A fake plane was added for south tower explosion

**7forever** · Sep 13th, 2011 12:23 PM

A Eureka moment for real 911 research

Whether truthers have noticed this before or not, I don't know but the live footage does NOT show the nose of the fake plane coming out the north side of T2 because tv fakery had not taken place yet.

**Fut004** · Sep 13th, 2011 3:26 PM

Originally Posted by Vuall

The only thing building 7 is the conclusive proof for, is that in spite of a sound explanation, and a foregone conclusion that a building designed to withstand just 4 hours of uncontrolled fire was going to collapse after 7 hours fire, some people would rather make up some fantasy to blame their government for.

Show us one other steel frame building that has ever completely collapsed due to a regular building fire. Then show us one other steel frame building that has collapsed entirely into it's own footprint, without somebody planning and rigging it up to do so before hand. These things just don't happen.

Also, visit the other thread - where we're discussing building 7, and take a look at the video I posted. You know, the one that kind of shows little explosions happening on every single floor right before the building completely collapses "due to a fire" on like the 12th floor or something.

***Vuall*** · Sep 13th, 2011 3:39 PM

Originally Posted by Fut004

Show us one other steel frame building that has ever completely collapsed due to a regular building fire. Then show us one other steel frame building that has collapsed entirely into it's own footprint, without somebody planning and rigging it up to do so before hand. These things just don't happen.

Also, visit the other thread - where we're discussing building 7, and take a look at the video I posted. You know, the one that kind of shows little explosions happening on every single floor right before the building completely collapses "due to a fire" on like the 12th floor or something.

Are you saying that because it's not happened before it will never happen?

By that logic the world will never end, there will be no Armageddon. I'll never die, because every day I wake up alive.......get real.

Show me one other building of that size that is cantilevered on the first floor, that has it's load redistributed to truss arrays, and that was fire rated for 4 hours and allowed to burn for 7.

Cant?

No of course you can't, because the construction and it's demise were unique.

And yes, plenty of steel structures have been brought down due to fire. Why do you think they fire proof steel structures nowadays, and the regulations get more strict, is it because the fire retardant looks pretty?

TC · Sep 13th, 2011 11:31 PM

Over 1,200 architects and engineers have identified themselves, stated their credentials, and declared that the official story we were told regarding # 7 defies the laws of physics. In as much that the "fall" was so perfect, that a duplicated controlled demolition would be hard to pull off. Over two hundred hours have been spent in frame by frame study of #7 by qualified people, and the overwhelming opinion is the substructure went first, big point here.... as fire damage was higher up.

Now why would these people put their professional reputation behind something so exposed by the media? knowing full well the consequences of being "labeled" as a nut job by their peers.

My apologizes for the thread derailment...

***Vuall*** · Sep 14th, 2011 1:48 AM

Thanks for that post TC. After researching the information you just provided I am reviewing my stance on WTC7.

**Fut004** · Sep 14th, 2011 8:02 AM

Originally Posted by Vuall

Thanks for that post TC. After researching the information you just provided I am reviewing my stance on WTC7.

So you don't watch the videos I posted - one of which is taken directly from the website that all those 1,200 Architects and Engineers are registered with - but one post from TC is enough to make you "review your stance"? Haha. Alright, whatever it takes for you to look into things a bit more...

Originally Posted by Vuall

WTC7 is easily explained quite logically, as soon as I can find it I'll post it for you

Just let us know when you figure it all out.

***Vuall*** · Sep 14th, 2011 8:05 AM

Originally Posted by Fut004

So you don't watch the videos I posted - one of which is taken directly from the website that all those 1,200 Architects and Engineers are registered with - but one post from TC is enough to make you "review your stance"? Haha. Alright, whatever it takes for you to look into things a bit more...

Just let us know when you figure it all out.

That post led me to look into these architects, I went to see who they were and I know one of them. After a brief telephone conversation I said I would review my stance. I didn't say I'd changed my mind already.

***James Random*** · Sep 14th, 2011 8:56 AM

Originally Posted by Fut004

Show us one other steel frame building that has ever completely collapsed due to a regular building fire. Then show us one other steel frame building that has collapsed entirely into it's own footprint, without somebody planning and rigging it up to do so before hand. These things just don't happen.

Also, visit the other thread - where we're discussing building 7, and take a look at the video I posted. You know, the one that kind of shows little explosions happening on every single floor right before the building completely collapses "due to a fire" on like the 12th floor or something.

quite so, in 2005 a skyscraper in Madrid (known as the Madrid Inferno) burned for 24 consecutive hours. Not only did it not collapse, but it was only half-built to begin with.

***James Random*** · Sep 14th, 2011 8:57 AM

Originally Posted by Vuall

Are you saying that because it's not happened before it will never happen?

By that logic the world will never end, there will be no Armageddon. I'll never die, because every day I wake up alive.......get real.

Show me one other building of that size that is cantilevered on the first floor, that has it's load redistributed to truss arrays, and that was fire rated for 4 hours and allowed to burn for 7.

Cant?

No of course you can't, because the construction and it's demise were unique.

And yes, plenty of steel structures have been brought down due to fire. Why do you think they fire proof steel structures nowadays, and the regulations get more strict, is it because the fire retardant looks pretty?

If something is against the laws of physics in the scenario given, that does not give it scope for a possibility of happening one day.

Building 7 is the most conclusive evidence that something was amiss, since you simply can't plan and affect a demolition within two hours,
it can't be done. At all. Not in a heavily populated area where months of planning and safety checks have to take place to avoid risk to life
and damage to property or worse. Yet they say they decided to demolish building 7 only two hours later because it was damaged? The govt
did not say it collapsed of its own accord, they claimed they demolished it for safety reasons.

Now, you have one building the government say that they, impossibly, demolished in two hours flat.
Then you have two buildings whose majority of world experts on the subject of demolition say outright
that it was a textbook demolition of buildings 1 and 2.

Now you simply can't demolish a building like Building 7 in two hours. Put that out of your mind. So logically
the explosives had to have been in place a few weeks before hand and planning on the placement of the explosives
conducted over the preceding couple of months. This is what they call 'Premeditation' in the world of crime.

So, given that logical scenario, how hard would it be to have explosives put in the other two buildings over that
same couple of months? Hm?

C'mon Vuall, use your brain. You're an intelligent chap.

+ YouTube Video

+ YouTube Video

TC · Sep 14th, 2011 11:14 AM

In 85 I was blasting for deep gas drilling platform sites in Big Piney Wyoming, and one area had a two lane concrete bridge that spanned 180ft, and 50ft above the river bed. Consequently the bridge had to taken down and replaced 500 yards west.

It had three main support pillars as well as the abutments. Both were heavy steel reinforced with 20mm rebar, so drilling to set the charges was a bitch. with each hole having to be burned several times with oxy reamers.

This took 4 days of drilling work for only 90cm deep holes ( roughly 3 ft) and countless destroyed 30mm carbide bits. Each pillar was 4ft across and the reinforcement was tight.. with four inch spacing.

I loaded the bottom charges with 24000ft a second primers, and used a slower Dupont powder at mid range with hard wire 5 millisecond delay to insure bottom detonation first and no cut offs.

All toll there was 90 holes, 30 in the pillars and 15 each in the abutments, with the pillars going first, and the center beginning to fold, the second round was fired at the bridge ends. And the whole structure collapsed into the dry river bed.

It took a week with drilling and loading and plaining, as well as 6 men working 10 hours a day to pull this off.

Now apply this scenario to a large multi story building....so there is no way in hell they could have done the work during the initial collapse of tower one and two.....this had to be in place before the event took place.

**Fut004** · Sep 14th, 2011 12:34 PM

Originally Posted by Vuall

That post led me to look into these architects, I went to see who they were and I know one of them. After a brief telephone conversation I said I would review my stance. I didn't say I'd changed my mind already.

I didn't say that you changed your mind yet either.
Let us know how your call goes though.

Originally Posted by James Random

quite so, in 2005 a skyscraper in Madrid (known as the Madrid Inferno) burned for 24 consecutive hours. Not only did it not collapse, but it was only half-built to begin with.

Yeah, upon further research there are a few other Steel Buildings that have collapsed due to fire, but the WTC buildings account for most of the recorded cases. Sort of strange that such a rare event would happen numerous times in one day.

With regards to the Madrid Inferno, if the building was only half-constructed it's quite possible that the fireproofing wasn't complete at the time of the fire. It would make sense that a building that's not completely fireproofed to code could fall in the event of a large fire. If I'm not mistaken there are similar circumstances to some of the other collapses I mentioned above, but of course WTC7 was completely built, and to code when the fires took it out.

**DaKat** · Sep 14th, 2011 1:28 PM

Originally Posted by 7forever

The plane is an illusion

The BIGGEST illusion here is that YOU have a brain!

**7forever** · Sep 14th, 2011 2:11 PM

Digi-plane meets ufo bomb for southeast FAKE-OUT. Notice how it bops across the south side like something right out of the Jetsons.

The fireball was on the northeast corner consistent with the missile impact on the north side of T1. T2 is consistent with the initial impact being on the east side and then creates the massive fireball on the northeast corner.

Matt Lauer described the ball being a small plane circling the building. No plane can circle a building. It is complete bullshit. A helicopter or ufo packed with explosives for sure and that is what exploded T2, not a missile and certainly not a commercial jet. One witness kinda snickered and commented on how slow it was moving. The only witness describing it live was a female reporter who said a helicopter was approaching and she freaked out when it exploded. I will try and get that footage.

Watch the white object on the northeast corner before it explodes. This could be where the orb really exploded creating the fireball in that very location.

4:48
911stealth Live Chopper 4 NBC No Plane Dim Orb vs 2 Stored NBC Tiny Orb - YouTube

**7forever** · Sep 14th, 2011 5:22 PM

FAKE PLANE SOUTH VS. UFO WEST WINS

The orb cannot be ignored because the fake west plane was shown on all networks who allowed and participated in TV FAKERY. These pics are 13-14 seconds before a decent sized fireball and show the circular bomb well west of the dive bomber myth. This proves two different flight paths beyond any doubt and that makes the ufo bomb the unanimous winner.

2nd hit CBS divebomber CBS9 4:37 pm - YouTube

***James Random*** · Sep 14th, 2011 6:17 PM

Originally Posted by Fut004

I didn't say that you changed your mind yet either.
Let us know how your call goes though.

Yeah, upon further research there are a few other Steel Buildings that have collapsed due to fire, but the WTC buildings account for most of the recorded cases. Sort of strange that such a rare event would happen numerous times in one day.

With regards to the Madrid Inferno, if the building was only half-constructed it's quite possible that the fireproofing wasn't complete at the time of the fire. It would make sense that a building that's not completely fireproofed to code could fall in the event of a large fire. If I'm not mistaken there are similar circumstances to some of the other collapses I mentioned above, but of course WTC7 was completely built, and to code when the fires took it out.

You misread, friend. I said that the Madrid building didn't collapse, despite being only half built and burning ten times longer than the WTC fire.

**7forever** · Sep 15th, 2011 2:43 PM

The wide angle has it right except the orb/missile really came from the west not south. The nose does not come through the north side in the wide angle, live footage, or even the dive bomber footage. This further proves video fakery and makes the west to east path stronger.

Advance this clip to 4:00 or before and see the plane created out of thin air from behind the building just right of the open and unobstructed skyline.
Unseen 911 Footage Finally Released By FBI, DOJ - YouTube

**7forever** · Sep 15th, 2011 7:21 PM

An epic slip up by roof news lady...OOPS!

"I believe that could be a police helicopter" and then T2 explodes two seconds later. She changes it to what must be a jumbo jet but the cat's out of the bag. It's the same as Connally saying he saw the third shot and changes it because he saw the driver shoot jfk. In the other live clip, the woman says there's another explosion but never acknowledges the orb. She did the right thing but this lady slipped up.

9/11 South Tower Strike WB11 Live (WPIX) - YouTube
This is fake plane west clearly showing the digi-plane taking the same west to east path as the orb like bomb, min-missile, ufo jetson floater.
The Grand TV Illusion - YouTube

**7forever** · Sep 16th, 2011 11:33 AM

I just began looking at 911 over a week ago by viewing your work and Rich Hall's. If there is to be any truth movement there has to be an organized conspiracy to get the truth out there. That hasn't happened and probably will never happen unless people come together and agree on the basics of how no plane hit T2. I can help you with that movement that will include my work on Greer shooting Kennedy. Here's my work on your work. I have proven two flight paths which is something you may have missed. Driving that point home and using the news lady that describes the orb as a possible helicopter is crucial to getting it right.

**lycanox** · Sep 16th, 2011 12:12 PM

Again, what about the thousands of people that videotaped the event and saw it first hand.

Your theory is as stupid as claiming that it was godzilla that sneaked up to the towers. Brought them down. And then Ninja sneaked on tip toes out of New york again without being seen.

**Fut004** · Sep 16th, 2011 12:18 PM

Originally Posted by 7forever

I just began looking at 911 over a week ago by viewing your work and Rich Hall's. If there is to be any truth movement there has to be an organized conspiracy to get the truth out there. That hasn't happened and probably will never happen unless people come together and agree on the basics of how no plane hit T2. I can help you with that movement that will include my work on Greer shooting Kennedy. Here's my work on your work. I have proven two flight paths which is something you may have missed. Driving that point home and using the news lady that describes the orb as a possible helicopter is crucial to getting it right.

This is a very strange post.

Who are you talking to, 7Forever? Who is Rich Hall?

To be honest, I don't think this is your writing at all, as you've been posting this shit for much longer than a week. So what's up, 7F? What's going on here?

***Waymarker*** · Sep 16th, 2011 12:59 PM

Originally Posted by 7forever

http://i889.photobucket.com/albums/a...wtcwestorb.jpg
http://i889.photobucket.com/albums/a...tcfakewest.jpg

Well that's pretty conclusive, a Klingon Bird of Prey done it

**7forever** · Sep 16th, 2011 4:53 PM

The hole that was NOT supposed to be there has to be there but is not there because no plane impacted T2. Everyone has seen the failure of TV fakery showing the nose come through the northeast side and the live footage showing no such thing. Add to that a picture with no circular hole.

**7forever** · Sep 19th, 2011 1:35 PM

It took this long to make this gif because gifsoup is a pos. It is clear why she didn't identify it as definitely being a helicopter because it has no propeller, therefore was not a helicopter, plane, or missile of any known kind. The only people who would know are ones with top secret clearance. Notice how slow it moves and the lapse of time between when it's hidden and the explosion. It circles the building as Matt Lauer described, leading to the likely conclusion that it really exploded on the east, not southeast side. The shape, size, and slow movement aren't anything like the digi-plane.

9/11 South Tower Strike WB11 Live (WPIX) - YouTube

**DaKat** · Sep 21st, 2011 3:42 AM

Originally Posted by Fut004

Show us one other steel frame building

The WTC towers WERE NOT traditional steel-framed buildings, and UNTIL YOU UNDERSTAND THAT, you can NOT have a valid opinion on why they collapsed.

The WTC towers were built using steel beams as a vertical frame, wiith a concrete shell around them (elevators and HVAC inside that shell). THEN, trusses (NOT traditional beams) were used to hold up the floors, with aluminum panels on the outside shell. The method used to hold up these trusses, AND the fact that the thermal shielding was stripped off by the impact, allowing them to be weakened by the heat of the fires, and they then failed and allowed the floors to pancake down.

**DaKat** · Sep 21st, 2011 3:45 AM

Originally Posted by 7forever

It is clear why she didn't identify it as definitely being a helicopter because it has no propeller, therefore was not a helicopter, plane, or missile of any known kind. The only people who would know are ones with top secret clearance. Notice how slow it moves and the lapse of time between when it's hidden and the explosion.

TOTALLY ignorant and nonsensical BULLSHIT!