Mystery of WTC 7 - Conspiracy

[OzFox]

I think there should be a controlled demolition on this thread

[adam1]

I have not read through this thread in its entirety.

I don't know if what I am to link has already been put up.

Alex Jones documentary "TerrorStorm".

The vid below has a 50 second intro of him selling the dvd but the film is in full after.

An Alex Jones film that covers in detail the proven history of government sponsored terrorism, and focuses on the 7/7 London bombings and 9/11.

[l444ry]

I have not read through this thread in its entirety.

I don't know if what I am to link has already been put up.

Alex Jones documentary "TerrorStorm".

The vid below has a 50 second intro of him selling the dvd but the film is in full after.

Alex Jones. You can't be serious!!......He's a fooking fruit loop..... Always amazes me that conspirators use this pillock as an expert on 9/11!!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rI0klCcLzsk&feature=related

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=58ac4KMGC9k&feature=related

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r2w2TRxSLxw&feature=related

[Zingari]

There is pictures of the landing gear and the engine. I'm find them later when i've finished my work.

You might want to read the bottom of the link you provided that states such a crash would turn the plane in to confetti. Correct me if i'm wrong, but in the photo I provided, there certainly appears to be lots of other small pieces of debris.

Also, have a read about the rotor in the link you provided. Surely you can't argue that was from a plane?

By all means post pictures of aeroplane parts , but remember these could quite easily belong to a small drone , and if the pictures of the engines etc are inside the structure of the pentagon then it won’t explain how 2 engines with an 8 foot diameter fitted 40 feet apart could squeeze into a hole only 16 feet across

So unless these engines are on the lawns outside it does not mean anything and only adds to the assumption that it must have been a much smaller aircraft such as a drone

I’m sure I have seen the pics before .

edit ;

if it turned the plane to confetti hitting the outside wall , what managed to pierce the other nine reinforced concrete walls

you can't have it both ways , only a missile could make a hole of that size and continue through the rest of the structure

[marko]

By all means post pictures of aeroplane parts , but remember these could quite easily belong to a small drone , and if the pictures of the engines etc are inside the structure of the pentagon then it won’t explain how 2 engines with an 8 foot diameter fitted 40 feet apart could squeeze into a hole only 16 feet across

So unless these engines are on the lawns outside it does not mean anything and only adds to the assumption that it must have been a much smaller aircraft such as a drone

I’m sure I have seen the pics before .

edit ;

if it turned the plane to confetti hitting the outside wall , what managed to pierce the other nine reinforced concrete walls

you can't have it both ways , only a missile could make a hole of that size and continue through the rest of the structure

So was it a missile or a drone?

You can't have it both ways!

Edit: The main hole in the Pentagon, before it collapsed, measured 75ft across. More than enough room to accommodate two engines.

[davieG]

Tonight on BBC2 The Conspiracy Files: 9/11 Ten Years On

Don't know if this has been posted.

[Zingari]

So was it a missile or a drone?

You can't have it both ways!

yes , i happen to accept that i don't know all the answers , but i do know 8 foot diameter engines fitted 40 feet apart are unlikely to try and squeeze into a 16 foot hole without leaving one or more on the outside

maybe something like this but i'm only guessing

[marko]

yes , i happen to accept that i don't know all the answers , but i do know 8 foot diameter engines fitted 40 feet apart are unlikely to try and squeeze into a 16 foot hole without leaving one or more on the outside

maybe something like this but i'm only guessing

Read my post - they didn't Although, after 10 years you'd expect these conspiracy theorists - if they're so certain it wasn't a 757 - to be able to categorically state exactly what DID hit the Pentagon.

There is no way on God's green earth that some of that debris came off a drone. There's been positive identification of landing gear wreckage, engine combustion chambers and it's outer shell - including markings.

[Rincewind]

whatevers shown on it some wont be satisfied. 'Why wasnt this shown' 'Why wasnt that shown' ' They didnt explain this' They didnt explain that'

I am a bit fed up with the subject tbh. This argument will still be going on 50years from now and Zing will stil start a thread on foxestalk saying that WT7 was a controlled explosion and others will agree unless his powers of pursuasion has finally broken through.

I will see what else is on TV an d may watch it or see it later if available on Iplayer but I cant see anything in the program bringing this thread to a conclusion.

I thought one of the conclusions was that the plane would not make a cartoon like hole in the walls of the pentagon which is being suggested.

[Zingari]

Read my post - they didn't Although, after 10 years you'd expect these conspiracy theorists - if they're so certain it wasn't a 757 - to be able to categorically state exactly what DID hit the Pentagon.

There is no way on God's green earth that some of that debris came off a drone. There's been positive identification of landing gear wreckage, engine combustion chambers and it's outer shell - including markings.

you'd think after 10 years they could find an actual photo or piece of film to prove it so we could finally put it to bed

[zubi]

Read my post - they didn't Although, after 10 years you'd expect these conspiracy theorists - if they're so certain it wasn't a 757 - to be able to categorically state exactly what DID hit the Pentagon.

There is no way on God's green earth that some of that debris came off a drone. There's been positive identification of landing gear wreckage, engine combustion chambers and it's outer shell - including markings.

I don't think they would be allowed any where near the pentagon to actually find out for themselves.

[fleckneymike]

What a thoroughly depressing thread.

Would all those who genuinely believe this was an inside job explain why the evil geniuses behind the plot chose to use controlled explosions?

Surely these evil overlords would realise that 'experts' would recognise a controlled explosion and therefore rumble their evil plan?

What on earth have all of America's enemies been up to? Surely any self respecting 'evil doer' would like nothing more than to shout from the roof tops about these controlled demolitions and help bring down the entire US system causing far more damage than two airliners crashing into two sky scrapers could ever achieve?

[Rincewind]

good point. It would please the 'other side' to have the US Government discredited by proving that there was a controlled explosion.

What other lies have they told in their war against terrorism?

[AndyElZorro]

There was an NYPD officer on the radio this morning discussing this very issue. A "conspiracy theorist" was on the phone discussing Tower 7 and how it must have been a controlled explosion. The police officer stated that when Tower 2 fell it left a gaping hole at the bottom of Tower 7 that encompassed the corner of the building from the ground up beyond the 4th floor. The officer continued to say that there were at least 40 officers dispatched to this locale to keep people away as a building collapse was imminent. At no time did people go in or come out. He said the fire burned for three hours until the building collapsed. He continused to talk about those who say it would never be hot enough to melt the steel, but yet those same theorists do not takeinto account that the bottom corner of the building was missing. He said that tv pictures only show the tower from sky height or from a distance, but do not show it from ground level where the hole was. He continued to state that anyone who thinks this was a controlled explosion is nuts. That there is no way anyone could have got in, and that even if they did, they could not have set up the blast in such a short period of time.

There may be a transript of said conversation on the Opie & Anthony radio show website.

[zubi]

There was an NYPD officer on the radio this morning discussing this very issue. A "conspiracy theorist" was on the phone discussing Tower 7 and how it must have been a controlled explosion. The police officer stated that when Tower 2 fell it left a gaping hole at the bottom of Tower 7 that encompassed the corner of the building from the ground up beyond the 4th floor. The officer continued to say that there were at least 40 officers dispatched to this locale to keep people away as a building collapse was imminent. At no time did people go in or come out. He said the fire burned for three hours until the building collapsed. He continused to talk about those who say it would never be hot enough to melt the steel, but yet those same theorists do not takeinto account that the bottom corner of the building was missing. He said that tv pictures only show the tower from sky height or from a distance, but do not show it from ground level where the hole was. He continued to state that anyone who thinks this was a controlled explosion is nuts. That there is no way anyone could have got in, and that even if they did, they could not have set up the blast in such a short period of time.

There may be a transript of said conversation on the Opie & Anthony radio show website.

10 years on and this is the first time im hearing about a gaping hole at the bottom of tower 7?

[Rincewind]

I dont think the therorists would mention it

[shen]

I dont think the therorists would mention it

But the official report would. Guess what it didn't...

[purpleronnie]

The loose change doc bloke is so completely deluded, nothing will change his mind.

[zubi]

The loose change doc bloke is so completely deluded, nothing will change his mind.

What do you mean?

[Zingari]

Tonight on BBC2 The Conspiracy Files: 9/11 Ten Years On

Don't know if this has been posted.

thanks for reminding me of this

Watched this tonight and thought on balance it presented a fair and balanced view.

The only thing I did not really like was the closing statement that implied that it was the conspiracy theorists not letting go that was causing so much grief to the families, when in fact it’s the families of 911 victims who are some of the most vociferous in calling for a new enquiry.

i still think WTC7 is going to prove to be the smoking gun though , (but maybe in about 40 more years )

[fleckneymike]

thanks for reminding me of this

Watched this tonight and thought on balance it presented a fair and balanced view.

The only thing I did not really like was the closing statement that implied that it was the conspiracy theorists not letting go that was causing so much grief to the families, when in fact it's the families of 911 victims who are some of the most vociferous in calling for a new enquiry.

i still think WTC7 is going to prove to be the smoking gun though , (but maybe in about 40 more years )

How is it? Why is it?

[marko]

thanks for reminding me of this

Watched this tonight and thought on balance it presented a fair and balanced view.

The only thing I did not really like was the closing statement that implied that it was the conspiracy theorists not letting go that was causing so much grief to the families, when in fact it’s the families of 911 victims who are some of the most vociferous in calling for a new enquiry.

i still think WTC7 is going to prove to be the smoking gun though , (but maybe in about 40 more years )

It highlighted how ridiculous the thermite theory was.

a) it's never used in controlled demolitions

b) the amount found was very small

c) the "experts" sample size was borderline hilarious - 4 samples, 4 chuffin' samples!!!

Edit: Surely you accept that it was a plane that hit the Pentagon now. Those photos were indisputable.

[Rincewind]

There were a lot of victims and I'm sure the majority of them are not calling for an inquiry.

[Zingari]

How is it? Why is it?

Did you not hear that Danish guy with regards to its collapse as being due to nano thermate , and the other 2 guys saying " oh yeah we could prove him wrong but we got far too much on at the moment " ( or words to that effect ), yeah right

i realise what you posted earlier , but nist have claimed that the collapse was due to fire and not structural damage , because your assertion of massive damage on one side of the building would most certainly have caused the building to collapse in a tilting motion and that obviously did not happen , as it obviously fell symmetrically in on itself and not like a falling tree after one side had been cut out .

but i really can't keep discussing this on so many levels now , please accept my terse reply

[Zingari]

It highlighted how ridiculous the thermite theory was.

a) it's never used in controlled demolitions

b) the amount found was very small

c) the "experts" sample size was borderline hilarious - 4 samples, 4 chuffin' samples!!!

Edit: Surely you accept that it was a plane that hit the Pentagon now. Those photos were indisputable.

no they weren't

i've seen those photos many times before and i really cannot see a plane , please show me where you can ,

they superimposed the image of a plane in the tv program for effect , there is no real unambiguous image of a plane in reality