BBC announced collapse of WT7 before it happened!

[ska invita]

So WTC7 was structurally surveyed to assess the exact damage before it collapsed then?

That first photo clearly isn't just a hole in the 18th to 20th floors. It's a great big lump out of the corner down to ground level.

The second photo shows nearly a third of one wall wiped out.


I'm not making any leap of faith.

It is a leep of faith, and your eek smiley says it all - that hole to my untrained eye doesnt look to bad - it doesnt look like the internal steel structure is about to collapse, nor that the building will collapse in on itself as a result. your untrained eye may think something else.

both of our opinions are irrelevant - expert opinion is what counts and the fact is the expert just dont yet know what made it collapse - end of.

 

[8den]

Watch Loose Change, it is here :
http://video.google.com/videosearch?q=loose+change

Why should I watch a documentary by two losers who are forced to admit theres mistakes in it.

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-1501073182328817124&q=hardfire+with+Mark+Roberts&hl=en

Watch the makers of loose change get their arses handed to them at the above link.

I am tired of saying the same things that documentaries like the one above say, and people ask, and I begin to tell them what is in the movie, because that is where I found out. Want to know watch the movie.
Yes big planes were flown by remote control. I have seen it even on Discovery channel, they crashed a plane for fuel tests. The auto pilot of a Boeing can even land it if the pilots let it do that, the pilot does nothing just says the route. Imagine if someone programs that autopilot with a different route.

Those planes are not 757s or 767's they cannot be flown by remote control.

 

[Andy the Don]

Watch Loose Change, it is here :
http://video.google.com/videosearch?q=loose+change

Yes because a bunch of early 20's slackers from West Buttfuck USA know sooo much about civil aviation, engineering & emergencies. As well as being experts on the oil business, terrorism & military matters. So lets listen to what they have to say, because all the experts are in on the conspiracy & therefore anything they state is null & void..

Fuck off to www.itsthejews/lizards/neoconsoranythingbutwhatreallyhappened.com..

But of course we have to be in on it as well otherwise we would be as intelligent as you. Actually everyone on the whole planet apart from you Jazzz & David Icke is in on it. That's how unpopular you are..

 

[MikeMcc]

Look at the Oklahoma bombing. Huge, giant, incredible damage, building still there. Does everyone know how a controlled demolition looks like ?
Even if I snatch half of the base of a building the building does not fall like that ! Look around you at some big buildings and imagine them falling like WTC 7 did
Yes it's the same old story, ok if you don't believe me look for yourselves I stop writing around.
What solid evidence. Why do WTC 1 and 2 fall at free fall speed ? Imagine 20 stories of WTC 1 suspended at 400 meters in the air. The one falling trough air hits the ground in 9 seconds - laws of physics, the other does the same if it has to pass trough 80 similar stories ?

Are you real, or are you one of the usual fantasists come back under a new name to go over the same old shit again!? If you are, then you are going to get your arse kicked again, especially quoting from prisonplanet and loose change!

 

[WouldBe]

It is a leep of faith, and your eek smiley says it all - that hole to my untrained eye doesnt look to bad - it doesnt look like the internal steel structure is about to collapse, nor that the building will collapse in on itself as a result. your untrained eye may think something else.

A couple of broken windows wouldn't look bad but that's nearly a third of 1 wall.

What you can't see from the photo's is how deep the damage goes or if any major structural steels have been wiped out or damaged.

It's not possible to say 'it doesn't look bad'.

The only way you would know exactly what damage had been done would be to have the building structurally surveyed. The building is badly damaged. Fires were raging on many floors. Would you volunteer to go in and structurally survey that building? That's what the was for.

 

[MikeMcc]

If it's not so bad, why were the firemen complaining about the damage and the ferocity of the fires in WTC7. The reports of which caused them to pull their teams out, even from ongoing rescue work. Again, the quotes and source material is easily locatable for you if you don't believe me.

 

[goldenecitrone]

You can just imagine these loons being around when the titanic went down. Impossible, a ship going down that fast because of an Iceberg. It must have been the Hun wot dun it. And delusionist begat delusionist.

 

[Aldebaran]

Next time I fly I want its remote control permanently within sight. You can't trust anyone with them these days.

paimei, since you have such in-depth knowledge and information, can you please answer all of my questions, systematically?

salaam.

 

[Lock&Light]

Fuck off you boring spastic.

If I still bothered to report nasty postings I would report this.

 

[ska invita]

I think this threads about ready for a mysterious collapse

 

[ska invita]

A couple of broken windows wouldn't look bad but that's nearly a third of 1 wall.

What you can't see from the photo's is how deep the damage goes or if any major structural steels have been wiped out or damaged.

It's not possible to say 'it doesn't look bad'.

The only way you would know exactly what damage had been done would be to have the building structurally surveyed. The building is badly damaged. Fires were raging on many floors. Would you volunteer to go in and structurally survey that building? That's what the was for.

Many buildings have bits that fall off but the steel skeleton remains - thats whats baffling here.
Infact, till now all buildings have had that experience. You're right - you cant see inside and tell - so why speculate?

I think this threads about ready for a mysterious collapse

 

[Bob_the_lost]

Planes can be flown by remote control. No bodies of the terrorists were found.
What about that flight instructor that says that the terrortists could not fly anything ? How did they become so skilled ? How did they navigate to hit their targets in a foreign country ?

You do know that quote was taken out of context / made up / somewhere inbetween don't you?

If you read it on prison planet then it's probably made up. Jazzz has never learnt this, will you?

 

[editor]

Many buildings have bits that fall of but the steel skeleton remains - thats whats baffling here.

But neither you or I are experts in this field, so why are you refusing to acknowledge and accept the considered opinions of those who are?

There is not a shred of proof that a controlled demolition took place, there's no sigh of space beams or invisible explosives, so employing Occam's razor means that it had to have been brought down by a combination of raging diesel fires and external damage from huge falling chunks of the WTC.

 

[fractionMan]

It was the MYSTERONS!!11!

 

[Bob_the_lost]

Look at the Oklahoma bombing. Huge, giant, incredible damage, building still there. Does everyone know how a controlled demolition looks like ?
Even if I snatch half of the base of a building the building does not fall like that ! Look around you at some big buildings and imagine them falling like WTC 7 did
Yes it's the same old story, ok if you don't believe me look for yourselves I stop writing around.
What solid evidence. Why do WTC 1 and 2 fall at free fall speed ? Imagine 20 stories of WTC 1 suspended at 400 meters in the air. The one falling trough air hits the ground in 9 seconds - laws of physics, the other does the same if it has to pass trough 80 similar stories ?

Christ, it's like trying to persuade a toddler that santa isn't real. He knows that santa is real as he got a teddy for christmas.

Firstly the towers did not fall at free fall speed, nor did they fall at near free fall speed. The numbers that somone came up with were 60% retardation. That's a hell of a lot once you stop to think about it.

 

[MikeMcc]

OMG, I missed that little comment. Surely we're not going to have to go through that painful process again!

The actual fall times were 14 - 17 sec. The 9 seconds given by NIST were defined as the time from collapse initiation until the first major pieces of debris hitting the ground (funnily enough perimeter columns falling at free-fall rates!), so were delayed by 50 to >80% of the time. That's if you ignore the spires from from remenants of the core structure that remained standing for 20-30seconds before collapsing. But this was gone over in much more detail on the other thread.

 

[kyser_soze]

Put it this way...

We don't know what the reasons for WTC7 collapsing were.

But we can make a beyond reasonable doubt statement about what it wasn't...

 

[ska invita]

so employing Occam's razor means that it had to have been brought down by a combination of raging diesel fires and external damage from huge falling chunks of the WTC.

..so why are you so confident when all officials and experts avoid making this conclusion outright? Again, the official US inquiry has stated at the preliminary stage that this explenation is "improbable", whilst the demolition experts at implode.com "do not know why and how it fell and decline to hypothesize"?

 

[Jazzz]

Jazzz, I'm not all too familiar with your posts on this issue, but can you answer a few obvious questions:

1.
a)How could demolition specialists completely undetected place an immense (for me as non-informed unimaginable immense) amount of explosives needed to bring such buildings down.
b) how long do you think it took them to do this
2. If you can answer that question
a) who were they
b) who planned all of it
b) who paid all of them
c) why
3. If you answered these questions:
a) why, if all that is done undetected,not simply blow everything up but bring passenger planes into the story at that
b) who recorded the voices of the people on these planes.
c) who were the people you can hear on these recordings, talking about them being hijacked (including their families who obviously heard them speaking to them)
d) who paid all of them
e) who wrote this scenario
d) why
4. If you answered all these questions
a) who piloted those planes
b) why did they commit suicide taking hundreds of people with them
c) why is their family in this plot and agrees with the situation
d) do they get recompensations for their losses by whomever plotted all of it

After you detailed answered all of this, we can proceed.

salaam.

Hi Aldebaran, I know you are a reasonable poster so I'll try to give a brief rundown, although a lot of this I've gone over before.

1) a) & b) The WTC security was controlled. This is the key. You control the security, you can let in people to do the work, also you can keep an eye out for anyone who might find something they shouldn't. Explosives would have to be of the remote-detonation variety. Still this is no easy task, granted. It would take months I would guess.

2) The plot would have been carried out by the highest levels of the US military, with lower levels knowing nothing of it. Maybe they used the few $trillion missing in the accounts. Why? An immediate answer is to fulfil the desires of PNAC, who infamously stated they needed 'a new pearl harbour' to accomplish their ambitions to empire within a few years. But that's just half the chessboard - a grander plan is the scheme to remove freedoms of the populace. You can see this happening by the day.

3) a) Crucial to the impact of 9/11 was that we watched the horror unfold live on television, it happened before our very eyes. This would not have been accomplished if the buildings were simply demolished.

b) I'm only aware of one recording from a plane which was recorded - Betty Ong. There are a mixture of methods by which the calls could have come around. They could have been faked, they may have been the genuine person tricked into fooling his next of kin, they may have been even been genuine calls (flight 93 may have been a staged hijack, nearly all the calls were from there). The point is that the reported calls, however appealing emotionally, are far from hard evidence; and it's telling that they are presented as the incontrovertible evidence for the official story.

d) e) f) I don't think it's for me to identify who the paymasters were or who indeed was paid

4. The planes that hit their targets were not the ones that took off. I don't believe anyone committed suicide on September 11 2001.

 

[editor]

1) a) & b) The WTC security was controlled. This is the key. You control the security, you can let in people to do the work, also you can keep an eye out for anyone who might find something they shouldn't. Explosives would have to be of the remote-detonation variety. Still this is no easy task, granted. It would take months I would guess.

Jazzz: you can't just drop off explosives in laundry baskets and cupboards. They have to be directly drilled into key points and that often involves stripping back partition walls and drilling into concrete.

Are you seriously suggesting that no one noticed all those thousands of charges being drilled around their offices?!

Oh, and could you give me some examples of explosives that manage to remain perfectly stable and capable of exploding right on cue in buildings that are catastrophically ablaze?

4. The planes that hit their targets were not the ones that took off.

Not this shit again. So where did the real ones disappear to and what happened to their passengers and crew? Where's your proof? Evidence?

 

[kyser_soze]

OK, for those who've never watched a building being blown up, or the prep phase, here's a picture of HOW explosives have to be wired into a building:

And here's a rundown of how much prep work has to go into it, long with some nice text on how you blow a building up

And just for emphasis:

A lot of work goes into the building before the first explosive charge can be placed. Interior walls, ceilings, doors and such are stripped from the building until nothing remains but the superstructure. This is then carefully attacked to weaken the building in key locations.

Now this is for a 20 storey building...

Jazz - your CD arguments are a crock of shite. Leaving aside the dubious science you claim (which is easily contradicted by people who actually know what they're talking about), the absolute failure of you and your fellows to come up with an even remotely convincing exaplanation of how the building was prepped - even if you ignore the necessity of drilling explosives directly into the concrete and what this would actually entail in a busy building like the WTC - leaves you holding a baby that isn't just still born - it never even got the stage of being a viable zygote.

 

[Crispy]

To be fair, kyser, that's a concrete building in the photo.

 

[kyser_soze]

Ah well, can't find any stills of prep work for steel frame CD...

 

[editor]

To be fair, kyser, that's a concrete building in the photo.

Here's the kind of thing 'The Man' would have to invisibly install for a controlled demolition of a large, steel framed building:

Under CDI direction, Homrich/NASDI’s 21 man crew needed three months to investigate the complex and four months to complete preparations for CDI’s implosion design. During that period, the lower two basements of the structure were filled with engineered fill and the perimeter basement walls bermed to 1st basement level with soil to support perimeter walls which would surely have failed under soil and hydrostatic loads once the horizontal support of the Hudson’s internal structure was removed by the implosion.

Double column rows installed in the structure between vertical construction phases, internal brick shear walls, x-bracing, 70 elevators and 10 stairwells created an extremely stiff frame. Columns weighing over 500 lb/ft, having up to 7.25 inch thick laminated steel flanges and 6 inch thick webs, defied commercially available shaped charge technology. CDI analyzed each column, determined the actual load it carried and then used cutting torches to scarf-off steel plates in order to use smaller shaped charges to cut the remaining steel. CDI wanted to keep the charges as small as possible to reduce air over pressure that could break windows in adjacent properties.

CDI’s 12 person loading crew took twenty four days to place 4,118 separate charges in 1,100 locations on columns on nine levels of the complex. Over 36,000 ft of detonating cord and 4,512 non-electric delay elements were installed in CDI’s implosion initiation system, some to create the 36 primary implosion sequence and another 216 micro-delays to keep down the detonation overpressure from the 2,728 lb of explosives which would be detonated during the demolition.
http://www.controlled-demolition.com/default.asp?reqLocId=7&reqItemId=20030225133807

If anyone thinks you could pull that off in an occupied, working building without a single soul noticing then they surely are a Grade A Nutcase with no grasp on reality.

 

[detective-boy]

d) e) f) I don't think it's for me to identify who the paymasters were or who indeed was paid

Which, roughly translated, means "This one's too difficult so I'll just blank it - can't even think up any shite like what I did for the others ..."

 

[detective-boy]

Are you seriously suggesting that no one noticed all those thousands of charges being drilled around their offices?!

Look, there was a bit of dust noticed a few times. And a bit of noise from "renovations" (Ha!). I've told you before about keeping up!

 

[Jazzz]

Which, roughly translated, means "This one's too difficult so I'll just blank it - can't even think up any shite like what I did for the others ..."

Well, seeing as the FBI hasn't come up with a definitive list of names, with all their investigative abilities, I certainly don't see how I can be expected to.

 

[Jazzz]

Here's the kind of thing 'The Man' would have to invisibly install for a controlled demolition of a large, steel framed building:

If anyone thinks you could pull that off in an occupied, working building without a single soul noticing then they surely are a Grade A Nutcase with no grasp on reality.

As far as you know they could have been installed before the building was occupied. The planning for this would have gone back years.

 

[Chairman Meow]

As far as you know they could have been installed before the building was occupied. The planning for this would have gone back years.

Wow. You really are utterly bonkers, aren't you?

 

[editor]

As far as you know they could have been installed before the building was occupied. The planning for this would have gone back years.

Could you give me a single example of a large building in New York - or any other major American city - being built with explosives charges pre-installed, please?

It's quite the most stupid, moronic, fuckwitted and - of course - evidence-free suggestion I've heard for years.

Why on earth would anyone build a massive commercial structure pre-wired with massive - and potentially unstable - explosive charges and leave them for fifteen years? And how come no one's stepped forward and taken credit for the job? And why do you think the building inspector managed to miss all the wires and explosives?

Go on. I dare you to come up with a non-lunatic answer to such a ridiculous, outlandish claim.