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.


* * * - - 2 votes

WTC7


  • Please log in to reply
1999 replies to this topic

#16    quillius

quillius

    52.0839° N, 1.4328° E

  • Member
  • 5,421 posts
  • Joined:04 Aug 2010
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:LONDON

  • A man should look for what is, and not for what he thinks should be.
    Albert Einstein

Posted 18 January 2012 - 04:19 PM

View PostQ24, on 18 January 2012 - 04:11 PM, said:

Ah I see what you mean.  It would seem the FDNY were not attempting to fight the fire at that point because they had been spooked by the OEM staff member who led them to believe the building was a “lost cause” even at the early time of 11:30am.  Hayden was observing the WTC7 deciding what to do… when enter our unnamed engineer.


:tu: although I would argue that the FDNY seemingly not attempting to fight the fire at the time is not necessarily true. The wording used 'IF we allowed it to burn' this indicates an action yet to be taken, so I think its reasonable to say they were actually fighting the fire at the time.


#17    skyeagle409

skyeagle409

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 32,470 posts
  • Joined:14 Apr 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:California

  • Keep Your Mach Up and Check Six

Posted 18 January 2012 - 04:29 PM

View PostQ24, on 18 January 2012 - 04:11 PM, said:

Fantastic, sky.

Now go to the opening post of the thread which contains that quote and try to follow the discussion through.

Perhaps even add something constructive.

How about destructive? It was clear that the building was coming down. On another note, why would the government blow up a building to destroy computers and file cabinets? The government doesn't keep all of its eggs in one basket.

KEEP YOUR MACH UP AND CHECK SIX

#18    Babe Ruth

Babe Ruth

    Non-Corporeal Being

  • Closed
  • 8,732 posts
  • Joined:23 Dec 2011
  • Gender:Not Selected
  • Location:27North 80West

Posted 18 January 2012 - 10:00 PM

Sky

I'm judging from your post above that you are unaware of the various federal offices inside WTC7.

Several federal agencies, including the SEC, had offices there.  The records regarding the Enron investigation were there, among other things.

Rudy's notorious NYC Emergency Command Center was also there.

So, between WTC7 and the Pentagon, extensive records regarding federal crimes were--ooops--lost.

More circumstantial evidence....  :ph34r:


#19    skyeagle409

skyeagle409

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 32,470 posts
  • Joined:14 Apr 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:California

  • Keep Your Mach Up and Check Six

Posted 18 January 2012 - 10:06 PM

View PostBabe Ruth, on 18 January 2012 - 10:00 PM, said:

Sky

I'm judging from your post above that you are unaware of the various federal offices inside WTC7.

I fail to see what difference that makes.

Quote

Several federal agencies, including the SEC, had offices there.  The records regarding the Enron investigation were there, among other things.

Rudy's notorious NYC Emergency Command Center was also there.

So, between WTC7 and the Pentagon, extensive records regarding federal crimes were--ooops--lost.

Did you really think that the WTC 7 building was the only place where government and other records are stored? There were no detonation cords nor blasting caps recovered at the WTC 7 site nor was there evidence that explosives were used.

Edited by skyeagle409, 18 January 2012 - 10:49 PM.

KEEP YOUR MACH UP AND CHECK SIX

#20    Babe Ruth

Babe Ruth

    Non-Corporeal Being

  • Closed
  • 8,732 posts
  • Joined:23 Dec 2011
  • Gender:Not Selected
  • Location:27North 80West

Posted 18 January 2012 - 10:10 PM

No Sky, I did NOT really think that.

Do you think there were NO records kept there?


#21    skyeagle409

skyeagle409

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 32,470 posts
  • Joined:14 Apr 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:California

  • Keep Your Mach Up and Check Six

Posted 18 January 2012 - 10:21 PM

View PostBabe Ruth, on 18 January 2012 - 10:10 PM, said:

No Sky, I did NOT really think that. Do you think there were NO records kept there?


Even if records were stored there, that is no reason to blow up a building because the government doesn't keep records in one place and you can expect records to be shared, copied, and stored by government employees in locations around the country.

Sharing, copying, and storing information around the country is nothing new and anyone who has used a government computer system should know that whenever they use a government computer, they can expect to be monitored. In other words, blowing up a building is no guarantee that evidence will be destroyed and as we have seen at the other crash sites, passports and other personal effects can, and do, survive.

Posted Image

Posted Image

Posted Image
Posted Image
Posted Image

Edited by skyeagle409, 18 January 2012 - 11:10 PM.

KEEP YOUR MACH UP AND CHECK SIX

#22    FurthurBB

FurthurBB

    Government Agent

  • Member
  • 3,390 posts
  • Joined:21 May 2008

Posted 19 January 2012 - 12:24 AM

View Postskyeagle409, on 18 January 2012 - 04:29 PM, said:

How about destructive? It was clear that the building was coming down. On another note, why would the government blow up a building to destroy computers and file cabinets? The government doesn't keep all of its eggs in one basket.


I really like the molten aluminum theory.  It would explain just about everything odd if it were true.  http://www.calgaryhe...6122/story.html The problem is we can never really know and that was the biggest 9/11 mistake in my mind.  A better locational investigation would have put a lot of these conspiracies to rest.  They didn't take enough time or do enough forensics.  They moved so quick the FAA was complaining that they could in no way finish their investigation.  To me it looks like they were sure it was the planes and were not really interested in the how.  To others it looks like a cover-up and leaves the door open for speculation.


#23    skyeagle409

skyeagle409

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 32,470 posts
  • Joined:14 Apr 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:California

  • Keep Your Mach Up and Check Six

Posted 19 January 2012 - 05:56 AM

View PostFurthurBB, on 19 January 2012 - 12:24 AM, said:

I really like the molten aluminum theory.  It would explain just about everything odd if it were true.  http://www.calgaryhe...6122/story.html The problem is we can never really know and that was the biggest 9/11 mistake in my mind.  A better locational investigation would have put a lot of these conspiracies to rest.  They didn't take enough time or do enough forensics.  They moved so quick the FAA was complaining that they could in no way finish their investigation.  To me it looks like they were sure it was the planes and were not really interested in the how.  To others it looks like a cover-up and leaves the door open for speculation.


I heard that! The B-767 is made up of tens of thousands of pounds of aluminum and the fire was hot enough to melt that much aluminum.

KEEP YOUR MACH UP AND CHECK SIX

#24    aquatus1

aquatus1

    Forum Divinity

  • 20,786 posts
  • Joined:05 Mar 2004
  • Gender:Not Selected

Posted 19 January 2012 - 06:07 AM

To say nothing of how much sheet aluminum is in the average office.  Holy cow, pretty much the entire place is made of it!


#25    Babe Ruth

Babe Ruth

    Non-Corporeal Being

  • Closed
  • 8,732 posts
  • Joined:23 Dec 2011
  • Gender:Not Selected
  • Location:27North 80West

Posted 19 January 2012 - 06:57 PM

The most interesting facet of the WTC7 thing--the way the TV girl announced that it had already happened while it was still standing in the background of her picture--is that it demonstrates very clearly why the "mainstream media" has such a lousy reputation today.

In this case it demonstrates that the media prints and sayw whatever it is told by government authorities.  No fact-checking, no skepticism, no nothing but rote repetition.  The media is spoonfed by the authorities, and half the population believes whatever the media tells it.

More circumstantial evidence as to the complicity of the media in the coverup and the periphery of the crime.  More evidence that the official story is untenable.


#26    RaptorBites

RaptorBites

    Poltergeist

  • Member
  • 2,208 posts
  • Joined:12 Jan 2012

Posted 19 January 2012 - 07:32 PM

Quote

I think that WTC 1 + 2 were probably brought down by a Directed Energy Weapon....so that they would fall

into their own footprint and that the damage to the surrounding area would be as minimal as possible.


Direct Energy Weapons?

What is this...i dont even.....

So not only do we have:

1. Missles that were made to look like planes.
2. Thermite
3. Squibs
4. Controlled demolition

Now we have Directed Energy Weapons.

What next? This was all planned by the New World Order who gave the order to the Annunaki who used their telepathic powers to mind control people to beleive that terrorists did all this.

*takes a deep breath*
....
...
..
*hysterical laughing*
..
...
....
Ok that was just....wow.

Im sure that DEW, although has its military uses, could not possible create enough heat to melt or assist in bringing down the towers that day.  The range of those weapons aren't made for long distance which would mean that many people would have actually seen those weapons and would have already said something.

Nice try.

Edited by RaptorBites, 19 January 2012 - 07:41 PM.

No, you surround yourself with a whole different kettle of crazy. - Sir Wearer of Hats

#27    Babe Ruth

Babe Ruth

    Non-Corporeal Being

  • Closed
  • 8,732 posts
  • Joined:23 Dec 2011
  • Gender:Not Selected
  • Location:27North 80West

Posted 19 January 2012 - 07:56 PM

And how would you be sure of that Raptor?  Have you training or expertise in DEW?

I do not, but have read articles claiming the military has been developing such weapons for quite a few years now.

Though according to last week's Aviation Week & Space Technology says that the Airborne Laser (modified Boeing 747) has now been halted and is being disassembled and stored for the future, technically it falls into the DEW category.


#28    bee

bee

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 11,276 posts
  • Joined:24 Jan 2007
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:England

Posted 19 January 2012 - 08:08 PM

View PostRaptorBites, on 19 January 2012 - 07:32 PM, said:


So not only do we have:

1. Missles that were made to look like planes.
2. Thermite
3. Squibs
4. Controlled demolition

Now we have Directed Energy Weapons.


thankyou for adding DEWs to the list.... :)

Although you might not realise that I don't think 9/11 was an Inside Job.

And I think that everything after the second tower was hit...was intended as damage limitation.

So my ideas about 'the day' involve cover up for political purposes. But not forward planning.


.


#29    frenat

frenat

    Poltergeist

  • Member
  • 3,104 posts
  • Joined:22 Jun 2005
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Fort Wayne, IN

Posted 19 January 2012 - 08:58 PM

View PostBabe Ruth, on 19 January 2012 - 07:56 PM, said:

And how would you be sure of that Raptor?  Have you training or expertise in DEW?

I do not, but have read articles claiming the military has been developing such weapons for quite a few years now.

Though according to last week's Aviation Week & Space Technology says that the Airborne Laser (modified Boeing 747) has now been halted and is being disassembled and stored for the future, technically it falls into the DEW category.
TECHNICALLY it does, but it was only a 1 megawatt class laser and it still needed an entire 747 to power it.  A megawatt laser won't bring down a building.  It wouldn't even melt the small missles it was designed to bring down.  It was only designed to heat them assymetrically so that air turbulence would cause them to break up.

-Reality is not determined by your lack of comprehension.
-Never let facts stand in the way of a good conspiracy theory.
-If I wanted to pay for commercials I couldn't skip I'd sign up for Hulu Plus.
-There are no bad ideas, just great ideas that go horribly wrong.
If you have to insist that you've won an Internet argument, you've probably lost badly. - Danth's Law

#30    RaptorBites

RaptorBites

    Poltergeist

  • Member
  • 2,208 posts
  • Joined:12 Jan 2012

Posted 19 January 2012 - 09:45 PM

View PostBabe Ruth, on 19 January 2012 - 07:56 PM, said:

And how would you be sure of that Raptor?  Have you training or expertise in DEW?

I do not, but have read articles claiming the military has been developing such weapons for quite a few years now.

Though according to last week's Aviation Week & Space Technology says that the Airborne Laser (modified Boeing 747) has now been halted and is being disassembled and stored for the future, technically it falls into the DEW category.

No I do not have training in DEWs. The fact remains that nobody in the vicinity of the collapse even mentioned those weapons in the vicinity, so the point of even mentioning that DEWs were involved is moot and very bad at best.

Unless of course, you can provide evidence.

No, you surround yourself with a whole different kettle of crazy. - Sir Wearer of Hats




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users