WTC 7 is about to "blow up"

[SUPREMEMASTER1]

Damn straight it blew up.

[Firewolf35023]

Say what you want but the footage clearly shows the building falling into it's own footprint... The only time that happens is under controlled demolition...

[audiofiend80]

Sooo.... What about the explosions heard by a security worker in building 7 before the 2 towers even came down? That guy mysterously died after telling his story on tv 2 years after it happend. HHMMMM? The plot thickens!!

[rfl133]

to those who don't know "Building 7" contained MANY FBI and CIA documents....... Need I say more?

[electramax]

Anyone with an IQ over 100 can see it's controlled. It's been proven so with forensic evidence.

Time to stop being in denial and DEMAND a blue tape investigation that is NOT associated with the US govt.

[kingofthepaupers]

Jct: This is the greatest video convincing me of demolition there is.

[TheUSMC2017]

Haflor is right, small time cops would not know that the buildings were about to "Blow up." If there was a cover up, it was sloppy. The leaders of a successful cover up would disregard the human life, and forego the whole plane thing. Just use the explosives, blame whoever you want to blame, and keep up the media coverage.

[8real]

@TheUSMC2017

I think you missed the point of the video. Thanks for watching and commenting on it though. If you read a few of my comments. I have said, the explosion in the background is what is interesting. They said it was going to blow up because that is what you think when you hear explosions going off...These cops didn't get a secret radio message. They heard something and told them to move back...The cops never said it was going to blow up. The workers did...

[AntiNWOMusic]

The guy looks like a calm and intelligent cop, if he meant the building was going to fall down or collapse he would have said "move back the building is about to collapse" , he said "blow up".

Hey why not every time anyone says "the building is going to collapse" we just say they really meant the building is going to blow up. If it works one way why not the other?

Apart from the reams of 'coincidences' about 911, the fact that so much was brushed under the carpet and ignored speaks volumes.

[unclesamnephew666]

This was a controlled demolition job.

[JSSTyger]

@unclesamnephew666

0:40...NW corner demo'd

[WNanette]

As far as the Uniformed guys (versus suits) they all knew about the idiotic diesel storage tanks within WTC7, I feel that is what the Uniformed guys were referring to.

Suits may have known about pre-existing shape charges, but Uniformed guys wouldn't have.

[Haflor]

They probably meant that the building is about to collapse. How the heck would these guys know if the building was goanna "blow up"? You guys all say this was some mass major government cover up so how ould a few random small-time cops know about it? Huh? Watch "9/11 Conspiracy Theories, Fact or Fiction". It debunks every single theory.

[8real]

Ever heard of a radio? That answers your 2 questions. On the topic of that BBC hit piece, it didn't answer any questions that weren't ALREADY answered. However, there are plenty of unanswered questions, so your statement shows how much research you have actually done. I am not here to teach people, I am just raising a few questions. I question all the 1st hand accounts that describe explosions and bombs that where never investigated and this supposed aluminum that poured out of the WTC.

[Ballinorest]

It was an iron oxide, that under extreme heats causes the aluminum to oxidize, and it would pour out becuase the aluminum is oxidized.

[WNanette]

Ballinorest,

So, as aluminum now has ferrous metal (Fe=iron) in it, I can now stick magnets to my frige and oven doors, and home siding?

Things OXidize because they come in contact with OXygen.

At least that's what I have been taught.....

[Ballinorest]

Im not an idiot, I took chem last year. I dont know what i wsa thinking. But the metal would become weaker if it oxidized. It can only become oxidized under certain conditions. Such as when you leave a bike out in the rain, it rusts, which is the metal oxidizing.

[gidsum29]

I have a question about this "supposed" molten metal you idiots keep ranting about. Any samples? Exactly!

[maximus2908]

@gidsum29 Do some research everyone knows about the molten pools of steel, they dug them up still glowing red hot over 2000df days after 9/11, note that jet fuels maximum burning point is only 1500 df max & i am not an idiot, i'm a firefighter!

[JSSTyger]

@maximus2908

Like I told the other guy, listen and watch the NW corner at 0:40

[maximus2908]

@8real I agree with you, im a firefighter & you have to be a complete idiot to have looked at all the evidence surrounding 9/11 & not see how it was clearly a false flag op to kick start the war on terror. Sadly most people don't know how manipulated the media companies are by the 5 multinational corporations that own all of them. They think 9/11 were an inside job the news companies would blow the story wide open incriminating the most powerful criminal network alive today, dont know if I would

[DarkwingScooter]

@Haflor That's like saying the bible debunks evolution.

Normally it is the argument which lacks internal consistency that requires additional proof. The official argument lacks internal consistency and hence it bears the burden of proof.

[PoetryHound]

Who are those guys in the video? You can't tell if they're FDNY or something else. Did anyone ever identify them? Did anyone ever interview them to see what they meant & whether they were really referring to pre-planted demo charges? If they were in on an alleged demo plot, why would they nonchalontly discuss it like that? Doesn't make sense.

[bigbadmuthafukkah]

Why would they be told to keep it quiet? It would make the whole thing look suspicious. I'm sure the demo team would be told something like "we need to take wtc7 down cuz it poses as a danger. do it, and here's a check to keep you real happy."

[PoetryHound]

Nah, it doesn't make any sense that FDNY were "told to keep it quiet" on a day when 343 of their brothers were killed. Besides, you want to know how much evidence there is that there was a demo team or that anyone was paid off? None.

[bigbadmuthafukkah]

yeah, i'm sure it just fell down by itself.

[PoetryHound]

Well, there were reasons for the collapse, but they weren't explosives. No evidence of that.

Acting incredulous doesn't make you right.

[bigbadmuthafukkah]

yeah, there's no evidence for demolitions when you've got wtc power outages just prior to 911, security of wtc run by bush family, wtc had phone threats, bomb sniffing dogs were removed from the wtc, the buildings fell down in perfectly symmetrical fashion, despite having steel beams built to withstand over 1000 times their stress load. nah, that's not evidence at all. it's just coincidence.

and it's not incredulous. it's sarcasm.

[PoetryHound]

Just 1 outage reported by 1 person - he said it lasted just 26 hrs & was only in 1/2 of 1 tower. Each tenant had their own security in addition to overall security. Only the EXTRA dogs were removed after an excercise, the normal level never decreased. Yes, largely symmetrical because no lateral forces. Your 1000 figure is incorrect.

Sarcasm doesn't make you right either.

[bigbadmuthafukkah]

In particular, the perimeter columns were designed with tremendous reserve strength whereby "live loads on these columns can be increased more than 2,000% before failure occurs."

you can google that entire quote to find the source. if you wanna keep losing, just reply.

[PoetryHound]

Losing? None of your stuff has been correct so far. The 2,000% figure refers to WIND load, not ALL loads. That's even explained in the Engineering News-Record article. And the wind load is potentially a great deal greater than the live load.

[bigbadmuthafukkah]

It says "live loads" and you take it to mean "wind load". That's your problem right there. You don't know how to read.

[PoetryHound]

No, sorry if I wasn't clear. The 2,000% figure refers only to live loads, not all loads. Even the wind loads are much larger than the live loads. The live loads are (were) only a minor contributor to the design load on the perimeter columns.

[bigbadmuthafukkah]

The exact ENR comments

referenced were "live loads on these [perimeter] columns can be increased more than 2000%

before failure occurs" and "one could cut away all the first-story columns on one side of the

building, and part way from the corners of the perpendicular sides, and the building could still withstand design live loads and a 100-mph wind force from any direction."

[bigbadmuthafukkah]

Do you even know what live load is? according to wiki: Live Loads are not permanent and can change in magnitude. They include items found within a building such as furniture, pianos, safes, people, books, cars, computers, machinery, or stored materials, as well as environmental effects such as loads due to the sun, earth or weather. Are you saying wind isn't weather?

[PoetryHound]

I'm well aware of what live loads are. They are not dynamic loads, which is what took place on 911. Do you know what dynamic loads are?

[bigbadmuthafukkah]

You clearly don't know what you're talking about. The wiki definition stated that live loads are NOT PERMANENT AND CAN CHANGE in magnitude. In other words:

live load a dynamic load (such as traffic) that is applied to a structure suddenly or that is accompanied by vibration, oscillation, or other conditions that affects its intensity

Get lost, fool.

[PoetryHound]

Looks like you don't even understand what you read in wiki. A live load is not the same as a dynamic load, and the 2000% figure applied only to live loads. Plus, it only applied to perimiter columns, not to other structural systems in the towers. Theologist David Ray Griffin originally raised this 2000% thing. He got it wrong & you're just repeated his mistake.

[8real]

The explosion in the backround is what is interesting....You can even see the reaction of the workers. They look back, then start to tell the camerman to keep his eye on that building....

[winterflame1965]

The whole 911 episode was an inside job. I bet Bush is hiding Bin Laden cause they were both in on it together!

[VolkColopatrion]

yet there isn't a shred of proof in loose change.

[fatrb38]

Right guys, every policeman in the city knew it was going to be 'blown up' but none will testify now.

It's a huuuuge conspiracy maaaan.

[jebbyday]

"Right guys, every policeman in the city knew it was going to be 'blown up' but none will testify now."

It's a little fishy, but the EPA also said the air was safe. Read a little bit about how they suppressed facts with that one and how 9/11 first responders are dying now.

[bigbadmuthafukkah]

And you're part of it.

[denialisimpotence]

This is a confession, if anyone ever needed any more evidence that 9/11 was an inside job....

[onefodderunit]

Not "blow up". Pulled. Rookies.

[DC180]

Yeah thats obvious it was controlled... tHEY make up alot of bullshit to sweep this one under the carpet.

[LuchieusV]

Obviously a control demo. like WTC,2

[PoetryHound]

There was no secret plot of planned demolition of Building 7. It was severely damaged by the collapse of Tower 1, had fires that burned for 6 hours w/no suppression efforts, and al the FDNY on site knew it was going to collapse. When it did, the FDNY did not see or hear any demo charges going off. So much for the conspiracy theory.

[prinparis]

PoetryHound has spoken! I already feel safe again. We can now all go back to our apple pie eating, MTV watching, designer jeans wearing lives. Thank you for clearing that up PoetryHound!

[PoetryHound]

I'm quite happy to provide facts. I see you have nothing to say to contradict me. Your sarcasm is no replacement for evidence. But then, you don't have any evidence to suupport your conspiracy theory, do you?

[endofsuburbia]

I notice you use the word collapse. They said "about to blow-up". Even Larry Silverstein used the words "pull it". So did it collapse or was it pulled, because there's a huge damn difference.

[MassacreBlast]

@PoetryHound - Yeah, they knew it was going to collapse so they said the building is going to 'blow up'. Because blow up in no way references controlled demolition. Nor is PULL IT a demolition term used for pulling down a building. And I guess the 1100 engineers and architects who simply by watching WTC 7 fall, say that it was a master piece of demolition. Right. So much for the debunkers.

[Locke1217]

@PoetryHound Building 7 was father away than any other WTC building yet none of those structures collapsed, yet this one "mysteriously" collapses on its own footprints. I'll take the side of structural engineers who know what a controlled demolition looks like. & if you don't believe me then enjoy your fema camps Sheeple :)

[DarkwingScooter]

@PoetryHound No high-rise in history before or since had fallen from fire alone (the falling debris theory was debunked as insignificant by NIST themselves) despite there having been many examples of larger and longer burning fires.

Why would it then be rational to expect the building to come down due to this cause?

Your little pet theory is superficially valid, but unsound in the particulars.

[JSSTyger]

@DarkwingScooter

Pause at 0:40 and tell me what you hear and what you see happening to the NW corner of the building.

[DarkwingScooter]

@JSSTyger I am not sure what you are getting at?

I am not really in the school of thought that video analysis of any kind can solve this puzzle with respect to the particulars.

But maybe I am missing something here that you are seeing?

[JSSTyger]

@DarkwingScooter

What I'm saying is the NW corner instantly crimps when you hear the boom. Its not a slow deformation.

[DarkwingScooter]

@JSSTyger Ah, I see what you mean.

I am not sure that that necessarily indicates an explosive cause in and of itself to be honest, but it it is certainly more consistent with that explanation.

If the crimp is caused by a beam hitting the ground it indicates that the beam was still intact and largely undamaged by earlier events: A characteristic more in keeping with instantaneous cutting than a gradual chaotic deformation of the superstructure.

[blackzc]

Main support beams breaking? lol that building burned for like 2 days before it fell, why would you need to blow it up? Whats the point. Common sense people,

[prinparis]

It's hard to pull one over on a New Yorker. The majority of us (New Yorkers) know what went down on 9/11! Once we calmed down, we knew that we were fucked and by who. It wasn't by the Boggy Man or death by Box Cutters. The Government fucked us!

[tiguer]

dont say that too loud. mid-western republican hicks will get you hanged for a comment like that

[tomphils]

Amen

[Thrashaero]

0:06...clearly a loud bang, of the explosives variety of bangs.. not something falling and making a bang.

[MarCavalier23]

why did that building fall?? Controlled Demolition!!

[Gevwer]

what a sad day.

[Telfyr]

great footage,