|
Post by jennyfromtheblock on Mar 30, 2014 13:36:02 GMT -5
Actually Larry lost BILLIONS on this attack. Insurance wouldnt cover all the damages and wouldnt cover rebuilding expenses. He also had to pay rent on the site that was generating ZERO income for years. You may want to read up on some facts about this misconception. He didnt profit at all. Larry Silverstein's huge loss
|
|
|
Post by anonymoushacker on Mar 30, 2014 14:42:03 GMT -5
Well golly gee, who else has been the #1 terrorist that could pull off a massive attack on foreign soil at the time and has been responsible for countless attacks around the world pror to 9/11? Old Agnes of 32 Meadow Lane in Bumbletown Idaho? Refresh my memory, who blew up the USS Cole? WTC 1993? Khobar Towers? Embassy Bombings in East Africa? Assassination attempts on the Pope and Pres Clinton? Yeaah. not too hard to figure out who dunno it after previous massive causality attacks. Hell even I knew it was OBL while I watched the attacks. youd have to have been pretty dense not to think or entertain the possibility of his involvement. Well congratulations! You solved the case an hour after it happened? The USG should disband their entire intelligence gathering community and just hire you.....again, kudos for your service to humanity.
|
|
|
Post by markedman on Mar 30, 2014 23:03:42 GMT -5
Well congratulations! You solved the case an hour after it happened? The USG should disband their entire intelligence gathering community and just hire you.....again, kudos for your service to humanity. Ah ok, so its wrong then to point the finger at the person that was actively saying "Death to America" 10x a day, was responsible for numerous mass casualty attacks in the past and just blew up a Navy destroyer less than a year earlier? Riiiight.... Plus, it was extremely obvious who dunnit, and also, they confirmed, and the kicker, OBL himself ADMITTED IT!!!
|
|
|
Post by russianspecialforces on Mar 30, 2014 23:15:57 GMT -5
There are many videos of Building 7 just prior to its collapse. Why don't you watch a few of them and point out to us the massive fires and damage that is apparent in those videos? A picture is worth a thousand words after all...
|
|
|
Post by Apollo_18 on Mar 30, 2014 23:47:56 GMT -5
Actually Larry lost BILLIONS on this attack. Insurance wouldnt cover all the damages and wouldnt cover rebuilding expenses. He also had to pay rent on the site that was generating ZERO income for years. You may want to read up on some facts about this misconception. He didnt profit at all. Larry Silverstein's huge lossHow much money do you figure was spent by the US government as a result of the 9/11 attacks and where did it all go? I just checked the US National Debt Clock and it currently stands at nearly $17 TRILLION dollars. Where did all that money go??? If it was pumped into the US economy then the US economy should be in the biggest boom in history right now!!!
|
|
|
Post by purplehazeleyes on Mar 31, 2014 16:19:32 GMT -5
Well, that took a whole minute to find. At about 50 seconds in you get a nice view of the thick smoke pouring out of the damaged structure over about 20 floors on the damaged side. There aren't a whole lot of videos that show it clearly, for a couple of reasons.
1. The best place to view the fire and damage was from on top of the rubble of the twin towers. Most folks had the common sense to remove themselves from the general area. So most video that we have doesn't show the collapse-damaged side clearly.
2. Aerial views of WTC7 after the collapse of the first two towers are unsurprisingly obscured by lots of smoke and clouds of dust.
|
|
|
Post by johnnyrockers on Mar 31, 2014 16:29:35 GMT -5
Given the fact that Robert Berhinig, P.E. states in “Protecting the Foundation of Fire-Safety,” in the July/August, 2002 IAEI (International Associaton of Electrical Inspectors) that “the FEMA report states further that until the attack on the WTC, no protected steel framed buildings had been known to collapse as a result of fire” and the fact that I did not see the physical damage referred to in the original reply would you please point out that severe damage to me?
|
|
|
Post by hardcoretruth on Mar 31, 2014 16:57:54 GMT -5
Given the fact that Robert Berhinig, P.E. states in “Protecting the Foundation of Fire-Safety,” in the July/August, 2002 IAEI (International Associaton of Electrical Inspectors) that “the FEMA report states further that until the attack on the WTC, no protected steel framed buildings had been known to collapse as a result of fire” and the fact that I did not see the physical damage referred to in the original reply would you please point out that severe damage to me? If you press the play button on the video, you will see smoke pouring out of an approximately 20 story tall gash in the south side of building 7, where falling pieces of the north tower directly impacted it. Maybe that doesn't qualify as 'severe damage' in your book. You asked for photographic evidence, and I provided it. The motto of this site is 'deny ignorance', not 'deny evidence'.
|
|
|
Post by Olivia on Apr 1, 2014 8:41:14 GMT -5
If you press the play button on the video, you will see smoke pouring out of an approximately 20 story tall gash in the south side of building 7, where falling pieces of the north tower directly impacted it. Maybe that doesn't qualify as 'severe damage' in your book. You asked for photographic evidence, and I provided it. The motto of this site is 'deny ignorance', not 'deny evidence'. So in your mind seeing smoke pour from the windows of a steel frame building, with no apparent external damage to the building, despite the fact is well documented that NO such building has ever collapsed before due to fire, constitutes evidence that such a building collapsed due to a fire? Is that how your 'logic' works?
|
|
|
Post by lucky4u on Apr 1, 2014 10:45:52 GMT -5
Actually, at 1:38 you can see that there is visible damage on the southwest corner, that is not even in the part of the building that is emitting enormous volumes of smoke. About the same time, you can see an onlooker say "look at the hole in that building!" Here's another video that shows exterior damage, and not just broken windows. see at about 4:00 minutes in.
|
|