John Kerry Says WTC 7 Was Brought Down in a Controlled Fashion

[hsedin33]

Here is the video the reporter is referring too, about them 'pulling' WTC 7. He didn't want to risk more firemen losing their lives, so they pulled it. Must have been one super intense demolitions team, running through a burning building with enough explosives to take down a reinforced 47 story steel structure only to have the whole thing taken down perfectly on its own footprint. (Oh, without anyone knowing or seeing them). Kudos to them

[nucklehead]

Funny if it's true. This statement means they quickly wired it for demo and brought it down, the same day of the towers falling?

[VICanucksfan5551]

Here is the video the reporter is referring too, about them 'pulling' WTC 7. He didn't want to risk more firemen losing their lives, so they pulled it. Must have been one super intense demolitions team, running through a burning building with enough explosives to take down a reinforced 47 story steel structure only to have the whole thing taken down perfectly on its own footprint. (Oh, without anyone knowing or seeing them). Kudos to them

[Offensive Threat]

Wake up sheeple! The towers were never brought down! They are still there hidden behind carefully placed mirrors! Its now the NSA's super secret base for monitoring our thoughts. Its so obvious.

Conspiracy theories are for people who want to feel important or special and have no way to do that in a productive way so they get into this ridiculous "hobby".

[hsedin33]

It was in reference to the firefighter operation going on there.

[La Mauviette75]

The term pull-it meant to take it down.

[nucklehead]

No, it's referring to firefighters pulling out of the building. The original conversation, which is so often misquoted was between Silverstein and the fire chief. he was saying that considering the amount of life lost already and the nature of the fires in building 7, it was probably best to just get everyone out.

not to mention that pulling a building, even in demolition terminology, doesn't refer to bringing a building down with explosives, but rather with cables, which clearly wasn't the case on 9/11.

http://www.debunking911.com/pull.htm

[VICanucksfan5551]

The term pull-it meant to take it down. If the building seriously fell based on damage and fire, it would have come down in chucks and pieces, parts of it would still be standing. Look at buildings in world war two, you have buildings made of brick that sustained bombings and intense fire, but they still stood to some degree. But this 47 level reinforced steel structure comes toppling right down? Not to mention in free fall motion at all four corners. If you look at the middle of the roof, it collapsed inward right before and during the collapse, which is typical to make a building fall into itself and not out. I'm sorry but it just doesn't look right. It looks like a building was brought down on itself by design or at least had a little help. Visually if this doesn't look in the least bit fishy to you then there isn't much more we can argue about, because that is what I'm going on.

[Batmania]

Dear god some of you folks are funny.

[ronthecivil]

Not this again.....

[TimberWolf]

We're still talking about "pull it"?

That was always about the firemen.

[Aladeen]

A layman's opinion of what "looks fishy" means exactly nothing.

[ilduce39]

my biggest issue I have with the "inside job" track is how unnecessarily elaborate 9/11 was if all they were looking for was a justification to march into a tactically-insignificant Afghanistan that has a track record of chewing up occupying forces.

Iraq's phantom "weapons of mass destruction" excuse seems just plain lazy in comparison.

[taxi]

Can we please let this die.

I'm sure plenty of wall and structures were demolished as part of the clean up/repair process.

Also, how would John Kerry even know about this conspiracy. He's a democrat and was just some random senator at the time of 9/11. You're talking about a group of people who can't even keep their marital affairs under wraps. If the senators knew anything about a 9/11 conspiracy, a lot more evidence would have found its way to the surface by now than random cut-off sound bites.

[taxi]

You're absolutely right, but perhaps it may be worth considering the opinion's of this group of people:

This group is made up of around 2000+ Architects and Engineers http://www.ae911trut...n/evidence.html

I think they have a little more knowledge on the subject than anyone in here, John Kerry, the Media or even Popular Mechanics.

All they are asking for is to open the investigation once again.

Why does anyone who questions the official story automatically fall into the category of Conspiracy Nut or the like? Why is the mere mentioning that there could be another possible explanation from what we are told by the mass media is ridiculed?

These are just questions and questions are good things to ask.

[apollo]

All the towers and the pentagon where brought down in controlled fashion.

Planes can't take down steel building. Its 100% impossible especially those buildings

[taxi]

my biggest issue I have with the "inside job" track is how unnecessarily elaborate 9/11 was if all they were looking for was a justification to march into a tactically-insignificant Afghanistan that has a track record of chewing up occupying forces.

Iraq's phantom "weapons of mass destruction" excuse seems just plain lazy in comparison.

[Aladeen]

Because it was a highly documented and investigated event. And there was absolutely zero proof of a conspiracy.

[Offensive Threat]

All the towers and the pentagon where brought down in controlled fashion.

Planes can't take down steel building. Its 100% impossible especially those buildings

[prana16]

Apparently Democratic Presidential Candidate John Kerry was in the planning meeting for the uber secret inside job planned by Republican pres george bush. Sounds legit.