Solving The Mystery Of WTC 7

Submitted by: Fancys_Asst 5 years ago in

A new 15-minute documentary with architects & engineers that try to get to the bottom of the mysterious Tower 7.
There are 80 comments:
Male 187
Sooo
The idiot monkey ass bush somehow orchestrated a master plot that involved somehow demolishing a building without anyone noticing anything whatsoever, despite all the work that is required. He also managed to hide anything that happened from the FBI and CIA, or somehow managed to convince them to keep quiet. Wow, Bush was a mastermind genius!
0
Reply
Male 187
Sooo
The idiot monkey ass bush somehow orchestrated a master plot that involved somehow demolishing a building without anyone noticing anything whatsoever, despite all the work that is required. He also managed to hide anything that happened from the FBI and CIA, or somehow managed to convince them to keep quiet. Wow, Bush was a mastermind genius!
0
Reply
Male 108
I am also convinced of a conspiracy because of news reports from Fox and from the BBC that reported on the collapse of 7 before it actually collapsed. Look it up on you tube.
0
Reply
Male 14,835
Either it was a government conspiracy or it wasn`t. I am not sure which is which.

However, the insurance companies would know. They are the big corporations most affected financially. They have procedures and systems and scientists.

Either they know the truth and were hushed up, or they know the truth and would go about reducing their risk.

Post 9/11, reinsurance spiked for terrorism risk and not general insurance fire risk applied to structural steel buildings. Make of that what you will.

Look for kickbacks to insurance companies or their management. Who got rich?
0
Reply
Male 1,284
its been proven that the fire suppression system was busted by the falling towers

Some people have trust issues, some are anti-american,some anti-gouvernment.

People make their own conclusion and look for the facts that approve this conclusion. Science is objective as the science that been used on the NIST report.

Now people i looking for every tiny mistakes the media and scientific made to discredit them. We all human of course there will be some but on a 10k pages report 3 or 4 mistakes is really not that much, small irrelevant
0
Reply
Male 309
"@Angilion "how it could have been done without anyone noticing anything."

"The Manhattan Project went on for years with thousands of people working on it, including several different outsourced companies and was only revealed when the bomb was dropped. Disbelief in the level of secrecy is always a bad excuse."


He`s not talking about the secrecy of planning, he`s talking about the physical act of placing the explosives.

The Manhatten Project took place in some unpopulated backwoods part of Tennessee, not the middle of New York City.
0
Reply
Male 10,339
My point is, they didn`t come on in ANY of the ones that were on fire.
0
Reply
Male 7,378
No. I don`t because each individual building has it`s own fire codes to live up to. Would make no sense for the sprinklers to come on in WTC5 if WTC7 was on fire.
0
Reply
Male 10,339
You don`t have to be a douche just because you didn`t read what I wrote.
0
Reply
Male 10,339
Yes. WTC7. Part of the WTC complex. Jeez man.
0
Reply
Male 7,378
eyeyeye AJ, This is WTC7. Come at me when you can follow along.
0
Reply
Male 10,339
@Madest: So you don`t think the fire suppression system to the whole complex was knocked out by HUNDREDS OF TONS OF AIRCRAFT SLAMMING INTO IT?!
0
Reply
Male 7,378
Because fire codes in America are extremely stringent. In New York even moreso. I`m certain this building had a sprinkler system backed up by a powerful fire pump which was also backed up by a generator if power were cut.
It would have put out any standard fire. It may have an increased difficulty if the fire was fuel based.
WTC7 wasn`t impacted.
0
Reply
Male 12,365
[quote]I know for fact that a regular fire could not bring down a steel framed building.[/quote]

How many skyscrapers of the same design as the WTC buildings have burned unchecked for hours after suffering massive structural damage from impact?

Not much of a sample size to draw conclusions from, is it?

So how do you know for a fact *that particular design* couldn`t be brought down by fire *and massive impact*?
0
Reply
Male 12,365
[quote]This is not something you should "decide for yourself" and history has proven we cannot trust what our government says.[/quote]

Random people on the internet talking about what they`d like to be true are a less trustworthy source.

I think it`s important to point out that not trusting anything said by anyone in any position of authority does not require trusting anything said by anyone who says anything different. That`s very often put forward as the only possible choice.
0
Reply
Male 7,378
I know for fact that a regular fire could not bring down a steel framed building. It would take fuel oil or demolition charges. Wiring a building for demolition would not go unnoticed however. I trust these experts. This is not something you should "decide for yourself" and history has proven we cannot trust what our government says. WTC7 housed the CIA and Secret Service amongst other government and securities offices. There are things about 9/11 that we will never know. This (it appears) is one of them. To disregard it as the making of conspiracy theorists means you trust everything your government tells you.
0
Reply
Male 12,365
[quote]I can`t wrap my head around how an uncontrolled event created a very controlled collapse. If a quarter, half, or even three quarters of this building collapsed and you had a some structure left standing that was taken down later, I can intuitively see how that would happen. But this collapse looks like they didn`t bolt any of the steel together and it was just standing there like a card house.[/quote]

Buildings are heavy. Take out the support on any level and you get all of the building above it banging down under gravity. That`s a hell of a lot of kinetic energy, easily enough to break the floors below. Straight down, bang bang bang as the floors collapse under the kinetic energy acting directly downwards.

You`re thinking in terms of buildings you`re intuitively familiar with - wider than they are tall. Towers behave differently.
0
Reply
Male 201
This is not a "documentary," but rather rhetoric.
0
Reply
Male 446
People should be concentrating on the financial collapse of the USA economy. Not as exciting as a controlled demolition, but hell of a lot more important and relevant to Americans right now.
0
Reply
Male 187
Sooo
The idiot monkey ass bush somehow orchestrated a master plot that involved somehow demolishing a building without anyone noticing anything whatsoever, despite all the work that is required. He also managed to hide anything that happened from the FBI and CIA, or somehow managed to convince them to keep quiet. Wow, Bush was a mastermind genius!
0
Reply
Male 362
put im pretty sure a piece of debris hit building 7 in the side which made it collapse
0
Reply
Male 38,498

We see amazing things all the time that happen by accident. We say "couldn`t do that again if I tried" or something like that. But when those same random events occur on a large object no one will believe it.

There was indeed a conspiracy...by terrorists. Until someone can give me a motive for taking down #7 I can`t buy into it. I mean, if it were a conspiracy then why bother with #7? They already had 1 & 2 down which were much more dramatic.
0
Reply
Male 6,737
Definately blown up.
0
Reply
Male 1,284
@alfasinha @gerry i had a friend was a biologist working for a tobacco companie. Is work was to look at the impact of tobacco on the organism but i dont remember in detail, its been a long time. So obviously is report was devastator for the tobacco companie but they did publish it (they had no choice). Except it did`nt get the media attention. surprise surprise



Imperial Tobacco Health and Science
0
Reply
Male 1,745
I can`t wrap my head around how an uncontrolled event created a very controlled collapse. If a quarter, half, or even three quarters of this building collapsed and you had a some structure left standing that was taken down later, I can intuitively see how that would happen. But this collapse looks like they didn`t bolt any of the steel together and it was just standing there like a card house.
0
Reply
Male 1,284
But i have to admit NIST didnt took seriously the option of controlled demolition but they did look for it. No evidence of blast no evidence of controlled events
0
Reply
Male 1,284
i have watched everything the conspiratist said, and also watch the official version in details. I made up my mind. NIST report is clear and precise. Did anyone read it here?
0
Reply
Male 1,360
So it was blown down, and?
0
Reply
Female 4
@Gerry1of1 You have a good point and i didn formulate it correctly, yes idd companies hire professors n experts to say what they are paid to say. But it`s still a whole different case of one saying tobacco is healthy and one saying they think this building has been intentionally blown up. But you are very right, we have to idd make up our own minds regardless of experts,ty for pointing it out. I personaly am inclined to believe most of what these particular experts are saying plus the amazing firefighters and policemen that were present.
0
Reply
Female 4
@Musuko42 What`s emotional outrage without atleast one cliché lol no use in putting it in any other way than the most obvious. And no i didn consider the word sheeple,it`s horrible lmao :p
0
Reply
Male 2,850
@Alfasinha

"Stop being a sheep"

"Wake up"

Could you please tone back the cliche? I`m just glad you didn`t say "sheeple". I`m sure you were tempted to do so, however.
0
Reply
Male 38,498

Alfasinha [quote]"one of those"nuts"has 2 PHD`s in relevant fields " [/quote]
Your point is....?
Tobacco companies have guys with lots of PHDs and other letters who all claim tobacco is not harmful.
Guys with PHDs said the atomic bomb would catch the atmosphere on fire and destroy all life on earth.
But sometimes they are right. But Always Always ask questions
0
Reply
Male 1,540
I can watch these videos all day but they just can`t sell me on the idea. In this video, without having to look anything up, I could sit here and write pages and pages as I deconstruct the argument presented in this video. I`ll spare IAB the time.

Let`s face it, the idea is that somebody (most likely the government) crashed planes in to buildings to coverup the fact that they had actually planted bombs in all of them (for one of many suggest reasons) is silly. On top of that, apparently this time the fire department was involved and thought it was a good idea to send its own men in to die after setting off bombs.

I`ll lend truthers my ear after they can start agreeing on what they think happened since their "evidence" tends to contradict itself between different theories.

Also, let`s not forget, the simplest answer is normally the most correct.
0
Reply
Male 1,737
My only real question about this. How is a research backed by the victim`s families non-biased? If they don`t believe the official version, than they are looking for another answer. I see that as at least a little biased.
0
Reply
Male 38,498

Angilion [quote]"alien destructo-rays were used." [/quote]
Really, Angilion? ... :)
I knew it! I knew Roswell was real! To bustards have gotten a couple of saucers now to reverse engineer.

Hey? Do you think they used the earthquake machine last month on the east coast? I bet they did!
0
Reply
Female 4
Are ppl seriously kidding me?Some say they are just a bunch of conspiracy theory nuts,well one of those"nuts"has 2 PHD`s in relevant fields so i think he and all those experts know a whole lot more on the matter than any of us do. To question that is ludacris. Some ppl ask why,why would they do this?Why would they NOT do it? What are 3000 civilians to the governement if they can pass on all these patriot n terrorist laws and earn billions with applying them to have an excuse to invade other countries thus enriching themselves?Ppl say ow is impossible for it to be a controlled demolition,firefighters SAW columns CUT THROUGH AND MELTING. Are you telling me that those noble men who risked their lives are LYING? Are you telling me the very unscientific reports the governement has releashed are more believeable? Stop being a sheep that believes that society wants the best for you. Those days are long gone. Civilians nowadays are used to pump money out of. Wake up
0
Reply
Male 813
Truthers = epic retards.
0
Reply
Male 192
@ Crabes and everyone else that says this is "wrong" I just want to ask you to do yourself a favor before dismissing this video. Find a copy of Fahrenheit 9/11 and watch it with an open mind. Do not believe it, just look at the facts and opinions in it and decide for yourself. And as far as this comment "No evidence of nano-thermite as been found" 1. i believe the vid when it said they were told it wasnt even tested for, and 2 how could it be tested when the rubble was cleaned up ASAP and for some reason shipped off and destroyed before anyone had a chance to even look? 3 this video shows the evidence, if you keep an open mind to it. I believe 100% the government is hiding what really happened.
0
Reply
Male 12,365
antagonizer, thank you for demonstrating the point I made earlier:

[quote]Anyone who thinks it was demolished deliberately should spend a couple of minutes looking at what is required to demolish a large building in a controlled way[/quote]

You obviously haven`t.

It`s one thing to hide a research project in wartime.

It`s quite another to go to the great lengths required to set up a controlled demolition in a building that is in use, without anyone noticing. In fact, it`s impossible. You are, through your ignorance, inadvertantly arguing that alien destructo-rays were used. Even if you think the government used people in invisibility suits to plant invisible explosives, it still couldn`t be done. There`s a lot of other work needed for a controlled demolition, e.g. weakening the building beforehand.
0
Reply
Male 1,284
So Larry Silverstein said that firefighters decided to "pull" the building because it was about to collapse. But they cut that part out.

The Manhattan project was a research project not a installing 500 tons of explosives without anyone notice it project. (by the way first nuclear test was named Trinity July 16, 1945, Hiroshima 16 August 1945)

No evidence of nano-thermite as been found.

The architect and engineer for the truth look impressive but is just a small group of stupid truther
0
Reply
Male 714
any fool knows that G W Bush, personally rigged the place to blow. probably because he hates black people.... LOOK AT THE EVIDENCE!
0
Reply
Male 38,498

Here`s a good video on it. The guys got a boring voice, but the info is good.

Jump to 1:45 for a graphic of the collapse from inside.

WTC7
0
Reply
Male 508
@Angilion "how it could have been done without anyone noticing anything."

The Manhattan Project went on for years with thousands of people working on it, including several different outsourced companies and was only revealed when the bomb was dropped.

Disbelief in the level of secrecy is always a bad excuse.
0
Reply
Male 2
Simply regurgitating mass media talking points about WTC7 doesn`t mean you can be so roostery and condescended to those that believe the buildings were "pulled" as Larry Silverstein so carefully put it.

You can`t ignore the owner of the building when he admits it in a PBS doc.. C`mon now, think!!
0
Reply
Male 2
All I can say, after 10 years, is if you still don`t believe WTC 7 was a controlled demolition, you never will. Why that is you have to answer for yourself..

Controllled demolition compilation, a usefull visual tool to compare to WTC 7 with other "pull" jobs
0
Reply
Male 12,365
What mystery? A building was very badly damaged by a very large amount of kinetic energy (tons of matter falling on it), caught fire (hardly surprising under the circumstances) and collapsed.

Anyone who thinks it was demolished deliberately should spend a couple of minutes looking at what is required to demolish a large building in a controlled way and then ask themselves how it could have been done without anyone noticing anything.

People really should stop believing whatever they`re told by whoever they consider an authority and start thinking more. But that will probably never happen.
0
Reply
Male 108
nettech - did you even watch the video? It`s not the designers of the buildings - it is a gathering of architects and engineers, aka experts, coming to a conclusion much different than the gov`ts. This is not loose change college students but trained and seasoned professionals. But maybe I should listen to nettech instead.
0
Reply
Male 1,054
So architects design a building that fails during a fire and then point the finger elsewhere? Too easy...

For all you conspiracy believers... Do you really think the buidling could be built with preplaced charges or modified later without one single construction worker, building occupant, or inspector coming forward with a tell-all story? We really suck at keeping secrets after all....
0
Reply
Male 1,268
"WAS people in the building when it was brought down. people who those who do not want to be found out wanted out of the picture."

Yes, there was ONE person. He has a name, you can look up.

Meanwhile, gitmo has nothing on detainee "centers" inside of Iraq. I assure you, if america doesn`t want you alive, we don`t need to blow up one of our buildings to accomplish this.
0
Reply
Male 2,764
While I do not subscribe to placed demolitions in the buildings, I do keep in mind that the U.S. government has a history of allowing events to happen in order to have a rallying point the public can get behind. Pearl Harbor comes to mind. However, if our government truly was ignorant of the plot- with all their fingers in all them pies, I really take no comfort in that.
What I do know is this: 9/11 has been good for (Certain)businesses and has allowed the federal government greater control of our Nation. Coincidence, who knows? But hell, what`s a few thousand civilian lives when there`s a buck to be made?
0
Reply
Male 290
the main reason this country is going to shyt is cause most of you A holes refuse to believe the so called "conspiracy" theories because you`re conditioned to think that way. as soon as you hear the word "conspiracy" your mind has already made up it`s mind and will remain stubborn even if the truth came up, punched you in the face, knocking you down, and then pooped on you. the next reason you will never see the truth is cause you`re conditioned to only care about feeding your ego, and these conspiracy theories don`t sit well with your ego because it means all the material shyt and all the false security you feel that your government promises you will all be washed away when the shyt hits the fan. so you just remain stubborn and go about your life, sniffing your own farts, stuffing your face with the genetically cloned chicken and beef your oh so trusted government provides you with, and pretending like everything is fine and dandy and that will never change.
0
Reply
Male 290
@LazyMe484: the building was rigged for this when it was built because this is where evidence against those who do not want to be found out was stored. also, there WAS people in the building when it was brought down. people who those who do not want to be found out wanted out of the picture.
0
Reply
Male 508
I don`t think the term `conspiracy` applies here.

Seems to me they`re simply saying that NIST was derelict in their duty when they collected evidence and there is sufficient grounds to suggest that there was more to this than the report said. Could well be the terrorists ALSO have used thermite.
0
Reply
Male 208
Really, starting with this nut job conspiracy BS again, hell, is not like it is too hard to find some conspiracy theorists to back a rediculous story.

And I love how they include Mike Gravel, The nuttiest politician they can find to support them.
0
Reply
Male 10,440
Wow that video tries really hard to be persuasive.

But they ask completely the wrong questions. If it was a demolition, then why? and how? and by whom? Buildings don`t wire themselves to implode, and why thermite? Silly...

You can always tell the difference between a documentary and a video full of conspiracy nuts. A documentary would have asked the right questions, like gone to ask the city if they had planned a demolition that day (for whatever reason), if there were still people in the building, if people were told, if people who worked there noticed others setting up explosives.

Whereas this spends all of it`s time persuading you that it`s right by repeating the same evidence over and over.

I don`t think so. Edward Current explains it best.

There is simply not enough evidence in this video.
0
Reply
Male 1,586
I like how everyone says that it is a conspiracy that Bush engineered. People seem to forget that he had only been in office for 9 months. If he was able to pull that all together in 9 months than he was the smartest president ever. Hmmmmmmm.....
0
Reply
Male 1,284
@gerry some say it was the reptilian order, some say is was a satanic ritual(sacrifice), some say its to start a war , many weird ideas no evidence
0
Reply
Male 27
Explanation
I can`t believe i used to believe this poo.
0
Reply
Male 38,498

Biggest hole in the conspiracy theory is "why".
You don`t pull of a hoax like that without a darn good reason.
They say WT7 went down to destroy CIA evidence in their offices... they can`t afford a shredder?
0
Reply
Male 195
Utter hogwash.
0
Reply
Male 2,619
Isn`t that the dude that voiced the old guy from Up?
0
Reply
Male 1,745
if the official line is true, the real morons are those who spend millions and engineer controlled demolitions, they should just set the building on fire and do nothing for 7 hours.

also, it was coincidence that CIA offices in NYC were in wtc7.
0
Reply
Male 1,284
@MildCorma
There is a real conspiracy industry out there, the gourous got to keep their business running. All their questions as been answered.
0
Reply
Male 496
The one thing that astounds me is there is -no- evidence supporting the various conspiracy theories out there. Like, fair enough if you want to believe it`s an inside job then fine, but don`t ask everyone to believe something based on eye witness reports (which don`t even hold up in courts) taken minutes after the event (often off he cuff remarks taken way out of context)and theory (this didn`t look right because of X and Y) without any evidence to back them up.

Nice ideas, but as Carl Sagan said "Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence".
0
Reply
Male 38,498

If I recall correctly, conspiracy theorists started their chatter before the second plane hit WTC 2. There was indeed a conspiracy...from Al Quida.
Explanation of Official Report

0
Reply
Male 10,339
Paperduck, you are an idiot. An unmitigated moron.
0
Reply
Male 1,284
@paperduck obviously install the command center in the destruction target zone is indeed real smart
drat the satellite!!!
0
Reply
Male 508
@Crabes Yup I don`t doubt he used the NIST report. However, 1500 specialists are saying that they purposely ignored viable evidence, meaning they didn`t do their job properly.

What they`re saying is that even if they didn`t think it was relevant, they should have included ALL the evidence and not just mined for the stuff that supports their conclusions otherwise the report was incomplete and therefore invalid.
0
Reply
Male 1,745
obviously what happened: wtc7 housed the command and control center for the rest of the operation, bringing down wtc1, 2 and hit on the pentagon. then the command and control center and all evidence of the coverup destroyed.
0
Reply
Male 25,416
well.... this is interesting
0
Reply
Male 1,284
@antagonizer that guy use the NIST report answers to make that video. Did you read it?

There his about 250k skilled experts and all US university approving the NIST
0
Reply
Male 508
@Crabes Who`s more credible? 1500 highly trained, professional architects or one guy with no credentials and a youtube video.

If 1500 highly educated specialists tell me something is true, you have to give way to the possibility that they`re right.
0
Reply
Male 17,512
Good link Crabes.
0
Reply
Male 1,284
@ggobez "science isn`t about sides it is about objective reasoning regardless of the outcome."

Rigorous science as been use to complete the NIST report and it as been approved by all US university and almost all experts. Except for about 13k which represent almost 1% of all experts.
0
Reply
Male 5,620
@naz2k55, He later took full responsibility on the Al Jazeera network. Really.. you should learn history, and be a bit more respectful.

"I am the one in charge of the nineteen brothers. [...] I was responsible for entrusting the nineteen brothers [...] with the raids". In the tapes he was seen with Ramzi bin al-Shibh, as well as two of the 9/11 hijackers, Hamza al-Ghamdi and Wail al-Shehri, as they made preparations for the attacks (videotape broadcast September 7, 2006)
0
Reply
Male 119
‎"I was not involved in the 9/11 attacks in the United States nor did I have knowledge of the attacks. The United States should try to trace the perpetrators of these attacks within itself; to the people who want to make the present century a century of conflict between Islam and Christianity. That secret government must be asked as to who carried out the attacks. The American system is totally in control of the Jews, whose first priority is Israel, not the United States."
- Osama bin Laden
0
Reply
Male 1,931
That video Crabes posted is convincing as well. I don`t know what the "truth" of the matter is. All I know is that I am open to either given the sufficient evidence. Whatever the truth is, we should look at it objectively, whether it was fire or bombs. People should stop taking sides though, science isn`t about sides it is about objective reasoning regardless of the outcome.
0
Reply
Male 1,284
if you wanna see the other side of the medal look here

Building 7 Explained
0
Reply
Male 1,931
Rather convincing footage, but it got a bit pandering towards the end. It does look like a demolition, from the middle falling in first and the building collapsing into it. If what they are saying is true about NIST and their responses, then that is deplorable as well.

I am glad they never said that "the government did it", it could have been the work of terrorists to set off the bombs themselves.
0
Reply
Female 1,780
Link: Solving The Mystery Of WTC 7 [Rate Link] - A new 15-minute documentary with architects & engineers that try to get to the bottom of the mysterious Tower 7.
0
Reply