Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

9/11 questions [BBC Joins Tinfoil "Truthers"]
BBC ^ | Feb. 14, 2007 | Mike Rudin

Posted on 02/16/2007 8:18:54 AM PST by Alouette

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-97 last
To: atomicpossum

81 posted on 02/16/2007 10:35:12 AM PST by Calpernia (Breederville.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 80 | View Replies]

To: Calpernia
From your source. Page 5-14.

"As described in Section 5.6.2, the sequence of the WTC 7 collapse is consistent with an initial failure that occurred internally in the lower floors on the east side of the building."

Further, on 5-16, it clearly states that WTC 1 debris damaged the front of WTC 7. When WTC 2 fell, it pretty much leveled WTC 5/6. When WTC 1 fell, it funneled part of that debris right towards WTC 7 severey damaging it.

The report you linked to clearly defines that damage and draws the conclusion that this damage and resulting fires brought down WTC 7.

No further conspiracy necessary.

82 posted on 02/16/2007 10:37:36 AM PST by Dead Corpse (Anyone who needs to be persuaded to be free, doesn't deserve to be.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 72 | View Replies]

To: Brad Cloven
Where are all the passengers of the four flights, if this was a conspiracy?

Where else? They are all at Area 51 along with Elvis, Jimmy Hoffa, Osama bin Laden and the autopsied bodies of aliens.

Don't you know anything?

83 posted on 02/16/2007 10:42:52 AM PST by Tokra (I think I'll retire to Bedlam.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: Calpernia
Take you insults and pound them up your arse.

I wasn't insulting you as much as the way you are acting. But your reply was too funny! Do you want me to pound it up there so you can "pull it" out?

84 posted on 02/16/2007 10:48:00 AM PST by Niteranger68 (Point your toilets towards Mecca!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 75 | View Replies]

To: Dead Corpse

"My source" is the FEMA report.

The web archive link again is here for anyone wanting to read it themselves.

http://web.archive.org/web/20051219170600/www.fema.gov/pdf/library/fema403_ch5.pdf

The damage is defined and not disputed by me on this thread. The collapse is still under investigation though. There were no conclusions in that report. Just more questions.


85 posted on 02/16/2007 10:49:19 AM PST by Calpernia (Breederville.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 82 | View Replies]

To: RacerF150

86 posted on 02/16/2007 10:50:46 AM PST by Calpernia (Breederville.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 84 | View Replies]

To: Calpernia

My source was your report. The damage was more than enough to drop the building. No conspiracy necessary.


87 posted on 02/16/2007 10:59:52 AM PST by Dead Corpse (Anyone who needs to be persuaded to be free, doesn't deserve to be.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 85 | View Replies]

To: Dead Corpse

Anyone can hit the link and read it themselves. It is not my report. It is FEMAs. And there are no conclusive statements in it.

They were blaring questions on the last page requiring more studies on what made the building fall.


88 posted on 02/16/2007 11:02:08 AM PST by Calpernia (Breederville.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 87 | View Replies]

To: Calpernia; Admin Moderator; Jim Robinson

Is this moonbat 'WTC demolition' hogwash welcome on FR?


89 posted on 02/16/2007 11:06:28 AM PST by Sloth (The GOP is to DemonRats in politics as Michael Jackson is to Jeffrey Dahmer in babysitting.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Sloth

90 posted on 02/16/2007 11:22:32 AM PST by Calpernia (Breederville.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 89 | View Replies]

To: Calpernia
Anyone can hit the link and read it themselves.

Which is what I did. It just points out WTC 7 was heavily damaged when WTC 1/2 fell and that this is most likely what dropped it. The only particulars left unresolved are how much damage was done by the various gas lines, oil tanks, and power transformers in the building may have been damaged in the initial impact of WTC 1/2.

91 posted on 02/16/2007 11:28:27 AM PST by Dead Corpse (Anyone who needs to be persuaded to be free, doesn't deserve to be.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 88 | View Replies]

To: Calpernia

92 posted on 02/16/2007 11:28:58 AM PST by Dead Corpse (Anyone who needs to be persuaded to be free, doesn't deserve to be.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 90 | View Replies]

To: Calpernia
From Popular Mechanics - Debunking The 9/11 Myths

WTC 7 Collapse

CLAIM: Seven hours after the two towers fell, the 47-story WTC 7 collapsed. According to 911review.org: "The video clearly shows that it was not a collapse subsequent to a fire, but rather a controlled demolition: amongst the Internet investigators, the jury is in on this one."

FACT: Many conspiracy theorists point to FEMA's preliminary report, which said there was relatively light damage to WTC 7 prior to its collapse. With the benefit of more time and resources, NIST researchers now support the working hypothesis that WTC 7 was far more compromised by falling debris than the FEMA report indicated. "The most important thing we found was that there was, in fact, physical damage to the south face of building 7," NIST's Sunder tells PM. "On about a third of the face to the center and to the bottom--approximately 10 stories--about 25 percent of the depth of the building was scooped out." NIST also discovered previously undocumented damage to WTC 7's upper stories and its southwest corner.

NIST investigators believe a combination of intense fire and severe structural damage contributed to the collapse, though assigning the exact proportion requires more research. But NIST's analysis suggests the fall of WTC 7 was an example of "progressive collapse," a process in which the failure of parts of a structure ultimately creates strains that cause the entire building to come down. Videos of the fall of WTC 7 show cracks, or "kinks," in the building's facade just before the two penthouses disappeared into the structure, one after the other. The entire building fell in on itself, with the slumping east side of the structure pulling down the west side in a diagonal collapse.

According to NIST, there was one primary reason for the building's failure: In an unusual design, the columns near the visible kinks were carrying exceptionally large loads, roughly 2000 sq. ft. of floor area for each floor. "What our preliminary analysis has shown is that if you take out just one column on one of the lower floors," Sunder notes, "it could cause a vertical progression of collapse so that the entire section comes down."

There are two other possible contributing factors still under investigation: First, trusses on the fifth and seventh floors were designed to transfer loads from one set of columns to another. With columns on the south face apparently damaged, high stresses would likely have been communicated to columns on the building's other faces, thereby exceeding their load-bearing capacities.

Second, a fifth-floor fire burned for up to 7 hours. "There was no firefighting in WTC 7," Sunder says. Investigators believe the fire was fed by tanks of diesel fuel that many tenants used to run emergency generators. Most tanks throughout the building were fairly small, but a generator on the fifth floor was connected to a large tank in the basement via a pressurized line. Says Sunder: "Our current working hypothesis is that this pressurized line was supplying fuel [to the fire] for a long period of time."

WTC 7 might have withstood the physical damage it received, or the fire that burned for hours, but those combined factors--along with the building's unusual construction--were enough to set off the chain-reaction collapse.

93 posted on 02/16/2007 11:51:15 AM PST by Niteranger68 (Point your toilets towards Mecca!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 86 | View Replies]

To: RacerF150
>>>>"There was no firefighting in WTC 7,"

hmmm, so we agree. 'IT' didn't reference Fire Brigade.
94 posted on 02/16/2007 11:55:22 AM PST by Calpernia (Breederville.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 93 | View Replies]

To: Calpernia

The Katherine Smith case ... the creation of fake identities for Jihadis. I always wonder about that, and I think that if one knew the full story, it would explain a lot about 9/11. She was murdered to shut her mouth, and we have never been given a proper explanation of the whole case.

Thanks for the additional information about the "plumber" who was working on the buildings.


95 posted on 02/16/2007 12:08:33 PM PST by BlackVeil
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Calpernia
hmmm, so we agree. 'IT' didn't reference Fire Brigade.

We don't. You can have firefighters working a building fire without being IN the building.

96 posted on 02/16/2007 12:15:09 PM PST by Niteranger68 (Point your toilets towards Mecca!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 94 | View Replies]

To: Alouette

The tin-foil brigade are up in arms. Check out some of the comments:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/theeditors/2007/02/911_questions.html#postcomment


97 posted on 02/19/2007 10:30:11 AM PST by Tommyjo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-97 last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson