It's the 3rd bread and the 9-11 WTC7 truthers still haven't researched the issue.

>>7611614

You're spouting nonsense about starting demo companies that use fires instead of demo.

Again, you quoted a large roll-up and your ID isn't present in the previous bread.

>>7611618

The fam? And religious quotes? None are relevant to the critical thinking skills needed to draw conclusions about the cause of WTC7 collapse.

Telling me to "gtfo shill" isn't an argument, either.

>>7611630

More waste of space with pointless meme.

>>7611639

So if I disagree with you and the AE911 truthers, then I must be antifa? I must be a "jew"? I must not be a patriot? Hahahaha

>>7611647

Got it. That kind of blabbering isn't related to the engineering behind WTC7 uncontrolled fires. It isn't, except in the deluded minds of anons who aren't putting on their thinking caps.

>>7611699

Ponzi scheme. Fed injections, combined with laws that enable perpetual stock buy-backs.

The $17T in paper wealth would evaporate quickly if people actually tried to liquidate.

>>7611713

Another anon cracks the case.

>>7611714

Another ad hominem.

>>7611726

>sense

Office fire, Support melted, Penthouse collapse, shell collapse.

>newfag

Ad hominem.

Notice that the majority of responses are all ad hominem. It's part of the mental bubble that one constructs around theories to protect those theories. It's mental bias.

Critical thinkers dis-engage from ad-hominem and do their own research. Sadly, some anons have convinced themselves that it "must be controlled demo" and thus lack the critical thinking skills to overcome that leap of faith - accepting that one could, in fact, be wrong in their initial conclusion.