Very new video WTC7 KINK

I mean how can be more obvious than this:



Lets face it this building was demolished point.

Piacenza I really admire your perseverance and your research, for me I have been on the CD from 9/11 itself, what opened the door for me was a comment by my wife when WTC 2 fell, she said, man they demolished the biulding and later on the pentagon "crash" I saw the footage and after being in an actual airliner accident myself I knew there was something fishy... 5 years ago, we believers of the conspiracy of 9/11, were mocked, insulted, ridiculed, you name it, and slowly the tides are turning, people who have been posting the inconsistencies in Youtube or other sites, or here in ATS, are bringing new perspectives so the majority of the population that has been brainwashed for ages, slowly, and painfully will realize that 9/11 was an inside job.

Even if you show the actual explosives planted in the building, the so called "debunkers" (that are nothing but brainwashed zombies that believe anything the media and the gov. tell them is true) will say they are anything but explosives and will go into long winded rants about, sidetrack and paralell explanations, and when cornered they will switch topics and declare they are being "attacked", typical tactics!

Now the video shows a perfect CD, its competely undisputable WTC7 was demolished to disapear all the data and documents in the building...In fact I think that the whole 9/11 was a plan to destroy that evidence and data and also to attack the pentagon and begin the war machine and two invasions. The towers of WTC were mere diversions (and good bussines to demolish them -ask Silverstein!)

thanks again Piacenza

Perhaps I'm being a bit dim, (but then I suppose you have to expect that from a "brainwashed zombie", thanks kix), but can you explain what exactly this poor quality video tells us about WTC 7 that all the other poor quality videos don't tell us?

Doesn't show much except the building is going down, course its already in the midst of going down in the video.

This video shows nothing new simply that the tower was demolished so it felt as a demolished building.
Exactly nothing new simply one more little piece of the puzzle.

Originally posted by piacenza
This video shows nothing new simply that the tower was demolished so it felt as a demolished building.
Exactly nothing new simply one more little piece of the puzzle.

How does this video prove that it was demolished?

Sorry, but I don't really see how this takes us any further forward down any path at all either pro or anti demolition.

It's a poor video showing nothing we haven't seen before If it showed something new or different it would be significant but it actually provides a worse view than some videos already in the public domain so I'm at a loss to understand how it can be another piece of the puzzle.

I am not going to explain what is new in this video if you cannot see it it means you dont wanna see it.
I give you a hint angle...

That's an interesting video, I haven't seen this at all. Face it Massive Steel Buildings should not come down like this due to a few fires that were unevenly spread in the building. Some people would rather believe that these buildings were made with balsa wood. Building 7 was a controlled demo, it is bizarre that so many people still go along with the offical story despite all the giant holes in the story.

Originally posted by piacenza
I am not going to explain what is new in this video if you cannot see it it means you dont wanna see it.
I give you a hint angle...

You ain't going to explain because you can't explain it. An angle? That don't conclude anything.

Originally posted by timeless test
Perhaps I'm being a bit dim, (but then I suppose you have to expect that from a "brainwashed zombie", thanks kix), but can you explain what exactly this poor quality video tells us about WTC 7 that all the other poor quality videos don't tell us?

You certainly raise a good point about all the videos of WTC7 being of very poor quality. On that day I would imagine hundreds of cameras pointed toward the WTC complex but I fond it strange that all videos of WTC7 uncovered are all of poor quality ..... wassup witdat?

Originally posted by piacenza
I am not going to explain what is new in this video if you cannot see it it means you dont wanna see it.
I give you a hint angle...

If you wish to create posts, you should provide at the very least some comments as to why you created a new topic in the first place.

If you expect others to blindly understand the jist of your own thinking, REFUSING to give commentary, such threads will be trashed by the moderator team.

Whatever it is, it sure as hell doesn't look like a natural collapse from fire-weakened steel and superficial damage to me.

Originally posted by BrokenVisage
Whatever it is, it sure as hell doesn't look like a natural collapse from fire-weakened steel and superficial damage to me.

Thats because nobody has ever seen a damaged, on fire steel weakening building collapse ever in history.

The thread is about a new WTC7 video.
What other explanation would you like me to add.
I see something new in this video which I did not see in any other videos.
The new thing its about how the building collapses which is different from other angles.
They way the building leans (don´t know if the spelling is correct) while the building collapes its totally new.
From this point of view you can actually see that the building not only collapses on its own footprint but that the left part actually leans towards the center (heavily) actually demonstrating the use of controlled demolition.
Sorry if you guys could not see it I tought it was blatant.

I agree with the mod, let's not be coy, piacenza.

As for the vid, it is a worthwhile addition to the body of evidence WTC7 was a CD.

What you have to understand is that modern steel-frame buildings simply don't give up their structural integrity like that, without a CD. They must have their column grids undermined in a carefully controlled manner.

So yes, the video shows that--the building simply collapses, disintegrating as it falls.

The structural integrity of such a bldg is not going to fail like that otherwise. These bldgs are not houses of cards people.

Very new video WTC7 KINK

Perhaps you meant link, but...
KINK - related to WTC7, this usually would mean, I would guess, the kink in the roofline profile, which is often used to show building fatigue pre-collapse and thus suggest NO demo. Unexpected anti-demo irony from Piacenza? No, your video doesn't even show the obvious kink, it just goes right to the collapse.
edit: Q answered
Just something ironic I noticed.

[edit on 7-5-2007 by Caustic Logic]

[edit on 7-5-2007 by Caustic Logic]

if anything it goes against your theory. you can see it falling at an angle torwards the corner that giant pieces of debris smashed into it. it also looks NOTHING like a controlled demo. if you want to see what a controlled demo actually looks like go to youtube and search for the landmark building demolition.

Originally posted by piacenza
The thread is about a new WTC7 video.
What other explanation would you like me to add.
I see something new in this video which I did not see in any other videos.
The new thing its about how the building collapses which is different from other angles.
They way the building leans (don´t know if the spelling is correct) while the building collapes its totally new.
From this point of view you can actually see that the building not only collapses on its own footprint but that the left part actually leans towards the center (heavily) actually demonstrating the use of controlled demolition.
Sorry if you guys could not see it I tought it was blatant.

this doesn't make sense. do you not get that giant pieces of debris from the other two collapses flew into the corner of the building? the lean would be because the corner that the pieces of debris smashed into would be the first part to collapse...again i say this video only further disproves your theory.

Angle eh?

Your onto something there mate. The light reflections on the windows seem to suggest the building fell at an angle (either towards or away from the camera), which would go against controlled demo.