Anything that happens for the first time is a conspiracy....
Don't pretend that WTC7 fell on just a normal day where there was nothing that might have somehow, I don't know.. delayed or hindered the firefighters efforts to put out the fire.
9/11 Conspiracy Thread (There can be only one!)
- Thread starter Stryder
- Start date
- Status
Don't pretend that WTC7 fell on just a normal day where there was nothing that might have somehow, I don't know.. delayed or hindered the firefighters efforts to put out the fire.
Check your links please.
It was peer reviewed by who? The scholars for truth?
Exactly. Building 7 and the Twin towers fell on a day used as Casus Belli, for war in Afghanistan and very oddly, in Iraq. Certainly NOT a normal day.
The official conspirators have gained the loss of their Powerbase, All Monies, their freedoms in any country the U.S has any influence in.
The Unofficial conspirators, talked about in this thread and many others, have gained Billions from insurance companies, tax payers, contracts and most of all Power.
If you are clinging to the "pull" comment then yes you are implicating the firefighters.
This is where Silverstein said "pull".
"I remember getting a call from the fire department commander, uh, telling me that they were not
sure they were gonna be able to contain the fire, and I said, 'We've had such terrible loss of life,
maybe the smartest thing to do is pull it.' And they made that decision to pull and then we watched
the building collapse."
Silverstein is talking to the fire cheif.
To begin with it is absurd that you take the word 'pull' out of the context where it clearly does not mean 'demolish'. "We've had such terrible loss of life, maybe the smartest thing to do is pull it " is not referring to explosives.
Then you ignore the fact that it implicates the fire department as well. So are you going to keep quoting Silverstein or not? Just the words that suit you?
Of course Ganymede won't see this as he has me on ignore...
Last edited:
So 9/11 was not a crime? The first thing investigators (should) do is follow the money or profit when investigating a crime.
Well, I see you (and he can see you through me then). I have seen this 'pull' comment before but I have never paid it much heed. I think it'd have made more sense if he had said 'to pull back'. I mean, seriously, demolition people do pull buildings and it would seem appropriate there; as in, the building can't be saved, so let's pull it so it doesn't cause damage to the surrounding buildings. I personally think he may have known the building was pulled and made a gaffe; as in, revealed more then he himself wanted to by mistake.
Anyway, I'm willing to believe that he may have simply been trying to say 'to pull back'. As far as I'm concerned, there's so much evidence that the building was pulled, the only important thing from his statement is that it lends itself to suspicions that he knew that the building was pulled. In terms of whether or not Larry Silverstein knew, I have no direct evidence that he did. I do know that he's a prominent jewish man and that Jim Marrs, author of several books on 9/11, stated that a jewish lease holder of part of one of the towers, broke their lease before 9/11, strongly suggesting foreknowledge. A member of ICQ, which I believe is an Israeli company, claimed to have tried to warn some that 9/11 was going to collapse. And some men, perhaps agents of Mossad, apparently filmed the destruction and seemed to celebrate; they were arrested but then released, which Jim Marrs says is common policy when dealing with agents from certain countries.
I have also heard that if the buildings were indeed pulled, control of the operation may well have been done from WTC 7. By destroying the building, they would remove the evidence.
I'll say right off the bat that I'm going off of memory here; if you ask me to cite sources, I will currently fall flat; I'm guessing most of this information can be found from Jim Marrs various books, but I've also read some things on the internet. To this day people still disagree on how many people killed JFK so perhaps we'll continue to argue about this 40+ years down the road as well. However, it seems to me that there are a lot more people who believe that 9/11 was an inside job only a few years after the event then there were people who felt the same about the JFK assassination; so perhaps things will develop more quickly. Time will tell.
Yeah, sorry about that; I realized they were messed up later but I had some things to do. The correct links are:
http://www.911readingroom.org/docs/WhyIndeed_version3.pdf (which I now see I'd already shown you) and:
http://www.911research.wtc7.net/reviews/mackey/index.html
(which I have also posted on here in the past).
What I did is I copied the links from the posts I had made; but if the urls are beyond a certain length, the post will cut off bits of them; in the original post, the link works fine, but if you copy it, it won't.
Yep, they got a lot. However, it's beginning to crumble for them. Many who have loved lost ones aren't settling for the official explanations. Power gained by such means can't last.
I am just saying that compensation alone is not a crime and proves virtually nothing on its own.
True. I think what he nietz is referring to is that in one of the official 9/11 reports, they said that it doesn't matter who financed the 9/11 attacks. It's an absurd claim, but so many things are about the government response to 9/11.
A sheep would be someone who follows something without understanding what they are following. I've looked at the history of 9/11 (or as you like to call it: "the official story"), I've also watched Loose Change and read many 9/11 truther websites. So I know "both sides". It's kind of like evolution and creationism... I know what both sides say.
Well you said that the conversation between Larry Silverstein and Dan Nigro was a conversation that lead to the WTC7 building being "pulled".
Dan Nigro backs up Larry Silverstein by saying that the thing being "pulled" was not the WTC7, but the rescue operation in the collapse zone Dan Nigro put in place. You are calling him a liar.
Dan Nigro by the way was almost killed by the South tower collapse, and he was only made fire commander that day because the fire commander before him was killed.
From what I've read, people were pulled from the immediate area surrounding WTC7 at around 2pm. Not once did I say that firefighters were standing directly beneath the building moments before it collapsed.
Firehouse: When you looked at the south side, how close were you to the base of that side?
Boyle: I was standing right next to the building, probably right next to it.
Well there's one firefighter that needed pulled
You still haven't recognised the video I posted of rescuers being held back for 3 hours due to fears of collapse. It wasn't just firefighters that were pulled. EVERYONE in the evacuation zone was pulled.
I have posted so many videos and quotes that say rescuers and firefighters were pulled. You ignore it all. You are dishonest.
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
Firehouse: Was there heavy fire in there right away?
Hayden: No, not right away, and that�s probably why it stood for so long because it took a while for that fire to develop. It was a heavy body of fire in there and then we didn�t make any attempt to fight it. That was just one of those wars we were just going to lose. We were concerned about the collapse of a 47-story building there. We were worried about additional collapse there of what was remaining standing of the towers and the Marriott, so we started pulling the people back after a couple of hours of surface removal and searches along the surface of the debris. We started to pull guys back because we were concerned for their safety
End of conspiracy. Debunked.
Denial. Evasion. Dishonesty. Conspiracy nut.
Only a conspiracy nut would not see a difference between a plane crashing at low speed and a plane crashing at 550mph head on with a reinforced concrete building. That is the very definition of strawman. It's like comparing a fender bender to a high speed freeway collision.
It was a 757. You can't even get that right.
In summary, we have studied two key pieces of wreckage [three including the update] photographed at the Pentagon shortly after September 11 and found them to be entirely consistent with the Rolls-Royce RB211-535 turbofan engine found on a Boeing 757 operated by American Airlines.
http://www.aerospaceweb.org/question/conspiracy/q0265.shtml
And you wonder why I laugh at you? 45 pounds of per square foot is nothing compared to the force per square foot of a 500mph 767 head-on.
Peer reviewed by whom? What scientific journals did it appear in? I think I know enough about the scientific method that if his findings had any merit, he would not currently be limited to the dolts of the "truth movement".
Laugh
So I'm a government plant now? I wonder what it must be like to live in this fantasy world of yours.
The "story"... I think the rest of us call it history.
Actually it was mistaken identity. This was cleared up years ago, but conspiracy nuts just latch on to it to this day.
I think the airlines would disagree with this.
The passport was not the only thing that made it out of the building intact. Seat cushions from one of the flights were also found on the streets below, as were life jackets, wallets, suitcases, tickets and many other peices of paper. However, because one item belonged to one of the hijackers, dishonest people think it was planted. Conjecture.
Anything that uses Alex Jones as a pundit is something to avoid.
Last edited:
Ganymede
Valued Senior Member
Ofcourse he wasn't he didn't plant the bombs in building 7. This was a high level false flag operation. Nor did he use the term pull it.
If it's the end why do waste your time regurgitating it? Also, Sliverstein said pull the building, he said nothing about firefiighters since the building was evacuated 7 hours before it collapsed, and the waterline was severed 6 hours prior. And Silverstein said that he knew the building was empty when he made that comment. Also, according the NIST report and FEMA no manual firefighting was taking place inside of WTC. So when he said pull the building, it was the biggest Freudian slip of the century.
due to lack of water, no manual firefighting actions were taken by FDNY. Section 5.5.4
www.fema.gov/pdf/library/fema403_ch5.pdf
due to lack of water, no manual firefighting actions were taken by FDNY. Section 5.5.4
www.fema.gov/pdf/library/fema403_ch5.pdf
Areospace web is a nameless non profit website where none of it's findings are peer reviewed. You fail at sourcing your information in a competent manner.
Actually it is, the WTC was designed to survive the impact of a 707 and hurricane wind loads, since a 707 is lighter and has a higher cruise speed then a 757, which means it would produce more kinetic energy on impact then a 757. So when you say, 530 MPH, Jetliner, crash, doesn't mean the laws of physics should be ignored, which you continue to do.
Ganymede
Valued Senior Member
Read the report and find out for yourself. This proves that you're to biased to even process any differing conclusions then your own subjective ones.
The "story"... I think the rest of us call it history.
I think the airlines would disagree with this.
It was planted. Along with the Koran he took with him on the flight, and the Koran he left in his hotel room, along with the Koran atta left at the bar he attended the night before. Also, the Government said they identified the hijackers through DNA evidence. Can you tell me where the Government attained the original D.N.A to match it against the ones that found on 911? You can't can you, all of the smoking gun evidence is either classified or non existent. Your theory requires blind faith.
People who believe everything the Government says should be avoided. Especially plants.
Ganymede
Valued Senior Member
Based on your responses to the questions I've raised it's safe to say you've never studied the inconsistencies of the official story. Because you aren't aware of any, and there's plenty, you just chose to ignore them, and re-frame your argument to avoid looking stupid.
No I didn't, you're a liar.
I'm sure Dan had nothing to due with the conspiracy, I only focus on the ones who benefit the most. And that would be the military industrial complex and oil companies.
and
You have no source to validate that claim.
Firehouse: When you looked at the south side, how close were you to the base of that side?
Boyle: I was standing right next to the building, probably right next to it.
Well there's one firefighter that needed pulled
You still haven't recognised the video I posted of rescuers being held back for 3 hours due to fears of collapse. It wasn't just firefighters that were pulled. EVERYONE in the evacuation zone was pulled.
Those were civilian rescue workers, not FDNY. And there was no one to rescue since everyone was evacuated one hour after the first plane hit Tower 1.
No Scott that is not what we were discussing, no offense but if you canot follow along with a few posts how would you possibly understand a complicated investigation?
also take into account that if all investigations such as this were conducted to satisfy every layperson and conspiracy theorist then these investigations would take hundreds of years to conclude or would never reach any conclusion.
since you brought up the financing, exactly what would you like to investigate? who bought the plane tickets for the hijackers? your grabbing at straws but really it is pretty comical because some of these theories are so simplistic that they are as though they are being asked by a child.
whoever brought up Alex Jones, i never even heard of him until fairly recently but googling his name and you soon see that he could not even finish community college.
please dont link to these sites for for intellectual matters, whoever was responsible for doing so. i am so sad because my IQ is being damaged, it is being drug through the mud, like staring at the screen of a one of those 1$ porn booths...over and over and over.
please dont link to these sites for for intellectual matters, whoever was responsible for doing so. i am so sad because my IQ is being damaged, it is being drug through the mud, like staring at the screen of a one of those 1$ porn booths...over and over and over.
- Status