WTC Building 7 on 9/11

Vibrations from the towers coming down, weakened foundation, underground damage etc. Do you even have a clue as to the size of those buildings?

The buildings (all three) were occupied 24\7, 365 days a year. You dont just walk in and start demolition project on the world trade center in lower Manhattan of all places.:rolleyes:
 
John99 said:
You do realise the explosives would have had to be planted in both buildings for this whole plan to work because what if something went wrong and the towers did not come down would they just leave all the explosives in place?
Click to expand...
-You are asking from the wrong guy, I didnt do it you know.

And what would the incentive be to take down WTC7? What purpose would it serve if it was intentional? You dont have to answer that question because there really is no answer to that question:D
Click to expand...
-I would really appreciate if you could go through this thread before bombing your questions, I dont know for sure but there is some clues for that too in this very same thread. Just that we could be in the same page so to speak.
 
Why dont you just point me to the post where my question have already been asked? I would read the thread but this has been discussed here so many times.
 
BlueMoose said:
-You are asking from the wrong guy, I didnt do it you know.


-I would really appreciate if you could go through this thread before bombing your questions, I dont know for sure but there is some clues for that too in this very same thread. Just that we could be in the same page so to speak.
Click to expand...
i think john is asking you valid questions.
surely you have a reason to believe the way you do.

the fact that you have no answers leads me to believe that you are just parroting what you hear instead of researching the situation.
 
10:05 a.m.: The south tower of the World Trade Center collapses, plummeting into the streets below. A massive cloud of dust and debris forms and slowly drifts away from the building.

10:28 a.m.: The World Trade Center's north tower collapses from the top down as if it were being peeled apart, releasing a tremendous cloud of debris and smoke.

5:20 p.m.: The 47-story Building 7 of the World Trade Center complex collapses. The evacuated building is damaged when the twin towers across the street collapse earlier in the day. Other nearby buildings in the area remain ablaze.
http://archives.cnn.com/2001/US/09/11/chronology.attack/

-Quite a vibrations, there is 7 hour gap of collapsing between WTC1/WTC 2 and WTC 7. I dont get what you are trying to say.
 
leopold99 said:
i think john is asking you valid questions.
surely you have a reason to believe the way you do.
the fact that you have no answers leads me to believe that you are just parroting what you hear instead of researching the situation.
Click to expand...

-It is mystery, is it, your words. Me parroting, give me a break, you guys force me to, asking same irrelevant questions all time long. I´ve rested my case already but you just insist me to continue, the facts are there and I´m not
so foolish that I would offer speculations as fact (which by the way, your side of the camp are doing all the time). So, I rest my case again :D
 
Blue Moose (post 137) "can you imagine it fallin in freefall speed to its own footprint. I cant."


It didn't. With a little more information, you can understand what happened too. WTC fell over to the rear of the building as it went down, causing much damage across the street. Understand, there weren't just 3 buildings structurally compromised on 9-11: 6 World Trade Center, 5 World Trade Center, 4 World Trade Center, 30 West Broadway (hit by WTC 7), the Marriott World Trade Center, St. Nicholas Greek Orthodox Church, Deutsche Bank, Fiterman Hall, 90 West Street, the Verizon Building (hit by WTC 7), the World Financial Center buildings, One Liberty Plaza, the Millenium Hilton, and 90 Church Street all suffered major damage.

The Popular Mechanics examination of the WTC 7 collapse is fairly thorough and easy to understand. Debunking 9-11 addresses the Morrow Building comparison:
The perpetually perplexed will show you a photo of the Oklahoma City Federal Building and say "Gee, that didn't fall. If that didn't fall with more visible damage why should the WTC 7 fall"?

...The OKC Federal building wasn't constructed the same as WTC7 and did not have its lower floors on fire for 6 hours. We can see clear as day that the building was not a tube in a tube design. We can see its lower floors weren't on fire. We can see the columns are covered in concrete.

...To put it simply, [WTC 7] DID fall over backward and to the south-east. Just not like a steel reinforced concrete building would.
Click to expand...
If you would like to explore a more engineering-oriented analysis of why the WTC buildings collapsed vertically, then begin with the definitive University of Edinburgh Paper, then read a follow-on regarding more generic tall steel structures (like WTC 7).

There are conspiracy theories, and there are Conspiracy Theories. Some require stupendous huge leaps of faith, compared with simpler scenarios, like "Who shot Kennedy?" Sober analysis such as you can read in the links above, requires no leaps of faith whatsoever. Because the ongoing complicity of so many hundreds of people from so many diverse backgrounds would be necessarily entailed, the notion of such an audacious secret being kept as a 9-11 demolition conspiracy is utterly ludicrous.
 
Last edited:
Popular Mechanics ? NIST report ? :roflmao:
-Why is that your experts are better than mine ? bias ?
-Leap of faith, lol, I see things like they are, if you dont like it you can always call me CT-nuts, terrorist-lover, anti-american, or something more juicy, choose your pick.
-I can tell you that here where we dont have such an emotional burden about this whole thing we are looking this issue very objectively, (as you can see in my posts in this thread, meaning that I´m avoiding speculations and try stay in facts), and very large amount of people here are smelling the fish in this 9/11 case. Just that you know. Out. Cheers.
 
i really have no interest in how WTC7 came down, it is a strawman argument when the whole event is considered. Maybe it was taken down afterwards for safety reason...i dont know and it does not sound like you have done any investigating aside from hammer head web sites. Maybe tapes of ******* getting a bj were in it and it was done to destroy the evidence.
 
Last edited:
"-Why is that your experts are better than mine ? bias ?"

No, "my" experts explain with reason. Demolition-conspiracy theorists explain with wild conjecture...

"I´m avoiding speculations and try stay in facts"

No you are not. Saying that WTC was taken down by a demolition conspiracy is patent conjecture and speculation. Showing how it became structurally compromised, and describing the failure sequence is not conjecture and speculation. Read the links.
 
Here in the best country in the world (like you US people like to say), Finland.
 
BlueMoose said:
-It is mystery, is it, your words.
Click to expand...
yes, that's what i said.
now, let me explain why i said it.
in this situation you have the official version and you have the conspiracy version.
now, i, as a layman, must ascertain which is the truth.
WTC1 and 2 is pretty easy to get the truth from.
it's claimed a jet crashed into the building causing massive structural damage and wide spread fires. these 3 things are what brought the building down.
now, the conspiracy version states that the buildings (1 and 2) was brought down by a controlled demolition.
what needs to be done is to watch controlled demolitions and compare them with the collapse of WTC 1 and 2.
when you do that you find that WTC1 and 2 DO NOT collapse like a controlled demolition.

now to building 7.
i stated it was a mystery because i cannot resolve FOR MYSELF the events that brought the building down.
from the videos i've seen it most certainly LOOKS like a controlled demolition.
and pardon me if i don't just take anybodys word for it.
i didn't for 1 and 2, why should i for 7?
 
hypewaders said:
"-Why is that your experts are better than mine ? bias ?"

No, "my" experts explain with reason. Demolition-conspiracy theorists explain with wild conjecture...
Click to expand...
-C´mon thats weak, you saying that all those professors through out the world are CTs... :bugeye: :rolleyes:

"I´m avoiding speculations and try stay in facts"

No you are not. Saying that WTC was taken down by a demolition conspiracy is patent conjecture and speculation. Showing how it became structurally compromised, and describing the failure sequence is not conjecture and speculation. Read the links.
Click to expand...
-Same could be said about you, the official reports are just as weak or weaker than theory of demolition regarding WTC7.
-You people getting little frenzy now all the sudden. :cool:
 
John99 said:
No offense but i believe the best thing you do is make vodka, unless you are keeping everything else secret.
Click to expand...
-Are you sure that you are not talking NOKIA mobile phones, or using KONEs elevator ? Your relative could have artificial joint in hes body made in here. Welcome here where we have clean air, clean water, lots of lakes and forest, still top technology advances in many fields. Near free healthcare, free education to everybody, even for you. :cool:
-It wasnt offence since I know that ignorance is a bliss. :D
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top