Reply With Quote
Get real. A montage of real time reporting of 'assumed' sound to cause and effect are not reliable. I see they keep focusing on explosion. That does not mean bomb. It's a sound quality.
The Twin Towers were blown to kingdom come. Don't believe me? Watch THIS!!
The Ultimate Con - 911
http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...arch&plindex=0
Get real. A montage of real time reporting of 'assumed' sound to cause and effect are not reliable. I see they keep focusing on explosion. That does not mean bomb. It's a sound quality.
The NIST press release was not written by a scientist, it was written by a political appointee of NIST, which is part of the Bush Administration's Commerce Department.
The NIST release doesn't say there isn't any evidence of a blast or controlled demolition event demolition, only that they have not "found" any.
Well, I have "found" some evidence and am posting it here:
9/11 WTC 7 BOMBS WITNESS
http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...arch&plindex=1
PS for debunkers only:
You may not consider this witness to be PROOF, but I would like to see you deny that it is EVIDENCE. This witness already spoke with federal investigators regarding this incident, so the statement they they have not "found" any evidence is an OUTRIGHT LIE.
I'm sorry Galileo, they physics are easily understood as to why the buildings went down. I'm really surprised that this is still a subject of debate.
WTC 7 fell down from a controlled demolition. That's why the video of its collapse looks like a controlled demolition.
The best websites on the subject are:
http://www.wtc7.net/
and
http://www.ae911truth.org/
Here's another one for the Archie Debunkers to lick around!
BBC Reported Collapse of WTC Building 7 23 Minutes Early
http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...arch&plindex=2
The Salomon Brother Building is what WTC 7 was commonly called by many at the time.
This would be like watching a Spurs game on TV, with reporter at the end of the 3rd quarter announcing the final score of the game.
VIDEO: BBC WAS HALF AN HOUR TOO EARLY REPORTING ON WTC7 COLLAPSE
On September 11th 2001, BBC World reported at 4:57pm Eastern Time that the Salomon Brothers Building (more commonly known as WTC7 or World Trade Building 7) had collapsed.
This even made the 5pm EST headlines, what is bizarre is that the building did not actually collapse until 5:20pm EST.
9/11 was unusual enough, without BBC World being able to foretell the destiny of WTC 7.
What is even stranger, is that the women reporter is telling the world that the building had collapsed when you can see it in the background over her left shoulder.
Then at 5:15pm EST, just five minutes before the building did actually collapse, her live connection from New York to London mysteriously fails.
So the question is, on 9/11 how did the BBC learn that WTC7 collapsed 23 minutes before it actually did.
Building Seven was 47 storeys, modern in design with structural steel throughout, yet symmetrically collapsed in 6.5 seconds, was someone leaking information.
No steel framed skyscraper has ever collapsed due to fire, before or after 9/11, most people who find out about WTC7, believe it was brought down by a controlled demolition, even demolition experts agree.
Please Investigate 9/11 - Time is of the essence. ---- ANOTHER BBC Video with TIME STAMP - NEWS24 also reported it had collapsed at 4.57!!! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7lWQ5cJ5XYY ----- http://www.angelsfortruth.com
Hey Newton;
What about all the TV reporters and 9/11 survivors talking about the bombs and explosions?
You know, I've pretty much stayed quite on these conspiracy threads because they have already been debunked so well. I see the same things spun in different ways. Photo's and films from one angle that other angles don't show the same things of. Accounts of rushed judgment and repeated words misinterpreted. Sorry, No conspiracy. Tired of putting any effort into the subject too.
This thread is so many years late.
They didn't see bombs, they heard sounds that sounded like explosions to them So what...
That's not what I'm saying at all.....What I am saying is that either theory is plausible.....there is enough evidence to convince any reasonable person that either theory is correct - the buildings fell because two planes loaded with jet fuel crashed into them going at 500MPH, weakening support columns, and sending jet fuel spiraling downward through the staircases and elevator shafts....or the buildings fell because two planes crashed into them going 500MPH, and inner support columns were weakened with explosives during the ensuing confusion...
I'm sorry, Wild Cobra, but the brilliant scientists at NIST still have not figured out why WTC 7 fell. But the physics is easily understood, right?
FYI
When bombs go off they sound like explosions.
Good to see an open mind.
Here's another good one! Check out the medic who said the crowd was chanting a 10-9-8... countdown just before WTC 7 fell down!
VIDEO -- WTC 7: The Smoking Gun of 9/11
Explosive new video contains rare footage and a call to action.
http://www.911blogger.com/node/11678
WTC 7 Archive:
WTC7
http://www.911blogger.com/taxonomy/term/712
The government's version of 9/11 is a giant conspiracy of people who hate us that are secretly placed all over the world.
Sounds a bit pranoid to me.
Here is the best overall 9/11 site so you can brush up on your facts:
http://www.911research.com/
How can people watch the testimony of eyewitnesses, firefighters and civilians say specific "explosions" took place in WTC 7 (in te sub basements, no less)and not question how a that building came down without a plane hitting it?
Just boggles my mind. Are you afraid to admit the official report may be wrong? So many people here question the governments every political step, yet not this.
I am what I am. I have always believed 9/11 was too convenient for the power structure. Dems, Repubs...it doesnt matter. To them, there is Us and Them. High time we started thinking the same way.
Mostly because WTC7 was build over a existing power plant - so for structural purposes they constructed the 'base' of the building on floors 1-6 - giant cross beams that could have possibly been weakened by fires caused by diesel gasoline that was pumped through the building to the upper floors because it was Giuliani's emergency control center built after the 03' WTC attack, and also by collapsing debris from WTC1....How can people watch the testimony of eyewitnesses, firefighters and civilians say specific "explosions" took place in WTC 7 (in te sub basements, no less)and not question how a that building came down without a plane hitting it?
DarkReign;
You are not alone.
Here is the latest polling data:
Zogby Poll: 51% of Americans Want Congress to Probe Bush/Cheney Regarding 9/11 Attacks; Over 30% Seek Immediate Impeachment
67% also fault 9/11 Commission for not investigating anomalous collapse of World Trade Center 7
http://www.zogby.com/news/ReadNews.dbm?ID=1354
Here is an early NIST report on WTC 7 which I posted earlier:
http://wtc.nist.gov/progress_report...4/appendixl.pdf
The power plant has nothing to do with it's collapse.
Which makes sense; why would buildings that are located on power plants fall in a controlled demolition.
Here is the single best article regarding on the topic of the Three Towers and their destruction:
The Destruction of the World Trade Center:
Why the Official Account Cannot Be True
David Ray Griffin
Authorized Version (with references & notes)
http://911review.com/articles/griffin/nyc1.html
Oh, by the way, the east penthouse, which is on the roof of WTC 7, collapsed about 8 seconds before WTC 7 itself fell.
Details here:
RARE NEW Video of WTC 7 Collapse ~ Close-Up of Penthouse on Roof, 9/11 Cover Up
http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...arch&plindex=0
So why would an explosion in the basement (which nobody witnessed) cause the roof to cave in?
WTC Building 7 demolition charges
http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...arch&plindex=2
It would be paranoid if there wasn't the fact that 3 groups hijacked aircraft and crashed them into buildings and then later a group sent in a video claiming credit for it.
Paranoid would be creating a vast conspiracy attributed to a giagantic coverup by the government.
Well, I wouldn't call them liars, but exposions could have been caused by the fires in the building igniting combustibles or jsut the sounds of the floors/equipment/etc falling and hitting each other at great force. I heard a loud bang outside of our aparment in LA a few years ago that sounded like a bomb going off when it was a drunk driver crashing into 7 cars. Sounding like an explosion doesn't necessarily mean that there was one.
I've seen interviews with a maintenance guy who said he saw a huge fire in the lower floors of WTC7, maybe even the basement, but I've never seen any photographic or video proof that there was a fire on the lower floors.....it's important because the prevailing theory is that fire destroyed WTC7....and in order for that to happen there must have been huge fires in floors 1-6........So why would an explosion in the basement (which nobody witnessed) cause the roof to cave in?
The structural integrity of this building was in those floors...if there were massive fires then it becomes plausible that the building collapsed because these lower floors caved in, causing the inter structure of the building to collapse first, which would explain why the penthouse collapses first....I believe the facade damage is just a distraction really....
It didn't need to be an explosion.
The critical building structures were not in the basement.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
