Why Destroy Building 7??

Originally posted by 4hero

Originally posted by Alfie1

You can see here some of the blizzard of paper resulting from the destruction of the WTC buildings. Any of it could have been picked up by anyone in the vicinity. Is this really the way to hide stuff ?

911research.wtc7.net...

No one was in the vicinity! The area was evacuated.

Do none of the pictures in the link I posted show people in the street ?

Some shady government business went down inside WTC 7. Even a false front operation was going down within the buildings. As of recently I've caught on to the notion that Flight 93 was intended for WTC 7 but then again the building wasn't as easy of a target as the Tower 1 & 2. But on the contrary if it was a part of the plan than maybe after Tower 1 & 2 were demolished it would make WTC 7 a much easier target to hit. It's all speculation, but if Flight 93 was intended for WTC 7 then maybe the passengers caught whim of what was going on elsewhere in the country at the time and they really did try to divert the plane from whatever target it was going to hit. While trying to take control of the plane they are shot down. The problem with that is there's no way to fully prove it was shot down. Shooting down a civilian aircraft requires going through several chains of command, so I don't really know how that could play out without the truth of the shoot down coming to light. It's way more speculation than fact, but it doesn't hurt to consider the possibilities.

Report: CIA Lost Office In WTC

A secret office operated by the CIA was destroyed in the terrorist attacks on the World Trade Center, seriously disrupting intelligence operations. The undercover station was in 7 World Trade Center, a smaller office tower that fell several hours after the collapse of the twin towers on Sept. 11, a U.S. government official said. The official, speaking on condition of anonymity, said that immediately after the attack, a special CIA team scoured the rubble in search of secret documents and intelligence reports stored in the station, either on paper or in computers. It was not known whether the efforts were successful. A CIA spokesman declined to comment on the existence of the office, which was first reported in Sunday's editions of The New York Times. The New York station was behind the false front of another federal organization, which the Times did not identify. The station was a base of operations to spy on and recruit foreign diplomats stationed at the United Nations, while debriefing selected American business executives and others willing to talk to the CIA after returning from overseas. The agency's officers in New York often work undercover, posing as diplomats and business executives, among other things. They have been deeply involved in counter-terrorism efforts in the New York area, working jointly with the Federal Bureau of Investigation and other agencies. The CIA's main New York office was unaffected by the attacks, but agents have been sharing space at the U.S. Mission to the United Nations, and have borrowed other federal government offices in the city. The agency is prohibited from conducting domestic espionage operations against Americans, but it maintains stations in a number of major United States cities, where CIA case officers try to meet and recruit students and other foreigners to return to their countries and spy for the United States. The New York station was believed to have been the largest and most important CIA domestic station outside the Washington area

reply to post by OtherSideOfTheCoin

Speaking of bankers that brings me to the other reason I have heard that in WTC 7 all the insider trading went on inside WTC7 and this is where the paperwork was being kept so they blow up the building to cover this up. Again makes not logical sense to destroy the building in this scenario because they could have just started a fire in a wastepaper bin to get rid of that and say it went up in flames when the other two towers came down, rather than going to the expense and difficulty of a covert controlled demolition. And yet again insider trading could have gone one anywhere in the world if one had prior knowledge of the attack why do it next door and in the same building as the IRS. Its not logical.

We're talking databases friend, not just paper records. Same as the questionable location of the strike on the pentagon, newly re-enforced area, also housing the very department, and records, investigating the mission trillions of dollars from the defense budget, you know, the money Rummy was talking about on what, september 10th?

Honestly though, and let me be clear, I do NOT buy the official story at all, it's the conspiracy that doesn't make logical sense, I can't even begin to grasp why they would have used this method at all, it's sloppy, and clearly, wasn't as decisive as would have been intended as people are still questioning it.

Why building 7? Why the wtc at all? Was building 7 having the same leasing problems (not enough tenants)? Was building 7 also full of asbestos that was too expensive to clean up?

I think you've asked a great question, that no one will ever be able to answer, and maybe that was by design.

Originally posted by OtherSideOfTheCoin

A fair point however that article is pretty critical 9/11 conspiracies.

It isn't about insurance, never was ... nor is "truth" about the "why". But to acknowledge the fact, that these buildings were demolished.

First of all, it was already declared prior to the building ... and I among many listened to it. So your attitude here, only helps to reflect the "real truthers" of this story.

The story goes, something like this....

A camel riding n...., hiding in a cave in Afghanistan. Armed with a laptop, but without a satellite connection unless authorized by the CIA, as he was residing in a country that was not technologically advanced. Used his "laptop" out in the desert, to launch an attack on the US, by people armed with box cutters, and otherwise unable to fly a chessna. And had them fool the most advanced security in the world, outfly the fastest fighter planes in the world ... just happend to be flying at the very instance that there was a training exercise in the US. Just happened to be able to fly a plain over the UN building, which according to all data is the "second" most guarded building in the world, second only to the white house. All this from his laptop, and his army of camel riding n....

The US launched a campaign against this "individual", attacked Afghanistan, Iraq, Lybia, Syria and is planning a strike against Iran and N.Korea, all as a go-ahead because of this single attack. The man who launched the attack is long dead, but the US is still in Afghanistan doing it's fighting. It's still in Iraq, and still planning it's attack on Iran, and N.Korea.

The last, is solid proof ... that the attack on N.Y. and hunt for Usama Bin Laden, was merely an excuse to get bigger things done. And at that very moment, that it's an excuse to "liberize" the world, or "modernize" the "camel riding negas", etc., at that very moment ... the entire scenario becomes suspect. Because officially you are murdering hundreds of thousands of people, becuase one man was responsible for 4000 peoples death. Your own soldiers have sodomized, used depleted uranium ... the world is watching upon children being borned two headed from the radiation, and you don't give a damn. You declare the whole world to be a battlefield, you put up controls against your own population ...

None of this, is because of Usama Bin Ladin ... he's already dead. If you fear revenge of his death so much, you should have thought about that, BEFORE you went ahead. Because any "revenge" will not be because of Usama Bin Laden, but because of the hundreds of thousands of dead people lying around, the amount of money you stole from world banks and poured into "non-productive shadow projects" and because of the disformed children being born.

And coming up now, claiming 9/11 truth etc, is far beyond stupidity. The man is dead ... and dumped into the ocean. And you claim 9/11 to be a reason for anything?

If you have the right to murder hundreds of thousands of people, because they level 3 buildings in NY. Then tell me, what does the world have the right to do ... to YOU, for murdering hundreds of thousands of people.

The answer to all of this is, the following ... which is the most logical conclusion to anything concerning 9/11.

The US government learned of an imminent attack, and fear of such an attack could cause an enormous damage. The military prepaired the building for controlled demolition, in case it would be needed. Knowing in advanced, just like the US knew about Pearl Harbour, they had this advantage. The US having had it's dream to be able to carry out inhialation of many Middle East governments, such as Iran, put up a plan that if this would turn out to be the case, to use this scenario as an excuse to launch such a plan. The attack on world trade centers, is more than likely an actual event ... but it was "allowed" to occurr, and already planned ahead ... the moment it occurred, the controlled demoliton prerparation were used, to "diminish" the damage the towers could have caused. Imagine a 100 story tower, toppling on the side. It's a scenario you can't imagine, but is a real scenario that could have happened ... this is "why" they were demolished. Tower 7 is a wild card, as to "why" as it wasn't necessary ... but most likely they had demoliton already in place, and went ahead with the demoliton to avoid "hard questions" afterwards.

The Attack on the Pentagon and the "shadow" attack on the White house, are more than likely fake scenarion done to give the attack a more dramatic sence.

The entire scenario, is a "Pearl Harbour" ... it was used by the US military, and the US government to launch an attack on the Middle east. And afghanistan was merely a start ... the US and Russia, never being the enemies they often were perceivied to be, just as China and the US, are not the enemies they are perceived to be. The US launched a scenario ...

Originally posted by 4hero
So are you saying anyone that does not believe the OS is a truther?

I do not in a million years believe the OS, and I am definitely not a 'truther' whatever they are supposed to be!?!

If we knew why they brought building 7 down then we'd be in on it too! What a stupid thread! We can only speculate, but it is a smoking gun, because it was clearly a controlled demolition. Why did they bring it down? Ask Larry and the government, they have all the answers, not the people researching it. I'm sure there were many reasons, not just one, as with the towers.

Let me ask you a question, why do you personally think it did not look like a controlled demolition?

That's entirely subjective. If you believe it was a controlled explosion you will state it looks like one. Likewise if you believe it collapsed then you would state that.

Personal opinion of the cause of an observed action is not and never will be evidence. It is an opinion. Unfortunately all the "evidence" is about the 9/11 conspiracy is based on subjective analysis of what the observer thinks took place. The only evidence that a plane did not hit the towers is enlarged video and thus blurred and so "the blur" can be open to subjective interpretation. What about the thousands of people standing there watching a plane hit the building? Given that the only evidence for the cause of the collapse is a strike by an aircraft then it seems strangely reasonable to assume it was the cause. NB denial by people who say the building was built to withstand a hit is NOT evidence. The Titance was built to never sink when it did sink we knew that that prior assumption was wrong. In the absence of a test tower being hit by a plane it is only an assumption that it can. The evidence after the strike was that it could not. The adjacent bulding 7 suffered severe damage due to an inferno next to it....I mean come on.

The OP is taking a different approach and looking at this logically and he/she is absolutely correct. The conspiracies are illogical (in addition to there being no evidence !). Double whammy.

to continue the "Soviet Campaign" in Afghanistan. This campaign has to do with flow of oil and gas, to Europe, where the Afghan government is a key component to secure this flow. This flow is necessary for Russia, which also the reason why Russia stood by in Yougoslavia ...

In such a scenario, where the US is trying to do the "Soviet" of controlling these pipelines ... Mr. Usama Bin Ladin suddenly becomes an extremely important piece. He is the very piece that helped turn things out bad for the Soviet Union. Which also, most certainly helps to describe why he was painted "the bad guy", from the start. And that is also why the Saudi's were flown out of the US, including Bin Ladins own family, during this start. Because it was necessary to cut all ties with Saudi Arabia, and cut the "supply lines" for Usama Bin Ladin and his "Taliban".

This was never about the 9/11 ... people are just being dumb, and can't see the big picture.

This kind of scenario, is not unique in US history ... in fact, US history is written by one false flag after another. It's pearl harbour, it's vietnam, it's korea ... and 9/11. All of these built upon scenarios, which the US knew about in advance, about incidents that never happened at all ... or, based on the wrong thing, as in the case of the US helping out their friends, the french foreign legion in Vietnam.

The US has NEVER in history, been the victim of anything ... yet.

Originally posted by phishyblankwaters

We're talking databases friend, not just paper records. Same as the questionable location of the strike on the pentagon, newly re-enforced area, also housing the very department, and records, investigating the mission trillions of dollars from the defense budget, you know, the money Rummy was talking about on what, september 10th?

Truther myth that keeps getting re-hashed no matter how many times corrected. The finance personnel killed at the Pentagon on 9/11 were engaged on Army financial statements for FY 2001. Have a look at the DoD Inspector General's report of March 2002. Scroll down to first para under "Executive Summary" :-

www.dodig.mil...

No-one was working on missing trillions and nothing was lost because the 2001 Army information was included in the Agency-wide statements.

reply to post by MrWendal

Now looking at this photo, starting at dead center and to the left a bit, you can see a building with a huge gaping hole in the top. Now move left a bit more and you will see a pile of rubble stacked up between 2 buildings that appear to be fully intact and suffer very little damage. That pile of rubble is Building 7.

Building next to WTC 7 (on west side) is Verizon - 140 West St

It survived, but required 1 billion in repairs

Here is series of pictures showing damage

newscenter.verizon.com...

Verizon survived because it was built in 1927 and featured heavy concrete exterior which prevented debris
penetrating to interior and starting fires


Building across street from towers was 130 Liberty St (Deutsche Bank) - it was badly damaged when facade
facing towers was slashed open and debris gutted the interior

en.wikipedia.org...:FEMA_-_4019_-_Photograph_by_Michael_Rieger_taken_on_09-21-2001_in_New_York.jpg

Then the lawyers took over and completed the destruction by arguing for years

The collapse of 2 World Trade Center during the September 11 attacks tore a 24-story gash into the facade of the Deutsche Bank Building and destroyed the entire interior of the structure.[citation needed] Steel and concrete were sticking out of the building for months afterward. This was eventually cleaned up, but due to extensive contamination it was decided that the 41 story ruin was to be taken down. After the 9/11 attacks, netting was placed around the remains of the building. The bank maintained that the building could not be restored to habitable condition, while its insurers sought to treat the incident as recoverable damage rather than a total loss.Work on the building was deferred for over two years during which the condition of the building deteriorated.

As usual are wrong.....

Originally posted by OtherSideOfTheCoin
reply to post by JizzyMcButter

 

I know you won’t like this but this link hear makes short work of the missing 2.3 trillion claim.

www.911myths.com...

also it was my understanding that the 2.3 trillion in accounting errors (lets say missing for arguments sake) was being investigated at the pentagon. And surly if it was just to destroy the evidence in that investigation they could have just said that the information was destroyed in the fires, or made a better job of covering up the “missing” 2.3 trillion by not having Rumsfelt announce it (wasn’t the first time it was mentioned though) the day before 9/11. That makes no sense and its not logical.

I want a logical answer.

edit on 14-5-2012 by OtherSideOfTheCoin because: (no reason given)

You want to talk about things being logical yet you are defending the official story without saying so. You don't say why and you avoid questions that make you uncomfortable limiting the scope of your understanding.

So what is logical about 2.3 TRILLION dollars worth of "Accounting Errors"? Do you really think accountants are that stupid to make an incredible amount of "Errors"?

How is this for logic? 2.3 trillion dollars was missing, Enron was in full swing with the current administration right in the middle of the accusations even though they had insider info which allowed them to get out before the stock crashed. There was no current war at the time and Bush and Cheney both had monumental connections with businesses that require war to make money. Iraq was ripe for the picking and the only thing needed was a reason to go to war. The trade center buildings were built with implosion devices installed (FACT) so the buildings could be brought down in their own footprint.

A sane person should be able to deduce a LOGICAL connection between these seemingly unconnected facts, or allegations if you prefer, if they are open minded. Unfortunately most people are afraid to consider the consequences of the realization that there could have been a deliberate operation and subsequent coverup by the administration. That seems impossible and illogical because a person would have to be insane to do such a thing knowingly. Megalomaniacs ARE insane. So that only leaves the possibility that YOU are unable to grasp the true depth of men.

Lets put something to rest here.

If you wanted to erase evidence of shady stock trading you would have to destroy the servers of the NYSE.
They were located underground in New Jersey. Plus they have back up is more than one location across the country.

The same holds true for the records of the 2.3 trillion. The Pentagon isn't the only location for their computer records. Plus they as well would have used underground servers. So the plane(s) could not have hit them.

Originally posted by TheLieWeLive
In my opinion and I stress "my opinion" I think the Shanksfield Pennsylvania plane (Flight 93) was intended to hit WTC7 and not the White House like the OS claims. It was shot down by the US military once they realized the first 3 planes had hit their target. Once the plane was taken out of the plan "they" had to continue to bring the WTC7 down because once insurance agencies started sifting through the damaged building they would discover the truth.

This is a feasible theory, but it's also been postulated that if the Capitol Building had been hit, it would have disabled the Legislative Branch of the US Government and enabled G. Dubya to declare himself dictator.

My thinking is that they were planning on the debris from the north tower doing more extensive damage to Building 7, but like the Pentagon (it did not collapse until 20 minutes after the hit), the contingency plan was in place with pre-planted explosives. At all costs, building 7 was not going to survive 911.

It would make a lot of sense that the 23rd floor, which was alleged to be Giuliani's $Billion "emergency bunker" was in fact a secret CIA office, the existence of which has been verified by mainstream reports, that housed the equipment that was necessary to co-ordinate the high-tech weaponry we witnessed being deployed on 911.

reply to post by TheLieWeLive


So you get to New York by flying to Washington DC ?

Typical "truther logic"

Originally posted by samkent
Lets put something to rest here.

If you wanted to erase evidence of shady stock trading you would have to destroy the servers of the NYSE.
They were located underground in New Jersey. Plus they have back up is more than one location across the country.

The same holds true for the records of the 2.3 trillion. The Pentagon isn't the only location for their computer records. Plus they as well would have used underground servers. So the plane(s) could not have hit them.

I guess you don't know anything about the secret occult economy, exponentially larger than the false front portrayed to the world, a mere pittance of the $Quintillions that are actually out there being used by the Power Elite "Private Club" behind the scenes.

This is what happens when you don't believe in conspiracies. It makes you as naive as a child. Head in sand, you'll never be a problem to them, and they have you fervently working to cover up their crimes to boot. Good way to spend your life dude!

Being the richest, most advanced country in the world...they sure do build shi**y buildings. Apparently even some debris can bring it down.

That US construction sucks balls...Now let's go rebuild Iraq and Afganistan. Hoooray !!!!

Originally posted by thedman
reply to post by TheLieWeLive

 

Typical "truther logic"

THis is a typical GOP logic ... it's ok to murder hundreds of thousands of people. It's ok to sodomize people in Abu Grahib, it's ok if Irak children are born deformed ...

And what makes it ok, is because a man called Usama Bin Ladin killed 4000 people.

That's what I call "NAZI LOGIC". Because it's precisely how the Nazis thought ... and the nazis are also famous for the Poland false flag operation.

And every attempt to discuss the topic, is reduced into squabble over office fires ...

The big pictures is this ... Usama Bin Ladin is dead ... what are you doing in Iraq? Fighting terrorists? The only terrorists I see, are fat pigs beating bystanders and pepper spraying them.

Originally posted by thedman
reply to post by TheLieWeLive

 

So you get to New York by flying to Washington DC ?

Typical "truther logic"

So I'm guessing they took the planes over immediately on take off with your theory. They didn't allow the plane to fly its regular course before managing a take over?

I repeat from my previous post "None of the planes went straight to their intended target". Some even flew slightly zig zag then went to their targets. Oh but your "non truther logic" just wont ever get that will you? Yea I know I even wasted my time telling you this. Oh well, someone else will benefit from it.

reply to post by thedman


And yet those buildings remain standing, and in comparison to building 7, the damage is minimal yet these buildings as well should be in the path of the falling towers just as much as building 7.

Originally posted by samkent
Lets put something to rest here.
The same holds true for the records of the 2.3 trillion. The Pentagon isn't the only location for their computer records. Plus they as well would have used underground servers. So the plane(s) could not have hit them.

"The technology revolution has transformed organizations across the private sector, but not ours, not fully, not yet. We are, as they say, tangled in our anchor chain. Our financial systems are decades old. According to some estimates, we cannot track $2.3 trillion in transactions. We cannot share information from floor to floor in this building because it's stored on dozens of technological systems that are inaccessible or incompatible." - Rumsfeld 9/10/2001

Apparently WTC7 was one of, if not THE most important building out of all the WTC's.

It held files on different levels about CIA, Enron, etc.

Anyway, there are several threads on ATS, as to why WTC7 is widely considered "THE Smoking Gun" in the 9/11 case.

An example:

The Impossibly Collapse of WTC7

reply to post by SimontheMagus

I guess you don't know anything about the secret occult economy, exponentially larger than the false front portrayed to the world, a mere pittance of the $Quintillions that are actually out there being used by the Power Elite "Private Club" behind the scenes.

So you use one conspiracy theory to prove another conspiracy theory?

Has the world ever produced $Quintillions?

History has shown us that once you get beyond a few billion in wealth you run out of toys to buy. They then tend to get philanthropic.

So can you show us any proof at all of anyone with wealth above the 50 billion or so to justify your belief in this super secret/super wealthy sub economy?