The WTC 7 thread to end WTC7 threads

reply to post by exponent


Of course people can disagree on things, but when you ignore real evidence and wash it over with lies then there is a big problem.

You act like you're all innocent, but you fail to address evidence like Craig Bartmer for example.

Was he talking crap? I believe him over you!

Originally posted by thegameisup
Of course people can disagree on things, but when you ignore real evidence and wash it over with lies then there is a big problem.

But I have not done this. I have sourced what I say and you can't point out a single lie.

You act like you're all innocent, but you fail to address evidence like Craig Bartmer for example.

Was he talking crap? I believe him over you!

I don't think he was talking crap, I think he experienced a traumatic event and is struggling to come to terms with it. Why would I want to insult or belittle someone like that?

I notice you've glossed over the question I asked you again.

Originally posted by ANOK

Well thank you. Funny thing is I actually went to school for engineering, a two year course in engineering fundamentals, which covered Newtonian physics (in Britain BTW). I didn't go to school for politics, or economics. I am pretty confident that my physics knowledge, when it come to engineering, is also pretty spot on.

It's a pity you know sweet FA when physics is applied to certain types of construction!!!

Maths, Physics , Engineering Drawing, Engineering Science (an advanced applied physics), four year apprenticeship with a STRUCTURAL STEELWORK company, civil engineering, 18+ years advising architects, engineers and site managers on structural fixings YOU KNOW the things that help hold buildings up and 30+ years in construction a lot on high rise buildings SO I AM MORE THAN CONFIDENT about what I know and what YOU cannot seem to understand!!!!

reply to post by exponent


So I guess that Larry Silverstien meant that he was going to pull the building over with cables , is that right ? Because all of the firefighters were already out of the building at 11:30 .

Originally posted by SimonPeter
So I guess that Larry Silverstien meant that he was going to pull the building over with cables , is that right ? Because all of the firefighters were already out of the building at 11:30 .

Not at all, I think he was talking about the firefighting operation. It makes perfect sense to say 'pull the operation' and therefore perfect sense to say 'pull it'. He even explicitly says that the firefighters made the decision to pull, which matches with Chief Nigro saying he made the decision without consulting Silverstein.

Do you really think he'd admit insurance fraud and whatever other health and safety charges they'd lay on him on national TV? Do you think the insurers would ignore it?

It makes no sense at all to believe he admitted it was a controlled demolition, I honestly cannot understand how you can believe that's the most likely case.

reply to post by wmd_2008


I have heard you present your credentials and I will not doubt you, but you haven't made a statement on what you think happened to cause WTC 7 collapse . I also know that you could be ostracized from the engineering community if you give a statement that favors implosion . No one is anonymous .

Originally posted by exponent
It makes no sense at all to believe he admitted it was a controlled demolition, I honestly cannot understand how you can believe that's the most likely case.

Dude, if you can possibly remove your bias about Alex Jones for a few minutes and objectively look at the facts, it'll become crystal clear to you rather quickly. Just a suggestion, when you read this article and look at the associated videos, just focus on the name "Paul Watson" instead of Alex Jones. The guy would have been off the scene a LONG time ago if EVERYTHING he says is BS. Even if AJ is a shill, he certainly has at LEAST 95 percent of the truth.

I'm going to quote only the preface here, visit the link for the rest of it:

To truly grasp the magnitude of this story, you really have to read the entire article. Immediately after the “pull it” controversy, debunkers claimed there was no plan to conduct a controlled demolition of the building. Now the fact that officials were considering blowing up the building is established, Silverstein’s consistent denial that this took place is a huge smoking gun. How did Silverstein expect to demolish the building safely when such a process takes weeks or even months to properly set up, even without the additional chaos surrounding WTC 7 on 9/11? How could explosives have been correctly placed on such short notice inside a burning building that had already been evacuated – unless the explosives were already in place? This new revelation is astounding and it needs to be investigated immediately.

truth11.com...

Originally posted by SimontheMagus
Dude, if you can possibly remove your bias about Alex Jones for a few minutes and objectively look at the facts, it'll become crystal clear to you rather quickly. Just a suggestion, when you read this article and look at the associated videos, just focus on the name "Paul Watson" instead of Alex Jones. The guy would have been off the scene a LONG time ago if EVERYTHING he says is BS. Even if AJ is a shill, he certainly has at LEAST 95 percent of the truth.

Dude, AJ and PW both post total nonsense readily. Nobody was planning to blow the building up on 911, it's rubbish. They considered the plans for after 911 but of course who wouldn't?

Seriously, they have no credibility in my eyes, you can see why when this is just the tip of the iceberg:

reply to post by exponent


I guess you missed the report that the firefighters had already been pulled out way before that. I suppose you have found no suspicious activity by Cheney and Bush concerning 911 . Lee Harvey acted alone . We didn't allow Pearl Harbor in order to get our people to go to war.Same with the Lusitania . Three events enraged a isolationist America to go to war . The assassination of the President put a new president into office the traded a war for the presidency he could not have had if JFK lived . I think it went , Get me the presidency I'll give you your damn war > So face it 911 stinks to high heaven of an inside job . It all amounts to war , the most profitable industry ever .

reply to post by SimonPeter


Here is an architects for the truth video,



watch it ALL the go to the following points

2:34 Watch the collapse see how long it takes from structure on the left side as you view it falls UNTIL the end of the collapse well almost to the end as you cant see that.

Now go to 5:30 listen to what Richard Gage says" it collapses in just under 7 secs" NOW GO BACK TO 2:35 the colapse has started WHEN that structure on the roof first gives way!! count 7 seconds from that. It's more like 15 secs in total.
Also look HOW many times through that video they show the building starting to collapse but that structure on the roof is not there WHY DO THEY DO THAT!!!!
They also avoid talking about the damage to WTC7!!!

1500 Architects/Engineers in 10 years a FRACTION of a percent of the number who practice in the USA along nevermind the rest of the world.
Anyway architects are NOT the best people to talk about structures STRUCTURAL ENGINEERS do the hard work and guess who their best customers USUALLY are ARCHITECTS

Also listen to his disingenuous use of other fires HE really is a bit DIM , You cant claim other fires are the same when some they talk about have lots of reinforced concrete in the structure or were partially complete, were not tube in tube like the twin towers BUT more important they did not get hit by aircraft at high speed or falling debris like WTC 7.

There were issuses with the design of WTC 7 , that due to the damage and fires caused the collapse.

Originally posted by SimonPeter
I guess you missed the report that the firefighters had already been pulled out way before that.

Way before what? We have no solid information on the time Silverstein spoke to anyone as far as I know.

I suppose you have found no suspicious activity by Cheney and Bush concerning 911 . Lee Harvey acted alone . We didn't allow Pearl Harbor in order to get our people to go to war.Same with the Lusitania . Three events enraged a isolationist America to go to war . The assassination of the President put a new president into office the traded a war for the presidency he could not have had if JFK lived . I think it went , Get me the presidency I'll give you your damn war > So face it 911 stinks to high heaven of an inside job . It all amounts to war , the most profitable industry ever .

It all amounts to you believing everything a conspiracy site tells you to believe. Do you not ever think about the alternate option? If they allowed 911, why did they do so in such a stupid and blatent manner that every conspiracy theorist and their dog reckons they know how it was done.

Could it be that you're grasping at straws and these conspiracy sites are convincing you you have lots of evidence, when all you have is superstition? I don't want to be offensive man but you can't support one conspiracy by saying look at all these others that I believe in!

reply to post by exponent


911 is the only thing I have read about on the computer and I swore that it was not a conspiracy for a long time . But I saw the Kennedy killing on TV back when it happened and there were too many things that didn't add up . The Lusitania was set up to be torpedoed to bring us into a war that was none of our business . British destroters pulled away as it approached England to allow German Subs the chance to attack a well announced arrival . They knew it was carrying war supplies .
Most old and prideful people just can't admit that their country has some rats in it . I have never believed blindly what politicians say . You know they are professional liars with no morals both Dems and Repubs.
Ask yourself why was Cheney running that war game .? Didn't we have better trained people that would normally do it ?

Originally posted by SimonPeter
Most old and prideful people just can't admit that their country has some rats in it . I have never believed blindly what politicians say . You know they are professional liars with no morals both Dems and Repubs.

I'm British. The political situation on 911 has nothing to do with me directly, but I will agree there are professional liars in both camps. I don't pretend the Government is some undeniable truth teller. I just don't believe in things without good strong evidence for them.

Ask yourself why was Cheney running that war game .? Didn't we have better trained people that would normally do it ?

He wasn't. You've been lied to. Again. Stop believing what they tell you. Follow your own advice and do some independent research.

Would they really plan public war games that were so obvious? Why would a secret conspiracy use public resources to that extent? It's begging to be discovered.

When things like this don't make sense, don't just accept them because some conspiracy site says it is the truth.

reply to post by plube


Sorry, but even the most basic understanding of the financial crisis suggests that it's impossible that any kindof elite, no matter how secret, could find it desirable. It's that simple.

reply to post by exponent


Well you have answered my question .You people have done so well in managing your affairs that you feel qualified to instruct us . Cheney and Bush admitted that Cheney was running those war games . The reason they were running those war games is evident by it's self . With a little research you could have known that . Cheney is up to his eyes in the New World Order which I'm sure that you will deny exist . Your own leaders have spouted out about how great the NWO is .

reply to post by SimonPeter


I dont know how old you are but once you hear the same kind of conspiracy BS and cliches for 30+ yrs they tend make you

reply to post by wmd_2008


I'm drawing social security , how about you . I was in Junior high when we went through a coup the Day JFK died . Talking about a conspiracy . Again JFK was stopping a war and the big boys wanted to make some money .WAR. Then we saw the Gulf of Tonkin attack below Viet Namn . Robert McNamara giggled like a school kid on a documentary about how he and LBJ contrived that one . WAR . WE gave Saddam permission to go into Kuwait and then we kick him out .WAR. The 911 inconsistencies and a white elephant is brought down .The NY Port Authority applied twice to get a permit to demolish the WTC , and it was denied because of Asbestos insulation . WAR in Afghanistan by the same coincidence the Taliban was refusing to permit a gas pipeline that Cheney was commissioned by the Saudis to negotiate through . You will either accept a carpet of Gold or a carpet of Bombs . Cheney's final offer .WAR. Then for some reason ( WMD) we removed the obstruction for Iran to invade Israel.WAR. Conspiracy or Coincidence ?

Originally posted by SimontheMagus

Originally posted by wmd_2008
The CONCRETE held the steel up !!!!!

Once again find out how your example is built before you post or you end up looking a real Richard Head

Give us a break. Concrete was quite obviously no match for whatever pulverized it in the twin towers on 911. If WTC had been built like Beijing or Windsor, all we would have is a lot more concrete dust to go along with the steel powder.

Epic fail.

Think of another one.

The twin towers had 4" thick concrete on the floorlabs the structure was steel frame the Beijing fire the building had a reinforced CONCRETE STRUCTURE with steel.

Obviously you see to miss this in my post

The boot-shaped high-rise has an exterior steel framework, much of which will be stripped away and rebuilt, and a concrete interior portion that can be salvaged.

The twin towers floor trusses were held in position by steel angle cleats on the core and walls this means the floors could DROP inside the building

YOU have to compare apples with apples YOU guys are so DUMB when it comes to comparing structures if you did the same with cars YOU would claim this could win NASCAR.



YOUR logic would be it has an engine it has 4 wheels you can steer it its a car so it could win!!!

Thats a building, this is another building so they are the same.

THATS THE LOGIC YOU APPLY WHEN COMPARING STRUCTURES.

Originally posted by SimonPeter
reply to post by wmd_2008

 

I'm drawing social security , how about you .

Well sorry to here that and I hope you get a job soon, I have been fortunate to only have been out of work twice in my life a LONG time ago.

Anyway dont you have a comment on the Architects for lies sorry truth video posted above

I am retired

reply to post by wmd_2008
I don't want or need a job . My departure from the job market made room for another friend to keep his job ,I hope .