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.
Other than initiating the fires in wtc7, the damage from the debris from wtc1 had little effect on initiating the collapse of wtc7.
NSTAR 1A, pxxxiii
Originally posted by jprophet420
. Thanks, and I look forward to having zero debunkers as usual.
Other than initiating the fires in wtc7, the damage from the debris from wtc1 had little effect on initiating the collapse of wtc7.
NSTAR 1A, pxxxiii
Originally posted by RRokkyy
Originally posted by jprophet420
. Thanks, and I look forward to having zero debunkers as usual.
Other than initiating the fires in wtc7, the damage from the debris from wtc1 had little effect on initiating the collapse of wtc7.
NSTAR 1A, pxxxiii
You got some splainin to do.
Why would they even bother with wtc7? Because of some records of some alphabet agency? They could just remove the records. That would be a lot simpler than planting tons of exposives.
There is no logical reason that I have heard for taking wtc7 down after two of the worlds most famous buildings have collapsed.
And why did they wait until the wtc 1 ,2 were hit by planes? Why not just use the alleged exposives without the planes. Why wait until most of the people got out? If they used exposives, why bother with putting them in the second tower. Why not just topple the first tower into the second. That would be pretty dramatic and eliminate the need for explosives in the second building or even the third,wtc7 if they toppled building 2 into it. Everybody says you have that kind of control with explosives.
Were explosives used in the Pentagram? Where were the explosives for the 4 th planes target?
As Condi unbelievably said,"How could anyone know they would fly planes into buildings."
Originally posted by C-JEAN
reply to post by jprophet420
Hi, jprophet420 and all waked up persons !
Here is my "point of view" and logics on the subject:
www.abovetopsecret.com...
Blue skies.
Originally posted by edgar34
I have a hard time not believing the experts who spent years studying the collapse of wtc7.
[edit on 26-6-2009 by edgar34]
Originally posted by Desucher
The fires were massive, and the building remained standing for several hours before it collapsed.
I don't see what's so surprising here.
Originally posted by jprophet420
Originally posted by Desucher
The fires were massive, and the building remained standing for several hours before it collapsed.
I don't see what's so surprising here.
Whats surprising here is there are building codes in the good 'ol U S of A and it defies them on an unprecidented level, and that it has never happened in history. If you believe that fires alone brought down wtc7 then please give me something better than "the fires were massive, and the building remained standing for several hours". There have been many fires that were more intense (massive as you so jr highishly put it) and burned longer and never brought a building down into symetrical global collapse, or any collapse for that matter.
no commercial building has ever fallen down from a fire in all of the history of buildings and none have since and none ever will. you don't see any
I don't see what's so surprising here
Originally posted by randyvs
reply to post by Desucher
no commercial building has ever fallen down from a fire in all of the history of buildings and none have since and none ever will.
I don't see what's so surprising here
saying its lie shows just how green you are on the subject.
That is a blatant lie
"Other than initiating the fires in wtc7, the damage from the debris from wtc1 had little effect on initiating the collapse of wtc7.
NSTAR 1A, pxxxiii
Originally posted by Desucher
Originally posted by randyvs
reply to post by Desucher
no commercial building has ever fallen down from a fire in all of the history of buildings and none have since and none ever will.
I don't see what's so surprising here
That is a blatant lie.
[edit on 26-6-2009 by Desucher]
Originally posted by dragonridr
reply to post by jprophet420
More to the point who cares honestly if they wanted to demolish the building all they would have done is waited for the fires to burn out decare it unsafe then demolish the building. They would need to go through all this subterfuge. If you honestly believe they blew up the building they still could have done this legally days weeks months later by claiming the building was damaged and declaring it a public health risk!
So honestly why would they bother to fake it your theory doesnt make sense.
Originally posted by edgar34
I have a hard time not believing the experts who spent years studying the collapse of wtc7.