OT: 9/11 - many reports of wtc7 collapse BEFORE IT HAPPENS!

Discussion of music production, audio, equipment and any related topics, either with or without Ableton Live
rasputin
Posts: 645
Joined: Wed Mar 19, 2003 10:16 pm
Location: San Diego, California, USA
Contact:

Here's the answer to all your questions

Post by rasputin » Tue Feb 27, 2007 6:12 pm

I gave up long ago trying to rationally argue people out of their conspiracy theories. From UFOs to the JFK assassination to the "fake Moon landing" to Conspiracy 58 == it will never end.

So basically, just check out Gene Ray's work, relax and enjoy

http://www.timecube.com/

andydes
Posts: 2917
Joined: Fri Feb 18, 2005 12:53 pm
Location: Bremen

Post by andydes » Tue Feb 27, 2007 6:20 pm

Aye, but even so, I don't see the need for them to bring down the buildings with explosives. It would have been a dramatic enough attack even if the buildings remained standing (maybe they thought they would).

It's just so much easier and safer to keep the chain of events as close to the official line as posible.

I haven't seen anything really to convince me the building were demollished. But I've heard plenty of other fishy things happening that day.

btw: Pull (out of) the building, perhaps?[/quote]

andydes
Posts: 2917
Joined: Fri Feb 18, 2005 12:53 pm
Location: Bremen

Re: Here's the answer to all your questions

Post by andydes » Tue Feb 27, 2007 6:25 pm

rasputin wrote:I gave up long ago trying to rationally argue people out of their conspiracy theories. From UFOs to the JFK assassination to the "fake Moon landing" to Conspiracy 58 == it will never end.

So basically, just check out Gene Ray's work, relax and enjoy

http://www.timecube.com/
Well there's certainly plenty of real conspiracies out there. Someone's got to look into them, we can go around thinking that everything we're told is true. But you need to look at the right things, there's no point clinging on to tenuous theories that don't fit the facts like some people do.

UFOs were real, they just happened to be built by lockhead martin.

The Phat Conductor
Posts: 1768
Joined: Thu Apr 07, 2005 9:30 pm

Re: Here's the answer to all your questions

Post by The Phat Conductor » Tue Feb 27, 2007 6:32 pm

andydes wrote: UFOs were real, they just happened to be built by lockhead martin.

dingdingding!

'aliens' are weapons of mass distraction!
ill gates aka the phat conductor
producer, performer + ableton/music teacher

http://www.illgates.com

dango
Posts: 734
Joined: Sun Jan 28, 2007 12:38 pm

Post by dango » Tue Feb 27, 2007 6:41 pm

andydes wrote:Aye, but even so, I don't see the need for them to bring down the buildings with explosives. It would have been a dramatic enough attack even if the buildings remained standing (maybe they thought they would).

It's just so much easier and safer to keep the chain of events as close to the official line as posible.

I haven't seen anything really to convince me the building were demollished. But I've heard plenty of other fishy things happening that day.

btw: Pull (out of) the building, perhaps?
[/quote]

well there was very good reason for those towers to come down. one is the billions of dollars in insurance money paid out to the lease holder. he battled the insurance company in court over his 3.5 billion dollar insurance policy that protected against acts of terrorism saying each plane counted as a seperate act.

also the whole building was coated in asbestos. all the fire coating placed on the steel during construction was made of it. the epa let the port authority who used to own the building slide for a whiler, but it did need to be fixed eventually. estimated cost: over 1 billion dollars.

and trhe countless amounts of financial records that were lost, including thousands of case files against enron and world com from a security company in tower 7. the 7 billion dollar california blackout scandall was gone, up in smoke.

the fact that tower 7 came down is not right. if you think that building came down from a fire you are a complete idiot who deep down does not want to believe that one of his precious fellow americans would do such thing in the name of financial gain and power and control. do you think these tyrants give a shit about the people? have you been paying any attention the last 6 years?

sweetjesus
Posts: 8803
Joined: Wed Mar 31, 2004 3:12 pm
Location: www.fridge.net.au
Contact:

Post by sweetjesus » Tue Feb 27, 2007 6:58 pm

dango wrote:
andydes wrote:Aye, but even so, I don't see the need for them to bring down the buildings with explosives. It would have been a dramatic enough attack even if the buildings remained standing (maybe they thought they would).

It's just so much easier and safer to keep the chain of events as close to the official line as posible.

I haven't seen anything really to convince me the building were demollished. But I've heard plenty of other fishy things happening that day.

btw: Pull (out of) the building, perhaps?
well there was very good reason for those towers to come down. one is the billions of dollars in insurance money paid out to the lease holder. he battled the insurance company in court over his 3.5 billion dollar insurance policy that protected against acts of terrorism saying each plane counted as a seperate act.

also the whole building was coated in asbestos. all the fire coating placed on the steel during construction was made of it. the epa let the port authority who used to own the building slide for a whiler, but it did need to be fixed eventually. estimated cost: over 1 billion dollars.

and trhe countless amounts of financial records that were lost, including thousands of case files against enron and world com from a security company in tower 7. the 7 billion dollar california blackout scandall was gone, up in smoke.

the fact that tower 7 came down is not right. if you think that building came down from a fire you are a complete idiot who deep down does not want to believe that one of his precious fellow americans would do such thing in the name of financial gain and power and control. do you think these tyrants give a shit about the people? have you been paying any attention the last 6 years?[/quote]

im on the 'left' but i do think its plausible that the foundations would have been considerably weaker after having two monoliths tumple down next to you... but i too smell a rat.

Landser
Posts: 238
Joined: Sat Oct 28, 2006 8:21 pm

Post by Landser » Tue Feb 27, 2007 7:30 pm

Mexico, Lousitania, Pearl Harbour, WTC.
Sadly people are naive enough to believe, that the only power leading war after war, without being attacked by others, after 200 years ruling the whole world, is always forced to defend itself and only wants to bring peace...
The most efficient tyranny is the tyranny, people don't recognize.

glu
Posts: 2769
Joined: Thu May 19, 2005 12:27 am

Post by glu » Tue Feb 27, 2007 9:46 pm

sweetjesus wrote: well there was very good reason for those towers to come down. one is the billions of dollars in insurance money paid out to the lease holder. he battled the insurance company in court over his 3.5 billion dollar insurance policy that protected against acts of terrorism saying each plane counted as a seperate act.

also the whole building was coated in asbestos. all the fire coating placed on the steel during construction was made of it. the epa let the port authority who used to own the building slide for a whiler, but it did need to be fixed eventually. estimated cost: over 1 billion dollars.

and trhe countless amounts of financial records that were lost, including thousands of case files against enron and world com from a security company in tower 7. the 7 billion dollar california blackout scandall was gone, up in smoke.

the fact that tower 7 came down is not right. if you think that building came down from a fire you are a complete idiot who deep down does not want to believe that one of his precious fellow americans would do such thing in the name of financial gain and power and control. do you think these tyrants give a shit about the people? have you been paying any attention the last 6 years?
Spot on. What kills me inside is how they are all getting away with it- murder, fraud, international crimes... it makes me sick to my stomach. I seriously can fathom the fall of this state...
not unlike the Mayans, Romans, Byzantines, etc..
cash in while you can you fucking aristocratics!
no prevailing genre of music:
http://alonetone.com/glu

jeskola
Posts: 1856
Joined: Wed Dec 01, 2004 1:04 pm

Post by jeskola » Tue Feb 27, 2007 9:52 pm

glu wrote: I seriously can fathom the fall of this state...
not unlike the Mayans, Romans, Byzantines, etc..
cash in while you can you fucking aristocratics!
those will be very dark days, and i can imagine we'll all go too.

Landser
Posts: 238
Joined: Sat Oct 28, 2006 8:21 pm

Post by Landser » Tue Feb 27, 2007 10:01 pm

glu wrote: cash in while you can you fucking aristocratics!
Aristocratics?
Plutocrats!

jeskola
Posts: 1856
Joined: Wed Dec 01, 2004 1:04 pm

Post by jeskola » Wed Feb 28, 2007 8:46 am

8O

now the BBC has had to make a comment about that video

http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/theeditors/2 ... iracy.html

dango
Posts: 734
Joined: Sun Jan 28, 2007 12:38 pm

Post by dango » Wed Feb 28, 2007 9:03 am

so it was not a green screen.

i never thought the bbc was in on it, they new no better, but why announce a building fell when a building had never fallen from fires before. why not say another buildin fell too.
sweetjesus wrote:
im on the 'left' but i do think its plausible that the foundations would have been considerably weaker after having two monoliths tumple down next to you... but i too smell a rat.

so you know, WTC towers 3,4,5,6 were right under the two towers, they were completley smashed by the full drop of the two main towers, but they did not collapse. they had to be domolished. sorry, but buildings do not just collapse like tower 7 did, unless they were demolished. that goes for the main towers as well.

dango
Posts: 734
Joined: Sun Jan 28, 2007 12:38 pm

Post by dango » Wed Feb 28, 2007 9:14 am

and that is the most bullshit explanation the bbc gave. they lost the original footage so they can not look to see what we are all speaking of? wahtever

pilcrow
Posts: 506
Joined: Tue Feb 15, 2005 5:26 pm

Post by pilcrow » Wed Feb 28, 2007 1:05 pm

Landser wrote:Mexico, Lousitania, Pearl Harbour, WTC.
Sadly people are naive enough to believe, that the only power leading war after war, without being attacked by others, after 200 years ruling the whole world, is always forced to defend itself and only wants to bring peace...
The most efficient tyranny is the tyranny, people don't recognize.
I learn so much from this forum! :)
That's why, try as I may, I can't stay away!

NorthernMonkey
Posts: 1098
Joined: Fri Feb 09, 2007 12:05 pm
Location: UK

Post by NorthernMonkey » Wed Feb 28, 2007 1:53 pm

jeskola wrote:8O

now the BBC has had to make a comment about that video

http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/theeditors/2 ... iracy.html
'We no longer have the original tapes of our 9/11 coverage (for reasons of cock-up, not conspiracy).'

8O :!: :roll:
..?

Post Reply