It is currently Sun Nov 23, 2014 1:01 pm

All times are UTC - 4 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 8 posts ] 
Author Message
 Post subject: Building 7
PostPosted: Sat Feb 19, 2011 7:50 pm 
Offline
Hear Me Roar!

Joined: Sat Nov 13, 2010 11:04 am
Posts: 329
I just watched a new video regarding building 7 on http://www.911docs.net. Most of the videos I've seen now, are simply from information I already know. However, I ALWAYS, watch them anyway. If anything, just out of the respect for the 911 Truth Seekers.

But as I watching the new video regarding building 7, something grabbed my attention. I've seen the building collapse before. I also, watched that pig Larry Silverstein, explain (LIE) to the public, as to why building 7 was "pulled."

Yes, we all know it takes weeks to wire up a building, and not just a few hours. Yes, we all know that this pig took out an additional insurance policy, regarding terrorist's attacks on the 'twin towers" and building 7. And yes, I've seen videos of the fire department, warning the people, that building 7 is gonna come down.

...but this is where I'm scratching my head

No one died, because of building 7's collapse. At least from the initial collapse. If I'm wrong, please correct me on this. Anyway, this is what I have seen...

1) Larry Silverstein, admitting he had his building"pulled."
2) The insurance policies.
3) Firefighters warning of building 7's collapse.

4) THE TIME!!

Yes, 5:20 in the afternoon. Several hours after the "twin towers" fell. My question is...

If the firefighters knew, that building 7 was going to come down, then when did THEY, actually know, that building 7 was going to come down?

The reason why I'm asking this is this. As I'm watching the beginning of this video, I can hear people carrying on conversations, regarding that awful day. I was listening to a couple young men, standing next to the camera, filming the collapse of building 7. Naturally, it caught them off guard as well, when building 7 fell. But as I was watching the other videos of building 7's collapse, I could see other people oh let's say, within 2-3 blocks of building 7, rushing out of the way.

My question is, at exactly when, did the firefighters and police for that matter, know when building 7 was going to collapse? I've already seen the firefighters warning people to get out of the way, because building 7 was going to collapse. Yet, as I'm watching building 7's collapse, I can see people fairly close by, running out of the way. Running in such a fashion, that it was a complete surprise to them as well. In addition, there were obviously, cameras pointed at building seven, just before it's collapse. Why were some pointed at building 7, just before it's collapse, and some were pointed there, long before it's collapse? At least it seems this way. I see people talking next to the camera pointed at building 7, with more than enough time needed, to film it's collapse. While other cameras were pointed at building 7, through "the luck of the draw." And this was also mentioned, in some of the videos I've already seen of building 7's collapse as well.

When were they warned, and why were they warned at that particular time? Personally, I don't know, but it MAY, have little impact on why they were warned at that particular time. My biggest question, FROM WHAT I'VE ALREADY SEEN, is that some were warned, yet it was a major surprise, to most New Youker's when building 7 fell.

Was there a reason for this? The "shock and awe," part of 911, was the 3000 killed, when the "twin towers" collapse, and for obvious reasons. (going to war) So I can understand the reasons why POSSIBLY, there were no their motivational factors, in killing more people in/around building 7. Yes, I know the contents of building 7 as well. But why were some warned about it's collapse while obviously, others won't. I could see the police/firefighters, as well as a t.v. news reporter, warning of it's collapse. However, I can still see the majority of the people running away, as if they were totally caught "off guard."

You have a building collapse, 7.5/8 hours, after the "twin towers" fell. You have firefighters, police AND OUR MEDIA ALSO, warning of it's collapse. In addition, you have a t.v. news reporter in England, stating that "the Soloman Building," (blg. 7) collapsing, when it hasn't actually collapsed yet!!

In short, there has to be a reason for this!! Personally, I don't think killing any additional people, would further these evil bastard's motive. At least NOT, on the initial impact" level." I mean, you have all these warnings of building 7's collapse, from several sources, yet people are running away, like it was a total surprise to them!!

Timing HAD, to be an issue here!! There must of been something else, transpiring that day, that made the timing crucial, in bringing down building 7. And by NO MEANS, am I accusing the police/firefighters or our media, as having anything to do with building 7's collapse. However, in addition to this, there were several cameras pointed at building 7, with more than enough time needed, to view it's total collapse. While some videos, were "the luck of the draw," meaning that there cameras were pointing in that general direction, right before it's collapse, some it seems, were pointed at buiilding 7, with more than enough time, before it came down.

It's like Jesse Ventura stating, that if Cheney ordered "the stand down," and no plane hit the Pentagon, then Cheney HAD, to know what was going to happen to the Pentagon, other than a plane hitting the building. (in so many words)

...this just doesn't make sense to me at all. :roll: :| :?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Building 7
PostPosted: Sat Feb 19, 2011 9:15 pm 
Offline
SuperMember!
SuperMember!
User avatar

Joined: Thu Oct 13, 2005 12:50 am
Posts: 1456
Location: Ct.
Quote:
When were they warned, and why were they warned at that particular time? Personally, I don't know, but it MAY, have little impact on why they were warned at that particular time. My biggest question, FROM WHAT I'VE ALREADY SEEN, is that some were warned, yet it was a major surprise, to most New Youker's when building 7 fell.


I wish I were not so sick right now. Can barely think so this will be short and hopefully semi coherent. :(

Something to take into consideration is that most New Yorkers were not watching the news at that point in time so chances are they had no outside knowledge of the imminent collapse.

We have to remember that on that day was mass chaos at ground zero. When they were warned was when it was decided to "pull" it. I wonder if why they were warned was because of the danger of news crews or other witnesses being to close to the building and surviving with empirical evidence of demolition?

I would think that only those near the epicenter of building 7 would have had any knowledge of impending collapse thanks to the warnings of the firefighters and such, probably getting everyone to move back a couple of blocks, but outside of that, who watching would know? I also think that many running were running from the massive cloud produced which covered MANY blocks.

The people were pushed back far enough to be some from the collapse itself, but once they saw that cloud coming towards them....well I can imagine that I would want to get the hell out of dodge.

Bleah, I dont know if what I'm writing is making sense. I think I have to go lay down again.

Anyhow, just some thoughts from my not so clear mind.

_________________
CrimsonEagle
The war to end all wars can only be fought on the front-lines of the mind.

The greatest deception they have perpetrated is that we need them. Our greatest mistake is that we believe them.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Building 7
PostPosted: Sun Feb 20, 2011 12:25 am 
Offline
Hear Me Roar!

Joined: Sat Nov 13, 2010 11:04 am
Posts: 329
Thanks CE and God yes, please do take care of yourself first.

***Something to take into consideration is that most New Yorkers were not watching the news at that point in time so chances are they had no outside knowledge of the imminent collapse.

Yes CE and I'm aware of this. And it was my fault here, because I didn't clarify this part very well. Sorry!!

The statement I made about this, should of been addressed more to the effect, of how the police/fire department spread the news about building 7's collapse. AT STREET LEVEL, as opposed to seeing it on the news, or listening to it on the radio.

When I made the comment, "when did the people down there know, that building 7 was going to collapse," I meant how effectievely the police and fire department spread the word AT GROUND LEVEL? This I do not know, only the few videos I have seen, showing the fire department warning people to stand back. Honestly, after this point, I simply don't know at what point or when, the fire department gave those instructions. (and how efficiently those instructions were given to the people of New York)

***because of the danger of news crews or other witnesses being to close to the building and surviving with empirical evidence of demolition?

Yes, I can go with that. Only under the condition that there was stuff in building 7, that the shadow government didn't want us to know about SPECIFICALLY. And yes indeed, there was. Enron information, tax records etc. Of course, we all know now, that ALL BUILDINGS, were brought down by controlled demolition. This is pretty much a given. In addition as you probably know as well, evidence was removed VERY QUICKLY as well. However, I think the evidence of a controlled demolition on people that close well, they already have enough evidence, from the other shit laying around. However, and pardon me if I'm taking this the wrong way. (I know you don't feel well) You also, may be stating that if the media was closer, we might of heard more bombs going off, than we have gathered so far. Yes, that's a valid point. Even though we already have a shitload of evidence already. However, the shadow government, might have "misjudged" this beforehand. (too bad Cheney...you puke!!) We got all the evidence we need on this one!!

***The people were pushed back far enough to be some from the collapse itself, but once they saw that cloud coming towards them....well I can imagine that I would want to get the hell out of dodge.

Yeah, you got that right. Which leaves me to another thought, when you bought that up. And this kinda falls under the "timing," that I was talking about earlier. Do you think the shadow government, wanted enough people close enough, to still be sick, years later? We all know this as a fact by now, don't we. If they knew they wanted people and rescuers sick from the clouds, then...

1)It takes pyroclastic clouds.
2)It takes a controlled demolition to do this. (other than a volcanic eruption) And I think we could safely rule this out.
3)If this is true, which it is, then the shadow government knew the deadly materials in those clouds, that would of been created/produced inside. (death and permanent injury basically)

I think it may be "within reasonable doubt," that they knew additional death and sickness, would be created from these clouds. The obvious? Less witnesses is obvious. However, was there a certain group of people they wanted to wash out? Possibly. But I would probably have to consider this one, "a long shot" though.

As for now, I'm still troubled, regarding the efficiency, of the police/fire department notifying more people. However, as stated before, they had nothing to do with this tragedy. In addition, their efficiency to get the warning out, regarding the collapse of building 7, was only as effective, as the information, (and the time) that it was given to them. Which is why I'm still a little perplexed, as to why so many people were unaware of building 7's collapse. With walkie talkies, bull horns and sirens, one would think, that you could still warn/rope off enough streets to keep more people at bay and much more importantly, far enough away from the collapsing building 7. BUT...

If the police and fire department, weren't given that much time well, that may open up a "new can of worms," as to why this was. Other than the fact, that the evil bastards who did this, will be kissing the face of Satan one day!!

Which in turn, COULD, possible support "the evidence theory" that you mentioned, regarding something that they possibly wanted to hide.

We'll probably never know. (but we know enough already I imagine) :?

Get well CE!! :D


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Building 7
PostPosted: Sun Feb 20, 2011 11:58 am 
Offline
SuperMember!
SuperMember!
User avatar

Joined: Thu Oct 13, 2005 12:50 am
Posts: 1456
Location: Ct.
Thanks EPL, I feel a bit better today. Not great but compared to yesterday....bleah....dont even want to think about it.


Anyhow, this is my theory on building 7.

Building 7 was flight 93's target. This is going with the belief that this building was brought down, which I have no doubt on.

Why?

As you noted, there was a ton of stuff going on in there that they wanted erased.

Why do I say building 7 was flight 93's target and not any of the other places the disinfo media told us?

Very simple.

Building 7 was rigged to be demolished. There is no way possible that they could have predicted any type or what type of damage, or if it would even take any damage at all due to the impact and the collapse of the twin towers. There is just no way that they could predict it with any reliability. I'm telling you, flight 93's target WAS building 7. Plane impact, implosion, piece of cake, it already happened to two building, a third would have seemed just as reasonable. Hell, most of the country believed the story anyhow.

However, a problem arose for them. The passengers on flight 93 took control of the plane. They could not have that. The possibility of surviving hijackers getting caught and interrogated was not an option, so they shot it down.

But they then had another problem. They had a building rigged for demolition that was not impacted by a plane with relatively minor damage still standing. If the building remained, they would have been found out.

They must have been sweating for awhile, wondering how they were going to handle this situation. They had no choice but to bring it down, but how could they justify it?

They waited and watched, trying to figure out what to do, trying to figure out a way to justify another building collapse, not able to come up with a way, they finally had to make a decision to pull it.

They really did not want people to be too close to the building. Like I said, possibility of witnesses. So, they put the word out that the building was coming down. The first responders who were in the area did their job to the best of their ability and pushed the crowds back to what they thought were a safe distance, and they pulled it and down it came.

Now, when did the first responders know that the building was coming down?

Quote:
The oral histories released on August 12, 2005 contain many reports of warnings of the collapse of WTC Building 7 at various times during the day. Most of the warnings were from after about 4 PM.

Is what I found from.
http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/evidence/oralhistories/b7foreknowledge.html

So if this is correct they had about an hour and a half, perhaps a bit less, to move people to a safe distance.

Now, by the time the order was given and the people who needed the information got it, then in the chaos moving all those people....I think they, (the first responders) did a great job.

Now do I think it was the intention of the perpetrators to cause more death from the cloud or anything like that?

Honestly, no, I dont believe they were even thinking about that. Not that they gave a shit about the people around, but they had one priority and one priority only. They HAD to get the building down.

After that day, for the most part they were able to ignore building 7. From their point of view, no plane crash, no mass deaths, no need for news coverage because it was a non issue compared to showing over and over and over again the planes crashing into the twin towers and the subsequent collapse.

Now a minor problem. There were people who noted, and noted markedly the collapse of building 7. Yet even still, when people would bring it up it was ignored. Building 7 ended up being a non event for a majority of the population. Not fed to them by the news, then they know nothing about it.

Now I'm not sure how much you are able to get out and talk with people, but their are two things that I find to be astounding.

One is the amount of people who do not remember the 2.3 trillion that was reported missing the day before 9/11

Two is the amount of people who know nothing of building 7.

Now after talking with them, I know why, but that would entail an entirely different thread.

Anyhow, that is what I believed happened and I am pretty damn confident with this theory.

If you see any glaring holes, please poke the hell out of it.

:)

_________________
CrimsonEagle
The war to end all wars can only be fought on the front-lines of the mind.

The greatest deception they have perpetrated is that we need them. Our greatest mistake is that we believe them.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Building 7
PostPosted: Sun Feb 20, 2011 2:11 pm 
Offline
Hear Me Roar!

Joined: Sat Nov 13, 2010 11:04 am
Posts: 329
CrimsonEagle wrote:
Thanks EPL, I feel a bit better today. Not great but compared to yesterday....bleah....dont even want to think about it.


Anyhow, this is my theory on building 7.

Building 7 was flight 93's target. This is going with the belief that this building was brought down, which I have no doubt on.

Why?

As you noted, there was a ton of stuff going on in there that they wanted erased.

Why do I say building 7 was flight 93's target and not any of the other places the disinfo media told us?

Very simple.

Building 7 was rigged to be demolished. There is no way possible that they could have predicted any type or what type of damage, or if it would even take any damage at all due to the impact and the collapse of the twin towers. There is just no way that they could predict it with any reliability. I'm telling you, flight 93's target WAS building 7. Plane impact, implosion, piece of cake, it already happened to two building, a third would have seemed just as reasonable. Hell, most of the country believed the story anyhow.

However, a problem arose for them. The passengers on flight 93 took control of the plane. They could not have that. The possibility of surviving hijackers getting caught and interrogated was not an option, so they shot it down.

But they then had another problem. They had a building rigged for demolition that was not impacted by a plane with relatively minor damage still standing. If the building remained, they would have been found out.

They must have been sweating for awhile, wondering how they were going to handle this situation. They had no choice but to bring it down, but how could they justify it?

They waited and watched, trying to figure out what to do, trying to figure out a way to justify another building collapse, not able to come up with a way, they finally had to make a decision to pull it.

They really did not want people to be too close to the building. Like I said, possibility of witnesses. So, they put the word out that the building was coming down. The first responders who were in the area did their job to the best of their ability and pushed the crowds back to what they thought were a safe distance, and they pulled it and down it came.

Now, when did the first responders know that the building was coming down?

Quote:
The oral histories released on August 12, 2005 contain many reports of warnings of the collapse of WTC Building 7 at various times during the day. Most of the warnings were from after about 4 PM.

Is what I found from.
http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/evidence/oralhistories/b7foreknowledge.html

So if this is correct they had about an hour and a half, perhaps a bit less, to move people to a safe distance.

Now, by the time the order was given and the people who needed the information got it, then in the chaos moving all those people....I think they, (the first responders) did a great job.

Now do I think it was the intention of the perpetrators to cause more death from the cloud or anything like that?

Honestly, no, I dont believe they were even thinking about that. Not that they gave a shit about the people around, but they had one priority and one priority only. They HAD to get the building down.

After that day, for the most part they were able to ignore building 7. From their point of view, no plane crash, no mass deaths, no need for news coverage because it was a non issue compared to showing over and over and over again the planes crashing into the twin towers and the subsequent collapse.

Now a minor problem. There were people who noted, and noted markedly the collapse of building 7. Yet even still, when people would bring it up it was ignored. Building 7 ended up being a non event for a majority of the population. Not fed to them by the news, then they know nothing about it.

Now I'm not sure how much you are able to get out and talk with people, but their are two things that I find to be astounding.

One is the amount of people who do not remember the 2.3 trillion that was reported missing the day before 9/11

Two is the amount of people who know nothing of building 7.

Now after talking with them, I know why, but that would entail an entirely different thread.

Anyhow, that is what I believed happened and I am pretty damn confident with this theory.

If you see any glaring holes, please poke the hell out of it.

:)


WOW CE!!...Great job and yes, this anwsers the question as to the time, and who knew about blg. 7.

******Two is the amount of people who know nothing of building 7.

Now after talking with them, I know why, but that would entail an entirely different thread.

Yep!! You're correct here too!!

*** ***One is the amount of people who do not remember the 2.3 trillion that was reported missing the day before 9/11

Yes, I believe that as well. Refresh my memory, it was 2.3 trillion in gold, and it was in the basement of blg 6, is this correct?

******The oral histories released on August 12, 2005 contain many reports of warnings of the collapse of WTC Building 7 at various times during the day. Most of the warnings were from after about 4 PM.

******Building 7 was rigged to be demolished. There is no way possible that they could have predicted any type or what type of damage, or if it would even take any damage at all due to the impact and the collapse of the twin towers. There is just no way that they could predict it with any reliability. I'm telling you, flight 93's target WAS building 7. Plane impact, implosion, piece of cake, it already happened to two building, a third would have seemed just as reasonable. Hell, most of the country believed the story anyhow.

So essentially what you're saying here, is the demolition was a back up, just in case flight 93 failed in hitting bldg. 7. And if flight 93 hit bldg. 7, it was simply going to be used as an additional "shock and awe" event, to once again, bring the american people into submission.

And I saw Larry Silverstein's video, regarding "pull it." However, you story holds water here, because Silverstein already had a "backup alibae," stating that the fires were too intense, so he had blg. 7 "pulled." (so the filthy bastard could receive billions in insurance money)

Talking about sitting back and reflecting on this huh!! This story has been completely new for me, and I've must of watched 100 videos, regarding 911.

Additional thought. Do you think there is a connection between the BBC's report, stating that Bldg. 7 was pulled, when it actually wasn't? (somewhere around 25 minutes earlier, if I remember correctly)

...anyway

Thanks CE, and be well!! :)


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Building 7
PostPosted: Sun Feb 20, 2011 4:08 pm 
Offline
SuperMember!
SuperMember!
User avatar

Joined: Thu Oct 13, 2005 12:50 am
Posts: 1456
Location: Ct.
Quote:
*** ***One is the amount of people who do not remember the 2.3 trillion that was reported missing the day before 9/11

Yes, I believe that as well. Refresh my memory, it was 2.3 trillion in gold, and it was in the basement of blg 6, is this correct?


No. This was announced on Sept 10!!!! 2001.

Here is a link.

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-7904516028875682825#

Then 9/11 happened and something that should have been the biggest news of at least a half of a century was forgotten all about.

Quote:
So essentially what you're saying here, is the demolition was a back up, just in case flight 93 failed in hitting bldg. 7. And if flight 93 hit bldg. 7, it was simply going to be used as an additional "shock and awe" event, to once again, bring the american people into submission.


No, not quite.

I think that they fully expected flight 93 to hit its target. Even if it did, it still would not have knocked down the entire building. The planes were the excuse for the buildings falling, but actually what brought them down was the demolition.

They were cocky and they didnt expect anything to go wrong. When something did go wrong, they had no choice but to bring it down without a plane impact. They expected and wanted the plane to hit to cover the demolition.

If the plane would have hit as planned, chances are that there would have still been people in the building who would have been killed. Another building, another plane crash, more deaths, this WOULD have also been all over the news. The world would have knows about 3 buildings collapsing that day instead of the 2 that most people know of.

Because the plane did not crash the people were able to get out. No plane crash, no deaths, no news. They were able to pretty much ignore building 7 and the general public never questioned because it was never mentioned. Only the twin towers were mentioned, and shown over and over and over again.

Quote:
Additional thought. Do you think there is a connection between the BBC's report, stating that Bldg. 7 was pulled, when it actually wasn't? (somewhere around 25 minutes earlier, if I remember correctly)


Was it the BBC that made that report while they had up in the background ground zero and the building was still standing there?

I'm honestly not sure what happened there. Could have been someone jumping the gun, misunderstanding "instructions", or it could have been something as simple as a miss communication.

I do not think that the media was part of the conspiracy itself. The reason that I say this is that (thinking like them), if I were to plan something like this, I would want only the people who had to know, know.

What we saw happen afterword was them being fed information at a very fast rate which they accepted and put out. Anything that went against the grain was pulled. (The dancing Israels for example) and anyone who questioned the official story got shit canned and was labeled as a traitor. (think Phil Donahue and Dan Rather)

But anyways, that's what I figure. I'm not sure on that, but it's what seems to make the most sense to me.

_________________
CrimsonEagle
The war to end all wars can only be fought on the front-lines of the mind.

The greatest deception they have perpetrated is that we need them. Our greatest mistake is that we believe them.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Building 7
PostPosted: Sun Feb 20, 2011 8:04 pm 
Offline
Hear Me Roar!

Joined: Sat Nov 13, 2010 11:04 am
Posts: 329
CrimsonEagle wrote:
Quote:
*** ***One is the amount of people who do not remember the 2.3 trillion that was reported missing the day before 9/11

Yes, I believe that as well. Refresh my memory, it was 2.3 trillion in gold, and it was in the basement of blg 6, is this correct?


No. This was announced on Sept 10!!!! 2001.

Here is a link.

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-7904516028875682825#

Then 9/11 happened and something that should have been the biggest news of at least a half of a century was forgotten all about.

Quote:
So essentially what you're saying here, is the demolition was a back up, just in case flight 93 failed in hitting bldg. 7. And if flight 93 hit bldg. 7, it was simply going to be used as an additional "shock and awe" event, to once again, bring the american people into submission.


No, not quite.

I think that they fully expected flight 93 to hit its target. Even if it did, it still would not have knocked down the entire building. The planes were the excuse for the buildings falling, but actually what brought them down was the demolition.

They were cocky and they didnt expect anything to go wrong. When something did go wrong, they had no choice but to bring it down without a plane impact. They expected and wanted the plane to hit to cover the demolition.

If the plane would have hit as planned, chances are that there would have still been people in the building who would have been killed. Another building, another plane crash, more deaths, this WOULD have also been all over the news. The world would have knows about 3 buildings collapsing that day instead of the 2 that most people know of.

Because the plane did not crash the people were able to get out. No plane crash, no deaths, no news. They were able to pretty much ignore building 7 and the general public never questioned because it was never mentioned. Only the twin towers were mentioned, and shown over and over and over again.

Quote:
Additional thought. Do you think there is a connection between the BBC's report, stating that Bldg. 7 was pulled, when it actually wasn't? (somewhere around 25 minutes earlier, if I remember correctly)


Was it the BBC that made that report while they had up in the background ground zero and the building was still standing there?

I'm honestly not sure what happened there. Could have been someone jumping the gun, misunderstanding "instructions", or it could have been something as simple as a miss communication.

I do not think that the media was part of the conspiracy itself. The reason that I say this is that (thinking like them), if I were to plan something like this, I would want only the people who had to know, know.

What we saw happen afterword was them being fed information at a very fast rate which they accepted and put out. Anything that went against the grain was pulled. (The dancing Israels for example) and anyone who questioned the official story got shit canned and was labeled as a traitor. (think Phil Donahue and Dan Rather)

But anyways, that's what I figure. I'm not sure on that, but it's what seems to make the most sense to me.


***I think that they fully expected flight 93 to hit its target. Even if it did, it still would not have knocked down the entire building. The planes were the excuse for the buildings falling, but actually what brought them down was the demolition.

Yes I know. My fault. I guess it didn't come out right. However, this does make sense.

Thanks for the info CE!! :D

Learned a lot here. That's what it's all about huh. :D


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Building 7
PostPosted: Sun Feb 20, 2011 8:15 pm 
Offline
Hear Me Roar!

Joined: Sat Nov 13, 2010 11:04 am
Posts: 329
CrimsonEagle wrote:
Quote:
*** ***One is the amount of people who do not remember the 2.3 trillion that was reported missing the day before 9/11

Yes, I believe that as well. Refresh my memory, it was 2.3 trillion in gold, and it was in the basement of blg 6, is this correct?


No. This was announced on Sept 10!!!! 2001.

Here is a link.

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-7904516028875682825#

Then 9/11 happened and something that should have been the biggest news of at least a half of a century was forgotten all about.

Quote:
So essentially what you're saying here, is the demolition was a back up, just in case flight 93 failed in hitting bldg. 7. And if flight 93 hit bldg. 7, it was simply going to be used as an additional "shock and awe" event, to once again, bring the american people into submission.


No, not quite.

I think that they fully expected flight 93 to hit its target. Even if it did, it still would not have knocked down the entire building. The planes were the excuse for the buildings falling, but actually what brought them down was the demolition.

They were cocky and they didnt expect anything to go wrong. When something did go wrong, they had no choice but to bring it down without a plane impact. They expected and wanted the plane to hit to cover the demolition.

If the plane would have hit as planned, chances are that there would have still been people in the building who would have been killed. Another building, another plane crash, more deaths, this WOULD have also been all over the news. The world would have knows about 3 buildings collapsing that day instead of the 2 that most people know of.

Because the plane did not crash the people were able to get out. No plane crash, no deaths, no news. They were able to pretty much ignore building 7 and the general public never questioned because it was never mentioned. Only the twin towers were mentioned, and shown over and over and over again.

Quote:
Additional thought. Do you think there is a connection between the BBC's report, stating that Bldg. 7 was pulled, when it actually wasn't? (somewhere around 25 minutes earlier, if I remember correctly)


Was it the BBC that made that report while they had up in the background ground zero and the building was still standing there?

I'm honestly not sure what happened there. Could have been someone jumping the gun, misunderstanding "instructions", or it could have been something as simple as a miss communication.

I do not think that the media was part of the conspiracy itself. The reason that I say this is that (thinking like them), if I were to plan something like this, I would want only the people who had to know, know.

What we saw happen afterword was them being fed information at a very fast rate which they accepted and put out. Anything that went against the grain was pulled. (The dancing Israels for example) and anyone who questioned the official story got shit canned and was labeled as a traitor. (think Phil Donahue and Dan Rather)

But anyways, that's what I figure. I'm not sure on that, but it's what seems to make the most sense to me.



Yeah. I remember this one. I should of watched this, before posting. I watched the same exact video as you did. However, it was mentioned in at least one video, that there was a substancial amount of gold, resting in the basement, or lower levels of I think, building 6. One reporter or witness stated, that if anyone got near it, they would of been shot. This was the video, that I thought, but mistakedly assumed, was in the post that you made. (my error)

No biggie though. It still falls in line, with the rest of these evil bastard's motivations. :evil:


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 8 posts ] 

All times are UTC - 4 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron
Blue Moon by Trent © 2007
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group