WHAT CAUSED THIS CRATER WITHIN WTC6?
this hole was blown virtually in synch with the aircraft collision into the south tower.
these are photos that i don't recall ever getting any significant air in the media.
were there explosives used to demolish buildings in the WTC complex of buildings?
the damage to this building would seem to be prima facie evidence that there was explosive-induced demolition involving WTC 6.
for the pix, go here
http://www.911studies.com./911photostudies120.htm
these are photos that i don't recall ever getting any significant air in the media.
were there explosives used to demolish buildings in the WTC complex of buildings?
the damage to this building would seem to be prima facie evidence that there was explosive-induced demolition involving WTC 6.
for the pix, go here
http://www.911studies.com./911photostudies120.htm
posted by albertchampion at 3:57 PM
5 Comments:
You're kidding, right?
You have a ground level photo that you claim was taken at the time of the first plane strike but there are no time stamps or other apparent proof to back that up. The photo shows a huge dust cloud that looks remarkably like the dust cloud created by the collapse of the south tower. The cloud appears to be wrapping around the north tower and proceeding west toward the river. THERE IS NO EVIDENCE THAT THE CRATER IN WTC6 WAS CREATED AT THIS TIME. Or that the dust cloud originated at WTC6. The next photo is an aerial photo clearly taken AFTER both towers had collapsed. Yet the idea that debris from the collapsing north tower, which was directly next to WTC6, could have fallen onto WTC6 creating the 'mystery crater' is not even entertained. Why not? Well, because it doesn't fit your narrative that some mysterious unknown group of demolition experts apparently wired half of lower Manhattan with demolition explosives without a single individual noticing that their office space was being torn apart and mined with explosives around them.
You're a real lunatic.
Gee, AC, I wonder which part of the assministration is paying al coa. It's hard to think anybody could be that stupid and manage to find out how to post a comment.
Gee MK, that's about the caliber response I expect to receive on this blog. Some name calling and a reference to being on the government payroll.
How about refuting the point that there is no evidence that the crater in WTC6 (of which there are smaller but similar ones in WTC5) was caused by anything other than debris from the collapse of WTC1 which stood directly next to it. Ironically, WTC7 stood across the street from WTC6. It's no stretch of the imagination to consider that tons of debris crashed down onto the roof of WTC6 as Tower 1 was collapsing and that tons of debris also hit the south side of WTC7 causing similar collapses.
But I don't expect you to think. A few pathetic insults are easier. So don't strain yourself.
the crater in WTC 6 was blown before the collapse of the south tower.
at least an hour earlier.
the crater in WTC 6 was blown before the collapse of the south tower.
Then why does Jack White's 'photo analysis' of the crater utilize a photo that was taken after both towers had collapsed? Where are the photos of the crater in WTC6 prior to the collapse of the north tower. His entire 'photo analysis of the WTC is a joke.
Just because you say the crater existed doesn't make it so. And just because you can link a bunch of circumstantial information doesn't a conspiracy make.
Sorry, you're just to laughable at this point. Any further commentary at this point is useless I see.
Post a Comment
<< Home