WTC-7 Any Questions

werrrt0 Says:

Nov 18, 2008 - "Hayden certainly included among them speaking to Rotanz or whoever, it doesn't MATTER" or whoever it was, nice work!

LHOdidntdoit Says:

Nov 18, 2008 - Thanks!! Back to CT school with you, I think you need a refresher.....

werrrt0 Says:

Nov 18, 2008 - Oh your very much welcome. when you found out who those two men are, be sure to let me know. "By the way I wasn't lying, I found Rotanz in LESS THAN 5 mins, but then I checked into it a little further and realized he MIGHT not be the guy." took you about 5 days to figure that out, something i already knew and i need a refresher? don't think so. got to butter up that lie, i would to.

lstchnce Says:

Nov 18, 2008 - Im just laughing on the 20,010 comments. This will never end. Even LHO's stupidity.

AlTilly Says:

Nov 19, 2008 - i don't know if anyone pointed this out yet... but building 7 was built essentially around a substation. it had huge trusses and lower structure collumns to hold and transfer loads across the substation. the center of the building had no direct foundation support. thats a major weakness when load bearing supports get damaged by fire, physical, or any imaginable means. it would take less overall damage to make a structure like that collapse than a 'conventional' steel or concrete box frame.

Sandberg1972 Says:

Nov 20, 2008 - erinmhughes wrote: "As I said I am not a "truther" as there is to much misinformation in the movement but some things they say are painfully obvious facts" Not to LHO erin, there are no obvious facts that contradict the official story, everything is in line, no contradictions whatsopever, of any kind. It's all one coherent & logical credible story, this explanation of the collapse of WTC7. No questions needed, the govt. & NIST have done a fine job researching, they really did their best.

LiteWaiter Says:

Nov 20, 2008 - MEANS - MOTIVE - OPPORTUNITY Billions go to Larry Sliverstein, no matter how the facts are presented. Even more billions go to Halliburton, Exxon, Carlyle, Warburg etc. That's SOME of the MOTIVE(s). 25% of the Pentagons budget is unaccounted for. That's SOME of the MEANS. The weekend before 9/11 there was a shut down where workmen prepared "new internet wiring". In the months before that there was a lot of "construction" noise from the empty floors. That's SOME of the OPPORTINITY(IES). .

Greenandscaly Says:

Nov 22, 2008 - Unlike the other fire, a huge catastrophe - the downing of the twin towers - occurred near Building 7 seven house before. Millions of tons of debris came crashing down, weakening nearby structures.

technomafia Says:

Nov 23, 2008 - the debris and fire isnt a great evidence for why building 7 collapse from bottom to top, this could only happen if the ground floor was fully destroyed by the fire and the debris and that wasnt the fact, so why did building 7 collapse from bottom to the top explain that to me ? ps. i am not a "truther", i am just a person seeking the answer to why we blame 911 on osama bin laden, we have no proof on why osama did this! and thats the fact!

JSSTyger Says:

Nov 24, 2008 - tell that to NIST and FEMA. According to both, debris initiated the fires which brought down the buildings. I see small fires on the lower floors....thats it. And I've got more news for you my friend. Building 7 was a total collapse while inner buildings right under the towers steel structures were still standing...and they took a beating.

FLATTSFANATIC Says:

Nov 24, 2008 - BLATANT DEMOLITION!! God help us from these people! I posted on another vid that there's a video of a guy who talks about how he became friends with a rockefeller who told him ahead of time about all the stuff that would go down and because of it this guy broke off the friendship and was horrified he couldn't do anything about it. He had nothing to gain by saying all this...if anything much to fear from those high and mighty people. scary world we live in. inside job you guys!

sloweatin Says:

Nov 24, 2008 - LOOK AT THE VERTICAL LINE OF DEMOLITION EXPLOSIONS ON THE RIGHT SIDE OF THE BUILDING AS IT JUST BEGINS TO FALL. WE ARE LOOKING FOR SOMEONE TO COME FORWARD AND VALIDATE THIS. MUST BE CREDIBLE AND HAVE PROOF. Learn about this pre-conceived plan to loot 10trillion dollars from the American peole visit churchofrealtruth.c0m

ratm3413 Says:

Nov 24, 2008 - Aaron Russo was that guy. He's dead now. Check out his documentary: freedom to fascism its on google video.

kenwag1963 Says:

Nov 26, 2008 - the reason you see "small" fires is because the view of the building is from the north side, the south side facing the WTC was completely engulfed and severely damaged.

JonnyMcTyler Says:

Nov 27, 2008 - the first building in this video was completely engulfed, not just one side, also being severely damaged. did it collapse? didnt think so buddy.

churchmn Says:

Nov 27, 2008 - Yes, that was the late Aaron Russo talking about his short relationship with Nick Rockefeller. Alex Jones did the interview, and you can find that segment of it on my youtube channel. I liked the video so much that I had to upload it for the sake of my subscribers. Aaron Russo, may he rest in peace, was the best...a REAL person!

pannicatack Says:

Nov 27, 2008 - The Windsor Building in Madrid was contructed primarily from concrete, and not steel. The steel parts of the building did collapse. Look at the upper floors of the Windsor Building after the fire.

bunmeguy Says:

Nov 28, 2008 - true, but 3 buildngs collasping on the same day in the same place due to fire? and just look at the way it went down and compare it to ANY controlled demo, its all very suspicous

mets72692 Says:

Nov 29, 2008 - my neighbor worked in WTC 7 and was inside when the 1st plane hit the north tower. And I saw it collapse live from about 5 blocks away, from where i was standing, there was a gigantic hole that had been scooped out of the side of the building that caused the collapse, not an explosion.

LHOdidntdoit Says:

Nov 29, 2008 - LOOK AT THE VERTICAL LINE OF DEMOLITION EXPLOSIONS ON THE RIGHT SIDE" Nothing more than blinds ruffling in the breeze as the bldg came down. The wdws already busted from the impacts from Tower 1. Simple really, even the hero of the stupid, Richard Gage of ae911 admits this. Where have you been?

heyitspalac Says:

Dec 1, 2008 - Yeah the only reason why people want to believe that 9/11 is complicated is because people like to think that there aren't thing out of their control, just watch and South Park episode about all you people who believe it was an inside job. The government cant do anything right without someone talking about.

PoetryHound Says:

Dec 1, 2008 - Since it was the south side of WTC 7 that was severely damaged, you basically had to be standing at Ground Zero (where WTC 1 & 2 had collapsed) to see it. If you were further south, it would have been difficult to see WTC 7 through the GZ smoke. That's why there aren't any good photos of the south side. I don't doubt you were there, but exactly WHERE were you that you had a view of the south side of WTC 7?

Machida356 Says:

Dec 1, 2008 - There was also a purple unicorn at the south side but like you said, there aren't any good photos of the south side. Just take my word for it.

PoetryHound Says:

Dec 1, 2008 - Well, I do take the word of the firefighters who reported the severe damage to the south side. They were right there. But someone 5 blocks away? I don't know. I suppose it's possible. But that's why I'm curious to know exactly where he was.

Sandberg1972 Says:

Dec 1, 2008 - Yeah, it's so logical of course that, when a big chunk of a building has been "scooped out", that same building will symmetrically collapse in two stages, where the latter one takes place at about freefall acceleration-rate. That's the very FIRST thing that came to my mind. OF COURSE it was that big hole, on the SIDE of WTC7, that caused this SYMMETRICAL collapse, that is sooooooo logical man, even a child could figure that out. Man, one must wonder what all this commotion is about, djee....