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 ProudBird
reply to post by homervb
LOL!!!
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
LOL!!!
WoW!!!
Try writing a movie script, or (easier) a "spy" novel!!
Wow!
Too hilarious to be believed, in real life..........
Originally posted by GoodOlDave
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.
Originally posted by SimontheMagus
So you admit that he "pulled" it, and you're even calling him a hero. Bravo.
As has been pointed out repeatedly, it takes a minimum of six weeks to wire a building this size for a CD, according to the people who do it for a living. How exactly then, did Larry "pull it" without explosives? Was it like the chanting and ritual at the Walls of Jericho?
Originally posted by GoodOlDave
Originally posted by SimontheMagus
So you admit that he "pulled" it, and you're even calling him a hero. Bravo.
Nope, because a) he didn't "pull" anything, it was the fire department, as his quote specifically said THEY pulled, not him.
So you are admitting Larry told They(FDNY) to pull the building, is that right?
the only two logical answers are that the NYFD either found a way to quickly rig a building with controlled demolitions before they could be destroyed, OR, there really weren't any demolitions regardless of what that guy in the video says. Since firefighters don't even have anything to do with controlled demolitions you'll know which scenario I'm siding with.
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!"
As for ascribing authority to Jawenko I am not, I posted the video just to show that there ARE professionals in the field of controlled demolition that agree with a controlled demolition theory.
Originally posted by Nathan-D
someone pointed out that Danny didn't think WTC1 or 2 were demolitions, which is irrelevant when it comes to WTC7. It is a digressive non-issue.
because if you take Jowenko as an authority then you must by necessity take his word on 1 and 2.
Originally posted by ProudBird
reply to post by homervb
LOL!!!
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
LOL!!!
WoW!!!
Try writing a movie script, or (easier) a "spy" novel!!
Wow!
Too hilarious to be believed, in real life..........
Originally posted by TrickoftheShade
Originally posted by Nathan-D
someone pointed out that Danny didn't think WTC1 or 2 were demolitions, which is irrelevant when it comes to WTC7. It is a digressive non-issue.
Wow. You think it's a non-issue. I think it's quite important. It's also germane to the thread however much Pancake wishes it wasn't - because if you take Jowenko as an authority then you must by necessity take his word on 1 and 2. If you don't then you can't enlist him regarding Seven either. So it's literally relevant to the topic of Seven.
Originally posted by Nathan-D
reply to post by TrickoftheShade
because if you take Jowenko as an authority then you must by necessity take his word on 1 and 2.
Thanks for your thoughts, TOTS. I agree, and that's obviously a problem, isn't it? But I wouldn't say that 'it's literally relevant to the topic of WTC7'. I can understand as to why Danny didn't think WTC1 or 2 were controlled demolitions because, well, let's face it, they don't look like conventional controlled demolitions whereas WTC7 does. Personally, I would try not to make habit of citing hollow statements from experts like Danny to support my arguments because, for all their experience, it's argument from authority and that's a logical fallacy the last time I checked. Such vacuous sources in fact provide no hard information at all about anything and are not authentic in any meaningful scientific terms. They are merely sources of suggestion, not of known truth. But I do get the feeling this topic is getting side-tracked into inconsequentialities again. I think one of the most important questions that have gone unanswered up until this point is why do NIST's models show some 2/3's of the core-columns still intact during free-fall? That would violate basic physics, I would think.edit on 10-5-2012 by Nathan-D because: (no reason given)
.
Originally posted by SimontheMagus
Pancake, I must admit that the three demolitions are all critical to the big picture. If one building was rigged then all three most certainly were, although 1 and 2 would require differently technology simply because of their sheer size and their close proximity to other buildings. If one looks at aerial photos of Ground Zero after the fires were brought under control and the thick smoke was out of the way one can clearly see that the falling debris actually burnt holes into the rooftops of the adjacent low buildings and also the plaza areas. In other words they didn't crush the infrastructures, they seared through them, slicing through steel roof and floor joists instead of caving them in as we would expect from the fall of debris that is normal and not superheated. Look particularly at the well-defined holes in the roofs of the two low buildings just north of the main towers along Vesey Street....
911research.wtc7.net...
Summary: If Jowenko doesn't believe 1 and 2 were CD'd then he must be suffering from mind-paralyzing cognitive dissonance. We have videos of molten metal pouring out of the towers on lower floors nowhere near the fires long before the collapse. That's really all one needs to see.edit on 10-5-2012 by SimontheMagus because: typoedit on 10-5-2012 by SimontheMagus because: (no reason given)edit on 10-5-2012 by SimontheMagus because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by TrickoftheShade
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!"
As for ascribing authority to Jawenko I am not, I posted the video just to show that there ARE professionals in the field of controlled demolition that agree with a controlled demolition theory.
So you think Jowenko has no authority. Why then are you enlisting him to support your case?
I repeat - I am not asking you to discuss WTC1 or 2. You are accusing me of derailing the thread in order not to have to consider the implications of accepting Jowenko's word.
Originally posted by PancakeTheoryNeedsSyrup
What is it with you and looking for Authority?
Jowenko was a demolitions expert
Originally posted by PancakeTheoryNeedsSyrup
Yet here you say that no one pulled/demolished WTC7.
So let me get this straight...you say Larry was a hero for bringing down WTC7 and should be praised, but then you say that you dont think FDNY could possibly have demolished the building because they dont do that kind of stuff.
Split personality much?
Originally posted by GoodOlDave
Originally posted by PancakeTheoryNeedsSyrup
Yet here you say that no one pulled/demolished WTC7.
So let me get this straight...you say Larry was a hero for bringing down WTC7 and should be praised, but then you say that you dont think FDNY could possibly have demolished the building because they dont do that kind of stuff.
Split personality much?
Do I really need to explain your own conspiracy theories to you? This fellow was insisting WTC 7 was brought down by controlled demolitions and I'm trying to explore this scenario rationally. It cannot be realistically debated there were fires burning out of control in WTC 7 any more than it can be realistically debated that WTC 7 collapsed. If there were controlled demolitions it would absolutely positively mean they were rigged right then and there on that day, before the fires were able to destroy the explosive charges and/or the mechanisms used to detonate them. Plus, you gleefully jump up and down quoting Silverstein's "pull it" statement but in the context you want to interpret it under, the building was "pulled" specifically to save lives, not because of any sinister secret plot to take over the world.
SO, according to your own conspiracy theories, either the New York Fire department risked their lives entering a building with an out of control fire raging inside to plant explosives in a matter of a few hours to bring down a dangerously unstable building and prevent any further loss of life...OR, there isnt any controlled demolitions conspiracy and you're simply seeing what a bunch of con artists and crackpots running those damned fool conspiracy websites want you to see. I know I don't need to tell you which one I myself say it is.
You truthers certainly aren't stupid. You've just never actually sat down and thought your conspiracy theories out all the way through logically until now.
Originally posted by PancakeTheoryNeedsSyrup
I have stated before that I do not quote Silversteins "pull it" interview as evidence, there is much more damning evidence/facts that show prior knowledge/participation in the attacks and the fact that you say that IF it was controlled demolition it "could only have been rigged for demo on the date of 9/11" just shows your closed mindedness.
Originally posted by Fluffaluffagous
Originally posted by PancakeTheoryNeedsSyrup
I have stated before that I do not quote Silversteins "pull it" interview as evidence, there is much more damning evidence/facts that show prior knowledge/participation in the attacks and the fact that you say that IF it was controlled demolition it "could only have been rigged for demo on the date of 9/11" just shows your closed mindedness.
None of that matters though, cuz if you introduce Jowenko as an unassailable expert, then that means that that 1 and 2 collapsed as a result of planes and fires. It was a terrorist attack then.
No inside job.
So therefore, regardless if 7 had explosives planted beforehand or not, in order for your theory to be internally consistent, it was brought down for legit reasons.
No inside job.
Again