Welcome to the Unhypnotize Truth Community!
A great place to discuss conspiracies, UFOs, NWO, truth, reality and enlightenment.

• » Conspiracies Discussions
• » UFOs and Extraterrestrial
• » Spiritual and Paranormal
• » World and Alternative News

Its time to wake up to the global conspiracy...and move beyond...
Our community is here to spread truth, discuss the Global Conspiracy and the world wide Truth Movement!

YES! I want to register for free right now!
Results 1 to 2 of 2

Thread: Fire Consumes WTC 7 Size Skyscraper, Building Does Not Collapse

  1. #1
    UHF JUNKIE UHF Moderator Rank ricklbert's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Powell River, British Columbia, Canada
    Posts
    2,611
    Rep Power
    10

    Fire Consumes WTC 7 Size Skyscraper, Building Does Not Collapse

    Fire Consumes WTC 7 Size Skyscraper, Building Does Not Collapse
    Wednesday, February 11, 2009

    Fire Consumes WTC 7 Size Skyscraper, Building Does Not Collapse

    Giant flames engulf every floor and 34-story building and it remains standing, yet limited fires just across 8 floors of WTC 7 building brought down within 7 seconds on 9 / 11. How can NIST's "new phenomenon" explain this one?

    See all attachments below

    Paul Joseph Watson
    Prison Planet.com
    Monday, February 9, 2009

    A fierce fire consumed all 34 floors of a skyscraper in Beijing today, shooting 30 foot flames into the air, but unlike the similarly-sized 47-story WTC 7, which suffered limited fires across just eight floors, the building did not collapse in China .

    "The fire was burning from the ground floor to the top floor of the large building, the flames reflecting in the glass facade of the main CCTV tower next to the hotel and cultural center," reports the New York Times.

    "The 241-room Mandarin Oriental hotel in the building was due to open this year. Flames were spotted around 7:45 pm and within 20 minutes the fire had spread throughout the building, Dominating that part of the city. "

    "Hundred of fire fighting vehicles and police blocked off all approaches to the building - which was also set to house a luxury hotel due to be opened in 2009 - with flames appearing to leap 20 to 30 feet into the air," adds the London Times.

    Compare images of WTC 7 with those of the skyscraper fire in Beijing. Note that the Beijing skyscraper appears to be leaning due to the unorthodox design of the building - it did not suffer any kind of collapse.


    Beijing skyscraper.


    WTC 7


    Beijing skyscraper.


    WTC 7


    Beijing skyscraper.


    WTC 7

    To any sane and rational observer, which of these buildings would have been the most likely to collapse? And yet it was WTC 7 which collapsed within 7 seconds into its own footprint on 9 / 11. The Beijing skyscraper, though gutted by fire damage, remains standing.

    How do the debunkers explain away this one? How come NIST's newly invented "phenomenon" or "thermal expansion" did not put paid to the skyscraper in Beijing? Does fire have different properties in China compared to the U.S.? Does it behave in different ways depending on what country it's in?

    Remember that WTC 7 was structurally reinforced and suffered limited fires just across 8 floors.

    The core of NIST's explanation, that an "extraordinary event" called "thermal expansion" was to blame for the sudden total collapse of WTC 7 is of course on the face of it a fraud when one considers the innumerable number of buildings that have suffered roaring fires across the majority of their floors and remained standing, whereas WTC 7 suffered limited fire damage across a handful of floors.

    The Beijing skyscraper fire provides yet more evidence to illustrate the comparable monolithic hoax that fire damage alone can cause buildings to collapse implosion style, adding more weight to the argument that both WTC 7 and the twin towers were destroyed by explosives that were seen and heard by boxes or eyewitnesses who were at ground zero.

    Take another example - the Windsor building in Madrid, a 32 story skyscraper which was a Raging inferno for no less than 24 hours before fire crews were able to put out the flames. Despite the building being constructed or columns a fraction as thick as those used in the WTC twin towers, as well as a total lack of fireproofing, the building's top section only partially collapsed while the integrity of the whole structure remained firmly intact.



    Compare these images of the Windsor building fire to those of WTC 7 and the twin towers.



    The skyscraper fire in Beijing offers another bold and stark reminder that when one eliminates the dodgy, agenda-driven, and incomprehensible Delusion or NIST, one fact remains abundantly clear;

    Office fires - as the towering inferno flame shooting variety - can not cause modern buildings to implode in on themselves and collapse. Only deliberately placed explosives can achieve this end. The Windsor fire, the Beijing skyscraper fire and many more yet to come painfully underscore the awful truth that the only way WTC 7 and the twin towers could have collapsed in the manner that they did was by means of controlled demolition.



    Source: unitynet
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails Fire Consumes WTC 7 Size Skyscraper, Building Does Not Collapse-090209top1a-png   Fire Consumes WTC 7 Size Skyscraper, Building Does Not Collapse-090209top2-jpg   Fire Consumes WTC 7 Size Skyscraper, Building Does Not Collapse-090209top3-jpg   Fire Consumes WTC 7 Size Skyscraper, Building Does Not Collapse-090209top4-jpg   Fire Consumes WTC 7 Size Skyscraper, Building Does Not Collapse-090209top5-png  

    “How is freedom measured, in individuals as in nations? By the resistance which has to be overcome, by the effort it costs to stay aloft. One would have to seek the highest type of free man where the greatest resistance is constantly being overcome: five steps from tyranny, near the threshold of the danger of servitude.”

    Friedrich Nietzsche

  2. #2
    UHF JUNKIE UHF Moderator Rank ricklbert's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Powell River, British Columbia, Canada
    Posts
    2,611
    Rep Power
    10

    Re: Fire Consumes WTC 7 Size Skyscraper, Building Does Not Collapse

    More pictures
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails Fire Consumes WTC 7 Size Skyscraper, Building Does Not Collapse-090209top6-jpg   Fire Consumes WTC 7 Size Skyscraper, Building Does Not Collapse-090209top7-jpg   Fire Consumes WTC 7 Size Skyscraper, Building Does Not Collapse-090209top8-jpg   Fire Consumes WTC 7 Size Skyscraper, Building Does Not Collapse-090209top9-jpg  
    Attached Images Attached Images Fire Consumes WTC 7 Size Skyscraper, Building Does Not Collapse-090209top10-png 
    “How is freedom measured, in individuals as in nations? By the resistance which has to be overcome, by the effort it costs to stay aloft. One would have to seek the highest type of free man where the greatest resistance is constantly being overcome: five steps from tyranny, near the threshold of the danger of servitude.”

    Friedrich Nietzsche

Similar Threads

  1. 30-storey building burns, does not collapse
    By Unhypnotized in forum September 11th attacks (911)
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: November 15th, 2010, 01:50 PM
  2. Building What? Just How Did Muslims Bring Down WTC 7?
    By Unhypnotized in forum September 11th attacks (911)
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: September 4th, 2010, 07:52 AM
  3. WTC Building 7 Exposed to One Million New Yorkers
    By Unhypnotized in forum September 11th attacks (911)
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: August 30th, 2010, 06:29 AM
  4. Danish Prime Minister Knew WTC Would Collapse
    By Unhypnotized in forum September 11th attacks (911)
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: October 16th, 2009, 10:09 AM
  5. Building collapse in Pakistan's Karachi kills 21
    By CASPER in forum World News
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: August 1st, 2009, 03:28 PM

Tags for this Thread