WOW. Just on TV.

reply to post by kro32


Well its clrealy working though don't you think?

Do you have that little faith in humanity that we will stay silent and unquestioning to our masters?

Up until recently, the whole "official story" has stuck and yes it HAS worked. Why? Because the bigger the lie, the more people will believe and the easier it is to sell.

Not to mention how the entire OBL incident cemented that belief...

reply to post by samkent


Sam, this ad and the people invloved in it are far from mainstream

Anything of this sort that makes it on to the MSM is a distraction and does not
broach the real truth.
What the perpetrators want to keep people away from at all costs is the
fact that 9/11 was a huge, made for tv, televisual hoax with
No terrorists, No planes and Few, if any victims.
It was a demolition job/insurance scam, with computer generated technology,
paid actors and MSM complicity all used as public convincers.
Most of the so-called victims are computer generated entities with
no real existence and personnal histories.
It was a 'false' false flag contrived to justify the invasion of innocent sovereign
nations and resources and was a necessary precursor to the nation takeovers that
we are seeing at the moment in the middle east.
9/11 was a scheme long in the devising and was simply the faked means by which
all the subsequent plans and plots for a new world order could be ushered in.
The current, contrived, drastic state of events in most countries of the world are
directly traced back to the BS Second Rate Theatrical Presentation that was 9/11.
WE WERE SOLD A PUPPY.
WE LAPPED IT ALL UP.
AND IT BRINGS US ALL DOWN.

You owe it to yourself to go patiently through the following links which proves
beyond doubt, all that is said above.

Proof Of Video Fakery And Media Complicity

9/11 Memorial Scams And Fake Victims

9/11 Actors

Debunk This If You Can

We Owe It To Ourselves And Our Children To Wake Up And Act.
Our World Is Corrupt From The Top Down,
All The Way To The Very Core.

What concerns me, Silverstein owned all 3 buildings (correct me if I'm wrong) and my main concern is that he bought up the Sears Tower (I am not going to call it the willis tower...ever) Coupled with the strange election bid and win by Rahm Emmanuel for Mayor, I think Chicago will have something going on next.

Originally posted by Jugtalicus
So what do you guys think, big news? Or will it just get swept under the carpet, or even some engineers who had an "accident" (I sure hope not)

I think they're yet another bunch of conspiracy kooks attempting to stoke false public unrest by distributing false information. All it took was a 30 second review to see they're being painfully fast and loose with their "facts"...

-They claim NIST is "implying" that NYFD predicted WTC 7 was going to fall down. Noone implied anything because the NYFD really DID predict WTC 7 was going to fall. NYFD deputy chief Peter Hayden testified the fires in WTC 7 were burning out of control and were causing three story tall bulges in the side of the structure. He said himself he knew it was going to collapse.

-They claim WTC 7 suffered minimal damage, which directly contradicts WTC 7 survivor Barry Jennings, who testified the front lobby (which faced the north tower) looked as if King Kong came in and destroyed it.

-They predictably repeat that ridiculous Silverstein "Pull it" internet meme. "Pull it" being slang for controlled demolitions is entirely the invention of the conspiracy theorists. The claim doesn't even make any sense- the NYFD doesn't have anything to do with setting up controlled demolitions.

-They repeat colorful propaganda slogans like "never before in history did steel buildings collapse from fire", while conveniently ignoring the fact that never before in history did anyone ever manage to rig a heavily occupied structure with controlled demolitions without anyone noticing anything.

-They completely ignore the fact that the penthouse collapsed into the interior of the building some six seconds before the rest of the structure, all so they can say "witnesses heard explosions six seconds before the collapse". That alone says they're attempting to pull a fast one.

If these characters want an investigation into the WTC 7 collapse, fine, but this means they need to review ALL the facts, not just those one or two cherry picked tidbits they can use to make things appear the way they themselves want things to appear.

Originally posted by esdad71
"All contributions are 100% tax-deductible. 5% of your contribution will be donated to the WTC Rescuers Foundation and 5% will go to Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth, one of the campaign’s cosponsors"

DING DING DING DING!

I stand corrected. These people aren't a bunch of conspiracy kooks. They're a bunch of con artists led by "cardboard box" Richard Gage trying to milk the memory of 9/11 for their own financial gain. How much longer is that guy going to be touring the country collecting money from gullible audiences before he gets off his butt and does something other than, well, just collect more money from gullible audiences?

reply to post by GoodOlDave

It's not even the first time they've been through it. First they tried NYCCAN, then they tried Building What?, and now they've moved on to Remember Building 7.

It seems to me like a scam, designed to take money from truthers while promising all sorts, and then folding with some random excuse (as they've done with both of their previous attempts).

reply to post by Jugtalicus


Surely you realise anyone with enough money can purchase ad space.

Originally posted by Iamonlyhuman

Originally posted by backinblack
reply to post by Alfie1

 

The 1200 odd members of AE9/11t are not all engineers with relevant expertise at all. But, even if they were, that figure needs to be seen in relation to the 123,000 members of the American Society of Civil Engineers alone.

And I take it you have poll figures from the 123,000 members showing their opinion on the event???

Or are you just ASSUMING you know what they think??

I'd bet the later..

You are correct that Alfie1's statement makes no sense.

I am a member of the ASCE and I am not one of the 1,200 AE9/11 members.

I too do not believe the OS.

edit on 10/6/2011 by Iamonlyhuman because: (no reason given)

If your view is common amongst ASCE members why is it not reflected in your Society's literature ? Are you suggesting many members are quietly seething at the leaderships inaction ? Why are you still a member ? Have you made your own representations ?

Any suggestions as to why no professional association of engineers anywhere in the world is complaining about controlled demos ? Are they all ignoring their membership ?

reply to post by Alfie1

If your view is common amongst ASCE members why is it not reflected in your Society's literature ? Are you suggesting many members are quietly seething at the leaderships inaction ? Why are you still a member ? Have you made your own representations ?

Any suggestions as to why no professional association of engineers anywhere in the world is complaining about controlled demos ? Are they all ignoring their membership ?

AGAIN..Have they all been asked??
You have the results??

reply to post by GoodOlDave


I wonder what caused the building to look so destroyed ??

Certainly wasn't from the clouds of dust the towers had turned into,

Perhaps it was easy for the chief to say "this is going to collapse" when his eyes could see the building was pulverizing from the inside out.

Hearing incredible explosions going off must have helped them be afraid to fight the fires as well, something they had NEVER done before, just let a building fall, since NO buildings have fallen before, but that day they got quite a shocker did they not ??? A building fell, and not ONE of those firefighters had the SLIGHTEST inclination that they could fall due to aircraft damage and fires,

And they were correct !! Nothing fell at all, but had an incredible burst of energy and then proceeded exploding into nothingness.

The ONLY kooks in here are the ones spouting the lies that this is remotely possible, AGAIN AND AGAIN.

It appears to me that Comedy Central is in the Fnord business.

en.wikipedia.org...

I have to say that it probably only takes two geeks who are in on the joke to get something like this going; one with the idea and the other to egg him on.
I was steeped in Robert Anton Wilson stuff from a very early age and cannot say that if I were a producer at Comedy Central that I wouldn't engage in exactly those types of shenanigans.

This just in, the American government has found new evidence pinning the blame of the 9/11 attacks on Pakistan and China...

Building What ???
So I remember a few mooonths back when this movement started to gain steam.
Then I see this article, Remember building 7
So,...I type in www.buildingwhat.org and it goes here.
Did they mid stride change their name?
There was a reason why it was called "building what?", A judge in NY supposedly did not know of a third building ...."collapsing" that day.
When presented with building 7 he replied, "Building what?".
Just the conspiracy theorist in me but, what gives??
What happened to building what and why is the page redirected to remember building 7, and the page says,

If you think this could be a problem with our website, don't hesitate to contact us.

Our available content is listed under the menus on the left.

Thank you for visiting RememberBuilding7.org

Absolutely no mention of name change or building what, the cornerstone of the idea...


(Edit)

Just found it on the bottom of the page in the "About" section.

The campaign changed its name from BuildingWhat? to Remember Building 7 with the release of the second ad in March 2011.

The least they could have done was let the original name die with a whimper...

reply to post by Jugtalicus


Hi, I'm not surprised it's on TV. In England, they've been showing a conspiracy programme which is shown either very early in the morning, about 6am or late at night at about 2am. Then I saw the programme in Spain which has exactly the same format, only in Spanish. I was shocked to see it on TV. It was that which confirmed to me that the PTB actually WANT us to know. All the information out there has been put there deliberately. It is clear to me that they are pushing for revolutions the world over - as was foretold in 'Red Symphony'. Have you read it??

reply to post by backinblack


I haven't said that every member of every professional engineering association in the world has been polled. What I maintain is that it is untenable to suppose they all have masses of members frustrated and angry about the cd of WTC 1, 2 & 7 when that is nowhere reflected in their policies and literature.

Originally posted by GrinchNoMore
reply to post by GoodOlDave

 

I wonder what caused the building to look so destroyed ??

Certainly wasn't from the clouds of dust the towers had turned into,

Perhaps it was easy for the chief to say "this is going to collapse" when his eyes could see the building was pulverizing from the inside out.

Hearing incredible explosions going off must have helped them be afraid to fight the fires as well, something they had NEVER done before, just let a building fall, since NO buildings have fallen before, but that day they got quite a shocker did they not ??? A building fell, and not ONE of those firefighters had the SLIGHTEST inclination that they could fall due to aircraft damage and fires,

And they were correct !! Nothing fell at all, but had an incredible burst of energy and then proceeded exploding into nothingness.

The ONLY kooks in here are the ones spouting the lies that this is remotely possible, AGAIN AND AGAIN.

I really don't have even the foggiest idea what the heck you're attempting to claim here, but as building 7 wasn't hit by a plane, but rather, another building, I will say that you really need to read up on your own conspiracy theories first before posting such drivel.

Originally posted by Alfie1
reply to post by backinblack

 

I haven't said that every member of every professional engineering association in the world has been polled. What I maintain is that it is untenable to suppose they all have masses of members frustrated and angry about the cd of WTC 1, 2 & 7 when that is nowhere reflected in their policies and literature.

And I say I have no idea how you come to that conclusion unless you polled a vast majority..
Did anyone do that??

Originally posted by backinblack

Originally posted by Alfie1
reply to post by backinblack

 

I haven't said that every member of every professional engineering association in the world has been polled. What I maintain is that it is untenable to suppose they all have masses of members frustrated and angry about the cd of WTC 1, 2 & 7 when that is nowhere reflected in their policies and literature.

And I say I have no idea how you come to that conclusion unless you polled a vast majority..
Did anyone do that??

Why would anyone unless it was an issue ? which it obviously isn't.

reply to post by Alfie1

Why would anyone unless it was an issue ? which it obviously isn't.

lol, yeah right...
How logical..