9/11: Controlled Demolition vs. North Tower

Further proof that 9/11/2001 was a controlled demolition.

please visit

http://911Revolution.magnify.net

http://911taboo.magnify.net

http://livevideo.com/spiney

http://livevideo.com/socialservice

Category:

Howto & Style

Tags:

• 911
• 9/11
• 911octopus
• september
• clues
• 911taboo
• spineymedia
• truth
• 911revolution
• socialservice
• bsregistration
• usa
• crime

[1844Freddy]

If it was a controlled demolition, how come it took so long to fall down after the initial explosions? Shouldn't it have fallen immediately, not 50+ minutes later?

[keyhole911]

@1844Freddy

not IF......it was clearly a controlled demolition !!!

"....in Free-Fall-Speed....." ....think about this FACT !!!

Please....there are lots of good informations inside the NET,

take yourself a few hours to study some of them

and you will have a good laugh

about your last question here......

[MazJax]

Okay, I'm sick of this stupid freefall claim. It's obviously untrue. Why? Easy. Falling debris from the collapse hit the floor WAY before the rest of the collapsing floors even made it half way. When the first debris hit, the tower was still halfway intact. This is proof of resistance and NOT freefall speed.

It took more than 12 seconds for tower 2 to fall, and around 20 seconds for tower 1 to fall. However, in freefall, they would have each taken 9.3 seconds to collapse.

NO FREEFALL.

[marvelfannumber1]

@keyhole911

Pffft free fall speed don't make me laugh.

[StanzelMafia]

@topcoatpaver "Hey Meatball" that was a doozy!;) I know there are Patsy's, as for "Blinders" (I might have to google that one) I've done my research....sorry for the miss conception. Ron Paul 2012

[topcoatpaver]

@Ahlywog Forget the speculation of however big the fires were... Use Science. Steel wont melt in a jetfuel fire. It just wont!

[topcoatpaver]

@StanzelMafia Hey meatball, there were NO terrorists... they are called PATSY's.  Take your blinders off and do some research so you dont look so stupid.

[topcoatpaver]

@1844Freddy Not if they are trying to hide it you idiot!

[MrRaymondscott]

@Asylumwillgetyou What i'm pointing here is that a building doesn't collapse like that if it's not a controlled demolition. Have you ever seen buildins collapse by an earthquake? They don't fall like this, they crack and become unstable or fall to one side but as a whole. I don't know who did it or why, and if you wanna know you may ask first the ones who didn't tell the truth.

[StanzelMafia]

@TJefferson1743 so if this was preplanned damage control, so you're saying they knew the "Terrorists'" were gonna hit, so they decided to load the place with exposives.....for what reason, to Blow innocent people up? before the attack? wow!

[Ahlywog]

@MrRaymondscott Exactly. The existence of massive fires inside the building is an assumption. Something had to bring the buildings down and jet fuel from a jetliner and the resultant fires are a convenient answer for most people. The fact is there is absolutely no evidence of the large, raging, 1800f infernos that would have been required to bring down the building. Lots of smoke does not mean a large hot fire and lots of fire is exactly what we do not see.