This guy admits something big, but falls short, why?

a reply to: Bilk22

LOL yeah like the man said. You got nothing. Give your theory or back out but don't throw in a "because I believe so" And not expect to be called on it. Back up your convictions.

originally posted by: ipsedixit

originally posted by: Answer

If it were an effect like an accordion there should be long streams of dust flowing out.

.

The dust streams ARE indeed "long" when watched on video. Stills are not a valid way to determine.

originally posted by: Answer

originally posted by: Psynic


I can't find any pics of the "vertical gash", even in the Wiki pic that supposedly shows it.

You didn't look very hard. Google images.

www.infowars.com...

There are videos of the fire raging through most of the building, helping to weaken the structure.

The bulge was caused by a hydraulic ram? Try one side of the building bulging out as it started to collapse on the opposite side. When a structure starts to crumple, the opposite side of the structure generally bulges out. Refer to the crushing of a soda can once again. Buckling occurs inward or outward, depending on how the structure decides to bend.

I looked hard enough to determine the link you posted to pictures of WTC7 were FALSE, they aren't even the right building!

Are you deliberately misinforming or was it an honest mistake?

Judging by your agenda of denial, I'll have to believe it's the former, and therefore ALL of your posts are suspect.

a reply to: AlphaHawk


First off, if not already established, this guy is lieing. It never ceases to amaze me on ATS, tho I've been away for a while, how many people have such specialist knowledge about things that I can always learn something here, but the same group of people cannot pick out obvious lies, cringeworthy BS, despite it smacking them in the face. And I say that after these photos were meant to be released, and I bet we're all still waiting.


Second;

I actually think it's great 9/11 is still being debated so long as it's for the right reasons. The truthers seem to be from the New Generation so to me that says people ARE waking up and it's heartening. I actually think it's the people who still want to argue with truthers quoting a 13 year old pantomime OS that can't let go. Maybe there are agendas, who knows. Tho if there are STILL people worried enough to be working that side, it makes me worry how big this actually was, maybe we'll find out one day.

As for what did happen on 9/11, I don't know.

But I'll tell you what didn't happen and I'll tell you why.

First, when I look at something to try to work out the facts, the first question I have is;

Is the version of events as im being told them actually POSSIBLE, thus allowing for possible facts?

On 9/11 the official story is so wildly improbable as to allow me fair comfort in stating, it's highly likely impossible the events could have unfolded as is claimed.

Why?

Because too many extremely unlikely (on any other day ever) things had to happen for the OS to be true. In fact, not only did they have to happen at all, they had to happen AT THE SAME TIME, IN THE SAME CITY, ON THE SAME DAY. Nope, sorry. Bull#.


Pilots experienced with the planes have scoffed at it being possible to do what was done.

The first buildingS (Note PLURAL) of their kind to fall from fire EVER.

Not only ONE first building of it's kind to fall from fire fell but TWO, of a two building set, fell, from fire, the first EVER.

The Buildings, the kind that burn and never fall from fire, were also designed to WITHSTAND impacts from planes taking into account the airliner.

The defence for the airspace had gone on a training program keeping them occupied while this happened.

BUILDING SEVEN (which really is all you ever actually need to talk about to know deep down the OS is just ludicrous) also falls. There is absolutely no reason for it to fall point one. Larry Silverstein has already told EVERYONE the decision was made to PULL IT. If Building Seven was pulled as everybody has been told, and as is obvious by the video of it falling, prior knowledge of it going (proven bY the BBC reporting it had fallen BEFORE it did) if that building was pulled, it was rigged to go PRIOR to 9/11, it was done with Larry Silversteins knowledge as he was privvy to the defision to pull it being made, and the only reason they rigged it was to pull it or why bother. Either they got lucky with the occurrence of 9/11 despite it being IMPOSSIBLE to plan for (unless having knowledge of the event prior to it happening, say if a friendly government top dog had signed off on it in the first place), or Silverstein (the leaseholder for the WTC buildings), was a big part in the planning committee.

For Larry Silverstein and friends, the loss of building seven was not only somewhat convenient owing to what was housed there, but also a nice little earner. Incredibly, only very recently, the very same man had negotiated a HUGE insurance policy covering specifically acts of terrorism and the use of aeroplanes in such acts. Building Seven being pulled and a few non sheeple asking questions that needed ignoring could be coped with for Billions of Dollars. That's exactly how it played out.

The first time a president of ANY COUNTRY hearing of such a catastrophe going on inside his boundaries, makes the decision reading books with 5 year olds is the necessary first course of action.

All of these events were masterminded by a man people had only been told about but never heard or seen. A FAMILY MEMBER of the Bin Laden's, an enormously wealthy family from Saudi Arabia, who just so happen to be huge contributers to the US economy, backers for the President G W Bush's early career forays into business ownership, and essentially huge Bush family friends. (Not to mention flown out of the country immediately on the only flights allowed to take off in the 9/11 aftermath). VERY VERY UNLIKELY TO VE RIDICULOUS.

The scheming Bin Laden, Usama, did all this by relaying information about the biggest terrorist attack in history to two pilots who apparently when sighted by trainers, were considered unskilled and not very adequate. However, not only was the attack entrusted onto them, they pulled it off with sharp 180s in their form and skill. Using maneuvers retired pilots state impossible, at least three planes apparently pulled off their wild plans to a perfection that would put into action a whole heap of other history, physics, and mind defying feats of IMPOSSIBLES in the hours to come.

Oh, and Bin Laden created and called for this plan without setting foot into the US.

The MSM had him nailed on for the attack within 24hrs despite the only reports of substance saying he had categorically denied the attack. Again, a first. Real terrorists are proud of their carnage. The terrorist who had just concocted the biggest # THE US in history, carried it off with stunning results, and for a laugh, had even had the balls to use pilots who weren't very good with planes, usually, you would think, would be crying with laughter as he claimed such a monstrous victory but he denied it. And yet he was deemed guilty anyway with information gathered in less than 24 hrs, non of which had even been sniffed by the intelligence agencys beforehand. Yeah, OK.

Building Seven was practically empty as most agencies had advised their staff not to fly or come in to work that day. UGH


Ok, I'm bored now. I realise most won't even bother trying, but I hope one or two get my point.

OS or biggest cover up and FF in history?

Bearing in mind in my opinion if the OS is BS (which it is), so many lies have been told to reach it, it's kbvous then who actually did it, this is absolutely FALSE FLAG.

The OS is simply NOT POSSIBLE. You would have to stretch the limit of acceptance to be ok with just one of the things I outline, but to accept all of of these completely ridiculous things as actual events that happened together, one after the other, with no input from the TPTB, (or much input) is absolutely mind boggling. NOT POSSIBLE. Didn't happen that way. You are NOT awake.

And I'll leave you with this

With such a MONUMENTAL piece of horrendous history playing out almost live to every single home worldwide, everyone watching in awe, in shock, in horror,

WHAT WAS HAPPENING BEHIND OUR BACKS AS WE WATCHED IN, OPEN MOUTHED, DRIBBLING FOR MORE.

Because, as you know, when they don't want us to look, they give all of us something else to look at!

ACTUALLY WAKE UP. DONT JUST THINK YOU HAVE BECAUSE YOU TELL OTHERS TO.

a reply to: kaptabs316

Great post. Total rot from front to back but whatever. It's lucky building seven was damaged and on fire or those pesky schemers would have looked awfully foolish going in the day after to remove all the demolition charges. Do you think without the fire and damage they'd have destroyed it anyways? It's a good thing the BBC reporter knew in advance because that way she wouldn't have said anything unintentional on camera. No wait. Its a bad thing the BBC reporter knew in advance because she can give away all the careful planning on camera. No wait. Its a good thing they told as many reporters as possible about it because that way they could practice their shock and horror voices in advance. No wait. Its a bad thing because then they could have just used their real shock and horror voices. No wait. Hold on, I'm tied in knots here. It's neither a good nor a bad thing that a reporter knew or did not know in advance. Yes. That's right.

All. Utter. Waffle.

a reply to: scottyirnbru

Exactly.

I love that youngsters have enough about them to say "huh, hang on a sec....",

But, 13 yrs on, for questioning people to still believe such farcical, elementary school standard yarn, produced only so parents can coo at their kids, with no regard for the concept of making sense (and that might be unfair on the kids to be honest), it's...it's enough to wait another 18 months to return.

Amazingly, it seems, the collective consensus still feels a need for head scratching as, confused, they try to work out if it's morning or if turning over and snuggling back down is the order of the day.

Do one or the other for goodness sake.

a reply to: kaptabs316

Sorry. Perhaps I was being unclear, hiding behind the irony curtain. Your post = waffle. Just entirely without substance or rational thought. Tell me something. If 7 hadn't burned for 6 hours or had a 20 storey gouge in its face or damage at the bottom corner would they have still blown up the building? Its lucky it did those things or they'd have been left with an awkward day after.

Why tell a reporter in advance? Why would you do that? What's the benefit?

Your post displays absolutely zero critical thinking.

a reply to: scottyirnbru

I didn't say I was critically thinking. I'm too tired of 9/11 as a point of argument.

But that's ok, I got your goading me wrong.

For me, for something to happen at all, it has to be agreeable that the components making up the event are generally likely to happen, feasible that they might happen anyway.

The statistical possibility that an event takes place requiring NEVER EMULATED before, or since, building collapses from short burning fires (TWO), PLANNING FLAWS as the buildings failed to withstand the planes despite such an attack originally planned for, a LUCKY BREAK as security had forsaken duty to carry out hypothetical exercises, and maneuvers being performed by the hijacking pilots that experienced Pilot experts would write off as IMPOSSIBLE.

All of these improbable scenarios had to occur for the first time EVER on the same day, in the same city, and all while subtle hints of prior knowledge jumped up and down...the whole things is madness.

But I'll finish off.

To go with the OS, its reqired that a sequence of events, all coming with their own experience defying logic, combine together to produce one massive event that, owing to the sum of its parts, is now pushing statistically impossible. (And I ignore all things inside Job too)

It simply did not happen as we have been told.

For the record, im not one of those who think big bad "W" was pulling the strings, nor do I know who was. (You can tell by Bush's face when the SS agent whispers to him in the video we've seen a million times, he looks like he just caught his best friend shagging his girlfriend, he didn't know at all).

But 9/11 was helped along significantly. It had to be, and you are told as much by the big players, but you refuse to listen.

I STILL to this day cannot understand why building seven is ignored.

Also why do you defend the OS much of which is unfathomable when considered subjectively, but you disregard Silverstein TELLING THE WHOLE WORLD he PULLED building seven (his decision). The ramifications, once you sit with this, are staggering. It was already rigged!!! Hello?? But this is simply passed over.

I would assume it's because the second you realise the building was rigged pre 9/11 as it HAD to be so it could actually BE PULLED, the OS no longer matters as someone knew the planes were coming at some point.

I've always thought Israel with help frlpom inside but Bush knew nothing.

I believe if anyone was brave enough to consider the likelihood of the event playing out as the OS says, I mean really consider it from a level playing field, you would realise it looks absolutely criminal to offer the explanation, and straight up embarrassing to take it on board as possible fact.

It's clear the Bin Laden's didn't know what their estranged family member was upto being IN America at the time but, with Usama already set up as a pasty regardless, it was very nice of TPTB to fly the family out so lovingly and without fanfare.

It's a farce. What did I hear today? More money spent on investigating steroids in baseballl than on the 9/11 commission. Right.

Your government decided a story, had some "evidence" fabricated, and just repeated it over and over again until it was accepted common knowledge.

They got handy at the old mind control over the years. No drugs needed, just pictures on a TV and repetition.

a reply to: kaptabs316

So just for confirmation, silverstein confirms he blew the building up. A confession then. Right there on a tape and yet he remains free. That's the most amazing part. He actually confesses and nobody wants to arrest him. He's one rich dude....

a reply to: scottyirnbru

YES

It's ludicrous.

And NO ONE talks about it as either the sheeple got on with their lives or, if in the US, it was buried.

How do I post a video. I'll give you Silverstein saying they pulled the building.

a reply to: kaptabs316

I think I got it.

Keep in mind, not only did he give the order to pull the building, he fought the Insurance company for years for billions in compensation for a building HE CHOSE TO DESTROY.

And no one cares. Its stupifying.

a reply to: kaptabs316

Wilfully ignorant. You are ignoring all rationality. This conversation is a lost cause.

a reply to: scottyirnbru


Because the OS is outlandish and I see that and because you are ignoring the owner of the building telling you he ordered it be pulled.

He doesn't have to convince me of anything but he tells me anyway and I think the ramifications are scary. The OS is something I am supposed to be using as an answer to my questions but before even doing that the story itself is laughably ludicrous and I question that.

How is that ignorant? It must be more ignorant to disregard information that leads to such alarming questions, the OS becomes almost irrelevant anyway because it's clear no one is telling the truth.

Anyway, thanks for the chat.

a reply to: kaptabs316

It's wilfully ignorant because you have abandoned logic and reason. In your theory silverstein confesses on video. The insurance companies who have just been diddled out of hundreds and hundreds of millions of dollars just accept it. You've seen the film. I've seen the film. I'm gonna wager at least one employee at the insurance company has seen the film. Yet silverstein cashes the cheque and the insurance co. takes the hit. Its beyond preposterous. It's a fairy story you've created. A dude near me sold his motor bike to an uninsured rider who later crashed and died. He had forgotten to cancel the remainder of the policy. The insurancepaid out then went back to the original owner to claim back the money. This was approx £11000. He's going to court. But silverstein confesses and they let him away with it. Hilarious.

a reply to: scottyirnbru

I don't understand why you believing a version of events told to you is so much better than me believing a man who clearly states what he did do.

I don't even know what's to illogical about me stating he said something and using that in to influence my POV when he clearly states it.

It makes no sense. He tells the fire chief to pull it and so when it collapses as though control demolished what is so odd about asking why no one cares about this.

He told them to pull it, they pulled it. I'm confused why this eludes your comprehension. It's the simplest piece of the puzzle to follow and is entirely unambiguous. But all chicken's are ducks guess.

So i'm guessing this guy just came out and said all that crap but never showed any pictures right?

a reply to: kaptabs316

Because he's not talking about knocking the building down!!!!!!!!! He says pull it as in pull the guys out of the way. Pulling it is not a demolition term. I'm amazed that we are actually having this conversation. Why would he admit to blowing up his own buildings on tv? I honestly can't believe that you actually think that is a rational and reasonable belief.

Silverstein's Quote:"I remember getting a call from the Fire Department commander, telling me they were not sure they were gonna be able to contain the fire, and I said, you know, 'We've had such terrible loss of life, maybe the smartest thing to do is just pull it.' And they made that decision to pull and then we watched the building collapse."

Pull it = remove people from area.

a reply to: Agent_USA_Supporter

The no plane theory isn't very popular, but neither is any uncomfortable truth. The stakes are high for those who espouse the lies. Their day is coming, slowly but surely.

The truth is what it is, and this fact will never die.

a reply to: scottyirnbru

Well it seems very much like you are interpreting what he says in such a way as to help your POV but the argument is that I'm doing that too I guess.

At least you give me context now which I think is all I wanted so I could understand the irony veiled attacks.

Thanks.

originally posted by: kaptabs316

It makes no sense. He tells the fire chief to pull it and so when it collapses as though control demolished what is so odd about asking why no one cares about this.

He told them to pull it, they pulled it. I'm confused why this eludes your comprehension. It's the simplest piece of the puzzle to follow and is entirely unambiguous. But all chicken's are ducks guess.

Let's say that you're right and Larry told the FDNY to pull the building with the preplanted explosives.

Therefore, the FDNY pulled 7 for safety reasons. Agreed?

Why are they covering up the fact that they leveled 7 for safety reasons?