It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


BBC News Reports Building 7 collapse 23 Minutes before it collapses.

page: 44
<< 41  42  43    45  46  47 >>

log in


posted on Feb, 28 2007 @ 12:26 PM

Originally posted by T0by

Originally posted by deltaboy

Guess pull has become a popular word these days.

I see that as deliberate confusing and expansion of the word.
What do you see?

The date on that article is after steins interview, i think. 5 am. Forgive me if i'm wrong.

[edit on 28-2-2007 by T0by]

I see this word is well used and was well used before 9/11.
Pull out is used by the miltary to mean leave.
Pull your head out of your arse.
Pull the cat out of the bag.

None had to do with demolition.

posted on Feb, 28 2007 @ 12:30 PM
Still trying to catch up on this thread, so in case this hasn't been answered...

Originally posted by Giordano Bruno
2) Can someone explain to me what 'putting a transit' on something means?

He is talking about a surveying transit. It is used to measure angles and elevation. I would say they set it up and with it being leveled on the ground they were able to aim the sight up the edge of the building and could see it was leaning.

However, if they did that, they would be able to state how much it was leaning. For example: 2 or 3 degrees off plumb, but no other information is given.

Hope that helps.

Edit: Bah.. Linky no worky. Try to google "surveying transit" images to see what it looks like.

[edit on 2/28/2007 by Hal9000]

[edit on 2/28/2007 by Hal9000]

posted on Feb, 28 2007 @ 12:33 PM
Thanks Hal9000. that is the first thing I thought when I read that they put a transit on it.

Interesting. I don't know if this is common for fire-fighters to do? does anyone else? Do they carry surveying equip around. Or were engineers/ surveyors on the scene by then?

Also I am not sure if they were checking lean or just if the floors were collapsing?

Very interesting questions to say the least.

Wonder if anyone has any ever asked about the results of that transit?

posted on Feb, 28 2007 @ 12:34 PM

Originally posted by Giordano Bruno
somewhere along the line 'will collapse' got mistranslated as 'has collapsed'.

I might have accepted the simple explanation that the BBC had made an error in reporting the collapse. It's certainly within the realm of possibility.

But isn't it a tad bit mysterious that the live feed of Jane Standley from New York is suddenly lost just minutes before the actual collapse of the Salomon building? Just like it's a mystery how the BBC can so easily lose their 9/11 World News tapes.

Evidence of the BBC reporting 7 WTC's collapse is interesting, but what I would really like to know is who were the BBC's sources? Which feeds or news services informed them twenty minutes prior that the 7 WTC "will collapse" or "has collapsed".

posted on Feb, 28 2007 @ 12:40 PM
Google Image has tons of pics of what I call a Surveying Transit. Just type in the words. :-)

posted on Feb, 28 2007 @ 12:43 PM
Ok that puts a whole new spin on things. Here we now have a story where emergency workers were quantatively measuring the damage caused to the building by a fairly substantial damage to the base of the south west corner. I don't know anything about this technology but from the interview with the deputy fire chief it would seem it is possible to use this equipment to assess a building's stability. Perhaps even to judge how long the building is likely to remain stable for. Perhaps confidently enough to know that you need to evacuate the place. Perhaps confidently enough so you can tell media roughly when it is about to collapse!

It would be helpful if we could find some more detailed info on the applications of a surveying transit. Info on the data collected at the time would be fantastic. Perhaps you are right Identified, and the original source was not human at all, but a measuring device!

Still means that the gash in the SW had to do enough damage to bring the whole thing down in one smooth implosion, but if it was leaning and straining for 8 hours then there may be a quantative record of the strain on the building leading up to the collapse.

If anyone is going to be the source of the message that the building will collapse, surely its the guy holding this transit thing?

posted on Feb, 28 2007 @ 12:46 PM

Originally posted by catchtwentytwo
Evidence of the BBC reporting 7 WTC's collapse is interesting, but what I would really like to know is who were the BBC's sources? Which feeds or news services informed them twenty minutes prior that the 7 WTC "will collapse" or "has collapsed".

probably the same source that had CNN reporting that WTC 7 "has collapsed or is about to collapse"

posted on Feb, 28 2007 @ 12:49 PM
yes but why didnt the 911 commision mention any of this in the offical report.

posted on Feb, 28 2007 @ 12:50 PM
Giordano Bruno,

This is exciting at least if it finally goes to solving this WTC7 conspiracy. It does make sense if they could get someone down there to do it that they would have. It also means they thought enough about the buildings damage to be worried about collapse.

It also points that there was a lot of potential information coming out about the state of the building well before it actually collapsed.

I am looking now to see if there is any testimony regarding who placed the transit, who was reading the transit and if a computer was set up to it and what happened to that data.

posted on Feb, 28 2007 @ 12:58 PM
Yeah catch I found the cut off, and the failure to switch quickly back to the scene, a little suspicious. However news feeds get lost pretty regularly, so that increases the probablilty of it being a chance event. It seemed to glitch before it died, so it wasn't like someone just pulled the plug.

I can buy that they may have confused future with past tense in the confusion of the day, got to be a million bits of info coming in at once, so mistaking 'will' with 'has' is a plausible excuse.

As for the losing of the footage, thats most likely a downright lie, or gross, gross incompetency on behalf of the Beeb. However there is a huge number of potential reasons for the lie if it is such. Bearing in mind the resonse was only a blog, he might just be trying to fob people off who he cant be bothered to respond to, and kill the interest. Having messed with CTers recently he may not want to be inundated with requests for original footage etc etc etc. Proves that the BBC are behaving a bit unprofessionally, but not that they are covering.

The only key bit of evidence the video provides is that someone told the newsreader the building had collapsed just before it did, however the more I read about it the more it seems like every man and his dog knew it was coming down. The only question remaining for me is:

How did they know it was going to collapse?

One explanation is the intended demolition theory, the other one is that the emergency workers used this surveying transit equipment on the building and realised it was increasingly unstable.

Need to find out more about the possibility of the latter before I put any more weight on the former.

posted on Feb, 28 2007 @ 12:59 PM

Firehouse Magazine Reports
The Two Towers: A Challenge To Two Professions

From the April 2002 Firehouse Magazine

>>"Heavy, thick smoke rises near 7 World Trade Center. Smoke is visible from the upper floors of the 47-story building. Firefighters using transits to determine whether there was any movement in the structure were surprised to discover that is was moving. The area was evacuated and the building collapsed later in the afternoon of Sept. 11.

posted on Feb, 28 2007 @ 01:03 PM

Originally posted by Identified
Interesting. I don't know if this is common for fire-fighters to do? does anyone else? Do they carry surveying equip around. Or were engineers/ surveyors on the scene by then?

I would think the WTC would have it's own engineering equipment handy or possibly the city engineer would keep it in a truck.

Originally posted by tombangelta
yes but why didnt the 911 commision mention any of this in the offical report.

Good question. You would think if measurements were made, they would have taken notes, and those notes would have been relevant to the investigation. Maybe they will show up in the NIST report on WTC7 if they ever get around to releasing it.

posted on Feb, 28 2007 @ 01:08 PM
Army tools used at the WTC site:

Says they were also using a laser Doppler vibrometer.

This is a jump from the LDSPatriot claims that one was used on WTC 7. Still looking.

[edit on 28-2-2007 by Identified]

posted on Feb, 28 2007 @ 01:18 PM
Quote from Global Security article "Army tools used for search and rescue at World Trade Centre could pay off in future"

A local construction survey company was managing "transits" to measure the building's movements. Transits are used to measure grade and elevation electronically. They were fixed on a point on the side of the building and checked about every five minutes to see if the building had moved, Lacko said. But the transits could give inaccurate readings because they were unable to filter out vibrations from heavy machinery or other factors in the area.

The readings caused numerous false alarms that required areas to be evacuated for hours at a time. "The search and rescue folks were on for 20 minutes and then off for two to three hours," Albarelli said.

Lacko's team used laser Doppler vibrometers, which send out laser signals that hit pieces of reflective tape and then beam signals back that help workers determine the vibrational frequency of the structure, he said. The tool sits on a tripod and is about 5 inches tall and 12 inches long.

"The laser Doppler vibrometer measures a building's frequency and whether it's vibrating five times a second, or if it moved six micrometers or six centimeters," Lacko said. "It determines how much it's actually moving and at what frequency."

Rescuers were able to home in on the building's frequency because it was different from the ones created by heavy machinery and jackhammers, he said.

The laser Doppler vibrometer was set up about 20 feet from the transit station — where the air horn used to alert personnel of a work stoppage was also kept — and the two tools were used together to help eliminate false alarms. "It gave all the workers in and around that point better security at the time as to whether that building was going to come down," Lacko said. "There was more technology on site to determine if the building was stable. Several different workers thanked us for coming."

Also, a transit can be called a theodolite if that helps. The data was collected by the FDNY and Cecom, they should still have the data. I know this is getting off topic a little, but its relevant as it's the most likely source of the foreknowledge other than the CD theory.

You would think NIST would have collected this data, but they may just be under staffed, under funded, or incompetent, not necessarily 'in on it'.

[edit on 28-2-2007 by Giordano Bruno]

posted on Feb, 28 2007 @ 01:19 PM
BTW the CNN report happened at 4:12

However, if we factor in CNN's Aaron Brown reporting that Building 7 "has collapsed or is collapsing" at 4:15PM EST, then that's over an hour before the building imploded into its own footprint.

Since may sources are used, it is now unlikely that this source is the same cause the time is so different. You can send out info to many groups at once.

CNN had an ambiguous report, saying it may or might be.

BBC had a definitive report. If it is the same source, 45 minutes later he must have updated the info.

With the testimony of emergency personal coming to light recently talking about a countdown.

With a N.Y police officer claiming he heard bombs as he ran away.

With a film clip, where you can hear someone say "keep your eye on that building, its about to blow up".

With the BBC reporting it minutes before it does happen, with the feed going dead.

With Google and its repeated efforts to quash this.

You are left with one conclusion.

Someone on the inside leaked this out to the media, probably thinking there was nothing to hide.

Thinking a building is going to collapse is one thing, there have been many super FIRES lately in the last few years.

In Spain and in other places.

Where people thought a building was going to collapse, including the so called *experts* on the scene.

But to actually have it happen is one thing.

But then to have it happen so close to your prediction??????

There is only one conclusion.

posted on Feb, 28 2007 @ 01:20 PM
I am trying to find out what I can regarding CECOM.
Not sure if that data is any report.

posted on Feb, 28 2007 @ 01:23 PM
More regarding the knowledge of a collapse:

After 10:28 a.m. September 11, 2001: Fire Fighters Trying to Extinguish Fires in WTC 7

According to Captain Michael Currid, the sergeant at arms for the Uniformed Fire Officers Association, some time after the collapse of the North Tower, he sees four or five fire companies trying to extinguish fires in Building 7 of the WTC. Someone from the city’s Office of Emergency Management tells him that WTC 7 is in serious danger of collapse. Currid says, “The consensus was that it was basically a lost cause and we should not lose anyone else trying to save it.” Along with some others, he goes inside WTC 7 and yells up the stairwells to the fire fighters, “Drop everything and get out!” [Murphy, 2002, pp. 175-176] However, other accounts contradict this, claiming that no attempt is made to fight the fires in WTC 7 (see (11:30 a.m.) September 11, 2001). One report later claims, “Given the limited water supply and the first strategic priority, which was to search for survivors in the rubble, FDNY did not fight the fires [in WTC 7].” [Fire Engineering, 9/2002] And a 2002 government report says, “the firefighters made the decision fairly early on not to attempt to fight the fires, due in part to the damage to WTC 7 from the collapsing towers.” [Federal Emergency Management Agency, 5/1/2002, pp. 5-21] Building 7 eventually collapses late in the afternoon of 9/11 (see (5:20 p.m.) September 11, 2001).

posted on Feb, 28 2007 @ 01:23 PM
(4:30 p.m.) September 11, 2001: WTC Building 7 Area Is Evacuated

The area around WTC Building 7 is evacuated at this time. [Kansas City Star, 3/28/2004] New York fire department chief officers, who have surveyed the building, have determined it is in danger of collapsing. Several senior firefighters have described this decision-making process. According to fire 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 Building 7]. 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.” [Fire Engineering, 9/2002]

posted on Feb, 28 2007 @ 01:27 PM
I'm gonna start this transit etc stuff in a new thread as it has wider relevance to 911 than the BBC report alone, for the sake of keeping this one on the BBC stuff.

posted on Feb, 28 2007 @ 01:28 PM

Originally posted by talisman

With a N.Y police officer claiming he heard bombs as he ran away.

Do you, or anyone else, have the link to this statement, please? And any links on this officer would be helpful also in seeing how he knows what a bomb sounds like. Was he ever in the armed forces, bomb disposal, demolition, etc before joining the police? Any other links to the eye(ear?)witnesses who said they heard bombs?

Without seeing the links yet obviously, it would be pretty easy to say on the day several terrorist attacks have taken place, that any explosive sounding noise heard is a bomb.

Originally posted by talismanBut to actually have it happen is one thing.

But then to have it happen so close to your prediction??????

There is only one conclusion.

Well, apparently not or we wouldn't still be talking about it

Although a little of course, I like how the thread has calmed down and new things (AFAWK) are being discovered! KUTGW crew!

top topics

<< 41  42  43    45  46  47 >>

log in