Building 7 was so obviously a controlled demolition. Too much evidence to deny it. And lack of evidence for the official story. All that needs to be said is BBC reported that WTC7 had collapsed while it was STANDING BEHIND THE REPORTER SAYING IT. Wake up people.
@MaxwellEindhoven The fact that people who were actually in 7 that day repoted explosions that killed people. The fact that it fell from fires on 3 floors with no jet fuel at almost free-fall speed into it's own footprint. The fact that WTC 3, 4, 5 and 6 were all closer to the towers and took more damage but their steel frames still stayed somewhat intact. The fact that explosive material was found in the dust in the aftermath. I guess BBC repoting the collapse with it in the back isn't enough.
@82thadangerous1 The explosive material is never found. Yes someone says he did, but nobody ever got to see it. Nobody ever heard explosive sounds either. In a controlled demolition you'll hear them. Oh and fires burned uncontrollably for 8 hours, on 15 floors. At some point heated up to 1800 degrees F. Enough for steel to fail.
@MaxwellEindhoven Nobody heard explosions? Have you seen any eye-witness testimonies? What about Barry Jennings who repored explosions in 7 and is now DEAD mysteriously. Steel starts to melt at over 2500 degrees F anyway and that still doesn't explain how it fell directly down into itself. Watch Loose Change 9/11 An American Coup where he shows the material and how they tested it. There was NO REASON for 7 to collapse. That's why its not even mentioned by the 9/11 commision. Why is it so hard?
@82thadangerous1 Oh please, Loose Change is full of LIES! The makers themselves admitted it! No reason for WTC 7 to collapse? It burned uncontrollably for nearly 8 hours, with temperatures rising up to 1800 degrees. That's enough for steel to loose more than 50% strength and stiffness.
@MaxwellEindhoven And don't say the steel didn't melt because 2 WEEKS after 9/11 there were hot-spots of molten steel under both towers AND 7 that housed temps of over 3000F... Lava in the basement=explosives [or thermate, which was found in the dust, but for some reason people say it isn't]. People are afraid of the truth so they do like George Carlin said and "stroke themselves"... Stop sugar-coating society.
@82thadangerous1 Dude, the steel indeed never melted! Yes there were hot glowing steel members found, (not surprising, fires burned inside the rubble for weeks) and even molten METALS, NO MOLTEN STEEL! Thermate found in the dust? Where is it? Nobody ever gets to see it!
@MaxwellEindhoven I've seen the thermite. Small red chips that burn off quickly in heat. And there was molten steel pouring out of the south tower just before it collapsed. Even if the steel weaked enough for the upper floors to give way, there is NO SCIENTIFIC WAY THAT IT WOULD'VE FALLEN STRAIGHT DOWN INTO ITSELF. How can you people possible believe that? Something had to move floors out of the way for it to fall in 11 seconds. The top 30% of the building would not obliterate the bottom 70%.
@82thadangerous1 Molten steel from the South Tower? That was aluminum, it came pouring down from the exact floor where the airplane debris was piled up. Aluminum has a low melting temperature. If it was melted steel caused by thermite, why didn't we see it at multiple floors, at both towers?
@MaxwellEindhoven The makers said it was full of lies? Never HEARD something that actually SMELLED like bullshit. A skyscraper in madrid burned from top to bottom for almost 24 hours and the steel structure stayed up even though the top few floors fell. Which would've happened if the towers legitly burned like we were told. Steel buildings burn all the time, for hours and hours and hours and don't even get close to collapse. Get outta here with this bullshit. SKYSCRAPERS DON'T FALL FROM FIRE.
@82thadangerous1 Guess what, the tower in Madrid wasn't hit by a jet plane at top speed. The tower in Madrid did partially collapse, guess what, the top floors were made from steel. The other floors were made from CONCRETE.
It would be impossible to place all those explosives without anyone noticing. They would have had to tear out large sections of drywall and other building materials, pre weakened the support columns, and wire all the explosives together, all without a single one of the thousands of people who worked there noticing. All the video cameras present would have recorded a series of loud explosions immediately before the building collapsed if explosives were used.
Barry Jennings states that a huge explosion blew up the lobby before either of the towers fell. If you don't know who he is, google him. He died a few days before the final WTC7 NIST report came out. No word on cause of his death. It's been kept hush hush. Barry was a city official and credible witness to bombs going off in WTC7 that would have discredited the NIST report. 100% Inside Job
This collapse was so strange the 9/11 com. report failed to disclose it. Most of the sheep who think our government would never induce 3000 americans to this are the same who think they're trying to take away our 2nd amendment rights.......Heeeellloooo? Wake up people. The governments around the world are salesmen selling you the bankers BS lies.
Gretavo, no offense, but go watch a few controlled demolition videos. They look NOTHING like this. Btw, if the south side of WTC 7 wasn't severely damaged, as you say, then why did it fall towards the south? And more importantly, how did it not sustain massive damage from the top 20 or so floors of WTC 1 hitting it? Honest questions.
Its all still ridiculous. NIST's model would have us believe the building-err internal structure- collapses east to west. The facade, however, sits up nice and pretty until it is all ready to come down as one.
The east side of the facade was standing with no support (allegedly)!! If that is the case, then why couldn't west side stand with no support. Why didn't the building lean toward the west as the support dissapated.
But it really doesn't come down as one though. When the east side started falling, that weight was sitting on nothing. The first row of adjacent upright supports, then, was being torqued. The torque on each upright has not been considered by anyone. Myself, with a 20' cheater bar can exerpt over 4 tons of torque thus snapping a 1" bolt. We are talking untold billions of foot pounds of torque on each upright. That row of uprights snap, then the next and the next like dominoes "Shelling".
In real life though...does it really happen like "dominoes"?? Was this domino effect so efficient to induce a free fall?
What causes the facade to fall inward, without tearing itself apart, and with no resistance?
I work in commercial construction (generally masonry wall 1 and 2 story buildings). I can't imagine a free standing masonry wall just falling perfectly vertically by itself...with any amount of weight sitting o top of it.
@JSSTyger "In real life though...does it really happen like "dominoes"?? Was this domino effect so efficient to induce a free fall?" Not free fall. More like "sleight-of-hand". In reality and if the building were 3 miles wide you would see the curvature of the fall. From one end to the other of WTC7 the end with nothing under it collapsed first and only fell maybe 5 feet before the torquing shock reached the other end. Once the first floor lost all its pillars 7 had a 20' free fall.
@srs876chief OMG!!! sir, you deserve a cookie. You're the ONLY person on ANY page I've visited to use the word torque. I got your back man. Please, read the first 5 pages of comments for:
/watch?v=_kSq663m0G8
where I describe the 8 second precollapse and 6 second collapse in as much logical detail as I could muster.
1) Penthouse fell first. 30,000 tons + - splatting on ground & then sideways underneath center of 7 like a bulldozer. 2) Center of 7 starts falling due to the resulting injury. 3) Remaining vertical supports (on end which windows blew out) tried to hold up. Too much weight falling. This created scenario where an immoveable object is being pulled down by an unstoppable force. Crumple zones resulted. Busted windows are clues to crumple zones...not charges. Thank you for your time.
Would consume elevators and doors first then weaken beams. It should have resembled a 450' cutting torch. Post-collapse field entrapped sufficient heat to create a self-sustained smelting furnace (like an underground peatbog fire or coal vein burning). Oh yeah. It would melt steel. Some old timers melted a mountain of stone together a couple thousand years ago. Its still there to see. They knew about core temps and how to get things hot by burying them.
there is a problem. this puffs appeared after the building began to colapse and they were on top of the building so it wouldn't have help in the distructions.
8 or so stories a second is slow? I have a real hard time believing ejections proceeding up the wall that fast are a result of structural failures.
And how is this SW corner column, which was supposedly gouged out at the bottom, in any sort of compression whatsoever. And then it buckles 8 stories from teh top...still in compression some how...buckles 7 stories from the top...and so on and so on.
@JSSTyger The SW corner is an edge that shares the southern and the western faces of the building. This previous sentence is important, because plates are able to effectively transfer shear loads. In another page, I describe how, in the absence of the central support, perimeter beams take the brunt of the remaining load and fail, imploding inwards. The surface walls still are capable of xfering shear (unless the surface is visibly cracked, which it isn't.) and thus compression can be xferd 2crnr
That air was displaced, not exploded. As 7 went down, the elevator shaft on left had burned hole thru roof and cloud kind of belched out slowly. Elevator shaft on right had much smaller hole and air had to "spew" out of the hole and upward. You can see elevator shaft debris get blown out by the air as the building does the accordian thing (falls).
when you claim things like this that are so easily vrifiable as being utterly false, do you think it helps your case? how hard is it for people to look up videos of the building collapsing to see that it is by no means engulfed, let alone fully engulfed. even the official reports are clear on the limited scope of the fire.
No, it's many squibbs running UP the side of the building. I have seen the other side of this building too. Check out the MARK HEATH video for more explosive video, that you can't explain away either! *FREE FALL SPEED HERE TOO DOG!
Lol, have u seen the OTHER SIDE of the building? Those arnt demolition charges, it's the corner of the building that was fucked up. You all are fucking idiots, IT ISNT A FUCKING SQUIB!!!!
in regards to "we never knew they could use these as weapons" when on that vey day DICK was running SEVERAL confusing HIJACK "DRILLS" and previous scenerious holding the Pentagon as well as the WTC as targets by suicide plane crashes... It's a pretty damn convincing set of facts. At least the ones I've gone into... I haven't even talked about free-fall speed or molten metal!!
Ummm... I think the VIDEO TAPE showing the SQUIBBS MOVING STRAIGHT UP AKA COntrolled Demolition is "Obvious"... The REASONING Behind it requires some thought, but really that doesn't even matter. It's Just COnjecture... Facts are Facts, Marvin Bush = Security for the Twins and #7, as well as the AIRLINES involved. Add that with all the foreknowledge they got from other countries, the stock options placed before-hand, and their blatant lies
So OBVIOUSLY a controlled demolition. Building seven was the headquarters of the CIA, FBI, SEC, Secret Ervice, Giuliani's bunker, etc. It was deliberately detonated, just like the twin towers.
Whenever someone says "obviously," I know it's not so obvious. You're claiming those agencies all got together and decided to blow up their own offices? Right.
homeric9 above is correct that the building 7 collapse was not a controlled demolition. Everything else that people are saying is just conjecture and unsubstantiated assertions. The FDNY had assessed the severe damage & knew well in advance it would likely collapse. They neither saw nor heard any demo charges at the time of the collapse.
"There was a huge gaping hole and it was scattered throughout there. It was a huge hole. I would say it was probably about a third of it, right in the middle of it. And so after Visconti came down and said nobody goes in 7, we said all right, we'll head back to the command post." -- Captain Chris Boyle
The major concern at that time was number Seven, building number Seven, which had taken a big hit from the north tower. When it fell, it ripped steel out from between the third and sixth floors across the facade on Vesey Street. We were concerned that the fires on several floors and the missing steel would result in the building collapsing. --FDNY Chief Frank Fellini
"So we left 7 World Trade Center, back down to the street, where I ran into Chief Coloe from the 1st Division, Captain Varriale, Engine 24, and 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." -- Lieutenant Rudolph Weindler
I remember standing there looking over at building 7 and realizing that a big chunk of the lower floors had been taken out on the Vesey Street side. Chief Nick Visconti
"It was fully engulfed, that whole building. There were pieces of Tower Two [he probably means Tower One] in Building Seven and the corners of the building missing and whatnot. But just looking up at it from ground level however many stories -- it was 40 some odd -- you could see the flames going straight through from one side of the building to the other, that's an entire block." --Firefighter Tiernach Cassidy
@PoetryHound so you knob why did silverstien the money grabbing bastard tell them to pull it not that it was shown in this video think ABOUT IT PULL IT IS A TERM USED IN DEMOLITION that building was not that badly affected but was blown to the ground by demolition ffs
I would call it for the global fascist capitalist order, but same difference. And no, we have our elections stolen every time now, Florida in 2000 Ohio in 2004, so we need help--if you see an AMeircan you should tell them to learn the truth already.
The rest of the world is trying its best to spread the truth and many (including me) are boycotting american products.But we cant have a word on american elections or politicians.You guys can and (dont get this wrong, im not refering to u personally) should try a little more than being shocked into inaction.Now its not about the rest of world getting killed.You and your neighbor are getting killed for the New World Order...
lol America still makes products? Everything sold here is made in China. You might wanna try boycotting Israel, that may be a little more effective *hint hint*
Because the ones who doubt don't all realize the extent of the lies, and the ones who do, well, some of them are just shocked into inaction and the others are doing all we can to rouse people. It's not easy when the media completely ignore the issues and so politicians think they can get away with not addressing them. For that matter, why hasn't the world boycotted American products or something? You can't expect us to stop these people ourselves--they are a global mafia.
Of course im not refering to ALL of you, but if, as you say, only 16% believe the Bush story and the rest believe in the greatest massacre on american citizens made by american hands, how come NOTHING happens about it so far??
not all of us are retarded, but many have let their brains rot from too much TV and not enough critical thinking. the people who claim to know how building 7 collapsed and cite fire and debris are just professional liars trying hard to protect the real perpetrators from their inevitable fate. they are failing big tim--almost no one believes Bush is telling the truth (16% according to latest poll) about 9/11!
Are you americans retarded or what? Buildings like that dont collapse from debris or fire! Its no wonder to me that you have a president like that. As they say, people have the leader they deserve...
America is the vehicle for the new world order to carry out it's plans and largely owned & controlled by foreign interests. It's meant to serve as the big bad imperialist supervillian that people of the world rally against, then accept the aid of the loving UN world government in order to defeat. That's my belief at least, & what all evidence seems to point to.
Bldg 7 south wall was severly damaged by WTC1. Debris landed on the base supported by a truss system NO WAY equiped to deal with WTC1 falling on it. Damaged trusses, fuel fed fire at the base by ConEd generators in #7, higher floors ripped open by debris and on fire. A fire left to rage unmanned for 7hrs. Simplified, the trusses gave way and the internal skeletal support fell in on itself.
This is WTC7 shot showing the SE corner of the building, based on the angle and where the sun is. Those shots of dirty air we see are not bombs, rather they are structural columns snapping as the trusses on the below on the same side of the building gave way from damage from the north tower and fuel from the substation that caught fire. No grassy knoll here guys, just science.
oh is that what they are? hee hee. if you call that science, then please explain how fire caused steel columns to "snap". Especially since the buildings directly under the towers didn't collapse, and neither di d any other building, except building 7...
I see, somebody placed bombes there and by coincidence they exploded shortly after the WTC went down after being hit by 2 planes. But of course there is no coonnection between the 2 ocurrences. Drem on!
Is that your final answer? You don't seem to understand that this is WTC 7, not one of the twin towers. All this is is a closeup of http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fLnBSyc4ICo&eurl= you are yet another dumbass turned traitor post 911
Building 7 was so obviously a controlled demolition. Too much evidence to deny it. And lack of evidence for the official story. All that needs to be said is BBC reported that WTC7 had collapsed while it was STANDING BEHIND THE REPORTER SAYING IT. Wake up people.
82thadangerous1 5 months ago
@82thadangerous1 What evidence is there to proof it was a controlled demolition?
MaxwellEindhoven 4 months ago
@MaxwellEindhoven The fact that people who were actually in 7 that day repoted explosions that killed people. The fact that it fell from fires on 3 floors with no jet fuel at almost free-fall speed into it's own footprint. The fact that WTC 3, 4, 5 and 6 were all closer to the towers and took more damage but their steel frames still stayed somewhat intact. The fact that explosive material was found in the dust in the aftermath. I guess BBC repoting the collapse with it in the back isn't enough.
82thadangerous1 4 months ago
@82thadangerous1 The explosive material is never found. Yes someone says he did, but nobody ever got to see it. Nobody ever heard explosive sounds either. In a controlled demolition you'll hear them. Oh and fires burned uncontrollably for 8 hours, on 15 floors. At some point heated up to 1800 degrees F. Enough for steel to fail.
MaxwellEindhoven 4 months ago
@MaxwellEindhoven Nobody heard explosions? Have you seen any eye-witness testimonies? What about Barry Jennings who repored explosions in 7 and is now DEAD mysteriously. Steel starts to melt at over 2500 degrees F anyway and that still doesn't explain how it fell directly down into itself. Watch Loose Change 9/11 An American Coup where he shows the material and how they tested it. There was NO REASON for 7 to collapse. That's why its not even mentioned by the 9/11 commision. Why is it so hard?
82thadangerous1 4 months ago
@82thadangerous1 Oh please, Loose Change is full of LIES! The makers themselves admitted it! No reason for WTC 7 to collapse? It burned uncontrollably for nearly 8 hours, with temperatures rising up to 1800 degrees. That's enough for steel to loose more than 50% strength and stiffness.
MaxwellEindhoven 4 months ago
@MaxwellEindhoven And don't say the steel didn't melt because 2 WEEKS after 9/11 there were hot-spots of molten steel under both towers AND 7 that housed temps of over 3000F... Lava in the basement=explosives [or thermate, which was found in the dust, but for some reason people say it isn't]. People are afraid of the truth so they do like George Carlin said and "stroke themselves"... Stop sugar-coating society.
82thadangerous1 4 months ago
@82thadangerous1 Dude, the steel indeed never melted! Yes there were hot glowing steel members found, (not surprising, fires burned inside the rubble for weeks) and even molten METALS, NO MOLTEN STEEL! Thermate found in the dust? Where is it? Nobody ever gets to see it!
MaxwellEindhoven 4 months ago
@MaxwellEindhoven I've seen the thermite. Small red chips that burn off quickly in heat. And there was molten steel pouring out of the south tower just before it collapsed. Even if the steel weaked enough for the upper floors to give way, there is NO SCIENTIFIC WAY THAT IT WOULD'VE FALLEN STRAIGHT DOWN INTO ITSELF. How can you people possible believe that? Something had to move floors out of the way for it to fall in 11 seconds. The top 30% of the building would not obliterate the bottom 70%.
82thadangerous1 4 months ago
@82thadangerous1 Molten steel from the South Tower? That was aluminum, it came pouring down from the exact floor where the airplane debris was piled up. Aluminum has a low melting temperature. If it was melted steel caused by thermite, why didn't we see it at multiple floors, at both towers?
MaxwellEindhoven 4 months ago
@MaxwellEindhoven The makers said it was full of lies? Never HEARD something that actually SMELLED like bullshit. A skyscraper in madrid burned from top to bottom for almost 24 hours and the steel structure stayed up even though the top few floors fell. Which would've happened if the towers legitly burned like we were told. Steel buildings burn all the time, for hours and hours and hours and don't even get close to collapse. Get outta here with this bullshit. SKYSCRAPERS DON'T FALL FROM FIRE.
82thadangerous1 4 months ago
@82thadangerous1 Guess what, the tower in Madrid wasn't hit by a jet plane at top speed. The tower in Madrid did partially collapse, guess what, the top floors were made from steel. The other floors were made from CONCRETE.
MaxwellEindhoven 4 months ago
It would be impossible to place all those explosives without anyone noticing. They would have had to tear out large sections of drywall and other building materials, pre weakened the support columns, and wire all the explosives together, all without a single one of the thousands of people who worked there noticing. All the video cameras present would have recorded a series of loud explosions immediately before the building collapsed if explosives were used.
TimothyRaymond1 8 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Barry Jennings states that a huge explosion blew up the lobby before either of the towers fell. If you don't know who he is, google him. He died a few days before the final WTC7 NIST report came out. No word on cause of his death. It's been kept hush hush. Barry was a city official and credible witness to bombs going off in WTC7 that would have discredited the NIST report. 100% Inside Job
Born2Flesh 10 months ago
Demolition charges? What fucken bullshit! Why would you put charges all the way up the building when you only need them at the base floors?
Dumb conspiracy chucking fucks.
Dannavy85 1 year ago
This collapse was so strange the 9/11 com. report failed to disclose it. Most of the sheep who think our government would never induce 3000 americans to this are the same who think they're trying to take away our 2nd amendment rights.......Heeeellloooo? Wake up people. The governments around the world are salesmen selling you the bankers BS lies.
Jrm4cam 1 year ago
Gretavo, no offense, but go watch a few controlled demolition videos. They look NOTHING like this. Btw, if the south side of WTC 7 wasn't severely damaged, as you say, then why did it fall towards the south? And more importantly, how did it not sustain massive damage from the top 20 or so floors of WTC 1 hitting it? Honest questions.
Landrar 1 year ago
I'm just going to say somethings not right about this buildings collapse. It doesn't look right and the facts just don't add up.
rolandjrg 2 years ago
you guys are all a bunch of paranoid faggots.you guys are all a bunch of paranoid faggots.
gretavo 2 years ago
@gretavo Good one. Good one.
82thadangerous1 1 year ago
@gretavo Who's the fag when people like you keep allowing yourself to bend over and get fucked by the system...?
82thadangerous1 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
INVASTIGATION SOLVED!!! ..WATCH THIS CLIP'S !!!!!!!
watch?v=uCjg_k2cifE&feature=channel_page
watch?v=7nD7dbkkBIA&feature=re c-HM-r2
watch?v=1ijfWC1LlsI
watch?v=D1lFYO5zE-c&feature=related
BeAGentlaman 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
SEE THIS VIDEO ON YOUTUBE:
watch?v=SDBuQya4io8&feature=related
BeAGentlaman 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
SEE THIS VIDEO ON YOUTUBE:
watch?v=Cr82wmGt4_0
BeAGentlaman 2 years ago
Its all still ridiculous. NIST's model would have us believe the building-err internal structure- collapses east to west. The facade, however, sits up nice and pretty until it is all ready to come down as one.
The east side of the facade was standing with no support (allegedly)!! If that is the case, then why couldn't west side stand with no support. Why didn't the building lean toward the west as the support dissapated.
Remember what NIST's model is telling you.
JSSTyger 3 years ago
But it really doesn't come down as one though. When the east side started falling, that weight was sitting on nothing. The first row of adjacent upright supports, then, was being torqued. The torque on each upright has not been considered by anyone. Myself, with a 20' cheater bar can exerpt over 4 tons of torque thus snapping a 1" bolt. We are talking untold billions of foot pounds of torque on each upright. That row of uprights snap, then the next and the next like dominoes "Shelling".
srs876chief 3 years ago
In real life though...does it really happen like "dominoes"?? Was this domino effect so efficient to induce a free fall?
What causes the facade to fall inward, without tearing itself apart, and with no resistance?
I work in commercial construction (generally masonry wall 1 and 2 story buildings). I can't imagine a free standing masonry wall just falling perfectly vertically by itself...with any amount of weight sitting o top of it.
JSSTyger 3 years ago
@JSSTyger "In real life though...does it really happen like "dominoes"?? Was this domino effect so efficient to induce a free fall?" Not free fall. More like "sleight-of-hand". In reality and if the building were 3 miles wide you would see the curvature of the fall. From one end to the other of WTC7 the end with nothing under it collapsed first and only fell maybe 5 feet before the torquing shock reached the other end. Once the first floor lost all its pillars 7 had a 20' free fall.
srs876chief 1 year ago
@srs876chief OMG!!! sir, you deserve a cookie. You're the ONLY person on ANY page I've visited to use the word torque. I got your back man. Please, read the first 5 pages of comments for:
/watch?v=_kSq663m0G8
where I describe the 8 second precollapse and 6 second collapse in as much logical detail as I could muster.
UcanthandletheYouth 1 year ago
1) Penthouse fell first. 30,000 tons + - splatting on ground & then sideways underneath center of 7 like a bulldozer. 2) Center of 7 starts falling due to the resulting injury. 3) Remaining vertical supports (on end which windows blew out) tried to hold up. Too much weight falling. This created scenario where an immoveable object is being pulled down by an unstoppable force. Crumple zones resulted. Busted windows are clues to crumple zones...not charges. Thank you for your time.
srs876chief 3 years ago
where does the molten steel come into you "theory"
QymLym 3 years ago
Would consume elevators and doors first then weaken beams. It should have resembled a 450' cutting torch. Post-collapse field entrapped sufficient heat to create a self-sustained smelting furnace (like an underground peatbog fire or coal vein burning). Oh yeah. It would melt steel. Some old timers melted a mountain of stone together a couple thousand years ago. Its still there to see. They knew about core temps and how to get things hot by burying them.
srs876chief 3 years ago
what your saying is different to the new official nist version
QymLym 3 years ago
Obviously, not building 7. Go take a look at what WTC 7 actually looked like and compare.
While you're at it, eat shit.
usc90Productions 3 years ago
It most certainly IS WTC 7. See the GldBR Veoh video for proof.
JSSTyger 3 years ago
I mean this is the complete reverse sequence of what we saw in towers 1 and 2. One "could" be pancaking...the other cannot be. Pick your poison
JSSTyger 3 years ago
there is a problem. this puffs appeared after the building began to colapse and they were on top of the building so it wouldn't have help in the distructions.
lordandrei1991 3 years ago
The most important thing is how rapid it was. It shot up there like a speeding bullet.
JSSTyger 3 years ago
they were quite slow
lordandrei1991 3 years ago
8 or so stories a second is slow? I have a real hard time believing ejections proceeding up the wall that fast are a result of structural failures.
And how is this SW corner column, which was supposedly gouged out at the bottom, in any sort of compression whatsoever. And then it buckles 8 stories from teh top...still in compression some how...buckles 7 stories from the top...and so on and so on.
JSSTyger 3 years ago
@JSSTyger The SW corner is an edge that shares the southern and the western faces of the building. This previous sentence is important, because plates are able to effectively transfer shear loads. In another page, I describe how, in the absence of the central support, perimeter beams take the brunt of the remaining load and fail, imploding inwards. The surface walls still are capable of xfering shear (unless the surface is visibly cracked, which it isn't.) and thus compression can be xferd 2crnr
UcanthandletheYouth 1 year ago
That air was displaced, not exploded. As 7 went down, the elevator shaft on left had burned hole thru roof and cloud kind of belched out slowly. Elevator shaft on right had much smaller hole and air had to "spew" out of the hole and upward. You can see elevator shaft debris get blown out by the air as the building does the accordian thing (falls).
srs876chief 3 years ago
honestly, you shouldve made the video a few seconds longer. but this is indeed daming evidence.
Slobbert 3 years ago
Wow, you have shown the side of the building begin to collapse. You have 2 seconds of garbage. Thanks for playing.
streakingcameraman 3 years ago
DEEZ NUTS
FooFooTheClown 3 years ago
"It was fully engulfed, that whole building. "
when you claim things like this that are so easily vrifiable as being utterly false, do you think it helps your case? how hard is it for people to look up videos of the building collapsing to see that it is by no means engulfed, let alone fully engulfed. even the official reports are clear on the limited scope of the fire.
gretavo 3 years ago
this tiny bit of video is all that you could show? - or is this the only bit that looks like a demolition?
wkwickham 3 years ago
Better lock/remove this video, cause Mr. Gage disagrees:
/watch?v=dGIxdnKouoc
ArmchairRevolution 3 years ago
No, it's many squibbs running UP the side of the building. I have seen the other side of this building too. Check out the MARK HEATH video for more explosive video, that you can't explain away either! *FREE FALL SPEED HERE TOO DOG!
yodalantern 4 years ago
Lol, have u seen the OTHER SIDE of the building? Those arnt demolition charges, it's the corner of the building that was fucked up. You all are fucking idiots, IT ISNT A FUCKING SQUIB!!!!
WTCTribute 4 years ago
No, you're a fucking idiot. Stop calling people names. Or I'll call you some more. Ass.
FooFooTheClown 3 years ago
You're ganna make me cry :(
Call me whatever you want, I don't really give a shit lol.
WTCTribute 3 years ago
I hope you have sex with a girl someday without her screaming "no, Daddy, stop it!"
FooFooTheClown 3 years ago
Thanks for the Video. 2 Seconds. How many thousands of words have been written, summed up THERE.
yodalantern 4 years ago
in regards to "we never knew they could use these as weapons" when on that vey day DICK was running SEVERAL confusing HIJACK "DRILLS" and previous scenerious holding the Pentagon as well as the WTC as targets by suicide plane crashes... It's a pretty damn convincing set of facts. At least the ones I've gone into... I haven't even talked about free-fall speed or molten metal!!
yodalantern 4 years ago
Ummm... I think the VIDEO TAPE showing the SQUIBBS MOVING STRAIGHT UP AKA COntrolled Demolition is "Obvious"... The REASONING Behind it requires some thought, but really that doesn't even matter. It's Just COnjecture... Facts are Facts, Marvin Bush = Security for the Twins and #7, as well as the AIRLINES involved. Add that with all the foreknowledge they got from other countries, the stock options placed before-hand, and their blatant lies
yodalantern 4 years ago
So OBVIOUSLY a controlled demolition. Building seven was the headquarters of the CIA, FBI, SEC, Secret Ervice, Giuliani's bunker, etc. It was deliberately detonated, just like the twin towers.
idotvads 5 years ago
Whenever someone says "obviously," I know it's not so obvious. You're claiming those agencies all got together and decided to blow up their own offices? Right.
PoetryHound 5 years ago
homeric9 above is correct that the building 7 collapse was not a controlled demolition. Everything else that people are saying is just conjecture and unsubstantiated assertions. The FDNY had assessed the severe damage & knew well in advance it would likely collapse. They neither saw nor heard any demo charges at the time of the collapse.
PoetryHound 5 years ago
hmmm, cite sources often? i'd be very interested in seeing this assessment of severe damage on the part of the FDNY. where is it?
gretavo 5 years ago
"There was a huge gaping hole and it was scattered throughout there. It was a huge hole. I would say it was probably about a third of it, right in the middle of it. And so after Visconti came down and said nobody goes in 7, we said all right, we'll head back to the command post." -- Captain Chris Boyle
PoetryHound 5 years ago
The major concern at that time was number Seven, building number Seven, which had taken a big hit from the north tower. When it fell, it ripped steel out from between the third and sixth floors across the facade on Vesey Street. We were concerned that the fires on several floors and the missing steel would result in the building collapsing. --FDNY Chief Frank Fellini
PoetryHound 5 years ago
"So we left 7 World Trade Center, back down to the street, where I ran into Chief Coloe from the 1st Division, Captain Varriale, Engine 24, and 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." -- Lieutenant Rudolph Weindler
PoetryHound 5 years ago
I remember standing there looking over at building 7 and realizing that a big chunk of the lower floors had been taken out on the Vesey Street side. Chief Nick Visconti
PoetryHound 5 years ago
"It was fully engulfed, that whole building. There were pieces of Tower Two [he probably means Tower One] in Building Seven and the corners of the building missing and whatnot. But just looking up at it from ground level however many stories -- it was 40 some odd -- you could see the flames going straight through from one side of the building to the other, that's an entire block." --Firefighter Tiernach Cassidy
PoetryHound 5 years ago
@PoetryHound so you knob why did silverstien the money grabbing bastard tell them to pull it not that it was shown in this video think ABOUT IT PULL IT IS A TERM USED IN DEMOLITION that building was not that badly affected but was blown to the ground by demolition ffs
SuperJoseppi 10 months ago
I would call it for the global fascist capitalist order, but same difference. And no, we have our elections stolen every time now, Florida in 2000 Ohio in 2004, so we need help--if you see an AMeircan you should tell them to learn the truth already.
gretavo 5 years ago
The rest of the world is trying its best to spread the truth and many (including me) are boycotting american products.But we cant have a word on american elections or politicians.You guys can and (dont get this wrong, im not refering to u personally) should try a little more than being shocked into inaction.Now its not about the rest of world getting killed.You and your neighbor are getting killed for the New World Order...
priapus26 5 years ago
lol America still makes products? Everything sold here is made in China. You might wanna try boycotting Israel, that may be a little more effective *hint hint*
DaveIrie 5 years ago
LOL True
enigmastarr8 5 years ago
Because the ones who doubt don't all realize the extent of the lies, and the ones who do, well, some of them are just shocked into inaction and the others are doing all we can to rouse people. It's not easy when the media completely ignore the issues and so politicians think they can get away with not addressing them. For that matter, why hasn't the world boycotted American products or something? You can't expect us to stop these people ourselves--they are a global mafia.
gretavo 5 years ago
Of course im not refering to ALL of you, but if, as you say, only 16% believe the Bush story and the rest believe in the greatest massacre on american citizens made by american hands, how come NOTHING happens about it so far??
priapus26 5 years ago
not all of us are retarded, but many have let their brains rot from too much TV and not enough critical thinking. the people who claim to know how building 7 collapsed and cite fire and debris are just professional liars trying hard to protect the real perpetrators from their inevitable fate. they are failing big tim--almost no one believes Bush is telling the truth (16% according to latest poll) about 9/11!
gretavo 5 years ago
Are you americans retarded or what? Buildings like that dont collapse from debris or fire! Its no wonder to me that you have a president like that. As they say, people have the leader they deserve...
priapus26 5 years ago
America is the vehicle for the new world order to carry out it's plans and largely owned & controlled by foreign interests. It's meant to serve as the big bad imperialist supervillian that people of the world rally against, then accept the aid of the loving UN world government in order to defeat. That's my belief at least, & what all evidence seems to point to.
DaveIrie 5 years ago
Bldg 7 south wall was severly damaged by WTC1. Debris landed on the base supported by a truss system NO WAY equiped to deal with WTC1 falling on it. Damaged trusses, fuel fed fire at the base by ConEd generators in #7, higher floors ripped open by debris and on fire. A fire left to rage unmanned for 7hrs. Simplified, the trusses gave way and the internal skeletal support fell in on itself.
homeric9 5 years ago
This is WTC7 shot showing the SE corner of the building, based on the angle and where the sun is. Those shots of dirty air we see are not bombs, rather they are structural columns snapping as the trusses on the below on the same side of the building gave way from damage from the north tower and fuel from the substation that caught fire. No grassy knoll here guys, just science.
homeric9 5 years ago
oh is that what they are? hee hee. if you call that science, then please explain how fire caused steel columns to "snap". Especially since the buildings directly under the towers didn't collapse, and neither di d any other building, except building 7...
gretavo 5 years ago
lol as if the grassy knoll theory for the JFK shooting has no scientific basis. No intelligence here guys ^ just arrogance.
DaveIrie 5 years ago
bombs!
prinparis 5 years ago
I see, somebody placed bombes there and by coincidence they exploded shortly after the WTC went down after being hit by 2 planes. But of course there is no coonnection between the 2 ocurrences. Drem on!
megagato 5 years ago
Is that your final answer? You don't seem to understand that this is WTC 7, not one of the twin towers. All this is is a closeup of http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fLnBSyc4ICo&eurl= you are yet another dumbass turned traitor post 911
gretavo 5 years ago
It's the floors and walls collapsing on the inside first.
Yet another conspiracy nut turned physics/crash site expert post-9/11..
PS: that doesn't even look like the WTC..
chibiq 5 years ago