Remembering Building 7

[CamaroMan]

You might do some research on who owned/leased Building 7 and what was stored inside.

Well after my last post I did just that on Wikipedia and I have concluded Building 7 was brought down by uncontolled fires burning all day. If thats true or not IDK but thats what I believe.

 

[RidgeHunter]

First they came for the Jews and I did not speak out because I was not a Jew.

Then they came for the Communists and I did not speak out because I was not a Communist.

Then they came for the trade unionists and I did not speak out because I was not a trade unionist.

Then they came for me and there was no one left to speak out for me

Gimme overplayed internet gun forum cliches for $500, DirtyDawg.

You didn't answer the questions.

Yeah, don't expect anything different.

I love these threads where people show they have absolutely no knowledge of how a controlled demolition works or what it takes to prep a building for demolition.

 

[reddog1]

So you think there is a possibility that a demolition team came in and set explosives in the hours after the attack and demolished building 7? Or do you think someone had knowledge of the attacks beforehand and had the explosives ready to go? Those are the only two choices I can see and both of them are batshit crazy. I'll keep any further comments to myself.

Im not getting into it with the closed mindedness here.

Im with you, im keeping my mouth shut.

 

[RidgeHunter]

Jesus, there are raw videos that show the charges systematically going off as the building are going down. But for some reason some ppl refuse to acknowledge.

No, what there isn't. What we have are multiple videos of the buildings collapsing that sound nothing like a demo. And L O fawking L at prepping occupied, insanely busy, gigantic buildings for demolition while they remained open for business. Do you guys have a clue what goes on before they bring a large building down? That's a rhetorical question, by the way.

Look, you guys can say 9/11 was an inside job all you want. I really don't have anything to prove otherwise, and don't care enough to argue with you. But when you say the buildings were brought down as a result of CD, you sound like Forrest Gump explaining neurosurgery, and if you keep posting everyone with a basic understanding of how CD works will keep laughing.

 

[RidgeHunter]

This is what an actual controlled demolition sounds like for the speds. Note the cameraman flinching because it is so loud. I'd hazard a guess it would be shockingly loud echoing off the surrounding buildings in Manhattan.





Now can we move on to how hundreds of workers with super silent tools prepped several of the busiest buildings in the world for demolition without a soul noticing their efforts? While occupied?

 

[doctorjj]

So you are saying it's reasonable to believe that a modern steel and concrete building collapsed because a couple of office couches caught on fire?

 

[peanut]

So you are saying it's reasonable to believe that a modern steel and concrete building collapsed because a couple of office couches caught on fire?

ZING!!

And the beams of the twin towers were cut in half perfectly in several different areas near the bottom of the towers
from burning fuel at the top of the towers! Lol !!! OK!!

 

[RidgeHunter]

So you are saying it's reasonable to believe that a modern steel and concrete building collapsed because a couple of office couches caught on fire?

I'm saying it's unreasonable to believe WTC 1, WTC 2 or WTC 7 were brought down by controlled demolition operations. Take from that what you will.

ZING!!

Yeah, I've been zung.

And the beams of the twin towers were cut in half perfectly in several different areas near the bottom of the towers
from burning fuel at the top of the towers! Lol !!! OK!!

...

 

[Gideon]

So you are saying it's reasonable to believe that a modern steel and concrete building collapsed because a couple of office couches caught on fire?

No, but when 90% of a building's mass is flammable, and the flammable part is what holds the building up, then it's likely to fall if the fire isn't suppressed.

If you want to claim that the hijackers were paid by the government, or that al Qaeda was a front for the CIA, then ok perhaps it was an inside job. Otherwise, you're just a person with an unrealistic idea of the type and extent of damage that occurred in this situation.

 

[RidgeHunter]

No, but when 90% of a building's mass is flammable, and the flammable part is what holds the building up, then it's likely to fall if the fire isn't suppressed.

If you want to claim that the hijackers were paid by the government, or that al Qaeda was a front for the CIA, then ok perhaps it was an inside job. Otherwise, you're just a person with an unrealistic idea of the type and extent of damage that occurred in this situation.

But...but... but...I have a blog link...anda youtube video mashup with a cool soundtrack that proves...