Loose Change

[aggle-rithm]

Why in the world would the government hide a controlled demolition of WTC7 as part of 9/11, when they went on later and did a deliberate demolition of all the other buildings that were damaged beyond repair? That just doesn't make any sense at all. Why not just destroy WTC7 along with the rest of the buildings? Even if there were "sensitive material" in it, 1) the fact that it is a hazard zone means that it is off limits to everyone, so who's gping to see it? The only people who have access are those who can access the information in the rubble, anyway. Besides, if you want to destroy the material, 2) why not just send it through the shredder? A lot more effective. Of course, 3) most of the contents were already destroyed by the fire raging out of control, so there wasn't going to be anything to find but charcoal.

So why destroy the building and cover it up?

The only reason to believe WTC7 was intentionally destroyed is that it manufactures just one more Factoid Mcnugget, something they can point to and say, "How do you explain this?" By CT standards, it doesn't have to make any sense, and doesn't have to fit into the scheme of the overall "theory". This theory is apparently sooper secret and can't be divulged to the likes of us.

 

[Stellafane]

Craziness

...it doesn't make you crazy if you think sept 11 was a falseflag terrorism, it only sounds crazy to you and actually not an impossibility. Falseflag terrorism have been performed all over the world several times in the past, why not in the US?...

This is going to sound rather uncharitable, but I personally believe one does have to be crazy to some extent to honestly believe that 9/11, one of the most witnessed, documented, and carefully studied events of all time, was "falseflag terrorism." Because to do so, you have to utterly ignore the vast preponderance of irrefutable evidence compiled by experts, and instead focus on stray pixels, blurry shadows, and crackpot theories that defy the laws of science.

That's not to say that I think you're crazy. I do suspect, however, that your loathing for the USA -- expressed in other posts that make it sound as though you consider this country one of the most corrupt, vile, and violent in history -- may be clouding your judgement. Thus you are hugely motivated to blame everything on the current government, whether or not any evidence exists to justify this idea.

 

[CurtC]

I'm sorry but by the way you posted it, without commenting on it or sourrunding them with these symbols (« »), you fully endorsed it.

By the way, Pardalis, you're the only person I've ever seen use the (<< >>) symbols, or whatever character you use to make them.

 

[Flo]

That's not to say that I think you're crazy. I do suspect, however, that your loathing for the USA -- expressed in other posts that make it sound as though you consider this country one of the most corrupt, vile, and violent in history -- may be clouding your judgement. Thus you are hugely motivated to blame everything on the current government, whether or not any evidence exists to justify this idea.

I do suspect that, in his case, it hasn't so much to do with the politics of the USA as with the small to nonexistent importance he has in it.

 

[NobbyNobbs]

Here ya go

I have no experience in engineering field, therefore I'm not keen on speaking technical launguage of engineering. But it seems too clear that the buildings came down with explosives.

This amazes me. From this, Geggy, you imply that anything you are not an expert on you nevertheless feel qualified to speak on with authority. What a mess this world would be if everyone thought that way.

"I'm no accountant, but it seems too clear that your books are wrong."
"I'm no teacher, but it seems too clear that your instructional methods are screwy."
"I'm no astronaut, but it seems too clear that those suit are too funny-looking to possibly work."

I don't know how to post links yet, but look back on what I said about common sense a page or two ago. It doesn't always work, particularly when speaking of something outside your field.

Try engaging a non-mathematician in a discussion of imaginary numbers and see what happens. Same thing.

 

[Arkan_Wolfshade]

The only reason to believe WTC7 was intentionally destroyed is that it manufactures just one more Factoid Mcnugget, something they can point to and say, "How do you explain this?" By CT standards, it doesn't have to make any sense, and doesn't have to fit into the scheme of the overall "theory". This theory is apparently sooper secret and can't be divulged to the likes of us.

Quite correct. It is the same god of the gaps argument used by creationists against evolutionary theory, and it is therefore the same logical fallacy.

 

[Manny]

Quite correct. It is the same god of the gaps argument used by creationists against evolutionary theory, and it is therefore the same logical fallacy.

For some of them that's it. Others have a weird fixation on Larry Silverstein and allege that he somehow profited by demolishing a fully-leased office building. Except that he profited at the expense of the insurance companies, who were also in on it. Or something like that.

 

[Dinsdale Piranha]

I've been lurking over this thread and would like to bring up one point if it hasn't already been covered.

Among the 3000+ victims in the WTC, there were many who were not US citizens. If there were *any* evidence that the Bush administration was involved would there not be an international outcry for some type of sanctions? It seems that there would be ongoing investigations by the other countries and the U.N., with extensive global media coverage. So far I haven't heard of any.

Feel free to ignore me if this point has been discussed previously.

 

[Shaun from Scotland]

Funny thing about the london bombing. al Qaeda was accused of the attack but investigators came to a conclusion that Qaeda had nothing to do with it. It's all over the BBC website.

I cannot find a single reference to this on the BBC website. Care to provide the links?

It may in fact be true that the London bombers did not meet anyone from Al Qaeda, but we have no info on what they did in Pakistan. And at the very least they were inspired by them. Or where tney British agents who "sacrificed" themselves?

 

[Belz...]

Plus, if you left this country, you would still have to deal with the lies, lootin', rampage, etc., of the country you move to. And you would probably not have the civil liberties you enjoy in the US (Just ask Randi why he left Canada!).

I wasn't aware we had a lack of civil liberties in Canada.

 

[aggle-rithm]

I've been lurking over this thread and would like to bring up one point if it hasn't already been covered.

Among the 3000+ victims in the WTC, there were many who were not US citizens. If there were *any* evidence that the Bush administration was involved would there not be an international outcry for some type of sanctions? It seems that there would be ongoing investigations by the other countries and the U.N., with extensive global media coverage. So far I haven't heard of any.

Feel free to ignore me if this point has been discussed previously.

In fact, there's a long list of groups that would positively salivate over any GOOD evidence that Bush's administration is corrupt, not the least of which is the Democratic party. They're STILL gloating over the Watergate scandal, and the political back-biting between parties has only become more viscious since then.

geggy, do you think you're more clever than all these people? Don't you think that if your views are the slightest bit credible, that the Democrats, and a lot of other political groups, would be all over it?

And don't say that they're all in it together. If you've watched the news more than a couple of times in your life, you KNOW better.

 

[Belz...]

By the way, Pardalis, you're the only person I've ever seen use the (<< >>) symbols, or whatever character you use to make them.

That's french quotes. The equivalent of the " ".

 

[geggy]

WTC7 housed several goverment agencies such as SEC, secret service, CIA, IRS, etc.

The command center on 23rd floor is intended to coordinate responses to various emergencies, including natural disasters like hurricanes or floods, and terrorist attacks.

WTC7 fell in a controlled demolition manner.

More on the thermal spot in WTC here: http://pubs.usgs.gov/of/2001/ofr-01-0429/thermal.r09.html

The mysterious collapse of WTC7 was not addressed in the 9/11 commission report.

 

[Belz...]

WTC7 housed several goverment agencies such as SEC, secret service, CIA, IRS, etc.

The command center on 23rd floor is intended to coordinate responses to various emergencies, including natural disasters like hurricanes or floods, and terrorist attacks.

Your point beign ?

WTC7 fell in a controlled demolition manner.

Could you PLEASE find a building that fell, but that wasn't demolished, so we can compare the two ?

 

[aggle-rithm]

That's french quotes. The equivalent of the " ".

Or as we like to call them in the US, "Freedom quotes".

 

[Belz...]

Or as we like to call them in the US, "Freedom quotes".

 

[Manny]

The mysterious collapse of WTC7 was not addressed in the 9/11 commission report.

OK, Osama, I'm officially sick of your ****. The collapse of 3WTC was also not addressed in the commission report. Nor was the damage to BT Plaza, the damage to the World Financial Center, the destruction of St. Nicholas church, etc. Know why? Because the report focused on the terrorists and their actions and the direct consequences of that. Not on collateral damage. It wasn't their mandate.

Actually, you do know that, don't you, you terrorist puke?

 

[Arkan_Wolfshade]

Or as we like to call them in the US, "Freedom quotes".

Gah. There was some restaurant I ate at over the last two weeks that you could get a side of American Fries with your sandwich.

 

[aggle-rithm]

WTC7 housed several goverment agencies such as SEC, secret service, CIA, IRS, etc.

And they weren't in on it?!?

The command center on 23rd floor is intended to coordinate responses to various emergencies, including natural disasters like hurricanes or floods, and terrorist attacks.

So did everyone in this command center perish? Or were they able to simply move to another building and continue to function, as so many other groups did?

WTC7 fell in a controlled demolition manner.

Yes, we KNOW you believe this. Your beliefs are meaningless without evidence.

The mysterious collapse of WTC7 was not addressed in the 9/11 commission report.

What?!? You mean they didn't delve into every whacko conspiracy theory out there?

Surely they investigated the reptoids?

 

[kookbreaker]

WTC7 housed several goverment agencies such as SEC, secret service, CIA, IRS, etc.

So why destroy a whole building? If they want stuff not to be found, why do it such an unreliable manner that could result in a clean-crewman finding incriminating materials

The command center on 23rd floor is intended to coordinate responses to various emergencies, including natural disasters like hurricanes or floods, and terrorist attacks.

So why destroy it?

WTC7 fell in a controlled demolition manner.

No it didn't.

That does it:

<mode= Samuel Jackson>

Say controlled demolition manner again! SAY controlled demolition manner AGAIN! I dare you, I double dare you, mot[rule8]! Say controlled demolition manner one more [rule8] time! Oh, I'm sorry, did I break your concentration?

</mode.>

[qimg]http://pubs.usgs.gov/of/2001/ofr-01-0429/hotspot.key.tgif.small.gif[/qimg]

More on the thermal spot in WTC here: http://pubs.usgs.gov/of/2001/ofr-01-0429/thermal.r09.html

This proves absolutely nothing except that there were hotspots. Why are you surprised at these hotspots?

The mysterious collapse of WTC7 was not addressed in the 9/11 commission report.

They don't hav to chance down the fantasies that you've invented.