DC: Why do you think WTC7 was a CD?

[beachnut]

Would it have sounded anything like 04:57 in this video?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=58h0LjdMry0


(Incidentally, can any debunkers explain why that video shows rescue workers walking round building seven saying "the building is about to blow up"?)

Wow, you got it, go get your Pulitzer Prize; you have cracked the CT! Wowzer!

You are so cool; when will you be on ABC, NBC, CBS, CNN, etc? Wowzer! Are you 16, or 11? Wowzer; you single handed solved 9/11! Wow.

Run upstairs and tell mom!

 

[johnny karate]

Would it have sounded anything like 04:57 in this video?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=58h0LjdMry0

Sure. Now all you have to do is tell us when and where that video was shot, and explain why no other recording device in the area picked up that particular explosion if it was in fact a detonation charge going off in WTC7.

(Incidentally, can any debunkers explain why that video shows rescue workers walking round building seven saying "the building is about to blow up"?)

The person who said that most likely was not being literal. It turns out when people are in massively chaotic situations, they may say things that when put under a microscope six years later seem odd or factually incorrect.

And here's my question to you: If WTC7 was a controlled demolition, then how did some random first responder know about it?

 

[DC]

And this prove 9/11 happened by impact and fire. But you need to have knowledge and rational thinking. Got physics? Gee gravity blew up that building, must of been CD. NWO never sleeps, we even do India, and the world. You are starting to debunk 9/11 truth! Better than the terrorist have done..

Knowledge is the key to not being fooled by 9/11 truth, the fantasy masters of the world.
More fiction flows from 9/11 truth than a Tom Clancy novel.

Tom Clancy novels are based on more facts than 9/11 truth's best efforts!

you overestimate your knowledge

 

[theauthor]

Sure. Now all you have to do is tell us when and where that video was shot, and explain why no other recording device in the area picked up that particular explosion if it was in fact a detonation charge going off in WTC7.

Did anyone see those goalposts move?

 

[theauthor]

Come on debunkers, why does the official in that video say wtc7 is about to blow up? any ideas? Its strange isn't it? The first collapse from fire in history and it looks like a CD, is announced early on TV, and even has officials announcing it will blow up!

You got any explanation for that? Saying he was "mistaken" or "confused" isn't good enough.

 

[CHF]

Come on debunkers, why does the official in that video say wtc7 is about to blow up? any ideas?

I suppose that official must have been in on it and has since covered it up.

is announced early on TV

Oh that's right...the BBC and CNN are in on it too.

You got any explanation for that? Saying he was "mistaken" or "confused" isn't good enough.

Well either he was mistaken or he was in on it. Along with the BBC and CNN.

I'm going with mistaken.

 

[johnny karate]

Did anyone see those goalposts move?

How were the goal posts moved? You pointed to a video clip that has no context and you want to use that as proof that WTC7 was a controlled demolition? Nice try, but no.

 

[johnny karate]

Come on debunkers, why does the official in that video say wtc7 is about to blow up? any ideas? Its strange isn't it? The first collapse from fire in history and it looks like a CD, is announced early on TV, and even has officials announcing it will blow up!

You got any explanation for that? Saying he was "mistaken" or "confused" isn't good enough.

I gave you a perfectly plausible answer. Your refusal to accept it is irrelevant.

Now how about answering my question: If WTC7 was a controlled demolition, then how did some random first responder know about it?

 

[DC]

I gave you a perfectly plausible answer. Your refusal to accept it is irrelevant.

Now how about answering my question: If WTC7 was a controlled demolition, then how did some random first responder know about it?

eerm isnt it the Debunkers that claim when WTC7 was CDed all the firefighters would knw it?

 

[e^n]

eerm isnt it the Debunkers that claim when WTC7 was CDed all the firefighters would knw it?

We find it hard to understand how they could have been ignorant, yet somehow 'not in on it'. Do you believe the firefighters are guilty of collusion?

 

[DaN K. StAnLeY]

I believe WTC7 was controlled demo because Alex Jones and Dylan Avery said so! dur hur!

 

[johnny karate]

eerm isnt it the Debunkers that claim when WTC7 was CDed all the firefighters would knw it?

You mean all those firefighters that believe WTC7 collapsed due to the damage and fire they witnessed firsthand, and furthermore witnessed absolutely nothing that would indicate a controlled demolition? Yes. It follows that if WTC7 was in fact a controlled demolition these people would have to at the very least been involved in a cover up after the fact.

However, CTers such as yourself and theauthor tap dance around this issue. You want to claim a controlled demolition, but are afraid to implicate the FDNY.

And here we have theauthor using the exclamation of first responder as proof that WTC7 was a controlled demolition. I'd like to see him offer an explanation how that person could possibly have known that without implicating first responders.

 

[johnny karate]

Would it have sounded anything like 04:57 in this video?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=58h0LjdMry0

Another thing to consider about your dubious video clip:

The explosion is followed by ten seconds of silence. No more explosions. No rumble of a collapsing building. In any controlled demolition of considerable size, there is a rapid succession of charges detonating, and the collapse begins almost immediately.

So you have a video with both the time and proximity to the building in question unknown, and other than a single explosion, with audio uncharacteristic of a controlled demolition.

Not very compelling evidence. But I guess you CTers have to take what you can get.

 

[DC]

We find it hard to understand how they could have been ignorant, yet somehow 'not in on it'. Do you believe the firefighters are guilty of collusion?

i dont fully understand collusion, but i dont belive the firefighters are in on it.
for sure not all of them, i have video that proves that several where no involved at all (Naudet docu)

 

[DC]

You mean all those firefighters that believe WTC7 collapsed due to the damage and fire they witnessed firsthand, and furthermore witnessed absolutely nothing that would indicate a controlled demolition? Yes. It follows that if WTC7 was in fact a controlled demolition these people would have to at the very least been involved in a cover up after the fact.

However, CTers such as yourself and theauthor tap dance around this issue. You want to claim a controlled demolition, but are afraid to implicate the FDNY.

And here we have theauthor using the exclamation of first responder as proof that WTC7 was a controlled demolition. I'd like to see him offer an explanation how that person could possibly have known that without implicating first responders.

even when FDNY personal was involved, most of them was not. maybe a few know it.

 

[stateofgrace]

even when FDNY personal was involved, most of them was not. maybe a few know it.

Like this guy?

Regarding WTC 7: The long-awaited US Government NIST (National Institute of Standards and Technology) report on the collapse of WTC 7 is due to be published at the end of this year (although it has been delayed already a few times [ adding fuel to the conspiracy theorists fires!]). That report should explain the cause and mechanics of the collapse in great detail. Early on the afternoon of September 11th 2001, following the collapse of WTC 1 & 2, I feared a collapse of WTC 7 (as did many on my staff).

The reasons are as follows:

1 - Although prior to that day high-rise structures had never collapsed, The collapse of WTC 1 & 2 showed that certain high-rise structures subjected to damage from impact and from fire will collapse.
2. The collapse of WTC 1 damaged portions of the lower floors of WTC 7.
3. WTC 7, we knew, was built on a small number of large columns providing an open Atrium on the lower levels.
4. numerous fires on many floors of WTC 7 burned without sufficient water supply to attack them.

For these reasons I made the decision (without consulting the owner, the mayor or anyone else - as ranking fire officer, that decision was my responsibility) to clear a collapse zone surrounding the building and to stop all activity within that zone. Approximately three hours after that order was given, WTC 7 collapsed.

Conspiracy theories abound and I believe firmly that all of them are without merit.

Regards, Dan Nigro
Chief of Department FDNY (retired)

http://911guide.googlepages.com/danielnigro

Or are there any other fire fighters you wish to name as accessories to mass murder?

 

[johnny karate]

even when FDNY personal was involved, most of them was not. maybe a few know it.

Actually, no. The firefighters that have yet to come forward and proclaim the official explanation of the collapse of WTC7 as bogus would have to be involved. Which would be all of them.

 

[theauthor]

I gave you a perfectly plausible answer. Your refusal to accept it is irrelevant.

Now how about answering my question: If WTC7 was a controlled demolition, then how did some random first responder know about it?

So a building looks like a CD (admitted by debunkers), is announced early on BBC, and it is then discovered that officials were warning people to get back from building 7 because it was about to BLOW UP..............and you don't see a problem?

Get some intellectual honesty FFS.

 

[stateofgrace]

So a building looks like a CD (admitted by debunkers), is announced early on BBC, and it is then discovered that officials were warning people to get back from building 7 because it was about to BLOW UP..............and you don't see a problem?

Get some intellectual honesty FFS.

Let me get this straight. It looked like a CD so it was a CD. The perps told the BBC in advance so they could announce it to the entire planet prior to the demolition and officials on the ground are also in on it, right?

And you have no problem with this?

 

[theauthor]

Let me get this straight.

It's about time you did.

It looked like a CD so it was a CD.

When did I say that?

The perps told the BBC in advance so they could announce it to the entire planet prior to the demolition

Another strawman.

and officials on the ground are also in on it, right?

Can you explain why he was telling people that the building was about to blow up?

And you have no problem with this?

As a matter of fact, I do. Don't you?