Scientific Report Comes Out Explaining WTC 7 Collapse

[L. Coyote]

Run time: 03:59 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nWs7VUI4gPI   Posted on YouTube: August 22, 2008 By YouTube Member: Views on YouTube: 0   Posted on DU: August 22, 2008 By DU Member: L. Coyote Views on DU: 1981

 
Do'h!! First skyscraper in history to be allowed to burn! Small woner.

[d_b]

1. three years for that?

[lob1]

2. If Building 7 was the first skyscraper to be brought down by fire,

what brought down the twin towers?

[progdonkey]

5. hmm, maybe the jumbo jets that hit each of them?

:eyes:

[Naturyl]

6. They were designed to withdstand *multiple* impacts from *larger* jets.

I'm undecided regarding 9/11 and have been for a long time, but I've looked at a TON of information on both sides of the debate and I don't think "the planes" alone is a viable answer.

[Bolo Boffin]

18. No, they weren't.

[Naturyl]

23. I've seen other info...

But even if we were to accept this, it wouldn't matter. None of the government reports list the impact as a major cause of collapse. Fire is blamed in all cases.

[global1]

8. We're Talking Building 7 Here - It Didn't Get Hit By A Jumbo Jet......nt

[progdonkey]

17. no shit...

Maybe you should look at the post I was responding to?

Here's the text, in case it's too difficult for you to scroll up to find it: "If Building 7 was the first skyscraper to be brought down by fire, what brought down the twin towers?"

And my response: "hmm, maybe the jumbo jets that hit each of them?"

[Bolo Boffin]

19. No, fires induced thermal expansion that knocked loose supports of a critical column.

And down it came.

[global1]

3. How Did They Come To This Conclusion?......

did these NIST scientists go down to the building and explore the ruins? Did they take samples of the steel and test it? I just can't buy this explanation. Not after seeing the film of the building going down.

Everything we've suspected that *CO was up to during their 8 yr reign of terror(ists) over us - is proving to be true. We are connecting the dots - but we are connecting the dots backwards from now back to 9/11. And you know what - we've been right on every account. Spying. Outing Spys. Lying us into war. Forgeries. Torture. etc, etc, etc.

What I'm thinking is happening now is that *CO is sending the "cleaners" in. You know the guys that go to a scene of a hit and clean the room down and get rid of the evidence. Kinda tidying up. (Just like on the Sopranos).

I'm not convinced by this latest report. Call me a conspiracy theorist if you will - but too many things happened like clockwork for this administration all through their tenure. Coincidences - I think not. I'm calling all of this last 8 years 'choreographed' and I'll take that belief with me.

I'm sorry - I just don't believe anything that comes out of this administration.

You know - like we're not in a recession and the economy couldn't be better.

[raystorm7]

7. Easy, they got payed to make this shit up.

[wysimdnwyg]

9. After watching...

the complete cluster-fk that is Iraq, I cannot believe this administration is adept at anything other than making money for their friends and keeping themselves out of jail. The planning necessary for even a coverup of this is, IMO, beyond BushCo. Even fear of Cheney wouldn't be enough to stop some kind of a leak.

I agree with Cenk - while what the NIST says is likely accurate, they've done a piss-poor job of convincing people.

[PerpetuallyDazed]

10. I agree

it seems like multiple agencies would have to be involved and in collusion. And that naturally brings me to this question: They've already (transparently) colluded NOT to impeach the bastard, so what else have they agreed upon in the interests of national security?

[NoSheep]

12. I don't think, in their eyes, Iraq is a cluster fck. The military industrial complex is making

money hand over fist!

And as for leaking, I think it all HAS been leaked and not one damn thing has come of it. Think about it. We already know they either let it happen or made it happen and no one is doing anything but just talking about it.

Everyone who refuses to believe it is basically complicent and most aren't even on the payroll.
That's what I think, anyway.

[Bolo Boffin]

20. Why don't you read the report and find out?

http://wtc.nist.gov

[pansypoo53219]

4. wasn't it very hot under the collapsed WTC towers?

and some skyscrappers near had to be torn down after because of damage. i was there in 2003. i took pics of the OLD buildings that survived. newer construction just isn't the same.
of course i DO believe cheeney allowed it to happen.

[Just-plain-Kathy]

11. I believe "the 9-11 folks"...n/t

[pleah]

13. I have never trusted anything that has come out this criminal administration.

And, never will.

[dixiegrrrrl]

14. What a load of BushWaaaa

All anyone has to do is look at footage of the collapse. It falls straight down, no 13th floor collapses. Bldng 7 had 45 stories, I believe.
go to You Tube, find the videos. Watch the free fall.
Larry Silverstein, owner of the financially troubled WTC complex, admitted, on tape, which was shown on several broadcasts, that he agreed to
"pull" the building because in his estimation, it was too badly damaged to save. He says the fireman gave the order to "pull it".

Check out the INternet Archive, which has minute by minute coverage of 9-11 on 5 tv stations, including BBC. On BBC, there is a brief news story showing a female announcer stating that building 7 has collapsed, with a live shot of the WTC area behind her, showing an intact Bldg.
7.

This is one "conspiracy theory" that has lots of legs.

[Bolo Boffin]

21. Are you looking at the complete footage or just the part at the end?

Silverstein said nothing of the sort.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DT0WjGyZW1M

[dfgrbac]

15. NIST pulls out all the (propaganda) stops.

After years of hard work (presumably using their intense blood, sweat, and tears), NIST has issued a final report that fire caused the collapse of World Trade Center Building 7. Their work though was apparently focused on how to somehow validate their previous statements rather than to actually study the known facts. Most of the important “facts” now known about this collapse NIST continues to prefer to simply ignore.

Has the general population of our country been dumbed down enough to believe the above report? NIST claims their research team included 50 experts from diverse fields “including engineering, explosives, fire, and construction”. On the other hand, over 400 professional architects and engineers see things differently. In a http://www.ae911truth.org/actionalerts/">news conference immediately following the NIST report, Richard Gage and others expose obvious factual evidence that NIST pretended to not exist. The web site set up by this group uses robust science to show that WTC-7 collapsed by controlled demolition. Anyone who has watched a controlled demolition can see it. Fire does not turn steel buildings into dust – it's a fact of life and science.

[bertman]

16. Bush's "Pearl Harbor". Isn't that what the Blueprint for a New American Century called for?

I won't go into all the so-called coincidences that "just happened" to converge in New York City on Sept 11, 2001 because many of us are well aware of them. Do some reading. Go to the 911 conspiracy websites and read what they have to say, then draw your own conclusions.

Then look at who the Bush crime family chose to head the commission that they did NOT want to investigate those events. Then evaluate the conclusions they reached. Conclusions based on circumscribed testimony and ignoring witnesses and avenues that might prove embarrassing or invalidate their conclusions.

Most Americans have no interest in, and perhaps no time and money to pursue these many diverse threads that lead to the conclusion that this was an inside job, but I am very grateful to those dedicated folks who have done so.

[OneBlueSky]

22. pure, unadulterated bullshit . . . n/t

.