Firefighters at the site of WTC7 "Move away the building is going to blow up, get back the building

M

Midex

100% EVIDENCE - SEE THE TRUTH FINALLY - ON THE GROUND VIDEO WITNESSES



In order to appreciate just what Truthers are talking about when they
cry Treason over WTC7, you would want to see this History Channel
documentary on what they claim happened to WTC7:




Ben Chertoff can't get his story straight

LIES LIES LIES LIES LIES

9/11 Truth Focoist Revolution. "When peaceful revolution is made
impossible, violent revolution is inevitable" - Martin Luther King.
How long shall they kill our prophets? Look up Focoism. Write about
it. Spread the method. It will be how this revolution will take shape.
 
E

Eric Gisse

[...]

I guess the explanation that people were looking at the building and
watching its' structure deform is too rational.
 
M

malibu

[...]

I guess the explanation that people were looking at the building and
watching its' structure deform is too rational.

Also, that was a Larry Silverstein impostor who
said they were going to 'pull it'.
And the only reason he took out huge amounts
of extra insurance on the buildings two months
before this happened was because of global
warming, because we all know a little bit of heat
will bring down steel buildings.

John
 
E

Eric Gisse


I guess the explanation that people were looking at the building and
watching its' structure deform is too rational.

Also, that was a Larry Silverstein impostor who
said they were going to 'pull it'.

....maybe if you read the context, it would make a little more rational
sense. Fucking nutter.
And the only reason he took out huge amounts
of extra insurance on the buildings two months
before this happened was because of global
warming, because we all know a little bit of heat
will bring down steel buildings.

A little heat and major structural damage.
 
D

default

LIES LIES LIES LIES LIES

Trying to understand the World Trade Center events is like waking up
to act fifteen of a long Greek Tragedy. It needs a complex fabric of
description to give a full picture. In explaining this crisis, we will
be showing how the situation rests on layers of historical
developments, layers of crises and solutions.

shamelessly taken from:
http://www.againstsleepandnightmare.com/ASAN/ASAN7/ASAN7.html

The World After September 11th, 2001

The Old Mole

By the time you read this, a crisis different from September 11th may
well be foremost in people's minds. Read on. For us today, all the
crises merge to one and we can see the form of Enron's Collapse or the
Iraq War within September 11th and vice-versa. Now, beyond the death
and destruction, the horror of an event like September 11th is the
horror of losing control of your world. This feeling is an extension
of the ordinary experience of being a resident of modern capitalist
society. Here, work, commuting, shopping, and television are
transmitted to you in ways that are beyond any individual or
collective control.

Damn good read.
 
M

malibu

[...]
I guess the explanation that people were looking at the building and
watching its' structure deform is too rational.
Also, that was a Larry Silverstein impostor who
said they were going to 'pull it'.

...maybe if you read the context, it would make a little more rational
sense. Fucking nutter.
And the only reason he took out huge amounts
of extra insurance on the buildings two months
before this happened was because of global
warming, because we all know a little bit of heat
will bring down steel buildings.

A little heat and major structural damage.



Gee, I'll bet all those explosions in the
subfloors of WTC1 + WTC2 did some
structural damage also!

Come to think of it.

When the firefighters got there, all the glass
on the street floors was blown out.

Shock wave from the plane hitting
80 floors up?

Janitors and such coming up from the basement levels
bleeding and dazed.

Jet fuel trickling down the elevator shafts being ignited
by someone's roach? And exploding?
Severing the three-foot thick steel columns?
All 5 dozen of them?
(That's mighty fine primo, pardner!)

Your brain got structural damage?
Dropped on your head as a kid?

Don't put that fire iron too close
to the flames, honey. It'll melt
and deform!

John
 
T

The Great Attractor

On May 2, 9:46 pm, Eric Gisse <[email protected]> wrote:

I guess the explanation that people were looking at the building and
watching its' structure deform is too rational.
Also, that was a Larry Silverstein impostor who
said they were going to 'pull it'.

...maybe if you read the context, it would make a little more rational
sense. Fucking nutter.
And the only reason he took out huge amounts
of extra insurance on the buildings two months
before this happened was because of global
warming, because we all know a little bit of heat
will bring down steel buildings.

A little heat and major structural damage.



Gee, I'll bet all those explosions in the
subfloors of WTC1 + WTC2 did some
structural damage also!

You're an idiot.
Come to think of it.

Slugs do not think.
When the firefighters got there, all the glass
on the street floors was blown out.

You're an idiot.

Shock wave from the plane hitting
80 floors up?

You're a goddamned retard, boy. ARe you an islamic extremist by
chance?
Janitors and such coming up from the basement levels
bleeding and dazed.

You're full of shit.
Jet fuel trickling down the elevator shafts being ignited
by someone's roach? And exploding?

You're an ifiot.
Severing the three-foot thick steel columns?
All 5 dozen of them?
(That's mighty fine primo, pardner!)


The buildings collapsed WAY WAY UP on the floors where the planes
hit, and fell from there down, taking floors out as the large top
section of the building fell.

You could be a bit more retarded, just not in this life.
Your brain got structural damage?

No, but your never was right from the moment your retarded felon
criminal mother shat you out of her ass and forgot to flush.
Dropped on your head as a kid?

Got any more adolescent baby bullshit, little boy?
Don't put that fire iron too close
to the flames, honey. It'll melt
and deform!

You're an idiot. There was a tanker crash in Oakland a couple days
back (Sunday) that melted sections of the bridge it was on.

Got Clue? You and Rosie are retarded.
 
M

mike3


I guess the explanation that people were looking at the building and
watching its' structure deform is too rational.

Also, that was a Larry Silverstein impostor who
said they were going to 'pull it'.
And the only reason he took out huge amounts
of extra insurance on the buildings two months
before this happened was because of global
warming, because we all know a little bit of heat
will bring down steel buildings.

John

Pull = pull out the firefighters. Also, did you know
that when they used "pull" to refer to pulling WTC6
it was because they were going to _pull it over_
not blow it up?

http://www.debunking911.com/pull.htm
 
M

mike3

100% EVIDENCE - SEE THE TRUTH FINALLY - ON THE GROUND VIDEO WITNESSEShttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YNN6apj5B2U

In order to appreciate just what Truthers are talking about when they
cry Treason over WTC7, you would want to see this History Channel
documentary on what they claim happened to WTC7:

Ben Chertoff can't get his story straighthttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9YND7XocMocj

LIES LIES LIES LIES LIES

9/11 Truth Focoist Revolution. "When peaceful revolution is made
impossible, violent revolution is inevitable" - Martin Luther King.
How long shall they kill our prophets? Look up Focoism. Write about
it. Spread the method. It will be how this revolution will take shape.

Maybe they were just speaking in the heat of the moment... or does
this mean that the FIREFIGHTERS were in on the conspiracy too?
Did you know that a conspiracy becomes more and more difficult
to do the bigger it gets? Do you also know that every structural
engineer, every scientist, all of NIST, everyone would have to be
"in" on this conspiracy?
 
M

mike3

[...]
I guess the explanation that people were looking at the building and
watching its' structure deform is too rational.
Also, that was a Larry Silverstein impostor who
said they were going to 'pull it'.
...maybe if you read the context, it would make a little more rational
sense. Fucking nutter.
A little heat and major structural damage.

Gee, I'll bet all those explosions in the
subfloors of WTC1 + WTC2 did some
structural damage also!

Come to think of it.

When the firefighters got there, all the glass
on the street floors was blown out.

Shock wave from the plane hitting
80 floors up?

Janitors and such coming up from the basement levels
bleeding and dazed.

Jet fuel trickling down the elevator shafts being ignited
by someone's roach? And exploding?
Severing the three-foot thick steel columns?
All 5 dozen of them?
(That's mighty fine primo, pardner!)

Your brain got structural damage?
Dropped on your head as a kid?

Don't put that fire iron too close
to the flames, honey. It'll melt
and deform!

Never mind that the irons in the WTC
were IN the fire, amongst the coals
no less!
 
M

mike3

[...]
I guess the explanation that people were looking at the building and
watching its' structure deform is too rational.
Also, that was a Larry Silverstein impostor who
said they were going to 'pull it'.
...maybe if you read the context, it would make a little more rational
sense. Fucking nutter.
And the only reason he took out huge amounts
of extra insurance on the buildings two months
before this happened was because of global
warming, because we all know a little bit of heat
will bring down steel buildings.
A little heat and major structural damage.
John
Gee, I'll bet all those explosions in the
subfloors of WTC1 + WTC2 did some
structural damage also!

You're an idiot.

You did not refute the claim. How do you
know this claim is wrong?
Slugs do not think.

You did not refute the claim.
You're an idiot.

You did not refute the claim.
You're a goddamned retard, boy. ARe you an islamic extremist by
chance?

You did not refute the claim.
You're full of shit.

You did not refute the claim.

You're an ifiot.

You did not refute the claim.
The buildings collapsed WAY WAY UP on the floors where the planes
hit, and fell from there down, taking floors out as the large top
section of the building fell.

First good argument so far...
You could be a bit more retarded, just not in this life.


No, but your never was right from the moment your retarded felon
criminal mother shat you out of her ass and forgot to flush.

You did not refute the claim.
Got any more adolescent baby bullshit, little boy?

You did not refute the claim.
You're an idiot. There was a tanker crash in Oakland a couple days
back (Sunday) that melted sections of the bridge it was on.

Second good argument so far.

Two good arguments and eight non-arguments,
but those two good arguments happen to clinch the thing
anyway...
 
J

James Stroud

mike3 said:
Maybe they were just speaking in the heat of the moment... or does
this mean that the FIREFIGHTERS were in on the conspiracy too?
Did you know that a conspiracy becomes more and more difficult
to do the bigger it gets? Do you also know that every structural
engineer, every scientist, all of NIST, everyone would have to be
"in" on this conspiracy?

Not entirely.

"A nobleman from the Baltic states, Freytag von Loringhoven was viewed
with suspicion by the Nazis 'who loathed education, real culture and
tradition'. Unlike Hitler's secretary, Traudl Junge, whose memoirs were
published before her death two years ago, he claims he never fell under
the Führer's spell and insists the distinction between the professional
Wehrmacht and politicised Waffen-SS was real. 'After the war I had the
unpleasant feeling of having served as a combustible, as heating wood,
for the adventures of a charlatan,' he says. 'I had served a criminal
regime while remaining loyal to my military convictions.'

It was only as a prisoner of war that he realised the Nazis had murdered
Jews 'on an industrial scale', he says. ' We didn't even know the names
of the concentration camps.'"

http://www.guardian.co.uk/germany/article/0,2763,1446410,00.html

James
 
J

James Stroud

default said:
Trying to understand the World Trade Center events is like waking up
to act fifteen of a long Greek Tragedy. It needs a complex fabric of
description to give a full picture. In explaining this crisis, we will
be showing how the situation rests on layers of historical
developments, layers of crises and solutions.

shamelessly taken from:
http://www.againstsleepandnightmare.com/ASAN/ASAN7/ASAN7.html

The World After September 11th, 2001

The Old Mole

By the time you read this, a crisis different from September 11th may
well be foremost in people's minds. Read on. For us today, all the
crises merge to one and we can see the form of Enron's Collapse or the
Iraq War within September 11th and vice-versa. Now, beyond the death
and destruction, the horror of an event like September 11th is the
horror of losing control of your world. This feeling is an extension
of the ordinary experience of being a resident of modern capitalist
society. Here, work, commuting, shopping, and television are
transmitted to you in ways that are beyond any individual or
collective control.

Damn good read.

Marxist trash.
 
D

default

Marxist trash.

We've been conditioned to think in those terms and the web site is
communist. The philosophy of communism isn't so bad, it is the people
and application that are the problem.

Capitalism works right out of the box then begins to fray and
deteriorate - again due to people and application. Either system
creates an elite class and poor class with little or no middle ground.
Each system is, ultimately, a failure.

I'm not advocating either system, both are flawed as long as people
can gain and hold power. Somewhere in there is a solution to the
problems - I wouldn't presume to know the right course.

Our politicians presume to know the right course - but they have no
idea what is happening in the real world just their own political
world.

We have a mix of socialism and capitalism in the US no matter what the
government/media hype says it is. Free market capitalism? hardly.
 
J

James Stroud

default said:
>

We've been conditioned to think in those terms and the web site is
communist. The philosophy of communism isn't so bad, it is the people
and application that are the problem.

Capitalism works right out of the box then begins to fray and
deteriorate - again due to people and application. Either system
creates an elite class and poor class with little or no middle ground.
Each system is, ultimately, a failure.

I'm not advocating either system, both are flawed as long as people
can gain and hold power. Somewhere in there is a solution to the
problems - I wouldn't presume to know the right course.

The Marxist contribution to western thought is that it put everything in
terms of labor and thus allowed us to quantify the human component of
economies. Though insightful, these insights were made 100 years ago and
are really only helpful in a sociological context. To attempt to turn
Marxist philosophy and insight into an economic policy is flawed because
economies are driven by greed. No policy will eliminate the greed, so it
is better to make policies that allow competition for resources (even
labor) fair. Marxism consolidates economic power into the hands of
government officials, who are the most greedy, and thus it ends up
siphoning wealth from the laborers who produce it in total contradiction
to its goals. That has been shown to be the reality despite the ideology.

Yes, the current global economic model is based on fascism, which is
unfortunate, but Marxism and the communism that arises from it are not
better alternatives--so it is better to identify Marxist economics as
the trash it is than to allow the unwitting to get confused about how
the greedy would end up applying it.

James
 
M

MooseFET

The Marxist contribution to western thought is that it put everything in
terms of labor and thus allowed us to quantify the human component of
economies.

No the great insight by Marx was in the selling of ducks. "Anybody
want to buy a duct" has done more to advance economic thinking than
the works of most economists.

Economists have a vested interest in preventing people from
understanding economics. They are well paid and know that they
wouldn't be for long if people really understood what was going on.
 
J

James Stroud

MooseFET said:
No the great insight by Marx was in the selling of ducks. "Anybody
want to buy a duct" has done more to advance economic thinking than
the works of most economists.

Economists have a vested interest in preventing people from
understanding economics. They are well paid and know that they
wouldn't be for long if people really understood what was going on.

You must be an economist because you provide absolutely no
interpretation of what the hell you were saying in ghe first paragraph
(as if you actually know what you were trying to say). Duct or duck,
first of all. Second of all--make a point.

James
 
C

Charles

You must be an economist because you provide absolutely no
interpretation of what the hell you were saying in ghe first paragraph
(as if you actually know what you were trying to say). Duct or duck,
first of all. Second of all--make a point.

James


Different Marx?
 
J

James Stroud

Charles said:
MooseFET said:
[....]


The Marxist contribution to western thought is that it put everything in
terms of labor and thus allowed us to quantify the human component of
economies.


No the great insight by Marx was in the selling of ducks. "Anybody
want to buy a duct" has done more to advance economic thinking than
the works of most economists.

Economists have a vested interest in preventing people from
understanding economics. They are well paid and know that they
wouldn't be for long if people really understood what was going on.

You must be an economist because you provide absolutely no
interpretation of what the hell you were saying in ghe first paragraph
(as if you actually know what you were trying to say). Duct or duck,
first of all. Second of all--make a point.

James

Different Marx?

Oh, so Curly of the 3 stooges did more to advance physics when a vase
fell on his head than all of the physics books written? Physicists don't
really want you to know whats going on so they can get paid more. Oh,
yes, I'm doing more for computer science by saying x=y than all of the
computer books written. Knuth, eat your heart out, see how smart I am?

James
 
M

MooseFET

MooseFET said:
[....]
The Marxist contribution to western thought is that it put everything in
terms of labor and thus allowed us to quantify the human component of
economies.
No the great insight by Marx was in the selling of ducks. "Anybody
want to buy a duct" has done more to advance economic thinking than
the works of most economists.
Economists have a vested interest in preventing people from
understanding economics. They are well paid and know that they
wouldn't be for long if people really understood what was going on.

You must be an economist because you provide absolutely no
interpretation of what the hell you were saying in ghe first paragraph
(as if you actually know what you were trying to say). Duct or duck,
first of all. Second of all--make a point.

Groucho Marx.
 

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments. After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.

Ask a Question

Members online

No members online now.

Forum statistics

Threads
473,744
Messages
2,569,482
Members
44,901
Latest member
Noble71S45

Latest Threads

Top