Real 9-11 Research

[DarrinS]

so why did anyone want wtc7 to come down?

Because, as Americans, we wouldn't be outraged enough by terrorist attacks on the north tower, the south tower, and the Pentagon. But with WTC7 and that's the final straw.

[911]

so why did anyone want wtc7 to come down?

The C.I.A.'s undercover New York station was in the 47-story building at 7 World Trade Center, one of the smaller office towers destroyed in the aftermath of the collapse of the twin towers that morning. All of the agency's employees at the site were safely evacuated soon after the hijacked planes hit the twin towers, the officials said.





The recovery of secret do ents and other records from the New York station should follow well-rehearsed procedures laid out by the agency after the Iranian takeover of the United States Embassy in Tehran in 1979. The revolutionaries took over the embassy so rapidly that the C.I.A. station was not able to effectively destroy all of its do ents, and the Iranians were later able to piece together shredded agency reports. Since that disaster, the agency has emphasized rigorous training and drills among its employees on how to quickly and effectively destroy and dispose of important do ents in emergencies.

[ChumpDumper]

How could it be an undercover station if they were listed tenants of the building?

[911]

You can ask all kinds of questions, post all kinds of links, and you can make point after point, but there is nothing you can say or link me to that will explain why a second plane hit the WTC w/o a fighter jet in the area.
To me that stinks like a cover up and if you don't agree then your not after the truth you just want to spare with someone.

[ChumpDumper]

You can ask all kinds of questions, post all kinds of links, and you can make point after point, but there is nothing you can say or link me to that will explain why a second plane hit the WTC w/o a fighter jet in the area

There was a huge delay in alerting the military because communication between the military and civilian aviation was pretty clunky back then. They didn't know where to go, partially because the military uses a different positioning system. When they did go, the ones closest to New York were sent over the ocean because no one knew from where the threat was coming.

To me that stinks like a cover up and if you don't agree then your not after the truth you just want to spare with someone.

You've just proven you didn't look into answering your own questions.

Again.

You should really take a look at the links provided at the beginning of the thread. If you are really serious about finding answers, that is.

[Blake]

You can ask all kinds of questions, post all kinds of links, and you can make point after point, but there is nothing you can say or link me to that will explain why a second plane hit the WTC w/o a fighter jet in the area.
To me that stinks like a cover up and if you don't agree then your not after the truth you just want to spare with someone.

you can dodge all kinds of questions, posts all kinds of youtube videos and you can dismiss valid point after point, but there is nothing you can say or link that has or will ever explain why the bad guys wanted WTC 7 to come down.

What exactly does the CIA having an office there prove?

[RandomGuy]

You can ask all kinds of questions, post all kinds of links, and you can make point after point, but there is nothing you can say or link me to that will explain why a second plane hit the WTC w/o a fighter jet in the area.

How many planes were purposefully crashed into buildings by terrorists in the USA before 9-11?

[Nbadan]

How many planes were purposefully crashed into buildings by terrorists in the USA before 9-11?

It was an extra-ordinary day, that for sure, so lets not add to that day's uniqueness with wild stories about fires bringing down a steel structure....

[RandomGuy]

It was an extra-ordinary day, that for sure, so lets not add to that day's uniqueness with wild stories about fires and impact damage from 180 ton objects moving at 500 miles per hour bringing down a steel structure....

Fixed.

Unless of course you were talking about WTC7.

It was an extra-ordinary day, that for sure, so lets not add to that day's uniqueness with wild stories about fires that raged uncontrolled for hours and impact damage from other buildings falling on top of them bringing down a steel structure....

Just to cover the bases. Why does the "truther" crap only stand up if if half the truth left out, Dan?

[PandaSpur.]

How many planes were purposefully crashed into buildings by terrorists in the USA before 9-11?

They never got the chance.

[911]

How many planes were purposefully crashed into buildings by terrorists in the USA before 9-11?

How many Nuclear missiles have been shot at our nation? Does that mean you don't protect the country. What does one have to do with the other? I guess you should not wear seat belts if you have never crashed a car?

Oh wait I see your point! Now that 9/11 resulted in two huge towers coming down due to planes flying off course now we can start a safety measure?

Your going to have to raise the bar if you want me to continue with this one sided debate.

[ChumpDumper]

How many Nuclear missiles have been shot at our nation? Does that mean you don't protect the country. What does one have to do with the other? I guess you should not wear seat belts if you have never crashed a car?

Seat belts were not standard in cars until the 1960s.

Oh wait I see your point! Now that 9/11 resulted in two huge towers coming down due to planes flying off course now we can start a safety measure?

So now you know what the 9/11 Commission was for. Congratulations.

Your going to have to raise the bar if you want me to continue with this one sided debate.

You're going to have to say what you think really happened on 9/11 to actually have a side in any debate.

[RandomGuy]

They never got the chance.

There is a vast difference between intercepting drug smugglers, and dogging a full passenger airliner with weapons hot.

[RandomGuy]

They never got the chance.

In other words, the answer is:

Zero.

No passenger jets were ever hi-jacked and slammed into buildings in the USA before 9-11

Now I understand that not everybody is old enough to remember what the world was like before 9-11-01, but terrorism wasn't considered much of a problem by the general public before then.

A minor problem yes, but not anywhere near the priority it was after. People had been screaming for better airport security for decades, and the public just wasn't willing to put up with the hassle.

To think that it was unusual for the jets not to have been intercepted as if a post 9-11 mindset was pervasive, are kidding themselves as to how the military dealt with such things.

[The Power Hour.]

There is a vast difference between intercepting drug smugglers, and dogging a full passenger airliner with weapons hot.

Your are the spin master!

[RandomGuy]

Your are the spin master!

[Nbadan]

that raged uncontrolled for hours and impact damage from other buildings falling on top of them

...NIST ruled out structural failure due to damage in its preliminary report, do you know more than NIST does? and the manner of collapse is inconsistent with collapse due to fire...if the building did collapse due to fire its more likely to collapse in sections not completely at once....the manner of collapse is more consistent with a complete collapse of the inner support core.....similar to WTC1 and WTC2...

[Nbadan]

....explosions?

...

[Blake]

...NIST ruled out structural failure due to damage in its preliminary report, do you know more than NIST does?

the NIST has not changed it's stance that there were no sign of any explosives.

do you know more than NIST does?

[Nbadan]

...the NIST has not changed it's stance that there were no sign of any explosives.

...considering it took them the better part of 6 years to declare that fire brought down WTC7, I wouldn't trust NIST as a good source for the weather...

[ChumpDumper]

if the building did collapse due to fire its more likely to collapse in sections

That's great because it did collapse in sections.



I know that part of the collapse is always left out of twoofer videos, so you probably never saw it.

[ChumpDumper]

...considering it took them the better part of 6 years to declare that fire brought down WTC7, I wouldn't trust NIST as a good source for the weather...

And whom should we trust? Someone who lied about their taking six years to determine what happened to WTC7?

It was three years, they were busy with the report on the twin towers. You know, the ones where people actually died.

[Galileo]

Best 9/11 Movies

9/11: Press For Truth

by the Jersey Girls

Everybody's Gotta Learn Sometime

John Albanese

Loose Change 2nd Edition Recut

by Dylan Avery, Jason Bermas, and Korey Rowe

Loose Change Final Cut

by Dylan Avery, Jason Bermas, and Korey Rowe

Zeitgeist

[warning - contains controversial material]

http://www.barrettforcongress.us/lib...tm#9/11_Movies

[Nbadan]

...they were busy...

....lame....

...whatever...there needs to be a independent investigation by the best scientific minds in the world while there is still some physical evidence not lost or destroyed.....

[ChumpDumper]

....lame....

You're saying they weren't? Everyone who isn't an idiot already knew some combination of structural damage and fire brought down WTC7.

...whatever...there needs to be a independent investigation by the best scientific minds in the world while there is still some physical evidence not lost or destroyed.....

....lame....

There isn't even one alternative theory that even passes a smell test. You yourself are afraid to post whatever half-assed theory you might have since you know it will be ripped to shreds in a matter of minutes.

There will be no independent investigation by the best scientific minds because the best scientific minds know the issues have been answered to their satisfaction. All that's left are kooks and idiots -- you know, the kind of guys who write papers about the archaeological evidence of Jesus in the American continents.

And you.