Unseen 9/11 footage shows WTC Building 7 consumed by fire

Not at all, I'm saying most of the CT claims can be disproved with video, picture and other methods. Which you seem to disagree with for some reason.
 
SteveOBHave said:
To the contrary, I agree. But the CTs will not, hence the pointless nature of the argument.
Click to expand...

They can't disagree on much if it.
Like no steel buildings collapsed - windsor tower in Madrid
Tower fell straight down, not a single bit of lean. - picture if wtc top leaning.
Wtc7 sustained no damage - pictures if damage

So on and so forth, they go quite when these are brought up.

And your still ignoring other readers and fence sitters. So it's not pointless.
 
AcidHell2 said:
They can't disagree on much if it.
Like no steel buildings collapsed - windsor tower in Madrid
Tower fell straight down, not a single bit of lean. - picture if wtc top leaning.
Wtc7 sustained no damage - pictures if damage

So on and so forth, they go quite when these are brought up.

And your still ignoring other readers and fence sitters. So it's not pointless.
Click to expand...

Windsor Tower (Madrid) caught fire, no Plane hit it and dumped Jet-Fuel in it, just like no plane hit WTC7 and dumped Jet-Fuel in that.

Why is Jet-Fuel mentioned? Because... http://www.nist.gov/el/disasterstudies/wtc/faqs_wtctowers.cfm and read No.6 where you will see:

Based on its comprehensive investigation, NIST concluded that the WTC towers collapsed because: (1) the impact of the planes severed and damaged support columns, dislodged fireproofing insulation coating the steel floor trusses and steel columns, and widely dispersed jet fuel over multiple floors; and (2) the subsequent unusually large number of jet-fuel ignited multi-floor fires (which reached temperatures as high as 1,000 degrees Celsius, or 1,800 degrees Fahrenheit) significantly weakened the floors and columns with dislodged fireproofing to the point where floors sagged and pulled inward on the perimeter columns. This led to the inward bowing of the perimeter columns and failure of the south face of WTC 1 and the east face of WTC 2, initiating the collapse of each of the towers. Both photographic and video evidence—as well as accounts from the New York City Police Department aviation unit during a half-hour period prior to collapse—support this sequence for each tower.
Click to expand...
So NIST consider the Jet-Fuel and important factor in the collapse of WTC1/WTC2.

WTC7 also collapsed but had no Jet-Fuel, it took damage from debris from the falling WTC2 which started a fire...

Windsor Tower burned for 1hr 40mins and then started to collapse, it collapsed slowly over almost 3hrs and then it stopped collapsing, it was a partial collapse, the fire carried on for another 16hrs until it was extinguished, the building still stood, it was demolished later.

WTC7 burned for 4hrs and then suddenly totally collapsed in 37seconds.

Are you honestly saying you can see no difference between these events? :confused:
 
doofer said:
WTC7 burned for 4hrs and then suddenly totally collapsed in 37seconds.

Are you honestly saying you can see no difference between these events? :confused:
Click to expand...

What's your point with the issue of it collapsing in 37 seconds? I imagine there's a strong element of critical mass with these things, that as soon as a particular point is reached the whole thing will go very quickly.
 
Did you read it?
Jet fuel did not cause failure. It lit multiple floors and burnt off well before the towers collapse. It's import in so much as it was there and was what caused most of the initial fires.

Different designs for a start. Structural damage and so forth. There's plenty of differences. But wtc certainly aren't the only steal structures to fail from fire.

It was only a partial collapse as the rest was built with reinforced concrete. So that holds no significance.

Slowly collapsed?
http://www.mace.manchester.ac.uk/pr...Study/HistoricFires/BuildingFires/default.htm
 
Last edited:
The thing I never got about the conspiracy theories though is something that was pointed out to me the other day by family members who were working in the defence industry at the time.

Apparently most of them believed at the time (before a lot of the reports etc.... were out) that it may have been done by the U.S. Government. They did however point out, that if the U.S. Government wanted to demolish the WTC's, the way they would have done it was exactly the way that it's been suggested. They would have flown a plane into it and blame it on terrorists. Why would they do it any other way?

I should note, that this is why I struggle to believe the conspiracy theories that suggest that it was done through ways other than flying a plane into the towers (among other reasons).

kd
 
Vonhelmet said:
Oh, so the CTs are investigating now, are they?
Click to expand...


It is easy to dismiss someone as a CT. Is it becuase most people can't see what's actually going on around them or just don't want to?


And, while we are on the subject why are there no marks where the jet engines would have hit the pentagon. If you see deep big the hole was in the pentagon from above and you look at one big hole where the plane supposed hit it on the side it just does not make any sense. Where were the marks left by the wings, engine and tail fin? Also, why is there no video of the crash and almost no debris? Then there's the problem of the flight path etc. Do some research people.

I read earlier that someone said that nobody cares. Really? You don't mind being lied to and going to war because of it. Federal reserve (A PRIVATE BANK...do some research!!) printing more and more money to fund illegal wars etc. Goverment sponsored "health" organisations putting Aspartime in our food, fluoride in our drinking water and MERCURY in jabs & flu shots to dumb down society to make us more docile and controllable. Our kids in school are taught not to ask questions, but just obey. Intelligence is frowned upon.

On average more people get killed by bee stings per annum than "terrorists". Yet, the governments feel the need to take away our freedoms, monitor our every move...just to protect us from those pesky terrorists. The human mind in a constant state of fear is not capable of rational thought.

Nobody cares? I beg to differ.
 
Last edited:
cman said:

It is easy to dismiss someone as a CT. Is it becuase most people can't see what's actually going on around them or just don't want to?


And, while we are on the subject why are there no marks where the jet engines would have hit the pentagon. If you see deep big the hole was in the pentagon from above and you look at one big hole where the plane supposed hit it on the side it just does not make any sense. Where were the marks left by the wings, engine and tail fin? Also, why is there no video of the crash and almost no debris? Then there's the problem of the flight path etc. Do some research people.

I read earlier that someone said that nobody cares. Really? You don't mind being lied to and going to war because of it. Federal reserve (A PRIVATE BANK...do some research!!) printing more and more money to fund illegal wars etc. Goverment sponsored "health" organisations putting Aspartime in our food, fluoride in our drinking water and MERCURY in jabs & flu shots to dumb down society to make us more docile and controllable. Our kids in school are taught not to ask questions, but just obey. Intelligence is frowned upon.

On average more people get killed by bee stings per annum than "terrorists". Yet, the governments feel the need to take away our freedoms, monitor our every move...just to protect us from those pesky terrorists. The human mind in a constant state of fear is not capable of rational thought.

Nobody cares? I beg to differ.
Click to expand...

Put your tinfoil hat back on.
 
Perhaps you should head your own warning before spouting BS

cman said:
Then there's the problem of the flight path etc.
Click to expand...
What yo mean the one which pretty much conclusively proves it was a plane.
I can only assume you think a missile instead, then how did it cut down lamposts

1320373943164.jpg

1320374026506.jpg


And of course we then have the massive gauge out of a diesel generator by one of the engines
1320374214550.jpg



cman said:
why are there no marks where the jet engines would have hit the pentagon. If you see deep big the hole was in the pentagon from above and you look at one big hole where the plane supposed hit it on the side it just does not make any sense. Where were the marks left by the wings, engine and tail fin?
Click to expand...

You mean apart from the engine debris
1320374478476.jpg


The photo of the diesel generator from the first point.


Landing gear
1320375367858.jpg


Wheel
1320375448141.jpg


Skin material, look at background loads of it
1320375484424.jpg


More random stuff
1320378467028.jpg


Identifiable part
1320378411911.jpg



Get the picture ;), plent of debris.


cman said:
. Also, why is there no video of the crash and almost no debris?
Click to expand...
Nice little video piecing it all together, with the security cam footage. What other footage do you want, why would there be more video footage.


Oh and of you want far more detail
http://fire.nist.gov/bfrlpubs/build03/PDF/b03017.pdf



As for mercury
http://www.fda.gov/BiologicsBloodVaccines/SafetyAvailability/VaccineSafety/UCM096228
* Introduction

Thimerosal is a mercury-containing organic compound (an organomercurial). Since the 1930s, it has been widely used as a preservative in a number of biological and drug products, including many vaccines, to help prevent potentially life threatening contamination with harmful microbes. Over the past several years, because of an increasing awareness of the theoretical potential for neurotoxicity of even low levels of organomercurials and because of the increased number of thimerosal containing vaccines that had been added to the infant immunization schedule, concerns about the use of thimerosal in vaccines and other products have been raised. Indeed, because of these concerns, the Food and Drug Administration has worked with, and continues to work with, vaccine manufacturers to reduce or eliminate thimerosal from vaccines.

Thimerosal has been removed from or reduced to trace amounts in all vaccines routinely recommended for children 6 years of age and younger, with the exception of inactivated influenza vaccine (see Table 1). A preservative-free version of the inactivated influenza vaccine (contains trace amounts of thimerosal) is available in limited supply at this time for use in infants, children and pregnant women. Some vaccines such as Td, which is indicated for older children (? 7 years of age) and adults, are also now available in formulations that are free of thimerosal or contain only trace amounts. Vaccines with trace amounts of thimerosal contain 1 microgram or less of mercury per dose.

In the following pages, a discussion of preservatives, the use of thimerosal as a preservative, guidelines on exposure to organomercurials (primarily methylmercury), thimerosal toxicity, recent and future FDA actions, and the conclusions of the Institute of Medicine's most recent review of thimerosal in vaccines are presented. This narrative on thimerosal contains references to the literature and links to other sites for readers who wish additional information; for quick reference, a number of frequently asked questions (FAQs) and answers are provided.
Click to expand...

Fluorine - well about the only side effect from that is discoloured teeth and it isn't even in all drinking water. As you can see its a tiny amount. Go government on Dumbing down a minute amount of the population, please.
http://labspace.open.ac.uk/mod/resource/view.php?id=446160
http://www.digitalhen.co.uk/news/uk-england-hampshire-14924292

Again you are the one who should do some research.
 
Last edited:
WAIT!!! Oh wow!!... oh no never mind... for a moment there I thought someone had an original thought... false alarm... just more of the same crap that we've heard for the last 10 years...
 
SteveOBHave said:
WAIT!!! Oh wow!!... oh no never mind... for a moment there I thought someone had an original thought... false alarm... just more of the same crap that we've heard for the last 10 years...
Click to expand...

I thought you said you were going to stay out of the thread but instead you offer trolling.

I've never seen Cman post before and if he's got any brain cells he just might take on board AcidHell's post instead of watching Loose Change.
 
SteveOBHave said:
WAIT!!! Oh wow!!... oh no never mind... for a moment there I thought someone had an original thought... false alarm... just more of the same crap that we've heard for the last 10 years...
Click to expand...

God you are annoying, we get it you think it's a waste of time. The other CTs are relatively untouched. Yet again it's still worth posting if other people read it.
 
JasonM said:
It's also a fact that only 3 steel buildings have ever in history collapsed due to fire. These were all on 9/11.
Click to expand...

Yes it is, WTC 7's fire raged unopposed because the towers collapse had severed the water main rendering the sprinklers useless, Madrid had functional fire suppression and fire fighters hence why the tower was saved.

The WTC are the only steel framed skyscrapers to ever collapse due to fire, 1/2 because the was no fire protection on the towers above the lower 3rd due to the asbestos ban during construction and 7 because its fire suppression had been neutralised by the collapse of 1/2. That's why those towers were lost when other towers were saved from worse fires, its that simple. No conspiracy, just bad luck
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom