WTC-7 Was A Controlled Demolition Inside Job

[SFC Ollie]

you are hilarious, dude. you just provided a video in which a guy describes being on the 8th floor of WTC7 and hearing an explosion.

this guy apparently lived (i think we can agree on that).

so you are saying that a controlled demolition collapsed building seven but allowed enough time for people to escape?

seriously, do you have ANYTHING that refutes reports of the building bulging from the 10th to the 13th floors for up to two hours before your controlled demolition is supposed to have taken place?

he was trapped in he building for hours so what about this supposed raging inferno and if the building was bulging on the 13Th floor why did the collapse initiate with the penthouse then collapse in a controlled fashion



[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=STbD9XMCOho&feature=related[/ame]

this video pretty much ends the debate and proves explosives brought the towers down.of course the Bush dupes wont watch it since they only see what they WANT to see.this video is the smoking gun they cant get around.

A video of one person making a statement is proof of nothing.

 

[DiveCon]

i see. i must be a government plant now!!

we arent allowed to critisize theories NOT supplied by the government. we can only critisize theories that are supplied by the government. is that what is going on here?

it's actually a really simple question. i dont know why nobody can answer it. if the buildings were brought down by explosives then why was there a bulge in the building reported between the 10th and 13th floors hours before?

i'm trying to be open minded but this really needs to be addressed before i can believe that the collapse was caused by explosives. there are problems with the governments version and there are problems with the explosives version. right now neither one seems right to me. the title of the thread states that it was an inside job. so i am asking for some simple proof of the claim

Nist says that building fires caused the collapse of wtc 7...can you provide a link for NIST that states this bulge was confirmed or plays a significant role in their collapse theory ?

NIST WTC 7 Investigation Finds Building Fires Caused Collapse, 08/21/08



Dr. Quintiere also expressed his frustration at NIST’s failure to provide a report on the third skyscraper that collapsed on 9/11, World Trade Center Building 7. “And that building was not hit by anything,” noted Dr. Quintiere. “It’s more important to take a look at that. Maybe there was damage by the debris falling down that played a significant role. But other than that you had fires burning a long time without fire department intervention. And firefighters were in that building. I have yet to see any kind of story about what they saw. What was burning? Were photographs taken? Nothing!”

NIST used computer models that they said have never been used in such an application before and are the state of the art. For this they should be commended for their skill. But the validation of these modeling results is in question. Others have computed aspects with different conclusions on the cause mechanism of the collapse. Moreover, it is common in fire investigation to compute a time-line and compare it to known events. NIST has not done that.


OpEdNews - Article: Former Chief of NIST's Fire Science Division Calls for Independent Review of World Trade Center Investigation

why do you LIE so much
they never say "fire alone"

 

[SFC Ollie]

i see. i must be a government plant now!!

we arent allowed to critisize theories NOT supplied by the government. we can only critisize theories that are supplied by the government. is that what is going on here?

it's actually a really simple question. i dont know why nobody can answer it. if the buildings were brought down by explosives then why was there a bulge in the building reported between the 10th and 13th floors hours before?

i'm trying to be open minded but this really needs to be addressed before i can believe that the collapse was caused by explosives. there are problems with the governments version and there are problems with the explosives version. right now neither one seems right to me. the title of the thread states that it was an inside job. so i am asking for some simple proof of the claim

Nist says that building fires caused the collapse of wtc 7...can you provide a link for NIST that states this bulge was confirmed or plays a significant role in their collapse theory ?

NIST WTC 7 Investigation Finds Building Fires Caused Collapse, 08/21/08



Dr. Quintiere also expressed his frustration at NIST’s failure to provide a report on the third skyscraper that collapsed on 9/11, World Trade Center Building 7. “And that building was not hit by anything,” noted Dr. Quintiere. “It’s more important to take a look at that. Maybe there was damage by the debris falling down that played a significant role. But other than that you had fires burning a long time without fire department intervention. And firefighters were in that building. I have yet to see any kind of story about what they saw. What was burning? Were photographs taken? Nothing!”

NIST used computer models that they said have never been used in such an application before and are the state of the art. For this they should be commended for their skill. But the validation of these modeling results is in question. Others have computed aspects with different conclusions on the cause mechanism of the collapse. Moreover, it is common in fire investigation to compute a time-line and compare it to known events. NIST has not done that.


OpEdNews - Article: Former Chief of NIST's Fire Science Division Calls for Independent Review of World Trade Center Investigation

why do you LIE so much
they never say "fire alone"

Also this good Doctor says that WTC 7 was not hit by anything.......Is he blind, stupid, or both?

 

[DiveCon]

Nist says that building fires caused the collapse of wtc 7...can you provide a link for NIST that states this bulge was confirmed or plays a significant role in their collapse theory ?

NIST WTC 7 Investigation Finds Building Fires Caused Collapse, 08/21/08



Dr. Quintiere also expressed his frustration at NIST’s failure to provide a report on the third skyscraper that collapsed on 9/11, World Trade Center Building 7. “And that building was not hit by anything,” noted Dr. Quintiere. “It’s more important to take a look at that. Maybe there was damage by the debris falling down that played a significant role. But other than that you had fires burning a long time without fire department intervention. And firefighters were in that building. I have yet to see any kind of story about what they saw. What was burning? Were photographs taken? Nothing!”

NIST used computer models that they said have never been used in such an application before and are the state of the art. For this they should be commended for their skill. But the validation of these modeling results is in question. Others have computed aspects with different conclusions on the cause mechanism of the collapse. Moreover, it is common in fire investigation to compute a time-line and compare it to known events. NIST has not done that.


OpEdNews - Article: Former Chief of NIST's Fire Science Division Calls for Independent Review of World Trade Center Investigation

why do you LIE so much
they never say "fire alone"

Also this good Doctor says that WTC 7 was not hit by anything.......Is he blind, stupid, or both?

well, a 110 story building is nothing, isnt it?

 

[eots]

i see. i must be a government plant now!!

we arent allowed to critisize theories NOT supplied by the government. we can only critisize theories that are supplied by the government. is that what is going on here?

it's actually a really simple question. i dont know why nobody can answer it. if the buildings were brought down by explosives then why was there a bulge in the building reported between the 10th and 13th floors hours before?

i'm trying to be open minded but this really needs to be addressed before i can believe that the collapse was caused by explosives. there are problems with the governments version and there are problems with the explosives version. right now neither one seems right to me. the title of the thread states that it was an inside job. so i am asking for some simple proof of the claim

Nist says that building fires caused the collapse of wtc 7...can you provide a link for NIST

that states this bulge was confirmed or plays a significant role in their collapse theory ?

NIST WTC 7 Investigation Finds Building Fires Caused Collapse, 08/21/08



Dr. Quintiere also expressed his frustration at NIST’s failure to provide a report on the third skyscraper that collapsed on 9/11, World Trade Center Building 7. “And that building was not hit by anything,” noted Dr. Quintiere. “It’s more important to take a look at that. Maybe there was damage by the debris falling down that played a significant role. But other than that you had fires burning a long time without fire department intervention. And firefighters were in that building. I have yet to see any kind of story about what they saw. What was burning? Were photographs taken? Nothing!”

NIST used computer models that they said have never been used in such an application before and are the state of the art. For this they should be commended for their skill. But the validation of these modeling results is in question. Others have computed aspects with different conclusions on the cause mechanism of the collapse. Moreover, it is common in fire investigation to compute a time-line and compare it to known events. NIST has not done that.


OpEdNews - Article: Former Chief of NIST's Fire Science Division Calls for Independent Review of World Trade Center Investigation

why do you LIE so much
they never say "fire alone"

can you provide a link from NIST that shows this bulge and were it is included in collapse model simulations ?

 

[eots]

Nist says that building fires caused the collapse of wtc 7...can you provide a link for NIST that states this bulge was confirmed or plays a significant role in their collapse theory ?

NIST WTC 7 Investigation Finds Building Fires Caused Collapse, 08/21/08



Dr. Quintiere also expressed his frustration at NIST’s failure to provide a report on the third skyscraper that collapsed on 9/11, World Trade Center Building 7. “And that building was not hit by anything,” noted Dr. Quintiere. “It’s more important to take a look at that. Maybe there was damage by the debris falling down that played a significant role. But other than that you had fires burning a long time without fire department intervention. And firefighters were in that building. I have yet to see any kind of story about what they saw. What was burning? Were photographs taken? Nothing!”

NIST used computer models that they said have never been used in such an application before and are the state of the art. For this they should be commended for their skill. But the validation of these modeling results is in question. Others have computed aspects with different conclusions on the cause mechanism of the collapse. Moreover, it is common in fire investigation to compute a time-line and compare it to known events. NIST has not done that.


OpEdNews - Article: Former Chief of NIST's Fire Science Division Calls for Independent Review of World Trade Center Investigation

why do you LIE so much
they never say "fire alone"

Also this good Doctor says that WTC 7 was not hit by anything.......Is he blind, stupid, or both?

he was the lead fire investigator at nist until 2007 and the person responsible for the thermal expansion theory you expound so...is he blind ..stupid or both ?

 

[DiveCon]

Nist says that building fires caused the collapse of wtc 7...can you provide a link for NIST

that states this bulge was confirmed or plays a significant role in their collapse theory ?

NIST WTC 7 Investigation Finds Building Fires Caused Collapse, 08/21/08



Dr. Quintiere also expressed his frustration at NIST’s failure to provide a report on the third skyscraper that collapsed on 9/11, World Trade Center Building 7. “And that building was not hit by anything,” noted Dr. Quintiere. “It’s more important to take a look at that. Maybe there was damage by the debris falling down that played a significant role. But other than that you had fires burning a long time without fire department intervention. And firefighters were in that building. I have yet to see any kind of story about what they saw. What was burning? Were photographs taken? Nothing!”

NIST used computer models that they said have never been used in such an application before and are the state of the art. For this they should be commended for their skill. But the validation of these modeling results is in question. Others have computed aspects with different conclusions on the cause mechanism of the collapse. Moreover, it is common in fire investigation to compute a time-line and compare it to known events. NIST has not done that.


OpEdNews - Article: Former Chief of NIST's Fire Science Division Calls for Independent Review of World Trade Center Investigation

why do you LIE so much
they never say "fire alone"

can you provide a link from NIST that shows this bulge and were it is included in collapse model simulations ?

LOL
you dont even read your own links

 

[eots]

why do you LIE so much
they never say "fire alone"

can you provide a link from NIST that shows this bulge and were it is included in collapse model simulations ?

LOL
you dont even read your own links

so what you are saying is no you can not provide confermation of your claim and show were the bulge is included in the Nist collapse simulation or is considered a significant factor ?

 

[DiveCon]

can you provide a link from NIST that shows this bulge and were it is included in collapse model simulations ?

LOL
you dont even read your own links

so what you are saying is no you can not provide confermation of your claim and show were the bulge is included in the Nist collapse simulation or is considered a significant factor ?

NO, i'm saying you are too fucking stupid to read your own fucking links because that link DID confirm it you fucking IDIOT

 

[eots]

LOL
you dont even read your own links

so what you are saying is no you can not provide confermation of your claim and show were the bulge is included in the Nist collapse simulation or is considered a significant factor ?

NO, i'm saying you are too fucking stupid to read your own fucking links because that link DID confirm it you fucking IDIOT

then why dont you provide it ?

 

[DiveCon]

so what you are saying is no you can not provide confermation of your claim and show were the bulge is included in the Nist collapse simulation or is considered a significant factor ?

NO, i'm saying you are too fucking stupid to read your own fucking links because that link DID confirm it you fucking IDIOT

then why dont you provide it ?

YOU posted the fucking link asshole
why dont YOU just go READ IT

 

[kyzr]

I have a question for the conspiracy nuts.
If there was a controlled demolition of the WTC Towers and/or the WTC-7 et.al how can anyone explain that a "controlled demolition" requires a lot of prep work, They need to pre-cut steel columns, place charges, and then string miles of wires to a detonator. There is no way any sane person could think that anything but the 757 jets traveling at 500mph caused the collapses by having so much debris fall from 1350' up. Thats a lot of steel falling doing lots of damage.
It was the terror attack, not faeries planting invisible explosives and miles of invisible wire.

 

[DiveCon]

I have a question for the conspiracy nuts.
If there was a controlled demolition of the WTC Towers and/or the WTC-7 et.al how can anyone explain that a "controlled demolition" requires a lot of prep work, They need to pre-cut steel columns, place charges, and then string miles of wires to a detonator. There is no way any sane person could think that anything but the 757 jets traveling at 500mph caused the collapses by having so much debris fall from 1350' up. Thats a lot of steel falling doing lots of damage.
It was the terror attack, not faeries planting invisible explosives and miles of invisible wire.

/putting on tin foil

they used super secret wireless detonators and ultra super secret thermite paint

/taking off tin foil


see, its easy if you try

LOL

 

[eots]

NO, i'm saying you are too fucking stupid to read your own fucking links because that link DID confirm it you fucking IDIOT

then why dont you provide it ?

YOU posted the fucking link asshole
why dont YOU just go READ IT

really...I must of missed that would you care to post it

 

[DiveCon]

then why dont you provide it ?

YOU posted the fucking link asshole
why dont YOU just go READ IT

really...I must of missed that would you care to post it

so you can ignore it once again?

why bother
you seriously need to seek out professional help for what ever deficiency it is that causes you to believe all these fucking conspiracies

 

[eots]

I have a question for the conspiracy nuts.
If there was a controlled demolition of the WTC Towers and/or the WTC-7 et.al how can anyone explain that a "controlled demolition" requires a lot of prep work, They need to pre-cut steel columns, place charges, and then string miles of wires to a detonator. There is no way any sane person could think that anything but the 757 jets traveling at 500mph caused the collapses by having so much debris fall from 1350' up. Thats a lot of steel falling doing lots of damage.
It was the terror attack, not faeries planting invisible explosives and miles of invisible wire.

according to demolition experts the wtc could be done in a day with approx twenty men
and the planning could of been done far in advance and there would of been bits of wire of every description the wtc.. the crime scene was not treated as such and almost all evidence was destroyed and your inane belief that the experts featured at this site are somehow intellectually challenged is ludicrous



Patriots Question 9/11 - Responsible Criticism of the 9/11 Commission Report


[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=877gr6xtQIc[/ame]

 

[eots]

YOU posted the fucking link asshole
why dont YOU just go READ IT

really...I must of missed that would you care to post it

so you can ignore it once again?

why bother
you seriously need to seek out professional help for what ever deficiency it is that causes you to believe all these fucking conspiracies

what a weasel.. whats the problem ...cant support your lies ??

 

[DiveCon]

really...I must of missed that would you care to post it

so you can ignore it once again?

why bother
you seriously need to seek out professional help for what ever deficiency it is that causes you to believe all these fucking conspiracies

what a weasel.. whats the problem ...cant support your lies ??

you are the one lying'

 

[DiveCon]

I have a question for the conspiracy nuts.
If there was a controlled demolition of the WTC Towers and/or the WTC-7 et.al how can anyone explain that a "controlled demolition" requires a lot of prep work, They need to pre-cut steel columns, place charges, and then string miles of wires to a detonator. There is no way any sane person could think that anything but the 757 jets traveling at 500mph caused the collapses by having so much debris fall from 1350' up. Thats a lot of steel falling doing lots of damage.
It was the terror attack, not faeries planting invisible explosives and miles of invisible wire.

according to demolition experts the wtc could be done in a day with approx twenty men
and the planning could of been done far in advance and there would of been bits of wire of every description the wtc.. the crime scene was not treated as such and almost all evidence was destroyed and your inane belief that the experts featured at this site are somehow intellectually challenged is ludicrous

BULLSHIT
it would take MONTHS
who ever said that is either a fucking liar or totally insane or BOTH

 

[eots]

I have a question for the conspiracy nuts.
If there was a controlled demolition of the WTC Towers and/or the WTC-7 et.al how can anyone explain that a "controlled demolition" requires a lot of prep work, They need to pre-cut steel columns, place charges, and then string miles of wires to a detonator. There is no way any sane person could think that anything but the 757 jets traveling at 500mph caused the collapses by having so much debris fall from 1350' up. Thats a lot of steel falling doing lots of damage.
It was the terror attack, not faeries planting invisible explosives and miles of invisible wire.

according to demolition experts the wtc could be done in a day with approx twenty men
and the planning could of been done far in advance and there would of been bits of wire of every description the wtc.. the crime scene was not treated as such and almost all evidence was destroyed and your inane belief that the experts featured at this site are somehow intellectually challenged is ludicrous

BULLSHIT
it would take MONTHS
who ever said that is either a fucking liar or totally insane or BOTH

or he is the owner of one of europe's largest demolition firms