The Zapruder film of 9/11 - Actor Daniel Sunjata

The collapse of World Trade Center Building 7 has long been considered the Zapruder film of 9/11 because of it's obvious controlled demolition-like collapse on 9/11:


[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/a39ae149b0f6.gif[/atsimg]


For every single column to be severed at the same exact time and thus have the building fall straight down, can only be accomplished with explosives. Fires have never accomplished such a feat, nor do controlled demolition companies use fire to bring steel-structured buildings down because it would be impossible to bring a building down like WTC 7 with fire.

Visit BuildingWhat.org for more information.

Suppose something I've always wondered about 9/11 and I'm sure it's been asked before ...

It does kind of look like a controlled demolition but why not just put a bomb in there and say terrorists did it rather than use a plane and explosives which might look odd?

Originally posted by Pinke
Suppose something I've always wondered about 9/11 and I'm sure it's been asked before ...

It does kind of look like a controlled demolition but why not just put a bomb in there and say terrorists did it rather than use a plane and explosives which might look odd?

The argument is that the amount of explosive charges needed, and the locations where they would need to be placed, would be all but impossible for a "terrorist" or group of terrorists to do. Most don't believe a single bomb would have brought down the towers, especially after 93's huge bomb.

Great work posting up the latest info BSBray.

I've been a long time subscriber of your threads and appreciate your efforts despite the derailing and close
minded posts.

This video clearly shows flashes going off...and no, it's not glass reflecting from sunlight.

AE911 and their team has been the leader in the truth movement, and is the closest thing we're going to get
to waking up the world. Let's hope this TV ad. reaches enough people, and enough of the right people!

Sorry, I meant Bone_Z!

I had just finished reading a post by BSBray. You're both very good at providing factual info.

Bonez, may I ask why you continue to use this heavily edited POS video from those damned fool conspriacy web sites? In the ten seconds or so before the start of this video, the penthouse collapsed down inside the structure while the outside structure remained standing for several seconds, before the entire structure fell. This proves the inside structure collapsed before the outside structure, and there isn't a controlled demolitions job on the planet that ever demolished a structure inside out.

I know it's been pointed out to you previously that you're deliberately editing out critical evidence to falsely sway your audience, and yet you continue to do it..

I have just assumed in all these years, most of America has seen the controlled demolition of Building 7 (building what?).

Is it possible not many people have seen this?? I know I have seen that gif, and many videos over the past decade. It is clear what happened to that building, maybe people "saw" this video and to believe it would completely burst their good government bubble, so they dismiss it.

I don't know about sending this fellow my hard earned money though. I'm too poor to do that, and when money becomes a driving force behind gettting your message out I am very suspect of motive.

If I hold a belief, everyone I come into contact with will eventually know my stance, and be shown proof of why I believe the way I do. That's free. Every American who holds the belief our government or some other sinister entity besides who was blamed commited the e act of 911 can tell their beliefs to all they come into contact with, for free.

Thank you for sharing though, seeing the gif is an eye opener for many people.

Originally posted by GoodOlDave
Bonez, may I ask why you continue to use this heavily edited POS video from those damned fool conspriacy web sites? In the ten seconds or so before the start of this video, the penthouse collapsed down inside the structure while the outside structure remained standing for several seconds, before the entire structure fell. This proves the inside structure collapsed before the outside structure, and there isn't a controlled demolitions job on the planet that ever demolished a structure inside out.

I know it's been pointed out to you previously that you're deliberately editing out critical evidence to falsely sway your audience, and yet you continue to do it..

GOD, I do believe you are posting on one of those damned fool conspiracy sites.

Please show the evidence for your claim, instead of just cutting down the OP. Is he hiding some footage? Why not show it then? I am very interested to see the footage of which you speak.

Originally posted by hotbakedtater

Please show the evidence for your claim, instead of just cutting down the OP. Is he hiding some footage? Why not show it then? I am very interested to see the footage of which you speak.

Be careful of what you ask for, Bonez-

Footage of penthouse collapse

Now compare this with the WTC 7 collapse video you posted and you'll notice your video has been specifically censored to remove the footage of penthouse collapse, and starting immediately before the entire structure collapsed. Unless you subscribe to Judy Wood's "evaporation by lasers from outer space" claims it necessarily means that for the Penthouse to collapse it means the internal structure failed while the outside remained standing. The kink that developed in the structure as it collapsed is therefore obvious- there was a gaping void inside WTC 7 from the penthouse collapsing into the interior. What controlled demolitions job ever demolished a building from the inside out?

I find it ironic that you'd use "the Zapruder film of 9/11" in your title, becuase this misrepresentation would be akin to snipping out the video showing JFK's first bullet strike.

reply to post by GoodOlDave


Thanks, GoD.

Anyway, the way I saw it, it does not refute or make controlled demolition a no go.

Originally posted by hotbakedtater
reply to post by GoodOlDave

 

Thanks, GoD.

Anyway, the way I saw it, it does not refute or make controlled demolition a no go.

Attempting to present a case for controlled demolitions while playing down the massive internal damage that already existed within the building is deliberately being disingenuous, Hotbaked, but whatever. I will ask again...when has there ever been a controlled demolitions job that demolished a structure from the inside out?

This is the first time I paid attention to the length of the video and the fact that the penthouse collapsed first. If you watch it, you can see the windows under the penthouse breaking as it goes by on the way down, then the building swayed, and then the whole structure fell. That casts doubt in my mind as to the controlled demo theory.

Originally posted by finemanm
This is the first time I paid attention to the length of the video and the fact that the penthouse collapsed first. If you watch it, you can see the windows under the penthouse breaking as it goes by on the way down, then the building swayed, and then the whole structure fell. That casts doubt in my mind as to the controlled demo theory.

And that is the reason that a edited version of the collapse was shown by the op, as they know to show the full version totally destroys their controlled demolition conspiracy theory!

reply to post by GoodOlDave


What you posted as proof of your ascertion clearly does not show something being detonated from inside out. It looks like your every day controlled demolition. I saw one right ehre in Louisville. I do not see how your scenerio is happening, it does not look like the center of the building is gone collapsed at all, the building came down in one level, not collapsing onto itself it its guts were gone.

reply to post by Pinke
if you wanted to start a war and have your citizens freedoms taken , how would you do that? Oh ya they did that, did they not?

Originally posted by GoodOlDave
In the ten seconds or so before the start of this video, the penthouse collapsed down inside the structure while the outside structure remained standing for several seconds, before the entire structure fell.

If what you say actually happened, then the outside walls would cave in from not having any support. But that's not what happened. The entire building as a whole came down as a whole.

Firstly, the collapse of the penthouse would not take out the entire interior structure. There would still be plenty of interior and exterior supports. They all would still have to be severed at the same exact moment to see what we saw happen to WTC 7.

Originally posted by GoodOlDave
I know it's been pointed out to you previously that you're deliberately editing out critical evidence to falsely sway your audience, and yet you continue to do it.

Because there's no deliberate editing of critical evidence, nor is there any false swaying of anyone. Just because you say it, doesn't make it so.

Originally posted by GoodOlDave
it necessarily means that for the Penthouse to collapse it means the internal structure failed while the outside remained standing

You have zero proof nor anyway of knowing what happened or was happening to the internal structure of WTC 7. For all we know, WTC 7 could've had a simple roof collapse taking the penthouse with it.

Further, you have zero idea of how the penthouse was constructed and how much damage, if any, it did to the internal structure of WTC 7. You're guessing and speculating, nothing more.

Originally posted by GoodOlDave
Attempting to present a case for controlled demolitions while playing down the massive internal damage that already existed within the building is deliberately being disingenuous

Attempting to present a case for massive internal damage when you have zero evidence other than the penthouse collapsing, is deliberately being disingenuous.

You have no idea whatsoever of what the collapsing of the penthouse played with any other part of that building and to say otherwise is being disingenuous. You're doing nothing but speculating and theorizing, that's it. Your little "disingenuous" street runs both ways. Wanna continue down it?

Originally posted by dereks
And that is the reason that a edited version of the collapse was shown by the op, as they know to show the full version totally destroys their controlled demolition conspiracy theory!

It does nothing of the sort. Only in fantasy worlds does that happen. You're forgetting about the numerous witnesses, including NYPD Craig Bartmer, who heard the BOOM BOOM BOOM of the detonations when WTC 7 collapsed. Anyone wanna post a video of a fire-induced collapse that produces BOOM BOOM BOOM sounds as it's collapsing? I didn't think so.

Originally posted by hotbakedtater
reply to post by GoodOlDave

 

What you posted as proof of your ascertion clearly does not show something being detonated from inside out. It looks like your every day controlled demolition. I saw one right ehre in Louisville. I do not see how your scenerio is happening, it does not look like the center of the building is gone collapsed at all, the building came down in one level, not collapsing onto itself it its guts were gone.

The video I posted specifically showed that the penthouse collapsed into the interior of the building several seconds before the entire structure collapsed, so by definition there was loss of structural integrity in the interior. PLEASE tell me you're not seriously suggesting these supposed secret agents of yours set up their explosives to target the penthouse to fall down only one or two floors, five seconds or so before bringing down the entire building. You know as well as I do just how goofball that sounds.

The problem for you is that my video shows the details that your video attempts to hide. When it collapsed, you can see cracks appearing on the side of the building, meaning that the wall is flexing inward. The only way it can flex inward is if there were no internal supports, and the most immediate evidence there is of why the internal supports were no longer there is becuase part of the interior had collapsed from the penthouse on down.

If you're genuinely saying that you've ever seen a controlled demolition demolish a building from the inside out the same way WTC 7 collapsed, you're lying through your teeth. Your own footage of a true controlled demolition shows they're rigged so the entire building collapses at once.

Originally posted by GoodOlDave
You know as well as I do just how goofball that sounds.

Really?

I decided to paste this whole section as I know the debunkers don't always click on links...

The main challenge in bringing a building down is controlling which way it falls. Ideally, a blasting crew will be able to tumble the building over on one side, into a parking lot or other open area. This sort of blast is the easiest to execute, and it is generally the safest way to go. Tipping a building over is something like felling a tree. To topple the building to the north, the blasters detonate explosives on the north side of the building first, in the same way you would chop into a tree from the north side if you wanted it to fall in that direction. Blasters may also secure steel cables to support columns in the building, so that they are pulled a certain way as they crumble...
Sometimes, though, a building is surrounded by structures that must be preserved. In this case, the blasters proceed with a true implosion, demolishing the building so that it collapses straight down into its own footprint (the total area at the base of the building). This feat requires such skill that only a handful of demolition companies in the world will attempt it....
Blasters approach each project a little differently, but the basic idea is to think of the building as a collection of separate towers. The blasters set the explosives so that each "tower" falls toward the center of the building, in roughly the same way that they would set the explosives to topple a single structure to the side. When the explosives are detonated in the right order, the toppling towers crash against each other, and all of the rubble collects at the center of the building. Another option is to detonate the columns at the center of the building before the other columns so that the building's sides fall inward.

science.howstuffworks.com...

Post collapse WTC 7...



All four outer walls are sitting on top of the rest of the building. All four walls on top of the debris pile means the majority of the building landed in its own footprint, this is the desired outcome of a controlled implosion demolition.

To do this parts of the building have to collapsed in an exact way. The center of the building is dropped first, quite visible in videos of WTC 7 that debunkers call the 'penthouse kink' and try to claim was cause by fire, this allows a space for the outer sections to fall into once they are dropped (pulled).

In this video you can clearly see the left side falling inwards to the center.

www.youtube.com...

For this to happen the timing has to be perfect, or it would not result in all four walls on top of the buildings rubble pile. Fire and damage to one side could not cause a perfectly timed implosion.

reply to post by _BoneZ_


" ... then the outside walls would cave in from not having any support. But that's not what happened. "

Bonez , we have all seen the rubble pile of WTC7 after it collapsed . It is CLEAR that the outside walls DID INDEED "cave in from not having any support" . This is why the outside walls (for the most part) came to rest on top of the debris pile .