[Liberty4eva]

Originally Posted by Shasown

At the time of Jowenkos interview he was told to all intents and purposes WTC 7 was intact, he wasnt informed about the damage to the north side of the building.

Wasnt just the BBC who prereported WTC -7 had collapsed Aaron Brown of CNN announced the building had or was collapsing, then like a minute later announced it was about to collapse. Reporters live misspeak on occasion, using it as proof of a conspiracy shows how lacking your critical thinking skills are.

Given the overall confusion fear and panic isnt it possible she got confused? The BBC reporter on the spot was taking live feed from the London studio which in turn was taking live feed from US TV stations.

Remember that the Fire dept chief expected the building to collapse and issued orders pulling people away from WTC 7 at 3:00 in the afternoon.

It begs the question: HOW DO THEY KNOW IT'S GOING TO COLLAPSE? No other building in the history of steel-structured buildings completely collapsed due to fire. They tell you it's going to collapse because that way when it does collapse people, most of whom have no knowledge of buildings, won't think it's peculiar.

Of course she could get confused but the BBC's reaction when asked about the "confusion" suggests something more. They at first said they couldn't find the video in their archives which was laughable, considering that it was perhaps the biggest event of the last decade.

Originally Posted by Shasown

As for witnesses hearing explosions did they hear explosions, what sounded like could be explosions or did they hear the sound of reinforced concrete supports cracking under the immense loadings?

The term "explosion" gets used by dozens and dozens of eye-witnesses. But the phrase "building cracking", "building collapsing" nor any other phrase not using the word "explosion" gets used by eye-witnesses when describing the sounds.

Originally Posted by Shasown

As for the free fall of the building, what way do you expect a building to drop if lower floors collapse?

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/7485331.stm

I would expect the building to collapse gradually, not in the same manner as a controlled demolition. When a building collapses by natural means, there are dozens of ways it can collapse. Because the building supposedly suffered asymetrical structural damage, one would think it would collapse in the direction of the damage and not straight down into itself. If it collapsed due to fire I would expect it to collapse gradually over the course of hours and not seconds.

Someone once said "the bigger the lie, the easier the sell". The buildings were demolished in broad daylight with a million eyes and cameras on it. Who would ever suspect that anyone would have the audacity to do such a thing? The people who collapsed those buildings and the people who sold the lie had an advanced understanding of mass human psychology. They understood that it would be so obvious that it would be invisible to most people.