Russian Skyscraper Fire vs. 9/11

[El Diablo Blanco]

Bin Laden never committed suicide for his religion.  he was a rich spoiled brat coward that used religion to further his agenda.  But the muslims who are willing to kill themselves for their religion are serious muslims.  They don't stray from anything.  They pray 5 times a day. They are hard core.  They believe that they are fulfilling god's will killing themselves as a martyr.  So going out drinking and fucking whores is not in their belief.  This is the issue with this story of who supposedly flew the planes.

They found Osama Bin Laden's stash of porn in his house after they killed him.

Or, is that all bullshit too?

[Twaddle]

Please cite buildings that pancake collapsed, and many other buildings have suffered far worse fires than WTC 7 and survived.  You need to forget about the planes, because WTC 7 was never hit by any planes and supposedly collapsed as a result of fire.  

Caracas Tower Fire, the tallest skyscraper in Caracas, a 50 story building experienced a severe fire on October 17, 2004. The blaze began before midnight on the 34th floor, spread to more than 26 floors, and burned for more than 17 hours.  Heat from the fires prevented firefighters from reaching the upper floors.  Guess what, still standing

Buildings that have progressively collapsed (pancake).  Progressive collapse happens due to fire and earthquake.  Like I said, it's not uncommon, and is actually very common in smaller structures.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Progressive_collapse

WTC 7 did not collapse all at once.  It came down in sections at different times.  Here's a good pictorial for simple people:


WTC 7 also has 6000 gallons of stored oil in it, that was burning.  This was a contributing factor to it's collapse.  That and the structural damage from the other towers collapsing into it.

[Twaddle]

Caracas Tower Fire, the tallest skyscraper in Caracas, a 50 story building experienced a severe fire on October 17, 2004. The blaze began before midnight on the 34th floor, spread to more than 26 floors, and burned for more than 17 hours.  Heat from the fires prevented firefighters from reaching the upper floors.  Guess what, still standing

Guess what, this was a normal content fire, and the Caracas Tower responded exactly like it was supposed to.  Guess what, had a passenger jet been flown into the Caracas Tower, and jet fuel was burning inside, it might not be standing.  Apples and oranges.  HTH.   

[Tapeworm]

The conspiracy is that a state of emergency was manufacturered to justify a US invasion and occupation of the ME, as well as universal surveillance and other cancellations of civil rights.

Up for debate is the extent to which the US was involved.  It's seems probable that intelligence was intentionally throttled to allow the incident to take place, and I don't reject the possibility that some from 'our side' may have been involved with the Saudis at the conception and planning stage.  


The whole fixation about whether or not government ninjas planted demolition charges is silly.  The question isn't how shit happened.  It's why.

[Twaddle]

The conspiracy is that a state of emergency was manufacturered to justify a US invasion and occupation of the ME, as well as universal surveillance and other cancellations of civil rights.

Up for debate is the extent to which the US was involved.  It's seems probable that intelligence was intentionally throttled to allow the incident to take place, and I don't reject the possibility that some from 'our side' may have been involved with the Saudis at the conception and planning stage.  


The whole fixation about whether or not government ninjas planted demolition charges is silly.  The question isn't how shit happened.  It's why.

I'll buy that idea.  The question I have to all the conspiracy theororists is this.  If the govt was really responsible, why would they go to all the trouble of planes, demolition, etc?  Why wouldn't they just bomb the ever living shit out of the twin towers, blame it on terrorists, and call it a day?

[Ronnie Rep]

The conspiracy is that a state of emergency was manufacturered to justify a US invasion and occupation of the ME, as well as universal surveillance and other cancellations of civil rights.

Up for debate is the extent to which the US was involved.  It's seems probable that intelligence was intentionally throttled to allow the incident to take place, and I don't reject the possibility that some from 'our side' may have been involved with the Saudis at the conception and planning stage.  


The whole fixation about whether or not government ninjas planted demolition charges is silly.  The question isn't how shit happened.  It's why.

This x 10!

[El Diablo Blanco]

The gov didn't do it.  But they allowed it to happen.  Big difference.  They could have stopped it before hand but the plan was too sweet for them to fulfill the agenda brought up by Rumsfeld and Wolfowitz.

I'll buy that idea.  The question I have to all the conspiracy theororists is this.  If the govt was really responsible, why would they go to all the trouble of planes, demolition, etc?  Why wouldn't they just bomb the ever living shit out of the twin towers, blame it on terrorists, and call it a day?

[Disgusted]

This is newer footage of  the WTC 7 collapse. Can anyone on here honestly say this fell on it's own and if so how after seeing this?

[Ropo]

LOL A teen twat - I'm 40 years old.  And I'm not the one throwing hissy fits all over this thread because someone doesn't agree with me.  

Personally, I don't care - to me it's suspicious, simple as that, many highly educated people take this stance also, a lot of people think there is a conspiracy of some sort.  I didn't even want to bother arguing 9/11 as I have done it too many times before, plus I initially sensed you were one of those unhinged whackjobs who just wanted to tell everyone how fucked up they were and how right you are because your an expert in everything.  I should have paid attention to my intuition.


^^^^^^ROPO

So, what you say is that you are a moron and you are proud of it? It is impossible to comprehend that 40 years old would be so childish at his opinions, so you must be lying what comes about your age. You are blind about the facts and you ignore laws of physics, and that is what the teen twats do, so you are no better than them.

[Ropo]

This is newer footage of  the WTC 7 collapse. Can anyone on here honestly say this fell on it's own and if so how after seeing this?

And this is original footage about the situation:
[ Invalid YouTube link ]

First of all, your video has turned 180° from the original, and some idiot has add some poor and fake explosions in it. Is there anything beside your stupidity which you try to point out?  

[jprc10]

I still don't think a building should collapse demolition style from damage from other buildings collapsing or fire alone. Doesn't matter if you can't hear the explosions. 

[Ropo]

yeah and generaly the ct videos dont show the damaged side of wtc7.

Have you ever wonder why? That would be a side where WTC 1 & 2  just collapsed, and there is fire, dust and crap like that, so cameras has no use, because you don't have any visibility.  There is some photos and videos about that side, but you don't find them from the foil hat idiots web site.

[Ropo]

I still don't think a building should collapse demolition style from damage from other buildings collapsing or fire alone. Doesn't matter if you can't hear the explosions.  

You have seen it with your own eyes, and you compare it towards what? What would be the example which you do your comparison? In fact, there isn't one, because these two towers are first two hit by the plane, burn etc. So you see this thing like everybody, first time in this world, and you think it is fake? Fake, compared to what? There is a legend about russian ass buzzer, but no one has seen one of those. Legend tells that it has two major faults: it doesnt buzz and it doesn't fit any ass. What that cadget look like? You can't know, because you have not seen anything like it. How you can know how the collapsing WTC tower should look like, while you haven't seen any which has hit by the aeroplane? You can't, it is simple as that.

[Seven Copper Coins]

I'll pose a different question. What if it didnt work?

The US govt actually signed off on doing TWO controlled demolitions that have never been attempted on buildings a fraction of the size, live without a net in front of the entire world  and they had to do it on the fly with no testing, .dry runs, staging.

 They somehow managed to load two of the biggest structures in the world with sufficient demolition to collapse them, managed to make it transparent, and flying two jets into the side of the buildings for dramatic effect. And this had no effect what would be the largest controlled demolition in history, by far. And it had to work flawlessy, Twice....or it would be the biggest scandal in the history of the world.

I think cooler heads would have prevailed in that cabinet meeting

[jprc10]

You have seen it with your own eyes, and you compare it towards what? What would be the example which you do your comparison? In fact, there isn't one, because these two towers are first two hit by the plane, burn etc. So you see this thing like everybody, first time in this world, and you think it is fake? Fake, compared to what? There is a legend about russian ass buzzer, but no one has seen one of those. Legend tells that it has two major faults: it doesnt buzz and it doesn't fit any ass. What that cadget look like? You can't know, because you have not seen anything like it. How you can know how the collapsing WTC tower should look like, while you haven't seen any which has hit by the aeroplane? You can't, it is simple as that.

I don't understand what you're trying to say here, improve your spelling bro.

[Irongrip400]

I still don't think a building should collapse demolition style from damage from other buildings collapsing or fire alone. Doesn't matter if you can't hear the explosions. 

You are not and architect or an engineer. You're not supposed to. Fact is, anyone who thinks that the towers collapsed because of anything other than planes hitting them, is ill informed.  

[Ropo]

I'll pose a different question. What if it didnt work?

The US govt actually signed off on doing TWO controlled demolitions that have never been attempted on buildings a fraction of the size, live without a net in front of the entire world  and they had to do it on the fly with no testing, .dry runs, staging.

 They somehow managed to load two of the biggest structures in the world with sufficient demolition to collapse them, managed to make it transparent, and flying two jets into the side of the buildings for dramatic effect. And this had no effect what would be the largest controlled demolition in history, by far. And it had to work flawlessy, Twice....or it would be the biggest scandal in the history of the world.

I think cooler heads would have prevailed in that cabinet meeting

There is more than that, because for demolition you should have at least three impossible things:

1. You should know where the plane hits, because you are installing explosives and detonation cords all over the place, and you don't want plane to hit them.
2. You shoud have explosives, which all are based chemicals, which all react to fire, and you should manage to make fireproof bomb from them
3. You should have the means to stop laws of physics

[jprc10]

You are not and architect or an engineer. You're not supposed to. Fact is, anyone who thinks that the towers collapsed because of anything other than planes hitting them, is ill informed.  

An engineer came here and posted his opinion about how the towers shouldn't have collapsed due to planes hitting them and you dismissed his opinion and now you tell me my opinion doesn't matter because I'm not one? It seems you disagree anything that doesn't go along with your bias.
I also don't think it is only the fact that the towers collapsed because of planes hitting them that some people doubt, it is also how they collapsed.  

[Ropo]

I don't understand what you're trying to say here, improve your spelling bro.

Well, the point is this: when you see something first time in your life, how do you know if it is fake or not? Answer is simple, you can't know that, before you have something to compare it. What comes to this case, you can't compare it to anything, so how do you know if it is fake or not?

What comes to spelling, blame google translator..

[Ropo]

lol you do know that russians like to take the piss on the usa.

the kgb used to spread ridiculous rumours about the usa back in the day.

besides, if it was taken down nuclear, then where is the radiation fallout?

how comes theres still ppl living in nyc

Well...no. There is quite big  disharmony between that claim and the claims which foil hat morons has make about the matter of the moon landing. They say that russian did know that USA moon flights were fake, but they choose to say nothing about the matter. You are right of course, and we all know that russian would be quite happy to shot down false claims about the moon landings, but that doesn't stop the foil hat morons make the fool out from themselves

[BB]

An engineer came here and posted his opinion about how the towers shouldn't have collapsed due to planes hitting them and you dismissed his opinion and now you tell me my opinion doesn't matter because I'm not one? It seems you disagree anything that doesn't go along with your bias.
I also don't think it is only the fact that the towers collapsed because of planes hitting them that some people doubt, it is also how they collapsed.  

One engineer that wasn't in the thick of things, and probably wasn't following it as closely as others.

Now you've got a team of independent engineers here* that actually spent tons of man hours actually there, saying this is what all of us figure, and I'll be damned if doesn't make sense to even a neophyte.

*

.

Give it the first 20 - 25  minutes, even in that short time, you get a picture of how everything probably happened.

[Seven Copper Coins]

this brings me to another often mised point.

ppl say they heard of a steel column building which has collapsed due to fire.

no shit,haha, but how about building where a freaking jumbo jet with quite some keroene(quite explosive)crashed into beforehand?

i mean how can one disregard the fact that a jubo jet flew into it, this wasnt just a fire bc some oven in the pizzeria overheated

Add that people say they THINK they heard an.explosion or two in the building. Yup, not like it was almost cut in half by a jumbo jet, and things might be going wrong inside, stuff  breaking, compressors overloading, beams failing..

[Ropo]

respect,man, youve just owned that argument.

they cant have it both ways.

i think i remember it was said that was molten aluminium,not sure.

and lol at the thermite stuff

Well, you should see what I am capable with my native language..

[Beefjake]

this brings me to another often mised point.

how about building where a freaking jumbo jet with quite some keroene(quite explosive)crashed into beforehand?

i mean how can one disregard the fact that a jubo jet flew into it, this wasnt just a fire bc some oven in the pizzeria overheated

WTC 7 ?

[gee38]

top work from ropo on this thread