9/11: So Much Debris Hit WTC7 from twin tower, BLOCKED Building 7, says ABC News on 9/11

[BatmansArse]

Rubbish!

[Gonga2121]

@19d4life Grow up! Do u really belive he meant to "pull" the firefighters??? He said "we decided to pull it" Do you believe "it" is referring to the firefighters??? Stop being ridiculous... i'm done with this!

[Mikester1200]

@Gonga2121 One of your major theory's in the 911 conspiracy is the media was in on it so why would they show him saying that if it was to mean demolition?

[Gonga2121]

@Mikester1200 What i believe is that someone besides the "cave mans" are involved in this attacks. This is why that many anwsers are still waiting to be replyed, i mean if they have nothing to hide they can anwser it right?

[Gonga2121]

@19d4life Im wrong? i proved i'm right. Instead of insulting try to come up with proof! How can you americans be so blind...

[Gonga2121]

@19d4life "The term "pull it" means pull it over. The term isn't used much today, because of the modern equipment used by demolition contractors. Fifty years ago wrecking contractors were less affluent, they depended more on ingenuity in the work place than on equipment. This was especially true when large buildings were taken down with hand labor. In those situations most interior and exterior walls had to be cabled and "pulled" in onto floors. "

[Gonga2121]

The owner of the World Trade Centers (the three that collapsed) said in an interview that he and the FDNY decided to PULL the building.

God even the owner admits that the demo. was planned....

[mrjazz747]

Funny how there was another building directly across the towers that was heavily damaged, and a lot smaller than building 7 and it didn't fall down. Very, very fishy!

[cancanbiker]

Tell us who hired John O'Neil?

[JonathonMoseley]

@cancanbiker Why do you -- like most people -- ask questions you can easily look up for yourself? In the few seconds it took to post the question, you could have found the answer. John P. O'Neill, anti-terrorism expert at the FBI and expert on Al Qaeda, was hired by Kroll Associates. Kroll Associates was hired to improve security at the World Trade Center as a result of the 1993 bombing of the Wolrd Trade Center

[cancanbiker]

@JonathonMoseley

Exactly. He was hired by Hauer @ Kroll. Kroll leads to AIG and the money trail goes from there. Kroll is like a private cia.... My point was Hauer has his fingerprints all over 9 11and its strange the managing director of the company doing security for the WTC is on TV on 9 11 to give the official story. Don't be fooled as he describes how the debris from the collapse weakened WTC7 because he knew they were coming down.

[JonathonMoseley]

@cancanbiker "leads" and "money trail" are complete crap. That is the crazy talk of conspiracy nuts.

Security of the WTC was run by the NY City Police, Port Authority Division. The owner of the WTC was and is the NY Port Authority. It was leased by Silverstein Properties.

John O'Neill and Kroll merely provided ADVICE to the NY Port Authority on how to improve security after 1993.

John O'Neill was an anti-terrorist leader in the FBI

[cancanbiker]

@Jonathon

John O 'Neil didn't start his job until shortly before 9 11and he was head of security. Given Hauer's connection to OEM and Giuliani and the fact O'Neil was head of security and the fact they do building security globally I believe their apparatus consisted of more than merely giving advice about car bombings. Jerry Hauer was OEM director and was a critical figure in getting the OEM in WTC 7. I agree the PA was in large responsible for security but wouldn't loose sight of Kroll

[JonathonMoseley]

@cancanbiker No, John O'Neil was not head of security of the World Trade Center. He was hired by ONE PARTICULAR COMPANY that rented space inside the World Trade Center to provide security.

Security for the WTC was and is run by the NYC Police Department, NY Port Authority division. The owner of the WTC is the NY Port Authority.

Kroll Associates had NO significant role in the operational security at WTC -- only providing consulting advice = studies, white papers, written reports

[Emsworker68]

The title of your video says: So much debris hit WTC 7. But no where in your video do you show this damage to WTC 7. Your title also says the debris was blocking WTC 7. But blocking a building is very different from hiting a building and doing structural damage.

[JonathonMoseley]

@Emsworker68 Yeah, actually it does show the debris hitting the WTC. Watch the video again

[Emsworker68]

@JonathonMoseley I know, I have seen other videos in the last two months that show some debris strike. Still, the fires were isolated and should not have lead to a uniform collapse that we saw that day.

[dreamdiction]

@JonathonMoseley Building 7 sustained only minor damages, see photos below.

.wtc7.net/damageclaims.html

[Seller3D]

this 9/11 is a planed thing not no dam accident . this is all planed out years before it happened. and happened on purpose .

[jtrish23]

the 9/11 comission,the NIST reports are not telling the truth!!!!! in fact they can't even answer some of the most simple questions and flat out refuse to answer them!!!!! so keep going by those reports and be happy with those lies but we all know the truth!!! and it's not coming from your wack put together videos!!!!

[JonathonMoseley]

The 9/11 Commission was not INTENDED to answer the types of questions you have.

The Commission was convened to investigate why the US government failed to detect and prevent the 9/11 attacks, and how well the govt responded.

The questions you have are completely outside the scope of the 9/11 Commmission.

There were dozens of OTHER investigations that dealt with your questions.

Private engineers and building experts were on site within HOURS, and have reported extensively.

[Skeptic121]

"The building DID collapse as it collapsed"

Oh...I see; thanks Jonathan, that really clears it up for me.

Care to explain the 2.25 seconds of free fall acceleration?

"Was any of the steel defective?" Gee, let's look at the debris and find out. Oops, we can't because it was sent to Asia for recycling.

I guess I'll just have to take your word for everything.

[JonathonMoseley]

Wrong. The steel was taken to the "Fresh Kills" salvage yards, taken over for the purpose, were 2,000 agents painstakingly examiend 55,000 bits of evidence from the WTC debris.

Why do you lie? Go to the 911Reality webiste and click on

NO Evidence Lost or Destroyed

However, if any material were defective, it would colapse at that point, and you would not be able to tell later. You assume that every building is the same. Most don't even conform to their own blueprints.

[Skeptic121]

No, you are disingenuous.The debris was taken to Fresh Kills, where it could have stayed indefinitely, without bothering anyone. THEN it was shipped to Asia for recycling. Bill Manning of Fire Engineering complained about it at the time.

Later, he "got with the program" and said Yes, it was checked out enough; fine to recycle now.

I do not understand why the debris needed to be thrown away, ever. The bullet that killed Abe Lincoln is in the Smithsonian, under argon. Why not throw IT away?

[JonathonMoseley]

Why would it stay there indefinitely? At whose expense? The Fresh Kills yard were not for free and had to be used for other things.

The debris was exhaustively examined and investigated.

Everything that you think should be done WAS ALREADY DONE.

There was absolutely no reason to keep it after the investigation was complete.

Lincoln's bullet does not weight several hundred thousand tons.

Land in NYC is at a premium. It is not free.

[Skeptic121]

So how much would it cost to keep the WTC debris at Fresh Kills as compared to, say, the investigation of Clinton's blowjobs?

[JonathonMoseley]

Keep ti for what? 2,000 agents spent months inspecting it all. Thousands of private volunteers participated. Private engineers, private university professors, private construction experts.

The job was done.

Why should they spend 1 dime hanging on to it simply for you?

[Skeptic121]

"Land in NYC is not free? Well, have you been by Fresh Kills recently? Notice any construction there? I didn't think so! As for shipping it to Asia for recycling, why not sell it to the highest American bidder? I would have bought a few pieces for more than the recyclers paid...and I would have come and gotten it!

[monkinator66]

keep it for what? have you lost sight of your own argument, you soft bastard?

[JonathonMoseley]

Again, one of the errors of the 9/11 Truthers is the idea that the entire world revolves around you.

No one is trying to, has to, or cares about proving toyou indivudally what happened on 9/11.

No one owes you an explanation or any proof.

An investigation was conducted -- many investigations in fact -- involving private engineers, university professors, construction experts, etc.

They determined what happened.

No one is going to show up and give you a personal briefing

[Skeptic121]

Guess what JonathonMoseley: lots of debunkers are willing to explain their arguments in great detail. Maybe they are just smarter than you are.

No problem.

[JonathonMoseley]

So you admit that you already know you are wrong.

Why do you keep lying when you already know the truth, when your errors have already been pointed out to you?

No, the bottom line is that no amount of explanation will penetrate until some underlying assumptions are cleared up.

YOu find it suspicious that nobody came over to your house and spread out the evidence on your kitchen table. That aint' never gonna happen. Your expectations are flawed.

You must fix that first

[Skeptic121]

No, I said that there are some smart debunkers who are willing to explain what they believe and why. I might not agree with them, but I respect their willingness to engage. Do you really not understand that? Are you a child?

[JonathonMoseley]

I understand that you KNOW you are wrong but refuse to admit it.

The heart of the 9/11 Falsers arguments starts with the idea that unless THEY PERSONALLY are convinced, then the public explanation of 9/11 cannot be true.

This is an impossible std, b/c they refuse to listen to the truth.

If you are honestly seeking understanding, that's great.

But you're not, and we all know it.

You WANT the result to be a certain result, regardless of the evidence.

You have to start right

[Skeptic121]

Well, guess what Jonathon: not everyone who disagrees with you knows he is wrong. I don't suppose YOU think you are wrong so stop putting words in my mouth?

I don't go to your work and knock the dick out of your mouth..so don't put words in mine.

[JonathonMoseley]

The building DID collapse as it collapsed.

And this is consistent with its design.

YOU have the burden of proof. YOU are trying to argue that WTC 7 COULD NOT have collapsed from fire alone and physical damage.

YOU must exclude every other possibility.

9/11 Truthers somehow imagine that we have to prove something to you.

A building is highly complex. Fire is complex and chaotic. 

Was any of the steel defective? DId they MISS any welds? FORGET any connector bolts?

[Skeptic121]

Fine, but we all agree the debris hit the SOUTH side of WTC7. Nevertheless, the NORTH side dropped right along with the south side.

[JonathonMoseley]

Answering your question requires pages to explain.

You need to understand how modern buildings are constructed. Centuries ago architects realized that if one side of a building were damaged, that side would fall down and the rest would follow like dominos.

Modern (major) buildings MUST be built with "load shifting" that redistributes the load. The bldg resists collapse. Thus, when it fails, it must fail everywhere at once. The undamaged part holds up the damaged part as long as possible

[Skeptic121]

Are you claiming that no building like WTC7 could collapse other than the way WTC7 did?

Are you claiming that no such building could tip over instead of dropping straight? There are videos of buildings tipping over following a bad demolition...so was it something special about WTC7? If so, could you explain it to us? Thanks!

[JonathonMoseley]

Don't be absurd. What other buildings did is 100% irrelevant. No 2 bldgs are the same. No bldg even conforms to its blueprints.

It is a simpleton mental disease to expect every building in the world to behave exactly the same way, though designed and constructed differently under very different conditions.

Doesn't that sound absurd to you?

In a bad demolition, explosives operate on one side but not the other What relevance does that have here?