9/11 Conspiracy Thread (There can be only one!)

i know what we should do, we should let the waiters at pizza hut conduct all criminal investigations. then everyone will be happy. give them radio programs, give them little laptops to write books on everything and anything and this is how we shall educate the masses.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

we shall embrace mediocrity, we shall cheer for average and below average IQs. from now on we will take every intellectual, every scientist, every professional and imprison them because they are an insult to stupid people.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

I see plenty of inconsistencies, with troofers rants and ravings.

There's no other way to interpret it. Larry Silverstein apparently said "pull it" to a fire commander.

He was talking to Larry Silverstein when "pull it" was said. This makes him involved according to your demolition theory.

Dan Nigro said he pulled everyone out 3 hours before the 7 building fell. I've pasted this letter to you two or three times.

Dan Nigro laid out an evacuation zone around the 7 building. Anyone (and I stress the word ANYONE) had to be removed from that zone. The evacuation zone went beyond the interior of the 7 building and this is a fact you stupidly continue to ignore.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

It would have. But there is nothing strange about someone missing a word like that when being interviewed.

No. Loading up a building with explosives takes time. They couldn't have made the decision to demolish it on the day while the building was burning and had been damaged by part of a skyscraper falling on it. It would have had to have been loaded up beforehand and somehow go completely unnoticed.

If that had happened the phone conversation between Silverstein and the fire chief would not have happened. There would have been no decision to make. The "pull" thing doesn't make any sense.

In the WTC7 lies document there are links for many firefighter testimonies where they used "pull" to describe backing away from WTC7.

It may seem that way at first. After a closer analysis, this collection of evidence starts to fall apart.

 

Yes he did. Dan Nigro has stated in a quote that I have pasted to you multiple times that it was his decision to create an evacuation zone and pull everyone out of that zone without the consent of Larry Silverstein or any other person.

You keep going back to saying nobody was inside the building which is true.. even though I pasted you firefighter testimony that they were heading inside the building before they got pulled. But that is not the point. The point is that there were people outside who were potentially in harms way should the building collapse. Get it through your thick skull and stop developing this farfetched hollywood movie based on the word "pull".

There isn't much difference between the kinetic energy either plane can produce. The 767 is heavier, larger and only slightly slower.

When the tower was designed, there was no notion of anyone deliberately flying planes at 550mph at 1,000 feet, so that's of course not what they were talking about. Perhaps they were thinking of a more realistic scenario of a plane low in fuel traveling at approach speed lost in fog hitting the WTC which would be a completely different scenario.

I don't have to read it, I've already read it be debunked, and the fact that he didn't submit it for scientific peer review means it's not worth anyones time. But it was peer reviewed you say? By whom? The "scholars for 9/11 truth"? You'll have to do better than that.

Nothing but conjecture. A plane crashed into a building and lots of peoples belongings on the plane were ejected to the street below. Simple.

Who exactly are these 'plants'?

 

Checkmate!

You're calling me a liar?

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

The direct link, which you didn't dare look up, obviously, is here:

http://graphics8.nytimes.com/packages/pdf/nyregion/20050812_WTC_GRAPHIC/9110313.PDF

Note the webaddress fragment: "nytimes.com". Does this remind you of anything?

Given the above, apparently not.

Once again:

http://graphics8.nytimes.com/packages/pdf/nyregion/20050812_WTC_GRAPHIC/9110313.PDF

You are blind. From his statement:

I think the term is: CHECKMATE.

I thought it was a demolition? :shrug:

Anyway, this is where your association with logic breaks down. You rant that there was no manual firefighting going on inside the building - and there certainly was no effective firefighting going on inside the building, because of the water pressure problem - but you then leap to construe this as "no firefighters were in the building". But even you can see that this is wrong - Varriale's statement above jives directly with the issue about no firefighting going on, and places them in the building. They couldn't fight the fire since there was no water pressure, and they pulled out.

There's another issue with your interpretation: even if firefighters weren't fighting the fire from outside the building, why do you assume they wouldn't need to be pulled out? How far away were they standing? You realise, I hope, that a 47-story building makes a fairly wide pile of rubble? You wouldn't want to be just across the street, smoking a cigarette. Do you follow me?

And why do you think FEMA is wrong about everything else - the structural failure because of fire, for example - but right about this comparatively minor detail? Let's have your link again for examination.

Done and done. Are you all done now?

You are now lying, or else ignorant. The link functions quite well, as I've illustrated above. I've even cited from the piece. Disprove it, or shut up and get off.

This next part was an amusing series:

Followed by:

That was funny.

Oh man. My question was (since you seemingly can't read, making you the actual poor researcher): "And you know that they were sure they got them all?" I bolded the part you didn't understand. I was referring, which you didn't understand, to what they knew. The firefighters. Did they know they got all the survivors, was the question, which was a response to your very obtuse comment about why they were sent in the first place.

Yes, I'm sure I could have posted it within your same post, somewhere, so you wouldn't be kept waiting. Within your same post. Hilarious. Feeling a little outgunned, huh?

"Hot hair". Heh! Source is up, interpretation is up.

Now: are you up to taking it on?

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

Exactly - and my second point. But firefighters were actually in the building. No manual firefighting simply means they didn't have any water.

Lizardoids. All filthy lizardoids.

It's funny how a movement for "Troof" has degenerated into a witch hunt. But which witch? It keeps changing.

 

Another interesting tidbit of information...The main structure collapses totally in under 7 seconds, only about a second slower than it would take a brick dropped from the building's roof to reach the ground in a vacuum.

http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/analysis/wtc7/speed.html

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4k6GMddY-lQ&feature=related

The collapse took at least 13 seconds. Conspiracy nuts don't like to count the penthouse falling as part of the collapse. They also drastically underestimate the time taken for the lower floors out of camera shot to collapse also.

Your dishonesty is exposed once again.

 

Just to put a bullet in this dying animal, here are just some of the sources of firefighters and first responders using the term pull relating to themselves being evacuated from the area. And we are to believe the when Larry said "pull", it could only mean "demolition"

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

Taken from Mark Roberts' excellent paper showing what liars "truthers" are:
http://forums.randi.org/local_links.php?action=jump&catid=18&id=86

7 World Trade Center was roaring. I remember being pulled off the pile like just before. It wasn't just before. It was probably an hour before 7 came down.
–Firefighter Kevin Howe
http://graphics8.nytimes.com/packages/pdf/nyregion/20050812_WTC_GRAPHIC/9110469.PDF

Firehouse Magazine: Was there heavy fire in there right away?
Hayden: No, not right away, and that’s probably why it stood for so long because it took a while for that fire to develop. It was a heavy body of fire in there and then we didn’t make any attempt to fight it. That was just one of those wars we were just going to lose. We were concerned about the collapse of a 47-story building there. We were worried about additional collapse there of what was remaining standing of the towers and the Marriott, so we started pulling the people back after a couple of hours of surface removal and searches along the surface of the debris. We started to pull guys back because we were concerned for their safety. "
Firehouse: Chief Nigro said they made a collapse zone and wanted everybody away from number 7—did you have to get all of those people out?
Hayden: Yeah, we had to pull everybody back. It was very difficult. We had to be very forceful in getting the guys out. They didn’t want to come out. There were guys going into areas that I wasn’t even really comfortable with, because of the possibility of secondary collapses. We didn’t know how stable any of this area was. We pulled everybody back probably by 3 or 3:30 in the afternoon. We said, this building is going to come down, get back. It came down about 5 o’clock or so, but we had everybody
backed away by then. –Deputy Chief Peter Hayden
http://tinyurl.com/zwtrs

There was a big discussion going on at that point about pulling all of our units out of 7 World Trade Center. Chief Nigro didn't feel it was worth taking the slightest chance of somebody else getting injured. So at that point we made a decision to take all of our units out of 7 World Trade Center because there was a potential for collapse.
http://graphics8.nytimes.com/packages/pdf/nyregion/20050812_WTC_GRAPHIC/9110150.PDF

So we go there and on the north and east side of 7 it didn’t look like there was any damage at all, but then you looked on the south side of 7 there had to be a hole 20 stories tall in the building, with fire on several floors. Debris was falling down on the building and it didn’t look good. But they had a hose line operating. Like I said, it was hitting the sidewalk across the street, but eventually they pulled back too. "
– Capt. Chris Boyle
http://tinyurl.com/e7bzp

Someone gave a Mayday. I guess it was someone trapped under one of the pedestrian bridges. We started to go under there to look. One of the Chiefs pulled us out of there. He said don't go under there. ..We searched that building and then we started making another move in and we got pulled out again, because I guess the Chiefs were getting more in control of the situation. They pulled everybody out of there. ...that was probably like four or five o'clock before we stopped.
–Firefighter Todd Fredrickson
http://graphics8.nytimes.com/packages/pdf/nyregion/20050812_WTC_GRAPHIC/9110403.PDF

When the third building came down that's where we were (Stuyvesant High School). We were actually -- they pulled us all back. Actually they pulled us all the way back that far at the point because they didn't want any -- they didn't want us anywhere near it. Everyone was just running around. When the third building came down, we were on that corner in front of the school, and everybody just stood back. They pulled us all back at that time, almost an hour before it, because they were sure -- they knew it was going to come down, but they weren't sure. So they pulled everyone back, and everybody stood there and we actually just waited and waited until it went down, because it was unsafe. They wouldn't let anyone next to I guess the two piles, we would call them, where one and two was. We stood back. We waited.
– EMT Joseph Fortis
http://graphics8.nytimes.com/packages/pdf/nyregion/20050812_WTC_GRAPHIC/9110200.PDF

After that they decided to pull everybody out and I know -- what building was it? Building 5, I believe [sic], the other tall building there, the third building that came down, they were evacuating people. So everyone just pushed up West Street all the way up towards the high school there. I forget the name of the high school.
–Firefighter Brian Russo
http://graphics8.nytimes.com/packages/pdf/nyregion/20050812_WTC_GRAPHIC/9110450.PDF

Then approximately I guess maybe two hours before number 7 came down, we went into Ground Zero and helped dig around and was there when they located Chief Feehan and one of the chiefs pulled us all out because they said 7 was going to come down.
--Firefighter Kevin Quinn
http://graphics8.nytimes.com/packages/pdf/nyregion/20050812_WTC_GRAPHIC/9110339.PDF

So then they aborted us from setting up the tower ladder because they were worried about now Seven coming down. So then they pulled us away. This is where I kind of start remembering a lot. We came around, I think we took Murray Street down the west side, and we stopped the rig and pulled over to the side and we all got out of the rig. We were standing, waiting for Seven to come down. We were there for quite a while, a couple hours.
–Firefighter Thomas Donato
http://graphics8.nytimes.com/packages/pdf/nyregion/20050812_WTC_GRAPHIC/9110471.PDF

They told us to get out of there because they were worried about 7 World Trade Center, which is right behind it, coming down. We were up on the upper floors of the Verizon building looking at it. You could just see the whole bottom corner of the building was gone. We could look right out over to where the Trade Centers were because we were that high up. Looking over the smaller buildings. I just remember it was tremendous, tremendous fires going on. Finally they pulled us out. They said all right, get out of that building because that 7, they were really worried about. They pulled us out of there and then they regrouped everybody on Vesey Street, between the water and West Street. They put everybody back in there. Finally it did come down. From there -- this is much later on in the day, because every day we were so worried about that building we didn't really want to get people close. They were trying to limit the amount of people that were in there. Finally it did come down. That's when they let the guys go on. I just remember we started searching around all the rigs.
–Firefighter Richard Banaciski
http://graphics8.nytimes.com/packages/pdf/nyregion/20050812_WTC_GRAPHIC/9110253.PDF

Then we were instructed to search through two or three buildings to make sure they were stable, and then they pulled everybody out because of the pink building.
Q:Was it 7 World Trade, that was going?
A: Right.
–Firefighter Adrienne Walsh
http://graphics8.nytimes.com/packages/pdf/nyregion/20050812_WTC_GRAPHIC/9110353.PDF

We operated until they finally started pulling people back. ...They pulled us back, I think it was like probably between 4 and 6, because of Seven. Seven was the concern at the time.
–Firefighter Fred Marsilla
http://graphics8.nytimes.com/packages/pdf/nyregion/20050812_WTC_GRAPHIC/9110399.PDF

They put another engine company in there which augmented us. And the stream was even good enough to almost reach Tower 7. And then what happened was, we heard this rumbling sound and my father pulled us all back and then with that Tower 7 came down.
–Firefighter Peter Blaich
http://www.firehouse.com/terrorist/911/magazine/gz/blaich.html

So we were in there just for a few minutes maybe and the chiefs pulled us out. They told us we had to get out, so we got out, and then later on we went back in again, and they pulled: us out once more, and that was it.
–Firefighter Peter Giammarino
http://hosted.ap.org/specials/interactives/_national/sept11_fdny_transcripts/9110436.PDF

We proceeded to go back one block to that post then slowly but surely every two minutes or so when we started to regroup we were pulled back further and further and further until we were behind – until we were past Stuyvesant High School
–Firefighter Dean Beltrami
http://graphics8.nytimes.com/packages/pdf/nyregion/20050812_WTC_GRAPHIC/9110359.PDF

"It's hot enough for the [Inaudible]"
"That's why he's pulled everybody outta here."
"That building's 50 stories, definitely reaching over here."
"[Inaudible] get everybody outta there, that's for sure."
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sYlVmTHjHe8

Here’s a summary of the first-person accounts I’ve read:

People who mention the FDNY order to withdraw from WTC 7 area 93
Number of times “Pull” is used to mean “withdraw rescuers” 29
Number of people who use “Pull” to mean “withdraw rescuers” 16

Waiting for WTC7 to fall:

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

lol, My dishonesty? Did you even watch the video you posted? It did not take 13 seconds Im afraid...

And we went over this already, attack the evidence not the person...
You may reveal your actual motivations otherwise!

 

I did watch the video, and counted 13 seconds minimum the same as the person who posted the video.

At the beginning of the video, watch the penthouse at the very top of the building. You will see this sink into the building this is when the first signs of collapse are visible and thus the clock begins. After the penthouse sinks, the building apparently remains standing (despite what is happening inside) for several seconds, before it begins to rapidly fall.

For clarification, the penthouse begins to fall at the 5 second mark of the video, the rest of the building begins to fall at the 12 second mark, the building disappears from view at 18 seconds. So 13 seconds not counting whatever happened out of view of the camera.

You don't get to be treated with respect when you are a conniving conspiracy nut.

 

Right, so you admit the MAJORITY of the building starting collapsing at 12 second mark. Then it only took 7 seconds to hit the ground...

Oh then why did the floors not collapse onto each other in a chain reaction form then? In the video you can clearly see the top floors remain intact while the bottom gives out...
The building itself hit the ground in 7 seconds after THE MAJORITY of the building started falling, not the penthouse. Explain that...

You obviously did not read the link I posted earlier so here it is again, its got MATH to prove the free fall rate. Please provide evidence to the contrary, your word isnt good enough.
http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/analysis/wtc7/speed.html

Well Ill treat you with respect no matter what. I could say the same about you, trying to defend a corrupt government. Perspectives a bitch isnt it? I suggest you expand your horizons. You may realize Pearl Harbor was a situation very similar. Roosevelt had pre-knowledge of the attack and let it happen anyway to join WWII. Bush let this happen so we could invade Iraq (which there is proof they had no WMDs and Bush DELIBERATELY lied to us about that). And you still think they are a pillar of unshakeable truth, and Im the gullible one...

 

He never said pull it, this your desperate attempt to save face after being humiliated by being exposed as a disinformation agent. You said pull it wasn't a demolition term, now that it has been confirmed that it is, you're attempting to change the argument.

I know it's true, but you originally stated that they were.

That weren't around building 7 in the first place. The firefighters were to busy trying to dig up their comrades who resided in towers 1 & 2. There was no one to rescue, nor was there any water available. For you to insinuate that the firefighters were just standing around building 7 is bullshit. That's not what Silverstein was referring to. He said it, if he said them, you would have leg to stand on, since he didn't, you don't.

You're distorting the truth once again. Here's the WTC designer regarding Jetliners hitting the WTC.

http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=614_1208638371

That's why it's so painfully obvious after losing so many points in this debate that you haven't considered any other facts but what the Goverment has fed you.

Scientists from prestigious Universities. Read it and weap.

http://physics911.ca/members/

No they weren't.

People who exercise extreme prejudice and hostility to any information that contradicts the official story. ^^^

 

They would have gotten away with it too, if it wasn't for you meddling kids.

 

Now I've wasted my time reading all of those PDF's, not one reference to the term "pull it" was found. Like I said, you can't find one, not one single phrase where the firefighters used the phrase "Pull it" to evacuate a building.

 

Bingo, the WTC 7 18 second collapse theory has only been pushed by disinformation agents. Plus, you're right Endlightend, he doesn't even read his own sources before he posts them. I'd put him on ignore, he's not here to have a honest debate. He's just trolling disinformation. On Ignore you go Kenny, I don't debate spooks.

 

The pdf that I posted proved that the firefighters were in the building.

The pdfs that Kenny posted proved that the firefighters and their commanders used the term "pulled".

Silverstein's comments prove that he was referring to the effort to save the building.

The argument that you posted proves you don't know what you're talking about.

Tell me: how did the explosives get planted in WTC7? How did they know the burning debris would hit it so that the collapse would be the only reasonable conclusion? For that matter, how did they know to place the explosives in the precise airplane strike spots in WTC 1 and 2? So many questions.

 

This is a lie.

And they still went in to try and save the building. You may be aware that sometimes firefighters try to save buildings, even without people being in them. I refer you to my posted pdf link above.

It's a matter of public record. Like your retardation.

Prove it. Prove his bad use of language translates to demolition. But you can't, so be quiet.

That's "weep". Awful lot of BAs and other crap in there. A kinesiologist? A virtual chiropractor?

Meaning you.

 

Dan Nigro confirms the phone call to Larry Silverstein and says there is no conspiracy. End of story... unless you call Dan Nigro a liar.

It's inconsequential. After reading up all these sources verifying firefighters being pulled from the area, you are left clutching at straws.

And yet the quotes I just gave say that even people trying to search and rescue in the rubble of 1 & 2 were pulled back. Think about it, standing in those piles was dangerous enough without the vibrations of a 47 floor building collapsing nearby.

I guess he was right in a way. The towers did survive the crashing planes. Obviously he never factored in the compounding factor of the fires though which is what ultimately brough the towers down.

No. Stephen Jones has not made any attempt for his work to be put through any credible scientific peer review. Watch him evade this question regarding peer review:

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

That is a conspiracy group. I want Stephen Jones' findings to be peer reviewed and accepted in something a little more credible than that.

So everyone who disagrees with you is a plant? Wow, your tin foil hat is shining real bright there.

LOL you really are a pathetic human being. Such a large farfetched story all resting on semantics. So you're telling me Silverstein said "pull it" to Dan Nigro, and so what does Dan Nigro do? He makes an evacuation area and pulls everyone out. You have yet to explain to me why saying "pull it" to a fire commander would suggest carrying out a controlled demolition, and if so, how does this NOT make the FDNY complicit in 9/11? End of conspiracy, you are dishonest.