9-11/WTC7/Destruction

 9-11/WTC7/Destruction   

Date	11 September 2001, 5:20:52 pm - 11 September 2001, 5:20:58 pm
Location	WTC7
Participants	Dancing Israelis, Sivan Kurzberg, Paul Kurzberg, Yaron Schmuel, Oded Ellner, Omer Marmari
Perpetrators	Supranational deep state
Witnessed by	Russ Baker, Richard Grove
Type	Bombing
Exposed by	Barry Jennings, Danny Jowenko
Interest of	David Chandler, Niels Harrit, Tony Rooke
Subpage	•9-11/WTC7/Destruction/Censorship •9-11/WTC7/Destruction/Foreknowledge
Description	Compared to the WTC Twin Towers, few people have seen video footage of the collapse of the 47-story WTC building 7, but the event was predicted and recorded by at least 3 TV networks and exactly resembles a controlled demolition. The event was subject to a news blackout by commercially controlled media for years afterwards, no mention of WTC7 was made in the 9/11 Commission's final report and Wikipedia has no separate page for this event.

World Trade Center 7 was destroyed in the space of 7 seconds, collapsing in on itself symmetrically and according to a lot of videos exactly resembling a professionally staged controlled demolition. The US government denied that the building fell at free-fall speed, although they later admitted this. The manner in which WTC7, which wasn't hit by a plane, together with the foreknowledge of the commercially-controlled media have made this something of a "smoking gun" for the 9-11 Truth movement.

Official Narrative

The first report of the 9-11/Commission choose simply to ignore the collapse of this building, the commission's chairman claiming he "couldn't remember" why this happened. The FEMA and NIST reports purport to explain the collapse based purely on impact damage from WTC1 and WTC2 and a few fires, notwithstanding the unprecedented nature of this claim. The 2008 NIST report on WTC 7, lead by Shyam Sunder told a press conference. “WTC 7 collapsed because of fires fueled by office furnishings. It did not collapse from explosives or from diesel fuel fires.”

Problems

Fires have never before or since lead to the collapse of a steel reinforced concrete building, far less a symmetrical, instantaneous freefall collapse which left residue of explosives. Numerous eyewitnesses report explosions in WTC 1,2 and 7 before the collapses. Thousands of professional architects and engineers have publicly disagreed with the official narrative. The 9/11 commission has released few details of the model of the collapse, citing "national security" as a justification.

The Landmark Tower was 380 ft high building located in Forth Worth, Texas that was brought down by in 7 seconds by a controlled demolition. WTC 7 was 576 ft high (not including the penthouse which collapsed a few seconds prior) but it also collapsed in just 7 seconds. If WTC 7 collapsed due to fire, how could this happen in a comparable time, making its destruction was faster and more efficient than other known controlled demolitions?

Exposure

Such a diagonally cut steel beam might have resulted from an explosive charge designed to destroy the structure.

Explosive Residues

Danish Chemistry Professor Niels Harrit published a paper entitled "Active Thermitic Material Discovered in Dust from the 9/11 World Trade Center Catastrophe" in the Open Chemical Physics Journal. He presented evidence that dust produced by the WTC collapse contained residues of nano-thermite (an explosive)..

Larry Silverstein "Pull it"

Larry Silverstein took out a long lease on the World Trade Center only six weeks before 9/11. In a 2002 PBS documentary entitled 'America Rebuilds', Silverstein made the following statement about Building 7:

"I remember getting a call from the, er, fire department commander, telling me that they were not sure they were gonna be able to contain the fire, and I said, 'We've had such terrible loss of life, maybe the smartest thing to do is pull it." And they made that decision to pull, and we watched the building collapse.'"

Subsequently, Silverstein Properties issued a statement denying that "pull it" meant "demolish building 7", claiming that when Silverstein advised the fire commander that "the smartest thing to do is pull it," what he meant was that it would be wise to pull a contingent of firefighters out of the building, although at that time, there were no firefighters in the building.

However, Jeffrey Scott Shapiro reported in 2010 for Fox News, that Larry Silverstein was on the phone with his insurers that day and discussing the destruction of the building:

Shortly before the building collapsed, several NYPD officers and Con-Edison workers told me that Larry Silverstein, the property developer of One World Financial Center was on the phone with his insurance carrier to see if they would authorize the controlled demolition of the building – since its foundation was already unstable and expected to fall.
A controlled demolition would have minimized the damage caused by the building’s imminent collapse and potentially save lives. Many law enforcement personnel, firefighters and other journalists were aware of this possible option.

John Kerry

Senator John Kerry was questioned by 911 truth activists during an appearance at Book People in Austin, Texas. According to him:

“I do know that that wall, I remember, was in danger and I think they made the decision based on the danger that it had in destroying other things-- that they did it in a controlled fashion.”
John Kerry

Indira Singh

Indira Singh who was a first responder in New York that day, when interviewed by Bonnie Faulkner for Guns and Butter, said the following:

“we were setting up different kind of stations, IV stations, cardiac stations, just .., wound stations, burn stations, just trying to have an organized space. What happened with that particluar triage site is that, pretty soon after noon, after mid-day on 911, we had to evacuate that because they told us that building 7 was coming down. If you had been there, not being able to see very much, just flames everywhere and dark smoke, it is entirely possible, I do believe that they brought building 7 down because I heard they were going to bring it down, because it was unstable, because of the colleteral damage. That I don't know, I can't attest to the validity of that, all I can attest to is that by noon or one o 'clock they told us we had to move from that triage site up to Pace University, a little further away, because building 7 was gonna come down, or being brought down. [...] The fire department, the fire department and they did use the word(s) 'we're gonna have to bring it down'”
Indira Singh

Foreknowledge

Full article: 9-11/WTC7/Destruction/Foreknowledge

Although no concrete steel framed building had ever collapsed due to fire before, officials moved people away from WTC7, warning that it would "be coming down", and that it was "about to blow up". This expectation was communicated to Rudy Giuliani and to the commercially-controlled media. Reuters, CBS, CNN, Fox News, MSNBC and BBC all announced that WTC7 either had collapsed or was going to collapse before it did. The failure to investigate this foreknowledge is widely regarded as a smoking gun as regards the complicity of the authorities.

Explosions

Michael Hess calling for help from the 8th floor of the bomb damaged WTC7, since the stairs had been destroyed. Together with Barry Jennings he escaped through the window.

New York City's corporation counsel, Michael Hess, accompanied by the late Barry Jennings report that they headed to the Office of Emergency Management's Emergency Operations Center, on the 23rd floor of WTC 7, seeking New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani. On arrival, Jennings telephoned to ask why the office was deserted and was instructed to leave immediately. Finding that the elevators would not work, they started down the stairs. When they reached the sixth floor, however, there was a powerful explosion beneath them, which prevented their escape by the stairs. They remained trapped on the eighth floor until rescued by firefighters.

NIST had recordings of explosions in the vicinity of Building 7, but withheld them until well after issuing their final report. The final report did not account for even the possibility of these explosions. A legal suit^[When?] forced NIST to release this evidence. Newly obtained 9/11 eyewitness footage that NIST attempted to keep secret contains what appears to be the sound of explosions coming from the vicinity of WTC 7 after the collapse of the twin towers.

NIST Explosions

The clip was released by NIST as part of a 3-terabyte package of video and photo data in response to a lawsuit brought by the International Center for 9/11 Studies.

The video (left) is from eyewitness Richard Peskin, who filmed ground zero from a high rise building that was in the vicinity of Building 7. The first portion of the footage was filmed immediately after the collapse of the closest tower to Building 7, WTC 1. At about 10 seconds into the clip, two clear explosions can be heard.

NIST report that they considered a "blast scenario," but it assumed the planting of explosives about a single column shortly before the 5:20 PM collapse of Building 7. Their assumption was that whom ever would plant such explosives would have done it earlier in the day after the building was vacated. NIST rejected this scenario because they said no audio record of a blast with sufficient decibel level existed.

But - even if there were no explosions, there is a problem in that there was no evidence of fires during the first 100 minutes following the Collapse of the second (closest) tower which caused the debris damage alleged to have started them

However, according to the NIST Final Report:

1. Fires on floor 22 were not involved in the critical damage to the building. Also fires first observed 2 hours after debris strikes from WTC 1 on floors 29 & 30, also were not floors with critical damage.
2. No fires moved from floor to floor
3. The floors contributing to the critical fire damage were on 7-9 and 11-13. The earliest evidence of fires on any of these floors was 3 hrs, 40 minutes after the debris struck.

Cover-up

Censorship

Full article: 9-11/WTC7/Destruction/Censorship

The commercially-controlled media rapidly instituted a complete blackout of all reporting of the WTC7 event, which was effective at forestalling widespread discussion of it for many years. The effectiveness of this can be gauged from the 9/11 Commission's utter failure to mention WTC7's collapse in their first report. After 2007, this policy was changed for the production of 'hit pieces' intended to discredit those who question the official account of a fire induced collapse. 9/11 anniversary specials show scaled-back their "uncut" footage of the day's events, which always skips the WTC7 footage.

9/11 Commission Report

Lee Hamilton - Joint Chair of the 9-11 Commission of Inquiry

There is no mention whatsoever of the Collapse of WTC 7 in the first version of the 9-11 commission report. Lee Hamilton, the former co-chair of the 9-11/Commission, gives a wide-ranging interview to the CBC about Without Precedent, a book he co-authored on the 9-11 Commission (see August 15, 2006). The interviewer, Evan Solomon, points out that the 9/11 Commission's final report does not actually mention the collapse of Building 7, and Hamilton says he does not recall whether the Commission made a specific decision to leave it out.

NIST Report

The conclusions reached by the NIST's "Final Report on the Collapse of World Trade Center Building 7" are remarkable in that this is the first time in history that a tall building has totally collapsed primarily due to fire, and the failures all occurred well below the temperature at which structural steel loses significant strength and stiffness. NIST refused to release their modeling data on the grounds that its release “might jeopardize public safety”.

Failure to mention the Swiss-Cheese Looking Steel Sample

Whereas the authors of FEMA Appendix C took the approach of calling for further research, since, for example, the rate of corrosion was unknown, NIST took the approach of saying, since it is unknown, the relationship between when the corrosion occurred, and the collapse can’t be determined. Furthermore, NIST noted the Appendix C authors stated they believed one of the steel samples came from WTC 7. NIST treated this as equivalent to the location being unknown, and it was not possible to link the first sample conclusively to WTC 7. Because of this, explain NIST, it wasn’t studied further.

This explanation was provided in a letter dated June 24, 2010, from NIST Senior Communications Officer, Michael E. Newman, to Ronald H. Brookman. Mr. Brookman had written to NIST Director Patrick Gallagher inquiring on this and other matters, May 31, 2010.

FEMA-Report Appendix on Swiss-Cheese Looking Steel Sample

Eroded A36 wide-flange beam

As commented by 911 Research, FEMA's WTC Building Performance Study, Appendix C Limited Metallurgical Study, describes observations interesting from a forensic standpoint, that steel members were severely corroded by sulfidative attack.

In an article by James Glanz and Eric Lipton, "A Search for Clues In Towers' Collapse; Engineers Volunteer to Examine Steel Debris Taken to Scrapyards," New York Times, February 2, 2002, the authors state, "Perhaps the deepest mystery uncovered in the investigation involves extremely thin bits of steel collected from the trade towers and from 7 World Trade Center, a 47-story high rise that also collapsed for unknown reasons. The steel apparently melted away, but no fire in any of the buildings was believed to be hot enough to melt steel outright."

The characteristic of severe corroding by sulfidative attack produces "Eutectic Steel." A short YouTube video probing this aspect was produced by Jonathan Cole, P.E., titled "9/11 Experiments: The Mysterious Eutectic Steel."

Freefall Collapse

A video by James Corbett; "How Did WTC7 Collapse?" (archived)

Chart illustrating the free-fall period of the WTC7 collapse

Composite time photo of Building 7. A 2.25-sec. time period to move this distance is pure freefall
Photo credits

The NIST Final Report explained the 2.25-sec freefall resulted in a drop spanning eight stories. No explanation was given as to how the structural components below could have suddenly offered no resistance.

At the time NIST was maintaining the building collapsed at 40% gravitational acceleration, high school physics teacher David Chandler submitted a graphical analysis of a video showing the collapse. This led to NIST acknowledgement of 100% gravitational acceleration, which is free fall. An updated video analysis by Chandler with more recent information from NIST is available from Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth on YouTube.

To gain an appreciation for eight stories of freefall, consider this figure showing two slices of time. The start of freefall is shown on the left, and the end of freefall on the right. The eight stories are shown as a block near the bottom left. This would be hidden from our view, and we don’t know if it was a block of eight floors as shown, or if the floors with structure removed were distributed in some manner. It’s probably more likely the columns on single floors were taken out every third floor, to leave column segments convenient in length for later removal.

After the period of freefall had ended, the remaining upper part of the building continued to accelerate downward, but because of resistance of the lower structure, descended at something less than gravitational acceleration.

WTC7 as a wedge issue

The controlled demolition of WTC7 has not been admitted, but the comments by Larry Silverstein and what could be observed on that day leave practically no doubt. Admitting that the building indeed fell by controlled demolition appears to have been a fall-back position that could have been taken, if public pressure had gotten to a point from which a more detailed investigation into the technicalities had to follow. Since after 911 only the Jersey Girls were able to bring enough public opinion against the government to force an official investigation, Silverstein could later again deny via press release that this is what he has said. It is possible that Flight 93 was meant to crash into WTC7, which would have lead to the conclusion that it collapsed from structural damage as the others. Enough energy from the 9-11 truth movement has been focused on this aspect, ignoring the probably most significant "smoking gun" of 911, the stand down of the North American Air Defense, which intercepted air planes of course over America before and after 911, but wasn't able to do so reliably with sufficient coverage on that day.

See Also

• Building What? How SCADs Can Be Hidden in Plain Sight - David Ray Griffin
• BBC reported Building 7 had collapsed 20 Minutes before it fell - By Paul Watson and Alex Jones. A detailed analysis of the BBC reporting of the Building 7 collapse
• RememberBuilding7.org on Silverstein's statement
• History Commons WTC 9/11 Timeline - An impressive collection of evidence, which tells quite a different story

 

Known Participants

3 of the 6 of the participants already have pages here:

Participant	Description
9-11/Israel did it/Dancing Israelis	A group of 5 Israelis, including Mossad agents, who were "documenting" the 9-11 event under cover of Urban Moving Systems. Arrested on the day after suspicious behaviour.
Paul Kurzberg
Sivan Kurzberg

 

Witnesses

Witness	Description
Russ Baker	Author of a breathtakingly definitive account of the Bush Crime Family.
Richard Grove	Late for a meeting, Richard Grove was not in the World Trade Center when it was attacked.

 

Related Documents

Title	Type	Publication date	Author(s)	Description
Document:Donald Rumsfeld and the demolition of WTC 7	article	22 May 2014	Kevin Ryan	Further evidence of Donald Rumsfeld's complicity in the events of 9/11, with particular reference to his substantial connection to WTC7 and his lying about it and its destruction..
File:NIST Analyses Brookman.pdf	paper	26 March 2010	Ronald Brookman

Many thanks to our Patrons who cover ~2/3 of our hosting bill. Please join them if you can.