Mystery of WTC 7 - Conspiracy

[Rincewind]

There is money to be made out of conspiracy theories. Did you send them the script Zing?

If you tell a story long enough eventually somebody will believe it. Just look at how religion has grown over the centuries.

[Reynard Bleu]

Folk see what they want to see and hear what they want to hear and disregard the rest. Evidence that might support their view is 'complelling', anything that does not is 'misinformation'.

Perhaps we are better of not knowing either way, it would change little.

[Captain...]

Zing get your popcorn ready!!!

Will the jihadists start attacking American embassies again? Besmirching the good name of the Martyr Osama Bin Laden, as if he would co-operate with the American dogs, sons of whores and pigs.

[Zingari]

I’ll have to be honest and say that I’ve almost given up trying to convince anyone of anything and I can’t see how a Hollywood film can tell us anything new about it.

The evidence to suggest controlled demolition is widely available every day from many sources

The only difference is some people, for whatever reason, will be more likely to believe what they see on a film starring famous people than on evidence presented to them by David Ray Griffin ( Scholars 911 truth) , Richard Gage ( Architects and Engineers 911 Truth)Rob Balsamo (pilots 911 truth ) etc etc

Suffice to say that until someone “demonstrates†to me where molten steel came from having only been exposed only to random office fires and how steel framed buildings can symmetrically collapse at close to freefall just by random structural damage and scattered fires, them I’ll choose to doubt the official story.

(by “demonstrate†I mean practically , not some computer mock up. I want to see hydro carbon fires get hot enough to melt massive steel beams)

If my viewpoint /opinion amuses, irritates or in any way affects you then I’m sorry but that’s how it is

If the masses want to believe the official line, then I’ll just have to accept that too as there’s no way I’ll change their minds because only the “clever men on the telly†can do that.

I’ve no doubt after the film is released, that the most comments will come from those that won’t actually watch it.

PS

If anyone doubts the presence of molten steel, I put up a video in my last comment a few posts back , although you can of course choose to disbelieve what is being presented , but even Giuliani states there was “molten steel†and the “meteorite†is surely a good piece of evidence for it . .

PPS

I think i've repeated pretty much the same stuff too many times now

[purpleronnie]

Sorry if you've already answered this question zing.

But what do you thing the reasoning is behind a controlled explosion of that building? And do you believe that demolition experts rigged the building knowing an attack was coming?

thanks.

[Rincewind]

Until I see how it was done I will stick with the official version. Detonators have to be placed at precise buildings for a controlled explosion yet there was no way of knowing what condition the building was in when it collapsed.

[Guest nathan.]

Now tell me it was office fire FFS

[purpleronnie]

Now tell me it was office fire FFS

[marty78]

Love the flying saucer

[Rincewind]

The answer to the collapse is simple. They hired O'Riley's instead of Stubbs to do the building work.

[Zingari]

Sorry if you've already answered this question zing.

But what do you thing the reasoning is behind a controlled explosion of that building? And do you believe that demolition experts rigged the building knowing an attack was coming?

thanks.

Until someone demonstrates how structural steel can be melted by office fires or even sufficiently weakened to cause total symmetrical virtual freefall collapse the only logical explanation is some form of pre positioned charges or explosives were used to achieve this.

Buildings have been brought down hundreds if not thousands of times by various controlled demolitions whereas they have never before or since collapsed due to random fire or asymmetrical structural damage or any combination of both.

Just watch the collapse of WTC 7 because it looks like it’s falling into a fookin big hole as though the whole under structure of the building has been systematically and rapidly removed and there seems only one rational explanation for this. ( and it ain’t random damage and fire ).

What I don’t want is to get into who put them there, or how, or why , because that would be part of a criminal investigation that would obviously have to follow the crime scene investigation which is where there still are many problems for the official story to be true .

[purpleronnie]

I've read reports that state buildings such as WTC7 could have been weakened enough to collaspe and I also read the opposite findings.

I guess it comes down to the rational behind it, and the logic. Thats why I can't believe that for some reason the buildings were primed before the 9/11 crashes, who did it? why? How did they know the attack was going to happen? How did they know the damage would cause fires and damage to that building? how did they do it without anyone knowing? All those invloved not saying a word in the face of such tradegy,....theres just simply too many reasons why a controlled explosion isnt the reason.

But even though I think your a little bonkers zing, your posts are an interesting read.

[Jordan]

Not this shit again...

[Babylon]

Until someone demonstrates how structural steel can be melted by office fires or even sufficiently weakened to cause total symmetrical virtual freefall collapse the only logical explanation is some form of pre positioned charges or explosives were used to achieve this.

Buildings have been brought down hundreds if not thousands of times by various controlled demolitions whereas they have never before or since collapsed due to random fire or asymmetrical structural damage or any combination of both.

Just watch the collapse of WTC 7 because it looks like it’s falling into a fookin big hole as though the whole under structure of the building has been systematically and rapidly removed and there seems only one rational explanation for this. ( and it ain’t random damage and fire ).

What I don’t want is to get into who put them there, or how, or why , because that would be part of a criminal investigation that would obviously have to follow the crime scene investigation which is where there still are many problems for the official story to be true .

It's almost as thought the last 49 pages didn't happen.

People could present you with a 20,000 page essay answering every point in detail. You would choose not to believe it though, you have chosen who you WANT to believe and what you are going to believe no matter what is posted in this thread.

Utterly pointless.

[marko]

Until someone demonstrates how structural steel can be melted by office fires or even sufficiently weakened to cause total symmetrical virtual freefall collapse the only logical explanation is some form of pre positioned charges or explosives were used to achieve this.

Buildings have been brought down hundreds if not thousands of times by various controlled demolitions whereas they have never before or since collapsed due to random fire or asymmetrical structural damage or any combination of both.

Just watch the collapse of WTC 7 because it looks like it’s falling into a fookin big hole as though the whole under structure of the building has been systematically and rapidly removed and there seems only one rational explanation for this. ( and it ain’t random damage and fire ).

What I don’t want is to get into who put them there, or how, or why , because that would be part of a criminal investigation that would obviously have to follow the crime scene investigation which is where there still are many problems for the official story to be true .

And because you have no logical explanation because it is simply not possible for those buildings to have been rigged with explosives.

Lets be honest, it would have taken months to rigged all the towers. Further, they needed to place these explosives (which require stripping support columns, drilling them, wiring them and with your wild theory, re-plastering and disguising the explosives) without a single person some much as seeing or suspecting of foul play (in one of the worlds busiest office blocks). That's also not considering the problem of somehow sneaking all the materials needed past security.

Now let's move on to other requirements for a controlled demolition. It's widely acknowledged, hell even the Architects and Engineers for Truth put forward a video that stated lift cars would need to be removed and shafts and stair wells cut, yet somehow people managed to make there way down the stairs in both North, South and WTC 7 stairs! How? Also, how did these people make it to their offices that morning without lifts? I'm sure not even you will try to argue some people walked 100+ floors that morning!

[marty78]

This site is a great read:

http://www.debunking911.com/index.html

[21st Century Fox]

I should've just PM'ed that article to Zingari

[marty78]

I should've just PM'ed that article to Zingari

It saves me copying and pasting loads of stuff written by someone else that I don't really understand.

[Zingari]

And because you have no logical explanation because it is simply not possible for those buildings to have been rigged with explosives.

Lets be honest, it would have taken months to rigged all the towers. Further, they needed to place these explosives (which require stripping support columns, drilling them, wiring them and with your wild theory, re-plastering and disguising the explosives) without a single person some much as seeing or suspecting of foul play (in one of the worlds busiest office blocks). That's also not considering the problem of somehow sneaking all the materials needed past security.

Now let's move on to other requirements for a controlled demolition. It's widely acknowledged, hell even the Architects and Engineers for Truth put forward a video that stated lift cars would need to be removed and shafts and stair wells cut, yet somehow people managed to make there way down the stairs in both North, South and WTC 7 stairs! How? Also, how did these people make it to their offices that morning without lifts? I'm sure not even you will try to argue some people walked 100+ floors that morning!

Show me the alternative as to how they can be brought down by fires and random damage then .Surely it's a simple enough request.

Where did the molten steel come from ? it's a simple enough question isn't it ?

Yes , believe me I can well understand the difficulties you face when you start to stray into the “who why how†territory of the criminal part of this problem , but the fact remains that the collapse seems to be totally inconsistent with the official narrative .

We ( the doubters) are all faced with this type of cognitive dissonance, in that we find it very difficult to accept that there were possibly other agencies involved that were not the named terrorists .

But we cannot just blindly accept a narrative solely based on this. The explanations have to fit the facts and I really do not see how they do.

Buildings do not naturally collapse in this way due to any kind of randomness however catastrophic , but it has all the components of a controlled demolition

which are ;

Rapid onset of collapse

Sounds of explosions at ground floor – a second before the building's destruction

Symmetrical "structural failure" – through the path of greatest resistance – at free-fall acceleration

Imploded, collapsing completely, and landed in its own footprint

Massive volume of expanding pyroclastic-like clouds

Expert corroboration from the top European controlled demolition professional

Foreknowledge of "collapse" by media, NYPD, FDNY

In the aftermath of WTC7's destruction, strong evidence of demolition using incendiary devices was discovered:

FEMA finds rapid oxidation and intergranular melting on structural steel samples

Several tons of molten metal reported by numerous highly qualified witnesses

Chemical signature of the incendiary thermite found in solidified molten metal, and dust samples

[Zingari]

I should've just PM'ed that article to Zingari

i really shouldn't take the bait so easily , I told myself I wasn't going to again

[marty78]

i really shouldn't take the bait so easily , I told myself I wasn't going to again

I know what you mean, the moon landing thread taught me a valuable lesson.

[21st Century Fox]

i really shouldn't take the bait so easily , I told myself I wasn't going to again

Maybe I shouldn't have been so naive as to think that resurrecting a thread from April wouldn't be poking a hornets nest

[Zingari]

Maybe I shouldn't have been so naive as to think that resurrecting a thread from April wouldn't be poking a hornets nest

No problems for me , I find it very interesting and I'll definitely try and get to see the film .

I really will leave it for now though and perhaps have another try after watching it .

i can't see how anything new will come out of it though , but it should be interesting anyway .

thanks for the advance info anyway

[21st Century Fox]

No problems for me , I find it very interesting and I'll definitely try and get to see the film .

I really will leave it for now though and perhaps have another try after watching it .

i can't see how anything new will come out of it though , but it should be interesting anyway .

thanks for the advance info anyway

Yeah I was wondering what sort of reception it'll get, especially with such established names in it. It sort of reminded me of the Oxfordian Authorship film Anonymous, which gave that theory massive publicity.

[Rincewind]

Why is the how when who and how irrelevant to a controlled explosion?