Who actually feels the United States was behind the towers colapse - Page 6 - GoFuckYourself.com

papill0n · 09-11-2011, 09:05 PM

go and build some sites you fucking freaks

iwbabes · 09-11-2011, 09:15 PM

It saddens me to think that the our own goverment did this but im not surprised. Its been ten years and the terroroists haven't attacked us why is that? Im sure if they really wanted to they would have already done so. It just makes me think that's because our goverment is behind this and not the terrorists. That's just my opinion.

CodeR70 · 09-11-2011, 10:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by iwbabes

It saddens me to think that the our own goverment did this but im not surprised. Its been ten years and the terroroists haven't attacked us why is that? Im sure if they really wanted to they would have already done so. It just makes me think that's because our goverment is behind this and not the terrorists. That's just my opinion.

I seem to remember that some terrorist were arrested before they could do anything.

But it saddens me that some think only attacks in the US count. Ever heard of London, Madrid and Bali? Israel maybe? Or Iraq and Afghanistan? Terrorist attacks are still plotted and executed every day in this world.

StickyGreen · 09-11-2011, 11:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CodeR70

I seem to remember that some terrorist were arrested before they could do anything.

But it saddens me that some think only attacks in the US count. Ever heard of London, Madrid and Bali? Israel maybe? Or Iraq and Afghanistan? Terrorist attacks are still plotted and executed every day in this world.

Americans only care about their own country.

That should be obvious given that they support unjust wars which kill thousands of innocent human beings, human beings who are people just like them, even though they are seen as different and less worthy to live because they have darker skin and a different culture.

MediaGuy · 09-12-2011, 06:08 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by porno jew

plenty of real factual evidence that silverstein meant to "pull" the firefighters out of the building.

zero evidence he meant it to mean a controlled demolition.

http://www.debunking911.com/pull.htm scroll down.

Actually, no. All Firefighters were "pulled" from the building hours earlier. There was no one in the building to "pull" - who was he talking with from the fire dept. that didn't know this?

:D

MediaGuy · 09-12-2011, 06:23 AM

The sad legacy of 9/11 is that the assholes, on each side, won.

MediaGuy · 09-12-2011, 07:37 AM

This is great:

:D

porno jew · 09-12-2011, 09:21 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MediaGuy

Actually, no. All Firefighters were "pulled" from the building hours earlier. There was no one in the building to "pull" - who was he talking with from the fire dept. that didn't know this?

:D

post proof of that. and not some shitty made up youtube video.

Phoenix · 09-12-2011, 09:24 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by porno jew

post proof of that. and not some shitty made up youtube video.

do your own work.
go prove that what he said is not true.

porno jew · 09-12-2011, 09:28 AM

what proof you have that the firefighters were pulled hours before larry said this https://youtube.com/watch?v=7WYdAJQV100?

yet there are multiple legit sources stating that it was firefighters being pulled for saety reason, often using the same terminology.

porno jew · 09-12-2011, 09:30 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Phoenix

do your own work.
go prove that what he said is not true.

how can i prove something that is not that doesn't exist ie: firefighters were pulled before larry said "pull it."

in my link there are multiple sources saying that was it firefighters being pulled moron.

porno jew · 09-12-2011, 09:32 AM

Silverstein's Quote:

"I remember getting a call from the Fire Department commander, telling me they were not sure they were gonna be able to contain the fire, and I said, you know, 'We've had such terrible loss of life, maybe the smartest thing to do is just pull it.' And they made that decision to pull and then we watched the building collapse."

-Fact which is undisputed by either side, he was talking to the fire commander

-Fact which is undisputed by either side, both are not in the demolition business

Silverstein's spokesperson, Mr. McQuillan, later clarified:

"In the afternoon of September 11, Mr. Silverstein spoke to the Fire Department Commander on site at Seven World Trade Center. The Commander told Mr. Silverstein that there were several firefighters in the building working to contain the fires. Mr. Silverstein expressed his view that the most important thing was to protect the safety of those firefighters, including, if necessary, to have them withdraw from the building."

He could be lying, right? But here is the corroborating evidence...

"They told us to get out of there because they were worried about 7 World Trade Center, which is right behind it, coming down. We were up on the upper floors of the Verizon building looking at it. You could just see the whole bottom corner of the building was gone. We could look right out over to where the Trade Centers were because we were that high up. Looking over the smaller buildings. I just remember it was tremendous, tremendous fires going on. Finally they pulled us out. They said all right, get out of that building because that 7, they were really worried about. They pulled us out of there and then they regrouped everybody on Vesey Street, between the water and West Street. They put everybody back in there. Finally it did come down. From there - this is much later on in the day, because every day we were so worried about that building we didn't really want to get people close. They were trying to limit the amount of people that were in there. Finally it did come down." - Richard Banaciski

http://www.nytimes.com/packages/html...2_WTC_GRAPHIC/
Banaciski_Richard.txt

Here is more evidence they pulled the teams out waiting for a normal collapse from fire...

"The most important operational decision to be made that afternoon was the collapse (Of the WTC towers) had damaged 7 World Trade Center, which is about a 50 story building, at Vesey between West Broadway and Washington Street. It had very heavy fire on many floors and I ordered the evacuation of an area sufficient around to protect our members, so we had to give up some rescue operations that were going on at the time and back the people away far enough so that if 7 World Trade did collapse, we [wouldn't] lose any more people. We continued to operate on what we could from that distance and approximately an hour and a half after that order was [given], at 5:30 in the afternoon, World Trade Center collapsed completely" - Daniel Nigro, Chief of Department

http://www.nytimes.com/packages/html...2_WTC_GRAPHIC/
Nigro_Daniel.txt

"Early on, there was concern that 7 World Trade Center might have been both impacted by the collapsing tower and had several fires in it and there was a concern that it might collapse. So we instructed that a collapse area -- (Q. A collapse zone?) -- Yeah -- be set up and maintained so that when the expected collapse of 7 happened, we wouldn't have people working in it. There was considerable discussion with Con Ed regarding the substation in that building and the feeders and the oil coolants and so on. And their concern was of the type of fire we might have when it collapsed." - Chief Cruthers

http://www.nytimes.com/packages/html...12_WTC_GRAPHIC
/Cruthers.txt

"Then we found out, I guess around 3:00 [o'clock], that they thought 7 was going to collapse. So, of course, [we've] got guys all in this pile over here and the main concern was get everybody out, and I guess it took us over an hour and a half, two hours to get everybody out of there. (Q. Initially when you were there, you had said you heard a few Maydays?) Oh, yes. We had Maydays like crazy.... The heat must have been tremendous. There was so much [expletive] fire there. This whole pile was burning like crazy. Just the heat and the smoke from all the other buildings on fire, you [couldn't] see anything. So it took us a while and we ended up backing everybody out, and [that's] when 7 collapsed.... Basically, we fell back for 7 to collapse, and then we waited a while and it got a lot more organized, I would guess." - Lieutenant William Ryan

http://www.nytimes.com/packages/html...12_WTC_GRAPHIC

Rochard · 09-12-2011, 09:40 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by wehateporn

For me the Fire Chief would have only known that WTC7 was going to be demolished shortly before it happened. He would also be told not to talk about that.

He wouldn't know anything else on the matter

Information is given out on a "Need to Know" basis

Your missing my point here. Why the fuck would the fire chief be involved in demolishing the building at all?

Rochard · 09-12-2011, 09:47 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by helterskelter808

Can you read? Here's what I posted:

Here is what you hear him say:

What's the difference exactly, aside from punctuation and the fact I quoted him word for word, unlike you? I even posted the entire video, with everything he said, so how did I in any way take anything 'out of context'?

Where did I quote him saying that? I quoted him as saying exactly what he said.

I don't even see the words "evacuate the building" in the quote you said you heard him say, let alone what he actually said. Are you hearing voices in your head perhaps?

If you want the context of what he said, it's in the question he was asked, which was about Silverstein "pulling" the building and about the building being demolished. Nobody mentioned "evacuations" so I have no idea where you dreamed up that totally bizarre and ridiculous interpretation from.

At least as much as, for example, Popular Mechanics, I imagine.

The entire video implies that John Kerry states they intentionally demolished WTC7. John Kerry did not say "evacuation" or "demolition". All he says is that "they" did "something in a controlled fashion".

Which would be evacuation. You "exit a building" in a "controlled fashion". I've never heard anyone "demolish" a building in a "controlled fashion".

This video is used to put the idea in people's heads that the government demolished WTC7. The so called truth movement claims that there was no reason for WTC7 to call, when the truth was it was on fire for fifteen hours, the southwest corner was missing, as was an entire side of the building.

Rochard · 09-12-2011, 09:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MediaGuy

Actually, no. All Firefighters were "pulled" from the building hours earlier. There was no one in the building to "pull" - who was he talking with from the fire dept. that didn't know this?

:D

But was he aware of the fact there was no fire fighting staff from the building to pull? Did he know at the time of the statement if there was anyone else in the building?

Rochard · 09-12-2011, 09:57 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by porno jew

"They told us to get out of there because they were worried about 7 World Trade Center, which is right behind it, coming down. We were up on the upper floors of the Verizon building looking at it. You could just see the whole bottom corner of the building was gone. We could look right out over to where the Trade Centers were because we were that high up. Looking over the smaller buildings. I just remember it was tremendous, tremendous fires going on. Finally they pulled us out. They said all right, get out of that building because that 7, they were really worried about. They pulled us out of there and then they regrouped everybody on Vesey Street, between the water and West Street. They put everybody back in there. Finally it did come down. From there - this is much later on in the day, because every day we were so worried about that building we didn't really want to get people close. They were trying to limit the amount of people that were in there. Finally it did come down." - Richard Banaciski

"The most important operational decision to be made that afternoon was the collapse (Of the WTC towers) had damaged 7 World Trade Center, which is about a 50 story building, at Vesey between West Broadway and Washington Street. It had very heavy fire on many floors and I ordered the evacuation of an area sufficient around to protect our members, so we had to give up some rescue operations that were going on at the time and back the people away far enough so that if 7 World Trade did collapse, we [wouldn't] lose any more people. We continued to operate on what we could from that distance and approximately an hour and a half after that order was [given], at 5:30 in the afternoon, World Trade Center collapsed completely" - Daniel Nigro, Chief of Department

One of the things about 9/11 and the so called truth movement is the argument over WTC7. The truth moment states that "WTC7 fell for no reason" and that there was "no damage to the building". And they've said it so many times that's almost become a fact - I mean, you can only hear the same things over and over again until people just accept it as fact.

These two quotes above state otherwise. WTC was hit by falling debris, was on fire for fifteen hours - unchecked the entire time - and suffered untold damage form when both towers fell.

Just the towers alone falling was similar to an earthquake, and enough to bring down buildings in it's own right.

MediaGuy · 09-12-2011, 10:01 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rochard

But was he aware of the fact there was no fire fighting staff from the building to pull? Did he know at the time of the statement if there was anyone else in the building?

No he probably didn't, but whoever he was talking to would have kown. Either way it's obvious from his statement that he wasn't referring to fire fighters...

:P

CodeR70 · 09-12-2011, 10:02 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by porno jew

Silverstein's Quote: ...

Didn't want to quote your whole post but thanks man. That was a good read and makes the "pull it" a lot clearer.

porno jew · 09-12-2011, 10:02 AM

there is a good article at slate on the history of the 9/11 "truth" movement and the circularity of the arguments.

also found it interesting the guy behind "loose change" isn't a truther anymore. well he believes there is some kind of cover-up, that's it. his continued investigations didn't hold up. ie: talked to witnesses that saw a plane at the pentagon, not a missile.

i was the same. i thought the conspiracies had some merit at one point, but the facts just didn't hold up to scrutiny over time.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rochard

One of the things about 9/11 and the so called truth movement is the argument over WTC7. The truth moment states that "WTC7 fell for no reason" and that there was "no damage to the building". And they've said it so many times that's almost become a fact - I mean, you can only hear the same things over and over again until people just accept it as fact.

These two quotes above state otherwise. WTC was hit by falling debris, was on fire for fifteen hours - unchecked the entire time - and suffered untold damage form when both towers fell.

Just the towers alone falling was similar to an earthquake, and enough to bring down buildings in it's own right.

porno jew · 09-12-2011, 10:04 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MediaGuy

No he probably didn't, but whoever he was talking to would have kown. Either way it's obvious from his statement that he wasn't referring to fire fighters...

:P

well before you ignore my question and hop to the next random theory where is the proof that the firefighters were pulled hours before silverstein said "pull it."

porno jew · 09-12-2011, 10:06 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MediaGuy

No he probably didn't, but whoever he was talking to would have kown. Either way it's obvious from his statement that he wasn't referring to fire fighters...

:P

how would they know? demolition experts don't use the term "pull it" anyway.

kbruno · 09-12-2011, 10:54 AM

I'm just disappointed not to see the conspiracy nuts trotting out aliens or at least the Trilateral Commission. I mean if you are going to have that many people keep a secret that big inside the U.S. government it would take some kind of mind control or people just disappearing all over the place. Anyone know if Robyn Gardener had info on WTC operations?

Rochard · 09-12-2011, 11:10 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by porno jew

there is a good article at slate on the history of the 9/11 "truth" movement and the circularity of the arguments.

also found it interesting the guy behind "loose change" isn't a truther anymore. well he believes there is some kind of cover-up, that's it. his continued investigations didn't hold up. ie: talked to witnesses that saw a plane at the pentagon, not a missile.

i was the same. i thought the conspiracies had some merit at one point, but the facts just didn't hold up to scrutiny over time.

My point is you can poke holes in anything.

The entire fucking birther movement was more of the same. Obama had to present proof of his birth in order to become President - before he could run - but yet this birther movement seeded doubt for years. Even after he produced the birth certificate they continued to claim it was fake. You know, because the President of the United States is going to produce a fake birth certificate.

The funny thing is all of this 9/11 stuff is based on how the towers were taken down by explosives. Funny thing is there was no explosions at all. Dozens of videos from ground level, and not one of them has any sounds of explosions on them. That fact is completely ignored by the so called truth movment.

The best part is "why?". Why would anyone want us in Afghanistan? For oil? Afghanistan has no oil, and even if they did we don't get our fucking oil from the Middle East. We get our oil from Canada and Mexico.

porno jew · 09-12-2011, 11:14 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rochard

The funny thing is all of this 9/11 stuff is based on how the towers were taken down by explosives. Funny thing is there was no explosions at all. Dozens of videos from ground level, and not one of them has any sounds of explosions on them. That fact is completely ignored by the so called truth movment.

no it wasn't. that's why they came up with the concept of nano-thermite.

theking · 09-12-2011, 11:26 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rochard

The entire video implies that John Kerry states they intentionally demolished WTC7. John Kerry did not say "evacuation" or "demolition". All he says is that "they" did "something in a controlled fashion".

Which would be evacuation. You "exit a building" in a "controlled fashion". I've never heard anyone "demolish" a building in a "controlled fashion".

This video is used to put the idea in people's heads that the government demolished WTC7. The so called truth movement claims that there was no reason for WTC7 to call, when the truth was it was on fire for fifteen hours, the southwest corner was missing, as was an entire side of the building.

Yes the bottom corner was damaged and there was a 20 story hole in one side...and the fire fighters noticed that the building was beginning to bulge and recognized that collapse was virtually imminent...so they began withdrawing to what was considered to be a safety zone.

Simply put...the severe damage alone would probably have caused the collapse of the building...eventually and combined with prolonged fire it made it imminent...end of story.

porno jew · 09-12-2011, 11:28 AM

how come of the "investigators for truth" have actually interviewed the firefighters and other safety people at the scene? i'm sure they could put together what really happened based on that.

2intense · 09-12-2011, 11:31 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by papill0n

go and build some sites you fucking freaks

theking · 09-12-2011, 11:33 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by porno jew

no it wasn't. that's why they came up with the concept of nano-thermite.

There were experiments done that showed nano-thermite would not have cut through the steel beams...but several of the major "truthers" denied the experiment with various arguments even after witnessing the experiments. Seeing is not enough proof for them.

porno jew · 09-12-2011, 11:43 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by theking

There were experiments done that showed nano-thermite would not have cut through the steel beams...but several of the major "truthers" denied the experiment with various arguments even after witnessing the experiments. Seeing is not enough proof for them.

yes it's pointless to argue. like arguing with a moonie, creationist or hardcore marxist.

helterskelter808 · 09-12-2011, 12:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rochard

The entire video implies that John Kerry states they intentionally demolished WTC7. John Kerry did not say "evacuation" or "demolition". All he says is that "they" did "something in a controlled fashion".

He did not say "something in a controlled fashion", he said "they did it in a controlled fashion". I'm surprised you don't understand how a basic conversation works. Here goes:

1. Someone says something about a "demolition", and nothing about an evacuation.
2. Kerry replies to that question, saying they did IT in a controlled fashion.

What's the "it" likely to be, genius, the very thing the guy is talking about to Kerry, or something nobody said that Kerry just pulls out of his ass and expects people to psychically know what he means when he says "it"?

Quote:

Which would be evacuation. You "exit a building" in a "controlled fashion". I've never heard anyone "demolish" a building in a "controlled fashion".

And I never heard anyone in the video mention "evacuation" or "exiting a building". Did you? I'm also willing to bet I can find more references to "controlled demolition" than "controlled evacuation".

helterskelter808 · 09-12-2011, 12:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CodeR70

But it saddens me that some think only attacks in the US count. Ever heard of London, Madrid and Bali? Israel maybe? Or Iraq and Afghanistan? Terrorist attacks are still plotted and executed every day in this world.

Does it sadden you that, like many other people, you only think terrorism by Muslims counts? I'm guessing you didn't mean ETA in Madrid and the IRA, who bombed London and other British cities multiple times, with arms and money from the USA, before the USA became the world's foremost self-righteous, self-indulgent bore on terrorism a decade ago.

CodeR70 · 09-12-2011, 12:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by helterskelter808

Does it sadden you that, like many other people, you only think terrorism by Muslims counts? I'm guessing you didn't mean ETA in Madrid and the IRA, who bombed London and other British cities multiple times, with arms and money from the USA, before the USA became the world's foremost self-righteous, self-indulgent bore on terrorism a decade ago.

We were talking about "after 9/11" right? But we can go even further, some actually think that the US (and allies) in Iraq or Afghanistan (or whatever) are considered to be terrorists? Anyway you wanna go with that is fine by me dude. Fact remains, the US does not have a monopoly on this. 9/11 was no the last terrorist attack as it was mentioned by the OP I was reacting on.

JamesGw · 09-12-2011, 01:29 PM

You guys are out of control

wehateporn · 09-12-2011, 01:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rochard

Your missing my point here. Why the fuck would the fire chief be involved in demolishing the building at all?

One would have to involve the Fire Chief if they had a desire to save his fire fighters, unless you have another way of convincing him to get his men out of the building.

His involvement would be along the lines of him being told "We know that's coming down, get your men out!"

EDIT: There were no firefighters in the building, they were told to stay away for safety reasons

* "No manual firefighting actions were taken by FDNY." [Fema Report]

* "There was no firefighting in WTC 7." [Popular Mechanics]

* "By 11:30 a.m., the fire commander in charge of that area, Assistant Chief Frank Fellini, ordered firefighters away from [WTC 7] for safety reasons." [New York Times]

In which case the "Pull It" statment from Larry Silverstein becomes less ambiguous

wehateporn · 09-12-2011, 02:48 PM

Here's something to think about, this is a French demolition technique known as Vérinage; it is performed without explosives. Hydraulics are used to push structural members out of alignment allowing the top portion of a building to then demolish the structure below via gravity alone.

I won't post my thoughts of how this compares with what we witnessed on September 11th, I'll leave this open for your opinions one way or the other

Keep it clean and try to give an unbiased opinion based on what you see

wehateporn · 09-12-2011, 03:08 PM

Now for what it's worth, here's the WTC 7 collapse to compare

mountainmiester · 09-12-2011, 03:14 PM

Behind, underneath, in front of and all around. or where you too young to remember.

What an absolutely horrible thing to honor those how died in this event. Clearly you lost no one nor do you care.

Whatever the fuck happened, today they are dead leaving behind loved ones. Let's try to focus on their lives and please save your political pontifications for a more appropriate moment.

helterskelter808 · 09-12-2011, 04:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CodeR70

We were talking about "after 9/11" right? But we can go even further, some actually think that the US (and allies) in Iraq or Afghanistan (or whatever) are considered to be terrorists? Anyway you wanna go with that is fine by me dude. Fact remains, the US does not have a monopoly on this. 9/11 was no the last terrorist attack as it was mentioned by the OP I was reacting on.

Well he said they haven't attacked "us", which I took to mean the USA, which they haven't. Anyway, not only are you correct to say other countries suffer from terrorism, and for decades before 9/11, they also respond to it in a more mature and proper way than the USA does.

They do not (with the exception of the other major rogue state in the world, Israel), start invading or bombing countries, or killing more innocent people, but they treat the terrorist acts as the crimes they are. They investigate the crime and find and prosecute those responsible in a legal way, and jail them.

You could put the USA's response to 9/11 down to a gun-crazy, cowboy-like immaturity, but it was really just about re-asserting control over the planet, and particularly the oil rich areas of the world, as laid out in the Neo-Con blueprint written one year before 9/11 that infamously pined for a "new Pearl Harbor". Pearl Harbor being the last time the US Government allowed/facilitated an attack on the USA, as pretext for joining a war that would make it the dominant power on the planet.

And now over 150 countries, according the Department of Defense, have US forces stationed on their soil, as part of the post WWII doctrine that the world belongs to the US.

papill0n · 09-12-2011, 05:04 PM

if you remember nothing else today remember this

those planes were flown into the towers as the direct result of one thing

the invasion and occupation of Iraq by US and coalition forces

glowlite · 09-12-2011, 09:16 PM

Truly amazing ...
A dozen+ porn slingers have actually figured out exactly what happened on September 11th, 2001. My God, why didn't you warn us? You rocket scientists could have certainly told us beforehand 9/11 was about to happen.

Or maybe not ...

Since the aftermath we (Americans) could have saved 100's of 1,000's of dollars in research just by asking one or two simple questions on GFY. I'm sure several of you analysts could have provided definitive answers.

Oh wait ... better yet... go back to selling pics/vids of naked people fucking to horny people. Now THAT's true rocket science. Tired of that? Go sell snowshoes in Alaska, suntan lotion in Hawaii, hotdogs at a ballgame, popcorn at a theater. You know, stuff that's _r e a l l y_ hard to sell.

Bunch'a Monday morning quarterbacks

TiaLing · 09-12-2011, 11:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by glowlite

Truly amazing ...
A dozen+ porn slingers have actually figured out exactly what happened on September 11th, 2001. My God, why didn't you warn us? You rocket scientists could have certainly told us beforehand 9/11 was about to happen.

Or maybe not ...

Since the aftermath we (Americans) could have saved 100's of 1,000's of dollars in research just by asking one or two simple questions on GFY. I'm sure several of you analysts could have provided definitive answers.

Oh wait ... better yet... go back to selling pics/vids of naked people fucking to horny people. Now THAT's true rocket science. Tired of that? Go sell snowshoes in Alaska, suntan lotion in Hawaii, hotdogs at a ballgame, popcorn at a theater. You know, stuff that's _r e a l l y_ hard to sell.

Bunch'a Monday morning quarterbacks

That's pretty funny , lol

Anyone that seriously believes this conspiracy theory crap has issues. We got attacked, our lives changed as a result ... we've prevented many attacks since in the u.s. ,however , many have succeeded in other countries. Say what you want about Bush, but many of his policies kept us safe. What's so hard to believe about that ???
Geese !

09-11-2011, 09:15 PM	#252
iwbabes Confirmed User Join Date: May 2005 Posts: 248	It saddens me to think that the our own goverment did this but im not surprised. Its been ten years and the terroroists haven't attacked us why is that? Im sure if they really wanted to they would have already done so. It just makes me think that's because our goverment is behind this and not the terrorists. That's just my opinion. __________________ ICQ at 336912555

09-12-2011, 06:23 AM	#256
MediaGuy Confirmed User Industry Role: Join Date: Sep 2004 Location: Montrealquebecanada Posts: 5,500	The sad legacy of 9/11 is that the assholes, on each side, won. __________________ YOU Are Industry News! Press Releases: pr[at]payoutmag.com Facebook: Payout Magazine! Facebook: MIKEB! ICQ: 248843947 Skype: Mediaguy1

09-12-2011, 07:37 AM	#257
MediaGuy Confirmed User Industry Role: Join Date: Sep 2004 Location: Montrealquebecanada Posts: 5,500	This is great: :D __________________ YOU Are Industry News! Press Releases: pr[at]payoutmag.com Facebook: Payout Magazine! Facebook: MIKEB! ICQ: 248843947 Skype: Mediaguy1

09-12-2011, 10:54 AM	#272
kbruno Registered User Join Date: Aug 2004 Posts: 4	I'm just disappointed not to see the conspiracy nuts trotting out aliens or at least the Trilateral Commission. I mean if you are going to have that many people keep a secret that big inside the U.S. government it would take some kind of mind control or people just disappearing all over the place. Anyone know if Robyn Gardener had info on WTC operations? __________________ http://www.twinkys.com/cgi-bin/multisitetrade.cgi

09-12-2011, 01:29 PM	#283
JamesGw Confirmed User Industry Role: Join Date: Apr 2011 Posts: 1,237	You guys are out of control __________________ Giggles.com has a huge selection of sex toys. Need backlinks? Ask to guest post on our adult blog.

09-11-2011, 09:05 PM	#251
papill0n Unregistered Abuser Industry Role: Join Date: Oct 2007 Posts: 15,547	go and build some sites you fucking freaks

09-12-2011, 09:28 AM	#260
porno jew Too lazy to set a custom title Industry Role: Join Date: Nov 2006 Posts: 10,166	what proof you have that the firefighters were pulled hours before larry said this https://youtube.com/watch?v=7WYdAJQV100? yet there are multiple legit sources stating that it was firefighters being pulled for saety reason, often using the same terminology.

09-12-2011, 09:32 AM	#262
porno jew Too lazy to set a custom title Industry Role: Join Date: Nov 2006 Posts: 10,166	Silverstein's Quote: "I remember getting a call from the Fire Department commander, telling me they were not sure they were gonna be able to contain the fire, and I said, you know, 'We've had such terrible loss of life, maybe the smartest thing to do is just pull it.' And they made that decision to pull and then we watched the building collapse." -Fact which is undisputed by either side, he was talking to the fire commander -Fact which is undisputed by either side, both are not in the demolition business Silverstein's spokesperson, Mr. McQuillan, later clarified: "In the afternoon of September 11, Mr. Silverstein spoke to the Fire Department Commander on site at Seven World Trade Center. The Commander told Mr. Silverstein that there were several firefighters in the building working to contain the fires. Mr. Silverstein expressed his view that the most important thing was to protect the safety of those firefighters, including, if necessary, to have them withdraw from the building." He could be lying, right? But here is the corroborating evidence... "They told us to get out of there because they were worried about 7 World Trade Center, which is right behind it, coming down. We were up on the upper floors of the Verizon building looking at it. You could just see the whole bottom corner of the building was gone. We could look right out over to where the Trade Centers were because we were that high up. Looking over the smaller buildings. I just remember it was tremendous, tremendous fires going on. Finally they pulled us out. They said all right, get out of that building because that 7, they were really worried about. They pulled us out of there and then they regrouped everybody on Vesey Street, between the water and West Street. They put everybody back in there. Finally it did come down. From there - this is much later on in the day, because every day we were so worried about that building we didn't really want to get people close. They were trying to limit the amount of people that were in there. Finally it did come down." - Richard Banaciski http://www.nytimes.com/packages/html...2_WTC_GRAPHIC/ Banaciski_Richard.txt Here is more evidence they pulled the teams out waiting for a normal collapse from fire... "The most important operational decision to be made that afternoon was the collapse (Of the WTC towers) had damaged 7 World Trade Center, which is about a 50 story building, at Vesey between West Broadway and Washington Street. It had very heavy fire on many floors and I ordered the evacuation of an area sufficient around to protect our members, so we had to give up some rescue operations that were going on at the time and back the people away far enough so that if 7 World Trade did collapse, we [wouldn't] lose any more people. We continued to operate on what we could from that distance and approximately an hour and a half after that order was [given], at 5:30 in the afternoon, World Trade Center collapsed completely" - Daniel Nigro, Chief of Department http://www.nytimes.com/packages/html...2_WTC_GRAPHIC/ Nigro_Daniel.txt "Early on, there was concern that 7 World Trade Center might have been both impacted by the collapsing tower and had several fires in it and there was a concern that it might collapse. So we instructed that a collapse area -- (Q. A collapse zone?) -- Yeah -- be set up and maintained so that when the expected collapse of 7 happened, we wouldn't have people working in it. There was considerable discussion with Con Ed regarding the substation in that building and the feeders and the oil coolants and so on. And their concern was of the type of fire we might have when it collapsed." - Chief Cruthers http://www.nytimes.com/packages/html...12_WTC_GRAPHIC /Cruthers.txt "Then we found out, I guess around 3:00 [o'clock], that they thought 7 was going to collapse. So, of course, [we've] got guys all in this pile over here and the main concern was get everybody out, and I guess it took us over an hour and a half, two hours to get everybody out of there. (Q. Initially when you were there, you had said you heard a few Maydays?) Oh, yes. We had Maydays like crazy.... The heat must have been tremendous. There was so much [expletive] fire there. This whole pile was burning like crazy. Just the heat and the smoke from all the other buildings on fire, you [couldn't] see anything. So it took us a while and we ended up backing everybody out, and [that's] when 7 collapsed.... Basically, we fell back for 7 to collapse, and then we waited a while and it got a lot more organized, I would guess." - Lieutenant William Ryan http://www.nytimes.com/packages/html...12_WTC_GRAPHIC

09-12-2011, 11:28 AM	#276
porno jew Too lazy to set a custom title Industry Role: Join Date: Nov 2006 Posts: 10,166	how come of the "investigators for truth" have actually interviewed the firefighters and other safety people at the scene? i'm sure they could put together what really happened based on that.

09-12-2011, 02:48 PM	#285
wehateporn Promoting Debate on GFY Industry Role: Join Date: Apr 2007 Posts: 27,173	Here's something to think about, this is a French demolition technique known as Vérinage; it is performed without explosives. Hydraulics are used to push structural members out of alignment allowing the top portion of a building to then demolish the structure below via gravity alone. I won't post my thoughts of how this compares with what we witnessed on September 11th, I'll leave this open for your opinions one way or the other Keep it clean and try to give an unbiased opinion based on what you see __________________ Sexy Girls Teasing Last edited by wehateporn; 09-12-2011 at 02:50 PM..

09-12-2011, 03:08 PM	#286
wehateporn Promoting Debate on GFY Industry Role: Join Date: Apr 2007 Posts: 27,173	Now for what it's worth, here's the WTC 7 collapse to compare __________________ Sexy Girls Teasing

09-12-2011, 03:14 PM	#287
mountainmiester Confirmed User Join Date: Oct 2002 Location: Arizona Posts: 509	Behind, underneath, in front of and all around. or where you too young to remember. What an absolutely horrible thing to honor those how died in this event. Clearly you lost no one nor do you care. Whatever the fuck happened, today they are dead leaving behind loved ones. Let's try to focus on their lives and please save your political pontifications for a more appropriate moment. __________________ Randall Crockett LIMELIGHT NETWORKS [email protected]

09-12-2011, 05:04 PM	#289
papill0n Unregistered Abuser Industry Role: Join Date: Oct 2007 Posts: 15,547	if you remember nothing else today remember this those planes were flown into the towers as the direct result of one thing the invasion and occupation of Iraq by US and coalition forces

09-12-2011, 09:16 PM	#290
glowlite Confirmed User Industry Role: Join Date: Dec 2005 Location: Arizona/Indiana Posts: 366	Truly amazing ... A dozen+ porn slingers have actually figured out exactly what happened on September 11th, 2001. My God, why didn't you warn us? You rocket scientists could have certainly told us beforehand 9/11 was about to happen. Or maybe not ... Since the aftermath we (Americans) could have saved 100's of 1,000's of dollars in research just by asking one or two simple questions on GFY. I'm sure several of you analysts could have provided definitive answers. Oh wait ... better yet... go back to selling pics/vids of naked people fucking to horny people. Now THAT's true rocket science. Tired of that? Go sell snowshoes in Alaska, suntan lotion in Hawaii, hotdogs at a ballgame, popcorn at a theater. You know, stuff that's _r e a l l y_ hard to sell. Bunch'a Monday morning quarterbacks