Jump to content




Welcome to Unexplained Mysteries! Please sign in or create an account to start posting and to access a host of extra features.


* * * * * 1 votes

911: Professional experts says it was staged


  • Please log in to reply
509 replies to this topic

#1    darkbreed

darkbreed

    Psychic Spy

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,052 posts
  • Joined:04 Nov 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Argentina

Posted 08 September 2011 - 10:43 PM

911Truth: Architects & Engineers agree it was staged controlled demolition

Experts Speak Out. Altogether more than 1,500 Architects & Engineers that have signed the calling for a new investigation of the destruction of the 3 buildings in WTC , 911.

Source:
http://conspiraciesf...?num=1315022038

VIDEO EMBED


www.PleiadianTalk.tk/ - Perspectives from a member of the Great White Brotherhood
American Atlantis Research - Documenting pre-colombian world migration and Atlantis-America
Increase your astral proection skills - Here at Unexplained Mysteries Forums!

#2    Ashotep

Ashotep

    Telekinetic

  • Member
  • 7,465 posts
  • Joined:10 May 2011
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:USA

  • Courage is being scared to death but saddling up anyway-John Wayne

Posted 08 September 2011 - 11:34 PM

Wouldn't be surprised if there was more to it that the government has been telling us.  To me it looked like a missile went through the pentagon instead of a plane.  They got their patriot act though.


#3    booNyzarC

booNyzarC

    Forum Divinity

  • Closed
  • 13,536 posts
  • Joined:18 Aug 2010
  • Gender:Not Selected

Posted 08 September 2011 - 11:50 PM

Just what we need... yet another 911 conspiracy thread. :rolleyes:


#4    Biff Wellington

Biff Wellington

    Poltergeist

  • Banned
  • 2,865 posts
  • Joined:18 Aug 2011
  • Gender:Not Selected

Posted 09 September 2011 - 12:52 AM

It's been a decade now... screw it! The "Man" might have lied to us *GASP!".

Edited by BiffWellington, 09 September 2011 - 12:52 AM.


#5    Karlis

Karlis

  • Member
  • 8,614 posts
  • Joined:19 Jul 2007
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Australia

Posted 09 September 2011 - 01:36 AM

View Postdarkbreed, on 08 September 2011 - 10:43 PM, said:

911Truth: Architects & Engineers agree it was staged controlled demolition

Experts Speak Out. Altogether more than 1,500 Architects & Engineers that have signed the calling for a new investigation of the destruction of the 3 buildings in WTC , 911.

Source: *Snip*

VIDEO EMBED

The following excerpted, copy-pasted information, appears on dozens of websites.


What are opinions concerning the destruction of WTC 7, as presented in this video? Posters who disagree with "the facts" as described in the video, your reasons for disagreement would be welcome.

Karlis
-=-=-=-


Architects & Engineers: Solving the Mystery of WTC 7

AE911Truth's  new 9/11 documentary Solving the Mystery, the destruction of World  Trade Center Building #7, WTC 7 on 9/11/01. Join actor, Ed Asner and  Architect Richard Gage, AIA and Architects and Engineers as they narrate  an unfolding story that decimates the official account ("collapse due  to normal office fires") of this 47 story high-rise which was destroyed  on the afternoon of 9/11 in record time: top to bottom in under 7  seconds - and at free-fall acceleration for a third of its fall.  ...

...

The documentary includes several of the dozens of  technical and building experts that were interviewed and that appear in  our forthcoming full length documentary - 9/11: Explosive Evidence -  Experts Speak Out. Altogether of course there are more than 1,500  Architects & Engineers that have signed the AE911Truth petition  calling for a new investigation of the destruction of all 3 high-rises  at the World Trade Center on 9/11.




#6    darkbreed

darkbreed

    Psychic Spy

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,052 posts
  • Joined:04 Nov 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Argentina

Posted 09 September 2011 - 01:58 AM

WTC 7 may have been the control center from which the two towers were demolished and operated from. Getting rid of the evidence while at it.

www.PleiadianTalk.tk/ - Perspectives from a member of the Great White Brotherhood
American Atlantis Research - Documenting pre-colombian world migration and Atlantis-America
Increase your astral proection skills - Here at Unexplained Mysteries Forums!

#7    Karlis

Karlis

  • Member
  • 8,614 posts
  • Joined:19 Jul 2007
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Australia

Posted 09 September 2011 - 04:40 AM

Is the following factual, or "Conspiracy Fiction"?
Karlis
-=-=-=-


The Mysterious Leveling of Building 7
At 5:20 PM on 9/11/01 the only building with a World Trade Center address that stood on a different block from the rest of the complex, 47-story steel-framed 7 World Trade Center, underwent a sudden total collapse. Officials and all government reports published since the attack that mention the building blame its collapse on a combination of structural damage and subsequent fires. However, the available evidence on the condition of Building 7 prior to its collapse fails to document more than superficial structural damage (from the "collapses" of the Twin Towers) and small isolated fires.

  The official explanations of WTC 7's collapse are problematic for several reasons:

  • Fire has never caused any steel-framed high-rise building to collapse in any manner, let alone with the vertical precision of Building 7's destruction. 1   Other steel-framed skyscrapers have experienced far more serious fires than Building 7.
  • WTC 7 fell straight down, which necessitated that all of the load-bearing columns be broken at the same moment. Inflicting such damage with the precision required to prevent a building from toppling and damaging adjacent buildings is what the science of controlled demolition is all about. No random events, such as the debris damage and fires envisioned by the official reports, or explosions from fuel tanks proposed by some, could be expected to result in such a tidy and complete collapse.
  • WTC 7 fell precipitously, at a rate closely approaching the speed of gravitational free-fall. That necessitated the sudden removal of structure near ground level that would have impeded its descent.
  • The collapse of WTC 7 exhibited all of the features of a standard controlled demolition. To suppose that a cause other than controlled demolition could produce an event with all of the features uniquely characteristic of controlled demolition defies logic.
Source


#8    el midgetron

el midgetron

    Government Agent

  • Member
  • 3,936 posts
  • Joined:26 Sep 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:the middle of the mitten

  • saturnalian brother

Posted 09 September 2011 - 05:22 AM

Posted Image

Posted Image

"Feels good to be breaking the laws in America again" - Kenny Powers


#9    Q24

Q24

    Government Agent

  • Member
  • 3,924 posts
  • Joined:12 Oct 2006

Posted 09 September 2011 - 06:11 AM

View Postel midgetron, on 09 September 2011 - 05:22 AM, said:

Posted Image
It appears there was a plan discussed at some stage to bring the building down: -


“Shortly before the building collapsed, several NYPD officers and Con-Edison workers told me that Larry Silverstein, the property developer of One World Financial Center was on the phone with his insurance carrier to see if they would authorize the controlled demolition of the building – since its foundation was already unstable and expected to fall.”
~Jeffrey Scott Shapiro, Fox News


“We had first reports that the building was unstable and that it was best for it to come down on its own or it would be taken down, I would imagine that it came down on its own.”
~FDNY Lieutenant Rastuccio


“The Fire Department, and they did use the words, we’re gonna have to bring it down.  And, for us, there observing the nature of the devastation it made total sense to us that this was indeed a possibility.
~Indra Singh, EMT


“[sound of explosion] It’s blowin’ boy.”
“Keep your eye on that building, it’ll be coming down soon.”
“The building is about to blow up, move it back.”
“Here we are walking back.  There's a building, about to blow up.”

~WTC emergency responders


One only has to decide if it was this plan or office fire that brought the building down.

Look at the above gif image again.

Not hard is it.

Operation Northwoods was a 1962 plan by the US Department of Defense to cause acts of violence, blamed on Cuba, in order to generate U.S. public support for military action against the Cuban government. The plan called for various false flag actions, such as staged terrorist attacks and plane hijackings, on U.S. and Cuban soil.

#10    aquatus1

aquatus1

    Forum Divinity

  • 19,484 posts
  • Joined:05 Mar 2004
  • Gender:Not Selected

Posted 09 September 2011 - 08:35 AM

Not in the slightest.  It was definitely a magical sword cutting through the spanned support.

Or maybe, it could have been a fire weakening the spanned support.

Or heck, you know, it could even have been explosives exploding the spanned support.

Hmm...Actually, yeah, it is pretty hard to tell by just looking at the picture...after all, no matter how the spanned support got cut, the building would have still fallen in the exact same way.

Personally, I'm leaning towards magic sword.

Edited by aquatus1, 09 September 2011 - 08:36 AM.


#11    preacherman76

preacherman76

    Humble Servent

  • Member
  • 10,922 posts
  • Joined:16 Jul 2007
  • Gender:Not Selected
  • Location:Parts Unknown

Posted 09 September 2011 - 09:51 AM

View PostBiffWellington, on 09 September 2011 - 12:52 AM, said:

It's been a decade now... screw it! The "Man" might have lied to us *GASP!".


If it wasnt driving the force of both our foreign and domestic policies, Id probably say the same thing.

Some things are true, even if you dont believe them.

#12    rambaldi

rambaldi

    Apparition

  • Member
  • PipPip
  • 277 posts
  • Joined:20 Dec 2007

Posted 09 September 2011 - 11:52 AM

View Postdarkbreed, on 08 September 2011 - 10:43 PM, said:

Experts Speak Out. Altogether more than 1,500 Architects & Engineers that have signed the calling for a new investigation of the destruction of the 3 buildings in WTC , 911.

Yawn... why can't truthers never look for counterarguments BEFORE posting some old b******s as it it was totally new and unanswered?

Have you ever

a ) checked to what extent these Architects and Engingeers actually have experience with the structural analysis of such buildings?

b ) wondered what percentage of ALL Architects and Engineers those 1500 represent and if all others are too lazy, too dumb or too evil to join?

As for WTC7:

- Why would one need a building as a controlcenter in the first place? Is this some Noplaner-Hologram BS?

- if, as the quotes say, people already expected WTC7 to come down, why would anyone who isn't frakking insane or dumb, prepare a demoliton in a FEW HOURS in an already UNSTABLE building?

- why are truthers in sentences like "Fire has never caused any steel-framed high-rise building to collapse in any manner" totally ignoring the documented previous damage from the WTC1+2 debris?

Edited by rambaldi, 09 September 2011 - 11:52 AM.


#13    Q24

Q24

    Government Agent

  • Member
  • 3,924 posts
  • Joined:12 Oct 2006

Posted 09 September 2011 - 12:28 PM

View Postrambaldi, on 09 September 2011 - 11:52 AM, said:

As for WTC7:

- Why would one need a building as a controlcenter in the first place? Is this some Noplaner-Hologram BS?
There were CIA, Department of Defense and Secret Service offices along with a custom built emergency command bunker in WTC7.  Any one of these locations could have been used for control of the tower demolitions, guidance of the planes, planning of the wider operation - if the theory is true, it had to be carried out from somewhere.

Why are you appealing to the most ridiculous theories, e.g. hologram planes?


View Postrambaldi, on 09 September 2011 - 11:52 AM, said:

- if, as the quotes say, people already expected WTC7 to come down, why would anyone who isn't frakking insane or dumb, prepare a demoliton in a FEW HOURS in an already UNSTABLE building?
There was no prior evidence the building was unstable; the “extraordinary” sequence of events NIST say caused failure only occurred in the moments before collapse.  The foreknowledge that WTC7 was going to come down originated very early in the day from anonymous individuals who warned off/influenced the firefighters and other responders on scene.  It was a cover to remove firsthand witnesses and potential casualties of the demolition.

Why do you assume the demolition was setup in only a few hours?


View Postrambaldi, on 09 September 2011 - 11:52 AM, said:

- why are truthers in sentences like "Fire has never caused any steel-framed high-rise building to collapse in any manner" totally ignoring the documented previous damage from the WTC1+2 debris?
Because NIST have confirmed the damage was superficial, i.e. had no bearing on the collapse which was induced entirely by plain old office fire… officially.

Why are you claiming the WTC1 debris damage, which affected other buildings too, had anything to do with it?

Operation Northwoods was a 1962 plan by the US Department of Defense to cause acts of violence, blamed on Cuba, in order to generate U.S. public support for military action against the Cuban government. The plan called for various false flag actions, such as staged terrorist attacks and plane hijackings, on U.S. and Cuban soil.

#14    Little Fish

Little Fish

    Government Agent

  • Member
  • 4,000 posts
  • Joined:23 Jul 2009
  • Gender:Not Selected

  • The default position is to give a ****

Posted 09 September 2011 - 03:31 PM

View PostQ24, on 09 September 2011 - 12:28 PM, said:

the extraordinary” sequence of events NIST say caused failure only occurred in the moments before collapse.  The foreknowledge that WTC7 was going to come down originated very early in the day from anonymous individuals who warned off/influenced the firefighters and other responders on scene.
hmmm...
this is a bit of an epiphany for me. I had never thought about this.

The official story and its beleivers tell us that "everyone was expecting the building to collapse", which contradicts the official explanation of collapse - that a beam fell off it's seat due to thermal expansion causing a rapid cascacde of failure - a series of events which occurred over a period of seconds.

The official technical explanation for collapse is inconsistent with the official foreknowledge explanations.


#15    Scott G

Scott G

    Psychic Spy

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,203 posts
  • Joined:16 Jul 2009
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Canada

Posted 10 September 2011 - 03:24 AM

View PostLittle Fish, on 09 September 2011 - 03:31 PM, said:

hmmm...
this is a bit of an epiphany for me. I had never thought about this.

The official story and its beleivers tell us that "everyone was expecting the building to collapse", which contradicts the official explanation of collapse - that a beam fell off it's seat due to thermal expansion causing a rapid cascacde of failure - a series of events which occurred over a period of seconds.

The official technical explanation for collapse is inconsistent with the official foreknowledge explanations.

My god, I think Q24 has actually persuaded you to doubt the official story on WTC 7, laugh :-)

Edited by Scott G, 10 September 2011 - 03:26 AM.





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users