DC: Why do you think WTC7 was a CD?

[Corsair 115]

So a building looks like a CD (admitted by debunkers), is announced early on BBC...

I find it curious why you are ignoring the fact that CNN announced some two hours before the WTC7 collapsed that the building was in danger of collapse due to fire, as told to them by the FDNY. And from then until the building collapsed they kept cutting back to a shot of the building and repeating that the building was in danger of collapsing according to the FDNY.

I can only conclude you were not at home that day watching the news. I was. In fact, I was home for three straight days doing little else other than watching the news.

 

[DC]

Like this guy?

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

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

massmurder??? how many died in WTC7?

 

[CHF]

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.

Show us an example of being intellectually honest, theauthor.

Tell us what you think happened.

Are first responders covering up WTC7's "demolition?" Are the BBC in on it?

You seem to have serious issues when it comes to taking claims to their logical conclusions.

 

[CHF]

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

Was Chief Daniel Nigro involved? Yes or no.

 

[DC]

Was Chief Daniel Nigro involved? Yes or no.

i dont know.

 

[CHF]

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)

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

i dont know.

It seems you're really struggling with this, DC.

WTC7 was an obvious CD, yet the FDNY, who were close the building all day, do not support this claim and have even given statements indicating that they knew the building would collapse from structural damage and fire.

I'd be confused too.

 

[johnny karate]

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.

This isn't how it works in a discussion, sport. You don't get to keep asking questions while ignoring the ones others pose to you. That's called intellectual dishonesty, and makes you little more that a troll.

So let's try again: How did the first responder in question know that WTC7 was about to "blow up"?

 

[johnny karate]

DP

 

[stateofgrace]

massmurder??? how many died in WTC7?

Yes dear boy MASS MURDER. Unless you are now telling us all that the MASS MURDER plot to kill thousands inside WTC 1 and 2 had absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with the demolition of WTC 7.That for some reason the demolishing of WTC 7 had absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with the rest of the days events. Is this your new angle? Is this how you justify it to yourself when you willingly try to imply that some of the fire fighters may have been involved?

Well DC? Have you got the balls to imply by name, any fire-fighter you think may have been involved in the demolition of WTC 7? One name, I defy you to put forward one single name, after all according to you, any fire fighter involved in the demolition is guilty of nothing, let alone MASS MURDER.

In your own good time, DC, name names, stop hiding,you have already implied that you believe some of the fire fighters may have been involved, so why not go the full nine yards and show everybody how bloody ridiculous you really are.

 

[aggle-rithm]

massmurder??? how many died in WTC7?

If WTC7 were secretly demolished, then the people behind the crime either knew about the plan to kill 3000 people, or they didn't.

If they did not know about it, then the WTC7 demolition was a separate, unrelated operation having nothing to do with the terror attacks.

Is this what you are contending?

Or, perhaps you are saying the the firefighters and others complicit in the demolition were ignorant of the plot. Surely, they would have suspected SOMETHING was up when, on the very day they were asked to secretly demolish a building (or at least participate in the cover-up), hundreds of their own colleagues were killed?

And they still went along with it?

And they kept QUIET about it, to this very day?

In what way would this NOT make them complicit in mass murder?

ETA, stateofgrace beat me to the punch!

 

[stateofgrace]

It's about time you did.

Indeed.

When did I say that?

Here

So a building looks like a CD

Another strawman.

Do try to learn the meaning of the above before you use it again and make yourself look even more foolish.

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

Because he was told in advance that somebody had put loads of explosives inside the building and the perps decided it would be a good idea if somebody went around shouting about it before hand just to ensure that everybody knew all about it and it would be posted on you tube by internet investigators who would blow wide upon this dastardly plot. What do you think? Does it sound plausible or stupid?

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

I have no problem with anything but if you do feel free to tell us all about it.

 

[DC]

sorry thats OT. make a new topic, maybe i answer there. thx

 

[stateofgrace]

sorry thats OT. make a new topic, maybe i answer there. thx

It is on topic, that being you explaining how you concluded WTC 7 was demolished. It is clear within your lengthily research you have concluded that fire fighters on the ground may have been involved.

You will not get another thread from me, you do not deserve it, I have seen enough of your drivel in this thread to draw my own conclusions and based on those you deserve nothing let alone the time other members of this forum have spend with you. You deserve no further platform to spew your contemptible garbage.

Forum decorum dictates that I should not offer you my utter contempt so I will not. I will leave this thread and you to wallow in your dream whereby it is ok for you to imply those that were there, those who did all they could to help, those who command my utter admiration and respect, are in fact involved in a mass murder plot.

Good day, sir.

 

[DC]

topic = Why do you think WTC7 was a CD?
i answered it already severaltimes now.
and firefighters knowledge or involvement is not one of the reasons i think WTC7 was a CD.
sorry, make a new topic and we can talk there, i dont want to get suspended.

 

[Totovader]

topic = Why do you think WTC7 was a CD?
i answered it already severaltimes now.
and firefighters knowledge or involvement is not one of the reasons i think WTC7 was a CD.
sorry, make a new topic and we can talk there, i dont want to get suspended.

Now you think it WAS a CD again?

I thought you said you didn't know (and were waiting for the NIST report on WTC7)?

 

[DC]

i think it is a CD but i do not know if it is a CD.
and before i make a final conclusion i want to read the NIST report first.

i also explained that i would not say im agnostic, because i tend very strong to a CD.

i hope it is clear now.

 

[applecorped]

well before i would consider the CD of WTC 7 a fact, i would like to read the official theory to it first.

maybe they have a good and convincing explenation for the collapses. especially i am looking into investigations to the steel column 81 and the columns nearby.

DC, is CD of WTC7 a fact to you or not? There have been contradictory statements by you and I'm not sure at this point what you believe. If you truly believe it was a CD then what would be the point of reading the upcoming report? If you are waiting for the report then just state that and stick to it. After the above post you went on to state emphatically that it was obvious that it was CD. Slow down, remember what you posted earlier before posting again.

 

[aggle-rithm]

i think it is a CD but i do not know if it is a CD.
and before i make a final conclusion i want to read the NIST report first.

i also explained that i would not say im agnostic, because i tend very strong to a CD.

i hope it is clear now.

The only thing that isn't clear is WHY you "tend very strong to a CD".

In the absence of evidence, motive, opportunity, or plausible mode of operation, what could possibly make you "tend very strong to a CD", other than very strong preconceived notions and a willingness to ignore reality?

 

[X]

Yes dear boy MASS MURDER. Unless you are now telling us all that the MASS MURDER plot to kill thousands inside WTC 1 and 2 had absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with the demolition of WTC 7.That for some reason the demolishing of WTC 7 had absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with the rest of the days events. Is this your new angle? Is this how you justify it to yourself when you willingly try to imply that some of the fire fighters may have been involved?

Well DC? Have you got the balls to imply by name, any fire-fighter you think may have been involved in the demolition of WTC 7? One name, I defy you to put forward one single name, after all according to you, any fire fighter involved in the demolition is guilty of nothing, let alone MASS MURDER.

In your own good time, DC, name names, stop hiding,you have already implied that you believe some of the fire fighters may have been involved, so why not go the full nine yards and show everybody how bloody ridiculous you really are.

Sorry thats OT. Make a new topic, maybe I will answer there. thx

No, it is not off-topic.
It is a part of why you think WTC 7 was a controlled demolition.
As such, it is perfectly within the topic for StateOfGrace to ask for clarification on the point.

Please answer the question.

 

[pomeroo]

i think it is a CD but i do not know if it is a CD.
and before i make a final conclusion i want to read the NIST report first.

i also explained that i would not say im agnostic, because i tend very strong to a CD.

i hope it is clear now.

With the single exception of Danny Jowenko, who has no experience with large buildings, all demolition experts concur that the collapse of WTC 7 does not resemble a controlled demolition. What do you know that they don't?