Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Bush-The Mastermind behind 9/11? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Don Earl who wrote (9695)	1/18/2005 3:06:57 PM
From: sea_urchin	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 20039

Don > A blurry video of a guy with a hat and beard is evidence OBL confessed, but a blurry photo of a lady standing in a place that is supposed to be hotter than a blast furnace is not. There is also a blurry video of the lady waving. But, as you say, the fundamental problem is a double standard -- people are not as critical of the official view as they are of anything which disagrees with it. And quite understandably, because it's far easier -- and definitely more beneficial -- to "go with the flow" than against it. > It may or may not be a rationalization but the arguments go something along the lines of, "Well, maybe she came out of a room that hadn't gotten hot enough to melt yet and was going to jump because of the heat." But the truth is that, as the combustible material was consumed, the fire would have become smaller not bigger. Which, in fact, it had. > one of the questions he asked me about the WTC 7 collapse was, "Where did the plane hit that one?" Indeed. This URL shows some good pics of the fire which "raged" in WTC7 prior to Larry Silverstein's suggestion that the building should be "pulled". As far as I can work out there were small fires on two, maybe three, floors and all seemed to have been lit from within because the exterior of the building appears perfectly intact. globalresearch.ca.myforums.net >>Unfortunately, we only have photos of the north and east faces of WTC 7. The official media/government lie suggests that a fire was raging only on the south side of the building, and that this fire never spread to the north face (apart from the minor fires pictured above). However, they do not provide any evidence to back this up, and on the surface this claim seems ludicrous. One also wonders how such small fires managed to start on the north face (the rest of the World Trade Center was to the south and consequently the collapse of the towers should not have impacted the north face of WTC 7 at all). << > unless the evidence hits hard enough to produce a "struck from behind" reaction, it isn't going to make much of a dent in the minds of the faithful. I suppose so and even then it probably won't. Nevertheless, and if only for one's own sake, I think every bit of information helps to justify and reinforce the view that the official story is nonsense.