Was 10:45 a.m. the Originally Planned Demolition Time of WTC 7? - The Truth Seeker

Fuente:

http://www.thetruthseeker.co.uk/?p=8626

Información:

Browse: Home / BBC Reported Collapse of WTC7 Before It Fell / Was 10:45 a.m. the Originally Planned Demolition Time of WTC 7?

Was 10:45 a.m. the Originally Planned Demolition Time of WTC 7?

By wmw_admin on May 7, 2008

9/11 Blogger – Wednesday, April 30, 2008

At 11:07 a.m. in the morning of September 11, 2001, a CNN correspondent in New York reported that a third tower had possibly collapsed. While this report was incorrect, it is interesting to note that the reporter’s description could have applied to World Trade Center Building 7. This huge skyscraper was indeed the third tower to collapse on 9/11. However it did not come down until late in the afternoon, more than six hours after this report.

CNN correspondent Allan Dodds Frank reported by phone from Lower Manhattan. He described: “[J]ust two or three minutes ago there was yet another collapse or explosion. I’m now out of sight, a Good Samaritan has taken me in on Duane Street. But at a quarter to 11, there was another collapse or explosion following the 10:30 collapse of the second tower.

And a firefighter who rushed by us estimated that 50 stories went down. The street filled with smoke. It was like a forest fire roaring down a canyon.” [1]

WTC 7 was a 47-story tower, so would have fitted the description of the estimated “50 stories” described by Frank. And it did indeed collapse completely. One could in fact accurately describe its demise with Frank’s words: “The street filled with smoke. It was like a forest fire roaring down a canyon.” However, this collapse did not happen until 5:20 that afternoon.

What could have led Frank to make his incorrect report? Surely, even in the chaos of that morning, it would have been quite difficult for a mistaken report of another massive skyscraper coming down to have emerged out of nothing. Could the reason be that WTC 7 had originally been scheduled to be brought down (with explosives) at 10:45 a.m.? The incorrect information Frank reported had therefore been put out, by persons unknown, on the assumption that this would be the case.

However, something – as yet unknown to us – happened that meant the demolition had to be delayed, and so Building 7 was not ready to be brought down until late that afternoon.

10:45 a.m. would certainly seem a far more logical time for the masterminds behind 9/11 to have wanted to bring down WTC 7. At that time, just 17 minutes after the North Tower had come down, the collapse of a third skyscraper would have appeared less obviously suspicious. It would have been easier for those involved with covering up the truth about 9/11 to claim this collapse was simply a consequence of the two earlier ones. Instead, however, the collapse at 5:20 p.m. appeared completely inexplicable. (Unless, of course, it was a controlled demolition.)

MORE REPORTS OF A THIRD COLLAPSE

What makes Frank’s report particularly notable is that there were other incorrect reports of a third building having collapsed – or at least being in danger of collapsing – later in the day, though these made specific reference to WTC 7. These went out in the hour or so before Building 7 came down:

At 4:15 p.m., CNN reported, “We’re getting information that one of the other buildings … Building 7 … is on fire and has either collapsed or is collapsing.” At 4:27, Greg Barrow reported from New York for the BBC radio channel Five Live, “We are hearing reports from local media that another building may have caught light and is in danger of collapse.” He added, “I’m not sure if it has yet collapsed, but the report we have is talking about Building 7.” At 4:54, presenter Gavin Esler reported on the BBC’s domestic television news channel, BBC News 24: “We’re now being told that yet another enormous building has collapsed. … It is the 47-story Salomon Brothers building.” At 4:57, presenter Phil Hayton announced on the BBC’s international channel, BBC World, “We’ve got some news just coming in actually that the Salomon Brothers building in New York right in the heart of Manhattan has also collapsed.” [2] However, WTC 7 (the “Salomon Brothers building”) did not collapse until almost 25 minutes later.

WHY PUT OUT ADVANCE REPORTS OF THE COLLAPSE?

These reports indicated that some people knew in advance that Building 7 was going to come down. This would have been quite a feat, since, as the New York Times put it, “before then, no modern, steel-reinforced high-rise in the United States had ever collapsed in a fire.” [3] Perhaps the real reason we heard these premature reports was that this information had somehow been passed to the media by the 9/11 perpetrators, as a cautious attempt at preventing speculation that WTC 7 was brought down with explosives. This was clearly what the collapse resembled, with the building falling completely and symmetrically into its own footprint in just 6.6 seconds.

Indeed, CBS News anchor Dan Rather commented at the time that it was “reminiscent of … when a building was deliberately destroyed by well-placed dynamite to knock it down.” [4]

Speculation such as this would surely have been a threat to the official 9/11 story, as it might lead people to ponder whether–rather than being committed by Osama bin Laden and al-Qaeda–the attacks were an “inside job.” To stifle any such debate, an official narrative would need to have been put out promptly.

Perhaps this was why at 5:10 p.m. – still before WTC 7 had come down – the BBC’s Phil Hayton reported: “[Y]ou might have heard I was talking a few moments ago about the Salomon building collapsing and indeed it has. … It seems this wasn’t the result of a new attack but because the building had been weakened during this morning’s attack.” [5] It appears the information had been put out already, not only that WTC 7 had collapsed, but also that it had come down without the use of explosives: It collapsed because “the building had been weakened during this morning’s attack.”

And thus, the cover-up had begun.

NOTES
[1] “America Under Attack.” Breaking News, CNN, September 11, 2001.
http://www.911blogger.com/node/15318

[2] These reports are summarized in Richard Porter, “Part of the Conspiracy? (2).” BBC News, March 2, 2007.

[3] James Glanz and Eric Lipton, “Burning Diesel is Cited in Fall of 3rd Tower.” New York Times, March 2, 2002.

[4] CBS News, September 11, 2001.

[5] Quoted in Richard Porter, “Part of the Conspiracy? (2).”

Ah, but what about an alternative scenario? What if, just maybe the real destination for flight 93 was not Washington, D.C., but WTC-7?

A Reader Comments – May 2, 2007

Pennsylvania is 307 miles across. United Airlines flight 93 crashed near Shanksville, Pennsylvania, in Somerset county. According to google maps, Shanksville is roughly 300 miles away from NYC. And that is going by highways, and not as the crow flies.

Flight 93 was shot down (or crashed, take your pick) at 10:06 a.m. on 9/11.

United Airlines flight 93 was a Boeing 757, which has a maximum cruising speed of 914 km/hr. Which equals 567 mph. Going at 550 to 567 mph, flight 93 could easily have made it to NYC in time to crash into WTC-7 at 10:45 a.m.—–the time that CNN reporter Allan Dodds Frank reported that a third, 50 story skyscraper had collapsed in NYC.

However, if the passengers of flight 93 did indeed bumrush the hijackers, and take control of the airplane, either a: they crashed the plane, rather than let the hijackers do any more damage, or b: the government shot the plane down with a missile to prevent their plans from being wrecked.

Now, that would leave a 47 story skyscraper still standing in NYC all wired and rigged to collapse, with no cover story plane to crash into it. It would explain why a CNN reporter was saying another skyscraper had collapsed at 10:45 a.m. when no such thing had happened. Remember, Allan Dodds Frank, the CNN reporter said that a firefighter had given him this information. And we know from audio and videotapes on youtube that firefighters ran around warning people that WTC-7 was about to explode shortly before 5:20 or so p.m., when the building did actually fall down.

One thing we know for certain. WTC-7 was brought down by a controlled demolition. No one with an ounce of brain power or common sense could possibly look at those videos of WTC-7 (aka the Salomon Bros. building) and not realize that that is a controlled demolition.

The sheer, breathtaking perfection of the collapse of WTC-7 violates all known laws of physics. All known laws of chemistry. All known laws of structural engineering. Except, of course, if it were a controlled demolition, which it was.

Posted in BBC Reported Collapse of WTC7 Before It Fell

Leer más»

Into Good and Evil - WTC 7

Fuente:

http://mynym.blogspot.com.es/2013/01/sandy-hook-and-premature-scripting-its.html

Información:

Monday, January 21, 2013

WTC 7

Further evidence of foreknowledge of WTC 7's collapse was provided by premature news reports, in which this building's collapse was announced before it actually occurred. These reports evidently began "at about 4:15," when CNN's Aaron Brown said: "We are getting information now that... Building 7... has either collapsed or is collapsing." This was over an hour before the building actually did collapse (at 5:21).

Additional premature announcements came from the BBC.

[Look at the building behind her for yourself... if you're not too lost in "official sources say."] 

At 4:53pm, the BBC's Radio Five Live said it had reports "that another large building has collapsed just over an hour ago." At 4:54, the BBC's domestic television news channel announced the collapse. Then at about 5:10, BBC World repeated this announcement. It even provided an explanation of why the building had collapsed, saying: "[T]his wasn't the result of a new attack but because the building had been weakened during this morning's attack." Finally, at 5:14, BBC reporter Jane Standley was seen announcing the collapse of the Salomon Brothers building—the other name for WTC 7—while it could still be seen standing in the background.'*

In February 2007, a video containing some of this news footage, especially of the BBC's premature reporting, was placed on the internet. After it had evoked an enormous amount of discussion and "lots of emails" to the BBC, Richard Porter, the head of news for BBC World, responded on his blog, writing:

We're not part of a conspiracy. Nobody told us what to say or do on September 11th. We didn't get told in advance that buildings were going to fall down. We didn't receive press releases or scripts in advance of events happening.... If we reported the building had collapsed before it had done so, it would have been an error—no more than that.

This was a manifestly inadequate response (as shown by viewers' responses to it, which numbered almost 600 by the end of 2007). It was obvious that the BBC's announcement was "an error." The question was: How could such an error—announcing the collapse almost 30 minutes before it happened—have occurred?[...]

...why would such agencies have been reporting the collapse approximately 30 or even—in the case of CNN-60 minutes before it happened? Porter's only explanation was to "point to [the] confusing and chaotic situation on the ground." This second blog entry by Porter evoked over 600 responses, most of which found his explanation inadequate.

Porter could have offered a somewhat plausible explanation by suggesting that the rumor that WTC 7 was going to collapse, which had been circulating for several hours, at some point became changed, through misunderstanding, into the rumor that it had already collapsed.

If we accept this explanation, which the BBC could have offered, we might conclude that the premature announcement of the collapse by the news media adds nothing to what we have already established, namely, that Giuliani's Office of Emergency Management had spread the word several hours in advance that WTC 7 was going to collapse.

Even with that interpretation, however, the premature announcements were not insignificant, because they revealed in a dramatic and memorable fashion the fact that someone knew in advance that Building 7 was going to collapse. This is important because, given the salient facts—that WTC 7 had not been hit by a plane, that no steel-framed high-rise building had ever collapsed because of fire alone, that WTC 7 had fires on only a few floors, and that some of the other still-standing WTC buildings had suffered far worse damage—there should have been no reason to expect WTC 7 to collapse.   (The Mysterious Collapse of World Trade Center 7: Why the Final Report about 9/11 is Unscientific and False by David Ray Griffin: 114-116)(Emphasis added)

*A satire: "Excuse me Jane but is that the Solomon building there in the background? I'm speaking in my best, most intelligent British accent about the destruction of wisdom between the Right and Left now. So that means it has already taken place, correct?" Etc... just kidding, believe them when they say they know nothing of conspiracy.

Indeed, you can believe everyone in "the base" that's been incorporated into low levels of the pyramid scheme (inc.) when they look at you with their wide little lemming eyes and say that the know nothing about the birds of prey circling above them.  (For that matter, I don't know anything either... except when I do.) 

Side note, if you're in "the club" then note that the closed source pyramid scheme type of organization or programming that you're typically initiated into, itself trails off into an occult/hidden ruling class above you too.  So even by the super dooper, elite and esoteric "top secret" logic typical to such schemes, you're usually just another lemming.

So you may as well stand with us (even the poor, the prostitutes and the crazies) and not the various species of birds of prey that keep fighting each other over their meal.  We are all equal before the law in their eyes.

Duh.

Leer más»

Psychic Predictions of WTC7 "Collapse"

Fuente:

http://acebaker.blogspot.com.es/2008/03/psychic-predictions-of-wtc7-collapse.html

Información:

MONDAY, MARCH 17, 2008

Psychic Predictions of WTC7 "Collapse"

Psychic Predictions of WTC7 “Collapse”

Though Chopper 5 had been cleansed, another serious blunder was discovered in those news archives. At around 5:00 p.m. on 9/11, BBC anchor Phillip Hayton announced the “Salomon Brothers building collapsing”. Hayton explained “this was not as a result of a new attack, but because the building had been weakened during this morning’s attacks”. Solomon Brothers is another name for the infamous World Trade Center building 7. Indeed, WTC7 did completely collapse, straight down, in free-fall time, exactly in the manner of a controlled demolition. But get this: WTC7 collapsed at 5:20 p.m., 20 minutes after the BBC announced it.

Hayton throws the conversation to BBC reporter Jane Standley in New York, and as she delivers her story, WTC7 is clearly seen standing behind her. A graphic across the bottom of the screen reads “The 47 storey Salomon Brothers Building close to the World Trade Centre has also collapsed”.

Back on the left side of the pond, FOX-5 Washington D.C. also made a psychic prediction of the WTC7 “collapse”. Just before the demolition, anchor Tracey Neal announces “ . . . we are getting word from New York right now that another building has collapsed. I understand that this is a 47 story building.” They switch to a live picture of the World Trade Center area, ground zero is fuming furiously, but WTC7 is standing straight and tall. “Is that smoke coming from this third collapse?” wonders Neale.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=GwUJ9MhzgKI

Neale is expressing hope that the building had been evacuated, when suddenly WTC7 begins dropping straight down, so her co-anchor says, “Take a look at that right hand side of the screen”. Neale concurs, “It’s going down right now”.

Scrambling for a way to cover such an obvious screw up, the co-anchor ad-libs, “We are seeing video today that only Hollywood could have produced at another time”.

The premature announcements of this unprecedented collapse are no less suspicious than if someone had announced the assassination of President Kennedy 20 minutes before it happened. Were the BBC and FOX fed the official script a little too early, or did the demolition of WTC7 go off a little too late? When news of the early report of WTC7 broke in February of 2007, the entire news archive was deleted from archive.org, flushed down the memory hole.

Leer más»

Conspiracy Theory No More, Video, Of BBC Announces Building 7 Collapse 20 Mins Before It Happens

Fuente:

http://usahitman.com/bab7cb/

Información:

Conspiracy Theory No More, Video, Of BBC Announces Building 7 Collapse 20 Mins Before It Happens

These buildings have sprinkler systems. Building 7 never suffered impact, how could it have collapsed from fire or heat damage to the structure?

An astounding video uncovered from the archives today shows the BBC reporting on the collapse of Salomon building (WTC Building 7) over twenty minutes before it actually fell at 5:20pm on the afternoon of 9/11.

The incredible footage shows a BBC reporter talking about the collapse of the WTC#7 while it remains standing in the live shot behind her head.

The BBC reported that it came down 23 minutes before it actually did! The transmission conveniently gets cut moments before the building does “collapse”.

This video demonstrates that there were people in the know about the controlled demolition that was to take place and the story was leaked early.

Thats Building 7 still standing over the reporters left shoulder! The main anchor from the BBC gives all the details of how Building 7 collapses while it is still standing in the Video. LOOK!

This is called Visual experience!

Watch as the windows of building 7 blow out as the controlled Demo takes place!

Visible Explosions NEW VIDEO SEPT 2011. WTC Building 7 Controlled Demolition 911

Here is the link: http://www.cpt12.org/911ExplosiveEvidence

I’ve received many emails stating that the 911 documentary “9/11 Explosive Evidence, Experts Speak Out” has been breaking viewing records at the PBS CPT12 website. I didn’t feel comfortable posting the claim without first verifying that it was accurate, so I left a message yesterday and received a call back today from Shari Bernson (Director of Development at CPT12.org). I figured I’d record the call just to provide a little additional proof that it’s not “just a rumor.” Hope you’ll visit the site and support the work of AE911Truth.org as well as CPT12 for having the courage to air this important information. Here is the link:http://www.cpt12.org/911ExplosiveEvidence

Source

Leer más»

911 Building #7

Fuente:

http://thetruthnews.info/wtc7.html

Información:

Welcome to The Truth News.Info
Latest 911 information out on the building #7 issue.
This is not the twin towers this is WTC #7 the 3rd building that not many are aware of.

Watch the video below Phil Hayton and Jane Standley of the BBC report building WTC#7 the Solomon Bro's building collapsing 20 minutes before it collapsed, then read the latest breaking news below the video. 

Not many still after all these years know about build 7, so if you don't know about it here is the info to know and make others aware of.

There is no way to despute this evidence of prior knowledge, and there is alot more than this.

 

Remember, no plane hit this building

Phil Hayton and Jane Standley of the BBC report building WTC#7 the Solomon Bro's building collapsing 20 minutes before it collapsed with it in the background while they are reporting it.

....

BBC Anchor Who Reported on WTC7 Collapse Early Agrees There May Be a ‘Conspiracy’

Aaron Dykes 

Jones Report 

April 25, 2008 

Link 

Members of We Are Change UK questioned ex-BBC reporter Phil Hayton about the early reporting of WTC 7’s collapse during a speaking appearance.

Hayton failed to recollect even being in the studio on the day of 9/11– at first– but then recalls the situation when it is described in detail, including the actions of Jane Standley, who reported the collapse some 26 minutes in advance with WTC Building 7 still visible in the background.

"A lot of eyebrows were raised," We Are Change reporters point out in summary, because many saw it as a clear controlled demolition, including a number of engineers.

Hayton responded, pointing out that he was not aware of the situation with WTC 7. "This sounds so significant– I’m just amazed I didn’t know about this… This is completely news to me."

"So, is there no official explanation?" Hayton further probed.

We Are Change continues to explain the delayed NIST report on WTC 7 as well as the response from a BBC editor who claimed 9/11 tapes were "lost" in a ‘cock-up.’

"I sense that you think there’s a conspiracy here– but you might be right," Hayton concluded.

On a previous occasion, We Are Change UK reporters contacted Jane Standley by phone about the telling incident. Standley, unlike Hayton, was not surprised by the revelation, but became uncomfortable and hurriedly ended the conversation, only commenting that she had been "harassed" about the situation already.

Surely, it is clear that neither Standley nor Hayton were ‘in on a conspiracy’– rather they were used and fed information. However, Hayton seems willing to admit it while Standley has thus far been unable to answer for the suspicious incident ahead of the unexplained collapse.

The suspicion surrounding early media reporting of WTC7’s collapse– which Aaron Brown of CNN also announced– only exacerbates the demolition apparent that many police, fire fighters and other emergency workers were told about in advance and which many other news anchors described as being like a ‘deliberately destroyed’ building.

Further, WTC lease holder Larry Silverstein said that the building was "pulled" and rescue worker Kevin McPadden has reported hearing a countdown to Building 7’s demolition.

Leer más»

BBC Reports WTC 7 Collapse Early!

Vídeo:

http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x1cu5d_bbc-reports-wtc-7-collapse-early_news

Leer más»

Building 7 - More than 9-11 Truth from Wellington, NZ

Fuente:

http://more911.wordpress.com/wtc7-building7/

Información:

Building 7

Building 7, WTC 7, aka “The Solomon’s Building” was the third building to be destroyed on September 11th 2001. It was a 47 story high steal frame building, and would be the very first steal frame building to collapsed due to fires in 100+ years of steal frame high rise construction, if there was no doubt into the cause of its rapid demise.

New Zealander’s know that poor design, greed, and earthquakes caused the tragic collapse of both the CTV building and the PGG building in the Canterbury earthquake of 2011.

The pictures below compare the known collapses in Christchurch to the alleged collapse of Building 7 close to the Twin Towers on 911.

Bellow are three prima facia examples of high rise office fires that did not result in collapse, and then those fires of Building 7, which are sited by the media to be the cause of collapse.

Where is the integrity of the news reporters, engineers, architects… whom know that there are glaring flaws in the NIST report into the collapse of Building 7, but fail to point them out?

Are those that promote the “conspiracy theory” meme i.e. conflating unrelated events together themselves guilty of perverting the course of justice by preventing open debate and analysis? Do you know someone whom does this? If so, is about time that their integrity gets put to the test?

Leer más»

WTC 7 (Building 7) - Metabunk

NOTA PERSONAL:

No reproduzco el texto del enlace en esta entrada porque se trata de un hilo de un foro con más de treinta y nueve páginas de intervenciones.

Simplemente, pongo el enlace a una discusión entre defensores de la Teoría de la Conspiración y, afrontémoslo, defensores de la Teoría de la Versión Oficial (ya que cualquiera que siga este blog SABE que la versión oficial del 11-S, se mire como se mire, es sólo un montón de ideas que chocan con la realidad científica más obvia, por no llamarlas mentiras descabelladas)

Enlace:

http://www.metabunk.org/threads/wtc-7-building-7.1094/

Leer más»

Silverstein, FDNY Razed WTC 7

Fuente:

http://www.seattle911visibilityproject.org/wtc7newsgo.htm

Información:

Silverstein, FDNY Razed WTC 7

Jeremy Baker

In a stunning and belated development concerning the attacks of 9/11 Larry Silverstein, the new controller of the destroyed WTC complex, stated plainly in a PBS documentary that he and the FDNY decided jointly to demolish the Solomon Bros. building, or WTC 7, late in the afternoon of Tuesday, Sept. 11, 2001.

This admission appeared in a PBS documentary originally aired in Sept. of 2002 entitled “Rebuilding America, A Year at Ground Zero.”

 "I remember getting a call from the fire department commander telling me they were not sure they were going to be able to contain the fire, and I said, 'you know, we've had such terrible loss of life, maybe the smartest thing to do is, is ‘pull’ it, and they made that decision to ‘pull,’ uh, and we watched the building collapse."

In the same program a cleanup worker referred to the demolition of WTC 6;  "...well, we're getting ready to "pull" building six." There can be little doubt as to how the word “pull” is being used in this context.

Mr. Silverstein’s comments came after FEMA and the Society of Civil Engineers conducted an extensive and costly investigation into the curious collapse of WTC 7. The study specifically concluded that the building had likely collapsed as a result of the inferno within, sparked apparently, by debris falling from the crumbling North Tower. 

Six weeks before 9/11 Larry Silverstein, the Manhattan developer, finalized a 99 year lease deal for the WTC (the first time in 30 years that the WTC has changed hands). Mr. Silverstein’s comments stand in direct contradiction to the findings of the extensive FEMA report. They also invalidate the “official” version of events reported widely by the international news media. They even negate Kevin Spacey’s narrative in the very documentary in which they appear; “WTC  7 fell after burning for 7 hours.” If it had been generally known that the building was “pulled” wouldn’t the narrative have phrased it that way?

This shocking contradiction is yet another curious twist in a disturbing series of events surrounding the “collapse” of WTC 7, and the WTC complex in general.

Among these is the fact that, in all the history of high-rise fires, not one has ever resulted in a collapse. On 9/11 three such anomalies occurred. Those who argue that the towers were vulnerable in their top-heavyness and verticality cannot then explain the collapse due to fire of WTC 7, a broad based, 47 story steel-framed building.

There is also the fact that most of the structures destroyed by falling debris were directly under the twin towers. WTC 7 was not only a full city block from Tower 1 but WTC 6 stood directly between the two buildings and certainly absorbed most of the damage.

In addition, WTC 7 suffered a strangely thorough and complete collapse leaving only a leveled lot where it once stood. Although it was a much smaller structure WTC 6’s 8 story carcass stood for months afterwards, even after being gutted by Tower 1.

There’s also disturbing correlations between the collapse of WTC 7 and the bombing of the Murrah building in OK City. Both buildings were constructed using the same bridge beam system  that, in WTC 7's case, allegedly contributed to its demise. But more importantly WTC 7, like the Murrah building, housed high-level government offices including the FBI, CIA and the Secret Service. WTC 7 was also the storage facility for millions of files pertaining to active cases involving international drug dealing, organized crime, money laundering and terrorism.

WTC 6, also known as the Customs House building, housed the Dept.’s of Commerce, Agriculture and Labor, and yet another Murrah building tennant, the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms.

WTC 7 was also the location of a kind of a doomsday bunker, (a $15 million project of Rudy Giuliani’s) a command post from which to operate in case of a total infrastructure breakdown. Building 7 had apparently been bullet proofed and reinforced to withstand hurricane force winds and attacks of all kinds, a fact which makes it’s fatal vulnerability to falling debris all the more puzzling.

Mr. Silverstein’s comments imply that he and the FDNY threw together an expert demolition job in the space of a few short hours on the afternoon of 9/11. This revelation is staggering enough considering its blatant contradiction to what has been, all along, the official cause of the “collapse.” But the fact that the building was buried under tons of debris and consumed in flames at the time makes his comments all the more baffling.

Growing evidence is supporting a compelling theory that explosives may’ve been planted inside the twin towers prior to 9/11, a mechanism designed to trigger a secondary event that would complete the job the hijacked jets had begun. Even a handful of seasoned professional firefighters and demolition men have commented on how neatly and evenly the tower’s had collapsed. Mr. Silverstein’s bewildering statements in “America Rebuilds...” give an exponential boost in creedance to this claim and, in a more terrifying light, loan credibility to growing suspicions that the attacks of 9/11 may have been an inside job.                       

Copyright Aug., 2003 by Darkprints

For a video of Silverstein’s comments about ‘pulling’ WTC 7, go to; 

www.infowars.com/print/Sept11/FDNY.htm

Please send comments on this article to;  web_wender@hotmail.com

Leer más»

The Pre-meditated Demolition of WTC Building Seven

Fuente:

http://cremationofcare.com/the_nwo_911_arch_wtc7_collapse.htm

Información:

The Pre-meditated Demolition of WTC Building Seven

Building Seven of the 'World Trade Center' complex collapsed within merely a few hours of the 911 attacks.

How and why did a steel building that was barely damaged (neither by fire nor debris) collapse?.

If it was indeed 'pulled' (a well known term for controlled demolition), how was this carried out?  Detonators can take weeks of precision planting, unless the detonators were already put in, prior to the attacks.  But if so, then why?

Confused?  So are we!!!

VIDEO FOOTAGE: -

A 'crimp' occurs during a conventional building demolition, when the main central support pillars are destroyed, so to ensure that the building collapses in-wards, for the purpose of minimising the collapse radius of the debris.

• Click here for a video of our amateur analysis of the collapse.
• Click here for the raw footage of the collapse.
• Click here for a high quality animated gif of the collapse of WTC7 - 3.78MB

NEWS LINKS: -

• Shareholder Proposal: Insurer to Investigate 9/11

LARRY SILVERSTEINS ADMISSION THAT WTC7 WAS 'PULLED': -

Larry Silverstein, WTC 7,�and the 9/11 Demolition: Larry Silverstein, the controller of the destroyed WTC complex, stated plainly in a PBS documentary that he and the FDNY decided jointly to demolish the Solomon Bros. building, or WTC 7, late in the afternoon of Tuesday, Sept. 11, 2001. In the documentary "America Rebuilds", aired September 2002, Silverstein makes the following statement; "I remember getting a call from the, er, fire department commander, telling me that they were not sure they were gonna be able to contain the fire, and I said, 'We've had such terrible loss of life, maybe the smartest thing to do is pull it.' And they made that decision to pull and we watched the building collapse."

• (JUNE 2005) Building 7 "Pull It" Comment: Silverstein (un-officially) Responds
• (JANUARY 2006) Silverstein Answers WTC Building 7 Charges: Says "pull it" meant to evacuate firefighters, but there were no firefighters in the building - After nearly two years of steadfast silence, Silverstein Properties have finally responded to questions about what Larry Silverstein meant when he told a PBS documentary that WTC Building 7 was "pulled" in the late afternoon of September 11 2001.
• Sheen demands that Larry Silverstein responds to questions over WTC �Pull it� comments: "When someone makes a statement like that I think it warrants a follow up response," - Charlie Sheen - On last nights Alex Jones radio show, actor/activist Charlie Sheen went on the record for a second time and demanded that Larry Silverstein speak further to a comment that he made in a PBS documentary titled �America Rebuilds�.

FURTHER NARRATIVE & PERSPECTIVE: -

Former German Minister Says Building 7 Used To Run 9/11 Attack: Guide the planes in, then destroy the crime scene - Former Helmut Schmidt cabinet member, 25-year German Parliamentarian and global intelligence expert Andreas Von B�low says that the 9/11 attack was run by the highest levels of the US intelligence apparatus using WTC Building 7 as a command bunker which was later demolished in order to destroy the crime scene.

• Madrid fire heats up 9-11 debate - Unlike the twin trade towers (and WTC 7), this 32 story steel beamed building remains standing after burning for 17 hours straight. Does steel act differently in Spain or are we confronted with yet another 9-11 anomoly?
• WTC7 collapse foreknowledge on FDNY tapes.    (Alternative Backup Link)
• WTC7.net: WTC7.net was created to address the suspicious silence surrounding the total collapse of the 47 story skyscraper known as WTC 7, or Building 7. Except for reports of the collapse on the day of the attack, most conspicuously lacking footage, mention of Building 7 has been essentially non-existent in the mainstream and even alternative press.

---

Click here to return to the '911 Archive'

Leer más»

WTC Building #7, a 47-story high-rise not hit by an airplane, exhibited all the characteristics of classic controlled demolition with explosives

Fuente:

http://www.ae911truth.org/en/news/41-articles/361-precognitive-dissonance-how-did-so-many-know-building-7-would-fall-.html

Información:

WTC Building #7, a 47-story high-rise not hit by an airplane, exhibited all the characteristics of classic controlled demolition with explosives:

1. Rapid onset of collapse
2. Sounds of explosions
3. Symmetrical structural failure
4. Free-fall acceleration through the path of what was greatest resistance
5. Imploded, collapsing completely, landing almost in its own footprint
6. Massive volume of expandingpyroclastic-like clouds
7. Expert corroboration from the top European controlled demolition professional
8. Foreknowledge of "collapse" by media, NYPD, FDNY

In the aftermath of WTC7's destruction, strong evidence of demolition using incendiary devices was discovered:

1. FEMA finds rapid oxidation andintergranular melting on structural steel samples
2. Several tons of molten metal reported by numerous highly qualified witnesses
3. Chemical signature of the incendiary thermite found in solidified molten metal, and dust samples

WTC7 exhibited none of the characteristics of destruction by fire:

1. Slow onset with large visible deformations
2. Asymmetrical collapse which follows the path of least resistance (laws of conservation of momentum would cause a falling, to the side most damaged by the fires)
3. Evidence of fire temperatures capable of softening steel
4. High-rise buildings with much larger, hotter, and longer lasting fires have never collapsed

As seen in this revealing photo, the Twin Towers' destruction exhibited all of the characteristics of destruction by explosives:

1. Destruction proceeds through the path of greatest resistance at nearly free-fall acceleration
2. Improbable symmetry of debris distribution
3. Extremely rapid onset of destruction
4. Over 100 first responders reportedexplosions and flashes
5. Multi-ton steel sections ejected laterally
6. Mid-air pulverization of 90,000 tons of concrete & metal decking
7. Massive volume of expandingpyroclastic-like clouds
8. 1200-foot-diameter debris field: no "pancaked" floors found
9. Isolated explosive ejections 20–40 stories below demolition front
10. Total building destruction: dismemberment of steel frame
11. Several tons of molten metal found under all 3 high-rises
12. Evidence of thermite incendiariesfound by FEMA in steel samples
13. Evidence of explosives found in dust samples

The three high-rises exhibited none of the characteristics of destruction by fire:

1. Slow onset with large visible deformations
2. Asymmetrical collapse which follows the path of least resistance (laws of conservation of momentum would cause a falling, intact, from the point of plane impact, to the side most damaged by the fires)
3. Evidence of fire temperaturescapable of softening steel
4. High-rise buildings with much larger, hotter, and longer-lasting fires have never collapsed

Leer más»