Tower 7 Question

[kuro]

What do you guys think about this?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G86yuunRBIw&feature=related

After all the 911 videos I've seen, it's little things like this that make me think again; mainly because the arguments i see back are just defamatory. I do agree that the 911 truth movement could better direct its energy into broader activism, but I also think if 911 could be proved fake once and for all it would more easily lead into broader areas.

Also, I am aware of all the other things blatantly wrong/shifty with the event, just I think it's important for myself to have all bases covered before I make a total accusation.

Previously from zeitgeist etc I was under the presumption that it fell totally of it's own accord.

This videos being spread around, so I think it's important to confront it.

Cheers :)

[jvx19]

I think its absurd. Wake up.

[jvx19]

Listen to an expert. Steven Jones, physicist.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oEoKhyXKWxQ

[graflok]

The video makes a big assumption that the collapse began before any motion of
the building was visible: "The floors beneath the penthouse would have had to
collapse before the penthouse began its collapse."

But, that's not true if controlled demolition was used and the penthouse area
was targeted first. So, the argument is illogical.

[kuro]

thanks for the vid; been bombarded with anti 911 theories lately so good to get a dose of support again haha :) I'm convinced - I think its important to confront these videos when they come out though.

Also, are there any videos/speeches by demolition experts? from looking at the comments to the vid i'd like to see a response to

"physicists are not demolitions experts. demolitions experts (as well as nearly all other actual scientists) sharply disagree with jones. plus, jones makes multiple claims which can be shown rather simply to be untrue (such as the fact that there's no such thing as a "thermite shape charge", and that thermite is not and never has been a CD tool)."

[graflok]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HgoSOQ2xrbI

[majicdragon]

http://www.archive.org/details/bbc200109111654-1736

In this video, at 13:33, the BBC starts reporting on the collapse of Building 7. Jane Standley reports live from a camera pointing directly at Building 7. As Jane describes the collapse, you can clearly see Building 7 in the background... intact.

So is Jane Standley complicit in the attacks? Is BBC complicit in the attacks?
Are all the News networks complicit in the attacks?

[lightgiver]

WTC 7 blown to smithereens:D:D
Courtesy of the neo CONS bush administration:D
with all the evidence along with it ie trillions of $$$$$$$$$ missing and the rest of the secret bunkem in the demolition;)
EEE bbc ya messed that one up;):D
and have ya noticed on the daily nausea news,they are still saying 911 terrorists,who staged and planned the event SHEIK YA BOOTY, i think there names are, that they want to become martyrs,
they BBC are still in a time warp i think with most of the population..mi thinks.
Have none of them seen that bbc wtc 7 footage,or i they trying to hide the facts.
Hmm let me think??????
HA HA HA.....

AAAAHHHHHHH.........

THEY are not gonna get outta that one very easily.......
well it is nearly 8 yrs ago so there not doing a bad job of it are they,
so much for people power,
more like ostrich power....ha ha

[true]

it's only 5 minutes, make sure you get to the end!!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=58h0LjdMry0

I always share this one with skeptics when first discussing their shortsightedness. :D

[mr_self_destruct]

^ Good video!

[gribz]

What do you guys think about this?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G86yuunRBIw&feature=related

After all the 911 videos I've seen, it's little things like this that make me think again; mainly because the arguments i see back are just defamatory. I do agree that the 911 truth movement could better direct its energy into broader activism, but I also think if 911 could be proved fake once and for all it would more easily lead into broader areas.

Also, I am aware of all the other things blatantly wrong/shifty with the event, just I think it's important for myself to have all bases covered before I make a total accusation.

Previously from zeitgeist etc I was under the presumption that it fell totally of it's own accord.

This videos being spread around, so I think it's important to confront it.

Cheers :)

Your having a laugh!

3 points i want to make and im not even an expert.

1) The central penthouse is on the top floor of the building - every demolition expert has always stated you take the central section out of the building prior to the collapse to make sure it goes into its own footprint.

2) The narrator there states after the penthouse has gone that the floors below the penthouse have already gone - How on earth can he know this for a fact? There is no cameras or proof of that.

3) He starts counting once the penthouse was taken out - then continues the counting even though the main demolition has not commenced.

Laughable excuse!!

[forza nascosta]

it's only 5 minutes, make sure you get to the end!!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=58h0LjdMry0

I always share this one with skeptics when first discussing their shortsightedness. :D

Interesting video.

[hagbard_celine]

The video makes a big assumption that the collapse began before any motion of
the building was visible: "The floors beneath the penthouse would have had to
collapse before the penthouse began its collapse."

But, that's not true if controlled demolition was used and the penthouse area
was targeted first. So, the argument is illogical.

Are there any vids of B7 falling from a different angle, because all I can see is the east penthouse falling through the roof, not the start of a collapse at allo.

[jimmi]

Point 1 of Gribz post refers to what demolition people call 'crimping', and as stated the technique is used to ensure that the building falls into itself.

Thermite has many uses in industry, I have used it to melt the rails of railway tracks together, a form of welding. I have little knowledge of demolition but my experience with thermite tells me that it would be ideally suited to the purpose of rapidly burning through steel supporting columns as in the world trade centre.
As I understand it, the theory is that it was used in combination with explosives which then would produce a much more intense heat than an 'ordinary' explosion thus facilitating the necessary cutting of the steel frame needed to get the buildings to collapse into their own footprint.