Most people don't know that there were actually 3 buildings which came
crashing down on the day of 9/11.

The third building, WTC 7, can be seen here

http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...32340306101329

There is no mention of this building in 911 Omission Report.

Can fire make a building come crashing down at free fall rate?

If you think it can, patent the idea and make billions in the
demolitions industry!

How do we know WTC 7 was demolished?

If WTC 7 collapsed in 6 seconds, and it takes 6 seconds to free fall
from the roof of WTC 7, then you got it - WTC 7 underwent a free fall.

This means as the each floor was falling straight to the ground it did
so without crashing into anything on the way. ONLY CONTROLLED
DEMOLITION CAN ACCOMPLISH THAT!

PROPOSITION 1:
It took a total of 6 seconds for the roof of WTC 7 to reach the
ground. This proposition is supported by the empirical,

http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...32340306101329
Collapse start time: 17 seconds
Collapse end time: 23 seconds
Total collapse time: 23-17 = 6 seconds

PROPOSITION 2:
A free fall from a height equal to the roof of WTC 7 would take 6
seconds. This proposition derives trivially through (Galilean)
kinematical considerations alone:

Displacement = initial velocity * total time + 1/2 * acceleration *
total time^2

or

s = ut + 1/2at^2
where
s = 174 m (height of building)
u = 0 m/s (building was stationary prior to collapse)
a = 9.8 m/s^2 (since gravitational field strengh averages at
a constant)

Thus,
174 = 0 t + 1/2 9.8 t^2

Solving for t
t = sqrt( 2 * 174 / 9.8)
= 5.9590
~ 6 seconds

On Oct 8, 8:08 am, wrote:
Most people don't know that there were actually 3 buildings which came
crashing down on the day of 9/11.

The third building, WTC 7, can be seen here

http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...32340306101329

There is no mention of this building in 911 Omission Report.

Can fire make a building come crashing down at free fall rate?

If you think it can, patent the idea and make billions in the
demolitions industry!

How do we know WTC 7 was demolished?

If WTC 7 collapsed in 6 seconds, and it takes 6 seconds to free fall
from the roof of WTC 7, then you got it - WTC 7 underwent a free fall.

This means as the each floor was falling straight to the ground it did
so without crashing into anything on the way. ONLY CONTROLLED
DEMOLITION CAN ACCOMPLISH THAT!

PROPOSITION 1:
It took a total of 6 seconds for the roof of WTC 7 to reach the
ground. This proposition is supported by the empirical,

http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...32340306101329
Collapse start time: 17 seconds
Collapse end time: 23 seconds
Total collapse time: 23-17 = 6 seconds

PROPOSITION 2:
A free fall from a height equal to the roof of WTC 7 would take 6
seconds. This proposition derives trivially through (Galilean)
kinematical considerations alone:

Displacement = initial velocity * total time + 1/2 * acceleration *
total time^2

or

s = ut + 1/2at^2
where
s = 174 m (height of building)
u = 0 m/s (building was stationary prior to collapse)
a = 9.8 m/s^2 (since gravitational field strengh averages at
a constant)

Thus,
174 = 0 t + 1/2 9.8 t^2

Solving for t
t = sqrt( 2 * 174 / 9.8)
= 5.9590
~ 6 seconds

The equation pears right and the top floor only need be hot enough to
collapse thus causing an overload & downward motion, they all fell
without controlled demolition! No public mention was not worthy since
no plane flu into it! If what your assuming is true, then they knew
the planes destiny in advance and loaded the top of the building with
fuel!!
The bracing held the building from falling sideways& the floor beams
pulled the coliums inward.the higher up the lighter the building
matereal was in design Thus had they have used the elevator instead of
the truck bomb in the lower parking garage it would have fell on thier
first attempt!!!!

Isn't everything scandalous or a conspiracy though now a days?

On Oct 8, 8:07 am, joeturn wrote:
On Oct 8, 8:08 am, wrote:



Most people don't know that there were actually 3 buildings which came
crashing down on the day of 9/11.

The third building, WTC 7, can be seen here

http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...32340306101329

There is no mention of this building in 911 Omission Report.

Can fire make a building come crashing down at free fall rate?

If you think it can, patent the idea and make billions in the
demolitions industry!

How do we know WTC 7 was demolished?

Just Google for "Loose Change 2" to see what happened there. Also
check out "Terror Storm" and "Alex Jones"; it's scary stuff and if all
this **** is true then Alex Jones would not be allowed to have his
radio show. So the "Fear" market lives on, buy your dosage today!
Only $19.95 plus your Civil Liberty and shipping. "You're either with
us or you're with the terrorists." -George Bush Take your pick,
either way they win so don't believe the hype.

Although I do think we all should drop windows, use linux/open source
(free software) and use encryption for all our e-mail in order to
"keep it real" and protect privacy. Fedora has a flavor of linux
which allows you to try it on your windows PC without installing to
your hard drive or changing anything. It boots up from the CD/DVD
drive and only resides in your RAM memory so where you take out the
disk you have your windows back until you decide to make the change
and re-format install. Goto http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/ to get
their "Live" CD free download. It's great, the first thing you will
love is No Virus Protection Needed; so you're not forced into buying a
cure for their disease.

Peace
SF

I like that movie Conspiracy Theory with Julia Roberts and Mel Gibson.

Isn't the Soviet Union responsible for our weather patterns?.....Global
Warming....humbug!


"ViperMods" wrote in message
ps.com...
Isn't everything scandalous or a conspiracy though now a days?

Regardless of whether you believe 'conspiracy theory' or not, there are a
lot of facts involved (with the Towers as well) that can't be ignored.

wrote in message
oups.com...
Most people don't know that there were actually 3 buildings which came
crashing down on the day of 9/11.

The third building, WTC 7, can be seen here

http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...32340306101329

There is no mention of this building in 911 Omission Report.

Can fire make a building come crashing down at free fall rate?

If you think it can, patent the idea and make billions in the
demolitions industry!

How do we know WTC 7 was demolished?

If WTC 7 collapsed in 6 seconds, and it takes 6 seconds to free fall
from the roof of WTC 7, then you got it - WTC 7 underwent a free fall.

This means as the each floor was falling straight to the ground it did
so without crashing into anything on the way. ONLY CONTROLLED
DEMOLITION CAN ACCOMPLISH THAT!

PROPOSITION 1:
It took a total of 6 seconds for the roof of WTC 7 to reach the
ground. This proposition is supported by the empirical,

http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...32340306101329
Collapse start time: 17 seconds
Collapse end time: 23 seconds
Total collapse time: 23-17 = 6 seconds

PROPOSITION 2:
A free fall from a height equal to the roof of WTC 7 would take 6
seconds. This proposition derives trivially through (Galilean)
kinematical considerations alone:

Displacement = initial velocity * total time + 1/2 * acceleration *
total time^2

or

s = ut + 1/2at^2
where
s = 174 m (height of building)
u = 0 m/s (building was stationary prior to collapse)
a = 9.8 m/s^2 (since gravitational field strengh averages at
a constant)

Thus,
174 = 0 t + 1/2 9.8 t^2

Solving for t
t = sqrt( 2 * 174 / 9.8)
= 5.9590
~ 6 seconds

On Oct 8, 4:42 pm, "Kilroy" wrote:
Regardless of whether you believe 'conspiracy theory' or not, there are a
lot of facts involved (with the Towers as well) that can't be ignored.

wrote in message

oups.com...

Most people don't know that there were actually 3 buildings which came
crashing down on the day of 9/11.

The third building, WTC 7, can be seen here

http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...32340306101329

There is no mention of this building in 911 Omission Report.

Can fire make a building come crashing down at free fall rate?

If you think it can, patent the idea and make billions in the
demolitions industry!

How do we know WTC 7 was demolished?

If WTC 7 collapsed in 6 seconds, and it takes 6 seconds to free fall
from the roof of WTC 7, then you got it - WTC 7 underwent a free fall.

This means as the each floor was falling straight to the ground it did
so without crashing into anything on the way. ONLY CONTROLLED
DEMOLITION CAN ACCOMPLISH THAT!

PROPOSITION 1:
It took a total of 6 seconds for the roof of WTC 7 to reach the
ground. This proposition is supported by the empirical,

http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...32340306101329
Collapse start time: 17 seconds
Collapse end time: 23 seconds
Total collapse time: 23-17 = 6 seconds

PROPOSITION 2:
A free fall from a height equal to the roof of WTC 7 would take 6
seconds. This proposition derives trivially through (Galilean)
kinematical considerations alone:

Displacement = initial velocity * total time + 1/2 * acceleration *
total time^2

or

s = ut + 1/2at^2
where
s = 174 m (height of building)
u = 0 m/s (building was stationary prior to collapse)
a = 9.8 m/s^2 (since gravitational field strengh averages at
a constant)

Thus,
174 = 0 t + 1/2 9.8 t^2

Solving for t
t = sqrt( 2 * 174 / 9.8)
= 5.9590
~ 6 seconds

I heard of ppl using linux and booting it from usb memory stick
http://www.pendrivelinux.com/

On Oct 8, 9:23 pm, ViperMods wrote:
On Oct 8, 4:42 pm, "Kilroy" wrote:



Regardless of whether you believe 'conspiracy theory' or not, there are a
lot of facts involved (with the Towers as well) that can't be ignored.

wrote in message

roups.com...

Most people don't know that there were actually 3 buildings which came
crashing down on the day of 9/11.

The third building, WTC 7, can be seen here

http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...32340306101329

There is no mention of this building in 911 Omission Report.

Can fire make a building come crashing down at free fall rate?

If you think it can, patent the idea and make billions in the
demolitions industry!

How do we know WTC 7 was demolished?

If WTC 7 collapsed in 6 seconds, and it takes 6 seconds to free fall
from the roof of WTC 7, then you got it - WTC 7 underwent a free fall.

This means as the each floor was falling straight to the ground it did
so without crashing into anything on the way. ONLY CONTROLLED
DEMOLITION CAN ACCOMPLISH THAT!

PROPOSITION 1:
It took a total of 6 seconds for the roof of WTC 7 to reach the
ground. This proposition is supported by the empirical,

http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...32340306101329
Collapse start time: 17 seconds
Collapse end time: 23 seconds
Total collapse time: 23-17 = 6 seconds

PROPOSITION 2:
A free fall from a height equal to the roof of WTC 7 would take 6
seconds. This proposition derives trivially through (Galilean)
kinematical considerations alone:

Displacement = initial velocity * total time + 1/2 * acceleration *
total time^2

or

s = ut + 1/2at^2
where
s = 174 m (height of building)
u = 0 m/s (building was stationary prior to collapse)
a = 9.8 m/s^2 (since gravitational field strengh averages at
a constant)

Thus,
174 = 0 t + 1/2 9.8 t^2

Solving for t
t = sqrt( 2 * 174 / 9.8)
= 5.9590
~ 6 seconds

I heard of ppl using linux and booting it from usb memory stickhttp://www.pendrivelinux.com/

Yes but it is not as extensive as Fedora; which is meant to replace
Windows in a realistic way.

wrote in message
oups.com...
Most people don't know that there were actually 3 buildings which came
crashing down on the day of 9/11.

The third building, WTC 7, can be seen here

http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...32340306101329

There is no mention of this building in 911 Omission Report.

Can fire make a building come crashing down at free fall rate?

If you think it can, patent the idea and make billions in the
demolitions industry!

How do we know WTC 7 was demolished?

-conspiracy crap snipped

No, it was not demolished. It was heavily damaged by the other two
buildings falling on it, and fires combined with the structural damage
finished it off. Visible signs of it failing were obvious well before it
came down, which is why the fire crews were pulled from the area.

Building 7 contained records of Enron that would have implicated Bush.
Besides, it wasn't entirely the US gov't behind it..it was the Trilateral
Commission...and they tell all Gov't what to do

"ViperMods" wrote in message
ps.com...
Isn't everything scandalous or a conspiracy though now a days?

Luvrsmel wrote:
Building 7 contained records of Enron that would have implicated Bush.
Besides, it wasn't entirely the US gov't behind it..it was the Trilateral
Commission...and they tell all Gov't what to do

All of whom are ultimately controlled by the Illuminati, who are controlled by
the Rothschilds.

Just Wondering wrote:

Luvrsmel wrote:
Building 7 contained records of Enron that would have implicated Bush.
Besides, it wasn't entirely the US gov't behind it..it was the Trilateral
Commission...and they tell all Gov't what to do

All of whom are ultimately controlled by the Illuminati, who are
controlled by the Rothschilds.

Doesn't DeBeers figure in there somewhere?


--
If you're going to be dumb, you better be tough

"Just Wondering" wrote in message
. ..
Luvrsmel wrote:
Building 7 contained records of Enron that would have implicated Bush.
Besides, it wasn't entirely the US gov't behind it..it was the Trilateral
Commission...and they tell all Gov't what to do

All of whom are ultimately controlled by the Illuminati, who are
controlled by the Rothschilds.

How do people like luvrsmel function in society? Building 7 had Enron
records? Well, of course the answer is to blow it up.

Ok I watched Terror Storm and Loose Change 2 and I am convinced it was
an inside job. The most confusing thing is why there are no videos of
the "plane" crashing into the pentagon? You'd think they would have
security cameras on every corner of that place. Why didn't they release
the tape is beyond me and is what has me convinced they are hiding
something.

todd wrote:
"Just Wondering" wrote in message
. ..
Luvrsmel wrote:
Building 7 contained records of Enron that would have implicated Bush.
Besides, it wasn't entirely the US gov't behind it..it was the Trilateral
Commission...and they tell all Gov't what to do

All of whom are ultimately controlled by the Illuminati, who are
controlled by the Rothschilds.

How do people like luvrsmel function in society? Building 7 had Enron
records? Well, of course the answer is to blow it up.

GET A LIFE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!





"Dallas D" wrote in message
news:4k6Pi.11958$%B2.9471@edtnps82...
Ok I watched Terror Storm and Loose Change 2 and I am convinced it was an
inside job. The most confusing thing is why there are no videos of the
"plane" crashing into the pentagon? You'd think they would have security
cameras on every corner of that place. Why didn't they release the tape is
beyond me and is what has me convinced they are hiding something.

todd wrote:
"Just Wondering" wrote in message
. ..
Luvrsmel wrote:
Building 7 contained records of Enron that would have implicated Bush.
Besides, it wasn't entirely the US gov't behind it..it was the
Trilateral Commission...and they tell all Gov't what to do

All of whom are ultimately controlled by the Illuminati, who are
controlled by the Rothschilds.

How do people like luvrsmel function in society? Building 7 had Enron
records? Well, of course the answer is to blow it up.

"Dallas D" wrote in message
news:4k6Pi.11958$%B2.9471@edtnps82...
Ok I watched Terror Storm and Loose Change 2 and I am convinced it was an
inside job. The most confusing thing is why there are no videos of the
"plane" crashing into the pentagon? You'd think they would have security
cameras on every corner of that place. Why didn't they release the tape is
beyond me and is what has me convinced they are hiding something.

Well then you are an idiot. Why the hell would they have security cameras
pointing at the sky? They are aimed at potential security risk points,
which approach along the ground, so are pointed at things like doorways,
roads, etc., there was no reason to aim them at the sky.

There are pictures of the immediate aftermath, which shows pieces of plane
scattered around everywhere, and many eyewitness accounts of people seeing
the plane fly into the building. How do you suggest the parts got there,
and how to you explain the eyewitnesses? Don't forget, you are talking
about a government who cannot manage to control a minor war, and you think
they are sophisticated enough to pull off something like what you are
suggesting?


todd wrote:
"Just Wondering" wrote in message
. ..
Luvrsmel wrote:
Building 7 contained records of Enron that would have implicated Bush.
Besides, it wasn't entirely the US gov't behind it..it was the
Trilateral Commission...and they tell all Gov't what to do

All of whom are ultimately controlled by the Illuminati, who are
controlled by the Rothschilds.

How do people like luvrsmel function in society? Building 7 had Enron
records? Well, of course the answer is to blow it up.

You're an ass, It's not me suggesting it; watch the vids and you'll see
what they are talking about. And then maybe you will have some valid
response, until then STFU. The cameras would have caught the plane when
it was at bilding level, smashing into the building smart ass! And the
pics after do not show parts of a "passenger jet" any where, there are
wire spools though, according to those vids. I say prove them wrong
with hard evidence not retort, flaming responses like you idiots have.

You don't thing George and his buddies wouldn't do it? Remember his
response when 911 happened? Didn't look to surprised did he? Just look
at the mockery he has made of the USA from the beginning and now look at
the state of the Union, it's not a Union anymore, it's an Empire. I'm
not saying it's a bad thing but at least let's call a spade a spade.




Robert Weldon wrote:
"Dallas D" wrote in message
news:4k6Pi.11958$%B2.9471@edtnps82...
Ok I watched Terror Storm and Loose Change 2 and I am convinced it was an
inside job. The most confusing thing is why there are no videos of the
"plane" crashing into the pentagon? You'd think they would have security
cameras on every corner of that place. Why didn't they release the tape is
beyond me and is what has me convinced they are hiding something.

Well then you are an idiot. Why the hell would they have security cameras
pointing at the sky? They are aimed at potential security risk points,
which approach along the ground, so are pointed at things like doorways,
roads, etc., there was no reason to aim them at the sky.

There are pictures of the immediate aftermath, which shows pieces of plane
scattered around everywhere, and many eyewitness accounts of people seeing
the plane fly into the building. How do you suggest the parts got there,
and how to you explain the eyewitnesses? Don't forget, you are talking
about a government who cannot manage to control a minor war, and you think
they are sophisticated enough to pull off something like what you are
suggesting?

todd wrote:
"Just Wondering" wrote in message
. ..
Luvrsmel wrote:
Building 7 contained records of Enron that would have implicated Bush.
Besides, it wasn't entirely the US gov't behind it..it was the
Trilateral Commission...and they tell all Gov't what to do

All of whom are ultimately controlled by the Illuminati, who are
controlled by the Rothschilds.
How do people like luvrsmel function in society? Building 7 had Enron
records? Well, of course the answer is to blow it up.

All messages with crossposts to alt.dss.hack,
de.alt.dateien.weibsbilder, edm.forsale, or alt.fashion plonked

--
--
--John
to email, dial "usenet" and validate
(was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)

"Dallas D" wrote in message
news:zy7Pi.11975$%B2.1682@edtnps82...
You're an ass, It's not me suggesting it; watch the vids and you'll see
what they are talking about. And then maybe you will have some valid
response, until then STFU. The cameras would have caught the plane when
it was at bilding level, smashing into the building smart ass! And the
pics after do not show parts of a "passenger jet" any where, there are
wire spools though, according to those vids. I say prove them wrong with
hard evidence not retort, flaming responses like you idiots have.

You don't thing George and his buddies wouldn't do it? Remember his
response when 911 happened? Didn't look to surprised did he? Just look at
the mockery he has made of the USA from the beginning and now look at the
state of the Union, it's not a Union anymore, it's an Empire. I'm not
saying it's a bad thing but at least let's call a spade a spade.

If you believe those videos then you are an idiot. Bush cannot manage a
war, there is no way in hell those idiots could manage a coverup of those
dimensions. I have seen the pictures of the crash, and I can clearly see
airplane parts. The security cameras were pointed at doors, and they use a
low frame rate to save space, the plane hit in the middle of a wall, there
is no way the cameras would have caught the plane. Other security cameras,
however, did. Do some research, and not the nutbar conspiracy sites.

I notice you had no response to the literally hundreds of eyewitness reports
of the crash.

Wow, google is amazing, here it is:
http://911research.wtc7.net/pentagon...hullpiece.html
I hope we can agree at least that the videos are entertaining.

Cheers

Robert Weldon wrote:
"Dallas D" wrote in message
news:zy7Pi.11975$%B2.1682@edtnps82...
You're an ass, It's not me suggesting it; watch the vids and you'll see
what they are talking about. And then maybe you will have some valid
response, until then STFU. The cameras would have caught the plane when
it was at bilding level, smashing into the building smart ass! And the
pics after do not show parts of a "passenger jet" any where, there are
wire spools though, according to those vids. I say prove them wrong with
hard evidence not retort, flaming responses like you idiots have.

You don't thing George and his buddies wouldn't do it? Remember his
response when 911 happened? Didn't look to surprised did he? Just look at
the mockery he has made of the USA from the beginning and now look at the
state of the Union, it's not a Union anymore, it's an Empire. I'm not
saying it's a bad thing but at least let's call a spade a spade.

If you believe those videos then you are an idiot. Bush cannot manage a
war, there is no way in hell those idiots could manage a coverup of those
dimensions. I have seen the pictures of the crash, and I can clearly see
airplane parts. The security cameras were pointed at doors, and they use a
low frame rate to save space, the plane hit in the middle of a wall, there
is no way the cameras would have caught the plane. Other security cameras,
however, did. Do some research, and not the nutbar conspiracy sites.

I notice you had no response to the literally hundreds of eyewitness reports
of the crash.

I like the fact that in a lot of w.t.c. vidz that you can hear the
noise of the blast charges(I believe they are called) and the
buildings look demolished via detonation floor by floor starting at
the top and working down
The demolition is faster than the fall rate of the building plus
buildings do not fall like what is seen in the videos unless they are
being demolished via explosives
But hey do your research then draw your own conclusions
I suggest if you're interested that you watch some videos until you
get one with uncut live audio on the scene from a spectator{no
reporters on the audio feed} and no stupid angles that cut off
sections of the building from your view also watch a documentary on tv
or the net about people that professionally demolish buildings via
controlled implosions you want to compare in your mind this footage of
controlled building demolition via explosives to the footage you re-
view on the w.t.c. I believe your opinion will change when you make
the comparison if you are open minded enough to give this a try
my mind is made up as I've completer hundreds of hours of research and
viewed countless documentary's but focusing too much on the past...
whats the point after all there is no time like the present in which
we live, I only use the past to shape the present so we may all have a
better future

"Dallas D" wrote in message
news7cPi.4555$G25.2182@edtnps89...
Wow, google is amazing, here it is:
http://911research.wtc7.net/pentagon...hullpiece.html
I hope we can agree at least that the videos are entertaining.

Cheers

Yes, they are entertaining fiction.



Robert Weldon wrote:
"Dallas D" wrote in message
news:zy7Pi.11975$%B2.1682@edtnps82...
You're an ass, It's not me suggesting it; watch the vids and you'll see
what they are talking about. And then maybe you will have some valid
response, until then STFU. The cameras would have caught the plane when
it was at bilding level, smashing into the building smart ass! And the
pics after do not show parts of a "passenger jet" any where, there are
wire spools though, according to those vids. I say prove them wrong
with hard evidence not retort, flaming responses like you idiots have.

You don't thing George and his buddies wouldn't do it? Remember his
response when 911 happened? Didn't look to surprised did he? Just look
at the mockery he has made of the USA from the beginning and now look at
the state of the Union, it's not a Union anymore, it's an Empire. I'm
not saying it's a bad thing but at least let's call a spade a spade.

If you believe those videos then you are an idiot. Bush cannot manage a
war, there is no way in hell those idiots could manage a coverup of those
dimensions. I have seen the pictures of the crash, and I can clearly see
airplane parts. The security cameras were pointed at doors, and they use
a low frame rate to save space, the plane hit in the middle of a wall,
there is no way the cameras would have caught the plane. Other security
cameras, however, did. Do some research, and not the nutbar conspiracy
sites.

I notice you had no response to the literally hundreds of eyewitness
reports of the crash.

On Oct 10, 7:09 pm, ViperMods wrote:
I like the fact that in a lot of w.t.c. vidz that you can hear the
noise of the blast charges(I believe they are called) and the
buildings look demolished via detonation floor by floor starting at
the top and working down
The demolition is faster than the fall rate of the building plus
buildings do not fall like what is seen in the videos unless they are
being demolished via explosives
But hey do your research then draw your own conclusions
I suggest if you're interested that you watch some videos until you
get one with uncut live audio on the scene from a spectator{no
reporters on the audio feed} and no stupid angles that cut off
sections of the building from your view also watch a documentary on tv
or the net about people that professionally demolish buildings via
controlled implosions you want to compare in your mind this footage of
controlled building demolition via explosives to the footage you re-
view on the w.t.c. I believe your opinion will change when you make
the comparison if you are open minded enough to give this a try
my mind is made up as I've completer hundreds of hours of research and
viewed countless documentary's but focusing too much on the past...
whats the point after all there is no time like the present in which
we live, I only use the past to shape the present so we may all have a
better future

Well said Viper. . .

When all is said and done the truth is out of style so how does it
really matter anyway? Just be a good citizen and STFU, do your job and
no one will get hurt right?

wrote:
On Oct 10, 7:09 pm, ViperMods wrote:
I like the fact that in a lot of w.t.c. vidz that you can hear the
noise of the blast charges(I believe they are called) and the
buildings look demolished via detonation floor by floor starting at
the top and working down
The demolition is faster than the fall rate of the building plus
buildings do not fall like what is seen in the videos unless they are
being demolished via explosives
But hey do your research then draw your own conclusions
I suggest if you're interested that you watch some videos until you
get one with uncut live audio on the scene from a spectator{no
reporters on the audio feed} and no stupid angles that cut off
sections of the building from your view also watch a documentary on tv
or the net about people that professionally demolish buildings via
controlled implosions you want to compare in your mind this footage of
controlled building demolition via explosives to the footage you re-
view on the w.t.c. I believe your opinion will change when you make
the comparison if you are open minded enough to give this a try
my mind is made up as I've completer hundreds of hours of research and
viewed countless documentary's but focusing too much on the past...
whats the point after all there is no time like the present in which
we live, I only use the past to shape the present so we may all have a
better future

Well said Viper. . .

On Wed, 10 Oct 2007 16:06:05 GMT, "Robert Weldon"
wrote:


"Dallas D" wrote in message
news:4k6Pi.11958$%B2.9471@edtnps82...
Ok I watched Terror Storm and Loose Change 2 and I am convinced it was an
inside job. The most confusing thing is why there are no videos of the
"plane" crashing into the pentagon? You'd think they would have security
cameras on every corner of that place. Why didn't they release the tape is
beyond me and is what has me convinced they are hiding something.

Well then you are an idiot. Why the hell would they have security cameras
pointing at the sky? They are aimed at potential security risk points,
which approach along the ground, so are pointed at things like doorways,
roads, etc., there was no reason to aim them at the sky.

You're the apparent idiot, here. The plane was said to have been
flying low enough to go right through the main doors. And I guess
this means it should have been cought on tape.

There are pictures of the immediate aftermath, which shows pieces of plane
scattered around everywhere, and many eyewitness accounts of people seeing
the plane fly into the building. How do you suggest the parts got there,
and how to you explain the eyewitnesses? Don't forget, you are talking
about a government who cannot manage to control a minor war, and you think
they are sophisticated enough to pull off something like what you are
suggesting?

Yeah, picking up bits of things that don't resemble anything the
size of a passenger craft. And what was that big blue thing they
carried out under secrecy? Oh yeah, where are all the dead bodies,
dip****?


todd wrote:
"Just Wondering" wrote in message
. ..
Luvrsmel wrote:
Building 7 contained records of Enron that would have implicated Bush.
Besides, it wasn't entirely the US gov't behind it..it was the
Trilateral Commission...and they tell all Gov't what to do

All of whom are ultimately controlled by the Illuminati, who are
controlled by the Rothschilds.

How do people like luvrsmel function in society? Building 7 had Enron
records? Well, of course the answer is to blow it up.

On Wed, 10 Oct 2007 21:33:35 GMT, "Robert Weldon"
wrote:


"Dallas D" wrote in message
news:zy7Pi.11975$%B2.1682@edtnps82...
You're an ass, It's not me suggesting it; watch the vids and you'll see
what they are talking about. And then maybe you will have some valid
response, until then STFU. The cameras would have caught the plane when
it was at bilding level, smashing into the building smart ass! And the
pics after do not show parts of a "passenger jet" any where, there are
wire spools though, according to those vids. I say prove them wrong with
hard evidence not retort, flaming responses like you idiots have.

You don't thing George and his buddies wouldn't do it? Remember his
response when 911 happened? Didn't look to surprised did he? Just look at
the mockery he has made of the USA from the beginning and now look at the
state of the Union, it's not a Union anymore, it's an Empire. I'm not
saying it's a bad thing but at least let's call a spade a spade.

If you believe those videos then you are an idiot. Bush cannot manage a

Like the other dude said, " Watch Loose Change 2 . . ." Until you
do, shut the **** up.

war, there is no way in hell those idiots could manage a coverup of those
dimensions. I have seen the pictures of the crash, and I can clearly see
airplane parts. The security cameras were pointed at doors, and they use a
low frame rate to save space, the plane hit in the middle of a wall, there
is no way the cameras would have caught the plane. Other security cameras,
however, did. Do some research, and not the nutbar conspiracy sites.

I notice you had no response to the literally hundreds of eyewitness reports
of the crash.

On Tue, 09 Oct 2007 13:49:27 GMT, "Robert Weldon"
wrote:


wrote in message
roups.com...
Most people don't know that there were actually 3 buildings which came
crashing down on the day of 9/11.

The third building, WTC 7, can be seen here

http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...32340306101329

There is no mention of this building in 911 Omission Report.

Can fire make a building come crashing down at free fall rate?

If you think it can, patent the idea and make billions in the
demolitions industry!

How do we know WTC 7 was demolished?

-conspiracy crap snipped

No, it was not demolished. It was heavily damaged by the other two
buildings falling on it, and fires combined with the structural damage
finished it off. Visible signs of it failing were obvious well before it
came down, which is why the fire crews were pulled from the area.



Your mere presence is depriving some village of its idiot.

wrote in message
...
On Wed, 10 Oct 2007 21:33:35 GMT, "Robert Weldon"
wrote:


"Dallas D" wrote in message
news:zy7Pi.11975$%B2.1682@edtnps82...
You're an ass, It's not me suggesting it; watch the vids and you'll see
what they are talking about. And then maybe you will have some valid
response, until then STFU. The cameras would have caught the plane when
it was at bilding level, smashing into the building smart ass! And the
pics after do not show parts of a "passenger jet" any where, there are
wire spools though, according to those vids. I say prove them wrong
with
hard evidence not retort, flaming responses like you idiots have.

You don't thing George and his buddies wouldn't do it? Remember his
response when 911 happened? Didn't look to surprised did he? Just look
at
the mockery he has made of the USA from the beginning and now look at
the
state of the Union, it's not a Union anymore, it's an Empire. I'm not
saying it's a bad thing but at least let's call a spade a spade.

If you believe those videos then you are an idiot. Bush cannot manage a

Like the other dude said, " Watch Loose Change 2 . . ." Until you
do, shut the **** up.

This horse has been beaten to death already. There was no conspiracy.


war, there is no way in hell those idiots could manage a coverup of those
dimensions. I have seen the pictures of the crash, and I can clearly see
airplane parts. The security cameras were pointed at doors, and they use
a
low frame rate to save space, the plane hit in the middle of a wall, there
is no way the cameras would have caught the plane. Other security
cameras,
however, did. Do some research, and not the nutbar conspiracy sites.

I notice you had no response to the literally hundreds of eyewitness
reports
of the crash.


No response to this I see.

wrote in message
...
On Wed, 10 Oct 2007 16:06:05 GMT, "Robert Weldon"
wrote:


"Dallas D" wrote in message
news:4k6Pi.11958$%B2.9471@edtnps82...
Ok I watched Terror Storm and Loose Change 2 and I am convinced it was
an
inside job. The most confusing thing is why there are no videos of the
"plane" crashing into the pentagon? You'd think they would have security
cameras on every corner of that place. Why didn't they release the tape
is
beyond me and is what has me convinced they are hiding something.

Well then you are an idiot. Why the hell would they have security cameras
pointing at the sky? They are aimed at potential security risk points,
which approach along the ground, so are pointed at things like doorways,
roads, etc., there was no reason to aim them at the sky.

You're the apparent idiot, here. The plane was said to have been
flying low enough to go right through the main doors. And I guess
this means it should have been cought on tape.

Don't think so, unlike the conspiracy loons, I look at the facts, not their
distorted crap. That silly movie has been dissected by the experts, and
the opinion is that it is the usual conspiracy crap. The plane hit in the
middle of a wall, where there are no doors nearby, therefore no cameras.
And learn something before you spout nonsense. The security cameras at that
time were low resolution and used a low frame rate, they were designed to
spot a person or vehicle, not a plane travelling at hundreds of miles an
hour. If a camera had caught anything, it would have been an indistinct
blur in one or two frames only. Besides, the plane was caught on camera
from other locations. Also hundreds of eyewitnesses, some of them military
personnel who would know what they were looking at, saw the plane come in.


There are pictures of the immediate aftermath, which shows pieces of plane
scattered around everywhere, and many eyewitness accounts of people seeing
the plane fly into the building. How do you suggest the parts got there,
and how to you explain the eyewitnesses? Don't forget, you are talking
about a government who cannot manage to control a minor war, and you think
they are sophisticated enough to pull off something like what you are
suggesting?

Yeah, picking up bits of things that don't resemble anything the
size of a passenger craft. And what was that big blue thing they
carried out under secrecy? Oh yeah, where are all the dead bodies,
dip****?

I saw the tv footagge at the time it happened, I saw pieces I recognized as
airplane parts. Literally thousands of eyewitnesses were on the site within
minutes, they all say they were airplane parts. Get your info from reality,
not conspiracy loon websites, dip****.


todd wrote:
"Just Wondering" wrote in message
. ..
Luvrsmel wrote:
Building 7 contained records of Enron that would have implicated
Bush.
Besides, it wasn't entirely the US gov't behind it..it was the
Trilateral Commission...and they tell all Gov't what to do

All of whom are ultimately controlled by the Illuminati, who are
controlled by the Rothschilds.

How do people like luvrsmel function in society? Building 7 had Enron
records? Well, of course the answer is to blow it up.

wrote in message
...
On Tue, 09 Oct 2007 13:49:27 GMT, "Robert Weldon"
wrote:


wrote in message
groups.com...
Most people don't know that there were actually 3 buildings which came
crashing down on the day of 9/11.

The third building, WTC 7, can be seen here

http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...32340306101329

There is no mention of this building in 911 Omission Report.

Can fire make a building come crashing down at free fall rate?

If you think it can, patent the idea and make billions in the
demolitions industry!

How do we know WTC 7 was demolished?

-conspiracy crap snipped

No, it was not demolished. It was heavily damaged by the other two
buildings falling on it, and fires combined with the structural damage
finished it off. Visible signs of it failing were obvious well before it
came down, which is why the fire crews were pulled from the area.



Your mere presence is depriving some village of its idiot.

Sorry, you appear to be looking in a mirror. I base my opinion on fact, not
conspiracy loon websites.