Fire brought down WTC 7

dg1979us · August 2008

RolandTD20Kdrummer wrote:

pics just before it went down...

http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/evidence/photos/docs/3073.jpg

http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/evidence/photos/docs/wtc7_northface.jpg

http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/evidence/photos/docs/fig_5_20.jpg

looks pretty shiny to me....

Just before it went down as in when? It burned for several hours. Are these pictures minutes before it went down? Several hours?

Vedderlution_Baby · August 2008

I still think the Bush administration should still be held responsible for manslaughter because of 9/11.

spyguy · August 2008

spyguy wrote:

can we stop talking about windows. who gives a fuck

http://www.nist.gov/public_affairs/releases/wtc_videos/wtc_videos.html

please watch

Roland what is your take on this?

dunkman · August 2008

RolandTD20Kdrummer wrote:

pics just before it went down...

http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/evidence/photos/docs/3073.jpg

http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/evidence/photos/docs/wtc7_northface.jpg

http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/evidence/photos/docs/fig_5_20.jpg

looks pretty shiny to me....

yep... thats the north face... which is the side all theorists post pics of.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Afb7eUHr64U

south side billowing with smoke and fire.

also... dont you believe all the firefighters saying the building was buckling and that they heard weird creaking noises...

Boyle: There were four engines and at least three trucks. So we’re heading east on Vesey, we couldn’t see much past Broadway. We couldn’t see Church Street. We couldn’t see what was down there. It was really smoky and dusty."

"A little north of Vesey I said, we’ll go down, let’s see what’s going on. A couple of the other officers and I were going to see what was going on. We were told to go to Greenwich and Vesey and see what’s going on. So we go there and on the north and east side of 7 it didn’t look like there was any damage at all, but then you looked on the south side of 7 there had to be a hole 20 stories tall in the building, with fire on several floors. Debris was falling down on the building and it didn’t look good.

So we gathered up rollups and most of us had masks at that time. We headed toward 7. And just around we were about a hundred yards away and Butch Brandies came running up. He said forget it, nobody’s going into 7, there’s creaking, there are noises coming out of there, so we just stopped. And probably about 10 minutes after that, Visconti, he was on West Street, and I guess he had another report of further damage either in some basements and things like that, so Visconti said nobody goes into 7, so that was the final thing and that was abandoned.

Firehouse: When you looked at the south side, how close were you to the base of that side?

Boyle: I was standing right next to the building, probably right next to it.

Firehouse: When you had fire on the 20 floors, was it in one window or many?

Boyle: There was a huge gaping hole and it was scattered throughout there. It was a huge hole. I would say it was probably about a third of it, right in the middle of it. And so after Visconti came down and said nobody goes in 7, we said all right, we’ll head back to the command post. We lost touch with him. I never saw him again that day.

RolandTD20Kdrummer · August 2008

dunkman wrote:

yep... thats the north face... which is the side all theorists post pics of.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Afb7eUHr64U

south side billowing with smoke and fire.

also... dont you believe all the firefighters saying the building was buckling and that they heard weird creaking noises...

Boyle: There were four engines and at least three trucks. So we’re heading east on Vesey, we couldn’t see much past Broadway. We couldn’t see Church Street. We couldn’t see what was down there. It was really smoky and dusty."

"A little north of Vesey I said, we’ll go down, let’s see what’s going on. A couple of the other officers and I were going to see what was going on. We were told to go to Greenwich and Vesey and see what’s going on. So we go there and on the north and east side of 7 it didn’t look like there was any damage at all, but then you looked on the south side of 7 there had to be a hole 20 stories tall in the building, with fire on several floors. Debris was falling down on the building and it didn’t look good.

So we gathered up rollups and most of us had masks at that time. We headed toward 7. And just around we were about a hundred yards away and Butch Brandies came running up. He said forget it, nobody’s going into 7, there’s creaking, there are noises coming out of there, so we just stopped. And probably about 10 minutes after that, Visconti, he was on West Street, and I guess he had another report of further damage either in some basements and things like that, so Visconti said nobody goes into 7, so that was the final thing and that was abandoned.

Firehouse: When you looked at the south side, how close were you to the base of that side?

Boyle: I was standing right next to the building, probably right next to it.

Firehouse: When you had fire on the 20 floors, was it in one window or many?

Boyle: There was a huge gaping hole and it was scattered throughout there. It was a huge hole. I would say it was probably about a third of it, right in the middle of it. And so after Visconti came down and said nobody goes in 7, we said all right, we’ll head back to the command post. We lost touch with him. I never saw him again that day.

If you want to believe steel buildings fall down perfectly symmetrical from asymmetrical damage that's your prerogative I suppose.

To my knowledge, it hasn't been observed before in all of recorded history, and I think there's a very good reason it hasn't.

spyguy · August 2008

spiral out wrote:

They don't need to, people think this one makes perfect sense already.

please watch this. I'd love to know your thoughts on this....although I'm guessing people like you and roland wont bother....here it is anyway

http://www.nist.gov/public_affairs/releases/wtc_videos/wtc_videos.html

Nevermind · August 2008

spyguy wrote:

please watch this. I'd love to know your thoughts on this....although I'm guessing people like you and roland wont bother....here it is anyway

http://www.nist.gov/public_affairs/releases/wtc_videos/wtc_videos.html

Why did the building fall in perfect unison? If the left side of the building's floor collapsed we should have seen the left side collapse first.

dunkman · August 2008

RolandTD20Kdrummer wrote:

If you want to believe steel buildings fall down perfectly symmetrical from asymmetrical damage that's your prerogative I suppose.

To my knowledge, it hasn't been observed before in all of recorded history, and I think there's a very good reason it hasn't.

it didnt fall down perfectly symmetrically

it fell down on one side first dragging the rest of the structure with it.

spyguy · August 2008

Nevermind wrote:

Why did the building fall in perfect unison? If the left side of the building's floor collapsed we should have seen the left side collapse first.

it didnt fall "in perfect unison" whatever the fuck that means. did you even watch the video?

Roland, any reason why you are ignoring the link I posted?

g under p · August 2008

One thing's for sure bring up a 9/II thread and it's a gauranteed to make the last page on each and every thread.

Peace

RolandTD20Kdrummer · August 2008

spyguy wrote:

Roland what is your take on this?

It poses a convincing argument. It's worth mentioning on the computer simulation thing that they originally had to crank the data so much at first just to get a collapse result it bordered on obscene, and even then they excluded the core columns.

It looks good no doubt. It's a good looking and convincing computer animation. I dare say they could make anything look convincing on a computer screen.

What of the people coming up out of the basements all blown up with their skin hanging off after hearing and feeling explosions coming from below ground? That's something I haven't been able to explain away yet.

RolandTD20Kdrummer · August 2008

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LD06SAf0p9A

looks pretty uniform to me...

dunkman · August 2008

RolandTD20Kdrummer wrote:

It poses a convincing argument. It's worth mentioning on the computer simulation thing that they originally had to crank the data so much at first just to get a collapse result it bordered on obscene, and even then they excluded the core columns.

It looks good no doubt. It's a good looking and convincing computer animation. I dare say they could make anything look convincing on a computer screen.

What of the people coming up out of the basements all blown up with their skin hanging off after hearing and feeling explosions coming from below ground? That's something I haven't been able to explain away yet.

so the government has managed to silence and co-erce all those scientists to come up with an answer that fits their agenda?

all those scientists.
all the fireman and construction guys
the news crews around the building

not one of them sees a demolition team enter the building and plant explosives?

there is no audible explosion and yet it was supposed to have been blown up.. have we invented some silent explosive stuff now? silent explosives that these scientists/demolition experts have heard of?

Vedderlution_Baby · August 2008

dunkman wrote:

so the government has managed to silence and co-erce all those scientists to come up with an answer that fits their agenda?

all those scientists.
all the fireman and construction guys
the news crews around the building

not one of them sees a demolition team enter the building and plant explosives?

there is no audible explosion and yet it was supposed to have been blown up.. have we invented some silent explosive stuff now? silent explosives that these scientists/demolition experts have heard of?

While I don't think they personally had a hand in it, I do think they allowed it to happen, either because of ill will or just negligence.

dunkman · August 2008

RolandTD20Kdrummer wrote:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LD06SAf0p9A

looks pretty uniform to me...

the south face collapses before the north face. you can see it dip just before it drags the rest with it... if hot steel girders soften due to heat and they collapse then surely its feasible that they will drag the attached colder steel girders with it... they wont just snap off and leave half a building standing up beside it... its not concrete....

dunkman · August 2008

Vedderlution_Baby! wrote:

While I don't think they personally had a hand in it, I do think they allowed it to happen, either because of ill will or just negligence.

so a man as completely incompetent as bush and his cronies managed to keep quiet a huge attack on their own country.. not one special agent who has developed a conscience out of all of this has broke away and done an exclusive tv interview.. a book... passed on his secret a la deepthroat... not one?

RolandTD20Kdrummer · August 2008

dunkman wrote:

so the government has managed to silence and co-erce all those scientists to come up with an answer that fits their agenda?

all those scientists.
all the fireman and construction guys
the news crews around the building

not one of them sees a demolition team enter the building and plant explosives?

there is no audible explosion and yet it was supposed to have been blown up.. have we invented some silent explosive stuff now? silent explosives that these scientists/demolition experts have heard of?

The only people that are involved with, or hired are the ones that don't have conspiracy on their minds. If they do, they are removed from the equation promptly.

They are reverse engineering something looking for a specific result. Demolition is not one of the desired results. In that scenario if you look hard enough you will find an excuse for anything imaginable. This is why it has taken so long to come up with an explanation other than demolition. The sound of thermite burning is rather quiet, and thermite residue was found quite readily in this case with forensics. It need not make an explosive sound. I don't think it would be wise to immediately assume standard technology would be used if it were demolished.

The service elevator shafts were being worked on for something like 9 months prior, and the frame of the building is completely accessible between floors where nobody sees or hears a thing. Lot's of people have come forward....extremely little to none makes it into public consciousness via the media.

people label them crazy and unpatriotic the second they do

Vedderlution_Baby · August 2008

dunkman wrote:

so a man as completely incompetent as bush and his cronies managed to keep quiet a huge attack on their own country.. not one special agent who has developed a conscience out of all of this has broke away and done an exclusive tv interview.. a book... passed on his secret a la deepthroat... not one?

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/10/02/washington/03ricecnd.html?hp=&adxnnl=1&adxnnlx=1219437171-xw0+qW5+sEfKdWuTWOgCyg

A review of White House records has determined that George J. Tenet, then the director of central intelligence, did brief Condoleezza Rice and other top officials on July 10, 2001, about the looming threat from Al Qaeda, a State Department spokesman said Monday.

The account by Sean McCormack came hours after Ms. Rice, the secretary of state, told reporters aboard her airplane that she did not recall the specific meeting on July 10, 2001, noting that she had met repeatedly with Mr. Tenet that summer about terrorist threats. Ms. Rice, the national security adviser at the time, said it was “incomprehensible” she ignored dire terrorist threats two months before the Sept. 11 attacks.

http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/03/22/clarke.bush/index.html

Former antiterror adviser says Bush ignored 9/11 warnings

http://www.thesmokinggun.com/archive/0914051faa1.html

FAA Warned Of Al Qaeda Hijack In 1998

http://www.thesmokinggun.com/archive/0409041pdb1.html

(Shows declassified article)

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/02/12/politics/12clarke.html

'01 Memo to Rice Warned of Qaeda and Offered Plan

(This link also has a memo that can be enlarged about halfway down the page)

There's a lot of information there, all showing that the Bush administration ignored warnings as early as Jan of 2001 about certain terrorist groups. There's also information showing that there were warnings in the late 90's that specifically said that terrorists were sending operatives into aviation school so it wasn't out of the blue when this happened. While there is a possibility that Bush saw this and thought "well, we can use this...let it happen" I believe it was more along the lines of them ignoring it out of negligence and letting over 3000 people get killed.

RolandTD20Kdrummer · August 2008

dunkman wrote:

so a man as completely incompetent as bush and his cronies managed to keep quiet a huge attack on their own country.. not one special agent who has developed a conscience out of all of this has broke away and done an exclusive tv interview.. a book... passed on his secret a la deepthroat... not one?

In a nutshell Israel (mossad) wanted America to know what it was like to live with terrorists.

So many big player dual citizens (Israel/US) in US politics many who have written about a catastrophic event which would be needed to steer America in a bold new direction as outlined in PNAC. they wanted a new pearl harbor was I believe the exact term.

The deeper you look it becomes quite clear that it's not a stretch of the imagination by any means to think something like this was devised to impose fear, and start global conflict based on an agenda.

We've alredy been lied to more than the human mind can comprehend, and there; s no sign of it letting up anytime soon.

And it's ALL based on 9/11. 9/11 was the seed to turn the world on it's ear and do whatever according to PNAC, and it all ties back into Israel, over and over again.

dunkman · August 2008

Vedderlution_Baby! wrote:

There's a lot of information there, all showing that the Bush administration ignored warnings as early as Jan of 2001 about certain terrorist groups. There's also information showing that there were warnings in the late 90's that specifically said that terrorists were sending operatives into aviation school so it wasn't out of the blue when this happened. While there is a possibility that Bush saw this and thought "well, we can use this...let it happen" I believe it was more along the lines of them ignoring it out of negligence and letting over 3000 people get killed.

yes i understand... i thought you were implying they had actual knowledge of it... date, time etc... i didnt think you were talking about warnings that suggested an unspecified time from an unspecified set of terrorists.

i was wondering... you know how people dont think a plane went into the Pentagon... they believe it was a missile dont they? so what happened to that plane full of people... were they allowed to land and then everyone was murdered.. was it shot down and yet not one person has seen it being shot down... not one piece of debris found that could be traced back to the shot down plane? just wondering

Fire brought down WTC 7

Comments

Categories