I don't care what Larry says,,,,the fact that Building 7 fell in less than 7 seconds,,,,total free fall,,,,confirms it was a controlled implosion. The fact that Nano Thermite was found in the dust confirms that these were taken down with demolition. Larry's statement just adds fire to these arguments,,,,but it is the other facts which confirm them IMO.
Pull it is also a term used to evacuate all safety, fire and rescue people. Before he said pull it, he made the statement "So many lives had already been lost they gave the order to 'pull it''' and that is referring to pulling emergency personal battling the fires to pull out after it was evacuated. Do better research. This had nothing to do with demolition. Suspicious that it imploded, but they are designed to do just that in a failure anywhere on the building in skyrise design.
The title on this video needs to be changed. WTC owner is incorrect. Larry Silverstein part of a joint venture with SPG Funds (Silverstein Properties Group). We do not know his exact percentage of ownership interests in the WTC Complex but my very educated guess is that the redhead we can see from the back on my featured vid has the largest ownership position. I was defrauded of SPG Funds I &II and the owner of those Funds gave me a special power of attorney to stop him from his manipulations.HR
I issued the orders to PULL back the firefighters and define the collapse zone. It was a critical decision; we could not lose any more firefighters. It took a lot of time to PULL everyone out, given the emotionalism of the day, communications difficulties, and the collapse terrain. - FDNY Chief of Department Daniel Nigro
@WillShakespeare2007 Thats the lamest excuse Ive heard yet. Larry Siverstien gained billions in insurance fraud money after collecting on his investment at the WTC buildings. Larry clearly stated on video, "They made the decision to PULL the building" Demolition by well placed thermite and explosives. 3000 people died because of his greed, and the greed of Dick Chaney, Donald Rumsfeld, and Wolfowitz.
@WillShakespeare2007 Oh we know what he said alright. Larry Silverstien: "Then they made the decision to Pull it", quote unquote. Larry Silverstien was in on it from the beginning. Money talks , and these greee bastards new exactly what they were planning before the towers were destroyed by controlled demolition. They new that hundreds or thousands might die and others injured for life. Did that bother DicK Chaney or Larry, Hell no.
@paskettle - Well that was not the quote you tried to get past me in your last post. You said "They made the decision to PULL the building" that was a lie and a perfect example of trying to distort the truth to fit a conspiracy theory. You have no evidence and so you have to keep lying about the actual facts to build a case. It is not working.
@WillShakespeare2007 You argue about the arguement. Dont confuse the issue. Larry Silverstein clearly stated that building seven was pulled, Controlled demolition is PULLING the building down. Nothing else was inferred in the statement. Bldg seven was controlled demolition at 5 pm on the samday. There hadnt been time to set the necessary charges for controlled demo. on 9 /11. Which means they already had planned to demolish bild #7 before sept 11. Preplanned by Silverstein & Dick.
@paskettle - He didn't say B7 was pulled. This is another example of you taking what he actually said and changing it to suit your conspiracy. You were even willing to totally misquote him in order to make his statement fit your view of events. The "issue" is what he said and that you keep trying to change what he said. No one has ever referred to a controlled demolition as "pulling" a building and he was clearly referring to pulling the firefighters out of the building. A common term.
@WillShakespeare2007 You are a simple shiller without a doubt. No one that has seen the video could deny that Larry Silverstein clealy stated they would PULL building #7. Only a fool would state it otherwise.
If your are only a fool, a simpleton, then we will pat you on the head and send you out ot play. You clearly do not have the capacity to understand. I would suggest you go back to watching the Simpsons or reality TV, the cartoons, or whatever you doing before you stopped here.
@firestones18 -"eey wanker" - just go and get an education, you are barely literate and can not even form a coherent sentence. Do you honestly expect a response to such illiterate nonsense?
@firestones18 - I was talking about 9/11 - you are the one that wants to talk about Obama's penis. Seems like you must not be able to keep it our of your mind. You are displaying the intelligence level one needs to be at to be a "truther". Well done you are winning the argument for me.
"I got a call from the fire department commander telling me they were not sure they were going to be able to contain the fire" i.e. they were fighting a losing battle & couldn't save the building.
"I said, you know we've had such terrible loss of life maybe the smartest thing to do is pull it! i.e. PULL the operation.
"And they made that decision to pull" i.e PULL the firefighters away from the building.
It is obvious what he means! Never heard the term PULL back?
@WillShakespeare2007 Dr. Shyam Sunder, of the National Institutes of Standards and Technology (NIST), which investigated the collapse of WTC 7, is quoted in Popular Mechanics (9/11: Debunking the Myths, March, 2005) as saying: "There was no firefighting in WTC 7."
@edwardstim - Yes because he said PULL them. Thanks for backing up the facts. What the hell do you want be the way? I was talking about the term PULL! Got a comment on that leave it, if not leave your tin foil hat on and keep your crap to yourself.
people, watch the video, share it on your facebook, email to friends, blog it, move onto the next one....do not engage in dialogue with these obvious paid agents who have suddenly begun appearing in here filling the comments with belittlement, name calling, and attempts to debunk the truth. They are paid, notice some of them are on daily, for several hours a day and they troll all over youtube trying to debunk us. Why would anyone do that unless they were being paid? Traitors!
If no one went in to Building 7 to plant explosives for a controlled demolition, how could they "pull it"? The controlled demolition HAD to have been planned in advance.
funny i thought building 7 was blamed on the terrioists... funny how they flip the story wenever the fuck they feel like and then get defended by retards and rasicsts who hate asians and have bin waitin for a chance 2 blame them 4 sumthin all their lives...lol just like the E.D.L (the retard club for people who want 2 suck hittlers dick even though he was a blantent pussy) warring a global EMP hits 23/6/2012 so bring matches
It really shows how ignorant Truthers are when "pull-it" has been explained time and time again to them and they ignore common sense from rock-solid sources yet they still cling to the bullshit that their Loose Change, 9/11 "Truth" groups & etc. tells them that they should think
@Iynnmb1204 You also forgot to answer my question. The term "pull it" was used on WTC 6. How did they "pull" WTC 6? The fact that you know the answer yet are afraid to be exposed as a fraud shows that you are intellectually dishonest and cannot admit you are terribly wrong.
@Iynnmb1204 "they made that decision to pull it". They. Larry didn't order anybody. Larry cannot order anybody.
The fact that you needed to change his words to fit your conclusion without any of the required steps to form a hypothesis and test it, shows that the scientific method is a hurdle you chose to ignore and found to be a hindrance to just making up a story and telling us that it is true because you WANT it to be true.
@Iynnmb1204 Yes, you found the term "pull it" in demolition. Now explain to us all how did they "pull" WTC 6? Explosives? Thermite? Laser beams? How? "I won't hold my breath."
Why do conspiracy believers keep saying Silverstein made $7 billion in an insurance scam? It's pure nonsense. The actual payout was $4.6 billion and it's all going to rebuilding, not to Silverstein's pocket. Furthermore, if the insurance companies thought Silverstein was scamming them, they wouldn't have paid out a penny. I don't care what you believe about any of the conspiracy theories, but at least get your facts straight.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
I find it amusing when truthers simultaneously cite reports of explosions and puffs of dust (which they think are explosions) while proposing thermite or thermate as the demolition mechanism, WHEN THERMITE DOESN'T EXPLODE! It burns.
@Berkeley626 i find it amusing you are so ignorant. nano thermite explodes...you just need to do more research. maybe you'll come around one day instead of laughing at the people that have your best interest first.
@utubeisdi what about the first responders, the people who helped search through the rubble, many of them got cancer and what does your government do, they offer financial support for healthcare over ten years after the incident, and all these people had to do was pass a terrorist check. the government has their own interests, and you're not in the picture, when did patriotism turn into being willfully ignorant and so obedient to state. the true patriot rejects government abuse.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
Except "pull" does not and never has meant demolishing a building with explosives. The only time demo people use the word is in its normal English sense, such as when they pulled the remainder of Building 6 down with cables.
This argument is one of the biggest lies of the so-called Truth movement
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
This is the dumbest fantasy I've heard that wasn't being used to defend voting for Obama. He meant pull the fire fighting crews and let the building burn.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
"We have never, ever heard the term 'pull it' being used to refer to the explosive demolition of a bldg, & neither has any blast team weve spoken with. The term is used in conventional demo circles to describe the specific activity of attaching long cables to a pre-weakened bldg & maneuvering heavy equipment to 'pull' the frame of the structure over onto its side for further dismantlement." - Brent Blanchard, Senior Editor, Implosion World, & Director of Field Operations, Protec.
911 liars are an evil bunch. Most of them know or, at least, suspect the TRUTH about 911. But they call it a lie anyway. There is a word for this: EVIL.
Carl Jung said that about thirty percent of any population was certifiably psychopathic. That would be the right wing.
Bertolt Brecht put it this way:
"A man who does not know the truth is just an idiot but a man who knows the truth and calls it a lie is a CROOK!"
WTC7was a controlled demolition. Destruction began at the base. First responders reported explosions. The fall was symmetrical at near-free-fall through a path of GREATEST resistance.
Some mistimed squibs were visible at the upper seven floors. Fire can't duplicate these effects.
Thermate can!
Thermate formed into ultra-fine particles, as has been accomplished at Los
Alamos National Laboratory, is called SUPER-THERMATE --used by pros to create CONTROLLED DEMOLITIONS.
ONLY controlled demolition looks like a controlled demolition. WTC7 looked like a CONTROLLED DEMOLITION to experts, journalists, network anchors and firefighters.
That's because WTC7 WAS a controlled demolition, Silverstein gop a BIG WHOPPING INSURANCE SETTLEMENT.
METHOD, MOTIVE AND OPPTY!
There's PROBABLE CAUSE to INDICT SILVERSTEIN for the crimes of MASS MURDER AND HIGH TREASON!
Clue for right wing idiots: look up 'probable cause' at Findlaw. Check out the CASE LAW, you nitwits!
On Sep 11th 1990, G Bush Senior gave a speech, announcing the "prospect of a New World Order, with the rule of (jewish) law, not the law of the jungle".
On Sep 11th 2001, he got hsi reply, from the East, as his CIA offices (rememeber g Bush snr was the head of the CIA), in the top few floors of the World Trade Centre, were destryed.
This has brought the whole issue out in the open.
And the Freemaons (MI4) have also been exposed, as the spies on YOUR street, watch your pc, as you use it !
Secondly: the first of 3 segments on the new AE911Truth Companion Edition to Blueprint for Truth can be found on YOUTUBE.
Richard Gage, AIA of Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth CITES the verifiable, scientific forensic evidence PROVING that the destruction of WTC 7 was an explosive CONTROLLED DEMOLITION.
CONTROLLED DEMOLITIONS require considerable advanced planning and 'planting' of explosives.
A scientific paper, 'Active Thermitic Material Discovered in Dust from the 9/11 World Trade Center' Catastrophe, PROVES conclusively that aluminothermic explosives was found dust samples from the Twin Towers. The chemical signature matches PREVIOUSLY documented aluminothermic residues found in the same dust samples.
The forensic case against Silverstein, Bushco, Cheney et al is growing.
I can smell some b*llshit. 9/11 self inflicted wound. I dont wish to undermine any of the people who died on that day but this must be said.
There is no way a person with two weeks of trainning could fly a plane into a building. Those buildings came just like a demolition job, untill 9/11 no steel building had ever fallen down due to fire. One steel building in spain raged for 20 HOURS and didnt come down
You are correct, AaronHoward. WTC7 was not struck by an airliner yet the same pack of lies is supposed to explain ALL of the highly improbable, criminal and treasonous events of that tragic day.
Bluntly --nothing looks like a controlled demolition BUT a controlled demolition; WTC 7 looks like a controlled demolition because it WAS a controlled demolition.
There is sufficient 'probable cause' to bring mass murder charges against Silverstein now!
Thermite was found at the site, usually used to melt solid steel.
However the best evidence. The twin towers was costing to much to run, apparently 1 million dollars per day. The owner takes out an insurance claim 7 weeks before the attack and makes a 4 billion dollar profit.
Don't even get me started on WTC 7
"I just told them to pull it" Larry Silverstein twin towers owner (were the demo's in there already?)
Hey Aaron, come on over to the IMDB boards. Google on "Internet Movie Data Base", and come to the "World Trade Center" movie board. Bring your best lunatic truther shit. You will need it. Debating on Youtube with a 500 character limit sucks.
To all none believers, i wish i could see your face when this shit gets uncovered because you need to open your eyes and realise there isnt just a good or evil
Anyone wants to take this up with me feel free!
'we need an attack like Pearl Harbour to invade IRAQ' Dick Chenney 2000
I really have to give Larry credit for advanced planning and project supervision. That was one of the prettiest and most symmetrical demolition jobs I've ever witnessed. Whoever planted those explosives KNEW what they were doing. Real professionals!
Worth repeating: PULLED is and was a term used by professional demolition firms to describe the CONTROLLED DEMOLITIONS of buildings.....buildings like WT7, for example.
--a twoofer off the deep end without a life raft. LOL --
Anyone using the INFANTILE and un-original 'TWOFER' or ''TROOFER' is an idiot.
The very word sounds like it is mouthed by toothless cretins with hair lips and cleft palates. And that's not to mention the ugly wild hair that protrudes several inches from a running nostril.
The last person I heard using the term ''twofer' or variations thereof mowed his lawn and discovered a 1953 model PACKARD.
Worth repeating: EVERYONE in the business of conducting controlled demolitions uses the word PULL to describe what they do. FACT, jack!
When SILVERSTEIN talked about pull 'IT", he was talking about the building and not the firefighters who are NOT an ''IT'" They are PEOPLE and they are a ''THEY'", possibly a 'THEM'.
THEY are NOT an IT.
As courageous firefighters they deserve better than being put in harm's way for Silverstein's megalomaniacal ambitions and insurance claims.
As I stated, lennhart is apparently too stupid to distinguish and recognize the difference between 'We' made the decision and 'They' made the decision (meaning the fire department)
So he just ignores the distinction.
I wasn't referring to the word 'it' ever.
But I suppose for a twoofer moron like lennhart, this is too complicated for him to understand.
No wonder he believes the troofer crap that's handed out by his masters. Pure stupidity.
Alien, it's time now for you to put up or shut up!
If you think WTC fell as a result of a fire, then PROVE YOUR THEORY.
put up or shut the fuck up!
The ONLY think you and your sorry ilk had going for you was the ad hominem and STUPID label CONSPIRACY THEORIST.
At the same time, like the IDIOT that you are you fell for the OFFICIAL CONSPIRACY THEORY. You know --the CONSPIRACY of Arab Hijackers who could not even pilot Cessanas let alone airliners.
--Basically it is clear lennhart is, in addition to being rather foul-mouthed, a prevaricator. He presents things as fact when they are s such as that thermite is used to do controlled demolitions; he misquotes Silverstein.--
Ahhh...you're just saying that because you HAVE FAILED to write a single meaningful sentence, FAILED to state a SINGLE VERIFIABLE FACT, FAILED to engage in adult debate ---just childish name calling, ad hominem attacks, strawmen fallacies, misstates.and outright lies.
Basically it is clear lennhart is, in addition to being rather foul-mouthed, a prevaricator. He presents things as fact when they are speculation, he makes completely bogus claims, such as that thermite is used to do controlled demolitions; he misquotes Silverstein.
Just another trash-talking truther troll, and a waste of time, IMHO.
"You started off accusing Silverstein of blowing up the building, you've veered off to Oklahoma city"
That's a bald faced lie.
I am inclined to accuse Silverstein of blowing up his building but have not so far! Secondly, the passage to which you refer was a word for word quote from a source and I had made that clear.
You are a liar!
If Silverstein wishes to sue me, go for it! Under the RULES OF DISCOVERY I might get enough to exonerate me and, at the same time, HANG A MURDERER.
" You've made a misquote of Silverstein, which you don't admit to. "
That's a bald faced lie. I paraphrase Silverstein but I did NOT misquote him.
He --in fact --said 'PULL IT'....not ''pull them out which even Silverstein might have said had he intended it to mean the firefighters and not the building.
Even SILVERSTEIN should be credited with having the good manners of NOT calling people an ''it'".
OK, I caught you in a pure lie. Here I'm quoting what you said:
'That's a bald faced lie. I paraphrase Silverstein but I did NOT misquote him. '
But earlier you wrote:
'His exact words were: "We made the decision to pull IT"'
So you presented it as a direct quote, not a paraphrasing. You were incorrect and misrepresented his statement. He specifically said 'they' pulled it.
You don't even realize you're lying. But the proof is clear. You're lying. And about thermite and CD. A lie.
Now ---I REPEAT: 'pull', in the industry, has ALWAYS meant ''controlled demoliton' and it was ONLY when the use of that term became embarassing for Silverstein, that the official conspiracy theorists began to SCRAMBLE to change the definition of an ESTABLISHED term.
If you persist in repeating that crap, I will just call you what you are: A G__AMNED LIAR.
Yes, you are doing that. Too bad you don't recognize it.
You started off accusing Silverstein of blowing up the building, you've veered off to Oklahoma city. It just doesn't stop with you truthers, does it? It goes on and on.
Next you'll tell me about chemtrails or something.
It is not a baseless assertion. It is a simple observation that you are completely uncritical of the report, yet dismiss any other science that came before it which doesn't agree with your conspiracy theory.
The report contains nothing new that Jones hasn't already been claiming for years now. I've been following the subject closely
Anomalies involving the collapse of WTC buildings on 9-11 are discussed from the perspective of possible controlled demolition implosion rather than of aircraft impact and fuel-fire damage. Considered is the possible use of thermite to melt sections of the columns of the WTC towers inner cores, thus aiding in their collapse. "
So --this is NOT paint dust. This is THERMITE as is, in fact, used to MELT STEEL.
I'll bet you don't even know anything about the publisher of the paper.
I'll bet you don't even care who published it.
You clearly don't understand the physics of thermite to know that a few micron-thick layer would not have enough energy to heat the steel more than about 10 to 25 degrees Kelvin.
This is a dead issue already dude. You're wasting everybody's time.
" Don't forget that Timothy McVeigh's Denver defense lawyer tried to introduce evidence that the Oklahoma City Federal Building showed evidence of implosion from within based on the supposition that explosive charges were set to demolish it from within.
They didn't follow up on that either. Those who do not learn from the lessons of History are doomed to repeat its mistakes."
doesn't surprise me in the least to find evidence that the WTC could have been rigged to be detonated to correspond with the inpact of the hijacked plane crashing into it. Wasn't it reported that the $2.3 Trillion
which Rumsfeld reported missing occurred only a day before ? The 9/11 investigation that occurred when the Bush Regime was in power couldn't have produced the truth with all that repression just starting up.... "
---Thermite is not ever used in controlled demolition of buildings. That is not evidence at all---
That is simply NOT true ...and if you had read my previous links and sources, you would have learned better.
Another except from the headlined paper:
" These red/gray chips show marked similarities in all four samples. One sample was collected by a Manhattan resident about ten minutes after the collapse of the second WTC Tower, two the next day, and a fourth about a week later.""
"A team of nine scientists have unearthed startling data from dust gathered in the days and weeks after the World Trade Center towers collapsed on 9/11. We have discovered distinctive red/gray chips in all the samples we have studied of the dust produced by the destruction of the World Trade Center.
Examination of four of these samples, collected from separate sites, is reported in this paper. "
Anyway, I'm not going to waste any more time debating with you. If you seriously propose that a news headline equals scientific proof, you're a gullible twit.
How many headlines come out claiming a new cause of cancer, or cure for cancer?
You believe every one of them? Please gimme a break.
'Johnny Cochran said: "If it does not fit, you must acquit!'
So OJ didn't kill his wife and Goldman? Because he had a sneaky lawyer?
Good lord.
btw lennhart, if one single paper with a claim is all the proof you need, then you don't understand science at all. First, the paper hasn't been verified by independent scientists, it's only just been published.
No one has yet even begun to demonstrate nanothermite paint in use to destroy structural steel columns.
'STUPID idea that somehow Árab Hijackers managed to REPEAL the laws of common sense and physics.'
Agreed. That is a stupid idea. But that's not what is being offered in the mainstream or consensus opinion.
And btw there is no 'law' of common sense. In fact, appealing to 'common sense' in obscure, complex matters is known as a logical fallacy 'argument to incredulity'.
Look it up.
Good science trumps popular opinion in determining the truth.
The presence of THERMITE is now an established fact. A trial might have already been held, conviction might already have been obtained HAD there been an investigation.
It was Bush who QUASHED the investigation before it could have begun. The mark of a guilty man who had much to fear from a REAL investigation.
My friend --Dr. John Leinhard --of the University of Houston Egineering Department summed up Occam's Razor in his syndicated radio program:
"The towering 14th-century philosopher William of Occam put it this way: "Multiplicity ought not to be posited without necessity." William was telling us we should make no more assumptions than we really need to explain anything -- the simplest explanation is best. We call that idea Occam's Razor because it helps slice away the junk in our thinking."
Best explanation is: SILVERSTEIN OK'D THE CONTROLLED DEMOLITON OF WHAT WAS --IN FACT --A CONTROLLED DEMOLITION.
Sorry, NIST, your BULLSHIT THEORY of HEAT EXPANSION is PURE BULLSHIT that violates Occam's Razor, the Laws of Entropy, specifically, the THIRD LAW OF THERMODYNAMICS.
Please calm down and stop using vulgarity. It doesn't make your points any better.
Heat expansion is well understood, it has been studied a lot in shipbuilding, you may discover.
NIST didn't invent it, they just had teams of qualified engineers who combed thru the evidence, compiled data, and came up with the strongest hypothesis.
I think you are entirely wrong to state that CD is 'in fact' what happened. It is not a fact at all - it is your theory or opinion.
Excuse me sir. First, listen carefully again to Silverstein. You've misquoted. He does not say 'we made the decision' anywhere.
He says 'they' made the decision, referring to FDNY.
/watch?v=7WYdAJQV100
So you've demonstrated that you don't know the exact words, even as you purport to quote them.
FDNY Chief Daniel Nigro specifically addresses this issue and states that HE ALONE made the decision to pull his men from WTC7 and form a collapse perimeter, as they felt it was coming down soon.
Corporations with PULL building for a living use the word PULL to describe CONTROLLED DEMOLITIONS. Google: Controlled Demolitons, Inc.
GOOGLE: "Pull", controlled demolition "
You will find a link to a such a corporations web site which includes a PRESS RELEASE describing how and why they are planning to PULL a building.
Secondly, go to 'HOW THINGS WORK" which, even prior to 911, had several authoritative articles re: 'controlled demolitions' by pros. They ALL used the word PULL.
Dumb enough to believe that Larry Silverstein, the billionaire, IVY league educated businessman, was stupid enough to go on British TV after 9-11 and admitt that he blew up his own building. Not one admission, but twice!
Do troofers really believe that he is that stupid???
When you see the entire interview and view it in context it becomes obvious that he is talking about NYFD firefighters PULLING BACK from the doomed building
The NIST invented 'heat expansion' to explain what is best explained without NIST ASSUMPTIONS, in fact, violations of Occam's Razor.
The OFFICIAL NIST explanation violates the laws of the conservation of matter and energy, the third law of thermodynamics and the laws of logical analysis by creating UNECESSARY hypotheses.
WTC is best explained by two words: CONTROLLED DEMOLITION which, alone, accounts for EVERY observed phenomenon that day.
I also recognize the words and terms of Steven Jones and perhaps shades of Jim Fetzer's oddly ironic declarations in your statement.
I suspect you are simply repeating what you've heard, without understanding the core physics or mechanics.
Please explain how NIST violates the laws of conservation of matter and energy, and thermodynamics. In your own words, or quote a good scientist who isn't on the 9-11 truth payroll....ie not selling a book or DVD to you.... if you can.
ps Steven Jones, a smart man with some really good physics chops, has totally gone off the rails in his quixotian quest to find thermite in the WTC collapses.
Don't just follow him into oblivion. He has made so many fundamental errors in judgement to accommodate his obsession, it isn't worth your time.
He abandoned good science in favour of a cult movement and some kind of status in it....(my opinion, anyway).
1) We'll have to disagree about the term 'pull'. My understanding is that it has nothing to do with explosive demolition.
2) I restate my questions
'Please explain how NIST violates the laws of conservation of matter and energy, and thermodynamics. In your own words, or quote a good scientist who isn't on the 9-11 truth payroll....ie not selling a book or DVD to you.... if you can'
And a fact for you: no explosive flashes or detonations were seen or heard at WTC7 ala CD.
how the fuck are they getting away with this shit.....It is Impossible to just pull a building.../without a lot of planing..My theory is that Flight 93 was meant for building 7 ..and they either couldn't stop there planted bombs or as he says they pulled it..I started studying the sept 11 attacks about 3 years ago with an open neutral mind... the proof of an inside job outweighs the proof of a terrorist attack by about ...90-1 this shit is real... the elite that control the government did this
Calling all moron CTists!! Bring your best argument to the JREF Conspiracy Theory Forum (google JREF). Prepare to get your ass handed to you on a platter, so you better bring your best CTist bullshit arguments.
Just because you believe some bullshit fairy tale how the government rules every aspect of the world doesn't mean you have the inside track on being correct, because you're not.
Just because false flag operations exist doesn't mean this is one of them.
Google "UNUSUAL EVACUATIONS" to see all the reports of eyewitness accounts of strange activities leading up to 9/11. Employees working in the Towers said they would find dust covering the desks and computers every morning. Dust from thousands of holes being drilled into the concrete.........
Does anyone know what the hell "pull it" means?! Its not some demolition command to destroy the building, they meant to PULL THE RESCUE WORKERS OUT OF THE BUILDING! They were trying to save lives and didnt want more rescuers to die in another building collapse.
It doesn't take weeks to blow up a building.
DeoMachina 2 months ago
I don't care what Larry says,,,,the fact that Building 7 fell in less than 7 seconds,,,,total free fall,,,,confirms it was a controlled implosion. The fact that Nano Thermite was found in the dust confirms that these were taken down with demolition. Larry's statement just adds fire to these arguments,,,,but it is the other facts which confirm them IMO.
timmer9lives 3 months ago
Pull it is also a term used to evacuate all safety, fire and rescue people. Before he said pull it, he made the statement "So many lives had already been lost they gave the order to 'pull it''' and that is referring to pulling emergency personal battling the fires to pull out after it was evacuated. Do better research. This had nothing to do with demolition. Suspicious that it imploded, but they are designed to do just that in a failure anywhere on the building in skyrise design.
pootskins 4 months ago
who does he think hes fooling lol what a twat
49mrjd 6 months ago
Comment removed
madderthanalex 6 months ago
The title on this video needs to be changed. WTC owner is incorrect. Larry Silverstein part of a joint venture with SPG Funds (Silverstein Properties Group). We do not know his exact percentage of ownership interests in the WTC Complex but my very educated guess is that the redhead we can see from the back on my featured vid has the largest ownership position. I was defrauded of SPG Funds I &II and the owner of those Funds gave me a special power of attorney to stop him from his manipulations.HR
HoneySiegalSurvivor 8 months ago
I issued the orders to PULL back the firefighters and define the collapse zone. It was a critical decision; we could not lose any more firefighters. It took a lot of time to PULL everyone out, given the emotionalism of the day, communications difficulties, and the collapse terrain. - FDNY Chief of Department Daniel Nigro
That is what PULL means to any sane person.
WillShakespeare2007 11 months ago
@WillShakespeare2007 Thats the lamest excuse Ive heard yet. Larry Siverstien gained billions in insurance fraud money after collecting on his investment at the WTC buildings. Larry clearly stated on video, "They made the decision to PULL the building" Demolition by well placed thermite and explosives. 3000 people died because of his greed, and the greed of Dick Chaney, Donald Rumsfeld, and Wolfowitz.
paskettle 4 months ago
@paskettle - /watch?v=7WYdAJQV100
Listen to what he says. Next time learn what you are talking about before using quotation marks. Otherwise you look like a fool.
"They made the decision to PULL the building" does he say that? No he doesn't. Then you just make up some nonsense about thermite.
So your starting point is totally wrong and your end point is frankly stupid.
WillShakespeare2007 4 months ago
@WillShakespeare2007 Oh we know what he said alright. Larry Silverstien: "Then they made the decision to Pull it", quote unquote. Larry Silverstien was in on it from the beginning. Money talks , and these greee bastards new exactly what they were planning before the towers were destroyed by controlled demolition. They new that hundreds or thousands might die and others injured for life. Did that bother DicK Chaney or Larry, Hell no.
paskettle 4 months ago
@paskettle - Well that was not the quote you tried to get past me in your last post. You said "They made the decision to PULL the building" that was a lie and a perfect example of trying to distort the truth to fit a conspiracy theory. You have no evidence and so you have to keep lying about the actual facts to build a case. It is not working.
WillShakespeare2007 4 months ago
@WillShakespeare2007 You argue about the arguement. Dont confuse the issue. Larry Silverstein clearly stated that building seven was pulled, Controlled demolition is PULLING the building down. Nothing else was inferred in the statement. Bldg seven was controlled demolition at 5 pm on the samday. There hadnt been time to set the necessary charges for controlled demo. on 9 /11. Which means they already had planned to demolish bild #7 before sept 11. Preplanned by Silverstein & Dick.
paskettle 4 months ago
@paskettle - He didn't say B7 was pulled. This is another example of you taking what he actually said and changing it to suit your conspiracy. You were even willing to totally misquote him in order to make his statement fit your view of events. The "issue" is what he said and that you keep trying to change what he said. No one has ever referred to a controlled demolition as "pulling" a building and he was clearly referring to pulling the firefighters out of the building. A common term.
WillShakespeare2007 4 months ago
@WillShakespeare2007 You are a simple shiller without a doubt. No one that has seen the video could deny that Larry Silverstein clealy stated they would PULL building #7. Only a fool would state it otherwise.
If your are only a fool, a simpleton, then we will pat you on the head and send you out ot play. You clearly do not have the capacity to understand. I would suggest you go back to watching the Simpsons or reality TV, the cartoons, or whatever you doing before you stopped here.
paskettle 4 months ago
@WillShakespeare2007 eey wanker you are a crazy you dont see the building fall in 6 seconds? wake up this is a world order
firestones18 4 months ago
@firestones18 -"eey wanker" - just go and get an education, you are barely literate and can not even form a coherent sentence. Do you honestly expect a response to such illiterate nonsense?
WillShakespeare2007 4 months ago
@WillShakespeare2007 ey gaylord.... suck obama his black cock dirty fag
firestones18 4 months ago
@firestones18 - I was talking about 9/11 - you are the one that wants to talk about Obama's penis. Seems like you must not be able to keep it our of your mind. You are displaying the intelligence level one needs to be at to be a "truther". Well done you are winning the argument for me.
WillShakespeare2007 4 months ago
This is what he's saying:
"I got a call from the fire department commander telling me they were not sure they were going to be able to contain the fire" i.e. they were fighting a losing battle & couldn't save the building.
"I said, you know we've had such terrible loss of life maybe the smartest thing to do is pull it! i.e. PULL the operation.
"And they made that decision to pull" i.e PULL the firefighters away from the building.
It is obvious what he means! Never heard the term PULL back?
WillShakespeare2007 11 months ago
@WillShakespeare2007 Dr. Shyam Sunder, of the National Institutes of Standards and Technology (NIST), which investigated the collapse of WTC 7, is quoted in Popular Mechanics (9/11: Debunking the Myths, March, 2005) as saying: "There was no firefighting in WTC 7."
edwardstim 8 months ago
@edwardstim - Really - wow then you must be right. All those dead firefighters on 9/11 were sent to Narnia then.
WillShakespeare2007 8 months ago
@WillShakespeare2007 learn to read, it said no fire fighters were in "WTC7". No one died in WTC7.
edwardstim 8 months ago
@edwardstim - "learn to read" do you really think I can't or is this just more proof that the "truthers " start at 9 up.
WillShakespeare2007 8 months ago
@edwardstim - Yes because he said PULL them. Thanks for backing up the facts. What the hell do you want be the way? I was talking about the term PULL! Got a comment on that leave it, if not leave your tin foil hat on and keep your crap to yourself.
WillShakespeare2007 8 months ago
why argue? ALL the buildungs that were brought down on 911 were obviously done with some form of demlition exlosives.
nikE9d0h 1 year ago 2
people, watch the video, share it on your facebook, email to friends, blog it, move onto the next one....do not engage in dialogue with these obvious paid agents who have suddenly begun appearing in here filling the comments with belittlement, name calling, and attempts to debunk the truth. They are paid, notice some of them are on daily, for several hours a day and they troll all over youtube trying to debunk us. Why would anyone do that unless they were being paid? Traitors!
sayNOtoevilNOW 1 year ago 3
If no one went in to Building 7 to plant explosives for a controlled demolition, how could they "pull it"? The controlled demolition HAD to have been planned in advance.
TwinMountain 1 year ago
@zenoist2 "Fire crews do not track down owners of buildings"
How do you know? Looks like you just made that up.
PoetryHound 1 year ago
@PoetryHound so what do u think happened to building 7??
BardleyCfan 1 year ago
Fire crews do not track down owners of buildings then call them up and have a conversation "Hey your buildings on fire "
They did on 9/11 apparently.
Another world first!
zenoist2 1 year ago
funny i thought building 7 was blamed on the terrioists... funny how they flip the story wenever the fuck they feel like and then get defended by retards and rasicsts who hate asians and have bin waitin for a chance 2 blame them 4 sumthin all their lives...lol just like the E.D.L (the retard club for people who want 2 suck hittlers dick even though he was a blantent pussy) warring a global EMP hits 23/6/2012 so bring matches
StonnerMaterial 1 year ago
@StonnerMaterial Watch some more PRIZE hocus pocus jiggery pokery pantomime dished up for us with WTC7 -
GOOGLE:
BBC JANE STANDLEY WTC7
CUERVOBRILLANTE 11 months ago
watch?v=MODMG-yfsDs
muzicmaker2001 1 year ago
Watch the full version of "9/11 In Plane Site - Director's Cut" on Google Videos.
TAC951 1 year ago
It really shows how ignorant Truthers are when "pull-it" has been explained time and time again to them and they ignore common sense from rock-solid sources yet they still cling to the bullshit that their Loose Change, 9/11 "Truth" groups & etc. tells them that they should think
CrazyRay7979 1 year ago
@Iynnmb1204 You also forgot to answer my question. The term "pull it" was used on WTC 6. How did they "pull" WTC 6? The fact that you know the answer yet are afraid to be exposed as a fraud shows that you are intellectually dishonest and cannot admit you are terribly wrong.
shooter686 1 year ago
@Iynnmb1204 "they made that decision to pull it". They. Larry didn't order anybody. Larry cannot order anybody.
The fact that you needed to change his words to fit your conclusion without any of the required steps to form a hypothesis and test it, shows that the scientific method is a hurdle you chose to ignore and found to be a hindrance to just making up a story and telling us that it is true because you WANT it to be true.
So, why did you change his words?
shooter686 1 year ago
it's funny how many controlled demolition amateurs post on youtube !!!!
LOLCATS3111 1 year ago
@Iynnmb1204 Yes, you found the term "pull it" in demolition. Now explain to us all how did they "pull" WTC 6? Explosives? Thermite? Laser beams? How? "I won't hold my breath."
shooter686 1 year ago
Why do conspiracy believers keep saying Silverstein made $7 billion in an insurance scam? It's pure nonsense. The actual payout was $4.6 billion and it's all going to rebuilding, not to Silverstein's pocket. Furthermore, if the insurance companies thought Silverstein was scamming them, they wouldn't have paid out a penny. I don't care what you believe about any of the conspiracy theories, but at least get your facts straight.
PoetryZound 1 year ago 2
Great job in recovering this video. Just another lie to continue the cover-up.
pmsan29 1 year ago 4
911 was an inside job, no buidlings can collapse temporarly in free fall without isochronic controlled demolitions!!!
MrBorisBo 1 year ago 6
@MrBorisBo And no explosives can just magically disappear.
TyVulpine 1 year ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
I find it amusing when truthers simultaneously cite reports of explosions and puffs of dust (which they think are explosions) while proposing thermite or thermate as the demolition mechanism, WHEN THERMITE DOESN'T EXPLODE! It burns.
Berkeley626 1 year ago
@Berkeley626 i find it amusing you are so ignorant. nano thermite explodes...you just need to do more research. maybe you'll come around one day instead of laughing at the people that have your best interest first.
utubeisdi 1 year ago 9
@utubeisdi what about the first responders, the people who helped search through the rubble, many of them got cancer and what does your government do, they offer financial support for healthcare over ten years after the incident, and all these people had to do was pass a terrorist check. the government has their own interests, and you're not in the picture, when did patriotism turn into being willfully ignorant and so obedient to state. the true patriot rejects government abuse.
G0JETSG0 2 months ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Except "pull" does not and never has meant demolishing a building with explosives. The only time demo people use the word is in its normal English sense, such as when they pulled the remainder of Building 6 down with cables.
This argument is one of the biggest lies of the so-called Truth movement
Berkeley626 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
THIS PERSON IS PURE DEVIL
Wake up USA wake up, who control you?
RicoCoracao 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
This is the dumbest fantasy I've heard that wasn't being used to defend voting for Obama. He meant pull the fire fighting crews and let the building burn.
cjinsd 2 years ago
you stupid, he did confess blowing the building
LedSlash71 2 years ago 8
9/11 was a demolition job, we need a real investigation.
LH0didntdoit 2 years ago 8
This has been flagged as spam show
do u really think a billionaire would expose his own plot on TV?
are conspiracy theorists really that dumb?
.
bigcherry99 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
"We have never, ever heard the term 'pull it' being used to refer to the explosive demolition of a bldg, & neither has any blast team weve spoken with. The term is used in conventional demo circles to describe the specific activity of attaching long cables to a pre-weakened bldg & maneuvering heavy equipment to 'pull' the frame of the structure over onto its side for further dismantlement." - Brent Blanchard, Senior Editor, Implosion World, & Director of Field Operations, Protec.
PoetryHound 2 years ago
Hmmm....Who should we believe - an experienced demolition expert or Joe Blow's conspiracy website? Gosh, it's so tough to decide.
PoetryHound 2 years ago
Explosives are used In controlled demolitions of steel-frame buildings to slice steel columns and beams into pieces.
PR folk for Controlled Demolition, Inc., says that RDX is commonly used to 'slice' steel as he put it '..like a "razor blade through a tomato."
He says that steel beams are thus slice into manageable lengths. That --in fact --happened n New York. There are PHOTOS to prove it.
It's time to bring mass murder, high treason charges against Silverstein, Bush Cheney, Marvin...
lennhart 2 years ago
The NIST---the National Institute for Standards and Technology (2005)---are LIARS who must surely know better!
If they know better but lie anyway they are crooks. If they don't kjnow better, they are just idiots!
NIST implies that fire-induced collapses of large steel-frame buildings are common and/or normal. THAT IS A LIE! ( See: Hoffman, 2005).
Such collapses have ONLY occurred DURING the the crime of mass murder and high treason that is called: 9/11.
lennhart 2 years ago
911 liars are an evil bunch. Most of them know or, at least, suspect the TRUTH about 911. But they call it a lie anyway. There is a word for this: EVIL.
Carl Jung said that about thirty percent of any population was certifiably psychopathic. That would be the right wing.
Bertolt Brecht put it this way:
"A man who does not know the truth is just an idiot but a man who knows the truth and calls it a lie is a CROOK!"
911 LIARS are, therefore, PSYCHOPATHIC CROOKS.
lennhart 2 years ago
There is probable cause to charge Larry Silverstein with mass murder and high treason.
Howz about a PLEA BARGAIN, Larry. You get LIFE in a pokey if you FINGER Bush Jr, Marvin Bush, Cheney, Rummie, Rice et al.
lennhart 2 years ago
Comment removed
lennhart 2 years ago
Recently --a fire consumed some 44 floors of a Beijing skyscraper which was shooting 30 foot flames into the aiir.
GUESS WHAT! The skyscraper DID NOT collapse. And there was NO FREE FALL.
This proves that mere FIRE will NOT, has never, and never will COLLAPSE a building as was the fact at WTC 7
ONLY a controlled demolition looks like a controlled demolition. WTC 7 LOOKS LIKE a controlled demolition because IT WAS a CONTROLLED DEMOLITION.
lennhart 2 years ago
WTC7was a controlled demolition. Destruction began at the base. First responders reported explosions. The fall was symmetrical at near-free-fall through a path of GREATEST resistance.
Some mistimed squibs were visible at the upper seven floors. Fire can't duplicate these effects.
Thermate can!
Thermate formed into ultra-fine particles, as has been accomplished at Los
Alamos National Laboratory, is called SUPER-THERMATE --used by pros to create CONTROLLED DEMOLITIONS.
lennhart 2 years ago
ONLY controlled demolition looks like a controlled demolition. WTC7 looked like a CONTROLLED DEMOLITION to experts, journalists, network anchors and firefighters.
That's because WTC7 WAS a controlled demolition, Silverstein gop a BIG WHOPPING INSURANCE SETTLEMENT.
METHOD, MOTIVE AND OPPTY!
There's PROBABLE CAUSE to INDICT SILVERSTEIN for the crimes of MASS MURDER AND HIGH TREASON!
Clue for right wing idiots: look up 'probable cause' at Findlaw. Check out the CASE LAW, you nitwits!
lennhart 2 years ago
On Sep 11th 1990, G Bush Senior gave a speech, announcing the "prospect of a New World Order, with the rule of (jewish) law, not the law of the jungle".
On Sep 11th 2001, he got hsi reply, from the East, as his CIA offices (rememeber g Bush snr was the head of the CIA), in the top few floors of the World Trade Centre, were destryed.
This has brought the whole issue out in the open.
And the Freemaons (MI4) have also been exposed, as the spies on YOUR street, watch your pc, as you use it !
mikeybrumbrum 2 years ago
Yeah, it was da joooooz!
Gee, 911 kookspiracy theories attract bigots. What a shock.
PoetryHound 2 years ago
See: "NIST Finally Admits Freefall (Part I)"
It's on YouTube.
Secondly: the first of 3 segments on the new AE911Truth Companion Edition to Blueprint for Truth can be found on YOUTUBE.
Richard Gage, AIA of Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth CITES the verifiable, scientific forensic evidence PROVING that the destruction of WTC 7 was an explosive CONTROLLED DEMOLITION.
CONTROLLED DEMOLITIONS require considerable advanced planning and 'planting' of explosives.
lennhart 2 years ago
Moreover ---WTC7 WAS a controlled demolition.
It certainly was NOT struck by an airliner.
There fires were small and unimpressive. NO OTHER STEEL FRAME BUILDING HAD EVER or SINCE collapsed as a result of a kerosene fire!
To believe that those fires BROUGHT DOWN WTC7 is just plain IDIOTIC and uninformed.
Only a controlled demolition looks like a controlled demolition and WTC7 looks JUST LIKE a controlled demolition becuase it IS.
There is NO OTHER CREDIBLE EXPLANATION! .
lennhart 2 years ago
A scientific paper, 'Active Thermitic Material Discovered in Dust from the 9/11 World Trade Center' Catastrophe, PROVES conclusively that aluminothermic explosives was found dust samples from the Twin Towers. The chemical signature matches PREVIOUSLY documented aluminothermic residues found in the same dust samples.
The forensic case against Silverstein, Bushco, Cheney et al is growing.
This HANGING will require a strong scaffold.
lennhart 2 years ago
Hey buddy lol.....you coming over to IMDB World Trade Center movie board? See you around buddy lol. Bring your best shit.
okedoke1234 2 years ago
I can smell some b*llshit. 9/11 self inflicted wound. I dont wish to undermine any of the people who died on that day but this must be said.
There is no way a person with two weeks of trainning could fly a plane into a building. Those buildings came just like a demolition job, untill 9/11 no steel building had ever fallen down due to fire. One steel building in spain raged for 20 HOURS and didnt come down
AaronHoward2304 2 years ago 4
regarding WTC7, what do you think occurred between larry s. saying "pull it" on 9/11 and the collapse?
unclesamsnephew666 2 years ago
You are correct, AaronHoward. WTC7 was not struck by an airliner yet the same pack of lies is supposed to explain ALL of the highly improbable, criminal and treasonous events of that tragic day.
Bluntly --nothing looks like a controlled demolition BUT a controlled demolition; WTC 7 looks like a controlled demolition because it WAS a controlled demolition.
There is sufficient 'probable cause' to bring mass murder charges against Silverstein now!
I am prepared to see the bastard in court!
lennhart 2 years ago
Thermite was found at the site, usually used to melt solid steel.
However the best evidence. The twin towers was costing to much to run, apparently 1 million dollars per day. The owner takes out an insurance claim 7 weeks before the attack and makes a 4 billion dollar profit.
Don't even get me started on WTC 7
"I just told them to pull it" Larry Silverstein twin towers owner (were the demo's in there already?)
AaronHoward2304 2 years ago 3
Hey Aaron, come on over to the IMDB boards. Google on "Internet Movie Data Base", and come to the "World Trade Center" movie board. Bring your best lunatic truther shit. You will need it. Debating on Youtube with a 500 character limit sucks.
okedoke1234 2 years ago
'lunatic truther shit'. Hardly lunatic really oke. All based on fact! see you around buddy lol. x
AaronHoward2304 2 years ago
To all none believers, i wish i could see your face when this shit gets uncovered because you need to open your eyes and realise there isnt just a good or evil
Anyone wants to take this up with me feel free!
'we need an attack like Pearl Harbour to invade IRAQ' Dick Chenney 2000
AaronHoward2304 2 years ago 4
I really have to give Larry credit for advanced planning and project supervision. That was one of the prettiest and most symmetrical demolition jobs I've ever witnessed. Whoever planted those explosives KNEW what they were doing. Real professionals!
lennhart 2 years ago
Worth repeating: PULLED is and was a term used by professional demolition firms to describe the CONTROLLED DEMOLITIONS of buildings.....buildings like WT7, for example.
Hey LARRY!
SUE ME! Make my day!
lennhart 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
" AE was right - you're a liar. FAIL! "
Spoken like someone who is trying to convince himself of something. LOL LOL My sides are hurting
You're whistling past the graveyard.
Silverstein said PULL IT and firefighters are NOT mere ITS.
FACT: PULLED is and was a term used by pros to designate CONTROLLED DEMOLITIONS.
Best explanation: SILVERSTEIN FUCKED UP and incriminated his sorry self.
Note to Larry S: SUE ME! I would LOVE for my attorney to have the power of discovery in my defense.
lennhart 2 years ago
lennhart got pwned! LOL.
AE was right - you're a liar. FAIL!
ferengoid 2 years ago
Comment removed
lennhart 2 years ago
--a twoofer off the deep end without a life raft. LOL --
Anyone using the INFANTILE and un-original 'TWOFER' or ''TROOFER' is an idiot.
The very word sounds like it is mouthed by toothless cretins with hair lips and cleft palates. And that's not to mention the ugly wild hair that protrudes several inches from a running nostril.
The last person I heard using the term ''twofer' or variations thereof mowed his lawn and discovered a 1953 model PACKARD.
lennhart 2 years ago
God what a tedious moron lennhart is.
a twoofer off the deep end without a life raft. LOL
ferengoid 2 years ago
Just recently China's TALLEST SKYSCRAPER caught fire....and, here's the news value: IT DID NOT COLLAPSE!!!
Boy --were the brainwashed Americans surprised to learn that it did NOT collapse.
Google this headline: China's Tallest Building Catches Fire, Does Not Collapse
lennhart 2 years ago
Anyone who thinks it's clever to use the OVER USED term 'troofer' or the variation ''twofer'' IS STUPID by definition.
Clue for idiots: it's NOT clever unless YOU thought of it. And, Alien, YOU DIDN'T originate with you.
You STOLE it!
That makes you a thief and a plagiarist
lennhart 2 years ago
Comment removed
Infiltrate808 2 years ago
I repeat: anyone using the AD HOMINEM fallacy 'twoofer' is a moron.
The term neither clever nor descriptive is SYMPTOMATIC of imbeciles, possibly drug addicts, fascists, nut jobs and psychopaths.
Psychologist Carl Jung estimated that some thirty percent of any population is certifiably PSYCHOPATHIC nut jobs, nut cases.
Anyone using 'twofer' or 'toofer' is among the nut jobs Jung referred to.
lennhart 2 years ago
The next comment is addressed to Silverstein:
Sue me!
lennhart 2 years ago
Worth repeating: EVERYONE in the business of conducting controlled demolitions uses the word PULL to describe what they do. FACT, jack!
When SILVERSTEIN talked about pull 'IT", he was talking about the building and not the firefighters who are NOT an ''IT'" They are PEOPLE and they are a ''THEY'", possibly a 'THEM'.
THEY are NOT an IT.
As courageous firefighters they deserve better than being put in harm's way for Silverstein's megalomaniacal ambitions and insurance claims.
lennhart 2 years ago
==You've failed. Run along back to your truther websites.==
LOL LOL LOL That's a kneeslapper.
I am a big success when IDIOTS, ne-erdowells, layabouts, dipshits, and asswipes call me a ''failure".
Alien, get yourself a THESAURUS. You are in DESPERATE NEED of a VOCABULARY.
lennhart 2 years ago
Comment removed
lennhart 2 years ago
Now Alien ....if you believe that the WTC fell as a result of being struck by a CONSPIRACY of incompetent ARAB PILOTS then PROVE YOUR CASE.
At least support it....
Otherwise, ass clown, just put up or shut up!
lennhart 2 years ago
As I stated, lennhart is apparently too stupid to distinguish and recognize the difference between 'We' made the decision and 'They' made the decision (meaning the fire department)
So he just ignores the distinction.
I wasn't referring to the word 'it' ever.
But I suppose for a twoofer moron like lennhart, this is too complicated for him to understand.
No wonder he believes the troofer crap that's handed out by his masters. Pure stupidity.
alienentity 2 years ago
Alien, it's time now for you to put up or shut up!
If you think WTC fell as a result of a fire, then PROVE YOUR THEORY.
put up or shut the fuck up!
The ONLY think you and your sorry ilk had going for you was the ad hominem and STUPID label CONSPIRACY THEORIST.
At the same time, like the IDIOT that you are you fell for the OFFICIAL CONSPIRACY THEORY. You know --the CONSPIRACY of Arab Hijackers who could not even pilot Cessanas let alone airliners.
You swallowed the kool aid, you idiot!
lennhart 2 years ago
lennhart, you're an idiot. And a lying idiot to boot.
You've failed. Run along back to your truther websites. Don't let the door hit your on your way out.
alienentity 2 years ago
I've been checking out your SHIT...insulting people who have PROVEN YOU WRONG is what you do.
I have news for you, psycho! That is a symptom of both PSYCHOSIS and PSYCHOPATHY.
You are immature, stupid, and loathsome. You are scaly, inarticulate. ideological, closed minded, and frightened of the truth.
You are a liar, a scummy worm, a mold wart and an ugly fucker to boot.
lennhart 2 years ago
""Apparently you are too fucking stupid to even remember a basic fact like that. I have no patience for this kind of lying. "
You are the liar and I have no patience you or your sorry ilk.
lennhart 2 years ago
==he misquotes Silverstein.=
Bullshit.
Elsewhere, Silverstein repeated the use of the word "IT":
Silverstein said: "The smartest thing to do is (unintelligible grunt) ....just pull IT"
Its are not people. ITS are THINGS. Buildings are THINGS. Firefitghters are PEOPLE.
lennhart 2 years ago
For the last time, lennhart insists 'So what??? Silverstein said that!!! '
No, he didn't. At about :46 into the video, he says 'They made the decision'.
Apparently you are too fucking stupid to even remember a basic fact like that.
I have no patience for this kind of lying.
alienentity 2 years ago
Again, alien, how old are you?
10???
Is that your mental age?
How long have you been an asskissing trolll for the establishment?
lennhart 2 years ago
Let's put it this way, ALIEN.
You are childish, immature and you are a liar. You lied about my statements about Silverstein.
Secondly, you are an IDIOT --or perhaps you are lying about Thermite.
In the meantime, I suggest you do some research about it.
And before you SHOOT YOUR STUPID MOUTH OFF, check out the SOURCES that i cited for the things you just happen not to like.
lennhart 2 years ago
Hey lennhart, fuck off. Fuck you and fuck your stupid lies.
Am I clear?
alienentity 2 years ago
--Basically it is clear lennhart is, in addition to being rather foul-mouthed, a prevaricator. He presents things as fact when they are s such as that thermite is used to do controlled demolitions; he misquotes Silverstein.--
Ahhh...you're just saying that because you HAVE FAILED to write a single meaningful sentence, FAILED to state a SINGLE VERIFIABLE FACT, FAILED to engage in adult debate ---just childish name calling, ad hominem attacks, strawmen fallacies, misstates.and outright lies.
lennhart 2 years ago
--But earlier you wrote: 'His exact words were: "We made the decision to pull IT"' --
So what??? Silverstein said that!!!
He is on video tape saying that.
You are apparently the only person who has not HEARD him say that.
lennhart 2 years ago
Basically it is clear lennhart is, in addition to being rather foul-mouthed, a prevaricator. He presents things as fact when they are speculation, he makes completely bogus claims, such as that thermite is used to do controlled demolitions; he misquotes Silverstein.
Just another trash-talking truther troll, and a waste of time, IMHO.
Goodbye Mr. Troll. Epic fail for you.
alienentity 2 years ago
"You started off accusing Silverstein of blowing up the building, you've veered off to Oklahoma city"
That's a bald faced lie.
I am inclined to accuse Silverstein of blowing up his building but have not so far! Secondly, the passage to which you refer was a word for word quote from a source and I had made that clear.
You are a liar!
If Silverstein wishes to sue me, go for it! Under the RULES OF DISCOVERY I might get enough to exonerate me and, at the same time, HANG A MURDERER.
lennhart 2 years ago
" You've made a misquote of Silverstein, which you don't admit to. "
That's a bald faced lie. I paraphrase Silverstein but I did NOT misquote him.
He --in fact --said 'PULL IT'....not ''pull them out which even Silverstein might have said had he intended it to mean the firefighters and not the building.
Even SILVERSTEIN should be credited with having the good manners of NOT calling people an ''it'".
lennhart 2 years ago
OK, I caught you in a pure lie. Here I'm quoting what you said:
'That's a bald faced lie. I paraphrase Silverstein but I did NOT misquote him. '
But earlier you wrote:
'His exact words were: "We made the decision to pull IT"'
So you presented it as a direct quote, not a paraphrasing. You were incorrect and misrepresented his statement. He specifically said 'they' pulled it.
You don't even realize you're lying. But the proof is clear. You're lying. And about thermite and CD. A lie.
Troll.
alienentity 2 years ago
You NEVER addressed the widely distributed article re: THERMITE.
You assert bunkum about THERMITE which you could not support.
Then you accused me of not knowing what I was taling about when, in fact, you have demonstrated ABYSMAL ignorance of both philosophy and physics.
You challenge credentials but only because you have none of your own.
Stop being so childish.
lennhart 2 years ago
"First, you're vulgar and rude. Second, you don't understand investigations, theories or science. "
LOL LOL That's a sophomoric ad hominem attack resorted to by those who have LOST an argument.
This is an ARGUMENT --because of you the level NEVER rose to that of a debate.
You have NEVER refuted anything I've posted.
You simply contradict and then call me a name.
How old are you? TWELVE?
lennhart 2 years ago
Now ---I REPEAT: 'pull', in the industry, has ALWAYS meant ''controlled demoliton' and it was ONLY when the use of that term became embarassing for Silverstein, that the official conspiracy theorists began to SCRAMBLE to change the definition of an ESTABLISHED term.
If you persist in repeating that crap, I will just call you what you are: A G__AMNED LIAR.
lennhart 2 years ago
''pull', in the industry, has ALWAYS meant ''controlled demoliton' '
OK now you're just lying thru your teeth. You're presenting opinion and speculation as fact.
debunking911. com /pull. htm
alienentity 2 years ago
" Your just posting bullshit.' "
NO FAIR...I said that about YOU FIRST!
lennhart 2 years ago
In fact, THERMITE explains the fact that the implosions at WTC resembled controlled demolitions.
The official story has changed so many times that is NO LONGER a single official story to refute. The perps prefer to be a moving target.
The FIRST COVER STORY was 'pancaking''. Remember that canard? It was bullshit.
That cover collapsed when it was obvious that no video of either of the WTC collapses shows any sign of stutter between floors.
Fom 'pancakes'' to 'heat expansion'. All bullshit.
lennhart 2 years ago
'Fom 'pancakes'' to 'heat expansion'. All bullshit.'
First, you're vulgar and rude. Second, you don't understand investigations, theories or science.
Third, there's no hard evidence of CD, and absolutely zero evidence that thermite could have produced the collapse of WTC7.
All you've got is wild speculation and hatred for anyone who disagrees, and hatred for your government.
Don't let the facts get in your way, whatever you do!
alienentity 2 years ago
You are engaging in childish, immature and STUPID personal ad hominem attacks on me.
YOU HAVE YET TO REFUTE ...you have yet to prove.
Your just posting bullshit.
lennhart 2 years ago
'you have yet to prove.
Your just posting bullshit.'
Yes, you are doing that. Too bad you don't recognize it.
You started off accusing Silverstein of blowing up the building, you've veered off to Oklahoma city. It just doesn't stop with you truthers, does it? It goes on and on.
Next you'll tell me about chemtrails or something.
alienentity 2 years ago
I've just proved that you are completely uncritical of this report, since you really, really, really want to believe in this conspiracy crap.
You've made a misquote of Silverstein, which you don't admit to.
You claim thermite is used in CD, which it isn't.
You claim thermite was found, which is unproven.
Where is your skepticism? Why the gullible 'it must be true'... It's like a religious cult.
alienentity 2 years ago
" I've just proved that you are completely uncritical of this repor "
And you've proven youself incapable of reading a damn link.
You wanted sources. You got them and ignored them
lennhart 2 years ago
" They know that they can fool people like you with a few such claims, and you won't blink before accepting it as fact. "
That is a BASELESS assertion on your part, mere supposition for which you have no support.
You have not even tried to READ the report ---nor the abstract from a separate source.
The charges you level at me are based upon your willfull ignorance, your arrogance.
You cannot refute something you haven't even BOTHERED to read.
lennhart 2 years ago
It is not a baseless assertion. It is a simple observation that you are completely uncritical of the report, yet dismiss any other science that came before it which doesn't agree with your conspiracy theory.
The report contains nothing new that Jones hasn't already been claiming for years now. I've been following the subject closely
alienentity 2 years ago
The following is from an abstract at Physics 911:
"Abstract
Anomalies involving the collapse of WTC buildings on 9-11 are discussed from the perspective of possible controlled demolition implosion rather than of aircraft impact and fuel-fire damage. Considered is the possible use of thermite to melt sections of the columns of the WTC towers inner cores, thus aiding in their collapse. "
So --this is NOT paint dust. This is THERMITE as is, in fact, used to MELT STEEL.
HANG ÉM HIGH
lennhart 2 years ago
I'll bet you don't even know anything about the publisher of the paper.
I'll bet you don't even care who published it.
You clearly don't understand the physics of thermite to know that a few micron-thick layer would not have enough energy to heat the steel more than about 10 to 25 degrees Kelvin.
This is a dead issue already dude. You're wasting everybody's time.
alienentity 2 years ago
Another excerpt from the comment:
" Don't forget that Timothy McVeigh's Denver defense lawyer tried to introduce evidence that the Oklahoma City Federal Building showed evidence of implosion from within based on the supposition that explosive charges were set to demolish it from within.
They didn't follow up on that either. Those who do not learn from the lessons of History are doomed to repeat its mistakes."
lennhart 2 years ago
So you're saying that the Murrah building was brought down by mythical nanothermite as well?
LOL
alienentity 2 years ago
Paint dust???? LOL Read the article.
Here's a reader comment:
" It
doesn't surprise me in the least to find evidence that the WTC could have been rigged to be detonated to correspond with the inpact of the hijacked plane crashing into it. Wasn't it reported that the $2.3 Trillion
which Rumsfeld reported missing occurred only a day before ? The 9/11 investigation that occurred when the Bush Regime was in power couldn't have produced the truth with all that repression just starting up.... "
lennhart 2 years ago
Yes, primer paint and such contains Aluminum, Titanium, Iron (red pigment).
They have not eliminated ordinary paints from being sources. They've pretended to, but they really didn't bother.
They know that they can fool people like you with a few such claims, and you won't blink before accepting it as fact.
Of course you're conditioned to ignore all other scientific opinion that goes against your conspiracy theory.
It's called brainwashing.
alienentity 2 years ago
---Thermite is not ever used in controlled demolition of buildings. That is not evidence at all---
That is simply NOT true ...and if you had read my previous links and sources, you would have learned better.
Another except from the headlined paper:
" These red/gray chips show marked similarities in all four samples. One sample was collected by a Manhattan resident about ten minutes after the collapse of the second WTC Tower, two the next day, and a fourth about a week later.""
lennhart 2 years ago
OK I'll bite. Give me one reliable source showing thermite used in a Controlled Demolition. I'm not talking about cutting up things during cleanup.
Go ahead, make my day.
Did you know that Jones team didn't publish the spectra of thermite, just their chips? It turns out that the spectra are different.
2) Did you know that Jones team didn't compare the chips to original WTC paint? In fact they ignored that comparison.
HMMM, I wonder why?
alienentity 2 years ago
An excerpt from the HEADLINE:
"A team of nine scientists have unearthed startling data from dust gathered in the days and weeks after the World Trade Center towers collapsed on 9/11. We have discovered distinctive red/gray chips in all the samples we have studied of the dust produced by the destruction of the World Trade Center.
Examination of four of these samples, collected from separate sites, is reported in this paper. "
lennhart 2 years ago
'If it's just Paint dust, spin a new conspiracy theory you must'
Johnny Cochrane via Yoda
alienentity 2 years ago
Re: your assertion that there is no real evidence of CD.
GOOGLE THE HEADLINE!
Thermite is EXCELLENT evidence of controlled demolition.
lennhart 2 years ago
'Thermite is EXCELLENT evidence of controlled demolition.'
1) Thermite is not ever used in controlled demolition of buildings. That is not evidence at all
2) The headline does not constitute established fact that thermite was used in WTC.
Sorry, you fail both times. You are making illogical leaps and you do not understand science. That is an established fact.
alienentity 2 years ago
Anyway, I'm not going to waste any more time debating with you. If you seriously propose that a news headline equals scientific proof, you're a gullible twit.
How many headlines come out claiming a new cause of cancer, or cure for cancer?
You believe every one of them? Please gimme a break.
goodbye.
alienentity 2 years ago
\\///I could turn your phrase on you just for fun \////
I doubt that you can turn a phrase at all.
But --knock yourself out. I could use a laugh.
Now ---GOOGLE the headline. The presence of Thermite is now an established fact.
lennhart 2 years ago
BTW --GOOGLE the FOLLOWING:
Scientists find active 'super-thermite' in WTC dust // Current
The JIG IS UP!
Johnny Cochran said: "If it does not fit, you must acquit!"
Today: "Thermite dust, then CONVICT you must!"
It is time to ROUND UP THE CULPRITS AND HANG THEIR SORRY ASSES.
lennhart 2 years ago
'Johnny Cochran said: "If it does not fit, you must acquit!'
So OJ didn't kill his wife and Goldman? Because he had a sneaky lawyer?
Good lord.
btw lennhart, if one single paper with a claim is all the proof you need, then you don't understand science at all. First, the paper hasn't been verified by independent scientists, it's only just been published.
No one has yet even begun to demonstrate nanothermite paint in use to destroy structural steel columns.
Slow down.
alienentity 2 years ago
I could turn your phrase on you just for fun 'Scientists find WTC collapses due to plane crashes and fire'
The jig was up years ago for the 'truth' movement, they just haven't accepted it yet.
Mark my words. There is no real evidence of CD. There never has been, and there likely will never be.
Over and out. Talk to me again in five years and we'll see where Jones has gotten with his thermite.
alienentity 2 years ago
I especially liked the last sentence:
"We call that idea Occam's Razor because it helps slice away the junk in our thinking."
The JUNK in our thinking is the STUPID idea that somehow Árab Hijackers managed to REPEAL the laws of common sense and physics.
The BEST explanation for WTC is CONTROLLED DEMOLITION,.
It LOOKS LIKE A CONTROLLED DEMOLITION because it frickin IS a CONTROLLED DEMOLITION.
lennhart 2 years ago
'STUPID idea that somehow Árab Hijackers managed to REPEAL the laws of common sense and physics.'
Agreed. That is a stupid idea. But that's not what is being offered in the mainstream or consensus opinion.
And btw there is no 'law' of common sense. In fact, appealing to 'common sense' in obscure, complex matters is known as a logical fallacy 'argument to incredulity'.
Look it up.
Good science trumps popular opinion in determining the truth.
alienentity 2 years ago
Google the headline I posted.
The presence of THERMITE is now an established fact. A trial might have already been held, conviction might already have been obtained HAD there been an investigation.
It was Bush who QUASHED the investigation before it could have begun. The mark of a guilty man who had much to fear from a REAL investigation.
Who benefits from quashed investigations?
THE GUILTY!
lennhart 2 years ago
Comment removed
lennhart 2 years ago
My friend --Dr. John Leinhard --of the University of Houston Egineering Department summed up Occam's Razor in his syndicated radio program:
"The towering 14th-century philosopher William of Occam put it this way: "Multiplicity ought not to be posited without necessity." William was telling us we should make no more assumptions than we really need to explain anything -- the simplest explanation is best. We call that idea Occam's Razor because it helps slice away the junk in our thinking."
lennhart 2 years ago
Best explanation is: SILVERSTEIN OK'D THE CONTROLLED DEMOLITON OF WHAT WAS --IN FACT --A CONTROLLED DEMOLITION.
Sorry, NIST, your BULLSHIT THEORY of HEAT EXPANSION is PURE BULLSHIT that violates Occam's Razor, the Laws of Entropy, specifically, the THIRD LAW OF THERMODYNAMICS.
lennhart 2 years ago
Please calm down and stop using vulgarity. It doesn't make your points any better.
Heat expansion is well understood, it has been studied a lot in shipbuilding, you may discover.
NIST didn't invent it, they just had teams of qualified engineers who combed thru the evidence, compiled data, and came up with the strongest hypothesis.
I think you are entirely wrong to state that CD is 'in fact' what happened. It is not a fact at all - it is your theory or opinion.
There is no hard evidence.
alienentity 2 years ago
It is significant that Silverstein NEVER said "pull THEM" as one might have said if he meant to say ''pull them (firefighters) out..."
But he DID NOT say that.
His exact words were: "We made the decision to pull IT"
IT is an impersonal pronoun that refers to an object. Folk normally do not refer to other FOLK as "it'", unless they are trying to insult them.
Was Silverstein trying to insult firefighters?
lennhart 2 years ago
Excuse me sir. First, listen carefully again to Silverstein. You've misquoted. He does not say 'we made the decision' anywhere.
He says 'they' made the decision, referring to FDNY.
/watch?v=7WYdAJQV100
So you've demonstrated that you don't know the exact words, even as you purport to quote them.
FDNY Chief Daniel Nigro specifically addresses this issue and states that HE ALONE made the decision to pull his men from WTC7 and form a collapse perimeter, as they felt it was coming down soon.
alienentity 2 years ago
Corporations with PULL building for a living use the word PULL to describe CONTROLLED DEMOLITIONS. Google: Controlled Demolitons, Inc.
GOOGLE: "Pull", controlled demolition "
You will find a link to a such a corporations web site which includes a PRESS RELEASE describing how and why they are planning to PULL a building.
Secondly, go to 'HOW THINGS WORK" which, even prior to 911, had several authoritative articles re: 'controlled demolitions' by pros. They ALL used the word PULL.
lennhart 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
How dumb are 9-11 troofers?
Dumb enough to believe that Larry Silverstein, the billionaire, IVY league educated businessman, was stupid enough to go on British TV after 9-11 and admitt that he blew up his own building. Not one admission, but twice!
Do troofers really believe that he is that stupid???
When you see the entire interview and view it in context it becomes obvious that he is talking about NYFD firefighters PULLING BACK from the doomed building
dreadnaught2 2 years ago
The NIST invented 'heat expansion' to explain what is best explained without NIST ASSUMPTIONS, in fact, violations of Occam's Razor.
The OFFICIAL NIST explanation violates the laws of the conservation of matter and energy, the third law of thermodynamics and the laws of logical analysis by creating UNECESSARY hypotheses.
WTC is best explained by two words: CONTROLLED DEMOLITION which, alone, accounts for EVERY observed phenomenon that day.
lennhart 2 years ago
I also recognize the words and terms of Steven Jones and perhaps shades of Jim Fetzer's oddly ironic declarations in your statement.
I suspect you are simply repeating what you've heard, without understanding the core physics or mechanics.
Please explain how NIST violates the laws of conservation of matter and energy, and thermodynamics. In your own words, or quote a good scientist who isn't on the 9-11 truth payroll....ie not selling a book or DVD to you.... if you can.
alienentity 2 years ago
I have not read either --but SO WHAT?
If they are wrong, cite an an example and PROVE IT!
I really don't give a shit about your OPINION of someone.
Post a fact! One will do for now.
lennhart 2 years ago
ps Steven Jones, a smart man with some really good physics chops, has totally gone off the rails in his quixotian quest to find thermite in the WTC collapses.
Don't just follow him into oblivion. He has made so many fundamental errors in judgement to accommodate his obsession, it isn't worth your time.
He abandoned good science in favour of a cult movement and some kind of status in it....(my opinion, anyway).
Don'tbe a moth to that flame.
alienentity 2 years ago
I CITED sources for my information that PULL means "controlled demolition"
NEITHER WAS EITHER FETZER NOR JONES.
Secondly --so what?
Truth is truth --something about which 911 DENIERS know nothing.
Secondly, NO ONE has a copyright on the truth.
At last, your comment re: FETZER and JONES is a transparent if somewhat DUMBASS and clumsy ad hominem.
lennhart 2 years ago
1) We'll have to disagree about the term 'pull'. My understanding is that it has nothing to do with explosive demolition.
2) I restate my questions
'Please explain how NIST violates the laws of conservation of matter and energy, and thermodynamics. In your own words, or quote a good scientist who isn't on the 9-11 truth payroll....ie not selling a book or DVD to you.... if you can'
And a fact for you: no explosive flashes or detonations were seen or heard at WTC7 ala CD.
/watch?v=JtG_0B4ypkg
alienentity 2 years ago
Greetings Earthlings.
I have just completed a new video on WTC 7, please take a look a it.
I will do a couple more in the series as time permits.
watch?v=eLyE6o-cOr0
A higher Res version is also available
watch?v=bKgtmnf63Nw
alienentity 2 years ago
how the fuck are they getting away with this shit.....It is Impossible to just pull a building.../without a lot of planing..My theory is that Flight 93 was meant for building 7 ..and they either couldn't stop there planted bombs or as he says they pulled it..I started studying the sept 11 attacks about 3 years ago with an open neutral mind... the proof of an inside job outweighs the proof of a terrorist attack by about ...90-1 this shit is real... the elite that control the government did this
kayslab 2 years ago 2
How is this an order when the fire commander is the person that says they should pull it, they they (meaning NOT him) made the decision to pull.
You people are unbelievable.
themange59 3 years ago
Calling all moron CTists!! Bring your best argument to the JREF Conspiracy Theory Forum (google JREF). Prepare to get your ass handed to you on a platter, so you better bring your best CTist bullshit arguments.
okedoke1234 3 years ago
GOOGLE: fucking idiots who believe that 9/11 was an inside job.
dsmcclellan 3 years ago
GOOGLE: stupid fucks who believe everything the government tells them.
It's called false flagging...
SingProudBoston 3 years ago 2
GOOGLE: Gullible conspiracy tards spoonfed by Joe Blow's unaccountable kookspiracy web site.
PoetryHound 3 years ago
It's called common sense and logic.
Just because you believe some bullshit fairy tale how the government rules every aspect of the world doesn't mean you have the inside track on being correct, because you're not.
Just because false flag operations exist doesn't mean this is one of them.
themange59 3 years ago
Google "UNUSUAL EVACUATIONS" to see all the reports of eyewitness accounts of strange activities leading up to 9/11. Employees working in the Towers said they would find dust covering the desks and computers every morning. Dust from thousands of holes being drilled into the concrete.........
GOOGLE : ODIGO WARNING
GOOGLE :UNUSUAL EVACUATIONS
GOOGLE : SILVERSTEIN PULL IT
GOOGLE : DANCING MOSSAD
GOOGLE : MEXICO MOSSAD
GOOGLE : BIN LADEN DENIED 9-11
GOOGLE : TED OLSEN CALL LIE
JesSaves 3 years ago
LARRY SILVERSTEIN INTERVIEW:
DOESN'T ANYONE SEE HIS FACE MIMICKING THE ACTUAL PULLING OF THE BUILDING?
"IT" IS A THING, A BUILDING, WTC7.
His right closes at the same time, to look away. He's a bad lyer.
And watch how he hesitates with his last words:
"and then we WATCHED THE BUILDING ...EH...COLLAPSE..."
HELLO, ANYBODY HOME? HELLO?
LiteWaiter 3 years ago
Does anyone know what the hell "pull it" means?! Its not some demolition command to destroy the building, they meant to PULL THE RESCUE WORKERS OUT OF THE BUILDING! They were trying to save lives and didnt want more rescuers to die in another building collapse.
emtpilot132 3 years ago 3
.... so your saying 'it' means people. good work... nice try.... but nah.
lightman514 2 years ago
they already had everyone out ....there was no loss of life...
kayslab 2 years ago
Evidently Silverstein didn't know everyone was already out.
PoetryHound 2 years ago
Comment removed
lennhart 2 years ago