LMAO! Another 911 doufus using the edit switch! Kerry said they evacuated WTC7 in a controlled fashion. In fact, I dont recall kerry EVER even mentioning the word "demolition".
Why dont you idiots watch the UNEDITED video of Building 7 collapsing, and see how it collapsed progressively and did not free fall AT ALL.
Fucking idiots watching this edited videos. How ironic that it is YOU being lied to. It really is fascinating how thick you all are.
The UNEDITED version of the building 7 can be seen at ItWasTyped. com under the Building 7 post in the conspiracy theory section. Raging fires and all. The ENTIRE collapse, no editing bullshit.
i was happy to see that a recent poll confirmed that nearly 87% of polled "truthers " still live in their mom's basement ,spending the bulk of their time playing "doom " and watching old episodes of "mission preposterous " ,"i spy" and movies with lots of inane car chases and unlikely pyro technics ...this would suggest that most wont actually ever impregnate any real world females and thereby futher endanger the already dubious gene pool of the ever more dumbed down american population .
WHY WAS BUILDING 7 RIGGED FOR EXPLOSIVES is the questions people should be answering this question , as their is no doubt that it was a controlled demo as was the WTC 1 and 2. The problem here is this : "Human Beings would rather live as lie if comfortable, then the truth however uncomfortable" and this is just too good an example of just that, who wants to admit the truth after being taken for so long and over such a horrible thing ...CGJames...saving humanity.......
Just suggesting something out of the blue is not enough.
To demonstrate that an incendiary is, well, an incendiary is not enough.
Submitting a pseudo-scientific paper out of the realm of the subject matter knowledgeable accredited peer-reviewed scientific domain (as Harrit, Jones and Farrer did) is not enough.
Whining about your paper is not taking seriously by the scientific community is not enough.
Ignoring certain consequences of your own pseudo research is deadly.
tubers, wimahlers is the hardest working shill on yt! lets ALL give a huge thumbs up to this comment if you agree! [gregorca gets honorable mention too!] LoL! ;-) what a bunch of traitors! working for the NASA NAZIS [title of a great vid on here btw]
@19d4life the joke is on you bro! its called AGENDA 21 you might want to look up NASA NAZIS on here, and fellow tubers who still have not checked by all means look up FAKE MOON LANDING on here, i am proud to announce that June22 2011 i was convinced via yt! and PLEASE protect your families from the deadliest parts of agenda21: CHEMTRAILS, VACCINES, FLUORIDE, GMO, SMARTMETERS... these are discussed at KillerSpray public education website created by a dentist with a few degrees
One thing I don't understand... Is why the New York Fire Department Demolitions Team and FEMA isn't in the Guinness Book of World Records for bringing down a super structure like WTC 7 in World Record Time? It was the fastest demolition job in history and everybody ignores it like it never even happened? What's with that? Ask any demo expert, who holds the record for demo of a super structure in world record time and I'm sure they would all give NYC the nod on that one for WTC 7!
so they spent several months/years very secretly wireing the detonators and plastique AND they also had airliners hyjacked by suicidal jihadis then flown into the buildings ?...because ...the airliner crashes simply wouldnt be dramatic enough on their own ? ..we neee the crashes AND then for the FULL effect we needed the secret ninja demolitions as well ?
c'mon ..are all of you truthers still in the seventh grade ?..seriously folks, this is a really,really DUMB theory ..
what top secret demolitions contractor was employed to do this highly illegal and certain to be discovered ..cutting ,wiring,and demo placement job that would have entailed many thousands of man hours ?..did they work arround the teeming masses of night hours janitorial staff or in plain view during the daytime?
excuse me miss ,could you pass me those wire cutters and blasting caps ,sorry for the mess folks,we will be done with this floor in a few more hours ..shhh ,dont tell anyone ..OK?
@woodenmajor your a simpleton! bushes bro was in charge of security, there were SEVERAL evacuations in weeks prior, security was completely shut off for extended periods, a whole floor was emptied and it would take little time to splice into the EISTING wiring, and while the security was off people with cabling were ALL OVER THE FLOORS to install new internet cables LOL! get off yer iphone and get real!
How did they set the charges? It was ad hoc while the building was ablaze, amidst all the smoke,mayhem,detritus,& carnage? Really? A short bus 3rd grader might buy that.The building was clearly brough down by controlled demolition.But the charges had to be there already,which proves that there was a plot to bring down 7.Which opens the door to a similar plot w/ the other buildings that came down in similar fashion.A thorough investigation would be nice. But how? They tossed all the evidence.
HEY GUYS , I JUST CAME ACROSS YOUR DISCUSSION.I LIVE ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THE PLANET, IN A COUNTRY WHERE OUR YOUTH GO TO WAR WITH AMERICAN YOUTH WHEN EVER OUR POLITICIANS NEED TO STIMULATE OUR ECONOMIES.I DONT THINK YOU SEE ALL THE WORLD NEWS THAT IS AVAILABLE OUT THERE. SO I WILL SHARE THIS WITH YOU , THE THIRD PLANE? THAT WAS DOWNED IN THE MIDDLE OF NO-WHERE WAS MEANT FOR BUILDING 7 . IT WAS PRE-WIRED LIKE THE TOWERS,THE PLANE ? DID NOT REACH ITS TARGET.SOUCE, RETIRED MOSSAD IN OZ!TAKE CARE
@laffredo In the WTC area there were seven buildings WTC1-WTC7. As fishy that the business of WTC 7 is I actually think Kerry misunderstands the question posed for how the remains of WTC 6 was taken care of. That one was ultimately brought down with cables after having the structure weakened. The destruction of WTC 7 still needs a thorough investigation though.
I say that the New York fires of that day were supernatural, unprecedently melting steel in building after building. With fires like that you would own the steel industry.
It's not a strawman, it's a bullet hole. The following comes from open credible sources. Check them and reply... but you probably won't ;) Twin Tower Chief Engineer: 0:30 @ youtube.com/watch?v=rjmHqES_lto, firemen in "Collateral Damages", imdb.com/title/tt0368656/: 03:49 @ youtube.com/watch?v=7QaookqVa-8, National Environment Health Organization: §2 @ neha.org/9-11%20report/index-The.html
For metal forensics, google FEMA report 403 Appendix C. These are just a few of the accounts.
Aha! The always credited eye witnesses, with the occasional appeal to authority fallacy, and the misinterpretation of FEMA report appendic C, which bears the title: "Limited Metallurgical Examination".
Let's ignore that one of the lead authors of appendic C, Barnett, confirmed a fire induced collapse. And ignore the fact that Les Robertson did not take a sample. And ignore the fact that unforseen events do occur (King's Cross fire), truthers still have no claim.
The "pools of molten metal" argument is embarrassing on multiple levels for truthers. Not because of the claims it was there, which is plausible, but because of the claim that this is somehow caused by any type of incendiary (a deriviate of thermite).
Why?
Why? Because in 10 years not a single celebrated truther has ever done an experiment to create even one pool of molten metal with any kind of experiment. Not ever!
Nor did ever truther bother to ask any witness about the size or location of the pool of molten metal (excluding the occasional remark. Like Robertson referring to sublevel B2). Size and location are important. It is important to estimate the amount of incendiary allegedly used to give some credit to your extraordinary claim. Truthers also "forget" about the reported "pool of flowing molten metal" under WTC 6. Was WTC 6 rigged with exlplosives too?
Finally, truthers are so focussed on just one cause they forget, or even consider, that there might be other causes. To confirm their bias they do selective quote mining of selected sources.
Selected quote mining of selective sources? Give it a break. There are no quotes taken out of context here. And 06.50, a transformer blew up, so what? I'm not talking about explosion sounds and certainly not about "all kinds of reactions". I'm talking about something that couldn't be there if the collapse was due to fire. That's why it's cruiscal. It's the bullet hole in the presumed drown. This is the reason why NIST denied to even know of such testimonies 05.30 /watch?v=khdCzqjYk9o
" Give it a break. There are no quotes taken out of context here. And 06.50, a transformer blew up, so what? I'm not talking about explosion sounds and certainly not about "all kinds of reactions". "
.
And indeed you are not!
And that is exactly why you are selective. Not to mention the fact that it is just plain stupid to ask Kerry something about something he does not know anything about. Not to mention the fact that you ignore the WTC 5 internal collapse due to fire.
Of which you claim: "This is the reason why NIST denied to even know of such testimonies 05.30".
This is selective quote mining again. Listen to the whole video and understand that it is John Gross saying he does not know anything about molten steel and therefore it is he(!) who can not comment on it.
But the molten steel argument is embarrassing for truthers. Because the can not explain anything with it. And they never did. Really embarrassing.
Of course, even more embarrassing is Jones's claim of molten metal due to thermite reactions at the corner of the 80/81st floor. Even after 10 years neither Jones or Gage has ever showed a calculation of how much thermite was used in that corner alone for the alleged thermite. Nor did they ever explain how you control an incendiary in a structurally impact zone that is on fire and initiate a collapse exactly at the impact zone about an hour later. Really shoddy research.
@wimahlers gage is a shill just like you. try asking gage about fake planes, he also happens to look like the freak david keith from the u of calgary [google it to see his pic and research] who designs chemtrail sprays
ALL this falls under the AGENDA21 blanket! if you want a nice summary C killerspray -com [just google killerspray and a ton of stuff will come up] and get the sidewalk chalk out! [works for me, and its fun]
that is what they FEAR MOST is independent folks getting the word out!!!
Also ignored is the fact that an alleged pool of molten metal was reported in the basement of WTC 6. That is NOT WTC 1 or 2 or 7 but 6. What was it doing there? Was WTC 6 also rigged with incendiaries and explosives?
Or if it is (now) claimed that it was due to thermite coming from WTC1/2 that ended up in the basement of WTC 6? How?
Just thinking about these consequential oddities related to a thermite claim makes me think that the no planer theory is more plausible than this.
Interesting about alleged findings beneath 6. It was between 1 and 7, very close to the first. It too would have to be investigated. It doesn't change the main question though. There should be NO such findings at the sites what so ever. Lastly, there are findings that show molten steel (Fema appendix C) and steel subjected to 1000C+ temperatures as well as material consistent with thermite in the dust. /watch?v=23n0Vr_A1TQ /watch?v=kJwE65Y32Y4 /watch?v=7ZNSXC3KVeE .
"There should be NO such findings at the sites what so ever."
.
Why? Just because you say so?
And if these findings were there can you name a plausible cause?
And if you name a cause has anybody ever tested it? Therefore actually CONFIRMING it is even possible?
And you keep referring to FEMA appendix C. But did you ever bother to VERIFY your claim at FEMA? Ever contacted Jonathan Barnett who was one of the experts and lead investigators? Truthers are so lazy and gullible.
/watch?v=23n0Vr_A1TQ I am anxiously awaiting his scientific paper. Oh, wait ... he did not produce any. Okay then, I am anxiously awaiting his experiment with (any deriviate of) thermite producing similar results. Oh, wait ... he did not do that either. Oh, well, I am anxiously awaiting the transcript between him and Barrett, which he refers to. Oh, wait ... he only mentioned Jonathan barnett in this video (around 10:30). But he actually never contacted him. Lazy and gullible.
watch?v=kJwE65Y32Y4 Farrer claims that the early FEMA report of 2002 was not used in the final NIST report because this anomaly is proof for thermite. It isn't! He could, would and should have known that if he actually had talked with Jonathan Barrett after(!) 2002 and actually had studied all the followup information. Instead he artificially clings to a description of an anomaly and draws a conclusion for which he never took the trouble to actually test(!) if it is even possible.
watch?v=kJwE65Y32Y4 A lot of bla, bla on the red/grey chips. What is utterly missing is the fact that they are there at all! That is, what Farrer conveniently leaves out is that when he claims this is evidence for (a deriviate of) thermite than his own(!) research must conclude that it was used in stupendously large quantities. But he leaves that detail out. Which makes his ramblings on the importance of the red/grey chips realistically highly improbable. But he dodges that issue.
Wow, we talk about molten steel that shouldn't under any circumstances be there, we talk about nano-thermitic material that absolutely shouldn't be there and by the way large quantities of small iron spheres in the dust that shouldn't be there either. The research material is open and possible to repeat and I warmly welcome it to be done, a duplication would only strengthen the result. This has however been of no interest of NIST. About the quantities, of course it had to be large.
"Wow, we talk about molten steel that shouldn't under any circumstances be there, ..."
.
Wow, you talk about molten steel ... I talk about molten metal.
And there could, indeed, be circumstances that even molten steel was there.
Anyway, I don't understand the argument. Since thermite (or any deriviate thereof) never has created "pools of molten steel". Nor will it ever. Unless ...
Unless, you Gage, Jones, Harrit, Farrer or whomever can DEMONSTRATE it is possible. Do it!
"This has however been of no interest of NIST" (on duplicating Harrit/Jones/Farrer results)
.
Of course not! What would be the relevance? Since you are so focussed on this side of the story I ask you to duplicate the "results" of Wood first (directed energy weapons). Or duplicate the "results" of the no-planers for that matter.
But first answer the question why Gage et.al. still claim a fire induced collapse is impossible when this phenomenon was observed in WTC 5. Explain!
@HurburBurbur As for the thermite/thermate/super-thermite claim...
I'll be happy to examine this once you have convinced me you have a case. To prove you have a case you have to demonstrate by performing a realistic experiment to show it is even possible. That is:
You have to show me that a (deriviate of) thermite can cut through support beams, leaving no trace to be reported by experienced clearers, do this in a burning buildings that collapses at the impact zone, create pools of molten, etc
@wimahlers There is an experiment on youtube with a guy in his backyard who proves that thermite (he was unable to obtain nano-thermate) can cut through steel beams, and using considerably less thermate than was reckoned by the discovery channel(maybe the History channel)... But I think the weight of the argument lies in the testimony of a man called Barry Jennings RIP. This man witnessed explosions and dead bodies within WTC7 before either of the towers had collapsed.
"There is an experiment on youtube with a guy in his backyard who proves that thermite (he was unable to obtain nano-thermate) can cut through steel beams"
.
I have seen it. Multiple times. I suggest you take those videos to any accredited subject matter knowledgeable scientific institution. And I know they will have the same criticism - and probably more! - than I already have given on this amateurish experiment. If anything, it proves it is NOT possible.
They will have, or you assume they will have. Can you see the level of control within the united states. Can you see how much courage it takes for one man or woman to come out and speak against the government... I don't trust any official study, any university research finding unless it agrees with my own reason. And my own reason tells me undoubtedly that the USA is anything but open and free.. But I would love to debate the thermate experiment personally with you on a forum we can arrange it?
"Can you see how much courage it takes for one man or woman to come out and speak against the government..."
.
Have you seen the movie "Expelled"? A prime example that demonstrates the fallacy of your argument.
You say you don't trust any official study or any university level unless it agrees with your own reason. With this you just admitted that you are not a skeptic, Because a skeptic demands(!) evidence. You merely demand bias confirmation.
"But I would love to debate the thermate experiment personally with you on a forum we can arrange it?"
.
Sure. But I cannot debate this issue. That is, I don't have the required expertise. But, I guess, neither have you. However, I can state the objections of the rather silly experiment and then you can try to convince me by listing scientifically accredited relevant sources answering these objections. Just remember, it is your claim therefore your responsibility.
@wimahlers embarrass myself? Sorry but I stopped letting my questions, opinions and thoughts be dictated by the fear of embarrassment or what other people would think of me.. If you knew anything about the secret history of the united states you would realise that their is hidden elements who could of silenced a person if needed, Barry Jennings was threatened with loosing his job, why would they of not gotten to the other person involved and silenced him. I assume this is an impossibility?
Yes! Stop embarrassing yourself by using Jenings.
You claim Jennings was threatened with loosing his job because of what he said about WTC 7. There is not a shred of evidence for that. Embarrassing.
You claim Jennings meant he saw dead people. He indeed did say that on that stressful day itself. A lot was said in the heat of the moment. However, he later explained himself. It really is embarrassing to still use Jennings street interview.
@wimahlers But anyway, every reasonable person knows that there should be an independent investigation into WTC7 building. Every demolition expert knows that building take a lot to come down. Lets arrange this debate any how...name the place
But I strongly suggest you first verify this, yet again, embarrassing gullible exposé of naivety at a subject matter knowledgeable scientific institution.
I know, I prejudge this video as "a gullible exposé of naivety" before you have verified this. This sounds like spoiling the well. But I ensure you that it is as much spoiling the well as claiming flat earthers have a "gullible exposé of naivety".
"...every reasonable person knows that there should be an independent investigation into WTC7 building."
.
No! Every reasonable person acknowledges that there is no reason to do yet again another investigation. Only conspiracists think, and are convinced, this is a reasonable request.
And every firefighter knows how easy it is for a burning structure to collapse. Especially steel constructed structures. The FDNY predicted that WTC 7 would collapse. And it did!
@crisisofconsciousnes I haven't heard from you in a while. But about that debate, her is one:
forums"randi"org/showthread"php?p=7473191
You really wish to do this all over again?
Anyway, instead of a debate I suggest you contact an accredited subject matter knowledgeable scientific source first. Like a relevant university. But that is just me. 'Cause me having not the required knowledge, I have to rely on verifiable accredited scientific sources.
For the youtube links, if you get problems just add the /watch?v=rjmHqES_lto and the /watch?v=7QaookqVa-8 separately to the "youtube.com" already existing.
@gspot6916 Exactly! But these nutty theorists who masquerade as "demolition experts" have no answer to that. Also there were two giant buildings (called the world trade center buildings one and two) that collapsed right next to building 7. Did anybody hear about that little tid bit? Giant mega ton pieces ripped into the side of building 7 at full speed. Firefighters noticed a bulge in the building and heard creaking at 2 PM. But theorists never mention any of that.
@gspot6916 Thats the same thing Im thinking. Especially a building that size. It would take more than a few hours for sure. Its fishy to say the least.
I did his makeup once when he was running for president. And I didnt get paid. Took time off of my busy work schedule and I guesss he thought i was donating my time just cuz he was running for president. BAH. He knows what happend. He took the oath to satan when wearing that black hood at the masonic temple in DC
He obviously didn't know the numbers of the buildings. WTC 6 was the building that was pulled down with cables and evidently was referring to that building. It's funny how conspiracy believers leap on little verbal gaffes as if they're sooooo significant. LOL!
@PoetryHound Building 7 was brought down dude, its not a conspiracy, I dont understand why everyone thinks it is. NYFD brought it down. Its a known fact by now.
@PoetryHound Tower 7 was empty and it was the NYFD that recommended it be brought down. Thats been known for years now. Silverstein, Kerry and the NYFD admitted they brought it down. That building had been rotting from black mold for years so they decided to pull.
@G1formation i think you are confusing tower 7 with another one of the buildings that was recently brought down due to black mold that was covered in a black tarp rotting for 10 years.
@jeffhickman10 I care what he says, because he is best friends with his brother in arms- the Skull and Bones member George Bush. If anyone knows what happened that day it is secret society members like John Kerry.
@jeffhickman10 I will not fall for anything, in fact i will question most things. It is people that fell for the false flag operation held on 9/11 that fall for any other fairy tale coming out of the "terror" threat. Example: Dumbasses scared of white al qaeda [which doesn't even exist anywhere]-------> /watch?v=F7pQTHpEbVk
Larry just happend to not make a insurance claim on building 7 but got paid for the other 2 uhuh )o...Didnt want to open that can of worms did he...o(
There were two major structural columns supporting bldg 7. Both would have had to basically disappear simultaneously to make the structure fall like that. In the report on bldg 7, Ramon Gilsanz wrote that no cause was found for the easternmost column to fail. When someone sais, "They proved that it fell by fire", that person is making stuff up. There is no "they" who proved anything; There is no report that "they" wrote showing that the east column just disappeared.
wow this is a pretty important video. together with larry silverstein's statements it doesn't leave much room for interpretation anymore. WTC7 was brought down by demolition and the official report lied about it. one has to ask why..
@19d4life you cant blame us...all you trolls act the same and have the most predictable comebacks. Plus the fact that youre well versed in all this reptilian/haarp nonsense even though you claim to be of a factual scientific background...ive seen trolls on other videos with the same behaviour ....either youre all possessed by the retard entity from another dimension ...or youre on a pay roll.
@19d4life if you want to go looking around for blasting caps at ground zero be my guest asshole. the statement below is proof enough for shady actions on the governments part... be a contrarian all your life im sure the people around you love you for who you are.
@19d4life kink in the middle of building and its fall at freefall speed? the fact that it contained the fbi and cias intelligence and budget logs? the same very logs that contained the information about the pentagons missing 2.3 trillion dollars?the fact that british and u.s news announced the building had fallen before it fell? the fact that all information surrounding building 7 was hushed and the bbc went to the bother of destroying the tapes? quit talking out your ass.
You're pretty dumb if you think the only records of any or all of those were only in paper form, as a single copy, placed in a file cabinet in WTC7
You're also not so bright if you think that WTC7's PREDICTED COLLAPSE...you know, the one the FDNY REPORTED was going to happen HOURS before it fell...would need to have a news station located in the UK report the fall early to UK viewers in the UK
@19d4life He said "Pull IT", not pull out. Just another slip of the tongue, like Bush saying he saw the first plane crash on t.v. and Rumsfeld saying flight 93 was shot down? And how lucky Larry and his daughter were to have prior engagements that very same morning and for him to pocket five billion in insurance - and all from a simple gut feeling that told him to buy those under occupied, asbestos ridden buildings in the first place. He must give thanks every day.
...and the Truthers continue to show their ignorance by repeating the complete lie about the fall time for WTC7, which didn't even fall close to 7 seconds, yet they continue to base their entire argument on something so wrong and so incorrect...if you've ever actually seen the video of WTC7's collapse, you would see that it takes longer than 7 seconds to fall...and then maybe one day you can study really hard and learn simple physics, realize how wrong you are, and stop being a Truther
@CrazyRay7979 You have been proven wrong by many people commenting on this video and youre still here troll ...calling people "truthers" is the lamest insult imaginable, its almost laughable saying as it berates people who simply want questions answered. You will go down in history as one of the many ignorant douchebags who didnt see the truth laid out infront of them.
Are you referring to the idiot below (thunder2falcon15) that I already proved wrong months ago who is dumb enough to think that WTC 7 fell in 6.7 seconds???
There are no questions to be answered, they have been answered to the best of thousands and thousands of actual experts in their fields' expertise...the only "questions" are by Truthers that are intentionally lied to, uninformed, or are not smart enough to understand the answers
The FNDY, who were there all day, reported the damage to WTC7 caused by WTC1 falling...then they reported the fires...then they evacuated the area...then they predicted that WTC7 was going to fall...then WTC7 fell
...so you're saying that the FDNY are liars?
...so you're saying that you know more about WTC7 than the FDNY?
guys, we all seen comparison of the video of the controlled demolition and wtc7, the speed and the way it came down simetrically is the same, then modus operandi has been the same.....period
The official story is complete bullshit. Even a few commission members have come out and said the investigation was a farce. Those towers came down due to explosives. You can see the squibbs coming out the sides as they go down. All THREE buildings. WTC7 fell too, the exct same way. And lucky larry silverstein said on camera later "we decided to 'pull it'". Around 6pm it came down. Wasnt hit by a plane, had minimal fires (fires dont bring down steel framed buildings neway ;)
Let me get this straight, on being asked directly about Silverstein and WTC7 being deliberately brought down in a controlled demolition this is what Kerry answers:
"..that wall, there was some danger and I think that they made the decision based on the danger that it had of destroying other things that they did it in a controlled fashion."
Would anyone like to propose the alternative government approved interpretation of what Mr Skull n Bones is saying?
WOW....are there still disinformed,dumb downed,Dedumbers/debunkers what ever you call them, naive sheeple??if you haven't gotten it by now you'll never get it..Dont bother messaging me either,wouldn't want you to miss Jersey shore
Interesting considering your buddy, Obama, is on record saying that 9/11 was not an inside job...and note that this video is of John Kerry, a guy so full of shit and lies, and so incompetent that he couldn't beat Bush in an election
Mates of my demolish building and they say that all 3 of those buildings were brought down by controlled explosions and that to plan something like that takes weeks to do.
Why do you feel the need to lie? Is the only thing keeping the Truther "movement" going are intentional lies that stupid people will believe?
Obviously you're lying, if your "mates" knew anything about controlled demolition then they'd know that it takes months to rig up a stripped abandoned building...and they'd know that TNT is always used for controlled demolitions...too bad no explosive residue was ever found to verify an implosion...
@CrazyRay7979 Explosive residue was found. Just like 16 guys in a van which actually had traces of explosives were found. It appears as though the bombs were placed there by people who appeared to be working for the Ace Elevator Company. I dont need to lie at all. There is more evidence for a controlled demolishion than against.
@CrazyRay7979 Yes there were. The Israeli art students who were caught celebrating when the towers went down? They knew full well it was going to happen and even admitted they were there to observe the towers being blown up.
There was not 16 people, it was like 3 or 4 and they were confronted 4 hours after the attacks for suspicious activity in New Jersey...there are and aren't reports about any explosives or explosive residue being present...
You're completely idiotic if you think a single van of explosives could bring down either of the towers, a truck parked in the parking garage beneath the WTC didn't take it down in 1993
Hey look, it's the usual out-of-context Truther quotes in video form...who is John Kerry? Why is he proof that 9/11 was an inside job?? Wouldn't John Kerry be on "the inside" if it was an inside job??
..and the usual Truther idiocy that "pull it" is a controlled demolition term, and even more stupid is that Truthers think Silverstein would be on the phone with the NYFD and be teling them to demolish the building using a term they use to get fire/rescue & people out of a compromised building...
@CrazyRay7979 You obviously have not done your research. There is no question that building was rigged way in advance of Silverstein's "pull it" comment. It would take at least a few days to a week to cut beams and rig explosives in a building of that size. And check the EMT witnesses that heard a 20 second countdown over their radios.
No, you have obviously not done yours; it takes weeks to months to prep an ABANDONED building for controlled demolition...no explosive residue was found..."pull it" is a firefighter term, not a controlled demolition one...so you must believe that the NYFD were behind WTC7 since that's who Silverstein said "pull it" to...so in your made-up "EMT countown" bullshit you are now suggesting that the EMTs were behind WTC7...and you think you're educated about 9/11, hilarious!!!
@CrazyRay7979 What da f--k are you saying? Explosive residue WAS found in many dust samples around NYC. Thermitic material, expoded and unexploded. Physicist Steven Jones did the testing & no, the truthers don't think it was the firemen. We've never said that. We believe #7, like 1 and 2 were rigged in the months before 9/11. Why would anyone oppose Silverstein being asked, on the record, about what he meant by "pull it" Answer that for meCrazy. Why not Silverstein UNDER OATH. Why protect him??
Under oath, haha, as if they put people not accused in a crime in court to tell their story because a bunch of scientifically-retarded Truthers demand it...
Explosive residue and/or thermitic material was NOT found...Jones had his paper published without permission in a pay-to-publish journal, the editor in chief (a nanomaterials professor) resigned over it...apparently you somehow missed that, maybe you're a new retard in the Truther "movement", ignorant to learning the truth
@blacknganga So why not put him under oath blackn? Let him tell the American people exactly what he meant by pull it. Wouldn't you be curious as to what he comes up with. I mean the man collected 6 bil. He makes Bernie Madoff look like a choir boy. Put him on the stand, Bush/Cheney too.
@Loejyrrab Too many average Americans are too ignorant of the facts for anyone to be publicly questioned over this. This was done, in part, to prop up the failing wealth of average Americans, anyway, so through their ignorance, they are sort of complicit in it anyway.
Oh, please tell me your "facts"...tell me all about your Truther "facts" that have been completely proven false...no Truther "theory" has any merit...
@CrazyRay7979 Are you entirely stupid or entirely ignorant, or are you a robot. Sorry, but there is no arguement here, you are a tool of..............?
I see, resort to calling me stupid because you can't refute my comments...come on man, tell us all how 9/11 went down since you're so smart...and, you know, besides all of the scientific failures, inaccuracies, and inconsistencies, including the Truther theories that contradict directly with each other
@blacknganga For one to "tell" how it went down would be an exercise in pretentiousness. Anyone with half a brain can see that the government line is entirely riddled with holes. I'll let you off, though, because maybe you haven't actually looked into this HOLE issue much yet? Remember that the official government line(s) here are just theories also. I've personally looked into this a great deal, but became so disgusted that I quit it. some people are genuinely stupid.
@blacknganga dont quit get angry brother..im from NYC and were sick & tired of these dumbed downed sheeple not getting the point...Your smart..thats a powerfull weapon by itself..give the direction to one sleeping next to you,but we beg of you & everyone else who know the TRUTH dont' ever give up
@alecboi84 They're quite possibly just robots, as it's hard to believe anyone could look into this matter for a while and not see "it". I suppose they go into it all patriotic, wanting a sort of "One America" - "I'll prove to those "truthers" the REAL truth". The Pentagon incident alone should be enough to prove to anyone that something is amiss.
I believe all large buildings are rigged for explosives when the are constructed in the event they need to be "pulled" for safety. :)
DTK5689 1 month ago
whooops.. 911 was an inside job
MultiSr16 1 month ago
LMAO! Another 911 doufus using the edit switch! Kerry said they evacuated WTC7 in a controlled fashion. In fact, I dont recall kerry EVER even mentioning the word "demolition".
ctcole77 2 months ago
911 was an OUTSIDE job!
ctcole77 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Why dont you idiots watch the UNEDITED video of Building 7 collapsing, and see how it collapsed progressively and did not free fall AT ALL.
Fucking idiots watching this edited videos. How ironic that it is YOU being lied to. It really is fascinating how thick you all are.
The UNEDITED version of the building 7 can be seen at ItWasTyped. com under the Building 7 post in the conspiracy theory section. Raging fires and all. The ENTIRE collapse, no editing bullshit.
Intelligent people welcome
culturebully3 2 months ago
i was happy to see that a recent poll confirmed that nearly 87% of polled "truthers " still live in their mom's basement ,spending the bulk of their time playing "doom " and watching old episodes of "mission preposterous " ,"i spy" and movies with lots of inane car chases and unlikely pyro technics ...this would suggest that most wont actually ever impregnate any real world females and thereby futher endanger the already dubious gene pool of the ever more dumbed down american population .
woodenmajor 3 months ago
WHY WAS BUILDING 7 RIGGED FOR EXPLOSIVES is the questions people should be answering this question , as their is no doubt that it was a controlled demo as was the WTC 1 and 2. The problem here is this : "Human Beings would rather live as lie if comfortable, then the truth however uncomfortable" and this is just too good an example of just that, who wants to admit the truth after being taken for so long and over such a horrible thing ...CGJames...saving humanity.......
messagetojames 3 months ago 2
This has been flagged as spam show
'Tuesday Morning in September'. Available on DVD. Runtime 130 minutes.
Pure, unfiltered, authentic, and being released in such a way to keep its integrity.
Project is not affiliated and or connected to, working for any organization,
putting forth propaganda and or slant perspectives of the events on 9/11.
It is the most complete chronicle in real time of the wtc attacks.
tusmorninginsept 3 months ago
Prove you have a case!
Just suggesting something out of the blue is not enough.
To demonstrate that an incendiary is, well, an incendiary is not enough.
Submitting a pseudo-scientific paper out of the realm of the subject matter knowledgeable accredited peer-reviewed scientific domain (as Harrit, Jones and Farrer did) is not enough.
Whining about your paper is not taking seriously by the scientific community is not enough.
Ignoring certain consequences of your own pseudo research is deadly.
wimahlers 3 months ago
After the rather paranoid reaction SprayOClockNews we can go back to the arguments again. Arguments like but not limited to:
1. WTC 5 had an internal collapse due to fire alone. Something according to Gage is impossible.
2. The fact that there were no explosive sounds registered during any of the collapses of WTC1, 2 or 7.
3. The fact that none of the clearers ever reported to have seen anything remotely related to explosive devices.
4. The fact Gage, Jones et.al. never proved any claim.
wimahlers 3 months ago
tubers, wimahlers is the hardest working shill on yt! lets ALL give a huge thumbs up to this comment if you agree! [gregorca gets honorable mention too!] LoL! ;-) what a bunch of traitors! working for the NASA NAZIS [title of a great vid on here btw]
SprayOClockNews 3 months ago
@19d4life the joke is on you bro! its called AGENDA 21 you might want to look up NASA NAZIS on here, and fellow tubers who still have not checked by all means look up FAKE MOON LANDING on here, i am proud to announce that June22 2011 i was convinced via yt! and PLEASE protect your families from the deadliest parts of agenda21: CHEMTRAILS, VACCINES, FLUORIDE, GMO, SMARTMETERS... these are discussed at KillerSpray public education website created by a dentist with a few degrees
SprayOClockNews 3 months ago
@19d4life
fuck you ! you are the godamned joke
hieronomy 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
One thing I don't understand... Is why the New York Fire Department Demolitions Team and FEMA isn't in the Guinness Book of World Records for bringing down a super structure like WTC 7 in World Record Time? It was the fastest demolition job in history and everybody ignores it like it never even happened? What's with that? Ask any demo expert, who holds the record for demo of a super structure in world record time and I'm sure they would all give NYC the nod on that one for WTC 7!
Bullets4Teeth 3 months ago
Kerry clearly had no idea what the question was about. He totally BSed his answer. No credibility.
mcfly17 4 months ago
@19d4life Its funny how right you are lol
Jaffsickle 4 months ago
so they spent several months/years very secretly wireing the detonators and plastique AND they also had airliners hyjacked by suicidal jihadis then flown into the buildings ?...because ...the airliner crashes simply wouldnt be dramatic enough on their own ? ..we neee the crashes AND then for the FULL effect we needed the secret ninja demolitions as well ?
c'mon ..are all of you truthers still in the seventh grade ?..seriously folks, this is a really,really DUMB theory ..
woodenmajor 4 months ago 2
I love how they just end the clip instead of letting him finish his comments on it. No way that was taken out of context.
aarondhp20 4 months ago
what top secret demolitions contractor was employed to do this highly illegal and certain to be discovered ..cutting ,wiring,and demo placement job that would have entailed many thousands of man hours ?..did they work arround the teeming masses of night hours janitorial staff or in plain view during the daytime?
excuse me miss ,could you pass me those wire cutters and blasting caps ,sorry for the mess folks,we will be done with this floor in a few more hours ..shhh ,dont tell anyone ..OK?
woodenmajor 4 months ago 2
@woodenmajor type in 911 shut downs prior to 911 then shut your fucking mouth.
BLAGASPANTS 4 months ago
@woodenmajor your a simpleton! bushes bro was in charge of security, there were SEVERAL evacuations in weeks prior, security was completely shut off for extended periods, a whole floor was emptied and it would take little time to splice into the EISTING wiring, and while the security was off people with cabling were ALL OVER THE FLOORS to install new internet cables LOL! get off yer iphone and get real!
SprayOClockNews 3 months ago
How did they set the charges? It was ad hoc while the building was ablaze, amidst all the smoke,mayhem,detritus,& carnage? Really? A short bus 3rd grader might buy that.The building was clearly brough down by controlled demolition.But the charges had to be there already,which proves that there was a plot to bring down 7.Which opens the door to a similar plot w/ the other buildings that came down in similar fashion.A thorough investigation would be nice. But how? They tossed all the evidence.
Stepper11 4 months ago 6
This has been flagged as spam show
WE HAVE THE VIDEO OF WTC7 BEING DEMOLISHED. THE VIDEO SHOWS THE EXPLOSIONS AND IT HAS THE AUDIO. ...ARREST LARRY SILVERSTEIN, NOW!!!
SEARCH: "!MUST WATCH NOW! Visible Explosions !NEW VIDEO! SEPT 2011 WTC Building 7 Controlled Demolition"
Born2Flesh 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@G1formation You're either confused or delusional. Why would you make claims if you can't even back them up?
I think that's standard operating procedure for truthers.
PoetryHound 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Kerry obviously meant WTC 6. Duh. That was the one who's remaining structure was brought down with cables.
PoetryHound 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
HEY GUYS , I JUST CAME ACROSS YOUR DISCUSSION.I LIVE ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THE PLANET, IN A COUNTRY WHERE OUR YOUTH GO TO WAR WITH AMERICAN YOUTH WHEN EVER OUR POLITICIANS NEED TO STIMULATE OUR ECONOMIES.I DONT THINK YOU SEE ALL THE WORLD NEWS THAT IS AVAILABLE OUT THERE. SO I WILL SHARE THIS WITH YOU , THE THIRD PLANE? THAT WAS DOWNED IN THE MIDDLE OF NO-WHERE WAS MEANT FOR BUILDING 7 . IT WAS PRE-WIRED LIKE THE TOWERS,THE PLANE ? DID NOT REACH ITS TARGET.SOUCE, RETIRED MOSSAD IN OZ!TAKE CARE
sped1407 4 months ago
Wow John Kerry admitting building 7 was brought down on purpose!!
laffredo 4 months ago
@laffredo In the WTC area there were seven buildings WTC1-WTC7. As fishy that the business of WTC 7 is I actually think Kerry misunderstands the question posed for how the remains of WTC 6 was taken care of. That one was ultimately brought down with cables after having the structure weakened. The destruction of WTC 7 still needs a thorough investigation though.
HurburBurbur 4 months ago
@HurburBurbur,
.
"The destruction of WTC 7 still needs a thorough investigation though."
.
I tell you a little secret. WTC 7 collapsed due to the fires.
As predicted by the FDNY on that same day.
And as evidenced by the damage of WTC5.
WTC 5, another WTC building that substantially collapsed internally due to fire alone.
And there you have it.
Not to mention the fact that WTC 7 was thorougly investigated. And WTC 1. And WTC 2. And WTC 5. And WTC 6. And ... well, you get the picture.
wimahlers 3 months ago
@wimahlers
I say that the New York fires of that day were supernatural, unprecedently melting steel in building after building. With fires like that you would own the steel industry.
HurburBurbur 3 months ago
@HurburBurbur.
.
" unprecedently melting steel in building after building."
.
That would indeed have been unprecedented ... if it had happened.
It didn't.
So no need to repat this strawman again ... but you probably will!
wimahlers 3 months ago
@wimahlers
It's not a strawman, it's a bullet hole. The following comes from open credible sources. Check them and reply... but you probably won't ;) Twin Tower Chief Engineer: 0:30 @ youtube.com/watch?v=rjmHqES_lto, firemen in "Collateral Damages", imdb.com/title/tt0368656/: 03:49 @ youtube.com/watch?v=7QaookqVa-8, National Environment Health Organization: §2 @ neha.org/9-11%20report/index-The.html
For metal forensics, google FEMA report 403 Appendix C. These are just a few of the accounts.
HurburBurbur 3 months ago
@HurburBurbur
Aha! The always credited eye witnesses, with the occasional appeal to authority fallacy, and the misinterpretation of FEMA report appendic C, which bears the title: "Limited Metallurgical Examination".
Let's ignore that one of the lead authors of appendic C, Barnett, confirmed a fire induced collapse. And ignore the fact that Les Robertson did not take a sample. And ignore the fact that unforseen events do occur (King's Cross fire), truthers still have no claim.
{continue}
wimahlers 3 months ago
@HurburBurbur {continue}
The "pools of molten metal" argument is embarrassing on multiple levels for truthers. Not because of the claims it was there, which is plausible, but because of the claim that this is somehow caused by any type of incendiary (a deriviate of thermite).
Why?
Why? Because in 10 years not a single celebrated truther has ever done an experiment to create even one pool of molten metal with any kind of experiment. Not ever!
{continue}
wimahlers 3 months ago
@HurburBurbur {continue}
Nor did ever truther bother to ask any witness about the size or location of the pool of molten metal (excluding the occasional remark. Like Robertson referring to sublevel B2). Size and location are important. It is important to estimate the amount of incendiary allegedly used to give some credit to your extraordinary claim. Truthers also "forget" about the reported "pool of flowing molten metal" under WTC 6. Was WTC 6 rigged with exlplosives too?
{continue}
wimahlers 3 months ago
@HurburBurbur {continue}
Finally, truthers are so focussed on just one cause they forget, or even consider, that there might be other causes. To confirm their bias they do selective quote mining of selected sources.
Like, for instance, watch?v=7QaookqVa8
They select 03:49 for the "molten steel" claim.
But these same truthers do not refer to 06:50 in the same source. Why not?
06:50 is:
a) a source for explosive sounds and,
b) proves that all kind of reactions were going on in the rubble.
wimahlers 3 months ago
@wimahlers
Selected quote mining of selective sources? Give it a break. There are no quotes taken out of context here. And 06.50, a transformer blew up, so what? I'm not talking about explosion sounds and certainly not about "all kinds of reactions". I'm talking about something that couldn't be there if the collapse was due to fire. That's why it's cruiscal. It's the bullet hole in the presumed drown. This is the reason why NIST denied to even know of such testimonies 05.30 /watch?v=khdCzqjYk9o
HurburBurbur 3 months ago
@HurburBurbur,
.
" Give it a break. There are no quotes taken out of context here. And 06.50, a transformer blew up, so what? I'm not talking about explosion sounds and certainly not about "all kinds of reactions". "
.
And indeed you are not!
And that is exactly why you are selective. Not to mention the fact that it is just plain stupid to ask Kerry something about something he does not know anything about. Not to mention the fact that you ignore the WTC 5 internal collapse due to fire.
wimahlers 3 months ago
@HurburBurbur About /watch?v=khdCzqjYk9o
Of which you claim: "This is the reason why NIST denied to even know of such testimonies 05.30".
This is selective quote mining again. Listen to the whole video and understand that it is John Gross saying he does not know anything about molten steel and therefore it is he(!) who can not comment on it.
But the molten steel argument is embarrassing for truthers. Because the can not explain anything with it. And they never did. Really embarrassing.
wimahlers 3 months ago
@HurburBurbur
Of course, even more embarrassing is Jones's claim of molten metal due to thermite reactions at the corner of the 80/81st floor. Even after 10 years neither Jones or Gage has ever showed a calculation of how much thermite was used in that corner alone for the alleged thermite. Nor did they ever explain how you control an incendiary in a structurally impact zone that is on fire and initiate a collapse exactly at the impact zone about an hour later. Really shoddy research.
wimahlers 3 months ago
@wimahlers gage is a shill just like you. try asking gage about fake planes, he also happens to look like the freak david keith from the u of calgary [google it to see his pic and research] who designs chemtrail sprays
ALL this falls under the AGENDA21 blanket! if you want a nice summary C killerspray -com [just google killerspray and a ton of stuff will come up] and get the sidewalk chalk out! [works for me, and its fun]
that is what they FEAR MOST is independent folks getting the word out!!!
SprayOClockNews 3 months ago
@HurburBurbur
Also ignored is the fact that an alleged pool of molten metal was reported in the basement of WTC 6. That is NOT WTC 1 or 2 or 7 but 6. What was it doing there? Was WTC 6 also rigged with incendiaries and explosives?
Or if it is (now) claimed that it was due to thermite coming from WTC1/2 that ended up in the basement of WTC 6? How?
Just thinking about these consequential oddities related to a thermite claim makes me think that the no planer theory is more plausible than this.
wimahlers 3 months ago
@wimahlers
Interesting about alleged findings beneath 6. It was between 1 and 7, very close to the first. It too would have to be investigated. It doesn't change the main question though. There should be NO such findings at the sites what so ever. Lastly, there are findings that show molten steel (Fema appendix C) and steel subjected to 1000C+ temperatures as well as material consistent with thermite in the dust. /watch?v=23n0Vr_A1TQ /watch?v=kJwE65Y32Y4 /watch?v=7ZNSXC3KVeE .
HurburBurbur 3 months ago
@HurburBurbur,
.
"There should be NO such findings at the sites what so ever."
.
Why? Just because you say so?
And if these findings were there can you name a plausible cause?
And if you name a cause has anybody ever tested it? Therefore actually CONFIRMING it is even possible?
And you keep referring to FEMA appendix C. But did you ever bother to VERIFY your claim at FEMA? Ever contacted Jonathan Barnett who was one of the experts and lead investigators? Truthers are so lazy and gullible.
wimahlers 3 months ago
@HurburBurbur
/watch?v=23n0Vr_A1TQ I am anxiously awaiting his scientific paper. Oh, wait ... he did not produce any. Okay then, I am anxiously awaiting his experiment with (any deriviate of) thermite producing similar results. Oh, wait ... he did not do that either. Oh, well, I am anxiously awaiting the transcript between him and Barrett, which he refers to. Oh, wait ... he only mentioned Jonathan barnett in this video (around 10:30). But he actually never contacted him. Lazy and gullible.
wimahlers 3 months ago
@HurburBurbur
watch?v=kJwE65Y32Y4 Farrer claims that the early FEMA report of 2002 was not used in the final NIST report because this anomaly is proof for thermite. It isn't! He could, would and should have known that if he actually had talked with Jonathan Barrett after(!) 2002 and actually had studied all the followup information. Instead he artificially clings to a description of an anomaly and draws a conclusion for which he never took the trouble to actually test(!) if it is even possible.
wimahlers 3 months ago
@HurburBurbur
watch?v=kJwE65Y32Y4 A lot of bla, bla on the red/grey chips. What is utterly missing is the fact that they are there at all! That is, what Farrer conveniently leaves out is that when he claims this is evidence for (a deriviate of) thermite than his own(!) research must conclude that it was used in stupendously large quantities. But he leaves that detail out. Which makes his ramblings on the importance of the red/grey chips realistically highly improbable. But he dodges that issue.
wimahlers 3 months ago
@wimahlers
Wow, we talk about molten steel that shouldn't under any circumstances be there, we talk about nano-thermitic material that absolutely shouldn't be there and by the way large quantities of small iron spheres in the dust that shouldn't be there either. The research material is open and possible to repeat and I warmly welcome it to be done, a duplication would only strengthen the result. This has however been of no interest of NIST. About the quantities, of course it had to be large.
HurburBurbur 3 months ago
@HurburBurbur,
.
"Wow, we talk about molten steel that shouldn't under any circumstances be there, ..."
.
Wow, you talk about molten steel ... I talk about molten metal.
And there could, indeed, be circumstances that even molten steel was there.
Anyway, I don't understand the argument. Since thermite (or any deriviate thereof) never has created "pools of molten steel". Nor will it ever. Unless ...
Unless, you Gage, Jones, Harrit, Farrer or whomever can DEMONSTRATE it is possible. Do it!
wimahlers 3 months ago
@HurburBurbur,
.
"This has however been of no interest of NIST" (on duplicating Harrit/Jones/Farrer results)
.
Of course not! What would be the relevance? Since you are so focussed on this side of the story I ask you to duplicate the "results" of Wood first (directed energy weapons). Or duplicate the "results" of the no-planers for that matter.
But first answer the question why Gage et.al. still claim a fire induced collapse is impossible when this phenomenon was observed in WTC 5. Explain!
wimahlers 3 months ago
@HurburBurbur As for the thermite/thermate/super-thermite claim...
I'll be happy to examine this once you have convinced me you have a case. To prove you have a case you have to demonstrate by performing a realistic experiment to show it is even possible. That is:
You have to show me that a (deriviate of) thermite can cut through support beams, leaving no trace to be reported by experienced clearers, do this in a burning buildings that collapses at the impact zone, create pools of molten, etc
wimahlers 3 months ago
@wimahlers There is an experiment on youtube with a guy in his backyard who proves that thermite (he was unable to obtain nano-thermate) can cut through steel beams, and using considerably less thermate than was reckoned by the discovery channel(maybe the History channel)... But I think the weight of the argument lies in the testimony of a man called Barry Jennings RIP. This man witnessed explosions and dead bodies within WTC7 before either of the towers had collapsed.
crisisofconsciousnes 3 months ago
@crisisofconsciousnes,
.
"There is an experiment on youtube with a guy in his backyard who proves that thermite (he was unable to obtain nano-thermate) can cut through steel beams"
.
I have seen it. Multiple times. I suggest you take those videos to any accredited subject matter knowledgeable scientific institution. And I know they will have the same criticism - and probably more! - than I already have given on this amateurish experiment. If anything, it proves it is NOT possible.
wimahlers 3 months ago
They will have, or you assume they will have. Can you see the level of control within the united states. Can you see how much courage it takes for one man or woman to come out and speak against the government... I don't trust any official study, any university research finding unless it agrees with my own reason. And my own reason tells me undoubtedly that the USA is anything but open and free.. But I would love to debate the thermate experiment personally with you on a forum we can arrange it?
crisisofconsciousnes 3 months ago
@crisisofconsciousnes,
.
"Can you see how much courage it takes for one man or woman to come out and speak against the government..."
.
Have you seen the movie "Expelled"? A prime example that demonstrates the fallacy of your argument.
You say you don't trust any official study or any university level unless it agrees with your own reason. With this you just admitted that you are not a skeptic, Because a skeptic demands(!) evidence. You merely demand bias confirmation.
wimahlers 3 months ago
@crisisofconsciousnes,
.
"But I would love to debate the thermate experiment personally with you on a forum we can arrange it?"
.
Sure. But I cannot debate this issue. That is, I don't have the required expertise. But, I guess, neither have you. However, I can state the objections of the rather silly experiment and then you can try to convince me by listing scientifically accredited relevant sources answering these objections. Just remember, it is your claim therefore your responsibility.
wimahlers 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@crisisofconsciousnes,
.
"Can you see how much courage it takes for one man or woman to come out and speak against the government... "
.
Yes! No courage at all required.
In fact, you can really make a good living out of it. See:
watch?v=GGEa759EHzw Rudowski.
watch?v=uc8aPx-p8mk Rudowski and Alex Jones.
And you can, of course, add Griffin, Barrett, Jones, Fetzer, Szamboti, Gage, Harrit, Wood, Farrer, etc.
By the way, the latter 3 are still professing their day time jobs.
wimahlers 3 months ago
@crisisofconsciousnes,
.
"Barry Jennings"
.
He testifies against a conspiracy. He also stronhgly denies having seen any dead bodies.
Barry Jennigs did indeed claim to have heard explosions. But the person who was with him denies any explosion.
I suggest you don't use Barry Jennings as an argument. You will embarrass yourself if you persist doing so.
wimahlers 3 months ago
@wimahlers embarrass myself? Sorry but I stopped letting my questions, opinions and thoughts be dictated by the fear of embarrassment or what other people would think of me.. If you knew anything about the secret history of the united states you would realise that their is hidden elements who could of silenced a person if needed, Barry Jennings was threatened with loosing his job, why would they of not gotten to the other person involved and silenced him. I assume this is an impossibility?
crisisofconsciousnes 3 months ago
@crisisofconsciousnes,
.
"embarrass myself?"
.
Yes! Stop embarrassing yourself by using Jenings.
You claim Jennings was threatened with loosing his job because of what he said about WTC 7. There is not a shred of evidence for that. Embarrassing.
You claim Jennings meant he saw dead people. He indeed did say that on that stressful day itself. A lot was said in the heat of the moment. However, he later explained himself. It really is embarrassing to still use Jennings street interview.
wimahlers 3 months ago
@wimahlers But anyway, every reasonable person knows that there should be an independent investigation into WTC7 building. Every demolition expert knows that building take a lot to come down. Lets arrange this debate any how...name the place
crisisofconsciousnes 3 months ago
@crisisofconsciousnes I guess you really want to debate this: watch?v=w4EdYVybDS0
But I strongly suggest you first verify this, yet again, embarrassing gullible exposé of naivety at a subject matter knowledgeable scientific institution.
I know, I prejudge this video as "a gullible exposé of naivety" before you have verified this. This sounds like spoiling the well. But I ensure you that it is as much spoiling the well as claiming flat earthers have a "gullible exposé of naivety".
wimahlers 3 months ago
@crisisofconsciousnes,
.
"...every reasonable person knows that there should be an independent investigation into WTC7 building."
.
No! Every reasonable person acknowledges that there is no reason to do yet again another investigation. Only conspiracists think, and are convinced, this is a reasonable request.
And every firefighter knows how easy it is for a burning structure to collapse. Especially steel constructed structures. The FDNY predicted that WTC 7 would collapse. And it did!
wimahlers 3 months ago
@crisisofconsciousnes I haven't heard from you in a while. But about that debate, her is one:
forums"randi"org/showthread"php?p=7473191
You really wish to do this all over again?
Anyway, instead of a debate I suggest you contact an accredited subject matter knowledgeable scientific source first. Like a relevant university. But that is just me. 'Cause me having not the required knowledge, I have to rely on verifiable accredited scientific sources.
As for a debate, I refer to the debate.
wimahlers 3 months ago
@wimahlers
For the youtube links, if you get problems just add the /watch?v=rjmHqES_lto and the /watch?v=7QaookqVa-8 separately to the "youtube.com" already existing.
HurburBurbur 3 months ago
How can they plan, rig, and execute the demo of a building that size in just a few short hours in that chaotic a location???
Xone7 4 months ago
Comment removed
PoetryHound 4 months ago
Doesnt it take weeks to do a controlled demolition?
gspot6916 4 months ago
@gspot6916 Exactly! But these nutty theorists who masquerade as "demolition experts" have no answer to that. Also there were two giant buildings (called the world trade center buildings one and two) that collapsed right next to building 7. Did anybody hear about that little tid bit? Giant mega ton pieces ripped into the side of building 7 at full speed. Firefighters noticed a bulge in the building and heard creaking at 2 PM. But theorists never mention any of that.
SupportAZ 4 months ago
@gspot6916 Thats the same thing Im thinking. Especially a building that size. It would take more than a few hours for sure. Its fishy to say the least.
Xone7 4 months ago
I did his makeup once when he was running for president. And I didnt get paid. Took time off of my busy work schedule and I guesss he thought i was donating my time just cuz he was running for president. BAH. He knows what happend. He took the oath to satan when wearing that black hood at the masonic temple in DC
ilikeitfunkee 4 months ago
i did his makeup once
ilikeitfunkee 4 months ago
Watch this film called ZERO An Investigation Into 9/11 on YouTube.
watch?v=8XRMrMdn0NQ
It's pretty straight forward and easy to understand.
Ganseblumchen12 4 months ago
He obviously didn't know the numbers of the buildings. WTC 6 was the building that was pulled down with cables and evidently was referring to that building. It's funny how conspiracy believers leap on little verbal gaffes as if they're sooooo significant. LOL!
PoetryHound 5 months ago
@PoetryHound Building 7 was brought down dude, its not a conspiracy, I dont understand why everyone thinks it is. NYFD brought it down. Its a known fact by now.
G1formation 4 months ago
@G1formation "NYFD brought it down"
Nope, no evidence of that.
Why would they participate in a 9/11 plot that killed 343 of their own? Makes no sense.
"Its a known fact by now"
Apparently only to you.
PoetryHound 4 months ago
@PoetryHound Tower 7 was empty and it was the NYFD that recommended it be brought down. Thats been known for years now. Silverstein, Kerry and the NYFD admitted they brought it down. That building had been rotting from black mold for years so they decided to pull.
G1formation 4 months ago
@G1formation "the NYFD that recommended it be brought down."
Simply repeating your claim is not a substitute for substantiating it.
"Thats been known for years now."
Once again, apparently you're the only one that's "known" it for years.
PoetryHound 4 months ago
@PoetryHound I didnt repeat what I said, can you read? Believe what you want, what the hell do I care?
G1formation 4 months ago
@G1formation i think you are confusing tower 7 with another one of the buildings that was recently brought down due to black mold that was covered in a black tarp rotting for 10 years.
ilikeitfunkee 4 months ago
@ilikeitfunkee No Im not confusing tower 7 with the Deutsche bank.
G1formation 4 months ago
Comment removed
PoetryHound 4 months ago
whats the deal with people posting short videos. It seems like there is more commentary to this why would you just post some of it?
moomoochacoo 5 months ago
body language
laninger 6 months ago
He knows the truth, but Dimitri Khalezov explained what took place on 911.
Ground Zero = Place of an atomic bomb explosion....
Massaricossudo 6 months ago
Who cares what John "I dock my yacht in another state to avoid taxes" Kerry says?
jeffhickman10 6 months ago
@jeffhickman10 I care what he says, because he is best friends with his brother in arms- the Skull and Bones member George Bush. If anyone knows what happened that day it is secret society members like John Kerry.
deceiver123m 6 months ago
@deceiver123m Good for you! Good for you! Fall for anything I guess.
jeffhickman10 6 months ago
@jeffhickman10 I will not fall for anything, in fact i will question most things. It is people that fell for the false flag operation held on 9/11 that fall for any other fairy tale coming out of the "terror" threat. Example: Dumbasses scared of white al qaeda [which doesn't even exist anywhere]-------> /watch?v=F7pQTHpEbVk
deceiver123m 6 months ago
barry jennings
mickymacky02 7 months ago
Larry just happend to not make a insurance claim on building 7 but got paid for the other 2 uhuh )o...Didnt want to open that can of worms did he...o(
MrSokitumi0007 8 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
There were two major structural columns supporting bldg 7. Both would have had to basically disappear simultaneously to make the structure fall like that. In the report on bldg 7, Ramon Gilsanz wrote that no cause was found for the easternmost column to fail. When someone sais, "They proved that it fell by fire", that person is making stuff up. There is no "they" who proved anything; There is no report that "they" wrote showing that the east column just disappeared.
HVYMETL 8 months ago
he does NOT say it was brought down in a controlled fasion. He says he THINKS it was brought down in a controlled fashion.
unputer 8 months ago
wow this is a pretty important video. together with larry silverstein's statements it doesn't leave much room for interpretation anymore. WTC7 was brought down by demolition and the official report lied about it. one has to ask why..
DanFrederiksen 8 months ago
@19d4life maybe
eggfleece 9 months ago
@19d4life you cant blame us...all you trolls act the same and have the most predictable comebacks. Plus the fact that youre well versed in all this reptilian/haarp nonsense even though you claim to be of a factual scientific background...ive seen trolls on other videos with the same behaviour ....either youre all possessed by the retard entity from another dimension ...or youre on a pay roll.
eggfleece 9 months ago
@19d4life reptilians and haarp lazers? ..you have to be a paid troll ...no one can be this idiotic on their own.
eggfleece 9 months ago
@19d4life what?! lol. 9 trillion of your countries wealth was stolen ..and thats what you say? fuck you ...youre not even a real american.
eggfleece 9 months ago
@19d4life maybe you should ask the off shore bankers who just raped your economy for trillions the same question.
eggfleece 9 months ago
@19d4life no. an open investigation is needed ...if you dont agree with that youre a traitor to your fucking country.
eggfleece 9 months ago
@19d4life if you want to go looking around for blasting caps at ground zero be my guest asshole. the statement below is proof enough for shady actions on the governments part... be a contrarian all your life im sure the people around you love you for who you are.
eggfleece 9 months ago
@19d4life kink in the middle of building and its fall at freefall speed? the fact that it contained the fbi and cias intelligence and budget logs? the same very logs that contained the information about the pentagons missing 2.3 trillion dollars?the fact that british and u.s news announced the building had fallen before it fell? the fact that all information surrounding building 7 was hushed and the bbc went to the bother of destroying the tapes? quit talking out your ass.
eggfleece 9 months ago
@eggfleece
You're pretty dumb if you think the only records of any or all of those were only in paper form, as a single copy, placed in a file cabinet in WTC7
You're also not so bright if you think that WTC7's PREDICTED COLLAPSE...you know, the one the FDNY REPORTED was going to happen HOURS before it fell...would need to have a news station located in the UK report the fall early to UK viewers in the UK
CrazyRay7979 9 months ago
@CrazyRay7979 didnt say they were in paper form
eggfleece 9 months ago
@19d4life doesnt change the fact that the building was taken down with explosives.
eggfleece 9 months ago
fold your arms and touch your nose when you tell a lie
KellieSmunt 9 months ago
@19d4life He said "Pull IT", not pull out. Just another slip of the tongue, like Bush saying he saw the first plane crash on t.v. and Rumsfeld saying flight 93 was shot down? And how lucky Larry and his daughter were to have prior engagements that very same morning and for him to pocket five billion in insurance - and all from a simple gut feeling that told him to buy those under occupied, asbestos ridden buildings in the first place. He must give thanks every day.
forthome3 9 months ago
@19d4life the argument isnt hinged on that really.
pengo2008 10 months ago
Yes..Skull and bonesmen..Stripping naked infront of a Devil and a Prist and telling you're sexual history dosen't sound to American to me.
BarryPuppetSoetoro61 11 months ago
...and the Truthers continue to show their ignorance by repeating the complete lie about the fall time for WTC7, which didn't even fall close to 7 seconds, yet they continue to base their entire argument on something so wrong and so incorrect...if you've ever actually seen the video of WTC7's collapse, you would see that it takes longer than 7 seconds to fall...and then maybe one day you can study really hard and learn simple physics, realize how wrong you are, and stop being a Truther
CrazyRay7979 11 months ago
@CrazyRay7979 You have been proven wrong by many people commenting on this video and youre still here troll ...calling people "truthers" is the lamest insult imaginable, its almost laughable saying as it berates people who simply want questions answered. You will go down in history as one of the many ignorant douchebags who didnt see the truth laid out infront of them.
eggfleece 9 months ago
@eggfleece
Who has "proven" me "wrong"?
Are you referring to the idiot below (thunder2falcon15) that I already proved wrong months ago who is dumb enough to think that WTC 7 fell in 6.7 seconds???
There are no questions to be answered, they have been answered to the best of thousands and thousands of actual experts in their fields' expertise...the only "questions" are by Truthers that are intentionally lied to, uninformed, or are not smart enough to understand the answers
Prove ME wrong
CrazyRay7979 9 months ago
@CrazyRay7979 youve been proven wrong ..your a troll theres no convincing you ...
eggfleece 9 months ago
@CrazyRay7979 youre pretty dumb if you think pockets of small fire can bring down a high rise. prove me wrong
eggfleece 9 months ago
@eggfleece
Ok...
The FNDY, who were there all day, reported the damage to WTC7 caused by WTC1 falling...then they reported the fires...then they evacuated the area...then they predicted that WTC7 was going to fall...then WTC7 fell
...so you're saying that the FDNY are liars?
...so you're saying that you know more about WTC7 than the FDNY?
CrazyRay7979 9 months ago
@CrazyRay7979 yes
eggfleece 9 months ago
@eggfleece
Ok, so you're a fucking asshole for calling the FDNY liars...don't bother responding, you're just dumb
CrazyRay7979 9 months ago
@CrazyRay7979 The telepath sit in the long tooth dungeon waiting for captain sprinkles to notice the coconut rainbow
eggfleece 9 months ago
And if a politician says it, it must be true.
Jcolinsol 11 months ago
Kerry is in on it.......He was in Skull and bones with Bush....
manelmariarodrigues 11 months ago
WHATS THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN A CONSERVATIVE WHO CAN ADMIT WHEN HE'S WRONG, AND A LIBERAL WHO WOULD DIE FIRST ?......
KNOCK, KNOCK .
THATS MY KNUCKLE ON YOUR NOGGIN, IF YOU NEED THE PUNCH.
13AJJONES 1 year ago
@13AJJONES
It's a trick question. Neither of those exist.
Jcolinsol 11 months ago
@Jcolinsol THANXZ,...YOU JUST SHOWED IT.
13AJJONES 11 months ago
Oh yeah?
Kerry and Silverstein should talk to one another before talking to the press!!!
Vaobat 1 year ago
how could they wire up that building in 8h and blow it up so quick?
nvmaniac 1 year ago
i wanted this bitch instead of the bitch george bush
dizzyloot90str 1 year ago
elite criminals dont investigate their own kind, never!
Allanlegacy43 1 year ago
i think crazyray is tyvupine, a known shill!
wellifthemediasaysit 1 year ago
@TylerDurdenMakesSoap dude crazyray is a known shill!
wellifthemediasaysit 1 year ago
john kerry = puppet
shackle5 1 year ago
asshole
anatmann 1 year ago
guys, we all seen comparison of the video of the controlled demolition and wtc7, the speed and the way it came down simetrically is the same, then modus operandi has been the same.....period
martyr2005 1 year ago 2
This has been flagged as spam show
The official story is complete bullshit. Even a few commission members have come out and said the investigation was a farce. Those towers came down due to explosives. You can see the squibbs coming out the sides as they go down. All THREE buildings. WTC7 fell too, the exct same way. And lucky larry silverstein said on camera later "we decided to 'pull it'". Around 6pm it came down. Wasnt hit by a plane, had minimal fires (fires dont bring down steel framed buildings neway ;)
george2648 1 year ago
at least Kerry didn't order the goons to throw the questioner out. Maybe there is hope.
Uncle5cary 1 year ago 2
Let me get this straight, on being asked directly about Silverstein and WTC7 being deliberately brought down in a controlled demolition this is what Kerry answers:
"..that wall, there was some danger and I think that they made the decision based on the danger that it had of destroying other things that they did it in a controlled fashion."
Would anyone like to propose the alternative government approved interpretation of what Mr Skull n Bones is saying?
(Paid stooges are welcome too).
AntiNWOMusic 1 year ago 3
This has been flagged as spam show
9/11 was an inside job. The government are not that stupid. They can prevent the attack if they want to. They had all the capabilities.
kenteles 1 year ago 4
Comment removed
kenteles 1 year ago
Kerry is a Truther ! lol-
AudioTruther 1 year ago
hey wheres the full vid? I need the full one please.
good stuff though
moediggity28 1 year ago
well, well. well
Never thought I'd hear this. 9 years of denials and lies then comes an admission.
Which once again puts the whole of 911 into question
kevofregland 1 year ago
controlled demolitions take months to plan...think about it
mariodubbz 1 year ago
doing NLP with a microphone in your hand ruins the effect for me. nice try bones
tehf00n 1 year ago
WOW....are there still disinformed,dumb downed,Dedumbers/debunkers what ever you call them, naive sheeple??if you haven't gotten it by now you'll never get it..Dont bother messaging me either,wouldn't want you to miss Jersey shore
alecboi84 1 year ago
Uhhhh... I think John Kerry just confirmed the theory.
Rememberthename8 1 year ago
@Rememberthename8 He sure fuckin did!
Loejyrrab 1 year ago
@Rememberthename8
Interesting considering your buddy, Obama, is on record saying that 9/11 was not an inside job...and note that this video is of John Kerry, a guy so full of shit and lies, and so incompetent that he couldn't beat Bush in an election
CrazyRay7979 1 year ago
@CrazyRay7979
lolz cool story bro
Rememberthename8 1 year ago
Politicians always deny having any knowledge of an event but it sure looks like this one was squirming and uncomfortable answering the question.
electrodes1300 1 year ago
@electrodes1300 Yea, did ya notice. In fact electrodes, it looked like he had an "electrode" attached to his cock.
Loejyrrab 1 year ago
Mates of my demolish building and they say that all 3 of those buildings were brought down by controlled explosions and that to plan something like that takes weeks to do.
kromed01 1 year ago
@kromed01
Why do you feel the need to lie? Is the only thing keeping the Truther "movement" going are intentional lies that stupid people will believe?
Obviously you're lying, if your "mates" knew anything about controlled demolition then they'd know that it takes months to rig up a stripped abandoned building...and they'd know that TNT is always used for controlled demolitions...too bad no explosive residue was ever found to verify an implosion...
...
CrazyRay7979 1 year ago
@CrazyRay7979 Explosive residue was found. Just like 16 guys in a van which actually had traces of explosives were found. It appears as though the bombs were placed there by people who appeared to be working for the Ace Elevator Company. I dont need to lie at all. There is more evidence for a controlled demolishion than against.
kromed01 1 year ago
@kromed01
Wow, it's amazing how totally wrong you are, no explosives, NONE...where do you get your bullshit information from?
CrazyRay7979 1 year ago
@CrazyRay7979 Yes there were. The Israeli art students who were caught celebrating when the towers went down? They knew full well it was going to happen and even admitted they were there to observe the towers being blown up.
kromed01 1 year ago
@kromed01
There was not 16 people, it was like 3 or 4 and they were confronted 4 hours after the attacks for suspicious activity in New Jersey...there are and aren't reports about any explosives or explosive residue being present...
You're completely idiotic if you think a single van of explosives could bring down either of the towers, a truck parked in the parking garage beneath the WTC didn't take it down in 1993
CrazyRay7979 1 year ago
Hey look, it's the usual out-of-context Truther quotes in video form...who is John Kerry? Why is he proof that 9/11 was an inside job?? Wouldn't John Kerry be on "the inside" if it was an inside job??
..and the usual Truther idiocy that "pull it" is a controlled demolition term, and even more stupid is that Truthers think Silverstein would be on the phone with the NYFD and be teling them to demolish the building using a term they use to get fire/rescue & people out of a compromised building...
CrazyRay7979 1 year ago
@CrazyRay7979 You obviously have not done your research. There is no question that building was rigged way in advance of Silverstein's "pull it" comment. It would take at least a few days to a week to cut beams and rig explosives in a building of that size. And check the EMT witnesses that heard a 20 second countdown over their radios.
BillySeagull 1 year ago
@BillySeagull
No, you have obviously not done yours; it takes weeks to months to prep an ABANDONED building for controlled demolition...no explosive residue was found..."pull it" is a firefighter term, not a controlled demolition one...so you must believe that the NYFD were behind WTC7 since that's who Silverstein said "pull it" to...so in your made-up "EMT countown" bullshit you are now suggesting that the EMTs were behind WTC7...and you think you're educated about 9/11, hilarious!!!
CrazyRay7979 1 year ago
@CrazyRay7979 What da f--k are you saying? Explosive residue WAS found in many dust samples around NYC. Thermitic material, expoded and unexploded. Physicist Steven Jones did the testing & no, the truthers don't think it was the firemen. We've never said that. We believe #7, like 1 and 2 were rigged in the months before 9/11. Why would anyone oppose Silverstein being asked, on the record, about what he meant by "pull it" Answer that for meCrazy. Why not Silverstein UNDER OATH. Why protect him??
Loejyrrab 1 year ago
@Loejyrrab
Under oath, haha, as if they put people not accused in a crime in court to tell their story because a bunch of scientifically-retarded Truthers demand it...
Explosive residue and/or thermitic material was NOT found...Jones had his paper published without permission in a pay-to-publish journal, the editor in chief (a nanomaterials professor) resigned over it...apparently you somehow missed that, maybe you're a new retard in the Truther "movement", ignorant to learning the truth
CrazyRay7979 1 year ago
Johnny Mac, there is a good chance Silverstein Was simply told that the building was
to be demolished- he's not definitely the big villain here.
blacknganga 1 year ago
@blacknganga So why not put him under oath blackn? Let him tell the American people exactly what he meant by pull it. Wouldn't you be curious as to what he comes up with. I mean the man collected 6 bil. He makes Bernie Madoff look like a choir boy. Put him on the stand, Bush/Cheney too.
Loejyrrab 1 year ago
@Loejyrrab Too many average Americans are too ignorant of the facts for anyone to be publicly questioned over this. This was done, in part, to prop up the failing wealth of average Americans, anyway, so through their ignorance, they are sort of complicit in it anyway.
blacknganga 1 year ago
@blacknganga
Oh, please tell me your "facts"...tell me all about your Truther "facts" that have been completely proven false...no Truther "theory" has any merit...
CrazyRay7979 1 year ago
@CrazyRay7979 Are you entirely stupid or entirely ignorant, or are you a robot. Sorry, but there is no arguement here, you are a tool of..............?
blacknganga 1 year ago
@blacknganga
I see, resort to calling me stupid because you can't refute my comments...come on man, tell us all how 9/11 went down since you're so smart...and, you know, besides all of the scientific failures, inaccuracies, and inconsistencies, including the Truther theories that contradict directly with each other
CrazyRay7979 1 year ago
@blacknganga For one to "tell" how it went down would be an exercise in pretentiousness. Anyone with half a brain can see that the government line is entirely riddled with holes. I'll let you off, though, because maybe you haven't actually looked into this HOLE issue much yet? Remember that the official government line(s) here are just theories also. I've personally looked into this a great deal, but became so disgusted that I quit it. some people are genuinely stupid.
blacknganga 1 year ago
@blacknganga dont quit get angry brother..im from NYC and were sick & tired of these dumbed downed sheeple not getting the point...Your smart..thats a powerfull weapon by itself..give the direction to one sleeping next to you,but we beg of you & everyone else who know the TRUTH dont' ever give up
alecboi84 1 year ago
@alecboi84 They're quite possibly just robots, as it's hard to believe anyone could look into this matter for a while and not see "it". I suppose they go into it all patriotic, wanting a sort of "One America" - "I'll prove to those "truthers" the REAL truth". The Pentagon incident alone should be enough to prove to anyone that something is amiss.
blacknganga 1 year ago