World Trade Center Building 7: Obvious Controlled Demolition

[SektorFloor]

Obvious Controlled Demolition ...

[iSchmal]

Okay, you people think you're so smart in physics and science, yet somehow the idea that it makes absolutely no sense to blow up the building escapes your mind? Why the hell would the US government (or anyone for that matter) want to do a controlled demolition of an empty building? 9/11 was all about killing people, not destroying structures. Lose the arrogance and explain that.

[StevenM818]

@iSchmal

Unfortunately the 9/11 cOmmission never investigated the matter. In fact they left WTC7 completely out of their report. Nothing fishy there pffffft. Do a search on teh intanets and you'll find lots of explanations and research for why WTC-7 may have been brought down. Try searching "reasons + to + demolish + wtc7'. I'm sure you'll have hours of material to read through once you do that. And maybe you should take your own advice on arrogance? Just a thought.

[danielnault333]

@iSchmal, im sure a lot was organize from tower 7, that's was the way they erase all trace of there plan

[bambam9969]

Think about it, All these Buildings were rigged to implode, so why did building 7 fall so late in the evening? The Damage it sustained broke the circuit and could not be imploded on cue, when they finally fixed the problem 7 hrs later ,they still had to bring 7 down or the explosives would of been found for sure and this whole thing would of been blown out of the water.

[basenjib123]

I am an structural engineer which makes me entitled to say that the "controlled demolition" crowd is...FULL OF SHIT!

[StevenM818]

@basenjib123

I think you're full of poo. Post your credentials. I want to see a certificate. You can block your name out if you want. But if your going to post such a claim on my video, I want to see you back it up. So upload your creds to your channel in video form. It's not that difficult. Just a shot of your certificate. Because when I click on your channel now, there are no videos on your page or anything about you. Instead it's dominated by comments from others calling you a troll, etc.

[StevenM818]

@basenjib123

Haha ok now I know you're a rascal. I just clicked on your comments. Don't you have anything better to do than troll up people's video comments? Come on, surely you can offer this community on youtube something far more valuable.

[bambam9969]

@basenjib123 Not necessarily, structural engineers are being pushed through the schools and really a lot of them have no clue.It,s funny when they have to go to the Manual. I know 2 or 3 good ones i would trust.. Seen Lots of Engineer fuck up,s

[EdwardiusMcAndriez]

@basenjib123 You can go ahead and keep insisting the sky is green with purple spots, but it actually looks quite blue to me.

[magicfl00d]

Thats how builds fall when they are blown with bombs.

[orbitar88]

Anyone who thinks that 911 happened the way the official story says it did are MORONS. Just the way the US government acted suspicious and in the shadows was proof enough for me. I didnt need the buckets of evidence we have against them.

Though even if everyone in the country learns the truth the government will just say "what you going to do about it".

Best thing to do is just find a way to save ourselves.

[bigcut3wood]

People would of heard them going off. I am sorry but i am no fool. I will not be fooled this time.

[StevenM818]

People did hear them going off. There are witnesses on record who said they heard them. There's also audio / video tapes of the explosions.

[EdwardiusMcAndriez]

@bigcut3wood I attended a controlled demolition before and did not hear much of anything.

[bigcut3wood]

And lets say they were going to demo the building. Why would they let the public see it by planting the charges on the outside beams. Like any good demo team, they would of removed the inner most support and let the middle of the building fall. That creates a void in the center and the structure will fall in to that hole they have created. That is how they get building to fall in such a small footprint. They dont go flying all over the place. Get real people, it would of taken over 1,000 charges

[StevenM818]

And re your other question concerning the explosions seen coming out the windows: those are earmarkings of controlled demolition from explosives planted on interior columns. What we're seeing is debris and demo squibs being forced out, breaking the windows. Europe's top demo expert identified WTC-7 as a controlled demo after studying all the evidence and all of the official explanations. Over a thousand other experts in Structural engineering and architecture have gone on record to say the same.

[bigcut3wood]

eye witnesses said that over one 3rd of the buildings structure was removed by towers 1 and 2 falling. The reason that i dont think those were the explositions that brought it down is becouse they happen as it falls. Anytime i have seen a demo, they weaken the whole structure with timed explosives and let the wieght of the building bring them to the ground. Any demo would of been done in the inter most coloums. Not the glass wall exterior.

[StevenM818]

There is no truth to your claim that "one 3rd of the buildings structure was removed". NIST originally made an unprovable claim that 20% of the building was removed, but they've never been able to produce any photos to document this. NYPD & others near the building said there was some damage to WTC-7, but nothing close to what NIST tried claiming. NIST has since backpeddled from saying debris caused the "collapse" due to lack of evidence, and now claim fire was the main reason why WTC-7 fell.

[FIGHT1FOR2CHANGE3]

@bigcut3wood You are just making that up, lol it was not even 5 % although NIST claimed more,, NIST has made so many mistakes and even had to change their mistakes and lies, well some of them..Lol are you a demo expert? the whole point is it was ment to be misleading and they failed at even that..you need to understand you are in denial.

[cut3wood]

@FIGHT1FOR2CHANGE3 i am not a demo expert. Let me ask you some questions. Do you know what was inside of building 7? Do you know how that tower was built? Did you know that before those towers were even finished that they were calling them fire traps? I have my doubts about alot of what olur goverment had to say about the cause of the collaspe. I dont think the reason they made mistakes is becouse they were trying to hide something.

[FIGHT1FOR2CHANGE3]

@cut3wood first I would like to say, your response was decent and resonible, well done...Now I do have a pretty good knowledge of the construction, since I have spent well over 100 hours researching this..Do you know about arcitects and engineers for 911 truth?, scholars for 911 truth, pilots for 911 truth? Do you no about the mistakes and contradictions in tHE nist report? Do you know about the whistler blower aron russo? RIP Arin russo? Let me know buddy,You sound decent, I would like to share

[cut3wood]

@FIGHT1FOR2CHANGE3 yes, i have watched the tem part vid. They have many of there facts misplaced as well. I find the argument for controlled demo quite compelling. However, i cannot get past the fact that our goverment would kill so many innocent people. The number of people would of been in the thousands. People over look the fact that a huge plane carring 16,000 liters of fule hit the towers at over 500 mph and then the fule exploded in side of the towers. Have you looked at the math?

[FIGHT1FOR2CHANGE3]

@cut3wood dont think of it as the "govenment" its not like they were all involved, the one thing that discredits, the movment is these truthers make it seem like like everbody was involved, bush administarion profited form their investments in this war, did you now marvin bush was giving the wtc contract for security systemss? giving him complete accsess to the entire building, it was a 8.3 MILLION $ CONTACT..interesting eh?

[cut3wood]

@FIGHT1FOR2CHANGE3 not that year. the year before on 9-11-99. we were on our honeymoon

[FIGHT1FOR2CHANGE3]

@cut3wood yaya sorry i respnded that I made a mistake as you typed that

[FIGHT1FOR2CHANGE3]

@cut3wood I have been with my girl for 7 years now, hope all is weel with you 2

[FIGHT1FOR2CHANGE3]

@cut3wood Add me as a friend and we can do this via P.M ..I find its more effective

[cut3wood]

@FIGHT1FOR2CHANGE3 we wil talk some more but i have to get off to bed. i have alot of work to do tommorow. I will keep in touch. It was a pleasure disscussing this withyou. Take care

[FIGHT1FOR2CHANGE3]

@cut3wood you too man, I really apreciate that you are able to debate in a mature and open minded fashion, This is refreshing, have a good night bro!

[cut3wood]

@FIGHT1FOR2CHANGE3 that my friend is alot of enegry being released in a moment. Everone wants to talk fire but quite frankly they need to talk structure past load limits with fire.

[cut3wood]

@FIGHT1FOR2CHANGE3 i know all about it. I to have spent many,mant hours looking in to this. I just dont know man. I am glad that you to are trying to find the truth. Weather people understand the math or not, the planes played a major roll in those buildings comming down. WT# 7 had 20,000 ballons of desiel fule in that building on fire. It was built on two huge trusses holding up 50 floors. I have been in that building. i was in those buildings on 9-11-99. 2 days after my wedding,

[FIGHT1FOR2CHANGE3]

@cut3wood maybe I misunderstood you, you were theier on 911?

[FIGHT1FOR2CHANGE3]

@cut3wood sorry, I didnt see 99..Yes I Only debate fact now..I Was once a debunker untill I leard the hundreds of reasonsthis was just another false flag, history shows most wars are started with a false flag, you have to understand building 7 was not hit by a plane and even debunkers admit that most of the fuel burned off instantly

[cut3wood]

@FIGHT1FOR2CHANGE3 I think it was becouse they didnt know what they were talking about. They were morons! Think for a minute, if they had this great plan to take the towers down, kill alot of people. They didnt have a plan in place to explain why they fell? This was an awesome plan. Not one witness has come forward in the ten years since it happend. Yet, they didnt bother to the explaintion planed out to? I think we both have an arguement

[FIGHT1FOR2CHANGE3]

@cut3wood I will also say that most interent truthers, present theory as fact and insult anybody that need more evidence, most debunkers do the same..this kind of dillutes the message that official is bogus, do you know about the history of false flag attacks?

[zeuqzavaj]

filmed from the base of bob & bri's bldg? what if the accelerant or explosive was painted on a la Italian Job film? excludes the need for traditional charges and wiring. who says this was done cheaply. this is as suspect as the naudet grand slam 4 great angles at appropriate timing and position and walk away easy. Ffeifer grandfathers them inside and the godfather(robert) narrates. too hollywood a package!

[spikenation69]

WOW! that definitely shows it was a controlled demolition, but by who?

[xsited1]

That was a pretty good demolition job, but it didn't come straight down. I'd give the guys who did this a 9.

[rentonsentinel]

socialists are gay...

[StevenM818]

LOL

[gloriousrebel]

You people that think a collapse like this happens from a couple random fires, you need to go back to middle school.

[Reisser420]

I personally think building 7 was the place where they controlled the demolition.And there is no better way to get rid of the evidence then to pull it.

[a4l619]

why the hell is there music when your saying this is a controlled demoltion lets hear the real audio

9/11 truth

[StevenM818]

The answer to your question is explained in the video's description box, and I also took the time to explain it to someone in the comments (directly under yours). Perhaps you should have read it, or reviewed the video's description before making your comment.

[jonqstudies]

The music covers up the sound, which is 50% of the evidence.

[StevenM818]

FYI the vid was anonymously released without audio about 3 months ago. I added the music.

[dabatjelly]

and this is the proof that the other towers were demolition controlled... oh and all the testimonies of people there saying they both heard & saw a controlled demolition on towers 1 & 2... and the planes that "crashed" had no windows (according to eye witness accounts & recorded data)... also so called terrorists & passengers were victims of ID theft (many citizens have come forward with photo ID such as passports)... it was an inside job... a sick act of government control... congrats! you won

[hazelwood55]

I am always amazed at how many idiots will believe any conspiracy theory thrown out there as long as it reflects badly on Bush/America. If a fire in a steal frame building rages uncontrolled, what do you think is going to be the ultimate result. Its going to eventually fall down!

[StevenM818]

No *STEEL* hi-rise has EVER fallen from fire. There has never been an example of that happening b4 or after 9/11. However, there have been numerous examples of hi-rises that have burned out of control, some 20+ hours, and not one of them in the history of steel hi-rises has ever completely collapsed. You'd have to be an "idiot" to think it was suddenly possible on 9/11, especially after everything we know about that day, such as the admitted cover-up of what happened by government officials.

[mgsfan15]

How many have had Boeing 767s flown into them?

[StevenM818]

WTC-7 wasn't hit by a plane. It was 47 storys tall & was a steel-beamed structure. It fell in 6 seconds at freefall speed (recently confirmed by NIST). Fell evenly in symmetrical fashion - meaning that all of it's supports gave way at the same time. There was some damage due to falling debris & there was fire on a few floors. But no hi-rise has EVER fallen from structural damage & fire b4 or after 911.

FYI the Empire State Bldg was hit by a large plane but didn't explode into a trillion pieces.

[mgsfan15]

A B25 is a lot smaller than a 767.

[StevenM818]

Yes & the Empire State Bldg was much smaller than the Towers so what's your point? I never claimed the planes were the same size. However, I used the example because it's one of the only other documented examples of a large aircraft crashing into a hi-rise. The building remained standing (built 50 years b4 the Towers). Great measures went into designing the twins so they could withstand large planes crashing into them. Those buildings exploded from top to bottom. Bombs caused that. Not planes.

[hazelwood55]

FYI the B25 that hit the Empire State building weighed about 1/9 the amount that a 767 weighs and it was lost in the fog taveling at a very low rate (about 1/5 the rate of the 767) so it probably impacted with less than 1% of the kinetic energy of the 767.

[StevenM818]

Whether your calculations are true or not isn't important. The fact is a B25 smashed into the Empire State Bldg with enough force to enter it & explode causing an inferno inside & structural damage. It remained standing. The plane was smaller than a 767, yes, but the area it smashed into was smaller than the WTC. The WTC was built to withstand impacts from large planes. And the laws of physics prove that WTC 1, 2, & 7 (not hit by a plane) couldn't have fallen the way they did without explosives.

[Thegroove420]

We will just ignore all the other steel framed buildings in the history of the world that burnt hotter and longer and still stood up, just for brainwashed robots like hazelwood55, to feel strong about Bush and America.

[ebmirador]

If building 7 fell by fire, it must of been made of cardboard. But everyone knows its not smart to use cardboard on a building so big. Many people just refuse to believe it was controlled demolition. But it's only obvious. I bet people would believe that building 7 fell due to a huge gust of wind if you told them... It shows how many millions are decieved. And how gullable people really are...

[SlowAndSteady2]

I've got a plan to erase mental malfunctions such as those "minijimi" here exhibit, at least in the aspect of physics. Make sure children are brought up to witness buildings being set up to be demolished, over and over, at least once a week of every month, so that with all the psychological and chemical dumbing down, at least they can't forget what a CONTROLLED DEMOLITION looks like! I seriously didn't get it. I thought, "how the Hell did they set up the charges SO FAST?"

[minijimi]

So the sound on the tape in your opinion sounds like an explosion then. We both are not audio experts so it is merely opionion not proof.

Fire damaged and weakened the supports of WTC7. It carried lots of weight and collapsed under its own accord.

[StevenM818]

We are at an impasse, James. And I really don't have time to argue with you about this or that. So let's just agree to disagree and leave it at that, shall we?

[JSSTyger]

This is the GldBr video...which had no audio we he first posted it. That said...its still obvious this was demo

[JSSTyger]

OH please....if fire weakened all these supports why were none of the walls bowing inward? All these girders were supposed to be failing yet opposite faces of the building remain at a constant distance...even throughout the fall.

[minijimi]

The walls bowed inwards just before collapse. There are lots of pictures and video proving that.

[Mytheoryous]

Apparently a lot of military/top secret buildings are built under a "Scorched Earth" policy. They are rigged at the time of construction for implosion in the case of an invading army. (Cold war style paranoia) This would explain the narrow timeline allowed to 'pull it' as Silverstein words it. Please comment, I need your knowledge and insight. May God rest the souls of the 9/11 heroes, victims and their families.

[StevenM818]

Thank you for the comment. Can you please post your source for the built to demolish documentation? Explosives have a shelf life. WTC-7 was erected in 1987. From what I understand, the building went up before it's occupants (CIA, FBI, FEMA, Secret Service, Guliani's command bunker, SEC) were decided. I've read that the owner, Larry Silverstein, had a difficult time leasing out office space, so he turned to the government, or they turned to him, to lease many of the offices within the building.

[Mytheoryous]

StevenM818: Thanks for the wake up call. You are right. When I worked with shaped charges in the oilfield, they did have best before dates. No one in their right mind would be planting explosives in a burning skyscraper on 911. No one would knowingly work in a skyscraper wired for scorched earth. If the building was prewired, the fires would have damaged the sequencing or interupted sections of the bloast sequence. (Causing the building 7 to not fall neatly into its footprint. I am back to sq.1

[StevenM818]

I suppose it depends on where the fires were in the building. For the most part they were isolated to a few floors. And efforts could have been made to protect any such explosive devices to withstand damage from fire when installed (b4 9/11). An operation of this magnitude would have to have an enormous amount of planning and funds poured into it. It wasn't all hatched and carried out over night.

It would be nice to know exactly how it was all done, but that's (next to) never going to happen.

[Mytheoryous]

StevenM818: Silverstein aquired WTC complex in the spring of 2001. The port authority may have been the ones have occupancy problems 20 years ago. I just don't know anymore. I have spent a considerable amount of time trying to understand this whole event and keep coming up with dead ends. The source for the prewired scorched earth is long dead. I can find nothing on google about it. Just another frustrating dead end.

Thank you for keeping the dialog alive by posting these videos.

[HamedMAX]

Thx a lot StevenM818 :D

[minijimi]

How come nobody heard the charges go off just before it collapsed?

[StevenM818]

Hi James. Good to see you! Re your question, people did report such explosions:

"We heard this sound that sounded like a clap of thunder... it looked like there was a shockwave ripping through the building and the windows all busted out... about a second later the bottom floor caved out and the building followed after that"

There are more documented reports of explosions, such as NYPD Officer Craig Bartmer's. Both of these witnesses are in "The Third Tower" presentation in the description --->

[StevenM818]

Also, there's a recording that captured the explosion. It's presented in the documentary "9/11 Eyewitness".

27minutes, 45seconds in:

tinyurlDOTcom/5swnld

(Replace "DOT" with a period)

[minijimi]

I saw the video you recommend here. The 'explosion' is just the sound of the air movement on the mic.

The collapse of WTC7 is unusual but when the lower part of a building has been burning for hours on end it cant support the weight it is carrying therefore collapse is imminent.

[StevenM818]

Sure that's your opinion. However, I'm almost certain you aren't qualified to analyze the audio to give an 'expert' opinion on what the sound was, nor am I. The sound on the tape sounds like an explosion to me. It occurs just before WTC-7 falls. That's all I'm saying.

Re your fire argument: The building was observed to be on fire around 1pm. It fell at 5:20. It was isolated to a few floors. No high-rise steel-beamed structure has ever collapsed due to fire & structural damage b4 or after 9/11.

[minijimi]

Witness reports in general are not the most reliable. Look up the word 'witness' on wikipedia. Everyone experiences something different and can interpret events in many different ways. The witness reports that you refernced are not solid proof of controlled demolition.

[StevenM818]

No disrespect, James, but you're speaking out both sides of your mouth. You first ask why no one heard charges going off? I presented you with witnesses who DID hear them. You then back peddle and say that witnesses aren't reliable. Do you realize how ridiculous you sound? Witnesses are used in court cases all the time. And people have been prosecuted just based on eyewitness testimony. By the way, did you watch the presentation in the video's description box, The Third Tower?

[minijimi]

Please research witness before you go further. I did some brief reading and probably wont trust a witness again. I understand why you think I am back pedalling, due to my first question. I am fine with that. I was convinced of controlled demolition but have since thought about it read about it and researched it and changed my mind.

[StevenM818]

I respectfully disagree, based on my own 5+ year investigation into 9/11, the laws of physics, the already admitted and documented cover-up of what happened by government employees designated to investigate 9/11, and some good ol' fashioned common sense :)

[Plutonwolf]

The whole deal keeps smelling worse and worse as we learn just how despicable this administration really is. No leader anywhere should ever be blindly followed or trusted, but these cats are off the chart!

[StevenM818]

Off the chart indeed. But the truth will prevail!

[Plutonwolf]

We can only hope. And it had better be soon, folks like this will take it as a nod to keep on doing horrendous things to the country and the world.

[islam4usa]

good work my friend! good video!

Norman LeBoon Sr.

[StevenM818]

Thank you. Please share with others.

[islam4usa]

You asked, I did!

Send them my way please!

ThanK you.

[LUKAvac2]

Obvious Controlled Demolition

[StevenM818]

Yes I couldn't think of a more apt title :o)