Added: 3 years ago
From: NsaneSk8er007
Views: 71,970
Sort by time | Sort by thread (beta)

Link to this comment:

Share to:

All Comments (1,137)

Sign In or Sign Up now to post a comment!
  • Comment removed

  • No it wasn't It was the terrorist

  • @kharvick2908 and the terrorist was your government!

  • 9/11 = 100% Inside Job and a Coverup. WE WANT A NEW INVESTIGATION!

  • The general public in the US IS STUPID because they want to believe what the media and politicians tell them.

  • @Vertigo1894 Wow, you're such a rebel.

  • A hotel can withstand fire better than the trade centers could because... the trade centers were hit with a FUCKING AIRPLANE. Isn't it common sense that it wasn't the fires that made it collapse but that a FUCKING AIRPLANE CRASHED INTO IT. lololololol people really believe this garbage?

  • FUCK YOU

  • @jordanmarie9 You are an absolute complete moron. Building 7 was not hit by an airplane. Any person with half a brain looking at the video of the building 7 collapse can tell that this was clearly an implosion. As a matter of fact I was watching the news that day and as soon as they started to fall I said to my friend, those buildings were just imploded. It was pretty obvious as we have standard in this country for buildings.

  • you cant compare the materials of 40 yrs ago to the ones that are used today. they compare the fire in a new hotel to the the towers. also being there at the time i never heard any explosions when the tower fell. if you ever seen a building being demolished the explosions are so loud that car alarms go off for miles.

    morons!!!

  • Oh great NAIVE America.

  • grate song...

  • I like how conspiracy videos fail to show the prior 8 seconds to the WTC 7 collapse in which the penthouse slowly collapses from left to right into the deteriorated core of the building, leaving the rigid outer frame to collapse completely. You act like you're smarter than scientists because you're dissatisfied with taking certain things at face value. There's no big plan or conspiracy, the universe is indifferent.

  • @kolyazhuravlyeva You're only avoiding what is presented in this video. Unless you can prove it wrong, your argument has no merrit.

  • @Antilli There's nothing to prove wrong. All the evidence that truthers provide is what doctors call 'extremely circumstantial'. "OH, DIS ONE BUILDING WAS BURNING ONCE, AND IT DIDN'T COLLAPSE. 9/11 WAS AN INSIDE JOB." The size of a fire is not relative to the heat that it creates, it is the chemical reactants contained within the fire that determines the temperature at which it burns. Also, it's spelled 'merit'.

  • @kolyazhuravlyeva So..? It's still an office fire and won't reach high enough temperatures..

  • @Antilli The fire originated from jet fuel. The argument presented in the video is a farce constructed from baseless and irrelevant evidence, and makes laughable conclusions. The only PROOF contained in this video is the PROOF that the public is silly.

  • @kolyazhuravlyeva And even Jet fuel can't make fires burn hot enough to melt steel.

  • @kolyazhuravlyeva you prove the "conspiracy theory" is true in your statement. How exactly were the core columns collapsing in a building that was not hit by a plane and had fires burning in it that were not engulfing the entire building? The core was removed by explosives, which they found residue of, and there is no physical way 47 floors can collapse without any resistance. The universal laws of physics apparently did not exist regarding this.

  • Hey everyone STFU please, no one cares

  • @TheJimmy144 nah

  • Comment removed

  • it's too bad people who post these interesting videos match them up to the most unlistenable "music," which only serves to diminish the serious thought we might give this material. I am a firm believer that WTC7 was demolished--consciously brought down--because Larry Silverstein saw additional opportunity to increase his fat insurance payout, and, in essence, to "finish the job" at Ground Zero and remove all the buildings for which he held the leases.

  • never trust a bush unless it's burning.

  • all will reveal itself in 2012

  • I got lava lamps that burn brighter than the fire that was in building 7!

  • How in the world were the fires in WTC 7 started in the first place?

  • @marinecorps29 FALLING DEBRIS FROM THE TOWERS... HAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

  • @mrdazzzza1 That's what I thought, a bunch of pulverized concrete dust started fires INSIDE the building... pffhh

  • @mrdazzzza1 Even better question to ask is what offices were on those floors that were burning. I would bet they were floors that contained information they wanted destroyed before the blew up the building.

  • @shermanr6 very true..

    

  • "Never trust a Bush unless it's burning". I like that!!!!

  • @asspirate. You know, they have made a lot of medical breakthroughs in the last decade or so, Now, even primates like you can lead a somewhat normal life. One thing they seem to not be able to cure is head up your ass syndrome. Im so sorry. maybe they can shove a straw or a hose up there so you can atleast get some air to what little brains you do have.

  • @ASSHOLE. Get a life and stfu.  Im not going to argue with another one of you fucktards on here. You do have the right to be as much of a fucking moron as you want to be. So Ill just leave it at that.

  • @blackjerryboymetal Not to be mean or nothing, but I realy think you should get your information from other sources then the corporate owned news channels. RESEARCH, RESEARCH. RESEARCH. I cant stress this enough. Peace.

  • Of course. That Hotel had just suffered 3 million ton's of building collapsing right next to it too. The beautiful symmetry of the conspiracy retards is the cleverer they THINK they are being, the stupider they actually are in reality.

  • The BBC reported the collapse of WTC7 40 minutes before it collapsed. We were watching in London and chatting with friends in US so we knew it was coming down before you even saw it. PLANNED implosion.

  • You Americans are so naive! You believe whatever your big daddy government tells you. You are afraid to see the truth. The WTC 7 had a single fire in one room in one floor and you believe it fell down like the ones with the big airplanes in them because they told you.

  • @b35991 Was exactly what I was gonna say. Jet fuel burns anywhere from 1000°C to 2500°C. Steel melts at around 1370°C depending on the type of steel alloy that is used. so your "theory" is thrown out the window you "9/11 truthers" My god give up already. Obama was born in Hawaii. My mother who was born in Hawaii around the same time as Obama in the same hospital as him has the same type of certificate of live birth. Wish all you people who hate how America has turned out leave this damn country

  • It takes a simple understanding of physics to realize that these "9/11 Truthers" are full of shit.

    How about you do some actually research of your own instead of simply pulling bullshit out of thin air and taking information from these conspiracy websites.

  • @Piiratekid1 You sound like you've did your research and found the answers you were looking for, can you tell everyone who should do their research , exactly what you found? and what they should be looking for ?

  • @matt876mma You should first start by going to a physics class, maybe going to back to highschool.

    Also, realize that the towers didn't burn down. They FELL down. It doesn't take an engineer to know how the towers fell. I'll explain it in a later comment, when I have more time.

  • I said it once, and I'll say it again-

    "911 was a political-Ideological Revolution."BB

  • Inside Job!

  • @Born2Flesh The fact that the WTC's didn't have concrete inner cores is well known and completely undeniable. You have very clearly just demonstrated the ignorance of the entire truther movement by your refusal to even take the time to assess if this were true or not, and instead just saying that the person who said it is "full of shit." It's almost funny how blatantly you all deny things which cannot be denied just because they don't conform with your retarded views. Grow up..

  • sorry folks but real youtube core comment, can someone refresh why bush brought this building down? was it because it had national debt ppwk in it or?? I forget

  • @Wojtek107 The most likely theory is that it was the command center for the operation. An explanation by Dimitri Khazlov is that the twin towers were brought down by nukes buried deep underground. He thinks the bombs were on rails sent from wtc7 to the twin towers. I like the underground nuke idea, but I don't see the point of using a rail delivery setup.

  • One possibility is that the real cover up happen during the constuction of building 1,2 and 7 , we were led to believe that all suporting frame work was made of metal...wrong , to save money the contractors used suports made of hard caramel wich would the explained the strong "candy store " like smell long after the colapses according to some witnesses...jet fuel melting candy ... I can live with that.

  • Yes:- very posble. I wonder who made that call(to pull 7) ?

  • Yep have had these thoughts myself apart from where is flight93 (just a hole in the ground) though yes your theory does work:- 93 was never ment for Washington, we've only been told that by media ! They must have been shitting bricks when 93 didn't show. Hence the delay and mixed messages!

  • flight 93 was supposed to hit no 7 to make a collapse more palatable They didnt plan for that appointment to fail.

    NO structural reason for bldg 7 to fall but it had to go because the records had to go and it was already set

  • metal becomes incandescent when heated enough and the color given off is an accurate and senstive indicator of temperature. You cant make any metal white hot whit orange flame. an orange-yellow flame is no more that 2000 degrees , white hot is 4000 degrees.

    Only thermite can melt ANY metal that hot. There IS NO other option unless there happened to be a huge carbon arc furnace installed in the building with its own power plant and even then it takes hours to melt that much

  • GOOD VIDEO TO NsaneSk8er007!!!

  • >"To shift the blame away from the guilty."

    Let me fix that for you Bush:

    "To shift the blame ONTO the guilty."

  • funny this 2 plains was of aluminium.how it is impossibel like you see cut this 2 building like butter.

    Alum agains steeal gives no sens..But look very closely you see explosions before planes hit and go into building

    On this way there also was no plan to investegate..oh i forgot 1 singel pas not plantet of cia on street from one of the terroist..Hmmm what a joke

  • To be honest I saw no proof of controlled demolition in the entire video. Just comparisons. The one question I have is why did you not show the south side of the tower. the side that was much more damaged. I suggest to all of you that you look up the engineering of World Trade Center 7. Also look up the Con Ed Substation which it was built over which created difficulties in construction that caused the building to be pulled down. And the most important fact, where are the explosions?

  • please now show footage of the side of building 7 that bore the brunt of the damage from the falling towers. Were the firemen who said that part of the foundation was gone and moved people out of the way because they knew it would fall, were they in on it? maybe they were masonic jewish firemen

  • i would make the point that the hotel was not struck by a plane like the world trade center. but that being said i am at a quagmire because those buildings were desinged to take that type of a hit and still be structurally intact, minus the 747 sized hole in the building. there is no way in hell that those buildings collapsed because of the fire.

  • clearly explosives, but this was planned months ago and surely not by any terrorists

    but hey, i don't expect you to see it, the majority of people is just manipulated dolls, hf

  • @IQdecline Clearly. Where is the explosion that all explosives create? Where were the demolition crews (It would take a week and a hundred guys to demo a building that large, and no building that large has ever been demoed) Where are the witnesses of the demolition crews and explosions? Where are the explosions that are seen?

  • @phlyegles43

    it imploded NOT exploded...difference...and it collapsed due to fires. either you live in a box or you are just that naive...if a two story house catches fire on the second floor it WILL NOT collapse like that...

  • @chasindacool

    Do you know how implosions work? The center most of the building will be detonated, as the center collapses it will pull the exterior in and down toward the center. It all goes well the building will land in its footprint on top of the collapsed core. However, The World Trade Centers Core was the last thing to collapse. Feel free to look at any videos. The building failed at the perimeter columns not the interior. Not an implosion. The core was last to fall.

  • @phlyegles43 There was no need to detonate the "core". We (pro and anti-conspiracists) are ALL working on the ERROR that WTC1 and 2 actually HAD CORES. Unbelievable though this is, they were actually supported SOLELY by the central and outer steel columns with NO CONCRETE CORE, unlike any sane tall-building design. The "core" was a set of columns protected by... ONLY 2" fireproofed PLASTERBOARD. Watch "NOVA: Why The Towers Fell" for 100% proof. ANY moderate fire would have destroyed the Towers.

  • Don't worry, Nell......we know you're full of shit. lol

  • funny how you see no explosions like a real demolition

    truth movement lying once again

  • the building was demolished and didnt collapse, larry silverstein was informed by the fire department and he decided to bring it down so there you go.

  • @owlbob69

    lol yeah, fireman making an agreement with the buildings owner just 5-6 hours after one of the biggest catastrophes to ny ever and get explosives quickly, bring them on and let this building collapse ... all happening while its burning ... sure that sounds really plausible, pls, get a brain and wake up

  • or maybe the chinesse have tougher building regulations the americans....LOL

  • Let us not tolerate outrageous conspiracy thories concerning the atacks on september 11th. malicious lies that atempt to shift the blame away from the terrorists themselves. away from george w douche, dick cheney, larry silverstine and any one else that defends these bastards, and the rediculous bull shit they have tried so hard to cram down our throats.

  • I'm still confused what exactly the point of blowing up WTC7 was? No one really heard anything about it until conspiracy theorists got ahold of it.

  • @soccergarcon I couldn't say for certain. The FBI, DoD, IRS, and Secret Service all had offices there, and all evidence of Enron's tax fraud was destroyed with the IRS office. So, it could have been done to destroy the evidence of any number of cases.

  • Excellent Video - pretty much sums it up.

  • Made in China

  • this is the most retarded video on this topic i have seen. I dont think I even need to explain why. Good day to you sir

  • This "music" SUCKS...

  • Maybe yes....

    The Twin Towers could have collapsed by fire for sure.

    WTC7 should not havd not in that mannor, i think it a coinsidence that the only 3 buildings to implode as if by demolition charges but caused by fire are the 3 that went down on 911.

    Also many pics show the planes to apear to be Military and not Passenger.

    I dont think they was holograms thats silly, but RC Military filed with fuel and maybe other stuff, i think you cant rule it out based on some of the proof

  • Whats the name of the song?

  • jfk did 911

  • when u look at it from 1:45 it looks exactly like a demolition. It's too "clean" a collapse. Compare demolition vids to this and u find their identical.

  • @BurningHeretics demolitions use explosives, what do you think a huge plane with jet fuel is?

  • 9-11 was in FACT an inside job.

  • Why are you all fighting amongst yourselves??? Half of you believe that 2 planes hit 2 buildings and 3 were brought down because of it. The other half of you believe the US Government was behind the attack so that we can go to war and be stripped of our rights. Why not listen to both sides of the story and do your own research from there. What makes you believe others are stupid when you haven't taken a solid look at both sides? Quit calling each other stupid. That gives credence to your own

  • @thnksmarter Everyone will be implanted with a chip by this year 2017, 2025 everyone will have a chip implanted in their skull called the soul catcher. The politicians don't want to talk about this right now, having everyone tagged with an implantable device called, Verichip, Rfid-chip, PositiveID, Mondex, and Health Link. And they will be called by different names in the future.

  • Comment removed

  • @blackjerryboymetal

    No you are an idiot, and thats a real shame

  • @blackjerryboymetal

    Look underneath the video you haven't even bothered watching. Over 50,000 views yet only 38 dislikes!. To say that YOU are in the minority here is beyond an understatement.

    Your "question" was marked as spam by someone, because you had posted numerous times to numerous people. Further more; It had absolutely nothing to do with the conversation that you were trying to get out of having.Your tactics are weak a puney.

    Maybe it's just time you realised that you're wrong.

  • @blackjerryboymetal

    That's all you have? some cut and paste/ marked as spam comment that has NOTHING to do with either my last or your last comment!. What a pathetic fail.

    Run along little pup, this topic is to big for your teeny brain.

  • @blackjerryboymetal

    I haven't read the entire NIST report.. and neither have you! so, prey tell; WHAT is your point?

    You seem to prefer using diversionary tactics to counter my valid point rather than just facing it head on. Why is that?

    If you want some sort of battle of words then it would only be fair for me to first warn you that you've already lost. If you can't even talk the talk then you deffinately shouldn't attempt to walk the walk. Move along or I'll shut you down.

  • @blackjerryboymetal

    What a moron you must be to use NIST statements as your evidence that NIST have not lied. DOH!

    Is that your girlfriend at the begining? lol

  • Don't trust a bush unless it's burning....I love it!

  • I dont know why people still question this it is as clear as day.

    IT WAS A CONTROLLED DEMOLITION

    Fuck sake even Larry Silverstein the guy who owned the building fucked up on t.v and said the building was pulled........then tried to say weeks later he meant pull the firefighters out PULL IT does that sound like he was referring to people pull IT

    WHY ARGUE FUCKING CONTROLLED DEMOLITION YOU BLIND BRAINLESS FUCKING IDIOTS...

  • pull it, is not even a term used in the demolition industry, it's real meaning is to pull with cables, which is what they did to building 6 during the clean up of the site, and if you say it was a controlled demolition, than how come there was no evidence such as det cord, blasting caps, copper backing from explosive charges indicating a controlled demo ever found at ground zero. and do u know how long it would take to rig both towers and building 7 for demolition, without nobody noticing them

  • @sgrocker45 When considering the possibility of Government involvement, you also need to consider the possibility they've got access to resources far more advanced than anything found and used by us, so you can't limit yourself.

  • @m1kereport yeah but if that is true, u still would have to take in to consideration the fact that a large number of people would be needed to rig the explosives in the buildings and not one worker in the buildings would notice a bunch of workers installing explosives

  • @sgrocker45 And with government complicity the potential to covertly pull this off is a definite possibility. After all it's a government building.

  • the only place steel structures collapse from fires is NYC.

  • Isn't it interesting about what makes the news. A huge skyscraper goes up in flames and it doesn't even get a tiny blurb in the newspapers.

  • Dark times ahead fellow travellers :(

  • Everyone knew it was going to collapse long before it did. Physics tells us that if you have fires started on multiple floors at once and no sprinklers then the single support in the center of the building that held up the end of the pent house that fell was going to collapse. Everyone knew it. They told all of the news agencies it was going to fall. They pulled out to a safe distance. I linked footage of a fire fighter talking about how it was going to fall.

  • @DRAT311

    Get back to your kitten videos, idiot.

  • @DRAT311 Your proof is psuedo scientific nonsense. Steel buildings do not collapse from fires. Especially; They do not disappear completely like the twin towers. Now 3 buildings suffered complete collapse on that day, and you think it was not demolition? You are in denial my friend...........

  • @Moissenjeff Fire burns hotter than 1300deg right? Steel is reduced to 50% strength at 1300deg. Thats science. The WTC is the only steel only high rise structure to be allowed to burn for that length of time with no fire suppression. There is nothing to compare it to. There are even smaller steel buildings that did collapse though. Windsor in Madrid is the perfect example of steel vs concrete. The steel portion collapsed in 2 hours while the concrete portion survived. Steel fails in fire

  • @DRAT311 WTC is the only steel frame building allowed to burn for that lengt of time!? So there is nothing to compare it with!? Now I know you are lying!!!

  • @DRAT311

    There are several buildings that have burnt way longer than WTC, search for Winsor in Madrid or Chinese Building Fire Skyscraper

  • @Moissenjeff Produce me a steel only building that had that many floors burning simultaneously without sprinklers or fire hoses. There isn't one. Winsdor in Madrid had concrete columns, not steel. The top 11 floors however WERE steel only and they collapsed completely after just 2 hours and 13 minutes of fire. I already mentioned this but I guess you aren't even reading my posts before responding.

  • @DRAT311 The WTCC building in Beijing was also a concrete core building. Concrete is not weakened by fire like steel is. Everyone knows this. The fact that you guys keep comparing concrete building fires to steel building fires betrays the fact that you know nothing about structural design or engineering. You can't even grasp the basics like the difference between steel and concrete.

  • @DRAT311 Yes because your post are not that interesting. Besides if you look at the tapes before the collapse, you will see a lot of thick smoke. This is because the buildings are not really burning very hot, if they where burning as hot as you claim there would be virtually no smoke at all. Also I heard a tape recording of one of the firemen saying before the collapse: " small isolated pockets of fire". And the fact that all three buildings fell close to g, makes this a no-brainer: INSIDE-JOB!!

  • @Moissenjeff Black smoke can only come from a cool, oxygen deprived fire? Then explain to me how the following fire was a cool burning oxygen deprived fire - /watch?v=ZnfvM1cRxpI And the twin towers didn't even fall at half G. The large debris falling from the top left clearly falls all the way from the top to the ground while the tower has only collapsed half way. /watch?v=DoOp40E6UZg

  • A blind man that claims vision is still blind

  • @DRAT311 A blind man that claims vision is still a blind man

  • @Moissenjeff A man with no proof who spouts random bits of wisdom still has no proof.

  • @DRAT311

    the only cure for your idiocy is a gun to the back of your head, I dare you to take a IQ test retard

  • @DRAT311 Exactly right

  • @Moissenjeff By the jews and reptilian aliens of course.

  • @Ltbird The jews? All of them? Aliens? Reptillians? I do not believe in aliens. I do however believe there are humans that worship Bathomet and Molok, and those are the ones that are behind this shit..........

  • @Moissenjeff Yes, Bohemian grove, where all world leaders go and sacrifice a human to a 40 ft owl named Moloch.

  • @DRAT311 I'll stick to believing the actual structural engineers who claim it was imploded with thermate. Evidence of molten steel in the earth and hot for a week...forget about those fires causing that. You'd have to be an idiot to believe that crap. The center begins to descend first. (CD) Collapse begins as roof equip. fold inward. (CD) Explosions heard by witnesses (CD) 7 Billion insurance payout (CD) Lost swindlers files (CD) War to the mideast (CD) patriot act and CONTROL (CD) FU

  • @haolejohn Name the structural engineers who believe it was imploded with thermate. I want to see their papers on the subject. No one heard explosions when WTC7 came down. Its on video. No explosions. Besides, thermate doesn't explode. Which was it? Get your own story straight. There was no 7b insurance. watch?v=dDXNDZDATLg "FU"? Brilliant. Obviously you're arguing from a biased emotion driven perspective. You don't believe it, you FEEL it.

  • @DRAT311

    your still a retard. it was a controlled demolition. PERIOD.

  • @sausagenmuff When I provide a long list of facts and you have nothing to refute it with except personal insults that's the very definition of victory.

  • Comment removed

  • Common sense made them know this one would. No tall buildings had collapsed due to fire? fpemag.c o m/archives/article.a s p?issue_id=27&i=153 Also, how many steel only buildings have had structural damage, fires started on multiple floors at the same time, and no sprinklers? ZERO. This was a first. And since they had some understanding of physics they knew it was going to collapse. Thats why they pulled all the firefighters out and closed off the area waiting for it to fall.

  • Ok, I'll link the video again, not that you'll watch it this time but watch?v=Afb7eUHr64U - Engulfed in flames. It was leaning but as soon as it lost integrity it fell down.  Thats how gravity work. It did fall slightly to one side, as evidenced by the debris across the street and the damage it did to the verizon building when it fell against it.

  • @DRAT311 that was a HUGE hole. I had never seen that video before.

  • @Hogan10298 Yeah, so few shots of the damage to WTC7 exist because everything to the south of the building was a mass of burning rubble and tall buildings block the view from a distance. That one picture at 1:06 in the video watch?v=_kSq663m0G8 is the only shot I've seen that shows how that entire corner of the building was scooped out by WTC1 when it fell.

  • If the Titanic happened today millions of truthers would say that it makes no sense at all for a giant steel ship to get brought down by a tiny piece of ice so it must have been an inside job. If something doesn't make sense on the surface you have to break it down piece by piece and look at how it could have happened. If each step in the process makes sense then the event as a whole makes sense, regardless of how strange it seemed at first glance. Truthers avoid details for this reason.

  • @DRAT311

    lol @ "a tiny piece of ice", that's the stupidest thing I've ever heard anyone ever say about the sinking of the Titanic.

    These random sweeping presumptions that you seem to be using as reinforcement for your own previously formed opinions are without logic.

    Answer me this; how is it possible that molten steel/ iron was pouring out from WTC2 and also found beneath the rubble weeks later. HOW IS THAT POSSIBLE?.

    I bet you don't have the nuts to respond to this question!

  • @ShillBasher It didn't happen. You're seeing Molten aluminum and assuming its steel. Aluminum melts at 900deg and the fires were burning at 1800 deg. And the images that "prove" molten metal was found in the ground were proven to be edited stills from a video where the light source claimed to be glowing steel was clearly shown in the video to be a flood light. debunking911.c o m/moltensteel.h t m

  • @DRAT311

    You're talking to someone who spent the first 5 years of his working life in a non-ferrous foundry. If you think for one second that molten aluminium glows deep bright orange when being poured then someone's obviously been lying to you

    /watch?v=OmuzyWC60eE

    First responders reported molten steel underneath the complex WEEKS after the collapse yet NIST still deny this:

    /watch?v=8YaFGSPErKU

    Once again; someone is lying to you, perhaps it's your own eyes?

  • @ShillBasher First responders dont know the difference between molten aluminum and molten steel. watch?v=DiQOMJvQTpg - Video of molten red hot aluminum. pubs.usgs.g o v/of/2001/ofr-01-0429/thermal.­r09.h t m l - The ACTUAL USGS report from their site which your video claims shows 3000deg temps but actually only shows 1300deg. Hot enough to produce molten aluminum. Now, I'm confused what you think all this was supposed to prove anyway? What would it mean if there had been molten steel?

  • @DRAT311

    It's irrelevant what temp' aluminium melts at because the molten metal that was filmed by numerous people pouring out of WTC2 was NOT aluminium.

    It looks as though I need to say this again:

    You're talking to someone who spent the first 5 years of his working life in a non-ferrous foundry. If you think for one second that molten aluminium glows deep bright orange when being poured then someone's obviously been lying to you.

    So.. are you still going to claim it was aluminium?

  • @ShillBasher WOW... all I can say is wow. If you're too afraid to watch the videos I link you of molten aluminum flowing red hot then I'm done arguing with you. It will liquify before it glows red but it will glow red if heated above that temperature... still well below 3000deg. I gave you video proof. There are about a dozen videos of red hot aluminum on youtube if you search "molten aluminum." Its easy to hold on to your beliefs if you COMPLETELY ignore every argument coming at you.

  • @DRAT311

    I'm ignoring nothing. You on the other hand are completely ignoring the FACT that I know exactly what molten aluminium looks like. You obviously need to watch videos to try and find out, whereas I can tell you from my own personal experience.

    Do you know from experience what consistency & color molten aluminium has? NO of course you don't!. I on the other hand CAN tell you from experience that it is very silvery and liquid and not at gloopy or thick.

    Temp' can't change that!

  • @ShillBasher Yes, keep ignoring the video proof I link you. You're like a little kid being told Santa Claus isn't real but you don't want to believe it so you're closing your eyes and sticking your fingers in your ears and yelling " la la la la la la I can't hear you." I work for the CIA, dozens of molten aluminum videos on youtube are all CIA fakes, 9-11 was an inside job, we've never been to the moon, santa claus is real, I'll stop threatening your reality now. Good day.

  • @DRAT311

    I can keep kicking your ass like this for ever a day, but somehow I just don't think your worth the effort.

    I have practical real world experience of working with molten aluminium.. YOU DON'T!, deal with that fact and move along.

    Bye troll

  • @ShillBasher lol@ the name shill basher :) You made me smile today

  • @DRAT311 You sir are a moron

  • @Moissenjeff I've already been called every name in the book and been accused of working for the government. I've even been threatened. You guys have run out of Ad Hom attacks and Red Herrings. You've said and done everything EXCEPT provide any proof that I am wrong. I deal in links to evidence and multiple videos that prove what I'm saying and you deal in personal attacks and "Nu uh." You guys wont even look at my proof. It's like trying to have a formal debate with a 5 year old.

  • @ShillBasher Everyone knew for hours that WTC 7 was going to collapse. watch?v=_kSq663m0G and a firefighter commenting on the fact that its going to collapse watch?v=Afb7eUHr64U The building was leaning significantly so news agencies were told that WTC7 is collapsing. When someone tells you they just got a report that WTC7 is collapsing its obvious that someone would turn around and say WTC7 collapsed. Is it more likely that conspirators told thousands of reporters ahead of time for no reason

  • @DRAT311

    WTC7 didn't gradualy start to collapse over a period of time. It collapsed suddenly and without warning. Some people may have speculated that it could collapse, but to actualy know that it was deffinately going to collapse raises yet more questions, like; how did they KNOW for sure and who did they tell?

  • @ShillBasher WTC7 most definitely did gradually start to collapse. The final collapse happened quickly of course. Gravity says hi. Fire fighters reported that it was leaning. The video I already linked shows the entire buildings engulfed in flames as a fire fighter says "that buildings coming down." They knew it had structural damage. They knew fires had been burning on multiple floors without sprinklers. The media had been reporting for hours that WTC7 was expected to collapse.

  • @DRAT311

    "WTC7 most definitely did gradually start to collapse" oh really!, could you prove that in some way?

    "it was leaning" Why didn't it fall sideways, then?

    "Engulfed in flames" admit it; you're lying now!

    "The final collapse happened quickly", err yeah.. really really quickly, about 7 seconds from begining to end. That's what I call quick!. Resistance says; hello?.

    No building like this had ever collapsed because of fire before so tell me this: what made them think this one would?

  • @ShillBasher Have you seen the model of the structural support for wtc7? There were 3 major steel beams supporting the upper structure. The one off by itself in the middle of the building was the one surrounded by fires. Thats the one holding up the corner of the penthouse that we see collapse first in the video. When that was weakened by 6 hours of fire it caused the core of the building to collapse.

  • @ShillBasher Building 7s collapse was not fully symmetrical. It did not collapse into its own footprint. A large portion of it fell across the street. It broke in two and part of it crushed the Verizon(iirc) building which had to be demolished. Watch the video I gave you and then tell me how it goes against the laws of physics. It blows my mind how you guys all think that just because all buildings fall down regardless of fire failure or demo that it defies the laws of physics. Gravity says hi

  • All of you had better prepare the meet God Almighty because there is coming a day when everyone will give an account to Him. ( warnings of wrath.com )

  • I dont recall the hotel having most of its core structure destroyed by a plane or having debris from another building fall on it. That hotel was simply on fire, not hit by a plane.

  • yo u can tell it was an inside job cause of the way it fell it looks like a demmolition no fucking tall as building is gonna fall on its self like that it wouldv fell over and fucked a bunch of shit up

  • So many ignorant americans still believe the bullshit story fed to them about 911.

    The smoking gun is flight 93.

    Engine parts weighting a ton were found 8 miles away from the supposid crash scene.

    And the crash scene itself is a conspiracy.

    Type in USGS geological survey 1944 Flight 93 those key words in google and you will see that crater that they told us was created by a plane crashing into it, was already there years ago.

    You have all been lied to, but your to ignorant to see.

  • i dont realy care all that much if it was real or set up but the fuel used for the jets when it burns on steel at a very high temperature it weakens it. also when the plane hit the building it could of easily damaged the steel as well.

  • @getgankednub your fucking stupid and brainwashed. Do you really believe the american government cares for us citizens. Healthcare is a prime example of this.

    And thermite was used in the trade centers when it was collapsed, thats what made it weaken and detonated explosives were placed throughout the floors of the trade centers, proof of this is as it collapsed you see squids (explosions coming as its collapsing 5 to 8 floors below the falling building) this is proof of demolition.

  • @ChilloutSessionZ Perhaps you should ask yourself the same questions you impose on others. Have you ever thought that you your self could be "brainwashed" buy your peers making these videos? these videos are nothing but propaganda made to exaggerate the fact that the governments story is not probable. Therefor people like you make up stories that make a little more sense to you. The only problem with your arguments is that they are so far fetched and ridiculous.

  • The only story that that has never been debunked, never been proven wrong, or impossible is also the one that makes the most sense. 2 planes hit the WTC, WTC 1 and 2 both collapsed after having most of its internal structure destroyed and by the fire that the fuel caused. Not the fuel itself. WTC7 was destroyed as a result of the structure being compromised debris from collapse of the first 2 towers as well as the fire that had spread to the building.

  • @mozleyman Fire dosnt stay lit for 8 fucking weeks asshole, thermite was found and used, and the bastard who did the 911 commision are all lying to us. Look what happened to JFK, a JFK commision report, same shit they did with 911. Why create a report written in lawyer fashion not easily read by the normal citizen and why make it a thousand pages which one can describe the event and proof of what they want to say in a simple page or two. 911 was an inside job, your a fucking parrot.

  • @mozleyman funny thing is everything I stated like I said before you ignorant kid is facts regarding 911, not my opinion like you are trying to state, but facts....and the facts dont add up regarding the bullshit lies they told us. They did it before with vietnam and they did it again with 911.

    Operation northwoods

    our government is nothing but satanic worshipping bastards at its highest level.