IPB




POSTS MADE TO THIS FORUM ARE THE SOLE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE AUTHOR AND DO NOT NECESSARILY REFLECT THE VIEWS OF PILOTS FOR 911 TRUTH
FOR OFFICIAL PILOTS FOR 9/11 TRUTH STATEMENTS AND ANALYSIS, PLEASE VISIT PILOTSFOR911TRUTH.ORG

WELCOME - PLEASE REGISTER OR LOG IN FOR FULL FORUM ACCESS ( Log In | Register )

 
Reply to this topicStart new topic
Wtc 7 Summary

bgaede
post Sep 11 2011, 04:29 PM
Post #1





Group: Student Forum Pilot
Posts: 13
Joined: 11-September 11
Member No.: 6,245




I think that the main points of WTC 7 are synthesized in this vid.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2Mj6POZ-XxY






Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
SanderO
post Sep 11 2011, 05:12 PM
Post #2





Group: Troll
Posts: 1,174
Joined: 23-December 09
From: NYC
Member No.: 4,814



These main points are not data but speculation... or circumstantial evidence. We need to investigate what caused the collapse. And that may reveal explosives were placed in the building.

You need to note that buildings such as WTC 7 would have many things exploding if they were on fire.... and they did have massive storage tanks of diesel fuel and it sat atop a Con Ed Sub station... which likely had transformers exploding. So fires alone could not bring any office tower down.. but office fires plus structural damage plus some extra damage... placed there or from things such as thousands of gallons of diesel burning for hours might weaken the steel in the core and set of a progressive collapse. And of course a few well placed explosive devices. Considering that the building was likely a disaster to salvage... taking it down and lumping it in with the rest of the WTC destruction might have motivated someone to actually place those charges... We don't know but that seems like a possibility as well.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
bgaede
post Sep 11 2011, 06:54 PM
Post #3





Group: Student Forum Pilot
Posts: 13
Joined: 11-September 11
Member No.: 6,245



QUOTE (SanderO @ Sep 11 2011, 05:12 PM) *
These main points are not data but speculation... or circumstantial evidence. We need to investigate what caused the collapse. And that may reveal explosives were placed in the building.

You need to note that buildings such as WTC 7 would have many things exploding if they were on fire.... and they did have massive storage tanks of diesel fuel and it sat atop a Con Ed Sub station... which likely had transformers exploding. So fires alone could not bring any office tower down.. but office fires plus structural damage plus some extra damage... placed there or from things such as thousands of gallons of diesel burning for hours might weaken the steel in the core and set of a progressive collapse. And of course a few well placed explosive devices. Considering that the building was likely a disaster to salvage... taking it down and lumping it in with the rest of the WTC destruction might have motivated someone to actually place those charges... We don't know but that seems like a possibility as well.










"not data but speculation... or circumstantial evidence... We need to investigate what caused the collapse."

Are you for real, Sander? In what century do you intend to investigate?

There will NOT be any investigation of any kind. Any investigation will INVARIABLY lead to George Bush, meaning the US Government. There is no other culprit for 9/11.

But the remedy would be worse than the disease. The consequences of 300 M Americans realizing that their own government committed this heinous crime is simply unimaginable and unacceptable. That's why the Clintons and the Obamas and the rest of them will continue with the farce and the cynicism of placing wreaths to the murders they caused or became an accessory-after-the-fact to.

The 'investigation', however little there was, is now over. Here's the white line on the sand. You either accuse the US Gov of committing the crimes of 9/11 or you become irrelevant. You are fooling yourself. The US Gov has now blocked all legal venues, withdrawn all evidence and brainwashed the majority into accepting the ludicrous official story. That alone should tell you that the Arabs have little to do with this matter. If you are still wondering at this point whether the Bush Admin had something to do with 9/11, then you really got a problem, now don't you? Because if it ain't bin Laden and it ain't Bush, then who do you propose demolished WTC 7? The Martians?


" many things exploding if they were on fire.... and they did have massive storage tanks of diesel"

Penny wise and pound foolish! You are looking for scapegoats and excuses. Barry Jennings went in and the lobby was intact. Barry Jennings came out AFTER HEARING EXPLOSIONS (just like everyone at the foot of the Towers) and just like you hear in the popular video in which the fireman says, "Keep your eyes on that building!", and the lobby was blown to bits. He was stepping over dead bodies. He was assassinated later by the US Government just before he was about to testify. What does fire or diesel have to do with any of this? What does fire or diesel have to do with WTC7 other than to distract from the true cause?


"thousands of gallons of diesel burning for hours might weaken the steel in the core and set of a progressive collapse"

Absolute nonsense! Pure poppycock!

There is no way that the building is going to collapse symmetrically on its footprint with your method. Buildings 3, 4, 5, 6 and every building in the world that has collapsed stands against your proposal.

Let me lay it straight on the line for you, Sander. The WTC 7 was demolished by George Bush and Co. What part are you still struggling with? Are you having trouble coming to grips with such a stunning realization?

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
DoYouEverWonder
post Sep 11 2011, 07:08 PM
Post #4





Group: Active Forum Pilot
Posts: 770
Joined: 1-February 09
Member No.: 4,096



QUOTE (SanderO @ Sep 11 2011, 04:12 PM) *
These main points are not data but speculation... or circumstantial evidence. We need to investigate what caused the collapse. And that may reveal explosives were placed in the building.

You need to note that buildings such as WTC 7 would have many things exploding if they were on fire.... and they did have massive storage tanks of diesel fuel and it sat atop a Con Ed Sub station... which likely had transformers exploding. So fires alone could not bring any office tower down.. but office fires plus structural damage plus some extra damage... placed there or from things such as thousands of gallons of diesel burning for hours might weaken the steel in the core and set of a progressive collapse. And of course a few well placed explosive devices. Considering that the building was likely a disaster to salvage... taking it down and lumping it in with the rest of the WTC destruction might have motivated someone to actually place those charges... We don't know but that seems like a possibility as well.

SanderO,

Out of respect for the dead, can you at least give it a break for today. You're relentless and no one else is buying your bs.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
bgaede
post Sep 12 2011, 04:28 AM
Post #5





Group: Student Forum Pilot
Posts: 13
Joined: 11-September 11
Member No.: 6,245



QUOTE (DoYouEverWonder @ Sep 11 2011, 07:08 PM) *
SanderO,

Out of respect for the dead, can you at least give it a break for today. You're relentless and no one else is buying your bs.






"Out of respect for the dead"

The way we respect the dead is not by doing politics -- especially on an anniversary -- but by hanging the people in Washington responsible for ALL of 9/11. Otherwise YOU are the one disrespecting them.


"no one else is buying your bs"

It doesn't matter if I'm the only person in the world who thinks this way. If George Bush and Co did 9/11, rolling your eyes the other way won't change what happened.

But I'm curious to know what your goal is within the movement if you believe that some barefooted hillbillies in Afghanistan did WTC 7 and the Pentagon. I mean, if fuel brought down WTC 7, we're done, right? It was an act of God.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
paranoia
post Sep 12 2011, 05:08 AM
Post #6


dig deeper
Group Icon

Group: Administrator
Posts: 1,016
Joined: 16-October 06
From: arlington va
Member No.: 96



bgaede - pay closer attention, dyew was talking to sanderO not you. sanderO has a history around here, and thats the context in which dyew was making her suggestion. look up some of his posts and maybe you'll see why she said what she said... though that shouldnt be necessary considering you yourself have already recognized the "Absolute nonsense! Pure poppycock!" he is pushing.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
bgaede
post Sep 12 2011, 06:13 AM
Post #7





Group: Student Forum Pilot
Posts: 13
Joined: 11-September 11
Member No.: 6,245



QUOTE (paranoia @ Sep 12 2011, 05:08 AM) *
bgaede - pay closer attention, dyew was talking to sanderO not you. sanderO has a history around here, and thats the context in which dyew was making her suggestion. look up some of his posts and maybe you'll see why she said what she said... though that shouldnt be necessary considering you yourself have already recognized the "Absolute nonsense! Pure poppycock!" he is pushing.






Sorry dyew! My mistake. I apologize.






Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
DoYouEverWonder
post Sep 12 2011, 05:21 PM
Post #8





Group: Active Forum Pilot
Posts: 770
Joined: 1-February 09
Member No.: 4,096



QUOTE (bgaede @ Sep 12 2011, 05:13 AM) *
Sorry dyew! My mistake. I apologize.

No problem.

Welcome to the forum. smile.gif
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

Reply to this topicStart new topic
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 




RSS Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 23rd October 2014 - 06:06 AM