Christopher 7 --- C7 & C4

[jaydeehess]

Ok so Christoper 7 hasn't said anything about C-4 explosive but it made for a neat thread title.

Christopher 7 did say that he believes that WTC 7 was a controlled demolition BUT in his thread about WTC7 and NIST appendix L he states;

Had you bothered to read some of this thread before posting, you would have noticed that i have repeatedly said "i'm not going to discuss CD's on this thread

Ok then perhaps we need this, a separate thread for C7 to discuss CD.

Have at it Christopher 7 ......................

 

[Coritani]

My god, what have you done?

I predict another 10,000+ posts thread. But then again, I'm probably wrong. C7 ain't as far away from reality as the other Christopher.

 

[jaydeehess]

My god, what have you done?

I predict another 10,000+ posts thread. But then again, I'm probably wrong. C7 ain't as far away from reality as the other Christopher.

We do not want to go assigning characteristics based on the similarity of forum names. After all mine is taken from my initials JDS which is uncannily similar to our old friend jdx

 

[Coritani]

We do not want to go assigning characteristics based on the similarity of forum names. After all mine is taken from my initials JDS which is uncannily similar to our old friend jdx

Yeah, I know. 'Twas a joke.

 

[jaydeehess]

Christopher 7 assures me that he will be responding to this thread tonight.



When I search the NIST database I get 167 returns on a search of

"WTC 7" 2006

One of the first ones is http://wtc.nist.gov/media/NCSTACmeetingDec06.htm

NIST is analyzing scenarios for the event that initiated the collapse of WTC 7. As a part of this work, NIST is considering whether hypothetical blast events could have played a role in initiating the collapse. While NIST has found no evidence of a blast or controlled demolition event, NIST will estimate the magnitudeof hypothetical blast scenarios that could have led to the structural failure ofone or more critical elements as a result of blast.
��Phase IIdentify hypothetical blast scenarios and materials, based on analysis and/or experience, for failing specified columns by direct attachment methods. Preliminary section cutting shall be considered. Compare estimated overpressures for each scenario against windowstrength.
��Phase IIFor blast scenarios with overpressures that clearly would not have broken windows, the worst case scenario(s) will be analyzed using SHAMRC software to determine overpressures at windows.
��Phase IIIIf Phase II overpressures did not clearly fail windows, 3 blast scenarios will be selected to determine the sound levels that would be transmitted outside the building through intact windows.

 

[R.Mackey]

I don't know if this will be central to your discussion, and I certainly don't mean to poison any wells, but previously we discussed the motivation for NIST to study explosives scenarios with world-class yokel 28^th Kingdom. My explanation is here.

 

[jaydeehess]

I don't know if this will be central to your discussion, and I certainly don't mean to poison any wells, but previously we discussed the motivation for NIST to study explosives scenarios with world-class yokel 28^th Kingdom. My explanation is here.

As dogmatic as Christopher 7 is I don't believe that he is anything like 28thK.

My interest at this point is more along the lines of just what evidence the CT's think they have for CD in WTC 7 that bests the evidence of collapse by impact/fires.

Christopher 7 believes in CD and I have asked him to lay out the evidence.

We know that the building suffered damage due to impacts by pieces of WTC 1 (pieces of WTC 2 hit it as well but most likely only smaller and/or lighter debris that took out windows but did not do structural damage) , AND , we know that there were extensive fires in the building.

We know for ceratin that extensive damage was done to the SW corner of the building by falling debris from WTC 1. There are references by witnesses of significant damage to more central portions of the south face as well.

Several of the fires, most notably that at the eastern portion of the 7th floor, would, by them selves, have been multi-alarm fires.

Therefore, given this empirical yet circumstantial evidence to back up the contention that the imapct damage and/or the fires caused the collapse of WTC 7, I wish to understand what evidence there is for controlled demolition of WTC 7.

I do not want a tirade against the evidence for impact/fire initiation, I want the evidence FOR CD. I want to also understand why it, whatever it is, should be considered the most compelling of the two bodies of evidence.

 

[Christopher7]

Ok so Christoper 7 hasn't said anything about C-4 explosive but it made for a neat thread title.

Have at it Christopher 7 ......................

Let's start with the evidence we don't have.

The physical evidence that was quickly removed and destroyed.
There was no need to do so and it made a real invistegation impossible.

It's like trying to determine what caused a plane crash without any pieces of the airplane.

The government confiscated over 6.000 photographs and 6,000 video clips.
They have been withheld from the public for over 5 years and now they want to charge $13,000 for them. [or go thru the freedom of information act]
There was no reason to remove them from the public in the first place.
The Masoui trial was an excuse not a reason as there were a number of photographs and videos that survived the purge.
Everyone knows what destruction was done. The photographs and videos had no berring on the planning of the attacks, which is what he was charged with.
In any case, that excuse is now gone.
Those photographs and videos belong to "we the people" not the government.
This is just another example of the Bush administration arrogance and desire to hide the truth about 9/11.
Most Americans don't even know that the government is withholding this evidence because it is never mentioned in the MSM.
Most Americans don't remember WTC 7 because MSM will not show the existing videos of it's collapse.

 

[Coritani]

Sup C7.

Let's start with the evidence we don't have.

The physical evidence that was quickly removed and destroyed.
There was no need to do so and it made a real invistegation impossible.

It's like trying to determine what caused a plane crash without any pieces of the airplane.

Source? How quickly is 'quickly'?

The government confiscated over 6.000 photographs and 6,000 video clips.
They have been withheld from the public for over 5 years and now they want to charge $13,000 for them. [or go thru the freedom of information act]
There was no reason to remove them from the public in the first place.

Yes there was: it was a criminal investigation. Not abnormal.

Those photographs and videos belong to "we the people" not the government.

Actually, the photos belong to whatever entity took the photo.

Most Americans don't even know that the government is withholding this evidence because it is never mentioned in the MSM.
Most Americans don't remember WTC 7 because MSM will not show the existing videos of it's collapse.

Uhh, there's dozens of videos. They're the ones that CTs use to parrot the 'fell in 6 seconds' lie.


There's certainly members here with more experience in criminal investigation laws and what not who can tell you far more than I can.


Now that we've got that out of the way, let's see some evidence of bombs.

 

[gumboot]

Under US case law and British Common Law any private property seized as part of a criminal investigation remains the property of the individual that owned it at the time it was seized.

In the case of video or photographs, these are also protected by copyright law, and the US Government would be violating both copyright and property law by releasing them to the public without the owner's consent.

-Gumboot

 

[jaydeehess]

Let's start with the evidence we don't have.

Well as interesting this may be it is not evidence of a CD. Evidence you don't have is not evidence of anything.

You imply malicious intent in keeping photos out of the public view. However $13,000 is really not that great an amount for any organization to come up with. Its the price of a good used car. As has been pointed out many times the copyright on these photos belongs to the entity that took them and as such the owners can rightly charge for their usage.

You also imply malicious intent in the removal and disposal of the remains of the building. Do you have a place in mind where one could have stored the rubble from a 47 storey building? Now I too am dismayed that almost all of the steel was disposed of but it is fact that some was kept.

 

[R.Mackey]

Let's start with the evidence we don't have.

The physical evidence that was quickly removed and destroyed.
There was no need to do so and it made a real invistegation impossible.

I'll ignore the fact that "starting with the evidence you don't have" is totally specious, and merely correct a mistake of yours.

I've seen the claim that "there was no reason to remove WTC7 debris so quickly" over and over again, and it's wrong. As I argued in this post, the FEMA WTC Performance Study, Chapter 7 (the link in that post has gone bad, but you can order a copy through here) clearly indicates that the debris from WTC 7 was a load on other nearby buildings. Its removal was essential to prevent further damage and other collapses.

Now, please continue, and use the evidence that you do have, please. Speculating on what you don't have might have said is misleading at best.

 

[Gravy]

Let's start with the evidence we don't have.

And by doing that you hope to prove controlled demolition? That won't work.

The government confiscated over 6.000 photographs and 6,000 video clips.

False. Those items were donated to the investigation.

They have been withheld from the public for over 5 years and now they want to charge $13,000 for them. [or go thru the freedom of information act]

And your movement is incapable of raising $13,700, despite the "fact" that 84% of Americans agree with you? What does that tell you?

There was no reason to remove them from the public in the first place.

Since they weren't public in the first place, your comment is meaningless.

The Masoui trial was an excuse not a reason as there were a number of photographs and videos that survived the purge.
Everyone knows what destruction was done. The photographs and videos had no berring on the planning of the attacks, which is what he was charged with.
In any case, that excuse is now gone.

You are not making sense.

Those photographs and videos belong to "we the people" not the government.
This is just another example of the Bush administration arrogance and desire to hide the truth about 9/11.

Please cite the precedent for the public release of all the evidence in an investigation.

Most Americans don't even know that the government is withholding this evidence because it is never mentioned in the MSM.

No Americans know that, because it's false. You can easily obtain the photos and video. Why don't you?

Most Americans don't remember WTC 7 because MSM will not show the existing videos of it's collapse.

Then why was it on TV the other day, and why is it featured in a History Channel documentary?

Please respond.

 

[Belz...]

Let's start with the evidence we don't have.

You want to start an investigation with lack of evidence ?

No wonder you guys haven't gotten anywhere in over 5 years.

 

[Architect]

Let's start with the evidence we don't have.

I have no evidence of the £1m that was stolen mysteriously from my bank account yesterday; will my insurers accept this line of argument?

 

[CHF]

Let's start with the evidence we don't have.

....."cuz the evidence we do have is rather inconvenient for my argument."



Start with the evidence we don't have....

Brilliant!

 

[Foolmewunz]

Let's start with the evidence we don't have.

Sig worthy. I call dibs!

This should be the brass placque on the entrance to the Truthers Secret Club House. They have already filled volumes with all their posts and blogs on the evidence they don't have.

Would that one of the cretins would post something on evidence we do have. If we were to remove every JREFer post (and the ensuing CTer non-answer)on the following topics, most of these threads would be about twenty posts:
> Do You Have Evidence for That Claim
> Have You Actually Read the NIST Report
> What are YOUR Credentials
> You Do Know that The Onion is Satire, Don't You

 

[Christopher7]

Sig worthy. I call dibs!

Be sure to add
The absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.

Perhaps that wasn't the best choice of words.
Allow me to re-phrase that.

Let's start with; the evidence the government has destroyed
and the evidence they are withholding.

 

[Christopher7]

Sup C7.
Source? How quickly is 'quickly'?

Before it could be analyzed. A few weeks, i believe.

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

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

Yes there was: it was a criminal investigation. Not abnormal.

There was no need to remove all the photographs and videos of 9/11 from public view.
Maybe you don't have a problem with that, but i do.

Some were in private hands and survived the purge.
Without them we would not know that there are some problems with the 'Official' story.

Actually, the photos belong to whatever entity took the photo.

Then why is the government selling them for $13,000 ?
Why not release them to their rightful owners so they can do with them as they wish?
Some people sell their photographs and videos of 9/11,
others post them on the internet for free.


ETA: If they needed to confiscate all the video clips and photographs of 9/11 for the Masoui trial, why didn't they confiscate the videos of the Trade Towers collapsing that we have all seen on TV countless times ?

 

[Christopher7]

Well as interesting this may be it is not evidence of a CD. Evidence you don't have is not evidence of anything.

I was just pointing out that the most important evidence, the physical evidence, was destroyed before it could be analyzed.

You imply malicious intent in keeping photos out of the public view. However $13,000 is really not that great an amount for any organization to come up with. Its the price of a good used car. As has been pointed out many times the copyright on these photos belongs to the entity that took them and as such the owners can rightly charge for their usage.

Yes, the owners can charge or post them for free. The government has no right make that decision for them.

You also imply malicious intent in the removal and disposal of the remains of the building.

Yes

Do you have a place in mind where one could have stored the rubble from a 47 storey building?

Right where it was.

To do a proper analysis of how and why the building collapsed, each main framing member would be photographed, and its location noted before it was removed, then the broken ends would be inspected to see why they broke.

Now I too am dismayed that almost all of the steel was disposed of but it is fact that some was kept.

None from WTC 7