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.

 

Could the answers lie in Bldg. #7?

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 7 2007 @ 04:58 AM
link   
I hope none of you mind and I'm just talking off the top of my head and going by memory on all of the 9/11 conspiracy information I've been reading over the past few days, but in my humble opinion, Bldg. #7 offers the most compelling evidence that it came down by demolition. That thread here on a recent skyscraper fire in China and the fact that even though that fire burned for hours and hours where at the end of the day, that structure still stands pretty much won me over that Bldg. 7 was intentionally brought down.

So having said this, wouldn't it be better for those experts out there who strongly suspect that all 3 buildings came down this way just focus instead exclusively on Bldg.7 for now and try to win over the public as to the possibility that a controlled demolition was the reason why it collapsed?

This way when the media juts its crooked finger up into the air to see which way the winds blows on this, they may even attempt to present a special tv program about Bldg. 7 due to all of the noise out there about it's demise.

I'm just saying that wouldn't it be better to focus on one thing at a time, starting off with the most obvious case that supports the 'controlled demolition' theory than to try convincing the general public that all three went down this way? And if general public opinion is swayed toward the demolition argument about this building then we will be seeing many people out there inquiring if in fact the other 2 went down this way too!

It makes sense to me that there needs to be an organized effort where those involved are implementing some kind of logical strategy to present these alternative 9/11 theories to the public in a less strident way for public consumption. It needs to be packaged differently because the general public are not going bite at any of this information unless it's presented as 'alternative viewpoints' as opposed to 'conspiracy theories'. Anything 'conspiracy' is a turn off to most conservatives and moderates.

In short, the Controlled Demolition Hypothesis should not be presented as a 'conspiracy theory' because even though technically it is, it should instead be presented, at least at this present time, as the Unofficial reason for why those 3 buildings collapsed.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Check out this page 'Architects and Engineer's for truth9/11' for some persuasive arguments in support of the 'controlled demolition' theory.
www.ae911truth.org...

The following video was recorded at a lecture at a university by a professional architect who owns a large architectual firm in CA who's talking about why those buildings came down by controlled demolition where for the sake of laymen comprehension, he focused on Bldg.7 because it's the easiest of the 3 to prove that the Controlled Demolition Hypothesis is correct.
www.911blogger.com...



[edit on 7-9-2007 by Palasheea]

[edit on 7-9-2007 by Palasheea]




posted on Sep, 7 2007 @ 09:14 AM
link   
Yeah and not to mention all the documents that were convenantly destroyed in wtc7.



posted on Sep, 7 2007 @ 12:16 PM
link   
the owner took out a lease 1 month before and a multi multi million dollar insurance policy, he said on TV it was pulled the building was



new topics
 
0

log in

join