World Trade Center Dust Contains Evidence of Explosives

@acid and ManCuBus
people on both side belive they are right!
and most likely nither of them are wrong

I belive that somewhere in between will be the answer to all this.
FACTS
Fema www.fema.gov had they own story on how it happend FACT

Nist www.nist.gov had a different answer FACT

And the guy who rented out TWTC, well his attorneys had another answer
but he did win the insurance claim and bagged $500mil profit

So who is righr? you cant say all but there again you cant say one.

As I say somewhere in there is the truth and NIST could call for a independent review
or give out the data they used in there computer sim so other people can test
what they say is correct but they wont!

@Werewolf the firemen was called away from WT7 4-6 hours before it collapsed.
So when they guy said PULL WT7 he could not meant the firemen.

all these are facts released by the USA gov check them then have a crack at me.

and no I wont do your searching for you.
 
8012665matrix22jpgnl8.jpg


Very coincidental don't you think?
 
deuse said:
And the guy who rented out TWTC, well his attorneys had another answer
but he did win the insurance claim and bagged $500mil profit
Click to expand...

God not tahnt again. it was not purchased days before teh attack. It has been part of teh conditions of the contract to have such insurance since it was built. Please stop posting rubbish.

deuse said:
@Werewolf the firemen was called away from WT7 4-6 hours before it collapsed.
So when they guy said PULL WT7 he could not meant the firemen.
Click to expand...

Proof... As this is not the way it happened.

we've already gone through the nist and other reports. Many times. here is no significant differences, remembering the time lines and the computer models can't be done past the point of f total failure due to the sheer numbers involved.
 
Last edited:
deuse said:
And the guy who rented out TWTC, well his attorneys had another answer
but he did win the insurance claim and bagged $500mil profit
Click to expand...


Profit? I rather doubt many people other then the guy's accountants are qualified to make that claim. Just how much did it cost to build the thing and run it all these years I wonder?

Besides, if he really wanted to make a few quid off it, maye he could have, oh I don't know, sold it?

Whilst this may be an out there and unconventional way of making money (you know, selling stuff you don't want anymore), it would surely be a better option then entering into a conspiracy with the US government. I mean, the cost of the planes alone must have eaten into the profit margins a little, dontcha think?
 
AcidHell2 said:
God not tahnt again. it was not purchased days before teh attack. It has been part of teh conditions of the contract to have such insurance since it was built. Please stop posting rubbish.
Click to expand...

Where did I say he puchased the insurance days before? please answer



Proof... As this is not the way it happened.

we've already gone through the nist and other reports. Many times. here is no significant differences, remembering the time lines and the computer models can't be done past the point of f total failure due to the sheer numbers involved.
Click to expand...

The new york times

"By 11:30 a.m., the fire commanderin charge of that area, Assistant Chief Frank Fellini, ordered firefighters away from it for safety reasons"
http://thewebfairy.com/killtown/wtc7/archive/nytimes_112901.html

WT7 fell at many hours later...Oh and by the way that is a fact :)
or look here..but do read it all...http://goldismoney.info/forums/showthread.php?t=28049
 
Spyderpig said:
Profit? I rather doubt many people other then the guy's accountants are qualified to make that claim. Just how much did it cost to build the thing and run it all these years I wonder?

Besides, if he really wanted to make a few quid off it, maye he could have, oh I don't know, sold it?

Whilst this may be an out there and unconventional way of making money (you know, selling stuff you don't want anymore), it would surely be a better option then entering into a conspiracy with the US government. I mean, the cost of the planes alone must have eaten into the profit margins a little, dontcha think?
Click to expand...

How old are you?

" In February of 2002 Silverstein Properties won $861 million from Industrial Risk Insurers to rebuild on the site of WTC 7
Silverstein Properties' estimated investment in WTC 7 was $386 million. So: This building's collapse resulted in a profit of about $500 million."

OK we done now...
 
deuse said:
How old are you?

" In February of 2002 Silverstein Properties won $861 million from Industrial Risk Insurers to rebuild on the site of WTC 7
Silverstein Properties' estimated investment in WTC 7 was $386 million. So: This building's collapse resulted in a profit of about $500 million."

OK we done now...
Click to expand...

That rather depends on when the investment was made surely? If it was made in say 1961 at $386m then getting a payout of $861m around 40 years later doesn't look like such an impressive "profit". I don't know when the investment was made, I'm merely pointing out that raw figures aren't terribly meaningful without context.
 
semi-pro waster said:
That rather depends on when the investment was made surely? If it was made in say 1961 at $386m then getting a payout of $861m around 40 years later doesn't look like such an impressive "profit". I don't know when the investment was made, I'm merely pointing out that raw figures aren't terribly meaningful without context.
Click to expand...


Now you have to do your home work wont you :)

Oh Ok i will help you..

Larry A. Silverstein
In 1980, Silverstein won a bid from the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey to construct 7 World Trade Center,I to the north of the World Trade Center.

Now he BUILT WTC and did not lease or own it at this time.

Silverstein was interested in acquiring the entire World Trade Center complex, and put in a bid when the Port Authority
put it up for lease in 2000. Silverstein won the bid when a deal between the initial winner and the Port Authority fell throug.
and he signed the lease on July 24, 2001, only weeks before the towers were destroyed in the September 11 attacks.

FACT not fiction..

EDIT= How did I forget " A settlement was reached in 2004, with insurers agreeing to pay out $4.55 billion"
 
Last edited:
deuse said:
How old are you?

" In February of 2002 Silverstein Properties won $861 million from Industrial Risk Insurers to rebuild on the site of WTC 7
Silverstein Properties' estimated investment in WTC 7 was $386 million. So: This building's collapse resulted in a profit of about $500 million."

OK we done now...
Click to expand...

I'd say my age is irrelevant.

So what are you suggesting? That he trashed the whole WTC complex, just to make some money on the insureance for WTC7?

Perhaps you have been sifting through his accounts sufficiently to tell us exactly how much of this money he has kept for personal use and how much he has put into rebuilding the complex?

Perhaps you could also explain how, even if he did make a sizeable profit from the insurance, this even begins to prove that he conspired with others to destroy it?
 
Its all very interesting, but the government didn't blow up the building by them self, it would be completely impossible, the amount of people involved and keeping them quiet alone make its impossible.

Now i used to believe that the government did do it, until i realise that fact, the most likely case scenario is the American government funded AQ (fact, there is evidence of this with regards to the Russian occupation of Afghanistan), AQ either saved some or use it to plot against America, the government knew this but allowed it as no major threat, sent 2 AQ agents to learn to fly planes etc, government watched, realised the target and instead of arresting them, they saw the potential in this and allowed it to happen. There is evidence of lift work 2 weeks prior to the WTC incident which might explain the thermite found, government giving them a helping hand?

Anyway the reason for letting them do that attacks is purely down to excuses to invade Iraq and Afghanistan to cease control of there natural resources. We are currently in a resource war and America and there allies are the bullies, if you don't conform they call you a rogue state and get sanctions against you.
 
Spyderpig said:
I'd say my age is irrelevant.

So what are you suggesting? That he trashed the whole WTC complex, just to make some money on the insureance for WTC7?

Perhaps you have been sifting through his accounts sufficiently to tell us exactly how much of this money he has kept for personal use and how much he has put into rebuilding the complex?

Perhaps you could also explain how, even if he did make a sizeable profit from the insurance, this even begins to prove that he conspired with others to destroy it?
Click to expand...


I would read the WHOLE thread and 3 others..and no where have I said he trashed it(as you ).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom