Article Image
News Link • 911 / World Trade Center

“BuildingWhat?” TV Ad

• BuildingWhat.org
 
 
What is “BuildingWhat?” A Worldwide Campaign to raise awareness of Building 7

More than eight years after the tragedy of September 11, 2001, New York Supreme Court Justice Edward H. Lehner was hearing arguments in a courtroom less than a mile from Ground Zero about a ballot initiative to launch a new investigation of the 9/11 attacks. When the lawyer for the plaintiffs sponsoring the initiative explained that the 9/11 Commission report left many unanswered questions, including “Why did Building 7 come down,” the Judge replied quizzically, “Building what?”

Like Judge Lehner, millions of people do not know or remember only vaguely that a third tower called World Trade Center Building 7 also collapsed on September 11, 2001. In any other situation, the complete, free fall collapse of a 47-story skyscraper would be played over and over on the news. It would be discussed for years to come and building design codes would be completely rewritten. So, why does no one know about Building 7? And why did Building 7 come down?

The answers to these questions have far-reaching implications for our society. The goal of the “BuildingWhat?” campaign is to raise awareness of Building 7 so that together we can begin to address these questions.

Thank you for visiting BuildingWhat.org.

What is Building 7?

Building 7 was a 47-story skyscraper and was part of the World Trade Center complex. Built in 1984, it would have been the tallest high-rise in 33 states in the United States. It collapsed at 5:20 pm on September 11, 2001. It was not hit by an airplane and suffered minimal damage compared to other buildings much closer to the Twin Towers.

Watch footage of Building 7 collapse:

Location of Building 7 in relation to the rest of the World Trade Center complex:

 

7 Comments in Response to

Comment by Mark Thompson
Entered on:

 I took everything at face value, at first.  Then I heard about the conspiracy "Wacko's". So I set out to prove them wrong.  The more I looked the more question's I had and the more obvious, I was being lied too!  I did not want to believe the conspiracy, but since then I have learned the Conspiracy is the "Offical story". Witnesses, with nothing to prove, give a different story, video's reveal explosion's at ground level; even news people reported ground level explosion's.  Now there are link's to the Mossad and at every turn is a Zionist Jew, from owning businesses, security, leases;  on and on.  For Pete's Sake! A majority of the 911 commissioner's say 911 should be reinvestigated. 

I know it sounds crazy to think my Government could do this. Well my Government didn't. Not MY GOVERNMENT!     

Comment by Anonymous
Entered on:

   In my previous comment below, I already warned you Truther not to present anything unless you understand what it is. Movies are the rationale of your fancy that are not only irrelevant but you don't even understand what the stories are all about. Read this again and if you still don't understand it, I am done with you: Entered on: 2010-09-12 08:58:24

     Truther, you entertain me with your latest comment as follows: Whoa!! Bakadude ... get a grip!  I didn't read your whole rant but I got the drift!  I suggest you watch "12 angry Men" with Henry Fonda again.  You are re-enacting Lee J. Cobb's part at the end of the movie.  He knew everything too .. right up to the end!” 

      You shocked me and at the same time you amused me to the hilt to know that you didn’t even understand the movie you are talking about.  Your disconnect from reality is so doltish I’m afraid it is incorrigible.

    What shocked me as almost unbelievable is this coincidence, believe it or not: I wrote a review of this 1957 movie in 1962 as a young student of Journalism on the subject of Literary Criticism. The plot of the story was the Jurors’ deliberation whether or not to find the boy defendant guilty of murder. In comparing this drama film directed by Sidney Lumet to the story of 911 directed by you, the defendant boy was the government whom all the imagining Jurors except Juror 8 [Henry Fonda] believed was guilty. The most radical guilty Juror of them all was Lee J. Cobb [Juror 3, guilty, guilty!].

       So from me, know this Truther: Since in 911 you and your kind are all imagining that the government was guilty, your role was that of Lee. J. Cobb, Juror 3. Don’t be convoluted and mess it up. My role -- if you want to know the sine qua non of the story -- was that of Henry Fonda, Juror 8 who maintained that the boy in the film [the government in your 911 story] was innocent.

        In the movie, the pivotal witness that turned the verdict into NOT GUILTY was a woman who cannot see unless she wears her eyeglasses. She testified she saw the murder took place. In the night of the murder, she was not wearing her eyeglasses.

        You and your kind cannot see unless you wear your eyeglasses. The day 911 terrorists struck, you were not wearing your eyeglasses. You did not see the terrorist-manned airlines rammed the Twin Towers structures and leveled them to the ground. Without your spectacles you couldn’t see an elephant in front of you. What you saw was a flying government striking the buildings! Your excuse and the excuse propounded by your kind claim that if indeed there were airplanes that struck the buildings, it was just a CAMERA TRICK!!! That’s why I insist that normal Americans neither buy this crap nor entertain this nonsense.

        In this important debate, please don’t present anything unless you understand what it is.  You get your grip of reality. And you better listen to the ring of knowledge [not “rant” as you messed and fouled it up] I wrote and I assure you that once you are reasonably informed, you will be fine.

Comment by Morpheus Titania
Entered on:

Bakadude:  how was it that BBC was able to predict building 7 had fallen 20 minutes prior to the actual collapse and did the actual report with building 7 in the background??  Come on man wake up, the official story has so many holes in it that 1281 architects and engineers have come forward to contest the official government coverup story.  Were it a movie like Iron Man you would expect to see a coverup so the population doesn't get scared.   What makes real life any different than a movie?  WAKE UP!

Comment by Anonymous
Entered on:

     Truther, you entertain me with your latest comment as follows: Whoa!! Bakadude ... get a grip!  I didn't read your whole rant but I got the drift!  I suggest you watch "12 angry Men" with Henry Fonda again.  You are re-enacting Lee J. Cobb's part at the end of the movie.  He knew everything too .. right up to the end!” 

 

     You shocked me and at the same time you amused me to the hilt to know that you didn’t even understand the movie you are talking about.  Your disconnect from reality is so doltish I’m afraid it is incorrigible.

    What shocked me as almost unbelievable is this coincidence, believe it or not: I wrote a review of this 1957 movie in 1962 as a young student of Journalism on the subject of Literary Criticism. The plot of the story was the Jurors’ deliberation whether or not to find the boy defendant guilty of murder. In comparing this drama film directed by Sidney Lumet to the story of 911 directed by you, the defendant boy was the government whom all the imagining Jurors except Juror 8 [Henry Fonda] believed was guilty. The most radical guilty Juror of them all was Lee J. Cobb [Juror 3, guilty, guilty!].

 

      So from me, know this Truther: Since in 911 you and your kind are all imagining that the government was guilty, your role was that of Lee. J. Cobb, Juror 3. Don’t be convoluted and mess it up. My role -- if you want to know the sine qua non of the story -- was that of Henry Fonda, Juror 8 who maintained that the boy in the film [the government in your 911 story] was innocent.

 

       In the movie, the pivotal witness that turned the verdict into NOT GUILTY was a woman who cannot see unless she wears her eyeglasses. She testified she saw the murder took place. In the night of the murder, she was not wearing her eyeglasses.

 

       You and your kind cannot see unless you wear your eyeglasses. The day 911 terrorists struck, you were not wearing your eyeglasses. You did not see the terrorist-manned airlines rammed the Twin Towers structures and leveled them to the ground. Without your spectacles you couldn’t see an elephant in front of you. What you saw was a flying government striking the buildings! Your excuse and the excuse propounded by your kind claim that if indeed there were airplanes that struck the buildings, it was just a CAMERA TRICK!!! That’s why I insist that normal Americans neither buy this crap nor entertain this nonsense.

 

       In this important debate, please don’t present anything unless you understand what it is.  You get your grip of reality. And you better listen to the ring of knowledge [not “rant” as you messed and fouled it up] I wrote and I assure you that once you are reasonably informed, you will be fine.

 

 

Comment by Steve A Truther
Entered on:

Whoa!! Bakadude ... get a grip!  I didn't read your whole rant but I got the drift!  I suggest you watch "12 angry Men" with Henry Fonda again.  You are re-enacting Lee J. Cobb's part at the end of the movie.  He knew everything too .. right up to the end! 

I would think you'd like this movie a lot because it's in BLACK AND WHITE!

Comment by American Insurgent
Entered on:

Typical Co-Intel-Pro 4chan Party Van response. Can't you lolGumment shit heads come up with something original for once after all these years.....?

Comment by Anonymous
Entered on:

      

      No use beating a dead horse. Why this 911 myth continues to live in the mind of anti-government radicals or remain on top of the agenda of a group of Leftists and Libertarian extremists and their allies – the anti-New World Order horsemen of the Apocalypse -- that want to create a new America without taxation, without a central bank [abolish the Federal Reserve [!]], and without a central regulatory authority called “the Government” that they believe interferes with the exercise of their individual freedom, does not really require the brain of rocket scientists to understand.  911 is fall of melodramatic opportunities to bash-in a hated government, and the enemy of the state from within and without would never let it go. That’s where the limelight is. That’s were they can ask a limitless number of doubting questions that feed into the insatiable hunger of a voracious Media for sensational news!

 

    However, no matter what they do, they cannot make a lie out of the truth that 911 was a terrorist attack against the United States in the name of Islamic Jihad. They cannot also make a truth out of their lie that it was the U.S. government who plotted and carried out the attacks, not by those murderous Jihadists from hell.

 

     Millions of questions they can ask everyday that insult the intelligence of the American public, but Americans are not mentally retarded to even pay attention to those craps.

 

     For example, were the people in the government remised in their responsibility to prevent the occurrence of 911 attacks? Yes, no doubt about it. To what extent this neglect or incompetence if you may, was, maybe to the highest degree of culpability. But it does not mean that because of their incompetence, they did it and that Osama bin Laden and his minions did not do it, as 911 myth theorists would like stupid Americans to believe their irresponsible juvenile conjuring.

 

     Similar truckload of questions were asked by government spoilers about the United States Armed Forces’ incompetence and the stupidity of our national security service for their failure to prevent the Japanese sneak attacks in Pearl Harbor.  But the American public will never be as stupid to admit the spoilers’ radical propaganda campaign against the government that in a conspiracy with the enemy similar to 911, it was the United States’ High Military Command that attacked Pearl Harbor, and not the Imperial Armed Forces of Japan. That similar to 911, what we saw in television footages of the Pearl Harbor attacks was just CAMERA TRICKS! This incredible innuendo insults the collective intelligence of the American people … it has a foul smell of treason that is so rotten leaving no doubt at all that it came from the rancid bowels of the earth.

 

     If Oswald did not kill Pres. Kennedy, who did? It does not mean that if Oswald didn’t do it, former Pres. Lyndon Johnson did it.  It does not mean that because the Warren Commission pointed to Oswald as the only lone assassin who carried out Pres. Kennedy’s murder, the Warren Commission had in fact ordered the bestial killing of Pres. Kennedy.  It does not mean that because Sen. Bobby Kennedy was New York’s most prominent radical activist, he was shot dead in the skull by the government, not shot by an enraged Sirhan Sirhan whose dream was to be “famous” in a very distorted way.

 

     The legends of Pearl Harbor and the murders of the Kennedys live forever, especially when the myth is kept alive in the name of anti-government activism. Like 911, millions of questions are asked everyday out of endless arrays of theories – mysterious and macabre alike. The more ghastly the assumptions are – that is the more delusional they are that fits in Stephen Kings’s mystery thrillers – the higher the command of media attention is.  But it’s all about the beating of a dead horse where the limelight falls as the curtains raise on the national stage of make-belief. If you are a Victorian Litterateur during my earlier halcyon days, you will immediately know that what we are dealing with is the present time’s Literature exemplar!

 


Join us on our Social Networks:

 

Share this page with your friends on your favorite social network:


Attorney For Freedom