Safe Mode: On
When does collapse begin? @ 0:03 or @ 0:10?
 Part of channel(s): September 11 attacks (current event)

Truthers claim WTC 7 collapsed in 8 seconds. For this to be true, they have to discount the fact that the penthouse control room (upper left corner) began to fall at 0:03 of this video. I'm curious what rationale anyone uses to argue that the penthouse falling does not count as the start of the collapse?


Added: Jul-12-2012 Occurred On: Sep-11-2001
By: khartoba
In: Conspiracy
Tags: 911, September 11, 2001, WTC, Truther, conspiracy
Location: United States (load item map)
Marked as: approved
Views: 915 | Comments: 66 | Votes: 0 | Favorites: 1 | Shared: 0 | Updates: 0 | Times used in channels: 2
You need to be registered in order to add comments! Register HERE
Sort by: Newest first | Oldest first | Highest score first
Liveleak opposes racial slurs - if you do spot comments that fall into this category, please report them for us to review.

  • FFS mate move on and get on with YOUR life....you are only here once...it's not a dress rehearsal

    Posted Jul-12-2012 By 
    toppo (599.06)  

    (5)

  • Ummm I hear people talking, some sirens, slight rumbling etc etc BUT I didnt hear any explosives going off... so I guess it was those micro thermite silent explosives being used huh truthertoads!?

    Posted Jul-12-2012 By 
    aa316 (601.82)

    (4)

  • Does it make any difference at all? I suppose you believe the lunar landing was staged in Arizona right?

    Posted Jul-12-2012 By 
    Diverdanm (393.22)  

    (3)

  • Good point.

    Posted Jul-12-2012 By 
    dorbie (2525.80)

    (2)

  • Now i'm convinced, it was Osama. Case closed.

    Posted Jul-12-2012 By 
    JohnMcLane2008 (771.40)

    (2)

  • Either way, it wasn't hit by a plane.

    Posted Jul-12-2012 By 
    iyel_bey (35.50)  

    (1)

    • @iyel_bey Correct it was hit by debris from the twins coming down. you do know all the vids of WTC 7 are shot from the side of the building facing AWAY from the twins! You do know there is audio of police, fire rescuers hours before talking about the massive hole in 7 and that it was coming down. You do know there is not one source of audio with the distinct sound of successive explosives going off!

      Posted Jul-12-2012 By 
      aa316 (601.82)

      (1)

  • I don't get your videos you're posting khartoba, I'm not a "truther" like i've said before, but what exactly is this video proving? I mean, in a demolition they detonate things at different levels no? So couldn't this be the first of the detonation? I suppose it could be a lot of things, debrit from one of the planes could have struck that and the damage in that area could've caused it to fail first, etc. Again, the videos your posting make "truthers" look more intelligen More..

    Posted Jul-12-2012 By 
    Remi (19.90)

    (1)

    • @Remi wheres the audio of it going off if youre right? Explosives for demo can be heard blocks away, Nothing even remotely like that takes place for all of WTC. Know why? Because there was NO controlled demo

      Posted Jul-12-2012 By 
      aa316 (601.82)

      (1)

    • @aa316

      Hey, I never said there was a demo, never said anything of the sort. As for the audio, yea, that can't be altered in anyway(sarcasm). Listen, all i'm saying is that this video proves nothing either. The logic is, your videos are moonbatty so i'm going to post my own moonbatty videos? In my opinion, you're not going to convince the moonbats otherwise, their minds are made up. Do the moonbat vids convince you otherwise? If not, then my point is made.

      Posted Jul-12-2012 By 
      Remi (19.90)

      (-1)

    • @Remi

      I think you need help in reading comprehension.

      "this video proves nothing"

      Truthers claim WTC 7 is the smoking gun of 911. Google "WTC 7 Free fall" and there are millions of results. If the point of this little exercise goes over your head, so be it.

      Posted Jul-12-2012 By 
      khartoba (133.70)  

      (0)

    • @khartoba

      All that proves is that you waste time watching things you don't believe and let it get under your skin. Solution, watch something else, and let the moonbats make fools of themselves.

      Posted Jul-12-2012 By 
      Remi (19.90)

      (0)

    • @Remi my vids are moonbatty? You never watched them otherwise you wouldnt make such a preposterous statement

      Posted Jul-12-2012 By 
      aa316 (601.82)

      (0)

  • That shit is a parapet with tons of air conditioners and heaters, the heaviest part of the roof.

    Posted Jul-12-2012 By 
    The Grim (744.40)  

    (1)

  • sigh...

    Posted Jul-12-2012 By 
    manontherun111 (534.54)  

    (1)

  • WHo cares. Muslim terrorists hit building. Building falls down.

    Posted Jul-12-2012 By 
    Rhemis (962.28)  

    (1)

  • Comment of user 'RugOutFromUnderYou' has been deleted by author!

  • In regards to buildings 1 and 2 .
    Take a #2 pencil unsharpened stand it up on your desk , place your hand on top and push down.
    Questain how much weight could you place on top before the pencil breaks?
    Now take 47 pencils and tie them into a bundle.
    How much weight would they support before breaking?
    My guess at least 200 lbs.
    This experiment goes to show how much strength that just pencils have.
    Now translate that into steel boxed columns tied into a bundle , standing on end , made as one unit More..

    Posted Jul-12-2012 By 
    RustRocket (1361.00)  

    (0)

    • @RustRocket

      LMFAO!!! You forgot to crash a plane into the pencils and stick them in a fire for 2 hours first and then push down on them, fucking moron!

      Posted Jul-12-2012 By 
      khartoba (133.70)  

      (0)

    • @khartoba

      That's just the juvenile response you are famous for.

      Your a fuckin scientist.

      How stable is acetylene?

      Get up off the couch and change your underwear , moms got dinner ready.

      Posted Jul-12-2012 By 
      RustRocket (1361.00)  

      (1)

    • @RustRocket

      "How stable is acetylene?"

      LOL! Because that is the key to this whole puzzle.

      I'm not going to fall for your little straw man argument.

      Posted Jul-13-2012 By 
      khartoba (133.70)  

      (0)

    • @khartoba

      Answer the question.

      Folks want to know.

      You seem to know all about physics.
      Enough to tell other people that they don't know anything about it , that makes you an authority on the subject , then I would expect you to answer a simple question , expert!
      I've given you enough time to save face and research it on the internet , so whats the hold up?
      You talk out of your ass!
      Jokers like you can dish the shit but you cant take it!
      If I was going to build a building ,I would seek the ad More..

      Posted Jul-13-2012 By 
      RustRocket (1361.00)  

      (1)

    • @RustRocket

      LOL! How fucking stupid do you have to be when I point out your tactic, and yet here you are still trying to use it?

      Or maybe your just so fucking stupid that you don't even know what the definition of a straw man argument is and therefore don't realize you've been called out on it?

      So which is it? Are you so fucking stupid that you don't even know what a straw man argument is, or are you just so fucking stupid that you think you can still use it even after you've been called More..

      Posted Jul-13-2012 By 
      khartoba (133.70)  

      (0)

  • Comment of user 'sleesin' has been deleted by author!

  • Cognitive infiltration video here!

    Posted Jul-12-2012 By 
    NeRdALeRt (167.80)  

    (0)

  • The collapse of the facade begins at 10 seconds. It is not controversial that the middle part collapses first. It is consistent with controlled demolitions. To make that outer walls collapse into the building you collapse the middle first so it pulls the outside inward. That's why they call it an implosion. It is not even a prerequisite that the structure falls at freefall speed for it to be a controlled demolition. I think you'll find that ALL controlled demolitions where the middle part falls More..

    Posted Jul-13-2012 By 
    wellybub (346.08)  

    (-1)

    • @wellybub

      "It is not controversial that the middle part collapses first."

      For truthers, it is controversial. Their claim is that the ENTIRE building fell at free fall speed. This helps with their argument that the only way possible for the ENTIRE building to collapse at free fall speed is if support columns were blown out, removing any resistance, as the building collapses.

      But YES! DING DING DING, there was not resistance to the outer facade collapsing because the middle, which More..

      Posted Jul-13-2012 By 
      khartoba (133.70)  

      (0)

    • Comment of user 'sleesin' has been deleted by author!