I am not into the truther movement but I have a question

[Mr. Jones]

Structural damage

Asymmetrical structural damage that produced symmetrical collapses, that should have instead leaned, toppled over and taken a longer time to fall are all things that are not explained by NIST. There are no miracles in science, but NIST found it had to resort to a first time miracle to weasel out of explaining WTC 7.
To believe NIST is to be ignorant to these things, or worse.

Of course the easiest explanation is that the massive buildings were assisted in their collapses by some other means, like Silverstein was alleged
to have mentioned to his insurance company in a phone call, and noted by a reporter. Perhaps that is why the BBC and other networks knew it would be coming down
just not at the time it was reported on and aired. The problem with this is that a 47 story fortified skyscraper can not be rigged in such a short time, so that leaves pre facilitating the building in the months prior to 9-11 as the only logical explanation.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Structural damage

I've seem how structurally damaged buildings fall, none have like building 7 did.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Structural damage

Asymmetrical structural damage that produced symmetrical collapses, that should have instead leaned, toppled over and taken a longer time to fall are all things that are not explained by NIST. There are no miracles in science, but NIST found it had to resort to a first time miracle to weasel out of explaining WTC 7.
To believe NIST is to be ignorant to these things, or worse.

Of course the easiest explanation is that the massive buildings were assisted in their collapses by some other means, like Silverstein was alleged
to have mentioned to his insurance company in a phone call, and noted by a reporter. Perhaps that is why the BBC and other networks knew it would be coming down
just not at the time it was reported on and aired. The problem with this is that a 47 story fortified skyscraper can not be rigged in such a short time, so that leaves pre facilitating the building in the months prior to 9-11 as the only logical explanation.

True it would be unsound to send a crew into a build that had structural damage with the chance of it collapsing to set charges to bring it down in a controlled fashion. Their would not have been enough time to set the charges and do the prep work.

 

[Jos]

Structural damage

Asymmetrical structural damage that produced symmetrical collapses, that should have instead leaned, toppled over and taken a longer time to fall are all things that are not explained by NIST. There are no miracles in science, but NIST found it had to resort to a first time miracle to weasel out of explaining WTC 7.
To believe NIST is to be ignorant to these things, or worse.

Of course the easiest explanation is that the massive buildings were assisted in their collapses by some other means, like Silverstein was alleged
to have mentioned to his insurance company in a phone call, and noted by a reporter. Perhaps that is why the BBC and other networks knew it would be coming down
just not at the time it was reported on and aired. The problem with this is that a 47 story fortified skyscraper can not be rigged in such a short time, so that leaves pre facilitating the building in the months prior to 9-11 as the only logical explanation.

The Plane that was supposed to hit WTC7 was shot down by a rogue pilot, who was not in the Loop
Flight 93 Shot Down by Lt Col Rick Gibney
Flight 93 Shot Down by Lt Col Rick Gibney
but they "pulled" it anyway

 

[Mr. Jones]

Structural damage

Asymmetrical structural damage that produced symmetrical collapses, that should have instead leaned, toppled over and taken a longer time to fall are all things that are not explained by NIST. There are no miracles in science, but NIST found it had to resort to a first time miracle to weasel out of explaining WTC 7.
To believe NIST is to be ignorant to these things, or worse.

Of course the easiest explanation is that the massive buildings were assisted in their collapses by some other means, like Silverstein was alleged
to have mentioned to his insurance company in a phone call, and noted by a reporter. Perhaps that is why the BBC and other networks knew it would be coming down
just not at the time it was reported on and aired. The problem with this is that a 47 story fortified skyscraper can not be rigged in such a short time, so that leaves pre facilitating the building in the months prior to 9-11 as the only logical explanation.

True it would be unsound to send a crew into a build that had structural damage with the chance of it collapsing to set charges to bring it down in a controlled fashion. Their would not have been enough time to set the charges and do the prep work.

This is just one of the many weird, strange, and too coincidental to ignore instances among many, about the official storyline. The 9-11 attacks are too important to us as a nation to simply trust a lying government and its agencies to explain.
It has changed the way many Americans look at their government, its leaders, and themselves, and has produced an awakening that has been dormant for decades, especially when one includes all the other things that have effected us recently, and the lies, coverups, and excuses.
Followed by legislation that is obliterating the Bill of Rights and the Constitution.

The economic disaster, and the Osama Bin Laden raid fiasco, are just 2 of the more recent instances that come to mind immediately, that don't quite add up or make sense, but history is full of instances like Vietnam, Pearl Harbor, 1st Gulf War, the Fed Reserve central bank creation, and plans like Northwoods that contain more BS then what we were led to believe, at the time.
We need to be more well informed and scrutinize everything we are told, remembering how many times we were lied to, and get off the beaten wife syndrome wagon, and speak out and resist and protest in whatever manner is fitting, when we feel that our governments actions are becoming more conspicuously egregious.

Massive wide spread voting for "none of the above", or writing in a candidate that isn't following the same paths as previous ones that led us to where we are today, would be a good start and send a message, signaling we aren't going to go along with their BS anymore.
Hell other countries populations have risen up, why the hell can't we? We gotta put an end to the manipulation and stop this train before shit gets so bad that they will impose martial law and suspend the constitution, which is what many think they are slowly building up to do, but they are bankrupting us first and taking away our resources, and passing legislation to make it more difficult for us to do this.
The future looks bleak if Americans don't seriously regroup, and join together, educating ourselves and one another is the first step.

 

[TakeAStepBack]

You're almost 12 years too late. No offense, but it makes no ******* difference now. Too late, the bus left.

 

[eots]

Structural damage

Asymmetrical structural damage that produced symmetrical collapses, that should have instead leaned, toppled over and taken a longer time to fall are all things that are not explained by NIST. There are no miracles in science, but NIST found it had to resort to a first time miracle to weasel out of explaining WTC 7.
To believe NIST is to be ignorant to these things, or worse.

Of course the easiest explanation is that the massive buildings were assisted in their collapses by some other means, like Silverstein was alleged
to have mentioned to his insurance company in a phone call, and noted by a reporter. Perhaps that is why the BBC and other networks knew it would be coming down
just not at the time it was reported on and aired. The problem with this is that a 47 story fortified skyscraper can not be rigged in such a short time, so that leaves pre facilitating the building in the months prior to 9-11 as the only logical explanation.

True it would be unsound to send a crew into a build that had structural damage with the chance of it collapsing to set charges to bring it down in a controlled fashion. Their would not have been enough time to set the charges and do the prep work.

according to NIST the removal of a single column (79) would of caused the Collpase of wtc 7

 

[candycorn]

Unless you can show the "how", nothing else matters since it's physically impossible. Please carry on though.

 

[LA RAM FAN]

at 5:26 am today someone farted in here.

 

[LA RAM FAN]

I was watching this video from the BBC talking about building 7 collapsing but when they were talking about it they showed it still standing even though they said it has collapsed. How can that be?

If This Does Not Get Thru To You; Nothing Will!!! - YouTube

Bld 7 is the crux of the 9/11 coverup commission that and disinfo agents like candycorn and his troll buddie Rat In The Hat whom I guarantee will be on here in seconds,cant get around.

 

[eots]

unless you can show the "how", nothing else matters since it's physically impossible. Please carry on though.

its physical impossible to take out a single column ?...how so ?

 

[Ariux]

I was watching this video from the BBC talking about building 7 collapsing but when they were talking about it they showed it still standing even though they said it has collapsed. How can that be?

The most likely reason is that it was a video from earlier in the day, placed behind her on a green screen.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

I was watching this video from the BBC talking about building 7 collapsing but when they were talking about it they showed it still standing even though they said it has collapsed. How can that be?

The most likely reason is that it was a video from earlier in the day, placed behind her on a green screen.

Watch the video it's live on location they don't do green screen back drops on a live on location news release.

 

[Mr. Jones]

[The Plane that was supposed to hit WTC7 was shot down by a rogue pilot, who was not in the Loop
Flight 93 Shot Down by Lt Col Rick Gibney
Flight 93 Shot Down by Lt Col Rick Gibney
but they "pulled" it anyway

Building 7 could not have been accessed by a plane strike from the south side as that the North and South towers completely shielded it from approach from that direction.

You should also notice the north side of Building 7 was also partially shielded by 3 buildings in close proximity. These buildings to the north of Building 7 didn’t completely obscure its north face from a potential air strike, but they did protect over half of its overall target area, making approach from that direction more difficult and therefore, more risky.

once the towers “fell” out of the way, due to the layout of lower Manhattan and the Trade Center, all of a sudden, you have a clear shot right at the heart of Building 7.

As it just so happens, Mayor Giuliani cleared the building earlier, and with the exception of one key witness, who has since died under very suspicious circumstances, Building 7 was completely vacant. It’s rather odd that the mayor of New York would leave his multimillion dollar emergency command post bunker long before the first tower “collapsed”. After all, even if he says that he feared a plane attack on Building 7, as we can see, as long as the towers stood, there was little chance of that.

Another rather telling aspect of the flight path of Flight 93 is how long it was in the air. Why did the hijackers wait so long to take over the plane? Logically that makes no sense.

So why did they wait so long to take over the flight?

In fact, why did they wait at all? They near D.C. when they took off and the departure time was already delayed to start with. All they would have to have done was take over the plane once they got to cruising altitude, turn the plane south to D.C. and they would have struck there target just minutes after the towers were hit. But for some reason, the “hijackers” waited over 35 minutes before they took over the plane.

Why would they risk all that time in the air, coming back from Ohio? They must have known they would be shot down… if they were terrorists with box cutters that is.

However, if “the terrorists” knew that multiple national security drills would be taking place that day and that NORAD rules had been changed in June of 2001 that kept NORAD commanders from giving the “intercept and engage” order, perhaps they would have known they had more time.

Perhaps, in that case, they would have known they had just enough time to circle around on a long exposed “hijacked” flight just long enough for both towers to “collapse” just as they made it back to downtown Manhattan.

And that is exactly why they waited so long. They were waiting for a clear path to Building 7.

Flight 93 was turned and headed straight back to it’s real target, while still far enough away to give enough time for the buildings to “collapse” out of the way.

Conclusion

The inescapable conclusion drawn from this is that a lot of very odd things had to happen to put Flight 93 on a direct collision course with Building 7 at just the right time after the two towers were cleared out of the way. Odd that is, if one believes they all happened by chance.

But, if you take a look at these events in the context of a deliberate schedule then you see that these “odd occurrences” took place in exactly the right sequence to put that plane in the north face of Building 7 at just the precise moment to not only justify the complete collapse of the building (and destruction of volumes of evidence) but also to serve as the final terrifying act of the “New Pearl Harbor” event the neocon Vulcans sitting in the command bunker had written about just 1 year earlier.

Interesting read on this theory, that ultimately led to the need of having NIST create the "miracle" of thermal expansion
and the whole BS fire theory. Also could explain Silverstein on the phone with his insurance company asking for permission to CD his property, as it was already pre-rigged, for the gran finale to end the days performance. Flight 93's demise before completing its mission had them scrambling for years to explain the "collapse" of WTC 7, now admittingly complete with free acceleration (that NIST tried to sneak past), that no massive highrise in history has experienced due to sporadic office fires.

"A hero took down 93… but building 7 still had to fall. It was stuffed like a turkey ..with demolition material."

"......publiclly proclaimed all their goals there in the PNAC documentation."

9/11 Shock Opera… Act 4

 

[LA RAM FAN]

Asymmetrical structural damage that produced symmetrical collapses, that should have instead leaned, toppled over and taken a longer time to fall are all things that are not explained by NIST. There are no miracles in science, but NIST found it had to resort to a first time miracle to weasel out of explaining WTC 7.
To believe NIST is to be ignorant to these things, or worse.

Of course the easiest explanation is that the massive buildings were assisted in their collapses by some other means, like Silverstein was alleged
to have mentioned to his insurance company in a phone call, and noted by a reporter. Perhaps that is why the BBC and other networks knew it would be coming down
just not at the time it was reported on and aired. The problem with this is that a 47 story fortified skyscraper can not be rigged in such a short time, so that leaves pre facilitating the building in the months prior to 9-11 as the only logical explanation.

True it would be unsound to send a crew into a build that had structural damage with the chance of it collapsing to set charges to bring it down in a controlled fashion. Their would not have been enough time to set the charges and do the prep work.

This is just one of the many weird, strange, and too coincidental to ignore instances among many, about the official storyline. The 9-11 attacks are too important to us as a nation to simply trust a lying government and its agencies to explain.
It has changed the way many Americans look at their government, its leaders, and themselves, and has produced an awakening that has been dormant for decades, especially when one includes all the other things that have effected us recently, and the lies, coverups, and excuses.
Followed by legislation that is obliterating the Bill of Rights and the Constitution.

The economic disaster, and the Osama Bin Laden raid fiasco, are just 2 of the more recent instances that come to mind immediately, that don't quite add up or make sense, but history is full of instances like Vietnam, Pearl Harbor, 1st Gulf War, the Fed Reserve central bank creation, and plans like Northwoods that contain more BS then what we were led to believe, at the time.
We need to be more well informed and scrutinize everything we are told, remembering how many times we were lied to, and get off the beaten wife syndrome wagon, and speak out and resist and protest in whatever manner is fitting, when we feel that our governments actions are becoming more conspicuously egregious.

Massive wide spread voting for "none of the above", or writing in a candidate that isn't following the same paths as previous ones that led us to where we are today, would be a good start and send a message, signaling we aren't going to go along with their BS anymore.
Hell other countries populations have risen up, why the hell can't we? We gotta put an end to the manipulation and stop this train before shit gets so bad that they will impose martial law and suspend the constitution, which is what many think they are slowly building up to do, but they are bankrupting us first and taking away our resources, and passing legislation to make it more difficult for us to do this.
The future looks bleak if Americans don't seriously regroup, and join together, educating ourselves and one another is the first step.

Dont forget the Kennedy assassination which till 9/11 was the worst tragedy ever.All the unaccountable bullets that were never reported and suppressed for years such as one in the windshield,one on the curb,one in the sign,one on the grass showing a police officer picking up and putting in his pocket.theres an awful lot of similarites in those events.the lack of security,the profits that were made as a result,the destruction of evidence,people dying mysteriously for giving a story that did not go along with the governments version,the list goes on and on and on.also bld 7 just like the towers had explosives planted in them months in advance so there was plenty of time to plant them in there.

thats what everybody needs to do is follow Mad scientists advise is vote for ron paul as a write in candidate.

 

[LA RAM FAN]

You're almost 12 years too late. No offense, but it makes no ******* difference now. Too late, the bus left.

Best post on this thread.I myself shouldnt have gotten drawn into this discussion because 9/11 is just like the kennedy assassination,done and over with.Its the LEAST of our problems we have to worry about from the government right now.suing the orchestraters behind 9/11 is pointless.

the courts are corrupt,the judges are corrupt,hand picked by powerful corrupt people,the justice system is corrupt,cops lie,lawyers lie,judges lie,nothing will ever change as long as we have this corrupt two party system which is really a ONE PARTY SYSTEM designed to look like two parties so the american sheople think they have a choice in who gets elected when actually are candidates are SELECTED for us.The elections are such a joke.Romney will be the new president.Obama and Romney are there only to serve wall street and the zionists,not us.

He is the one the Bilderbergers have tapped for the POTUS.He's their boy they have selected.We know he will be the new president because just like the last elections,Mccain wasnt at a bilderberger meeting but Obama was and he got elected,same here.Obama wasnt there this time but Romney and his political advisor was.He is their boy.Just like Obama and Romney,he will continue our our great depression we are in and continue the phony war on terrorism.

 

[Ariux]

I was watching this video from the BBC talking about building 7 collapsing but when they were talking about it they showed it still standing even though they said it has collapsed. How can that be?

The most likely reason is that it was a video from earlier in the day, placed behind her on a green screen.

Watch the video it's live on location they don't do green screen back drops on a live on location news release.

The news resport might have been live, but that doesn't mean the content in the background was live. I didn't see a claim there that the reporter is on location.

Maybe the news reporter just misidentified a building that had already fallen. A very simple mistake.

Or, maybe the BBC received a report that authorities feared WTC7 would fall, and in the excitement, someone misread the report and thought WTC7 had fallen.

Another possibility is that the video is fake. The ending, with the explosions, is certainly fake. The lady reporter never mentions WTC7, so she might not have been talking about WTC7. All it would take is someone splicing an earlier segment of the same coverage to a later segment (notice, with the man's head turned, you can't see him actually asking about WTC7, making a good splicing point).

An ABSURDITY is that the BBC botched their role in a conspiracy. It would be completely unnecessary for conspirators to include the BBC. This would demonstrate such rank stupidity among the conspirators that there's no way they could have pulled it off, let alone kept the conspiracy secret, aside from little clues like this video.

You do realize there's a whole crew producing that news report. That's another dozen people to blow the whistle on the conspiracy. And, for what, like there's a possibility the media wouldn't notice WTC7 falling without advance notification?

The only conspiracies there is regarding 9/11 is the conspiracy of Arab hijackers to pull it off and the conspiracy of Israel and her supporters to let Israel off the hook for not sharing vital intelligence with the US prior to 9/11.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Yeah, you are a birfer and a trufer and a stupider and generally just conceptually challenged.

I was watching this video from the BBC talking about building 7 collapsing but when they were talking about it they showed it still standing even though they said it has collapsed. How can that be?

If This Does Not Get Thru To You; Nothing Will!!! - YouTube

 

[LA RAM FAN]

Yeah, you are a birfer and a trufer and a stupider and generally just conceptually challenged.

I was watching this video from the BBC talking about building 7 collapsing but when they were talking about it they showed it still standing even though they said it has collapsed. How can that be?

If This Does Not Get Thru To You; Nothing Will!!! - YouTube

and your a chickenshit afraid of the truth about government conspiracys and the government loves you for being scared.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Yeah, you are a birfer and a trufer and a stupider and generally just conceptually challenged.

I was watching this video from the BBC talking about building 7 collapsing but when they were talking about it they showed it still standing even though they said it has collapsed. How can that be?

If This Does Not Get Thru To You; Nothing Will!!! - YouTube

and your a chickenshit afraid of the truth about government conspiracys and the government loves you for being scared.