PROOF that Building 7 was demolished with explosives!!!

reply to post by taccj9903


Debris damage and fire.

reply to post by THE AQUARIAN 1


Debris damage and small fires on one side of the building caused the whole building to collapse uniformly on its own footprint?

Originally posted by weedwhacker
Still, I have a major BURNING (

) question:

HOW was the building 'rigged' for CD? WHEN? (OK, that was two).

Unless that can be answered adequately, then the title of this thread is false --- as to "proof".

That seems to be a question all the "truthers" avoid, as they are unable to answer it and it totally destroys their conspiracy theory that explosives were used to bring down the 3 buildings!

Originally posted by dereks

Originally posted by weedwhacker
Still, I have a major BURNING (

) question:

HOW was the building 'rigged' for CD? WHEN? (OK, that was two).

Unless that can be answered adequately, then the title of this thread is false --- as to "proof".

That seems to be a question all the "truthers" avoid, as they are unable to answer it and it totally destroys their conspiracy theory that explosives were used to bring down the 3 buildings!

Actually, they almost al always address this, you all just never accept the answer. Those buildings were like small cities. Can you account for every person that entered those buildings in weeks prior? Can you tell me who was there and what they were doing? Can you find anyone that worked in the buildings, even security that can tell you everyone that came and went and what it is they did while inside? This question is more absurd than anything as no one can explain how they would even know if a crew was in there rigging up the building. I would like to know how many of the people asking this have ever worked in a large office building. Have you?

Originally posted by dereks

Originally posted by weedwhacker
Still, I have a major BURNING (

) question:

HOW was the building 'rigged' for CD? WHEN? (OK, that was two).

Unless that can be answered adequately, then the title of this thread is false --- as to "proof".

That seems to be a question all the "truthers" avoid, as they are unable to answer it and it totally destroys their conspiracy theory that explosives were used to bring down the 3 buildings!

Where have you been??? Truthers have addressed that question, it is all over just google it. www.youtube.com...

Originally posted by evil incarnate

Originally posted by dereks

Originally posted by weedwhacker
Still, I have a major BURNING (

) question:

HOW was the building 'rigged' for CD? WHEN? (OK, that was two).

Unless that can be answered adequately, then the title of this thread is false --- as to "proof".

That seems to be a question all the "truthers" avoid, as they are unable to answer it and it totally destroys their conspiracy theory that explosives were used to bring down the 3 buildings!

Actually, they almost al always address this, you all just never accept the answer. Those buildings were like small cities. Can you account for every person that entered those buildings in weeks prior? Can you tell me who was there and what they were doing? Can you find anyone that worked in the buildings, even security that can tell you everyone that came and went and what it is they did while inside? This question is more absurd than anything as no one can explain how they would even know if a crew was in there rigging up the building. I would like to know how many of the people asking this have ever worked in a large office building. Have you?

This guy managed to have free access to the Towers days before 9-11. How many others just like him? Hundreds?

Who Signed Sakher Hammad's WTC Basement Level Pass?

A photo ID pass for Sept. 5 found on one of the men charged with fraudulently obtaining a Tennessee driver's license from a Memphis woman gave him access to the six underground levels of the One World Center building.

But which tenant hired Sakher 'Rocky' Hammad, 24, to work on its sprinklers is lost, said Port Authority of New York and New Jersey spokesman Alan Hicks on Friday.

Hammad told federal authorities that he was working on the sprinklers six days before the twin towers were brought down by terrorists, court testimony revealed this week.

But Hicks said the Port Authority, which owned the building, did its own sprinkler work, and that any other work involving sprinklers would have been arranged by an individual tenant.

"We don't know (which one) because all our records were destroyed in the World Trade Center, as were some of the people who know that," Hicks said.

whatreallyhappened.com...

Or perhaps these guys had unrestricted access? Of course all records were destroyed; lucky for you guys on the damage control team.

Port Authority of NY/NJ: Records For Reported WTC Renovation Work Destroyed On 9/11

Turner Construction, who supervised the 2000 demolition of the Seattle Kingdome, participated in the post-9/11 Ground Zero clean-up and performed extensive renovations within the World Trade Center towers just prior to 9/11, was in fact performing unspecified renovation work throughout the WTC complex until the very morning of September 11, 2001. The Port Authority of NY/NJ now claims that records describing such work or other projects were destroyed on September 11, 2001. A December 2000 WTC property assessment described required renovation work to be completed within one year, upon steel columns within elevator shafts of both WTC towers that was immediately pending or already underway.

www.911blogger.com...

How convenient that the elevator shafts are located inside the massive core which appears to be the source of the explosions hurling huge sections of multi-ton exterior wall sections in all directions up to 600 feet away.

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/870606a20bd4.jpg[/atsimg]

So Turner Construction was working in the Tower Cores for almost an entire year prior to 9-11? Do you defenders of the 9-11 OFFICIAL STORY think almost a year was enough time to prep the Tower Cores for demolition?

Explosive Wave 7 Floors Ahead of Collapse Wave and Accelerating

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/b817965410cc.jpg[/atsimg]

[edit on 3/6/10 by SPreston]

Click here to learn more about this warning.

Originally posted by K J Gunderson
reply to post by SPreston

 

I really hope that helps to answer that question once and for all for not only Dereks and Liarweedwhacker but the rest of their ilk as well.

Very doubtful.

They are on a damage control mission, and are used to ignoring any evidence which does not suit their purpose. As shown repeatedly by weedwhacker, outright bald-faced lying is a bonafide and often used tactic when backed into a corner.

They must have a Liar's Handbook handed out to all Defense Team members by the 9-11 perps.

post by weedwhacker

post by weedwhacker

post by K J Gunderson

The missing floors responsible for the 2.25 seconds of WTC7 freefall were most certainly removed by demolition explosives planted long in advance of 9-11. After all this was a CIA secured building and they can plant anything they want and do all the time.

Perhaps Turner Construction got a CIA contract to prep WTC7 for demolition also. Or perhaps military or Israeli teams using exotic and highly advanced US Military demolition pretending to be Turner Construction?

post by SPreston

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/3abd8190fbe1.jpg[/atsimg]

reply to post by evil incarnate


CD's on much smaller buildings require weeks of preparation, wall removal, cutting of beams, cabling to direct the fall, charge placement, wiring and detcord connections. After the charges are placed, there is a danger of inadvertent explosion.
You would have everyone believe that this was completely covert, that those who dismissed it as "maintenance" at the time have not realized what was going on and come forward between now and then. I don't have a problem with theories that are grounded in some sense of reality but none of the CD theories so far proposed have any coherency.
There is no rationale for CD. Anything that was to be accomplished by a terrorist attack was accomplished whether the buildings fell or not.

I am still waiting for "PROOF" as advertised in the thread topic.


[edit on 3/6/2010 by pteridine]

reply to post by SPreston


I appreciate you refreshing our memories. There are quite a few people on my ignore list already for telling blatant lies. If they could admit that it was a mistake or they were wrong, I might understand. When they lie and lie to defend that lie, it really does taint everything they say. Since they support the OS so much, it kind of taints that too.

Originally posted by pteridine
reply to post by evil incarnate

 

CD's on much smaller buildings require weeks of preparation, wall removal, cutting of beams, cabling to direct the fall, charge placement, wiring and detcord connections. After the charges are placed, there is a danger of inadvertent explosion.

So you are certain that the people that would do such a thing do not have access to methods of demolition that you may not be fully aware of? We all know the military has more advanced technology than we are allowed. We are just now learning about steel weakening solutions that were unheard of just 10 years ago.

Please explain to me how you could possible know each and every method that could have been used to bring down those buildings. If you do not, then you have no clue what kind of prep was needed, right?

I cannot wait to hear.

You would have everyone believe that this was completely covert, that those who dismissed it as "maintenance" at the time have not realized what was going on and come forward between now and then. I don't have a problem with theories that are grounded in some sense of reality but none of the CD theories so far proposed have any coherency.
There is no rationale for CD. Anything that was to be accomplished by a terrorist attack was accomplished whether the buildings fell or not.

I am still waiting for "PROOF" as advertised in the thread topic.


[edit on 3/6/2010 by pteridine]

As was just pointed out, there was maintenance happening in the elevator shafts. Please tell me just how many people you think look into closed elevator shafts. What is the largest building you have ever worked in? Have you ever been to the WTC? I think you have no idea the scope of what we are dealing with here.

Can you account for every person entering and leaving those buildings then?

reply to post by taccj9903

Debris damage and small fires on one side of the building caused the whole building to collapse uniformly on its own footprint?

Small fires?

www.911myths.com...

Watch these video shots of WTC 7 - only ones know to exiist

Notice heavy volume of smoke pushing out from South face of building on
multiple floors (Video 1 -8)

Can also see some of the damge to the building

Photograher goes to North side of building to document fires breaking
out there (Video 9-11)

Fires on multiple floors in several sections of building


As for collapsing in own footprint

Debris from WTC 7 crossed Barclay St - a 4 lane highway to smash
30 West Broadway (Fiterman Hall)



Debris pile - 30 West Broadway on left



Damage to 30 West Broadway

reply to post by SPreston


We aren't talking about WTC 1 & 2.

This is WTC 7.

Yes, sure...in the fantasy and unconnected imaginations of 'truthers' they like to use that scenario to make incredible claims of pre-set demo explosives.

BUT, MY question (which was dodged) was about WTC 7.

So, I ask again: How was WTC 7 pre-set with demo explosives? And, the Scananavian SHIP building engineer (BTW, what does he know about building design???) that I mentioned earlier, and that you seem to admire, said in his analysis that the building showed that it began to collapse around floors 7-14 (or so). YET, it is already indisputable that there were major fires buring for most of the day, on those same floors!

How to reconcile that?

This building, WTC 7, is "suspect" because of the tenants. Yet, BECAUSE of those very tenants, wouldn't it seem reasonable that the security would have been HIGHER than 1 or 2?

Also...don't you think any of those Agencies, that are pointed to because "they had something to hide" have, other methods to make things 'disappear' that would have been far less public, and thus prone to scrutiny? Like the 'truthers' are doing now???

I think 'truthers' are looking through the wrong end of the binoculars on thisissue...focussing on the itty-bitty details to the exclusion of the bigger picture. It's almost obsessive...


@K J Gunderson ---

About the "penthouse" issue...since you are merely baiting, and dissembling in an antagonistic manner, based on YOUR interpretation, and your attempt at a "gotcha" over a turn of phrase in something I wrote, (and it is all on record) then I suggest you DROP IT. I expect most who pay attention to the exchanges will see my point.

reply to post by REMISNE

Then you would agree that the incident commader could have only been talking about the building when he stated PULL IT, since the firemen were already out of the building.

"Pull It" comes from interview year later with Larry Silverstien - a comment which has been twisted by lunatic fringe as some siort of signal

Incident commnder didnt use such terms - orders were relayed to men in the arer that collapse zone was being set up and clear the area for suffienct distance. In WTC 7 case that was 900 ft around building aka
3 football fields.

"The most important operational decision to be made that afternoon was the collapse (Of the WTC towers) had damaged 7 World Trade Center, which is about a 50 story building, at Vesey between West Broadway and Washington Street. It had very heavy fire on many floors and I ordered the evacuation of an area sufficient around to protect our members, so we had to give up some rescue operations that were going on at the time and back the people away far enough so that if 7 World Trade did collapse, we [wouldn't] lose any more people. We continued to operate on what we could from that distance and approximately an hour and a half after that order was [given], at 5:30 in the afternoon, World Trade Center collapsed completely" - Daniel Nigro, Chief of Department

Originally posted by weedwhacker
reply to post by SPreston

 

We aren't talking about WTC 1 & 2.

This is WTC 7.

Yes, sure...in the fantasy and unconnected imaginations of 'truthers' they like to use that scenario to make incredible claims of pre-set demo explosives.

BUT, MY question (which was dodged) was about WTC 7.

It was not dodged. It was addressed thrice starting with this post here. The only thing being dodged is your explanation for that blatant lie. Try reading the thread as there are three responses to this question you claim was dodged. Can you even tell the truth?

Originally posted by thedman
Incident commnder didnt use such terms - orders were relayed to men in the arer that collapse zone was being set up and clear the area for suffienct distance. In WTC 7 case that was 900 ft around building aka
3 football fields.

Yes, and this was done before the phone call to Silverstein.

Also there is a video of workers comming out of the safety zone stating the building is comming down.

Do not forget about CHief Haydens statement that they were worried about fire jumping to other buildings.

reply to post by SPreston


SPreston, have you ever stopped to think just how much explosive would be needed on each and every floor to create such an "explosive wave"? Are you aware of the design of each floor and what it would take to create such an effect with explosives? I ask this because I dont see cutter charges doing such massive amounts of dust on detonation.

reply to post by SPreston


Thanks for pulling those three posts all together, so everyone can see the intent of what I WROTE, re: the penthouse level. There was some spinning around my words, and their intent...perhaps I wrote what I thought was obvious, but didn't convey my thoughts in a way that were understood by others the way I intendend. Semantics. Even though your intent was to pile up on me, which is not very honorable, it actually helps.

Now, I notice you didn't repeat the UTube video capture of the actual collapse. Why?

I have watched it over, and over. The FIRST thing I see moving is the TOP floor. The 'penthouse' is the little portion, I assume, that peeks up over the edge of the building, since the camera is recording at a low angle, from the ground, we can only see a portion.

As I said, that's where it appears to INITIATE. In an earlier exchange with a certain other member, I was asked what I thought about why the walls fell INWARD and not outward, and I said it looked to me as if the top level (which included the penthouse, obviously) started first, and since (obviously) a building's floor must be attached to the outer vertical walls, THAT is what was pulling inward....isn't that obvious to anyone else but me?

NOW....that does not prove, nor disprove any claim of CD....because we really can't see what's going on inside.

ALSO, I may be wrong, but it looks to me as if we're seeing the building from 'behind', the undamaged North side, in that video.

Perhaps someone could compile a group of videos, from various angles, for comparison?

Back to the video I'm talking about....I see, each time, the TOP floor start to move first. I have no idea how much that total structure would have weighed...but it was certainly a lot of mass. Moments after it begins down, the exterior walls start to 'balloon' out slightly, it seems. But, only briefly. They almost "ripple". That indicates, to me, that the upper floors (not just the top floor, by now) are all adding up, as they fall, and the connections that THEY each have to the outer walls are also pulling in...causing the progressive collapse.

I have never seen another example of CD that resembles that. Also, I see NO traditional signs either, of the smaller charges normally associated with CD, as critical points in the structure are destroyed, so that gravity will cause the desired result.


Let me toss out a question: In a known example of CD, has anyone timed the falls??? Do those buildings also exhibit a so-called "free-fall" speed of collapse???

Do you see where I'm going with this?

If not, let me clear it up.

In a scheduled CD, the company involved wants to get the job done at a minimum cost, to maximize profit, right? SO, they stragically plant only the minimum they think they will need. They bid on the job, hoping for a tidy profit at the end.

PART of that strategy is to locate the most critical points, and allow gravity, and the mass of the building, to break at OTHER points, because they will be over-stressed during the collapsing sequence.

How come a severely damaged building, like WTC 7, wouldn't behave in much the same manner??? Assuming that critical key points were weakened, and added to that, the continued, untamed fires. Further causing weakness.

Finally....WHY did "they" wait until 1720 that day???

You see, first we have the claim that it was pre-rigged, days or weeks prior, OR we get the 'argument' that it was rigged in a hurry, after 1 & 2 collapsed.

Which is it?

The latter scenario seems very, very unlikely...that no one, none of the NYFD on scene, saw this.....
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Oh, I have to bring that video I mentioned...





[edit on 6 March 2010 by weedwhacker]

Originally posted by weedwhacker
reply to post by SPreston

 

Thanks for pulling those three posts all together, so everyone can see the intent of what I WROTE, re: the penthouse level, and how someone else SPUN that around by intentionally taking it so literally as to just play a game of semantics. Even though your intent was to pile up on me, which is not very honorable, it actually helps.

I spun it by taking it too literally? Do you even know what you are saying? You just said that I manipulated the meaning by using exactly what was there as it is. Do you have any clue how little sense that makes?

Let's just put this to rest then. You said I am a liar for saying you stated the penthouse pulled the rest of the building down. Let me then just ask, did you or did you not state that the penthouse pulled the rest of the building down? You called me a liar for saying you did so I expect your answer to be no. I am sick of this being spun by you so let's just finish it now.

Did you claim that the penthouse pulled the rest of the building down or not?