WTC 7 fell in relative silence, no detonation capable of cutting steel.

a reply to: SkeptiSchism

Fire walls that were destroyed BY 2 planes that crashed into the building?!!

The planes destroy (I’m guessing) a 5 floor span.. so you hAve about a 50ft section where all those protections have been gutted BY A PLANE HITTING THE BUILDINGS!!

Maybe you are visualizing the plane only impacting one floor??? It would have taken out EVERYTHING but the main supports in a roughly 4-6 floor span..




After rereading your post, honestly I have no idea what your saying??


Have you even watched the MIT model documentary???

Do you even know the mainstream story?

a reply to: neutronflux

More than that.. just logically, why do you need the demolition??

It is overkill..


Just the planes hitting gives them the excuse for the war.. no need to have the buildings collapse too..

originally posted by: JoshuaCox
a reply to: neutronflux

More than that.. just logically, why do you need the demolition??

It is overkill..


Just the planes hitting gives them the excuse for the war.. no need to have the buildings collapse too..

One, it’s a distraction from the incompetence of the US government concerning 9/11. What political ties got the terrorists in the USA. Why the WTC buildings were allowed to be cheaply made by minimizing concrete usage.

Or.....

Two, people have emotional bought into the con of the truth movement. Jone’s Thermite. AE fizzle no flash explosives. Dr Woods dustification. Nukes used with absolutely no scientific evidence or proof.

It’s is easier to double down on WTC CD at ATS, and get elevated for pure fantasy than admit there is absolutely no proof of CD. Than admit people were conned by Jones, Gage, Wood, AE 9/11 Truth, and fraudulent thermite research.

But if you spend all your time on conspiracy sites, never studied all angles of the WTC arguments, how would you even know?

a reply to: JoshuaCox

And it is amazing the facts the truth movement hides. Like in this thread I just found out mail and a manifest from the WTC jets was found. I just learned last week one of the jets that crashed into the twin towers almost had two mid air collisions on the way to the towers. Sure as heck never heard those facts by those pushing drones, missiles, lasers l, and holograms at the WTC....

By the way, numerous IDs were recovered from the WTC rubble. There is a long history of passports surviving passenger jet crashes. Even passenger jets knocked down by missiles.

originally posted by: JoshuaCox
a reply to: neutronflux

More than that.. just logically, why do you need the demolition??

It is overkill..


Just the planes hitting gives them the excuse for the war.. no need to have the buildings collapse too..

Your right. However it is worth mentioning that there was no other possible way to bring those decrepit old towers down, economically. CD has never been done at that height and there are no mobile crane big enough to dismantle the tower from the top down as would usually be done.

No developer would ever want this property. The cost to demolish the old building and building new ones was more than any property market would tolerate.

Bottom line is these terrorist really did the new York skyline an enormous favor.

originally posted by: JoshuaCox
a reply to: Salander

Why would the government need to perpetuate 911??

To invade the middle East in order to secure the peteodollar. You know, that little phenomenon that forces every country without oil to trade with the US for USD needed to buy oil from oil producing nations. A group if then (OPEC and friends) deposits the US dollars into US banks who are allowed to lend about 25X that amount and earn interest from it. If I had that, I would scorch the earth before I gave it up.

To start the war on terror?? Right?

Yes.

Is 911 the easiest, cheapest, most effective and least risky plan we can think of?

The way that will never be forgotten. They way that can be repeated visually through the MSM every 20 min for over a year before anyone got to live a single day without being reminded what those Muslim terrorists did to America.

Basically, is 911 the path of least resistance??

Yes it was. Being that big, undeniable and unforgettable was the path of least resistance to invade any nation it wanted without reprisal nationally or internationally

HELL NO, the US government has never needed a 911 level event to go to war..

... a close to 20 year war with no end in sight?... You forgot what life was like before 9/11.

The Lusitania..

The missing WMD’s

The gulf of Tonkin..

All false flags that started wars..


Known and agreed upon false flags..

the missing WMD's would have gone nowhere if not on the coat tails of 9/11.

The Lusitania was only as strong as the story written by journalists and most people could not read back then. People went to war when they were told it didn't take much to start them

I’m saying it is OVERKILL..

Poison one small towns water supply and kill 50,000 in an afternoon..then say the Muslims did it..

That would not have the same affect. My 11 year old constantly makes reference to 9/11 and terrorists. He wasn't even alive in '01.

Are you questioning how affective 9/11 was think it was a waisted effort? It wasn't.

you got your war on terror for less than 1,000,000$

How much did 911 cost to perpetrate and maintain??

I'm sure it didn't cost much to pull off. The terrorist were terrorists. Intelligence agencies carry more than enough to motivate them in a station chiefs petty cash box.

The maintainence could be paid for by tax payers quite easily. People want the terrorist watched so just spend the money watching people that question the threat of terrorists and call them terrorist. It's not brain science.

No matter how horrible it was, I must begrudgingly say that it was really well planned and very well executed.

And so many people still believe it all these years later, showing the efficacy of misinformation efforts.

originally posted by: Salander
No matter how horrible it was, I must begrudgingly say that it was really well planned and very well executed.

And so many people still believe it all these years later, showing the efficacy of misinformation efforts.

Yes you are right. It was incredibly horrible what a few terrorists set on destruction backed by Middle Eastern interests and Middle Eastern governments could do.

And it is incredibly sad people with no discernment for truth allow individuals like Gage, Jones, Wood to exploit 9/11 for profit and fame in the total absence of any credible proof. To push items like WTC CD that their is no proof of.

Anyone like to quote from this thread evidence of CD at WTC 7.

I only see people claiming it looked like an implosion, while ignoring that WTC 7 was nothing like an implosion.

No audio to indicate a detonation powerful enough to cut steel columns.

No audio of enough explosions to create the implosion of WTC 7.

No seismic record by seismic equipment recording in Manhattan on 9/11 of detonations powerful enough to cut steel.

No flashes, no windows blown out, no evidence of pressure waves.

The collapse started in the interior. It was progressive from east to west as indicated by the large structures on WTC 7’s roof. The items on the roof shows the interior of WTC 7 failed. Only after the interior of WTC 7 could not hold up the facade did the facade fall.

a reply to: MALBOSIA

Can you cite evidence that planted detentions brought down WTC 7 as claimed by the truth movement?

a reply to: MALBOSIA

Sorry. When it comes to planted charges at the WTC 7, there is simply no proof.

No proof WTC 7 was prepared with charges.

No physical proof of exsplosions powerful enough to cut steel.

No proof caught in video.

No proof caught on audio.

No seismic proof.

CD at WTC 7 is a false narrative. It is that simple.

originally posted by: neutronflux
a reply to: MALBOSIA

Sorry. When it comes to planted charges at the WTC 7, there is simply no proof.

No proof WTC 7 was prepared with charges.

No physical proof of exsplosions powerful enough to cut steel.

No proof caught in video.

No proof caught on audio.

No seismic proof.

CD at WTC 7 is a false narrative. It is that simple.

And nothing to prove your BS theories either.

What's your point?

Corilation does not prove causation.

You DO know that, right?

ATTENTION PLEASE-
Be advised the rules in this forum are enforced more strictly than in others. Trolling, name calling and personal insults can lead to a permanent Ban without any explanation or discussion.

Do not reply to this post.

a reply to: MALBOSIA

Then state a theory that has credibility to supersede WTC 7 collapsed from building damage/fire damage/ and thermal stress.

It’s good to question. But it is ironic that conspiracists choose to engage in name calling when they are questioned. They seem to use threads to rant instead of actively engaging in debate to prove their narratives through the baptism of argument.

Do you have a credible argument based on evidence that something other than building damage/fire/thermal stress brought down WTC 7.

Again....

Anyone like to quote from this thread evidence of CD at WTC 7.

I only see people claiming it looked like an implosion, while ignoring that WTC 7 was nothing like an implosion.

No audio to indicate a detonation powerful enough to cut steel columns.

No audio of enough explosions to create the implosion of WTC 7.

No seismic record by seismic equipment recording in Manhattan on 9/11 of detonations powerful enough to cut steel.

No flashes, no windows blown out, no evidence of pressure waves.

The collapse started in the interior. It was progressive from east to west as indicated by the large structures on WTC 7’s roof and video evidence. The items on the roof shows the interior of WTC 7 failed first. Only after the interior of WTC 7 could not hold up the facade did the facade fall.

It's ironic that you call anyone that questions a narrative a "conspiracist" and accuse them of name-calling.

Then you on to describe your theory as a matter of fact.

Priceless

originally posted by: MALBOSIA
It's ironic that you call anyone that questions a narrative a "conspiracist" and accuse them of name-calling.

Then you on to describe your theory as a matter of fact.

Priceless

Then cite evidence of CD at the WTC 7. Then state a credible theory with evidence to supersede impact/fire/thermal stress damage. Or will you choose to rant instead?

a reply to: MALBOSIA

Or quote credible evidence of CD provided in this this thread.

Or form a rebuttal to this linked to item that outlines there is no proof of CD at WTC 7.

www.implosionworld.com...

a reply to: MALBOSIA

Or refute the studies as sworn evidence in the Aegis vs WTC 7 owners that WTC 7 collapsed from fire related issues.

Studies other than the NIST report.

other-wtc7-investigations-aegis-insurance-v-7-world-trade-company-expert-reports.t7112/
www.metabunk.org...