nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

To those who believe WTC 7 didn't fall due to fire, how did it fall?

Dohnjoe

Straightforward enough, explain what alternatively caused the building to collapse with normal evidence, sources and information (not infowars, conspiracy sites and random blog stuff please)

Since I have a long history with this whole 911 thing, it's highly likely that individuals may attempt to divert or deflect back to attacking the NIST or details - many other threads cover that, this is a thread about alternative theories and looking at the supporting evidence behind those theories

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

weisses

Dohnjoe wrote: »

The official investigation concluded that the building fell due to fire

I lost count asking for the relevant info ?

Can you provide the solid evidence that building 7 collapsed due to fires ??

I noticed you are so evidence based .... then provide it when asked for it !

Dohnjoe

Cheerful Spring wrote: »

Bush frightened everyone after 9/11. You either with us or against us he said! I think reporters were afraid to investigate 9/11 and be labelled unAmerican. America did a lot of bad **** to people after 9/11. Rendition flights, torture, holding people without trial. The patriotic act is actually no different to the Nazi enabling act. You could go on all day about it, but people seem to ignore this behaviour because its America. It was Wikileaks who exposed the scandals if I remember correctly not official media in the US.

Horse**** again

Abu Ghraib and extraodinary rendition were broken and reported by US press and other outlets. Like it or not, the "Nazi enabling act" was supported by a majority of Americans, but democracy, what can you do. The US president can't even bar one journalist from his own press conference. Everything you come out with seems to be shaped by this ridiculous anti-establishment conspiracy narrative

storker

Cheerful Spring wrote: »

Bush frightened everyone after 9/11. You either with us or against us he said!

This is not proof of anything.

I think reporters were afraid to investigate 9/11 and be labelled unAmerican. America did a lot of bad **** to people after 9/11.

What you think doesn't amount to proof either.

Rendition flights, torture, holding people without trial. The patriotic act is actually no different to the Nazi enabling act. You could go on all day about it, but people seem to ignore this behaviour because its America.

In the context of 9/11, it's ignored because it...wait for it...doesn't prove anything. Are you seeing a pattern here yet?

The Watergate scandal was exposed by two reporters at the Washington Post. The media did not join in and go after Nixon until some time later. By the way, an insider approached the reporters and gave them inside information so they did not find this all out on there own.

The Washington post stood by the story because the editor was sufficiently satisfied by what the reports had uncovered to deem it worth the considerable risk. Remember that Woodward and Bernstein had an inside source. Where is the inside source that is informing the 911 movement? Where is the newspaper prepared to stand over the conspiracy claims? What risk is run by uploading a Youtube video or hosting a 911 Conspiracy website? To liken 911 conspiracy fans with Woodward, Bernstein and Bradlee is to stick two fingers up to real investigative journalism.

E Howard Hunt who was CIA and was involved in organising the Watergate breakin claimed there was a conspiracy to kill JFK. He even listed some of those people involved before he died.

This is a claim, and what he said was a claim if he said it, because even the claim that he made the claims has not been verified. See if you can work out how this fails to qualify as proof.

Cheerful Spring

The Nal wrote: »

The main stream media have done nothing but expose the current government, help to leak information and are basically at war with the current White House.

The main stream media uncovered Watergate, were all over the Iran/Contra affair and now employ Oliver North as a commentator. They have uncovered and reported on Clintons Lewinski affair, Grover Clevelands illegitimate son, the Petticoat affair and Thomas Jefferson and Sally Hemmings, both of which were about was 200 years ago. All of the above reported on and exposed under extreme pressure not to do so from the US government. Literally, hundreds of years of main stream media exposing the US government.

Thats to name but a few. Heres a list, which is incomplete. All reported on by the mainstream media. Shills for the US government.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_federal_political_scandals_in_the_United_States

Bush frightened everyone after 9/11. You either with us or against us he said! I think reporters were afraid to investigate 9/11 and be labelled unAmerican. America did a lot of bad **** to people after 9/11. Rendition flights, torture, holding people without trial. The patriotic act is actually no different to the Nazi enabling act. You could go on all day about it, but people seem to ignore this behaviour because its America. It was Wikileaks who exposed the scandals if I remember correctly not official media in the US.

I never said official media never exposed government corruption in the past. You looking to the past to claim the same standards apply always. I don't think that was the case with 9/11.

Since its relevant to our discussion.

The Watergate scandal was exposed by two reporters at the Washington Post. The media did not join in and go after Nixon until some time later. By the way, an insider approached the reporters and gave them inside information so they did not find this all out on there own.

E Howard Hunt who was CIA and was involved in organising the Watergate breakin claimed there was a conspiracy to kill JFK. He even listed some of those people involved before he died.

Cheerful Spring

Dohnjoe wrote: »

So why has Trump declared war on the media?

Is this where you decide to go full deep state Alex Jones just to distance yourself from Alex Jones?

That's trump. He, not even politician his a reality host an outsider. Why do you think the establishment hates him his not one of them.

Cheerful Spring

The Nal wrote: »

This has nothing to do with 9/11. Zero, nada.

No one denies governments engage in covert acts and deception.

https://www.nytimes.com/1986/11/30/us/white-house-crisis-evidence-points-big-saudi-role-iranian-contra-arms-deals.html

Prince Bandar was funding the Iran-Contra affair. He involved in all the shady stuff for last 30+ years.

Prince Bandar funded and facilitated the 9/11 attacks.

Ipso

Conspiracy theorists are the original hipsters, the media is too mainstream for them.

storker

The Nal wrote: »

The main stream media have done nothing but expose the current government, help to leak information and are basically at war with the current White House.

I tend to think that when someone or some organisation is annoying both sides equally, they're probably getting the balance right.

(Cf. the EU, which is considered too left-wing by the Tory party, and too right-wing by Labour.

)

The Nal

The main stream media have done nothing but expose the current government, help to leak information and are basically at war with the current White House.

The main stream media uncovered Watergate, were all over the Iran/Contra affair and now employ Oliver North as a commentator. They have uncovered and reported on Clintons Lewinski affair, Grover Clevelands illegitimate son, the Petticoat affair and Thomas Jefferson and Sally Hemmings, both of which were about was 200 years ago. All of the above reported on and exposed under extreme pressure not to do so from the US government. Literally, hundreds of years of main stream media exposing the US government.

Thats to name but a few. Heres a list, which is incomplete. All reported on by the mainstream media. Shills for the US government.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_federal_political_scandals_in_the_United_States

Dohnjoe

Cheerful Spring wrote: »

.

The mainstream news in the US are shills for the US government. So we never going to get the truth from them.

So why has Trump declared war on the media?

Is this where you decide to go full deep state Alex Jones just to distance yourself from Alex Jones?

[Deleted User]

The Nal wrote: »

This has nothing to do with 9/11. Zero, nada.

No one denies governments engage in covert acts and deception.

Yea, but he's gotta pretend he knows something we don't after people have twigged he just feeds on attention.
And cause he's not able to form an independent opinion: post a youtube video.
It's almost like having an original thought.

The Nal

Cheerful Spring wrote: »

To understand the deep covert world you need to watch this.

This has nothing to do with 9/11. Zero, nada.

No one denies governments engage in covert acts and deception.

Cheerful Spring

To understand the deep covert world you need to watch this.

Cheerful Spring

Dohnjoe wrote: »

Alex Jones was calling it an inside job from the moment it happened

You both think WTC 7 was a controlled demolition, he uses much of the same "evidence" and incredulity as you do.

It is an inside job. Bush and his cronies would not have shut down the investigation into Saudi Arabia involvement if they were innocent. They also refused to hand over documents to the panel on the 9/11 commission. Two commissioners resigned over it. Even the 9/11 commissioners left on the panel claimed they were lied to and stated this later.

The FBI claimed they don't who funded the operation in 2001. In fact its public knowledge now that money was sent to a Saudi spy wife bank account in Regis Bank through Prince Bandar wife account. That Saudi spy then passed on funds to the 9/11 hijackers.

Prince Bandar is a longterm friend of the Bushes. He was involved in Iran- Contra.

Cheerful Spring

Dohnjoe wrote: »

Ah, care to explain why any serious engineer or architect would choose to go onto an extreme radio show hosted by a loon (your own words), who has an audience of lunatics (who harass families of victims of shootings)?

Why would they do it multiple times?

Why would they invite said loon to speak at their conference?

I can make up an answer to that pretty easily, can you

Trump appeared on Alex Jones as he is the president of the United States now. They go on his show to express their views.

The mainstream news in the US are shills for the US government. So we never going to get the truth from them.

Dohnjoe

Cheerful Spring wrote: »

So what if he went on there to express his point of view? He appeared on Irish TV in the past.

Ah, care to explain why any serious engineer or architect would choose to go onto an extreme radio show hosted by a loon (your own words), who has an audience of lunatics (who harass families of victims of shootings)?

Why would they do it multiple times?

Why would they invite said loon to speak at their conference?

I can make up an answer to that pretty easily, can you

Cheerful Spring

Dohnjoe wrote: »

Richard Gage, head of AE911 in one his appearances on Alex Jones

So what if he went on there to express his point of view? He appeared on Irish TV in the past.

Dohnjoe

Oh here is Alex Jones again, this time as a guest of AE911

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KQvL8eUBJWo

Dohnjoe

Cheerful Spring wrote: »

Dohnjoe Bill Cooper broadcast June 2001.

Richard Gage, head of AE911 in one his appearances on Alex Jones

Dohnjoe

Cheerful Spring wrote: »

Bin Laden group had carried out terrorist actions against US targets in Africa and the Middle East pre 9/11. If there was going to be a terrorist attack on US soil it was going to be blamed on them.Bin laden denied his movement carried out 9/11 a few days after it occurred.

It was actually Bill Cooper in June 2001 who predicted the Bin Laden would be blamed. Alex Jones probably heard his broadcast and then took credit for it. Bill Cooper was a popular conspiracy guy in 2001.

Alex Jones was calling it an inside job from the moment it happened

You both think WTC 7 was a controlled demolition, he uses much of the same "evidence" and incredulity as you do.

Cheerful Spring

Dohnjoe Bill Cooper broadcast June 2001.

Cheerful Spring

Dohnjoe wrote: »

Because he literally invented it. Here he is "predicting it" in July 2001
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a8Hk1-BpXO8

He believes it was a controlled demolition, like you
He constantly refers to AE911, like you

They seem to love appearing on his show, Gage, Jones, everyone. In fact, they've invited him as a guest at their events

Loons of a feather

Bin Laden group had carried out terrorist actions against US targets in Africa and the Middle East pre 9/11. If there was going to be a terrorist attack on US soil it was going to be blamed on them.Bin laden denied his movement carried out 9/11 a few days after it occurred.

It was actually Bill Cooper in June 2001 who predicted the Bin Laden would be blamed. Alex Jones probably heard his broadcast and then took credit for it. Bill Cooper was a popular conspiracy guy in 2001.

Dohnjoe

Cheerful Spring wrote: »

No, he isn't the father of this conspiracy I don't why you think that?

Because he literally invented it. Here he is "predicting it" in July 2001
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a8Hk1-BpXO8

If you asked Alex Jones to break down the NIST investigation of WTC7 he would not be able to. He knowledge is limited. He brings on guests and then talks over them.. I listened to his show a few times and its damn awful presentation.

He believes it was a controlled demolition, like you
He constantly refers to AE911, like you

They seem to love appearing on his show, Gage, Jones, everyone. In fact, they've invited him as a guest at their events

Loons of a feather

[Deleted User]

Cheerful Spring wrote: »

He knowledge is limited. He brings on guests and then talks over them.. I listened to his show a few times and its damn awful presentation.

lol.
So exactly the same then.

Cheerful Spring

Dohnjoe wrote: »

Alex Jones believes 911 was an inside job. He's pretty much the father of this conspiracy. That is far from the only conspiracy you have in common.

I already know how you're going to rationalise it, but the irony isn't lost here

No, he isn't the father of this conspiracy I don't why you think that? If you asked Alex Jones to break down the NIST investigation of WTC7 he would not be able to. He knowledge is limited. He brings on guests and then talks over them.. I listened to his show a few times and its damn awful presentation.

Dohnjoe

Cheerful Spring wrote: »

If I was Alex Jones type I might have a problem;)

Alex Jones believes 911 was an inside job. He's pretty much the father of this conspiracy. That is far from the only conspiracy you have in common.

I already know how you're going to rationalise it, but the irony isn't lost here

Dohnjoe

Cheerful Spring wrote: »

They're not far out conspiracies.

They are far-out conspiracies. Supporters of these types of conspiracies are regularly referred to as loons, etc. You yourself dismiss people who believe in certain far-out conspiracies you don't subscribe to

Pot calling the kettle black

Cheerful Spring

storker wrote: »

Ah, my mistake. so it's gut feelings that are proof now...got it.

That still isn't proof of a controlled demolition.

Actually, it is as they did six years of work on it, what they think caused the collapse. They released there final draft of the final report in 2008. When freefall was brought up in questions and answers session. NIST claimed freefall could not have occurred as their model and calculations and work up to six years had shown that buckling of columns was not instantaneous and there still was resistance underneath when the top portion collapsed down.

Freefall is a well-known observed phenomenon when buildings are controlled demolition.

We have evidence why WTC7 failed and was not due to fire alone. You don't find melted steel in fires that only reach 400c and 600c.

Cheerful Spring

JJayoo wrote: »

Cheerful: is the world flat???? I need to know

It's a cube why would you think the world is flat;)

storker

Cheerful Spring wrote: »

That what they felt on the day what they are seeing it not logic. They had a gut feeling something was not right.

Ah, my mistake. so it's gut feelings that are proof now...got it.

By the way, NIST has come out and stated they were unable to explain the full collapse. Their study only explains what they think the failures are. They are unable to explain the ejections of steel in the air and pulverising of concrete floors, that we all saw on tv.

That still isn't proof of a controlled demolition.