FDNY Lieutenant Admitted Plan To ‘Take Down’ WTC 7! , page 1

Newly uncovered video from 9/11 featuring an interview with FDNY lieutenant David Rastuccio on MSNBC confirms that there was a plan to deliberately demolish WTC Building 7, as was originally indicated in Larry Silverstein’s infamous statement on the PBS documentary, America Rebuilds.

In the clip, Rastuccio responds to the host’s statement that “You guys knew this was coming all day,” by stating, “We had first reports that the building was unstable and that it was best for it to come down on its own or it would be taken down, I would imagine that it came down on its own.”

Though Rastuccio expresses his opinion that the building had collapsed without the aid of explosives, he admits that a plan had been in place to deliberately demolish the structure.

Watch the clip
www.prisonplanet.com...

Slowly the truth is going to all come out. Then maybe Americans will WAKE UP!
You were “lied” to by the very people we trusted to run this Country and keep all of us safe, Ya, right! They tried to kill us and now they are looting our tax dollars and literally given it all away to the greedy bankers what for? They are not bailing out the economy, Please! The Government blew up all three of the WTC, there were plans already in place long before 911 had happened to demolish WTC 7. Why should Larry S be aloud to collect any insurance money he has committed fraud, I have to wonder if Silerstein gave some of the insurance money to his cronies that help him to take down those Towers.
Now we know why NIST did everything they could to avoid given any attention to demolition, including lying to the public. When ask NIST spoke person as to why did you all not do any research in demolition bring the WTC down, NIST responded by saying there where no eye witness who saw or heard any explosions. WHAT A LIE!
I will never trust NIST to do any reports on anything as far as I am concern they are TRAITORS, against the American people, and they are supporting the TERRORISTS!
I mean it, the more the truth comes out the madder I get, and you all should be just as angry! Sorry people for my venting, however my passion is to see that the truth come out about 911 and the “real” terrorist are caught and dealt with accordingly.




[edit on 12/24/2008 by cashlink]

Actually, not at all.

No, I am not going to do "the truth's" homework for them (again).

For those who are more concerned with the echo-chamber that is now the so-called truth movement, this isn't for you. For everyone else start with THIS. After that, research the context and entirety of the conversation.

reply to post by SlightlyAbovePar

---

Amazing how debunker responses are usually little more than name calling, accusations, and links to nothing. Thanks for adding nothing to the thread. I think we can all find wikipedia on our own but thanks again, really.

reply to post by angel of lightangelo

---

Your discomfort is noted. No name calling, no accusations and the link works perfectly.

reply to post by SlightlyAbovePar

---

So you are insinuating that you are comfortable with what the government has told you. That there is no conspiracy...?

Originally posted by SlightlyAbovePar
reply to post by angel of lightangelo

---

Your discomfort is noted. No name calling, no accusations and the link works perfectly.

Discomfort? Sorry, please point out the info in your post. Your link is to Wikipedia on the definition of quote mining. Do I need to repeat myself? If you have nothing to add, stop hitting the + button.

Originally posted by alaskan
Were they going to do it with their axes? "I would imagine it came down on it's own" leaves room for doubt.

I am not trying to be rude, shrill or "derail". This is very circa 2004 - 2005 and has been discussed ad naseum.

In short, there would be cause for doubt if any actual, creditable evidence had ever been forthcoming. To date, it hasn't and what we are left with is yet more quote mining more than seven years post-event.

That’s why I take exception to posts like this. If no other evidence existed (or was very thin in nature) then you would be correct. The fact of the matter is, the evidence that 9-11 happened pretty much like most think it did is overwhelming. What 9-11 CT’ers like to do – as in the OP contained within this thread – is present single data points, quotes out of context, and present that information as if that’s all there is. The 9-11 CT’ers have never been able to produce a single, cohesive, plausible alternate narrative.

WTC 7 was demolished? Where are the blasting caps? Wiring? Who planted the explosives? Where are the witnesses to the planting of the explosives? Where is the 130 + decibel bang recorded on video? Where is the explosive residue? This can go on and on and on.

(9-11 CT’ers get around the lack of any actual evidence by coming up with crackpot nonsense about unknown technology – beam weapons, Doppler sound effect machines, mini nuclear weapons…….no, I wish I was kidding)

Something to pay attention to: when confronted by the lack of evidence, 9-11 CT’ers just go deeper into the conspiracy. What, no explosive residue? Why, that’s because they used ‘nano-thermite’ or focused ‘harmonic weapons’!


The information on WTC 7 is voluminous and out there for anyone who wants to go looking. I submit a good place to search is HERE.

reply to post by angel of lightangelo

---

So your response to what you think is meaningless post is to create one yourself? Can’t help yourself can you?

As before, there was no name calling, no accusations and the link works perfectly.

Originally posted by SlightlyAbovePar
The information on WTC 7 is voluminous and out there for anyone who wants to go looking. I submit a good place to search is HERE.

I submit that is not a very good place to search since it says things like this

This hasn’t stopped people trying to make the most of the story, though.

The Pentagon conducted a training exercise called "MASCAL" simulating the crash of a Boeing 757 into the building on 24 October 2000, and yet Condoleezza Rice, among others, has repeatedly asserted that "no one ever imagined" a domestic airplane could be used as a weapon. How is this possible?
www.scholarsfor911truth.org...

Here the Scholars for 911 Truth press release is written in such a way that it could leave the reader thinking the exercise simulated a plane being used as a weapon, yet without them saying that explicitly. Another good reason to question not only the facts and references presented in what you read, but any implied meanings, too.

That is right. There was never any prior knowledge that planes might be used as weapons. Rice says no one could have imagined it. She must have been right since the pentagon is near an airport, right?

9/11: THREATS ABOUT AIRPLANES AS WEAPONS PRIOR TO 9/11

Originally posted by SlightlyAbovePar
reply to post by angel of lightangelo

---

So your response to what you think is meaningless post is to create one yourself? Can’t help yourself can you?

As before, there was no name calling, no accusations and the link works perfectly.

Can't read? No wonder you believe the guvmint story. Keep repeating that the link works. I can keep repeating that it is just a link to wikipedia on quote mining. What are you missing exactly?

Originally posted by SlightlyAbovePar


Instead of demanding that I answer your question, why don’t you do your own research and share it with us. The construction was engineered in such a way as to consider a future demolition?

Um what? Let me show you something ok. This Place can help you out. That post was not to you and I never demanded anything. Listen **SNIP**. If you want to get snippy over a question that I asked, wait until I ask you! I know you hope every response is to you but sadly, if you just read the stuff you are responding to you might get it a little.

I am sorry if this seems like a personal attack; I don't mean it to. Your post is classic truther logic-flow. That is, you make an assertion based off of nothing more than your opinion, then demand that I prove it wrong.

WHAT **SNIP** PLANET ARE YOU ON????? What assumption did I make and when did I demand that you prove it wrong?????? Are you really this stupid or just insane?

It's not my burden to prove you wrong; it's your burden to prove your assertions. If you choose to believe WTC 7 was brought down because that’s your belief system – have at it! However, don’t make an assertion and then demand that I prove it incorrect.

Wow. Wipe the drool off of your chin strap and adjust the helmet so that you can see the entire screen. Take a deep breath and count for me as best you can. 1....2....c....l... Now scroll up. If you are not sure, drop something. The way it fell, that is down. Up is the other way. Go back to my post and see if it was to you. See if I demanded anything from anyone.

Do not apologize for your completely baseless personal attack. Apologize for wasting my time with your complete lack of intelligent thought. If you cannot read, you are not going to do well on an internet forum.



Mod Edit: Profanity/Circumvention Of Censors – Please Review This Link.

Mod Note: General ATS Discussion Etiquette – Please Review This Link.

Mod Note: Warnings – Please Review This Link.


Admin Note: Attack the post, not the poster. It's the internet, nothing is personal.

[edit on 24-12-2008 by Crakeur]

US Consulate Whistleblower Says 9/11 Hijackers Passports were issued by the CIA
  Posted 18 days ago with 21 member flags

9-11 lecture at Basel University, Switzerland.
  Posted 13 days ago with 14 member flags

Hollywood Stars Seek to Make Feature Film Focused on WTC Demolitions
  Posted 19 days ago with 12 member flags

An Overview and Debunking of the AE9/11T\'s List of Demolition Signs
  Posted 15 days ago with 12 member flags

9/11 Actors re-visited
  Posted 6 days ago with 12 member flags

Wikipedia categorizes 9/11 truth as \'denialism\'
  Posted 17 days ago with 11 member flags

Building Collapses in Rio
  Posted 13 days ago with 6 member flags

new film "Human the film (2012)" covers all the bases and more!
  Posted 7 days ago with 6 member flags

Newest topics, updated in real-time:

Newest topics getting flags, in real-time:

Newest topics getting replies, in real-time: