Firefighters Professional Trade Journal Concludes 9/11 Was "Explosive Demolition"

[Soupnazi630]

I am quite surprised that so many respondents appear to accept the official line that office fires caused the collapse of WTC 7 on 9-11. I was watching live TV news when Larry Silverstein, WTC owner, stated that the Fire Dept. had just informed him that they were going to "pull" WTC 7. "Pull" is the term building demolition contractors use to describe the controlled demolition of a building. This is only one of the discrepancies which belie the official account. Many more questions are covered in the five minute video which appears at:

Wrong

Pull is not and has never been a term used to describe the demiolition of a building

 

[toobfreak]

WTC 7 wasn't hit by a plane.

No, it was hit by the seismic shock of the two towers falling right besides it and who knows what else. Besides, just what scurrilous reason do you think someone would have for artificially destroying building 7? Like you said, it wasn't hit by a plane, so if the two main towers were detonated as you seem to believe, why compound the risk of detection by leveling #7 too?

 

[munkle]

"Sudden transition to freefall rules out a progressive collapse by fire or any other known natural mechanism other than explosive demolition."

This particular article deals with WTC 7 but if Seven was wired for demolition then they all were. This is a game-changer. Arrest George W. Bush while he is still alive.


FSJA Fire and Safety Journal of the Americas: "Built to last or built to fail: Could office fuel loads cause the complete collapse of WTC 7?"

Built to last or built to fail: Could office fuel loads cause the complete collapse of WTC 7?

WTC 7, the third high-rise to collapse on 9/11, was located about 100 yards (91.4m) north of WTC 1, was a 47-story steel building, stood 610 ft. (186 m),

fireandsafetyjournalamericas.com

Firefighters Call 9/11 an Inside Job - "Calling Out Bravo-7" Documentary.

 

[rightwinger]

Can we get this in Conspiracy Theories?

 

[1srelluc]

 

[Donald H]

That which is a conspiracy theory to some, is seen as current events by others.

Is it fair to move a thread and effectively label it a conspiracy theory.

Just because I see it as total nonsense and batshit crazy bullshit, doesn't mean I'm right!

 

[Donald H]

Proof that the fire department was prepared and ready to fight the WTC fires!

Or at least use a rusty pipe gadget to fight a plugged drain or something?

 

[munkle]

This mod is censoring firefighters who would run into a burning building to save his life, by shoving this into conspiracy. Careful karma is a bitch.

 

[Soupnazi630]

This mod is censoring firefighters who would run into a burning building to save his life, by shoving this into conspiracy. Careful karma is a bitch.

No it is not

This thread has nothing to do with fire fighters it is about mindless conspiracy theory fools

 

[TheInfiniteSadness]

1srelluc that video you posted is taken from the Documenatry 9/11 made by Jules and Gédéon Naudet. Jules was the one that filmed it inside. Gideon outside

Jules Clément Naudet and brother Thomas Gédéon Naudet are French-American filmmakers. The brothers, residents of the United States since 1989 and citizens since 1999, were in New York City at the time of the September 11 attacks to film a documentary on members of the Engine 7, Ladder 1 firehouse in Lower Manhattan.

Jules captured the clearest footage of the first airplane, American Airlines Flight 11, hitting the North Tower of the World Trade Center. The footage shot in 2001 was made into the 2002 documentary 9/11. The video camera that Jules was using that captured Flight 11 crashing into the World Trade Center is now on display in the National Museum of American History in Washington, D.C.

Jules and Gédéon Naudet - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

9/11 (2002 film) - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

​

 

[TheInfiniteSadness]

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

"Sudden transition to freefall rules out a progressive collapse by fire or any other known natural mechanism other than explosive demolition."

This particular article deals with WTC 7 but if Seven was wired for demolition then they all were. This is a game-changer. Arrest George W. Bush while he is still alive.


FSJA Fire and Safety Journal of the Americas: "Built to last or built to fail: Could office fuel loads cause the complete collapse of WTC 7?"

Built to last or built to fail: Could office fuel loads cause the complete collapse of WTC 7?

WTC 7, the third high-rise to collapse on 9/11, was located about 100 yards (91.4m) north of WTC 1, was a 47-story steel building, stood 610 ft. (186 m),

fireandsafetyjournalamericas.com

Firefighters Call 9/11 an Inside Job - "Calling Out Bravo-7" Documentary.

And if WTC-7 wasn't wired, none were?

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

There is no such things as a cascade failure. That is why no high rise has ever collapsed to the ground in seconds until 9/11 unless they were prepped and wired to do so for months prior.

Where are all the explosive rigs?

 

[NewsVine_Mariyam]

No, it was hit by the seismic shock of the two towers falling right besides it and who knows what else. Besides, just what scurrilous reason do you think someone would have for artificially destroying building 7? Like you said, it wasn't hit by a plane, so if the two main towers were detonated as you seem to believe, why compound the risk of detection by leveling #7 too?

All I said is that it wasn't hit by a plane.

Which means that the cause(s) attributed to why the first two towers fell (hit by a fully fueled commercial airliner) cannot be used to explain why a third tower fell when that third tower was NOT hit by a fully fueled commercial airliner.

 

[toobfreak]

Which means that the cause(s) attributed to why the first two towers fell (hit by a fully fueled commercial airliner) cannot be used to explain why a third tower fell when that third tower was NOT hit by a fully fueled commercial airliner.

True, but like I said, it had to be damage from the other buildings falling right next door and the seismic vibrations of their falling. Ask yourself this: If the Towers were indeed detonated and made to appear destroyed by al Quada terrorists as part of some CIA plot, does the falling of the small building 7 next door AID or HURT that perception?

Why dynamite it too when there is no immediate, plausible explanation to cover its collapse? Doing so only brings questions and doubts like you are expressing here, and if these Towers and all who died there was indeed an "inside" job, wouldn't this be the last thing they'd want?

Also, if the claim is true that the Towers were blown up on purpose, then they had to know that those jets would be flown into them, on that day and hour, meaning that all of 9/11 was staged. Pretty big claim.

 

[TheInfiniteSadness]

True, but like I said, it had to be damage from the other buildings falling right next door and the seismic vibrations of their falling. Ask yourself this: If the Towers were indeed detonated and made to appear destroyed by al Quada terrorists as part of some CIA plot, does the falling of the small building 7 next door AID or HURT that perception?

Why dynamite it too when there is no immediate, plausible explanation to cover its collapse? Doing so only brings questions and doubts like you are expressing here, and if these Towers and all who died there was indeed an "inside" job, wouldn't this be the last thing they'd want?

Also, if the claim is true that the Towers were blown up on purpose, then they had to know that those jets would be flown into them, on that day and hour, meaning that all of 9/11 was staged. Pretty big claim.

WTC 7 was struck by debris from the north tower when it collapsed and that's what started the fires. The collapse of the of south tower is on video from a lot of angles and there is no smoke anywhere near the bottom when it collapses. Dynamite kind of leaves evidence of smoke when it explodes.

 

[toobfreak]

WTC 7 was struck by debris from the north tower when it collapsed and that's what started the fires.

I kind of figured it had to have been hit and damaged by the main tower collapses.

The collapse of the of south tower is on video from a lot of angles and there is no smoke anywhere near the bottom when it collapses. Dynamite kind of leaves evidence of smoke when it explodes.

Yep. I've seen a lot of buildings dynamited; the twin towers collapsed from the top down--- there was no failure of the ground floors integrity until the upper sections hit it, it was not like the whole building dropped as one like in a demolition.

In fact, people in the fire escapes and ground floors were still running down them and out the doors as the buildings collapsed.

People who survived inside the buildings could hear the floors collapsing on top of them even as the part of their building was steady and stable--- no one reported seeing or hearing explosions going off in the central tower or saw or felt the building moving or collapsing around them until the structure above them came down on them.

That rules out a man-made demolition.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

All I said is that it wasn't hit by a plane.

Which means that the cause(s) attributed to why the first two towers fell (hit by a fully fueled commercial airliner) cannot be used to explain why a third tower fell when that third tower was NOT hit by a fully fueled commercial airliner.

that third tower was NOT hit by a fully fueled commercial airliner.

It was hit by burning chunks of the towers.

 

[sparky]

This thread has nothing to do with fire fighters

343 died that day, most of whom would not have had three buildings collapsed around them . Again, FF's are trained to realize potential collapse, and did not see it coming 9/11. That alone should raise a brow.......~S~

 

[Soupnazi630]

343 died that day, most of whom would not have had three buildings collapsed around them . Again, FF's are trained to realize potential collapse, and did not see it coming 9/11. That alone should raise a brow.......~S~

being trained does not preclude volunteering to stay and help. They knew it was coming and stayed

Training is not some absolute rule which forces people to do anything

You are simply wrong