9/11 Truth: Bush Admin. sets the towers to fall, raises military budget, Iraq for OIL

Abookamongstthemany

trappedinmyradio wrote:

please, stop talking about fire destroying steel structures...it's ridiculous...and fire didn't destroy either building 1 or 2.

That's the point he was making. He's saying if fire didn't bring down the first two, what was the reason for 7.

SPEEDY MCCREADY

Abookamongstthemany wrote:

That's the point he was making. He's saying if fire didn't bring down the first two, what was the reason for 7.

hehehehe..........that must be the 4,835 time i have seen this question in this thread....

the reason 7 collapsed was due to structural damage caused by the first 2 towers falling........



and this thread needs to suffer a quick painless death.......

CorporateWhore

SPEEDY MCCREADY wrote:

and this thread needs to suffer a quick painless death.......

Agreed.

trappedinmyradio

Abookamongstthemany wrote:

That's the point he was making. He's saying if fire didn't bring down the first two, what was the reason for 7.

he lumped it in with the other two by saying it was only the third steel structure building to come down because of fire...fire didn't destroy any of the buildings...to keep bringing it up is ludicrous...i have no idea why building 7 came down...i haven't looked into it at all...

sonicreducer

SPEEDY MCCREADY wrote:

the reason 7 collapsed was due to structural damage caused by the first 2 towers falling........

if you look at pictures of wtc 3, 4, 5, & 6 you can easily see that they sustained far greater damage than building 7, especially 5. i believe the term 'raging inferno' would be correct for wtc 5. considering that NIST is still researching why 7 fell, and in their powerpoint they suggest explosives as possibility, i wouldn't be that quick to be so vague in your explanation.

SPEEDY MCCREADY

sonicreducer wrote:

if you look at pictures of wtc 3, 4, 5, & 6 you can easily see that they sustained far greater damage than building 7, especially 5. i believe the term 'raging inferno' would be correct for wtc 5. considering that NIST is still researching why 7 fell, and in their powerpoint they suggest explosives as possibility, i wouldn't be that quick to be so vague in your explanation.

page 5 seems to explain the reason why 7 collapsed.....

and this is from the NIST report.....correct????

http://www.popularmechanics.com/technology/military_law/1227842.html

sonicreducer

SPEEDY MCCREADY wrote:

page 5 seems to explain the reason why 7 collapsed.....

and this is from the NIST report.....correct????

http://www.popularmechanics.com/technology/military_law/1227842.html

"further investigations are needed"


http://wtc.nist.gov/media/WTC7_Approach_Summary12Dec06.pdf

SPEEDY MCCREADY

im gonna stick with my utterly ridiculous illogical theory...

structural damage caused by the collapse of the towers caused the collapse of 7...

sonicreducer

SPEEDY MCCREADY wrote:

im gonna stick with my utterly ridiculous illogical theory...

structural damage caused by the collapse of the towers caused the collapse of 7...

we'll find out for sure, hopefully sooner than later,...

citizen_drew

Anyone happen to know why Henry Kissenger resigned as the chairman of the 9/11 commission after accepting the post just a couple weeks prior?

Seems like he would have been a really good fit for the task.

69charger

El_Kabong wrote:

usually you'd duck out of the thread when building 7 came up or you would start making personal attacks...

�� An initial local failure occurred at the lower floors (below floor 13) of the building due to fire and/or debris-induced structural damage of a critical column (the initiating event) which supported a large-span floor bay with an area of about 2,000 square feet;

�� Vertical progression of the initial local failure occurred up tothe east penthouse, and as the large floor bays became unable to redistribute the loads, it brought down the interior structure below the east penthouse;

�� Triggered by damage due to the vertical failure, horizontal progression of the failure across the lower floors (in the region of floors 5 and 7that were much thicker and more heavily reinforced than the rest of the floors)resulted in a disproportionate collapse of the entire structure.

That's a very close approximation of how it happened.

sonicreducer

69charger wrote:

�� An initial local failure occurred at the lower floors (below floor 13) of the building due to fire and/or debris-induced structural damage of a critical column (the initiating event) which supported a large-span floor bay with an area of about 2,000 square feet;

�� Vertical progression of the initial local failure occurred up tothe east penthouse, and as the large floor bays became unable to redistribute the loads, it brought down the interior structure below the east penthouse;

�� Triggered by damage due to the vertical failure, horizontal progression of the failure across the lower floors (in the region of floors 5 and 7that were much thicker and more heavily reinforced than the rest of the floors)resulted in a disproportionate collapse of the entire structure.

That's a very close approximation of how it happened.

those are sequence theories,... among other theories being explored by NIST

69charger

sonicreducer wrote:

those are sequence theories,... among other theories being explored by NIST

That's right! You win a gold medal!

:rolleyes:

sonicreducer

69charger wrote:

That's right! You win a gold medal!

:rolleyes:

look assbag,... just don't act like everyone who thinks the commission report and the 'official' story is bullshit is a conspiracy nutjob,... there are many credible and reputable people questioning and investigating for the whole truth.

69charger

sonicreducer wrote:

look assbag,... just don't act like everyone who thinks the commission report and the 'official' story is bullshit is a conspiracy nutjob,... there are many credible and reputable people questioning and investigating for the whole truth.

Really? Who? Name one. And how many people qualify as "many"?

Assbag? Am I supposed to take offense to that? Who calls someone assbag...

:rolleyes:

Coming back to life

Why hasn't this been locked yet? Would do a better job of playing the violin than a Roman emperor.

ledvedderman

69charger wrote:

Really? Who? Name one. And how many people qualify as "many"?

Assbag? Am I supposed to take offense to that? Who calls someone assbag...

:rolleyes:

http://www.wanttoknow.info/officialsquestion911commissionreport

I would like to think members of our military and intelligence agencies would qualify to you as "credible and reputable".

sonicreducer

ledvedderman wrote:

http://www.wanttoknow.info/officialsquestion911commissionreport

I would like to think members of our military and intelligence agencies would qualify to you as "credible and reputable".

thanks

El_Kabong

69charger wrote:

�� An initial local failure occurred at the lower floors (below floor 13) of the building due to fire and/or debris-induced structural damage of a critical column (the initiating event) which supported a large-span floor bay with an area of about 2,000 square feet;

�� Vertical progression of the initial local failure occurred up tothe east penthouse, and as the large floor bays became unable to redistribute the loads, it brought down the interior structure below the east penthouse;

�� Triggered by damage due to the vertical failure, horizontal progression of the failure across the lower floors (in the region of floors 5 and 7that were much thicker and more heavily reinforced than the rest of the floors)resulted in a disproportionate collapse of the entire structure.

That's a very close approximation of how it happened.

'it brought down the interior structure below the east penthouse'

'resulted in a disproportionate collapse of the entire structure'

this doesn't look like a disproportionate collapse, looks pretty uniform to me...

http://www.wtc7.net/videos.html

where, exactly, is it disproportionate???

Mickey1794

Its interesting that some of the posts argue that our government wouldn't do this and that and we should stop wasting our time with conspiracy theory and so on. Interestingly enough, during WWII, when the first reports began to circulate of there being mass murder occuring in death camps, Germans opted to believe and trust in their government. They ignored the reports and dismissed them as conspiracy theory.
Its healthy for us to discuss these theories (1)because at least there are still some US citizens who care enough about the world that they would even waste their time on this board trying to expose the rest of us to events or facts that aren't out there for the mainstream audience to learn about. (2) What if it is all true? Is this acceptable. I fear that for many Americans it is. They are so indifferent to world events they probably would still not care. So what if our country is on the path to a fascist dictatorship. Many Americans would not care until their individual rights are gone. ....Which in case you haven't noticed are slowing dwindling away. (Secret wire taps, lack of due process for 'suspected terrorists', etc...e.g.The Patriot Act)