Building 7 Discussion Continued Here

JD, you have some sense. Do you have any reliable sources that can confirm that Building 7 collapsed the way it did accidentally?

Define ''reliable''.

Who would you believe?

Other than Jesus?

Art Bell?

A report that doesn't have a vested interest in the outcome. Something independent. Jesus would be fine.

A report that doesn't have a vested interest in the outcome. Something independent. Jesus would be fine. Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy

In the famous words of Maxwell Smart...


Would you believe Allāh?

Let me take a break from our delightful ribbing banter to ask you a serious question. And I am being serious, for a change. Since you are one of those who are certain that the Bush administration was one of the worst in history, as am I, and believe that he lied about WMD's and many other things, why do you take his word on what was arguably the biggest event of our lifetime, as if it were Gospel Truth? You don't have to believe that he destroyed the buildings in a false flag attack to believe that there is missing information. Even the chairs of the commission were unsatisfied with their findings. So why the blind support for President Bush?

Just asking.

Time Line of Building 7 Collapse:

..After the North Tower collapsed, some firefighters entered 7 World Trade Center to search the building. They attempted to extinguish small pockets of fire, but low water pressure hindered their efforts. Over the course of the day fires burned out of control on several floors of 7 World Trade Center, the flames visible on the east side of the building. During the afternoon, fire was also seen on floors 6–10, 13–14, 19–22, and 29–30. In particular, the fires on floors 7 through 9 and 11 through 13 continued to burn out of control during the afternoon. At approximately 2:00 pm, firefighters noticed a bulge in the southwest corner of 7 World Trade Center between the 10th and 13th floors, a sign that the building was unstable and might collapse. During the afternoon, firefighters also heard creaking sounds coming from the building. Around 3:30 pm FDNY Chief Daniel Nigro decided to halt rescue operations, surface removal, and searches along the surface of the debris near 7 World Trade Center and evacuate the area due to concerns for the safety of personnel. At 5:20:33 pm EDT the building started to collapse, with the crumble of the east mechanical penthouse, and at 5:21:10 pm EDT it collapsed completely. ...

And COG would now say: The buildng collapsed on it's own footprint, therefore, it was a controlled demoliton , orchestrated by (Bush, CIA, Silverstien and the NYPD, pick your boogey man, afterall Bush lied !) .

I also believe Bush was one of the worse Presidents in our history; but I don't believe he lied about WMDs in Iraq....I think Clinton (both bill and hillary), Kerry, Al Gore, Harry Reid, and hosts of others also believed the intelliegnece reports, the UN stuides, and other info that said SH had WMDs.

And your arguement for a Building 7 controlled demoliton depends on you making Bush to be a liar ?

Your conspiracy theories get more webby each sentence. This is the problem with conspiracy theories...they don't need facts and they rely on the public to suspend their reasonable judgements.

We know Bush was a liar. I just want to find out if this is the truth. So far, nothing verifies his story.

Your a moroon; address your statement that Buildilng 7 was blown up.

What proof do you have ?

You have none ; other than Bush lied and your opinon that Building 7 collapse couldn't have possibly happened on it's own footprint.

BTW; Bush didn't lie regarding WMDs in Iraq.

OK, I said nothing of the kind. I said that I know of no building that ever collapsed like that without a controlled demolition. I am trying to find information that says Building 7 was NOT a controlled demolition.

I'll ask you, why do you take the Bush administration's word as gospel when we know they lied about almost everything related to 9-11, such as WMD's, Iraqi involvement in the attacks, etc.? It's not like they were careful with the facts about anything. So why this one, the biggest event of our lifetime, why do you believe they were totally transparent and on the level, and released everything they knew?

espousing these conspiracies and musing about "what if's" and "maybe's" and supposed "factoids" that fly in the face of true fact and true causal agents and then no matter the explanation given, refusing to accept the explanation as satisfactory, only harms and detracts and lessens the worth of anything one might say that does have merit.

Yes you did; that makes you a Bush-like liar...here is your quote from the previous thread.......

"I have no idea who blew up the buildings. "

http://www.eccie.net/showpost.php?p=2368814&postcou nt=74

OK, I said nothing of the kind. I said that I know of no building that ever collapsed like that without a controlled demolition. I am trying to find information that says Building 7 was NOT a controlled demolition.

I'll ask you, why do you take the Bush administration's word as gospel when we know they lied about almost everything related to 9-11, such as WMD's, Iraqi involvement in the attacks, etc.? It's not like they were careful with the facts about anything. So why this one, the biggest event of our lifetime, why do you believe they were totally transparent and on the level, and released everything they knew? Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy

It's the conspiracy theory nuts who need to answer the questions for the rest of us; not the other way around...

Again, if the buildings were a controlled demoliton, then who do you think blew them up and why?

COG, these types of arguments simply make you look silly.

And that openning line, "we know Bush is a Liar". That is an absolute that I do not agree with. Yes, he was naive about some of the circumstances in Iraq, but as Whirly just pointed out, so was most of the civilized world.

You will never let facts get in the way of a good fable.