9/11 Conspiracy Thread (There can be only one!)

[KennyJC]

The poor guys never going to be able to appear in public again until he explains how a building of that type collapses all at once from fire damage:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EtPC0W4HII8&feature=related

I watched the first 5 minutes of this video, and I have to say, it was the most disgusting display by 9/11 "truthers".

I thought Larry handled them very well.

 

[KennyJC]

Until you can provide an official source to back up your claim you're providing nothing but Bullshit. Also, in the video that Cazzo posted, Larry Silverstein says that he knew that everyone was already evacuated when he made that statement.

So you're saying Firehouse magazine completely faked these interviews? I'm sure if he said "bomb" you'd jump all over it.

http://www.firehouse.com/terrorist/911/magazine/gz/boyle.html
http://www.firehouse.com/terrorist/911/magazine/gz/norman.html
http://www.firehouse.com/terrorist/911/magazine/gz/hayden.html

Even conspiracy websites use these sources in an attempt to prove their conspiracy theories:

http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread225868/pg1

 

[nietzschefan]

Never forget the damage caused to the south side of the building by tons of falling debris. Never forget the effect of the fires on a very oddly constructed skyscraper. Never forget the countless statements made by those close to the tower saying they could tell it was in danger of collapse. Never forget the conjecture looneys like you make which distort the happenings of that day.

Look at my GIF again. That's called demolition. Use your eyeballs, not your ears, to the lies you've been told.

 

[Ganymede]

So you're saying Firehouse magazine completely faked these interviews? I'm sure if he said "bomb" you'd jump all over it.

http://www.firehouse.com/terrorist/911/magazine/gz/boyle.html
http://www.firehouse.com/terrorist/911/magazine/gz/norman.html
http://www.firehouse.com/terrorist/911/magazine/gz/hayden.html

Even conspiracy websites use these sources in an attempt to prove their conspiracy theories:

http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread225868/pg1

Based on those interviews, it's safe to say that they never entered WTC7 and carried out any firefighting operations as the NIST & FEMA reports have stated. They only mentioned that they attempted to fight the fires when they were outside of the structure, but they said it was futile because the hoses had no pressure. So once again, there was no firefighters to pull.

 

[KennyJC]

Based on those interviews, it's safe to say that they never entered WTC7 and carried out any firefighting operations as the NIST & FEMA reports have stated. They only mentioned that they attempted to fight the fires when they were outside of the structure, but they said it was futile because the hoses had no pressure. So once again, there was no firefighters to pull.

Well it's nice to see you finally admit they were attempting to fight the fires whilst outside the WTC7, and thus in a dangerous place should the WTC7 collapse as expected. And since the firefighters were actually on their way in the WTC7 thus proves there was an operation to cancel.

I never said that the Fire Chief was involved. A chief wouldn't have the authority to make that call. I haven't seen any evidence that the NYFD was involved.

Larry Silverstein said "pull it" to Dan Nigro the fire commander. Since you interpret this as meaning to destroy the building, that then makes Dan Nigro complicit in the "conspiracy".

And Dan Nigro (who almost died with the collapse of the South Tower), says that you, Ganymede, are full of shit:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H8BkI2cyVTc

At the 3 minute mark, he says it was HIS decision to evacuate firefighters and rescue workers from the area.

De-fucking-bunked.

Most of their accounts refute the official story. Since it was them who first said they saw a foundry of molten steele in the basement, and heard bombs going off in the towers.

Can you show me some of these quotes of "molten steel" and "bombs"?

 

[EndLightEnd]

If this was a "New Phenomena" as NIST stated, then HOW did the firefighters in the following video KNOW the building was going to collapse before it did? (Listen for “Keep your eye on that building, it’ll be coming down soon.”)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z9CXQY-bZn4

And the fact this is the FIRST steel frame building to collapse from NORMAL scattered fires is an extraordinary claim. Look at all these other buildings, with much more fire damage, that did not collapse.

http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/analysis/compare/fires.html

 

[Ganymede]

Well it's nice to see you finally admit they were attempting to fight the fires whilst outside the WTC7, and thus in a dangerous place should the WTC7 collapse as expected. And since the firefighters were actually on their way in the WTC7 thus proves there was an operation to cancel.

There was no firefighters to pull out of the building. There were no manual firefighting operations taking place inside WTC7 as the FEMA report states.

Larry Silverstein said "pull it" to Dan Nigro the fire commander. Since you interpret this as meaning to destroy the building, that then makes Dan Nigro complicit in the "conspiracy".

"Pull it" is a term used in building demolition. As the facts clearly demonstrate. No matter how hard your try to distort the truth.

And Dan Nigro (who almost died with the collapse of the South Tower), says that you, Ganymede, are full of shit:

He said that he wasn't involved in the buildings demolition. No one ever insinuated the NYFD blew up the buildings. Larry told the truth about was being done to WTC7, he just lied about the circumstances behind the decision.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H8BkI2cyVTc

At the 3 minute mark, he says it was HIS decision to evacuate firefighters and rescue workers from the area.
De-fucking-bunked.

Rescue workers? Why would they have rescue workers dispatched to WT7 when all employee's were evacuated 8 hours before the collapse?

09:03 A second Boeing 767 laden with jet fuel hits the South Tower. Shortly afterwards all the civilians are evacuated from WTC7.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/programmes/conspiracy_files/7437516.stm

Here's another GEM.

11 September

06:46 The fire alarm system for World Trade Centre 7 is "placed on test" because of "routine maintenance".

Nist notes that: "Under test conditions (1) the system is typically disabled for the entire building, not just for the area where work is being performed, and (2) alarm signals typically do not show up on an operator console." (Final Report on the collapse of the World Trade Center Towers)

How convenient, WTC7's internal fire suppression systems were disabled 2 hours before attacks.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/programmes/conspiracy_files/7437516.stm

,

 

[iceaura]

He said that he wasn't involved in the buildings demolition. No one ever insinuated the NYFD blew up the buildings.

You are. You are claiming that the fire chief was told to carry out the demolition of the building, and did so.

How convenient, WTC7's internal fire suppression systems were disabled 2 hours before attacks.

How would that affect demolition by explosives ? Are you changing your mind about what brought the building down ?

 

[KennyJC]

There was no firefighters to pull out of the building. There were no manual firefighting operations taking place inside WTC7 as the FEMA report states.

"Pull it" is a term used in building demolition. As the facts clearly demonstrate. No matter how hard your try to distort the truth.

He said that he wasn't involved in the buildings demolition. No one ever insinuated the NYFD blew up the buildings. Larry told the truth about was being done to WTC7, he just lied about the circumstances behind the decision.

You are calling Dan Nigro a liar:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=08F_ZOwkX-o

The first 35 seconds of that video shows rescue workers being held back because they were "pulled", much to their displeasure.

1 minute 40 seconds is a letter written by Dan Nigro saying why people like you are a disgrace.

I made the decision without consulting the owner, the mayor or anyone else, as ranking fire officer, that decision was my responsibility to clear a collapse zone surrounding the building and stop all activity within that zone. Approximately 3 hours after that decision was given, wtc7 collapsed.

Conspiracy theories abound, and I believe firmly that all of them are without merit.

- Dan Nigro

So it seems Larry Silverstein had nothing to do with this. Which means you are claiming Dan Nigro was in on the conspiracy, even though it is clear he was working with the safety of the firefighters and rescue workers in mind, and not to coverup an asinine conspiracy.

Rescue workers? Why would they have rescue workers dispatched to WT7 when all employee's were evacuated 8 hours before the collapse?

09:03 A second Boeing 767 laden with jet fuel hits the South Tower. Shortly afterwards all the civilians are evacuated from WTC7.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/programmes/conspiracy_files/7437516.stm

Moron. They were in the collapse zone that Dan Nigro layed out.

How convenient, WTC7's internal fire suppression systems were disabled 2 hours before attacks.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/programmes/conspiracy_files/7437516.stm

0646 The fire alarm system for World Trade Centre 7 is "placed on test" because of "routine maintenance".

How would this be relevant anyway, since you believe that some sort of silent bomb destroyed the WTC7?

 

[KennyJC]

If this was a "New Phenomena" as NIST stated, then HOW did the firefighters in the following video KNOW the building was going to collapse before it did? (Listen for “Keep your eye on that building, it’ll be coming down soon.”)

Because they saw the WTC collapse, and hearing and seeing what a bad state the WTC7 was in, didn't exactly make them confident standing close to it.

And the fact this is the FIRST steel frame building to collapse from NORMAL scattered fires is an extraordinary claim. Look at all these other buildings, with much more fire damage, that did not collapse.

http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/analysis/compare/fires.html

Well I don't know.. did those buildings have a concrete core or concrete columns? How differently were they built compared to the WTC? Was their integrity compromized by a direct hit by 500mph airliners?

One size does not fit all therefore these questions need to be asked, only conspiracy theorists don't understand that.

 

[Pandaemoni]

"Pull it" is a term used in building demolition. As the facts clearly demonstrate. No matter how hard your try to distort the truth.

As used by two people NEITHER of whom was in the demolition business. Look at the damned statement, he wants it pulled because he fears greater loss of life. How does demolishing the building accomplish that? It DOESN'T. You know what might? Getting all the firefighters out of the area in case it collapsed on its own, which I remember (having worked in Tower 2 at the time) news reports said was a fear.

Face it, you are the one distorting the truth.[/QUOTE]

 

[Sock Puppy]

Your quote is from Wiki, my source is from the FEMA report. No contest.

Well....no. Mine is from the New York Times, under eyewitness accounts of personal actions. So, no contest. Also, I think you misunderstand your sources.

Even though the FEMA report alludes to a collapse steming from fire damage and structural damage.

This is the part that always surprises me - Troofer picking and choosing of data from report that ultimately invalidates their reasons for living.

Ok, there's 3 mainstream sources that confirm no manual firefighting was taking place in WTC 7. So until any of you can provide one mainstream source to refute the evidence I've just presented, politely shut the **** up.

Probably a bit of deception on your part. While, they probably did little manual firefighting of any note in the building, they were in the building, as the the NYT source illustrates.

Based on those interviews, it's safe to say that they never entered WTC7 and carried out any firefighting operations as the NIST & FEMA reports have stated.

Sheer assumption. I can see from this that you probably can't bring yourself to believe it any more.

They only mentioned that they attempted to fight the fires when they were outside of the structure, but they said it was futile because the hoses had no pressure. So once again, there was no firefighters to pull.

So - in your thesis, when they were fighting the fire from outside the building - when they realized the building was going to go down, they...just stood around directly outside it? Say, ten feet away? Had a smoke or something, did they? "Can't hurt us - we're not inside!"

There was no firefighters to pull out of the building. There were no manual firefighting operations taking place inside WTC7 as the FEMA report states.

Well, the NYT interview clearly demonstrates that there were firefighters in the building. Whether they did too much firefighting is another question, of course, but one you wisely don't address.

"Pull it" is a term used in building demolition. As the facts clearly demonstrate. No matter how hard your try to distort the truth.

It kind of hurts that no one believes you and that the people on the forum took about five minutes to knock this Trooferism down, doesn't it?

Rescue workers? Why would they have rescue workers dispatched to WT7 when all employee's were evacuated 8 hours before the collapse?

And you know that they were sure they got them all? What's your argument then: that no rescue workers were dispatched? Which would prove what in any case?

How convenient, WTC7's internal fire suppression systems were disabled 2 hours before attacks.

Actually it was by the falling debris.

So, I'm sorry, but your thesis doesn't stand.

Done. :shrug:

 

[Ganymede]

Well....no. Mine is from the New York Times, under eyewitness accounts of personal actions. So, no contest. Also, I think you misunderstand your sources.

You're a liar, you didn't link shit from the New York Times, you have no source that quote and calling you out out.

This is the part that always surprises me - Troofer picking and choosing of data from report that ultimately invalidates their reasons for living.

What a moronic response.

Probably a bit of deception on your part. While, they probably did little manual firefighting of any note in the building, they were in the building, as the the NYT source illustrates.

They were not in the building, you have no source that confirms that. Once again you're a liar.

So - in your thesis, when they were fighting the fire from outside the building - when they realized the building was going to go down, they...just stood around directly outside it? Say, ten feet away? Had a smoke or something, did they? "Can't hurt us - we're not inside!"

They weren't fighting the fire from outside the building. They attempted to but there was pressure coming from the hoses because the waterline was severed from the WTC 1 & 2 collapse. The fact still remains, no manual firefighting was taking place in WTC7 as the NIST and FEMA reports indicate. Until you can source your quote that allegedly refutes their data, you're pushing unsubstantiated claims.

Well, the NYT interview clearly demonstrates that there were firefighters in the building. Whether they did too much firefighting is another question, of course, but one you wisely don't address.

You have no source for that information. You're a liar. You're depending on a WIKI article with a dead link. You fail, and it's quite embarrassing that I'm even paying any attention to such a poor researcher such as yourself.

It kind of hurts that no one believes you and that the people on the forum took about five minutes to knock this Trooferism down, doesn't it?

All you're doing is name calling and labeling. You're intellectually inept, and incapable of weighing the evidence objectively and without prejudice.



[quoteAnd you know that they were sure they got them all? What's your argument then: that no rescue workers were dispatched? Which would prove what in any case?[/quote]

WTC 7 had zero casualties. Like a said, you're poor researcher.

Actually it was by the falling debris.

So, I'm sorry, but your thesis doesn't stand.

Still waiting for you source your claim. You're about to be humiliated bub.

Done. :shrug:

Out of all of that hot hair, you didn't list or source one fact to back up any of your arguments. You fail at debating. NEXT!!!

 

[Ganymede]

You are. You are claiming that the fire chief was told to carry out the demolition of the building, and did so.

I never implicated anyone in carrying out the bombing. So please refrain from trying to distort my arguments.

How would that affect demolition by explosives[/quote
Are you changing your mind about what brought the building down ?

Nope, bombs brought the buildings down. But the Governments symmetrical collapse by fire theory wouldn't stand if t was known that the fire suppression systems were operational.

 

[Ganymede]

As used by two people NEITHER of whom was in the demolition business
Look at the damned statement, he wants it pulled because he fears greater loss of life.

The building was evacuated one hour after the first plane hit. So there was nobody to pull. And the NYFD never carried out any manual firefighting inside WTC7 as the FEMA report states. Nor did they spend any extended period of time attempting to fight the fire outside WTC7 because there was enough water pressure as the FEMA report states.

How does demolishing the building accomplish that? It DOESN'T. You know what might? Getting all the firefighters out of the area in case it collapsed on its own, which I remember (having worked in Tower 2 at the time) news reports said was a fear.

Face it, you are the one distorting the truth.

I'm not here to impugn motives, I'm here to examine the facts. And the fact is, no manual firefighting was taking place in WTC7 as the FEMA report states, so there was no firefighters to pull. If you have any information to refute the facts I've presented, besides your subjective opinion please do so.

 

[Ganymede]

During the last four decades, other towers in New York, Philadelphia and Los Angeles have remained standing through catastrophic blazes that burned out of control for hours because of malfunctioning or nonexistent sprinkler systems. But 7 World Trade Center, which was not struck by a plane, is the first skyscraper in modern times to collapse primarily as a result of a fire. Adding to the suspicion is the fact that in the rush to clean up the site, almost all of the steel remains of the tower were disposed of, leaving investigators in later years with little forensic evidence

.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/08/22/nyregion/22wtccnd.html?partner=rssnyt&emc=rss

It's comforting to know that the Government is basing their conclusions with little forensic evidence.

 

[scott3x]

.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/08/22/nyregion/22wtccnd.html?partner=rssnyt&emc=rss

It's comforting to know that the Government is basing their conclusions with little forensic evidence.

I've read 2 books from Jim Marrs that essentially believes that 9/11 was an inside job, so ofcourse the powers within the government that did it would want to remove as much evidence as soon as possible. Anyway, I'm on the third book from Marrs on the subject; it's titled "The Terror Conspiracy". It's a good read, but I admit I'm a bit bored of it all really.. it's like, yes, I know, inside job, lots of evidence, but most people who haven't lost someone there don't seem to care enough to bother going beyond the extremely flawed official explanations.

Anyway, a good link to get started with is here:
http://www.911truth.org/

 

[KennyJC]

The building was evacuated one hour after the first plane hit. So there was nobody to pull. And the NYFD never carried out any manual firefighting inside WTC7 as the FEMA report states. Nor did they spend any extended period of time attempting to fight the fire outside WTC7 because there was enough water pressure as the FEMA report states.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=08F_ZOwkX-o

Watch the first 35 seconds of that video.

Video footage from ABC news, rescuers are seen frustrated because for 3 hours they were not allowed into the area - they had been pulled out.

Nope, bombs brought the buildings down. But the Governments symmetrical collapse by fire theory wouldn't stand if t was known that the fire suppression systems were operational.

The team said that the smallest blast event capable of crippling the critical column would have produced a “sound level of 130 to 140 decibels at a distance of half a mile,” yet no noise this loud was reported by witnesses or recorded on videos.

http://www.nist.gov/public_affairs/releases/wtc082108.html

It's not looking good for you is it? Your claims are easily debunked and yet you persist. I really don't understand. Maybe something is missing in your life?

 

[Ganymede]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=08F_ZOwkX-o

Watch the first 35 seconds of that video.

Video footage from ABC news, rescuers are seen frustrated because for 3 hours they were not allowed into the area - they had been pulled out.

There was no one to rescue from WTC 7, it was evacuated 7 hours before it collapsed. And there were no manual firefighting taking place as the FEMA report states, so there was no firefighters to pull.

The team said that the smallest blast event capable of crippling the critical column would have produced a “sound level of 130 to 140 decibels at a distance of half a mile,” yet no noise this loud was reported by witnesses or recorded on videos.

http://www.nist.gov/public_affairs/releases/wtc082108.html

It's in accurate when he reports that no loud noises were reported by witnesses or recorded on videos. What a blatant lie. I present exhibit A.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0YvrKfWkxdw

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PbbZE7c3a8Q

It's not looking good for you is it?

For you it isn't, especially since you've been shadowing me for last week on this forum. That's why I left the other thread because you were losing point after point, then changing the subject after I successfully produced the evidence that you requested, that would validate my claims.

Your claims are easily debunked and yet you persist. I really don't understand. Maybe something is missing in your life?

You're the one persistently following me around presenting bogus arguments from unsubstantiated sources. One more time, for the knockout VIDEO.

Look how tame this fire is, the building is not a towering inferno. Rare CBS building 7 fire video.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G4SEhMpbo74

 

[Pandaemoni]

The building was evacuated one hour after the first plane hit. So there was nobody to pull. And the NYFD never carried out any manual firefighting inside WTC7 as the FEMA report states. Nor did they spend any extended period of time attempting to fight the fire outside WTC7 because there was enough water pressure as the FEMA report states.

There were firefighters in and around the area of the building outside of it; there were firefighters all over the place that day. Nigro pulled those men back.

I'm here to examine the facts.

"Facts"?? You are here to peddle the theory that that because "pull" has a certain meaning in the demolition trade, that you can read the minds of two men who were not in that trade and determine that that is the sense in which they meant it...definitely....no question about it is even possible. That's no fact, it's spurious speculation.