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.
Originally posted by homervb
I don't give a rat's ass what your point was dude. The random poster in that thread completely speculated that the hijackers might have not known it was a suicide mission. He didn't offer any evidence to back it up and you immediately agreed with him. I offer complete speculation, which I provided evidence for and you completely shot it down at the first sight of it. You battled me and eventually questionined how I knew that the military can track planes without a transponder on. [I'm guessing the military can only track aircrafts that make contact with them. If Russia ever decided to bomb us, I hope they contact the military first and let them know] Bias much?
I'm not supporting his theory, I'm just totally sick of how you treat truthers vs. those on your side. You come off as the most pompous a-hole on planet Earth and it really does get annoying. I can't say you don't have any valid points, because you do. You've opened my eyes to things I never thought about. But the way you express yourself and your feelings about people in search of the truth, well it's just hostile and rude
Originally posted by TrickoftheShade
reply to post by PancakeTheoryNeedsSyrup
Are you aware that Danny Jowenko is emphatic that WTC 1 and 2 were not CDs? If so, how do you feel about that? Are you going to reject his opinion about that but endorse what he says about this?
Originally posted by PancakeTheoryNeedsSyrup
Originally posted by TrickoftheShade
reply to post by PancakeTheoryNeedsSyrup
Are you aware that Danny Jowenko is emphatic that WTC 1 and 2 were not CDs? If so, how do you feel about that? Are you going to reject his opinion about that but endorse what he says about this?
Yes I am aware of this, however referring to WTC1 & WTC2 is going to do nothing but derail the thread... I simply posted this because of his conclusion that WTC7 WAS CONTROLLED DEMOLITION.
Originally posted by TrickoftheShade
Originally posted by PancakeTheoryNeedsSyrup
Originally posted by TrickoftheShade
reply to post by PancakeTheoryNeedsSyrup
Are you aware that Danny Jowenko is emphatic that WTC 1 and 2 were not CDs? If so, how do you feel about that? Are you going to reject his opinion about that but endorse what he says about this?
Yes I am aware of this, however referring to WTC1 & WTC2 is going to do nothing but derail the thread... I simply posted this because of his conclusion that WTC7 WAS CONTROLLED DEMOLITION.
Sorry, but it's not derailing the thread. You are introducing this man purely because you ascribe some authority to him. I'm not asking you to discuss WTC1 and 2, I'm asking you to think about whether you actually do consider him an authority.
Because if you do then you will have to concede that the same rules apply in any discussion of the other towers - you will have to uncritically accept his word because of the special insight you ascribe to him.
Originally posted by PancakeTheoryNeedsSyrup
It IS derailing- we are not discussing WTC1 and WTC2 we can leave that for another thread. I believe the title of this thread is "My reasons for thinking WTC7 was probably a controlled demolition!"
Originally posted by GoodOlDave
Originally posted by PancakeTheoryNeedsSyrup
It IS derailing- we are not discussing WTC1 and WTC2 we can leave that for another thread. I believe the title of this thread is "My reasons for thinking WTC7 was probably a controlled demolition!"
No, actually, it's misdirection. There's a glaringly obvious hole in what you're attempting to claim so you attempt to pull a "pay no attention to the man behind the curtain" so you won't have to admit you're wrong. That stunt didn't work on Dorothy and it certainly isn't going to work on us.
BUT...if you insist painting yourself into a corner with this bit, fine. What you've essentially said without meaning to say it is that WTC 7 was the ONLY building that was secretly demolished controlled demolitions on 9/11. Silverstein specifically said it was "pulled" because there was already so much loss of life, and if your position is correct that WTC 7 was the ONLY building that was secretly demolished by controlled demolitions it means there was a legitimate safety reason for doing so and it probably saved many people's lives.
So where's the "sinister secret conspiracy" here?
Originally posted by PancakeTheoryNeedsSyrup
In regards to "sinister secret conspiracy" if WTC7 was "pulled"/Controlled demolition which you seem to be accepting you do realize that the demolition of this building would have been rigged weeks in advance, It would not have been possible to rig the building while it is consumed by fire as the official report claims.
Originally posted by PancakeTheoryNeedsSyrup
Nice try but no. I am trying to maintain this thread on topic, something you and shadows are not understanding. Again the title is WTC7 and probability of controlled demolition.
In regards to "sinister secret conspiracy" if WTC7 was "pulled"/Controlled demolition which you seem to be accepting you do realize that the demolition of this building would have been rigged weeks in advance, It would not have been possible to rig the building while it is consumed by fire as the official report claims.
Report: CIA Lost Office In WTC
A secret office operated by the CIA was destroyed in the terrorist attacks on the World Trade Center, seriously disrupting intelligence operations.
The undercover station was in 7 World Trade Center
Originally posted by GoodOlDave
Originally posted by PancakeTheoryNeedsSyrup
Nice try but no. I am trying to maintain this thread on topic, something you and shadows are not understanding. Again the title is WTC7 and probability of controlled demolition.
You're stalling, now. Asking whether WTC 7 was the only building rigged by controlled demolitions is still relevent to WTC 7 and the probability of controlled demolition.
In regards to "sinister secret conspiracy" if WTC7 was "pulled"/Controlled demolition which you seem to be accepting you do realize that the demolition of this building would have been rigged weeks in advance, It would not have been possible to rig the building while it is consumed by fire as the official report claims.
Nope, because the fires were burning out of control and they would have consumed any explosives that might have been in the building at that time (when set on fire, C4 will burn rather than explode). The out of control fires and the tremendous loss of life from the (according to your own vsources) legitimate fire induced collapse of the towers was the entire reason WTC 7 was "pulled" after all. Everything is pointing to the fact that Silverstein was a hero by puling WTC 7, and since noone died in WTC 7 it turned out to be the right call.
Why then are you artifically trying to induce all this suspicion and doubt to soil the man's heroism? I'm only going by your own sources that WTC 7 was the only building rigged by demolitions, after all.
Asking whether WTC 7 was the only building rigged by controlled demolitions is still relevent to WTC 7
The CIA didn't know their own building was be rigged for CD.