|
Note: This is a Text only archive. Go directly to the real forum.
Proof that WTC7 was "pulled" BBC reports it 20 minutes before it happened.
- Click HERE to go to the original thread with graphics
banner
| Proof that WTC7 was "pulled" BBC reports it 20 minutes before it happened.
- Click HERE to go to the original thread with graphics
|
| Stickman |
Quote: Originally posted by Halcyon
No, I was convinced a while ago that WTC7 was brought down to maintain a level of safety on purpose.
For some reason though it's of paramount importance to drill this into our heads because it proves the conspiracy that the government engineered 9/11 and planted demolition charges all throughout the main two towers.... *shrug* |
Actually it does since you can't wire and drop a buidling into its own footprint in an afternoon.
WTC 7 is one of several smoking guns. |
|
|
| Billyfromsphily |
So show us a chart that explains the footprint?
Oh I guess that gravity would have it move away from that? Fucking imbecile!
You spend too much time playing with tinker toys. |
|
|
| Stickman |
Quote: Originally posted by Billyfromsphily
So show us a chart that explains the footprint?
Oh I guess that gravity would have it move away from that? Fucking imbecile!
You spend too much time playing with tinker toys. |
I'll do you one better and show you a picture. I know you resent the fact that you haven't mastered the complex skill of posting a pic on SFN.
 |
|
|
| Oz |
Quote: Originally posted by Billyfromsphily
So show us a chart that explains the footprint?
Oh I guess that gravity would have it move away from that? Fucking imbecile!
You spend too much time playing with tinker toys. |
honestly I see you jabbing at stickman about this but you might want to consider looking up if the building collapses does it naturally fall into its own footprint - because that's clearly what happend. If that's not what happens when it happens "naturally" then he's onto something. |
|
|
| Billyfromsphily |
OZ thats what I am saying. It didn't tip over. he still hasn't proved shit!
OFFICIAL SHIT THREAD! |
|
|
| Snoopyrules |
Quote: Originally posted by KOAJaps
Fine you debunked 9/11. It's all conspiracy lies. Why then after six years in office has Bush not secure the borders? Why are the Republicans yelling now to close the borders when for 12 years, even during the Clinton administration, the Republican did nothing to close the borders? Why are they now screaming to close the borders, when they are now the minority? Also, the map?
Are members of known terrorists organizations in America. Why aren't the borders closed and why aren't we arresting these terrorists? It'll violate their civil rights? Wrong! The Patriot Act as well as the backing of the Supreme Court allows the removal of these terrorists, but each terrorists that's deported, more are coming in from the borders and by visas. So why aren't we closing the borders? Is it because we're doing a fine job keeping the terrorists out?
Sure don't seem like it. Well then, maybe what happened on 9/11 did not occur with terrorists, because, it appears the Bush administration isn't interested in sealing the borders and arresting businesses who hire illegals. Maybe there is something to these conspiracy theories, because, it appears the Bush administration does not care about security, because, there is no reason to and if that theory is correct, as evident in the border crossing and the members of terrorists in America, then suffice to say maybe that 9/11 was actually a false flag to attack Iraq and Afghanistan when the WMDs are in Russia, China, North Korea, India, Pakistan and Israel?
No you're right, believe in the government, they are truthful, they are here to protect us, when it was the Republicans' party God Ronald Wilson Reagan who said, "The most terrifying words in the English language are: I'm from the government and I'm here to help." and " In this present crisis, government is not the solution to our problem; government is the problem." Which is it, believe the official story or Believe Reagan?
By the Way, everyone knows
Ronald=6
Wilson=6
Reagan=6
But did you know his name is an anagram to: Insane Anglo Warlord? |
I have no idea how all this supports 9/11. If the point is to bash the republican party because you think I'm a member, you wasted this on the wrong person. I'm a registered democrat who believes Reagan was as evil as Bush...BUT, 9/11 was terrorism. Believing otherwise is for the wackos crowd. |
|
|
| Stickman |
How convincing!
The website declined to show this webpage
HTTP 403
Most likely causes:
This website requires you to log in.
What you can try:
Go back to the previous page.
More information
This error (HTTP 403 Forbidden) means that Internet Explorer was able to connect to the website, but it does not have permission to view the webpage.
For more information about HTTP errors, see Help. |
|
|
| itsdifferent |
Links don't work for me
and I don't care if these are too big
 |
|
|
| tourette_ticker |
Quote: Originally posted by Oz
honestly I see you jabbing at stickman about this but you might want to consider looking up if the building collapses does it naturally fall into its own footprint - because that's clearly what happend. If that's not what happens when it happens "naturally" then he's onto something. |
Where else would gravity allow a building to collapse? Unless explosives were used, and then you can blast it out of the footprint. |
|
|
| Stickman |
Quote: Originally posted by tourette_ticker
Where else would gravity allow a building to collapse? |
In the direction of the damage.
All three buildings collapsed straight down at nearly freefall speed.
Why wasn't one of the collapses progressive? or why didn't a single building topple over? |
|
|
| tourette_ticker |
Quote: Originally posted by Stickman
In the direction of the damage.
All three buildings collapsed straight down at nearly freefall speed.
Why wasn't one of the collapses progressive? or why didn't a single building topple over? |
Buildings do not fall over sideways just because you expect them to. This really shows your lack of understanding of the physics involved here.
If you think you understand the subject, this should be a simple question for you.
What force would cause the building to fall in the direction of the damage?
And as far as progressive, I am not sure I know what you mean. If you can elaborate I will try to answer. |
|
|
| Stickman |
Quote: Originally posted by tourette_ticker
Buildings do not fall over sideways just because you expect them to. This really shows your lack of understanding of the physics involved here.
|
It's you who has a lack of understanding. This took about two minutes to find on google.
 |
|
|
| Stickman |
Then I remembered this recent collapse in the Philipines.
 |
|
|
| Halcyon |
No offense Stickman... but Phillipines?
And where was the other picture taken? Mexico?
I mean.. what kind of foundations were these buildings sitting on? The phillipines picture looks like someone just pushed it over for christ's sake.
I'd imagine the construction and foundation laying of these buildings is nowhere near the kind of meticulous construction we use for buildings such as the WTC |
|
|
| Stickman |
Quote: Originally posted by Halcyon
No offense Stickman... but Phillipines?
And where was the other picture taken? Mexico?
I mean.. what kind of foundations were these buildings sitting on? The phillipines picture looks like someone just pushed it over for christ's sake.
I'd imagine the construction and foundation laying of these buildings is nowhere near the kind of meticulous construction we use for buildings such as the WTC |
You're right. The WTC was built with enormous cores and foundations.
These pics only refute TT's point. Buildings will topple over in the direction of damage.
WTC 7 was not damaged to the point where it would collapse in on itself. Check the pic of the WTC 7 footprint and you can see the exterior walls are pulled in, in the exact manner of a controlled demolition. |
|
|
| Glenda Yenta |
| I didn't realize how many structural engineers posted on this forum. It's truly amazing! |
|
|
| Billyfromsphily |
| Hal, Stickman's allegations are always a car wreck and who can pass it and by not look? |
|
|
| Halcyon |
Quote: Originally posted by Glenda Yenta
I didn't realize how many structural engineers posted on this forum. It's truly amazing! |
No shit... I'm going back to my stupid little space thread |
|
|
| tourette_ticker |
Quote: Originally posted by Stickman
You're right. The WTC was built with enormous cores and foundations.
These pics only refute TT's point. Buildings will topple over in the direction of damage.
WTC 7 was not damaged to the point where it would collapse in on itself. Check the pic of the WTC 7 footprint and you can see the exterior walls are pulled in, in the exact manner of a controlled demolition. |
As both of those buildings are still largely intact, they did not collapse, they toppled. Big difference. And what and where is the "damage" that these buildings toppled in the direction of? You have refuted nothing. |
|
|
| Stickman |
You don't have to be a structural engineer to know that there never were fires hot enough in WTC 7 to bring it down in 6.5 seconds, into its own footprint.
You guys are falling for the logical fallacy of 'appeal to authority.' A fact is knowable without regard to authority. |
|
|
| Billyfromsphily |
Quote: Originally posted by Stickman
You don't have to be a structural engineer to know that there never were fires hot enough in WTC 7 to bring it down in 6.5 seconds, into its own footprint.
You guys are falling for the logical fallacy of 'appeal to authority.' A fact is knowable without regard to authority. |
You are no scientist either and posting a picture and making a declaration or giving an opinion is not enough. Except for you and all your friends on the left hand side of the bell curve. |
|
|
| Halcyon |
Quote: Originally posted by Stickman
You don't have to be a structural engineer to know that there never were fires hot enough in WTC 7 to bring it down in 6.5 seconds, into its own footprint. |
I'll admit... when I watched it all unfold ON 9/11, I was so surprised to hear they had fallen. The fires and damage that could be seen on CNN for example did not look like it would have been possible for that little bit of damage and fire to collapse a building or TWO like the twin towers! |
|
|
| VacateTheWord |
Quote: Originally posted by Stickman
You don't have to be a structural engineer to know that there never were fires hot enough in WTC 7 to bring it down in 6.5 seconds, into its own footprint.
You guys are falling for the logical fallacy of 'appeal to authority.' A fact is knowable without regard to authority. |
What about the stuctural damage done to the building as a result of the twin towers collapse? |
|
|
| Stickman |
Quote: Originally posted by VacateTheWord
What about the stuctural damage done to the building as a result of the twin towers collapse? |
There is no photographic evidence of massive damage enough to cause a 6.5 second collapse. |
|
|
| Snoopyrules |
no damage being done here
 |
|
|
| Snoopyrules |
Quote: Originally posted by Stickman
You don't have to be a structural engineer to know that there never were fires hot enough in WTC 7 to bring it down in 6.5 seconds, into its own footprint.
You guys are falling for the logical fallacy of 'appeal to authority.' A fact is knowable without regard to authority. |
Just because you constantly say it's a logical fallacy doesn't make it true. It just means you learned a term somewhere and you're trying to create the illusion of intellect. It's the same reason you quote Faulkner. Your conspiracy story is still ridiculous and there's no getting around that no matter how many smoke screens you throw up to ensure that you're not exposed for the idiot you are. Tell me again, how many of the millions of people that had views of the World Trade Center recollect it being dark the weekend before the attack? How many people can verify that a power down occurred? How many of firefighters back up your story? No need to answer' I'll do it for you....zero, 1 (although he's been pretty silent ever since), and 1 (he did it 5 years after the attack and after watching loose change and it contradicts every firefighter who verify the damage and the pending collapse). |
|
|
| Snoopyrules |
Quote: Originally posted by Stickman
How convincing!
The website declined to show this webpage
HTTP 403
Most likely causes:
This website requires you to log in.
What you can try:
Go back to the previous page.
More information
This error (HTTP 403 Forbidden) means that Internet Explorer was able to connect to the website, but it does not have permission to view the webpage.
For more information about HTTP errors, see Help. |
Hey dumbass, I didn't say click on the link, I said copy and paste it in a new window. Read directions correctly instead of trolling for quotes you could post to make you appear brighter than evidence suggests. |
|
|
| Kill Van Kull |
Quote: Originally posted by Stickman
You're right. The WTC was built with enormous cores and foundations.
These pics only refute TT's point. Buildings will topple over in the direction of damage.
WTC 7 was not damaged to the point where it would collapse in on itself. Check the pic of the WTC 7 footprint and you can see the exterior walls are pulled in, in the exact manner of a controlled demolition. |
You weren't there.
:D |
|
|
| Stickman |
Quote: Originally posted by Snoopyrules
no damage being done here
|
So then why didn't the two buildings on either side of 7 collapse?
Only Silverstein owned buildings fall on 9/11? Even one across the street huh?
Just another coincidence, I suppose. You guys really are coincidence theorists. |
|
|
| tourette_ticker |
Quote: Originally posted by Stickman
So then why didn't the two buildings on either side of 7 collapse?
Only Silverstein owned buildings fall on 9/11? Even one across the street huh?
Just another coincidence, I suppose. You guys really are coincidence theorists. |
So this damage was an element of the plan? Made to convince us that explosives were not used? Cool. How did they do that?
 |
|
|
| Oz |
Quote: Originally posted by tourette_ticker
So this damage was an element of the plan? Made to convince us that explosives were not used? Cool. How did they do that?
|
don't forget these buildings are designed by code to NOT fall from most damage - including direct hits from airplanes |
|
|
| Stickman |
Quote: Originally posted by tourette_ticker
So this damage was an element of the plan? Made to convince us that explosives were not used? Cool. How did they do that?
|
Spare me the strawman tactics.
The real question is if there was significant damage to the SW corner, why did the collapse begin at the penthouse down, pulling the exterior walls in, in the exact manner of a controlled implosion? |
|
|
| Billyfromsphily |
| Stickman, if you were a doctor , you would use a crayon to describe a tumor instead of a X-ray. |
|
|
| Halcyon |
Quote: Originally posted by Stickman
Spare me the strawman tactics.
The real question is if there was significant damage to the SW corner, why did the collapse begin at the penthouse down, pulling the exterior walls in, in the exact manner of a controlled implosion? |
With all the media coverage regarding 9/11 at the time.... why have I NEVER seen a piece of video evidence, from you, supporting this claim? |
|
|
| Stickman |
Quote: Originally posted by Halcyon
With all the media coverage regarding 9/11 at the time.... why have I NEVER seen a piece of video evidence, from you, supporting this claim? |
Probably because you can't watch videos where you work.
It might be among the hundred or so videos Fates and I have posted, after which you would promptly remind us that you can't watch videos at work.
http://video.google.com/videoplay?d...3&q=wtc+7&hl=en |
|
|
| Halcyon |
Quote: Originally posted by Stickman
Probably because you can't watch videos where you work.
It might be among the hundred or so videos Fates and I have posted, after which you would promptly remind us that you can't watch videos at work.
http://video.google.com/videoplay?d...3&q=wtc+7&hl=en |
Very probably supposition... thanks for the link... I will watch this when I get home tonight |
|
|
| WillieJones |
Quote: Originally posted by Oz
don't forget these buildings are designed by code to NOT fall from most damage - including direct hits from airplanes |
The code isn't based on testing of direct hits from airplanes, more on theory... |
|
|
| tourette_ticker |
Quote: Originally posted by WillieJones
The code isn't based on testing of direct hits from airplanes, more on theory... |
And the design planes were smaller, low on fuel and flying slow because they are lost in fog. That is the scenario designed for, not an intentional attack at full speed. |
|
|
| focker |
| Please take your conspiracy theories with you when you get hit by a car tonight.. how could I know that? |
|
|
| KOAJaps |
Quote: Originally posted by Billyfromsphily
You are no scientist either and posting a picture and making a declaration or giving an opinion is not enough. Except for you and all your friends on the left hand side of the bell curve. |
Alex Jones a lefty? |
|
|
| Halcyon |
Quote: Originally posted by KOAJaps
Alex Jones a lefty? |
Why oh WHY did you have to bump this thread? :( |
|
|
| KOAJaps |
Quote: Originally posted by VacateTheWord
What about the stuctural damage done to the building as a result of the twin towers collapse? |
What about the building that houses Deutschland Bank, which was closer to T-1 than T-7 and it didn't collapse. |
|
|
| KOAJaps |
Quote: Originally posted by Snoopyrules
Just because you constantly say it's a logical fallacy doesn't make it true. It just means you learned a term somewhere and you're trying to create the illusion of intellect. It's the same reason you quote Faulkner. Your conspiracy story is still ridiculous and there's no getting around that no matter how many smoke screens you throw up to ensure that you're not exposed for the idiot you are. Tell me again, how many of the millions of people that had views of the World Trade Center recollect it being dark the weekend before the attack? How many people can verify that a power down occurred? How many of firefighters back up your story? No need to answer' I'll do it for you....zero, 1 (although he's been pretty silent ever since), and 1 (he did it 5 years after the attack and after watching loose change and it contradicts every firefighter who verify the damage and the pending collapse). |
There's a recording I'm wanting to hear that has the firefighters saying that there are explosions all around them. Long before the towers collapsed. Maybe it's a rumor but it's worth listening |
|
|
| KOAJaps |
Quote: Originally posted by WillieJones
The code isn't based on testing of direct hits from airplanes, more on theory... |
And T-7 was not hit either. So why did it collapse and not the facades closer to T-1 and T-2? |
|
|
| KOAJaps |
Quote: Originally posted by focker
Please take your conspiracy theories with you when you get hit by a car tonight.. how could I know that? |
Well maybe you're a psychic or maybe threatening the people who ask questions. Which is it? I hope it aint the latter, because, dick-face sued a listeners from Stepping out (of the closet) Magazine...I forgot his name |
|
|
| KOAJaps |
Quote: Originally posted by Halcyon
Why oh WHY did you have to bump this thread? :( |
because I had mail and decided to respond |
|
|
| Billyfromsphily |
Quote: Originally posted by KOAJaps
Well maybe you're a psychic or maybe threatening the people who ask questions. Which is it? I hope it aint the latter, because, dick-face sued a listeners from Stepping out (of the closet) Magazine...I forgot his name |
It was Chauncey and he was involved in wiring the buildings for controlled demolition.
Oh yeah, if building 7 was demolished by controlled demolition, then why are there no seismographic evidence of explosions before it fell ? Just like the other towers? Nop series of pops before they collapsed...... |
|
|
| Stickman |
Quote: Originally posted by Halcyon
Very probably supposition... thanks for the link... I will watch this when I get home tonight |
How did that turn out for you, Hal? |
|
|
| Stickman |
"As a former Minister Of National Defense, when the news came out I had to wonder. Why did airplanes fly around for an hour and a half without interceptors being scrambled from Andrews? Why did the President just sit in the schoolroom when he heard the news? Why did he not acknowledge that he already knew what was going on? You spend billions and billions with spooks all over the world and surely should have known what was going on. You get into very deep terroritory here because it's the same kind of thing as we saw with Pearl Harbor."
— Paul Hellyer - Former National Defense Minister Of Canada |
|
|
| Billyfromsphily |
| So the minister of Defense for Canada was at Pearl Harbor? |
|
|
| Stickman |
Let me see if I get this billylogic. You have to be at a historical event to study the historical event?
Only Snoopy can understand what the fuck you're talking about. |
|
|
| Snoopyrules |
Quote: Originally posted by KOAJaps
What about the building that houses Deutschland Bank, which was closer to T-1 than T-7 and it didn't collapse. |
You do know that this non Silverstein building is structual unsound due to the damage suffered. It has been vacant since the attack and is in the process of being taken down. |
|
|
| Snoopyrules |
Quote: Originally posted by KOAJaps
And T-7 was not hit either. So why did it collapse and not the facades closer to T-1 and T-2? |
this is why
Can you not see this building is getting pummeled by steel at concrete. It's taken a direct hit. Why is this ignored. |
|
|
| Snoopyrules |
Quote: Originally posted by KOAJaps
There's a recording I'm wanting to hear that has the firefighters saying that there are explosions all around them. Long before the towers collapsed. Maybe it's a rumor but it's worth listening |
Read every single one of these
http://www.nytimes.com/packages/htm...stories_01.html
Find one firefighter who backs up this nonsense without taking the quote out of context.
This stupid story needs to end; it's a joke and you people are idiots. |
|
|
| Stickman |
Quote: Originally posted by Snoopyrules
You do know that this non Silverstein building is structual unsound due to the damage suffered. It has been vacant since the attack and is in the process of being taken down. |
Yeah, but it didn't collapse. That's the point. |
|
|
| Snoopyrules |
Quote: Originally posted by Stickman
"As a former Minister Of National Defense, when the news came out I had to wonder. Why did airplanes fly around for an hour and a half without interceptors being scrambled from Andrews? Why did the President just sit in the schoolroom when he heard the news? Why did he not acknowledge that he already knew what was going on? You spend billions and billions with spooks all over the world and surely should have known what was going on. You get into very deep terroritory here because it's the same kind of thing as we saw with Pearl Harbor."
— Paul Hellyer - Former National Defense Minister Of Canada |
Here is something else Paul Hellyer believes
Paul Hellyer, a former Minister of Defence in the Pearson Government, has announced his belief that UFOs are real and that the US is developing weapons systems for space which are to be used against alien craft entering earth's airspace.
http://www.ufobc.ca/Beyond/exopolitics.htm |
|
|
| Snoopyrules |
Quote: Originally posted by Stickman
Yeah, but it didn't collapse. That's the point. |
That's the point now....last time your point that the people from Deutche Bank were linked to the CIA. You're good at changing your stupid story. |
|
|
| Stickman |
| Oh that's true. Buzzy Krongaard is definitely linked to both, but the Deutsche bldg didn't collapse. |
|
|
| Snoopyrules |
Quote: Originally posted by Stickman
Oh that's true. Buzzy Krongaard is definitely linked to both, but the Deutsche bldg didn't collapse. |
First off the with the exception of WTC 7 of all the WTC buildings are all in the same complex. So, it's logical that if two 110 story building fall, the buidlings directly below them would be ruined. So, that explains what happned to 3, 4, 5, and 6. Now we need to look at the buildings on the streets across from the complex. If you look at the collapse in post #354 it's clear WTC 7 is taking brunt of the collapsing steel and concrete. Additionally the other 2 buildins are smaller and not as squared. It is clear from that picture that if one of those 3 was going to collapse, WTC 7 would have the highest probability. Add the raging fires in that building (see mulitple testimonials in post #355) and the likelihood goes even higher. Now if we look at the buildings the wackos say "why didn't that one fall" to the left and the right (the the skinny one on the left is millenium hotel (next to the Century 21 where I occasionally go because it's in walking distance of my job) and the tall one with the green pyramid on top is the Am Ex building, you can cleary see it's not suffering the same pummeling as WTC 7. So, of all the buildings outside the complex the one suffering the greatest trauma causing the greatest likelihood of collapse is WTC 7. Now on the other side of the street across from building 2, you have the Deutche Bank Building. That is the only other buildling that could have possibly suffered the same amount of pummeling WTC 7 did. While it didn't fall, it was ruined forever. So of the 2 buildings that had the greatest likelihood of collapse the one that had server fires on top of severe trauma collapsed and the other was permanently collapsed. It's logical and not this Silverstein (who sued to have the courts pay him for 2 attacks but LOST the case) co-conspirator compliance crap.
 |
|
|
| nunpuncher |
Quote: Originally posted by Stickman
"As a former Minister Of National Defense, when the news came out I had to wonder. Why did airplanes fly around for an hour and a half without interceptors being scrambled from Andrews? Why did the President just sit in the schoolroom when he heard the news? Why did he not acknowledge that he already knew what was going on? You spend billions and billions with spooks all over the world and surely should have known what was going on. You get into very deep terroritory here because it's the same kind of thing as we saw with Pearl Harbor."
— Paul Hellyer - Former National Defense Minister Of Canada |
i agree why did he sit in classroom
why not put on his superman cape and fly around the world a bunch of times reversing everything that happened |
|
|
| Halcyon |
Quote: Originally posted by Stickman
How did that turn out for you, Hal? |
Ok... I watched that clip 4 times in a row... and looked for 2 things:
1) The collapse starting from the penthouse down.... as you claim
No, the building falls straight down from the bottom, not the top
2) The exterior walls are pulled in before the building collapses which indicates a demolition explosive type effect, as you claim
No, what I see is the middle of the building 'slumps' down, not in, as it collapses.
Now... I am NOT a physics expert, and I am NOT a demolition expert, and I am NOT an architect, and I am NOT in construction.
My knowledge of implosions and demolitions I must confess lends itself to seeing implosions and demolitions on television such as:
The seattle superdome demolition
Various hotels in Las Vegas
Various hotels in America on television
As I recall, they look different from how THIS building fell. Is there any other video links that prove your two claims?
I'm going to give this another chance... Thanks for the link, but with that video, I am still not convinced... it looks like the building falls from the bottom and that it slumps in the middle not inwards.... |
|
|
| Billyfromsphily |
Quote: Originally posted by Stickman
Let me see if I get this billylogic. You have to be at a historical event to study the historical event
Only Snoopy can understand what the fuck you're talking about. |
Again you show your lack of intelligence by criticizing what you are unable to understand.
Can you show us the seismographic charts that have the details of the charges being set off to begin the controlled demolition?
NO you can't so this thread and all the other threads about the conspiracy are shit.
Now understand why I make fun of your internet science !
You really are MR. LIE THE SCIENCE GUY.
OFFICIAL SHIT THREAD! |
|
|
| Stickman |
Quote: Originally posted by Halcyon
No, the building falls straight down from the bottom, not the top
2) The exterior walls are pulled in before the building collapses which indicates a demolition explosive type effect, as you claim
|
From the bottom? Here are three pics of the kink at the top of the bldg that starts the collapse. See the penthouse?
I never said the exterior walls were pulled in before the collapse. They were pulled in last. That's why the exterior walls cover the debris pile
|
|
|
| Halcyon |
Quote: Originally posted by Stickman
From the bottom? Here are three pics of the kink at the top of the bldg that starts the collapse. See the penthouse?
I never said the exterior walls were pulled in before the collapse. They were pulled in last. That's why the exterior walls cover the debris pile
|
Hmm... again, it's really hard to tell what to see in those pictures.
Let's suffice to say that it begs the questions of what really happened there.
It's evident to me however that there really should be a HUGE investigation into what happened to those buildings, and that day in general.
Thanks for showing me those photos and the video. |
|
|
| Stickman |
Quote: Originally posted by Halcyon
Hmm... again, it's really hard to tell what to see in those pictures.
Let's suffice to say that it begs the questions of what really happened there.
It's evident to me however that there really should be a HUGE investigation into what happened to those buildings, and that day in general.
Thanks for showing me those photos and the video. |
Ahh yes, the sweet smell of common ground.
I'm not really the persistent asshole I might come off as to some on here. When I first started posting this stuff, all I hoped for was the reaction you give here.
I don't expect everyone to agree with me, but I do expect that a look into the larger story of 9/11 should, at least, elicit a desire to re investigate.
BTW, Ron Paul would agree completely. He's been very outspoken about this on Alex Jones' show. |
|
|
| Halcyon |
Quote: Originally posted by Stickman
Ahh yes, the sweet smell of common ground.
I'm not really the persistent asshole I might come off as to some on here. When I first started posting this stuff, all I hoped for was the reaction you give here.
I don't expect everyone to agree with me, but I do expect that a look into the larger story of 9/11 should, at least, elicit a desire to re investigate.
BTW, Ron Paul would agree completely. He's been very outspoken about this on Alex Jones' show. |
I mean, but you do realize that this has been my position really for the longest time.
We disagree about what we see, but the overall position on the issue was ALWAYS the same.
I hope you realize that.
BTW: I don't agree with everything that Ron Paul believes in... ie... abortion, and gun laws |
|
|
| Stickman |
Quote: Originally posted by Halcyon
I mean, but you do realize that this has been my position really for the longest time.
We disagree about what we see, but the overall position on the issue was ALWAYS the same.
I hope you realize that. |
I do. I was just commending you that for all of the differences in details, what I think most Americans would agree with is that a thorough investigation is necessary. It was not accomplished with the Commission, and even they admit that.
Now to a larger, more difficult question:
If a thorough, complete, and objective investigation were to occur, which do you think is more likely?
a) Evidence proves the planning of the attack by OBL and carried out by the 19 Arab hijackers.
b) Evidence proves that elements of the US gov't either assisted the hijackers in carrying out the attack or actually facillitated the attack and then lied to cover up the truth. |
|
|
| Halcyon |
Quote: Originally posted by Stickman
I do. I was just commending you that for all of the differences in details, what I think most Americans would agree with is that a thorough investigation is necessary. It was not accomplished with the Commission, and even they admit that.
Now to a larger, more difficult question:
If a thorough, complete, and objective investigation were to occur, which do you think is more likely?
a) Evidence proves the planning of the attack by OBL and carried out by the 19 Arab hijackers.
b) Evidence proves that elements of the US gov't either assisted the hijackers in carrying out the attack or actually facillitated the attack and then lied to cover up the truth. |
I choose B....however.... I do not think the buildings were wired to explode. This is the major bone of contention between you and I.
I have no qualms about extending the blame for 9/11 to the government. We've been shown before from other governments in the past that it is entirely possible for a government to do aweful things to their own people.
Some do it blatantly (like Saddam who tortures and kills his own people for crimes) and some do it with stealth (like our own Government conducting experiments on small towns with experimental chemicals and shit [and yes, I do believe this gets done, that's why I live in a metropolitan area or major city]). But I think all governments are capable and it's certainly been proven, that they very rarely care about the lives of a few as long as they can obtain their ultimate goals of greed, power, and corruption.
This is what I believe.... do I think the government had a hand in 9/11? Very possibly. Let's just say it wouldn't surprise me if this was the case. But certain facets you try to provide to prove the case I disagree with. |
|
|
| Stickman |
Quote: Originally posted by Halcyon
This is what I believe.... do I think the government had a hand in 9/11? Very possibly. Let's just say it wouldn't surprise me if this was the case. But certain facets you try to provide to prove the case I disagree with. |
Totally understandable, and I respect the fact that you can keep it clear and respectful. |
|
|
| Billyfromsphily |
| You respect the fact but no one else . Oh I forgot, this is the Stern Fan Network and your internet science and phone respect are a Joke. Go ahead and curse your questioners its all just fun lkke your crackpot theories. |
|
|
| Stickman |
Quote: Originally posted by Billyfromsphily
You respect the fact but no one else . Oh I forgot, this is the Stern Fan Network and your internet science and phone respect are a Joke. Go ahead and curse your questioners its all just fun lkke your crackpot theories. |
In billylogic I wonder what phone respect is... |
|
|
| Billyfromsphily |
| Again your don't know..... all of your statements express basic level of ignorance. |
|
|
| Halcyon |
Quote: Originally posted by Billyfromsphily
Again your don't know..... all of your statements express basic level of ignorance. |
If Stickman is really as stupid as you say... he'd have to have more than just a rudimentary level of ignorance.... he'd have to be a master of it. |
|
|
| Billyfromsphily |
Well he won't address the question of how they wired and demolished WTC 7 without there being any seismic shock waves from the explosives.
He can't put together a rudimentary explanation without interjecting opinion and using questions instead of facts, of how it was pulled off.
He attacks people when questions exceed his capacity for rational thought.
He spins and deflects with profanity and picks on non essential things to cover his lack of experience in any of the required fields to be investigator of any stature.
He dwells on others weaknesses instead of working to answer the questions posed
Its more about him and not about the incidents.
His constant posting of the same pictures that are not conclusive proof of his premises.
He wanders back and forth from Noble to Coarse and blames it on the site and not his lack of refinement. Or in other words, the subject is a joke when he wants it to be since this is SFN.
I feel that this says he has basically mastered the rudiments of ignorance. |
|
|
| Halcyon |
Quote: Originally posted by Billyfromsphily
Well he won't address the question of how they wired and demolished WTC 7 without there being any seismic shock waves from the explosives.
He can't put together a rudimentary explanation without interjecting opinion and using questions instead of facts, of how it was pulled off.
He attacks people when questions exceed his capacity for rational thought.
He spins and deflects with profanity and picks on non essential things to cover his lack of experience in any of the required fields to be investigator of any stature.
He dwells on others weaknesses instead of working to answer the questions posed
Its more about him and not about the incidents.
His constant posting of the same pictures that are not conclusive proof of his premises.
He wanders back and forth from Noble to Coarse and blames it on the site and not his lack of refinement. Or in other words, the subject is a joke when he wants it to be since this is SFN.
I feel that this says he has basically mastered the rudiments of ignorance. |
I think you spend way too much time thinking about Stickman.... you might want to take a vacation from SFN. :hw: Just trying to be helpful |
|
|
| Billyfromsphily |
| Thanks Hal, I don't really spend more than a few seconds every time he posts more nonsense. Its just such a target rich environment. He insults the dead and the professional so he will be questioned and made fun of for a long time. |
|
|
| tourette_ticker |
Quote: Originally posted by Halcyon
I think you spend way too much time thinking about Stickman.... you might want to take a vacation from SFN. :hw: Just trying to be helpful |
In Billy's defence (not that he needs it or requested it form me - but that never stopped me before :p ) it can be very difficult to let some of stick's crap go without responding to it. I think it is more for other's than it is for Stick. He's a lost cause. |
|
|
| Stickman |
Quote: Originally posted by tourette_ticker
In Billy's defence (not that he needs it or requested it form me - but that never stopped me before :p ) it can be very difficult to let some of stick's crap go without responding to it. I think it is more for other's than it is for Stick. He's a lost cause. |
Not only do you make little sense here, any chance you can be specific about my "crap?" or are you content with being a whiny douche? |
|
|
| Billyfromsphily |
Quote: Originally posted by Stickman
Not only do you make little sense here, any chance you can be specific about my "crap?" or are you content with being a whiny douche? |
Way to win friends and influence people with that kind remark. OHHHH its the Stern Fan Network , comment coming next? Its all about Stickman. You can't handle the holes in your stupid theory and you can't stand having your ego bruised ! Now where is the crap about the seismographic records of the charges being set off before any of the collapses?
Now who's the Whiny Little Douchebag???? |
|
|
| Stickman |
Quote: Originally posted by Billyfromsphily
Way to win friends and influence people with that kind remark. OHHHH its the Stern Fan Network , comment coming next? Its all about Stickman. You can't handle the holes in your stupid theory and you can't stand having your ego bruised ! Now where is the crap about the seismographic records of the charges being set off before any of the collapses?
Now who's the Whiny Little Douchebag???? |
Sounds like you. Your posts very much resemble the ramblings of a menstruating mental patient.
Now what are you talking about seismographic records? Did I say anything about seismographic records of WTC 7? No. So for entertainment's sake, what the fuck are you talking about? |
|
|
| Billyfromsphily |
| Answer the question asshole ! |
|
|
| Stickman |
What fucking question?
I'm all ears, Billy. Ask me a specific question that can be answered with reference to research, and I'll answer as best as possible. And I won't even call you an asshole. |
|
|
| Billyfromsphily |
| Where is the seismographic records of the collapses and why doesn't it show charges being set off? |
|
|
| Billyfromsphily |
| Answer that Asshole...! |
|
|
| Billyfromsphily |
Whats the matter Stickman ? After all these months you don't have this KEY information at fingertip reach? I guess it would not be in your best interest to provide it as it totally defeats your controlled demolition theory no matter what some (Pull IT) conversation can be twisted into.
OHH I see its been deleted or destroyed by Jack Bauer or some of the other UBER agents who perpetrated the collapse?
Take your time... I'm sure you can provide some credible excuse if you take forever.
. |
|
|
| Stickman |
Quote: Originally posted by Billyfromsphily
Where is the seismographic records of the collapses and why doesn't it show charges being set off? |
Sorry that I wasn't perched atop my computer waiting for this gem. I had to go drain some glycerin from a biodiesel batch.
You're asking two questions. The first part is easy. Seismographic records from Columbia U exist for the collapses of the towers. So? You're trying to get me to argue a point I didn't make. This thread is about the implosion of WTC 7. I didn't bring up seismographic records you did.
Now if I had to speculate one reason why such records don't show "charges being set off" might be because the charges are attached to the frame of the building, not the ground. Or maybe seismographs for the collapse of WTC 7 aren't available to the public. I haven't seen them.
A word of advice, if you really want to debate this, back up your silly questions with a graph, a link, a quote, anything but your incomprehensible cuntiness. |
|
|
| Billyfromsphily |
SILLY QUESTIONS Thats good! It shows the depth of your investigation.
"I can't answer that because its silly!"
Now you sound like George Bush and we all know what s genius he is.
OK now here is a SILLY QUESTION for this OFFICIAL SHIT THREAD!
WHY DON"T YOU GO GET THE ANSWERS TO THE SILLY QUESTION?
Can't come up with it can you!
Keep spinning and deflecting. Its what you do best!
A word of advice . If you start something then you better be able to finish it and you are no where near that, so answer the question or shut the fuck up!
. |
|
|
| tourette_ticker |
Quote: Originally posted by Stickman
What fucking question?
I'm all ears, Billy. Ask me a specific question that can be answered with reference to research, and I'll answer as best as possible. And I won't even call you an asshole. |
Well you never responded to this:
Quote: Originally posted by tourette_ticker
As both of those buildings are still largely intact, they did not collapse, they toppled. Big difference. And what and where is the "damage" that these buildings toppled in the direction of? You have refuted nothing. |
You just posted up a couple of pictures and claimed to refute my statements. You never showed how you pictures were reasonable comparisons to the collapse we were discussing. |
|
|
| Stickman |
Quote: Originally posted by tourette_ticker
Well you never responded to this:
You just posted up a couple of pictures and claimed to refute my statements. You never showed how you pictures were reasonable comparisons to the collapse we were discussing. |
We went over this. You made the claim that buildings don't topple over. I posted pics of buildings toppled over. Get over it. Now ask a real question. |
|
|
| Billyfromsphily |
Another weak, deflected, non- answer.
OFFICIAL SHIT THREAD ! |
|
|
| Stickman |
Quote: Originally posted by Billyfromsphily
Another weak, deflected, non- answer.
OFFICIAL SHIT THREAD ! |
Billy:
OFFICIAL SHIT HEAD
You make it too easy, dude. |
|
|
| Billyfromsphily |
| Still can't answer the specific question can you! |
|
|
| tourette_ticker |
Quote: Originally posted by Stickman
We went over this. You made the claim that buildings don't topple over. I posted pics of buildings toppled over. Get over it. Now ask a real question. |
You are changing my claim. I asked how your pictures related and what the damage was. You still haven't answered. That is the type of "crap" I was referring to earlier. |
|
|
| Billyfromsphily |
So the final answer is .................I'm rubber your glue. Whatever you say bounces off of me and sticks to you".
Thats the kind off proof that makes people want to spend millions of dollars educating stickman and his gang, because they are incapable of learning and understanding. They need very simple answers to complex issues and if it can't be explained in a cartoon, then they are mad.
PROOF of....................................................................AN OFFICIAL SHIT THREAD !
Again.
. |
|
|
| Stickman |
Quote: Originally posted by tourette_ticker
You are changing my claim. I asked how your pictures related and what the damage was. You still haven't answered. That is the type of "crap" I was referring to earlier. |
NIST and Popular Mechanics assert that a 25 story "scoop" was taken out of WTC 7 in the southwest corner.
My question is why did the building implode with the penthouse collapsing first, straight down in 6.5 seconds, in the exact manner of a controlled demolition? |
|
|
| tourette_ticker |
Quote: Originally posted by Stickman
NIST and Popular Mechanics assert that a 25 story "scoop" was taken out of WTC 7 in the southwest corner.
My question is why did the building implode with the penthouse collapsing first, straight down in 6.5 seconds, in the exact manner of a controlled demolition? |
If it was weakened to the point of collapse (as it obviously was) what would you expect it to do, and why? |
|
|
| Stickman |
Quote: Originally posted by tourette_ticker
If it was weakened to the point of collapse (as it obviously was) what would you expect it to do, and why? |
What evidence do you have that it ever was weakened to the point of collapse? |
|
|
| Snoopyrules |
Quote: Originally posted by Stickman
What evidence do you have that it ever was weakened to the point of collapse? |
First, t | | | | | |
