On 9/11, WTC7 Collapse Was Firemen's Concern (controlled demolition debunked)

[dannyb]

I know I got flamed for posting YouTube videos before, but this has some good footage of the damaged rear of the building. There were multiple reports that the building was in imminent danger of collapse.

http://youtu.be/_7rj5UQvlWw

 

[Sabretooth]

embedded:


Good video...but the truthers only believe the MSM when it benefits them.

 

[The Big Dog]

embedded:


Good video...but the truthers only believe the MSM when it benefits them.

Interesting video, particularly when it goes careening off into an anti-Israel screed for no discrenable reason.

 

[Sabretooth]

Interesting video, particularly when it goes careening off into an anti-Israel screed for no discrenable reason.

Yeah...strange. It doesn't make sense, but doesn't undermine the facts in the beginning.

 

[AndrewBurley]

I know I got flamed for posting YouTube videos before, but this has some good footage of the damaged rear of the building. There were multiple reports that the building was in imminent danger of collapse.

Didn't the wtc7 final report by NIST say the damage played no actual part in the collapse?

 

[Seymour Butz]

Didn't the wtc7 final report by NIST say the damage played no actual part in the collapse?

Only for collapse initiation.

They determined that if it would have been undamaged, then the ext column buckling would have been higher in the building, given the same fire conditions.

 

[twinstead]

Well, the damage did play a huge part in the fires that played a huge part in the collapse.

 

[TexasJack]

Didn't the wtc7 final report by NIST say the damage played no actual part in the collapse?

So Andrew, you don't believe that 7 collapsed due to fire, correct? Prior to collapse, there were firemen stating that the building was going to collapse due to fire and set up a safety zone. Why? Were they in on a conspiracy?

 

[AndrewBurley]

So Andrew, you don't believe that 7 collapsed due to fire, correct? Prior to collapse, there were firemen stating that the building was going to collapse due to fire and set up a safety zone. Why? Were they in on a conspiracy?

Could the firemen see beams around column 79 expanding?

 

[Sabretooth]

Could the firemen see beams around column 79 expanding?

You've got to be kidding.

:facepalm:

 

[Miragememories]

Apparently these firefighters disagree.

http://firefightersfor911truth.org/

MM

 

[Sabretooth]

The firefighters were told that WTC7 was going to come down.

MM

From the other thread, since it was off-topic...

Who "told" the firefighters that 7 was coming down?

 

[A W Smith]

Apparently these firefighters disagree.

http://firefightersfor911truth.org/

MM

were they there?

 

[Sabretooth]

Apparently these firefighters disagree.

http://firefightersfor911truth.org/

MM

BFD.

You pass along a site that hasn't been active in a year and a half.

And 91 "firemen" out of the 1,082,500 active firefighters in the USA is a joke.

Let's do math!

91 morons / 1082500 = .0084%

Wow. Not even 1/100th of a percent. This means that if you poll 11,900 firemen, you might find one truther.


Considering that every family has it's morons, I gotta say that the firefighting family is doing pretty good for itself, no?

Thanks for the helpful info, MM!

 

[triforcharity]

Could the firemen see beams around column 79 expanding?

There was a bulge over a few floors that was visible earlier in the day. This is indictive of thermal expansion.

Not to mention the other signs that were visible that were clues of structural instability.

You should read the NIST report.

BTW, It doesn't matter if they knew HOW exactly it was going to collapse, just that it was.

 

[triforcharity]

Apparently these firefighters idiots disagree.

http://firefightersfor911truth.org/

MM

FTFY.

(BTW, why is it that not one single member of FDNY that was there, is a member of FF911T? )

 

[Sword_Of_Truth]

Apparently these firefighters disagree.

http://firefightersfor911truth.org/

MM

Just a reminder, real firefighters hate truthers.

http://www.firehouse.com/forums/showthread.php?t=107457

 

[Athyrio]

Apparently these firefighters disagree.

http://firefightersfor911truth.org/

MM

Did you even read the nonsense posted on the home page by the retired FDNY lieutenant?

1. We are asked to believe that on that day three structural steel buildings, which have never before in history collapsed because of fire, fell neatly into their basements at the speed of gravity

2. We are asked to believe that jet fuel (kerosene) can melt steel.

3. We are asked to believe that the most sophisticated air defense system in the world, that responded to sixty-eight emergencies in the year prior to 9-11 in less than twenty minutes allowed aircraft to wander about for up to an hour and a half.

4. Trade Tower #7 by itself is the “smoking gun”. Not hit by an aircraft, with only a few relatively small fires, it came down in a classic crimp and implosion, going straight into its basement, something only very precise demolition can accomplish

Yeah, the video posted by the OP clearly shows those few relatively small fires.

And that's the highlight of the home page. Jerkology is what it is. That's all they are about if they can fall for that kind of idiocy.

 

[twinstead]

Who exactly is asking anybody to believe that jet fuel can melt steel?

 

[Dave Rogers]

Could the firemen see beams around column 79 expanding?

No, but they might well have noticed that two very tall buildings had suffered structural damage, burned fiercely for some time over several floors at once, and then collapsed, and that they were faced with another very tall building that had suffered structural damage and burned fiercely for some time over several floors at once. In those circumstances, if my life depended on it, I would work on the assumption that there was a good chance that one would collapse too.

Dave