Greetings to All:

All of the evidence points directly to insider terrorists taking down WTC-7 by Controlled Demolition on 9/11. WTC-7 was designed and built using Compartmentalization of all supporting columns and beams separated by solid concrete slabs horizontally and curtain walls vertically. A building fire has never destroyed a steel-framed skyscraper in US history before or after 9/11 and WTC-1, WTC-2 and WTC-7 were owned by Larry “Pull It” Silverstein. Many fail to realize the World Trade Center Towers had never been in private hands prior to the summer of 2001, when Mr. Silverstein received possession from the New York Port Authority.

Verify references here >> http://cooperativeresearch.org/entity.jsp?...rry_silverstein

WTC 7 Collapse >> http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/WTC7_Collapse.mpg

Use your curser to hold the round scrollbar and move WTC-7 up and down repeatedly. The roof section and the center of the building collapse first, then the two sides plummet at ‘free fall’ velocity like any successful controlled demolition. Before looking at the details of how WTC-7 was built using Compartmentalization of all the steel supports, we need to take a look at the massive frame itself.



All of the WTC-7 steel columns, beams, girders and bar joists were bolted down and welded together into a single unit creating literally hundreds of connections that must be severed to cause the catastrophic failure seen from the aftermath of the attack.



The melting point of WTC-7 structural steel is 1535 degrees Celsius or 2795 degrees Fahrenheit [ http://911research.wtc7.net/talks/towers/t..._pre050712.html ]. The first problem with the ‘Fire Caused The Collapse’ theory is that building fires burn between 800 and 1000 degrees Fahrenheit [ http://www.schwabcorp.com/faqs.htm#fire_safe ], or about one third the required temperature to melt structural steel. The second problem is that building fires typically burn for only 20 minutes in any given area, because the fuel is depleted and the fire moves in the direction of a fresh source. The third problem is that all supporting columns were coated with 3-hour ‘spray-on’ fireproofing insulation, which is nine times more protection needed for the typical building fire; even if the required 2800 degree temperatures were reached.

http://911research.wtc7.net/mirrors/guardi...wtc/WTC_ch5.htm

The website above is perhaps the best on the internet for discovering the truth about the WTC-7 collapse. Moving down the page you arrive at Figure 5-3 showing the massive steel network and how certain areas (floors 1-7, 22-24) received extra support.



This information is very important, because remember WTC-7 collapsed in one single smooth motion, which means extra attention was paid to placing charges to sever these thicker and stronger steel supports. Try to imagine the amount of energy required to break all of these connections simultaneously and you begin to see the ‘fire theory’ is certainly a hoax. Below you come to Figure 5.3.3 and descriptions of how WTC-7 was built in many separate ‘compartments’ eliminating ‘fire’ as even a remote possibility for causing this collapse.



Even if two or five or ten fires were started, the fuel source within those particular compartments would be consumed LONG before the fireproofing safety countermeasures were compromised; and the fire had no way to pass through solid concrete slabs or curtain walls to invade the neighboring compartments. This does not even account for the fully functional sprinkler system that had to be turned off for these fires to spread any distance at all. Here is a four minute video well worth watching to gain a better perspective on how to weigh the evidence in this case:

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=475401188440074396

“Fire has never destroyed a steel building,” but three steel buildings owned by Larry Silverstein were ‘Pulled’ on 9/11. “Pull it” is controlled demolition lingo for wiring the building up and pulling it down. Mr. Silverstein was obviously lying about speaking to the New York Fire Chief, as the firemen only entered the scene on 9/11 after the attacks. Try to imagine the resources at the Fire Chief’s disposal upon arriving at WTC-7 and how that could not possibly include thermite charges for “Pulling” down the 47-story steel-framed skyscraper. Here we have a few small fires burning on a few floors, but the Fire Chief cannot figure any way to extinguish them. The firemen had no time to set all the required charges to “Pull” WTC-7 down in just a few hours and Mr. Silverstein just pointed the finger at himself about having prior knowledge of these 9/11 attacks. Now compare our images of WTC-7 and these “Pull It” videos:

Pulling It >> http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=6633218138868662267

Pulling It >> http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-2421326324041129616

Free Falling >> http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=5360235832416833797

How many of you really believe these trained demolition crews could set a few fires in the buildings to run away and have them fall into their own footprints just a few hours later? Many buildings have been demolished using controlled demolition looking exactly like WTC-7 on 9/11, but again, no steel-framed skyscraper has ever collapsed due to fire in the history of this planet. Twenty-first century demolition techniques include the use of Thermite shaped charges ( http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/april...eidentified.htm ) found all over WTC-1, WTC-2 and WTC-7.

http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/wtc_charges.html



The damage from a thermite shaped charge is exactly what you see above the fireman’s confused head. Note the size of the massive column and the molten iron residue that flowed inside and outside the column.



Thermite burns at a very high 2500 degrees Centigrade or 4532 degrees Fahrenheit, which represents the kind of temperature required to sever these massive red-iron columns. As a trained demolition supervisor tearing down buildings for many years, I know of nobody using 45-degree angle cuts to remove any red-iron part of any conventional demolition job. This particular column has molten iron residue, which is a ‘controlled demolition’ signature, as any torch cut would blow the molten iron off the column entirely away from the worker. There is no cut from any torch that would leave molten iron residue on the inside and outside of 'all' the sides of the column this way. The idea that any demolition worker would make a 45-degree cut is ridiculous, because of the danger to other workers and the waste of fuel.

The problem with the Official ‘Fire’ Cover Story is these 45-degree angle shaped-charge cuts appear everywhere . . .




. . . even in locations where demolition crew workers could not possibly reach. The common practice is to remove steel debris in an orderly ‘pick and remove’ manner, which eliminates the possibility of needlessly shifting weight and putting workers in danger. We play this dangerous game like a child plays ‘Pickup Sticks’ ( http://www.polandbymail.com/get_item_435992.htm ), as any skilled demolition foreman can look at the pile and tell you which debris to remove first. None of the demolition workers in the picture above climbed up any ladder forty or fifty feet in the air to make that 45-degree angel cut, because that was part of the original ‘controlled demolition’ of WTC-7. Note the clean 90-degree cuts labeled “Severed Column End” that you could have found scattered throughout this debris pile. However, also note these steel members are buried under the debris of the walls collapsing upon them ‘during’ the controlled demolition process. These cuts could not have been made by this demolition crew, because they still have mountains of debris to remove before even thinking about cutting any structural steel; which would only serve to shift weight in this very dangerous situation. The very best work on these WTC controlled demolition attacks is presented by Dr. Steven E. Jones (Brigham Young University) here:

http://www.libertypost.org/cgi-bin/readart.cgi?ArtNum=126128

Upon careful examination of all the evidence, I believe you will also conclude that WTC-7 was definitely brought down using Controlled Demolition techniques also found in WTC-1 and WTC-2. This evidence explains why we have reports on hundreds of ‘explosions’ taking place throughout the day.

http://youtube.com/watch?v=OkWTXz7tcn8

This is the only explanation that explains all the evidence in this WTC-7 Controlled Demolition Case.

Flight 93 Thread: http://z10.invisionfree.com/Loose_Change_F...showtopic=14794

Flight 77 Thread: http://z10.invisionfree.com/Loose_Change_F...showtopic=14796

GL,

Terral

I have worked with or for demolitionists for years and pull it was never part of any vocabulary. In order to demo those building you need people in the Twin Towers to be there for hours even months placing noticible demo charges in places that even a blind man would have seen. It has been scientifically proven that the WTC towers 1 and 2 werent just taken out by fire but also that fact that a 767 hitting the towers sprayed debree into the towers that removed the fire proofing from the columns. The force of the jets alone was like a sand blaster on those columns given that and that the plane took out the center column partially they were going to fall. The planes took out the tower!! And building 7 waas going to go from the damage and that it wasnt built like the other buildings. The term pull it as you so joyfully like to mention was that the owner knew that the tower were a lost cause and that he was telling people to pull the fire fighters being as that we lost so many of those brave souls in the first 2 world trade center collapses.

Attacking "pull-it" is your best debunk attempt?

Hmm...so a 1 second sand blast removed all that fire proofing...ya right.

MM

one second were you there did you time it building 7 wasnt like the other 2 towers have you ever even seen what building 7 looked like up close I have. The building was damaged the building was going to go everyone knew it well except you that is. Do you know how much time and man power it would take to put in that much blasting jell. Even then the supports would still of had to have been scrubbed. The building was damaged from the collapse of the 2 towers sone 5 feet away from it you know the other 2 "controlled explosions". I was inside those buildings before. The building 7 was a penthouse type building and dont you think that the government has better ways to remove data then to destroy the building. Damn thats like killing the patient to remove a tooth. Haven tou ever seen the bourne Identity.

If you're going to post your dogma adi2d30, at least write properly or hire someone that can.

There were a lot of people near WTC7 on 9/11.

Your impressions/observations are not in agreement with everyone else's.

Since the 9/11 WTC collapses were unique events, anyone claiming they 'knew' based strictly on eyeballing, was just blowing smoke out their ass.

You won't find a single firefighter quote saying they expected WTC7 to perform a total structure, high speed, symmetrical, level roofline, controlled demolition-style collapse!

Your rambling, incoherent post is virtually impossible to reply to.

I can only assume you 'smoked up' and thought you were writing something worth reading.

And members of the 9/11 Truth Movement are saying we have this torn up and totally destroyed body that sure looks like a case of murder but the experts are claiming the victim must have been killed walking into a door.

Because of the state of the body, we have no idea whether a tooth or teeth were removed prior to death, but that doesn't negate all the circumstantial evidence that argues walking into a door shouldn't have killed the victim.

MM

no one ever said that it was a controlled explsion even the interview with the fire chief that building was going down like it or not and not from some demolition. That building was smaller and was damaged from all the debree. You need to come up with actual proof not I heard it through the grapevine S^&*(. None of the firefighters in that building mentioned a demo or controlled explosion. And I am sure that the people there when building 7 went down were all trained in what a controlled explosion looks like or even what it takes to take a building that big down huh.

Danny Jowenko, an expert in controlled demolitions is in total disagreement with you.

http://www.pumpitout.com/audio/danny_jowenko_022207.mp3

MM

So Was he there did he see the actual explosion or just what people told him it was not a controlled demo I have 30 years demo experience.

Please enlighten us then. Were you there? Did you see the actual demolition of building 7?

(BTW, it's DEBRIS, not DEBREE...)

If you've done any homework at all (can you ? ) you'd know that Danny Jowenko was shocked when he discovered that it was WTC7 that he'd just categorically declared a CD. Nobody told him what building he was looking at when he made that declaration.

And if you really have 30 years of "demo experience," please tell us who you've been working for all these 30 years.

Thanks.

Ya sure you do... BS!!!!!

If you were a demo expert I'm sure you would have spoken up from the onset.

Just go smoke another one will ya!

MM

I talked to my roommate today, his entire family is firefighters and he has many friends of the family that are, as well. He said that to have a property owner such as Silverstein "pull" the firefighters out of the building is unheard of. The property owner doesn't have any say in what the firefighters orders are.

Not to mention people inside the building have reported hearing and seeing explosions going off.
http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/june2...07interview.htm

I fail to see what your getting at battlingmonkeys

So like you've got this bud who's part of a colony of firefighters and they say the property owner doesn't give instructions to the fire department. Duh. Silverstein never said he told them what to do. He indicated they consulted with him about their planned course of action with respect to fire fighting in WTC 7 and he agreed that it was the right thing to do. A big difference.

Regarding people inside the building hearing explosions, you make the statement but you don't characterize it? What about those statements?

MM

Besides all the evidence it wasn't a torch cut it appears the cuts are in the middle, and the ends snapped. If someone was to torch cut these wouldn't they start at one end and work across?

Hi Battling, Mirage, Elder and Adi:

First off, please allow me to thank Miragememories for taking the time to address Adi’s nonsensical ramblings. While Adi obviously has no building demolition experience, or even a grasp of the English language, my verified credentials for joining AE911Truth.org ( http://www.ae911truth.org/joinus.php = find Terral Lee Croft) includes decades of General Contractor and Demolition Supervisor experience of Adi’s claims. Every registered member from our AE911Truth Board is given a user name including his first land last name (mine = TerralCroft), because above all else we insist on testimony from credible and verifiable sources willing to put their names and reputations on the line. Even so, I am just one 911Truther here to call them like he sees them. I appreciate having Battling, Mirage and Elder here as my advocates to the “Controlled Demolition” Opening Post resembling Richard Gage’s homepage presentation ( http://www.ae911truth.org ) from our website. Mirage and Elder appear to need no assistance in dealing with Adi’s unsupported statements and bogus claims, so allow me to give comment on a good point made by Battling (Aug 31 2007, 06:18 PM) :

The inconsistencies in Larry Silverstein’s incriminating statements go far beyond the clear facts you are pointing out. This testimony is from an excerpt of my NYPD report ( http://www.divshare.com/download/720128-30a ). Quotes for my own words have been omitted for clarity. Connections to then Mayor Giuliani and Dick Cheney are included to allow inspection of the larger picture:

-----------------

You are probably aware of Larry Silverstein’s “Pull it” statements better than this guy from Florida.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u0scE7bQWdk

Mr. Silverstein’s statements are far more incriminating that many realize:

1. The pictures of WTC-7 falling at almost ‘freefall speed’ . . .

http://911research.wtc7.net/mirrors/guardi...wtc/WTC_ch5.htm



. . . do not even show evidence of fire in the unbroken windows. Remember our massive columns and beams are located very near these windows and require 2,800 degrees to begin melting. The entire WTC-7 building has sprinklers installed and fire alarms that never went off, but for some reason ‘pulling it’ made more sense than putting out the fire.



Note the 'kink' created in the top of the collapsing structure taken down by 'controlled demolition.'

2. Setting these shaped charges all over WTC-7, to compromise all the compartmentalized safeguards, requires weeks or even months by a highly skilled demolition crew. There is simply no way that Mr. Silverstein decides to ‘pull it’ and the entire 47 stories comes tumbling down into its own footprint without careful planning and execution of that plan.

3. If the ‘decision’ was made to ‘pull it,’ then why is Mr. Silverstein seeking a claim for a ‘fire’ related catastrophe?

4. The ‘time’ required to set all of these charges means Mr. Silverstein had prior knowledge of the 9/11 attacks, which was also knowledge held by then Mayor Giuliani.

What many Americans do not know is that Mayor Giuliani was heading up the second of five “Anti-Terror” Exercises leading up to 9/11.

http://www.infowars.com/print/Sept11/wargames_cover.htm

Mayor Giuliani’s responsibility was to carry out the provisions of “Biowarfare Exercise Tripod 2”, which included FEMA setting up emergency operations in New York City for themselves, the City of New York and the Justice Department. FEMA showed up the day before 9/11 to set up that emergency command center on the 23rd floor of WTC-7 in Giuliani’s 15-million dollar upgraded Emergency Command Bunker. However, Mayor Giuliani also tipped his hand about foreknowledge of the 9/11 attacks by diverting the FEMA people to set up operations at Pier 29 instead. Giuliani got his wires crossed and forgot that he was supposed to send FEMA to Pier 29 ‘after’ the Twin Towers were attacked and not on the day prior to 9/11. Giuliani told Peter Jennings, “We were operating out of there when we were told that the World Trade Center was gonna collapse,” but that would have been impossible on 9/10! These five anti-terrorist warfare exercises included ‘live-fly’ exercises using up to 22 hi-jacked aircraft under the direction of Vice-president Dick Cheney . . .

(End of NYPD Report excerpt)
----------------------

Larry Silverstein was lying about talking to the NYFD Fire Chief on the phone during his famous “Pull it!” dialogue with the supervisor of the Demolition Crew responsible for the Controlled Demolition of all these WTC skyscrapers. No city Fire Chief has access to the kinds of charges required to ‘pull’ any skyscraper down in a single day. The number of charges required for this massive task took months of planning and execution of that plan. The CD expert was on the other end of the phone call receiving his instructions to “Pull it!,” which initiated the final series of explosions that brought WTC-7 down in 6.5 seconds.

Rudy Giuliani also incriminated himself by sending FEMA to Pier 29 on September 10th, 2001 or the day ‘before’ the 9/11 attacks. He was supposed to empty the WTC-7 building, where his 15-million dollar command center was located, but inadvertently tipped his hand by diverting the FEMA heads to the alternate location long before the Twin Towers were attacked. Many Americans fail to realize five anti-terrorist military and non-military exercises were being carried out on 9/11 right under our very noses ( http://www.cassiopaea.org/cass/boeing.htm = Addendum at bottom of page), which gave the real insider terrorists up to 22 Jetliners (some remote controlled) for accomplishing their “Inside Job” plan.

Thank you for providing support to the Opening Post video ( http://youtube.com/watch?v=OkWTXz7tcn8 ) placing a large number of explosions on the WTC scene ‘before’ and ‘during’ the Controlled Demolition of these three WTC skyscrapers. You are making the point of why the NYPD and NYFD refuse to support Rudy Giuliani who allowed all of these brave men to run into burning buildings HE KNEW (along with Larry Silverstein and all of their evil cohorts) were all wired for demolition. Now perhaps some among the Loose Change membership understand why this 911Truther writes on these topics with such conviction. "Knowing" The 911Truth about all of these related tragedies makes my blood boil over at the thought of these evil men murdering innocent Americans and getting away with it. How many more Americans will die by the hands of these same evil men continuing to work within our own government to bring in their enslaving New World Order? Every American should be working together in making sure their evil plans are never realized.

Terral

Can you explain to me how the collapse of WTC 7 differs from a controlled demolition?

In your line of work, do you throw rubble into one side of the building and then hope an office fire breaks out?

Does that make buildings fall straight down?

If so, why does anyone hire a controlled demolition company, when they could just throw rubble at one side of the building.

That would save money.

I'm glad to help where ever I can Terral.

It can get very lonely here when the skeptics who aren't interested in honest discussion start swarming.

I suspect as 9/11/07 approaches, the Loose Change Forum will face increasing propaganda attacks from those who wish to maintain the Big Lie about 9/11.

I commend you on your great work Terral!

MM

Hi MM:

Thank you for writing.

Over ninety percent of the ‘skeptics’ have simply been deceived by the massive “Loyal Bushie” Propaganda and Disinformation Media Machine into believing “what is false,” until now that has become their personal ‘opinion.’ You and I are forced into presenting ‘The 911Truth’ day by day and post by post, until eventually we are in the majority. :0) Every post represents a new challenge to create a better presentation for the next guy coming along. We are like the farmer sowing in hope of a great harvest, so please keep up the good work and do everything to remain encouraged and fruitful.

There are many ways to view these challenges, but only a few of them are productive. I treat this deliberation process like Republicans and Democrats battling over the 20 percent (higher this round) undecided vote. Do the Republicans try to convert Blue Dog Democrats to their ranks? :0) No sir. We are not here to convince our debating adversaries of anything, but the ‘unbiased’ third party reader standing in the undecided position. Many Americans are too afraid and much too insecure to take a stand against the Official Bushie Administration Cover Stories and for more reasons that we can count on this thread. We are also dealing with a very wide spectrum of people with backgrounds and prejudices keeping them far beyond our own sphere of influence. The idea is to help as many people around you as possible, so some of them can reach farther in the darkness and save as many as possible from their own delusions and misconceptions about what really happened on 9/11. We sow seeds and oftentimes another must come along and water, until eventually our readers experience the kind of growth that moves mountains. Some people characterize my writing as too forceful and arrogant, while others require that kind of encouragement and will stand for nothing less. My position is that ‘knowledge makes arrogant’ (1Corinthians 8:1), as an axiom and divine principle, because knowing anything eliminates all of the other possibilities. That means one man of knowledge is worth a thousand men of faith, and the man of wisdom is a thousand times greater than he. ;0)

Thank you very much, MM. One can easily tell that you are one of the good guys wearing the white hat around here. Please call if I can be of any service on any of these 911Truth topics.

Terral

If this type of CD would have taken so much careful planning and months of prepping, why is it so many "truthers" say that the reports of closures and power being down just two weeks prior are proof that the building was being wired? I'm no expert and will never claim I am, I'm just asking an honest question as to why all the "truth" stories seem to contradict each other in so many ways. I know its cliche, but how could these buildings be wired for CD and never be noticed? Please go into more depth Terral as to what kind of time frame would be needed for such a careful operation. If the buildings were gonna come down from CD, why spend so much effort making sure they ended in a neat pile when it seems they could have easily caused a very convincing "colllapse" by making the buildings fall on their sides or in some other fashion than a tidy little pile. Again, I'm no expert, just looking for good discussion and answers.

Regards,
HMK

The building was not wired damn and all these attacks on people are not the way to go. The building was going to fall from the damage and not aliens or anything else. And I want proof not that the building fell straight down or anything like that. I want actual proof and i didnt speek up right away because I love to see the stupid fight over things that the Enquirer would print about the WTC7 being wired. Damn stop with the idiacy and look to the skies because the mothership is coming.

Because the truthers are a bunch of loons and go from one conspiracy idea to the next. Its mud slingin to see what sticks.

Hi Iceman:

Your questions and concerns are those from an authentic and concerned LC member in search of ‘The 911Truth.”

You are voicing concern in areas where I rarely venture on a new site, until the “Controlled Demolition” consensus is much higher than we have here on the Loose Change Board. This place is loaded down with disinformation cronies going out to deceive and many simply deceived without knowing the difference either way. You can imagine that our limited membership and exclusion of the public from our deliberations at http://www.ae911truth.org give us a much cleaner and uncompromising environment for these kinds of in-depth explanations. The bad guys cannot even open their mouths for very long on our Board, because they will receive a Petition Of Removal with evidence and charges finding them on the outside looking in faster than you can say spit! :0) However, the opposite side of the coin reveals very little opportunity to write rebuttals to “Loyal Bushie” Disinformation and Propaganda, which is one reason you are looking at me in the first place. :0) You must give me better information on reported closures and power outages in the WTC area, before these events can be connected to these three Silverstein-owned skyscrapers. George Bush’s brother (Marvin P. Bush) was on the board of directors for “Securacom” (now Stratesec) based in Sterling, Virginia with a “completion contract” to handle security at the World Trade Center.

http://www.commondreams.org/views03/0204-06.htm

The wiring of the WTC skyscrapers required considerable amounts of accessibility, planning, time, patience and stealth. Members of the Israeli Demolition Team ( http://portland.indymedia.org/en/2006/05/339398.shtml , http://www.thornwalker.com/ditch/towers_5.htm ) were hidden in plain sight as WTC Maintenance, Security and Construction personnel (fireproofing the buildings). Some parts of the operation took place during the day with most of the activity happening at night. When Larry Silverstein was having his supposed chit-chat with the “Fire Department Commander” ( http://vestigialconscience.com/PullIt.mp3 ), then he was really talking to the Demo Supervisor heading the 91-man Demolition crew. :0) If you think things through very carefully, then no FDNY Fire Department Commander showed up on 9/11 with the tools to “Pull it!,” so WTC-7 could fall into its own footprint in 6.6 seconds. The common denominator in all three WTC skyscraper cases is none other than Larry Silverstein who just took possession of the Twin Towers that same summer.

http://cooperativeresearch.org/entity.jsp?...rry_silverstein

Then Mayor Rudy Giuliani tipped his “9/11 Foreknowledge” hand also by sending FEMA to Pier 29 to set up the emergency command center for the Tripod2 antiterrorism exercises on the day ‘before’ 9/11. FEMA was supposed to set up the command center for themselves, the Justice Department and New York City part of Tripod2 ( http://www.fromthewilderness.com/free/ww3/...ripod_fema.html ), but on the 23rd floor of WTC-7. That was the location of Giuliani’s famous 15 million dollar “Emergency Command Center” ( http://911research.wtc7.net/talks/wtc/commandcenter.html ). Giuliani was supposed to evacuate WTC-7 on 9/11 only ‘after’ the Twin Towers were attacked, but he slipped up ( http://www.infowars.com/articles/sept11/no...ver_for_911.htm ) and gave the FEMA people the alternate “Pier 29” location instead. MANY people from our Federal and State governments, including members of the Bushie Administration AND our ‘do-nothing’ Congress, had full knowledge of the these attacks LONG before 9/11. That is why you cannot get Congress to open their eyes even today some six years later, because they already know more than you do. :0) If they blow the whistle now, then their complicity in the 9/11 attacks will become common knowledge to everyone and their heads will be on the chopping block right along with Senor Bushie, Cheney, Ashcroft, Silverstein, Giuliani, the Joint-chiefs, NORAD and everybody else. This is why the Congress has provided NO “Congressional Oversight” of this out-of-control El Presidente Senor Bushie Administration from the very beginning! This is why the ‘do-nothing’ Congress has the lowest approval rating in history and is currently just as ‘detached’ from We The People as the out-of-control crumbling Bushie Administration.

The reason is because there are so many Loyal Bushie ‘disinformation artists’ circulating their propaganda everywhere 24 hours every day. You are living within the period where the same ‘inside job’ terrorists that really carried out 9/11 are still very much in control of the White House AND Capitol Hill. Therefore, when someone like Terral comes along presenting “The 911Truth,” then every word appears foreign, very strange out completely ‘out there.’ :0) If I sat you down and explained the complicated facets of the ‘whole story,’ then you would think me out of my cotton picking mind about one quarter of the way through. That is why I concentrate on the Basic 911Truth 101 Topics like

Flight 93 Never Crashed Near Shanksville >> http://z10.invisionfree.com/Loose_Change_F...showtopic=14794

Flight 77 Never Crashed Near The Pentagon >> http://z10.invisionfree.com/Loose_Change_F...showtopic=14796

WTC-7 Collapsed Due To Controlled Demolition >> http://z10.invisionfree.com/Loose_Change_F...showtopic=14798

Let’s first separate fact from fiction by comparing the real ‘evidence’ to the conclusions of the Official Bushie Administration Cover Stories. THEN when we have a consensus of opinion from the membership, THEN we can dive headlong into the deeper aspects like “What happened to the passengers of Flight 77 that never hit the Pentagon?” If you are still arguing about a 100-ton Jetliner creating a tiny 20-feet diameter hole in the outer E-Ring wall, then Iceman is not ready for the ‘rest of the story.’

An accurate answer requires data that is simply not at my disposal. The demo supervisor who originally looked at the blueprints likely had no idea of the timeframe either, because of the stealth aspect and secrecy involved. The man running this crew was using custom made Thermate Shaped Charges never used by demo companies, because they are illegal and the basic components untraceable. Any demo supervisor depends heavily upon his experience and knowledge of the conditions divided by the variables involved. Right away the bad guys handed him a set of variables that he had no experience controlling, which worked directly against the concept of a “Controlled Demolition.” That means the demo leader heading this crew was ‘compensating’ as he went along using safeguards from his experience to counter the challenges. The reason these people will get caught is because of the variables of “Thermate,” the accumulated “Molten Metal” pools and microscopic evidence that were ‘beyond’ the demo supervisor’s abilities to predict and control. The tools that will catch the bad guys are ‘Facial Reorganization Technology’ and the creation of twin databases matching the faces WTC uniformed personnel (maintenance, security and construction / fireproofing), marching around in the months ‘before’ the attacks, to records of trained demolition crew personnel. All you need is one match to follow that lead into the den of bad guys who really carried out these 9/11 attacks. If our government were really interested in catching the bad guys (not), they would have done that long ago. Our problem is that the inside job demo crew was working for our government in the first place. :0)

This is where the demo crew supervisor is guilty of following his long list of safety measures and countermeasures. The shadow government cronies responsible for planning these attacks had the ‘objective’ of taking down the WTC skyscrapers, which obviously could NOT be carried out by a USA company. However, locating the right crew for the job meant also transferring elements of the decision making process to the demo specialist who again is leaning heavily upon his own experience. How many demo supervisors are in the position of making a CD job look like anything else? :0) The man who headed up this crew did exactly what his employers hired him to do with expertise and precision and just like any other CD job. His 90-man crew placed the illegal Thermate and other explosive charges, according to his plan, until Larry Silverstein gave the order to “Pull It!” and the rest is 911 (Help!) history . . . At some point the “Great Delusion” is perpetuated by the same men who ‘hired’ the demo crew by carefully micromanaging the content of their “Official Bushie Administration / DoD Cover Stories.” Look at the Shanksville case (link above) to realize there was NEVER any 100-ton Jetliner in that empty field! Who needs a great cover story, when the deluded public will believe just about anything? :0) The Federal Reserve System is owned by a group of international bankers that has been siphoning off American wealth for almost a hundred years. Paul Warburg started the illegal ‘central bank’ back in 1913, after a failed attempt in 1910 ( http://reactor-core.org/none-dare.html = read every word of this Gary Allen book). He told our Senate:

http://quotes.liberty-tree.ca/quote/james_warburg_quote_bc08

9/11 was planned and carried out by the same evil men who have been siphoning off our wealth all this time, as they have crippled our economy today by raising their interest rates in 17 straight sessions. The point is that Americans are so gullible and naïve that they allow such things as “Lobbyists” to buy off our Congress and the FED bankers to lend us back our own money for the out-of-control National Debt, that the idea of WE The People even beginning to ‘wake the hell up’ is almost nil! The same insider 9/11 terrorists who really are responsible for the attacks are lying to you every night on the National News, as their New World Order grows wings to fly right before your eyes. Senor Bushie has you looking over in Iraq for the Bearded Jihadist Radical Terrorists, when he was behind 9/11 all along. :0) Our children are over there dying FOR NOTHING, so his “Loyal Bushie” Contractor buddies can continue raking in billions and billions of tax payer money from ‘no contest / no bid’ contracts. There have been no new 9/11-like attacks here in the USA, because elements of our government have been the bad guys all along. The 9/11 ‘conquest’ attacks happened, AND the one on the horizon will happen out West, because We The People are not ‘consenting’ quickly enough; according to their New World Order agenda . . .

GL,

Terral

Silverstein didn't "own" WTC1+2. Silverstein Properties leased them.

Securacom's (partial) contract for WTC security ended in 1998. Marvin Bush stopped even being a director of Securacom in June 2000.

But never mind fiddly old facts eh, Terral? Keep on postin' them long ol' posts.

p.s. you might make fewer gross errors if your research ventured beyond 9/11 CT sites.

Just curious, if 9/11 was a Mossad operation, does that mean Osama is a Mossad agent, and all the Arab press is controled by Jews?

30 years demolition experience but cant spell debris? What were you, the ball?

That is true. 70 some year old Larry Silverstein acquired the lease to the complex 2 months before the attack even though he had own WTC7 for over 3 decades.

We should also make note that the lease Silverstein was "rewarded" with was a 99year lease to a man in his 70's. :blink:

Why the boggle-eyes?

The lease was to a company. Are you suggesting it should have been limited to the life-expectancy of the founder of the company? That would be an insane way to conduct a business.

Hi Gwb:

You were presented tons of evidence to support my “Controlled Demolition” Case and this is all you got? :0) Okie . . .

The full story is provided in the link ( http://cooperativeresearch.org/entity.jsp?...rry_silverstein ) of the Twin Towers changing hands, which includes the lease agreement you are talking about. My statement above is based upon this vital information taken directly from the story:

This ‘changed hands’ lingo is based upon the transferal of ‘rights’ to ‘insure’ the same buildings part of this 9/11 Controlled Demolition attack.

Larry Silverstein did NOT enter into this agreement AND over-insure the Twin Towers to allow someone else rights to collect on his investment. These ‘rights’ were transferred in the summer of 2001 and at the same time that a demolition specialist was being selected to bring the Twin Towers down! :0) Go ahead and try to split hairs, as if Larry “Pull It!” Silverstein is NOT the common denominator in all three WTC skyscraper “Controlled Demolition” attacks. Pretend that I did not provide this same link (my very first link in the OP) to all the information on the “the only time the WTC has ever changed hands since it was opened in 1973.”

Old facts?! :0) Did you bother to ‘quote >>’ one word of my commentary connecting Marvin Bush to anything? No sir. Why not? The reason is that I offered NOTHING along those lines at all. The link ( http://www.commondreams.org/views03/0204-06.htm ) was provided and the Bush-Link was made between the Bushie Administration and “a ‘completion contract’ to handle some of the security at the World Trade Center ``up to the day the buildings fell down." The date on the “Bush-Linked Company” Article is February 4, 2003, which is five and three years after the dates you describe above. The article clearly says “Marvin P. Bush, the president's youngest brother, was a director at Stratesec from 1993 to fiscal year 2000.” Do you really think we are blind?? The fact remains that former directors have much more influence over potential security breaches than the typical John Q. Citizen walking the streets and far more than any Bearded Jihadist Radicals. :0)

In case you are completely unaware (and you seem to be), Senor Bushie is a ‘good ole boy’ politician often giving key positions to Loyal Bushie Texans. He picks up the phone and cuts miles of red tape by having ‘relationships’ with key players. Some of our readers may have no idea that Senor Bushie even had a younger brother, or that he was the director of any Security Company with connections to WTC security. My intention was to show a security ‘connection’ between the Bushie Administration, the Department of Defense (including US Army) and the General Services Administration (in line for noncompetitive contracts). This entire Security Entity was originally capitalized by “the Kuwait-American Corporation, a private investment firm D.C.”. Our 911Truth investigators are simply being given related facts to help in the process of drawing ‘informed’ 911Truth conclusions. Anyone wishing to follow the Bushie-Security-Patriot Act trail can begin here:

http://www.commondreams.org/views02/1127-07.htm

Terral’s Commentary >> None. Draw your own conclusions. I have bigger fish to fry. :0)

Please forgive, but does Gwb (obviously not you real name) believe that one person carried out the 9/11 attacks all alone? I doubt it. Therefore, Gwb must have an explanation for how and why ‘many’ principals planned and carried out these 9/11 attacks. Right or wrong? Any explanation you have is also a ‘conspiracy theory’ based on whatever you consider credible ‘evidence.’ Trying to demonize 911Truthers with your CT rhetoric only points to Gwb being the complete fool. Even the Official Bushie Administration Cover Story says ‘many’ Bearded Jihadist Radicals planned and carried out these attacks, which places the government in the CT business just as much as anyone else. The difference is that my 911Truth presentations are filled with claims and conclusions based upon photographic, video and eyewitness ‘evidence’ to support my explanations. Do you have a “Building Fire” explanation for how three steel-framed skyscrapers collapsed into their own footprint on the same day just hours apart? Do you have the combined collaboration of respected architects and engineers ( http://www.ae911truth.org ) supporting your explanations? :0) No. The fact is that our 911Truth investigators judging all parties in this debate require MUCH more convincing than your work is prepared to offer. I greatly appreciate having your point of view and will consider editing my comments to strengthen my Controlled Demolition Presentation.

GL in the 911Truth debates,

Terral

Please tell us, what vocabulary is used to communicate the meaning associated with initiating a controlled demolition.

Is there more than one phrase used to describe the initiation of a controlled demolition,
or is there only one phrase that all the industry experts have agreed upon at the exclusion of all others.

Please tell us, what words do the "demolitionists" use?

What is that supposed to mean? People enter into long term leases all the time and age is not a major factor in the decision making process. Ability to follow the terms of the lease are.

He was not rewarded with the lease. He won the lease in some sort of a competitive bidding process.

BTW adi2d30,

This is the one question all the "internet demolition experts" never answer.

Please tell us, what vocabulary is used to communicate the meaning associated with initiating a controlled demolition?

Hi nrmis: (apologies to Slamin) my bad :0)

Please allow me to use this opportunity to make a few requests:

Hopefully your criticisms are directed at adi2d30 and not Terral the Thread Starter of this “Wtc-7 Collapsed Due To Controlled Demolition” Debate. Please begin opening your posts with a brief salutation like you see above, so everyone can recognize the appropriate party being addressed. Then take moment to ‘quote >>’ from the comments of the party you are addressing, so your statements are given context to something already stated in this debate. Anyone submitting an application to join AE911Truth.org is subjected to a lengthy verification process that requires everyone to lay out a laundry list of information. We provide names, addresses and phone numbers, so all of our credentials can be verified as completely authentic. We have no nrmis’ or Gwb’s (no offense intended), because every registered AE member is assigned a user name that includes their first and last name combined. Everyone knows exactly who is saying what and about whom in all of our deliberations where all reputations are put on the line. If you head over to http://www.ae911truth.org/joinus.php and search for my name (Terral), then you will find my first and last name, place of residence and description of my qualifications and experience. Therefore, what you see is what you get from me. :0) I am proud to represent 911Truth.org and AE911Truth.org on Boards like PilotsForTruth.org and here at this fine Loose Change Board, because we need more expert testimony from dedicated 911Truthers on all of these related topics to separate fact from fiction and myth.

GL in the 911Truth debates,

Terral

Hi Honway:

Controlled Demolition Supervisors regularly ‘pull’ buildings in the conversations back and forth between all the principles involved.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FNEoiOP76QQ

You are making reference to Larry “Pull It” Silverstein’s famous remarks included in the video above. “Pull It” is not the common phrase, but this statement proved he was talking to people USING THAT 'pull' TERM. Suppose you contracted me to demolish your building using Controlled Demolition. We will go over your blueprints and subsequent modifications from the original drawings. Many people fail to realize that we use three sets of drawings in constructing these massive structures. The architect draws pretty pictures, but the engineer is hired to make everything work. Therefore, the engineer's drawings take priority over anything drawn by the architect in all cases. However, a third party steel manufacturer (or many of them) is always involved and their engineers have the final say in most every case. This means the General Contractor is placed in the position of sending a constant flow of change orders to the architect, which means the actual building is different from his pretty pictures. :0) Therefore, anything we discuss about your building demolition job is contingent upon our actual ‘on site’ findings made later down the road. Eventually the day will come when your building is ‘pulled.’ Our conversations between our original meeting and that day will include comments about the day we ‘pull’ your building. Larry Silverstein is obviously not any kind of Controlled Demolition man, but he errantly and foolishly included his own concocted “Pull It” lingo in his comments about the day WTC-7 was intentionally ‘pulled’ IMHO.

There is NO WAY that any Fire Department Commander was called on 9/11 to show up on the WTC-7 scene with the tools to ‘Pull’ anything. Larry Silverstein was actually speaking to the Controlled Demolition Supervisor making ready to make the final connection of the entire time-sequenced network. This was like a 90-man team working for months placing a million dominos in various patterns, until every single component part was in the right place. The Demo Supervisor held the final domino in his hand and received confirmation to activate the final connection and to “Pull” the switch. Larry Silverstein incriminated himself with the first mention of “Pull Anything,” because that simple slip proved he had been having ongoing 'pull' conversations that MUST have been taking place for an extended amount of time. He offered the phase casually, because he had done so with the Demo Supervisor and his crew chiefs many times previously. The more Mr. Silverstein attempts to hide his WTC “Inside Job” involvement, the deeper he sinks into the quicksand of his own invention and demise.

We should base our conclusions on the “Controlled Demolition” evidence ( http://www.ae911truth.org ) more than Larry Silverstein’s ‘slip’ of the tongue . . .

GL,

Terral

Hi Terral

That was not my post you are quoting - though it did make me chuckle.

SHUT UP

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vqwFXQ11_i0

I would like to see gwb to reply now hehe

Terral you are awesome in your presentation. Really I mean it best presentation so far about the wtc7. There are even some aspects I have never heard before about wtc7.

Thx for your input and wish you guys luck at 911truth.org and ae911truth.org

I repeat -

Silverstein didn't "own" WTC1+2. Silverstein Properties leased them.

Securacom's (partial) contract for WTC security ended in 1998. Marvin Bush stopped even being a director of Securacom in June 2000.

But never mind fiddly old facts eh, Terral? Keep on postin' them long ol' posts.

Would you like to address those errors you made or will you simply pretend they didn't happen?

Your MO, Terral, seems to be to dance around and ignore every single debunking that comes your way. Are you a Government disinfo agent intent on making the 9/11 truth movement look stupid? If so, you're doing an excellent job.

Hi Gwb:

Repeat yourself a thousand times if that makes Gwb happy. The reasons for my choice of terms have been explained to my complete satisfaction. We are allowed to disagree you know. :0) Does Larry Silverstein represent the common denominator in all three WTC skyscraper collapses? Yes! Does the cited article clearly titled in bold print say:

http://cooperativeresearch.org/entity.jsp?...rry_silverstein

Yes again! Does the article say, “This is the only time the WTC has ever changed hands since it was opened in 1973.” Yes! So what is your cotton picking problem?? The entire article is available for anyone to read about the details of the agreement that entitled Larry Silverstein to make all of this money from over-insuring the Twin Towers. Forget about the fact that after the summer of 2001 your Larry Silverstein had the keys to all the offices, security stations, bathrooms, maintenance rooms, storage rooms, etc. in WTC-1, WTC-2, and WTC-7, because the New York Port Authority was then out of the picture. Larry Silverstein had the authority after the summer of 2001 to allow anyone into these three skyscrapers and to install any security override protocols he pleased. He could tell the security department “A crew of fireproofing specialists are coming in to upgrade the buildings, because of new insurance requirements.,” and the bad guys are off to the races. The fact is that Larry Silverstein had to make these kinds of arrangements, so the 91-man demolition team could complete the job in time for 9/11. BTW, you seem far too concerned about defending Larry “Pull It” Silverstein for some mysterious reason. Would you care to elaborate on that? When he stands before God for taking an active role in these hideous crimes against We The People, then I hope you are standing at his side with the same willingness to lead his defense AND to share in his fate. :0)

Do you have problems with my “WTC-7 Controlled Demolition” Thesis, Claims, Evidence and Conclusions from the Opening Post, or any of my attempts to defend them? Are you standing with the Larry Silverstein “Building Fire Did It” Popular Mechanic cronies?? If so, then please head over to my rebuttal to their disinformation ‘piece’ ( http://z10.invisionfree.com/Loose_Change_F...showtopic=15311 ) and show us what you got. Larry Silverstein has MANY accomplices working to cover his tracks and every single one will be exposed in that day . . .

GL,

Terral

Then I suggest you devote as much effort towards starting legal proceedings against him as you do to talking tosh on a CT forum.

Damage and fire are *also* a common factor in all 3 collapses. Perhaps you missed that.

Anyway, you made some factual errors and ignored the responses that followed. Perhaps you should check out the accuracy of the countless CT sources you quote (endlessly) before posting them?

p.s. did you ever respond to those points made to you about the grab supposedly lifting "molten steel" (heh). I notice you've used the same photo in another post.

Hi Gwb:

Thank you for writing.

Please reserve your suggestions for those truly seeking them. The fact is that if I spend 2 hours writing a lengthy presentation to you, then no matter how much factual data is included, Gwb can offer back a reply in about 2 minutes. Right? Of course.

If you say so . . .

Nothing like that appears in your recent post. Sorry.

Yes. A piece of severed column fell into a molten metal pool and was inadvertently lifted with some building debris:



The left end of the steel column piece is lying sideways at about eight o’clock and extending through the molten metal and the building debris. You can see the jaw-ends very clearly grasping ‘the debris,’ but they are not in contact with the molten metal mass on the far side at all. The hotter ‘yellow’ metal fell off, but the cooler red metal clung to the steel column caught in the debris. Surely you realize that 2800 degree molten iron has a very large temperature range between the solid and liquid states. This molten metal is obviously nearer the ‘solid’ side of the spectrum than the liquid. BTW, there is a vast difference between ‘characterizing’ another’s work as “factual errors” and actually quoting someone and making a solid case from your own ‘evidence.’ Since a majority of your posts are five sentences of opinion with no support for anything, they are rightly ignored allowing more time to consider the supported arguments of others. Thank you again for writing,

Terral

I am amazed by the fact that not only do you know Silverstein pulled it you know how many men were on the demoition team.