If you think anyone is expected believe isolated fire and minimal damage (also isolated) causes perfect, and symmetrical, spontaneous building collapse, then you would be stretching it all a bit to too far beyond reality.
Looking at the entire building. Absolutely yes the damage was very minimal.
Not even close to cause the collapse that happened. Nowhere near.
Why is it the 9/11 commission remained so quiet and elusive about it. They have no answer. Dozens (thousands) of the worlds top engineers cannot place logic to the damage it sustained with the collapse is sustained. What does that tell you?
It's a steel cage building. Fire does not affect open steel enough, nor was the structural damage enough to cause what happened.
Progress is not made by everyone joining some new fad,
and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
over specific principles, goals, and policies.
Progress is not made by everyone joining some new fad,
and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
over specific principles, goals, and policies.
9/11 conspiracy, abortion, and religion threads are like bad acid. Not meant for human consumption. Neither side can really prove without a doubt that they are right so what you get is a debate that decends into childish name calling and utter stupidity.
"When one gets in bed with government, one must expect the diseases it spreads." - Ron Paul
9/11 conspiracy, abortion, and religion threads are like bad acid. Not meant for human consumption. Neither side can really prove without a doubt that they are right so what you get is a debate that decends into childish name calling and utter stupidity.
It's pure physics and laws of nature. Since when is that conspiracy?
Progress is not made by everyone joining some new fad,
and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
over specific principles, goals, and policies.
Looking at the entire building. Absolutely yes the damage was very minimal.
Not even close to cause the collapse that happened. Nowhere near.
how do you know? did you personally inspect the damage? you seem so sure of yourself. but you are only going by what you read on the net. mostly by what alex jones says.
Why is it the 9/11 commission remained is quiet and elusive about it. They have no answer. Dozens (thousands) of the worlds top engineers cannot place logic to the damage it sustained with the collapse is sustained. What does that tell you?
it tells me they dont know yet. what does it tell you? that bombs were planted throughout the building? regardless, I'm not going to say 100% that the building was not taken down on purpose. I think its very relevant that not a single person was even injured in the collapse.
It's pure physics and laws of nature. Since when is that conspiracy?
It's not pure physics. Unless you are a structural engineer and personally examined WTC 7 prior to it's collapse and saw first hand how the collapse of WTC 1 and 2 affected and/or comprimised the structural integrity of the building it is all speculation.
You can take the same building and set off a truck bomb outside it's main entrance and the building could still remain erect. You can take the same building and place a much smaller amount of explosives next to a weight bearing support collumn and probably bring the whole fucker down.
None of us was inside that building so we really have no idea what the structural damage was like inside.
"When one gets in bed with government, one must expect the diseases it spreads." - Ron Paul
how do you know? did you personally inspect the damage? you seem so sure of yourself. but you are only going by what you read on the net. mostly by what alex jones says.
it tells me they dont know yet. what does it tell you? that bombs were planted throughout the building? regardless, I'm not going to say 100% that the building was not taken down on purpose. I think its very relevant that not a single person was even injured in the collapse.
fire weakens steel. you have no idea how bad the damage was from the fallen debris of 1 & 2
Well the engineers on site saw it...they have all the video...the pictures...the diagrams...all the blueprints...the many firefighter eyewitness testimonies from inside and outside the building... etc...etc...etc... essentially every angle of being there and witnessing it.
....and not a single one of them can see ANY reason whatsoever why #7 fell exactly like a demolished building does.
Actually there is far more evidence leaning towards demolition (#7) than not.
So combine the two realities of that encompassing scenario, and see where common sense seems to rest.
Progress is not made by everyone joining some new fad,
and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
over specific principles, goals, and policies.
no its not. its physics and laws of nature according to alex jones.
That's an inaccurate statement and you know it.
Progress is not made by everyone joining some new fad,
and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
over specific principles, goals, and policies.
Well the engineers on site saw it...they have all the video...the pictures...the diagrams...all the blueprints...the many firefighter eyewitness testimonies from inside and outside the building... etc...etc...etc... essentially every angle of being there and witnessing it.
....and not a single one of them can see ANY reason whatsoever why it fell exactly like a demolished building does.
It's not pure physics. Unless you are a structural engineer and personally examined WTC 7 prior to it's collapse and saw first hand how the collapse of WTC 1 and 2 affected and/or comprimised the structural integrity of the building it is all speculation.
You can take the same building and set off a truck bomb outside it's main entrance and the building could still remain erect. You can take the same building and place a much smaller amount of explosives next to a weight bearing support collumn and probably bring the whole fucker down.
None of us was inside that building so we really have no idea what the structural damage was like inside.
see post #40.
Progress is not made by everyone joining some new fad,
and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
over specific principles, goals, and policies.
Well the engineers on site saw it...they have all the video...the pictures...the diagrams...all the blueprints...the many firefighter eyewitness testimonies from inside and outside the building... etc...etc...etc... essentially every angle of being there and witnessing it.
....and not a single one of them can see ANY reason whatsoever why it fell exactly like a demolished building does.
Actually there is far more evidence leaning towards demolition than not.
So combine the two realities of that encompassing scenario, and see where common sense seems to rest.
Was this before or after WTC 1 & 2 fell?
"When one gets in bed with government, one must expect the diseases it spreads." - Ron Paul
its possible, but so far from a slam dunk that you and your God, Alex, play it out to be.
It's all there. People (responders) were there. Firefighters were there. Engineers were there ...the 9/11 commission was there. All the people needed to figure it out were all there trying to figure it out...taking pictures...video...making notes....drawings etc...etc etc...
Are you saying this didn't take place?
Progress is not made by everyone joining some new fad,
and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
over specific principles, goals, and policies.
What the 9/11 commission reports? Feel free. This is official public domain information widely available everywhere on the net.
They can't explain #7. They never did.
Progress is not made by everyone joining some new fad,
and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
over specific principles, goals, and policies.
cmon...use your head, the official 9/11 govt reports.
Progress is not made by everyone joining some new fad,
and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
over specific principles, goals, and policies.
It's all there. People (responders) were there. Firefighters were there. Engineers were there ...the 9/11 commission was there. All the people needed to figure it out were all there trying to figure it out...taking picture...video...etc etc...
What the 9/11 commission reports? Feel free. This is official public domain information widely available everywhere on the net.
They can't explain #7. They never did.
I read the 9/11 Commision report and just because the collapse can not be explain doesn't necessarily mean that it was a controlled demo job. I ask again was the inspection of the building done prior to WTC 1 & 2 collapsing or after those two buildings had already come down. And lastly, for arguments sake, let's say that WTC 7 was purposely brought down does that really equate to the whole evnt of 9/11 being a giant government conspiracy.
"When one gets in bed with government, one must expect the diseases it spreads." - Ron Paul
What do you think the official 9/11 commission report was a result of?
exactly that.
Progress is not made by everyone joining some new fad,
and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
over specific principles, goals, and policies.
Come on the twin towers were questionable but tower 7, what you say is just laughble.
Maybe do some research on buildings that have caught on fire or with randon structual damage and if you come back with evidence of the any of them collapsing symmetrically.
Then we may take you seriously.
Why is it laughable? I think its a credible theory as to why it collapsed.
Id take people more seriously if you didnt come across as someone who thinks they know it all.
People say im paranoid. Well, they dont say it, but i know that's what they are thinking.
I read the 9/11 Commision report and just because the collapse can not be explain doesn't necessarily mean that it was a controlled demo job. I ask again was the inspection of the building done prior to WTC 1 & 2 collapsing or after those two buildings had already come down. And lastly, for arguments sake, let's say that WTC 7 was purposely brought down does that really equate to the whole evnt of 9/11 being a giant government conspiracy.
Then you need to read post #40 again. It (#7) wasn't due to fire or structural damage.
So exactly what was it then? Do you think a caged steel building is a flimsy structure?
Progress is not made by everyone joining some new fad,
and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
over specific principles, goals, and policies.
I read the 9/11 Commision report and just because the collapse can not be explain doesn't necessarily mean that it was a controlled demo job. I ask again was the inspection of the building done prior to WTC 1 & 2 collapsing or after those two buildings had already come down. And lastly, for arguments sake, let's say that WTC 7 was purposely brought down does that really equate to the whole evnt of 9/11 being a giant government conspiracy.
wtc7 was un-salvageable. and not a single person died or was hurt when it came down.
and if it was taken down on purpose, how was it done so quickly? demo teams take weeks to properly place the demo charges in the right spot. and if it was laced with bombs for weeks before hand, how can not one single person come forward. 10s or even a 100 people would have known
wtc7 was un-salvageable. and not a single person died or was hurt when it came down.
and if it was taken down on purpose, how was it done so quickly? demo teams take weeks to properly place the demo charges in the right spot. and if it was laced with bombs for weeks before hand, how can not one single person come forward. 10s or even a 100 people would have known
To add to that precise cuts have to be made on key weight bearing columns in order to control the directions and speed of the collapse. Any engineer or firefighter inspecting the twisted remains of the steel columns from WTC 7 would have easily picked up on this.
"When one gets in bed with government, one must expect the diseases it spreads." - Ron Paul
wtc7 was un-salvageable. and not a single person died or was hurt when it came down.
and if it was taken down on purpose, how was it done so quickly? demo teams take weeks to properly place the demo charges in the right spot. and if it was laced with bombs for weeks before hand, how can not one single person come forward. 10s or even a 100 people would have known
We were told in the media by Silverman (the guy who got big cash) it was unsalvagable. Hell, if I were him I be hoping on the insurance deal as well.
There are also video accounts of firefighters being told to stand around and let it burn instead of putting it out.
It still wouldn't have collapsed from fire and the minor structural damage though (according to all the official 9/11 engineers).
Progress is not made by everyone joining some new fad,
and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
over specific principles, goals, and policies.
Comments
minimal damage? thats a stretch.
Don't ya think?
Looking at the entire building. Absolutely yes the damage was very minimal.
Not even close to cause the collapse that happened. Nowhere near.
Why is it the 9/11 commission remained so quiet and elusive about it. They have no answer. Dozens (thousands) of the worlds top engineers cannot place logic to the damage it sustained with the collapse is sustained. What does that tell you?
It's a steel cage building. Fire does not affect open steel enough, nor was the structural damage enough to cause what happened.
and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
over specific principles, goals, and policies.
http://i36.tinypic.com/66j31x.jpg
(\__/)
( o.O)
(")_(")
http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/august2006/230806wtccomplex.htm
and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
over specific principles, goals, and policies.
http://i36.tinypic.com/66j31x.jpg
(\__/)
( o.O)
(")_(")
It's pure physics and laws of nature. Since when is that conspiracy?
and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
over specific principles, goals, and policies.
http://i36.tinypic.com/66j31x.jpg
(\__/)
( o.O)
(")_(")
it tells me they dont know yet. what does it tell you? that bombs were planted throughout the building? regardless, I'm not going to say 100% that the building was not taken down on purpose. I think its very relevant that not a single person was even injured in the collapse.
fire weakens steel. you have no idea how bad the damage was from the fallen debris of 1 & 2
It's not pure physics. Unless you are a structural engineer and personally examined WTC 7 prior to it's collapse and saw first hand how the collapse of WTC 1 and 2 affected and/or comprimised the structural integrity of the building it is all speculation.
You can take the same building and set off a truck bomb outside it's main entrance and the building could still remain erect. You can take the same building and place a much smaller amount of explosives next to a weight bearing support collumn and probably bring the whole fucker down.
None of us was inside that building so we really have no idea what the structural damage was like inside.
no its not. its physics and laws of nature according to alex jones.
Well the engineers on site saw it...they have all the video...the pictures...the diagrams...all the blueprints...the many firefighter eyewitness testimonies from inside and outside the building... etc...etc...etc... essentially every angle of being there and witnessing it.
....and not a single one of them can see ANY reason whatsoever why #7 fell exactly like a demolished building does.
Actually there is far more evidence leaning towards demolition (#7) than not.
So combine the two realities of that encompassing scenario, and see where common sense seems to rest.
and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
over specific principles, goals, and policies.
http://i36.tinypic.com/66j31x.jpg
(\__/)
( o.O)
(")_(")
That's an inaccurate statement and you know it.
and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
over specific principles, goals, and policies.
http://i36.tinypic.com/66j31x.jpg
(\__/)
( o.O)
(")_(")
its possible, but so far from a slam dunk that you and your God, Alex, play it out to be.
see post #40.
and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
over specific principles, goals, and policies.
http://i36.tinypic.com/66j31x.jpg
(\__/)
( o.O)
(")_(")
how so? every single link you have posted has been directly from alex jones.
Was this before or after WTC 1 & 2 fell?
Can you provide a link to there reports.
It's all there. People (responders) were there. Firefighters were there. Engineers were there ...the 9/11 commission was there. All the people needed to figure it out were all there trying to figure it out...taking pictures...video...making notes....drawings etc...etc etc...
Are you saying this didn't take place?
and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
over specific principles, goals, and policies.
http://i36.tinypic.com/66j31x.jpg
(\__/)
( o.O)
(")_(")
http://prisonplanet.com/ :rolleyes:
What the 9/11 commission reports? Feel free. This is official public domain information widely available everywhere on the net.
They can't explain #7. They never did.
and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
over specific principles, goals, and policies.
http://i36.tinypic.com/66j31x.jpg
(\__/)
( o.O)
(")_(")
cmon...use your head, the official 9/11 govt reports.
and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
over specific principles, goals, and policies.
http://i36.tinypic.com/66j31x.jpg
(\__/)
( o.O)
(")_(")
its all where?
so if they cant, why can you?
I read the 9/11 Commision report and just because the collapse can not be explain doesn't necessarily mean that it was a controlled demo job. I ask again was the inspection of the building done prior to WTC 1 & 2 collapsing or after those two buildings had already come down. And lastly, for arguments sake, let's say that WTC 7 was purposely brought down does that really equate to the whole evnt of 9/11 being a giant government conspiracy.
What do you think the official 9/11 commission report was a result of?
exactly that.
and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
over specific principles, goals, and policies.
http://i36.tinypic.com/66j31x.jpg
(\__/)
( o.O)
(")_(")
Why is it laughable? I think its a credible theory as to why it collapsed.
Id take people more seriously if you didnt come across as someone who thinks they know it all.
Then you need to read post #40 again. It (#7) wasn't due to fire or structural damage.
So exactly what was it then? Do you think a caged steel building is a flimsy structure?
and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
over specific principles, goals, and policies.
http://i36.tinypic.com/66j31x.jpg
(\__/)
( o.O)
(")_(")
wtc7 was un-salvageable. and not a single person died or was hurt when it came down.
and if it was taken down on purpose, how was it done so quickly? demo teams take weeks to properly place the demo charges in the right spot. and if it was laced with bombs for weeks before hand, how can not one single person come forward. 10s or even a 100 people would have known
You still haven't answered my question. Was the inspection of WTC 7 executed before or after the collapse of WTC 1 & 2?
why wasnt it due to fire and hundreds of millions of tons of concrete and steel that crashed into the base?
To add to that precise cuts have to be made on key weight bearing columns in order to control the directions and speed of the collapse. Any engineer or firefighter inspecting the twisted remains of the steel columns from WTC 7 would have easily picked up on this.
We were told in the media by Silverman (the guy who got big cash) it was unsalvagable. Hell, if I were him I be hoping on the insurance deal as well.
There are also video accounts of firefighters being told to stand around and let it burn instead of putting it out.
It still wouldn't have collapsed from fire and the minor structural damage though (according to all the official 9/11 engineers).
and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
over specific principles, goals, and policies.
http://i36.tinypic.com/66j31x.jpg
(\__/)
( o.O)
(")_(")