Feds: Fire Downed WTC Building 7 On 9/11

But Critics Say There Is Evidence Explosives Were Behind Demise Of Skyscraper Next To Twin Towers

(AP)  Federal investigators said Thursday they have solved a mystery of the Sept. 11, 2001 attacks: the collapse of World Trade Center building 7, a source of long-running conspiracy theories.

The 47-story trapezoid-shaped building sat north of the World Trade Center towers, across Vesey Street in lower Manhattan. On Sept. 11, it was set on fire by falling debris from the burning towers, but skeptics have long argued that fire and debris alone should not have brought down such a big steel-and-concrete structure.

Scientists with the National Institute of Standards and Technology say their three-year investigation of the collapse determined the demise of WTC 7 was actually the first time in the world a fire caused the total failure of a skyscraper.

"The reason for the collapse of World Trade Center 7 is no longer a mystery," said Dr. Shyam Sunder, the lead investigator on the NIST team.

Investigators also concluded that the collapse of the nearby towers broke the city water main, leaving the sprinkler system in the bottom half of the building without water.

The building has been the subject of a wide range of conspiracy theories for the last seven years, partly because the collapse occurred about seven hours after the twin towers came down. That fueled suspicion that someone intentionally blew up the building in a controlled demolition.

Critics like Mike Berger of the group 9/11 Truth said he wasn't buying the government's explanation.

"Their explanation simply isn't sufficient. We're being lied to," he said, arguing that there is other evidence suggesting explosives were used on the building.

Sunder said his team investigated the possibility that an explosion inside the building brought it down, but found there was no large boom or other noise that would have occurred with such a detonation. Investigators also created a giant computer model of the collapse, based partly on news footage from CBS News, that they say shows internal column failure brought down the building.

Investigators also ruled out the possibility that the collapse was caused by fires from a substantial amount of diesel fuel that was stored in the building, most of it for generators for the city's emergency operations command center.

The 77-page report concluded that the fatal blow to the building came when the 13th floor collapsed, weakening a critical steel support column that led to catastrophic failure.

"When this critical column buckled due to lack of floor supports, it was the first domino in the chain," said Sunder.

The NIST investigators issued more than a dozen building recommendations as a result of their inquiry, most of which repeat earlier recommendations from their investigation into the collapse of the two large towers.

In both instances, investigators concluded that extreme heat caused some steel beams to lose strength, causing further failures throughout the buildings until the entire structure succumbed.

The recommendations include building skyscrapers with stronger connections and framing systems to resist the effects of thermal expansion, and structural systems designed to prevent damage to one part of a building from spreading to other parts.

A spokeswoman for the leaseholder of the World Trade Center, developer Larry Silverstein, praised the government's work.

"Hopefully this thorough report puts to rest the various 9/11 conspiracy theories, which dishonor the men and women who lost their lives on that terrible day," said Silverstein spokeswoman Dara McQuillen.

In discussing the findings, the investigator Sunder acknowledged that some may still not be convinced, but insisted the science behind their findings is "incredibly conclusive."

"The public should really recognize the science is really behind what we have said," he said, adding: "The obvious stares you in the face."

[coryellco]

i also think its kinda that right rosie fat *** said"fire does not melt steel" a tanker truck in cal. hit a bridge underpass and the frie weakened the steel enough to cause the bridge to fall.....and could have been at 40% of freefall as it was connected to two sides of the road

[coryellco]

The stories below would prohibit freefall. Freefall means no obstructions. period.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Posted by ToolMangler at 10:04 PM : Aug 23, 2008------------------------------------------------------------- man dont confuse them with logic...they dont understand it

[toolmangler-2009]

NIST also claims that the building only fell at 40% free fall speed, as if this isn%u2019t suspicious.

Posted by redwhtblue2 at 11:18 PM : Aug 22, 2008



The stories below would prohibit freefall. Freefall means no obstructions. period.

[toolmangler-2009]

Posted by redwhtblue2 at 11:41 PM : Aug 22, 2008


Is this your version of an ''Ego trip'' or are you being paid to push this ***.

[mydiatribe]

Why should we belive a Millon Dollar NIST investigating team consisting of schooled, experienced Fire, Steel and Construction Engineers when a dumb,talk show host like Rosie O''Donnell had figured this out for us years ago? Duh!

There will never be a SATISFACTORY answer for the CRAZIES! NUTS IS NUTS!

[wardoglrs]

Did you really expect the mob to investigate the Mob?

[redwhtblue2]

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.


Dr. Shyam Sunder, the lead investigator on the NIST team
Sunder said his team investigated the possibility that an explosion inside the building brought it down, but found there was no large boom or other noise that would have occurred with such a detonation.


NIST admits their lab rats didn%u2019t even bother to test the steel though!

ANYMORE QUESTIONS?

[redwhtblue2]

As
Former Chief of NIST''''s Fire Science Division James Quintiere said back in AUG 2007

Dr. Quintiere said he originally "had high hopes" that NIST would do a good job with the investigation. "They''''re the central government lab for fire. There are good people there and they can do a good job. But what I also thought they would do is to enlist the service of the ATF [Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives], which has an investigation force and a laboratory of their own for fire. And I thought they would put people out on the street and get gumshoe-type information. What prevented all of this? I think it''''s the legal structure that cloaks the Commerce Department and therefore NIST. And so, instead of lawyers as if they were acting on a civil case trying to get depositions and information subpoenaed, those lawyers did the opposite and blocked everything."

those lawyers did the opposite and blocked everything."


those lawyers did the opposite and blocked everything."

those lawyers did the opposite and blocked everything."

[redwhtblue2]

One has to wonder what was the purpose for the complete destruction of WTC 7 all the video evidence that was filmed for the WTC complex including WTC 1 & 2 was stored there? All records including the former mayor Rudy G. security office, ECT. Records destroyed. What was the real reason? Was WTC 7 the key to getting rid of the most incriminating evidence of all?

[redwhtblue2]

Ronald H. Brookman, structural engineer, with a masters degree in Engineering from UC Davis, of Novato California, writes:
%u201CWhy would all 47 stories of WTC 7 fall straight down to the ground in about seven seconds%u2026 ? It was not struck by any aircraft or engulfed in any fire. An independent investigation is justified for all three collapses including the surviving steel samples and the composition of the dust.%u201D
Graham John Inman, structural engineer, of London, England, points out:
%u201CWTC 7 Building could not have collapsed as a result of internal fire and external debris. NO plane hit this building. This is the only case of a steel frame building collapsing through fire in the world. The fire on this building was small & localized therefore what is the cause?%u201D
A Dutch demolition expert (Danny Jowenko) stated that WTC 7 was imploded
A prominent physicist with 33 years of service for the Naval Research Laboratory in Washington, DC (Dr. David L. Griscom) said that the official theory for why the Twin Towers and world trade center building 7 collapsed %u201Cdoes not match the available facts%u201D and supports the theory that the buildings were brought down by controlled demolition

[redwhtblue2]

NIST WTC 7 Report: Shameful, Embarrassing And Completely Flawed

%u201CThere are holes in this story that you can drive a truck through,%u201D he added, citing NIST%u2019s claim that no evidence suggested loud explosive booms accompanied the collapse of the building by reminding that Thermite, a steel cutting agent, makes no explosive sound.

Even aside from this argument, there were numerous close proximity eyewitnesses who reported loud explosions, including NYPD officer Craig Bartmer and ground zero first responder Kevin McPadden (who also experienced the countdown before the building fell), but this fact was again simply ignored by NIST.

%u201CFEMA found it,%u201D said Gage. %u201CDr. Steven Jones found it, in the dust that landed in the entire area of lower Manhattan. And he finds it in the chunks of previously molten metal [from the towers].%u201D

The core of NIST%u2019s explanation, that an %u201Cextraordinary event%u201D called %u201Cthermal expansion%u201D was to blame for the sudden total collapse of the building is of course on the face of it a fraud when one considers the innumerable number of buildings that have suffered roaring fires across the majority of their floors and remained standing, whereas WTC 7 suffered limited fire damage across a handful of floors.

NIST also claims that the building only fell at 40% free fall speed, as if this isn%u2019t suspicious

[redwhtblue2]

Bill Manning wrote: The structural damage from the planes and the explosive ignition of jet fuel in themselves were not enough to bring down the towers. Fire Engineering has good reason to believe that the official investigation blessed by FEMA . . . is a half-baked farce that may already have been commandeered by political forces whose primary interests, to put it mildly, lie far afield of full disclosure.

Except for the marginal benefit obtained from a three-day, visual walk-through of evidence sites conducted by ASCE investigation committee members described by one close source as a tourist trip no one''s checking the evidence for anything (Manning, 2002).

[redwhtblue2]

In 1988, a fire in the First Interstate Bank Building in Los Angeles raged for 3.5 hours and gutted 5 of this building 62 floors, but there was no significant structural damage (FEMA, 1988). In 1991, a huge fire in Philadelphia One Meridian Plaza lasted for 18 hours and gutted 8 of the building 38 floors, but, said the FEMA report, although [b]eams and girders sagged and twisted . . . under severe fire exposures. . . , the columns continued to support their loads without obvious damage (FEMA, 1991). In Caracas in 2004, a fire in a 50-story building raged for 17 hours, completely gutting the building top 20 floors, and yet it did not collapse (Nieto, 2004). And yet we are supposed to believe that a 56-minute fire caused the south tower to collapse.

[libsluv2spit]

MyComment said, "They are not smart enough to realize that no building is meant to withstand a JET CRASHING into loaded with JET FUEL."

Actually, that''''s not true. The WTC themselves were designed to withstand the impact of a B737 or similar sized aircraft. I think you can actually find that at a *.gov website (read "reliable")...

Regards,


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Posted by Nancy_Naive at 01:58 PM : Aug 22, 2008
+ report abuse


***************

and it will remain a conspriacy..you know why?? because that is as far as you guys would go..chat about it..where is your revolution?? bunch of spoiled chatty brats with too much coffee and time in thier hands

[libsluv2spit]

When it comes to conspiracies, the REAL one is WHY were the only planes in the air on September 12 filled with Saudis flying home?

Regards,


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Posted by Nancy_Naive at 02:05 PM : Aug 22, 2008
+ report abuse

************

why dont you grace us with your theory..

[libsluv2spit]

Oh, and you want me to believe a fascist corporate oil regime.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Posted by noloyalisti at 05:26 PM : Aug 22, 2008
+ report abuse


*******************************

you dont believe them but YET YOU BUY EVERY DROP OF GASOLINE IN YOUR CAR....ironic..

[libsluv2spit]

these liberal conspiracy theorists reminds me of those christians who sees the faces of jesus or mary on a piece of toast..

you believe in it enough..your mind makes it real.

it could had been osama bin laden blowing himself up but yet these liberals would conspire that it was george bush in an mock osama outfit. too much time..too spoiled and too comfortable..

[noloyalisti]

Yeah, jet fuel that burns at 1400 degrees melted steel that melts at 2100 degrees. And I''ve got oceanfront property for you in Kansas. Oh, and you want me to believe a fascist corporate oil regime.

[inventagod2]

Kudos to Nancy_Naive, posting opinions...

Then there is Mycomment, posting ASSaults...

[rwm2_2000]

Does anyone know how to get a copy of this report and if anyone not associated with the US gov''t has studied the report and it''s findings OR is this the mainstream media trying to feed the US citizens more bull?