Collapse of World Trade Center

Five years later, 9/11 blogger explores perplexing factors of tower’s fall

Adam Parrott, Sci ’06
Adam Parrott, Sci ’06

A Scripps Howard/Ohio University poll conducted in July 2006 found that 36 per cent of Americans believe that it is “very likely” or “somewhat likely” that federal officials either participated in the attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon or took no action to stop them “because they wanted the United States to go to war in the Middle East.” The poll also found that 16 per cent of Americans believe that the towers and World Trade Center Building Seven were destroyed by explosives. This is starkly different from the official narrative which states that they collapsed from a combination of plane crashes and office fires.

Why the great discrepancy—and how do these two theories stand up against each other?

World Trade Building Seven was a 47-storey building with a steel frame that housed many federal agencies, including the C.I.A. In close proximity to the two towers, the building was said to have been evacuated early that day after it suffered minor damage. The fires were small and would have been routine work for New York City firefighters, but they left the building. Around 5:20 pm on 9/11, the building disappeared in under seven seconds into a cloud of smoke.

The official story claims that an explosion of diesel fuel tanks in the basement caused the complete collapse of the building, but the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) official report admits that “The specifics of the fires in building seven and how they caused the building to collapse remain unknown at this time.

Although the total diesel fuel on the premises contained massive potential energy, the best hypothesis has only a low probability of occurrence.”

The investigations into tower seven leave some disturbing questions.

Why did FEMA quit probing when it admits its theory is highly unlikely? Strangely, FEMA’s non-investigation is consistent with that of the official 9/11 Commission Report: the collapse of building seven is not mentioned once in the 571-page document.

Let’s revisit the events:

Building seven collapsed into itself in about seven seconds, accelerating downward at nearly the rate of objects in free-fall.

Hardly any damage is caused to the surrounding buildings because it collapses onto its own base, or “footprint.” Nothing is left of the building but a one-storey pile of rubble.

During the collapse, a kink forms near the centre of the building, indicating a near-centre column is the first to fail.

A row of “squibs,” or dust-jets are seen shooting out of the building sequentially. Huge expanding dust clouds made of pulverized concrete puff out of the base.

Mixtures of liquid steel are found in the rubble weeks after the collapse, which simply cannot be produced by office fires. These are unknown events for typical office fires; these events are expected in controlled demolitions.

Larry Silverstein, the building’s owner said on PBS’s 9/11 special, America Rebuilds: “I remember getting a call from the fire department commander… and I said ‘We’ve had such a terrible loss of life, maybe the smartest thing to do is pull it.’ And they made that decision to pull and we watched the building collapse.”

The phrase “pull it” is an industry-wide term for “demolish.”

Reviewing the footage of the collapse, Queen’s civil engineering professor, Luke Bisby said, “The collapse of building seven looks similar to the type of collapse that one would expect in a controlled demolition.”

Controlled demolition cannot be done in a day. It takes demolition experts weeks of careful planning. The physical evidence for the controlled demolition of building seven, the United States government’s refusal to properly investigate, and the surprising omission of this issue from the front page of our newspapers is alarming.

We ought to seriously re-evaluate the recent changes in our foreign policy that stemmed from 9/11, the so-called War on Terror and our occupation of Afghanistan.

Moreover, we need to recognize that the media is obstructing the truth about building seven and ask ourselves, why?

----------

Adam Parrott is a recent Queen’s grad who maintains the blog, 911truthkingston.blogspot.com. He is currently organizing the formation of the 9/11 Truth Campus Action Network.

When commenting, be considerate and respectful of writers and fellow commenters. Try to stay on topic. Spam and comments that are hateful or discriminatory will be deleted. Our full commenting policy can be read here.