• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Here is one rescue worker who was "in on it"

Russ_Dalton said:
Which demolition expert were on the WTC7 ruling out the evidence you mentioned. May be I missed it, Could you show me the source.
Click to expand...


Gee, maybe I made it up. Or maybe you're another lazy kid who is new to this conspiracy crap and hasn't read a goddamned thing.

Start with Brent Blanchard's Protec paper and the various sources linked to by Mark Roberts.

http://wtc7lies.googlepages.com/introduction
 
Last edited:
pomeroo said:
If you understood who he was, you would know that, yes, he is just that obtuse.
Click to expand...


After reading on a thread last nite all the horrible things he wrote about the military, I'm thinking he's got issues.

Scroll down and keep reading. The posts are quite enlightening.
 
Okay, so we have:

- A conspirator in the biggest, most secret, plot ever.

- He knows about the bombs in WTC7, and when they'll detonated.

- He is, therefore, in the know of "The Inside-Job."

This conspirator then decides he is going to turn his face to the camera and let the cat right out the bag by announcing to the watching world that they're going to blow the whole building up. Hmmm.
How utterly careless of this NWO operative.

Of course, the more mundane answer is that a lot of people there knew the building's integrity was in serious doubt, and this man is simply using a figure of speech.

Who knows?
 
Hyperviolet said:
Okay, so we have:

- A conspirator in the biggest, most secret, plot ever.

- He knows about the bombs in WTC7, and when they'll detonated.

- He is, therefore, in the know of "The Inside-Job."

This conspirator then decides he is going to turn his face to the camera and let the cat right out the bag by announcing to the watching world that they're going to blow the whole building up. Hmmm.
How utterly careless of this NWO operative.
Click to expand...

Don't worry. He has been "dealt with". He was never our brightest operative anyways. When we said "Don't tell ANYONE. Its SOOPER SEKRIT", he took it as "Tell everyone and announce it to all cameras in sight."
 
Quad4_72 said:
Don't worry. He has been "dealt with". He was never our brightest operative anyways. When we said "Don't tell ANYONE. Its SOOPER SEKRIT", he took it as "Tell everyone and announce it to all cameras in sight."
Click to expand...

Let's PULL it!
 
theauthor said:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z9CXQY-bZn4

"We are walking back because the building is about to blow up"

How did he know building 7 was about to "blow up"?
Click to expand...

Because you fail to understand both Occam's Razor and Hanlon's Razor.

Actually, that's pretty much my answer to the vast majority of 9/11 conspiracy theory questions that are asked with a forgone conclusion in mind. It's not really a question based on wanting to know if you're only willing to accept a single answer. Instead, it's a quiz meant to promote an idea.
 
I've just read this thread and I have a couple of words to say about the OP and all of the posts by the people here trying to suggest that the Firefighter trying to move people along by using emotive language was somehow admitting that WTC7 was rigged with explosives:

TOO STUPID

Thanks, that is all.
 
R.Mackey said:
No, there are not. The only eyewitness that talks about bombs and explosives is Mr. William Rodriguez, and his account, if true, would refer to the period before impact, and have no bearing at all on the collapses.
All of the other accounts, if you read them carefully, accurately, and in context, do not describe bombs or explosives at all. As another poster noted, the concept of "simile" is essential here, but evidently lacking in your analysis.
I have also explained to you personally how to differentiate the sounds. Stop asking the same question over and over again.
Click to expand...

Ryan, this is an error in your knowledge base or a deceitful statement. The following evidence hopefully will assist you in your knowledge base or expose the deceit in your statement.
1. USA Today and MSNBC both report authorities working hypothesis.
USA Today
MSNBC-Rick Sanchez
To date, there has been no retraction of the reports.

2. The following reporters during the unfiltered time period after impacts refer to bombs or explosives:
MSNBC-the reporter amongst other people is being moved back from WTC 7 because of the fear of additional explosions, other bombs, and concern of gas explosions or gas bomb. The key is "other bombs". She asks the police officer on scene...do we know any more about other bombs.
This aligns nicely with the reports above and the concern of bombs in the WTC complex. In one instance in the clip, the police officer is more worried about the building on the other side of the brown building, WTC 7 falling into 7 not collapsing straight down. Considering the condition of other WTC buildings ie. 6 among others, this would be a legitimate concern. Brian Williams reaffirms the fear of WTC 3 falling into another building.

CNN The reporter goes into detail about secondary explosions after the plane hits. He speculates that something at the base of the towers was the coup de grâce that brought the towers down.
Granted, he doesn't directly say bomb, but the reasonable person would think that especially in the midst of a terrorists attack and the historical record surrounding the building.

[URL="http://911truth.ning.com/video/video/show?id=505920:Video:187"]News reporter discussing chief of safety of the fire department of NYC received word that a secondary device that is another bomb going off...

Marlene Cruz states it was a bomb, not "like" a bomb. "Here we go again..." referring to another truck bomb attack as happened in 1993.

Second interview where Marlene Cruz refers to the bomb that exploded in the basement.

Rick Sanchez reports police find a suspicious device that could lead to another explosion and discusses the belief by police that a van was parked in the building that had an explosive device in it.


Ryan, please update your knowledge base when trying to debunk something or clean up your moral slate. I will give you the benefit of the doubt and accept that you did not know these direct references to bombs and explosive devices
existed in the public domain.
-----
The seismic argument is debunked by the controlled demolition industry itself as they have the technology to CD a building without seismic registration.

Secondly, the 1993 WTC truck bombing did not register on the seismic scale either.
----
WTC 7 silence? Nonsense. This audio interview explains what is heard.
Lets not forget Barry Jennings and his testimony as well as. He of course states that it wasn't a fuel oil tank that destroyed the 6th floor in WTC 7. He doesn't specifically state bombs but the intelligent person would conclude that would be the only thing to cause that damage int he midst of a terrorist attack...and both towers were still standing.


I'm sure you remember the video where a loud explosion sound is heard, workers look back, and comment the building will be coming down soon.

Or this video highlighting a huge explosion that sounds like a clap of thunder and the firefighter commenting: "We gotta get back, 7 is exploding"

Silent 7? I think not.
 
Hyperviolet said:
Okay, so we have:

- A conspirator in the biggest, most secret, plot ever.

- He knows about the bombs in WTC7, and when they'll detonated.

- He is, therefore, in the know of "The Inside-Job."

This conspirator then decides he is going to turn his face to the camera and let the cat right out the bag by announcing to the watching world that they're going to blow the whole building up. Hmmm.
How utterly careless of this NWO operative.

Of course, the more mundane answer is that a lot of people there knew the building's integrity was in serious doubt, and this man is simply using a figure of speech.

Who knows?
Click to expand...


I just wanted this salient post repeated after SD's blather.
 
Swing Dangler said:
Ryan, this is an error in your knowledge base or a deceitful statement. The following evidence hopefully will assist you in your knowledge base or expose the deceit in your statement.
1. USA Today and MSNBC both report authorities working hypothesis.
USA Today
MSNBC-Rick Sanchez
To date, there has been no retraction of the reports.

2. The following reporters during the unfiltered time period after impacts refer to bombs or explosives:
MSNBC-the reporter amongst other people is being moved back from WTC 7 because of the fear of additional explosions, other bombs, and concern of gas explosions or gas bomb. The key is "other bombs". She asks the police officer on scene...do we know any more about other bombs.
This aligns nicely with the reports above and the concern of bombs in the WTC complex. In one instance in the clip, the police officer is more worried about the building on the other side of the brown building, WTC 7 falling into 7 not collapsing straight down. Considering the condition of other WTC buildings ie. 6 among others, this would be a legitimate concern. Brian Williams reaffirms the fear of WTC 3 falling into another building.

CNN The reporter goes into detail about secondary explosions after the plane hits. He speculates that something at the base of the towers was the coup de grâce that brought the towers down.
Granted, he doesn't directly say bomb, but the reasonable person would think that especially in the midst of a terrorists attack and the historical record surrounding the building.

[URL="http://911truth.ning.com/video/video/show?id=505920:Video:187"]News reporter discussing chief of safety of the fire department of NYC received word that a secondary device that is another bomb going off...

Marlene Cruz states it was a bomb, not "like" a bomb. "Here we go again..." referring to another truck bomb attack as happened in 1993.

Second interview where Marlene Cruz refers to the bomb that exploded in the basement.

Rick Sanchez reports police find a suspicious device that could lead to another explosion and discusses the belief by police that a van was parked in the building that had an explosive device in it.


Ryan, please update your knowledge base when trying to debunk something or clean up your moral slate. I will give you the benefit of the doubt and accept that you did not know these direct references to bombs and explosive devices
existed in the public domain.
-----
The seismic argument is debunked by the controlled demolition industry itself as they have the technology to CD a building without seismic registration.

Secondly, the 1993 WTC truck bombing did not register on the seismic scale either.
----
WTC 7 silence? Nonsense. This audio interview explains what is heard.
Lets not forget Barry Jennings and his testimony as well as. He of course states that it wasn't a fuel oil tank that destroyed the 6th floor in WTC 7. He doesn't specifically state bombs but the intelligent person would conclude that would be the only thing to cause that damage int he midst of a terrorist attack...and both towers were still standing.


I'm sure you remember the video where a loud explosion sound is heard, workers look back, and comment the building will be coming down soon.

Or this video highlighting a huge explosion that sounds like a clap of thunder and the firefighter commenting: "We gotta get back, 7 is exploding"

Silent 7? I think not.
Click to expand...

Fail.
 
Swing Dangler said:
Ryan, this is an error in your knowledge base or a deceitful statement. The following evidence hopefully will assist you in your knowledge base or expose the deceit in your statement.
1. USA Today and MSNBC both report authorities working hypothesis.
USA Today
MSNBC-Rick Sanchez
To date, there has been no retraction of the reports.

2. The following reporters during the unfiltered time period after impacts refer to bombs or explosives:
MSNBC-the reporter amongst other people is being moved back from WTC 7 because of the fear of additional explosions, other bombs, and concern of gas explosions or gas bomb. The key is "other bombs". She asks the police officer on scene...do we know any more about other bombs.
This aligns nicely with the reports above and the concern of bombs in the WTC complex. In one instance in the clip, the police officer is more worried about the building on the other side of the brown building, WTC 7 falling into 7 not collapsing straight down. Considering the condition of other WTC buildings ie. 6 among others, this would be a legitimate concern. Brian Williams reaffirms the fear of WTC 3 falling into another building.

CNN The reporter goes into detail about secondary explosions after the plane hits. He speculates that something at the base of the towers was the coup de grâce that brought the towers down.
Granted, he doesn't directly say bomb, but the reasonable person would think that especially in the midst of a terrorists attack and the historical record surrounding the building.

[URL="http://911truth.ning.com/video/video/show?id=505920:Video:187"]News reporter discussing chief of safety of the fire department of NYC received word that a secondary device that is another bomb going off...

Marlene Cruz states it was a bomb, not "like" a bomb. "Here we go again..." referring to another truck bomb attack as happened in 1993.

Second interview where Marlene Cruz refers to the bomb that exploded in the basement.

Rick Sanchez reports police find a suspicious device that could lead to another explosion and discusses the belief by police that a van was parked in the building that had an explosive device in it.


Ryan, please update your knowledge base when trying to debunk something or clean up your moral slate. I will give you the benefit of the doubt and accept that you did not know these direct references to bombs and explosive devices
existed in the public domain.
-----
The seismic argument is debunked by the controlled demolition industry itself as they have the technology to CD a building without seismic registration.

Secondly, the 1993 WTC truck bombing did not register on the seismic scale either.
----
WTC 7 silence? Nonsense. This audio interview explains what is heard.
Lets not forget Barry Jennings and his testimony as well as. He of course states that it wasn't a fuel oil tank that destroyed the 6th floor in WTC 7. He doesn't specifically state bombs but the intelligent person would conclude that would be the only thing to cause that damage int he midst of a terrorist attack...and both towers were still standing.


I'm sure you remember the video where a loud explosion sound is heard, workers look back, and comment the building will be coming down soon.

Or this video highlighting a huge explosion that sounds like a clap of thunder and the firefighter commenting: "We gotta get back, 7 is exploding"

Silent 7? I think not.
Click to expand...



Now, Brad, why on earth would you trot out your silly, thoroughly debunked falsehoods again? AS YOU KNOW, Protec had seismic devices in place throughout the WTC complex. AS YOU KNOW, there isn't a single firefighter who swallows the fantasies of your evil, brain-dead movement. AS YOU KNOW, Barry Jennings turned out to be a tad less than you liars hoped for.

Do you enjoy these beatings?
 
Swing Dangler said:
Ryan, this is an error in your knowledge base or a deceitful statement. The following evidence hopefully will assist you in your knowledge base or expose the deceit in your statement.
1. USA Today and MSNBC both report authorities working hypothesis.
USA Today
MSNBC-Rick Sanchez
To date, there has been no retraction of the reports.

2. The following reporters during the unfiltered time period after impacts refer to bombs or explosives:
MSNBC-the reporter amongst other people is being moved back from WTC 7 because of the fear of additional explosions, other bombs, and concern of gas explosions or gas bomb. The key is "other bombs". She asks the police officer on scene...do we know any more about other bombs.
This aligns nicely with the reports above and the concern of bombs in the WTC complex. In one instance in the clip, the police officer is more worried about the building on the other side of the brown building, WTC 7 falling into 7 not collapsing straight down. Considering the condition of other WTC buildings ie. 6 among others, this would be a legitimate concern. Brian Williams reaffirms the fear of WTC 3 falling into another building.

CNN The reporter goes into detail about secondary explosions after the plane hits. He speculates that something at the base of the towers was the coup de grâce that brought the towers down.
Granted, he doesn't directly say bomb, but the reasonable person would think that especially in the midst of a terrorists attack and the historical record surrounding the building.

[URL="http://911truth.ning.com/video/video/show?id=505920:Video:187"]News reporter discussing chief of safety of the fire department of NYC received word that a secondary device that is another bomb going off...

Marlene Cruz states it was a bomb, not "like" a bomb. "Here we go again..." referring to another truck bomb attack as happened in 1993.

Second interview where Marlene Cruz refers to the bomb that exploded in the basement.

Rick Sanchez reports police find a suspicious device that could lead to another explosion and discusses the belief by police that a van was parked in the building that had an explosive device in it.


Ryan, please update your knowledge base when trying to debunk something or clean up your moral slate. I will give you the benefit of the doubt and accept that you did not know these direct references to bombs and explosive devices
existed in the public domain.
-----
The seismic argument is debunked by the controlled demolition industry itself as they have the technology to CD a building without seismic registration.

Secondly, the 1993 WTC truck bombing did not register on the seismic scale either.
----
WTC 7 silence? Nonsense. This audio interview explains what is heard.
Lets not forget Barry Jennings and his testimony as well as. He of course states that it wasn't a fuel oil tank that destroyed the 6th floor in WTC 7. He doesn't specifically state bombs but the intelligent person would conclude that would be the only thing to cause that damage int he midst of a terrorist attack...and both towers were still standing.


I'm sure you remember the video where a loud explosion sound is heard, workers look back, and comment the building will be coming down soon.

Or this video highlighting a huge explosion that sounds like a clap of thunder and the firefighter commenting: "We gotta get back, 7 is exploding"

Silent 7? I think not.
Click to expand...


And I'll repeat my earlier question. Reporters and others on the news coverage during the day and in the time immediately following said that there were at least 20,000 and probably more people killed when the towers collapsed. Since you hold these on the spot reports as gospel, where are all the bodies?
 
SD,
If you are going to post links at least make sure they work .
You spent alot of time insulting Ryan and very little checking your links.
 
Tomblvd said:
And I'll repeat my earlier question. Reporters and others on the news coverage during the day and in the time immediately following said that there were at least 20,000 and probably more people killed when the towers collapsed. Since you hold these on the spot reports as gospel, where are all the bodies?
Click to expand...



Please link to these reports of at least 20,000 people killed. I dont remember this. All the n ews media said they had no ida of numbers
 
Early news reports made guesses of 20,000 based on the number of people normally in the WTC buildings. But of course as a standard twoofer author, you didn't really pay much attention that day, you just started reading conspiracy tabloids later on.

And this is the same kind of thing as when the press announced that the VA miners that were trapped were all alive, only to find out they were actually dead. You kids are going to need a better tactic than taking people's wording and news reports out of context.
 
WOW another ball sails right over Theauthor's head.
Is English your secondary language?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom