Somebody would have talked.

[Booted]

I understand both views to the towers. Some accept the official report, some don't. Whatever, the buildings are gone and proving it one way or the other is pointless. I, myself feel WTC7's collapse is sketchy. However,.............I will say this.

If you knew absolutely nothing of the 9/11 attacks If you never heard one detail of any of it and I showed you videos of hundreds of buildings being demoed and you watched how they all fell...Then you see WTC7's collapse...You wouldn't for a second think, Hmmm That building didn't seem to fall like the other demos. That building's collapse seemed different. No ....you wouldn't But like everyone's opinion ever posted in this forum....we all got 'em and ain't nothing gonna change 'em

 

[fedderone]

For those that do and don't believe the validity of the official report, consider this.............

It's not that there even has to be a diabolical underlying conspiracy from the New World Order, our own government, the Saudi's, etc.
It's the FACT that the official report, much like the official report for JFK's assassination, is full of 100% abject lies/untruths/scientific impossibilities that our government thinks it can pass off on the American public.
Be it to get the answers out as quick as possible to calm everyone down, or try to tell white lies to try and cover up their own ineptness in responding to these attacks, or whatever other excuse you want to imagine that could be other than a mass conspiracy.
The FACT remains that our government has lied to us on multiple occasions, has been caught red handed lying to us, and continues to lie to us because we continue to let them get away with it.
We are sedated and unwilling to rise up to overthrow this tyranny that has been taking advantage of us for well over 100 years now.
Our founders and early settlers are rolling over in their graves.

Please, let us continue to elect Nancy Pelosi, and Chuck Schumer, and Mitch McConnell, and John McCain, and Clintons and Bushs. They're all honest with our best intentions in mind.
( Please note the sarcasm in the last sentence, I was laying it on rather thick )

 

[CharlesDavenport]

If someone could offer a reason for doing it that made any kind of sense, that would help.

 

[fedderone]

If someone could offer a reason for doing it that made any kind of sense, that would help.

I think it would fall under the same lines as why does a teacher rape a student, or why does a killer pick a random family and just slaughter them, or why someone would dip their french fries in mayonnaise?
The reason behind it is really insignificant to the actual horror of the action itself.

Please tell me you're not buying the narrative of "the terrorists bombed us because they hate our freedom we enjoy".
Because, that reason makes absolute no sense and people are blindly accepting that.

 

[Steelr4evr]

I crack up every time this topic comes up. Funny ****. From evil Bush looking for oil to big weapons contracts of evil corporations. It was the League Of Shadows. They did it. I saw a video on YouTube with a computer voiced narrator who told me so. It was to usher in the new world order that Captain BookeeBunkaboo leader of the supreme order of the taco would rule for 10,000 years.


...the truth is at last out. I need to go into hiding for a time now..bye bye

 

[CharlesDavenport]

I think it would fall under the same lines as why does a teacher rape a student, or why does a killer pick a random family and just slaughter them, or why someone would dip their french fries in mayonnaise?
The reason behind it is really insignificant to the actual horror of the action itself.

Please tell me you're not buying the narrative of "the terrorists bombed us because they hate our freedom we enjoy".
Because, that reason makes absolute no sense and people are blindly accepting that.

I'm talking about the US government purposely blowing up WTC7.

 

[fedderone]

I'm talking about the US government purposely blowing up WTC7.

I understand.
My point is, there are too many McGuffens with WT7 as contrasted to Towers 1 and 2.
As horrific as it is to relieve, seriously watch all three fall.
You can plainly see with 1 and 2 the towers collapsing on itself, meaning from the top down and by pure gravity and weight, the underneath of the buildings giving out and going down. I won't get into a science debate about if it would have stopped or not at a certain point, as that is out of my realm of expertise.
But WTC7 CLEARLY shows the bottom being destroyed and the top falling to the ground due to lack of something being under it, not the weight of the top of the building pancaking into the lower half until it was rubble.
But this is EXACTLY what is said to have caused WT7 to collapse. Fiery debris falling on the roof, causing fires up top, which caused the building to collapse.
Now, as I said before, I won't comment intelligently on WT1 and WT2 and get all scientific because I'm out of my element, Donny.
But my eyes and common sense say WT7 was a controlled demolition or done with explosives, but not by fiery debris raining down.

I'm not saying who did it or why.
I'm saying the official report is gigantically flawed, is pure and utter BS, there are blatant lies within - mainly with WT7, and this is why you have the millions of conspiracy theories and pointing of fingers and everyone acting paranoid.
Something is rotten in Denmark, and those who call the government on their nonsense are labeled as paranoid, unstable, and whack jobs because they don't accept a lie.
Sorry, some of us know when our leg is being peed on and don't accept someone telling us not to worry about it as it's only rain.

You want a good reason to believe. I understand.
I can't provide a true motive or a true bad guy.
But my eyes and my brain can tell me what I saw and what the official report say don't match at all, other than the time and day.
That report was written by our government. Why they chose to paint it in the manner they did is not for me to say. I don't know enough.
I mentioned a list of possibilities above that have nothing to do with our government doing it at all. Maybe it was Al Queda and they regret not being able to protect us and feared us voting them out for incompetence.
Maybe they had all their records in WT7 and thought too many investigators would be down there nosing around and didn't want anyone to know about all the kickbacks they get from lobbyists.
Don't know. Don't actually care.
You lied to me. THAT'S what I care about. The reason is insignificant at this point.

 

[CharlesDavenport]

The reason is insignificant at this point.

I've read enough reports that contradict the theory that it was a controlled explosion. I would need a reason to even consider that is was planned and controlled. Occam's razor.

 

[wig]

Occam's Razor would have you absolutely terrified of stepping into ANY high rise steel frame building on the face of the earth then Charles.

3 in one day. Not a freak occurrence, but a clearly demonstrated structural inefficiency. If you choose to accept the "official collapse theory", you must accept that all high rise steel frame buildings are at tremendous, impending risk. 3 in one day.

 

[Tibs]

I never thought there was a conspiracy of any kind. Passenger jets have never flown into skyscrapers before creating this type of impact, fire and heat. I don't care what the structural models show or what engineers think. Those planes hit those buildings, and sadly, they came crashing down. I agree with wig that it's something we need to be aware of stepping foot into any high rise, that it could happen again.

 

[DBS1970]

It was aliens.

 

[fedderone]

I never thought there was a conspiracy of any kind. Passenger jets have never flown into skyscrapers before creating this type of impact, fire and heat. I don't care what the structural models show or what engineers think. Those planes hit those buildings, and sadly, they came crashing down. I agree with wig that it's something we need to be aware of stepping foot into any high rise, that it could happen again.

It's actually happened before and since. No, I'm not including any of the roody poo Cessna's, either. One, IIRC, in South America somewhere, or maybe Italy, burned for 2 days or so. Building didn't collapse. Empire State build way long ago. 30s or 40s maybe. Obviously not anywhere near same type of planes/fuel.


Sent from my iPhone using Steeler Nation mobile app

 

[CharlesDavenport]

Occam's Razor would have you absolutely terrified of stepping into ANY high rise steel frame building on the face of the earth then Charles.

3 in one day. Not a freak occurrence, but a clearly demonstrated structural inefficiency. If you choose to accept the "official collapse theory", you must accept that all high rise steel frame buildings are at tremendous, impending risk. 3 in one day.

I admit that all high rise steel frame buildings are at tremendous risk if airplanes with full fuel tanks fly into them. I also admit that surrounding structures are at risk in that event.