 seat. This girder fell to floor 12,
which then precipitated a cascade of floor failures from floor 12 down to floor 5, and
column 79 then became unsupported laterally causing it to buckle. It is then said that
column 79's buckling caused the upper floors to cascade down, which started a chain
reaction — a north-to-south then east-to-west horizontal, progressive collapse — with a
global exterior collapse that was captured on the videos.
The first omission concerns flange-to-web stiffeners on the south end of the girder (A2001).
See drawing 9114. These omitted stiffeners would prevent the girder flange from folding
when the girder web moved beyond the seat, requiring twice the possible expansion of the
beams framing into the girder from the east to move the girder far enough to the west for it
to fall off its seat.
References:
x Frankel Shop Drawing #9114 https://www.dropbox.com/s/r009pjr3qhduyjg/9114.TIF?dl=0
o Girder_A2001_Stiffeners_Plan_HL
https://www.dropbox.com/s/jnt2f9i2vn..._Plan.jpg?dl=0
o Girder_A2001_Stiffeners_Elevation_HL
https://www.dropbox.com/s/uy7cehcn2s...ation.jpg?dl=0

2. OMISSION OF THREE LATERAL SUPPORT BEAMS ON THE 13TH FLOOR G3005 BEAM
Technical Statement: NIST omitted three lateral support beams from the exterior frame to
the north-most beam (G3005) framing into the A2001 girder between columns 44 and 79
from the east. The NIST WTC 7 report contains a second possible failure initiation
mechanism, where G3005 buckles and causes the other four beams framing into the girder
from the east (A3004, B3004, C3004, and K3004) to also buckle, lose their load-carrying
capability, collapse downward, and rock (pull) the girder off its seats back to the east. When
these lateral support beams are excluded in the NIST analysis, the beam slenderness is
increased by 16 times, and this reduces the actual buckling load to 6% of what it would have
been in reality. Analysis with the lateral support beams included shows that the beam
would not buckle and that it would actually deflect the girder and put the other four beams
in tension, eliminating any chance of them buckling, as beams and columns need to be in
compression in order to buckle.
References:
x Frankel Shop Drawing #3005 https://www.dropbox.com/s/qoikgin4l8x0yub/3005.TIF?dl=0
This is occam. Claiming an aerospace engineer isn't qualified to ask why they omitted certain key, integral parts to the building's support in the NIST report is macco.
__________________
Low-IQ bible scholars are legion, the big book o' bullshit is catnip to the underbrained. --ALEX LINDER

Last edited by Crowe; September 16th, 2021 at 10:08 PM.
 
Old September 17th, 2021 #19
George Witzgall
Senior Member
 
George Witzgall's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 8,645
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Crowe View Post
All Tony Szamboti did was call out the NIST report/simulations. Anyone can read the report and see that the points being made are intelligent and reasonable. And you call him a crackpot, and hide behind the "peer reviewed" label as if you're not allowed to criticize "official" reports without them being "peer reviewed".
Read Tony's white paper by all means, and there are many more criticisms of NIST out there. But if they were valid points they would find purchase in the scientific community.

No, it isn't the case that "anyone can read the report and see that the points being made are intelligent and reasonable." Most people don't have the background and ability to do the research to determine which technical arguments hold water and what arguments, while seeming to be "intelligent and reasonable", are actually bullshit.

You may believe everyone should bow down to your perspective, but that's not how it works. You need to convince several competent, experienced reviewers that your points being made are worthy of incusion in a publication for reasonable folks to take you seriously, that's how peer-review works. It doesn't guarantee quality, but it helps to separate out the chaff.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Crowe View Post
That's not Occam, Gigi, that's Macco.
Don't know what your language is here. If you're making a point about Occam's Razor, you still haven't addressed my point in post #11. I'll repeat it a third time:
Quote:
Originally Posted by George Witzgall View Post
What if fires hadn't started in WTC7 and burned throughout the day? Then, assuming WTC7 was rigged for demolition, how are you going to demo it without it being obvious?

Why were no loud explosions consistent with all controlled demolitions recorded in the moments before the collapse (there were cameras with mikes all around the site when it collapsed)?

You're asking me to believe that somehow the "Jews" knew that fires would burn on ten floors of the building at locations and for long enough that it would lead the vast majority of architects and engineers who actually build high-rises to be convinced that a thermal design vulnerability was to blame for the collapse, but NO, in truth that special constellation of factors was all just a planned ruse and the Jews actually set off ultra high tech undetectable silent explosives right under our noses?
The silence is deafening. Ok, continuing on.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Crowe View Post
Also, aerospace engineers like Tony Szamboti are overqualified on these matters. Any aerospace engineer could apply their skill set to high rise buildings. Only the best go into aerospace, because it's a higher tier position.

This is occam. Claiming an aerospace engineer isn't qualified to ask why they omitted certain key, integral parts to the building's support in the NIST report is macco.
If Tony has research he wants to get folks to consider, he should publish his work in a respected journal. Blowing holes in the work and theories of others is how science works, it's how we progress, it's why we're able to build robust high-rises in the first place. But if your points are valid and worthy of consideration, you should be able to convince a few of your peers they are worthy of publication in a journal.
__________________
Blood & Soul Aryan
 
Old September 17th, 2021 #20
Joe from OH
Senior Member
 
Joe from OH's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 2,433
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by George Witzgall View Post
Read Tony's white paper by all means, and there are many more criticisms of NIST out there. But if they were valid points they would find purchase in the scientific community.

No, it isn't the case that "anyone can read the report and see that the points being made are intelligent and reasonable." Most people don't have the background and ability to do the research to determine which technical arguments hold water and what arguments, while seeming to be "intelligent and reasonable", are actually bullshit.

You may believe everyone should bow down to your perspective, but that's not how it works. You need to convince several competent, experienced reviewers that your points being made are worthy of incusion in a publication for reasonable folks to take you seriously, that's how peer-review works. It doesn't guarantee quality, but it helps to separate out the chaff.


Don't know what your language is here. If you're making a point about Occam's Razor, you still haven't addressed my point in post #11. I'll repeat it a third time:


The silence is deafening. Ok, continuing on.


If Tony has research he wants to get folks to consider, he should publish his work in a respected journal. Blowing holes in the work and theories of others is how science works, it's how we progress, it's why we're able to build robust high-rises in the first place. But if your points are valid and worthy of consideration, you should be able to convince a few of your peers they are worthy of publication in their journal.
I have no strong opinion on this, but your jew-dripping "peer review" shit is laughable. You fuckers have a tightly sealed control lid on all of these "journals".

All "peer review" means anymore is that the official jewish party line has given its approval to whatever "study" or "paper" it deems useful. Before the academic game became completely rigged, it meant something. Now it means absolutely nothing in terms of verifying facts or truth. Absolutely nothing.

But you know all this. Fucking kike faggot. Your favorite review is the "queer review" at your local bathhouse. Die of AIDS, shitdick schmeul.
 
Reply

Share


Thread
Display Modes


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:51 PM.
Page generated in 0.20298 seconds.