"Demolition Teams" on site at Ground Zero hours BEFORE WTC 7 Fell

While attempting to find out who the "special engineer" was that accurately predicted the collapse of Building 7 five hours before it fell, I ran across an article written by Brett Blanchard, Director of Field Operations for Protec Documentation Services.

The article itself is here:


... and the site for Protec is here:


Once again, the article is of the typical "whitewash the controlled demolition theory" garden variety. Not hard at all to run through line by line and debunk. Blanchard's piece is full of unsupported misinformation like "The fact is many steel structures have collapsed due to fire." which, of course stands in direct contrast to NIST's report as well as even the latest BBC hit piece which agrees with the conclusion that Building 7 and the Towers were the first steel framed buildings in history to collapse due to fire.

But then, on page 9, Blanchard offers this little tidbit of information "5. Several demolition teams had reached Ground Zero by 3:00pm on 9/11, and these individuals witnessed the collapse of WTC 7 within a few hundred feet of the event."

Really? Now that is news, isn't it?

He doesn't try to explain why "demolition teams" all rushed to the site on Sept. 11th nor does he name the "witnesses" he spoke with for the paper. But he is very specific when he says that demolition "teams" were on site BEFORE the "collapse" of Building 7 ad they didn't think it was a controlled demolition.

Why don't you think Popular Mechanics or the BBC or even NIST would chose to use their expert testimony to debunk the "sounds of explosives" testimony? Perhaps because it's a little difficult trying to explain why "demolition teams" were there in the first place?

But leave it to a over zealous contractor trying to help dispell the controlled demolition theory to let the cat out of the bag, so to speak.

By the way, who is Protec you ask? They just happen to do seismic recordings and documentations of demolition projects for clients like Bechtel, NASA, Lockheed Martin, and the US Army Corp of Engineers to name a few.

I should note, in order to give you a better understanding of the piece, it is full of self contradictory statements.

In summation Blanchard writes "Finally, we have not dicovered or been presented with any physical evidence indicating explosives were used to fell the structure."

But on page 7 he writes "These beams apparently tested positive for thermite, which led Dr. Jones to conclude thermite was used on 9/11 by unkown parties..."

So, in fact, Blanchard was presented evidence, by Dr. Jones (who Blanchard admits he was in extensive communications with prior to writing this piece) that shows explosives were used.

Again, we must consider the source. But, one very useful bit of information leaks out of this silly work by Blanchard: demolition "teams" were on site hours before building 7 collapsed.

Protec, a company that uses siesmic equipment to monitor demolitions, and has extensive government contracts, was also there. That much we can gather from Blanchard's useful article.

Awesome detective work!

Awesome detective work!

nice catch

foreknowlege of criminal complicity- or extreme competence and psychic intution?

Who called in the demo teams and why- are demo teams normally called in to clean up after a building collapse or demo, or is that generally handled by more traditional and less expensive construction workers?

9/11 Family Steering Committee Review of the 9/11 Commission Report:

Complete 9/11 Timeline

You must be kidding

two of the most vocal proponents of the official non-explanation of the towers collapse had access to ground zero, while others did not?

1: Protec was operating portable field seismographs at construction sites in
Manhattan and Brooklyn on 9/11, and these seismographs were recording
ground vibration throughout the timeframe of events at Ground Zero. These
measurements, when combined with more specific and detailed seismic data
recorded by Columbia University’s Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory, help to
provide an unfiltered, purely scientific view of each event.

2. In the weeks following 9/11, several Protec building inspectors and staff
photographers, including this author, were contracted by demolition teams to
document the deconstruction and debris removal processes at Ground Zero.
These processes included the mechanical pull-down of the remains of the U.S.
Customs Building (WTC 6) and various other activities occurring simultaneously
throughout the site. Our teams took thousands of photographs and personally
examined untold amounts of debris, including countless structural elements from
WTC 1 and 2.


Security was at an all time high. Access to the sites in New York and Washington DC, were tightly restricted. Due to initial military and FBI presence, even the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) staff had a difficult time getting access to the site for anything other than the immediate needs associated with rescue and recovery.

The fact that the FBI in conjunction with FEMA orchestrated the destruction of the most important crime scene in the history of the United States prior to agencies like NIST getting access cannot be easily dismissed. In this regard Snell wrote: Obviously, it would have made a great deal of difference to have been in a position to initiate the investigation in October 2001, rather than August 2002. More steel would have been available to us as well as physical artifacts from ground zero. The minds of those we would have interviewed then may have been clearer regarding personal observations than now nearly a year later and their recall may be confused by the many new things they have read or heard subsequently.



For more than three months, structural steel from the World Trade Center has been and continues to be cut up and sold for scrap. Crucial evidence that could answer many questions about high-rise building design practices and performance under fire conditions is on the slow boat to China, perhaps never to be seen again in America until you buy your next car.

Such destruction of evidence shows the astounding ignorance of government officials to the value of a thorough, scientific investigation of the largest fire-induced collapse in world history. I have combed through our national standard for fire investigation, NFPA 921, but nowhere in it does one find an exemption allowing the destruction of evidence for buildings over 10 stories tall.


No. Fire Engineering has good reason to believe that the "official investigation" blessed by FEMA and run by the American Society of Civil Engineers is a half-baked farce that may already have been commandeered by political forces whose primary interests, to put it mildly, lie far afield of full disclosure. Except for the marginal benefit obtained from a three-day, visual walk-through of evidence sites conducted by ASCE investigation committee members- described by one close source as a "tourist trip"-no one's checking the evidence for anything.



They have all reasons to cover their asses. JM2C.

Another interesting note...

From page 7 of http://www.jod911.com/WTC%20COLLAPSE%20STUDY%20BBlanchard%208-8-06.pdf

we spoke directly with equipment operators and site foremen who personally extracted beams and debris from Ground Zero (several of whom have requested anonymity to prevent harassment). These men worked for independent companies in separate quadrants of the site, and many were chosen due to their extensive experience with debris removal following explosive demolition events.


Since the PDF is copy locked...