911 goes NUCLEAR

http://cosmicconvergence.org/?p=8197

“This 9/11 data dump is so radioactive the US Government will likely collapse.  The world will never be the same when nations everywhere see this report!”
– Veteran 9/11 Investigator

you must have creamed your genes in hopes of trying to blame americans for this deal. other than who has been doing this shit continuously since.

oh wait, its americans fault to

why don't you go profanity deleted FT, your perfect for her

Oh great you can't get your attention fix with dreams so you attack me...KMA.

incidentally it wasn't Americans it was Saudis and Israelis in cahoots with high officials in our government. Our Government is run by offshore banks....so you can try to deflect this to ma and pa American but it wasn't it was globalists that are destroying Americans...but you can choose the wrong side...you do that often....

TEOTWAWKI wrote:

Oh great you can't get your attention fix with dreams so you attack me...KMA.

I dont seek attention with dreams.

you can KMA

You are a liberal tarian face it

Even I can only tolerate all the anti american shit from you

hurry, go find a few hundred more post about how bad police are, or maybe a few about the evil jews and when that dont work, just dig America for every god damn wrong thing in the world. that should give you plenty to do.

Ah you're too easy....those are such big targets....

Well lemme see now.  So what brought down the twin towers was atomic bombs implanted in the granite rock below the skyscrapers?  And I'm supposed to accept this just because somebody created a graphic?
A graphic which doesn't even spell the word granite correctly?

TEOTWAWKI wrote:

it was Saudis and Israelis in cahoots

That's about as likely as Duck Commander and Richard Simmons being in cahoots. lol

TEOTWAWKI wrote:

incidentally it wasn't Americans it was Saudis and Israelis in cahoots with high officials in our government.

The involvement by the Saudi government is now well understood because of the redacted pages from the 9/11 Commission Report.

The Saudi government was giving money and support to the jihadists who executed 9/11 as a form of protection money. The Saudi Royals are scared to death that the "arab spring" and the jihadis will try to overthrow them. So to appease the jihadi nutters, the Saudis got in bed with them.

The Saudis need America to buy their oil. They have no incentive to want to blow up New York City. They're just gutless dictators who want to maintain that status quo.

The Israelis have no incentive to blow up New York City either. They are totally dependent on United States handouts. And they have a very entrenched influence on American politics already.

The link you posted is utter nonsense.

BobW wrote:

TEOTWAWKI wrote:

incidentally it wasn't Americans it was Saudis and Israelis in cahoots with high officials in our government.

The link you posted is utter nonsense.  

But, but, but - it was on the INTERNETZ! It must be true!!!!!

teo doesn't believe that horseshit. teo is a smart guy and he knows how insane it is to claim that A-bombs were planted in the bedrock 200 feet below the skyscrapers
He's just trying to get a rise out of us like always.

Cui Bono...the Zionists have benefited a great deal from the 911 event. But you Dilberts can continue believing in the man in the cave and his magic airplanes....Larry (pull-it) Silverstein alone made a fortune.

True BobW, I don't exactly know how they were brought down but the official story wasn't it. So I look at even the most extreme explanations which might hold a kernel of truth. Certainly WTC7 was imploded and if it was they all were...case closed.

TEOTWAWKI wrote:

Larry (pull-it) Silverstein alone made a fortune.

It's now well documented common knowledge (except to tinfoilers) that Silverstein deliberately underinsured the World Trade Center to save money on insurance premiums.

Why would someone who underinsured his property want to destroy that property just to collect on an insurance claim?
The ONLY reason Silverstein didn't lose his ass on the WTC loss was because his lawyers convinced the courts to rule the 9/11 attacks were two separate events (two planes striking different towers) so Silverstein could collect the maximum amount twice.
Nobody in his right mind would risk losing so much money on a gamble that the courts would rule in his favor.

LOL he never made the first insurance payment...great timing.

TEOTWAWKI wrote:

LOL he never made the first insurance payment...great timing.

After the Port Authority decided to put the WTC complex up for lease,  Silverstein put a bid in on it and that lease was awarded to Silverstein on July 24, 2001.  The insurance policy was purchased and all this took place only a month before the 9/11 attack.  

So let's see now.  Here's Silverstein planning to blow up the property a month later and collect on the largest insurance fraud in the history of the world.  So what does he do?  He insures the property for a lot less than it's actual value.  And even more insane,  he knows he will lose hundreds of millions of dollars in lost tenant revenue over the next ten years until the buildings can be rebuilt.
If this is the modus operandi of the "zionists",  then it amazes me how the zionists have taken over the world. I imagine the zionists must be in cahoots with the Keystone Cops.  lol

He got double so do you have a point ?

That's right, his legal team was able to convince the courts that the two airliners should result in two claims. But the point is that no one would make a gamble like that. He would know full well that if he lost such a crazy gamble as that, he would have collected half what the property he was destroying was actually worth. But even aside from that, if he intended to destroy the property to collect on insurance, why in the world would he have under-insured the property to begin with. And of course the answer is that neither he nor anybody else would ever do such a stupid thing.

All this crazy conspiracy stuff involving him resulted only because he said the words "pull it". When the fact is that "pull it" is not even a term used in the explosive demolition industry. It's a fire department term. And it becomes a lot more clear when Silverstein's whole quote is presented. Here that is...

"I remember getting a call from the Fire Department commander, telling me they were not sure they were gonna be able to contain the fire, and I said, you know, 'We've had such terrible loss of life, maybe the smartest thing to do is just pull it.' And they made that decision to pull and then we watched the building collapse."

"The most important operational decision to be made that afternoon was the collapse (Of the WTC towers) had damaged 7 World Trade Center, which is about a 50 story building, at Vesey between West Broadway and Washington Street. It had very heavy fire on many floors and I ordered the evacuation of an area sufficient around to protect our members, so we had to give up some rescue operations that were going on at the time and back the people away far enough so that if 7 World Trade did collapse, we [wouldn't] lose any more people. We continued to operate on what we could from that distance and approximately an hour and a half after that order was [given], at 5:30 in the afternoon, World Trade Center collapsed completely" - Daniel Nigro, FDNY Chief

"Early on, there was concern that 7 World Trade Center might have been both impacted by the collapsing tower and had several fires in it and there was a concern that it might collapse. So we instructed that a collapse area -- (Q. A collapse zone?) -- Yeah -- be set up and maintained so that when the expected collapse of 7 happened, we wouldn't have people working in it. There was considerable discussion with Con Ed regarding the substation in that building and the feeders and the oil coolants and so on. And their concern was of the type of fire we might have when it collapsed." - Chief Cruthers

The explosives were planted and the fix was already in. The right palms were greased and on with the show.

There is no way they could have previous knowledge 7 would collapse ... But they did and reported it 30 minutes before it did on the BBC

Finally, and then I'll stop, there is that other thing about this that would be so preposterous and nobody ever talks about it.
Why would a man who was committing the largest insurance fraud in the history of the world which resulted in the horrible mass murder of 3000 innocent people; why in the name of sense would that man confess to the world on television that he blew up the building?

Duh!

TEOTWAWKI wrote:

There is no way they could have previous knowledge 7 would collapse ... But they did and reported it 30 minutes before it did on the BBC

The BBC responded to that in an editorial in 2007...

The 9/11 conspiracy theories are pretty well known by now. The BBC addressed them earlier this month with a documentary, The Conspiracy Files, shown within the UK.

Until now, I don't think we've been accused of being part of the conspiracy. But now some websites are using news footage from BBC World on September 11th 2001 to suggest we were actively participating in some sort of attempt to manipulate the audience. As a result, we're now getting lots of emails asking us to clarify our position. So here goes:

1. We're not part of a conspiracy. Nobody told us what to say or do on September 11th. We didn't get told in advance that buildings were going to fall down. We didn't receive press releases or scripts in advance of events happening.

2. In the chaos and confusion of the day, I'm quite sure we said things which turned out to be untrue or inaccurate - but at the time were based on the best information we had. We did what we always did - sourced our reports, used qualifying words like "apparently" or "it's reported" or "we're hearing" and constantly tried to check and double check the information we were receiving.

3. Our reporter Jane Standley was in New York on the day of the attacks, and like everyone who was there, has the events seared on her mind. I've spoken to her today and unsurprisingly, she doesn't remember minute-by-minute what she said or did - like everybody else that day she was trying to make sense of what she was seeing; what she was being told; and what was being told to her by colleagues in London who were monitoring feeds and wires services.

4. We no longer have the original tapes of our 9/11 coverage (for reasons of cock-up, not conspiracy). So if someone has got a recording of our output, I'd love to get hold of it. We do have the tapes for our sister channel News 24, but they don't help clear up the issue one way or another.

5. If we reported the building had collapsed before it had done so, it would have been an error - no more than that. As one of the comments on You Tube says today "so the guy in the studio didn't quite know what was going on? Woah, that totally proves conspiracy... "

Looked like panic to me. Hey what the hell it has served its purpose and you will feel the boot on your neck soon enough.