YT sent me the following alert on 2/3/2010: “Your video, BBC Reports Collapse of WTC Building 7 Early– TWICE , may include content that is owned or licensed…
(Visited 67 times, 1 visits today)
BBC Reports Collapse of WTC Building 7 Early– TWICE
,,, this is true horror.
And yet people keep voting for the same assholes like nothing has happened.
Those who control mass media and Hollywood must be arrested and brought up on charges of racketeering, treason, sedition and mass murder.
It isn't the Hawaiians. Think "Kosher Nostra".
oh fuck off. clearly says "were"
No matter how many people know this truth, it won't make a difference,the government don't seemed to be bothered, and they're still getting away with it
This is just another classic example of how news reports are almost never completely reliable. BBC just messed up.
Still, watch a few hours worth of videos of controlled demolitions, watch what happens when these demolitions don't go as planned, investigate genuine structural failures.
If you can't see a controlled demolition on 911 then check out:
/watch?v=8YaFGSPErKU
/watch?v=PG3uaQxc8uQ
/watch?v=RAAztWC5sT8
Add to that ALL the witnesses of explosions inside before 1 & 2WTC collapse.
SPOOKY!!!
Now that you have been proven to be a fuckwitt and a liar.. you can fuck off..
NO building EVER in history has falling into its own footprint (the path of greatest resistance) at freefall speed, on collapse by a fire. NEVER
3:14 "We know it's about almost 300 people on the airliners WE used in these attacks."
911 was an inside job
Please, do pull your head out of your arse and seek psychiatric help.
Please do find the page in the NIST report.. whereby the state all of the core columns failed instantaneously across the entire width of the building..
You are not bored,, FFS.. you are just brain damaged goods..
Er, it's in a video called "BUILDING 7 EXPLAINED." Wierd huh?
Since you're offering internet videos as "proof" I thought I'd return the favour.
Seriously, can I leave now? I'm so bored…
HAHAHA.. The core failed first… Certainly not backed up by NIST.. please provide NIST link for your claim..
But indeed this is what A&E are suggesting..
It is the only way the entire structures could come down..
I shall not hold my breath.. and watch you disappear..
Hahahaha..
Even NIST (Shyam Blunder) admitted that free fall is not possible…
"A free fall time would be an object that has NO STRUCTURAL COMPONENTS BELOW IT".. <– Shyam Blunder..
They later removed this technical briefing from their official website..
But the fuckwitts… later went on to publish it in the final NIST report..
Stage 2 of the collapse FFA (1.75 to 4.0s) = 2.25 seconds or 105'ft (approx. 18 stories)
You can start at 3:14
HAHAHAHAHA..
watch?v=eDvNS9iMjzA
I'm going to leave these retards to you mate, i've been trying to escape from this comment board for ages now…
Hmm, your laughing at me…dude, you have no idea how funny your delusional, paranoid ranting is. Do you own many tin foil hats?
Firstly, the core DID collapse first. Not sure why thats funny, because its backed up by architects, structural engineers, firemen on the scene, witnessess and video footage.
Secondly, since you're so convinced the official story doesn't add up, then please, enlighten us as to what actually happened. I'll try to keep a straight face…honest…
I'm certainly not going to plow through a 2+ hour video looking for the nugget you claim is there. How about saving us all a bit of time and pointing us to the part of the video where a physicist makes the specific case that "physics proves that fires do not cause steel to free fall" It's there, right?
Yes I agree.. I was laughing at the expense and reciting comments that blkmrkmatt had made earlier..
Yes FFA is scientifically impossible.. Even Shyam Blunder has admitted this.. but the irony is they went and published it in the final report.. without any scientific or plausible explanation.. They produced rubbish in = rubbish out computer models, with no independent verification and then immediately closed the case..
There is actually a huge documentary of physicists who complain about the official story not making sense. watch?v=YW6mJOqRDI4
That wouldn't cause a building to fall on it's footprint at freefall speed. Physically impossible there is something called resistance.
He probably means all the conspiracy theories created in reaction to pretty much any mainstream media news piece : north korea, mars, moon, 9/11, epidemics, etc.
Hahahaha.. the entire inner core collapsed first..
It magically moved downwards and sideways.., whilst the 4 outer walls "facades" happen to remain standing for a period of time unsupported.??
Then the out walls realized… the entire inner core has collapsed,, therefore we must also fall.. kapoooof..
Try reading the NIST report.. they claimed only 1 column failed #79.. which brought down the entire building..
Conspiracy: An agreement between two or more persons to commit a crime… You do not believe in that? Please remove your self from this planet.
Yes and how do u suppose that happened? A fire does not even burn steel, let alone disintegrate the core of a 47 story building. Even my house can have a fire in a substantial part and still remain standing, its frame being the last thing to be destroyed. Of course, explosives may have been placed BEFORE. Plus the BBC could not wait to report on the imminent fall, being so sure it WOULD fall… and how are YOU so sure about what actually happened?
If you believe that… you'll obviously believe anything. (We'll just assume you have no knowledge of how building are built)
But it had completely disintegrated. The entire core collapsed first (backed up by numerous videos that show the full collapse). It was only after the inner core collapsed, that the outer shell collapsed so quickly.
Its common sense. Think back to high school physics. In order for something to free fall it needs to basically be dropped from the air. That can only happen with a building if its structure is disintegrated, all throughout the building on every floor at the same time. Freefall means at the speed of gravity. So put your thinking cap on 😉
"but physics proves that fires do not cause steel to free fall"
Ridiculous! Find me a physicist or two who says this.
Firehouse: Chief Nigro said they made a collapse zone and wanted everybody away from number 7— did you have to get all of those people out?
Hayden: Yeah, we had to pull everybody back. It was very difficult. We had to be very forceful in getting the guys out. They didn't want to come out … We said, this building is going to come down, get back … We had said to the guys, we lost as many as 300 guys. We didn't want to lose any more people that day."
Wow, your desperation to deny the facts is truly palpable!
Yes, it took hours to get everyone out because firefighters are notoriously determined when it comes to things like rescuing their brothers when they're in trouble. They didn't WANT to pull out. But that's what happened. I can produce dozens of direct quotes from firefighters proving this if that's what you want.
But then, you've already seen the quotes, haven't you?
Google "chief hayden firehouse 7" & read his story (pgs 4 & 5).
Some troll sarcastically stated "an editor in a newsroom did not know what was going on… Proves it must be a conspiracy"…. Well think about this… What are the CHANCES of predicting something so off the wall as an entire building collapsing? Sure there was a fire in it, reportedly,but physics proves that fires do not cause steel to free fall and collapse without the appropriate controlled assistance. And maths proves that you can not predict something like that by a clueless editor.
This is my last attempt. Please, don't bother replying.
If you begin your research with an idea in mind (e.g. conspiracy) then you will ALWAYS find things that seem to support that idea. But that doesn't make your theory correct. You will be guilty of applying the REVERSE scientific method.
All large scale experiments, even under contolled conditions, will produce a mass of unexplained data. This is no different.
Pointing to gaps in the official version doesn't make your theory true.
GO BBC! I don't believe in conspiracies either! LOL!
This is related to the last (3rd) building that fell on 9 1 1..
This was the steel framed Salomon building (aka WTC7).
It fell like a sack of shit falling from the sky with a period of free fall acceleration at approx. 5:20pm in the afternoon.. apparently because there was an office fire.. (No plane and no jet fuel).. Never before 9 1 1 and never again..
However the BBC announced its collapse prematurely.. they were reading the script that was handed to them by their zionist masters.
Please do tell me who was the individual or team of fire fighters - chiefs that made the assessment that WTC7 was going to collapse..??
Because it was common knowledge for many hours prior to its collapse.. So someone made an assessment very early and relayed that on radio to all of the fire crews nearby and in WTC7.. whom were all oblivious to a potential building collapse (due to fire) prior to the radio communications..??
The media knew the building was going to collapse because the firefighters TOLD them it was.
So why not ask how the firefighters knew?
can someone tell me why the guy said "its been some 8 hours since the attack"?? I thought the buildings collapsed after like 2 hours?
Something is not right if the media knew a building that was never struck by a plane was going to collapse. Innocent American people were killed and the US media and government knew of this event prior. Buildings do not free fall by fire ever in history. Human life is no longer valued. It is a sad time we live in.
The fuck?!? It's just a redirect!. Fine, just GOOGLE the fucking quote. It's from an article in Firehouse Mag.
Sheesh.
Sorry do you have another source.. I do not trust tinyurl ..
YOU: "none of the firefighters oral testimonies suggested that they used any of their observation skills, training, experience or other to determine WTC7 was in danger of imminent collapse.."
CHIEF NIGRO: "A number of fire officers and companies assessed the damage to the building. The appraisals indicated that the building's integrity was in serious doubt. I issued the orders to pull back the firefighters and define the collapse zone."