Uncommon Video on WTC 7 Demolition: Can There Now Be Any Doubt?

reply to post by earthchanges


Boom!. This explosion happened after the collapse of the twin towers.

I have had debubers try to pass of the explosion as a sonic boom from a fighter jet. Pathetic.

Look at how small the debris field is. An obvious controlled demo took place. There is no question. One can argue that one didnt happen but then it can be argued that thos building were designed to come down in that fashion.

I do believe that they had a self destruct plan set up after the 93 bombing. They will not admit to this because of the serious question it would bring up such as who pulled the buildings down when they did. Could they have waited?

Here's a couple of articles discussing what was contained in WTC7 and the reasons for it's demise...I suggest looking through some of the other links on the pages...

What Was In Building 7?
www.wtc7.net...

Larry Silverstein, WTC 7, and the 9/11 Demolition
whatreallyhappened.com...

Follow the Stocks
angelsfortruth.com...

Follow the Gold
angelsfortruth.com...

And this...

New Information on the Death of 911 Eyewitness Barry Jennings
edwardrynearson.wordpress.com...

And what is this about??? I noticed someone talking about squib misfires...

Mystery Objects Above WTC 7
angelsfortruth.com...

9/11 DVD Censored! Image of Strange Flash as Flight 11 Hit North Tower Missing From Footage
www.prisonplanet.com...

[edit on 9/19/2009 by Hx3_1963]

reply to post by CaptainAmerica2012

Look at how small the debris field is. An obvious controlled demo took place. There is no question. One can argue that one didnt happen but then it can be argued that thos building were designed to come down in that fashion.

The debris field crossed Barclay Street - a 4 lane highway to the north
of WTC 7. It smashed 30 West Broadway aka Fiterman Hall damaging
it so severely that it is being dismantled. In NYC you do not use
"controlled demolition" for the simple reason that you cause collateral
damage. The Verizon telephone building adjacent to WTC 7 was
also badly damaged when debris plowed into it. The fact that it was
built with strong outer masonary shell prevented structural damage to
interior columns and fires from taking hold.

. Nevertheless, according to George Famulare, Verizon's manager of corporate real estate, "the building is a tank." Built with reinforced concrete and steel, its floors can hold 250 to 300 pounds per square foot, constructed to support the giant electromechanical switching assemblies that were replaced long ago by electronic alternatives.

If that sturdiness accounted for its survival, the subsequent efforts to protect and restore 140 West Street have been nothing short of Homeric. Verizon lost two of its technicians, who were working above the crash zones, in the World Trade Center attack. None died in the Verizon Building.

Now, much of the 14 floors of damage to the south-facing wall has been refaced with custom-fabricated brick from Stone Creek, Ohio. Gone is the 7 World Trade Center debris that was stacked up to Verizon's fifth floor.

In addition your neat "controlled demolition" crippled the primary
communications facility serving southern Manhattan - which includes
nearby Wall St. Without Wall St the financial industry grinds to a halt
and so does the whole US economy

. The building controlled 300,000 dial tone lines — 35,000 of them in the twin towers themselves — in a several-blocks-wide swath of Lower Manhattan stretching from the Hudson to the East River, affecting 20,000 residences and 14,000 businesses including the New York Stock Exchange.

Also down and out were 4.5 million data circuits, including high-speed Internet lines and connections to brokerages, Lotto terminals and A.T.M.'s.

Swift move Shelock! You just knocked out the whole US economy!

Do you have any more brillant ideas?

I did some work for Verizon - talked to a few of the people who were
actually there....

Your reply was for what reason?

If your going to quote someone try to put a link as to who your quoting because 3/4 of your thread makes no sense and you not quoting me.


Nothing of substance was posted. You failed to sway anyone from the truth.

You can call people who seek and find the truth "Twofers" or stupid but that is an attack. Do you know what the opposite of truther is?.... a Liar.


Your not helping your cause with un-sourced material that really goes against all the eyewitnesses and researchers that not only know wtc 7 was brought down by in a controlled fashion but witnessed it in person.

You are actually insulting the victim's families who make up a percentage of the truth movement.

Have some respect man.

[edit on 19-9-2009 by CaptainAmerica2012]

[edit on 19-9-2009 by CaptainAmerica2012]

There is no doubt -re-opening the 9/11 investigation will be like opening a can of worms

Originally posted by watcher2
reply to post by TrueAmerican

 

looks to me that there were explosives in that building, but the towers did not fall down they just went away. let me explain. according to a Dr Judy wood who studied the towers there should have been 12 stories of steel after they came down, but there was not. just dust. her conclusion is that the towers were hit by some kind of weapon that causes molecular dis-association which turned the building to dust and it just blew away. sounds really out there, but it really explains a lot of that day and I don't see anybody else explaining where those buildings went.
if you want to explore this idea you can go to drjudywood.com

this is based on real physics, not junk science like the gov comes out with.

This is disinfo...... this kind of junk science won't work here on ATS.... nice try though ... We need to call out people trying to distract from the real investigation . Its theories like this that give truthers a bad name.

Originally posted by galloways
There is no doubt -re-opening the 9/11 investigation will be like opening a can of worms

Good.

Originally posted by thedman
The Verizon telephone building adjacent to WTC 7 was
also badly damaged when debris plowed into it.

It was damaged by the towers falling, not WTC7.

Originally posted by thedman
In addition your neat "controlled demolition" crippled the primary
communications facility serving southern Manhattan

In addition? That IS the Verizon building. Again, damaged by the TOWERS. Not WTC7.

reply to post by TrueAmerican


Good video - star and flag!

Actually one doesn't have to be the sharpest tool in the drawer to realize all three buildings were brought down by CD. Just google "Kobe earthquake" to see the pictures of buildings that collapsed in a more natural fashion.

Why didn't any of the three WTC buidings, partially or whole, fall over sideways?

Afghan cave-men???

soon we can piece it all together, Bush had advanced knowledge...
www.abovetopsecret.com...

I think they made it more dramatic by demolition the buildings. Maybe they aprehended the teorists at the airport.

[edit on 19-9-2009 by conar]

reply to post by Clickfoot

In addition? That IS the Verizon building. Again, damaged by the TOWERS. Not WTC7

Must have problem with basic comprehension - the part about 5 story
debris pile from WTC 7 against building

The south and east facades of the Verizon Building were heavily damaged in the September 11, 2001 attacks, from the collapse of the adjacent 7 World Trade Center, as well as the collapse of the Twin Towers. No fires were observed in the building on September 11.[10]

Debris from WTC 7 embeded in Verizon



Debris from WTC 7

reply to post by Skallagrimsson

Actually one doesn't have to be the sharpest tool in the drawer to realize all three buildings were brought down by CD. Just google "Kobe earthquake" to see the pictures of buildings that collapsed in a more natural fashion.

Earthquake damage is not equivalent to building collapses on 9 11

Earthquakes generate strong shear or lateral forces which rock building
side to side causing it to fail - building slumps to side in direction of the shear forces.

Buildings at WTC collapsed do to fire

Originally posted by thedman
Must have problem with basic comprehension - the part about 5 story
debris pile from WTC 7 against building

It was the towers that caused the damage you quoted in your post. Bits of WTC7 falling into the side of the building did not cause the major damage, flooding, and taking out 300,000 phone lines. THAT was the towers.

reply to post by TrueAmerican


You seem to completely disregard the left side of the building, wich clearly shows missing windows, shattered by the whole deformation of the left side of the builfing (visible on the top left of the building).

"And I say this to any who will insist that the "structural failure" caused these effects. Nuh uh, no way in hell. "

Oh yes, the old 'Nuh uh' argument. Sure to earn you respect amongst people, who actually know what theyre talking about...

reply to post by Skallagrimsson


Actually, they did fall over sideways...WTC 1 and 2. It is basic facts like this that are ignored over and over and over by people such as yourself.

Where is the physical evidence? Where True American???

I always found that odd that the building went down and learned that they said it was because of Fire, that fire caused the building to pancake.



[edit on 19-9-2009 by GCDrift]

only sick people cannot see the truth.
Building 7 = control demo

video speaks for itself - evidence is right there in plain sight...

This is a reply to Joey Canoli, and it is important that all at ATS understand why I am doing this.
My original post,
"The trouble is, (not disagreeing with the beginning of collapse) is that the wall most brightly lit, seemingly mostly undamaged, and i'm thinking that it a is West or Westerly wall, goes down in compliance to the rest of the building ie; straight down. If any wall was to bend in the collapse this should have been the one, and that should have been toward the East or inwards but it didn't. To me that wall's integrity was compromised somewhere near the bottom."

This is the portion of my post used by Joey Canoli,
"(Originally posted by smurfy)
To me that wall's integrity was compromised somewhere near the bottom. "


His reply to me using the above portion,

Originally posted by Joey Canoli


It was.

Read the NIST report, and where they describe how col 79 buckled around the 13th floor.

Your observation fits perfectly with NIST's explanation.

Joey Canoli, are you trying to deceive here? The full text of my post was that the brightly lit wall,(as seen in the video) and most likely the WEST wall should have been pulled inwards, but it wasn't it went straight down and it was the most undamaged wall. Column 79 was a core column and had columns to its South side and to its West side...in other words it was on the EAST side. So I repeat, the brightly lit WEST wall goes straight down unhindered and uninfluenced by anything that is happening to the East or the South where all the fatal damage was thought to be, that to me says I'm looking at something that is impossible, but it happens right there on the OP's video.
So, Joey Canoli, in future if you quote me, quote the full bloc and not use misleading portions. And as a note to all at ATS, it is useful to check any posters full contingent of posts at their profiles, they are there to be seen.











[edit on 19-9-2009 by smurfy]

Originally posted by smurfy

Joey Canoli, are you trying to deceive here?

No, the rest of your post was gibberish, and I honestly couldn't tell what you were trying to say.

At any rate, my point stands. The NIST report on 7 states that the building's Achille's heel was when col 79 buckled around floor 13. That confirms your observation that the structure was weakened, or whatever you said, down low.

I'm pointing out, that in this case, your observation is correct.

Give yourself a cookie........