100% FREE ONLINE DATING
sponsored links
Community > Posts By > germanchoclate1981
|
|
|
And WTC7 specifically tells us the outcome of the 9/11 commission report cannot be the result of what they told us happened on that day. Buildings do not catch on fire and THEN get wired for demolition with other buildings burning and exploding around them. No company or government agency in the United States in one of the most densely populated areas of the WORLD (Manhattan) would allow explosives in large amounts to be taken to the scene of an active crime, fire, explosions, accident, or anything else that could have caused the sheer magnitude of destruction we saw that day before it was under control which we all know didn't happen until months later. A building can however be wired and have the structure weakened in a deliberate and professional manner as it admittedly was, THEN catch or be set on fire. It cannot be explained in any other way given the admission that WTC7 was "pulled". Not legally, not logically, not realisticly, not at all. Check your facts. BBC, PBS and from the horses mouth. Larry Silverstein. yep,real smart,inducing Fire into a Building that is prepared to be taken down with Explosives! Sure preserves your Sequence! Never heard of Explosives cooking off above a certain temperature? Besides,there is no evidence that ANY of the Buildings have been structurally weakened! Besides,you are way off Topic! 'Larry Silverstein, his unjust claim, the act that was the foundation of the claim and it's DIRECT connection to the topic is in the article Moe posted. Pointing out his foreknowledge unjustifying his claim and his complicity in the act is not off topic. It gives credence to the conspiracy that was also in the O.P. There is proof that WTC7 was strategically weakened prior to being pulled as there is with the towers in the 45 degree cuts int the structural steel beams and the presence of thermite which is used to do exactly that. The NYFD describe the collapse as a series of booms (thermite charges also seen as tiny puffs going down the building ahead of above floors collapsing) "just like a demolition". Larry Silverstein confirmed it in a documentary on PBS. Are you telling Larry Silverstein who made the decision to pull the building that it wasn't pulled? He made it pretty clear. As for the sequence, the charges aren't just set around file cabinets. They have to be on the steel columns themselves which are not visible from outside the building. Once whatever needed to be done inside WTC7 that morning was done, it didn't matter if a superficial fire was set or a separate explosion causing an externally visible damage as the building was just going to be pulled anyway. Logically there had to be some externally visible damage for the 'justification' for 7 to be pulled, though 3,4,5,and 6 were not. Of all the standing damaged burning buildings 7 was the least damaged. The reason WHY 7 was pulled would be the EXACT REASON Zurich Insurance would be at odds with LARRY SILVERSTEIN, THE FBI, THE PROJECT FOR A NEW AMERICAN CENTURY, and the BUSH ADMINISTRATION. This makes the O.P. articles point that given the executive's connection and legal fight to deny double indemnity clause in the policy with Silverstein, there is very little likelihood that he committed suicide. 9/11 is in the title of the O.P. as is: Zurich Insurance 2nd executive suicide and connection to (9/11) the only thing i agree with with is that he was sucided, but i think it had more to do with the Chinese explosion than 9/11... Funny thing about confessions.... You don't have to agree with it for it to be the truth, or a fact. There is such a thing as a false or coerced confession, but since this was not an interview or interrogation by law enforcement or congress or a judge. It was voluntary contribution to an official documentary on an educational network. The explosion in China was at least first reported as an accident, incorrect possibly, but largely viewed as negligence or just an accident. There was no zealot somewhere in a cave saying how much he hates China that they broadcast on major media to all their citizens. The likelihood is that both insurance execs were suicided there was just an 'accident' placed before the second execs death to divert attention away from the huge scandal of 9/11. The explosion in China wasn't a small thing by any means but it pales in comparison to 9/11 as every crime or act of terrorism since Dec 7th 1941. Hmmmm. A catalyzing event like a new Pearl Harbor.... I've heard that somewhere before...... I digress. It doesn't matter if you don't agree with a fact, it's still a fact. Larry Silverstein wasn't in stripes, behind bars in an interrogation room or a courthouse. He could have declined to speak or deny they pulled WTC7. He admitted it. That is something every American needs to know and accept the implications of. He knew. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
And WTC7 specifically tells us the outcome of the 9/11 commission report cannot be the result of what they told us happened on that day. Buildings do not catch on fire and THEN get wired for demolition with other buildings burning and exploding around them. No company or government agency in the United States in one of the most densely populated areas of the WORLD (Manhattan) would allow explosives in large amounts to be taken to the scene of an active crime, fire, explosions, accident, or anything else that could have caused the sheer magnitude of destruction we saw that day before it was under control which we all know didn't happen until months later. A building can however be wired and have the structure weakened in a deliberate and professional manner as it admittedly was, THEN catch or be set on fire. It cannot be explained in any other way given the admission that WTC7 was "pulled". Not legally, not logically, not realisticly, not at all. Check your facts. BBC, PBS and from the horses mouth. Larry Silverstein. yep,real smart,inducing Fire into a Building that is prepared to be taken down with Explosives! Sure preserves your Sequence! Never heard of Explosives cooking off above a certain temperature? Besides,there is no evidence that ANY of the Buildings have been structurally weakened! Besides,you are way off Topic! 'Larry Silverstein, his unjust claim, the act that was the foundation of the claim and it's DIRECT connection to the topic is in the article Moe posted. Pointing out his foreknowledge unjustifying his claim and his complicity in the act is not off topic. It gives credence to the conspiracy that was also in the O.P. There is proof that WTC7 was strategically weakened prior to being pulled as there is with the towers in the 45 degree cuts int the structural steel beams and the presence of thermite which is used to do exactly that. The NYFD describe the collapse as a series of booms (thermite charges also seen as tiny puffs going down the building ahead of above floors collapsing) "just like a demolition". Larry Silverstein confirmed it in a documentary on PBS. Are you telling Larry Silverstein who made the decision to pull the building that it wasn't pulled? He made it pretty clear. As for the sequence, the charges aren't just set around file cabinets. They have to be on the steel columns themselves which are not visible from outside the building. Once whatever needed to be done inside WTC7 that morning was done, it didn't matter if a superficial fire was set or a separate explosion causing an externally visible damage as the building was just going to be pulled anyway. Logically there had to be some externally visible damage for the 'justification' for 7 to be pulled, though 3,4,5,and 6 were not. Of all the standing damaged burning buildings 7 was the least damaged. The reason WHY 7 was pulled would be the EXACT REASON Zurich Insurance would be at odds with LARRY SILVERSTEIN, THE FBI, THE PROJECT FOR A NEW AMERICAN CENTURY, and the BUSH ADMINISTRATION. This makes the O.P. articles point that given the executive's connection and legal fight to deny double indemnity clause in the policy with Silverstein, there is very little likelihood that he committed suicide. 9/11 is in the title of the O.P. as is: Zurich Insurance 2nd executive suicide and connection to (9/11) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
suicide or suicided? Amid renewed public interest in determining the identities of all the culprits behind the 9/11 attacks, comes word that a second executive with one of the World Trade Center's insurers has died from "suicide." Zurich Insurance Group's former CEO Martin Senn was reported to have shot himself at his vacation home near Davos in Switzerland. No suicide note was found by police. Senn resigned as CEO of the insurance giant last December after the company experienced losses from the still-unexplained large explosions in Tianjin, China, last August. WMR reported on August 21, 2016: (2016??) WMR's sources from throughout Asia are reporting the same thing: the massive August 12 explosion that completely obliterated the Binhai New Area of the special economic zone city of Tianjin appears to not have been the result of an accidental chemical explosion but from state-sponsored industrial sabotage. The initial explosion was followed by a series of other explosions, said to be from combustible materials stored in the port and warehouse area. Moreover, WMR's sources report that the nature of the initial shock wave and secondary fireball indicates that the conflagration may have been caused by a tactical nuclear bunker buster bomb hidden in a shipping container. Our report continued: Among the 117 deaths from the explosion were a number of firemen. Some 70 people, most of them firemen, remain missing with a fear that they were vaporized by the series of explosions. Some 800 people were injured in the blast. Damage to the surrounding area was extensive with more than 8,000 new cars from Hyundai, Kia, Volkswagen, Renault, and Toyota left as burnt-out shells from the explosion. Nearby metro train stations, a Japanese department store, and the National Supercomputing Center of Tianjin were damaged by the explosions. Tianjin is 75 miles east of Beijing. Senn had spent time as an executive of the Swiss Bank Corporation from 1976 to 1994 in Hong Kong, Singapore, and Tokyo, more than enough time to build up a network of associates with a detailed knowledge of Asia, including China. Senn served as the honorary consul of the Republic of Korea in Zurich. Zurich Insurance's payout to settle claims was the second such large expenditure for the firm in a little over a decade. Zurich was one of the insurers of the World Trade Center in New York and it, along with six other insurance companies, paid out $4.56 billion to the complex's lessee, Larry Silverstein. Silverstein angled for an even larger payout from the insurance companies but was unsuccessful. It is known that the insurers conducted their own investigations of the culprits behind 9/11, which may have yielded different conclusions than those reached by the U.S. 9/11 Commission. In August 2013, Zurich Insurance's then-chief financial officer, Pierre Wauthier, was found hanging at his home in Walchwil, in the canton of Zug, Switzerland, not far from Zurich. Wauthier previously worked for JPMorgan Chase. Police said the hanging "pointed to" a suicide. The insurance company conducted an investigation and determined that Wauthier was not suffering from stress as Swiss police contended. In January 2014, Tim Dickenson, the communications director for Swiss Re, another World Trade Center insurer, died from unexplained causes in London. Swiss Re was one of the firms that experienced suspicious put options on its stock prior to 9/11 and which went toe-to-toe with World Trade Center lessee Larry Silverstein on settling insurance claims. Swiss Re, like Zurich Insurance, conducted its own investigation of 9/11 and both companies indicated that Silverstein was using the attacks and destruction of the WTC to bilk the insurance companies and make a handsome profit. Senn's recent "suicide" once again proves the old axiom that "coincidences don't kill people but conspiracies do." http://www.intrepidreport.com/archives/18295 You brought it up. /\ Silverstein, Zurich Insurance, the payout, the 9/11 connection, the b.s. 9/11 Commission Report, and the conspiracy which is actually a crime in and of itself. If a conspiracy that kills 3000 innocent American civilians and causes 15+ years of war and conflict killing thousands of Americans and costing Billions if not Trillions of USD is boring what kind of American does that make you? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
And WTC7 specifically tells us the outcome of the 9/11 commission report cannot be the result of what they told us happened on that day. Buildings do not catch on fire and THEN get wired for demolition with other buildings burning and exploding around them. No company or government agency in the United States in one of the most densely populated areas of the WORLD (Manhattan) would allow explosives in large amounts to be taken to the scene of an active crime, fire, explosions, accident, or anything else that could have caused the sheer magnitude of destruction we saw that day before it was under control which we all know didn't happen until months later.
A building can however be wired and have the structure weakened in a deliberate and professional manner as it admittedly was, THEN catch or be set on fire. It cannot be explained in any other way given the admission that WTC7 was "pulled". Not legally, not logically, not realisticly, not at all. Check your facts. BBC, PBS and from the horses mouth. Larry Silverstein. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I thought the Topic was the "possible Suicide" of Insurance Executive who might have been involved in some sort of Insurance-Fraud connected with the Insurance of the destroyed WTC! lol, he wouldn't give Silverstein all the billions he wanted... and it seems something was up in China as well... I don't buy for a second that this guy voluntarily ended his own life. If there has to be an explosion chain reaction much like the type designed by the Manhattan Project in some warehouse district in China to silence someone involved with a crime committed 15 years ago. Since there is no possibility the minor fires (set) in building 7 could have caused the collapse or even create enough damage to cause the building to have to be demolished, logic and Silverstein himself tell us they made the choice to "pull" WTC7. Not 4,5,6 which all sustained much more fire and structural damage AND ALL REMAINED STANDING FOR WEEKS, this means without a doubt SOMEONE PREPARED WTC7 for destruction prior to September of 2001. Any structural engineer or demolitions expert worth his salt will tell you this cannot be done in one day. It cannot be done when there are buildings on fire within 1000'. Not without artillery, bombs, mortars, excavators, wrecking balls all were not present on Sept 11th 2001. With this absolutely concrete circumstance, this makes 100% clear that at the very least Larry Silverstein knew what was coming that day. We know there had to be more people involved, but.... The insurance company COULD NOT pay out to Silverstein or anyone else if the destruction was planned. That's fraud, mass murder and much much more. The insurance company couldn't publicly deny the claim with the families of those wounded and killed that day digging for answers. Denial of Silverstein's claim would be denial of the 'official' story, paying out on the fraudulent claim seriously hurt the companies and their shareholders and hurt their clients even worse raising rates an undoubtedly leaving many policies cancelled people and property uninsured. More pissed off scared people looking at the insurance company and asking questions, filing complaints, lawsuits.... Which is exactly what the families of victims survivors and first responders did. 5 billion in hush money, more murders and cover ups. Lather rinse repeat. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Why hasn't Larry Silverstein been indicted?
A he signed 99 year lease (very little price tag) and insurance on which he attempted to claim double indemnity since both the North and South towers were demolished. Demolished, not destroyed, demolished just as Silverstein himself admitted WTC7 (the Solomon Brothers building) was "pulled" on the PBS documentary. "There was so much loss and damage on that day the decision was made to 'pull' the building, so we pulled it." Wait a minute there Larry... When, who, how, huh? How long does it take to professionally WIRE a building with EXPLOSIVES and CUT load bearing steel framing and or core columns IF they are even EXPOSED to be able to be CUT to make said building drop at FREEFALL SPEED INSIDE ITS OWN FOOTPRINT? And you mean to tell us that between the first 'plane strike' and when the 'pulling' of building 7 that afternoon that a private company was able to do the weeks worth of work to professionally 'pull' and effectively DUSTIFY (as we saw with the North and South towers that morning)? No? Then it was the NYPD Bomb Squad? No? NYFD? No? 3rd plane? No? Damage from TOPPLING of North and/or South towers? No? Damage from remains of planes that struck the North and/or South towers? No? No. So if none of the above caused significant enough damage to WTC7 (WTC 4,5 &6 sustained SIGNIFICANT damage from debris and fire and did not collapse or be determined to have to be pulled or demolished until much later) then why was building 7 'pulled'? Did you make that decision? The BBC actually declared the building was destroyed on a broadcast showing a correspondent in New York and building 7 can clearly be seen standing in the background behind the correspondent. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
He shook up the world.
Rest in peace. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic:
why people
|
|
.wonk t'nod I .sdrawkcab si ekil smees enoyreve tI
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic:
Attractive privileges
|
|
"Attractiveness"? Not important. I feel that that the wealthy elite have More Privileges & this even includes breaking the law without repercussion, penalty, or punishment;}  It's no longer innocent until proven guilty, it's GUILTY until proven Financially Flexible. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic:
Attractive privileges
|
|
yes... and not just attractive, anyone that can make someone else money... You can say that again. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic:
RIP Prince and Chyna
|
|
Little red Corvette was literally at the beginning of my love for music at age 4. That entire album and much of what came after in his records was genius. My prayers go to the friends family and fans. RIP way way too soon.
Not much of a wrestling fan but RIP Chyna. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic:
Yipee...its 420 time...
|
|
Here in Durham NC there was a cop that allegedly smelled mj in a house, forced entry and accosted and tazed a man, the mother I believe was filming the incident on her phone. I haven't seen a follow-up on this case yet but I'd bet he spent some time behind bars if he's not still.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic:
Search Bug or glitch?
|
|
It appears the thread has been downgraded since posting doesn't raise it up on the cue on the home page.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic:
Search Bug or glitch?
|
|
I'm not a geography expert but I believe New York and Alabama are not within 50 miles of any part of North Carolina. Age seems to be holding true for my searches but if you are using the mobile app it may behave a bit different than the full site. I'd be interested in hearing what the site moderators have to say about this. They're probably going to contact you and lock this thread.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic:
Search Bug or glitch?
|
|
I haven't noticed the age alterations but I do get odd location cities(out of State?) , United States on my home page. Lots of home page issues actually. I'll check next time I search.
What I have noticed is when on the full site my home page shows the same profiles with one new one in the last spot. Refresh close reopening navigating back or forward doesn't matter. Same 100% of the time. The last profile is either and obvious fake or a phisher. When I report the fake the profiles on the home page get a shuffle and the process restarts. If one of them is different it'll be a profile that was already in that small pool or would be on the first page when I do a search. The last one stays as above, fake or phisher. Also searches do not show all results from the specified area. Mutual Match will present a profile that is inaccessible in any other attempt. On occasions when a message is sent to me from a real person, after 4 exchanges or so the messages stop. Nudges have been sent back and forth after this but messages are either blocked not recieved or I am not able to send messages. I have heard about algorithm locks or alterations in business applications on major search engines but not on social/dating sites. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic:
Dilemma
|
|
If she doesn't act right herself, treat you right, or even know if she wants to be with you NOW, there's nothing else for you to offer her besides a paycheck and more kids.
It doesn't mean that people have been right about you. This happens A LOT. Not all single mothers are bad people or have the same intentions. I repeat, Not all single mothers are bad people or have the same intentions. If you didn't love her ways, her habits, her attitude, and her lack of enthusiasm for being with you, Do you really love her? Think about that for a few days. Don't answer, just think. After a few days when you have really mulled it over, in your own words thinking about the long haul, do you STILL think she is the one. Don't answer, think a few more days. Think logically. Think alone. For clarity what I am specifically NOT telling you to do is call the cops when you think she buying or smoking. That could backfire in unimaginably terrible ways. Also don't run straight to her and give her an ultimatum. That's how she got you to give up the special sauce. That could blow up in your face too. You need to make the decision, and what ever you do DO NOT LAY A FINGER ON HER. No matter how bad she pisses you off. You can always walk away from an argument, peacefully. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic:
Dilemma
|
|
But we are about to share a child together. I can't do it. I'm a man of conscience. She's a woman (girl, really) of con-silence. 6 months of being a decent significant other doesn't earn the goo. 6 months of make believe when you thought she was pleasing you was a con job, not a blow. It's a blow (an affront) to your conscience which is exactly what she used to straight up manipulate you. It hurts, bad. I've been manipulated and deceived more times than I'd like to admit but never gave an unwrapped present. Since you have you need to collect evidence so she doesn't give birth to a paycheck. Get rock solid evidence and legal representation. The less she knows the better but at some point she will have to find out. Cards are stacked against guys even moral men in good standing. Good luck. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic:
USA : "Super Lice" Epidemic
|
|
I suspect fried lice.. More likely Plum. You should look into islands. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic:
USA : "Super Lice" Epidemic
Edited by
germanchoclate1981
on
Mon 02/29/16 10:31 PM
|
|
I couldn't find any outbreaks in Mexico or Puerto Rico. But there was on in Canada, but that was 2014. So...where did this come from ? The lice in Mexico and south America passed zika virus to their offspring resulting in supermicrocephaly. This left their mandibles too small to puncture skin leaving them unable to feed. Many clutches were mislaid or aborted. Others caught syphilis, were eaten by crabs or turned to hard drugs in despair. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Real life excerpt from Dec 7th FDR speech in Pearl Harbor 'A day that will live in infamy...'
Kitchen scene from Bobby "Back and to the left. Back, and to the left. Back, and, to the left." JFK BLACKHAWK DOWN! Self explanatory. "I could have saved more." Shindler's List The Letter from Abraham Lincoln to the mother who lost all her sons in the war from Saving Private Ryan Woody Harrelson's character jumping on the live grenade in The Thin Red Line Just to name a few. |
|
|
|
|
Previous
