- "Numerous firemen were telling me that they heard
numerous secondary explosions all over the building - these guys are seasoned
firefighting professionals - a lot of them have military backgrounds and
they're not stupid." -- Major Michael McCormack, WTC first responder.
-
- Those who take the word of the controlled media, are
soon controlled and their country demolished.
-
- What exactly happened on September 11, 2001? Are we Americans
less than patriotic, less than civic-minded, if we continue to ask questions
of government officials regarding questionable occurrences and
suspicious, hard-to-explain happenings?
-
- We have all watched controlled demolitions on television.
The buildings slowly tremble before pancaking down into a pile of dust
and rubble. Really, the only way to knock a well-built building down today
is to strike it with a powerful bomb, rig internal explosives or witness
a powerful earthquake.
-
- So, how exactly did WTC-7 fall? According to the government
explanation (parroted by the controlled media), severe yet cosmetic damage
and several suspicious room fires caused this 47 story US government building
to weaken and then collapse at near freefall speed.
-
- Pancake Theory Exploded
-
 Ask any structural engineer this
theoretical question: In a so-called pancake collapse of a tall steel skyscraper
(theoretical because it had never happened before or since), would ejected
material travel more than 350 feet horizontally from the exact moment of
initial collapse, mimicing a volcanic eruption? Because that is exactly
what happened when WTC-1, the North Tower collapsed. Meanwhile, WTC-7 stood
350 feet away from the North Tower. If the tower began to pancake from
the 90th floor, would enough material begin to eject and shear substantial
portions of WTC-7 to weaken it?
-
- Physically impossible, claim some physicists. The amount
of energy required to transform reinforced concrete into dust particles
and propel heavy steel beams and aluminum panels 350 feet is
greater than the energy of the falling building. Especially in the first
few seconds.
-
- To either side of WTC-7 stood the Verizon building and
the US Post Office building. Arguably the Verizon building stood much closer
to the North Tower, yet neither suffered the extent of damages as WTC-7.
Why not? Neither did the two adjacent buildings suffer the rash of suspicious
fires--more than a dozen---that ravaged the highly sensitive and secure
US government building, WTC-7.
-
- Highly coincidental or highly suspicious?
-
- NIST acknowledged no fires within WTC-7 prior to 12 noon
on September 11, 2001. If the Twin Towers had already collapsed over an
hour earlier, how did these numerous fires start? Flaming aluminum debris
and steel beams ejected 400 feet inside the WTC-7? Or arson fires set by
a secret team?
-
- According to NIST: "From 11:30 am to 2:30
pm: no diesel smells reported from the exterior, stairwells or lobby areas.
No signs of fire or smoke were reported below the 6th Floor from the exterior,
stairwells or lobby areas. In the east stairwell, smoke was observed around
Floors 19 or 20, and signs of a fully involved fire on the south side of
Floor 23 were heard--seen---smelled from Floor 22. Interviews place a fire
on Floor 7 at the west wall, toward the south side, at approximately 12:15
p.m."
-
- So HOW exactly did all those other fires suddenly ignite?
If the Twin Towers had already collapsed more than 90 minutes
before, how did ejected aluminum debris and steel beams cause several spontaneous
fires? And if ejected material did not cause the fires, what did? "There
is no visible debris on the roof," NIST stated. So how did so many
fires start inside the building---and why didn't an equal number of fires
start inside the Verizon or Post Office building?
-
- Soon the fires inside WTC-7 spread in a most haphazard
fashion. Almost as if a pyromaniac, or a team of well-trained arsonists,
raced from floor to floor. Fires were reported on floors 6, 7, 8, 9, 10,
11, 12, 13, 14. Floors 19, 21, 22 and 29 also reported fires. Who knew
the contents of WTC-7 were so combustable. Curious indeed that the Secret
Service occupied floors 9 and 10, while the SEC occupied 11 and 12. Curious
indeed.
-
- Collapses Followed A Predictable Pattern
-
- Damage to the south face of the trapezoid shape WTC-7
varied from considerable to cosmetic. NIST noted, according to eyewitnesses,
only two exterior support columns compromised. However, Deputy Chief Peter
Hayden observed: "We were pretty sure that 7 World Trade Center would
collapse." Understandable reasoning, since Hayden had just witnessed
two other WTC buildings collapse. "You actually could see there was
a visible bulge, it ran up about three floors. It came down about 5 o'clock
in the afternoon, but by about 2 o'clock in the afternoon we realized this
thing was going to collapse."
-
- What caused that "visible bulge?" A roomful
of burning computers? A floor full of burning SEC records? Recall that
the lower floors were not reported ablaze, where a utility substation was
located.
-
 Yet if all New York steel skyscrapers
now predictably collapse from fires why don't other steel skyscraper around
the world also collapse, especially after burning hotter and longer? Do
the Spanish build better skyscrapers? Indeed they must, if that skyscraper in
Madrid (photograph) that burned forever is any example of their structural
superiority. Even more significant, why didn't WTC 7---if indeed structurally
damaged along its south face--topple into Vesey Street, like a tree toppling
sideways chainsawed by a lumberjack?
-
- The skyscraper in Madrid never fell. So how did
WTC-7? How did a building engineered to be extremely strong, because
it sat atop an electrical substation, how did a strong building that housed
the mayors emergency command post, collapse into its own footprint after
several room fires and some frontal damage?
-
- Unfortunately, for the plotters who placed those charges,
WTC-7 fell perfectly, in a textbook example of controlled demolition. The
conspirators performed their work almost too well. Check out the example
at www.wtc7.net for a textbook, controlled demolition.
-
- Murrah Building. Oklahoma City
-
- Take a look at the Murrah Building (photograph),heavily
damaged in the explosion allegedly caused by a truckload of fertilizer.
Why didn't it collapse? Far more structurally damaged than WTC-7, the building
stood until Controlled Demolition "pulled it." (And yes, the
demolition guys do indeed use that term. In the TV Documentary, America
Rebuilds, a worker clearly states: "We're getting ready to pull building
6").
-
 Murrah may simply have been a practice
run for something far more spectacular. The USAF officer who attempted
to investigate the debris at Murrah, General Partin, reported that
additional demolition charges brought the building down. "This,"
said General Partin, "is a classic coverup of immense proportions."
-
- Exactly.
-
- And, as in the case of the controlled demolitions
of the WTC buildings, where the steel was hastily shipped overseas and
recycled, the debris pile in Oklahoma City was hastily buried, hastily
hidden.
-
- "Demolition, especially a very hurried demolition,
was essential though to bury the evidence," wrote William
Jasper. "General Partin visited the landfill outside Oklahoma City
recently where the Murrah Building rubble was taken. He had originally
thought that the materials would have been laid out for investigation,
as one would expect in a case of this importance, involving such great
loss of life and such serious national security implications. Far from
it. Although much of the debris was initially deposited on the parking
lot and the grounds of the Oklahoma County Sheriff's Department Training
Center for examination, it is now buried. The landfill is surrounded by
a chain link fence and, when the general visited the site, was guarded
by security personnel."
-
- Not surprisingly, the same company---Controlled Demolition
Inc (CDI) performed clean up chores at both the WTC and Murrah bombsites.
And debris that might have indicated clues to a greater conspiracy was
hastily removed and destroyed.
-
- Likewise, in the first frantic reports from
the destruction at the Murrah building, firemen and policemen on the scene
reported finding a "second and third explosive device". The
reports of additional bombs would become eerily similar to reports of additional
bombs going off in the Twin Towers. Could all of these brave
first responders---those in Oklahoma City and now in New York--- be
lying?
-
- Predictibly, the controlled, corporate US media quashed
any investigation into a possible conspiracy. In effect the media was
saying to dead and dying firefighters: Keep your mouths shut.
-
- Recently, Major McCormack, the WTC hero who raised the
fallen flag on September 11, 2001 was arrested by a SWAT team. A victim
of government harassment. Why? McCormack had concluded that around 75%
of police, firemen and rescue personnel that he had personally spoken with
now believed there was a cover-up pertaining to 9/11 and that many had
been threatened that "if they ever open their mouth their pensions
are at risk."
-
-
- Postscript: One puzzling scientific anomaly. If jet fuel
only burns at 600-1000 degrees celsius and steel melts at 1500 degrees,
how then were pools of molten steel discovered weeks later, far below
the street level of WTC? There is no rational explanation. There is NO
scientific explanation. Steel may indeed weaken. But a 600-1000 degree
fire can NEVER melt a metal that liquifies at a higher temperature. Just
one of the many unexplainable scientific facts that NIST, FEMA and MIT
will attempt to explain away.
-
- If you let them.
-
- Longtime internet gadfly, Douglas Herman writes uncomfortable
scenarios for a discomfiting time.
|
