9/11 - Firefighters NYFD say Explosives brought down Towers
 

This is amazing to watch. I sure hope the new movie coming out has some of this stuff in it.

https://youtube.com/watch?v=fKdvl--1Dt0

keep the truth alive~!!!

Whats amazing is the firefighters had to sue in court to get the tapes released.

Controlled demolitions did not topple the twin towers, that is the only fairy tale here.

Carry on.

Are you talking about Oliver Stone's movie? It's not going to have anything like that in it. It was made to reinforce the government's official fairy tale. Oliver Stone has always been a propagandist.

The only weird thing is that it all went so smooth... lol

Very old news!

hmm, as a structural engineer and a PhD in physics I'd say you're wasting your skills being a board whore for a porn program.

It takes neither to see the cold, hard reality - which conspiracy types seem so unwilling to accept.

What is the hard reality?

holy shit

Watch this:

http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...q=loose+change

http://www.911revisited.com/video.html

And then read the facts:

http://www.st911.org/

http://www.911proof.com/

http://www.truth911.net/

There is no 9/11 conspiracy, you morons! -- Maddox.

he comes off very matter of fact as if he knows what he is talking about eh?


however anyone with any formal or even informal training or the slightest interest in physics or even science fiction would most likely recognize that those buildings didnt fall on their own.

Me thinks Dollarmansteve enjoys being on the other side of the argument and will most likely always try to back the unpopular opinion.

Maybe he roots for the underdogs in most situations as well?

Classic, blame the messanger and not the message.

What's the reality, and how are you certain that what you're told is what happened? Just curious as to how you came to the conclusion and if you took into account any of the alternate theories before dismissing them.

Are you starting with the assumption that it would not be possible for a government or for private interests to achieve an act of false flag warfare like this? Or that they simply WOULD NOT do it? I think that's where most people who accept the government's version seem to sit, on the fact that they "wouldn't" or "couldn't" do it. That's a big mistake, history has proven that they can and will.

I'm not saying I know what happened, I do not. I'm no engineer. I personally don't believe the crap about a missile hitting the Pentagon. All I know is that there are way too many holes in the official story to be true. Starting with the video confession by Osama Bin Laden. Why would the FBI authenticate a tape that is so obviously not Bin Laden? It's not even a good look alike. That raised a serious eyebrow.

How did I know before I opened this thread you would be the second one in LOL

it might be because you are ghey...but im not sure

On what do you base that theory? Considering all the evidence, blindly beliving the government makes you sound crazy imho.

You don't need all these web sites or stories to wonder why the towers fell as fast as a stone dropped off the top of them. I mean towers that were made out of steel and with modern technologies all of a sudden fell in free fall? Do you know how many different techologies were used to NOT have them ever fall at all?

And do you know that the burning fuel from the jets simply does not have enough temperature to melt steel?

Lack of evidence. None. Zero. Post what you think is evidence of controlled demolition and I'll tell you why it's not.

Im starting with a clear, rational mind not influenced by politics or fear. Also, with an understanding of the economics of incentive and the geo-political theory of rational actors. As well as logical tools such as ockam's razor.


How agnostic of you. It's easy to not prove something to yourself and then selectively play both sides of the fence.

Also, your bin laden tape theory? Thoroughly debunked.. but you dont want to believe that, you want to believe the conspiracy or at least leave the option open. If you want to learn about the real 'truth' and have all your wildest conspiracy theories debunked, feel free to let me know.

Please, post the evidence.

oh wow, did you watch loose change. You are so educated now.

/sarcasm

Then explain why WTC building 7 collapsed???? :mad:

bump 4 reopen the 911 files and bump 4 telling the people about other conspiracy theories.. (there're only two, one of clear thinking people, like me and pheonix eg and the other from the bush government..)

governments do stuff like that all the time. hitler did it, bush, churchill.. every major government is doing it.

wake up fools..

yes, it is in our own h istroy books even.
this is nothing new it is like they read the manual on facism and started applying it.

i personally think we h ave ostrich syndrome..where people really dont want to realise what is going on so they ignore it...they offer sarcasitic remarks to the only free thinkers out there.....ostrich syndrome..lol

anyone not asking questions and just offering their word as gospel and the only possible truth is laughable

Some of the smartest people i h ave ever met were full of questions non stop....not preaching like some religious fanatic

- 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.

- "The most important operational decision to be made that afternoon was the collapse (Of the WTC towers) had damaged 7 World Trade Center, which is about a 50 story building, at Vesey between West Broadway and Washington Street. It had very heavy fire on many floors and I ordered the evacuation of an area sufficient around to protect our members, so we had to give up some rescue operations that were going on at the time and back the people away far enough so that if 7 World Trade did collapse, we [wouldn't] lose any more people. We continued to operate on what we could from that distance and approximately an hour and a half after that order was [given], at 5:30 in the afternoon, World Trade Center collapsed completely" - Daniel Nigro, Chief of Department

- "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?) -- 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." - Chief Cruthers

- "Then we found out, I guess around 3:00 [o'clock], that they thought 7 was going to collapse. So, of course, [we've] got guys all in this pile over here and the main concern was get everybody out, and I guess it took us over an hour and a half, two hours to get everybody out of there. (Q. Initially when you were there, you had said you heard a few Maydays?) Oh, yes. We had Maydays like crazy.... The heat must have been tremendous. There was so much [expletive] fire there. This whole pile was burning like crazy. Just the heat and the smoke from all the other buildings on fire, you [couldn't] see anything. So it took us a while and we ended up backing everybody out, and [that's] when 7 collapsed.... Basically, we fell back for 7 to collapse, and then we waited a while and it got a lot more organized, I would guess." - Lieutenant William Ryan

here's a pic of WTC7, you'll notice that it's completely on fire and heavily damaged. Oh, but your reply will be "ya but fire has never brought down a steel building before". This is true - but WTC7 was no normal building, it was a heavily structurally damaged building that also happened to be on fire.

http://www.debunking911.com/WTC7_Smoke.jpg

show us the flames in your pic

i mean it is your only evidence..there should be flames shooting out of it like the other buildings around the world that have burnt with raging infernos clearly seen by everyone...these other builds all stood up.

Table 5.1 WTC 7 Tenants


Floor Tenant
46-47 Mechanical floors
28-45 Salomon Smith Barney (SSB)
26-27 Standard Chartered Bank
25 Inland Revenue Service (IRS)
25 Department of Defense (DOD)
25 Central Intelligence Agency (CIA)
24 Inland Revenue Service (IRS)
23 Office of Emergency Management (OEM)
22 Federal Home Loan Bank of New York
21 First State Management Group
19-21 ITT Hartford Insurance Group
19 National Association of Insurance Commissioners (NAIC)
18 Equal Opportunity Commission (EEOC)
14-17 Vacant
13 Provident Financial Management
11-13 Securities and Exchange Commission
9-10 US Secret Service
7-8 American Express Bank International
7 OEM generators and day tank
6 Switchgear, storage
5 Switchgear, generators, transformers
4 Upper level of 3rd floor, switchgear
3 Lobby, SSB Conference Center, rentable space, manage
2 Open to first floor lobby, transformer vault upper level, upper level switchgear
1 Lobby, loading docks, existing Con Ed transformer vaults, fuel storage, lower level switchge


Look at the tenants note the yellow ones


World Trade Center Seven collapsed on September 11, 2001, at 5:20 p.m. There were no known casualties due to this collapse. The performance of WTC 7 is of significant interest because it appears the collapse was due primarily to fire, rather than any impact damage from the collapsing towers. On the contrary, it appears the collapse was due primarily due to a controlled demolition. Prior to September 11, 2001, there was little, if any, record of fire-induced collapse of large fire-protected steel buildings. Before September 11, no steel framed skyscraper had ever collapsed due to fire.

On September 11, WTC 7 collapsed totally. It is suggested below that this collapse was exclusively due to fire. No significant evidence is offered to back up this suggestion (after all it is only a suggestion). It should be emphasized that WTC 7 was neither hit by an aircraft nor by significant quantities of debris from the collapse of the twin towers. It is also widely claimed that WTC 1 and WTC 2 collapsed mainly due to fire. I emphasize, that before September 11, no steel framed skyscraper had ever collapsed due to fire. However, on September 11, it is claimed that three steel framed skyscrapers collapsed mainly, or totally, due to fire.

1) It is not suggested that WTC7 fell solely due to fire, nor WTC1 or 2 - all three buildings suffered massive physical damage and subsequent fires.

2) listing tenants of a building is evidence of nothing. Also, Do you know what was in those offices? Large organizations have offices in 10s maybe hundreds of office towers. None of the tenants highlighted in yellow would consider those offices as large and/or particularly important. Of the highlighted tenants, the most floors occupied by any one tenant is two floors. In downtown toronto, the bank of montreal occupies almost the full 80 floors of the BMO bank towers. I can assure that an office that occupies 1 or 2 floors of an office tower is highly insignificant. Also, it would not be prudent to store sensitive documents (the kind that an organization would want destroyed..) in such an unsecure location - like the 10th floor of WTC7. So your highlighted tenants lack any real incentive to level their building.

I expect you will post something about insurance / larry Silverstein / "pull it" next? Go ahead, im ready.

is that a joke? I dont know where the flames are.. maybe they are hidden........ BEHIND THE 40 STORIES OF SMOKE.

You don't need all these web sites or stories to wonder why the towers fell as fast as a stone dropped off the top of them. I mean towers that were made out of steel and with modern technologies all of a sudden fell in free fall? Do you know how many different techologies were used to NOT have them ever fall at all?

And do you know that the burning fuel from the jets simply does not have enough temperature to melt steel?

Wrong about Silverstein.... So with tennants like that in WTC 7 one would think that building would have been a fortress, it was discribed that way in many news stories, odd how it collapsed. As for Silverstien I will let someone else question you on that one, I'm sure they will:thumbsup

i think the samething for every single one of your posts on this subject

I love these threads

Works both ways, doesn't it? What evidence is there that your assumptions about the incident are correct? Show me one bit of evidence that Al Queada was behind the attack. The fact that CNN had Bin Laden's face on TV 15 seconds after the second plane hit doesn't do it for me.





So, any situation in which you don't personally have decicive proof, you simply accept the government's story without question? Without even leaving room for the posssibility of questioning it? My thoughts about the situation may be agnositc, but yours are certainly dogmatic. I'm saying I don't know exactly what happened. You're saying with absolute certainty that the government's story is true.




Please show me the debunking of this tape. There is no way the person on the tape I have seen was Osama Bin Laden. It doesn't take TV telling me that one way or another. Look at the confession tape beside other tapes known to be Bin Laden. Sometimes you have to trust your own eyes and common sense. Common sense tells me that Bin Laden did not get a nose job for the confession video.


Bin Laden on the confession tape that CNN told me was real beyond question:

http://911research.wtc7.net/disinfo/.../osamafake.jpg


Real Bin Laden:

http://911research.wtc7.net/disinfo/...ocs/osama2.jpg

Differences I can see with my own two eyes: Fatty Bin Laden (fake tape) has a wide nose, higher cheeks, and his face isn't as wide (look at width of face at eye level).

Bill O'Reilly saying over and over again that this is the real Bin Laden is never going to confuse me into believing it.

This is far from the only thing that raises questions in my mind. The absolute refusal from the administration to investigate is another major one.

Then there's building 7, which didn't have a "20 foot hole" in it, at least not when I saw it burning, from about 200 feet away an hour before it fell. And yes, the owner of that building, Larry Silverstien, going on TV and saying that they demolished that building. Then the 9/11 commission denying that.

It goes on and on. Anyone who accepts the official story before we have a real, independent investigation, is thinking with their emotions, not their heads. You're saying there is no evidence, well, it's hard to prove anything without investigating, which for some reason our leadership has made sure will not happen. What you're saying is the definition of dogma.

Ok, so you watched loose change too.. here's a line from the film that references one of the buildings you are talking about:

"On February 23rd, 1991, a 38 storey skyscraper in Philadelphia, built in 1973, burned for more than 19 hours and spread over 8 floors. It did not collapse."

Ok, So here's what really happened at that building:

-Fire was contained by fire dept. and sprinklers from floor 30 and up.
- Bldg was not damaged prior to fire. Fire protection coating was not blown off.

and a quote:

"The Philadelphia fire LC mentions was the Meridian Building. The firefighting efforts were abandoned after 11 hours because the fire department feared (ta-dah) pancake collapse! The building was effectively destroyed in any case. It had a large net over it and had to be reinforced before it could be brought down!"

:1orglaugh :1orglaugh I love that. Yes, pancake collapse is impossible - so impossible that firefighters stopped fighting a fire in the above mentioned building because they were afraid of it!!

sorry only flawed logic and unsound reasoning allowed when speaking to this guy..lol


WTC 7 was pulled because it housed a wealth of info being collected on the current admin...they were going to crucify them....all the evidence was in there....the bush family has been under the gun by the usa for decades

Fuck it I will play the Silverstein card:)


Larry Silverstein, the owner of the WTC complex, admitted on a September 2002 PBS documentary, 'America Rebuilds' that he and the NYFD decided to 'pull' WTC 7 on the day of the attack. The word 'pull' is industry jargon for taking a building down with explosives.

We have attempted to call Larry Silverstein's office on several occasions. Silverstein has never issued a retraction for his comments.

Photos taken moments before the collapse of WTC 7 show small office fires on just two floors.

Firefighters were told to move away from the building moments before it collapsed.

In February of 2002 Silverstein Properties won $861 million from Industrial Risk Insurers to rebuild on the site of WTC 7. Silverstein Properties' estimated investment in WTC 7 was $386 million. So: This building's collapse resulted in a profit of about $500 million!

i've done alot more research then i care to admit on the subject.

regarding firefighters...tell us why the ones fighting the WTC fires reported the fires being out? and that they were just mopping up the last of them?

you are hopeless...lets not chat on th is subject any further

it is obvious to me you have another agenda of some sort