PDA

View Full Version : What other buildings fell/collapsed besides 1, 2 and 7?



awepittance
04-12-2006, 07:24 PM
on 911myths.com they claim some other buildings including a church collapse due to falling debris or fire during 9/11. Is there any validity whatsoever to these claims?

Im just curious because from what i already know, it seems like building 7 was the only other building to collapse that was not hit by a plane.

Partridge
04-12-2006, 07:49 PM
I think all the buildings in the area did (due to debris pushing out from the collapse - i think like, the came down at the same time as the two towers) but building 7 is special cos it wasn't particuarly near any of the other buildings - and had only mild fires.

I'm not the expert though, ask Gold. Where is he?

jmb597
04-12-2006, 10:23 PM
the buildings that aren't there anymore were demolished as they cleaned up afterwards due to damage from the towers.

WTC 7 was the furthest away from the towers which is why its peculiar that that one fell while WTC 3, 4, 5, 6 were all demolished due to severe damage. 7 had the least damage.
http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/attack/docs/9_21_pic08.jpgthis is building 5 and 6

http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/attack/docs/wtc5_fire_floors.jpgbuilding 5

http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/attack/docs/fig_5_19.jpg building 7

awepittance
04-13-2006, 04:11 AM
thanks for the replies, so there is no validity to the claim that a nearby church collapsed (im not sure where i heard this) shortly after the attacks on its own?

Goatfish
04-13-2006, 02:38 PM
Your BBC article has been linked today from the whatreallyhappened.com (http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/) site!

Congrats, and good work in helping to show what bullcrap those black op faked beheadings are..

BBC (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/3544032.stm)

awepittance
04-13-2006, 08:44 PM
Your BBC article has been linked today from the whatreallyhappened.com (http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/) site!

Congrats, and good work in helping to show what bullcrap those black op faked beheadings are..

BBC (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/3544032.stm)


nice! unfortuantely that BBC article still is somewhat of a smear.
La Figaro was the only paper that told our story correctly. Every single other media institution did nothing but complain and play the emotional card when pertaining to our story. It was so painfully obvious they were just trying to cover their on lazy asses for running the fake story in the first place.

*they* didnt do the fact checking, we never sent it to them, they got it off the finng internet, so they get mad at us, fair isnt it?

"Mr Zarqawi's group has released footage of hostage beheadings, but doubts were quickly expressed about this footage."

this part of the article cracks me up. What is their definition of quickly? And who do they mean doubted it? People at ogrish,.com thought it was fake, but the AP and Reuters thought it was real enough to run it. The AP and Reuters ran the story as true for over 5 hours, as a result it was also ran as true in over 2,000 newspapers in the world. Most of them did not know to retract the story until the next day.

thanks for the link!

(coming next.... how to make a fake al queda training video in 3 hours with only $50 worth of supplies ....just kidding, i dont want the FBI to visit me again)

Goatfish
04-13-2006, 09:27 PM
The FBI visited you over that?? What a bunch of crap. Once again, that shows that this whole terrorist nonsense has nothing to do with securing this country and everything to do with slipping a police state through the back door.
I'm not surprised that just about every media outlet tried to marginalize or smear you. They are tools of propaganda, not reliable accurate information.