WTC-7 Collapse Footage Shows Unmistakable Demolition Charges

The above clip is taken from this longer video of the WTC-7 collapse, which itself is a small segment of the Naudet brothers' documentary "9/11".

Looking at the upper right-hand corner of the building we see a rapid series of small explosions travelling upward just as the building itself begins to fall. The size, placement and timing of these "puffs" is very consistent with squibs from cutting charges of the type used in professional controlled demolitions, and in fact nothing but small explosive charges could create such an appearance.

The decreasing volume of the building from the collapse itself could not create enough pressure to cause such localized high-velocity effects, and this early in the collapse would have only created a modest overpressure.

Category:

Howto & Style

Tags:

• 9-11
• wtc7
• september
• 11
• 2001
• bush
• terror
• bomb
• terrorist
• bin
• laden
• wtc
• 9/11

[remind999]

your government make a mistake not delivering one more airplane. lol

[jbnumba1]

Um, no. The charges went UP building, if what you were talking about had actual scientific basis the compressed air would begin at the top and go down. Air compresses easily and would be not be "explosive". Think about a BB gun that uses compressed air. You can pump those things 15+ times!

[EscuchaYcalla]

@NellJSmith Why don't you ever show the South side of the building? The one who has a hole of about ten floors where half a burning skycraper hit it? Half a goddamn tower hitting on a building has the ability to hurt it.

And, no, I'm not defending George W. Bush. But if after rigging an election with his brother in Florida and getting his own country in the worst deficit since WWII and into a war sold out with lies about WMD... if after that, Americans need to lie to blame him... I don't get it.

[MaxwellEindhoven]

What you see are the external sun blinds.

[corrigami81]

WHY IS THERE NO SOUND????? FUCK

[usindependent50]

@NellJSmith

Relatively small fires? By whose standards? The fires were more thatn capable to weaken the long floor trusses and this is was retired FDNY Battalion Chief Arthur Scheuerman says himself and nearly ever FDNY worker.

[NellJSmith]

@usindependent50 Please check the NIST Report itself. Even NIST decided that: (a) the diesel generators were not responsible; (b) the temperature reached by the steel elements (any of them) inside WTC7, which had only local, relatively small fires, was not sufficient even to weaken the steel to the point of collapse, and was FAR too low to melt it (molten metal was found under WTC7, though!), and (c) they themselves could not be sure what made WTC7 collapse and would have to do further research.

[usindependent50]

@Faelinroma

That is incorrect. One, there were diesel generators fueling the fires as well. There is also the point that you dont need jet or diesel fuel at all. Regular house fires can reach temperatures hot enough to cause steel to lose half of its integrity in a little over three minutes. Not to mention that the floor trusses in Building Seven were just as long as the ones in the twin towers and just as susceptible.

[dobberdoss]

@zenoist2,

Amen to that!

[dobberdoss]

Now THAT is excellent evidence!