WTC7 Demolition on mainstream news site

[wendy]

http://www.canada.com/calgaryherald/...2-180a4720e918

The curious tale of the 'other' WTC tower

Kevin Brooker, Calgary Herald

Published: Monday, March 26, 2007

Now that Rosie O'Donnell is trying to table it on The View, I guess we can talk about it here.

First, a news quiz: If, some time after the collapse of World Trade Center towers 1 and 2, a 47-storey office building in a major American city also came crashing to the ground, do you think you'd know about it?

Of course, you would.

But if I were to tell you that such an event actually did happen, could you name that building?

If you are like most North Americans, I'm guessing probably not.

In fact, the collapse of the Salomon Brothers Building, which was also known as WTC 7 and stood but two blocks away from ground zero, occurred late in the day on Sept. 11, 2001.

It remains one of the central anomalies in a day filled with anomalies, yet it was treated then, and remains today, at least in official annals, as an insignificant footnote.

Struck by no aircraft, and little debris, WTC 7 nevertheless had small fires mysteriously burning in several of its middle floors. Judging from photographs, one would assume those fires should have been easily contained.

Yet at 5:20 p.m., in a space of 6.5 seconds, or practically at a free-fall rate, WTC 7 collapsed perfectly into its footprint. It should have been big news, if only because it would have been the first steel-frame building in history to collapse due exclusively to fire. But for some reason, reporters gave it a wide berth.

Shortly after 9/11, when Associated Press published a timeline of events called A Stunning 48 Hours of News, WTC 7 was not mentioned at all. Neither was it in the government's official 9/11 report. And to this day, authorities have only issued an inconclusive draft report as to why the building fell.

Not everyone is so incurious, however. A host of researchers have busily gathered everything they could learn about that day, and WTC 7 in particular.

Though you're unlikely to have seen it, video of the collapse does exist (and can be found on the Internet). The footage exhibits the hallmarks of controlled demolition, including bursts of dust from what appear to be many tiny explosions and the curtain-like plummeting of the entire structure.

During the brief aftermath before WTC 7 disappeared into the memory hole, CBS anchor Dan Rather showed the video and said, "For the third time today, it's reminiscent of those pictures we've all seen too much on television before, where a building was deliberately destroyed by well-placed dynamite."

Many have concluded it was just that. Moreover, they discovered that WTC 7 had unusual tenants, including several floors devoted to each of the FBI, the CIA and mayor Rudy Giuliani's emergency headquarters. It was also home to a legal branch of the Security and Exchange Commission, which allegedly harboured evidence relating to a number of ongoing investigations of market malfeasance.

A PBS television documentary later showed the WTC's owner, Larry Silverstein, describing how he reacted that day: " 'We've had such terrible loss of life,' " he recalled saying, " 'maybe the smartest thing to do is pull it.' And they made that decision to pull and we watched the building collapse."

You can read into that what you may, just as you can with the fact that Silverstein's group had only acquired WTC six months earlier, for $3.2 billion, and bought insurance that for the first time specifically indemnified acts of terrorism. As of last report, Silverstein had collected $4.6 billion.

Finally, from the department of curiouser and curiouser, came another bombshell this year. Researchers unearthed a BBC television report from 9/11 in which the reporter announced the collapse of WTC 7. Strangely, though, the building is still plainly visible over her right shoulder, and would not fall for another 20 minutes.

Well, if the rest of the world won't get to the bottom of this, maybe Rosie will.

911 smoking gun

[Figleaf]

http://www.canada.com/calgaryherald/...2-180a4720e918

...Finally, from the department of curiouser and curiouser, came another bombshell this year. Researchers unearthed a BBC television report from 9/11 in which the reporter announced the collapse of WTC 7. Strangely, though, the building is still plainly visible over her right shoulder, and would not fall for another 20 minutes.

Well, if the rest of the world won't get to the bottom of this, maybe Rosie will.

911 smoking gun

Toooo bizarre!

[stignasty]

Before this thread gets (rightly) deleted.

A comment on the youtube link (the other link is not working, perhaps forged to lend credibility?):

"OMG, the BBC was in on it!

Please.

Just a case of inept reporting. The "news crew" probably heard over the police scanner that the building was probably going to collapse, and she misheard it as having just collapsed. She, like the rest of the world, probably didn't know anything about WTC 7. So, she didn't follow up on it, by looking over her shoulder."

Sounds reasonable to me.

Just so it's clear, the twin towers didn't collapse into their own footprints. In fact, they hit WTC 7 in a couple of pretty sensitive spots. One was a 17 story gash that removed the entire corner of the building to the street. The other was in the front of the building near the top. The building started to sag noticeably well before the collapse. The fires in the building were fueled by fuel tanks for generators. WTC didn't fall into its own footprint either. The buildings around it were also damaged. The building directly behind it was later demolished because of the damage WTC7 caused.

This 9/11 Truthiness has to stop.

[August1991]

Am I the only one to find amusing that these conspiracy nuts criticize the mainstream press until the mainstream press prints anything remotely related to their crazy theories?

BTW, the WTC7 building was relatively close to the Twin Towers. I saw Ground Zero within months of September 2001 and there were chunks missing from surrounding buildings. There should be no doubt in anybody's mind that WTC7 fell as a result of the collapse of the other buildings.

Also, if these posters are going to continue to participate here, would it be possible to build a separate sandbox where they could play quietly alone?

[Figleaf]

Also, if these posters are going to continue to participate here, would it be possible to build a separate sandbox where they could play quietly alone?

You have a real yen for censorship, don't you August?

The video is truly freakish. Do you have an explanation for it, or is capital I Ignoring it going to be your response?

[stignasty]

The video is truly freakish. Do you have an explanation for it, or is capital I Ignoring it going to be your response?

Just a case of inept reporting. The "news crew" probably heard over the police scanner that the building was probably going to collapse, and she misheard it as having just collapsed. She, like the rest of the world, probably didn't know anything about WTC 7. So, she didn't follow up on it, by looking over her shoulder."

http://www.911myths.com/html/wtc7_damage.html details the damage with some pictures that give a pretty good picture of why it collapsed.

[wendy]

Here you can hear rescue workers tell everyone to get away from WTC 7 because it is about to blow up.

Here you can hear Larry Silverstein admits that WTC 7 was "pulled", the industrial term for demolished.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u0scE7bQWdk

note:

VERY few people in the world can do this type of controlled demolition plus it takes weeks to prepare in advance, LOL!

Great site for WTC 7 here:

http://www.911exposed.org/WTC1.htm

More sites exposing 9/11:

http://www.911scholars.org/

http://www.infowars.com/index.html

http://www.911blogger.com/

http://prisonplanet.com/

911 was most definitely an inside job. Pass these videos around to as many people as you know. People need to know what really happened and stop this murderous regime.

[stignasty]

Here's a funny picture of a dragon eating a sheep that has burst into flames. It makes as much sense as 9/11 truthiness.

[BornAlbertan]

If incompetence is proof of a conspiracy in the Bush administration...what does proven corruption say about the Liberal party of Canada?

[stignasty]

...what does proven corruption say about the Liberal party of Canada?

I don't think corruption has been patented by the Liberal Party of Canada. Give the Conservatives a majority for 13 years and they'll find the rope to hang themselves with too.

[geoffrey]

Here's a funny picture of a dragon eating a sheep that has burst into flames. It makes as much sense as 9/11 truthiness.

Your artistic talents are awe inspiring.

[Charles Anthony]

Thank you Wendy for reporting this event. At the very least, it should not be in the Federal Politics sub-category of discussion.

[PolyNewbie]

You can read into that what you may, just as you can with the fact that Silverstein's group had only acquired WTC six months earlier, for $3.2 billion, and bought insurance that for the first time specifically indemnified acts of terrorism. As of last report, Silverstein had collected $4.6 billion.

If corrected this should read:

You can read into that what you may, just as you can with the fact that Silverstein's group had only acquired WTC six months earlier, for $3.2 billion $200 million, and bought insurance that for the first time specifically indemnified acts of terrorism. As of last report, Silverstein had collected $4.6 billion [added correction] as double indemnity due to the attacks being an act of terrorism.

Methinks Stignasty doth protest too much.

Charles Anthony Thank you Wendy for reporting this event. At the very least, it should not be in the Federal Politics sub-category of discussion

Stephen Harper has stated that we are at war in Afghanistan because of the terrorist attacks on 911. The terrorist attacks have federal political repercussions.

This business of 911 being an inside job isn't going to go away. Its only going to get bigger. Its been growing steadily since the "attacks".

[Argus]

Also, if these posters are going to continue to participate here, would it be possible to build a separate sandbox where they could play quietly alone?

You have a real yen for censorship, don't you August?

Maybe he's just too sane to want the site cluttered up with looneys and their kooky conspiracy theories. There are far too many of them here now, and far too many who are several bricks shy of a full load willing to take them at least partially seriously.

The video is truly freakish. Do you have an explanation for it, or is capital I Ignoring it going to be your response?

I think these kinds of idiotic conspiracy theories have been proven to be so much hot air time and time again. And really, anyone who would incorporate the BBC and its anchorman into the conspiracy really needs to reassess their gullibility.

[PolyNewbie]

Argus I think these kinds of idiotic conspiracy theories have been proven to be so much hot air time and time again. And really, anyone who would incorporate the BBC and its anchorman into the conspiracy really needs to reassess their gullibility.

Anyone that that would make a statement like that without looking at any evidence and without actually being able to produce any evidence that justifies their own position on the matter perhaps needs to re assess their own gullibility.

You cannot produce a single shred of evidence that supports the official conspiracy theory. The Bin Laden confession was faked - its obvious. The FEMA report even says "low probability of occurance" wrt wtc7 collapse. They can't explain it, NIST still can't explain it. But you geniuses just want to agree with whats on TV.

Occams Razor does not guarentee the most simple minded explanation to be correct. The simplest explanation that explains the observations is most likely correct according to this junk logic "razor".

The official explanation does not explain the hot spots and molten metal, nor the evidence of demolition.

[Charles Anthony]

Stephen Harper has stated that we are at war in Afghanistan because of the terrorist attacks on 911. The terrorist attacks have federal political repercussions.

The Opening Post and this discussion is not addressing any Federal Politics with respect to Canada.

[wendy]

Maybe he's just too sane to want the site cluttered up with looneys and their kooky conspiracy theories. There are far too many of them here now, and far too many who are several bricks shy of a full load willing to take them at least partially seriously.

Actually Argus if you had any knowledge of history you would know that government sponsored terrorism is very normal for US government and many others through history as a pretext to gain support and trick its citizens into war. Pear Harbour, USS Liberty, Golf of Tonkin, Reichstag fire and Operations Northwoods are all well known "false flag" events.

U.S. Military Drafted Plans to Terrorize U.S. Cities to Provoke War With Cuba

In the early 1960s, America's top military leaders reportedly drafted plans to kill innocent people and commit acts of terrorism in U.S. cities to create public support for a war against Cuba.

Code named Operation Northwoods, the plans reportedly included the possible assassination of Cuban émigrés, sinking boats of Cuban refugees on the high seas, hijacking planes, blowing up a U.S. ship, and even orchestrating violent terrorism in U.S. cities.

The plans were developed as ways to trick the American public and the international community into supporting a war to oust Cuba's then new leader, communist Fidel Castro.

America's top military brass even contemplated causing U.S. military casualties, writing: "We could blow up a U.S. ship in Guantanamo Bay and blame Cuba," and, "casualty lists in U.S. newspapers would cause a helpful wave of national indignation."

The plans had the written approval of all of the Joint Chiefs of Staff and were presented to President Kennedy's defense secretary, Robert McNamara, in March 1962. But they apparently were rejected by the civilian leadership and have gone undisclosed for nearly 40 years.

"These were Joint Chiefs of Staff documents. The reason these were held secret for so long is the Joint Chiefs never wanted to give these up because they were so embarrassing," Bamford told ABCNEWS.com.

"The whole point of a democracy is to have leaders responding to the public will, and here this is the complete reverse, the military trying to trick the American people into a war that they want but that nobody else wants."

http://www.prisonplanet.com/us_military_dr...e_us_cities.htm

http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/news/20010430/

Time to wake up sheeple!

[wendy]

Great must see movie on Government Sponsored Terrorism

Terror Storm: A Chronicle of False Flag Terrorism in this century... compelling evidence that even London's 7/7 bombings were planned/allowed by the British Govt.

If you like this, PLEASE buy the original and make copies for your friends! Spread the word!

[White Doors]

Zzzzz....

[Figleaf]

Thank you Wendy, for posting all this excellent material.

No doubt you have noticed how certain posters tend to angrily deny and froth at the mouth and yet fail to say anything substantive in response. You should regard this behaviour as proof of your success in puncturing a construct of vapid and mistaken beliefs.

[Catchme]

http://www.canada.com/calgaryherald/...2-180a4720e918

In fact, the collapse of the Salomon Brothers Building, which was also known as WTC 7 and stood but two blocks away from ground zero, occurred late in the day on Sept. 11, 2001.

It remains one of the central anomalies in a day filled with anomalies, yet it was treated then, and remains today, at least in official annals, as an insignificant footnote.

Struck by no aircraft, and little debris, WTC 7 nevertheless had small fires mysteriously burning in several of its middle floors. Judging from photographs, one would assume those fires should have been easily contained.

Yet at 5:20 p.m., in a space of 6.5 seconds, or practically at a free-fall rate, WTC 7 collapsed perfectly into its footprint. It should have been big news, if only because it would have been the first steel-frame building in history to collapse due exclusively to fire.

Well, if the rest of the world won't get to the bottom of this, maybe Rosie will.

911 smoking gun

Wow, the new owner sure made a bundle off of that deal, eh? And the WTC7 stood 2 blocks away, and it made history, that is not being acknowledged, amazing truly amazing.

[White Doors]

amazing truly amazing.

But is it 'boggling your mind'?

[White Doors]

This I find to be mind boggling! Truly mind boggling!

FACT: Many conspiracy theorists point to FEMA's preliminary report, which said there was relatively light damage to WTC 7 prior to its collapse. With the benefit of more time and resources, NIST researchers now support the working hypothesis that WTC 7 was far more compromised by falling debris than the FEMA report indicated. "The most important thing we found was that there was, in fact, physical damage to the south face of building 7," NIST's Sunder tells PM. "On about a third of the face to the center and to the bottom--approximately 10 stories--about 25 percent of the depth of the building was scooped out." NIST also discovered previously undocumented damage to WTC 7's upper stories and its southwest corner.

NIST investigators believe a combination of intense fire and severe structural damage contributed to the collapse, though assigning the exact proportion requires more research. But NIST's analysis suggests the fall of WTC 7 was an example of "progressive collapse," a process in which the failure of parts of a structure ultimately creates strains that cause the entire building to come down. Videos of the fall of WTC 7 show cracks, or "kinks," in the building's facade just before the two penthouses disappeared into the structure, one after the other. The entire building fell in on itself, with the slumping east side of the structure pulling down the west side in a diagonal collapse.

According to NIST, there was one primary reason for the building's failure: In an unusual design, the columns near the visible kinks were carrying exceptionally large loads, roughly 2000 sq. ft. of floor area for each floor. "What our preliminary analysis has shown is that if you take out just one column on one of the lower floors," Sunder notes, "it could cause a vertical progression of collapse so that the entire section comes down."

There are two other possible contributing factors still under investigation: First, trusses on the fifth and seventh floors were designed to transfer loads from one set of columns to another. With columns on the south face apparently damaged, high stresses would likely have been communicated to columns on the building's other faces, thereby exceeding their load-bearing capacities.

Second, a fifth-floor fire burned for up to 7 hours. "There was no firefighting in WTC 7," Sunder says. Investigators believe the fire was fed by tanks of diesel fuel that many tenants used to run emergency generators. Most tanks throughout the building were fairly small, but a generator on the fifth floor was connected to a large tank in the basement via a pressurized line. Says Sunder: "Our current working hypothesis is that this pressurized line was supplying fuel [to the fire] for a long period of time."

WTC 7 might have withstood the physical damage it received, or the fire that burned for hours, but those combined factors--along with the building's unusual construction--were enough to set off the chain-reaction collapse.

Source:

http://www.popularmechanics.com/technology...842.html?page=5

[stignasty]

Thank you Wendy, for posting all this excellent material.

No doubt you have noticed how certain posters tend to angrily deny and froth at the mouth and yet fail to say anything substantive in response. You should regard this behaviour as proof of your success in puncturing a construct of vapid and mistaken beliefs.

I'm neither angry nor frothing at the mouth. I'm attempting to be a voice of reason in a storm of nonsense. If you want something substantive, read the article at Popular Mechanics in response to Ms. O'Donnell's comments.

Step back and think for a moment what it would take to perform a controlled demolition on the three towers that fell on September 11. The amount of explosives and wiring would be enormous, yet no one noticed this beforehand and no one has come forward in the time since to note that they saw such devices or were involved in their placement.

Two towers were 110 stories each, the smaller one was about half that size. Each of them would need thousands or explosive charges. As an example, a 23 story building took 20 days of continuous work (and was abandoned at the time) and over 4,000 explosive charges before implosion. To do this at the WTC without anyone noticing is simply impossible.

There are so many other holes in the conspiracy theory that they should be dismissed out of hand. Yet, many people promote them. Read the Popular Mechanics page. While the truthies may whine about how it isn't accurate (angrily deny and froth at the mouth), I don't hear many structural engineers and other experts voicing their concerns. (Yes, I know that someone will pull a name out as an example, but keep it in perspective)

The 9/11 truthiness is simply fiction. 9/11 was not an inside job. It was a terrorist attack by a group of fundamentalists. That's it.

[guyser]

You can read into that what you may, just as you can with the fact that Silverstein's group had only acquired WTC six months earlier, for $3.2 billion $200 million, and bought insurance that for the first time specifically indemnified acts of terrorism. As of last report, Silverstein had collected $4.6 billion [added correction] as double indemnity due to the attacks being an act of terrorism.

1) Where does $200M come from. Larry was the leaseholder and the agreement meant $3.2B to the Port Authority.

2) Double indemnity......in property policies ? Not that I have ever seen.