"I think hours and hours of oil-fueled fire turned the building into a warm wobbly marshmallow that collapsed. Hell, we just watched the tallest two buildings collapse. Or are we going to start into "jet fuel (or oil) fire can't melt steel beam" territory immediately?"
So how do you explain WTC7? No aircraft hit that building.
Ha wow I've seen this footage countless time and I've never noticed how the widows BLOW OUT seconds before the building collapses across a few floors. What is that, random oxygen tanks exploding? Bursts of air flowing due to the fire?
in bloomberg's nyc, you had to have 3 dozen permits to sell a hotdog.
to wire up a 30 story 'scraper to the max with demolition stuff...
that shit was either put up that day (hastily, around fires, on videos that don't exist, and would now be considered one of if not the best demo in history), or before that day (which would mean either foreknowledge of the event or crazy ass in-case-of-glass-break-this planning). there have been no official statements either way.. that i know of..
where's the investigation?
anyway, the conspiracy comes about in the fact that the "official story" of 9/11 says that fire went down due to fires and a lack of water in the sprinklers, whereas clearly it came down due to "silverstein's pull."
so at the very least, the story behind how one of the three buildings lost that day was taken down is a lie, and that the truth has not been sought by the powers that be leads to more avenues of questions entirely - including questions of conspiracy to defraud the public at the very least.
I have made nothing but ambiguous statements/questions
You have chosen to interpret the statements and then make a conclusion about my beliefs. Not knowing anything about me but the 2 comments in this thread.
Even getting defensive about it.
It's fascinating really.
(3 people are replying to my comments. I am treating it as one conversation. oh well)
Even if it wasn't a controlled demolition 9/11 was a conspiracy. A conspiracy is a person or people secretly planning a crime and then acting on those plans. So if Osama and the hijackers planned the crime and then committed the crime it was a conspiracy. And just so you know in 1993 WTC "bombing". The terrorist set off bombs in WTC. So it's not so hard to believe they could have done it again.
Never in HISTORY -- for 100 years, all around the world, has ANY skyscraper come down. These were the 3, on 9/11. I can believe that the planes which hit the twin towers brought them down, which is why I'm not making that claim. But it is physically impossible for a light fire over several hours to have that kind of effect, when a plane did not hit Bldg 7. It's PHYSICALLY inconceivable. And especially when you realize that it came down exactly the way a controlled demolition would. Straight down. Very fast. It's easy -- and I think you'll know that inside, but your mind is too afraid to admit it.
With enough information to the contrary would you change your mind?
if no then this is like religion to you. No amount of facts can change your beliefs and no amount of you evangelizing is going to change peoples beliefs.
So why are you doing this? Why do you need people to believe you?
I'm honestly mystified by your response. I changed my mind completely, from one of confidence and trust in Bush's thinking to the opposite. And BTW, Cheney and Rumsfeld and Wolfowitz did it I believe; I still don't know whether Bush had anything to do with it or not (although his father, Bush 41, very likely did have a major role). But I learned it by researching it thoroughly for many years, something which you are oblivious to. This is the root of your problem. I believe.
All three. I edited and added an "s". Also you didn't ask me shit and I didn't ask you shit.. I told you to ask yourself the same question. But I already know the answer. There will never be enough evidence to convince you because your belief is like a religion to you. I already was like you and I changed my mind when presented with overwhelming evidence. You on the other hand will never be satisfied.
LOL! I actually think they put explosives in place and when plane three messed up they shot down plane three and just blew up the Pentagon and claimed a plane 4 also was hijacked.
I'm holding out hope that Russia and/or China have hacked the US and gotten their hands on a lot more than video footage, and that they are waiting for an opportune moment to tear down the US political system by exposing it.
Please just view it for at least a couple of minutes (it's 14 minutes total, and worth every nickel -- it's truly damning). You HAVE TO admit that it's simply not conceivably possible for Bldg 7 to come down except thru a controlled demolition. It's simply not within the realm of possibility, and once you admit that, the answers are downright frightening. Conspiracy becomes simple fact. And on 9/11, and everything after that -- THAT'S why I'm so insistent.
respondwithdata ago
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ne1FJBVkh4s
"I think hours and hours of oil-fueled fire turned the building into a warm wobbly marshmallow that collapsed. Hell, we just watched the tallest two buildings collapse. Or are we going to start into "jet fuel (or oil) fire can't melt steel beam" territory immediately?"
So how do you explain WTC7? No aircraft hit that building.
OrangeKraken ago
Ha wow I've seen this footage countless time and I've never noticed how the widows BLOW OUT seconds before the building collapses across a few floors. What is that, random oxygen tanks exploding? Bursts of air flowing due to the fire?
God dammit.
PraiseIPU ago
Crazys really like to point fingers at how everyone else is nuts don't they?
Konran ago
Now, was that an ambiguous statement just there?
PraiseIPU ago
who am i calling crazy?
Konran ago
Interesting. Your ambiguity actually means that you include yourself in this now-sweeping statement.
PraiseIPU ago
yup that was the point
It's fascinating to see how people will spin things.
SaneGoatiSwear ago
in bloomberg's nyc, you had to have 3 dozen permits to sell a hotdog.
to wire up a 30 story 'scraper to the max with demolition stuff...
that shit was either put up that day (hastily, around fires, on videos that don't exist, and would now be considered one of if not the best demo in history), or before that day (which would mean either foreknowledge of the event or crazy ass in-case-of-glass-break-this planning). there have been no official statements either way.. that i know of..
where's the investigation?
anyway, the conspiracy comes about in the fact that the "official story" of 9/11 says that fire went down due to fires and a lack of water in the sprinklers, whereas clearly it came down due to "silverstein's pull."
so at the very least, the story behind how one of the three buildings lost that day was taken down is a lie, and that the truth has not been sought by the powers that be leads to more avenues of questions entirely - including questions of conspiracy to defraud the public at the very least.
PraiseIPU ago
I have made nothing but ambiguous statements/questions
You have chosen to interpret the statements and then make a conclusion about my beliefs. Not knowing anything about me but the 2 comments in this thread.
Even getting defensive about it.
It's fascinating really.
(3 people are replying to my comments. I am treating it as one conversation. oh well)
SaneGoatiSwear ago
lol https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wq-0JIR38V0
edit: that's the guy who owns WTC clearly stating they "decided to pull it" ie demolish WTC 7 that morning, on a pbs broadcast
SaneGoatiSwear ago
SERIOUSLY THIS IS CONSPIRACY CONFIRMED
how can people not know this already?
the dude who owned this building called for it "to be pulled" ie demolished that morning.
he said it on PBS a few years after 9/11, and later somewhere else a couple years after that.
shit's still up on youtube for spaghetti monster's sake.
there it is: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wq-0JIR38V0
klongtoey ago
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jbReTl3Uin0
(John Kerry says on camera that WTC7 was brought down by controlled demolition)
about 2m40s
toobaditworks ago
Even if it wasn't a controlled demolition 9/11 was a conspiracy. A conspiracy is a person or people secretly planning a crime and then acting on those plans. So if Osama and the hijackers planned the crime and then committed the crime it was a conspiracy. And just so you know in 1993 WTC "bombing". The terrorist set off bombs in WTC. So it's not so hard to believe they could have done it again.
ideasware ago
Never in HISTORY -- for 100 years, all around the world, has ANY skyscraper come down. These were the 3, on 9/11. I can believe that the planes which hit the twin towers brought them down, which is why I'm not making that claim. But it is physically impossible for a light fire over several hours to have that kind of effect, when a plane did not hit Bldg 7. It's PHYSICALLY inconceivable. And especially when you realize that it came down exactly the way a controlled demolition would. Straight down. Very fast. It's easy -- and I think you'll know that inside, but your mind is too afraid to admit it.
PraiseIPU ago
With enough information to the contrary would you change your mind?
if no then this is like religion to you. No amount of facts can change your beliefs and no amount of you evangelizing is going to change peoples beliefs.
So why are you doing this? Why do you need people to believe you?
ideasware ago
I'm honestly mystified by your response. I changed my mind completely, from one of confidence and trust in Bush's thinking to the opposite. And BTW, Cheney and Rumsfeld and Wolfowitz did it I believe; I still don't know whether Bush had anything to do with it or not (although his father, Bush 41, very likely did have a major role). But I learned it by researching it thoroughly for many years, something which you are oblivious to. This is the root of your problem. I believe.
PraiseIPU ago
People go to Jesus school for years to become priests too. It doesn't mean that there is a god.
I was just curious. Belief is a strong thing and clouds judgment.
toobaditworks ago
You should ask yourself the same questions.
PraiseIPU ago
Which one? I asked 3 questions.
Also I asked you first.
toobaditworks ago
All three. I edited and added an "s". Also you didn't ask me shit and I didn't ask you shit.. I told you to ask yourself the same question. But I already know the answer. There will never be enough evidence to convince you because your belief is like a religion to you. I already was like you and I changed my mind when presented with overwhelming evidence. You on the other hand will never be satisfied.
PraiseIPU ago
So you made a conclusion up based on no evidence. Interesting.
SaneGoatiSwear ago
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wq-0JIR38V0
bro. here's the owner of the building saying he demolished wtc 7.
Lag-wagon ago
Anyone have any footage of the plane flying into the pentagon?
toobaditworks ago
Yup
Lag-wagon ago
LOL! I actually think they put explosives in place and when plane three messed up they shot down plane three and just blew up the Pentagon and claimed a plane 4 also was hijacked.
respondwithdata ago
No, the Israelis launched a cruise missile from a Dolphin class submarine.
pray_the_gay_away ago
I'm holding out hope that Russia and/or China have hacked the US and gotten their hands on a lot more than video footage, and that they are waiting for an opportune moment to tear down the US political system by exposing it.
ideasware ago
Please just view it for at least a couple of minutes (it's 14 minutes total, and worth every nickel -- it's truly damning). You HAVE TO admit that it's simply not conceivably possible for Bldg 7 to come down except thru a controlled demolition. It's simply not within the realm of possibility, and once you admit that, the answers are downright frightening. Conspiracy becomes simple fact. And on 9/11, and everything after that -- THAT'S why I'm so insistent.
Rosenkavalier ago
Also, nano-thermite found in the debris of those controlled demolitions is logical but disturbing.
http://benthamopen.com/contents/pdf/TOCPJ/TOCPJ-2-7.pdf