Last night I started thinking about the collapse of WTC 7, once again. Why? Perhaps the recent 5th anniversary of the WTC tragedy spurred my discontent. Perhaps it was a photo like this taken about two hours before the collapse:
http://www.mindfully.org/Reform/2006/WTC-Jones19mar0602.jpg
I never bought FEMA's inundation by fire explanation for the collapse of WTC 7. This building was a steel core structure. These types of buildings are built to withstand far more fire than WTC 7 experienced. Here are some pics of the fires:
http://thewebfairy.com/killtown/images/wtc7/wtc7_nypd2001.jpg
http://www.kolumbus.fi/av.caesar/wtc/wtc7_fire.jpg
I've personally witnessed demolitions of buildings similar to WTC 7. This one went down in exactly the same fashion. Is it an unfathomable leap to believe WTC 7 was brought down by a few hours of fire which did not inundate a majority of the structure? I think so. Here are some examples of how buildings come down, including WTC 7. This one came down like a Vegas Casino making way for something newer and more ostentatious. :
http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/wtc7.html
The new and improved 7 WTC was opened not long ago:
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/7/7a/Wtc7_jan06.jpg/450px-Wtc7_jan06.jpg
Check this building with the same design as WTC 7, standing after 2 days of fires, not just a few hours:
http://judicial-inc.biz/Madrid_skyscraper.htm
The infamous Popular Mechanics March 2005 article debunking any and all 9/11 conspiracy theorists (without naming a specific group) was a herculean swallowing feat. There were glaring omissions and slippery slope arguments. Read it here: http://www.popularmechanics.com/technology/military_law/1227842.html?page=1
The inevitable and expected backlash followed. I believe much of what's in the following article but by no means accept it's arguments wholeheartedly. See Jim Hoffman's 9/11 Truth rebuttal here:
http://911review.com/pm/markup/index.html
We've had many threads here reagarding 9/11 Conspiracy. My current thoughts are on this one piece of glaring evidence. No plane hit WTC 7. Steel core buildings can withstand monumental amounts of fire and heat. No building of this type has ever collapsed as a result of fire. Here's one more photo of the building at 3pm, just before the collapse. A picture is worth a thousand words:
http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/IMAGES/wtc7_3pm.jpg
http://www.mindfully.org/Reform/2006/WTC-Jones19mar0602.jpg
I never bought FEMA's inundation by fire explanation for the collapse of WTC 7. This building was a steel core structure. These types of buildings are built to withstand far more fire than WTC 7 experienced. Here are some pics of the fires:
http://thewebfairy.com/killtown/images/wtc7/wtc7_nypd2001.jpg
http://www.kolumbus.fi/av.caesar/wtc/wtc7_fire.jpg
I've personally witnessed demolitions of buildings similar to WTC 7. This one went down in exactly the same fashion. Is it an unfathomable leap to believe WTC 7 was brought down by a few hours of fire which did not inundate a majority of the structure? I think so. Here are some examples of how buildings come down, including WTC 7. This one came down like a Vegas Casino making way for something newer and more ostentatious. :
http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/wtc7.html
The new and improved 7 WTC was opened not long ago:
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/7/7a/Wtc7_jan06.jpg/450px-Wtc7_jan06.jpg
Check this building with the same design as WTC 7, standing after 2 days of fires, not just a few hours:
http://judicial-inc.biz/Madrid_skyscraper.htm
The infamous Popular Mechanics March 2005 article debunking any and all 9/11 conspiracy theorists (without naming a specific group) was a herculean swallowing feat. There were glaring omissions and slippery slope arguments. Read it here: http://www.popularmechanics.com/technology/military_law/1227842.html?page=1
The inevitable and expected backlash followed. I believe much of what's in the following article but by no means accept it's arguments wholeheartedly. See Jim Hoffman's 9/11 Truth rebuttal here:
http://911review.com/pm/markup/index.html
We've had many threads here reagarding 9/11 Conspiracy. My current thoughts are on this one piece of glaring evidence. No plane hit WTC 7. Steel core buildings can withstand monumental amounts of fire and heat. No building of this type has ever collapsed as a result of fire. Here's one more photo of the building at 3pm, just before the collapse. A picture is worth a thousand words:
http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/IMAGES/wtc7_3pm.jpg