oh.. i thought building 7 WASN'T a controlled demolition.

hmmm..

that's funny because Larry Silverstein admits it..

I guess he's a conspiracy theorist who conspires about having his OWN building taken down..

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-jPzAakHPpk

 

Does the clip include

"I remember getting a call from the, er, fire department commander, 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 we watched the building collapse. "

If it does.
This is old news.
An old conspiracy.
And a load of rubbish.

 

Yeah, he only pretended to say it. Right??

 

No...He said it alright.
But what WAS at conjecture is what he meant.
Fevered minds had him talking about a "controlled demolition" to fit in to their narrative.
http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/silverstein_pullit.html


I say it is a load of rubbish because it is.

If you want to give it your time, fine.

 

Well, regardless of what Silverstein was referring to (maybe he meant pulling his finger), it doesn't take a rocket scientist to see that the building was brought down in a controlled demolition.

Here is a Dutch demolition expert's reaction upon seeing the footage of WTC-7 collapsing:

Part I
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k3DRhwRN06I

Part II
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sep-HDZoEBM&feature=related

Part III
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k3DRhwRN06I&feature=related

 

The question is, was it going to come down anyway before they decided to pull it down?

 

I can't view youtube as I am at work. I'll use my physic powers and assume the video has Danny Jowenko in it. Saying things like:
"This is controlled demolition."

"A team of experts did this."

"This is professional work, without any doubt."

Well, just wow.
I'm convinced now.

I'm not going around that cul-de-sac thanks.
I'm just saying the Silverstein thing is a load of rubbish and very very old news.

 

Never before 9/11 had a steel-frame building collapsed from fire (the official explanation for the collapse), yet on 9/11 three buildings collapsed and one of them wasn't even hit by a plane. So you tell me.

 

That's what I thought, exactly. How did they decide to bring it down because of a fire??

 

Say, is there anything out there that shows a taping of what happened to the Pentagon? Anything?

 

I am not sure what you're asking, but obviously the fires (which were minor) had nothing to do with the collapse, so something else had to have brought it down so perfectly into its own footprint.

You've seen the footage of the collapse, right?

 

Are you referring to actual footage? All that's been released is a series of pictures of something hitting the Pentagon, which was snapped from a parking lot security gate surveillance camera. But the quality of the images is so bad that you cannot tell what it is that's hitting the building.



Keep in mind the Pentagon is surrounded by cameras as it's one of the most heavily guarded buildings in the entire world. There are literally HUNDREDS of cameras surrounding the building, yet supposedly that's the best footage they have? We also know that surveillance camera footage was confiscated from a nearby hotel and gas station just minutes after the building was struck.

 

And never before 9/11 has a steel-frame building NOT collapse after getting hit by a 757 at 500mph, nor has a steel building with the unusual structural design of WTC 7 NOT collapse after burning for hours from a diesel fuel fed fire while suffering severe structural damage. Not once in the history of steel-frame buildings.

 

Yeah, I know, Arabs with boxcutters outsmarted the best air defense system in the world with no fighter response for over an hour. Muslims are evil and George Bush will save us... we just need to give up our liberties in exchange for protection and everything will be alright. Who cares that the plan to invade Afghanistan was written up months before the attacks and were sitting on Bush's desk the morning of 9/11. I am sure it's also just a coincidence he was taking Cipro on 9/11.

It's all just a coincidence. Let's stop asking questions because the government just wants to save us from the evil doers that hate us because of our freedom.

 

Lets ask NEW questions.
Not ones that have been asked (and answered)
over and
over and
and over
and over
and over
and over
and over
and over
and over
and over
and over
and over
and over

 

It was originally a rhetorical question. Sorry.

Aye, I've seen several footages of the collapse.

 

ALSO!

Let's keep in mind that at the time the towers were constructed in the late 60's, the 707 was the biggest passenger plane. While the 707 is slightly smaller than the 767, it's still comperable in size and weight.

Here is one of the project managers during the WTC construction, who says the trade towers were designed to sustain MULTIPLE strikes from airliners without collapsing:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_BbN_2tAUCU

 

The reason the Pentagon tapes haven't been released is that the Bush administration has presided over a culture of secrecy that permeates all levels of government. Of course, it allows Americans, who have always loved a good conspiracy theory, to really wonder about this. And hey, the assholes who pulled the wool over your eyes about Iraq, exposed a CIA agent to score political points, explained away torture as a necessity and who -- best of all -- will, instead of being punished for this, be rewarded with millions of more dollars in consulting fees.

They could care less.

Even if 9-11 was an inside job, nothing would happen to them. Not a fucking thing.

George W Bush is a fucking criminal. That's not even an opinion.

By any reasonable standard, he has ignored the Constitution, turned the Executive into a monarchy, and is a war criminal. But he can smile, joke, and spend the rest of his life on his fucking ranch. And no one will ever touch him.

Makes me almost pray for a civil war to start, because there are some days that I just want to take a gun to every motehrfucker that used your country as a conduit for monetary gain.

 

Yes, George Bush is a criminal traitor. He is also a mass-murdering psychopath.

But Bush is only as powerful as the people that control him allow him to be. They have given him the power to be dictator, eviscerating habeus corpus and posse comitatus. At the same time, he's only as powerful as the complacent American public allow him to be without putting their foot down and saying enough is enough.

So what I am saying is that Bush is a puppet. The power he holds is merely figurative power. The people who run the show from behind the facade of presidents and elected officials never leave office. The only role Bush really serves is to cast the illusion that he's running the show when that could not be further from the truth. I cannot believe so many people are gullible enough to think that a man like Bush could possibly run America. All Bush does is sign bills given to him and makes appearances where he struggles to string words together to form proper sentences. Most of the time he fails.

Because Bush is such a simple-minded fool with obvious brain damage, it's easy for people to point the finger at Bush as being the sole contributor to the country's problems, when it in fact goes much deeper than that. I think that's one of the reasons they put Bush into office. When you have someone with an intelligence deficiency, they are easier to manipulate and control. They also make for great frontmen for the public to take their anger out on while the people remain blind to the intricacies of the system that runs things from behind the spotlight of media.

 

And the Titanic was designed to be unsinkable.
http://www.historyonthenet.com/Titanic/unsinkable.htm