Except FEMA claims that it was primarily fire damage that caused the collapse.
That was a preliminary report with little investigation.
Which makes sense, as for the building to fall straight down as it did the core of the building would have had to have been damaged, while if the damage to the south side was critical to the collapse either that side would have fallen while the rest remained upright or it would have fallen over rather than implode.
Videos indicate that WTC7 did, in fact, tip toward the side of significant damage during it's collapse. Clearly seen in theseframes. This picture shows the north face of WTC7 laying on top of debris pile, which suggests that the collapse did indeed initiate on the south face.
Hmm... I don't know about you, but I'd pick a better bunch of people if I were to carry out a conspiracy. I mean, they couldn't even handle a relatively simple conspiracy as Watergate without being exposed. Are we to believe these same people are capable of some grand 9/11 conspiracy, still going strong after 5 years?
Really. I mean.... the government confiscates my property so I can release it?
Argh. Communication problem. The government can't release the videos of their own accord. The company who owns them has to give permission. Therefore, it's pointless to accuse the government of "hiding" something by not releasing the video, when it's not their sole decision to do so.
If you want to kill the conspiracy theories, you have to explain WTC7. It was over-engineered because it was the bunker for emergencies for NYC.
No, the building itself wasn't, and how could it be? The bunker came well after the construction of WTC7. Not to mention that WTC7 was built over an electrical substation, and that required such unique construction that ultimately failed under load, because if significant damage.
Then you have the owner of the building, Larry Silverstein, saying that he was sorry they had to "pull" the building. (Link to video below.)
The word "pull" is used in the demolitions industry to indicate manual demolition through things like wrecking balls and, literally, pulling the structure over or down. When you talk about explosive demolition, you use the word "shoot".
Why would they disavow pulling the building due to safety concerns? Because it takes weeks to plan the demolition of a building, and you can't really plant explosives to pull a building if the building is on fire. Especially the kind of fire that is melting steel, which occurs at 3000 degrees Fahrenheit.
There is no evidence "melted steel", especially at WTC7. Of course, steel doesn't have to melt in order to fail. I may be wrong, but I'm pretty sure that at half its melting point, steel has only 25% of its strength.
Explain why a high rise in Spain can burn for over 24 hours, partially collapse, and still not fall.
lol. Wow, awesome. You fell for that claptrap hook, line, and sinker. Did you know that the Windor building is a predominately concrete structure? Did you realize that the steel parts of the building exposed to the fire did fail?
Don't waste my time if you can't be bothered to do basic research.
Explain why the only three steel and concrete buildings in history to collapse from fire do it on a single day in the same square mile.
My God... Why do you people keep insisting that fire was the only cause of these collapses? You only demonstrate severe ignorance and blindness when doing so. Have you forgotten about the two planes that impacted WTC1 and WTC2? How about the severe structural damage (evidence for which I linked to earlier) of WTC7? How many other steel building in history have been subjected to these conditions? You're conveniently ignoring all of this.
how come there is no visible part of the plane after the crash, yet all the bodies in the plane were found?
Maybe because the plane had travelled into the building? There are numerous pictures of debris from the Pentagon floating all over the Internet. Also, I think saying "all the bodies in the plane were found" is a bit misleading. They found remains, not whole bodies...
How come so many incredible things happened coincidentally at the same time?
lol. What? You make it sound like they were all disconnected events that just "happened coincidentally at the same time". Give me a break...
How can you be so sure Bush is not related with this episode, since he actually profited from the whole thing big time?
I have to question in what way he benefitted, but now you're subscribing to the absurd idea that anyone who benefits from a tragedy had a hand in it. I suppose you should be blaming the families of the victims, too, since they received life insurance payments and all of their loved ones' possessions. Geez.
why the secret services had fled the WTC right before the collapse?
Got something to back that claim up? I've never heard it before.
Do you know what CIA has been doing in the last 70 years in my country (Italy) and in Sicily in particular?
Wow, thanks. That's fascinating, in that it directly contradicts the official story -- has it been adopted into the official story?
No, because that interpretation of Silverstein's words is incorrect. The word "pull" is used in demolition to mean manually knocking a structure down using, say, a wrecking ball or cables. The term used for explosive demolition is "shoot".
That's the only part that I think I can begin to question, though that's not to say our government is more behind it than any other government in the world. If anything's wrong, it's the towers falling so quickly like they did.
What was so quick about the collapse? I'm aware of the claim that it was "free-fall speed", but that's just absurd. If the buildings collapsed that fast, then how could there be debris falling faster than the rest of the building?
The problem is that there is not a clear view of a 747 running into the pentagon. Just a streak and a fireball. Kinda like those UFO pictures and videos.
Interesting. You're ignoring all the other evidence that points to it actually being an American Airlines 757.
Eyewitness accounts, with sources, the numerous pictures of debris, and the DNA identification of human reamins found at the Pentagon as being passengers from Flight 77.
1. Not that I doubt the Pentagon was hit by an aircraft, but it is documented fact that several security camera tapes were confiscated after the crash. Release them in their entirety.
The videos are property of the companies they were confiscated from. It's up to those companies to publically release the videos, not the government.
2. Explain to me why standard operating procedures for NORAD that would normally require specific orders to disregard, were disregarded that day.
What procedures were ignored?
3. Explain to me how WTC-7 came to be the only steel-framed structure in recorded history to suffer a complete collapse as a result of fire alone. (FEMA's own report offers an elaborate theory which they say has a "low probability of occurance")
The FEMA report was preliminary. Further investigation, not to mention somepictures and someinterviews with firefighters on the scene, indicate that WTC7 also suffered severe structural damage, not just fire.
4. In light of the signifigance (particularly to insurers, architechts, engineers) of WTC-7's collapse-due-to-fire, why were the building remains sold to China for scrap before they could be fully analyzed?
The building had been evacuated hours before the collapse, it was not necessary for rescue crews. This is a major event in the building industry: if steel structures can collapse from fire alone, insurance rates would have to be adjusted, architects would have to reconsider the design of thousands of structures.
Well, if a building couldn't collapse due to fire alone, then what's the point of fireproofing the steel columns?
5. If Flight 93 was destroyed by being crashed (intentionally or accidentally) into a field in Shanksville, PA, why did it leave a debris field over 8+ miles?
It didn't. Indian Lake is not 6 miles from the impact site, as some people would like you to believe. Popular Mechanics has some bits about Flight 93 (continues on next page, too) in their "9/11: Debunking The Myths" article.
I don't have the Firefox 2.0 alpha release, but I'd imagine it's as easy as making anything else in the interface go away. You'll have to find out the element name for the button, and then in/chrome/userChrome.css add...
The code doesn't use a doctype line. Not only does that preclude basic QA in the form of validation, but it kicks browsers into "quirks mode", which screws up CSS rendering.
It's a good thing this article wasn't about valid HTML coding, then, isn't it?
He probably is right about Boot Camp being intended to bring more Windows Users to the Mac side of the force. Too bad it's embedded in a steaming pile of vitriol. His disdain for Apple, Steve Jobs, and Mac users is so thick, you have to wonder how he managed to come up with any insight at all.
I wouldn't label that specific observation of his as insightful. It's pretty obvious to just about anyone interested.:-) Although I have no doubts that he certainly considers it lid-blowingly insightful.
"Jobs's bet: You'll start spending more and more time in OS X, until you--too--become one of the pod people. It's sad to see so many of my compatriots being turned into lemmings. Perhaps they'll wake up and smell the Apple pie in the sky--and realize they've been taken for a ride. But I doubt it."
If you have two products side-by-side, and one is clearly better in your mind, how the hell does that make you a lemming?
I don't his compatriots are the ones who need to wake up.
When you think about it, he's the only guy other than John Kerry who's had the opportunity to stand (effectively) face to face with Bush and tell him what he really thinks of 6 years of lousy policies. And he did a much better job than Kerry.
Slashdot Mirror
Videos indicate that WTC7 did, in fact, tip toward the side of significant damage during it's collapse. Clearly seen in these frames. This picture shows the north face of WTC7 laying on top of debris pile, which suggests that the collapse did indeed initiate on the south face.
Source, and more info: http://www.geocities.com/debunking911/pull.htm
The word "pull" is used in the demolitions industry to indicate manual demolition through things like wrecking balls and, literally, pulling the structure over or down. When you talk about explosive demolition, you use the word "shoot".
There is no evidence "melted steel", especially at WTC7. Of course, steel doesn't have to melt in order to fail. I may be wrong, but I'm pretty sure that at half its melting point, steel has only 25% of its strength.
lol. Wow, awesome. You fell for that claptrap hook, line, and sinker. Did you know that the Windor building is a predominately concrete structure? Did you realize that the steel parts of the building exposed to the fire did fail?
Don't waste my time if you can't be bothered to do basic research.
My God... Why do you people keep insisting that fire was the only cause of these collapses? You only demonstrate severe ignorance and blindness when doing so. Have you forgotten about the two planes that impacted WTC1 and WTC2? How about the severe structural damage (evidence for which I linked to earlier) of WTC7? How many other steel building in history have been subjected to these conditions? You're conveniently ignoring all of this.
Pictures:
http://wtc7.batcave.net/_webimages/WTC-7_sw_corne
http://www.kolumbus.fi/av.caesar/wtc/wtc7_2.jpg
Firefighter interviews:
http://www.firehouse.com/terrorist/911/magazine/g
http://www.firehouse.com/terrorist/911/magazine/g
lol. What? You make it sound like they were all disconnected events that just "happened coincidentally at the same time". Give me a break...
I have to question in what way he benefitted, but now you're subscribing to the absurd idea that anyone who benefits from a tragedy had a hand in it. I suppose you should be blaming the families of the victims, too, since they received life insurance payments and all of their loved ones' possessions. Geez.
Got something to back that claim up? I've never heard it before.
What's the relevence?
Eyewitness accounts, with sources, the numerous pictures of debris, and the DNA identification of human reamins found at the Pentagon as being passengers from Flight 77.
What procedures were ignored?
The FEMA report was preliminary. Further investigation, not to mention some pictures and some interviews with firefighters on the scene, indicate that WTC7 also suffered severe structural damage, not just fire.
This is just plain wrong. http://911myths.com/html/recycled_steel.html
Well, if a building couldn't collapse due to fire alone, then what's the point of fireproofing the steel columns?
It didn't. Indian Lake is not 6 miles from the impact site, as some people would like you to believe. Popular Mechanics has some bits about Flight 93 (continues on next page, too) in their "9/11: Debunking The Myths" article.
display: none !important;
}
*cough*
I don't his compatriots are the ones who need to wake up.
Sometimes you just don't want or even need to carry all of your information around everywhere you go...