Larry Silverstein designed NEW WTC-7 in April of 2000

a reply to: s3cz0ne

When American 77 was hijacked it was in a area between Ohio/West Virginia/Kentucky . This area is rugged and thinly
populated - something of a radar "black hole"

The Indianapolis Air Traffic Control Center, as well as American Airlines dispatchers, made several failed attempts to contact the aircraft. At the time
the airplane was hijacked, it was flying over an area of limited radar coverage. With air controllers unable to contact the flight by radio, an
Indianapolis official declared that the Boeing 757 had possibly crashed at 09:09

Air traffic made assumption that it had crashed and began looking WESTWARD along projected track. At this time
were the hijackings and impact of the hijacked aircraft into WTC becoming known - despite the supposed
Instant communications it still takes time to disseminate information down to where everyone is aware
Air traffic controller are in a darken room with no TV /Internet access. It was only after passengers had contacted
family members that the hijacking became known.

Two people on the aircraft made phone calls to contacts on the ground. At 09:12, flight attendant Renee May called her mother, Nancy May, in Las Vegas. During the call, which lasted nearly two minutes, May said her flight was being hijacked by six persons, and staff and passengers had been moved to the rear of the airplane. May asked her mother to contact American Airlines, which she and her husband promptly did; American Airlines was already aware of the hijacking. Between 09:16 and 09:26, passenger Barbara Olson called her husband, United States Solicitor General Theodore Olson, and reported that the airplane had been hijacked and that the assailants had box cutters and knives. She reported that the passengers, including the pilots, had been moved to the back of the cabin and that the hijackers were unaware of her call.

From time became aware of hijacking to impact at Pentagon at 9:37 would have only 20 minutes

originally posted by: firerescue
a reply to: s3cz0ne

When American 77 was hijacked it was in a area between Ohio/West Virginia/Kentucky . This area is rugged and thinly
populated - something of a radar "black hole"

No, thats not true, It's not a black hole for radar coverage, wasn't in 2001 either. At 9:05 controllers pick up the primary target heading westbound.

Air traffic made assumption that it had crashed and began looking WESTWARD along projected track. At this time
were the hijackings and impact of the hijacked aircraft into WTC becoming known - despite the supposed
Instant communications it still takes time to disseminate information down to where everyone is aware
Air traffic controller are in a darken room with no TV /Internet access. It was only after passengers had contacted
family members that the hijacking became known.


From time became aware of hijacking to impact at Pentagon at 9:37 would have only 20 minutes

At 9:03 after UAL175 hit the South Tower coordination for a ground stop for traffic destined NY was initiated and implemented by 9:08. Controllers would have been informed of the ground stop immediately along with a reason. They may not have had TV in the control room but they were given reason for the ground stop.

originally posted by: pale5218

originally posted by: firerescue
a reply to: s3cz0ne

When American 77 was hijacked it was in a area between Ohio/West Virginia/Kentucky . This area is rugged and thinly
populated - something of a radar "black hole"

No, thats not true, It's not a black hole for radar coverage, wasn't in 2001 either. At 9:05 controllers pick up the primary target heading westbound.

Air traffic made assumption that it had crashed and began looking WESTWARD along projected track. At this time
were the hijackings and impact of the hijacked aircraft into WTC becoming known - despite the supposed
Instant communications it still takes time to disseminate information down to where everyone is aware
Air traffic controller are in a darken room with no TV /Internet access. It was only after passengers had contacted
family members that the hijacking became known.


From time became aware of hijacking to impact at Pentagon at 9:37 would have only 20 minutes

At 9:03 after UAL175 hit the South Tower coordination for a ground stop for traffic destined NY was initiated and implemented by 9:08. Controllers would have been informed of the ground stop immediately along with a reason. They may not have had TV in the control room but they were given reason for the ground stop.

Thank you. I'm not in the position, at least at the moment, to dig into the data and post quotes and sources. That said I have read quite a bit if it. Also, and this is an assumption as dumb as it may seem, one would think it might raise someone's eyebrows seeing an airplane heading straight towards the Pentagon! Again we must factor in the very very limited experience of the alleged hijackers and the lack of any decent surveillance footage!

a reply to: s3cz0ne

Also why only the grainy surveillance video? Seriously? That's all the Pentagon had in place at the time? No local businesses or government offices?

This has been talked to death before.
That wedge had just been renovated.
Typically things like security camera wiring/ take place after all the renovations are finished.
Back in 2001 security camera footage was recorded on video tape. Remember those ?
With all the workers cleaning up the tools and details why record it? Assuming the cameras were functioning at all.
Also security is a contracted service not military police.

If you are a nearby business with security cameras and recorders, which direction are you going to point your cameras ?

originally posted by: samkent
a reply to: s3cz0ne

Also why only the grainy surveillance video? Seriously? That's all the Pentagon had in place at the time? No local businesses or government offices?

This has been talked to death before.
That wedge had just been renovated.
Typically things like security camera wiring/ take place after all the renovations are finished.
Back in 2001 security camera footage was recorded on video tape. Remember those ?
With all the workers cleaning up the tools and details why record it? Assuming the cameras were functioning at all.
Also security is a contracted service not military police.

If you are a nearby business with security cameras and recorders, which direction are you going to point your cameras ?

Well if I had a parking lot one would be pointed towards the street. I'm also aware of how the construction process occurs. It is just incomprehensible to me that ANY part of the Pentagon would have inadequate surveillance. Contractors or not. Construction or not. If we can find a vehicle by satellite, circa 2001, there damn well should have been adequate surveillance. I just have a very hard time accepting the argument of incompetence because if this was because of construction all that is left is incompetence and negligence.

a reply to: samkent

You saying they would not want to keep an eye on the renovations of one of the most important buildings the world has ever seen ?

And that nothing is wired up because ""Renovations""

originally posted by: hellobruce

True, as they are dead, killed when their planes hit the buildings etc.

How naive ...

Anyone, with half a brain ... that any "terrorist" is just like a foot soldier ... he is the weapon, not the person who is yielding that weapon. Whoever yielded the weapon, is the one responsible ... and "if" any party had the ability to put the "safety" on, before the weapon was utilized ... these persons, are equally responsible for the damage, caused by the weapon.

It's time ye change your view and up your intellect ... just a notch.

The "prime" suspects of 9/11 is still the US government ... they got their wishes to come true, to shape the "world" in their image.

Show me a decent source then I will start to pay some attention to this until then this is just another truther claim.

I dont say this to be dismissive, I am not saying this is a total lie as such (there may be truth to it) rather what I am saying is that if you want a serious 9/11 researcher to take a good look at this you had better be showing off some decent sources.

Honestly I see a bias source like "veteranstoday" and I don't bother even reading it, if this evidence does exist then sorry but I expect the OP to post it hear on ATS with a decent commentary and additional supporting links. Just saying hear is what this totally bias link has to say without anything else for me just does not cut it. Additionally if you have presented the evidence further down the thread OP then please do direct me to it.

a reply to: bjarneorn

Indeed my friend... However, it likely extends far beyond the US government. Their are many players. KSA? Other Gulf monarchies? Israel? Who knows where the rabbit hole ends. I'm not making any accusations but this incident ended with someone's dirty work being done and it could be any of the above. Tricky world we live in it seems.

a reply to: hellobruce

Come now. Should we listen to you or Architects & Engineers for 911 Truth? 40 experts disagree. FORTY. I think I believe their decades of experience and beaucoup degrees over your contrived suggestion that terrorists took out the WTC with aircraft. Oh and btw, the "terrorists" who died? You can find 7 of them in their home countries...alive. So...just stop. The continued line of BS aka the official story is total # and any logical, rational person realized it almost 15 years ago.

originally posted by: ColdChillin
a reply to: hellobruce

Come now. Should we listen to you or Architects & Engineers for 911 Truth? 40 experts disagree. FORTY.

So out of about 100,000 registered Architects and 2 million practicing engineers in the USA, only 40 have signed....

You can find 7 of them in their home countries...alive.

Sure about that?

conspiracies.skepticproject.com...

a reply to: hellobruce

You don't refer to people fighting fires in a building by the word "it." You use the word "them." The very next sentence Silverstein said after this notorious phase "pull it" refers to the building collapsing, clearly indicating that he had meant his words "pull it" to refer to the building, not to any hypothetical fire fighters (who, anyway, were not in the building because a burst water pipe earlier in the day had stopped all fire fighting at the WTC7).

All this silly, semantic confusion persisting among some 9/11 truth sceptics merely because some of them STILL won't admit the obvious - namely, that Silverstein had a slip of the tongue in which he admitted that WTC7 was deliberately demolished in order to save lives.

I posted this link on another thread. It is a very informative piece of info. Go to the 3rd page and read
what some experts said about the building(s) coming down.
They make reference that the WTC was "listing" 3 degrees...Never heard that before...Pretty interesting.

sites.google.com...

I still have a tough time believing that the pancaking floors actually pulled down the inner support
system without the help of prior weakening of the columns. If there was in fact an inner support
failure, I would think that building design changed dramatically since 2001.

If the whole scenario was changed to "A Foreign Group of Terrorists Detonated An Extremely Powerful
Explosive Device on The 79th Floor of the World Trade Center at 9:32 This Morning".
No planes, no other charges, just one powerful explosion.... Would the towers have still fallen?

I am no expert so I don't know...but I will not try and debunk those that are experts in their field.

I saw this thread earlier today, and just now I stumbled across this short video, so I thought to just quickly drop it in here.
It doesnt add anything, but I just thought it funny old Rumsy acting like he doesn't know about building 7. Sorry if its been posted, I didnt read all pages.

a reply to: OtherSideOfTheCoin

So are you saying your perceptions and conclusions are formed by the writings of other people?

originally posted by: Salander
a reply to: OtherSideOfTheCoin

So are you saying your perceptions and conclusions are formed by the writings of other people?

No I am saying I want some solid sources that i can take a critical look at.

Show use the plans that had been in place since 2000, that would be a very good start.

a reply to: wildb

What is the proof of this. Veterans Today is proving to be a cabal disinfo site trying to blame specific people and take the blame off the Royal families and Jesuits for their participation in the New World Order agenda.

originally posted by: micpsi
a reply to: hellobruce

You don't refer to people fighting fires in a building by the word "it." You use the word "them." The very next sentence Silverstein said after this notorious phase "pull it" refers to the building collapsing, clearly indicating that he had meant his words "pull it" to refer to the building, not to any hypothetical fire fighters (who, anyway, were not in the building because a burst water pipe earlier in the day had stopped all fire fighting at the WTC7).

All this silly, semantic confusion persisting among some 9/11 truth sceptics merely because some of them STILL won't admit the obvious - namely, that Silverstein had a slip of the tongue in which he admitted that WTC7 was deliberately demolished in order to save lives.

So your saying that there was explosives planted in the towers and Silverstein was in charge of ordering the detonation of these explosives and the detonation was executed by the NYFD?

That is a bold claim.

It has been my pet theory that Silverstein and his associates had a side operation that was not known by those inside the US that were aware the attacks were coming. I dont believe the towers coming down was necessary to get the reaction we got. He did not get a blank check on his compensation and the feds never really stepped in to help him. I dont think whoever brought the towers down had the blessing of those who first planned to use the event as catalyste to a NWO.

It could not have been guaranteed that the towers would come down if impacted by a plane. Look at the effort that has been put in to try and push the faux logic that the towers collapsing due to fire and small amount structural damage was normal. We are seeing such desperation in searching for logic that we have given up and just blamed in on the mafia.

Surely if the towers coming down was pre-planned, there would have been a better back story in place than the now abandoned "pancake" theory explination. It has been a long road to explinations we are given today. Hardly the work of an well planned operation. It has been damage control ever since 9/12/2001.

I think the planes hitting the towers would have been enough. So why bring down the towers? Back to the point of my reply. If Silverstein was involved on planning the ultimate destruction of the towers, why would he involve himself in the execution of that and how would he get the NYFD on board?

originally posted by: thesaneone
a reply to: wildb

This is not a credible source but if you can source a reliable one I would be interested in the reading.

Good luck.

Wait a minute...Larry Silverstein is ON TAPE clearly stating the first design meeting took place in APRIL OF 2000!!!

What difference does it make which website posts the video?

originally posted by: samkent
a reply to: s3cz0ne

Also why only the grainy surveillance video? Seriously? That's all the Pentagon had in place at the time? No local businesses or government offices?

This has been talked to death before.
That wedge had just been renovated.
Typically things like security camera wiring/ take place after all the renovations are finished.
Back in 2001 security camera footage was recorded on video tape. Remember those ?
With all the workers cleaning up the tools and details why record it? Assuming the cameras were functioning at all.
Also security is a contracted service not military police.

If you are a nearby business with security cameras and recorders, which direction are you going to point your cameras ?

All the construction taking place? I have BEEFED UP SECURITY, to include MORE VIDEO SURVEILLANCE...

Epic fail...