Judges shocked by first time seeing video of WTC 7 collapse in Denmark court, March 2015

a reply to: illuminnaughty

The speed of those buildings coming down has always been the standout thing for me.
There just doesn't seem to be enough time for the floor above to be hitting the floor below and so on.
In your experience in demo can you understand how 110 stories can come down in less than fifteen seconds.. even using the explosives we have today ?
If I`m right, that would make it just over a second for every ten floors.....no slowing down. Just stayed a continuous fast pace.
That`s why i firmly believe the closest anyone has got to what happened to the buildings is what Judy Wood offers.

The rogue outfit who carried out the attacks used, in my opinion, a weapon/explosives that we just don`t have or know of.

originally posted by: hellobruce

originally posted by: enlightenedservant
Watching the building go into a freefall like that is exactly what a controlled demolition looks like....... if it was a controlled demolition

Except for the man months of work required to wire a building up, with no one noticing the tonnes of explosives or km of wire, or the holes bashed in the walls, then there are the silent explosives that they used, as no one heard tonnes of explosives going off, then they also used blast free explosives, as no one saw windows being blown out by the tonnes of explosives used...

Also they would have found all of those tonnes of explosives and km of wire if they could not have set it off, as the only reason it collapsed was it was severely damaged by the collapse of WTC1 and the fires...

Also how do you explain the building leaning and the FDNY having a transit on the building watching it lean.... this is before your magical explosives were set off, remember....

So when you look at the claim it was wired and fired for demolition you really see what a silly idea that was!

How do YOU explain the building leaning, and WHY would they put a transit on it ??

Could it be that this building was damaged in a manner they have never before seen ??

Of course this is all explained in your little brain as perfectly normal because you have decided that they could not have blown it ANY other way than the standard CHEAPEST form of Controlled Demolition!!

Gotta admit, you stick to the same old tired OFFICIAL LIES with the best of them, but your appeals to stupid emotions are your folly !!

Care to show us any other buildings with windows blowing out ??

And for that matter WHO CARES if the windows blow out or not !!! It is not windows that are the target !!!

Such silly illegitimate states of mind are the harbinger of the lost, even more funny is the talk of finding wire and explosives that EXPLODED.

Think anyone was looking for this wire ?? Furthermore, you think they used everyday CONTROLLED DEMOLITION WIRE they get with you know, TAGS all over claiming what kind of wire it is ??

Just another way of covering up reality, something OFFICIAL STORY THEORISTS ALWAYS DO !!

The worst part of it is , many people have been so brainwashed these retarded ideas are actually plausible in their afraid paranoid minds!!!

originally posted by: cardinalfan0596
a reply to: rossacus

Actually, I have demolished stuff before. And, for a 47 story building, it would have taken a minimum of five months. Five months in which the inside is completely stripped to gain access to all the necessary structural supports. Five months in which the tenants would not be able to be in the building.

B.S. IT is NOT completely stripped to gain access to anything, but to salvage and reduce the contents of the building according to area laws.

originally posted by: cardinalfan0596
a reply to: Blackmarketeer


Massive damage and fire. Not a "random" fire as you posted. Besides, by the afternoon, the fires in WTC 7 were ANYTHING but "random".

Then the second part, why would it be so hard to carry out.....because people would still notice a crew drilling holes in the walls of their offices and then sticking demolition charges in them.

So the fires were NOT random, were they planned ??? Did they have a particular agenda ??

Were they SMARTER than regular fires ??

Oh wait, you are one of those that believes that Jet Fuel burns constantly even after it is already gone and does damage far after it has been burned off aren't you !!

originally posted by: Shamrock6

originally posted by: ParasuvO

originally posted by: SanitySearcher
a reply to: Blackmarketeer

If anyone knows the work involved and equipment needed to set up a real demolition to fall so perfectly...in a building full of staff in various businesses only emptied at 9am the day of the WTC attack.......!!!!!

Well, no more needs said, because I don't want to expose the idiots.

Of course all that work was perfectly carried out by unknown caused fires and unknown extremely minute bits of damage to the building!!!!

Which idiots do you think would be exposed ?

Was the 20 floor long gash/hole in the side of the building one of the "extremely minute" bits of damage? Or did that come from something else?

And yes, that's a legit question (im the one who's getting into the WTC 7 stuff for the first time, be kind) and not a troll. That hole didn't seem minute to me, but was it caused by something other than falling debris? And is there definitive evidence of it, or just conjecture?

Ya, that would be a minute bit of damage, got any pics of this GASH in the building and all of the support structures that it damaged ??

That's right you do NOT, because no damage of the sort took PLACE, also, tell me how the fires got started that were nowhere near any of the damage zones, that burnt like they were being fanned by the devil himself ??

originally posted by: ParasuvO

originally posted by: Shamrock6

originally posted by: ParasuvO

originally posted by: SanitySearcher
a reply to: Blackmarketeer

If anyone knows the work involved and equipment needed to set up a real demolition to fall so perfectly...in a building full of staff in various businesses only emptied at 9am the day of the WTC attack.......!!!!!

Well, no more needs said, because I don't want to expose the idiots.

Of course all that work was perfectly carried out by unknown caused fires and unknown extremely minute bits of damage to the building!!!!

Which idiots do you think would be exposed ?

Was the 20 floor long gash/hole in the side of the building one of the "extremely minute" bits of damage? Or did that come from something else?

And yes, that's a legit question (im the one who's getting into the WTC 7 stuff for the first time, be kind) and not a troll. That hole didn't seem minute to me, but was it caused by something other than falling debris? And is there definitive evidence of it, or just conjecture?

Ya, that would be a minute bit of damage, got any pics of this GASH in the building and all of the support structures that it damaged ??

That's right you do NOT, because no damage of the sort took PLACE, also, tell me how the fires got started that were nowhere near any of the damage zones, that burnt like they were being fanned by the devil himself ??

Ask a question. Make it clear that one is asking a genuine question due to lack of insight. Go so far as to put a disclaimer in there that it's not a troll question.

Get responded to like one is a certified moron, and spoken to like a backward child.

Thanks, I think I'll direct my questions to other, more helpful and less agitated members from now on

a reply to: Doctor Smith

How did it collapse? Is that whole "in its own footprint" thing? Or is there other aspects?

a reply to: Shamrock6

When you show us an example let us know. Until then you lose.

All the shills and Boot licking trusters are always defeated with this simple question. Show us an example of another steel frame high rise, that collapsed like building 7, for any reason other than controlled demolition?

originally posted by: Doctor Smith
a reply to: Shamrock6

When you show us an example let us know. Until then you lose.

All the shills and Boot licking trusters are always defeated with this simple question. Show us an example of another steel frame high rise, that collapsed like building 7, for any reason other than controlled demolition?

Silly me, I thought you were genuinely explaining it for me. Your troll game is strong, I applaud it.

Strange, you truthers. Somebody comes along who's essentially a blank canvas, asking for knowledge, yet you all seem so eager to jump on the troll train. Helps the cause

originally posted by: Debunkology

originally posted by: enlightenedservant

originally posted by: Nikola014
a reply to: hellobruce

But, weren't there testimonies of people saying that they heard explosions before the building collapsed?

Also, you don't need that many explosives. All you need is a couple of explosives that would damage the foundations of a building enough for it to go down...

In my opinion, I don't know how can a building collapse due to fire on a couple of floors and a plane wrecks that hit the upper levels of building.

Haha, don't waste your time. He doesn't listen to reason. I even posted a video earlier in this thread with several minutes worth of live footage from Ground Zero. It was focused on the numerous times people on the scene said they heard explosions; workers in the towers (basement and upper floors) saying they heard multiple explosions; showed firefighters saying they heard explosions; and even had clips with the sounds of explosions in the background, some even interrupting interviews. These were scenes from 9/11 itself & yet dude still insists there were no explosions & that his knowledge of 9/11 is more accurate than the people who were there & the camera footage.

There is even CNN video footage of firefighters saying Building 7 is going to "blow up" before it did. Also eye witness accounts by 9/11 first responder who even witnessed a friggin countdown before it blew. Not to mention other eye witness accounts who were told that Building 7 was going to be "brought down".

Yep, you don't have to convince me. Years ago, I even showed my friends & family video clips of successful and unsuccessful controlled demolitions. That way, they could see what happens when things don't work perfectly. The part that stuck out with some of them the most was actually the convenient passports dropped at the foot of the towers. They couldn't believe the crashes were so powerful that the could vaporize planes, but left flimsy passports unscathed lol.

I hated the existence of Al-Qaeda & Bin Laden, because as a moderate American taxpaying Muslim, I'm the type they hated the most. But I hate even more the fact that the world's governments used the different "Al-Qaeda" attacks on 9/11 & throughout Europe as an excuse to kill so many innocent, non-Wahabi Muslims. Especially since so many Western firms not only have armed & financed these gorups in the past, but they rely on their respective govts for petrodollar support.

Once people accept that the official story is BS, they'll realize the 80,000+ Afghan civilians died for nothing (not the Taliban, but civilians). They'll realize hundreds of thousands of Iraqi civilians were killed for nothing. An estimated 2 million Iraqi Christians were exiled because of the Iraq war, as well as the atrocities of the torture program; Abu Ghraib, Gitmo, and the seemingly perpetual attacks on Islamic majority countries (Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria, Libya, Somalia, Pakistan...).

Many of my high school friends & younger brother's friends went to fight in Iraq and/or Afghanistan, and many of them can't even get the benefits they were promised before they left. And I've seen in person the horror of PTSD & other veterans who come back missing a limb, depressed because of the things they had to do, blindsided by divorces, etc. That's why we must keep speaking out about this.

originally posted by: Shamrock6

originally posted by: Doctor Smith
a reply to: Shamrock6

When you show us an example let us know. Until then you lose.

All the shills and Boot licking trusters are always defeated with this simple question. Show us an example of another steel frame high rise, that collapsed like building 7, for any reason other than controlled demolition?

Silly me, I thought you were genuinely explaining it for me. Your troll game is strong, I applaud it.

Strange, you truthers. Somebody comes along who's essentially a blank canvas, asking for knowledge, yet you all seem so eager to jump on the troll train. Helps the cause

Let's have less of the troll/shill thing, it's not allowed here, however it is a good way of using those rules to kill a thread that needs dealing with properly.
Everyone that knows about WTC7, knows that it fell in free fall for a short period of time, mostly it fell straight down until the last moment did keel over, and pictures shown from above are clear that it's footprint was barely breached, and that ground pictures show that that rubble pile is as consistent with any demolition pile that you could get given the size of that big building.
Against what some insist here that there were no explosions, let's look again at this video,


So, WTF is that all about? nobody's ever contested that video, it's obviously after the towers have gone as the dust slowly clears, and clearly is a double detonation, a primary detonation, and ensuing main explosion perhaps, and the dialogue going on by all those present. So what could have caused that? obviously not the three wise monkeys doing their thing. Thing is, I would love that particular video to be a fake..a bit like the three monkeys would, but that sound is of an impressive explosion in a city.

a reply to: smurfy

Not trying to get anything shut down, calling a spade a spade. I asked a question and got "rolled" in response

Your response is much appreciated though smurfy. I'm about to displace from one location to another, so I'll have to give it a second going over when I get there. I appreciate the info and the video, and look forward to digging in

originally posted by: Shamrock6
a reply to: Doctor Smith

How did it collapse? Is that whole "in its own footprint" thing? Or is there other aspects?

"In its footprint" just refers to it collapsing downwards onto itself, in the way an accordion compresses into itself. Or like a coke can if you step on. In order for a building to do that perfectly, all of its support beams must be snapped in multiple places at the exact same time. Otherwise, it'll either tilt when it falls or won't fall all the way.

Kind of like this...

a reply to: ParasuvO. I see. You are going to stick charges in the drywall and hope for the best.

a reply to: ParasuvO. I so love the either or mentality of the truth movement. All the jet fuel burned off so there was nothing left to burn. That's what you believe right?

originally posted by: Shamrock6

originally posted by: Doctor Smith
a reply to: Shamrock6

When you show us an example let us know. Until then you lose.

All the shills and Boot licking trusters are always defeated with this simple question. Show us an example of another steel frame high rise, that collapsed like building 7, for any reason other than controlled demolition?

Silly me, I thought you were genuinely explaining it for me. Your troll game is strong, I applaud it.

Strange, you truthers. Somebody comes along who's essentially a blank canvas, asking for knowledge, yet you all seem so eager to jump on the troll train. Helps the cause

The building pinched in the center, as in a standard demolition when a building is "walked." That would mean the columns were explosively sheered on diagonal angles to cause a center "crimp" in the building structure. The building then fell into it's own foot print.

One thing I did notice about building 7 that has always bothered me, there were fires. However, I watched all the major newscasts that day and I didn't see one bit of debris on fire fall from either of the WTC main towers onto WTC7 or even really in its proximity. Now, how did those fires start, unless they were set. I can't figure out how flaming debris could have landed on the roof and ate through a few dozen floors or maybe how it could have fallen 700 feet from WTC1 or 2 and then turned a 90 degree angle parallel to the ground and then fly into the interior of WTC7? Like, WTF, that only happens in cartoons. The official fairy tale doesn't make sense.

Another point of consternation in this thread is that it would have taken months to wire the buildings. Guess what, the WTC complex was being overhauled to either remove or seal all of the asbestos coatings on the beams and pillars. That had been going on for a couple of years. Silverstein had been complaining about the costs of refurbishing, which if I remember right were over a million a month. Workman had 24 hour constant access to all the buildings. However considering the amount of toxic materials, including asbestos, that blew out with the alleged "collapse" it makes me wonder if many those "workmen" (plus others from DOD explosives) were not the ones actually wiring the buildings. This does make sense and the opportunity and materials were available.

Another point, on WTC7 you only see the upper floors, you don't see the lowers where the primary explosives would be used to walk the building, hence no glass being see blowing out. On WTC1 and 2, it's different and you do see windows blowing out and puffs of directional materials. This could be the product of gaseous evacuation as the floors pancaked and that sounds like a good theory, except for one very simple fact. There are two buildings, they came down almost identically from hits in two different floor levels and two different directions. The probabilities of a natural footprint collapse on two buildings like this are about 200 trillion to 1. And again, both 1 and 2 collapsed basically into their own footprints. In order for this to happen, all of the materials and all the mixes would also have to be literally identical, say within 0.000000000001 percent. Also both buildings collapsed at different times, with different temperatures, wind speeds and direction conditions. Natural collapse due to planes and jet fuel has a non-zero probability (jet fuel can't melt iron/steel in a free/open fire), meaning that the chances are infinitely small. Again, the official fairy tale doesn't make sense.

The scientific evidence and probabilities point to an extremely well thought out multiple building demolition with a multipurpose "payout." That being the increase in the surveillance state, increase in funding to the MI complex, Silverstein gets to dump his "white elephants," shrub gets his war to vindicate daddy, the corporations get to rape Iraqi resources and of course the guy who knew what was going on, Saddam, doesn't get to tell the truth in court and is summarily executed. This makes sense and there are people in this world that are pure evil, I have known a few, when I was overseas. The kind of people that just make your skin crawl and you just want find the closest exit and gets some distance.

One last thing on the WTC, the ruble was so hot, that after 3 months the underground temperatures were so high that they maintained pools of molten iron (2650+ degrees F, jet fuel in the engine burns at 1700 F, open flame about 1200 F). You have to wonder what kind of natural collapse is going to maintain those kinds of temperatures and if it's natural, why aren't we using it to heat steam to produce electricity cleanly? Again, the temperatures don't make sense, just like the official fairy tale.

The official story is a lie generated for "profit and control" from all the scientific evidence and measured probabilities. People can chose to believe the official lie or seek the truth.

I've seen situations like this before, on a smaller scale, where a passenger plane (or three) is just "too sweet" a target and consequently it gets taken down, innocents die and someone benefits. Afterwards the US Navy with CIA handlers go in and get what they took the plane down for and everybody's happy. Well, except for the tens of thousands of friends and families that had relatives and friends on the doomed flight. It's a corrupt vile world.

I wrote this fast as I am going to go have some dinner, so any mistakes, my apologies.

Back from dinner... If the theory don't fit, you must toss it (sounds like an OJ trial LOL).

Cheers - Dave

a reply to: Shamrock6. Twenty STORY hole carved out of 7. Just for clarification....

There is no earthly explanation for the presence of the thermite particles found in the dust and debris of the WTC collapse. This simple fact is actively being ignored in the OS'ers. WTC7 caught fire, we are told, by burning debris that blew in through the windows of the facade, yet this fire brought the building down in short order. Nonsense. OS'ers are living in a world of denial (or involved in keeping the cover alive).

originally posted by: Macabe
There is no earthly explanation for the presence of the thermite particles found in the dust and debris of the WTC .

As there were no thermite particles found, what are you babbling about?