rabbitoh - there were plenty of staged witnesses appearing on Fox etc just minutes after the building was hit with full blown theories about what happened. They were all liars. I don't normally post about who said what the argument is endless. The case of WTC7 is markedly different.
WTC7 a stand alone building, 47 stories of steel and concrete, unhit by any plane, and even less by much flying debris as nut case claims because it was too far away, and finally affected by small low temperature fires any firefighter that day would confidently have expected to control suddenly falls the first 100 ft at exactly freefall speed, then the rest of the way at close to freefall speed stright into its own footprint. That's nothing short of a miracle.
WTC7 is the reason why many former 'believers' came to change their minds about the official story. The pulling of WTC7 was the single biggest mistake made by the real conspirators that day and neither NIST nor FEMA are able to give an account of how it happened. NIST in particular says it has a theory for the collapse of WTC7 but will not reveal its reasoning. NIST are flat out liars. They categorically said there were no explosives used in WTC7 but also reveal they never analysed a single piece of steel from the buildings. They also deny the presence of any molten metal in the twin towers despite video evidence of it and many reports from salvage witnesses. They also deny any explosions taking place in any of the buildings though explosions were reported by hundreds of WTC employees and many firemen.
how much bull do you have to swallow before you wake up?
actually, I'm surprised at your position on this. From many of your posts on other matters you appear to be of independent thought? anyhow, it's your call mate...
