WTC 7's structural integrity and its footprint

Read what 9/11 firemen said about WTC 7 (building 7):
http://representativepress.blogspot.com/2006/09/wtc-7-was-severely-damaged-on...
see previous videos: http://www.TinyUrl.com/BowingDebunks
See Photos: http://www.TinyUrl.com/BowingDebunksCD
http://representativepress.blogspot.com/2006/09/wtc-7-was-severely-damaged-on...
http://TinyUrl.com/NewsPoliticsDefault
See http://TinyUrl.com/BowingDebunksCD
http://TinyUrl.com/FiremanExplains
http://TinyUrl.com/NISTFAQ
http://TinyUrl.com/WTC7FAQ
Please Join E-Mail List:
http://RepresentativePress.googlepages.com/JoinMailingList.html Tell Others: http://www.youtube.com/share?u=representativepress
SEE MOST VIEWED VIDEOS HERE:
http://www.youtube.com/profile?user=representativepress&view=videos&s...
With a supposed controlled demolition, the onset is sudden BUT that isn't what happened. What we see is exactly what David Ray Griffin says is an example of a FIRE INDUCED collapse: "in fire-induced collapses---if we had any examples of such---the onset would be gradual. Horizontal beams and trusses would begin to sag; vertical columns, if subjected to strong forces, would begin to bend." The problem is Griffin is ignorant of the bending and sagging well before collapse! Firemen could see that the structures were failing well before they collapsed. Look what firemen said they saw: "We saw a bulge in the southwest corner between floors 10 and 13 ... You actually could see there was a visible bulge, it ran up about three floors." - Deputy Chief Peter Hayden "That building doesn't look straight." - Captain Chris Boyle "A number of fire officers and companies assessed the damage to the building. The appraisals indicated that the building's integrity was in serious doubt." - Fire chief Daniel Nigro

"Yeah, we had to pull everybody back. It was very difficult. We had to be very forceful in getting the guys out. They didn't want to come out. There were guys going into areas that I wasn't even really comfortable with, because of the possibility of secondary collapses. We didn't know how stable any of this area was. We pulled everybody back probably by 3 or 3:30 in the afternoon. We said, this building is going to come down, get back. It came down about 5 o'clock or so, but we had everybody backed away by then." - Deputy Chief Peter Hayden
Division 1 - 33 years http://representativepress.blogspot.com/2006/09/wtc-7-was-severely-damaged-on...

Category:

Nonprofits & Activism

Tags:

• WTC7
• WTC
• collapse
• footprint
• conspiracy
• controlled
• demolition
• 9/11
• 911
• Gage
• fireman
• firemen
• Verizon
• building
• damage
• truth
• world
• trade
• center
• debunked
• debunking

[Iffy50]

So you're saying that building 7 fell over?  I've seen video and I have to say it looks like it's coming straights down... and fast. If it fell over I wouldn't cry foul, but to me it certainly didn't look like it fell over. I agree it looked damaged, maybe the firemen could assess that it wasn't worth trying to fight the fire. However, I think everyone who saw it come down was very surprised.

[IndividualParties]

@mrfellowship

":Silverstein admits to it"

LOL, no he doesn't, you still believe that myth? It's funny how long the 9/11 "truth" cult will continue to repeat something that has been long refuted, like the old "pull it" canard.

"w building 5 and 6 they have severe damage 100 times more damage "

That's not a very rigorous or compelling argument. "100 time more damage," lol, are you sure it wasn't more like 90 times more? Maybe it was a 114 'times' more damage. LOL, wtf?

[mrfellowship]

Hey dorky why don't you show building 5 and 6 they have severe damage 100 times more damage than building 7 and 5 and 6 had to be "pulled" if you don't know that term just watch the other videos when they "pull" or controlled demolition" Silverstein admits to it, Barry Jenkins was walking around in that building, BUILDING 7 WAS TAKEN DOWN BY THE USA GOV

[islandbuoy4]

sorry dude

you are a waste of time

why don't you end it now?

WTC7 clearly shows puffs of smoke and crimping in the middle of the building.

Unless there is a demolition company that can lay charges in a few hours amid the 911 panic?

Your inane ramblings suggest the following:

Are you another PATRI-IDIOT who has checked into Hotel DeNILE?

[shroomraptor]

@911sausageman Fire has never brought down a steel structured skyscraper before or after 911, period. Buildings have burned for 20+ hours and were still standing when the fires were put out, so you're fire theory doesn't hold up to reality. Your third paragraph is of your own invention, I do not see where I stated anything you attempt to address in that paragraph. Your fourth isn't even worth the time. Still, tell us what caused the pulverization of the concrete or can you not do this?

[911sausageman]

@shroomraptor a B-25 lost in the fog hit the Empire State building, a building totally unlike the WTC towers in that it has steel reinforced by concrete.

The WTC DID withstand the impacts from the jetliners. The subsequent fires is what brought the building down.

That you think that because it falls downward IN THE DIRECTION OF GRAVITY like in your precious 'comparison' videos, is simply stupid.

Really impressive how you've learned structural engineering in just a few hours on youtube!

[shroomraptor]

@911sausageman And while I can not name another building that has withstood 500mph crashes, I do know the Empire had a plane strike it and is still standing. Thing is, the WTC was built to withstand impacts from fully loaded 707's, which outweigh what did strike that day.

Have you ever heard the phrase, if it walks, talks & acts like a duck, then it's a duck before? Well, I believe that sums up your question concerning the compare & contrast known CD's with 911 now does it not?

[shroomraptor]

@911sausageman Plus the fact, kerosene doesn't even reach a temperature that could weaken the steal in the building, let alone cause it to melt. How did these kerosene induced fires pulverize concrete to dust? Why is it that the steal was removed from the crime scene before any investigation if the story we've been sold is true? The only time evidence is removed from a crime scene is when someone has something to hide. Put that in your pipe and smoke it.

[shroomraptor]

@911sausageman The portion of the buildings above the impact may have fallen that day, if the center core steal columns were severed but the bulk of the building below the impact would not have fallen. It's that simple but I know that is above your head. The buildings fell at near free fall speed, meaning every floor would have to fail instantaneously, which is fucking impossible unless a demolition device(s) were used, which is obvious from watching the numerous videos out there.

[911sausageman]

@shroomraptor I will name you one when you name me one other time that two jets traveling 500mph crashed into buildings constructed like the WTC towers.

Why do you think watching videos showing how buildings fall down in CD, just like they did on 9/11, prove anything?

Which way were the buildings supposed to fall? Up?