Originally posted by chithappens
1) We are talking about people who own the people being responsible for what happened. WTF would be so hard in that case?2) See #1
3) I want you to cite a place that states no one got any money from that and that they DO PLAN TO REBUILD THOSE BUILDINGS.
They already rebuilt WTC 7:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/05/23/AR2006052301328.html
And, they are working on the the freedom tower to replace WTC 1 & 2
Also, the towers were a liability as well. They costtly and a asbesto's bomb shell. The only reason why they weren't legally demolished, is because it's illegal to do so. Furthermore,the towers required some $200 million in renovations and improvements. most of which related to removal and replacement of building materials declared to be health hazards in the years since the towers were built.
very true.there was also this one fellow worker of Giuliani's who went to the building shortly before it collapsed and he was in his office there talking to someone on a radio telling him the mayor wasnt there and nobody was in the office and he said that the fellow co worker of Giuliani's then said on the radio-He's not there? get out of there,they are going to pull the building.!!!!! and the man bailed out of a window a few floors up saying he heard explosions going off so he knew he didnt have much time to get out and he just barely avoided having the building topple on him by getting to nearby cover.
but the thing that shoots down the pathetic attempts by people to try and convince them bombs were not planted in the buildings is again,to say the south towers antenna would just magically come back and cave into the roof like it did REVERSING its direction where the videos show it is clearly getting ready to topple sideways and TIP over-which is what the top half of the towers would have done in just a mere collapse,is you got to ignore the laws of science that scientists have gone by for thousands of years and of course,as we know,in just a mere collapse of a building due to fire,its going to gradually come apart and take hours NOT freefall the same way those buildings did DOWNWARDS.not to mention that your not going to have puffs of dust shooting upwards like the towers did and the concrete disintegrates into powder.thats just being a plain moron being that bullcrap.then you have molten metal under bld 7 as well.and as i said before,you have towers 6 and 8 damaged far more severely with RAGING fires where bld 7 had just small manageable fires,yet those buildings did not collapse.probably because they didnt need to be imploded to get rid of all the CIA secrets ect that silverstein had in his building.
To believe THAT,thats the same logic as saying if you jump out of an airplane,you can reverse your direction and get back into the airplane. 😆 same thing,no difference,in both cases,your defying the laws of science that scientists have gone by for thousands of years. 🙄 😆 😆
Unless you are an experienced demolition engineer then you don't have the right to say how it should have fallen. Hell no one has a clue what the hell would happen to buildings that big that had just been, you know hit by a 747 passenger jet moving at considerable speed. Watching the video that day I cant understand the whole zomgz it didn't fall right, it simply fell down on its self which makes more sense than it falling over which imo would be the case if it was hit lower down by the aircraft. Mr.Parker you made no point and your post was filled with crap, written by some one who has no idea what he is talking about but likes to think he does because he read a book omg.
Oh and mr.parker your posts are pathetic and filled with non sensical rantings of some one who just does not seem to have the slightest clue yet likes to believe he knows it all. You're English skills are that of a 12 year old and my eyes bleed every time I read one of your posts, I'm adding you to ignore because it just frustrates me every time I read one of you're rants.
Originally posted by Sandai KitetsuLink? Reference? Quote? Something I can google? Anything that shows this isn't something you made up?
Also, The CIA, The Department of defense, and the secret service were all tenants of the Solomon building. Furthermore, Mayor Rudolf Giuliani had a command center specially built within WTC 7.
Originally posted by Magee
Unless you are an experienced demolition engineer then you don't have the right to say how it should have fallen. Hell no one has a clue what the hell would happen to buildings that big that had just been, you know hit by a 747 passenger jet moving at considerable speed. Watching the video that day I cant understand the whole zomgz it didn't fall right, it simply fell down on its self which makes more sense than it falling over which imo would be the case if it was hit lower down by the aircraft. Mr.Parker you made no point and your post was filled with crap, written by some one who has no idea what he is talking about but likes to think he does because he read a book omg.Oh and mr.parker your posts are pathetic and filled with non sensical rantings of some one who just does not seem to have the slightest clue yet likes to believe he knows it all. You're English skills are that of a 12 year old and my eyes bleed every time I read one of your posts, I'm adding you to ignore because it just frustrates me every time I read one of you're rants.
sigh.
Originally posted by Sandai KitetsuI'm glad you see the benefits of my side. In a world of lies, you can't trust ANYONE! That includes your greatest source.
It's good to be a skeptical conspiracy theorist, since there is alot of crap coming from the movement itself. Especially from people like Professor Steven Jones.
Originally posted by Mr Parker
whats your problem with steven jones ashtar?
He's forged pictures and made ridiculous arguments. I'll make a thread soon, about the guy.
Originally posted by lord xyz
I'm glad you see the benefits of my side. In a world of lies, you can't trust ANYONE! That includes your greatest source.
Word, I agree with that.
Originally posted by lord xyz
*sigh*1. How can they plant bombs in the buildings? It takes weeks to prepare, costs a lot, needs many people in at once etc.
2. How can they be undetected? Bare in mind that a bunch of demolition experts entering a building is VERY suspicious, and is something that would get reported. Not only that, but bombs are not hard to find, neither is a guy placing a bomb in a building.
3. Why demolish Building 7 in the first place? They didn't get any money off it. Rebuilding the building cost the insurance and way more. What a huge, unlikely **** up.
4. It can still be a conspiracy without a controlled demolition. You assholes don't realise that you have to be skeptical of conspiracy theorists and that they don't have to fake everything to be a conspiracy. JFK for example was said to be a conspiracy because of a second rifle-man, not all the lies told.
5. Someone saying "It sounds like this" or it "looks like whatever" DOES NOT PROVE ANYTHING! It's important for a "truth seeker" to know that. Screw Loose Change made that point, which proves you didn't watch that video. What are you afraid of?
6. The fact that the only evidence is people saying they sound like bombs is as stupid as saying Flight 77 looked like a missle. And we all know what happened there don't we?
Counter these 6 points respectively before calling me stupid.
For the purpose of debate, I'll try and counter your arguements...
1. Controlled demolition can take as short as 6 hours to prepare, the fire dept. have to do it every known and again.
2. They're the government... they're here to help us. They can do what they want.
3. To further create a reason to invade two innocent countries and further their oil supply, and create a sense of fear to control the people.
4. K then, this isn't aimed at me and I can't answer it.
5. True, but when there is evidence backing it up then it is viable. Also, what are you afraid of? The truth?
6. Yeah... the plane crashed into the tower. Why did the bottom fall, just like a building under demolition would?
Lord Xyz... your reply?
Originally posted by The Grey Fox1. What about the cost? The people required? Not only that, but what's the fire dept. got to do with it? And no, controlled demolitions (especially on buildings as big and complex as that) can't take a mere 6 hours to prepare.
For the purpose of debate, I'll try and counter your arguements...1. Controlled demolition can take as short as 6 hours to prepare, the fire dept. have to do it every known and again.
2. They're the government... they're here to help us. They can do what they want.
3. To further create a reason to invade two innocent countries and further their oil supply, and create a sense of fear to control the people.
4. K then, this isn't aimed at me and I can't answer it.
5. True, but when there is evidence backing it up then it is viable. Also, what are you afraid of? The truth?
6. Yeah... the plane crashed into the tower. Why did the bottom fall, just like a building under demolition would?
Lord Xyz... your reply?
2. So, they can go invisible?
3. But didn't they already do that with WTC 1, the pentagon and WTC2?
4. Well, yeah it is aimed at you, if you claim it's a controlled demolition, and that it's evidence of a conspiracy.
5. What evidence? Please provide it to me.
6. The bottom fell? The bottom collapsed because of the weakened steel, 20 story holes and the penthouse falling damaging the lower floors. Watch the video if you don't believe me.
Originally posted by lord xyz
1. What about the cost? The people required? Not only that, but what's the fire dept. got to do with it? And no, controlled demolitions (especially on buildings as big and complex as that) can't take a mere 6 hours to prepare.2. So, they can go invisible?
3. But didn't they already do that with WTC 1, the pentagon and WTC2?
4. Well, yeah it is aimed at you, if you claim it's a controlled demolition, and that it's evidence of a conspiracy.
5. What evidence? Please provide it to me.
6. The bottom fell? The bottom collapsed because of the weakened steel, 20 story holes and the penthouse falling damaging the lower floors. Watch the video if you don't believe me.
1. They're one of the richest governments in the world. 1% of what they spend on arms a year could feed most of Africa for a year. Naturally, demolishing the building would take longer -- but it would be possible.
2. The FBI can do what they want. Nobody would suspect them.
3. Yes -- it was pointless.
4. I'm not claiming anything. Note I said 'for the purpose of debate'.
5. Didn't say there was. But some say there is.
6. I watched the video, and to be fair I doubt it was a controlled demolition.
Can we agree?
Originally posted by The Grey Fox1. People required? Time? It's not possible, where are they gonna get the people to do it? It's just too unrealistic.
1. They're one of the richest governments in the world. 1% of what they spend on arms a year could feed most of Africa for a year. Naturally, demolishing the building would take longer -- but it would be possible.2. The FBI can do what they want. Nobody would suspect them.
3. Yes -- it was pointless.
4. I'm not claiming anything. Note I said 'for the purpose of debate'.
5. Didn't say there was. But some say there is.
6. I watched the video, and to be fair I doubt it was a controlled demolition.
Can we agree?
2. Who said anything about the FBI? And your point is stupid. If someone is planting a bomb in my building, I wouldn't let him because he's someone I wouldn't suspect, he's planting a ****ing bomb in the building!
3. Brilliant conclusion. Makes so much more sense than it collapsing on it's own.
4. K.
5. So you are talking bullshit.
6. You're right, it wasn't.
Well, I don't know what you're trying to prove here, so not yet.