PROOF that Building 7 was demolished with explosives!!!

reply to post by Sean48


I 100% agree Sean - peace bro

reply to post by arizonascott


One of the video posted in this thread was the interview of Bernie -- the Emergency Coordinator in Tower Seven. Jason Bernas, who did the interview, mentioned his new film

"Fabled Enemies" on 911

I'm watching it now --

this is beyond "Loose Change" and an amazing investigative expose on 911:

video.google.com...#

Originally posted by downisreallyup

PROOF that Building 7 was demolished by explosives!!!

Even if this video was shown before, it is apparent that some on ATS still call into question whether WTC building 7 was demolished by explosives. The first videos that came out of the building's collapse showed the building falling from far away, and there was no view of the tell-tale explosions that typically precede the building falling into it's own footprint. Well, here is a video that was released in 2008 that clearly shows the explosions occurring simultaneously on each floor, a fraction of a second before the building crashes down in one fell swoop. If you watch this video and still believe the story that the building fell under its own weight because of failure due to fire, you are clearly living in a delusional world of fantasy and wishful thinking.

And, yes, it takes weeks to prepare for a demolition like this, so the implications of this video are indeed very serious. Some may ask, "why demolish building 7?" Well, this building housed the CIA, the mayor's emergency operation center, and other sensitive things. A good hypothesis would be that the entire 9/11 false flag operation was run from this building, and they fully expected to level it and remove it as the "last act of the play." This would be quite consistent with other activities done by the government, such as the Waco Texas fiasco... bury the evidence with bulldozers!

[edit on 12-2-2010 by downisreallyup]

If you pay attention to Larry Silverstein who owned the towers and WTC7, he said in an interview that they didn't want to see anymore loss of life and they decided to PULL IT. Later on his spoke person said that he meant pulling the firefighters out of the building. If you followed his wording and interview, he meant the building and not the firefighters. I have said on more than one occasion that this crucial comment tells alot. For him to admit that it was imploded, then as you said and I've had said how did a demolition company happen to get its equipment and people down to WTC7 to implode it within an hour after the biggest terrorists attack in US history. Its not possible, unless the implosion was already set to happen. Which indicates foreknowledge and if that is the case then it opens up the conspiracy that more than 19 individuals did the attack but a group in our own govt. helped it along. When you have a conspiracy this large, sometimes a word or a phrase or a picture can pry open the armor of the conspiracy.

Originally posted by drew hempel
reply to post by arizonascott

 

One of the video posted in this thread was the interview of Bernie -- the Emergency Coordinator in Tower Seven. Jason Bernas, who did the interview, mentioned his new film

"Fabled Enemies" on 911

I'm watching it now --

this is beyond "Loose Change" and an amazing investigative expose on 911:

Google Video Link

Yes it is an excellent video that everyone should see... it sheds a lot more light on this 30-year conspiracy spoken of by Bob Kerrey.

As more and more truth comes out, which I fully believe it will as more and more Americans wake up from their slumber and stupor, perhaps one day the world will know what truly happened on that day.

For all you "trusters" I do hope you will try and look at things with a fresh open mind. Hope for the world lies in a unified understanding and a common purpose to stand against tyranny in all its shapes and forms. For this to happen, all the masks must be removed and all the darkness must be illuminated, so that liberty, truth and justice can prevail.


[edit on 14-2-2010 by downisreallyup]

Originally posted by hoghead cheese
Well, here is a video that was released in 2008 that clearly shows the explosions occurring simultaneously on each floor, a fraction of a second before the building crashes down in one fell swoop.

Pity that the building has already started collapsing before that video starts - now why did they edit out the east mechanical penthouse that was the first thing that started falling? - before the windows were blown out?


[edit on 14/2/10 by dereks]

Originally posted by dereks

Originally posted by hoghead cheese
Well, here is a video that was released in 2008 that clearly shows the explosions occurring simultaneously on each floor, a fraction of a second before the building crashes down in one fell swoop.

Pity that the building has already started collapsing before that video starts - now why did they edit out the east mechanical penthouse that was the first thing that started falling? - before the windows were blown out?


[edit on 14/2/10 by dereks]

Dereks, you are looking at the top of a 47-story building. When they demolish the building, they first blow out the bottom supports in order to get the building to start folding in on itself, so as to prevent it from falling sideways. Over half the building's height is below the part we can see in the video. That is why you see the building go down very slightly first, followed by the rest of the building following. This is a bottom-up demolition, unlike the top-down demolition of the twin towers.

Those windows "blew" out from explosives going off, as evidenced by their simultaneous destruction. If it was just air being pushed up from below, they would pop out in sequence, if they popped out at all.

Dereks, I have also done very detailed analysis of the timing, and as posted in a previous post in this thread, the building first starts to move down at the beginning of video, while the camera is still zoomed in, and only 1 or 2 seconds passes before we see the first of the windows blowing out. This close timing strongly shows that we are looking at a smooth bottom-up demolition event.

Also, regarding the fires in the building, I have not seen one single video or photo of the supposedly damaged side of the building, which I find extremely disconcerting. Also, given that China's largest building had fires on many floors, and it didn't even bend, never mind collapse, I find it impossibly hard to believe that a steel-structured building could in any way fall as building 7 fell, merely by fire or minor structural damage. If there was more than minor structural damage, I'd like you to produce a photo of said damage. Certainly with all the videos taken of building 7, somebody thought to take a video of the supposedly damaged side.

Originally posted by downisreallyup

Dereks, you are looking at the top of a 47-story building. When they demolish the building, they first blow out the bottom supports in order to get the building to start folding in on itself,

Then the fact that the east penthouse started falling first destroys your silly cconspiracy theory that they blew out the bottom of the building!

Those windows "blew" out from explosives going off

But they blew out AFTER the building started collapsing... so that also destroys the explosives theory...,

the building first starts to move down at the beginning of video, while the camera is still zoomed in, and only 1 or 2 seconds passes before we see the first of the windows blowing out.

So the windows were not blown out by explosives, as the building had already started collapsing!

I have not seen one single video or photo of the supposedly damaged side of the building,

Of course you have not, as you do not visit those sites that destroy your conspiracy theory!
www.911myths.com...
www.debunking911.com...
wtc7lies.googlepages.com...

reply to post by downisreallyup


Of course the orders still stand.

reply to post by dereks


The penthouse dropped because the first thing they blew was the central columns, followed closely by the rest. The central columns go first so that when the outer columns are blown they are pulled inwards as apposed to falling outwards which they would do otherwise. This is how they get buildings to fall mostly in their own footprint to diminish damage to surrounding buildings.

WTC7 showed a classic demolition. Most of the mass fell in it's own footprint and damage to other buildings minimal. And look how tight of a space they had to work with, it would never be this perfect from a natural collapse. Outer walls do not naturally fall in on themselves, as that would be the path of most resistance. The resistance has to be removed by taking out the inner structure first.



This also explains why windows were blown out by explosives after the collapse initiated. Please go look at a physics site, and a demolition site, that has no 9-11 bias and learn something.

[edit on 2/14/2010 by ANOK]

Originally posted by Alfie1

Originally posted by lozenge
reply to post by Alfie1

 

Architects and Engineers For 9/11 Truth is a professional association (because it's an association of professionals.)

It is NOT a conspiracy website, it is an association of PROFESSIONALS who are looking for TRUTH.

You must be daft.

no major association will say as a whole that NIST is wrong (except FEMA, which you attacked me over for providing that proof, and are now ignoring it) because they will loose their credibility. That is why INDIVIDUAL professionals must come together to form association like Architects and Engineers For 9/11 Truth.


[edit on 14-2-2010 by lozenge]

If you think AE911T is not a conspiracy site I don't know what to say to you.

I don't agree with you that professional associations would not dispute NIST if they thought it warranted. In fact I would suggest they have a professional duty to do so.

As neither FEMA nor NIST has suggested a cd I don't see how this helps you.

Alfie you are living in a dreamland... organizations are made up of individuals, and the very nature of "peer review" is the same as "peer pressure." Nobody wants to stand out as a "Lone Ranger" and nobody wants to be the first to suggest something that may jeopardize their career. You WAY underestimate the political forces that exist in all these so-called "professional" organizations. That is all part of the "truster's" mentality... to TRUST that organizations, whether public or private, will "DO THE RIGHT THING." The sad truth is, collectivism, group think, and political peer-pressure will always prevent these mainstream organizations from being at the forefront of anything... and I mean ANYTHING. They will only come forth AFTER the fact, once the tide of groundswell is so massive that they can't ignore it any longer.

Why do they do this? Well, if they were true to their convictions and came out with some finding that contradicts the official story, they could lose all kinds of funding, credibility, etc. They would immediately be branded a "conspiracy theory" organization, would be marginalized, and discounted. As long as the conspirators control the media, governments, money supply, and major funding arteries, these organizations will NOT lead in anything that out of the official, sanctioned direction... PERIOD!

You need to wake up and realize that on a very fundamental level the world DOES NOT work the way you have always thought it did. Nearly EVERYONE is on the take somehow, whether it is executives afraid of losing their cushy positions, scientists afraid of losing their funding, military leaders afraid of court marshal, government workers afraid of being fired, or minor members of congress afraid of losing at the polls, everyone has some personal stake that they feel they must protect, and it is the rare individual indeed who will risk all to take a stand that is not patently obvious and widespread.

For example... Architects and Engineers For 9/11 Truth is indeed a professional association, and yet you call it a conspiracy organization merely because they do not believe the OS. Do you actually think that all those professionals and experts involved with that organization started out believing there is a conspiracy afoot? Certainly not! As each of those brave men and women came to their own expert and professional opinions, they found themselves surrounded by people with less courage and character... they found themselves surrounded by people who cared more about their own paychecks and careers than getting at the truth. So, these men and women, who are highly qualified in their respective fields of engineering and science, formed a group of like-minded professionals. They are not a conspiracy "site" as you say... they are a professional organization made up of experts that happen to see a high degree of evidence that the OS is not true and correct. And for that, they must suffer your brand of labeling, which is quite wrongly and falsely attached.

So, why would any government funded or government attached organization want to face the same kind of labeling? Also, I am sure that plenty of political pressure has been applied in order to keep each individual within those organizations fearful and/or in the dark. All it takes is some well-placed top-level people to keep the lower ranks in line. Any anyone who comes forth with contrary views... well they can easily be dealt with by veiled threats and admonitions.

Originally posted by ANOK
reply to post by dereks

 

The penthouse dropped because the first thing they blew was the central columns, followed closely by the rest. The central columns go first so that when the outer columns are blown they are pulled inwards as apposed to falling outwards which they would do otherwise. This is how they get buildings to fall mostly in their own footprint to diminish damage to surrounding buildings.

WTC7 showed a classic demolition. Most of the mass fell in it's own footprint and damage to other buildings minimal. And look how tight of a space they had to work with, it would never be this perfect from a natural collapse. Outer walls do not naturally fall in on themselves, as that would be the path of most resistance. The resistance has to be removed by taking out the inner structure first.



This also explains why windows were blown out by explosives after the collapse initiated. Please go look at a physics site, and a demolition site, that has no 9-11 bias and learn something.

[edit on 2/14/2010 by ANOK]

Well said ANOK, well said! Star for you!

Originally posted by dereks

Originally posted by downisreallyup

Dereks, you are looking at the top of a 47-story building. When they demolish the building, they first blow out the bottom supports in order to get the building to start folding in on itself,

Then the fact that the east penthouse started falling first destroys your silly cconspiracy theory that they blew out the bottom of the building!

Those windows "blew" out from explosives going off

But they blew out AFTER the building started collapsing... so that also destroys the explosives theory...,

the building first starts to move down at the beginning of video, while the camera is still zoomed in, and only 1 or 2 seconds passes before we see the first of the windows blowing out.

So the windows were not blown out by explosives, as the building had already started collapsing!

I have not seen one single video or photo of the supposedly damaged side of the building,

Of course you have not, as you do not visit those sites that destroy your conspiracy theory!
www.911myths.com...
www.debunking911.com...
wtc7lies.googlepages.com...

Dereks, I answered you and yet you insist on quoting just partial lines and then twisting what I've said to suit your own agenda. Do you work for the MSM by the way? It wouldn't surprise me if you did!

Dereks, the middle of the building began to sag first, as ANOK correctly noted, because the middle supports were taken out first. Also, the bottom supports were taken out, followed by the outer supports. So, here is the sequence:

1) Bottom middle supports taken out with some sort of incendiary devices.
2) Middle of building begins to come down slowly, showing a sag in the middle of the building, visible as the roof line begins to deform. The outer walls of the building begin to lean in slightly towards the center.
3) A second or two later, key supports on the outer parts of the building are blown, possibly taking out groups of windows from the blast. In a bottom-up demolition, the outer supports of the lower floors are taken out a fraction of a second before the higher floors, causing the lower floors to be crushed by the falling upper floors. At this point, the building falls in near-free-fall speed, falling as a single unit, crushing the floors at the bottom.

Do not misquote me or misrepresent me Dereks! I'm quite serious.

Show me demo footage of tall building where you can't SEE explosions.

reply to post by seethelight


Don't tase me bro. Don't tase me.

reply to post by GenRadek



"MICs or Super-thermites are generally developed for military use, propellants, explosives, and pyrotechnics. Because of their highly increased reaction rate, nanosized thermitic materials are being researched by the U.S. military with the aim of developing new types of bombs that are several times more powerful than conventional explosives.[3] Nanoenergetic materials can store higher amounts of energy than conventional energetic materials and can be used in innovative ways to tailor the release of this energy. Thermobaric weapons are considered to be a promising application of nanoenergetic materials. Research into military applications of nano-sized materials began in the early 1990s."

I'm not getting into this whole conspiracy about building 7 or the other ones, but please do some research on nanothermite/super thermite before you disregard it. Super-Thermite will demolish a steel beam within minutes, if not seconds. And not, it really doesn't have an "explosive" sound. It has a.. burning sound I guess? So in theory it wouldn't be heard over the roaring sirens of emergency vehicles, people screaming, things falling etc. Not trying to disprove you, just don't put off some technologies as false, when they're not.

reply to post by Horus12


I am very uncomfortable with this thread. I still basically believe in the OS, but the collapse of WTC 7 is a real problem for me. It does not make any sense because it was not struck.

The problem for me is in the arguments. I cannot sort out which is correct. It does look like a controlled explosion, but I am not sure what a random building collapse looks like in this situation. You know, collateral damage from a terrorist attack. There are only simulations and models. This exact event has never actually occurred before. In fact, it is off the scale never happened before. Same problem with the other side of the argument. If this was a controlled explosion by dark and powerful forces, I assume they were using some heavy duty ninja stuff that does not follow the usual pattern and sounds of normal building demolition. Pointing to controlled building demolitions in other places in other buildings just doesn't end the inquiry for me. There was nothing normal about that day. That is probably the only thing that the two sides can agree on.

As for building design and such, I basically discard this. It could have been the best designed place in the world. But ordinary people had to build the design. I do believe in graft, lazy workers, and generalized "close enough for government work" products. Did the WTC fall into this category? I don't know.

In the end, I just don't know. And I crave the truth. What really happened? Only a few have actual first hand knowledge. Others have chosen up sides based upon deeply un-shakeable and sincerely held beliefs. The rest of us are left to guess, theorize, and debate about a novel event. That is why I see nothing "clear" or "irrefutable" on either side of the argument.

I am seeking knowledge here. I am trying to make an intelligent choice. This is why I wish the barbed rhetoric would take a holiday: The conspiracy theorists are not crazy. The truthers are not stupid. Unless you were one of the murderers or terrorists who did this, you do not know for certain either. Somebody actually knows. They are either dead, silenced, or not talking.

The gravity of this debate is so heavy. Either a group of people and organizations have been falsely accused of treason, or these same people and groups have committed mass murder. This is not a pretty background against which I am ready to start choosing up sides. I am a student. A neophyte. I appreciate the posters who approach this subject seriously and honestly, whichever side you are on. I mean no offense to anyone who posts a theory or statement. I am just trying to understand.

reply to post by dereks


Well, since the sites you posted are part of the Bush/Cheney administration propaganda and mainstream media owned (Rupert Murdoch) they are not valid since they only represent the false official story guidelines.

reply to post by Sibilance


Everyone (like Rudy Giuliani) was warned to get out - the demolition words "Pull It" were heard and "it wasn't hit by a plane" but collapsed, again steel structure and in its own footprint. And what about that guy, Barry (who talked and I believe is now dead) who said they were stepping over dead bodies while going out through the lobby before the collapse.

Building seven is one lie that really slaps you in the face with truth and common sense.

What about the UK news clip about it collapsing - before it fell, (Murdoch insiders who popped the cork too soon) they too were informed it was going to be pulled-demo'ed.

There sure were a lot of wired buildings coming down that day (since they pulled it) - in their own "FOOTPRINTS"

[edit on 14-2-2010 by arizonascott]

Originally posted by seethelight
reply to post by The X

 

Man, you need to learn how to use google.

You claim to be rational, but use Stubblebine as your go to guy:

en.wikipedia.org...
en.wikipedia.org...

He believed he could walk through walls and tried.

"A proponent of psychic warfare, Stubblebine was involved in a US military project to create "a breed of 'super soldier'" who would "have the ability to become invisible at will and to walk through walls". He encouraged visitors to his office to walk through walls and has said that the ability to do so is a great idea, but that it would also be a disappointment, similar to levitation.[3] He features prominently in Jon Ronson's book The Men Who Stare at Goats[6], where he is described as firmly believing that he himself can walk through walls."
More Faither bull#.
If you want the world to listen to you, don't use this loon as your go to guy.
I love how you say, "ignore non-believers" and "believe this crackpot".

So you quote wikipedia at me, that oh so special environment where information can change from one instance to the next depending on who is there making the page to say what they want it to say.

When i was talking about selective objectivity its people like you i had in mind, you selectively presented information to put general stubblebine in a light that portrays him as an out there lunatic whos credentials are more smoke and mirrors than grounded firmament.
The black budget research community has been experimenting in the far reaches of human undrstanding and belief, due to the fact that all these areas must be explored because no doubt the enemies of america would also be tryng to make progress in thse areas.
It says more of Gen, stubblebine that he is entrusted with this research and that he was willing to explore it as a radical free thinker, unlike the many other military men who couldn't think that far outside the box.
Who knows where his research led or what other avenues were created from it.
Like i said selective objectivity and your lack of objectivity in your reply, with the body of work Gen, stubblebine has been involved in, its plain to see you selectively deigned to paint him as someone who through their work on the fringes of human understanding is to be rgarded as a crackpot with nothing of any value within his body of his lifes work.
How very wrong you are.

One of his experiences in the Army was being in charge of the Army’’s imagery interpretation for scientific and technical intelligence during the Cold War. Among his other accomplishments, he participated in a special task force which defined the requirements of the U.S. Army for future conflict.

He is a long-term out-of-the-box thinker who redesigned the U.S. Army’’s Intelligence Architecture while serving as the Commanding General of the U.S. Army’’s Intelligence School and Center. This intelligence restructuring earned him his place in the Intelligence Hall of Fame.

Major General Albert N. Stubblebine doesn”t believe in the official conspiracy theory put forward by the Bush administration and has been a 9/11 Truth defender for many years. In a recent interview, he mentions “you look at the buildings falling, they didn”t fall down because of an airplane hit them, they fell down because explosives went off inside. Demolition. Look at Building 7 for God sakes.”

Link to full text
There also appear to be some very unimformed people/mods on ATS i recived a warning for stating that i would be placing certain people on my kill list.
When an email program encounters an email from the member of a B list it is either deleted or placed in a special FOLDER. It is also known as a KILL LIST.

Originally posted by Sean48
reply to post by GenRadek

 

Not so fast Gen.

Using your video, it shows the entire building collapseing.

Why then, aren't all the windows breaking out?

>> I'm thinking, that if you are going to DEMOLISH a building for a false flag -- and betray your nation, you wouldn't want people to KNOW.

Cut the outer supports when you prep the building. Then the squibs are on every support facing inside other than the very outer supports. I've looked at a few demolitions since 9/11 -- and without real effort -- it doesn't look like they blow out that many windows.

It's kind of amusing to here the Truster's explain how the kerosene explosion wiped insulation off the steel. I'd think THAT would have blown out all the windows. And I'd expect more windows would be melting, if we are to believe that the fire only ten feet away was reducing the strength of steel. We saw people WAVING out of the building a floor away from the fire -- an inferno that is supposed to be hot enough to reduce steel -- and twenty feet away, people are still breathing?

Every possible theory to explain HOW a building could fall, and the people trying to explain why it's not still standing, have to have every detail explained to move people into questioning an event that got us into invading two countries and passing the Patriot Act -- and oh, by the way, the folks we are trusting with these 9/11 FACTs are all proven crooks.

>> I just saw Dick Cheney on the news tonight -- he was saying how the "Bush policy should get some credit for how things are going so well in Iraq now..." -- This guy has to be confident, playing the act that Obama isn't on his side, when at any time he could have an investigation -- but he doesn't. But even more disgusting, is that the media doesn't ask the simple question; "Mr. Cheney, if you shot someone in the face, and they survived, would you compliment yourself on good aim?"

We invaded on bogus reasons and we have no SECURITY reason to be their -- I could give a Damn if the OCCUPATION is successful. We have to pay some war-profiteering corporate goons -- because we are dependent on them now. We spend way more on the legacies of 9/11 than we did rescuing mortgages and what we spend today trying to "stimulate the economy."

>> 9/11 should not have to be proven a conspiracy -- and crooked SOB like the gang that was in office should be proving they didn't do it before they can tell us who did.