One million New Yorkers to see Building 7 fall (AE911truth)

reply to post by dereks

If they were undercover they wouldn't entertain no Dogs! besides if you asked they could answer with all sorts of Building jargon just to keep yea off the sent pardon the pun!

One glaring stumbling block remains, concerning this fantasy: How are they going to raise the $500.000? See the latest debarcle involving Richard Gage, where the truthers only had to raise $10.000 in order for him to put on a show at the National Press Club, yet after weeks and weeks of begging, they've only managed slightly over $3.000.

Originally posted by slugger9787
The biggest and best advertised conspiracy theory of all is the dumbass idea that 19 Arabs did this while suffering kidney failure from a cave in Afghanistan.

Really? I thought the 15 muscle and hijackers and the 4 trained pilots were on the planes. The more you know, I guess..

reply to post by roboe

Why are you always going on about money? you live in a Capitalist Country dont you? (well a failed Capitalist Country) so money should'n be a big deal!

Originally posted by DCDAVECLARKE
reply to post by roboe

 

Why are you always going on about money? you live in a Capitalist Country dont you? (well a failed Capitalist Country) so money should'n be a big deal!

I live in a socialist welfare state, not the US of A.

Originally posted by beijingyank
The list goes on and on, every time the Truth Movement has been derailed it is because of zionists.

Yeah, right. It has absolutely nothign to do with the lunatics who think the planes were all holograms and that the WTC was destroyed by lasers from outer space. It has absolutely nothing to do con artists charging $10,000 per engagement to drop boxes onto tables. It has absolutely nothign to do with gullible people reciting paranoid drivel they found on some conspiracy web site that can be debunked with a 30 second Google search.. It's all the fault of yet another secret conspiracy from the zionists. Of course.

Dude, why don't you get your head out of the clouds? The reason your truth moment is being derailed is becuase it's behaving like an outright three ring circus. You're infested with crackpot and idiotic conspiracy theories that noone can take seriously, you're all but getting into fistfights with each other becuase not even two people among you can even agree with each other on what this "blatantly a conspiracy" even is, and now you've become so desperate to show conspiracy that you've taken to bickering over what happened to every single nut, bolt, and toilet seat in the buildings...and even then all you can come up with is innuendo. You're a case study on how NOT to conduct a grass roots organization.

reply to post by TheImmaculateD1


they had 4th generation thermonuclear devices at the time.

Sublimating steel, vaporization of items containing water, pulverization of concrete.
Where did the 500,000 gallons of water on each of the roofs go to? Remember seeing and water?
The dumbass official theory of a conspiracy of 19 cave men Arabs led by a kidney failure leader is egregiously trite.

Originally posted by slugger9787

they had 4th generation thermonuclear devices at the time.

It doesn't make a difference whether they had eleventeen gazillionth generation thermonuclear devices at the time. The very mechanics of a thermonuclear reaction necessarily means Manhattan would have been molten slag, highly radioactive, and people would be dropping left and right from radiation poisoning. Physics have to apply to your conspiracy stoies just as they do to everyone else.

The dumbass official theory of a conspiracy of 19 cave men Arabs led by a kidney failure leader is egregiously trite.

Ah yes, the standard tactic of the conspiracy theorists-they have no tangible evidence of any real conspiracy so they have to resort to making up their own. Most of the hijackers came from middle to upper class families, and Mohammed Atta had a university degree and has pilot licenses from every country he visited. Not bad for a caveman who never stepped foot in a cave.

reply to post by GoodOlDave


It's official.

You're more obsessed with hologram theories than anyone else here, "truthers" included. No one is arguing holograms here "Dave."


If you would try posting without abusing a straw-man within the first 2 sentences of your rant, people might take you a little more seriously.

At least save it for the end of the post if you absolutely can't resist. Even that would be a slight improvement.

Originally posted by VirginiaRisesYetAgain
reply to post by GoodOlDave

 

It's official.

You're more obsessed with hologram theories than anyone else here, "truthers" included. No one is arguing holograms here "Dave."


If you would try posting without abusing a straw-man within the first 2 sentences of your rant, people might take you a little more seriously.

At least save it for the end of the post if you absolutely can't resist. Even that would be a slight improvement.

LOL how right you are VRYA.

It is amazing how obsessing on all the obtue unbelievable conspiracy theories is being done on a thread about watching a movie about WTC7 imploe.

It is just cognitive dissonance being acted out in its worst display of pathetic whinings.

JFK was killed in a conspiracy theory.

Would you believe still that 10% of the population of USA STILL think the dumbass patsy Oswald did it himself?

I want my teddy bear before I go nitey night mommy kind of mentality.
SAD.

reply to post by slugger9787


I think its higher than 10% in the USA but its way down in Europe ..


Sunday, August 22, 2010
Retired FBI Agent Claims Oswald 'Absolutely' Did Not Kill JFK

Right-wing extremist Joseph Milteer has been implicated in JFK's assassination by retired FBI agent Don Adams

irishcentral - A retired FBI agent has come forward with evidence that President John F. Kennedy was not killed by Lee Harvey Oswald in Dallas, Texas on Nov 22, 1963.

The Korean War veteran and retired FBI agent, Don Adams, was interviewed by a FOX 8 news reporter. He told the reporter that he worked as an FBI field agent in Thomasville, Georgia.

Adams, who is now 80-years-old, told the reporter that one of his assignments was to investigate "one of the most violent men in the country,” Joseph Milteer.
Source,,
naturalplane.blogspot.com...

[edit on 23-8-2010 by DCDAVECLARKE]

[edit on 23-8-2010 by DCDAVECLARKE]

Don't get me wrong, I'm all for putting up fliers around NYC showing people that WTC 7 fell, but if you're going to do that, then at least have the integrity to give them ALL the information, not just the carefully edited information intended to trick people to think something suspicious is going on. Namely, like this-

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/5e7e517abf71.jpg[/atsimg]

The building in the center is WTC 6, and to the left, WTC 7. To the right of WTC 6 was where WTC 1 formally stood, and you can see leaning on the side of what's left of WTC 6 is a gigantic slab of the distinctive waffle patterned sheathing of the WTC, bent in the direction that it fell. The distribution of the wreckage right away shows that when WTC 1 collapsed, tons of falling wreckage fell in that direction, crushed WTC 6 and smacked up WTC 7. What domino effect of structural collapse that was instigated by this damage is subject for debate, but what's not up for debate is that WTC 7 was in fact damaged by falling wreckage from WTC 7.

So, are the organizers of this flier campaign going to include the fact that WTC 7 stood for over 30 years and only fell after tons of WTC 1 wreckage fell on it? My money is that they won't because it disproves what they want people to believe.


[edit on 23-8-2010 by GoodOlDave]

Okay maybe it is higher than 10%.

My father, God rest his soul, knew when they showed the rifle on TV that fateful day in 1963 that that rifle did not do it.

He said, "A wealthy Texan wanted to be president." and "The only people who have the rifle that has a bullet to do that is the U Govt."

I bet the Warren Report, which is the Offical Story, and those who did and still do believe in official stories, get laughed at behind their backs.

Most of the people then as now who are in the know about what really happened, were and are avid and staunch supporters of the official story.

I personally cannot exist with the personal integrity violation such a position requires.

My morals say honesty and truth are the right answer, and when I knowingly lie, and keep doing it, I get more and more ashamed and
well for me personally, the truth will be divulged either in the here or the hereafter. Much better in the here though.

The official story is a dumbass lie, and believing it is either gullibiliy at its worse or outright deciet.

I personally know the viewing or WTC7 collapes can and will help people understand the truth.

How many times have you watched the Zapruder film?

Originally posted by slugger9787
I personally know the viewing or WTC7 collapes can and will help people understand the truth.

How many times have you watched the Zapruder film?

To which I can answer...

a) I'm not up on all the details of the JFK assassination conspiracies so I leave this for others to debunk, but one thing I can definitely say is that I know more about firearms and shooting than you do, and I know the bullet that killed JFK absolutely came from behind. I've seen the same "explosion in the direction the bullet came from" when I shot water jugs that I saw in the Zapruder film, plus the bullet for the Carcano rifle is long and skinny and was intentionally engineered to tumble in the way the Warren report said it did. Once those two details are srtipped out of your conspiracy theories, your accusations pretty much become toothless.

b) it's always been my position that the bulk of the people who support these 9/11 conspiracies likewise support a host of OTHER conspiracy theories and have supported them long before the 9/11 attack ever occurred, and this "the gov't is out to murder us all" abject paranoia is what drives them to go to those damned fool 9/11 conspiracy web sites for their information to begin with. Worse, these con artists pushing out these conspiracies ALWAYS ALWAYS ALWAYS leave out critical information that prevents us from forming reasoned decisions becuase their intention isn't to provide the facts. Their intention is to deliberately get people all paranoid over shadows.

The moral of the story is: you have not shown me to be incorrect.

Originally posted by GoodOlDave
Don't get me wrong, I'm all for putting up fliers around NYC showing people that WTC 7 fell, but if you're going to do that, then at least have the integrity to give them ALL the information, not just the carefully edited information intended to trick people to think something suspicious is going on. Namely, like this-

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/5e7e517abf71.jpg[/atsimg]

The building in the center is WTC 6, and to the left, WTC 7. To the right of WTC 6 was where WTC 1 formally stood, and you can see leaning on the side of what's left of WTC 6 is a gigantic slab of the distinctive waffle patterned sheathing of the WTC, bent in the direction that it fell. The distribution of the wreckage right away shows that when WTC 1 collapsed, tons of falling wreckage fell in that direction, crushed WTC 6 and smacked up WTC 7. What domino effect of structural collapse that was instigated by this damage is subject for debate, but what's not up for debate is that WTC 7 was in fact damaged by falling wreckage from WTC 7.

So, are the organizers of this flier campaign going to include the fact that WTC 7 stood for over 30 years and only fell after tons of WTC 1 wreckage fell on it? My money is that they won't because it disproves what they want people to believe.


[edit on 23-8-2010 by GoodOlDave]

This is by far your most willfully ignorant attempt of trolling yet, since i'm sure you know that the strutcural damage done to WTC 7 had nothing to do with it's collapse.

Posting a picture after the collapse of WTC 7 and then using it to point towards damage pre-collapse is just moronic to say the least. Then to imply that that this worthless attempt at trolling needs to be involved in this campaign is just an incredible display of stupidity, even for you.

[edit on 23-8-2010 by curious_soul]

Okay, I concede.
I will go all the way back to 11/22/1963.

The Official Story is True.
The Official Story is True.
The Official Story is True.
The Official Story is True.
All the Official Stories are True.
All.....

Wait a minute, why am I beginning to have visions of
Dorothy, clicking her red shoes together saying

"There's no place like home"

"There's no place like home"

"There's no place like home"

Then visions of some guy holding his hand on his furrowed brow....

Well ones believes what one needs to believe to help them sleep at night.

Cool they are going to show the film shots of WTC7 imploding.
Wake some people up from their dreams I hope.


[edit on 23-8-2010 by slugger9787]

[edit on 23-8-2010 by slugger9787]

Edited to provide a picture link to Dorothys Shoes.

[edit on 23-8-2010 by slugger9787]

Originally posted by GoodOlDave
So, are the organizers of this flier campaign going to include the fact that WTC 7 stood for over 30 years and only fell after tons of WTC 1 wreckage fell on it?

I don't see why anyone should considering that even NIST agrees that that damage was insignificant to WTC7's collapse.

For that much, "truthers" and the government agree. Only you amateur "debunkers" seem to have never gotten the memo.

Originally posted by VirginiaRisesYetAgain
I don't see why anyone should considering that even NIST agrees that that damage was insignificant to WTC7's collapse.

This is true, but the fact remains that the chain of events that did cause WTC 7's collapse was still instigated by wreckage from WTC 1 falling on it. You're a Civil War buff, so you know full well that CW soldiers didn't always die from the bullet that hit them. The bullet caused some additional problem that killed them- gangrene, the wound becoming infected, the body's inability to fight off disease in its weakened state, the shock from the limb that the bullet had hit being amputated, and so on. If you refute the NIST report's explanation, that's fine, but whatever did cause the collapse, it was necessarily due to a problem caused by WTC 1 falling on it.

At the end of the day, the fact still remains: WTC 7 stood for over 30 years without a problem, and it only fell after the wreckage from WTC 1 had hit it If you attempt to deny any of this then you will be lying, so it's unrealistic to dismiss the obvious corelation.

Originally posted by GoodOlDave
If you refute the NIST report's explanation, that's fine, but whatever did cause the collapse, it was necessarily due to a problem caused by WTC 1 falling on it.

How do you figure that?

2nd line goes here.

’OlDave’, we need to ‘work’ them over per the specific points discussed in our last meeting. This is imperative at this stage as you may now realize. Key objectives as outlined per revised memo (082210B) can be reviewed if needed. Per Superiors, as of 0300, plan “B” is most advantageous. Refer to newly revised memo for full details. *******As always, delete this IM immediately from your inbox. Shall see you on the boards. ~DM*******

Originally posted by DarkRedSoda
’OlDave’, we need to ‘work’ them over per the specific points discussed in our last meeting. This is imperative at this stage as you may now realize. Key objectives as outlined per revised memo (082210B) can be reviewed if needed. Per Superiors, as of 0300, plan “B” is most advantageous. Refer to newly revised memo for full details. *******As always, delete this IM immediately from your inbox. Shall see you on the boards. ~DM*******

Per memo