194
195

WTC Building 7 Collapse - 23 angles (youtube.com)

GNUgamer が 投稿

並べ替え:
ベスト
ベスト
トップ
新着
注目
論争中
古い順
あなたは単独のコメントのスレッドを見ています。

残りのコメントをみる →

[–]radii314 16 ポイント17 ポイント  (36子コメント)

best collection of vids I've seen and many with the full building in view ... it collapses into its own footprint the way controlled demolitions are designed to do, owner Silverstein said, "The decision was made to pull it," ... the manner in which it fell, where clearly the central section was sheared from the ends is, again, exactly how controlled demolition would do it

9/11 is the day that will live in infamy - a great crime was committed, a great lie was told to us, and the criminals not only walk free but have the power

[–]khamul787 -3 ポイント-2 ポイント  (19子コメント)

Once again. This has been repeated hundreds, thousands of times. Pull it has nothing to do with demolition. This is made incredibly clear by context. I legitimately don't understand why people espouse such nonsense.

[–]getityetquestionmark 6 ポイント7 ポイント  (2子コメント)

The term pull is a demo term.

And you don't say, "pull it" when referring to firemen. It would be "pull them". Unless you see people as objects. Which he may. But he meant the building.

[–]TheRehabKid [非表示スコア]  (0子コメント)

It is a demo term, but not for controlled explosions.

It's used when you are simply pulling something down with cables and such. Is that going to be part of conspiracy now? They pulled the building down with cables?

[–]khamul787 -3 ポイント-2 ポイント  (0子コメント)

Unless he meant the operation, which, again, is clear.

[–]radii314 5 ポイント6 ポイント  (15子コメント)

perhaps it's the evidence right there in front of your eyes

[–]khamul787 -2 ポイント-1 ポイント  (14子コメント)

Such as...? The glaringly obvious context of his phrasing?

[–]radii314 7 ポイント8 ポイント  (13子コメント)

how does a large steel-framed building go into complete free-fall?

there supposedly was only fire, no impacts on WTC 7 ... in the history of iron and steel-framed buildings none has ever before come down from fire

[–]ModsRCorrupt -3 ポイント-2 ポイント  (11子コメント)

no impacts on WTC 7

Besides the huge hole in the side near the bottom due to falling debris from the other towers?

[–]WTCMolybdenum4753 6 ポイント7 ポイント  (0子コメント)

Besides the huge hole...

We'd be seeing 23 angles of an asymmetrical collapse.

[–]Ferrofluid 1 ポイント2 ポイント  (7子コメント)

holes alone do not cause buildings to fall.

they require paper based office fires as NIST says.

FEMA claims diesel fuel even tho NIST says no diesel fuel burnt.

[–]further_truths 2 ポイント3 ポイント  (6子コメント)

How do you explain buildings collapsing without fires or holes?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aiY869APaWc

[–]dhs2020 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (5子コメント)

do you have context for this collapse? Report, etc?

[–]dhs2020 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (4子コメント)

I read about this. It appears this was a 2 story structure with a foundation to support such, but then it was built up to 6 stories. This isn't exactly the same thing. There are some theories about this building's collapse, too, even some claiming Controlled Demolition. Not saying I agree, but this is not exactly the same thing. Furthermore, WTC7 was over 40 stories, not 6. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SHJfGVmuYHg

[–]Youngy798 -1 ポイント0 ポイント  (1子コメント)

A separate analysis showed that even without the structural damage due to debris impact, WTC 7 would have collapsed in fires similar to those that occurred on Sept. 11, 2001. None of the large pieces of debris from WTC 2 hit WTC 7 because of the large distance between the two buildings. - NIST

[–]ModsRCorrupt [非表示スコア]  (0子コメント)

I was just pointing out the error in the previous commenter's comments.

Also, WTC1 was closer to WTC7 than WTC2 was.

[–]iamfromreallife -4 ポイント-3 ポイント  (7子コメント)

Funny how, unlike all other controlled demolitions, there's not a one, a one flash of light or debris from the explosives being used in none of those 23 angles. Instead, you clearly see the columns giving way seconds before the actual implosion of the building.

[–]WTCMolybdenum4753 6 ポイント7 ポイント  (3子コメント)

unlike all other controlled demolitions

No flashes.

Mayfair Hotel, Philips Building, Southwark Towers, ...

http://implosionworld.com/cinema.htm

We should assume demolition technology has been perfected.

[–]iamfromreallife -1 ポイント0 ポイント  (2子コメント)

You can clearly see the detonations in those though. Tell me honestly if they are similar to WTC7?

[–]WTCMolybdenum4753 2 ポイント3 ポイント  (0子コメント)

The question was if demolition flashes were a constant in every demolition.

Tell me honestly if they are similar to WTC7?

They blew columns in WTC7 which is different than a top down implosion.

[–]conzorz 3 ポイント4 ポイント  (0子コメント)

Look for yourself.

[–]canihaveahint 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (0子コメント)

all

[–]shmegegy [非表示スコア]  (0子コメント)

I see squibs in some of the videos. Many of them seem to have 'lighting' problems too.. strange.

Some of them have had audio scrubbed, or replaced. There are low booms heard in a few, and of course there's the famous 'seven is exploding' tape with a huge explosion sound.

[–]Ferrofluid 1 ポイント2 ポイント  (0子コメント)

funny how if you look closely at some of the videos, you CAN see flashes and squibs occurring.

and at least one or more of the videos, the rare ones that haven't had their audio removed by persons unknown, you can hear the pop pop pop mixed in with the roar of the building coming down.

then theres the videos of loud booms going off from video of firefighters in the street near WTC7.