Tuesday, September 6, 2011

So why did building 7 collapse on its blueprint without having been hit?
Posted by at

16 comments:

  1. vzaSeptember 7, 2011 at 5:36 AM

    Please do not tell me you are a 9/11 truther!!!!

    ReplyDelete
  2. thankgodimatheistSeptember 7, 2011 at 6:07 AM

    <span>?!!</span>
    <span>It's a simple question because I didn't quite get it.
    </span>

    ReplyDelete
  3. thankgodimatheistSeptember 7, 2011 at 6:09 AM

    What caused that thing to crumble like that if it wasn't hit?

    ReplyDelete
  4. buhSeptember 7, 2011 at 1:04 PM

    Larry Silverstein, I believe his name is, who recently before had purchased the complex and took out "put options" on it, which is sort of an insrance policy and the action could surely be googled; said in an interview closely following the demolitions that they had to "pull" building 7 because of damags or something.
    However, pull is an demolition industry term for imloding a structure, and it would then have had t0 have been pre-wired for destruction.
    There' also the famous news clip of the BBC reporter standing at the scene saying that building 7 had to be taken down when it was clearly visable behind her.  Then it goes down as she continues talking.
    I also don't believe that  fuel could take down the other two buildings when no airplane crash has ever caused buildings to collapse before or since.  Surely these are the two biggest ever hit.
    Also, building 2 was just flown through on a corner with most of the fuel burning outside, yet it collapsed first.
    Suggested reading: "The 9-11 Commission, Ommissions and Distortions" by David Ray Griffin, along with many other books by him and other authors.

    ReplyDelete
  5. thankgodimatheistSeptember 7, 2011 at 6:19 PM

    <span>Thank you Buh. Yes I watched Griffin's 1:50 minutes video. I didn't make up up my mind either way as an opinion cannot be formed without full knowledge of the facts that the gov't officials didn't disclose. There are questions that re still without answers such as the collapse of B7.</span>

    ReplyDelete
  6. annSeptember 7, 2011 at 9:53 PM

    But what would be the motive?  

    ReplyDelete
  7. Jemmy HopeSeptember 8, 2011 at 6:38 AM

    Let's just agree that it was the work of terrorists.

    ReplyDelete
  8. thankgodimatheistSeptember 8, 2011 at 8:40 PM

    <span>If it was not hit, only affected one way or another, why no one said it was brought down? Was that because it could lead to the idea that maybe the other two were also brought down, which I don't personally believe but only intrigued by the collapse of B7.</span>

    ReplyDelete
  9. thankgodimatheistSeptember 8, 2011 at 8:41 PM

    Any idea, vza?

    ReplyDelete
  10. AnonymousSeptember 9, 2011 at 3:37 AM

    "Professional Demolition of World Trade Center Building 7
    Larry Silverstein, the owner of the WTC complex, admitted on a September 2002 PBS documentary, 'America Rebuilds' that he and the NYFD decided to 'pull' WTC 7 on the day of the attack. The word 'pull' is industry jargon for taking a building down with explosives.
    We have attempted to call Larry Silverstein's office on several occasions. Silverstein has never issued a retraction for his comments.
    Photos taken moments before the collapse of WTC 7 show small office fires on just two floors.
    Firefighters were told to move away from the building moments before it collapsed.

    http://www.prisonplanet.com/011904wtc7.html

    ReplyDelete
  11. thankgodimatheistSeptember 9, 2011 at 3:37 AM

    Guest is me

    ReplyDelete
  12. ananSeptember 9, 2011 at 10:10 AM

    TGIA, please don't listen to truthers. They are extremely negative IQ people or people of low moral character.

    We know the Takfiri did 9/11, have killed thousands of people in Thailand, killed many Indonesians, targetted Malaysians and Singaporeans, killed tens of thousands of Indians, mass murdered over a hundred thousand Shiites, mass murdered thousands of Sufis, murdered many Russians, etc. etc. etc. None of this is controvercial. This is the way of the Takfiri.

    They have even killed many Britishers. Although some Britishers now tilt towards Takfiri as an instrument to be used against people they don't like.

    The Takfiri have fought several pitch battles with Hamas and killed many Hamas.

    +++++++++

    Totally off topic, I don't understand why you don't read documentation about Assad and the Syrian Army's role in killing 18 thousand Iraqi Security Forces. Many Iraqi Army soldiers have openly talked about this. Why don't you trust them?

    ReplyDelete
  13. buhSeptember 9, 2011 at 12:11 PM

    Exactly fight, TGIA. 

    And your favorite commenter saying that "truthers" are negative IQ people of low moral character.  As opposed to Cheney, Rumsfeld and Bush, who used false intelligence to start a devastating war and also tried to tie 9-11 to Iraq?

    ReplyDelete
  14. buhSeptember 9, 2011 at 12:13 PM

    Sorry, should read: Exactly right, TGIA.

    ReplyDelete
  15. thankgodimatheistSeptember 9, 2011 at 4:41 PM

    <span>http://english.aljazeera.net/indepth/spotlight/the911decade/2011/09/201193211230257579.html  
     
    <span>Sceptics cast doubt on events of 9/11 </span> Numbers growing of people who say the official version of what happened on September 11, 2001, is a lie.</span>

    ReplyDelete
  16. thankgodimatheistSeptember 9, 2011 at 4:44 PM

    I'm not a truther ya ahbal. I'm trying to ratiomnalise an event and if I have to listen to someone, it's certainly not to a crackpot of epic dimension.
    BTW, I never read more than a 1 line or 2 of your comments so I have no isea what you're ranting about.

    ReplyDelete

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)