Reply With Quote
Translation:
"The stupid from the WTC towers has been so thoroughly debunked that not even most dumb-ass conspiracy theorists believe it, so the movement will instead focus on something else to hide how weak the evidence is."
Has that demolition man confessed yet? Where is he?
Translation:
"The stupid from the WTC towers has been so thoroughly debunked that not even most dumb-ass conspiracy theorists believe it, so the movement will instead focus on something else to hide how weak the evidence is."
Good translation. What will they do when WTC-7 gets completely debunked?
a silly question...
How could WTC 7 be planned so quickly after a sneak attack?
That's not the translation.
The attack was not a sneak.
WTC 7 was lined with explosives before 9/11, and on the morning of 9/11 at 6:47 A.M., the alarm system was turned off in this high security building.
Secureacom, the WTC security company, was also the security company at Dulles airport where FL77 was highjacked.
Marvin Bush, George's brother, had been a corporate executive at Secureacom in fiscal year 2000, and Wirt Walker, George's cousin was the CEO of Secureacom.
WTC 7 is debunk proof.
OK, help me here;
If debris from WTC 1 didn't bring WTC 7 down, how could Tower 1 be controlled well enough to appear as such?
What if no debris travelled in the direction of WTC 7. Would they still have blown WTC 7?
Why would it be staged to bring WTC 7 down with WTC 1 if everyone wants to claim it was impossible for it to happen that way?
Why not fly into WTC 7 also? But wait... it was a more traditional structure. A jet wouldn't bring it down, right? The trussing above the power station had to be damaged. Why isn't the debris from WTC-1 the answer? The latest reports claim it to be.
Now you are really out on a limb to invole the security company when something as small as a box butter could be brought on a flight. Have you ever flown before 9/11? I used to regularly, traveling for contracted maintenance. They only cared about larger quan ies of metal like a gun. My belt buckel never set the things off. Neither would a box cutter.
What a joke bring Marvin up. His gig there was up in June 2000!
I'll tell you what's "debunk proof." That you're an imbecile.
Has the demolition man confessed yet?
Smoking gun testimony, demolition detonations reported by top brass in official statement
The rank of this witness is:
CAPTAIN KARIN DESHORE OF BATTALION 46
CAPTAIN KARIN DESHORE QUOTE :
“SOMEWHERE AROUND THE MIDDLE OF THE WORLD TRADE CENTER, THERE WAS THIS ORANGE AND RED FLASH COMING OUT.
“INITIALLY IT WAS JUST ONE FLASH. THEN THIS FLASH JUST KEPT POPPING ALL THE WAY AROUND THE BUILDING AND THAT BUILDING HAD STARTED TO EXPLODE. THE POPPING SOUND, AND WITH EACH POPPING SOUND IT WAS INITIALLY AN ORANGE AND THEN RED FLASH CAME OUT OF THE BUILDING AND THEN IT WOULD JUST GO ALL AROUND THE BUILDING ON BOTH SIDES AS FAR AS I COULD SEE.
“THESE POPPING SOUNDS AND THE EXPLOSIONS WERE GETTING BIGGER, GOING BOTH UP AND DOWN AND THEN ALL AROUND THE BUILDING. I WENT INSIDE AND TOLD EVERYBODY THAT THE OTHER BUILDING OR THERE WAS AN EXPLOSION OCCURRING UP THERE AND SAID THINK WE HAVE ANOTHER MAJOR EXPLOSION. I DONT KNOW IF WE ARE ALL GOING TO BE SAFE HERE.”
The second building was being demolished.
http://rinf.com/alt-news/911-truth/d...tatement/1621/
sounds like a description of a controlled demolition to me
Not so fast; I think it's time to see a transformer explosion:
http://www.stupidcollege.com/items/Electric-Transformer-Explosion
All these buildings had transformers and transformer vaults.
I'll second that motion.
If it's not 'that important' why has the WH done everything it can to prevent Sibel Edmonds from talking?
On August 15, 2002, Burnett v. Al Baraka Investment & Dev. Corp., was filed by families of 600 victims of the 9/11 attacks against Saudi banks, charity organizations, and companies. Edmonds was to file a deposition in this case regarding her claim that FBI had foreknowledge of al-Qaeda's attacks against the World Trade Center. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sibel_Edmonds While she was employed as a contract linguist for the FBI, she was given top-secret security clearance and hired to retranslate material that was collected prior to 9/11 to determine if anything was missed in the translations relating to the plot. She concluded that do ents clearly showed that the 9/11 hijackers were in the country and plotting to use airplanes as missiles to carry out an attack in a major city. She said do ents also included information relating to terrorist financial activities. http://inn.globalfreepress.com/modules/news/article.php... In response, the FBI offered her a substantial raise and a full-time job to encourage her not to go public that she had been asked by the Department of Justice to adjust translations of terrorist subject intercepts that had been received before September 11, 2001 by the FBI and CIA. http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/HL0504/S00251.htm The tapes she translated, often connected to terrorism, money laundering or other criminal activity, provide evidence that should have made apparent that an al-Qaeda plot was in the works. Edmonds is offended by the Bush White House claim that it lacked foreknowledge of the kind of attacks made by al-Qaeda on 9/11. "Especially after reading National Security Advisor Condoleezza Rice where she said, we had no specific information whatsoever of domestic threat or that they might use airplanes. That's an outrageous lie. And do ents can prove it's a lie." She testified before 9/11 commission staffers in February 2004 for more than three hours, providing detailed information about FBI investigations, do ents and dates. http://dir.salon.com/story/news/feature/2004/03/26/tran... Unfortunately, the 9/11 Commission reduced her contributions in the 9/11 Commission Report to a single footnote.
Amazingly, that footnote is more information than the Department of Justice has been willing to allow Edmonds to disclose to the American public. On October 18, 2002, Attorney General John Ashcroft, in response to her lawsuit filed July 22, 2002, against the Department of Justice, the FBI, and several high-level officials, alleging that she was wrongfully terminated from the FBI in retaliation for reporting criminal activities committed by government officials and employees, invoked the State Secrets Privilege in order to prevent disclosure of the nature of Edmonds' work on the grounds that it would endanger national security, and asked that the suit be dismissed. Then on December 11, 2003, in response to her deposition in the Burnett v. Al Baraka 9/11 case, Ashcroft again invoking the State Secrets Privilege, filed a motion calling for Edmonds' deposition to be suppressed and for the entire case to be dismissed. The judge, seeking more information, ordered the government to produce any unclassified material relating to the case. In response, Ashcroft submitted further statements to justify the use of the State Secrets Privilege, and on May 13, 2004, took the unprecedented step of retroactively classifying as Top Secret all of the material and statements that had been provided to the Senate Judiciary Committee in 2002 relating to Edmonds' own lawsuit, as well as the letters that had been sent by the Senators and republished by a watchdog group, Project On Government Oversight (POGO). Ashcroft’s reclassification was successful; Edmonds was barred from testifying in the 9/11 class action suit, and on July 6, 2004, her own suit was dismissed on state secrets grounds. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sibel_Edmonds The judge who dismissed her suit, Reggie Walton, is also the judge in the trial of Scooter Libby. To this date, the Department of Justice gag order, despite all appeal attempts by Edmonds’ lawyers, has remained in effect. If it were to be rescinded, Edmonds told Kyle Hence, cofounder of 9-11 Citizens Watch, “it could lead to charges of treason being leveled against officials at top levels of the U.S. government”. Hence added, “If that is the case, then all those who have been involved in keeping this information from getting to the public are complicit in this treason”. http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php? le=Sibel_Edmond...
While she has been gagged from revealing specifics of the crimes she discovered, Edmonds has gone on record describing the government’s reaction to 9/11 as a cover-up. "Nobody is looking at the Department of Defense aspect of the whole 911 cover-up. The FBI is citing two reasons for my gag order: to protect ‘sensitive’ diplomatic relations and to protect foreign U.S. business relationships," she said. "I will say this: The FBI is only a mouthpiece for the State Department. The State Department is the main reason for the cover-up. It has to do with foreign business relationships and who they are...Pakistan, Turkey...espionage in the State Department...preventing an investigation." She believes that "once this issue gets to be...investigated, you will be seeing certain (American) people that we know from this country standing trial; and they will be prosecuted criminally… There is direct evidence involving no more than ten American names that I recognized… some are heads of government agencies or politicians--but I don’t want to go any further than that," revealing the content of the FBI intercepts she heard indicates that recognizable, very high-profile American citizens are linked to the 9/11 attacks. When asked in 2002 by CBS 60 Minutes co-host Ed Bradley, "did she seem credible to you? Did her story seem credible?" Senator Charles Grassley (R-IA) said "Absolutely, she’s credible. And the reason I feel she’s very credible is because people within the FBI have corroborated a lot of her story." http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/HL0504/S00251.htm Her credibility received further confirmation when on January 14, 2004, the Justice Department's Office unclassified summary of the Justice Department's Inspector General's report on Edmonds found that many of her claims “were supported, that the FBI did not take them seriously enough, and that her allegations were, in fact, the most significant factor in the FBI's decision to terminate her services”. http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php? le=Sibel_Edmond...
She can talk -- why isn't she talking?If it's not 'that important' why has the WH done everything it can to prevent Sibel Edmonds from talking?
Latest poll score shows..........
Bush lovers 1
Nbadan 99
you do the math!
* Controlled demolitions are controlled, you can start the charges off in whatever order you like. In the case of WTC 1 & 2, they started the charges near, but not exactly, where the planes hit.
* Yes they had to take WTC 7 down because it was loaded with explosives prior to 9/11. The fires created a smokescreen.
* The media strategy with WTC 7 was to have it totally ignored. After 9/11, it was never shown on TV for several years and most people forgot about it. If not for the Internet, it would still be forgotten.
* The people who hijacked the planes took over the pits with guns, not boxcutters. That is what the passengers and FAA reported, but this was buried in the news.
* Marvin Bush did indeed leave the security company officially in June 2000, but he still had connections and influence there. George Bush's cousin Wirt Walker was still an executive of the company on 9/11. The point here is that Secureacom was a politcally connected firm.
If you read the NIST reports on WTC 7, it shows the location of debris damage and possible debris damage. The SW corner was damaged, and the center of the south face may have been damaged.
A good article which disputes the damage in the center is here:
Photographic Analysis of Damage to WTC7 and Critical Errors in NIST's Estimations
http://www.studyof911.com/articles/winstonwtc701/
The NIST report also shows the area where the collapse initiated, the core columns near the eastern edge of the core below the east penthouse.
The debris damage has nothing to do with collapse, and NIST is attempting to come up with a fire theory instead.
I'm not going to read a report from a guy who won't put his own name on it. And Winston Smith is a poor choice -- I guess he never read the whole book.
The fact remains that there is NO photographic evidence showing major debris damage in the middle of the south face of WTC 7.
Nor does hypothetical debris damage there explain why the collapse looks just like a controlled demolition.
Hasn't been disproved either, nor is it necessary to explain the collapse.The fact remains that there is NO photographic evidence showing major debris damage in the middle of the south face of WTC 7.It looks that way because of the probable point of structural failure.Nor does hypothetical debris damage there explain why the collapse looks just like a controlled demolition.
It's not nescessary to explain the collapse if you want to cover up mass murder.
WTC 7 looks like a controlled demolition because it is a controlled demolition. Steel buildings that fall in controlled demolitions from office fires do not exist any more than Bigfoot or the Tooth Fairy exist.
Which is why they are still working on finding the exact cause.It's not nescessary to explain the collapse if you want to cover up mass murder.
Nah. There's no reason to control it. You never came up with a good explanation of that.WTC 7 looks like a controlled demolition because it is a controlled demolition.
Exactly. Go back and read that sentence.Steel buildings that fall in controlled demolitions from office fires do not exist any more than Bigfoot or the Tooth Fairy exist.
Precisely, now go back and read that sentence.
How long do you think it will take before NIST realizes that WTC 7 didn't fall from an office fire?
No, you should. It's hilarious.Precisely, now go back and read that sentence.
It will be a more specific version of their current hypothesis:How long do you think it will take before NIST realizes that WTC 7 didn't fall from an office fire?
"An initial local failure occurred at the lower floors (below floor 13) of the building due to fire and/or debris-induced structural damage of a critical column (the initiating event) which supported a large-span floor bay with an area of about 2,000 square feet;
Vertical progression of the initial local failure occurred up to the east penthouse, and as the large floor bays became unable to redistribute the loads, it brought down the interior structure below the east penthouse; and
Triggered by damage due to the vertical failure, horizontal progression of the failure across the lower floors (in the region of floors 5 and 7 that were much thicker and more heavily reinforced than the rest of the floors) resulted in a disproportionate collapse of the entire structure."
And you'll claim the report was fixed and that everyone at the NIST is in on the conspiracy too.
It's great to see that Dan and mookie have finally come forward with a theory that makes sense.
Thanks dudes!
Edit: the props is also directed towards mouse
Last edited by smeagol; 11-05-2007 at 01:50 PM.
Bush could go to Chumps house stick an Ice pick in his skull and he would still find a way to blame it on debris from the WTC
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
