You can actually SEE the demolition cuts on this cross!
What is a Demolition?
When a building, such as a skyscraper needs to be brought down explosives are set a key points along a building (a process that normally takes weeks, if not months or analysis and preparation). Then the building is brought down "cleanly", into it's "footprint". A modern skyscraper is built with reinforced steel beams that can't be brought down with fire. There was no plan crash into WTC 7. There was no extra hot jet fuel in WTC7. The fires were not even particularly fierce in that building and it only covered a FEW floors. Before WTC7 fell everyone was told it was going to fall. Then it fell cleanly into it's footprint because it was a demolition. This took place in the afternoon. The only question left to ask here is whether this demolition was planned months before hand OR was done within a few hours using 9-11 as cover to hide George Bush's Securities Fraud Scandal (which WAS under investigation till that point BUT then stopped.) The cross above could easily have ended up in the same rubble pile with the WTC twin towers in the chaos of the hurried cleanup of the twin towers WITHOUT any investigation! Covered in full here = Securities Fraud & The Demolition of Building #7.
An Analysis Of The DEMOLITION WTC #7
If a building breaks it happens something like this;
Building Demolition Goes Wrong by DiagonalView
If a building is demolished it looks like this;
demolicion estadio-Atlanta Fulton County Stadium... by Kimaras
Look at these two examples:
Example 1 - Building #7 Falls
Example 2 - Building #7 Falls (different angle)
By comparison, this is an image of a building that caught fire in Madrid, Spain;
Here is a close up of the building, the fire is so hot the metal is bending;
This last picture is the same building after the fire has been put out...it's still standing;
Th way Building 7 fell (see above) looks like a demolition. You can learn more about demolitions here.
World Trade Center Building # 7 EXPOSED
[Important Note: If I seem to be somewhat dispassionate to some people who are encountering this evidence for the first forgive me, I've been studying stuff like this for years.]
BBC summarizes the problem of WTC 7 falling because of fire in this video...
The following article highlights the primary points this post goes over;
World Trade Center 7 Report Puts 9/11 Conspiracy Theory to Rest
Conspiracy theorists have long claimed that explosives downed World Trade Center 7, north of the Twin Towers. The long-awaited report from the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) conclusively rebuts those claims. Fire alone brought down the building, the report concludes, pointing to thermal expansion of key structural members as the culprit. The report also raises concerns that other large buildings might be more vulnerable to fire-induced structural failure than previously thought.
Today's report confirms that a fire was, indeed, the cause. "This is the first time that we are aware of, that a building taller than about 15 stories has collapsed primarily due to fires," Sunder told reporters at the press conference. "What we found was that uncontrolled building fires--similar to fires experienced in other tall buildings--caused an extraordinary event, the collapse of WTC7." The unprecedented nature of the event means that understanding the precise mechanism of the collapse is important not just to answer conspiracy theorists' questions, but to improve safety standards in the engineering of large buildings.
The final report describes how debris from the collapse of WTC 1 ignited fires on at least 10 floors of WTC 7 at the western half of the south face. Fires on Floors 7 through 9 and 11 through 13 burned out of control, because the water supply to the automatic sprinkler system had failed. The primary and backup water supply to the sprinkler systems for the lower floors relied on the city's water supply. Those water lines were damaged by the collapse of WTC 1 and 2. These uncontrolled fires in WTC 7 eventually spread to the northeast part of the building, where the collapse began.
Read more: World Trade Center 7 Report Puts 9/11 Conspiracy Theory to Rest - Popular Mechanics
This is the other side of the debate...
Some Architects and Engineers Analyze Building 7 (WTC 7)
Why would WTC 7 be demolished?
There could be several reasons (such as witnesses or wiping out evidence) but I think the most potent reason for an investigation is the one involving fraud as being convicted of fraud would not only end a presidency but would also put the guilty in prison... 'Bush was being investigated by the securities and exchange commission'. If the office of the commission doing any investigating was in WTC 7 then that would be a possible reason for a demolition
1. All news stations and relevant reporters and cops/firemen know the building is going to fall before it happens... yet the NIST report insists that they have proven something that has never happened before (i.e. a modern steel building falling by fire alone). How could people know something is going to happen before hand if it has never happened before as its an architectural and engineering impossibility?
Here is video evidence of news anchors/reporters knowing the impossible before it happened...
2. A Modern Skyscraper Has Never Before (or Since) Fallen By Fire
Including the following building which had an intense fire for 3 times longer than WTC 7...
By comparison, the following video shows the kind of fires that existed in WTC 7 that "did" fall by fire...
The problems with the fall of WTC 7...
(Click here for a clip of the fall of WTC 7 from BBC)
The following notes are from this video at BBC
Q. Why are many conspiracy theorists on 9/11?
A. Part of the reason is that answers are so long coming
Q.There are claims that BBS is part of this conspiracy
A. Because tower 7 was still standing when it was reported to have fallen
- the tapes were found (fortunately them finding the tapes was not necessary in today's easy recording environment)
- "There are often simpler explanations to some of these things"
That is true, problem is sometimes those easy explanations are denied or ignored. Of course, he was referring to the fact that some conspiracy theories are wrong which they are bound to be as explained above.
- The reporter being screamed at angrily for being part of the conspiracy (normal in the political environment of America as I demonstrated in my posts on Patrick McHenry's wall - and in this case, forced BBC to respond), can't be blamed for reading a press release. The building was supposed to be evacuated and the two towers had fallen which was far more traumatic.
- He say's that mainstream media or any official source will not be trusted by some, concerning 9/11 this is partly explained above.at approx 3 mins: - Reuters are the ones that sent out the press release that building 7 had fallen and then this report was withdrawn when they found out the building hadn't fallen.
Also, note in video #1 of this analysis above that every news organization and reporter were taken by surprise.
Conspiracy theories can get out of hand so context is important
When there is no investigation (or even a fake investigation) then obvious problems with an official theory will be noticed and amplified. A person (or group of people) can get paranoid and imagine problems where there are not any. If mistakes in theories are focused on while accuracies are ignored then you are making a big mistake in assuming human infallibility (even eye witnesses can be wrong sometimes).
However, when something is proven beyond doubt then only a cover-up that involves threats and killing (i.e. acting on those threats) will work. The election in 2000 was not just contested, it was unprecedented... Then the election of 2004 had its own problems. The question you have to ask yourself is this: If you killed people (which can be proven easily) then you know that if you are found out you will be tried and according to the law of your land, probably executed. If you have already stolen one election, blown up a building, all evidence pointing to yet another election steal... would you allow someone to come to power who could expose you? The simple answer is no.
The last 9/11 non-investigation...
Given the problems with testimony and evidence provided by low level eyewitnesses and government employees notice how well balanced the following investigation by BBC is...
[Approx 8 mins - It takes days/weeks to plan a building demolition for a biulding much smaller than WTC 7. ]
[ Approx 7 min 20 sec - Notice that the expert is a contractor with the US government. Given the torture being practiced by the Bush administration (Khalid Shaikh Mohamed admitted to doing everything bad beneath the sun, i.e. torture someone and they will tell you what you want to hear to stop it). What if you threaten witnesses? This is a comedy video that explains what is going on and many people may find it distasteful, however, watching it is necessary to understanding basic human psychology. ]
[Approx 7 min 10 seconds - Barry Jennings (see above) retracts the implication of what he says and admits to wanting to pull his whole interview from some documentary investigation. He died shortly after. Barry - was the most credible eyewitness and also the only one with testimony that contradicts official government reports that had ties to the government]
In other words, BBC is the only news media with global reach that can be trusted for some balanced news reporting, even if its rather late. All you need is the ability/knowledge/patience to analyze information. US mainstream media has obviously been heavily compromised and can never recover their reputations if this were ever to come out and neither can the corporations that run them unless they blame everything on George Bush and Cheney. So there may be cover-ups in other areas such as oil or aspects of the financial disaster that are linked to 9/11 in some way or another. Many people will notice these cover-ups (and many will exaggerate the extant of it) and US mainstream medias reputation as mouthpieces will remain for many people. A transparent 9/11 investigation will hurt some powerful people very hard and they will resist to various degrees. This has to be kept in mind when investigating 9/11.
No matter how bad you think things could be, imagine what would happen if 9/11 came out but the corporations and politicians that will be trying to protect their reputation and who have demonstrated control over mass news media, are able to avoid a transparent investigation. They (mainstream US news media) will cause the greatest emotional chaos that a nation of traumatized people could go through, after 9/11.
If there is a proper transparent investigation with balanced news media reporting then there will be hue and cry but people will balance themselves in the new environment and get on with their lives.
If there is a lingering legacy of Sept. 11, 2001, this is it: Americans fear terrorist attacks, but they've come to live with the threat. They let workers dig through bags at Disney World. They take off shoes, submit to scans and frisks, and walk through metal detectors. They then set fear aside. And move on.