| Story Views | |
| Now: | |
| Last Hour: | |
| Last 24 Hours: | |
| Total: | |
Chechnya Skyscraper Engulfed By Fire, Does Not Collapse (Video)
Thursday, April 4, 2013 4:59
% of readers think this story is Fact. Add your two cents.
The new understanding of physics since September 11, 2001, that limited fire damage can cause buildings to implode at almost free fall speed into their own footprints, was confounded once again as a 40-storey skyscraper in Chechnya was engulfed with flames for hours yet did not collapse.
The blaze consumed an apartment building in Grozny, the Chechen capital yesterday evening before it was eventually put out in the early hours of Thursday morning. Fires burned on every single floor of the structure apart from the ground floor.
“According to the emergencies service, the blaze has damaged an area of more than 14,000 square meters. It has completely destroyed the plastic trimming used on the building’s exterior, but the interior remained untouched,” reports RIA Novosti.
9-11, whether you want to know it or think it or not, as tragic as it was, it was shady as hell. There is definately more to the story than the government wants us to know. -Mort
hang them…..
Mort, if you intend to be a professional writer, please learn to use spell check. For example, definitely, not “definately.”
Of course it didn’t collapse. Anybody with a brain knows that 9/11 was a big lie and they got away with it. Three different buildings collapsed in the same exact way. But one of the buildings was a entirely different structure and didn’t sustain the same damage as the towers. The two towers were the same, but damaged in different areas, but both collapsed in the same exact way. Too much of a coincidence. Totally unbelievable that Building 7 would have collapsed at all.
The WTC dissolved into nothingness and went skywards, not earthwards. Thus there was virtually no debris lying on the ground immediately after the event. Which is not the case if a building is blown up with explosives.
Dr. Judy Wood is the ONLY person with sufficient intelligence to point out this simple fact, it seems.
That being understood, this fire is in no way analogous to the WTC. Here we have the external plastic covering burning, which you can see happening if you look at the picture, and listen to what you are being told, instead of jumping to knee-jerk conclusions. The news agency tells us that the interior was entirely unburned.
Mort therefore needs to do a little more than simply checking his spelling.
That’s kuz they didn’t use about a third of a load of jet fuel in order to melt steel . . .
Such nonsense
Oh and likely there weren’t any thermite bombs inside either.
It was ONLY the outer material that caught fire and burned… The inside of the building is fire proof…
The outside material is very flammable because of fossil fuels and oils needed to make the material for coating the outside of the building…
Exactly…. 9/11 truthers will be ridiculed comparing this fire to 9/11 because of this one key point…
“It has completely destroyed the plastic trimming used on the building’s exterior, but the interior remained untouched,”
Im not saying 9/11 happened the way the ‘official story’ says, but to compare this incident to 9/11 is laughable.
Reprint my comment. I am reality. Plastic exterior? Give me a break. Who else do you know that was there, nobody apparently. You not zionist jewish, are you. Perhaps a touch oif freemasonry or an in with the NWO. reprint it. Be smart. I documented the preset back in 1969 you worm.
you can only pull the false flag garbage for so long cause more and more people start getting their eyes open. the evil just digs their own grave.