The WTC 7 thread to end WTC7 threads

This might help understand what happens when a building has a weak side such as the bulge described by WMD2008 .

youtube...

www.youtube.com...

reply to post by Varemia


The banksters are headed by the Rothschilds and they are the creators of the NWO . It already exist and Agenda 21 is going to clip our wings for us . The present administration and Democrats especially are up to their necks in the NWO . We are about to be under a Global Socialist government.

Originally posted by SimonPeter
We are about to be under a Global Socialist government.

No we're not. Socialism is the workers ownership of the means of production, an economic system, not a form of government.

We are already under a world-wide capitalist corporate dictatorship. Capitalist interests control governments.

If the workers took control of the means of production we would all be better off in more ways than one, and we wouldn't need government.

reply to post by ANOK


In socialism the state owns the land , corporations and everything else . The Rothschild bunch gets it all .There are about 10 to 13 families that make up the banksters . They are all Jewish and Socialism is their trademark . But have you ever heard of Feudalism . Look up Agenda 21 .On youtube there are some pretty good explanations of what this means to you by people who understand all the legal jargon .

Originally posted by SimonPeter
This might help understand what happens when a building has a weak side such as the bulge described by WMD2008 .

youtube...

www.youtube.com...

Let me guess. Is the building made almost entirely of concrete?

Yup! What a similarity to WTC 7. The entire structure is completely different in the most extreme way imaginable.

reply to post by thegameisup

Even the buildings that were closer to the towers when they came down did not collapse, and the Marriott hotel (WTC3) that was spliced almost in half because it was in the direct path, was still standing. Did they put a transit on that? Did they put a transit of WTC5 & WTC6 because they were closer to the towers than WTC7 and suffered a lot of damage? I will post some overhead ariel photos of ground zero and the building orientations in a short while.

Answer to your stupid remarks about why didnt use a transit to watch WTC 6

Answer is size

WTC 7 was 47 stories, WTC 6 was 8

When WTC 7 comes down it will caused a lot of damage over much wider area

That was important because right next to WTC 7 is Verizon Telephone building . It covers lower Manhattan
and provides voice/data circuits for the financial markets including Wall Street

When it came down inflicted 1 billion damage to Verizon. Reason it survived was heavy masonry exterior
(it was built in 1927) preventing debris from entering the building

Originally posted by SimonPeter
reply to post by Varemia

 

The banksters are headed by the Rothschilds and they are the creators of the NWO . It already exist and Agenda 21 is going to clip our wings for us . The present administration and Democrats especially are up to their necks in the NWO . We are about to be under a Global Socialist government.

You are now associating your keenly argued opinions about 9/11 with a verisimilitude of 'facts' often peddled by the ignorant.

reply to post by Varemia


Again you miss the point . When a building support is compromised as WMD 2008 was saying on one side the building would collapse falling over to that side . For a demonstration you will understand , stand on top of 2 cinder blocks . One foot on each block standing on end about a foot apart , now take your knuckle headed friend and have him break one of the blocks and see if you fall straight down .

Originally posted by Varemia

Originally posted by SimonPeter
This might help understand what happens when a building has a weak side such as the bulge described by WMD2008 .

youtube...

www.youtube.com...

Let me guess. Is the building made almost entirely of concrete?

Yup! What a similarity to WTC 7. The entire structure is completely different in the most extreme way imaginable.

So, if the apartment building was steel framed, it would have telescoped straight down? Is that the point you're trying to make?

reply to post by Flatcoat


YUP THAT'S IT !
That's what he thinks !

Originally posted by thedman
reply to post by thegameisup

 

Even the buildings that were closer to the towers when they came down did not collapse, and the Marriott hotel (WTC3) that was spliced almost in half because it was in the direct path, was still standing. Did they put a transit on that? Did they put a transit of WTC5 & WTC6 because they were closer to the towers than WTC7 and suffered a lot of damage? I will post some overhead ariel photos of ground zero and the building orientations in a short while.

Answer to your stupid remarks about why didnt use a transit to watch WTC 6

Answer is size

WTC 7 was 47 stories, WTC 6 was 8

When WTC 7 comes down it will caused a lot of damage over much wider area

That was important because right next to WTC 7 is Verizon Telephone building . It covers lower Manhattan
and provides voice/data circuits for the financial markets including Wall Street

When it came down inflicted 1 billion damage to Verizon. Reason it survived was heavy masonry exterior
(it was built in 1927) preventing debris from entering the building

Oh, you're one of those people that cannot be polite on a forum. Another touchy OS'er. You really are a hostile bunch aren't you. Anyone would think you're trying to deliberately drive people away with all the attitude that comes across. It says a lot about you as a person when you behave like that.

What about the Verzion, WTC US Post Office, and the Bankers Trust building? No transits for them either?
How come the Verzion & the WTC Post Office were not on fire and did not collapse? The Bankers Trust was not on fiore either, neither did that collapse?



I said why did they not use them on WTC3, 4, 5 & 6. You still missed some buildings out

reply to post by thegameisup


Apparently have problem with reading comprehension......

Did you miss the point about WTC 7 being built with heavy masonry exterior shell?

That was how built buildings prior to late 1960's/70's - discontinued because of cost

You asked why no transit for WTC 3 (Marriott Hotel)

Answer - time . Less than 1/2 hour between initial impact when South tower came down to being crushed
when North Tower fell on it.

Also was moot - even if have set transit would have done what ? Transits are used to establish if building
is shifting or moving which preceeds collapse. Not when 110 story building falls on you.....

Asked about Bankers Trust (aka Deutsche Bank - 130 Liberty)

Ok - was damaged badly by debris from South Tower, but fotunately escaped being set on fire

Have one component in common with WTC 7, heavy structural damage. But unlike WTC 7 no fires
compromising the structure

Now WTC 4, 5, 6 - Again that reading comprehension thing Or did you miss the point about sizes

These buildings were 8-9 stories, even if collapsed would not cause collateral damage to other buildings still
standing

WTC 7 at 47 story would and did - it smashed 30 West Broadway across Barclay St so badly it had to be
torn down. Damaged Verizon, which again escaped do to its heavy construction

Originally posted by SimonPeter
reply to post by ANOK

 

In socialism the state owns the land , corporations and everything else . The Rothschild bunch gets it all .There are about 10 to 13 families that make up the banksters . They are all Jewish and Socialism is their trademark . But have you ever heard of Feudalism . Look up Agenda 21 .On youtube there are some pretty good explanations of what this means to you by people who understand all the legal jargon .

LOL talk about off topic but I guess I started it. State ownership is nationalization, worker ownership is socialism.

Nationalization (British English spelling nationalisation) is the process of taking an industry or assets into government ownership by a national government or state.[1] Nationalization usually refers to private assets, but may also mean assets owned by lower levels of government, such as municipalities, being transferred to the public sector to be operated and owned by the state. The opposite of nationalization is usually privatization or de-nationalization, but may also be municipalization.

Nationalization

To be on topic the 911 events, including the controlled demolition of WTC 7 were done for capitalist, and national, interests, not the interests of working people, 300 of whom were murdered on 911.

reply to post by thedman


I don't think that WTC 7 was built with a Masonry exterior . The building that it collapsed next to was built with a heavy masonry exterior because the exterior is the structure and the floors are supported by that exoskeleton .And that was the way of it early on .

reply to post by ANOK


Agreed the nationalism is the a process within Socialism . And it is not a system serving the people as some may think . 911 is just one process to facilitate the loss of our rights and way of life . To make a finding that WTC was imploded supports criminal activities and methods of operation swaying our government with unlawful means . I'm pretty sure that that means High Crimes And Misdemeanors by some of our government officials . This highlights the illegal process we call Treason and murder of 2800 individuals . If the findings of this thread is that building 7 was imploded , the implications would be great and would encompass a large group of Elite .

Originally posted by SimonPeter
reply to post by Varemia

 

The banksters are headed by the Rothschilds and they are the creators of the NWO . It already exist and Agenda 21 is going to clip our wings for us . The present administration and Democrats especially are up to their necks in the NWO . We are about to be under a Global Socialist government.

Really? The greediest swines in the world just purposely wrecked their market and are also socialists?

That doesn't make much sense.

Originally posted by SimonPeter
Agreed the nationalism is the a process within Socialism.

Don't want to argue with you but no. The only connection nationalisation has with socialism is in Marxism. Marxism calls for nationalisation as part of it's temporary transition period in order to re-organize industry. Not all socialists agree with nationalisation, or the political path of Marxism. The socialists who wanted direct action called themselves anarchists. But the state under Marxism would not be the same as the state we have under capitalism. It would be a worker controlled state, the dictatorship of the proletariat.

Transition to Socialism

In the evolution of class society, and that is the only kind of society that has existed within the limits of written history, the function of the State is to uphold the interests of the ruling class. No State represents the interests of the whole of society. Very often is has suppressed the growth of certain private enterprises, but only for the benefit of the private owners as a whole. Within the limits of capitalism the workers are still a dependent class whether any industry is nationalised or not. It is possible, however, that nationalisation could be used to forward the interests of the working class. At present the State is used to exploit the workers in the interest of the capitalist. In a transition period the State would be taken over by the workers and used to prevent exploitation of workers.

The workers’ State, however, would differ from all other States that have existed in the past. Its function would be to restrain the reactionary capitalists until they were overthrown and such restraint was no longer necessary. With socialism a classless society emerges which needs no State in order to govern; but there will appear in its place an administration which will function in the interest of the whole of society. The State withers because it has no function in the higher stage of socialism. The advent of the Workers’ State is the only kind of nationalisation that can be of any real benefit to the working class.

Nationalisation: a socialist analysis

Socialism requires no state or government, it is workers control of the means of production, their own production. The ultimate goal of Socialists, Marxists, Anarchists, Communists is 'free association' the only difference is the in the path to get there. But don't confuse this with what governments tell you, all governments are ultimately anti-socialist as it is not in their best interest to support their own demise. Just like government lied about 911 it lies about it's true nature.

In the anarchist, Marxist and socialist sense, free association (also called free association of producers or, as Marx often called it, community of freely associated individuals) is a kind of relation between individuals where there is no state, social class or authority, in a society that has abolished the private property of means of production. Once private property is abolished, individuals are no longer deprived of access to means of production so they can freely associate themselves (without social constraint) to produce and reproduce their own conditions of existence and fulfill their needs and desires.

Free association (communism and anarchism)

"Anarchism is stateless socialism", Mikhail Bakunin Anarchist collectivist who was the main opponent of Marx when they were both leading members of the International Working Men’s Association, a socialist organization.

This is off-topic so that's the last I'll post on this.