Go Back   David Icke's Official Forums > Main Forums > 9/11 & 7/7

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 05-09-2011, 03:08 PM   #21
ragnarok
Banned
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Humanchester
Posts: 16,494
Likes: 5 (5 Posts)
Default

How much time did anyone spend in the OEM on that day? I'm sure I've read the entire building was evacuated before the towers came down, but I might be mistaken.
ragnarok is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-09-2011, 03:10 PM   #22
bully2100
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 750
Likes: 84 (42 Posts)
Default

i still cant see why a terrorist would want to crash into wtc7?
bully2100 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-09-2011, 03:38 PM   #23
anyhoo
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 1,611
Likes: 2 (2 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ragnarok View Post
Maybe because admitting a US fighter pilot had shot down a passenger jet would have distracted from the mission of blaming everything on the muslim extremists?
Notice in the one interview where Rumsfeld fucked up and admitted the plane was shot down, completely contrary to the cover story of the brave passengers storming the cockpit and causing the plane to crash on its own.
__________________
Lies are weapons that they use against us. Belief in those lies are the chains they use to bind us. This includes Fear. Knowledge is the key to unlocking those chains and is also a shield that makes their weapons useless.
anyhoo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-09-2011, 03:41 PM   #24
merlincove
Premier Subscribers
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 28,909
Likes: 425 (247 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by bully2100 View Post
that maybe what he meant, but.. videos showing the fireman retreating saying "the buildings gonna come down" dont help that statement :-)
Quote:
Originally Posted by ex sheep View Post
I think the logistics of trying to get a demolition team through the blocked city on 9/11, and set it up in building 7 within a few hours, is a closed case.
They fucked up.

These things take weeks of planning and prep, nuff said.
It certainly leads one to consider that all 3 buildings were rigged at the same time, prior to the attacks, perhaps, as has been suggested by analysts, during 'maintenance work' - and if that is the case one might consider that Silverstein, who profited hugely from the attacks, is up to his eyes in the cover up story.
merlincove is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-09-2011, 03:44 PM   #25
anyhoo
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 1,611
Likes: 2 (2 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ragnarok View Post
How much time did anyone spend in the OEM on that day? I'm sure I've read the entire building was evacuated before the towers came down, but I might be mistaken.
It was evacuated (or so they say). But how can you believe anything they say when so many lies and so much deception had to have taken place for this to happen? Every aspect of the official explanation has to be viewed with suspicion at the very least because it is part of a cover story. Who knows what really happened inside WTC 7 before it fell? Its certainly something that you will never hear on CNN.
__________________
Lies are weapons that they use against us. Belief in those lies are the chains they use to bind us. This includes Fear. Knowledge is the key to unlocking those chains and is also a shield that makes their weapons useless.
anyhoo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-09-2011, 03:46 PM   #26
merlincove
Premier Subscribers
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 28,909
Likes: 425 (247 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by anyhoo View Post
Notice in the one interview where Rumsfeld fucked up and admitted the plane was shot down, completely contrary to the cover story of the brave passengers storming the cockpit and causing the plane to crash on its own.
i think you also need to consider the phone calls from passengers allegedly on the flight, and the glaring discrepancies in what was apparently said, the question mark as to whether flight 93 landed at Cleveland airport, the missing plane at the Pentagon, the buried plane at Shanksville, the pilots inability to control even crop duster, single engined planes etc - the whole story just has way too many holes in it. One could perhaps forgive the official story if it tied in everywhere else and had one or two question marks - but with every alleged impact and every facet of the official paper we see glaring holes.
merlincove is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-09-2011, 03:50 PM   #27
anyhoo
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 1,611
Likes: 2 (2 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by bully2100 View Post
i still cant see why a terrorist would want to crash into wtc7?
You make a good point. Perhaps there was no good reason for a terrorist to want to do so but perhaps there was another reason. Two theories I have heard floated for it is that there was something inside the building that TPTB wanted destroyed because it threatened them. Something huge that threatened the economy, etc. Another theory is that WTC 7 was the place where the demolitions of WTC 1 and 2 were controlled. If that were the case, it had to come down as part of the cover up.

I agree it is a mystery, but you have seen the videos yourself and you recognize a controlled demolition when you see one. You are not denying it was a controlled demolition, are you?
__________________
Lies are weapons that they use against us. Belief in those lies are the chains they use to bind us. This includes Fear. Knowledge is the key to unlocking those chains and is also a shield that makes their weapons useless.
anyhoo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-09-2011, 03:53 PM   #28
anyhoo
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 1,611
Likes: 2 (2 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by merlincove View Post
It certainly leads one to consider that all 3 buildings were rigged at the same time, prior to the attacks, perhaps, as has been suggested by analysts, during 'maintenance work' - and if that is the case one might consider that Silverstein, who profited hugely from the attacks, is up to his eyes in the cover up story.
What you say "one might consider" is stating the obvious to me. Of course Silverstein is a part of the conspiracy, but he is NOT the originator of it. This is much bigger than Silverstein. Silverstein merely profited from something that others wanted to happen for completely different reasons.
__________________
Lies are weapons that they use against us. Belief in those lies are the chains they use to bind us. This includes Fear. Knowledge is the key to unlocking those chains and is also a shield that makes their weapons useless.
anyhoo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-09-2011, 03:56 PM   #29
bully2100
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 750
Likes: 84 (42 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by anyhoo View Post
You make a good point. Perhaps there was no good reason for a terrorist to want to do so but perhaps there was another reason. Two theories I have heard floated for it is that there was something inside the building that TPTB wanted destroyed because it threatened them. Something huge that threatened the economy, etc. Another theory is that WTC 7 was the place where the demolitions of WTC 1 and 2 were controlled. If that were the case, it had to come down as part of the cover up.

I agree it is a mystery, but you have seen the videos yourself and you recognize a controlled demolition when you see one. You are not denying it was a controlled demolition, are you?
all i am saying is that if the 3rd plane was to fly into wtc7, then why? i know what was in there, but why would a terrorist choose it, which is what you and others are saying :-)
bully2100 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-09-2011, 03:57 PM   #30
bryan
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 4,098
Likes: 121 (70 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by anyhoo View Post
It was evacuated (or so they say). But how can you believe anything they say when so many lies and so much deception had to have taken place for this to happen? Every aspect of the official explanation has to be viewed with suspicion at the very least because it is part of a cover story. Who knows what really happened inside WTC 7 before it fell? Its certainly something that you will never hear on CNN.
Yet you believe Silverstein when he says he got a phone call from the fire commander.
bryan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-09-2011, 03:58 PM   #31
anyhoo
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 1,611
Likes: 2 (2 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by merlincove View Post
i think you also need to consider the phone calls from passengers allegedly on the flight, and the glaring discrepancies in what was apparently said, the question mark as to whether flight 93 landed at Cleveland airport, the missing plane at the Pentagon, the buried plane at Shanksville, the pilots inability to control even crop duster, single engined planes etc - the whole story just has way too many holes in it. One could perhaps forgive the official story if it tied in everywhere else and had one or two question marks - but with every alleged impact and every facet of the official paper we see glaring holes.
The official explanation is so full of holes that only a fool could believe it. And I am sorry if that is considered disrespectful to say that. They made so many mistakes that it would take a blind person not to see them, which is why I think some kind of mass brain washing must be going on that prevents most people from being even curious about all of this. I can't even talk about this at work without being labeled a crackpot, that is how bad it is.
__________________
Lies are weapons that they use against us. Belief in those lies are the chains they use to bind us. This includes Fear. Knowledge is the key to unlocking those chains and is also a shield that makes their weapons useless.
anyhoo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-09-2011, 04:04 PM   #32
anyhoo
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 1,611
Likes: 2 (2 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by bully2100 View Post
all i am saying is that if the 3rd plane was to fly into wtc7, then why? i know what was in there, but why would a terrorist choose it, which is what you and others are saying :-)
These people made a lot of mistakes. Look at the attack on the Pentagon. Very sloppily done and obviously not done by a plane. You think these people were really careful to make it look authentic? In some cases they were but in some cases they were not. WTC 7 was pre-planned to come down on 9-11, for whatever reason. Some external event had to happen for it to come down. A plane hitting it would be that external event that could explain its collapse into its own footprint. You think people would not "buy" it, in light of the planes hitting WTC 1 and 2? Of course they would. Shock and awe was one of the purposes of 9-11. It does not all have to make perfect sense to be believable.
__________________
Lies are weapons that they use against us. Belief in those lies are the chains they use to bind us. This includes Fear. Knowledge is the key to unlocking those chains and is also a shield that makes their weapons useless.
anyhoo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-09-2011, 04:08 PM   #33
anyhoo
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 1,611
Likes: 2 (2 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by bryan View Post
Yet you believe Silverstein when he says he got a phone call from the fire commander.
I believe he was speaking the truth when he said that. What I don't understand is the context of that interview. That interview makes no sense at all relative to the official cover story. Everyone knows what Silverstein meant when he said the word "pull", so let's stop talking falsely. He spoke the truth that is contrary to the official explanation. I admit that I do not understand why that he would do that.
__________________
Lies are weapons that they use against us. Belief in those lies are the chains they use to bind us. This includes Fear. Knowledge is the key to unlocking those chains and is also a shield that makes their weapons useless.
anyhoo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-09-2011, 04:36 PM   #34
bryan
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 4,098
Likes: 121 (70 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by anyhoo View Post
I believe he was speaking the truth when he said that. What I don't understand is the context of that interview. That interview makes no sense at all relative to the official cover story. Everyone knows what Silverstein meant when he said the word "pull", so let's stop talking falsely. He spoke the truth that is contrary to the official explanation. I admit that I do not understand why that he would do that.
I'm only playing devil's advocate. Think about this...

You go round to your neighbour's with your smoking-gun evidence Building 7 was demolished. So he goes on some football forum saying Silverstein said they decided to pull the building. Next thing, along comes a debunker and says:

"He only says they decided to pull IT. How would demolishing a building that's already been evacuated save lives? Silverstein obviously meant 'pull the firefighting operation', which would probably save firemen's lives. Then they'd watch as the building burned down."

What happens next? All the football fans start calling your neighbour a paranoid tinfoil hat, and he tells you not to bother going round next time you find a smoking gun.

I can think of three reasons why Silverstein might have made up the story.

1. To cover his arse.
2. To lay the ground for a future plan B to say it was an emergency demo.
3. To create general confusion in the truth movement.

Does it not bother you that the fire commander says he never spoke to him on the day?

Nobody can prove he meant 'pull the building'. Nobody can show there was even a phone call. It's a dead end.
bryan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-09-2011, 04:51 PM   #35
anyhoo
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 1,611
Likes: 2 (2 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by bryan View Post
I'm only playing devil's advocate. Think about this...

You go round to your neighbour's with your smoking-gun evidence Building 7 was demolished. So he goes on some football forum saying Silverstein said they decided to pull the building. Next thing, along comes a debunker and says:

"He only says they decided to pull IT. How would demolishing a building that's already been evacuated save lives? Silverstein obviously meant 'pull the firefighting operation', which would probably save firemen's lives. Then they'd watch as the building burned down."

What happens next? All the football fans start calling your neighbour a paranoid tinfoil hat, and he tells you not to bother going round next time you find a smoking gun.

I can think of three reasons why Silverstein might have made up the story.

1. To cover his arse.
2. To lay the ground for a future plan B to say it was an emergency demo.
3. To create general confusion in the truth movement.

Does it not bother you that the fire commander says he never spoke to him on the day?

Nobody can prove he meant 'pull the building'. Nobody can show there was even a phone call. It's a dead end.
I've only seen small snippets of that interview. I'd like to watch the entire thing and hear all of Larry's answers to the questions he was asked.

The interview does not make sense to me. I believe Larry spoke truth, but why would he, when it goes against the official explanation?

These two facts are linked like concrete:

1. The collapsing of WTC 7 into its own footprint that was without doubt a controlled demolition.

2. Larry Silverstein saying a decision was made to "pull" the building.

These are two peices of the puzzle that fit together perfectly. TPTB have gone to great lengths to try to confuse the issue, but focus on this and you get a picture of what actually happened.

There is a third fact that I believe is another peice of the puzzle that goes with these two, which is the BBC news reporter falsely claiming that WTC 7 had fallen hours before it did. This is significant. This was not just a simple mistake. I believe WTC 7 was "supposed" to have fallen when they said it diid, but something had gone wrong and it did not fall. 9-11 was a choreographed event where everything was timed for maximum shock and awe. They knew when each building was supposed to fall in advance. A lot of people had to have been privy to this inside information including news people. It is very significant that they falsely claimed it had fallen hours before it actually did.
__________________
Lies are weapons that they use against us. Belief in those lies are the chains they use to bind us. This includes Fear. Knowledge is the key to unlocking those chains and is also a shield that makes their weapons useless.

Last edited by anyhoo; 05-09-2011 at 05:23 PM.
anyhoo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-09-2011, 05:26 PM   #36
bryan
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 4,098
Likes: 121 (70 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by anyhoo View Post
The interview does not make sense to me. I believe Larry spoke truth, but why would he, when it goes against the official explanation?
If you interpret the meaning as 'pull the firefighting operation', it doesn't go against the official explanation.
bryan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-09-2011, 05:40 PM   #37
anyhoo
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 1,611
Likes: 2 (2 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by bryan View Post
If you interpret the meaning as 'pull the firefighting operation', it doesn't go against the official explanation.
Has anyone ever used the term "pull" like that before? Larry used the word "pull" at least twice. It is obvious what he meant. We can go around in circles endlessly argueing this, but I believe I know what Larry meant. I believe you know what Larry meant. The fact that you watched WTC 7 being "pulled" on video fits hand-in-glove with Larry Silverstein saying a decision was made to "pull" the building. Its like two peices of puzzle that fit together perfectly, but the puzzle they are part of is not the official explanation at all. Its something else entirely. That is where the confusion lies.
__________________
Lies are weapons that they use against us. Belief in those lies are the chains they use to bind us. This includes Fear. Knowledge is the key to unlocking those chains and is also a shield that makes their weapons useless.

Last edited by anyhoo; 05-09-2011 at 05:40 PM.
anyhoo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-09-2011, 06:18 PM   #38
razorbill
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Caledonia
Posts: 688
Likes: 0 (0 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by bully2100 View Post
all i am saying is that if the 3rd plane was to fly into wtc7, then why? i know what was in there, but why would a terrorist choose it, which is what you and others are saying :-)
This is actually a very good question.

Why would Muslim terrorists want to commit 9/11 at all?

Good analysis here:


__________________
HAARP UK: Capel Dewi, UK 52.424517, -4.005442 http://forum.davidicke.com/showpost....9&postcount=34

Every facet of mind control that can be exerted through the mass media is exerted by the mass media. http://www.veteranstoday.com/2011/05...t-of-info-war/
razorbill is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-09-2011, 06:30 PM   #39
merlincove
Premier Subscribers
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 28,909
Likes: 425 (247 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by anyhoo View Post
The official explanation is so full of holes that only a fool could believe it. And I am sorry if that is considered disrespectful to say that. They made so many mistakes that it would take a blind person not to see them, which is why I think some kind of mass brain washing must be going on that prevents most people from being even curious about all of this. I can't even talk about this at work without being labeled a crackpot, that is how bad it is.
Yes, i'd agree - and that blind man would be able to see the holes while riding a galloping horse through a forest.

At night.



i'm sure that the upcoming anniversary will host a gaggle of docu's and discussions on the TV about 'how the day unfolded' - and further instill the brainwashing into the minds of the people.

All they need to do is open their eyes, but that day was so colossus and so huge, it changed the entire planet overnight - this is the tool they apply that affixes the belief firmly in place - how can something that huge have been a smoke screen, how can it have been a USA / Mossad drive, how could they do that to themselves? this is how the lie is sold. and, as we can see when we discuss it with those who are outside the conspiracy world, it has been sold very, very well.

Highlight that the West (USA and the UK - to a degree) have been waging 'a' war against the Muslim nations for centuries, going back as far as the Crusades, all the way to the occupation of Muslim lands and the war against the Muslim state (we really are seeing a westernised Jihad against Muslims) spear pointed by 911 - and it might start to make some sense to those looking in.
merlincove is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-09-2011, 06:42 PM   #40
bryan
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 4,098
Likes: 121 (70 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by anyhoo View Post
Has anyone ever used the term "pull" like that before? Larry used the word "pull" at least twice. It is obvious what he meant. We can go around in circles endlessly argueing this, but I believe I know what Larry meant. I believe you know what Larry meant. The fact that you watched WTC 7 being "pulled" on video fits hand-in-glove with Larry Silverstein saying a decision was made to "pull" the building. Its like two peices of puzzle that fit together perfectly, but the puzzle they are part of is not the official explanation at all. Its something else entirely. That is where the confusion lies.
So how does demolishing the building prevent more loss of life?
bryan is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 03:54 AM.


Shoutbox provided by vBShout (Lite) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2019 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.