Donkeys and Elephants and Delegates,oh my!
Check out the most popular
Emergency Official Witnessed Dead Bodies In WTC 7
prisonplanet.com — Exclusive video of emergency official Barry Jennings discussing explosions inside WTC 7 before either of the twin towers had collapsed and having to step over dead bodies of victims as he attempted to vacate the building has been released for the first time.
madwizard- 210 diggs
- digg it
- towne420, on 06/23/2008, -7/+78Keep on pushing, the truth will come out.
- Samwizen, on 06/23/2008, -8/+65There's an enormous amount of evidence and scientific proof that the 3 towers collapsed on 9/11 from something More than just impact damage & resulting fires.
- Herkimer56, on 06/23/2008, -31/+15Where? I've been asking you people to show us this alleged evidence for months and no one has shown even a shred of evidence to support your claim. There have been several university papers appear in engineering and scientific journals that detail that the buildings were brought down by impact damage and fire but so far nothing which supports your claim.
- card51short, on 06/23/2008, -6/+25you've been here for months asking people for evidence every day?
Why? Haven't you already proven to yourself that those who question 9/11 are with al Qaeda. Why are you still talking to us?
Weird... - stienster, on 06/23/2008, -6/+16HERE
http://www.psicounsel.com/CivilEngineeringJournal. ...- Hortnon, on 06/23/2008, -10/+9Just to humor me, describe what that document proves, and show me where the evidence is presented for each point.
Thanks.
- Hortnon, on 06/23/2008, -10/+9Just to humor me, describe what that document proves, and show me where the evidence is presented for each point.
- Becca4RonPaul, on 06/23/2008, -5/+11Herk, your game is denial. Just keep denying that there is evidence, no matter how much is shown to you, no matter how much surfaces, no matter how clear the implications. You are an agent of disinformation; everything you write is a transparent psy-op.
- Herkimer56, on 06/23/2008, -11/+9My game is the truth. Your game is the dissemination of lies. There is evidence, tons of it, and all of it proves your theories to be lies.
- card51short, on 06/24/2008, -4/+6"There is evidence, tons of it, and all of it proves your theories to be lies."
How could a theory be a lie? It could be wrong...but a lie?
- card51short, on 06/23/2008, -6/+25you've been here for months asking people for evidence every day?
- Piknik, on 06/23/2008, -7/+14You need to do some research for yourself. You need to go out and find things because they are well hidden by the powers that be it so.
Do some scouting, watch some documentaries, use common sense. Even with this article here, just put the pieces together. Explosions in building 7 before a plan even hit tower 1, or 2? Think about it.
This is responding to Herkimer56.- Hortnon, on 06/23/2008, -14/+8What do explosions prove?
- FelicityJones, on 06/24/2008, -5/+13That explosives were used. What part do you not get?
- inobla, on 06/24/2008, -10/+7No evidence of explosives were found in the debris, FelicityK. What part do you not get?
- card51short, on 06/24/2008, -4/+9you're right...didn't you read the BATF's 9/11 report in which they document their search for explosives in the rubble? Oh wait...there's no BATF 9/11 Report...err ummm...lets just ASSUME they did the search ;)
But...two passports WERE found! ;)
No questions here... - inobla, on 06/25/2008, -2/+4tard,
Do you know there were dozens of agencies and thousands of individuals other than the BATF involved in the search through that rubble? Do you know that forensics experts sifted through that ***** for months? Miles of detonation cord and tons of blasting cap remnants, among all the other CD fingerprints would be ***** obvious. It's not something you miss if you don't look for it.
http://cryptome.org/wtc-fk/wtc-freshkills-full.htm
(Courtesy of insane11)
If somebody gets electrocuted, do you question whether the person might have actually been shot in the head instead because the autopsy has no mention of looking for a bullet wound?
Your argument is so weak it barley qualifies as one. Wow. You folks are unbelievably clueless.
- Herkimer56, on 06/23/2008, -17/+11Why do you people always assume that I haven't done research just because I disagree with the little fantasy world that you've built for yourselves? I have done research. Real research, not just parroting what some tragedy whore on the internet posted. You need to get yourself off of the internet and in to a library, preferably a research library at a university, and do some serious studying. If you do, there's a good chance that you'll come to realize that the Cult of 9/11 has absolutely no idea what they're talking about and their theories are nothing more than juvenile trash.
- FelicityJones, on 06/24/2008, -6/+13Herki sounds like a brainwashed government shill project gone bad. I keep hearing the same idiotic buzz words from him:
"little fantasy world"
"Cult of 9/11"
"juvenile trash"
LOL
Herki, you are a joke. You can't make one solid believable argument. Put down your Gubment Shill 101 handbook and give it a rest. If you would just leave out your petty childish name calling then people might take you seriously. You do the same thing over and over just like those neo-con talk show hosts do. They are reading from the same scripts your are. Just make your point without the silly name calling and people will start believing you rather than laughing at you. If you are here to parrot the official lie, then at least do it with dignity. - Herkimer56, on 06/24/2008, -11/+8So tell us "LadyK, still cheering for Hamas?
- FelicityJones, on 06/24/2008, -6/+13Herki sounds like a brainwashed government shill project gone bad. I keep hearing the same idiotic buzz words from him:
- Hortnon, on 06/23/2008, -14/+8What do explosions prove?
- Herkimer56, on 06/23/2008, -31/+15Where? I've been asking you people to show us this alleged evidence for months and no one has shown even a shred of evidence to support your claim. There have been several university papers appear in engineering and scientific journals that detail that the buildings were brought down by impact damage and fire but so far nothing which supports your claim.
- RP4408, on 06/23/2008, -7/+52Thank you Mr. Jennings.
- stp4, on 06/23/2008, -5/+46Very timely to release this today. This new BBC hit piece is totally discredited and will probably be even worst than their last smear attempt. It is laughable that they are even attempting to "debunk" the truth about what happened to WTC7 after their last fiasco.
- theright, on 06/23/2008, -16/+8"This new BBC hit piece is totally discredited [...]"
It hasn't even been broadcast yet and you're already claiming it has been "totally discredited"? I've yet to see even a single criticism from the available trailer footage, except the children over at Prison Planet throwing their toys out of the pram because the BBC didn't approach them for a spot on an unrelated show about the 7/7 attacks.
Heck, I don't even remember any valid criticism of the last BBC "hit piece", except a whole bunch of crybabies screaming "strawman! strawman!", etc.- card51short, on 06/24/2008, -2/+7yes the BBC's last project was totally accurate.
They used the NOVA simulation in which it shows the building's collapsing in a simulation and EVEN IN THE SIMULATION ALL 47 STEEL COLUMNS ARE STANDING.
Just a mistake, right?
(It took me 5 seconds to remember this huge, glaring mistake and you back this movie up?)
- card51short, on 06/24/2008, -2/+7yes the BBC's last project was totally accurate.
- theright, on 06/23/2008, -16/+8"This new BBC hit piece is totally discredited [...]"
- COMPACTION, on 06/23/2008, -11/+42I heard a bunch of Bdg 7 debunking yesterday and anyone who believes that has their head up their ass. Arguing about the words "we gotta 'pull' it". Pre-collapse explosions and molten steel, try debunking that!
- Infinite84, on 06/23/2008, -11/+21Pull simply means to take something down in the context that Silverstein said it. Like when a video's removed from youtube people say they pulled it. The strawman is debating whether it's an official demolition term or not, when Larry Silverstein is a buisness man & a white collar criminal not a demolitions expert. He also lied about talking to the fire dept chief, why? To support his original line that the building was brought down for safety reasons imo that he didn't withdraw until years later. & was said purposefully vague.
- Herkimer56, on 06/23/2008, -26/+17"Pre-collapse explosions and molten steel, try debunking that!"
Gotcha. Lots of things explode in a building that is heavily on fire. Pipes, transformers and switch boxes to name but a few. The sound of explosions is by no means an indicator that explosives were present and the examination of the debris would indicate that explosives were not present in any of the buildings. Molten steel? How do you know that it was molten steel? Did you collect samples? It was never hot enough in any of the buildings to melt steel but it was more than hot enough to melt other metals such as aluminum. Why would anyone capable of critical thought immediately jump to the conclusion that it was steel when it couldn't possibly have been steel?- maxtangent, on 06/23/2008, -9/+20Heavily on fire? How amazing for anyone to survive 'trapped for hours' in a building burning so furiously.
Herk sounds like a tin-foil hat wearing conspiracy theorist.- Herkimer56, on 06/23/2008, -21/+14And you sound like a mouth breathing moron. Who was trapped in WTC7 for hours? Names, please. That building was evacuated early on and even the firefighters didn't go back in because of the danger of collapse. Get your lies straight.
- card51short, on 06/23/2008, -9/+17but herkimer i thought Silverstein gave the orders to pull the firefighters out of WTC7?
- maxtangent, on 06/23/2008, -9/+16Of course herk wouldn't know who was trapped in the building because he didn't bother to read the article before attacking it.
Well, what else can we expect from a self-admitted hater who rants on dig because he 'despises idiots and liars'? - Herkimer56, on 06/23/2008, -14/+8I read the article and I still don't know. Everything in it is a complete fabrication.
- maxtangent, on 06/23/2008, -3/+11Everyone thank herk for admitting he can read something and if it doesn't match his preconceived notions, conclude it must be fabricated - regardless of eyewitness testimonials.
Yet he demands his own experiences and viewpoints be taken as conclusive. - card51short, on 06/23/2008, -2/+12lol exactly. He "doesn't know" what happened yet he somehow KNOWS that what we are saying is false.
- Hortnon, on 06/23/2008, -10/+5And yet you believe a commercial jet didn't hit the Pentagon, dispite eyewitness testimonials.
But truthers don't talk about that...They'd have to admit their hypocrisy. - maxtangent, on 06/23/2008, -2/+10I never said I believe a commercial jet didn't hit the Pentagon. Making things up again because you have no truth to work with horty?
Good job proving my point though, since the bury brigade accepts eye witness testimonials of the Pentagon strike but denies eye witness testimonial at WTC7.
It's okay though, we don't need you guys to admit to your hypocrisy - it's blatant enough all on its own. - Hortnon, on 06/24/2008, -11/+6Sorry, I get confused sometimes which truthers believe what. There's so many theories out there!
I'll try to remember, though.
No, we don't. We accept that they heard explosions. Now, describe what that proves. - maxtangent, on 06/24/2008, -2/+10Do you also accept that bodies were stepped over and that firefighters were there even though 'officially' they were never in the building?
They heard explosions before the twin towers fell. We seem to agree on that, but not that they are suspicious?
It proves we haven't been told everything and that a new, truly independent investigation is warranted. - Hortnon, on 06/24/2008, -10/+6Alone, they are not suspicious. If you had, say, corroborating evidence of explosives, then they might be suspicious.
But you don't. - maxtangent, on 06/24/2008, -2/+9So, the fact that we haven't been told everything is not suspicious. The fire started and there were explosions before towers fell and that's not suspicious. We were told there were no casualties, but there were bodies, and that's not suspicious. We were told there were no firefighters in the building, but eye witness testimonial says there were, and that is not suspicious.
That's and interesting perspective. - Hortnon, on 06/24/2008, -10/+4I think it's on this page somewhere that it's pointed out that 7 was used as a triage center.
- honestjoe, on 06/24/2008, -2/+8@Horton you said; "I think it's on this page somewhere that it's pointed out that 7 was used as a triage center."
It is well documented that the fire department initially ordered the lobby of WTC7 to be set up as the triage area for any wounded evacuated from the North tower. But an order came down not to use WTC7 (from an unknown official) before the second plane struck. You can read the reports of EMS Captain Abdo Nahmod, Chief John Perrugia, EMT Gregg Brady, EMT Richard Zarillo etc.
When the second attack occurred Fire Commissioner Thomas Von Essen arrived at WTC 7 before the collapse of the South Tower, looking for Mayor Giuliani. Learning that the OEM headquarters has been evacuated, he later claims that he thinks, “How ridiculous. We’ve got a thirteen-million-dollar command center and we can’t even use it.” [Essen, 2002, pp. 26] He says in frustration, “How can we be evacuating OEM? We really need it now.” He will later tell an interviewer that he’d headed for the OEM headquarters because, “I thought that was where we should all be because that’s what [it] was built for.” [Fink and Mathias, 2002, pp. 230]
All individuals in the Secret Service’s New York field office, located in WTC 7, were ordered to evacuate after the first attack. [PCCW Newsletter, 3/2006] OEM Commissioner John Odermatt, said during an interview that after the first plane hit the WTC, he left only two staffers at the command center. [Barrett and Collins, 2006, pp. 34] According to a soldier at the scene, WTC Building 7 is evacuated before the second tower is hit. [Fort Detrick Standard, 10/18/2001] No reason has been given for the speedy evacuation of WTC 7 or why they DIDN'T evacuate the South Tower but instead sent everyone back into the South Tower.
Question #1 for Horton. Why did they decide before the South Tower was hit that the “Bunker” was a greater risk to its occupants than the South Tower?
Question #2 for Horton. What reason was given for the NYFD to relocate the triage area away from WTC7?
The answer to both is because WTC7 had explosions and was already on fire! This has been confirmed by Chief Hall, and Chief Morris, who decided not to establish a command post at WTC7 as planed because they had discovered it was already on fire before the “South” Tower collapsed. This is also confirmed by Lt. Dennis P. Stafford who had met up with Chief Hall, and Chief Morris to assist in the establishment of a command post. http://www.thememoryhole.org/911/pa-transcripts/pa ... Other accounts confirm that WTC7 was on fire before the South Tower had collapsed and had been evacuated immediately after the first plane had struck the North Tower come from Michael Hess, New York’s corporation counsel, and Barry Jennings, a City Housing Authority worker.
Here are just a few pictures of over a dozen that show WTC7 on fire before the collapse of the South Tower. (The fire clearly originates from SEC and Provident Financial Management.)
Shows the fire location (before fire) of WTC7 before the false flag event: http://www.amanzafar.com/WTC/wtc-8.jpg
Shows the fire on the lower floors below the shadow line cast by another building
in WTC7 after the jet had struck the South Tower:
http://www.amanzafar.com/WTC/wtc-31.jpg
Shows the fire in WTC7 before the collapse of the South Tower:
http://www.amanzafar.com/WTC/wtc-31.jpg
Shows the fire even through all the dust after the 1st collapse when the view/light was obscured by dust. http://www.amanzafar.com/WTC/wtc-67.jpg
Its quite a coincidence that the fire originates at the SEC office isn’t it?
Recently during a public meeting on the progress of the WTC7 report NIST said they do “NOT” know how the fires were initiated in WTC7. NIST also makes clear at the meeting that the shutdown of the fire alarm in the morning really isn’t a big deal (this was also addressed in the conference) just like how they don’t think it matters how the fire was started.
http://nasathermalimages.com/images/NIST_NCST_Advi ...
Its quite odd that NIST does not care how or when the fire started isn't it?
The cause of the explosions are unclear but it is absolutely certain from witness testimony and photo evidence that the fire started before the South Tower collapsed therefore there is plenty of evidence to declare WTC7 an arson and begin investigating it as such.
So lets start with evidence that is looked for and used in any arson investigation.
NATIONAL STANDARD FOR FIRE INVESTIGATION: NFPA 921.
Sec 12-4: Unusual residues ...could arise from thermite, magnesium or other pyrotechnic materials!
The Twin Towers and WTC 7 had the puzzling sulfur residue! World Trade Center Building Performance Study, Appendix C Source”Limited Metallurgical Examination”, shows evidence of explosives used, by way of photographs, microscopic, and chemical examination.
“Evidence of a severe high temperature corrosion attack on the steel, including oxidation and sulfidation with subsequent intergranular melting, was readily visible in the near-surface microstructure."… “The thinning of the steel occurred by high temperature corrosion due to a combination of oxidation and sulfidation."..."The unusual thinning of the member is most likely due to an attack of the steel by grain boundary penetration of sulfur forming sulfides that contain both iron and copper."..."A liquid eutectic mixture containing primarily iron, oxygen, and sulfur formed during this hot corrosion attack on the steel."… “The severe corrosion and subsequent erosion of Samples 1 and 2 are a very unusual event. No clear explanation for the source of the sulfur has been identified.”
• NY Times: "perhaps the deepest mystery uncovered in the investigation.“
Sulfur is used with thermite (called “thermate”) to cut fast through steel and has been used as evidence by investigators in arson cases!
NATIONAL STANDARD FOR FIRE INVESTIGATION: NFPA 921.
Sec 12-4: Unusual residues ...could arise from thermite, magnesium or other pyrotechnic materials!
- Jockdoe, on 06/23/2008, -11/+11"Gotcha" xD
Through the analysis of the 'dust' that Dr.David ray griffin who found 'microshperes' of molten steel/aluminum high in sulfur content which is indicative of thermate.
But i guess you are more educated and knowledgeable then the Dr.- Herkimer56, on 06/23/2008, -16/+17You're confusing David Ray Griffin with Steven Jones and his undocumented sample of dust he claims came from the WTC. He claims that the sulfur was an indication of thermate but he totally failed to look for another, more reasonable, source of sulfur. There is sulfur in drywall and he did not account for it. That's why no engineering journal would touch his paper. It's just bad science.
- Jockdoe, on 06/23/2008, -8/+15Yes Herk i did write the wrong name, thanks. So you do belive you have a greater knowledge then Steven Jones and Dr.David ray griffin. Interesting...
- BohicaTwentyTwo, on 06/23/2008, -10/+14Jones is a nuclear physicist of questionable intellect. Griffin, on the other hand, is a theologist which no scientific background.
- Jockdoe, on 06/23/2008, -12/+3So you also believe you know better then both? jeez almost shocking level of personal belief which borders on sociopathy.
http://www.youmeworks.com/sociopaths.html - BohicaTwentyTwo, on 06/23/2008, -8/+17Yes, I have a more scientific background than David Ray Griffin. That is a fact.
- Jockdoe, on 06/23/2008, -9/+9Please let us know your credentials because the Dr. is a Professor of Philosophy and Theology.
Both of which are sciences. You must either have a great deal of scientific credentials or you just don't know they are sciences. - Herkimer56, on 06/23/2008, -13/+13I believe that David Ray Griffin has no idea what he's talking about but claims that he does. I believe that Steven Jones is a liar who has attempted to manufacture evidence to back-up his discredited claims. It's not a matter of who knows more, it's a matter of integrity and those two men lack it completely.
- Jockdoe, on 06/23/2008, -7/+12Please can you back that up with some facts and truths, thanks.
- card51short, on 06/23/2008, -2/+12"I believe that David Ray Griffin has no idea what he's talking about but claims that he does."
And we believe your opinion means absolutely nothing on the matter. Thanks for sharing it, though. - Herkimer56, on 06/23/2008, -8/+7David Ray Griffin has no relevant training in any field which would qualify him to offer an expert opinion on the events of 9/11. He's not an engineer, he just pretends to be one on the internet. Steven Jones could not get his paper peer reviewed in a journal because every editor that saw it realized that it was junk science with no supporting documentation or evidence. Despite that, Jones told the BYU administration that it had been published in an engineering journal and had been peer reviewed. Actually, he got it published in a journal on economics and the paper was never peer reviewed. When BYU discovered that he was lying he was suspended from his teaching duties for intellectual dishonesty and eventually forced to accept early retirement. Since that time he has been busily trying to produce evidence to support his claims and to date he has failed miserably.
Those are the facts and the truth. You don't have to make things up where the Cult of 9/11 is concerned. They do an excellent job of discrediting themselves. - JohnReb, on 06/23/2008, -5/+6"Please let us know your credentials because the Dr. is a Professor of Philosophy and Theology.
Both of which are sciences."
When did Philosophy and/or Theology become sciences? They are subject areas in the humanities, not the sciences. - card51short, on 06/24/2008, -1/+6"David Ray Griffin has no relevant training in any field which would qualify him to offer an expert opinion on the events of 9/11. He's not an engineer, he just pretends to be one on the internet."
WWW.AE911TRUTH.ORG
But, sir, surely these 300+ engineers and architects have "relevant training", right?
Oh, right, they are with al Qaeda. I understand, Herkimer...isn't it nighty nighty time? - honestjoe, on 06/24/2008, -1/+5NIST has stated in their latest update on the progress of WTC7 investigation that the gas lines did not feed the fires or cause any explosions, that For WTC7, NIST said “it was a normal fire & no diesel fuel lines came into play”. I repeat the lead investigator said that the diesel fuel lines/diesel fuel have been ruled “OUT” as having any effect on the fire of WTC7!
So you know where you can stick your exploding pipe theory don't you?
As for Herkimer56 claiming that the sulfur in drywall was never considered by FEMA, NIST and others is absurd.
The severe corrosion and subsequent erosion of Samples 1 and 2 are a very unusual event. No clear explanation for the source of the sulfur has been identified.”
http://www.fema.gov/library/wtcstudy.shtm FEMA, Appendix C
Quote from FEMA; “Evidence of a severe high temperature corrosion attack on the steel, including oxidation and sulfidation with subsequent intergranular melting, was readily visible in the near-surface microstructure."… “The thinning of the steel occurred by high temperature corrosion due to a combination of oxidation and sulfidation."..."The unusual thinning of the member is most likely due to an attack of the steel by grain boundary penetration of sulfur forming sulfides that contain both iron and copper."..."A liquid eutectic mixture containing primarily iron, oxygen, and sulfur formed during this hot corrosion attack on the steel."… “The severe corrosion and subsequent erosion of Samples 1 and 2 are a very unusual event. No clear explanation for the source of the sulfur has been identified.”
• NY Times: "perhaps the deepest mystery uncovered in the investigation.“
Sulfur is used with thermite (called “thermate”) to cut fast through steel and has been used as evidence by investigators in arson cases!
NATIONAL STANDARD FOR FIRE INVESTIGATION: NFPA 921.
Sec 12-4: Unusual residues ...could arise from thermite, magnesium or other pyrotechnic materials!
Note that sulfur is:
“The most popular vaporizing agent due to the fact it lowers ignition temperature for most pyrotechnic mixtures.” --From the web page: Pyrotechnic Chemicals
http://web.archive.org/web/20040415193823/http://m ...
During a recent public meeting on the progress of the WTC7 report NIST said they do “NOT” know how the fires were initiated in WTC7.
http://nasathermalimages.com/images/NIST_NCST_Advi ...
So lets start with evidence that is looked for and used in any arson investigation.
NATIONAL STANDARD FOR FIRE INVESTIGATION: NFPA 921.
Sec 12-4: Unusual residues ...could arise from thermite, magnesium or other pyrotechnic materials!
The Twin Towers and WTC 7 had the puzzling sulfur residue! World Trade Center Building Performance Study, Appendix C Source”Limited Metallurgical Examination”, shows evidence of explosives used, by way of photographs, microscopic, and chemical examination.
- card51short, on 06/23/2008, -11/+18"Lots of things explode in a building that is heavily on fire. Pipes, transformers and switch boxes to name but a few. The sound of explosions is by no means an indicator that explosives were present and the examination of the debris would indicate that explosives were not present in any of the buildings.
So do "pipes" exploding cause people 70 floors below to "fly around the room"?
"Molten steel? How do you know that it was molten steel? Did you collect samples?"
Please forward your samples that prove it was aluminum. Thanks! - Piknik, on 06/23/2008, -8/+15Compare Bldg 7 to other buildings that raged on fire for days and still didn't fall. To say that building 7 fell due to fires in only a few floors, compared to other, much larger buildings, that stand for days on fire.
***** use your brain jackas. Do some research of your own. Look at NASA satellite photos of temperatures much warmer (probably from thermite) than jet fuel burns. - Herkimer56, on 06/23/2008, -11/+5Did those other buildings suffer extreme damage from tons of debris falling on them? Were those other buildings balanced over a power station? Are you aware that thermite and thermate burn very rapidly and consume themselves in a matter of seconds? Even if they had been present, and they were not, they could not have contributed to the heat of the fires under the debris pile. Try using your brain for once. We'd all thank you for it.
- card51short, on 06/24/2008, -1/+7"Did those other buildings suffer extreme damage from tons of debris falling on them?"
No and nor did WTC7. It suffered light damage. Buildings 4, 5 and 6 suffered heavy damages (and were MUCH closer to the towers) and had to be "pulled" months later.
"Were those other buildings balanced over a power station?"
You gotta be kidding me...
- card51short, on 06/24/2008, -1/+7"Did those other buildings suffer extreme damage from tons of debris falling on them?"
- maxtangent, on 06/23/2008, -9/+20Heavily on fire? How amazing for anyone to survive 'trapped for hours' in a building burning so furiously.
- Cadmium77, on 06/23/2008, -5/+40And Building 7 isn't even mentioned in the official 911 report, run by the criminal Zelikow. Of course everyone was saying that if the Commission would track down the evildoers that made all the futures trades on American and United Airlines just prior to 911 we'd catch the terrorists...but Zelikow's commission found that the trail did not lead to Al Quaeda or Bin Laden and therefore it was irrelevant. Amazing eh? The trail of course led to Buzzy Krongard at Deutchbank. What is he now? Assistant Deputy Director of the CIA???
Hehe...Good work Zelikow. You did your evil work well. But we shall see if it will be enough to permanently bury the truth... Oh yeah and thank you indeed Mr. Jennings; I hope you don't suffer any harassment from the Zionist criminals that plotted the coup d'etat of 911.- Herkimer56, on 06/23/2008, -19/+10The 9/11 Commission wasn't supposed to report on WTC7. It was supposed to report on the intelligence and law enforcement failures that led to the attack.
Buzzy Krongard hasn't been with the CIA since 2004. The rest of your information regarding him is just as factual.- maxtangent, on 06/23/2008, -7/+14The 9/11 Commission stating they would report on WTC7 at some point in the future means they weren't supposed to in herk's world.
- Herkimer56, on 06/23/2008, -17/+10You're confusing the 9/11 commission with NIST.
- Hortnon, on 06/23/2008, -5/+8I find it hilarious that you're getting buried for stating an undisputable fact.
- Herkimer56, on 06/23/2008, -5/+8The truthers fear the truth above all things.
- maxtangent, on 06/23/2008, -7/+14The 9/11 Commission stating they would report on WTC7 at some point in the future means they weren't supposed to in herk's world.
- theright, on 06/23/2008, -11/+77 World Trade Center is mentioned at least seven times in the 9/11 Commission Report last time I checked...
- Hortnon, on 06/23/2008, -8/+7Well, if any truther actually did their own research instead of throwing their wallets at Jones & Co, they would know that...
- Becca4RonPaul, on 06/23/2008, -3/+5The building itself may have been mentioned, but there was no in-depth treatment of the causes of its collapse at all, or even mention of the fact that it imploded on that day. The subject was studiously avoided by the Commission--a fact you cannot deny. AND, the FEMA report concluded that even its best hypothesis for the building's failure had "only a slight possibility of occurrence." That includes your precious debris / fire damage theory.
- Hortnon, on 06/24/2008, -7/+8WTC7 was beyond the scope of the investigation.
Let me ask you something: If the investigation proved that there was no controlled demolition of 1&2, what good would investigating 7 do?
I see WTC7 as the truther of equivelant of "yeah! but..." You guys got your asses handed to you on 1&2 repeatedly, and because 7 wasn't thoroughly investigated yet, it's picked up as "B-b-b-b-but SEVENnnnnnnnnnnnnnnn!!!!!111one" - Becca4RonPaul, on 06/24/2008, -6/+6Hortnon, you couldn't be more wrong. The collapse of 1 and 2 according to the official story DEFY THE LAWS OF PHYSICS. Sorry, you're not going to get me to agree that 2 + 2 = 5. : ) The collapse of building 7 presents even more glaring problems for the official story. YOU are the one whose claims are laughably inconsistent with the evidence.
WTC7 "beyond the scope of the investigation." That's a good one. Yeah, it was beyond the scope of Zelikow's rigged Commission and its ludicrous distortions and lies. Oh, and the financing of the hijackers through the Pakistani ISI was ALSO "beyond the scope of the investigation," (Commissioner Hamilton said the issue of funding was "irrelevant") because it would lead right back to the CIA. HOW CONVENIENT! - Hortnon, on 06/24/2008, -6/+7Please prove they "defy" the laws of physics. Please present factual backing, and scientific support.
Thanks. - card51short, on 06/24/2008, -4/+5www.ae911truth.org
let's let the experts explain. Since we have more experts on our side, of course ;) - inobla, on 06/28/2008, -0/+4"let's let the experts explain. Since we have more experts on our side, of course ;)"
LOOOOOOL!! One for each sentence. - inobla, on 06/28/2008, -0/+4http://51short.com/imgref/ae911truth/ae911petition ...
Follow the link and look closely at the "experts" who signed the petition last year. ae911"truth" had their scam exposed when some JREF& digg users discovered that there was absolutely no verification of professional credentials what so ever. All Gage wanted was the appearance of credibility.....and your donations.
Card, find me a professional engineering / scientific organization that wasn't created with the specific premise of a 9/11 Conspiracy who agrees with you.. I'm still waiting. Gosh, with more experts on your side this should be a piece of cake!
- Hortnon, on 06/24/2008, -7/+8WTC7 was beyond the scope of the investigation.
- Becca4RonPaul, on 06/23/2008, -6/+5Cadmium, there are a lot of people like yourself who are very knowledgeable about 911, but you just kill me with your simplistic conclusions that it was "Zionist criminals." It makes you sound like an ideologue with an axe to grind. I do suspect the Mossad and other international intelligence agencies had a hand in carrying out and / or covering up 911, but the persons / groups involved and their objectives are much bigger than that one facet. Look at Operation Gladio--false flag terror attacks perpetrated across Europe by European governments since the 1970's to frighten people into surrendering their freedoms. There is a complex strategy at work, with many diverse players. At least if you are going to use such terms as "Zionist criminals," you need to explain what exactly you're talking about. To me, statements like that bring the 911 truth movement into disrepute.
- ssn697, on 06/24/2008, -10/+10LOL. That is a classic post! His conspiracy just isn't complex enough for you!
Of course, you claim the collapses defy the laws of physics, despite no less than a dozen studies that shows they didn't, so what else can we expect from you?
- ssn697, on 06/24/2008, -10/+10LOL. That is a classic post! His conspiracy just isn't complex enough for you!
- Herkimer56, on 06/23/2008, -19/+10The 9/11 Commission wasn't supposed to report on WTC7. It was supposed to report on the intelligence and law enforcement failures that led to the attack.
- card51short, on 06/23/2008, -6/+30What?! Barry Jennings OBVIOUSLY was recruited by Alex Jones and bin Laden to dirty up the name of our loving government!
Lies!
/herkimer56 - brooklynzoo81, on 06/23/2008, -6/+34Would love to see the trolls on digg put a thumbs down on this one lol. This issue is non debatable. He was there, and laid out everything he saw and experienced. The more people come out others will to.
- molardiere, on 06/23/2008, -5/+28When the teetering house of cards fall we will load it on barges, ship it to Fresh Kills and hustle it off to China. Just as the administration did with the steel from the WTC.
- Herkimer56, on 06/23/2008, -21/+9"Just as the administration did with the steel from the WTC."
That's a lie. The steel was available to investigators and researchers for more than a year at Fresh Kills and a substantial quantity of the steel still exists.- card51short, on 06/23/2008, -4/+16proof? where's the steel? Let's test it.
- vexadril, on 06/23/2008, -3/+16You're wrong. Only a small quantity of specially selected steel beams were kept for testing, the other 99% of the wreckage was hauled off to Asian recycling plants and quickly, despite the protests of the families who were in court at the time trying to get Giuliani to stop it.
Remember how we were all amazed how quickly Ground Zero got cleaned up? - TacoHell, on 06/23/2008, -3/+14Fire Engineering's editor-in-chief, Bill Manning, called the official investigations (blessed by FEMA and run by the American Society of Civil Engineers), "a half-baked farce".
Quote: "Fire Engineering has good reason to believe that the "official investigation" blessed by FEMA and run by the American Society of Civil Engineers is a half-baked farce that may already have been commandeered by political forces whose primary interests, to put it mildly, lie far afield of full disclosure. Except for the marginal benefit obtained from a three-day, visual walk-through of evidence sites conducted by ASCE investigation committee members- described by one close source as a "tourist trip"-no one's checking the evidence for anything." - mick1959, on 06/23/2008, -2/+12Poor Jerkimer.
Even jcm, Hortnon and the rest arent going to help you out on this one.
I'm sure there are many more witnesses of this calibre waiting to come forward and pretty soon its going to be game over for you.- Hortnon, on 06/23/2008, -8/+3http://www.highbeam.com/doc/1G1-86456046.html
22 May 2002. That's when the last of it was taken out of the actual site. That would be ~7 months of clean-up.
http://wtc.nist.gov/media/recovered_steel.htm
Regardless, please provide proof of your claim that the steel was sold very quickly.
- Hortnon, on 06/23/2008, -8/+3http://www.highbeam.com/doc/1G1-86456046.html
- l0k0, on 06/24/2008, -9/+4Let me help you out here since you clearly didn't do your research.
At the Fresh Kills Site
The materials were inspected by 24 local, state, and federal agencies including:
-55 FBI Evidence Response Teams (over 1,000 agents)
-New York Evidence Response Team
-Atleast 193 U.S. Customs Agency volunteers
-600 NYPD detectives
^^I guess you think they were in on it huh? Don't worry, you can just claim a jedi mind trick was pulled on you like Jason Bermas when he claimed the NYFD was "paid off".
This is what they recovered and screened:
-806,000 tons of debris
-35,000 tons of steel had been removed (165,000 tons were removed directly at Ground Zero)
-4,257 human remains
-54,000 personal items
-4,000 photographs, many returned to their owners
-1,358 personal and departmental vehicles
^^The stuff truthers claimed "turned to dust" (Perhaps the most laughable claim of them all)
And ZERO traces of an explosive device or its effects on steel or the other debris.
http://wtc7lies.googlepages.com/groundzerocleanup% ...
And some pictures of the site:
http://home.hiwaay.net/~langford/wtc/- honestjoe, on 06/24/2008, -1/+7The head of the WTC collapse investigation said he “would possibly consider examining” the collapse of Building 7, but by this time all the rubble has already been removed and destroyed. [US Congress, 3/6/2002]
“I have combed through our national standard for fire investigation, NFPA 921, but nowhere in it does one find an exemption allowing the destruction of evidence for buildings over 10 stories tall.” Bill Manning Fire Engineering
NIST admited that they did "NOT" look for explosive residue and said; "If you're looking for something that isn't there, you're wasting your time … and the taxpayers' money."
http://www.ae911truth.org/press/23
So tell me how can NIST know there's no evidence if you don't look for it first?
NATIONAL STANDARD FOR FIRE INVESTIGATION: NFPA 921.
Sec 12-4: Unusual residues ...could arise from thermite, magnesium or other pyrotechnic materials!
The Twin Towers and WTC 7 had the puzzling sulfur residue! World Trade Center Building Performance Study, Appendix C Source”Limited Metallurgical Examination”, shows evidence of explosives used, by way of photographs, microscopic, and chemical examination.
“Evidence of a severe high temperature corrosion attack on the steel, including oxidation and sulfidation with subsequent intergranular melting, was readily visible in the near-surface microstructure."… “The thinning of the steel occurred by high temperature corrosion due to a combination of oxidation and sulfidation."..."The unusual thinning of the member is most likely due to an attack of the steel by grain boundary penetration of sulfur forming sulfides that contain both iron and copper."..."A liquid eutectic mixture containing primarily iron, oxygen, and sulfur formed during this hot corrosion attack on the steel."… “The severe corrosion and subsequent erosion of Samples 1 and 2 are a very unusual event. No clear explanation for the source of the sulfur has been identified.”
• NY Times: "perhaps the deepest mystery uncovered in the investigation.“
Sulfur is used with thermite (called “thermate”) to cut fast through steel and has been used as evidence by investigators in arson cases!
NATIONAL STANDARD FOR FIRE INVESTIGATION: NFPA 921.
Sec 12-4: Unusual residues ...could arise from thermite, magnesium or other pyrotechnic materials! - card51short, on 06/24/2008, -1/+6"At the Fresh Kills Site
The materials were inspected by 24 local, state, and federal agencies including:
-55 FBI Evidence Response Teams (over 1,000 agents)
-New York Evidence Response Team
-Atleast 193 U.S. Customs Agency volunteers
-600 NYPD detectives "
WHAT?! ARE YOU SAYING NONE OF THESE BOMB EXPERTS FOUND EXPLOSIVES?
What?!!!!?!! Obviously the NYPD detectives were there to search for bombs.
And, of course, the Customs Agency was SURELY there to hunt down explosives.
That's what they do, right?
hahahahahaha
- honestjoe, on 06/24/2008, -1/+7The head of the WTC collapse investigation said he “would possibly consider examining” the collapse of Building 7, but by this time all the rubble has already been removed and destroyed. [US Congress, 3/6/2002]
- Herkimer56, on 06/23/2008, -21/+9"Just as the administration did with the steel from the WTC."
- ExplosivesWTC, on 06/23/2008, -6/+31On day one they edited Jennings interview so no one knew that this happened in Building 7. That in itself is telling.
- bagelred, on 06/23/2008, -5/+35WOW. This interview is HUGE NEWS!!! Get ready to see this interview everywhere, CBS, MSNBC, CNN, NYTimes....omg.....the news producers are going to love this. What a scoop!!!!!!!!!.........
PAUSE
LMAO.......just kidding........lol...........you'll never hear a peep about this. - jcm267, on 06/23/2008, -38/+12Buried as spam.
- arabesque, on 06/23/2008, -8/+25Buried as troll.
- Piknik, on 06/23/2008, -6/+11Buried. This is a world exclusive.
- card51short, on 06/23/2008, -4/+15translation = I have nothing to say.
- FelicityJones, on 06/23/2008, -4/+13Translation = I lose, you win. Next?
- Hortnon, on 06/23/2008, -7/+6Yeah, that's exactly it.
You truthers suck at this... - jcm267, on 06/24/2008, -9/+4Translation = I was at work and didn't much have time to bother reading this article, and I didn't want to spend the time doing so and having any of my new coworkers seeing me visiting a nutjob conspiracy site. First impressions mean a lot, and I don't want them to think that I'm anything like card, Brappie, Cow, or you.
- HumanCattle, on 06/24/2008, -3/+9You would probably hate for us to find out where you work and send them an email with some choice quotes of yours such as:
jcm267: Islam is a gutter religion.
That would be bad, huh?
Take Care
HumanCattle. - jcm267, on 06/24/2008, -10/+6What is wrong with that statement, cow? How's your little file about me coming along, stalker?
- card51short, on 06/24/2008, -2/+8just imagine JCM's frothing rage if someone said Judiasm is a gutter religion.
I am not even joking, he would be on the horn with the ADL IMMEDIATELY.
I don't know how these people can be such blatant contradictions.
Just look at how brainwashing has affected JCM. After 9/11, he is ready to exterminate an entire religion of people. That is perfectly normal.
However, implicating a member of another religion, EVEN IF THEY ARE GUILTY, is considered bigotry to him.
Weird... - BrapAllgood, on 06/24/2008, -2/+6"Translation = I was at work and didn't much have time to bother reading this article, and I didn't want to spend the time doing so and having any of my new coworkers seeing me visiting a nutjob conspiracy site."
This is also evidence of dishonesty; purposeful misrepresentation of self to lead the beliefs of others.
Why not just be proud of who you are, jcm? If your mission is pure, nobody can thwart it, not even new coworkers.
('But I want them to *like* me!')
- HumanCattle, on 06/24/2008, -3/+9You would probably hate for us to find out where you work and send them an email with some choice quotes of yours such as:
- Hortnon, on 06/23/2008, -7/+6Yeah, that's exactly it.
- card51short, on 06/24/2008, -1/+6"Translation = I was at work and didn't much have time to bother reading this article, and I didn't want to spend the time doing so and having any of my new coworkers seeing me visiting a nutjob conspiracy site."
You don't think they look at you weird already for following us "nutjobs" around 24/7?- rexblade, on 06/25/2008, -1/+2He never reads em.
- arabesque, on 06/23/2008, -8/+25Buried as troll.
- BohicaTwentyTwo, on 06/23/2008, -23/+14How do "explosions" in a building seven hours before it collapsed support the theory of controlled demolition? That doesn't sound like a controlled demolition to me.
- Jockdoe, on 06/23/2008, -7/+12Hmmm, if i were behind it, i think i would set up the Secret Servicemen that knew about the operation to die in a building that they thought was going to be safe....
- BohicaTwentyTwo, on 06/23/2008, -12/+9And why haven't we heard of these Secret Servicemen before? Oh, that's right, its a secret.
- f3l1x, on 06/23/2008, -6/+13First, explain why "explosions" would legitimately go off well before the collapse of the twin towers. Either way, it all just goes to show how little everyone knows, and so called experts are all just guessing/lying.
I can't pick a side logically because internet comments are not fact. We need a real independent investigation but imho its way too late. Too much time has gone by and too much has been covered up. Now its all hearsay on both sides of the camp and most (ignorant) Americans don't want to be associated with criminals so they just defend their ever loving, perfect government to the death.- Hortnon, on 06/23/2008, -6/+7'Go off' is a misleading term, because it implies, before any information has been analyzed, that the explosions were man-made and controlled. Your bias is showing.
It's clear what side you've chosen despite your claim to the contrary. Man up and admit you believe these conspiracy kooks so I can mock you a bit better.- HumanCattle, on 06/24/2008, -4/+7"'Go off' is a misleading term, because it implies, before any information has been analyzed, that the explosions were man-made and controlled. Your bias is showing."
Hortnon is military. Google him. Then put him on ignore.
A machine should not speak for men, so shut the ***** up you mindless drone.
Take Care
HumanCattle. - Hortnon, on 06/24/2008, -7/+6You suck at Google.
- Herkimer56, on 06/24/2008, -7/+6Cow sucks at life.
- HumanCattle, on 06/24/2008, -4/+7You suck at Oracle 9i.
- Hortnon, on 06/24/2008, -7/+6blah blah blah
You suck at Google.
- HumanCattle, on 06/24/2008, -4/+7"'Go off' is a misleading term, because it implies, before any information has been analyzed, that the explosions were man-made and controlled. Your bias is showing."
- Herkimer56, on 06/23/2008, -8/+6I'll defend the truth to the death. You should get to know the truth sometime. It's a lot more interesting than the fantasy world you truthers live in.
- HumanCattle, on 06/24/2008, -2/+9If you love the truth so much, you should start a movement called the Truth Movement.
- Herkimer56, on 06/24/2008, -8/+6That title has already been taken by a bunch of disingenuous assholes who are trying to cover up the fact that they're lying their asses off by pretending to be telling the truth.
- BrapAllgood, on 06/24/2008, -2/+7"a bunch of disingenuous assholes who are trying to cover up the fact that they're lying their asses off by pretending to be telling the truth."
Wow. Super example of projection. This should be in a textbook.
- Hortnon, on 06/23/2008, -6/+7'Go off' is a misleading term, because it implies, before any information has been analyzed, that the explosions were man-made and controlled. Your bias is showing.
- Becca4RonPaul, on 06/24/2008, -2/+7The point is, these explosions went off between the impact of the planes into the first and second towers. The official story is based on the theory that falling debris from the collapse of the buildings ignited huge fires, did tremendous damage, resulting in the collapse. But here we have an eyewitness who saw the building completely evacuated before the second plane hit and before any buildings had collapsed, and who also witnessed many explosions inside the building, including some that destroyed the lobby. Sorry, there is no explanation for these explosions other than charges planted in the building. It is interesting to note that such seemingly random explosions, well ahead of the beautifully choreographed main-event at 5:20 do not argue for a well-executed implosion, but this is not a very significant point in my view. Squibs (explosions out of sequence) are a common feature in controlled demolition, AND the perpetrators only had a limited window of opportunity during which to get all this material planted in the buildings. Can't expect a PERFECT job considering those limiting factors, now can you?
- Jockdoe, on 06/23/2008, -7/+12Hmmm, if i were behind it, i think i would set up the Secret Servicemen that knew about the operation to die in a building that they thought was going to be safe....
- arabesque, on 06/23/2008, -5/+22"When we reached the 6th floor the landing that we were standing on gave way, there was an explosion and the landing gave way, I was left there hanging, I had to climb back up and walk back up to the 8th floor," said Jennings. "The explosion was beneath me....so when the explosion happened it blew us back....both buildings (the twin towers) were still standing," he added. "I was trapped in there for several hours, I was trapped in there when both buildings came down - all this time I'm hearing all kinds of explosions, all this time I'm hearing explosions, said Jennings, adding that when firefighters took them down to the lobby it was in "total ruins". "For me to see what I saw was unbelievable," said Jennings... The firefighters kept saying to Jennings "do not look down" because, according to Jennings, "we were stepping over people and you can tell when you're stepping over people."
- Piknik, on 06/23/2008, -6/+23I think the debunkers are going to chase their tail with this one. What will they say now? That Jennings doesn't exist?
This along with what Dice is doing for the war in Iraq is only getting the word out more. Anyone with a brain can put the pieces of the puzzle together.- l0k0, on 06/24/2008, -9/+5I'm not claiming Jennings doesn't exist, nor am I claiming he is lying. I would appreciate it if truthers would actually read the NIST report, because like I said in my comment below, a Triage center was established in the lobby to assist victims from WTC 1 and 6, and therefore it is not a surprise to me at all that dead bodies were in the lobby of WTC 7. Here is a picture of it highlighted in bright yellow so you don't have to read any of the other stuff, I apoligize I don't have a YouTube video to hold your hand through it with phat beats playing in the background to help you out, but since you clearly haven't even read the report, maybe this can help you:
http://forums.randi.org/showpost.php?p=2703667&pos ...- honestjoe, on 06/24/2008, -1/+8It is well documented that the fire department initially ordered the lobby of WTC7 to be set up as the triage area for any wounded evacuated from the North tower. But an order came down not to use WTC7 (from an unknown official) before the second plane struck. You can read the reports of EMS Captain Abdo Nahmod, Chief John Perrugia, EMT Gregg Brady, EMT Richard Zarillo etc.
When the second attack occurred Fire Commissioner Thomas Von Essen arrived at WTC 7 before the collapse of the South Tower, looking for Mayor Giuliani. Learning that the OEM headquarters has been evacuated, he later claims that he thinks, “How ridiculous. We’ve got a thirteen-million-dollar command center and we can’t even use it.” [Essen, 2002, pp. 26] He says in frustration, “How can we be evacuating OEM? We really need it now.” He will later tell an interviewer that he’d headed for the OEM headquarters because, “I thought that was where we should all be because that’s what [it] was built for.” [Fink and Mathias, 2002, pp. 230]
All individuals in the Secret Service’s New York field office, located in WTC 7, were ordered to evacuate after the first attack. [PCCW Newsletter, 3/2006] OEM Commissioner John Odermatt, said during an interview that after the first plane hit the WTC, he left only two staffers at the command center. [Barrett and Collins, 2006, pp. 34] According to a soldier at the scene, WTC Building 7 is evacuated before the second tower is hit. [Fort Detrick Standard, 10/18/2001] No reason has been given for the speedy evacuation of WTC 7 or why they DIDN'T evacuate the South Tower but instead sent everyone back into the South Tower.
Question #1 for Horton. Why did they decide before the South Tower was hit that the “Bunker” was a greater risk to its occupants than the South Tower?
Question #2 for Horton. What reason was given for the NYFD to relocate the triage area away from WTC7?
The answer to both is because WTC7 had explosions and was already on fire! This has been confirmed by Chief Hall, and Chief Morris, who decided not to establish a command post at WTC7 as planed because they had discovered it was already on fire before the “South” Tower collapsed. This is also confirmed by Lt. Dennis P. Stafford who had met up with Chief Hall, and Chief Morris to assist in the establishment of a command post. http://www.thememoryhole.org/911/pa-transcripts/pa ... Other accounts confirm that WTC7 was on fire before the South Tower had collapsed and had been evacuated immediately after the first plane had struck the North Tower come from Michael Hess, New York’s corporation counsel, and Barry Jennings, a City Housing Authority worker.
Here are just a few pictures of over a dozen that show WTC7 on fire before the collapse of the South Tower. (The fire clearly originates from SEC and Provident Financial Management.)
Shows the fire location (before fire) of WTC7 before the false flag event: http://www.amanzafar.com/WTC/wtc-8.jpg
Shows the fire on the lower floors below the shadow line cast by another building
in WTC7 after the jet had struck the South Tower:
http://www.amanzafar.com/WTC/wtc-31.jpg
Shows the fire in WTC7 before the collapse of the South Tower:
http://www.amanzafar.com/WTC/wtc-31.jpg
Shows the fire even through all the dust after the 1st collapse when the view/light was obscured by dust. http://www.amanzafar.com/WTC/wtc-67.jpg
Its quite a coincidence that the fire originates at the SEC office isn’t it?
Recently during a public meeting on the progress of the WTC7 report NIST said they do “NOT” know how the fires were initiated in WTC7. NIST also makes clear at the meeting that the shutdown of the fire alarm in the morning really isn’t a big deal (this was also addressed in the conference) just like how they don’t think it matters how the fire was started.
http://nasathermalimages.com/images/NIST_NCST_Advi ...
Its quite odd that NIST does not care how or when the fire started isn't it?
The cause of the explosions are unclear but it is absolutely certain from witness testimony and photo evidence that the fire started before the South Tower collapsed therefore there is plenty of evidence to declare WTC7 an arson and begin investigating it as such.
So lets start with evidence that is looked for and used in any arson investigation.
NATIONAL STANDARD FOR FIRE INVESTIGATION: NFPA 921.
Sec 12-4: Unusual residues ...could arise from thermite, magnesium or other pyrotechnic materials!
The Twin Towers and WTC 7 had the puzzling sulfur residue! World Trade Center Building Performance Study, Appendix C Source”Limited Metallurgical Examination”, shows evidence of explosives used, by way of photographs, microscopic, and chemical examination.
“Evidence of a severe high temperature corrosion attack on the steel, including oxidation and sulfidation with subsequent intergranular melting, was readily visible in the near-surface microstructure."… “The thinning of the steel occurred by high temperature corrosion due to a combination of oxidation and sulfidation."..."The unusual thinning of the member is most likely due to an attack of the steel by grain boundary penetration of sulfur forming sulfides that contain both iron and copper."..."A liquid eutectic mixture containing primarily iron, oxygen, and sulfur formed during this hot corrosion attack on the steel."… “The severe corrosion and subsequent erosion of Samples 1 and 2 are a very unusual event. No clear explanation for the source of the sulfur has been identified.”
• NY Times: "perhaps the deepest mystery uncovered in the investigation.“
Sulfur is used with thermite (called “thermate”) to cut fast through steel and has been used as evidence by investigators in arson cases!
NATIONAL STANDARD FOR FIRE INVESTIGATION: NFPA 921.
Sec 12-4: Unusual residues ...could arise from thermite, magnesium or other pyrotechnic materials! - card51short, on 06/24/2008, -2/+5"a Triage center was established in the lobby to assist victims from WTC 1 and 6, and therefore it is not a surprise to me at all that dead bodies were in the lobby of WTC 7."
Sir, you should really stop being so smug. Especially when you're so wrong.
The triage center was set up after the collapses. Barry is describing coming down before either building collapsed. There was no triage center yet.- l0k0, on 06/24/2008, -5/+2Wow, you didn't even read it. The triage center was established at 9:30 a.m. The south tower collapsed at 9:59 am and the north tower at 10:28 am. How are you this retarded?
- honestjoe, on 06/24/2008, -1/+4@I0k0
They did "NOT" establish a triage at WTC 7 at 9:30 am!
Chief Hall, and Chief Morris, decided "NOT" to establish a command post at WTC7 as planed because they had discovered it was already on fire before the “South” Tower collapsed. This is also confirmed by Lt. Dennis P. Stafford who had met up with Chief Hall, and Chief Morris to assist in the establishment of a command post.
(Start reading near the bottom beginning with Lt. Dennis P. Stafford) http://www.thememoryhole.org/911/pa-transcripts/pa ...
Other accounts confirm that WTC7 was on fire before the South Tower had collapsed and had been evacuated immediately after the first plane had struck the North Tower come from Michael Hess, New York’s corporation counsel, and Barry Jennings, a City Housing Authority worker.
http://www.cooperativeresearch.org/entity.jsp?enti ...
When the second attack occurred Fire Commissioner Thomas Von Essen arrived at WTC 7 before the collapse of the South Tower, looking for Mayor Giuliani. Learning that the OEM headquarters has been evacuated, he later claims that he thinks, “How ridiculous. We’ve got a thirteen-million-dollar command center and we can’t even use it.” [Essen, 2002, pp. 26] He says in frustration, “How can we be evacuating OEM? We really need it now.” He will later tell an interviewer that he’d headed for the OEM headquarters because, “I thought that was where we should all be because that’s what [it] was built for.” [Fink and Mathias, 2002, pp. 230]
http://www.cooperativeresearch.org/context.jsp?ite ...
All individuals in the Secret Service’s New York field office, located in WTC 7, were ordered to evacuate after the first attack. [PCCW Newsletter, 3/2006] OEM Commissioner John Odermatt, said during an interview that after the first plane hit the WTC, he left only two staffers at the command center. [Barrett and Collins, 2006, pp. 34] According to a soldier at the scene, WTC Building 7 is evacuated before the second tower is hit. [Fort Detrick Standard, 10/18/2001] No reason has been given for the speedy evacuation of WTC 7 or why they DIDN'T evacuate the South Tower but instead sent everyone back into the South Tower.
http://www.cooperativeresearch.org/entity.jsp?enti ... - honestjoe, on 06/24/2008, -1/+3!
- honestjoe, on 06/24/2008, -1/+8It is well documented that the fire department initially ordered the lobby of WTC7 to be set up as the triage area for any wounded evacuated from the North tower. But an order came down not to use WTC7 (from an unknown official) before the second plane struck. You can read the reports of EMS Captain Abdo Nahmod, Chief John Perrugia, EMT Gregg Brady, EMT Richard Zarillo etc.
- Piknik, on 06/24/2008, -1/+7I have read the NIST report. You are correct with the triage center, and that does explain the dead bodies, partially. However, the NIST report does not address why there was a preemptive explosion in WTC7 prior to the planes hitting the buildings.
- l0k0, on 06/24/2008, -9/+5I'm not claiming Jennings doesn't exist, nor am I claiming he is lying. I would appreciate it if truthers would actually read the NIST report, because like I said in my comment below, a Triage center was established in the lobby to assist victims from WTC 1 and 6, and therefore it is not a surprise to me at all that dead bodies were in the lobby of WTC 7. Here is a picture of it highlighted in bright yellow so you don't have to read any of the other stuff, I apoligize I don't have a YouTube video to hold your hand through it with phat beats playing in the background to help you out, but since you clearly haven't even read the report, maybe this can help you:
- vexadril, on 06/23/2008, -4/+24This is amazing testimony. Imagine how many other people would come to testify about what they know if Congress opened a real, independent 9/11 investigation and actually invited people to tell their stories. A lot of people are being quiet about what they know because they don't feel that anyone in power or authority wants to hear it.
- stienster, on 06/23/2008, -6/+21Herkimer>>> if you're NOT a troll, all I can say is, you're lost in your own personal world.
- Herkimer56, on 06/23/2008, -15/+13Yes, that world is called Reality. Come and visit us sometime.
- beebelo, on 06/24/2008, -3/+9It's that world called 'Ignorance Is Bliss'.
- Herkimer56, on 06/24/2008, -9/+6Well, it's hard to argue with that. After all, you truthers are the undisputed masters of ignorance.
- BrapAllgood, on 06/24/2008, -4/+7"After all, you truthers are the undisputed masters of ignorance."
I dispute that. You just lied. Again. - Herkimer56, on 06/24/2008, -9/+5Nobody cares what you think, troll.
- BrapAllgood, on 06/24/2008, -4/+7"Nobody cares what you think, troll."
At the VERY LEAST, my wife does. You lie again.
Get over your God Complex, would ya? You do not speak for everyone, no matter what you and your 'I work for DHS' deluded mind think. Do you dress-up for the part, too? Got some deeply dark shades perched on that nose? With or without the black brimmed hat? I mean, you are old, after all.... - Herkimer56, on 06/24/2008, -7/+5Nobody cares what your wife thinks, either, troll.
- BrapAllgood, on 06/24/2008, -3/+5"Nobody cares what your wife thinks, either, troll."
I do. Is lying something you can't live without? Does it give you warm fuzzies to disregard others as worthless? - Herkimer56, on 06/24/2008, -7/+4Nobody cares that you care what your wife thinks because nobody cares what either you or your wife think, troll.
- BrapAllgood, on 06/24/2008, -3/+5"Nobody cares that you care what your wife thinks because nobody cares what either you or your wife think, troll."
Seriously...do you ever leave the playground? This is childish even for you. Lemme see if I am up to it...
You are the troll! Nyah! Nobody cares whether you care that my wife cares when I care for her-- nah. I'm not up to this. Or down to it.
I guess you'll have to carry on by yourself...but you are used to that, huh Herk. - Herkimer56, on 06/24/2008, -6/+3Going to go troll somewhere else? That's cool, I don't care. Nobody cares really, troll.
- BrapAllgood, on 06/24/2008, -4/+7"After all, you truthers are the undisputed masters of ignorance."
- HumanCattle, on 06/24/2008, -6/+12Are you ready for a BLOG ATTACK?
Herkimer56, how many McCain Points have you racked up today?
Keep it up champ. We're all behind you.- Hortnon, on 06/24/2008, -12/+11Is it like when Alex Jones ordered you ***** to 'assault Digg'?
Or is that ok?- HumanCattle, on 06/24/2008, -8/+11Who are "you *****"?
Are they your monolithic enemy? Are they a cohesive group?
Alex Jones has never ordered me to do anything. I don't know who this "you *****" is referring to. - Hortnon, on 06/24/2008, -10/+10Morons. Mentally unstable individuals. Children. Basically, truthers.
But, that's beside the point. Is it ok when Alex Jones does it? - HumanCattle, on 06/24/2008, -7/+10It's ok when anybody does it. This is an information war, after all. Don't be sad that you're losing :(
- Hortnon, on 06/24/2008, -10/+10Hah!
Prove it.
- HumanCattle, on 06/24/2008, -8/+11Who are "you *****"?
- Herkimer56, on 06/24/2008, -12/+12What makes you think that I'm a McCain supporter, cow? Once again we have a truther throwing out unsupported accusations.
- HumanCattle, on 06/24/2008, -6/+12Oh please.
I wish you would man up and admit who you're barracking for.
(see what I did there?)
gb2LGF, blowhard. - Herkimer56, on 06/24/2008, -9/+7Neither one of them was my candidate, herd animal. Stop being so bitter just because your racist old fool got his ass handed to him in every primary.
- HumanCattle, on 06/24/2008, -6/+12Oh please.
- card51short, on 06/24/2008, -7/+10Yeah, Cow! We all know Herkimer won't reveal his candidate until the election is complete.
One thing is for sure, Herkimer will be the first minion to grovel to the new boss. - card51short, on 06/24/2008, -6/+8"Is it like when Alex Jones ordered you ***** to 'assault Digg'?"
I think Alex used the words 'assault Digg' once a year ago and you guys still think everyone here is under direct mind control of Alex Jones from that one statement he made a year ago.
Conspiracy nut.
- Hortnon, on 06/24/2008, -12/+11Is it like when Alex Jones ordered you ***** to 'assault Digg'?
- Herkimer56, on 06/23/2008, -15/+13Yes, that world is called Reality. Come and visit us sometime.
- stienster, on 06/23/2008, -2/+20Oh, and here's the scientific peer review paper you've been just yearning for (Herk, Hort, jcm, ssn, etc):
http://www.psicounsel.com/CivilEngineeringJournal. ...- card51short, on 06/23/2008, -5/+8Oh yeah? But do you have any midget eskimo structural engineers who agree with you?
DIDN'T THINK SO TWOOFER!- stienster, on 06/23/2008, -1/+8dude...what the heck are you talking about... LOL!
- inobla, on 06/24/2008, -7/+4People have been asking him that for months.
- card51short, on 06/24/2008, -2/+5it was a joke...the deniers always make more and more demands, never agreeing that we met their previous demands.
Hilarious.- stienster, on 06/25/2008, -1/+2oh sorry card. That's what I get for being on digg hours after my bedtime... ;o)
- stienster, on 06/23/2008, -1/+8dude...what the heck are you talking about... LOL!
- Hortnon, on 06/23/2008, -12/+7That's not science, nor is it peer-reviewed.
Unless you can prove otherwise? - Herkimer56, on 06/23/2008, -11/+7That is a letter to the editor that Steven Jones had to pay to have published in a vanity journal. It has never been peer reviewed because it does not offer any new scientific research. You fail.
- card51short, on 06/24/2008, -3/+5"That is a letter to the editor"
Wrong. It is not a "letter to the editor".
"Steven Jones had to pay to have published in a vanity journal. "
Many journals charge money to publish. Unless, of course, you could prove otherwise.
"It has never been peer reviewed because it does not offer any new scientific research."
Actually it was reviewed. By three researchers.
How could you be so wrong in only two sentences?
- card51short, on 06/24/2008, -3/+5"That is a letter to the editor"
- card51short, on 06/23/2008, -5/+8Oh yeah? But do you have any midget eskimo structural engineers who agree with you?
- FelicityJones, on 06/23/2008, -3/+15The REAL "The Third Tower" WTC7 documentary:
Part 1: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sBOel-LyJ_E
Part 2: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R3ePuE0tvp4
Please spread this video to everyone you know. Americans must be woken up. - diggertigger, on 06/23/2008, -22/+0Cul de sac storys
I would suggest that the only valid reason to listen to or watch anything Paul Watson or Alex Jones' media/propaganda, would be for the same reason one would watch CNN... to observe propaganda in action. Though, as even listening with this awareness could leave one still susceptible to entrainment, those who are on a path of pollution-riddance would choose not to listen. While those who are into studying the art of propaganda and charismatic entrainment, might still. - diggertigger, on 06/23/2008, -20/+0As one of the Jesuits run everything crowd, I will say that I know that Alex has done more harm than good. I've investigated him for 15 years. He is a Jesuit provocateur and a Zionist by proxy. Don't take my word for it, do your own investigation. Ask him yourself and see how irrational and angry he gets when you ask him about his Jesuit training. I did, some fifteen years ago and he threatened my life. What I have found is that Jones makes 6 figures a year spreading fear, with your help & money
- card51short, on 06/24/2008, -1/+4Okay crazy boy ;)
- diggertigger, on 06/26/2008, -1/+0These comments were cut and pasted from this neat little clip.
http://ie.youtube.com/watch?v=ye5NtbWy-vw
.. crazy?.. I wish.. then I wouldnt give a toss!! hehe!!
that said...Alex Jones is almost as absurd as the Binladen! computer generated clips in this Punch and Judy show called MSN!!
http://ie.youtube.com/watch?v=ye5NtbWy-vw
- diggertigger, on 06/26/2008, -1/+0These comments were cut and pasted from this neat little clip.
- rexblade, on 06/25/2008, -0/+1Alex Jones was 19 15 years ago. I guess he got his training pretty early then?
- card51short, on 06/24/2008, -1/+4Okay crazy boy ;)
- diggertigger, on 06/23/2008, -19/+0Radio host, Alex Jones was spreading misleading, false and overblown claims linking Peter Power, a crisis management consultant and former member of Britain's anti-terror police, to a 'terrorism drill' which Jones alleges was used to provide cover for State perpetrators of the multiple blasts.
The wild allegations leave others presenting so-called "conspiracy theories" about these attacks open to ridicule --because of false claims by the most reknowned radio show on these topics. - diggertigger, on 06/23/2008, -17/+2The most effective spies are able to don the garments,both rhetorically and spiritually, of the groups that they are charged with infiltrating. AJ is too well financed and promoted to be taken at face value. In my opinion, he is an over-blown characature of a true Patriot. When all of his followers are sitting in government detention camps AJ will, by some miracle, still be on the air.
No need for simplistic sarcasm
The trick is
Jones draws attention to many "Crime's" and gets peoples trust with his info(which believe me is already out there)
and fake patriotism but leads us away from the the culprits
Jones is a left gatekeeper and would have been dead a long time ago if he was the real ticket
At the end of the day free we only see who they want us to see
Im not ashamed to admit I was a big Jones fan too till I seen through the *****!!- Becca4RonPaul, on 06/24/2008, -1/+5Do you have any objective or rational basis for your radical skepticism, besides just your own paranoid subjectivity? Can you justify any of your claims with evidence--Jones a "left gatekeeper"? draws attention to many "crimes" so people will trust him . . . so he can do what in your opinion? (better yet, do you have any reason other than your opinion?) leads us away from the culprits--oh, okay, who are these culprits Jones is cloaking and what's your evidence? I think you surrendered to your own mental ***** instead of seeing through it as you claim.
- diggertigger, on 06/25/2008, -2/+0eg 1. :- Alex Jones was right in like a flash spreading misleading, false and overblown claims linking Peter Power, a crisis management consultant and former member of Britain's anti-terror police, to a 'terrorism drill' which Jones alleges was used to provide cover for State perpetrators of the multiple blasts.
The wild allegations left others presenting so-called "conspiracy theories" about these attacks open to ridicule --because of false claims by the most reknowned radio show on these topics.
- diggertigger, on 06/25/2008, -2/+0eg 1. :- Alex Jones was right in like a flash spreading misleading, false and overblown claims linking Peter Power, a crisis management consultant and former member of Britain's anti-terror police, to a 'terrorism drill' which Jones alleges was used to provide cover for State perpetrators of the multiple blasts.
- Becca4RonPaul, on 06/24/2008, -1/+5Do you have any objective or rational basis for your radical skepticism, besides just your own paranoid subjectivity? Can you justify any of your claims with evidence--Jones a "left gatekeeper"? draws attention to many "crimes" so people will trust him . . . so he can do what in your opinion? (better yet, do you have any reason other than your opinion?) leads us away from the culprits--oh, okay, who are these culprits Jones is cloaking and what's your evidence? I think you surrendered to your own mental ***** instead of seeing through it as you claim.
- l0k0, on 06/24/2008, -11/+5"In reality, what Jennings witnessed completely contradicts the official story of what happened to Building 7."
So the new evidence here, in the case of PP or Infowars, is that dead bodies were in WTC 7, and thus a controlled demolition occurred. In fact, this isn't new evidence at all. Dead bodies in the lobby of WTC 7 is something I would expect. If you actually read the NIST report you would know:
"At approximately 9:30 a.m., FDNY, EMS, established a Division for assissting victims at WTC 7. An EMS triage center was established in the lobby of WTC 7 as occupants from WTC 1 and WTC 6 evacuated through WTC 7."
It's on page 109 of the NIST report:
http://wtc.nist.gov/NISTNCSTAR1-8.pdf
This was published in September of 2005, so the fact that people think dead bodies in the lobby of WTC 7 is somehow inconsistent with the NIST Report, perhaps you should try actually reading it.- FelicityJones, on 06/24/2008, -2/+8According to Barry, the lobby was completely destroyed. Explosions were heard going off all over. NIST refused to even consider explosives being used at all which is effectively claiming no explosives were involved. That is the contradiction. Regarding the bodies, whatever destroyed the lobby more than likely killed the people who were there including the wounded. If the lobby was unrecognizable as Barry puts it, I'm sure many people in the lobby would have been killed also including triage workers, firemen and police. It was claimed that no one died in WTC7 which appears to be false now.
So you can try to pick things apart only to have you picked apart. The key is so many witnesses go on the record describing huge explosions going off and yet NIST never even considered that as a possibility. Are you going to blame that on incompetence as well? No, they were ordered to not go there.
- l0k0, on 06/24/2008, -4/+5"NIST refused to even consider explosives being used at all which is effectively claiming no explosives were involved. That is the contradiction."
Wrong as usual. They spent three years investigating it, considered all hypothesis, such as controlled demolition, but found nothing corrobarating it. You would know this if you bothered to read the FAQ:
http://wtc.nist.gov/pubs/factsheets/faqs_8_2006.ht ...
The fact he claims no one was in WTC 7 when he entered does contradict practically every other eyewitness, which I'm sure you will ignore since it can't be twisted to support your *****. The pullout didn't start until 2:30 p.m. at the earliest. Are all these people lying and Jennings is not. Are they all confused, with the exception of Jennings. Is this guy lying when he claims other people were in WTC 7?
"Then we found out, I guess around 3:00 o'clock, that they thought 7 was going to collapse. So, of course, we've got guys all in this pile over here and the main concern was get everybody out, and I guess it took us over an hour and a half, two hours to get everybody out of there. So it took us a while and we ended up backing everybody out, and that's when 7 collapsed. Basically, we fell back for 7 to collapse, and then we waited a while and it got a lot more organized, I would guess. –"
Are all these people lying?
http://wtc7lies.googlepages.com/eyewitnessaccounts ...
You really think that damage to the lobby couldn't have occurred from the fire or the massive amount of debris that hit WTC 7?
"The key is so many witnesses go on the record describing huge explosions going off and yet NIST never even considered that as a possibility."
You fail again:
http://wtc7lies.googlepages.com/whattheyheard
And you repeat your lie that NIST did not consider the CD hypothesis.
- honestjoe, on 06/24/2008, -2/+4NIST admited that they did "NOT" look for explosive residue and said; "If you're looking for something that isn't there, you're wasting your time … and the taxpayers' money."
http://www.ae911truth.org/press/23
So tell me how can NIST know there's no evidence if you don't look for it first?
NIST also has been forced to admit that the total free-fall collapse of the twin towers (WTC 7 is still unexplained, possibly because it was omitted from the commission report) cannot be explained after an exhaustive scientific study, implicitly acknowledging that controlled demolition is the only means by which the buildings could have come down.http://digg.com/world_news/NIST_Admits_Total_Colla ...
During a recent public meeting on the progress of the WTC7 report NIST said they do “NOT” know how the fires were initiated in WTC7. At one point, a participants asks NIST if the fires were initiated by the collapse of WTC2, and the NIST guy is ambiguous in his response, claiming that all they know is that there were fires, which may have been caused by the collapse and he goes on to say there are other forms of initiation, such as electrical outlets. NIST also makes clear at the meeting that the shutdown of the fire alarm in the morning really isn’t a big deal (this was also addressed in the conference) just like how they don’t think it matters how the fire was started.
http://nasathermalimages.com/images/NIST_NCST_Advi ...
Its quite odd that NIST does not care how or when the fire started isn't it?
The head of the WTC collapse investigation says he “would possibly consider examining” the collapse of Building 7, but by this time all the rubble has already been removed and destroyed. [US Congress, 3/6/2002]
“I have combed through our national standard for fire investigation, NFPA 921, but nowhere in it does one find an exemption allowing the destruction of evidence for buildings over 10 stories tall.” Bill Manning Fire Engineering
So lets start with evidence that is looked for and used in any arson investigation.
NATIONAL STANDARD FOR FIRE INVESTIGATION: NFPA 921.
Sec 12-4: Unusual residues ...could arise from thermite, magnesium or other pyrotechnic materials!
#1 "Many different incendiary devices are constantly being created in order to mislead fire investigators into thinking the fire is due to natural causes. Thanks to skilled fire investigators, experience and technological advances, the mystery of these devices and how they work is soon understood and exposed. In recent years the use of thermite reactions as incendiary devices has gained popularity with arsonists because they are easily ignited with a match, burn quickly and can generate a very intense heat in excess of 4000F." http://www.materials-engr.com/ns96.html
Note that sulfur is:
“The most popular vaporizing agent due to the fact it lowers ignition temperature for most pyrotechnic mixtures.” --From the web page: Pyrotechnic Chemicals
http://web.archive.org/web/20040415193823/http://m ...
The Twin Towers and WTC 7 had the puzzling sulfur residue! World Trade Center Building Performance Study, Appendix C Source”Limited Metallurgical Examination”, shows evidence of explosives used, by way of photographs, microscopic, and chemical examination.
“Evidence of a severe high temperature corrosion attack on the steel, including oxidation and sulfidation with subsequent intergranular melting, was readily visible in the near-surface microstructure."… “The thinning of the steel occurred by high temperature corrosion due to a combination of oxidation and sulfidation."..."The unusual thinning of the member is most likely due to an attack of the steel by grain boundary penetration of sulfur forming sulfides that contain both iron and copper."..."A liquid eutectic mixture containing primarily iron, oxygen, and sulfur formed during this hot corrosion attack on the steel."… “The severe corrosion and subsequent erosion of Samples 1 and 2 are a very unusual event. No clear explanation for the source of the sulfur has been identified.”
The severe corrosion and subsequent erosion of Samples 1 and 2 are a very unusual event. No clear explanation for the source of the sulfur has been identified.”
http://www.fema.gov/library/wtcstudy.shtm FEMA, Appendix C
• http://www.fema.gov/pdf/library/fema403_apc.pdf
• NY Times: "perhaps the deepest mystery uncovered in the investigation.“
Sulfur is used with thermite (called “thermate”) to cut fast through steel and has been used as evidence by investigators in arson cases!
NATIONAL STANDARD FOR FIRE INVESTIGATION: NFPA 921.
Sec 12-4: Unusual residues ...could arise from thermite, magnesium or other pyrotechnic materials!
- honestjoe, on 06/24/2008, -2/+4NIST admited that they did "NOT" look for explosive residue and said; "If you're looking for something that isn't there, you're wasting your time … and the taxpayers' money."
- l0k0, on 06/24/2008, -4/+5"NIST refused to even consider explosives being used at all which is effectively claiming no explosives were involved. That is the contradiction."
- FelicityJones, on 06/24/2008, -2/+8According to Barry, the lobby was completely destroyed. Explosions were heard going off all over. NIST refused to even consider explosives being used at all which is effectively claiming no explosives were involved. That is the contradiction. Regarding the bodies, whatever destroyed the lobby more than likely killed the people who were there including the wounded. If the lobby was unrecognizable as Barry puts it, I'm sure many people in the lobby would have been killed also including triage workers, firemen and police. It was claimed that no one died in WTC7 which appears to be false now.
- honestjoe, on 06/24/2008, -1/+16It is well documented that the fire department initially ordered the lobby of WTC7 to be set up as the triage area for any wounded evacuated from the North tower. But an order came down not to use WTC7 (from an unknown official) before the second plane struck. You can read the reports of EMS Captain Abdo Nahmod, Chief John Perrugia, EMT Gregg Brady, EMT Richard Zarillo etc.
When the second attack occurred Fire Commissioner Thomas Von Essen arrived at WTC 7 before the collapse of the South Tower, looking for Mayor Giuliani. Learning that the OEM headquarters has been evacuated, he later claims that he thinks, “How ridiculous. We’ve got a thirteen-million-dollar command center and we can’t even use it.” [Essen, 2002, pp. 26] He says in frustration, “How can we be evacuating OEM? We really need it now.” He will later tell an interviewer that he’d headed for the OEM headquarters because, “I thought that was where we should all be because that’s what [it] was built for.” [Fink and Mathias, 2002, pp. 230]
All individuals in the Secret Service’s New York field office, located in WTC 7, were ordered to evacuate after the first attack. [PCCW Newsletter, 3/2006] OEM Commissioner John Odermatt, said during an interview that after the first plane hit the WTC, he left only two staffers at the command center. [Barrett and Collins, 2006, pp. 34] According to a soldier at the scene, WTC Building 7 is evacuated before the second tower is hit. [Fort Detrick Standard, 10/18/2001] No reason has been given for the speedy evacuation of WTC 7 or why they DIDN'T evacuate the South Tower but instead sent everyone back into the South Tower.
Question #1. Why did they decide before the South Tower was hit that the “Bunker” was a greater risk to its occupants than the South Tower?
Question #2. What reason was given for the NYFD to relocate the triage area away from WTC7?
The answer to both is because WTC7 had explosions and was already on fire! This has been confirmed by Chief Hall, and Chief Morris, who decided not to establish a command post at WTC7 as planed because they had discovered it was already on fire before the “South” Tower collapsed. This is also confirmed by Lt. Dennis P. Stafford who had met up with Chief Hall, and Chief Morris to assist in the establishment of a command post. http://www.thememoryhole.org/911/pa-transcripts/pa ... Other accounts confirm that WTC7 was on fire before the South Tower had collapsed and had been evacuated immediately after the first plane had struck the North Tower come from Michael Hess, New York’s corporation counsel, and Barry Jennings, a City Housing Authority worker.
Here are just a few pictures of over a dozen that show WTC7 on fire before the collapse of the South Tower. (The fire clearly originates from SEC and Provident Financial Management.)
Shows the fire on the lower floors below the shadow line cast by another building
in WTC7 after the jet had struck the South Tower:
http://www.amanzafar.com/WTC/wtc-31.jpg
Shows the fire in WTC7 before the collapse of the South Tower:
http://www.amanzafar.com/WTC/wtc-31.jpg
Shows the fire even through all the dust after the 1st collapse when the view/light was obscured by dust. http://www.amanzafar.com/WTC/wtc-67.jpg
Shows the fire location (before fire) of WTC7 before the false flag event: http://www.amanzafar.com/WTC/wtc-8.jpg- honestjoe, on 06/24/2008, -1/+10The cause of the explosions are unclear but it is absolutely certain from witness testimony and photo evidence that the fire started before the South Tower collapsed therefore there is plenty of evidence to declare WTC7 an arson and begin investigating it as such.
So lets start with evidence that is looked for and used in any arson investigation.
NATIONAL STANDARD FOR FIRE INVESTIGATION: NFPA 921.
Sec 12-4: Unusual residues ...could arise from thermite, magnesium or other pyrotechnic materials!
#1 "Many different incendiary devices are constantly being created in order to mislead fire investigators into thinking the fire is due to natural causes. Thanks to skilled fire investigators, experience and technological advances, the mystery of these devices and how they work is soon understood and exposed. In recent years the use of thermite reactions as incendiary devices has gained popularity with arsonists because they are easily ignited with a match, burn quickly and can generate a very intense heat in excess of 4000F." http://www.materials-engr.com/ns96.html
Note that sulfur is:
“The most popular vaporizing agent due to the fact it lowers ignition temperature for most pyrotechnic mixtures.” --From the web page: Pyrotechnic Chemicals
http://web.archive.org/web/20040415193823/http://m ...
The Twin Towers and WTC 7 had the puzzling sulfur residue! World Trade Center Building Performance Study, Appendix C Source”Limited Metallurgical Examination”, shows evidence of explosives used, by way of photographs, microscopic, and chemical examination.
“Evidence of a severe high temperature corrosion attack on the steel, including oxidation and sulfidation with subsequent intergranular melting, was readily visible in the near-surface microstructure."… “The thinning of the steel occurred by high temperature corrosion due to a combination of oxidation and sulfidation."..."The unusual thinning of the member is most likely due to an attack of the steel by grain boundary penetration of sulfur forming sulfides that contain both iron and copper."..."A liquid eutectic mixture containing primarily iron, oxygen, and sulfur formed during this hot corrosion attack on the steel."… “The severe corrosion and subsequent erosion of Samples 1 and 2 are a very unusual event. No clear explanation for the source of the sulfur has been identified.”
The severe corrosion and subsequent erosion of Samples 1 and 2 are a very unusual event. No clear explanation for the source of the sulfur has been identified.”
http://www.fema.gov/library/wtcstudy.shtm FEMA, Appendix C
• http://www.fema.gov/pdf/library/fema403_apc.pdf
• NY Times: "perhaps the deepest mystery uncovered in the investigation.“
Sulfur is used with thermite (called “thermate”) to cut fast through steel and has been used as evidence by investigators in arson cases!
NATIONAL STANDARD FOR FIRE INVESTIGATION: NFPA 921.
Sec 12-4: Unusual residues ...could arise from thermite, magnesium or other pyrotechnic materials!- honestjoe, on 06/24/2008, -1/+10Its quite a coincidence that the fire originates at the SEC office isn’t it?
During a public meeting on the progress of the WTC7 report NIST said they do “NOT” know how the fires were initiated in WTC7. At one point, a participants asks NIST if the fires were initiated by the collapse of WTC2, and the NIST guy is ambiguous in his response, claiming that all they know is that there were fires, which may have been caused by the collapse and he goes on to say there are other forms of initiation, such as electrical outlets. NIST also makes clear at the meeting that the shutdown of the fire alarm in the morning really isn’t a big deal (this was also addressed in the conference) just like how they don’t think it matters how the fire was started.
http://nasathermalimages.com/images/NIST_NCST_Advi ...
Its quite odd that NIST does not care how or when the fire started isn't it?
The head of the WTC collapse investigation says he “would possibly consider examining” the collapse of Building 7, but by this time all the rubble has already been removed and destroyed. [US Congress, 3/6/2002]
“I have combed through our national standard for fire investigation, NFPA 921, but nowhere in it does one find an exemption allowing the destruction of evidence for buildings over 10 stories tall.” Bill Manning Fire Engineering- Sep11insidejob, on 06/24/2008, -1/+7Thanks for posting that.
- honestjoe, on 06/24/2008, -1/+10Its quite a coincidence that the fire originates at the SEC office isn’t it?
- honestjoe, on 06/24/2008, -1/+10The cause of the explosions are unclear but it is absolutely certain from witness testimony and photo evidence that the fire started before the South Tower collapsed therefore there is plenty of evidence to declare WTC7 an arson and begin investigating it as such.
- diggertigger, on 06/24/2008, -14/+0Thanks for that honest joe
can I say even after all this time your still easily the most obvious shill on DIGG
most guys on here are on a learning curve and will eventually realize that You, Alex the Ballex jones, and Mr Watson are all intel shill's- card51short, on 06/24/2008, -1/+6for the jesuits, right?
- diggertigger, on 06/24/2008, -11/+0For the Jesuits the Zionists and the Banksters
- del35, on 07/06/2008, -0/+2Ok let me get this right. Prior to the collapse of the twin towers, there were explosions in WTC 7. We have to conclude then that:
Debris from at least one of the plains that hit the twin towers fell on WT7 causing damage and subsequent explosions.
OR
Someone decided to blowup the Office of Emergency Management prior to the collapse of the twin towers.
Why would someone want to blow up the OEM? Perhaps it was an attempt to destroy evidence? But why? Was the OEM used to coordinate some event that would have to be covered up? There is however another problem. If the Twin Towers had not collapsed, the collapse of the towers could not have been managed from the OEM.
Was the collapse of WTC7 an entirely separate criminal event from the attack on the towers?
This is possible given that so many sensitive documents concerning ongoing criminal investigations were housed in WTC. - humanerror, on 07/07/2008, -0/+2The screaming, rabid paranoia of many self proclaimed "truthers" is the biggest obstacle to those of us who would like to see an actual investigation into the events of 9/11. People who support finding out the truth need to be very clear about exactly what we know and what we do not.
What we know is,
1. The official version is incomplete and self-contradictory.
2. There have been consistent attempts by the Bush administration and others to cover up the events of 9/11 and prevent an honest investigation.
That's what we know, and it is more than enough to demand answers.
If you say you know for a fact what happened on 9/11, then it's easy for the people involved to dismiss you and ignore you and call you irrational and crazy, because you ARE being irrational and you DO sound crazy. Stop pretending you know what happened, becuase you don't, and if you did then we wouldn't need an investigation to begin with.
To review, here's what we do not know:
1. We do NOT know what actually happened to building 7. That's the whole point of investigating it.
2. We do NOT know whether or not the planes caused the towers to fall. We may have many reasons to question whether they did or not. We may have good grounds to demand real explanations and answers to our questions. But, again: We do NOT already know the answers to those questions. That's the whole point of asking them.
So please, continue to ask questions and demand answers, only from now on while you're doing it, keep your armchair engineering expertise to yourself. Yes, your extensive examination of youtube videos is perfectly good grounds to form your own opinion, but it is NOT good grounds for making the case to others. That's why we need an actual investigation in the first place.
And finally, for *****'s sake, how about some perspective? It's cool when you take to the streets with your megaphone and scream and demand accountability. I'm all for that. But why the ***** are you upset about 9/11 when you don't care about MILLIONS OF HUMAN BEINGS being killed directly or indirectly by Americans at this very moment?
Maybe you have some fairly good reasons to believe Bush caused 9/11.
But you can be damned sure without a doubt that BUSH CAUSED IRAQ. And that's a far, far more serious crime by any standard. And it's still going on!! If you're angry, if you're sick of sitting down, then get out there and ***** stop it!
Otherwise all your screaming and ranting and disrupting interviews and public talks and TV shows is just taking attention away from the larger crime that's still going on now, and guess what, that makes you part of the ***** problem.- contemplator, on 07/07/2008, -0/+2Hell ya!!
Hopefully this logical and level headed approach will infect both sides of the argument. The "Truth Movement" in its current manifestation is one of the best things going for the "official story" crowd.
- contemplator, on 07/07/2008, -0/+2Hell ya!!
