WTC-7 Was Taken Down Using Controlled Demolition

Atonement said:
I happen to be one of the lurkers a few people have mentioned they're trying to convince as opposed to the thread starter. I've watched Loose Change and Zeitgeist and a few others out of curiosity. I don't take stuff like that at face value, but at the same time I never took the time (out of laziness/didn't know where to start) to actually research 9/11 enough to draw my own educated conclusions. I just wanted to throw down some thanks to everyone here who has taken the time and worked hard. It's been very informative.
Click to expand...


I'm sure a great many people are suddenly thrilled to find out it has not all been for nothing.

Thany you, Atonement, for being honest. To yourself, and everyone else.
 
Last edited:
Atonement said:
I happen to be one of the lurkers a few people have mentioned they're trying to convince as opposed to the thread starter. I've watched Loose Change and Zeitgeist and a few others out of curiosity. I don't take stuff like that at face value, but at the same time I never took the time (out of laziness/didn't know where to start) to actually research 9/11 enough to draw my own educated conclusions. I just wanted to throw down some thanks to everyone here who has taken the time and worked hard. It's been very informative.
Click to expand...

[X] said:
I'm sure a great many people are suddenly thrilled to find out it has not all been for nothing.

Thany you, Atonement, for being honest. To yourself, and everyone else.
Click to expand...


Ditto. Thank you. Much appreciated.
 
ElMondoHummus said:
.

Did the diesel fuel have any impact on the fires? Unknown. Evidence argues against it; according to the journal Professional Safety, May 2002, in the article "SH&E at Ground Zero":

“72,000 gallons of diesel fuel were stored in a tank (on basement level 7) for the WTC complex backup generator/power systems. Final status: The tank was eventually located and inspected. Although slightly damaged, no leaks were found. The fuel was removed.”
Click to expand...

Actually there are a number of errors in that above quote. There was more than one tank, most of them were underground except for a 3,000 gallon tank on the first floor and the various day tanks associated with the generator sets. The total volume of all the storage tanks was 43,000 gallons, not 72,000 gallons. And no, not all of the fuel was recovered and accounted for. Significantly the 12,000 in the two Solomon Brothers tanks was missing. The tanks were damaged by the collapse, but there was no indication that the fuel spilled into the backfill around the tanks. This indicates that the tanks were emptied prior to the collapse. This is particularly worrisome as this particular system did not have day tanks staged with the generator sets on the 5th floor, instead it utilized pressurized fuel piping to deliver the fuel supply from the USTs up to the generators.

This fuel piping traversed the south side of the 5th floor and was in the general area of structural damage reported for the building. Physical damage to that piping could very well have resulted in the release of fuel into the building interior.

http://wtc.nist.gov/media/testimony/TestimonySept8_06.pdf
 
Last edited:
Alferd_Packer said:
Actually there are a number of errors in that above quote. There was more than one tank, most of them were underground except for a 3,000 gallon tank on the first floor and the various day tanks associated with the generator sets. The total volume of all the storage tanks was 43,000 gallons, not 72,000 gallons. And no, not all of the fuel was recovered and accounted for. Significantly the 12,000 in the two Solomon Brothers tanks was missing. The tanks were damaged by the collapse, but there was no indication that the fuel spilled into the backfill around the tanks. This indicates that the tanks were emptied prior to the collapse. This is particularly worrisome as this particular system did not have day tanks staged with the generator sets on the 5th floor, instead it utilized pressurized fuel piping to deliver the fuel supply from the USTs up to the generators.

This fuel piping traversed the south side of the 5th floor and was in the general area of structural damage reported for the building. Physical damage to that piping could very well have resulted in the release of fuel into the building interior.

http://wtc.nist.gov/media/testimony/TestimonySept8_06.pdf
Click to expand...

Huh... That may indeed be correct. I don't know which account is definitive, but the NIST report is dated later than the Professional Safety article (2006 as opposed to 2002), so that probably does override the article I posted.

All right. Thank you Alferd. That's good info to know. Maybe I'll try to convince myself to write either the authors of those articles, or Bechtel themselves and get that clarified. Maybe... we'll see...
 
While we're at it, I have to mea culpa a mistake I just caught:

ElMondoHummus said:
The building debris not only landed on WTC 7, but also damaged other buildings, such as 30 West Broadway and the Verizon building.
Click to expand...

I said that in reference to debris from the main towers. Actually, according to the FEMA "403" documents (titled "World Trade Center Building Performance Study"; specifically, Chapter 7) 30 West Broadway was damaged by WTC 7, not main towers debris. So I was wrong about that point. Consider that point now corrected.

Althought the Verizon building was indeed hit by main tower debris. In fact, that same document says WTC 1, 2, and 7 all damaged it. Should've been able to figure out on my own that 7 hit it, given the close proximity (WTC 7 and Verizon are next door neighbors (another map here)), but I didn't know both main towers sent debris into it. On a day full of bad luck, that stands out a bit.
 
Foreknowledge, the Smoking Gun!

The charade is over, Timothy Osmond has just posted a video on p4t that provides PWOOF that there was foreknowledge of WTC 7 pending demolition.....

The video footage speaks for itself. Fox-5 anchor Tracey Neale says that a 47-story building had collapsed in downtown Manhattan which is an obvious reference to WTC-7 because it too was a 47-story building in downtown Manhattan. Then just seconds after Neale reports on the building collapse, they witness WTC-7 collapse at free fall speed in their own video footage.
Click to expand...

http://www.roguegovernment.com/news.php?id=6533

Edited by Lisa Simpson: 
Inappropriate image removed.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Last edited:
DGM said:
We've really been duped. Did you notice in that same video the towers collapsed AFTER WTC7 and then WTC 7 collapsed AGAIN.:eek:
Click to expand...

Twice in ONE DAY! That make 4 times steel buildings collapsed for the first time in history.:rolleyes:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom