Conspiracy IV: WTC 7

The videos weren't exactly the same - the important difference was the highlighting of the penthouse's collapse to show that the popular 7-second collapse is wrong. Furthermore, WTC7 did NOT fall into its own footprint: - WTC7 leaning to the south as it collapses (http://www.debunking911.com...) - Massive amounts of debris clearly outside the building footprint (http://www.debunking911.com...) Also, WTC7 was not "only the victim of fires" as can clearly be seen here: - North Tower crashes into the south side of WTC7 (http://www.911myths.com...) - SW corner of WTC7 ripped away (http://www.rense.com...) - Entire south side of WTC7 smoking after the collapse of the North tower (http://www.911myths.com...). Descriptions of damage to WTC7: "on the north and east side of 7 it didn't look like there was any damage at all, but then you looked on the south side of 7 there had to be a hole 20 stories tall in the building, with fire on several floors. Debris was falling down on the building and it didn't look good." "Captain Varriale told Chief Coloe and myself that 7 World Trade Center was badly damaged on the south side and definitely in danger of collapse. Chief Coloe said we were going to evacuate the collapse zone around 7 World Trade Center, which we did." "we were pretty sure that 7 World Trade Center would collapse. Early on, we saw a bulge in the southwest corner between floors 10 and 13, and we had put a transit on that and we were pretty sure she was going to collapse. You actually could see there was a visible bulge, it ran up about three floors. It came down about 5 o'clock in the afternoon, but by about 2 o'clock in the afternoon we realized this thing was going to collapse." (http://www.911myths.com...) >> "As far as Mr. Silverstein is concered, for more than a year he refused to explain what he meant by the term "pull it"." Silverstein is neither in the construction/demolition business, nor in the firefighting business. The language of pulling firefighters from the building is obvious, but does not entirely explain the connection between pulling people out of the building and "pull it," which is used in cases where buildings are demolished via high-tension cables, such as was done to WTC6. Buildings as tall as WTC7 cannot be demolished by "pulling" them. Sliverstien's quote also says, "They made the decision to pull" [the building]. The pronoun "they" refers to the Fire Department. Why would the fire department be demolishing buildings? In a different, often-quoted interview, Silverstien said, "I said, you know, we've had such terrible loss of life. Maybe the smartest thing to do is to pull it." In this case, the pronoun "it" refers to the team of firefighters in the building. >> "They also claim that this was merely a mistake, however it does seem odd that neither the reporter in studio nor the reporter in New York city would recognize the error. Especially since the building was clearly visible behind her." In this case, it is indeed simply an egregious error. The most likely explanation is that the reporters had received notice that WTC7 was going to collapse, a conclusion the fire department reached by 2 PM. Mis-communication simply led to the reporters mistaking "is going to collapse" for "has collapsed" or even twisting the story in hopes of being the first network to accurately report the collapse. Furthermore, the announcer states that details on the collapse are "very, very sketchy," which may simply mean that details are guesswork. Also, this is not the first example of the media being completely wrong about something. A few good examples: Dewey defeats Truman. 13 miners alive, 1 dead. Kerry/Gephardt running for office. WTC7 has collapsed. AFFIRMED.