9/11: Caught on Tape: WTC Building 7 Damaged by Debris from Twin Towers Collapse (Updated) (WTC 7)

Buldiing 7 of the World Trade Center collapsed after 8 hours because it was heavily damaged, and fire raged for 8 hours. These images show SOME of the actual damage to WTC 7 from the collapse of the WTC twin towers, but do not show the fornt of the most damaged face closest to the twin towers. Smoke and other buildings get in the way

Category:

News & Politics

Tags:

• 9/11
• WTC7
• Al Qaeda
• world trade center
• WTC 7
• terrorism
• truthers

[Allergic2StupidAchoo]

@JonathonMoseley How do you explain the BBC announcing WTC 7 had fallen well before it ever did? How do you explain that the highest possible burning temperature of jet fuel isn't nearly high enough to melt steel and yet not only did it melt it here, it did so in such an extremely rapid rate that the buildings entered free fall? Or that no steel building has ever previously fell like this? And these arent conspiracy theorists saying this, but accredited engineers and demolitions experts.

[B3lievingBom]

Im not being racist but. . Fuck you Osama Bin laden !!! Fuck fuck fuck im sosososos happy you died,Die in Hell bitchas ! Why Da fuck did u hate americans ?

[way2easy2love]

theres a psychological name for people who are in denial about large events who just cant handle the truth

[rantingrich]

Yea I can see those raging fire from top to bottom! WOW! I guess I was wrong! ANd yes I can see how that big cloud of dust almost knocked down WTC7 Well done professor!

[marvelfannumber1]

@Allergic2StupidAchoo

Well maybe they reported it earlier because the firefighters were expecting it to collapse. I mean the building had a huge hole in it, it was leaning to the side and it had massive fires. The fires did not melt the steel the weakened it (that's a fact). The buildings never went into freefall:

WTC 1-2 freefall-9 seconds. Real time: South tower: 15 seconds North tower: 15 seconds.

Wtc 7 freefall: 6 seconds Real time 15 seconds

[Allergic2StupidAchoo]

Argue semantics all you want. I really don't care what you believe. Whatever, i'm done with this.

[Allergic2StupidAchoo]

@Magni56 Ok, if you haven't even done the most elementary of research on this then frankly, your opinion is invalidated and i'm done with this conversation.

Silverstein clearly said "Pull it", this is a FACT, it is on VIDEO, on this very site. As far as evidence of 9/11 being an inside job, there are tons, but if you haven't even bothered looking this far into it, i'm done. Agreeing to disagree means i'm not going to change your mind, you certainly won't change mind. But I don't care anymore

[Magni56]

@Allergic2StupidAchoo

There is no "agreeing to disagree". You have been unable to provide even the tiniest shred of evidence while there is plenty of evidence against you. Thus, you are wrong. Ths is not a matter of opinion, it's a matter of fact. And factually, all evidence points at the same conclusion: That there was not a sinlge microgram of explosives involved anywhere and that there was no grand conspiracy besides that of a few guys to hijakc planes and ram them into buildings.

[Magni56]

@Allergic2StupidAchoo

Provide factual evidence that it is a "backslide". Also, he never said "pull IT". That's another complete invention by the conspiracy szene. As for those buildings on the tape, they're still not free-falling. So yes, anyone saying they're free-falling is either ignorant or spouting conspiracy drivel. Meanwhile, the actual fucking learned experts on the subject say differrent things.

[Allergic2StupidAchoo]

@Magni56 Sure, whatever bud. Silverstein can backslide all he wants, I know what he said. "Pull it" does not mean "pull the men out". I suppose you're one of those people who could literally get pissed on and be told it was rain. And these buildings are on video tape falling down. You're aware of this, right? No conspiracy, just what's on tape.

Also, calm down bud. Agree to disagree, remem? Oh wait, that's not acceptable to you.

Well, tough trucknuts then, kid.