WTC 1/2 Collapse: I was a truther. Not any longer.

Originally posted by Shadow Herder
reply to post by Varemia

 

Amazing how the claim that sporadic fires and damage on one side or corner could cause such a perfect demolition.

Well done pre rigging the buildings. Without this, the casualties and damages would of been far greater.

Maybe I'm daft, but the picture taken soon after the collapse does not show a perfect demolition. It is decidedly imperfect.

Look how little damadge to wtc 7 neighbours . This is a professional job. No doubt. Controlled demolitions were used on WTC 7 at 5pm on 911. Fact. :


Experts agree that this is a professional demolition. No denying this.

reply to post by Shadow Herder


I guess they (the charges) had some magical protection from fire otherwise they would blow at random.

reply to post by Shadow Herder


Who prerigged building 6? How about 5?

reply to post by Shadow Herder


Experts also disagree that this is a professional demolition. No denying this.

Good Job TS for speaking out your feelings, but as you already know, 90% of the people in here will just bash you and call you a "sheep" because you don't agree with them.

Finally people as beginning to wake up from this "movement". I was the same as you once, I would buy into EVERYTHING that the truth videos said. I would ignorantly believed that what they said was 100% facts, but once I did my own research while not being biased towards either side of the story, I understood that the truthers like to mix real facts with fiction. They would also leave out details just so that their explanation coincides with their beliefs.
They're no better than fox news.

reply to post by Shadow Herder

Experts agree that this is a professional demolition. No denying this.

Please name the experts (persons who have put their names on demoltion permits and plans, not computer programmers or landscape archtiects) that have stated that Building 7 was a professional demolition.

No one benefited from 9/11? The defense budget has increased 40% since then. On 9/11, we had no bases from Bagdad to Karachi. Now we have over 40. We have secret drone bases in Africa and the Arab peninsula. We're in seven wars now, all in muslim countries, not a one of them did one single thing to us. More soldiers have died in the Iraq war than died in the Vietnam war. Its all done to please our masters in Israel. We're still giving no-bid contracts away to just about any defense contractor that bellys up to the plate.
This is all done so this country, by the fascists, of the fascists and for the fascists can get ready to present us with their next false flag attack, in order to manipulate us into doing their bidding.

Originally posted by hooper
reply to post by Shadow Herder

 

Experts agree that this is a professional demolition. No denying this.

Please name the experts (persons who have put their names on demoltion permits and plans, not computer programmers or landscape archtiects) that have stated that Building 7 was a professional demolition.

hmmm....I didn't see a similar list of names of professionals who actually blow up LARGE buildings and have recognizeable companies, in your post....

Originally posted by TrailGator

hmmm....I didn't see a similar list of names of professionals who actually blow up LARGE buildings and have recognizeable companies, in your post....

edit on 21/9/11 by TrailGator because: left out a word

Implosion world

Originally posted by hooper

 

Please name the experts (persons who have put their names on demoltion permits and plans, not computer programmers or landscape archtiects) that have stated that Building 7 was a professional demolition.

I forget the guy's name, but there is in fact a controlled demolitions expert over in Poland who holds the "professional opinion" that WTC 7 was a controlled demolition. The only reason how I even know about him is becuase of these conspiracy people posting his statement here. HOWEVER, what the conspiracy people *don't* mention is that this same guy holds the "professional opinion" that the towers one and two were NOT controlled demolitions, but was instead the result of fire induced structural failure. He certifies the so-called "squibs" the conspiracy people are constantly referencing can't be demolitions squibs, but were really air plumes that were forced out of the structure as the buildings collapsed.

What does it say about the con artists behind those damned fool conspiracy web sites when they consider one "professional opinion" credible and another "professional opinion" to be rubbish, even when it's all coming from the exact same person? It says to *me* that there's a heck of a lot of grasping at straws going on.

reply to post by roadtoad

More soldiers have died in the Iraq war than died in the Vietnam war.

Since your facts about this are so wrong, what other facts do you have wrong?

And since you can't get the facts right, maybe your entire hypothosis is wrong?

reply to post by Varemia


LOL Verm, you just hit the nail on the head for ONCE.

Please direct us to a decidedly "perfect" demolition.

Was it a decidedly imperfect collapse as well ???

Oh , i see what you mean, the fact that the buildings look like Atomic bombs being detonated is what gives you this opinion that things just do not look right.

Even GOD must cringe when he sees such "simple" posts.

Originally posted by Varemia

Originally posted by ParanoidAmerican
reply to post by Varemia

 

Yes that is why first responders and other are dieing of cancer.

Yes, I know. It's a shame, because those are the people who should be in greatest health for being decent human beings.

I just don't see the reason for the destruction of the towers as a way to cheaply get rid of the asbestos problem.

They weren't destroyed because of any alleged asbestos problem. They were destroyed because of the "American's aren't afraid of our fake boogeyman" problem. And the "government doesn't have enough dictatorial control" problem. Among others.

Originally posted by Human0815
I share some Points with the Op. because the Inner-Core of the WTC was very, very small
compare to the Building.
(which wasn't big in the Basement either, only high!)

The Plane cut through the Building in a easy manner (because there was not much Resistance)
and destabilized everything,
the damaged and de-stablized Inner-Core get heated up with expansion of the Steel
and loosed the Stability, finally the Pancake-Effect happened!

But than it + WTC 7.got blown up because of Security Matters

S.& F. because of having Eggs in the Pantsu!

edit on 20-9-2011 by Human0815 because: (no reason given)

Pancake effect does not pulverise concrete into dust.

Originally posted by Gando702
For years I'd have anyone who would listen to me for more than a few seconds watch the YouTube videos, check out ATS, and read anything they could on the events of 9/11. I then decided to just take some time, and simply research ONE event, ONE happening that had plenty of evidence, plenty of conversation and debate, and ONE part of the official story that I didn't believe, and see if I could make some sense of it.

I could go on and post numerous websites and references and videos, but (hopefully) there are others like me who really don't have time to sift through every single reference on one of those long, drawn out threads, and with the abundance of information, not only on this site, but on the internet, it's easy to find evidence backing up everything I will explain.

Some simple facts, and some flaws in the arguments of truthers:
1. The building was hit by a plane far larger than the original design when the towers were engineered and constructed. To say that they shouldn't have fallen because they were designed to withstand a hit from any plane is a bit ridiculous.
2. The steel columns lost a considerable amount of their strength due to the intense heat cause by the fires inside the building. They wouldn't remain standing, as they're still bolted to the trusses and concrete slabs, and by being weakened by the fire, were simply bent down and snapped by the weight of the collapse.
3. Asking for evidence of 110 floors nicely stacked up at the bottom of the rubble is like asking for a carton of eggs to be intact after being dropped 10 feet onto concrete. Stuff breaks. The farther it falls, and the more it has falling on top of it, the more unrecognizable it's going be after the collapse.
4. Comparing temperature charts to grainy pictures of flames from the fires, and claiming that the fires must have been hot enough to constitute thermite is silly. I can light a match, and it will have several of the colors on those charts, and the flame from my match isn't going to come close to 1100 degrees.
5. Towers 1 and 2 WERE a controlled demolition. Just not in the sense of C4/Thermite/Dynamite charges. The building was weakened, burned, and collapsed. The building had nowhere to go but down. Anyone claiming that the second tower should have "tipped over" because of the angle, is naive at best. It's still being held together by the core columns, and even being weakened, still held the building together. The building simply had too much inertia to go anywhere but straight down.

There are plenty of events that day that are absolutely unexplainable, and we probably will NEVER know exactly why certain things happened. I'm respectful of EVERYONE'S beliefs, because at one time I was convinced.

My wife put up with me talking about this for 3 years. She holds an architecture degree from Arizona State University, and when I told her that I was starting to change my mind, she smiled and said, "I didn't feel like arguing with something you seemed so close minded about, but when I saw the gaping holes in those buildings, I knew they were coming down sooner or later. The impacts were too low, leaving too much weight above them for them to remain standing."

Like I said, I respect everyone's beliefs. Building 7 is a different story. I think some people had a vested interest in seeing that building fall. But to me, WTC1&2 fell because of a perfect storm of structural damage, fire, weakening core columns and too much weight above the damaged floors that couldn't possibly be supported as the structure weakened.

Peace.

Bolded the most important sentence. You see, it almost doesn't matter what the real story is, whether 1&2 WC really did collapse because of fire, or if it was a different aircraft that hit the pentagon, or a missile, or many of the other anomalies. what DOES matter, is that the US gov. lied about the story. whatever the real story is, they ain't telling it. which is the core issue of 9/11 truth. as far as 7WC..well, you can't rig a building for demo in a day. takes awhile. so, there was foreknowledge of the event by persons involved.
which means conspiracy.

Look, I could poke holes in your argument all day, not trying to be an ass..I think that, you really want to go back to a world where you don't have to contemplate living in a country where our own government would do this. I'm sorry..you can't.

Originally posted by AwakeinNM

Originally posted by Varemia

Originally posted by ParanoidAmerican
reply to post by Varemia

 

Yes that is why first responders and other are dieing of cancer.

Yes, I know. It's a shame, because those are the people who should be in greatest health for being decent human beings.

I just don't see the reason for the destruction of the towers as a way to cheaply get rid of the asbestos problem.

They weren't destroyed because of any alleged asbestos problem. They were destroyed because of the "American's aren't afraid of our fake boogeyman" problem. And the "government doesn't have enough dictatorial control" problem. Among others.

I dont think it was the motivation for the attack, but I think it was considered by the committee planning the attack as one of the reasons for choosing that target.

Just picture yourself sitting in a room with Rumsfeld, Cheney, Powell et al and you are all brainstorming a target for a false flag operation, what would you choose? The side of the Pentagon thats being renovated? or the ugly old buildings in NY that you cant insure because their unsafe?

why not both!

Originally posted by samkent
reply to post by roadtoad

 

More soldiers have died in the Iraq war than died in the Vietnam war.

Since your facts about this are so wrong, what other facts do you have wrong?

And since you can't get the facts right, maybe your entire hypothosis is wrong?

what are your death toll figures for both conflicts?

I love the ever-growing number of "I was a truther and now I'm not" threads.

Does "their" playbook really say that this kind of reverse psychology actually works? I think a third-grader wrote the playbook.

Peace

Originally posted by Dr Love
I love the ever-growing number of "I was a truther and now I'm not" threads.

Does "their" playbook really say that this kind of reverse psychology actually works? I think a third-grader wrote the playbook.

Peace

Im so much enjoying those OSr fear threads, they know the end is near, needing to close ranks much? Sadly most of those sheeps are not even paid shills, they are just too retarded to see further than their own noses, and so they love the OS, and support it even when its beyond support. Either way, this guy or whatever it is has not presented a case as for he was a real truth seeker, looks like a shill, talks like a shill...