What REALLY happened on 9/11, the truth of 9/11... carry an open mind. Options

[Silver]

omfg bend over and grab your shoulders and pull your head from your ass. according to the FEMA report Ch5 on WTC 7 it all makes sense. look at how the building was built. all screwed up because of how the building was built around the other building....sigh....

[Too Exclusive]

WTF DO YOU MEAN!!!??? ACCORDING TO THE FEMA REPORT (fema's a government agency btw so garunteed that 1/2 the stuff at least in that report is bullshit :/) THEY DONT KNOW WHAT CAUSED BUILDING 7 TO COLLAPSE AND THEY ASSUME IT'S THE FIRES! NOW, AGAIN, LARRY SILVERSTEIN (LEASEHOLDER OF THE WORLD TRADE CENTER):

http://infowars.com/Video/911/wtc7_pbs.WMV

NOW AGAIN, LUIS MENDES(HEAD OF DEPARTMENT OF DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION):

http://www.prisonplanet.com/pullit2.mp3

NOTE: this is only the MP3 but i did see the actual clip with video saying luis mendes. i would get a screenshot for you, but i can't because it's really weird when i try to screenshot divX videos :/ doesn't work :/
and silver, after THIS CLEAR CUT PROOF that building 7 was taken down with explosives, if you don't believe it yourself, YOU are the one who need to take ur thick-head out of ur ass...
AGAIN, THESE CLIPS ARE FROM THE SAME PBS DOCUMENTARY... THESE PEOPLE ARE NOT CONSPIRACY THEORISTS.

This post has been edited by Too Exclusive: 03/05/05 5:11pm

[Silver]

ok...open ur eyes...
1.) how long does it take to prep a building for demo?

2.)does it not take extensive work and drilling to place charges into supports to demo a building?

3.)why would the gov. take building 7, what purpose would it serve?

4.)how many people died in building 7?

5.)why would the gov. demo a building when all they had to do was have the FEMA building inspector slate the building for emergency demolition? it can be done in hours. w/o charges being placed. anf if the building was taken down on purpose they never fwould have used charges because
A.)ruptured mains and gas lines in the area.
B.)radio operations can set off charges in the area.
C.)the implosion of building 7 would make the ground settle where the towers came down, killing survivors and makeing rescue attempts harder.

6.)why take a building down so much later? why not make it fall as the twin towers fell as to not raise concern from nut cases like the forums u belong to.
waiting for a reply....

This post has been edited by Silver: 03/05/05 5:21pm

[Too Exclusive]

YOU HEARD LARRY SILVERSTINE SAY PULL IT!! YOU HEARD LUIS MENDES SAY PULL IT, BOTH IN TERMS OF TAKING A BUILDING DOWN!! I AM NOT A NUT CASE FOR SIMPLY TELLING YOU WHAT THE FUCK IS IN A PBS DOCUMENTARY!! SO IM GUESSING YOU'RE SAYING PBS ARE CONSPIRACY NUTS TOO!!??

UGGHH THE WHOLE POINT IS THAT BUILDINGS TAKE WEEKS TO PREP FOR DEMO!!! DUHH!! IT'S CALLED PRIOR FUCKING KNOWLEDGE AND INVOLVEMENT!!

sorry for yelling.

now i believe if you were to do research you'd see that a fortified bunker on the 20-24th floors (i believe) was made fortified a few weeks earlier (what purpose does that serve i have no clue). the CIA and FBI also had offices in building 7 along with other defence agencies(i dont have the exact stuff on the top of my head). now as for ur radio and gas mains, i dont know anything about that. and as for ur rescue thing, probably wouldnt be too much of a problem because dont forget building 7 wasn't very close to the towers... unlike many taller buildings that actually had pieces fall on them but somehow only had minor damage. those buildings werent leased by larry silverstine. ONLY buildings leased by larry silverstein collapsed on 9/11... THAT'S A FACT. IT'S ALSO A FACT THAT LARRY SILVERSTEIN WAS ONLY THE LEASEHOLDER TO BUILDING 7 UNTIL A FEW WEEKS B4 9/11 WHEN HE GOT A 200 MILLION DOLLAR LEASE WITH INSURANCE ON THE WHOLE WTC COMPLEX... IT'S ALSO A FACT THAT HE GOT 3.5 BILLION BACK IN INSURANCE.
you know what they say when it comes to politics... follow the money.
sorry for the caps, but ur thick-headedness pisses me off. you guys wouldn't believe it was an inside job if the president admitted it :/

This post has been edited by Too Exclusive: 03/05/05 5:33pm

[Silver]

no matter how you look at it.....building 7 was on fire, evatuated, secured and no operations were happening there, all rescue ops were happening a few hunder feet away. they had no reason to detonate which would draw attention to the fact they wanted to ditch the building. even for money, there would be an investigation into the collapse...now nut case....i have a street level mentality. you dont do dirt and try to let everyone know. no matter how you look at it this would draw attention. If they would have said...we have to tear the building down its too vlose to the scene its imparing the rescue...poof the building would have been torn down and no one would have knowen....it would be common to do that......they (gov) are not that stupid.
i dont have to yell....i can see the truth...you dont see the truth, thats why you are yelling

p.s. nut case

This post has been edited by Silver: 03/05/05 6:10pm

[Too Exclusive]

your head must be a foot thick. ALL I NEED IS THE MOTIVE AND THE FUCKING ADMITTANCE. PERIOD. IT WAS ADMITTED FACE IT! THE BUILDING WAS TAKEN DOWN BY CD's THERE IS NO DENYING THAT IT WAS ADMITTED BY LARRY SILVERSTINE! but obviously u think pull it still means that bs u posted a while ago even when it was used AGAIN in terms of taking down building 6... or did u not read that?

[Silver]

nutty write the guy and ask him for your self....<pulling out stamper> L

[Too Exclusive]

alright question, what DOES pull it mean if it doesn't mean take the building down? dont forget it was used by silverstine in reference to building 7 collapsing then it was used by the department of construction and design guy in reference to building 6 being demolished... what more could you want? does that not constitute enough? obviously it cant mean pull power or w/e cause there was no power in the building in mid december... dont forget "o they're getting ready to pull building 6" then him talking about how they needed to be careful with building 6 not to damage the slurry wall... then the engineer talking about the excitement of bringing down the last structure in the trade center complex... and you're STILL denying it? damn...

[Silver]

to pull operations away from building 7. they were no longer concerned with building 7 sense it was secured. why have someone watch and try and save the building. and yes there were alot of gov. tenents in that building. but.....still why use all that shit to do something they had the right to do anyways. and you are wrong according to the debris fields from the towers bld. 7 had been in the center of the debris field. fema's study of wtc bld.7 ch.5 has pic's and such of the damage and the huge amounts of smoke and large fires by the main supports at the area that the break in the building when it fell. read it it makes sense.

[realdeal]

What really happened on 9/11?

Some Arab scumbags hi-jacked a plane, brutally killed the pilots and some passengers, then flew the planes into the twin towers, the Pentagon and a field in Pennsylvania killing 3,500+ innocent people.


That's fucking what happened that day.

[Too Exclusive]

jesus christ i feel like im talkin to a brick wall. first of all only 2,800-3,000 died... whoever's telling u 3,500+ died is lying. 2nd of all... did the whole building 6 thing blow over your head? the engineer said "they're getting ready to pull BUILDING 6" when the whole segment was talking about demolishing the remaining structure's... then the guy luis mendes starting talking about how they had to bring down building 6 so it wouldn't damage the slurry wall... listen to the clip again:

http://www.prisonplanet.com/pullit2.mp3

then what isn't in that clip is an engineer saying this:
There's a certain excitement in the air about bringing the last structure down at the World Trade Center. then the documentary shows the building [6] being taken down and the engineers cheering.

they're talking about DEMOLISHING the remaining structures on the WTC... specifically building 6 there... DID THAT BLOW OVER YOUR HEAD!? we're not talking about building 7 right now... this is building 6... there are no operations to pull away from building 6!! the only thing they're PULLING is the building itself... so what does it mean there? "they're getting ready to pull building 6" or did that blow over your thick head too?

This post has been edited by Too Exclusive: 03/06/05 1:52am

[realdeal]

only 2,800-3,000 died... whoever's telling u 3,500+ died is lying.

Only? You're a moron.

[Too Exclusive]

alright so that only came out wrong... yes 3000 ppl is a lot... but whoevers telling u 3,500 is wildly inflating it... the highest figure i've ever heard (and this was in the papers shortly after 9/11) was 3,016... but that's not the argument.... someone still has to answer my question about what 'pull it' has to do with building 6...

[Silver]

one was to many. why the hell are you talking about building 6? even if they said we BLEW the building up....they wouldnt be stupid enough to say it on tv....they would be in jail. and we are thick skulled? you want controversy, why not talk about the drug war, racism in american culture, the increase in distance from lower class to middle class then to rich? there is controversy in america just your barking up the wrong tree.....the nut tree.....no one blew up shit, your paranoid. (and this comming from a paranoid person.)

This post has been edited by Silver: 03/06/05 1:34pm

[Too Exclusive]

LARRY SILVERSTEIN (in reference to building 7):
"[the firefighters] said the best thing to do would be to pull it, they made that decision to pull then we watched the building collapse"

ENGINEER IN REFERENCE TO DEMOLISHING BUILDING 6:
*PHONE RINGING* "O they're getting ready to pull building 6"

what does pull mean in reference to building 7? what does it mean in reference to building 6? it sure doesn't mean 2 different things.