Should we just focus on Building 7?

originally posted by: Prezbo369

originally posted by: Jchristopher5

Wow, you are thick headed.

Again, for the third time, I mentioned that it was a fact that it was reported on the BBC before the building collapsed. I did not claim the BBC was in on the conspiracy, but clearly they reported something before it happened.

Either way, it doesn't change the fact this is the smoking gun on the official story being false. I suspect that you are aware of that, and that you are trying to lead me into a rabbit hole.

The amount of assumptions that would have to be made to allow for the apparent early reporting of building 7 by the BBC to be done for nefarious reasons would lead most critical thinkers to have serious doubts.

That is all that I have to say about the reporting from the BBC today. Perhaps the reporter is a psychic (unlikely)? Maybe it was a "simple mistake (unlikely).

Draw whatever conclusion that you choose. Why don't you address the rest of the points, if you really seek the truth?

Yeah perhaps the BBC are part of the evil plot (likely) lol

If this is how you react to a critical eye placed upon one of your talking points/claims I think i'll leave it here.

However I do understand a little bit more as to why you guys have the label you do.

I think its an important point as it wasnt just the bbc that reported before it happened. It is quite obvious that someone reported it to the redactions of those shows. Meaning someone did exactly know at what time it was going to come down. Not meaning the shows are in on it, they were just reporting what they heard. But who knew? Or just another major coincidence to add to the list? Tell me what the odds are then.

Ow to add: it is also obvious the bbc was used as a tool for the government, and were close to people in control because they were claiming bin laden from the very start. They should start working with tge Cia with that kind of accurate predictions.. ow wait.

a reply to: Blowback

The Seattle Firefighter that has no firsthand knowledge of the events that day? And the guy that FDNY routinely disparages? You are going to use him????

As problematic as is the WTC 7 collapse, I think we may be seeing the Great Unraveling starting to develop in the following January 7, 2015, ABC News article (and others like it) courtesy the almost completely captured MSM:


From ABC News, Still Secret: 28 Pages That Could Change Our Understanding of 9/11

A bipartisan group of congressmen joined with 9/11 family members today to renew efforts to declassify 28 pages of a joint congressional inquiry into the worst terrorist attack against the United States.

The information, redacted by President George W. Bush, is believed to point to allegations that Saudi Arabia may have assisted in financing the 9/11 terrorists....The 28 pages primarily relate to who financed 9/11 and they point a very strong finger at Saudi Arabia as being the principal financier,” said former Sen. Bob Graham, D-Florida, who co-chaired the inquiry and helped to write the report.

and from the same article:

“The position of the United States government has been to protect Saudi Arabia,” former senator Graham contended. “At virtually every step of the judicial process, when the United States government was called upon to take a position, it has been a position adverse to the interests of United States citizens seeking justice and protective of the government which, in my judgment, was the most responsible for that network of support,” Graham said, referring to Saudi Arabia.

a reply to: Krazysh0t

What he refuses to accept is that the 9/11 Commission Report, was not an engineering report. It was not supposed to explain the collapses of the buildings. It was meant to look at the history leading to that day, the events of the attack and our responses. The collapse of WTC 7 did not kill anyone, nor was it directly impacted by the attack.

a reply to: Elbereth

It could just be used as a decoy to put all conspiracies about inside jobs to rest. Think about it how easy and genious it is to just make a report that does give it a whole different explanation so people are shocked because of it and will never think that even that still might not be the full story. Especially if you make it secret first because then it must be true not? What if its just part of the plan and they had taken conspiracies into account from the very start? Then this secret report is the perfect bone to throw.

a reply to: Realtruth
Let's see.....FDNY had already watched two buildings collapse that day that had killed 343 of their brothers and sisters. They were staring at a heavily damaged building which had fires growing in it and they did not have water to fight said fires. Then they set up a transit to measure the building and it was recording an increasing tilt to the building.

Yeah, there was no way to foresee that WTC 7 was going to collapse as well......

originally posted by: whatsup86
a reply to: Elbereth

"It could just be used as a decoy to put all conspiracies about inside jobs to rest...."


Perhaps, but once you start pulling the Saudi thread, I think the whole grand conspiracy will unwind....Follow the money.

a reply to: ParasuvO

How did WTC 7 get damaged.....

Here, go to Google, to an image search using "World Trade Center Layout prior to 9/11"

When the images come up, click on one, take note of WTC 6 and its relation to WTC 1 and WTC 7.

Then look at the photos of WTC 6 after the collapse of WTC 1. It all but draws a line from WTC 1, to the section of WTC 7 that was damaged by the collapse of 1.

originally posted by: cardinalfan0596
a reply to: Realtruth
Let's see.....FDNY had already watched two buildings collapse that day that had killed 343 of their brothers and sisters. They were staring at a heavily damaged building which had fires growing in it and they did not have water to fight said fires. Then they set up a transit to measure the building and it was recording an increasing tilt to the building.

Yeah, there was no way to foresee that WTC 7 was going to collapse as well......

Like it was suddenly normal for skyscrapers to drop like they were made out of playing cards?

Its likely important to push the NY mayor into using his pre-determined excusatory out.....he was caught on tape telling them to "pull it"...this refers to building # 7.His job was to give the order under the power of his Civic Leadership to "pull it" or to intentionlly drop the building #7,they will say it was a damage control issue to prevent further collateral damage to the surrounding area....taking one for the team if you will the "american way"....no one ever points the finger at the man jumping on the grenade right?

This was a multi-pronged attack,one prong was to fleece the insurance industry,another was to generate political momentum and another was to destroy forever hardcopy evidence of something MASSIVE which was contained in building #7.Everyone knew the building was doomed and was going to have to either be repaired or torn down either option costing BILLIONS OR TENS OF BILLIONS to complete,this being put directly onto ownership.The Building owners needed an out. Someone had something to hide in building #7 and they hooked up with the Insurance scammers .Someone wanted an epic shot of political juice to work with they needed the American Public in a frenzy either as a diversion for something happening just prior or in the moment or to spearhead further peripheral chaos.So someone even higher up joined in and provided quasi-military support,so so far we have Insurance fraud by the Buildings owners ,a possible conspiracy to destroy evidence of crimes in building#7..anyone die in there... therefore there must be some Government connections.Add in the Black-Ops which are Military of the highest level which made it look like terrorists thereby building political momentum for yet another Stakeholder ,toss in the Citys Mayor,throw the mass Media co-ordination on top and it looks like the same group of morons who murdered JFK.

Someone called in some help from the Global Cabal..they came running and once again left a massive trail of evidence in their wakes.

This is ultimately a "sooner" than "later" issue,the public is on the case and they have the resources to be heard,this issue is very much far from over.

a reply to: cardinalfan0596

Yeah, there was no way to foresee that WTC 7 was going to collapse as well......

Yep, they must have had a crystal ball or something...

a reply to: whatsup86
If that is your way of saying that had YOU had been there, you would have come to a different conclusion about WTC 7, it is lacking in imagination. The experts were there that day, they were pretty positive that 7 was going to fall.

a reply to: Flatcoat

It did not take a crystal ball to see that 7 was going to fall. The FDNY had it figured out pretty early.

I'm with you on this. I'm not a truther, but the collapse of 7 is the most convincing evidence something isn't right.

They always say the 4 plane was going to the White House, but part of me thinks it was destined for 7.

Demolition is more conceivable than it just fell down.

a reply to: cardinalfan0596

Which part of "the building is about to blow up" is confusing you?

a reply to: whatsup86

Like it was suddenly normal for skyscrapers to drop like they were made out of playing cards?

Like it's common for fully loaded 757's to be directly flown at full speed into buildings.

a reply to: GenerationGap

The single thread people need to tug on to unravel the entire tapestry is the weakest link it is the Mayor...simply because he had the power and every right to give the order to "pull it" or to destroy the building....but he needs to be pressured into admitting he did it before he has a fatal skydiving or rodeo accident.

"They" knew he would be the first link to be tested,they planned for it,they just wanted to delay disclosure that he actually gave the order for as long as possible,there is likely a secondry level of support for the Mayor as well in that there was a National Security risk ongoing and pulling the building could have been an order from higher up if not Obaama then a subordinate who may not have even been required to report the actions to Obama himself depending on protocals.

Once we establish that he did indeed give the order to "pull it" which we all heard on audio,then we can focus on who he was helping and in what ways the destruction...the ASSURED destruction of building #7 helped them....from here on in ASSUME the Twin Towers were the DIVERSION and building #7 was the real primary target.

Getting the Mayor to admit he gave the order to "pull it" which he must do because he is recorded saying the words leads to the activation of deeper support from his secondary option...the higher up source likely government or military of some type or source.This is how you pull the tapestry apart by finding one small string and gently pulling and pulling and un-winding and pulling ect ect ect.

a reply to: one4all

Silvestein and firefighters in general have said time and time again that they were 'pulling the firefighters from the building' which is a firefighting term. When I first heard it I knew exactly what they meant, it never occurred it would mean anything else to me or most people with their own brain until Loose Change or whoever came along to 'explain' it.
Yet people like you keep choosing to ignore this clarification from people that actually know what it means (and in Silversteins case specifically what he meant) and applying your own definition because it suits your little narrative. Don't you think that's a bit... 'special'?

What are you going to do? Physically harass him until he 'confesses' and you hear what you want to? Nearly 15 years and still the same tired old arguments from a bunch of 'special' people, it's so sad and pitiful it's funny. The only 'damning' evidence anyone can come up with demands a suspension of intelligence, a small amount of narcotics and a knock on the head to start to believe. So when exactly are you all going to 'save America'? Another 15 years? Hahahaha.

There is no logical explanation for building 7 to collapse like it did when it did, other than a controlled demolition period.
I think the point is people want to believe the offical story even if it refutes physics and common sense. The key is they want to believe it. Its called being willfully ignorant of the truth being presented.

a reply to: Zcustosmorum

…but this isn't crap, the events of 9/11 have rippled through time and changed EVERYTHING to this point.

-this
observation reminds me so much of the scene from the film Back To The Future where some mysterious and life-changing event unknown to the time travelers has occurred in the past drastically affecting the present. Anarchy rules the streets and Marty McFly after seeing his world totally transformed into a dark and foreboding place is crying in the cemetery repeating, “This can’t be happening…this can’t be happening” Until the wise old Doc appears saying, “I’m afraid it is Marty…all of it!”
That mysterious event in the context of this thread is 9/11. The truth of what really happened is like the contents of the sports almanac hidden within the dust covers of ‘My Pet Goat’ and further locked away inside a safe.
The truth of 9/11 is like a stinking corpse under the bed and no-one knows why they cannot sleep like they used to and no-one knows where the smell is coming from.