48375
47833

WTC Building #7

Conspiracy theories and weird science discussions.

WTC Building #7

Postby averagejoe » Nov 5th, 2009, 11:18 am

Just wondering about WTC Building #7 that collapsed after fire. How come the Beijing Mandarin Hotel didn't collapse because of fire? A lot worse fire. They were both 47 stories high.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tWq_dVmiUd4
"Man is not free unless government is limited." -- Ronald Reagan
User avatar
averagejoe
Walks on Forum Water
 
Posts: 10814
Likes: 2004 posts
Liked in: 1512 posts
Joined: Nov 23rd, 2007, 10:50 pm

Re: WTC Building #7

Postby Nebula » Nov 5th, 2009, 11:22 am

Was the Beijing Mandarin damaged when a much taller building beside it collapsed? What proof do you have that the fire at the Beijing Mandarin was "much worse" than in WTC #47? Were both buildings constructed in the same way? Made with the same materials?

I can ask many questions too.
You cannot reason someone out of a position that they did not use reason to arrive at.
User avatar
Nebula
Buddha of the Board
 
Posts: 16288
Likes: 18 posts
Liked in: 125 posts
Joined: Jul 6th, 2005, 8:52 am
Location: Puzzle Palace

Re: WTC Building #7

Postby averagejoe » Nov 5th, 2009, 11:56 am

Haaa, I just have to look at the pictures to see that the fire was much more intense there WD.


Nebula wrote:Was the Beijing Mandarin damaged when a much taller building beside it collapsed? What proof do you have that the fire at the Beijing Mandarin was "much worse" than in WTC #47? Were both buildings constructed in the same way? Made with the same materials?

I can ask many questions too.
"Man is not free unless government is limited." -- Ronald Reagan
User avatar
averagejoe
Walks on Forum Water
 
Posts: 10814
Likes: 2004 posts
Liked in: 1512 posts
Joined: Nov 23rd, 2007, 10:50 pm

Re: WTC Building #7

Postby eyepop » Nov 5th, 2009, 12:18 pm

averagejoe wrote: How come the Beijing Mandarin Hotel didn't collapse ...


because it wasn't 'pulled'.
eyepop
Lord of the Board
 
Posts: 4449
Likes: 2 posts
Liked in: 4 posts
Joined: Jun 2nd, 2006, 8:23 am
Location: earth, presently.

Re: WTC Building #7

Postby peaceseeker » Nov 5th, 2009, 3:20 pm

eyepop wrote:
averagejoe wrote: How come the Beijing Mandarin Hotel didn't collapse ...


because it wasn't 'pulled'.


Agreed.

WTC buildings 5 (9-story) and 6 (8-story) were much smaller - tiny in comparison - than WTC7 (47-story)...along with being closer to WTC1 (primarily 6). Both suffered extensive damage and still had to have the remaining structures brought down via controlled demolition.

Given that WTC7 had damage to its base only on one side (along with the raging fires), one would think the building should have toppled in a similar fashion as the building seen in this video...

Demolition Gone Wrong

But no...all the buildings collapsed at close to free-fall speed into their own footprints while violating the most basic laws of physics.

The fire insurance rate's for large buildings were sure to have sky-rocketed after 9/11...damn, there's a business opportunity missed.
"I think our society is run by insane people for insane objectives...I think we're being run by maniacs for maniacal ends...but I'm liable to be put away as insane for expressing that. That's what's insane about it."
~ John Lennon
User avatar
peaceseeker
Lord of the Board
 
Posts: 3995
Likes: 380 posts
Liked in: 261 posts
Joined: Sep 11th, 2008, 9:27 am

Re: WTC Building #7

Postby westsidebud » Nov 5th, 2009, 8:55 pm

watch the documentery by the 2 brothers 9/11 the firefighters , you will understand
GO CANUCKS GO
User avatar
westsidebud
Lord of the Board
 
Posts: 3808
Likes: 0 post
Liked in: 1 post
Joined: Jul 18th, 2009, 10:36 pm
Location: bc canada

Re: WTC Building #7

Postby Cumungala » Nov 13th, 2009, 11:20 pm

If you check out Google Earth and zoom into New York you can see a detailed image of the WTC site. There are also links to photos and wikipedia articles for each building. You should check it out (if you have Google Earth)
Cumungala
Übergod
 
Posts: 1327
Likes: 4 posts
Liked in: 23 posts
Joined: Jan 31st, 2009, 5:40 pm
Location: Kelowna BC

Re: WTC Building #7

Postby peaceseeker » Jun 9th, 2010, 12:07 pm

Need there be more evidence?

Building7Footage.com
http://building7footage.com/
"I think our society is run by insane people for insane objectives...I think we're being run by maniacs for maniacal ends...but I'm liable to be put away as insane for expressing that. That's what's insane about it."
~ John Lennon
User avatar
peaceseeker
Lord of the Board
 
Posts: 3995
Likes: 380 posts
Liked in: 261 posts
Joined: Sep 11th, 2008, 9:27 am

Re: WTC Building #7

Postby babybunnies » Jun 14th, 2010, 11:25 am

Buildings don't just collapse because "much larger buildings collapsed beside them".

World Trade Center 1 and 2 came down almost uniformly vertically, there was some debris that went off to the side, but beyond the immediate vicinity many buildings didn't even suffer broken windows.

This was a lot more like a controlled demolition than a collapse due to a fire or plane crash. The Federal IRS Building in Texas didn't collapse when it had a plane fly into it (admittedly, a much smaller plane, but also a much smaller building).

I can't believe that construction on building 7 was so bad that a bit of debris from a building next door could cause it to collapse. What about the reporter who said that the building had collapsed, despite the building being completely visible in one piece (and barely damaged) in the background of her shot?

People seem to have their blinders on for 9/11 - believing ANY official story about the "attack" - just because they saw it on the news. In one of the Alex Jones movies, he tries to give a DVD to a guy who shouts at him because he "spent all day watching on the news so it must be true" - a direct quote.

News organizations spin even the "official news release" to meet their own needs (just check out the differing coverage on the Gulf Oil Spill on Fox vs. CNN news for two completely different versions of the same story) and the Government is perfectly capable of feeding complete nonsense to the news networks and passing it off as news.
babybunnies
Fledgling
 
Posts: 249
Likes: 0 post
Liked in: 2 posts
Joined: Sep 2nd, 2005, 9:27 am

Re: WTC Building #7

Postby peaceseeker » Jun 15th, 2010, 3:15 pm

babybunnies wrote:Buildings don't just collapse because "much larger buildings collapsed beside them".

World Trade Center 1 and 2 came down almost uniformly vertically, there was some debris that went off to the side, but beyond the immediate vicinity many buildings didn't even suffer broken windows.

This was a lot more like a controlled demolition than a collapse due to a fire or plane crash. The Federal IRS Building in Texas didn't collapse when it had a plane fly into it (admittedly, a much smaller plane, but also a much smaller building).

I can't believe that construction on building 7 was so bad that a bit of debris from a building next door could cause it to collapse. What about the reporter who said that the building had collapsed, despite the building being completely visible in one piece (and barely damaged) in the background of her shot?

People seem to have their blinders on for 9/11 - believing ANY official story about the "attack" - just because they saw it on the news. In one of the Alex Jones movies, he tries to give a DVD to a guy who shouts at him because he "spent all day watching on the news so it must be true" - a direct quote.

News organizations spin even the "official news release" to meet their own needs (just check out the differing coverage on the Gulf Oil Spill on Fox vs. CNN news for two completely different versions of the same story) and the Government is perfectly capable of feeding complete nonsense to the news networks and passing it off as news.


All valid points, babybunnies...thanks for posting.

Let's not forget the words of Barry Jennings...he, along with Michael Hess, was trapped in WTC7 for most of the morning...both are on record stating they heard/experienced explosions in the building while waiting for rescue crews to arrive (note: this occurred before the second plane hit and before either Twin Tower 'collapsed').

Michael Hess recanted his own words recorded via interview that morning and went on to help found Guliani Partners.

Barry Jennings chose to speak of his experiences regarding that fateful morning and he is now dead...his family's home is vacant and nobody knows to where they may have gone. Even a PI (hired by Dylan Avery) came back, returned the money and told Avery to 'never contact him again'...when one starts doing the math it becomes fairly easy to comprehend what's truly at play here.
"I think our society is run by insane people for insane objectives...I think we're being run by maniacs for maniacal ends...but I'm liable to be put away as insane for expressing that. That's what's insane about it."
~ John Lennon
User avatar
peaceseeker
Lord of the Board
 
Posts: 3995
Likes: 380 posts
Liked in: 261 posts
Joined: Sep 11th, 2008, 9:27 am

Re: WTC Building #7

Postby peaceseeker » Aug 18th, 2010, 9:37 am

Building What?
http://www2.ae911truth.org/actionalerts ... NYCcan.php

“Recognizing the high correlation between those who know about the collapse of WTC 7 and those who believe that a new – or rather real – 9/11 investigation is needed, I propose that the international 9/11 Truth Movement initiate, starting this September, a world-wide, year-long ‘BuildingWhat?’ campaign. Through this campaign, we would seek to make the fact of its collapse so widely known that the mention of Building 7 would never again evoke the question: ‘Building What?’ ”

–David Ray Griffin



Dear Fellow Truth Advocates,

We are pleased to announce the beginning of the worldwide “BuildingWhat?” campaign started on August 11.

For nearly nine years, the American people and the world have been kept in the dark about an event of monumental significance: the freefall collapse of World Trade Center Building 7, a 47-story skyscraper that was the third building to fall on September 11, 2001, even though it was not struck by a plane and suffered only minimal fire damage. Only a small minority of the public has seen footage of this collapse. But the vast majority of those who have seen the footage agree that the building was brought down intentionally, and they therefore support a new investigation of 9/11.

In 1975, nearly 12 years after JFK’s assassination, the public release of the Zapruder film created widespread doubt of the official account and eventually led to the creation of the House Select Committee on Assassinations. The Committee found that the Warren Commission investigation had been seriously flawed, and that there had indeed been a second gunman. The lesson we must take from this is that a few seconds of video footage can help reshape the way a country views the event of its generation.

There is a reason why the mainstream news media won’t discuss or air footage of the collapse of Building 7 – because that footage is the “Zapruder film of 9/11.” As the first step in a worldwide effort to spread awareness of the collapse of Building 7 to every corner of the globe, we have come together to cosponsor the “BuildingWhat?” Television Advertising Campaign in New York City. Our goal is to enlighten over 1 million New Yorkers with footage of Building 7’s freefall collapse. The plan is to blanket the New York City television market with our ad during the week of September 20, 2010.

We are seeking to raise $500,000 between August 11 and September 11, 2010 to cover the costs of this effort. Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth is now a 501(c)(3) tax-exempt organization, and so every dollar that is donated to this campaign will be fully tax-deductible!

We know there is nothing you would want more than for the truth about 9/11 to be revealed, and for the positive impact it would have on our society to take hold. Indeed, you have been involved in this struggle for many years.

We ask you now to unite in a movement-wide effort and give as much as you can to make this campaign possible. We must prove to ourselves what we are capable of. Let’s start a tidal wave of truth that will grow from city to city until tens of millions of people learn the truth about 9/11. Please read the details below and consider becoming a part of what will perhaps be the most important effort ever to awaken the public to the truth. After you’ve read more about the campaign, please go to BuildingWhat.orgto donate.

Thank you for caring.

Very truly yours,

Manny Badillo, Nephew of Thomas Joseph Sgroi

Richard Gage, Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth

David Ray Griffin, Religious Leaders for 9/11 Truth

Niels Harrit, Coauthor of the WTC Nanothermite Study

Karen Johnson, Political Leaders for 9/11 Truth

Erik Lawyer, Firefighters for 9/11 Truth

Bob McIlvaine, Father of Bobby McIlvaine

JF Ranger, World for 9/11 Truth

Kevin Ryan, Coeditor of the Journal of 9/11 Studies

Ted Tilton Jr. and Justin Keogh, 911Blogger.com

William Veale, Lawyers for 9/11 Truth

Ted Walter, NYC CAN



What:

The “BuildingWhat?” Television Advertising Campaign is a movement-wide effort cosponsored by several 9/11 truth organizations and leaders to blanket New York City in the week of September 20, 2010 with television advertisements featuring footage of Building 7’s collapse.

Fundraising:

• The fundraising drive will run from August 11th until September 11th.

• As a 501(c)(3), Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth will serve as the fundraising vehicle. Your contribution will be 100% tax-deductible!

• Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth will receive 5% of the funds raised, another 5% will go to the WTC Rescuers Foundation, and the remaining 90% will go toward ad placement, web design and press releases.

• A fundraising target of $500,000 will allow for heavy saturation of the New York City television market for one week.

Scope of the Ad Campaign:

At an average cost of $750 per 30-second ad, and an average viewership of 10,000 people per ad, $500,000 minus expenses will allow for approximately 5.5 million individual views. The number of people who would see the ad at least once would be around 1 million.

Why New York:

To have an immediate and major impact, the first advertising campaign will be concentrated in one location. In addition to being where the events took place, New York City is the best location for three reasons:

1. It makes up 6.5% of US television viewers, more than double the third largest market, Chicago.

2. As the media capital of the country, New York City is the most likely to have an after-effect in the media.

3. New York City’s government provides the best chance for an official investigation to be started in the foreseeable future. Many local officials have been educated about Building 7 and are waiting for greater public support before taking action.

After the New York campaign is finished we will begin fundraising for the next campaign in a city to be determined. As the campaign grows, thousands of new donors will emerge and our fundraising efforts will snowball.

Description of the Ad:

The ad will be produced by John Kirby, creator of both NYC CAN ads, "Vote For Answers" and “A Message from Bob McIlvaine.” The ad will be shot and edited in a similar style to the NYC CAN ads, featuring a handful of 9/11 family members together with the most compelling footage of Building 7.

The ad will be unveiled on Friday, August 27! Stay tuned!

BuildingWhat.org:

Over one million New Yorkers will see Building 7’s collapse for the first time and tens of thousands will go to BuildingWhat.org for more information. The website will be a visually stunning, user-friendly journey through the most essential information about Building 7. It will open with a 90-second intro featuring 9/11 family members and David Ray Griffin telling the story of Building 7, interspersed with news footage from 9/11. There will be a video gallery, an 8-part section on evidence of controlled demolition, a page on fundraising for future ad campaigns, and an advocacy page explaining what New Yorkers can do. There will also be links to the organizations cosponsoring the ad campaign.

The website will also be unveiled on Friday, August 27! Stay tuned!

What You Can Do:

1) Donate generously!

2) Tell your friends to donate generously!

3) Help us find matching contributors! Do you know someone who would be able to match 2% or 5% or even 20% of everything that is raised? Can you match a certain percentage? Please let us know so that when we unveil the ad and website on Friday, August 27, we can invigorate the fundraising drive with the promise of matching contributions!

Please go to BuildingWhat.org to donate. Thank you in advance for your support.
"I think our society is run by insane people for insane objectives...I think we're being run by maniacs for maniacal ends...but I'm liable to be put away as insane for expressing that. That's what's insane about it."
~ John Lennon
User avatar
peaceseeker
Lord of the Board
 
Posts: 3995
Likes: 380 posts
Liked in: 261 posts
Joined: Sep 11th, 2008, 9:27 am

Re: WTC Building #7

Postby peaceseeker » Aug 28th, 2010, 7:56 am

Image

Watch The Ad One Million New Yorkers Will See!
http://www2.ae911truth.org/actionalerts ... YCcan2.php
"I think our society is run by insane people for insane objectives...I think we're being run by maniacs for maniacal ends...but I'm liable to be put away as insane for expressing that. That's what's insane about it."
~ John Lennon
User avatar
peaceseeker
Lord of the Board
 
Posts: 3995
Likes: 380 posts
Liked in: 261 posts
Joined: Sep 11th, 2008, 9:27 am

Re: WTC Building #7

Postby peaceseeker » Aug 31st, 2010, 10:06 pm



This video tracks the motion of the NW corner of Building 7 of the World Trade Center on 9/11 2001. For a period of ~2.5 seconds. This means it was falling through itself for over 100 feet with zero resistance, an impossibility in any natural scenario. This period of freefall is solid evidence that explosives had to be used to bring the building down. In the final draft for public comment (August 2008) NIST denied that WTC7 fell at freefall. In the final report in Nov 2008 they reversed themselves and admitted freefall, but denied its obvious significance.
-----
[The WTC7 series has elicited a number of questions from people unclear on the details of how I did the measurements, compared to how NIST did them and how the representatives of NIST described their measurements. I have therefore created a WTC7 Measurement FAQ page:
http://www.911speakout.org/WTC7-Measurement-FAQ.pdf ... . I will also use this FAQ as a place of reference for other questions that arise as well.]
-----
Sign the petition demanding a new investigation at http://www.AE911Truth.org
See also http://www.911speakout.org





There is ample evidence, from both witnesses and recordings, of explosions associated with the destruction of World Trade Center Building 7 (WTC 7). NIST sidestepped investigating explosions and explosives by setting up an artificially high threshold of interest. They swept aside any testimony or recordings of explosions that would not register 130-140 dB one kilometer away. They established this criterion using RDX (one of the loudest explosives) in a scenario that produced a far higher sound level than other possible uses of explosives to bring down the building. Then they turned around and used sound level as the sole criterion for deciding whether the use of explosives was a credible hypothesis. By this maneuver, they sidestepped investigating the testimony of explosives or possible evidence of explosive residues. This is just one more instance of fraudulent behavior on the part of the NIST investigation of the World Trade Center disaster.

Check out our website: http://www.911speakout.org .
Last edited by peaceseeker on May 2nd, 2012, 10:01 am, edited 1 time in total.
"I think our society is run by insane people for insane objectives...I think we're being run by maniacs for maniacal ends...but I'm liable to be put away as insane for expressing that. That's what's insane about it."
~ John Lennon
User avatar
peaceseeker
Lord of the Board
 
Posts: 3995
Likes: 380 posts
Liked in: 261 posts
Joined: Sep 11th, 2008, 9:27 am

Re: WTC Building #7

Postby TheBank » Sep 5th, 2010, 8:11 am

There is nobody on castanet as uneducated or blatantly stupid as Captain Awesome...I know 8 yr olds who could grasp these simple concepts and you sit there defending The US elite ppl who did this to take away freedoms from US citizens....
TheBank
Fledgling
 
Posts: 114
Likes: 0 post
Liked in: 0 post
Joined: Apr 6th, 2008, 10:10 pm

Re: WTC Building #7

Postby peaceseeker » Sep 9th, 2010, 8:20 am

Last edited by peaceseeker on May 2nd, 2012, 10:01 am, edited 1 time in total.
"I think our society is run by insane people for insane objectives...I think we're being run by maniacs for maniacal ends...but I'm liable to be put away as insane for expressing that. That's what's insane about it."
~ John Lennon
User avatar
peaceseeker
Lord of the Board
 
Posts: 3995
Likes: 380 posts
Liked in: 261 posts
Joined: Sep 11th, 2008, 9:27 am

Next

Return to Conspiracies and Weird Science

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests