Visible explosives 7 wtc

page: 13
18
<< 10  11  12   >>

log in

join

posted on Mar, 30 2007 @ 01:43 PM
link   
Don't go back to Nuremberg for the 911 Crime Trials,

that is most likely where the Illuminati are that started this

whole control the world idea.

The View would be good.




posted on Mar, 30 2007 @ 09:52 PM
link   
ahahaha I AM being serious! oh i didntknow..i honestly didn;'t know some random building that never got struck collapsed. i know sounds lame. but im not joking haha why would i?



posted on Mar, 30 2007 @ 11:21 PM
link   
Meant to say where a plane was suppose to have hit

We all know no plane hit this building.

Heck 90% of the world doesn't even know about this 3rd building.



posted on Mar, 30 2007 @ 11:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by endrna
Heck 90% of the world doesn't even know about this 3rd building.


The media forgot to make a big deal about it.

You would think that a 52 story building collapsing due to fire would make the news.


I didn't even know about it until a few months ago.


Who knew?


[edit on 30-3-2007 by In nothing we trust]



posted on Mar, 31 2007 @ 02:42 AM
link   
yeah damn im going to ask my dad if he knows..i honestly didn't

but why? i mean why blow up a random building .what is the purpose?
what is the purpose of everything about 9/11
oh yeah power.ugh...it trips me out these so called men old enough to be my father acting like teenagers and power trippin.



posted on Mar, 31 2007 @ 02:46 AM
link   

Originally posted by TheBadge
but why? i mean why blow up a random building .what is the purpose?


Building 7 was New World Order head quarters.



posted on Mar, 31 2007 @ 02:48 AM
link   


Building 7 was New World Order head quarters.


whaaat? I haven't heard that before..no mames! hahaa



posted on Apr, 1 2007 @ 01:32 PM
link   
A building fallling straight should be your first clue.

When you have all that concrete and steel beams it moves constantly
a direction of a fall. It is still strange that because the other buildings
floors fell down upon themselves that those buildings somehow
were still able to reasonably fall straight down too.

You cannot control it in this manner without controlled blasts to weaken
the places needed to make the building stay in a straight line
course of free fall.



posted on Apr, 1 2007 @ 04:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by Diplomat
Doesn't look like explosives to me. It just looks like it probably would as the weight of the top of the building started to collapse...


Riiiiight..

Only a collapse occurs from the top down not vice versa..



posted on Apr, 1 2007 @ 04:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by dscomp
Only a collapse occurs from the top down not vice versa..



collapse - a sudden, complete failure; breakdown

dictionary.reference.com...



posted on Apr, 1 2007 @ 04:44 PM
link   
o shiet it really was a control demolition...lol so tis all true the planes were not strong enough to bring the building down....terorist never learn...watch independence day FOR SAKE the aliens hit the bottom part of the building so the whole thing falled down...



posted on Apr, 2 2007 @ 01:48 AM
link   
The Badge

Steel melted without anything making it melt. No fire has every been
documented to melt steel in this manner at any time in history I
believe.

No plane hit this building.

80% of the population was not ever made aware a 3rd building came down.

This building came down as a controlled demolition. This building
collapsed too easily, fell too straight down. No building of this size
has been documented to fall in this manner. Many buildings smaller
have gone over to the side when you look at earthquake footage
and buildings.

Common Sense says things are not adding up as originally explained
to the population. When you have these many questions with
no real answers don't you wonder why rather than allowing yourself
to believe whatever you are told by someone else?



posted on Apr, 3 2007 @ 04:37 AM
link   

Originally posted by Unisol
o shiet it really was a control demolition...lol so tis all true the planes were not strong enough to bring the building down....terorist never learn...watch independence day FOR SAKE the aliens hit the bottom part of the building so the whole thing falled down...


If you have seen cross section photos taken of these towers during construction you would realise they were built like brick outhouses. You could take a chunk out of one & clearly it would have made no difference to the structural integrity. And if you look at the thickness of the girders in the core & imagine an aluminium plane hitting them, to even assume they were even more than 'scratched' is laughable.

Yet these towers disintegrated into dust. What did that because clearly a plane couldnt have. A 100 planes couldnt have.



posted on Apr, 6 2007 @ 02:00 AM
link   

Originally posted by dscomp
If you have seen cross section photos taken of these towers during construction you would realise they were built like brick outhouses. You could take a chunk out of one & clearly it would have made no difference to the structural integrity.


Brick outhouses?

Are you serious?

The WTC buildings were not made like "brick outhouses" whatever that means.

They were steel framed tube within a tube design.

I have yet to see a 100+ story outhouse made of bricks, I did not realize that was possible.

If you believe that large buildings can have large chunks taken out with no effect whatsoever on the structural integrity, than it's no wonder if you believe in the bombs/nukes/thermite theories.




posted on Apr, 6 2007 @ 02:39 AM
link   
lol leftbehind, the term brick ****house is used to describe something built really really really well. (assming you werent just being sarcastic)

however this all comes back to the fact that ok, so the building were built REALLY well, that just means it takes MORE explosives to bring them down.

and there is NO evidence whatsoever that has ever proven to me, or many other guys ive talke to about this that have real demo experience, that there was ANY high explosives in that building.

point to all of the youtube videos you want, show me all the photos you want, theres not one bit of evidence that has been able to convince me otherwise. and im sorry to thsoe that believe but ill trust my own experience with high explosives before i take your opinions until someone brings me something more tangible.



posted on Apr, 6 2007 @ 10:05 AM
link   

Originally posted by endrna
No building of this size
has been documented to fall in this manner. Many buildings smaller
have gone over to the side when you look at earthquake footage
and buildings.


This is one time that I will call apples to oranges when comparing earthquake forces to gravity forces. Earthquakes will make a building fall to the side because the forces are lateral. In a gravity driven failure, there is only one way to go....down. But, then that begs the question of how exterior columns traveled with enough force to lodge themselves in buildings 600+ feet away.





new topics
 
18
<< 10  11  12   >>

log in

join