Those IMPLAUSIBLE & IMPOSSIBLE cellphone calls

[phrodeau]

Do you have a problem with reality, phrodeau? Apparently you do. Damn your Mommy must be disappointed in your thickheaded lack of intelligence.

EVERY OTHER OCCASSION both before and since Sept 11 2001, when STEEL-FRAMED TOWER buildings collapsed STRAIGHT-DOWN into their own footprint, it has been due to a controlled demolition.

Can any of you silly shills cite a single exception to this?

With a photo, video, or anything else.

No, seriously. The planes hit the towers above WTC7. WTC7 was damaged by falling debris. You claim that no plane hit WTC7, but you have no proof of that.

You're making unsubstantiated claims while you're accusing others of making unsubstantiated claims.

If you would only investigate the damage that WTC7 sustained before it fell, you might learn what causes such a building to collapse. You seem unwilling to consider any evidence which refutes the theories you've been reading about and c&p-ing here.

 

[Lovelynice]

WTC7 was damaged by falling debris..

1) Please be show that WTC 7 was damaged more extensively than WTC 5 and WTC 6, WITH PHOTOS AND/OR VIDEO for comparison.

2) Please show how ASSYMETRICAL damage can somehow lead to SYMMETRICAL collapse. Your claim is preposterous and doesn't explain this;

http://www.thewebfairy.com/killtown/video/wtc7/wtc7_collapse_lg.gif

That STRAIGHT-DOWN collapse is IDENTICAL to any typical controlled demolition.

and it looks just like any other clearly recognisable typical controlled demolitions
http://xs513.xs.to/xs513/07104/building-implosion-11.gif
http://www.thewebfairy.com/killtown/images/wtc7/oslo_demo_clips.jpg


3) EVERY OTHER OCCASSION both before and since Sept 11 2001, when STEEL-FRAMED TOWER buildings collapsed STRAIGHT-DOWN into their own footprint, it has been due to a controlled demolition. Please cite a single exception to this, with a photo, video, or anything else.

How pathetic phrodeau's excuses are....

 

[Cap’n AMatrixca]

I was listening to a bit of McConnell this yesterday and he had on the editor of Poular Mechanics who wrote the book on Debunking the 9-11 Myths.

You are correct in your assumption and your question but where you err is in the nature of the fire and collapse. Never in the history of steel-framed buildings have multiple conflagrations occurred over multiple floors. When those planes hit the towers, they were banking (I remember the video even though our freedom-hating press will not show them). Do you know where those newly fueled jets stored their fuel? In the wings. That means jet fuel was sprayed over several floors which all began to burn at once on unexhausted fuel. This has never, ever happened in the whole history of buildings of almost any kind. Now, now, we finally know just what would happen under this scenario, in fact, we have two identicle examples of what will happen.

Furthermore, when they traced most of the source scientists, most were glad for the opportunity to clear the record and point out how they have been taken out of context and a couple of the claims are just out and out lies.

I know you won't believe a word of what I say, you'll go to your grave convinced Bush did this on purpose.

But you're not taking a whole lot of company with you.

 

[Cap’n AMatrixca]

No, seriously. The planes hit the towers above WTC7. WTC7 was damaged by falling debris. You claim that no plane hit WTC7, but you have no proof of that.

You're making unsubstantiated claims while you're accusing others of making unsubstantiated claims.

If you would only investigate the damage that WTC7 sustained before it fell, you might learn what causes such a building to collapse. You seem unwilling to consider any evidence which refutes the theories you've been reading about and c&p-ing here.

She'd better not read Rudy's book because that's where NYC's emergency command and control during disasters had been set up; he describes exactly how it weas damaged and he was on site...

We have the film of that too!

 

[Pookie]

A little recapping ...

http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/SMALL_wtc-7_1_.gif

Yep, looks EXACTLY like a CONTROLLED DEMOLITION

If you deny that, you are either a moronic fuckwit or a liar.

Naw. It probably means he did some research and knows you're trying to pull one over to sucker people into supporting your scam ... and maybe even making a "monetary love offering" to the "search for truth". Heh.

With some simple research, here is just a small sample of what can be found ...

CTs often show video from street level and remark about how quickly the building fell (6.6 seconds, according to an estimate by BYU professor Steven E. Jones and his students, although since much of the collapse is obscured by other buildings and by the dust and smoke thrown up by WTC 7, it’s impossible to tell exactly when the collapse ends).

However, in this video http://*******.com/z66rz (download and play it in full-screen mode) it’s obvious that the collapse takes at least 13.5 seconds from the first movement of the east mechanical penthouse, a structure about 115 x 130 feet (35 x 40 meters) in area, until it disappears behind the foreground buildings. NIST and FEMA posit that the penthouse collapse was due to collapses on floors at the lower levels.

http://www.911myths.com/WTC7_Lies.doc

Some quotes from the firefighters and others on the damage ...

The biggest decision we had to make was to clear the area and create a col-lapse zone around the severely damaged [WTC 7] building. A number of fire officers and companies assessed the damage to the building. The appraisals indicated that the building’s integrity was in serious doubt. [Fire Engineering magazine, 10/2002]

The most important operational decision to be made that afternoon was [that] the collapse [Of the WTC towers] had damaged 7 World Trade Center, which is about a 50 story build-ing, at Vesey between West Broadway and Washington Street. It had very heavy fire on many floors and I ordered the evacuation of an area sufficient around to protect our members, so we had to give up some rescue operations that were going on at the time and back the people away far enough so that if 7 World Trade did collapse, we [would-n't] lose any more people. We continued to operate on what we could from that distance and approximately an hour and a half after that order was [given], at 5:30 in the afternoon, 7 World Trade Center collapsed completely. http://*******.com/g8c6y

We walked over by number Seven World Trade Center as it was burning and saw this 40-plus story building with fire on nearly all floors. –FDNY Lieutenant Robert LaRocca
http://graphics8.nytimes.com/packages/pdf/nyregion/20050812_WTC_GRAPHIC/9110081.PDF

...Just when you thought it was over, you're walking by this building and you're hearing this building creak and fully involved in flames. It's like, is it coming down next? Sure enough, about a half an hour later it came down. –FDNY Lieutenant James McGlynn
http://graphics8.nytimes.com/packages/pdf/nyregion/20050812_WTC_GRAPHIC/9110447.PDF

When the building came down it was completely involved in fire, all forty-seven stories.
–FDNY Assistant Chief Harry Myers (Smith, Dennis, 2002. Report From Ground Zero: The Heroic Story of the Rescuers at the World Trade Center. New York: Penguin Putnam. p. 160)

The major concern at that time was number Seven, building number Seven, which had taken a big hit from the north tower. When it fell, it ripped steel out from between the third and sixth floors across the facade on Vesey Street. We were concerned that the fires on several floors and the missing steel would result in the building collapsing. –FDNY Chief Frank Fellini
http://graphics8.nytimes.com/packages/pdf/nyregion/20050812_WTC_GRAPHIC/9110217.PDF

At that time, other firefighters started showing up, Deputy Battalion Chief Paul Ferran of the 41 Battalion, and James Savastano of the First Division assigned to the Second Battalion showed up and we attempted to search and extinguish, at the time which was small pockets of fire in 7 World Trade Center. We were unaware of the damage in the front of 7, because we were entering from the northeast entrance. We weren't aware of the magnitude of the damage in the front of the building. – FDNY Captain Anthony Varriale
http://graphics8.nytimes.com/packages/pdf/nyregion/20050812_WTC_GRAPHIC/9110313.PDF

[Shortly after the tower collapses] I don’t know how long this was going on, but I remember standing there looking over at building 7 and realizing that a big chunk of the lower floors had been taken out on the Vesey Street side. I looked up at the building and I saw smoke in it, but I really didn't see any fire at that time. Deputy ––Chief Nick Vis-conti http://*******.com/paqux

A few minutes after that a police officer came up to me and told me that the façade in front of Seven World Trade Center was gone and they thought there was an imminent collapse of Seven World Trade Center. –FDNY Lieutenant William Melarango
http://graphics8.nytimes.com/packages/pdf/nyregion/20050812_WTC_GRAPHIC/9110045.PDF

I think they said they had seven to ten floors that were freestanding and they weren't going to send anyone in. –FDNY Chief Thomas McCarthy
http://graphics8.nytimes.com/packages/pdf/nyregion/20050812_WTC_GRAPHIC/9110055.PDF

So we go there and on the north and east side of 7 it didn’t look like there was any damage at all, but then you looked on the south side of 7 there had to be a hole 20 stories tall in the building, with fire on several floors. Debris was falling down on the building and it didn’t look good. But they had a hose line operating. Like I said, it was hitting the sidewalk across the street, but eventually they pulled back too.
Then we received an order from Fellini, we’re going to make a move on 7. That was the first time really my stomach tightened up because the building didn’t look good. I was figuring probably the standpipe systems were shot. There was no hydrant pressure. I wasn’t really keen on the idea. Then this other officer I’m standing next to said, that building doesn’t look straight. So I’m standing there. I’m looking at the building. It didn’t look right, but, well, we’ll go in, we’ll see.
So we gathered up rollups and most of us had masks at that time. We headed toward 7. And just around we were about a hundred yards away and Butch Brandeis came running up. He said forget it, nobody’s going into 7, there’s creaking, there are noises coming out of there, so we just stopped. And probably about 10 minutes after that, Vis-conti, he was on West Street, and I guess he had another report of further damage either in some basements and things like that, so Visconti said nobody goes into 7, so that was the final thing and that was abandoned.
Firehouse Magazine: 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.
Firehouse: When you had fire on the 20 floors, was it in one window or many?
There was a huge gaping hole and it was scattered through there. It was a huge hole. I would say it was proba-bly a third of it, right in the middle of it. And so after Visconti came down and said nobody goes in 7, we said all right, we’ll head back to the command post.
– Capt. Chris Boyle http://*******.com/e7bzp

So we left 7 World Trade Center, back down to the street, where I ran into Chief Coloe from the 1st Division, Captain Varriale, Engine 24, and Captain Varriale told Chief Coloe and myself that 7 World Trade Center was badly damaged on the south side and definitely in danger of collapse. Chief Coloe said we were going to evacuate the collapse zone around 7 World Trade Center, which we did. – FDNY Lieutenant Rudolph Weindler http://graphics8.nytimes.com/packages/pdf/nyregion/20050812_WTC_GRAPHIC/9110462.PDF

At this point, 7, which is right there on Vesey, the whole corner of the building was missing. I was thinking to myself we are in a bad place, because it was the corner facing us. –Fred Marsilla, FDNY
http://graphics8.nytimes.com/packages/pdf/nyregion/20050812_WTC_GRAPHIC/9110399.PDF

I actually worked at WTC7 and was there on 9-11. From the minute the first plane hit the towers, WTC7 was getting hit with debris.
In fact, when I finally got down to the lobby 45 minutes later, we were all forced to leave through the back since so much debris had hit the building and blocked the entrance.
I also would love to have someone tell me how the 28-44th floors were wired for demolition, when we packed like sardines after the merger with Smith Barney and most floors had people on them 7 days a week. ( A few floors were trading floors so it was 24x7 and many worked 6-7 days a week), and I never saw one construction crew in my time there doing anything significant.
Why won't CT's talk to people who worked at WTC7? My friends and I who worked with at Salomon are eager to talk but I'm guessing you won't like the answers. http://*******.com/n5xap


I gots plenty more if you think this isn't enough, LN. Are you going to call all these people (and many many others) moronic fuckwits and liars too?

If the truth is on your side, why do you have to use deception, LN?

 

[Cap’n AMatrixca]

The Biggest Little Conspiracy in Texas

 

[Pookie]

Some video of WTC 7's damage and fires ...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YHdt7wRQtaY&eurl=http://www.debunking911.com/pull.htm

The FULL WTC 7 collapse, and not just the last 6.6 seconds that Lovelynice tries to scam people into believing was the full collapse.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CLHwvwJCmgk&eurl=http://www.debunking911.com/pull.htm

 

[Lovelynice]

I was listening to a bit of McConnell this yesterday and he had on the editor of Poular Mechanics who wrote the book on Debunking the 9-11 Myths.....

WHICH WAS PROMPTLY DEBUNKED AS A PILE OF DOGPOO

Popular Mechanics was THOROUGHLY DEBUNKED as a pile of strawman arguments, nonsense, and outright lies.

POPULAR MECHANICS 9/11 ARTICLE DEBUNKED
http://911research.wtc7.net/essays/gopm/index.html
http://www.serendipity.li/wot/pop_mech/reply_to_popular_mechanics.htm
http://911review.com/pm/markup/index.html

So McConnell was an idiot too, just like you.

 

[Lovelynice]

Some video of WTC 7's damage and fires ...

Seen it, now as a reminder once again...

1) Please be show that WTC 7 was damaged more extensively than WTC 5 and WTC 6, WITH PHOTOS AND/OR VIDEO for comparison. (did you get that last bit this time. moron?)

2) Please show how ASSYMETRICAL damage can somehow lead to SYMMETRICAL collapse. Your claim is preposterous and doesn't explain this;

http://www.thewebfairy.com/killtown/video/wtc7/wtc7_collapse_lg.gif

That STRAIGHT-DOWN collapse is IDENTICAL to any typical controlled demolition.

and it looks just like any other clearly recognisable typical controlled demolitions
http://xs513.xs.to/xs513/07104/building-implosion-11.gif
http://www.thewebfairy.com/killtown/images/wtc7/oslo_demo_clips.jpg


3) EVERY OTHER OCCASSION both before and since Sept 11 2001, when STEEL-FRAMED TOWER buildings collapsed STRAIGHT-DOWN into their own footprint, it has been due to a controlled demolition. Please cite a single exception to this, with a photo, video, or anything else.

NOW ARE YOU ABLE TO DEAL WITH THE REAL PROBLEMS WITH YOUR BULLSHIT OR NOT???

 

[Cap’n AMatrixca]

Wow.

What a resoned comeback.

Popular Mechanics lies?

Let me rephrase what the editor said in response to that charge:

I am a journalist. I am going to sit on the biggest story of two centuries? The Conspiracy Crowd doesn't know the first thing about journalists...

 

[Cap’n AMatrixca]

Reset...

 

[Lovelynice]

Let me rephrase what the editor said in response to that charge:

I am a journalist. I am going to sit on the biggest story of two centuries?

Why not? The response to that stupid excuse of yours is tooooo easy! Journalists sit on stories all the time when those stories would damage the side that the journalist favours, and it's certainly not the "biggest story of two centuries" - that's just hyperbole.

Now please answer the damn questions, and stop bullshitting with excuses, both yours and other people's. They mean NOTHING, basically a big fat ZERO.

 

[Lovelynice]

Reset...

Yes you should.

Now answer the huge fat problem that you have....

EVERY OTHER OCCASSION both before and since Sept 11 2001, when STEEL-FRAMED TOWER buildings collapsed STRAIGHT-DOWN into their own footprint, it has been due to a controlled demolition. Please cite a single exception to this, with a photo, video, or anything else.

WHEN ARE YOU GOING TO PROVIDE THIS?????

Or are you going to sit on your ass and hope that the truth will go away? Give up, because it won't.

That's why you loony liars are losing!

RESULTS OF ONLINE POLLS ABOUT 9/11
http://fawkesfiles.com/graphics/polls/polls_large/believe_conspiracy2.jpg
http://fawkesfiles.com/graphics/polls/polls_large/gov_involved2.jpg
http://fawkesfiles.com/graphics/polls/polls_large/wisconson_teach2.jpg
http://www.prisonplanet.com/images/march2006/240306poll1.jpg

You idiots aren't even in the majority on THIS SITE
when asked this question about the Official Conspiracy Theorist claims :
100 witnesses (all from the same company or working at the Pentagon) saw the plane hit the Pentagon, but we have no video to prove it, and it doesn't matter that there's no sign of those huge jet engines hitting the walls, and it's the first time that a plane folded up to go through a little hole - wings and all!

500+ witnesses heard, saw, and felt explosives taking down the WTC buildings, there's hours and hours of video showing explosions going off in long straight lines BEFORE the debris reached the floor, and seismic tremors were impossibly shorter than the collapse times, and it's never before happened in the entire history of steel+concrete skyscrapers have collapsed at almost freefall speed into their own footprint (except with controlled demolitions) ---- but who cares, there's no evidence. All of the hundreds of witnesses were idiots, and don''t watch those videos because they lie.

https://forum.literotica.com/showthread.php?t=448232

and this is how the majority voted;
http://xs204.xs.to/xs204/06314/Tinfoil_OCTers.jpg

 

[Cap’n AMatrixca]

What you say is true!

How can I refute that?

Every other building did that was brought down by a controlled explosion. That does not prove the converse, that a skyscraper subjected to intense fire over a huge portioned of its already weakened structure cannot fall into its own footprint, that it must take on some sort of skew (and keep in mind that unlike most modern skyscrapers, some of the towers skeleton was on the outside, which, to me, seems logical that it would help stop a skewed fall.

But more importantly, look who is arguing against you. People who think Bush out and out lied and maipulated data to draw us into a war in Iraq for [fill-in-the-blank] gain. Even they cannot go this far and what you are doing is the converse of what your Party has been doing - to tie Republicanism to its most radical elements. Now, you go out and give the Democrat Party one huge black eye because its so easy to convince members of your own party that you are on the lunatic fringe.

Take what happened in Utah when ya'll got a debate cancelled because it was on Fox. How stupid is that?

 

[Pookie]

Seen it, now as a reminder once again...

1) Please be show that WTC 7 was damaged more extensively than WTC 5 and WTC 6, WITH PHOTOS AND/OR VIDEO for comparison. (did you get that last bit this time. moron?)

Argument from ignorance is a logical fallacy. I told you to do better. Try harder.

 

[Pookie]

2) Please show how ASSYMETRICAL damage can somehow lead to SYMMETRICAL collapse. Your claim is preposterous and doesn't explain this;

Yet another argument from ignorance. Pitiful.

And sugar britches, using Killtown's website isn't adding to your credibility. LOL

 

[Cap’n AMatrixca]

If you take ANY dividing issue and check out where A_J and Pooks stand, it's throwing rocks at each other's glass house.

Now you got us buying drapes together...

 

[Pookie]

3) EVERY OTHER OCCASSION both before and since Sept 11 2001, when STEEL-FRAMED TOWER buildings collapsed STRAIGHT-DOWN into their own footprint, it has been due to a controlled demolition. Please cite a single exception to this, with a photo, video, or anything else.[/SIZE]

NOW ARE YOU ABLE TO DEAL WITH THE REAL PROBLEMS WITH YOUR BULLSHIT OR NOT???

And yet again ... argument from ignorance.

Depending on logical fallacies isn't going to get you anywhere, hon. Sorry.

 

[Pookie]

If you take ANY dividing issue and check out where A_J and Pooks stand, it's throwing rocks at each other's glass house.

Now you got us buying drapes together...

I get to pick out the color though.

 

[Lovelynice]

The photo shows the north face of WTC 7 reflected, with the fires visible. Do they look like huge raging infernos filling the entire building to you?
http://xs206.xs.to/xs206/06375/wtc7_northface.jpg

You need to post photos or links to video of VISIBLE FIRES

There was no - repeat NO twenty story HOLE in WTC 7, why lie?, just don't bother posting lies and wasting every one's time with nonsense like that will you for a change?

I want you to post an attached photo of this twenty storey hole in WTC 7, and I want you to describe in detail exactly where this hole is.

While you are at it I want you to explain why WTC 7's 14th and 15th floors were in the months and weeks leading up to 9/11 heavily fortified with bomb proof glass facing the twin towers.

They have since claimed it was a bunker for Mayor Giuliani in case of terrorist attacks would you believe, which he took the opportunity not to use on the day of the attacks!

I want you to explain why these two mysterious fires started given that no windows had been smashed on the corresponding floors, or any where on the entire facade of the building facing the twin towers, never mind and twenty story hole! - Even if they had been that is not necessarily reason for a fire to start.

Why did the automatic sprinkler system conveniently fail to activate and extinguish these fires?

Why did the then new WTC lease holder Larry Silverstein clearly state in a TV interview a year after the attacks that he and the NYFD decided to 'pull' WTC 7 on the day of the attack? The word 'pull' is industry jargon for taking a building down with explosives.

Photos taken shortly before before the collapse of WTC 7 show small office fires on just two floors.

Firefighters were told to move away from the building moments before it collapsed.

In February of 2002 Silverstein Properties won $861 million from Industrial Risk Insurers to rebuild on the site of WTC 7. Silverstein Properties' estimated investment in WTC 7 was $386 million. So: This building's collapse resulted in a profit of about $500 million!

Explain to everyone why buildings that didn't belong or weren't insured by Silverstein holdings and that were right beside the twin towers and sustained massive damage - far more damage than WTC 7 - didn't collapse into their own footprints at near free fall speed!

Yet this WTC 7 building - which was by the way the strongest building on the WTC site being fortified with solid cross section girders rather than the 'H' type because it straddled the a major electrical substation - was conveniently demolished, tell tale streamers and charges can be seen all over the front of the building and explosive charges running up the side in a straight perpendicular line running up the sides.

The penthouse can clearly be seen falling in through the roof first as the building was violently eviscerated from the inside.

Why was the steel from this controlled demolition immediately and illegally shipped off before almost any major examination had been done to check for the possibility of explosives, and to try and determine the cause of it’s collapse so as to prevent it happening in future?

Unfortunately, we may never know what happened because the steel from the WTC was immediately and illegally shipped off before almost any major examination had been done to check for the real reasons for it‘s collapse.

"Some 185,101 tons of structural steel have been hauled away from ground zero. The city's hasty move has outraged many victims' families who believe the steel should have been examined more thoroughly. Last month fire experts told congress that about 80% of the steel was scrapped so far, without being examined because investigators did not have authority to preserve wreckage". - One investigator of the WTC told New York Times, "this is almost the dream team of engineers in the country working on this, and our hands are tied." The member asked not to be identified because members have been "threatened with dismissal for speaking to the press". "FEMA is controlling everything," the team member said .

Implosion World.com, a website about the demolition industry, states that an implosion is “by far the trickiest type of explosive project, and there are only a handful of blasting companies in the world that possess enough experience . . . to perform these true building implosions."
- Can anyone really believe that fire would have just happened to produce the kind of collapse that can be reliably produced by only a few demolition companies in the world? The building had 24 core columns and 57 perimeter columns. To hold that fire caused this building to collapse straight down would mean believing that the fire caused all 81 columns to fail at exactly the same time. To accept the official story is, in other words, to accept a miracle.

http://h1.ripway.com/ken_from_dublin/manning3oo.jpg

http://h1.ripway.com/ken_from_dublin/madrid4zh.jpg

Now look this folks - much stronger building, unexplained small fires behind unbroken windows and failed state of the art sprinkler systems, and no fires visible upon collapse, fires not even hot enough to break a window! YET........

http://h1.ripway.com/ken_from_dublin/wtc-7.gif

There was also NO INFERNO in WTC 7, but just some MINOR fires. Not serious at all, and the damage was MINOR in comparison to the size of the building.

WTC 6 had FAR MORE DAMAGE, and other WTC buildings had far worse fires than WTC 1, 2, & 7.

Larry Silverstein, ADMITTED on Public Broadcast Television that explosives were used to demolish WTC building #7

Yes, Silverstein, who had conveniently insured these buildings (which had been ordered to be dismantled due to safety hazards) for billions of dollars just weeks before 911, said on public television:

"(The Fire Department) were not sure that they were gonna be able to contain the fire. I said, you know, we´ve had such terrible loss of life. Maybe the smartest thing to do is pull it. They made that decision to pull and then we watched the building collapse"

In the demolition industry, “pull” is the common term they use for demolishing buildings with carefully positioned explosives, an operation that can take seasoned professionals weeks to plan.

So even the building owner admits that explosives were used to demolish at least one of the three WTC buildings!

And if planning to demolish WTC 7 had been carefully prepared for weeks, why not the other two?

and the damage that was done was MINOR in comparison to the building. Particularly when other buildings in the WTC complex had REAL INFERNOS and FAR MORE DAMAGE and STILL DIDN'T COLLAPSE.

Besides, it was "pulled" just as old Larry Silverstein said.

CBS News’ Dan Rather
also commented that the collapse of building 7, which
wasn’t hit by a plane, resembled a deliberate attempt
to demolish the structure using incendiary devices.
"For the third time
today, it’s reminiscent of those pictures we’ve all seen
too much on television before when a building was deliberately
destroyed by well placed dynamite to knock it down."

NBC’s Pat Dawson reported
the working hypothesis of the FDNY in the immediate aftermath
of the towers’ collapse.
"The chief of safety
of the Fire Department of New York City told me he received
word of a possibility of a secondary device — that is
another bomb going off. He tries to get his men out as
quickly as he could, but he said that there was another
explosion which took place and according to his theory,
he thinks that there were actually devices that were planted
in the building."

MSNBC news anchor Rick
Sanchez reported that police had found suspicious devices
in and around the WTC area and that the secondary explosions,
which were reported by numerous survivors, were thought
by police to be bombs.
"Police have found
what they believe to be a suspicious device and they fear
that it may lead to another explosion."
"I spoke with some
police officials moments ago, Chris, and they told me
they have reason to believe that one of the explosions
at the World Trade Center aside the ones caused by the
planes, may have been caused by a van that was parked
on the building that may have had an explosive device
in it."

During an exchange between
ABC’s Peter Jennings and reporter Don Dahler following
the collapse of the north tower, the first assumption
is again that controlled demolition must have been used
to take down the building.
"Yes Peter its Don Dahler down here. I’m four blocks
north of the World Trade Center. The second building that
was hit by the plane has just completely collapsed."
"The entire building
has just collapsed as if a demolition team set off….when
you see the old demolition of these old buildings. It
just folded in on itself and it is not there anymore."

Peter Jennings: "If
you wish to bring, if anyone has ever watched a building
being demolished on purpose knows, that you’re going to
do this you have to get at the, at the under infrastructure
of a building and bring it down."

Police chiefs, fire department
heads, veteran news anchors, eyewitnesses on the ground
- everyone’s first reaction was "controlled demolition"
because the events suggested nothing else.

 

[Lovelynice]

WTC 7 was in fact the STRONGEST of all the WTC complex buildings, and had within it a major emergency command bunker, including millions of dollars worth of additional reinforcement to the building.

 

[Pookie]

That's why you loony liars are losing!

RESULTS OF ONLINE POLLS ABOUT 9/11
<snip>

You idiots aren't even in the majority on THIS SITE
<snip>

and this is how the majority voted;
<snip>

First, the polls aren't valid statistical samples. This will not do.

Second, appeal to popularity is a logical fallacy.

Science, in general, doesn't use logical fallacies. Scam artists use logical fallacies. Stop it.

 

[Pookie]

WTC 7 was in fact the STRONGEST of all the WTC complex buildings, and had within it a major emergency command bunker, including millions of dollars worth of additional reinforcement to the building.

Argument from ignorance is still a logical fallacy. Repeating the same mistake over and over doesn't bode well for your scam.

 

[Cap’n AMatrixca]

I'm color-challenged, kept me out of avionics; gotta be able to tell the red and green wires apart...



This whole thing began with a Frenchman who claimed that it was a missile and not Babara Olsen slamming into the Pentagon and morphed into the Twin Tower Myth. The missile claim has been so debunked that the conspirators have had to abandon it. You don't see that thread being dumped.

I hope Ishmael is at least following this because I think he shares my fascination for the study of all religions.

 

[Lovelynice]

By the way, you didn't forget this did you;

I posted it before.

Indira Singh: The fire department... the fire department and they did use the word "we're going to have to bring it down."

Is she lying? Or can you consider a new concept, that the firemen mentioning that WTC 7 was possibly going to collapse ARE NOT contradicting all the evidence that WTC 7 was deliberately brought down, "pulled", in a controlled demolition. All of them are telling the truth except for Larry Silverstein's "retraction", but then he's been caught lying anyway since there were no teams in the building at the time so his excuses don't work.