MIHOP! WTC # 7 was "pulled" down intentionally says WTC owner!!

[ElementaryPenguin]

Larry Silverstein - the owner of the WTC on 9-11, let this out in an interview!!

It literally made me sick this morning to view the videos and consider the weight of this evidence! Here is the website. You need to scroll down about a third of the way - and access a story about WTC Tower 7 - and Larry Silverstein! The ramifications of this story are incredible and horrifying - in that there can now be little doubt that the MIHOP theory is TRUE!! This MUST BE SPREAD FAR AND WIDE!! How about to Will Pitt and the Kucinich camp, for starters!!

http://www.davidicke.com/icke/index1c.html

:puke:
:argh:

[aldian159]

1. MIHOP?

what's that stand for?

[Flubadubya]

2. Reference to Bush administration's culpability in 9/11...

You will also see LIHOP. MIHOP is "made it happen on purpose" and
LIHOP is "let it happen on purpose".

[aldian159]

6. thanks

I've always believed that the jet in PA was shot down. As nice as a story about rugby players taking out Saudis is, once they took out the hijackers, where was the pilot/copilot to ensure the bird didn't crash?

[aquart]

4. made it happen on purpose

[BlueEyedSon]

3. Tinfoil hat stuff

they "pulled" out the firefighters

[ElementaryPenguin]

10. Read it all - watch the videos! "Pulled" means demolition!!

NOT re: the firefighters!

[RH]

15. Been there....... Done it.

Is this the fourth or the fifth thread on the same saubject?

:eyes:

I have lost count.

:boring:

[ElementaryPenguin]

19. What's more important is that more people see it!!

I hadn't seen this particular evidence before. I don't think we should be striving to entertaining here - we should be striving to uncover the truth!! And sometimes that can be boring! So fucking what!!!

[RH]

27. One miliion multiplied by zero = zero

:nuke:

It is old news.

It led to nothing then.

It has led to nothing since.

[Az]

5. Sorry

Unconvincing. This smacks of a capital C Conspiracy nut getting ahold of a misinterpretted statement and running wild with it.

Please explain the necessity of knocking down another building after the 2 largest buildings in the world came down.

[ElementaryPenguin]

8. Overkill by the BFEE/PNAC Mob for dramatic effect! 9-11 had to be HUGE!!

To justify everything to come!

[Az]

18. Um

The 2 largest buildings in the world had just collapsed. Anything else after that is superflous. Unnecissary. Needless. Wasted effort. A further chance to get caught. Pointless. Stupid. Insane. Not likely.

Identify the time and intent behind the statement. This could well be a reference to having to removing the remains of the building. This argument is built on an assumption of what was meant in the statement. You need to seal such issues before leaping to conclusions.

[el_gato]

26. i would suggest you look at who and what was housed in WTC7

you might be surprised.

[RH]

28. Been there....... Done it. ...n/t

[el_gato]

31. and?

[RH]

35. It was your point.

Tell us.

Is it supposed to prove something?

[el_gato]

39. you said "been there done that"

what did you do or are you just saying random phrases?
If you've been there and done that I would be interested
if you have anything to add or if you found anything out.
I guess not.

[RH]

49. review the messages

I responded to a specific suggestion, the title of message #26

Was that a random phrase or was there supposed to be a point to it?

I suggest to make a point in case your desire may be gain attention; perchance you may have something new to say.

If your wish is merely to know what has been covered before, please review the archives, the main purpose of an archive being to avoid the need to endlessly repeat.

[ElementaryPenguin]

55. Pointless, stupid, insane...these adjective describe every ChimpCo action!

It's called greed - and the BFEE/PNAC Mob is so fucking brazen that they are constantly indulging in massive overkill! Subtlety ain't exactly Prick Cheney or Herr (Shock & Awe) Scumsfeld's forte!

[Solomon]

9. Not to join the grassy knoll crowd, but Silverstein got billions in

insurance because of the destruction of those buildings almost right after he leased them for 99 years.

[ElementaryPenguin]

11. Don't forget...

The Grassy Knoll crowd makes a helluva lot more sense than the Warren Report!

[JHB]

7. Link?

I mean one that's a little more specific than that page of jumble you pointed to.


For the questioner:
MIHOP: Made It Happen On Purpose -- the belief that the Bushies didn't merely exploit the events of 9/11, they had an active hand in bringing them abut. (Not to be confused with LIHOP -- Let It Happen On Purpose -- the idea that the Bushies had some warning of some sort of terrorist plot (specifics not necessarily known) which they deliberately failed to prevent in order to exploit the resulting chaos.)

[aquart]

13. Control F put Silverstein in the box. It will search the page for you.

[JHB]

29. OK, got it....but it's crap.

Ickes says Silverstein said that the FD was going to "pull it...", which he interprets as "pull it down", i.e., deliberately demolish it.

To my ears, Silverstein did get to "pull", then a catch as he rephrases what he was going to say, and in context my first thought for the unfinished phrase was "pull back", which is consistent with what the FDNY did.

Hardly something that can be waved around as proof of MIHOP, jeez!

[ElementaryPenguin]

36. It's clear to me that Silverstein ISN'T referring to the fire department

and no building on earth would ever implode like that due to a fire. I must say it's considerably easier for me to believe my own eyes and ears more than the bullshit, sketchy explanation offered by the most corrupt, secretive, and untruthful administration in the history of this nation!

[RH]

50. Who was he talking to then when he'd said "pull"?

Did I miss something?

:shrug:

[aquart]

12. Alex Jones is the source? Ye gods.

There isn't enough tin foil on the planet.

[ElementaryPenguin]

14. I'll bet there isn't much in this story that you can refute.

eom

[nostamj]

17. i refute the entire thing.

it's nonsense.

it's IMPOSSIBLE.

you tell me which premise you believe and I'll refute it.

1. bombs were preset in the WTC7 and they survived the collapse of WTC1 and 7+ hours of fire to be set off by the builder (or by the FDNY for the builder)

2. bombs were set in the BURNING building by the FDNY

present a LOGICAL premise for CD. this goes in the same loony bin with the missing Pentagon plane.

note: not a single serious person involved in 9/11 inquiry believe this.

firemen were 'pulled' from a dangerous location. dangerous location collapsed after 7+ hours of fire and structural damage.

[ElementaryPenguin]

21. You explain why the building imploded - went straight down like that

due to a couple of small fires - a building a block away from the towers! It isn't possible - and it HAS to be explained! You still don't get it - the BFEE/PNAC Mob are capable of any degree of ruthlessness they believe to be necessary to further their agenda! I'll bet within months, you'll be believing all of it. Have you read the Paul O'Neill "Price of Loyalty" book yet?

[Az]

24. Here is your mantra

The world's two tallest buildings just fell down. repeat
The world's two tallest buildings just fell down. repeat
The world's two tallest buildings just fell down. repeat

Ok. Why did building 7 fall down? The world's two tallest buildings just fell down. The impact from this would not be secluded to their footprint. The damage would be substantial to the immediate area and cause intrinsic damage to the foundations of any building in the immediate area. Some may withstand this but others may collapse.

[el_gato]

30. putting words in someones mouth is dishonest

strawman method

I can't stand it when people do that.

You are argueing against what you want to argue against instead of dealing with what people are actually saying.

[Az]

37. Perhaps you misunderstand my intent

I was suggesting a mantra not suggesting what it was. I have run into his arguments before and he seems to forget repeatedly that 2 rather large buildings had collapsed in the incident and may have caused some collateral damage. Forgive me if you thought I was trying to restate his position to my advantage.

[ex_jew]

32. Now that really is silly !

Seismic damage to the foundations caused WTC7 to fall ? Is that your best shot at explaining it ?

Can anyone who really knows something please tell me if the persistent fires under WTC1 and WTC2 were also found under WTC7 ? Thanks.

[RH]

34. Land moves

when a big weight is displaced.

It makes sense to me.

[nostamj]

40. you haven't picked your premise. because you can't.

"small fires" my ASS. there was like 5000 gallon of diesel. and it burned for 7+ HOURS. do some research! WTC7 was heavily damaged by the collapse of WTC1. did you forget that Guliani was nearly trapped there?

and yes, I've read TPoL

[ElementaryPenguin]

41. Can you show us ONE other burned building that collapsed like that?

Straight down - like a demolition? Show that video to several people without prompting them - and see how many will tell you that's a demolition.

[nostamj]

43. you STILL haven't picked your premise

because you CAN'T.

WHO PUT THE BOMBS IN THE BUILDING AND WHEN?

Silverstein working with al-Qaeda and/or the BFEE prior to the attacks or Silverstein working with the FDNY after the attack (while the building was burning.

we await your answer. but will get nothing but additional hysterical distraction, of that I have no doubt.

[ElementaryPenguin]

44. How can I tell you when or how bombs were placed - even the 9-11

Commission can't get the evidence they request out of this bunch! Just because Bushler and his gang won't allow a proper investigation of this crime - doesn't mean the BFEE/PNAC Mob is innocent! Silverstein made 500 million dollars off of the deal (obviously made before the attack) - and I'm pretty sure Larry wasn't working for Al-Qaeda, who are a joke when compared to the resources Bushler has! Right about my hysteria - only it isn't for distraction purposes - I'm just outraged that these fuckers appear to be on the verge of getting away with all of this - while many of the stupid fucking 'Murican sheeple are still waving those litte 'Murican flags made in China, thinking they have thusly fulfilled their duties as responsible citizens!!

Why you and I are at each other's throats over this when we are clearly allies, I really couldn't say. Sorry if my presentation of this story as irrefutable proof of MIHOP upset your evidentiary sensibilities - but for me - I really feel that I know for a certainty that these sick bastards MIHOPed this thing! Perhaps I'd have a hard time proving it in court at this point - but of course it's not going there anyway!

:shrug:

[nostamj]

47. i'm not at anyone's throat

i am challenging the LOGIC of this theory.

you believe there were bombs. correct?

you must have a logical theory about when and how they were placed.

your bombs either survived 7+ hours of fire and structural damage and still successfully denotated in a CD

or

your bombs were placed in a burning building

neither premise has a shred of logic, does it?

THEN, you must convince doubters that Silverstein was in league with:

a. islamic fundamentalists
b. BFEE/PNAC
c. both

AND you must convince doubters that the FDNY (on 9/11 no less) were willing participants in this plot

because HE got a deal to make some insurance money on this attack?

stick to the real issues. I believe in LIHOP and I believe fringe theories like this and the missing pentagon plane distract and cheapen the legitimate inquiries.

get Kristen Breitweiser to believe this and I promise to take a 45th look at this, frankly silly, story.

[RH]

20. Read the previous threads:

"Why "must" the absurd WTC 7 Official Story be defended?"
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=125&topic_id=6728&mesg_id=6728

"Got an email that the WTC buildings were built with demolition options"
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=125&topic_id=6776&mesg_id=6776

"If WTC 7 was "pulled", maybe WTC 1 & 2 were also."
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=125&topic_id=6415&mesg_id=6415

"Silverstein, FDNY Razed WTC7 (WTF?)"
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=125&topic_id=6459&mesg_id=6459

[ElementaryPenguin]

23. Thanks for sending these.

Sorry to have been rude in my last post.

[RH]

33. Seriously, .......

before you want to tell the whole World it would help to have a case that would hold some water.

http://www.geocities.com/fables312/idiom/Shepherd_Boy_and_the_Wolf.html

The value of this vicinity is to hear a few smart folk to review the merit.

[ElementaryPenguin]

38. I think it holds plenty of water - a helluva lot more than the BushCo

explanation!! Methinks at times we're a bit too jaded by the bombardment of info we subject ourselves to around here - which may possibly be yet another thing that the Chimp regime actually banks on - the Hitler philosophy of the bigger the lie, the more people will believe it. Sure, it sounds crazy - but EVERYTHING regarding this misadministration is fucking crazy!!

:crazy:

[RH]

48. What you think

is beside the point.

And ever more so for as long as you care not to consider the totality of the information and analysis on offer.

[ElementaryPenguin]

54. And what YOU think is that you have a monopoly on the truth - even

in a case that cannot be entirely solved since you damn well know that an investigation supplied with ample resources will likely never be permitted in our lifetimes!

<sigh> Believe what you like, my esteemed Dem comrade - if that looks like something other than a controlled demolition to you - than you're never going to be convinced that explosives had to have been planted beforehand - but short of someone producing a polaroid shot of the culprits in action - you ain't buyin' it. Just curious. Do you also accept the Magic Bullet theory?

[RH]

57. Instead of reacting in such a

stubbornly ignorant, infantile fashion, please consider what has already been examined.

Not the least of the issues attended to here has been an intelligently detailed review of the merits the investigation in progress:


"NIST WTC Investigation: Access to All Essential Data Obtained"
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=125&topic_id=6512&mesg_id=6512

"NIST Testing Controversial Theory of WTC Collapse!"
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=125&topic_id=6871&mesg_id=6871

[ElementaryPenguin]

16. It sucks to put in this forum - because few people will see this!

We've become bureaucrats here!

:evilfrown:

[cosmicdot]

22. you got me to google

and, it told me that Larry Silverstein's policy was issued by Industrial Risk Insurers; and, additional googling indicated that General Electric had bought IRI in 1997 ...

I know it's just a little 'aside' ... but, it's something that I hadn't paid attention to ... not that it means anything at all ... I just found it interesting that GE is involved ...


http://www.wirednewyork.com/forum/topic.cgi?forum=4&topic=665

GE Capital Services' Employers Reinsurance Corp. and Industrial Risk Insurers announced that they have reached a definitive agreement under which GE Capital will purchase the assets, reinsure the in-force policies, and assume the renewal rights of IRI. The transaction aligns the loss prevention engineering expertise of Hartford-based IRI, a joint underwriting association that is a leader in highly protected risk (HPR) property insurance with the financial strength of Overland Park-based Employers Reinsurance Corporation, a global life and non-life reinsurance company with assets of more than $25 billion, and a wholly owned subsidiary of GE Capital Services Inc.

http://66.102.7.104/search?q=cache:6fzpYdBbJW8J:www.bizjournals.com/kansascity/stories/1997/12/15/daily8.html%3Fjst%3Ds_rs_hl+Industrial+Risk+Insurers&hl=en&ie=UTF-8

[ElementaryPenguin]

25. Good find. GE - Jeez!

This web is so wide!

[Bolo Boffin]

42. Oh, how I hate to get up in the morning...

:eyes: :puke: :crazy: :wtf: :freak: :hangover:

Curb your repetitive threads.

[ElementaryPenguin]

45. Sorry. I hadn't been

here for awhile. It was NEW to me - (and evidentally to a few others)

:shrug:

[Bolo Boffin]

46. Regardless, it's still just as false.

Fifth verse, same as the first
A little bit shriller and a whole lot worse.

[RH]

51. That's true.

Do they think that by throwing a bigger tantrum every time around they're going to be that much more convincing?

:puffpiece:

[Name removed]

52. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[RH]

53. An invitation was already given

to review previous threads.

I took the trouble to supply links.

Too bad then to fail to bother to follow them. :spank:

boloboffin's previous contributions speak for themsleves.

[Name removed]

56. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.