I am still puzzled by two things about the 9/11 disaster.

[KlatooBNikto]

First, when the WTC7 went down, the owner Silverstein is said to have remarked we decided to "pull" the building for safety reasons. Now, to pull a building of that size,it would require explosives to be laid well in advance of the pulling event,something of the order of two weeks.If they had prewired it, wouldn't it indicate advance knowledge? Anyone have any thoughts on this?

Second, it never made any sense to me why air quality measurements were not done on that day because of the potential for health related problems in one of the most densely inhabited parts of the country. I then realized that air quality measurements would also have detected the presence of nitrogenous compounds, a telltale sign of the use of explosives in bringing down the towers.

As I add all these things together, I am convinced that the 9/11 event was premeditated and executed by people with motive, means and opportunity.

[MrModerate]

1. Well, yeah . . .

Motive: hate for western bullying and threats to their culture and religion

Means: a few bucks, a good plan, and boldness

Opportunity: a very weak antihijack system and a (suddenly) obsolete notion that cooperating with hijackers was the best way to survive.

Charges preset in buildings to bring them down? Nah, I don't think so.

[KlatooBNikto]

2. You still have not answered the specific questions I have raised.

Notice that WTC7 was not hit by any plane.And air quality monitoring would have been routine and requires no complex equipment.

[Zynx]

4. The impact groundquake of WTC 1 and WTC 2 would have hit WTC 7 hard

The energy release of each of those collapses dwarfs Oklahoma City by several orders of magnitude.

[KlatooBNikto]

7. So tthey had it prewired just in case WTC1 and 2 were demolished

by a hijacking? Otherwise why would the owner say he decided to "pull" the building and it happened within two hours after the main towers fell.

[Zynx]

14. Link to owner's statements? Credible link?

I've never heard this. I've only heard that FDNY decided to "pull" out of the building, in other words, withdraw. I really strongly suspect that is what the owner is talking about.

Once again, the energy release of OK City is somewhere in the realm of 8 GJ (8 gigajoule or 8,000,000,000 joules) of energy.

WTC 1 and WTC 2 each had a mass of around 500,000,000 standard tons/450,000,000 metric tons.

Even assuming only half of that is falling at only standard gravity of 9.8 m/s that is 10,804,500,000,000 Joules, or 10804 GIGAJOULES. That's over 1300 TIMES greater than the McVeigh bomb.

Now, the force is not as explosive as McVeigh's was, and the application of force is less direct, but it's very safe to say WTC7 and other nearby buildings are going to take massive structural damage from TWO energy dumps of this size.

[TomClash]

28. But

the Post Office is still standing at the corner of Church and Vesey. 140 West at the corner of West and Vesey was damaged but no one ever suggested it be demolished. Even the Deustchbank building, which was directly across the street from 2 WTC, and was much closer to 2 WTC than 7 WTC was to 1 WTC, is still standing. So is the Millenium, which was close to 2 WTC.

The only major building destroyed was the old Vista (Marriott) Hotel, adjacent to both 1 and 2. 7 was pulled down.

[TheWraith]

24. The definition of unreasonable paranoia...

...Is when someone overlooks more plausible explanations to leap to an outlandish conclusion unsupported by evidence. Like saying that the only way the steel beams in the towers could have melted was from the use of a tactical nuclear weapon.

If they did demolish WTC 7, there are more rational possibilities. For one thing, a controlled collapse doesn't require explosives, nor to be planned for two weeks ahead of time. That's just how they traditionally do it. You could probably do it with six guys, two cranes, and some reenforced steel cable, without ever going inside. It would be messier, but somehow I doubt that neatness was the foremost thing in their mind at the time.

Possibility two, that WTC 7 was already structurally unsound for whatever reason, and that the energy discharges of the towers collapsing critically compromised the structure's remaining integrity.

Possibility three. WTC 7 was the home of the CIA's New York center. Knowing the CIA, I wouldn't be surprised if they had some contingency plan to evacuate and demolish the building in the event of emergency, just as TomClash suggested.

There's a lot of people here who expect others to believe that there's a far-ranging cabal of conspirators who are smart enough to shuffle airplanes around, collapse buildings, use nuclear weapons in New York City, and pull off the biggest lie in human history, yet who are so obvious that evidence of their perfidy rests everywhere, from the debris fields to casual comments about collapsing buildings. And yet none of the thousands of people who would have to have been in on it have ever said a word, and the thousands of people whose eyewitness testimony contradicts the conspiracist's theory-de-jour are either mistaken or lying.

To answer the other part of the OP's question, air samples and tests were taken on and after the day of the attacks. Some of the agencies involved issued warnings about the toxic potential of the site, but the official fed position was that it was perfectly safe--they didn't want to scare off the firefighters. As for evidence of nitrogen, I've never seen any report saying one way or another about it, but I doubt that it's evidence of foul play.

[KlatooBNikto]

29. The simplest explanation is what I offered not the dreamt up excuses you

have come up with.Trying to demolish a building of the size of WTC 7, especially in the neat way it was carried out with no trace of the steel structure left could not have been done the way you describe it.Take it from me, I have been a structural engineer for over thrity years.

As for Nitrogen, as you call it, it is also a fallacy to assume that foul play cannot be detected by the analyses I have asked for.Even the casual dismissal of my proposal by you as calling for nitrogen betrays your ignorance of what is possible.It is indeed possible to analyze for exact compounds of nitrogen that are present in explosives, not Nitrogen the element.

All in all, I stand by my post.

[Igel]

3. I think any EPA or NY state environmental person that tried

to go into the area to take a series of air quality samples would have been judged insane. People wanted out; those that were getting in were there to help look for or take care of the wounded, or lower-level public safety. Oh, or to be looky-lous.

[KlatooBNikto]

6. It could have been done even after 24 hours.

[Igel]

17. That would have been more reasonable. n/t

[SnowGoose]

5. What I don't get

is how AFTER that horrendous fireball, and AFTER the immense buildings had been reduced to a mountain of rubble...

They find Mohammad Atta's passport in the pile in what? Like 48 hours?

It just doesn't seem credible.

[Last Lemming]

8. Compound that with

the article published in Newsweek which reportedly states that the Y2K bomber told the feds about the WTC plans three months before 9/11.

(Sorry, I can't get the link to work though. Go to MSNBC and then Newsweek site.)

Of course they knew. . . Probably they planned. . .

[tavalon]

9. Do you know for sure that it would have to be wired two weeks in advance?

As far as the air quality measurements not being done, it is a sign of chaos combined with the patented Bush administration stance of "we don't give a fuck about you".

I went LIHOP a long time ago. I'm still on the fence with MIHOP.

[Zerex71]

10. You know, I never really thought of it, but that's complete commonsensical

now that I think about it. Good thinking.

I have long thought this thing was just on this side of premeditated.

Here's something else to consider: If by August 6, there was a PDB given to Chimpus Maximus -- over a month before the event -- that pretty much means everything was set and ready to go (by all parties/on all sides), and all parties had entered into a waiting for a "GO signal". (In other words, in classic military/paramilitary operations, I don't think anyone waits until the last second to finish their preparations.) The "bad guys" had basically made their intentions known all along, and it was only by August 6 that it had been turned into a bureaucratic instrument (the PDB) to be forwarded to Dim Son. Therefore, this means that even well prior to that, the plans had been fixed (my position is that in order to cull all the intelligence and language that could be printed up in a government document -- allowing for the slow march of bureaucracy -- the CIA, NSA, et. al. would have had to be constantly filtering data and slowly producing a dossier that would eventually turn into the PDB). In point of fact, I recall that outside of Gary Condit and the shark bites all that summer (I was laid off and had my TV on a lot in the other room), I distinctly recall that the bin Laden boogeyman was on there quite a bit indicating that they were planning something spectacular.

As far as I'm concerned, the language in the PNAC documents strongly suggest that these neocon witches were waiting for a "Pearl Harbor-style event" which would open the doors for their global neoimperialism. Clinton was wise by '97-'98 to ignore those crackpots. This is a group that does not shy away from their intentions of neoimperalism -- and when laid out there in the PNAC documents, it's pretty much clear as day what their intentions have been all along.

So, there's one smoking gun.

Something to consider:

If you're in intelligence circles, and want to contact the CIA, NSA, or the government in some form, that hey, we're going to attack you guys -- and it plays right into the hands of the party receiving this information, who just happen to have a plan that needs this sort of thing -- why would the receiving party tell anyone about it?

Also, and I don't care how this sounds, but understand that much of our foreign-policy is way too influenced by Israel. A look at the who's-who of the PNAC shows that most of them are hardcore Jewish neocons. What's to say they didn't look at 9/11 as "a tactical loss but a strategic win" in the ongoing battle between the West and (Middle) East?

Smoking gun #2 in my opinion were the suspicious dealings on the markets shortly before 9/11, concerning the large number of put options that were registered with the major airlines. If you haven't heard about this, poke around the web and in short order it'll basically become clear that major stakeholders -- those with the most to lose -- dumped their airline stocks...as though they knew they would tank...

Smoking gun #3 is the following:

We already know that Bush, from the moment he got into office, had a hate-on for Saddam. On 9/11, Rumsfeld scribbled that he wanted to find a link to Saddam -- remember, this is a guy who was totally out of the loop from a communications and command and control perspective as the frippin' Secretary of Defense, but yet somehow had the presence of mind to start thinking about how to get Saddam roped into this.

I really would like to probe this subject further, because at some point, they cannot hide factual information on an operation of this size. We all know that by now most of the American public has swallowed the "official story"/"national mythology" of 9/11, and that no matter how hard we try, probably fully 50% could just never believe that our Gov. would be evil and murderous.

[QuettaKid]

15. The "GO" signal....

For the longest time I have been thinking something very similar to what you wrote about a GO signal. Does anyone recall about 1 week before 9/11 happened? a parachutist got hung up on the Statue of Liberty? extinguishing the torch of liberty anyone?

http://archives.cnn.com/2001/US/08/23/statue.parasail/

[Bridget Burke]

11. Obviously, some "heroes" of 9/11 have been neglected.

Why have we been denied the stories of the demolition experts who quickly laid explosives in WTC7, as smoke still billowed forth from the wreckage of the twin towers?

Their noble efforts to "pull" the building for the safety of all have been neglected. Not even a made for TV movie!

[HamdenRice]

12. WTC 7 is the key to the puzzle

I also believe that the collapse of WTC7 is the key that will unravel the whole mystery.

But first, Silverstein's comment about pulling the building is not necessarily evidence of anything. As I have written elsewhere, "pull" has different meanings in different subcultures at ground zero. For demolition/construction workers, pull means "pull down" or demolish.

But for firemen, pull means "pull out" as in pull their forces out of a dangerous situation. Silverstein explicitly states he was talking to firemen, when the decision was made to pull WTC 7.

That said, the collapse of the building makes no sense. It was not even next to the towers, but a block away. Two buildings between the towers and WTC 7 were badly damaged, but did not collapse.

The official explanation of the collapse of WTC7 is fire. But WTC7 was a conventional steel skeleton building of a type that has never collapsed all at once as a result of fire.

[TomClash]

27. It is really likely . . .

that a man who has spent his life as a major player in the commerical real estate business, participating in the construction and demolition of buildings, is going to use the Fire Department's definition of "pull?"

[HamdenRice]

30. If he was relating a conversation with firemen, yes ...

but my point is not that WTC7 was not demolished -- only that you can't prove the point, as is sometimes alleged, with the Silverstein comment.

[TomClash]

31. I understand your point

but your view can only be true if you believe Silverstein's subsequent but dubious explanation.

[burn the bush]

13. Yes, the more I learn the more I am convinced that our

govt is guilty of the worse kind of treason and I hope they pay for it daily in prisons.

If u told me 6 months ago that I would be saying 9/11 was done or helped by our own govt, I would have called you crazy. The more I read and learn, the more it is looking to be that exactly. It is so heavy and saddening on my heart to have to face that our govt did this.

I think that if people can come to realize that they did this, then they can begin to understand our govt and what we are up against. I think this one charge agains our govt says loads about who they really are.

I think Osama was planning the attack, Saudi leaders got involved, told US. Idea emerged. They financed Osama through the Saudi govt. The Saudi govt strung Osama along and gave him more help than the could ever have asked for. I don't think Osama knew they were playing him. I think he really is a terrorist. I think he really had plans to attack the US. I think they found out about it and made it into a really grand plan. Osama was probably quite surprised at the pentagon attack since I am thinking that he didn't have any part in that missile.

Did u know that the main witness for that plane hitting the pentagon is JimmyJeffs Talon boss? I think the other woman Penny Elgas may be married to someone on the GAO disaster research team. Can't think of his name Elgas, He lives in Springfield like Penny who is married and this Elgas is the only one I found in Virginia or DC. I do not know for sure that she is the wife of the GAO guy but I suspect she is. Her account was like JimmyJeffs boss; way too much detail. Planned. rehearsed.

[TomClash]

16. Here are some possibilities

First, it is widely known that the CIA's NY station was in 7. Taht is most likely the real reason it was pulled down. I would not be surprised if there was already a contingency plan to demolish that building in the event of an emergency.

Second, at least nine air samples were taken in Brooklyn on 9/11, but I don't know if the EPA took samples in lower Manhattan. Interestingly, I have never seen a report discussing nitrogen or its derivatives. They either never tested for it or are withholding that evidence. But they are not the only agency that tested air samples in NYC post-9/11 - the NY DEP did as well.

[Dancing_Dave]

18. Radioactive elements in first WTC explosive debris study

Answers to your two questions

1)Yes, Silverstein had to have the demolition explosives for WTC 7 arranged in advance. He knew very well what was coming down the insurance opportunity it gave him.

2)The first study of WTC explosive debris indicates that tactical nukes were probably the very high temperature explosives deep in the WTC Towers sub-basements:
http://ehp.niehs.nih.gov/members/2002/110p703-714lioy/lioy-full.html

"Abstract

The explosion and collapse of the World Trade Center (WTC) was a
catastrophic event that produced an aerosol plume impacting many
workers,
residents, and commuters during the first few days after 11 September
2001.
Three bulk samples of the total settled dust and smoke were collected at

weather-protected locations east of the WTC on 16 and 17 September 2001;

these samples are representative of the generated material that settled
immediately after the explosion and fire and the concurrent collapse of
the
two structures. We analyzed each sample, not differentiated by particle
size, for inorganic and organic composition. In the inorganic analyses,
we
identified metals, *radionuclides*, ionic species, asbestos, and
inorganic
species. In the organic analyses, we identified polycyclic aromatic
hydrocarbons (PAHs), polychlorinated biphenyls, polychlorinated
dibenzodioxins, polychlorinated dibenzofurans, pesticides, phthalate
esters,
brominated diphenyl ethers, and other hydrocarbons. Each sample had a
basic
pH. Asbestos levels ranged from 0.8% to 3.0% of the mass, the PAHs were
>
0.1% of the mass, and lead ranged from 101 to 625 µg/g. The content and
distribution of material was indicative of a complex mixture of building

debris and combustion products in the resulting plume...

Radionuclides. We analyzed the gamma spectrum of the samples using an
EG&G/Ortec high-purity Ge detector (50% relative efficiency) gamma
counter
(EG&G/Ortec Instruments, Inc., Oak Ridge, TN). We analyzed approximately
50
peaks based on statistical significance (counting/lack of
interference’s).
These included thorium, uranium, actinium series, and primordial
radionuclides."

This explains some of the strangest health problems among WTC clean up workers, including teeth falling out and leukemia.

Feel free to work your way through the report and figure out what you can about the timed chemical explosives used as cutting charges higher on the buildings. I would love to hear what you come up with.

[Dancing_Dave]

19. BTW BACK THIS WHOLE STUDY UP NOW!

This info was only intended for members of government agencies. We should be glad that some good citizen geek made it available to us for a time...back it up before it disappears!

Gerard Holmgren should be able to put a copy online from Australia if/when it disappears...but to be sure you will have accesss to it, back it up yourself. ;-)

[demodewd]

20. Thanks!

Thanks Dancing_Dave. That was most informative.

[Make7]

22. According to www.archive.org...

...that article has been available to the public on the Environmental Health Perspectives' website since June 4, 2002. (Although to download the .pdf version you either need to be a subscriber or you have to pay for the article.)

http://web.archive.org/web/20021224032458/ehpnet1.niehs.nih.gov/docs/2002/110p703-714lioy/abstract.html

In the bottom left corner is the date that the archive for the page was last updated.

-Make7

Note: the current issue on their website is the May 2005 issue.
The feature article is titled Unequal Housing, Unequal Health.
ehp.niehs.nih.gov/docs/2005/113-5/maycov.jpg

[TomClash]

26. Tactical nukes?

Ridiculous.

Many more would already have died from radiation exposure.

[KlatooBNikto]

21. Thank you for the info.I will study it and report later.

[Dancing_Dave]

23. I can link you to other studies done from public health/environmental POV

No, the tests aimed at finding traces of chemical explosives were never done for the cover-up reason you suggest. However, some of the studies looking for environmental toxins do have valuable clues. You may have to really put your thinking cap on and look for some indirect lines of evidence.

And the ammounts of explosive residue are bound to be so small compared to the ammounts of explosively transformed building materials, that they would hardly seem significant enough for a researcher to report unless that was what they were looking for. But look at what did happen to some of the building materials...for instance vaporized building metals that that turned up as elementary condensed metal deposits on some of the dust (as reported by RJ Lee, Thomas Cahill and others). The main thermo-explosive energy source for these transformations of metal was underground, where the pools of molten metal persisted long after 9/11. But perhaps you can see contributions from other explosions as well...more distributed throughout the building material.

I hope I can help you to evidence you can use...but some of the most straightforward info for identifying explosives does seem to have been effectively suppressed. One thing the 9/11 truth movement could use, is some people who know more about Chemistry than I do! I can understand the physics, but my knowledge of chemistry is far from comprehensive.

Perhaps the most important element that turned up in this report is ACTINIUM...look up some info on this rare highly radioactive toxin.

[carlvs]

25. No, what I see here is...

someone who has no idea of the workings of a nuclear explosion.

To make it short and simple, when a nuclear bomb is detonated at or below the surface, the heat released from the blast vaporises everything at or nearby ground zero. Most of that vapor then is sucked into the nuclear fireball and gets irradiated by the intense radiation contained within it. When that vaporised material condenses back into solid particles (i.e., fallout,) it would still retain that radioactivity (from both the remains of the device, and any elements that had been transmuted into their radioactive versions from their trip through the fireball.)

If a tactical nuke had been detonated, there is no way that the radiation signature could be hidden. Even if the blast was underneath the WTC structures as you stated, the smoke rising from the ruins would have still carried large amounts of radioactive particles into surrounding area.

However, that is not what we see here. If you bothered to read the actual report instead of just the abstract, you would have come across this in the results section:

"...We found only background levels of alpha radionuclide activity by liquid scintillation counter analysis of all three samples. Beta activity was slightly elevated, but not more than twice the background level. There were no levels of gamma activity > 1 Bq/g except for naturally occurring potassium-40.

[Dancing_Dave]

32. You have no idea what a wide range of tactical nukes are possible

And you aren't taking account of the cover-up at ground zero and indeed around New York...though some interesting holes in the cover-up are beginining to appear.

Nothing like the Hiroshima or Nagasaki bombs is being proposed. One possibility is a small pure fusion weapon with a casing that absorbed some neutrons, and slowly re-emitted them later. Such a casing could produce exactly the quantum the emission spectrum noted in this report.

Most of this radioactive material would have been carried by a rising thermal in to the mushroom clouds that formed high about each of the Twin Towers. The winds up there spread this material far beyond New York. The amount of radioactive fallout produced by such a tactical nuke is small, and it is no surprise that their was no great concentration found around New York City.

As a matter of fact, a lot of material from the WTC sub-basements WAS vaporized, and reappeared as elementary condensed metal deposits on WTC dust, including Iron, Zinc, Lead, Aluminum etc. These condensates from a vaporizing thermal-explosive event have turned up in electron microscope studies of WTC dust. The vaporized metals naturally condensed on dust made of cooler building materials such as cement...cement does not conduct heat as well as metal, so the extreme heat from the thermo-explosive event below the WTC would not have reached most of the WTC cement to such an extreme degree.

Dirt, glass and metals deep in the WTC rubble pile continued to be aerasolized for weeks after 9/11, and were identified in smoke from the WTC debris pile by Professor Thomas Cahill, who also predicted long-term health effects on WTC cleanup workers on this basis. These effects are still being seen. Leukemia is starting to appear among these workers too...and the time between radioactive exposure and leukemia it causes is often many years. We have just seen the tip of the iceberg of this public health catastrophe in New York.

Other tactical nukes such as the top secret a-neutrino bomb could have been used instead...we are just now figuring this out.

Bush and the Neo-Cons are very enthusiastic about wonderful "mini-nukes". Well, those mini-nukes sure seem to have worked to their political advantage on 9/11!

[Dover]

33. Anyone know how O'Neill died that day? I find that odd, because he

should have been heading up and instructing others in the security of the towers, yes? So how did he die? Any witnesses?