5 votes

Does New Footage of WTC 7's Collapse Disprove Controlled Demolition Theory?

http://911debunkers.blogspot.com/2008/11/does-new-footage-of...

This is a great example of the debunking of those who try to debunk 9/11 Truth. Debunking of 9/11 kookery(no planes, no planes hitting the Pentagon, laser weapons) is great, but the debunkers can't explain away the critical elements of the government's official conspiracy theory.



Trending on the Web

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

Sorry, but had to down-vote

First, I'm not sure what I'm supposed to be seeing in this "new footage" that's meant to change my opinion one way or another.

Even so how do we know this video hasn't been altered? After all there are some who like to demonstrate their skill at fakery because apparently (in their minds) it proves their version of what happened on 9/11 is correct. Example: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k8VAsoVuShM

Personally I believe the best argument against the official report of events that day so far come from Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth. I like that they try to take a non-subjective scientific approach in analyzing the situation.

If men are good, you don't need government; if men are evil or ambivalent, you don't dare have one.

I was presenting an example

I was presenting an example of a supposed debunking debunked by a 9/11 Truther. If you read the post, you would have understood.

I did read the post and I

I did read the post and I don't understand it either. Explain it please, like we are 2 years old..

If you disagree with me on anything you are not a real libertarian...

It looks like

it fell onto its own footprint to me, but hey what do I know?

“When a well-packaged web of lies has been sold gradually to the masses over generations, the truth will seem utterly preposterous and its speaker a raving lunatic.” – Dresden James

the wording of your post is a

the wording of your post is a bit confusing (debunking debunkers truth kookery bunk what the hell)
...What are you trying to say? BTW, this is not new footage of WTC7..

I think what I wrote is very

I think what I wrote is very clear. This is an example of the debunking of so called debunking of 9/11 Truth. That's all. I had seen a post on another thread trying to debunk 9/11 Truth, and I found a great link that debunks the so called debunking.

after re-reading it several

after re-reading it several more times, I basically started to understand what you were saying....the problem was the double,triple negatives started to break my brain. The pejorative terms "truther" "debunker" "conspiracy theorist" etc, are too ridiculous IMO....for me, there is the truth, and then there are lies (aka official story) .....sorry if my post came across poorly. To answer your original question, I have been to "debunking" sites at various times during research sessions through the years, but to go to any of them with any regularity would be a form of masochism...peace

At this point....

If you don't believe that totally corrupt humans with this much power would do anything to stay in power, you are a delusional fool.

Your part of the problem.

Natural Order

Where are the debunkers?

Where are the debunkers?