yep no controlled demolition of bld 7 or lost libertys since 9/11 alright

[TNHarley]

Ok, so if it was "rigged", why blow that one up?

 

[SAYIT]

Quote: Originally Posted by paulitician
Yep, we're more free now than we've ever been. Well, that's what Big Brother and his Goose Steppers keep telling us anyway.

Quote: Originally Posted by SAYIT
Exactly what were you doing before 9/11 that you can't do today, Princess? Carrying boxcutters aboard commercial jets?

Quote: Originally Posted by paulitician
Man, i hope they're paying you well for being such a loyal Bootlicker. You can't be playing this dumb for free.

Quote: Montrovant
Of course, you didn't actually answer the question.....
I actually agree that we lost a bit of freedoms after 9/11, and perhaps more importantly, lost a bit of the sense that our freedoms are at least as important as our safety. Still, you are pretty extreme in your views and I'm very curious what, specifically, you think are the lost freedoms that have turned us into, how was it described in another thread, the least free country in the developed world?

Nothing to see here folks. All is well. Big Brother knows what's best for ya. He has to take your freedoms away in order to protect them. Kinda like his Perpetual War for Perpetual Peace Catch 22. Man, how can so many Americans be so ignorant and obedient. Sadly, even darker days are ahead for our Nation.

What a lame coward. Not only does he continue to avoid the question raised by his whining about what he calls our lost rights, he truncates the thread because it exposes him for the whiny, snivelly, ignorant jackass he clearly is.

I try avoiding feeding lame ass Sock Trolls. But do carry on stalking. I'm flattered.

Nah. What is do is toss lame BS on the wall and then deflect from any request that you stand behind your silly crap. Are you still thinking about that list of rights you claim to have lost to the Pat Act?

 

[SAYIT]

Ok, so if it was "rigged", why blow that one up?

I'm not certain you aimed this question at me. Perhaps you meant it for 9/11 Hand Job? I have never claimed that bldg 7 was felled by the impact of the jets on 1 & 2, I never heard anyone make that claim, nor have I ever claimed it was "rigged" or "blown up."
Additionally there is no evidence those were factors in 7's collapse.
So who did claim the impact destroyed 7?

 

[TNHarley]

Ok, so if it was "rigged", why blow that one up?

I'm not certain you aimed this question at me. Perhaps you meant it for 9/11 Hand Job? I have never claimed that bldg 7 was felled by the impact of the jets on 1 & 2, I ever heard anyone make that claim, nor have I ever claimed it was "rigged" or "blown up.
Additionally there is no evidence those were factors in 7's collapse.
So who did claim the impact destroyed 7?

No one. 911 was talking about the explosives in it. So my question to him was, why would they blow that one up?

 

[SAYIT]

Ok, so if it was "rigged", why blow that one up?

I'm not certain you aimed this question at me. Perhaps you meant it for 9/11 Hand Job? I have never claimed that bldg 7 was felled by the impact of the jets on 1 & 2, I ever heard anyone make that claim, nor have I ever claimed it was "rigged" or "blown up.
Additionally there is no evidence those were factors in 7's collapse.
So who did claim the impact destroyed 7?

No one. 911 was talking about the explosives in it. So my question to him was, why would they blow that one up?

Got it. So what inspired your original question?

Quote: Originally Posted by TNHarley
So can someone answer my question? Could the force from the airplane cause the other tower to fall by itself?
Quote: Originally Posted by SAYIT
Are you asking if the force of the planes hitting towers 1 & 2 caused 7 to collapse?
Quote: Originally Posted by TNHarley
Yes. The best result I have ever been able to find is "natural causes"

 

[TNHarley]

I'm not certain you aimed this question at me. Perhaps you meant it for 9/11 Hand Job? I have never claimed that bldg 7 was felled by the impact of the jets on 1 & 2, I ever heard anyone make that claim, nor have I ever claimed it was "rigged" or "blown up.
Additionally there is no evidence those were factors in 7's collapse.
So who did claim the impact destroyed 7?

No one. 911 was talking about the explosives in it. So my question to him was, why would they blow that one up?

Got it. So what inspired your original question?

Quote: Originally Posted by TNHarley
So can someone answer my question? Could the force from the airplane cause the other tower to fall by itself?
Quote: Originally Posted by SAYIT
Are you asking if the force of the planes hitting towers 1 & 2 caused 7 to collapse?
Quote: Originally Posted by TNHarley
Yes. The best result I have ever been able to find is "natural causes"

I am trying to figure out why it would just fall

 

[SAYIT]

No one. 911 was talking about the explosives in it. So my question to him was, why would they blow that one up?

Got it. So what inspired your original question?

Quote: Originally Posted by TNHarley
So can someone answer my question? Could the force from the airplane cause the other tower to fall by itself?
Quote: Originally Posted by SAYIT
Are you asking if the force of the planes hitting towers 1 & 2 caused 7 to collapse?
Quote: Originally Posted by TNHarley
Yes. The best result I have ever been able to find is "natural causes"

I am trying to figure out why it would just fall

The obvious place to start would be GOOGLE. Just punch in "why did building 7 collapse on 9 11" and you will get both factual theories (Structure Mag, POP Mechs, NIST Report) and all the CTs you can handle. There's even an independent study by some Chinese University. Have fun!

 

[georgephillip]

Got it. So what inspired your original question?

Quote: Originally Posted by TNHarley
So can someone answer my question? Could the force from the airplane cause the other tower to fall by itself?
Quote: Originally Posted by SAYIT
Are you asking if the force of the planes hitting towers 1 & 2 caused 7 to collapse?
Quote: Originally Posted by TNHarley
Yes. The best result I have ever been able to find is "natural causes"

I am trying to figure out why it would just fall

The obvious place to start would be GOOGLE. Just punch in "why did building 7 collapse on 9 11" and you will get both factual theories (Structure Mag, POP Mechs, NIST Report) and all the CTs you can handle. There's even an independent study by some Chinese University. Have fun!

Including 2.25 seconds of free fall acceleration over eight stories.

 

[SAYIT]

I am trying to figure out why it would just fall

The obvious place to start would be GOOGLE. Just punch in "why did building 7 collapse on 9 11" and you will get both factual theories (Structure Mag, POP Mechs, NIST Report) and all the CTs you can handle. There's even an independent study by some Chinese University. Have fun!

Including 2.25 seconds of free fall acceleration over eight stories.

Debunking 9/11 Conspiracy Theories and Controlled Demolition - Free Fall

 

[GuyPinestra]

So can someone answer my question? Could the force from the airplane cause the other tower to fall by itself?

In a word, no.

The buildings were designed to withstand the impact of the largest airliner of the day, comparable in size and weight to the planes that struck the buildings.

ETA: Sorry I misunderstood your question. The planes couldn't be responsible for the destruction of WTC 1&2, let alone WTC 7...

 

[GuyPinestra]

Ok, so if it was "rigged", why blow that one up?

The answer to your question is found in the occupants of that building and the information it's collapse 'disappeared'.

Think SEC and fraud investigations.

 

[GuyPinestra]

No he didn't and you keep posting that lie despite knowing it's a lie.
Whatsamatta Guy ... the truth not strong enough to make your case?

You keep telling me it's a lie but you provide ZERO evidence to back your assertion.

He paid $124 million to get his 99 year lease.

He collected over $4 billion from the terrorism clause in his insurance policy.

Which of those two statements is false?

Provide proof, please.

It doesn't seem to matter how often your lying is refutted ... you continue lying. You will, as usual, ignore the facts in order to persue your lies.

"The lease agreement applied to One, Two, Four, and Five World Trade Center, and about 425,000 square feet (39,500 m2) of retail space. Silverstein put up $14 million of his own money to secure the deal.[15] The terms of the lease gave Silverstein, as leaseholder, the right and the obligation to rebuild the structures if destroyed."

Larry Silverstein - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

"As leaseholder of buildings One, Two, Four and Five, Silverstein had the legal right to rebuild the buildings, including 1 World Trade Center at the World Trade Center site which would later be designated as building One, and while the site remains unoccupied, he continues to pay $10 million per month in rent to the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey."
"Ground was broken on the construction of 1 World Trade Center on April 27, 2006.[31] Lack of financing had prevented construction from commencing earlier. The proceeds of the insurance policies arising from the destruction of the previous buildings were insufficient to cover the cost of rebuilding all the insured buildings."

Larry Silverstein - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

$10 million a month X 12 months = $120 million/year x 10 years = $1.2 billion

What was your point?

How much money was contributed after the fact by both government and private individuals?

No money, my ass!

 

[SAYIT]

So can someone answer my question? Could the force from the airplane cause the other tower to fall by itself?

In a word, no.

The buildings were designed to withstand the impact of the largest airliner of the day, comparable in size and weight to the planes that struck the buildings.
ETA: Sorry I misunderstood your question. The planes couldn't be responsible for the destruction of WTC 1&2, let alone WTC 7...

More knowledgeable and far smarter peeps disagree with you, Guy.
For instance, Cesar Pelli, who designed the Petronas Towers in Malaysia and the World Financial Center in New York, remarked, "no building is prepared for this kind of stress."

'Magnitude Beyond Anything We'd Seen Before'

 

[SAYIT]

Ok, so if it was "rigged", why blow that one up?

The answer to your question is found in the occupants of that building and the information it's collapse 'disappeared'.

Think SEC and fraud investigations.

Great! Now all you need is some evidence that bldg 7 was rigged for demo and you've got something, Princess ... maybe. Do you have any proof that any SEC evidence was lost? You have heard of electronic record storage, right?

 

[SAYIT]

You keep telling me it's a lie but you provide ZERO evidence to back your assertion.

He paid $124 million to get his 99 year lease.

He collected over $4 billion from the terrorism clause in his insurance policy.

Which of those two statements is false?

Provide proof, please.

It doesn't seem to matter how often your lying is refutted ... you continue lying. You will, as usual, ignore the facts in order to persue your lies.

"The lease agreement applied to One, Two, Four, and Five World Trade Center, and about 425,000 square feet (39,500 m2) of retail space. Silverstein put up $14 million of his own money to secure the deal.[15] The terms of the lease gave Silverstein, as leaseholder, the right and the obligation to rebuild the structures if destroyed."

Larry Silverstein - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

"As leaseholder of buildings One, Two, Four and Five, Silverstein had the legal right to rebuild the buildings, including 1 World Trade Center at the World Trade Center site which would later be designated as building One, and while the site remains unoccupied, he continues to pay $10 million per month in rent to the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey."
"Ground was broken on the construction of 1 World Trade Center on April 27, 2006.[31] Lack of financing had prevented construction from commencing earlier. The proceeds of the insurance policies arising from the destruction of the previous buildings were insufficient to cover the cost of rebuilding all the insured buildings."

Larry Silverstein - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

$10 million a month X 12 months = $120 million/year x 10 years = $1.2 billion

What was your point?

How much money was contributed after the fact by both government and private individuals?

No money, my ass!

You forgot the small matter of lost profit and the cost of rebuilding the towers which I've repeatedly told you is required by the lease. Any idea what that will cost, Princess?

 

[LA RAM FAN]

So can someone answer my question? Could the force from the airplane cause the other tower to fall by itself?

In a word, no.

The buildings were designed to withstand the impact of the largest airliner of the day, comparable in size and weight to the planes that struck the buildings.

ETA: Sorry I misunderstood your question. The planes couldn't be responsible for the destruction of WTC 1&2, let alone WTC 7...

Exactly.Its impossible for the planes alone to destroy the towers.Aluminum slamming into steel?you wont hurt the steel framed building,that aluminum plane will crumple up everytime. the crux of the 9/11 coverup commission that paid troll sayit cant get around is the 9/11 commission said that the planes caused the collapse of the towers.even if that were true it cant account for building 7.as you can see in that video,building 6 which was much closer to the towers than bld 7,received far more extensive damage done to it than bld 7 and the fires were far more severe and far more extensive as well than bld 7's was yet that building and other buildings that were damamaged far more extensively and had far worse damage than bld 7 all remained standing.

Its all just a mere bizarre coincidence to agent troll Say it that the only buildings that collapsed that day were all owned by zionist jew larry Silverstein.Just one of many bizarre incredible coincidences this troll ignores all the time.

Including 2.25 seconds of free fall acceleration over eight stories.

yep.

 

[GuyPinestra]

It doesn't seem to matter how often your lying is refutted ... you continue lying. You will, as usual, ignore the facts in order to persue your lies.

"The lease agreement applied to One, Two, Four, and Five World Trade Center, and about 425,000 square feet (39,500 m2) of retail space. Silverstein put up $14 million of his own money to secure the deal.[15] The terms of the lease gave Silverstein, as leaseholder, the right and the obligation to rebuild the structures if destroyed."

Larry Silverstein - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

"As leaseholder of buildings One, Two, Four and Five, Silverstein had the legal right to rebuild the buildings, including 1 World Trade Center at the World Trade Center site which would later be designated as building One, and while the site remains unoccupied, he continues to pay $10 million per month in rent to the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey."
"Ground was broken on the construction of 1 World Trade Center on April 27, 2006.[31] Lack of financing had prevented construction from commencing earlier. The proceeds of the insurance policies arising from the destruction of the previous buildings were insufficient to cover the cost of rebuilding all the insured buildings."

Larry Silverstein - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

$10 million a month X 12 months = $120 million/year x 10 years = $1.2 billion

What was your point?

How much money was contributed after the fact by both government and private individuals?

No money, my ass!

You forgot the small matter of lost profit and the cost of rebuilding the towers which I've repeatedly told you is required by the lease. Any idea what that will cost, Princess?

There are several billion dollars available from government and private entities, and better than $3 billion left from the insurance.

As the cost overruns pile up, Congress will write Larry ANOTHER check to get him 'over the hump'...

 

[SAYIT]

$10 million a month X 12 months = $120 million/year x 10 years = $1.2 billion

What was your point?

How much money was contributed after the fact by both government and private individuals?

No money, my ass!

You forgot the small matter of lost profit and the cost of rebuilding the towers which I've repeatedly told you is required by the lease. Any idea what that will cost, Princess?

There are several billion dollars available from government and private entities, and better than $3 billion left from the insurance.
As the cost overruns pile up, Congress will write Larry ANOTHER check to get him 'over the hump'...

You have no idea what costs Silverstein has incurred. For instance, he ceded some of his right to rebuild along with some of the insurance money to the Port Authority.
Any idea what that cost him?
You have no idea what remains of the insurance settlement, no idea what it will cost him to rebuild and no evidence that Congress has ever or will ever write "Larry" a check.
It seems you are slowly oozing out of the closet, Bubba, and I'm not a bit surprised by what is oozing out.

 

[GuyPinestra]

You forgot the small matter of lost profit and the cost of rebuilding the towers which I've repeatedly told you is required by the lease. Any idea what that will cost, Princess?

There are several billion dollars available from government and private entities, and better than $3 billion left from the insurance.
As the cost overruns pile up, Congress will write Larry ANOTHER check to get him 'over the hump'...

You have no idea what costs Silverstein has incurred. For instance, he ceded some of his right to rebuild along with some of the insurance money to the Port Authority.
Any idea what that cost him?
You have no idea what remains of the insurance settlement, no idea what it will cost him to rebuild and no evidence that Congress has ever or will ever write "Larry" a check.
It seems you are slowly oozing out of the closet, Bubba, and I'm not a bit surprised by what is oozing out.

Speaking of 'oozing', you might want to wipe your chin and tone down the hysterics a notch or two.

You claim I 'have no idea', but the fact is I have some facts to go on.

Fact 1.) Larry collected several billion dollars insurance money from the attacks of 9/11.

Fact 2.) The government set up several different recovery funds with several billion dollars of both public money and private donations.

Fact 3.) Your stated expenses so far have totaled approximately $1 billion.

Fact 4.) Construction costs so far are estimated to be $3 billion.

Fact 5.) Congress will HAPPILY write Larry a check should he need it. You think that ANY of the 535 worms on Capitol Hill would say 'No'?

 

[SAYIT]

There are several billion dollars available from government and private entities, and better than $3 billion left from the insurance.
As the cost overruns pile up, Congress will write Larry ANOTHER check to get him 'over the hump'...

You have no idea what costs Silverstein has incurred. For instance, he ceded some of his right to rebuild along with some of the insurance money to the Port Authority.
Any idea what that cost him?
You have no idea what remains of the insurance settlement, no idea what it will cost him to rebuild and no evidence that Congress has ever or will ever write "Larry" a check.
It seems you are slowly oozing out of the closet, Bubba, and I'm not a bit surprised by what is oozing out.

Speaking of 'oozing', you might want to wipe your chin and tone down the hysterics a notch or two.

You claim I 'have no idea', but the fact is I have some facts to go on.

Fact 1.) Larry collected several billion dollars insurance money from the attacks of 9/11.

Fact 2.) The government set up several different recovery funds with several billion dollars of both public money and private donations.

Fact 3.) Your stated expenses so far have totaled approximately $1 billion.

Fact 4.) Construction costs so far are estimated to be $3 billion.

Fact 5.) Congress will HAPPILY write Larry a check should he need it. You think that ANY of the 535 worms on Capitol Hill would say 'No'?

It has been 138 months since 9/11 ($10 rent mil x 138 = $1.38 bil). Add in the costs incurred by Silverstein on 9/11 (any thoughts what they were?) and all costs since. I don't know what they are and neither do you but I do know these props have not run themselves for 136 months. Silverstein relinquished his rights and obligation to rebuild bldg 7 along with some of the insurance money. Any idea how much, Princess? It is obvious that whatever is left of the money isn't going to be enough to cover the rebuilding costs whatever the final number is. If this is the basis of your 9/11 CT you may as well retire from the loony tune biz right now.