Comments by "Old Guy Gaming Network" (@CRAZYHORSE19682003) on "Weird stuff that happened around the Twin Towers leading up to 9/11" video.

You would be wrong, I was an eyewitness to the attack on the Pentagon as I was stuck in morning traffic coming into DC from Virginia that day.
8
So what, Building 7 WAS his by THOUSANDS of tons of falling debris from the towers. It has a 22 story gouge taken out of the NE corner. A prominent bulge appeared almost instantly in the SW corner of the building indicating the support structure was compromised. Simply put the building NEARLY collapsed from being hit by all the falling debris. I am also sure you are unaware the building seven was built over and around an existing building, the ConEd power substation. It used a complicates system of trusses around the substation and everything above the 6th floor was supported by ONLY THREE columns. The loss of one of them would have caused the building to collapse. I am also sure you are unaware that the building was 12 feet LONGER than the blueprints called for and the building was NOT redesigned to accommodate for the increased size. That building was so flimsy, it should have NEVER passed code and been allowed to be built but somehow it was.
8
@guitarplaya903 It is hilarious when people parrot stuff they heard on the internet without ever bothering to see if it was true. Most of WTC 7 ended up across the street piled up against the Verizon building doing significant damage to it.
5
@ShawnKennedy-w2i If you think that is the case than I would say your powers of observation and attention to detail are totally missing. The collapses of the two buildings couldn't have been any different.
5
Except they didn't, the energy discharged into the building on impact was dam near enough to make them collapse but it was the fire that weakened the remaining support structure enough that caused the buildings to fail. Fun fact, if you heat steel to just 1000 degrees it loses 50% of its tensile strength. If you heat it to 1500 degrees and it loses 90% of its strength. The only people who don't think the buildings would collapse because of the aircraft impacts are those not that versed on physics.
3
@17nussbaumroad The aircraft was in a dive and as it got close to the ground the wing in ground effect took over. There were tons of cameras operating just not pointing at the impact sight. If you had ever toured the Pentagon before 9/11 you would know that the security was at the entrances and inside the building.
2
They did not, it was planes and FIRE that brought them down. Google The Towers Lost And Beyond to read a series of essays written by MIT civil engineers. They give a very good explanation as to why the towers failed.
1
The thermite claim was made by wacko's who have no clue what they are talking about.
1
@joeyledbetter What sparks?
1
Funny, there was not ONE SHREAD of proof that explosives were used on 9/11. Protec, one of the largest demolition companies was contracted to clean up ground zero. They wrote an article that during the cleanup they found no evidence that explosives were used and they take down buildings with explosives all the time.
1
@timcarr6401 The whole missile thing came from an eyewitness who said the plane went towards the Pentagon like a cruise missile. Conspiratards heard this and thats all they say missile!!!!
1
As to the put options, it is true that happened but it is also just as likely as those with ties to Al Quaida are the ones placed the put options. American and United were not the only Airlines hit with massive put options, British Airways was also had massive put options placed on them on Sep 7th.
1
@Starfleet2269 That and the moon landings were fake. Conspiracy theories have one thing in common, the room temperature IQ people who believe in them.
1