Tuesday, October 10, 2006

WTC 7 Video

As you can seen from about 25 seconds on, an enormous amount of smoke is pouring out of WTC 7.


At 10 October, 2006 11:50, Blogger Rob said...

WTC 7 stood to the North side of the WTC plaza, and its South side was hit by falling fragments of the North tower. The video shows 2 views of WTC 7 - first from the North, where only a couple of fires are visible through windows, then from the South where almost the whole face of the building is emitting smoke. Naturally, the view from the North looks like "only a handful of minor fires" and is all that ever makes it into truther films and claims.

At 10 October, 2006 12:40, Anonymous Anonymous said...

What say you, truth cultists? There have to be some deniers lurking. Answer the evidence:

Video clearly showing WTC 7 suffered extraordinary damage from the fall of WTC 1&2. You can't even say the Government started the fires to make it look more realistic. The damage from WTC 1&2 debris is obvious, and unique to WTC 7.

Is it just a coincidence that the building the government planned to demolish anyway suffered the most severe damage of the buildings not hit by passenger jets? Did they somehow divine beforehand which bulding would get hit the hardest? Maybe all the buildings were rigged to collapse, just in case the government got the chance. Or is it possible that WTC 7 collapsed due to the extraordinary and unique damage it suffered - as every association of structural engineering agrees?

I'm just asking questions and demanding answers, truthiness-ers.

At 10 October, 2006 13:14, Blogger Lying_Dylan said...

They must FORGOTTEN to mail that HUGE CHECK out to that dude with the camera.

At 10 October, 2006 13:36, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Oh that sucks for them....

At 10 October, 2006 16:08, Blogger Killtown said...

Love how all the smoke is coming from the side where the WTC 5 & 6 were completely engulfed in flames too.

And funny hardly any smoke is coming out of the north face even though there are a couple "out of control" fires seen on that side.

Pull it!

At 10 October, 2006 16:17, Blogger Dog Town said...

Guess all the witnesses don't count to you...huh KKK?

Why here, have your flocks abandoned you again?

At 10 October, 2006 16:20, Blogger Rayzor said...

It never fails to amaze me how they still remain so hopelessly desperate in their cause.

At 10 October, 2006 16:20, Blogger The Artistic Macrophage said...

You know, they will just come back with this fire or that fire that lasted for 8 weeks and still the building stood...lol


At 10 October, 2006 16:36, Blogger shawn said...

Pull it!

Which isn't a term used for explosive/implosive demolitions!

If there was a God I'd thank Him for granting me a good brain instead of the lemon you got stuck with.

At 10 October, 2006 16:37, Blogger shawn said...

It never fails to amaze me how they still remain so hopelessly desperate in their cause.

No kidding, the smoke is obviously coming from WTC7, but Killtown still can't let it go.

At 10 October, 2006 16:42, Blogger MarkyX said...

Hey KT, maybe you can answer this since no other 9/11 Denier has.

The other buildings such as the WTC 6 and 5: How were they built and how tall were they?

At 10 October, 2006 16:48, Blogger Alex said...

Oh come on! It's so OBVIOUS that the video was faked. I could do that in 5 minutes in Lightwave!


At 10 October, 2006 17:38, Blogger Lying_Dylan said...

The video HAS TO BE FAKE!!
I mean everyone was paid off!!
This cant be real!!

At 10 October, 2006 21:34, Blogger Pat said...

Killtown, you can see the wind is blowing south, which means that the smoke from the other two buildings should be (and is) no where near WTC7. That smoke is coming from WTC7 and no other building.

At 11 October, 2006 03:52, Blogger Bubbers said...

Yup....nooooo question about it.

At 11 October, 2006 12:10, Blogger RatMan said...

please expain how a squib materializes 35-40 floors below the initial collapse of the south tower? impossible without explosives. take a look:


At 11 October, 2006 12:23, Blogger The Artistic Macrophage said...

This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

At 11 October, 2006 12:26, Blogger The Artistic Macrophage said...

ok ratman:

Please present evidence that states, that THE ONLY WAY to have ejected debris 30-40 storeys down in the south tower was EXPLOSIVES. This is what you said, so PROVE IT.

I want a statement from a top demolitions expert and/or structural engineer quoted as saying "Only explosives could cause the phenomenon we see 30-40 storeys down in the south tower".

I am willing to bet you cant find one. Maybe my aunt hilda tossed a chair at the window...maybe the air pressure blew it out, from the floors collapsing, maybe the heat from the fire contributed.

Like I said, show me proof, or your comment is merely speculation.


At 11 October, 2006 12:57, Blogger Alex said...

Amazingly enough, that squib materialized at the EXACT SAME INSTANT that I farted. I think my ass is somehow connected to the New World Order.

At 11 October, 2006 13:17, Blogger Rayzor said...

initial collapse of the tower? one, uno, ein, 1, squib?

That squib appears about two-three seconds after the collapse. Why set off an explosive after the building is already collapsing? Just for kicks?

And one, God-almighty, squib brings down the entire building? Have you ever seen a real controlled demolition, they show them on the History channel, discovery channel, you can even see one in Ocean's Eleven. bunch of squibs going UP the building BEFORE the building falls. One squib is not all that is needed to bring down a building.

Now, you explain, as have already been asked, how is it that this squib is impossible without an explosive.

At 15 October, 2006 09:54, Blogger Rogerthat said...

Can someone answer about what this clame from Patricia Ondrovic?

From 911review.org

In an exclusive Killtown interview, Ground Zero EMT Patricia Ondrovic talks about her harrowing day at the WTC on 9/11. Within minutes after the South Tower collapses, she witnessed the WTC 5 blowing up, cars exploding, and explosions inside the lobby of the WTC 6, all the while narrowly escaping with her own life."

I guess this looks really crasy.

At 26 November, 2006 20:18, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Guess most of you folks in here dont like the truth eh? Larry Silverstien has SAID he had the WTC7 building pulled that day. Demolition charges take WEEKS to plant. Get all your annoying asses over to Physics911.net and stop hiding from the truth! I know its not easy accepting the facts, but that does'nt mean you should go attempting to "debunk" Loose Change etc in a futile attempt to hide facts from people. LOADS of scientists etc have stated it has all the charictaristics of a controlled demolition and they have more knowledge than ANY of us!

At 26 November, 2006 20:30, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Watch TERRORSTORM and more importantly, September 11th revisited. TOP SCIENTISTS SHOW THE TRUTH!!!

Have an open mind damn it, do your own research and find the truth not some blogger or screw loose change films that have no facts or make some up! Yes, MADE UP! Clearly that is the case with the Screw Loose Change film/book. "Pull it" IS A TERM USED BY DEMOLITION COMPANIES!!!! Many documentaries clear that matter up when jargon busting phrases. Truth will pervail in the end even with the debunking sites and papers that do more to debunk THEMSELVES than anything else!!!

By the way, I used to be like many here and think the "conspiracy theories" were rubbish. Until I looked around and saw the evidence for myself. Just thought I'd add that before my inevitable attack from you all dening the truth once again. Also plenty of online videos etc have been shown to be fake such as the obvious ones like the plane missing the towers. Its that easy to forge footage these days. TOO EASY!

At 26 May, 2007 00:10, Blogger Demonslayer said...

What ?

How could a building when put on fire and debris thrown at it FALL SO SYMMETRICALLY.
It fell as if 'It had been in a demolition.If you watch clearly ,you'll find the roof first falls even though there were no fires at the roof.
It is better to say that they just demolished it.

At 25 April, 2010 21:16, Blogger Unknown said...

Asymmetrical damage, as was seen in WTC 7, would not have caused a perfectly symmetrical collapse of this building into its own footprint...at nealy free-fall speed.


Post a Comment

<< Home