some newly released footage from building 7 about an hour befpre collapse, As you can see in the video, the fire is not that bad or intense. Not enough to be…
(Visited 73 times, 1 visits today)
New footage of building 7 newly released via freedom of imformation act
The Penthouse doesn't show it wasn't a controlled demolition. The Penthouse can be well explained by supposing it was brought down so that it would look less like a controlled demolition.
Who knows how they set the explosives that took this building down or that they went off properly, but in any case the building was demolished. Just because the penthouse collapsed "at free fall speed" before the rest of the entire building fell in linear fashion straight down into its own footprint "at free fall speed" doesn't negate the laws of physics defied had it otherwise fallen by natural causes. This was controlled demolition plain and simple. Building don't fall like this by chance.
You can even see that they paused the video to make it look like the building just fell instantly.
The footage at 04:32 is misleading, the penthouse falls 8 seconds before the rest of the building falls, if the full video was shown you would see this, which in turn shows it wasn't a controlled demolition.
Exactly … for those interested to learn some disturbing facts about the "whodunnit" of that fateful event … watch "9/11 —- The Missing Link"! There are not many persons in powerful positions and companies with the technology needed for a stunt like 9/11.
… after "Bu$h, the lesser" it is now called NUCULAR
Since I never claimed you were from the U.S, so whatever.
Is anyone aware tower 7 was built over another station ?? It had abnormal supports because of this. They sustained significant damage from debris from the other towers. Causing the building to collapse from the center ?
I am NOT from USA, i am NOT a truther, i am NOT a children (39 years), my mind is working perfectly, and of course: NUCLEAR DEMOLITION. Ok?
Nuclear demolition? Pfft. LOL. Come harder than that. I KNOW you truthers can.
;D
Yeah, and all those thousands of people who work and/or visit the buildings each day saw or suspected nothing. I forgot they were apart of the conspiracy. Oops.
Firefighters went into this building and there was tons of fires and they noticed a bulge in abit of the building which made the building unstable and could of collapsed the fire fighters also were hearing creaks in the building hours before it fell so they got everyone out of the area and no won died in its collapse
It does take a significant amount of time to prepare (NOT prepair) a building for a controlled (NOT Controld) demolition. And if you knew anything about controlled demolition you'd know that you start by weakening the building at its base. All 3 buildings had 24 hour access, so who can say how long the murderers took to prepare it for 9/11? And it's "hey" not "hay. Who is the retard now? Learn to spell. P.S. there are lakes (therefore beaches) in Montana.
Explosives CAN´T DO THAT, OK?:
Youtube: 911 Eyewitness – Evidence of thermonuclear explosions
I have had investigate FOUR YEARS 9/11 until THE END.
NU-CLE-AR DEMOLITION, NOTHING DOUBT.
Dr. Judy Wood Deserve the Nobel Prize….she solved it.
I agree with you 100% NUCLEAR guys want to mislead or they do not know what nuclear power is.
The "inside job" guys seem to have better arguments than the "official 9/11 report" guys.
I wish people would stop saying that. Its just a regular demolition with military grade explosives (more powerful than what contractors use). No radiation, no nuclear demolition.
Your fucking dumbass. You think isreal attacked america? what are you on crack. The palentinias hated america. The jews respected america. get a fucking clue you inside job dumbfuck!
NUCLEAR DEMOLITION
"newly released via freedom of imformation act"
MY FUCKING ASS
It's a LIVE NEWSCAST MORONS
is that journal an engineering journal? is the journal that millette's paper is published in….oh wait, i forgot. it's not in any journal. lol
h t t p : / / w w w(dot)springerlink(dot)com/content/f67q6272583h86n4/fulltext(dot)pdf?MUD=MP
why don't you take your own advice and try attacking the actual article. i know it will require you to read but you can do it cole. i believe in you.
It "Struggling for Obama's Soul" a structural engineering paper?
911 WAS AN OUTSIDE JOB!
still looking for that proof cole. not guess you can't find it? lol. and guess what, if "Struggling for Obama's Soul" is in fact in that journal, than that article has more peer review that millette's paper. what journal was that published in again? i can't remember.
How can you peer review such a wide variety of topics?
Seriously?
"Struggling for Obama's Soul" is peer reviewed?
LMAO!
911 TRUTH = MAKING SHIT UP
looking for your proof that it's not a peer reviewed journal…looking….looking. nope. not finding any proof from you. as usual. just you trying to bash a journal as usual. "whatever that is." is 100% more of a peer reviewed journal than the one that your precious millette's paper is in. which one is that again? lmao