Why No One Could Have Predicted The Collapse Of WTC 7
Building was specifically designed
to have floors removed without collapsing
Thursday, March 1, 2007
This week has seen a cornucopia of news come pouring forth
with regards to what happened to World Trade Center building
7 on September 11th 2001. The catalyst for this has been
the discovery that the BBC reported the building had collapsed
a full thirty minutes before it actually fell on 9/11.
The BBC, instead of attempting to explain
how it could have reported this, has attempted to both
evade and cloud the issue. The truth is that no one could
have possibly predicted the building would collapse and
Aside from the fact that previous to 9/11
no steel framed building in history had ever collapsed
due to fire damage, Building 7, otherwise known as the
Salomon Brothers building, was intentionally designed
to allow large portions of floors to be permanently removed
without weakening the structural integrity of the building.
In 1989 the New York Times reported on this
fact in a story covering the Salomon leasing of the building
which had been completed just two years earlier.
Salomon had wanted to build a new structure
in order to house its high-technology operations, but
due to stock market crash in 1987 it was unable to. The
company searched for an existing building that they could
use and found one in Larry Silverstein's WTC 7.
The Times reported:
BEFORE it moves into a new office tower in downtown
Manhattan, Salomon Brothers, the brokerage firm, intends
to spend nearly two years and more than $200 million cutting
out floors, adding elevators, reinforcing steel girders,
upgrading power supplies and making other improvements
in its million square feet of space...
In some office buildings, that alteration would be
impossible, but Silverstein Properties tried to second-guess
the needs of potential tenants when it designed Seven
World Trade Center as a speculative project.
''We built in enough redundancy to allow entire
portions of floors to be removed without affecting the
building's structural integrity, on the assumption that
someone might need double-height floors,'' said Larry
Silverstein, president of the company. ''Sure enough,
Salomon had that need...
MORE than 375 tons of steel - requiring 12 miles
of welding - will be installed to reinforce floors for
Salomon's extra equipment. Sections of the existing
stone facade and steel bracing will be temporarily removed
so that workers using a roof crane can hoist nine diesel
generators onto the tower's fifth floor, where they
will become the core of a back-up power station.
The entire article can be read here.
Want to start your own blog or website, get the word out
and support Alex Jones? Infowars.net offers
high-quality webhosting services at very competitive prices,
and most importantly, with
infowars.net, privacy is paramount! We don't sell the
names of our customers to marketing
firms or the government. Click
here for more info.
What this amounted to, as the Times pointed out, was
that WTC7, specifically designed to be deconstructed and
altered, became "a building within a building".
An extraordinary adaptable and highly reinforced structure
for the modern business age.
This is of course also partially the reason why in 1999
the building was chosen to house Mayor Rudolph Giuliani's
$13 million emergency crisis centre on the 27th floor.
Remember that on 9/11 only eight floors of the building
were subject to sporadic fires. The official NIST report
failed to comprehensively identify how the building could
have collapsed symmetrically into its own footprint given
the damage that it had sustained.
A follow up report due soon has been forced to take into
account a hypothetical situation whereby explosives were
used to demolish the building, primarily because every
other explanation thus far has failed to explain how it
could have come down.
Furthermore, as has been thoroughly documented, building
7 was the furthest away in the WTC complex from the twin
towers. Buildings much closer sustained massive amounts
of damage from the collapse of the towers and did not
come anywhere close to full scale symmetrical collapse.
Given all this information it is quite clear to surmise
that if you were going to "predict" the collapse
of any building in the WTC complex following the destruction
of the towers, building 7 would have most certainly been
BOTTOM of the list.
Building 7 now becomes the key to unlocking the 9/11
fraud. What was witnessed on 9/11 was a perfectly symmetrical
collapse, with no resistance, of a steel-framed "Building
within a building". A perfectly symmetrical collapse
of a building that was designed from the ground-up to
have entire portions of floors to be removed without affecting
the building's structural integrity.
We have an owner who let slip that the building was "pulled"
and we have firefighters on video telling people to get
back as the building was going to "blow
up". We have the BBC reporting
the collapse before it happened and a follow up desperate
attempt to avoid the issue by claiming that it cannot
verify anything because it has lost
the entirety of its broadcast recordings from 9/11.
Furthermore, the BBC continues to play dumb by responding
to questions other the fiasco by intimating that it is
being suggested that they were "in on the conspiracy".
Here is the latest response we have received from the
BBC regarding the matter after continuing to press them
for an explanation:
Hello and thank you for your email in reaction
to claims made in an
article published online.
The notion that the BBC has been part of any conspiracy
ludicrous. We reported the situation as accurately as
we could, based on
the best information available. We cannot be categorical
about the exact
timing of events that day - this is the first time it
has been brought
to our attention and it was more than five years ago.
If in the chaos
and confusion of that day our correspondent reported
that the building
had collapsed before it had done so, it would have been
a genuine error.
BBC World Customer Relations
What is ludicrous is that the BBC expects us to believe
it has lost its tapes of the most important event of the
21st century. No one is suggesting BBC is complicit in
any conspiracy, and its attempt to frame this issue in
that way is a blatant attempt to make the questions that
it has not answered go away.
Why did the BBC report the collapse of one the most structurally
reinforced buildings in New York before it collapsed and
what was their source?
In further developments more
BBC video from the day of 9/11 has been unearthed
in which a correspondent, within hours of the towers coming
down, claims the reason for the collapses is because of
their design. He then then provides blatantly false information
about the designs to justify the statement, without referring
to any sources and negating the fact that the towers had
47 massive central core columns.
Was this another "cock up" on the part of the
BBC or were they once again going off scripted information
that was being spoon fed to the media? Certainly it is
startling that the subsequent official FEMA report, after
months of investigation, gave more or less the same explanation
as to why the towers fell as is witnessed in this BBC
news footage from just hours after the towers fell.
As for the BBC's shockingly arrogant and dismissive
"it was more than five years ago comment", as
long as the truth continues to be withheld we will continue
to target those who are aiding its suppression.
BECAUSE THERE'S A WAR ON FOR YOUR MIND