This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.
Engineers Request Permission to Speak Freely Regarding World Trade Building 7
Preface: This essay does not question whether Bin Laden and Al Qaeda attacked us on September 11, 2001, or whether Iran, Saudi Arabia or another nation-state had a hand in the attacks. It focuses solely on a peripheral issue regarding the third building which fell on that terrible day.
Former commander-in-chief President Bush said:
Let us never tolerate outrageous conspiracy theories.
Indeed, the 9/11 Commission was warned not to probe too deeply. For example, ACLU, FireDogLake's Marcy Wheeler and RawStory reported (quoting RawStory):
Senior
Bush administration officials sternly cautioned the 9/11 Commission
against probing too deeply into the terrorist attacks of September 11,
2001, according to a document recently obtained by the ACLU.
The current commander-in-chief, Barack Obama, has also warned against questioning 9/11:
As anyone in the military knows, you can't give your opinion unless you get first "permission to speak freely".
We're not in the military. However, I am not entirely sure that matters, given that speaking out against government policies may be considered a type of terrorism in America today.
Many hundreds
of high-level military officers, intelligence officers, congressmen,
legal scholars and experts have broken the commander-in-chief's orders
not to question the government's official narrative regarding 9/11. And
see this and this.
But neither Bush nor Obama has instructed us not to discuss World Trade Center Building 7. Indeed, they have never once mentioned the
fact that a third building collapsed on 9/11 (and the 9/11 Commission
never mentioned it either), even though that building was not hit by a
plane.
And no one was killed when Building 7 collapsed. As such,
discussions of why Building 7 fell does not question Al Qaeda's
responsibility for the 3,000 deaths of innocent Americans which occurred
on 9/11. It doesn't even touch on U.S. military affairs since 9/11,
since no wars or anti-terror campaigns were launched to avenge anything
which happened in connection with Building 7.
For these reasons, I
will take the commander-in-chiefs' silence on this subject as
permission to speak freely. And the family members who lost loved ones
on 9/11 want this topic discussed.
Moreover,
if Building 7 collapsed for reasons other than the official
explanation, that does not necessarily show nefarious intent. For
example, Paul K. Trousdale - a structural engineer with decades of
experience - says
:
I had always thought the 3rd building was destroyed to prevent unpredictable collapse.
Here It Is
Have you ever seen Building 7 collapse? Here's footage from several different angles:
Top Experts Say Official Explanation Makes No Sense
Numerous structural engineers - the people who know the most about
office building vulnerabilities and accidents - say that the official
explanation of why building 7 at the World Trade Center collapsed on
9/11 is "impossible", "defies common logic" and "violates the law of
physics":
- Two professors of structural engineering at a
prestigious Swiss university (Dr. Joerg Schneider and Dr. Hugo
Bachmann) said that, on 9/11, World Trade Center 7 was brought down by controlled demolition (translation here)
- Alfred Lee Lopez, with 48 years of experience in all types of buildings:
I
agree the fire did not cause the collapse of the three buildings. The
most realistic cause of the collapse is that the buildings were
imploded
- John D. Pryor, with more than 30 years experience:
The
collapse of WTC7 looks like it may have been the result of a
controlled demolition. This should have been looked into as part of the
original investigation.
- Robert F. Marceau, with over 30 years of structural engineering experience:
From
videos of the collapse of building 7, the penthouse drops first prior
to the collapse, and it can be noted that windows, in a vertical
line, near the location of first interior column line are blown out,
and reveal smoke from those explosions. This occurs in a vertical line
in symmetrical fashion an equal distance in toward the center of the
building from each end. When compared to controlled demolitions, one
can see the similarities
- Kamal
S. Obeid, structural engineer, with a masters degree in Engineering
from UC Berkeley and 30 years of engineering experience, says:
Photos
of the steel, evidence about how the buildings collapsed, the
unexplainable collapse of WTC 7, evidence of thermite in the debris as
well as several other red flags, are quite troubling indications of well
planned and controlled demolition
- Steven L. Faseler, structural engineer with over 20 years of experience in the design and construction industry:
World Trade Center 7 appears to be a controlled demolition. Buildings do not suddenly fall straight down by accident
- Ronald H. Brookman, structural engineer, with a masters degree in Engineering from UC Davis, writes:
Why
would all 110 stories drop straight down to the ground in about 10
seconds, pulverizing the contents into dust and ash - twice. Why would
all 47 stories of WTC 7 fall straight down to the ground in about seven
seconds the same day? It was not struck by any aircraft or engulfed in
any fire. An independent investigation is justified for all three
collapses including the surviving steel samples and the composition of
the dust.
- Graham John Inman points out:
WTC
7 Building could not have collapsed as a result of internal fire and
external debris. NO plane hit this building. This is the only case of a
steel frame building collapsing through fire in the world. The fire on
this building was small & localized therefore what is the cause?
- Paul W. Mason notes:
In
my view, the chances of the three buildings collapsing symmetrically
into their own footprint, at freefall speed, by any other means than by
controlled demolition, are so remote that there is no other plausible
explanation!
- David Scott says:
Near-freefall collapse violates laws of physics. Fire induced
collapse is not consistent with observed collapse mode . . . .
- Nathan Lomba states:
I began having doubts about, so called, official explanations for
the collapse of the WTC towers soon after the explanations surfaced. The
gnawing question that lingers in my mind is: How did the structures
collapse in near symmetrical fashion when the apparent precipitating
causes were asymmetrical loading? The collapses defies common logic from
an elementary structural engineering perspective. “If” you accept the
argument that fire protection covering was damaged to such an extent
that structural members in the vicinity of the aircraft impacts were
exposed to abnormally high temperatures, and “if” you accept the
argument that the temperatures were high enough to weaken the structural
framing, that still does not explain the relatively concentric nature
of the failures.Neither of the official precipitating sources
for the collapses, namely the burning aircraft, were centered within the
floor plan of either tower; both aircraft were off-center when they
finally came to rest within the respective buildings. This means that,
given the foregoing assumptions, heating and weakening of the structural
framing would have been constrained to the immediate vicinity of the
burning aircraft. Heat transmission (diffusion) through the steel
members would have been irregular owing to differing sizes of the
individual members; and, the temperature in the members would have
dropped off precipitously the further away the steel was from the
flames—just as the handle on a frying pan doesn't get hot at the same
rate as the pan on the burner of the stove. These factors would have
resulted in the structural framing furthest from the flames remaining
intact and possessing its full structural integrity, i.e., strength and
stiffness.Structural steel is highly ductile, when subjected to
compression and bending it buckles and bends long before reaching its
tensile or shear capacity. Under the given assumptions, “if” the
structure in the vicinity of either burning aircraft started to weaken,
the superstructure above would begin to lean in the direction of the
burning side. The opposite, intact, side of the building would resist
toppling until the ultimate capacity of the structure was reached, at
which point, a weak-link failure would undoubtedly occur. Nevertheless,
the ultimate failure mode would have been a toppling of the upper
floors to one side—much like the topping of a tall redwood tree—not a
concentric, vertical collapse.For this reason alone, I rejected
the official explanation for the collapse of the WTC towers out of
hand. Subsequent evidence supporting controlled, explosive demolition
of the two buildings are more in keeping with the observed collapse
modalities and only serve to validate my initial misgivings as to the
causes for the structural failures.
- Edward E. Knesl writes:
We
design and analyze buildings for the overturning stability to resist
the lateral loads with the combination of the gravity loads. Any tall
structure failure mode would be a fall over to its side. It is
impossible that heavy steel columns could collapse at the fraction of
the second within each story and subsequently at each floor below.We
do not know the phenomenon of the high rise building to disintegrate
internally faster than the free fall of the debris coming down from the
top.The engineering science and the law of physics simply
doesn't know such possibility. Only very sophisticated controlled
demolition can achieve such result, eliminating the natural dampening
effect of the structural framing huge mass that should normally stop the
partial collapse. The pancake theory is a fallacy, telling us that
more and more energy would be generated to accelerate the collapse.
Where would such energy would be coming from?
- Antonio Artha,with 15+ years of experience in building design
Fire
and impact were insignificant in all three buildings. Impossible for
the three to collapse at free-fall speed. Laws of physics were not
suspended on 9/11, unless proven otherwise.
The symmetrical "collapse" due to asymmetrical damage is at odds with the principles of structural mechanics
It
is virtually impossible for WTC building 7 to collapse as it did with
the influence of sporadic fires. This collapse HAD to be planned
- Travis McCoy, M.S. in structural engineering
- James Milton Bruner,
Major, U.S. Air Force, instructor and assistant professor in the
Deptartment of Engineering Mechanics & Materials, USAF Academy, and
a technical writer and editor, Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory
It
is very suspicious that fire brought down Building 7 yet the Madrid
hotel fire was still standing after 24 hours of fire. This is very
suspicious to me because I design buildings for a living
- David Anthony Dorau,
practicing structural engineer with 18 years' experience in the
inspection and design of buildings under 5 stories tall, who worked as a
policy analyst for the Office of Technology Assessment, an arm of the
U.S. Congress providing independent research and reports on
technological matters
- Russell T. Connors, designed many buildings and other types of structures
- Lester Jay Germanio, 20+ years experience
- Daniel Metz, 26+ years experience
- Jonathan Smolens, 11 years experience, with a specialty in forensic engineering
- William Rice, P.E., structural engineer, former professor of Vermont Technical College
The above is just a sample. Many other structural engineers have questioned the collapse of Building 7, as have numerous experts in other disciplines, including:
- The
former head of the Fire Science Division of the
government agency which claims that the World Trade
Centers collapsed due to fire (the National Institute of
Standards and Technology), who is one of the world’s
leading fire science researchers and safety engineers, a Ph.D. in
mechanical engineering (Dr. James Quintiere), called
for an independent review of the World Trade Center
collapse investigation. "I wish that there would be a
peer review of this," he said, referring to the NIST
investigation. "I think all the records that NIST has
assembled should be archived. I would really like to see
someone else take a look at what they've done; both structurally
and from a fire point of view. ... I think the official conclusion that NIST arrived at is questionable.
- A Dutch demolition expert (Danny Jowenko) stated that WTC 7 was imploded
- Harry
G. Robinson, III - Professor and Dean Emeritus, School of
Architecture and Design, Howard University. Past President of two
major national architectural organizations - National Architectural
Accrediting Board, 1996, and National Council of Architectural
Registration Boards, 1992. In 2003 he was awarded the highest honor
bestowed by the Washington Chapter of the American Institute of
Architects, the Centennial Medal. In 2004 he was awarded the
District of Columbia Council of Engineering and Architecture Societies
Architect of the Year award. Principal, TRG Consulting Global /
Architecture, Urban Design, Planning, Project Strategies.
Veteran U.S. Army, awarded the Bronze Star for bravery and the Purple
Heart for injuries sustained in Viet Nam - says:
The
collapse was too symmetrical to have been eccentrically generated.
The destruction was symmetrically initiated to cause the buildings to
implode as they did.
- A prominent
physicist with 33 years of service for the Naval Research Laboratory in
Washington, DC (Dr. David L. Griscom) said that the official theory
for why Building 7 collapsed "does not match the available facts" and supports the theory that the buildings were brought down by controlled demolition
Again,
this essay is not questioning whether or not Al Qaeda carried out the
9/11 attacks, or even the collapse of the Twin Towers.
It is simply questioning why a third building which was never hit by a plane collapsed on 9/11.
»
- advertisements -
Ooh! THAT's fucking funny!
Fourth Reich firmly in control here. Note how stern both presidents are on their insistance of their right to wage endless war and conquer any nation while they wave the all powerfull "innocent 9/11 victims" banner. They both remind me of Hitler and the Nazi party. Excact same play book too. You better believe every god damn nation on earth knows they are eventually going to be conquered by the U.S. unless they completely submit to every demand and let us enslave them through central banking. After this happens they can make slavery the law of the land again and make all of us thier bitch. Ancient Rome, Ancient Babylon, Ancient Egypt, 4th Reich hybrid bitches! It's gonna be great. We can all look forward to being waterboarded and tortured. USA! USA!
The Reichstag fire on steroids...
have been all over the world trade center, including the basement. I was there right after the first bombings, examining the damage, and it looked like Dante's description of Hell. Picture a massive pit six stories deep, with cables and girders hanging everywhere. It was so large you couldn't throw a football across the pit. The clips on the six levels of sub basement had failed, and those floors caved in, leaving the upright girders with no lateral support. Think drinking straws here, very strong if weight is placed on each end and they are kept straight, but remove lateral support and the whole thing collapses. The only thing that saved the building that night was the heroic action of the welders who came into a dark and dangerous pit and welded girders to keep the vertical steel from bending out of true (and some of them were already bowed). I was long gone by then, but I heard the building was groaning above them as they worked. This is the true nature of New York, bad attitude and very little manners yes, but huge hearts and a lot of guts when the rubber meets the road.
Anyway GW, I don't agree based on logic, and no inside info at all.
The destruction of the towers destroyed the six levels of sub basement. I'm sure that much tonnage ramrodding into the sub basement was as close as you get to a unstoppable force meeting an immovable object (the foundation). Please use logic here, where did all that shit go? Did it punch through meters upon meters of solid concrete and steel and continue down into the earth? Unlikely, that foundation was substantial enough to hold up one of the biggest building in the world. It couldn't rebound back up and it couldn't go down, maybe we should just entertain the crazy idea that it spurted out in the direction of least resistance, sideways? Maybe, that much force would obliterate anything in its path, like the foundation of the buildings around it? Maybe they would topple over like a tree? Maybe this looks unusual on a video?
Controlled detonation takes months of work. They have to remove all of the existing sheetrock and material to get at the superstructure of the building. They use bobcats, INSIDE THE BUILDING, to accomplish this feat and it involves miles of electrical cables to do so. What some people are entertaining is the idea that the towers and the surrounding buildings could be imploded by some nefarious character, perhaps the government, or more likely The Brenank, WHILE IT IS OCCUPIED, and nobody notice?. I think I would notice a bobcat getting on the elevator with me. I think I woud notice miles and miles of cables snaking through a building. Or maybe someone thinks they linked the THOUSANDS of detonators that would be needed to some sort of radio link, IN NEW YORK CITY??? Oh no, no danger of a premature detonation there. Electrical detonators are completely safe for use as suppositories in major metropolitan areas where people would never dream of breaking FCC laws and millions upon millions of signals are occuring around you so that three of them could combine, like monkeys typing Shakespear, to blow your ass away.
I think, in a world that is one big conspiracy to rob the common man, that we can accept that a bunch of hateful self appointed martyrs, just few some big ass planes into some big ass buildings and created a tsunami of steel and concrete that wiped out everything around it, including some wave action underground where you can't see it.
Then again, I like the idea that the Chairsatan is responsible for everything. It ties everything up in one thight little package
I think, in a world that is one big conspiracy to rob the common man, that we can accept that a bunch of hateful self appointed martyrs, just few some big ass planes into some big ass buildings and created a tsunami of steel and concrete that wiped out everything around it, including some wave action underground where you can't see it.....
yeh sure. it was those wascally evil al qaeda guys......
Thanks for vocalising my thoughts better than could I. There are so many things about 9 11 that stink to high heaven that persuing this avenue is pointless. Hell, it would be more plausable that the repeated attempts to topple the towers were false flag operations to foment actions in the ME. Seems to have been quite successful, too.
The Hollow towers, go search it, break your normalcy bias, your not in Kansas anymore, who owned the security firm of the WTC site? Who owned the security firm at Logan? Why was nano thermite found on the scene? why was the Twin towers closed for that weekend leading into 9/11? Why did Dick Cheney give the stand down order in the Presidential bunker that morning with Norman Minetta as a witness in front of congress and never made it into the 9/11 Commission report? It wasn't an investigation, just a story of the events leading into 9/11. Sibal Edmonds, FBI gag orders pre 9/11 (sheded intellegence reports).
NORAD stand down, Ronald Reagan Int stand down, the moring of 9/11 just happened to be a NIE training mission for the scenario of airplanes hitting the world trade centers, but they were training up north?
Capitol Police officer Sergent Lagassey eye witness testimony.
jacked up credentials and VISA's but still allowed to board the airplanes.
You go search these terms before junkin or you just don't want to know the truth.
capital police officer lagassey said he saw a plane approaching the pentagon flying low towards it while he was at a gas station. yet his eye witness testimony on tape, does not jive with the official story. so we must conclude the plane he saw was a distraction to make it look like it was going toward the pentagon and as it flew near the pentagon, it banked off to the right and climbed out of sight.
all of the planes involved has much fewer passengers than normal. at this point, not sure hat happened to them. probably they were taken somewhere and shot.....and dumped at sea or something........the planes that took off that morning from boston logan were not the same planes that hit the wtc. there was a switch made probably in cleveland. the smae israeli mossad company that operates security at boston logan also operates security at cleveland...
some people say that there were no planes and that the whole thing was a media illusion. i think there were planes. you look at the side of the buidlings and it looks like a plane hit it......sure we are talking about titanium tubes here but nevertheless that much weight going through the air at 400 mph will make a mark on what it hits.....
the planes were full of fuel so they were in effect flying bombs and when they hit, they had the desired effect with all of the fire and smoke etc. but the fire and smoke died down not long afterwards as related by firemen who had gotten to the floors affected and notified their superiors that they would have no problem putting out the fires there.
so here it is ten years later and we still talk about this stuff. amazing people we are. amazing........
Inconceivably idiotic.
are you fucking insane?
You THINK there were planes?
JFC, man, friends of mine I've known for 20 years WATCHED THIS SHIT HAPPEN in real time. EVERYONE is in on the conspiracy?
WTF is wrong with you people?
You forgot to mention that it was John P. O'Neill's first day as head of security of the WTC complex.
Forbidden Truth.
Why don't you listen to the guy who wired the buildings about how hard it would have been to wire the buildings:
George, thanks for that video. A compelling narrative.
@smiddy - The man is a professional engineer giving an educated analysis of what he saw replicated on TV and elsewhere. Did you bother to listen to the man describe the construction of the core columns, the perimeter columns and the nature of the floor suspension system?
Is HE a bomb tech? No? LOL He's an old man with an electrical engineering degree and an opinion. How about that doddering old astronaut who believes in UFO's? Do we believe in UFO's because he does? Sure, extraterrestrial life is probable (certain) but the distances are so incredibly great, and the human mind is so succeptible to suggestion, that I think it is baloney.
With the whole fabric of our society being revealed as a conspiracy, why can't we admit that they USA had a handful of kids from the Middle East kick our asses, and then trip the avalance of spending that destroyed Rome. They didn't make it snow, the Fed did. The powers that be don't need a conspiracy to rob you, you are already hooked up to the Matrix.
I'll tell you what. I will admit I can be wrong. I will read and watch everything. I will suspend disbelief, and publicly kiss your ring if there is something there that smells bad. Hey, I shorted the greatest Fed created bull market in American history, so I am not perfect by any measure. I have learned that it is all a conspiracy, circles within circles, within circles, while publicly professing that the path to Nirvana is "Stocks for the Long Run."
Peace
Top controlled demolition expert:
that one's always been one of my favorites. I love his reaction at the end
Well, looks like you're wrong again. I'd figure that sticking to the fundamentals (such as a proper undertanding of gravity) might help.
Detonating explosives such as Primasheet 1000 can be accomplished with or without wires. It is very much like a choreographed fireworks show, just behind the walls.
gw, none of that is positivist enough for some folks.
On the other hand, I'm uber close to someone (PE, SE for years, smart as hell) that's been working on this issue for years (I mean years) as a result of the lawsuit between the two landlords.
They have the plans, models, experts. They have very rational ways to explain why it fell and why it fell that way.
I love ZH and how it's a unique forum to exchange ideas and be critical of what we are told but on this one I have to say I do not buy the article's theory. Tons of smart, normal, scientific people with more time at it and better material will disagree with the ones cited in the article.
Is gravity a theory?
This is a perfect example why you can't trust your intelligence in the markets. The markets eat up lazy and stupid people, but it eats up intelligent people too. Lawyers, doctors, and dentists, are perrenial butts of trader humor. The only thing the markets reward is wisdom and logic. If you cannot use logic, you are lost.
This article is completely convincing and completely illogical.
I remember a market adage about bears having all the most convincing arguments, and that's why they lose. Maybe this is another example of being blinded by too much brain power.
Hey, apologetic genius. Here's a market/fiancial story for you.
9-11 Research: Insider Trading
How do you explain the airline puts if nobody knew what was going down?
How do you explain that the party that bought those puts has not been identified? investigated? held to account?
Things was clear from the beginning:how to put control on world population,put hand into pocket of every one and confiscate duty free rights to shop and deliver chip items into own country without taxes-the things done,billions of people suffered terror of the planning this group,we have always to look into "Who is beneficiary",easy bank transfers by phone call was immeduetely made impossible,you had to come into office or to send sighned originally papers with secure post(DHL/UPS) or you could get special permission which was taking no responsibility from bank if any third party intervine into your account,all privacy things was cancelled,all identities opened,last bastion UBS sold its clients last year-now hungry idiots asking themselfs about what to now?Because they spent all they stealed from us and now they bankrupted America and World,they understand that terror story is not matter any more as people on the brin of revolution,so,expect some new "Idea" soon from "Fathers" of all good!Its only stupid,which is most people are ,could believe into such story of victimised plan in order to think the some terrorists could do such a thing in country which air control is so tough?!This was very very good plan and results is:every one today shut up and affraid to pie or to say any wrong word,as he going direct to Guantenamo 8star accomodation hotel!You are scruwed and lied,same as your money and wealth deteriorated by same group of people,they want Hitler plan to work-you should work frei and eat grass-we are on the way to it!
Look, I am from the other side of Politics, I am from the side that watches plans in advance happen, My loyalty is to the Constitution of the USA at the end of the day when everything is said and done. I know where "Davey Jones" locker is but I am only one voice, this is many.
You have a rogue element working out of the Pentagon, their mercs for hire who have no alligance to your flag. That's all I'm going to say. This social experiment is comming to an end, wake up please.
This is your new Govenment waiting in the wings:
search: "Mt Weather"
This was my area of expertise.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_MFEpYCCUgs
Took a FOIA request and lawsuits to release this.
The Bad Guy.
"You have a rogue element working out of the Pentagon, their mercs for hire who have no alligance to your flag. That's all I'm going to say. This social experiment is comming to an end, wake up please."
eyes opening thank you Badman. is that a shadow of a buzzard mine eyes see in the sky over Mt. Weather?
Sorry - not interesting. Yes there is an explosion in the grainy distance. Care to explain?
Did that look like a 767? And I don't have to explain a circus, I just have to inform that the FBI confiscated ALL tapes that had vantage point that morning, go search that.
I just have to inform that the FBI confiscated ALL tapes that had vantage point that morning
Agreed. Thanks.
Google FEMA 9/11 and you find that they arrived the night before, on 9/10.
WTC I and II came down due to additive effect of a) violent plane strike impact, b) violent explosion of jet fuel, and c) sustained fire melting support members already much weakened by a + b. The fact that the tower hit second came down first is fairly conclusive: hit many floors further down, its support members had much more weight above them. The super-violent collapse of both buildings so weakened the overall structure of #7 that it eventually came down too. Internal explosives? Maybe...but this imputes a degree of conspiratorial competence to our Zionist Occupation Government that it has shown in no other respect.
who do you work for? military?
He's a bold troll, I'll give him that.
CompassionateFascist - at least your handle is somewhat honest. The Fascist part that is.
How do you know so much about #7? Because you read about it in the 9/11 Commission report?
No conspiracy story here ... exccept that the flacid 9/11 Commision never even mentions #7.
Bullshit.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TNXqkZO3Y1g
here's some info about the planes:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ENSpEbiJ1PA
OK, just looked at 2nd vid - strong evidence of Zionist conspiracy here, and I wouldn't dispute much of it. Another interesting bit is the famous "Bob and Bri" video which begins just after the first hit, aka "What We Saw", and taken just north of the NW tower. When the second hit occurs, she remarks: "it was a military plane". How we reconcile this with the missing passengers I have no idea.
Just names on a manifest?
Checked out the first vid; contains some legit issues, but ignores intense, flash heat of the initial jet fuel explosions. As to the ZOG's all-too-sudden revelation of the 19 names and etc., yes, that indicates quite a bit of foreknowledge...ditto with 7/12/41, in fact. So they just let it go ahead (as w Pearl Harbor), as neo-cons who had Bush's ear were looking for an opening to take down anti-Israel middle east confrontation states, esp. Iraq and Iran. Oil? Pipelines? Most all the Iraq oil goes to China, Japan...not U.S. And we have been in Afghanistan for years now....still no NG pipeline.
No pipeline, but there's gold in them thar hills!!!
...and silver, copper, probably some uranium, REEs.
lithium baby lithium.
better get those ryobi cordless tools while you still can.
god bless home depot.
"intense, flash heat of the initial jet fuel explosions"
That's rapid exhaustion taking place. Most of the jet fuel was burned up in relatively short order. You don't cook anything by hitting it with a short duration (high) flame.
Where the oil is going isn't the issue. The issue is who is controlling it. Also, what the initial intentions/designs were doesn't mean that they've turned out as expected (meaning "what's happening now may not have all that much signficance on what the original intent was- this has turned out to be a disaster [if one believes the initial sales pitch, that it would be a cake walk and that the US would spend little on the operation]).
Just before Britain was kicked out of Iraq back around 1919 they'd had a signed agreement for oil rights for 75 years. 75 + 19 = 94: Gulf War I was about stalling this contract out, keeping Saddam from fully disconnecting with the West.
Lastly, the US constructed the largest foreign military base in Iraq.
Read The Grand Chessboard. Also, Pepe Escobar is perhaps the best analyst of "pipelaneistan" (http://www.atimes.com/atimes/South_Asia/KE29Df02.html).
I got to know Beverly after 911, her story is chilling, her death even more so....
http://crooksandliars.com/susie-madrak/beverly-eckert-911-widow-dead-buffalo
And this -
9/11 - "Lucky Larry Silverstein." Follow The Money | Love for Life
All you wanna-be-believers out there. Believers in the "official conspiracy". How do you explain this.
9-11 Research: Insider Trading
Another 9/11 casualty who died after the fact for knowing too much.
media monarchy: barry jennings, key witness to wtc7 explosions, dead at 53
My favourite is the video where the BBC presenter talks about WTC7 building having collapsed while it was still standing right behind her:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C7SwOT29gbc
The BBC's "explanation" on their website is less than convincing:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/theeditors/2007/02/part_of_the_conspiracy.html
The fact that they claim to have "lost" the original tapes (for reasons of cock-up, not conspiracy) is quite enough to convince me of their culpability. I mean, they have kept pretty well everything since the 1960's so this is a bit of a steep claim.
always been one of the more telling pieces of evidence I think
Thanks for keeping this alive Nassim.
Nice work George as usual. 9/11 reveals unequivocally that honest government in this day and age is a hoax. Maybe it always was.