user ballots
Login
Register
Add One
FAQ/Contact
Newest Ballots
Newest Blogs
Private Ballots
Joke Ballots
Popular Ballots
Recent Popular
Recent Votes
Best
Worst
Yes or No
Choices
What If
Prediction
Advice
Would You
Crime
Recommend
Quiz
TV & Movie
Music & Radio
Political
Science
Sports
Relationship
Techonology
Culture
Philosophy
Religion
Ethics
History
Food & Health
Fashion & Beauty
Crime
FanBase
Discussion
Bug Report
|
COMMENTS:
Voted : Invested heavily in aluminum
Probably using his money to spread the word of the new coming one world government and pay the salaries of conspiracy nuts so they can write nonsense on internet boards.
Kenny boy, you can go first.
Okay, you can do it your way kenny, having last word.
Voted : Carries it to the bank...while laughing!
And thinking of the next smart way to part a fool from his money.
Voted : Invested heavily in aluminum
He must be getting a cut from the companies making aluminum.
The guy is an opportunist
The tinfoil hat Kenny has planted his vote choices. Let the tinny hat vote spamming games begin!
How about one of those berky water bottles, or one of those infowars braclets? LOL!
Another link:
(http:) (//) (infowars-)(shop.) (stores.) (yahoo.) (net/)
Good for him, he has the blessing of the cops and firefighters and ordinary folk of New York who love him.
prisonplanet. com/articles /september2006 /110906 insidejob.htm
Alex Jones: Most Police, Firefighters Now Believe 9/11 Inside Job
Truth events at ground zero enjoy very encouraging reception
Paul Joseph Watson/Prison Planet.com | September 11 2006
Documentary film maker and radio host Alex Jones, coordinating today's 9/11 truth movement events in downtown New York City, says that the atmosphere around ground zero has dramatically changed, with the majority of firefighters and police officers now sympathetic to the claim that 9/11 was an inside job.
Alex is featured at the end of the Associated Press video above imploring viewers to understand that 9/11 was "a self-inflicted wound designed to create a police state in the U.S. and capture us as an engine for world government and world domination."
Alex was assigned to lead a protest march today which he described as over 1000 strong as it snaked across ground zero and through lower Manhattan.
Saying that the "entire atmosphere had changed,"
Alex explained how police support for protesters at ground zero had gone from 20% support two years ago to around 60% support now - with many willing to affirm that sentiment on camera and many knowledgeable about Alex Jones' work and the 9/11 truth movement.
"Police just saying 'keep your investigation going, we appreciate you' on video," said Jones.
"The firemen we've been talking to - a hundred per cent are on our side and have seen the documentary films....it is just incredible what's happened at the grass roots."
Jones said that the few debunkers who were spewing Bush administration style propaganda were met with distain from the police.
"I think that thing that triggered it was the fact that the government lied about the dust, the asbestos all of it," said Jones in citing why first responders and police have become increasingly skeptical about anything the government says about 9/11.
Alex later commenced a vocal bullhorning of ground zero and led a chant of "9/11 was an inside job," more on that to come tomorrow.
A benchmark of the wildfire success of the 9/11 truth movement can be measured with a new CNN poll released today that shows the amount of American citizens who "blame the Bush administration for the September 11, 2001, attacks," has risen from a third to over a half over the past four years.
No matter whether what he says is true, can you at least agree that Alex Jones is profiting very nicely from his new job?
You're missing the whole point, this guy is a hero, he pumps all his profits back into his media enterprises, driving a modest car and living in a modest house, hardly the trappings of some media mogul, he exposes the real profiteers from 9/11 - the evil war profiteers like the Bush family, Cheney and Rumsfeld etc., who are making billions from it, it's tragic to see Americans turn away and attack the very person who is pointing this out to them.
The PNAC mafia are the ones laughing all the way to the bank.
Go get 'em Alex - you're a true American Patriot.
'Telling the truth in a time of deceit is a revolutionary act'
George Orwell, 1984
"You're missing the whole point, this guy is a hero"
by Ken_from_Dublin on Mon Sep 11, 06 3:16pm
Yes, a hero to young enteprenuers, business people and the book publishers.
"he pumps all his profits back into his media enterprises, driving a modest car and living in a modest house"
by Ken_from_Dublin on Mon Sep 11, 06 4:14pm
Oh really, close buddies are you? What kind of car does he drive and what does his home or homes look like. Modest and conservative living is what young smart business people do when they are maximizing their investments, to build on new ones.
^^^ Shite response - anyone else got a better one? (o:
^^^No response. Love it.
Hey Ken - you ever seen a video of a building being demolished by controlled demolition?
It's strange because it looks nothing like what happened to the wtc buildings. Weird huh?
Oh wait - the buildings fell down - that was similar. Oh no! You're not basing you whole argument on that are you?
there's a link on my user page
refute that!
LOL
WTC 7 - amazing coincidence wasn't it?
Sure the others just fell because of the planes, weren't 'pulled' (Larry Silverstein) like WTC 7, and we all know why the demolished it.
'..they...' typo (o:
'Hey Ken - you ever seen a video of a building being demolished by controlled demolition?'
'It's strange because it looks nothing like what happened to the wtc buildings. Weird huh?'
by wideheadofknowledge
Not weird at all, you've never seen a building of those gargantuan proportions being pulled, they were by far the largest buildings ever demolished, and they went down exactly as you would expect them too, the twin towers couldn't be imploded because of the huge over engineered 47 steel cores that stretched the length of them, and would have acted as heat conductors into the bedrock even if those fires reached the critical temperature to even soften the steel which it didn't because plane fuel doesn't burn at nearly high enough temperatures (blowtorch territory).
These forty seven steel core columns existence is DENIED in the 9/11 Omission report by the way - a blatant lie.
'It's strange because it looks nothing like what happened to the wtc buildings. Weird huh?'
by wideheadofknowledge
Are you claiming now that WTC 7 looks nothing like a classic controlled demolition?
By the way: why are you using the term "pull" to describe the controlled demolition of a building?
"Pulling" in demolition is a process of attaching cables to building in order to direct its fall. The only people who use "pull" to mean a controlled demolition itself are conspiracy theorists. And they're wrong.
Look it up on a legitamate site.
Watch the video link on my user page.
Look or sound like ANY of the collapses on september 11th?
Ah! So now I see that your controlled demolition theory has been changed somewhat! "the twin towers couldn't be imploded"?!?! Are you sure? But what about all those squibs and explosions you said you saw or that someone else said they thought that they might of heard?
Before I demolish that load of crap you just posted, you seem to have conveniently missed my last query -
Are you claiming now that WTC 7 looks nothing like a classic controlled demolition?
C'mon now - out with it!
Why did the 9/11 Omission report deny and lie about the existence of the gigantic 47 steel core columns?
{ "Pulling" in demolition is a process of attaching cables to building in order to direct its fall. The only people who use "pull" to mean a controlled demolition itself are conspiracy theorists.
by wideheadofknowledge on Wed Sep 13, 06 4:44pm}
You're telling LIES by the way.
All you're repeating is Blanchard's nonsense, and I've already debated this on another ballots and proven him a liar.
The term "pull" was originally used for the use of cables a century ago, but is STILL USED theese days in the controlled demolition industry for use of explosives in demolitions despite the claims of Blanchard - the LIAR. It's a particularly common term for controlled demolitions in the military.
{ Look or sound like ANY of the collapses on september 11th?
by wideheadofknowledge on Wed Sep 13, 06 4:44pm}
I've seen HUNDREDS of videos of controlled demolitions, and guess what? ALL THREE WTC COLLAPSES look just like controlled demoltions.
WTC 7 = controlled implosive demolition, looking EXACTLY like a very well done, perfectly executed controlled implosive demolition.
WTC 1 & 2= controlled explosive demolitions, looking like many such controlled EXPLOSIVE demolitions with the same distinct "cauliflower" appearance of being blown to bits floor by floor. Which was reported by HUNDREDS OF WITNESSES, who presumably saw & heard & felt what they said that they saw, particularly as it's supported by video evidence showing lines of explosions blowing out the floors before the falling debris could reach those floors, and there's seismic data showing impossibly short tremors revealing the use of explosives in those controlled demolitions.
I think it would be rather simple to place those explosive charges in the buildings over a long period of time. You get some John Smiths dressed up like "electricians" or "A/C repairman" with the proper tools, training, timing and access and i'm sure they can hide that stuff. When was the last time you hovered over a repairman in a big office complex asking what the hell was he doing?
There was plenty of time and ways to get the explosives in there. To say otherwise is stupid. They could've put them in over a period of MONTHS before that day. They could've brought them in on nights only when hardly anyone was there. They could've used areas of the building that were off limits for repairs to the regular sheeple workers.
There was plenty of time.
Ben Fountain, a financial analyst who worked in the World Trade Center, told People Magazine that in the weeks before 9-11, there were a number of unannounced and unusual drills where sections of both the Twin Towers and building 7 were evacuated for 'security reasons'.
Daria Coard, a guard in the North Tower, told Newsday that security detail was working 12 hour shifts for two weeks before 9-11, but on Thursday the 6th, bomb sniffing dogs were abruptly removed from the building.
On the weekend of 9/8, 9/9 there was a 'power down' condition in WTC tower 2, the south tower. This power down condition meant there was no electrical supply for approx 36 hrs from floor 50 up... "Of course without power there were no security cameras, no security locks on doors and many, many 'engineers' coming in and out of the tower.
Loveleynice. Show us the official and original transcripts of all those people that said this and said that. The conspiracy theorists have already been caught lying, and editing and omitting so many quotes and statements.
Want to see the proof? Please say yes.
"Are you claiming now that WTC 7 looks nothing like a classic controlled demolition?"
Well, only in the fact that the building fell down. Apart from that, no it didn't.
Who cares what it "looked like"? Why not focus on what it actually was?
"ALL THREE WTC COLLAPSES look just like controlled demoltions."
Well, no they didn't but even if they did it doesn't mean they were.
All your theory is based on is you guys saying "It looked like this" or some witness ssaying "it sounded like that". You have absolutely failed to show even ONE shred of evidence in your favour. Searching for mistakes, holes, anomalies and things you can't explain in the real chain of events doesn't make a conspiracy - it makes your arguments look anaemic and vapid.
I'll state it again - you have NOTHING. You're not even close.
"Are you claiming now that WTC 7 looks nothing like a classic controlled demolition? "
There were six puffs of smoke coming from the broken windows in the top corner of the building AFTER it began to fall, the penthouse was seen collapsing far before anything else, there were no loud cracks or bright flashes before the event (see wideheads video), the building damaged surrounding buildings on its way down.
So the answer is no.
"Explosive demolitions" LOL
Used alot are they? Lovelynice.
{Well, only in the fact that the building fell down. Apart from that, no it didn't.
by wideheadofknowledge on Thu Sep 14, 06 12:55}
Oh yes it did. Very much so. WTC 7 looked EXACTLY like a controlled implosive demolition - BECAUSE IT WAS!
Despite all your attempts to LIE about this, you have NEVER been able to prove otherwise.
{ Who cares what it "looked like"? Why not focus on what it actually was?
by wideheadofknowledge on Thu Sep 14, 06 12:55am}
Yes, they were in fact controlled demolitions. You have NEVER been able to show otherwise.
{ "ALL THREE WTC COLLAPSES look just like controlled demoltions."
Well, no they didn't but even if they did it doesn't mean they were.
by wideheadofknowledge on Thu Sep 14, 06 12:55am}
Yes actually they did, because that is in fact what they were, as anyone with a brain - WHO ISN'T A GOVERNMENT SHILL pretending otherwise - damn well knows and can recognise.
{I'll state it again - you have NOTHING. You're not even close.
by wideheadofknowledge on Thu Sep 14, 06 12:55am}
Well, you keep saying that as many times as you like, but you also know quite well that you're LYING, and that I have many hundreds of times cited evidence to support what I say.
{Well, no they didn't but even if they did ...
by wideheadofknowledge on Thu Sep 14, 06 12:55am}
Wow, so many times you get proven wrong that I don't know why you bother - unless you're being paid to make those silly claims.
Everyone’s first reaction was "Controlled Demolition"
CBS News’ Dan Rather
also commented that the collapse of building 7, which
wasn’t hit by a plane, resembled a deliberate attempt
to demolish the structure using incendiary devices.
"For the third time
today, it’s reminiscent of those pictures we’ve all seen
too much on television before when a building was deliberately
destroyed by well placed dynamite to knock it down."
NBC’s Pat Dawson reported
the working hypothesis of the FDNY in the immediate aftermath
of the towers’ collapse.
"The chief of safety
of the Fire Department of New York City told me he received
word of a possibility of a secondary device — that is
another bomb going off. He tries to get his men out as
quickly as he could, but he said that there was another
explosion which took place and according to his theory,
he thinks that there were actually devices that were planted
in the building."
MSNBC news anchor Rick
Sanchez reported that police had found suspicious devices
in and around the WTC area and that the secondary explosions,
which were reported by numerous survivors, were thought
by police to be bombs.
"Police have found
what they believe to be a suspicious device and they fear
that it may lead to another explosion."
"I spoke with some
police officials moments ago, Chris, and they told me
they have reason to believe that one of the explosions
at the World Trade Center aside the ones caused by the
planes, may have been caused by a van that was parked
on the building that may have had an explosive device
in it."
During an exchange between
ABC’s Peter Jennings and reporter Don Dahler following
the collapse of the north tower, the first assumption
is again that controlled demolition must have been used
to take down the building.
"Yes Peter its Don Dahler down here. I’m four blocks
north of the World Trade Center. The second building that
was hit by the plane has just completely collapsed."
"The entire building
has just collapsed as if a demolition team set off….when
you see the old demolition of these old buildings. It
just folded in on itself and it is not there anymore."
Peter Jennings: "If
you wish to bring, if anyone has ever watched a building
being demolished on purpose knows, that you’re going to
do this you have to get at the, at the under infrastructure
of a building and bring it down."
Police chiefs, fire department
heads, veteran news anchors, eyewitnesses on the ground
- everyone’s first reaction was "controlled demolition"
because the events suggested nothing else.
I guess to MOST PEOPLE it really did look EXACTLY like controlled demolitions, and YOU'RE WRONG AGAIN!
"Are you claiming now that WTC 7 looks nothing like a classic controlled demolition? "
There were six puffs of smoke coming from the broken windows in the top corner of the building AFTER it began to fall, the penthouse was seen collapsing far before anything else, there were no loud cracks or bright flashes before the event (see wideheads video), the building damaged surrounding buildings on its way down.
So the answer is no.
"CBS News’ Dan Rather
also commented that the collapse of building 7, which
wasn’t hit by a plane, resembled a deliberate attempt
to demolish the structure using incendiary devices.
by Lovelynice on Thu Sep 14, 06 10:03am
Those are not his exact words but it dosen't matter. Lovelynice, I too said something similar when I saw the WTC towers fall, but so what? It was a normal anology and thought to describe how the buildings looked coming down, not what caused them to come down. Why don't you go ask Dan Rather what he really thinks? Do you honestly think he is going to say those buildings were brought down by demolition explosions?
When it comes down to it, in reality the way those tall buildings came down was nothing at all like a real demolition.
"I guess to MOST PEOPLE it really did look EXACTLY like controlled demolitions"
by Lovelynice on Thu Sep 14, 06 10:03am
Lovelynice, your quotes are of absolutely no worth whatsoever.
I does not matter what people thought it looked like or sounded like.
Actually read those quotes back to yourself out loud. Saying it was "reminiscent of" or "resembled" or "brought to mind" a controlled demolition does not make it a controlled demolition.
Watch the video link on my user page and tell me - in what way is that similar to the WTC collapses?
Whn you directly compare a real demoltion to the WTC collapses you will see that there really is no similarites - except, of course, that buildings fall down.
I just watched it, five times Awesome video. There is no comparison to how that building went down and the WTC buildings. Those explosions were LOUD, and so many for such a small building, at least in contrast to the Twin Towers. Great stuff.
{I does not matter what people thought it looked like or sounded like.
by wideheadofknowledge on Thu Sep 14, 06 11:38pm}
Let's apply that same erroneous excuse of yours to the Pentagon attack, shall we?
NO VIDEO OF A PLANE.
Maybe there was one, maybe there wasn't, but by your logic there was only something that resembled a plane. Maybe if was flying clouds, a big bird, a balloon, swampgas or whatever. In any case, it wasn't really a plane because it only resembled a plane. With this excuse and your logic, we can say that the big explosion wasn't a plane crash either, it only resembled an explosion and a plane crash but really was something else, dust blowing of windows, and nothing more.Maybe the renovations failed and it was just a perfectly expected collapse of steel reinforced concrete structure - happens everyday, you know.
No, sorry, not buying it and your bullshit doesn't work.
Besides, in the case of the WTC buildings, WE HAVE VIDEO EVIDENCE showing lines of explosions blowing out the floors before the falling debris could reach those floors, and there's seismic data showing impossibly short tremors revealing the use of explosives in those controlled demolitions.
{Whn you directly compare a real demoltion to the WTC collapses you will see that there really is no similarites -
by wideheadofknowledge on Thu Sep 14, 06 11:38pm}
Yes, it LOOKS EXACTLY LIKE WTC 7 going down in it's controlled IMPLOSIVE demolition.
Of course, if you bothered to get out and see a LOT MORE VIDEOS of controlled demolitions you'd also recognise that ALL OF THE COLLAPSES looked EXACTLY LIKE controlled demolitions.
You should stop pretending that there's only one kind of controlled demolition too.
By the way, if anyone wants to look up more videos on controlled demolitions I can give a fairly large list, along with video links to people like MIT Engineer Jeff King who goes into detail why the WTC Towers and WTC 7 were brought down by explosives.
This is what dutch demolition expert Jowenko said when he was asked to study the WTC 7 collapse;
"This is controlled demolition"
I can cite quite a few physicists too, and other structural engineers too.
So lovely nice, did you hear tens, sorry, hundreds of ear piercing explosions and bright white flashes seconds before WTC7 fell?
"{I does not matter what people thought it looked like or sounded like.
by wideheadofknowledge on Thu Sep 14, 06 11:38pm}
Let's apply that same erroneous excuse of yours to the Pentagon attack, shall we?"
First of all let's examine the evidence shall we? Two planes hit the twin towers and a bit later they fell down. YOU say that some people THOUGHT it looked like a controlled demolition and that's enough evidence for you.
Some people THOUGHT they saw a passenger jet hit the pentagon but that's not enough - no, we actually have the physical evidence (plane parts and the bodies of the passengers) to back up our eyewitness accounts.
Again I have to point out - you have not one shred of tangible evidence to back up your story. Not one.
{YOU say that some people ...
by wideheadofknowledge on Sun Sep 17, 06 5:18am}
"some people" huh?
MORE LIKE HUNDREDS WITNESSED EXPLOSIONS AND CONTROLLED DEMOLITIONS !
It's typical of you to casually dismiss the hundreds of witnesses to the EXPLOSIONS at the WTC. Despite the fact that these reports of EXPLOSIONS AND CONTROLLED DEMOLITIONS are supported by the videos showing lines of explosions blowing out the floors before the falling debris could reach those floors, and there's seismic data showing impossibly short tremors revealing the use of explosives in those controlled demolitions.
Are you perhaps going to claim that all those WTC witnesses to EXPLOSIONS were LYING?
ARE THEY ALL LYING, including the firemen and other witnesses describing explosions at the other WTC buildings and describing what they recognised as controlled demolitions. Are they all lying? ALL OF THEM? Are you going to pretend that ALL OF THEM are delusional, that ALL OF THEM are so stupid that they can't recognise EXPLOSIONS when they hear them?
Are ALL OF THOSE EXPERIENCED FIREMEN AND RESCUE WORKERS so moronically STUPID that despite YEARS OF EXPERIENCE that they were simply confusing some little puffs of dust and the sound of some falling debris for HUGE EXPLOSIONS?
MIT Engineer Breaks Down WTC Controlled Demolition
Jeff King goes into detail why the WTC Towers and WTC 7 were brought down by explosives.
video . google . com / videoplay ? docid = 1822764959599063248 & q = wtc
NYC Firefighters say 9/11 WTC collapse seemed like controlled demolition
video . google . com / videoplay ? docid = 2032865563019209801 & q= wtc
and from a demolition expert's opinion about WTC 7
"this is conrolled demolition"
youtube . com / watch ? v = Uqrn5x2 _ f6Q
Are they all lying?
fireman2: We made it outside, we made it about a block.
fireman1: We made it at least 2 blocks.
fireman2: 2 blocks.
fireman1: and we started runnin'
fireman2: poch poch poch poch poch poch poch
fireman1: Floor by floor it started poppin' out ..
fireman2: It was as if as if they had detonated, det..
fireman1: yea detonated yea
fireman2: as if they had planned to take down a building,
boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom ...
fireman1: All the way down, I was watchin it, and runnin'
So, Mr Wolf, are you telling me that these firemen are lying?
What about the other 500 or so witnesses to the explosions at the WTC, the controlled demolitions? Are you telling that they were lying too?
I'm pretty sure that those firemen can recognise controlled demolitions when they see them. Many firemen have military backgrounds, also they are frequently called to be on the scene for other planned controlled demolitions for possible emergencies, and they frequently have a great amount of experience with witnessing explosions of various kinds.
Edward Cachia FDNY WTC2 describing explosions before collapse
As my officer and I were looking at the south tower, it just gave. It actually gave at a
lower floor, not the floor where the plane hit, because we originally had thought there was like an internal detonation explosives because it went in succession, boom, boom, boom, boom, and then the tower came down.
Is he lying too?
FIREFIGHTER JOSEPH MEOLA
WCT2
As we are looking up at the building, what I saw was, it looked like the building was blowing out on all four sides. We actually heard the pops. Didn't realize it was the falling -- you know, you heard the pops of the building. You thought it was just blowing out.
Is he lying too?
FIREFIGHTER THOMAS TURILLI
WTC2
All of a sudden you just heard like it almost actually that day sounded like bombs going off, like boom, boom, boom, like seven or eight, and then just a huge wind gust just came. My officer knew how to actually get out and and we just walked out of there.
At that point we were kind of standing on the street and I looked to my left and actually I noticed the tower was down. I didn't even know what it was when we were in there. It just seemed like a huge explosion.
Is he lying too?
EMT JULIO MARRERO
WTC2
In that process of him trying to explain to me to pull my ambulance over, I heard a loud bang. We looked up, and we just saw the building starting to collapse. I was screaming from the top of my lungs, and I must have been about ten feet away from her and she couldn't even hear me, because the building was so loud, the explosion, that she couldn't even hear me.
Is he lying too?
FIREFIGHTER CRAIG CARLSEN -explosions when buildings fell
File No. 9110505 WTC2
I guess about three minutes later you just heard explosions coming from building two, the south tower. It seemed like it took forever, but there were about ten explosions.
Is he lying too?
FIREFIGHTER FERNANDO CAMACHO WTC2 Explosions
We went across the lobby of the hotel, going north, and we exited and made a right going towards the second tower, the south tower. We must have walked about 100-200 feet to revolving doors, which led into a hallway to where the mall was. I could see maybe 20, civilians and I believe Ladder 25, which was about another 100 to 150 feet ahead of us. As we came in through the revolving doors, the lights went out. A second or two later everything started to shake. You could hear explosions.
Is he lying too?
FIREFIGHTER ANGEL RIVERA
WTC2
the chief told us go to the Marriott Hotel, go from the 14th floor up, search and evacuate all the floors. So we walk all the way up, no problem. Then we hear the explosion and debris falling. We were looking out of the windows and see body parts all over the place.
Is he lying too?
PARAMEDIC DANIEL RIVERA
WTC2
Q. WHAT DID YOU HEAR? WHAT DID YOU SEE? A. It was a frigging noise at first. At first I thought it was a professional demolition, where they set the charges on certain floors and then you hear Pop Pop Pop Pop. That’s exactly what I thought it was
Is he lying too?
FIREFIGHTER JOSEPH RAE
WTC2
We started walking north to just about the second footbridge, which would be 6 World Trade, and all of a sudden we heard the explosion and the building started to come down and I ran
Is he lying too?
EMT JASON CHARLES
I HEARD SIX LOUD EXPLOSIONS AND THOSE SIX LOUD EXPLOSIONS CHANGED MY MIND REAL QUICK AND I WENT BACK OVER TO THE TRIAGE CENTER AND IT WAS LIKE YOU KNOW WHAT, LET ME WAIT HERE. I HAD NO HELMET
Is he lying too?
FIREFIGHTER TIMOTHY JULIAN
WCT2
We came out from 90 West , made Left, headed East, and right when we got to the corner of Washington and Albany, that’s when we heard the building collapse. I thought it was an Explosion. I thought maybe there was a bomb on the plane but delayed type of thing, you know secondary device. I was convinced for a week it was secondary devices. I JUST HEARD LIKE AN EXPLOSION AND THEN CRACKING TYPE OF NOISE AND THEN IT SOUNDED LIKE FREIGHT TRAIN RUMBLING AND PICKING UP SPEED.
Is he lying too?
FIREFIGHTER EDWARD KENNEDY
WCT2
We took two steps, there was a tremendous boom, explosion, we both turned around, and the top of the building was coming down at us. With this I just turned to Richie and said run.
Is he lying too?
BATTALION CHIEF JOHN SUDNIK
WTC2
THEN WE HEARD A LOUD EXPLOSION OR WHAT SOUNDED LIKE A LOUD EXPLOSION AND LOOKED UP AND SAW TOWER TWO START COMING DOWN.
Is he lying too?
PARAMEDIC KEVIN DARNOWSKI
3 Explosions before WTC2 fell
At that time I started walking back up towards Vesey Street. I heard three explosions, and then we heard like groaning and grinding, and tower two started to come down.
Is he lying too?
BATTALION CHIEF DOMINICK DeRUBBIO - WTC2 appeared like a timed explosion
I was looking over t h e Winter Garden a t t h e second tower, and then I saw that starting to come down. It was weird how it started to come down. It looked like it was a timed explosion
Is he lying too?
EMT MOUSSA DIAZ WTC2, big boom then collapse
When we heard the big boom, I looked up and I just saw the building collapsing.
“The sound it made. As I said I thought the terrorists planted explosives somewhere in the building. That's how loud it was, crackling explosive, a wall.”
Is he lying too?
EMT GREGG BRADY 3 explosions in WTC1 before collapse
We proceeded to 3 World Financial Center, the American Express building They set up a triage area in that lobby. ...
At that time, when I heard the 3 loud explosions,
Is he lying too?
WTC1
FIREFIGHTER KEVIN GORMAN WTC1 explosions, then falls
John Malley, who was right behind me, I turned around for him, because he was doing something, either putting his coat on or something, and as I was looking at him I heard the explosion, looked up, and saw like three floors explode
Is he lying too?
I have HUNDREDS of these quotes.
When so many witnesses mention that the very beginning of the collapse was a BIG BOOM, and many of these witnesses say that it was BELOW (not at, but BELOW) the damaged part of the building in the intact area where the supports were still undamaged - why is it that you continue to ignore them?
and why do you also ignore that what they say is supported by video evidence showing LONG STRAIGHT LINES OF EXPLOSIONS blowing out the floors before the falling debris could reach those floors, and there's seismic data showing impossibly short tremors (far too short to be from the building collapses that went on much longer) revealing the use of explosives in those controlled demolitions because it was NOT the building collapses causing those tremors?
Michael McCormack described the comments of individuals who were at ground zero when President Bush visited in the days after the attack.
"Numerous firemen were telling me that they heard numerous secondary explosions all over the building - these guys are seasoned firefighting professionals - a lot of them have military backgrounds and they're not stupid."
"Everybody on the planet knew that not only was the World Trade Center hit - it was totally wiped out," said McCormack.
McCormack said that around 75% of police, firemen and rescue personnel that he had personally spoke with now believe there is a cover-up pertaining to 9/11 and that many had been threatened that "if they ever open their mouth their pensions are at risk."
Is lying as well?
"fireman2: It was as if as if they had detonated, det..
fireman1: yea detonated yea
fireman2: as if they had planned to take down a building"
It was AS IF. Come on - these guys are not backing you up here!
"we originally had thought there was like an internal detonation explosives"
Ah, you ORIGINALLY THOUGHT that. How about NOW?
Every single one of your quotes does nothing to back up your claim.
No-one is accusing these guys are lying AT ALL. You are twisting the word 'explosion' in a way to make it consistent with your erroneous beliefs. How else would expect them to describe the collapse? Of course it sounded like an explosion - the building was pulverzing itself in front of them.
I cannot be bothered to go through each of the quotes - it doesn't take a genius to assertain the worth of them in relation to your claims.
Even if EVERYBODY there THOUGHT is LOOKED LIKE a controlled demolition that does not make it so.
To insinuate that we believe eyewitnesses to be liars is a bit rich coming from a group who deliberately rip their words from context whilst twisting and misusing them for your own ends.
I think it's painfully obvious who the liars are.
Jesus Chist, finally SOMEBODY suggested that this guy is simply out for the cash and little else. This 9/11 shit will be argued about endlessly and probably never resolved (at least not in my lifetime). There isn't TRUTH, or FACTS, people. There's EVENTS, and our BIASED INTERPRETATIONS OF SAID EVENTS. Jones? He has the ABILITY TO EXTENSIVELY MANIPULATE THE CONTENT OF EVERY "NEWS" PIECE COMING OUT OF HIS MEDIA ORGANIZATIONS, just like the Mainstream media that he says lies every other word.
{ It was AS IF. Come on...
by wideheadofknowledge on Sun Sep 17, 06 7:39pm}
You really are so desperately clutching at the smallest straws aren't you? (^^)
fireman2: We made it outside, we made it about a block.
fireman1: We made it at least 2 blocks.
fireman2: 2 blocks.
fireman1: and we started runnin'
fireman2: poch poch poch poch poch poch poch
fireman1: Floor by floor it started poppin' out ..
fireman2: It was as if as if they had detonated, det..
fireman1: yea detonated yea
fireman2: as if they had planned to take down a building,
boom boom boom boom boom boom boom boom ...
fireman1: All the way down, I was watchin it, and runnin'
Looks clear to me that they recognised a controlled demolition. Have you watched the video of their interviews?
EVERY OTHER OCCASSION both before and since Sept 11 2001, when STEEL-FRAMED tower buildings collapsed down at near free fall speed into their footprint, it has been due to a controlled demolition.
Can any of you cite a single exception to this?
With a photo
{here isn't TRUTH, or FACTS, people..
by Guest User on Thu Sep 21, 06 2:22pm}
Yes there are, and they don't favour the USA government's propaganda, or any of the OFFICIAL CONSPIRACY THEORISTS' nonsense claims and pathetic excuses.
Similes are not reliable lovelynice.
"Have you watched the video of their interviews?"
Yes, I have watched Loose Change.
Did you know on the latest "recut" edition there is a disclaimer at the beginning saying that the firefighters do NOT believe that there was a conspiracy?
That's right - their words have been ripped from context and their views misrepresented right in front of your eyes.
Check it out - you will see I am telling the truth.
I heard he wasted it all chasing a snowman
Luciferian Controllers.
Let me guess, yet another vote spammed ballot
It would be great if people who spend so much time defending the official 9-11 story that the Bush Administration has promoted would be kind enough to answer these questions;
Where's some real video of a huge plane hitting the Pentagon? You can't show any.
When is that you are you going to explain how it is possible for all the supports on a floor (both the undamaged structural supports and the damaged ones in varying amounts of damage), to fail on all sides of a building - at the exact same time - not just in 1 building, but in all 3 buildings on the same day?
When is that you are you going to provide links, quotes, and sources to back your claims about the cellphones, and show a scientific study that shows that cellphones can make successful many-minutes-long calls from passenger jets flying at passenger jet speeds, and at passenger jet altitudes?
When is that you are you going to cite any event where steel-framed hi-rises collapsed straight-down into their bases any time in the entire history of steel-framed hi-rise buildings without a controlled demolition being the cause - apart from the 3 buildings of 9-11 (WTC 1, 2, 7)?
When will you back your point of view about 9-11 with a link, source, and quote from somebody, anybody, whose mathematical simulation or computer simulation based on the empirical data (without distortion, deviation, or bullshit fictions) proves that there was enough energy for a gravity-driven collapse?
Please explain WHY if it was floors collapsing, then how the explosions were blowing out floors BEFORE those floors from above could reach them? This is visible on the videos in slow motion - you can see such on this video showing explosions going off many stories below the collapse, and eyewitness accounts of secondary explosions as well as their reporting of the first big explosions happening BELOW the plane impact point. Witnesses confirm this;
video . google . com / videoplay ? docid = 3249714675910247150 & q = 911 & h l = en
Please explain why the seismic tremors were shorter than the collapse times, and cite at least a couple of geologists and/seismic experts explaining this - because according to everyone I've asked, this is impossible and shows that the energy source for the tremors was not the collapsing buildings but could only be from another source (explosions).
You've been asked to provide real answers to many of these questions asked by Ken from Dublin, Lovelynice, Meteor7, Coldcircuit, Blackcat06, Tank Girl, but you have never answered them
|
|
