5:22 p.m. on September 11th 2001, the 47 story building number 7 of the
World Trade Center Plaza came down in slightly over 8 seconds.
The building had not been hit by any plane, nor sustained any significant
damage from the "collapse" of the Twin Towers seven hours earlier, nor
was there any major fire in the building at the time. The video
clearly show that it was brought down as result of a synchronized
Building 7 was not part of the WTC Plaza -- it was on a different block.
Implying that it was on the same block makes its collapse
as a result of the tower collapses seem more plausible,
regardless of the (correct) claims that follow.
Moreover, it happened at 5:20 PM, not 5:22
and it took 6.5 seconds,
not slightly over 8 seconds, to come down.
Too bad only one of the three following videos works.
(Most readers will have given up after the first two.)
And of course you won't find a link here to
videos on www.wtc7.net,
all of which do work.
A video of the collapse of Building 7 (Local Copy)
of the World Trade Center shows the perfect controlled demolition of WTC 7
(Local Animated Gif).
WTC 7 was 2 blocks away from WTC1/2, and was only superficially hit by
debris when 1 and 2 collapsed as you can readily see from the starting
point of the video. At 5:22 p.m., over six hours after WTC 1 and 2
"collapsed", WTC 7 came down in a free fall.
Since the video is from the north, it does not show that Building 7
was only superficially hit by debris when 1 and 2 collapsed.
What does show that are aerial views of Ground Zero documenting the
of heavy rubble from the towers.
911Review.org is curiously free of any photographs
of the destruction at Ground Zero.
Building 7 is the rubble pile in the middle of the overhead view
of about six blocks,
which includes a section of the WTC superblock extending to about
the middle of North Tower's footprint.
FEMA documented that the heavy collapse fallout of the tower's
north wall went only as far as the north side of Building 6,
the one with the oval-shaped crater.
Building 7 was a hundred feet beyond that, across Vesey Street.
The Official Story in the press is that diesel fuel reservoirs for
backup power generators at Guilliani's Emergency Command Center in the
building exploded and brought the resulting fire brought the building down,
even though there has never been a case on record of
fire-induced collapse of large fire-protected steel buildings,
The official story told by FEMA is that diesel fuel leaked out from
a ruptured supply line and fed fires.
There was some speculation about diesel tank explosions in the media,
but it never had the status of an official story.
Also, the vast majority of the diesel fuel was in tanks in the basement.
There were no storage tanks on the 23rd floor Emergency Command Center.
there were only very small fires in progress when the building "collapsed."
Not to mention that, as any one with the slightest technical background
knows, diesel at normal pressure is non-explosive and barely flammable.
or fire-induced collapses of large non-fire-protected steel buildings
See our pages MuslimsSuspendPhysics.
At standard temperature and pressure (STP) diesel fuel is not even
According to the House so-called
Loss of structural integrity was likely a result of weakening caused
by fires on the 5th to 7th floors. The specifics of the fires in WTC 7
and how they caused the building to collapse remain unknown at this
time. Although the total diesel fuel on the premises contained massive
potential energy, the best hypothesis has only a low probability of
occurrence. Further research, investigation, and analysis are needed
to resolve this issue.
In other words: no reason.
The video clearly shows that it was not a collapse subsequent to a
fire, but rather a controlled demolition: amongst the Internet investigators,
the jury is in on this one. The investigation continues of WTC 1 and 2
(there's lots of interest),
but the observation that there has never been a fire-induced collapse
of large fire-protected steel building holds true for them too.
If you could melt fire-protected hardened steel with kerosene,
someone should tell the steel companies!
Nor any steel-framed high-rise, regardless of fire-protection.
Damage to fire protection is one of the official explanations.
More to the point, and funnier, is Eric Hufschmid,
who, in Painful Deceptions,
calls for investors for his new company, Fire Demolition Inc..
See our page Guardian.
went online in August of 2003, a month before 911Review.org,
has videos that work, unlike 911Review.org's.
Or try one of these actions:
of this page
(last modified 2004-01-01 03:06:34)