10 story hole in WTC 7

[Christopher7]

Why would everybody "know their task" - i.e. be ready to go for a hit+run CD of WTC7 - in advance of 9/11 ?

If "they" expected the building to be hit by WTC1 debris, then how could "they" possibly predict that the damage and initial fires would be slight enough to allow the CD work to go ahead?

I can only repeat what has been said many times - there is no possible narrative that makes any sense.

Deniers mantra:

I can't see how they did it, therefore, it could not be done.

 

[Jonnyclueless]

As opposed to "I want it to have happened so bad I will only assume they did even if it can't be proven".

Don't worry, I am still here chuckling as I read.

 

[Jonnyclueless]

Oh, but Chris is right. Just because we can't figure out how the easter bunny did it does not mean the Easter bunny is not responsible for the collapse. Only deniers would claim that the easter bunny couldn't have done it. Right?

 

[Christopher7]

The point is, this method has been in use since 1999.

by whom?

You missed the point again.
It does not matter who used this method.
The point is, this method has been in use since 1999

so for all CD there is only explosives below the 6th floor? never on any floor higher?

Have you done any research at all? Sometime they place explosives on other floors.

[FONT=&quot]We only really need to work on the first two floors, because—you can make the building come down that way.[/FONT][FONT=&quot]
[/FONT][FONT=&quot]Stacey Loizeaux[/FONT]

one explosion? heard by who?

Look at the video and see if you can figure it out.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CcRs1fv8i3I

would one explosion be enough to bring down the building but be able to leave it a few hours before deciding to fall?

No


The government collected, and is withholding from the public, over 6,000 video clips from 911.

how many of WTC7? and are you sure it is the goverment that is witholding them? also source please?

NIST FOIA told me they had 25 photos and 2 video clips with sound, of the east half of the south side of WTC 7.
They said that was an estimate. I did not record the call.

Did you know that NIST is a government agency?
It is headed by a Bush appointee.
It is part of the Commerce Dept., also headed by a Bush appointee.

a few weeks? interesting? source please for jowenko saying it could be done in one day

Evidently, you never bother to check out the links i provide.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k3DRhwRN06I



Danny did not recognize WTC 1 & 2 as CD's because there had never been a top down demolition before.

so they are not CD then, good i am glad you have come off that fence

What part of "did not recognize" don't you understand?

more than anyone else watching an incomplete and edited video with no further background info, but still not enough to use as evidence

He saw the same videos we have all seen.
He is an expert, you are not.
He is absolutely certain that WTC 7 was a CD based on what he saw.
You are not qualified to say he does not know what he is talking about.
It's just arrogance and denial that makes you do so.

Answer post # 3091 now Christopher

Yes sir

You need a diagram?

yes, why not?

You can't possibly be that stupid. Stop yanking my chain.

The south side of WTC7 is hwere all that smoke is coming from? Why do you insist on showing the fires on the other sides then?

Because that's where the area of the initiating event is.

including your "just before" quote you posted

That was RedIbis post 3073

 

[cloudshipsrule]

Damn it, Chris.

What makes you a better expert on the collapse of WTC7 than the actual experts who studied evidence which you have no access to?

 

[CHF]

Chris, have you figured out what kind of bombs were used on WTC7?

Remember...quite ones.

 

[Christopher7]

Damn it, Chris.

What makes you a better expert on the collapse of WTC7 than the actual experts who studied evidence which you have no access to?

The FEMA and NIST reports were written so that anyone of reasonable intelligence could read and understand them.

I have seen the evidence and data they have presented.

It does not support the official hypothesis.

They have photographs and videos that we have not been allowed to see.

If there was anything there to support their case, they would have presented it in 'preliminary' report.

They concluded that the 'DD/F caused the implosion of WTC 7' hypothesis [set of assumptions]
"appears possible".

They had 2 years to assess the debris damage and the progression of the fires.

It is extremely unlikely they missed anything major.

They will not find any evidence of what happened in those 80 boxes of documents.


I don't dispute what the experts said. They were honest. They put enough truth in the report to point out the problems as well as the possibilities of the official story. Finally, they said, it "appears possible".

A bit of a stretch IMO, but reasonable.

 

[GlennB]

He saw the same videos we have all seen.
He is an expert, you are not.
He is absolutely certain that WTC 7 was a CD based on what he saw.

Which video(s) was he shown?

 

[Revolutionary91]

If the skeptics believe that the smoke on the whole south face of wtc7 is from fire in that building then do they also believe this picture shows the whole north tower on fire?

 

[GlennB]

If the skeptics believe that the smoke on the whole south face of wtc7 is from fire in that building then do they also believe this picture shows the whole north tower on fire?

Now you're being juvenile.
That's dust and smoke from the (recent) collapse of WTC2.
It was transient, unlike the smoke from WTC7.

p.s. you need to look at this

 

[Revolutionary91]

Now you're being juvenile.
That's dust and smoke from the (recent) collapse of WTC2.
It was transient, unlike the smoke from WTC7.

p.s. you need to look at this

No, im making a serious point. If the smoke and dust can so easily make it look like the north toweer is completely on fire then the same thing can happen to 7. In fact that picture shows the south side of the north tower and it is the south side of 7 that has all the smoke.

They look exactly the same and anyone viewing that picture could be forgiven for thinking every floor of the north tower was on fire.

 

[jaydeehess]

Typical out of context posting Rv91

You are very aware that that picture was taken while the dust of the collapse of WTC 2 had not yet settled. I would venture a gues that it was taken about 10 minutes after the collapse. That makes it dust in the vortex downwind of WTC 1 that you are referring to. What then is the source of what you believe is happening in the pictures of WTC 7, well after the collapses of 1&2?

Christopher, you should know full well that the "explosion" that "trapped" the two on the 8th floor was in fact the dust coming up the stairwell as a result of the collapse of WTC 2. These men were unaware that #2 had collapsed, they had fast moving dust coming up at them moments after hearing and feeling the intense vibrations caused by a 110 storey building collapsing and drew a quite natural conclusion that it was an explosion in the building they were in. A conclusion that was in error.

The only other "explosion" you refer to is the one that two guys heard as #7 commenced collapsing and it is also very obvious that what they heard was the initial, interior failure that brought about the collapse.

The building was badly damaged as fires began and the fires were major fires that went unchecked and the building succumbed to the totality of the damages in the late afternoon of the same day.

You are re-hashing everything over and over again. Nothing you have points definitively to CD, in fact everything you have is easily refuted or has an obvious and more likely alternative explanation, and it bears repeating that there is no senario for implementing a CD of WTC 7 that makes any sense.

 

[jaydeehess]

No, im making a serious point. If the smoke and dust can so easily make it look like the north toweer is completely on fire then the same thing can happen to 7. In fact that picture shows the south side of the north tower and it is the south side of 7 that has all the smoke.

They look exactly the same and anyone viewing that picture could be forgiven for thinking every floor of the north tower was on fire.

A large percentage of the windows of WTC 7 south side were broken and thus it would be expected that smoke from interior fires would escape the building on the south side.
I don't know that there was fire on every floor and that is not what is meant by "fully involved" anyway. That means that fire OR heavy smoke is present throughout the building.

 

[Revolutionary91]

Typical out of context posting Rv91

You are very aware that that picture was taken while the dust of the collapse of WTC 2 had not yet settled. I would venture a gues that it was taken about 10 minutes after the collapse. That makes it dust in the vortex downwind of WTC 1 that you are referring to. What then is the source of what you believe is happening in the pictures of WTC 7, well after the collapses of 1&2?

Christopher, you should know full well that the "explosion" that "trapped" the two on the 8th floor was in fact the dust coming up the stairwell as a result of the collapse of WTC 2. These men were unaware that #2 had collapsed, they had fast moving dust coming up at them moments after hearing and feeling the intense vibrations caused by a 110 storey building collapsing and drew a quite natural conclusion that it was an explosion in the building they were in. A conclusion that was in error.

The only other "explosion" you refer to is the one that two guys heard as #7 commenced collapsing and it is also very obvious that what they heard was the initial, interior failure that brought about the collapse.

The building was badly damaged as fires began and the fires were major fires that went unchecked and the building succumbed to the totality of the damages in the late afternoon of the same day.

You are re-hashing everything over and over again. Nothing you have points definitively to CD, in fact everything you have is easily refuted or has an obvious and more likely alternative explanation, and it bears repeating that there is no senario for implementing a CD of WTC 7 that makes any sense.

The smoke we see on the southside of wtc7 is actually from wtc5 and 6.

 

[funk de fino]

The point is, this method has been in use since 1999.

there is a point, by whom?

You missed the point again.
It does not matter who used this method.
The point is, this method has been in use since 1999

see above

Have you done any research at all? Sometime they place explosives on other floors.

so your original point was?

Look at the video and see if you can figure it out.

figure out how the penthouse fell first? you tell me how, you know better than me

No

well then what brought it down? not this explosion?

The government collected, and is withholding from the public, over 6,000 video clips from 911.

NIST FOIA told me they had 25 photos and 2 video clips with sound, of the east half of the south side of WTC 7.

They said that was an estimate. I did not record the call.

so you were trying to mislead here with your inflated figures? the government cannot withold it unless it is to be used for a criminal proceeding or affects national security, the video belongs to the people who shot it, if they want to withold it there is nothing we can do?

Did you know that NIST is a government agency?

It is headed by a Bush appointee.

It is part of the Commerce Dept., also headed by a Bush appointee.

yes, so and so

will this affect the work done by the poepl involved or are they all bush appointees

Evidently, you never bother to check out the links i provide.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k3DRhwRN06I

i did, i cannot see where he says this could be done in a day in that video?

if it could be done in a day, when was it done? all the cutting with torches, taping cutter charges to the beams etc etc that jowenko speaks of

Danny did not recognize WTC 1 & 2 as CD's because there had never been a top down demolition before.
What part of "did not recognize" don't you understand?

he is the expert and he has said from watching the video it does not look like a CD, you cant have it both ways pal

He saw the same videos we have all seen.
He is an expert, you are not.
He is absolutely certain that WTC 7 was a CD based on what he saw.
You are not qualified to say he does not know what he is talking about.
It's just arrogance and denial that makes you do so.

see above reply

Yes sir

You need a diagram?


You can't possibly be that stupid. Stop yanking my chain.

post a diagram, what is the problem here?

Because that's where the area of the initiating event is.

not because you are trying to be misleading by stating the fires were not that bad?

That was RedIbis post 3073

now look at this and learn

you are correct on this, i have made a mistake and i apologize for that, not too difficult and that is what seperates me from people like you

your fellow truther was mistaken then?

 

[funk de fino]

The smoke we see on the southside of wtc7 is actually from wtc5 and 6.

[qimg]http://img512.imageshack.us/img512/2585/wtc6hose3bf5.jpg[/qimg]

This is a picture posted by christopher7 on this thread where he says these are fires, are you saying he is wrong?

 

[jaydeehess]

The smoke we see on the southside of wtc7 is actually from wtc5 and 6.

[qimg]http://img512.imageshack.us/img512/2585/wtc6hose3bf5.jpg[/qimg]

In the photo you post I see no smoke from 5 or 6 being drawn towards the face of #7 yet the face of #7 is very much obscured by smoke. The smoke from 5&6 is going straight up and looks to be unaffected by the turbulent air flow around 7

In the photo posted by funk de fino we see #5(IIRC) in front of and to the left of #7. No smoke is visible rising from that part of #5, no smoke from #5 obscures the west side of #7 and yet we see smoke rising from the lowest visible portion of #7 along its face.

Are you denying major fires in #7? Do we have to post the pictures of flames coming out the windows or are they also reflections of fires in 5 & 6?

 

[Belz...]

Deniers mantra:

I can't see how they did it, therefore, it could not be done.

Actually, it's "if it can't possibly happen, then it didn't."

No, im making a serious point. If the smoke and dust can so easily make it look like the north toweer is completely on fire then the same thing can happen to 7. In fact that picture shows the south side of the north tower and it is the south side of 7 that has all the smoke.

Rev, this had been already dealt with and Jay provided a link. Smoke can be seen pouring FROM the hole in 7 WTC. If you had done ANY research on this subject you'd know this.

 

[Christopher7]

Christopher, you should know full well that the "explosion" that "trapped" the two on the 8th floor was in fact the dust coming up the stairwell as a result of the collapse of WTC 2.

Should i now? This is the first i've heard of it.
Smashing speculation.
Except, ....... stairwells are closed.

These men were unaware that #2 had collapsed, they had fast moving dust coming up at them moments after hearing and feeling the intense vibrations caused by a 110 storey building collapsing

Really? When did they say they heard and felt intense vibrations?
In the videos i've seen, neither one of them said that.

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=6475257160515133665&q=wtc7+new+footage
Start at 6:20 [WARNING: audio very loud, turn down volume]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WnF--czW0F8&mode=related&search=

and drew a quite natural conclusion that it was an explosion in the building they were in. A conclusion that was in error.

Whenever a witness says they heard an explosion, you guys say they didn't.
If nothing else, you're consistent.

The only other "explosion" you refer to is the one that two guys heard as #7 commenced collapsing and it is also very obvious that what they heard was the initial, interior failure that brought about the collapse.

The initial failure?
Would that be several floors collapsing around a core column or the massive core column snapping like a twig, followed by two other columns failing silently. No, wait a minute, The first column failed and then two more, and then the vertical collapse took about 5 or 6 seconds. and then [minus 1 sec for time delay] there was a clap of thunder, a shock wave ripped thru the building and a second later the bottom caved out, and the building followed.
So the clap of thunder coincides, time wise, with the failure of the other 21 columns, not the initial failure.

The building was badly damaged as fires began and the fires were major fires that went unchecked and the building succumbed to the totality of the damages in the late afternoon of the same day.

Ah yes, the totality of the damages.

But there was no debris damage near columns 79, 80 and 81, you know, the ones under the east penthouse.

You are re-hashing everything over and over again.

No, the stuff about vertical columns not being adversely effected by extreme fires is new.

Nothing you have points definitively to CD,

Well now, that's a matter opinion.

Me and Danny and Hugo and Jorg think the videos definitively point to CD.
Then there's Richard Gage and 134 other Architect and Engineers.
[They are not all experts but they all have degrees in Architecture and Engineering]

in fact everything you have is easily refuted or has an obvious and more likely alternative explanation,

Easy to talk in vague generalities.
I have refuted your refutes and i refuse to recant.

and it bears repeating that there is no senario for implementing a CD of WTC 7 that makes any sense.

How 'bout this one:

"They" had 'maintenance' men affix wireless demolition charges to the core columns in the elevator shafts and mechanical floors where no one would see them. [except the 'maintenance' men who installed them]

They used Thermate on columns 79, 80 and 81 because they were so massive. [over 4 tons per floor]
Thermate, as you know, only needs a relatively small explosion to get it started and the sound would be muffled inside a building.

Then they blew all the rest of the core columns together making a sound like a clap of thunder.
This would send a shudder thru the building.
AS the core of the building collapsed, the perimeter columns would not be able to carry the load and they would cave out at the bottom.
The rest of the building would follow.

 

[funk de fino]

Enid Blyton?

when do you mention Moonface?