Building #7 (suspect, military, terrorist, money)

[Thaskateguy]

Originally Posted by Mightyqueen801

So to be clear, it's not that there is no report, as your OP claimed, it's that you don't agree with the ones that are out there.

I am troubled by your "they". There seems to be some kind of idea that "the government" did all the recovery of the debris, examination, investigation and analysis without the input of other agencies and experts.

As far as I know, the videos of the collapse of Building 7 are from the north side. I could be wrong about that. But I always caution people not to base their beliefs on video alone. I was in the WTC on 9/11, and when I watch the videos of the day, they look almost like cartoons. There is so much you do not see. For example, have you ever watched the Naudet bros film of the first plane hitting the north tower? It looks as if it smoothly glides in and parks itself there. You can barely discern the movement of the building, yet anyone who was inside can tell you the impact was so hard that we thought we were going over sideways. People at their desks found themselves on the floor. I was walking at the moment of impact and suddenly I was falling to the side and barely kept my balance. The ceiling started to crumble and fall, fire was blasting out of nearby a elevator shaft, at least two of the "cattle car" express elevators that were on the 44th floor skylobby filled with burning jet fuel and dropped to the B-levels filled with burning, screaming human beings and when they hit their terminus (B-3, I believe) spewing out the burning dead, the fireball shot through the lobby, burning people alive (some of the burn victims did not die for a month or more, however, including a friend of mine who was in the T1 lobby and who died in late October), the glass entrance at West Street shattered and decapitated/sliced to death the people who were standing immediately outside, and the fireball shattered the glass in the revolving doors on the east side of the T1 lobby, killing anyone who happened to be inside the doors at the moment and shot through the Concourse. You don't see any of that on the video.

If you were there, what is your take on the explosions in the basement that rocked the building just prior to the plane hitting? The explosion that blew people across the room, and blew out all the windows. ---Reports are not facts. sorry to say. they are often swayed by the people either doing the reports, or by those paying for them.

[Mightyqueen801]

Originally Posted by jtur88

I have not made much of a study of all this, but one thing bothered me. The two main towers fell exactly as though it had been a controlled demolition. In other words, straight down. Why is it necessary to go to so much trouble to get everything exactly in synch in a controlled demolition, if a building normally falls that way anyway?

Controlled demolitions work as they do, because all weight-bearing points of the building have synchronized destabilization. Who synchronized the destabilization of all the support points in the WTC towers, to keep it from tipping over on its side instead of falling vertically?

The heat would have to have been exactly uniform through an entire transverse cross-section of the building, in order to melt all the steelwork to a fail point simultaneously. Or else, it wouldn't have to be, and then controlled demolition is a bogus science.

Not really. The collapse started from the impact points. A controlled demolition would have been more controlled. The towers were designed to fall that way should it ever have had to be taken down at the end of its useful life. It is unlikely it would have ever fallen vertically, although that is certainly what it felt like it was going to do at first.

Even in the stairs down where I was right after impact (40's) you could hear that the steel didn't sound normal. That was scaring me the most at the time. It was sort of shrieking one way and not coming back, and you could tell we were leaning. The steel usually made a back-and-forth groaning noise--the best comparison I can think of is the sound effects when Charlton Heston is a slave on the galley ship in Ben Hur--the loudness depended upon how windy it was on any given day.

[Thaskateguy]

Originally Posted by Mightyqueen801

You need to speak with people who were there. FDNY will do, as there were hundreds there. I know a few people (engineers) who were there and say it was obvious that the corner at the front was buckling. Also, I've noticed that some people put a weird twist put on the fall of building 7 that it "suddenly" fell. It was expected to collapse for five hours or so before it actually did, and the news kept saying that all day. There was nothing sudden about it. If you recall, they also thought the Milennium Hilton might collapse, but it didn't. It was found to be stable enough to repair, and it was. I wonder if it had fallen if there would have been stories about that, too. St. Nicholas Church was crushed to smithereens, but oddly, there's no conspiracy theory stories about that one.

If you have any interest, this PBS site has some good photos of all the buildings that were affected that day, both within the WTC complex and outside of it. You click on the numbers.

America Rebuilds: A Year at Ground Zero . Assessing Buildings | PBS

Thanks for your thoughts on the matter.

[Mightyqueen801]

Originally Posted by Thaskateguy

If you were there, what is your take on the explosions in the basement that rocked the building just prior to the plane hitting? The explosion that blew people across the room, and blew out all the windows. ---Reports are not facts. sorry to say. they are often swayed by the people either doing the reports, or by those paying for them.

Not sure what windows in the B-levels you are referring to. I know WHO you are referring to, but the story of the three electricians I spoke with who were a level below Willie and witnessed the express elevators explode out their human contents when they hit bottom seems to explain an "explosion". A contractor I know who was on B-5 said the first thing he remembers is a sound like someone dropping a piece of machinery above him.

I also have never heard a satisfactory answer as to how Willie Rodriguez, underground, knows when the plane hit 500 feet above him or that it was before he heard the explosion. I was on the 43rd floor. I didn't know a plane had hit us. I know a few people who worked higher up (I worked in the 70's) who actually saw the plane coming toward the building, but most people didn't know exactly what had just happened. I just knew whatever it was, it was far worse than 1993, when the building just shook.

[Thaskateguy]

Originally Posted by Mightyqueen801

Not really. The collapse started from the impact points. A controlled demolition would have been more controlled. The towers were designed to fall that way should it ever have had to be taken down at the end of its useful life. It is unlikely it would have ever fallen vertically, although that is certainly what it felt like it was going to do at first.

Even in the stairs down where I was right after impact (40's) you could hear that the steel didn't sound normal. That was scaring me the most at the time. It was sort of shrieking one way and not coming back, and you could tell we were leaning. The steel usually made a back-and-forth groaning noise--the best comparison I can think of is the sound effects when Charlton Heston is a slave on the galley ship in Ben Hur--the loudness depended upon how windy it was on any given day.

OK, I must go dig up my info. I don't want to work off memory. But I saw the damage on the first floor, (Video, not in person) and listened to the interview with the Fireman that was blown down the hallway from the blast in the basement. Several other people were interviewed, and reported the same thing. All before hearing the plane explode, high above them.--- which by the way, that fire ball we all saw was it's fuel supply. When fuel cells rupture and explode like that, all the fuel explodes, hence the fireball. Do we really think some just doesn't explode, but just runs down the building. I fought a Naphtha tank explosion, and everything goes up at once. There is no liquid fuel left to drain down anywhere. ---but we are off topic. Building #7 was not hit, and was ordered pulled, due to "so many deaths already, we just decided to pull it" --Not one steel framed building has ever collapsed any where in the world, due to fires, that often last for days. but with no collapse. Wood, plastic and paper don't get hot enough to melt steel. Does you skillet melt?

[Mightyqueen801]

[quote=Thaskateguy;11548504]If you were there, what is your take on the explosions in the basement that rocked the building just prior to the plane hitting? The explosion that blew people across the room, and blew out all the windows. ---Reports are not facts. sorry to say. they are often swayed by the people either doing the reports, or by those paying for them.[/quote]

I can agree with that. In the end, I believe the structural failure happened as it did because I work with a lot of professional engineers who are not government employees, who worked at Ground Zero for the nine months after on the recovery, who examined the structural elements at Fresh Kills and contributed to NIST's investigation, and who know that there was no evidence of explosives in the debris. They can explain the global collapse in laymen's terms, and it makes sense.

Most of these men and women were in the WTC themselves that day, and lost friends and colleagues. One lost his police officer son. They are not going to participate in a cover-up for the Bush administration, trust me.

Most of them shrug off or just laugh at the conspiracy theories, but I had a discussion years ago with one of them when the first "controlled demolition" websites started to proliferate--the kind that includes lengthy "physics calculations". He said he looked at the site and that it would be very convincing to someone who didn't know the details of the structure of the WTC and hadn't seen the steel afterward. Said that someone went to a great deal of trouble to create the information on the site to make it sound plausible.

As for me, who is not an engineer but worked with them and at the WTC for 19 years and knows something about building operations and contracting at the buildings, I've yet to find someone who can come up with a plausible explanation of how the sabotage was conducted, demonstrating knowledge of the security protocols for contractors working in the WTC for example. I know that as far back as 1985 we received warnings about possible sabotage to the mechanical equipment rooms by ME terrorist groups posing as engineering students asking for tours, and I know how much security changed after 1993. (If you recall, in the late 80's it was recommended that the parking garages be closed due to bomb threats. They weren't, and we all know the results.) After '93, we couldn't get a pizza delivery guy up to the office floors, let alone allow contractors access to restricted areas without background checks and escorts. There were cameras everywhere linked to the security control center that contained banks of CCTV screens. You couldn't scratch your ass in front of an elevator without it being taped.

I'm not saying anything is impossible. However, some people seem to have an idea that a group of black ops guys dressed in hardhats could have somehow strolled into one of the most high-security non-governmental buildings in the world and started cutting columns and placing charges without being recorded or seen or leaving a paper trail, and offer no detailed explanation as to how it was done. Something like that was probably the most-expected security-breech scenario ever thought of.

[Thaskateguy]

So what do you know of the building being shut down weeks prior to 9/11 for security up grades. Various floors, closed off, with heavy construction being heard by many employees. Then groups of people warned not to come in to work on that fateful day. ---These are not facts, but lead me to ask questions. After Kennedy, King, and Bobby, I trust no one.

[Thaskateguy]

Building 7

The September 11th Attack

Building 7 (also known as WTC 7) was a 47-story skyscraper that stood on the block immediately north of the block that contained the rest of the World Trade Center complex. Building 7 was shrouded in secrecy. Then-Mayor Rudolph Giuliani had a bunker on the 23rd floor.
Fires

[SIZE=-1] Photographs of Building 7 prior to its collapse show only small areas of fire. [/SIZE] Building 7 was not hit by any aircraft, and apparently did not suffer massive damage from the violent destruction of either of the Twin Towers. Small fires were observed in a few different parts of the building prior to its "collapse." Most of the fires were barely visible, and were not hot enough to cause window breakage, at least on the north side of the tower, of which there are photos shortly before the collapse. The largest observed fires were the ones visible on the southeast wall shown in the photograph.
Evacuation

Building 7 was supposedly evacuated around 9 AM. The area around the building was evacuated in the hour before the collapse. Photographer Tom Franklin, who took the famous photograph of firemen raising the American flag, said:
Firemen evacuated the area as they prepared for the collapse of Building Seven. [SIZE=-1] 1 [/SIZE]
There are no photographs that show large fires in Building 7. Tom Franklin did not take any photos of the building before heeding firemen's orders to evacuate the area. Had there been large fires, one would expect that the professional photographer would have documented them.
Destruction

Building 7 underwent a total structural collapse at 5:20 PM. [SIZE=-1] [/SIZE][SIZE=-1]2 [/SIZE] Although there were few people in the area to witness its destruction, several videos captured the event. Like the collapses of the Twin Towers, the collapse of Building 7 commenced suddenly and was over in seconds. At first the penthouse, which rests on central columns, began to drop. Within a second the entire building began to drop as a whole, falling into its footprint in a precisely vertical fashion. The destruction of Building 7, which is not explained by the official theory, looked exactly like a standard controlled demolition.
[SIZE=-1] In under seven seconds Building 7 was transformed from a skyscraper to a tidy rubble pile. [/SIZE] It is commonly believed that "ancillary damage" from the collapses of the Twin Towers led to the collapse of WTC 7. In fact Building 7 was separated from the North Tower by Building 6 and Vesey Street. A photograph of its north facade taken in the afternoon shows isolated small fires, and not even a single window was broken.
References

[SIZE=-1] 1. Getting the photo of a lifetime, arlingtoncemetary.net, 9/13/01 [cached]
2. September 11: Chronology of terror, CNN.com, 9/12/01
[/SIZE]

[SIZE=-2]page la[/SIZE]

[Thaskateguy]

http://www.prisonplanet.com/images/december2004/121204BREAKING.gif (broken link)
http://www.prisonplanet.com/images/december2004/121204MARTIAL.gif (broken link)
http://www.prisonplanet.com/images/may2005/Banner_MLIR_190.gif (broken link)
http://www.prisonplanet.com/images/december2004/121204pptv2.gif (broken link)
http://www.prisonplanet.com/images/december2004/121204INFOWARSNET.gif (broken link)
http://www.prisonplanet.com/images/december2004/121204NETWORK.gif (broken link)
[LEFT]http://www.prisonplanet.com/images/january2006/050106silverstein2.jpg (broken link)[/LEFT]
[LEFT]Silverstein Answers WTC Building 7 Charges
Says "pull it" meant to evacuate firefighters, but there were no firefighters in the building[/LEFT]
[LEFT]Paul Joseph Watson | January 5 2006[/LEFT]
[LEFT]After nearly two years of steadfast silence, Silverstein Properties have finally responded to questions about what Larry Silverstein meant when he told a PBS documentary that WTC Building 7 was "pulled" in the late afternoon of September 11 2001.[/LEFT]
[LEFT]Building 7 occupied a city block immediately north of the World Trade Center complex. Photos taken minutes before its collapse show small fires on two or three floors. Building 7 became only the third steel building in history before or since 9/11 to collapse from fire damage. The other two were the North and South towers of the World Trade Center.[/LEFT]
[LEFT]Any building that was not owned by Silverstein Properties strangely remained upright.[/LEFT]
[LEFT]Photo and video evidence of the collapse shows classic indications of a controlled demolition. The standard 'crimp' in the center-left top of the building and the subsequent 'squibs' of smoke as it collapses clearly represent explosive demolition.[/LEFT]
[LEFT]Even Dan Rather, commenting on the collapse for CBS News said that the collapse was, "reminiscent of those pictures we’ve all seen too much on television before, where a building was deliberately destroyed by well placed dynamite to knock it down.”[/LEFT]
[LEFT]http://www.prisonplanet.com/images/january2006/050106seven2.jpg (broken link)[/LEFT]
[LEFT]Click here for Alex Jones' video analysis of the collapse of Building 7.[/LEFT]
[LEFT]Questions about the highly suspicious nature of the building's collapse remained comparatively muted until January 2004, when a PBS documentary, America Rebuilds, originally broadcast in September 2002, received attention across the Internet.[/LEFT]
[LEFT]The documentary was made infamous for one comment made by Larry Silverstein on the subject of 9/11. Silverstein states, "I remember getting a call from the, er, fire department commander, telling me that they were not sure they were gonna be able to contain the fire, and I said, "We've had such terrible loss of life, maybe the smartest thing to do is pull it. And they made that decision to pull and we watched the building collapse."[/LEFT]
[LEFT]Click here to watch the clip.[/LEFT]
[LEFT]We know that the term 'pull it' means to bring the building down by means of explosives because in the same documentary a cleanup worker (in December 2001) refers to the demolition of WTC Building 6 when he says, "...we're getting ready to pull the building six." The term is industry jargon for planned demolition.[/LEFT]
Click here to listen to the clip.
For the following year and a half the Internet and alternative talk radio was aflame with talk of Building 7 and Silverstein's apparent admission. For many it is now the central issue of 9/11.
http://www.prisonplanet.com/images/january2006/050106seven1.jpg (broken link)
In June 2005 this website reported Silverstein's only response to date. It was an ambiguous comment made to New York Post journalist Sam Smith. Silverstein told Smith that he "meant something else" by the "pull it" comment but mysteriously refused to elaborate any further.
Silverstein Properties have finally provided a detailed explanation of what Silverstein meant when he said Building 7 was pulled.
The State Department, as part of its pathetic efforts to debunk 9/11 research, has posted the response from Silverstein's spokesperson Dara McQuillan on its website.
Bear in mind that the State Department said that China's organ trade was a conspiracy theory even though the State Department itself put out a report on how China harvests organs from executed prisoners on a different area of its website.
The response reads as follows.
Seven World Trade Center collapsed at 5:20 p.m. on September 11, 2001, after burning for seven hours. There were no casualties, thanks to the heroism of the Fire Department and the work of Silverstein Properties employees who evacuated tenants from the building.
The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) conducted a thorough investigation of the collapse of all the World Trade Center buildings. The FEMA report concluded that the collapse of Seven World Trade Center was a direct result of fires triggered by debris from the collapse of WTC Tower 1.
In the afternoon of September 11, Mr. Silverstein spoke to the Fire Department Commander on site at Seven World Trade Center. The Commander told Mr. Silverstein that there were several firefighters in the building working to contain the fires. Mr. Silverstein expressed his view that the most important thing was to protect the safety of those firefighters, including, if necessary, to have them withdraw from the building.
Later in the day, the Fire Commander ordered his firefighters out of the building and at 5:20 p.m. the building collapsed. No lives were lost at Seven World Trade Center on September 11, 2001.
http://www.prisonplanet.com/images/january2006/050106silverstein.jpg (broken link)
The State Department website then comments,
As noted above, when Mr. Silverstein was recounting these events for a television documentary he stated, “I said, you know, we've had such terrible loss of life. Maybe the smartest thing to do is to pull it.” Mr. McQuillan has stated that by “it,” Mr. Silverstein meant the contingent of firefighters remaining in the building.
The insurmountable problem with this explanation of Silverstein's statement is that there were no firefighters inside WTC 7.
Dr. Shyam Sunder, of the National Institutes of Standards and Technology (NIST), which investigated the collapse of WTC 7, is quoted in Popular Mechanics (9/11: Debunking the Myths, March, 2005) as saying: "There was no firefighting in WTC 7."
The FEMA report (http://www.fema.gov/library/wtcstudy.shtm - broken link) on the collapses, from May, 2002, also says about the WTC 7 collapse: "no manual firefighting operations were taken by FDNY."
And an article by James Glanz in the New York Times on November 29, 2001 says about WTC 7: "By 11:30 a.m., the fire commander in charge of that area, Assistant Chief Frank Fellini, ordered firefighters away from it for safety reasons."

Some defenders of the official 9/11 story say that the term "pull" is not demolition lingo for "bring down by controlled demolition". However, the same PBS video in which Silverstein makes his admission, contains the following exchange:

(unidentified construction worker): "Hello? Oh, we're getting ready to pull building six." Luis Mendes, NYC Dept of Design and Construction: "We had to be very careful how we demolished building six. We were worried about the building six coming down and then damaging the slurry walls, so we wanted that particular building to fall within a certain area."
But even this argument is beside the point. The building's collapse had all the hallmarks of controlled demolition.
Silverstein's explanation, after two years of stonewalling, that "pull it" meant to withdraw the firefighters is a lie. There were no firefighters in the building for hours before the building's collapse.
http://www.prisonplanet.com/images/january2006/050106seven3.jpg (broken link)
So what did Larry Silverstein mean when he stated: "I said, 'You know, we've had such terrible loss of life, may be the smartest thing to do is, is pull it. And they made that decision to pull and then we watched the building collapse." He could not have meant that they should "pull" the firefighters from the building because there weren't any firefighters in the building, at least according to FEMA, NIST, and Frank Fellini, the Assistant Chief responsible for WTC 7 at that time. And if he meant "pull the firefighters" then why did he say "pull it", with no reference to anything other than the building? The argument that "pull" is not used to mean "demolish" a building is belied by the other footage in the PBS documentary. And consider the timing: "they made that decision to pull and then we watched the building collapse." Could it really be possible that some (nonexistent) fire brigade was removed from the building and just at that moment ("then") the building collapsed? Is there really any doubt here about what Silverstein meant?

The only reasonable conclusion is that Larry Silverstein's statement is an admission that WTC 7 was brought down by a controlled demolition, meaning that the official version of what happened to WTC 7 is false, and casting serious doubt on the official story that terrorists of a foreign origin destroyed the twin towers, as well as on the rest of the official account of 9/11. Note that this admission is a statement against Silverstein's own interests (putting him at odds with the official version of events and potentially jeopardizing his insurance claims). Such statements are given great weight as a matter of law.
In February of 2002 Silverstein Properties won $861 million from Industrial Risk Insurers to rebuild on the site of WTC 7. Silverstein Properties' estimated investment in WTC 7 was $386 million. This building's collapse alone resulted in a profit of about $500 million.
[LEFT]How concerned should we be therefore that Silverstein Properties bought the lease from MetLife for Chicago's Sears Tower in March 2004?[/LEFT]
[LEFT]The length of time that it took Silverstein to respond to these charges and the fact that his eventual rebuttal does not correspond with the facts only gives us more grounds for skepticism.[/LEFT]
[LEFT]A real, thorough, impartial, independent investigation of the collapse of Building 7 needs to take place and if the conclusions of that investigation are that Building 7 was professionally demolished, criminal charges need to be brought against those suspected of involvement.[/LEFT]
[LEFT]---------------------------------[/LEFT]
[LEFT]Thanks to our anonymous reader who contributed to this article.[/LEFT]
[LEFT]---------------------------------[/LEFT]
[LEFT]Related: Professional Demolition of World Trade Center Building 7[/LEFT]
[LEFT]Related: Clips from Alex Jones' Martial Law video which details the controlled demolition of both Building 7 and the twin towers.[/LEFT]
[LEFT]Related: Police Found Suspected Bombs In WTC On 9/11[/LEFT]
[LEFT]Related: WTC7.net the hidden story of Building 7[/LEFT]
[LEFT]http://www.prisonplanet.com/images/november2005/261105subscribe.jpg (broken link)[/LEFT]

[Thaskateguy]

As I say, I have no facts, only questions. I guess it depends on who you choose to believe. I think it should be easier, if the facts are not manipulated. Everybody should have the same story, but they don't.