Create your own social network with a free forum.
zIFBoards - Free Forum Hosting
Welcome to Loose Change Forum. We hope you enjoy your visit.


You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free.


Join our community!


If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features:

Name:   Password:


Pages: (6) 1 [2] 3 4 ... Last » ( Go to first unread post )

 Search For Wtc 7 South Upper And Lower Lobby Photo, Where are the WTC7 lobby area photos
e^n
Posted: May 26 2007, 09:02 PM


NWO Employee Of The Year 2007


Group: Members
Posts: 2,126
Member No.: 3,405
Joined: 26-March 07



QUOTE (chris sarns @ May 26 2007, 07:46 PM)
For $239.25 [estimate] i can have them with these conditions:
...
No photographs or videos will be released to anyone until the 'investigation' is complete.

No firm date for when this will happen. [maybe June]

Personally I think we should wait for the final report if this is the case, but if you are intent on going ahead with it I will put in $50.
Top
chris sarns
Posted: May 28 2007, 10:41 AM


Advanced Member


Group: Members
Posts: 491
Member No.: 691
Joined: 26-October 06



e^n

Thanx for the offer.

I don't feel right about taking money but after i send a check to NIST-FOIA you could buy some LC2e's and send them to me.
Top
genghis6199
Posted: May 28 2007, 10:57 AM


Advanced Member


Group: Gone
Posts: 154
Member No.: 3,456
Joined: 28-March 07



i think it's funny how people think nist is gonna publish a report that actually examines wtc7 properly.

it would go like this....
we spent 2 years backing up the whole 19 arabs thing but wtc 7 was oddly brought down by demolition.......
Top
chris sarns
Posted: May 28 2007, 03:16 PM


Advanced Member


Group: Members
Posts: 491
Member No.: 691
Joined: 26-October 06



No, no, no

It will read like this:

We have determined, by reexamining the videos of the collapse, that
WTC 7 looks like a Duck.
Upon further examination of the audio evidence from 2 of the 6,000 video clips we are withholding from the public, we have determined that the
WTC 7 collapse sounds like a Duck.
However, we are still trying to determine how we can determine weather or not
WTC 7 walked like a Duck.
Further study is needed.
Top
e^n
Posted: May 28 2007, 08:14 PM


NWO Employee Of The Year 2007


Group: Members
Posts: 2,126
Member No.: 3,405
Joined: 26-March 07



QUOTE (genghis6199 @ May 28 2007, 10:57 AM)
i think it's funny how people think nist is gonna publish a report that actually examines wtc7 properly.

it would go like this....
we spent 2 years backing up the whole 19 arabs thing but wtc 7 was oddly brought down by demolition.......

Why would that be a problem for them? It's like saying "They're not going to investigate WTC 1 and 2 properly", but they did? Hell even their preliminary report contains some pretty reasonable speculation.

The very fact you are discounting it before it is even released is worrying.
Top
miragememories
Posted: May 29 2007, 10:17 AM


Advanced Member


Group: Members
Posts: 1,333
Member No.: 364
Joined: 20-October 06



QUOTE (e^n @ May 29 2007, 01:14 AM)
QUOTE (genghis6199 @ May 28 2007, 10:57 AM)
i think it's funny how people think nist is gonna publish a report that actually examines wtc7 properly.

it would go like this....
we spent 2 years backing up the whole 19 arabs thing but wtc 7 was oddly brought down by demolition.......

Why would that be a problem for them? It's like saying "They're not going to investigate WTC 1 and 2 properly", but they did? Hell even their preliminary report contains some pretty reasonable speculation.

The very fact you are discounting it before it is even released is worrying.

If it looks like a duck, walks like a duck and sounds like a duck, NIST will say "it must be time to redefine a duck."

Why would NIST have a problem with a controlled demolition finding for WTC7?

Are you really that naive e^n??

It's not just a matter of doing a scientific investigation, analyzing the results and presenting the conclusions. I mean it should be, and you seem to think that it is as simple as that.

Unfortunately, like it or not the whole process is effected by political considerations.

IF NIST in their Final WTC7 Collapse Report determine that the only viable causal explanation for the collapse of WTC7 was pre-planted controlled demolitions, it won't be a case of "well that's that, what do we work on tomorrow?"

That finding virtually rips open all the 9/11 political wounds.

How was it done?

Who did it?

Why did they do it?

If they planned a CD of WTC7 on 9/11 how can the high speed vertical collapses of WTC 1 & 2 possibly be a coincidence?

Did NIST investigate the collapses of WTC 1 & 2 properly?

A controlled demolition finding for WTC7 is a Pandora's Box and NIST administrators know it. It's the NIST administration and those who supervised the NIST investigations and determined what was important and was not that will find their neckties feeling awfully tight.

A few Notes about NIST and their delayed WTC7 Collapse Report;

NIST claims they did not have sufficient time to complete the report, because its staff was too small. They accepted $20,000,000.00 of tax payer money to to investigate WTC 1,2 & 7, yet 5 years after this horrific event of major ongoing consequence and importance, they have yet to complete it's final investigation because they chose to not hire more staff?

As an agency of the U.S. Commerce Dept., and hence an agency of the U.S. government, is there any doubt that if President Bush had asked Congress for an additional $10 million to expedite NIST's work, Congress would have approved it?

NIST can't use any of the three main claims it employed to explain the collapses of WTC 1 & 2.
- no airplane impact stripped fireproofing from steel
- no airplane explosion and jet fuel initiated very big fires
- no airplane impact severing and damaging sufficient columns to allow a 'falldown' collapse

NIST is stuck with debris damage from WTC1 and whatever they can argue re:fire damage.

NIST has to explain the total high speed collapse of a huge, modern, over-engineered for renovation, concrete and steel building. 47-storys, 24 core columns, 57 perimeter columns and covering a complete city block.

NIST has to explain the symmetry of the collapse. How did 81 columns manage to all fail at the same time?

NIST should, though they ignored it with WTC 1 & 2, explain the molten metal underneath WTC7.

NIST needs to account for all the eyewitness accounts of explosions, though again, NIST ignored similar reports of explosions with WTC 1 & 2.

NIST needs to discount expert testimony from Dutch demolition expert Danny Jowenko, Hugo Bachman & Jorg Schneider of the ETH Swiss Federal Institute of Technolgy in Zurich and Heikki Kurttila, an accident analyst for the Finnish National Satety Technology Authority.

NIST should explain the widespread and long duration foreknowlege of WTC7's collapse?

What is worrying is that people like yourself have bet your whole bankroll on NIST and after having done so, only pretend to listen to contrary opinions.

In your own words, you accept their preliminary report as pretty reasonable speculation. When experts far more qualified than yourself, give an educated, experienced opinion with which you disagree, your loyalty to NIST as an institution appears to blind you to the reality of NIST as a political entity, and you steadfastly cling to your faith in the NIST speculation of failing transfer trusses that miraculously made this all possible.

A wiser person would keep their mouth shut and hope that their NIST heroes would come up with a better explanation.

WTC7 is not called the "smoking gun" for nothing!

MM
Top
e^n
Posted: May 29 2007, 12:59 PM


NWO Employee Of The Year 2007


Group: Members
Posts: 2,126
Member No.: 3,405
Joined: 26-March 07



QUOTE (miragememories)
If it looks like a duck, walks like a duck and sounds like a duck, NIST will say "it must be time to redefine a duck."
Why would NIST have a problem with a controlled demolition finding for WTC7?
Are you really that naive e^n??

You have yet to demonstrate they have ignored evidence, true scientists do not change conclusions based on politics and there's no evidence of manipulation of the reports .

QUOTE
IF NIST in their Final WTC7 Collapse Report determine that the only viable causal explanation for the collapse of WTC7 was pre-planted controlled demolitions, it won't be a case of "well that's that, what do we work on tomorrow?"

That finding virtually rips open all the 9/11 political wounds.

Yes, yes it does. I'm not denying the fact it would re-open a bunch of queries and I think that if they do determine controlled demolition they need to reinvestigate WTC1 and 2

The rest of your post is mostly valid

QUOTE
NIST needs to account for all the eyewitness accounts of explosions, though again, NIST ignored similar reports of explosions with WTC 1 & 2.

No they don't, not only is this impossible, it's pointless. Are you claiming that in a large scale office fire there would be no explosions other than planted ones?

QUOTE
NIST should explain the widespread and long duration foreknowlege of WTC7's collapse?

How is this not sufficiently explained already?

QUOTE
A wiser person would keep their mouth shut and hope that their NIST heroes would come up with a better explanation.

You insult me and claim I steadfastly claim to the NIST report yet this is simply because you have produced absolutely no evidence of any manipulation of inaccuracy. You complain about NIST regularly and misrepresent their report by literally replacing words you don't find appropriate yet you have yourself completely ignored a thorough analysis of your work.

It is you who refuses to accept arguments against your theory, I posted a comprehensive analysis of Kinetic Energy in response to your critique here, nearly a month later while ignoring my original reply you claim it again here and yet again fail to show me how I am wrong.

Stop claiming that I am somehow brainwashed or steadfast in my beliefs, your absolute inability to provide contradictory evidence and your ignoring of my criticisms indicates that you are the one without ability to change.
Top
peterabbit
Posted: May 29 2007, 02:06 PM


TruthgoneWild


Group: Members
Posts: 247
Member No.: 4,244
Joined: 29-April 07



QUOTE (e^n @ May 28 2007, 08:14 PM)
QUOTE (genghis6199 @ May 28 2007, 10:57 AM)
i think it's funny how people think nist is gonna publish a report that actually examines wtc7 properly.

it would go like this....
we spent 2 years backing up the whole 19 arabs thing but wtc 7 was oddly brought down by demolition.......

Why would that be a problem for them? It's like saying "They're not going to investigate WTC 1 and 2 properly", but they did? Hell even their preliminary report contains some pretty reasonable speculation.

The very fact you are discounting it before it is even released is worrying.

Look, they're playing good cop bad cop now...

these two are disinfo partners, just watch how they play off eachother.
Top
Ferric Oxide
Posted: Jun 6 2007, 10:54 AM


Advanced Member


Group: Members
Posts: 51
Member No.: 4,626
Joined: 17-May 07



Guiliani evacuated the building. I am certain there are photos and video of the evacuation, the triage center, and "others" entering and leaving the building. I can not stress enough that it is vitally important that we get these photos and video. It is the only way (aside from testing the steel and observing collapse videos) that we can see what went on by observing who went in and out of there during the day.




(Posted Image)
Above: The intact Vesey Street bridge is seen from in front of the WTC 7 Lobby. Building 5 and 6 are on the right of the photographer.

Below:One can see the lower lobby entrance of the WTC 7 south side after the collapse of the towers in the condition stated in the NIST report.
"2-No heavy debris observed in lobby area, white dust coating."

(Posted Image)
(Posted Image)

Here is the reference video to help us pinpoint time and place:
Building 7 South Side Lower Lobby with view of Vesey Street Bridge

Note that the south lobby was a triage center at 9:30am. We now need photos and video of the UPPER SOUTH SIDE LOBBY from anytime during the day on 911, and go from there. And we need many more of the photos taken of the WTC7 Division Triage Center and after the collapses of the towers.

Jim Dwyer of the New York Times told me he didn't have anything from the south side lobbies, but said I should ask NIST.
Top
e^n
Posted: Jun 6 2007, 11:00 AM


NWO Employee Of The Year 2007


Group: Members
Posts: 2,126
Member No.: 3,405
Joined: 26-March 07



In the first picture above, that certainly appears to be after WTC2 collapsed, WTC1 did significantly more damage to the walkway. Is this the case for the next two pictures or are they from a seperate video?
Top
Ferric Oxide
Posted: Jun 7 2007, 12:43 PM


Advanced Member


Group: Members
Posts: 51
Member No.: 4,626
Joined: 17-May 07



They are all from the same video. The reference video is there for your review. So far this is the only south side lobby "footage" available. Again, there was a triage center called WTC 7 Division set up at 9:30am. (I'm not sure whether it was in the upper or lower. But remember that the Mayor evacuated this building and people were in and out until the evacuation. Photos are available, and likely in the possession of NIST. This would make for a very pointed and specific Freedom of Information request. (Video and still photographs of the WTC 7 south side upper and lower lobbies from throughout the day on 9/11/2001.)
Top
DoYouEverWonder
Posted: Jun 15 2007, 02:58 AM


Advanced Member


Group: Members
Posts: 433
Member No.: 2,410
Joined: 19-February 07



QUOTE (e^n @ May 23 2007, 05:02 PM)
QUOTE (peterabbit @ May 23 2007, 03:58 PM)
Copyright photographic evidence? Riiight...

NIST does not have any authority to copyright images they do not own.

Photographs belong to the person who takes them, because NIST can't claim copyright they can't distribute them as they see fit. It's entirely possible that $17k is the cost of the copyright from every person involved and processing fees.

Who knows, but i'm willing to put in plenty of cash to support getting them all released.

Any photographs taken by people working for a government agency are not subject to copyright, since they have been paid for with taxpayers dollars.
Top
DoYouEverWonder
Posted: Jun 15 2007, 04:11 PM


Advanced Member


Group: Members
Posts: 433
Member No.: 2,410
Joined: 19-February 07



QUOTE (e^n @ Jun 6 2007, 11:00 AM)
In the first picture above, that certainly appears to be after WTC2 collapsed, WTC1 did significantly more damage to the walkway. Is this the case for the next two pictures or are they from a seperate video?

I agree, these are from after the WTC 2 collapse, but before the WTC 1 collapse, because the south walkway is still in good shape. Still interesting to see the conditions during that time period.

Also, do any of the Official Myth reports address the ConEd Substation that was located down there? If that caught fire, what would have happened?
Top
e^n
Posted: Jun 15 2007, 04:15 PM


NWO Employee Of The Year 2007


Group: Members
Posts: 2,126
Member No.: 3,405
Joined: 26-March 07



QUOTE (DoYouEverWonder @ Jun 15 2007, 04:11 PM)
Also,  do any of the Official Myth reports address the ConEd Substation that was located down there? If that caught fire, what would have happened?

I'm not entirely sure what you mean, the NIST Preliminary WTC7 report addresses the ConEd substation existing, but not it's flammable contents, I would imagine several hundred gallons of mineral oil at the least (transformer coolant).

I'm sure the final report will contain some more details if it's deemed relevant.
Top
DoYouEverWonder
Posted: Jun 15 2007, 04:25 PM


Advanced Member


Group: Members
Posts: 433
Member No.: 2,410
Joined: 19-February 07



QUOTE (e^n @ Jun 15 2007, 04:15 PM)
QUOTE (DoYouEverWonder @ Jun 15 2007, 04:11 PM)
Also,  do any of the Official Myth reports address the ConEd Substation that was located down there? If that caught fire, what would have happened?

I'm not entirely sure what you mean, the NIST Preliminary WTC7 report addresses the ConEd substation existing, but not it's flammable contents, I would imagine several hundred gallons of mineral oil at the least (transformer coolant).

I'm sure the final report will contain some more details if it's deemed relevant.

Google before you post please.


QUOTE
One of the biggest problems to hit Lower Manhattan in the aftermath of September 11th was the disruption of the power supply, caused when the existing two substations adjacent to 7 World Trade Center were significantly damaged by the building's fire and subsequent collapse. On May 26, 2004, Con Edison opened the first part of the 7 World Trade substation, a two-part electrical station dedicated to providing power both to the World Trade Center as it continues to develop, and to the surrounding neighborhood.

http://www.projectrebirth.com/rebuild/engineering/conEd.html


According to this there were 2 substations adjacent to WTC 7 and both were significantly damaged by the fire and then the collapse. Could these substations have been a significant source for the smoke that billowed up from Vesey Street most of the day? If there was a lot of fire in these substations, exactly where were they located and what the hell was there to burn inside of them?
Top
DoYouEverWonder
Posted: Jun 16 2007, 06:40 PM


Advanced Member


Group: Members
Posts: 433
Member No.: 2,410
Joined: 19-February 07



QUOTE (e^n @ Jun 15 2007, 04:15 PM)
QUOTE (DoYouEverWonder @ Jun 15 2007, 04:11 PM)
Also,  do any of the Official Myth reports address the ConEd Substation that was located down there? If that caught fire, what would have happened?

I'm not entirely sure what you mean, the NIST Preliminary WTC7 report addresses the ConEd substation existing, but not it's flammable contents, I would imagine several hundred gallons of mineral oil at the least (transformer coolant).

I'm sure the final report will contain some more details if it's deemed relevant.

Aw, gee wiz, e^n, don't have an answer? Maybe those substations deserve a closer look? What the hell was going on down there that day. Why did the man behind the curtain need to block access to that area for until the building collapsed?

(Posted Image)

This was a mechanical site map for the WTC after the 1993 bombing.
Top
Ferric Oxide
Posted: Jun 24 2007, 02:30 PM


Advanced Member


Group: Members
Posts: 51
Member No.: 4,626
Joined: 17-May 07



OK, so now we apparently have some stills from the video showing the condition of the WTC 7 lower lobby (outside doors and outside area) before the collapse of the north tower. I suspect that the Triage center known as "WTC 7 Division" was quartered in the upper south lobby---near that sculpture. We also have that new eye witness who apparently witnessed some bodies and damage there--BEFORE the collapse of either tower.

We need the photos and video of that triage area, the evacuation--and from any point during the day---Cirone, Spak and others have them. This, my friends, will SHOW us what went on---who went in and out that day.
Top
hturt
Posted: Jun 24 2007, 05:19 PM


Advanced Member


Group: Gone
Posts: 91
Member No.: 5,230
Joined: 16-June 07



Dr. Steven Jones said the company NIST commissioned to do the WTC7 report were asked only to look at floors 8 thru 46. WTC7 has 47 floors with sub floors.

If anyone thinks NIST is going to put out a report that would not support the OTC they are deluded; the fix is already in.

Top
Ferric Oxide
Posted: Jun 24 2007, 08:43 PM


Advanced Member


Group: Members
Posts: 51
Member No.: 4,626
Joined: 17-May 07



I have a hunch that the insurance company that paid out is waiting intently for the report---the certified report.
Top
JTGOB
Posted: Jun 24 2007, 08:52 PM


Advanced Member


Group: Members
Posts: 1,237
Member No.: 594
Joined: 23-October 06



QUOTE (e^n @ May 23 2007, 10:02 PM)
QUOTE (peterabbit @ May 23 2007, 03:58 PM)
Copyright photographic evidence? Riiight...

NIST does not have any authority to copyright images they do not own.

Photographs belong to the person who takes them, because NIST can't claim copyright they can't distribute them as they see fit. It's entirely possible that $17k is the cost of the copyright from every person involved and processing fees.

Who knows, but i'm willing to put in plenty of cash to support getting them all released.

They can under Fair Use, and this would surely fall under Fair Use.
Top
0 User(s) are reading this topic (0 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:
« Next Oldest | WTC 7 | Next Newest »
zIFBoards - Free Forum Hosting
zIFBoards gives you all the tools to create a successful discussion community.
Learn More · Sign-up for Free

Topic OptionsPages: (6) 1 [2] 3 4 ... Last »



Hosted for free by zIFBoards* (Terms of Use: Updated 2/10/2010) | Powered by Invision Power Board v1.3 Final © 2003 IPS, Inc.
Page creation time: 0.0346 seconds · Archive