Why do people only think 2 towers fell?

>At family dinner party
>Start talking conspiracy theories
>Mention WTC7
>Literally nobody has any idea what I'm talking about
>They only think 2 towers fell that day

Did the globalists get away with this?

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=E6s0Gam54mk
youtube.com/watch?v=mWuOKBVtWDU
youtube.com/watch?v=rVCDpL4Ax7I
youtube.com/results?search_query=failed building demolition
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beijing_Television_Cultural_Center_fire
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2010_Shanghai_fire
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windsor_Tower_(Madrid)
youtube.com/watch?v=j-_WYHwUtcI
twitter.com/SFWRedditVideos

Have you considered that the problem here might be your family?

>Republican national security

WTC 7 wasn't a defining element of New York's skyline and most news footage wasn't focusing on it either compared to the twin towers. That's not social engineering.

What time frame do you usually spend on Sup Forums

>omg they don't know
>this is proof

Buildings are designed to collapse straight down. I don't care what was in it or who owned it. If these buildings had fallen over like a tree there would still be conspiracy theories saying it was the joos or Bush or the illuminati or whatever.

Give me a video of George Bush saying it was an inside job. Show me bank accounts and withdrawals where the people were paid who executed the plot. Show me a video of someone installing explosives onto steel supports (which would be embedded under dry wall and concrete might I add).

You need proof, not a video which implies everything was by design.

gravity

Shill.

Minor asymmetrical damage doesn't lead to a symmetrical free-fall collapse.

Dont worry nufags, Pol knows the truth.

Always.

It's been 16 years.

>Did the globalists get away with it.

Yes.

Trump may give us the truth watch the video of his interview in the day.

Based.

>Buildings are designed to collapse

Actually, buildings are designed to not collapse user

Lmao thank you based lord

do you have links to support your claim on symmetrical downward collapse design? or is this just an assumption?

Asymmetric damage doesn't lead to a symmetrical collapse at freefall shariablue, maybe if you got a real degree you'd know this, sad all your liberal arts degree got you was a "career" in gaslighting autists on Sup Forums

47 minute challenge

youtube.com/watch?v=E6s0Gam54mk

I said the exact same thing.

Thank you, my woke friend.

Yes

WTC7 wasn't any more a tower than a manlet is a person

I mean you aren't wrong

Im gonna be a bro and give you a cheat sheet.

Google "Safari Club" and "Dancing Israelis" and "Kurtzberg Brothers".

Why would a building fall over like a tree? First of all buildings are not one solid object with consistent rigidity throughout. A building is an organized stack of material hollow throughout. If you hit it with a 1,000 ton object going 300-400 mph full of combustible fuel you're going to have fire and massive structural damage. If you had a controlled demolition the towers would've collapsed immediately on impact. Essentially a cascade event occurred where the weight of collapsing upper floors precipitated into all of the floors collapsing. Tower 7 collapsed because of fires caused by the smoldering rubble of towers 1 and 2.

Once again, if you have DEFINITIVE PROOF the buildings were destroyed by something other than the very conspicuous dual airplane strikes then I'm all ears.

One thing here is for certain and that is two airplanes going balls out struck towers 1 and 2 with a great deal of force. The rest can be fabricated, sure, so unless you have something more than hearsay and nebulous theories I believe these buildings were destroyed by buildings, or in the case of WTC 7 fires caused by the destruction of the other buildings.

these anons get it

> if you already know about ae911truth, skip the first ~2-3 min
youtube.com/watch?v=mWuOKBVtWDU

Jesus Christ

Why is anyone who disagrees with you on a given subject against you in every subject?

This is when debate breaks down on Sup Forums:

>I don't agree with you and here is why

>YOURE JUST CTR SHARIABLUE FAG-KEK

>woke

You think sharing a dissenting opinion with a stranger means you're both as aware of the machinations of rich and powerful people as the other? You think you agree with this person on every subject? If he doesn't share all of your opinions or world views then that means he isn't really "woke" true?

Look at the NIST reports, they're lying

>They claim there were no explosions heard by anyone yet multiple explosions were caught on video
>The simulated model they used to show the collapse of WTC7 shows less than half of the collapse, and even that model doesnt match the video of what happened that day
>Their study was not peer reviewed and they will not release the simulated model of the first building in history to collapse in on itself from a fire bc "danger to public safety"

So you are 100% sure that two 1000 ton aircraft traveling at a speed of 300-400 mph could not have caused enough damage to make the twin towers collapse and cause a hot enough conflagration to cause another building to collapse next to it?

>mfw I realize WTC7 was the real target
who notices lil 7 when THE TWIN TOWERS are collapsing
somebody post the screenshot that lists the targets inside the building and what was lost when it fell

Pure coincidence, goym

Of course they got away with it. They won that battle

>mfw watching a cheap Chinese building burn with an inferno inside for hours until only the frame remains

> trusting the GEW

Actually, structural damage caused by high temperatures does lead to vertical collapse.

It wasn't free-fall either, where are you getting that information from? Have you even watched any videos of it?

Stop parroting retarded Illuminati lizard people shit.

You're not even arguing any of my points moron. Why are you scared to look into this?

>first building in history to collapse in on itself from a fire
>first building in history to collapse in on itself from a fire
>first building in history to collapse in on itself from a fire

There you go. From a guy who lives in a country who has had the same president for nearly 20 years. You must really question your leaders vlad. Especially when they continue to hold onto power despite their political opponents dying en masse from shootings and poisonings.

Just wait till the pictures leak of them wiring the explosives.

No, merely the first skyscraper in history to collapse in on itself from a fire.

The sun sets at midnight

yeah man, illuminati lizard people

youtube.com/watch?v=rVCDpL4Ax7I

I swear nobody knows about building 7. It's a redpill in itself.
"So there were 3 planes...?"

PULL IT!

And neither are you apparently.
Checked, praised and kekked.

The fall entirely depends on where the damage is and how much. You cannot predict it until it happens. If you hit just one side, obviously the building will fall forwards that side. Think of chopping a tree

Your points aren't anything but claims.

How can people be expected to provide clear witness testimony when they are in fear for their lives? Do a lot of New Yorkers suddenly have years of demolition experience and can differentiate between demolition charges going off and the sound of a collapsing building.

>not peer reviewed
>not released to public

All that means is you don't have information. It may seem fishy, but no evidence isn't evidence.

It's not proving that what the official claim is false. You must provide a clear chain of events (besides conspicuous 1000 ton airplane strikes) that lead to the collapse of these buildings.

Who made the demolitions/bombs, like give me a company name. Who installed them? Who paid for the demolitions? Where did that money they used come from? What points in the buildings were they installed? How many demolition charges were there? Did the airplane strikes contribute to the collapse at all?

Did... did you just BTFO yourself? lol wtf?

Maybe watch the video again and actually listen to what this retard is saying hahaha fuck

youtube.com/results?search_query=failed building demolition

ggwp

This is building demolition 101:
if you don't blow up every column every 4-8 level, the building's upper half will stay intact.

As far as i know the wtc7 was hit buy a few rubbish from the other towers, and it got a little fire, and dmg on one of it's side.

Literally no way it should have even collapsed. Even if it does, it's not a freefall total demo.

Life is too short to ask such complex questions goy

Retarded sandniggers hijacked 767's and hit the WTC's and the Pentagon while maintaining a 3 foot altitude at full throttle.

Now go back to your video games and TV series he he

Wait, some people still think two towers fell? Kek.

The fire spread underground from the basements of towers one and two to the basement of wtc 7. There were many conjoining utility tunnels and vectors for fire. The attacks occurred at 8 am and wtc 7 didn't collapse until 4:11 am... 8 hours after the initial airplane impacts.

Also, the way one building collapses is not indicative of how any other building would/should collapse unless that building conforms to every variable in another duplicate building.

Also, when the airplanes struck, very large portions of the tops of the buildings were destroyed.

>The fire spread underground from the basements of towers one and two to the basement of wtc 7.
How can fire spread through a basement? Fire goes upwards

...

I SAID

STOP ASK QUESTIONS GOYIM

This. I don't think it was an inside job at all. What I -do- think is that Bush and Cheney knew it was coming, and let it happen because it was a convenient excuse to get us into the middle east and to boost Cheney's military-industrial holdings.

So there was enough jet fuel for the initial explosions, spread down 110 stores, causing fire hot enough to melt the steel, then spread through underground tunnels and cause fires hot enough to bring that (and only that) building down too?

this

hot fuel goes down becuase of gravity.

So the fuel went all the way from the top to the basement and then moved sidewards and started fire under WTC7?

Lol. Okay.

It was THE terrorist attack. The big and first one that started it all.

The one that started the war we're still in, with no end.

And no one remembers it. That's how propaganda and indoctrination work user

...

What about a burning raging fire of 3000 degrees, one that simultaneously weapons the steal and concrete support beams

If you don't think a jet fuel powered raging fire can weaken steal and make it Eventually buckle, you're just a troll

>Buildings are designed to collapse straight down
No, building detonations are designed to collapse straight down. Buildings are designing to stay standing

...

...

...

I don't get it.

Yep, George Bush pulled off the greatest con-job in the history of the world 8 months into his presidency, then acted like a retard for 7 years just to throw us off the scent.

>Why do people only think 2 towers fell?

Everyone who was able were glued to the television that entire day, most probably saw WTC 7 collapse on live television. If they say they don't know, then they either forgot or were too young to remember.

And fucking retards like this are exactly the reason why they got away with it.

There were no casualties associated with the collapse of wtc 7, it had been evacuated, so it doesn't get as much mention if it all.

These are fucking stupid. There is plenty suspicious but not these for crying out loud...

Fire spread from basement to level 0 to 40 something amirite?
Now i'm monitored by the CIA.

fml


>At 9:37 am, an occupant on the 105th floor of the South Tower reported that floors beneath him "in the 90-something floor" had collapsed.

>According to FEMA, the building started to collapse at 5:20:33 pm EDT

just to talk about actual facts, beacuse you are defeniatly on the wrong side of the river.

>fire burning the whole building from inside out, so it collapses like it's demo: freefall

are you payed to say this, or just really buy that?

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beijing_Television_Cultural_Center_fire

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2010_Shanghai_fire

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windsor_Tower_(Madrid)

There are a shit tonn of fires in skyscrapers, that was burned for hours, and still: none of them collapsed. Much bigger fires than WTC7.

but muh basement fire

If you think that fire reached anywhere near 3000 degrees you're retarded.

Yes goyim, just look at the two towers, focus ONLY on the two towers, ignore the fact that part of the complex is being very obviously imploded in a planned, controlled operation

He's right. That and there were gas lines and plenty of heat pocket spaces throughout the buildings ventilation.

Let's say it can, let's say the plane completely severed the building up on the 95th floor.
If you still believe 15-odd damaged floors can collapse, pile drive and obliterate the remaining 90 undamaged floors that's your choice user.

Engineers have already debunked all these conspiracy theories.

I can fap to this

Not a controlled demolition at all goyim. Move along

Non conspiracy-fag here

But came someone explain how the wings seem to cut through the exterior steel without exploding on impact?

Wouldn't the whole plane explode on impact? It seems like it cuts through the exterior steel and explodes inside the building?

Your comprehension skills are low mate, I had a viddy to see what you're on about and the guy is saying building seven was in freefall for at least the first 2 seconds, then encountered resistance.

It was mostly glass windows on the exterior.

youtube.com/watch?v=j-_WYHwUtcI

so freaky

Wasn't the WTC buildt with exterior Steel?

Pic related

what about the pentagon?
what about the other plane that didn't reach it's target and crushed into a field?

yes... just look at the 2towers that fell... you're a good boy!

(((Democrat))) national security is about as effective as (((Republican))) national security friendo. They just haven't had a reason to blow up any more landmarks just yet.

You're literally a retarded faggot kike normie if you believe that the two parties actually have any difference in goals outside of their rhetoric.

...

How?

HOW?

Buildings are mostly hollow.
Planes are mostly hollow.
The fuel is further back in the plane.
It takes a second for fuel to explode.

If would be far more bizarre if the plane exploded as its tip touched.

...

The field plane had a movie made about it, seems like a bad way of making people forget it.

>he argued with the insurers for double the amount as two planes struck

Oy fucking vey you can't make this shit up

You understand that there's a difference between a building which's exterior is mainly made of glass and the solid concrete block in the picture you posted?

More US ships were sunk in WW2 by Japanese kamikaze pilots then by conventional means. Those were very light planes that purposely carried little to no fuel that were able to destroy heavily armored targets.

>he argued with the insurers for double the amount as two planes struck
kek. Once a jew, always a jew

Buildings ARE designed to collapse a certain way in the inevitable event of a collapse because (DING DING DING) you guessed it buildings are designed to last forever. A rock isn't designed to collapse.

24/7

It was. 50% of the towers load was supported by its steel exterior to allow for pillarless, open floors

So if ships that were designed for taking 150mm shells and torpedoes were able to be sunk by a 2,360 kg Japanese zero with little to no jet fuel could sink armored warships then I don't find it surprising that a 333,400 kg could go through a weak steel exterior and glass windows.

>not a single spark until the plane was well and truly buried into the steel structure.

who said gwb pulled off the whole thing?
dummies love to think the president is running the whole show, and in charge of every decision ever.

Absolutely true but only if you fill that ship with tons of explosives and fuel before the hit