9/11 facts to discuss....

[creativedreams]

I have to leave,

You should leave too; I'm sure you or one of your socks will be back in a few nano seconds

Your signature image you are currently using which I posted below is a fitting metaphor as to how you are throwing out defenses to an "official story" full of holes that is being chased down...

 

[candycorn]

You should leave too; I'm sure you or one of your socks will be back in a few nano seconds

I'm sure you'll miss me...

No dumbfuck; you never leave; when Creativedreams goes away, you have a sock show up. When that sock leaves, you have a drawer full of them. Then you expect people to take you seriously which defies all common sense.

The subject is very serious and you have done nothing but cheapen it while professing to be "wanting to get to the bottom of it" while being totally dishonest and misrepresnetative of your very own legitimacy.

I think you're mentally ill and I think you need help. To do this on a sports board or another type of board is borderline lame but the subject nature is trivial. Here that is not the case and you really should be ashamed of yourself.

I know you'll do nothing different in May that you did for the last 9 years; which is why your "movement" is DOA and always will be. As long as you're part of it; it deserves every cross word that comes its way.

Fuck off and die.

 

[creativedreams]

The subject is very serious and you have done nothing but cheapen it while professing to be "wanting to get to the bottom of it"

You clearly don't want to get to the bottom of it and it is proven by your endless name calling propaganda without addressing any of the facts listed in this thread...

Fuck off and die

I simply present a list of facts to discuss and this is what you wish?

 

[candycorn]

The subject is very serious and you have done nothing but cheapen it while professing to be "wanting to get to the bottom of it"

You clearly don't want to get to the bottom of it and it is proven by your endless name calling propaganda without addressing any of the facts listed in this thread...

You have proven to be nothing but dishonest. You create sock after sock to bolster your fledgling position. Do you deny that?

I don't debate with dishonest people; there is no point.

Lets hear it; do you deny creating socks? If not, please list ALL SOCKS YOU'VE CREATED ON THIS AND OTHER MESSAGE BOARDS so we can see just how dishonest you have been.

Your chance to come clean.

Let me guess; you won't do it will you bitch boy? he he he... Didn't think so.

 

[candycorn]

The subject is very serious and you have done nothing but cheapen it while professing to be "wanting to get to the bottom of it"

You clearly don't want to get to the bottom of it and it is proven by your endless name calling propaganda without addressing any of the facts listed in this thread...

You have proven to be nothing but dishonest. You create sock after sock to bolster your fledgling position. Do you deny that?

I don't debate with dishonest people; there is no point.

Lets hear it; do you deny creating socks? If not, please list ALL SOCKS YOU'VE CREATED ON THIS AND OTHER MESSAGE BOARDS so we can see just how dishonest you have been.

Your chance to come clean.

Let me guess; you won't do it will you bitch boy? he he he... Didn't think so.

And she runs away; how not surprising.

 

[creativedreams]

Again...Sorry to get off topic...here is a recap of what I would like to discuss...


A question I ponder is if the tree fort built within the World Trade Center 7 in which it had its terrorism fighting 23rd floors walls and windows reinforced; did this terrorism fighting headquarters have the 23rd floors walls and windows reinforced to make sure none of the remote operating equipment or wireless detonating controls were damaged from flying debris from the planes impacts?

Wouldn't it have made a perfect vantage point to be precise on impact floors of World Trade Center 1 & 2 and a subsequent setting of a detonating sequence for wireless explosives?

To be sure to get world support to obtain one of the most strategic squares on the worlds chessboard?

So basically 9/11 may have simply been a move of sacrificing a pawn to take a rook and gain a strategic square to stay in the match on the worlds chess game?

It was in the news just before 9/11 about now having technology to remote operate boeing planes in the event of a terrorism hijacking.

There is technology used in computer programs to plug in precise flying routes for remote operating planes.

The World Trade Center 7 had a tree fort built in it to fight terrorism. This tree fort terrorism fighting headquarters had its 23rd floor walls and windows reinforced.

 

[creativedreams]

Here is an excellent interview on FOX News at the bottom...

Also yet again...here is a recap of what I would like to discuss...


A question I ponder is if the tree fort built within the World Trade Center 7 in which it had its terrorism fighting 23rd floors walls and windows reinforced; did this terrorism fighting headquarters have the 23rd floors walls and windows reinforced to make sure none of the remote operating equipment or wireless detonating controls were damaged from flying debris from the planes impacts?

Wouldn't it have made a perfect vantage point to be precise on impact floors of World Trade Center 1 & 2 and a subsequent setting of a detonating sequence for wireless explosives?

To be sure to get world support to obtain one of the most strategic squares on the worlds chessboard?

So basically 9/11 may have simply been a move of sacrificing a pawn to take a rook and gain a strategic square to stay in the match on the worlds chess game?

It was in the news just before 9/11 about now having technology to remote operate boeing planes in the event of a terrorism hijacking.

There is technology used in computer programs to plug in precise flying routes for remote operating planes.

The World Trade Center 7 had a tree fort built in it to fight terrorism. This tree fort terrorism fighting headquarters had its 23rd floor walls and windows reinforced.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hqAf6zmLzUk]YouTube - AE911Truth on Detroit Fox News TV Channel 2 - 4-18-11[/ame]

 

[candycorn]

Here is an excellent interview on FOX News at the bottom...

Also yet again...here is a recap of what I would like to discuss...


A question I ponder is if the tree fort built within the World Trade Center 7 in which it had its terrorism fighting 23rd floors walls and windows reinforced; did this terrorism fighting headquarters have the 23rd floors walls and windows reinforced to make sure none of the remote operating equipment or wireless detonating controls were damaged from flying debris from the planes impacts?

Wouldn't it have made a perfect vantage point to be precise on impact floors of World Trade Center 1 & 2 and a subsequent setting of a detonating sequence for wireless explosives?

To be sure to get world support to obtain one of the most strategic squares on the worlds chessboard?

So basically 9/11 may have simply been a move of sacrificing a pawn to take a rook and gain a strategic square to stay in the match on the worlds chess game?

It was in the news just before 9/11 about now having technology to remote operate boeing planes in the event of a terrorism hijacking.

There is technology used in computer programs to plug in precise flying routes for remote operating planes.

The World Trade Center 7 had a tree fort built in it to fight terrorism. This tree fort terrorism fighting headquarters had its 23rd floor walls and windows reinforced.

YouTube - AE911Truth on Detroit Fox News TV Channel 2 - 4-18-11

Love the moron who thinks anybody trusts him.

 

[creativedreams]

Love the moron who thinks anybody trusts him.

What's there to trust or not trust? Facts are facts...how they relate is worth investigating...

Here are relating facts about the subject....please remain on topic at hand...

Here is an excellent interview on FOX News at the bottom...

Also yet again...here is a recap of what I would like to discuss...


A question I ponder is if the tree fort built within the World Trade Center 7 in which it had its terrorism fighting 23rd floors walls and windows reinforced; did this terrorism fighting headquarters have the 23rd floors walls and windows reinforced to make sure none of the remote operating equipment or wireless detonating controls were damaged from flying debris from the planes impacts?

Wouldn't it have made a perfect vantage point to be precise on impact floors of World Trade Center 1 & 2 and a subsequent setting of a detonating sequence for wireless explosives?

To be sure to get world support to obtain one of the most strategic squares on the worlds chessboard?

So basically 9/11 may have simply been a move of sacrificing a pawn to take a rook and gain a strategic square to stay in the match on the worlds chess game?

It was in the news just before 9/11 about now having technology to remote operate boeing planes in the event of a terrorism hijacking.

There is technology used in computer programs to plug in precise flying routes for remote operating planes.

The World Trade Center 7 had a tree fort built in it to fight terrorism. This tree fort terrorism fighting headquarters had its 23rd floor walls and windows reinforced.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hqAf6zmLzUk]YouTube - AE911Truth on Detroit Fox News TV Channel 2 - 4-18-11[/ame]

 

[candycorn]

Since we can't trust you, why should we trust anything you say?

 

[creativedreams]

Please explain in your own words how WTC 7 collapsed

I would like someone to please explain why there was a tree fort built in World Trade Center 7 just before 9/11...

This tree fort built in Building 7 was a terrorism fighting headquatrers...

Just before 9/11 it was in the news about rigging boeing planes with remote control for a precaution in the event a plane got hijacked...

Just before 9/11 it was in the news about successfully flying pilotless boeing planes with remote control...

Just before 9/11 it was in the news how the remote flying of boing planes was a terrorism hijacking precaution to be controlled by a terrorism fighting headquarters...

There was a terrorism fighting headquarters built like a tree fort in World Trade Center 7...

The terrorism fighting tree fort was a high floor in Building 7 which was the only floor with reinforced walls, windows, etc...

Terrorism fighting by developing remote operating systems to be installed in boeing planes in the event of a hijacking to be controlled by a terrorism fighting headquarters just like the one built like a tree fort in Building 7...


Most people with at least a couple I.Q. points already know how...hence why this is going on...


Now well over 1,400 Licensed Architects and Engineers who are well educated, very experienced, and experts in their field want a new and real investigation into the collapses of the three World Trade Center buildings AE911Truth.org

Numbers are growing since this sign was put out...

 

[creativedreams]

Here is a recap with info about the treefort...

A very controversial terrorism fighting headquarters was built like a tree fort high in World Trade Center 7.

This very controversial Command Bunker (tree fort) was designed on the 23rd floor of Buiding 7.

This "Bunker" as described by the Press was highly criticized because of the cost of over $15 Million Dollars.

The 50,000 sq. ft. "Bunker" on the 23rd floor of WTC7 went through many construction renovations and upgrades putting in bulletproof windows, bomb resistant walls as well as its own air supply and back up generators.

This "tree fort" had rooms full of computers, video monitors, etc from where the Mayor could oversee City Emergency Planning.

This "Skybox" was staffed around the clock...

The Office of Emergency Management(OMC) was created by Mayor Rudolph Giuliani in 1996 which he organized a team of High Ranking Emergency Officials from various agencies such as Police Department, Fire Department, FEMA, Port Authority, Counter Terrorism, Etc.

This new emergency group had their "Skybox" officially open in June 8, 1999.

This group mainly focused on counterterrorism.

This "Treefort" was greatly ridiculed for its cost, location, and other various reasons.

The Press dubbed it names such as "Bunker", "Skybox", "Treefort", etc.

Time Author Philip Shenon: "seemed the supreme example of how Guiliani's ego and arrogance knew no bounds"

WABC Radio mocked Guiliani with a "Name-That-Bunker" contest for its listeners.

This "Treefort" was highly criticized not only for its massive cost but also for its location right next to one of America's biggest terrorist targets the WTC Twin Towers.

In addition it was criticized for the high floor it was on making it vulnerable to power, water, and elevator outages.

Perhaps most controversial was the 6,000 gallon fuel tank placed in the building.

In 1998 & 1999, Fire Department Officials warned that the tank violated City Fire Codes and poses a hazard. According to one Fire Dept Memorandum, "if the tank were to leak or catch fire it would mean disaster".

The 6,000 gallon fuel tank was positioned about 15 feet above the ground floor between the 2nd and 3rd floors and was near several lobby elevators.

This large tank of fuel was meant to fuel generators that would supply electricity to the 23rd floor "Treefort" in the event of power failure.

Originally it was wanted to run the fuel line from the tanks up the elevator shafts, which anyone in building construction knows how elevator shafts need to be fire rated for safety, but due to fierce opposition from the fire department they were not allowed to run fuel lines from the tanks up the elevator shafts...

Rudolph ("Rudy") Giuliani


New York City Office of Emergency Management - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

7 World Trade Center - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

http://www.fema.gov/pdf/library/fema403_ch5.pdf

 

[creativedreams]

Here is a disturbing video about World Trade Center 7 or Building 7:

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JSCwwA2fmpE]YouTube - 9/11 - collapse of WTC 7[/ame]

 

[Patriot911]

Your bullshit about WTC 7 has already been thoroughly debunked. Why do you insist on repeating it when you can't even answer the questions about the major flaws in your "theory"?

For instance, WTC 7 was the WORST possible place to pilot in planes to hit the towers considering the directions the planes came in from. Flight 11 came in right over WTC 7 which means a person would have no chance to see both the plane and the tower at the same time. Flight 175 came in from the south and the South Tower was between the WTC 7 and Flight 175, so again, no direct line of sight to the aircraft.

Again, what is the point of doing everything in WTC 7 when your reasons are nothing but sheer bullshit? There IS NO REASON to do ANYTHING in WTC 7 that couldn't be done from a far more discrete, less public, and much more secure location that would not be scrutinized after the fact. Pretending they collapsed an entire building just to cover their tracks shows just how fucking retarded you really are.

 

[Patriot911]

Here is a disturbing video about World Trade Center 7 or Building 7:

YouTube - 9/11 - collapse of WTC 7

This is priceless! You post a video that destroys your own theory!

First off, the shithead who made the video posts CDs of much smaller, concrete structures. This proves the shithead is a moron of epic proportions and does not understand the principals of physics involved in a collapse.

Second, it shows that CDs sometimes fail. WHY would you risk your life and the lives of every other person in on the conspiracy on something that could very well fail and LEAVE ALL THAT EVIDENCE BEHIND THAT YOU CLAIM THEY WERE DESTROYING!



Now run away like the little bitch you are, CD. We all know you can't answer these questions and won't even try. Why? Because you know you're wrong. So instead you will just wait a week or so and repost as though nobody has completely kicked your scrawny, retarded ass yet again.

 

[creativedreams]

Your bullshit about WTC 7 has already been thoroughly debunked. Why do you insist on repeating it when you can't even answer the questions about the major flaws in your "theory"?

For instance, WTC 7 was the WORST possible place to pilot in planes to hit the towers considering the directions the planes came in from. Flight 11 came in right over WTC 7 which means a person would have no chance to see both the plane and the tower at the same time. Flight 175 came in from the south and the South Tower was between the WTC 7 and Flight 175, so again, no direct line of sight to the aircraft.

Again, what is the point of doing everything in WTC 7 when your reasons are nothing but sheer bullshit? There IS NO REASON to do ANYTHING in WTC 7 that couldn't be done from a far more discrete, less public, and much more secure location that would not be scrutinized after the fact. Pretending they collapsed an entire building just to cover their tracks shows just how fucking retarded you really are.

You know that computer programs are used for pilotless flight paths so why do you repeat the "no chance to see" bs...

 

[Patriot911]

Your bullshit about WTC 7 has already been thoroughly debunked. Why do you insist on repeating it when you can't even answer the questions about the major flaws in your "theory"?

For instance, WTC 7 was the WORST possible place to pilot in planes to hit the towers considering the directions the planes came in from. Flight 11 came in right over WTC 7 which means a person would have no chance to see both the plane and the tower at the same time. Flight 175 came in from the south and the South Tower was between the WTC 7 and Flight 175, so again, no direct line of sight to the aircraft.

Again, what is the point of doing everything in WTC 7 when your reasons are nothing but sheer bullshit? There IS NO REASON to do ANYTHING in WTC 7 that couldn't be done from a far more discrete, less public, and much more secure location that would not be scrutinized after the fact. Pretending they collapsed an entire building just to cover their tracks shows just how fucking retarded you really are.

You know that computer programs are used for pilotless flight paths so why do you repeat the "no chance to see" bs...

Then why did they have to be in WTC 7? You're the jackass who keeps saying they were in WTC 7, yet you can't give us a viable reason WHY, much less a viable reason why they would believe collapsing the building would somehow guarantee the destruction of all evidence.

BTW, they don't use computer programs for pilotless flights. They use a remote pilot like they do with global hawks. Try to learn something before making a complete ass and fool out of yourself.

 

[creativedreams]

Again, what is the point of doing everything in WTC 7 when your reasons are nothing but sheer bullshit? There IS NO REASON to do ANYTHING in WTC 7 that couldn't be done from a far more discrete, less public, and much more secure location that would not be scrutinized after the fact. Pretending they collapsed an entire building just to cover their tracks shows just how fucking retarded you really are.

We both know WTC7 would make the perfect place for an operation like this and destroy any evidence for the investigation to come...

Plus we both know the destruction of all 7 World Trade Centers like that would be a perfect way to get world support to move chess pieces on the worlds chessboard...

 

[creativedreams]

BTW, they don't use computer programs for pilotless flights.

Yes they do and I will be back with links...

There are programs where one man at a computer can fly several planes at once placing them on any flight route desired...

 

[Patriot911]

Again, what is the point of doing everything in WTC 7 when your reasons are nothing but sheer bullshit? There IS NO REASON to do ANYTHING in WTC 7 that couldn't be done from a far more discrete, less public, and much more secure location that would not be scrutinized after the fact. Pretending they collapsed an entire building just to cover their tracks shows just how fucking retarded you really are.

We both know WTC7 would make the perfect place for an operation like this and destroy any evidence for the investigation to come...

No, YOU PRETEND it is. Yet you can't give us any reasons WHY one would set up shop right next door and risk all kinds of unneeded exposure when the same thing can be accomplished FAR more discretely elsewhere.

Plus we both know the destruction of all 7 World Trade Centers like that would be a perfect way to get world support to move chess pieces on the worlds chessboard...

Seriously? Wow. You are far more retarded than I ever gave you credit for, and I really REALLY thought you were retarded before! How do you remember to breathe without someone reminding you constantly?

Like you shithead truthtards are always whining about, not many people know about WTC 7 or the rest of the buildings. Why? They were trivial to the point of meaninglessness next to the towers and the loss of life sustained there. Pretending that WTC 7 had to collapse to push everyone over the edge when most people could care LESS about a building collapsing with nobody hurt is MORONIC.

You're going to have to do far better than that to make this case. How about showing us the outrage from people that WTC 7 was brought down by terrorists? Your claim. You prove it.