• What Happened to WTC Building 7 on 9/11?
    1,009 replies, posted
[QUOTE=Sgt Doom;24837738]Oh, it's this paranoid delusional bullshit again.[/QUOTE]
eh snip
One of the towers fell over sideway and heavily damaged the building. Then fire weakened (NOT MELTED, WEAKENED) the frame to the point that it could no longer support all the weight on it.
[QUOTE=Ridge;24845035]One of the towers fell over sideway and heavily damaged the building. Then fire weakened (NOT MELTED, WEAKENED) the frame to the point that it could no longer support all the weight on it.[/QUOTE] I guess this explains it.
Not quite. [IMG]http://wtc7.net/docs/b7_3_s.jpg[/IMG] The rubble from WTC 7. Now why exactly is the outer wall still in tact and leaning inwards, toward the rubble? This means that, not only did the building continue to fall vertically until the end, the outer walls were pulled inward so that they fell on top of the rubble pile. In short, Building 7 imploded. Buildings are not designed to implode. They are designed to remain standing. To achieve a precisely vertical collapse, in which the remains of the building fall inward, is the objective of [B]controlled demolition[/B]. Fire could not have done this. Nor could any amount of debris. The other WTC buildings (which were closer to the two towers, mind you) were COVERED in debris, but the clean up crew had to [I]tear them down.[/I] Because steel structured buildings have never collapsed from fire.
I don't think the US government was responsible for 9/11, however, it has committed far more serious crimes than 9/11. Wouldn't be surprised if 9/11 and other conspiracy theories were spread by the Bush administration - they waste lots of activist effort and make people think that the government is in control of everything.
[QUOTE=ShukaidoX;24845174]Not quite. [IMG]http://wtc7.net/docs/b7_3_s.jpg[/IMG] The rubble from WTC 7. Now why exactly is the outer wall still in tact and leaning inwards, toward the rubble? This means that, not only did the building continue to fall vertically until the end, the outer walls were pulled inward so that they fell on top of the rubble pile. In short, Building 7 imploded. Buildings are not designed to implode. They are designed to remain standing. To achieve a precisely vertical collapse, in which the remains of the building fall inward, is the objective of [B]controlled demolition[/B]. Fire could not have done this. Nor could any amount of debris. The other WTC buildings (which were closer to the two towers, mind you) were COVERED in debris, but the clean up crew had to [I]tear them down.[/I] Because steel structured buildings have never collapsed from fire.[/QUOTE] Wow so glad we have someone here who is a demolitions expert, and obviously is not wrong in any way.
[QUOTE=ShukaidoX;24845174]Not quite. [IMG]http://wtc7.net/docs/b7_3_s.jpg[/IMG] The rubble from WTC 7. Now why exactly is the outer wall still in tact and leaning inwards, toward the rubble? This means that, not only did the building continue to fall vertically until the end, the outer walls were pulled inward so that they fell on top of the rubble pile. In short, Building 7 imploded. Buildings are not designed to implode. They are designed to remain standing. To achieve a precisely vertical collapse, in which the remains of the building fall inward, is the objective of [B]controlled demolition[/B]. Fire could not have done this. Nor could any amount of debris. The other WTC buildings (which were closer to the two towers, mind you) were COVERED in debris, but the clean up crew had to [I]tear them down.[/I] Because steel structured buildings have never collapsed from fire.[/QUOTE] You'd really think that a website devoted to a mod for a game with a halfway decent physics engine would have a greater idea of, well, physics.
Do I need to get my dad to tell you you are stupid for thinking it's a controlled demolition. Granted, he did work in a mine, not demolition, but explosives are explosives, and he knows his shit.
[QUOTE=FreeThinker;24845215] Wouldn't be surprised if 9/11 and other conspiracy theories were spread by the Bush administration - they waste lots of activist effort and make people think that the government is in control of everything.[/QUOTE] you're worse than ShukaidoX
my dad is 3 times world champion 100m sprinter and has 50 gold medals from the Olympics dont make me get him here and say how dumb u are [editline]09:15PM[/editline] he knows his shit
[QUOTE=mogul20478;24845442]Wow so glad we have someone here who is a demolitions expert, and obviously is not wrong in any way.[/QUOTE] My points are all rooted from legitimate sources, which do include demolitions experts and the like.
[QUOTE=FreeThinker;24845215]I don't think the US government was responsible for 9/11, however, it has committed far more serious crimes than 9/11. Wouldn't be surprised if 9/11 and other conspiracy theories were spread by the Bush administration - they waste lots of activist effort and make people think that the government is in control of everything.[/QUOTE] I'd have expected you to blame it on Israel, and that they filled the planes with poor Palestenian children....
[QUOTE=cccritical;24845706]you're worse than ShukaidoX[/QUOTE] You're either profoundly stupid or very young - I'm not joking or trolling by the way. [QUOTE=AIPAC-Ridge;24845779]I'd have expected you to blame it on Israel, and that they filled the planes with poor Palestenian children....[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=cccritical;24826807]While we're discussing 9/11 conspiracies have truthers come up with any benefits yet? from what I see, we've lost billions of dollars, gotten in a ten-year war, lost thousands of troops, and lost one of our biggest commerce centers, aaand no pro's besides a slightly democratic shithole where a dictatorial shithole just was[/QUOTE] cause it gives rich people money [editline]01:31PM[/editline] [QUOTE=JohnStamosFan;24831939]There aren't any benefits. The conspiracy theorist could possibly argue that the government was hoping for a "WWII" type Economic boost, but it's all so unrealistic. People just seem to like to jump on the idea that "big brother" suddenly has a boner for mass-destruction. All that has come from 9/11 has been two wars that are hemorrhaging money from the "US Bank Account" and an increase in terrorist recruitment world wide. I just don't understand why people think the Government would do it, and why they would pick something as complex as crashing planes into buildings. Like they couldn't have hired some super secret team to pretend to be building inspectors who planted charges. Also, why blow up WTC7at all?[/QUOTE] like i said alot of people made money off of the war
[QUOTE=VeoSeo24;24834875]To assume that all conspiracies are false is absolutely ignorant and you should leave if you dont want to be a part of it.[/QUOTE] To just disregard mr.codemoney's post and just ignore all the evidence that debunks the conspiracy theories is also very, very ignorant. [editline]04:38PM[/editline] I mean at least TRY to make up your own bullshit reasons against them instead of ignoring it completely
The Bush Administration submitted the 342-page [URL="http://911research.wtc7.net/post911/legislation/usapatriot.html"]USA PATRIOT Act[/URL] to Congress on September 24th, 2001, just 13 days after the attack. Other [URL="http://911research.wtc7.net/post911/legislation/index.html"]legislation[/URL] would follow, but most of the policies enacted in the name of the War on Terror would be accomplished through [URL="http://911research.wtc7.net/post911/executive/index.html"]executive orders[/URL]. Two Senators who attempted to slow the passage of the PATRIOT Act [URL="http://911research.wtc7.net/post911/attacks/harassment.html"]received letters containing Anthax[/URL]. Copy pasta including sources from my information. Considering what the PATRIOT Act has allowed to happen since 9/11 this should raise some alarms.
[QUOTE=ShukaidoX;24846380]The Bush Administration submitted the 342-page [URL="http://911research.wtc7.net/post911/legislation/usapatriot.html"]USA PATRIOT Act[/URL] to Congress on September 24th, 2001, just 13 days after the attack. Other [URL="http://911research.wtc7.net/post911/legislation/index.html"]legislation[/URL] would follow, but most of the policies enacted in the name of the War on Terror would be accomplished through [URL="http://911research.wtc7.net/post911/executive/index.html"]executive orders[/URL]. Two Senators who attempted to slow the passage of the PATRIOT Act [URL="http://911research.wtc7.net/post911/attacks/harassment.html"]received letters containing Anthax[/URL]. Copy pasta including sources from my information. Considering what the PATRIOT Act has allowed to happen since 9/11 this should raise some alarms.[/QUOTE] You have almost everything right except the 9/11 part - it's true that it seems as if 9/11 was done on purpose to get all these acts passed, but it could also be and is far more likely that Bush and other neo-cons were waiting for attacks of this kind to happen. (Check the Project for The New American Century, which most of the Bush administration was a part of)
[QUOTE=rampageturke;24845750]my dad is 3 times world champion 100m sprinter and has 50 gold medals from the Olympics dont make me get him here and say how dumb u are [editline]09:15PM[/editline] he knows his shit[/QUOTE] Would you like me try find where the detanator box is. He has no actual detanators though. Just the push box.
[QUOTE=FreeThinker;24846618]You have almost everything right except the 9/11 part - it's true that it seems as if 9/11 was done on purpose to get all these acts passed, but it could also be and is far more likely that Bush and other neo-cons were waiting for attacks of this kind to happen. (Check the Project for The New American Century, which most of the Bush administration was a part of)[/QUOTE] The truth is [I]always[/I] somewhere in the middle.
The difference between my claim and fazes is that I will be able to prove it.
[QUOTE=teeheeV2;24846706]The difference between my claim and fazes is that I will be able to prove it.[/QUOTE] Still waiting for you to back up any of your claims, for that matter.
Interesting how when called to back their claims, the only people who can and have are the people in support of finding the truth.
What difference does it make if 9/11 was an inside job or if there's some sort of conspiracy surrounding it that could be true? We're never going to hear the truth if it was an inside job, and even if some information did break out, the media would instantly deny its credibility. So in the end, it's a waste of time and effort to speculate because nothing can or will be done about it.
[QUOTE=ShukaidoX;24847160]Interesting how when called to back their claims, the only people who can and have are the people in support of finding the truth.[/QUOTE] You two seems to have conveniently ignored this. [QUOTE=CodeMonkey3;24810551] [URL="http://www.facepunch.com/#"]View YouTUBE video[/URL] [URL]http://youtube.com/watch?v=_kSq663m0G8[/URL] [editline]06:56PM[/editline] Oh Jesus, this again? That building did partially collapse. The top 11 floors were steel framed, those were the ones to collapse. The concrete inner core saved the rest of the building from completely collapsing and part of the 11 floors it supported. [IMG]http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/staff/agentsmith/madrid.jpg[/IMG] The World Trade Center was steel framed, not mention it lacked a concrete inner core. That's completely ignoring a fact that a jet flew into it going 560 miles an hour, full of jet fuel, destroying much of the support columns, blowing off the fire proofing, burning tons of paper and other office supplies and had to support the tons of building above the impact site. The "This is the first time a steel framed building has ever collapsed due to fire!" argument holds no water, there have been quite a few steel framed buildings that have collapsed due to fire, ranging from schools to highways. Certainly 9/11 was the first time in history a 'skyscraper' collapsed from fire, but it was also the first and only time an unprotected steel-framed building burned unchecked for a prolonged period of time. By the same logic we can say that 100% of unprotected steel-framed buildings have collapsed due to fire. I should also note that the new World Trade Center is being designed with a concrete core for this reason.[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=ExplodingGuy;24847365]You two seems to have conveniently ignored this.[/QUOTE] The building the poster compared was completely different in its inner structure and is negligible in comparison due to the fact Building 7 collapsed from minimal fires whereas that structure was left burning for hours and hours. Also in building 7 the 23rd floor received 15 million dollars worth of renovations, including independent and secure air and water supplies, and bullet and bomb resistant windows designed to withstand 200 MPH winds. Why would a building this elaborate and complex built to withstand [B]terrorist attacks [/B]collapse so entirely due to fire? [I]Not to mention [/I]it collapsed in a way that would suggest controlled demolition, as evidenced by a previous poster.
[QUOTE=ShukaidoX;24847741]The building the poster compared was completely different in its inner structure and is negligible in comparison due to the fact Building 7 collapsed from minimal fires whereas that structure was left burning for hours and hours.[/quote] Both towers had fallen by 11am EST. WTC 7 collapsed at 5:20pm EST. So it burned uncontrolled for 6 and a half hours. [quote]Also in the building the 23rd floor received 15 million dollars worth of renovations, including independent and secure air and water supplies, and bullet and bomb resistant windows designed to withstand 200 MPH winds. Why would a building this elaborate and complex built to withstand [B]terrorist attacks [/B]collapse so entirely due to fire? [I]Not to mention [/I]it collapsed in a way that would suggest controlled demolition, as evidenced by a previous poster.[/QUOTE] 200mph winds =/= a 110 story building partially falling onto it. The air pressure from the collapse blew smoke and debris nearly a dozen Manhattan city blocks away from the collapse. That implies a lot of pressure at the external edge of the smoke, let alone the air pressure and falling debris point blank. None of the buildings were built to withstand terrorist attacks. The towers were designed to survive a direct hit from a 175,000 pound 707 cruising slowly around town at around 200mph, lost in a fog. Not a 300,000 pound 767 smashing into it at almost 600mph.
[QUOTE=Ridge;24847951]Both towers had fallen by 11am EST. WTC 7 collapsed at 5:20pm EST. So it burned uncontrolled for 6 and a half hours. 200mph winds =/= a 110 story building partially falling onto it. The air pressure from the collapse blew smoke and debris dozens of Manhattan city blocks away from the collapse. That implies a lot of pressure at the external edge of the smoke, let alone the air pressure and falling debris point blank. None of the buildings were built to withstand terrorist attacks. The towers were designed to survive a direct hit from a 175,000 pound 707 cruising slowly around town at around 200mph, lost in a fog. Not a 300,000 pound 767 smashing into it at almost 600mph.[/QUOTE] You're forgetting that WTC 7 collapsed without getting hit by anything. You say 6 hours as if it's a long time but in fact; recent examples of high-rise fires include the 1991 One Meridian Plaza fire in Philadelphia, which raged for 18 hours and gutted 8 floors of the 38-floor steel reinforced building, but it never collapsed. That building burned 3 times longer, but still stands today. Research indicates that even if a steel-framed building were subjected to an impossible superfire, hundreds of degrees hotter and far more extensive then any fire ever observed in a real building, it would still not collapse.
[QUOTE=ShukaidoX;24848149]You're forgetting that WTC 7 collapsed without getting hit by anything. You say 6 hours as if it's a long time but in fact; recent examples of high-rise fires include the 1991 One Meridian Plaza fire in Philadelphia, which raged for 18 hours and gutted 8 floors of the 38-floor steel reinforced building, but it never collapsed. That building burned 3 times longer, but still stands today. Research indicates that even if a steel-framed building were subjected to an impossible superfire, hundreds of degrees hotter and far more extensive then any fire ever observed in a real building, it would still not collapse.[/QUOTE] Collapsed without getting hit by anything, eh? [media][URL]http://youtube.com/watch?v=_kSq663m0G8[/URL][/media] Yeah, I guess several hundred tons of debris does no damage, right?
Shukaido is a freedom fighter, you're all ignorant for ignoring his accurate claims that the Shadow Government caused World Trade Center 7 to collapsed using a controlled demolition, the explosives with which were smuggled in without the knowledge or attention of the workers and residents, spread throughout the building and then detonated days after on 9/11. It's all part of their scheme to create an army of unwed-teenage mothers to wage a war for oil. The Shadow Government is also working with the legion of doom. [editline]06:24PM[/editline] By posting this, I'm basically saying; "Ignore him, because no matter what you'll say he'll pull something out of his ass to support his claims, unlike WTC 7."
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.