Two planes apparently caused three steel framed towers to collapse into dust

Just say that aloud and you know the official story is bull.

The explanation for WTC 7 is that structural damage and fires brought it down - ermm, what fires ?

I ask anyone to watch the footage of the collapse of WTC 7and show me where this inferno was that brought it down.

Metro

Regarding that, the Loose Change 2 thingy, talks about when another Sky Scraper was crashed into by a plane, the building still stood in the aftermath

firefighters reported seeing structural deformations of Building 7 hours before its collapse, including the top FDNY fire Chief Daniel Nigro, who stated, “I feared a collapse of Building 7 (as did many on my staff). The collapse of WTC 1 damaged portions of the lower floors of 7. Building 7 was built on a small number of large columns providing an open Atrium on the lower levels. Fires on many floors of WTC 7 burned without sufficient water supply to attack them. For these reasons I made the decision (without consulting the owner, the mayor or anyone else—as ranking fire officer, that decision was my responsibility) to clear a collapse zone surrounding the building and to stop all activity within that zone. Approximately three hours after … WTC 7 collapsed. Conspiracy theories abound and I believe firmly that all of them are without merit.”

comment by Metro.⚽️ (U6770)
posted 36 minutes ago

Two planes apparently caused three steel framed towers to collapse into dust

Just say that aloud and you know the official story is bull.

The explanation for WTC 7 is that structural damage and fires brought it down - ermm, what fires ?

I ask anyone to watch the footage of the collapse of WTC 7and show me where this inferno was that brought it down.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Ok, if it wasnt planes and the resulting fires that caused the towers to collapse, what did?

comment by Sid (U1868)
posted 36 minutes ago
comment by Metro.⚽️ (U6770)
posted 36 minutes ago

Two planes apparently caused three steel framed towers to collapse into dust

Just say that aloud and you know the official story is bull.

The explanation for WTC 7 is that structural damage and fires brought it down - ermm, what fires ?

I ask anyone to watch the footage of the collapse of WTC 7and show me where this inferno was that brought it down.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Ok, if it wasnt planes and the resulting fires that caused the towers to collapse, what did?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
maybe these planned explosions (i am no expert but you could not under those circumstances get in a demolition firm and bring down a building like that within 2 hours, it would take weeks of prep)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kqG6v7KZ_s8

I know what you ate saying m8. I have seen no plausable alternative suggestion as to what brought down the WTC buildings

No way that demolition charges or the detonation wires could survive the damage those buildings suffered and still work perfectly.

It was the construction of the towers that ultimately became their downfall, they were built on a tight budget using radical (at the time) techniques, the concrete slab floors were fixed around the outside perimeter to the steel framework and on the inside to the internal lift shaft framework, so once one floor went it had a cascade effect which resulted in them coming down, Bin Laden having studied construction engineering will have known this.

Tin foil hats off lads

comment by Sid (U1868)
posted 5 minutes ago
I know what you ate saying m8. I have seen no plausable alternative suggestion as to what brought down the WTC buildings

No way that demolition charges or the detonation wires could survive the damage those buildings suffered and still work perfectly.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
"No way that demolition charges or the detonation wires could survive the damage those buildings suffered and still work perfectly". speaking specifically about those fires on tower 7, why is no footage of them? if tower 7 were that badly damaged surely there would be some pictures video of this raging inferno. the footage of the 'control explosion' from various angles show no flames of copious amounts of smoke to justify damaging beyond repair such a large building.
if there were no visible fires, then there is no reason to believe that they would of damaged any demolition set up.

Sid when it comes to 9/11 I prefer to talk about what we know didn't happen as opposed to what we think might have happened.

Several hijackers with little flight training and experience did not take over planes and fly them at impossible speeds into buildings with near perfect precision.

Also a building with fires on only a couple of floors that wasn't hit by a plane suddenly collapsed in on itself in a total demolition makes absolutely no sense whatsoever. Especially when you consider that it was a perfectly symmetrical collapse only ever seen in controlled demolitions.

Having looked at the evidence in detail nobody is going to convince me that is what happened that day.

There were buildings closer to the twin towers than building 7 and none of them collapsed in that manner.

Building 7 itself was 300 feet away from the nearest tower that fell and most of the heavy fallout from the destruction of the North Tower landed short of Building 7.

http://www.wtc7.net/location.html

The laws of physics as we know them need to be rewritten if the official version of what happened on 9/11 is true.

Frankie

I know no 2 cases are ever the same, but the other example given on that Loose Change2, was of another Sky Scraper (i think it was in NYC as well) having a plane go in to it in not too dissimilar fashion and the building survived the crash.

Flash yeah that was the Empire State Building if memory serves me eright although I believe it was a much smaller plane that hit. I'd have to check that.

Either way the WTC Towers were designed to withstand multiple hits by aeroplanes being such tall buildings in an area with such busy airspace.

comment by Earl Brutus (U1449)
posted 1 hour, 39 minutes ago
"...... Bin Laden having studied construction engineering will have known this.

Tin foil hats off lads
----------------------------------------------------------------------
And you Sir are a prime example of media manipulation.

Tin foil hats? Is that all you have as an explanation to the millions of people who don't believe the official story?

The tin foil hats comment cracks me up. Entirely made up by the media, as a way of ridiculing and therefore discrediting anyone with a differing view, and you buy into it.

Tin foil hats? Is that all you have as an explanation to the millions of people who don't believe the official story?
--------------
No, the explanation was in the paragraph which preceded that statement, but you chose to ignore it, cos it doesn't fit with your wacko theory

Earl, so "It was the construction of the towers that ultimately became their downfall, they were built on a tight budget using radical (at the time) techniques, the concrete slab floors were fixed around the outside perimeter to the steel framework and on the inside to the internal lift shaft framework, so once one floor went it had a cascade effect which resulted in them coming down"

That explains it all to you does it? WTC7 wasn't even hit by a plane, it was +/- 300 ft away from any building that was hit by planes. Why did it fall down?

Also, what's my "wacko theory" by the way? There was me thinking I didn't know what happened!

WTC 7 was not hit by an aeroplane, it had severe damage on its south side from falling debris from the towers and had been burning for hours.


Nobody has suggested any other reason other than controlled demolition which is absurd in my view for reasons I stated above.

Do those who believe the conspiracy think that the FBNY were in on the conspiracy?

If they were it would mean they sent their own colleagues to certain death in the towers and also lied about WTC 7 having fires on multiple floors.

Conspiracy just doesnt add up for me.

Okay grizzly you win, it was a couple of agents from the matrix flying hologram planes that did it

Comment deleted by Site Moderator

Under orders from George dubya

FDNY*

Does anybody on this thread believe the "chemtrailers" conspiracy?

I have a few questions about it.

Comment deleted by Site Moderator

forget 9/11 it was on telly...

where did the MH370 flight go...with no debris

Comment deleted by Site Moderator

comment by #Forza (U19575)
posted 8 minutes ago
yes, it has been established for many many years that the buildings were constructed in such a way that in case of catastrophy, they would collapse in on themselves rather than laying waste to the entirety of lower Manhattan.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

First time I've ever heard that.

So Building 7 was designed to collapse in on itself in the event of fires on a couple of floors ?

Comment deleted by Site Moderator