Our system detected that your browser is blocking advertisements on our site. Please help support FoxesTalk by disabling any kind of ad blocker while browsing this site. Thank you.
Jump to content
Zingari

Mystery of WTC 7 - Conspiracy

Recommended Posts

Posted

Well firstly you are trying to separate the two events, they are one and the same. So no you aren't JUST left with the fire. They both contributed in some way.

Secondly this isn't an ordinary fire is it? It's not a paper bin catching fire and slowly spreading around the building. It's a great big bloody explosions with jet fuel being spread over multiple floors and giving the fire one hell of a kick start.

Ah the old “magical combination†of plane impact and jet fuel soaked infernos that can bring huge steel framed buildings down symmetrically at virtual freefall.( although there is no visual evidence of these infernos)

Unfortunately, even if this is true there was a third building that keeps being conveniently overlooked, WTC7, which was not hit by an aircraft.

So even if you substitute debris impact for the plane impact one of the key ingredients for the magical combination is still missing, the jet fuel.

No jet fuel, no magical combination of the two.

So you have to devise a theory whereby asymmetric impact and simple random office fires can still achieve total global symmetric collapse.

Posted

What I cannot understand is, if it is so obvious to a layman that it was a controlled explosion why do the majority of experts on physics, aerodymanics , explosives etc say it was not? Are they all being paid by the US government to be quiet? Or are the CIA holden their children hostage? Or have they all had a 'Obey me' Transmitter' inserted into them?

Nobody has come forward from the the team that set the explosives. No Government official has leaked the plot to the press as far as I know. No one has committed suicide unable to live with the knowledge that they were responsible for the death of over a thousand innocent US civilians.

It just does not make sense. There was an unprecedented collapse of an unusual nature. The building did not collapse all at once. Parts of it could not been seen from that one camera angle. It was at a distance so the other side could not be seen. The audio recordings were not clear and could have various meanings. Finally the ones who planted the explosive devices would have to have prior knowledge of the state of the building for the time set for demolition. I dobt they could do it on the spot as it may take a while to go round to look for the best places to put explosives and to dodge all the emergency services that were around.

It would make a good story though.

Posted

Just a quick question, probably been answered before, but why didn't WTC 6 collapse, or 5 or any of the other buildings as close to WTC 1 and 2 as WTC 7?

WTC_Building_Arrangement_and_Site_Plan_%28building_7_highlighted%29.jpg

There probably is a rational explanation, but things like this do make you question things.

Posted

Yes and the questions were probably asked before now

The only reason they would do a controlled explosion would be to SAVE lives but there was no time to plan one so.......

Posted

Just a quick question, probably been answered before, but why didn't WTC 6 collapse, or 5 or any of the other buildings as close to WTC 1 and 2 as WTC 7?

WTC_Building_Arrangement_and_Site_Plan_%28building_7_highlighted%29.jpg

There probably is a rational explanation, but things like this do make you question things.

Interesting question Capt for which there is probably no physical explanation.

However, Larry Silverstein owned the massively over insured leases on the 3 buildings that collapsed.

He didn't on any of the others.

So it seems that if "Lucky (7 billion dollars better off after the attack) Larry" owns the lease, the building falls down dramatically , if he doesn't , it behaves as it should.

edit

fast forward video to about 3 minutes :thumbup:

Posted

Ah the old “magical combination†of plane impact and jet fuel soaked infernos that can bring huge steel framed buildings down symmetrically at virtual freefall.( although there is no visual evidence of these infernos)

Unfortunately, even if this is true there was a third building that keeps being conveniently overlooked, WTC7, which was not hit by an aircraft.

So even if you substitute debris impact for the plane impact one of the key ingredients for the magical combination is still missing, the jet fuel.

No jet fuel, no magical combination of the two.

So you have to devise a theory whereby asymmetric impact and simple random office fires can still achieve total global symmetric collapse.

Wtc7 fires were burning for over seven hours before the collapse, so that takes care of that, no need for any magical combination, a building cannot withstand being on fire forever.

Posted

Wtc7 fires were burning for over seven hours before the collapse, so that takes care of that, no need for any magical combination, a building cannot withstand being on fire forever.

There may have been some minor office fires burning for a few hours , but i can't see anything remotely like a raging inferno even at the point of collapse .

You're still left with the problem of the rapid onset of collapse , the symmetry, virtual free fall rate of collapse, the pulverized dust clouds

How could asymmetric debris damage and sporadic fires achieve this ?

Thousands of metal joints would have to shatter simultaneously by means of slow burning office fires ?

You might expect the building to topple , or even a subsequent creaking partial collapse but not total collapse.

Steel framed buildings have withstood far greater and longer lasting fires and the steel frame remains.

Just take a look at the almost perfect example of a building falling into it's own footprint .

No team of experts could have achieved a better result.

I'm done on this thread for now because we're all repeating ourselves now but maybe it'll be worth digging it out again after the September Morn film in 2013 :D:thumbup:

Posted

You seriously think a building of that size and weight is going to topple over on its side, like a tree?

You're wasting your breath! You'd have more luck at turning your hand to raising the dead than getting some of conspiracy theorists to be remotely rationale.

Posted

Did Larry Silverstein also own one side of the Pentagon and a field?

Yeah, and the airliners (someone on the internet told me they were at the end of their flying life)! Oh, he also owned the demolition company that rigged all three buildings. Apparently it was a nice little payday!

Posted

:D i'm not rising to the bait so i'll just leave a little clip from AE911 Truth film.

Please join their site and destroy their silly little ideas ? :thumbup:

Posted

:D i'm not rising to the bait so i'll just leave a little clip from AE911 Truth film.

Please join their site and destroy their silly little ideas ? :thumbup:

@2.43 "tells me thermite was used"

Really?!

Don't tell me, wrong type of thermite, right?!

Or was he in on it as well?!

Posted

Yes but just after that Harrit said "nano thermite"

if you don't believe thermite thermate or nano thermite is capable , why do you believe office fires are ?

Posted

Yes but just after that Harrit said "nano thermite"

lol lol lol lol lol lol lol lol lol lol lol lol lol You, my friend, are priceless!

How come no-one else has mentioned this nano thermite?!

1342551334865.jpg

Posted

if you don't believe thermite thermate or nano thermite is capable , why do you believe office fires can be responsible ?

Posted

:D i'm not rising to the bait so i'll just leave a little clip from AE911 Truth film.

Please join their site and destroy their silly little ideas ? :thumbup:

In the clip at 2:03 (the angle many say shows demo blasts to the right of the building after the collapse begins) you can clearly see various, random windows bursting all throughout the building, presumably from the air pressure being shoved downwards. I'm not saying anybody's right or wrong, just that it's worth thinking about before claiming it must be explosives.

Posted

if you don't believe thermite thermate or nano thermite is capable , why do you believe office fires can be responsible ?

Because it's a whole lot more plausible than the harebrained theories that your videos put forward, which, incidentally, have been prove wrong over and over again!

Posted

Because it's a whole lot more plausible than the harebrained theories that your videos put forward, which, incidentally, have been prove wrong over and over again!

show me a steel building collapsing or having collapsed due to fire then :thumbup:

Posted

show me a steel building collapsing or having collapsed due to fire then :thumbup:

For god sake! Show me two 100+ storey office blocks that have been stealth rigged without a single soul seeing, plus another office block just shy of 50 stories.

Lest we forgot the sheer amount of explosives and thermite that would be needed.

You're so keen to ask for evidence to your questions yet very rarely provide answers to basic requirements that your theories rely upon.

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...