A place for all things 7 World Trade Center [W:424,1132:1312]

[Mark F]

To avoid all the derails in threads which have nothing to do with this subject this thread is intended as a depository for all discussions regarding 7 World Trade - the 9/11 Truth Movements Alamo. Here is your chance to address issues such as:

1. If you believe 7 was brought down through malicious human intervention (MHI) of some sort rather than the victim of fires started by the collapse of the North Tower why do you suppose this nondescript, unimportant, ordinary office tower which nobody who did not work or live in the immediate area had heard of have to come down? What is the motive?

How does the destruction of an unknown and unimportant building further the plot when all the other alleged targets were famous symbols of American economic, political and military power?

2. How (very specifically) was it done? What kind of devices, how many, placed where and by whom?

3. Why wait 7 hours after the collapse of the North Tower? Why take that risk? Why not bring it down in sync with the collapse of the North Tower when no one would even see it. Heck, why not bring 7 down before it was evacuated in order to cause maximum casualties?

4. If 7 was the real target off the attacks, why then target the Twin Towers, the Pentagon and an innocent disused gravel pit in Pennsylvania? Why not a simple fertilizer bomb in the back of a panel truck? That would take at most 2 guys to pull off, not hundreds or even thousands like any CD scenario ever put forward.

5. How do you account for the obvious signs of imminent collapse 7 displayed in the hours before it finally came down as reported by emergency personnel and city engineers?

6. If you do think the collapse of 7 was a case of MHI but you have not asked yourself the above questions before, then ask yourself why not? They are fundamental.

OR

If you don't buy into the MHI scenario and are convinced 7 World Trade collapsed as a result of damage it suffered in the collapse of the North Tower by all means share your conclusions here.

 

[What if...?]

re: A place for all things 7 World Trade Center [W:424,1132]

To avoid all the derails in threads which have nothing to do with this subject this thread is intended as a depository for all discussions regarding 7 World Trade - the 9/11 Truth Movements Alamo. Here is your chance to address issues such as:

1. If you believe 7 was brought down through malicious human intervention (MHI) of some sort rather than the victim of fires started by the collapse of the North Tower why do you suppose this nondescript, unimportant, ordinary office tower which nobody who did not work or live in the immediate area had heard of have to come down? What is the motive?

How does the destruction of an unknown and unimportant building further the plot when all the other alleged targets were famous symbols of American economic, political and military power?

2. How (very specifically) was it done? What kind of devices, how many, placed where and by whom?

3. Why wait 7 hours after the collapse of the North Tower? Why take that risk? Why not bring it down in sync with the collapse of the North Tower when no one would even see it. Heck, why not bring 7 down before it was evacuated in order to cause maximum casualties?

4. If 7 was the real target off the attacks, why then target the Twin Towers, the Pentagon and an innocent disused gravel pit in Pennsylvania? Why not a simple fertilizer bomb in the back of a panel truck? That would take at most 2 guys to pull off, not hundreds or even thousands like any CD scenario ever put forward.

5. How do you account for the obvious signs of imminent collapse 7 displayed in the hours before it finally came down as reported by emergency personnel and city engineers?

6. If you do think the collapse of 7 was a case of MHI but you have not asked yourself the above questions before, then ask yourself why not? They are fundamental.

OR

If you don't buy into the MHI scenario and are convinced 7 World Trade collapsed as a result of damage it suffered in the collapse of the North Tower by all means share your conclusions here.

I'm a slight small group "lihopper". Not convinced but suspiscious.

The collapses in the footprint have always troubled me a bit.

My loose theory is that it could have been purely logistical. Better to have it all come down at once than deal with the long term problems of dismantling all those buildings surgically in a city plagued by gridlock. Long term psychology of ruined buildings looming for what could be years.

 

[Mark F]

re: A place for all things 7 World Trade Center [W:424,1132]

I'm a slight small group "lihopper". Not convinced but suspiscious.

The collapses in the footprint have always troubled me a bit.

Fair enough. But why do you think any of the towers (1, 2 & 7) collapsed in their own footprint? I ask because the North Tower for example caused considerable damage to 7 WTC when it collapsed and 7 was what, 350 feet away with another building in between. When 7 collapsed it did considerable damage to the Verizon building and destroyed Fiterman Hall on the opposite side of a 4-lane street.

Even if they had fallen in their own footprints, why is this suspicious?

My loose theory is that it could have been purely logistical. Better to have it all come down at once than deal with the long term problems of dismantling all those buildings surgically in a city plagued by gridlock. Long term psychology of ruined buildings looming for what could be years.

Fair enough again but,... what about say the Bankers Trust building and Fiterman Hall? Those had to be dismantled which took years. Why not just pop them too? Why stop within the WTC complex?

I'm not really seeing solutions here, just more questions.

 

[What if...?]

re: A place for all things 7 World Trade Center [W:424,1132]

Fair enough. But why do you think any of the towers (1, 2 & 7) collapsed in their own footprint? I ask because the North Tower for example caused considerable damage to 7 WTC when it collapsed and 7 was what, 350 feet away with another building in between. When 7 collapsed it did considerable damage to the Verizon building and destroyed Fiterman Hall on the opposite side of a 4-lane street.

Even if they had fallen in their own footprints, why is this suspicious?



Fair enough again but,... what about say the Bankers Trust building and Fiterman Hall? Those had to be dismantled which took years. Why not just pop them too? Why stop within the WTC complex?

I'm not really seeing solutions here, just more questions.

I've wondered if it was the owner. That he found out about what was going to happen and rigged them to minimize problems with his investment.

TBH, i try not to think about it too much. Every time i looked for a while it made me MORE suspiscious.

 

[Mark F]

re: A place for all things 7 World Trade Center [W:424,1132]

I've wondered if it was the owner. That he found out about what was going to happen and rigged them to minimize problems with his investment.

TBH, i try not to think about it too much. Every time i looked for a while it made me MORE suspiscious.

So Larry Silverstein Properties Inc. found out there was going to be a terrorist attack on the Twin Towers and rather than report this information (how would they even know?) they chose to wire their own building (7) for demolition?!?!?!?

 

[What if...?]

re: A place for all things 7 World Trade Center [W:424,1132]

So Larry Silverstein Properties Inc. found out there was going to be a terrorist attack on the Twin Towers and rather than report this information (how would they even know?) they chose to wire their own building (7) for demolition?!?!?!?

It would depend on how they (he) found out.

The idea that a handful of people wouldn't cynically allow thousands to die to further an agenda is belied by human history. Some people are amorally ****ty, and our system biases a bit towards bastards, causing our upper echelons to contain a disproportionate percentage of bastards.

Counting on decency or humanity from the ruling class is a fools game.

 

[Mark F]

re: A place for all things 7 World Trade Center [W:424,1132]

It would depend on how they (he) found out.

The idea that a handful of people wouldn't cynically allow thousands to die to further an agenda is belied by human history. Some people are amorally ****ty, and our system biases a bit towards bastards, causing our upper echelons to contain a disproportionate percentage of bastards.

Counting on decency or humanity from the ruling class is a fools game.

So you are saying Larry Silverstein Properties Inc, a real estate development firm in NYC has its own secret intelligence service that uncovered a terror plot even the CIA and FBI couldn't expose. This plot was directed at buildings Silverstein Properties held the lease on and represented a substantial portion of the companies revenues. So, rather than report this information from their secret intelligence network to foil the plot and save the company from potentially dangerous financial losses this real estate firm hired contractors to wire 7 WTC with super-secret silent hush-a-boom explosives which were then set off 7 hours after the North Tower fell, even though 7 was already going to collapse due to the damage and fires it had sustained.

Do I have that right?
Does that make sense to you?

 

[What if...?]

re: A place for all things 7 World Trade Center [W:424,1132]

So you are saying Larry Silverstein Properties Inc, a real estate development firm in NYC has its own secret intelligence service that uncovered a terror plot even the CIA and FBI couldn't expose. This plot was directed at buildings Silverstein Properties held the lease on and represented a substantial portion of the companies revenues. So, rather than report this information from their secret intelligence network to foil the plot and save the company from potentially dangerous financial losses this real estate firm hired contractors to wire 7 WTC with super-secret silent hush-a-boom explosives which were then set off 7 hours after the North Tower fell, even though 7 was already going to collapse due to the damage and fires it had sustained.

Do I have that right?
Does that make sense to you?

There was a big new insurance policy. And same day demolition gets the rebuilding started MUCH faster.

I don't have a dog in the fight on this.

My point is that evil ****heads clearly exist and tend to accumulate at the top.

My musings are more towards WHY there might have been motive to pre-rig the buildings.

I don't take it seriously.

 

[Mark F]

re: A place for all things 7 World Trade Center [W:424,1132]

There was a big new insurance policy. And same day demolition gets the rebuilding started MUCH faster.

I don't have a dog in the fight on this.

My point is that evil ****heads clearly exist and tend to accumulate at the top.

My musings are more towards WHY there might have been motive to pre-rig the buildings.

I don't take it seriously.

But if insurance can only be used for rebuilding at the same site where is the profit? What about the years of lost revenue when the towers are out of commission? Wouldn't it be more worthwhile - given the costs of running a private international espionage outfit that can infiltrate terrorist groups - to expose the plot and take the positive PR?

 

[What if...?]

re: A place for all things 7 World Trade Center [W:424,1132]

But if insurance can only be used for rebuilding at the same site where is the profit? What about the years of lost revenue when the towers are out of commission? Wouldn't it be more worthwhile - given the costs of running a private international espionage outfit that can infiltrate terrorist groups - to expose the plot and take the positive PR?

The country's psyche would never survive the discovery that members of its own government allowed the deaths of thousands of people to satisfy a questionable agenda.

And hastening the destruction of the existing buildings all at once on the day of the event would shorten the "downtime" to a fraction of what dismantling two skyscrapers with planes stuck in them piece by piece would take.

 

[Mark F]

re: A place for all things 7 World Trade Center [W:424,1132]

The country's psyche would never survive the discovery that members of its own government allowed the deaths of thousands of people to satisfy a questionable agenda.

I really doubt that.

And hastening the destruction of the existing buildings all at once on the day of the event would shorten the "downtime" to a fraction of what dismantling two skyscrapers with planes stuck in them piece by piece would take.

But turning in the plotters means NO DOWNTIME and no loss of revenue plus a huge PR bonus - all of which makes your scenario rather doubtful.

I notice BTW you have not even raised an eyebrow at the idea a real estate developer operates his own private anti-terrorism task force.

 

[Mark F]

re: A place for all things 7 World Trade Center [W:424,1132]

What, nothing else? We seem to have had a drive-by Truthing

 

[NWO_Spook]

re: A place for all things 7 World Trade Center [W:424,1132]

What, nothing else? We seem to have had a drive-by Truthing

A rather absurd one at that. The whole insurance scam accusation is banal to say the least. Silverstein had nothing to gain and everything to lose by such a stupid and brain dead plan. There are still people who don't understand the whole 'pull it' command and who actually made the call.

 

[Mark F]

re: A place for all things 7 World Trade Center [W:424,1132]

In the interest of asking a question our resident Truthers should have asked but apparently haven't thought of (because they are too busy with fantasies of "retained its shape" and "free-fall"),...

We know that Column 79 failed, initiating a progressive collapse of 7 World Trade which doomed the entire structure.

Let's presume the evil plotters of the inside job were able to figure out ahead of time that Column 79 was the Achilles Heel of 7 WTC and blowing it could induce a progressive collapse of the entire structure. IF they blew just Col 79 with explosives/Therm_te/nukes/Santa's Custard would that be enough to induce the collapse or would other adjacent structure also need to go at the same time?

 

[mike2810]

re: A place for all things 7 World Trade Center [W:424,1132]

Is in not a given that a properly planned and executed controlled demolition can take down a structure?
Where is the supporting evidence that WTC7 was taken down by CD?

 

[Mark F]

re: A place for all things 7 World Trade Center [W:424,1132]

Is in not a given that a properly planned and executed controlled demolition can take down a structure?
Where is the supporting evidence that WTC7 was taken down by CD?

Sure it is a given that CD can take down a building. That's not the point. We are talking hypotheticals here.

I was just thinking that if for the sake of discussion I was a Truther AND I could clearly see that Column 79 failed first BUT because I am a Truther I am resigned to believe 7 WTC was a CD because well, it fell down even though it wasn't hit by a plane, I would have to come up with a way to explain this observation. So, rather than just make the bare assertion "it was a CD because I say so and I don't need to explain how" I am giving the Truthers a little nudge and asking for them the question they should be asking but don't.

I know its weird since this is at least 2 levels above normal Truther thinking but like I said, I'm just trying to give them a gentle nudge forward. Maybe then they could answer the big questions like what do you think really happened on 9/11.

 

[ozeco41]

re: A place for all things 7 World Trade Center [W:424,1132]

...I know its weird since this is at least 2 levels above normal Truther thinking but like I said, I'm just trying to give them a gentle nudge forward. Maybe then they could answer the big questions like what do you think really happened on 9/11.

I think that is the real problem Mark.

It NEEDS thinking "at least 2 levels above normal Truther thinking" BUT "they" cannot do it. And it is near universal. I cannot recall a truther who has ever 'thinked' at that 2 levels higher. They cannot line up and join the dots. That is one reason why they play "reversed burden of proof" - it gets debunkers doing the thinking and SOME debunkers can do it plus the debunker side arguments are mostly correct so even if the responding debunker is a "parrot" the response will be near enough rational and correct.

No such luxury for the truthers who cannot think. The truther party lines are mostly wrong so "parroting" a leading truther guarantees that the truther parrot is wrong.

ADD to that unlevel playing field of both thinking skill and need for thinking ANOTHER massive barrier.

It is this: Since the main claims of 9/11 truth are false it is well nigh impossible if not totally impossible to coherently "line up and join the dots" for a truth side argument. Dunno about you but I tried it on two occasions allying with two separate truthers to see if I could help them formulate an hypothesis. IIRC it was about 2008-9. They were both old style "genuine truthers" who appreciated the co-operation BUT the exercise doomed to fail. There is no coherent argument for the main truther claims. The facts are against it happening 'coz the dots wont line up. There was no CD at WTC - etc Pentagon/Shanksville.
Finally, remember that people who cannot mange your "2 levels above normal truther" will not comprehend what I have written - because it is 3 levels higher - an additional "meta-process" level ABOVE the 2 levels needed by the problem. Let's see if we get proof of that "meta-process" claim. :roll:

 

[Mark F]

re: A place for all things 7 World Trade Center [W:424,1132]

So I've been thinking about the claims, championed primarily by CATIwampus and before him the now-departed MK that "2.25 seconds of free-fall" and "uniform collapse" of 7 World Trade Center can only mean and proves controlled demolition by pre-planted devices of some sort.

Folks who are convinced of some MHI in the collapse of 7 World Trade love to cherry-pick apart details of what they call the "official story" but I don't see them question the details of their own claims. This is probably because other than "it looked like a CD" and "free-fall" they don't have any claim, no hypothesis to pick apart. So lets create one for them, shall we?

Broadly when it is possible to get a CT to be that specific the claim for CD invariably evolves around the "2.25 seconds of free-fall" measured by NIST and Chandler, and the claim of symmetrical collapse across the length of the building, which they say is only possible if all the columns for 8 floors were blown simultaneously, which interestingly is something that wouldn't be done in a normal CD. So lets run with that for a moment, shall we?

24 columns x 8 floors with at least two charges per column (one cutter, one kicker) - that is a minimum of at least 384 demo charges all going off simultaneously but likely more as columns may require multiple devices. And to do that one has to gain access to the columns and make pre-cuts in the steel to ensure everything works properly and arrange for the demolition system - wiring and so on. That's a lot of work, especially given that it was a busy building and many of the columns abutted elevator shafts, stairwells, office space and so on. A lot of work that would certainly take months and be extremely obvious. Yet strangely none of this preparation work was heard or seen. And where are 400+ instances of BOOM, BOOM, BOOM?

But that's not even what happened, is it?

How could 24 core columns been "taken out" at the time free-fall was measured when the east mechanical penthouse had already collapsed into the building about 6 seconds earlier? Does that mean the evil plotters took out core columns 76 through 81 to bring down the penthouse and then 6 seconds later they took out the rest?

How is that symmetrical?

Why even bother?

Why would anyone have to take out ALL of the core columns over 8 floors? Wouldn't taking them out on a single floor cause the same total collapse? That is after all what happens in that CD video Koko loves to re-post over and over and over again. Is wiring 8 floors for simultaneous demo something the evil plotters would actually do, or just something you need to have happen in order to justify the symmetrical free-fall claim?

Or did the Star Chamber need to do an 8 story almost free-fall drop in order to be more spectacular?

Why spend months rigging 8 floors with hundreds of charges when two guys with a panel truck and a fertilizer bomb could bring the tower down at much lower risk and cost?

Then there is the question of the alibi. If the alibi for covering up the CD collapse of 7 was damage and fires started by the collapse of the North Tower, what would have happened if the North Tower had fallen slightly differently and not showered 7 in tons of burning debris, opening up the exterior and starting multiple fires? What to do for a cover story then? How to explain the sudden and seemingly spontaneous collapse of 7? Seems overly risky to me.

And what is the motive for destroying 7 World Trade anyway, an unimportant and unexceptional building few people had ever heard of? To destroy some hard drives and paper files? Insurance scam? Seems like the hardest way possible to accomplish either.

Why does it have to be such a "controlled" demolition? Why bring it down so supposedly neat and clean, symmetrically and in its own footprint? Are you saying Dr. Evil needed to be careful about how he completely destroyed an irrelevant structure after destroying two 110 story cultural icons and murdering nearly 3,000 people? Was Dr. Evil concerned that since he inexplicably chose to drop the building 7 hours later than the Twin Towers he might hurt some firefighters and rescue workers, having already killed hundreds of those?

For those Truthers who support the CD claims for 7 World Trade Center, have you ever asked these questions? Ever tried to figure out how it could be done or even why? If not, why not? You question the official story but not the alternative? Why?

 

[KokomoJojo]

re: A place for all things 7 World Trade Center [W:424,1132]

In the interest of asking a question our resident Truthers should have asked but apparently haven't thought of (because they are too busy with fantasies of "retained its shape" and "free-fall"),..

one would have to be delusional to claim it did not retain its shape, and even NIST who tried to cover up freefall by wordsmithing it admitted it after a truther made an ass out of them in open debate.

The real question is whats the matter with the people who who would claim it did not freefall? Something horrible wrong there.

 

[KokomoJojo]

re: A place for all things 7 World Trade Center [W:424,1132]

and make pre-cuts

only people living in the stone age still blather about precuts. they are not needed.

 

[KokomoJojo]

re: A place for all things 7 World Trade Center [W:424,1132]

I think that is the real problem Mark.

It NEEDS thinking "at least 2 levels above normal Truther thinking" BUT "they" cannot do it. And it is near universal. I cannot recall a truther who has ever 'thinked' at that 2 levels higher. They cannot line up and join the dots. That is one reason why they play "reversed burden of proof" - it gets debunkers doing the thinking and SOME debunkers can do it plus the debunker side arguments are mostly correct so even if the responding debunker is a "parrot" the response will be near enough rational and correct.

No such luxury for the truthers who cannot think. The truther party lines are mostly wrong so "parroting" a leading truther guarantees that the truther parrot is wrong.

ADD to that unlevel playing field of both thinking skill and need for thinking ANOTHER massive barrier.

It is this: Since the main claims of 9/11 truth are false [in your opinion] it is well nigh impossible if not totally impossible to coherently "line up and join the dots" for a truth side argument. [sure it is but you always try to control the debate] Dunno about you but I tried it on two occasions allying with two separate truthers to see if I could help them and thats the first problem formulate an hypothesis. IIRC it was about 2008-9. They were both old style "genuine truthers" who appreciated the co-operation BUT the exercise doomed to fail. There is no coherent argument for the main truther claims. Oh come on, truthers dont claim the paint job stood while the building fell for gods sake, or that it fell faster than freefall] The facts are against it happening 'coz the dots wont line up. There was no CD at WTC [and you wonder why you cant get a debate going LMAO] - etc Pentagon/Shanksville.
Finally, remember that people who cannot mange your "2 levels above normal truther" will not comprehend what I have written - because it is 3 levels higher - an additional "meta-process" level ABOVE the 2 levels needed by the problem. Let's see if we get proof of that "meta-process" claim. :roll:

but it was a truther who made fools out of NIST, and if you went in and told them the building descended faster than freefall the debunkers would would claim their rightful place in history as the laughing stock of 911 analysis

 

[Jango]

re: A place for all things 7 World Trade Center [W:424,1132]

I really doubt that.

the idea a real estate developer operates his own private anti-terrorism task force.

1) Oh? Why is that, exactly?

2) Well, John P. O'Neill, a former F.B.I. special agent and counter-terrorism expert who investigated the '93 WTC bombing, the Khobar tower bombing, the attack on the U.S.S. Cole, al Qaeda and Osama bin Laden was the head of security for the WTC on 9/11. Billionaires and large multinational corporations employ all sorts of individuals who, among other things, maintain security and gather useful information (intelligence) that will benefit their employer. Besides, if a person or corporation is wealthy enough, there is no telling the depth of their connections with such entities as an intelligence agency or the military or the police or politicians. The idiom "every man has his price" comes into play with billionaires and the people they have solicited for things like information or access.

 

[Mark F]

re: A place for all things 7 World Trade Center [W:424,1132]

1) Oh? Why is that, exactly?

2) Well, John P. O'Neill, a former F.B.I. special agent and counter-terrorism expert who investigated the '93 WTC bombing, the Khobar tower bombing, the attack on the U.S.S. Cole, al Qaeda and Osama bin Laden was the head of security for the WTC on 9/11. Billionaires and large multinational corporations employ all sorts of individuals who, among other things, maintain security and gather useful information (intelligence) that will benefit their employer. Besides, if a person or corporation is wealthy enough, there is no telling the depth of their connections with such entities as an intelligence agency or the military or the police or politicians. The idiom "every man has his price" comes into play with billionaires and the people they have solicited for things like information or access.

John P O'Neil did not work for Larry Silverstein Properties and he was not a one-man counter terror intelligence apparatus with agents infiltrating Al Queada. He was a retired law enforcement official who took up a lucrative private security career post retirement. He was also killed in the attacks - so much for foreknowledge.

The lengths Truthers will go to in order to justify their personal brands of reality-distortion boggle the mind.

 

[Jango]

re: A place for all things 7 World Trade Center [W:424,1132]

John P O'Neil did not work for Larry Silverstein Properties and he was not a one-man counter terror intelligence apparatus with agents infiltrating Al Queada. He was a retired law enforcement official who took up a lucrative private security career post retirement. He was also killed in the attacks - so much for foreknowledge.

The lengths Truthers will go to in order to justify their personal brands of reality-distortion boggle the mind.

:lol: You think I'm a truther?

 

[Jango]

re: A place for all things 7 World Trade Center [W:424,1132]

I really doubt that.

Oh? Why is that, exactly?