Building 7 (WTC) Collapse (different angle)

[LilKateMoss]

You need to sew the ogre some gangsta pants and mail them to Detroit?

That didn't make any sense nor was it funny.

[tontoz]

Q & A with Hazard:

Q: Why would Silverstein allegedly confess to insurance fraud in an interview with a reporter?

Hazard: I don't know.

Q: Why would they blow the building at all since it would eventually have to be torn down anyway just like the other WTC buildings?

Hazard: I don't know.

Q: So the firemen were part of the conspiracy since they were the ones who decided to "pull"?

Hazard: i don't know.

Q: How did Silverstein have the foresight to know not only that the WTC 1 and 2 would be hit by planes but also that one of them would collapse into WTC7?

Hazard: i don't know.

Q: What would Silverstein have done with all of his explosives in the building if one of the twin towers HADN'T collapsed into WTC7?
Hazard: i don't know.

Q: Why did Siverstein deliberately blow up his own building?

Hazard: To collect insurance money.

Q: What about the lost rent of all the paying tenants that he won't be getting now? What about the lease payments that he still has to make? What about the rebuilding costs? Do you not realize that he actually lost a lot of money when WTC7 went down?

Hazard: Ummmmmmm.....

[lurch67]

That didn't make any sense nor was it funny.

Wrong on both accounts

[Hazard]

Do you not realize that he actually lost a lot of money when WTC7 went down?

The insurance policies obtained in July 2001 for World Trade Center buildings 1, 2, 4 and 5 had a collective face amount of $3.55 billion. Following the September 11, 2001 attack, Silverstein sought to collect double the face amount (~$7.1 billion) on the basis that the two separate airplane strikes into two separate buildings constituted two occurrences within the meaning of the policies.

Does Tontoz pull a massive amount of shit out of his ass?
Hazard: Self explanitory..

[lurch67]

You're posting in a troll thread? Probably so.

Well, yah if you go for the obvious, but the obvious has been ignored by the initiating half of this thread.

[LilKateMoss]

You're posting in a troll thread? Probably so.

It was actually "ya'll ****** posting in a troll thread", but that was close enough. Good job sir.

[Hazard]

But what I'm saying is, if you look at his quote, and see that as an admission of demolition, then you really are like a kid, seeing the shadow of a monster when all it's really a shadow of is a chair with a shirt draped on the back of it. It would make no sense for him to publicly admit to giving an order to bring down the building, all the while referring to it as the "smart thing to do" in relation to human life. Even in the context of a conspiracy it makes no sense. It's grasping at straws, by arguing the potential nefarious implications of one statement which is really just an issue of semantics.

If you have two hours to kill watch this:
http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...1586264750761#

Yeah yeah I know Alex Jones is a douche, but the documentary is very well put together. They put a lot of political figures on the spot by asking them about 9/11, to which their response is usually "uhh". Check it out for yourself, if this does not raise questions in your mind I will be surprised.

Before I watched this I had absolutely no doubts about Al Qaeda being responsible.

[tontoz]

The insurance policies obtained in July 2001 for World Trade Center buildings 1, 2, 4 and 5 had a collective face amount of $3.55 billion. Following the September 11, 2001 attack, Silverstein sought to collect double the face amount (~$7.1 billion) on the basis that the two separate airplane strikes into two separate buildings constituted two occurrences within the meaning of the policies.

Does Tontoz pull a massive amount of shit out of his ass?
Hazard: Self explanitory..

Q: And did he get $7.1 billion?

Hazard: Ummmm....

Q: Did he actually make more money than he would have made if the terrorist attacks never happened?

Hazard: Ummmm....

[miller-time]

Silverstein sought to collect double the face amount (~$7.1 billion) on the basis that the two separate airplane strikes into two separate buildings constituted two occurrences within the meaning of the policies.

yes he saw an opportunity to get more money after the fact. so what?

[RedBlackAttack]

yes he saw an opportunity to get more money after the fact. so what?

So what? It is clear evidence that the government plotted to bring down WTC7 after planes hit the first two buildings. OPEN YOUR EYES!

[gts]

The insurance policies obtained in July 2001 for World Trade Center buildings 1, 2, 4 and 5 had a collective face amount of $3.55 billion. Following the September 11, 2001 attack, Silverstein sought to collect double the face amount (~$7.1 billion) on the basis that the two separate airplane strikes into two separate buildings constituted two occurrences within the meaning of the policies.

Does Tontoz pull a massive amount of shit out of his ass?
Hazard: Self explanitory..

yesterday you didn't know about the fact he had to have insurance to lease the building until i pointed out that detail...

you didn't know he had just taken over the lease in july and that's why it concurred with the insurance policy being taken out, until i pointed that out to you.

yesterday you were screaming from the highest hill he took out an insurance policy in july, conspiracy!!!!!


... today you're an expert... go figure

[tontoz]

yesterday you didn't know about the fact he had to have insurance to lease the building until i pointed out that detail...

you didn't know he had just taken over the lease in july and that's why it concurred with the insurance policy being taken out, until i pointed that out to you.

yesterday you were screaming from the highest hill he took out an insurance policy in july, conspiracy!!!!!


... today you're an expert... go figure

All those questions he can't answer, simple facts that he is completely ignorant about, and yet he still believes completely in the conspiracy because he watched a video. This is what he had to say just yesterday.

The lease holder of WTC7 himself has admitted to demolishing the building. Why are you retards still arguing? The fact that he collected a fat check after demolishing the building doesn't really help his case either. But of course that's overlooked cause the dumbass sheep of this country will believe anything they are told.

Read and shut the hell up.
http://******************.com/WRHART...?q=cutter.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Larry_Silverstein

And he calls us sheep. This guy is the very definition of a mindless sheep. He can't think for himself, doesn't bother to do the most basic research, has no answer for the most basic questions yet has the nerve to call other people sheep.

[GOBB]

yesterday you didn't know about the fact he had to have insurance to lease the building until i pointed out that detail...

you didn't know he had just taken over the lease in july and that's why it concurred with the insurance policy being taken out, until i pointed that out to you.

yesterday you were screaming from the highest hill he took out an insurance policy in july, conspiracy!!!!!


... today you're an expert... go figure

[Maniak]

C'mon, we both know Maverick Carter set this thing in motion. It lays the groundwork for LBJ to opt out of his contract in 3 years to go to NYC, just 9 months after converting to Islam and being known as Hakim Akim Egoalon and donating 90% of his salary to the Taliban.

Makes sense.

[biayyatch]

Windsor Tower was very different in structure than WTC towers: most importantly, it had a relevant concrete core, that WTC7 didn't have; it also had two storeys wholly in concrete, to give more solidity.

I always see the Windsor Tower being used as an example of why the WTC towers couldn't have collapsed so thought I would add this bit of extra info.

http://911myths.com/html/madrid_windsor_tower.html

The building totalled 32 storeys, with 29 floors above ground and three below. A concrete core and concrete frame supported the first 16 floors. Above that was a central support system of concrete columns, supporting concrete floors with steel perimeter columns. An additional feature was the presence of two 'technical floors' - concrete floors designed to give the building more strength. One was just above the ground level and the other at the 17th floor.
http://www.concretecentre.com/main.asp?page=1095

So no, it didn't have the same design as the WTC towers.

The steel columns above the 17th floor suffered complete collapse, partially coming to rest on the upper technical floor.

...
An investigation is underway between Spanish technical agency Intemac and UK authorities including Arup Fire, the University of Edinburgh and the concrete industry including Cembureau, BCA and The Concrete Centre. Preliminary findings suggest that a combination of the upper technical floor and the excellent passive fire resistance of the tower's concrete columns and core prevented total building collapse.

The fire is significant in terms of its potential similarities between the collapse of the building's steel frame above the 17th floor and the experience seen at the World Trade Center. Notably, one of the recommendations of NIST's interim report on the World Trade Center disaster is for tall building design to incorporate 'strong points' within the frame.
http://www.concretecentre.com/main.asp?page=1095

Also remember that the Madrid Tower didn't have a plane flying into it.