@terry4100 I see you been drinking your prozac taste good? YOU SAY "conspiracy nut jobs show me proof of the demolition crew" Lol are you for real? I will believe the official story when I see the videos from the pentagon and the videos of the supposed plane hitting it from the citgo gas station and sheraton hotel that the FBI confiscated.
@SAMMARTINO68 the only videos released are too grainy. but there ARE photos of the plane wreckage in the area. go look them up. and there are plenty of witnesses who say it was a plane.
So why wasnt he at work that day? Why did he make sure his insurance covered terrorism? Why did he buy the building when he knew it would cost 1 billion dollars to remove the illegal asbestous?
When you conspiracy nut jobs show me proof of the demolition crew preparing building 7 for its 9/11 destruction day to coincide with the airplanes flying into the twin towers come talk to me about our sinister government.. The problem is.. You retards give the government to much credit for ability to do anything with the precision and competence it would have taken to pull of such an amazing feat. There are many things you have to over look for your theory to have a chance it just amazes me.
@terry4100 amen. what really pisses me off is they tend to distort witness accounts of what they saw, edit videos, ignore important stuff and all that other junk to prove their point. they're a bunch of LIARS
"A federal jury on Monday ruled that the assault on the Twin Towers of the World Trade Center was in fact two occurrences for insurance purposes. The finding in U.S. District Court in Manhattan means leaseholder Larry Silverstein may collect up to $4.6 billion, according to reports." [Forbes.com 12/06/04]
We are both correct then. You are correct on the sum and it was seen as two attacks so the insured sum ($3.3 Billion) was paid out twice.
"A federal jury on Monday ruled that the assault on the Twin Towers of the World Trade Center was in fact two occurrences for insurance purposes. The finding in U.S. District Court in Manhattan means leaseholder Larry Silverstein may collect up to $4.6 billion, according to reports." [Forbes.com 12/06/04]
@buddyfreakinhoIIy, Ok, you don't believe that "Pull it" is a phrase used in the demolition industry referring to the use of ropes and chains to pull main supports down so that the rest of the building would follow. But you do believe that fire can destroy the main supports of a steel framed building in such a precise and systematic way as to make it come down like a perfect demolition job which takes precision planning and timing. Architects, engineers and physicists dont agree with you on that
@neverfoundthetime "Pull it" refers to the use of cables, not explosives. You have failed to provide a single case where "pull it" has been used to refer to the use of explosives in a demolition. Not even one example. Why would you believe something if there's no evidence to support it?
@buddyfreakinhoIIy, "Pull it" is irrelevant in the face of the destruction of the towers and building 7. What do you think in the face of the evidence proffered by A&E911Truth to say the buildings cannot have been downed by fire and gravity?
@neverfoundthetime ""Pull it" is irrelevant in the face of the destruction of the towers and building 7"
If it's irrelevant, why did you bring it up? It turns out that it's not a term that refers to the use of explosives. Now that you know that, rather than admit you were wrong, you claim it's irrelevant and try to change the subject. LOL!
AE911truth has not presented any evidence of explosives or incendiaries. Richard Gage has made lots of false claims & apparently you fell for them.
@buddyfreakinhoIIy, I already knew where the term to Pull a building came from and looks like you did too. Yes it originated before explosives were used. The issue is the fall of the buildings not being "kosher", the terminology is a side show. Richard Gage and the other 1500 co-signers of A&E911 Truth has asked for an investigation of the fall of the buildings. I'm sure every one would like to see an investigation to the crime of the century... and claims could be proved or disproved then.
@buddyfreakinhoIIy, I already knew where the term to Pull a building came from and looks like you did too. Yes it originated before explosives were used. The issue is the fall of the buildings not being "kosher", the terminology is a side show. Richard Gage and the other 1500 co-signers of A&E911 Truth has asked for an investigation of the fall of the buildings. I'm sure every one would like to see an investigation to the crime of the century... and claims could be proved or disproved then.
Although, I'm not sure I can really take credit. I drink a bunch of beer then things just come to me. sort of a channeling type thing.
There are about 3000 souls screaming for vengence, not to mention the family and friends of those now departed. Larry Silverstein will reap what he helped sow.
And really, I'm trying to help him.
An admonission and confession would go along way to absolving him.
@buddyfreakinhoIIy, So I'm not a "Truther", I'm fact I'm a sceptic.... of the NIST report and the government's explanation of 911 and the way the White house fought tooth and nail not to have a criminal investigation of the crime of the centenary.
@buddyfreakinhoIIy, well it is out there and he did cash double the insurance. It could be innocent. The way building 7 fell isn't innocent. Controlled demolition is the only possible answer according to hundreds of engineers and architects and physicists. I' don't belong to any "Truther" movement , I just have looked at the evidence and have BIG questions.
@neverfoundthetime BTW, you also got the insurance payout wrong. You said Silverstein "did cash double the insurance." That's incorrect. Double would have been $7 billion. The total payout added up to $4.6 billion.
Fact is "pull it" is a phrase routinely used in demolition and probably never before used to mean abandon the fire-fighting or abandon the building or get your people out of there. And then the building did collapse in its own footprint in the identical way a building comes down in controlled demolition. Fire still has never brought down a steel-framed skyscraper and fire has never brought down a building with the exact signature of a controlled demolition. Or can you give us an example of that?
@neverfoundthetime Truthers ike you regularly claim that "pull it" is a demolition term but they (you) have been unable to find an example of the term being used that way. On the other hand, the term "pull" was used by firefighters to refer to pulling firefighters away from the buildings on 9/11.
The idiocy of truthers is amazing. They actually want people to believe that Silverstein first committed a multi-billion dollar act of insurance fraud, then admitted to doing so on national TV, and then somehow, 2 years later in 2004, not one of the WTC complex's 24 insurance holders ever raised the issue of possible fraud before paying out a total of about $4.5 Billion in insurance claims. Logic has never seemed to permeate the so called "truth movement".
@thorkyll Sorry, I head the demolition expert on TV use the term "pull" & the building came down. This was prior to 9/11. In fact, Architects and Engineers for 9/11 truth actually found a clip where a demolition crew used the term "pull" to show that this is indeed a insider term that some demolition experts use with regard to demolition. If "pull" mean to withdraw - then just say withdraw or evacuate. Call a spade a spade. Then WTC7 came down in 6 seconds defying Newton's 3rd Law of motion.
@reinharv You're right, it is unique, however it does not, reffer to demolishing a building with explosives. It's a more literal term meaning to pull a small building down with cables, which is how WTC6 was brought down. WTC7 would have been too big to bring down that way, and it wasn't brought down that way anyway. Silverstein is not a demolition expert, nor was he talking to one, so logic dictates that his use of the term was not in refference to a demolition of any kind anyway.
@eaglejoe8 Look at the the videos posted by Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth. There is one complete 3-part video. They specifically show a demolition expert say "we are ready to PULL" the building. Since when do fireman contact an owner of a building, during the chaos of 9/11 to tell the owner they have to "Pull" the building & that Silverstein made the decision to "pull" the building. Silverstein is not a demolition expert & is merely repeating words he heard.
@reinharv I'm aware of the video you're reffering to, and truther sites always cut the video at the same spot. The reason being is that if they continued to show the video, they would see that Building 6 had steel cables attatched to it that were used to "pull" the building down. In demolition terms, "pull" does not mean to bring a building down with explosives. Silverstien was reffering to the contingent of firemen when he said to pull.
@reinharv The fire commander was basically making a courtesy call to let him know they weren't going to be able to stop the fire. They had already made the decision to pull their men back. Silverstein even said,"they made that decision to pull", "They" being the fire department.
Don't expect much from buddyfreakinHolly. He/she is a paid poster, hired to attack and post propaganda. If he/she attacks that means you must have posted the truth and he/she has to attack the truth, it is his/her job.
The most rediculous CONSPIRACY THEORY is that muslems did the well planed job on 9/11 with so many cells inside USA. But after 9/11 all the cells disapeared and no further attack happened. The INSIDERS and PLANERS of 911 must think we are stupid little animals beliefing all their shit.
i wanna see what the next pathetic excuse is for people when a conspiracy fact comes up. He said "pull it" (a term that means blow up a building by demolition) and you guys are taking it out of context and saying he ment "pull the operation" and get the firefighters out of there. Well let me ask you something, do you really think a FORTY SEVEN STORY BUILDING WOULD BE FLATTENED IN 6 SECONDS BY FUCKING FIRES? oh and isnt it also a coincidence that it fell right when he said "pull it"...
it was an inside job, it was a plan, its obvious, stop being stupiid we all know, but we just don't want to accept it so we look for ways to argue. as the WTC was collapsing, areas of the building that were not yet being flattened had debri shooting out from it as means of implosion, and a half a second later the downcoming force swallowed it up, thats why we fail to believe it. I could care less about "pull it" that might just means to quit the job and evacuate, but we all know better than that
Why is this confusing so many people? They decidedly demolished, or "pulled" WTC7. Not only does Silverstein clearly admit this fact, but he also provides a reason; acknowledging the terrible loss of life that had already occurred, he wanted to spare the lives of the FIREFIGHTERS who would have continued to fight the fire and very well could have died inside the building. It was simply easier to call back the units and destroy the building to evade that possibility. Lives over real-estate.
The man Larry Silverstein made billions from the collapse of the these three buildings. It doesn't take much to realize that money is, and was the main reason for killing all those people. Besides once Larry Silverstein took the bribe it was no problem taking down building seven, and no plane hit that building. You here all the experts, and people still don't see the real picture. I think it's because people are so smart that they refuse to be outwitted. Swollow your pride and see the truth
@soulsurcher great point"swallow your pride"thats exactly why these arseholes are in denial,they cant handle the fact they have been been lied to all their life.911 was a satanic ritual sacrifice like ww1 ww2 and ww3 which is being played out in front of their eyes as we speak through the fake war on terre(EARTH)
@TylerDurdenMakesSoap you are not comparing similar events. what are you saying happened to the building? Was it a silent invisible explosion that took it down?
Larry Sliverstein, on his Facebook site recently published an open letter admitting guilt and collaboration with Zionist corporations Worldcom and Enron in the entire 911 disaster. He talked of suicide then said he lost his nerve. He talked of being blackmailed into buying the WTC. After 3 weeks of the letter being up he said his site had been hacked. This, after saying he just couldnt live with the lie anymore. Last week, his site was taken down off Facebook. Also, noone islamic was involved
According to NIST you only need some diesel and a lighter to get rid of those core columns...man those demolition experts are dumb! using shape charges...il do you're next demolition for $50 and a chocolate muffin.
1. To demolish; destroy: pull down an old office building.
from: diclib.com Collins COBUILD Advanced Learner's English Dictionary 4th edition: To pull down a building or statue means to deliberately destroy it.
from: websters-online-dictionaryDOTorg pull: 4: [Verb] To demolish; to subvert; to destroy. In political affairs, as well as mechanical. from princetonDOTedu# tear down so as to make flat with the ground.
1. To demolish; destroy: pull down an old office building.
from: diclib.com Collins COBUILD Advanced Learner's English Dictionary 4th edition: To pull down a building or statue means to deliberately destroy it.
from: websters-online-dictionaryDOTorg pull: 4: [Verb] To demolish; to subvert; to destroy. In political affairs, as well as mechanical. from princetonDOTedu# tear down so as to make flat with the ground.
Larry Silverstein admitted that the building was pulled later in the afternoon of 9/11 (video is on youtube).
Normally a building of that size takes weeks or months of preparation in order to demolish it. So how the hell could those guys at 9/11 do it in just a few hours? That indicates THEY KNEW about it in advance. No debate possible.
Face it folks 9/11 wasn't done by some bums in caves. If you still buy that story then you've been brainwashed beyond help. Maybe one day you'll come to your senses but it seems the mainstream propaganda is too powerful for the drones.
Face it folks 9/11 wasn't done by some bums in caves. If you still buy that story then you've been brainwashed beyond help. Maybe one day you'll come to your senses but it seems the mainstream propaganda is too powerful for the drones.
No matter what silverstein meant on "pull it", whether taking the building down, or a firefighter's term for evacuating, etc etc....It was still a controlled demolition.
MIT ENGINNER and research scientist Jeff King details how the official government story violates the laws of physics and chemistry. He goes on to explain how the subsequent government investigations were designed NOT to uncover what happened. He also provides insight into what most likely happened that day.
watch?v=peUB03Qjk7g
ARCHITETS & ENGINNERS for 9/11 TRUTH AE911.ORG
AE911.ORG Evidence:
watch?v=hSApOavkHg8
(replace the watch in the browser to access the page)
You're an idiot. He says "pull it" which is demolition jargon for destroy it. He did not say blow it up and that is not what nay sayers say. Take your earmuffs off. If you follow what We Are Change founder Luke Rudkowski has done he cornered Larry Silverstein on the fact that the NYC Fire Dept Commander never spoke with him. Larry refused to answer.
That is what he meant / said by saying 'pull-it'.... but the docile masses easily forget, are easily duped and easily taught a 'new' history.... and these shysters get away with it.... until they die.
Then they will be paying, for Justice does meet it's verdict, if not in this world....
Writer Jeffrey Shapiro wrote that after the Twin Towers turned to dust he witnessed Silverstein phoning his insurance company to ask if they would pay a claim on WTC7 if it was intentionally taken down.
Jew boys' death would not be a terrible loss of life, like they say evil people live forever. They also keep jump starting Cheney and he is 5 * the evil that silverstein is. And we cant forget George W who SAID he saw the 1st plane hit the building b4 the rest of the world did. Yet people are blinded by the lies and too couch potatoed to act on those blatanty lies that these cvnts keep making. Larry says Pull It and magically it falls. He must have got word from BBC cause they knew it as well
Only an IDIOT would think that this video is proof of a controlled demolition; apparently Truthers don't even pay attention to anything IN CONTEXT...
He clearly states that he was on the PHONE with the FIRE DEPARTMENT COMMANDER, and that "THEY", THE FIRE DEPARTMENT, MADE THE DECISION to "pull-it"...which is a F.D. evacuation term and not a controlled demolition term...
...but I guess Truthers will take anything that Loose Change tells them as absolute fact without even the slightest thought...
So after all these years, the demolition companies have got it all wrong. You don`t need to spend days and money wiring up a building with explosives to bring the building down. All you need to do is buy a cheap box of matches, light a few fires at the bottom of the building and then in about 5 hours time, the steel framed building will come crashing down in an even free fall way. Ha ha! You skepDICK society people need to open your eyes and stop accepting official stories.
@ManFromMelbourne Wrong. Actually what you need to do is to gouge a gaping hole in the side of the building igniting fires on multiple floors at the same time and then feed oxygen to the fires through said gaping hole. You then need to hope the building is a uniquely designed structure with long span beams and several columns carrying a heavy load. You need to pray the fire burns in exactly the right way to expand said beams. And you need to be totally unconcerned with collateral damage.
why would larry silverstein admit it on camera? and in that context? he said "we've had such a terrible loss of life, maybe the smartest thing to do is pull it" why would he decide to "pull it" because they've had such a terrible loss of life?
Truthers: The NIST reports are detailed, thorough, and have withstood peer review by expert consensus. I am sorry but you cannot refute it by dumbing it down with arguments starting with your ignorance of how heat affects structural steel, or consistently withholding easily verified facts from that day's events from your claims. City engineers held a transit up to the building and noted a lean in the building 2 hours before it collapsed. That alone says "STFU".
As part of the NCST Act, no part of any report resulting from investigations can be admitted as EVIDENCE or used in any suit or action for damages. Additionally, NIST employees are not permitted to serve as expert witnesses.
signed into law on Oct. 1, 2002, by President Bush
as in: anything NIST concludes is inadmissible in a court of law and makes it as good as hearsay. So much for NIST's credentials.
@vengencefrom1979 no it means they are not liable to get sued for doing their jobs.
It has no bearing on this: no rational person, informed in the art of construction demolitions, knowing the extensive, invasive, obtrusive and enormous work it would take to rig these buildings for controlled demolition, could possibly advance such a theory beyond sheer laughter. End of story.
Well Eddy3. Ask anyone in the demolition industry what "pull it" means. You moron that thing fell at Free Fall Speed. Fires dont cause demolition asshole. Drink your fluoride water Americano.
@ryno99 yeah and ask anyone in the demolition industry if they think that those three buildings could be rigged for CD in advance with nobody seeing a thing and after the fact there isn't a bit of physical evidence of all the blasts and he will say fuck you I'll blow your ass up for asking such a dumb question.
@batvette Thanks asshole, Im a civil engineer so I know plenty of demolition guys. People did see things asshole. Do some research. Looks like mommy scrambled your brains with the coat hanger abortion attempt. You got anything else you stupid cunt?
@MrRandomuser99999 Okay I'll bite. You PM me a message with a link to a qualified demolition engineer with industry credentials detailing his professional description of how those buildings were rigged with explosives. Not "People saw things". You "did the research", right" SHOW ME WHAT I ASKED FOR THAT YOU REPLIED TO.
has anyone ever seen one of thoes failed demolition videos. its amazing how strong some of these buildings are. even when the intention is to bring them down, it dosnt always work. my mind cannot grasp how a building like wtc7 would just fall down. if someone could explain with logic and reason how this happens, i would apreciate it.
Watch the video of an interview of a Danish professor at the University of Copenhage, Niels Harrit. Look it up here on youtube. He knows about nanothermite and explosives. He believes what I believe: nanothermite and standard explosives were used in conjunction to bring down the buildings. Two planes, three buildings. The WTC 7 was hardly touched. No tinfoil hats are being worn, here.
He obviously doesn't know much about thermite and explosives...his paper is flawed, the "research" is highly questionable, and was paid for to be published...YouTube user dprjones had contacted one of the "scientists" and questioned the research and the paper and was insulted & blown off...a random word generator made a paper that was published on the same site...you simply fail to understand science, architecture, engineering, and physics...you're just another blind fool
Another blind fool. Yes. I should have seen that an impact not unlike the scale impact of a B-25 hitting the Empire State Building (which did not collapse) coupled with kerosene burning at 550 degrees could bring down three steel buildings. Perfectly. Straight down. No falling to one side or another at all. One of them never touched by kerosene. How many steel buildings in history have been weakened by internal fire and then collapsed like WTC7? Why couldn't I see JP8 did it?
So why did you just reply with something completely different than what I replied to you with? Obviously because YOU ARE a "blind fool"..to think that a B-52 and the Empire State Building is an analog for the WTC on 9/11 is a ridiculously stupid thought..."perfectly", no, "straight down", pretty much and as how anyone that knows how the WTC was constructed would have expected it to fall...keep repeating that Truther BS that you keep reading because those points are not your own
A B-52 Stratocaster did not hit the Empire State building. A B-25 Mitchell did. Entirely different aircraft.
The points are my own. Everyone talks about how amazingly strong modern steel buildings are. How well built. Then they collapse more perfectly, more easily than a deck of cards after an impact. Then the third falls with no impact whatsoever. Maybe they should start using JP8 in demolitions, what do you think?
Oops, 25/52, you know what I meant...anyways nobody talks about how "amazingly strong modern steel buildings are" because they aren't,...steel gives us the ability to build tall buildings because of it's ease-of-use; the steel isn't "the building", it's the "skeleton" of it...you do understand that the Twin Towers fell at the point of impact and that 7 was hit with falling pieces of the Towers, don't you? ...you can bring down a steel building by heating it's structural steel
The skeleton, yes. How did every bone in the body snap because a rib got broken? You said I don't understand how steel buildings are constructed. Are they constructed so that when a level becomes weak, the entire thing collapses like an accordion for 50 floors? You do realize that the "fluke" that was repeated three times that day would require weeks of planning, and a little more than an impact and kerosene, if they were planning to demolish those buildings?
"A rib"? More like a few and then into the spine...the design of the WTC was that, it fell the way it should've fell, the WTC was not your normal-type of skyscraper...since BOTH towers started falling at the point of impact, it is obviously not a controlled demolition and obvious duplicate design of these buildings...it's amazing how you think you're so informed and intelligent yet you can't even understand the simplest things
The structural damage was obviously on the side that faced the Twin Towers; there's plenty of photos of it out there, but apparently your only sources are Truther sources that purposely omit this information...just like the ones that say there were "only a few small fires" and show you the opposite side of the building that faced the Towers...and apparently you missed the firefighters that said it was full of fire and was buckling due to the heat of the fires
Google 'Shame on Jesse Ventura!' It's a hit piece by either a buffoon or a genius named Jeffery Scott Shapiro who as it seems, inadvertently revealed that Larry Silverstein was on the phone with his insurance carrier in regards to authorizing the controlled demolition of WTC tower 7. This just came out a few weeks ago and isn't being publicized, gee I wonder why.... Spread the word!
Oh, it's you again...It's "Mr. Silverstein Pull-It nutjob"...you are aware that if the insurance company knew he demolished his buildings that he wouldn't have received his insurance claim, don't you? So saying that he was on the phone with his insurance company OKing a demolition in which he would later receive insurance money is an absolute idiotic thought...call your car insurance company and try the same thing and see what happens
Even if the twins had melted floors why did the remaining 87 floors collapse. hahahhahaa Don't argue with the shills truther friends. They are just silly stupid. hahahha. WE WILL PROSECUTE YOU NEOCONS.
In a recent Fox News hit piece on Jessie Ventura the author of the article admits that it Silverstein now was on the phone with his insurance company to find out if he could demolish the building. Search "Shame On Jesse Ventura!" Jeffrey Scott Shapiro
The only "idiocy" here comes from YOU, for criticizing folks (including architects, demolition specialists, scientists, etc) who say that the building was intentionally demolished. WTC7 wasn't hit by ANYTHING that could have caused it to collapse. It was "pulled" ... just as Silverstein stated in the actual (not this) recording. You're not very convincing. The ONLY "conspiracy" theory is our government's "official" story. WTC 7 wasn't included in the official report ..... WHY?
@noaid2israel Produce me a list of these Scientists, Demo Exports and Architects who agree this building was intentionally demolished. I could produce dozens if not hundreds who agree it fell due to the damage sustained and subsequent fire. Also the official report into WTC 7 is now out and has been for some time....give it a read.
@eddyk3 here is a video of Barry Jennings, he was inside building 7 prior to the collapse, he explains how he witnessed explosions Inside of the building /watch?v=7PSziAiD9jM&feature=related
Here is a video of Larry Silverstein refusing to answer the question of Who he spoke to about "pulling" the building
/watch?v=EtPC0W4HII8
oh and Larry also made 7 Billion dollars for the buildings being destroyed, only 15 million dollars were presented to investigate how his buildings fell
@eddyk3 you have got to be kidding me. Larry Silverstein owned these buildings. Even the damn evidence against Enron was destroyed in WTC 7. Look up Kevin McPadden and Barry Jennings.
@eddyk3 Richard Gage member of the AIA American institute of architecture licensed architect for 22 years, also founder of the non profit organization Architects and Engineers for 9/11 truth. I f you look up that organization there is a list of names on there site where they have a petition you can sign and also view the names that are on it they also put there title whether they are a engineer or a architects as a header over the names listed, hope that helps, Peace!
@eddyk3 Its like with the holocaust. Plenty of eyewhitnesses say what went down and experts who did some research back up their story. One official report from a government says otherwise (okay maybe 2). I believe the eyewhitnesses who survived the holocaust and the experts who back them up over some "official" report of somebody who was not there. Same story for me with 911. I believe the firefighters who survived and the indipendent experts who were not payed to produce the official report.
@buddyfreakinhoIIy If it would have been leaning it would have fallen to the side, no? Actually it looked more like the building exploded. Usually I believe a large group of people over a small group of people. With the holocaust I belive the people who were there and many historians who back it up, over one president of Itan. With the moonlanding I believe the many qualified people who say people were on the moon, over the few qualified people who say they werent. So far so good.
@cassius969 I'm not a structural engineer or forensic engineer so I don't know if the building would necessarily have fallen to the side. I do know that there were quite a few firefighters who said the building was unstable. They even put a transit on it to determine that it wasn't standing straight.
@noaid2israel you have no idea what you are talking about. Have you heard the prior sentences to his famous "pull it" line? He is clearly talking about pulling the operation to fight the fires. You are the only one covering something up when you only quote one part of his sentence. Do you really think it is more likely that he'd put 3 sentences together than make ZERO sense with each other and commit fraud on TV?
@asyouweresir so, they have a magic button that instantly demolishes a building? A silent invisible explosive that nobody noticed being planted for months, or even when it happened?
@asyouweresir A silent invisible explosive? Most explosions tend to make a sound and are visible. You have absolutely no evidence of what you say, but keep acting like a retard if you want.
@asyouweresir Asking questions does nothing but show that you know very little or nothing about the topic. Your (very dumb) questions are not evidence, and never will be. You have NOTHING to support what you say about explosives being planted 6 weeks ahead, etc. Easily debunked nonsense...the event unfolded on tape, and there was no explosion seen or heard on the tapes.
@asyouweresir it is well documented how it fell. Is it possible for you to participate in a discussion without asking questions over and over? Aren't you supposed to know something about the subject?
@asyouweresir Again, it is well documented how the building fell. I don't need to spend time educating you on historic events. If you are trying to debunk a story, you might want to start with your own. A conspiracy involving thousands, a secret demolition team, and a silent invisible explosive is a little less than plausible or possible. Why are you focusing on the building that nobody died in? Are you some sort of (horrible) insurance fraud detective?
@asyouweresir I don't have my OWN "story!" I go with the historical events and facts. It is you that needs to make up a story due to complete lack of evidence.
"I remember getting a call from the fire department commander telling me that they were not sure if they were going to be able to contain the fire"
"we've had such terrible loss of life."
Sorry, but you have to include those lines which are EXACTLY BEFORE the pull it line. I know it doesn't quite go along with your lame detective game. Is admitted insurance fraud on TV REALLY more likely? You are the only one covering something up by excluding those lines.
@johnnymac497 look how many people jumped to my defense when you posted this ignorant comment. YES he admitted insurance fraud on television. who the FUCK is going to arrest somebody like larry silverstein? and he said those lines to try to make himself look like a decent person and to make it appear that there was a legitamate reason to PULL the building. why the hell are you so quick to defend this man? tell me how the hell this building FELL to the ground if it wasnt PULLED.
@hamhawk816 well, you need something called evidence usually to arrest someone. In fact the public would demand his arrest if he had ACTUALLY confessed. Even if you are willing to make an incorrect leap and interchange "pull" and "demolish," the line continues to make ZERO sense with his lines before it. AS IN HE IS NOT TALKING ABOUT DEMOLISHING A BUILDING. CONTEXT. Why would he admit it?!!? HE MENTIONS NOT BEING ABLE TO CONTAIN THE FIRE ALSO.
@hamhawk816 You act like he had some moment of honesty and decided to tell everyone that he demolished his building with a magic silent invisible explosive. You then act like his preceding comments which clearly point to pulling the firefighters out of the building are purposely misleading. WOW! Odd confession, purposely misleading in 2-3 lines which are clearly about the fire and the firefighters, and then an all of the sudden he comes out with the vague "truth" (or should I say troof).
@johnnymac497 myself along with hundreds of thousands of other citizens are calling for much more than his and many other mens arrest for their involvement in killing thousands of innocent americans in the 911 false flag terror attacks. its not a magic explosive either. its called thermite and it exists in this very not magical world lol. i doubt he even meant to make the confession, and if he did its because theyre ready to let the people know whats happening.either shut up or wake up you fool.
@hamhawk816 and i ask you two questions again...why are you so quick to defend this devil of a man? and how the FUCK did the building come tumpbling down in a controlled fashion then? answer my questions and quit trying to discredit me by saying silly little things like (or should i say troof).
@hamhawk816 if silverstein is your evidence that you use to say building 7 and the other towers were demolished, I really don't know what to tell you. We have exhausted that topic. That argument aside, let's talk about the videos of the events. In all of the camera angles, we do not see or hear explosives. There is no such thing as a silent invisible explosive or demolition...PERIOD... including thermite which creates a huge fireball. The buildings were not demolished, sorry.
@johnnymac497 lmao just because you say they werent doesnt matter one little fucking bit to me. ANSWER MY QUESTIONS!!! god you are retarded lol. just read my questions and answer them, ok little boy? here we go...1. how did the building fall then? 2. why are you defending larry silverstein with such a fucking fervor?? now...ANSWER THE QUESTIONS!
1. I am not going to waste time telling you how the building fell. It is a historic event and it is clearly documented.
2. I would be the first to demand Silverstein's arrest if he had confessed to something. I assume that you ask because you think that I am "in on the conspiracy" somehow, just because I ask for FACTS and EVIDENCE when someone says that a building was demolished with silent invisible explosives. "Mr honesty" also clarified.
@johnnymac497 you didnt answer either question i had for you you worthless piece of trash. stop being a fool and wake up and see we dont live in a fairytale world where muslims crash planes into buildings then dont do anyting for 9 years after, even though we raped their homelands and killed their women and children
@johnnymac497 therefore, you are a fucking retard since you cant even answer the simplest questions on a topic you fight so feverishly for. so you and your sheepish family need to just go ahead and die if you cant use your brains like human beings. scum.
@johnnymac497 you answered neither! are you on drugs? go back and look at your responses. and then answer my fuckin question. you must be too busy sucking that weird old man silverstein's dick to answer two simple fucking questions. so shut the fuck up if you cant make a halfway decent rebuttle. you ass.
@hamhawk816 Why would I spend my time educating someone that knows NOTHING about the topic? If you are asking what happened to the building, you know NOTHING about the topic. Look it up, it is a historic event. It has been CLEARLY documented what happened. That is your first answer. Your second answer (AGAIN) is that I do not care about silverstein himself and would also demend his arrest if he had actually confessed. Do you understand yet? Or do you want to ask me more questions?
@johnnymac497 i want you to stop taking everything that is "documented" about a bullshit event at face value you scared little fucking pansy tool. your government lies! look up all thats been "documented" about how the government has lied to us time and time again. you know nothing about this topic because you accept everything you are told. like a five year old. and by the way, santa claus is not fucking real either. sorry to blow it for you, sonny.
@hamhawk816 I go by my own eyewitness account. There were CLEARLY no explosives seen or heard when the building came down. It has to do nothing with what the government said. I also use common sense, something that you lack entirely. I am also interested in FACT in place of CONSPIRACY. YOU are the one that is brainwashed (and terrified of ) your government. You think that they are some sort of super-duper power capible of conspiracies involving thousands. Go hide in a bomb-shelter.
@johnnymac497 immense amounts of people, including those closest to the EXPLOSIVES, the NY firefighters, saw AND heard explosions, as well as many civilian eyewitnesses. and by the way, you obviously dont know what the hell common sense even is, or else it would tell you WTC7 was without a doubt BROUGHT DOWN by explosives.
@johnnymac497 youre sounding like more of a conspiracist now, believing in a lie that your silly television news stations perpetuauted. and i do not fear my government. they fear me(the people) which is why they feel the need to lie to us. becuase we outnumber them 1000 to 1. and by the way the tooth fairys not real either kiddo, sorry.
@hamhawk816 You continue to have absolutely nothing to back up what you say, and never will have anything to back it up. The government has you very, very frightened... maybe you should turn off the TV, or better yet.. stop watching videos made by crackpots on youtube.
@johnnymac497 wow now youre just using the very same things i said to you against me. or at least trying to. i dont watch tv, its mindwashing garbage. you obviously watch WAY too much, as i already stated and you tried to say back to me. and you obviously cant read because i said im not frightened of them already lol. please read my replies before replying youreslf you stoned stupid bastard. and by the way...the easter bunny is lie too little one!
@hamhawk816 Again, I go by my own eyewitness account .. You clearly think that they are capable of the largest conspiracies involving thousands, and you clearly live in fear. You actually credit the government by thinking they have that type of power. Sorry, you are just a completely paranoid idiot with no evidence. Why do you continue to focus on building 7? Nobody died in the building. Are you just a horrible insurance fraud detective?
@johnnymac497 still going huh fool? i focus on wtc7 because its one of the smoking guns along with the pentagon attack and the flight which was shot down in pennsylvania. and any "power" the government has was given to it by fucking imbeciles like yourself who worship and praise them like gods(mostly because you fear them). youre pathetic. give up, you lose. loser.
@hamhawk816 face it, a complete moron such as yourself would never even admit that the twin towers were hit by planes if there were not dozens of videos. WTC7 is a "smoking gun?" LOL, according to who, you?
@hamhawk816 by the way, you may have noticed that I ignored you some time ago. I know I am the closet thing you have to a friend, but really... I don't want to talk to you anymore. If you want to discuss the subject matter fine. However, I am afraid that I have owned you on this topic and nothing else will need to be said. I know you strive to talk to someone that talks about actual FACT instead of CONSPIRACY, but once again... please stop trolling.
@johnnymac497 where exactly did you own me? quote it EXACTLY. and youll notice i dont respond moments after you post because i have a life outside of arguing with you, unlike yourself. you even respond again when i havent said anything in days because you need my attention you insignificant loser. you havent stated a fact throughout this entire argument, all youve done is personally attack me and use CAPITALS like that means a damn thing hahaha. stop fearing your government and grow a pair pussy
@hamhawk816 I see on your page that you are busy having youtube wars with other people, calling them "faggots" and "pussies" over and over. When you are proven wrong, you clearly go into some sort of childish rage and try name calling. Sorry, just makes you look even more stupid.
@johnnymac497 lol dont try to claim that youre me, even though i understand because im much more successful and generally good at living life than you. i owned YOU. theres no way to own myself dipshit. i OWN you. youre my bitch now johnnymac just fuckin accept it. at least your master is someone as grand as me, not someone like yourself whos too mentally deficient to see through the bullshit of this world. you suck.
9/11 was an outside job.
USA4July1776 2 months ago
@terry4100 I see you been drinking your prozac taste good? YOU SAY "conspiracy nut jobs show me proof of the demolition crew" Lol are you for real? I will believe the official story when I see the videos from the pentagon and the videos of the supposed plane hitting it from the citgo gas station and sheraton hotel that the FBI confiscated.
SAMMARTINO68 2 months ago
@SAMMARTINO68 the only videos released are too grainy. but there ARE photos of the plane wreckage in the area. go look them up. and there are plenty of witnesses who say it was a plane.
ryanmacdaddy1000 2 weeks ago
So why wasnt he at work that day? Why did he make sure his insurance covered terrorism? Why did he buy the building when he knew it would cost 1 billion dollars to remove the illegal asbestous?
jwaldman69 2 months ago
When you conspiracy nut jobs show me proof of the demolition crew preparing building 7 for its 9/11 destruction day to coincide with the airplanes flying into the twin towers come talk to me about our sinister government.. The problem is.. You retards give the government to much credit for ability to do anything with the precision and competence it would have taken to pull of such an amazing feat. There are many things you have to over look for your theory to have a chance it just amazes me.
terry4100 2 months ago
@terry4100 Literaly ever aspect of 9/11 has been completely proven to be a lie, you stupid fucks just dont LISTEN.
jwaldman69 2 months ago
@terry4100 amen. what really pisses me off is they tend to distort witness accounts of what they saw, edit videos, ignore important stuff and all that other junk to prove their point. they're a bunch of LIARS
ryanmacdaddy1000 2 weeks ago
Sorry, the insurance sum was ($2.3 Billion) was paid out twice. (typo)!
neverfoundthetime 4 months ago
"A federal jury on Monday ruled that the assault on the Twin Towers of the World Trade Center was in fact two occurrences for insurance purposes. The finding in U.S. District Court in Manhattan means leaseholder Larry Silverstein may collect up to $4.6 billion, according to reports." [Forbes.com 12/06/04]
We are both correct then. You are correct on the sum and it was seen as two attacks so the insured sum ($3.3 Billion) was paid out twice.
neverfoundthetime 4 months ago
"A federal jury on Monday ruled that the assault on the Twin Towers of the World Trade Center was in fact two occurrences for insurance purposes. The finding in U.S. District Court in Manhattan means leaseholder Larry Silverstein may collect up to $4.6 billion, according to reports." [Forbes.com 12/06/04]
We are both correct then.
neverfoundthetime 4 months ago
@buddyfreakinhoIIy, Ok, you don't believe that "Pull it" is a phrase used in the demolition industry referring to the use of ropes and chains to pull main supports down so that the rest of the building would follow. But you do believe that fire can destroy the main supports of a steel framed building in such a precise and systematic way as to make it come down like a perfect demolition job which takes precision planning and timing. Architects, engineers and physicists dont agree with you on that
neverfoundthetime 4 months ago
@neverfoundthetime "Pull it" refers to the use of cables, not explosives. You have failed to provide a single case where "pull it" has been used to refer to the use of explosives in a demolition. Not even one example. Why would you believe something if there's no evidence to support it?
buddyfreakinhoIIy 4 months ago
@buddyfreakinhoIIy, "Pull it" is irrelevant in the face of the destruction of the towers and building 7. What do you think in the face of the evidence proffered by A&E911Truth to say the buildings cannot have been downed by fire and gravity?
neverfoundthetime 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@neverfoundthetime ""Pull it" is irrelevant in the face of the destruction of the towers and building 7"
If it's irrelevant, why did you bring it up? It turns out that it's not a term that refers to the use of explosives. Now that you know that, rather than admit you were wrong, you claim it's irrelevant and try to change the subject. LOL!
AE911truth has not presented any evidence of explosives or incendiaries. Richard Gage has made lots of false claims & apparently you fell for them.
buddyfreakinhoIIy 4 months ago
@buddyfreakinhoIIy, I already knew where the term to Pull a building came from and looks like you did too. Yes it originated before explosives were used. The issue is the fall of the buildings not being "kosher", the terminology is a side show. Richard Gage and the other 1500 co-signers of A&E911 Truth has asked for an investigation of the fall of the buildings. I'm sure every one would like to see an investigation to the crime of the century... and claims could be proved or disproved then.
neverfoundthetime 4 months ago
@buddyfreakinhoIIy, I already knew where the term to Pull a building came from and looks like you did too. Yes it originated before explosives were used. The issue is the fall of the buildings not being "kosher", the terminology is a side show. Richard Gage and the other 1500 co-signers of A&E911 Truth has asked for an investigation of the fall of the buildings. I'm sure every one would like to see an investigation to the crime of the century... and claims could be proved or disproved then.
neverfoundthetime 4 months ago
Larry Silverstein do you want to face the Demons of this Earth, or the Demons of the next world?
What happens when you go to sleep Larry?
Where do you think you will go when you are dead?
Same place ASSHOLE
Legion is waiting.
Confess now, or confess later.
Believe me, the pain is less in this world.
Confess
surfn123 5 months ago
@surfn123 I couldn't of said it better myself!!!
bktodc 3 months ago
@bktodc
Thanks man.
Although, I'm not sure I can really take credit. I drink a bunch of beer then things just come to me. sort of a channeling type thing.
There are about 3000 souls screaming for vengence, not to mention the family and friends of those now departed. Larry Silverstein will reap what he helped sow.
And really, I'm trying to help him.
An admonission and confession would go along way to absolving him.
surfn123 2 months ago
@buddyfreakinhoIIy, So I'm not a "Truther", I'm fact I'm a sceptic.... of the NIST report and the government's explanation of 911 and the way the White house fought tooth and nail not to have a criminal investigation of the crime of the centenary.
neverfoundthetime 5 months ago
@neverfoundthetime I don't care what you believe. But if you continue to go around making false claims like:
"Fact is "pull it" is a phrase routinely used in demolition"
. . . then you'll remain hopelessly lost.
buddyfreakinhoIIy 4 months ago
@buddyfreakinhoIIy, well it is out there and he did cash double the insurance. It could be innocent. The way building 7 fell isn't innocent. Controlled demolition is the only possible answer according to hundreds of engineers and architects and physicists. I' don't belong to any "Truther" movement , I just have looked at the evidence and have BIG questions.
neverfoundthetime 5 months ago
@neverfoundthetime BTW, you also got the insurance payout wrong. You said Silverstein "did cash double the insurance." That's incorrect. Double would have been $7 billion. The total payout added up to $4.6 billion.
buddyfreakinhoIIy 4 months ago
lolololol awesome, it sounds so retarded when you put it like that
cjnewson88 5 months ago
Fact is "pull it" is a phrase routinely used in demolition and probably never before used to mean abandon the fire-fighting or abandon the building or get your people out of there. And then the building did collapse in its own footprint in the identical way a building comes down in controlled demolition. Fire still has never brought down a steel-framed skyscraper and fire has never brought down a building with the exact signature of a controlled demolition. Or can you give us an example of that?
neverfoundthetime 5 months ago
@neverfoundthetime Truthers ike you regularly claim that "pull it" is a demolition term but they (you) have been unable to find an example of the term being used that way. On the other hand, the term "pull" was used by firefighters to refer to pulling firefighters away from the buildings on 9/11.
buddyfreakinhoIIy 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
The idiocy of truthers is amazing. They actually want people to believe that Silverstein first committed a multi-billion dollar act of insurance fraud, then admitted to doing so on national TV, and then somehow, 2 years later in 2004, not one of the WTC complex's 24 insurance holders ever raised the issue of possible fraud before paying out a total of about $4.5 Billion in insurance claims. Logic has never seemed to permeate the so called "truth movement".
eaglejoe8 7 months ago
I hate all "no planers" and "controlled demolitionists" in the truth movement, this is just one more step to killing them off, thank you.
kushsmokkeralt 8 months ago
I have watched videos on demolition experts specifically say "Pull" when taking about demolishing a building. It's a very unique term.
reinharv 8 months ago
@reinharv "pull" means "withdraw from", i.e. evacuate
thorkyll 8 months ago
@thorkyll Sorry, I head the demolition expert on TV use the term "pull" & the building came down. This was prior to 9/11. In fact, Architects and Engineers for 9/11 truth actually found a clip where a demolition crew used the term "pull" to show that this is indeed a insider term that some demolition experts use with regard to demolition. If "pull" mean to withdraw - then just say withdraw or evacuate. Call a spade a spade. Then WTC7 came down in 6 seconds defying Newton's 3rd Law of motion.
reinharv 8 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@reinharv
"Sorry, I head the demolition expert on TV use the term "pull" & the building came down."
Yeah, and there was a PRELIMINARY EXPLOSION at the foundation, too-- so tell us, Einstein, WHERE is is that explosion on building seven?
Rhetorical question: IT AIN'T THERE!
It's GROUND-SHOCK from the 2 towers hitting the foundation.
Try an experiment: put a glass on a table, and whack the table with a basball-bat-- if the glass breaks, was it a CONTROLLED DEMOLITION?
No, GROUND-SHOCK.
postalmeter 8 months ago
@reinharv You're right, it is unique, however it does not, reffer to demolishing a building with explosives. It's a more literal term meaning to pull a small building down with cables, which is how WTC6 was brought down. WTC7 would have been too big to bring down that way, and it wasn't brought down that way anyway. Silverstein is not a demolition expert, nor was he talking to one, so logic dictates that his use of the term was not in refference to a demolition of any kind anyway.
eaglejoe8 7 months ago
@eaglejoe8 Look at the the videos posted by Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth. There is one complete 3-part video. They specifically show a demolition expert say "we are ready to PULL" the building. Since when do fireman contact an owner of a building, during the chaos of 9/11 to tell the owner they have to "Pull" the building & that Silverstein made the decision to "pull" the building. Silverstein is not a demolition expert & is merely repeating words he heard.
reinharv 7 months ago
@reinharv I'm aware of the video you're reffering to, and truther sites always cut the video at the same spot. The reason being is that if they continued to show the video, they would see that Building 6 had steel cables attatched to it that were used to "pull" the building down. In demolition terms, "pull" does not mean to bring a building down with explosives. Silverstien was reffering to the contingent of firemen when he said to pull.
eaglejoe8 7 months ago
@reinharv The fire commander was basically making a courtesy call to let him know they weren't going to be able to stop the fire. They had already made the decision to pull their men back. Silverstein even said,"they made that decision to pull", "They" being the fire department.
eaglejoe8 7 months ago
To everyone:
Don't expect much from buddyfreakinHolly. He/she is a paid poster, hired to attack and post propaganda. If he/she attacks that means you must have posted the truth and he/she has to attack the truth, it is his/her job.
074August 1 year ago
Laughing all the way to the bank ...
Lucky Larry !
MrPierrePhilippe 1 year ago
The most rediculous CONSPIRACY THEORY is that muslems did the well planed job on 9/11 with so many cells inside USA. But after 9/11 all the cells disapeared and no further attack happened. The INSIDERS and PLANERS of 911 must think we are stupid little animals beliefing all their shit.
Greetings from your still occupied Germany.
mihdd 1 year ago
i wanna see what the next pathetic excuse is for people when a conspiracy fact comes up. He said "pull it" (a term that means blow up a building by demolition) and you guys are taking it out of context and saying he ment "pull the operation" and get the firefighters out of there. Well let me ask you something, do you really think a FORTY SEVEN STORY BUILDING WOULD BE FLATTENED IN 6 SECONDS BY FUCKING FIRES? oh and isnt it also a coincidence that it fell right when he said "pull it"...
allstar00442288 1 year ago
conspiracy fact? lol. How does demolishing a building have ANYTHING to do with the other comments that he made?
johnnymac497 1 year ago
You ass hole this is fake
ncdhfujdf 1 year ago
it was an inside job, it was a plan, its obvious, stop being stupiid we all know, but we just don't want to accept it so we look for ways to argue. as the WTC was collapsing, areas of the building that were not yet being flattened had debri shooting out from it as means of implosion, and a half a second later the downcoming force swallowed it up, thats why we fail to believe it. I could care less about "pull it" that might just means to quit the job and evacuate, but we all know better than that
chromeninjar3d 1 year ago
Why is this confusing so many people? They decidedly demolished, or "pulled" WTC7. Not only does Silverstein clearly admit this fact, but he also provides a reason; acknowledging the terrible loss of life that had already occurred, he wanted to spare the lives of the FIREFIGHTERS who would have continued to fight the fire and very well could have died inside the building. It was simply easier to call back the units and destroy the building to evade that possibility. Lives over real-estate.
Enigmatism415 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
The man Larry Silverstein made billions from the collapse of the these three buildings. It doesn't take much to realize that money is, and was the main reason for killing all those people. Besides once Larry Silverstein took the bribe it was no problem taking down building seven, and no plane hit that building. You here all the experts, and people still don't see the real picture. I think it's because people are so smart that they refuse to be outwitted. Swollow your pride and see the truth
soulsurcher 1 year ago
@soulsurcher great point"swallow your pride"thats exactly why these arseholes are in denial,they cant handle the fact they have been been lied to all their life.911 was a satanic ritual sacrifice like ww1 ww2 and ww3 which is being played out in front of their eyes as we speak through the fake war on terre(EARTH)
asyouweresir 1 year ago
So., PULL-IT means remove the Firemen, Proving, Larry is verbally challenged.
Good thing he was able to tell his insurance guy to Add terrorist attacks to his policy
VMATT500C 1 year ago
@TylerDurdenMakesSoap you are not comparing similar events. what are you saying happened to the building? Was it a silent invisible explosion that took it down?
johnnymac497 1 year ago
@TylerDurdenMakesSoap You didnt answer my question. How did the conspirators know that one of the twin towers would hit building 7?
Spectre11B 1 year ago
Larry Sliverstein, on his Facebook site recently published an open letter admitting guilt and collaboration with Zionist corporations Worldcom and Enron in the entire 911 disaster. He talked of suicide then said he lost his nerve. He talked of being blackmailed into buying the WTC. After 3 weeks of the letter being up he said his site had been hacked. This, after saying he just couldnt live with the lie anymore. Last week, his site was taken down off Facebook. Also, noone islamic was involved
lpsling 1 year ago
According to NIST you only need some diesel and a lighter to get rid of those core columns...man those demolition experts are dumb! using shape charges...il do you're next demolition for $50 and a chocolate muffin.
0pocketpenis0 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
from: thefreedictionaryDOTcom/pull+down pull down:
1. To demolish; destroy: pull down an old office building.
from: diclib.com Collins COBUILD Advanced Learner's English Dictionary 4th edition: To pull down a building or statue means to deliberately destroy it.
from: websters-online-dictionaryDOTorg pull: 4: [Verb] To demolish; to subvert; to destroy. In political affairs, as well as mechanical. from princetonDOTedu# tear down so as to make flat with the ground.
Dawgtha 1 year ago
from: thefreedictionaryDOTcom/pull+down pull down:
1. To demolish; destroy: pull down an old office building.
from: diclib.com Collins COBUILD Advanced Learner's English Dictionary 4th edition: To pull down a building or statue means to deliberately destroy it.
from: websters-online-dictionaryDOTorg pull: 4: [Verb] To demolish; to subvert; to destroy. In political affairs, as well as mechanical. from princetonDOTedu# tear down so as to make flat with the ground.
Dawgtha 1 year ago
Larry Silverstein admitted that the building was pulled later in the afternoon of 9/11 (video is on youtube).
Normally a building of that size takes weeks or months of preparation in order to demolish it. So how the hell could those guys at 9/11 do it in just a few hours? That indicates THEY KNEW about it in advance. No debate possible.
dorlandosonicNL 1 year ago
@dorlandosonicNL Not only did they know in advance but they also calculated that another building would hit it. These guys were pure geniuses.
I mean how did they know it was going to hit "that" building. hmmm.
Spectre11B 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Face it folks 9/11 wasn't done by some bums in caves. If you still buy that story then you've been brainwashed beyond help. Maybe one day you'll come to your senses but it seems the mainstream propaganda is too powerful for the drones.
Dopeium 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Face it folks 9/11 wasn't done by some bums in caves. If you still buy that story then you've been brainwashed beyond help. Maybe one day you'll come to your senses but it seems the mainstream propaganda is too powerful for the drones.
Dopeium 1 year ago
No matter what silverstein meant on "pull it", whether taking the building down, or a firefighter's term for evacuating, etc etc....It was still a controlled demolition.
ebmirador 1 year ago
MIT ENGINNER and research scientist Jeff King details how the official government story violates the laws of physics and chemistry. He goes on to explain how the subsequent government investigations were designed NOT to uncover what happened. He also provides insight into what most likely happened that day.
watch?v=peUB03Qjk7g
ARCHITETS & ENGINNERS for 9/11 TRUTH AE911.ORG
AE911.ORG Evidence:
watch?v=hSApOavkHg8
(replace the watch in the browser to access the page)
WawsestilL 1 year ago
You're an idiot. He says "pull it" which is demolition jargon for destroy it. He did not say blow it up and that is not what nay sayers say. Take your earmuffs off. If you follow what We Are Change founder Luke Rudkowski has done he cornered Larry Silverstein on the fact that the NYC Fire Dept Commander never spoke with him. Larry refused to answer.
thnksmarter 1 year ago
@thnksmarter "Pull it" refers to the use of cables, not explosives.
PoetryHound 1 year ago
Umm the voice you hear is not that of Larry Silverstein, someone wiped the original audio and placed their own recording over it.
Watch other videos of Silverstein, he has a kind a throaty raspy voice. The person speaking is NOT Silverstein.
JackRyan1985 1 year ago
who ever made this is a retard.
ADULTEDUCATION4U 1 year ago
That is what he meant / said by saying 'pull-it'.... but the docile masses easily forget, are easily duped and easily taught a 'new' history.... and these shysters get away with it.... until they die.
Then they will be paying, for Justice does meet it's verdict, if not in this world....
govlover 1 year ago
Writer Jeffrey Shapiro wrote that after the Twin Towers turned to dust he witnessed Silverstein phoning his insurance company to ask if they would pay a claim on WTC7 if it was intentionally taken down.
ReDiscover911 com
A Jewish crime network did 9-11.
whole2th 1 year ago
Jew boys' death would not be a terrible loss of life, like they say evil people live forever. They also keep jump starting Cheney and he is 5 * the evil that silverstein is. And we cant forget George W who SAID he saw the 1st plane hit the building b4 the rest of the world did. Yet people are blinded by the lies and too couch potatoed to act on those blatanty lies that these cvnts keep making. Larry says Pull It and magically it falls. He must have got word from BBC cause they knew it as well
UTubeFreeMind 1 year ago
Only an IDIOT would think that this video is proof of a controlled demolition; apparently Truthers don't even pay attention to anything IN CONTEXT...
He clearly states that he was on the PHONE with the FIRE DEPARTMENT COMMANDER, and that "THEY", THE FIRE DEPARTMENT, MADE THE DECISION to "pull-it"...which is a F.D. evacuation term and not a controlled demolition term...
...but I guess Truthers will take anything that Loose Change tells them as absolute fact without even the slightest thought...
CrazyRay7979 1 year ago
eddyk3,
I think your mother dropped you on your head when you were a baby!
(the only explanation I can think of...)
zedonutube 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
9/11 Experiments: The Mysterious Eutectic Steel
watch?v=VvQDFV1HINw&feature=player_embedded
uncledevo 1 year ago
9/11 Experiments: The Mysterious Eutectic Steel
watch?v=VvQDFV1HINw&feature=player_embedded
uncledevo 1 year ago
So after all these years, the demolition companies have got it all wrong. You don`t need to spend days and money wiring up a building with explosives to bring the building down. All you need to do is buy a cheap box of matches, light a few fires at the bottom of the building and then in about 5 hours time, the steel framed building will come crashing down in an even free fall way. Ha ha! You skepDICK society people need to open your eyes and stop accepting official stories.
ManFromMelbourne 1 year ago
@ManFromMelbourne spot on pal
wellifthemediasaysit 1 year ago
@ManFromMelbourne Wrong. Actually what you need to do is to gouge a gaping hole in the side of the building igniting fires on multiple floors at the same time and then feed oxygen to the fires through said gaping hole. You then need to hope the building is a uniquely designed structure with long span beams and several columns carrying a heavy load. You need to pray the fire burns in exactly the right way to expand said beams. And you need to be totally unconcerned with collateral damage.
LordDavidVader 1 year ago
why would larry silverstein admit it on camera? and in that context? he said "we've had such a terrible loss of life, maybe the smartest thing to do is pull it" why would he decide to "pull it" because they've had such a terrible loss of life?
truthers are fucking idiots
UltraProle21 1 year ago
@UltraProle21 LOOK AT MY COMMENT TO SOULSURCHER
asyouweresir 1 year ago
Truthers: The NIST reports are detailed, thorough, and have withstood peer review by expert consensus. I am sorry but you cannot refute it by dumbing it down with arguments starting with your ignorance of how heat affects structural steel, or consistently withholding easily verified facts from that day's events from your claims. City engineers held a transit up to the building and noted a lean in the building 2 hours before it collapsed. That alone says "STFU".
batvette 1 year ago
@batvette quote right off of NIST's own web site.
As part of the NCST Act, no part of any report resulting from investigations can be admitted as EVIDENCE or used in any suit or action for damages. Additionally, NIST employees are not permitted to serve as expert witnesses.
signed into law on Oct. 1, 2002, by President Bush
as in: anything NIST concludes is inadmissible in a court of law and makes it as good as hearsay. So much for NIST's credentials.
vengencefrom1979 1 year ago
@vengencefrom1979 no it means they are not liable to get sued for doing their jobs.
It has no bearing on this: no rational person, informed in the art of construction demolitions, knowing the extensive, invasive, obtrusive and enormous work it would take to rig these buildings for controlled demolition, could possibly advance such a theory beyond sheer laughter. End of story.
batvette 1 year ago
Well Eddy3. Ask anyone in the demolition industry what "pull it" means. You moron that thing fell at Free Fall Speed. Fires dont cause demolition asshole. Drink your fluoride water Americano.
ryno99 1 year ago
@ryno99 yeah and ask anyone in the demolition industry if they think that those three buildings could be rigged for CD in advance with nobody seeing a thing and after the fact there isn't a bit of physical evidence of all the blasts and he will say fuck you I'll blow your ass up for asking such a dumb question.
batvette 1 year ago
@batvette Thanks asshole, Im a civil engineer so I know plenty of demolition guys. People did see things asshole. Do some research. Looks like mommy scrambled your brains with the coat hanger abortion attempt. You got anything else you stupid cunt?
MrRandomuser99999 1 year ago
@MrRandomuser99999 Okay I'll bite. You PM me a message with a link to a qualified demolition engineer with industry credentials detailing his professional description of how those buildings were rigged with explosives. Not "People saw things". You "did the research", right" SHOW ME WHAT I ASKED FOR THAT YOU REPLIED TO.
batvette 1 year ago
@ryno99 Done. And what they have said is that "pull it" is NOT demolition slang for anything.
LordDavidVader 1 year ago
What a reprehensible LIE it is to put YOUR words into someone else's mouth!
TimReed22222 1 year ago
has anyone ever seen one of thoes failed demolition videos. its amazing how strong some of these buildings are. even when the intention is to bring them down, it dosnt always work. my mind cannot grasp how a building like wtc7 would just fall down. if someone could explain with logic and reason how this happens, i would apreciate it.
hennaert 1 year ago
Watch the video of an interview of a Danish professor at the University of Copenhage, Niels Harrit. Look it up here on youtube. He knows about nanothermite and explosives. He believes what I believe: nanothermite and standard explosives were used in conjunction to bring down the buildings. Two planes, three buildings. The WTC 7 was hardly touched. No tinfoil hats are being worn, here.
SansAuthoritas 1 year ago
@SansAuthoritas
He obviously doesn't know much about thermite and explosives...his paper is flawed, the "research" is highly questionable, and was paid for to be published...YouTube user dprjones had contacted one of the "scientists" and questioned the research and the paper and was insulted & blown off...a random word generator made a paper that was published on the same site...you simply fail to understand science, architecture, engineering, and physics...you're just another blind fool
CrazyRay7979 1 year ago
@CrazyRay7979
Another blind fool. Yes. I should have seen that an impact not unlike the scale impact of a B-25 hitting the Empire State Building (which did not collapse) coupled with kerosene burning at 550 degrees could bring down three steel buildings. Perfectly. Straight down. No falling to one side or another at all. One of them never touched by kerosene. How many steel buildings in history have been weakened by internal fire and then collapsed like WTC7? Why couldn't I see JP8 did it?
SansAuthoritas 1 year ago
@SansAuthoritas
So why did you just reply with something completely different than what I replied to you with? Obviously because YOU ARE a "blind fool"..to think that a B-52 and the Empire State Building is an analog for the WTC on 9/11 is a ridiculously stupid thought..."perfectly", no, "straight down", pretty much and as how anyone that knows how the WTC was constructed would have expected it to fall...keep repeating that Truther BS that you keep reading because those points are not your own
CrazyRay7979 1 year ago
@CrazyRay7979
A B-52 Stratocaster did not hit the Empire State building. A B-25 Mitchell did. Entirely different aircraft.
The points are my own. Everyone talks about how amazingly strong modern steel buildings are. How well built. Then they collapse more perfectly, more easily than a deck of cards after an impact. Then the third falls with no impact whatsoever. Maybe they should start using JP8 in demolitions, what do you think?
SansAuthoritas 1 year ago
@SansAuthoritas
Oops, 25/52, you know what I meant...anyways nobody talks about how "amazingly strong modern steel buildings are" because they aren't,...steel gives us the ability to build tall buildings because of it's ease-of-use; the steel isn't "the building", it's the "skeleton" of it...you do understand that the Twin Towers fell at the point of impact and that 7 was hit with falling pieces of the Towers, don't you? ...you can bring down a steel building by heating it's structural steel
CrazyRay7979 1 year ago
@CrazyRay7979
The skeleton, yes. How did every bone in the body snap because a rib got broken? You said I don't understand how steel buildings are constructed. Are they constructed so that when a level becomes weak, the entire thing collapses like an accordion for 50 floors? You do realize that the "fluke" that was repeated three times that day would require weeks of planning, and a little more than an impact and kerosene, if they were planning to demolish those buildings?
SansAuthoritas 1 year ago
@SansAuthoritas
"A rib"? More like a few and then into the spine...the design of the WTC was that, it fell the way it should've fell, the WTC was not your normal-type of skyscraper...since BOTH towers started falling at the point of impact, it is obviously not a controlled demolition and obvious duplicate design of these buildings...it's amazing how you think you're so informed and intelligent yet you can't even understand the simplest things
CrazyRay7979 1 year ago
@CrazyRay7979
Where did WTC7 "start falling?" Looks like entire building miraculously crumbled . . . equilaterally. Where was the structural damage?
SansAuthoritas 1 year ago
@SansAuthoritas
The structural damage was obviously on the side that faced the Twin Towers; there's plenty of photos of it out there, but apparently your only sources are Truther sources that purposely omit this information...just like the ones that say there were "only a few small fires" and show you the opposite side of the building that faced the Towers...and apparently you missed the firefighters that said it was full of fire and was buckling due to the heat of the fires
CrazyRay7979 1 year ago
Google 'Shame on Jesse Ventura!' It's a hit piece by either a buffoon or a genius named Jeffery Scott Shapiro who as it seems, inadvertently revealed that Larry Silverstein was on the phone with his insurance carrier in regards to authorizing the controlled demolition of WTC tower 7. This just came out a few weeks ago and isn't being publicized, gee I wonder why.... Spread the word!
MassacreBlast 1 year ago
@MassacreBlast
Oh, it's you again...It's "Mr. Silverstein Pull-It nutjob"...you are aware that if the insurance company knew he demolished his buildings that he wouldn't have received his insurance claim, don't you? So saying that he was on the phone with his insurance company OKing a demolition in which he would later receive insurance money is an absolute idiotic thought...call your car insurance company and try the same thing and see what happens
CrazyRay7979 1 year ago
Even if the twins had melted floors why did the remaining 87 floors collapse. hahahhahaa Don't argue with the shills truther friends. They are just silly stupid. hahahha. WE WILL PROSECUTE YOU NEOCONS.
sssssjjjj1 1 year ago
9/11
who was behind it?
GS212301 1 year ago
In a recent Fox News hit piece on Jessie Ventura the author of the article admits that it Silverstein now was on the phone with his insurance company to find out if he could demolish the building. Search "Shame On Jesse Ventura!" Jeffrey Scott Shapiro
Michaelllllllllll 1 year ago
The only "idiocy" here comes from YOU, for criticizing folks (including architects, demolition specialists, scientists, etc) who say that the building was intentionally demolished. WTC7 wasn't hit by ANYTHING that could have caused it to collapse. It was "pulled" ... just as Silverstein stated in the actual (not this) recording. You're not very convincing. The ONLY "conspiracy" theory is our government's "official" story. WTC 7 wasn't included in the official report ..... WHY?
noaid2israel 1 year ago 2
@noaid2israel Produce me a list of these Scientists, Demo Exports and Architects who agree this building was intentionally demolished. I could produce dozens if not hundreds who agree it fell due to the damage sustained and subsequent fire. Also the official report into WTC 7 is now out and has been for some time....give it a read.
eddyk3 1 year ago
@eddyk3 here is a video of Barry Jennings, he was inside building 7 prior to the collapse, he explains how he witnessed explosions Inside of the building /watch?v=7PSziAiD9jM&feature=related
Here is a video of Larry Silverstein refusing to answer the question of Who he spoke to about "pulling" the building
/watch?v=EtPC0W4HII8
oh and Larry also made 7 Billion dollars for the buildings being destroyed, only 15 million dollars were presented to investigate how his buildings fell
your thoughts?
HereIsYourProofSir 1 year ago
@eddyk3, many! too many to list!
zedonutube 1 year ago
@eddyk3 There are acutally man Architects and Demo Experts who say it couldnt of happened due to fire alone. Watch some documentarys?
GamingVidsPs3 1 year ago
@eddyk3 you're a waste of time...STFU. and stupid
haolejohn 1 year ago
@eddyk3 you have got to be kidding me. Larry Silverstein owned these buildings. Even the damn evidence against Enron was destroyed in WTC 7. Look up Kevin McPadden and Barry Jennings.
thnksmarter 1 year ago
@thnksmarter "Larry Silverstein owned these buildings"
No he didn't. He only owned WTC 7. He leased the others.
"Even the damn evidence against Enron was destroyed"
No it wasn't. All the top Enron executives were convicted.
PoetryHound 1 year ago
@eddyk3
OK
ae911truth(dot)org)
WollyMamogram 1 year ago
@eddyk3 Richard Gage member of the AIA American institute of architecture licensed architect for 22 years, also founder of the non profit organization Architects and Engineers for 9/11 truth. I f you look up that organization there is a list of names on there site where they have a petition you can sign and also view the names that are on it they also put there title whether they are a engineer or a architects as a header over the names listed, hope that helps, Peace!
changethecurrent 1 year ago
@eddyk3 Its like with the holocaust. Plenty of eyewhitnesses say what went down and experts who did some research back up their story. One official report from a government says otherwise (okay maybe 2). I believe the eyewhitnesses who survived the holocaust and the experts who back them up over some "official" report of somebody who was not there. Same story for me with 911. I believe the firefighters who survived and the indipendent experts who were not payed to produce the official report.
cassius969 1 year ago
@cassius969 Do you believe the firefighters who said building 7 was leaning and creaking and likely to collapse?
buddyfreakinhoIIy 1 year ago
@buddyfreakinhoIIy If it would have been leaning it would have fallen to the side, no? Actually it looked more like the building exploded. Usually I believe a large group of people over a small group of people. With the holocaust I belive the people who were there and many historians who back it up, over one president of Itan. With the moonlanding I believe the many qualified people who say people were on the moon, over the few qualified people who say they werent. So far so good.
cassius969 1 year ago
@cassius969 I'm not a structural engineer or forensic engineer so I don't know if the building would necessarily have fallen to the side. I do know that there were quite a few firefighters who said the building was unstable. They even put a transit on it to determine that it wasn't standing straight.
buddyfreakinhoIIy 1 year ago
@noaid2israel you have no idea what you are talking about. Have you heard the prior sentences to his famous "pull it" line? He is clearly talking about pulling the operation to fight the fires. You are the only one covering something up when you only quote one part of his sentence. Do you really think it is more likely that he'd put 3 sentences together than make ZERO sense with each other and commit fraud on TV?
"we've had such terrible loss of life"
"lets instantly demolish a building"
johnnymac497 1 year ago 11
@johnnymac497 building 7 was cia main command post,they pulled it to hide evidence.sliverstein mossad mi6 standard false flag terrorism.get over it
asyouweresir 1 year ago
@asyouweresir so, they have a magic button that instantly demolishes a building? A silent invisible explosive that nobody noticed being planted for months, or even when it happened?
johnnymac497 1 year ago
@johnnymac497 THE EXPLOSIVES WERE PLANTED 6 WEEKS B4 BY FAKE ELECTRICAL ENGINEERS,LOK AT MY COMMENT TO SOULSURCHER YOU IDIOT
asyouweresir 1 year ago
@asyouweresir A silent invisible explosive? Most explosions tend to make a sound and are visible. You have absolutely no evidence of what you say, but keep acting like a retard if you want.
johnnymac497 1 year ago
@johnnymac497 ok you tell me how and why building 7 fell
asyouweresir 1 year ago 2
@asyouweresir Asking questions does nothing but show that you know very little or nothing about the topic. Your (very dumb) questions are not evidence, and never will be. You have NOTHING to support what you say about explosives being planted 6 weeks ahead, etc. Easily debunked nonsense...the event unfolded on tape, and there was no explosion seen or heard on the tapes.
johnnymac497 1 year ago
@johnnymac497 ok you tell me how and why it fell maybe a strong gust of wind?
asyouweresir 1 year ago
@asyouweresir it is well documented how it fell. Is it possible for you to participate in a discussion without asking questions over and over? Aren't you supposed to know something about the subject?
johnnymac497 1 year ago
Comment removed
asyouweresir 1 year ago
@johnnymac497 ive said what happened in earlier comments,say your version if youve got one or get gone.your pathetic, in denial or a stooge
asyouweresir 1 year ago
@asyouweresir Again, it is well documented how the building fell. I don't need to spend time educating you on historic events. If you are trying to debunk a story, you might want to start with your own. A conspiracy involving thousands, a secret demolition team, and a silent invisible explosive is a little less than plausible or possible. Why are you focusing on the building that nobody died in? Are you some sort of (horrible) insurance fraud detective?
johnnymac497 1 year ago
@johnnymac497 ok dont answer the question on how the building fell.goodbye
asyouweresir 1 year ago
@asyouweresir Are you unfamiliar with history?
johnnymac497 1 year ago
@johnnymac497 ive heard his story,iasked you 3 times for your story on how building 7 fell,you aint got an answer cos your an idiot
asyouweresir 1 year ago
@asyouweresir I don't have my OWN "story!" I go with the historical events and facts. It is you that needs to make up a story due to complete lack of evidence.
johnnymac497 1 year ago
@johnnymac497 so you believe the official story?
asyouweresir 1 year ago
@johnnymac497 "i told them pull it. so they pulled it and we watched the building fall" wake up retard.
hamhawk816 1 year ago
@hamhawk816 LOL, what about
"I remember getting a call from the fire department commander telling me that they were not sure if they were going to be able to contain the fire"
"we've had such terrible loss of life."
Sorry, but you have to include those lines which are EXACTLY BEFORE the pull it line. I know it doesn't quite go along with your lame detective game. Is admitted insurance fraud on TV REALLY more likely? You are the only one covering something up by excluding those lines.
johnnymac497 1 year ago 19
@johnnymac497 look how many people jumped to my defense when you posted this ignorant comment. YES he admitted insurance fraud on television. who the FUCK is going to arrest somebody like larry silverstein? and he said those lines to try to make himself look like a decent person and to make it appear that there was a legitamate reason to PULL the building. why the hell are you so quick to defend this man? tell me how the hell this building FELL to the ground if it wasnt PULLED.
hamhawk816 1 year ago
@hamhawk816 well, you need something called evidence usually to arrest someone. In fact the public would demand his arrest if he had ACTUALLY confessed. Even if you are willing to make an incorrect leap and interchange "pull" and "demolish," the line continues to make ZERO sense with his lines before it. AS IN HE IS NOT TALKING ABOUT DEMOLISHING A BUILDING. CONTEXT. Why would he admit it?!!? HE MENTIONS NOT BEING ABLE TO CONTAIN THE FIRE ALSO.
johnnymac497 1 year ago
@hamhawk816 You act like he had some moment of honesty and decided to tell everyone that he demolished his building with a magic silent invisible explosive. You then act like his preceding comments which clearly point to pulling the firefighters out of the building are purposely misleading. WOW! Odd confession, purposely misleading in 2-3 lines which are clearly about the fire and the firefighters, and then an all of the sudden he comes out with the vague "truth" (or should I say troof).
johnnymac497 1 year ago 26
@johnnymac497 myself along with hundreds of thousands of other citizens are calling for much more than his and many other mens arrest for their involvement in killing thousands of innocent americans in the 911 false flag terror attacks. its not a magic explosive either. its called thermite and it exists in this very not magical world lol. i doubt he even meant to make the confession, and if he did its because theyre ready to let the people know whats happening.either shut up or wake up you fool.
hamhawk816 1 year ago
@hamhawk816 and i ask you two questions again...why are you so quick to defend this devil of a man? and how the FUCK did the building come tumpbling down in a controlled fashion then? answer my questions and quit trying to discredit me by saying silly little things like (or should i say troof).
hamhawk816 1 year ago
@hamhawk816 if silverstein is your evidence that you use to say building 7 and the other towers were demolished, I really don't know what to tell you. We have exhausted that topic. That argument aside, let's talk about the videos of the events. In all of the camera angles, we do not see or hear explosives. There is no such thing as a silent invisible explosive or demolition...PERIOD... including thermite which creates a huge fireball. The buildings were not demolished, sorry.
johnnymac497 1 year ago
@johnnymac497 lmao just because you say they werent doesnt matter one little fucking bit to me. ANSWER MY QUESTIONS!!! god you are retarded lol. just read my questions and answer them, ok little boy? here we go...1. how did the building fall then? 2. why are you defending larry silverstein with such a fucking fervor?? now...ANSWER THE QUESTIONS!
hamhawk816 1 year ago
@hamhawk816 Here are your answers.
1. I am not going to waste time telling you how the building fell. It is a historic event and it is clearly documented.
2. I would be the first to demand Silverstein's arrest if he had confessed to something. I assume that you ask because you think that I am "in on the conspiracy" somehow, just because I ask for FACTS and EVIDENCE when someone says that a building was demolished with silent invisible explosives. "Mr honesty" also clarified.
johnnymac497 1 year ago
@johnnymac497 you didnt answer either question i had for you you worthless piece of trash. stop being a fool and wake up and see we dont live in a fairytale world where muslims crash planes into buildings then dont do anyting for 9 years after, even though we raped their homelands and killed their women and children
hamhawk816 1 year ago
@johnnymac497 therefore, you are a fucking retard since you cant even answer the simplest questions on a topic you fight so feverishly for. so you and your sheepish family need to just go ahead and die if you cant use your brains like human beings. scum.
hamhawk816 1 year ago
@hamhawk816 I answered both questions clearly. By asking questions over and over, you just show that you know next to nothing about the topic.
johnnymac497 1 year ago
@johnnymac497 you answered neither! are you on drugs? go back and look at your responses. and then answer my fuckin question. you must be too busy sucking that weird old man silverstein's dick to answer two simple fucking questions. so shut the fuck up if you cant make a halfway decent rebuttle. you ass.
hamhawk816 1 year ago
@hamhawk816 Why would I spend my time educating someone that knows NOTHING about the topic? If you are asking what happened to the building, you know NOTHING about the topic. Look it up, it is a historic event. It has been CLEARLY documented what happened. That is your first answer. Your second answer (AGAIN) is that I do not care about silverstein himself and would also demend his arrest if he had actually confessed. Do you understand yet? Or do you want to ask me more questions?
johnnymac497 1 year ago
@johnnymac497 i want you to stop taking everything that is "documented" about a bullshit event at face value you scared little fucking pansy tool. your government lies! look up all thats been "documented" about how the government has lied to us time and time again. you know nothing about this topic because you accept everything you are told. like a five year old. and by the way, santa claus is not fucking real either. sorry to blow it for you, sonny.
hamhawk816 1 year ago
@hamhawk816 I go by my own eyewitness account. There were CLEARLY no explosives seen or heard when the building came down. It has to do nothing with what the government said. I also use common sense, something that you lack entirely. I am also interested in FACT in place of CONSPIRACY. YOU are the one that is brainwashed (and terrified of ) your government. You think that they are some sort of super-duper power capible of conspiracies involving thousands. Go hide in a bomb-shelter.
johnnymac497 1 year ago
@johnnymac497 immense amounts of people, including those closest to the EXPLOSIVES, the NY firefighters, saw AND heard explosions, as well as many civilian eyewitnesses. and by the way, you obviously dont know what the hell common sense even is, or else it would tell you WTC7 was without a doubt BROUGHT DOWN by explosives.
hamhawk816 1 year ago
@johnnymac497 youre sounding like more of a conspiracist now, believing in a lie that your silly television news stations perpetuauted. and i do not fear my government. they fear me(the people) which is why they feel the need to lie to us. becuase we outnumber them 1000 to 1. and by the way the tooth fairys not real either kiddo, sorry.
hamhawk816 1 year ago
@hamhawk816 You continue to have absolutely nothing to back up what you say, and never will have anything to back it up. The government has you very, very frightened... maybe you should turn off the TV, or better yet.. stop watching videos made by crackpots on youtube.
johnnymac497 1 year ago
@johnnymac497 wow now youre just using the very same things i said to you against me. or at least trying to. i dont watch tv, its mindwashing garbage. you obviously watch WAY too much, as i already stated and you tried to say back to me. and you obviously cant read because i said im not frightened of them already lol. please read my replies before replying youreslf you stoned stupid bastard. and by the way...the easter bunny is lie too little one!
hamhawk816 1 year ago
@hamhawk816 Again, I go by my own eyewitness account .. You clearly think that they are capable of the largest conspiracies involving thousands, and you clearly live in fear. You actually credit the government by thinking they have that type of power. Sorry, you are just a completely paranoid idiot with no evidence. Why do you continue to focus on building 7? Nobody died in the building. Are you just a horrible insurance fraud detective?
johnnymac497 1 year ago
@johnnymac497 still going huh fool? i focus on wtc7 because its one of the smoking guns along with the pentagon attack and the flight which was shot down in pennsylvania. and any "power" the government has was given to it by fucking imbeciles like yourself who worship and praise them like gods(mostly because you fear them). youre pathetic. give up, you lose. loser.
hamhawk816 1 year ago
@hamhawk816 face it, a complete moron such as yourself would never even admit that the twin towers were hit by planes if there were not dozens of videos. WTC7 is a "smoking gun?" LOL, according to who, you?
johnnymac497 1 year ago
@hamhawk816 by the way, you may have noticed that I ignored you some time ago. I know I am the closet thing you have to a friend, but really... I don't want to talk to you anymore. If you want to discuss the subject matter fine. However, I am afraid that I have owned you on this topic and nothing else will need to be said. I know you strive to talk to someone that talks about actual FACT instead of CONSPIRACY, but once again... please stop trolling.
johnnymac497 1 year ago
@johnnymac497 where exactly did you own me? quote it EXACTLY. and youll notice i dont respond moments after you post because i have a life outside of arguing with you, unlike yourself. you even respond again when i havent said anything in days because you need my attention you insignificant loser. you havent stated a fact throughout this entire argument, all youve done is personally attack me and use CAPITALS like that means a damn thing hahaha. stop fearing your government and grow a pair pussy
hamhawk816 1 year ago
@hamhawk816 I see on your page that you are busy having youtube wars with other people, calling them "faggots" and "pussies" over and over. When you are proven wrong, you clearly go into some sort of childish rage and try name calling. Sorry, just makes you look even more stupid.
johnnymac497 1 year ago
@johnnymac497 nice subject change pussy faggot hahaha. you fuckin LOSE!!!! owned.
hamhawk816 1 year ago
@hamhawk816 congrats, you have owned yourself once again.
johnnymac497 1 year ago
@johnnymac497 lol dont try to claim that youre me, even though i understand because im much more successful and generally good at living life than you. i owned YOU. theres no way to own myself dipshit. i OWN you. youre my bitch now johnnymac just fuckin accept it. at least your master is someone as grand as me, not someone like yourself whos too mentally deficient to see through the bullshit of this world. you suck.
hamhawk816 1 year ago