9/11 WTC 7 Demolition - Westside Highway CBS Camera Angle
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 27 янв 2013
- WTC Building 7 was one of the largest buildings in downtown Manhattan. It was 47 stories tall, about half the height of the Towers, and took up an entire city block. It was 300 feet from the closest Twin Tower (the North Tower, WTC 1), and was a steel-framed, concrete structure. WTC Building 7 -- on its 23rd floor -- housed an Emergency Command Center for the City of New York that Mayor Rudolph Giuliani had built in the mid-1990's. On the morning of September 11th, Mayor Giuliani did not go "to his Command Center -- with its clear view of the Twin Towers -- but to a makeshift, street-level headquarters at 75 Barkley Street." WTC 7 also held the offices of numerous government agencies, including the Department of Defense, the CIA, the Secret Service, the IRS, and the Security and Exchange Commission. WTC Building 7 was not hit by airplane or any large pieces of significant debris on September 11th. By the afternoon of September 11th, there were a few small fires of unknown origin evident in the building, and these small fires could be seen in only a few of the hundreds and hundreds of windows in the building. World Trade Center Building 7 suddenly and rapidly collapsed. Beginning with the penthouse, all 47 stories of it imploded into its own footprint in less than seven seconds. On September 16th, NASA flew an airplane over the World Trade Center site, recorded infrared radiation coming from the ground, and created a thermal map. The U.S. Geological Survey analyzed this data, and determined the actual temperature of the rubble. This map shows that five days after the collapse of Building 7, the surface temperature of a section of its rubble was 1,341º F. This high a temperature is indicative of the use of explosives.
The collapse of WTC Building 7 shows five characteristics of a controlled demolition:
It "dropped directly into its own footprint in a smooth, vertical motion";
It "collapsed completely in less than seven seconds";
"Dust streamed out of the upper floors of Building 7 early in its collapse";
"WTC 7's roof inverted toward its middle as the collapse progressed"; and
"WTC 7's rubble was mostly confined to the block on which the building stood." (FEMA Report #403 World Trade Center Building Performance Study).
A major aspect of 9/11 has been excluded from the entire U.S. media after September 11th, and was also omitted from The 9/11 Commission Report. This was the sudden fall to earth, on September 11th, 2001, of World Trade Center Building 7. Not hit by airplane or significant debris, 300 feet from the closest Twin Tower, and with just a few small fires burning within it, at 5:20PM EDT this massive concrete and steel-framed 47-story skyscraper imploded into its own footprint in less than seven seconds. Its rapid implosion had all of the characteristics of a controlled demolition, and the World Trade Center leaseholder, Larry Silverstein, stated in so many words that the building had been collapsed by demolition. It takes weeks, if not months, to prepare the demolition of a building as large as WTC 7; this implosion could not have been engineered and implemented in seven chaotic hours on September 11th.
Video Source: NIST Cumulus release #13 CBS Dub 7 Clips 46 - 48
"It was a demolition no planes!!!"
Well if that's the case, then how come people bought tickets for all 4 flights but died because they crashed/got flew into a building?
Plus the penthouse on top collapsed at least 6-7 seconds before it caved in on itself, so how could it have been?
@@mr.whyaxis9842 hahaha you have no video of it on your channel
Christopher Cromwell , I will admit that you offer a plausible explanation, one that I had also considered, however it seems to me that the windows should have blown out floor by floor, instead of in a mostly horizontal pattern. And if you look at videos of the south side of Bldg. 7, the side facing away from the towers, you will clearly see that certain floors have most or all of the windows blown out, while adjacent floors both above and below have all of the windows intact. At the same time you can see thick smoke pouring out of the east side of the Bldg. from ALL of the floors of this portion of the Bldg. The problem I have with all of this is not just the windows from Bldg. 7. It is the 100s of other things that just do not add up about 9/11.
Just a few of them are : Take a look at any one of many plane crash sites, I like the Germanwings site in the French Alps, that was going 430 mph on impact, there were pieces of the plane the size of a car. Now look at the crash site of flight 93 at Shanksville. WHERE is the plane? I know, it self buried itself in the soft spongy soil. One of the black boxes from flight 93 was supposedly found buried at a depth of 15 feet, and the other at 25 FEET. One of the black boxes from Germanwings was found buried at a whopping 8 INCHES. Wow that must be some incredibly soft spongy soil !
I will believe everything that the U.S. Government tells me about the events of 9/11 just as soon as they release all the videos from the security cameras from the Pentagon.
I can not seem to be able to find a plane there either.
If a crash succeeds a speed like 500mph then pieces become the size of 2x4s
I've seen the video of the F-4 Phantom hitting a 4 foot thick block of concrete,it was turned to dust. Everything accept the wing tips that exceeded the width of the block. The speed was around 500 mph.
Now a plane the size of a 767 or any large plane can't just disappear. When contacting the ground. Even at a straight dive there would be large chunks from deflection. But who knows, Three huge buildings fell the same day with zero resistance. Bullllllllshiiiiiittttt
Also Thermite is a non pressure wave type of explosive.It uses extreame heat directed at a steel beam or track,but they is no explosive boom like in nitro,black powder,etc, The burn rate is so fast it just goes fissst,and leaves a hole.
Why isn't anyone asking the obvious question...with everything that was going on that day, why was a camera focused on this particular building for so long? It's as if this particular news agency or whoever the person filming was, had foreknowledge that the building was about to go down.
More than that, why did we watch it for 9 minutes and nothing happened? Where is the Money Shot?
Bama Bushcrafter simple answer, it was on fire after the north tower's debris crashed into it. Simple question got a simple answer.
Bama Bushcrafter its cause there were reports that ot gad to be evacted and that they pulled the fire men out
Probably because from what others have said is the news reported it had collapsed before it had actually been demolished so other probably got their phones out because it was clearly still standing when the news let out that it had "collapsed"
firefighters feared that it was going to collapse
No way this was controlled demolition.
The penthouse falls at least 8 seconds before the rest of the building.
There are no deafening popping sounds, no bursts of explosives.
The windows begin to break as the building begins to fall.
There was no "free fall" with any of the buildings on 9/11. Where do people get that from?
J Law
You sir are the first intelligent comment I saw here.
You can see the light shining through the facade.
Regarding the lack of explosions.
Don't they claim It was thermite?
J Law
It's also funny, that so few people consider the possibility, that the windows broke, because the facade was bending as it fell.
No, instead every detail gets interpreted to fit the narrative.
And 9/11 truther wonder why they don't get taken serious.
After all, as 17 years went by, there are no real leaks, but only laymen analysis of videos and single expert opinions on it.
At least that is most of what one finds. Seldom there is something that really gets you think.
dr judy woods bitch
Dr Judy Woods Bitch doesn't believe in Controlled Demolition. She believes it was Flash Gordon with his mysterious "directed energy beam".
J Law, thanks for the light of sanity in this pit of idiocy. I'd happily debate any truther about the collapse of these buildings because the truth is so readily apparent and all they have is inconceivable and illogical conspiracy theories that aren't supported by any facts.
American people: collective cognitive dissonance.
you: schizophrenic
Grunge Sponge a undeniable heloudocule male
American:the best place.Marco MElis:a idiot in north korea
On to you Satan.
They forgot that maybe without England and France they would have never existed. When Arrogance reach its peak. But shame on Europe for still following them like a good dog.
This is sad. Remember all this like it was yesterday.
This was without a doubt a fire. Evidence at 7:24 when the building structure collapses after 7 hours of fire. The building takes almost 15 seconds to reach free fall speed from moment of collapse. Not instantaneous. When the whole building goes down it's only the Skelton left not the whole body.
Building 7 was the emergency command center. Which means the whole building was built to federal standards. Reinforced concrete, and Reinforced steel. Never happen
No people this wasn’t a controlled demolition, the reason World Trade Center 7 and the two towers fell is because 1 they were made of steel. At the time a building made of steel falling was new, but now we have had more incidents were buildings have fallen because they were made of steel. You see when fire burns hot enough or for a long period of time it weakens the steel. Some buildings are made of concrete and that is why they don’t fall so easily. Others are made of both. In 2005 part of a building made of steel and concrete fell. The part that fell, you guessed it, was the outer steel skeleton. The surviving part was the inner concrete section. When the North Tower collapse a lot of it’s Debris fell on top of WTC 7 and caused massive fires. The firefighters were busy putting out the fires at ground zero, so they let WTC 7 burn for a full 7 hours! This caused some weak steel points inside the building to burn and eventually weaken the steel. This caused floors inside the building to collapse in on each other and this continued until the building was just a hollow steel shell, hints why you can see parts caving in on the top left corner of the building moments before it collapsed. So without any support Beams ,or anything for that matter, the hollow shell just collapsed in on it’s self, which is why it’s collapse was so symmetrical when it fell.
DC 71 he provides evidence and reasoning,you provide “go away you lobotomised fuck.Nano thermite and shape charges” nice one
At 5:43 of this video an emergency siren starts, at about 6:14 it stops, it is approximately 30 seconds in duration. Might this be a obligatory warning for the detonation/implosion?
don't be absurd
Or it could just be one of the probably hundreds of emergency vehicles in the area...
@ 6:17 you can clearly hear two loud pops.Then the smoke from the thermite starts increasing ,and keeps going until the roof caves in. On the day it happened a secret service agent wa running around looking for people in the building. Found no one and no fires. Just sirens no smoke in building . Hmmm
@@ynotdrappehs7440 Wha... What thermite dude, XD. If you are smart and look for videos, there's a reporter going out and in of the wtc7, he recorded the fires and a big part of the damaged structure. You don't even know how the themate is placed and how it works, but ok, live in ignorancy
@@seann3526 Why was the building on fire. Nothing hit it or anything burning. Self combustion maybe. You're an idiot if you think the building came down because of fire. It's virtually IMPOSSIBLE FOR A STEEL STRUCTURE TO COLLAPSE BECAUSE OF FIRE. !!!!!
Havn't seen such a perfect demo in ages. Who did this?
How did the BBC report the collapse of building 7 twenty minutes before it happened? Search the videos and you will see them saying the building had collapsed when you can see the building standing in the background. In both cases the video feed is immediately interrupted after the mistake is made. The whole thing is a disgrace!
cantonear1968
They sure did. Just like those Israelis caught celebrating and later declaring they were there to document the event.
because everyone knew hours in advance, that wtc7 will collapse unless they put in a massive effort to save it. so ask yourself, as a chief of the fire dept., would you put firemen at a risk to save an empty building, or would you have them look for survivors in the pile of rubble that used to be WTC 1+2, whose chance of survival decreases by every minute?
GrumbleSnatch
If that is the case, ie; the building was going to collapse due primarily to the office fires then, as we have seen (WTC 7), it is possible for high rise steel and concrete buildings to be demolished in future by fire, kero and a strategic wrecking ball hit. No need for weeks or months of planning or explosives. Just make the area safe and clear well before "demo" day. Much cheaper. Save a fortune!
YES! It is ENTIRELY POSSIBLE for a highrising steel building to collapse due to fire. And it's proof that truthers are the ones who need to wake up. Remember the windsor tower in madrid that burned for a solid 24h? You know, that "evidence" you like to throw up into everyone's faces when it comes to burning buildings? It's every truthers favorite argument and probably the source of all the claims that fire can't take down a building.
And now get ready to wake up, because the steel frame of that building collapsed after a little less than 2 hours into the fire. There's even videos of it on youtube. the part that didn't collapse was concrete, which in that building was the supporting part. in all the WTCs that collapsed that day, steel was the supporting element, not concrete. 600 degrees won't deform a concrete structure, that's the reason the tower burned for so long. rock don't burn. For steel however, 600° are enough to weaken it.
So, when the penthouse came down due to its support beams being made out of metal, and after 5h of fires that metal was butter, with it came tons of steel and concrete. now tell me, in what world would a concrete floor be able to withstand all this damage? So after the first collapse, half the building was gone already. imagine someone blew off one of your legs with a pumpee. the only way you could still stand after losing your leg, is if you were to shift your center of mass in a way that you're balanced. a building cannot do that.
GrumbleSnatch
No. Steel and concrete high rise buildings do not "collapse" virtually straight down due to office fires etc. They are, without a shadow of a doubt, designed to withstand the effect of office furniture fires etc., so as not to collapse. Architects, structural engineers understand these vital requirements and design and build accordingly. I look forward to future, controlled building "demos" whereupon demolition experts "throw away" years of modern expertise requiring explosives etc., and resort mainly to fire to bring down high rise steel and concrete buildings. THAT WILL BE AN EYE OPENER.
Let me add the sound effects of a controlled demolition, BOOM BOOM BOOM BOOM BOOM.
@@mr.whyaxis9842 what utter rubbish, you believe whatever floats your boat, even if it is complete horsesh#t....
keep reuploading these videos
The building was on fire for 7 hrs unattended...If you look at the top before it finally collapses you can see the inner core falling inside, then it was just the outter shell that crumbled under its own weight. .. Besides.. Bin Landen already took credit for ordering the attacks I'm the first place...
Keep drinking that sweet, sweet, cool-aid.
What was that object with a trail that flew from lower right to upper left just before the demolition began at about 4:05 into the video?
Bird
Sure doesn't SOUND like any controlled demos I've seen. Where are the explosion sounds?
If that's true, why did the collapses begin 1000 feet above street level?
Your opinion. Thermite in the basement just happened to start the collapse at the exact place where the plane crashed 1000' above. Twice. But that's your opinion.
Right.
Ooops! My bad! You'd think I'd remember what my own comment was about :-) Still, thermite is a pretty poor theory IMO. For one thing, its presence has never been independently verified - and in fact, the one study of the dust I know of _refuted_ it.
If you've looked at the blueprints for bld 7 you know it was a pretty complex building; it would be difficult to demo even using conventional means. And AFAIK thermite has _never_ been used to demo anything, let alone a building like that.
No, honestly, they don't. You see, a single study doesn't make for "absolute proof." That - or at least general acceptance - comes after processes like peer review & reproduction; independent confirmation. That hasn't happened re thermite; it's just one paper's claim, and its conclusions have not been confirmed or accepted. The world's experts in such things are NOT convinced. And in fact there has been at least one follow-up study showing that thermite was NOT present (since the dust had no elemental aluminum, something thermite always contains).
I agree, we should be able to ask questions & debate civilly; I try to keep my approach to "here's what's true and here's what's not." (I don't deny I get uncivil mighty quickly when I feel someone is lying or spreading misinformation, or claiming an understanding of physics they clearly don't possess!) In this case my point is: The presences of thermite, which of course would prove the inside job, has not been proven. And for something this big, you gotta prove it.
(Psst - if you tell me the earth is flat, my civil tone will go downhill in a hurry!)
To all the people saying this was a controlled demolition, show me a video that you can hear the multiple explosions needed to bring the building down. You can clearly see it collapsed in on itself and caused each column of stories to collapse one by one
A normal comment in the bunch of comments that are idiotic
Les trous (où explosions ?) qui apparaissent sur la vidéo à 9:24 correspondent exactement à ceux filmé sur l'autre face visible à ruclips.net/video/4GY0yWXGaKs/видео.html aux mêmes endroits et aux mêmes instants.
Je n'ai pas de logiciel de montage vidéo ,mais ils serait intéressant de voir les 2 vidéos en parallèles , si les explosions sur les deux faces du building sont synchronisées parfaitement ce serait au moins la preuve que les vidéos ne sont pas "fake".
Why spend hundreds of dollars on dynamite and hours placing them all over the building when all you need is a couple of matches to bring it down.
Precisely. First time in history fire has ever destroyed something, right? Hundreds of California homeowners will be thrilled to know that in fact, their homes are still there. 10,800 buildings didn't burn down.
Why does the vid have those little glitches or whatever ? Is it possible from radiation ?
"The further a society drifts from the truth, the more it will hate those who speak it."~George Orwell
\\][//
That sir, is nothing but the truth
Well if we are to believe the fire caused this building to collapse this easily, I wouldn't want to work in NYC, as it seems it's buildings are as safe as matchstick buildings.. in the UK we had the terrible Grenfell tower high rise fire that burned for many more hours, far more intense, yet the building was never in danger of collapse 🤷♂️
Grenfell was structurally concrete and not steel.
@@NerdismOfficial nobody makes buildings out of concrete ... Well if they did here , then I'm not surprised it fell, the question is how it stood up for so long lol 😂
@@PaulBrownclk-me there’s a crap ton of structurally concrete buildings in the world. It’s stronger than steel (at least when faced with fire) when reinforced. Hence why Grenfell stayed up and WTC 7 eventually fell.
Concrete reinforced with steel?? Not just concrete right?
@@PaulBrownclk-me it’s rebar, so yes. That’s what reinforced concrete is
No way this was a demo it just got hit by a 110 story building
why was the camera focused on this building for so long? because they knew it was going to fall and they wanted to capture it on film
kepler240 because it was evaced and no fire men were in the building as it was burning.
Firemens said that the building will collapse 4 or 3 hours before, what do you expect them to do bro
First building in the history of burning buildings to go down all at once!
Actually third. The first 2 were the twin towers. 😂
I still try to understand how they say "free fall" when the penthouse collapses a full 7 seconds before the rest of building 7.
And the windows that bust out are after the penthouse collapses downward, you know the floors are collapsing on top of one another throughout the building. That is not "explosions"
Explosions should come first, then building moves. Not the other way around. Odd that conspiracy theorists seem to think demolitions work by having the building move first, then the explosives go off.
and wouldn't someone trying to avoid exploding walls or windows when placing the charges, in order NOT to make the demolition too obvious and visible from the outside ? I'm quite sure theres a way to do that.
Jason X - Not beams, columns.
Because Building 7 was built on top of an existing and much smaller building which served as part of Building 7's foundation, Building 7 had unusual attributes including transfer beams and trusses and other load transfer techniques that allowed the building to be cantilevered out over the perimeter of the Con Ed foundation. These attributes affected the qualitative and quantitative structural redundancy in the building. Specifically, large portions of Building 7 depended on relatively isolated structural elements and when those elements were compromised, it affected a disproportionately greater fraction of the structure.
Column 79 was one of those elements.
Column buckling of #79 - probably caused by the collapse of multiple floors around it in the 7-14 region - caused the kink which appeared in the EMP roof. We know from several engineering studies conducted since that the buckling of 79 would lead to a cascade effect through the structure, with Columns 80 and 81 failing next, as evidenced by the dropping of the EMP below the roofline. Then the failures would progress from east to west through the core until the core was gone.
And that is exactly what happened.
Explosives NOT required or even necessary.
M Fitz Unfortunately , it's the structural engineers on the side of the CT that are the big issue. You don't have to be an expert to see WTC7 would be compromised by hundred of tonnes of concrete collapsing against it in the right (or wrong!) place. As you've stated , WTC7 was very unusual in the way it was built over another structure. It drives me mad why these experts just deny what does seem to be very possible. Fortunately a big majority are more sensible. I think its the minority whose opinions are influenced by their distrust of US governments which seems to be a sad epidemic in the US. I agree they have been corrupt and done bad things but this? There is NO REAL evidence of government involvent anywhere, just a load of random dots some people like joining together to make a CT . I suppose that's how all CTs work anyway.
Paul Dunn - The number of bonafide structural engineers spouting controlled demolition nonsense can be counted on one hand with digits remaining. They are of no real concern.
That's called controlled demolition. Nothing but. Fact. Period.
The real smoking gun is all the radioactive noise the video camera was picking up.
Thank you for your video
Yes, the collapse of each building "resembled" a "controlled demolition" in collapse only.
Zero other hallmarks of a controlled demolition.
My main thought is: So the American government has that much power and control, that much power and control that they could carry out an event like 9/11. And that's the best they could come up with?? That's the absolute best they could do??
Maybe I just do not have that much faith in the "intelligence" of the American government like some people do.
Look at the smoke burning the building.
About it being the Iran Contra secret team. I have read somewhere that Ted Shackley is the person to look at so you may be correct.
It was struck by the tower and was on fire for 7 hours before falling,no timed explosions were heard,which are audible in all building implosions,the structure failed do to excessive prolonged heating of the structure,it was unable to support itself.
Godscountry no tower struck building 7! Watch the towers being demolished into dust midair. Also a retired CIA agent as confessed to blowing up building 7.
7:25
It literally collapses from the inside out.
Inner workings/floors seperate from surrounding shell.
After inner workings / floors are basically gone the outer shell of the building collapses under its own weight
7:27 If you look CLOSELY you can actually see the support of structure of the building actually giving way. First on the left side f the building, then the right side, then the building fully collapses. Such lies we've been told >:(
That’s called internal collapse brought upon by fires weakening the steel superstructure
Yeah the same thing that would happen during an earthquake. Something the 2 towers simulated when they fell.
Question . . . Why was this camera focusing on this building for 9 minutes? There wasn't much to record - till it fell. But many other dramatic things were going on around before it's collapse. Would YOU keep YOUR camera trained on an unaffected building for 9 minutes when there was so much drama to record? Just curious as to who filmed this, and why.
I'm glad they did, as it shows the perfect controlled demolition of WTC7 for all to see. Us Brits were ahead of the schedule though . . . our BBC reported it 20 minutes before it happened! WTF the worlds gone mad!
If, as a major news organization, you are told that a building is burning out of control & expected to collapse - _as the firefighters & engineers on the scene told the media they expected 7 to collapse_ - then of course you train a camera on the building in question. Basic journalism.
I was under the impression nobody knew about building 7!
How many impacted exterior columns from WTC 2 did NIST recover and examine? How many WTC 2 core columns did they say were damaged by impact? Which? Using the exterior panels as reference what was the approx. dimensions of the WTC 2 impact hole? Which specific WTC 2 exterior panels were damaged (specification numbers)? How come there is no inward deflection around the impact hole? What does the second law of motion say happens when you ram your face into a denser heavier object, at any speed?
Nice conversation!
I have over 50 pounds of dust from the twin tower! I think it worth alot of money, I was there when it happen, I took shit loads of photos! my friends uncle own a big scrap yard in New Jersey we got all kinds of cool stuff, like wierd looking metal!!!
I don't think that's healthy, wasn't there like deadly stuff in it like asbestos ? Not hating just wondering.
@@dontbeabitch110 yes , the guy who owned the twin tower and had them heavily insured, was going to be told the asbestos in them had to be removed…… that’s why a lot of people are suffering with the effect of inhaling the dust ,known to be carcenagenic , he also forced the insurers to payout twice ,as the court hearing ruled it was two separate acts of terrorism, and building seven s collapse wasn’t caused by some office furniture burning, the whole episode stinks of collusion and corruption in high places, the hole in the pentagon , a plane ? The wreckage at Shanksville ? ( non existent ! ) . Everyone will know the truth in about fifty years time, and no one will care. The only thing you can believe in most newspapers is the date at the top of the page, and television can get you to believe anything that suits the administrations agenda.
@@metalmicky - Exactly my sentiments. Thank you so much for articulating what many, many people around the world feel about what they witnessed that day, and has worried them ever since.
The owner/leaseholder Larry Silverstein said in a televised interview about Building 7 soon after 9/11 that, because "there had been such a terrible loss of life already" on that day, he and his advisers "took the decision to pull it", meaning demolish it. He added, "And later we watched the building come down".
What doesn't make sense about his comments is that, being a property tycoon and construction expert, surely he would know that a building of that size, 47 storeys, would take weeks to prime for demolition. So if he was correct, and he knew that it was going to be demolished (whether he gave the order or not), the building must have been prepared for destruction some time during July or August of that year. So I wonder why that decision was made at that time, and who actually gave the order.
Billions of dollars were made by arms manufacturers and their shareholders in preparation for the wars that followed. The Patriot Act and Homeland Security Act were adopted in succeeding years, bringing inevitable restrictions in everyday life for ordinary Americans. And as you say Michael, it will take 50 years or more before the full truth of that day is revealed to the American public who surely deserve the truth now, in this era.
What amazes me about this video is that it exists at all, and has not been arbitrarily taken down, like so many others on this subject.
7:26
Maybe camera man knew it was about to go and why he was recording it, or was he going on a hunch? Think about it? You got mass panic and two buildings on fire and your recording the building with no action going down
Most definitely was a static camera
And, the building in Tehran collapsed after burning.
Also, just because something "has never happened before in history" does that mean that it cannot happen? Everything happened a "fist time".
Wow it twisted as it started falling
Fireman knew hours before that #7 was going to collapse, walls were buckling which is why they couldn't enter it to put out the fires. I remember waiting all day until the collapse, as fireman has said it would earlier in the day.
MmeDefarge (Expose NYC Meth Labs) Why was it on fire?
Melvin Key Perhaps severed gas lines.
MmeDefarge (Expose NYC Meth Labs) Just like that on 911?
Melvin Key It was damaged by the behemoth beside it which also destroyed a church when it fell.
MmeDefarge (Expose NYC Meth Labs) You mean damaged by the twin towers
It's quite obvious that the penthouse collapsed first only a fool wouldn't concede that, also it fell across Barclay Street which is a four lane street, that's hardly a symmetrical collapse.
Controlled demolition or not i'm still waiting for the video were you can hear the explosions
The top of the building collapsed 5 seconds before the whole building which proves the fire destroyed it. The proof is at 7minutes 24 seconds.
@thecomfortstation How dare you comment when knowing nothing. Today there is no shame in being ignorant. Even the Pentagon which was built by reinforced concrete, much more resistant to fire than steel buildings, collapsed in the fire. Search: "steel buildings collapsed by fire."
@thecomfortstation RUclips censors the truth.
oh dear.
"proves the fire destroyed it" are very powerful, but maybe incorrect words Aleksandar. Perhaps you had better study scientific protocols, gather evidence and do technical analysis first before you jump to wild conclusions about fire destroying the building. Think about it this way, gravity and the speed of falling concrete suddenly stopping destroyed the building, the real question is, how did all that internal steel simultaneously give way to allow the building to fall into its own footprint?
@@jamescarney6894 RUclips censors the truth.
Amazing how they comoflauge the entire video with tiny spots flashing throughout. Who did this?
It’s to cover up the flashes and Windows blowing out on the right side of the building
You mean the shit that happens to any old vhs tape? Godammit you people will make something out of anything.
@@HemiCuda63 legit dude these people are brain fogged
their is extensive damage on the opposite side of this building. when i viewed the videos of this building falling it was always on the side with no damage so i believed it must have been brought down, pulled. please view the other side you will clearly see fatal damage.
+joan lantis So, if there was damage it would topple and not go down into its own footprint. This is a controlled demolition and frankly, it is just 1 of hundreds of problems with the official story.
+joan lantis
Fatal damage? Google "damaged building" and tell me how are those building left standing? OKC is an exelent example. Buildings are made to withstand an fires, earthquakes and some an impact of several boing 747 (WTC).
their not. the question is was any of the damage enough to bring them down. i am just not sure.
You Can See It Yourself...... it looks a Duck, it walks like a Duck,...but the media tells you it's a bold Eagle and you believe it because.....you're too scared of what your eyes are telling you and what that could mean.
how did gravity vaporizer 2000 people and all the contents of tower 1 and 2
another thing that has never happened before in the history of the world (planes, people, and luggage, vaporizing into thin air without a trace) and it happened 4 times on the same day!!!!
This was, without a doubt, a controlled demo.
no reports of explosions, no reports of sounds of very loud detonations and that shit is loud. whole building collapsed at once instead of partially and the rest following with it..
Not demolition. Easily debunked. Now take your meds.
***** This is not debunked. Anyone who thinks this bld came down because of a fire, needs their head examined. Now go see you're shrink.
damnright4 still no reports of explosions, still no sounds of detonations, building still came down all at once instead of partial.
Yea, it's been debunked hundreds of times.
Agreed. A couple of days ago, a sky scrapper in Dubai caught fire and the fires spread over many floors, for 2 hours.You may have seen it on the news.
It's still standing. No free fall there. It may take a while for the general public to put 2 and 2 together but it's events like this that will keep questioning the official story.
Ajeph Emaph Thats because the dubai tower was built far differently. Actually every building made post-9/11 have that event in mind and cut out the flaws in order to prevent a collapse from fire.
in terms of the dubai tower much of it was made of concrete which does not crumble from heat.
fuck it was not the demolition of the building number 7 fell due to uncontrolled fire
+BloodMoon. CZ ...then please explain the Mandarin Hotel fire, it burned for more than 20 hours, like a tree on fire, and guess what, it still stood.
omg but building number 7 was damaged by the collapse of the north tower
BloodMoon. CZ ....Hmm, good answer.
If it was on fire, why not use the built-in sprinkler system all buildings have by law?
Because the goal was clearly total demolition. Hard to imagine the insurance paying off.
bert panzer Im not sure if a sprinkler would help against fire reaching at least 1200 fahrenheit m8.
bert panzer the sprinkler systems are made to put out small fires. not extremely large ones exceeding 1200 degrees Fahrenheit.
you're a head case. go back to your hole. Im tired of this argument. You all say the same bullshit and have nothing new to present. You have stale, debunked arguments that you refuse to let go of. I know that it sucks to be wrong, but sometimes, you just have to deal with it.
Danny Riot
Alexander Stael Cook uh yeah. There was a water main break on top of all the water being directed to building 1 and 2. No pressure = no water. Oh shit, i just appealed to your sense of reason, you better run and turn it off, call me a shill, and a paid troll. Oh lordy lordy, what are you going to do? Someone just came at you with FACTS and not rehashed, debunked theories. "That guy is reasonable! He must be a troll!" "That guy has extensive knowledge in fire fighting, he must be a shill!" fuck off with your paranoid candy asses. Do you enjoy living a life of fear and paranoia? I live free kid. Not a worry in the world. Your bullshit, that you fucking morons have been spouting for 14 years over and over again, without coming up with anything new to the contrary, is dead. your movement, is dead. everyone thinks you people are psychos. Psychiatrists have a term for you, it's called Paranoid Schizophrenic. You all need help, or your doomed to keep living your miserable life of fear, as you give all your money away to the piper you call, Alex Jones." I'm so fucking tired of you idiots not letting sleeping dogs lay. You're all beating a dead horse. you movement is fruitless. The only thing that keeps you morons going is the fucking internet. A whole web where you can connect to other paranoid freaks like yourself.
as i said. have fun living your miserable life. you brain dead fucks aren't worth a moment of my time any more.
For the record... I WAS THERE! I WITNESSED THIS ALL AT GROUND FUCKING ZERO.
You can even see the flashes
No you can't. What the fuck is wrong with you people?
@@bman342a nothing wrong with asking questions.
It wasn't a question.
@@bman342a who are you people?
We speak the truth, unlike you 'deniers' (not unlike holocaust deniers).
I have never in my life seen a steel building fall down like this one did due to fire. I do tend to believe those highly trained engineers that testify that a steel building will not fall down due to fire alone. I have also watched other steel buildings burn for a much longer time and leave a skeleton of steel standing. What one can prove or disprove is dependent on many factors. Perhaps the most revealing piece of information to consider involves the actions the US President took soon after 9/11. As of this writing in January, 2017, those actions are still occurring, i.e. Afghanistan, Iraq. Would a country invade two other countries simple because a few rogue warriors from an unrelated country (Saudi Arabia) came and destroyed some buildings? I submit that the cause of the collapse is not as important as the reason for the event and the actions taken by the Bush Administration following the event. Clearly, there was a political agenda to fulfill before the event took place. Working it back from there, I think we can arrive at a valid conclusion and dispense with all this debate about the WTC buildings.
Weird how you believe a cherry picked few engineers who say it can't fall due to fire alone but not the vast majority who say it can.
also because no other steel buildings in history were crushed by a skyscraper
anybody else notice the windows popping before it falls? surely this is an indication of something.. maybe all the floors giving in or summon
Steel concert and good build quality!"GUYS...NO FIRE NO PLAINES DID THIS...
You, me and many others know the truth, if only others did too.
Flight 93 was supposed to hit building 7
they messed up with the inside job, the mossad van bombers also got arrested, zionist usa has gotten more corrupte, the israeli aipac occupies the usa govt for the 9-11 mossad terrorists who hate you for your freedoms as judaism is racism!
@@falsesectslikeshiaarejudeo6543 is this English what the fuck?
Pity we can't hear what they're saying with all that engine noise. Other angles from this scene show guys standing around looking up at 7 like they knew it was going down that way very soon.
you can see it fall in on itself starting from the east side. It's almost as if a hole appears under the east side and sucks out the innards,, leaving a shell to collapse. I wonder what could make a hole that big in the ground.
Our own scientists proved this collapse was the result of fires and structural weakness caused by falling debris. With no functioning sprinkler systems, the building was weakened and collapsed.
ruclips.net/video/aZbmTa_PSDU/видео.html
@@swankybutters8371 Hey there, loser, why did you delete your comments on that other thread from @p martin below? Can't you man up & admit you were wrong?
In fact, now that you know that video you posted is a joke, shouldn't you delete your links to it?
Here's the proof Swanky's video is a joke:
ruclips.net/video/k8VAsoVuShM/видео.html
I wish more people could see this...
and now for something that is lacing in a controlled demoltion. not a single sound of demolition bombs going off. check any controlled demolition video, you can hear them for miles, this is from less than 500 feet away and you can't hear a thing.
I know and you also know what happened...............God is watching everything
The "truther" knows no shame!
how come London tower didn't fall, it burn for two days and still standing!
It was a concrete building not a steel framed one.
Ali Mohammond reinforced conctrete.
Wtc7 was allll steel
Wtc7 collapse Clearly not caused by office fires, I'm not saying standard demolition either but definitely not office fires
It was built out of concrete, which is fire resistant. WTC 1, 2, And 7 were all steel framed buildings with poor fire protection.
First something in the rooftop falled, later a thing in rooftop falled making the whole building fall
Mauro Productions you were seing the top collapse inwards then everything fall from the inside out.
at 4:06 what looks to be a missile enters the screen at about 20 past, it carries on through and out of shot at 10 to. doesnt hit any of the building though. it looks a bit iffy tbh as if it was added to the footage. would be interesting to see where it was in relation to the other buildings
That's a bird, you idiot.
nccrawford Well hey, nc bird lover you ever see a wolverine go after a waffle ? I doubt it so keep expecting good news hawk eye and shut the fuck up !
Recalcitrantinfidel What are you trying to say?
+Recalcitrantinfidel Horrible Comeback, and Yes that was a bird.
Who the fuck would fire a missile in plain sight.
Even the 38 diffrent angles of the WTC Crumbling dont show a missile.
I didn't realize that missiles were built to miss their target, and to fly super slow where a mere wind gust causes them to change direction.
Watch at 7:30 ...You will see...
+sorphea42 It starts at 7:23, and not a single sound of any explosives.
+Zaparoony Zap This was a military operation silly. They have way more productive explosives then you can think of. Thermite for one!And that makes no sound from a good distance.
+Peter Hunsader Thermite can't bring down a building, silly. It hasn't been used to take down any buildings since 1954 because it fails miserably at it. They tried to demolish the ruined roof with thermite the year before (1953) and failed. They were finally able to do it, after considerable time and effort, in 1954.
sorphea42 youre missing the first part of the collapse idiot
The mindless and blind all say fire did it. Unbelievable how there's even a debate on this.
Neo Morpheus
You might want to take a closer look at the scoreboard slick...
Ah, i dont see his comment, but so the Shill is also in this thread spouting his bullshit?
That he takes himself serious is beyond me. Or anybody with a brain for that matter.
All the guy can do is ridicule, call people names, play the willfully ignorant game when things are brought to his attention which he CAN NOT DEBUNK.
But hey, he must be proud of himself. The great Humanbeing that he is, for disrespecting his fellow Humanbeings like if they are just air.
Man, these people should all be hunted down. Every single one of em. In my opinion.
Tim Michaels you can see daylight through the top floor windows after the penthouse suite collapses downward at 7:23
Start here, the beginning is quite long. 7:22
2 Buildings made of steal just fell on it.
Silverstein got his payout right on time. "Pull it" was the most profitable thing he ever said.
Pull it is a term firefighters use to stop operations and evacuate a building they cannot save.
***** it's strange controlled demolition teams use that term too. And now you're saying firefighers use it too? I saw an interview with a fire chief and he said they never use that term.
Clifford Zellner It's strange, I'm a fire fighter and yes, we do use the term "pull it," to inform the on scene leader to "pull" the hose and team out of a space that has been designated out of control and too dangerous.
Demolition teams do not use the term "pull it." There is nothing they pull, only buttons to push. The term you're confusing it with is "blow it."
care to link the "interview you saw," and where you get your asinine definitions of demolition and fire fighting terms?
Danny Riot can't link it. Using my phone. but if you type in 9/11 firefighter blows WTC7 cover. .. The thumbnail will be a black guy in front of a mic
Clifford Zellner he's not a fire chief... he's a regular fire fighter who also suffers from PTSD from the Vietnam war...Not too mention, i asked for something that WASN'T from Alex Jones.
You can see the support structure failing on the left side a whole six seconds before it fails on the right side. Right after the top left housing collapses, windows approx 8 floors down pop out. The windows are a result of the collapsed structure. If the broken windows were a result of explosives, they would've broken before the top left housing fell. Then after the windows stop popping out on the left side, the entire building is then being supported by the structures on the right side, and they can't handle the full weight, so the right-side structure buckles after six seconds, causing windows on the right side to pop out as the building falls. The whole thing takes about 12 seconds starting from initial left-side structure failure to finished collapse. Sorry, but that is nothing like a controlled demolition.
+dlancer2k It is exactly like a controlled demolition.
+First Last it is not at all! You can clearly see how it fell on its own. How is it a controlled demolition and please, by all means. Tell us about how you became such a wonderful expert about demolition
First Last
I would agree with you if both support sides failed at the same time. It makes no sense for a controlled demolition to take six seconds after one side structure has collapsed, unless they demolished only one side which is ridiculous.
+Christopher Cromwell all people have to do is compare controlled demolition buildings to the 3 trade towers that were brought down at FREE FALL speed. The Twin towers were 110 stories high, WT7 was 50 stories high, you do the math how is it possible for fires to brings down those high rise buildings under 10 seconds and reduce them to DUST. Do you people understand simple physics? Or would you rather listen to the shills because it gives you a false sense of security?
9/11forDummies
because the support structure failed on one side six seconds before it failed on the other side, putting the entire building's weight on the right-side support. As soon as that right-side support failed under the entire building's weight with no other supports left to hold it up, it fell at freefall speed. no controlled demolition would destroy one side's structure six seconds before it destroyed the other side structure. A fire, however, just might only affect one side's support structure, leaving the other one perfectly intact, but incapable of holding the entire building's weight, and as soon as it fails... freefall, baby.
Why did only one person on the recording react to the building collapsing? So blasé and also could hear someone laughing? It's not the time for laughter. So eerie!
Is it not at least reasonable to suggest that rather than 'collapsing', the building seems to be exploding in a progressive wave of expertly timed blasts popping out one floor at a time, creating a perfectly symmetrical downward wave of explosions? Is it not reasonable to suggest from the video evidence that, rather than falling, the building seems to be exploding, one floor at a time, into huge clouds of pulverized dust? Is it not odd that huge multi-ton steel beams are being ejected hundreds of feet laterally in front of the lighter dust particles, a phenomenon only possible with the aid of explosives? Is it not odd that, if the floors did indeed break away from the center support columns and fall one on top of the other in the supposed 'pancake' collapse, the 47 massive central steel support columns on which those floors sat are not standing naked hundreds of feet in the air after having been stripped of the attached floors, like a trunk stripped of its branches? Is it not odd that these 47 massive central steel support beams rising over 1,000 feet into the air were somehow severed into convenient 25 and 30 foot lengths to be collected and shipped away without anyone bothering to analyze them? Is it not odd that this federal disaster area and crime scene was cordoned off before qualified investigators, explosives experts, and/or arson specialists could be called in, and almost all physical evidence (i.e. the building parts) was removed, recycled, and shipped ovrerseas? These are all questions that have never been addressed in any of the official reports on the Towers' demise. Why?
Run the video at .05 speed and you can clearly see the windows blowing out as each charge goes off. No doubt about it, this was blown up.
Wes Fox If you really seriously think it all depends on sounds, then you are deluded.
Mr Loizeoux said: I do not know of a way how to use thermite shape charges to cut all those columns at the same time.
(a rough quote)
He admits that all columns had to be cut at the same time.
If they hadnt, it wouldnt have dropped the way it did.
With freefall acceleration for 2.25 seconds, into its own footprint and symmetrically.
But so, if charges designed for that purpose cant do it........ how then would a fire do it?
BTW: who gives a fuck about edited audio?
Do you really believe everything you see?
Air pressure blowing out of the windows you say? Like the dustpuffs in those twin towers?
Tell us then: An explosion was felt, heard, seen in the basement.
But the Lobby was also damaged.
Windows blown out.
So an elevator coming down caused that to happen?
If so...........
Then why were ALL the windows blown out? And why when the building "collapses" do we see single windows being pushed out by this imaginary airpressure?
Btw, did you know airpressure can be caused by explosives? Infact, thats how they basically work, right?
I don't know what building your looking at, but building 7 fell in it's own foot print. I WAS THERE.
Yo: Izzy G You obviously are to stupid to comprehend my view. Or maybe you are a disinfo agent. Either way you a total peace of shit, and a dumb one at that.
Wes Fox o yes he can, but you arent willing to look at it.
Wes Fox det cord, not needed. Remote control.
Charges? They can be manufactured to burn away with the rest of the stuff.
And, as for explosive noises......
I can give you links to 3 videos. 1 shows wtc 7 and we can hear a boom before anything moves. Then a second or 2 later the penthouse is gone.
This boom is clearly audible.
The same goes for a huge explosion being heard prior to the collapse of bld nr 2. The South tower. Which collapsed first ofcourse.
And they are both NIST videos, from 2 different sources.
Both with what appears to be original audio.
Both carry the same explosion sound prior to the collapse of the building.
Clearly recognizable.
As for vibrations................. Yeah.
Fire doesnt cut through all columns at the same time. And 2 different demolition experts have stated that all columns had to be cut at the same time.
Plus, room had to be created so that the building could fall with freefall acceleration for 2.25 seconds.
It can not fall through itself with freefall acceleration.
That was a perfectly controlled demolition.
Reduce the speed of the video to 0.25 and Watch the video from about five seconds before the collapse...you could clearly see Windows being shattered at two different ends of the building's facade, almost as if they were minor detonations
OR the moment frame was being twisted.
Also if you look closely at where the windows are being shattered, you can see little puffes of black smoke.
what do you expect for the windows, to not explode when the structure is literally GOING DOWN???
Building 7 is controlled demolition. In controlled demolition the core columns are the first to go which is the reason for the penthouse to fall first. The rest of the building falls symmetrically cause all columns are remove at the same time which can never be achieved by fire alone. The building falls at free fall which can only be achieved by controlled demolition. There are many recording of explosions before it fell. Never has a building had total collapse from fire alone. Building 7 is a great example of controlled demolition. As far as controlled demolition is concerned , building 7 is one of the best ever. Fire causes metal to slowly soften and bend and can never achieve free fall symmetrically. Molten metal was found at building 7 even months after 9/11 which can be achieved by thermochemical react or in a foundry. Fire alone will not melt steel. Nano thermite was found in dust sample saved. One of the known manufacturers of this is the US military. This is not something anyone could manufacture and is atomically engineered. Twin towers were also controlled demolition and had multiple explosions before and during collapse as testified to by many witnesses and fire fighters. Molten metal was found months after below the towers. Molten metal was pouring out of a tower before it collapsed. The structure below the initial explosion could never fully collapsed. The structure below was profoundly stronger than the upper floors cause it had to carry the weight of the whole tower. Fire fighter and media say it was like a controlled demolition. If this isn't controlled demolition, then there are only 3 building to ever to suffer total collapse and they all happened on the same day and were leased by the same guy and had fires hot enough to melt iron.
"Building 7 is controlled demolition."
No.
Fabulous argument , you must have graduated debunker 101 with honours , pure genius , nice name , you should the the name tag " truthers are wrong , liars are right " then you could be a debunking master
Nice bit of whining. Does it generally upset you when people invade your conspiracy cocoon and confront you with reality?
Does it generally upset you
No
Debunkers have provided great attention to the truth movement. They do clearly show how obvious the 9/11 cover-up, corrupt , false flag is. We need to thank all debunkers for bringing more attention and credibility to the truth movement. Thank you debunkers, Your efforts have provided a great service to fuel the momentum and strength of the truth. I don't think this movement would have so much power and exposure with out the debunkers efforts. They have been working tirelessly to fuel the truth movement. They are clearly out numbered but keep fuelling the movement against overwhelming odds.The guilty could never be exposed so well without their efforts. Thank you all for your efforts that expose the truth to a level that could never be achieved without you.
A few small fires!! LOL
video looks purposely blurred....
Then it should all be blurred
Daniel Trottier the quality of this video is no worst the the older news footage
wtf doesnt this start at 7 minutes?
If you want to skip the preamble first externally visible signs of collapse on this low-fi version begin at 7:24.
07:31 Unexpected Collapse HERE!
Actually, it _WAS_ expected!
"We had our special operations people set up surveying instruments to monitor, and see if there was any movement in the building [7]. We were concerned of the possibility of collapse in the building. And we had a discussion with one particular engineer there, and we asked him if we allowed it to burn could we anticipate a collapse and if so, how soon? And it turned out that he was pretty much on the money, that he said 'In its current state you have about 5 hours.'" - FDNY Deputy Chief Peter Hayden
Holy shit this was not a demolition, my brother was around tower 7. The team was told the evacuate the building a few hours before it collapsed because all the diesel generators were burning wildly inside and the support beams were starting to bend. He said there was a huge gas in the middle of the tower (other side) that was on fire from one of the towers. He said when the tower came down his friends could hear metal bending loudly. There was no explosion. It would be impossible for no one to notice a demolition team setting up explosives all throughout the building. If this all actually happened it would have been leaked before they even got a chance to carry it out. There would have been just way too many people involved. One man brought down the NSA and this would have been thousands of times more serious lol.,
Deathkill06 You can't win Death, if you appeal to their sense of reason, they'll just turn it off.
Deathkill06 Your brother is a liar, the official NIST report from the government said small office fires and nothing more.
Dexion845 You're a liar. Show us EXACTLY where it says in the NIST report that it said "SMALL office fires".
Zaparoony Zap Dexion doesn't know how fire works Zap. He thinks they burn in one spot and go out, like a camp fire. I don't think he's aware of how quickly fire spreads without containment.
Danny Riot go look at the report the NIST said I don't even know why you're arguing with me.
Thermites
Nano thermite to be more precise. Small particles were found in the dust from the pulverized buildings. The huge steel beams supporting the structure did not melt from the fire, they were blown to smithereens in a controlled demolition. That's how two 110 story buildings collapsed into a pile less than 50 feet in height. The thermite burned for several weeks after the blasts despite NYC fire crews dousing everything with huge volumes of water.
mossad van bombers had rdx i thought?
Building 7 - NEW FOOTAGE
Vid is deleted
Michael, you have to make your "NEW FOOTAGE" open to the public otherwise no one can see it. Go back into RUclips and change your settings for that video.
And the 911 commission never even mentioned this.....wonder why.
controlled demo! pull it!
Meekimoto 413 huge loss of life
Make room for real estate mogul Silverstein
I firmly believe the plane videos are fake and that the plane script was fully engineered. The explosion was real, the planes were added in before being fed to the media pool. The engines and landing gear planted, actors bussed in. The description was a cut and paste, when I try to edit the sentence RUclips wont save it. The sentence should say the building was evecuated for a FDNY fire drill at 7:00 am, when the alarms were disabled and sprinklers were shut off. The glitches are "aftermarket"
WTF are you talking about?
Couldn't find any model reconstruction for the two towers directly other than CGI models, but there is relevant info found by the University of Fairbanks Alaska, studying and reconstructing building 7 models using computers and engineering knowledge. WTC 7 is the smoking gun!
You can review this extensive study at:
ine.uaf.edu/projects/wtc7/
also an 85 page pdf document at bottom of the page entitled, Progress Report 2017.
also ruclips.net/video/Mf1ewgbq4fY/видео.html
buildings as big as these dont fall in free fall they would partly collapse or topple over they wouldnt free fall onto their foot print. dont take my word for it there are hundreds of engineers and architects that share that same view. and do you honestly think 3 massive buildings in the middle of Manhatten are all going to fall onto their foot print on the same day!!! Really !!! I dont think so!!!
What if they actually did pull it down, but because it was in vane to keep it up due to it being structurally damaged too much?
What's all the fuss about just a building collapsing into its footprint because of a fire
@Falling Eagle Rising Star buildings fall from fire all the time! Look at Grenfell
If you believe this is how buildings collapse, or if you believe fire can do this to steel buildings I have some land to sell you for a good price
Real structural engineers say that's _exactly_ what happened. Who are you to tell them they're wrong?
You want to loose out, that's on you.
The fact that you don't know or understand facts and reality? Is a clear you problem.
@@Tim22222 you mean a few cherry picked engineers who have been paid/ forced to lie?
Never heard of architects and engineers for 9/11 truth?
@@mooneyes2k478 the facts are that NIST committed numerous crimes and covered up any chance of a real investigation
@@coolyoutubename16 LOL! Your "cherry-picked" engineers represent the _vast majority opinion_ of what happened to those buildings.
Meanwhile, A&E911 is a for-profit operation that has published no papers of merit, performed no studies, and has no respect in the engineering community. You've been had.
There are all kinds of structures at Hiroshima and Nagasaki that did not collapse or vaporize at temperatures of 10 million centigrade
Yup, just get out the brooms socialisme.nu/blog/uploads/2015/08/19451000-HIroshima.jpg
ffs start at 7:20
wotever goverment said there be someone claiming this or that.planes n arabs done this .
i gave my life to defend this country.MY LIFE SEE.damn me damn me damn me.those who are so blind to see.just damn me.protecting the devil himself.damn me
why is a 7 second event take 9 1/2 minutes
Context