WTC-7 Was A Controlled Demolition Inside Job

Discussion in 'Conspiracy Theories' started by Terral, Mar 18, 2009.

  1. Terral
    Offline

    Terral Terral Corp CEO

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2009
    Messages:
    2,490
    Thanks Received:
    91
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Ratings:
    +91
    Greetings to All:

    All of the evidence points directly to inside-job terrorists taking down WTC-7 by Controlled Demolition on 9/11. WTC-7 was designed and built using Compartmentalization of all supporting columns and beams separated by solid concrete slabs horizontally and curtain walls vertically making ‘death by fire’ an impossibility. A building fire has never destroyed a steel-framed skyscraper in US history before or after 9/11 and WTC-1, WTC-2 and WTC-7 were owned by Larry “Pull It” Silverstein all suffering the same fate. Many fail to realize the World Trade Center Towers had never been in private hands prior to the summer of 2001, when Mr. Silverstein received possession from the New York Port Authority.

    Cooperative Research Website:

    Watch the [ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LD06SAf0p9A"]WTC-7 Collapse Video[/ame] again:

    Use your curser to hold the round scrollbar and move WTC-7 up and down repeatedly. The roof section and the center of the building collapse first, then the two sides plummet at ‘free fall’ velocity like any successful controlled demolition. Before looking at the details of how WTC-7 was built using Compartmentalization of all the steel supports, we need to take a look at the massive building itself.

    [​IMG]

    All of the WTC-7 steel columns, beams, girders and bar joists were bolted down and welded together into a single unit creating literally thousands of connections that must be severed to cause the catastrophic failure seen from the aftermath of the attack.

    [​IMG]

    The melting point of WTC-7 structural steel is 1535 degrees Celsius or 2795 degrees Fahrenheit. The first problem with the ‘Fire Caused The Collapse’ Theory is that building fires burn between 800 and 1000 degrees Fahrenheit, or about one third the required temperature to melt structural steel. The second problem is that building fires typically burn for only 20 minutes in any given area, because the fuel is depleted and the fire moves in the direction of a fresh fuel source. The third problem is that steel is an excellent conductor of heat and any steel-framed network would disperse the heat much more quickly than any building fire could raise the temperature to anywhere near ‘steel-softening’ temperatures. Another problem is that all supporting columns were coated with 3-hour ‘spray-on’ fireproofing insulation, which is nine times more protection needed for the typical building fire; even if the required 2800 degree temperatures were reached.

    911Research Website:

    The website above is perhaps the best on the internet for discovering the truth about the WTC-7 collapse. Moving down the page, Figure 5-3 shows the massive steel network and how certain areas (floors 1-7, 22-24) received extra support.

    [​IMG]

    This information is very important, because remember WTC-7 collapsed in one single smooth motion, which means extra attention was paid to placing charges to sever these thicker and stronger steel supports. Try to imagine the amount of energy required to break all of these connections simultaneously and you begin to see the ‘building fire theory’ is certainly a hoax. Below you come to Figure 5.3.3 and descriptions of how WTC-7 was built in many separate ‘compartments’ eliminating ‘fire’ as even a remote possibility for causing this collapse.

    [​IMG]

    Even if two or five or ten fires were started, the fuel source within those particular compartments would be consumed LONG before the fireproofing safety countermeasures were compromised; and the fire had no way to pass through solid concrete slabs or curtain walls to invade the neighboring compartments. This does not even account for the fully functional sprinkler system that had to be turned off for these fires to spread any distance at all. Here is a four minute video to help gain a better perspective on how to weigh the evidence in this case:

    Four Minute WTC-7 Collapse Video

    “Fire has never destroyed a steel building,” but three steel buildings owned by Larry Silverstein were ‘Pulled’ on 9/11. “Pull it” is controlled demolition lingo for wiring the building up and pulling it down. Mr. Silverstein was obviously lying about speaking to the New York Fire Chief, as the firemen only entered the scene on 9/11 after the Twin Towers attacks. This Fire Chief had no access to Controlled Demolition charges when he arrived at WTC-7 for “Pulling” down the 47-story steel-framed skyscraper that could possibly be placed in a single day. Here we have a few small fires burning on a few floors, but the Fire Chief cannot figure any way to extinguish them. Since the firemen had no time to set all the required charges to “Pull” WTC-7 down in just a few hours, as if firemen even have controlled demolition crews, then Mr. Silverstein just pointed the finger at himself about having prior knowledge of these 9/11 attacks. Now compare our images of WTC-7 and these “Pull It” videos:

    Paris Building

    Office Building

    Landmark Tower Implosion

    Many buildings have been demolished using controlled demolition looking exactly like WTC-7 on 9/11, but again, no steel-framed skyscraper has ever collapsed due to fire in the history of this planet. Twenty-first century demolition techniques include the use of Thermite Shaped Charges found all over WTC-1, WTC-2 and WTC-7.

    Shaped Charges And The World Trade Center Collapses

    [​IMG]

    The damage from a thermite/thermate shaped charge is exactly what you see above the confused fireman’s head. Note the size of the massive column and the molten iron residue that flowed inside and outside the column.

    [​IMG]

    Thermite burns at a very high 2500 degrees Centigrade or 4532 degrees Fahrenheit, which represents the kind of temperature required to sever these massive red-iron columns. As a demolition supervisor (search "Terral") tearing down buildings for many years, I know of nobody using 45-degree angle cuts to remove any red-iron part of any conventional demolition job. This particular column has molten iron residue, which is a ‘Controlled Demolition’ Signature, as any torch cut would blow the molten iron off the column entirely away from the worker. There is no cut from any torch that would leave molten iron residue on the inside and outside of 'all' the sides of a column this way. The idea that any demolition worker would make a 45-degree cut is ridiculous, because of the danger to other workers and the waste of fuel.

    Another problem with the Official ‘Fire’ Cover Story is these 45-degree angle shaped-charge cuts appear everywhere . . .

    [​IMG]

    . . . even in locations where demolition crew workers could not possibly reach. The common practice is to remove steel debris in an orderly ‘pick and remove’ manner, which eliminates the possibility of needlessly shifting weight and putting workers in danger. We play this dangerous game like a child plays ‘Pickup Sticks,’ as any skilled demolition foreman can look at the pile and tell you which debris to remove first. None of the demolition workers in the picture above climbed up any ladder forty or fifty feet in the air to make that 45-degree angle cut, because that was part of the original ‘Controlled Demolition’ (AE911Truth.org) of WTC-7. Note the clean 90-degree cuts labeled “Severed Column End” scattered throughout the debris pile. However, also note these steel members are buried under the debris of the walls collapsing upon them ‘during’ the controlled demolition process. These cuts could not have been made by this demolition crew, because they still have mountains of debris to remove before even thinking about cutting any structural steel; which would only serve to shift weight in this very dangerous situation. The very best work on these WTC controlled demolition attacks is presented by Dr. Steven E. Jones (Brigham Young University) here:

    Liberty Post Website:

    WTC-7 was definitely (100 percent certainty) brought down using Controlled Demolition techniques also found in WTC-1 and WTC-2. This evidence explains why we have reports on hundreds of ‘explosions’ taking place throughout the day.

    9/11 Firemen Describe WTC Explosions

    And yet, the ‘keyword sanitized’ 911Commission Report only uses the term ‘explosion’ six times outside the notation references for ‘all’ these 9/11 cases combined and never uses the term ‘explosions’ (plural) even once. Guess what? The bogus Arlington County After-Action Report uses the term ‘explosion’ six times in 215 pages ‘and’ also never uses the term ‘explosions’ even one time the very same way, even though we can hear multiple explosions taking place in this single [ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WefPzgxvfS4"]News Video[/ame].

    9/11 was definitely an inside-job and many LIARS are helping the real terrorists get away with murdering thousands of our innocent fellow Americans. Let us see how many Official Cover Story LIARS line up to convince these readers that 9/11 was carried out by people like this (pic) and that building fires and debris took down these WTC skyscrapers . . .

    GL,

    Terral
     
  2. Godboy
    Offline

    Godboy Gold Member

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2008
    Messages:
    6,868
    Thanks Received:
    1,358
    Trophy Points:
    245
    Ratings:
    +3,471
    Great, you open your post with a lie and you never stop after the first one. All of the evidence does NOT point to an inside job, because if it did, everyone on these boards wouldnt think you are crazy.

    Its quite apparent that you have no idea what real proof and evidence is.
     
  3. Terral
    Offline

    Terral Terral Corp CEO

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2009
    Messages:
    2,490
    Thanks Received:
    91
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Ratings:
    +91
    Hi Godboy:

    I see the Light now. God is not a man (Num. 23:19), so that means He is a Godboy (far right). :0)

    I have one question, Godboy:

    Was John the Baptist right or wrong?

    The fact is that a man can be baptized with the Holy Spirit in his mother’s womb and walk a righteous path his entire life ‘and’ people like Godboy :)cuckoo:) will still think he has a demon. :0)

    Just ‘quote >>’ anything that appears off in my WTC-7 explanation and show us what you have using whatever the Godboy thinks is ‘credible evidence.’ I am obviously not the only guy on this planet knowing for A FACT that WTC-7 was taken down using Controlled Demolition. I have already given mine and now you can give your side of the story. Right? Then everyone can decide if anybody is a Loyal Bushie Cover Story DUPE for believing WTC-7 fell down from building fires. :0)

    PS. This is the Conspiracy Theories Forum. Right? Am I lost or what? Someone please explain for me why ANYBODY in his right mind gets up in the morning to head out to the "Conspiracy Theory" Forum to convince everyone that 'there is no conspiracy?' That is funny too . . .

    GL in the debate,

    Terral
     
    Last edited: Mar 18, 2009
  4. Godboy
    Offline

    Godboy Gold Member

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2008
    Messages:
    6,868
    Thanks Received:
    1,358
    Trophy Points:
    245
    Ratings:
    +3,471
    If you are trying to push my buttons by making fun of religion, you are barking up the wrong tree pal.
     
  5. Godboy
    Offline

    Godboy Gold Member

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2008
    Messages:
    6,868
    Thanks Received:
    1,358
    Trophy Points:
    245
    Ratings:
    +3,471
    Hah! what a fucking dumbass you are. You first try to make the claim that the conspiracy zone is only for like minded people to discuss conspiracies, yet you end by saying "GL with the debtate", so even YOU are aware that its a debate forum.

    Priceless.
     
  6. Godboy
    Offline

    Godboy Gold Member

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2008
    Messages:
    6,868
    Thanks Received:
    1,358
    Trophy Points:
    245
    Ratings:
    +3,471
    No, you arent the only one, there are plenty of other insane people like you who dont understand what a fact is.

    Heres is an absolute fact that any sane person could not refute...

    "You do NOT know for a fact that WTC-7 was taken down using controlled demolition."
     
  7. Mad Scientist
    Offline

    Mad Scientist Deplorable Gold Supporting Member Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2008
    Messages:
    23,940
    Thanks Received:
    5,212
    Trophy Points:
    270
    Ratings:
    +7,683
    I recently switched from regular peanut butter to soy peanut butter. The natural stuff was ok but kind of bland. Soy has a slight sweet taste to it and it's delicious when spread on multigrain bread.

    You guys should give it a try. :D
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
  8. xotoxi
    Offline

    xotoxi Platinum Member

    Joined:
    Mar 1, 2009
    Messages:
    30,322
    Thanks Received:
    5,203
    Trophy Points:
    1,110
    Location:
    your mother
    Ratings:
    +5,492

    I agree with you about the multigrain bread...but I'm not sure I'd like the soy based peanut butter because of the anaphylaxis that I would experience.

    But when it comes to peanut butter, I like creamy over chunky.

    Any thoughts?

    (I've been waiting for a good debate about peanut butter...now we have it!)
     
  9. Toro
    Offline

    Toro Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Sep 29, 2005
    Messages:
    50,771
    Thanks Received:
    11,058
    Trophy Points:
    2,030
    Location:
    The Big Bend via Riderville
    Ratings:
    +25,106
    Bah!

    Bacon and eggs over easy, with a good helping of fried hashbrowns, downed with a pot of coffee. That's a Man's breakfast!
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
  10. xotoxi
    Offline

    xotoxi Platinum Member

    Joined:
    Mar 1, 2009
    Messages:
    30,322
    Thanks Received:
    5,203
    Trophy Points:
    1,110
    Location:
    your mother
    Ratings:
    +5,492
    Do you like onions with your hashbrowns? Or just potato?

    And which do you read first: the front page or the sports section?
     

Share This Page