how did WTC 7 implode perfectly on 911 when it was not hit by a plane or the towers and had no fire for hours?
375230
ma be there were no terrorists at all on the plane the bomb was detonated from another building.
1086272
I believe you and I saw your google video.  Those buildings should have not come down that way.  Those buildings came down like a demolition crew was there.  It came down too straight.  That takes years of training. Where did that video go.  I was trying to send it to a few people and even my copy of the web address changed.  What's Up With THAT?
1180502
Guys, this retard thinks that Americans downed the twin towers using DYNAMITE. You cannot take anything he/she says seriously.\n\nI am NOT making this up ... see it here:\n\nhttp://answers.yahoo.com/question/?qid=20060629152526AARdiv2
702565
You prefer the loose change dribble I see.\n\nhttp://michellemalkin.com/archives/005885.htm\n\nhttp://911research.wtc7.net/pentagon/evidence/photos/index.html#parts
1149911
Absolutely absurd. How could the US have helped 9/11? Why would  they? How would no one have come up with any credible evidence after all these years? What reason is there to think that it was not a well-planned attack, run by a large group of Arab terrorists? I think that is the story that fits the evidence.\n\nThey're not addressed in any plausible way. Vast conspiracies don't actually happen or work. Someone always finds out, and yet there's no evidence of this conspiracy.\n\nEdit: Jets did not intercept the planes because they are stationed hundreds of miles from where they were and were not alerted until shortly before the planes crashed. The FAA notified NORAD at 8:40 and planes were scrambled 6 minutes later, 153 miles from the World Trade Center and the first plane crashed at about that time. http://mckinneysucks.blogspot.com/2002_06_01_mckinneysucks_archive.html#77997492\n\nThe buildings fell quickly because they were crashed into by giant airliners. It seems like a building like that should be able to withstand more, but neither you, nor I, nor Ruppert, nor even the engineers who built the towers know what it is like for a plane to crash into a building. The commission report clearly states that the plane struck main support beams and started fires that raged at intense temperatures, further weakining the already weakened supports. Once that happens it doesn't take long for a building to collapse onto itself.\n\nAs for WTC7, the report is clear enough that fires were started on several floors by debris. People say it looks too controlled, but they failr to realize that buildings that tall are made to crumble down and not out. If a main beam buckles, there's no momentum to throw debris out - the force is all down.\n\nHow long it took to form a commission is a question I have myself, but that alone does not make a conspiracy.\n\nAs for explosions, see this: http://www.geocities.com/factsnotfantasy/ExplosivesDebunked.html
1160918
Popular Mechanics Article here:\nhttp://www.popularmechanics.com/science/defense/1227842.html\nPentagon Site here:\nhttp://www.abovetopsecret.com/pages/911_pentagon_757_plane_evidence.html\nStructural failure report by NIST here:\nhttp://wtc.nist.gov/\n\nA little common sense will get you thinking the right way.  Good luck.
1027720
I'm sorry, but I have to disagree with you.  The burning fuel INSIDE the WTC generated enough oven-type temperature to weaken the steel of the building (not high enough to melt it, granted).  The rest was gravity and the inherent design of the buildings (which, BTW, were designed to pancake exactly as they did, albeit far in the future when their natural demolition time came).  The fact that temperatures over 1500 degrees were registering in the pile afterward is the same closed-oven concept- the pile kept the heat in much longer than if it was exposed to the air.
649228
I have not seen this but i can only imagine the theory behind 9/11.  I know that it was not by accident that the twin towers came a tumblin down...but i also know that it would never have happened if the gov't wasn't in on it. It is just to tragic and too big of a game for it to happen on American soil.
29237
This is a very true possibility because there is actual proof of the government hiding what happend on that day... if you recall a plane had also hit the pentagon as well as the towers right... negative there was no plane wreckage at that site. what had actualy hit it was a missle. and the government wants us to believe that it was a plan to not cause panic.
1125038
I worked in building 7. It burned up from the heat and the collapse\nof one and two. The whole area was wrecked, even buildings(like Myrill Lynch) where ruined, and it was blocks away, not connected by the path and the underground mall like 7 was.\n7 collapsed just the way it was built  to, like all towers in populated areas are. Spin down not fall over.
108448
This is one of those nutty conspiracy theories.  The satellite photo was takeng the day after the attacks.  It doesn't show much of anything that you can distiguish in any detail.  For all we know, they could have hauled debris away that might have hampered rescue efforts.  Who knows how much of the debris might be in the building?\n\nThe second photo was taken 3 days after the attacks.  Again, debris could have been removed to safety reaons, etc. And it isn't a vgood picture.  Debris could be in areas not shown on the photo like the courtyard area.\n\nThen of course there is the security tape showing the crash.  There is nothing new here, this is just someone who has too much time on their hands.\n\nAdded:\n\nYour question was "try this out and comment".  You posted a link to inconclusive photos that could be interpreted any number of ways.  You try to point to some vague conspiracy and a cover up with no supporting evidence.  How do you think people are supposed to react?  You ask where the wreckage is and I provide a number of plausible explanations that you chose not to ignore and not to analyze.
950996
I truly appreciate this question. \n\nTo all those who give the token thumbs down to a question like this, or use the juvenile retort of "conspiracy-nut job," please, take some time to seriously analyze the unanswered questions surrounding the 9/11 attacks. \n\nInterestingly, the burden of proof is no longer on the "conspiracy theorists" but on those who have stood by the government's official claim that 19 hijackers with box-cutters financed by Bin Laden, crashed 4 planes without any chance of prevention. \n\nThe following is irrefutable: \n\nFact: Bin Laden is NOT wanted by the FBI for the 9/11 attacks. Check out the FBI website. Reason? They don't have sufficient evidence to convict him. Perhaps this is why Bush said he really doesn't care about him. \n\nFact: There are hundreds of televised claims from that day that witnesses heard or felt explosions prior to the collapse of the towers.  These include firefighters, police, newsreporters, and civilians. \n\nFact: 47 story - WTC 7, we are told, collapsed from fire alone. This was unprecedented for a steel frame building. Furthermore, it fell symetrically in free fall speed. Science and deductive reasoning will easily support the cause of this collpase as demolitions. Fire does not have the energy to do this.  \n\nFact: The steel from WTC was shipped overseas before an investigation was even opened. This is the greatest destruction of evidence in the history of forensics. \n\nFact: Thousands of first responders have been afflicted and some have even died from respiratory failure. The government will not support investigations into the many reports which show that these heroes have micronized steel, glass, and concrete in their lungs. Fire, and the collapse from gravity would not produce this type of dust. Demolitions, however, supports the evidence. \n\nFact: We were told that NORAD didn't intercept any of the planes that day. This spans from about 8:24, the time of the first report of a hijacking, to 10:06, when the last plane crashed in Penn. NORAD's has a prior track record of intercepting planes within minutes. Standard Operating Procedure was not followed that day. They also changed their story several times. \n\nFact: The investigation into 9/11 was initially opposed by the Bush Administration. The 9/11 families pressed for one. They got it, but with remarkable conditions. The total costs of the investigation, including the NIST report, was only $16 million. The cost to investigate the Space Shuttle crash - $50 million. The cost to investigate Clinton - $42 million. In other words, the greatest failure of our defenses deserved less money than the shuttle and Clinton's perjury. What an insult to the 9/11 families. \n\nFact: No one has been fired for 9/11. \n\nFact: The spike in put options on Boeing, United Airlines, and American Airlines were never investigated. Millions are still unclaimed. This indicates someone knew. Why not check out this lead? \n\nFact: The August 6, 2001 Public Daily Briefing Memo was titled BIN LADEN DETERMINED TO STRIKE IN THE US. Yet prior to its declassification, we were told by Rice and Fleisher that there were no warnings. Had this news been made public, couldn't travelers, law enforcement, and the airline workers  have been a little more guarded or informed to notice something that day? Wouldn't we have guessed right away that the first report of a hijacking was indeed a terrorist? Or would we have dismissed it as "one bad pilot" and continued to read "My Pet Goat" while America was attacked?\n\nThe bottom line - If the deaths of 3000 people occurred under the control of a corporation, people would have been brought up on charges of criminal negligence. Despite the growing movement and mounting evidence into the WTC collapses, the government still has made up its mind that it is fire that brought these buildings down and that 9/11 was simply a failure of imagination. Th
607464
If you don't know . . .\n\nIt happened on Sept. 11, 2001. Three hijacked planes struck the two World Trade Center towers and the Pentagon. A fourth was taken down in a field. Thousands died.
1161949
In a cascading gravity-driven collapse (the "pancake theory"), each floor of the building should have offered at least a modicum of resistance before giving way, with the inertia of the increasing debris forcing itself through less and less resistance as the towers fell.\n\nThe WTC buildings falling at free-fall speed can only be explained by a lack of resistance in any intervening floors all the way to the foundation, meaning complete simultaneous (or rapidly sequential) instant failure of most support and core columns.  Before and after 9/11, this has only been achieved in a controlled demolition environment.\n\nTesting of metal samples of the core columns with supporting evidence of molten metal found at the site 3 weeks AFTER 9/11 have shown large quantities of thermate by-products, an acid-like cutting agent where a very small amount can be used to cut cleanly through metal.  This analysis has been conducted using WTC steel samples provided for WTC memorials at 3 separate universities and is quite conclusive, moreso than DNA evidence.\n\nWith the scientific evidence clearly stacked on the side of "controlled demolition", the greatest obstacle to any 9/11 Truth movement is the psychological factor.  Most people just don't understand science and are quite afraid of it, easily able to dismiss it when any fast-talking pundit counters with a senseless 15-second sound bite.  Most Americans have been thoroughly conditioned to this "hard science is just another opinion" mentality that is making us a joke in the rest of the world, and thoroughly helping our business competitors in the world to import our jobs.
829451
Please let the paranoia pass. 2 airplanes broght down the WTC. Not a bomb in the basement.
1084548
Why should anyone "flame" you for questioning such a major issue that has affected the lives of so many. It takes a lot of courage to question things and to seek the truth.\n\nThere are many websites that question the 9/11 official story.  \n\nThe controlled demolition of the twin towers by Thermate which is the controlled demolition explosive thermite plus sulfur. Sulfur cases the thermite to burn hotter, cutting steel quickly and leaving trails of yellow colored residue. \n\nQuestions that need answers as to why President Bush continued to calmly read goat stories at the school when he had just been informed that a plane hit the first tower.\n\nYou may want to check out these sites, best of luck and God bless you: \nwww.whatreallyhappened.com\nwww.informationclearinghouse.info\nwww.rense.com\nwww.reopen911.org\nwww.wanttoknow.info\nwww.ny911truth.org\nwww.mikehersh.com\nwww.prisonplanet.com\nwww.911review.com\nwww.septembereleventh.org
556651
The buildings looked like they were professionally demoed. Plus, some of the people questioning the matter have been killed in accidents or murders. \n\nI don't know if Bush himself knew about it or not, but I find the whole thing suspicious. Plus, there was no evidence of a plane hitting the Pentagon. No wings, no footage from security cameras. But then the question is if it wasn't the plane that hit, where's the plane with all of those passengers? Also, what did explode at the Pentagon? I heard on the news at first that it was a truck bomb, then it was changed.\n\nbradsgranny, Bush has said he wasn't interested in Osama's whereabouts since the Iraq invasion.