Popular Mechanics: "The attacks if 9/11 is what caused WTC 7 to collapse"


In one of the most pathetic hit pieces in ages, Inside Edition has thrown together an unbelievably horrible piece of propaganda in an attempt to trash Rosie and 9/11 Truthers. The Orwellian doublethink one would have to exhibit to believe this trash is surreal:

James Meigs, editor in chief of "Popular Mechanics," ... said as much as 25% of the building was scooped out by the falling debris. He added, "There were intense fires that burned inside the building that weakend the steel frame. Rosie O'Donnell said this was the first time in history fire melted steel, but fire doesn't have to melt steel to weaken it enough to fail."

Building 7's symmetrical "failing" in 6.5 seconds due to fire.

To qualm you nutty conspiracy theorists who think that a building "weakened" by fire would not symmetrically collapse in 6.5 seconds, the "Inside Edition" continues with its "expert," "scientific," analysis:

The building is seen falling in on itself, and it seems to follow the classic pattern of a controlled demolition.

But Meigs says that it's no conspiracy. "You don't need to go into fanciful explanations of bombs and mysterious things. That building fell because of the attacks if 9/11."

You see foolish theorists, the one factor you forgot was the "attacks if 9/11"! The "attacks if 9/11" is what caused WTC 7 to collapse! It had nothing to do with those "mysterious things" called bombs (You know the things which go *BOOM* and are used to demolish buildings? You probably don't, they're very mysterious).

So there you have it, the "attacks if 9/11" is what caused the collapse, thank you Inside Edition and Popular Mechanics for enlightening us all.

And if all others accepted the lie which the Party imposed - if all records told the same tale -- then the lie passed into history and became truth. 'Who controls the past' ran the Party slogan, 'controls the future: who controls the present controls the past.' And yet the past, though of its nature alterable, never had been altered. Whatever was true now was true from everlasting to everlasting. It was quite simple. All that was needed was an unending series of victories over your own memory. 'Reality control', they called it: in Newspeak, 'doublethink.'

'Stand easy!' barked the instructress, a little more genially.

Winston sank his arms to his sides and slowly refilled his lungs with air. His mind slid away into the labyrinthine world of doublethink. To know and not to know, to be conscious of complete truthfulness while telling carefully constructed lies, to hold simultaneously two opinions which cancelled out, knowing them to be contradictory and believing in both of them, to use logic against logic, to repudiate morality while laying claim to it, to believe that democracy was impossible and that the Party was the guardian of democracy, to forget whatever it was necessary to forget, then to draw it back into memory again at the moment when it was needed, and then promptly to forget it again: and above all, to apply the same process to the process itself. That was the ultimate sublety: consciously to induce unconciousness, and then, once again, to become unconscious of the act of hypnosis you had just performed. Even to understand the word 'doublethink' involved the use of doublethink.

- George Orwell, 1984

That building fell because of the attacks if 9/11

I caught that also...

It's like they try not to lie, yet also not tell the full truth.

Doublespeak, like when Bush said, '"because they hate our freedoms"... Who's "they"


Best wishes

No comprendo senior!

I'm a french speaking Canadian and I don't wanna sound weirdo but can someone translate me "the attack if 911"

What is the "if" about?

Merci! Thank you! Gracias!

"if" should have been "of"

"In times of universal deceit, telling the truth will be a revolutionary act." - George Orwell


Hi fellow northern frenchy! I happend to play drums too, as your nickname suggest you do. Connais-tu d'autres "truthers" au Québec. Sais-tu s'il y a des groupes déjà organisés? Bye.

Attention all Truthers in

Attention all Truthers in Quebec, especially those close to Montreal, please read this article regarding an attack in the Montreal subways:


Please distribute this among anyone and everyone who might do something about it. This may be a false alarm, but you never know.



Thanks Somebigguy

I'd like to know why this post is not part of the main 911blogger page - or maybe I missed something here. I'm sure there a lot of Canadian people hwo would like to know about this, not just french speaking one. I'm certain there`s a lot of Canadians that follow your superb blog.

Thanks again!

We typically save the main

We typically save the main page for news, and put opinion pieces and that sort of thing in the Blogs section.  The blogs see lots of activity too, just click on the Blogs tab right beside the News tab on the top of your 911blogger page.

HI frenchy !

Yes in fact I'm a drummer and I'm Québécois. I've been registered to that blog for 25 months and I sure did learn a lot about all of this 911 group. I'm leaving you my email so we could talk about all of this further more in french. See ya!


My email didn't get through to you...

I just re-sended using contact form in your profile. Hope to get in touch.

"The attacks if 9/11 is what

"The attacks if 9/11 is what caused WTC 7 to collapse" - is that a misspelling? Shouldn’t it be "The attacks of 9/11"?

Thats the point, the idiots

Thats the point, the idiots can't even form a proper sentence, and we're supposed to see them as an authority on the 9/11 Attacks?

It's a tell. Lies cannot

It's a tell. Lies cannot exist without them.

Ahh, should have read the

Ahh, should have read the article haha. But thinking about it, does it makes us just as petty to score points and highlight this typo?

Inside Job Edition? WTC7

Inside Job Edition? WTC7 collapse shown 5 (!) times in 2:29 minutes saying it looked like a CD, switching to Meigs who responds "that building fell...because of the attacks of 9/11" mentioning "among the tenants of building 7 were several federal agencies, including the CIA..." closing with Rosie saying "if you wanna know what's happening in the world, go outside of the US media" There was even more, but I think that's a pretty clear picture. ______________ interns < internets Submitted by bruce1337 on Sat, 03/31/2007 - 9:54pm.


I am reposting comments by bruce1337 because I think he made some valid points about the Inside Edition piece.  When you add it all up, maybe more of a plus than a minus.

If it gets people thinking.

Stupid Question...

Did anybody ever ask why there were fires in WTC7 in the first place?

Did burning debris from the twin towers penetrate the building's outer walls/windows, or was it just a fluke that a fire erupted in the building for a completely different reason?

Meigs is up to his ears in this cover up. He better enjoy his payoff money while he can, because he'll be wearing an orange jump suit soon enough.

no stupid questions, they

no stupid questions, they have fed us so much bullshit its hard not to be confused about some things. but yeah, im pretty sure they claim that all of the fires started from "debris". and when things get really tough they like to throw in the "huge friggin fuel tanks" in the basement level. i guess there were one of those tanks up in the penthouse too.......

Flaming Debris from North Tower?

I see. So then flaming steel beams (or maybe desks? or sheet rock? or concrete? or computers? or printer paper?) were ejected 355 feet horizontally with enough force to penetrate building 7 and ignite the contents of that building? Am I getting this right? Is this the official story?

I didn't see any flaming debris at all from the north tower collapse. All I saw was lots and lots of dust. Diesel tank or no, it's hard to picture how the north tower collapse could have ignited fires on scattered floors in WTC7.

Jim Meigs! Mark Roberts! Where are you? We conspiracy theorists need some clarification on the official theory here.

Inside Edition wants your video

Click on that link: "Inside Edition has thrown together ..." They want your response on video, that may be used on the show.




Rosie O'Donnell has triggered a firestorm after spreading yet another theory about 9/11.

Rosie is claiming that World Trade Center 7 was deliberately demolished.

On Thursday's "The View," Rosie said, "It defies physics for the WTC 7, which collapsed in on itself -it's impossible for a building to fall the way it fell without explosives being involved."

Rosie issued a challenge to "Look at the films," and "get a demolition expert."

What Rosie and other conspiracy theorists don't say is that building 7, since rebuilt, suffered a 10-story gash from huge columns which fell from the twin towers. It was also weakened byfires that burned for 10 hours.

James Meigs, editor in chief of "Popular Mechanics," led a team of experts who wrote a book debunking 9/11 conspiracy theories.

Meigs said as much as 25% of the building was scooped out by the falling debris. He added, "There were intense fires that burned inside the building that weakend the steel frame. Rosie O'Donnell said this was the first time in history fire melted steel, but fire doesn't have to melt steel to weaken it enough to fail."

INSIDE EDTION cameras caught the tragic last moments as the 47-story building came down on 9/11, about nine hours after the planes struck the twin towers.

The building is seen falling in on itself, and it seems to follow the classic pattern of a controlled demolition.

But Meigs says that it's no conspiracy. "You don't need to go into fanciful explanations of bombs and mysterious things. That building fell because of the attacks if 9/11."

Among the tenants of building seven were several federal agencies including the CIA. That has helped fuel paranoid conspiracy theories.

What do you think of Rosie's remarks about 9/11? Click here to send us your comments on video. You may be featured on a future broadcast of INSIDE EDITION.



Address Correction for INSIDE EDITION


Look for Rosie 911 Story.

The blogger edit feature will not allow me to edit the message above.


So, basic mechanical physics has been proven- 'False'?

Do yourself a favor and build a trapezodial cardboard box. Now, sit atop it and prove to us that it is capable of falling straight down. -It doesn't happen, -...Especially with one of the larger surface planes 'scooped-out.'

Taking only the exterior collums into mind makes their 'argument' all that much more implausible, and in fact it demands even more scrutiny of the --actual set of plans--.

* -Remember, folks, I'm the guy who's been screaming at Hoffman, et. al, since 'Confronting the Evidence,' that "WE DON'T EVEN HAVE THE REAL PLANS OF THE TOWERS!"

What you will find on #7, explicitly demands further investigation into the --ORIGINAL-- plans, versus the --REVISIONS-- that were instigated by Silverstein, et. al., -just prior to the --SECOND,-- so-called 'topping-out.' Any steelworker can tell you --EXACTLY-- what was wrong with this picture.

From my perspective, having built hundreds of wooden homes, the irregular, 'double-dimensioned' vertical supports here would have contributed to the problem. -...So go find the plans, and let's talk, O'Riley!

First they ridicule you, then you look for better ways to be entertained!


Yes I have to agree with Meigs when he said the building fell as a result of the attacks of 9/11.
What he fails to mention is that those attackes were from our own government and included pre-set explosives to make sure the job...and the evidence...was obliterated.

And I would love to hear Meigs address the fact that WTC7 was unlike any other building on the face of the earth, in that it was designed with extra and independent supports which would allow ENTIRE FLOORS TO BE REMOVED at the whims of its tennants.

This Popular Mechanics "science" is taking on epic comic proportions.


I agree with your agreement

Meigs does state the exact truth, just not the exact mechanism. Another tell...

He is correct

He should also not the if 911 never happened then those buildings would still be standing today.
Together in Truth!

Dan's song

Why haven't more people shown support for the guys who made Dedicated? Please scroll down to their movie--even if you don't watch it all at least fast forward to 58min and listen to the man's song. It's powerful. It moves me deeply everytime I hear it. Everyone should hear it.


Is this Dan's Song?


(I engineer these clips to sound best through computer speakers - yes, I spank the dynamic range hard)


Run to the Sound of Gunfire!

A few problems with the article

"a 10-story gash"
Presumably this is the SW corner hole. However, as you can see when you look at the Zafar photo, there was no hole there. NIST just misinterpreted a patch of smoke in front of the building as a hole.

"from huge columns"
Never believe anybody who describes anything as "huge", "massive", or "enormous". A casual view of the 14-inch perimeter steel columns of the Twin Towers may give one the impression they are "huge". However, at the top they are entirely hollow and the sides are only 0.25 inch thick. This sort of column is supposed to have smashed its way through 10 reinforced concrete floors. I doubt it.

"which fell from the twin towers"
Some debris from the North Tower hit WTC 7. According to the ACSE, the South Tower missed. So the author takes the real figure - 1 tower - and increases it by 100%.

"fires that burned for 10 hours."
10 hours? 10:28 to 5:20 is not 10 hours. It is not even seven hours. If the author thought he had a good argument, he would not have felt compelled to add on an extra 3 hours. He also neglects to mention that the building was fireproofed.

"Meigs said as much as 25% of the building was scooped out by the falling debris."
No, he didn't. He said 25% of a section covering about a third of the south face of the building was scooped out over about a fifth of the building's height. So take the 25% and divided it by 3 (for the portion of the south face) then divide it again by 5 (for the height). That gives you a figure just over 1.5% scooped out. There are no photos of this and it appears to be based on a tendentious slant on cherry-picked eyewitness evidence that would make Thierry Meyssan draw breath sharply.

"There were intense fires that burned inside the building that weakend the steel frame."
Really? Produce some evidence the steel was weakened sufficiently and I might be interested. Analysis of the WTC steel suggested it was not.

So, to sum up, the author refers to a non-existent hole, bigs up the size of columns potentially hitting the building, doubles the number of towers falling on it, adds on three hours of fire, exaggerates the scoop-out, which may not exist at all, and claims the steel was sufficiently weakened without troubling himself to find any evidence for this. And they tell us to be more careful! This piece is so shoddy it could have been written by debunking911.

And now for something completely different . . .

Short clip of Sandy Berger testifying underscored with beautiful music.

2 minutes



Jamie Gorlick thinks a missle hit the pentagon

Original audio from:
(great source of information if you like to study this stuff)

"Running to the sound of gunfire"

Off Topic- Bill O'Reilly

I know this off topic but in the latest post on 9/11 bloggers was an article about Bill O'Reilly. I am getting sick of that sorry piece of human scum and want to give him a piece of my mind. Where can I get his e-mail address? I have had enough of his BS and want to tell that Nazi bastard off. I want him to come after me. I will rip him a new a-hole!


Yeah he's a real little goebbels, maddog.
contact the bastard here:


Sik "em boy.


Thanks Zonk

E-Mail sent. I hope all 9/11 truthers do the same.

Show "Typo" by JamesB

That's pretty rich, coming

That's pretty rich, coming from you.

Not because a typo...

But because for the first time Meigs is being honest, when he said...

That building fell because of the attacks of 9/11

I agree, WTC7 was brought down as part of the planned 9/11 attack.

The Terrorists brought down WTC7

The terrorists are responsible for the attacks of 9/11. They just don't match the FBI artist's rendering.

3 piece suit, little American flag on the lapel, creepy looking . . . . all perfect looking . . . attracted to little children . . . . filmed at parties snorting coke . . . steer military contracts the right way . . .

I really would sleep better at night if we could put the terrorists in jail. I worry about my kids everyday when they go into school.


IN THESE TIMES wants input on where they should be goung


Send Us Feedback

In These Times welcomes your input on where you think we should be going. Want to see something else in our newsletters? ;Let us know.