ISF Logo   IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Conspiracies and Conspiracy Theories » 9/11 Conspiracy Theories
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Reply
Old 1st October 2013, 06:46 AM   #81
Spanx
Master Poster
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 2,045
And what does the bald faced liar have to say about it.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qU0Bn...eature=youtube

Looks like plenty of firefighters in the area of wtc7 to me.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Afb7e...eature=youtube

I certainly wouldn't want to be standing near that building when it came down.

Last edited by Spanx; 1st October 2013 at 07:01 AM. Reason: Last link
Spanx is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 1st October 2013, 06:50 AM   #82
IDB87
Illuminator
 
IDB87's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 4,022
Originally Posted by sonofgloin View Post
How is it possible that within a few hours of making the decision to demolish Bldg 7 it falls into its own footprint?
The decision to demolish Bldg7 was never made. The decision that was made was to abandon firefighting and rescue operations.

Quote:
According to Larry Silverstein the NYFD achieved in a few hours what demolition teams and engineers take weeks to accomplish.
It doesn't take much time to suspend firefighting and rescue operations.

Quote:
Given that before 911 no high rise has fallen to its basement due to fire, this is not just suspect this is arguable proof of pre meditation given who made the statement. Can any poster propose a scenario that rebuffs the obvious?
When Building 7 collapsed it was arguable proof that building 7 had in fact collapsed.
__________________
That really hustled my bones.
IDB87 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 1st October 2013, 10:27 AM   #83
Travis
Misanthrope of the Mountains
 
Travis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 23,620
I've gone ahead and color coded the list.

Red = Outright lies
Blue = Misrepresentations of true things
Green = Truths that are irrelevant


1) Nano Thermite was found in the dust at Ground Zero. Peer reviewed in the Bentham Open Chemical Physics Journal. ‘Niels Harrit’, ‘Thermite Bentham’, “The great thermate debate” Jon Cole, ‘Iron rich spheres’ Steven Jones, ‘Limited Metallurgical Examination (FEMA C-13, Appendix C-6)’. ‘Nano Tubes’

2) 1700+ Engineers and Architects support a real independent 9/11 investigation. Richard Gage, Founder. ‘Explosive Evidence’, ‘Blueprint for Truth’, ‘AE911′, ‘Toronto Hearings’, ‘Kevin Ryan’.

3) The total collapse of WTC 7 in 6.5 seconds at free fall acceleration (NIST admits 2.25 seconds). Larry Silverstein used the term “Pull it”. Steel framed high rise buildings have NEVER totally collapsed from fire or structural damage. Builidng 7 was not hit by a plane. ‘Building 7′, ‘WTC 7′.

4) Dick Cheney was in command of NORAD on 9/11 while running war games. ‘Stand down order’. “Of course the orders still stand, have you heard anything to the contrary?”. Norman Minetta testimony. “Gave order to shootdown Flight 93.”, ‘NORAD Drills’.

5) 6 out of the 10 Commissioners believe the 9/11 Commission report was “Setup to fail” Co-Chairs Hamilton and Kean, “It was a 30 year conspiracy”, “The whitehouse has played cover up”, ‘Max Cleland resigned’, ‘John Farmer’.

6) FBI confiscated 84/85 Videos from the Pentagon. ‘Moussaoui trial’ revealed these videos. Released Pentagon Security Camera (FOIA) does not show a 757 and is clearly Missing a frame. ‘Sheraton Hotel’, “Double tree’, ‘Citgo”.

7) Osama Bin Laden was NOT wanted by the FBI for the 9/11 attacks. “No hard evidence connecting Bin Laden to 9/11.” CIA created, trained and funded “Al Qaeda/Taliban” during the Mujahideen. OBL was a CIA asset named ‘Tim Osman’. OBL Reported dead in Dec 2001 (FOX).

8)100′s of Firefighters and witness testimony to BOMBS/EXPLOSIONS ignored by the 9/11 Commission Report. 9/11 Commission Report bars 503 1st responder eyewitnesses. “Explosions in the lobby and sub levels”, ‘Firefighter explosions’, ‘Barry Jennings’, ‘William Rodriguez’.

9) 100′s of firefighters and witness testimony to MOLTEN METAL ignored by the Commission report. “Like you’re in a foundry”, “NIST’s John Gross denies the existence of Molten Metal”, ‘Swiss Cheese’, “As of 21 days after the attack, the fires were still burning and molten steel was still running.” Leslie Robertson’.

10) ’5 Dancing Israeli’s’ arrested in ‘Mossad Truck Bombs’ on 9/11 that stated “We were there to document the event.” ‘Urban Moving Systems’ front company, ‘Dominic Suter’. “$498,750 Business loan (June 2001)”. “Officer DeCarlo’, ‘Art Students’, ‘Israeli Spying’.

11) On September 10th, 2001. Rumsfeld reported $2.3 TRILLION missing from the Pentagon. ‘Dov Zakheim’ Pentagon Comptroller. Former VP of ‘Systems Planning Corporation’ (Flight Termination System). Signatore of PNAC document.

12) 220+ Senior Military, Intelligence Service, Law Enforcement, and Government Officials question the official story. ’9/11 Whistleblowers’, ‘Patriots for 9/11′. ‘Robert Bowman’, ‘Sibel Edmonds’, ‘Albert Stubblebine’, ‘Wesley Clark’, ‘Mark Dayton’, ‘Alan Sabrosky’, ‘Cyntha McKinney’, ‘Jesse Ventura’, ‘Kurt Sonnenfeld’. “patriotsquestion911.com”

13) Towers were built to withstand a Boeing jet(s). “I designed it for a 707 to hit it”, Leslie Robertson, WTC structural engineer. “Could probably sustain multiple impacts of jetliners”, “like a pencil puncturing screen netting” Frank De Martini, deceased Manager of WTC Construction & Project Management. “As far as a plane knocking a building over, that would not happen.” Charlie Thornton, Structural Engineer.

14) History of American False Flag attacks. ‘USS Liberty’, ‘Gulf of Tonkin’, ‘Operation Northwoods’, ‘OKC Bombing (Murrah Building)’, ’1993 WTC attacks’. ‘Patrick Clawson’. Project for the New American Century (PNAC) needed “a New Pearl Harbor”, “Rebuilding America’s Defenses”. 9/11 Achieved those goals.

15) BBC correspondent Jane Standley reported the collapse of WTC 7 (Soloman Brothers building) 20 minutes before it happened. CNN/FOX/MSNBC also had early reports. ‘BBC wtc 7′, ‘Jane Standley’, Ashleigh Banfield’.

16) “Flight 93″ debris was spread out over many miles. Cheney admits to giving the order to shootdown 93. “shot down the plane over Pennsylvania” Rumsfeld, “nothing that you could distinguish that a plane had crashed there” ‘Chris Konicki. “Not a drop of blood” Coroner Wallace Miller. “there was no plane.” Mayor Ernie Stull.

17) Bush hesitated for 441 days before starting the 911 Commission. ‘Jersey Girls’. ‘Phil Zelikow’ already wrote the outline before the commission began. Steel shipped over seas. Obstruction of justice. JFK and Pearl Harbor commissions were started within 7 days.

18) The 911 commission was given extremely limited funds. $15 million was given to investigate 9/11. (Over $60 Million was spent investigating Clintons’ affairs with Monica).

19) Bush said he watched the first plane crash into the North tower on TV before entering the classroom. “The TV was obviously on.” Was informed about the second impact while reading ‘My Pet Goat’ to the children. Remained for at least 8 more minutes while America was under “attack”.

20) The PATRIOT ACT was written before 9/11. Signed into law October 26th, 2001.

21) Marvin Bush was director of Stratasec (Securacom, ‘KuAm’) which was in charge of security of the WTC, United Airlines and Dulles International Airport. All three were breached on 9/11. ICTS was another company that provided security at the airports. ‘Wirt Walker’, ‘Ezra Harel’, ‘ICTS”, ‘WTC power downs’.

22) “Who killed John O’Neil?”. Former FBI task force agent investigating Al Qaeda/Bin Laden. Transferred by Kroll Corporation to head the security just before 9/11. John O’Neil died in the Towers. ‘Jerome Hauer’ ‘Jules Kroll’.

23) Insider trading based upon foreknowledge. ‘Put Options.’ Never identified insiders made millions. ‘United and American Airlines’ ‘Raytheon.’

24) At least 7 of the 19 listed highjackers are still alive (BBC). No video footage of 19 highjackers or passengers boarding the 4 planes. Pilots of the 4 planes never squawked the highjacking code. ‘Alive highjackers’, ‘ACARS’, ‘Pilots for 9/11 Truth’.
__________________
"Because WE ARE IGNORANT OF 911 FACTS, WE DEMAND PROOF" -- Douglas Herman on Rense.com
Travis is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 1st October 2013, 10:49 AM   #84
cjnewson88
Graduate Poster
 
cjnewson88's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 1,699
I concur.

Although a suggestion. Cheney did pass on an order to have UA93 shot down, of course he never 'gave' the order himself, and when it did come it was already too late, but it was there. Kind of.

The $15m to investigate 9/11 should be in red. I heard a figure somewhere that PENTTBOM cost $70m.
__________________
Common sense has clearly been snuck up on from behind beaten several times on the head and left to bleed.
Over 140 pieces of evidence showing American 77 hit the Pentagon http://therightbloggerbastard.blogspot.co.nz/
http://www.youtube.com/user/cjnewson88
cjnewson88 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 1st October 2013, 11:31 AM   #85
jaydeehess
Penultimate Amazing
 
jaydeehess's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: 40 miles north of the border
Posts: 20,821
As pointed out before, although the 911Commission may have gotten $15M, the truther habit of misrepresentation then characterizess the cost as representing all that was spent, ignoring FEMA and NIST.
jaydeehess is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 1st October 2013, 12:49 PM   #86
Travis
Misanthrope of the Mountains
 
Travis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 23,620
Right. They are correct that the 9/11 Commission only got that much money but ignore that the commission was only a small piece of the investigation pie. In fact it was one of the smallest since its mission was very limited. The big pieces were the FBI and CIA investigations the true total cost of which may never be fully known.
__________________
"Because WE ARE IGNORANT OF 911 FACTS, WE DEMAND PROOF" -- Douglas Herman on Rense.com
Travis is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd October 2013, 01:16 AM   #87
sonofgloin
Thinker
 
sonofgloin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 215
DGM, thanks for your one line tiger.
“ The FDNY would be the only ones that would pull their fire fighting efforts. I don't know what you're talking about.”

That leaves me as my verbiage left you, unsure of what you are talking about.

About your statement “PANYNJ hold the purse strings for most of the insurance money.”
I and Larry Silverstein were under the impression that whoever held the lease on the structures, insured the structures....it’s in his lease...well he and his partner Frank Lowie’s lease. What the port authority has to do with the question of Silverstein’s insurance is beyond me.

Mark F, about “FDNY” ....that is the acronym that the “FDNY” use on their web site, NYFD and FDNY are both correct. So you must resist intimating that I am an imbecile thereby assaulting my credibility....many thanks.
http://www.nyc.gov/html/fdny/html/home2.shtml
I read the rest of what you had to say and I dismiss it. The bulk of your synopsis and quotes from officials has documented contradictory testimonies.
About your liner note and your ruse of credibility by using the Chief:
“What do the FDNY have to say about the collapse of 7? How about this from Chief Hayden;”

Should I quote you what General Colin Powell said about WMD’s.....get real there are anomalies and firsts.....multiple first, and that is why we are discussing it here on JR’s forum.
The fact that you will not entertain greed as a driver for human actions leaves you nowhere to go except to the tabloids.


Jaydeehess thanks for your contribution of:
“Mark F. has done a fine job of rebuffing the obvious utterly simplistic.”
Jay if you are relying on Mark as an authority I would consider attaching your harness to another star.
Regarding your other observation “Aaaaahahahahahahaha” I would get that seen to champ.

IDB87, and of your contribution:
“When Building 7 collapsed it was arguable proof that building 7 had in fact collapsed.”
Your speciality, the bleeding obvious...you can have Jay’s “Aaaaahahahahahahaha” for that.

Well that wraps up the responses to your less than standard responses....many thanks.
sonofgloin is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd October 2013, 02:55 AM   #88
Jack by the hedge
Safely Ignored
 
Jack by the hedge's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 9,215
Originally Posted by sonofgloin View Post
I read the rest of what you had to say and I dismiss it.
Well, I'm convinced.
Jack by the hedge is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd October 2013, 03:38 AM   #89
twinstead
Penultimate Amazing
 
twinstead's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 12,370
Originally Posted by sonofgloin View Post
DGM, thanks for your one line tiger.
“ The FDNY would be the only ones that would pull their fire fighting efforts. I don't know what you're talking about.”

That leaves me as my verbiage left you, unsure of what you are talking about.

About your statement “PANYNJ hold the purse strings for most of the insurance money.”
I and Larry Silverstein were under the impression that whoever held the lease on the structures, insured the structures....it’s in his lease...well he and his partner Frank Lowie’s lease. What the port authority has to do with the question of Silverstein’s insurance is beyond me.

Mark F, about “FDNY” ....that is the acronym that the “FDNY” use on their web site, NYFD and FDNY are both correct. So you must resist intimating that I am an imbecile thereby assaulting my credibility....many thanks.
http://www.nyc.gov/html/fdny/html/home2.shtml
I read the rest of what you had to say and I dismiss it. The bulk of your synopsis and quotes from officials has documented contradictory testimonies.
About your liner note and your ruse of credibility by using the Chief:
“What do the FDNY have to say about the collapse of 7? How about this from Chief Hayden;”

Should I quote you what General Colin Powell said about WMD’s.....get real there are anomalies and firsts.....multiple first, and that is why we are discussing it here on JR’s forum.
The fact that you will not entertain greed as a driver for human actions leaves you nowhere to go except to the tabloids.


Jaydeehess thanks for your contribution of:
“Mark F. has done a fine job of rebuffing the obvious utterly simplistic.”
Jay if you are relying on Mark as an authority I would consider attaching your harness to another star.
Regarding your other observation “Aaaaahahahahahahaha” I would get that seen to champ.

IDB87, and of your contribution:
“When Building 7 collapsed it was arguable proof that building 7 had in fact collapsed.”
Your speciality, the bleeding obvious...you can have Jay’s “Aaaaahahahahahahaha” for that.

Well that wraps up the responses to your less than standard responses....many thanks.
"I read the rest of what you had to say and I dismiss it. The bulk of your synopsis and quotes from officials has documented contradictory testimonies". Really?

Isn't it precious you concentrate on frustrated snide remarks--what else can one do when faced with this kind of crap--instead of the thoughtful and time-consuming responses to your arguments that fill this thread? Do you want to reply to any of them with something other than, "the bulk of your synopsis and quotes from officials has documented contradictory testimonies"?
__________________
You are not entitled to your opinion. You are entitled to your INFORMED opinion. No one is entitled to be ignorant. -- Harlan Ellison

Last edited by twinstead; 2nd October 2013 at 03:41 AM.
twinstead is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd October 2013, 03:47 AM   #90
JSanderO
Master Poster
 
JSanderO's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: nyc
Posts: 2,867
Originally Posted by sonofgloin View Post
...

Should I quote you what General Colin Powell said about WMD’s.....get real there are anomalies and firsts.....multiple first, and that is why we are discussing it here on JR’s forum.
The fact that you will not entertain greed as a driver for human actions leaves you nowhere to go except to the tabloids.
Anomalies.

Since not massive completely occupied in use and energized and of rather unique structural designs have ever collapse and none hit by jumbos one would expect to see some unusual *things* resulting from the collapse of well over 1,000,000 millions tons of building in a very short time span.

Since this is not an every day occurrence or even a common one... what are anomalies may simply be artifacts of such monster collapses of occupied buildings. CD's are done to stripped out buildings and much smaller ones to boot... and mostly to concrete frames because the don't lend themselves to piece by piece dismantling.

There are many examples/lessons of mechanics (physics) and chemistry to take from the WTC events. This sort of analysis is beyond the expertise and comprehension of Joe Average. Joe needs to understand the world on his level and that's not a scientific education or profession and mostly informed by TV and Hollywood.

Hollywood has provided all sorts of fantasy which confuses (misinforms) people about the real world. And the truth community is not looking to explain *anomalies* with science but to use them as a basis to support their need for the event to be a CD / inside job / false flag. It's..."I never saw this so it's the result of CD"... of course without any explanation or mechanism.

Truthers are mostly trapped by and coming from a confirmation bias position. And they resist any explanation which crashes their beliefs.
__________________
So many idiots and so little time.
JSanderO is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd October 2013, 05:09 AM   #91
sonofgloin
Thinker
 
sonofgloin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 215
Twinstead “Isn't it precious you concentrate on frustrated snide remarks--what else can one do when faced with this kind of crap--instead of the thoughtful and time-consuming responses to your arguments that fill this thread?”

Twinstead thanks for the advice and chastising.
That is not a reasoned appraisal from you T.
I posted....DGM gives me a one liner....Mark gets up me for an acronym....Jay gives me two lines that include “utterly simplistic” and “Aaaaahahahahahahaha,” I don’t care how you respond to such overtures, I respond how I like.

The only responses to the premise I poised by presenting the video’s and commentary came from JSanderO and I have to digest what he says....unlike the lot I named and your manuscript of four lines....thanks for replying though.
sonofgloin is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd October 2013, 05:35 AM   #92
BStrong
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 11,660
Originally Posted by JSanderO View Post
Anomalies.

Since not massive completely occupied in use and energized and of rather unique structural designs have ever collapse and none hit by jumbos one would expect to see some unusual *things* resulting from the collapse of well over 1,000,000 millions tons of building in a very short time span.

Since this is not an every day occurrence or even a common one... what are anomalies may simply be artifacts of such monster collapses of occupied buildings. CD's are done to stripped out buildings and much smaller ones to boot... and mostly to concrete frames because the don't lend themselves to piece by piece dismantling.

There are many examples/lessons of mechanics (physics) and chemistry to take from the WTC events. This sort of analysis is beyond the expertise and comprehension of Joe Average. Joe needs to understand the world on his level and that's not a scientific education or profession and mostly informed by TV and Hollywood.

Hollywood has provided all sorts of fantasy which confuses (misinforms) people about the real world. And the truth community is not looking to explain *anomalies* with science but to use them as a basis to support their need for the event to be a CD / inside job / false flag. It's..."I never saw this so it's the result of CD"... of course without any explanation or mechanism.

Truthers are mostly trapped by and coming from a confirmation bias position. And they resist any explanation which crashes their beliefs.
Thank you.

I've posted it in other threads, but it's just as applicable to the 9/11 CT's - many people have a world view formed by Hollywood popular fiction, not by reality, and it distorts their perception of events to the point that they believe the world around us is filled with evil villains and grand conspiracies - it must make a drab life more exciting, but it's a world view based on fantasy, not reality.
BStrong is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd October 2013, 06:03 AM   #93
Mark F
Graduate Poster
 
Mark F's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 1,597
Originally Posted by sonofgloin View Post
DGM, thanks for your one line tiger.
Mark F, about “FDNY” ....that is the acronym that the “FDNY” use on their web site, NYFD and FDNY are both correct. So you must resist intimating that I am an imbecile thereby assaulting my credibility....many thanks.
http://www.nyc.gov/html/fdny/html/home2.shtml
I read the rest of what you had to say and I dismiss it. The bulk of your synopsis and quotes from officials has documented contradictory testimonies.
About your liner note and your ruse of credibility by using the Chief:
“What do the FDNY have to say about the collapse of 7? How about this from Chief Hayden;”

The fact that you will not entertain greed as a driver for human actions leaves you nowhere to go except to the tabloids.
Sonofgloin, your entire argument that 7 World Trade Center was destroyed in a controlled demolition of some kind is built on one tiny, flimsy piece of evidence - a single public statement by Larry Silverstein that is at best open to interpretation:

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

Who is Larry talking to? Brent Blanchard? No, he is talking to the fire department commander.

And what are they talking about? The terrible loss of life.

And what else do we know about the condition of 7 at that time? We know it was burning out of control with no water pressure to fight the fires. We know the building was already being reported as unstable, having taken on a lean with creaking and moaning noises coming from it. We know this from all the FDNY radio traffic which reported these things at that a collapse of 7 would endanger rescuers working in the rubble pile of the Twin Towers.

To the rest of us, what Silverstein is saying is there has been such terrible loss of life already, and the 7 is in such a perilous state with out of control fires, no water pressure and the building starting to lean, creak and moan that lets get those first responders out of harms way so we don't lose any more people. That "pull" refers to people and not buildings is clear from the context of Larry's comments and corroborated by the statement I provided by Chief Hayden - a point I think you may have missed. I can provide more such quotes from other fire department officials if that helps for clarification.

The rest of us find that pulling rescue workers out of harms way is a far more plausible explanation of this statement than Larry admitting on national TV under no duress at all that he ordered the fire department to blow up a building for a motive that is at best unclear.

If after planning the most fiendish criminal act in all of human history Larry decided to very casually admit to the whole thing on national TV without any prompting whatsoever, where is the corroboration from other witnesses? If he could be broken with such incredible ease, surely someone else must have blabbed something. Perhaps over a pint at the local watering hole? Perhaps because he was not happy with his share of the insurance money? At least hundreds of people would have to be involved in this, yet not a single one has come forward? Heck, Larry would have had to pay off the entire FDNY handsomely - a department whose surviving members had just lost hundreds of their brothers. Do you really think that makes logical sense? How much money would it take for you to turn a blind eye to the deaths of hundreds of men you consider your brothers?

Where is the supporting physical evidence? Why were there no explosions? Why is there no blast-damaged steel? No remnants of detcord, no traces of explosive residue? How do you explain how these explosives that don't explode or leave any trace evidence even got into the building let alone survived nearly 8 hours of raging fires?

How do you think you would do if you presented this case to a prosecutor for presentation to a grand jury?

"Hey, I think 7 was a CD because Larry S. said "pull it" on national TV and I think that means CD. I have no other corroboration from witnesses or physical evidence and there is no motive because he didn't make any money on the deal. When is the trial date?"

I can entertain greed as a motive. But you have not presented a prima facie case for greed as a motive. Not only have you provided no evidence of any kind that a CD did in fact take place, you have not established that your primary suspect - Larry Silverstein actually made any monetary gain on the deal. Nor have you even attempted to establish how Larry asking the fire department to blow up his building (not in their job description) fits in with all of the other events of that day. You can't treat 7 as a seperate, stand-alone case. It was just one relatively small and unimportant part of a much larger event. If Larry Silverstein did 7, then he had to also do the Twin Towers, the Pentagon and Flight 93. You can't even start to have a case until you can show that link.

You know, you are not exactly the first person to come up with this. People have been failing with this case for more than a decade. It's been mined to death and there is just nothing here. I humbly suggest you move on to something more plausible.
__________________
So I'm going to tell you what the facts are, and the facts are the facts, but then we know the truth. That always overcomes facts.
Mark F is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd October 2013, 06:05 AM   #94
sonofgloin
Thinker
 
sonofgloin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 215
JSanderO” There are many examples/lessons of mechanics (physics) and chemistry to take from the WTC events. This sort of analysis is beyond the expertise and comprehension of Joe Average. Joe needs to understand the world on his level and that's not a scientific education or profession and mostly informed by TV and Hollywood.”

JS I will give you two unfathomable examples from the public record that Joe can comprehend that should have you asking why such acceptance of the official “story” when there was no investigation whatsoever.
Why did the National Institute of Standards and Technology not test for explosive compound residue in steel samples, only noting that similar compounds would have been present during construction of the towers. This seemed like an odd call, almost negligence given compounds degrade.
Then in 2006 NIST were given smples of dust (supposedly from the WTC) that had thermite compound residue, and they quite rightly rejected them as their pedigree was not assured. NIST was immediately petitioned to conduct its own studies using its own known "chain of custody" dust samples, but NIST refused.

The publics scrutineers did not do their job....why...they do more at a local homicide.

Just to end on a bright note as you did...did you know acolytes are mostly trapped by and coming from a confirmation bias position. And they resist any explanation which crashes their beliefs.

Travis thanks for your efforts, good post.
sonofgloin is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd October 2013, 06:33 AM   #95
Animal
Master Poster
 
Animal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: SE Michigan
Posts: 2,094
Originally Posted by Mark F View Post

To the rest of us, what Silverstein is saying is there has been such terrible loss of life already, and the 7 is in such a perilous state with out of control fires, no water pressure and the building starting to lean, creak and moan that lets get those first responders out of harms way so we don't lose any more people. That "pull" refers to people and not buildings is clear from the context of Larry's comments and corroborated by the statement I provided by Chief Hayden - a point I think you may have missed. I can provide more such quotes from other fire department officials if that helps for clarification.
And "PULL" has never been used WRT an explosive controlled demolition in the past nor present.
Animal is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd October 2013, 06:49 AM   #96
twinstead
Penultimate Amazing
 
twinstead's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 12,370
Originally Posted by sonofgloin View Post
JSanderO” There are many examples/lessons of mechanics (physics) and chemistry to take from the WTC events. This sort of analysis is beyond the expertise and comprehension of Joe Average. Joe needs to understand the world on his level and that's not a scientific education or profession and mostly informed by TV and Hollywood.”

JS I will give you two unfathomable examples from the public record that Joe can comprehend that should have you asking why such acceptance of the official “story” when there was no investigation whatsoever.
Why did the National Institute of Standards and Technology not test for explosive compound residue in steel samples, only noting that similar compounds would have been present during construction of the towers. This seemed like an odd call, almost negligence given compounds degrade.
Then in 2006 NIST were given smples of dust (supposedly from the WTC) that had thermite compound residue, and they quite rightly rejected them as their pedigree was not assured. NIST was immediately petitioned to conduct its own studies using its own known "chain of custody" dust samples, but NIST refused.

The publics scrutineers did not do their job....why...they do more at a local homicide.

Just to end on a bright note as you did...did you know acolytes are mostly trapped by and coming from a confirmation bias position. And they resist any explanation which crashes their beliefs.

Travis thanks for your efforts, good post.
Bias position? The very definition of the "pot calling the kettle black"
__________________
You are not entitled to your opinion. You are entitled to your INFORMED opinion. No one is entitled to be ignorant. -- Harlan Ellison
twinstead is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd October 2013, 06:55 AM   #97
NoahFence
Banned
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Patriot Nation
Posts: 22,131
Originally Posted by sonofgloin View Post

JS I will give you two unfathomable examples from the public record that Joe can comprehend that should have you asking why such acceptance of the official “story” when there was no investigation whatsoever.
Why did the National Institute of Standards and Technology not test for explosive compound residue in steel samples, only noting that similar compounds would have been present during construction of the towers. This seemed like an odd call, almost negligence given compounds degrade.
more
The problem is you people insist on making this into some episode of CSI / Criminal Minds. It's not that complicated.

One of the biggest aircraft in the world went as fast as it possibly could into one of the largest buildings in the world. happens. One of the largest buildings collapses wreaking havoc on the surrounding areas.

Fini. Investigation COMPLETE.

Last edited by NoahFence; 2nd October 2013 at 06:57 AM.
NoahFence is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd October 2013, 06:57 AM   #98
BStrong
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 11,660
Originally Posted by sonofgloin View Post
JSanderO” There are many examples/lessons of mechanics (physics) and chemistry to take from the WTC events. This sort of analysis is beyond the expertise and comprehension of Joe Average. Joe needs to understand the world on his level and that's not a scientific education or profession and mostly informed by TV and Hollywood.”

JS I will give you two unfathomable examples from the public record that Joe can comprehend that should have you asking why such acceptance of the official “story” when there was no investigation whatsoever.
Why did the National Institute of Standards and Technology not test for explosive compound residue in steel samples, only noting that similar compounds would have been present during construction of the towers. This seemed like an odd call, almost negligence given compounds degrade.
Then in 2006 NIST were given smples of dust (supposedly from the WTC) that had thermite compound residue, and they quite rightly rejected them as their pedigree was not assured. NIST was immediately petitioned to conduct its own studies using its own known "chain of custody" dust samples, but NIST refused.

The publics scrutineers did not do their job....why...they do more at a local homicide.

Just to end on a bright note as you did...did you know acolytes are mostly trapped by and coming from a confirmation bias position. And they resist any explanation which crashes their beliefs.

Travis thanks for your efforts, good post.
Because no trained and experienced criminal investigator would look at the ample evidence of aircraft strikes, fire and structural damage and conclude that the buildings must have been destroyed by means of a controlled demo job.


As far as "local homicides" go, if an investigator rolls in and finds a decedent with three seperate perforating wounds to the head and their hands tied behind their back, they're not going to be looking for a suicide note or water in the lungs.
BStrong is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd October 2013, 07:15 AM   #99
jaydeehess
Penultimate Amazing
 
jaydeehess's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: 40 miles north of the border
Posts: 20,821
Originally Posted by sonofgloin View Post
About your statement “PANYNJ hold the purse strings for most of the insurance money.”
I and Larry Silverstein were under the impression that whoever held the lease on the structures, insured the structures....it’s in his lease...well he and his partner Frank Lowie’s lease. What the port authority has to do with the question of Silverstein’s insurance is beyond me.
I suppose that is the result of not knowing much about insurance.
As a condition of lease a leasee can be required to take out insurance on the property with claims payable to the owner of the structure. Same can apply to a simple home mortgage. A bank can require that in the event of total loss they are paid first, out of any insurance settlement while also demanding that the mortgagee pay the premiums.
Leasees can and do often also insure contents and chattel separately which is payable to the leasee since they are the ones who own it.

Furthermore even with a home insurance claim for total loss, the insurance company first asks if you will rebuild on the property. You can say yes or no. If you say yes you will receive compensation based on replacment costs. If you decide not to rebuild you will be paid less. The insurance company often pays out enough to start work then pays out portions as work continues and may require proof that work is continuing and may, if work stops, hold payment of the claim.
No one gets rich on insurance claims. Insurance companies are not in the business of giving away free money and making others rich at their expense. Your premise assumes that the company with the most to lose is either complacent or taking ordrs from the claimant. Both are ridiculous.

However in this specific case its obvious that you just assume rather than actually make an effort to find out, how the monies are paid out and to whom.

Quote:
Jaydeehess thanks for your contribution of:
“Mark F. has done a fine job of rebuffing the obvious utterly simplistic.”
Jay if you are relying on Mark as an authority I would consider attaching your harness to another star.
Regarding your other observation “Aaaaahahahahahahaha” I would get that seen to champ.
So you'd like a more in depth reply then. Well I could tell you to use the search function and find the pages and pages of discussion on these forums already devoted to this specific subject. These discussions have come up many times since Silverstein was interviewed and discussed and argued over for YEARS NOW, yet you come along and assume you are bringing up stupendous new smoking gun news.
ETA: here's but one thread with 4200+ posts http://www.internationalskeptics.com...d.php?t=110013

That is why I laugh at you.
Quote:
Larry Silverstein makes a statement that he never repeats or acknowledges again.
Wrong, since truthers mangled his words he has clarified his position.
ETA: the search function is your friend: http://www.internationalskeptics.com...0&postcount=29 (not, btw, from the same thread linked to above)
There is even a tag for "pull it" to make searching easier. Are you unaware of how searches work, or are you incapable of manipulating a search engine?
.
That is why I laugh at you.

Quote:
How is it possible that within a few hours of making the decision to demolish Bldg 7 it falls into its own footprint?
Assumes the consequent logical fallacy. False premise logical fallacy.

That is why I laugh at you

Quote:
According to Larry Silverstein the NYFD achieved in a few hours what demolition teams and engineers take weeks to accomplish.
A statement not in any way supported by any evidence at all, I can only assume you made this up yourself. Larry Silverstein did not instruct the FDNY to demolish WTC 7, nor has the FDNY ever taken ordrs from real estate developers, nor has the FDNY ever been in the business of demolishing high rise buildings or for that matter any structures.

That is why I laugh at you

Quote:
Given that before 911 no high rise has fallen to its basement due to fire, this is not just suspect this is arguable proof of pre meditation given who made the statement. Can any poster propose a scenario that rebuffs the obvious?
Ignores completely the specifics of this event and assumes malfeasance despite no evidence of it.

That is why I laugh at you

Quote:
This piece adds more "obvious" scenarios needing to be explained. The detractors last statement of "reporters do your job...ask some questions" expresses the exasperation of those who for good reason do not believe the media.
Once again, nothing new at all. Nothing that has not been argued often and long in the pages of these forums, and, most importantly nothing that supports the view of the author, or you.

That is why I laugh at you.

Perhaps instead, I should pity you.

Last edited by jaydeehess; 2nd October 2013 at 08:05 AM.
jaydeehess is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd October 2013, 09:20 AM   #100
Travis
Misanthrope of the Mountains
 
Travis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 23,620
Originally Posted by sonofgloin View Post
JSanderO” There are many examples/lessons of mechanics (physics) and chemistry to take from the WTC events. This sort of analysis is beyond the expertise and comprehension of Joe Average. Joe needs to understand the world on his level and that's not a scientific education or profession and mostly informed by TV and Hollywood.”

JS I will give you two unfathomable examples from the public record that Joe can comprehend that should have you asking why such acceptance of the official “story” when there was no investigation whatsoever.
Why did the National Institute of Standards and Technology not test for explosive compound residue in steel samples, only noting that similar compounds would have been present during construction of the towers. This seemed like an odd call, almost negligence given compounds degrade.
It is actually quite simple. No one tests for explosive residue unless there is some evidence that would suggest it is necessary. And no evidence was apparent. There were no beams cut in two by shaped charges. There were no blasting caps. There were no stray bits of detcord or anything at all to suggest that someone should waste their time testing for explosives.

Originally Posted by sonofgloin View Post
Then in 2006 NIST were given smples of dust (supposedly from the WTC) that had thermite compound residue, and they quite rightly rejected them as their pedigree was not assured. NIST was immediately petitioned to conduct its own studies using its own known "chain of custody" dust samples, but NIST refused.
Um. No. What was found was dust that had spericles in it that were left over from construction. Nothing more. There was no need to waste time on them.

Originally Posted by sonofgloin View Post
The publics scrutineers did not do their job....why...they do more at a local homicide.
No they do the same thing at a homicide. If they pull up and find a body with a gash on the neck they don't immediately send out an APB for a unicycle clown wielding an acetylene torch.



Originally Posted by sonofgloin View Post
Travis thanks for your efforts, good post.
Thanks.
__________________
"Because WE ARE IGNORANT OF 911 FACTS, WE DEMAND PROOF" -- Douglas Herman on Rense.com
Travis is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd October 2013, 09:35 AM   #101
dafydd
Banned
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 35,398
Originally Posted by sonofgloin View Post
Twinstead “Isn't it precious you concentrate on frustrated snide remarks--what else can one do when faced with this kind of crap--instead of the thoughtful and time-consuming responses to your arguments that fill this thread?”

Twinstead thanks for the advice and chastising.
That is not a reasoned appraisal from you T.
I posted....DGM gives me a one liner....Mark gets up me for an acronym....Jay gives me two lines that include “utterly simplistic” and “Aaaaahahahahahahaha,” I don’t care how you respond to such overtures, I respond how I like.

The only responses to the premise I poised by presenting the video’s and commentary came from JSanderO and I have to digest what he says....unlike the lot I named and your manuscript of four lines....thanks for replying though.
Gloin wouldn't be proud of you.
dafydd is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd October 2013, 10:41 AM   #102
JSanderO
Master Poster
 
JSanderO's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: nyc
Posts: 2,867
Originally Posted by sonofgloin View Post
JSanderO” There are many examples/lessons of mechanics (physics) and chemistry to take from the WTC events. This sort of analysis is beyond the expertise and comprehension of Joe Average. Joe needs to understand the world on his level and that's not a scientific education or profession and mostly informed by TV and Hollywood.”

JS I will give you two unfathomable examples from the public record that Joe can comprehend that should have you asking why such acceptance of the official “story” when there was no investigation whatsoever.
Why did the National Institute of Standards and Technology not test for explosive compound residue in steel samples, only noting that similar compounds would have been present during construction of the towers. This seemed like an odd call, almost negligence given compounds degrade.
Then in 2006 NIST were given smples of dust (supposedly from the WTC) that had thermite compound residue, and they quite rightly rejected them as their pedigree was not assured. NIST was immediately petitioned to conduct its own studies using its own known "chain of custody" dust samples, but NIST refused.

The publics scrutineers did not do their job....why...they do more at a local homicide.

Just to end on a bright note as you did...did you know acolytes are mostly trapped by and coming from a confirmation bias position. And they resist any explanation which crashes their beliefs.

Travis thanks for your efforts, good post.
My hunch for why they didn't look for explosive residue is as follows:

There was no steel or enough of it seen/recovered which looked suspiciously like it was the victim of *foul play*. In all the photos I saw of the fallen steel debris none of it looks like it was exploded apart or cut through with some sort of cutting device. It all seems to be mechanically broken.

YES there was some steel with eutectic corrosion. This MAY have been a post collapse process as the pile stewed and burned for months.

Having said this I am sure that they have dust samples and could perform the tests... and if they could be conclusive... why not?

The claim of thermite has not only been disputed or debunked depending on who you believe... but there is no mechanism to explain how painted steel would caused it to come apart as we saw... or for that matter explain the so called anomalies that truthers associate with CD.

Unprotected steel does not fare well in unfought fires.
__________________
So many idiots and so little time.
JSanderO is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd October 2013, 11:21 AM   #103
DGM
Skeptic not Atheist
 
DGM's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: West of Northshore MA
Posts: 24,652
Originally Posted by sonofgloin View Post
DGM, thanks for your one line tiger.
“ The FDNY would be the only ones that would pull their fire fighting efforts. I don't know what you're talking about.”

That leaves me as my verbiage left you, unsure of what you are talking about.
Go with that if it makes you feel better.

Quote:
About your statement “PANYNJ hold the purse strings for most of the insurance money.”
I and Larry Silverstein were under the impression that whoever held the lease on the structures, insured the structures....it’s in his lease...well he and his partner Frank Lowie’s lease. What the port authority has to do with the question of Silverstein’s insurance is beyond me.
Obviously it is beyond you. You don't own the property you lease. I can't make it any easier for you. If you want, call a bank or insurance company and ask.

Silverstein is well aware of his responsibility. If he wasn't he wouldn't have signed the 2006 agreement. You do know the agreement I'm talking about, right?
__________________
"Remember that the goal of conspiracy rhetoric is to bog down the discussion, not to make progress toward a solution" Jay Windley

"How many leaves on the seventh branch of the fourth tree?" is meaningless when you are in the wrong forest: ozeco41
DGM is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd October 2013, 01:03 AM   #104
sonofgloin
Thinker
 
sonofgloin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 215
BStrong>> I've posted it in other threads, but it's just as applicable to the 9/11 CT's - many people have a world view formed by Hollywood popular fiction, not by reality,<<

BS....you are correct but your good self and JS omitted to mention the accessibility of YouTube footage, it perhaps more than any other media has a load to answer for as it is portrayed as nonfiction. Simple souls have to be told they are watching a movie.
In saying that I still believe 911 stinks.

Twinstead>> Bias position? The very definition of the "pot calling the kettle black"<<
T as I said to BS, 911 stinks and it will until I am convinced otherwise.
As an example....why did the secret service leave the president sitting at the school after the second strike given his presence there was on the public calendar, that aint in the rule book.

Mark I read all you wrote. Re the fire fighters believing the company line....there is this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rr7n-uZ6bhc
Re your last comment about being done to death....ok

Jay>> That is why I laugh at you.<<
Who cares,........it’s only you.

Dafydd>> Gloin wouldn't be proud of you.<<
Gloin was good at fighting, not thinking.

JS>> Unprotected steel does not fare well in unfought fires.<<
Building 7 was the first and last steel framed high rise to fall to the basement, due to a fire.
Anyway as Mark said, it has all been said.....
sonofgloin is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd October 2013, 03:54 AM   #105
Travis
Misanthrope of the Mountains
 
Travis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 23,620
Originally Posted by sonofgloin View Post
Twinstead>> Bias position? The very definition of the "pot calling the kettle black"<<
T as I said to BS, 911 stinks and it will until I am convinced otherwise.
As an example....why did the secret service leave the president sitting at the school after the second strike given his presence there was on the public calendar, that aint in the rule book.
Why would they not? The school was a secure place. Better to keep him in the place you already have secure than to rush him out of there with no clear plan on what to do next.

Originally Posted by sonofgloin View Post
JS>> Unprotected steel does not fare well in unfought fires.<<
Building 7 was the first and last steel framed high rise to fall to the basement, due to a fire.
Anyway as Mark said, it has all been said.
And it was the first steel framed highrise to have an unfought, out of control fire in it. So would we not expect unusual results from an unusual situation?
__________________
"Because WE ARE IGNORANT OF 911 FACTS, WE DEMAND PROOF" -- Douglas Herman on Rense.com
Travis is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd October 2013, 04:46 AM   #106
dafydd
Banned
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 35,398
Originally Posted by sonofgloin View Post
Dafydd>> Gloin wouldn't be proud of you.<<
Gloin was good at fighting, not thinking.
You are well named.
dafydd is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd October 2013, 04:47 AM   #107
dafydd
Banned
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 35,398
Originally Posted by sonofgloin View Post
T as I said to BS, 911 stinks and it will until I am convinced otherwise.
As an example....why did the secret service leave the president sitting at the school after the second strike given his presence there was on the public calendar, that aint in the rule book.
What should have happened? The president and the secret service running around like headless chickens? Could you quote the apposite rule from the rule book?
dafydd is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd October 2013, 04:51 AM   #108
Jack by the hedge
Safely Ignored
 
Jack by the hedge's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 9,215
Regarding Secret Service behaviour which "ain't in the rule book", am I wrong to imagine the US Secret Service are not so foolish as actually to publish their "rulebook" for protecting the president and that this is no more than an expression of personal incredulity?
Jack by the hedge is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd October 2013, 05:44 AM   #109
Mark F
Graduate Poster
 
Mark F's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 1,597
Originally Posted by sonofgloin View Post
Mark I read all you wrote. Re the fire fighters believing the company line....there is this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rr7n-uZ6bhc
Re your last comment about being done to death....ok
Wow, after all the points I brought up, after all the effort I put into that your sole retort is an out-of-context Youtube video that has nothing to do with building 7? Could you be any more lazy than that? Could you fail any more completely to miss the point - not just miss it but I suspect deliberately avoid it?

And what about your video link which doesn't really address any of my points? I should ignore your obvious attempt to change the subject but this is an important lesson in how Truther Youtube videos so frequently get it so wrong.

I would like you to think about this for a moment. If these firefighters being interviewed in your video were in the South Tower lobby AND there were explosions (of whatever kind) in that lobby AND these explosions were powerful enough to bring down a 110-story steel structure AND they in fact did bring down said structure, why are these men still alive?

Nobody made it out of the South Tower.

Isn't that enough right there to cast serious doubt on what I suspect you believe this video proves - that pre-planted bombs in the lobby of the twin towers brought them down? For your belief to be true these men have to be dead. Since they are not dead we have reason to cast serious doubts on your interpretation of events.

If you had done your homework it would have taken you a few minutes to figure out these 3 men were NEVER in the lobby of the South Tower. They were in the lobby of the Marriott Hotel. Thus they were never in a position to witness "explosions in the lobby of the twin towers". What they heard which they described as being "like an explosion" (they are not saying it was an explosion, or "bombs" but that it sounded LIKE an explosion) was the sound of the South Tower collapsing on top of them.

http://i995.photobucket.com/albums/a...DrewAP-400.jpg

So you still have not met your burden of proof.

You have not established that there was CD.
You have not established that Larry Silverstein admitted to CD.
You have not established that Larry Silverstein had motive to commit CD.
You have not established how/why your villain, Larry Silverstein (the "Evil Jew" so necessary it seems to most modern CT's) would have also pulled off the Pentagon attacks and Flight 93.

If you want to believe 9/11 stinks then have at it. I'm down with that. But you should believe it for the right reasons and not just fall un-critically for any nonsense that supports what you want to be true. If you do that you will never figure out what is actually true.
__________________
So I'm going to tell you what the facts are, and the facts are the facts, but then we know the truth. That always overcomes facts.

Last edited by Mark F; 3rd October 2013 at 05:45 AM.
Mark F is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd October 2013, 08:15 AM   #110
twinstead
Penultimate Amazing
 
twinstead's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 12,370
Originally Posted by dafydd View Post
What should have happened? The president and the secret service running around like headless chickens? Could you quote the apposite rule from the rule book?
It's all in the Chicken Little Addendum of 1997. Where have you been?
__________________
You are not entitled to your opinion. You are entitled to your INFORMED opinion. No one is entitled to be ignorant. -- Harlan Ellison
twinstead is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd October 2013, 08:25 AM   #111
tsig
a carbon based life-form
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 39,049
Originally Posted by Travis View Post
I've gone ahead and color coded the list.

Red = Outright lies
Blue = Misrepresentations of true things
Green = Truths that are irrelevant


1) Nano Thermite was found in the dust at Ground Zero. Peer reviewed in the Bentham Open Chemical Physics Journal. ‘Niels Harrit’, ‘Thermite Bentham’, “The great thermate debate” Jon Cole, ‘Iron rich spheres’ Steven Jones, ‘Limited Metallurgical Examination (FEMA C-13, Appendix C-6)’. ‘Nano Tubes’

2) 1700+ Engineers and Architects support a real independent 9/11 investigation. Richard Gage, Founder. ‘Explosive Evidence’, ‘Blueprint for Truth’, ‘AE911′, ‘Toronto Hearings’, ‘Kevin Ryan’.

3) The total collapse of WTC 7 in 6.5 seconds at free fall acceleration (NIST admits 2.25 seconds). Larry Silverstein used the term “Pull it”. Steel framed high rise buildings have NEVER totally collapsed from fire or structural damage. Builidng 7 was not hit by a plane. ‘Building 7′, ‘WTC 7′.

4) Dick Cheney was in command of NORAD on 9/11 while running war games. ‘Stand down order’. “Of course the orders still stand, have you heard anything to the contrary?”. Norman Minetta testimony. “Gave order to shootdown Flight 93.”, ‘NORAD Drills’.

5) 6 out of the 10 Commissioners believe the 9/11 Commission report was “Setup to fail” Co-Chairs Hamilton and Kean, “It was a 30 year conspiracy”, “The whitehouse has played cover up”, ‘Max Cleland resigned’, ‘John Farmer’.

6) FBI confiscated 84/85 Videos from the Pentagon. ‘Moussaoui trial’ revealed these videos. Released Pentagon Security Camera (FOIA) does not show a 757 and is clearly Missing a frame. ‘Sheraton Hotel’, “Double tree’, ‘Citgo”.

7) Osama Bin Laden was NOT wanted by the FBI for the 9/11 attacks. “No hard evidence connecting Bin Laden to 9/11.” CIA created, trained and funded “Al Qaeda/Taliban” during the Mujahideen. OBL was a CIA asset named ‘Tim Osman’. OBL Reported dead in Dec 2001 (FOX).

8)100′s of Firefighters and witness testimony to BOMBS/EXPLOSIONS ignored by the 9/11 Commission Report. 9/11 Commission Report bars 503 1st responder eyewitnesses. “Explosions in the lobby and sub levels”, ‘Firefighter explosions’, ‘Barry Jennings’, ‘William Rodriguez’.

9) 100′s of firefighters and witness testimony to MOLTEN METAL ignored by the Commission report. “Like you’re in a foundry”, “NIST’s John Gross denies the existence of Molten Metal”, ‘Swiss Cheese’, “As of 21 days after the attack, the fires were still burning and molten steel was still running.” Leslie Robertson’.

10) ’5 Dancing Israeli’s’ arrested in ‘Mossad Truck Bombs’ on 9/11 that stated “We were there to document the event.” ‘Urban Moving Systems’ front company, ‘Dominic Suter’. “$498,750 Business loan (June 2001)”. “Officer DeCarlo’, ‘Art Students’, ‘Israeli Spying’.

11) On September 10th, 2001. Rumsfeld reported $2.3 TRILLION missing from the Pentagon. ‘Dov Zakheim’ Pentagon Comptroller. Former VP of ‘Systems Planning Corporation’ (Flight Termination System). Signatore of PNAC document.

12) 220+ Senior Military, Intelligence Service, Law Enforcement, and Government Officials question the official story. ’9/11 Whistleblowers’, ‘Patriots for 9/11′. ‘Robert Bowman’, ‘Sibel Edmonds’, ‘Albert Stubblebine’, ‘Wesley Clark’, ‘Mark Dayton’, ‘Alan Sabrosky’, ‘Cyntha McKinney’, ‘Jesse Ventura’, ‘Kurt Sonnenfeld’. “patriotsquestion911.com”

13) Towers were built to withstand a Boeing jet(s). “I designed it for a 707 to hit it”, Leslie Robertson, WTC structural engineer. “Could probably sustain multiple impacts of jetliners”, “like a pencil puncturing screen netting” Frank De Martini, deceased Manager of WTC Construction & Project Management. “As far as a plane knocking a building over, that would not happen.” Charlie Thornton, Structural Engineer.

14) History of American False Flag attacks. ‘USS Liberty’, ‘Gulf of Tonkin’, ‘Operation Northwoods’, ‘OKC Bombing (Murrah Building)’, ’1993 WTC attacks’. ‘Patrick Clawson’. Project for the New American Century (PNAC) needed “a New Pearl Harbor”, “Rebuilding America’s Defenses”. 9/11 Achieved those goals.

15) BBC correspondent Jane Standley reported the collapse of WTC 7 (Soloman Brothers building) 20 minutes before it happened. CNN/FOX/MSNBC also had early reports. ‘BBC wtc 7′, ‘Jane Standley’, Ashleigh Banfield’.

16) “Flight 93″ debris was spread out over many miles. Cheney admits to giving the order to shootdown 93. “shot down the plane over Pennsylvania” Rumsfeld, “nothing that you could distinguish that a plane had crashed there” ‘Chris Konicki. “Not a drop of blood” Coroner Wallace Miller. “there was no plane.” Mayor Ernie Stull.

17) Bush hesitated for 441 days before starting the 911 Commission. ‘Jersey Girls’. ‘Phil Zelikow’ already wrote the outline before the commission began. Steel shipped over seas. Obstruction of justice. JFK and Pearl Harbor commissions were started within 7 days.

18) The 911 commission was given extremely limited funds. $15 million was given to investigate 9/11. (Over $60 Million was spent investigating Clintons’ affairs with Monica).

19) Bush said he watched the first plane crash into the North tower on TV before entering the classroom. “The TV was obviously on.” Was informed about the second impact while reading ‘My Pet Goat’ to the children. Remained for at least 8 more minutes while America was under “attack”.

20) The PATRIOT ACT was written before 9/11. Signed into law October 26th, 2001.

21) Marvin Bush was director of Stratasec (Securacom, ‘KuAm’) which was in charge of security of the WTC, United Airlines and Dulles International Airport. All three were breached on 9/11. ICTS was another company that provided security at the airports. ‘Wirt Walker’, ‘Ezra Harel’, ‘ICTS”, ‘WTC power downs’.

22) “Who killed John O’Neil?”. Former FBI task force agent investigating Al Qaeda/Bin Laden. Transferred by Kroll Corporation to head the security just before 9/11. John O’Neil died in the Towers. ‘Jerome Hauer’ ‘Jules Kroll’.

23) Insider trading based upon foreknowledge. ‘Put Options.’ Never identified insiders made millions. ‘United and American Airlines’ ‘Raytheon.’

24) At least 7 of the 19 listed highjackers are still alive (BBC). No video footage of 19 highjackers or passengers boarding the 4 planes. Pilots of the 4 planes never squawked the highjacking code. ‘Alive highjackers’, ‘ACARS’, ‘Pilots for 9/11 Truth’.
Originally Posted by sonofgloin View Post
Twinstead “Isn't it precious you concentrate on frustrated snide remarks--what else can one do when faced with this kind of crap--instead of the thoughtful and time-consuming responses to your arguments that fill this thread?”

Twinstead thanks for the advice and chastising.
That is not a reasoned appraisal from you T.
I posted....DGM gives me a one liner....Mark gets up me for an acronym....Jay gives me two lines that include “utterly simplistic” and “Aaaaahahahahahahaha,” I don’t care how you respond to such overtures, I respond how I like.

The only responses to the premise I poised by presenting the video’s and commentary came from JSanderO and I have to digest what he says....unlike the lot I named and your manuscript of four lines....thanks for replying though.
Reposted
tsig is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd October 2013, 08:30 AM   #112
carlitos
"más divertido"
 
carlitos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 18,812
Originally Posted by sonofgloin View Post
BStrong>>

Twinstead>>

Mark

Jay>>

Dafydd

JS>>
Please consider using the quote / multiquote function.

How to use the multiquote function is at the bottom of this page.
carlitos is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd October 2013, 08:37 AM   #113
BStrong
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 11,660
Originally Posted by sonofgloin View Post
BStrong>> I've posted it in other threads, but it's just as applicable to the 9/11 CT's - many people have a world view formed by Hollywood popular fiction, not by reality,<<

BS....you are correct but your good self and JS omitted to mention the accessibility of YouTube footage, it perhaps more than any other media has a load to answer for as it is portrayed as nonfiction. Simple souls have to be told they are watching a movie.
In saying that I still believe 911 stinks.


Twinstead>> Bias position? The very definition of the "pot calling the kettle black"<<
T as I said to BS, 911 stinks and it will until I am convinced otherwise.
As an example....why did the secret service leave the president sitting at the school after the second strike given his presence there was on the public calendar, that aint in the rule book.


Mark I read all you wrote. Re the fire fighters believing the company line....there is this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rr7n-uZ6bhc
Re your last comment about being done to death....ok

Jay>> That is why I laugh at you.<<
Who cares,........it’s only you.

Dafydd>> Gloin wouldn't be proud of you.<<
Gloin was good at fighting, not thinking.

JS>> Unprotected steel does not fare well in unfought fires.<<
Building 7 was the first and last steel framed high rise to fall to the basement, due to a fire.
Anyway as Mark said, it has all been said.....
First bolded: film footage of the aircraft strikes, resultant structural damage and subsequent fires that led to structural failure are there for all to see, and in the words of the late, great Daniel Patrick Moynihan, "Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own facts."

You are free to believe whatever the hell you want about 9/11, that doesn't mean that your beliefs take precedence over the laws of physics, nor do your beliefs take precedence over the established facts.

Second bolded:

What "rule book" are you getting on about?

The Secret Service did exactly what they are expected to in a situation of national emergency with no known immediate threat to POTUS - secure him, the area and then evacuate to a controlled safe area.

What exactly does your training and experience in the field leads you to conclude that the Service acted outside SOP?

Last edited by BStrong; 3rd October 2013 at 08:39 AM.
BStrong is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd October 2013, 09:54 AM   #114
dafydd
Banned
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 35,398
Originally Posted by Jack by the hedge View Post
Regarding Secret Service behaviour which "ain't in the rule book", am I wrong to imagine the US Secret Service are not so foolish as actually to publish their "rulebook" for protecting the president and that this is no more than an expression of personal incredulity?
Of course. He has never seen this 'rule book'. I noticed that he has not told me how the president should have acted.
dafydd is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd October 2013, 10:40 AM   #115
jaydeehess
Penultimate Amazing
 
jaydeehess's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: 40 miles north of the border
Posts: 20,821
Originally Posted by sonofgloin View Post

Jay>> That is why I laugh at you.<<
Who cares,........it’s only you.
Wrong again.

Quote:
JS>> Unprotected steel does not fare well in unfought fires.<<
Building 7 was the first and last steel framed high rise to fall to the basement, due to a fire.
Anyway as Mark said, it has all been said.....
Actually that was also a main point I made., that it has ALL been discussed here and with truther posters much better at constructing an arguement than you are.
Building 7 was framed in an unconventional fashion. Building 7 was in large part, constructed over an existing lower structure. Building 7 suffered major damage to it SW face prior to fires developing. When you ignore these and other salient facts you are simply displaying your religious adherence to a predetermined assumption.

I do note that for all your complaint about one liners, you now seem to be vying for champ of the one liner response.

Like I said perhaps I should pity, rather than laugh at, you.

Last edited by jaydeehess; 3rd October 2013 at 10:56 AM.
jaydeehess is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd October 2013, 11:08 AM   #116
jaydeehess
Penultimate Amazing
 
jaydeehess's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: 40 miles north of the border
Posts: 20,821
Oy vey!, now its the 'Secret Service should have run screaming from the school' meme!
Of the non-technical truther memes this ranks as one of the stupidist.
The two attacks were those involving large aircraft flying into massive and easily identified office buildings in NYC.
The president was in a low rise school in a residential area hundreds of miles from NYC. If he were a target it would be highly unlikely that there would be an attempt to have pilots try to locate such a small target from the air. If he were being targeted on the ground then he is much safer in the building where potential snipiers cannot see him. If he were rushed off to AF1 he would now be in a large well marked aircraft sitting on the tarmac away from other planes, a much easier target to see from the air and at a time when all aircraft were being instructed to land asap. If targeted by ground attack, once again it would be less safe to be in a vehicle loaded with thousands of gallons of fuel and sitting out in the open. Not to mention the exposure while transporting between school and AF1.

It is SOP that when the POTUS is in a direct threat environment that the Secret Service rush him out of that location. Thus it was simply common sense to wait in place, set up extra security along the route to AF1 and at the airport and then leave the school. The truther meme in this case makes absolutely no sense whatsoever, and those who expound on it simply demonstrate their lack of logical thought and reasoning.

Last edited by jaydeehess; 3rd October 2013 at 11:13 AM.
jaydeehess is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd October 2013, 11:11 AM   #117
DGM
Skeptic not Atheist
 
DGM's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: West of Northshore MA
Posts: 24,652
sonofgloin:

What no rebuttal on the insurance/lease deal? Can I assume you read the "06" agreement and now retract what you said about the insurance money?

PANYNJ really does hold all the purse strings.
__________________
"Remember that the goal of conspiracy rhetoric is to bog down the discussion, not to make progress toward a solution" Jay Windley

"How many leaves on the seventh branch of the fourth tree?" is meaningless when you are in the wrong forest: ozeco41
DGM is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd October 2013, 11:11 AM   #118
carlitos
"más divertido"
 
carlitos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 18,812
Originally Posted by jaydeehess View Post
The president was in a low rise school in a residential area hundreds of miles from NYC.
Around 1300 miles.
carlitos is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd October 2013, 11:20 AM   #119
Spanx
Master Poster
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 2,045
Originally Posted by carlitos View Post
Around 1300 miles.
But this is evidence that Bush distanced himself from the attacks so that no one would suspect him.
Spanx is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd October 2013, 11:31 AM   #120
jaydeehess
Penultimate Amazing
 
jaydeehess's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: 40 miles north of the border
Posts: 20,821
Originally Posted by Spanx View Post
But this is evidence that Bush distanced himself from the attacks so that no one would suspect him.
Dastardly brilliant are these neo-cons. Rumsfeld made sure he was actually in a building that was attacked which just goes to show he knew exactly which offices would be hit. G W Bush makes sure he is 1300 miles away (thx carlitos) which just shows he knew exactly what office structure in NYC was going to be hit right?
jaydeehess is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Conspiracies and Conspiracy Theories » 9/11 Conspiracy Theories

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 08:54 PM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.