Anomalous Collapse of World Trade Center 7 on 9/11/2001
Before diving into this controversial subject, I want to make something perfectly clear. I strongly support the founding principles of these United States and all the good men and women who honorably serve the best interests of this nation. You and I can give this support by fulfilling our Constitutional obligation to keep ourselves informed; and to thus provide a check and balance to the actions of our public officials. We must do so by rising above our biases and letting the facts speak for themselves. The Bill of Rights is preserved when we carry out this responsibility. Bearing these ideas in mind…
Do you think a disposable cigarette lighter can melt your wrought iron or stainless steel pan? Would your answer change if a panel of experts showed you a computer simulation demonstrating such a happenstance? The respective answers are no and of course not. How about if the panel suggested to think otherwise labeled you as crazy or unpatriotic? Again, your answer might take the form of pound sand (further expletives deleted). Yet by implication, this analogy is only one of several highly improbable events that you are asked to believe to support the conclusions of the official 9/11 investigation.
In the two-part video below, I highlight some of the most obvious errors/deceptions – in particular, those surrounding the collapse of World Trade Center 7 (WTC7). As some of you may still be unaware, WTC7 was only exposed to several hours of nominal fire (and was not hit by an airplane), yet it still collapsed into its own footprint. Despite numerous examples of high-rise fires, never before has this caused such a collapse. A recent example of a raging high-rise fire in Shanghai has led even some of the most skeptical to wonder: why didn’t it collapse like WTC7? (see photos after video)
Collapse of WTC7 – Part 1 of 2
Collapse of WTC7 – Part 2 of 2
Shown below is the nominal fire in WTC7 compared to a raging fire in a Shanghai high-rise. You can read the full story of this recent fire in the New York Times’ article here.
WTC7 on 9/11/2001 Shanghai High-rise on 11/15/2010A question is begged: why didn’t this building collapse like WTC7?
Even mainstream media is beginning to admit that WTC7 was brought down by controlled demolition as embodied in Geraldo Rivera’s reversal shown in the video below. (A note of emphasis is called for here: whether Rivera, Beck, Stewart or any other pundit espouses their opinion is basically of zero interest to me. I only include this video in the knowledge that many of you are still swayed by what is reported in the mainstream. Again, for me, let the facts speak for themselves…)
Geraldo Rivera changes his mind on WTC7
For those of you who wish to learn more about 9/11, I highly recommend you explore the rather comprehensive testimonial and scientific evidence as presented in the links below.
Lucus: The Ultimate Con – 911
FireFighter Eric Lawyer Slams NIST And The 9/11 “Investigation”
New Hampshire Referendum
David Chandler Most Recent
Neils Harrit Peer-reviewed paper nanothermite
Military Officers for 9/11 Truth
Architects and Engineers
Patriots Question 911
Scholars for 911 Truth
Revealing new aerial photos of 9/11 attack released