With the thread about 'why bring down building 7' being overtaken by silly arguments, I would like to start a new thread to explain why building 7
came down the way it did, and how there is a strong case that flight 93 was headed for WTC7.
There are a many threads with footage of all different angles showing how building 7 came down, whilst people can debate the timing of the collapse
(when it first started giving way), one thing that really stands out is how it neatly collapsed, once the main structure visibly gave way, the
building comes down in just under 7 seconds. It collapsed into it's own footrpint close to free fall speed and it came down almost vertically- even
somebody with no engineering or physics knowledge should see the nature of the collapse is very odd. If one part of the structure gave way, you could
imagine some kind of toppling effect or some of the building to collapse- not all at once as it appears.
This is where the theory comes that argues WTC7 was in fact intended to be struck by flight 93. When you start looking into the timelines, it can be
quite a strong argument.
Here is an excellent article on how flight 93 may have been headed for WTC7-
I'll break down the main arguments from the article.
Firstly, let's look at the timelines of the events- you have to understand the timeline to see how flawed the official account is-
Flight 11 is hijacked just 13 minutes into its departure, 8:13am.
Flight 175 takes off at 8:14am.
Flight 93 takes off at 8:42am.
Flight 175 is hijacked at 8:42am.
Flight 11 crashes at 8:46am.
Flight 175 crashes into WTC2 at 9:03am.
Now this is where it gets suspicous because both WTC1 and WTC2 have been hit, flight 93 took off at 8:42 yet ony gets hijacked at 9:28am
whole 46 minutes before the hijackers make their move. Both towers have been hit and 25 minutes later, flight 93 is hijacked.
At 9:35 flight 93 turns around after travelling west and then heads back east. The official story claims it was heading to Washington DC, yet from
the official account's crash site in Shanksville, the plane could easily have been heading back to New York city.
The first tower collapses at 9:58am and at 10:03am, flight 93 crashes, the official story tells of the passengers revolting against the hijackers and
bringing it down.
Flight 93 had turned around at 9:35, it crashed at 10:03am, if it was heading to New York City, then it still had 40-50 minutes worth of travel. It
was about 40% of the way within half an hour (just looking at the flight path, from the point of turning to head back east and crashing in relation to
location of WTC7).
So if you imagine the plane is heading to WTC7, it has approx 45 minutes of travel left at 10:03am, the north tower collapses at 10:28am, as this
collapses, if flight 93 was headed for WTC7, it still had about twenty minutes to reach it's destination.
Norad used to pride itself on it proven track record of intercept speed. Up until that day it was something close to 7 minutes, I believe, from the
time a “problem” occurs on a flight. Many flights are routinely intercepted all year long and 2001 was no exception to that rule.
The only day that didn’t occur was Sept. 11th 2001. But the “hijackers” wouldn’t have known this (unless of course…) and they would have had
to anticipate that after two planes had struck the towers after being hijacked, they would have armed company up there tailing them in a matter of
In fact, why did they wait at all? They near D.C. when they took off and the departure time was already delayed to start with. All they would have to
have done was take over the plane once they got to cruising altitude, turn the plane south to D.C. and they would have struck there target just
minutes after the towers were hit. But for some reason, the “hijackers” waited over 35 minutes before they took over the plane.
So think about this, we have a timeline where flight 93 is hijacked and then the hijackers wait over 45 minutes to take over the plane, you have an
airforce that can respond to a hijacked plane in 7 minutes, yet they waited 45 minutes to hijack flight 93- both towers had already been hit, surely
hijackers would have hijacked the plane as early as possible and heading south straight away if they were heading to Washington DC.
As the article explains, the theory is that the 'hijacker's' plan was in fact to wait for both towers to have collapsed, thus leaving space to hit
With the towers standing, a plane could not hit WTC7, but after both had collapsed, if flight 93 was in fact heading for New York, there would have
been about twenty minutes after the second tower collapsing and then WTC7 being struck. They would have destroyed all the evidence with WTC7.
Flight 93 was speculated to have been heading to Washington DC, but that was the conclusion of the 9/11 comission, the diagram of the flight path
shows it heading east, and arguably more in line with heading to New York than Washington DC.
Why would they risk all that time in the air, coming back from Ohio? They must have known they would be shot down… if they were terrorists with box
cutters that is.
However, if “the terrorists” knew that multiple national security drills would be taking place that day and that NORAD rules had been changed in
June of 2001 that kept NORAD commanders from giving the “intercept and engage” order, perhaps they would have known they had more time.
Perhaps, in that case, they would have known they had just enough time to circle around on a long exposed “hijacked” flight just long enough for
both towers to “collapse” just as they made it back to downtown Manhattan.
And that is exactly why they waited so long. They were waiting for a clear path to Building 7.
Flight 93 almost certainly never crashed like the official story wants us to believe.
Flight 93 was shot down. Period. The debris field 6 miles from the crash site proves it beyond any reasonable doubt. Also there were several eye
witnesses at the scene who testified to hearing loud “booms” and THEN looking up to see Flight 93 still in the air and struggling to stay in the
Flight 93 was shot down because the debris was up to 6 miles apart, the crash site itself was nothing remotely like a plane had crashed.
In fact, the plane had actually made a course change to head to New York, although the official story claims this was because the passengers had tried
to take back the plane and it crashed not long after.
What more likely happened is that despite people like Cheney trying to keep fighter jets from intercepting, a fighter pilot had acted regardless and
shot down the plane, therefore denying the true flight path of flight 93.
WTC7, already rigged to blow not long after both towers had collapsed, as a sick finale to the day's events, was sitting with no plane to hit it as
it had been shot down.
This is why the building was 'pulled', they couldn't go back on the plan, hence building 7's collapsed was delayed until much later in the day, in an
effort to make the 'collapse through fire' more plausible. This explains why it looks like a controlled demolition, and is the true smoking gun of
edit on 16-5-2012 by Wonderer2012 because: (no reason given)
edit on 16-5-2012 by Wonderer2012 because: (no reason