Building Number 7

Something is really fishy here.


(Visited 220 times, 1 visits today)

Share This Post

34 Comments - Write a Comment

  1. 70 reasons?? How about one. Go and read the fire dept debriefing interviews
    on this. You'll never make the same comments on this structure again. " B 7
    took a big hit from the North tower when it came down. We were afraid that
    with the fires and the missing steel the building was in serious risk of
    collapsing" (FDNY Chief Frank Fellini) And there is quote after quote of
    statements like that.

    Reply
  2. Inside job?? that an entire battalion of firemen were completely aware was
    going to collapse. Something the fire dept were preparing for and had
    cordoned off the building?? What’s the purpose of blowing up the building?
    Oh wait its to erase all of the computer hard drives and file cabinets from
    existence right???? This is the kind of nonsense that constitutes a good
    idea in Troof land. You people are a bunch of morons.

    Reply
  3. @markh1011 Example: the moon is pretty massive, yes. It stays in orbit
    around the earth due to gravity. The force of gravity is reduced but the
    inverse square law relative to distance from the source. The moon is quite
    a distance away, meaning the gravitational force from the earth would be a
    number too small for you to comprehend. Now if the moon was sitting on the
    face of mars and mars was as close as the moon is now the earth would have
    no affect on it.

    Reply
  4. Allyn E. Kilsheimer of KCE Structural Engineers “It was absolutely a plane,
    and I’ll tell you why,” [of Washington, D.C.] “I saw the marks of the plane
    wing on the face of the building. I picked up parts of the plane with the
    airline markings on them. I held in my hand the tail section of the plane,
    and I found the black box. I held parts of uniforms from crew members in my
    hands, including body parts.” 911 TRUTH DEBUNKED!

    Reply
  5. The light poles are interesting, because they indicate a flight path south
    of the gas station, but all witnesses, including the police, say the ‘plane
    went north of the gas station. The police witnesses were actually in the
    gas station so a mistake is implausable, and other witnesses would not have
    had a sightline to a southern approach.

    Reply
  6. see
    911debunkers.blogspot.com/2011/07/charlie-veitch-parroting-outdated.html
    for a thorough rebuttal of your unsourced claim that half the building was
    taken out by damage from the twin towers’ collapse. Even the peddlers of
    the official government conspiracy theory don’t claim that half of WTC 7
    was taken out.

    Reply
  7. thats what they excactly wanted to say: these buildings are there with high
    damage but never were nuked up by the responsible figures. the wtc7 was
    huge and important, no damage. and it disappeared. so u said it in best
    words!

    Reply
  8. It makes perfect sense to me. And Jane Standley of the BBC has explained it
    a thousand times. It was simply a mix up from her people in the field
    advising her. The “its going to collapse” got turned in to “It has
    collapsed”. Just some confusion on a very mixed up and confused day. I
    don’t see this as a big deal in the least. And Jane cleared it up years
    ago. The fire dept were saying it was going to go at 3pm. It came down at
    5. Why is this a big deal at all?

    Reply
  9. @markh1011 Well I do have to give you some props, you are getting better at
    debating. If you want to debate the entire “Official” story. There are
    plenty of things that don’t add up.

    Reply
  10. Blunder?. How do you think CNN could report that the building is GOING to
    collapse?. How do you think Scott Pelley of CBS could make the same report.
    Or any number of about half a dozen other news outlets? Because the Fire
    dept knew at 3pm it was going to come down. Go read some of their reports
    for Christ sake. The fire dept knew all about 7’s situation. A zone was
    established around it so nobody else got hurt.

    Reply
  11. georgewashington2.blogspot.com/2008/09/clarifying-collapse-time-of-wtc-7.html
    911research.wtc7.net/wtc/analysis/wtc7/speed.html
    911debunkers.blogspot.com/2010/02/ultimate-proof-nist-is-lying-about-wtc7.html
    for additional discussion (this one has a link to a NIST report admitting
    free fall speed, but NIST removed it.

    Reply
  12. @Bcm80 hate to shame you out in public, but you did ask for it. youtube the
    following and go to 5:59 Dimitri Khalezov – WTC Nuclear Demolition [12/26].
    next time do some research before spouting shit on here boy. i know youre
    only 22 but still, u should be old enough to look for yourself

    Reply
  13. it stood as long as it did, because no fires in history have ever led to
    the vertical collapse of steel skyscrapers, until supposedly this one.
    Please see my other evidence below.

    Reply
  14. @stelley08 You do know that video says your thermite conclusion is
    impossible. It says that the towers were brought down by nuclear bombs
    right? I’m just wondering if you have watched your own evidence.

    Reply
  15. The minions of A&E. No university, research centers, technical journals,
    scientists, associations of engineers, pilots, architects, firefighters and
    medical believe the lies and the demolition of the A&E. The same in Asia,
    Oceania, Canada, Europe and South America. The list below is today. I have
    the link of all. Always find more on the internet. There evidence against
    the towers and WTC7.Only 0,0001% of U.S. engineers are in A&E. Without the

    Reply
  16. @MrTHEORIGINALICEMAN “That is why when a building collapses, it for the
    most part falls over” – Where is the force going to come from the make 20
    floors of the WTC move to the left? Wind? 20 floors smash down on one
    weakened floor… it cannot stop them or move them… the structural
    strength for that floor is smashed and 21 floors fall onto the next… then
    22 onto the next.. and it continues.

    Reply

Post Comment