Video & Evidence There Was No Controlled Demo

Originally posted by Fowl Play
If this is the tone of your previous questions, no wonder i didnt answer them.

i don't buy you didn't read the first post on page 3, right on top, so you must know about the 'tone' of my previous posts you seem to deplore so much and that it really wasn't anything to complain about. if you see a problem i suggest you ask a moderator.


afaics, you're simply unable to explain the standing cores, the molten steel evidence including the meteorite (but not limited to it), you're simply using FUD on minor details. yet another simple question: what do you think happened after they pulled the object from the rubble? (using heavy gear) handled it like raw eggs or tried to reduce it into smaller parts? what happened next, imagine.... does it even matter if your armchair expert sense tells you that by looking at a short video, you're able to declare the thing a fake?


as i said already if what was said about the 'meteorite' is only half true, anyone backing convential, sanitized theories, like the official version has a whole lot to explain.


i see you're again using a cop out, adressing selectively, accusing me of bias, well gues what? it's not my job to come across as unbiased, imaprtial and trustworthy (unless i make it my first priority of course), but as the thread starter, answering fully backed questions (with links, so i didn't make it all up) might very well be yours.

Summary; you're unable to answer the pertinent questions, you're unable to effectively refute the salient points. may i remind you that you still haven't produced one single word as a rebuttal to my points about 'jets' emanating from the buildings during collapse, in discernible, non random patterns.

if someone keeps ignoring things like these for days and then jumps onto the 'etiquette' bandwagon, which, in effect, is an advocation of censorship (or did i violate the T&Cs? if not the logical conclusion is that if you're in disagreement, you're a loony CT'er, isn't it?), you should not be surprised the reactions aren't 100% to your liking.

edit: repetitions removed, silly end changed

reference:www.abovetopsecret.com...

[edit on 15.6.2007 by Long Lance]

Originally posted by Griff
If he ment the building: Since when does a fire chief have the authority to demolish a building?

Well for 1 it was not the firechief, it was the incident commander. He has more authority then a firechief. He believed the building was going to collaspe and cause more damage and spread fire to other buildings.

The only reason for the call was for the incident commander to let Silverstien know that they could not save the building (the firemen were already out of the building). You are right that Silverstien had no authority over the firemen.

WTC 7 was severely damaged on the south side of the building and was on fire for about 7 hours

At 10:29 a.m., WTC 1 (the north tower) collapsed and contrary to the claims of 9/11 conspiracy people, it did not collapse into its footprint like a controlled explosion. Instead, as the building collapsed, the debris from WTC 1 spilled into the surrounding streets and onto WTC 7 among others, damaging the building.
Eyewitness accounts from firemen such as Captain Chris Boyle and Deputy Chief Peter Hayden and photographic evidence back this up. It is the south side of WTC 7 that was damaged and it is likely that the fires started as a result of debris from the collapse of WTC 1, the fires in WTC 7 started at approximately the same time as the collapse of WTC 1 and it is the fires that are primarily the reason the WTC 7 building collapsed. Most 9/11 conspiracy people only show you the east side and north side of the WTC 7.
Reports from the scene mention the damage:
Captain Chris Boyle
Engine 94 - 18 years

Boyle: ... on the north and east side of 7 it didn't look like there was any damage at all,
but then you looked on the south side of 7 there had to be a hole 20 stories tall in the building, with fire on several floors. Debris was falling down on the building and it didn't look good.

... Then we received an order from Fellini, we're going to make a move on 7. That was the first time really my stomach tightened up because the building didn't look good. I was figuring probably the standpipe systems were shot. There was no hydrant pressure. I wasn't really keen on the idea. Then this other officer I'm standing next to said, that building doesn't look straight. So I'm standing there. I'm looking at the building. It didn't look right, but, well, we'll go in, we'll see.

So we gathered up rollups and most of us had masks at that time. We headed toward 7. And just around we were about a hundred yards away and Butch Brandies came running up. He said forget it, nobody's going into 7, there's creaking, there are noises coming out of there, so we just stopped. And probably about 10 minutes after that, Visconti, he was on West Street, and I guess he had another report of further damage either in some basements and things like that, so Visconti said nobody goes into 7, so that was the final thing and that was abandoned.

Firehouse: When you looked at the south side, how close were you to the base of that side?

Boyle: I was standing right next to the building, probably right next to it.

Firehouse: When you had fire on the 20 floors, was it in one window or many?

Boyle: There was a huge gaping hole and it was scattered throughout there. It was a huge hole. I would say it was probably about a third of it, right in the middle of it. And so after Visconti came down and said nobody goes in 7, we said all right, we'll head back to the command post. We lost touch with him. I never saw him again that day.

Link to full report.
www.firehouse.com...


Fire chief Daniel Nigro clearly thought the building could collapse. Here's why:

The biggest decision we had to make was to clear the area and create
a collapse zone around the severely damaged [WTC Building 7].
A number of fire officers and companies assessed the damage to the
building. The appraisals indicated that the building's integrity
was in serious doubt.

Full report
www.cooperativeresearch.org...

Another fireman reported damage that progressed as the day wore on.

Deputy Chief Peter Hayden
Division 1 - 33 years

Hayden: ... also we were pretty sure that 7 World Trade Center would collapse.
Early on, we saw a bulge in the southwest corner between floors 10 and 13, and we had put a transit on that and we were pretty sure she was going to collapse. You actually could see there was a visible bulge, it ran up about three floors. It came down about 5 o'clock in the afternoon, but by about 2 o'clock in the afternoon we realized
this thing was going to collapse.

Firehouse: Was there heavy fire in there right away?

Hayden: No, not right away, and that's probably why it stood for so long because it took awhile for that fire to develop. It was a heavy body of fire in there and then we didn't make any attempt to fight it. That was just one of those wars we were just going to lose. We were concerned about the collapse of a 47-story building there. We were worried about additional collapse there of what was remaining standing of the towers and the Marriott, so we started pulling the people back after a couple of hours of surface removal and searches along the surface of the debris. We started to pull guys back because we were concerned for their safety.

Firehouse: Chief Nigro said they made a collapse zone and wanted everybody away from number 7 - did you have to get all of those people out?

Hayden: Yeah, we had to pull everybody back. It was very difficult. We had to be very forceful in getting the guys out. They didn't want to come out. There were guys going into areas that I wasn't even really comfortable with, because of the possibility of secondary collapses. We didn't know how stable any of this area was. We pulled everybody back probably by 3 or 3:30 in the afternoon. We said, this building is going to come down, get back. It came down about 5 o'clock or so, but we had everybody backed away by then.

Full report
www.firehouse.com...

Are these guys all liars?
Are we believing in a Conspiracy just because some information was not disclosed?
Could the official story be true, and just be releasing parts of the real story?
Was Controlled demolition used?
Are certain people in the truth brigade more knowledgable about events that day than the proffesionals?
Personally i dont think so, as someone seeking the real truth, i think we have been going down the wrong path.



[edit on 16-6-2007 by Fowl Play]

Sorry Fowl Play, but the fact still remains that WTC7 DID fall in its own footprint. A tiny alleyway seperated it from the building directly east, and it was totally undamaged.

Now watch a film of the collapse of WTC7. Watch as the mechanical penthouse on the roof starts to fall before the rest of the building. This penthouse was supported on the strongest part of the roof by steel columns. Are you sure that the fires (the true extent of which, along with damage to the South side, are unknown) caused this? The official report into WTC7's collapse has yet to be released, and yet you know the extent of the damage, and that it lead to the collapse?

I would hardly call these Neatly into their own footprint


and



screwloosechange.blogspot.com...

This Video along with the police and fire chiefs statement, shows this was no freefall due to CD, there was a pre-collapse and the actual time of collapse was substantially slower than would of been from CD..
These photos debunk the myth of " falling in its own footprint" :up

Fowl Play,

I thought you questioned WTC 7? I'm pretty sure I have read that you said you question it? Confused.

I think someone needs to read the FEMA report that quoted that building 7 only had some damage to 10 floors according to firemen on the scene.

Not enough to casue a collapse even with fire. No steel building has ever collasped due to fire.

www.wtc7.net...

According to the account of a firefighter who walked the 9th floor along the south side following the collapse of WTC 1, the only damage to the 9th floor facade occurred at the southwest corner. According to firefighters' eyewitness accounts from outside of the building, approximately floors 8-18 were damaged to some degree. Other eyewitness accounts relate that there was additional damage to the south elevation.

No Controlled Demolitions eh? Ok well look at this pic, and see if you can find ANY other buildings of relative size and contruction that collapse due to fire, or damage if you like, that fall STRAIGHT down into it's own footprint like this does...



If I'm not mistaken there is/was some money in it if you can proove the official story by the way.

Originally posted by Griff
Fowl Play,

I thought you questioned WTC 7? I'm pretty sure I have read that you said you question it? Confused.

I do question the official story on 9/11 for WTC7, but i dont believe it was controlled demo, i think the collapse was encouraged and was brought down for other reasons, it is possible imo that explosives was used, but i believe this to be for a seperate reason to the twin towers, one could almost call it a red herring in conspiracy circles, but i dont believe it is a smoking gun for the disasters of the day.

Originally posted by twitchy
No Controlled Demolitions eh? Ok well look at this pic, and see if you can find ANY other buildings of relative size and contruction that collapse due to fire, or damage if you like, that fall STRAIGHT down into it's own footprint like this does...



If I'm not mistaken there is/was some money in it if you can proove the official story by the way.

I agree with you twitchy, explosives may of been used... i really dont know, but i believe the fire chiefs reports, i just think because of the disasters of the day, they could get this one in and overlook it , like they have done.
Im not a spook as some of you think, i am a CT'ist that has done military service and been involved in Intelligence to a certain degree..
I cannot explain truly what i think happened to building 7. But i agree with you, it was not what was in the reports
I just see no evidence for total CD, there was not any significant explosions, that you would equate with CD, but did the building have any assistance in collapse? Possibly, i think firefighters did there best job, but by then.. people who could had already done what was required.

P.S. I would never try and make a penny out of 9/11..
what i lost could never be returned by money, or by winning a bet.

[edit on 16-6-2007 by Fowl Play]

Originally posted by ULTIMA1
I think someone needs to read the FEMA report that quoted that building 7 only had some damage to 10 floors according to firemen on the scene.

Not enough to casue a collapse even with fire. No steel building has ever collasped due to fire.

www.wtc7.net...

According to the account of a firefighter who walked the 9th floor along the south side following the collapse of WTC 1, the only damage to the 9th floor facade occurred at the southwest corner. According to firefighters' eyewitness accounts from outside of the building, approximately floors 8-18 were damaged to some degree. Other eyewitness accounts relate that there was additional damage to the south elevation.

So what are you saying Ultima1, that the evidence you present of that fireman, is not as relevant as the 2 statements of the chiefs i present?
Cant have it one way, and not the other mate...
We must study both statements as equal evidence and make a judgement on the result of our studies.
You cant dismiss what u want and accept what you want... This is the main problem between certain truthers... Pick and choose evidence.

Originally posted by Fowl Play
explosives may of been used... i really dont know

Well Fowl Play, you just won some respect from me. The wisest men know only that they do not know, and I appreciate our shared goals of examining information here objectively. I wish all these would-be skeptics had that mentality.

Originally posted by twitchy

Originally posted by Fowl Play
explosives may of been used... i really dont know

Well Fowl Play, you just won some respect from me. The wisest men know only that they do not know, and I appreciate our shared goals of examining information here objectively.

I wish all these would-be skeptics had that mentality.

Cheers pal, i appreciate your words, I am a total Ctist, ive seen huge Black Triangles and have some weird beliefs, i am prepared to accept CD as a theory to study, just from my study, i feel i have debunked it.. if someone can show me undeniable proof, i will change my opinin, of course..

[edit on 16-6-2007 by Fowl Play]

Originally posted by Fowl Play
I would hardly call these Neatly into their own footprint...

This is about as 'in its own footprint' you will ever get from a 47 story controlled demolition. How can you say this is not in it's own footprint?
The outer walls all lying on top of each other, because they folded inwards which is a classic sign of controlled demo. Yes some buildings were damaged, but that is not unusual in a CD. In fact when buildings are that close to the CD they cover them with sheets of material, not sure what exactly, to minimize damage.
If it was a natural collapse the outer walls would not have folded inwards.

Originally posted by Fowl Play
[So what are you saying Ultima1, that the evidence you present of that fireman, is not as relevant as the 2 statements of the chiefs i present?
Cant have it one way, and not the other mate...
We must study both statements as equal evidence and make a judgement on the result of our studies.
You cant dismiss what u want and accept what you want... This is the main problem between certain truthers... Pick and choose evidence.

So your saying the firemen that were actually there on the scene do not know what they are talking about.

Lets look at the quote from Firemen and policemen at WTC 7

PAPD Sergeant David Lim: "So I attempted to get in through the Barkley Street ramp which is on Barkley (sic) and West Broadway, but I was being held back by the fire department, because 7 World Trade, which is above the ramp, was now fully engulfed."

www.911report.com...

FDNY Captain Jay Jonas:"We could hear fires crackling. We didn’t know it at the time, but No. 7 World Trade Center and No. 5 World Trade Center were immediately adjacent to us and they were roaring, they were on fire. Those were the sounds that we were hearing. ...At the same time, No. 5 World Trade Center, No. 6 World Trade Center and No. 7 World Trade Center were roaring. They were on fire. And they were right next to us. So we have all that smoke that we’re dealing with."

archive.recordonline.com...

First Responder Accounts

1. 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

graphics8.nytimes.com...

2. ...Just when you thought it was over, 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

graphics8.nytimes.com...

3. I walked out and I got to Vesey and West, where I reported to Frank [Cruthers]. He said, we’re moving the command post over this way, that building’s coming down. At this point, the fire was going virtually on every floor, heavy fire and smoke that really wasn’t bothering us when we were searching because it was being pushed southeast and we were a little bit west of that. I remember standing just where West and Vesey start to rise toward the entrance we were using in the World Financial Center. There were a couple of guys standing with me and a couple of guys right at the intersection, and we were trying to back them up – and here goes 7. It started to come down and now people were starting to run. –FDNY Deputy Chief Nick Visconti

www.firehouse.com...

All morning I was watching 7 World Trade burn, which we couldn't do anything about because it was so much chaos looking for missing members. –Firefighter Marcel Klaes

graphics8.nytimes.com...

5. When the building came down it was completely involved in fire, all forty-seven stories.

–FDNY Assistant Chief Harry Myers (Smith, Dennis, 2002. Report From Ground Zero: The Heroic Story of the Rescuers at the World Trade Center. New York: Penguin Putnam. p. 160)

6. The concern there again, it was later in the afternoon, 2, 2:30, like I said. The fear then was Seven. Seven was free burning. Search had been made of 7 already from what they said so they had us back up to that point where we were waiting for 7 to come down to operate from the north back down. –Captain Robert Sohmer

graphics8.nytimes.com...

7. Then we had to move because the Duane Reade, they said, wasn't safe because building 7 was really roaring. –FDNY Chief Medical Officer Kerry Kelly.

graphics8.nytimes.com...

8. At this point 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

graphics8.nytimes.com...

9. Chief Cruthers told me that they had formed another command post up on Chambers Street. At this point there were a couple of floors burning on Seven World Trade Center. Chief McNally wanted to try and put that fire out, and he was trying to coordinate with the command post up on Chambers Street. This is after searching for a while. He had me running back and forth trying to get companies to go into Seven World Trade Center. His radio didn't seem to be working right either because he had me relaying information back and forth and Chief Cruthers had me --

Q. So everything was face-to-face? Nothing was by radio?

A. Yeah, and it was really in disarray. It really was in complete disarray. We never really got an operation going at Seven World Trade Center. –FDNY Captain Michael Donovan

graphics8.nytimes.com...


I could post another 20+ quotes from different firemen, but I think you guys get the jist of it. WTC7 was damaged badly and burning out of control.


Other Eyewitnesses

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

Originally posted by ANOK
What caused steel and concrete to fuse together in what is known as the
WTC meteorite?

Nice WTC meteorite video, that leaves no doubt in my mind...

I may not know what happened to the WTC but i don't think i'm going to base my accusation on this jokers theory of THE WTC METEORITE...

"all these things fused by the heat into one signal element"...repeat

As for the orginal post, i do see a twist but the camera is focused in on one corner of the building. If it showed the length of the building you might have something.

Originally posted by CaptainObvious
Lets look at the quote from Firemen and policemen at WTC 7
I could post another 20+ quotes from different firemen, but I think you guys get the jist of it. WTC7 was damaged badly and burning out of control.
Other Eyewitnesses

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

So your saying the other steel buildings that had bigger and longer burning fires and suffered more structural damage and did not collapse. But building 7 with just some damage to 1 side on 10 floors and minor fires a few floors (per photos) just collasped ?

Please show me in the photos that the building was fully invilved.
i114.photobucket.com...
i114.photobucket.com...
i114.photobucket.com...

I guess you did not see or hear Silverstein when he stated that the incident commader decided to PULL the building.

The firemen were out of the building early in the day (according to firechiefs timeline) The only reason for the incident commander to call Silverstein was to let him know they could not save the building (Silverstien had no authority to tell the incident commander what to do with the firemen). I guess it was just good timming that the building did not collapse until after the phone call.

www.firehouse.com...

Firehouse: Chief Nigro said they made a collapse zone and wanted everybody away from number 7� did you have to get all of those people out?
Hayden: Yeah, we had to pull everybody back. It was very difficult. We had to be very forceful in getting the guys out. They didn�t want to come out. There were guys going into areas that I wasn�t even really comfortable with, because of the possibility of secondary collapses. We didn�t know how stable any of this area was. We pulled everybody back probably by 3 or 3:30 in the afternoon. We said, this building is going to come down, get back. It came down about 5 o�clock or so, but we had everybody backed away by then.

[edit on 16-6-2007 by ULTIMA1]

Originally posted by ULTIMA1

So your saying the other steel buildings that had bigger and longer burning fires and suffered more structural damage and did not collapse. But building 7 with just some damage to 1 side on 10 floors and minor fires a few floors (per photos) just collasped ?

I guess you did not see or hear Silverstein when he stated that the incident commader decided to PULL the building.

The firemen were out of the building early in the day (according to firechiefs timeline) The only reason for the incident commander to call Silverstein was to let him know they could not save the building (Silverstien had no authority to tell the incident commander what to do with the firemen). I guess it was just good timming that the building did not collapse until after the phone call.

Once again, please list all these buildings that suffered more fire damage and more structural damage but remained standing.

And your description of the damage to WTC7 is extremely dishonest. You know you are trying to mislead people by downplaying the damage. All anyone has to do is listen to the firefighters and look at the pictures that the conspiracy tabloids don't show you.

And you pretend the phone call was made right before the collapse. It was made much earlier that day.

And could you please *quote* the part where the commander said to pull the building?

Some more firemen quotes:

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

...Just when you thought it was over, 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

I walked out and I got to Vesey and West, where I reported to Frank [Cruthers]. He said, we’re moving the command post over this way, that building’s coming down. At this point, the fire was going virtually on every floor - FDNY Deputy Chief Nick Visconti

When the building came down it was completely involved in fire, all forty-seven stories.
–FDNY Assistant Chief Harry Myers

Then we had to move because the Duane Reade, they said, wasn't safe because building 7 was really roaring. –FDNY Chief Medical Officer Kerry Kelly.

At this point 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


There are plenty more, but I think this will suffice to show that there clearly was some serious fire and damage going on and that the firefighters were completely expecting it to come down. As opposed to "there's just a hand full of fires and some light damage to 10 floors" or whatever the claim was above (I don't mean that to be a literal quote).