9/11 "Building What?" ad campaign

[jimnyc]

Please do try and keep up. We were not discussing evidence of debris AFTER THE COLLAPSES OF THE TWIN TOWERS; we were discussing Barry Jennings who got hit by an explosion in WTC7 half an hour BEFORE the collapse of either tower.
So there were NONE of the debris you're talking about in WTC7 yet
But there were already explosions.

So thousands and thousands of people there and this one man has a different story? No other person heard the explosions other than him? If anything, the surrounding buildings were probably being hit with falling debris for quite some time after the towers were initially hit.

[jimnyc]

I also believe he was with a member of Giuliani's staff, as well as other firemen in the lobby and near vicinity. Why aren't all of these people running to the press with conspiracies of explosions in WTC7 before the other 2 towers fell?

[Gaffer]

Explosives leave residue. There was no residue at any buildings.

Now just for shits and giggles have any of the truthers ever looked at the possibility that if there were explosives planted and set off that they might have been done by other muslim terrorists attacking from the ground? Why would it have to be the US government? Some mission impossible jihadis could have been behind it all.

[revelarts]

I also believe he was with a member of Giuliani's staff, as well as other firemen in the lobby and near vicinity. Why aren't all of these people running to the press with conspiracies of explosions in WTC7 before the other 2 towers fell?

For one thing some people who have gone to the press aren't really welcomed. If you were a reporter would you run his story Jimmy? There's a video of one Eyewitness who said he heard explosions in the basement of building 2 (?) Then he heard plans hit above. That's in the raw footage but what aired on TV was cut, and his story was "corrected" to go along with the official story. I doubt there's some mass cover-up it was probably just lazy reporting, easy reporting, --lets not make waves, --He must be mistaken the experts say reporting. It's just easier to go along with Guys like you that are so upset at the notion of anything but the story of steel buildings falling from 2 fires.

but to your question specifically, the firemen weren't with him only "mr Hess" was.
But do you see what your doing with your questions. You are dismissing his testimony not based on what he's said but based on lack of corroborating testimony. Which is a legitimate to ask for of course but it doesn't negate the truth of his testimony at all. Well below is Mr. Hess's interview on 9-11 and then a later interview. He expanded and changed his story a bit later. but the day of he simply gave a less detailed but nearly exact copy of what Mr. Jennings said. that there was an explosion near the 8th floor stairwell.

<object width="480" height="385"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/6e3K9jcPdXc?fs=1&amp;hl=en_US"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/6e3K9jcPdXc?fs=1&amp;hl=en_US" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="480" height="385"></embed></object>

<object width="480" height="385"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/hy5lpp6yADw?fs=1&amp;hl=en_US"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/hy5lpp6yADw?fs=1&amp;hl=en_US" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="480" height="385"></embed></object>

Jimmy here's my problem,
it's hard to get get any of the story strait, I've found lying and misquotes and changed stories and speculation on all sides.
My own council says that 7 stinks.

I've yet to here a definitive answer on why the Jennings and Hess in 7 before the collapse heard explosions felt the building shake etc.. It sounds like you have speculated debris to your satisfaction. I'm still not sure.

[revelarts]

Graffer

<object width="480" height="385"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/Q_OIXfkXEj0?fs=1&amp;hl=en_US"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/Q_OIXfkXEj0?fs=1&amp;hl=en_US" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="480" height="385"></embed></object>

[revelarts]

Jimmy, you asked about different reasons for the collaspe from the official story.
It's been a while since i've really dug into this stuff that deep I'm not sure i can just dig it up for you. But if I remember correctly the 1st fema report said one thing then it was something else from NIST years later some variation and some corrections. BUt those are the official reports. however there's been officail speculation without the "hands ons" inspection that your talking about that's been used in news reports , by gov't spokesmen and most others.

an MIT professor had one theory other scientist and engineers from around the country have given several different explanations that became part of the air that everything else had to be compared to well before the OFFICIAL reports came out. some said the truss where the problem, some said the rivets, some said the steel melted, others said it weakened, some said the impact and pancake force of the uppers stories was enough later others said no you have to combine it with the weaker steel. that's what i'm talking about.

[Noir]

I think this 10 second clip shows resonable doubt for anyone who sees it, the building falls in a uniform motion, perpendicular to the ground and almost at free fall speed. Its just too perfect a collapse to have been done by nature.

[Sertes]

Explosives leave residue. There was no residue at any buildings.

Now just for shits and giggles have any of the truthers ever looked at the possibility that if there were explosives planted and set off that they might have been done by other muslim terrorists attacking from the ground? Why would it have to be the US government? Some mission impossible jihadis could have been behind it all.

AGAIN: no one blames US gov!

And for your assertion "explosives leave residue": that's true. If you don't want to find it you simply don't look for it!

12. Did the NIST investigation look for evidence of the WTC towers being brought down by controlled demolition? Was the steel tested for explosives or thermite residues? The combination of thermite and sulfur (called thermate) "slices through steel like a hot knife through butter."

NIST did not test for the residue of these compounds in the steel.

http://wtc.nist.gov/pubs/factsheets/faqs_8_2006.htm

[krisy]

AGAIN: no one blames US gov!

And for your assertion "explosives leave residue": that's true. If you don't want to find it you simply don't look for it!



http://wtc.nist.gov/pubs/factsheets/faqs_8_2006.htm

Again,if not the government,then who?

[Gaffer]

AGAIN: no one blames US gov!

And for your assertion "explosives leave residue": that's true. If you don't want to find it you simply don't look for it!



http://wtc.nist.gov/pubs/factsheets/faqs_8_2006.htm

Your saying the government didn't look for residue traces, but they aren't to blame. You say it's all a big cover up by the government, but they're not to blame. As Krissy asked, who is?

[Sertes]

Your saying the government didn't look for residue traces, but they aren't to blame. You say it's all a big cover up by the government, but they're not to blame. As Krissy asked, who is?

I'm saying that NIST got congress mandate to investigate cause and dynamic of the three collapses, and they didn't even test the residue for explosives/high incendiaries compounds.

That can be blamed on the system, because I bet people is not informed about this and many other crucial issues on 9/11.

When the people will know they will ask for a second, real investigation, with subpoena power. Then the investigators will give us names.

It took 14 years for the Zapruder film to go on prime-time tv; After 9 years many will see for the first time the collapse of WTC7, then we'll see what happens.

[jimnyc]

I'm saying that NIST got congress mandate to investigate cause and dynamic of the three collapses, and they didn't even test the residue for explosives/high incendiaries compounds.

That can be blamed on the system, because I bet people is not informed about this and many other crucial issues on 9/11.

When the people will know they will ask for a second, real investigation, with subpoena power. Then the investigators will give us names.

It took 14 years for the Zapruder film to go on prime-time tv; After 9 years many will see for the first time the collapse of WTC7, then we'll see what happens.

Your own link states why they didn't search for residue:

NIST did not test for the residue of these compounds in the steel.
The responses to questions number 2, 4, 5 and 11 demonstrate why NIST concluded that there were no explosives or controlled demolition involved in the collapses of the WTC towers.
Furthermore, a very large quantity of thermite (a mixture of powdered or granular aluminum metal and powdered iron oxide that burns at extremely high temperatures when ignited) or another incendiary compound would have had to be placed on at least the number of columns damaged by the aircraft impact and weakened by the subsequent fires to bring down a tower. Thermite burns slowly relative to explosive materials and can require several minutes in contact with a massive steel section to heat it to a temperature that would result in substantial weakening. Separate from the WTC towers investigation, NIST researchers estimated that at least 0.13 pounds of thermite would be required to heat each pound of a steel section to approximately 700 degrees Celsius (the temperature at which steel weakens substantially). Therefore, while a thermite reaction can cut through large steel columns, many thousands of pounds of thermite would need to have been placed inconspicuously ahead of time, remotely ignited, and somehow held in direct contact with the surface of hundreds of massive structural components to weaken the building. This makes it an unlikely substance for achieving a controlled demolition.
Analysis of the WTC steel for the elements in thermite/thermate would not necessarily have been conclusive. The metal compounds also would have been present in the construction materials making up the WTC towers, and sulfur is present in the gypsum wallboard that was prevalent in the interior partitions.

As for the dolts always talking about engineers who solely saw video clips who state it was a controlled demolition, I'll take the following people who did in depth research for a better answer:

Some 200 technical experts—including about 85 career NIST experts and 125 leading experts from the private sector and academia—reviewed tens of thousands of documents, interviewed more than 1,000 people, reviewed 7,000 segments of video footage and 7,000 photographs, analyzed 236 pieces of steel from the wreckage, performed laboratory tests and sophisticated computer simulations of the sequence of events that occurred from the moment the aircraft struck the towers until they began to collapse.

And lastly, I wouldn't expect someone who doesn't even live in the USA to know better - but the collapse of WTC7 has been aired on national stations thousands and thousands of times on CBS, NBC, ABC, CNN, MSNBC and tons of pundits shows. Additionally, thanks to conspiracy nuts like yourself, it's probably been viewed by the general public millions upon millions of times on the internet.

Ok, this is really the last one. You don't seem to want to say WHO you think pulled off this conspiracy, only that we aren't being told the truth. They must have had thousands of people involved in years of planning - if they wanted to bring it down themselves, why not detonate it in a manner that it fell a different way to avoid people as smart as you from foiling their master plan? Are you saying they pulled off perhaps the best plan of all time, but forgot about little details that someone like yourself can solve from Italy?

[jimnyc]

AGAIN: no one blames US gov!

Did you not yourself implicate Dick Cheney as lying as part of a cover up? Was he not part of the US government? Maybe he was flying solo and acted as a citizen and performed controlled demolitions and flew missiles along with a few other citizens?

Again, you like to play the conspiracy part but till this very day you have not provided one piece of factual and real evidence. Not one shred. Oh, unless you consider secretly moving the passengers to a hidden location and killing them before replacing the plane with a missile to hit the Pentagon. Umm, yeah, that's a great story! LOL

[Nukeman]

I think this 10 second clip shows resonable doubt for anyone who sees it, the building falls in a uniform motion, perpendicular to the ground and almost at free fall speed. Its just too perfect a collapse to have been done by nature.

Umm It wasn't "done by nature" there was NOTHING natural about the intentional distruction of the twin towers.. It was deliberate!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Gaffer]

I think this 10 second clip shows resonable doubt for anyone who sees it, the building falls in a uniform motion, perpendicular to the ground and almost at free fall speed. Its just too perfect a collapse to have been done by nature.

Actually nature had a lot to do with the collapse. It's called gravity. Weakening even one section of a tall building will cause a collapse. As the weight of the floors above come down on each other it pancakes. Gravity rules, everything goes straight down.

The building was shifting. That alone can cause generators and gas lines to explode. Which in turn causes fires. Fire melts steel. It doesn't have to be super hot, just continuous. In the case of building 7 the fires were burning for 7 hours.

One or two generators blow and other generators have to pick up the load. If it becomes too much and no one is there to monitor them they will blow too. Maybe an hour or two after the first ones blew. How the generators were effected by the initial plane strikes would depend on their locations in the building. There probably were a number of explosions throughout the day until the building collapsed.