Saturday, March 24, 2007

New WTC 7 Video Surfaces

I am doing my first international SLC post, as I am stuck waiting for a plane in Seoul. If you would like a break from the Charlie Sheen nuttery, go on over to Debunking 911, where a video has surfaced showing the damage to the south side of building 7. Scroll about halfway down the page.

Except for the 20 story gash taken out of the building, and the smoke pouring out just about of every floor, it was hardly damaged at all. Nothing a little paint and spackle couldn't take care of...

Labels:

17 Comments:

At 25 March, 2007 09:08, Blogger 911_truthiness said...

I to came up with a not often seen video of WTC7

WTC 7 Collapse, Rare Video

Note as you view the video at about 11 seconds into the video if you look closely at the left side of WTC 7 you can clearly see one of the penthouses fall into the building. I take a full 6 seconds after the fall of this penthouse for the rest of the building to fall, this is completely unlike an sort of controlled demolition, but is completely in line with the idea of a building suffering internal structural failure from fire. Mind you all this is backed up by witnesses at the scene who said the south wall fell first and the north wall followed.

Also note the remarks from the reporter on scene.
“Fully involved in fire”

"Told by firefighters “there is a good chance building 7 was going to collapse” (not blow up)

“Watching building seven burn cause there was nothing they could do about it”

“Inferno was huge, parts of the building falling into the street.”

“The fires were so massive”

Could he be talking about the same “pristine” buildings truthers want you to believe in?

 
At 25 March, 2007 10:04, Blogger Sameer said...

1. That video is not rare
2. That video is in, say it with me, 'slow motion'
3. The 'billowing smoke' that you guys claim came from WTC7 was from WTC 5 & 6, which were closer to the twin towers collapse
4. Here's the proof:

http://infowars.net/pictures/mar07/200307WTC.jpg

http://infowars.net/pictures/mar07/200307WTC2.jpg

http://infowars.net/pictures/mar07/200307WTC3.jpg

http://infowars.net/pictures/mar07/200307WTC4.jpg

http://infowars.net/pictures/mar07/200307WTC5.jpg

http://infowars.net/pictures/mar07/200307WTC6.jpg

http://infowars.net/pictures/mar07/200307WTC7.jpg

This information has been up on 'twoofer' websites for days, but of course, this blog wouldn't dare speak of it. You would much rather focus of some random anti-semitic site which not many take seriously. Your straw-man arguments are getting old, seriously.

 
At 25 March, 2007 11:34, Blogger Alex said...

lol. Slow motion? I thought you idiots said the building collapsed at "freefall speed"? If it collapsed in roughly 7 seconds in real life, and it collapses in roughly 7 seconds in this video, then how the hell is the video "slow motion"?

Gawd, I am SO tired of dealing with you morons. Don't you think for even 5 bloody seconds before you post???

And what do those pictures prove other than that other buildings were on fire?

"Oh, buildings 5 and 6 were on fire, so there's no way building 7 could have been on fire".

What the hell kind of logic is that????

 
At 25 March, 2007 11:54, Blogger shawn said...

Your straw-man arguments are getting old, seriously.

Your lies are much older.

The slow motion argument doesn't even work - it's still billowing at full speed as it is in slow motion - just comes out faster.

It's quite obvious the smoke is coming OUT of WTC7. You either haven't watch the video(s), or you're a liar. Take your pick.

 
At 25 March, 2007 11:54, Blogger shawn said...

watched*

 
At 25 March, 2007 12:39, Blogger Tom said...

Sameer:

No, you're right - the collapse in this video is not rare. However, the full clip is hardly ever shown.

Groups on your side of the fence love to bandy around the clip, but cut it short when the visual comparison to a CD is made (which is obvious, because it looks similar).

The video, however, was not in slow motion - it appears exactly the same speed as any of the other collapse videos. Prove to us, if you're so sure, that it's in slow motion.

Furthermore, all those pictures show is that there was billowing smoke coming from 5 and 6. Doesn't show that there wasn't any billowing smoke coming from 7, which various other photos and video footage (such as the video in this blog post, and the Steve Spak (sp?) footage).

 
At 25 March, 2007 12:58, Blogger 911_truthiness said...

You can also see another video I have uploaded that clearly shows the "gash" cut into WTC 7 by the fall of twin towers.

In this video you can clearly see the smoke is coming from WTC7 an ONLY WTC7. AND high up in WTC7 so it could NOT be from other buildings.

WTC7 Groove

And all this goes without mentioning the countless eye witness accounts of people who were there, who saw he fires, saw the smoke and who knew from the extreme damage done to building 7 that it was going to collapse.

 
At 25 March, 2007 13:14, Blogger 911_truthiness said...

What Sameer calls Slow Motion is in fact Low frame rate. A common problem with internet video. I does not change the timing of the video, but I does look choppy.

And I think the bigger point is the reporters comments. It paint a very bleak picture of the state of WTC7.

 
At 25 March, 2007 13:24, Blogger Tom said...

Indeed. And I notice that he connects the 'secondary explosions' from WTC7 with building damage that he was witnessing. The building 'falling apart into the street' (para).

But of course, he could only be talking about TEH BOMBZZ, yes?

 
At 25 March, 2007 17:04, Blogger Swing Dangler said...

WTC 4,5,6...'nuff said.

 
At 25 March, 2007 17:55, Blogger J-son said...

the clear assumption here is that if debree from the second tower didn't cause the collapse of WTC 7 then clearly a planned demolition must be the cause.

videos like this cannot clearly distinguish internal damage although the building may look perfectly sound from the outside.

It is perfectly reasonable from millions of pounds of metal from the gigantic twin towers to be good damaging factors to WTC 7 therefore making it more weak as time goes by causing it to collapse.

 
At 25 March, 2007 17:55, Blogger J-son said...

This comment has been removed by the author.

 
At 25 March, 2007 19:22, Blogger Sword of Truth said...

Oooohhh... Sameer, Sameer, Sameer...

This is what your sad excuse for a religion looks like just before it completely collapses:

http://911myths.com/html/wtc7_fire.html

How does it feel to know you've been wrong all this time?

BTW, those are "random" anti-jewish hate-sites. They're 9-11 twoofer sites. Hate is, after all, the defining emotion of the twoofer cult.

 
At 25 March, 2007 20:28, Blogger CHF said...

WTC 4,5,6...'nuff said.

Amazing insight, Swing.

 
At 26 March, 2007 06:36, Blogger 911_truthiness said...

So, Swing.... How did all that smoke from the other buildings get INSIDE WTC7?. It is clear that the smoke in the video is coming from windows in building 7.

I know! it must have blown in from he BIG hole in the south face.

What you see in the videos ha been corroborated by witnesses on the scene who saw the gash and the fires, and who saw the building was in bad shape and in danger of collapse.

Now that's 'nuff said.

 
At 26 March, 2007 16:31, Blogger Col. Jenny Sparks said...

This comment has been removed by the author.

 
At 26 March, 2007 18:10, Blogger Cl1mh4224rd said...

http://www.911myths.com/html/wtc7_smoke_4.html
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/5/5d/WTC7.jpg

WTC 4, 5, and 6... Riiight...

 

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home