Split Thread 7WTC - controlled demolition or fire and damage induced collapse?

Oystein said:
Could you write down the caption of fig.3-15, and compare with the claim you made in post 192? Thank you ;)

(If you do this proiperly, you will see that you were very wrong)

ETA: Your comparison has it backwards: Correct would be: the Pythagoras theorem does not become invalid once it is displayed wrongly on youtube and declared false.
Click to expand...

Not sure what you are getting at?

In post 192 I write: "Even NIST (finally) admitted that the building came down with free fall speed. QED. "... in response to your assertion that sound was lacking.

Sound is irrelevant; free fall collapse means that columns weer blown away (or cut, no sound necessary).
 
9/11-investigator said:
Huh, and where does NIST fit in??!!
Why did they come up with weird thories about thermal expansion (I believe the phrase was)??!!
Are you saying that Silverstein had forgotten to give NIST a phone call about what was the real reason for the collapse? That the building was 'pulled'?
And what architect designs a building that will collapse if only 1 column fails!?

Come on now.
Click to expand...

The NIST report was a fraud, a necessary cover-up.

Several columns had to be take out for the collapse of WTC 7. Recently there was a video of Ashley Banifield (NBC)--presented on this forum--doing an interview with the cutter charges going off in the background. Banifield said “This is it” referring to the expected demolition of WTC 7.
 
9/11-investigator said:
Not sure what you are getting at?

In post 192 I write: "Even NIST (finally) admitted that the building came down with free fall speed. QED. "... in response to your assertion that sound was lacking.

Sound is irrelevant; free fall collapse means that columns weer blown away (or cut, no sound necessary).
Click to expand...

And you pointed me to fig. 3-15 to back up that claim.
But I see that you did NOT write the caption of fig. 3-15.
If you did that, and compared to your claim, you'd notice an important difference, which is all-important and renders your claim "totally wrong".
 
MaGZ said:
The NIST report was a fraud, a necessary cover-up.

Several columns had to be take out for the collapse of WTC 7. Recently there was a video of Ashley Banifield (NBC)--presented on this forum--doing an interview with the cutter charges going off in the background. Banifield said “This is it” referring to the expected demolition of WTC 7.
Click to expand...

oh really. How did I miss this video. Please, indulge me, and point me to it.

TAM:)
 
This video? I hear no cutter charges (2 versions)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y0pKUz8UpSs
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O-WZpXiEKAo&feature=related


As for the "This is it." comment, she was probably given advance warning from some authority that the building was in imminent danger of collapse.

Listen to what Banfield says in the beginning of the second video...she was told by an officer it was going to collapse (this is earlier in the day, hence the "this is it" comment later on). Brian williams, after the second Banfield segment in the video, even remarks "What we have been expecting all day has happened." referring to the collapse of WTC7. Was Brian Williams in on it too?

Is that it, or is there a truther modified version with added explosions?

TAM:)
 
Last edited:
MaGZ said:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O-WZpXiEKAo
Click to expand...

yes see my comments above.

Banfield (well before the second segment where she says "this is it") says she was told by an officer it was going to come down because there was no way they could recover it or stabilize it.

Oh, and I do not hear any cutter charges. I hear some very quiet sounds that MIGHT be the first sounds of the collapse.

TAM:)
 
MaGZ said:
No. The missile started fires in WTC 7 and setoff the explosion that Jennings and Hess experienced in the stairwell at 9:03. The missile nor the fires had anything to do with the collapse of WTC7.
Click to expand...

Hey MagZ, who provided proof of a missile? Did somebody find missile evidence? Why would a missile be used to start a fire; Did someone forget to bring the Bic lighter or perhaps forgot the matches too? Was there something in WTC7 that fire couldn't destroy?

You also say the fires or the missile weren't the reason for collapse of WTC7, so the building had to be CD rigged? Wow, why take this building out when WTC's 1 & 2 were already destroyed? How do you hide CD on 2 buildings by performing the same thing on a 3rd for the sole reason as a decoy?

Are these questions to difficult for you to answer?
 
MaGZ said:
The NIST report was a fraud, a necessary cover-up.
Click to expand...

Exactly! But the NIST report would be an entirely superfluous exercise if in reality WTC7 had been blown up for the reason you say it was, namely to prevent greater damage to the surrounding environment. There would have been no necessity whatsoever for NIST to produce a cover-up in the first place!

Several columns had to be take out for the collapse of WTC 7. Recently there was a video of Ashley Banifield (NBC)--presented on this forum--doing an interview with the cutter charges going off in the background. Banifield said “This is it” referring to the expected demolition of WTC 7.
Click to expand...

You really want to maintain that the WTC7 demolition exercise was carried out in merely 7 hours? Deciding, planning, assembling a team of demolition experts, ordering explosives, mounting these explosives, pushing the button??!! So where are these demolition experts who can confirm that they carried out this scenario? Should be a piece of cake and silence all these horrible truthers for ever who say that WTC7 is 911's 'smoking gun'.

But this did not happen. Silverstein and co. were embarrased because F93 did not show up as planned, because it was shot down by Eric Gibney after he reported to his superiors that F93 was a ghost plane with crew and passengers all sitting dead in their chairs. And his local superiors watching CNN decided to shoot the plane. And now Silverstein (conveniently returning from his visit to his doctor **) and co. were stuck with a building stuffed with explosives; they had no choice but to push the button and blame the collapse on 'heavy damage'.

Silverstein made a mistake with his 'decided to pull' remark. Because if he had stayed with this explanation he should have answered questions like 'who prepared the explosives'. That's why he backtracked and the spontaneous collapse theory prevailed. And NIST had to go at great length to produce a report (after 8 years!) that covered up the real reason: pre-planted explosives/thermite/whatever that caused the controlled demolition. 2.5 seconds free fall (admitted by NIST) means controlled demolition. No discussion.

** - both his children who worked at WTC were also absent; what a coincidence!
 
Last edited:
MaGZ said:
No. The missile started fires in WTC 7 and setoff the explosion that Jennings and Hess experienced in the stairwell at 9:03. The missile nor the fires had anything to do with the collapse of WTC7.
Click to expand...

Mike Catalano proves you are a liar. There was no missile.
 
9/11-investigator said:
Even NIST (finally) admitted that the building came down with free fall speed.

QED.
Click to expand...

BFS. (Bull ******* ****)

A PORTION of the building's NORTH FACE fell at FFA for 2.25 seconds. NOT the entire building, not freefall for the entire collapse. 2.25 seconds and a portion of the N. face.

Try again.
 
9/11-investigator said:
Huh, and where does NIST fit in??!!
Why did they come up with weird thories about thermal expansion (I believe the phrase was)??!!
Are you saying that Silverstein had forgotten to give NIST a phone call about what was the real reason for the collapse? That the building was 'pulled'?
And what architect designs a building that will collapse if only 1 column fails!?

Come on now.
Click to expand...

Thermal expansion has been known for years and years.

Why do you think that they cut lines in the sidewalks in hotter environments? Thermal expansion.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thermal_expansion

http://physics.info/expansion/

Why do you think they put these in bridges?

http://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl...MWdDQ&esq=1&page=1&ndsp=23&ved=1t:429,r:1,s:0

Why do you think that running hot water over a metal jar lid, helps to open it when it is stuck?

This concept is not new or funny in any sense of the word.
 
9/11-investigator said:
Huh, and where does NIST fit in??!!
Why did they come up with weird thories about thermal expansion (I believe the phrase was)??!!
.
Click to expand...

The fact that steel expands in fire and how this affects firemen has been on the NYFD promotion tests for decades.
 
9/11-investigator said:
But this did not happen. Silverstein and co. were embarrased because F93 did not show up as planned, because it was shot down by Eric Gibney after he reported to his superiors that F93 was a ghost plane with crew and passengers all sitting dead in their chairs. And his local superiors watching CNN decided to shoot the plane. And now Silverstein (conveniently returning from his visit to his doctor **) and co. were stuck with a building stuffed with explosives; they had no choice but to push the button and blame the collapse on 'heavy damage'.
Click to expand...

My bolding.

So why the absence of a closely synchronised set of flashes and 130db explosions immediately before the collapse? Bear in mind it was filmed from many different locations.

Or are you a devotee of hush-a-boom technology? Or are you, perhaps, deluded?
 
BigAl said:
The fact that steel expands in fire and how this affects firemen has been on the NYFD promotion tests for decades.
Click to expand...

Yes. In my discussions with a senior UK fire technician (now sadly purged from http://www.fireservice.co.uk/forum ) he pointed out that one of the firefighters' greatest fears when tackling the 'mill fires' in Britain was that the massive steel girders would expand and push the walls outwards, leading to sudden collapse.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom