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.

 

They are now saying that WTC 7

page: 3
0
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 6 2004 @ 11:17 PM
link   
The dust of the world trade towers feel on the WTC 7 and it couldn't hold the weight and feel.


The owner of building 7 packed it with bombs on sept 10th and gave the order on sept 11 to bring it down


The matrix crashed causing building 7 to come down.:



I'll take the bomb theory, seems most logical.




posted on Sep, 7 2004 @ 11:39 AM
link   
As I stated earlier, If you dont believe what we are trying to figure out, please find us any type of evidence that a fire can bring down a steel structure like it did 4 times in one day as it did on 911.

Stop bashing and start supporting your theory.

and also 1 thing I want to add, the pancake theory they came up with would not leave the WTC in a pile of pulverized metal concrete and such.

The weakening of a tower that the plane it would tip over not fall straight.. They stated that the tower was leaning 65 degrees or something from the main tower. If that were the case the top of the building would tip over just like blocks do when you build them to high.. Not fall straight down..

Now WTC 7 as i stated a zillion times already fell due to only fire, Anyone in thier right mind knows for FACT that a steel structure knows damn well that a building like that will not fall only after burning a little over 2 hrs and some odd minutes. The towers didnt do any damage to that building..

Now SHOW US THE PROOF THAT THAT BUILDING FELL THEY WALL THE GOVERNMENT SAID!!!!!

you all scream at us for bringing up actual info and you show us nothing. now its time to put up or shut up...

[edit on 7-9-2004 by ThichHeaded]



posted on Sep, 7 2004 @ 11:53 AM
link   

Originally posted by ThichHeaded
Stop bashing and start supporting your theory.

Now SHOW US THE PROOF THAT THAT BUILDING FELL THEY WALL THE GOVERNMENT SAID!!!!!

you all scream at us for bringing up actual info and you show us nothing. now its time to put up or shut up...

[edit on 7-9-2004 by ThichHeaded]


where's the proof showing that if fell due to any other reason ?

hmmm hmmm hmmmm hmmmm



posted on Sep, 7 2004 @ 11:59 AM
link   
What you are forgetting is that generally buildings aren't left to burn and burn!!! This was a completely unique scenario. The area was to dangerous for any firefighters to put the fires out, everything which burns and burns eventually falls down!!!!



posted on Sep, 7 2004 @ 12:05 PM
link   
you know it, thich. it boggles my mind to read people defending the official lie, like it was some kinda gospel. the evidence is overwhelming. there were other energies involved in the equation.
i like in this thread how someone used as an argument that there was a big enough fire to cause this supposed collapse, the fact that there was still intense heat in the underground rubble. this points obviously to explosives. fires at the top of the building do not burrow through rock and other rubble to rest safely nestled in the bowels of the earth. there was MOLTEN steel down there. i say the towers fell because of an infestation of those pesky little critters, ...thermites. although, it could have been done with scalar or microwave weaponry.
and about the argument that there is no qualified voice saying this, just look at the blacklisted scientists and engineers that are being replaced left and right(okay, just right) by underqualified corporate friendly types. just look at all the gag orders issued preventing people from legally saying what they know and saw. look at the increasing number of dissenters being labeled as 'threats' and 'terrorists'.
did you know the uniform for terrorism is a pink tutu, and jumping off a diving board is a terrorist act? weapons of splash destruction, i guess.
what does that have to do with the towers? everything.



posted on Sep, 7 2004 @ 01:21 PM
link   
OK here, On 911 there were comments made by firefighters that state a few key things, like there is no immedate danger of the buiding collapsing or such. they only need 2 hoses to taker out fires. so you tell me does this seem like a building that is going to collapse. I dont think so.

prisonplanet.com...

and Ironnically this radio trassmission has become classified, I wonder why that is???

maybe the same reason they classified the videos from the pentagon, and the 911 call on fight 93.

cause it dont go along with thier fairy tale crack ass story...

god wake up and look for infomation...

I want you people for the Offical 911 story to SHOW US 1 peice of proof that those building fell like they did cause of what was stated, Untill then The conspiracy theorists have every right to know what they talk about, actually we do its you who dont.

and dont you find it interesting that every conspiracy theory that is been brought up has been reality such as a few before 911

JFK, Pearl Harbor

so you see its all a lie just wake up and get out of the box you live in its not hard. really there is alot more light out here.

[edit on 7-9-2004 by ThichHeaded]



posted on Sep, 7 2004 @ 02:52 PM
link   

they only need 2 hoses to taker out fires. so you tell me does this seem like a building that is going to collapse.


The wreckage in the area (NOT just 1 & 2) was burning for many days. Whoever said that any fires in that area were easy to put out is either a liar or an unqualified guesser.

Also, those thinking that "dust" caused damage are a little slow on the uptake I guess. How about the sheer weight of 110 stories slamming into the ground TWICE. Do you not think that could shake the ground up significantly and cause foundation and beam damage?

Wake up. Not everything is a super secret.



posted on Sep, 7 2004 @ 04:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by Djarums

they only need 2 hoses to taker out fires. so you tell me does this seem like a building that is going to collapse.


The wreckage in the area (NOT just 1 & 2) was burning for many days. Whoever said that any fires in that area were easy to put out is either a liar or an unqualified guesser.



Like i said earlier....it burnt underground for MONTHES...I WAS THERE numerous times between sept and december...AND ALL TIMES IT WAS BURNING...



posted on Sep, 7 2004 @ 04:47 PM
link   
In a stunning and belated development concerning the attacks of 9/11 Larry Silverstein, the controller of the destroyed WTC complex, stated plainly in a PBS documentary that he and the FDNY decided jointly to demolish the Solomon Bros. building, or WTC 7, late in the afternoon of Tuesday, Sept. 11, 2001.

In the documentary Silverstein makes the following statement;

"I remember getting a call from the, er, fire department commander, telling me that they were not sure they were gonna be able to contain the fire, and I said, 'We've had such terrible loss of life, maybe the smartest thing to do is pull it.' And they made that decision to pull and we watched the building collapse."
This can be heard in the audio file VestigialConscience.com...
www.rense.com...



posted on Sep, 7 2004 @ 06:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by Tomashi
In a stunning and belated development concerning the attacks of 9/11 Larry Silverstein, the controller of the destroyed WTC complex, stated plainly in a PBS documentary that he and the FDNY decided jointly to demolish the Solomon Bros. building, or WTC 7, late in the afternoon of Tuesday, Sept. 11, 2001.

In the documentary Silverstein makes the following statement;

"I remember getting a call from the, er, fire department commander, telling me that they were not sure they were gonna be able to contain the fire, and I said, 'We've had such terrible loss of life, maybe the smartest thing to do is pull it.' And they made that decision to pull and we watched the building collapse."
This can be heard in the audio file VestigialConscience.com...
www.rense.com...




Interesting so why are we being told two different stories, and if they did decide to bring it down using explosives anybody know how long it takes to rig the explosives to bring down a 44 story building? I mean you can't just go into a building and blow it up and have it come down properly without some expertise and some knowledge of how to do it and the right equipment. there are people who make their living at demolition, were they called in? Why have we not heard about these heroes, I mean here you got a demolition expert going into a burning building setting it up to come down right so that lives can be saved, thats a hero in my book, why have we not heard about these people? Also if they did it that way why was the area not cleared better aroud the building I clearly recall watching Paula Zahn CNN talking to some woman holding her baby on the streets of New York near the area of WTC7 and Zahn trying to shield the baby with her hands and then with her body from the dust and concern of flying debris. Why was that interview taking place so close to the demolition area if it was planned, surely the heroes who went into a burning building to rig it for demolition to bring it down for safety sake would have taken the time to make sure the area was cleared for safety. If that building came down by demolition then who rigged it for demolition? When was the order given for demolition? How long did it take to rig a 44 story building for demolition? How long in ordinary circumstances does it take for a demolitions expert to rig a 44 story building for demolitions? You got to know what you are doing to bring a building down that size and not destroy everything around it, think about it if the building does not implode properly and falls to the side how much damage could have been done to the city blocks surrounding it. These are questions that should be answered before we believe the explanations we are being given.

A side note to this hubby once worked for a company that laid water lines. The old man who did the dynamiting liked the fact that hubby thought dynamiting things was cool and was teaching him to use dynamite, sort of on the job training. One day they were having a really hard time getting through some rock so the old man told hubby to pack the dynamite and pack it good, he did not want to see nothing but dust left of that rock, well hubby did and that was all that was left. They also cracked the floors of nearby buildings including town hall, knocked out windows of homes and businesses and the mayor called the company that hubby worked for and told the owner to have every piece of equipment they had in his town out by the next morning and that the contract was null and void.

[edit on 7-9-2004 by goose]



posted on Sep, 7 2004 @ 09:42 PM
link   
Are there any demolitions experts here? Surely someone has some expertise in bringing down big buildings. Anyway I am looking for a website that addresses some of the questions I asked above, here is one website about the collapse of the WTC7
killtown.911review.org...



posted on Sep, 7 2004 @ 10:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by SimpleTruth
And, I'm concerned about your statement that suspecting our government of these things is paranoid and delusional. I beg to differ. Do you think that our government, not even one or a few parts or people, are above or incapable of corruption?

Capable of corruption? Yes. Willing to murder thousands? They'll do that eventually, and blatantly.

Look. I would assume that if Building 7 was dropped with explosives, it would have had to been wired prior to the twin towers falling. Osama himself was surprized to see the towers drop... HE didn't even know that was going to happen! So, if what Osama expected to happen did so, and building 7 was rigged with explosives, they you'd have two big buildings still standing, and one little building blown up.

I'm sorry. None of this adds up. I don't remember what the video looked like, but I doubt either you or I could determine by the way a building fell down what caused it to do so.



posted on Sep, 7 2004 @ 11:31 PM
link   
WTC7 was demolished on purpose in a controlled demolition. Hear this from the mouth of the owner of the WTC complex, Silverstein, here:

www.infowars.com...



posted on Sep, 8 2004 @ 01:35 AM
link   

Originally posted by DeltaChaos

Originally posted by SimpleTruth
And, I'm concerned about your statement that suspecting our government of these things is paranoid and delusional. I beg to differ. Do you think that our government, not even one or a few parts or people, are above or incapable of corruption?

Capable of corruption? Yes. Willing to murder thousands? They'll do that eventually, and blatantly.

Look. I would assume that if Building 7 was dropped with explosives, it would have had to been wired prior to the twin towers falling. Osama himself was surprized to see the towers drop... HE didn't even know that was going to happen! So, if what Osama expected to happen did so, and building 7 was rigged with explosives, they you'd have two big buildings still standing, and one little building blown up.

I'm sorry. None of this adds up. I don't remember what the video looked like, but I doubt either you or I could determine by the way a building fell down what caused it to do so.


And if you look at the tapes building WTC1 and 2 came down the same way WTC 7 did. If WTC 7 was wired and rigged with explosives then who and when did they do it? Scary question isn't it and if it was then one can't help but wonder about WTC1 and 2. And many people do no want to cross that line of thinking such things. The owner of WTC 7 says it was intentionally brought down the decision was made at some point during the day of 911, it came down about 5:15pm. If that is correct, if it was a demolitions job then it only opens up an avenue of more questions.



posted on Sep, 8 2004 @ 01:58 AM
link   


We must speak the truth about terror. Let us never tolerate outrageous conspiracy theories concerning the attacks of September 11, malicious lies that attempt to shift the blame away from the terrorists themselves, away from the guilty."-- A desperate George W. Bush speaking before the UN General Assembly November 10, 2001

www.canadiancontent.net...

The greatest conspiracy of all is that there are no conspiracies, besides its too late anyways. So laugh it up...hahahahaha,,,tinfoil hats,black helicopters,take your meds, lay off the Icke books, yadda yadda.

infowars.com...

The Model that will probably work until the end of time:
www.google.com...
www.google.com...

Now Hush or we will send MIB for the conspiracy theorists and the anti-conspiracy theorists and yes, even the ones in the middle, that wonderful grey area where its nice and bland.



posted on Sep, 8 2004 @ 02:37 AM
link   
the building fell because it wasn't built correctly. the only way the amount of fire in that building could weaken the floor supports to the point of collapse is if the structure were incredibly, extremely fire-prone
. not the way to build a 47 story office tower in NYC, don't you agree?



posted on Sep, 8 2004 @ 09:22 AM
link   
Allright! This is one case where I'm glad I was wrong, and to Simple Truth and the others who believed it was purposely demolished, congratulations on being right. That's all anyone wants anyway, isn't it?

So it was destroyed by the government. The NYC government. And now I see that is was the correct decision and action for the circumstance.

Good night building 7 thread...



posted on Sep, 8 2004 @ 09:45 AM
link   

Originally posted by DeltaChaos
Allright! This is one case where I'm glad I was wrong, and to Simple Truth and the others who believed it was purposely demolished, congratulations on being right. That's all anyone wants anyway, isn't it?

So it was destroyed by the government. The NYC government. And now I see that is was the correct decision and action for the circumstance.

Good night building 7 thread...


Man, I hate to see it end where someone just leaves angry. I was hoping that Delta might change his mind. Sorry Delta if you got pissed off, but I think some legitimate issues are being discussed. Didn't mean for you to get mad.



posted on Sep, 8 2004 @ 09:49 AM
link   
Who's angry? I'm just glad this discussion no longer has relevance. It didn't really before, but now it's settled.



posted on Sep, 8 2004 @ 12:37 PM
link   
For the last damn time, if you don't know the lingo you're criticizing, DON'T USE IT.

PULL (in it's proper context PULL BACK) is used by firefighters to mean back off and let the fire run its course. It is used ONLY when a fire has been deemed too dangerous to send personnel into. Period.

The call to pull back would be issued and all firefighters in the building and its immediate vicinity would "pull back" and the fire would burn out on its own. That is the command.

Speculation from people who don't know what the term means and believe it means "pull the building down" is stupid. It does not help anyone. It does not help the truth to surface. It just misleads people, more and more.

Think of the outrageousness of what you're doing. You're claiming that the building was brought down on purpose and that one of the people involved BLABBED ABOUT IT TO THE BBC??? HELLO MCFLY. ANYONE THERE??

I don't understand why in all the speculations that have been around over the past three years not one person is responsible enough to talk to someone who was there and knows about what happened. Anyone who ever talks to people involved slants it in their own irresponsible way: case in point the Silverstein interview.

Use your brains. I was there. Claiming that the fire at number 7 would have been easy to put out is a LIE. Claiming there were bombs going off is a LIE. Claiming that there were no structural failures in 1&2 is a LIE. I heard the noises (creakings, crackings etc) don't tell me it was a bloody bomb if you don't know squat about what went on from people who were FEET away. Not miles.



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join