Storing Cookies (See : http://ec.europa.eu/ipg/basics/legal/cookies/index_en.htm ) help us to bring you our services at overunity.com . If you use this website and our services you declare yourself okay with using cookies .More Infos here:
https://overunity.com/5553/privacy-policy/
If you do not agree with storing cookies, please LEAVE this website now. From the 25th of May 2018, every existing user has to accept the GDPR agreement at first login. If a user is unwilling to accept the GDPR, he should email us and request to erase his account. Many thanks for your understanding

User Menu

Custom Search

Author Topic: 9/11 truth movement topic  (Read 434386 times)

PYRODIN123321

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 253
    • Pyrodin's Information Anabranch
Re: 9/11 truth movement topic
« Reply #930 on: September 18, 2008, 04:14:06 PM »
HEY!

Emergency coordinator and 9/11 witness Barry Jennings has passed away with controversy about WTC7 still hot– as the BBC hit piece and NIST report have been released to counter Jennings’ exclusive testimony of explosions inside Building 7.


HERE IS THE LINK

http://www.infowars.com/?p=4602

ANYBODY READ "TEETH OF THE TIGER" BY TOM CLANCY?
« Last Edit: September 18, 2008, 04:55:19 PM by PYRODIN123321 »

madsen

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 176
Re: 9/11 truth movement topic
« Reply #931 on: September 18, 2008, 04:29:22 PM »
@Nomen luni:

I also wanted to address your link which shows the BBC reporting the collapse of WTC7 23 minutes before it actually happened.  If you accept the information about firefighters observing the building moving, which suggests a collapse might be imminent, then I think the news reports are understandable.  Remember that Aaron Brown on CNN, over an hour before the collapse, stated that wtc7 "has either collapsed or is collapsing".  Given the tendency for news organizations to assume the most sensational version of a story, I don't find it surprising to see that the BBC reporting what they did. 

On the other hand, if we go with the controlled demolition theory, we have to answer some difficult questions:

1)  Were news organizations involved in the plot?  Did they accidentally jump ahead in the script, or perhaps was the timing of the demolition delayed, and they didn't get word?

2)  If the news organizations were not involved, who fed them the incorrect information?  And why would the perps be trying to feed information to the press, when I imagine it would be very difficult to actually coordinate the script with actual events?  Why not just let the reporters do their job and avoid embarrassing and revealing mistakes such as this one?

hartiberlin

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8154
    • free energy research OverUnity.com
Re: 9/11 truth movement topic
« Reply #932 on: September 19, 2008, 02:40:12 AM »
The News media is controlled.
So don´t believe them.

WTC7 was destroyed by controlled demolition.

No way is has been pulled down by steel strings,
what some pro governmental anti-truth websites claim.

The smoke clouds would have been very different then
and the building would not have collapsed this fast.

The building was pulverised to dust by the explosions !

Controlled demolition takes at least 2 weeks to plan and
implant into the building,
but not doable in 5 hours with this chaos all around it...

This was a governmental plan.

Not some arab terrorists.

Wake up people....

We can´t live without the truth !





b0rg13

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 651
Re: 9/11 truth movement topic
« Reply #933 on: September 19, 2008, 02:50:59 AM »
The News media is controlled.
So don´t believe them.

WTC7 was destroyed by controlled demolition.

No way is has been pulled down by steel strings,
what some pro governmental anti-truth websites claim.

The smoke clouds would have been very different then
and the building would not have collapsed this fast.

The building was pulverised to dust by the explosions !

Controlled demolition takes at least 2 weeks to plan and
implant into the building,
but not doable in 5 hours with this chaos all around it...

This was a governmental plan.

Not some arab terrorists.

Wake up people....

We can´t live without the truth !






well this seems to hit the nail right on the head!.

madsen

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 176
Re: 9/11 truth movement topic
« Reply #934 on: September 19, 2008, 04:04:47 AM »
No way is has been pulled down by steel strings,
what some pro governmental anti-truth websites claim.

Hi Stefan,

WTC7 pulled down by steel strings (cables)?  Has someone claimed that?  I hadn't heard that before.  Are you referring to WTC6?

@Nomen luni:  This Mineta information is interesting, but pretty complex.  I'm going to take more time to look at it before I post on it.

Elvis Oswald

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 256
    • ONI
Re: 9/11 truth movement topic
« Reply #935 on: September 19, 2008, 04:59:17 AM »
Eh?  I don't think it's a misquote.  Here's what I hear Silverstein saying:

I'm certainly not disputing that he said "pull it" first (and it didn't occur to me that the website was doing so either).  The next thing he said was "they made that decision to pull".  So are you saying he was instructing the firefighters to blow up the building?  In this clip, Silverstein is describing his conversation with the "commander of the fire department", correct?

OK - so he said there has already been such a terrible loss of life.... maybe "the smartest thing to do is pull it ... uh

He didn't say - we had lost so many men... the smartest thing to do is to pull those guys out of there... or - pull the unit out... or - pull the firefighters out...
He didn't say - PULL THEM OUT
He didn't say - OUT, BACK, AWAY, CLEAR
And nothing his preceding comments - that there had been such a terrible loss of life already..... DID not include any of those words... and there was no inuendo that MIGHT suggest that he was talking about pulling firefighters out of the building.
The only reference to pulling firefighters out came in his response to questions about his comments.

The man say's PULL IT.

What is IT?  That is the question.

When you see IT like this in a sentence.... you must look for IT to be NAMED in a sentence before or after.

You have to look at the context of the sentence.

He said - "the smartest thing to do is pull it ... uh"  and then he said, "and they made that decision to pull, and we watched the building collapse."

So when he say's, "they made that decision to pull"  -  he is STILL talking about IT.   The "uh" connects the two "pulls"

Then he say's - "and we watched the building collapse."

So IN THE CONTEXT of the interview... he was absolutely referring to the building when he said "pull it" and "pulll"

So - he either had one hell of a brain fart and said something odd... like when Rumsfield said TWICE that a missile hit the pentagon...

OR

He had a "slip of the tongue"

And what a coincidence it is to have said that by accident....
just like Rumsfield saying that a missile hit the pentagon...
and just like Bush said he saw the first plane crash on TV that morning...
and just like the secret service let Bush sit in that classroom for 7 minutes after the second plane had hit....
it's all just one big coincident.

And the fact that the towers all collapsed into their footprint... which had to piss alot of people off who had been charged lots of money for "experts" to wire their buildings for "controlled demolition". 

Jesus!!!  Thank you Madsen!!!!  I have just had a vision!!

I am going to contact an attorney in the morning and outline a class action suit against the biggest controlled demolition firm I can find.  WOO HOO!!!!!!

Turns out - these guys are selling snake oil.  Just start a fire with some diesel fuel - hell, pick a floor, and then watch the building fall.
I'll tell you what son - I owe you one.

madsen

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 176
Re: 9/11 truth movement topic
« Reply #936 on: September 19, 2008, 05:08:46 AM »
OK - so he said there has already been such a terrible loss of life.... maybe "the smartest thing to do is pull it ... uh

<snip>

Ok, so he suggested to the fire department officials that they "pull it", i.e., blow up the building.  Then they (the fire deparment officials) made the decision to do so.  Do you think that the fire department was therefore involved in the plot?

Elvis Oswald

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 256
    • ONI
Re: 9/11 truth movement topic
« Reply #937 on: September 19, 2008, 05:10:30 AM »
Who say's he's talking about the fire dept.?

madsen

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 176
Re: 9/11 truth movement topic
« Reply #938 on: September 19, 2008, 05:15:26 AM »
Who say's he's talking about the fire dept.?

I'm just going by what Silverstein said---he said he was talking to a "fire department commander" on the phone.

Elvis Oswald

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 256
    • ONI
Re: 9/11 truth movement topic
« Reply #939 on: September 19, 2008, 05:23:36 AM »
There is no THEY in "fire dept commander."

But if you want to make a leap and say that he was referring to the fire dept commander and others when he say's THEY...
then by all means... and where does that lead?

The fire dept commander and some other people (unknown) made the decision to PULL IT (the building)

not quite as fun as holographic planes and death rays.... but it is possible.


madsen

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 176
Re: 9/11 truth movement topic
« Reply #940 on: September 19, 2008, 05:31:23 AM »
There is no THEY in "fire dept commander."

But if you want to make a leap and say that he was referring to the fire dept commander and others when he say's THEY...
then by all means... and where does that lead?

The fire dept commander and some other people (unknown) made the decision to PULL IT (the building)

not quite as fun as holographic planes and death rays.... but it is possible.

Here's what I'm working from, just for reference:

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

Just to clarify, though, you do accept that the fire department commander participated in the decision?  If so, then that commander is definitely implicated in the conspiracy, agreed?

Elvis Oswald

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 256
    • ONI
Re: 9/11 truth movement topic
« Reply #941 on: September 19, 2008, 05:31:45 AM »
Seriously... if you're DOD PsyOps... THANK YOU!!!!  I am going to make a mint with this class action lawsuit.

They can line up all the expert witnesses they want.  I'll just play the 9/11 video and the jury will RAIN money down on me,

Mwhahahahahahaha!!

BUT, if you're serious about learning the truth... why not find out the approval process for demolishing a building.

Can you get a permit with 20,000 gallons of diesel fuel and an aluminum ball bat 50' long?

Elvis Oswald

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 256
    • ONI
Re: 9/11 truth movement topic
« Reply #942 on: September 19, 2008, 06:08:38 AM »
I don't think "they" had a fire dept commander amongst them.

He just said they.  I guess we will never know who they were.

But SOMEONE made the decision to PULL IT (the building)

And I wonder if we can find any documentaries about controlled demolition that would have guys using "pull it" to mean "blow it up"??

Cause - not only does he not say "pull them"... there is no evidence of that term being used to mean "pull firefighters out" that I have seen - pre-911 that is...

But - OH MY - here's the term used...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FNEoiOP76QQ


madsen

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 176
Re: 9/11 truth movement topic
« Reply #943 on: September 19, 2008, 06:25:23 AM »
I don't think "they" had a fire dept commander amongst them.

He just said they.  I guess we will never know who they were.

But SOMEONE made the decision to PULL IT (the building)

And I wonder if we can find any documentaries about controlled demolition that would have guys using "pull it" to mean "blow it up"??

Cause - not only does he not say "pull them"... there is no evidence of that term being used to mean "pull firefighters out" that I have seen - pre-911 that is...

But - OH MY - here's the term used...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FNEoiOP76QQ



Yes, the first part of that video showing the demolition of building 6 is consistent with the quote I posted earlier:

Quote
Conspiracy theorists say "Pull" is a term used by demolition experts. This is one of those many half truths conspiracy theorists use to convince the ignorant. "Pull" is used when they "Pull" a building away from another with cables during demolition.

For a picture of the demolition of WTC6 with cables attached, see this page, near the top:  http://www.911myths.com/html/wtc7_pulled.html

Back to the Silverstein statement---he uses the word "they" three times, the first two clearly referring back to the firefighters.  But the third occurrence of "they" doesn't?

Elvis Oswald

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 256
    • ONI
Re: 9/11 truth movement topic
« Reply #944 on: September 19, 2008, 06:27:37 AM »
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-UrI2uV_PYw&feature=related


just watch

and then while watching the second segment... notice the square and compass on the book  :)

I could make up better lies for the man.  7 layers of truth in my yarns.  All I need is a little seed...