Wednesday, June 03, 2009


Questions and Answers about the NIST WTC 7 Investigation (Updated 04/21/2009)
For example: 
What caused the fires in WTC 7?
Debris from the collapse of WTC 1, which was 370 feet to the south, ignited fires on at least 10 floors in the building at its south and west faces. However, only the fires on some of the lower floors—7 through 9 and 11 through 13—burned out of control. These lower-floor fires—which spread and grew because the water supply to the automatic sprinkler system for these floors had failed—were similar to building fires experienced in other tall buildings. The primary and backup water supply to the sprinkler systems for the lower floors relied on the city’s water supply, whose lines were damaged by the collapse of WTC 1 and WTC 2. These uncontrolled lower-floor fires eventually spread to the northeast part of WTC 7, where the building’s collapse began. Read more WTC7 Q & A here
Read NIST FAQ on WTC1 & WTC2 here:


Greg Bacon said...

Let me humbly offer some eyewitness accounts of building collapses. Several years back, I retired from a central Missouri Fire Department (FD) as a career fire fighter. Retired with the rank of Lieutenant.

The reason I mention my rank is to comment on the fact that as a LT. I was able to be in command of a fire and observe the fire behavior and building's characteristics from the outside, instead of being in the interior, fighting the Beast.

In 20+ years of service, i was on the scene of more than a few structure fires. Fires in various types of buildings, including residential, commercial and industrial. Even high rises. Most times, we were able to fight the fire successfully, extinguish the flames and return a sizable portion of the building and contents back to the owner.
However, some of the times, we lost the fight--and as the post fire investigation by the Fire Marshal's office would find, those fires involved arson--and were forced to go from an offensive mode, in which we would conduct interior fire fighting, to a defensive mode, in which we would "surround and drown" the building with immense amounts of water from the exterior.

When that happened, some of the times the building would collapse, due to interior fire damage and the immense amounts of water applied in fire suppression. The structure would collapse in a random, haphazard, piecemeal manner. Not once did i personally witness one of those structures collapsing in the rather controlled and somewhat neat pancake fashion as the WTC towers and Building 7.

i might be able to believe that one of the towers could fall that way, but all three? On the same day, within hours of one another? Think that would be physically impossible.

There has been much made about the interior fire's heat contributing to the collapse of the WTC's. i also disagree with that.
Those buildings, thanks to the fire codes enacted over the years, were built to withstand fire and not add to the flames.

The type of fires left burning after the jet fuel flamed off are what we call "contents fires". They involve the burning of the contents of the rooms/building, such as furniture, carpets and the like.
Initially, these fires are hot, but either burn out quickly or suffocate themselves due to the fire needing a large amount of oxygen and not being able to receive the proper amount of oxygen due to the large amount of smoke generated or no fresh sources of oxygen.

Couple of years ago, the NYFD released some of the on scene radio transcripts from some of the interior fire fighting units. i've read thru some of the radio traffic and from their accounts, in one of the towers, they not only had the fire extinguished, they were going to start providing medical care to the victims.

i believe the published radio accounts, not only due to the authentic sounding radio traffic, but the fact that they acted like fire fighters; that is, you make a decision at the beginning of the operation as to whether you are going to fight fire or rescue victims.
Since most FD's are usually understaffed and cannot provide both services, you usually elect to fight the fire, while ventilating the building to push out the toxic gases and smoke so the victims can at least get fresh air.

If the on scene fire crews had not only extinguished the fire(s) and determined that the building was safe enough to conduct medical care and rescue, then there is something terribly amiss and wrong with the so called "official" 9/11 version.

i thank you for your time and your bravery in putting out vital info regarding 9/11 on the web. Maybe, just maybe, one of these days, thanks to the diligence of people such as yourself, we will get to the bottom of the events regarding 9/11 and bring the true instigators and mass murderers to justice.

Greg Bacon

P.S. And you can damn well bet it wasn't those 19 Arabs that were behind 9/11.

Anonymous said...

It's important to have an impartial discussion on this topic. Impartiality requires assessing the evidence, ALL of the evidence (ideally also the WTC7 debris expeditiously exported to China for recycling BEFORE it could be analyzed... but I digress), and especially the physical evidence which we do have, e.g. the videos of the collapse. Therefore, lets let the a Physicist provide some insights... and please maintain an open mind.