Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

The Conspiracy Files: 9/11 - The Third Tower (BBC2 Sun 6/7).

I think it is unfair to label everybody who questions anything about 9/11 a conspiraloon.

I am genuinely intersetd in how WTC7 fell as if a controlled explosion.

I understand that the stell may well have been weakened by fire, I understand that this would cause the building to fall. What I find hard to understand is how the collapse was so even when the ehat would not have been even across the building, especially when in the programme last night they showed that one side of the building was supported on huge beams over the subway. As a layman I owuld have expected the forces here to be far higher than the rest of the building and would have expected these beams to fail first, that wasn't explined at all last night.

Like I said I'm not a conspiraloon, but would like to know why the building collapsed in the way it did.
It wasn't even in the slightest. WATCH the video rather than just taking what you read as the truth. IIRC the collapse started about 2/3 of the way along the center on one side and the building collapses into itself a bit.

It was nothing like a controlled explosion, it's only the same when you look really superficially, there was dust and it fell down, that's about all it's collapse and a controlled demolition have in common. I've gone into detail on this in the past, search still pulls some of the posts up.
 
It didn't explain why it collapsed so absolutely perfectly tho.

What the hell is a 'perfect' collapse?

Doesn't this phrase alone show your preconceptions particularly, if you're like me, your experience of and expertise on controlled demolitions and collision forces is strictly limited.
 
Sadly most of the posts search still finds are me ranting and raving. I'll respond to any questions in a more polite and sensible manner this time :D

Misconception 1: There are "squibs" visible. There are windows breaking as the structure deforms. If they were squibs they'd happen before the building starts to move, as it is they happen after the inital movement, it's close as glass is very rigid and will fail very quickly but if you run the video several times you'll see the sequence. The debris is too small to be from explosive demolition, check out the youtube videos of it being done for real.

Also the patern of breaking glass does not conform to a sensible demolition plan, that'd be done on a ring main located on each floor (quick option taking a few days to rig) or a series of ring mains with delays for each beam (couple of weeks) and a distinct, visible lag between them. The pattern is too quick to be a series of ring mains, it's as if a shockwave is moving through the building (oh, that'd be what's really happening ;)), the progression is as if it were on a plane at 45 degrees to the ground (you just can't do this) and finally the squibs go all the way to the roof, what's the point?

If you were going to blow the building itself you'd take out the central pillars, wait a half second or so and then blow the next furthest out, then another half and blow the next etc. It'd be on two or three floors and massive explosions compared to the visible debris and smoke, the building would have fragmented more (that's why you have several floors rigged) as the explosives cut through the structural joists. Oh yeah and you wouldn't have it on fire, cos that'll cook off detonators, cut detcord and drop debris that could do either at any point.
 
What the hell is a 'perfect' collapse?

Doesn't this phrase alone show your preconceptions particularly, if you're like me, your experience of and expertise on controlled demolitions and collision forces is strictly limited.

The one side of that building was supported on beams over the subway. If the beams weakened then you would expect one side of the building to collapse before the other side, this didnt happen, the building came down together.
 
The one side of that building was supported on beams over the subway. If the beams weakened then you would expect one side of the building to collapse before the other side, this didnt happen, the building came down together.
It really didn't though. :) The building didn't have bits standing for a bit afterwards like the towers did but the collapse was not simultaneous, find the vid clip on youtube and look at it.
 
Well, I guess the Bush administration must be getting pretty nervous about leaving office with the possibility of Obama's lot coming into power and unearthing all the secret documents containing the full damning story of the truth behind 9/11. I can't wait. ;)
 
I don't reckon that the buildings where demolished, and WTC7 collapsing due to damage and fire is obviously the sensible option.

But I have doubts that the story in the 911 comission report is very comprehensive, and it is completely inadequate as it is. There are problems in the narrative that clearly don't make sense. Of course you are not allowed to discuss them around here because that makes you a conspiraloon.:hmm:
 
It didn't explain why it collapsed so absolutely perfectly tho.

"As the North Tower collapsed on September 11, 2001, debris hit 7 World Trade Center, damaging the south face of the building and igniting fires. The bottom portion of the building's south face was heavily damaged from debris, including: damage to the southwest corner from the 8th to 18th floor, a large vertical gash on the center-bottom extending at least ten floors, and other damage as high as the 18th floor

A massive fire burned into the afternoon on the 11th and 12th floors of 7 World Trade Center, the flames visible on the east side of the building. During the afternoon, fire was also seen on floors 6–10, 13–14, 19–22, and 29–30. At approximately 2:00 p.m., firefighters noticed a bulge in the southwest corner of 7 World Trade Center between the 10 and 13th floors which was a sign that the building was unstable and might collapse. During the afternoon, firefighters also heard creaking sounds coming from the building. Around 3:30 pm, given that 7 World Trade Center was unstable and would possibly collapse, FDNY Chief Daniel Nigro decided to halt rescue operations, surface removal and searches along the surface of the debris near 7 World Trade Center and evacuate the area due to concerns for the safety of personnel. At 5:20 p.m. EDT on September 11, 2001, 7 World Trade Center collapsed.

Specifically, NIST's interim report on 7 World Trade Center displays photographs of the southwest façade of the building that show it to have significant damage. The report also highlights a 10-story gash in the center of the south façade, toward the bottom, extending approximately a quarter of the way into the interior. A unique aspect of the design of 7 World Trade Center was that each outer structural column was responsible for supporting 2,000 sq ft (186 m²) of floor space, suggesting that the simultaneous removal of a number of columns severely compromised the structure's integrity. Consistent with this theory, news footage shows cracking and bowing of the building's east wall immediately before the collapse, which began at the penthouse floors. In video of the collapse, taken from the north by CBS News and other news media, the first visible sign of collapse is movement in the east penthouse 8.2 seconds before the north wall began to collapse, which took at least another 7 seconds

A progress report was released in June 2004, outlining NIST's working hypothesis. The hypothesis, which was reiterated in a June 2007 status update, is that an initial failure in a critical column occurred below the 13th floor, caused by damage from fire and/or debris induced structural damage of a critical column, from the collapse of the two main towers. The collapse progressed vertically up to the east mechanical penthouse. The interior structure was unable to handle the redistributed load, resulting in horizontal progression of the failure across lower floors, particularly the 5th to 7th floors."

(From here).

A paper by structural engineers on how the loss of one column may have led to the collapse:

http://www.structuremag.org/Archives/2007-11/SF-WTC7-Gilsanz-Nov07.pdf


Alternatively, it was a conspiracy planned decades in advance when the building was wired for demolition as it was built, this conspiracy involving builders, the fire department and the BBC.
 
I don't reckon that the buildings where demolished, and WTC7 collapsing due to damage and fire is obviously the sensible option.

But I have doubts that the story in the 911 comission report is very comprehensive, and it is completely inadequate as it is. There are problems in the narrative that clearly don't make sense. Of course you are not allowed to discuss them around here because that makes you a conspiraloon.:hmm:

Actally that's something that's never been levelled against you cos you bother doing things like providing well researched sources and evidence instead of the usual 'Well it must have been the USG cos that's what The Man does' type stuff.
 
Eddy walks a fine line and sometimes does wander across to the dark side :p ;)

Yeah the report was not as comprehensive/heads-must-roll as it could/should have been. My view is that it's arse covering rather than MIHOP/LIHOP
 
Well, I guess the Bush administration must be getting pretty nervous about leaving office with the possibility of Obama's lot coming into power and unearthing all the secret documents containing the full damning story of the truth behind 9/11. I can't wait. ;)

Obama and the Democrats are in on it too.

As is editor.

As am I.
 
Actally that's something that's never been levelled against you cos you bother doing things like providing well researched sources and evidence instead of the usual 'Well it must have been the USG cos that's what The Man does' type stuff.

Yeah but you can't discuss the errors in the 911 commission report without being told your making up conspiracy theories. Like this thread I started got locked, but I'll give it a plug anyway. I mean I'm not having a go at FM for locking it, I just think he saw it as one of those threads, which perhaps it was:

http://www.urban75.net/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=249076

I can see that the forum has debunked many of the 911 conspiracy theories, and I can understand and share the sense of frustration with a lot of it, but for me at least (leaving aside the bullshit Loose Change official 911 troof stuff) there are things that haven't been answered. That is one example, another is that the 911 Commission was pretty limited in its scope i.e. it was to describe what happened on the day, but had nothing to do with going into where mistakes if any where made througout the intelligence agencies and governmental chains of command in any detail or with any authority. Anyway, I won't go on all day, I'm sure people have had enough of it all.
 
There are problems in the narrative that clearly don't make sense. Of course you are not allowed to discuss them around here because that makes you a conspiraloon.
Strange that, because I can count at least 10,000 posts discussing every conceivable aspect of 9/11 residing in the archives. Are you saying that those posts didn't actually happen?

OMG! Non-LOL!
 
Alternatively, it was a conspiracy planned decades in advance when the building was wired for demolition as it was built, this conspiracy involving builders, the fire department and the BBC.
Yes. That clearly looks to be the most likely option. The BBC always looked a bit shifty to me. Especially hendo.


*ignores comprehensive report by structural engineers.
 
I'm interested in the same thing, but from the perspective of someone who always finds the inner workings of government interesting! As you know, I lean toward cock-up and incompetence rather than deliberate conspiracy, but even that should be punished given the magnitude of what was to come afterwards...
 
Strange that, because I can count at least 10,000 posts discussing every conceivable aspect of 9/11 residing in the archives. Are you saying that those posts didn't actually happen?

OMG! Non-LOL!

No they where very informative. I don't think they did discuss every conceivable aspect though. But as I say they where very worthwhile. But there is a 'no 911 shit' policy now in force, which my thread got 'pulled' under.:hmm: I wasn't even complaining really just stating my opinion/plugging contraband thread.
 
Back
Top Bottom