9/11 third tower mystery 'solved'

reply to post by jpm1602


Surely you can smell the Sarcasm?

"wink"

Originally posted by Extralien
The BBC also fails to mention it's own 'mistake' of reporting that WTC7 was down before it had happened.
[edit on 4-7-2008 by Extralien]

THAT should be the most damming peice of evidence...

Instead... its just ignored...



Its been totaly blacked from view...

I can gaurentee that 99% percent of not just americas, but EVERYONE who is globaly aware doesnt know this...


To see those little empty suits, saying that the tower has fallen, and it is DIRECTLY in the foreground... is just mind blowing...

I guess the Brits are daft... i mean... they were looking at the building standing, while they were reported as saying it has already fallen...

I guess the US gets our shody reporting from our UK mothers...

Personally, I lean toward thinking 9-11 was an inside job.

Having said that, I am very much looking forward to reading this report, and will do so open mindedly. I am not so attached to my beliefs that I will not leave facts change them. I would like nothing more than to be throughly convinced that the government is not covering anything up.

I think that despite what this report suggests, there will still be some very huge questions left to be answered, such as, why did this take 7 years when the rest of the report did not? And more importantly, why didn't the media and politicians question how long this report was taking?

I mean seriously, not one person in the main stream media or congress (well there are a few exceptions in congress that were called kooks) has expressed outrage at the fact that 7 years after the collapse of these three towers we still have no clue as to why one of them came crashing down.

I leave it to the readers of this thread, who is more patriotic, the people demanding answers as to why building 7 fell, or the people who find it outrageous to do so?

reply to post by xmotex


there were no firefighters in the building. how can you pull out something that's not in?

Originally posted by Andrew E. Wiggin
reply to post by Comforter

 

Do you really believe that people outside of the government of the united states are not capable of carrying out any of these attacks?

Im really glad this question was asked...let's get away from the buildings and look at another aspect of 9/11. Are people outside our government able to make NORAD stand down? I don't think so.

Is anyone outside our government able to put control of NORAD into the hands of Dick Cheney for the first time in history 2 months prior to the attack? I don't think so.

So by answering those two questions alone, leads me to your answer... No. No one outside the US Government was capable on carrying out these attacks. Bin Laden didnt make NORAD stand down. Muhammad Atta didn't give control on NORAD to Dick Cheney, and AL CIAda didnt keep jet fighters grounded on 9/11 so that "Hijacked" Passenger plans could fly around for hours without being intercepted.

What would be a good option to save lives?
A) Pull the firefighting effort away from WTC7, which it is known it will collapse soon from damage, to save the lives of the firefighters?
or
B) blow it up to save lives by rushing more people into the building to rig it with explosives?
Which sounds more plausible?

You are assuming that the building would have had to be wired with explosives right there on the spot. This is not the case at all. There is plenty of information out there that suggest when Building 7 as well as both Towers could have been wired. You just have to go look for it and there is some very good info already on this thread that can help you get started.

Now second:
WTC7 is burning on multiple floors. FDNY reports it is tilting, creaking, large gash down its face that got hit by WTC North. It is in danger of falling over. So now, how does a demo team go in there and set up charges so fast when it usually takes days and weeks to rig up a real CD on a much smaller building? You mean to tell me it only took a few hours to set up demo charges in a burning, tilting, 47 story building? Must be a new record! (not to mention the hazard pay for whoever did it)

You seem to put so much stock into what these firefighters "said" yet you ignore the hundreds that do claim to have witnessed secondary explosions and in the case of Building 7 you just disregard completely the claims of firefighters who say they heard the actual countdown to the demolition of Building 7.

Something else you say makes no sense at all... you claim the building is tilting. By your description a building that is tilting and ready to come down would fall into the path of least resistance. So wouldn't Building 7 if it was already "tilting" fall into that path? Instead this building does not fall into it's "tilt" but falls straight down within itself causing virtually no damage to the buildings beside it.

No record in wiring the building, it was done before hand and we already covered that.

Third:
Preplanted explosives? How can that be? If that was the case, and Larry knew about them, why the hell would the FDNY Commander call him, and then have Larry tell the fire commander to blow it up? Look, if it was meant to be blown up, with prior knowledge from LS, what is the point of calling him and asking him what to do, and why blow it up 7 freaking hours later? Not to mention the risk of the charges going off early from the fires and/or the impact of the North Tower's debris? Seriously.

You want answers to these questions? Then demand a new investigation into 9/11. What you are asking for is way too much speculation...and why should I waste my time speculating when I can deal with the facts of the case which show that 9/11 was an inside job? If we had a REAL investigation into 9/11 every question you have asked would already be answered. You can't ask me to answer it...that would be like asking me why Ted Bundy kill victim #3? I don't know why he did it...but I know that he did.

Fourth:
Fire fighters that actually were in and around WTC7 all said WTC7 was severely damaged. One even points it out on a youtube video.
(see "Firefighter comments on WTC 7 on 9/11" on youtube)
They then all said they got "pulled" in one way or another from WTC7 by the fire commander because it was going to collapse.
Now, are they all lying? If so, why? The just lost a few hundred of their fellow brothers to the first collapses. Why would they lie about getting pulled and pointing out the damage done to WTC7?

Why lie? Because it would be in their best interest to do so. Most of these first responders need medical care, maybe they got it by parroting the official story, maybe they were threatened or told to leave it alone. Reports of these types of things have been around for quite some time. Even well before 9/11 it is no big secret that the US Government has silenced people one way or another.

Using your logic however.... why would the countless other first responders lie? Why would they say they heard a countdown? Why would they say they witnessed and heard secondary explosions? Why would Willie Rodriguez lie hours after the Towers Collapsing? Personally I will take the testimony of First Responders who were interviewed right away than the testimony of someone who has had the time to rehearse their story.

Why cant people can use their critical thinking skills and some common sense (which I know nowadays is really hard to come by) before jumping to crazy conclusions?

Funny I was thinking that same thing when I was reading about the "tilting" building that did not fall over but instead fell within itself defying all the basic Laws of Physics.



[edit on 5-7-2008 by MrWendal]

Ah great, hopefully nist will be involved this time too..

Had me worried the demolition..err..collapse, was pre-planned for a moment.

Logic tells me a few small spot fires cant bring down a 'steel framed' building, but if nist or some other 'expert' that knows better can tell me 'a few fires started, the core melted, and it came down, kthxbye' then Im a happy man.

Originally posted by Extralien
The BBC also fails to mention it's own 'mistake' of reporting that WTC7 was down before it had happened.

THAT should be the most damming peice of evidence...

Instead... its just ignored...

Its been totaly blacked from view...



Yea, well the 'believers' dont want to touch that one. Best they debate 'structural strength' and the melting point of steel, than try and tackle irrefutable proof.

This, building 7's collapse, flight 93, other video evidence, alleged hijackers still living, and the fact they have deliberately with-held video evidence from the pentagon, coupled with who benefited from 9/11 all points to ONE thing - A MASSIVE cover-up & pre-planned events on that day.

[edit on 5-7-2008 by Nonchalant]

I have always wondered why a large number if not all control demo companies did not go out of business after 911. I mean the evidence shows 100% that all you have to do is set a fire in a steel frame building to bring it down. Why pay all that money to a company to come in and wire it up over the course of a few weeks when you could just pay a few bums off the streets to walk through the building with a few gas cans and some matches and accomplish the same thing. In fact i have been thinking of starting my own demo company. This would be a very cheap business to open, the only equipment i would need are gas cans and matches.

those who believe that any structure that is heavily damaged on one side and not so much on the others(steel framed or wood)will fall straight down while the roof stays completely level i suggest this. Go to the home depot and get you 4 pieces of 8 by 4 plywood and 4, 8 ft. 2x4 and fashion your self a large box and stand it up, next get a shot gun and start shooting one side of it, obviously you would have to shoot at an angle through one corner of the structure and once you have damaged this thing severely enough for it to fall, get on ats and tell us whether or not it fell to the side, toppling over, or if it fell straight down through itself while the top stayed completely level until it hit the ground. Im sure you already know what your answer will be.

later

reply to post by dontmatter

This would be a very cheap business to open, the only equipment i would need are gas cans and matches.

Kool! can i be your business partner!
Some of these sheeple have got some serious learning to do.
Are they thick or ignorant? which one? either way there not helping...

reply to post by hande

I think all "terrorist" planes landed to secured location and passangers were eliminated. Auto-pilot planes hit WTC 1,2. Pentagon was hit by missile or something like that.

Wouldnt it be easier to simply crash the planes with the passengers on board? I'm pretty sure they would be just as dead, and you wouldnt have to worry about the logistics of killing and removing hundreds of people, not to mention getting rid of the planes.

Simpler is better. Especially in an operation as complex as 9/11.

CT

Dear Andrew E. Wiggin

It is not a question of what could have been it is only a question of what was and is.

In every case of terrorism I have personally researched or assisted in stopping, an inside group has assisted the “terrorist”.

Now I know people read a statement like that and think Jeez this guy a nut.

Let me give you an example:

The Move in Philadelphia back in the early 80’s was backed by money from an Islamic organization based in NY.

They picked up some L.A.W.s, M-16 and this is important, cases of HEs.
They proceeded to do “evil deeds” including downing two aircraft one during landing at New Orleans. “Wind Shear” was the official cover-up. I think it was even used for the six planes in the US and one in Mexico that broke in half at take off and landing. You see L.A.W.s suck for range and really not best for taking down planes.

Anyway instead of buying these munitions (my suggestion) the FBI wanted to trail the perp selling the goods that had come from an armory heist back in 82 from NY (yes NY). Never mind that it included me going hand to hand with a guy with his hand on a piece clearing his ankle holster, no problem, giants, mass killers, just doing my civic duty for an ungrateful people.

I’ll spare you the long story. John Africa was about to get paid $230 million to stop that, the body count was only around 400. This was not what I thought was a really great plan but when the SOB decided he also wanted all aid to Israel stopped more people agreed that a pay off was a really bad idea. So history is history the Move made good kindling (I know what about the children, well there was an infant on that flight they took down too). But what poor thug, in any city in the US is going to come up with a demand like that when they are about to grab $230 million in cash? Seems the old Islamic hand was pulling some more strings.

Now since Johnny Public doesn’t know this or any of the other long lists of similar activities about US history. Maybe they should, cause it is the same damn group that brings these people together in the US. It is always the same power brokers setting the terrorists up with US legs and muscle to get the job done, for a nominal fee.

I think the ones that do know continue to cover up the group. Our system has covered this group that has backed every single terrorist activity in the US that I have looked into since 1970.

The group that brokers these deals was into law enforcement and our government even back then. Like Frankenstein’s Monster it doesn’t really have a name. But one organization that joined up with it was called the Process. The Process left the west coast during 1974 thru 1975 to join the Foundation in NY (get it NY). Looking at the restructuring during those years as well as its power I just wonder what the “sainted” Rockefeller Foundation was up to just prior to 9-11? What kind of money has passed through that group since? They are only a few blocks from “ground zero”.

reply to post by Andrew E. Wiggin

"But if someone wants me to believe 9/11 was an inside job, they're going to have to do better than this "

Fine, keep your eyes shut and believe as you wish. I really think you will be just as happy believing everything the govenment and media tell you.
Don't worry, be happy

Did anybody watch the recent BBC documentary regarding the "third tower"?
what are your views?

I dont think they really "solved" anything really, it was just another way so "they" can get the final say.

It took them 7 years to come to the conclusion that we all knew they would come to, despite what really happened?

There will be no public outcry about this report. Most people don't even know about Building 7. Ask anyone out on the street how many buildings collapsed on 9/11, and I guarantee most will say two.

No one will pay attention to this report. They've dragged this on for a good long time so that the masses have moved on, the mainstream media will barely mention it, and then we'll have another celebrity scandal to move on to.

This is the last, more widely known "mystery" of 9/11, and now they have "solved it" and put it to bed. In their eyes, and the eyes of the average American who may know of the existence of a Building 7, the "9/11 Truth Movement" is dead and there's nothing left to confront.

Those of us who are intelligent aren't convinced, but that would only matter if intelligence was the majority in this country.

Go watch re-runs of The Bachelorette. Nothing to see here.

Originally posted by Maya432
get ready for the typical OFFICIAL BS
lies lies lies lies
and more lies.......
911 was an inside job,,, its been proven over and over again.

Spare Change and Zeitgeist do not constitute proof. A construction worker who heard something does not consttiute proof. Proof means we know who did, how they did it, and why they did it.

Originally posted by Unkle Greggo

Originally posted by Maya432
get ready for the typical OFFICIAL BS
lies lies lies lies
and more lies.......
911 was an inside job,,, its been proven over and over again.

Spare Change and Zeitgeist do not constitute proof. A construction worker who heard something does not consttiute proof. Proof means we know who did, how they did it, and why they did it.

Quite right.

What should have been said was 'evidence to suggest'.
It's through a collection of evidence that can lead to proof.

And, to me, there is plenty of evidence to suggest that what happened was not what we have been told. There is just way too much evidence that throws massive amounts of doubt on the official story.

reply to post by NovusOrdoMundi

This is the last, more widely known "mystery" of 9/11, and now they have "solved it" and put it to bed. In their eyes, and the eyes of the average American who may know of the existence of a Building 7, the "9/11 Truth Movement" is dead and there's nothing left to confront.

I hope your wrong but it dont seem too rosy...

I know its very disrespectful to the victims but i wish all those "witnesses" took a lie detector test in public.
They could of shown people who were certainly there but not in the places mentioned, so its kinda like TWISTING the truth.

I think the truth movement should keep going, full steam.
There are still a lot of people not clued up.
Theres still the other inconsistencies;
Footage of "plane" at pentagon?
"wreckage" at shanksville?
thermate lava on twin towers?
even WMDs?


There are too many dying right now BECAUSE of 9/11!
It cant be over...

reply to post by badBERTHA


" 9/11 third tower mystery 'solved'

Investigators are expected to say ordinary fires on several different floors caused the collapse. "


Mystery? What bloody mystery?

There's no mystery mate, unless you are just addressing the zombies, who need an official to tell them what happened,

because they're afraid to think on their own and they can't trust their own mind!..

The rest of us who have been paying attention, know how they all came down, and don't need an official stooge to tell us fairy tales...

[edit on 9-7-2008 by toasted]

Hi there - the title is a quote from the bbc - so isn't my own choice of words.

The programme shown in the UK has been repeated 3 times so far which I thought was a bit unusual in itself. I've watched it and was left completely unconvinced - the experts and witnesses were in favour of the fire theory were particularly weak. In fairness to the BBC they did cover all the main popular questions relating to this conspiracy and presented the for and against views - for me it was the views of the nay sayers who looked the least plausible, one of particular note was the chap who was recorded to have said that he had stepped over bodies etc when he was being led from the building then completely denying that he'd said any such thing.. instant credibility failure.

Anyway at least important issues like this are being aired one way or another - most right minded people will still draw their own conclusions

All the best

Berth

Any one believing the Official Fairy Tale need not read further.

First of all if we, as a nation, wanted to do something about 911 way back on 9-12-01, we should have taken Pakistan since their ISI was over here setting things up prior to and during our latest “Pearl Harbor”. I would recommend the taking of this nation at that time to secure the nukes there and to replace the present coup with elements of there last legitimate government (while she was still alive).

At the same time having the very best undercover agents we have (should have been sent) looking into dismantling the “cult” within the Rockefeller Foundation, the one that uses tetra toxin with such unnoticed success. Oh and were involved with so many other unreported terrorist acts within the US. Sky scrapers falling down were just too hard to keep unnoticed even from the American public. But that was the plan to create a Pearl Harbor - gather around the flag boys!

Particular prejudice should have been shown to that “cult” groups ties with politicians that supply inductees into West Point. Perhaps this would guide those of us that have taken action in the past to have clear targets of actual leaders in this matter (911). I suspect we would find them to be the same ones that supply children to Saudi Princes for a slight fee.

Also and at the same time our rapid deployment should have been sent into Syria to take possession of the Variant-U / Red Rain fungal agent that was taken there from Iraq just prior to the act of war on Iraq. This is the actual WMD so well advertised but missing from Iraq prior to the start of the war.

Ideally Special Ops could have taken care of all matters except Pakistan, who by way of trafficking the Opiate product from Afghanistan have too much money and political control.

At present we continue to strengthen our enemies with no perceivable economic plans in place to prevent the spreading of war. The greatest advancement of war still exists from Pakistan becoming a Islamic theological state.

How oh how could this possibly happen you ask. The plan at hand is to stash two thirds of the bio-fungal of new improved Marburg virus (Variant- U) with improved Yellow rain (red variant) into the nuclear waste storage areas used for commercial nuclear wastes in western India. This gas will be released over southern Pakistan to destroy the area of that country allowing the US to have a puppet at their helm. The US has spent 10 billion dollars at present on this puppet.

What is achieved here will be to undercut “democracy” (India will not know what is going on) in that part of the world and gain control of those 40 plus nuclear warheads in Pakistan. It also will give the American public a taste for what the remaining one third of gas will do in the US (southern Florida).

I don’t know if this is complete enough to paint an accurate picture for you all or not so keep on posting until I give an understandable big picture.

reply to post by Comforter


what are you saying? USA are going to wipe out Pakistan?!! This cant be!
Im clueless, please explain...