So who the heck ever said "Pull it" was slang for controlled demolitions?

Originally posted by longjohnbritches

Originally posted by -PLB-
reply to post by longjohnbritches

 

Its good that we have actual video and audio evidence of the events so we do not need to rely on often unreliable or subjective eyewitness reports. But for the sake of the truth movement, lets ignore that evidence. Its not a good practice to base your opinion on objective evidence that anyone can verify if you want to be a truther.

Hi plb,
Is that audio?
What's a truth movement?
Got a vid?
thanks ljb

You're lagging again, long johns. Try to keep up.

Originally posted by lunarasparagus

Originally posted by longjohnbritches

Originally posted by -PLB-
reply to post by longjohnbritches

 

Its good that we have actual video and audio evidence of the events so we do not need to rely on often unreliable or subjective eyewitness reports. But for the sake of the truth movement, lets ignore that evidence. Its not a good practice to base your opinion on objective evidence that anyone can verify if you want to be a truther.

Hi plb,
Is that audio?
What's a truth movement?
Got a vid?
thanks ljb

You're lagging again, long johns. Try to keep up.

Hi there lun
let me know what I should be keeping up with?
Glad to see you woke up from your nap.
Are all your brothers still asleep since I tucked them in too?
You have all let the cat out the bag about building 7 being a demo job.
What's left? Stop blaming firemen!
Here have a cup.ljb

Originally posted by -PLB-
reply to post by lunarasparagus

 

Its equivalent to "Evidence is not required to see the truth." Indeed, we just need our gut feeling. That is what got us to the moon, and made it possible to be typing this message on a computer. All that math is just silly and invented to confuse laymen.

HiPLB,
You and your crony sure are a chuckle scratching each other's back with nothing more than unsubstanciated fool reports and personal twisted opinion. So come on back from La Luna and realize you are being ignored.
see ya ljb

Originally posted by longjohnbritches

So come on back from La Luna and realize you are being ignored.

Unlike the Truth Movement which has come on in leaps and -

Oh no, hang on...

Originally posted by longjohnbritches

Glad to see you woke up from your nap.
Are all your brothers still asleep since I tucked them in too?

For the record I'm very much not asleep, nor have you "tucked me up". I just cannot understand your appallingly written posts. They are so close to illiterate that I'm no longer surprised that you can't grasp why your version of events must necessarily implicate the fire personnel.

OMG, 44 pages over what Larry Silverstein meant when he said "pull it"? And I can see the 3-letter-agency goons are out here in full force with their utter nonsense and semantic game-playing.

Building 7 was hit by no airplane and came down in 6.9 second into its own footprint and according to Larry Silverstein, this happened ON DEMAND no matter WHAT he meant by the term. Anyone who thinks this happened by a series of well-placed diesel tanks and some damage in the corner of the building should go back to American Idol and leave the intelligent discussions to those with intelligence.

Originally posted by SimontheMagus

6.9 second into its own footprint

Oops.

Originally posted by TrickoftheShade

Originally posted by longjohnbritches

So come on back from La Luna and realize you are being ignored.

Unlike the Truth Movement which has come on in leaps and -

Oh no, hang on...

bounds of decent honest citizens of the world tired of paying tribute to OZ

Originally posted by TrickoftheShade

Originally posted by SimontheMagus

6.9 second into its own footprint

Oops.

Oops what? Subtract the 6 seconds between the start of the collapse of the penthouse section and the start of the collapse of the main structure from the 13 seconds of total demolition time and you have about 7 seconds.

Tell me, who built WTC 7? A child with an erector set?

Originally posted by TrickoftheShade

Originally posted by longjohnbritches

Glad to see you woke up from your nap.
Are all your brothers still asleep since I tucked them in too?

For the record I'm very much not asleep, nor have you "tucked me up". I just cannot understand your appallingly written posts. They are so close to illiterate that I'm no longer surprised that you can't grasp why your version of events must necessarily implicate the fire personnel.

Come on tricks,
Even with all the best of your miss quotes, this is still CLASSIC spin 101 ATTEMPT.
The only thing you are doing with this tripe is inditing yourself as a continual Fireman basher.
And admitting your brotherhood to sleepy eyes,
got a cup for you too ljb

Originally posted by SimontheMagus

Originally posted by TrickoftheShade

Originally posted by SimontheMagus

6.9 second into its own footprint

Oops.

Oops what? Subtract the 6 seconds between the start of the collapse of the penthouse section and the start of the collapse of the main structure from the 13 seconds of total demolition time and you have about 7 seconds.

Tell me, who built WTC 7? A child with an erector set?

edit on 2-4-2012 by SimontheMagus because: (no reason given)

edit on 2-4-2012 by SimontheMagus because: (no reason given)

Hi si,

Not to mention the fact that the penthouse sinking can be directly contributied to the earlier bomb mentioned in the Barry Jennings video.
Oops!!! the best ljb

Originally posted by longjohnbritches

Originally posted by SimontheMagus

Originally posted by TrickoftheShade

Originally posted by SimontheMagus

6.9 second into its own footprint

Oops.

Oops what? Subtract the 6 seconds between the start of the collapse of the penthouse section and the start of the collapse of the main structure from the 13 seconds of total demolition time and you have about 7 seconds.

Tell me, who built WTC 7? A child with an erector set?

edit on 2-4-2012 by SimontheMagus because: (no reason given)

edit on 2-4-2012 by SimontheMagus because: (no reason given)

Hi si,

Not to mention the fact that the penthouse sinking can be directly contributied to the earlier bomb mentioned in the Barry Jennings video.
Oops!!! the best ljb

You enjoy making up whatever you like to fit your beliefs. Seriously, do you have a hint of evidence or even reasoning to believe this? It has been dissected dozens of times on ATS that Barry Jennings' testimony put him in WTC 7 when the North tower collapsed. The guy he was with testified as well, and his stuff further proved that the towers collapsed while they were in the building. Why is this so damn hard for you to even imagine?

reply to post by longjohnbritches


Oops, you do realise Barry Jennings was out of WTC 7 hours before it collapsed ?

Originally posted by SimontheMagus

Originally posted by TrickoftheShade

Originally posted by SimontheMagus

6.9 second into its own footprint

Oops.

Oops what? Subtract the 6 seconds between the start of the collapse of the penthouse section and the start of the collapse of the main structure from the 13 seconds of total demolition time and you have about 7 seconds.

Tell me, who built WTC 7? A child with an erector set?

edit on 2-4-2012 by SimontheMagus because: (no reason given)

edit on 2-4-2012 by SimontheMagus because: (no reason given)

Then why not say 13 seconds upfront ? What is the purpose of subtracting anything except to mislead ?

Originally posted by Alfie1

Originally posted by SimontheMagus

Originally posted by TrickoftheShade

Originally posted by SimontheMagus

6.9 second into its own footprint

Oops.

Oops what? Subtract the 6 seconds between the start of the collapse of the penthouse section and the start of the collapse of the main structure from the 13 seconds of total demolition time and you have about 7 seconds.

Tell me, who built WTC 7? A child with an erector set?

edit on 2-4-2012 by SimontheMagus because: (no reason given)

edit on 2-4-2012 by SimontheMagus because: (no reason given)

Then why not say 13 seconds upfront ? What is the purpose of subtracting anything except to mislead ?

Because no matter how you slice and dice it, it took 6.9 seconds for the main structure of the building to collapse from top to bottom. If you think that's trying to mislead, then you are nothing more than a disinformation operative trying to DISTRACT.

Originally posted by SimontheMagus
Oops what? Subtract the 6 seconds between the start of the collapse of the penthouse section and the start of the collapse of the main structure from the 13 seconds of total demolition time and you have about 7 seconds.

Thus, the only reason why these conspiracy stories can survive- their authors are granting themselves license to rewrite the events to their liking, as it manufactures gaps in which they can insert their own tailor made pieces of the puzzle, and to noone's surprise the pieces are always oriented toward these sinister secret plots to take over the world.

FIRST, the collapse of the Penthouse is in fact the beginning of the collapse of the building. The whole reason the penthouse collapsed was because critical structures holding it up were compromised, and their failure in addition to the Penthouse collapse itself almost certainly contributed to critical damage elsewhere inside the building. You cannot pretend this wasn't part of the pattern of collapse any more than you can't pretend there were a few shots before the final head shot in the JFK assasination film. Kennedy wasn't grasping his throat because he needed a cough drop.

SECOND, it's only in the propaganda of the interet con artists like Richard Gage that says the entire building collapsed symmetrically solely on the basis of one single solitary video of the north side. NIST created a computer model that theorizes the south side actually folded inward, which is actually what we were seeing when the penthouse collapsed, and the north side fell down simply because there was no more building holding it up. Granted, it's only a mathematical theory has only circumstancial evidence backing the model up, but nonetheless it has more credibility than claims that the building "fell symmetrically" with NO evidence to back the claim up.

You were caught posting false information. Deal with it.

Originally posted by SimontheMagus
Because no matter how you slice and dice it, it took 6.9 seconds for the main structure of the building to collapse from top to bottom. If you think that's trying to mislead, then you are nothing more than a disinformation operative trying to DISTRACT.

Come on now, seriously, haven't you milked this "armies of sinister secret agent" routine of yours enough? It's quickly becoming obvious that every time evidence comes forth that shows why your conspiracy claims are false, you truthers ALWAYS ALWAYS ALWAYS pull out this "armies of sinister secret agents" excuse to justify why you don't need to believe it.

You have to know this isn't even remotely an attempt to research the truth behind the events of the 9/11 attack. This is using circular logic in preserving what you yourself want to believe by restating the original accusation in different terms. You imagine that hese armies of sinister secret agents planted secret demolitions in an occupied buildings and these armies of sinister secret agents are actively working to cover it up by manufacturing fake physical evidence, giving false testimony, and creating bogus structural analysis studies, so whenever someone call you on it- BIG SURPRISE- it's always due to these armies of sinister secret agents pretending to be posters to spy on you personally.

Although "Grow up!" is hardly a satisfying response, it's really the only one that fits. If you don't believe anything else I say, then at least believe this- you're not anyone important that the gov't would need to assign you your own sinister secret agent to shadow you.

Originally posted by Alfie1
reply to post by longjohnbritches

 

Oops, you do realise Barry Jennings was out of WTC 7 hours before it collapsed ?

And!!! al
Barry described major bomb damage in the interior of BLD 7.
It is obvious no one in government,including you wants that info public.
It took the USSR longer to collapse from within. BUT it DID.
Stop reading all that damn fool stuff stored in your basement.
Try gravitating towords the future and truthfullness, like the youth of the world.....ljb

Originally posted by Varemia

Originally posted by longjohnbritches

Originally posted by SimontheMagus

Originally posted by TrickoftheShade

Originally posted by SimontheMagus

6.9 second into its own footprint

Oops.

Oops what? Subtract the 6 seconds between the start of the collapse of the penthouse section and the start of the collapse of the main structure from the 13 seconds of total demolition time and you have about 7 seconds.

Tell me, who built WTC 7? A child with an erector set?

edit on 2-4-2012 by SimontheMagus because: (no reason given)

edit on 2-4-2012 by SimontheMagus because: (no reason given)

Hi si,

Not to mention the fact that the penthouse sinking can be directly contributied to the earlier bomb mentioned in the Barry Jennings video.
Oops!!! the best ljb

You enjoy making up whatever you like to fit your beliefs. Seriously, do you have a hint of evidence or even reasoning to believe this? It has been dissected dozens of times on ATS that Barry Jennings' testimony put him in WTC 7 when the North tower collapsed. The guy he was with testified as well, and his stuff further proved that the towers collapsed while they were in the building. Why is this so damn hard for you to even imagine?

Duh
So if Barry said he was tying his shoes when the bomb went off,
you would say that the reason the bomb went off was because Barry was tying his shoe????
Neither Barry or his partner say the bomb noise was tower 1 noise, do they spinster.

Originally posted by SimontheMagus
OMG, 44 pages over what Larry Silverstein meant when he said "pull it"? And I can see the 3-letter-agency goons are out here in full force with their utter nonsense and semantic game-playing.

Building 7 was hit by no airplane and came down in 6.9 second into its own footprint and according to Larry Silverstein, this happened ON DEMAND no matter WHAT he meant by the term. Anyone who thinks this happened by a series of well-placed diesel tanks and some damage in the corner of the building should go back to American Idol and leave the intelligent discussions to those with intelligence.

"According to Larry Silverstein . . . " It's amazing you'll take an ambiguous 10 second soundbite from Larry Silverstein as gospel, while ignoring pages of interviews from dozens of firefighters who were at the scene. The "ON DEMAND" scenario you're grasping for is nothing like what was described by the FDNY. I guess you think the fire-fighters were lying?