9/11 Museum’s Biggest Oversight: No Mention of WTC Building 7

How can you have a memorial and leave out a 47 story building collapsing ???!!!!
It seems the Government thinks that omitting building 7 falling they can conceal the truth, but I think the people are getting wise to this.

There was a digital presentation showing the flight paths. There where photos of Shanksville and the Pentagon. But by now you may be noticing there’s a glaring omission to this report. There is nothing on WTC7!

To add further weight to this proposition, just think how the truth about WTC7 actually changes the meaning of everything in the museum! Just think how the entire official narrative caves in on itself. It boggles the mind…

911Building 7

It was the building 7 collapse that made me really believe it was an inside job so I think they left it out because the official story is just so absurd even the most asleep sheep might wake up to the BS.

a reply to: RocksFromSpace

I don't think anyone died in the collapse of bldg 7.

Secondly its a memorial for the people who lost their lives and not a platform to argue a conspiracy theory (I mean time and place for everything).

Trying to make that argument at the memorial site is no better than the Westboro Baptist Church protesting funerals.

a reply to: RocksFromSpace
does this ''museum'' also have the terrorists fire resistant passport that flew out out of the fireball and landed on the ground? Why not? Its not like he needs it anyway.

a reply to: sk0rpi0n

one would hope so, I think that will be next to the memorial which lists the many witnesses who have wound up dead after 911

a reply to: Xcathdra

That's a ridiculous argument. Trying to compare valid questions concerning WTC7 and the homophobic ramblings of Westboro just defies logic.

No lives were lost in building 7 because it was empty because it was being imploded. Yet the owner takes out an insurance policy covering terrorist attacks just months before, then receives a billion dollar insurance payout after being on TV saying he made the call to "Pull it" .

These things raise legitimate questions which remain unanswered. Having suspicions of nefarious goings on and insider knowledge is not unreasonable under the circumstances.

It doesn't necessitate Govt. collusion, but it casts lots of doubts on the official story and who knew what and when.

a reply to: sk0rpi0n

Cargo holds designed to prevent / control a bomb explosion.
Items on the persons can survive largely intact.

There is a difference between a sustained fire and a fireball / explosion. The fireball follows the fuel source and is moving faster than a normal fire would. That blast can kill people however because its moving it is possible for items on the persons to survive. The planes did not explode on initial impact. They penetrated the exterior of the building and exploded inside from their own structural integrity failure. Debris moving thru the plane on impact hitting people before the fuel ignites. The explosions came out both sides of the buildings, which also makes it possible for items to be intact.

There are some other examples provided of located ID's / belongs from the flights that were intact as well.

I don't wanna drag off topic (not sure what angle the OP wants for discussion here). Just some observations.

Memorial for the people who lost their life not for the buildings getting destroyed, i see nothing wrong.

7 buildings were destroyed in the attack or had to be demolished in the aftermath of WTC.

a reply to: watchitburn

Reread my post.

Its not a ridiculous comparison at all.

There is a time and place for everything. A memorial dedicated to those who died in the WTC should not be used to further a conspiracy theory.

I am not saying for people to stop researching. I am saying the research should continue without dragging the memorial site into it. Not every single person who lost loved ones that day think it was an operation by our own government. To assume all families involved would welcome that type of argument at the memorial site is problematic.

Just like its problematic when the Westboro Baptist Church protests at a funeral. Its not appropriate to do and even though they have Baptist in their name does not mean they represent the mindset of everyone who belongs to the Baptist Church.

originally posted by: Mianeye
Memorial for the people who lost their life not for the buildings getting destroyed, i see nothing wrong.

7 buildings were destroyed in the attack or had to be demolished in the aftermath of WTC.

It is supposed to be a MUSEUM about 9/11. The purpose of a museum is information, how can you leave so much out. They display info on the structure of the towers...

Over time people will all be like my Father in-law who does not even believe there was a building 7 that fell because it was not on his news.

WTC7 will remain as the thorn in the side of those who caused 911. TPTB did not expect Americans to think for themselves and actually question the 'official' story and produce volumes of literature and videos pointing out the flaws and plotholes in the ''official story'' pasted all over the www. These 911 conspiracy theorists may have unwittingly thrown a wrench in the machinery of TPTB, at least enough to slow them down.

a reply to: RocksFromSpace

Precisely...

In addition to Building 7 omission is the word "Islam" before the word "terrorist".

Harry Reid types are going to be very confused by "terrorist" and think you brought the towers down!

"The 911 Museum" forgets to include Benghazi-911.

a reply to: sk0rpi0n
also, can we expect the actor who portrayed a 'random witness on the street' scientifically explain why the building collapsed...to show up as a tour guide for the 911 museum? Google it. The ''official'' explanation was framed on the spot.

I believe it was excluded to highlight the human cost of the attacks. As the official story seems to be - to the best of my understanding, a controlled demolition for safety as the integrity of the structure had been compromised, its destruction perhaps was not deemed as noteworthy when contrasted against the other losses that day in 2001, and 1993.

See:


Source: Wikipedia Article on Museum

Let's not forget that the collapse of building 7 was reported by the BBC BEFORE it collapsed. Oopsy daisy. I think they forgot to properly account for the time zone difference before they read the script.

a reply to: skunkape23

So by not commemorating it, are they hoping the conditions of its demise will be forgotten?

The editing of history....the tailoring of facts.....all products of the ministry of truth we get our information from.....
Future generations will look upon all this quite differently than we do.....the truth movement will die out with time as the memory of that day is selectively erased through propaganda.....and so it goes............

An expensive piece of propaganda, which proliferates an "official story" that is a lie and a ceaseless "war on terror" that is genocide, the 9/11 memorial and museum cost well over $700 million to build and now requires $165,000 each day to operate.

source: bigstory.ap.org...
source: en.wikipedia.org...
source: www.911memorial.org...
source: en.wikipedia.org...

Same reason it was omitted from the Official Report, they don't want you to know. Buy a Coffee Mug with Giuliani on it instead.