911 Audio and video
See other 911 Audio and video Articles
Title: Nails in the Coffin of Trade Seven Close-ups from WTC-7 Collapse Footage Show Unmistakable Signature of Demolition Charges
Source:
st12.startlogic.com
URL Source: http://st12.startlogic.com/~xenonpu ... ibs_along_southwest_corner.htm
Published: Jun 9, 2006
Author: unattributed
Post Date: 2006-06-09 00:12:34 by A K A Stone
Keywords: None
Views: 11834
Comments: 21
Here you will find proof of what really happend on 911. You will find the truth.
Here is video of the collapse
http://st12.startlogic.com/~xenonpup/video%20archive/wtc-7_collapse.mpa
The smaller clip above was taken from this segment of the Naudet Brothers' DVD. Only cropping and panning techniques were used - there was no use of sharpening or edge-enhancing filters.
Looking at the upper right-hand corner of the building we see a rapid series of small explosions travelling upward just as the building itself begins to fall. The size, placement and timing of these "puffs" is very consistent with squibs from cutting charges of the type used in professional controlled demolitions, and in fact nothing but small explosive charges could create such an appearance. The decreasing volume of the building from the collapse itself could not create enough pressure to cause such localized high-velocity effects, and this early in the collapse would have only created a modest overpressure.
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
#1. To: All (#0)
Other video evidence of squibs: Larger mid-wall squibs in the WTC-1 collapse http://st12.startlogic.com/~xenonpup/Flashes/squibs_and_streamers.qt
view link in above post. It is conclusive.
More distant view of WTC-1 from the north Two very sharp and elongated squibs can be seen on the right side of the building http://st12.startlogic.com/~xenonpup/collapse%20update/wtc-1_jets.mpg
REALLY?
Taken with all of the other evidence. Yes I honestly believe it is. Why do you think no stations EVER play 911 video anymore? Even Fox Snooze doesn't use it to hype the war. Why do you think the explosions occur?
See here too http://www.freedomunderground.org/view.php?v=3&t=3&l=1&aid=22223#1
2) That's actually about it. We're doing everything within our power to comply, now that we have spoken to all parties concerned and are much more informed as to the situation. So for now, again, leave them alone, and I'll keep you posted as always. http://64.233.161.104/search? http://q=cache:re3SqUX0jRkJ:screwloosechange.blogspot.com/2006/05/loosers-threaten- copyright-lawyer.html+WTC-7+Collapse+DUE+TO+CNN&hl=en&gl=us&ct=clnk&cd=14
NY TIMES 12/20/2001 City Had Been Warned of Fuel Tank at 7 World Trade Center "Fire Department officials warned the city and the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey in 1998 and 1999 that a giant diesel fuel tank for the mayor's $13 million command bunker in 7 World Trade Center, a 47-story high-rise that burned and collapsed on Sept. 11, posed a hazard and was not consistent with city fire codes. The 6,000-gallon tank was positioned about 15 feet above the ground floor and near several lobby elevators and was meant to fuel generators that would supply electricity to the 23rd-floor bunker in the event of a power failure. Although the city made some design changes to address the concerns - moving a fuel pipe that would have run from the tank up an elevator shaft, for example - it left the tank in place. But the Fire Department repeatedly warned that a tank in that position could spread fumes throughout the building if it leaked, or, if it caught fire, could produce what one Fire Department memorandum called "disaster." http://www.ulster.net/~babs7/articles/robertlederman/guilianigang.htm “Tuesday's terrorist attack on the World Trade Center (WTC) has had a significant impact on Con Edison's energy infrastructure in lower Manhattan. The fire and subsequent collapse of 7 World Trade Center has permanently damaged two substations located adjacent to the building as well as major electric transmission cables. A third substation located near the South Street Seaport also lost service. Approximately 12,000 customers are currently without electric power.” http://9-11-01.powerquality.com/ar/power_wtc_disaster_causes/index.htm “A cleanup is underway to remove tens of thousands of gallons of oil that spilled from 7 World Trade Center when the 47-story office tower collapsed on Sept. 11, according to a published report. Citing an environmental impact report made public by the Empire State Development Corp., Newsday reported Thursday that 130,000 gallons of oil leaked from the Con Edison substation contained within the building. Additional oil leaked from two 6,000-gallon storage tanks owned by Salomon Smith Barney, and conduits beneath the building may have contained asbestos and feeder lines wrapped in a material containing toxins, the report said. Two 11,690-gallon diesel fuel tanks operated by Silverstein Properties were also inside the building, but were removed in March and April and showed no evidence of spillage, Newsday said. “
The manager of the building when it collapsed, Walter Weems, said the larger tank sat on a steel-and-concrete pedestal on the second floor and held 6,000 gallons of diesel fuel. He said an even larger cache, four tanks containing a total of 36,000 gallons of diesel fuel, sat just below ground level in the loading dock near the southwest corner of the building. "I'm sure that with enough heat it would have burned," Mr. Hauer said of the diesel. "The question is whether the collapse caused the tank to rupture, or whether the material hitting the building caused the tank to rupture and enhance the fire." Falling debris also caused major structural damage to the building, which soon began burning on multiple floors, said Francis X. Gribbon, a spokesman for the Fire Department. By 11:30 a.m., the fire commander in charge of that area, Assistant Chief Frank Fellini, ordered firefighters away from it for safety reasons. 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, Dr. Barnett said. "Any structure anywhere in the world, if you put it in these conditions, it will not stand," Mr. Marcus said. "The buildings are not designed to be a torch."
Kind of weird that on 911 there were 3 buildings that collapsed. Never in the history of the world has any steel framed buildings collapsed before. Building 7 was brought down by demolition. Larry Silverstein (the owner of the building) said that he told them to pull the building. I'll get the audio for that later. You know how long it takes to put charges on a building and bring it down like that? With all the other stuff going on on 911, they didn't have enough time. Building 7 needed to be destroyed because it was where the operation was run from.
FYI
I"ll keep an open mind on it but I would hate to think we have cold hearted robots , having the power to plan and carry out this action(9/11)for their own personal gain.
Schoolin Since Birth
Some human beings did it. Americans aren't some morally superior race of people. There is good and evil in all cultures.
Eventually the explosive system was brought back online and the only thing left to do was wait for the fires to build. But ... the fires never grew to convincing proportions. ... [But]
Great empires like Rome, Atlantis even England back in 1700's fell not to mention the Spanish the Indians before Eurpeans took their land, so what is to keep present version USA from faltering. There is evil and good in the hearts of men God allows us to see which one prevails, it's our choice.
Schoolin Since Birth
Who is the Marcus character. Because several buildings burnt a lot hotter for 18 to 20 hours and more and didn't collapse. Fires like this don't melt steel. It violates the laws of physics and common sense. Put a steel beam in a fire and it's not going to melt or give.
With the collapse of both towers by 10:30 a.m., larger pieces of the twin towers had smashed parts of 7 World Trade and set whole clusters of floors ablaze. An hour later, the Fire Department was forced to abandon its last efforts to save the building as it burned like a giant torch. It fell in the late afternoon, hampering rescue efforts and hurling its beams into the ground like red-hot spears. Within the building, the diesel tanks were surrounded by fireproofed enclosures. But some experts said that like the jet fuel in the twin towers, the diesel fuel could have played a role in the collapse of 7 World Trade. "If the enclosures were damaged, then yes, this would be enough fuel to explain why the building collapsed," Dr. Barnett said. Dr. Barnett and Mr. Baker are part of an assessment team organized by the American Society of Civil Engineers and the Federal Emergency Management Agency to examine the performance of several buildings during the attacks. If further studies of the debris confirm the findings of extremely high temperature, Dr. Barnett said, "the smoking gun would be the fuel." Others experts agreed that the diesel fuel could have speeded the collapse, but said the building might have met the same fate simply because of how long it burned. http://64.233.161.104/search? q=cache:4JFDS2teW48J:www.prisonplanet.com/engineers_are_baffled_over_the_collaps e_of_7_wtc.html+,%22+Mr.+Marcus+said.+% 22The+buildings+are+not+designed+to+be+a+torch.%22&hl=en&gl=us&ct=clnk&cd=1
So what do you think took down building 7?
#2. To: All, master of disaster, ironsage (#1)
#3. To: All (#0)
#4. To: A K A Stone (#2)
It is conclusive
#5. To: TLBSHOW (#4)
#6. To: TLBSHOW (#4)
#7. To: A K A Stone (#6)
#8. To: A K A Stone (#6)
1) The removal of some or all of the Naudet Brothers' footage from LC2E, which includes online versions
#9. To: A K A Stone (#6)
case closed
#10. To: All (#9)
#11. To: All (#10)
New York Times, November 29, 2001 THE SITE Engineers Suspect Diesel Fuel in Collapse of 7 World Trade Center by JAMES GLANZ
#12. To: TLBSHOW (#11)
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, Dr. Barnett said.
#13. To: All, master of disaster (#0)
#14. To: A K A Stone (#13)
#15. To: master_of_disaster (#14)
I"ll keep an open mind on it but I would hate to think we have cold hearted robots , having the power to plan and carry out this action(9/11)for their own personal gain.
#16. To: A K A Stone (#12)
Building 7 needed to be destroyed because it was where the operation was run from.
Building 7 had to go. If WTC 7 was indeed an operations and control center for this sprawling conspiracy, it was, essentially, a crime scene that needed to be destroyed ...
[so] when they could wait no longer, they put an end to the spectacle at 5:25 PM, dropping Building 7 neatly within its footprint, an obvious controlled implosion so perfect it would have earned any demolition company a bonus.
#17. To: A K A Stone (#15)
#18. To: A K A Stone (#13)
"Any structure anywhere in the world, if you put it in these conditions, it will not stand," Mr. Marcus said. "The buildings are not designed to be a torch."
#19. To: TLBSHOW (#18)
Mr. Marcus
#20. To: A K A Stone (#19)
Silvian Marcus, executive vice president for the Cantor Seinuk Group and a structural engineer involved in the original design of the building, which was completed in 1987.
#21. To: TLBSHOW (#20)
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Mail] [Sign-in] [Setup] [Help] [Register]