+ Reply to Thread
Page 9 of 10 FirstFirst 1 9 10 LastLast
Results 161 to 180 of 190

Thread: The sheer volume of concrete and steel that simply vanished on 9/11

  1. Link to Post #161
    Canada Avalon Member
    Join Date
    16th September 2018
    Posts
    1,790
    Thanks
    5,347
    Thanked 10,971 times in 1,706 posts

    Default Re: The sheer volume of concrete and steel that simply vanished on 9/11

    Believe it or not, volcanoes hold the key to understanding how the WTC towers were demolished on 9/11.

    On our planet, pyroclastic flows occur in only two instances:

    1. During volcanic eruptions
    2. During nuclear explosions

    We can quickly rule out volcanic eruptions having occurred as each of the three towers came down.

    Take a good look at the following videos and photos to get a good grasp of what pyroclastic dust flows look like.

    Volcano pyroclastic flows
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4Tc0-6zVx2w

    Nuke, small yield
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0jkaPHPRC1o

    WTC towers
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kXV6lh9TPK0
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lg4f6LGCOGU

    Volcano:
    https://ibb.co/gHCivU
    https://ibb.co/d6EtUp
    https://ibb.co/dsPDvU
    https://ibb.co/dCPk9p

    Nuke:
    https://ibb.co/j9Fgzp
    https://ibb.co/numzkU

    WTC towers:
    https://ibb.co/d8LdC9
    https://ibb.co/nwigX9

    Pyroclastic clouds are rich, dense, cauliflower-like, rapidly expanding and hot.

  2. The Following 7 Users Say Thank You to DaveToo For This Post:

    avid (29th June 2019), Bill Ryan (28th June 2019), Kryztian (29th June 2019), silvanelf (14th September 2019), Soda (14th September 2019), Tintin (14th September 2019), waree (29th June 2019)

  3. Link to Post #162
    France On Sabbatical
    Join Date
    7th March 2011
    Location
    Brittany
    Posts
    16,763
    Thanks
    60,315
    Thanked 95,891 times in 15,481 posts

    Default Re: The sheer volume of concrete and steel that simply vanished on 9/11

    Quote Posted by DaveToo (here)
    Believe it or not, volcanoes hold the key to understanding how the WTC towers were demolished on 9/11.
    [...]
    Hi Dave, I moved your post to this thread and recommend you have a look at post #49.
    "La réalité est un rêve que l'on fait atterrir" San Antonio AKA F. Dard

    Troll-hood motto: Never, ever, however, whatsoever, to anyone, a point concede.

  4. The Following 6 Users Say Thank You to Hervé For This Post:

    avid (29th June 2019), Bill Ryan (29th June 2019), DaveToo (29th June 2019), Forest Denizen (29th June 2019), Kryztian (29th June 2019), Tintin (14th September 2019)

  5. Link to Post #163
    Canada Avalon Member
    Join Date
    16th September 2018
    Posts
    1,790
    Thanks
    5,347
    Thanked 10,971 times in 1,706 posts

    Default Re: The sheer volume of concrete and steel that simply vanished on 9/11

    Quote Posted by lucidity (here)
    hello Siblings,

    I thought i was familiar with all the evidence on 9/11 until is saw this.

    This video was distributed by richplanet.tv: Highly recommended.
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yapQLt4DChg

    be happy

    lucidity
    Richard Hall, nice guy that he is, is a dyed-in-the-wool Dr. Wood disciple.
    And a preaching one at that!
    He goes around wherever he can giving lectures on Dr. Wood and her DEW theory.

    I went down many a rabbit hole on my 9/11 journey. I left no stone unturned.
    Heck I will admit to everyone here that for a very brief period I too was a Dr. Wood proponent
    and also a Richard Hall proponent.

    But that love affair didn't last long.

    I was quite satisfied with all the research I had done up until a couple of years ago.
    Then quite by accident I discovered Heinz Pommer, a German nuclear physicist.

    The rest as they say is nuclear history!

    I would strongly encourage those who haven't seen his lectures to check out these videos:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gxC_8Kuagcw
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Se5BDbEbtwU
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vbwYEzrB-g0

  6. The Following 6 Users Say Thank You to DaveToo For This Post:

    Baby Steps (14th September 2019), gord (14th September 2019), Intranuclear (29th June 2019), Kryztian (29th June 2019), silvanelf (14th September 2019), waree (29th June 2019)

  7. Link to Post #164
    Avalon Member gord's Avatar
    Join Date
    13th October 2015
    Location
    The Vampire State
    Language
    English
    Age
    61
    Posts
    694
    Thanks
    14,972
    Thanked 4,603 times in 673 posts

    Default Re: The sheer volume of concrete and steel that simply vanished on 9/11

    Quote Posted by DaveToo (here)
    Quote Posted by lucidity (here)
    hello Siblings,

    I thought i was familiar with all the evidence on 9/11 until is saw this.

    This video was distributed by richplanet.tv: Highly recommended.
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yapQLt4DChg

    be happy

    lucidity
    Richard Hall, nice guy that he is, is a dyed-in-the-wool Dr. Wood disciple.
    And a preaching one at that!
    He goes around wherever he can giving lectures on Dr. Wood and her DEW theory.

    I went down many a rabbit hole on my 9/11 journey. I left no stone unturned.
    Heck I will admit to everyone here that for a very brief period I too was a Dr. Wood proponent
    and also a Richard Hall proponent.

    But that love affair didn't last long.

    I was quite satisfied with all the research I had done up until a couple of years ago.
    Then quite by accident I discovered Heinz Pommer, a German nuclear physicist.

    The rest as they say is nuclear history!

    I would strongly encourage those who haven't seen his lectures to check out these videos:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gxC_8Kuagcw
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Se5BDbEbtwU
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vbwYEzrB-g0

    I tried to post those three Pommer videos on The Unz Review and the post was rejected.
    The only place a perfect right angle ever CAN be, is the mind.

  8. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to gord For This Post:

    DaveToo (14th September 2019), silvanelf (14th September 2019)

  9. Link to Post #165
    Great Britain Avalon Member Baby Steps's Avatar
    Join Date
    29th August 2014
    Age
    56
    Posts
    1,634
    Thanks
    16,925
    Thanked 8,663 times in 1,521 posts

    Default Re: The sheer volume of concrete and steel that simply vanished on 9/11

    Thanks for sharing the Pommer videos, their description of a directed nuclear fountain, contained by the bathtub base structure of the towers and therefore directed upwards in a super heated chimney effect makes allot of sense.


    The Russian nuclear scientist who previously had suggested larger nukes that dustify the towers from the base makes less sense to me as we can see progressive destruction from the top going down..however the fact that the debri piles were so low, does suggest a bomb created cavity to accommodate.

    However the nuclear plasma chimneys, which work to soften the cores of the towers, do not account for recordings of explosions going off after the planes had hit, nor accounts of detonations in the basements leading to people emerging from there with their skin hanging off(indicating nuclear flash injury)

    It seems unlikely that each tower could have had two or more separate nuclear events, at the base, one prior to collapse and one during it
    we have subcontracted the business of healing people to Companies who profit from sickness.

  10. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Baby Steps For This Post:

    oz93666 (17th July 2021), silvanelf (14th September 2019)

  11. Link to Post #166
    Canada Avalon Member TomKat's Avatar
    Join Date
    23rd September 2017
    Posts
    2,616
    Thanks
    2,694
    Thanked 13,330 times in 2,365 posts

    Default Re: The sheer volume of concrete and steel that simply vanished on 9/11

    Quote Posted by lucidity (here)
    hello Siblings,

    I thought i was familiar with all the evidence on 9/11 until is saw this.

    This video was distributed by richplanet.tv: Highly recommended.
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yapQLt4DChg

    be happy

    lucidity
    This is fully explainable. It's called the Boxcutter Effect :-)

  12. The Following User Says Thank You to TomKat For This Post:

    DaveToo (14th September 2019)

  13. Link to Post #167
    Canada Avalon Member
    Join Date
    16th September 2018
    Posts
    1,790
    Thanks
    5,347
    Thanked 10,971 times in 1,706 posts

    Default Re: The sheer volume of concrete and steel that simply vanished on 9/11

    Quote Posted by Baby Steps (here)
    Thanks for sharing the Pommer videos, their description of a directed nuclear fountain, contained by the bathtub base structure of the towers and therefore directed upwards in a super heated chimney effect makes allot of sense.


    The Russian nuclear scientist who previously had suggested larger nukes that dustify the towers from the base makes less sense to me as we can see progressive destruction from the top going down..however the fact that the debri piles were so low, does suggest a bomb created cavity to accommodate.

    However the nuclear plasma chimneys, which work to soften the cores of the towers, do not account for recordings of explosions going off after the planes had hit, nor accounts of detonations in the basements leading to people emerging from there with their skin hanging off(indicating nuclear flash injury)

    It seems unlikely that each tower could have had two or more separate nuclear events, at the base, one prior to collapse and one during it
    That's a pretty good very brief summary of Pommer's work Baby Steps.
    He does go into detail about the points you make at the end of your post.

    He is certain (and I concur) that there were multiple devices used to bring down the towers, each serving their own important purpose.
    The primary mechanism of course being the nuclear devices beneath each of the three towers.

    In addition to those were more conventional bombs and thermite.

  14. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to DaveToo For This Post:

    Baby Steps (14th September 2019), silvanelf (14th September 2019)

  15. Link to Post #168
    Great Britain Avalon Member Baby Steps's Avatar
    Join Date
    29th August 2014
    Age
    56
    Posts
    1,634
    Thanks
    16,925
    Thanked 8,663 times in 1,521 posts

    Default Re: The sheer volume of concrete and steel that simply vanished on 9/11

    DaveToo

    Agree, and cannot help but wonder if the progressive collapse described by Fire department witnesses as "POP! POP! POP!"
    as successive floors were dustified were not also mini nukes.

    the alleged 17 suitcases
    we have subcontracted the business of healing people to Companies who profit from sickness.

  16. Link to Post #169
    Great Britain Avalon Member Baby Steps's Avatar
    Join Date
    29th August 2014
    Age
    56
    Posts
    1,634
    Thanks
    16,925
    Thanked 8,663 times in 1,521 posts

    Default Re: The sheer volume of concrete and steel that simply vanished on 9/11

    knew too much to live
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails Click image for larger version

Name:	image.jpg
Views:	114
Size:	123.2 KB
ID:	41533  
    we have subcontracted the business of healing people to Companies who profit from sickness.

  17. The Following User Says Thank You to Baby Steps For This Post:

    DaveToo (15th September 2019)

  18. Link to Post #170
    Canada Avalon Member
    Join Date
    16th September 2018
    Posts
    1,790
    Thanks
    5,347
    Thanked 10,971 times in 1,706 posts

    Default Re: The sheer volume of concrete and steel that simply vanished on 9/11

    Quote Posted by Baby Steps (here)

    It seems unlikely that each tower could have had two or more separate nuclear events, at the base, one prior to collapse and one during it
    The explosions in WTC1's basement occurring prior to the plane crash were likely caused by more conventional explosives.

    However, if you have understood Pommer's latest theories from the past couple of years, he is suggesting 'slow-cooking' nuclear devices were used. That is, they were activated at a certain time and started to do their own thing. The exact time that the plasma would break through the containment at the base and be released to shoot up through the tower's interior columns was unknown.

    It's entirely possible that the explosions that occurred in the basement were unpredictable results of the slow-cooking device.

  19. The Following User Says Thank You to DaveToo For This Post:

    Baby Steps (15th September 2019)

  20. Link to Post #171
    Avalon Member winstonsmith's Avatar
    Join Date
    11th November 2015
    Posts
    52
    Thanks
    23
    Thanked 189 times in 45 posts

    Default Re: The sheer volume of concrete and steel that simply vanished on 9/11

    Quote Posted by Baby Steps (here)

    The exact time that the plasma would break through the containment at the base and be released to shoot up through the tower's interior columns was unknown.
    There are several very good reasons to disregard buried nukes as a demolition mechanism.

    1. In WTC1, 14 people were unharmed in a stair near the 4th floor.
    2. There is no visible evidence of destruction rising from the base.
    3. How smart can this nuke be, to know exactly how high to rise, into different levels of each tower, and REVERSE DIRECTION, to begin visibly destroying the towers from the top down.
    4. The B6 slab was undamaged. See figure 26 here http://www.drjudywood.com/wtc/ (This is not an endorsement of Wood's theories, just a link to a photo she features)
    Last edited by Cara; 21st September 2019 at 13:22. Reason: Fixed quote tags

  21. The Following User Says Thank You to winstonsmith For This Post:

    Baby Steps (28th September 2019)

  22. Link to Post #172
    Canada Avalon Member
    Join Date
    16th September 2018
    Posts
    1,790
    Thanks
    5,347
    Thanked 10,971 times in 1,706 posts

    Default Re: The sheer volume of concrete and steel that simply vanished on 9/11

    Quote Posted by winstonsmith (here)
    Quote Posted by Baby Steps (here)

    The exact time that the plasma would break through the containment at the base and be released to shoot up through the tower's interior columns was unknown.
    There are several very good reasons to disregard buried nukes as a demolition mechanism.

    1. In WTC1, 14 people were unharmed in a stair near the 4th floor.
    2. There is no visible evidence of destruction rising from the base.
    3. How smart can this nuke be, to know exactly how high to rise, into different levels of each tower, and REVERSE DIRECTION, to begin visibly destroying the towers from the top down.
    4. The B6 slab was undamaged. See figure 26 here http://www.drjudywood.com/wtc/ (This is not an endorsement of Wood's theories, just a link to a photo she features)
    Winston I don't have time at the moment to go into detail with my reply, as I'll be busy for a few weeks still.
    However it seems you haven't taken the time to check out the research of Heinz Pommer who I reference above.
    He has been meticulous in his work.
    He has covered the four points you bring up and is able to explain each of them as it fits with his nuclear theory.

    Please take the time to catch up on his research. I think it will be time well-invested.

  23. Link to Post #173
    Canada Avalon Member
    Join Date
    16th September 2018
    Posts
    1,790
    Thanks
    5,347
    Thanked 10,971 times in 1,706 posts

    Default Re: The sheer volume of concrete and steel that simply vanished on 9/11

    jaybee I hope you find my reply to your post here.


    "good old 9/11 eh.... evidence and counter evidence can be conjured up for every aspect of it and every layer of every aspect...

    Myself I think a more covert and experimental technology was used on the WTC area on 9/11 and that oddities with the fires around the world at the moment could indicate an off shoot of that technology...

    Perhaps the basis of the technology itself is an offshoot of the original nuclear experiments - they've had decades to work on it - "

    I thought that replying in a 9/11 thread would be more appropriate than in the Wildfire thread we started to derail.

    If you read some of my posts near the end of this thread you will see that I discovered Hans Pommer a few years ago.
    What better authority to discuss the possibility of nuclear devices having been used on 9/11 than a nuclear physicist?

    He is suggesting 'nuclear devices' were used, not nuclear bombs. That's a big difference.
    He came to this conclusion after examining all of the evidence very carefully.
    And not nuclear devices exclusively.

    The nuclear devices he describes would certainly have fallen into the category of 'covert and experimental technology'
    that you mentioned.
    If you haven't checked out this man's work yet I highly recommend you do.

  24. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to DaveToo For This Post:

    jaybee (17th July 2021), wondering (17th July 2021)

  25. Link to Post #174
    UK Unsubscribed
    Join Date
    1st June 2021
    Language
    English
    Age
    70
    Posts
    236
    Thanks
    242
    Thanked 1,097 times in 205 posts

    Default Re: The sheer volume of concrete and steel that simply vanished on 9/11

    Quote Posted by Baby Steps (here)
    The Russian nuclear scientist who previously had suggested larger nukes that dustify the towers from the base makes less sense to me as we can see progressive destruction from the top going down..
    Yes ... that's clearly disinformation ...There is a slight of hand in his presentation ...He reports seeing pulverized (dustified) rock at Russian under ground nuke detonations , but this only occurs because containing rock allows incredible pressures ... Nothing was containing the towers , so this cannot happen ...

    As Judy Wood says it was a directed energy weapon ...But she doesn't know how or where ... Members here know about the SSP , the secret government have craft which can cloak and have these sort of weapons... The most reliable source we have informs us that one cloaked craft firing a DEW dustified the towers ... These same craft are out now starting forest fires all over the globe using other types of DEW . They want to convince us it's global warming burning up the planet ...Soon the malevolent ET's will arrive offering a solution.

  26. Link to Post #175
    Canada Avalon Member
    Join Date
    16th September 2018
    Posts
    1,790
    Thanks
    5,347
    Thanked 10,971 times in 1,706 posts

    Default Re: The sheer volume of concrete and steel that simply vanished on 9/11

    Quote Posted by oz93666 (here)
    Quote Posted by Baby Steps (here)
    The Russian nuclear scientist who previously had suggested larger nukes that dustify the towers from the base makes less sense to me as we can see progressive destruction from the top going down..
    Yes ... that's clearly disinformation ...There is a slight of hand in his presentation ...He reports seeing pulverized (dustified) rock at Russian under ground nuke detonations , but this only occurs because containing rock allows incredible pressures ... Nothing was containing the towers , so this cannot happen ...

    As Judy Wood says it was a directed energy weapon ...But she doesn't know how or where ... Members here know about the SSP , the secret government have craft which can cloak and have these sort of weapons... The most reliable source we have informs us that one cloaked craft firing a DEW dustified the towers ... These same craft are out now starting forest fires all over the globe using other types of DEW . They want to convince us it's global warming burning up the planet ...Soon the malevolent ET's will arrive offering a solution.
    The Russian you are referring to is Dimitri Khalezov.
    Heinz Pommer and I agree that he is off on his theory for nukes.

    Please take the time to read up and on Heinz Pommer.

    The only thing Judy Wood is correct about is that a DEW was used.
    Not the type she is thinking about (she never says what it looks like nor how it was deployed).
    The directed energy weapon that was used was a nuclear one.

    The nuclear devices were situated in the basement levels of the towers and directed upwards through the towers.
    Pommer lays everything out.
    He explains the explosions (and how people could have survived in the stairwells) etc.

  27. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to DaveToo For This Post:

    oz93666 (17th July 2021), wondering (17th July 2021)

  28. Link to Post #176
    UK Unsubscribed
    Join Date
    1st June 2021
    Language
    English
    Age
    70
    Posts
    236
    Thanks
    242
    Thanked 1,097 times in 205 posts

    Default Re: The sheer volume of concrete and steel that simply vanished on 9/11

    Quote Posted by DaveToo (here)
    The Russian you are referring to is Dimitri Khalezov.
    Heinz Pommer and I agree that he is off on his theory for nukes.

    Please take the time to read up and on Heinz Pommer.

    The only thing Judy Wood is correct about is that a DEW was used.
    Not the type she is thinking about (she never says what it looks like nor how it was deployed).
    The directed energy weapon that was used was a nuclear one.

    The nuclear devices were situated in the basement levels of the towers and directed upwards through the towers.
    Pommer lays everything out.
    He explains the explosions (and how people could have survived in the stairwells) etc.
    I did look into him a long time ago ... can vaguely remember ...


    Neutron radiation "evaporating" inner core doesn't make sense ... Evaporation means the steel reached a temperature where it vaporized 2865C impossible for many reasons ... it Dustified .. somehow the atomic bonds were broken without expenditure of much energy

    Early nuke test were done with the nuke atop of a flimsy steel tower 3mm "L" beams , but no steel was evaporated just buckled



    I don't need to tell you how thick the steel was in the towers!!

    The controllers are encouraging the nuke myth ... building those two blue pools ... and people like Pommer will find the nuke idea attractive because nukes is the only thing they know!

    We know the cabal have vast amounts of different exotic weaponry Pommer has no idea about
    Last edited by oz93666; 17th July 2021 at 07:37.

  29. Link to Post #177
    Avalon Member jaybee's Avatar
    Join Date
    17th March 2010
    Location
    Midlands England
    Posts
    2,633
    Thanks
    8,381
    Thanked 15,959 times in 2,206 posts

    Default Re: The sheer volume of concrete and steel that simply vanished on 9/11

    Quote Posted by DaveToo (here)
    jaybee I hope you find my reply to your post here.


    "good old 9/11 eh.... evidence and counter evidence can be conjured up for every aspect of it and every layer of every aspect...

    Myself I think a more covert and experimental technology was used on the WTC area on 9/11 and that oddities with the fires around the world at the moment could indicate an off shoot of that technology...

    Perhaps the basis of the technology itself is an offshoot of the original nuclear experiments - they've had decades to work on it - "

    I thought that replying in a 9/11 thread would be more appropriate than in the Wildfire thread we started to derail.

    If you read some of my posts near the end of this thread you will see that I discovered Hans Pommer a few years ago.
    What better authority to discuss the possibility of nuclear devices having been used on 9/11 than a nuclear physicist?

    He is suggesting 'nuclear devices' were used, not nuclear bombs. That's a big difference.
    He came to this conclusion after examining all of the evidence very carefully.
    And not nuclear devices exclusively.

    The nuclear devices he describes would certainly have fallen into the category of 'covert and experimental technology'
    that you mentioned.
    If you haven't checked out this man's work yet I highly recommend you do.

    Thanks.... I will definitely check that out when I have the head space to get into it...

    The difference between 'nuclear bomb' and 'nuclear device' is noted...

    A few years ago I spent a lot of time going through the YouTube videos of nuclear explosions to see if I could spot any UFOs in the vicinity... .... looking frame by frame by tapping on the pause button...

    On one of them at one point a beam of light passed through the mushroom cloud - through the hottest part that was glowing red.... after I mentioned it on another forum and posted the video with a still... it disappeared and I think many of those videos carefully omit anything like that - - just throwing that out - I don't know what that beam of light was or how it could fit in with 9/11 but I can imagine there might be a connection... ???

  30. The Following User Says Thank You to jaybee For This Post:

    wondering (17th July 2021)

  31. Link to Post #178
    Avalon Member winstonsmith's Avatar
    Join Date
    11th November 2015
    Posts
    52
    Thanks
    23
    Thanked 189 times in 45 posts

    Default Re: The sheer volume of concrete and steel that simply vanished on 9/11

    I have checked out Pommer and stand by my rebuttals. The buried nukes theory is ridiculous on its face. defies observations, videos and common sense physics.

  32. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to winstonsmith For This Post:

    oz93666 (18th July 2021), wondering (18th July 2021)

  33. Link to Post #179
    Avalon Member winstonsmith's Avatar
    Join Date
    11th November 2015
    Posts
    52
    Thanks
    23
    Thanked 189 times in 45 posts

    Default Re: The sheer volume of concrete and steel that simply vanished on 9/11

    "The nuclear devices were situated in the basement levels of the towers and directed upwards through the towers."

    Think about this for one minute.
    How does one achieve this without damaging the basement (B6) foundation and slab?
    How does one effect a rise of a damage wave without any damage visible at the lower 90 levels?

    Makes no sense.

  34. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to winstonsmith For This Post:

    oz93666 (18th July 2021), wondering (18th July 2021)

  35. Link to Post #180
    Canada Avalon Member
    Join Date
    16th September 2018
    Posts
    1,790
    Thanks
    5,347
    Thanked 10,971 times in 1,706 posts

    Default Re: The sheer volume of concrete and steel that simply vanished on 9/11

    Quote Posted by winstonsmith (here)
    I have checked out Pommer and stand by my rebuttals. The buried nukes theory is ridiculous on its face. defies observations, videos and common sense physics.
    Quote Posted by winstonsmith (here)
    "The nuclear devices were situated in the basement levels of the towers and directed upwards through the towers."

    Think about this for one minute.
    How does one achieve this without damaging the basement (B6) foundation and slab?
    How does one effect a rise of a damage wave without any damage visible at the lower 90 levels?

    Makes no sense.
    Given your comments and questions above it is clear that you have not checked out Pommer carefully enough.
    He covers each and every comment/question in detail in his videos and accompanying documents.

  36. The Following User Says Thank You to DaveToo For This Post:

    wondering (18th July 2021)

+ Reply to Thread
Page 9 of 10 FirstFirst 1 9 10 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts