"A common sense test: You’re dispatched to a house fire in a 2 story with a basement. Upon arrival, all 3 floors are well involved. After extinguishment, the neighbor across the street tells you he saw flashes on all 3 floors within seconds of each other. It turns out the owner has arson convictions on his record. You smell gasoline. Now, should you test the debris for accelerants? No matter what the owner and his friends tell you, wouldn’t you still test it? It’s a 'NO-Brainer'…isn’t it?
Silverstein has no arson conviction. Nor was there they 'smell of bombs' after the WTC 7 collapsed. Nor was any explosive or apparatus of explosive ever found. Nor was there residue of explosives in the dust samples. Nor was a single girder cut in a manner consistent with explosive demolition. With the port authority bomb squad searching the entire WTC plaza with bomb sniffing dogs and finding no bombs only a week before 911.
And here's the kicker: the building was on fire before it collapsed. Meaning your system of explosive demolition would have been ON FIRE. Even the most chemically stable explosive would have melted. Any wires would have melted. Detonators would have detonated. Any timers or receivers would have been reduced to bubbling pools of plastic.
ANd of course the FDNY already determined the cause of the collapse, accurately predicting WTC 7's fall hours before it came down....due to fire and structural damage.
All of which you ignore. So much for your 'common sense'.
"NOW, HOW WOULD YOU INVESTIGATE?
Look at the facts of the WTC, specifically Tower 7, collapses:
1) Terrorists used explosives on WTC 1 in 1993.
And they didn't work.
2) Over 118 first responders reported hearing explosions before all 3 collapses, many said it sounded like the 'bang-bang-bang' you hear during a demolition.
Then by all means, show us the 118 first responders who report explosions before WTC 7. So far, the closest you came was Craig Bartmer who reported hearing 'booms' *after* the collapse began.
Worse, there are video after video of the collapse of WTC 7. And there were no sound of explosions preceding the collapse. See, if bombs caused the collapse of the building, the bombs would have preceded the collapse. Cause THEN effect. In your bizarro version, the collapse began, then there were the sound of bombs. Effect THEN cause.
If only reality worked that way. Back in the real world, there were no explosions preceding the collapse of the WTC 7. Here's a video of the collapse:
WTC 7 began its collapse in such silence that at first, people didn't even notice. Here's actual controlled demolition:
Which from every angle is ludicrously loud. How do you explain this obvious, theory killing hole in your conspiracy? You don't, pretending it doesn't exist. But just because you close your eyes and pretend doesn't mean that we're similarly obligated to ignore what you do.
No explosions, no explosives. Your theory just went 'poof'.
3) We have video, photographic and audio evidence of explosions after the impact and before collapse.
In actual controlled demolition, the charges go off and the building collapses like a train falling from the sky. In your version of controlled demolition there are the 'sound of bombs'.....occurs 8 hours before the collapse. But just coincidentally coincides with pieces of the north tower colliding with the WTC 7. With the WTC 7 falling in virtual silence 8 hours later.
That's not controlled demolition.
Worse, there are more than half a dozen other theory killing holes that you ignore and pretend don't exist.
There were no girders cut in a manner consistent with controlled demolition. There was no residue of explosives in the dust samples. There was no seismic signatures of explosives, despite seismic sensors being scattered throughout the Manhattan. The building was on fire, and no system of explosives operates while set ablaze. No explosives or apparatus of explosives were ever found....not before, during or after the collapse. And the Port Authority bomb squad went through the entire WTC plaza a week before the collapse and found zero bombs.
You can't explain any of them. You're so utterly stumped, your useless conspiracy so utterly debunked, you refuse to even discuss them.
Keep running.
4) Live news was reporting multiple explosions, and the possibility terrorists also planted explosives.
Then offer us these 'live reports' preceding the collapse of WTC 7. As we have report after report from the FDNY that the building collapsed due to fire and structural damage.
The major concern at that time at that particular location was number Seven, building number seven, which had taken a big hit from the north tower. When it fell,
it ripped steel out from between the third and sixth floors across the facade on Vesey Street. We were concerned that the fires on several floors and the missing steel would result in the building collapsing.
So for the next five or six hours we kept firefighters from working anywhere near that building, which included the whole north side of the World Trade Center
complex. Eventually around 5:00 or a little after, building number seven came down.
FDNY Fire Chief Frank Fellini
http://www.nytimes.com/packages/html/nyregion/20050812_WTC_GRAPHIC/Fellini_Frank.txt
And again...
“They told us to get out of there because they were
worried about 7 World Trade Center, which is right behind it,
coming down. We were up on the upper floors of the Verizon
building looking at it. You could just see the whole bottom
corner of the building was gone. We could look right out over
to where the Trade Centers were because we were that high up.
Looking over the smaller buildings. I just remember it was
tremendous, tremendous fires going on.
FDNY Richard Banaciski
http://www.nytimes.com/packages/html/nyregion/20050812_WTC_GRAPHIC/Banaciski_Richard.txt
And again....
Boyle: ...on the north and east side of 7 it didn’t look like there was any damage at all, but then you looked on the south side of 7 there had to be a hole 20 stories tall in the building, with fire on several floors. Debris was falling down on the building and it didn’t look good.
Firehouse: When you looked at the south side, how close were you to the base of that side?
Boyle: I was standing right next to the building, probably right next to it.
Firehouse: When you had fire on the 20 floors, was it in one window or many?
Boyle: There was a huge gaping hole and it was scattered throughout there. It was a huge hole. I would say it was probably about a third of it, right in the middle of it. And so after Visconti came down and said nobody goes in 7, we said all right, we’ll head back to the command post. We lost touch with him. I never saw him again that day.
FDNY Captain Chris Boyle
http://www.firehouse.com/terrorist/911/magazine/gz/boyle.html
There are *so* many others.
You ignore virtually every account from the FDNY, despite their account being one of the most cogent, most relevant, and most detailed. Why?
Because the FDNY doesn't ape your conspiracy. And anything that doesn't ape what you want to believe is ignored. If you were actually interested in what happened, you'd eagerly pour over the FDNY accounts, and assimilate them into your theory. But instead, you ignore any account that contradicts you. Any fire fighter, any fire chief, any first responder that doesn't ape your theory....
......and you ignore them entirely. Just like you ignore all the holes in your conspiracy that render it a physical impossibility. But what would a rational person ignore any of this?
5) Barry Jennings, the Emergency Coordinator for the NY Housing Authority reported explosions in Tower 7. He also reported being knocked down by explosions prior to the collapse of the tower.
8 hours prior to the collapse of WTC 7. He entered the WTC 7 after the south tower fell but before the north tower did. Then he 'hears bombs' and is pulled from the WTC 7 by the FDNY. With his 'account of bombs'
matching exactly the collision of huge chunks of the falling north tower with the WTC 7.
Gee, I wonder what that sound could have been caused by? Occam's Razor, my friend.
Jennings wasn't even on site when the WTC 7 actually fell. He had already been sent to a hospital.
6) Molten steel AND concrete were found at Ground Zero 'remember, hydrocarbon fires do not burn hot enough to melt steel or concrete.'N.F.P.A. 921- 19.2.4 Exotic Accelerants states that molten steel and concrete could indicate the use of exotic accelerants, specifically Thermite.
Bombs don't produce molten steel. Nixing that as your cause. Thermite burns, it doesn't explode. Nixing that as your cause. 'Nano-Thermite' has the explosive velocity of GUN powder. 1/10th that of TNT. Making it utterly insufficient to detonate the building.
And finally, there were reports of molten metal 3 MONTHS after 911 came down. Thermite, once ignited, can't be put out as it provides its own oxygen. So if thermite is your cause for the molten metal, you'd have to have enough to burn continually, every minute of every hour of every day of every week of every month...
...for 3 months.
A pile of thermite so enormous you would have been able to see it from orbit. Yet oddly, no one noticed before, during, or after the attack. Despite the fact that thermite burns so insanely bright that its used it *fireworks*, no one noticed a single thermite reaction. Despite your theory requiring thousands of them. And of course, there wasn't a single cut in a manner consistent with thermite OR bombs. Rendering your entire theory moot.
How do you deal with these theory killing holes in your theory? Ignore them, as you do everything else that proves your conspiracy is nothing but blithering nonsense.
7) WTC 7 was the first concrete and steel high rise to collapse during a fire that had not been struck by an aircraft. It was determined not to be significantly damaged by the falling debris, and diesel fuel tanks DID NOT contribute significantly to the fire (according to NIST final report 2008)."
Dude, you know damn well that the building was hit by enormous chunks of the north tower. That entire corners of the building had been carved away. That huge holes had been carved out of the south face of the building. And that there were enormous fires in the building.
....also we were pretty sure that 7 World Trade Center would collapse.
Early on, we saw a bulge in the southwest corner between floors 10 and 13, and we had put a transit on that and we were pretty sure she was going to collapse. You actually could see there was a visible bulge, it ran up about three floors. It came down about 5 o’clock in the afternoon, but by about 2 o’clock in the afternoon we realized this thing was going to collapse.
Firehouse: Was there heavy fire in there right away?
Hayden: No, not right away, and that’s probably why it stood for so long because it took a while for that fire to develop. It was a heavy body of fire in there and then we didn’t make any attempt to fight it. That was just one of those wars we were just going to lose. We were concerned about the collapse of a 47-story building there. We were worried about additional collapse there of what was remaining standing of the towers and the Marriott, so we started pulling the people back after a couple of hours of surface removal and searches along the surface of the debris. We started to pull guys back because we were concerned for their safety.
FDNY Deputy Chief Peter Hayden
http://www.firehouse.com/terrorist/911/magazine/gz/hayden.html
And again....
The biggest decision we had to make was to clear the area and create a collapse zone around the severely damaged [WTC Building 7]. A number of fire officers and companies assessed the damage to the building.
The appraisals indicated that the building's integrity was in serious doubt.
FDNY Fire Chief Daniel Nigro
http://www.cooperativeresearch.org/entity.jsp?id=1521846767-634
And again.....
..Captain Varriale told Chief Coloe and myself that
7 World Trade Center was badly damaged on the south side and definitely in danger of collapse. Chief Coloe said we were going to evacuate the collapse zone around 7 World Trade Center, which we did.
FDNY Lieutenant Rudy Weindler
http://graphics8.nytimes.com/packages/pdf/nyregion/20050812_WTC_GRAPHIC/9110462.PDF
And again...
From there, we looked out at 7 World Trade Center again. You could see smoke, but no visible fire, and some damage to the south face. You couldn’t really see from where we were on the west face of the building, but
at the edge of the south face you could see that it was very heavily damaged.
FDNY Battalion Chief John Norman
http://www.firehouse.com/terrorist/911/magazine/gz/norman.html
Yet in every account of the collapse of WTC 7, you always fail to mention any of this. That's *exactly* what I'm talking about: no one who was genuinely interested in the cause of the collapse of WTC 7 would ignore the damage caused to WTC 7 by the collapse of the north tower.
But you do. You're more interested in polishing your turd of a conspiracy than in finding out what *actually* happened.
So you randomly omit amazingly relevant details for no other reason than they don't fit into your conspiracy. No rational person would ever ignore what you must to cling to your failed conspiracy nonsense.
as in the governments version that ignore the laws of physics,experts in their fields what they say ,and witness testimonys and facts of these high credible people who dont accept the lies that bullshit troll? nice try fellow paid troll.
