911 Revisited Poll

[tokeprep]

Indeed, what would you expect to happen here?

This is a REAL fire, not that girl scout marshmallow roast thing going on at WTC 7.

View attachment 2630825

know what that building looked like 2 days later after burning uncontrollably for 8 times as long as WTC 7 did??? BTW the design is the same.

View attachment 2630824

WTC 7 is the ONLY skyscraper that ever collapsed from fire. Ever.

The first building is the Beijing Television Cultural Center. The fire was put out within 6 hours of starting after a long firefighting effort. The first article I found about this building brags that it uses far less steel than conventional skyscrapers and is built to be especially stable in order to withstand earthquakes. I see no basis for your claim that this building is of the same design as World Trade Center 7.

We should also note that this building was under construction when the fire started. How much carpet, furniture, paperwork, etc. was in it when it ignited? Probably not as much? The picture looks compelling, but you have no idea what you're looking at. The fact that one fire is more visible than another fire doesn't necessarily mean that it's worse.

 

[Dr Kynes]

Since you cannot be bothered to read the report, nor be bothered to reference post # 199, I will reiterate it for you.



It is not MY assertion that the building came down from fire alone, I think that is the most rediculous idea ever. its only obvious that it came down from something OTHER than fire.

it is NIST and Government who claim it came down from FIRES ALONE!! Not mine. If you were a better consumer of information you would have realized that many many posts ago, but instead you just want to lay claim to something else entirely and then pretend the proof that makes your claim false does not exist.


Do you understand now? Or are you just going to point fingers and cry out "Troofer, Troofer, Squawk!!"

even greater butthurt.

i DID read the rerport, TEN FUCKING YEARS AGO!

do I have to make my text bigger too?


further "primarily by uncontrolled fires" does not mean "FIRE ALONE AND NOTHING ELSE"

the FFaq is not the report, the report talked about fires,, it talked about structural damage, it talked about sprinkler failure etc,, it never said FIRES ALONE, so maybe your just squawking a Troofer line, and not as good at reading as you seem to think.

with the exception of Troofers, i have NEVER heard "fires alone" from anyone. so maybe my shitty rag popular mechanics has more on point than your bullshit extracted from excertps of Loose Change version 7.5 The Re-Revisioning. The Troof Always Needs a Re-Mix.

 

[NoDrama]

the outside structure concrete is gone and that is not a steel frame building

none of them were.

Concrete structure wall construction


the steel is a light weight structure held up by the walls

The outside structure is gone? LOL they are using the building right now because , and I quote here:

The initial images of the blaze suggested that the tower might be nearly destroyed. However Rem Koolhaas said that "they are simply rebuilding it as it was, because there was no structural damage."

Steel construction, used 144,000 tons of steel vs WTC 7 189,000 tons of steel. Made of steel. Might be less steel, but steel is stronger than concrete.

even greater butthurt.

i DID read the rerport, TEN FUCKING YEARS AGO!

do I have to make my text bigger too?


further "primarily by uncontrolled fires" does not mean "FIRE ALONE AND NOTHING ELSE"

the FFaq is not the report, the report talked about fires,, it talked about structural damage, it talked about sprinkler failure etc,, it never said FIRES ALONE, so maybe your just squawking a Troofer line, and not as good at reading as you seem to think.

with the exception of Troofers, i have NEVER heard "fires alone" from anyone. so maybe my shitty rag popular mechanics has more on point than your bullshit extracted from excertps of Loose Change version 7.5 The Re-Revisioning. The Troof Always Needs a Re-Mix.

From the report that you said you read, but obviously don't remember any of:

GAITHERSBURG, Maryland -- The National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) has released its long-awaited report on the collapse of World Trade 7 following the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001. "Our take-home message today is that the reason for the collapse of World Trade Center 7 is no longer a mystery," NIST lead investigator Shyam Sunder told journalists at this morning's press conference in Gaithersburg, Md. "WTC 7 collapsed because of fires fueled by office furnishings. It did not collapse from explosives or from diesel fuel fires."

Sunder told reporters at the press conference. "What we found was that uncontrolled building fires--similar to fires experienced in other tall buildings--caused an extraordinary event, the collapse of WTC7."​

And, while debris damage to WTC 7's southern exterior was considerable (and initiated the destructive fires), the collapse originated in the northeast portion of the building. In fact, the report concludes: "Even without the structural damage, WTC 7 would have collapsed from fires." ​

Fires alone there buddy.

FWIW I am not butthurt, but if you are going to insist that you are correct, when you clearly are wrong, it needs to be brought to your attention.

PS, here is a Quote from Popular Mechanics, your self professed reading choice:

Conspiracy theorists have long claimed that explosives downed World Trade Center 7, north of the Twin Towers. The long-awaited report from the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) conclusively rebuts those claims. Fire alone brought down the building, the report concludes, pointing to thermal expansion of key structural members as the culprit. The report also raises concerns that other large buildings might be more vulnerable to fire-induced structural failure than previously thought.

Read more: World Trade Center 7 Report Puts 9/11 Conspiracy Theory to Rest - Popular Mechanics
​

​

​

​

Try not to be too butthurt.

Edit: one other thing bothering me, Why would you think "troofers" would say that WTC7 came down from fire alone? does that even fit the narrative, or did you not really think your assertion through?

 

[NoDrama]

Another fun tidbit from the NIST investigation said this about the diesel fuel (24,000 gallons) for the emergency generators:

However, the final NIST report downplays both scenarios, concluding that the diesel fuel stored in tanks (and intended to power backup generators) did not burn long enough or hot enough to account for structural failures.

​

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/7_World_Trade_Center

But then has this to say about WTC 1 and 2:

Based on its comprehensive investigation, NIST concluded that the WTC towers collapsed because: (1) the impact of the planes severed and damaged support columns, dislodged fireproofing insulation coating the steel floor trusses and steel columns, and widely dispersed jet fuel over multiple floors

Approximately 8,000 gallons of jet fuel is a lot of jet fuel and does a shit load of damage according to NIST, but 24,000 gallons of diesel, hell it won't even catch fire when heated to the failure point of steel.

http://911encyclopedia.com/wiki/index.php/How_much_jet_fuel_was_in_the_Twin_Towers?


RIDICULOUS!!!!!

Jet Fuel and Diesel are nearly the same damned thing and in the open air burn at less than 600F

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

The autoignition temp of diesel is 410F, of jet fuel? 410F

The point at which structural steel fails is over 1500 F and won't melt until about 2500F.

Yet Diesel fuel burns at the same temp as jet fuel, but didn't burn hot enough in WTC 7 to cause any damage.

But in WTC towers 1 & 2, jet fuel burned hot enough to be a contributing factor??


Shit don't add up.
​

 

[zzwasted]

You see what I did there?

I made it clear what I was responding to. that way those who wish to figure out what the fuck I'm responding too dont have to infer it from 30 pages of one line twatter post bullshit

Try it, it might make you seem less insufferable.

and now, to the subject at hand...

so it WASNT Mossad or are you asserting that "them jews done it, and them jews is all in it together?" cuz thats the only way to get from "Mossad done it" to "Inside Job"

i do not believe it was a jewish plot but mossad could have very well have infiltrated al qaeda. because there is no way on earth some 3rd world (untrained)sand people are going to accurately pull of such an attack .. is all im saying ..
but secondly their is a plot to take power over the western world and to basically to sum it up , make everyone else poorer and them richer ,not saying it's a jewish plot but coincidentally there happens to be alot of jewish people who are involved,but of course religion has nothing to do with it , its just easier to say jew's run the western world , because its pretty much a true statement , (i.e. Rockefeller ,Rothschild) of course its not just them involved but their buisness partner's since rothschild bought shares of the rockerfeller back in 08 (or the other way round i cannot remember but they also own ap and reuters too as well as their banking dynasty's , so yeah its easier to say jew's run this shit but obviously not around people who call people anti semetic because they criticise a couple of jewish family's ,im not anti semetic im anti making the working class poor as shit , and if by criticising a couple of jewish family's for the bad they have done and are doing , then i guess that means i hate all jews that ever existed ever . that was me being sarcastic...... i don't hate any religion i hate people hiding behind their religion knowing full well they deserve the critism they get

 

[Doer]

Here is your problem, Z-man. This worse than guessing. You are tarring the Jews with this, and it is all made up. All the Jew hate in history was made up by the Church of Rome. Don't buy in. Don't try to tap dance your feeling around this implanted Jew hate in our world. In fact finding, no one talks like this.

but mossad could have very well have infiltrated al qaeda

no way on earth some 3rd world (untrained)sand people

make everyone else poorer and them richer

its just easier to say jew's run the western world , because its pretty much a true statement

that was me being sarcastic......

Unfortunately, you provided nothing but sarcasm Hahahahahaahahaha, so far.

 

[Doer]

Drama, your problem is also believing politcal bs.

Is this truly all there is to this? That somehow these previewed differences in B-7's destruction, means the entire thing is a scam?

The big buildings fell on the others. So, planes hit big buildings and that ulimately distroyed the entire site.

So, it is so thin and political to blame (who, what, where when how, who?) the govt.

I mean why? The gummit did it. So what if they did? Nothing a bunch of hand waving can solve. Her career was dead, I know that. So, besides spotlight, what are the B-7 kooks, like Rosy O'Donnald, really trying to say?

It doesn't make any sense. And it doesn't matter. Just like Kennedy doesn't matter, but, I bet he gets dug up again. Maybe for some movie, again.

You are supporting a political $$ business called Troofers. Nothing more. An agenda without a Cause.

Even if WE were all suddenly Kennedy crazy over 9/11, dig up the site! Hold more investigation.

You know were that will lead? Nowhere. Kennedy will turn in his grave while the Troofer movement fizzles along. But, this is the only 9/11 truth we will see in our life times. Why bother?

 

[zzwasted]

Drama, your problem is also believing politcal bs.

Is this truly all there is to this? That somehow these previewed differences in B-7's destruction, means the entire thing is a scam?

The big buildings fell on the others. So, planes hit big buildings and that ulimately distroyed the entire site.

So, it is so thin and political to blame (who, what, where when how, who?) the govt.

I mean why? The gummit did it. So what if they did? Nothing a buch of hand waving can solve. Her career was dead, I know that. So, besides spotlight, what are the B-7 kooks, like Rosy O'Donnald, really trying to say?

It doesn't make any sense. And it doesn't matter. Just like Kennedy doesn't matter, but, I bet he gets dug up again. Maybe for some movie, again.

You are supporting a political $$ business called Troofers. Nothing more. An agenda without a Cause.

Even if WE were all suddenly Kennedy crazy over 9/11, dig up the site! Hold more investigation.

You know were that will lead? Nowhere. Kennedy will turn in his grave while the Troofer movement fizzles along. But, this is the only 9/11 truth we will see in our life times. Why bother?

nah i don't support the troother movement i support the right to freedom of expression ,
but your right the jew thing is just a troofer hype (in different degree's as in some people say jew's own everything and they really believe they own everything and they link all these thing's together ) point i was trying to make typing in this thread for so long was that the rothschild own ap and reuter's that's all . (mossad thing is obviously a theory but as it's not aimed at a government its cannot be classed as a conspiracy)
and of course you can tell it's not a religious plot at all 1 because there are people like ted turner ,a real anti semite (self admitted)he also owns cnn tnt tbs or founded , so basically he would not be where he is if it was a religious thing because he has alot of power for someone who is a a publicly known anti semite.
so yes jew's have a lot of control and power over the western world , but do they own /run and make all the decision's for everything that happen's ? no there's loads more evidence to say they don't ted turner was first to come to mind . just to clear up anything i may have said prior to this that may have been perceived differently ,i thought it would be funny to come on here and say mossad 911 and to see how americans would feel about that haha i got my answer.

 

[Doer]

Well, that's tolling, you jerk. Good job!

 

[zzwasted]

and i still believe what i said was a accurate statement lol

• no way on earth some 3rd world (untrained)sand people could have pulled of such an accurate attack << i believe this no way could they unless they where trained .. and in the 90s you could hire al qaeda for like 200 bucks it may be inaccurate to describe them as sand people lol but no way could they do that, and not with your defence system ,anyway let's not go into the whole norad discussion again lol . ​

 

[zzwasted]

its people like ted turner and al gore you guy's have to watch out for if you look at the land people like that are buying its crazy amount's ..oh and the depopulation thing why would you think they would want to kill of large amount's of people what do you think there motive's would be ????

 

[Doer]

I think you are a nit-wit and an admitted troll

go jerk your own chain

 

[Doer]

Well so what you believe your Cretin talk?

a fool believes

men find out

 

[Dr Kynes]

From the report that you said you read, but obviously don't remember any of:

Fires alone there buddy.

FWIW I am not butthurt, but if you are going to insist that you are correct, when you clearly are wrong, it needs to be brought to your attention.​

​

​

not fires alone, specifically, NOT EXPLOSIVES OR DIESEL FUEL, but not fires alone. thats editorial comment. that's not what is written in that quote nor the nist report i read ten years ago, and still remember well enough to say it doesnt say "Fires Alone".

you might as well insist that im claiming the structure fell because of structural damage alone, or because of diesl fires alone, or because of shoddy construction alone. many things combined to make the building fall down, and "FIRES ALONE" is a strawman.

PS, here is a Quote from Popular Mechanics, your self professed reading choice:

another strawman. YOU accused me of reading popular mechanics, way back here,

OFFICIAL word from NIST and the Government is that FIRES did it and nothing else.

BTW the ONLY ones to claim that structural damage was done by falling debris was ...Popular Mechanics... they have since retracted that statement to align with the official statement by NIST and the government that "Fires alone did the damage."

I respect you Dr K, please don't get your theories from some 2 bit magazine. Only a real wacko would believe that falling debris bit.



http://www.popularmechanics.com/technology/engineering/architecture/4278874
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/08/22/nyregion/22wtccnd.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0
http://www.nist.gov/el/disasterstudies/wtc/


I guess the government and NIST are now TROOFERS??

The OFFICIAL reason WTC7 fell was SOLELY due to fires, and fires alone. Nothing else, just fires. Only fires. Fires did it. Hot stuff make building go boom.

so yeah, you just attacked your strawman with a mighty blow and smote it with great smotency. rock on with your bad self.

Read more: World Trade Center 7 Report Puts 9/11 Conspiracy Theory to Rest - Popular Mechanics

​

​

​

​

yeah you show that strawman who's boss! editorial comments in what you yourself describe as a "Two Bit Magazine" is now the authoritative word on your assertion... shit im getting dizzy.

Try not to be too butthurt.

Edit: one other thing bothering me, Why would you think "troofers" would say that WTC7 came down from fire alone? does that even fit the narrative, or did you not really think your assertion through?

the "fires alone" troofer claim is another strawman, they claim it so they can then Troof the claim away as if it were something real, and not merely their own construct. ONLY TROOFERS bring up the "Fires Alone" claim, and only Troofers try to back it upo with comments and quotes from various dubious sources like the FAQ from nist, or the pages of a rag you describe as "Two Bit" before asserting that it's totally to be trusted and shit, just a few moments later.

ill make it plain:

WTC 7 was built poorly, on a foundation that was never intended to support a building that large, using substandard materials. it stood for a long time, until it got hit with tonnes of burning rubble, got lit on fire, which caused the diesel fuel tanks to ignite, and caused the submarine batteries to burst, and caused power transformers to explode, and eventually it fell down.

none of this should be taken as a claim that the building fell from "Fires Alone" any more than it fell from shoddy construction alone, or shitty maintenance alone, or getting hit by burning rubble alone, or being build on a too-small foundation alone, or because the janitor on floor 25 didnt dust the cubicles thoroughly enough alone, , or because the good folks at Iglesia Ni Christo didnt pray hard enough that day alone.

NIST is responsible for reportiong their findings, and soothing the fears of a panicky public. if they had said "yep, diesel fuel fires can burn hot enough to soften steel structural components and can cause shit to collapse" then no building would ever allow diesel fuel in the doors, for "safety"

however, diesel fuel and gasoline CAN AND DO burn hot enough, even in open air, without a building acting as a refractory to melt and weaken structural steel, and WILL cause the collapse of even very large structures, including structures which are FAR MORE SUBSTANTIAL than an office building.:

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/04/30/us/30collapse.html?_r=0

psst... this actually was "Fires Alone" since the bridge was designed to get hit by trucks and not collapse, and has been hit by trucks many times without collapsing.

 

[Doer]

There is no much material, why just review the part you like?

World Trade Center 7, Building 7 - Debunking 9/11

9/11 Debunked: WTC 7's Collapse Explained - YouTube

World Trade Center 7 Report Puts 9/11 Conspiracy Theory


Busted! The 9/11 WTC Building 7 Conspiracy Theory Debu


And just to show I'm fair, here is de-bunk, de-bunk. Of couse it ends with this bullshit. Bias? You be the judge.

SO WHAT???

Debunking the Debunkers: Building 7 Explained?



3:06 "Building 7 is the only skyscraper to burn uncontrollably for seven hours."

 

[tokeprep]

Kynes, I don't think you're helping by suggesting your own conspiracy about NIST's final report. It's a fact that the building collapsed because of the fires alone, with or without the diesel fuel being ignited. The only meaningful "evidence" against that conclusion that's come out in this thread was accounts and pictures of other large building fires, and we've established that none of them was comparable (although in both cases collapse was feared).

I'll pose my own question: why would the 9/11 conspirators be so concerned with bringing World Trade Center 7 down at all, and especially hours after the other buildings had collapsed? And with full knowledge that no building had ever collapsed because of uncontrolled fires, why would they choose that route? I can't think of any motivation that would necessitate bringing another building down, and I can't imagine how people who so brilliantly plotted and pulled this scheme off would leave such a significant hole.

Presuming no one has a plausible explanation, the conclusion is simple: this was an extraordinary event with no comparable event in the very brief history of skyscrapers, and the outcome, accordingly, differed with every other past outcome. Buildings that use a structural system like the one in World Trade Center 7 may be more prone to fire-induced collapse than anyone had previously believed (with a sufficient number of uncontrolled fires burning long enough).

 

[Doer]

I know!!..(can't rep again yet)

It is so deeply stupid and a mere artifact of blame Bush, that no one can even say why it can possible matter.

They can't say what is the Damn Point. Sad and laughable.

Very well put, sir. I approve.

 

[Mr Neutron]

if the govt did it i don't care. It is the call of those among us, we elect to do the hard jobs... It is not a bad thing to me that our govt keeps secrets. It is supposed to... I say so what? I'm not shocked if it is true.

wow!!!!!!!

 

[Doer]

But, I also said if WE could ever catch someone in OUR govt with anything to do with it (and the press is digging right now,) we would execute them. Mossad? Certainly. The press is digging for everything and if they find some one, I say Hang Them.

So, to me this is no conspiracy until we find a single fact, then we hunt witches. The American Way. It could be a few more lifetimes.....71 years minimum. National secrets, we have no need to know.

Wow!!!!

 

[zzwasted]

the sound of the explosion if you listen carefully (slow the video down as the explosion happen's you can quite easily tell that you hear several little explosions not just one boom of the jet fuel exploding ... please keep replying your actually quite funny to to wind up .. are you a faketriot ? loving a country that's destroying innocent people's live's ? please defend the white houses story all you want can even read it before bed just so you know every line it still doesn't make it true