Windsor Building Fire BBC Report

[rockondon]

lindon johnston kills kennedy over 80billion dollar vietnam war..plus did uss liberty

[rockondon]

in the 70s the world trade center burned

for 6hours..nothing happened there eiether 911=iraqs oil

[spikenation69]

Steel melts at 1300 degrees LOL Steel melts at 2750 degrees. You government conspiracy theorist try to make up shit to justify your case. I bet they didn't find any pools of molten steel under that tower.

[pixarian72]

OK, the Windsor tower burned, hotter, much longer 18hrs and was still standing afterwards. Chunks fell off it, but but that's the dynamic of fire damage, bit's fall off over a long period. The Windsor Tower's steel beams were encased in concrete trapping the heat making the steel MUCH hotter than WTC and still it stood! The WTC fires were much less and the non-concrete encased steel would redistribute heat quickly. Windsor Tower actually supports WTC demolition theory.

[apc467]

Hey guys read the "Northwoord" operational reports of 1960's i think. They talk about how the US govt could blow up a boat and blame it on Cuba. They could also blow up a plane in mid flight abnd blame cuba... sound familiar?

If you think scams are above the US govt read the Watergate reports.... truly amazing stuff

[nachio12]

There was so much fire in the twin towers of the windsor madrid, look at the structure of windsor.

And that the collapse of building No. 7 world trade center, no planes and no impact was not even a big fire a few isolated fires as the towers and much lower.

Question to collapse the building No. 7, but no commercial aircraft impact.

[estandid]

i think we can agree on one thing (truthers and skeptics alike) - this fire did not look a thing like the wtc fires, down to the very color of the smoke (and volume) and also how it rises instead of hanging in the air like wtc.

[lamaravilla10460]

steal loses half its strength at 600° C ( 1,100° F)

- 911 research

That depends on the alloy of steel you are talking about. The term alloy is almost always used incorrectly these days, especially amongst bicyclists. They use the term to mean aluminum. What the term alloy really means is a mixture of metals, any kind of metals. Almost all metal used today is a mixture and therefore an alloy.... . Steel often melts at around 1370 degrees C (2500°F).

-Jefferson Lab

[MindsUnleashed]

BTW the world trade centers were the first modern steel structured buildings in history, anywhere in the world, to collapse from fire, and that includes plane crashes (i.e. Empire State building, Windsor Building in madrid 2005)

[LegoFan970]

Please don't ignore the fact that the Empire was hit by a SMALL B-52 bomber that was low on NORMAL AIRPLANE fuel, while the twin towers were struck by enormous jets loaded with highly combustible jet fuel.

[MindsUnleashed]

DON'T WASTE TIME ARGUING tell them that

JET FUEL BURNS AT 800 to 1,500 degrees Fahrenheit

Steel does not begin to weaken until 2,000F degrees, It gets red hot at 2,500F degrees, and melts at 2,750F degrees.

[BUBearL]

Building 7 was an operations HQ for the CIA, Dep.ofDef., FEMA, Secret Service, and the Securities and Exchange Commission.

Firefighters were NOT allowed to examine debris of Building 7.

TV show "LoneGunmen" aired the episode March 4 2001 dealing with a plot by the government to slam planes into the WTC to "further the objectives of the Military Industrial Complex"

Head of the Pakistani ISI was in Washington meeting with high level officials, when on 9-10, he wired $100000 to terrorist M. Atta

[BUBearL]

NORAD, in the first time in its history, was told to stand down directly from Cheney.

Fighter Jet Launch procedure was changed a few months before so that only Rumsfeld could order an intercept.

Hijackers listed on their DLs and place of residence as being at AFBs such as Lackland and Maxwell AFB's Air War College, learning explosives techniques, strategy and tactics.

Molten steel which was found up to Jan to Feb 2002, more then what jet fuel was capable of.

[BUBearL]

The Phoenix Memo, Richard Clark's Memo, the first WTC bombing which was directly orchestrated by the FBI who first paid the terrorists to build the bomb, put them bomb in place, then detonate it, then arrest them.

The CIA and NORAD, on 9-11, were having a drill in regards to planes being used to hit the WTC. Repeat: a drill on the same day in regards to the same situation.

[BUBearL]

"Man dude, I can't help. Just keep telling yurself Osama ordered NORAD standowns, FBI warrant denials, removal of bomb dogs the week prior, phantom inputs on ATC radar, hijackers trained at US military..."

Let me clarify the surrounding facts.

Operation Northwoods, a CIA/DoD plan from 1962 calling for staged terror attacks so the American public would be for an invasion of Cuba.

[CACBCCCU]

"7 was fucked up on the north side. you dont see any pictures because that was the side facing the towers and was off limits ..."

The corner was hit by a very large and heavy photoshop brush:

"Popular Mechanics and NIST caught doctoring WTC 7 photos!"

watch?v=_3uQI2msoDA

The most serious early damage seems to have been caused by a narrow black banner rolled down the middle the wall and given the name "gash."

"ABC 13:54 WTC7 'damage'"

watch?v=5GEEzHn4tqo

[bansidh]

One would think if one support was destroyed the building would topple in that direction. The amazing thing is the way it came straight down INTO the path of greatest resistance. Maybe it should have fallen towards the ruined north side.

[GO2NU8]

Watch this video AGM-158 JASSM Air Force connect the Dots

[ayebretwalda]

Man dude, I can't help. Just keep telling yurself Osama ordered NORAD standowns, FBI warrant denials, removal of bomb dogs the week prior, phantom inputs on ATC radar, hijackers trained at US military... I never said "fully covered". I said "buried" - stories deep, you can verify that by looking at any ground level photo. That amount of debris connotates an INCREDIBLY large amount of mass falling on it. Leave out WTC 3 because it was squashed? Are you now saying WTC 7 was squashed? LOL.

[moviedude111]

some people are so patriotic, it is like back in the day when people believed the world was flat. No amount of logic will change there mind, they are brainwashed.

[Modelmaterial7]

Hahah.. indeed. I've been fighting these numbskulls for weeks. Thank you for that fine analogy, i may have used it once or twice.

[ayebretwalda]

plug in this vid: ...watch?v=hZ6OYDUVWuw

The initial part of the collapse sequence (stairway/penthouse - ironically where Barry Jennings was when it blew up BEFORE 1 & 2 came down) is no more an evidence for collapse by fire than it is for a controlled demolition.

Can you show me a comparable structure collapsing "due to fire"?

Again, why did WTC 4,5, & 6 remain upright while sustaining incredible damage?

[Gormanmod]

there are 3 possibility to those squibs. Your demo theory, the highly unlike compressed air theory (due to hight vs. weight), or the very possible breaking of glass with the ash within coming out.

Being a lover of large explosions and a studied of physics, it takes quite a large explosion to break steel. In Iraq, we see steel structures surviving tank shells, and they're quite a sight. If one wanted to make explosions, there would need to be more then just squibs...

[Gormanmod]

after all,an explosion IS compressing air with enough force and energy so as to break something.

[BoberMcBoberson]

Because 4,5, and 6 were all only 9 floor high, therefore not even remotely close to the amount of mass pushing down on the other buildings. Do you conspiracy theorist think about anything? You guys always claim to know your physics, but consistently overlook the obvious.

[ayebretwalda]

LOL. Good Lord. You are right though - not even remotely close to the amount of mass pushing down. Probably 100's of times more - 1 & 2 buried them. Do you coincidence theorists think about anything? You guys always claim to know your physics, but consistently overlook the obvious.

[BoberMcBoberson]

The areas of 4,5, and 6 hit by 1 and 2 were crushed, they were never fully covered like you say, you can verify that by looking at any aerial photo, and why do you guys always leave out WTC 3 it was squashed flat.

[Gormanmod]

...The thing is, the wtc towers came down interestingly, yes I'll give you credit there, but the wtc7 took a very slow time to collapse, not the out of no where" style of the towers.

[ayebretwalda]

LOLZ. Look at the footage from NJ bub - the chunk never hit WTC7. Plain as day. Funny though - how WTC 4,5,& 6 - though right under the towers - never collapse. DOH!

No, actually I don't blindly accept as you do. Like most I followed the rhetoric for years until I investigated it beyond the lame explanations. It's funny your so sure when even NIST is not.

[ayebretwalda]

Yes that's what NIST says (and still admits they can't explain the total collapse in its own footprint in <10 seconds). Seen any photos of this anecdotal claim? Didn't think so.

I have watched Barry Jennings interview though - in the building before WTC 1&2 collapsed - witnessed explosions in the stairwells - saw dead bodies...

...Keep drinking the Kool-Aid it tastes fantastic!

[graphicism]

Silent bombs?... no explosions heard? Watch CKFn3aRRcY4&NR=1

[bansidh]

I don't really have an agenda. I saw controlled demolitions and expected the government to take that into account. Then came the amazing statement from Bush and Cheney that they did NOT want an investigation. That made no sense at all. I have enough physics to know that nothing falls into the path of greatest resistance. There is something very wrong here. I would like to know what is going on.

[bansidh]

Why didn't the steel in the

Windsor building lose it's resistance and fall?

[matchesison]

first off, windsor wasnt hit by a plane thus displacing structural steel. second, have you ever seen a building fall that wasnt deliberately taken down? how do you know what a "controlled demolition" looks like compared to an uncontrolled demolition

[bansidh]

Building seven was not hit by a plane either. What do you think it takes to turn thousands of pounds of steel and concrete into fine dust.  More than a fire.

[bansidh]

The bombs were not silent. Explosions were reported by hundreds of people, Firemen and Police included. Building 7 was the old fashioned demolition . 1 and 2 were a little different. However the janitor reported a huge explosion in the basement, shortly before the plane hit. His name is William Rodriguez if you want to check it out. BTW if you learn your history you will see that most (not all)terrorist attacks are done by governments to control the people.

[matchesison]

and im not calling you stupid or anything. but if you can come across the video footage that was taken in the tower one lobby, you can hear explosions too. but, the "explosions" were people hitting the metal awnings and cars and other things like that after jumping a hundred plus floors....and in building 7 there were fuel lines going to emergency generators and they were all on fire. could those have blown up? who knows. all im saying is that there was a lot of shit blowing up that day.

[bansidh]

I know a controlled demolition when I see one, and I saw three on September 11, 2001 and so did all of you. I guess I am just an unworthy person who cannot see the beautiful material of the Emperor's New Clothes.

[psikeyhackr]

Windsor Twr. 131 ft x 82 ft x 348 ft tall

30 flrs of WTC 205 ft x 205 ft x 360 ft tall

There had to be enough steel on the 80th floor of the south WTC to hold FOUR Windsor Towers. But we don't hear how much steel was on every level of the buildings see WTC Impact Model - MIT

[eamonradecki]

ya except that completely wrong. the entire steel core was in the very center. steel cores can't exactly "pancake" their way into dust, moron.

[TVnostalgia]

The New York towers fell because all the support was on the outside - they were unique in that design which made them fell. They were also damaged by gallons of burning aviation fuel soaking through, which made things worse.

Reading other comments, I can't believe that people are still harping on about conspiracy theories.

[Dominuce]

no the main supports were on the inside hence the name core-columns, core is in the middle or center not outside. So please stop making up answer to an argument witch you know nothing about or obviously get paid to ignore

[Spanishfries]

stop watching tv

[bobo480]

911 was an inside job

[LolLoosechange]

Chief Daniel Nigro.

"The biggest decision we had to make was to clear the area and create a collapse zone around the severely damaged [WTC 7] building. A number of fire officers and companies assessed the damage to the building. The appraisals indicated that the building's integrity was in serious doubt."

[Dominuce]

Umm let me let you feel stupid for a moment, there something called building codes, where the state list parameters on witch a building must be able to perform under server condition like hurricanes and fires. so by knowing what building who building 7 housed CIA FBI etc...would agree that the structure would have to be better then average

[LolLoosechange]

Just when you thought it was over, you're walking by this building and you're hearing this building creak and fully involved in flames. It's like, is it coming down next? Sure enough, about a half an hour later it came down. --FDNY Lieutenant James McGlynn

[Eyrothath]

What we must understand about the WTC is that they suffered structure damage, HEAVY structure damage.. So it wasn't just the fires at fault..

[Dominuce]

So did the post office, and building 3,4,5 witch were directly under WTC 1,2 and they remained structurally intact and standing very firm after been hit with the a 110 stories of building

[CordovaMage]

The core of this building was made out of concrete. Hence why the core stayed standing while the steel melted away. This building has no connection what so ever with proving or disproving anything with the WTC buildings. Only thing it shows is that steel isnt as great as concrete when it comes to stability during a fire.

Molly, youre an idiot...go read up before you make such outlandish conclusions, these conspiracy nut jobs rely on you not to look into the whole truth.

[AlphaCid85]

holy shit... someone knows what they're talking about. THANK YOU

[Dominuce]

if you referring to

CordovaMage

LolLoosechange

TVnostalgia

the only thing they know is the fine art of bullshit

[MoteparaMotim]

«The core of this building was made out of concrete.»

That's utterly false. WTC7 was a steel framed building, its core was made of steel just like the towers.

«Hence why the core stayed standing while the steel melted away. »

1. WTC7 wasn't hit by anything.

2. WTC7 had some small fires in some floors. They were never properly explained.

3. Stell doesn't melt at the high temperatures provoked by any of the fires on all WTCs.

[LolLoosechange]

WTC7 DID NOT have "small fires". Look at the south side of the building. WTC7 was hit by debris from the collapsing towers. Hit had 20 story chunk taking out.

[bazrippa]

Rubbish. WTC7 had small fires and the damage to the building was superficial!

Do some research man!!!!!!!

[LolLoosechange]

Watch this vid /watch?v=Afb7eUHr64U.

Are you telling me that ain't big!!!

[bazrippa]

Er am i missing something?

Is there supposed to be a hole in the building somewhere?

Compared to the fire in Madrid this is pathetic, black smoke means an oxygen starved fire and ultimately low temperature fire.

This is not a good attempt to debunk!! (NEXT)

[LolLoosechange]

There is no absolute rule of "black smoke = an oxygen-starved fire". It's not as simple as that. You need to consider the materials that are burning.

Any analysis that attempts to extract meaning from the smoke colour, then, should also consider what might be burning at that point in the WTC fire.

[bazrippa]

If a fire does not have oxygen then it will not burn efficiently resulting in a low temperature burn and black smoke!!

[LolLoosechange]

I don't know how long this was going on, but I remember standing there looking over at building 7 and realizing that a big chunk of the lower floors had been taken out on the Vesey Street side. I looked up at the building and I saw smoke in it, but I really didn't see any fire at that time. Deputy ----Chief Nick Visconti

[bazrippa]

I copied and pasted something from a website only to prove that your comments were not factual! Now it appears that you want to copy and paste the entire contents of google in an attempt to prove your knowledge!

Im sorry but you are UNEDUCATED and stupid!!!!

For gods sake do some research!!!!!!

[MoteparaMotim]

«youre an idiot»

You are totally wrong about WTC7 and you obviously never made any research on 9/11 by yourself. You seem to believe everything the media tells you. Who's the real idiot?

[Dominuce]

ummmmm that made %110 no sense, every building in Manhattan does have concrete in the core witch you are correct but 100 times out of a 100 they are being applied over a steal network of supports, i would be very very unlikely to have the core supports of a building made of substance they can easlly corroded over time and turn to pudding under fire??????hence building codes

[AlphaCid85]

Building codes?? Have you seen the change in how buildings are constructed in the past few decades? Everything is moving to lightweight truss and steel truss construction which collapses after minutes of being exposed to high heat.

[sirfingerlock]

So that means they are going to have to redesign all of these buildings because they are fire hazards, right? Or are they going to allow them to stand?

[AlphaCid85]

Building codes have continuously made little things (sprinkler systems, standpipes, outward swinging doors w/ panic bars) safer, while at the same time they fail to address big things (lightweight construction, bowstring trusses, polyurethane/polyethylene/PVC materials etc) that make fires exponentially more dangerous. I'm not saying anything is going to change, i'm saying that the presence building codes doesn't mean that buildings won't burn and or collapse.

[cptsolaris]

I can tell you from a Los Angeles perspective. After the last major earthquakes we had, building codes were revised from a 1996 edition to a 1998. Although no skyscrapper collapsed, or even faced demolition, the building and even some construction codes, changed enough to let the rest of us know that our guard isn't being let down.

As for the Big Apple, if you havn't noticed any positive change in your codes someone is dropping the ball, you guys actually had buildings collapse!

[AlphaCid85]

...and those building codes still allow truss construction in all types of buildings... but it's apparently all ok because they say that all the doors have to swing outwards. Not to mention, when was the last time a commercial airliner slammed into a high-rise building in L.A.?

[MollyMason2u]

Great video.....shows building 7 DEFINITELY was a controlled demolition.....thanks!!!!

[grokker]

no it doesn't???!

[cinevidproductions]

Yes, only America can boast the kind of engineering marvels that make steel high rise buildings fall into a pile of dust from a fire that only lasted an hour and a half.

[bonusonus]

Look at the damage that a conventional fire can cause. The steel is deforming incredibly due to the heat of the fire and it doesn't even have 30+ stories on top of it...

[3theThird]

Only three hi-rise steel buildings have ever collapsed due to fires. All within hours of each other. None with the kind of damage seen on this vid or even in the prior WTC tower fire of 1975.

Good video. Deserves to be seen.