- Register |
- Login |
- Premium Memberships |
- Audio & Video Chat |
- Top Leakers |
- Faq |
- Contact Us |
- Set As Homepage |
- Advanced Search
- Sections:
- All |
- News/Politics |
- Middle East (Iraq, Afghanistan, Iran..) |
- Entertainment |
- Celebrity |
- Education |
- Citizen Journalism
WTC7 Collapsed Due to Damage and Fire - Reply to Bushwack
The bldg was hit by falling debris and burned unchecked for over 7 hours. People on the site saw it visibly leaning. There is no mystery.
Liveleak requires flash. If you see this message, make sure you have the latest flash player installed. To install the latest version, click HERE
Added: Jan 11 2008 In: yoursay
- Tags:
- wtc7,
- bushwack,
- 911,
- conspiracy
- Views: 3429 |
- Votes: 15 |
- Recommendations: 1 |
- Comments: 244
- |
- Send to Friends |
Comments - sort by newest to oldest
Have at it guys. I am not going to play whack-a-mole in this thread. Gotta go paint the house.
Posted Jan-11-2008 by "CriticalThinker" Premium
There is new evidence that Bush was on site and soon as he heard PULL-IT pushed the button that brought #7 down.
A Bush Haters Dream Story. sorry traitors I made it up
Posted Jan-11-2008 by "noliberals" (B)
There are too many questions...
And the people need answers..that is all.
Posted Jan-11-2008 by "madness8" (R)
Nice reply CT. I've been asking these "truthers" for one piece of a blasting cap or detonation cord for years now....guess what? Nothin'! Not one piece of evidence to support demolition. Certainly Bush couldn't be controlling every one of the thousands of people that have tracked through the debris. I think by now, at least one person should have found ONE PIECE of physical evidence to support this claim, but it hasn't happened.
Posted Jan-11-2008 by "Blackhawk067" (R)
And the people need answers..that is all.
The only question I want answered is how we let this happen.
Most of these other questions have been answered 100 times over Mad. Some people just don't want to see it or are too convinced that the government has the brains to be able to pull something like this off when they've blatantly screwed up so many other things so many other times. If it (WTC 7) was a controlled demolition, I think at least ONE of the thousands of witnesses would have stepped forward and said they heard the concussions of the explosives or saw a flash or something, but none of that has come forward...their only proof is that the building collapsed in on itself, which again, it was designed to supposedly.
I provided links to many controlled demolitions on Bushwack's thread....I don't see any resemblance between them and WTC 7 except for the way it fell...which it was designed to do.
Posted Jan-11-2008 by "Blackhawk067" (R)
Good Post
Posted Jan-11-2008 by "Kueppers" (R)
People saw it leaning? Is that why it fell into its own footprint, FASTER THAN GRAVITY?
Posted Jan-11-2008 by "infinit" (R)
http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=b37_1199520060
This architect with 20 years experience disagrees with you.
Posted Jan-11-2008 by "infinit" (R)
How did it fall, "faster than gravity"?
What degree do you have under your belt that gives you the knowledge to make that claim?
And let's get this straight. Even a building brought down by explosives cannot fall "faster than gravity".
Posted Jan-11-2008 by "dynadude" (R)
http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=b37_1199520060
"Shock wave ripping through the building.. windows breaking... and the building coming down"
no evidence eh?
Posted Jan-11-2008 by "infinit" (R)
I stoped watching when I saw the History Chanel. That is a Neo-con hit piece...
Posted Jan-11-2008 by "uniqmaster" (R)
Oh, do you understand how gravity works? Something can only fall faster than gravity if it is propelled downward. A demolition does not propel the building towards the ground. It takes away the structural support so the building COLLAPSES IN ON ITSELF. You can't even get your conspiracies straight. The argument is the way the building fell, not how fast it fell. BTW, it didn't fall faster than gravity.
Posted Jan-11-2008 by "Blackhawk067" (R)
And the people need answers..that is all.
The answers are there, 'the people' you are talking about just aren't willing, or able to understand it.
Posted Jan-11-2008 by "Dawsopolis" (B)
Excellent post, votizzled.
Posted Jan-11-2008 by "Dawsopolis" (B)
How did it fall, "faster than gravity"?
What degree do you have under your belt that gives you the knowledge to make that claim?
And let's get this straight. Even a building brought down by explosives cannot fall "faster than gravity".
The building fell in a vaccuum, there would have to be no air resistance in the building to fall at the speed it did. 6.5 seconds, into its own footprint, with molten steel in the basement.
Posted Jan-11-2008 by "infinit" (R)