Japan Skyscrapers Sway With 8.9 Earthquake but the WTC collapsed !! still beleive the 9/11 version?

Originally posted by FDNY343

Originally posted by Cobaltic1978
Yeah I keep hearing about WTC7 being on fire and the fire not being able to be contained. But I reiterate, this was the first steel structure building in the World to collapse due to fire.

Incorrect.
Kader Toy Factory
Sight and Sound Theatre.

Originally posted by Cobaltic1978

Not only that, but the way it collapsed does look like it was a controlled demolition. There was a sky scraper in Madrid, Spain that burned uncontrollably for a longer period than WTC7, but that didn't collapse at all.

Had a concrete core, and was built with concrete protection on the steel it did have.

Thanks for the heads up on that. It may have been a concrete core, but you can bet that there were steel fixings contained within. If not then the concrete would have exploded due to the intense heat. I know because I have seen it first hand.

You weren't able to answer the only question contained within the post though.

Managed to find this on Wikipedia :

The Kader toy factory manufactured stuffed toys and licensed plastic dolls primarily intended for export to the United States and other developed countries. The toys were produced for Disney, Mattel and others. The Factory is located in the Sam Phran District of Nakhon Pathom Province. The structures that were destroyed in the blaze were all owned and operated directly by Kader, which owns the site. Kader has two sister companies that also operate at the location on a lease arrangement.

The factory was poorly designed and built. Fire exits on the plans were not put in place, and external doors were locked. Furthermore, the building was reinforced with un-insulated steel girders which quickly weakened and collapsed.

Did the WTC buildings have un-insulated steel girders?

Originally posted by Doomzilla
You mean the first responders who were told it was SAFE to enter ground zero ?
You mean the first responders who are DYING of chronic illnesses because they were told it was safe ?
You mean the first responders who are receiving no help for treatment from the government who told them it was safe ?

Not sure what your point is, but yes, he does suffer from some chronic ailments (mostly his back and some lung issues). There are others far worse off than he is, but he still is able to do his rescue work. (He is on standby for Japan right now.)

Originally posted by SphinxMontreal

My best friend was a first responder on 9/11 and worked the pile for five straight days after,

What does this little personal unverified claim have to do with 9/11 being a poorly orchestrated scam believed by hundreds of millions of gullible brain dead morons?

The point is that I hear a lot of lies and falsehoods spoken and written about on these sites. My point is that I know someone who was on site, on that day and saw the actual damage to Building 7 close up with his own eyes. One of the falsehoods that gets bandied about is that WTC 7 was not significantly damaged before it came down, but the fact that I have heard from my eyewitness friend is that it was. Unverified, sure, but I can only relate what I know. You are free to take it or leave it.

Originally posted by LifeInDeath

Originally posted by SphinxMontreal

My best friend was a first responder on 9/11 and worked the pile for five straight days after,

What does this little personal unverified claim have to do with 9/11 being a poorly orchestrated scam believed by hundreds of millions of gullible brain dead morons?

The point is that I hear a lot of lies and falsehoods spoken and written about on these sites. My point is that I know someone who was on site, on that day and saw the actual damage to Building 7 close up with his own eyes. One of the falsehoods that gets bandied about is that WTC 7 was not significantly damaged before it came down, but the fact that I have heard from my eyewitness friend is that it was. Unverified, sure, but I can only relate what I know. You are free to take it or leave it.

So how does SIGNIFICANT DAMAGE make all of the supports give SI8MULTANEOUSLY so the roofline remains straight while the collapse occurs?

It is amazing how people can not see stuff so obvious. The word SIGNIFICANT is so scientifically precise in describing physical phenomenon. The videos show how well synchronized the fall had to be all of the way across the building.

psik

Originally posted by Haydn_17
reply to post by Ben81

 

Japanese skyscraper are built with earthquakes in mind.

As far as i know New York doesnt have Earthquakes over 7+ so they wont be reinforced.

Simple logic

New York City does have a fault line running right under it, it cuts right across the island of Manhattan, actually. However, it has been silent for something like 300 years when an estimated 7.+ hit, so no, none of the buildings in NYC are designed with earthquakes in mind. The design of skyscrapers is by their very nature perfect for earthquakes, but many of the smaller buildings like some 10 to 20 story apartment buildings and brownstone townhouses, like what I live in, are completely vulnerable to an earthquake. If a big one hits while I am at home, I will almost certainly die. I'm on the third floor, and the entire building made of piled heavy stones will collapse in on itself. If a 7+ hits NYC (and someday it will) millions could die.

reply to post by LifeInDeath


My point is bro its a travesty what happened and is happening to these brave people , therefore I feel it is our duty to question events which may indicate foul play .

You say your friend didnt hear bombs going off but we have plenty of people saying they did .
There is a discrepancy so therefore its right to investigate .

Peace ,

reply to post by FDNY343



Congress just approved another bill recently keeping the hospitals and clinics open in NYC for that exact purpose.

Wow thats quick work isnt it when did 9/11 happen ?

I suggest you watch the documentaries about volunteers who bought medication for these 1st responders because they had been ignored by the government .
It brought a tear to my eyes , the government does not care for its citizens .

Ask all the vets on ats how their government forgot them when they could no longer kill for their BENEFIT .

reply to post by Doomzilla

Ask all the vets on ats how their government forgot them when they could no longer kill for their BENEFIT

So true .. and so sad
i have know that for a long time
so many vets are suffering from Post traumatic syndrome
being left homeless in the street without any money and medical care extension

im sure they are proud now and by the time we speak .. the lies to make them kill innocent people in the ME.. once they know everything the marines have done in the ME was for Israel and not in the american interest

some vets will be pissed off and go rampage .. i think the gov wants that so they can put in place a police state in the street .

everything was planned .. trillions of dollars was wasted into the inteligence services
bush was part of it .. and now we clearly see Obama having the same path

im beginning to think that Obama familly was threatened by the secret services
that if he dont comply with the current regime he will be another JFK

anyone though of that before ???

Originally posted by psikeyhackr
So how does SIGNIFICANT DAMAGE make all of the supports give SI8MULTANEOUSLY so the roofline remains straight while the collapse occurs?

It is amazing how people can not see stuff so obvious. The word SIGNIFICANT is so scientifically precise in describing physical phenomenon. The videos show how well synchronized the fall had to be all of the way across the building.

psik

Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain!!!!!

reply to post by Cobaltic1978

I appreciate you are entitled to your opinion as much as I am entitled to mine. Please don't try to put me in the truthers box or any other box that you feel I fit in. I am just looking at all the facts and they don't add up with the official version, period.

same here.
funny how they always ignorantly classify folks.
must be a glitch in the software
or wetware as the case may be.

The point is that I hear a lot of lies and falsehoods spoken and written about on these sites. My point is that I know someone who was on site, on that day and saw the actual damage to Building 7 close up with his own eyes. One of the falsehoods that gets bandied about is that WTC 7 was not significantly damaged before it came down, but the fact that I have heard from my eyewitness friend is that it was. Unverified, sure, but I can only relate what I know. You are free to take it or leave it.

The point is your friend's unverified testimony is hearsay and not evidence, therefore, it would never stand up in a court of law. Why would I bother to accept hearsay information when investigating facts? In any event, here are some questions for your friend?

1) How could he see all this damage to WTC 7 through all that smoke, fire and dust? According to the official story, WTC 7 was engulfed in fire and smoke wasn't it?

2) How could your friend have even a clue as to WTC 7 collapsing when he obviously did not inspect the interior of it. A number of firemen have died from collapsing roofs because....they are unable to predict a building's collapse just by viewing it from the exterior. Especially, when said building is engulfed in fire and smoke.

3) Does your friend feel he has solved the mystery of the WTC 7 collapse just by visually inspecting the damage to the building. In other words, how can some damage on the corner of a building cause a simultaneous failure and global collapse of a 47 story steel framed skyscraper? This isn't a house of cards we're talking about, where the collapse of one card can set off a chain of events collapsing all the other cards.

I do appreciate the effort though, since there are many people out there stupid enough to read your comment about your friend and draw idiotic conclusions from it.

I don't agree with the reasoning but had to give you a S&F just for posting that video.

All I can do watching that video is laugh. We humans are crazy. Seeing those massive abominations of steel and concrete teeter tottering like that makes me wonder why anyone would build such things near a fault line in the first place.

But like you said, they stood, so I guess we got away with it. It must be like climbing a mountain: we just do it because we can. No skyscraper has ever been built like a house of cards.

Originally posted by Cobaltic1978
Each tower was designed to withstand an impact from two commercial planes

Yet another truther lie - care to show where the designers claimed that?

WTC7 was the first steel structure building in the world to collapse due to fire.

Still lying - you are ignoring it sufferd severe damage - why ignore that, unless you ignore it as it completely destroys your silly conspiracy theory!

reply to post by dereks


Engineers had to consider every peril they could imagine when they designed the World Trade Center three decades ago because, at the time, the twin towers were of unprecedented size for structures made of steel and glass."We looked at every possible thing we could think of that could happen to the buildings, even to the extent of an airplane hitting the side," said John Skilling, head structural engineer.

community.seattletimes.nwsource.com...

The structural engineer who designed the towers said as recently as last week that their steel columns could remain standing if they were hit by a 707. Plumes of smoke pour from the World Trade Center buildings in New York after planes crashed into the upper floors of the 110-story buildings. The Empire State building, seen in the foreground, was the scene of a plane crash in 1945. It remained intact and reopened for business within months. Les Robertson, the Trade Center's structural engineer, spoke last week at a conference on tall buildings in Frankfurt, Germany. He was asked during a question-and-answer session what he had done to protect the twin towers from terrorist attacks,
www2.ljworld.com...




OK? NOW STOP CALLING US LIARS !

reply to post by Doomzilla


Cobaltic said that each tower was designed to be hit by TWO airliners. He was wrong. Dereks called him on it.

Originally posted by Doomzilla
even to the extent of an airplane hitting the side," said John Skilling, head structural engineer.

Nothing there about 2 airliners...

The structural engineer who designed the towers said as recently as last week that their steel columns could remain standing if they were hit by a 707.

Nothing there about 2 airliners - and the plane that hit it was heavier and flying a lot faster...

OK? NOW STOP CALLING US LIARS !

I will when you stop lying - show us where the designer said that the WTC could survive 2 airliners.... that claim is a lie!

reply to post by vipertech0596


I dont give a toss , 911 was an inside job end of story .
1 plane 2 planes either way the towers FAILED to withstand what they were designed to withstand . why ?
controlled demolition!


Thankyou and Goodnight .

Originally posted by Doomzilla
1 plane 2 planes either way the towers FAILED to withstand what they were designed to withstand

Still wrong, they were NOT designed to withstand a high speed airliner crash but you ignore that as it does not fit with your silly conspiracy theory!

Still wrong, they were NOT designed to withstand a high speed airliner crash but you ignore that as it does not fit with your silly conspiracy theory!

How about fake CGI created airliners? Were they designed to withstand those?