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: 12169
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
Begin Trace Mode for Comment # 16.
#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.
REALLY?
See here too http://www.freedomunderground.org/view.php?v=3&t=3&l=1&aid=22223#1
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.
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]
There are no replies to Comment # 16. End Trace Mode for Comment # 16.
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
#2. To: All, master of disaster, ironsage (#1)
#4. To: A K A Stone (#2)
It is conclusive
#6. To: TLBSHOW (#4)
#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.
#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.
Replies to Comment # 16.
[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Mail] [Sign-in] [Setup] [Help] [Register]