On Sept. 11,why did building WTC-7 fall, though no aircraft struck it?
375707
Good question. \nDo a web search for the movie Loose Change for those of you who haven't seen it. I promise it will make you start to question what actually happened on 9/11.
490158
Some parts landed an the far side from the entry points. The rest which was in the towers became an eternal part of building parts and the ash remains of the victims. I did see a part of a tail section and an entire engine in some pictures.
678003
Your first question is how did it collapse.  \nFrom everything I heard it was "pulled" or a planned implosion.\n\nYour second question was is it possible that it collapsed due to fire.\nNo.  In fact no steel framed building before or since has completely collapsed due to fire.  And in this case there were only two floors that had small fires on them.\n\nI'm no expert.  But this is what some scientists and people who are looking into the collapse of building 7 along with towes 1 and 2 are saying.
1078717
Yes, but not having a Boeing 747 crashed into them. They actually stood up for quite a long time with the fires and the structural weakening. No building is meant to withstand the magnitude of a crash from a Boeing 747 with a full tank of fuel. The steel inside should have actally expanded, but yet it stayed still long enough for most of the survivors to get out. I think the structural integrity weighs out the disaster. The twin towers weren't going to stay up forever, as with most skyscrapers they are very succeptable to the elemetns as well.
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.
347447
Yes, the buildings were insured for an unheard off amount a month before the event and there were numerous other things that point towards this type of theory bin laden and the bush family have had business deals in the past as well as the other players within the New World Order and other secret societies, The rest of the world are just pawns in a game of a chosen few. If a leader of a country denies what is expected of them, they are ejected in one form or another.\nI try not to read too much into it because there is nothing I can do nor anyone else\n\nI also have to add that clinton is in on it as well, from the same group.\n\nDo you really think that it was a matter of fate that the buildings fell like that of a controlled implosion.\n\nI also found it interesting that chaney was hidden away while bush was talking through a blow horn at ground zero
300531
Yes, the world trade center was brought down by explosives.\nThis was visible to anybody with a serious knowledge of demolitions from the images taken by the victims at ground level. The building fell too easilly, too smoothly, didn't\ntumble, didn't veer to one side. You can see the explosives taking out every few floors in slow motion.\n\nIn all probability the world trade center was demolished by the bush administration.\n\nAs an aside, the idea that the fuel of those planes could have caused the collapse is total nonsensical fiction. The physics say theres not enough energy. And one of the planes\nblew up 95 percent of its fuel against the side of the building. Also interesting are the buildings demolished by explosives hundreds of feet away from the towers.\n\nThere is an entire movement on the internet called the 911\ntruth movement that has been bringing attention to this for years. Eventually history will show that 911 was the Bush administrations "riestagg fire". The excuse they needed to justify the wars they wanted to have.
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
937910
I have screamed since 9/11 that we needed to look at those who gained from the attacks, just prior to the attack, the middle east was in chaos, Israel was in trouble with the UN and US public opinion was calling for sanctions in their attacking unarmed Palastinains, Bush was pushing for increased sanctions against Iraq, meanwhile bomb sniffing dogs were removed from the trade centers and security was cut back drastically. Much of the buildings colaspe does not make scientific sense if it was caused by the fire and inpact from the jets, steel does not melt at the temp that the fire heated to, buildings do not free fall when colasping only imploding caasues this. No engine or balck box was found in the pentegon! Too many unanswered questions and no real governement attempt to answer them
635126
C’mon: Do you really think nineteen guys with box cutters were behind 9/11? Then why, when no steel-frame building had ever collapsed from fire, did three fall down that day? (One, 7 WTC, wasn’t even hit.) How could a terrorist’s passport emerge in perfect condition? Why was it so important to clear debris before all the bodies were recovered? Did the U.S. secretly plan the whole thing? The 9/11 conspiracy theorists have it all figured out.
619968
The solidity of the ground. The ground was too soft to support the weigfht of the tower. The distribution of the towers weight on it's surface area required a more compact soil to be build upon. The engineers of that time didn`t have the means to predict this problem accuratly and hence the tower started leaning a fraction of an inch each year since the time it was built, untill it reached the weird inclination it has now.
829451
Please let the paranoia pass. 2 airplanes broght down the WTC. Not a bomb in the basement.
172001
Well i think you have to specify which World trade center you are asking about. So many of them were taken out, so be a little clearer.
1063847
There is no proof. All the evidence disappeared to China or the bottom of the ocean. Why were they so quick to get rid of that steel? Do you really believe that jet fuel gets hot enough to collapse an I beam? Hell, I've picked out beer cans after a bonfire. Duh! And as far as I know, airliners aren't made for knocking down buildings. They are light so they can fly. Have ever seen a crash site? There usually isn't a whole lot of recognizable things left. A building that would collapse after getting hit like that wouldn't pass a NYC building code exam.
438888
you didn't mention where,whether in WTC,or in some other places .\n\nyour second answers is there is no exact clue about how many people died over there,only you will get a approx figure.
419578
They also didn't know that the buildings were going to collapse. They were trying to first rescue the injured inside the buildings. That's how triage works, first you help the people who need it the most.
553816
wasn't supposed to.  There is no doubt that a plane flew into the pentagon and two into the World Trade Center.\n\n\n\n\nPS.  It proves it takes to long to enforce the the freedom of information act.