This is the thread that may very well change the way you look at 9/11 FOREVER!

[Architect]

Not to mention...the magical building collapses... that defied common sense...logic and the laws of physics. Nothing about the official story makes sense...and everything about the PET makes sense.

YOO HOOO, TUMSHIE 28TH?????

Will those be the "magical collapses" due to fire that I posted a technical response on, then you ran away and put me on your ignore list?

Are you ready to finally respond, or are you hoping that we all forgot?

 

[apathoid]

That's harder to believe...than 19 hijackers...with amateur flying experience...hijacking 4 commercial airliners (100% success rate 4 for 4) with box cutters and managing to pull off air maneuvers that would test even the most skilled fighter pilots...and ......blah...blah...blah...(I stopped reading).

28th, this is an amatuer pilot, not an airline pilot or a fighter pilot. Enjoy.

 

[uk_dave]

28th Kingdom,

You're not Sacha Baron Cohen are you?

 

[Architect]

He'll think you're running it backwards; they talk funny, like.

 

[defaultdotxbe]

Greed. Cash Money (Insurance claim)

so how much did silverstein collect from insurance on WTC7?

how much did he spend rebuilding it?

 

[babazaroni]

Not to mention...the magical building collapses... that defied common sense...logic and the laws of physics. Nothing about the official story makes sense...and everything about the PET makes sense.

We've been through that with you before. Would you like to review?

 

[~enigma~]

They had these 19 men train at various US flight schools in order to create a compelling back story that meshed with the official story. The 19 men probably had no idea of the elaborate plot they were taking part in.

You have a really good imagination. Ever consider writing movies for hollywood? Only four of the hijackers were trained as piolets but I am sure you neither care nor would understand that.

On 9/11 - I believe the US government simply took drone aircrafts (a la ONW) and flew them into the twin towers. I think the reason they used drone aircraft was not to save the lives of the people on board the flights, but because they couldn't find pilots who would fly the planes into buildings.

Where are the passengers, oh right...they landed in Cleveland and were herded aboard flight 93 to be used as target practice.

 

[apathoid]

Greed. Cash Money (Insurance claim)

Heres your homework assignment, 28th. It wont take 3 minutes of googling.

I would like you to find out how much Silverstein received for WTC7, then find out how much the new WTC7 cost to build. Compare the two figures. Perform some simple math. Conclude what Silversteins net gain(or loss) was on WTC7...

 

[Architect]

We've been through that with you before. Would you like to review?

He can't; he runs away faster than the Italian Army.

 

[Timble]

That's harder to believe...than 19 hijackers...with amateur flying experience...hijacking 4 commercial airliners (100% success rate 4 for 4) with box cutters and managing to pull off air maneuvers that would test even the most skilled fighter pilots...and that somehow, the most advanced and powerful military force in the world...was rendered completely defenseless against such an attack? And, that the Pentagon...was left open for attack - even though we knew at least 20 minutes before it was hit - that America was supposedly under attack from hijacked airliners.

It's easier to believe, it's keep it simple stupid, do the unexpected (hijackers until then had either used planes as negotiating tools, some planes were blown up with all on board but damage was collateral rather than intentional, e.g. Lockerbie), and your air defences were designed to defend you from external attacks with fighters and bombers, not internal attacks using passenger planes as weapons.

It's a stunt you can do probably do once...

BTW if they had shot down the plane over Washington, it would have fallen somewhere, with potentially even a worse outcome.

 

[28th Kingdom]

Oh, he's saying WTC7 was the fourth intended target?

You don't think they intended to pull WTC 7 without the aid of a plane crash do you? It was obviously demolished with explosives (which had to of been planted before 911) so what I said about flight 93 and it's original plan to hit WTC 7 makes perfect sense. Coupled with the fact that I just showed you a video of Rumsfield saying flight 93 was, in fact, shot down.

 

[defaultdotxbe]

You don't think they intended to pull WTC 7 without the aid of a plane crash do you? It was obviously demolished with explosives (which had to of been planted before 911) so what I said about flight 93 and it's original plan to hit WTC 7 makes perfect sense. Coupled with the fact that I just showed you a video of Rumsfield saying flight 93 was, in fact, shot down.

what happened to the passengers on the 4 flights if they were all drones?

 

[28th Kingdom]

so how much did silverstein collect from insurance on WTC7?

how much did he spend rebuilding it?

Heres your homework assignment, 28th. It wont take 3 minutes of googling.

I would like you to find out how much Silverstein received for WTC7, then find out how much the new WTC7 cost to build. Compare the two figures. Perform some simple math. Conclude what Silversteins net gain(or loss) was on WTC7...

The only math you need to do is figure out how much the lease cost Silverstein for WTC 1 & 2 - and then how much he received from the insurance claim. He profited over 3 billion dollars on one day. Who else in the world can say they made more money on 9/11 than Larry Silverstein?

Newsflash. At this point. Silverstein has 3 billion dollars. He's not obligated to rebuild anything...if he is rebuilding it's treated as a new business venture...that is to make him even more profit. People don't build buildings to lose money.

 

[uk_dave]

He's not obligated to rebuild anything...

Really?

 

[apathoid]

You don't think they intended to pull WTC 7 without the aid of a plane crash do you? It was obviously demolished with explosives (which had to of been planted before 911) so what I said about flight 93 and it's original plan to hit WTC 7 makes perfect sense.

Its been 3 minutes, your homework assignment is now due.....show us why the plan made perfect sense even though the 4th plane failed to reach WTC7. You said money and greed, lets see the (very simple) math that supports this notion.......

 

[Firestone]

The only math you need to do is figure out how much the lease cost Silverstein for WTC 1 & 2 - and then how much he received from the insurance claim. He profited over 3 billion dollars on one day. Who else in the world can say they made more money on 9/11 than Larry Silverstein?

Newsflash. At this point. Silverstein has 3 billion dollars. He's not obligated to rebuild anything...if he is rebuilding it's treated as a new business venture...that is to make him even more profit. People don't build buildings to lose money.

You are as good in accounting as you are in physics.
(Sorry, add logic to that.)

 

[Pardalis]

You don't think they intended to pull WTC 7 without the aid of a plane crash do you? It was obviously demolished with explosives (which had to of been planted before 911) so what I said about flight 93 and it's original plan to hit WTC 7 makes perfect sense.

So we got:

WTC 1 and 2, world renown symbols of American Economy (makes sense)
the Pentagon, world renown symbol of American military might (makes sense)

And WTC7, which nobody ever heard of before 9/11.

So, if the plane had hit WTC7, how would the Official Story explain the choice for WTC7 as a target by the terrorists?

And as Apathoid asked, why did they blow it up, since the plane didn't hit it?

Coupled with the fact that I just showed you a video of Rumsfield saying flight 93 was, in fact, shot down.

He says the people who attacked New York are the ones who "shot" down flight 93.

So it's either:

a) Al Qaeda shot down flight 93
b) the USG attacked New York
c) it's a mistake and he meant "brought" down flight 93

 

[defaultdotxbe]

The only math you need to do is figure out how much the lease cost Silverstein for WTC 1 & 2 - and then how much he received from the insurance claim. He profited over 3 billion dollars on one day. Who else in the world can say they made more money on 9/11 than Larry Silverstein?

Newsflash. At this point. Silverstein has 3 billion dollars. He's not obligated to rebuild anything...if he is rebuilding it's treated as a new business venture...that is to make him even more profit. People don't build buildings to lose money.

you claimed WTC7 was brought down without the aid of the plane (rather than aborted) due to money, so the money garnered from 7 alone must be worth all the suspicion its drawing correct?

so how much did he make from 7, and how much did it cost him to rebuild?

BTW, yes, he was obligated to rebuild WTC7 (thats why it was built so quickly and without any tenants signed on, because he only had a certain amount of time to do it) and i wouldnt be surprised if he has similar obligations for the rest of the complex

also, IIRC, he did collect over 3 billion in insurance but he spent nearly all of that rebuilding 7 and now has to foot the bill for rest of the freedom tower complex

 

[28th Kingdom]

what happened to the passengers on the 4 flights if they were all drones?

What proof do we have, that those planes ever took off on 9/11? I saw something where one of the flights...wasn't even scheduled to fly on 9/11.

And, please remove this from your sig:

Arab Muslims do NOT exist. -28th Kingdom

You know I edited that typo right after I submitted my post.

 

[apathoid]

The only math you need to do is figure out how much the lease cost Silverstein for WTC 1 & 2 - and then how much he received from the insurance claim. He profited over 3 billion dollars on one day. Who else in the world can say they made more money on 9/11 than Larry Silverstein?

Newsflash. At this point. Silverstein has 3 billion dollars. He's not obligated to rebuild anything...if he is rebuilding it's treated as a new business venture...that is to make him even more profit. People don't build buildings to lose money.

No he didnt profit. His tenants(some of whom are dead) are no longer paying their leases. Can you also prove your claim that he is not required to rebuild?