Deep Politics Forum

Dawn Meredith Wrote:So Jeff what did Silverstein - the owner who had just insured for top dollar- mean re building 7 when he said "we decided to pull it?". And what do you make of the BBC reporter on tv saying Building 7 had fallen BEFORE it fell? And you expect us to beleive that the "terrorists" got so lucky that they flew into the WTC the very same day that simulated training exercises of planes flying into these very buildings were occurring??? Talk about co-incidence. And remember the passport they said they found: Atta's???
Did you really believe THAT?.

Dawn

Dawn, No one knows what someone else meant when they spoke. I can only guess at some possible meanings of this statement out of context. I don't like the idea of supporting any real estate developer landlord. However... one should consider the following.

All property owners obtain and hold insurance on their properties... and the WTC was apparently already a target in 93 of an attack (even if it was an FBI sting gone wrong)... and have it in place the minute they acquire ownership or the lease. I don't see anything unusual that Silverstein had insurance for his property. I see greed which is pretty common, when he tried to make the two plane strikes separate incidents and get a larger insurance settlement. Seems like something any capitalist pig would try to do. He succeeded.

There were also rumors that Silverstein had inquired about his coverage on bldg 7 on that day as it was burning. Perhaps he asked his insurance co. if he could get 100% loss recovery including the cost of demolition if the burning structure was determined to be unrepairable at a reasonable cost. Would they cover his loss of income from losing the tenants and having to relocate them and so forth. All this is only speculation. And I am speculating.

The NYC DOB and FDNY will make the determination of the safety of a building which has been severely damaged or is burning out of control. WTC 7 was. There were no working sprinklers or standpipes to charge the system as there was a water main rupture on Vesey street in the AM (I believe).. no water, no electricity. Two towers had collapsed in the AM and there were reports of explosions in bldg 7 of unknown origin. But at the time it was presumed that it was all part of a terrorist attack. NYC official were trying to assess the condition of the building and called for the area to be evacuated of civilians. They apparently had FDNY personnel looking at the building to determine its stability. At some point in the afternoon, I presume they concluded that it was unstable and would or could collapse at any time. When they make such a determination, they call in the press and make sure the area is clear of everyone. They issue such notices to protect life and for safety reasons. They likely withdrew their personnel from the building assessment as well and were in a wait-and-see mode expecting the worst. And it happened... regardless of whether or not the cause of the weakening was placed devices whether or not this was determined at the time. Investigations occur AFTER the event not while it's ongoing.

I can't explain why BBC decided to take the advisory from the FDNY and do a standup probably with a green screen and the building showing (they would use bldg 7 of course since that it the topic of the advisory)... or was it a live shot??? But the reporter probably understood that the building was about to collapse and taped the segment that it did. Was this a live report or taped? How does find out? I think that matters.

I don't think the people who guided the planes into the towers got lucky choosing the day... or maybe they did. It seems that the DOD and intel knew of the attacks and may have facilitated their success by staging the Vigilant Warrior military exercises which would provide the cover and confusion and excuses for the failure to stop the planes... This straddles the boundary between MIHOP and LIHOP in my mind. I still see no evidence despite Lemkin's rants that the towers were brought down by placed devices. There have been several peer reviewed papers in engineering publications about progressive floor collapse/destruction and so this is certainly possible and it happened 2x on 9-11.

Bldg 7 was apparently a structural failure on floors 6&7 which enabled the core from flr 8 above to plunge right to the ground... the perimeter supporting structure below 8 ... of columns and trusses followed the core immediately and what was left of the 40 stories above floor 7 fell at FF until it slammed into the ground and the motion slowed.

I suspect that the names of the hijackers (if there were any) were fabricated and it's likely that the passport was planted. There is no evidence about who was on those planes and who may have hijacked them... no videos from the airports... only what the FBI released. FBI lies. I therefore don't know who was on the planes that hit the towers.

Speculation is something anyone can do... technical analysis is something only a few can do and understand (Lemkin is not one of them by the way)

Albert Doyle Wrote:

Peter Lemkin Wrote:
NO! [size=12]Do some homework. All tests have shown that there was almost NO combustible materials in the dust - what had been combustible had been consumed prior to / during the explosions and pyroclastic cloud formation. Second, there was little oxygen to feed any combustion and lots of water and special foams sprayed on by the fire department. The high temperatures and the continued temperatures for many months high enough to keep steel molten are nothing short of suspicious and the smoking gun. Your making up scenarios to fit a pre-determined outcome, rather than taking the evidence as it is and the science as it is. JO does much the same - all 911 Deniers do....they have to....the facts and evidence - even the laws of physics, chemistry and logic are not on their side.
[/SIZE]

There's something that isn't right here. A volcanic pyroclastic flow is something that incinerates that which it covers. I saw plenty of firemen and other civilians who got pretty covered in dust but they weren't burnt. Sorry, Peter but I think you're getting slightly carried away here. You might be conflating the concept of concrete dust and shredded combustible materials. Also, I'm not entirely satisfied that you know the oxygen venting pattern from the underground pavilion tunnels under the WTC Plaza. Your information is suspect because I watched coverage of the pile and at no point was it covered in foam. Not even nearly. The water could enter the drainage pattern of the pile and be shunted away from the burning parts. Sorry, but I think you're exaggerating.

WTC 7 is more curious. I'd like the person who said "It will either fall on its own or be taken down" interrogated to hear where they got that from? There seems to be a matter of when the alleged WTC 7 charges were placed and how they knew the building would be damaged and catch fire?

Did you notice they put no time comparison on the loud boom witnessing? Maybe it was a transformer?

I've seen videos of thermite packs burning. It burns with a bright sparkler-like flame. And I would bet it makes a distinct smell too. Something I don't think would be missed by the fire-science trained witnesses focused on the Towers.

Also, did you notice the video makes a claim of captured explosive booms but then ends with an explanation of how thermite cutter charges were used. Well, which was it?

By the way, what was the explanation for the south Tower collapsing first out of sequence?

This was obviously not a volcanic pyroclastic flow and not as hot as that, although many witnesses spoke of feeling the heat behind them as they ran away. This was a different pyroclastic flow with the fine particles [odd in and of itself!] having been somewhat cooled as they flowed out. It is the liquid-like flow of the ash cloud that determines it as pyroclastic; just look at the videos! It was THICK and flowing like a liquid. Thermite/thermate, actually nanothermate residue and even some small amounts of unreacted nanothermate HAVE been found in several studies and examination of the dust/ash from various locations. No other explanation for the metal spheres, X-ray spectrography signature nor chemical composition has been found and I don't think any other is possible. You again seem to be grasping at straws and endlessly changing the topic...now you ask why the S. tower collapsed first. I think I know, but that has nothing to do with what we are taking about. The few passageways under the towers were clogged by debris [beams and the few bottom floors that didn't turn to dust] plus the dust - and were not reported by anyone as windy and feeding any large fires - what was burnable, burnt off in the first FEW DAYS or LESS!; but even IF they were [and they were not!] there was little to nothing left to burn and nothing ever in the building - not even the jet fuel which burned off in the first ten minutes could reach temperatures high enough to melt steel and even titanium!....methinks you are grasping at straws so that controlled demolition is something you don't have to face....because you and so many others fear what that implies...face it...or America remains 'dead' - as it is today - taken over in the coup of 911 for endless wars, removal of freedoms at home, and the rapid build-up of a police state.....almost consolidated today. Face the truth of 911 [or JFK's Assassination] and you can begin to recover the corpse of our democracy and polity. Ignore them or buy the big LIES the official versions are and you are but a controlled tool for those who are pulling the strings of the magic shows.

There are echoes of Dealey Plaza games on this and other 911 threads. It is already known to a logical and moral certainty that the official version was a pre-planned and still carried out lie. The same is true of 911, yet people endlessly bring up the same discounted things over and over and over again. IMHO they are either terribly new to the subjects and not informed or have the agenda to stop the progress of threads and research - to keep the community endlessly at the starting point all over again. Jack White and I and others have detailed on this Forum [search] how the official version is a lie - multiple lies - total lies; and how witnesses heard explosions; saw explosions; video caught molten metal flowing from the WTC; the evidence fits only controlled demolition and there was molten steel in the basements of three towers for many months [min 4; maybe 6 months]. The meteorites found [cooled masses of metal, molten metal and concrete] along with the chemical/atomic signatures of nanothermite speak volumes. It is time to move on and not go back [as official versioners and Sunstein agents would have us do]. People felt the ground shake BEFORE a few times and then again during the 'attack' - but multiple times rapidly as the buildings came down; everything was incinerated but a planted passport of one of the patsy 'terrorists' [all of who trained and worked for the US military or intelligence services - or sister services of other countries]. The evidence was quickly destroyed; access to ground zero and photos of it were controlled. First responders were and still often are afraid to speak of what they saw and heard. Some have been threatened. Some now begin to speak out, but the long hidden tapes and interviews just during and after the event do NOT comport with the official lies. CNN and BBC reported WTC7 down before it had and the owner said they agreed to 'pull it'. WTC gold disappeared hours before the 'attack'. Others had foreknowledge and acted on it. Many of the largest corporate fraud files and trail evidence were in WTC7 and destroyed. Even which floors [which companies] were targeted by the planes is more than suspect and obliterated damning computer data and persons; as well as coinciding exactly with where the WTC towers had been retrofit with new 'fire retardant foam' [ample time and access to pre-plant the explosives and wireless detonators, etc.] The only time in history the air defenses of the USA were helpless, and the air defenses at the Pentagon didn't work [not to mention the hole only could fit a missile, not a plane - and we are denied the 20+ videos and satellite reconnaissance - why?]. I could go on for hours...people have in books. The official 'investigations' can be easily demonstrated as orchestrated cover-ups. Why? What did they need to hide [obviously what really happened]. Read a good book such as those by Gafney or Griffin [and others]; read the scientific papers on the nanothermite. Get real. We need to solve who did this and the details of how - and how they covered and cover it up still....not endlessly re-invent the wheel and debate what has been decided....by all but the naive, mis- or uninformed, or agents trying to stop the truth from wide dissemination and the logical following citizen anger and action to dismantle the government [and those behind it] and build a new society. We have nothing to fear in the truth. Those who pulled Dallas and 911 [and so many other such] have EVERYTHING to fear in the truth and its discussion.

Lemkin sees what he wants to see and fails to see what actually occurred. There was no pyroclastic flow. ... a complete misnomer and an attempt it appears at a sort of shock and awe.

The concrete and other friable materials were reduced through collisions, abrasion, grinding to dust and small sizes particles. There was no stone in the concrete aggregate and the concrete was light weight and there were only a few areas with re bar. It was more like a poured gypsum wall board into thin fluted metal pans (22 gauge -.033" thk). It broke apart very easily. it was NOT structural concrete that one knows of from side walks, retaining walls and basement floors even. The aggregate used was likely extremely lightweight ground slag or fly ash with little ability to hold the composite together... certainly less than stone aggregate which gives concrete strength.

The heat released from the fiction was transferred to the building materials, crushed concrete and broken steel and in turn to the surround air. It represented a heat sink of almost 400,000 tons for each tower. No matter was destroyed.. a bit combusted and turned to gas and smoke which drifted off the the SE. But most of the destroyed materials are seen coming down from gravity of course close to the building. Heavy steel of the facade can be seen falling away... some core steel which survived the core collapse at tall as 50 stories toppled over or self buckled. The compacted volume of the concrete were it stacked one floor atop the other would be not even 34 feet high. The pour was 4" max and the flutes were 1 1/2" deep so at least half the slabs thickness was only 2 1/2".

The elevated heat of the debris from friction heated the air above it by radiation heat transfer. The collapse itself also *pulled* a low pressure zone behind (above) it as any moving thing does... air rushes in to fill the volume the moving object once occupied. In the case of the building collapse this represented a mass of air equal to the volume of the towers... with each floor representing 18,000, cubic yards of air that was replaced at 1 *floor" per second... or about 65 mph of down draft (the measured speed of collapse which was about 15 seconds). The is analgous to water rushing down a sink drain when the stopper is pulled out. Or fill a tube with sand which is standing on a table and lift the tube and the sands rushes out the bottom and air comes in to the top of the tube (down draft) at the speed that the sand leaves it from the bottom.

So you had heated debris with hundreds of thousands of tons of dust facing a down draft of 65 mph of cooler air. The down draft air was heated... as cool air from a bellows would be heated when encountering hot materials. This interaction caused the down draft air to spread radially from the base of the former tower where the hot debris was piled up. The lighter debris and dust was swept up in the moving air.

Hot air expands as Boyle's gas laws explain and so the dust laddened air billowed up and was seen as enormous dust clouds and faster moving air rushed outward in all directions carrying dust and even heavier particles. The down draft of air can be understood of one takes a hose of pressurized water or air and directs it downward at a pile of broken up ash and hot embers. The force of the downward fluid will hit the pile of hot ash and embers and disburse them in all directions and the air will carry with it some of the heat of the smoldering fire.

If a burning building were to collapse, a pulse of hot air would radiate from the collapse. In this case the pulse was driven by the down draft which received heat from the heated debris and remains of the building.

So whatever the cause of the heating of the debris... the production of the huge billowing dust clouds and the rush of hot dust filled air from the site of the collapse is explained by Boyle's, Charle's , Avogadro's and other fundamental gas laws known for centuries. Itwas not a pyroclastic flow.
The was no slope or gradient or gravity driving the pulse of hot gas (wind). It was driven by the down draft.

Why not describe what actually caused the wind pulse and hot cloulds with emerged post collapse? The did occur in both the top down driven floor collapse of the twin towers and the bottom driven structural collapse of WTC 7. Both produced similar outcomes of hot debris filled wind pulses and dust laddened billowing clouds. Because Boyle's gas laws... the *laws of physics* describe what happened.

Referencing #69:

The videos and a few others in my view represent irrefutable evidence that WTC7 was brought by controlled demolition. First, the Ashley Banfield interview is quite revealing. The involunatary response to sounds that are by my estimate .5k away (at least) tells us the sound is perceived as loud and dangerous. Second, hat it is registered by a directional mic confirms the involuntary response. Third, the sounds are sequential mimicking the explsions in controlled demolitions. Fourth, Banfield confirms the testimony of other witnesses that the building will be coming down. Some of those witnesses have been told the building will be taken down. Fifth, the sequential nature explosions demonstrated by audio analysis are confirmed by witnesses. Sixth, one witness claims to have seen a man push the button which brough the building down. It all comes together.

The only resonable explanation is controlled demolition.

You can accept that as hard evidence. I don't.

The DOB and FDNY assessed the structure throughout the day and determined in the afternoon it would come down.. ie it would not last because of the structural damage and unfought fires. They informed the press and so the press had "fore knowledge" ... no different than predicting an eclipse.

I have not heard any audio which sounds like a detonation sequence. If you have a link., please post it.

When the actual collapse began #3 transfer truss gave way. I would think it would be quite noisy and the entire column 79 line for 40 stories came down... that would make a staccato sound as each column section hit ground.

You WANT to accept the accounts you cite as evidence to support your pre conceived belief. Nothing will shake those beliefs. Congregation... please be seated.

Jeffrey Orling Wrote:You can accept that as hard evidence. I don't.

The DOB and FDNY assessed the structure throughout the day and determined in the afternoon it would come down.. ie it would not last because of the structural damage and unfought fires. They informed the press and so the press had "fore knowledge" ... no different than predicting an eclipse.

I have not heard any audio which sounds like a detonation sequence. If you have a link., please post it.

When the actual collapse began #3 transfer truss gave way. I would think it would be quite noisy and the entire column 79 line for 40 stories came down... that would make a staccato sound as each column section hit ground.

You WANT to accept the accounts you cite as evidence to support your pre conceived belief. Nothing will shake those beliefs. Congregation... please be seated.

Agent [for those who pulled-off 911 as an inside job and Big Lie], or fool...I personally can't see any other alternative.......how do your explain your removal from the first 911-truth group you joined, and were for a short time prominent in [AE911Truth], or your removal from other websites? You're entire 'purpose and 'raison d'etre' here is to bring DOUBT and confusion ------ there is NO DOUBT; NO confusion - 911 was and inside job, done by controlled demolition, and you are here [fool or paid] to try to lead others to think otherwise. I suggest you try to haunt a much lesser sophisticated website...you fool no one here.

" I have not heard any audio which sounds like a detonation sequence" says agent JO....but Jack White, I and many others have already posted multiplel urls to those who were there who did...and also say there was molten metal....and felt explosions BEFORE the planes hit, and more...MUCH MORE!

I won't waste more time on an agent provocateur other than to put my efforts to see you removed...as as I perceive it, your 'game' is exactly to waste the time and energy and advancement of research and postings on the TRUTH of 911. You are all about the LIES and deceptions, cover-up, and obfuscation of 911. Go away....or be chased away.

will state unequivocally and stake my name and reputation that you are the hidden face of the 'enemy' we fight on this Forum.

Jeffrey Orling Wrote:You can accept that as hard evidence. I don't.

The DOB and FDNY assessed the structure throughout the day and determined in the afternoon it would come down.. ie it would not last because of the structural damage and unfought fires. They informed the press and so the press had "fore knowledge" ... no different than predicting an eclipse.

I have not heard any audio which sounds like a detonation sequence. If you have a link., please post it.

When the actual collapse began #3 transfer truss gave way. I would think it would be quite noisy and the entire column 79 line for 40 stories came down... that would make a staccato sound as each column section hit ground.

You WANT to accept the accounts you cite as evidence to support your pre conceived belief. Nothing will shake those beliefs. Congregation... please be seated.

The videos are in post #69. The auio analysis is in the Ashley Banfield sequence. But we both know that will not make any difference. I have come to my conclusions only after years of denial and then skepticim. Now it is Game, Set, Match. Your only recourse is deny, deny, deny. Your analysis is at least plausible. But the video evidence in #69 is the final proof that you are wrong.

Lemkin,

Quit the ad homs. It is undignified. I explained by history of / with 9-11 and I will do it once more because you persist and making what are insulting and even slanderous remarks.

Like many others I was surprised when the towers fell as I live in NYC and had a biz only 8 blocks from them for many years and visited the site many times. I just never conceived that a well built structure could collapse so completely. Many other in the building industry had the same first reaction.

I waited to learn of the official explanation and meanwhile was pissed at how long it took and how quickly the nation was pushed to support a war in the ME... And that made no sense at all to me... not for vengeance nor because those nation could not be a threat to the USA. It was bullying and a play for oil/gas and power.

I have been protesting the US militarism since Vietnam when luckily my lotto number meant I didn't have to run off to Canada or sit in jail. I've been to scores of anti war and other anti government demonstrations and have been arrested and spent the night in jail for my beliefs. So I am neither a fool nor a government stooge or agent.

I followed the developments about 9-11 on the WWW and signed the AE911T petition in 07 as I felt this was the group which represented my standing as an architect. I signed a couple of other petitions as well.

At the 8th anniversary of 9-11 approached in '09 I heard that there was a weekend conference at St Mark's Church on 10th street and among the presenters was to be Richard Gage. I decided it was time to get out and get more involved so my wife and I attended the We Demand Transparency conference Sander Hicks organized. I listened and met several presenters chatted with a few such as Craig Ranke from CIT, Barry Zwicker, Barry Kissip and Russ Baker and of course Gage and Tony Szambotti who was from NJ and an AE911T member. I offered my time to Gage to help get the interest for a new investigation. I wrote him a long letter listing what I believed were the lies of the official account. He phoned me and invited to his weekly strategy team call. I listened. I didn't know exactly what I could do or what the group actually did.

After listening in on a few calls I emailed Gage with some ideas for improving their collaborative *virtual* organization. One of them was to use BaseCamp a collaboration software product I had used on one of my own projects involved several professionals working together. BaseCamp was installed and I was assigned to be the go to guy and teach others how to use it. I also populated it with articles and so forth including ones trying to get members to discuss the technical aspects/b building performance. I was advocating for that AE911T undertake an FEA - finite element analysis using some of the petition signer's expertise.

Gage appointed me his *liaison* to all the team leaders and we spoke daily about AE911T issues. I got more involved and was the person who planned the AE911T 1000 press conference/event in SF. I designed the alteration to the logo and made many suggestions which were implemented. Some were not and were resisted by the volunteers. One of them was to use the term *engineered destruction* as opposed to *controlled demolition*. Gage and Board member Deets liked the idea. It was about this time I was invited to be a Board member. I refused. Gage insisted that I accept and so after a week of cajoling I did. I never served on a board and never wanted to. Again I listened mostly at the teleconference board meetings.

A group of volunteers decided that the installation of Basecamp and the suggestion to use *engineered destruction* language was a clear sign that I was a Sunstein cognitive infiltrator. They got together and presented Gage with the demand that I be ousted from the group or they would refuse to work on the 1000 press conference. The entire incident would have been laughable but the *reformer* group was deadly serious.

Gage was stuck between a rock and a hard place being essentially blackmailed into tossing me out in exchange for their work in the presser. He stood by me and the board established a grievance process which would deal with their charges AFTER the presser was over. They refused to accept the grievance process. And then Gage called me and begged me to just step down from the board. But they wanted me purged from AE911T entirely.

As a board member I learned about where some bodies are buried, but I see no point in going that route. As unsettling as these facts were, they had nothing to do with me and were before my time. I refused to resign because I had done nothing to merit a resignation. John Cole and Justin Keogh were working with the *reformer group* and set about to have me voted off the board... among other things. The board vote did not have the votes to get me off.

Cole and Keogh then called an unannounced board meeting and offered new bylaws which allowed for a simple, not a super majority to expel a member (me) and without cause. They then suggested at the next board meeting that Kevin Ryan be added to the board. I had no problem with that and voted for him.

The first order of business once he was *seated* was a vote to expel me. Deets spoke against it. Gage praised my work but said that my presence now was blocking the group from working together. This was true, but not from my side. It's a much longer detailed tale... but the board voted me off the island and that was that.

I was then free to conduct my own research and fact checking... which is what I did. When I discovered from my research and fact checking that the statement about high speed ejections of massive steel to 600+ feet at 60-70mph was wrong I wrote Gage an email detailing my findings. I asked him to check them out and see if he (the group's *experts*) agreed. if they did he should revise this statement he often makes. He said he would look into it can get back to me. He never did.

I ran into Gage at the Treason In America conference. At that conference Sander Hicks who I had become friends of sorts with took my work - a presentment of Misprision of Treason and offered it to the Conference to sign on to. When he saw me sitting in the audience he sheepishly ...before he began pointed to me and gave the credit for having written what he was presenting (without prior consultation BTW). Not very cool... but I suppose all is fair in love and war. During a break Gage sauntered over to me and began to chat forgetting that he had a month before stabbed me in the back. What are friends for?

Later than summer I attended another Sander Hicks event at his summer home in the catskills at Livingston Manor. It was a small event and I met several of the other activists. Gage was to be there and I wanted to present my most recent work and get his reaction. He came late crashed upstairs and when he came down we spoke alone for about 1/2 hr. After I was done his comment was...."when I saw the towers come down I intuitively knew they were taken down by CD". So much for building performance analysis or mapping the movements of the building parts and so forth... and science and engineering and building professionals. It was at that moment I realized Gage was simply a front man for marketing AE911T. It WAS his career now and he was paying himself from the proceeds of the organization about 100,000$ plus his travel expenses to run around the world and do his same old dog and pony show. I told him that the dust was not 4-12" deep for miles around the WTC after the collapse. But he repeated this in the Fall to the audience when he spoke at the 9th anniversary event on Walker Street when the third beam was shown into the sky.

Now the movement began appearing cult like to me. I attempted to speak with *truthers* there and at a few more 9-11 conferences over the next year. Not a person had any technical understanding of the buildings, had done a shred of research but all parroted the same talking points which they did understand.

I was by them a orphan of the movement and still seeking the understanding of the twin tower's destruction. But I had a working theory and I did get support for my ideas from a former AE911T engineer who had published in the Journal of 911 Science...Gordon Ross PE. He left the movement because he was fed up with the conversation being dominated by what he termed in an email to me bakers and candlestick makers who understood nothing about what they were speaking about (Lemkin?)

I did attend a NIST critique at the Christian Regenhard Center at Jon Jay College and met Jame Quintierre who was a fire Professor and had been booted out of NIST for wanting to do a proper investigation. He found my ideas interesting but said he had no engineering background to properly evaluate them. Wayne Coste of AE911T was obnoxious (my opinion!) and set up a little booth to pass AE911T materials (propaganda?) when the conference was about fire and disaster investigations and specifically what NIST did or did not do re 9/11.

I am perfectly fine not being inside the 9/11 truth movement. I've learned more about the event on my own, doing my own research and studying the work of other scientists and physicists who have no political agenda and are simply interested in the technical accuracy to explain the collapses. I can assure Laren and Dawn that reports from reporters are not considered technical evidence and such does not influence the research.

I certainly can see that NIST blew it big time on many things. My sense is that they were covering up... but since we haven't found hard evidence of CD the coverup of collapses must be for another purpose. I can only speculate. I still try to pass on my findings and thinking to others on 911 discussion groups. It's pretty futile for several reasons. Most simply have no technical background at all. And all seem to relie on others for this... including author David Griffin who wrote a book about the collapse of WTC 7 but answered one of my emails buy saying the question was technical and above his pay grade. Dr G is a clipping gatherer who strings what others put out into a logic matrix and extracts conclusions. He's done no technical research and should, by his own admission not be writing books about the collapse of building 7.

The problem Lemkin and others have with me is that I will not accept what they think is solid evidence for CD, but I still believe NIST lied and we need a new investigation. When I venture into political frames I am soundly pilloried because I suggest the treason of LIHOP and not accept the inside job, the Israeli/Mossad did it or there giant conspiracy of the unseen deep state. I am told to go off and learn because I an too dumb to get it. So it's indeed a unless and thankless task trying to get people to open their minds and learn a little but about engineering and physics. They want to just cling to their beliefs, parrot their chosen experts (who they can't tell if they are wrong or right) and attack anyone who refuses to think like them leveling the accusation of fool or Sunstein agent with the intent of silencing or intimidation.

This forum has been instructive of the how intelligent people can be blinded by their beliefs to be completely comfortable in their ignorance about the world and rely on others to explain it to them. It's no wonder the truth movement has made no progress in 10 plus years in revealing how those towers came down. And they will not do it in another 10. They are not interested in it. Not one bit. They already know. Ashley Banfield, Peter Jennings et al told them so.

You can bring a horse to water but you can't make her think

The rescue person who said either WTC 7 would fall on its own or be taken down needs to be found and interrogated. It is highly suspicious that he wasn't. However it could have been a general statement after appraising that WTC 7 was "totalled" and therefore unstable which would mean it would have to be taken down because it might fall anyway.