See other 9/11 Articles
Title: WTC 7: Silverstein's "Pull It" Explanation Examined
Source:
http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/silverstein_pullit.html
URL Source: http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/silverstein_pullit.html
Published: Feb 10, 2007
Author: M Rivero
Post Date: 2007-02-10 20:28:49 by Kamala
Ping List: *9-11* Subscribe to *9-11*
Keywords: 911
Views: 46455
Comments: 467
WTC 7: Silverstein's "Pull It" Explanation Examined On September 9, 2005, Mr. Dara McQuillan, a spokesman for Silverstein Properties, issued the following statement on this issue: Seven World Trade Center collapsed at 5:20 p.m. on September 11, 2001, after burning for seven hours. There were no casualties, thanks to the heroism of the Fire Department and the work of Silverstein Properties employees who evacuated tenants from the building. ... In the afternoon of September 11, Mr. Silverstein spoke to the Fire Department Commander on site at Seven World Trade Center. The Commander told Mr. Silverstein that there were several firefighters in the building working to contain the fires. Mr. Silverstein expressed his view that the most important thing was to protect the safety of those firefighters, including, if necessary, to have them withdraw from the building. Later in the day, the Fire Commander ordered his firefighters out of the building and at 5:20 p.m. the building collapsed. No lives were lost at Seven World Trade Center on September 11, 2001. As noted above, when Mr. Silverstein was recounting these events for a television documentary he stated, “I said, you know, we've had such terrible loss of life. Maybe the smartest thing to do is to pull it.” Mr. McQuillan has stated that by “it,” Mr. Silverstein meant the contingent of firefighters remaining in the building. [US Department of State] There is a problem with the above statement, namely there were no firefighters in WTC 7: "No manual firefighting actions were taken by FDNY." [Fema Report] "There was no firefighting in WTC 7." [Popular Mechanics] "By 11:30 a.m., the fire commander in charge of that area, Assistant Chief Frank Fellini, ordered firefighters away from [WTC 7] for safety reasons." [New York Times] Let's have a look at Silverstein's full statement: "I remember getting a call from the, er, fire department commander, telling me that they were not sure they were gonna be able to contain the fire, and I said, 'We've had such terrible loss of life, maybe the smartest thing to do is pull it.' And they made that decision to pull and we watched the building collapse." WMV video download (490kB) In summary, the fire department commander said the fire could not be contained, Silverstein said "the smartest thing to do is pull it", and the fire department made the decision to pull. "Pull" is a term used in building demolition... "We're getting ready to pull Building 6" ... "We had to be very careful how we demolished Building 6..." WMV video download (564kB) ...but the US Department of State contends that Silverstein's "pull it" statement refers to withdrawing firefighters from WTC 7. If this was the case then firefighters should have received a message which said something like "World Trade 7 is unsafe. Abandon the building and withdraw from the area." Okay, let's have a look at the language used by firefighters withdrawing from the area of WTC 7: "It's blowin' boy." ... "Keep your eye on that building, it'll be coming down soon." ... "The building is about to blow up, move it back." ... "Here we are walking back. There's a building, about to blow up..." WMV video download (1 MB) The above indicates the message received by the firefighters was "We are going to demolish 7 World Trade. Clear the area." INDRA SINGH EMT: "...by noon or one o'clock they told us we need to move from that triage site up to Pace University a little further away because Building 7 was going to come down or be brought down." HOST: "Did they actually use the word "brought down" and who was it that was telling you this?" SINGH: "The fire department. And they did use the words 'we're gonna have to bring it down' and for us there observing the nature of the devastation it made total sense to us that this was indeed a possibility..." [Prison Planet] It has also been stated that a 20 second radio countdown preceded the collapse of WTC 7. The statement by Silverstein Properties and the US Department of State also contends there were no deaths in WTC 7 because "pull it" was an evacuation order. This is factually incorrect: Speakers for voice evacuation announcements were located throughout the building and were activated manually at the Fire Control Center (FCC) [WTC 7 Report] It would be impossible to miss an evacuation order. "...I'm on top of building 7 just pulling out rubbish. Pulled out a Port Authority cop at about 11 o'clock in the morning..." WMV video download (597kB) "When 7 World Trade Center came down on Sept. 11, an agent on loan from Washington, special officer Craig Miller, perished..." [PDF download (link expired)] "The Secret Service New York Field Office was located in 7 World Trade Center ... Master Special Officer Craig Miller, died during the rescue efforts." [PDF download] The death of Master Special Officer Craig Miller is another inconsistency in the official explanation of Silverstein's "pull it" comment. Why aren't the numerous inconsistencies questioned by the mainstream media? See also: Larry Silverstein, WTC 7, and the 9/11 Demolition The 9/11 WTC Collapses: An Audio-Video Analysis What Really Happened Email This Page To A Friend
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
Comments (1-195) not displayed.
.
.
.
#196. To: angle (#195)
The LEM landed with some of it there after Rob Brown lifted off from Faluja. Just ask BAC. That's where they took the moon pictures too.
Bunch of internet bums ... grand jury --- opium den ! ~ byeltsin
Jackie Onassis was flying Ron Brown's plane. She parchuted to safety just before it nosed in. ROTFLOL!! Kooks!! Clintonistas!!
Really? That's strange considering that molten aluminum does appear silvery white in broad daylight, and it was a clear sunny day on 9/11/2001. But then again, what the heck would a structural engineer know about molten aluminum anyway? It appears that these structural engineers that said this don't know or care about the facts here. So why take their word for anything if they would lie so easily?
God is always good! Seem's reasonable to me. Yeah, it might seem reasonable to a lot of people, but that doesn't make it a fact though. What I did is an experiment today, with two colleagues here, to test the NIST proclamation: "NIST concluded that the source of the molten material [observed flowing out of WTC2 before its collapse] was aluminum alloys from the aircraft, since these are known to melt between 475 degrees Celsius and 640 degrees Celsius (depending on the particular alloy), well below the expected temperatures (about 1,000 degrees Celsius) in the vicinity of the fires. Aluminum is not expected to ignite at normal fire temperatures and there is no visual indication that the material flowing from the tower was burning. "Pure liquid aluminum would be expected to appear silvery. However, the molten metal was very likely mixed with large amounts of hot, partially burned, solid organic materials (e.g., furniture, carpets, partitions and computers) which can display an orange glow, much like logs burning in a fireplace. The apparent color also would have been affected by slag formation on the surface." NIST says that flowing aluminum with partially burned organic materials mixed in, "can display an orange glow." But will it really do this? I decided to do an experiment to find out. We melted aluminum in a steel pan using an oxy-acetylene torch. Then we added plastic shavings -- which immediately burned with a dark smoke, as the plastic floated on top of the hot molten aluminum. Next, we added wood chips (pine, oak and compressed fiber board chips) to the liquid aluminum. Again, we had fire and smoke, and again, the hydrocarbons floated on top as they burned. We poured out the aluminum and all three of us observed that it appeared silvery, not orange! We took photos and videos, so we will have the recorded evidence as these are processed. (I have now attached two videos showing clearly the silvery appearance of the flowing aluminum.) Of course, we saw a few burning embers, but this did not alter the silvery appearance of the flowing, falling aluminum. We decided to repeat the experiment, with the same aluminum re-melted. This time when we added fresh wood chips to the hot molten aluminum, we poured the aluminum-wood concoction out while the fire was still burning. And as before, the wood floated on top of the liquid aluminum. While we could see embers of burning wood, we observed the bulk of the flowing aluminum to be silvery as always, as it falls through the air. This is a key to understanding why the aluminum does not "glow orange" due to partially-burned organics "mixed" in (per NIST theory) - because they do NOT mix in! My colleague noted that it is like oil and water - organics and molten aluminum do not mix. The hydrocarbons float to the top, and there burn - and embers glow, yes, but just in spots. The organics clearly do NOT impart to the hot liquid aluminum an "orange glow" when it falls, when you actually do the experiment! (Refer to attached videos of our experiments.) In the videos of the molten metal falling from WTC2 just prior to its collapse, it appears consistently orange, not just orange in spots and certainly not silvery. We conclude that the falling metal which poured out of WTC2 is NOT aluminum. Not even aluminum "mixed" with organics as NIST theorizes. What is it? I have a bold hypothesis which still stands all our experimental tests to date, as described in my paper Why Indeed Did the WTC Buildings Collapse?. NIST should do experiments to test their "wild" theories about what happened on 9/11/2001, if they want to learn the truth about it. Sincerely, Steven E. Jones God is always good! Except these notable structural engineers from Switzerland: “In my opinion the building WTC 7 was, with great probability, professionally demolished,” says Hugo Bachmann, Emeritus ETH-Professor of Structural Analysis and Construction. And also Jörg Schneider, likewise emeritus ETH-Professor of Structural Analysis and Construction, interprets the few available video recordings as evidence that “the building WTC 7 was with great probability demolished.” At the ETH in the Institute of Structural Engineering (IBK) since 1969 Professor Hugo Bachmann has been active in in teaching and research in reinforced and prestressed concrete as well as in the design of bridges and buildings. Beginning in the late 70ies, he concentrated on the scientific field of structural dynamics and earthquake engineering, and he headed a group of collaborators and doctoral students until he retired in October 2000. The group was wellknown in the structural dynamics and earthquake engineering community world-wide and gained a high international reputation. In particular, 25 doctoral thesis, many research reports and numerous other publications such as books and articles in scientific journals were produced in the following fields: * Vibration problems in structures caused by rhythmical human body motions, machines, wind etc., experimental and theoretical work * Earthquake problems in structures and plants Conceptual seismic design, analysis, member design and detailing of new buildings, bridges and industrial facilities, assessment and if necessary seismic upgrading of existing structures, capacity design and deformation-oriented procedures in the case of reinforced concrete and masonry structures etc., experimental and theoretical work * Impact problems in structures Impacts by explosions, blasting, vehicles, stones, avalanches etc., experimental and theoretical work God is always good! I told you so, AG.
"The desire to rule is the mother of heresies." -- St. John Chrysostom
I've seen worse, LOL.
Oh ... so now the requirement is broad daylight? And what if the aluminum were to have other material entrained in it? Well then, name and quote some metallurgists who say that the material pouring out of the tower had to be steel. Who say it definitely wasn't aluminum.
The siding was an aluminum alloy; as pure aluminum wouldn't survive the corrosion of weather. Different critter, entirely. As to its melting - imagine somebody pulling the siding into the building, where it could be melted down, so as to run out of the building. DUMB! More BAC bullshit! (Why is anyone feeding this Mossadic troll, called BAC; anyway?) "BeOcho was no man Get BAC, Get BAC!"
Steven Jones is not a metallurgist. In fact, he spent the last 30 years working on nothing but sub-atomic particles and cold fusion. Seems reasonable. Did they do this experiment in daylight, Ricky? ROTFLOL! Did they add everything that might have been in the structure. For example, did they add sulfur from gypsum board to the mixture? Actually, this isn't true. If you watch this video, http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-2991254740145858863&q=cameraplanet+9%2F11 which I posted earlier, you will see silver color in the stream of material once it gets away from window. Clear as day. This occurs from 12 seconds in the video to 33 seconds into the video. It is especially clear at about 32 seconds into the video. Another sequence of streaming material begins around 55 seconds into the video. From 0.57 to 1:07, there is clearly a silver look to the material pouring from the tower. And at 1:14 - 1:15 the material pouring from the corner of the tower is VERY CLEARLY SILVER, NOT ORANGE. So Steven Jones is lying.
Yeah BAC - you deceitful piece of shit - unlike aluminum, it started out red; sure, as it cooled, it turned to a more silver color - as steel would. Phase-shifting the events doesn't work. (Why feed this Mossadic troll called" BAC," anyway?)
Oh, I stand corrected ... there is one. ROTFLOL! BUT ... Do you know what Mr Bachmann's theory is regarding WTC7, Ricky? http://www.infowars.com/articles/sept11/how_could_they_plant_bombs_in_wtc.htm "The article went on to say that “Bachmann could imagine that the perpetrators had installed explosives on key supports in a lower floor before the attack.” If the perpetrators had rented office space, then these “explosive tenants” could have calmly placed explosive charges on the vulnerable parts of the building “without having anyone notice." Is there any documentary evidence to support the existance of these "explosive tenants"? No? And do you know Bachmann made his assertion that WTC7 probably was brought down by explosives after seeing only a few videos from the collapse during an interview with kindly conspiracists? He didn't take time to study the case, or research further, he just watched a few videos. And one more thing. Anything on record from Mr Bachmann regarding the towers ... WTC 1 and 2? The reason I ask is that a fellow European, Mr Jowenko, an expert in demolition, who also believes WTC 7 was a controlled demolition based on seeing limited material supplied by kindly conspiracists, is on the record stating that WTC 1 and WTC 2 were clearly NOT controlled demolitions. Hmmmmm.... So is Jowenko right about that, Ricky?
Like this aluminum?
Wrong color - asshole; "Red," remember.
Why is anyone feeding the BAC Troll?
You ex freepers have perverted the meaning of what a forum troll is. Troll does not mean someone who vigorously disagrees with you. Freepers have changed the meaning of troll to mean people who disagree with the established forum order. True trolls for example tend to post off-topic things to distrupt the forum. The word troll is often and easily misused as ad hominem attack against someone whose viewpoints and input cannot othewise be silenced.
"The desire to rule is the mother of heresies." -- St. John Chrysostom
Actually that speaks volumes about how sure he was that it was a demolition. I mean to put his reputation on the line like that after only seeing a few videos, which is all that exist of WTC7 collapsing, must mean that he was 100% sure that it was a demolition. He didn't need to see or investigate any other evidence, it was as plain as day to him.
God is always good! I am not surprised you know the true meaning of being a troll. You had a lot of practice.
God is always good! So, who is authorized to 'finalize' the definition of a "troll?" I don't give a rip about Effer. In my book, a troll is an intellectual predator. The ultimate/intended enemy of the truth, as God knows it.
I am not surprised you know how to mis-use the term troll and accuse those you want to shut down debate with as trolls - you must have a lot of practice.
"The desire to rule is the mother of heresies." -- St. John Chrysostom
and you know the truth because you know god? That is the terminology of a fanatic - a dogmatist really - not a journeyman for truth who has to leave open the possibility he may be wrong if he is to be objective.
"The desire to rule is the mother of heresies." -- St. John Chrysostom
Seeing as they don't get a paycheck from the USG one way or another, then their opinions don't count. Matter of fact they do not exist. Them from the old Europe, Rummy says don't matter no more.
If it is that obvious, how come hundreds of other structural engineers and demolition experts out of the tens of thousands world wide haven't spoken up too? Being 100% sure doesn't mean he was right. It just might mean he was getting old. And what about Jowenko, Ricky? He was 100% sure that WTC 1 and WTC 2 were not controlled demolitions. You accept that?
I said as God know it, not in terms of my being on par with God. There's a radical difference, obviously.
SALT LAKE CITY, United States (AFP) - The refugee community in Salt Lake City has expressed its shock after this week's shopping mall shooting spree by a Bosnian teenager that left five people dead. Proud new immigrants.
fair enough. But I do see dogmatism from tour side of the argument - Because I do consider the govts actions on that day suspicious enough to be suspect and thus I am open to the possibility of demolition charges being at play on 9/11 but I don't find the arguments compelling. There are plenty of non American engineers/architects etc who are not subject to American govt sanction around the world with access to high powered computers to run simulations and not one such group as come to the defense of the '9/11truth movement' to back up their claims.
"The desire to rule is the mother of heresies." -- St. John Chrysostom
The 9/11 hijackers were Muslims who were veterans of the Bosnian Muslim army - a fact hidden from the American people until much later because America trained the Bosnian Muslims and supplied them with arms and jihadists.
"The desire to rule is the mother of heresies." -- St. John Chrysostom
And rays from Edison NJ have made me the Keeper of all Knowledge.
do you know alwaysontheright? he is an obsessed kook too. he hangs out over on
aka stone's forum. you should look him up.
"And this is the end of my brilliant career on the 4um..." -- ponchy 12/20/2006
If you don't even see the significance of the post 9-11 bin Laden family preferential treatment over all other Americans, add the 'handy' NORAD stand down; then you and BAC are of the same cut of cloth! A bunch of you guys showed up about the same time. Does this signal the Iran operation as a sure thing?? Are you guys "...in place?" How many more can we expect?
You mean like your constant rants about Bosnia/Serbia?
"First they ignore you. Then they ridicule you. Then they fight you. Then you win." --Mahatma K. Gandhi
No, because I don't mention them in forums not related to the topic.
"The desire to rule is the mother of heresies." -- St. John Chrysostom
I have repeatedly stated that I consider American elements within our govt to be directly or indirectly related to the events of 9/11 as guilty parties in the conspiracy. I find in incredible that after I mention this you wingnuts then accuse me of covering flak for the govt just cause I don't accept the demolitions allegations. I repeat : I have repeatedly stated that I consider American elements within our govt to be directly or indirectly related to the events of 9/11 as guilty parties in the conspiracy.
"The desire to rule is the mother of heresies." -- St. John Chrysostom
angle: You mean like your constant rants about Bosnia/Serbia? destro: No, because I don't mention them in forums not related to the topic. Geez, this thread makes you look like a liar. Thread: View of a Military Expert: Why the Towers of the World Trade Center collapsed Post #177 by Destro "More dispositive than these speculations, however, are the very real connections between Washington and Islamic jihadists in the Balkans throughout the 1990s. The report hints at this relationship by mentioning the presence of charity fronts of bin Laden's "network" in Zagreb and Sarajevo. In fact, the U.S. government engaged in a massive covert operation to infiltrate Islamic fighters, many of them veterans of the Afghan war, into the Balkans for the purpose of undermining the Milosevic government. The "arms embargo," enforced by the U.S. military, was a cover for this activity (i.e., using military force to keep prying eyes from seeing what was going on). A key Washington fixer for the Muslim government of Bosnia was the law firm of Feith and Zell. Yes, Douglas Feith, one of the principal conspirators involved in launching the Iraq war under the banner of opposing Islamic terrorism, was a proponent of introducing Islamic terrorists into South Eastern Europe. Do the "Islamofascists" of pseudo-conservative demonology accordingly seem less like satanic enemies and more like puppets dangling from an unseen hand? Or perhaps the analogy is incorrect: more like a Frankenstein's Monster that has slipped the control of its creator.
"First they ignore you. Then they ridicule you. Then they fight you. Then you win." --Mahatma K. Gandhi
In the mid-1990s British Steel and the Building Research Establishment performed a series of six experiments at Cardington to investigate the behavior of steel frame buildings. These experiments were conducted in a simulated, eight-story building. Secondary steel beams were not protected. Despite the temperature of the steel beams reaching 800-900º C (1,500- 1,700º F) in three of the tests (well above the traditionally assumed critical temperature of 600º C (1,100º F), no collapse was observed in any of the six experiments). At temperatures above 800º C structural steel loses 90 percent of its strength. Yet even when steel structures are heated to those temperatures, they never disintegrate into piles of rubble, as did the Twin Towers and Building 7. Why couldn't such dramatic reductions in the strength of the steel precipitate such total collapse events? High-rise buildings are over-engineered to have strength many times greater than would needed to survive the most extreme conditions anticipated. It may take well over a ten-fold reduction in strength to cause a structural failure. If a steel structure does experience a collapse due to extreme temperatures, the collapse tends to remain localized to the area that experienced the high temperatures. The kind of low-carbon steel used in buildings and automobiles bends rather than shatters. If part of a structure is compromised by extreme temperatures, it may bend in that region, conceivably causing a large part of the structure to sag or even topple. However, there is no example of a steel structure crumbling into many pieces because of any combination of structural damage and heating, outside of the alleged cases of the Twin Towers and Building 7. Esso
"First they ignore you. Then they ridicule you. Then they fight you. Then you win." --Mahatma K. Gandhi
To the poster responsible for the steel like wet noodles position: This one (above) is for you.
"First they ignore you. Then they ridicule you. Then they fight you. Then you win." --Mahatma K. Gandhi
informative, clear post
In Washington Post reporter Bob Woodward's book about the Iraqi war, Plan of Attack, Lt. Gen. Tommy Franks, who was in charge of the operation, famously called Feith the "dumbest f****** guy on the planet."
The missing element of 9-11 is the time required at the necessary temperatures. As the escaping blonde in the Pulizer Prize photo showed, it wasn't that hot - at the hottest point! IMPOSSIBLE! {Eat shit, BAC!}
Bin Laden's factions were assets of the Clinton administration. Still no one asks what an "Ethnic Albanian" is - a Muslim! (The Psyops works!)
how about the unscathed hijacker passports sitting atop the rubble? :P
Comments (236 - 467) not displayed.
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
#197. To: Minerva (#194)
It all fits doesn't it.
#198. To: BeAChooser (#188)
(Edited)
That's fine, except structural engineers everywhere seem to think the material that poured from the WTC tower shortly before it collapsed was probably aluminum.
"It was an interesting day." - President Bush, recalling 9/11 [White House, 1/5/02]
#199. To: BeAChooser (#188)
Pure liquid aluminum would be expected to appear silvery. However, the molten metal was very likely mixed with large amounts of hot, partially burned, solid organic materials (e.g., furniture, carpets, partitions and computers) which can display an orange glow, much like logs burning in a fireplace. The apparent color also would have been affected by slag formation on the surface. "
Experiments to test NIST "orange glow" hypothesis...
by Steven E. Jones, August 31, 2006
Videos Liquid Aluminum Part 1 Liquid Aluminum Part 2
"It was an interesting day." - President Bush, recalling 9/11 [White House, 1/5/02]
#200. To: BeAChooser (#35)
NO structural engineers, demolition experts, experts in steel or fire, or macro-world physicist have signed on to your demolition theory.
Well, there goes another one of your cherished delusions. All structural engineers do not agree with the government's theory.
Hugo Bachmann
Prof. em., Dr. sc. techn, Dr. h.c. Hugo Bachmann
"It was an interesting day." - President Bush, recalling 9/11 [White House, 1/5/02]
#201. To: AGAviator (#100)
#202. To: Destro, christine (#201)
I told you so, AG.
Bozo List: (1)[D]angle, (2) Kamala
#203. To: RickyJ, ALL (#198)
That's strange considering that molten aluminum does appear silvery white in broad daylight, and it was a clear sunny day on 9/11/2001.
But then again, what the heck would a structural engineer know about molten aluminum anyway?
#204. To: beachooser, Critter, Christine, Brian S, Honway, Robin, Aristeides, Red Jones, Diana, Kamala, All (#203)
Who say it definitely wasn't aluminum.
He said he was a loner
But he knew he couldn't last.
#205. To: RickyJ, honway, ALL (#199)
by Steven E. Jones
"Pure liquid aluminum would be expected to appear silvery. However, the molten metal was very likely mixed with large amounts of hot, partially burned, solid organic materials (e.g., furniture, carpets, partitions and computers) which can display an orange glow, much like logs burning in a fireplace. The apparent color also would have been affected by slag formation on the surface."
We melted aluminum in a steel pan using an oxy-acetylene torch. ... snip ... We poured out the aluminum and all three of us observed that it appeared silvery, not orange! ... While we could see embers of burning wood, we observed the bulk of the flowing aluminum to be silvery as always, as it falls through the air.
In the videos of the molten metal falling from WTC2 just prior to its collapse, it appears consistently orange, not just orange in spots and certainly not silvery.
#206. To: beachooser, Critter, Christine, Brian S, Honway, Robin, Aristeides, Red Jones, Diana, Kamala, All (#205)
which I posted earlier, you will see silver color in the stream of material once it gets away from window. Clear as day. This occurs from 12 seconds in the video to 33 seconds into the video. It is especially clear at about 32 seconds into the video. Another sequence of streaming material begins around 55 seconds into the video. From 0.57 to 1:07, there is clearly a silver look to the material pouring from the tower. And at 1:14 - 1:15 the material pouring from the corner of the tower is VERY CLEARLY SILVER, NOT ORANGE. So Steven Jones is lying.
#207. To: RickyJ, ALL (#200)
Except these notable structural engineers from Switzerland:
Hugo Bachmann
“In my opinion the building WTC 7 was, with great probability, professionally demolished,” says Hugo Bachmann, Emeritus ETH-Professor of Structural Analysis and Construction.
#208. To: SKYDRIFTER, ALL (#206)
unlike aluminum, it started out red; sure, as it cooled, it turned to a more silver color - as steel would.
#209. To: beachooser, Critter, Christine, Brian S, Honway, Robin, Aristeides, Red Jones, Diana, Kamala, All (#208)
Like this aluminum?
#210. To: beachooser, Critter, Christine, Brian S, Honway, Robin, Aristeides, Red Jones, Diana, Kamala, All (#207)
#211. To: SKYDRIFTER, BeAChooser, Critter, Christine, Brian S, Honway, Robin, Aristeides, Red Jones, Diana, Kamala, All (#210)
Why is anyone feeding the BAC Troll?
#212. To: BeAChooser (#207)
(Edited)
And do you know Bachmann made his assertion that WTC7 probably was brought down by explosives after seeing only a few videos from the collapse during an interview with kindly conspiracists? He didn't take time to study the case, or research further, he just watched a few videos.
"It was an interesting day." - President Bush, recalling 9/11 [White House, 1/5/02]
#213. To: Destro (#211)
(Edited)
"It was an interesting day." - President Bush, recalling 9/11 [White House, 1/5/02]
#214. To: Destro, Christine, Brian S, Honway, Robin, Aristeides, Red Jones, Diana, Kamala, All (#211)
#215. To: RickyJ (#213)
I am not surprised you know the true meaning of being a troll. You had a lot of practice.
#216. To: SKYDRIFTER, Christine, Brian S, Honway, Robin, Aristeides, Red Jones, Diana, Kamala, All (#214)
In my book, a troll is an intellectual predator. The ultimate/intended enemy of the truth, as God knows it.
#217. To: RickyJ (#200)
Well, there goes another one of your cherished delusions. All structural engineers do not agree with the government's theory.
#218. To: RickyJ, ALL (#212)
Actually that speaks volumes about how sure he was that it was a demolition.
I mean to put his reputation on the line like that after only seeing a few videos, which is all that exist of WTC7 collapsing, must mean that he was 100% sure that it was a demolition.
#219. To: Destro, Christine, Brian S, Honway, Robin, Aristeides, Red Jones, Diana, Kamala, All (#216)
#220. To: Destro (#215)
http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20070214/ts_alt_afp/uscrimerefugees_070214191205
#221. To: SKYDRIFTER, RickyJ, Christine, Brian S, Honway, Robin, Aristeides, Red Jones, Diana, Kamala, BeAChooser, AGAviator, All (#219)
#222. To: Jethro Tull (#220)
SALT LAKE CITY, United States (AFP) - The refugee community in Salt Lake City has expressed its shock after this week's shopping mall shooting spree by a Bosnian teenager that left five people dead.
#223. To: Destro (#222)
#224. To: BeAChooser (#218)
#225. To: Destro, Christine, Brian S, Honway, Robin, Aristeides, Red Jones, Diana, Kamala, All (#221)
Dogmatism? Me? How 'bout pure patriotism; from an educated Viet Nam vet?
#226. To: Destro (#211)
True trolls for example tend to post off-topic things to distrupt the forum.
#227. To: angle (#226)
You mean like your constant rants about Bosnia/Serbia?
#228. To: SKYDRIFTER, Christine, Brian S, Honway, Robin, Aristeides, Red Jones, Diana, Kamala, All 221 (#225)
you don't even see the significance of the post 9-11 bin Laden family preferential treatment over all other Americans, add the 'handy' NORAD stand down; then you and BAC are of the same cut of cloth!
#229. To: Destro, christine, kamala (#227)
destro: True trolls for example tend to post off-topic things to distrupt the forum.
#230. To: SKYDRIFTER, esso (#204)
(Edited)
CREDIT: ESSO
#231. To: all (#230)
#232. To: angle, Esso (#230)
#233. To: angle, Brian S, Christine, Honway, Robin, Aristeides, Diana, All (#230)
#234. To: angle, Brian S, Christine, Honway, Robin, Aristeides, Diana, All (#229)
#235. To: SKYDRIFTER (#233)
As the escaping blonde in the Pulizer Prize photo showed, it wasn't that hot - at the hottest point!
.
.
.