See Pathetic Con Men Lie About BBC Documentary The Third Tower. This 9/11, let’s really work together to counter their deceptions which are misdirecting peop…
(Visited 32 times, 1 visits today)
9/11 Charlatans EXPOSED Denying Building 7 Damage
So then you completely disagree with NIST s findings that determined stored fuel and damage were not factors in the collapse and it was initiated by the failure of column 79 due to fire alone ?
That's a bullshit lie conspiracy theorist such as you promote.
No other highrises don't normally contain power stations, generators and various fuel tanks.
No other highrises aren't built on-top of three main columns in a cantilever design.
And other steel structures have collapsed due to fire.
GOOGLE IT
However, my issue is this. Never before has a high rise steel structure collapsed due to fire. Never before in History. I don't have facts in front of me about these other skyskrapers that ''never'' collapsed due to huge fires that burned for days.
One would ''Have'' to believe that the previous high rise structures were also housing generators, and other explosive Fire Fueling equipment. Never before in history… has a steel high rise collapsed due to Fire. 3 in 1 Day. Common Sense
Lucid Fallacies… I've got one main thing to mention here. WTC7 collapsed due to ''fires'' raging in the building… as these videos you've posted attempt to depict? They said there were gas explosions, generators… things of this sort in WTC7, yes I can see that causing a substantial fire no doubt
"No, the damage in that photo was not significant enough to bring the building down."
Video of WTC7 damage.
tinyurl com/ludic911
Two pricks for the price of one
yeah, my bad. I typed that to the wrong person. I meant to ask that to the conspiracytard.
There is nothing to explain. That theory/notion/supposition is RETARDED and only a person with little to no critical thinking skills would believe it.
You seem to be the guy to ask this question to. Can you please explain to me the motive for blowing up a random skyscrpaer, that had nothing to do with anything? Also please don't say there was secret documents there, because that is the stupidest thing I've ever heard. People sneak in the building every night to put bombs in the building, but they can't just seal the documents? Also blowing up the building, would put a lot of these documents on the street. Please explain.
That is not the point of the video.
The video is pointing out that your conspiracy theory sources like Alex and Jason here are LIARS.
Do you deny they are LIARS ?
No, the damage in that photo was not significant enough to bring the building down.
No it didn't because if you didn't have WTC1 hitting WTC7 the fires wouldn't have started in the first place inside WTC7 that lead to the failure of column 79.
What NIST says is they ran a computer model heating the vicinity of column 79 with the same/similar energy level as the incident and in doing so it failed the model also showed a collapse.
THAT'S IT
It proves nothing to support you idiotic conspiracy theory of explosives.
PROVES NOTHING
Watch my recent uploads of WTC7 fires.
this extent of structural damage is not shown in the picture. there is just some kind of hole, or some kind of size.
Please watch this playlist from the first video in sequence to at least the 40th or shit… watch the entire god dam thing !
youtube.com/playlist?list=PLUZvxcfs21-iIUTJWE3SwTv3ifcd4OIc5
No it didn't because if you didn't have WTC1 hitting WTC7 the fires wouldn't have started in the first place inside WTC7 that lead to the failure of column 79.
What NIST says is they ran a computer model heating the vicinity of column 79 with the same/similar energy level as the incident and in doing so it failed the model also showed a collapse.
THAT'S IT
It proves nothing to support you idiotic conspiracy theory of explosives.
PROVES NOTHING
Watch my recent uploads of WTC7 fires.
Watch this playlist at least to the 20th video.
tinyurl com/ludic911debunk
"NIST report does not say column 79 failed due fire" -TheEots
BULLSHIT
scoooped out…lol …a line straight out of popular mechanics….not the NIST report….
you can all cap all you want but the NIST report does not say column 79 failed due fire and other structural damage you just made that up ..it says column 79 failed due to fire and its failure under any circumstance would have initiated the collapse sequence
NIST determined other than igniting fires ..damage from falling debris was not a factor in the collapse of wtc 7
You troofer shit-for-brains claimed for years there was no damage to WTC 1 AFTER the collapse of WTC 1 as is seen in this video of Alex fucking Jones and Jason Bermas.
You can't deny this damage anymore as there is VIDEO EVIDENCE OF IT.
Visit my channel for WTC 1 south side videos showing massive smoke and damage.
Can't you fucking troofer morons comprehend anything that happens – happens on a god damn timeline and in a certain sequence.
If anything in that sequence is broken then the end event doesn't happen.
Column 79 wouldn't have failed "on it's own" to cause the entire collapse.
It failed FIRST ON IT'S OWN but only DUE TO FIRE AND OTHER STRUCTURAL DAMAGE FROM WTC1 HITTING THE GOD DAMN FUCKING BUILDING LIGHTING IT ON FIRE AND CAUSING MAJOR STRUCTURAL DAMAGE.
BUT
The column wouldn't have been damaged if WTC 1 hadn't fallen into WTC 7 causing major structural damage.
SHIT
It created a gash that was 30-40 feet wide running vertically the length of the building and also scooped out 30%+ of the base to the fucking tenth floor !!!
according to NIST fire alone caused the failure of column 79…pal..and the failure of this single column regardless of damage would of caused the collpase
And WTF do you think caused the failure of that single column pal !?!
you would int know science if it bit you on the ass NIST statement on stored fuel is clear and it was not a factor in the collapse..there is no straw that broke the camels back in the NIST report…they are very clear the failure of a single column under any circumstance regardless of damage would of initiated the collapse ..you can accept or reject the NIST report but you cant just re-write as it suites you
Jesus fucking Christ are you stupid…
The hijackers getting on the planes caused WTC 7 to fall indirectly…
Don't you understand how fucking science works !?!
What they are saying is the failure of a certain column was the "straw that broke the camel's back" and was the direct final event that lead to the collapse.
Don't you understand a series of events lead to it !!!
One of which was the fucking fires !!! and the diesel fuel from those tanks were apart of.
worded incorrectly ..lol…as if…stop your lies debwunker
That's a public affairs PR statement that's worded incorrectly. If you had read the entire report you'd understand the fires from that fuel oil contributed to the collapse but did not cause it in the same way the WTC 1 debris didn't cause the collapse DIRECTLY but it did cause the collapse INDIRECTLY.
NIST concluded stored fuel was not a factor in the collapse
19. Did fuel oil systems in WTC 7 contribute to its collapse?
No. The building had three separate emergency power systems, all of which ran on diesel fuel. fuel stored in day tanks on the lower floors—could not have been sustained long enough, could not have generated sufficient heat to weaken critical interior columns, and/or would have produced large amounts of visible smoke from the lower floors, which were not observed.
according to NIST damage did not cause the building to be strutral unstable and it was the failure of a single column #79 due to fire alone that initiated the collapse sequence and the failure of this pone column under any circumstance would of initiated the collapse sequence,,,so you think NIST is wrong ?
So Jason and Alex aren't lying their asses off about the damage to WTC7 ?
Are you brain damaged ?
RP here just showed you the damage that includes a 40 foot wide gash that ran from the top to the bottom of the building. Also more than 30% of the base was scooped out to the tenth fucking floor. Then the diesel/fuel oil generator tanks caught fire. Then the pipes feeding those tanks ruptured and burned for hours and hours.
You think calling RP a shill is a counter arguing point !?!
DUMBASS
You are so incompetent you can't even copy paste a URL for Christ's sake !
You can't post complete URLs here because google filters it.
tinyurl is the domain
com is the TLD
You need to place a . between tinyurl and com you TOTAL RETARD.
What the hell is that supposed to mean ?
Representative Press is a shill.
It went to an Ask page. ?
THE JEWS DID IT THE JEWS DID IT !!!
HOW FUCKING TRITE !!!
YOU RACIST FUCK
Watch this.
tinyurl com/ludic911debunk
Controlled plane demolitions, to be precise. LOL!
Fuckin' troll. It's so obviously controlled demos that it can only be denied by sheep and trolls.
LOL. Nice argument, jerk. Go back to your mom's basement.
Yeah, right. Nice try, Dickhead.
Not a great photo. If they were trying to asses if the building would fall then there would be more photos than this. Perhaps they will surface so we can get a proper look.
There was some debris, not a lot, but some. Google images: Pentagon debris. Have you seen the movie "Aliens". When an alien gets shot, acid-blood sprays all over the shooter. I heard that this isn't very realistic, because when a bullet hits a body, most of the debris goes flying in the same direction as the bullet, like a rock going through a glass window. I think that when a fast plane hits a building, it is like a rock going through a window, most of the debris (if not all) flies forward.
Representative press dude. I like your work a lot. I was wondering if you have a view on the lack of debris or cctv footage at the pentagon? Hope you find time to enlighten me. after all I only have access to stuff on the internet which is notoriously hard to trust…
LBJ was a criminal to order our U.S.S Liberty to be sunked! Why can the sheeple not open there damn eyes! Thank you Frankie! Gods chosen people…ha!