It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

PhD Kevin Barrett in an interview with Russia Today RT about who really did 9/11

page: 1
34
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:
+3 more 
posted on Nov, 27 2010 @ 01:20 PM
link   
It's such a shame how a this good man with great docentry skills isn't alowed to teach anymore for speaking out about this, its really sad... We are still very much in the dark ages if this good man and all the others that suffered the same fate dont get they're life back





posted on Nov, 27 2010 @ 01:30 PM
link   
I said what he said up to about 1:20 on a 911 truth thread and the debunkers were on me like slime on a swamp.

I did hear silverstein tell Kevin Spacey on a PBS interveiw that they blew the building up
staight from the whorses mouth so to speak.
I don't know what is so hard for people to understand
FandS



posted on Nov, 27 2010 @ 01:51 PM
link   
I like Kevin
but I did notice he didn't
mention anything about Mossad
in the video or maybe I missed it.
Why would he leave it out?



posted on Nov, 27 2010 @ 01:55 PM
link   
reply to post by Danbones
 



I did hear silverstein tell Kevin Spacey on a PBS interveiw that they blew the building up


No , you did not . Prove me wrong .



posted on Nov, 27 2010 @ 02:01 PM
link   
reply to post by okbmd
 


read em and weep



In a stunning and belated development concerning the attacks of 9/11 Larry Silverstein, the new controller of the destroyed WTC complex, stated plainly in a PBS documentary that he and the FDNY decided jointly to demolish the Solomon Bros. building, or WTC 7, late in the afternoon of Tuesday, Sept. 11, 2001.

This admission appeared in a PBS documentary originally aired in Sept. of 2002 entitled "America Rebuilds". Mr Silverstein's comments came after FEMA and the Society of Civil Engineers conducted an extensive and costly investigation into the curious collapse of WTC 7. The study specifically concluded that the building had collapsed as a result of the inferno within, sparked, apparently, by debris falling from the crumbling North Tower.

In the documentary Silverstein makes the following statement;

I remember getting a call from the, er, fire department commander, telling me that they were not sure they were gonna be able to contain the fire, and I said, "We've had such terrible loss of life, maybe the smartest thing to do is pull it." And they made that decision to pull and we watched the building collapse.
[This can be heard in the audio file VestigialConscience.com... (also at sirdave.com...). Thanks to Sir Dave 'tmo' Soule for transfering this from the video to an MP3 file. "America Rebuilds", PBS Home Video, ISBN 0-7806-4006-3, is available from shop.pbs.org...]
www.serendipity.li...



edit on 27-11-2010 by Danbones because: (no reason given)

edit on 27-11-2010 by Danbones because: fixed quote box



posted on Nov, 27 2010 @ 02:02 PM
link   
reply to post by SL55T0T0
 


nice post! S&F for you.

it just amazes me that so many otherwise intelligent people, who normally would have no problem seeing the truth with the overwhelming evidence that has been presented, can just blindly believe whats been fed to them by TPTB and the main stream media?????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????


it has to make you wonder, why are so many reputable and educated folks saying that the facts DO NOT match up with the OS.............

these people are willing to be criticized, riducled, face loss of careers, and some even have their lives threatened, while others are no longer with us, and of course their deaths were either under suspicious circumstances, or of course the convientent suicide.


what will it take for the majority of the people to just LOOK at the overwhelming evidence with an open mind???????????

or, maybe they have, and they are just frightened, what if it really was an inside job?????



posted on Nov, 27 2010 @ 02:04 PM
link   
reply to post by Danbones
 


I'm sorry, but I do believe that your claim needs to be corroborated.



posted on Nov, 27 2010 @ 02:13 PM
link   
reply to post by Danbones
 


Two things, there.

What is being misunderstood is: Silverstein was, as the day wore on, more and more resigned to the fact that WTC 7 could not be saved, nor salvaged. He fully expected that, at some point, it would have to be demolished. Since it was impossible and too unsafe to fight the fires, and stop further damage being inflicted as a result of them.

His "pull it" refers only to the cessation of efforts to fight the fire, and "save" the building. Period. Fearing that any further efforts were too dangerous to the FFs.

The building collapsed on its own, seen after the fact as inevitable, once it was examined closely. DURING the day, no one could safely get inside, to assess exactly what was occurring.

Its self-collapse, due to the damage and subsequent fires, actually saved money, and effort, of a planned demolition!!!



posted on Nov, 27 2010 @ 02:15 PM
link   
reply to post by weedwhacker
 


It looked like only a small fire, how was that enough to say that the building needed to be demolished?



posted on Nov, 27 2010 @ 02:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by boondock-saint
I like Kevin
but I did notice he didn't mention anything about Mossad in the video or maybe I missed it.
Why would he leave it out?


He left it out as it is just a lie made up by jew haters here and elsewhere -



posted on Nov, 27 2010 @ 02:18 PM
link   
reply to post by weedwhacker
 


His "pull it" refers only to the cessation of efforts to fight the fire, and "save" the building. Period. Fearing that any further efforts were too dangerous to the FFs. ]


you may have flown a plane at sometime in your life my freind
but I do demolition




To pull the supports out from under it similar to imploding it is not what it means, that sounds good, but here is what it means.
The demolition process uses explosives to damage the columns. This explosion, like any, is a sudden expansion of gases. That expansion, when over, leaves a vacuum. The vacuum within the building "pulls" the building into the middle, helping it to implode, not explode all over the surrounding area.
When a bld is demo'd they might say, "pull it", to mean create that little black hole to suck the buld into.
The pulling action also helps the building to fall faster than it would without assistance.

wiki.answers.com...

Read more: wiki.answers.com...
prove it is misunderstood
edit on 27-11-2010 by Danbones because: (no reason given)

edit on 27-11-2010 by Danbones because: (no reason given)

edit on 27-11-2010 by Danbones because: (no reason given)

edit on 27-11-2010 by Danbones because: fix quote box



posted on Nov, 27 2010 @ 02:20 PM
link   
reply to post by Danbones
 


Prove that you correctly understand.

Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. Any claim made with no evidence can be dismissed with no evidence.

You make a lot of claims without evidence.



posted on Nov, 27 2010 @ 02:21 PM
link   
reply to post by SL55T0T0
 


Sorry....he may have a Ph.D, but at 0:44 he says "nano-thermite explosives"!!!

Straight from the most ridiculous "truth movement" website crackpot claims!!

Setting aside, for the moment, that NO "thermite" nor "thermate" was found (the "study" that claims to have, is flawed and totally discredited) .... what these "theorists" can't seem to figure out, as yet, is that thermite materials do NOT "explode". They burn, very hot. No 'Boom!'

What's truly disturbing about these continued "claims" is, even a website like Rense (which is generally considered to be more "pro" the 'inside-job' claims) knows better than to get on the "explosive thermite" crazy bandwagon!!:

www.rense.com...


Oh, and "Russia Today" as a source? Come on.... :shk:



posted on Nov, 27 2010 @ 02:24 PM
link   
reply to post by Judge_Holden
 


in answer to the unevidenced post you just made please see the evidence preceeding it

as to me making alot of claims with out evidence
there is not one link in the rebutals to my evidence so far on this thread
just empty rhetoric
laughable and pathetic
edit on 27-11-2010 by Danbones because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 27 2010 @ 02:28 PM
link   
reply to post by Danbones
 


I am aware of that interview, and I am aware of the link you posted. I am asking you to prove that when he said "pull it," that meant "tear the thing down."



posted on Nov, 27 2010 @ 02:29 PM
link   
reply to post by weedwhacker
 



the "study" that claims to have, is flawed and totally discredited

PROVE IT!
man hypocrit much?



posted on Nov, 27 2010 @ 02:31 PM
link   
reply to post by Danbones
 


"laughable and pathetic"?

Maybe you are fairly new to this debate....some of us tire of constantly providing links, when anyone with a sense of interest, and fair intelligence, can use the Google just as easily as anyone else, and thus find gobs and loads of information....instead of hovering in "truth movement" biased websites, where they only give one (distorted) side.

SO, you want a link? Here is one for you:

www.debunking911.com...



posted on Nov, 27 2010 @ 02:32 PM
link   
reply to post by Judge_Holden
 


i provided a credible demonstrrtion of the common usage of the term "pull it' as it is used in the demolition industry.
what proof have you provided to counter it
NONE
poop or get off the pot
deny ignorance and all that



posted on Nov, 27 2010 @ 02:35 PM
link   
from your link WW

How the Loss of One Column May Have Led to the Collapse of WTC 7"

www.debunking911.com...

In what universe is the word MAY considered PROOF?
laughable and pathetic

got better things to do do then play footsie with time wasters like that
have a nice day



posted on Nov, 27 2010 @ 02:38 PM
link   
reply to post by Danbones
 


See my post immediately above.

The only claims of "thermite" come from a man named Stephen Jones, once attached with a University in Salt Lake City, Utah. He is no longer considered, by them, to be credible, for many reasons....well before 9/11, he got involved in that "cold fusion" debacle, back in the late 1980s.....

He is bluff and bluster, and his "work" is not peer-reviewed. It is, indeed, scoffed at by real scientists and experts.

You can find "proof" here in many ATS threads, especially a substantial number of posts by ATS member pterdine. He IS a very knowledgeable scientist, and knows plenty about the chemistry, and the analysis, and the flaws in the Jones' work.

You may also be interested to know, Jones has tossed in with that lady (forget her name, atm....oh, yeah! Judy Woods) who is still going around claiming the Towers were dematerialized with space-based energy beams, and that the airplanes were holograms. No, really! She is that delusional. Never-mind that hundreds of people witnessed, with their own eyes, the airplanes. Doesn't seem to faze her, in her crazy world where she resides.....



new topics

top topics



 
34
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join