Fox admits WTC7 demolition

I wasn't aware that WTC7 was vacant prior to 9/11. Are you sure about that?

 

I'm sure that planning to bring down a building takes more than a few hours Sparky.

 

I am pretty sure that you don't call your insurance company when you have been planning and rigging your occupied building for weeks or months with explosives and ask if it is ok to go ahead and bring it down now.

 

But that is exactly what he did, so says Fox.(truthers have long since known this anyway).
Since it did actually implode straight down..you'd have to conclude the building was rigged well prior.
Oh and the insurance did say NO. With a stroke of luck for Mr Sliverstein, the building just fell straight down anyway. Good thing...since the ins. company said no to demolition, no need to blow the building since it just "fell down" anyway. That way, Sliver gets the insurance money...cause it umm....fell down.

 

Of course he did. I can hear the conversation now:

Him: "Hey, can I bring this building down in a controlled demolition and still get paid for it?"

Them: "Well that would take weeks of months to plan and implement."

Him (presses button): "Never mind. It just came down on its own. Go ahead and send me my check."

 

That is not what I was asking. I was asking, are you sure the building was vacant prior to 9/11? No demolitions company would plant explosive charges in an occupied building because it is illegal. Your initial claim was that all of the buildings were wired by a government agency that had access to military grade explosives and the means to cover up their actions. Now you are claiming that the owner of the WTC7 hired independent mercenaries to rig the building with explosives while the building was still occupied. Exactly how much do you think that cost him assuming he was able to find a group that was capable and willing to do it.

BTW, are you just assuming that this clandestine mercenary demolitions group wired the twin towers at the same time they were working on WTC7? And while we are discussing time. Exactly how long is the planning and preparition process of high rise builidings?

 

More like

him: "You know there's been such great loss of life, maybe the best thing to do is just 'pull' it, and so they made that decision to 'pull' the building and we watched it come down".



Them:No Mr. Sliverstein..we can't authorize you to "pull" the building.

Him: Oh ummm...did I say pull? I meant umm....pulling the firefighters out. (except that no firefighters had occupied the building since around noon that day....some 5 plus hours prior).

Him: Oh my goodness...would you looky there! It just fell down on it's own. Hello insurance company? Yes. The building fell down all by itself. I didn't do anything cause I know you said we couldn't go the "pull" route. But see...it's on the BBC channel right now! It's fallen on it's own. See! Oh wait...the building is still there, even though they're reporting it has already fallen. Doh! It's right there over the reporter's left shoulder that's reporting it has already fallen! Doh! Idiots! Do I have to do everything myself??!! Never mind insurance company. I'll call ya back after it has fallen on it's own.

 

Sparky...you are the one claiming the buildings were vacant some time prior to the staged event. Not me. Corral attempt #1.

I said nothing of the sort regarding some government agency...blah...blah....blah...Those are your words Sparky. Corral attempt #2.

I never claimed anything about mercenaries blah..blah...still occupied. Your spin attempt. Corral attempt #3.

Far as how long, when it happened Sparky..I don't know exactly. That's the truth, because I do not know. See I can recall rather quickly whether or not what you are attempting to post are my actual words or your attempts to muddy the waters, because, I don't have to "remember" the truth, because the truth is the truth...it comes out the same every time because it is, well, the truth. Only liars, spinsters, and other such immoral, hidden agenda specialists, have to remember what lie they told at what time. (such as NORAD changing it's timeline of what actually happened no less than 3 different times).

 

Thanks for once again helping me prove my contention that folks ignore information, even when it's right in front of them. You extracted what you found useful to your point of view, but completely ignored the rest of it. I do appreciate the assistance. It does show hope that folks can actually analyze information (even though they do ignore it) Maybe not all is lost!

 

I never claimed the buildings were vacant, I asked you if they were vacant. You still have not cleared it up.

In the original 9/11 thread you told us that part of your conspiracy theory was that nano-thermite charges were planted by a faction of the US government under the direction of the Bush administration. True or False?

In the FOX report which you posted, it seems clear that you have shifted away from the explosives being planted by the government and are now claiming that the explosives were planted under the orders of the owner of the building for financial reasons. This scenario eliminates both a government agency and any licensed demolitions company. Since you have not deviated from the nano-thermite theory, it would seem that the only people capable of something like this would be professional military mercenaries with access to military grade explosives. It is not my fault that your own conspiracy theories are so incomplete that I am forded to fill in the blanks myself. However, if I am wrong, then feel free to fill us in. What happened Tom? Who planted the explosives in the building?

So you don't know how long it takes to rig a high rise building for demolition. You are the one that is claiming that the 9/11 was an inside job and the buildings were brought down via controlled demolition. Are you saying that you have not done your homework? It seems clear to me that understanding the demolitions process of buildings of this size would be a pre-requisite for making the claim that the buildings were brought down via controlled demolition. Are you saying that you don't know when the explosives were planted? You were the one who claimed in the original 9/11 thread that the explosives were planted over two weekends prior to 9/11 when the both buildings were completely closed down and the security systems disabled. By that rationale, it seems clear that you were saying it takes 48 hours to rig a building the size of one of the WTC towers for a controlled demolition. Perhaps that was a lie since your story seems to have changed. Maybe you and NORAD have more in common than you would like to admit.

 

Hey, don't you dare try to confuse tomconspiracy with facts..that's just not fair. At least give him time to find out what Ryan Seacrest, Tommy Chong and Paris Hilton have to say about it all.

 

You brought up the "vacant" issue...you clear it up Sparky. Part of your intended goal of misdirection though..I understand.

Nano thermite/Bush admin.? Yes..I'd have to go with true on that one.

If the buildings were brought down by demolition, as I and many other smarter, more educated people contend, then they all would have to have been wired/constructed/modified well in advance.That would require coordination of some sort, by the owners of the buildings and the security personnel at some level on all three buildings. That would suggest that the "plan" so to speak, was hatched to do so, also well in advance. Mr. Sliverstein didn't own WTC7 for very long, and he specifically insured it to cover catastrophic things like bombs/planes flying into it, etc...so..I can speculate, because I wasn't privy to the actual criminal process that took place, that he knew about the "plan" well ahead of time, bought and insured WTC7 accordingly, and took part in the criminal enterprise popularly known today as "business". Whether or not he was actually an active participant in the conspiracy to bring down all three, in association with Georgey, and certainly Cheney, I do not know. I can easily surmise though that Mr. Sliverstein, at the very least, had advanced knowledge of the upcoming event. How he knew is debatable, but I can comfortably assume...he knew.
Who planted them? I don't know exactly Sparky. But since someone would have had to have had full access to the buildings on a previously unprecedented level, I can only conclude that the "folks in charge" would have had to have had at least some knowledge of the upcoming event. The common, lower tier folks probably had no idea what they were actually doing. Security systems, in place at the time, would had to have been disabled. I find it very convenient that Georgey's brother Marvin, just happened to be head of security of those buildings at the time. I would speculate that during this time is when the buildings were "modified", but I cannot be sure, I can only assume, based on the facts.
I am not a demolition expert Sparky, however everything I've researched indicates that a demolition of that magnitude, would require signifigant planning. No Sparky...I don't need to be a demolition expert to conclude that the process would take signifigant time.
The "two weekends" prior thing might have only been a small phase of the production. Perhaps the "final checks", placement of the electronics required, who knows? Fact is the buildings were powered down, security systems offline, "maintenance" people running in and out all during the time. Anything prior to that could have been done over a period of time, perhaps incrementally. Again..who knows? Marvin, George, and the Dick ain't talkin'.
NORAD changed it's story three times. Seems to me the truth would only require one version. I do appreciate ther comparison though. Not bad for a clown.

 

Wow...pretty funny there Sparky. I just noticed. Somebody wouldn't do something because it is illegal?!? Is that right? Well that's a helluva premise. LOL. I know that you realize that things are compartmentalized on a "need to know" basis. You do realize that thermite can be "painted" onto a surface, don't you? If not..now you know. Miantenance workers coulda been "performing maintenance" without ever knowing what they were painting on. Perhaps you can see the logic in painting thermite onto a steel structure that will accelerate exponentially it's demise. Perhaps not. Either way..no matter. You wouldn't admit anything regardless so the point is moot I guess. How would they find any group? Pllllleeeeeeease. I would guee the same way they get people in the military to fire upon children, women...bomb them on video and laugh. The military does that kind of thing you know. Don't mean to spoil your blinded perception of reality.
Regardless...."Thermite" dust was found all over Manhattan that day and subsequent days. Samples of the dust were collected and tested by independent labs. (labS...Plural). Themite dust doesn't occur naturally Sparky. Unexploded/unburned flakes were found and also tested. I guess Thermite dust being all over Manhattan is not of much consequence to you, but to folks the world round, it means quite a bit.

 

You mean I was really supposed to respond to that tired old 'Pull' quote. I figured it was just a smart ass reply to my smart ass reply. That quote, in my eyes, is just more shoving square pegs into round holes to prove your conspiracy theory...or as you like to call it The Truth. But, I am sure it is Gospel to you and a way for you to expand the thread beyond your initial misleading link to lead us all to the Promised Land.

 

So what would your interpretation of Mr. Sliverstein's "pull it" reference in the clip? Maybe he was simply referring to his love life? I know you don't respond to religions, or at least not since the last time you responded to a religion (above), but I'm not following the square pegs reference. Nothing of substance there. Care to respond again to a religion?

 

Sorry, but I am not willing to make the stretch that the firefighters blew up WTC7.

 

No,no,no!! Don't do a Davey. I never said the firefighters blew up anything. All done remotely, just as the planes were flown remotely, and the third plane (that was meant for WTC7), well, let's just say it didn't go to it's original target..that is WTC7. Hence the reason for Sliverstein scrambling to try and get 7 taken down.
Then it just fell. Problem solved. You dodge, substitute my words with yours rather well. I see why you are on the team. I just need to think of a name for you. Disinfo Inc?? Nah...that's probably already taken. The Three infiltrators. NAH. I'll come up with something accurate and amusing.

In short. You're not willing to engage in anything that sheds light the truth. Misguide, substitute words and say they're mine, ridicule, spread disinformation any way you can....THAT ...you ARE willing to do.

 

That wasn't the question. Question was..What did Mr. Sliverstein mean when he said to "pull' the buildings?? A direct answer would be nice.

 

If you are going to stoop to making ridiculous theories like the maintenance men working in the WTC were unknowingly painting thermite on structural steel beams of the buildings then I must respond in kind. Regarding the thermite found at the scene, did you know that Mark Furman had an office in the WTC at the time?

 

You'd have to ask him to be sure. But, I interpret that quote in that he thought it was best to stop efforts to save the building, evacuate the area where the building might collapse and not risk any more lives and that they (the firemen) decided to do that.

One thing I do not believe is that he was using some demolition term dating back to the days when people pulled buildings down with cables and they (the firemen) decided to do that.