WTC 7 Question - why blow it up?

[JimBenArm]

I would recommend blowing your house up, instead. Give a countdown so your next door neighbors can escape.... Hmm... Actually, fly planes into your neighbors' houses and then blow your house up.

This must be why they didn't pay my insurance claim...

 

[Disbelief]

Not that I like it, but I feel the need to stand up for Zen and SD. The OP asked for a motive, and then people start stating that they are dabbling in speculation. Well, of course they are since that was what was requested. Of course, I think that there motives are not only speculation, but rather silly as pointed out numerous time. I could propose that the leader of the evil cabal did not like the design so he decided to blow it up. Not only is it just as valid, it is also harder to debunk.

 

[ZENSMACK89]

Close, no cigar.

Now you are asserting that the order to destroy WTC 7 in order to destroy senstive docuements came from the administration of GWB. were they targeting just one office or several?

Whereas he and his people have shown themselves to be incompetant I still do not subscribe to the notion that you do, that they are complete and utter morons.

As pointed out above, the idea that the demolition of a building is a secure and efficient method of destroying senstive materials is absolutely and completely in the realm of idiocy. I expect that any sugestion to anyone on charge of the offices in question that this be done to 'protect' materials in the offices would be met with vociferous objection and likely a refusal to follow orders based on the illegality of them as outlined by the regulations posted by Sabrina.

I worked at a very remote weather station that also had a military post which did 'radio research'. Everyday there were two armed soldiers who were in charge of burning bags of already shredded docuements. They did not open the plastic bags, they were set into the incinerator as is. On one occasion that I walked too close I was informed, politely, that I was to remain 30 feet away from the small incinerator. I asked a member of the military who I knew, why it was two guys. "They watch each other" was his answer. He told me that they were to ensure that every shred was burned completely and that after the paper was all burned out they were to dump 1 liter of gasoline on the ashes just to make sure. Their work was checked on each day after they were done by an officer.
It would require military clearance just to be on the base. It was located in one of the most remote places on Earth yet these measures were being taken, BUT Zens figures that crumpling a building in the hopes that at least most of the material in question will be destroyed despite the fact that total destruction of them cannot be guaranteed nor checked for afterwards would be fine.

And I have worked in industries and for State Government where I was responsible from everything depending on the time and position from riding along with maintence personnel to the shredder and actually having to stand there and make sure I physically see truck loads of documents being shred to working in data centers and being responsible for things like off-site storage of data. I presently work somewhere that we have a security audit coming up and we are preparing for it.

Now if you people who seem to endorse the official version believe that there was a 10 story gash in the building and the building was known for some time before it came down that it just might come down then let me pose a scenario to you.

WTC has fire gutted floors and a 10 story gash and could come down at anytime. Possibly into the street possibly into a building next door you have know idea of when and how. Who do you send in who knows what to look for and has the security clearance to retrieve things and how long do you wait? What are your options? If you do send people in to retrieve something and the building falls on them who is liable for that?

Now what if there is something in there you really can’t afford for the wrong person to find? Or a whole bunch of things?

 

[SDC]

This must be why they didn't pay my insurance claim...

No, it's because you forgot to say, "Pull it!"

 

[Sabrina]

And I have worked in industries and for State Government where I was responsible from everything depending on the time and position from riding along with maintence personnel to the shredder and actually having to stand there and make sure I physically see truck loads of documents being shred to working in data centers and being responsible for things like off-site storage of data. I presently work somewhere that we have a security audit coming up and we are preparing for it.

Now if you people who seem to endorse the official version believe that there was a 10 story gash in the building and the building was known for some time before it came down that it just might come down then let me pose a scenario to you.

WTC has fire gutted floors and a 10 story gash and could come down at anytime. Possibly into the street possibly into a building next door you have know idea of when and how. Who do you send in who knows what to look for and has the security clearance to retrieve things and how long do you wait? What are your options? If you do send people in to retrieve something and the building falls on them who is liable for that?

Now what if there is something in there you really can’t afford for the wrong person to find? Or a whole bunch of things?

Well, if we're assuming that there were established thoughts the building might come down, I'd do exactly what was done; namely establish a collapse zone around the building and wait for it to come down. Once it HAS, and the area has been deemed stable enough by experts, then the area could be cordoned off and only authorized personnel with the necessary security clearance would be allowed to enter; alternatively, they would simply ensure that approved debris-removal personnel were allowed to enter and would guard to ensure that nothing left in an improper manner. In addition, the debris collected from this area would be sent to a separate facility away from the rest of the WTC debris and gone over with a fine tooth comb to determine what survived and who it belonged to. There would be representatives from all of the federal agencies with offices in the building present to ensure that the information went to the proper agency. Once the debris was gone over, it could be sent to the facility where the remaining Ground Zero debris was located and disposed of as necessary. Given that none of this was done, as far as any of us knows, I'd say that the likelihood of the building being demolished to protect classified info drops significantly. Especially when you take into consideration that there were exponentially more effective ways of ensuring the information was destroyed already approved by the government that cost the merest fraction of what it would take to demolish a building.

The plain fact of the matter is, the very idea of the building being demolished to destroy classified material is ludicrous, Zensmack. I'm sorry, but that's just the plain, unvarnished truth. If the powers that be loved money and power so very much, why would they choose an insanely expensive and unproven manner of destroying the information they didn't want to get out when much more cost-effective and PROVEN methods already existed?

 

[jaydeehess]

Now if you people who seem to endorse the official version believe that there was a 10 story gash in the building and the building was known for some time before it came down that it just might come down then let me pose a scenario to you.

WTC has fire gutted floors and a 10 story gash and could come down at anytime. Possibly into the street possibly into a building next door you have know idea of when and how. Who do you send in who knows what to look for and has the security clearance to retrieve things and how long do you wait? What are your options? If you do send people in to retrieve something and the building falls on them who is liable for that?

Now what if there is something in there you really can’t afford for the wrong person to find? Or a whole bunch of things?

There are two possibilities, the building will collapse on its own or it will not.
If it does collapse then you are no further ahead or behind than if you actually cause it to come down.
If it does not collapse then it is enterable at some later date and until that date any materials still inside are secure since first of all it would be dangerous to enter the building until engineers have shored it up to make it temporarily safe AND you have security around the building to ensure only authorized personel even get close to it.

You DO NOT send anyone into the building while it is on fire. That would only be considered for the removal of materials that were determined too important to risk destruction of. If such top priority materials were in the building it would be idiocy to reverse course and trust to a basic crap shoot whether or not they actually get destroyed by demolishing the building.

Once the building is made more safe then you send in people in hard hats, workboots, overalls, work gloves and any other safety equipment deemed neccessary and carefully remove all materials that you can. There would be a need for one of those people to be someone familiar with the layout and where the materials in question were. All would have security clearance to handle such material but need not have clearance to view it.

You do not ask a demolition team to rig the building for implosion. The building was damaged, it was twice the height of the tallest previous implosion drop, it was on fire which meant that damage pattern to the building was changing constantly, and your senario would require that it be assessed, a plan developed, rigged and dropped within 7 hours MAX. That is plain stupid, no two ways about it.

Disbelief points out that people were asked for reasons to demolish WTC 7 and this was one given. Granted, it addresses the OP. That does not mean however that it is not stupid.

 

[sts60]

Now what if there is something in there you really can’t afford for the wrong person to find? Or a whole bunch of things?

Let's see, I'll blow the building up so I have no control over the disposition of the incriminating evidence. I could have my secret plans fluttering all over lower Manhattan. I could have my secret atomic laser cannons landing on FDNY trucks - that would look good on the front page of the New York Post.

Or I could use some of the strict discipline used by the hundreds upon hundreds of conspiracy troops, none of whom has ever talked, to make sure that they shred the papers, wipe the disks, and dismantle the equipment beforehand.

Listen to yourself talk. You started out fairly reasonable, and now you're trying to convince us that destroying a 47-story building to destroy some papers is more secure than shredding them. You're telling us to seriously consider the notion that two of the largest buildings on Earth were not only secretly rigged for demolition and imploded by the government but also that the floors of the building were actually propelled downwards by special explosives placed in secret, because just letting them fall wasn't fast enough.

These notions are insane. You know, I don't care for this Administration either, but don't leave sanity behind in your desire to see punishment meted out, or whatever else is driving you. Stop reaching for the ridiculous when there are real problems to deal with; you're just hurting your own cause.

And speaking of dealing with reality,
Can you provide empirical evidence that the hijacker pilots were trained how to navigate a 757's at altitude via the instruments?
Swing Dangler's denial of the hijackers' ability to navigate an airliner from Boston to NYC that day borders on the pathological. "What evidence" is there that someone with a commercial pilot's license was capable of that? What sort of desperate idiocy is a question like that? Not that you even need a CPL to do it. It's trivial to do with a GPS. I could do it with a VOR and a map. On that day - selected because of the beautiful clear weather - it could have been done by dead reckoning and point-to-point navigation.

Why the desperate reaching for such foolishness? Why, if one is convinced the government was behind it, not retreat to a LIHOP position, or a modified MIHOP where the gov't facilitated what really did physically happen, or at least not go so far beyond the usual explosives claims?

In short, why are two evidently intelligent people going deeper and deeper into sheer fantasy and outright denial? It saddens me. It really does.

 

[Bell]

Do you think before you post, or just place random words on the page, and hit "Submit"?

Sigged

 

[JimBenArm]

Sigged

Totally cool!

 

[jaydeehess]

Excellent post sts60

Very much to the point.

 

[ZENSMACK89]

And again you all ignore or forget that the building was claimed to be in jeopardy of collapse a safety hazard not just to anyone attempting to go into it but also to the surrounding structures. You also forget that by evidence of the rapid heat corrosion of steel in the rubble that the buildings didn't just collapse they continued to incinerate contents after the fact. What was recovered? Does anyone know if anything?

Now some of Sabrina's last post is pretty close to what I proposed and what they did do except I offer they might not have felt they could afford to wait and see when and how it would collapse and instead went ahead and brought it down on purpose.

Now Jaydees is also close but seems to think they could have waited until the fires went out and gone in to retrieve things. Who? And is the building safe to do this? Do you believe there was a 10 story gash in the building?

Now sts60 seems to think its also safe (at some point?) go into the building and take things out and shred them. Who? When? How? Who is liable? Also I didn’t suggest that Dubya was down there himself with his finger on the button. Guliani himself might have also had an interest in bringing down the buildings being that his emergency bunker was located there.

Now if they did bring it down on purpose it might also be kept quiet for insurance reasons. Collateral damage from the tower collapse is completely no fault as opposed to taking it down on purpose. How long can you wait if you’re going to blame it on collateral damage?

 

[twinstead]

Sigh

 

[ZENSMACK89]

Now what if there is something in there you really can’t afford for the wrong person to find? Or a whole bunch of things?

Let's see, I'll blow the building up so I have no control over the disposition of the incriminating evidence. I could have my secret plans fluttering all over lower Manhattan. I could have my secret atomic laser cannons landing on FDNY trucks - that would look good on the front page of the New York Post.

Or I could use some of the strict discipline used by the hundreds upon hundreds of conspiracy troops, none of whom has ever talked, to make sure that they shred the papers, wipe the disks, and dismantle the equipment beforehand.

Listen to yourself talk. You started out fairly reasonable, and now you're trying to convince us that destroying a 47-story building to destroy some papers is more secure than shredding them. You're telling us to seriously consider the notion that two of the largest buildings on Earth were not only secretly rigged for demolition and imploded by the government but also that the floors of the building were actually propelled downwards by special explosives placed in secret, because just letting them fall wasn't fast enough.

These notions are insane. You know, I don't care for this Administration either, but don't leave sanity behind in your desire to see punishment meted out, or whatever else is driving you. Stop reaching for the ridiculous when there are real problems to deal with; you're just hurting your own cause.

And speaking of dealing with reality,
Can you provide empirical evidence that the hijacker pilots were trained how to navigate a 757's at altitude via the instruments?
Swing Dangler's denial of the hijackers' ability to navigate an airliner from Boston to NYC that day borders on the pathological. "What evidence" is there that someone with a commercial pilot's license was capable of that? What sort of desperate idiocy is a question like that? Not that you even need a CPL to do it. It's trivial to do with a GPS. I could do it with a VOR and a map. On that day - selected because of the beautiful clear weather - it could have been done by dead reckoning and point-to-point navigation.

Why the desperate reaching for such foolishness? Why, if one is convinced the government was behind it, not retreat to a LIHOP position, or a modified MIHOP where the gov't facilitated what really did physically happen, or at least not go so far beyond the usual explosives claims?

In short, why are two evidently intelligent people going deeper and deeper into sheer fantasy and outright denial? It saddens me. It really does.

What is the question of the OP?

Prove how they really did it or why would they do it?

 

[Sabrina]

At this point I think I'll simply sit back and watch the woo flow. *shakes head and gets the popcorn*

 

[Bell]

At this point I think I'll simply sit back and watch the woo flow. *shakes head and gets the popcorn*

I must read posts more careful. I thought you said

*shakes head and gets the porn*

 

[jaydeehess]

And again you all ignore or forget that the building was claimed to be in jeopardy of collapse a safety hazard not just to anyone attempting to go into it but also to the surrounding structures. You also forget that by evidence of the rapid heat corrosion of steel in the rubble that the buildings didn't just collapse they continued to incinerate contents after the fact. What was recovered? Does anyone know if anything?

If the material recovered is sensitive what makes you think that the media would be made aware of what was or was not recovered? Why would I or anyone else here have this info?

Now some of Sabrina's last post is pretty close to what I proposed and what they did do except I offer they might not have felt they could afford to wait and see when and how it would collapse and instead went ahead and brought it down on purpose.

Which brings up the fact that doing so with any hope of having it happen they way you want it to would be pure folly in a building that is damaged and continues to suffer damage and is much larger than the largest previously dropped structure.

Now Jaydees is also close but seems to think they could have waited until the fires went out and gone in to retrieve things. Who? And is the building safe to do this? Do you believe there was a 10 story gash in the building?

What do you want? Their names? I already told you who. The agencies in question are security agencies. The CIA for eg. has many people for whom this would not be a problem. Why do you assume that the only people available would be 90 pound clerks and IT geeks?

Yes they can wait for the building to either collapse, in which case you are no further ahead or behind than if you attempt to drop the building deliberatly, OR, you can wait out the fires and go in later. I have already outlined this above.

Now sts60 seems to think its also safe (at some point?) go into the building and take things out and shred them. Who? When? How? Who is liable? Also I didn’t suggest that Dubya was down there himself with his finger on the button. Guliani himself might have also had an interest in bringing down the buildings being that his emergency bunker was located there.

I highly doubt that any CIA manager (for eg.) would allow an order from GWB to do what you propose. Guliani has no jurisdiction over the CIA or any other Federal agency and I cannot see any engineer in his service taking on the job of destroying the building in the fashion you propose.

Now if they did bring it down on purpose it might also be kept quiet for insurance reasons. Collateral damage from the tower collapse is completely no fault as opposed to taking it down on purpose. How long can you wait if you’re going to blame it on collateral damage?

If the building was dropped because it was going to collapse or because it was danger then there is no effect on the insurance, it is still no fault of the owners. The insurance co. is not going to demand that the building be allowed to stand if engineers have determined it has to come down. If they did and someone was hurt then THEY would be liable for that. However such a drop would absolutly never be considered to be done in 7 hours in a damaged building that was on fire and was 47 freakin stories tall.

 

[sts60]

What is the question of the OP?

Prove how they really did it or why would they do it?

Of course we know the OP question: "why?"

The answer is "no sane reason".

Of course, there is also no credible evidence it was done.

Moreover, there were unambiguous collapse indicators beforehand: heavy structural damage, heavy unchecked fire, a compromised fire-suppression system, no fire attack, the building directly observed to be coming out of line by FDNY personnel, and of course the creaking, etc. sounds. The building was expected to fall, and it did, and there were no explosives required.

Now sts60 seems to think its also safe (at some point?) go into the building and take things out and shred them.

No, of course not - I neither said nor implied anything of the sort.

Are you being dense on purpose? Any such incriminating materials would have been shredded prior to the actual event.

Do you even think at all about what you're saying anymore? There is this giant conspiracy capable of planning all these attacks, planting all these cover stories, and stealthily preparing three occupied office buildings for controlled demolition, but can't think about shredding papers and CDs beforehand in a building they knew they had to abandon? Or they had to keep all this incriminating stuff around until after the building fell?

Who? When? How? Who is liable? Also I didn’t suggest that Dubya was down there himself with his finger on the button. Guliani himself might have also had an interest in bringing down the buildings being that his emergency bunker was located there.

Or maybe The Donald did it. Or Cthulu. As long as you're frantically waving your hands in support of this insane premise, you might as well really go for it.

 

[ZENSMACK89]

If the material recovered is sensitive what makes you think that the media would be made aware of what was or was not recovered? Why would I or anyone else here have this info?

No someone suggested that to bring the building down is stupid because it might scatter contents to “all corners if the earth”. Did this happen? Did someone find something? Anything?

Which brings up the fact that doing so with any hope of having it happen they way you want it to would be pure folly in a building that is damaged and continues to suffer damage and is much larger than the largest previously dropped structure.

And? Waiting for it to fall on its own is better?

What do you want? Their names? I already told you who. The agencies in question are security agencies. The CIA for eg. has many people for whom this would not be a problem. Why do you assume that the only people available would be 90 pound clerks and IT geeks?

I’m sorry I didn’t know CIA agents have staff immune to building collapse. Do they also have security clearance to happen upon the info of all the other agencies in the building?

Yes they can wait for the building to either collapse, in which case you are no further ahead or behind than if you attempt to drop the building deliberately, OR, you can wait out the fires and go in later. I have already outlined this above.

This doesn’t explain away anything I outlined. Just because the fire goes out does that mean the building is safe to enter? It could be on the verge of collapse for a year.

I highly doubt that any CIA manager (for eg.) would allow an order from GWB to do what you propose. Guliani has no jurisdiction over the CIA or any other Federal agency and I cannot see any engineer in his service taking on the job of destroying the building in the fashion you propose.

And again we’re not exactly talking about people who play by the rules or make the best decisions. For instance why was the emergency bunker built so close to the WTC towers a known terrorist target?

If the building was dropped because it was going to collapse or because it was danger then there is no effect on the insurance, it is still no fault of the owners. The insurance co. is not going to demand that the building be allowed to stand if engineers have determined it has to come down. If they did and someone was hurt then THEY would be liable for that. However such a drop would absolutely never be considered to be done in 7 hours in a damaged building that was on fire and was 47 freakin stories tall.

How do you prove that to the insurance companies? Did they make a complete inspection of the building while it was still on fire to determine this was necessary? Good luck trying to collect on that one. It took them 5 years as it is.

 

[ZENSMACK89]

Of course we know the OP question: "why?"

The answer is "no sane reason".

What do you know about sane?

Of course, there is also no credible evidence it was done.

Says you.

Moreover, there were unambiguous collapse indicators beforehand: heavy structural damage, heavy unchecked fire, a compromised fire-suppression system, no fire attack, the building directly observed to be coming out of line by FDNY personnel, and of course the creaking, etc. sounds. The building was expected to fall, and it did, and there were no explosives required.

So they knew exactly when and how it would fall?

No, of course not - I neither said nor implied anything of the sort.

Are you being dense on purpose? Any such incriminating materials would have been shredded prior to the actual event.

Are you dense? Did you read what I wrote? What if WTC7 wasn't part of the original plan and wasn't meant to be damaged by the towers. Why would they have shred anything before hand?

Do you even think at all about what you're saying anymore? There is this giant conspiracy capable of planning all these attacks, planting all these cover stories, and stealthily preparing three occupied office buildings for controlled demolition, but can't think about shredding papers and CDs beforehand in a building they knew they had to abandon? Or they had to keep all this incriminating stuff around until after the building fell?

Do you read? Try again.

Or maybe The Donald did it. Or Cthulu. As long as you're frantically waving your hands in support of this insane premise, you might as well really go for it.

Nothing huh?

 

[SDC]

No someone suggested that to bring the building down is stupid because it might scatter contents to “all corners if the earth”. Did this happen? Did someone find something? Anything?

[... cut, cut, cut ...]

How do you prove that to the insurance companies? Did they make a complete inspection of the building while it was still on fire to determine this was necessary? Good luck trying to collect on that one. It took them 5 years as it is.

I'm sorry but, Z.Smack, now it looks like you are arguing against the idea of intentional demolition of WTC 7. I'm really confused. Could you please take a clear stand? Here's mine: the damned thing collapsed because planes hit WTC 1&2, which eventually collapsed, and a whole bunch of stuff landed on 7, damaging it and starting fires which lasted 7 hours or so. The damage and fires were made worse, it seems, but the unusual construction of the thing many years before, and the fuel stored in the building. Various companies and government agencies were lucky enough not to lose any people, and in addition, since this is the 21st century, important data, files, etc., could be reconstructed or had been backed up elsewhere.

How's that?