English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

http://www.infowars.com/articles/sept11/bbc_wtc_7_911_coverup_unraveling.htm

and the fact that BBC claims to have lost the tapes on one of the most important days in recent history, how convenient is that?

and what about building 3? Building 3 was not a uniform collapse like building 7. shouldnt have building 7 fell in the same manor?

2007-02-28 23:34:36 · 6 answers · asked by Anonymous in News & Events Current Events

6 answers

I truly don't have an answer for you on this one--honestly don't know !
But, I will post to primarily ask something myself of the first poster in this question
I'd like to know-- when the little short list of "attacks" that were never responded to by the U S A comes out of the Neocon bag--there is never a mention one of the attacks that happened to sitting Republican Presidents who never responded in kind--- like the Lebanon Marine Barricks attack that killed so many American Marines when the Republic god Reagan was in office ---I even have a video clip of him making his famous "you can run but you can not hide" speech !!!----and Nothing !!! THE REASON WAS because everyone in that day thought that any retalliation against any muslim target would set off a World Wide Religious War and so no one retalliated no one Republicans right in there with the rest---IT TOOK 9/11 to kick the whole thing off---and WHO EVER was responsible for it---has a very definate date with GOD on the matter !!!!!!!!!!!!

2007-02-28 23:57:08 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 1 2

They didn't.

At the time of 9/11 I was with a DOD agency that used a router located in the basement of that building to connect the computer networks for our Boston office to the rest of our offices in the US. That router failed at exactly the same time that the building was reported to have collapsed.

2007-03-01 04:45:11 · answer #2 · answered by MikeGolf 7 · 0 0

You mean the guy who replace into thrown accessible to record, yet who did not understand something concerning to the WTC? She for sure did not understand which construction replace into what, and she or he replace into not an experienced reporter, the two. With all the concepts coming in, she for sure replace into puzzled. and you think of it particularly is "data" of something? And why do you think of that comments interior the midst of an journey like that frequently are not getting puzzled? bear in suggestions the killings, rapes and mayhem interior the Superdome after Katrina.... that for the duration of no way happened? and those have been stated by enormous time journalists. Is that what you think approximately "stressful" or "medical" "data"? LOL!

2016-12-18 03:08:51 · answer #3 · answered by ? 4 · 0 0

Why do people have to believe that this is all a Government conspiracy? Can't people ever accept the fact that we were attacked by terrorist, from another country?
So, are you saying every terrorist attack in this country is a Government set up? Was the USS Cole a set up for Clinton to do nothing, the African embassies in 1998 was another cover up for Clinton to do nothing? The first WTC bombing was a test to see Clinton would do nothing? Tim McVeigh (Sp) was set up by the Government? If the Government used 9/11 solely to invade Iraq, why did we bother with Afghanistan then?

2007-02-28 23:44:18 · answer #4 · answered by Colonel 6 · 0 3

the building showed signs of collapse for a day before it did. It was structurally unsound after the towers came down and it was burning. They knew it would come down but not exactly when it would. It was a big building and it did come down hard.

2007-02-28 23:45:43 · answer #5 · answered by jgold49 3 · 0 2

Are you still smoking that "wacky weed" ?

2007-03-01 00:02:53 · answer #6 · answered by donrentf 3 · 1 3

fedest.com, questions and answers