Which 9-11 theory you believe?

[eots]

Comments on NIST briefing collapse WTC 7 21 aug 2008

Comments on NIST briefing collapse WTC 7 21 aug 2008 - TVcert

Got any physical evidence yet?

Idiot

Your entire investigation included no physical evidence. How can you be so sure you know what happened?
In general, much less evidence existed for WTC 7 than for the two WTC towers. The steel for WTC 1 and WTC 2 contained distinguishing characteristics that enabled it to be identified once removed from the site during recovery efforts. However, the same was not true for the WTC 7 steel. Certainly, there is a lot less visual and audio evidence of the WTC 7 collapse compared to the collapses of the WTC 1 and WTC 2 towers, which were much more widely photographed.
Nonetheless, the NIST investigation of WTC 7 is based on a huge amount of data. These data come from extensive research, interviews, and studies of the building, including audio and video recordings of the collapse. Rigorous, state-of-the-art computer methods were designed to study and model the building's collapse. These validated computer models produced a collapse sequence that was confirmed by observations of what actually occurred. In addition to using its in-house expertise, NIST relied upon private sector technical experts; accumulated copious documents, photographs and videos of this disaster; conducted first-person interviews of building occupants and emergency responders; analyzed the evacuation and emergency response operations in and around WTC 7 performed computer simulations of the behavior of WTC 7 on Sept. 11, 2001, and combined the knowledge gained into a "probable" collapse sequence.

 

[Citizen Pat]

Believe it or not, there are intelligent citizens out here that see the truth, even if you have blinders on. I am a woman, citizen, and daughter, sister and aunt to many U.S. military men. Do not infer something you have no idea about. You insult my intelligence and you weaken your stature in my eyes. I request a retraction from you.

 

[Citizen Pat]

WTC 1 and 2 controlled demolition caused the greatest loss of life from a single criminal act. If these buildings were built as the military was doing with missile silos at the same time, then they were built to come down without dropping on six acres of other buildings. That would be an important fact to follow.

 

[eots]

WTC 1 and 2 controlled demolition caused the greatest loss of life from a single criminal act. If these buildings were built as the military was doing with missile silos at the same time, then they were built to come down without dropping on six acres of other buildings. That would be an important fact to follow.

Well I see wtc 7 as the most clearly improbable of the collapses..and if you prove that the rest would follow but thats one opinion..if you think otherwise go for it ..ultimately the most critical realization is that the commission reports and NIST are without question cover-ups designed to obscure the truth

 

[Fizz]

shut the fuck up..LEANING TOWER BOY [/B]
Why did WTC 7 collapse, while no other known building in history has collapsed due to fires alone? The collapse of WTC 7 is the first known instance of a tall building brought down primarily by uncontrolled fires. The fires in WTC 7 were similar to those that have occurred in several tall buildings where the automatic sprinklers did not function or were not present. These other buildings, including Philadelphia's One Meridian Plaza, a 38-story skyscraper that burned for 18 hours in 1991, did not collapse due to differences in the design of the structural system.

Questions and Answers about the NIST WTC 7 Investigation

nice. you were shown that first responders said the building was leaning and your response is "shut the fuck up"!!!

yeah.... you are REALLY seeking the truth!!!

you see that silly thing in the silly phrase you made enormous letters of? it looks like this ---------> ?

so you know what that is?

of course you don't or you would understand that it is a question and not a statement. the NIST did NOT state the buildings collapsed due to FIRE ALONE!!

you lied!!

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bf7Z_I1CAZ4&feature=channel]YouTube - WTC 7's structural integrity and its footprint[/ame]

 

[eots]

shut the fuck up..LEANING TOWER BOY [/B]
Why did WTC 7 collapse, while no other known building in history has collapsed due to fires alone? The collapse of WTC 7 is the first known instance of a tall building brought down primarily by uncontrolled fires. The fires in WTC 7 were similar to those that have occurred in several tall buildings where the automatic sprinklers did not function or were not present. These other buildings, including Philadelphia's One Meridian Plaza, a 38-story skyscraper that burned for 18 hours in 1991, did not collapse due to differences in the design of the structural system.

Questions and Answers about the NIST WTC 7 Investigation

nice. you were shown that first responders said the building was leaning and your response is "shut the fuck up"!!!

yeah.... you are REALLY seeking the truth!!!

you see that silly thing in the silly phrase you made enormous letters of? it looks like this ---------> ?

so you know what that is?

of course you don't or you would understand that it is a question and not a statement. the NIST did NOT state the buildings collapsed due to FIRE ALONE!!

you lied!!

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bf7Z_I1CAZ4&feature=channel]YouTube - WTC 7's structural integrity and its footprint[/ame]

nist wrote the entire piece both question and answers dipshit

 

[Fizz]

looks like chris has a new fake nick name!!

Too bad your survey question did not offer None of the above or Other. I stand with evidence until new evidence disproves the provided evidence. So far:

ok. let's see your evidence then......

1. Oxford Encyclopedia, 1990 called the WTC was built with a concrete core;

no. oxford used the WTC as an example of what a skyscraper is. then it is said that SKYSCRAPERS have concrete and steel cores. they are correct since the WTC has a steel core.

2. The original stamped approved structural plans were NEVER given to the law enforcement, 9/11 Commission or NIST. Why?

says who? show your proof/

3. Newsweek a few days after 9/11 quotes the original architect Robertson, that WTC had a tube in tube concrete core.

no it doesnt. the reporter said it. not robertson. robertson later clarified that the article is wrong and it has a steel core.

4. FEMA uses an earlier rendering without the japanese structural engineer's'recommended core construction detail, without insisting the Port Authority turn over the originally stamped approved plans.

proof please, chris.... err pat.... whatever. we keep asking for it and you never give us any documentation to back up the stupid claim.

5. Giuliani is allowed to leave office with the original approved plans, all photos and images and turns them over to an entity.

a complete lie and totally absurd. there is NOTHING that states guilianni EVER had the building plans.

6. I reviewed the Silverstein leaked plans, missing elevator construction details, and more alarmingly altered revision tables. Would the real plans have cost him a double hit on the insurance payment.

yawn....

7. 3,000 people show death certificates for a plane hitting the building. The real cause of death would be complete pulverization from an explosion brought on by controlled demolition and a building built to demolish.

no. 3000 people have HOMICIDE written on their death certificates. it doesnt say " a plane hitting the building" or any other of your stupid shit.

8. Were the tenants in either WTC ever informed they were sitting on plastic coated rebar which would pulverize in an attack? Not sure the rents would be so high if they knew beforehand. Moreover, Silverstein might have had to pay the victims families damages from the insurance he received, had they challenged their leases with a short term owner.

I am sure the defense lawyers for the perpetrators will delight in the official story that will not convict one person, even if arrested, arraigned and in trial.

proof of the plastic coated rebar please. you said you follow facts. where is your proof of this claim?

 

[eots]

you have one firemen stating it doesn't look straight.. I have provided several that say differently and shown NIST makes no mention of a lean and in fact the success and calculations of the computer model is designed with the data there is no leaning ..so there is a real problem if the man you present is correct inst there..it would in fact invalidate the nist model and bring the entire investigation into question...btw you have still failed to provide a link to the print version of the testimony you provided...why ?

 

[eots]

Captain Chris Boyle
Engine 94 - 18 years

Boyle: ... on the north and east side of 7 it didn't look like there was any damage at all,
but then you looked on the south side of 7 there had to be a hole 20 stories tall in the building, with fire on several floors. Debris was falling down on the building and it didn't look good.

... Then we received an order from Fellini, we're going to make a move on 7. That was the first time really my stomach tightened up because the building didn't look good. I was figuring probably the standpipe systems were shot. There was no hydrant pressure. I wasn't really keen on the idea. Then this other officer I'm standing next to said, that building doesn't look straight. So I'm standing there. I'm looking at the building. It didn't look right, but, well, we'll go in, we'll see.

So we gathered up rollups and most of us had masks at that time. We headed toward 7. And just around we were about a hundred yards away and Butch Brandies came running up. He said forget it, nobody's going into 7, there's creaking, there are noises coming out of there, so we just stopped. And probably about 10 minutes after that, Visconti, he was on West Street, and I guess he had another report of further damage either in some basements and things like that, so Visconti said nobody goes into 7, so that was the final thing and that was abandoned.

when are you going to provide a link to where you got this ??

 

[SFC Ollie]

Captain Chris Boyle | Firehouse.com

 

[zzzz]

Eyewitness accounts are not to be taken at face value. In stressful situations human beings can imagine things and memories change over time. What apeared to be isn't what happened in reality. So all these eyewitness statements, even from first responders have to be taken in context and with a certain degree of disbelief.

Anytime anything happens there is always a conspiracy. At least to the paranoid ther is always a conspiracy. In reality there is nothing there but in a paranoids mind there are conspiracies all around every day, they can't help it! So do not get mad at them because they cannot control themselves. They deserve to be pitied not scorned.

 

[SFC Ollie]

Eyewitness accounts are not to be taken at face value. In stressful situations human beings can imagine things and memories change over time. What apeared to be isn't what happened in reality. So all these eyewitness statements, even from first responders have to be taken in context and with a certain degree of disbelief.

Anytime anything happens there is always a conspiracy. At least to the paranoid ther is always a conspiracy. In reality there is nothing there but in a paranoids mind there are conspiracies all around every day, they can't help it! So do not get mad at them because they cannot control themselves. They deserve to be pitied not scorned.

This is so very true. Ask two people who were 20 feet away from each other during a firefight and you will get two different stories about what actually happened.

 

[GHook93]

Nor do I. I acknowledge that the act was perpetrated by al-Qa'idah but absolutely believe that the US government "let it happen" in some sense.

Like Pearl Harbor huh?

I don't buy it! Rather I think America was sleeping at the wheel. I think we saw an Islamofacist threat, but believed it was an overseas threat! But glad to see your only a half-truther, which makes you only half-retarded and not a full retard like EOTS, 9/11 Insider, Terrel, PF Titmore and Freeman!

 

[GHook93]

Nor do I. I acknowledge that the act was perpetrated by al-Qa'idah but absolutely believe that the US government "let it happen" in some sense.

indeed, too much to be gained to stop it

Are you kidding too much to lose by letting it happen! Believe it or not I don't think America wanted to find themselves in the hell-hole called Afghanistan. I don't think they wanted the big hit to the economy immediately after the attack.

Also if you think Bush and the Republicans wanted it to remain in power, well the Republicans lost the house, senate and Presidency!

 

[GHook93]

iraq was the only country stopping iran from becoming what is now and the super power it will be in the next few years

LOL Bluballs, Iraq was the only polarizing force in the middle east no doubt, but they are FAR FAR FAR FAR FAR away from becoming a super power. Do you leftist assholes even believe the shit you type?

 

[GHook93]

I believe the theory that doesn't violate the laws of physics or rely on irrational hatred as "proof". And so far in the polling, 2 people prefer the violations of natural laws and irrational hatred.

but then you know jack shit about the physics of the official story..you are not even well versed in the official explanation you claim to support

LOL coming from a self-proclaimed drug addict! Classic!

 

[GHook93]

It was the Martians.
Step One: 9/11!!!
Step Two: Come out of the ground in tripods killing everything in their path.

 

[Two Thumbs]

It was the Martians.
Step One: 9/11!!!
Step Two: Come out of the ground in tripods killing everything in their path.

Was Bush a martian?

Cheney, sure Cheney is a martian, or ***** Martian, as the case may be.

I love reading crap like this, you can tell who is nuts and who isn't.

 

[Mr.Fitnah]

NIST states damage played "no significant role "in the collapse and that fires alone would still have initiated the collapse it was on the nist fact sheet but now it is only available on pdf and it would not cut and paste.. no mention of fizzes leaning tower however

again, "no significant role" does NOT equal "no role"
you nitpick the report and try and make it say something it actually doesnt

and "would still have" doesnt say "did"

impact caused no damage to the spray-applied fire resistive material that was applied to the steel columns, girders, and beams except in the immediate vicinity of the severed columns. The debris impact damage did play a secondary role in the last stages of the collapse sequence, where the exterior façade buckled at the lower floors where the impact damage was located. A separate analysis showed that even without the structural damage due to debris impact, WTC 7 would have collapsed in fires similar to those that occurred on Sept. 11, 2001. None of the large pieces of debris from WTC 2 (the south tower) hit WTC 7 because of the large distance between the two buildings.

Questions and Answers about the NIST WTC 7 Investigation


moron

17. The whole south side of Seven World Trade had been hit by the collapse of the second Tower. – Fire Captain Brenda Berkman (Susan Hagen and Mary Carouba, Women at Ground Zero, 2002, p. 213)

18. At that point, they said that Seven World Trade had no face and it was ready to collapse. – EMT Mercedes Rivera: (Susan Hagen and Mary Carouba, Women at Ground Zero, 2002, p. 29)

19. You see the white smoke, you see the thing leaning like this? It's definitely going. There's no way to stop it. 'Cause you have to go up in there to put it out, and it's already, the structural integrity is not there. –Unidentified firefighter

 

[Mr.Fitnah]

1. They backed me off the rig because Seven was in dead jeopardy, so they backed everybody off and moved us to the rear end of Vesey Street. We just stood there for a half hour, 40 minutes, because Seven was in imminent collapse and finally did come down. –Firefighter Thomas Smith
http://graphics8.nytimes.com/packages/pdf/nyregion/20050812_WTC_GRAPHIC/9110246.PDF

2. Chief Nigro directed me to continue monitoring conditions at the site. Specifically to monitor number 7 World Trade Center. We were very concerned with the collapse potential there, and to do whatever I could do to ensure site safety in that no additional people became injured. –FDNY Deputy Chief Harold Meyers http://graphics8.nytimes.com/packages/pdf/nyregion/20050812_WTC_GRAPHIC/9110382.PDF

3. We were concerned that the fires on several floors and the missing steel would result in the building collapsing. So for the next five or six hours we kept firefighters from working anywhere near that building, which included the whole north side of the World Trade Center complex. –Chief Frank Fellini http://graphics8.nytimes.com/packages/pdf/nyregion/20050812_WTC_GRAPHIC/9110217.PDF

4. We made searches. We attempted to put some of the fire out, but we had a pressure problem. I forget the name of the Deputy. Some Deputy arrived at the scene and thought that the building was too dangerous to continue with operations, so we evacuated number 7 World Trade Center. –Captain Anthony Varriale http://graphics8.nytimes.com/packages/pdf/nyregion/20050812_WTC_GRAPHIC/9110313.PDF

5. I remember him screaming about number 7, No. 7, that they wanted everybody away from 7 because 7 was definitely going to collapse, they don't know when, but it's definitely going to come down, just get the hell out of the way, everybody get away from it, make sure you're away from it, that's an order, you know, stuff like that. –Firefighter Edward Kennedy http://graphics8.nytimes.com/packages/pdf/nyregion/20050812_WTC_GRAPHIC/9110502.PDF

6. Early on, there was concern that 7 World Trade Center might have been both impacted by the collapsing tower and had several fires in it and there was a concern that it might collapse. So we instructed that a collapse area --

Q. A collapse zone?

A. Yeah -- be set up and maintained so that when the expected collapse of 7 happened, we wouldn't have people working in it. There was considerable discussion with Con Ed regarding the substation in that building and the feeders and the oil coolants and so on. And their concern was of the type of fire we might have when it collapsed. They shut down the power, and when it did collapse, the things that they were concerned with would have been [sic]. That's about it. –Chief Frank Cruthers
http://graphics8.nytimes.com/packages/pdf/nyregion/20050812_WTC_GRAPHIC/9110179.PDF