• 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.

Confusing New Woo Tactic on WTC7

Joined
Jun 28, 2007
Messages
716
Something has cropped up lately on WTC7 truther videos and descriptions that is very puzzling. I'm not sure what to make of it.

They openly concede the fact that it takes weeks to prepare a building for demolition, but then plow ahead with the usual tripe of "pull", explosions, yadda yadda.

What is going on? This is a new twist to me unless I haven't been paying attention. Has anyone else observed this?

Here are a few examples. Sometimes the concession is in the video and sometimes it is in the description or comments.

@3:56
http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=06b_1200046899

In the description:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iORXhcrxkQI

In the woo comments:
http://myspacetv.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=vids.individual&videoid=5383965

:boggled::confused:
 
The only thing more idiotic than the claim WTC just HAD to be CD is the claim that it was prepared for demolition while it was on fire. I guess they're just trying to be slightly less idiotic by implying that it was rigged prior to 911.
 
Last edited:
I believe they are trying to make the point that given WTC7 was brought down with explosives, the demolition charges must have been placed there earlier and therefore someone knew about the attacks before they took place.

I think they are trying to say that after the towers collapsed, FDNY or whoever didn't quickly rig the building with explosives so they could bring it down for safety means or whatever.

Of course, this is assuming that WTC7 has already been proven to be a controlled demolition.
 
Has anyone calculated how much explosive it would take to demolish WTC7 without removing all the interior walls and suchlike? And whether that quantity of explosives could even be stuffed into a building? And how these magical explosives brought the building down but weren't heard, weren't seen, and didn't blow the contents of WTC7 all over Lower Manhattan?
 
I believe they are trying to make the point that given WTC7 was brought down with explosives, the demolition charges must have been placed there earlier and therefore someone knew about the attacks before they took place.

I think they are trying to say that after the towers collapsed, FDNY or whoever didn't quickly rig the building with explosives so they could bring it down for safety means or whatever.

Of course, this is assuming that WTC7 has already been proven to be a controlled demolition.
Yes. It makes sense :boggled: now. The only way to resolve the conflict of timing and FDNY complicity is to claim it was prepared weeks in advance.

Interesting though that it seems to be a common theme that cropped up recently. Did I miss the newsletter that outlines official truther talking points?
 
WTC7 was demolished by the Monster from "Cloverfield".
Makes as much sense as the Twoofers theories.....
 
does it surprise you.

The truthers believe that a SEKRIT TEAM OF COVERT OPS got into the building each night, and then SEKRITLY moved about, like the grinch did on xmas eve, and planted the explosives. They did this for weeks prior to the detonation...lol

TAM:)
 
Has anyone calculated how much explosive it would take to demolish WTC7 without removing all the interior walls and suchlike?
If you read Scheuerman's report you can conclude that you only need to cut a few key columns in order to initiate a progressive collapse. If that is true the implication is that you need only a very little amount.

And whether that quantity of explosives could even be stuffed into a building?
If you read something about controlled demolitions you can learn that the minimum amount that is needed will be used, enough to initiate collapse, but not too much because then the building explodes instead of implodes. But the Scheuerman findings help us out, you don't need much at all. And the fires were localized.

And how these magical explosives brought the building down but weren't heard, weren't seen, and didn't blow the contents of WTC7 all over Lower Manhattan?
There are testimonies of people who heard it, a British news reporter, Craig Bartmer and I'm sure much more, but it is not my hobby to collect quotes, it is no matter of counting the pro- and anti- testimonies; the fact that there are contradicting testimonies is a fact. It didn't blow the contents all over lower Manhattan because that is the purpose of a controlled demolition.
 
Last edited:
S
What is going on? This is a new twist to me unless I haven't been paying attention. Has anyone else observed this?

Cognitive Dissonance is what's going on. Like HeyLeroy said, they want to have it both ways, even if both ways contradict each other.

Steve S.
 
I believe they are trying to make the point that given WTC7 was brought down with explosives, the demolition charges must have been placed there earlier and therefore someone knew about the attacks before they took place.

Presumably they would have not blown it up if it hadn't had massive damage to it and been on fire, or else it would have looked stupidly suspicioius.

So I suppose they were rolling the dice. "What luck! It was massively damaged when the towers came down. Now we can demolish it without looking too obvious about it!"
 
only need to cut a few key columns?

...well how stupid are Demolition companies then, when they rig the buildings...dumb demolition companies...stupid overkill...so much wasted explosives...

jhc, the minds of the truthers boggle me to this day.

TAM:)
 
If you read Scheuerman's report you can conclude that you only need to cut a few key columns in order to initiate a progressive collapse. If that is true the implication is that you need only a very little amount.
A very little amount...but big enough to destroy huge columns...and tough enough to withstand the massive fires that are raging against those same columns...so they can be detonated...completely silently...seven hours after the building was damaged and on fire and creaking and groaning and leaning and apparent to all the experts that it was going to collapse...and the explosives were placed completely inconspicuously...with some sort of damage-proof and fireproof timer...by invisible conspirators...all cleverly designed to look like a "natural" collapse...although they couldn't have known the building would be on fire...and all for no conceivable reason.

Well, you sold me, einsteen! Teh WTC 7 wuz a inside job!
 
Last edited:
only need to cut a few key columns?

...well how stupid are Demolition companies then, when they rig the buildings...dumb demolition companies...stupid overkill...so much wasted explosives...

jhc, the minds of the truthers boggle me to this day.

TAM:)
T.A.M.:
Einsteen right with this particular building. With the transfer truss system only a relatively small amount of explosives would be needed (*Couple hundred pounds*). Of course as Gravy has said they would be where the fires were and they would still make a very loud noise. Possible but not too probable.

* I was looking at Scheuerman's paper and the plans (NIST) and was planning on working out the exact number later, This is only an educated guess for a direct contact shaped device.
 
Last edited:
Obviously truthers have never held a job in a large building that housed large financial companies like Solomon Brothers that are open 24/7. They must think that life imitates Tom Cruise in "Mission Impossible."
 
only need to cut a few key columns?

...well how stupid are Demolition companies then, when they rig the buildings...dumb demolition companies...stupid overkill...so much wasted explosives...

jhc, the minds of the truthers boggle me to this day.

TAM:)

Dear T.A.M.,

Don't shoot the messenger. I'm not talking about what I think but what we can conclude from the Scheuerman report. If that report is true then that is the implication.
 
yes the fires were localized to SEVERAL FLOORS.
What's the big deal?

"The building was fully involved in fire." – Photographer Steve Spak

We walked over by number Seven World Trade Center as it was burning and saw this 40-plus story building with fire on nearly all floors. –FDNY Lieutenant Robert LaRocca

Almost every window has fire. It is an amazing site. –Captain Jay Jonas

7 was fully involved –Firefighter TJ Mundy

7 World Trade was burning from the ground to the ceiling fully involved. It was unbelievable. –Firefighter Steve Modica

Seven World Trade was going heavy, and they weren't letting anybody get too close. Everybody was expecting that to come down. –Firefighter Vincent Massa

...you're walking by this building and you're hearing this building creak and fully involved in flames. It's like, is it coming down next? Sure enough, about a half an hour later it came down. –FDNY Lieutenant James McGlynn

7 World Trade, which is above the ramp, was now fully engulfed. –PAPD K-9 Sergeant David Lim

fire was going virtually on every floor –FDNY Deputy Chief Nick Visconti

Seven was free burning.
–Captain Robert Sohmer

there was fire on every floor. – Fire Captain Brenda Berkman

building 7 was really roaring. –FDNY Chief Medical Officer Kerry Kelly.

Building #7 was still actively burning and at that time we were advised by a NYFD Chief that building #7 was burning out of control and imminent collapse was probable. –PAPD P.O. Edward

7 WTC was ablaze and damaged –M. DeFilippis, PAPD P.O.

The flames were coming out of every window of that building from the explosion of the south tower. So then building Seven came down. When that started coming down you heard that pancaking sound again everyone jumped up and starts. ...Because it really got going, that building Seven, saw it late in the day and like the first Seven floors were on fire. It looked like heavy fire on seven floors. It was fully engulfed, that whole building. ...you could see the flames going straight through from one side of the building to the other, that’s an entire block. –Firefighter Tiernach Cassidy

I heard on the handy talky that we are now fighting a 40-story building fully involved.

7 World Trade was burning up at the time. We could see it. ... the fire at 7 World Trade was working its way from the front of the building northbound to the back of the building. –Firefighter Eugene Kelty Jr.

He informed us that the fires in building 7 were uncontrollable and that its collapse was imminent. There were no fires inside the loading dock (of 7) at this time but we could hear explosions deep inside. –PAPD P.O. William Connors

We looked over, and it's engulfed in flames and starting to collapse. –Paramedic Louis Cook

We couldn't even go that way, that's how bad the fire was, but by the time I was coming back it was rolling, more than a couple of floors, just fully involved, rolling. ...things were just crackling, falling and whatnot...he said that building was rolling on top of the building that we were passing. That building was on fire and likely to collapse more too. –Firefighter Gerard Suden

"7 has got fire on several floors." –Lieutenant William Ryan

They are worried that number 7 is burning and they are talking about not ceasing operations. –Deputy Commissioner Frank Gribbon

they were waiting for 7 World Trade Center to come down as it was on fire. It was too dangerous to go in and fight the fire. –Assistant Commissioner James Drury

Building 7 was on fire. That was ready to come down. –Charlie Vitchers, Ground Zero Superintendent

At that point, Seven World Trade had 12 stories of fire in it. Firefighter Maureen McArdle-Schulman

The 7 World Trade Center was roaring. –Firefighter Kevin Howe
einsteen says he doesn't collect quotes. I do.

Anything unclear, einsteen? Anything at all?
 
Last edited:
Dear T.A.M.,

Don't shoot the messenger. I'm not talking about what I think but what we can conclude from the Scheuerman report. If that report is true then that is the implication.
When the messenger is also the author of the message, and the message he's written is complete nonsense, the messenger will be sacked.
 
Last edited:

Back
Top Bottom