Nice. I don't want to be involved with conspiracy theories I
think you know there are lots of them they can go on with you speculate on that
forever. But we really me. No. How.
How.
My husband Steve was forty is old when he was killed on September eleventh two
thousand and nine he's in the North Tower one hundred fourth floor. There are so
many unanswered questions and that's scary to me we never had he insists nobody
ever stopped to have a scientific investigation a scientific investigation
a scientific. Tribute lights in the New York
skyline an annual memorial to the lives lost on nine eleven. Yet there's
still more light that needs to shine revealing truths that their family members
deserve to know. September eleventh two thousand and one
a day that changed history. For planes went silent and off course through
those planes crashed into the World Trade Center twin towers. Several columns were
severed and the jet fuel ignited fires that spread over several floors. About an
hour later millions watched in shock as both towers were suddenly and rapidly
destroyed. Killing almost three thousand people for whom truth and justice may
have yet to be served. I am Richard
Gage
a licensed architect over twenty years and member of the American Institute of Architects
and founder of Architects and Engineers for nine eleven Truth
a nonprofit organization of well over
a thousand technical and building professionals. According to official government
reports. The fires weakened the structural steel framing of both twin towers
leading to sudden progressive and total collapses.
Unknown to most people
a furred steel frame highrise World Trade Center seven was also destroyed.
Critical questions have been raised by more than fifteen hundred architects and
engineers about the official explanations for the destruction of all three of these
buildings. Along with more than ten thousand other concerned individuals these
professionals collectively comprising more than twenty five thousand years of
experience have signed our petition they're calling for
a new investigation into the destruction of these three World Trade Center high
rises this call is based on evidence that reveals of very different destruction
scenario than reported by government engineers This includes abundant scientific
forensic data and eyewitness testimony that was omitted from the official reports.
You'll be seeing this evidence and hearing from dozens of these technical experts
including many who are among the top in their respective fields listen to the
president provide his account of the pervasive political abuse of science and we
have watched as scientific integrity has been undermined and scientific research
politicized in an effort to advance pre-determined ideological agendas I claim
they're not doing science at all they're doing propaganda or complicity in whatever
they're doing but it's not science it's not playing by the rules of cities to
undermine scientific integrity is to undermine our democracy. We at eighty nine
eleven Truth take President Obama at his word in his affirmation to the American
people during his inauguration. How do we accomplish this. We've done our best to
fulfill the president's vision by using this scientific method examining the
evidence from the World Trade Center and developing unbiased conclusions from
unbiased experts in their fields as coherent sets of scientific facts are brought
into focus by the experts the data and the witnesses in this film you will come to
a much greater understanding of the events of nine eleven and will be in
a position to draw your own informed conclusion.
Of course the ones still most affected by the events of that tragic day are the
family members of the victims lost on nine eleven. Several have asked to appear in
this documentary although our focus will be primarily technical We are deeply moved
and honored to give them the opportunity to speak directly to you. Now let's hear
from the eighty nine eleven Truth professional petition signers who will share with
you what conclusions they came to among these experts are high rise architects and
engineers in the fields of structural design materials science chemistry fire
protection metallurgy as well as physicists explosives experts and demolition
technicians if we believe that fire has brought down the World Trade Center
buildings on nine eleven this is extremely troubling for those of us in the design
professions architects and engineers even physicists buildings just don't behave
like that there was no hesitation there was no hesitation when it was to hit story
after story but tops of the buildings were basically. Disintegrated the fact that
it was all reduced to rubble and powder just did not make sense of all there was
a total collapse and there's very few things that could explain that our whole
society is being led to believe that these fundamental laws of physics hard science
don't apply anymore and that's I think that's it right now it's.
Also psychologists therapists and counselors along with theologians David Ray
Griffin who have
a deep understanding of the personal issues associated with nine eleven well
explain why it is so difficult for us to come to terms with the reality of these
events and learn how we can help ourselves and others with this difficult yet vital
responsibility we were confident through where we felt secure and all of the sudden
that security collapse so the question becomes why. Why is it that people have so
much trouble hearing this information when your beliefs are challenged fear and
anxiety are created Don't mess with me don't mess with my home don't mess with my
comfort with how things how things are I believe that to be the kind of country
that we think we are we have to face some of the things that are not as we think
they are. We need the truth in order to.
The new World Trade Center Building seven blooms above the site of its original.
Building seven was
a forty seven story high rise not hit by an airplane yet it was the third modern
steel frame skyscraper to collapse rapidly and symmetrically on nine eleven. It was
a football field away from the north tower and sustained minor damage from the am
falling debris building seven's precipitous collapse was blamed on normal office
virus. One Trade Center seven collapse because the fires fueled by office furnish.
It did not collapse from explosives are from fuel oil fires from
about one hundred sixty five until about nine hundred eighty five of my most My
experience has been
a high rise multistory steel buildings would have us to believe that these were it
was
a typical office fire scattered office fires if you will that brought this building
down since the mid sixty's I've tried to follow highrise fires because there are
something we worry
a lot about as we design these buildings and I'm not aware of any. Highrise
building that have come down as
a result of fires I'm Steve Barish founder and president of Parrish architects and
Associates Inc
a thirty three year old architecture planning in engineering for one of the things
that really interested me is how quickly the tower seven fell fell within seven
seconds approximately from top to bottom this building was built in the mid
eighty's and met all the codes at the time I first became aware of the problems
with the official account of the collapse when I saw. Online from architects and
engineers trying to live in truth they pointed out various problems with the of
official story. Once that caught my attention where the Raps failure of the
connections in order for the building to come down at the rate that it did I've
been involved in many large projects including overseeing several high rise
buildings ranging in size from fourteen stories to forty for the course of twenty
years I'm mainly called in to help with very large difficult projects when I
watched building seven collapse it basically left no doubt in my mind something was
wrong Building seven had not been hit by
a plane the coup de gras for me was when I found out that Building seven
had collapsed later that day and when I saw building seven come down to me
the fact that it looks like
a perfect controlled demolition of an intact building. I
mean that's what I call
a smoking gun. Was
the structural steel from World Trade Center seven preserved documented analyzed
according to standard procedures for investigating engineering failures hailing the
collapse study as an assessment rather than as an investigation has allowed
valuable evidence in the form of the towers structural steel to be destroyed it is
a steel that holds the primary key to understand the chronology of the events
resulting in the collapse when did you become aware that the steel from the World
Trade Center was being sold off. I think it was on the order of
a week or so before we arrived on site on October the fifth I believe they were
the city was selling. Or was disposing of material
within two weeks. Of the actual event I believe I was the first one to
find out that the steel is being recycled New York Times reporter Jim glass told me
two weeks after the collapse and I tried to contact city and also New York
Times reporters tried to make sure we can have access to the to do research it was
not happening I just think there's so much that that has been lost in these last
six months that we can never go back and retrieve it that's it's only unfortunate
it's borderline criminal. Four hundred truckloads per day of material were taken
away from the World Trade Center site and sent to China for recycling there were
laws violated in the destruction of that evidence and for the American Society of
Civil Engineers to ignore those events is extremely disturbing. And is
a violation in my opinion the professional code of ethics it was contrary to way
all investigations are done if an airplane crashes they see over off the entire
area nobody touches anything they move it to secure
a location and reconstructing aircraft normally when you have
a structural failure. You carefully go through the debris field. Looking at
each item photographing every team has collapsed and every column where it is on
the ground and you pick them up very carefully and you look at each element we were
able to do that in the case of our seven World Trade Center seven would have been
the first steel framed high rise building in history to simply collapse. There's
a fire you can't do science when you are deprived of the evidence and your
hypothesis is the least valid instead of the most likely and the most likely is in
in the case of Building seven wasn't even mentioned. This is not science so the
claim is that it's something else it's preconceived trying to prove preconceived
ideas.
Was
a proper investigation performed that might have revealed the use of accelerants or
explosives in World Trade Center seven its destruction NIST concedes that they
found no evidence for explosives so then we asked them well did you look and they
said no we did not look for explosives or residues of explosives NIST never did
a proper evaluation of the collapse site and the debris World Trade
Center seven I would have expected they would have tested for explosives also
because of the nature of the collapse and the unprecedented nature of steel framed
high rise building collapsing in such
a fashion my practice has included among other things design and testing of
structures that were designed to withstand blasts specifically for instance to
launch facilities for the Minuteman missile system or the American Society of Civil
Engineers were brought into this investigation early on they did
a very superficial investigation of the site they issued
a report without any significant forensic examination neither Mr Fema
followed standard protocol. For fire and explosion investigations or just fire and
vesting this is for that matter National Fire Protection Association God Number
nine twenty one calls for saving the evidence and being prepared to justify why you
would it also calls for testing for accelerants and explosives when the high
ordered I was involved in this did not do this the minimum explosive charge the
nine pounds it wired to fail critical column I seventy nine but
a producer of pressure wave that would have broken windows and often East is
altered in
a sound level of one hundred thirty to one hundred forty decibels which is the
equivalent of the sound to a gunshot blast there were no witness reports of such
a loud noise there were all kinds of firefighters and civilians that were reporting
explosions you heard explosions like. This like
a distinction like when the compression like. The like floors that were dropping
collapsing this was. Like you felt
a rumble on the ground like almost like you want to grab on to something big
explosion goes back into the floor OK All right give them all you want call your
mother somebody. Just the fact that there were explosions means they need to be
investigated terrorist used explosives the one three we had witnesses two
explosions we have audio recording of explosions we have overwhelming evidence that
there were some explosive events the manual gets into thermite and if it says if
you have melted steel or concrete which we had on nine eleven and there's videos of
it people can see it we should test for it says when you have melted steel or
concrete you test for thermite. So the fact that they're not testing for it is
is crazy we have three thousand you know Americans murdered and we had the first
three high rise and still collapses we have all these reports of explosions we have
a history of terrorists using explosives it's absolutely ridiculous that the I mean
there's no excuse for it it's criminal in my opinion it's absolutely criminal that
they refused to follow the national standards and the national standards say that
they should be testing that for explosives the national standards are very clear we
have preservation of evidence we have spoil ation of evidence there's all kinds of
and basically standards that you don't destroy evidence we don't have the real
story on what happened because there wasn't
a proper investigation done. As
reported by The New York Times engineers were found by the collapse of Building
seven since no steel framed high rise has ever completely collapsed due to fire how
are we to understand this mysterious event high rise buildings simply do not
collapse due to fire there has never been until nine eleven an experience for
a high rise building that was steel framed completely collapsed there have been
fires burned longer and similar structures without any collapse. In this test
done by British Steel in one thousand nine hundred five
a large amount of typical office furniture was burned to see what would happen to
the heavy steel beams that supported the ceiling it's not that it melts in
a fire in fact the fires of normal fires are not hot enough to melt steel even if
you were for example to use an unusual fuel like kerosene you cannot
achieve temperatures hot enough to melt steel but what happens is it starts to lose
its strength and as it loses its strength it starts to sag this was the
largest test of its kind ever conducted it showed how unprotected steel can be
distorted even by
a normal office fire but as is typical in steel buildings the structural beams only
slowly and progressively warped and sag there was no chance of
a sudden collapse. In my previous career as
a firefighter. Normally you'd never be afraid to go into
a type one building because they're not combustible and you would just charge at it
and put the fire out never in my training were we ever taught that these type of
buildings could just collapse you know so there's definitely much more going for
the World Trade Center seven building reminds me of the meridian bank building and
in some ways in Philadelphia the meridian bank building is
a thirty eight story skyscraper that burned for eighteen hours in one thousand nine
hundred ninety one suffered extensive damage from the fire but did not collapse
we've never had
a steel framed skyscraper collapse in the United States or internationally so
there's no precedent as NIST tells us that this collapse mechanism starting with
thermal expansion that worked its way up toward an outward through the building in
a matter of seconds there's not enough time for the building to collapse the way
that NIST tells us
a collapsed this claims the fires were very large very hot and long lasting when in
reality observation which has been researched by many people shows these fires that
were not last very long they were not in the locations were missed claims they were
given saw and I am
a fellow of the American Institute of Architects for the forty plus years that I've
been practicing architecture I've designed
a variety of buildings from small houses to high rise office buildings. Some of the
high rises that I've worked on are one shell into shell here in Houston I was
a project manager for
a twenty two story office building in Akron Ohio later in the day when the World
Trade Center seven collapsed they had already showed us pictures of
a few fires in that building and I mean they weren't even raging and how could that
cause
a building to collapse as if it were imploded couldn't happen. According
to lead investigator Shyam Sunder of the National Institute for Standards and
Technology NIST World Trade Center seven collapsed at freefall acceleration for
more than one hundred feet of its fall what does the speed of the collapse reveal
to us essentially in less than seven seconds. Tower seven came down upon
itself so it's like taking your car keys out and just dropping them that's how fast
the building can go for over one hundred feet which And the only way you can get
that out is when there is zero resistance and so what we're looking out is it
building just coming straight down falling right through itself was zero resistance
buildings don't have
a zero resistance which is why you feel comfortable walking into
a building this building had forty thousand tons of structural steel and its
structural system and that is intended to keep it from going anywhere. I've heard
people say well it came down to freefall or close to free fall and so forth so I
decided to measure myself at
a simple tool at the time called physics told that which allowed me to take
a video and put
a dot on each frame to follow the motion of things and I realized that it actually
coming down at freefall pretty much dead on the acceleration of gravity well
nest in their final draft was saying that the building came down it was forty
percent longer than freefall time. How can such
a publicly visible easily measurable quantity be sent
a sign of freefall time would be an object that has no structural components below
it that was the structural resistance that was provided in this particular case he
was making our case for us. You can't have free fall when their support in the
final report they modified it may actually admitted there was
a period of freefall involved this is telling us that the building below it ceased
to exist. For the first few seconds of the collapse of the building well things in
physics just don't cease to exist and cease to resist the forces that are on them
the building didn't disappear so the building can fall for
a hundred feet at freefall speed that's impossible that's
a violation of the fundamental law of physics that says that for every action
there's an equal and opposite reaction the floors fall they tend to fall and are
braced by the floor directly beneath it and there is some delay their connections
are designed with
a safety factor of one point five to three times the failure load for the members
this is sure is that the member will always fail first first and last that move and
then
a plastic mode the connections failed first with the any of the members exhibiting
large affirmations or reflections over four hundred connections per second
had to fail an order for the member for the members to be released and for the
structure to descend at almost free fall rate to fail at the rate that they
did. Progressively across the building even if for
ward to collapse it still wouldn't be able to collapse all of the connections
simultaneously at the rate that it did without the secondary explosions.
We might anticipate that in an evenly damaged building would fall over. Yet
videos of the collapse of Building seven show
a fairly symmetrical problem how do we make sense of this the exterior of the
building comes down fully symmetrically and I one time both sides of the building
come down completely this is fully indicative of full structural support being
removed for at least six stories that could not happen by fire if the buildings had
come down by fire we would have seen
a more natural progression of collapse and clearly more asymmetrical pattern.
Should have been present. The symmetry is
a smoking gun it cannot happen that when you have asymmetric damage you will get
a perfectly symmetrical collapse the exterior columns on the outside on the outside
as well as on the inside at the bottom would have to be severed almost the same
time.
I work for controlled demolition of corporate at C.D.I.
The top rated explosive demolition firm in the world as an explosives loader my job
was to place explosives in the buildings to prepare them for demolition I was
licensed while in New York by the New York Fire Department to handle explosives and
I worked on major projects such as Seattle Kingdome to show you've ever stadium
Philadelphia Naval Hospital and the and Key Span gas holders in New York what I saw
it was
a classic implosion the center of the core the penthouse area starts to move first
and then the building follows along with it that's another indicator that this in
this report is very suspect finished the outside walls from the lower floors are
power went on top of the other right in the middle of the building just like
a house of cards if it were coming down as
a structural engineer I don't believe that the failure of one column would normally
bring down an entire building in the way we saw World Trade Center seven come down
because of redundancy because of all the other columns in the building that were
not affected according to NASA the failure occurred at column seventy nine on
level twelve this means basically they're talking about
a single column or collapse or failure that resulted in
a total collapse of the building that just does not make any sense.
This provided computer animations in support of their fire collapse theory but what
do independent engineers say about these animations. When you observe the footage
of how the building failed and when you look at the the the animation of the
failure and compare that to what you actually observe in reality I think they
disprove their own theories it is impossible for for it to fail the way they said
the exterior of the NIST World Trade Center seven computer simulation model what's
they put together to try to explain their theory so those large very large
defamations which are not exert of in the video of the actual event and they don't
attempt to explain this in the report what we're seeing is what would happen and
that's what quads and what we see on the real video is not in the house or flaps.
There had to be some agent that was destroying the connections and building number
seven F.
One hundred connections for second and the only thing that I could see that would
be capable of doing this would be explosive devices at the connections.
This is why I think that there has to be
a new investigation to find out the real physical causes for these all these
members to act in an atypical fashion the Freedom of Information Act request to
miss by
a registered structural engineer for tactile laces an analysis substantiating the
walk all failures of the horizontal girders from their seats
a column seventy nine eighty one was denied by this with the claim that releasing
this data might jeopardize public safety. How could that possibly jeopardize public
safety to tell people in the industry engineers who are responsible for designing
these buildings how this failure could occur science is never secret when it's done
right science is
a way of finding out that is self-correcting and while as many people science isn't
science unless it's published unless it's openly published and made available for
treatises the explanations from Fema and from NIST don't add up. But
there is enormous circumstantial evidence circumstantial and actually physical
evidence as well that would lead us to
a different conclusion. And the conclusion is controlled demolition
a building cannot do freefall with huge structural steel structural system in place
to support it without it being blown up that's the only way it could could come
down in freefall with this controlled demolition take of
a TO SHAKE of eight it is not as fluid. As you look to the fifteen for
the Express Building seven to me is is really what gives it away because that's
a classic case of controlled demolition.
This is the original site of the World Trade Center twin towers Construction is now
underway where dramatic new facilities are being erected. Just ten years ago
the planes hit the towers cutting through some exteriors and interior supporting
structural steel columns the fuel from the planes ignited office fires across
several floors according to the official reports the structural steel frame was
weakened and failed causing
a total progressive collapse of each tower does the official explanation makes
sense was there
a comprehensive investigation that examined all of the evidence and I walked into
the office. And the first words that I heard was
a plane just run into the World Trade Center. And my initial thought was well
that's OK It's built to withstand a seven
o seven it did not seem possible that they used these towers that were designed to
withstand the impact of a seven o seven could possibly collapse in such
a short order of time from the time that they were hit there's no way the building
was designed to take the impact of one if not more multiple airplanes they were
designed to withstand hurricane force winds of up to one hundred forty miles an
hour these buildings are built to handle several times
a lot about them as permanent columns could handle five times the load above them
and the core columns can handle three times
a lot about them I remember walking up to a window and
a young man turned to me with tears coming down his face and he said will they fall
down and I said no. Never has
a steel structure building in the history of steel structured buildings ever fallen
down for the reason to fire the majority of the jet fuel was burnt up instantly in
the big fireball. And it was gone. The fires that
were left were office furnishing carpet things like that
a lot of things in these kind of buildings have to be fire resistant by nature it's
required by code so there really isn't
a whole lot of fuel in there to begin with the media portrayed the fires as being
extremely hard. To fires were not that hard and World Trade Center and wanting to
if you look at in its own data you can see that. And to use our own powers of
observation you could tell by a by scene these fires and see
a black smoke come out the window that means that the fires were oxygen starved and
it was incomplete combustion and so it was a rogue temperature fire I looked up in
a manual the burning temperature of jet fuel and found that
that under the conditions that existed at the World Trade Center on nine eleven
that jet fuel had been burning at about seven hundred fifty degrees Fahrenheit I
also noticed that the official explanation of what happened
was that the heat from the fire supposedly softened the steel and thereby brought
the buildings down if you have
a flame at seven hundred fifty degrees you can hold that flame under
a steel beam for ever and you'll never reach
a high enough temperature to bend steel let alone melted so immediately I knew at
that point that the official explanation was dead wrong.
Rather than
a slow growing collapse that we might anticipate the twin towers show in the videos
a very rapid sudden onset of destruction what does this imply structural
steel is required by building
a design code to prevent catastrophic failure and loss of public life. Everybody
seeing the building collapses on line eleven and it was shocking how fast the
buildings collapsed this doesn't happen with structural steel buildings and never
has and never will again we assume that fires could destroy
a building why people slept steel buildings because they would destroy slowly the
basic philosophy of the building codes for the last seventy five to eighty years
has been to ensure the failure of the members to provide for the public safety
under this philosophy members that are open loaded well the form don't last the CLI
. With any elastic range of material with increasingly large defamations in the
flesh and this gives rise to march defamations that are visible and apparent to the
occupants of the structure it would gradually twist and bend and give people plenty
of time and safety in getting out of the building I would not have expected the
whole building to just give in at once and I thought it rather that they. Fell
almost perfectly. In very similar ways may seem to
that lightning would strike twice. And it certainly would stay in the damage zone
it would not drop down through eighty thousand tons of insulated and
damage to actual steel and do it in twelve seconds and this claim that the upper
section of each of the towers cross the lower section however when you watch video
closely in the case of World Trade Center one you'll see that the upper section of
the Senate grates itself it appears to be
a controlled demolition of its own of the upper section the top section pushing on
the bottom section it's going to meet equal forces as it goes both sections are
going to be demolished at the same rate so by the time you've crushed
fifteen stories below the top fifteen stories are also going to be crushed by
others demolitions. Done in France would choose what we call the Bernard stack
technique where they take out
a couple fours worth the columns with hydraulics they take the columns out and they
let the building the upper section building drop to full force and when if impacts
the lower section there's
a very definitive observable jolt deceleration and the loss of the loss you're
looking for
a jolt that this thing if it actually comes down and hits you should be able to see
the point at which they actually impact because it would actually slow down the
motion of the falling block it never slows down get Excel or rates the entire time
and that was what was extremely significant I was very familiar with twin towers
elevator shift and I actually wrote up a noun elevator shaft on a top of
a car calling twelve hundred feet
a minute and you could imagine the experience. Before. You coward started
collapsing from the top. Intended daughter to four. And
Canada. Of course was always the middle of the elevator shaft and very
familiar with the interior structure. That surrounded the yellow radius
sheriffs and the fence ability with the elevator companies had twenty four
seven The only way that I can say that
the Taliban could have collapsed. Is that the in period columns would
compromise it would be a problem once you gain access to the elevator shafts then
a team of loading experts would have access to all the core columns and beams
the rest could be accomplished at that point by just the right kind of explosives
for the job at hand.
This National Institute of Standards and Technology acknowledges that the towers
came down at essentially free fall acceleration What are the implications of that
admission. Measurements have indicated that our one collapsed in about eleven
seconds and power to collapse in about nine seconds. This is essentially the
rate at which freefall would happen from what I what I understand the buildings
actually exonerated as they came down meaning they were not getting resistance from
these massive columns in the center of the core of this building core this building
was very heavy your huge columns huge this block accelerates straight down.
It's picking up speed downward continually It doesn't slow down it just continues
to speed the Twin Towers couldn't could not have come straight down through the
thousands of tons of structural steel through the greatest resistance there columns
of steel around the exterior of the building and within the core all of which are
there to prevent. The thing from falling down in so if even if something falls on
it it's not going to immediately just go up up up up up like that floor by floor
it's going to if it's going to collapse it's going to tough to take some time to
weekend the structure below it this structure is capable of holding three to five
times the weight and here it is falling through it with the resistance of only one
third of its weight roughly ninety percent of the resistance has been removed and
what's happening is the top section is not crushing down the lower section like
a pile driver which is the picture of the Basically it's painting it's it's
actually falling into material that's already been pulverized that's offering very
little resistance it's just coming down through prepared for eyes. Material
the buildings fall at
a speed which can only occur if the structure has been removed the vertical
structure structural connections. Not only had to fail nearly
simultaneously but in sequential order I was shocked at the at how the buildings
collapsed really expected that they would have come down much slower that that it
would have tipped over the whole thing did not make sense and
ever since
a hard time believing that the fires did drop the buildings the area
below the damage where the planes flew in and where the fire was that area below
that eighty or ninety stories eighty thousand tons of structural steel was not
damaged in any way yet you stood there and watched it destroy itself wiping out
floor by floor all two hundred eighty seven structural columns. As if they didn't
exist under nice the damage so.
Over one hundred first responders reported sounds of explosions and flashes of
light at the onset of destruction of both towers. These were not discussed in the
misreporting what did these eyewitnesses actually see and hear.
As you again ugh Iran they can always get
a stairway we're going to close and heavy duty explosion inside the lobby we stuck
into. We finally got down to the lobby then we got to the lobby which is big
because there were numerous secondary explosions taking place now as Can they were
continuous explosions it was a secondary of television probably
a device to the plant the before. You know that's the second those close and then
the stuff because it sounds like gunfire you know by my bank and then it also on
the huge closures about fifty consecutive bangs and it went down like
a waterfall and we heard the noise associated with an implosion we heard
a very loud blast of explosions we heard a lot of splosion at that point we heard
a large boom. You know I looked up and just saw the building coming at us you know
it was an explosion it was
a building collapse. To me it sounded like it that to me it sounded like an
explosion there was another major explosion all of
a sudden you hear explosion and you could see the building start to collapse huge
explosion that we all heard and felt we could hear
a rumble which is about five seconds long preceding the actual collapse and then of
. When each of those towers collapsed by just seconds ago there was
a huge explosion and it appears right now the second World Trade Tower has just
collapsed but I was about five blocks away were not heard explosions and then you
heard from far away boom boom and you heard the boom boom boom boom boom boom.
Like. It was like it was just the city you know that in a way if you take out
a bill with the flu and it just started going to pop up with boom boom boom boom
boom and he goes how fast they go like firecrackers they're reporting exactly what
I would expect you hearing BOEM BOEM BOEM BOEM BOEM waves of the of of explosions
going off not one man. Of big boom there are so many videos of witnesses from that
day that report explosions there's radio transmissions from the Afghan why we have
the transcripts that were recorded you know back in two thousand and one of all
these firefighters and first responders reporting explosions this testimony should
have caused the presumption that there was
a good chance explosive residue would be found and justified testing forward rather
than the opposite to doesn't look like a cloud it's like
a huge mushroom in billowing kind of an event. That whole
thing looks nothing like the building falling down it's
a building being blown up that's what the physics shows yet they refuse to consider
the possibility that explosives or some other form of the most of the vice
president used to cause the collapse of the towers and the fact that controlled
demolition is consistent with all the available tactical weapons and the response
to that request for correction is this simply saying they're unable to provide
a force relation for the total collapse even though that was their task given to
them by God.
They much documents
a twelve hundred foot diameter debris field around each tower videos show multi-ton
steel sections of hundreds of individual steel pieces be jetting out of the towers
at sixty miles an hour for
a distance of six hundred feet they also show clouds of debris whole horizon in mid
air and isolated explosive ejections as many as sixty stories below the so-called
partial so videos also show the near total destruction of both towers What
does all this tell us about the forces and energies involved and the destruction.
The spread of debris and no large radius around each tower what we see is an
outward explosion of material beyond the parameters of each footprint and this is
not expected and it's not can grow it with the reports of our government debris
that was shooting out for hundreds of feet in all directions seventy miles an hour
leaving the eighty a floor of the North Tower and making
a fairly level trajectory that to me is fairly alarming large
well to turn beams were hurled hundreds of yards laterally gravity works vertically
not laterally.
So something's happening to throw these things horizontally at those kinds of
speeds and here it is trailing white smoke the whole time it really is indicative
of some kind of explosion the individual explosions that I know is twenty and
thirty and forty stories below the collapsing structure and naysayers tend to say
well that's just error being blown out the windows for me it doesn't really work to
say it's just air pressure
a sign of these are coming out faster than hundred miles an hour the floors
pancaking upon themselves would create gushes of air out the side but not the. Kind
of explosive force that we saw that was through I beams across the street into the
windows of other buildings the exaction of the materials out of the building the
manner in which it fell the speed at which it fell exhibit all the signs of
demolitions and the completeness of destruction down to their individual elements
when the South Tower was destroyed at first it looked like it was going to land in
the street or take
a building out next to it and then all of the sudden it disappears in this huge
cloud of smoke. There were two shrubs
stations around one hundred eight for. The seventy fifth floor
and forty for each floor and the seventh floor at those eight locations there were
four Transformers in each substation that weighed over thirty thousand pounds
the Transformers would not explode on their own they were air cooled dry type
transformer and yet after the collapse there was no evidence of them
being found at the bottom of the tower. I wonder why.
As an architect I would expect to see. Larger portions of the building floors
the decking the steel decking the concrete topping much larger remnants of what the
structural components of this building was after all there was one hundred ten
floors in each building and each floor plate was over an acre in size we have no
explanation of how the concrete was pulverized it takes an enormous amount of
energy and there's no concrete this very little hungry boy you see the moon still
what happened to the concrete was over and I was down here Tuesday and it was like
you were on
a form planet of Lower Manhattan not just the site from river to river it was just
prouder to resist that the concrete was just. Pulverized.
In its report on the World Trade Center seven which came out in May of two thousand
and two the My Documents in Appendix C.
Steel that has been melted and even partially evaporated resembling Swiss cheese
what are we to make of this this was the size of steel that they used in the
construction of Tower seven they didn't use this particular kind of steel in towers
one or Towers two so that's why we know it's pedigree. It was
a surprise to me because it was so eroded and deformed and so.
We took it for analysis in the lab one section of steel was kept how it got to be
in its present state was described by The New York Times as perhaps the deepest
mystery uncovered in the investigation those parts where the entire half inch of
the beam is of has gone entirely dissolved right through and so something happened
to cause the steel to really stand and in some places to disappear entirely Well it
was attacked by what we determined was
a liquid slag when we did the analysis we actually identified it is and I know
a liquid containing iron sulfur and oxygen so Jonathan Barnett study which I
thought was very well done and quite extensive is all documented by Fema in Penn
Dixie and their in their be Pat report that was May of two thousand and two
unfortunately it was never used in the NIST report and I'd like to know why I
missed excluded the evidence of melting steel Why is this not included
Why is this forensic evidence not being included in the report.
First of all let's go back to your basic girlfriend is that there was
a pool with no more steel I know that absolutely no way no eyewitnesses there's
a little bit is that you get down below when you see molten
steel. Of molten steel running down the generals.