The final mystery of 9/11 will soon be solved, according to US experts investigating the collapse of the third tower at the World Trade Center.
The 47-storey third tower, known as Tower Seven, collapsed seven hours after the twin towers.
Investigators are expected to say ordinary fires on several different floors caused the collapse…
The National Institute of Standards and Technology, based near Washington DC, is expected to conclude in its long-awaited report this month that ordinary fires caused the building to collapse.
“We’ve been at this for a little over two years and doing a two or two and a half year investigation is not at all unusual. That’s the same kind of time frame that takes place when we do aeroplane crash investigations, it takes a few years.”
This should keep conspiracy sites in business for decades. Fairly detailed article; but, the real fun doesn’t start till the whole report is released.
RE:
#55, Patrick,
Exactly, and Clinton allowed the terrorists to come and train here + allowing the whole set up to be put together. I wonder how much he was paid by Osama?
#56, Jezcoe,
Prove it
#60, Patrick,
Prove that Clinton was in the White House for the 8 years up until the beginning of 2001? Okay, proved.
*
So Clinton’s Administration is responsible for the terrorists? His Administration allowed, and thus knew the terrorists were here and planning to fly planes into buildings?
Geeze, the moranic responses from the wing nuts gets more stupid every day. NOBODY knew except for a few terrorists what was going down. It’s called a SECRET. If the authorities are totally unaware of an illegal enterprise, that does not mean they are allowing it, condone it, acquiesce to it, approve it, or even pass judgment upon it.
But there was some messages picked up by the CIA and passed to the White House in August of 2001. Seven months after Clinton left the White House. While the same Terrorist Expert, Richard Clark, who had served under three former Presidents, was telling Bush that something was up and was ignored.
Ya right. Talk about morally and mentally bankrupt.
All buildings are not constructed the same. In most parts of the world prestressed concrete is used. The Twin Towers were made with an outside metal frame. The reasons that concrete wasn’t used include things like the fact that the mafia controlled the concrete business and the constructors weren’t prepared to pay the extra prices for the gangster tax to include concrete in their buildings. Needless to say the buildings were put up with the usual care with the lowest payed workers being given jobs like spraying the crucial insulant onto the steel structural members. You can work out how well it was done. When heated above it’s stress limit, say by being in a massive aviation fuel inferno steel turns plastic and can’t support it’s own weight, let alone carry the load of any building above.
The towers were made of steel. There was no concrete to hold them up. There were massive fires. Probably because someone ran hijacked planes with fuel in them into them. The steel got hot. The buildings fell down.
Read the reports.
#64 – Chill dude. Of course it’s ridiculous. I was using the same “reasoning” that the tin foil wearers were by saying Bush helped plan 9/11 attacks.
#66, Patrick,
I was using the same “reasoning” that the tin foil wearers …
Bullshit. You were trying your wing nut response to blame Clinton for what Bush didn’t do. Only you were called on it.
And yes, it is ridiculous.
#67 grow. Clinton wasn’t responsible for 9/11 any more than Bush. God, what an idiot, can’t understand sarcasm. Get an IQ then post.
#59-Jezcoe,
In a situation like this, I think there is definitely enough evidence to trigger an external investigation. Why was security suddenly more lax than it had been? Why were so many planes out of the country? I don’t know whether it was gross incompetence or something else, but I think that it should be investigated.
#69 Noel
I think I already know what you mean by the “lax security” and “planes out of the country” but please provide specifics so I can address them directly.
I would never blame on a conspiracy what simple stupidity can explain.
Simple question really.
Has any other building in history with construction similar to WTC7 ever collapsed due to a simple fire?
#71 Rick Cain
How about fire and structural damage as I have been saying in multiple posts.
#73–Gee Danny==none of the links or pictures/galleries you present mention or show the twin towers. Why did you provide the links?
I also saw a Trojan Horse and the Lighthouse at Pharos==both no longer with us?
So, I have to ask you, did the Chinese do as you claim and if they did, was it part of Historical Buildings of Interest.
With all the bullshit about computer simulation programs – please remember: Garbage in, garbage out – the fact remains that a steel and concrete building CANNOT collapse at freefall speed, with nothing left standing, except by controlled demolition. This goes for Buildings 1 and 2, and for Building 7. Not only that, but the guy who gave the order to pull Building 7, Larry Silverstein, admitted doing so on global television! What more do you want!
BOB,
see here
http://www.flickr.com/photos/dutchtom/2249674303/in/photostream/
#73–Gee Danny==none of the links or pictures/galleries you present mention or show the twin towers. Why did you provide the links?
http://www.flickr.com/photos/dutchtom/2249674303/in/photostream/
I also saw a Trojan Horse and the Lighthouse at Pharos==both no longer with us?
So, I have to ask you, did the Chinese do as you claim and if they did, was it part of Historical Buildings of Interest.
It was part of a NYC skyline feature, built in 1992, and at that time, it made sense. of course. but now the Twin Towers are not standing, so why does the theme park in Beijing, about the host the summer olympics, why do they still show the buildings standing?
Does this not offend you, BOBO? Maybe not.
Just curious.
#73 danny bloom
Not any issue with me and I used to see them out my kitchen window. It could also be seen as a sign of disrespect to destroy the models. Or maybe they just didn’t want to take them down.
#75 Robert Hoogenbloom
Oh and they would have gotten away with it too if it wasn’t for you pesky kids. Your flawless reasoning skills and deductive powers see right through their plan.
Well since I have yet to get the simple one piece of evidence just a growing list of inane “truth” then here are my questions to you.
Where is the evidence for a controlled demolition? Other than it must be. Where is the physical evidence that is always left behind by explosives? Why was the initiation of the collapse where the planes hit in both instances of WTC1 and WTC2? How much of the buildings do you think were wired with explosives? When and how was this done without notice? What was the purpose of the grand conspiracy to destroy building 7? Why couldn’t fire and structural damage be enough to bring down the buildings, other than well it has to be? Who wired the buildings with explosives and when did it begin?
Think about it
#77 The one I LOVE is the theory a plane didn’t hit the Pentagon and the gov’t kidnapped and executed all the passengers & crew of the plane that “supposedly” hit it.
As I said, a steel and concrete building CANNOT collapse at freefall speed, with nothing left standing, except by controlled demolition. All the rest is irrelevant to this point. For all I know, Santa Claus did it. But somebody did it, i.e., rig those buildings and then blew them up.
Oh, and by the way, those who did it told the world media too early. So, the BBC and a number of stations in the US announced that Building 7 HAD come down whereas it didn’t come down (in the case of the BBC) about 23 minutes later. (In the case of an American station I saw a recording of, the announcers said: “Building 7 HAS come down … oops, there it is, it’s coming down now!”
Put it this way, postulate, just postulate, that the three buildings had been rigged by Bush and friends and that they had made sure it all looked like Arabs executing a masterplan involving planes, and that all the relevant people, including Rupert Murdoch and his media empire, were asked, bribed and threatened to play along. It then suddenly all makes sense, doesn’t it? – the contradictions, the governmental and judicial shenanigans, the NIST bullshit, the twisting and the turning and the barefaced lies, and, of course, the invasion of Iraq to grab the oil. In Philosophy 101, subject Philosophy of Science, this is called: “Postulate confirmed”, and in this case, because of the OVERWHELMING evidence corroborating the postulate: “Hypothesis proven”.
Discussion closed.
Sydney, Australia
#79, Robert,
As I said, a steel and concrete building CANNOT collapse at freefall speed, with nothing left standing, except by controlled demolition.
I guess if you say so then that must be a fact. No disputing it because YOU said so. BTW, who said the buildings came down at free fall speed?
For all I know, Santa Claus did it. But somebody did it, i.e., rig those buildings and then blew them up.
OK, and your proof is, … . Oh right, Santa Claus. Umm, ya.
Put it this way, postulate, just postulate, that the three buildings had been rigged by Bush and friends
Think, just THINK how much more intelligent you might sound if you took your meds.
because of the OVERWHELMING evidence corroborating the postulate: “Hypothesis proven”.
Discussion closed.
A little presumptuous there Robert? Hitting the bong a little early in the day?
#79 Robert Hoogenbloom
Guess what was never found on the pile at ground zero? Any evidence of explosives. No remains of detonation cord, no hangers that are commonly used to fix explosives to the walls. Nothing. Nothing like this was found. I have worked with and know people in the pile. The only thing weird that one of them said about it was that he couldn’t find any doorknobs. Not only was nothing that indicates explosives found, but no explosives were heard. Out of all of the recording devices set up that day not one of them recorded anything that sounds like a controlled demolition.
As for the BBC. They (the FDNY) knew the building was going to fall down. They could see the damage happening. The BBC got one word wrong. Building 7 will fall down became building 7 has fallen down. OK one word and a tense. Not to far of a stretch of the imagination considering what happened that day.
To say that Silverstein gave the order to destroy Building 7 just implicates the Fire department on the biggest crime of the new century. ” What do you mean Mr. Silverstein you can just blow it up?”
Now lets say the buildings were rigged with explosives. Lets only contain it to towers 1&2. At a conservative estimate to bring down the towers themselves lets just say a quarter of each building was rigged to come down. This is of course ignoring that the collapse initiation started where the planes hit, the pilots weren’t that good.
So a quarter of two 110 story buildings means that over 50 acres of Manhattan was wired with explosive in a very short amount of time and no one noticed?
Please sir I think that you should check reality.
You want evidence?
Nano thermite discovered in WTC dust.
Peer reviewed study. Europeans asking what is the silence from the American media?
Military psi-ops still under way.
CIA making decisions in all U.S. media.
Can you deny this is happening?
The courts have to be our next step.