You aren't making sense to me. Of course nobody round the world had any interest in a random skyscraper (WTC7) in NY before 9/11 It was just an office building full of spooks.
I was researching the Oklahoma City event in my spare time when 9/11 happened. I can remember the feeling when WTC 7 and the Pentagon occurred and for a brief moment I thought all three were connected, but I didn't know how. Obviously everyone was distracted by WTC 1 & 2 for months afterwards; so was I. It took another year or so for me to clear my head. Now, I see almost any event in history, at least the ones the media and historians make a big fuss about as a false flag.
So far as that 2nd clip, Flight 175 came in from the other side. The explosion is blasting through the building. And that clip actually shows the plane incoming from the upper right...
Yeah, I saw the video elsewhere. It is BS. The length of the supposed missile is about the height of the Pentagon, which is 71 feet. There are no cruise missiles of that length today. There was also no indication of wings or stabilizers, which hints at how crappy the image was. The likelihood is that the camera was seeing a sun glare off the fuselage of the 767. It would help if you guys would actually study what you are pointing at.
Uh, maybe because they have had 'way too much experience being in structures that collapsed due to fire. Don't you realize that is what happens to buildings that are engulfed in fire?
The BBC preknowledge of WTC7 collapse was a major redpill for me. It ended the BBC for me,
She could have verified the building was standing by looking behind her!
Anyway the BBC has always been the most professional and most pernicious disinfo outfit the cabal had in the 20th century,
Total scum.
You aren't making sense to me. Of course nobody round the world had any interest in a random skyscraper (WTC7) in NY before 9/11 It was just an office building full of spooks.
This is the very thing that broke the 9/11 narrative to me.
Going to collapse ≠ has collapsed.
Can you give a timestamp? The video is about five hours long.
I was researching the Oklahoma City event in my spare time when 9/11 happened. I can remember the feeling when WTC 7 and the Pentagon occurred and for a brief moment I thought all three were connected, but I didn't know how. Obviously everyone was distracted by WTC 1 & 2 for months afterwards; so was I. It took another year or so for me to clear my head. Now, I see almost any event in history, at least the ones the media and historians make a big fuss about as a false flag.
Every shooting the media has focused on in the last 10 years is ALWAYS linked to the FBI. Hmmmmmm.
So far as that 2nd clip, Flight 175 came in from the other side. The explosion is blasting through the building. And that clip actually shows the plane incoming from the upper right...
Yeah, I saw the video elsewhere. It is BS. The length of the supposed missile is about the height of the Pentagon, which is 71 feet. There are no cruise missiles of that length today. There was also no indication of wings or stabilizers, which hints at how crappy the image was. The likelihood is that the camera was seeing a sun glare off the fuselage of the 767. It would help if you guys would actually study what you are pointing at.
Kazarian demon Silverstein said “pull it”
Uh, maybe because they have had 'way too much experience being in structures that collapsed due to fire. Don't you realize that is what happens to buildings that are engulfed in fire?
So what was important about #7 then? I'll dig around of course, but just curious if there are some common theories.
Glowies occupied building
On the surface this is the list of tenants:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_tenants_in_7_World_Trade_Center
The alphabets plus that cutthroat bank occupying most of the building definitely makes me scratch my head a little.
WTC 7 was a command HQ for several agencies and had been rebuilt only a few years before.
WTC7 completely blew my mind.
It's a condition known as the "Fox" syndrome