Are Millions of Business People At Risk of Dying In Collapsing Buildings?

George Washington's picture

This is one in a series of safety-related public service announcements.

Death Traps?

Millions of people work in or visit high-rise buildings … assuming the buildings were more or less safe.

But it turns out that there is a severe, lethal risk of sudden collapse in even the best-made skyscrapers in America, Britain, Germany, Japan and other nations worldwide.

A New Understanding

Before 9/11, no modern steel-frame high-rise building had ever collapsed due to fire.

9/11 radically changed our understanding of architecture and engineering …

Specifically, 3 steel-frame buildings collapsed on that day. That includes one that was never hit by a plane, and had only small, isolated office fires prior to its collapse.

This was unexpected, as much hotter, longer-lasting fires have never before brought down a modern steel-frame office building.  For example, the 2005 Madrid skyscraper fire “reached 800 degrees Celsius (1,472 F), said Javier Sanz, head of Madrid firefighter”  and lasted some 20 hours without collapsing.

In other words, officials who write building codes, architects and structural engineers had never before worried about small office fires causing office buildings from collapsing.

Appendix A of the Federal Emergency Management Agency’s World Trade Center Building Performance Study notes:

In the case of the fire at One Meridian Plaza, the fire burned uncontrolled for the first 11 hours and lasted 19 hours. Contents from nine floors were completely consumed in the fire. In addition to these experiences in fire incidents, as a result of the Broadgate fire, British Steel and the Building Research Establishment performed a series of six experiments at Cordington in the mid-1990s to investigate the behavior of steel frame buildings. These experiments were conducted in a simulated, eight-story building. Secondary steel beams were not protected. Despite the temperature of the steel beam reaching 800-900 °C (1,500-1,700 °F) in three tests (well above the traditionally assumed critical temperature of 600 °C [1,100 °F]), no collapse was observed in any of the six experiments.

Underwriters Laboratories tested the steel components at the Twin Towers and found they could withstand fires for hours without failure:

“NIST [the government agency - National Institute of Standards and Technology, a branch of the Department of Commerce - responsible for investigating the collapse of the 3 buildings on 9/11] contracted with Underwriters Laboratories, Inc. to conduct tests to obtain information on the fire endurance of trusses like those in the WTC towers…. All four test specimens sustained the maximum design load for approximately 2 hours without collapsing… The Investigation Team was cautious about using these results directly in the formulation of collapse hypotheses. In addition to the scaling issues raised by the test results, the fires in the towers on September 11, and the resulting exposure of the floor systems, were substantially different from the conditions in the test furnaces. Nonetheless, the [empirical test] results established that this type of assembly was capable of sustaining a large gravity load, without collapsing, for a substantial period of time relative to the duration of the fires in any given location on September 11.” (NIST, 2005, p. 140).

Other fire tests have also failed to cause failures at high temperatures.

So the collapse of World Trade Center Building 7 on 9/11 (not hit by a plane) was a surprise … and should be a huge concern to the millions of people who work in office buildings worldwide.

To get to the bottom of this issue, Washington’s Blog reached out to a former manager at Underwriters Laboratories – Kevin Ryan – to seek reassurance that the danger was small for the millions of financial services industry workers, business men, lawyers, web executives, and others who work in office buildings:

[Question]  Wasn’t the steel used in the Twin Towers and Building 7 of inferior quality?  So as long as builders use better-quality steel, can’t we be assured of safety?

[Kevin Ryan]   The steel used to build WTC Building 7 was the standard grade for high-rise construction–still used to this day–called ASTM A36 grade steel. It was not inferior in any way from the steel used to make many of the other high-rise buildings in America.

For the Twin Towers, fourteen different grades of steel were used in the construction, including A36, which has a nominal strength of 36 ksi.  The other grades used were higher strength steels like 100 ksi WEL-TEN steel which was manufactured in Japan and shipped to the States. The steel used in the Towers was actually far superior to typical structural steel.

The official government reports on the destruction of the WTC buildings did not find any problem with the quality of the materials or construction methods used. And although those reports did make some recommendations for changes to building codes, those changes have not been incorporated in municipal codes or adopted by the building construction community.

[Question]   You write in Foreign Policy Journal:

“And if people actually understood and believed the official account of what happened at the WTC they would not enter tall buildings because in doing so they would be putting their lives at risk.”

What do you mean?

[Ryan]  What I mean is that high-rise buildings are designed and constructed to withstand fires that are much worse than what we know existed in WTC Building 7. My former company, Underwriters Laboratories (UL), plays a big part in that process. We know that UL did the fire resistance testing that was behind the selection of the steel components for WTC7 because that fact is in the NIST WTC7 report. Therefore the steel columns and floor assemblies should have withstood 2 to 3 hours of intense fire in a testing furnace, as required by the NYC code.  But on 9/11, the fire lasted only 20 minutes in any given area, a fact that NIST admits, and the entire structure was destroyed due to an inexplicable failure to resist fire.

Moreover, NIST abandoned its previous hypotheses that suggested the destruction of WTC7 might have resulted from diesel fuel fires, or damage from falling debris, or the design of the building. In the end, NIST said that it was only the effects of the fire fed by office furnishings, on fully-fireproofed steel components, that caused the total destruction of this 47-story building. And since no actions have been taken to retrofit any existing high-rise buildings, we must assume that what happened to WTC7, according to the official account, could happen to any tall building that experiences a typical office fire.

No Change (?!)

Given that 9/11 totally changed our understanding of how dangerous small office fires could be, we couldn’t believe Ryan’s claim that “changes have not been incorporated in municipal codes or adopted by the building construction community.”

So Washington’s Blog contacted Richard Gage,  a practicing architect for more than two decades, who has worked on most types of building construction, including one project which used  around 1,200 tons of steel framing:

[Question] Have high-rise architects and engineers changed how they build skyscrapers, to prevent collapses after 9/11?

And have they changed how they build skyscrapers to prevent office fires from knocking down steel buildings?

[Richard Gage] No – they haven’t made any structural changes.

No structural changes?!

Either building code writers, architects and engineers are cavalierly ignoring this catastrophic new understanding of the extreme danger of small office fires, or the investigation into the collapse of World Trade Center building 7 on 9/11 was flawed.

No wonder New York residents have launched a High Rise Safety Initiative to try to protect the safety of those who work or visit office buildings.

Postscript:  Until this issue is resolved through a complete revision of building codes and architectural and engineering practices, we recommend that everyone stay out of office buildings. Because if even small office fires can cause the whole building to collapse, it’s just not worth the risk to go inside.

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
The Pop In's picture

More trolls here than under all the bridges in Scandinavia.

InjuredThales's picture

I want to fly planes into these idiot truthers' houses so they can argue about whether or not the resulting fire caused the collapse.

These conspiracy theories are a mix of non-falsifiable claims and cognitive dissonance.

InjuredThales's picture

I want to fly planes into these idiot truthers' houses so they can argue about whether or not the resulting fire caused the collapse.

These conspiracy theories are a mix of non-falsifiable claims and cognitive dissonance.

The Pop In's picture


Internet Trolls Really Are Horrible People: Narcissistic, Machiavellian, psychopathic, and sadistic. By Feb 14 2014

Radical Marijuana's picture

"Dark Tetrad: Machiavellianism (willingness to manipulate and deceive others), narcissism (egotism and self-obsession), psychopathy (the lack of remorse and empathy), and sadism (pleasure in the suffering of others)."

There is a runaway pathocracy that dominates our political processes much more so than merely trolls on the Internet. The DARK TETRAD are the primary characteristics of the people who really did 9/11 as inside job, false flag attack, and those who covered that up, while promoting the huge lies in the official story about what had happened.

From the Greek pathos, “feeling, pain, suffering”; and kratos, “rule:”

A totalitarian form of government in which absolute political power is held by a psychopathic elite, and their effect on the people is such that the entire society is ruled and motivated by purely pathological values.

The Pathocrats

DavidPierre's picture


Now you know why I have little of no time for 9/11MORONs other than to insult them.

Quinn's original webmaster, ('Raging Debate' @ ZH, Jason Rines) who gave him a well run and free website but ended up booting his sorry ass to the curb.


moneybots = Jim Quinn




Jason Rines just posted this.

"Smokey and Jim are the same people, yes. I mapped both the I.P.'s back to his office at Wharton.

As for having fun, well... his new blog is a place where. if you want to be abused and argue with someone with only academic experience, then go for it.

As for me, I moved on.

3,000 of my countrymen are dead, they were not enemy combatants. Radical Islam was used as usual as the convenient manipulated fools they are. They like blood money and Islam gives these individuals the convenient excuse for murder-for-hire. No different than the 1880's in Russia and the 1930's in Germany. 

I want as close to the truth as we can all get and we are only partially there.

I cannot waste time on the wannabe dictators while my dead countrymen have not received justice.

Justice will be served when I feel the rest of my countrymen are safe and that also is a long ways away. We will probably be old men by the time we feel we know enough truth to say we concluded our own investigation and many of the perpetrators dead of old age, war or both.

So I have little time for Quinn."


So there it is from someone who knows.

Jim Quinn is a FRAUD and a LIAR.

 I have posted on ZH and on...

Jim Quinn is Smokey.

Hide your face in shame Quinn.

You will always have 'sheep' who will still respect you in the morning.


Jim Quinn during one of his frequent Bi-Polar Spells last night posting to himself on

Lifted edits;


  1. Smokey says:

    LLPOH—–There is another blog, Zero Hedge. I think they have about 25k members. Zero Hedge posts guest articles from hundreds of sources on his site. Quinn is one of his favorite guest authors because people love to read and comment on Quinn’s articles. They generate much traffic for ZH. There is an article over there now “9/11—-A Fourth Turning Perspective” of Quinn’s from this site that has over 200 comments so far this weekend. THAT’S where many of the 9/11 loonies came from this weekend. They read the article over there and came over here. I haven’t seen SSS all weekend, although Stuck was on our side this weekend against the loonies. I’m getting ready to crash for tonight, but I’ll be back to start some shit with someone tomorrow. Later.

    Like or Dislike: 0  0

    12th September 2010 at 11:28 pm



Quinn... a guy who posts to himself on his own website.

And he knows the Truth about 9/11 ?!

Pity the fool!



RM...Good to have you on ZH for you have much more patience than I.

A. Buttle's picture

GW's articles are valuable if for no other reason than to smoke out the .gov cockaroaches that lurk in the shadows around here. 

DavidPierre's picture

You know what... it is not just the crime but more importantly... it is the cover up.

Son of Captain Nemo's picture

Last one on?!!!...

If I am I hope everyone that's been on this for the last two days (pro-Israeli lobby shills excluded of course) signs the 'High Rise Safety Petition' and manages to contact their Congressional Representatives in Washington to sign it as well.

Might be our last best chance before the next one comes along.

ItsDanger's picture

You're citing an experiment of a 9 floor building using ONE variable, that fire alone.  Holy shit.  Go build another WTC and try to replicate.

jbradt's picture

What was Rudy Giuliani doing the day of 911 walking the streets? Shouldn't he been in a communication shelter someplace?  He said quote " They told me they were comming down and then they did".  See link below.  Fire Crews reported only isolated pockets of fire, before the building  WTC 1 collaspe.  Oh yes collaspe at free fall speed, in other words, all the tons of steel below the impacted floors offered no resistance. If the pancake theory was true, there would of been 27 stories of debris in the footprint.  How do you explain the molten steel burning for weeks after the 911, Thermite is the answer. Please see the 2nd link below; I'm so very happy this fraud is comming to light.

moneybots's picture

"Fire Crews reported only isolated pockets of fire, before the building  WTC 1 collaspe."


After all these years, you still don't know they were on the 78th floor when they said that and that the main body of fire was on the floors immediately above them?

"Oh yes collaspe at free fall speed, in other words, all the tons of steel below the impacted floors offered no resistance."

The free falling exterior columns were free falling faster than the Towers collapsed.  The floor connections offered little resistance to falling debris.

"If the pancake theory was true, there would of been 27 stories of debris in the footprint"

Debris could be seen rapidly progressing down, floor by floor.  Recalculate.





blindman's picture

here, for anyone who may have missed it.
Johnny Cocknballs
Johnny Cocknballs's picture
Vote up!
Vote down!
Did you see that thing that flew right by you?

That was "the point".

Urban Roman's picture

It's pretty late in this thread, but I just wanted to point out one thing, GW.

The safety experts and engineers (with a few exceptions) have not recommended shutting down all the GE Mark I BWRs, despite the fact that they have been demonstrated to be death traps and safety hazards to millions of people. Very few of the remaining fleet have been mothballed since 3/11/11... as you also well know. Therefore a few flimsy skyscrapers will not bother them.

Is human life fundamentally cheaper to officialdom now, or has it always been thus?

Winston Smith 2009's picture

To all of the "truthers" from someone who is definitely not a GW Bush supporter or apologist:

Get a clue. If a collection of huge government bureaucracies had a collective asshole, they couldn't wipe it if they tried nor could they keep the attempt a secret.

Ignatius's picture

Chomsky:  "Even if they did do it, who cares?"

Why don't you shut the fuck up.

Winston Smith 2009's picture

Chomsky:  "Even if they did do it, who cares?"

Doesn't nullify the logic of everthing else he said. Your comment is a logical fallacy technique. Look it up.

blindman's picture

n.c. logic is wanting in this clip.
the fact is the administration at the time
had no cia operative influence in iraq but
plenty in saudi arabia, pakistan and
so they used it and then attempted to paint
hussein as a collaborator with their alciada
agent in iraq. remember? chomsky conveniently
forgets these events and actions of the bush
""The reason I keep insisting that there was a relationship between Iraq and Saddam and al Qaeda: because there was a relationship between Iraq and al Qaeda," Bush said after a Cabinet meeting. As evidence, he cited Iraqi intelligence officers' meeting with bin Laden in Sudan. "There's numerous contacts between the two," Bush said.

The finding of the commission's staff led Bush's Democratic challenger, Sen. John F. Kerry (Mass.), to escalate his accusations that Bush deceived both the Senate and the American public about the rationale for war in Iraq. "The president owes the American people a fundamental explanation about why he rushed to war for a purpose that it now turns out is not supported by the facts," Kerry told reporters at the Detroit airport. "That is the finding of this commission.""
chomsky also conclude, without logic or evidence, that the administration
was not composed of "total lunatics" when, in fact to any casual observer,
they were and remain "total lunatics", murderous and criminal total lunatics.

Ignatius's picture

His 'logic' is terribly flawed.

I don't know why a smart guy like Chomsky goes full retard on some issues, but nevertheless, he does.

And you using "truther" as pejorative.  You'd rather we be liars? Or is that your role?

Winston Smith 2009's picture

"And you using "truther" as pejorative."

Watch this excellent documentary if you haven't.  It's the kind of fully substantiated TRUTH I'm talking about:

9/11: Press For Truth

Ignatius's picture

Dude, I watched it when it came out.  Good doc, as far as it goes.

Back at ya.  9/11 - Experts Speak Out

Winston Smith 2009's picture

I have no conspiratorial "role."  And I think conspiracies definitely exist, but that in most cases, they are a matter of manipulating government bureaucracies via their innumerable weaknesses from WITHOUT rather than from within. So, from the huge amount I've read on the topic, the primary reason for the failure to stop 9/11 was BUREAUCRATIC INCOMPETENCE which should in itself be considered a redundant term. Try spending 21 years within one with the security clearance of god and you'll begin to realize what I do. They ARE that bureaucratically stupid.

Ignatius's picture

The fact that bureaucracies are what they are is not an argument.

Incredulity is not an argument.

Evidence makes arguments.  Study some.

Winston Smith 2009's picture

The failure to stop the 1993 WTC bombing as well as 9/11 and all of the dots they failed to connect due to bureaucratic inter and intra-agency infighting, failure to pass intel between agencies, and just plain old incompetence. YES, they ARE that bad!  PERIOD!

blindman's picture

it is broadly known that the key actor in the 93
bombing was the fbi. it was a sting operation
that went live, look it up and check it out.
that is the way "counter" terrorism works/
doesn't work.

Ignatius's picture

World empire, but you plead 'incompetence'.  Get a grip.

You obviously don't know much about WTC '93 either, do ya?

Winston Smith 2009's picture

"You obviously don't know much about WTC '93 either, do ya?"

I've read this:

1000 Years for Revenge: International Terrorism and the FBI--the Untold Story

Read that if you haven't and you'll see the clown show for what it is.

Ignatius's picture

If Lance represents the depth of your study then you've... got a lot more reading to do.

Winston Smith 2009's picture

When you have highly classified experience deep WITHIN the system, get back with me. Bureaucracies ARE that stupid. Ever heard, "An elephant is a mouse designed by a committee"?

Ignatius's picture

Winston Smith 2009:  "Bureaucracies are nightmares of incompetence, therefore NOTHING else of consequence happens in the world!"

Did I paraphrase you correctly?

Elliptico's picture

Heh, heh, heh, ..... move along now.

blindman's picture

it happens that apparently intelligent people can over look the very
simple and obvious while they become enamored with their own
technical bias; it is the initial assumption, oversight and bias
that leads to fallacious conclusions. either that or the practice
of lying for pay.
check this link where
n.c. argues from "uncontroversial" facts to a fallacious conclusion
based on the absolute profundity of his bias. (to some applause)
Noam Chomsky slams 9/11 truthers (VIDEO)
the gate keepers at work.
there is the crime, the cover up/ false narratives, and then
the profiting from the crime. the entity that can do all
that is the guilty party/s.
it is that simple and complex simultaneously.
that isn't "conspiracy" thinking, it is "investigative" thinking.
something the "government" no longer practices or tolerates and for good
reason. by the way it is a symptom of fascism.

Deathstar's picture

When 25% of people in AmeriKa cannot even answer correctly, a question that is remedial at best.... this is what happens. Dumb FK Moronic dullards will believe the sky is green if uttered by someone with perceived "authority".



Always question authority, it frequently lies.



One in Four Americans Unaware that Earth Circles Sun"

blindman's picture

the relationship of the earth and sun is actually more complicated
than the mere circling idea communicates but i get the point.
it is frightening but it is what it is.
but just for punctuation and further evidentiary destruction
remember the pentagon wing that blew up due to a commercial
airline that left a missile like print on the building and
then disintegrated leaving not one piece of itself at the
site, (yet conveniently killing the bulk of the team tasked
with locating 2 trillion missing dollars from the budget!);
though there must have been hundreds of sources
of video evidence of the surrounding scene not one bit has
been deemed suitable for public consumption. the "authorities"
are most definitely taking care to control a narrative, that
is their job as they see it. (dupes). the truth has nothing to do with
the controlled narrative and there are reasons for this
as the truth might inspire people to relieve themselves of
false prophets and other assorted "authorities".
that would cost a chunk of money to a bit of the "elite" status quo.
truth, justice and change, says who and by what "authority"?
the thinking individual might consider themselves as a
hunted and dying breed in the new world dystopian "order"
where even nation states are not sovereign but are pawns
of the global monetary and fiscal elite.
i say have faith as the darkest hour is before the dawn. no?
the butchers love their sheep right up to the point that
they decide to sell the meat but people, all people, are not
sheep, even if they do not know that the earth "circles"
the sun.
who do these butchers think they are? or do they never
ask the question? and there is a price to pay for that too.

TNTARG's picture

This sentence showed me this article is pure shit:

"Before 9/11, no modern steel-frame high-rise building had ever collapsed due to fire."

None of the buildings on 9/11 collapsed due to fire. ZH, I can't believe you're giving space to this crap.


blindman's picture
Did NIST Fraudulently Omit A Key Component Related to Collapse Theory From WTC Building 7 Report?
nist concluded the cause of collapse (wtc7) was fire, do you disagree?
"..What is progressive collapse?
Progressive collapse is defined as the spread of local damage from a single initiating event, from structural element to element, eventually resulting in the collapse of an entire structure or a disproportionately large part of it. The failure of WTC 7 was an example of a fire-induced progressive collapse." ..

sosoome's picture

Progressive collapse

Funny. The operator didn't get his full days work on this one!

sosoome's picture

NIST didn't model in the actual damage , which makes their models moot. I don't think it was fraudulent; everyone missed it, it seems.


blindman's picture

at "bones don't lie." right, people lie.
who controlled the "bones" at this scene?
who declared it all a crime scene requiring
a full investigation? right, nobody!
the "bones" were hauled off to china, asap.
you can still smell the stench of those
actions and decisions, the smell of it will never
dissipate and will define certain reputations
for eternity. imho
the entire "event" was played and left the signature
of the players.
yes, move along, nothing to see here. ....
any incongruities will be dealt with/taken care of at
a later date should they surface.

moneybots's picture

"at "bones don't lie." right, people lie.
who controlled the "bones" at this scene?
who declared it all a crime scene requiring
a full investigation? right, nobody!
the "bones" were hauled off to china, asap."


The debris removal was not done in secret, nor was a secret team removing the debris.


sosoome's picture

How come I can find tons of structural evidence, all of which shows the buildings broke apart at their connectors?

And how do you know an investigation was not conducted? I hear that repeated over and over with no substantiation. FBI, NYPD, ATF, FEMA, FDNY, and every other investigative agency in the country were all over the site from day one. Were they all there just for show, so the conspiracy would gain som cred? Provide some proof there was no investigation. 

blindman's picture

@"How come I can find tons of structural evidence, all of which shows the buildings broke apart at their connectors?"
because a controlled demolition uses the weight/mass of the building to
cause catastrophic failure of the entire structure, including the connectors,
by removing the essential vertical support elements.
the mass of the building then works to damage the other elements of
construction. the appearance of resulting destruction would vary
from construction type with method of demolition, there being
many possible final appearances of debris.
the idea that you could get from wtc7 with the proposed
gash and fire a total catastrophic structural failure
remains unique in the entire history of the world.
correspondingly, the idea that the building was
brought down by a controlled demolition, under the given
circumstances is an equally unique and abhorrent idea but
for entirely different reasons.
and there is no plane to point to with this one,
my guess was that flight 93 was intended but never
arrived so....plan b kicked in. there another abhorrent
anyway ....

blindman's picture

you cannot prove a negative. if there was an investigation
where is it, was it a secret? and not that white house
commissioned farce that did not even mention wt7 or the finance
part of the problem and much of which remains "secret". remember
bush first proposed henry kissinger to head that investigation,
turns out he may have had serious financial conflicts of
interest and maybe already knew exactly what was happening? you can find the link?
if there was an investigation perhaps the result reveals
complicity where it most definitely is not welcome, that
being upon aspects of the investigators organisation and
you tell me where there WAS an investigation and analysis of
the evidence before it was disappeared to china.
"Absence of evidence
If someone were to assert that there is an elephant on the quad, then the failure to observe an elephant there would be good reason to think that there is no elephant there. But if someone were to assert that there is a flea on the quad, then one's failure to observe it there would not constitute good evidence that there is no flea on the quad. The salient difference between these two cases is that in the one, but not the other, we should expect to see some evidence of the entity if in fact it existed."
a crime scene investigation would be the elephant, not the flea.

blindman's picture

i suppose there are some negatives than can be proved,
on second thought, but not in this case as if there was
a competent investigation done it is as a ghost, invisible,
unpublished and no documentation offered.
if you say to me prove there is no ghost here and i respond
i can't see one, that is certainly proof of nothing but might
suggest something concerning the nature of the object under consideration.
perhaps that it does not really exist or was introduced as an
object of consideration in error or with questionable sincerity-integrity,
no implication here with regards your efforts and research intended.
just questioning your logic with regards the evidence and/or lack thereof.
best to you in your research.

sosoome's picture

How often does the FBI release public reports of investigations they conduct? That's all I'm saying. They were there, observing every piece of debris removed. It doesn't take scientific analysis to see the buildings were cut apart. It'll be obvious in "the bones".

But don't misunderstand my POV. I am only speaking of CD; not any other factor. There are plenty of reasons to suspect (know) a cover up unsued throughout the post 911 inquiries. It's just that controlled demolition is not part of it, and is actually a diversion which takes the heat off the real cover up.

So as I stated, you'll have to find some structural evidence of CD if you are to have a case for a new investigation based on CD.

blindman's picture

there may have been other destructive technologies involved
in a less than controlled manner, i'll give you that.
but the point is the point and i think/hope you get it.
"..Crime Scene Evidence Quickly Removed and Destroyed
Alan D. Ratner’s Metals Management and the SIMS group was made responsible for quickly scooping up the WTC steel/debris and shipping it off to Asian smelters. Alan Ratner is Jewish. Ratner merged with the SIMS group and the Hugo Neu corporation and they made a handsome profit. Ratner sold over 50,000 tons of crime scene evidence steel to a Chinese company at $120 per ton. Ratner had obtained it for $70 per ton. He not only destroyed evidence from one of the biggest crime scenes in history, he made a vast profit doing so. More research on the criminal destruction of crime scene evidence can be found here."
the wording may be flawed but the message
should be clear. besides the initial crime there is ample
evidence of follow up crime and profit from obfuscating
the facts of the initial crime, that is a signature!
a tramp stamp if you will. and. there is, ongoing, a tremendous
investigation being done with no access to official "secrets"
and it is simply ignored by the media and those who do not
want to know what really happened, i guess out of love for their
position, money, country, life or even out of respect for
the dead victims who are still pilling up and being turned into
not entities, if you can believe that.

sosoome's picture

Which begs the question. Why is it I can find the evidence?

But your facts are wrong. Nothing was shipped to asia prior to examination by the various teams assembled at the landfills, and their signing off on recycling. The simple fact is there are reams of photo and video documentation of structural remains. None of it shows any sign of CD. Fact.

blindman's picture

so where is the evidence and documentation of the quality and quantity
of signed off debris? that would be tens of thousands of photographs.
where are they? who has been maintaining this database? who created
it and why has no one in the white house commissioned investigation
been privy to it or the public had access to it till you declared
the fact?
please reveal the sources and let the world evaluate the evidence
or .... not. it is up to you.

moneybots's picture

"so where is the evidence and documentation of the quality and quantity
of signed off debris? that would be tens of thousands of photographs.
where are they? who has been maintaining this database? who created
it and why has no one in the white house commissioned investigation
been privy to it or the public had access to it till you declared
the fact?
please reveal the sources and let the world evaluate the evidence
or .... not. it is up to you."


None of the debris was removed in secret.  There was no secret team removing the debris.


Jetliners were flown into the the Towers, out of control fires raged and they collapsed.  The nefarious act was flying the jetliners into the Towers, not the collapse of the towers.


Whether or not the Towers collapsed, had no bearing on the subsequent War on Terror.  Had the Towers stood at the end of the day, Afghanistan would still have been attacked, as well as Iraq.


No amount of documentation of the debris is going to satisfy those who don't want to believe it.

The Zapruder film shows JFK's head blew out on the upper right side, yet claims persist that he was shot from the right front.  There are claims the autopsy photos are fake.  There are claims the Zapruder film is fake. There are claims the body was altered.

Jim Marrs, who wrote Crossfire, stated in his book that he doubted Bill Lovelady was the man resembling Oswald, standing in the doorway of the Depository, despite the fact that Lovelady said it was him standing there and other people standing there also said it was Lovelady.