these video clips are nothing less than smoking gun evidence of the absolute absurdity in the belief that wtc 7 collapsed due to fire-after seeing this how can anyone still accept the official story which includes this building being destroyed by fire?
*********************************************************
Nails in the Coffin of Trade Seven

Close-up of WTC-7 Collapse Footage Shows

Unmistakable Demolition Charges

http://st12.startlogic.com/~xenonpup/Flash...west_corner.htm

Dude! We all sat there that fateful morning and watched as the second Jet flew into the building. We saw it with our own eyes. Two planes full of fuel. Two buildings.
What is so hard to understand? The fire was so incredibly hot it melted the steel beams holding up the upper floors...when the upper floors then collapsed, it had a dominoe effect on the rest of the building. Please! You insult our intelligence!

ok "DUDE!" in case you missed it,or were not paying attention,wtc bldg 7 had no plane crash into it--it iwas a 47 story hi-rise which was not breached by any plane yet we are told it collpased due to fire-your the only one insulting your own intelligence

Sunofone - never heard of air presure then?

Building 7 collapsed for no reason,a small fire on the 10th floor wouldn't bring down the whole structure.

But apparantly this is perfectly normal.????and no demolition was involved,even though the owner admitted to it being pulled,(detonated)Hmmmm? The building must of been made out of chocolate for a such a small fire to bring it down.

Maybe it was,but thats another conspiracy entirely.

You forgot to include the part where President Bush channeled the spirit of Hitler through a Ouija board utilizing the black magic that only the highest tiers of AmeriKKKan government know about and thereby used his supernatural powers to bring the building down.

Please. If you're going to make us all stupider for having to read things like that, at least show some originality.

Yes... Those black blurs are definitly detonators! But.... they can only be seen by the camera! They're invisible to the naked eye! And you know what else? The people who placed them there must be invisible and could fly too, in order to place them there without anyone seeing them or the detonators!!!

Damn them reptilians!

You guys are giving Sunofone a hard time to the point of ridicule but in his defence and to the discredit of the rest of you...building 7 WAS "pulled". Meaning they had to take it down for safety reasons. This is on the web and you can view it from credible source. I may be wrong but I think Sun already posted it in another thread. Do your homework guys c'mon.

Quoting from site about some anomalies:


"Building 7
Building 7 imploded late on 9/11/01. It was not hit by an aircraft.
Building 7 experienced total collapse, allegedly because of fires, when no steel-frame building before or since has ever collapsed, totally or even partially, due to fires. Building 7 was an over-engineered 47-story steel-frame skyscraper, standing over 350 feet from the nearest of the Twin Towers. Only small fires burned in it on September 11th.
Building 7 collapsed in a nearly perfectly vertical fall, leaving the buildings only 60 feet on either side virtually unscathed.
Building 7 collapsed into a remarkably small rubble pile of mostly pulverized remains, when no steel building falling for any reason has ever pulverized itself.
Building 7 contained a 23-million-dollar emergency command center, but instead of using it for its ostensible purpose, then-Mayor Giuliani evacuated his team to a makeshift command center as soon as the September 11th attack started.
The emergency command center was pulverized along with the rest of the building, even though it was constructed as a bomb-hardened shelter.
The remains of Building 7 were rapidly removed and the steel recycled, evidently without any on-site and only extremely limited off-site examination. The rapid disposal operation proceeded despite the fact that no one was believed buried in the rubble, and the tidy rubble pile was not blocking adjacent roads. "

Hey, I never said that the building wasn't pulled. Those looked like very obvious detonating charges in that photo. The implication was, however, that 9/11 was a U.S. government conspiracy. And this would not by any stretch of the imagination be Sunofone's first suggestion toward that end. From what I've seen of his, he tends to believe that if it is an event that occurs, regardless of what it is, it's part of an evil American government conspiracy. As far as conspiracy theorists go, he's excessive...he doesn't even do it in moderation, which would lend some credibility to his arguments. It's really every damn thing...

air pressure? Oh come now. That sounds like something Ari Fleischer would have us believe.LOL....P aaleeeze!

dont laugh spycat this is actually the most civil response from a skeptic although lacking in common sense

I never understand why someone takes the most outlandish theory over the most logical one.

To the naysayers about conspiracies I would say that you are too old by now not to have seen or heard of at least one big one by now in your life. Take one conspiracy for example...any one...get FOIA docs, read both sides reaction...see who profits. Most conspiracies involving war or murder are over money and power, not ideology. Very few conspiracies involve small time folks. It also helps to be objective, not reading into left or right but look at all evidence presented from more than just one source. Also...the best conspiracy to start is with is an older one because there will be greater factual information out by now as opposed to starting with something new like 9-11. If you all understood the machinations of WW1 and WW2 things would be clearer to you all. Key World Banks and Ammunition manufacturers were involved. Most were from the US. Yes they were penalized but the information was never made public at the time. Learn about the same key families in power now and how far back they go being involved with war for profit. I am trying to say that nothing has changed today except that a young generation has to learn what the old generation already knows about these people.
The MO never changes and there is an endless supply of money thrown at keeping these things secret. Remember the Genocide in Cambodia? No one was reporting it but it happened right? The greatest conspiracy is how powerful people are shaping our future behind closed doors through black-ops and weakening the elected governments of all nations. Small conspiracies concern the way its being done here and there. Like assassinations in various places for political purposes.

When people read the conspiracy theories (I am an avid reader myself), do they also stay on top of the 'official' story as well? It makes me ponder because building 7 was demolished and they admitted that from day one. I can't remember why but I think it was for safety purposes...and it was evacuated as well so there were no casualties. There's no conspiracy with building 7...the only prrof you have here is that they told the truth LOL

correction: silverstein was quoted from day one as using the term "pull"-the official story is that it collapsed due to fire alone-some try to imply that he was referring to the evacuation of the bldg but they are ignoring the context he used that day-
here is audio of silverstein himself from that day and notice how he uses the term pull then "connects" it to the phrase"we watched it come down" with "and"
silverstein audio

bldg 7 collapsed at 5:20pm that day due to fire -here is a photo of the fires just 2hr prior to its structural failure from heat-

from the audio it sounds exactly like he's referring to the evacuation of the fire crews. The connection "and we watched it come down", makes sense, as in, wow we made the right decision to get them out of there, it came down not long after.

so your trying to convince me that the fire in photos is enough to rationally conclude the imminent structural failure of the bldg? you honestly believe that bldg7 in the picture i posted collapsed 2 hrs later due to the structural failure of the steel and concrete from the heat?here it is again-2hr and 20min before it collpsed-

so tell me, what qualifications in engineering, demolitions etc do you have?

where are the hundreds of actual experts claiming conspiracy? beyond various misquotes you've been proven to have posted before.

I was referring solely to the comments in the audio, and providing an alternate to your claims regarding them.

I dont get it,did the government say it fell due to fire damage?
Or admit to using bombs to bring it down for safety reasons.(but doesnt this take days/weeks of planning and preparation to set it all up?and to do so in the middle of terrorist attack? and wasnt there shady repairs carried out on alot of floors a few weeks before:huh:and have bullet/bomb proof glass on only office facing the twin towers. ? )
I dunno,maybe I look at too many strange websites?

Hey MK, I did hear about some strange things some people posted about the Towers and floor maintenance and also a meeting in WTC before 9-1 where things were being discussed like some sort of military exercise, but the guy who was at this meeting wasn't supposed to be there, he was there under a miscommunication and the others thought he was sent there. Anyway, do you have the links for those things you mentioned? I like to check out all avenues.

Bathory, it seems to me that a building of this type will not fall because of fire. They are made to withstand fires. You don't have to be an expert for these things, it is common sense stuff. You see, normal fires do not burn hot enough to melt steel. Since building 7 wasn't hit by anything there is no reason for the fires in the first place, but even if the fires were legitemate, don't you think it is odd that Silverstien was talking about "pulling" the building. What does pulling mean to you? To me it means making the building come down with demolitions. Geez, even with evidence of foul play you still refuse to dig deeper. Ask yourself...how did fires start in the basement of WTC7 that day. Does it make sense?

the official govt theory is that it came down due to the heat weakening the support beams-silverstein commenting that day on the collapse is a completely unrelated event and has been used,by those believing silvestein demolished wtc1,2,6 and 7 that day with cia assistance acting on behalf of the mic,to make him look bad considering the pictures and video that has been disected and exposed since then-

Surely the sprinklers would of put out most of the fires in building 7.

So Silverstein saying it was pulled is nothing to do with the building fall down?
I still dont get it but I doubt that it would fall due to small fires.
And whats the point of a single office with bomb proof glass that faced the towers,(maybe a look out station for the mysterious Mr X watching his devious plan unravel,or maybe the remote to help guide the planes? Then all thats left is to destroy the evidence?)
Who knows?.... maybe the building was made out of cheese,but thats another website!

Sunofone & dmgspycat - The reason i mention air pressure is that the force of a collapsing building (and in the short film you linked to at the beginning of the thread, the building appears to be collapsing) the force of air will blow out at the weakest points - arguably the windows, though as i have no access to the schematics of the building i can't possibly say with 100% certainty, i'm just applying common sense.

From that footage i would say there is no conclusive evidence that it was blown up using squibs.

As for the photos showing fire, if you look carefully it appears that the whole inside of the building is alight. All it takes is there to be a central set of stairwells and lifts for a fire to take hold throughout a large building without it being evident visibly from the outside. It really depends on open doors, and ventilation and access ways throughout the building. those pictures really don't give us enough information to make such a judgement i'm afraid.

Steel loses half its strenght at 1100F, it doesn't need to be melted, it just needs to be weakened enough to cause it to collapse. Parts of the WTC fire were reported to get as high as 1832F - this however wasn't at the building we are talking about but just as a point of reference. Likewise for reference standard house (or even room fires) can reach 1200F

The 9/11 conspiracy is one that just thinking of gives me a headache. Theres just TOO MUCH. Far too many layers of filth to unravel. I personally think this building was destroyed because of documents, to eliminate the paper trail. The files stored in the tons of computers. Who knows? Maybe some of you do?

Off topic, but good quote in your user info Mr Blonde

I leave you guys for a couple of weeks and you go all crazy on me.

So what is the white "smoke"? Most likely it's concrete dust. Overstressed steel has a lot of energy stored it in. When it "snaps" it's loud -- like an explosion -- and will quite happily pulverize any concrete in the vicinity. Dust is often mistaken for smoke. Just because some Fox News reporter says he saw another "explosion" doesn't make his interpretation correct.

It appears that most conspiracy theorists obsess over "anomalies". Nine times out of ten these "anomalies" are merely something the amateur investigator has misunderstood, either because he's not a very competent or experienced investigator, or because there is expertise that needs applying, which hasn't been applied.

Either every single structural engineer and demolitions expert who has studied the building and is satisfied that there is nothing suspicious about their failure is in on the plot or stupid, or the evidence when looked at by people qualified to look at them is consistent with the official story.

Which one is it?

Oh really? Just like the molten pools of steel in the basements of these WTC buildings? Does that make sense to you? So far underground with little oxygen to get to them. Hmmmm. How does that happen Twinstead? I am sure that there is a perfectly plausible explanation for that in your Fuzzy Physics book. Molten! Key word here...molten...not hot or broken or fallen over...but molten pools of steel. Sounds like demolitions to me. If you have some explanation for that other than demolitions then we had all better rewrite our physics books. You people wake up.

A link or a reference to this molten steel would help your case dmgspycat

No problem Stu...gimmie a lil' time.

dmgspycat, you didn't answer my question. Professional metallurgists almost to a man have no problem reconciling the collapse of the WTC buildings. What qualifies YOU, and what exactly are your arguments, that contradict these professionals?

The idea that some of the world's largest, busiest skyscrapers could be prepared for demolition without anyone noticing is not credible. It's no more likely than someone who was part of the conspiracy to do so would be sitting in a public place "pushing detonator buttons". What is quite believable is that someone could hear explosion noises in a building heavily involved and beginning to collapse. One would kind of expect that, in fact.

One thing that took people by surprise is how fast the buildings collapsed. That's part of our expectation fed by slo-mo Hollywood shots. In truth, pancake collapses are pretty darn fast, according to friends of mine who are collapse rescue experts and thus actually know something about structural failures.

Although melting steel was NOT the cause of the collapse (any structural engineer will tell you steel does not have to melt to fail) An ideal mixture of aviation fuel and air, i.e. one in which there is just enough oxygen present to oxidize all the fuel, can indeed reach temperatures hot enough to melt steel. I once calculated that fire temperatures in excess of 1,800 degrees C are possible. I have found varying figures for the melting point of steel, but it seems to be around 1,400 degrees C.

What I see here are theories which go right from "anomalous" to wild tales of missiles and controlled demolitions, ignoring the vast gulf between them. All investigations will have unanswered questions and anomalies. That doesn't mean they cannot reach defensible conclusions about cause and effect.

Real experts know why the WTC structures failed, and they know what was applied to them to make them fail.

The issue here is alternate explanations. You demand we look to alternate explanations of the collapse, yet you stubbornly refuse to accept something that experts agree on.

Purple Stuart, here is a article about the molten steel from American Free Press, also it appears to have been seen by others too.



********************************************************************
Here is a report on the WTC tower collapses from Christopher Bollyn of American Free Press. The article appears to be well documented, although I have not seen any independent confirmation or mainstream media reports. Caveat lecteur.
www.americanfreepress.net/09_03_02/NEW_SEISMIC_/new_seismic_.html
New Seismic Data Refutes Official WTC Explanation
Two unexplained "spikes" in the seismic record from Sept. 11 indicate huge bursts of energy shook the ground beneath the World Trade Center's twin towers immediately prior to the collapse.
American Free Press has learned of pools of "molten steel" found at the base of the collapsed twin towers weeks after the collapse. Although the energy source for these incredibly hot areas has yet to be explained, New York seismometers recorded huge bursts of energy, which caused unexplained seismic "spikes" at the beginning of each collapse.
These spikes suggest that massive underground explosions may have literally knocked the towers off their foundations, causing them to collapse.
In the basements of the collapsed towers, where the 47 central support columns connected with the bedrock, hot spots of "literally molten steel" were discovered more than a month after the collapse. Such persistent and intense residual heat, 70 feet below the surface, in an oxygen starved environment, could explain how these crucial structural supports failed.

********************************************************************


Evidence of explosives in the World Trade Centers:
Investigative journalist Christopher Bollyn has written one of the best expositions on the ample evidence that there were explosives wired into the building prior to the attack. He writes, “In the basements of the collapsed towers, where the 47 central support columns connected with the bedrock, hot spots of ‘literally molten steel’ were discovered more than a month after the collapse. Such persistent and intense residual heat, 70 feet below the surface, in an oxygen starved environment, could explain how these crucial structural supports failed. Peter Tully, president of Tully Construction of Flushing, N.Y., told AFP that he saw pools of ‘literally molten steel’ at the World Trade Center.

“Tully was contracted after the Sept. 11 tragedy to remove the debris from the site. Tully called Mark Loizeaux, president of Controlled Demolition, Inc. (CDI) of Phoenix, Md., for consultation about removing the debris. CDI calls itself ‘the innovator and global leader in the controlled demolition and implosion of structures.’ Loizeaux, who cleaned up the bombed Alfred P. Murrah Federal Building in Oklahoma City, arrived at the WTC site two days later and wrote the clean up plan for the entire operation. AFP asked Loizeaux about the report of molten steel on the site. ‘Yes,’ he said, ‘hot spots of molten steel in the basements.’ These incredibly hot areas were found ‘at the bottoms of the elevator shafts of the main towers, down seven [basement] levels,’ Loizeaux said. The molten steel was found ‘three, four, and five weeks later, when the rubble was being removed,’ Loizeaux said. He said molten steel was also found at 7 WTC, which collapsed mysteriously in the late afternoon.

“Construction steel has an extremely high melting point of about 2,800 degrees Fahrenheit. Asked what could have caused such extreme heat, Tully said, ‘Think of the jet fuel.’ Loizeaux told AFP that the steel-melting fires were fueled by ‘paper, carpet and other combustibles packed down the elevator shafts by the tower floors as they pancaked into the basement.’ However, some independent investigators dispute this claim, saying kerosene-based jet fuel, paper, or the other combustibles normally found in the towers, cannot generate the heat required to melt steel, especially in an oxygen-poor environment like a deep basement.

“Eric Hufschmid, author of a book about the WTC collapse, Painful Questions, told AFP that due to the lack of oxygen, paper and other combustibles packed down at the bottom of elevator shafts would probably be ‘a smoky smoldering pile.’ Experts disagree that jet-fuel or paper could generate such heat. This is impossible, they say, because the maximum temperature that can be reached by hydrocarbons like jet fuel burning in air is 1,520 degrees F. Because the WTC fires were fuel rich, as evidenced by the thick black smoke, it is argued that they did not reach this upper limit. The hottest spots at the surface of the rubble, where abundant oxygen was available, were much cooler than the molten steel found in the basements.” [End of Bollyn quote.]

Canadian Investigator Will Thomas has written an excellent work entitled, All Fall Down. In it he documents, “An eyewitness 6 blocks from the WTC heard explosions prior to each collapse. A fireman’s transcription of the New York Times 9/11 firefighters’ audio tape reveals an explosion prior to the collapse of WTC 2 was reported. A video shows an object falling from WTC 1 followed by a camera shake. 14 seconds later WTC 1 collapses.”
Thomas, Bollyn and others believe that the only explanation that explains the collapse of the Twin Towers without the use of complicated timed explosives placed throughout the building (requiring extensive pre-wiring) is the use of thermite charges in the basement, filling the cavity of the core section of 4 inch thick pillars holding up the towers. Here’s Bollyn again: “Thermite is very exothermic. Temperatures above 4,500°F (2,500°C) are often reached. A byproduct of a thermite detonation in the WTC basements would be molten steel. The service core [of central pillars] of WTC 2 initially survived the collapse, but after a few seconds it also came to ground. This is consistent with molten iron from a thermite reaction pooling around the core columns, thus causing the collapse. ‘If I were to bring the towers down, I would put explosives in the basement to get the weight of the building to help collapse the structure,’ [says] Mark Loizeaux, president of Controlled Demolition, Inc.”
However, contrary to Bollyn, I disagree that the seismic evidence shows powerful explosives prior to the collapse. I have looked at the charts and fail to see what he claims. Yes, there were plenty of eye and ear witnesses to prior explosions, but they most likely were not large enough to register on the seismic charts as a significant quake. This also points to the use of thermite. Thermite doesn’t explode rapidly like C-4 or other demolition explosives. The mixture of aluminum powder and iron oxide burns only moderately fast, giving off heat well in excess of that required to melt steel. What’s more, it creates its own oxygen supply by consuming the iron oxide and thus is the only thing that can account for the huge heat being generated for days in the aftermath of the fall of both towers.
********************************************************************

The problem Twinstead is that you throw out credible evidence found by engineers and professionals and people that were there who saw these things because they don't agree with the official White House response. The proffesionals are divided too. I am just reflecting what is out there already. Im not making it up . Please do your own homework...don't take my word for it...but you shouldn't take the White Houses word either. When things don't add up it is because there is a lie involved and if someone IS lying then you have to begin to ask tough questions as to why? Someone had this whole 9-11 thing figured out the same day? That is UNBELIEVABLE in itself. Just like the authorities already had Oswald as the killer of JFK...within hours...because it was already PLANNED that way. Think what you want but I feel I know enough about Bush family politics and dirty deeds to not put it past those in power to do this or allow it so they could benefit from the policy changes later. You have to be objective about it so take off your political blinders.

With all due respect sir, ideological blindness works both ways. Conjecture and distrust of a government do not facts make. It really boils down to scientific evidence, and qualifications to question them.

To be honest, I think your statement that professionals are divided too has a touch of hyperbole to it. I would submit that the vast majority of professional structural engineers, demolitions experts, avionics experts, and metallurgists see very little if any inconsistency. Unless we can come to an agreement on the percentage of qualified people who are willing not only to contradict other expert's interpretation of the events, including the giant leap that is required to go from an anomaly to conspiracy theory, I fear that suggesting many qualified professionals dispute the official story is a bit disingenuous.

[Edited for spelling and to make it at least half make sense]

You can twist it any way you want it ...fact is twinstead not one official has dealt with the "molten" pools of steel story ...if anthing the "officials" have avoided it. Of course the news will portray experts that agree with the administration...duuu. You see any investigative news lately?> Please...let me know where. SO explain it for me? How did they get there then? What do your "experts" say? Thats whatb I thought. Since nobody wants to touch the subject maybe the "experts" think it will go away. About the demolitions you were talking about earlier...who the hell said demolitions have to explode? For example...do you know anything about "thermite". It does not explode but hot enough to cut through steel like butter. Just as an example.

Thank you i will read when i have a spare moment.

the link for the above source as well?

Someone would have to bennifit from it.
Nationwide Ins had the towers Insured and when they went down,
needless to say they had to pay out a big claim becuase terrorisum
wasnt coverd in the policy exclutions. after 2001 insurance companys are not held responsible to pay for a claim if the damage was caused by terrorisum. How do i know this, i work in Ins.

Yeah...here it is:http://www.americanfreepress.net/09_03_02/...w_seismic_.html[URL=http://www.americanfreepress.net/09_03_02/NEW_SEISMIC_/new_seismic_.html]

Yeh but if they point the finger to one of those masny countries they owe money to, then they can take their resources and clear the dept and move on to the next country that they owe mo.....wait a minute........didn't that already happen?

Ok so let me get this straight. No building before, or after has ever collapsed the same was as #7? Ok, so what? Many things were unbelievable until they happened for the first time. How can we know for sure that this building wasn't as it was supposed to be. Perhaps it did come down because of fire, due to an error in the design or the construction. Mistakes do happen. Just because they have never happened before, doesn't make them a conspiracy. Lets say you were the first person to travel to Mars and land there. People would automatically began yelling that something isn't right. It was done in some guys building here. I mean come on, I like to believe there's more to some things than we know about. But this one, just doesn't seem that way. Maybe I'm worng, I've been wrong before. But maybe I'm right. But then again how will we ever know? We won't because despite what physical evidence there is, the whacked conspiracy theorists are going to continue to believe everything they here.

Now if you will, lets get back to reality.

"Whacked" is the right word.

Let me get this straight about this demolition theory:

So, for several months, many people walked in and out of all the WTC buildings, bringing in explosives and heavy drills. They exposed all the supports for the buildings, laid miles of wires, then planted these explosives in key columns. And nobody noticed.

Workers who would have had to set up the charges (and not anybody can do this kind of work; you don't just make a call and ask the CIA to gather up some spare clerks to set demolition charges) even if they didn't know why they were doing it at the time, on 9-11 any idiot would put 2 and 2 together. SOMEBODY would grow a conscience. Why nothing? Where's the whistle blowers?

I'm not one to blindly accept the official story of things, but a little investigation and talking to competent experts in engineering, metallurgy, avionics, and demolitions goes a long way. I'm not an expert, so I will never say (unlike the OP) that I am right. I have given the subject enough attention and investigation to come to my own unbiased opinion about it (by the way I am not a republican, nor did I vote for GWB; ideology plays NO part in this for me)

Gentlemen something is fishy about this demolition theory. Something is fishy about this whole 911 conspiracy theory. I question the legitimacy of ignoring the majority of witnesses, expert analysis of the building failures, and the science and physics involved, simply because if you are opposed to a government ideologically, everything they do is suspect.

That's bad investigation.

That is the crux of the matter. Dissatifised people that want to think the American governement is a evil machine. Hell, some of the conpiracy nuts think Bush is the anit-christ. Literally. Some aspects of the government need alot of work, but come on.

well all the whisle blowers have the john oneil story to deal with-(former fbi director of 31yrs who resigned because of pres order w199I-which threatened him with arrest if he didnt stop investigating al-CIAduh,who was killed on 9/11 for it his first day at his new job as wtc security supervisor[courtesy of marvin bush in charge of wtc security]))
************************
you have blindly accepted the official lie about this bldg collapsing due to fire-did this picture have any affect on your decision or are you just accepting what your being told?

its smoking gun evidence! what is wrong with you? 2hrs 20min before structural failure!HA LOL- you will never see anything other than what the govt wants you to see-

Again, it seems Sunofone, in his infinite wisdom, has enlightened us all and opened our eyes to the true evil in the world. Good to know there's SOMEONE in the world who knows everything about everything and isn't afraid to tell the truth, since everyone else is so naive and/or stupid that they can't see it.

Sunofone, your real name wouldn't happen to be Michael Moore, would it?

From the chruch lady on SNL," Is your name sataaannn!"lol

thats awesome.

dedicated to twin,eric,drip and all the other shades of death i see

......
......

......



Slayer
Skeletons Of Society

Minutes seem like days
Since fire ruled the sky
The rich became the beggars
And the fools became the wise
Memories linger in my brain
Of burning from the acid rain
A pain I never have won

Nothing here remains
No future and no past
No one could foresee
The end that came so fast
Hear the prophet make his guess
That paradise lies to the west
So join his quest for the sun

Shades of death are all I see
Fragments of what used to be

The world slowly decays
Destruction fills my eyes
Harboring the image
Of a spiraling demise
Burning winds release their fury
Simulating judge and jury
Drfiting flurries of pain

Deafening silence reigns
As twilight fills the sky
Eventual supremacy
Daylight waits to die
Darkness always calls my name
A pawn in this recurring game
Humanity going insane

Shades of death are all I see
Fragments of what used to be

Minutes seem like days
Corrosion fills the sky
Morbid dreams of anarchy
Brought judgment in disguise
Memories linger in my brain
Life with nothing more to gain
Perpetual madness remains

Shades of death are all I see
Fragments of what used to be
Skeletons of society

It makes me feel all warm inside. Thanks.