Christopher 7 --- C7 & C4

[Christopher7]

I saw it in the afternoon on 11 September, 2001. And I'm not even American.

You don't appear to be human either.

 

[Christopher7]

I am Canadian and I saw it on the evening news of Sept 11/01.

If Americans simply do not watch the news or read news papers beyond the captions of the pictures and therefore do not know the addendum to the collapses of the better known WTC towers and Pentagon it is hardly the fault of the MSM or the gov't. Has the collapse of WTC 7 been a secret that has been hiding in plain view for 5 1/2 years?

I watch the news, all networks, but mostly CNN, BBC, CSPAN, LINK TV, and FSTV. There has been virtually nothing about WTC 7 in the last 5 years except for a 5 second clip in the *History Channel 9/11 a year later special and the '9/11 Conspiracy Theory' special on LINK TV. That's when i saw WTC 7 implode for the first time. When i saw the History Channel special again, [Sept. '05] that 5 second clip did not escape my notice.

*[I'm going to buy the one Gravy mentioned and see what they show]

Most people i have told about WTC 7 barley remember it or don't remember it.
None have ever seen the video of the collapse, or don't remember. [having seen it only once on 9/11]

You can blame the public for not knowing if you want.

Dan Rather thought it looked like a CD but that was the last time i heard anything about WTC 7 on the news until recently.

Have you seen the collapse of WTC 7 on TV in the last 5 years, if so when and on what program ? [other than the 5 second clip in the HC special]

 

[Christopher7]

Absence of evidence is evidence of controlled demolition?

That's a new one.

No. WMD's in Iraq. At least thats what Rummy said.

 

[Christopher7]

If you turn it around and look at it from another angle: Is charging $13,700 for something REALLY the best way to hide evidence of mass murder?

The evidence has been hidden for 5 years, and yes, charging more than all but a few could pay for, and then restricting putting it on the web for free because of copyright, would be the next best thing.

 

[Christopher7]

A completely untenable senario for two reasons.
First as has been pointed out, there is the economic pressures of keeping a major part of Manhattan from even starting to be repaired. Never mind the rebuilding of the above ground structures there is also the fact that WTC 7 was a major power grid hub and I would assume also communications as well, then there is sewer and water and subway systems. It had to be removed ASAP if that part of Manhattan was to be made habitable again.

Second there is the rescue/recovery effort. Though it could be assumed that no living person was in WTC 7 , its debris extended into several other buildings as well and there may have been someone who was already dead due to injuries from the tower collapses still in the building when it also collapsed.

This was not a single vehicle accident where a car runs off the road into a tree. It was more akin to a multiple vehicle collision on a major highway. In that case the cars are removed asap, just as soon as the dead and injured are removed. By your logic it would behoove the authorities to leave all vehicles in place until all were photographed from several angles and only then could they be removed and the roadway put back in service.

Most of your posts are intelligent.
This one is not.

 

[Christopher7]

Not only that, but from a crime standpoint, WTC7 could be seen as an innocent bystander caught up in a larger crime. There was little mystery as to why it collapsed.

That is a matter of opinion.

 

[Christopher7]

Why would that be needed?

To determine for sure what made WTC 7 collapse instead of guessing.

Have you read the NIST Report ?

It is supposition upon supposition ending in "the following general sequence of events appears possible"

Without any physical evidence they are not going to be able to do much more than that.

Though dwarfed by the Trade Towers, this is still a major event with huge implications for building codes.

A through and investigation should have started immediately and the physical evidence should have been examined to determine he cause.

NIST took 3 years to put out a preliminary report.
It is going to be nearly 6 years before they release the final report.
This could have and should have been done in 1 year or 2 at the most.

Maybe you think it was a good idea to destroy the physical evidence without first inspecting and analyzing, but i don't.

 

[Belz...]

5 years ? Prehaps it is you who should return to reality.

2001-09 to 2007-01 isn't a tad over 5 years ?

Wow. That's new.

They removed the large beams one at a time.
All they had to do was photograph and catalog each piece as they went.

And that would have accomplished what ?

I saw it in the afternoon on 11 September, 2001. And I'm not even American.

You don't appear to be human either.

Why ? Because I don't susbscribe to your retarded view of reality ?

I saw 7 collapse on the evening news, and it's my understanding that people in America would've been quite riveted to their TV set that day. How they could've missed the collapse of a 47 storey building is beyond me. Perhaps you were already too busy drinking kool-aid with your CT pals, salivating at the thought of a new conspiracy theory to keep you occupied, to notice.

 

[Belz...]

The evidence has been hidden for 5 years

Oh, so NOW it's 5 years ?

You can blame the public for not knowing if you want.

No, I blame you.

No. WMD's in Iraq. At least thats what Rummy said.

What does this have to do with 9/11 ?

To determine for sure what made WTC 7 collapse instead of guessing.

It is supposition upon supposition ending in "the following general sequence of events appears possible"

Without any physical evidence they are not going to be able to do much more than that.

That's because the people at NIST aren't morons. They know what a 110-storey building can do to surrounding structures when it collapses. Etc.

NIST took 3 years to put out a preliminary report.
It is going to be nearly 6 years before they release the final report.
This could have and should have been done in 1 year or 2 at the most.

Speculation. You don't have any expertise in the relevant fields. How can you possibly make such a claim ?

 

[aggle-rithm]

That is a matter of opinion.

Sure, it's POSSIBLE that WTC7, after having been hit by huge chunks of debris from the collapse of a nearby 110-story building, collapsed for some other reason.

It's also POSSIBLE that John F. Kennedy died of a brain hemmorage an instant before he was hit by the third bullet.

Would you say, therefore, that it's only a matter of opinion that JFK died from a bullet wound to the head?

Would you say that the fact that he COULD have died of a brain hemmorage suggests in any way that some OTHER crime was committed that day?

The brain hemmorage and speculative "second crime" are both unknown and unecessary entities that should be cut out of any rational argument. Same goes for controlled demolition and Larry Silverstein's masterful crime of blowing up his own building for no apparent reason.

 

[jaydeehess]

I watch the news, all networks, but mostly CNN, BBC, CSPAN, LINK TV, and FSTV. There has been virtually nothing about WTC 7 in the last 5 years except for a 5 second clip in the *History Channel 9/11 a year later special and the '9/11 Conspiracy Theory' special on LINK TV. That's when i saw WTC 7 implode for the first time. When i saw the History Channel special again, [Sept. '05] that 5 second clip did not escape my notice.

*[I'm going to buy the one Gravy mentioned and see what they show]

Most people i have told about WTC 7 barley remember it or don't remember it.
None have ever seen the video of the collapse, or don't remember. [having seen it only once on 9/11]

You can blame the public for not knowing if you want.

Dan Rather thought it looked like a CD but that was the last time i heard anything about WTC 7 on the news until recently.

Have you seen the collapse of WTC 7 on TV in the last 5 years, if so when and on what program ? [other than the 5 second clip in the HC special]

Chris, on Sept 11 2001 I was in charge of the move to another building of a cable TV system in a small town in Canada. We started in the morning and had one of two 10foot diameter satellite dishes taken down when one of the guys happened to notice through the open door of the building that the channel that the TV was tuned to was showing a large aircraft flying into one of the towers. We stopped all work. I called the head office and told them we had already taken down the dish that we got CNN, A&E and WTBS from. All other signals were on the other dish(Canada's Anik F1). We waited until noon to take off the other channels and instead got the CNN dish (at that time satellite G5) moved to the new site and set up first. By 6 pm we had all major TV networks back on at the new site. I worked there until midnight finishing up. All through this I had the monitor on. For the most part it did not matter that I had taken down CNN first thing in the morning since almost all stations were carrying the CNN feed anyway. Shortly after 6 pm I saw WTC 7 come down. I saw it several more times before midnight. I saw it many more times the next day on various channels. That next day I was installing the new(to that town) digital cable system. I had to check every channel as I got them on. Without fail every single one that was not a specialty channel(for eg. The Game Channel) was giving updates that often included the fact that, if not the video of, the collapse of WTC 7.

WTC 7 was however much overshadowed by the collapses of the towers and the events at the Pentagon. So was the crash in Penn. Why is that? Is it because the MSM was trying to supress those two items?
NO
The other events simply carry more weight.
The towers were already known world wide, not so WTC 7. I had never heard of WTC 7 until Sept 11/01, I doubt many outside of New York had.
The Pentagon is also known worldwide and is the home of the most powerful armed forces in the world.I had never heard of WTC 7 until Sept 11/01, I doubt many outside of New York had.

Nor had I or anyone outside of Pennsylvania ever heard of Shankesville prior to 9/11/01

Since that day I have noticed many docuementaries concerning the events of 9/11/01. I have watched some. They tend to concentrate on the towers and the Pentagon or the happenings in the planes, primarily flt 93. Why primarily flt 93? Is it beacuse the MSM wants to suppress the ventes on the other 3 planes?
NO
Flt 93 carries more weight than the others because the passengers fought back. There's more story to its story!

You may not like that news concentrates on what the audience can most easily relate to but that is the way it is.

However was there ample chance for you or anyone else to have learned of the collapse of WTC 7.
YES

The fact that many people do not immediatly recall that WTC 7 fell is a consequence of its anonymity prior to 9/11/01 and the fact that most people just have not beeen talking about 9/11/01 as much as people like you or I.

 

[jaydeehess]

Most of your posts are intelligent.
This one is not.

I felt it was a fair analogy. You are aware that analogies do always break down at some point aren't you?

FACT is that in order to get Manhattan going again the debris had to be removed and that the economic impact of not doing so would have been enormous. Not sure how you could dispute that.

 

[jaydeehess]

To determine for sure what made WTC 7 collapse instead of guessing.

Have you read the NIST Report ?

It is supposition upon supposition ending in "the following general sequence of events appears possible"

Without any physical evidence they are not going to be able to do much more than that.

Though dwarfed by the Trade Towers, this is still a major event with huge implications for building codes.

A through and investigation should have started immediately and the physical evidence should have been examined to determine he cause.

NIST took 3 years to put out a preliminary report.
It is going to be nearly 6 years before they release the final report.
This could have and should have been done in 1 year or 2 at the most.

Maybe you think it was a good idea to destroy the physical evidence without first inspecting and analyzing, but i don't.

NIST has said why it has taken so long to get around to again looking at WTC 7(see the other thread)

You and others of your persuasion have also had 6 years to find some evidence of controlled demilition. I have asked you for that evidence. So far you have produced nothing other than what-you-don't-have.

Will you be then getting around to the actual topic of this thread anytime soon Chris?

 

[jaydeehess]

No. WMD's in Iraq. At least thats what Rummy said.

Given that you will find few supproters of the Bush admin and even fewer of Donald Rumsfeld on this forum(though perhaps more than on LC) do you really think that was a witty riposte?

Personally I doubted the evidence of WMD in quantity all along. The admin's publically available evidence was flimsy.

However, at least they tried, at least they had something however bogus it was.

So its a bad analogy. They had evidence, bad evidence but evidence nonetheless. You are arguing that no evidence IS evidence in itself.

 

[aggle-rithm]

The evidence has been hidden for 5 years, and yes, charging more than all but a few could pay for, and then restricting putting it on the web for free because of copyright, would be the next best thing.

So you believe it's reasonable for someone, having committed one of the most heinous crimes in history, to put evidence that would implicate him up for sale, right out in the open, on the theory that the authorities won't be able to afford it?

You DON'T think it would be more reasonable to simply hide or destroy this evidence?

Really?

 

[The Almond]

NIST took 3 years to put out a preliminary report.
It is going to be nearly 6 years before they release the final report.

That's an awful long time to spend fabricating a report to support a pre-defined hypothesis, don't you think? It sure is a good thing that NIST scientists are in on such a great scam. They don't have to do any work or research, just BS day in and day out. Awesome!

This could have and should have been done in 1 year or 2 at the most.

Umm, on what basis are you making this claim? Is it based on your vast experience with forensic investigations?

Maybe you think it was a good idea to destroy the physical evidence without first inspecting and analyzing, but i don't.

How would you go about analyzing billions of tons of rubble? What tests would you perform?

 

[Christopher7]

The fact that many people do not immediatly recall that WTC 7 fell is a consequence of its anonymity prior to 9/11/01 and the fact that most people just have not beeen talking about 9/11/01 as much as people like you or I.

True
I was glued to CNN mostly but somehow managed to miss the fall of WTC 7.
Most people have never seen or don't remember the collapse of WTC 7.
Were it not for the fact that it looks like a CD [IMO], this would not be a problem.
Now there is renewed interest in the collapse of WTC 7 but the MSM will not show the video on any news program. [correct me if i'm wrong]
Case and point: Fox news had Stephen Jones on and refused to show the video of the collapse of WTC 7.
This the most serious issue of our time. MSM, with few exceptions, [Paula Zahn interviews Dylan] doesn't cover it despite a large and growing number of people believe there should be an independent investigation and coverage on MSM news.

 

[jaydeehess]

True
I was glued to CNN mostly but somehow managed to miss the fall of WTC 7.
Most people have never seen or don't remember the collapse of WTC 7.
Were it not for the fact that it looks like a CD [IMO], this would not be a problem.
Now there is renewed interest in the collapse of WTC 7 but the MSM will not show the video on any news program. [correct me if i'm wrong]
Case and point: Fox news had Stephen Jones on and refused to show the video of the collapse of WTC 7.
This the most serious issue of our time. MSM, with few exceptions, [Paula Zahn interviews Dylan] doesn't cover it despite a large and growing number of people believe there should be an independent investigation and coverage on MSM news.

I don't consider FoxNews to be MSM frankly. Two words, Tony Snow. I am NOT saying that FoxNews is covering up for the admin but they would be very well aware of the political bent of Jones and that basically he is part of a movement that is accusing Fox's wonderboy, GWB, of being complicit in mass murder.

Sure there is renewed interest in WTC 7 BUT only amoung those of us who are still at all concerned about WTC 7. You simply cannot force people to want to see a program about a building they didn't know about in the first place and only saw anything about for a few days, 5 years ago. Your passion is not the same as the majority of people.

Now I re-iterate;

You and others of your persuasion have also had 6 years to find some evidence of controlled demilition. I have asked you for that evidence. So far you have produced nothing other than what-you-don't-have.

Will you be then getting around to the actual topic of this thread anytime soon Chris?

ETA; I see that I posted shortly after you did and may not yet have had time to post your evidence tonight at this time.

 

[Christopher7]

A completely untenable senario for two reasons.
First as has been pointed out, there is the economic pressures of keeping a major part of Manhattan from even starting to be repaired.

Economic pressures should not trump the proper investigation of an event of this magnitude.

Never mind the rebuilding of the above ground structures there is also the fact that WTC 7 was a major power grid hub and I would assume also communications as well, then there is sewer and water and subway systems. It had to be removed ASAP if that part of Manhattan was to be made habitable again.

Cataloging and photographing the framing members as they were removed would not delay the process a great deal.

Second there is the rescue/recovery effort. Though it could be assumed that no living person was in WTC 7 , its debris extended into several other buildings as well and there may have been someone who was already dead due to injuries from the tower collapses still in the building when it also collapsed.

So what? None of that has anything to do with weather or not they should catalogue and photograph the framing as it was removed.

This was not a single vehicle accident where a car runs off the road into a tree. It was more akin to a multiple vehicle collision on a major highway. In that case the cars are removed asap, just as soon as the dead and injured are removed. By your logic it would behoove the authorities to leave all vehicles in place until all were photographed from several angles and only then could they be removed and the roadway put back in service.

Here's where you went off the deep end.
In a multiple car pileup, nothing is moved until the damage to all the vehicles has been photographed, and their locations and directions precisely noted.
This is to determine how it happened and who is at fault.
This is the way it's done in California. In Canada, you're not so 'sue' crazy, so procedures might be different.

In any case, the only way to determine what caused the collapse with any degree of certainty, [not just the initiating event, but the subsequent failures] is to photograph and note the precise location and attitude of each piece of framing [easily done by satellite] and catalog it [easily done with a hand held computer] as it is removed.

 

[Christopher7]

I don't consider FoxNews to be MSM frankly. Two words, Tony Snow. I am NOT saying that FoxNews is covering up for the admin but they would be very well aware of the political bent of Jones and that basically he is part of a movement that is accusing Fox's wonderboy, GWB, of being complicit in mass murder.

Sure there is renewed interest in WTC 7 BUT only amoung those of us who are still at all concerned about WTC 7. You simply cannot force people to want to see a program about a building they didn't know about in the first place and only saw anything about for a few days, 5 years ago. Your passion is not the same as the majority of people.

Amen

**************************************************


Exibit A: [the reason i am here]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ixwx19t2IMQ

A.1

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6_czyNCNhDI