Screw Loose Change!
http://video.google.co.uk/videoplay?docid=-3214024953129565561&q=screw+loose+change
Best ****ing video on the internet.
Screw Loose Change!
http://video.google.co.uk/videoplay?docid=-3214024953129565561&q=screw+loose+change
Best ****ing video on the internet.
seen it and it is a load of crap.
can you tell me how building 7 collapsed xyz?
*waits for pathetic answer*
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zsn4JA450iA&mode=related&search
US Army General Says Flt 77 Did Not Hit Pentagon
um.......the guy you linked to is like.......80 years old, wasn't there .....has no current information about anything to do with military.......he's some old retired guy talking about working during the cold war. what is the relevance? might aswell of posted a video of you saying the same thing Deano......you have as much information as he does. you both have internet access.
Originally posted by DeanoDid you visit the links in the video?
seen it and it is a load of crap.can you tell me how building 7 collapsed xyz?
*waits for pathetic answer*
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zsn4JA450iA&mode=related&search
US Army General Says Flt 77 Did Not Hit Pentagon
Originally posted by Deano
seen it and it is a load of crap.can you tell me how building 7 collapsed xyz?
*waits for pathetic answer*
17. Claim: WTC 7, a 47 story office building 300 feet away from the North Tower, suddenly collapsed for no reason.
Truth: There was nothing sudden about it. The building was hit by falling debris from one of the towers, was missing much of one corner, had a huge hole in the middle and was on fire for hours. The building had started leaning and making creaking noises so fire department officials ordered the evacuation of the area over an hour earlier. Source and here
Source 1: http://www.911myths.com/html/wtc7_damage.html
Source 2: http://screwloosechange.blogspot.com/2006/06/wtc-7.html
Complete with pictures of the damaged WTC 7 prior to it collapsing.
*wonders how that is a pathetic answer*
complete bullshit. it wasnt that damaged. you had witnesses at the time telling people to getback because it is going to fall. larry silverstien even admitted they pulled the building
but maybe im wrong. even bin laden admitted on tape he did it
http://screwloosechange.blogspot.com/2006/05/top-lies-and-deceptions-in-loose_17.html
35. Claim: The bin Laden confession tape must be fake because bin Laden is lefthanded, and the man in the tape uses his right hand to write.
Truth: Aside from the fact that many left handers are ambidextrous, in Muslim culture the left hand is considered “unclean”. Osama, being a strict Muslim would most likely not prefer to use his left hand.
36. Claim: The bin Laden confession tape must be fake because bin Laden is wearing a gold ring, which is forbidden by Islamic law.
Truth: Islamic law only forbids men from wearing gold. There is no way of telling what metal the ring is made out of, and in fact he is seen wearing the same ring in other tapes.
Your 'expert' is wrong.
larry silverstien even admitted they pulled the building
are you blind kinnery? look at the two photos. they look nothing alike. look at the nose for the gods sake LOL
Grow up.
its on the net somewhere. look for it
Originally posted by DeanoDoes pulling the building mean demolition? The video states I posted clearly states it doesn't.
complete bullshit. it wasnt that damaged. you had witnesses at the time telling people to getback because it is going to fall. larry silverstien even admitted they pulled the buildingbut maybe im wrong. even bin laden admitted on tape he did it
WATCH THE ****ING VIDEO.
Originally posted by Kinneary
Because people never look different over time or from different angles! ROFLMGDAOIGHALKG!!!11!!11Grow up.
lame comeback. what kind of angle made his nose that big lol
Wow, you don't even have evidence to back up your own argument? That's a new low, Deano.
i know he said it because he was on tv saying it 😆
find it.
Originally posted by lord xyz
Does pulling the building mean demolition? The video states I posted clearly states it doesn't.WATCH THE ****ING VIDEO.
''we made the decision to pull the building''
what else can that mean?
the video is shit. pull the building CAN mean to demolish it. and seeing as there was little damage to the building then its HIGhLY PROBABLE that it was bought down by controlled demolition
Originally posted by DeanoThis is on the video, if you watched it, you'd know that.
lame comeback. what kind of angle made his nose that big loli know he said it because he was on tv saying it 😆
find it.
''we made the decision to pull the building''
what else can that mean?
the video is shit. pull the building CAN mean to demolish it. and seeing as there was little damage to the building then its HIGhLY PROBABLE that it was bought down by controlled demolition
It is stupid to assume Larry would destroy his own building.
Larry got 4.6 billion dollars insurance money. The rebuildings cost 6.3 billion dollars. Someone had to pay that 1.7 billion. Larry also had to pay $120M per month on the lease just so he had the right to rebuild it.
The Firefighters knew it was going to collapse.
Firefighter Butch Brandies heard noises and told everyone to not go in there. According to Deputy Chief Peter Hayden, there is a buldge in the south west corner of the building between the 10th and 13th floors. Captain Chris Boyle says "There was a hole 20 stories tall in the soth side of the building, with fire on several floors." Dan Nigro says "There was heavy fire on many floors, I ordered the evacuation and got people far away so we wouldn't lose any more people." Chief Cruthers says "Early on, there was concern that WTC7 had both been impacted by the collapsing tower and had several fires in it and there was a concern that it might collapse."
Physical Evidence
Demolitions have lots of visible evidence to suggest it is so, and any demolitions expert will confirm that. In order of first happening to last:
[list][*]Loud simultanious bangs -- Building 7 had none
[*]Flashing lights coming from the bottom to the top -- Building 7 had none
[*]Squibs before the collapse -- Building 7 had none
[*]Another set of bangs and flashing lights -- Building 7 had none
[*]Bottom explodes and collapse -- Building 7's did not
[*]Flashes whilst the building falls and gaps between floors -- Building 7 had none
[*]Explosives left in the debris -- Building 7 had none[/list]
Just because it fell at a downwards motion DOESN'T mean it was a controlled demolition. And even so, that DOESN'T prove it was an inside job, maybe the terrorists demolished the buildings.
Not a single demolition firm agrees the WTC buildings were demolished.
And now to answer your question about what pulling the building means.
First, why would the firefighters be a part of this scandel and how would they have the authority to do this? Second, "Pull it" doesn't mean demolish the building. In my opinion, "Pull it" is like "Give up" or "evacuate". Third, Brent Blanchard says he has never heard the term "Pull it" as a demoliton term, and neither has any blast term he's spoken with. [He as in him and his colleagues.] The term is to describe the specific activity of attaching long cables to a pre-weakened building and maneuvering heavy equipment to "pull" the frame of the structure over onto it's side for further dismantlement.
Silverstein was refering to the firefighters having to be pulled.
Screw Loose Change video 17:50 -- 24:00
References and more information are in the video.
Originally posted by Deano
complete bullshit. it wasnt that damaged. you had witnesses at the time telling people to getback because it is going to fall. larry silverstien even admitted they pulled the buildingbut maybe im wrong. even bin laden admitted on tape he did it
Deano obviosly knows best. He was there; no amount of picture evidence could unravel his bulletproof theory.
Originally posted by Spartan005Well, he doesn't know that when someone smiles, like Osama in the video is doing, your nose in affect, widens. Try it, place your finger tips on the tip of your nose then smile as big as you can, feel your nostrils stretch.
Deano obviosly knows best. He was there; no amount of picture evidence could unravel his bulletproof theory.
You could argue that Osama in the other picture is smiling, but is it as big, as expressive, enough to narrow his eyes? No. The other pictures smile is no more than a grin. Whereas Osama's smilie in the first photo is a big smile.
larry silverstein had massive insurance policy put out on the buildings only a few months earlier!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! thats why he woudnt care if his buildings were destroyed. duh
Well, he doesn't know that when someone smiles, like Osama in the video is doing, your nose in affect, widens.
i seriously pissed myself laughing at that comment. are you being serious? oh my good lord. i hope my nose doesnt get that big when i smile 😆
Originally posted by Deano
i seriously pissed myself laughing at that comment. are you being serious? oh my good lord. i hope my nose doesnt get that big when i smile 😆
Considering the imaging effects of multiple angles, different lighting, and the very poor quality of the video I'd say that was a rather poor argument of yours.
Originally posted by lord xyz
This is on the video, if you watched it, you'd know that.It is stupid to assume Larry would destroy his own building.
Larry got 4.6 billion dollars insurance money. The rebuildings cost 6.3 billion dollars. Someone had to pay that 1.7 billion. Larry also had to pay $120M per month on the lease just so he had the right to rebuild it.
The Firefighters knew it was going to collapse.
Firefighter Butch Brandies heard noises and told everyone to not go in there. According to Deputy Chief Peter Hayden, there is a buldge in the south west corner of the building between the 10th and 13th floors. Captain Chris Boyle says "There was a hole 20 stories tall in the soth side of the building, with fire on several floors." Dan Nigro says "There was heavy fire on many floors, I ordered the evacuation and got people far away so we wouldn't lose any more people." Chief Cruthers says "Early on, there was concern that WTC7 had both been impacted by the collapsing tower and had several fires in it and there was a concern that it might collapse."
Physical Evidence
Demolitions have lots of visible evidence to suggest it is so, and any demolitions expert will confirm that. In order of first happening to last:
[list][*]Loud simultanious bangs -- Building 7 had none
[*]Flashing lights coming from the bottom to the top -- Building 7 had none
[*]Squibs before the collapse -- Building 7 had none
[*]Another set of bangs and flashing lights -- Building 7 had none
[*]Bottom explodes and collapse -- Building 7's did not
[*]Flashes whilst the building falls and gaps between floors -- Building 7 had none
[*]Explosives left in the debris -- Building 7 had none[/list]Just because it fell at a downwards motion DOESN'T mean it was a controlled demolition. And even so, that DOESN'T prove it was an inside job, maybe the terrorists demolished the buildings.
Not a single demolition firm agrees the WTC buildings were demolished.
And now to answer your question about what pulling the building means.
First, why would the firefighters be a part of this scandel and how would they have the authority to do this? Second, "Pull it" doesn't mean demolish the building. In my opinion, "Pull it" is like "Give up" or "evacuate". Third, Brent Blanchard says he has never heard the term "Pull it" as a demoliton term, and neither has any blast term he's spoken with. [He as in him and his colleagues.] The term is to describe the specific activity of attaching long cables to a pre-weakened building and maneuvering heavy equipment to "pull" the frame of the structure over onto it's side for further dismantlement.
Silverstein was refering to the firefighters having to be pulled.Screw Loose Change video 17:50 -- 24:00
References and more information are in the video.
Why even post this? This rebuttal is far too intelligent and logical to warrant a reply by Deano; he will simply ignore it, claim it is "bullshit," and call you ignorant.