Safe Mode: On
WTC7 - Explained Very Simply

Amazing how many people are in denial . . .

Loading the player ...
Embed CodeSwitch Player
Plays: 28551 (Embed: 9842)

Added: Sep-30-2012 Occurred On: Sep-30-2012
By: noxomus
In:
Conspiracy
Tags: wtc7, demolition, pancakes,
Location: New York, New York, United States (load item map)
Views: 26080 | Comments: 150 | Votes: 7 | Favorites: 6 | Shared: 1242 | Updates: 0 | Times used in channels: 1
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.
  • The orange could have been a tangerine or a small grapefruit. Dramatic visualization: FAIL.

    Posted Oct-1-2012 By 

    (5) | Report

  • whats wrong with that apple???

    Posted Oct-1-2012 By 

    (4) | Report

  • See this is stupid. Most people know it's an orange because they have EXPERIENCE with the Orange. They are TOLD it is an orange in school. Take a Clemintine and ask people what it is.. how many will say it's an Orange? But it's not.. it LOOKS like an Orange. Take a blood Orange without telling people what it is, and ask people what colour the Inside is.. most will say Orange.. but it is in fact red. Visual identification is totally fucked up. You see a man covered in blood with a dead guy next More..

    Posted Oct-1-2012 By 

    (4) | Report

  • Left out the part about how the the front of it had a massive hole in it. Left out the part that the structure had its weight on 3 trusses 2 of which were damaged. Left out the part of the video where the penthouse collapsed(internal collapse) first then about 8 seconds later the rest of the bldg came down. Left out the fact there is ZERO audio of successive blasts associated with a demolition as demonstrated in this video. Many argue they heard explosions but the time one hears them to when th More..

    Posted Oct-1-2012 By 

    (4) | Report

    • @aa316 Check these out.

      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QNCRnlKfQXc&feature=plcp sources in description.

      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2V0WQFztLyg&feature=plcp sources in description.

      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TNXqkZO3Y1g&feature=plcp sources in description.

      ...why is not one person reported any MAJOR construction prior to 9/11..."
      Like This?
      "The building was extensively renovated in 1989 to accommodate the needs of Salomon Brothers. This led to the alternat More..

      Posted Oct-2-2012 By 

      (0) | Report

  • Fucking Bush!

    Posted Oct-1-2012 By 

    (3) | Report

  • The British accent totally adds credence to this utter fucking lunacy.

    Posted Oct-1-2012 By 

    (3) | Report

  • its sad that even the simplest of explanations can not penetrate the thick skull of the willfully ignorant. Steel framed buildings do not fall down like that unless demo'd. A fire would not have made all of the vertical supports fail like that . . . sorry dummies.

    Posted Oct-1-2012 By 

    (3) | Report

  • So let me get this straight...

    Instead of leaving building 7 be as it was, the sinister government forces behind this attack decided to demolish it for the sole purpose of having to then come up with an explanation of why it fell?

    Posted Oct-1-2012 By 

    (2) | Report

  • Of course it wasn't caused by bombs, missiles or a a controlled explosion... Fire which burned a good part of the day, heated the floor beams near column 79 which expanded and unseated one of the main girders.. It had an offset truss system that re-distributed the weight making it unbalanced when the girder failed...

    Posted Oct-1-2012 By 

    (2) | Report

    • Comment of user 'tugpilotsmiffy' has been deleted by author (after account deletion)!
    • Comment of user 'klaus123' has been deleted by author (after account deletion)!
    • @ILovePickles Not to mention how many tons of shit hit the building from the North tower. People like to over complicate shit. Wanna go to war? Why not just slam some aircraft into some buildings. That alone would be enough to go to war... but noooo we need to get super secret agents to place bombs (that could have gone off during the attack) and try to make it LOOK natural. K.I.S.S

      Posted Oct-1-2012 By 

      (1) | Report

    • @klaus123 better call them structural engineers and tell them that all those steel structure buildings they have designed and built fir the last 50 years are unsafe due to a weakness to low temperature fires. you would become a hero for saving millions of lives!
      steel=strong
      steel+lower temperature fire=weak flimsy steel
      structural engineers know > government = government's explanation is correct.
      ignore uproar from structural engineers around the world for a proper investigation, because of More..

      Posted Oct-1-2012 By 

      (-3) | Report

    • @klaus123 You ever worked with steel? You ever been a certified welder? Have you ever welded anything? Have you even ever cut any steel with an acetylene torch?

      Didn't think so.

      Posted Oct-1-2012 By 

      (1) | Report

  • WTC 1 + 2 may have been a terrorist attack, but the more I see the WTC7 collapse the more I am convinced it was a controlled demolition.

    Both towers falling down in a controlled manner is just coincidence, but WTC7 with all the damage on one side also collapsing in such a neat and tidy manner? Nah, pull the other one, it jingles!

    As for why? No idea why it was possibly demolished, but we don't have to know why.

    Posted Oct-1-2012 By 

    (2) | Report

    • @bmused55 Agree.. WTC looks wierd. WTC1 and 2 were just a design issue, but the traditional design of wtc 7 makes it "look" controlled. We also only see this from 1 side on a 2D image. It could have fallen backwards into the damaged section. Who knows.

      Posted Oct-1-2012 By 

      (0) | Report

    • @bmused55 oh, so two modern steel framed world record setting towers, collapsing exactly the same way into their foot print after taking damage at completely different areas, with completely different levels of damage, is a coincidence. whereas the third is not? wow.
      @youpube .. so you really think that office fires can take down a steel framed building?.. and you believe that the damage to WTC7 was enough to take it down symmetrically? you have any idea how easy it would have been to plan all t More..

      Posted Oct-1-2012 By 

      (0) | Report

    • @Aariss WTC 1&2 had incredible design! this was not the first time the towers were hit by a plane, much less a bomb. the whole structure was designed to redirect the load to the outer walls, as well as the center columns (48).
      the center columns took most of the weight and were 18"x 36", with steel walls 4" thick. how the fuck would office fires for less than 2 hours, heat that enough to make it fail?
      as for WTC7, there are multiple videos from different angles, as well is pic More..

      Posted Oct-1-2012 By 

      (0) | Report

    • @fha_dynamo The fire traveled both up and down. The floors the firefighters got to were LOWER then the impact zone. Steel that is hit, deforms and becomes weak. It's this weak steel that started the collapse. You need to remember the Buildings were not just on fire, they took a plane hit from an aircraft that weighs up to 350,000 lbs traveling at speeds in the hundreds of MPH. Many people quote stats that deal with the structure not damaged. This IS the first time a plane hit the WTC. They were More..

      Posted Oct-1-2012 By 

      (0) | Report

  • The Orange did it.

    Posted Oct-1-2012 By 

    (2) | Report

  • Wow, an orange coloured apple, I never...

    Posted Oct-1-2012 By 

    (2) | Report

  • Bollox yet again.

    The fires weren't extinguished. The Brigades evacuated early in the event. Fires raged uncontrolled fed by the rooftop diesel generator tanks and internal flammable material

    It collapsed internally first - see the penthouse disappearing. The facade was dragged down by the core.

    Posted Oct-1-2012 By 

    (2) | Report

  • i didn't hear the explosions that would have been needed to destroy the supports.

    Posted Oct-1-2012 By 

    (1) | Report

    • @spbster

      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0YvrKfWkxdw

      Is that loud enough for ya?

      Posted Oct-1-2012 By 

      (2) | Report

    • @whatduh One explosion? I really don't know what that was that blew up (or when it happened, the video doesn't prove it happened just before the building fell), but there should have been multiple explosions to destroy the supports the way other buildings are brought down. You still haven't convinced me.

      Posted Oct-5-2012 By 

      (-1) | Report

  • I'm finally convinced after all the conspiracy vids about wtc7 on LL ... well done nox....... FAIL

    Posted Oct-1-2012 By 

    (1) | Report

  • Remember when the MGM Grand was destroyed by fire, and pancaked into its own footprint?

    No, of course you don't. Because that is silly. That does not happen.

    Posted Oct-1-2012 By 

    (1) | Report

    • @livewire242 As a kid I watched it burn from street level and after the first jumper hit the ground my pops took me home... the things you never forget.

      Posted Oct-1-2012 By 

      (0) | Report

    • Comment of user 'the wedge' has been deleted by author (after account deletion)!
    • @the wedge
      omg... go put on your tard helmet.. he was being sarcastic

      Posted Oct-1-2012 By 

      (0) | Report

  • It is very obvious though...Buildings don't just collapse like that...

    Posted Oct-1-2012 By 

    (1) | Report

  • yawn!go away please ... wake up ,get a job,a life and quit pushing your nonsence....

    Posted Oct-1-2012 By 

    (1) | Report

  • 11 years on and we have a picture of an orange. Nice work.

    Posted Oct-1-2012 By 

    (1) | Report

  • It's been 11 years and that's the first time I've seen a vid of 7 going down. Blame it on fire, seems legit.

    Posted Oct-1-2012 By 

    (1) | Report

  • Yep denying this is beyond ignorance

    Posted Oct-1-2012 By 

    (1) | Report

  • Look closely at 1:18, that thing on the top of the roof collapses first, then the bottom is next. They blew the center of the building away first, which made the roof start to collapse then the base columns were taken away a second later. Computer timing is the only way this could have happened. 9-11 liars have been "pulling it" for over ten years now.

    Posted Oct-2-2012 By 

    (1) | Report

  • Are these people still talking about this? LOL.

    News flash:
    WT7 collapsed as a result of being severely damaged and burned...whether you like it or not.

    Posted Oct-1-2012 By 

    (1) | Report

    • @Jarhead 2234

      I think HOW it got severely damaged and burned is the subject of question in most peoples' minds. You are correct in that it was severely damaged, burned, and collapsed. I will say the way this was achieved may not be how you are imagining it.

      Posted Oct-2-2012 By 

      (0) | Report

    • @RadioGaGa It's not in my imagination. WT7 had been hit by a chunk of the north tower and had many fires buring inside. There were fire crews in that building until transit measurements showed the structure was listing. The fire chief pulled the crew a few hours before it collapsed. The commission report explains in detail why it fell the way it did. Simply put, no one planted anything in that building.

      Posted Oct-2-2012 By 

      (0) | Report

  • Comment of user 'focusv5' has been deleted by author (after account deletion)!
  • Fucking retards

    Posted Oct-1-2012 By 

    (1) | Report