Still Standing: The Building That Proves WTC 7 Was Imploded

Discussion in 'Politics & Religion' started by AMT4SWA, Feb 11, 2009.

  1. Still Standing: The Building That Proves WTC 7 Was Imploded

    Paul Joseph Watson
    Prison Planet.com
    Tuesday, February 10, 2009

    New videos of the Mandarin Oriental Hotel fire in Beijing highlight the vivid contrast between the damage it suffered as it was completely consumed by roaring flames, yet remained standing, and the comparative sporadic fires across just 8 floors that led to the complete free fall collapse of WTC 7.

    Article and Videos.............. http://www.infowars.com/still-standing-the-building-that-proves-wtc-7-was-imploded/
     
  2. Fire Consumes WTC 7-Size Skyscraper, Building Does Not Collapse

    Paul Joseph Watson
    Prison Planet.com
    Monday, February 9, 2009

    Giant flames engulf every floor of 44-story building and it remains standing, yet limited fires across just 8 floors of WTC 7 brought down building within 7 seconds on 9/11. How can NIST’s “new phenomenon” explain this one?

    Article and Videos.......... http://www.infowars.com/fire-consumes-wtc-7-size-skyscraper-building-does-not-collapse/
     
  3. Beijing skyscraper.

    [​IMG]

    [​IMG]


    WTC 7

    [​IMG]

    [​IMG]



    There is no way in hell, WTC 7 could collapse at the speed of gravity in a perfect, choreographed failure.

    Every girding, every steel beam and all the load-bearing steel columns - most of which WERN'T EVEN DAMAGED - just buckled at exactly the right moment to enable a perfect, foot print collapse of WTC 7?!!

    Talk about DELUSIONAL

    Even a structure that fails in one section, would bring parts or the whole structure down in a very chunky, staggered way, as the remaining structure is still intact, and capable of supporting itself. That means those intact structures would RESIST and HOLD UP those failed sections. That means a quiet, gravity-speed collapse into its own foot print IS IMPOSSIBLE>

    Just think about it. There's no Goddamed way one tiny failure - assuming there was even one! - could make every joint, joyce and column 400 ft AWAY in a totally different section gracefully fail in a seamless collapse.

    No way. The entire NIST report is tautological by its very nature.

    Engineering science has never seen this type of systemic collapse before to such scant damage in over-engineered buildings. So they fit facts around the theory, that the building must have collapsed from natural causes!!
     
  4. And the number one DIFFERENCE between the Beijing building fire and WTC 7 collapse............they WILL NOT FIND "NANO-THERMITE" is all the dust/rubble samples in Beijing!!! :eek:

    WTC 7......controlled DEMOLITION.......CASE CLOSED! :cool:
     
  5. [​IMG]