English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

The south tower I believe it was called.

I mean, no planes hit it. Was it very badly built? Is central NY prone to earthquakes? If it was because of debris falling from the other towers why did nothing else come down? And why did it fall in exactly the same way at the other towers? ie suddenly pancaking down like one of those controlled demolitions.

2006-08-24 23:49:42 · 21 answers · asked by airmonkey1001 4 in Politics & Government Military

Yes sorry building 7 which was also a tower ie. great big very tall skyscraper.

2006-08-25 01:59:14 · update #1

21 answers

Well, you see, it was Iraqi designed super-termite nano-bots that Hussein gave to the Al Qaida at their yearly Tea-Party, which after chewing the solid steel supports, moved on to building 7 and did the same thing there. But, after that their batteries ran out.

My other pet theory is that some person, who visited all three sites, farted in each of them, filling them with flammable gas from his/her ***, which then of course lighted up by the planes or as collateral damage somehow.

Hmm, well that's the only reasons short of planted bombs I can come up with, and those certainly didn't happen.

2006-08-25 01:01:19 · answer #1 · answered by dane 4 · 0 0

WTC 7 was only one of a number of other buildings which came down, which despite what the looney conspiracy theorists would have you believe, was due to the fact that two of the largest buildings in the world has just fallen down outside the front door.

An effect not entirely unlike an earthquake.

It was also on fire and took a lot of debris from the towers.

Finally if you look across the road from Ground Zero you will see a skyscraper which has black cloth draped down its front.

This is the Deutsche Bank building and despite looking intact and undamaged, this is going to be torn down as it is unsafe and cannot be repaired due to damage incurred when the towers fell.

This building was further away than WTC 7 and wasnt on fire and was still so badly damaged structurally that it has to come down.

2006-08-25 14:35:56 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

You're talking about building 7.

Larry Silverstein (owner of ALL the destroyed buildings) admits (stupidly) involvment in intentionally demolishing building 7 in this video http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/march2005/180305groundzero.htm which also contains some other interesting, surprising, and factual information

Fire departments DO NOT demolish buildings. It take more than a day to place the explosives. Demolition teams don't place explosives in burning buildings!!!

Yes... This absolutely proves something stinks about 9-11. Do people really think they design high-rises that will collapse from fire?

This video makes a complete fool out of anyone who says building 7 was not intentionally demolished. IT'S BEEN ADMITTED OTHERWISE. IT'S RIGHT HERE ON THE VIDEO. Know the facts before you try to act like you know more than you do. You know what you've been fed by the media... But the facts are out there if you bother to look for yourself. If explosives just happened to be ready to take down building 7... Why not other buildings as well???

The very fact that SO MANY people have "proof" building 7 wasn't intentionally demolished when it admittedly was... just shows the breadth of the disinformation campaign initiated after 9-11. They can't tell the truth because it's INCREDIBLY incriminating. BUT IT'S RIGHT HERE ON VIDEO.

2006-08-25 07:03:09 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 1 0

There were only two towers, each of which had a direct hit by a jumbo jet. The heat from the fires allowed the metal supports to warp causing the concrete floors to collapse pancake style. Debris showered over the entire area causing numerous fires and destruction to other buildings. I believe it was a total of 7 buildings that needed to be demolished in the World Trade Center complex.

2006-08-25 07:01:09 · answer #4 · answered by ally 2 · 0 0

First off this is in the wrong category. This is not a military question. Next the building was called wtc 7. Now, while planes did not hit it, it was heavily damaged when the main towers fell. 1/3 of the face to the center and to the bottom -approximately 10 stories was scooped out. There was also damage on the upper stoies & SW corner. This damage and the fire that burned uncontroled for 7 hours led to structrual failure in a progressive collapse.

The Conspirisy crap, is just that crap. Popular Mechcanics Magazine have had over 300 experts in various fields examine all of these 9/11 myths. It is the March 2005 issue. The building falls because structural supports fail. The dynamic load on the floor bellow excedes its design load. So it fails, and so on and so on. Like a deck of cards.

2006-08-25 07:49:47 · answer #5 · answered by lana_sands 7 · 0 2

It was debris that caused the damage. They pancake down because that is the way they are built. They are designed to fall down like that for the reason that if there were a problem and they fall, then they dont destroy half the city in the process. Could you imagine the destruction if they fell over like dominoes?

2006-08-25 07:10:51 · answer #6 · answered by bildymooner 6 · 0 1

I believe it was a different kind of building, not considered a tower. It fell due to all the debris and instability of everything going on around it.

2006-08-25 06:53:45 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

you may watch the video again because there were only two towers and that south tower may be a normal building that fell down due to the great pressure

2006-08-25 07:12:11 · answer #8 · answered by Different 2 · 0 0

Hmmm I wonder maybe because the invisible plane hit the invisible tower! Yeah I think that is it! (since there are only 2 towers of the World Trade Center!)

2006-08-25 06:53:18 · answer #9 · answered by E.F. Landeros 3 · 0 1

I think you mean Bldg. 7. The burnt debris found in the basement indicated controlled demolition,

2006-08-25 06:56:27 · answer #10 · answered by westgaliberty 6 · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers