The Third Tower

page: 2
23
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join

posted on Nov, 22 2010 @ 03:46 PM
link   
If it looks like a duck and quacks like a duck, chances are, it's a goddamn duck.




posted on Nov, 22 2010 @ 04:06 PM
link   
"Again with the lasers from space??? I haven't seen any mention of that anywhere in this thread...
Why is it YOU that brings these things up all the time?"

Don't mind GOD; he seems to have a fetish for lasers from outer space and other loony tune theories.


"BTW, did you forget to mention rge holograms?"

Stick around - he'll also be mentioning those pretty soon.


"I haven't seen any pics of this huge damage to WTC7, the bulging walls or the massive fires."

And you never will. Just like you will never see video or photographic evidence of a commercial airliner striking the PentaCon. So, for the time being, you will have to settle for GOD directing you to planted witnesses and bad actors.

A three story bulge in a major skyscraper and not one person bothered to photograph it. Ain't that something? Maybe GOD can use his special powers and dig something up for us. Like he dug up that previous www.firehouse.com link, which by the way, does not work, only returning back a message stating: Forbidden-wbcgi. Having fun sending people on a wild goose chase?


"This necessarily gives the NIST report at least some measure of credibility, and necessarily means you conspiracy people are resorting to grasping at some pretty far fetched straws to keep your conspiracy stories alive."

Then I know and you know that you're in desperate need of getting a life, since you've made a career out of consistently responding to conspiracy people who are grasping at far fetched straws.

As for you OPINION about the NIST report, that and $1.50 will buy you a nice steaming hot cup of coffee.
edit on 22-11-2010 by SphinxMontreal because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 22 2010 @ 04:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by backinblack
reply to post by GoodOlDave
 

It's strange because I doubt any of these firemen have ever seen a skyscaper collapse before.
So I find it strange that they thought this one would.
I haven't seen any pics of this huge damage to WTC7, the bulging walls or the massive fires.
Could you please share them with us?


I'm not going by pics, I'm going by eyewitness accounts. Barry Jennings was inside WTC 7 when WTC 1 fell on it, and he said in an interview that when rescue workers were pulling him out he went out through the lobby and it looked like King Kong came by and trashed the place. I'd post the transcript, but I have a hunch you've already seen it.

FYI this wasn't from a cadet firemen. This was from the deputy fire chief with decades of experience under his belt. I dare say that if it happened in New York, he's seen it.



posted on Nov, 22 2010 @ 04:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by SphinxMontreal
And you never will. Just like you will never see video or photographic evidence of a commercial airliner striking the PentaCon. So, for the time being, you will have to settle for GOD directing you to planted witnesses and bad actors.



??? So are you saying that Deputy Fire chief Peter Haden and Barry Jennings are planted witnesses and bad actors? That they're involved in a coverup that caused the murder of 343 fire fighters? Go ahead, accuse them of being secret agents. I double dog dare you.

You are making up childish excuses to avoid having to accept the fact that your conspiracy stories are wrong. You know that and so do I.



posted on Nov, 22 2010 @ 04:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by GoodOlDave

Originally posted by TrueFalse
reply to post by GoodOlDave
 


omg dave again.

Show me please one report of a fire fighter that talks about the 3 story bulge that the WTC 7 supposedly had. We have videos and pictures form all sides of the WTC and still i havent found ANY evidence to your "knowledge" of the bulge.


Absolutely. The following is from an interview with Deputy NYFD chief Peter Hayden, who was physically there at WTC 7 tryign to get the fires under control:

Firehouse: Other people tell me that there were a lot of firefighters in the street who were visible, and they put out traffic cones to mark them off?
Hayden: Yeah. There was enough there and we were marking off. There were a lot of damaged apparatus there that were covered. We tried to get searches in those areas. By now, this is going on into the afternoon, and we were concerned about additional collapse, not only of the Marriott, because there was a good portion of the Marriott still standing, but also we were pretty sure that 7 World Trade Center would collapse. Early on, we saw a bulge in the southwest corner between floors 10 and 13, and we had put a transit on that and we were pretty sure she was going to collapse. You actually could see there was a visible bulge, it ran up about three floors. It came down about 5 o�clock in the afternoon, but by about 2 o�clock in the afternoon we realized this thing was going to collapse.

Firehouse: Was there heavy fire in there right away?
Hayden: No, not right away, and that�s probably why it stood for so long because it took a while for that fire to develop. It was a heavy body of fire in there and then we didn�t make any attempt to fight it. That was just one of those wars we were just going to lose. We were concerned about the collapse of a 47-story building there. We were worried about additional collapse there of what was remaining standing of the towers and the Marriott, so we started pulling the people back after a couple of hours of surface removal and searches along the surface of the debris. We started to pull guys back because we were concerned for their safety.


The full interview can be found here. Give the page time to load.

www.firehouse.com..." target="_blank" class="postlink">FIREHOUSE.COM Interview


Your arguments are just ridicoulus. I could also say that Aliens from the Moon highjacked the planes and destroyed the WTCs and it would make as much sense as your story...


You are being intellectually lazy here. The conspiracy people, almost to a man, never actually investigate what the people who were there actually said, or did, or saw. They rely entirely upon prepackaged second or third hand information rations from these damned fool conspiracy web sites that are telling them only what they want them to know. I, on the other hand, am literally quoting the people who were there as they'd necessarily be the best sources to find out what was going on there. Deputy Chief Hayden was there. You and I were not.

I will believe him over your friend Dylan Avery who does nothing but make internet videos in his dorm room, if you don't mind.


as your link doesnt really work, ive searched for a picture of the alleged bulge.

are you reffering to this one ?



if yes, then please explain why the building didnt fall to the side, as the bulge was right on the corner of the building. The only possible way would be for it to tip to the side... PLease explain how it was able to fall in the manner it did...



posted on Nov, 22 2010 @ 04:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by GoodOlDave

Originally posted by backinblack
reply to post by GoodOlDave
 

It's strange because I doubt any of these firemen have ever seen a skyscaper collapse before.
So I find it strange that they thought this one would.
I haven't seen any pics of this huge damage to WTC7, the bulging walls or the massive fires.
Could you please share them with us?


I'm not going by pics, I'm going by eyewitness accounts. Barry Jennings was inside WTC 7 when WTC 1 fell on it, and he said in an interview that when rescue workers were pulling him out he went out through the lobby and it looked like King Kong came by and trashed the place. I'd post the transcript, but I have a hunch you've already seen it.

FYI this wasn't from a cadet firemen. This was from the deputy fire chief with decades of experience under his belt. I dare say that if it happened in New York, he's seen it.


wow dave.

so you are actually believing berry jennings... the man who was trapped on the 6th floor of WTC 7 cause and explosion happend beneath him and made it impossible to escape...


And why did the lobby look like King Kong would go through it? He was walking over corpses in the lobby, did you know that? How could there be dead bodies in the lobby of WTC 7 ?

Really nice, your are going into the right direction, but there is still much research for you to do to find out that the OS is bs.



posted on Nov, 22 2010 @ 04:22 PM
link   
reply to post by GoodOlDave
 



I'm not going by pics, I'm going by eyewitness accounts. Barry Jennings was inside WTC 7 when WTC 1 fell on it, and he said in an interview that when rescue workers were pulling him out he went out through the lobby and it looked like King Kong came by and trashed the place. I'd post the transcript, but I have a hunch you've already seen it.

FYI this wasn't from a cadet firemen. This was from the deputy fire chief with decades of experience under his belt. I dare say that if it happened in New York, he's seen it.


So, no pics of these massive fires or a 3 storey bulge in the building although at this point every news crew within hundreds of miles were there filming??

Ohh, and your hunch is wrong...I do not read every thread concerning 9/11 like some do..It seems to be almost a religion to some people on both sides of the fence..



posted on Nov, 22 2010 @ 04:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by GoodOlDave

Originally posted by SphinxMontreal
And you never will. Just like you will never see video or photographic evidence of a commercial airliner striking the PentaCon. So, for the time being, you will have to settle for GOD directing you to planted witnesses and bad actors.



??? So are you saying that Deputy Fire chief Peter Haden and Barry Jennings are planted witnesses and bad actors? That they're involved in a coverup that caused the murder of 343 fire fighters? Go ahead, accuse them of being secret agents. I double dog dare you.

You are making up childish excuses to avoid having to accept the fact that your conspiracy stories are wrong. You know that and so do I.


Go watch the CIT video about the Pentagon attacks. You have 8 witnesses who saw the plane from a different angle then the OS tells us. One witness states, that the plane flew OVER the pentagon and passed it...

So who do you believe dave... you make your story fit your imagination. Nothing more...



posted on Nov, 22 2010 @ 04:24 PM
link   
reply to post by airspoon
 


Great Post there , the Evidence just continues to come to light even after 9 Years of Lies .

www.youtube.com...

www.youtube.com...
edit on 22-11-2010 by Zanti Misfit because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 22 2010 @ 04:25 PM
link   
"I'm not going by pics, I'm going by eyewitness accounts. Barry Jennings was inside WTC 7 when WTC 1 fell on it, and he said in an interview that when rescue workers were pulling him out he went out through the lobby and it looked like King Kong came by and trashed the place."

This may be a stupid question, but how does Mr. Jennings' eyewitness account prove the claim that there was a three story bulge in WTC 7? Why would there be all this damage to the interior lobby of WTC 7, while the exterior of the building only showed some isolated fires on about four floors? Could it be that the damage to the interior lobby of WTC 7 was cause by bombs within that building?



posted on Nov, 22 2010 @ 05:16 PM
link   
reply to post by backinblack
 


Another fireman on scene that also can attest to the condition of the building:



But I know this is in vain, since the trusters are just going to ignore this testimony, or try and bury it, or say its hogwash and say firefighters have no training to know about structural integrity in buildings on fire. But hey, maybe you might learn something new too. If you have any questions as to what firefighters do or know, be sure to ask our ATS member thedman. He will fill you in on just what exactly firefighters are and are not trained to do.

I also reccomend this book for those that TRUELY wish to learn something about fires:
Firefighter's Handbook: Basic Essentials of Firefighting, Basic Edition

www.delmarlearning.com...

They have quite a bit on what to look for in a building during a fire, including any sounds of structural integrity failing, shifting of the structure, leaning, tilting, bulging, cracking, doors being unable to open or close, gaps, etc. Lots of good info. I encourage all ATSers to check this out, and especially the ones believing in the "inside job" idea of the WTC.

Also to the damage done:






yeah I dont think it takes a rocket scientist to figure out that that gash aint right, and cant be good for the building.
edit on 11/22/2010 by GenRadek because: Added videos



posted on Nov, 22 2010 @ 07:04 PM
link   
reply to post by GenRadek
 


LOL at you guys calling us trusters... we are not, you are ...

Secondly in your picture i do not see a gash, again as usual can you point out where this "gash" is ??

A leaning tower, that instead of continuing to lean somehow instead crashes straight down.

Trusters you are !!!



posted on Nov, 22 2010 @ 07:33 PM
link   
reply to post by GrinchNoMore
 


Take a good close look at the face of WTC7 in the two videos and the picture.


Now look at the original picture of the face of WTC7:




Now look real close and notice that the video version has something on it, besides the smoke. What is that large black grey line running up the face of WTC7? I dont see it in any other normal picture of WTC7, so whats it doing there? Do you see it yet? Is it suppose to be there?
edit on 11/22/2010 by GenRadek because: pictures added



posted on Nov, 22 2010 @ 07:40 PM
link   
reply to post by GenRadek
 


Which way is it leaning during the collapse?







But if you think it was suppose to collapse like this:


or this


Then you are waaaaaaay out of your league here.



posted on Nov, 22 2010 @ 07:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by SphinxMontreal
This may be a stupid question, but how does Mr. Jennings' eyewitness account prove the claim that there was a three story bulge in WTC 7? Why would there be all this damage to the interior lobby of WTC 7, while the exterior of the building only showed some isolated fires on about four floors? Could it be that the damage to the interior lobby of WTC 7 was cause by bombs within that building?


So we go back to Fire Chief Hayden about the bulge witnessed by the NYFD.

Also which side of the exterior are you talking about? Did you forget that a building has FOUR sides?


South Side:


South and West side:


North side Fires:


East side:



Looks like an aweful lot of fire in there.



posted on Nov, 22 2010 @ 08:09 PM
link   
reply to post by GenRadek
 


So, let’s look at what science has to say instead of he said, she said and assumptions, opinions, to what many of you OS defenders think.


WTC Building #7, a 47-story high-rise not hit by an airplane, exhibited all the characteristics of classic controlled demolition with explosives:
1. Rapid onset of "collapse"
2. Sounds of explosions at ground floor - a second before the building's destruction
3.Symmetrical "structural failure" -- through the path of greatest resistance -- at free-fall acceleration
4. Imploded, collapsing completely, and landed in its own footprint
5. Massive volume of expanding pyroclastic dust clouds
6. Expert corroboration from the top European Controlled Demolition professional
7. Fore-knowledge of "collapse" by media, NYPD, FDNY
In the the aftermath of WTC7's destruction, strong evidence of demolition using incendary devices was discovered:
8. FEMA finds rapid oxidation and intergranular melting on structural steel samples
9. Several tons of molten metal reported by numerous highly-qualified witnesses
10. Chemical signature of thermite (high tech incendiary) found in solidified molten metal, and dust samples
WTC7 exhibited none of the characteristics of destruction by fire, i.e.

www.ae911truth.org...



posted on Nov, 22 2010 @ 08:13 PM
link   
LOL those pictures are laughable it seems you forgot the building has 4 sides that gash you pointed out seems to disappear through the timeline of your photos I do see a shadow that could be a gash BUT like I said before it was not damage to the main structure it was the outer structure, and if bldg7 was not controlled then it should have fallen towards the damaged side if you watch videos and not a bunch of random pics that are out of order you will see a controlled demolition the building falls equally so that means all 24 or whatever number of columns failed at the exact same time yet only one side had damage.

and FIRE cannot melt steel. it takes a mixture and of oxy/acetalene and a torch to concentrate the flame just to cut steel open flame CAN NOT melt steel so the fires are meaningless.

I'd like to add that clip of the firefighter mumbling about the bldg, I have seen countless other interviews of firefighters talking about explosions hearing a countdown on their walkies being told to evac before they pull it.

I don't think your firefighter is talking about bldg 7, and if he is talking about bldg7 bulging or leaning he doesn't say those words he says "the structural integrity is not there he said" who told him the structural integrity wasn't there was there a structural engineer there on site?
edit on 11/22/2010 by -W1LL because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 22 2010 @ 08:20 PM
link   
reply to post by airspoon
 


Forgot that Worl Financial Center 3 (aka American Express Building) was also damaged by debris from
WTC 1.

Verizon Building was struck by debris from WTC 1 - can see numerous windows smashed and pieces of steel
sticking out of the building like arrows . Reason Verizon survived while WTC 7 failed lies in the construction
type. Verizon had heavy masonry shell which resisted penetration by debris.



The building's older design utilizes thick masonry and gives the building added strength, which helped the building withstand the attacks and remain structurally sound. The building has thick, heavy masonry in the infill exterior walls, which encloses the building's steel frame. Brick, cinder, concrete and other masonry materials encase interior steel columns, beams, girders and other structural elements. The masonry allowed the structure to absorb much of the energy from debris hitting the building. Nonetheless, the building had extensive damage to its east and south facades. Underground cable vaults belonging to Verizon, along with other underground utility infrastructure were also heavily damaged from water and debris.



Because of their close proximity and the devastating nature of the collapse of World Trade Center Towers 1 and 2, 140 West Street suffered severe structural and façade damage to its south face, with entire column bays destroyed as high as the 13th story. To the east, a mere 60’ away across Washington Street, stood a 47 Story building identified as 7 World Trade Center. When 7 WTC collapsed later that same day, it fell to the west, causing even more structural damage to the eastern portions of the first 9 floors of Verizon’s most critical equipment floors. The burning rubble from its remains piled seven stories high against and through the east façade of 140 West Street. While the sturdy Verizon building did remain standing, extreme damage was suffered in the surrounding streets by the collapsed steel and concrete, severely damaging Verizon’s underground cable vaults, and severing incoming Con Edison feeders, DC power and steam service, domestic water mains and sanitary sewage piping.


Damage as high up as 13th floor from collapse of WTC 1...

Your statement about Verizon escaping is false.....

Here is engineering study of damage to buildings around WTC by Columbia University

Lots of pictures of damage to WFC 3 and Verizon highlighting impacts

www.civil.columbia.edu...



posted on Nov, 22 2010 @ 08:33 PM
link   
reply to post by thedman
 



Reason Verizon survived while WTC 7 failed lies in the construction
type. Verizon had heavy masonry shell which resisted penetration by debris.


That is your opinion and lacks any credible facts to support your claim.


The masonry allowed the structure to absorb much of the energy from debris hitting the building. Nonetheless, the building had extensive damage to its east and south facades. Underground cable vaults belonging to Verizon, along with other underground utility infrastructure were also heavily damaged from water and debris.


Someone else’s opinion, nothing more.


Your statement about Verizon escaping is false.....


Yet you have failed to prove it false.

If opinions are going to be your truths, that’s fine, but do not expect the rest of us to assume your opinions and others opinions are right because you say so.



posted on Nov, 22 2010 @ 08:35 PM
link   
reply to post by TrueFalse
 


Wow, is right! Just when I was about to give up hope on GoodOlDave, he has a breakthrough.

I guess we could see it coming, back when he was calling truthers trusters.





top topics
 
23
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join