• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

BBC and WTC 7 on 9/11: confusion or NWO-blunder?

oahuoahu said:
according to the twoofers, Yes, the firefighters did know about the collapse during that day. Heres how most of them claim it went.

Mayor Giuliani moved the emergency response command team and operation out of BLDG7, before the attacks, for a drill. This emergency response command team was commanding FDNY, NYPD, and the first response teams during the crises. 3 NWO agents were at the top levels of this team getting orders from major HQ and when it was received that 7 was going to be brought down, so they radio'ed the FDNY and NYPD that 7 was coming down and to get back, AT THAT POINT FDNY KNEW IT WOULD COLLAPSE, but just because they knew it would collapse because superiors told them so, doesn't mean they were involved in making it happen, they were just following orders.
Click to expand...

Sounds like a good explanation....until one reads the individual quotes from firefighters stating how unstable WTC7 was and how they feared it would collapse.

So I guess that means the NWO agents somehow hid microchips in the eyes of the firefighters to transmit false images to their brains. Clever bastards!
 
Twoofers get themselves into this ugly jam all the time.

They believe WTC7 was a demolition but they don't want to blame the FDNY for being involved or covering it up. Poor taste what with 350 FDNY being killed that day, not to mention the theory being a tad stupid.

Only problem is that the FDNY was clearly aware that WTC7 would collapse.

So how does one pose the demolition theory without implicating the FDNY in either the execution or coverup?

Right - you can't.
Click to expand...

here it is

according to the twoofers, Yes, the firefighters did know about the collapse during that day. Heres how most of them claim it went.

Mayor Giuliani moved the emergency response command team and operation out of BLDG7, before the attacks, for a drill. This emergency response command team was commanding FDNY, NYPD, and the first response teams during the crises. 3 NWO agents were at the top levels of this team getting orders from major HQ and when it was received that 7 was going to be brought down, so they radio'ed the FDNY and NYPD that 7 was coming down and to get back, AT THAT POINT FDNY KNEW IT WOULD COLLAPSE, but just because they knew it would collapse because superiors told them so, doesn't mean they were involved in making it happen, they were just following orders.
Click to expand...
 
Sounds like a good explanation....until one reads the individual quotes from firefighters stating how unstable WTC7 was and how they feared it would collapse.
Click to expand...

and some firefighters say they heard bombs exploding in BLDG7 right before it came down and during the collapse

ive went to New York and most firefighters say they were told "get back, its coming down" 30 minutes before it came down to the time it came down, and the ones ive talked to say they werent told why it was coming down just that it was coming down

so who knows?

maybe guiliani should go under a lie detector test
 
oahuoahu said:
and some firefighters say they heard bombs exploding

ive went to New York and most firefighters say they were told "get back, its coming down" 30 minutes before it came down to the time it came down, and the ones ive talked to say they werent told why it was coming down just that it was coming down

so who knows?

maybe guiliani should go under a lie detector test
Click to expand...

And don't forget to ask him about Bigfoot.

Unless those "bombs" were all going off at once (dozens of them) a second before the collapse, I'm afraid that ain't proof of a demolition.
 
Did anyone here have the Idea the reporter might be talking of a partial collapse and not a total collapse that followed a partial collapse?
Buildings are funny things a piece of them can collapse and leave another part still standing.
 
What amazes me is the lack of common sense exhibited by amoeba like TS and the other truthers.

If you look at any huge traumatic event, a downed airliner, a hijacking, a Tsunami, an Earthquake, a terrorist attack, you will find these kind of blunders throughout the day. I am sure somewhere some news broadcast probably stated that WTC 5 and 6 had collapsed...in error.

Look at all the misinformation that came out early on about the ballplayer airplane that hit in NYC last year.

You think there weren't similar blunders made when the Tsunami hit, or when a president has been assassinated, or an attempt made.

It is absolute, utter foolishness for the CTers to take this OBVIOUS BLUNDER as a sign that WTC was intentionally taken down.

TAM
 
oahuoahu said:
ive went to New York and most firefighters say they were told "get back, its coming down" 30 minutes before it came down to the time it came down, and the ones ive talked to say they werent told why it was coming down just that it was coming down
Click to expand...


Stop the presses!

Firemen were being kept out of a building in imminent danger of collapse?

Why, that's...well, it's completely logical and reasonable and obviously has no place in the truther movement.
 
parmanides said:
The NIST report must therefore prove that ground workers could tell (despite having no historical precident and no real way to assess the internal structure) that the building would entirely collapse in a dramatic, clean and sudden fashion within a half hour time-frame. Do the sources that claim this damage, put an sudden and complete collapse in that time frame?

If not, the only other explanation that would account for such fore-knowledge and conviction would be demolition.
Click to expand...

Not sure what you mean by 'no historical precedent', but anyway.....

Buildings are in a constant fight against gravity.

Gravity makes buildings fall down

Buildings work best when they are upright, structurally sound, stationary and untroubled by fire.

Buildings which exhibit signs of structural damage, are no longer upright, make nasty noises indicating structural movement is occuring, and are on fire, have a high probability of losing the fight against gravity.

Basically it comes down to asking yourself if you would have wanted to have been in the shadow of wtc7 while it burned, moved and groaned. I wouldn't.
 
Arkan_Wolfshade said:
That post is one big example of post hoc rationalization and why it is not logically sound reasoning.

Additionally, please provide evidence of:
1) "no historical precident"
2) "no real way to assess the internal structure"
3) "would entirely collapse"
Click to expand...

1) no steel frame collapse from fire (ever)

2) so they went inside and assesed a burning building?

3) firefighters "its coming down"
BBC news - like the twin towers it has "also collapsed"
 
The lack of something previously occuring is not a precedent...try again.

TAM
 
parmanides said:
1) no steel frame collapse from fire (ever)

2) so they went inside and assesed a burning building?

3) firefighters "its coming down"
BBC news - like the twin towers it has "also collapsed"
Click to expand...
RE 1) a) Lack of precedent is not an indicator of impossibility. It it were, you never would have been born
b) You're assuming they specifically meant a global collapse
RE 2) Questions are not evidence.
RE 3) a) Citation?
b) You're assuming they specifically meant a global collapse

You need to show that the FDNY and other parties differentiated between global and partial collapses in their assessment and, if so, that they specifically meant a global collapse. Otherwise you are making a sweeping generalization fallacy.
 
Arkan_Wolfshade said:
Citation please.
Click to expand...

Didn't the Journal of 911 Studies contain a study on 118 Firefighters statements referencing bombs in the WTC? This was recorded as part of an oral history documenting their experiences and obtained under FOIA. It's not disputed.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom