9/11 Building 7 Close Up

2 Close up shots of the collapse of wtc building 7 on 9/11. The first shows the rooftop penthouse collapsing a split second before the rest of the building a…


(Visited 16 times, 1 visits today)

Share This Post

34 Comments - Write a Comment

  1. And let me say this to you insanedrummer, even though I don't believe 9/11
    was an inside job, Bush would've killed his own people if it meant
    continuing the established order that he brought forth. Now, I do believe
    that Bush & his administration allowed 9/11 to happen, which is quite
    obvious, & took advantage of that day, due to the suddence of the patriot
    acts 1 & 2 brought forth & the sudden issue of us taking part in now 2 wars.

    Reply
  2. lololoolloolololloloollolololololololololoolo to you fuckers 😀
    lololololololololoklolololololololololololololololololololololololololololololokolololololololololol
    olololololloolololololololololoolololololoolololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololoolololololololololoolololololollolololololoolloolololoolololololololololololoolloollollllllllollollolololololollololololollololololololololololoollllolololoolololololololoooololollolololololololololo

    Reply
  3. hey retard, a 1000 ft bldg fell in on it and gashed out 25% of the bldg
    from the center and many of the supporting trusses – no 100s of demolition
    charges -NO CONSPIRACY – it only fell hours after firefighters heard it
    creaking and abandoned it – AMAZING – but I do have a soul trapped in a
    bottle that I'd like to sell you on ebay

    Reply
  4. WOW a bldg actually fell in towards a gaping massive hole that firefighters
    say ripped out 25% of the bldg and all the supporting trusses – and then
    fell hours after firefighters heard creaking sounds in the bldg and
    abandoned the effort to save it – damn IT MUST BE AN INSIDE JOB!!! WAKE UP
    YOU STUPID AMERICAN WHITE TRASH

    Reply
  5. There was substantial damage to one corner of the bldg effectively making
    that corner almost worthless as support. BUT, BUT the collapse started when
    the penthouse collapsed first because of a loss of collum support ON THE
    OTHER SIDE OF THE BLDG. That's what makes this suspicious as hell not to
    mention bombs going off in the bldg. Youtube: "Seven is Exploding" and
    watch it to the very end and you'll be asking q's too!

    Reply
  6. it is amazing how reluctant people are to engage with the physical evidence
    about this event. Rgardless of 'conspiracy theory' this or that, when you
    take a cold, hard, scientific look at this building and its demise, the
    physical evidence does not support the explanation that wtc7 fell down
    through some combination of damage from the twin towers and subsequent
    fires. This explanation is not at all consistent with the physical evidence.

    Reply
  7. Actually, with the precollapse of the penthouse, the real collapse becomes
    around 14 seconds which is double than a free-fall collapse. So it wasn't
    free-fall. And the "squibs" aren't squibs. Notice on the left side of the
    building, during the 2nd part, & you'll see the same blackened areas before
    the collapse. These are open window blinds. So during the collapse, we have
    a good amount of window blinds on the right opening as well, which is
    completely logical. So it wasn't an inside job.

    Reply
  8. I do believe it's very possible that building was brought down by
    prepositioned explosives, but I am wondering why the penthouse falling in
    makes it more likely that it was a controlled demolition. Why does it
    matter?

    Reply
  9. exactly. I thought the free fall argument was their strongest point? This
    video dispels that bull shit and yet they still try and use it to their
    advantage. Look at the misrepresentation in the description.>>> "The first
    shows the rooftop penthouse collapsing a split second before the rest of
    the building" Really? a split second? learn how to count it's more like 5
    or 6 seconds then the rest of the building making the total time of
    collapse way longer than free fall.

    Reply
  10. when I say minimal I mean in comparison to the damage sustained by the
    first two buildings. It seems FDNY knew that this building was going to
    come down despite the fact that a building coming down from fire damage was
    unprecedented (excepting wtc's 1 and 2.) Also, I'd like your take on
    physicist Steven Jones' contention that the buildings were brought down by
    explosives and more importantly WHY DID THE 9/11 COMMISSION LEAVE OUT ANY
    MENTION OF BUILDING 7'S COLLAPSE IN THEIR FINAL REPORT?

    Reply
  11. Windows breaking eh. So the towers apparently fell down and damaged wtc7
    enough to eventually bring it down later on but not enough to break the
    windows untill it fell. Which then exploded out. Not just break. Wake up
    for fuck sake. Why is it so hard for some people to see that a government
    that has been proven to have lied about the WMD in Iraq and plenty of other
    times cant be behind this.

    Reply
  12. Hide you heads in the sand all you like, kiddies. Those buildings were
    brought down by controlled demolition. I dare you to try proving otherwise.
    I dare you to show me another building that has symmetrically collapsed as
    a result of a fire. Remember, NO plane hit building 7, and there was fire
    damage on only ONE side of the structure. Why did it fall so perfectly?
    Explosives were planted, plain and simple.

    Reply
  13. Well, the FDNY were WTC 7 witnesses, which counts for a lot. It's true that
    they aren't structural engineers, but we know from them that there weren't
    just "a couple of fires" or just some minor damage to a few support
    columns. We also know they anticipated the collapse and didn't report
    seeing or hearing any demo charges going off at the time of collapse.
    Although we can rule out explosives, point well taken that we don't know
    the exact sequence of structural failures.

    Reply
  14. I was responding to your assertion that the eyewitnesses are credible. I've
    responded to that but you didnt acknowledge my respons and instead changed
    the subject to bin Laden. I don't feel like playing the endless
    What-about-this-What-about-that game. So let's stick with 1 thing at a
    time. Do you think these witnesses I cited are lying?

    Reply
  15. "We were concerned about additional collapse, not only of the Marriott,
    because there was a good portion of the Marriott still standing, but also
    we were pretty sure that 7 World Trade Ctr would collapse…Early on, we
    saw a bulge in the southwest corner between floors 10 and 13, and we had
    put a transit on that and we were pretty sure she was going to collapse.
    You actually could see there was a visible bulge, it ran up about three
    floors." –FDNY Dep. Chief Peter Hayden

    Reply
  16. Well if you discount the testimony of dozens of firefighters who heard
    explosives going off and ignore the fact that never in the history of time
    had a building been brought down by fire (except for wtc 1 and 2 earlier
    that day) and try to explain silverstein's self-incriminating comments by
    saying he meant something else than what he actually said i guess i would
    believe you.

    Reply
  17. It would'nt matter, where I come from we don't put money, oil and political
    gain before human lives, especially our own people. The average American
    has to stop buying into gov't bullshit and not be going into the military.

    Reply
  18. oh come on man… don't you want to believe your own eyes? Take a step
    back, open your mind to the possibility that we are all being lied to.
    Osama is left handed but in the confession tape he writes with his right
    hand. That tape was found in Afganistan by US troops. btw the invastion of
    Afganistan was already planned… the order to invade had been signed on
    sept 10th… the same day FEMA arrived in NY in prep for the attack.

    Reply
  19. PoetryHound how can one explain Larry Silverstein's comment that "we pulled
    building 7" along with the fact that he made hundreds of millions of
    dollars in insurance claims after the attacks. That goes along with the
    fact that somehow a 47 storey building that had minimal fire damage to it
    somehow collapsed into its own footprint at freefall speed 8 hours after
    the first two buildings fell. How could explosives not be involved?

    Reply

Post Comment