Jump to content

Welcome to canucks.com Vancouver Canucks homepage

Photo

John Kerry Says WTC 7 Was Brought Down in a Controlled Fashion


  • Please log in to reply
66 replies to this topic

#1 hsedin33

hsedin33

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,672 posts
  • Joined: 14-February 10

Posted 15 September 2013 - 12:29 AM

Not sure if this was ever posted here



He says a wall on the WTC 7 was in danger of causing more damage so they decided to bring down the building in a controlled fashion.

I
  • 1

#2 VancouverCanucksRock

VancouverCanucksRock

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,412 posts
  • Joined: 11-February 09

Posted 15 September 2013 - 12:41 AM

so how can that be DEBUNKED, hmmm?
  • 1
Posted Image WHen idiots think numbers are words, I do believe in 2012 for cleansing Earth of the idiots

#3 Henrik Kesler

Henrik Kesler

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,732 posts
  • Joined: 05-April 13

Posted 15 September 2013 - 12:42 AM

"Conspiracy theory" says that all three towers fell because it was an inside job based on the cut/break angle of the steel...
  • 0

#4 In the Slot

In the Slot

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,229 posts
  • Joined: 29-June 13

Posted 15 September 2013 - 04:56 AM

Interesting...so let me get this straight..
  • In the midst of Pearl Harbour 2011
  • In a building right between the twin towers
  • While they are burning
  • People running for their lives
  • The government sends in demolition experts to wire / set charges throughout a building,
  • All in 3 hours (it usually takes days to do it, and months of planning to do it right)
  • They pull down wtc 7...
hmm...its funny what americans accept as the 'explanation'....John Kerry pretty much told the world right there, that the truthers are right...
  • 4
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"If you can't win an argument, correct the grammar instead"
- Internet Troll Handbook Chapter 1 pg 23


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"Especially if the Kassian's are 6'3'' mountain men with missing teeth and cool tattoos and the Hodgson's are short legged weirdos with politician parents" - Hansen36

#5 CB007

CB007

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,661 posts
  • Joined: 23-October 03

Posted 15 September 2013 - 07:15 AM

Don't know whats going on behind the scenes but how not EVERYONE in America realizes that WTC 7 was not burned down is beyond believe.
  • 0
Posted Image

#6 Dittohead

Dittohead

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,192 posts
  • Joined: 13-August 04

Posted 15 September 2013 - 07:54 AM

GWB wired the building himself.
  • 0

#7 aqua59

aqua59

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,963 posts
  • Joined: 16-January 08

Posted 15 September 2013 - 08:15 AM

Not sure if this was ever posted here

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iHKgMssSIEk

He says a wall on the WTC 7 was in danger of causing more damage so they decided to bring down the building in a controlled fashion.

I

Funny if it's true. This statement means they quickly wired it for demo and brought it down, the same day of the towers falling?
  • 0

#8 aqua59

aqua59

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,963 posts
  • Joined: 16-January 08

Posted 15 September 2013 - 08:18 AM

This is one of the better 911 so called documentary. Very interesting and well done, true? I don't know. Takes some time but interesting.


  • 1

#9 Dittohead

Dittohead

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,192 posts
  • Joined: 13-August 04

Posted 15 September 2013 - 08:19 AM

he's talking about a wall they brought down not the whole building...anyway carry on.
  • 0

#10 nucklehead

nucklehead

    Canucks Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,446 posts
  • Joined: 23-March 03

Posted 15 September 2013 - 08:29 AM

he's talking about a wall they brought down not the whole building...anyway carry on.


Care to elaborate? You seem to be quite knowledgable about what happened on that day so please, enlighten us.
  • 0
biggerabacus_zps5cae10b6.jpg

I got kicked out of the slut walk for trying to bid on the participants.

-BananaMash

#11 Remy

Remy

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,172 posts
  • Joined: 17-December 08

Posted 15 September 2013 - 08:42 AM

http://www.popularme...ry/news/4220721


For the conspiracy theorists.

"Something seems suspicious, therefore, INSIDE JOB. Must be, it makes so much sense when I imagine it in my mind with no real facts or proof to back it up except for some exceptionally mild hearsay and conjecture! Gosh everyone else is SO DUMB that they can't see what's painfully obvious if you really, really stretch some facts."
  • 1

#12 Dittohead

Dittohead

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,192 posts
  • Joined: 13-August 04

Posted 15 September 2013 - 08:50 AM

Care to elaborate? You seem to be quite knowledgable about what happened on that day so please, enlighten us.


Can't you listen? The guy asks him about demoing the building and the lease holder making billions and an investigation.. Kerry replies I don't know anything about that but he then says there was a WALL they brought down because it was dangerous then the video cuts off. I'm pretty sure a wall was brought down after the attacks happened because it would prob fall on the rescue efforts... got it?
  • 2

#13 Dittohead

Dittohead

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,192 posts
  • Joined: 13-August 04

Posted 15 September 2013 - 08:56 AM

Bill Clinton failed in his attempt to bring the WTC down so they had to elect The Master Mind GWB to do it. Total inside job.
  • 1

#14 Harbinger

Harbinger

    Canucks Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,198 posts
  • Joined: 12-October 05

Posted 15 September 2013 - 09:07 AM

Ditto and I may disagree on a lot of things. But not on this one. Too funny
  • 0

Posted Image


#15 elvis15

elvis15

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 21,309 posts
  • Joined: 27-February 07

Posted 15 September 2013 - 09:32 AM

Can't you listen? The guy asks him about demoing the building and the lease holder making billions and an investigation.. Kerry replies I don't know anything about that but he then says there was a WALL they brought down because it was dangerous then the video cuts off. I'm pretty sure a wall was brought down after the attacks happened because it would prob fall on the rescue efforts... got it?

It's pretty obvious he's about to say something else as well when the video cuts off, but the conspiracy theorists got their sound bite. People clearly are skipping the time that 7 WTC was brought down - which the reporter himself mentions.

More from Wikipedia:

The South Tower collapsed at 9:59 a.m. after burning for 56 minutes in a fire caused by the impact of United Airlines Flight 175 and the explosion of its fuel. The North Tower collapsed at 10:28 a.m. after burning for 102 minutes. When the North Tower collapsed, debris fell on the nearby 7 World Trade Center building (7 WTC), damaging it and starting fires. These fires burned for hours, compromising the building's structural integrity, and 7 WTC collapsed at 5:21 p.m.

Those are facts about when the buildings collapsed, with the 7 WTC building having been damaged from the other collapse 7 hours earlier. Considering that much time had elapsed it's reasonable that there was a window where they could bring down a wall (not a whole building, Kerry says wall as ditto mentioned already) with a controlled demolition to prevent it from being a danger to rescue teams in the area.

Edited by elvis15, 15 September 2013 - 09:33 AM.

  • 0

c3c9e9.pnganimalhousesig.jpg

Tanev is going to EDM. I can put my life savings down on it

 


#16 TOMapleLaughs

TOMapleLaughs

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 32,294 posts
  • Joined: 19-September 05

Posted 15 September 2013 - 10:21 AM

Interesting they'd admit it... Now...
  • 1
Posted Image

#17 Wolfman Jack

Wolfman Jack

    Canucks Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,532 posts
  • Joined: 27-April 07

Posted 15 September 2013 - 10:29 AM

Bill Clinton failed in his attempt to bring the WTC down so they had to elect The Master Mind GWB to do it. Total inside job.

"W" may have a mind, but he certainly hasn't mastered it yet
  • 0
Men never do evil so completely and cheerfully as when they do it from religious conviction.
Blaise Pascal

#18 theminister

theminister

    Head Troll

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 12,511 posts
  • Joined: 07-July 03

Posted 15 September 2013 - 10:45 AM

he's talking about a wall they brought down not the whole building...anyway carry on.


Which wall is he referring to?

I've never heard anything about any demolition going on that day.

That alone is a new insight and does raise questions.
  • 1

Posted ImageNEW YORK ISLANDERS ROSTER - CDC GM LEAGUEPosted Image


2013 CDCGML CUP CHAMPIONS


#19 VICanucksfan5551

VICanucksfan5551

    Canucks Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,045 posts
  • Joined: 11-August 04

Posted 15 September 2013 - 12:06 PM

The video was originally from 2007. I'm not sure why a senator would have knowledge of something that was apparently a secret part of a conspiracy. Are truthers claiming he was part of the conspiracy and slipped up? It sounds more to me like he's confused and not exactly sure of the facts and what he's saying. Stating that a "wall" was taken down doesn't really match up with what happened with WTC 7.

Here's the whole quote for reference:
"I don't believe there's been a formal investigation. I haven't heard that; I don't know that. I do know that that wall, I remember, was in danger and I think they made the decision based on the danger that it had in destroying other things-- that they did it in a controlled fashion. You know he's part of the construction-- effort for the memorial and the use of the land, etc. There's been a long tug-of-war going on in New York and I've not been following every aspect of it because it's not in my jurisdiction, so to speak. But I'll check on the story-- I'll take a look at it based on what you've said. You're the first people anywhere in the country who've brought this to my attention."
  • 0
Posted Image
Posted ImagePosted ImagePosted ImagePosted Image

#20 hsedin33

hsedin33

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,672 posts
  • Joined: 14-February 10

Posted 15 September 2013 - 12:11 PM

More of the interview


  • 1

#21 hsedin33

hsedin33

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,672 posts
  • Joined: 14-February 10

Posted 17 September 2013 - 07:37 PM



Here is the video the reporter is referring too, about them 'pulling' WTC 7. He didn't want to risk more firemen losing their lives, so they pulled it. Must have been one super intense demolitions team, running through a burning building with enough explosives to take down a reinforced 47 story steel structure only to have the whole thing taken down perfectly on its own footprint. (Oh, without anyone knowing or seeing them). Kudos to them :rolleyes:
  • 1

#22 nucklehead

nucklehead

    Canucks Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,446 posts
  • Joined: 23-March 03

Posted 17 September 2013 - 08:40 PM

Funny if it's true. This statement means they quickly wired it for demo and brought it down, the same day of the towers falling?


He's just repeating what Larry Silverstein already said. You can't put the toothpaste back in the tube once it's been squeezed.
  • 0
biggerabacus_zps5cae10b6.jpg

I got kicked out of the slut walk for trying to bid on the participants.

-BananaMash

#23 VICanucksfan5551

VICanucksfan5551

    Canucks Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,045 posts
  • Joined: 11-August 04

Posted 17 September 2013 - 09:23 PM



Here is the video the reporter is referring too, about them 'pulling' WTC 7. He didn't want to risk more firemen losing their lives, so they pulled it. Must have been one super intense demolitions team, running through a burning building with enough explosives to take down a reinforced 47 story steel structure only to have the whole thing taken down perfectly on its own footprint. (Oh, without anyone knowing or seeing them). Kudos to them :rolleyes:

It was in reference to the firefighter operation going on there.
  • 1
Posted Image
Posted ImagePosted ImagePosted ImagePosted Image

#24 Offensive Threat

Offensive Threat

    Canucks Second-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,588 posts
  • Joined: 18-March 03

Posted 17 September 2013 - 10:20 PM

Wake up sheeple! The towers were never brought down! They are still there hidden behind carefully placed mirrors! Its now the NSA's super secret base for monitoring our thoughts. Its so obvious.



Conspiracy theories are for people who want to feel important or special and have no way to do that in a productive way so they get into this ridiculous "hobby".
  • 3

Posted Image


#25 hsedin33

hsedin33

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,672 posts
  • Joined: 14-February 10

Posted 18 September 2013 - 01:54 AM

It was in reference to the firefighter operation going on there.



The term pull-it meant to take it down. If the building seriously fell based on damage and fire, it would have come down in chucks and pieces, parts of it would still be standing. Look at buildings in world war two, you have buildings made of brick that sustained bombings and intense fire, but they still stood to some degree. But this 47 level reinforced steel structure comes toppling right down? Not to mention in free fall motion at all four corners. If you look at the middle of the roof, it collapsed inward right before and during the collapse, which is typical to make a building fall into itself and not out. I'm sorry but it just doesn't look right. It looks like a building was brought down on itself by design or at least had a little help. Visually if this doesn't look in the least bit fishy to you then there isn't much more we can argue about, because that is what I'm going on.

Edited by hsedin33, 18 September 2013 - 01:56 AM.

  • 0

#26 La Mauviette75

La Mauviette75

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,243 posts
  • Joined: 28-February 12

Posted 18 September 2013 - 05:45 AM

The term pull-it meant to take it down.


No, it's referring to firefighters pulling out of the building. The original conversation, which is so often misquoted was between Silverstein and the fire chief. he was saying that considering the amount of life lost already and the nature of the fires in building 7, it was probably best to just get everyone out.

not to mention that pulling a building, even in demolition terminology, doesn't refer to bringing a building down with explosives, but rather with cables, which clearly wasn't the case on 9/11.

http://www.debunking911.com/pull.htm
  • 2
Posted Image

O Ville Lumière, Sens la chaleur, de notre coeur

#27 nucklehead

nucklehead

    Canucks Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,446 posts
  • Joined: 23-March 03

Posted 18 September 2013 - 06:03 AM

No, it's referring to firefighters pulling out of the building. The original conversation, which is so often misquoted was between Silverstein and the fire chief. he was saying that considering the amount of life lost already and the nature of the fires in building 7, it was probably best to just get everyone out.

not to mention that pulling a building, even in demolition terminology, doesn't refer to bringing a building down with explosives, but rather with cables, which clearly wasn't the case on 9/11.

http://www.debunking911.com/pull.htm


Wow...
  • 0
biggerabacus_zps5cae10b6.jpg

I got kicked out of the slut walk for trying to bid on the participants.

-BananaMash

#28 VICanucksfan5551

VICanucksfan5551

    Canucks Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,045 posts
  • Joined: 11-August 04

Posted 18 September 2013 - 06:43 AM

The term pull-it meant to take it down. If the building seriously fell based on damage and fire, it would have come down in chucks and pieces, parts of it would still be standing. Look at buildings in world war two, you have buildings made of brick that sustained bombings and intense fire, but they still stood to some degree. But this 47 level reinforced steel structure comes toppling right down? Not to mention in free fall motion at all four corners. If you look at the middle of the roof, it collapsed inward right before and during the collapse, which is typical to make a building fall into itself and not out. I'm sorry but it just doesn't look right. It looks like a building was brought down on itself by design or at least had a little help. Visually if this doesn't look in the least bit fishy to you then there isn't much more we can argue about, because that is what I'm going on.

A layman's opinion of what "looks fishy" means exactly nothing.
  • 0
Posted Image
Posted ImagePosted ImagePosted ImagePosted Image

#29 Batmania

Batmania

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,133 posts
  • Joined: 29-June 13

Posted 18 September 2013 - 07:05 AM

Dear god some of you folks are funny.
  • 0
Posted Image

#30 ronthecivil

ronthecivil

    Canucks All-Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 18,222 posts
  • Joined: 18-August 05

Posted 18 September 2013 - 08:03 AM

Not this again.....
  • 0




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users

Canucks.com is the official Web site of The Vancouver Canucks. The Vancouver Canucks and Canucks.com are trademarks of The Vancouver Canucks Limited Partnership.  NHL and the word mark and image of the Stanley Cup are registered trademarks and the NHL Shield and NHL Conference logos are trademarks of the National Hockey League. All NHL logos and marks and NHL team logos and marks as well as all other proprietary materials depicted herein are the property of the NHL and the respective NHL teams and may not be reproduced without the prior written consent of NHL Enterprises, L.P.  Copyright © 2009 The Vancouver Canucks Limited Partnership and the National Hockey League.  All Rights Reserved.