It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

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

page: 4
47
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 8 2014 @ 04:59 AM
link   

originally posted by: Mianeye
a reply to: Moresby



Clearly this statement isn't true:

lol In reality i couldn't care less about 9/11... Im over it, so that statement isn't true


You're clearly not "over it".

People who are over things don't devote their free time to debating the issue.

You're like the guy who says he's over a break up right after leaving the 19th message on his ex's voicemail that night.




posted on Jun, 8 2014 @ 05:02 AM
link   

originally posted by: hgfbob
yet WTC7,NOT hit by a plane OR falling tower debris,


You really know nothing about 9/11, as you again show your lack of knowledge.


Captain Chris Boyle Engine 94 - 18 years Boyle: ...on the north and east side of 7 it didn’t look like there was any damage at all, but then you looked on the south side of 7 there had to be a hole 20 stories tall in the building, with fire on several floors. Debris was falling down on the building and it didn’t look good. Firehouse: When you looked at the south side, how close were you to the base of that side? Boyle: I was standing right next to the building, probably right next to it. Firehouse: When you had fire on the 20 floors, was it in one window or many? Boyle: There was a huge gaping hole and it was scattered throughout there. It was a huge hole. I would say it was probably about a third of it, right in the middle of it. And so after Visconti came down and said nobody goes in 7, we said all right, we’ll head back to the command post. We lost touch with him. I never saw him again that day.



Deputy Chief Peter Hayden Division 1 - 33 years ...also we were pretty sure that 7 World Trade Center would collapse. Early on, we saw a bulge in the southwest corner between floors 10 and 13, and we had put a transit on that and we were pretty sure she was going to collapse. You actually could see there was a visible bulge, it ran up about three floors. It came down about 5 o’clock in the afternoon, but by about 2 o’clock in the afternoon we realized this thing was going to collapse. Firehouse: Was there heavy fire in there right away? Hayden: No, not right away, and that’s probably why it stood for so long because it took a while for that fire to develop. It was a heavy body of fire in there and then we didn’t make any attempt to fight it. That was just one of those wars we were just going to lose. We were concerned about the collapse of a 47-story building there. We were worried about additional collapse there of what was remaining standing of the towers and the Marriott, so we started pulling the people back after a couple of hours of surface removal and searches along the surface of the debris. We started to pull guys back because we were concerned for their safety.


www.911myths.com...



posted on Jun, 8 2014 @ 05:11 AM
link   
a reply to: Moresby

Then keep researching it.

The argument made for wtc 7 is not supported by the NIST report.
Because of that there is no need to invoke it at the memorial site.

However if it were to be included then it should reflect the result of the study and not the conspiracy portion.

Secondly those bitching about Kennedy are not doing so at the museum / memorial.
It would be inappropriate, as would including conspiracy info about WTC 7 at the WTC memorial / museum.
edit on 8-6-2014 by Xcathdra because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 8 2014 @ 05:15 AM
link   
a reply to: Moresby

Well...You are kind of right, i'm just tired of the same BS being posted again and again when clearly there is no proof of WTC 7 being demolished on purpose but there is clearly evidence of the opposite , but i have made up my mind based on facts not on theories so therefore i am over it but will still participate in discussions.

What about the rest of my post...Don't you have a comment on that, i asked you to provide some counter proof??

edit on 8-6-2014 by Mianeye because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 8 2014 @ 05:16 AM
link   

originally posted by: Flatcoat
a reply to: Xcathdra




People need to understand that when buildings are constructed, they are done so in manner that will equalize / distribute the weight of the building evenly. All it takes is the failure of one support column to cause a shift in weight balance. That will overburden other support columns, eventually leading to a failure.


Right..because it's happened so many times before..ever heard of redundancy? "OSers" are always asking "truthers" for proof, so show me proof of this alleged girder walkoff at column 79. And I don't mean some crappy, totally unrealistic computer sim.


Stop being lazy and go to the link I provided in my response, which is to the report along with pictures.

As for redundancy yes I have heard of it. They are in place to prevent catastrophic instances in semi controlled scenarios allowing for a greater chance of survival. Since no one was in WTC 7 the building was ignored, which allowed the structural integrity to break down because none of the fires were dealt with nor was any type of effort made to shore up structural integrity points that were compromised.

Resulting in WTC 7 collapse.

I love it when you guys invoke a report, and the moment it does not support your position you demand more proof.



posted on Jun, 8 2014 @ 05:56 AM
link   
Same thing with the 9/11 commission report. I have a copy right here and there is no mention of a 47 story building collapsing! How does an investigative report not mention a skyscraper collapsing?!?!?

9/11 was a MOSSAD operation from the get go.

"By way of deception, thou shalt do war."

Cant wait for the posters to come in and here saying your disrespecting the people who lost their lives in that day because your questioning the event. It's just the opposite. If you don't question the event when there's writing all over the wall, you are pissing over the victims graves for not seeking the truth!

Truth does not fear investigation.



posted on Jun, 8 2014 @ 06:00 AM
link   
a reply to: loveguy

Nice straw man. Is that really the best you can do?



posted on Jun, 8 2014 @ 06:13 AM
link   
a reply to: LadyGreenEyes

Building 6 is another can of worms as well. I wonder if its mentioned in this museum.



posted on Jun, 8 2014 @ 06:22 AM
link   

originally posted by: Revelations29
Same thing with the 9/11 commission report. I have a copy right here and there is no mention of a 47 story building collapsing! How does an investigative report not mention a skyscraper collapsing?!?!?


What is the title of the report?


9/11 was a MOSSAD operation


Yes, there is always at least one.... "Blame the Jews"!!



posted on Jun, 8 2014 @ 07:54 AM
link   
a reply to: hellobruce

"9/11 Report The National Commission on Terrorist Attacks upon the United States"

Authored by Thomas H. Kean, Chair, and Lee H. Hamilton, Vice Chair.

Blame the Jews? Do you honestly think I just picked the MOSSAD out of the blue, for no reason whatsoever?

www.conspiracy-cafe.com...

Read the whole thing and get back to me.

I also would like your opinion on why the official 9/11 commission report did not mention anything about WTC 7 falling?


"blame the Jews"

I never said anything about Jews. MOSSAD is not a Jewish operation. MOSSAD is a Zionist organization that has nothing to do with Judaism. Do you understand what Judaism is? Do you understand that MOSSAD has nothing to do with Judaism at all?

I'm guessing you don't. Because when I say the MOSSAD was behind 9/11, you immediately think I'm an anti Semite, and of course, this is an easy tactic to use to discredit someones argument. Because when someone criticizes Isreali actions or the actions of the MOSSAD, they are immediately called an Anti Semite and a racist. This is a tactic used by Zionists so they can avoid questioning and criticism.

Instead of using logical fallacies like the Straw man you used "blame the jews" you could easily try to further your argument by providing me reasons why the 9/11 commission report never mentioned WTC 7 falling. Or why it fell in the first place.

Your use of a straw man shows your true intentions on this board. And what intention might that be? No one uses a Straw Man on purpose unless their trying to deliberately discredit someones argument to make themselves look more reasonable, instead of rational debate. Which you people can never do, because if you did, you wouldn't be here in the first place.



posted on Jun, 8 2014 @ 08:05 AM
link   

originally posted by: Mianeye
a reply to: Moresby

Well...You are kind of right, i'm just tired of the same BS being posted again and again when clearly there is no proof of WTC 7 being demolished on purpose but there is clearly evidence of the opposite , but i have made up my mind based on facts not on theories so therefore i am over it but will still participate in discussions.

What about the rest of my post...Don't you have a comment on that, i asked you to provide some counter proof??


I only wanted to dismiss your claim that it's been "debunked so many times it isn't even funny". Clearly, it's not been effectively debunked. Those who believe in the conspiracy promoted by the government are very scared of the WTC7 evidence.

This is the whole point of this thread. Why would they exclude WTC7 from the 9/11 Museum? The only reason that seems at all logical is because it calls into question the conspiracy theory that the government supports. It's very existence does that. Numerous people have stated it's the single fact that drew them to alternate narratives.

Many OC supporters just wish WTC7 would go away. The museum has made their wish come true.



posted on Jun, 8 2014 @ 08:10 AM
link   
a reply to: Revelations29

Whats to discuss about WTC 7?

The NIST report and subsequent 3 year study determined the cause and the reason for collapse.

in total about 6 buildings were destroyed that day. Either directly by impact and structural compromise or by structural compromise from debris from WTC 1 and 2 coupled with fires that went uncontrolled.

The video that shows the collapse of WTC 1 and 2 are predominately from a distance where the collapse looks "organized" IE controlled. If you watch the video taken near the base looking up with the buildings collapse you will see it was anything but controlled. You will also see the debris slamming into surrounding buildings on the way down.

Another factor is the "earthquake" registered because of the debris. New York, contrary to how its portrayed, does not sit completely on geologically solid ground. Secondly a large chunk of the island is built on human expanded areas. During the construction of the new WTC you can see this when they had to shore up the walls where they had seepage from the ocean.

Taken individually can result in damage. Taken together and its impact can be more than what people think. not to mention the buildings in question were older.



posted on Jun, 8 2014 @ 08:15 AM
link   
9/11 Memorial Museum

The Museum Exhibition Design


Part 3: After 9/11

The culminating chapter of the historical exhibition takes visitors from the immediate aftermath of 9/11 to the present moment, exploring the character and challenges of the post-9/11 world. From presentations on collective grief, global responses, and the search for the missing in the immediate days and weeks after the attacks, the exhibition will explore the prodigious efforts of recovery and rebuilding at the three attack sites, describing innumerable acts of compassion, volunteerism and public service. A final alcove presents the ongoing questions arising out of 9/11, and the evolving nature of how we understand its significance and place in history.



posted on Jun, 8 2014 @ 08:40 AM
link   
a reply to: Moresby




Those who believe in the conspiracy promoted by the government are very scared of the WTC7 evidence.


What evidence, because there is no factual evidence, there are just theories from conspiracist picking things out of content.

IMO there is no evidence in the way the main buildings collapsed ( WTC1, WTC2, WTC7 ) that shows that it was an inside job and brought down on purpose , they simply collapsed from damage which is "proven", it can never completly be proven, only calculated/simulated from videos,witnesses , pictures and knowledge about the damage and the buildings structure, but there is plenty of videos and pic's to base it on.

I'm not saying that it wasn't an inside job, i'm just saying if you want evidence you are looking in the wrong direction of the whole 9/11.

The buildings are not the smoking gun, and it's ridiculous to keep saying WTC 7 is where the evidence is when there clearly are no evidence other than the usual video and the misunderstood "pull" comment from Silverstein.

"The usual video".


edit on 8-6-2014 by Mianeye because: (no reason given)

edit on 8-6-2014 by Mianeye because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 8 2014 @ 08:58 AM
link   
a reply to: Mianeye

To add to your post -

An Areal view of WTC 7 after collapse. You can see the building did not completely collapse.

Source - 911researchWTC 7



posted on Jun, 8 2014 @ 09:35 AM
link   
Treason, Betrayal, and Deceit: 9/11 and Beyond by Alan Sabrosky.
source: www.informationclearinghouse.info...

To whose benefit?




edit on 8-6-2014 by seasoul because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 8 2014 @ 10:22 AM
link   


@hellobruce...
Yes, there is always at least one.... "Blame the Jews"!!
two words ...dancing israelis. If wtc7 is the smoking gun, then the 5 israelis who were 'documenting' the event are the smoking cannons.



posted on Jun, 8 2014 @ 10:25 AM
link   

originally posted by: Mianeye
a reply to: Moresby




Those who believe in the conspiracy promoted by the government are very scared of the WTC7 evidence.


What evidence, because there is no factual evidence, there are just theories from conspiracist picking things out of content.


This thread isn't about WTC7 theories. There have been thousands of those. It's about why it's excluded from the museum. The OP's reasoning still seems the most credible:



the Government thinks that omitting building 7 falling they can conceal the truth


I haven't read a credible counter reason.

As I said previously, those that support the government's conspiracy theory wish WTC7 would just go away. And the museum has granted them that wish.



posted on Jun, 8 2014 @ 10:26 AM
link   
9/11 is a litmus test to show if are able to suspend common-sense.

They are so obviously controlled demolitions its a joke that people refuse to see it. They follow the Alpha-dog I suppose.

WTC7 that was "pulled" and then wasn't.

No pictures of the "plane" that hit the most observed building in the world (the Pentagon).

Yeah, whatever...



posted on Jun, 8 2014 @ 12:48 PM
link   

originally posted by: Xcathdra
a reply to: RocksFromSpace

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



Not according to witness testimony from fire fighters who were in the building before it collapsed...

I recall reading one account where they were apparently "stepping over dead bodies"....




top topics



 
47
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join