Really? I'm not so sure. Suppose Silverstein and the firefighters suspected the building was going to collapse, instead of saying pull Silverstein could have said: "and they made that decision to leave the area and then we watched the building collapse."
He could have just have easily "we watched the building collapse" referring to the fact that he EXPECTED the building to collapse.
@BBC7 5.20pm 5+2 =7. 2.3 trillion reported missing the day before 9+11+2001 =23
23 the hanged man in the tarrot.. The Royal Star of the Lion.. karmic reward number. it guarantees help from superiors and protection from those in high places.
then there's this tim osman 3+2 from the cia, formally usamah. 32 has the same properties as 23 with stronger biast towards communication and the media "the polititions vibration" just check all that your self anyway. i wonder.
His wife told him to pull it, well the mole at least! what a fucking joke! lol. They rub it in your face people, or maybe fragments? Although, I hope not. In plane sight! Wake the fuck up- its 2012!
this is one of the strongest damning pieces of evidence out there. the people who twist this interview always have another agenda, thanks Mr Larry Silverstein for waking us up.
"Ok, How do you pull a building of that magnitude down in an instance????"
Maybe you mean "instant", oh mightily uneducated padawan. Note that the buildings took over an hour to collapse after the initial aircraft impact - far greater than the "instant" you fail to understand, if not simply using the wrong term in a feeble attempt to add impact to your comment. At your age I would expect far better. Fail..
to pull off a false flag operation like the events of 9/11 NOT everyone would have to be in on it, like so many people claim. Only a handful of Moles in key positions and handlers controlling a network of patsies and BINGO! you got yourself a successful op. There really is no mystery as to who is truly responsible... it's not as much of a "secret" conspiracy so much as perception control. Those responsible were actually quite blatant.
Either the firefighters made the decision to pull the building down, as their job to out the fire was nearly impossible. Despite the man lose, it may be interpreted that Silverstein acknowledged the decision to pull, and so got involved to be potential candidate of being responsible of wtc 7. Not much truth can be found other then that.
10 years later and you twoofers still can't grasp physics and collapse mechanics or that fire is very destructive to the stability of steel. 10 years. Not one whistleblower. 10 years not one step closer to a new investigation. 10 years spouting the same old refuted "evidence". When will the Truth Movement provide a clear, concise and complete narrative? A working hypothesis? Thermite debunked. CD debunked. No planes debunked. 10 years of the TM profiteering scam and you've all been had.
@Oz1976 when will an "official story" be presented that is a clear, concise, and complete narrative? CONspiracy theories like the "no planes" theory are deliberate disinformation. The "truth movement" was immediately infiltrated and subverted. I'm not trying to start a boobtube debate with you, if you do respond, let's agree to disagree.
@SteveFusionX that is one Con theory yes... there are many others. The CIA/NSA infiltrated and subverted the "truth movement" from the get go... agent provocateurs, disinformation agents dressed as "hippies" going on national television and putting out false conspiracy theories just to discredit the credible ones. You have to realize the type of psychological subversion that is going on in the U.S. There are many many layers to the cake.
@SteveFusionX its controlled resistance. psychological warfare. i would even argue that certain key figures in the "truth movement" like Alex Jones for example, work for the very powers responsible for all of this... Cults of personality like Jones may not even be aware that they are doing the bidding of the powers that be, or they may be fully aware and actual disinfo agents, agent provocateurs, etc. The easiest way to defeat a resistance is to infiltrate it and lead it astray.
@SteveFusionX to make myself clear i am of the Made It Happen On Purpose school of thought. It is plain to see that a network operating within, outside, and above the U.S. govt, military-industrial complex, and intelligence apparatus are responsible for 9/11. Read a book called 9/11 Synthetic Terrorism by Webster G. Tarpley. I am saying that this is obvious and that "they" wanted us to know it was an inside job. That's why they were so blatant. There is more to the cake. peace.
@DoctorSess ROFL! Paranoid much? yes the super secret illuminati / nwo has infiltrated the truth movement. ROFL! You're fucking out of your mind. The illuminati has not been seen since the 1800's and were nothing more than men of science against the church. This NWO has over 70 years of failure. Who are the big bad guys coming to get us huh? Sorry, 911 was perpetrated by terrorists from the middle east under the direction of KSM and OBL. Plain and simple. It's pretty clear to rational thinkers.
@Oz1976 wrong. 9/11 was perpetrated by a network of Moles, Handlers, and Patsies operating within the U.S. Govt, Military-Industrial, and Intelligence Apparatus. Less people were in on it than one would think. It only takes a handful in key positions to carry out a successful coup d'etat. I never said anything about "ILLUMINATI" that's a boogie man. The oligarchy is very real... that is not a theory, simply a fact. An oligarchical society has existed for a long time and continues to exist.
@Oz1976 I'm a very rational thinker. My beliefs are based off of evidence and witness testimony, not unsubstantiated "official" theories. Let's agree to disagree.
@DoctorSess You mean the testimony of those witnesses you quote mine and cherry pick from? None of whom believe in your idiocy? Evidence? What evidence? You have ZERO evidence of anything. Face it, 911 was an outside job and you're a paranoid delusional whackjob, or terribly uneducated and misinformed (or mislead) if you believe otherwise.
@Oz1976 I didn't quote anyone. I am not cherry picking anything. The witnesses speak for themselves and their testimony is quite clear. Same goes for the evidence; it speaks for itself. Like I said 9/11 was carried out by a rogue network operating within, above, and outside of the U.S. government, Military, and Intelligence community. This "rogue network" consisted of a series of Moles, Handlers, and Patsies in key positions. Agree to disagree my friend.
@Oz1976 furthermore I am not delusional, or diagnosed with any clinical psychological disorders, I am educated, and apparently more well informed than you. No response is necessary, but feel free. peace.
@DoctorSess No you're not. You're batshit insane, uneducated and/or terribly misinformed. If you're so smart, read Bazant "What Did and Did Not Cause the Collapse of the Towers in New York" and tell me why he's wrong...that is if you can even fathom or comprehend the physics and mathematics used in the paper...here's a link since I know you're too dumb to find it on your own:
(heiwaco.tripod. com/blgb.pdf)
Please show me ONE publication refuting it. Bazant has SEVERAL published papers on 911
@Oz1976 Your personal attacks are petty and weak. Calling me crazy simply because I disagree is ignorant and immature. Even if I am completely wrong this does not make me clinically insane. You obviously cannot control your emotions. I would like to insult you back, and trust me I could, but I refuse to stoop to your primitive level of discussion. I will look at the link you provided because I am not close minded and I am not so arrogant as to think I know it all. You could learn a lot from me.
@DoctorSess Not calling you crazy because you disagree with me. Calling you crazy because you fucking crazy. I don't give a shit if it's immature, it's definately NOT ignorant, that's on your end. It DOES make you insane. Why? Because you fail to grasp the actual REALITY of it. You can't see past your blind allegiance to a conspiracy theory that FOR TEN YEARS still has ZERO COHERANT NARATIVE. ZERO EVIDENCE. AND ZERO SCIENCE! I couldn't learn a damn thing from you, you're an idiot.
@Oz1976 Don't be so angry. Agree to disagree. I am certainly not an idiot. A conspiracy theory is a model for understanding illegal or immoral activities planned and/or carried out by a group of two or more people. I have no allegiance except to my own logic, which of course is not infallible. At least I am willing to learn. Who has the blind allegiance, me or you? All I have stated is that a network of moles, handlers, and patsies orchestrated the events of 9/11 and that an Oligarchy exists.
@DoctorSess Ridicule is the only weapon which can be used against unintelligible propositions. Ideas must be distinct before reason can act upon them. It has nothing to do with maturity and everything to do with your idiocy.
@Oz1976 if you're going to quote Jefferson give him credit... also that was an incomplete quote taken out of context. Let me help you: "Ridicule is the only weapon which can be used against unintelligible propositions. Ideas must be distinct before reason can act upon them; and no man ever had a distinct idea of the trinity. It is the mere Abracadabra of the mountebanks calling themselves the priests of Jesus." -Thomas Jefferson.
Furthermore Ozzy there's nothing unintelligible about my proposition, unless you aren't as smart as you clearly think you are. In your opinion my statement (9/11 orchestrated by Network of moles/Oligarchy does exist) is unsubstantiated, but not unintelligible. Correct me if I'm wrong. I assume you were comparing the Made It Happen On Purpose view of 9/11 with Christian Mythos? Nice try. Now please sir be done with it and take my original advice: Agree (learn) to disagree (w/o personal attacks).
@DoctorSess No you're wrong yet again. I don't take advice from people who are clearly insane. There was no False Flag on 911. The keyword in everything you've said...BELIEF. Kinda like FAITH. Do you comprehend how many people would need to be involved? Do you comprehend how many people you're accusing of being liars and/or murderers? With ZERO conscience? Give me a complete, all encompassing narrative of that days events, something NO truther has been able to do. Not one.
@Oz1976 I finds that all 911 truthers - and I mean ALL of them - are motivated not by a serious line of scientific or engineering inquiry but by their belief that the U.S. government is evil. They are thus willing to swallow the most outlandish rumors about government misdeeds from some guy typing them in his basement on some loony conspiracy-oriented web site. No normal people are truthers. It's only these folks who believe in a whole host of conspiracies.
@PoetryHound This is indeed a large group of them...however there are those that truly are just misinformed, truly do want some transparency and truth, or are swayed by the seductive nature of being in the minority that "knows the REAL truth". There's a thread on the JREF forums of 100's of former truthers, who, once they took the time to actually think and do REAL research, have seen the error of their thoughts and how stupid they were. Charlie Vietch is a prime example.
Also look at how they are using the fire damage and other damage from bombs as evidence of "from towers" damage. They show fire fighters soaking there heads in water but no water to fight fires in building 7. Rows of burning cars and buses are skipped over and go unexplained. They also talk about internal damage but conclude without explanation how the towers caused that damage. The "just not real" comment also goes by without any explanation.
THANKS FOR UPLOADING THIS VIDEO WHICH THE BBC HAVE REMOVED FROM THEIR WEBSITE SINCE THE AMAZING RESPONSE FROM PEOPLE WITH A BIT OF BACKGROUND KNOWLEDGE - I HAVE INCORPORATED THIS VIDEO INTO ONE OF MY OWN VIDEOS IN RESPONSE TO savagemonkey555 'S REQUEST TO ADD MORE INFO, AND ADDED ANOTHER 4 MINUTES OF ADDED INFORMATION
COPY AND PASTE:
BBC edits Larry Silverstein pull it wtc7 lies kerry controlled fashion wtc 7
Don't you understand yet that the "Pull it" interview was bait put right in your face? You load all your hopes into what obviously could not happen and then the perps will snap the rug from beneath you.
The collapse video is just a fake digital construct prepared long before. Your analysis is dependent on a false reality like a box they've placed you in and your every reaction is dictated by them.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
So now Richard Gage professes to be a psychologist, amongst many other things he claims to be. The firefighters told Siverstein they couldn't save WTC7. In fact, Silverstein has huge losses over the entire ordeal if you do your research. If you imply that the firefighters were a part of the conspiracy, why did over 340 of them die? Get a grip!
This reply is for the benefit of other viewers. Nowhere in this video does it imply that the firefighters were involved in any conspiracy. This user has made this point of view up and does not provide an example as to why this would be true. This video is only meant to tackle how the BBC altered a clips meaning intentionally. See the description box for more information.
There's no manipulation here at all. I've seen much worse, and not just from the BBC. Look around and you'll find "documentaries" on the Apollo missions where they edit footage and audio to imply it's all fake, and they know it's not. The BBC will air a show if it makes money.
It's been 8 years and nobody has come forward and said anything, no proof of a conspiracy, nothing. You point at minutia to "prove" what? Just another idiot born every minute that can't do the math.
@savagemonkey555 MrOllyK is only repeating what the BBC wants people to believe that the 91 Truth movement includes FF and police which is a scam. I would assume the "insiders" in inside job would be include control over media outlets and the Bush administration is only part of whole picture. To focus on any one part removes the complete view. Notice they don't include themselves as part of the conspiracy. Also review the mythbusters ban on 911 theories.
Well said. I can't see any manipulation in the BBC's story. This video is just a personal viewpoint, severely lacking in education and moral standards (lookee.. someone's bin' watchin' me video pa..!"
I see "pull it" as meaning "pull the rescue operation". How can anyone save a building so badly damaged? Maybe the 911 contortionists have a few ideas - as usual..
Countless firefighters that were there risking their lives that day still stick to their guns and swear that they heard secondary explosions going off in the building and that there must have been explosives planted in the buildings (many immediately thought that terrorists must have planted bombs in the buildings as well as crashing the planes). Many of these firefighters have also said that they were told they would lose their jobs if they discussed this. This witness testimony's not debatable
Secondary explosions can be caused by ruptured gas lines filtering through the rubble until an ignition source is connected with the gas. High power electrical conduits short-circuiting can make "explosive" noises, including the "bangs" heard by onlookers as bodies slammed into the pavement and surrounding architecture. There's NO evidence of any explosives at the 911 site. Get an education on physics! PROVE it!
@MrOllyK What is not debatable is that countless witnesses, including NYFD, reported secondary explosions... even an explosion BEFORE the planes struck was reported. Of course it's debatable what caused these explosions, and you are entitled to your opinion. How can we know for sure if there was evidence of explosives used when over 80% of the steel was cleaned up, shipped overseas, and recycled by Controlled Demolition INC. before it could be analyzed?
"What is not debatable is that countless witnesses, including NYFD, reported secondary explosions..."
In a building collapse of that magnitude I would expect many noises mistaken for "explosions" by the untrained ear. A loud bang can be caused by anything, such as a high voltage spark or ruptured gas lines igniting. Still no proof of explosives after 10 years, considering initial 911 movement diatribe was to invent thermite, thermate & nano-tripe theories, which don't explode btw.
"..even an explosion BEFORE the planes struck was reported."
Now that's just morons like you making shit up and spreading it like pig flu which the 911 movement is. Have you forgotten that some reported lasers from satellites, rockets fired from planes that apparently looked NOTHING LIKE the planes that hit the buildings (regardless all the independent video) and not forgetting those holograms and flying saucers. Really wanna stick with your crowd and look just as stupid?
"How can we know for sure if there was evidence of explosives used when over 80% of the steel was cleaned up, shipped overseas, and recycled by Controlled Demolition INC. before it could be analyzed?"
How much evidence do you need? I think the remaining 20% you say of the all-important-to-you steel is more than enough for evidence, considering EVERYBODY YOU SPEAK TO WITNESSED THE BUILDINGS BEING LOADED BY EXPLOSIVE BUT NON-EXPLODING THERMITE THAT EXPLODED.. Duh..!
"Controlled Demolition Inc. the same company that cleaned up the Murrah Federal Building after the Oklahoma City bombing."
So you mean maybe Timothy McVeigh had something to do with 911 or are you saying that company had something to do with the satellite lasers and holograms/spaceships that destroyed those buildings with the only exploding thermite, thermate, nano/super/triple-tripe that keeps being re-invented for every conceivable 911 conspiracy argument? Get even more bent.
@MrOllyK you're putting words in my mouth and attempting to twist what i've said... i mean exactly what i said, nothing more nothing less. Which is true. The same company [Controlled Demolition Inc.] that cleaned up the Murrah Building cleaned up the WTC site. They did so immediately before the CRIME SCENE could be examined. If we did not analyze the steel how do we know that it failed due to thermal weakening? We don't, that is just a THEORY. Guilty behavior is an indication of guilt.
@MrOllyK ask the NYFD why they were so angry with Giuliani. It's because he had them blocked from the WTC site... they were no longer allowed to search the rubble for their fallen brothers. No one was allowed to take photographs of the WTC site, they were harassed and had their cameras and film confiscated. The evidence (especially the steel) at the WTC was cleaned up and destroyed before it could be analyzed. Why? I don't have all the answers, I just have legitimate questions.
"ask the NYFD why they were so angry with Giuliani. It's because he had them blocked from the WTC site..."
You're not asking questions, you're making unfounded and ridiculous statements. The site would have been made a crime scene and unauthorised access disallowed. Makes sense huh?
I did happen to notice that hundreds of firefighters searched through the rubble for weeks. Did you miss that too or did all the news reporters taking video end up on the wrong site?
@MrOllyK Now honestly I am not going to gain anything by discussing this with someone like you. It's obvious you cannot have a genuine discussion with someone who doesn't agree with you. Right away you're twisting everything I say and using insults, making it personal, implying I am unintelligent or clinically insane, etc. It's the same old story, if i don't agree with you and i question the official version of events i must be clinically insane right? Wrong.
"..if i don't agree with you and i question the official version of events i must be clinically insane right?"
Pretty much, going by all the unproven statements you make.
1. Show me how well you understand physics in relation to speed and kinetic energy, temperature and structural integrity. You might pass by never referring to any of the buildings being in freefall the entire way.
2. Don't just say it, prove explosives were used. You must have at least 50 examples by now.
@MrOllyK I didn't say explosives were used... i said that eye witnesses and firefighters (some were even inside the towers) reported secondary explosions. There is a difference. How can anyone prove anything if the evidence was scooped up, shipped overseas, and recycled? That's my main point right there. The official theory is unproven also. If the steel was never analyzed we cannot prove either way what caused it to fail. Explosives, Thermite, or just plain Fire included.
@MrOllyK You either are misreading my comments or deliberately trying to discredit what i've said by putting words in my mouth and making things up. You exhibit all the signs of an agent provocateur. Equating what I've said with things as ridiculous as laser beams and holograms. I suspect you don't even really care you're just trying to attack me and make me angry. In no way does what I've said even suggest that I have a clinical psychological disorder.
@MrOllyK He made billions from his insurance companies on old buildings that were full of asbestos and which were too expensive to get up to standard. I think you must be trolling as nobody can be that stupid to suggest that the firefighters were part of the conspiracy or that Silverstein did not profit from this.
So many of the videos state they have indisputable evidence when most of it is subject to interpretation. We need the solid scientific facts and the actual video evidence, untampered with backed legitimate sources. A proper compilation of true evidential material should be put together. That means literally hours and hours of interviews and scientific presentation of the facts. It,s all probably here on youtube. I know the pilotsfor911 truth video does that. I would like to see more of that.
I know a couple of jerks that edited real footage to show their own conclusions, just one example being holographic planes. It was no problem to find the real unedited footage and bunk his "theory"..
Good work chap! We are not fooled on this side of the pond either, but this was a good observation, as if the BBC isn't totally controled like the U.S. media by one group. JOHN 8 : 44
The BBC is also biased for not complying with international regulations on legal standard names because it never uses the correct name, "Persian Gulf," in its reports. What it does is that it vandalizes a historical name, of which is a part of the Persian heritage. This is not only an insult to my country. But, it's also an insult to journalism as a whole, since it promotes inaccuracy and dishonesty, not to mention an insult to historical/geographical truth!
During the Sassanian dynasty and the time of the Islamic Prophet Muhammad and the 4 caliphs, the name invariably used was the "Persian Sea". This was continued by the Ummayyads and Abbassids, while during the time of the Ottoman empire, both "Persian Gulf" or "Persian Sea" were used.
Until the 1960s Arab countries used the term "Persian Gulf" as well, however with the rise of Arab nationalism in the 1960s, most Arab states started adopting the term "Arabian Gulf".
"Notice that the last line re-affirms that Silverstein was referring to the building and not the firefighters"
No, it does nothing of the sort. First of all, notice that he says that THEY (the firefighters) made the decision to pull, not him. So even if we are to accept that "pull it" means "to bring down with explosives," it was the fire dept, not Silverstein. Second of all, his last comment just says that after they (the fire dept) pulled "it" that they watched the building collapse.
mikshakes, you're missing my point. I totally know WTC7 was demolished with explosives, but if you get into a debate/argument with a debunker and use the Silverstein comment as insurmountable evidence, then you will get laughed out of town (been there & bought the T shirt, trust me). Nice video tho' Silverstein looks & sounds well shaky on the subject. ;)
"I totally know WTC7 was demolished with explosives"
Why don't you assemble a class-action lawsuit then. I'm sure they'd like to hear/see/touch your "evidence" considering none has been found and all manner of ridiculous theories have been completely smashed over the last 10 years. You're not at all special, unless you're also in special school..
Of course I believe he is talking about the building, but as evidence the comment is not compelling, because he could have been talking about the fire service operation.
FEMA had stated that the firefighting operation in WTC7 was stopped very early on. So, Silverstein could not have been talking about the operations which include the firefighters.
You can hold a ruler to the building as it collapses. And if anyone thinks that the building wasnt demolished or that silverstein didnt mean 'pull' the BUILDING, the only successful 'pulling' was that of your leg or the wool over your eyes.
The "pull it" comment remains inconclusive as hard evidence. The evidence is WTC7. Unfortunately the majority don't seem capable of rational free thought processes, instead they blindly accept the "group-think" mass media manipulated untruth as truth. Freedom is Slavery, Ignorance is Strength, etc. etc. The implication is that Big Brother has always been with us, but now the gloves are off.
Yeah I fully appreciate that. Then again it's no great surprise that the British Bullshit Corporation is manipulating & politically spinning it's news content ;)
The BBC are total scumbags, they are stopping certain music being played, they NEVER represent the people, they have lost touch entirely with the youth and older people, middle age people and people as a whole ... Whats worse is WE HAVE TO PAY A TV LICENSE TO THEM OR WE ARE IN SERIOUS TROUBLE, DEBT COLLECTORS, BAD CREDIT ETC, HOW IS THIS DEMOCRATIC!!???
yep, right at the end of the BBC Doc they had Dillon Avery swearing - It's a primacy recency trick that was intended to linger with the viewer. It gives the impression that the truth movement are slightly yobbish. Shame on the BBC.
I believe he meant to say "pull out"...to leave the area. Or it was his way of saying "pull the 'plug'"...to get out of there.
That being said, buildings just don't implode like that.
Yet, it would have taken many people to prepare a building for implosion. I can't believe all those people will keep quiet if that was the case. Someone (would have) or will squeal.
Truth is truth and no matter how they try and dismiss truth, the truth becomes more clear. Like the old saying goes...give em enough rope and they'll hang themselves. Jesus Christ saves from death, He's the only true life and His life is found in His Word.
The most obvious "words" in his statement are..."....maybe the best the smartest thing to do is to pull "IT", and "THEY" made that decision to pull and "WE" watched it collapse. Isn't IT singular?? I would think in referring to the firefighters ,"maybe the smartest thing to do is to pull THEM....and THEY made the decision to pull THEM....". BUT, that would contradict the latter part of his statement of...."and WE watched the building collapse." It fell after pulling them....hahaha
could have been edited more strong, concerning the timing, silence volume of the sound.
need more emphasis the point of what you want to tell.
(especially the narration could be improved, it is odd stand out tone in whole piece, take notice about how many word to be read in a second, what is the stress.)
I appreciate the advice on how to better the "piece", though it is very clear what point I'm trying to get across and all that matters, in relation to this, is how the BBC have edited the Silverstein clip, not my edit of the youtube piece.
I understand that this video has cartain purpose that is to tell the truth.
And I clearly see the point that, you want to try the contradictive way to what BBC did, because you know the influence and effect that you can get with "editing".
Well edited "video piece" might not be your aim.
Although then, I can't see the reason you made the video very structual, documentary style this time. If the reason was to make the content clear, I don't think it worked well.
OK "BBC Manipulates Silverstein Comment" is the content. but I am talking about "structure" I think we have different starting point and same conclusion. well good luck.
could have been edited more strong, concerning the timing, silence volume of the sound.
need more emphasis the point of what you want to tell.
(especially the narration could be improved, it is odd stand out tone in whole piece, take notice about how many word to be read in a second, what is the stress.)
they desperately try to mislead the ppl away from this testimony of silversteen.
media manipulation is very common in our world, but they do this things only if they feel unsafe.
they know that most ppl will believe this coverstory from bbc even if this ppl wasnt sure anymore about wtc 7 .
media is not ignorant, they are part of it, dont get fooled by the smiling entertainers in the media, media is owned by the perpetrators, they will not inform but only manipulate the sheeples
Cheney had Halliburton build a super secret weather machine in his basement and if Jeb Bush hadn't of let that hurricane get past Florida, none of this would have happened...
You can see how the chemtrails pushed the holographic plane off course and detonated the explosives Ronald Reagan planted years before with black helicopters when the trade center was built...
Cheney had Halliburton build a super secret weather machine in his basement and if Jeb Bush hadn't of let that hurricane get past Florida, none of this would have happened...
You can see how the chemtrails pushed the holographic plane off course and detonated the explosives Ronald Reagan planted years before with black helicopters when the trade center was built...
Only from your perspective. Ever hear of satire? Do you actually think this guy is serious? Obviously you took it as someone who is attempting to insult your intelligence only because you fear that your intelligence is being insulted... yet the only person insulting your intelligence is yourself. You subject yourself to this stimulus to overreact and attack someone's intelligence... Welcome to the circle of stupidity.
I loled at his comment because I saw the form I wanted to see. And you?
You by your own words saw the form you wanted to see. What am I meant to say to you after that? I saw what he wrote which is a typical kind of attack on the truth movement that is repeated all over. Sarcasm to make a point but with no substance.
If it wasn't for the alien cover up at Area 51 by Eisenhower, Nixon never would have never been cloned to started the Vietnam War and the World Trade Center hologram would still be standing!
The original documentary featuring Larry's "pull it" remark is called "America Rebuilds". As shown here, the clip immediately following Larry's last words "we watched the building collapse" is a shot of WTC 7 collapsing. Appropriate. Anyone who tells you "pull" means "evacuate" is evacuating your leg. Incidentally, they "pulled" all copies of America Rebuilds off the shelves. Boycott MSM. Check out INFOWARS for real news.
the bbc up to their old tricks again, still trying to con the few people who haven't yet woken up to the fact that 911 was an inside job. they did the same thing when they edited out part of an interview that David Frost did with Benazir Bhutto. The BBC didn't want us to hear Bhutto say that Bin Laden had been murdered, so they took it upon themselves to edit that bit out. the bbc are the uk government's propaganda department. without the bbc they'd be in Sh1t Street.
Really? I'm not so sure. Suppose Silverstein and the firefighters suspected the building was going to collapse, instead of saying pull Silverstein could have said: "and they made that decision to leave the area and then we watched the building collapse."
He could have just have easily "we watched the building collapse" referring to the fact that he EXPECTED the building to collapse.
Pirate44444 5 days ago
don't i love those jews.......NOT
silverlightprinzess 1 month ago in playlist 9/11 TRUTH 3
This has been flagged as spam show
@BBC7 5.20pm 5+2 =7. 2.3 trillion reported missing the day before 9+11+2001 =23
23 the hanged man in the tarrot.. The Royal Star of the Lion.. karmic reward number. it guarantees help from superiors and protection from those in high places.
then there's this tim osman 3+2 from the cia, formally usamah. 32 has the same properties as 23 with stronger biast towards communication and the media "the polititions vibration" just check all that your self anyway. i wonder.
nettledned 1 month ago
Outstanding 3:23 minutes of truth. Very good piece. Someone send it to Larry.
secretsundaze 1 month ago
very nice upload manipulation will always be there were is truth ...
k1llum1nat 6 months ago
The British Bullshitting Corporation had a 911 conspiracy docu on last night and they didnt include any of larrys comments .
imawakeish 6 months ago
bbc are the uk government's propaganda department and we have to pay to watch it !! very good video and free to.
dermot2222 6 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@dermot2222 Don't pay - I don't. Just ignore their threats. There is no way I'm paying for this propaganda machine.
Catandthespoon 6 months ago
jane stanley, what about jane stanley?
iglwy 6 months ago
His wife told him to pull it, well the mole at least! what a fucking joke! lol. They rub it in your face people, or maybe fragments? Although, I hope not. In plane sight! Wake the fuck up- its 2012!
Noodles8ify 6 months ago
@Noodles8ify its already 2012??...damn i overslept...
ah well the world is coming 2an end in 2012 any way....
might aswell go 2sleep again...good night :)
BTW about this vid:
i guess all the firefighters & policemen saying on camera like 15times:
back off people we are gonna blow up building7
while 1explosion after another can be heard on the background
is ofcourse also insignificant 2investigate 4 the 9/11 commision?
neither is any witness injured by lower explosions heard by the comm.
resonance303 6 months ago
Also why would the firefighters take orders from the building owner?
conspiracytheory1066 6 months ago
I wonder what the BBC's position is on WMDs...
MIJVI 7 months ago
this is one of the strongest damning pieces of evidence out there. the people who twist this interview always have another agenda, thanks Mr Larry Silverstein for waking us up.
MorpheusWasRight 7 months ago
Ok, How do you pull a building of that magnitude down in an instance????
CHESEABUN 7 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@CHESEABUN
"Ok, How do you pull a building of that magnitude down in an instance????"
Maybe you mean "instant", oh mightily uneducated padawan. Note that the buildings took over an hour to collapse after the initial aircraft impact - far greater than the "instant" you fail to understand, if not simply using the wrong term in a feeble attempt to add impact to your comment. At your age I would expect far better. Fail..
MrOllyK 6 months ago
You don't have to watch the BBC or pay their license fee
if you don't watch BBC live you are not required by law to have a license.
Dont encourage this propraganda machine their no better than Murdoch.
noelligh 7 months ago
to pull off a false flag operation like the events of 9/11 NOT everyone would have to be in on it, like so many people claim. Only a handful of Moles in key positions and handlers controlling a network of patsies and BINGO! you got yourself a successful op. There really is no mystery as to who is truly responsible... it's not as much of a "secret" conspiracy so much as perception control. Those responsible were actually quite blatant.
DoctorSess 7 months ago
Either the firefighters made the decision to pull the building down, as their job to out the fire was nearly impossible. Despite the man lose, it may be interpreted that Silverstein acknowledged the decision to pull, and so got involved to be potential candidate of being responsible of wtc 7. Not much truth can be found other then that.
wrathfeeling 7 months ago
Truth is TREASON in the empire of lies. Dr. Ron Paul
eenam786 7 months ago
10 years later and you twoofers still can't grasp physics and collapse mechanics or that fire is very destructive to the stability of steel. 10 years. Not one whistleblower. 10 years not one step closer to a new investigation. 10 years spouting the same old refuted "evidence". When will the Truth Movement provide a clear, concise and complete narrative? A working hypothesis? Thermite debunked. CD debunked. No planes debunked. 10 years of the TM profiteering scam and you've all been had.
Oz1976 8 months ago
@Oz1976 when will an "official story" be presented that is a clear, concise, and complete narrative? CONspiracy theories like the "no planes" theory are deliberate disinformation. The "truth movement" was immediately infiltrated and subverted. I'm not trying to start a boobtube debate with you, if you do respond, let's agree to disagree.
DoctorSess 7 months ago
@DoctorSess
the only "CONspiracy" is the official story george bush told us about 19 muslims hijacking planes and making NORRAD stand down.
SteveFusionX 7 months ago 5
@SteveFusionX that is one Con theory yes... there are many others. The CIA/NSA infiltrated and subverted the "truth movement" from the get go... agent provocateurs, disinformation agents dressed as "hippies" going on national television and putting out false conspiracy theories just to discredit the credible ones. You have to realize the type of psychological subversion that is going on in the U.S. There are many many layers to the cake.
DoctorSess 7 months ago
@SteveFusionX its controlled resistance. psychological warfare. i would even argue that certain key figures in the "truth movement" like Alex Jones for example, work for the very powers responsible for all of this... Cults of personality like Jones may not even be aware that they are doing the bidding of the powers that be, or they may be fully aware and actual disinfo agents, agent provocateurs, etc. The easiest way to defeat a resistance is to infiltrate it and lead it astray.
DoctorSess 7 months ago
@SteveFusionX to make myself clear i am of the Made It Happen On Purpose school of thought. It is plain to see that a network operating within, outside, and above the U.S. govt, military-industrial complex, and intelligence apparatus are responsible for 9/11. Read a book called 9/11 Synthetic Terrorism by Webster G. Tarpley. I am saying that this is obvious and that "they" wanted us to know it was an inside job. That's why they were so blatant. There is more to the cake. peace.
DoctorSess 7 months ago
@DoctorSess ROFL! Paranoid much? yes the super secret illuminati / nwo has infiltrated the truth movement. ROFL! You're fucking out of your mind. The illuminati has not been seen since the 1800's and were nothing more than men of science against the church. This NWO has over 70 years of failure. Who are the big bad guys coming to get us huh? Sorry, 911 was perpetrated by terrorists from the middle east under the direction of KSM and OBL. Plain and simple. It's pretty clear to rational thinkers.
Oz1976 7 months ago
@Oz1976
"The illuminati has not been seen since the 1800's and were nothing more than men of science against the church."
I think you've been reading too many dan brown books (or watching the dire films...) these are works of fiction (sorry to burst your bubble!)
Your "rational thinking" is no better than the conspiracy-theorists you attempt to ridicule.
SteveFusionX 7 months ago 4
@Oz1976 wrong. 9/11 was perpetrated by a network of Moles, Handlers, and Patsies operating within the U.S. Govt, Military-Industrial, and Intelligence Apparatus. Less people were in on it than one would think. It only takes a handful in key positions to carry out a successful coup d'etat. I never said anything about "ILLUMINATI" that's a boogie man. The oligarchy is very real... that is not a theory, simply a fact. An oligarchical society has existed for a long time and continues to exist.
DoctorSess 7 months ago
@Oz1976 I'm a very rational thinker. My beliefs are based off of evidence and witness testimony, not unsubstantiated "official" theories. Let's agree to disagree.
DoctorSess 7 months ago 2
@DoctorSess You mean the testimony of those witnesses you quote mine and cherry pick from? None of whom believe in your idiocy? Evidence? What evidence? You have ZERO evidence of anything. Face it, 911 was an outside job and you're a paranoid delusional whackjob, or terribly uneducated and misinformed (or mislead) if you believe otherwise.
Oz1976 7 months ago
@Oz1976 I didn't quote anyone. I am not cherry picking anything. The witnesses speak for themselves and their testimony is quite clear. Same goes for the evidence; it speaks for itself. Like I said 9/11 was carried out by a rogue network operating within, above, and outside of the U.S. government, Military, and Intelligence community. This "rogue network" consisted of a series of Moles, Handlers, and Patsies in key positions. Agree to disagree my friend.
DoctorSess 7 months ago 2
@Oz1976 furthermore I am not delusional, or diagnosed with any clinical psychological disorders, I am educated, and apparently more well informed than you. No response is necessary, but feel free. peace.
DoctorSess 7 months ago
@DoctorSess No you're not. You're batshit insane, uneducated and/or terribly misinformed. If you're so smart, read Bazant "What Did and Did Not Cause the Collapse of the Towers in New York" and tell me why he's wrong...that is if you can even fathom or comprehend the physics and mathematics used in the paper...here's a link since I know you're too dumb to find it on your own:
(heiwaco.tripod. com/blgb.pdf)
Please show me ONE publication refuting it. Bazant has SEVERAL published papers on 911
Oz1976 7 months ago
@Oz1976 Your personal attacks are petty and weak. Calling me crazy simply because I disagree is ignorant and immature. Even if I am completely wrong this does not make me clinically insane. You obviously cannot control your emotions. I would like to insult you back, and trust me I could, but I refuse to stoop to your primitive level of discussion. I will look at the link you provided because I am not close minded and I am not so arrogant as to think I know it all. You could learn a lot from me.
DoctorSess 7 months ago
@DoctorSess Not calling you crazy because you disagree with me. Calling you crazy because you fucking crazy. I don't give a shit if it's immature, it's definately NOT ignorant, that's on your end. It DOES make you insane. Why? Because you fail to grasp the actual REALITY of it. You can't see past your blind allegiance to a conspiracy theory that FOR TEN YEARS still has ZERO COHERANT NARATIVE. ZERO EVIDENCE. AND ZERO SCIENCE! I couldn't learn a damn thing from you, you're an idiot.
Oz1976 7 months ago
@Oz1976 Don't be so angry. Agree to disagree. I am certainly not an idiot. A conspiracy theory is a model for understanding illegal or immoral activities planned and/or carried out by a group of two or more people. I have no allegiance except to my own logic, which of course is not infallible. At least I am willing to learn. Who has the blind allegiance, me or you? All I have stated is that a network of moles, handlers, and patsies orchestrated the events of 9/11 and that an Oligarchy exists.
DoctorSess 7 months ago
@Oz1976 Now unless you mature mentally in the next minute or so don't bother responding to me anymore. I have gotten enough out of you. Peace son.
DoctorSess 7 months ago
@DoctorSess Ridicule is the only weapon which can be used against unintelligible propositions. Ideas must be distinct before reason can act upon them. It has nothing to do with maturity and everything to do with your idiocy.
Oz1976 7 months ago
@Oz1976 if you're going to quote Jefferson give him credit... also that was an incomplete quote taken out of context. Let me help you: "Ridicule is the only weapon which can be used against unintelligible propositions. Ideas must be distinct before reason can act upon them; and no man ever had a distinct idea of the trinity. It is the mere Abracadabra of the mountebanks calling themselves the priests of Jesus." -Thomas Jefferson.
DoctorSess 7 months ago
Furthermore Ozzy there's nothing unintelligible about my proposition, unless you aren't as smart as you clearly think you are. In your opinion my statement (9/11 orchestrated by Network of moles/Oligarchy does exist) is unsubstantiated, but not unintelligible. Correct me if I'm wrong. I assume you were comparing the Made It Happen On Purpose view of 9/11 with Christian Mythos? Nice try. Now please sir be done with it and take my original advice: Agree (learn) to disagree (w/o personal attacks).
DoctorSess 7 months ago
@DoctorSess No you're wrong yet again. I don't take advice from people who are clearly insane. There was no False Flag on 911. The keyword in everything you've said...BELIEF. Kinda like FAITH. Do you comprehend how many people would need to be involved? Do you comprehend how many people you're accusing of being liars and/or murderers? With ZERO conscience? Give me a complete, all encompassing narrative of that days events, something NO truther has been able to do. Not one.
Oz1976 7 months ago
@Oz1976 I finds that all 911 truthers - and I mean ALL of them - are motivated not by a serious line of scientific or engineering inquiry but by their belief that the U.S. government is evil. They are thus willing to swallow the most outlandish rumors about government misdeeds from some guy typing them in his basement on some loony conspiracy-oriented web site. No normal people are truthers. It's only these folks who believe in a whole host of conspiracies.
PoetryHound 7 months ago
@PoetryHound This is indeed a large group of them...however there are those that truly are just misinformed, truly do want some transparency and truth, or are swayed by the seductive nature of being in the minority that "knows the REAL truth". There's a thread on the JREF forums of 100's of former truthers, who, once they took the time to actually think and do REAL research, have seen the error of their thoughts and how stupid they were. Charlie Vietch is a prime example.
Oz1976 6 months ago
Also look at how they are using the fire damage and other damage from bombs as evidence of "from towers" damage. They show fire fighters soaking there heads in water but no water to fight fires in building 7. Rows of burning cars and buses are skipped over and go unexplained. They also talk about internal damage but conclude without explanation how the towers caused that damage. The "just not real" comment also goes by without any explanation.
danp5648 1 year ago
THANKS FOR UPLOADING THIS VIDEO WHICH THE BBC HAVE REMOVED FROM THEIR WEBSITE SINCE THE AMAZING RESPONSE FROM PEOPLE WITH A BIT OF BACKGROUND KNOWLEDGE - I HAVE INCORPORATED THIS VIDEO INTO ONE OF MY OWN VIDEOS IN RESPONSE TO savagemonkey555 'S REQUEST TO ADD MORE INFO, AND ADDED ANOTHER 4 MINUTES OF ADDED INFORMATION
COPY AND PASTE:
BBC edits Larry Silverstein pull it wtc7 lies kerry controlled fashion wtc 7
OR GO TO: ABZ2000123
PEACE,
ABZ
abz2000123 1 year ago
And if the building was 'pulled', how did they get the explosives in and wired up in HOURS when it takes WEEKS or MONTHS to do it normally?
The explosives MUST have been in place BEFOREHAND.
BrainDeadBritain 2 years ago 2
911missinglinksDOTcom
latest film banned by JooTube
euro944t 2 years ago
Ozzy must be a Shill of some kind, his allegations are insane. Everything in Ozzy's world is a CGI insert. Nonsense.
IExposeMormonism 2 years ago
How mindlessly credulous are you?
Don't you understand yet that the "Pull it" interview was bait put right in your face? You load all your hopes into what obviously could not happen and then the perps will snap the rug from beneath you.
The collapse video is just a fake digital construct prepared long before. Your analysis is dependent on a false reality like a box they've placed you in and your every reaction is dictated by them.
Google "OODA Loop" and "information warfare."
OzzybanOswald 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
So now Richard Gage professes to be a psychologist, amongst many other things he claims to be. The firefighters told Siverstein they couldn't save WTC7. In fact, Silverstein has huge losses over the entire ordeal if you do your research. If you imply that the firefighters were a part of the conspiracy, why did over 340 of them die? Get a grip!
MrOllyK 2 years ago
This reply is for the benefit of other viewers. Nowhere in this video does it imply that the firefighters were involved in any conspiracy. This user has made this point of view up and does not provide an example as to why this would be true. This video is only meant to tackle how the BBC altered a clips meaning intentionally. See the description box for more information.
savagemonkey555 2 years ago 12
There's no manipulation here at all. I've seen much worse, and not just from the BBC. Look around and you'll find "documentaries" on the Apollo missions where they edit footage and audio to imply it's all fake, and they know it's not. The BBC will air a show if it makes money.
It's been 8 years and nobody has come forward and said anything, no proof of a conspiracy, nothing. You point at minutia to "prove" what? Just another idiot born every minute that can't do the math.
MrOllyK 2 years ago
@savagemonkey555 MrOllyK is only repeating what the BBC wants people to believe that the 91 Truth movement includes FF and police which is a scam. I would assume the "insiders" in inside job would be include control over media outlets and the Bush administration is only part of whole picture. To focus on any one part removes the complete view. Notice they don't include themselves as part of the conspiracy. Also review the mythbusters ban on 911 theories.
danp5648 1 year ago
@savagemonkey555
Well said. I can't see any manipulation in the BBC's story. This video is just a personal viewpoint, severely lacking in education and moral standards (lookee.. someone's bin' watchin' me video pa..!"
I see "pull it" as meaning "pull the rescue operation". How can anyone save a building so badly damaged? Maybe the 911 contortionists have a few ideas - as usual..
MrOllyK 6 months ago
Countless firefighters that were there risking their lives that day still stick to their guns and swear that they heard secondary explosions going off in the building and that there must have been explosives planted in the buildings (many immediately thought that terrorists must have planted bombs in the buildings as well as crashing the planes). Many of these firefighters have also said that they were told they would lose their jobs if they discussed this. This witness testimony's not debatable
DoctorSess 7 months ago
@DoctorSess
"This witness testimony's not debatable"..
Because you say so? Really!
Secondary explosions can be caused by ruptured gas lines filtering through the rubble until an ignition source is connected with the gas. High power electrical conduits short-circuiting can make "explosive" noises, including the "bangs" heard by onlookers as bodies slammed into the pavement and surrounding architecture. There's NO evidence of any explosives at the 911 site. Get an education on physics! PROVE it!
MrOllyK 6 months ago
@MrOllyK What is not debatable is that countless witnesses, including NYFD, reported secondary explosions... even an explosion BEFORE the planes struck was reported. Of course it's debatable what caused these explosions, and you are entitled to your opinion. How can we know for sure if there was evidence of explosives used when over 80% of the steel was cleaned up, shipped overseas, and recycled by Controlled Demolition INC. before it could be analyzed?
DoctorSess 6 months ago
@DoctorSess
"What is not debatable is that countless witnesses, including NYFD, reported secondary explosions..."
In a building collapse of that magnitude I would expect many noises mistaken for "explosions" by the untrained ear. A loud bang can be caused by anything, such as a high voltage spark or ruptured gas lines igniting. Still no proof of explosives after 10 years, considering initial 911 movement diatribe was to invent thermite, thermate & nano-tripe theories, which don't explode btw.
MrOllyK 6 months ago
@DoctorSess
"..even an explosion BEFORE the planes struck was reported."
Now that's just morons like you making shit up and spreading it like pig flu which the 911 movement is. Have you forgotten that some reported lasers from satellites, rockets fired from planes that apparently looked NOTHING LIKE the planes that hit the buildings (regardless all the independent video) and not forgetting those holograms and flying saucers. Really wanna stick with your crowd and look just as stupid?
MrOllyK 6 months ago
@DoctorSess
"How can we know for sure if there was evidence of explosives used when over 80% of the steel was cleaned up, shipped overseas, and recycled by Controlled Demolition INC. before it could be analyzed?"
How much evidence do you need? I think the remaining 20% you say of the all-important-to-you steel is more than enough for evidence, considering EVERYBODY YOU SPEAK TO WITNESSED THE BUILDINGS BEING LOADED BY EXPLOSIVE BUT NON-EXPLODING THERMITE THAT EXPLODED.. Duh..!
MrOllyK 6 months ago
@MrOllyK Controlled Demolition Inc. the same company that cleaned up the Murrah Federal Building after the Oklahoma City bombing.
DoctorSess 6 months ago
@DoctorSess
"Controlled Demolition Inc. the same company that cleaned up the Murrah Federal Building after the Oklahoma City bombing."
So you mean maybe Timothy McVeigh had something to do with 911 or are you saying that company had something to do with the satellite lasers and holograms/spaceships that destroyed those buildings with the only exploding thermite, thermate, nano/super/triple-tripe that keeps being re-invented for every conceivable 911 conspiracy argument? Get even more bent.
MrOllyK 6 months ago
@MrOllyK you're putting words in my mouth and attempting to twist what i've said... i mean exactly what i said, nothing more nothing less. Which is true. The same company [Controlled Demolition Inc.] that cleaned up the Murrah Building cleaned up the WTC site. They did so immediately before the CRIME SCENE could be examined. If we did not analyze the steel how do we know that it failed due to thermal weakening? We don't, that is just a THEORY. Guilty behavior is an indication of guilt.
DoctorSess 6 months ago
@MrOllyK ask the NYFD why they were so angry with Giuliani. It's because he had them blocked from the WTC site... they were no longer allowed to search the rubble for their fallen brothers. No one was allowed to take photographs of the WTC site, they were harassed and had their cameras and film confiscated. The evidence (especially the steel) at the WTC was cleaned up and destroyed before it could be analyzed. Why? I don't have all the answers, I just have legitimate questions.
DoctorSess 6 months ago
@DoctorSess
"ask the NYFD why they were so angry with Giuliani. It's because he had them blocked from the WTC site..."
You're not asking questions, you're making unfounded and ridiculous statements. The site would have been made a crime scene and unauthorised access disallowed. Makes sense huh?
I did happen to notice that hundreds of firefighters searched through the rubble for weeks. Did you miss that too or did all the news reporters taking video end up on the wrong site?
MrOllyK 6 months ago
@MrOllyK Now honestly I am not going to gain anything by discussing this with someone like you. It's obvious you cannot have a genuine discussion with someone who doesn't agree with you. Right away you're twisting everything I say and using insults, making it personal, implying I am unintelligent or clinically insane, etc. It's the same old story, if i don't agree with you and i question the official version of events i must be clinically insane right? Wrong.
DoctorSess 6 months ago
@DoctorSess
"..if i don't agree with you and i question the official version of events i must be clinically insane right?"
Pretty much, going by all the unproven statements you make.
1. Show me how well you understand physics in relation to speed and kinetic energy, temperature and structural integrity. You might pass by never referring to any of the buildings being in freefall the entire way.
2. Don't just say it, prove explosives were used. You must have at least 50 examples by now.
MrOllyK 6 months ago
@MrOllyK I didn't say explosives were used... i said that eye witnesses and firefighters (some were even inside the towers) reported secondary explosions. There is a difference. How can anyone prove anything if the evidence was scooped up, shipped overseas, and recycled? That's my main point right there. The official theory is unproven also. If the steel was never analyzed we cannot prove either way what caused it to fail. Explosives, Thermite, or just plain Fire included.
DoctorSess 6 months ago
@MrOllyK You either are misreading my comments or deliberately trying to discredit what i've said by putting words in my mouth and making things up. You exhibit all the signs of an agent provocateur. Equating what I've said with things as ridiculous as laser beams and holograms. I suspect you don't even really care you're just trying to attack me and make me angry. In no way does what I've said even suggest that I have a clinical psychological disorder.
DoctorSess 6 months ago
@MrOllyK Now I really am not going to discuss this any further here. If you feel the need to get the last word in be my guest. Agree to disagree.
DoctorSess 6 months ago
Ask these firefighters why they hate Guiliani so much...
DoctorSess 7 months ago
@MrOllyK and what do you profess to be? idiot
kingston0708 7 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@MrOllyK He made billions from his insurance companies on old buildings that were full of asbestos and which were too expensive to get up to standard. I think you must be trolling as nobody can be that stupid to suggest that the firefighters were part of the conspiracy or that Silverstein did not profit from this.
Catandthespoon 6 months ago
So many of the videos state they have indisputable evidence when most of it is subject to interpretation. We need the solid scientific facts and the actual video evidence, untampered with backed legitimate sources. A proper compilation of true evidential material should be put together. That means literally hours and hours of interviews and scientific presentation of the facts. It,s all probably here on youtube. I know the pilotsfor911 truth video does that. I would like to see more of that.
crapthisbetterwork 2 years ago
@crapthisbetterwork
I know a couple of jerks that edited real footage to show their own conclusions, just one example being holographic planes. It was no problem to find the real unedited footage and bunk his "theory"..
MrOllyK 6 months ago
AmeriCUNTs are too ignorant to know what really happened to them on 9/11and who? fucked them in reality!
AfghansWorld 3 years ago
Well done. sylverstein committed capital arson.
CNN911Fakes 3 years ago
Good work chap! We are not fooled on this side of the pond either, but this was a good observation, as if the BBC isn't totally controled like the U.S. media by one group. JOHN 8 : 44
SAYYOURROSARY 3 years ago
new world order its all part of the game its just the beginning
theoneagain 3 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
The BBC is also biased for not complying with international regulations on legal standard names because it never uses the correct name, "Persian Gulf," in its reports. What it does is that it vandalizes a historical name, of which is a part of the Persian heritage. This is not only an insult to my country. But, it's also an insult to journalism as a whole, since it promotes inaccuracy and dishonesty, not to mention an insult to historical/geographical truth!
PersiaMyLove 3 years ago
@PersiaMyLove
During the Sassanian dynasty and the time of the Islamic Prophet Muhammad and the 4 caliphs, the name invariably used was the "Persian Sea". This was continued by the Ummayyads and Abbassids, while during the time of the Ottoman empire, both "Persian Gulf" or "Persian Sea" were used.
Until the 1960s Arab countries used the term "Persian Gulf" as well, however with the rise of Arab nationalism in the 1960s, most Arab states started adopting the term "Arabian Gulf".
So fukn what..
MrOllyK 6 months ago
"Notice that the last line re-affirms that Silverstein was referring to the building and not the firefighters"
No, it does nothing of the sort. First of all, notice that he says that THEY (the firefighters) made the decision to pull, not him. So even if we are to accept that "pull it" means "to bring down with explosives," it was the fire dept, not Silverstein. Second of all, his last comment just says that after they (the fire dept) pulled "it" that they watched the building collapse.
macman13 3 years ago
mikshakes, you're missing my point. I totally know WTC7 was demolished with explosives, but if you get into a debate/argument with a debunker and use the Silverstein comment as insurmountable evidence, then you will get laughed out of town (been there & bought the T shirt, trust me). Nice video tho' Silverstein looks & sounds well shaky on the subject. ;)
darthstarwarsgeek 3 years ago
@darthstarwarsgeek
"I totally know WTC7 was demolished with explosives"
Why don't you assemble a class-action lawsuit then. I'm sure they'd like to hear/see/touch your "evidence" considering none has been found and all manner of ridiculous theories have been completely smashed over the last 10 years. You're not at all special, unless you're also in special school..
MrOllyK 6 months ago
Of course I believe he is talking about the building, but as evidence the comment is not compelling, because he could have been talking about the fire service operation.
darthstarwarsgeek 3 years ago
FEMA had stated that the firefighting operation in WTC7 was stopped very early on. So, Silverstein could not have been talking about the operations which include the firefighters.
MattForTruth911 2 years ago
Is there a video or interview that confirms this and can you give the link? Thank you. J.B.
crapthisbetterwork 2 years ago
Will you Truthers please feign outrage over your Dear Leaders doing what you accuse the BBC of doing?
/watch?v=H8BkI2cyVTc
/watch?v=mA9KqFfclbY
/watch?v=o-IThuAtOsY
Probably not.
ClunkityClunk4Truth 3 years ago
You can hold a ruler to the building as it collapses. And if anyone thinks that the building wasnt demolished or that silverstein didnt mean 'pull' the BUILDING, the only successful 'pulling' was that of your leg or the wool over your eyes.
Psy0psAgent 3 years ago 4
To pull a building, does the BBC (Berry Bad Company)mean "to pull" in Britain is a few men pulling a rope?
Media depend on their political masters, and we all know that politics mean "to lie always",and politicians mean "people that always lie.
zilverenmist 3 years ago
The "pull it" comment remains inconclusive as hard evidence. The evidence is WTC7. Unfortunately the majority don't seem capable of rational free thought processes, instead they blindly accept the "group-think" mass media manipulated untruth as truth. Freedom is Slavery, Ignorance is Strength, etc. etc. The implication is that Big Brother has always been with us, but now the gloves are off.
darthstarwarsgeek 3 years ago 7
I completely agree. My point wasn't to say this was the best evidence, just an instance when the BBC manipulated a comment in their favour.
savagemonkey555 3 years ago 2
Yeah I fully appreciate that. Then again it's no great surprise that the British Bullshit Corporation is manipulating & politically spinning it's news content ;)
darthstarwarsgeek 3 years ago 4
Sigh... now 50 million soccer moms out there are going to know "Truth" because some guy with an English accent told them so on the BBC.
IvoryGuru 3 years ago
Great video... respect x
DrUK2008 3 years ago
The BBC are total scumbags, they are stopping certain music being played, they NEVER represent the people, they have lost touch entirely with the youth and older people, middle age people and people as a whole ... Whats worse is WE HAVE TO PAY A TV LICENSE TO THEM OR WE ARE IN SERIOUS TROUBLE, DEBT COLLECTORS, BAD CREDIT ETC, HOW IS THIS DEMOCRATIC!!???
DropZoneRecords 3 years ago
yep, right at the end of the BBC Doc they had Dillon Avery swearing - It's a primacy recency trick that was intended to linger with the viewer. It gives the impression that the truth movement are slightly yobbish. Shame on the BBC.
DickGhostmoon 3 years ago 8
I know, and I'm sure the 'journalist' kept on provoking Avery with nonsense until he had to swear. Well spotted!
savagemonkey555 3 years ago 2
Pull it = boom
OtherOne81 3 years ago 4
I believe he meant to say "pull out"...to leave the area. Or it was his way of saying "pull the 'plug'"...to get out of there.
That being said, buildings just don't implode like that.
Yet, it would have taken many people to prepare a building for implosion. I can't believe all those people will keep quiet if that was the case. Someone (would have) or will squeal.
Thomasmosser 3 years ago
this is so true ur a smart man and 9% americans are dumm
quakertownjackass 3 years ago
Truth is truth and no matter how they try and dismiss truth, the truth becomes more clear. Like the old saying goes...give em enough rope and they'll hang themselves. Jesus Christ saves from death, He's the only true life and His life is found in His Word.
CurtisGSXR 3 years ago
he said pull "it" , not "them"..which is contradictory in itself. How can you refer to firefighters as "it"???????????
BlueDhalia 3 years ago
The most obvious "words" in his statement are..."....maybe the best the smartest thing to do is to pull "IT", and "THEY" made that decision to pull and "WE" watched it collapse. Isn't IT singular?? I would think in referring to the firefighters ,"maybe the smartest thing to do is to pull THEM....and THEY made the decision to pull THEM....". BUT, that would contradict the latter part of his statement of...."and WE watched the building collapse." It fell after pulling them....hahaha
BlueDhalia 3 years ago
the bbc couldn't spell unbiased
handsomemackem 3 years ago 3
could have been edited more strong, concerning the timing, silence volume of the sound.
need more emphasis the point of what you want to tell.
(especially the narration could be improved, it is odd stand out tone in whole piece, take notice about how many word to be read in a second, what is the stress.)
though good start, keep up.
mayupero 3 years ago
I appreciate the advice on how to better the "piece", though it is very clear what point I'm trying to get across and all that matters, in relation to this, is how the BBC have edited the Silverstein clip, not my edit of the youtube piece.
savagemonkey555 3 years ago
I understand that this video has cartain purpose that is to tell the truth.
And I clearly see the point that, you want to try the contradictive way to what BBC did, because you know the influence and effect that you can get with "editing".
Well edited "video piece" might not be your aim.
Although then, I can't see the reason you made the video very structual, documentary style this time. If the reason was to make the content clear, I don't think it worked well.
Although
mayupero 3 years ago
... check the YouTube title, "BBC Manipulates Silvestein Comment", that's the content, all you need to know really.
savagemonkey555 3 years ago
OK "BBC Manipulates Silverstein Comment" is the content. but I am talking about "structure" I think we have different starting point and same conclusion. well good luck.
mayupero 3 years ago
could have been edited more strong, concerning the timing, silence volume of the sound.
need more emphasis the point of what you want to tell.
(especially the narration could be improved, it is odd stand out tone in whole piece, take notice about how many word to be read in a second, what is the stress.)
though good start, keep up.
mayupero 3 years ago
they desperately try to mislead the ppl away from this testimony of silversteen.
media manipulation is very common in our world, but they do this things only if they feel unsafe.
they know that most ppl will believe this coverstory from bbc even if this ppl wasnt sure anymore about wtc 7 .
media is not ignorant, they are part of it, dont get fooled by the smiling entertainers in the media, media is owned by the perpetrators, they will not inform but only manipulate the sheeples
horror11 3 years ago
I watched that a few week ago i though he meant pull the building.
SlaughterAnimal 3 years ago
SirWinstonChurchill masonic idiot.
torrypeach 3 years ago
Cheney had Halliburton build a super secret weather machine in his basement and if Jeb Bush hadn't of let that hurricane get past Florida, none of this would have happened...
You can see how the chemtrails pushed the holographic plane off course and detonated the explosives Ronald Reagan planted years before with black helicopters when the trade center was built...
SirWinstonChurchill 3 years ago
Nice job on the vid.
Yep, the BBC (Blair Broadcasting Corporation) was never going to tell the truth - and they know most people are afraid to speak out.
Anyone can see what is going on - if they wish to.
Peace
Chrisky81 3 years ago 2
Cheney had Halliburton build a super secret weather machine in his basement and if Jeb Bush hadn't of let that hurricane get past Florida, none of this would have happened...
You can see how the chemtrails pushed the holographic plane off course and detonated the explosives Ronald Reagan planted years before with black helicopters when the trade center was built...
SirWinstonChurchill 3 years ago
hilarious :D
swyft187 3 years ago
No, dumb and ignorant.
InfowarsAlchemy 3 years ago
There is absolutely no evidence the WTC ever existed. It was an elaborate hologram the whole time...
SirWinstonChurchill 3 years ago
Yeah that's all your left to do now, just make up silly scenarios because you can't debate the facts anymore.
InfowarsAlchemy 3 years ago
Only from your perspective. Ever hear of satire? Do you actually think this guy is serious? Obviously you took it as someone who is attempting to insult your intelligence only because you fear that your intelligence is being insulted... yet the only person insulting your intelligence is yourself. You subject yourself to this stimulus to overreact and attack someone's intelligence... Welcome to the circle of stupidity.
I loled at his comment because I saw the form I wanted to see. And you?
swyft187 3 years ago
You by your own words saw the form you wanted to see. What am I meant to say to you after that? I saw what he wrote which is a typical kind of attack on the truth movement that is repeated all over. Sarcasm to make a point but with no substance.
InfowarsAlchemy 3 years ago
For the record, BBC sucks.
swyft187 3 years ago 2
Especially if you happen to be English...
SirWinstonChurchill 3 years ago
There is absolutely no evidence the WTC ever existed. It was an elaborate hologram the whole time...
SirWinstonChurchill 3 years ago
If it wasn't for the alien cover up at Area 51 by Eisenhower, Nixon never would have never been cloned to started the Vietnam War and the World Trade Center hologram would still be standing!
SirWinstonChurchill 3 years ago
The original documentary featuring Larry's "pull it" remark is called "America Rebuilds". As shown here, the clip immediately following Larry's last words "we watched the building collapse" is a shot of WTC 7 collapsing. Appropriate. Anyone who tells you "pull" means "evacuate" is evacuating your leg. Incidentally, they "pulled" all copies of America Rebuilds off the shelves. Boycott MSM. Check out INFOWARS for real news.
ThoughtCrime7 3 years ago
Nice video! I watched this documentary on TV, i thought it was bias too.
WorldWideResistance 3 years ago
ugh i remember dat day, it sucked the smoke was chasing my back as i was running...I WAS ONLY 7 GOD DAMNIT
crappysoda1 3 years ago
i saw the ad for this, thought about watching it, but then remembered that the BBC would just lie about it
nick000bristow 3 years ago
the bbc up to their old tricks again, still trying to con the few people who haven't yet woken up to the fact that 911 was an inside job. they did the same thing when they edited out part of an interview that David Frost did with Benazir Bhutto. The BBC didn't want us to hear Bhutto say that Bin Laden had been murdered, so they took it upon themselves to edit that bit out. the bbc are the uk government's propaganda department. without the bbc they'd be in Sh1t Street.
beckyNYC1 3 years ago 4
Well spotted!
j0nw 3 years ago 2
please take the muscic off or turn it down
chief36 3 years ago
Please be specific. I don't know what you're referring to.
savagemonkey555 3 years ago
May'be he's referring to the music played in the middle not realising that it's part of the documentary itself.
InfowarsAlchemy 3 years ago 2
Excellent point!
dan211cr 3 years ago 3
Great work.
InfowarsAlchemy 3 years ago 3