Video of WTC 7 Burning! A Must See

Can anyone explain the blue flame that bursts from the window that is furthest right with 1:15 of the video remaining?

Originally posted by ULTIMA1


But what about the EMT and firemen that have come foreward and stated that they were told to leave the area that the building was being pulled and then heard a countdown over the radio.

Ultima,

I swear I remember sitting in my living room on 9/11 watching the day's events unfold, when one of the news anchors said that WTC7 was about to go down, and they switched to a live shot of WTC7. Within a few seconds, WTC7 collapsed and the news anchors commented on this third building falling.

With all that went on during the course of 9/11, I always wondered why so many video cameras were FOCUSED on WTC7 at 5:00 pm just before it went down.

Originally posted by coughymachine
Can anyone explain the blue flame that bursts from the window that is furthest right with 1:15 of the video remaining?

That's a great catch!

I'm not sure what it means, but I did notice that when they looped this video they cut this blue flame burst out of the loop.

Also, right after the blue flame, it seems like the other fire intensified.

So what could make a blue flame burst out of a window like that?

Originally posted by ULTIMA1

Originally posted by CameronFox
Ultima? come on now! Your a pretty smart guy. But Geesh! to even THINK that CD experts could look at a 47 story skyscraper burning out of control and say...."ok lets all run into this burning building... plant EXPLOSIVES...and detonate in under 2 hours????" Dude... your reaching here. Remember the last two hours all the firemen were doing was pretty much standing around watching it burn. Of the hundreds of firefighters..not one ever mentioned seeing a crew of people running into the building with explosives.

Sorry... not one of your better posts.

Well for 1 if you rememebr from the report from the EPA recovering the fuel states that thier was probly no fires on the ground floor because other wise they would have recovered all the fuel.

Second all personel including firemen were moved back beyond a safety zone around building 7.

Third as stated several times and backed up by fire department, no steel buiding has collapsed due to fire and or structural damage.

That last bit isn't true. The Mc Cormick convention center in Chicago was a steel building that fell due to fire.

The firemen were moved back from WTC7 because it was freakin' Unstable! Firemen KNOW danger It is their job.

During all of the chaos that was going on in Manhattan of Sept. 11th... with the Firemen's business of saving lives and assessing damage; What makes you think their ground level evaluation of the situation would go anything like this:

"Hey, Joe..get on google and tell me if any 40 story steel framed buildings have ever collapsed before due to uncontrolled fires and severe structural damage...Let me know quick cause I got a team of Super-Ninja's here wanting to set explosives all over the building"

"Uh-huh..Ok...Thanks Joe"

" Um..Guys.. Joe tells me no 40 story bulding with uncontrolled fires and severe structural damage has EVER fallen...so I guess it is OK for you to do your thang with all of your detenation devices...whatever that might be."

Yeah REAL FEASIBLE!

Originally posted by nick7261

Originally posted by T Trubballshoota
CTers are proposing that unknown individuals were clever enough to sneak in huge quantities of explosives under peoples noses, plan to have aircraft crashed into buildings at different locations and all the rest of the ingenious stuff...]

The government is proposing that a small group of extremists planned and financed the simultaneous hijackings of 4 commercial airliners over a several year period, all without going noticed by any U.S. intelligence operations which were specifically looking for terrorists who might be planning just such an attack.

Yep! They are incompetent, complacent, vain, and have very poor communication between bureacracies.

The government is proposing that these terrorist would sneak around the country, attend flight training schools, receive large amount of cash wired to them through international banks, right under the noses of the billion dollar intelligence organizations who were LOOKING for them.

Take a look at America's most wanted list sometime...There are people that live HERE IN AMERICA for years evading investigators. Why can't they find them?...and these people have already committed crimes..not just planning them- without a shred of solid evidence to PROVE what their intentions *might* be IN THE FUTURE!

Our Federal Govt. isn't some kind of Santa Claus figure that has a list of every single person in America and knows if they have been bad or good...much less, if they will be bad or good tommorow, six months, six years. Pre 9/11 what would you suggest we do: Not allow any immigrants of the muslim faith the freedom to choose a career path..be it in Flight School or any other vocation.

What if 9/11 was caused by a giant exploding Birthday Cake... Should we have not let any immigrant Muslims become pastry chefs?

The government's 9/11 Commisioners are also proposing that they were simply mistaken when they first denied that the officers from Able Danger ever wanted to talk to them, and that the information they were going to provide wasn't relevant to the 9/11 Commission investigation anyway.

Again this is no "smoking gun".. It is *sigh* YET ANOTHER example of how our government is unorganized, and cannot communicate properly.

The government is proposing that the NIST after 5 years, and after being 2 1/2 years behind schedule, still can't figure out why WTC7 collapsed the way it did.

Well it isn't because they are efficent.

But you can believe bin Laden and a rag-tag group of untrained arabs that never planned or carried out any thing even remotely similar to this COULD have pulled this off?

The plan worked due to its simplicity, NOT its complexity.

Let me make sure I understand this...

The CIA and the Dept. of Defense, with billion dollar budgets and thousands of professionally trained and experienced operatives could NOT pull off 9/11, but 20 or so untrained, inexperienced, arabs, with little or no support organization an minimal funding, COULD pull off 9/11?

Do you really think this makes any sense?

Absolutely makes sense. ALL of these ordinary people with their "gubment" training, ya know, the ones that went to the same elementry schools as us, had the same girlfriends as us, liked the same movies as us, loved the same country as us, suddenly decided to MURDER us so thier bosses could make a buck? All of this done with immaculate precision, without one, NOT ONE of them spilling the beans? What kind of Borg-like world do YOU live in?

America's best minds are NOT working for the Gubment for $45k-55K a year. Hell, even America's own private enterprise knows it: Why do you think they sell the gubment $500 hammers and get away with it? It ain't because they are the most effecient bunch around.

WAKE-UP!! You will someday..I just wish it was now.





[edit on 18-2-2007 by GwionX]

There's a lack of imagination and intelligence
when one implies or assumes the buildings were
rigged after the attacks. Of course it wasn't feasible,
they had plenty of time the weeks and months
prior to do all the rigging necessary.

BUILDINGS JUST DON'T FALL LIKE THAT.

Seriously, what is so hard to grasp?

THEY CONTROLLED DEMO'D IT

please, READ THIS TIMELINE thoroughly
If you cannot deduce that 9-11 was in an inside job,
YOU CLEARLY BELONG ON A FARM

Originally posted by aecreate


BUILDINGS JUST DON'T FALL LIKE THAT.

Seriously, what is so hard to grasp?

There is nothing to compare it with equally. NO ONE and I mean NO ONE knows how a building is going to fall in an uncontrolled environment.

An environment that has unsupressed and extensive fires, and clearly documented random structural damage.

If the explosives were set BEFORE the North Tower fell...HOW (and this is important) HOW could any demo team be able to see into the future and determine WHERE the fires would be, Where the debris damage would be. Because without that knowledge whatever they had "pre-planned" could either explode too early, or not explode at all..this due to things happening to WTC7 THAT DAY! not weeks in advance.

Sorry dude...this whole 9/11 conspiracy thing is a scam... I am seeing YouTube "Quick Doc's" getting made about this tragedy Just like the Nigerian "spam" scammers, all begging for money in e-mails. Throwing this stuff together to make a quick buck off of the naive.

I watched Arron Russo's from freedom to facism ..And I was like... WOW..Holy Cow! I started to kinda believe this stuff ...Then I went to his website...He takes Credit Cards! HA! Credit cards! Now if he *really* believed his own B.S. he sure as hell wouldn't take Credit Cards.

A few days later I started checking the validity of his claims..and Surprize, just like Loose Change, and In Plane site, and all the other fear-based documentarys....the info was false, twisted, or taken out of context...Why?

To literally scare the money right out of your pockets.

( I know you can watch some of this stuff for free on YouTube, and Google Video, and listen to it free on the radio; consider it a free trial-- but mark my words..if you start delving deep into it you are going to be asked to fork over some cash...for something like a book, or a speshul video)

Video Spammers with a Cause!! Yay!!

Fear is what they sell.








[edit on 18-2-2007 by GwionX]

Originally posted by GwionX
ALL of these ordinary people with their "gubment" training, ya know, the ones that went to the same elementry schools as us, had the same girlfriends as us, liked the same movies as us, loved the same country as us, suddenly decided to MURDER us so thier bosses could make a buck?

Are you just more comfortable thinking that evil only exists in darker skinned people who worship a different God than you do?

Somebody murdered 3,000 people on 9/11. That's clear. So you think al-Qaeda committed these murders by convincing 19 young men to kill themselves, just so the rest of al-Qaeda could get bombed out of Afghanistan? Do you honestly believe that these al-Qaeda murderers are so evil, so delusion, and so stupid, but yet clever enough to pull off 9/11?

And what exactly did they pull off? So they murdered 3000 Americans and knocked down a couple of buildings. What did al-Qaeda gain from this?

On the other hand, the founding members of PNAC who left PNAC and their jobs as corporate executives, what did they gain from 9/11?

All of this done with immaculate precision, without one, NOT ONE of them spilling the beans? What kind of Borg-like world do YOU live in?

Unfortunately, I live in a world where our government can even consider events like Project Northwoods, complete with its real or fake victims.

By the way, how many U.S. troops have been sent to die in Iraq? Who sent them there? Am I better off now than I was before these troops died? I know Halliburton and Exxon execs and stockholders are.

America's best minds are NOT working for the Gubment for $45k-55K a year. Hell, even America's own private enterprise knows it: Why do you think they sell the gubment $500 hammers and get away with it? It ain't because they are the most effecient bunch around.

My cousin just got hired out of college at about $100k a year to work for a top defense contractor. See, the government doesn't hire thes best minds. The government hires the companies that hire the best minds. It is my understanding that she can't even say 1 word about what she does because she signed a non-disclosure agreement that makes spilling the beans a federal, criminal offense.

WAKE-UP!! You will someday..I just wish it was now.

I'm afraid I'm not the one who is in the media induced, believe-whatever-they-tell-me trance.





[edit on 18-2-2007 by GwionX]

You guys are talking like fire + steel building = unavoidable global collapse, when the fire you're looking at is pathetic and dwarved by the massiveness of the building itself.

Steel beams in standard fire tests reach a state of deflections and runaway well below temperatures achieved in real fires. In a composite steel frame structure these beams are designed to support the composite deck slab. It is therefore quite understandable that they are fire protected to avoid runaway failures. The fire at Broadgate showed that this didn't actually happen in a real structure. Subsequently, six full-scale fire tests on a real composite frame structure at Cardington showed that despite large deflections of structural members affected by fire, runaway type failures did not occur in real frame structures when subjected to realistic fires in a variety of compartments.

This project was the first major effort to understand this behaviour using computational models of the Cardington fire tests. A full explanation of the mechanics that are responsible for the robust behaviour of unprotected composite frames in fire has been achieved and will be presented in detail in this report. Reaching this new understanding has been a laborious process, and numerous blind alleys had to be investigated along the way, however obvious the answer may now seem to the researchers involved in this project. It is possible that the conclusions will not seem obvious to others who have not been directly involved, however considerable effort has gone in to presenting the results of the project to provide as much detail as possible. Approximately 40 supplementary reports and over 10 technical papers have been written and appear as an appendix to this report. This amount of work has ensured that the conclusions presented have been verified by a number of independent approaches. Mutually reinforcing arguments were developed from the results of different computational models, application of fundamental mechanics and the analysis of test data. It is therefore with a great deal of confidence that these findings have been presented for close scrutiny by the profession. Once this new understanding of structural behaviour in fire is widely disseminated, discussed and understood, the way will be clear for completing all the other tasks which are necessary for full exploitation of the knowledge gained. This will lead to safer, more economic and rational design of steel frame structures for fire resistance.

guardian.150m.com...

That's from the University of Edinburgh, from the year 2000, after they had been studying the effects of fire upon structural steel since the 1980's.


Why can't fire EVER fail steel in a controlled lab environment, where the heat is intentionally cranked up?

[edit on 18-2-2007 by bsbray11]

Originally posted by nick7261

Originally posted by GwionX

Are you just more comfortable thinking that evil only exists in darker skinned people who worship a different God than you do?

How do you know how dark I am...Hmmm? How do you know what God I worship? Hmmm? that statement of your is what is known formally as "a Loaded Question" and is a common form of rhetoric.

Rhetoric is defined as: A Broad catagory of linguistic techniques people use when thier primary objective is to influence beliefs, attitudes, and behavior.

Somebody murdered 3,000 people on 9/11. That's clear. So you think al-Qaeda committed these murders by convincing 19 young men to kill themselves, just so the rest of al-Qaeda could get bombed out of Afghanistan? Do you honestly believe that these al-Qaeda murderers are so evil, so delusion, and so stupid, but yet clever enough to pull off 9/11?

And what exactly did they pull off? So they murdered 3000 Americans and knocked down a couple of buildings. What did al-Qaeda gain from this?

Well, for one..They have you convinced that our own government did this. They know they cannot beat us in a ground war. The only way they can defeat us is from within. With FEAR. THAT sir, is a No-Brainer.

On the other hand, the founding members of PNAC who left PNAC and their jobs as corporate executives, what did they gain from 9/11?

You are putting the effect before the cause. But, to answer your question: I don't know what they had to gain, but I am sure it was bad if it is linked to this conspiracy...ya know, something ELSE to be afraid of.

Unfortunately, I live in a world where our government can even consider events like Project Northwoods, complete with its real or fake victims.

Can you imagine the faces of this "Northwoods" guy's peers when they read this crap? BWAHA.. I bet they were like: Um..dood, you might want to think about retirement..ASAP. To imply it was "considered"-- is a huge leap of faith...one I am not willing to take.

By the way, how many U.S. troops have been sent to die in Iraq? Who sent them there? Am I better off now than I was before these troops died? I know Halliburton and Exxon execs and stockholders are.

I do think our Government (Wrongfully) used the emotional shock of 9/11 as a supporting pretence to invade Iraq. And this is not OK. However, to say they ransacked New York to do it is ridiculous. TOO much risk. Too many things could have panned out differently. They wouldn't have needed to stage a 9/11. They could have just chunked a couple of blocks of Uranium in a Scud and said..SEE! But they couldn't find WMD's why would they lie about 9/11 but not WMD's if they were truly on a mission to "Rule the Werld!!!1!" This did nothing but give them a WORLD-WIDE Black-eye and halt any progress they had made from 9/11 in their "sinister plan."

Oh, and ...There is no sinister plan. It is goofy.

America's best minds are NOT working for the Gubment for $45k-55K a year.

My cousin just got hired out of college at about $100k a year to work for a top defense contractor. See, the government doesn't hire thes best minds. The government hires the companies that hire the best minds. It is my understanding that she can't even say 1 word about what she does because she signed a non-disclosure agreement that makes spilling the beans a federal, criminal offense.

I bet she would be singing like a canary if they told her to Kill your Mom and Dad! or even MY Mom and Dad.

WAKE-UP!!

I'm afraid I'm not the one who is in the media induced, believe-whatever-they-tell-me trance.

Nope, you have been "enlightened" By the "truth" (not) ... When the Enlightenors ask you to drink the Kool-Aid..don't do it, It has poison in it.

Why was WTC 7 burning ? It got hit ? I believe they activated the demolition stuff inside and that is why it was burning

[edit on 18-2-2007 by pai mei]

I see it like this. People paranoid about the baddies of the state, NWO, bogieman etc will always look for evidence of any wrong doing to accuse said baddies.

By their very nature people looking for conspiracy, have already in their mindset that germ of belief. From then on psychologically it becomes a case of selective perception and evidence.

I always note that the CTers are always the more unstable under cross examination. To generalise, the so called "sheeple" tend to say their piece and leave it at that, the CTers rant, rave and gesticulate wildly. That always says a lot to me. Maybe I am being selective in my observations, though.

I personally doubt the CTers motives. Almost everywhere you go in CTer land someone is making a buck. In a country like the USA you only need a small percentage of the population to buy your books or tickets for seminars to make a handsome buck. The USA is full of freaks who scam the gullable. Now CTers may or may not really believe what they are saying, but I notice in many documentaries the main protagonists don't seem to be doing too badly from it. Christ if I had no integrity I might get on the band wagon myself. Thing is in this day and age that shout long enough and loud enough about something and someone will eventually make a movie, T shirt or buck out of it. Probably eventually a movie, Hollywood is also well known to be selective in its facts.

I dare say that some are making a bit of profit from countering the CTers claims. There is IMHO enough scope for someone to wear both hats and anonomously make a buck from both sides

So to close, paranoia and a chance to make a buck not good for truth IMHO.

Originally posted by something smells
Maybe I am being selective in my observations, though.

I would say so. Your whole last post was a total rant and had no substance in it at all.

bsbray11

Why can't fire EVER fail steel in a controlled lab environment, where the heat is intentionally cranked up?

Excellent point. For people to hold to maintain that Bldg 7 fell from fire they would have to show good reasons why dense steel, the type used in super-structures would have had failure.

Since, it is seen time and time again that steel can maintain the right strength, this in and of itself should negate the fire argument concerning Bldg 7.

So we have good reasons to think fire wasn't the cause of the collapse.

For people who have problems accepting the Madrid Fire for a good reason to *doubt* Bldg7 and its collapse from fire.


Then turn your attention to a STEEL BUILDING that burned 17 hours and spread over 26 floors, reaching the roof.

17 hours.... How long did Bldg 7 burn for?? What was so different with the Steel in Bldg 7???

Did Bldg 7 have some kind of Steel that got weak all at the same precise time?

Was the Steel in Building 7 now inferior to the Steel of this building???

I don't see Bldg 7 looking like this....









BTW, the temperatures were so high the Fire Fighters couldn't even get close to the fire!

And furthermore....

www.cbsnews.com...

Firefighters' efforts were also hampered by malfunctioning water pumps and the lack of fire extinguishers inside the building as fire laws are not strictly enforced in Venezuela.

So the water wasn't even working!

As was mentioned, Steel doesn't fail in tests, NO SkyScraper has ever collapsed from fire.

Therefore I see no good reason to suppose that Bldg7 fell in 6 seconds or so, from fire.

The usual response by some are, well 9/11 was a unique day etc.

That doesn't change the fact that every incident is unique, including when the Empire State Building was hit by a b-25 bomber. As I see it, it still stands!

So again, each case is unique as in the example above, there was no water. What Building 7 did and in the manner it did it, was very suspicious.

It wasn't just the fact it fell, it fell straight down into its foundational footprint.





[edit on 18-2-2007 by talisman]

Originally posted by talisman


It wasn't just the fact it fell, it fell straight down into its foundational footprint.

[edit on 18-2-2007 by talisman]

...and every steel vertical support beam failed almost simultaneously.


How?

[edit on 18-2-2007 by nick7261]

in my humble opinion......

silverstein was well aware of what was gonna happen that day... not only was this all a great way to justify a war, stir up the nation, destroy some important papers, etc. BUT he got a massive insurance payout from his new purchases... a little too suspicious?

ALSO.... he (silverstein) was actually QUOTED- its in lots of videos i have seen- saying "we made the decision to pull" building 7. since there was no way they could have arranged the explosives that morning, they must have known they were bringing down the building (and building 1 and 2, and consequently the entire rest of the WTC that got crushed), days, weeks, (i dont actually know how long it takes to put detonators in a building...) and that is how it so magically crumbled.... much like the twin towers.

i cannot understand anyone that would do this... but i also can't understand a conspiracy theory (oh sorry, official story) that the towers just crumbled, cos a man in hole got a few people trained in light aircraft aviation, they manage to get planes into manhattan without anyone noticing,..then a while later building 7 disappears as well.... and then silverstein's buildings were gone..... he files for insurance money and gets double the payout due to the two separate planes.. bush gets a war... the nation is devastated...

*waits for backlash*

Look guys... How many times does this have to be said. It was NOT JUST a fire. We all know ... for the love of God its all we here time and time again... No steel building... BLAH BLAH BLAH ... we KNOW !!!!

All these pictures you post ARE accurate they are sky scrapers burning... Ultima you claim damage "DUE TO FIRE" Where are the pictures of buildings that were on fire due to large passenger planes intentionally slammed into them a 500 mph?. Were are the photographs of the steel building that is burning due to getting showered with tons of debris from a collapsing skyscraper???

I will concede that never has a steel skyscraper collapsed due to FIRE ALONE. If YOU will concede that no skyscraper has survived an intentional attack by using a large commercial airliner traveling at 500 mph. OR a skyscraper that has collapsed due to a sky scraper showering tons of debris on it.

The facts remain. WTC suffered severe damage due to the collapse of the WTC tower casuing fires through out several floors. WTC had a unique structure above an electrical substation. These fires that were burning near the damaged areas increased in intensity and by the video I posted... Proves the fires were intense and there were many. NIST has yet to come out with 100% certainty WHY it collapsed, but there is not one piece of physical evidence that proves that it was CD.

Also Ultima... i would like your source as to the EMT hearing a countdown. Sorry but that has BS written all over it.


EDIT: Add ... Guys get over the Silverstein quote..its BASELESS and means nothing. Its been debated a hundred times here and anyone with 1/2 a brain will realize that a multimillionaire would NOT confess to blowing up his building. Simple... if there is insurance fraud you take the money and run. "lucky Larry" rebuilt ! And had a very hard time finding tennants! DO some research on this guys.





[edit on 18-2-2007 by CameronFox]

what do you mean its baseless and means nothing? comes out of his mouth... you may be right but, making it look like he hasn't committed insurance fraud seems quite logical, since everything is being covered up. why run away with his millions when he can make many more from rebuilding, and being the good guy? ALSO... consider this... since it was built, the world trade centre had only had ONE owner, Port Authority.... just seems a little coincidental that it happened to change hands that very summer, and look at the timelines mentioned earlier.... this is obviously just my opinion, and i think we are free to question this, when its there for all to see. are you suggesting that was a puppet of larry silverstein?

Originally posted by purplecoral
what do you mean its baseless and means nothing? comes out of his mouth... you may be right but, making it look like he hasn't committed insurance fraud seems quite logical, since everything is being covered up. why run away with his millions when he can make many more from rebuilding, and being the good guy? ALSO... consider this... since it was built, the world trade centre had only had ONE owner, Port Authority.... just seems a little coincidental that it happened to change hands that very summer, and look at the timelines mentioned earlier.... this is obviously just my opinion, and i think we are free to question this, when its there for all to see. are you suggesting that was a puppet of larry silverstein?

Hi Purple -

What came out of his mouth? This quote has been hashed over for years and years. Tell me something... why didn't the insurance companines take him to court in attempt to at least slow down the insurance payments. The incurance company must have seen the PBS video. Did you know that the insurance company actually took Silverstein to court over WTC 1&2 ?? I mean heck if they would take him to court over WTC 1&2, why not 7 ...where a lot of you still think he admitted to tell the FDNY to blow up his building.