My theory on WTC7

page: 1
0
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join

posted on Feb, 23 2005 @ 06:11 AM
link   
I have a theory on the WTC7 that fell all on it own supposedly around 5pm on 911 due to stress from the fire, nothing impacted it though I am sure the towers falling near it probably has some effect. Anyway I believe that there was supposed to have been a fifth hi-jacked plane that morning and for some reason it got canceled due to weather or something. I also believe the towers were rigged with hidden explosives. an employee who worked there said that at times certain areas would be off limits to everyone due to maintenanace but this had never happened before to his knowledge and this went on for the last two months before the attacks. WTC 7 was the next largest to the towers with over 40 some floors. I think that they had to bring it down before firefighters went in for if they did they would have found the explosives and also if not completely obliterated like the other two towers there might be too much physical evidence left behind to be found doing clean up. Currently I am trying to find evidence of any canceled flights before the attacks. If you recall the last flight (93) that was supposedly hi-jacked was late and many believe that had an impact on the fact that by the time it was in the air and hi-jacked the passengers realized fully what was going to happen and took matters into their hands. so in my mind it is possible that there was supposed to have been another plane hi-jacked. I was wondering if anyone might have access to or knowledge of the canceled flights before the no fly zone? I have searched the internet and can't find anything on it.




posted on Feb, 23 2005 @ 09:20 AM
link   
funny that, i am reading the book 'New Pearl Harbour' at the moment.
have you read it? its about 9/11 and how not everything the government said adds up.

www.wtc7.net...

here's a site about wtc 7. if you look at the pictures of the rubble from the building they look like they were made from a controlled explosion.



posted on Feb, 23 2005 @ 05:01 PM
link   
Thanks for the website, I'll be checking into that. No I have not read the book, sounds like a good read though, but I do know about Operation Northwood that eerily sounds like the start of the plan for 911 and was updated. Operation Northwood is actually in the government archives, I'm shocked they did not shred it. I have some links to it if you would like those. I agree that it sure looked like a controlled explosion. The thing is that not before or since 911 has a steel builing collapsed like that. I wonder what would happen if irrefutable proof came out that 911 was what many here believe it was?



posted on Feb, 23 2005 @ 11:52 PM
link   
I would like everyone to think about something here...I have just read a lot of these posts concerning "conspiracies" surrounding 9/11 and I see a commonality...the overwhelming majority of you can't spell correctly, can't form complete sentences, and can not coherently convey messages through the written word. Now, stop and consider the possibility that if you lack these abilities, perhaps you lack the ability to disseminate and comprehend logical information, i.e. reasonable, logical explanations to all of these 'theories' you have. My suggestion is this: Get an education, try joining the military and actually serving your country instead of just criticizing it, and grow up.



posted on Feb, 24 2005 @ 02:10 AM
link   
Thanks for the link, man I spent a good while on that site and found lots of information but I also found something startling:

Note flights 11, flight 93, flight 175 and 77 I noticed this

(11=11), (9+3=12), (1+7+5=13), (7+7=14)
(
Now whatever that means beats me just figured it was odd!!!!!



[edit on 24-2-2005 by 2ndSEED]



posted on Feb, 24 2005 @ 02:46 AM
link   

Originally posted by GatorRanger
I would like everyone to think about something here...I have just read a lot of these posts concerning "conspiracies" surrounding 9/11 and I see a commonality...the overwhelming majority of you can't spell correctly, can't form complete sentences, and can not coherently convey messages through the written word. Now, stop and consider the possibility that if you lack these abilities, perhaps you lack the ability to disseminate and comprehend logical information, i.e. reasonable, logical explanations to all of these 'theories' you have. My suggestion is this: Get an education, try joining the military and actually serving your country instead of just criticizing it, and grow up.


LOL I spent 6 yrs in the military. If people don't criticize, then the powers that be will get away with anything they want. If people didn't criticize then we would still be putting children to work in sweat shops. We would not have the 40 hr work week (even though I think that is still too much).
Women wouldn't be able to vote. We would still have segregation etc...etc...I could go on but I think the point is made.
I also believe that 9-11 is not as we are told. There is overwhelming evidence out there that points to wards a cover up.

Sry I don't mean to go OT but I felt a need to say that...
Great post Goose and a great theory

Makes sense to me, there is so much that points to certain ppl, including Silverstein the owner of the WTC buildings, knowing about the attack before it happened. Yes building 7 could not be allowed to remain standing because it would have given the whole game away.

Do you think maybe the plane that crashed in Pennsylvania was meant to hit building 7 and not the White House as they say?



posted on Feb, 24 2005 @ 02:49 AM
link   
Also check this picture;



Looks just a little like a controlled demolition, no?

[edit on 24/2/2005 by ANOK]


SMR

posted on Feb, 24 2005 @ 03:45 AM
link   

Originally posted by GatorRanger
I would like everyone to think about something here...I have just read a lot of these posts concerning "conspiracies" surrounding 9/11 and I see a commonality...the overwhelming majority of you can't spell correctly, can't form complete sentences, and can not coherently convey messages through the written word. Now, stop and consider the possibility that if you lack these abilities, perhaps you lack the ability to disseminate and comprehend logical information, i.e. reasonable, logical explanations to all of these 'theories' you have. My suggestion is this: Get an education, try joining the military and actually serving your country instead of just criticizing it, and grow up.


Everyone get out their spelling books,otherwise your mind will never see logic and common sense
shhhheeeesss

On topic,I think many can SAFELY agree that this building was taken down by controlled demo.The words came out of Silverstiens mouth.Common sense also tells you this,just by watching them on TV.
Anyone who has seen a demo,many have been shown from old casino's in Vegas,you see this WTC fall the same way.You cant deny that.Anyone who thinks it was fire that did this is kidding themselves.The fact that the place wasnt even on fire long,nor was there much damage,NOR the fact that only small ( smaller than the 2 towers ) fires were present.
Seeing is believing.The eyes dont lie and many saw the way it fell.Just like demos do.

Here is another good site with info and illustrations here



posted on Feb, 24 2005 @ 04:04 AM
link   

Originally posted by SMR
Seeing is believing.


There's a lot more to reality than what the you see.
Eyes don't lie?
Optical illusions are a good example of how wrong our eyes can be.

I can't say for sure what happened to WTC7.
It fell.
That's about the only thing I'm convinced of.



posted on Feb, 24 2005 @ 07:05 AM
link   

Originally posted by GatorRanger
I would like everyone to think about something here...I have just read a lot of these posts concerning "conspiracies" surrounding 9/11 and I see a commonality...the overwhelming majority of you can't spell correctly, can't form complete sentences, and can not coherently convey messages through the written word. Now, stop and consider the possibility that if you lack these abilities, perhaps you lack the ability to disseminate and comprehend logical information, i.e. reasonable, logical explanations to all of these 'theories' you have. My suggestion is this: Get an education, try joining the military and actually serving your country instead of just criticizing it, and grow up.


You inspired me to rewrite the first verse of a favorite song and GatorRanger this is dedicated to you, lets all have a big round of applause for GatorRanger, Whoohoo! The title of the song is, "You're so Anal".

Well you walked into my thread
Like you were walking onto a spelling bee
You're T's all crossed
You're I's all dotted and you're grammar it was perfect
You had one eye on spell check and on your grammar check too
And all the people thought
You're so anal
They could not help but think it
Cause you are so anal

Now don't you feel good when you inspire someone, thanks for the inspiration.


[edit on 24-2-2005 by goose]



posted on Feb, 24 2005 @ 04:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by SMR
Anyone who has seen a demo,many have been shown from old casino's in Vegas,you see this WTC fall the same way.
How many uncontrolled demolitions of skyscrapers by airplane impact have you seen to compare it to? Isn't it possible the two events could appear to be similar?



posted on Feb, 24 2005 @ 04:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by nataylor

Originally posted by SMR
Anyone who has seen a demo,many have been shown from old casino's in Vegas,you see this WTC fall the same way.
How many uncontrolled demolitions of skyscrapers by airplane impact have you seen to compare it to? Isn't it possible the two events could appear to be similar?


Yes but building 7 was NOT impacted by an aircraft, and there are plenty of building engulfed by fire to compare to.
Take the recent one in Madrid for example.
And look at the pic I posted above, then compare that to pics of controlled demolitions.



posted on Feb, 24 2005 @ 05:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by ANOK

Originally posted by nataylor

Originally posted by SMR
Anyone who has seen a demo,many have been shown from old casino's in Vegas,you see this WTC fall the same way.
How many uncontrolled demolitions of skyscrapers by airplane impact have you seen to compare it to? Isn't it possible the two events could appear to be similar?


Yes but building 7 was NOT impacted by an aircraft, and there are plenty of building engulfed by fire to compare to.
Take the recent one in Madrid for example.
And look at the pic I posted above, then compare that to pics of controlled demolitions.


OK, how many uncontrolled demolitions of skyscrapers within a few hundred yards of multi-million ton collapsed buildings do you have to compare this to?

Doesn't matter if they look alike. A collpasing building may just look like that. Show me some collasped skyscrapers that weren't brought down by explosives. Show me they look different than a controlled demolition.



posted on Feb, 24 2005 @ 05:31 PM
link   
I think the point is there really arn't any big building like that that have collapsed without explosives.
Fire alone has NEVER collapsed a building in the US...


SMR

posted on Feb, 24 2005 @ 08:03 PM
link   
Your back peddling nataylor
Many have seen buildings fall do to other causes,and they dont fall in uniform pattern like a demo.I will try and find a video or image on the net,but may be hard.
I have seen,and sure many others as well,buildings falling from small fire and earthquake damage and shown on TV,and they do NOT fall like that at all.

I just cant figure out how people look at that footage and say it was NOT a controlled demo.Even people I know that say 9/11 has no conspiracy behind it question how that building fell like that from fire.They have even said it looked like a demo.And these are people who say I am crazy to think 9/11 was an inside job and that I believe a 757 did NOT hit the Pentagon.

Again,will try and find images/video,but may be hard to get something that isnt done by way of controlled demo.



posted on Feb, 25 2005 @ 08:06 AM
link   
Does it look like a controlled demo? Sure it does. But then again, I've never seen an equivilant building collapse by any other means, so I have nothing to compare it to. Just makes sense to me that if a building falls by way of its support mechanism being damaged (either by fire, shock waves, or explosives), the building it going to fall pretty much the same way.



posted on Feb, 25 2005 @ 08:08 AM
link   
Havent they already admitted that they decided "to bring WTC7 down" with a controlled explosion.

Everyone knows it takes a long time to rig up the explosives, now they either had them in the building from when they were built or had them put in with knowledge of what was going to happen.

Now if they did this to WTC7, its not much of a stretch of the imagination to think they also did the same to the twin towers, is it?



posted on Feb, 25 2005 @ 12:17 PM
link   
You guys never worked in NY have you? A collapsing building the size of the WTC would definately cause major structural problems to surrounding buildings! LOL. And could definately cause an almost immediate collapse. Initially following the attacks they thought the Hudson River would leak its way into downtown and possibly submerge parts of the city because of the immense structural damage the whole downtown area experienced. They also subsequently thought that they'd have to manually knock down a number of downtown buildings because of such intense structural damage they suffered. Don't underestimate the forces generated by two of the largest buildings in the world falling right next to one another. I'm sure the forces generated by the first collapse weakened a lot of walls, concrete, different areas and infrastructure that the second collapse affected even worse. It's like anything.. punch your arm twice, the first time it will just hurt and the second time it will hurt even more and may even bruise.

As for your talk about a fifth plane, I'm curious as to why you think they would even want to fly into WTC7? More likely targets would include the Empire State Building, the New York Stock Exchange (small but still probably hittable by a plane), the Woolworth Building, the Chrysler Building, etc etc. If a plane hit the Empire State Building the entire day would have been 10x as worse because you'd have huge disasters not only concentrated downtown but also in midtown.



posted on Feb, 25 2005 @ 10:28 PM
link   
Hey fella's.. I saw 9-11 with my own eyes...something I will never forget for the rest of my life. I remember hearing about WTC7 .. but I believe they said that they did have to take it down b/c it wasn't structurally sound. If they didn't do it intentionally...it would've been an uncontrolled collapse. Have any of you been to the World trade Center in it's heyday. If you would've have noticed.. WTC7 is dirrectly accross the street form the WTC Towers. The way the towers came down.. it must of hit that building.. all the other buildings around it were hit, even the Hotel which is further away from the towers than WTC7. I just don't buy your conspiracy theories and all.. you guys are trying to make too much out somethign so tragic.. it happened.. keep it at that.. direct your anger or suspicions at the terroirsts and those typew of people that would do such a thing like this..and keep your theories of the US gov't outta here.... They're trying to prtoect you buddy..



posted on Feb, 26 2005 @ 01:12 AM
link   
the last I heard according to the owner himself, they had the bldg "pulled"

funny thing is. a controlled demo , takes blueprint reading , to know where all the supports are....planning takes weeks , not hours. the implication is, they had foreknowledge.

for my money, the whole thing stinks. if the gov't can plan "operation northwoods" and they can sell coc aine [ mena/central L.A. ] to our citizens , then they can do anything. those two reasons alone are enuf to have me very suspicious of what they say. their unwillingness to show confiscated footage , adds to the mystery.





new topics

top topics



 
0
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join