Mystery of WTC 7 - Conspiracy

[Guest ttfn]

those beams look nicely cut into sections , so presumably that is not how they were originally found at ground zero

its a bit like looking at a body for clues to death after it's been embalmed

it's a crime scene , so yes

So when was this sold to Asia? If it was the next week, then yes, that's ridiculous. But if it's 5, 10 years down the line, a long time after the matter has been investigated and a commission has given its verdict on what happened then it's perfectly understandable.

[Rincewind]

I believe the emergancy services were more concerned with trying to find survivors or the remains of bodies than looking for small amounts of explosives that they had no reports on being there as hours before ailiners had crashed into the twin towers. Why would anyone even suspect at that time or the days to follow that it had been an inside job? There was a few thousand tonnes of dust and rubble as well as disintergrated human beings and these therorists take about four samples and conclude that the twin towers WTC7 and the pentagon was the work of the American Government in order to have an excuse to start war. We're in Hollywood mode here. Like someone said the other night film directors love this sort of thing.

[Zingari]

So when was this sold to Asia? If it was the next week, then yes, that's ridiculous. But if it's 5, 10 years down the line, a long time after the matter has been investigated and a commission has given its verdict on what happened then it's perfectly understandable.

it was sold before any independent investigation could take place and transported away under great scrutiny, ( why?) so that no evidence could be checked .

why did they not allow anyone to look at the steel , what were they hiding ?

maybe nothing , but maybe not ,

in any other crime scene , would anyone be allowed to remove evidence like this and sell it ?

america is a fookin big country , there is enough room for this steel to have been kept for anyone to investigate it , they are not so poor as to need to sell a few tons of steel at the scrap value

it stinks

[fleckneymike]

those beams look nicely cut into sections , so presumably that is not how they were originally found at ground zero

its a bit like looking at a body for clues to death after it's been embalmed

it's a crime scene , so yes

They very kindly have an audio commentary on there which explains that the steal comes in 36ft sections for the exterior facade, that is roughly the size of a flat bed truck. Now obviously thats not what you'd be interested in as it would be all the interior columns. but they have some of those too if you look.

In the conspiracy then, where and when did they 'clean' the beams? And the 1000+ cars which were towed away which undoubtedly would have contained residue from the steal.

[Zingari]

They very kindly have an audio commentary on there which explains that the steal comes in 36ft sections for the exterior facade, that is roughly the size of a flat bed truck. Now obviously thats not what you'd be interested in as it would be all the interior columns. but they have some of those too if you look.

In the conspiracy then, where and when did they 'clean' the beams? And the 1000+ cars which were towed away which undoubtedly would have contained residue from the steal.

so you will at least admit that in it's present state it's of no use for investigation then ?

[fleckneymike]

it was sold before any independent investigation could take place and transported away under great scrutiny, ( why?) so that no evidence could be checked .

why did they not allow anyone to look at the steel , what were they hiding ?

maybe nothing , but maybe not ,

in any other crime scene , would anyone be allowed to remove evidence like this and sell it ?

america is a fookin big country , there is enough room for this steel to have been kept for anyone to investigate it , they are not so poor as to need to sell a few tons of steel at the scrap value

it stinks

What would be the use of keeping it all?

Whilst it was a crime scene it was a crime witnessed by the whole world, it didn't need Sherlock Holmes to pop along and work out what happened because sadly we all got to see it live.

[Koke]

It's a load of old bollocks.

Let's just say it was a conspiracy. How the hell are you meant to keep something like that a secret for a whole decade? You're giving the U.S. government far too much credit. George Bush Jr. and his mates were certainly not capable of pulling off something so huge-scale and intricate without it becoming public knowledge. Have you any idea how many people would have to be involved in something like this? Each and every one of them would have to be sworn to secrecy and have to make no errors in order to stop it being leaked.

Most people who want to believe this conspiracy rubbish just want to feel safe. They want to know that the people in charge of their country won't let anything bad happen to them, and don't like to face up to the fact that there are real foreign threats.

Just ask yourself, what's more likely - a bunch of religious fanatics hijack a plane and fly it into a building, believing they're the good guys and they go straight to heaven, or an inept bunch of politicians secretly plot and create a disaster killing thousands in probably the most densely populated city in their own country, and no-one finds out in the following 10 whole years? Even if they did want to create the illusion that muslim terrorists have attacked the U.S.A. on their own soil, why on Earth would they have to kill anyone? They could have made it look like they foiled a bombing attempt, or flew the planes just past a building killing no-one and destroying nothing, and still had exactly the same excuse they supposedly wanted to go to war in the middle east.

The more boring answer is usually the correct one.

Dunno man, but I certainly dont believe a bearded Saudi and his camel shagging mates in caves in the mountains are capable of plotting such a sophisticated attack.

I dont know the true story and we'll probably never find out the true story, but there are far too many lies, inconsistencies & unanswered questions regarding the official story.

I have my own opinion and personal view of what, who, where & why etc. but I have no solid evidence to back it up and present it as proper evidence. The US version of events are also full of lies and inconsistencies, and I cannot believe something as false as the "official story".

The 911 event will be debated till doomsday

[fleckneymike]

so you will at least admit that in it's present state it's of no use for investigation then ?

What ever state it is in it will never be good enough for you because you choose to ignore all the evidence to the contrary.

Will you at least admit that Thermite cannot be used to cut through steel in order to demolish a tower? There's even some science you can read in case you're in any doubt

http://www.debunking911.com/thermite.htm

[fleckneymike]

Dunno man, but I certainly dont believe a bearded Saudi and his camel shagging mates in caves in the mountains are capable of plotting such a sophisticated attack.

I dont know the true story and we'll probably never find out the true story, but there are far too many lies, inconsistencies & unanswered questions regarding the official story.

I have my own opinion and personal view of what, who, where & why etc. but I have no solid evidence to back it up and present it as proper evidence. The US version of events are also full of lies and inconsistencies, and I cannot believe something as false as the "official story".

The 911 event will be debated till doomsday

It's not actually that complicated a plot. Hijack four planes and crash them isn't quite up there with the Thomas Crown affair in terms of complexity.

[Zingari]

What would be the use of keeping it all?

Whilst it was a crime scene it was a crime witnessed by the whole world, it didn't need Sherlock Holmes to pop along and work out what happened because sadly we all got to see it live.

You do not remove or destroy any evidence at a crime scene especially if the reason is to sell it for scrap to a foreign country.

While i accept it may be necessary to relocate it , there was no reason ( other than to cover up a crime ) to destroy it .

It's like saying you would only keep a few bits of the "Titanic" because it couldn't tell investigators anything.

Just try removing anything from a crime scene , it's not that easy , and why were security services so obsessed that no one took photos or removed anything from the collapsed buildings if it was so unimportant ?

[Rincewind]

Crime scene? Who decided that? I am sure the NYPD didn't. All they knew was that terrorists had hijacked two planes and flown them into the Twin Towers causing catatrrsphic damage and the loss of thousands of lives. Why would they be examining steel girders on the hearsay of a few crackpot conspiracy therorists? The mind boggles.

[shen]

It's not actually that complicated a plot. Hijack four planes and crash them isn't quite up there with the Thomas Crown affair in terms of complexity.

Preparation has to be impeccable so as not to raise suspicion. If 19 hijackers were involved, there's a high risk factor that the cover could be blown. Explosives have to be carried on board without detection. You have to time it right (re: avoiding interception by military planes), and the difficulty of execution is pretty high given that piloting skills required for such accuracy in those planes are difficult to acquire. I'm sure I've overseen other things that are not easy-as-you-like to overcome.

[l444ry]

[fleckneymike]

You do not remove or destroy any evidence at a crime scene especially if the reason is to sell it for scrap to a foreign country.

While i accept it may be necessary to relocate it , there was no reason ( other than to cover up a crime ) to destroy it .

It's like saying you would only keep a few bits of the "Titanic" because it couldn't tell investigators anything.

Just try removing anything from a crime scene , it's not that easy , and why were security services so obsessed that no one took photos or removed anything from the collapsed buildings if it was so unimportant ?

Again I think you fail to comprehend what sort of crime scene it was. This was a 'crime scene' to a crime that was already solved. You may have seen it on TV, a plane flew into one tower and then another one flew into the other tower. You'll never guess what happened next, they fell down! Ground zero lay covered in steel for quite a time, turns out steel is quite heavy and difficult to transport around. Thankfully TV cameras were trained on it 24 hours a day from that point on.

[Rincewind]

The pilots actually had flying lessons in America so it was plotted long before.

And the explanation why it wasnt foreign terrorists.?

Beared men living in caves would not be able to plan something like this. And is that what it all rests on?

[Zingari]

Crime scene? Who decided that? I am sure the NYPD didn't. All they knew was that terrorists had hijacked two planes and flown them into the Twin Towers causing catatrrsphic damage and the loss of thousands of lives. Why would they be examining steel girders on the hearsay of a few crackpot conspiracy therorists? The mind boggles.

i really don't know what to say , but you are fookin unbelievable

do you really think that that 3 hijacked airliners crashing into buildings , (plus another crashing into the ground )

aren't crime scenes ?

just try walking into them and start interfering with evidence and you would soon be left in no uncertainty that your presence was unwanted

[fleckneymike]

Preparation has to be impeccable so as not to raise suspicion. If 19 hijackers were involved, there's a high risk factor that the cover could be blown. Explosives have to be carried on board without detection. You have to time it right (re: avoiding interception by military planes), and the difficulty of execution is pretty high given that piloting skills required for such accuracy in those planes are difficult to acquire. I'm sure I've overseen other things that are not easy-as-you-like to overcome.

But they didn't have any explosives, they had box cutters (stanley knives). To avoid interception they hijacked 4 planes. To coordinate they checked timetables.

[shen]

Crime scene? Who decided that? I am sure the NYPD didn't. All they knew was that terrorists had hijacked two planes and flown them into the Twin Towers causing catatrrsphic damage and the loss of thousands of lives. Why would they be examining steel girders on the hearsay of a few crackpot conspiracy therorists? The mind boggles.

Because they're now building a new WTC. That's mega-sky scrapers. Now, if you want to prevent it from happening again, you need to investigate what happened to the structure that made it come down, right? So where would the obvious place to start such an investigation be? NY authorities allegedly assumed (and this is where I think the whole thing stinks) that the towers were fire-proof and could resist the impact of the planes that hit them. Yes, the planes would obviously cause massive damage, but no-one had anticipated that the buildings would be reduced to rubble. If however authorities KNEW that the buildings did NOT meet the required security standards, how do you think it would've reflected on them if investigators had found out from the rubble and debris?...

[Zingari]

Again I think you fail to comprehend what sort of crime scene it was. This was a 'crime scene' to a crime that was already solved. You may have seen it on TV, a plane flew into one tower and then another one flew into the other tower. You'll never guess what happened next, they fell down! Ground zero lay covered in steel for quite a time, turns out steel is quite heavy and difficult to transport around. Thankfully TV cameras were trained on it 24 hours a day from that point on.

no crime is "solved" on tele visual evidence , otherwise you would have to accept that wtc 7 was a controlled demolition

because no plane hit it

everyone is so keen to keep telling us that we are only witnessing the events in 2d in the wtc7 scenario , how come this logic is suspended for the other events ?

[Rincewind]

i really don't know what to say , but you are fookin unbelievable

do you really think that that 3 hijacked airliners crashing into buildings , (plus another crashing into the ground )

aren't crime scenes ?

just try walking into them and start interfering with evidence and you would soon be left in no uncertainty that your presence was unwanted

They were not crime scenes inasmuch a room with a body in. The crime and perpertrators were obvious. You have said that two planes were crashed into the towers. That was the crime. There was no crime done in the WT7. It was a building that came down as a result of damage caused to it. So why would anything suspicios occur to anyone clearing the scene?

[Zingari]

They were not crime scenes inasmuch a room with a body in. The crime and perpertrators were obvious. You have said that two planes were crashed into the towers. That was the crime. There was no crime done in the WT7. It was a building that came down as a result of damage caused to it. So why would anything suspicios occur to anyone clearing the scene?

I'm fairly sure there aren't different degrees of "crime scene"

It is either is a crime scene or it isn't and the fact that hijacked airliners crashed into buildings make them undoubtedly "crime scenes"

And you do not destroy evidence from a crime scene however insignificant it may seem to untrained eyes ( or any other eyes for that matter )

[Rincewind]

So the rescue teams were supposed to stop looking for survivors? Or locating bodies? It was only some time after that people started to talk about explosives being planted so why would they look for them then. It was a demolition site a far as those concerned could see. It was only the therorists that ever mentioned an inside job. I would have thought that much was obvious.

[Zingari]

So the rescue teams were supposed to stop looking for survivors? Or locating bodies? It was only some time after that people started to talk about explosives being planted so why would they look for them then. It was a demolition site a far as those concerned could see. It was only the therorists that ever mentioned an inside job. I would have thought that much was obvious.

Looking for survivors does not in any way equate to removing evidence

And if as you are suggesting there were explosives planted then that means that there was something in the rubble to look for and that the building was brought down other than by the aircraft

you are arguing against yourself

[zubi]

CIA knew of 9/11 beforehand

[Rincewind]

I am saying there was nothing to look for because there was no reason to. The crime was committed on the Twin Towers. The WTC7 collapsed as a result of this. Nobody had any reason to think anything else. Where did I suggest there were explosives? The only people that have suggested it was the therorists which was some time after the event..

If you finda body with multiple stab wounds would you look for a gun as the murder wepon?