WTC-7 fires started before the towers collapsed

According to the official liars the fires in WTC-7 were started before the towers collapsed. Here he claims the fires started around 9:30 while the first building collapse only occurred around 10:30.

Category:

News & Politics

Tags:

• wtc7
• collapse

[darion65]

@CultOfTheGlenda

Are you saying no one heard explosions? Are you really claiming that. 9/11 commision report opmitted 500+ statements from workers, firefighters, police about hearing seeing and feeling explosions in all the buildings. There is video evidence of explosions being recorded all day long.

To claim there was no one to hear explosions was a complete lie.

[zenoist2]

I heard the first fire reports for wtc7 were around 930 AM too..

If its true then they were started deliberately and had nothing at all to do with towers collapsing.rubble

[CultOfTheGlenda]

Planes crashed into the building. That is controlled?

No one heard explosions.

[pepelapiu2004]

>> So no way it was a controlled demolition.

Now how did you get such an idea? I didn't say it was a CD, how did you get to such a conclusion? I only asked what do you think caused that collapse.

Never the less, just answer my question:

The 9/11 commission, the NIST, your TV and your guberment all tell you it was a fire collapse. Look at my other video one more time and just tell me if you believe them? Do you beleive fire can bring down a building in this manner?

[CultOfTheGlenda]

Videos show no evidence of any explosions. No one heard explosions. So no way it was a controlled demolition.

[pepelapiu2004]

>> Considering WTC was made of glass on the exterior, not

>> really only the south side.

Okay, so let me re-phrase that:

Would you agree that THE MOST DAMAGE would occur on the South face, directly toward the towers?

If you don't agree with that, you are going to have to hit Google Pictures and find me any evidence of debris damage to the other 3 sides..... you won't find any.

[pepelapiu2004]

Well, I find it kinda peculiar that WTC5 and WTC6 (which were directly between the towers and WTC7) would have to suffermore damage then WTC7, being closer and all.Yet they didn't go down perfectly vertically. In fact both WTC5 and 6 were completely engulfed with fire and they had severe damage from the towers, yet they stood erect.

But WTC7, further away, with a lot less damage and a lot less fires, collapsed perfectly vertically inside 6.5 seconds as if it had been dropped into the ground !!!

[CultOfTheGlenda]

Considering WTC was made of glass on the exterior, not really only the south side. I would be willing to bet much debris was pushed through the bottom floor. Let's also not forget diesel rained from above.

[pepelapiu2004]

WTC7 was positioned North of the towers. So you would have to agree that if it received any damage from the collapse of the towers, it would be strictly to it's South face (the side facing the towers) ..... agreed?

[CultOfTheGlenda]

watch?v=t6qm7hMyoNo

5:03

You can see the south tower falling at an angle. I know you are talking about WTC7, but it had different circumstances. It was so fucked by two huge structures collapsing near it.