“Footage That Kills 9/11 Conspiracy Theories” Actually Validates Them Written by Paul Joseph Watson, Infowars.com, 11/2/2011 Tuesday, 15 November 2011 21:21 UK’s Daily Mail newspaper claims weakening of ‘exterior beams’ caused WTC 7 collapse Editor’s note: In this incisive article , Infowars journalist Paul Joseph Watson refutes the illogical claims of an overambitious reporter from the UK Daily Mail, who asserts that video footage confirms the destruction of WTC Building 7 by office fires. The Daily Mail article comes in stark contrast to the easily accessible and understandable evidence of the controlled demolition of WTC 7 on the afternoon of 9/11. Official sources claim that small isolated pockets of fire, like this one, destroyed the mammoth WTC 7 high-rise – dropping it in just seconds into its own foo In perhaps one of the weakest and downright laughable 9/11 hit pieces ever published, the UK’s Daily Mail newspaper, not noted for its commitment to accuracy, presents old footage as new to make the ludicrous claim that WTC 7 collapsed due to “exterior” damage caused by fires. The Mail article claims the video was recently released via a FOIA request and represents new footage, yet virtually identical footage has been available for years, as well as high quality photographs which depict the same scene showing World Trade Center Building 7, which was not hit by a plane, shortly before its collapse in the late afternoon of 9/11. The story, written by Meghan Keneally, claims that the “unseen” footage “kills the conspiracy theories” surrounding the collapse of WTC 7 as it shows the building being “consumed by fire.” 1 / 7
Transcript
“Footage That Kills 9/11 Conspiracy Theories” Actually Validates Them
Written by Paul Joseph Watson, Infowars.com, 11/2/2011Tuesday, 15 November 2011 21:21
UK’s Daily Mail newspaper claims weakening of ‘exterior beams’ causedWTC 7 collapse
Editor’s note: In this incisive article , Infowars journalist Paul Joseph Watson refutes theillogical claims of an overambitious reporter from the UK Daily Mail, who asserts that videofootage confirms the destruction of WTC Building 7 by office fires. The Daily Mail article comesin stark contrast to the easily accessible and understandable evidence of the controlleddemolition of WTC 7 on the afternoon of 9/11.
Official sources claim that small isolated pockets of fire, like this one, destroyed the mammoth WTC 7 high-rise – dropping it in just seconds into its own footprint
In perhaps one of the weakest and downright laughable 9/11 hit pieces ever published, the UK’sDaily Mail newspaper, not noted for its commitment to accuracy, presents old footage as new tomake the ludicrous claim that WTC 7 collapsed due to “exterior” damage caused by fires.
The Mail article claims the video was recently released via a FOIA request and representsnew footage, yet virtually identical footage has been available for years, aswell as high quality photographs which depict the same scene showing World Trade CenterBuilding 7, which was not hit by a plane, shortly before its collapse in the late afternoon of 9/11.
The story, written by Meghan Keneally, claims that the “unseen” footage “kills the conspiracytheories” surrounding the collapse of WTC 7 as it shows the building being “consumed by fire.”
“Footage That Kills 9/11 Conspiracy Theories” Actually Validates Them
Written by Paul Joseph Watson, Infowars.com, 11/2/2011Tuesday, 15 November 2011 21:21
“ In accusing “conspiracy theorists” of inventing “wild claims” to substantiate their explanations, Keneally has dreamt up the wildest claim yet – that the structural integrity of modern buildings rests on their exterior beams and window frames. ”
According to Keneally, the clip proves that “Building 7 was brought down by the intense heat ofthe blazing World Trade Center.” Presumably, she means the Twin Towers of the World TradeCenter, which had already collapsed into rubble eight hours before WTC 7 imploded.
In reality, the footage shows nothing that we didn’t already know – specifically that the buildingwas not “consumed by fire,” as has happened in the case of numerous other modern buildingswhich did not collapse despite being ravaged by flames at every level.
The video clip only serves to confirm the fact that the fires in WTC 7 were relatively limited andby no means had “consumed” the building. The fires were nowhere near powerful enough tothreaten the structural integrity of a 47-story building.
However, this is not the most ludicrous aspect of the Mail hit piece. Keneally goes on tobizarrely claim that the footage proves how “the building’s exterior frame could no longerwithstand the high temperatures,” and how the “buckling” of these “exterior metal beams,” “ledto floors falling in on one another, causing the building to collapse.”
Yes, you read that correctly – Keneally is claiming that the structural integrity of modernbuildings – the part that prevents them from collapsing – rests on “exterior metal beams.”
“Footage That Kills 9/11 Conspiracy Theories” Actually Validates Them
Written by Paul Joseph Watson, Infowars.com, 11/2/2011Tuesday, 15 November 2011 21:21
FEMA’s Appendix C documents what amounts to proof of demolition by incendiaries
Even NIST’s official investigation of the collapse, which has been challenged by the thousandsof professionals who make up Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth, was not (stupid) enoughto suggest that “exterior” damage can cause a building to collapse in its own footprint. Theofficial report, which Keneally has obviously not even checked, claims that the fires weakenedthe interior core columns of the building, not the “exterior metal beams”.
If you knew that a building was supported by its “exterior” beams you wouldn’t even dare goinside. The building would never even be approved for construction in the first place.
According to Keneally, the footage shows “how there is legitimacy to the explanation providedby the government’s 9/11 Commission investigation,” which is a strange argument to makeconsidering the fact that the 9/11 Commission didn’t even investigate the collapse of WTC 7.
“ If the collapse of WTC 7 came as a result of a “new phenomenon” and an “extraordinary event,” then why did news stations and ground zero workers know it was about to happen a hour or more in advance? ”
In accusing “conspiracy theorists” of inventing “wild claims” to substantiate their explanations,
3 / 7
“Footage That Kills 9/11 Conspiracy Theories” Actually Validates Them
Written by Paul Joseph Watson, Infowars.com, 11/2/2011Tuesday, 15 November 2011 21:21
Keneally has dreamt up the wildest claim yet – that the structural integrity of modern buildingsrests on their exterior beams and window frames.
One wonders how such a ham-fisted and inadequate story, which comes across like it waswritten by a child for a school essay, can make it past the editorial board and into the pages of amajor national newspaper.
As we have documented, WTC 7 was a structurally reinforced building that was designed tohave floors removed without collapsing.
In its final report on the collapse of WTC 7, NIST claimed that the never before observed “newphenomenon” of “thermal expansion” was to blame for the destruction of the building, acompletely ludicrous conclusion in a report that simply ignores eyewitness testimony and hardevidence that points to the deliberate demolition of the structure.
“Footage That Kills 9/11 Conspiracy Theories” Actually Validates Them
Written by Paul Joseph Watson, Infowars.com, 11/2/2011Tuesday, 15 November 2011 21:21
There are almost 100 examples of very hot, large, and long lasting fires in high-rises, and not one has collapsed
NIST completely fails to address prior knowledge of the building’s collapse, including why news outlets like the BBC and CNN reportedthat the building had collapsed an hour before it actually fell, as well as firefighters on the scenewho are heard on video saying, “Keep your eye on that building, it’ll be coming down soon.
If the collapse of WTC 7 came as a result of a “new phenomenon” and an “extraordinary event”that had never happened before in the history of building collapses, then why did news stationsand ground zero workers know it was about to happen an hour or more in advance?
NIST claims that the collapse of Building 7 is “The first known instance of fire causing the totalcollapse of a tall building”.
We are actually being asked to believe the impossible – that WTC 7 was the only building inhistory to have defied all precedent and suffered a complete and almost instantaneous collapsefrom fire damage alone, despite this being an impossibility if one accepts the basic laws ofphysics as accurate.
“Footage That Kills 9/11 Conspiracy Theories” Actually Validates Them
Written by Paul Joseph Watson, Infowars.com, 11/2/2011Tuesday, 15 November 2011 21:21
Building 7 falls as fast as a bowling ball dropped off the top of the building
The issue of molten metal, which was discovered under both the twin towers and WTC 7,suggesting an extremely hot burning agent was used in the demolition process, is completelyignored in NIST’s report, despite it being acknowledged in Appendix C of FEMA’s World TradeCenter Building Performance Study, which stated:
“Evidence of a severe high temperature corrosion attack on the steel, including oxidation andsulfidation with subsequent intergranular melting, was readily visible in the near-surfacemicrostructure. A liquid eutectic mixture containing primarily iron, oxygen, and sulfur formedduring this hot corrosion attack on the steel… The severe corrosion and subsequent erosion ofSamples 1 and 2 are a very unusual event. No clear explanation for the source of the sulfur hasbeen identified.”
6 / 7
“Footage That Kills 9/11 Conspiracy Theories” Actually Validates Them
Written by Paul Joseph Watson, Infowars.com, 11/2/2011Tuesday, 15 November 2011 21:21
Speaking during a press conference that was called to counter NIST, Richard Gage, founder ofArchitects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth and a member of the American Institute of Architects,dismissed the report.
“Tons of [molten metal] were found 21 days after the attack,” said Gage in an interview with aVancouver, Canada television station. “Steel doesn’t begin to melt until 2,700 degrees, which ismuch hotter than what these fires could have caused.”
The core of NIST’s explanation, that an “extraordinary event” called “thermal expansion” was toblame for the sudden total collapse of the building is of course on the face of it a fraud whenone considers the innumerable number of buildings that have suffered roaring fires across themajority of their floors and remained standing , whereas WTC 7 sufferedlimited fire damage across less than a quarter of its total floor space.
NIST also claims that the building only fell at 40% free fall speed, as if this isn’t suspicious initself.
Remember that this 47-story behemoth took just 7 seconds to completely collapse within itsown footprint falling through the path of most resistance.
