I just learned something...

I literally...I mean as of a few minutes ago... just learned something about WTC7 that has shook my world.

I need a little time to internalize it and then clarify again with my source. When I'm done with that, I'll get back to you reporting what I learned.

Let me MAKE SURE what my source just said to me is what he meant. I think he realizes he just said something he didn't mean to say to me.

#. If what he says is true, then I need to reconsider some stuff (i.e., I doubted, until a few minutes ago, the 9/11 conspiracies).

Crap. This is insane.


Sorry for dangling this carrot in front of you, but some of the old timers around ATS know me and know I'm good for it.

It does seem odd that you would present something like this.

Sorry but this kind of thread usually goes nowhere.

Look, for many of you, what I was told is probably a foregone conclusion and probably not a big deal.

For me, it blew my mind. And it counters the official 9/11 report. Which, to me, if this one fact is wrong, then how much else of that report is wrong?

I will give you guys something later today.

Alright. Thanks for dealing with me.


Now, I'm going to be careful here because I still don't fully know what this all means. Maybe I'm missing some nuance to what he told me, but I did re-question him and well....anyway.


I CANNOT at this moment say who told me nor his exact role involved with the WTC, but I will tell all of you that this morning during an interview on a subject COMPLETELY different than 9/11, a person who is involved in some way with the WTC project financing and studies says, without batting an eye, that WTC7 was purposely demolished because the damage was too great.

No, it didn't collapse on its own, but was "imploded."

He told me this like it was a known fact. In fact, it was common knowledge as the WTC owners were negotiating over insurance payments for WTC7.

Now, wasn't that the building that the 9/11 Commission said collapsed and was not demolished?

Unless I'm confusing a building --- and there's a chance --- then the official assertions are wrong? And if that detail is wrong (and the building WAS purposefully demolished), then what else is wrong?


I'm a skeptic. I have been for a long time on the conspiracies surrounding 9/11. Now, my brain is still reeling.


Now, I'm nervous because I don't want to burn a source. Our interview wasn't about WTC at all. It just came up while we chatted. And I'm not sure he was "confessing" anything. I mean, he just told me like it was common knowledge. Sooo, hence maybe I got the wrong building? Or he misspoke? Dunno... and I'm still trying to process this.


'

reply to post by behindthescenes


If WTC 7 was demolished "because the damage was too great" why be secretive about it ?

And how was this demolition carried out ? We know the firefighters were pulled back early afternoon because the building had uncontrolled fires and was threatening to collapse. So who risked their lives going in there to rig it for cd while it was on fire, leaning and bulging ?

reply to post by behindthescenesIt's been my contention that these buildings were built with the knowledge that one day they would have to be torn down. This is not crazy, but rather rational thinking. This whole thing reeks of conspiracy, fraud and most of all, murder for profit. As a wise man once said, "follow the money". Who thinks like this? Ask 'lucky Larry'.

Originally posted by Alfie1
reply to post by behindthescenes

 

If WTC 7 was demolished "because the damage was too great" why be secretive about it ?

And how was this demolition carried out ? We know the firefighters were pulled back early afternoon because the building had uncontrolled fires and was threatening to collapse. So who risked their lives going in there to rig it for cd while it was on fire, leaning and bulging ?

Dunno. Great questions. Really, I was so taken aback by the whole thing, I didn't formulate followup questions. I'm having drinks with this person in 2 weeks, I will probe much more carefully then and report back...

Click here to learn more about this warning.

Did some of this came out in documents associated with Larry Silverstein's suit against Boeing and American Airlines?

Anyone ever read those docs? The case was settled, but those docs should be available....

Originally posted by behindthescenes
I CANNOT at this moment say who told me nor his exact role involved with the WTC, but I will tell all of you that this morning during an interview on a subject COMPLETELY different than 9/11, a person who is involved in some way with the WTC project financing and studies says, without batting an eye, that WTC7 was purposely demolished because the damage was too great.

No, it didn't collapse on its own, but was "imploded."

Congratulations. You just accused the New York Fire department AND the New York Police Department AND the New York Port Authority of conspiring to commit mass murder. All these departments were physically there maintaining order and security and not one of them seems to remember anything about any implosion project that would require their help.

He told me this like it was a known fact. In fact, it was common knowledge as the WTC owners were negotiating over insurance payments for WTC7.

I smell more yet more truther straw grasping. Negotiating over insurance payments over an intact building and supposedly demolishing an unstable and unsafe building have nothing to do with each other.

I would talk to him again to precisely verify where he gets his facts, because "It's common knowledge" is a notorious buzzword those damned fool conspiracy web sites tend to use whenever they make an accusation they can't back up with a tangible reference.

Originally posted by GoodOlDave

Congratulations. You just accused the New York Fire department AND the New York Police Department AND the New York Port Authority of conspiring to commit mass murder. .

You see, I just read the entire thread ,and I didn't get that, (above Quote)

I read a thread where the OP says he stumbled upon something, imploding towers, But he wanted to talk again to get more information.

I clearly SEE your slandering attempt, and character assasination of his character, which is on par for the OS side.

Me , I can wait 2 weeks, we will be here.

Originally posted by Tw0Sides

Originally posted by GoodOlDave

Congratulations. You just accused the New York Fire department AND the New York Police Department AND the New York Port Authority of conspiring to commit mass murder. .

You see, I just read the entire thread ,and I didn't get that, (above Quote)

I read a thread where the OP says he stumbled upon something, imploding towers, But he wanted to talk again to get more information.

I clearly SEE your slandering attempt, and character assasination of his character, which is on par for the OS side.

Me , I can wait 2 weeks, we will be here.

Yeah, thanks for that support. I never accused anyone of "mass murder." That's ridiculous beyond extremes. In fact, no one died in WTC7's "collapse."

I think documents will be involved in my next meeting. Will keep you posted.

Click here to learn more about this warning.

reply to post by behindthescenes


that was no carrot you dangled, it was a rock. Please put in the title of this thread that it is full of suspense and nothing more.

Originally posted by earthdude
reply to post by behindthescenes

 

that was no carrot you dangled, it was a rock. Please put in the title of this thread that it is full of suspense and nothing more.

No, it's not a carrot or a rock. It's not suspenseful either. It more like something that smells unpleasant and is usually found around barn lots on a cattle farm...

Originally posted by Reheat


No, it's not a carrot or a rock. It's not suspenseful either. It more like something that smells unpleasant and is usually found around barn lots on a cattle farm...

Are we talking about The 911 Commission Report?