By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions. We in turn value your personal details in accordance with our Privacy Policy.
Please log in or register. Registered visitors get fewer ads.
9/11 unanswered questions on 15:24 - Apr 18 by Flashberryjack
Are you watching it the right way up, cause it looks like it's collapsing from the top down.
It collapsed from the bottom.. anyone who can't see that is a muppet.. if it collapsed from the top.. the bottom half of the building would hold firm.. but the bottom half collapses.. the bottom half should hold firm.. not collapse downwards.. especially with the fire being held by fire proof floors.. what was the bottom half made out of? matchsticks?
It's like trying to help a blind man cross the road on this site..
It collapses from the top mun!
The awkward moment when a Welsh Club become the Champions of England.. shh
The Swansea Way.. To upset the odds.
9/11 unanswered questions on 15:39 - Apr 18 by skippyjack
It collapsed from the bottom.. anyone who can't see that is a muppet.. if it collapsed from the top.. the bottom half of the building would hold firm.. but the bottom half collapses.. the bottom half should hold firm.. not collapse downwards.. especially with the fire being held by fire proof floors.. what was the bottom half made out of? matchsticks?
It's like trying to help a blind man cross the road on this site..
It collapses from the top mun!
thats a different building from the other video Skip.
thats one of the towers
the other video shows another building, collapsing from the bottom
9/11 unanswered questions on 19:04 - Apr 17 by Lord_Bony
So according to that debunk above they pulled the WT7 building down with cables?
Does nt look that way to a lot of people just saying millions world wide are still questioning it considering no steel structured building has ever collapsed through fire before...the official inquiry says it collapsed through "office fires" if you read the report.
It's all so obvious mun:
Larry Silverstein needed to get rid of asbestos in the WTC and didn't want to pay for it and he also fancied a big compo payout.
The US Government wanted a conflict in the Middle East to control the oil fields.
After much head scratching and chin stroking between the 2 parties, where ridiculous ideas like turning a blind eye to illegal asbestos dumping or stoking up tensions in the Middle East through allied countries in the region etc. were roundly rejected, they came up with the only plausible plan: fill the World Trade Centre full of explosives; smash 2 commercial jets into the building and then blow it up to ensure that thousands, not hundreds, of people die.
There was just one problem, if they only did that then it would be pretty obvious to everyone that it was a Silverstein/Government asbestos removal/Middle East war scheme.
But these schemers were smarter than your average bear and they knew that all they had to do to convince the sheeple was to fill another building near the twin towers up with explosives and blow that up a little bit later and also fire a missile into the Pentagon and say it was another commercial jet sh!ts and giggles and they would be home and dry.
And they would have got away with it too if it hadn't been for the dozy demolition man saying "pull it" on national television.
If man evolved from monkeys why do we still have monkeys?
1
9/11 unanswered questions on 16:55 - Apr 18 with 2139 views
9/11 unanswered questions on 16:59 - Apr 18 by blueytheblue
It's been explained.
It's just the explanation wasn't as conspiracy filled as some would like, so...
Well most of the top architects and structural engineers in America do not accept your explanation that it was pulled down by cables or collapsed through fire.
Over 2,500 of them have signed a petition that there is something seriously wrong with these explanations and in their opinion WT7 collapsed through controlled demolition.
Now these are the kind of people that REALLY know what they are talking about. If you d like to argue against their view point then crack on but many people world wide support their opinion.
PROUD RECIPIENT OF THE THIRD PLANET SWANS LIFETIME ACHIEVEMENT AWARD.
"Per ardua ad astra"
9/11 unanswered questions on 16:30 - Apr 18 by Cottsy
It's all so obvious mun:
Larry Silverstein needed to get rid of asbestos in the WTC and didn't want to pay for it and he also fancied a big compo payout.
The US Government wanted a conflict in the Middle East to control the oil fields.
After much head scratching and chin stroking between the 2 parties, where ridiculous ideas like turning a blind eye to illegal asbestos dumping or stoking up tensions in the Middle East through allied countries in the region etc. were roundly rejected, they came up with the only plausible plan: fill the World Trade Centre full of explosives; smash 2 commercial jets into the building and then blow it up to ensure that thousands, not hundreds, of people die.
There was just one problem, if they only did that then it would be pretty obvious to everyone that it was a Silverstein/Government asbestos removal/Middle East war scheme.
But these schemers were smarter than your average bear and they knew that all they had to do to convince the sheeple was to fill another building near the twin towers up with explosives and blow that up a little bit later and also fire a missile into the Pentagon and say it was another commercial jet sh!ts and giggles and they would be home and dry.
And they would have got away with it too if it hadn't been for the dozy demolition man saying "pull it" on national television.
That explanation seems pretty plausible .............to anyone that's thick as f*ck.
9/11 unanswered questions on 17:27 - Apr 18 by Lord_Bony
Well most of the top architects and structural engineers in America do not accept your explanation that it was pulled down by cables or collapsed through fire.
Over 2,500 of them have signed a petition that there is something seriously wrong with these explanations and in their opinion WT7 collapsed through controlled demolition.
Now these are the kind of people that REALLY know what they are talking about. If you d like to argue against their view point then crack on but many people world wide support their opinion.
What really happened? Well that's simple, substandard materials suffered from ansckybis damage and collapsed
9/11 unanswered questions on 17:27 - Apr 18 by Lord_Bony
Well most of the top architects and structural engineers in America do not accept your explanation that it was pulled down by cables or collapsed through fire.
Over 2,500 of them have signed a petition that there is something seriously wrong with these explanations and in their opinion WT7 collapsed through controlled demolition.
Now these are the kind of people that REALLY know what they are talking about. If you d like to argue against their view point then crack on but many people world wide support their opinion.
That group claim that an elevator modernisation scheme that took place prior to the attacks would have been a good smokescreen for planting explosives without suspicion.
Or it could have been a, you know, scheme for modernising the elevators.
9/11 unanswered questions on 17:55 - Apr 18 by blueytheblue
That group claim that an elevator modernisation scheme that took place prior to the attacks would have been a good smokescreen for planting explosives without suspicion.
Or it could have been a, you know, scheme for modernising the elevators.
lol
PROUD RECIPIENT OF THE THIRD PLANET SWANS LIFETIME ACHIEVEMENT AWARD.
"Per ardua ad astra"
9/11 unanswered questions on 17:27 - Apr 18 by Lord_Bony
Well most of the top architects and structural engineers in America do not accept your explanation that it was pulled down by cables or collapsed through fire.
Over 2,500 of them have signed a petition that there is something seriously wrong with these explanations and in their opinion WT7 collapsed through controlled demolition.
Now these are the kind of people that REALLY know what they are talking about. If you d like to argue against their view point then crack on but many people world wide support their opinion.
Richard Gage is a nutter and earns a very tidy salary from this extremely dodgy organisation.
Architect magazine (the magazine of err...architects) calls them the "bizarre and debunked conspiracy theories"
The vast majority of architects, materials scientists and structural engineers find the "truthers" to be dumber than a bag of spanners. Still - you crack on and believe whatever you want to believe (until WW3 starts, obviously).
Great video at the top of the page
"It's a freakin' noodle!"
1
9/11 unanswered questions on 19:52 - Apr 18 with 1996 views
Fair enough guys but still a lot of people cant understand how this building was pulled down by "cables" as you say...it does nt look that way and thats why people still question it...
PROUD RECIPIENT OF THE THIRD PLANET SWANS LIFETIME ACHIEVEMENT AWARD.
"Per ardua ad astra"
9/11 unanswered questions on 17:27 - Apr 18 by Lord_Bony
Well most of the top architects and structural engineers in America do not accept your explanation that it was pulled down by cables or collapsed through fire.
Over 2,500 of them have signed a petition that there is something seriously wrong with these explanations and in their opinion WT7 collapsed through controlled demolition.
Now these are the kind of people that REALLY know what they are talking about. If you d like to argue against their view point then crack on but many people world wide support their opinion.
Really? Most of the the top architects and structural engineers in the US disagree?
Are you sure you don't mean some out of all of the architects and engineers in America?
How many of the 2500 that signed that petition are Pritzker Prize winners? Or are heads of leading international architecture firms? Or are professors at MIT, Yale, Harvard, Princeton, Caltech etc.? Or have designed something more impressive than a 3 bed detached house?
If man evolved from monkeys why do we still have monkeys?
2
9/11 unanswered questions on 11:47 - Apr 19 with 1843 views
9/11 unanswered questions on 11:47 - Apr 19 by father_jack
wasnt there a secret service office in wtc7?
Yes there was. Bond only just escaped in time but the Swedish bird he was shagging didnt make it but as the building collapsed he quipped "well she really brought the house down" and started chatting up a journalist.
The creatures outside looked from pig to man, and from man to pig, and from pig to man again; but already it was impossible to say which was which.
Hilary Clinton was playing dominoes this week. It sort of explains how two things can bring down more than one. The dominoes were in the wrong plane though.
0
9/11 unanswered questions on 17:43 - Apr 19 with 1744 views
9/11 unanswered questions on 21:29 - Apr 19 by Lord_Bony
Naughty boy...its an eye opener for some...make of it what you will heres the movie...
It was ok but I wouldn't call it ground breaking or an eye opener. The stuff at the start about how "modern" religions have nicked elements of older faiths is is fairly well documented (and some of it inaccurate). The rest was just a re-hash of the usual conspiracy theories. I suppose it might have made some think when it was first released
9/11 unanswered questions on 21:39 - Apr 19 by Highjack
He's already watched it today mun he doesn't need to see it again.
I ve only ever watched the odd clip myself on Youtube,its on the house in all its glory if anyone wants to watch it...the religious stuff I ve seen is certainly thought provoking... but still take it with a pinch of salt...
PROUD RECIPIENT OF THE THIRD PLANET SWANS LIFETIME ACHIEVEMENT AWARD.
"Per ardua ad astra"
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
