Guest Stephen Turner Posted June 21, 2007 Share Posted June 21, 2007 The big question here is to whom has the event we call 911 ultimately proven benificial. Other areas I would like Members thoughts on...Iraq, Afganistan, the 2004 Presidential election outcome, Blair, new Labour, and his legacy, Israel- Palistine, relations with the European union, civil liberty issues. Steve. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sid Walker Posted June 21, 2007 Share Posted June 21, 2007 (edited) The big question here is to whom has the event we call 911 ultimately proven benificial.Other areas I would like Members thoughts on...Iraq, Afganistan, the 2004 Presidential election outcome, Blair, new Labour, and his legacy, Israel- Palistine, relations with the European union, civil liberty issues. Steve. The main beneficiaries of 9-11 have been Islamic jihadis, of course, Stephen. Don't you read the papers? Other matters (excuse my brevity)... Iraq = occupied and immiserated Afganistan = occupied and immiserated 2004 Presidential election outcome = stolen (again!) Bliar = War Criminal Nu Labour = pass (the sick bucket) Bliar's legacy = War Crimes Israel-Palestine = invasion, occupation and apartheid on steroids Relations with the European Union = if Bliar becomes President, I may boycott European languages. I already boycott Hebrew. Civil liberty issues = what? Did I miss anything? Edited June 21, 2007 by Sid Walker Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sid Walker Posted June 21, 2007 Share Posted June 21, 2007 (edited) Why is it that I have no great expectations of the veracity of Loose Change Avery?David Or Alex Jones for that matter. Why would bombs be set off hours before they planned to demo the building while there still were people inside? I agree Len. Sounds like a load of horse manure. But then again, did you ever hear the tale about the 47-floor building in NYC that one sunny day just happened to fall down at near free fall velocity in its own footprint because of a few fires? Or the major news organization that reported this unprecedented collapse 20 minutes before it actually happened? I think with WTC-7, one just has to admit that anything's possible. Why not wait and see what's in the new movie before sneering? (silly question) Edited June 21, 2007 by Sid Walker Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sid Walker Posted June 21, 2007 Share Posted June 21, 2007 An interesting article in Infowars.com, focusing mainly, but not exclusively, about Michael Moore's apparent shift in views I notice Amy Goodman is feeling the heat from an inquiring public. Poor Amy! Passed her use-by date as a pinko mocking bird - and she has so much more to give. She needs a real job in the mass media where she won't have to encounter the great unwashed. Filmmaker Michael Moore Now Says 9/11 Could Be Inside Job Discusses Explosions in Buildings, Demands '100 Angles' of Pentagon Video, and Calls for a New Investigation-- "They Haven't Even Told Us Half the Truth." Infowars Network | June 18, 2007 Academy Award winner Michael Moore answered questions on 9/11 truth during a sneak peak of his new documentary, SiCKO, in New York . Our reporters were initially avoided by Moore, but he subsequently decided to approach We Are Change.org/ Infowars.com reporters for a discussion. Moore brought up his lingering questions on 9/11, which are a clear departure from the 'government negligence' picture he painted in his film Fahrenheit 9/11 , released some three years ago. Moore told reporters, "I've had a number of firefighters tell me over the years and since Fahrenheit 9/11 that they heard these explosions-- that they believe there's MUCH more to the story than we've been told. I don't think the official investigations have told us the complete truth-- they haven't even told us half the truth." Michael Moore brought up the blackout of video at the site of the alleged Pentagon plane crash on his own, appearing quite willing to discuss subjects that so-called left gatekeepers have previously refused to raise questions about. "I've filmed there before down at the Pentagon-- before 9/11-- there's got to be at least 100 cameras, ringing that building, in the trees, everywhere. They've got that plane coming in with 100 angles. How come with haven't seen the straight-- I'm not talking about stop-action photos, I'm talking about the video. I want to see the video; I want to see 100 videos that exist of this," Moore said. He went on to imply the implausibility of a pilot executing the flight pattern of the flight that allegedly hit the Pentagon. "Why don't they want us to see that plane coming into the building? Because, if you know anything about flying a plane, when you're going 500 miles per hour, if you're off by that much, you're in the river. So, they hit a building that's only 5 stories high...[unclear] that expertly. I believe that there will be answers in that video tape and we should demand that that tape is released." Michael Moore was not vague or bashful in discussing 9/11 truth-- rather, he demanded a "new investigation before we get too far away from this-- to find out the whole truth." "And I intend, in my own way, to find some answers," Moore added. "Thank you for doing whatever you're doing." Amy Goodman, who was also at the premiere, cowered from a question that brought up the fact that she witnessed WTC Building 7 collapse-- she was seen on video during news coverage of the apparent demolition. She declined even a brief response, stating that an interview was about to begin. Moore's most recent comments on 9/11 are a far cry from statements he made to Alex Jones during the 2004 RNC convention when he told Jones, tongue-in-cheek, that he didn't report on NORAD standing down because "it would be un-American." This is a huge development in public figures going public with 9/11 questions-- particularly on the part of 'liberals' and others who identify with the 'left.' Despite overwhelming discontent with the Bush Administration, many such voices dismiss the importance of investigating 9/11 or simply decline to discuss any outstanding questions or relevant evidence. Noam Chomsky, for one, suggested that it "wouldn't matter" even if 9/11 had been hatched from a government plot. Will the mainstream media continue to ignore the fact that the official story on 9/11 is all but dead, and more and more figures are coming forth to demand the truth? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Stephen Turner Posted June 21, 2007 Share Posted June 21, 2007 The main beneficiaries of 9-11 have been Islamic jihadis, of course, Stephen.Don't you read the papers? ONLY THE GRAUNIAD. Iraq = occupied and immiserated Sid, lets see if i'm understanding you correctly, are you saying that 911, or no 911, Iraq would have been invaded and illegally occupied? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest David Guyatt Posted June 21, 2007 Share Posted June 21, 2007 It is an extremely well consider question. Being of a cynical state of mind, I would argue that 911 was exactly what the Anglo-American-European fascisti had in mind. David Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sid Walker Posted June 21, 2007 Share Posted June 21, 2007 (edited) The main beneficiaries of 9-11 have been Islamic jihadis, of course, Stephen.Don't you read the papers? ONLY THE GRAUNIAD. Iraq = occupied and immiserated Sid, lets see if i'm understanding you correctly, are you saying that 911, or no 911, Iraq would have been invaded and illegally occupied? Well Stephen, Beating up Iraq was open policy for the PNAC in the late 90s. See for example, this charming article by Kristol & Kagan, written in early 98: Bombing Iraq Isn't Enough So that's rather clear. On the other hand, one looks in vain for an overt PNAC demand for a false-flag operation. My guess is that kept it to themselves Probably very wise. While American public opinion is largely amenable to open discussions about attacking other nations (it's called foreign policy debate), mass murder of Americans is a more sensitive issue. Until 9-11, these guys were having trouble whipping up the requisite level of hysteria to go 'beyond' bombing (and blockading and harassing) Iraq. After 9-11, it was a cinch. What does that suggest to you about 9-11? Al Qaida did it, of course! It stands to reason! If in doubt, check out the official 9-11 reports. They are fact-filled and a testament to the state of contemproary 'western intelligence' in all its glory. Edited June 21, 2007 by Sid Walker Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Stephen Turner Posted June 21, 2007 Share Posted June 21, 2007 The main beneficiaries of 9-11 have been Islamic jihadis, of course, Stephen.Don't you read the papers? ONLY THE GRAUNIAD. Iraq = occupied and immiserated Sid, lets see if i'm understanding you correctly, are you saying that 911, or no 911, Iraq would have been invaded and illegally occupied? Well Stephen, Beating up Iraq was open policy for the PNAC in the late 90s. See for example, this charming article by Kristol & Kagan, written in early 98: Bombing Iraq Isn't Enough So that's rather clear. On the other hand, one looks in vain for an overt PNAC demand for a false-flag operation. My guess is that kept it to themselves Probably very wise. While American public opinion is largely amenable to open discussions about attacking other nations (it's called foreign policy debate), mass murder of Americans is a more sensitive issue. Until 9-11, these guys were having trouble whipping up the requisite level of hysteria to go 'beyond' bombing (and blockading and harassing) Iraq. After 9-11, it was a cinch. What does that suggest to you about 9-11? Al Qaida did it, of course! It stands to reason! If in doubt, check out the official 9-11 reports. They are fact-filled and a testament to the state of contemproary 'western intelligence' in all its glory. Yes Sid I am familiar with all the PNAC stuff, and I'm also aware that motive alone, and granted there's plenty of that, doesn't constitute evidence of wrongdoing, but I dont really want yet another back-and foward on 911, but rather what members feel the World would have looked like without that catalytic event. So, with that in mind, are you saying that the invasion, and destruction of Iraq was a done deal irrespective of the events of 11th September 2001. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Len Colby Posted June 21, 2007 Share Posted June 21, 2007 Why is it that I have no great expectations of the veracity of Loose Change Avery?David Or Alex Jones for that matter. Why would bombs be set off hours before they planned to demo the building while there still were people inside? I agree Len. Sounds like a load of horse manure. But then again, did you ever hear the tale about the 47-floor building in NYC that one sunny day just happened to fall down at near free fall velocity in its own footprint because of a few fires? Or the major news organization that reported this unprecedented collapse 20 minutes before it actually happened? I think with WTC-7, one just has to admit that anything's possible. Why not wait and see what's in the new movie before sneering? (silly question) Why did you post a story that you now say you think is BS? (Or rather HS). By the same logic shouldn’t you have waited till the film came out of at least until the person was identified to make your post? Funny that you say the story “sounds like a load of horse manure” but criticize me for saying essentially the same thing. Shouldn’t you “wait and see what's in the new movie before sneering?” As for Amy Goodman I’ve seen the video and it’s not entirely clear it’s her. What Jones omitted is that her office was (and is) about a mile north of the WTC and the video was shot about a mile north of the WTC. There were lots of people in the crowd. Funny that Moore now fancies himself an expert on aviation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sid Walker Posted June 22, 2007 Share Posted June 22, 2007 (edited) Why is it that I have no great expectations of the veracity of Loose Change Avery?David Or Alex Jones for that matter. Why would bombs be set off hours before they planned to demo the building while there still were people inside? I agree Len. Sounds like a load of horse manure. But then again, did you ever hear the tale about the 47-floor building in NYC that one sunny day just happened to fall down at near free fall velocity in its own footprint because of a few fires? Or the major news organization that reported this unprecedented collapse 20 minutes before it actually happened? I think with WTC-7, one just has to admit that anything's possible. Why not wait and see what's in the new movie before sneering? (silly question) Why did you post a story that you now say you think is BS? (Or rather HS). By the same logic shouldn’t you have waited till the film came out of at least until the person was identified to make your post? Funny that you say the story “sounds like a load of horse manure” but criticize me for saying essentially the same thing. Shouldn’t you “wait and see what's in the new movie before sneering?” As for Amy Goodman I’ve seen the video and it’s not entirely clear it’s her. What Jones omitted is that her office was (and is) about a mile north of the WTC and the video was shot about a mile north of the WTC. There were lots of people in the crowd. Funny that Moore now fancies himself an expert on aviation. I didn't say I thought this story is HS, Len. I said it "sounded" like that. It was an attempt on my part to be agreeable. After all, the whole 9-11 story is outlandish. If anyone had told me the plot in 1999, I'd probably have said something like 'incredible!' As we've already been asked to believe in miracles by the authorities, it behooves us to keep an open mind about 9-11. Let's wait to see the new story in entirety before dismissing it. Perhaps it is accurate? After all, WTC-7 has been a building of many surprises. Who'd have ever thought, for instance, that first the mass media would report its collapse in advance - then practically ignore the fact that it did collapse for the next few years? Inicidentally, I gather WTC-7 had largely been rebuilt, ready to generate rental again for its lucky larrikin leaseholder. I do hope the builders have done a better job this time. Has it once again been pre-rigged with explosives, so it can be 'pulled' in moments at the whim of the mayor? Inquiring minds would like to know. It's fine to speculate from this distance... but if I was a tenant in the new building, I'd be nervous. Lightning may rarely strike twice - but what about miracles? Here in Australia, I occasionally visit Westfield shopping centers. It's hard to avoid them completely; they are as ubiquitous in this land as Rupert Murdoch's newspapers. As Larry Silverstein and Frank Lowy (Australia's richest man) were business partners in Westfield America, I hope Frank hasn't caught flimsy-building-syndrome from his illustrious American friend. A gallant veteran of the Israeli War of Independence (aka the Nakba), Mr Lowy is apparently tireless, - and a great philanthropist. As well as serving on the Board of Australia's Reserve Bank Board, he finds time to promote Australian soccer, high-profile work which is widely applauded in this sport-crazy part of the world. Frank has also had the decency to fund a right-wing think tank called the Lowy Institute for International Policy, regularly cited by the Australian media as a font of wisdom in matters related to the economy, terrorism etc. Perhaps some of the brilliant academic minds proudly associated with the Lowy Institute could look into the WTC-7 saga and give us the inside scoop? Edited June 22, 2007 by Sid Walker Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack White Posted June 22, 2007 Author Share Posted June 22, 2007 Sid...yes, Building Seven was rebuilt...IN ALMOST RECORD TIME, as if new plans were already drawn in advance. I will send a photo of it to Bernice to post for me. Jack Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bernice Moore Posted June 22, 2007 Share Posted June 22, 2007 Hi Fellas : Here you go Jack...... Best B...... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sid Walker Posted June 22, 2007 Share Posted June 22, 2007 Hi Fellas :Here you go Jack...... Best B...... Nice one, Jack and Bernice. It looks solid enough... Remarkable how quick it went up, really. It's as if new plans were already in the drawer, ready to go - like the PATRIOT Bill? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Evan Burton Posted June 22, 2007 Share Posted June 22, 2007 (edited) Little is known? I disagree. Construction of the new 7 World Trade Center began in 2002, and was completed in 2006 at a cost of $700 million. The 52-story building is 750 feet (228 m) tall, and contains 1,700,000 square feet (158 000 m²) of leasable office space, starting at the 11th floor. The first ten floors will house an electrical substation, which will power most of Lower Manhattan. The office tower has a narrower footprint at ground level than its predecessor, because the course of Greenwich Street has been restored in an effort to re-unite TriBeCa and the Financial District.The architect was David Childs, of Skidmore, Owings and Merrill, who worked in conjunction with glass artist and designer James Carpenter. They used ultra-clear, low-iron glass to provide reflectivity and light, with stainless-steel spandrels behind the glass to help reflect sunlight. Artist Jenny Holzer created a large light installation inside the main lobby, with glowing text moving across wide plastic panels. The entire wall is about 30 meters wide by 7 meters tall; it changes color according to the time of day. The building has 2-foot- (60-cm-) thick reinforced-concrete and fireproofed elevator and stairway access shafts, whereas the original building used only drywall to line these shafts. The stairways are wider than in the original building, to permit faster exits. Steel columns are encased in much thicker fire protection. The building is being promoted as the safest skyscraper in the U.S. According to Silverstein Properties, the owner of the building, it "will incorporate a host of life-safety enhancements that will become the prototype for new high-rise construction". 7 World Trade Center is equipped with Otis destination elevators. After entering their floor destination on a lobby keypad, passengers are grouped together and directed to specific elevators that will stop at their particular floor. There are no buttons to press inside the elevators. This system is designed to reduce elevator waiting and travel times. The building is considered New York City's first "green" office tower, and gained gold status in the U.S. Green Building Council's LEED program. Rainwater is collected and used for irrigation of the park, and to cool the building, and recycled steel was used in the building's construction. The triangular park was created by David Childs with Ken Smith and his colleague Annie Weinmayr, of Ken Smith Landscape Architect. It is between the now extended Greenwich Street and West Broadway, and comprises an open central plaza with a fountain and flanking groves of trees and shrubs. As the seasons change, so will the colors in the park, providing a natural complement to the adjacent tower. At the center of the fountain, sculptor Jeff Koons created Balloon Flower (Red), whose mirror-polished stainless steel represents a twisted balloon in the shape of a flower, at a monumental scale. Building Seven was not included in the original World Trade Center master plan by Daniel Libeskind, but was designed by Skidmore, Owings & Merrill under the leadership of David Childs, who largely redesigned the Freedom Tower. The building was officially opened at noon on May 23, 2006 with a free concert sponsored by Larry Silverstein. The concert featured Suzanne Vega, Citizen Cope, Bill Ware Vibes, Brazilian Girls, Ollabelle, Pharaoh's Daughter, Ronan Tynan (of the Irish Tenors), and special guest Lou Reed. From September 8 to October 7, 2006, the work of photographer Jonathan Hyman was displayed in "An American Landscape", a free exhibit, hosted by the World Trade Center Memorial Foundation, at 7 World Trade Center. The photographs captured the response of people in New York City and across the United States after the September 11, 2001, attacks. The exhibit took place on the 45th floor, before the space was leased and converted into offices. The building has 42 floors of rentable space. As of March 2007, 60 percent of the building had been leased. In September 2006, Moody's signed a 20-year lease to rent 15 floors of 7 World Trade Center. As of May 2007, other tenants in 7 World Trade Center include ABN Amro, Ameriprise Financial Inc., Darby & Darby P.C., Mansueto Ventures LLC, business publisher of Fast Company and Inc., New York Academy of Sciences, and WNYX Business offices. Silverstein Properties also has offices in 7 World Trade Center. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/7_World_Trade_Center http://www.wtc.com/inner_page.aspx?id=11 http://www.architectureweek.com/2007/0509/design_1-1.html That is from a cursory glance via Google. I'm sure there is far more detailed information available for those who want more. Edited June 22, 2007 by Evan Burton Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sid Walker Posted June 22, 2007 Share Posted June 22, 2007 (edited) As for Amy Goodman I’ve seen the video and it’s not entirely clear it’s her. What Jones omitted is that her office was (and is) about a mile north of the WTC and the video was shot about a mile north of the WTC. There were lots of people in the crowd. Nice to see you cover for Amy too, Len. You are busy. Strange, because I always thought that Amy Goodman could speak for herself. She seems so good at it normally. I'll wait to see if her inability to talk about 9-11 is a temporary phenomenon, or something more permanent. Speaking of silence, I am rather concerned about Jane Standley, the clairvoyant BBC presenter, who is "Too Busy" To Discuss WTC 7 Don't they have unions any longer at the BBC? Give Jane a rest! I fear she may be imprisoned inside BBC HQ, compelled to contribute her psychic skills to the Beeb on a 24x7 basis, like a genie trapped in a bottle... while the Board gets mega-rich playing the stock exchange and betting on horses. Edited June 22, 2007 by Sid Walker Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now