The unexplainable evidence 9/11 was allowed to happen. *Very short video*

originally posted by: cosmania
Wow, I don't believe the conspiracy theorists on this, but I agree. He was reading notes. He clearly stated the 2002 date, and I also know the building process. No way, that building gets designed and approved and construction begins from Sept to April. No way.

This is so odd. But he must be pretty senile to think he can leak that info and he won't face repercussions. Why don't they just make him go away so he doesn't continue to leak this info.

It's all very peculiar. Great find.

I dont know why but your Sig kills me

Never Pet a Burning Dog

man, anyway, off topic.. probably get pinged for it.. but lmfao

a reply to: AnAbsoluteCreation

Again? Why would the murderous new world order leave Silverstein as a liability after all those supposed truth movement damning Silverstein gaffs?

What does the supposed Silverstein insurance scam have to do with the new world order plans of peace through one government control?

Why would the new world order include Silverstein in their plans.

How was WTC 7 brought down, and how was Silverstein the mastermind.

The whole thing about the new world order didn't know about the Silverstein Israel speech is out of context of the new world order contolls and knows all.

You seem to use the terms new world order vs US government based on convenience, not in a coherent argument.

I would say 99.9 percent of all speach gaffs are non conspiracy related. I watch archeology shows on YouTube. It's sad the number of times people correct the archeologist in the videos in the comment sections on dates and data.

So,

Prove its not just a speech gaff by showings Silverstein had direct control of bringing WTC 7 down on 9/11, and how WTC 7 was brought down other than through fire and structural damage brought on by the collapse of WTC 1 and 2.

Also note, fire damage brought down a high rise steel framed building in Tehran in a widely real time documented event.

a reply to: neutronflux

I've answered your part question over on over.

You just keep asking the same thing while ignoring my points.

And by the way, the Iran building fell over not on it's footprint.

AAC

a reply to: AnAbsoluteCreation

The Tehran building fell over in such a away fire fighters in buckets atop extended ladders from ladder trucks survived the collapse without being hit by the falling building!

How many buildings did the collapse of the WTC towers destroy and damage? Something like four to six buildings destroy beyond safe and economical use? Something like a total of forty buildings damaged.

www.metabunk.org...
From Debunked: WTC towers fell in own footprints.
By Mike West

Nobody is disagreeing that's it's hard to bring down a building "in its own footprint". Impossible really.

But you suggested that it was suspicious that it was "virtually in its own foot print". (about 20x the area of its actual footprint)

Look at the images above, are you saying you would have expected a wider debris field? Or that you would have expected the building to topple like a tree?

a reply to: AnAbsoluteCreation

Going to do this the hard way huh?

First, Silverstein had no obligation to build?

What sites were leased for 99 years?
Silverstein had to pay rent to the port authority for the land no matter the condition of his buildings.

How much would it have cost Silverstein to breach his lease to the port authority for the remainder of the 99 years?

accidental repost