[QUOTE="ferret837"]im not sure if i believe it but they did raise interesting points.......... such as the way building 7 collapsed,notconspiracy
what was unusual about it?
Its unusual in that it collapsed the same way as a building collapses with explosives, but its probably possiable it collapsed from the fire. But why wasnt it mentioned in the 9/11 comission is all im wondering notconspiracyfirst off, the fire was ****ing huge. it was an inferno. second, it was heavily damaged by debris from collapsing buildings. tower 7 wasn't designed like most buildings. it was supported by only 2 trusses, and one was damaged.
thirdly, the collapse was not like a controlled demolition for 2 reasons. 1: controlled demolition take on the order of a few seconds. tower 7 took 16 seconds to collapse if you include the penthouse. 2: There were no explosions all along the facade of the buildings like ALL other controlled demolitions
There was no inferno. The biggest fires in Tower 7 were on 3 floors(floors 11, 12 and 28 ) at most and were described as small blazes compared to WTC 1 & 2. Tower 7 took less then 7 seconds to collapse at free-fall speed, had the usual "kink" in the building that many witnessed and it coincidentially fell into it's own footprint as well right into it's own basement. If that isn't descriptive on a controlled demolition, than America must've taught me wrong. This building right here, Tower 5 had a much more ferocious inferno going thru it for much longer time, and yet it never fell.
Log in to comment