Preface: If you believe that the government always tells the truth, you have gotten lost in a bad neighborhood, and you should turn around and get back on the freeway as quickly as possible.
If you believe that politics, war and terrorism do not greatly affect your lifestyle, your investment portfolio and the economy, you are sadly mistaken. See this, this, this, this and this.
If, on the other hand, you believe that 9/11 was an inside job, then please point out any inaccuracies, shortcoming or erroneous conclusions contained within the post. Please don’t just label it as being a “limited hang-out” propaganda sell-out hit piece … instead, if you believe it is wrong, please link to actual evidence which disproves what I am saying, or which adds pieces of information which you think are missing. Maybe I’ll agree with you, maybe I won’t. But I will consider every comment.
People who state that 9/11 was an inside job are claiming that it is a false flag operation which killed people, was used to justify wars in Iraq and elsewhere and a power grab in the U.S.
But World Trade Center building 7 – the third building to collapse on September 11th – has nothing to do with any inside job:
- No one died as a result of the collapse
- No airplane hit the building, and so it was not directly involved in the terrorist attack
- No wars were launched to avenge WTC7
- No power grabs or loss of civil liberties ensued because of the collapse of this building
- Unlike the rest of 9/11, the government has been very quiet about its destruction
As such, the collapse of the building – also known as the “Solomon Brothers Building” – was not an inside job.
Of course, the building might have been demolished to save lives. 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.
(some point to the World Trade Center owner's statement about the decision to "pull" the building as confirming Trousdale's theory).
So why am I wasting your valuable time in discussing this?
Because the government – as part of its political cover-up of negligence before and on 9/11 – pretended that the building collapsed due to “natural causes”. This should not be entirely surprising … we know that government personnel sometimes misspeak about things like the economy or Iraq and weapons of mass destruction, and they may also have made some minor errors peripherally related to 9/11:
- The EPA misspoke about the dangers to heroic first responders from toxic chemicals at Ground Zero
- Government officials misspoke about 9/11 being wholly unforeseeable … including pretending that Al Qaeda’s plans to fly planes into the World Trade Center and Pentagon were a complete surprise
- Top government personnel misspoke about Iraq’s role in 9/11
Again, this post has nothing to do with “9/11 inside job”: no one died when building 7 collapsed.
What Do the Experts Say?
What does the evidence show about the Solomon Brothers Building in Manhattan?
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)
- 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
- 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 [please ignore any reference in this essay to the Twin Towers. This essay focuses solely on Building 7]. The most realistic cause of the collapse is that the buildings were imploded
- Ronald H. Brookman, structural engineer, with a masters degree in Engineering from UC Davis, writes:
Why would all 47 stories of WTC 7 fall straight down to the ground in about seven seconds the same day [i.e. on September 11th]? 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:
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.
***
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 … 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 ….
- 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 [Again, please ignore any reference to the Twin Towers ... this essay focuses solely on WTC7]. 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 top experts in other relevant disciplines, including:
- A demolition loader for the world’s top demolition company (which is based in the United States), Tom Sullivan
- The former head of the Fire Science Division of the government agency which claims that Building 7 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)
- 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
Watch this short video on Building 7 by Architects and Engineers (ignore any reference to the Twin Towers, deaths on 9/11, or any other topics other than WTC7):
Fish In a Barrel
Poking holes in the government’s spin on Building 7 is so easy that it is like shooting fish in a barrel.
As just one example, the spokesman for the government agency which says that the building collapsed due to fire said there was no molten metal at ground zero:
The facts are a wee bit different:
- The structural engineer responsible for the design of the WTC, described fires still burning and molten steel still running 21 days after the attacks (page 3)
- A structural engineer who worked for the Trade Center’s original designer saw “streams of molten metal that leaked from the hot cores and flowed down broken walls inside the foundation hole.” (pages 31-32)
- An engineer stated in the September 3, 2002 issue of The Structural Engineer, “They showed us many fascinating slides ranging from molten metal, which was still red hot weeks after the event.”
- New York firefighters recalled in a documentary film, “heat so intense they encountered rivers of molten steel.”
- A NY firefighter described molten steel flowing at ground zero, and said it was like a “foundry” or like “lava”.
- A public health advisor who arrived at Ground Zero on September 12, said that “feeling the heat” and “seeing the molten steel” there reminded him of a volcano.
- An employee of New Jersey’s Task Force One Urban Search and Rescue witnessed “Fires burn[ing and molten steel flow[ing] in the pile of ruins still settling beneath her feet.”
- The head of a team of scientists studying the potential health effects of 9/11, reported, “Fires are still actively burning and the smoke is very intense. In some pockets now being uncovered, they are finding molten steel.”
- According to a worker involved with the organizing of demolition, excavation and debris removal operations at ground zero, “Underground it was still so hot that molten metal dripped down the sides of the wall from Building 6.”
- A reporter with rare access to the debris at ground zero “descended deep below street level to areas where underground fires still burned and steel flowed in molten streams.“
- According to a member of New York Air National Guard’s 109th Air Wing, who was at Ground Zero from September 22 to October 6, “One fireman told us that there was still molten steel at the heart of the towers’ remains. Firemen sprayed water to cool the debris down but the heat remained intense enough at the surface to melt their boots.”
- A retired professor of physics and atmospheric science said “in mid-October when they would pull out a steel beam, the lower part would be glowing dull red, which indicates a temperature on the order of 500 to 600 °C. And we know that people were turning over pieces of concrete in December that would flash into fire–which requires about 300 °C. So the surface of the pile cooled rather rapidly, but the bulk of the pile stayed hot all the way to December.”
- A fireman stated that there were “oven” like conditions at the trade centers six weeks after 9/11.
- Firemen and hazardous materials experts also stated that, six weeks after 9/11, “There are pieces of steel being pulled out [from as far as six stories underground] that are still cherry red” and “the blaze is so ‘far beyond a normal fire’ that it is nearly impossible to draw conclusions about it based on other fires.” (pay-per-view)
- A NY Department of Sanitation spokeswoman said “for about two and a half months after the attacks, in addition to its regular duties, NYDS played a major role in debris removal – everything from molten steel beams to human remains….”
- New York mayor Rudy Giuliani said “They were standing on top of a cauldron. They were standing on top of fires 2,000 degrees that raged for a hundred days.”
- As late as five months after the attacks, in February 2002, firefighter Joe O’Toole saw a steel beam being lifted from deep underground at Ground Zero, which, he says, “was dripping from the molten steel.”
- A rescue worker “crawled through an opening and down crumpled stairwells to the subway five levels below ground. He remembers seeing in the darkness a distant, pinkish glow–molten metal dripping from a beam“
- And see witness statements at the beginning of this video
- Indeed, not only was structural steel somehow melted on 9/11, but it was evaporated. As the New York Times reports, an expert stated about World Trade Center building 7:
A combination of an uncontrolled fire and the structural damage might have been able to bring the building down, some engineers said. But that would not explain steel members in the debris pile that appear to have been partly evaporated in extraordinarily high temperatures.
(pay-per-view). Evaporation means conversion from a liquid to a gas; so the steel beams in building 7 were subjected to temperatures high enough to melt and evaporate them
Please remember that firefighters sprayed millions of gallons of water on the fires, and also applied high-tech fire retardants. Specifically, 4 million gallons of water were dropped on Ground Zero within the first 10 days after September 11, according to the U.S. Department of Energy’s Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratories:
Approximately three million gallons of water were hosed on site in the fire-fighting efforts, and 1 million gallons fell as rainwater, between 9/11 and 9/21 ….
The spraying continued for months afterward (the 10 day period was simply the timeframe in which the DOE was sampling). Enormous amounts of water were hosed on Ground Zero continuously, day and night:
“Firetrucks [sprayed] a nearly constant jet of water on [ground zero]. You couldn’t even begin to imagine how much water was pumped in there,” said Tom Manley of the Uniformed Firefighters Association, the largest fire department union. “It was like you were creating a giant lake.”
This photograph may capture a sense of how wet the ground became due to the constant spraying:
The fact that there were raging fires and molten metal even after the application of massive quantities of water and fire retardants shows how silly the government spokesman’s claim is.
Again, this has nothing to do with “inside job” … no one was killed in the collapse of Building 7, no wars were launched based on a rallying cry of “remember the Solomon Brothers building”, and no civil liberties were lost based on a claim that we have to prevent future WTC7 tragedies.
It is merely meant to show that government folks sometimes lie … even about issues tangentially related to 9/11.
Rich Man's War - John Trudell
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fDOZ00A1aos
.
http://www.lyrics.com/rich-mans-war-lyrics-john-trudell.html
.
rich man's war
john trudell
hay ah iy ya hey iy ah hey......
rich mans war,
industrial streets, class lines
money talks, turning language to paper pieces
rich man's war free man's society.
raging violent insecurity
nuclear man, nuclear woman
unclear how to act.
rich man's war
Persians cruising Europe.
America Russia
governmental nuclear views
industrial allies cutting the world
as though they cannot see blood flowing
.
rich man's war
Central America bleeding
wounds same as Palestine and Harlem
Three Mile Island in El Salvador
Pine Ridge in Belfast
rich man's war
the poor, starving for food
starving for land, starving for peace,
starving for real.
rich man's war
attacking human, attacking being
attacking earth, attacking tomorrow
rich man's war
thinking of always war
thinking of always war.
with machines for ancestors
new unborn generations
chemical umbilical chords are only wiring
in your electrical progress
human lives burnt offerings to the god greed
with lies for ancestors
there is no truth in some futures
rulers of minds feeding next generation's souls
to the control machine.
sacrifice ritual for the proper technology
with isolation for ancestors
there is only the present bought by the credit material uses
forging chains binding you to destruction
compliments of your deities
the industrial priest.
.
hay ah iy ya hey iy ah hey......
.
no more than neon flash
trying hiding in neon mask
have to face who we really are
at some point we had no choice.
distant star distant light
.
in real world we are human being
in shadow of real world we are
being human.
.
neon mask for neon flash.
distant thunder distant cloud
passions reign
drenched in possession
what we take is hard to do
what we do is hard to take
some ones are crazy or maybe we take turns
dreaming about some kind of life we say
"it could have been different".
but it wasn't because we weren't
no matter what, it turns out the same
a lot of things we said weren't true
industrial stories in an electric instant
neon mask neon flash neon flash.
.
thing is nihilistic desires
civilized gone insane
didn't imagine it turning like this
some things start good and go bad
some things get bad and stay bad.
are we caught in between living a lie or
not living at all?
eliminated choices lost in dreams we let go
memories we never got to have
something else to think about...
waking up in industrial society
surrounded by angry days,
going through motions
of not being.
wanting the best but not expecting it.
surviving paid for in dreams
feeling like a world alone
serving god with the devil to pay.
feeling like something in no place
what goes on in hell anyway?
.
thing is, it has to do with heart.
we have to understand what hearts are for
before we can get back to heaven or paradise
or the power in OUR MIND.
.
hay ah iy a hey e ya hay........
http://donaldfox.wordpress.com/2012/07/09/jim-fetzer-real-deal-appearance-7912/
Unseen videos of the 3 falling WTC buildings (and comparison to nuclear blast in Japan)
structural failure resulting in pyroclastic cloud.
oh my, this must be the first such occurrence
in the history of the world. there is always a
first so i guess n.y. welcomes that kind of distinction.
it somehow enhances marketability in general,
a rising of all boats sort of effect. what is new york
if not a trend setter? don't answer that, it was
merely a sarcastic rhetorical slur.
It takes significant time to prep a building for demolition. More than a few hours or a day.
The fact that building 7 collapse was (obviously) the result of a demolition proves forethought and pre-planning.
That should be far more than enough to prove there was a conspiracy.
And just for clarification:
con·spir·a·cy
? ?
1. the act of conspiring.
2. an evil, unlawful, treacherous, or surreptitious plan formulated in secret by two or more persons; plot.
3.a combination of persons for a secret, unlawful, or evil purpose: He joined the conspiracy to overthrow the government.
4.Law . an agreement by two or more persons to commit a crime, fraud, or other wrongful act.
5.any concurrence in action; combination in bringing about a given result.
Let's start a new investigation. We bring in Cheney, W.,Rumsfeld, and that asshole neocon Paul Wolfowitz. Each should be hooded, handcuffed, and brought to a dark sight...preferably Syria or Egypt. Every living relative of these bozos should be stuffed on board the transport plane. Initial questioning should commence, then random relatives should be horrifically executed in front of suspects. Next, questions should be asked and interviewee should be WATERBOARDED- hundreds, if not thousands of times. Investigation should end inconclusively after each and every witness and all spawn are summarilly raped, tortured, executed, burned and then completely destroyed by an unexplained and never discussed thermite explosion. Fuck you and good riddance! Enjoy an eternity in hell with the Kennedy's, ASSHOLES!!!
Or we could drop them off in Afghanistan and Iraq with a us government American express card and an Israeli passport. Follow them around with one of those drones "we the people " payed for. Tell them" if you can make it back to the states on your own you traitor we won't execute you"? Televised 24/7 for our viewing pleasure would be like the "running man" remake for the 21st century.
I can find even more experts to to agree that we can control the weather by minute changes to a trace gas and ignore the heliosphere, the magnetic field variation around the earth, sun spots, solar winds, and the lack of precise temperature measurements for the past two hundred for various locations in the Northern and Southern Hemispheres.
The love of conspiracy is overwhelming. JFK was killed by the CIA, the Oil Industry, LBJ, the Mafia Families, the Diem Family, or some combination of these groups. As opposed to the simple direct answer of a dedicated Marxist killing the President that had spent much money and effort trying to kill the Marxist Castro.
The problem is no one knows what else was in the building besides the fuel. That it was the HQ for the alphabet intelligence agencies has always been ignored because it was the Terrorist Response Center for New York City, but there were many other agencies located in Number 7.
And I'm sure that you could find people that still think that the world is flat... Throw out everything and take it to this SIMPLE question: how can something that is still structurally connected to a base FALL in accordance with the laws of gravity?
I sense that I'll hear nothing but crickets...
Or perhaps you haven't heard the rumor that the evidence of the sale of a trillion dollars worth of fake treasury bonds was stored in the basement....of course all four corners and the center of this building all melted at the exact same time and it pancaked perfectly even from the bottom up...Just because these people are ruthless beyond belief doesn't mean they aren't. What's not to understand about "violates the laws of physics"? The weather is one thing but structural engineering is pretty cut and dried. Kennedy was also the first President since Andrew Jackson to threaten to take away the issuance of our currency from the international banking cartel that owns the Fed. Just sayin.
Huge fan.
Enjoyed this post as I enjoy all of your posts.
Just random thoughts I have had on the subject:
insurance - maybe it was as simple as insurance. if the insurance paid out if the building "fell" but didn't pay out (or paid out to a lesser extent) for a controlled demo - that would make sense for the cover up.
I also always wondered about the claims that there was info in Building 7 related to the SEC investigation of Enron. That undermines your argument that there was no motivation for an inside job, but I really don't know the facts on the SEC investigation of Enron and what data was lost (if any) as a result of Building 7's destruction. Hoped you'd have touched on it.
The insurance angle is likely just a bonus in there. Maybe Silverstein (sp?) was blackmailed to accept all of this lest the EPA (or whomever is supposed to enforce cleanup like this) was to be let loose?
Never forget that compartmentalization takes place. Silverstein might not known of the bigger plan (but then again he might have).
wow, "I always thought America was destoryed to prevent unpredictable collapse.."
The credibility of all your analysis has been greatly diminished in my eyes, really.. monumentally naive.
Riiiiiiight... [please ignore any reference in this essay to the Twin Towers. This essay focuses solely on Building 7].
Just not sayin'...well played!
The premise of this article is based off an odd belief system. Let's stick to the science, which entirely undermines the govt/msm narrative.
All governments are lying cocksuckers. - Bill Hicks
So fucking what. Whether 9/11 was an inside job or not is frankly irrelevant. The action is fighting to repeal all the fascist bullshit the've enacted, not rehashing again and agian a case that's never going to be tried against criminals who are never going to be indicted. You should change your name to Don Quixote.
Did you read what you wrote before sending it through the intertubes?
Building 7? What's that? I never heard of it. Neither did Secretary of War Don Rumsfled.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xKbSMD0ZGY4
[hypothesis] 1/2 abby martin w/ brett smith - YouTube
[hypothesis] 2/2 abby martin w/ brett smith - YouTube
GW, the government story says these Saudi Arabian fellows connected with Al Qaeda came here, learned how to fly airplanes and planned two targets, the World Trade Center structures and the Pentagon, and for whatever reason, created the War in Iraq and the War on Terror. Then there are those of us who say it was an inside job.
Yet, you say the collapse of WTC 7 was not an inside job; and the government is lying about it.
Therefore, the question is why?
If it wasn’t an inside job then it was an outside job. But, if the government did it, it is an inside job. And whether it’s a false flag or not, somebody did it. Therefore, who did it?
Also, how is it that that building fell and there was no one in it; why was it completely unoccupied?
In that Leo the Explosive Man didn’t have time or opportunity to set up explosives in Building 7 after the Twin Towers collapsed, then the super-thermite or explosives that brought all three buildings down had to be sprayed or painted on or installed before the Twin Towers collapsed. (Our sources make the case that the Towers fell because of the detonation of pre-applied super-thermite, i.e., explosive paint that when detonated “cuts through steel like a warm knife through butter” and turns it into molten steel.)
So, is it fair to conclude that there is a close connection to the controlled demolition of the highly insured Salomon Brother’s building owned by Larry Silverstein ( WTC 7) and the suspected demolition of the Twin Towers?
IOW, did Leo the Explosive Man prepare all three at the same time? If so, the whole thing was an outside job. Cui bono? Larry Silverstein?
Interesting that Susan Lindauer, a former CIA asset, has revealed that "video cameras show trucks arriving at the WTC complex every night from August 23 until September 2 at 3:00 AM when no one was in the buildings." Says Christopher Bollyn, "As a CIA asset, she was told by the CIA to stay out of the WTC area during that time because there would be 'hijacking of the planes and an attack on the World Trade Center.'"
I'm just pontificating, George, but it’s certainly interesting….
well said the oddity of 7 is just nothing more than the idea that nothing no matter how well planned involving this kind of complexity is ever under complete control
+7 (WTC)
How much did the Bushes pay those guys to get them to fly planes into the towers? How can Goverments which are so incompetent keep such an important and sensational secret across so many departments and personnel who would have to have been involved? Which shadow group of greedy zionists put the commie Obummer into office so he could redistribute their wealth? What kind of hedonistic and lavish lifestyle does Cheney lead? But I'm NOT saying big foot exists...
"Which shadow group of greedy zionists..."
Well, Lucky Larry Silverstein made a few billion off the hoax. $4.5 billion to be exact. Despite being out-of-date and having unresolved multi-billion-dollar asbestos liabilities, he obtained a 99 year lease on the WTC complex on July 24, 2001, because he "felt a compelling urge to own them." Coincidentally I'm sure, he and his children (who also worked in the towers) decided to take the day off that day. He's a Zionist whose cronies include the likes of Sharon and Netanyahu.
Then there is Frank Lowry, who is the owner of Westfield America, and leased the Mall at the WTC. Czechoslovakian born Jew. Fought in Israeli war of independence. Former member of Jewish terrorist organization Hagganah. Buddies with all the usual Likudnik supects.
It was Lewis Eisenberg who as head of the Port Authority of New York that authorized the lease transfer to Silverstein and Lowry. Eisenberg was a large contributor to Bush-Cheney campaigns, and former partner with Goldman-Sachs. And Ronald Lauder (of Estee Lauder fame) that lobbied for the privatization of the WTC in the first place. Lauder founded a school for the Mossad and is active in numerous Jewish and Pro-Israel/Zionist organizations.
Another person of interest is Rabbi Dov Zakheim. Trillions of dollars went unnaccounted for in "unsupported accounting entries" under his watch as Pentagon comptroller from May 2001 to March 2004. He was co-author of the PNAC paper "Rebuilding America’s Defenses", which pines away for a Pearl Harbor-like incident to get Boobus all whipped up and excited about supporting their global war.
WTC security was handled by Kroll Associates. Owned then by Zionist Jews Jules and Jeremy Kroll. Managing Director at the time was Jermone Hauer, another Zionist Jew.
"How can Goverments which are so incompetent keep such an important and sensational secret across so many departments and personnel who would have to have been involved?"
First of all, only a small handful needed to be in on the entire conspiracy. Second of all, who said anything about keeping secrets? There are numerous 9/11 whistleblowers. How about Sibel Edmonds? She was an FBI Turkish and Farsi translator monitoring conversations between Turkish intelligence agents and their American contacts. The ACLU calls her “the most gagged person in the history of the United States of America.” She is quoted as saying: “If they were to do real investigations [regarding 9/11] we would see several significant high level criminal prosecutions in this country. And that is something that they are not going to let out. And, believe me; they will do everything to cover this up.” She’s just one of many whistleblowers. See here for a full list: http://www.corbettreport.com/articles/20100305_911_whistleblowers.htm
Besides, the notion that the government can’t keep secrets from the general public is silly. As an example, the NSA was formed in 1952 and dwarfs the CIA in size, yet the American people didn’t even know of the agency’s existence until 1975 when it was revealed as part of a Senate investigation as (according to Senator Frank Church) “probably the largest government interception program affecting Americans ever undertaken.” So basically a huge, secret conspiracy to spy on Americans (e.g., anti-war and other dissidents) that was kept secret from the public for 23 years.
Actually it was the invocation of Bigfoot as a straw man that really sealed it for me....was Bigfoot ever on a UFO?
They are getting desperate.
Great post psychobilly. Logical, scientific and precise. Everything they are not.
thesis: after the failed 1993 WTC attack, contingency plans were draw up in the event of a future attack. The buildings of the entire complex were prewired. In the event of a future attack that did not cause immediate bldg failure, but did however produce irrepairable catastrophic structual damage, a means of quickly and efficiently bringing the structure down in a way to avoid the damage caused by an uncontrolled failure was introduced.
1) the time to properly prepare a bldg by a trained team can take one week with complete bldg access.
2) the access to the wtc would have to done under total covert circumstances. this would significantly increase the time required.
3) due to the covert circumstances, charge placement would be greatly altered, reduced effectiveness and lowering success probability
4) three bldgs were involved in this operation. potential time required could be over one month. during this time, emplaced devices would be subject to discovery.
5) numerous global elements maintained interest in further negative activity against the target.
proposed conclusions:
the probability of such an insider covert undertaking to prep the bldg being successfully carried out without detection would be low. therefore the activity was carried out far in advance of the event, and was an authorized activity.
as part of a contingency plan, knowledge of this option would be made available to a number of emergency management persons, intelligence elements, and political leaders.
persons not adverse to carrying out the contingency could use such information to trigger a series of events. at any given time numerous groups worldwide could be found with sufficient resources for the operation. a group of interest could be allowed to advance their operations without the customary intelligence/law enforcement intervention. regardless of the groups efforts, success could be assured via activation of the contingency plans.
due to the immense political implications of an intention bldg pull, it could be generally assured that all persons with knowledge of the contingency would be highly motivated to make sure such information would remain undisclosed, and would actively attempt to suppress such information. likewise, security forces who had been misdirected would be eager to avoid blame and could be counted on to limit exposure.
my two cents. A group with knowledge of the contingency and with the ability to surreptitiously misdirect security services allowed and possibly provided assistance to a group to carry out the operation. emergency management persons carried out contingency plans in good faith. consequential efforts to avoid and conceal responsibilty for assorted actions that shaped the event has and continues to shield those groups responsible for orchestrating the event.
Ok, agree with you. So effing what. Bunch of us agree it was basically an inside job. Now what.
Exactly.
I think this is where GW is coming from. We're seriously fucked. Government is broken. Not non-functioning, no, seriously malfunctioning. It's just not working. Representatives don't. Courts aren't. The executive is the new dictat. We all think, cool, any day now this thing goes over the cliff, awesomesauce. Delete, defrag, reinstall, reboot. Fresh start. Sadly, this thing coming undone might take another decade or more. In the meantime... what? We just keep shlepping along, hone our cynism, nyuknyuknyuk in our little chat rooms and spin the latest delicious conspiracy bs. And then what?
Guys, this isn't a fucking Disney movie. There isn't any clearly delineated 3-act plot with an exact beginning, middle and end, cardboard cutout villians and you're the toothy square-jawed Hero who gets the chesty blonde and off into the sunset with ya.
They already took your job. Then they took your house. Now they're taking your money. And you're stockpiling beans and bullets. Gimme a fucking break. You go on ZHedge and convince 98 out of 100 readers 9/11 was an inside job. Applause. And then what? Exactly. Nothing. That's what.
You're all waiting for Patrick Swayze and Red Dawn or some shit. Colonel Howdy Doody is going to issue his marching orders from his secret location and the Militias of America are gonna rise up and overthrow the NWO. Fucking spare me.
Let me clue you in. It's already over. It happened. It's done. They fucking OWN IT. It's happening. Now. Where you are. Around you. Around me. Around all of us. It's h-a-p-p-e-n-i-n-g. That shit we've been speculating about, it's here. Now. When they come knocking on my door with their bs warrant, no militia's coming to my rescue. It'll be on me. When they pull me over at the next traffic stop. It's on me. When the bank officer says I've got so-and-so many days to pay or foreclose, it's on me.
We're all on our own. Get used to the idea.
We're all fucked.
Gotta agree with GW on this one. We're fucking pathetic.
As a possible different take/vector on all of this...
Look around you, look at all the people who still believe the BS, all the people that don't even understand simple gravity. These are the same people that those with power see. If you had power like them do you think that you could get the majority of folks to understand? Keep in mind that there are forces out there that would like to see a biblical Armageddon unfold. If you're a "govt" person, or some high-powered business type you'd been seen as an agent of Satan, your words would be rejected before they were even spoken.
Yes, this is an angle along the lines of "benevolent dictator." We cannot actually read (be IN) the minds of TPTB, in which case I'm just saying that it's by no means a shut case that TPTB is/are in fact out to get us.
But... the reason why people won't come around in significant enough numbers to "change the system" is because they'd have to be propelled to relinquish the existing paradigm. And, really, it seems that only Armageddon-like events can produce such events: I suspect that people eventually figure out that a messiah isn't coming, and that this takes a good couple thousand years to set in, after which time when massive upheaval between those who no longer believe and those who continue to carry the story, it comes to a head; a reset happens (mass die-off, war, pestilence and or big climate changes [such as the appearance of the next glacial period]) and then, slowly, the next story builds and we do it all again...
The paradigm is dying and TPTB have no ability to change it. As is the case with all crashes, it's best to slow down the time interval of the impact...
I credit 9/11/2001 as my awakening point. The most important things that we can take away from all of this is that we should concentrate on the fundamentals: Food, Shelter and Water.
Hey great to meet another miserable bastard.
To further your depression is it just me or did the control PLAN really accelerate over the last 20 years...
its like TPTB just thought 'yep we've got them now... its time... fucking 2012 isnt too far away and that would be amusing to have it all stitched up by then...'
or maybe thats just moi
Nice post. Think William Black is a great measuring tool for this. Head of banker prosecution twenty years ago, banished to the internet today. It is definitely accellerating but that's what empires do and how exponentials work
Add Paul Craig Roberts to that banished list as well... They're perfect examples of folks who come forward to "out" shit. Nobody listens to them (because the MSM still has control over the masses).
"thesis: after the failed 1993 WTC attack, contingency plans were draw up in the event of a future attack. The buildings of the entire complex were prewired. In the event of a future attack that did not cause immediate bldg failure, but did however produce irrepairable catastrophic structual damage, a means of quickly and efficiently bringing the structure down in a way to avoid the damage caused by an uncontrolled failure was introduced."
So they used a demolition method for the twin towers (exploding it outward) that ensured an orgiastic spectacle that would maximize damage to the buildings that immediately surrounded them, and maximize the size of the primary debris field at 1200' in diameter, ensuring that other buildings farther away would also be damaged, all as a way to "avoid the damage caused by an uncontrolled failture"? lol. Nonsense.
In addition to Building 7 (Export-Import Bank, US Secret Service, SEC, IRS, CIA, DOD), which housed several agencies and offices in particular that were critical to the investigation of massive financial crimes, building 6 was also a likely target of the attack, containing the U.S. Customs agency and an interagency money-laundering task force called the El Dorado Task force. There were also a number of likely targets in the twin towers that were related to the coverup of huge financial crimes, but suffice it to say your thesis is rather preposterous in my opinion. I think the demo jobs were geared around these targets.
1) I did not venture as to motive. start a war. create a police state. cover up crime. even simple insurance fraud.
2) law of relativity. there were no clean and painless ways to bring down the buildings. what you saw was limited compared to what uncontrolled horizontal failure would have looked like.
3) the state has a habit of sanitizing such sites as quickly as possible. even when not needed. is it to avoid evidence that contradicts official explainations? is it just a straight forward propaganda issue of not wanting continuing momuments to their failure? picture a year of daily MSM and internet coverage using conventional demo techniques. picture the cost and liability of sending a civilian workforce into structually damaged buildings.
4) you are greatly underestimating the work that would be required to achieve what was apparently done. four guys didn't spend a couple of weeks wondering around several buildings with boxes of mysterious stuff without building security, building maintenance, and employees knowing about it. maybe, a front company could have rented a floor or so in each building to cover the work, but that would have caused a whole series of other issues. you criticize my idea of what happened without offering a plausible alternative.
5) The gov has a whole world of contingencies waiting for things you wouldn't image. There are books filled with what ifs. there are checklists. contact info. chain of command. most are very generic. some are specific. I have seen some of these books. I have no knowledge of this event, but from what I have seen, it would not be tin foil outside the rhelm of possibility.
6) I cannot and will not unsee the video of building 7. I know exactly what it shows. I stand by my explaination of what happened as being highly plausible. Why and who are completely different subjects.
"I did not venture as to motive. start a war. create a police state. cover up crime. even simple insurance fraud."
Yes you did: "a means of quickly and efficiently bringing the structure down in a way to avoid the damage caused by an uncontrolled failure was introduced."
"what you saw was limited compared to what uncontrolled horizontal failure would have looked like."
No, it wasn't. You should review the extensive damage to all of the surrounding buildings. If they really wanted to minimize damage to surrounding buildings, they wouldn't have exploded the buildings outward (in the case of the twin towers) in all directions, ensuring maximum damage and a maximum primary debris field that reached 600 feet in all directions from the base of each tower. That's how far multi-ton column-trees were being hurled after shooting out the side of the building at 50 mph. It makes no sense. Whoever designed those twin tower demolitions didn't care one whit about preventing damage to the surrounding area (as someone else commented, more of a military-style demolition than civilian).
"you are greatly underestimating the work that would be required to achieve what was apparently done."
No, I'm not. In fact, I didn't comment on that at all in the post you are replying to. I did comment on the amount of work that would be required for WTC 7 elsewhere in another post on this topic. With enough lead time and the building owners and security company (Kroll) in on it (which I think is likely given their ideological bent and political connections - you should research those aspects), it would have been no problem. WTC 7 was loaded with government offices. And the twin towers had a lot of vacant office space. There was also a big elevator project that would have been ideal for accessing the core columns. Office build outs could have also provided cover. Having worked in such buildings myself, nobody is going to give some maintenance people going about their business a second glance. With cost not a consideration, going wireless would have cut down on the need for lugging a bunch of cables around.
"I cannot and will not unsee the video of building 7. I know exactly what it shows. I stand by my explaination of what happened as being highly plausible. Why and who are completely different subjects."
My comments regarding exploding outward were in reference to the twin towers, not WTC 7 (which was not previously targeted, and brought down in a conventional demolotion, i.e., bottom-up implosion).
well done and bingo. imo
and this: we live in a time of redundancy
manifest as shadow entities. we have it in
banking, security, government and maybe more.
i think i remember a time when this concept
was abhorrent but some how the population has
become accustomed to it, the part that knows
a little bit about it's existence.
this might explain a few things about how
secret "security" measures could be used as
weapons by a small insider group without any
repercussion to themselves. they just fold
from the shadow into their designated position,
where they themselves are responsible to lead
the investigation and enforcement of any potential
crimes that have been committed.
i would say the time when we found "shadow"
entities abhorrent, if there ever was one, was
a better time and perhaps a model of where we
should direct our attention at least with regards
to Government.
@ "I have seen in person at a distasnce of 1/4 mile with my own eyes in the real world, an actual controlled demolition and all 3 buildings do not have the same appearance as one that was demo'd."
and....
"Appears is not the same as 'it is'."
.
sir, do you see the problem?
.
appearance relates to the presentation of information
to the senses and the cognitive context of that information. cognition and context are relative
terms in relation to perspective and identity and
man being a social creature with less than absolute
powers of omniscience appeals to authority or experts
can at times be enlightening however, as you point out,
these same appeals can be misleading in their result.
often the bias and self interest of the authority or
expert can colour their testimony. i don't think that
is the case in this post.
.
what "is" is the question i guess. which conspiracy
theory is based on facts? who determines the facts?
where is the evidence? what happened to the evidence?
who did that? there is an appearance of impropriety.
no?
And, these sites were NEVER treated as crime scenes; there was NEVER the intent to gather evidence suitable for a real trial. Higher-ups who deal with crime scene investigation can easily point out that this was the case here.
http://www.paulcraigroberts.org/2012/09/11/the-11th-anniversary-911-paul...
The 11th Anniversary of 9/11 ~ Paul Craig Roberts
September 11, 2012
.
"..You only have to know two things.
One is that according to the official story, a handful of Arabs, mainly Saudi Arabians, operating independently of any government and competent intelligence service, men without James Bond and V for Vendetta capabilities, outwitted not only the CIA, FBI, and National Security Agency, but all 16 US intelligence agencies, along with all security agencies of America’s NATO allies and Israel’s Mossad. Not only did the entire intelligence forces of the Western world fail, but on the morning of the attack the entire apparatus of the National Security State simultaneously failed. Airport security failed four times in one hour. NORAD failed. Air Traffic Control failed. The US Air Force failed. The National Security Council failed. Dick Cheney failed. Absolutely nothing worked. The world’s only superpower was helpless at the humiliating mercy of a few undistinguished Arabs.
It is hard to image a more far-fetched story–except for the second thing you need to know: The humiliating failure of US National Security did not result in immediate demands from the President of the United States, from Congress, from the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and from the media for an investigation of how such improbable total failure could have occurred. No one was held accountable for the greatest failure of national security in world history. Instead, the White House dragged its feet for a year resisting any investigation until the persistent demands from 9/11 families for accountability forced President George W. Bush to appoint a political commission, devoid of any experts, to hold a pretend investigation.
On 9/11 Doubts Were Immediate
..." pcr
http://www.corbettreport.com/corbett-report-radio-219-the-osama-myth-exp...
It's not worrying that most of us here and others are becoming aware of some semblance of truth, it's the majority of our neighbors who not only believe the "official story" without question but that they believe whatever they see on TV, whatever the latest cult of personality says. You know.
A relevant anecdote if you please.
Just yesterday I was discussing Afghanistan with a 24 year old "kid" at work who was stationed in Kandihar for a time. Being idealistic, proud and fairly bright he was arguing how my viewpoint was unfair and ignorant of all the good work the Canadian military does... The fact the U.S. wasn't even around and it was all NATO forces over there, etc. I was surprised he didn't know about the financing and support of "terror" over the decades, the poppy fields and resource corridors, money laundering and black projects, the Karzai family and their associations, the history of the zio-MIC, the fact that the Canadian military is virtually irrelevant in the scope of affairs and the West wasn't over there spreading "democracy" anyway... Libya likewise, when mention of attacks and motivation for, rebels, etc. this guy doesn't have a frickin' clue.
Someone who was close enough to touch it yet totally programmed. Stupid.
This is what worries me, that we are all surrounded by the enemy for the time being and truth is a dish best enjoyed cold.
Your comment underlines and reminds the much paraphrased Pogo cartoon as a comment on our collective capacity for ignorance programming:
I have met the enemy and he is us.
http://www.mindparts.org/blog_images/pogo.jpg
So it wasn't an Inside Job, it was just a Job?
Performed to cover-up the evidence and destroy the records related to the tech-bubble, the WorldCom and Enron frauds, and other criminal acts of Wall St during the 80's - 90's?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_tenants_in_Seven_World_Trade_Center
It marked the beginning of the "official" end of the financial system; and, we know that the financial system is the heart of the entire paradigm. Oh, and is always the case in any war, "truth" was the first casualty...
To accomplish a goal, there needs to be focus and concentration. The goal of America at this minute and every minute up to the election process should be to define and select the leaders that we need to get this Nation off the edge of the cliff.
Who killed JFK, 911 theories, FDR and the surprise attack, Iraq WMD, and on and on are important. But not at the moment.
Help us focus George. Bush is not running, nor LBJ.
We have the House, Senate, and White House to place leadership quality people into for the survival of the Nation. The Government lies and we need to change that--- focus George on right now and help us do so.
That "leadership" you point to is only an illusion. They are leaders only in the sense they distract and herd the sheep. Government always lies. You cannot change that. It comes with the territory.
Bush and LBJ, among others, are some of the reasons why we are where we are. If you don't understand that, you cannot understand where we're going. Bush and his co-perpetrators would like very much that we forget their involvement in The Crime of The Century.
" 'Who controls the past,' ran the Party slogan, 'controls the future: who controls the present controls the past.' " -- George Orwell 1984
The electoral process is an inside job.
"What the experts say" is the fallacy of Appeal to Authority. Thus the entire post is dead as an argument.
If you cannot understand this stratement:
"World Trade Center 7 appears to be a controlled demolition"
and you don't, then rational discourse with the intelligent is impossible.
Appears is not the same as 'it is'.
If you must rely upon others to interpret something for you, then you lack the intelligence and observational perspicacity to see the world for yourself.
I have watched, as I am open minded, videos of WTC 1, 2 & collapsing about 100+_ times, timing them frame by frame.
I have seen in person at a distasnce of 1/4 mile with my own eyes in the real world, an actual controlled demolition and all 3 buildings do not have the same appearance as one that was demo'd.
That so many of you cannot see this leads me to conclude the following;
-You are stupid.
-You cannot see reality accurately
-You are the complrete opposite of observant.
These 3 points are not ad hominem, they are based upon posts such as the above and similar that I have read on line since 2001.
The flaws are always the same.
You will never be convinced otherwise and hold this opinion to your death.
It is thus a better use of time by the intelligent and observant to ignore you.
That is why so few counter your 'arguments'. We are tired of your recalcitrant idiocy.
Ya .. you ... you mean, two donkeys, a goat and three roosters designed the Saturn 5 rocket engines?
Wow! I would've thought they'd get someone like a rocket scientist or sumfin.
There's reasonable scientific scepticism mate, and then there's irrational ostentatious bullshit objectionism.
SO basically you're denying physics, free-fall collapse, and pretending you can deny it for all buildings because you saw it with ONE. At 1/4 mile away which is very far away.
Footage of 9/11 collapses from various angles RIGHT NEXT TO IT is available all over the place, SO MANY people observed it.
Molten metal dripping off the building prior to collapse and FREE-FALL acceleration are CLEARLY observed.
You DO NOT see this happen with any collapse of any building EVER, AT ALL, in ALL HISTORY that is from a fire or an impact which does these things. Ever.
Who you think you're fooling?
This isn't reddit. This isn't Facebook. This isn't HuffingtonPoop.
THIS IS ZEROHEDGE.
Derp.
"I have seen in person at a distasnce of 1/4 mile with my own eyes in the real world, an actual controlled demolition and all 3 buildings do not have the same appearance as one that was demo'd."
How do you explain the below video then? It really makes you look deceitful and leads one to believe your story is false. It's a side-by-side comparison of an actual demolition and the (patently obvious) demolition of WTC 7:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=73qK4j32iuo
Ceci n'est pas une pipe
In the case of the twin towers, those were brought down differently (top down, and exploded outward instead of bottom-up and imploded), but not in a way that is unheard of in the business. In the case of the twin towers, the intent was to destroy the buildings immediately surrounding the towers as well. In the case of WTC 7, they wanted the debris contained and the damage to surrounding buildings minimized. Explosives are the only way to explain phenomena like multi-ton column trees being blown out the side of the twin towers at 50 mph to land 600 feet away. Those imagining that these flying column trees are the work of gravity (whatever their private motivations for doing so may be) need to look into taking (or re-taking) high school physics.