You realize a job of that magnitude would take months to complete, with MILES of wiring, tons of equipment, explosives and manpower -- with unfettered access to the building(s)? WTC was what you would call "fettered".

So, yes it could be possible, but not under the circumstances of 9/11.

PornoStar69: This is not the forum for this, I think.

This has got to be a fake nick winding people up... No one can be THIS stupid.

Bush talks about EXPLOSIVES in building (on 9/11?)
https://youtube.com/watch?v=USnxe7hxP4I


WTC Witness heard Sonic Boom from...Missile on 9/11
https://youtube.com/watch?v=iqrdX0rX64U

WTC Witness Saw a Missile on 9/11
https://youtube.com/watch?v=aHVg9P73lQ0&feature=related

World Trade Center Attack Confirmation in 1996 (Movie [The Long Kiss Good Night])
https://youtube.com/watch?v=ntpTuOpnt70&feature=related

http://www.gofuckyourself.com/showth...5#post14968205

:2 cents::2 cents:

911 "Nose Out" Plane Cameraman Suggests TV Fakery is Reality
https://youtube.com/watch?v=P5PZxGsYNnY



9/11 no nose no plane (TV FAKERY)
https://youtube.com/watch?v=C9FAWi_u1hg&feature=related

http://www.gofuckyourself.com/showth...5#post14968205

:2 cents::2 cents:

some ppl need to get a life

Oh, come on, you wouldn't want GFY to be empty, would you?

See my sig for explosive payouts!

Shameless plug in drama thread!

PornoStar trying to convince the sheeple on gfy that there is holes in the official story of what happened on 9-11 is a waste of time. They're like little kids putting their hands over their ears and going lalalala so they can't hear you. They think that their Governments love them and would never do anything to hurt them and are always working with their best interest in mind. lol Now I don't believe that Bush was the master mind behind 9-11, or lasers from outter space knocked down the buildings, but with all the new information that is out there you would think they would want at the least a new independent investigation into these matters.

Enjoy taking your chip :)

True this would take a while or would it? How did they pull building 7 in just a few hours though? :)

:1orglaugh:1orglaugh:1orglaugh:1orglaugh

Hei man! You woke up too late..The whole world does know it since the second day it happened...but great that you know it too

You have to admit, you can find all sorts of idiots on here.

What more proof could anyone need

:1orglaugh:1orglaugh:1orglaugh

so Hollywood was in on the conspiracy too?

Wow...I'm actually speechless.

Hey Germ doesnt matter what you say, i can debunk whatever the US gov throws down

I would love to own the media, i'll make everyone believe pigs can really fly

WTC Collapse 911 (wnplus) UK Channel 5 news

wtc collaspes in 7 seconds (spot the flashes)
https://youtube.com/watch?v=7C8SDoZdFrk

Do you what it takes to perform one of these jobs? No I'm not an expert, but I know more than the average conspiracy nut who just blurts out "they were wired to blow" without even thinking for a second about the enormity of the task.

The largest recorded controlled demo was performed on 2.2 million square feet of office space. It was month long job with an army of engineers, who had TOTAL access to the building. It was empty.

The WTC combined was about 12 million square feet. Do that math compared to the reigning grandaddy of controlled demos.

So how are the buildings going to be wired to blow under the noses of everyone working there? It's a logistical nightmare already, doing just one of the buildings, even if it was empty. Tons of explosives and drilling equipment being hauled up many floors, miles and miles of wiring laying through hallways and wherever they needed to be.

And who was doing this job? Was there an army of evil experts not only with enough skill to execute the plan, but with no qualms about killing innocent people -- and also able to keep it quiet.

President Clinton couldn't even sneak a damn blowjob. You people need to stop and think sometimes.

The government is not my friend, that's for sure, but even if they would do this, they couldn't.

Building 7 was not pulled -- you pulled that out of your ass like it's a fact or something.

just like you said, its just that some are just inclined to think like what the they perceive as not like the rest

The Nova documentary didn't explain why the base of the Towers fell.

Lasers from outerspace? You must link some articles about that one!

Fabled Enemies - http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...33190875239407

I dont think they did it but I do think they knew it was coming and looked the other way.

I like tits.

what utter bollocks

9 of the 19 hi-jackers are still alive

Robin Cook, the Database and Secrets

On the day after the July 7th, 2005 bombings on London transport, former foreign secretary Robin Cook MP wrote what turned out to be his penultimate newspaper column for the Guardian. In it he revealed something about al-Qaeda that perhaps he shouldn't have.

Bin Laden was, though, a product of a monumental miscalculation by western security agencies. Throughout the 80s he was armed by the CIA and funded by the Saudis to wage jihad against the Russian occupation of Afghanistan.

Al-Qaida, literally "the database", was originally the computer file of the thousands of mujahideen who were recruited and trained with help from the CIA to defeat the Russians. Inexplicably, and with disastrous consequences, it never appears to have occurred to Washington that once Russia was out of the way, Bin Laden's organisation would turn its attention to the west.

As far as I know, this was the first time publicly, in the anglophone world, that the al-Qaeda name had been explained as referring to a computer database.

In the francophone world, a colourful former French military intelligence officer, Pierre-Henri Bunel, had had a book published in 2004, "Proche-Orient, une guerre mondiale?", extracts of which appeared [in French] on a French conspiracy website. The extract went into some detail of how al-Qaeda originally referred to a computer database of Islamist fighters. But, AFAIK, it was not until after Robin Cook had revealed the same in the Guardian, and after his death a month later, that an English translation of Bunel's words appeared on the web. It's a rough translation, which doesn't read well. But the basic outline of his account accords with what Cook had revealed.

Here's my suspicion: that Robin Cook knew nothing about P-H Bunel's book or article, and that his knowledge of the origin of the Qaeda name stemmed solelyfrom his time at the Foreign and Commonwealth Office. In other words, that both men had, independently of each other, revealed that, as they understood it, the designation 'al-Qaeda' had originally referred to a computer database. And, according to Bunel, that that name had been operative at least by the mid-'80s.

But yesterday MI5 the government published its 'narrative' of the July 7th bombings [.pdf]. Annex 3 of the whitewash was a chronology of the development of modern jihadism. Extract:

c1984 Radical preacher Abdullah Azzam set up an organisation called Maktab al-Khidmat (MAK) "Bureau of Services" to disseminate propaganda about jihad in Afghanistan. Usama bin Laden (UbL) joins.

1989 Withdrawal of Soviet forces from Afghanistan. UbL returns to Saudi Arabia. Decision by MAK to continue to support jihadist causes. Thinking around "the base" or "foundation" (translation: Al Qaida) for further operations articulated.

1988-89 UbL disagreement over focus of the cause and starts to form Al Qaida. [...]

So, MI5's version of the aetiology of the 'Qaeda' name makes no mention of computer databases, or its use by western intelligence agencies before 1989, and it repeats previous explanations as to its origins. So, either Cook and Bunel were wrong, or they were right but wrong to reveal it. And while Bunel is a peripheral figure lacking credibility, Robin Cook was neither.

When I first read Cook's July 8th article, and the zinger about 'al-Qaeda' as a database, I wondered about what secret he might reveal to us next. But now I wonder about what, say, MI6 thought about the possibility of the former foreign secretary, who had signed the Official Secrets Act for life, revealing other things that he shouldn't (if, that is, the database story were true). Then, it would have become a matter of national security. How could they prevent him from repeating his mistake? Could they have had him arrested and charged under the OSA? Did they try to speak to him, between July 8th and August 6th, 2005, to warn him as to his future conduct?

If Robin Cook was starting to spill secrets, his sudden death one month later would have saved the defence, intelligence and security services from having to confront a difficult problem, one which would have had no obvious, certain solution.

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

Pakistani General Who Wired $100,000 to Mohammad Atta Met with a "Senior Representative from the Joint Chiefs of Staff" Right Before 9/11

In response to a Freedom of Information Act Request submitted by Kevin Ryan, Mick Harrison and Paul Smith, the government has disclosed documents confirming that Pakistani ISI General Ahmed - the guy who wired $100,000 to lead hijacker Atta -- met with a "Senior Representative from the Joint Chiefs of Staff", Centcom Commander General Tommy Franks, the Director of the Defense Intelligence Agency, Wolfowitz, Feith, other PNAC members, and probably Intelligence Committee members Graham and Goss, and others in the week before 9/11.

All credit goes to Kevin, Mick and Paul. I'm just reporting on their efforts.