it was brought down in a controlled fasion. whats the big deal?comp_atkins
If that's so, then that's probably the explanation. Someone told the BBC "we're bringing this building down", and the BBC mis-interpreted it as "The building's come down".
[QUOTE="comp_atkins"]it was brought down in a controlled fasion. whats the big deal?SAURON221
If it drops in a controlled fashion that means it was brought down my demolition not from burning. the U.S. government states it came down by fire.
one of the chief engineers for the wtc site said it was decided to bring it down in a controlled way, as well as the building owner agreeing. its his building, he can do what he wants with it. not that big a deal. no one was killed / injured in its collapse.
I see no reason to post this all people do is say your crazy and you don't really know. Most of them don't even look at the proof you present and if they really did take the time to watch the original videoof 9/11 and proof presented by people there minds may just change.
[QUOTE="comp_atkins"]it was brought down in a controlled fasion. whats the big deal?EJ902
If that's so, then that's probably the explanation. Someone told the BBC "we're bringing this building down", and the BBC mis-interpreted it as "The building's come down". exactly.
[QUOTE="comp_atkins"]it was brought down in a controlled fasion. whats the big deal?comp_atkins
If it drops in a controlled fashion that means it was brought down my demolition not from burning. the U.S. government states it came down by fire.
one of the chief engineers for the wtc site said it was decided to bring it down in a controlled way, as well as the building owner agreeing. its his building, he can do what he wants with it. not that big a deal. no one was killed / injured in its collapse.
The original report was fire damage caused it to collapse I believe that is still the report then later the owner of the building said in a report with a tv channel they gave the decision to "pull it'. "pull it" is a demolition term to mean to blow the building up. Also he still got the insurance policies on the buildings and to my knowledge your not aloud to blow up your own buildings and still get the money.
[QUOTE="comp_atkins"]it was brought down in a controlled fasion. whats the big deal?SAURON221
If it drops in a controlled fashion that means it was brought down my demolition not from burning. the U.S. government states it came down by fire.
one of the chief engineers for the wtc site said it was decided to bring it down in a controlled way, as well as the building owner agreeing. its his building, he can do what he wants with it. not that big a deal. no one was killed / injured in its collapse.
The original report was fire damage caused it to collapse I believe that is still the report then later the owner of the building said in a report with a tv channel they gave the decision to "pull it'. "pull it" is a demolition term to mean to blow the building up. Also he still got the insurance policies on the buildings and to my knowledge your not aloud to blow up your own buildings and still get the money.
well, what do you want from me? silverstien was able to defraud his insurance company... happens a lot.. you dont get to where he is in life by being a nice guy all the time
[QUOTE="comp_atkins"]it was brought down in a controlled fasion. whats the big deal?comp_atkins
If it drops in a controlled fashion that means it was brought down my demolition not from burning. the U.S. government states it came down by fire.
one of the chief engineers for the wtc site said it was decided to bring it down in a controlled way, as well as the building owner agreeing. its his building, he can do what he wants with it. not that big a deal. no one was killed / injured in its collapse.
The original report was fire damage caused it to collapse I believe that is still the report then later the owner of the building said in a report with a tv channel they gave the decision to "pull it'. "pull it" is a demolition term to mean to blow the building up. Also he still got the insurance policies on the buildings and to my knowledge your not aloud to blow up your own buildings and still get the money.
well, what do you want from me? silverstien was able to defraud his insurance company... happens a lot.. you dont get to where he is in life by being a nice guy all the time
You obviously don't understand the importance of whether or not this building fell from demolition.
[QUOTE="comp_atkins"]it was brought down in a controlled fasion. whats the big deal?SAURON221
If it drops in a controlled fashion that means it was brought down my demolition not from burning. the U.S. government states it came down by fire.
one of the chief engineers for the wtc site said it was decided to bring it down in a controlled way, as well as the building owner agreeing. its his building, he can do what he wants with it. not that big a deal. no one was killed / injured in its collapse.
The original report was fire damage caused it to collapse I believe that is still the report then later the owner of the building said in a report with a tv channel they gave the decision to "pull it'. "pull it" is a demolition term to mean to blow the building up. Also he still got the insurance policies on the buildings and to my knowledge your not aloud to blow up your own buildings and still get the money.
well, what do you want from me? silverstien was able to defraud his insurance company... happens a lot.. you dont get to where he is in life by being a nice guy all the time
You obviously don't understand the importance of whether or not this building fell from demolition.
the owner already said it had! omg! teh conspiracy! seriously, you conspiracy guys are grasping with this one.. the only dubious part of this is that silverstein got away with it. what can i say, he has good lawyers.
ok i'll indulge. the building was prepared beforehand for implosion weeks in advance because the gov't told them they were going to fake a terrorist attack. so weeks in advance, the building was cleared out of all material, office supplies, furniture, etc.. because all that extra stuff made it difficult for the workers to do thier thing. namely demolishing all non load bearing walls in order to not hinder the collapse. of course, all this is going on while the building is in full use, but none of the occupants seem to mind at all that their walls, furniture, and computers are all gone. now the workers get to stripping the walls down to get to all the steel support columns they need to rig in order to implode the building. the steel columns are rigged with rdx and the blasting caps have all been placed, as well as wiring up all the lead lines for the electrical detonation. again, inside the building, its business as usual for the tenets.. nothing strange at all for them to see this in their office.
BBC responds, also there's no time stamp in the movie so how can you be so sure? http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/theeditors/2007/02/part_of_the_conspiracy.html
[QUOTE="biocunsumer"]BBC responds, also there's no time stamp in the movie so how can you be so sure? http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/theeditors/2007/02/part_of_the_conspiracy.html look at my link...... first paragraph
ok the video they're using is different then some of the other ones CTers suse but my link still stand. Also how stupid does any one have to be to plan such a massive conspiracy and not have a single person come forward to talk about it, yet they'll give information to a newstation in a different continent?
Another conspiracy topic? No wai! :roll:.EvanSkanes
Oh im sorry, i guess discussing how mountain dew tastes better then Dr. Pepper is way more important then realizing that there was corruption within the government when it came to the death of over 2000 American citizens? wake up
yes, becuase we're all sheople, Why is it hard to understand that a man who has tried to destroy the WTC before, has said on many occasions how he hates America, then took credit for the attacks afterwards, why couldn't he have done it?
[QUOTE="EvanSkanes"]Another conspiracy topic? No wai! :roll:.proctorsurf
Oh im sorry, i guess discussing how mountain dew tastes better then Dr. Pepper is way more important then realizing that there was corruption within the government when it came to the death of over 2000 American citizens? wake up You're goddamn right it's better. At least there's not a Dr. Pepper thread every ****ing page.
Demolitions take weeks to prepare. Obviously there was prior knowledge of what was going to occur.proctorsurf
it was improvied.....they brought tower 7 down quickly so that it wouldn't collapse and potentially hurt more people..what is so hard to understand about that?.....
[QUOTE="proctorsurf"]Demolitions take weeks to prepare. Obviously there was prior knowledge of what was going to occur.Omni-Slash
it was improvied.....they brought tower 7 down quickly so that it wouldn't collapse and potentially hurt more people..what is so hard to understand about that?.....
[QUOTE="EvanSkanes"]Another conspiracy topic? No wai! :roll:.proctorsurf
Oh im sorry, i guess discussing how mountain dew tastes better then Dr. Pepper is way more important then realizing that there was corruption within the government when it came to the death of over 2000 American citizens? wake up You, sir, are a dupe of the conspiracy. Dr. Pepper has been PROVEN by multiple videos on Google video to be the superior soda. Why don't people just do some simple research, rather than believing everything Mountain Dew tells them???
Log in to comment