10 story hole in WTC 7

[DGM]

Originally Posted by Christopher7
There is NO physical evidence of CD or anything else because the evidence was quickly and illegally removed and destroyed.

You cannot admit, nor can you deny, that the physical evidence was illegally removed and destroyed, so you . . . subject shift.

Are you saying that all the steel was removed without the blessing of the FBI? That would be the only way it would have been illegal to remove it. (unless someone else partitioned a court to have it saved)

 

[jaydeehess]

Originally Posted by Christopher7
There is NO physical evidence of CD or anything else because the evidence was quickly and illegally removed and destroyed.

Originally Posted by jaydeehess
It would be nice if you would tell us why neither you, or S.Jones, or A.Jones, or Griffin or someone else, has bothered to file suit if it is so very obvious that such an illegal act took place

You cannot admit, nor can you deny, that the physical evidence was illegally removed and destroyed, so you . . . subject shift.

I certainly can deny that there was any illegality involved. However you did not answer the question I asked. That is, if this was a patently illegal act then why no action concerning it from S.Jones, A.Jones, Griffin, Gage, Fetzer (I thought of the last two after my above post) , or you?

As pointed out by Phantomwolf and DGM the ruins were inspected and the disposal of the steel sanctioned by the FBI. I do not know directly and personally that the FBI sanctioned it but that agency has not laid any charges concerning this which certainly suggests that they saw nothing amiss.

It is similar to the "CIT" claiming that Lloyd England planted evidence of the accepted flight path of Flight 77. That would be evidence tampering, yet they have done nothing at all to bring this man to justice.

 

[jaydeehess]

The question was:

While we're at it, can someone summarize the physical evidence for a controlled demolition?

There is NO physical evidence of CD or anything else because the evidence was quickly and illegally removed and destroyed.

So the answer to Johnny's question is that the list constitutes an empty set.

 

[Jonnyclueless]

Ah, so what Christopher is telling us is that there is no evidence of a controlled demolition. I would have to say that I agree with him on this point.

 

[Christopher7]

So your evidence of a CD again, is the evidence that ou don't have and the reason it is evidence is BECAUSE you don't have it. Is that correct?

No, i am saying there is no physical evidence of CD or anything else because the physical evidence was illegally removed and destroyed.

 

[Pardalis]

Thread started on january 3rd, 2007.

It keeps going, and going...

 

[Jonnyclueless]

No, i am saying there is no physical evidence of CD or anything else because the physical evidence was illegally removed and destroyed.

So there is no evidence of a CD. Got it. You can go back to pretending that FEMA didn't examine the debris now.

 

[Christopher7]

So when FEMA claims that 151 engineers made 63 trips over the space of 53 days and searched through unsorted piles of steel for pieces from the WTC 1 and WTC 2 impact areas and from WTC 5 and WTC 7 checking for:

• Badly burnt pieces from WTC 7.
• Connections from WTC 1, 2, and 7, such as seat connections, single shear plates, and column splices.
• Bolts from WTC 1, 2, and 7 that were exposed to fire, fractured, and/or that appeared undamaged.

They were lying because all the WTC 7 steel was gone? And that when three follow up trips were made 8 months later they are lying because it was all gone?

No
They did not find any pieces that could be positively identified as being from WTC 7 because the steel from WTC 7 was illegally removed from the site an mixed with the steel from the Trade Towers.

NIST Executive Summary
http://wtc.nist.gov/pubs/NCSTAR1-3ExecutiveSummary.pdf

page 2 E.1
"the steel used in the construction of WTC 7 is described
based solely on data from the literature, because no steel from the building was recovered."

page 9 E.6

No steel was recovered from WTC 7

 

[Christopher7]

Ah, so what Christopher is telling us is that there is no evidence of a controlled demolition. I would have to say that I agree with him on this point.

There is no physical evidence of CD or DD/F.

We are both in the same boat, NO PHYSICAL EVIDENCE.

 

[funk de fino]

No
They did not find any pieces that could be positively identified as being from WTC 7 because the steel from WTC 7 was illegally removed from the site an mixed with the steel from the Trade Towers.

NIST Executive Summary
http://wtc.nist.gov/pubs/NCSTAR1-3ExecutiveSummary.pdf

page 2 E.1
"the steel used in the construction of WTC 7 is described
based solely on data from the literature, because no steel from the building was recovered."

page 9 E.6

No steel was recovered from WTC 7

There was none available for this study. This does not mean none was recovered and searched/studied by FEMA earlier.

Did you notice also in the NIST link, which never seems to be quoted by truther bots.

In addition to the NIST analysis, an outside contractor made an independent study of the recovered steel elements. In general, the observations concerning local failure mechanisms by the contractor agreed with those that NIST found.

Why is that?

Also, care to answer this post you missed earlier?

Are you saying that all the steel was removed without the blessing of the FBI? That would be the only way it would have been illegal to remove it. (unless someone else partitioned a court to have it saved)

 

[Christopher7]

I certainly can deny that there was any illegality involved.

Here's the law again:
New York Penal Law Section 215.40 - Tampering With Physical Evidence.

http://law.onecle.com/new-york/penal...40_215.40.html

§ 215.40 Tampering with physical evidence. A person is guilty of tampering with physical evidence when:
1. With intent that it be used or introduced in an official proceeding or a prospective official proceeding, he (a) knowingly makes, devises or prepares false physical evidence, or (b) produces or offers such evidence at such a proceeding knowing it to be false; or
2. Believing that certain physical evidence is about to be produced or used in an official proceeding or a prospective official proceeding, and intending to prevent such production or use, he suppresses it by any act of concealment, alteration or destruction, or by employing force, intimidation or deception against any person. Tampering with physical evidence is a class E felony.


An official proceeding into how these unprecedented building collapses occurred was inevitable.

However you did not answer the question I asked. That is, if this was a patently illegal act then why no action concerning it from S.Jones, A.Jones, Griffin, Gage, Fetze , or you?

Subject shift. Give it up, i ain't goin' for it.

 

[beachnut]

Fire burned all day after building was hit by debris, zero firefighting, no water for sprinklers, TONS of fuel. Do you think the building is going to survive? There are examples of buildings that were put out before falling and they were totaled by fire. The list is long of fire destroying buildings. Someone's lack of experience is producing post after post exposing lack of knowledge on fire and structures.

What does it matter if we called in an air strike to put 7 out of its misery? WTC7 has to be the biggest failure of tying any plot to anything rational in 9/11 truth's arsenal of false information! It is like connecting dots, but you have zero dots. Are there any logical people in 9/11 truth?

There was damage to WTC7, you can see stuff flying into it from the towers.

 

[Christopher7]

There was none available for this study. This does not mean none was recovered and searched/studied by FEMA earlier.

FEMA found and photographed a W14 column from WTC 7.
Pg 12:
http://www.fema.gov/pdf/library/fema403_apd_x.pdf

And a structural steel member with unusual erosion patterns, that appeared to be from WTC 7.
Pg 1: http://www.fema.gov/pdf/library/fema403_apc.pdf

However;
NIST had access to the FEMA data and determined that neither of the 2 pieces that FEMA had collected could be unambiguously identified as being from WTC 7.
NISTNCSTAR1-3B: Pg 27[on pg counter]

The volunteers searched through unsorted piles of steel and other debris for pieces from the WTC buildings, specifically searching for (McAllister 2002):
• Badly burned pieces from WTC 7;
NISTNCSTAR1-3B: Pg 31[on pg counter]
http://wtc.nist.gov/pubs/NISTNCSTAR1-3BDraft.pdf

Originally Posted by NIST (? ? ?)
In addition to the NIST analysis, an outside contractor made an independent study of the recovered steel elements. In general, the observations concerning local failure mechanisms by the contractor agreed with those that NIST found.

Did you notice also in the NIST link, which never seems to be quoted by truther bots.

URL please

Also, care to answer this post you missed earlier?

I sited the NY state law, i don't know the federal statute. Do you?
Does the FBI have to sign off on the removal of evidence?

 

[Christopher7]

Fire burned all day after building was hit by debris, zero firefighting, no water for sprinklers, TONS of fuel.

You keep talking in generalities.
The fires did NOT burn all day in the AIE. They burned on 4 floors at different times and moved around leaving burned out areas.

Do you think the building is going to survive?

There have been larger, longer lasting fires in high rise buildings without any collapse at all.

There are examples of buildings that were put out before falling and they were totaled by fire.

There has never been a COLLAPSE in a high rise building despite much larger fires.
[Windsor Towers was a unique hybrid, primarily reinforced concrete frame with very lightweight exterior columns on the upper 10 floors]

There was damage to WTC7, you can see stuff flying into it from the towers.

The debris damage was not a significant factor in the initiating event.

 

[funk de fino]

FEMA found and photographed a W14 column from WTC 7.
Pg 12:
http://www.fema.gov/pdf/library/fema403_apd_x.pdf

And a structural steel member with unusual erosion patterns, that appeared to be from WTC 7.
Pg 1: http://www.fema.gov/pdf/library/fema403_apc.pdf

However;
NIST had access to the FEMA data and determined that neither of the 2 pieces that FEMA had collected could be unambiguously identified as being from WTC 7.
NISTNCSTAR1-3B: Pg 27[on pg counter]

The volunteers searched through unsorted piles of steel and other debris for pieces from the WTC buildings, specifically searching for (McAllister 2002):
• Badly burned pieces from WTC 7;
NISTNCSTAR1-3B: Pg 31[on pg counter]
http://wtc.nist.gov/pubs/NISTNCSTAR1-3BDraft.pdf

So, there was steel recovered from WTC7. It was just not used or available for the NIST study you posted. Why would that have been?

URL please

Don't be dense Chris, it is in your own link. Try reading complete studies instead of cherry picking them. My point is proved.

I sited the NY state law, i don't know the federal statute. Do you?
Does the FBI have to sign off on the removal of evidence?

What type of crime was it and who had jurisdiction?

You tell me if they have to sign off, you are the one claiming something illegal was done. If they do have to sign off on it you have to show they did not before you claim anything.

 

[funk de fino]

You keep talking in generalities.
The fires did NOT burn all day in the AIE. They burned on 4 floors at different times and moved around leaving burned out areas.

He is correct. The fires in the building lasted all day, until it collapsed.

There have been larger, longer lasting fires in high rise buildings without any collapse at all.

Source for larger fires?

There has never been a COLLAPSE in a high rise building despite much larger fires.

Source for larger fires?

[Windsor Towers was a unique hybrid, primarily reinforced concrete frame with very lightweight exterior columns on the upper 10 floors]

fire weakens steel

The debris damage was not a significant factor in the initiating event.

That is not what NIST latest hypothesis for WTC7 says. You have been shown this recently, by myself, so you are either lying or are being stupid. Which is it Chris?

 

[funk de fino]

This is what NIST say about what happened that day in the latest release.

An initial local failure occurred at the lower floors (below floor 13) of the building due to fire and/or debris-induced structural damage of a critical column (the initiating event) which supported a large-span floor bay with an area of about 2,000 square feet;

Come on Chris, I really do not believe you have made the same mistake again so you must be deliberately misleading or lying?

 

[DGM]

Chris:
What's an "official proceeding" in the context of the NY state penal law that you posted? How would that apply to how your claiming that the steel was removed illegally? Did the FBI know the steel was removed?

 

[Christopher7]

So, there was steel recovered from WTC7. It was just not used or available for the NIST study you posted. Why would that have been?

NIST obviously had access or they would not have been able to say it could not be unambiguously identified as coming from WTC 7.

The original point here is:

There is no physical evidence of CD or DD/F because the physical evidence was illegally removed and destroyed.

Don't be dense Chris, it is in your own link. Try reading complete studies instead of cherry picking them. My point is proved.

Don't be evasive, i've posted many links.
From what source did that quote come from?
I would like to know, who was this outside contractor that made an independent study and what specifically did he verify?

What type of crime was it and who had jurisdiction?

The law does not say that there had to be a crime, only that:
"certain physical evidence is about to be produced or used in an official proceeding or a prospective official proceeding, and intending to prevent such production or use, he suppresses it by any act of concealment, alteration or destruction.

An official proceeding into how these unprecedented building collapses occurred was inevitable.

You tell me if they have to sign off, you are the one claiming something illegal was done. If they do have to sign off on it you have to show they did not before you claim anything.

The FBI does not need to sign off on a violation of state law.
The FBI investigates federal crimes. I don't know the federal statute that would apply here so i don't know if they would have to sign off.

Once again, the point here is:

There is no physical evidence of CE or DD/F because the physical evidence was illegally removed and destroyed.

 

[DGM]

Chris:
What criminal investigation was the steel (the steel itself) involved in? Could you state the case please.