Change Player Size
Watch this video in a new window

WTC 7 - Pull It By Larry Silverstein

Those who question the official epxlanation of the 9/11 2001 attacks cling to this one issue. The owner of the World Trade Centers (the three that collapsed) said in an interview that he and the FD...  
 
Customize

More From: jpass2424

Loading...

QuickList(0)

Upgrade to Flash Player 10 for improved playback performance. Upgrade Now or get more info.
403 ratings
Sign in to rate
167,081 views
Want to add to Favorites? Sign In or Sign Up now!
Want to add to Playlists? Sign In or Sign Up now!
Want to flag a video? Sign In or Sign Up now!

Statistics & Data

Loading...

Video Responses (1)

Sign in to post a Comment

Text Comments (6,663)   Options

Loading...
GGcaptmandrake (33 minutes ago) Show Hide
 0
Marked as spam
Yep! He talks about kinetic energy, then says that the top section should have stayed in place! LOL!!!
dionstrezlecki (2 hours ago) Show Hide
 0
Marked as spam
ive seen this several times before but still each time i see it i am gob smacked lol,
smellyfooty (10 hours ago) Show Hide
 0
Marked as spam
it takes TIME, alot of TIME to just "pull" any building. You need days to prepare. that simple. ask any professional in the field. I guess you would have to take time out and ask or interview someone with that expertise. does anyone understand this?
PoetryHound (11 hours ago) Show Hide
 0
Marked as spam
Good old pesky physics defeats kooks like devo every time. Here's someone who, unlike devo. actually understands physics and calculates the tremendous AMOUNT of kinetic energy and the AMOUNT of resistance it overwhelmed.

w w w 911myths*com/WTCREPORT.pdf
PoetryHound (11 hours ago) Show Hide
 0
Marked as spam
Every time devo is defeated, he runs away. He has no clue how much kinetic energy there was in the collapses yet based on nothing claims there wasn't enough. Sure sign of a kook.
GGcaptmandrake (13 hours ago) Show Hide
 0
Marked as spam
Not to mention: That building 7 sustained catostrophic damage, from the falling debris of the twin towers' collpase! including a scoop out of the side of the building!
GGcaptmandrake (13 hours ago) Show Hide
 0
Marked as spam
DEVO's so dumb, that he thinks that the top section, would have stayed in place, even if any ONE floor below it gave way! As if it's just going to sit there! LOL!!!
uncledevo (13 hours ago) Show Hide
 0
Marked as spam
The purported "gravitational collapse" (video) of World Trade Center building 7, which was hit by zero aircraft, and which also vertically collapsed in within a second of free-fall-time-in-a-vacuum later that same day, fails this conservation-of-energy analysis.

The best part of all of this is that the official 9/11 Commission report states 2 WTC fell in 10 seconds, and that NIST says that a significant portion of WTC 7 fell at "freefall speed" folks and the shills can't make that go away!
GGcaptmandrake (13 hours ago) Show Hide
 0
Marked as spam
How would the glass, stay intact, under crushing pressure of a now UNSTABLE KINETIC top section?...LMAO!!!
GGcaptmandrake (13 hours ago) Show Hide
 0
Marked as spam
How would ANY resistence be offered by the lower floors, if there WASN'T an INTACT support structure in place to repel it?...
North tower collpase time: 22.02 seconds
South tower collapse time: 15.75 seconds
The inner core column structure, only offered 60% of the total support for the buildings load! The outter grid support system, shouldered the other 40%! There is NO WAY to hold up the rest of an INTACT TOP SECTION in this condition!

Would you like to comment?

Join YouTube for a free account, or sign in if you are already a member.