As federal agency declares 'new phenomenon' downed WTC 7, activists cry foul

reply to post by Andrew E. Wiggin





If you want to believe that a common office fire forced steel resistant beems to melt, subsequently collapsing an entire skyscraper at free fall speed....be my guest.


Im not here to convince anyone otherwise.

reply to post by BlackOps719


common office fire?

Yeah - that'd be the only office fire - in history - to be started by a bat out of hell giant jumbo jet full of jet fuel


but yeah

just an office fire :shk:

reply to post by Andrew E. Wiggin





You mean the jumbo jet liner filled with fuel that DIDN'T hit WTC7?





Edit: you SURE you dont wanna go back and watch those videos now?



[edit on 8/21/08 by BlackOps719]

reply to post by Andrew E. Wiggin


Uh... a "bat out of hell giant jumbo jet full of jet fuel" did not strike WTC 7. There were several small fires, usually referred to as "office fires" in this building. There was no catalyst, such as jet fuel (we won't revisit the "jet fuel doesn't burn hot enough to weaken, let alone melt steel" argument here), to spread the fire. Only things burning in this building were file cabinets and anatomically incorrect office chairs.

reply to post by BlackOps719


The only buildings that fall due to mild heat compared to the steel that encompasses it were the WTC1, WTC2, WTC7. The Empire State was different, and only buildings in Spain and Venezuela can withstand an impact, burn for hours or days and not collapse. It's all that inferior construction design they got lucky with. Highly Likely.



I'm not easily swayed one way or another, but I sure as # know when something doesn't feel right and my gut is churning when I pour over this topic.

reply to post by DeadFlagBlues




It is rather uncanny, there are about 15 incidences that occured on 9/11 that were pretty much first timers....meaning that it was the first time on record any of them ever happened. All on the same day.

Gotta love that official story....the unbelievable events of that day seem to rival that of the stories of the bible.

I've always found it amazing that bldg 7 fell into a pile of nothing from debris-invoked fires, yet bldg 7 is on the OTHER side of other buildings from the towers that the jets hit, yet those building in-between, stood their ground.

Go figger.

It is possible thermal exapnsion could have brought it down...IF and only if, the building was structuraly unsound. Ever live in a house, and time totime, you can hear pops and creeks coming from the ceiling or walls? Thats a house settling in, its structuraly unsound. It means, in the next 30 years, its gunan shift and fall lol. For a concrete, steel beamed building to be flawed , structuraly unsound? Call me crazy, but don't the architecs and builders on big projects, endure that dosnt happen???
I don't buy this 'thermal expanison" bluff.

So, they would have us believe, they built the WTC with as common a house builder, as someone form the late 1880's? You know, like in movies, you see a sherrif or bounty hunter from that time, buildin his own home, outta wood, and its off balance, still has holes in ceiling, and is angled WAY off proportion?
Interesting, lol.

Whats wrong with this calculation?

Steel + Concrete / Air Fuel = DUST (WTC 1 + 2)

Steel + Concrete / ????? = DUST (WTC 7)



Z

Originally posted by Leo Strauss
reply to post by Maxmars

 

He basically withdrew his interview from Loose Change and said he did not witness any bodies in WTC 7. He has 4 kids and a mortgage and would like to remain employed(those are my words not Barry Jennings). By the way I think he is a good guy in a tough situation.

I understand completely. A really tough situation.

So can we discuss what thermal expansion really IS? I have a theory that I was hoping people would jump on to either solidify or refute my opinion, but no one did, here goes...

Wikipedia.com
"An explosion is a sudden increase in volume and release of energy in an extreme manner, usually with the generation of high temperatures and the release of gases. An explosion creates a shock wave."

#1 High Temps=Thermal
#2 An explosion creates a shock wave=Expansion

Anyone want to refute this?

reply to post by Andrew E. Wiggin

we witnessed the building collapsing upon its self fromt he point of impact

See, that's exactly what can't happen. A building with a massive steel core does not fall INTO the path of MOST RESISTANCE. If the aluminum plane had done enough damage to the steel support columns, they would have leaned to a side and SLID OFF!

Even if the surrounding structure fell away, the Steel Core skeleton would be left standing there, free of all the stress of its 'body'.

You have a jet weighing several tons traveling at over 200MPH, nearly 100 stories in the air. Then you stop suddenly into a monolithic building with enough force to shoot debris out the back of it.

my guess is that the building was at the very least rattled by the impact, possibly even causing enough tension to snap welds or rivets. Where you go with that is up to you.

as for WTC 7:

The most likely time that debris would have both impacted the building and set fire to it would have been either at 8:46 when the North tower was struck, or later during the second impact. Either way, the sprinkler system should not have been damaged at the time of the fire, as the south tower (miraculously collapsing well before the north) allegedly damaged the water pipes during it's demolition, and thus I think this story is bunk.

Yeah it's Thermal Expansion alright, right out of their a$$. Just like a hot fart, but with more stench.

It's kind of an admission now that I think about it.

I'm pretty sure bombs create a thermal expansion effect too.

Ok this accompanying Bush's statement he was playing golf with Barb that day. In total discrepancy to earlier report he was doing lunch with the saudi royal 'cough' family.
Something is up. A new investigation?
Rather uncanny lol. You bet your sweet bippy it is.

[edit on 8/21/2008 by jpm1602]

reply to post by jpm1602


The truth of this will be so obvious when it is viewed historically that future generations will use it as an example of how nations can be manipulated. IF the wars spawned by the event don't wipe us all out first.

reply to post by HimWhoHathAnEar





I agree completely.


The 9/11 attack will go down in history next to the Trojan horse as one of the worlds greatest scams of all time.

It will be required reading for classes like "The Fall of the American Empire" and will be discussed by military strategists everywhere as the first time a government attacked its own people for political gain.

reply to post by BlackOps719


I would agree..., but something wants me to bring up the point that as horrible as it is to disagree, the greatest scam of all time is the concept of fractional reserve banking and fiat currency.

9/11 is a strong second place though.

reply to post by Maxmars

I would be forced to agree. Although 911 was part and parcel of the military/industrial greedfest and therefore is the same thing.