• What Happened to WTC Building 7 on 9/11?
    1,009 replies, posted
I only checked one of these, since I intend to have fun today in this magical world I live in where my government doesn't kill thousands of its own citizens to justify an expensive, PR disaster of a war. [QUOTE=ShukaidoX;25022318]ALSO, straight from the NIST website: [quote]Why did WTC 7 collapse, while no other known building in history has collapsed due to fires alone?[/quote] They literally themselves acknowledge that it [I][B]was the first known building collapse due to fires alone. [/B][/I]All you facepunchers who continue to try and debunk this point, please, please tell me why the NIST say the same exact thing?[/QUOTE] You say that's from the NIST website, but I searched for that exact phrase and it's nothing but conspiracy shit. The first Google result is this thread. Did you actually see this on the NIST website or are you just taking ghetto-ass conspiracy websites at their word? Link or it's bullshit.
[QUOTE=ShukaidoX;25024990]Apparently I wasn't clear enough. What happened on 9/11 that has [I]never [/I]happened before was that[B] no other known building in history has collapsed entirely due to fires alone. The NIST says that [URL="http://www.nist.gov/public_affairs/factsheet/wtc_qa_082108.cfm"]on their own website.[/URL] [/B]Any other incorrect assumptions I need to clear up?[/QUOTE] It wasn't due to the fires, it was due to two massive fucking aeroplanes slaming into it.
[QUOTE=MrEndangered;25023402] On the very same day? What the fuck are you talking about now? Oh yes I forgot, we went to war on the same day 9/11 happened. Right. Funny how nobody remembers that.[/quote] You've very obviously mistaken what I wrote. I said "WTC 7 collapsed with all of its confidential documents inside (there are records of this), that could have been used by wikileaks etc, on the exact same day as the controversial WTC 1 & 2 collapse. My god you get ornery when you don't know what you're talking about. [QUOTE=MrEndangered;25023402] Also, why would ALL the documents be within the VERY BUILDING THEY KNEW THEY WERE GOING TO DESTROY? Do you think people are that retarded? "Hey, we have information that they're going to destroy these buildings... lets hide all the clues and files IN THIS BUILDING FOR SAFE KEEPING"[/quote] Yes... in the building they probably KNEW was going to be leveled. Don't you think if the Secret Service was going to destroy the evidence to show they had a hand in 9/11 they would have done it [B]the same day?[/B] Now I admit this is speculative at best, but it should be taken into consideration. [QUOTE=MrEndangered;25023402] There have been no false-flags in American history that involved murdering thousands of your own countrymen, or from any nation as a matter of fact.[/QUOTE] Research the Sinking of the Lusitania, Pearl Harbor, Gulf of Tonkin Incident, and now 9/11. The Gulf of Tonkin was already acknowledged by the government as having been a fraud. What makes you think they wouldn't do it again?
Besides, WTC 1 and 2 were very futuristic buildings for the 60's and 70's. They were begining of new stlye skyscrappers. So even if it was due to fires, it doesn't suprise me. How many buildings of this sort have fallen?
[QUOTE=TH89;25025483] Link or it's bullshit.[/QUOTE] I've linked it twice already but okay your highness. [url]http://www.nist.gov/public_affairs/factsheet/wtc_qa_082108.cfm[/url] [editline]10:04PM[/editline] [QUOTE=Warhol;25025632]Besides, WTC 1 and 2 were very futuristic buildings for the 60's and 70's. They were begining of new stlye skyscrappers. So even if it was due to fires, it doesn't suprise me. How many buildings of this sort have fallen?[/QUOTE] Have fallen due to fire alone, ever? 0. [editline]10:04PM[/editline] Except for 9/11 of course.
[QUOTE=ShukaidoX;25025610]You've very obviously mistaken what I wrote. I said "WTC 7 collapsed with all of its confidential documents inside (there are records of this), that could have been used by wikileaks etc, on the exact same day as the controversial WTC 1 & 2 collapse. My god you get ornery when you don't know what you're talking about. Yes... in the building they probably KNEW was going to be leveled. Don't you think if the Secret Service was going to destroy the evidence to show they had a hand in 9/11 they would have done it [B]the same day?[/B] Now I admit this is speculative at best, but it should be taken into consideration. Research the Sinking of the Lusitania, Pearl Harbor, Gulf of Tonkin Incident, and now 9/11. The Gulf of Tonkin was already acknowledged by the government as having been a fraud. What makes you think they wouldn't do it again?[/QUOTE] What kind of fucked up Silent Hill world do you live in? [editline]11:05PM[/editline] [QUOTE=ShukaidoX;25025636]I've linked it twice already but okay your highness. [url]http://www.nist.gov/public_affairs/factsheet/wtc_qa_082108.cfm[/url] [editline]10:04PM[/editline] Have fallen due to fire alone, ever? 0. [editline]10:04PM[/editline] Except for 9/11 of course.[/QUOTE] have fallen, ever. [editline]11:05PM[/editline] also, care to fucking quote where it says the government did 9/11?
[QUOTE=ShukaidoX;25025636]I've linked it twice already but okay your highness. [URL]http://www.nist.gov/public_affairs/factsheet/wtc_qa_082108.cfm[/URL] [editline]10:04PM[/editline] Have fallen due to fire alone, ever? 0. [editline]10:04PM[/editline] Except for 9/11 of course.[/QUOTE] the wright brothers flew the first airplane. clearly god must have helped them fly, after all it never happened before.
Let me just find that bush quote it's around here somewhere... :downs: [editline]10:09PM[/editline] [QUOTE=SgtCr4zyAlt;25025702]the wright brothers flew the first airplane. clearly god must have helped them fly, after all it never happened before.[/QUOTE] Or maybe the government did it. :tinfoil:
What the Actual [I][B]Fuck![/B][/I] Y'all are fucking idiots.
[QUOTE=ShukaidoX;25025752]Let me just find that bush quote it's around here somewhere... :downs: [editline]10:09PM[/editline] Or maybe the government did it. :tinfoil:[/QUOTE] This post was satire... [editline]10:31PM[/editline] Also, still waiting for you guys to refute my points. Unless your conveniently ignoring them, which would lump you in with the rest of the apathetic masses.
[QUOTE=ShukaidoX;25022555]Apparently you don't understand what that means to the entirety of the official 9/11 story. Let me spell it out to you: If on 9/11 that something that [B]has never happened before[/B] occurred, wouldn't you cry foul play? It's obvious from what they've deduced that there had to be some outside force helping the building collapse.[/QUOTE] I've never had sex, I'm going to call foul play on the girl. It's good to see you referencing your stuff now, if I wasn't on my iPod I would counter research.
[quote]19 al-Qaeda terrorists hijacked four commercial passenger jet airliners.[/quote] Proof 9/11 wasn't a conspiracy. It's basically the same kind of proof shukaidoX has been shitting out.
[QUOTE=teeheeV2;25016262]I couldn't care less to be honest. You were banned for trying to get us to do your research to make you look good on skype. Deal with it. And that other thread was a parody thread of this and the other theorist threads, it was obvious, and you started to be a bitch.[/QUOTE] Okay yeah I parody threaded without me knowing, uh huh
[QUOTE=ShukaidoX;25025610]You've very obviously mistaken what I wrote. I said "WTC 7 collapsed with all of its confidential documents inside (there are records of this), that could have been used by wikileaks etc, on the exact same day as the controversial WTC 1 & 2 collapse. My god you get ornery when you don't know what you're talking about.[/QUOTE] No, you don't know the difference between 'fact' and 'speculation'. There is no fact there were any secret documents inside, and you're also not answering the more important question I asked you: Not everybody who worked in those buildings died, there were lots of survivors, how could the government guarantee that none of the survivors had 'secret documents'? Telling me I get 'ornery' doesn't prove yourself correct. If there were 'secret documents', why would they all be in the building? Surely something this large would take more than one day to plan, and would have a bigger paper trail than one sheet of paper. Any whistle blower would have atleast had a few days to know about this plan and store information elsewhere. [QUOTE=ShukaidoX;25025610][B]Now I admit this is speculative at best[/B], but it should be taken into consideration.[/QUOTE] No, this is speculation. Speculation is not evidence. When you g to court, you cannot go in there saying 'Well.. he PROBABLY murdered that man because he PROBABLY did this or did that'. Speculation should never be taken into consideration. [QUOTE=ShukaidoX;25025610]Research the Sinking of the Lusitania, Pearl Harbor, Gulf of Tonkin Incident, and now 9/11. The Gulf of Tonkin was already acknowledged by the government as having been a fraud. What makes you think they wouldn't do it again?[/QUOTE] No, there are theories surrounding them, none of them have ever been proven to be 'secret government coverups'. I believe the 'souce' you were looking at for these 'theories' were from that first result on google, right? The 9/11 Truther site? That's not unbiased information. The Lusitania for example, think about it. A neutral ship was carrying ammo to another country at war under the guise of a purely passenger ship? That's called supplying arms covertly, breaching international law. THEY WERE SUPPLYING ARMS TO THE ALLIES IN SECRET. It's that simple. You can distort that as much as you want. Yes it was a stupid way of doing it, but it was a clever and dirty one. Which is what war is about. [editline]11:38PM[/editline] [QUOTE=ShukaidoX;25026183]This post was satire... [editline]10:31PM[/editline] Also, still waiting for you guys to refute my points. Unless your conveniently ignoring them, which would lump you in with the rest of the apathetic masses.[/QUOTE] Go ahead, it doesn't make any difference. I honestly don't care what you do or don't believe, I'm simply arguing with you for the sake of people who might come upon this thread from google, and we need somebody to point out your utter stupidity. Protip, I already refuted your points, look up.
guys the empire state building wasnt collapsed by the government oh shit wait
[QUOTE=ShukaidoX;25023292]All very true statements which bring up valid points. But consider everything the Bush administration has done since then, and how he looked for an in-to the war in Iraq before it even started. The fact that what happened did is just extremely suspicious, and the fact that the building that would have held the documents to persecute/leak/whistle blow these actions had been destroyed on the very same day makes this situation highly questionable. [/QUOTE] Bush may be a dumbshit, but anyone smart enough to get his job would have lots of advisors helping him. These advisors get some info, ofcourse they are going to discuss it. And who goes to war without planning on the best way to attack. [editline]08:43AM[/editline] [QUOTE=cccritical;25023487]it's funny, I've noticed Shukaido hasn't even mentioned explosives used in his last ~8 posts, now instead of debating his original point he's rambling about how there's never a first for anything[/QUOTE] That's a stupid point of his. Either way it's a first.
[QUOTE=ShukaidoX;25025636]Have fallen due to fire alone, ever? 0. [editline]10:04PM[/editline] Except for 9/11 of course.[/QUOTE] I'll keep spamming this so maybe you'll read it one day. [img]http://img580.imageshack.us/img580/5346/madridremains.jpg[/img] "Dr. Pal Chana of the British Cement Association demonstrated the relative likelihood of floor collapse in a steel versus concrete framed building, using the vivid example of the Madrid Windsor Tower fire which raged over 26 hours on 14-15 February 2005. This former landmark office block of 30 storeys featured a concrete core throughout, but with concrete columns up to the 21st floor and steel columns between the 22nd and 30th floors. Remarkably, despite the intensity and duration of the fire, the concrete floors and columns remained intact however, the steel supported floors above the 21st floor collapsed, leaving the concrete core in-situ and exposed." As you can clearly see, part of the Madrid tower DID collapse due to fire, but it was built partly from concrete AND didn't have it's fireproofing removed by a 500 MPH jet.
[QUOTE=ShukaidoX;25026183]This post was satire... [editline]10:31PM[/editline] Also, still waiting for you guys to refute my points. Unless your conveniently ignoring them, which would lump you in with the rest of the apathetic masses.[/QUOTE] we already did lol
inb4: SPANISH GOVERNMENT DID IT
[QUOTE=ShukaidoX;25026183]This post was satire... [editline]10:31PM[/editline] Also, still waiting for you guys to refute my points. Unless your conveniently ignoring them, which would lump you in with the rest of the apathetic masses.[/QUOTE] you mean like how you conveniently ignore posts.
So is Sheik Mohammad real or not? is he an actor?
[QUOTE=cccritical;25024033]I want to bring up again, there's never been a consensus on what there is to gain from masterminding or allowing shit like 9/11 or pearl harbor to happen a few tards said "some people somewhere got rich off of it but I can't really think of anyone right now" and thought it was a concrete argument but honestly ~3000 civilians and millions of dollars in the government, possibly billions of dollars in civilian life plus government losses, all so that we could start a ten-year war "for oil" or "because" what is wrong with conspiracy theori[i]oh wait[/i][/QUOTE] Atleast shudo can give a reason, the ones at school go "because it was, are you fucking retarded"? This is the kid who thinks he is unbiased because he hasn't done any research into how Alienware is overpriced.
[QUOTE=MrEndangered;25026350]No, you don't know the difference between 'fact' and 'speculation'. There is no fact there were any secret documents inside,[/QUOTE] Wrong. Straight from the WTC 7 wiki: [Quote]7 World Trade Center housed SEC files relating to numerous Wall Street investigations, as well as other federal investigative files. All the files for approximately 3,000 to 4,000 SEC cases were destroyed. [B]While some were backed up in other places, others were not, especially those classified as confidential[/B][B].[/B] Files relating Citigroup to the [URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WorldCom"]WorldCom[/URL] scandal were lost. The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission estimates over 10,000 cases will be affected.The Secret Service had its largest field office, with more than 200 employees, in WTC 7 and lost investigative files. Says one agent: “All the evidence that we stored at 7 World Trade, in all our cases, went down with the building.”[/Quote]The losses went heavily recorded, as a matter of fact. It is even mentioned that there were Wall Street scandal documents involving multi-billion dollar cases. There's a word for a string of coincidences that all point to one thing, its called [B]evidence.[/B] [QUOTE=MrEndangered;25026350] No, this is speculation. Speculation is not evidence. When you g to court, you cannot go in there saying 'Well.. he PROBABLY murdered that man because he PROBABLY did this or did that'. Speculation should never be taken into consideration.[/QUOTE] You don't see me trying to appeal to the supreme court do you? All I'm doing is spreading knowledge and awareness, so that perhaps one day when it is put to trial, the thousands who have seen the evidence will echo their cry to the courts for the truth to be revealed. [QUOTE=MrEndangered;25026350] The Lusitania for example, think about it. A neutral ship was carrying ammo to another country at war under the guise of a purely passenger ship? That's called supplying arms covertly, breaching international law. THEY WERE SUPPLYING ARMS TO THE ALLIES IN SECRET. It's that simple. You can distort that as much as you want. Yes it was a stupid way of doing it, but it was a clever and dirty one. Which is what war is about. [/QUOTE] Regardless, the [B]citizens[/B] aboard were told it was to be a safe journey, and they were taken to dangerous waters (despite Nazi warnings ahead of time). This is one example. Another (which you conveniently ignored) was the Gulf of Tonkin incident. Which the government (again this is on the record, but apparently every damn thing I say you disbelieve) came out and admitted was falsely reported as having occurred due to enemy combatants when in actuality it was a means to sway public opinion toward the war. [QUOTE=MrEndangered;25026549]I'll keep spamming this so maybe you'll read it one day. [IMG]http://img580.imageshack.us/img580/5346/madridremains.jpg[/IMG] [/QUOTE] That's only partially collapsed. We're talking about a fully collapsed structure that fell into its own footprint. Sorry, doesn't count. Also, no plane hit WTC 7 if you remember correctly. The only explanation for WTC 7's collapse (by both the NIST and FEMA) was that it collapsed (entirely mind you) from fire alone.
But what about thermite?
ok shudo, files were in the building. Your next point is a contradiction, you say you're not going to court about this, then say you are spreading facts for people to go to court with, after saying previously that your posts are speculation at best. I can't counter the third, iPod copy paste doesn't work very well, all I could give you is more links to ignore. [editline]09:06AM[/editline] [QUOTE=Carbon Knight;25026865]But what about thermite?[/QUOTE] No one claims thermite in WTC 7, and we already debunked that no matter how much shudo ignores or twists it. [editline]09:08AM[/editline] Ninja edit by shudo, if you read, the part that collapsed wasn't concrete reinforced. Just like building 7 wasn't. The rest of that building had concrete reinforcing on the beams and stood tall.
[QUOTE=teeheeV2;25026893] No one claims thermite in WTC 7, and we already debunked that no matter how much shudo ignores or twists it.[/QUOTE] Well that's odd because you wouldn't think that 2/3 towers would use the same supossed explosive material (that has been debunked) and the third one to use something else that hasn't been named because no one has found anything.
[QUOTE=teeheeV2;25026893] No one claims thermite in WTC 7, and we already debunked that no matter how much shudo ignores or twists it.[/QUOTE] Contrary to the board's popular belief I constantly am analyzing all opposing evidence and if it stands to reason that it debunks mine then I move onto other, more fact based conclusions. That's why you wont see me trying to debate the thermite unless I find another legitimate source to assert the claim.
[QUOTE=ShukaidoX;25026772] That's only partially collapsed. We're talking about a fully collapsed structure that fell into its own footprint. Sorry, doesn't count. Also, no plane hit WTC 7 if you remember correctly. The only explanation for WTC 7's collapse (by both the NIST and FEMA) was that it collapsed (entirely mind you) from fire alone.[/QUOTE] that building is like 60% gone. Imagine if a giant fucking jumbojet with a full tank of petrol slammed into it.
[QUOTE=ShukaidoX;25026183]Also, still waiting for you guys to refute my points. Unless your conveniently ignoring them, which would lump you in with the rest of the apathetic masses.[/QUOTE] You do realize that this is [I]precisely[/I] what you have been doing? You post something, we refute it, and you ignore the posts that you don't have a good argument against (which are usually the most thoughtful and well reasearched ones.) Meanwhile, [I]we[/I] are still waiting on [I]you [/I]to provide, concrete, factual, and unbiased evidence that supports your claim. Like they say, extaordinary claims require extraordinary proof. [QUOTE=ShukaidoX;25026989]Contrary to the board's popular belief I constantly am analyzing all opposing evidence and if it stands to reason that it debunks mine then I move onto other, more fact based conclusions. That's why you wont see me trying to debate the thermite unless I find another legitimate source to assert the claim.[/QUOTE] Well if that's the case, and you no longer think thermite was what did the building in, the argument falls on its ass because the only other way they would have been able to demolish the building would be with explosives that would have been heard miles away.
And the building was not made of fucking concrete.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.