A new report by BBC 2's "Conspiracy Files" claims that the US National Institute of Standards and Technology is preparing to release a long awaited report on the collapse of World Trade Center 7, which fell on Sept. 11, 2001, about seven hours after WTC 1 and 2 were downed.
The NIST investigators are widely expected to stake the claim that fires were responsible for causing the structure's simultaneous column failure, bringing building 7 down at near free fall speed onto its footprint. Should the claims hold true, WTC 7 would be the first steel frame skyscraper to ever collapse due to fire damage.
The BBC, while focusing on the details of NIST's upcoming report, goes to some lengths to balance its revelation with comments by Richard Gage, founder of the group Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth.
"Building Seven is the smoking gun of 9/11…" states Gage. "A sixth grader can look at this building falling at virtually freefall speed, symmetrically and smoothly, and see that it is not a natural process. Buildings that fall in natural processes fall to the path of least resistance, they don't go straight down through themselves."
9/11 Truth proponents argue that a symmetrical collapse, not just in WTC 7, but also WTC 1 and 2, is impossible without the presence of coordinated explosives. While some purport theories of what 'really' happened, others merely lob questions which have a tendency to make politicians uncomfortable.
The BBC as well is no stranger to the scrutiny of 9/11 Truth activists. On the evening of Sept. 11, 2001, the BBC reported that WTC 7 had collapsed some 26 minutes before it actually fell. Video footage of the report clearly shows the tower in the background, behind Jane Standley, the network's correspondent, as she speaks of its demise. Before her report was complete, the news anchor lost the feed from New York. BBC editor Richard Porter vehemently denies the channel was part of any conspiracy.
Witnesses, many of them firefighters, reportedly saw molten metal pouring out of ALL THREE towers before they collapsed. Fire cannot do that. Only thermite can do that.
I am well aware that the 9-11 conspiracy theory is the dangerous third rail for liberal bloggers. If we dare to talk about it we are quickly labeled "kooks" and "crazed conspiracy theorists", but this thing absolutely drives me crazy. I cannot simply ignore it and move on, because I absolutely believe it is the key to everything we do not know about our government and the Bush administration.
I am usually a pretty rational guy, which is why I cannot accept the story that the government keeps trying to sell us.
There are just so many unanswered questions. Where did the molten metal come from? Why were the steel girders taken out of the country and destroyed? Why did eyewitnesses mention multiple explosions? Where are the wings and seats from the plane that supposedly hit the Pentagon?
I can go on like this all day long. And there have been days in which I have.
If you have similar questions and feel isolated by them you can go here, and here, and here, or simply go to Google and search for Loose Change videos.
Believe me I would love to bury my head and just pretend these questions and inconsistencies do not exist, but I simply cannot. And I am pretty damn sure we should not as well.
When the BS is this thick, I rely on my own memory of events. Here's what I remember on the news THAT DAY. At some point later in the afternoon, whatever TV news I was watching started saying that Bldg 7 was going to be brought down in a controlled demolition because it was so damaged as to be unstable. A little later we saw the bldg collapsing ... and I never thought anything more about it until conspiracy people began talking about it. Among other things, I guess their point is the govt won't admit it was brought down purposefully for safety reasons? And I guess the question remains what was inside Bldg 7 that might've been NECESSARY to destroy? And something about explosives being planted in all the WTC towers? Well, as I said, I rely on my own memories of live-feed TV news that day, feed that I heard as it happened.
ReplyDeleteWell d.k. the question that immediately springs to mind about bringing the building down because it was so damaged is how did they get the explosives into the building to bring it down?
ReplyDeleteThey could not have carried them in while it was burning so had they been in place before the fire started? Why?
And did all of the towers have them? It just speaks to my point that NONE of it makes any sense. And neither do the official explanations.
Here's a link to the declassified August 6, 2001 PBD that Condi, Cheney and Bush (he was two sheets to the wind at Crawford and not to be disturbed) that suggests the bad guys planned to use airplanes as bombs to attack U.S. targets
ReplyDeletehttp://news.findlaw.com/hdocs/docs/terrorism/80601pdb.html
While most people (including me) want all of the Bush junta to appear before the Hague and charged as war criminals, the reality is, it will never happen.
Bush removed the U.S. from the Tribunal in the run-up to the invasion of Iraq. This is no accident.
Were the noose to ever tighten, remember he has a 100,000 ranch in Paraguay to escape to and a private militia of 103 Stasi/military assigned to protect him until the day he dies.
BBC News is generally excellent, but sometimes they give equal credence to irrational conspirationalist viewpoints when they shouldn't. (Another example is the current fear of wifi in Great Britain)
ReplyDeleteWTC 7 conspiracy claims debunked:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jtYrArNibHo
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nu1yjD0N5Qo&NR=1
All the videos by this person: http://www.youtube.com/user/boloboffin
Hey funkalunatic, I appreciate your input but that does not explain the molten metal found in its basement that burned for over a month and other questions that make this thing stand out like a sore thumb in the story of 9-11.
ReplyDeleteI am not saying if I personally have a conspiracy theory I am just saying that the "official" story does not make any sense. And if they wanted to keep people from mistrusting them then why take away all of the metal girders?
I call bullshit. You're buying into crap on the Internet made up by people who are emotionally invested in believing in a huge, illogical 9/11 conspiracy and don't know what the hell they're talking about. The article you linked to is filled with bogus claims. Could it be that the "official story" actually makes perfect sense, but you are just insecure about your lack of understanding of every little detail?
ReplyDelete