Is Rosie Right About 9/11 Comments

[Parche]

Bill Oreilly was talking with that great comedian Dennis Miller Friday night about how
Rosie was completely wrong about 9/11 and a disgrace to the people who lost loved ones...and
a comfort to terrorists.......how in the hell could the truth be a 'comfort to terrorists'
Without even researching anything, he says hands down, Rosie is wrong.
What say you? :shrug: :shrug: :hi:

[Az]

1. Lemme get this straight

You are asking DUers if they agree with something Billo said? Were you expecting something beyond dismay?

[AlCzervik]

2. who?

[LakeSamish706]

3. Not going to comment much on this... But as usual Bill is wrong and is an idiot! n/t

[Blashyrkh]

8. Here here. All that needs to be said really.

[JuniperLea]

4. I haven't heard all that Rosie has to say on the matter

But some of it is absolutely true. I did hear her mention building seven once though, and that generally sets off the CT bloodhounds.

All that being said, if Billy says she is totally wrong, I can only think she is totally right!

:shrug:

[aikoaiko]

5. What were Rosie's comments?

[Suich]

6. I think she said Building 7 was controlled demolition. n/t

[Parche]

9. Bldg 7

I have seen several video's, and yes she is right about bldg 7

But Oreilly doesnt even make the effort to research anything, and says she is a nut, without
looking into it....he has his mind already made up.

:hi:

[Dangerman]

7. She may have a point...

That 9/11 was an inside job. It's physically impossible for high-rise buildings like the WTC to have its' structure weakened by plane crashes and collapses into dust.

Explosives are only plausible cause for this.

God bless Rosie for standing for the truth and goddamn Bill O'Reilly for treating her like trash.

[Gin]

10. Forgetting the inside job, planned demolition theory....I wonder how the

builders planned to demolish a 100+ story building, if they had to, for whatever reason.....there has to be some contingency plan during the planning phase, to take that tall structure down. (IMHO)

[defendandprotect]

11. You'd have had to DE-CONSTRUCT it . . . because of the asbestos . . .

The estimates for the scaffolding, etal --- HUGE costs --

Meanwhile, the conversations are moving on to the WTC not only including probably thermate, but
possibly NUKE material --

The heat is just so high that it seems even way beyond thermal ---


The Port Authority tried to get permits to demolish the WTC . . . supposedly . . . can't find
definite info on this because of asbestos -- $200 million and electrical modernizations required -- -$800 million ---

PLUS there was galvanizing of the aluminium fascade -- which was creating a great problem.
It did not interfere with the buildings ability, however, to withstand a plane flying into it
perpendicularly.