Extended version of interview w/ Controlled Demo Expert Danny Jowenko confirming that Building 7 was brought down on purpose

A person who goes by the name of "einsteen" over on Loose Change's message boards has translated and posted a much more detailed and extended version of a recent interview conducted with Controlled Demolition Expert Danny Jowenko, in which he confirms that Building 7 was indeed brought down via controlled demolition.

Excerpts from this unedited raw footage first appeared on a Dutch television news program called, Zembla investigates 9/11 theories (2006).

PART 1 of 3

PART 2 of 3

PART 3 of 3

Much more information concerning Mr. Jowenko and Building 7 can be found here: Demo Expert Confirms WTC-7 Was "Controlled Demolition" http://www.911blogger.com/node/2807 Big thanks to einsteen for translating and posting this video up on Youtube.

cool info I had not seen in its entirety

ok, so they had from the time the first wtc collapsed, until 11:30 to plan and implement the insurance fraud in an hour and a half inside a burning building that they didn't know they were going to be going in until a half hour before? There's no way you can add this up without admitting it was all done weeks before..

off topic

off topic but does alex jones know about the chavez document manipulation that is clearly seen and was widely discussed on this site last night....how could promote the guy today with these looming questions regarding the document?

alex is being a tool

alex is...like yea knaow...being...like yea knaow.. a jerk about... like yea knaow... this chavezombi guy... like yea knaow?

alex is being a dick about this because it's a slow news day and he didn't have another guest. He did this with that bozo who was in that clip about torture where they found out it was fake later. He vets nothing and doesn't care if it ends up making truthers look stupid. I like alex, but, like howard stern always admits, he's gotta fill three hours a day

Undeniable Video Proof of Demolition

This is an excellent 8 minute animation of the WTC skeletal system and reaction to the plane crashes is breaking news. At 6:50 into the video the explosion sequence begins and then finishes at 7:07, in that 17 seconds lapse of time you'll see video evidence of the explosives taking down the still partially standing inner core of the tower.


Gravely Seriously and On Topic

This is on topic. The video I posted is clear and unarguable, and fully responsive to the discussion surrounding a demolition expert's opinion. This video moves the topic beyond opinion and shows the facts. Watch it and see for yourself. Very soon after the collapse of the North Tower, in the middle of a giant cloud of pulverized concrete, the silhouette of the North Tower’s core is visible - and standing. The core is badly damaged yet it still partially stands nearly fifty stories tall. That is until a short series of detonations finally manages to take down the core. Can anyone tell me why this is not definitive proof of demolition?

The video is an excellent 8 minute animation of the WTC skeletal system and its reaction to the plane crashes. At 6:50 into the video, the core explosion sequence begins and then finishes at 7:07. In that 17 seconds lapse of time you'll see video evidence of the explosives taking down the still partially standing inner core of the North tower.

to the canadian below...off

to the canadian below...off topic or not, i'll discuss anything i please...i'm tired of seeing fascists tell me what to say and what not to say....i don't want that here too.

Do you chew with your mouth open, too?

Even though the "fascists" tell you not to? It's just courtesy, dude -- thread hijacking is not polite.

bite me

bite me


I save biting for people who respect their fellow posters.


We are here to discuss Jowenko, not Chavez

This is an interesting video, which I think amounts dis-info. Here
is why:

On the one hand our expert, Jowenko, admits that the WTC7 collapse was
definitely Controlled Demolition. Fact is, to anyone its obvious so
how could he not say so, he would discredit his profession. When
asked if they might have been able to rig the building with explosives
in the seven hours after the WTC1 + WTC2 fell, he actually gives it
serious consideration, but when told about the fires in WTC7 he says
he can't explain it.

In another part of the video, when discussing the collapse of WTC1 +
WTC2 he rules out the use of explosives, chiefly arguing that it would
take a year to rig these buildings.

Wait ... Compared to WTC1 + WTC2, WTC7 is little less than a quarter
of their size (47 floors vs. 220, roughly the same floor area). So ,
logically, if rigging WTC1 + WTC2 would take a year, than rigging WTC7
would take at 2-3 months. Why on earth did Jowenko even begin to
consider the 7 hour setup feasible????

Later in the video we get three students giving their confirmation in
a second opinion, but they give no facts, just nod their heads and
say, oh yes, WTC1 + WTC2 had no explosives and the collapse theory
is feasible ...

I find MIT Enginerr Jeff King's analysis much more factful and logical:

You can draw your own conclusions.

It's not disinfo, people are

It's not disinfo, people are entitled to an opinion you know. The Dutch demo expert Danny Jowenko, and the students, like many many people including myself and nuff others now in the truth movement ALSO believed that the Towers were felled as officially described. It's called a mass brainwashing. Jowenko and the Students have an obvious naïve and honest bias, it's not their fault that things haven’t clicked with them yet. This bias was show up best in Jowenko who stated that the official explanation for the collapse of the towers was probably correct. But then was exposed to building 7 without knowing what building it was and stated the obvious about it being demoed. Although the interviewer did say, "this is WTC7" when he introduced it to Jowenko, Jowenko didn’t quite know this was on 9/11. I can guarantee that if the interviewer had been any more explicit then Jowenko's bias would have kicked in and it would have taken him much longer to have stated that WTC7 was demoed etc. I can also guarantee that he is probably now questioning and reassessing his analysis of the Towers after seeing building 7's collapse. LOL, no way is this disinfo!

If anyone's disinfo it’s Mr "no planes/tv fakery hit the WTC" Jeff King!

Jeff King is NOT a no-planer

Who on God's earth would call Jeff King a no-planer?!? The man is an
MIT Engineer, for crying out loud - a person who deals in facts not
fantasy. Watch the video I gave a link to: HE STICKS TO FACTS: NEVER

I find your claim outlandish, flimsy. You have not addressed my
argument, you are just trying to character assinate Jeff King on false
pretenses. Further to that, you want us to believe that this Jowenko is
acting on first impressions. But the HUGE flaw in his logic I've pointed
out indicates clearly that he is following a script.

Could it be that you are another dis-info, 'paid forum writer',
pretending to be a truther?

Disinfo people are co-conspirators in the Crime of the
Century, accesory to the murder, execution style, of 3000 people on
September 11, 2001.

And they are getting paid to pump out these lies. What unspeakable
evil is this?

before you go jumping all

before you go jumping all over someone else you should look into it..

as i understand it Jeff King goes by Plague Puppy, and was interviewed on Tarpley's radio station to discuss the no-plane theory.

if someone has an audio link please post it.

Three against one - or is that four?

Glad to see that you are pulling out your heavy guns.

Now we see how you are further trying to character assainate Jeff
King: Some bogus and obviously faked interviews with Tarpley under
some assumed name. And you post this here as 'hard evidence' and
further try to claim that you are truth seekers.

Its amusing to watch the disinfo trail - you just have to push a
little to see it for what its worth. You can just see these spin
doctors in their backrooms making strategies on how to keep the truth
from coming out.

Wouldn't it be easier to just kill anyone who speaks out?



first off take a deep breath.

second off, you can find out that Plague Puppy is the name that Jeff King uses on the internet pretty darned easy, just go to his website:

third, you can find the interview on rbnlive.com under the archive for tarpley's radio show

fourth, dont attack the messenger, especially calling me disinfo, just cause you dont like that Jeff King might advocate a certain position doens't make it my fault.


since i'm afriad you might

since i'm afriad you might just continue to attack without looking, here is the information for you, read it, and chill out.

PlaguePuppy is the nom-de-net of Jeff King, a 60ish former electrical engineer - graduated from MIT, class of '74 with a combined Biology-EE major, worked for about eight years in electronics and electro-mechanical engineering. At the moment, and for about the past 25 years, I have been working as a family physician, doing office-based primary care in rural central California.

Since 9-11 I have been deeply involved with collecting, analyzing and making available to the public and other researchers as much as I could find of the photo and video evidence of the World Trade Center collapses.

The name PlaguePuppy, for those who may be curious, derives from several sources: an awful pop-science fiction novel called The Plague Dogs that I admit to having barely skimmed, an extremely good book called Riddley Walker by Russell Hoban that features the Bernt Arse dog pack as a major character, and an old beach towel of mine with the cartoon characters the Pound Puppies on it.

click this link for the archive, look under 'March 2006' to find the direct download. this is the archive for Webster Tarpley's weekly radio show.

sorry if you think others are out to attack you, but you are the one attacking now, and im trying to help you out.

"Canadian Truth ..." your

"Canadian Truth ..." your being paranoid. And second you don't even know Jeff King's website is called "plaguepuppy", yet you dickride the man? You don't know enough about him clearly, he is down for Nico's disinfo, and that makes him more then anybody else here that you've attacked, more likely and "agent". That or he's just an honest retard for believing “no planes hit the Towers”.

Watch the video of Jeff King's presentation!

Dear Reader:

If you've read the thread this far, your probably thinking, well,
what's up with this Jeff King? Or maybe you're asking the same
question about Mr. Jowenko.

If you have not heard Jeff King speak, please watch the video before
you go further. It is very factual and clear headed. This man is NOT
a nut-case, and he presents a very convincing argument. Here is the
link again:


Now as to these fellows who are attacking Jeff King, consider this:
there is no doubt that the Bush 'Administration' is investing millions
if not billions on the cover up of the truth of 911. So its not hard
to believe they would work hard to create any evidence they needed to
character assassinate someone they see as a threat. They have already
forced BYU to suspend Prof. Steve Jones.

Remember that, to date, the mainstream media has done next to zero
to dig into the truth of 911. What kind of money and power does
it take to control all the major media?

Marketing companies regularly pay people to do nothing but post on
forums and blogs on the net to further their cause and discredit the
competition. This is becoming a major part of their PR campaign.

In the case of 911 truth, they would also seek to 'divide and
conquer'. Create whatever divisions they can, pitting one sub group
against another. (eg. LIHOP vs. MIHOP)

I used to be a LIHOP ([they] let it happen on purpose), now I am a
MIHOP ([they] made it happen on purpose). The reason for that was
that I finally saw (after 5 years thanks to major media cover-up) the
obvious controlled demolition of WTC7.

Now, if they CD'd WTC7, as they clearly did, why not also WTC1 + WTC2?

The fact is, the more I have dug into this, the more I have found that
the evidence that they CD'd all three is overwhelming.

But don't listen to me, check out Jeff King's presentation and here are
some more links documentaries/presentations that have left me with zero
doubt that they indeed did CD all three of these buildings:

911 Mysteries (a very 'plain speaking' look at the 'collapse' theory):

Collection of lectures from Steve Jones PhD on the use of Thermate at WTC

Animation showing in detail the strength of the construction of WTC1 &

Collection of videos of WTC7 falling: text book Controlled Demolition

Or you could just ask me...

Actually I do think that planes hit the Twin Towers, though probably not the specified passenger liners. There is some funny business that makes me think that they were specially rigged in some way, but I have never questioned that some kind of real, physical planes hit the buildings.

The Tarpley interview is here: http://www.plaguepuppy.net/public_html/video%20archive/index.htm#ti

The confusion about my being a "no planer" comes from the first part of the show which is an interview with Nico Haupt. Nico is something of an odd character, and was going on about some kind of nanotechnology being the key to 9-11(influenced by Karl Schwarz I believe). It made no sense to me, and my part of the interview dealt only with controlled demolition. Nico was very disruptive at the 9/11/04 NYC conference, and many consider him a disinfo agent.

Thanks Jeff

Thanks for clearing that up. 

have read all replies, you are all truth seekers!

After the slandering and name calling is deleted, you all make good points. Instead of attacking, can't we just inquire? Help eachother to make some sense of all this and in so doing, move a little closer to the truth? Look at all the topics and comments, so many! 9/11 truth has come a long way in a short time. Most of us joined in 2006. That is such an important stat. Lets pull together people, we all make mistakes. This doesn't make us infiltrators or sabateures. And for the one liner name callers, don't give them the benefit of a reply...PLEASE.

Mike Casner
Cheshire County911truth

You need to get a f*cking

You need to get a f*cking clue "Canadian Truth ...", Jeff King chimed in with Nico "the most industrious spreader of disinfo on the internet" Haupt about "TV Fakery" and "no planes at the wtc". I remember this painful interview well because it was not long after the whole Charlie Sheen thing, and Webster Tarpley had been on CNN, what a way to destroy your credibility after having national exposure! Webster Tarpley is way to naive despite his intellect. Diverse research is welcome by all means, but "disinfo" is not research, it's "disinfo" period. And I still don't understand why Tarpley doesn’t get this;

Sat., March 25, 2006: Playlists: M3U | RAM (Individual MP3s:
Guest: Nico Haupt Guest: Dr. Jeff King a.k.a. Plaguepuppy




alright guys, kiss and make

alright guys, kiss and make up.

i personally had no idea that Jeff King supported such things either until about 2 months ago. although i never did listen to it, but i will now.

thanks dbls for the links.

Enough with the slander!!!

This is a total misrepresentation: I did not "chime in" with Nico about no planes. I had the misfortune of following him on Tarpley's show, and had no control over that. He ran over into the second hour, and Tarpley tried to segue by asking me some questions while still talking to Haupt.

I said nothing to endorse his ideas, which in any case were so confusing that I don't even know what he was claiming. If there is other disinfo out there linking me to this, please let me know so I can go to the source. What exactly did you see 2 months ago?



Please forgive me if I misrepresented your opinion, I only listened to the interview today, and it was other users who had suggested your support on the issue which I did not follow up on as I mentioned in my comment.

If I do see anything which suggests something other than your opinion stated here I will be sure to contact you immediately.

Please feel free to contact me.

Why I'm I listening to this

Why I'm I listening to this shit again lol. "We went to war over cartoons" that just makes want to vomit, YOU WENT OT WAR OVER PEOPLES DEATHS ASSHOLE! F*cking disinfo assclowns, I can't stand these retards! And is it just me, or do all "no-planers" sound like such hardcore geeks lol?


I'm with you, man. Thanks for speaking up.



Jowenko is a CD expert.

Jowenko is a CD expert. Jeff King is not an MIT engineer, but a physician who has taken classes in engineering at MIT and who has absolutely no expertise in demolition or structural engineering.

Further Jowenko said that a demolition of WTC 1 and 2 would take a year to set up because of it would be unconventional top down demolition. The conventional demolition of WTC 7, according to Jowenko, could be accomplished much more quickly.

8 years at MIT is just 'taking a few classes' ???

Jeff King's credentials a very solid. He states them at the start of
the video I posted - watch it. (Eight years study of physics at MIT,
I believe, and engineering experience to boot - considerably more indepth
than just 'taking a few classes').

His thesis in the video is the overwhelming evidence of massive
explosions occuring during the 'collapse' of WTC1 + WTC2. He is more
qualified than Jowenko in this regard becuase of his extensize
knowledge of physics and his engineering experience.

Fact is people, the concept of a gravity collapse of WTC1 + WTC2 as a
result of plane-impact/fire is so ludicrous that it can be ruled out
just on first principles, and I would be glad to take on in a debate
anyone who thinks that is possible.

When you stated ...
"Further Jowenko said that a demolition of WTC 1 and 2 would take a year to set up because of it would be unconventional top down demolition. The conventional demolition of WTC 7, according to Jowenko, could be accomplished much more quickly."

... are you trying to suggest that CD of a building of any size only
requires a couple of charges? No, they put charges all over the
place - and it takes weeks and weeks of preparation. Ridiculous
for Jowenko to even consider that it could be done in 7 hours.

Canadian Truth, you're not being fair to Mr. Jowenko

You are confusing what he said when he stated that it would be physically possible for a team of 30-40 individuals to enter a building and plant explosives in 7 hours. Trust me, Canadian Truth, Danny Jowenko does NOT think that the entire operation could have been achieved in less than 7 hours.

Video Proof of Demolitions

This is on topic. The video I posted is clear and unarguable: after the collapse and in the middle of a giant cloud of pulverized concrete the sillouhette of the core of the North Tower is visible. The core is badly damaged yet it still is partially standing nearly fity stories tall. That is until visble detonation finally manages to take down the core. Can anyone tell me why this is not definitive proof of demolition?

the new dvd 'improbable

the new dvd 'improbable collapse' hits on this point pretty hard.. the reason it is such an issue is that it too comes directly straight down..

the remaining core should have fallen over if anything, but it went direclty straight down.. check it out on that dvd, it was a new arguement for me..

Great Lead

Thanks, I checked it out and it looks to be very compelling. Also, thanks for responding. I had thought I'd seen everything about the collapse. I't's clear, demolition was used to take down the core.

i'll discuss anything i

i'll discuss anything i please until the fascist come and take me...off topic or not.

I just sent him an e-mail about it...

"In the beginning of a change, the Patriot is a scarce man, brave, hated and scorned. When his cause succeeds, however, the timid join him, for then it costs nothing to be a patriot." - Mark Twain

or years....

??? ;-)

"There's a shadow on the faces of the men who send the guns to the wars that are fought in places where their business interest runs."

impeachment, imprisonment, death penalty

R.L. Michael K.

Friends our time is getting short. We need to gather all
the evidence together from all like minded sources, unite,
focused with a single minded purpose. Then like a sledge
hammer coming down on an anvil, hit this congress with
unwavering determination that they will gather together
the 'real' suspects (and we know who they are) and pursue
with a vengeance for indictment, impeachment, conviction,
imprisonment and finish it with the justice 'they' deserve
as the murdering, treasonous monsters they are. It's the
only way to send a message to the rest of their kind. The
righteous, by God' grace, will prevail. If we let ourselves
get bogged down in the nuts and bolts of all that took place
on that tragic and terrible day, these monsters will get away with it. At the price of far far more lives then have to date been lossed.

Is Einsteen actually a

Is Einsteen actually a truther or rather someone who tries to debunk us ? Is he showing the whole interview in order to say "look he says more than just 'this is CD' " ?

re: Is Einsteen actually a truther

Hi G-U-F. If you clicked on the link I provided for "einsteen", you'll notice that it leads to Loose Change's message board where einsteen posted the extended Jowenko interview, followed by this comment:

I'm no pure CT'er and don't like that abbreviation, it's a kind of insult, the official theory is also a CT. I don't know what I have to think about all wild theories but am convinced that physics will debunk the official theory one day. What happened with the WTC's is a near zero probability.

einsteen seems all right to me. And if you watched the Danny Jowenko interview, it's extremely damning to the official conspiracy theory regarding Building 7, so I doubt that a "debunker" would be promoting Jowenko's interview.

Does anyone know what he

Does anyone know what he said about the towers ? Controlled demolition or pancake ?

Jowenko said that the towers

Jowenko said that the towers collapse due to damage and fire, but what he described didn't sound like the pancake theory of collapse. Instead he said the inner core failed or at least that's how I remember it.

does he know about the

does he know about the near-freefall collapse and pulverization of 99% of the concrete to powder?

Yes he does.

Yes he does.

The towers weren't

The towers weren't conventional demolitions. They were "top down" demolitions, which are rare in the professional demolition industry.

This was achieved by strategically planting and detonating explosives beneath each tower's predetermined impact zone. This was done to create the illusion that airliner impacts caused the towers to fall.

Building 7 was a classic demolition job -- bottom up -- the type of demolition that Danny Jowenko is qualified to give his professional opinion on.

Excellent Stallion, big

Excellent Stallion, big propz man! Why is this not on the front-page yet? This is way more credible and important then "Chavez".

should be on the front page

for sure

Zembla - full documentary with English subs

Here's a link to the original Dutch "Zembla" documentary (with English subtitles) which was broadcast on Dutch national tv last September 10: http://omroep.vara.nl/tvradiointernet_detail.jsp?maintopic=424&subtopic=... A high res. torrent version is probably floating around on the internet by now as well.
By the way, in the weeks before and after September 11, 2006, the Dutch 9/11 truth movement has had a huge breakthrough in Dutch national media, with many television shows, all national and local newspapers, all news programmes en several local events paying lots of serious attention to 9/11 truth issues and "theories" for 2 weeks in a row. Pretty much everyone in Holland is now fully aware of the 9/11 Truth Movement and its mission, I can assure you guys in the US...!!!
Last remark about Jowenko: don't bother to try and contact him, as he never wants to talk about WTC-7 to anyone out there ever again.... haha. He's probably feeling as if he's been "used" by the Zembla crew or something. Not very brave, hey... the guy was totally unaware of WTC-7 at the time. Excellent strategy: no mass-psychological pre-conditioning when he was interviewed. (Sounds a bit like trying to find an objective jury for Michael Jackson, right? But they succeeded when they found this guy! Completely unbiased / naive. A scientifically correct way of making a genuine documentary of an expert's genuine reaction and opinion on things.)
We've also recently had a chance to discuss pretty much everything with the makers of this documentary for half a day. They actually "took the whole afternoon off" for us (while they we're sitting behind their computers in the tv studios, yet still being paid by the broadcasting corporation for their 11.20am - 4.25pm Q&A session with us!), to discuss 9/11 issues and their documentary on our own forum.
See http://www.vkmag.com/forums/viewthread/5070/ ("Zapruder forum"; together with a few other websites, this is one of the hot-spots of the Dutch 9/11 truth movement. See the list of international sites on 911blogger for all relevant Dutch websites/groups. There are about 4 separate active 9/11-"fronts" and even one new Dutch national 9/11-truth political party.)
Zembla also happens to be one of the most, if not THE most respected documentary program in the Netherlands, with past shows even having created heated debates in Dutch parliament.
Dutch regards,

What I really disliked about this docu

were those TU Delft students claiming they had calculated that a gravitic collapse would be the most probable scenario - without offering any insights at all.

Did anyone inquire into that? Where/What are these supposed calculations?

Delft University of Technology students

Strangely enough, we haven't yet been able to get a copy of their report. Perhaps Jimmy Walter has it (you may wish to contact him and ask for it; he now lives in Holland by the way). They presented their "findings" during a special evening in Delft. Most people in the audience weren't very impressed by their research, which had only taken them a couple of weeks to prepare. It also sounded a bit strange to us that they had never before even heard of any "9/11 conspiracy theories". They hadn't even seen Loose Change before.
I'm currently a student in International, European and Dutch Law in Amsterdam. However, back in 1998/1999, I studied Aerospace Engineering for 6 months at that same university (TU Delft). Later on I learned that many, many students at TU Delft started questioning teachers and professors about 9/11 right after it had happened, so it puzzles me how they managed to create a team of complete dummies in this field while many of their fellow students had been researching this stuff for years already.
Almost everyone (including me) in the Dutch 9/11 movement thinks that this whole university "summer project" is false and scientifically useless, as it was done by student amateurs in only a couple weeks time, and under the supervision of a bunch of relatively "debunk-minded" university professors.
However, I'm not an expert on this whole thing.
If you guys want to know more about it, just ask one of our people at the Zapruder forum.

Alright, thanks

I'll be digging a little over there, I'm most likely not the first to ask.

[edit: that's what TU Delft has to offer right now]

"An Error Has Occurred

The application log file may contain additional information. Please consult your administrator."


A commenter said: "Hier staan zoveel onwaarheden in dat ik niet weet waar ik moet beginnen...."

I know this feeling :o)

torrent file

I'll be following the TU Delft issue, for sure

Nail 'em!

Thanks for the links - I've watched through the entire thing already and probably won't once more, though. Still, thanks.

TU Delft presentation, slides etc.

For some reports (2 Dutch, 1 English) about the evening of the TU Delft presentation, see http://www.onderzoek911.nl/media/presentaties/presentatie_tu_onlin.shtml
For a video of the evening, see http://collegerama.tudelft.nl/mediasite/viewer/
For the slides of their presentation (in Dutch....), see

As soon as we'll have their full report (for what it's worth), I'll post a link to it here as well.

Woah, thanks a bunch!


audio file of TU Delft presentation

Plus one separate audio-file of the TU Delft presentation (again in Dutch, however):

That's all folks, for now...

something else - completely off-topic

PS: something I just have to mention as well, yet totally unrelated (or is it...?):
check out http://www.chagossupport.org.uk and spread the word.
After having read this, remember that Cheney used to be CEO of Halliburton which built the US base on Diego Garcia.
Several court cases by the Chagos Islanders against the British and American governments are still continuing.
Anyone in the US who's interested in this tragedy can contact me via this forum or the Dutch "Zapruder" one.

After taking over

they might at least have renamed it into "Bay of Pigs"

Those bastards.

Dutch 9/11 documentary "2 Vandaag" - English subs

Here's another excellent "9/11 truth" documentary by "2 Vandaag", which was recently broadcast on Dutch national tv: see http://video.google.nl/videoplay?docid=2507263054811686324
See also http://www.2vandaag.nl/index.php?module=PX_Story&func=view&cid=210&sid=3...

Chagos Islanders / Diego Garcia

You can now watch John Pilger's "Stealing a Nation" (2004) at http://video.google.com/googleplayer.swf?docId=-3667764379758632511&hl=nl

what i'd like to know from a

what i'd like to know from a demo. expert is how would they bring down a building like the WTC, if it were not for the asbestos problem, and no close surrounding buildings. Would they have done it "top down", or is there another method? The crazy thing about it seems to me they never ever demolished a skyscraper of this size, e.g. the Empire State Building, instead they're all still standing, so the WTC was the first ever super-skyscraper to be brought down.

they had to do it top down

they had to do it top down so it looked like the planes and fire were the cause.

Good question regarding WTC1 and 2

I wonder if a traditional implosion on a tower with such a large height to width ratio would present problems. It seems as though a standard implosion would not be effective, and might present the danger of the building tipping to a considerable degree. Top down is messy, but likely the better option to maintain a some of control over the collapse progression.

But regardless, top down was the only way to somewhat convincingly convey the sense of the upper floors crushing the lower ones. Plus, all the debris made it easy to conceal a lot of the e action going on underneath.

Why not conventional?

I don't see how a classic CD would present problems. By eliminating the columns' bases, the building would essentially free fall, and where there is no fulcrum, there can be no torque.

Anyway, Guiness should update their records...

You don't have to be an

You don't have to be an engineer to realize that the towers would tip over if you severed their foundation. Top-down ensures minimal tipping.


There's a great question for a demolition expert, would taking out just the bottom of a very tall skinny building be safe, or would you have to add progressive explosions from the top down?

You definitely

would have to have charges above. Before anyone asks, I'm no demoltions expert, but that's (relatively informed) common sense.

I think you all might be interested in footage of the Zip Feed Mill CD, btw.

It wouldn't take much

I was just making the point that the height of the towers is very large in comparison to the width of the towers. Therefore, even a relatively minor error towards the lower portion of the building could result in a significant variation in relation to the upper portion of the towers. Any assymetry in destruction of the columns towards the bottom could create a fulcrum (even if only briefly) which would convert gravity into torque, tipping the tower to one side or another.

Yes, but

it worked well in the past with relatively comparable buildings (height/width wise), and to my knowledge there never were major misfirings causing unintended toppling. If one or two columns were not blown, they'd probably buckle immediately before having much effect.

What? Please provide a cite

What? Please provide a cite for previous examples of controlled demolition of buildings comparable to the towers.

Clearly, the towers were the "gold standard" of expert C.D., requiring special techniques. Weakened steel DOES NOT explain their explosion. Traditional C.D. does not explain their explosion. Clearly, their explosions were the product of considerable expertise.

Slam Dunk! Video Proof of Demolition

This excellent 8 minute animation of the WTC skeletal system and reaction to the plane crashes is breaking news. At 6:50 into the video the explosion sequence begins and then finishes at 7:07, in that 17 seconds lapse of time you'll see video evidence of the explosives taking down the still partially standing inner core of the tower.


Molten metal not mentioned

Why don't they discuss the molten metal in WTC 1 and 2 (and 7, but that is not really important here, since Jowenko is certain of the CD of WTC 7) in the Jowenko-part of the documentary where he judge on the collapse of WTC 1 and 2? It would be great to hear his opinion on this !!


As far as I know, Jowenko never again wants to have anything to do, say or answer with respect to 9/11 ever again for the rest of his life. At least that's the last impression he's given us. (Perhaps he's received a phone call from a secret service?)
Anyway, here's his website: http://www.jowenko.nl
Feel free to try again...


Mr. Jowenko is Holland's no. 1 expert in controlled demolitions.

Not what you think

Forget it folks, this man wasn't told that WTC7 happened on 9/11. He didn't know anything about the circumstances when WTC fell. They just showed him the clip, not the FEMA info, actually no information whatsoever. Since then, he refuses to talk about it, surely, unhappy about he told the film crew.

Did you watch the same video I watched?

Danny Jowenko repeatedly stated that Building 7 was controlled demolition even after he was given the government's official explanation.

One of the last things in the interview that Mr. Jowenko said AFTER studying this reported damage to wtc7's South face was "On this, the building will stand. Guaranteed. Guaranteed."

I agree with him.

Watch the raw footage. They

Watch the raw footage. They did show him some of the official explanation.

Bad journalism: the guy has

Bad journalism: the guy has had no time to make a factual judgement, he's constantly confused by what he sees. He doesn't know it happened at 9/11. He hasn't seen all the pictures. The journalist doesn't know the facts either: slight damage, he says. that is not what other pictures seem to suggest. He hasn't read the FEMA report either, that's what the journalist tells him. They should have given him the material prior to the interview.

Yeah, right.

"They should have given him the material prior to the interview."
So that his reaction would have been just as non-spontaneous as that of most other people.

He does get to see many of

He does get to see many of the pictures and sticks with his original conclusion that the WTC 7 was brought down by controlled demolition just as he sticks by his conclusion that the WTC towers were not brought down by CD.


Hey fellow Dutchie,
That's exactly what I like about it: at first instance, Jowenko didn't have a clue of what he was actually looking at, so he honoustly called it a controlled demolition.
He hadn't been brainwashed yet about WTC-7 like most other experts.
And even after they had told him about WTC-7, the official story etc., he still kept insisting that it had been a controlled demolition.
Ain't that beautiful... we should send the guy an award, even though he'd hate us for it.

Implosions - Tall and Skinny

Failed implosion, the weight of the building is not enough to bring it down:


Tip over implosion:


Plenty of implosions on YouTube. Search for "implosion"

Con Edison Post WTC7 Collapse

I have "not" been able to find anything about the condition of the sub-station that was located under WTC7 some speculation as to inherent weakness of the building due to the sub-structure. This is no more complicate than any high rise that has a basement. In fact, this would have likely been more reinforced! Has anyone checked into the sub-station issue . . . was it still functioning, what repairs were necessary, was it destroyed? If the Con-Edison substructure survived then this had absolutely nothing to do with building 7's collapse. Anyone know the answers?

Con Ed substation

It took up the bottom 6 floors of the building, and seems to have been destroyed, as the rubble pile was only ~1 storey high.

It did create an unusual structure for the bottom of WTC-7, with big north-south transfer trusses on the 7th floor that bridged over the substation:

If there was a failure near ground level (as there was at the outset) the loss of the trusses should have toppled the building to the north, and makes a straight-down collapse even less likely.

Wow. Please don't forget to

Wow. Please don't forget to identify the gunman (gunmen?) on the grassy knoll and provide details of the faked moon landing. You people are off the reservation.

Wow is right!

Make an argument please, because 7th grade called and wants their playground tantrum back. Saying someone is "off the reservation" is not only racist in it's bigoted insinuation, but a personal attack called an "ad hominem", when one doesn't have an argument or a sound platform to stand upon. I find that a person not interested in 911 truth to come into a 911 bloggers site to harass is not thinking clearly in the least.

Argue this: How does 47 steel box columns disintegrate in 10 seconds? Answer; They're demolished in a controlled demolition. Argue this: how does kerosene fire bring a steel structured skyscraper down after 1 hour of burning, and yet after 10 hours of fire engulfed the Windsor Building in the heart of Madrid’s business and banking district and not collapse? (http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/spain_fire_2005.html)

I ask again, why would people working in tower 1 go back up to the their offices AFTER a plane just hits their building and they're evacuating? Because people will believe anything. Believe if you will what you are spoon fed. I choose physics. So until you have an argument, go back up into your office and shut the fuck up.

WTC 7 Controlled Demolition

On the video of the Dutch building specialist: It is important to remember the NIST diagrams they were viewing show NIST theorized damage. NIST cannot supply any pictures of the South side central damage. NIST theorizes a 15 story high, 60 foot wide, 50 foot deep gash. I know of no one who has pictures or verbal stories to support the S.central gash theory. Further, the FEMA report makes no mention of the S.central damage theory. It is resonable to believe NIST is flat out lying about South Central damage to support their "anything but controlled demolition" explanation.
If anyone knows about South side Central building damage 15 stories high - please - email me at ronbarlean@verizon.net. This is a very important issue and could bring down the entire govt cover up.

Also - the South Park story was cute, and somewhat informative - however it left children - viewers - confused. We need to unite that more information from the Govt must be released. We need answers. The Govt rules at our consent - no the other way around.

Strange video

The guy is smart... I think he knew a lot more than he pretended to know. He definitely messed up Silversteins name up on purpose. Conclusion? He sets up Silverstone (stein, whoops!), as a scapegoat if our US regime ever needs a patsy. Second, he doesn't really look at buildings 1 and 2... and you KNOW he's been on the internet doing some investigation himself. This guy is smart, but suspect. And i'm sorry sir, but you can't get rid of 47 steel box columns with kerosene. Only a small nuke or mass quantities of thermate can do that, as evidenced of molten iron. But, the a core evidence is affirmed again; Controlled demolition for money.

I hate to

be a partypooper, but he also said WTC 1 and 2 weren't brought down by CD.


You obviously haven't read the thread. We've already discussed this. The towers weren't conventional controlled demolitions. They were top-down demolitions. Jowenko isn't experienced in performing top-down demo. His experience is in conventional controlled demo (bottom-up).

And when he gave his opinion on the towers, he hadn't seen statements from FDNY, NYPD, FBI, and other first responders about finding bombs in the towers, or their statements about seeing "orange and red flashes at the base of the towers shooting up and down and all around" just BEFORE the buildings came down, as well as statements about them hearing loud explosions coming from the towers just BEFORE they fell. Here are just some of those statements:


pgs 14-16: I know I was with an officer from Ladder 146, a Lieutenant Evangelista, who ultimately called me up a couple of days later just to find out how I was. We both for whatever reason -- again, I don't know how valid this is with everything that was going on at that particular point in time, but for some reason I thought that when I looked in the direction of the Trade Center before it came down, before No. 2 came down, that I saw low-level flashes. In my conversation with Lieutenant Evangelista, never mentioning this to him, he questioned me and asked me if I saw low-level flashes in front of the building, and I agreed with him because I thought... I saw a flash flash flash and then it looked like the building came down.

Q. Was that on the lower level of the building or up where the fire was?

A. No, the lower level of the building. You know like when they demolish a building, how when they blow up a building, when it falls down? That's what I thought I saw. And I didn't broach the topic to him, but he asked me. He said I don't know if I'm crazy, but I just wanted to ask you because you were standing right next to me. He said did you see anything by the building? And I said what do you mean by see anything? He said did you see any flashes? I said, yes, well, I thought it was just me. He said no, I saw them, too... it's just strange that two people sort of say the same thing and neither one of us talked to each other about it. …

Q. On the television pictures it appeared as well, before the first collapse, that there was an explosion up on the upper floors.

A. I know about the explosion on the upper floors. This was like eye level. I didn't have to go like this. Because I was looking this way. I'm not going to say it was on the first floor or the second floor, but somewhere in that area I saw to me what appeared to be flashes. I don't know how far down this was already. I mean, we had heard the noise but, you know, I don't know.

-CAPTAIN KARIN DESHORE Interview Date: November 7, 2001

pg 10: I had no clue what was going on. Never turned around because a sound came from somewhere that I never heard before. Some people compared it with an airplane. It was the worst sound of a rolling sound, not a thunder. I can’t explain it, what it was. All I know is -- and a force started to come hit me in my back. I can’t explain it. You had to be there. All I know is I had to run because I thought there was an explosion.

pg 11: Whatever this explosion was simply sucked all the oxygen out of the air.

pg 15: Somewhere around the middle of the world trade center, there was this orange and red flash coming out. Initially it was just one flash. Then this flash just kept popping all the way around the building and that building had started to explode. The popping sound, and with each popping sound it was initially an orange and then a red flash came out of the building and then it would just go all around the building on both sides as far as I could see. These popping sounds and the explosions were getting bigger, going both up and down and then all around the building. I went inside and I told everybody that the other building or there was an explosion occurring up there and I said I think we have another major explosion…


pgs 13-14: I remember seeing, it looked like sparkling around one specific layer of the building... My initial reaction was that this was exactly the way it looks when they show you those implosions on TV.

FIREFIGHTER EDWARD CACHIA Interview Date: December 6, 2001

pg 5: As my officer and I were looking at the south tower, it just gave. It actually gave at a lower floor, not the floor where the plane hit, because we originally had thought there was like an internal detonation explosives because it went in succession, boom, boom, boom, boom, and then the tower came down.


pg 9: It was a frigging noise. At first I thought it was -- do you ever see professional demolition where they set the charges on certain floors and then you hear “pop, pop, pop, pop, pop”? That’s exactly what -- because I thought it was that. When I heard that frigging noise, that’s when I saw the building coming down.

-FIREFIGHTER KENNETH ROGERS Interview Date: December 10, 2001

pgs 3-4: … then there was an explosion in the south tower... I figured it was a bomb, because it looked like a synchronized deliberate kind of thing. I was there in '93.

-LIEUTENANT GEORGE J. DeSIMONE Interview Date: October 22, 2001

pg 6: The next thing I know, we heard a little bit of a rumbling, and then white powder came from the first collapsed building. I thought it was an explosion initially.

pgs 7-8: After that, I still thought it was an explosion. I thought it was some kind of thermal explosion where I'm either going to get burnt -- and I had kind of ideas that it was going to be something like Hiroshima where all this heat was coming at me and we were going to get burnt...

pg 10: I was fearful that there were bombs in the building. That was my first thought, being the military kind of guy that I am.

-FATHER JOHN DELENDICK Interview Date: December 6, 2001

pgs 5-6: I remember asking Ray Downey was it the jet fuel that blew up. He said at that point he thought there were bombs up there because it was too even.

-NBC Reporter, Pat Dawson: “[Albert Turi] the Chief of Safety of the Fire Department of New York City told me he received word of the possibility of a secondary device, that is another bomb going off. He tried to get his men out as quickly as he could, but he said there was another explosion which took place. …That his theory he thinks that there were actually devices that were planted in the building.” Video: http://terrorize.dk/911/witnesses/911.wtc.reporter.1.wmv

FIREFIGHTER TIMOTHY JULIAN Interview Date: December 26, 2001

pg 10: … right when we got to the corner of Washington and Albany, that’s when I heard the building collapse. First I thought it was an explosion. I thought maybe there was a bomb on the plane, but delayed type of thing, you know, secondary device. I was convinced for a week it was secondary devices. … You know, and I just heard like an explosion and a then a cracking type of noise, and then it sounded like a freight train, rumbling and picking up speed, and I remember I looked up, and I saw it coming down…

-MSNBC Reporter, Rick Sanchez: "… Police have found what they describe as a suspicious device, and they fear that it might be something that could lead to another explosion...I spoke with some police officials moments ago, Chris, and they told me that they have reason to believe that one of the explosions at the WTC aside from the ones that may have been caused by the impact of the plane with the building, may have been caused by a van that was parked in the building that may have had some type of explosive device in it. So, their fear here is that there may have been explosive devices planted either in the building or in the adjacent area ..."
Video: http://www.terrorize.dk/911/comments/911.wtc.police.found.explosives.wmv

BATTALION CHIEF DOMINICK DeRUBBIO Interview Date: October 12, 2001

pg 5: It was weird how it started to come down. It looked like it was a timed explosion

-Reporter: “… there was an explosion. It was way up where the fire was.. and the whole building, at that point, bellied out in flames…”Video: http://terrorize.dk/911/witnesses/911.wtc.reporter.2.wmv

-FIREFIGHTER WILLIAM REYNOLDS Interview Date: December 11, 2001

pgs 3-4: After a while, and I don't know how long it was, I was distracted by a large explosion from the south tower and it seemed like fire was shooting out a couple of hundred feet in each direction, then all of a sudden the top of the tower started coming down

-FIREFIGHTER THOMAS TURILLI Interview Date: January 17, 2002

pgs 4-5: … sounded like bombs going off, like boom, boom, boom, like seven or eight

-FIREFIGHTER KEITH MURPHY Interview Date: December 5, 2001

pgs 19-20: I had heard right before the lights went out, I had heard distant boom boom boom, sounded like three explosions. I don’t know what it was. At the time, I would have said they sounded like bombs

-War Corespondent, Jack Kelley: "…Apparently what appears to happen was that at the same time two planes hit the building that there... that the FBI most likely thinks that there was a car or truck packed with explosives underneath the buildings which also exploded at the same time, and brought both of them down..."
Video: http://www.terrorize.dk/911/comments/911.wtc.truck.bombs.fbi.jack.kelley.rm

-Terrorism Security Expert (used by many news organizations): “We’ve heard reports of secondary explosions after the aircraft impacted, whether in fact there wasn't something else at the base of the towers that in fact were the coup de grace to bring them to the ground.”
Video: http://terrorize.dk/911/comments/911.wtc.secondary.explosions.jeffrey.be...

-FIREFIGHTER RICHARD BANACISKI Interview Date: December 6, 2001

pgs 3-4: We were there I don't know, maybe 10, 15 minutes and then I just remember there was just an explosion. It seemed like on television they blow up these buildings. It seemed like it was going all the way around like a belt, all these explosions.

-FIREFIGHTER CRAIG CARLSEN Interview Date: January 25, 2002

pg 6: I guess about three minutes later you just heard explosions coming from building two, the south tower. It seemed like it took forever, but there were about ten explosions.

-ABC Reporter: “…the entire building has just collapsed as if a demolition team set off....”
Video: http://terrorize.dk/911/comments/911.abc.demolition.team.wmv

-Witness: "I was about five blocks away when I heard explosions... three thuds and turned around to see the building that we just got out of... tip over and fall in on itself."Video: http://terrorize.dk/911/witnesses/911.wtc.witness.1.wmv

-Witness: "...and then all of a sudden it started like... it sounded like gunfire... you know, bang, bang, bang, bang, bang, bang and then all of a sudden three big explosions. "
Video: http://terrorize.dk/911/witnesses/911.wtc.witness.2.wmv

-FDNY: "As we were getting our gear on and making our way to the stairway, there was a heavy duty explosion."
Video: http://terrorize.dk/911/witnesses/heavy.duty.explosion.wmv

-FIREFIGHTER CHRISTOPHER FENYO Interview Date: December 11, 2001

pg 3: There was an explosion at the top of the Trade Center and a piece of Trade Center flew across the West Side Highway and hit the Financial Center.

pg 5: About a couple minutes after George came back to me is when the south tower from our perspective exploded from about midway up the building.

pgs 6-7: At that point a debate began to rage because the perception was that the building looked like it had been taken out with charges. We had really no concept of the damage on the east side of 2 World Trade Center at that point, and at that point many people had felt that possibly explosives had taken out 2 World Trade…

-FDNY: "We were trying to get some of the people out, but then there was secondary explosions and then subsequent collapses..." Video: http://www.911blimp.net/videos/FDNY-explosions.mov

-FIREFIGHTER FRANK SWEENEY Interview Date: October 18, 2001

pg 9: I hear what sounded like firecrackers and a low rumble. I look up, and the south tower – I could see the top part of the siding overlapping the bottom side of the siding..

Clip of firemen talking about bombs found in one of the towers:


* Fireman: "There's a bomb in the building!"
Fireman: "Here we go again"
Fireman: "There's a bomb in the building, start clearing out."
Bystander: "Sorry? Did you say there was a bomb? What did you say?"
Fireman: "Bomb in the building! Start clearing out!"
Fireman: "We gotta get the **** outta here!"
Fireman "There's a secondary device in the building!"
Fireman: "We got a secondary device!"
Fireman: "Got a secondary device in the building!"
Fireman: "Secondary device!"

-FDNY recall "detonations" in South Tower:

fireman: It was as if as if they had detonated, det..
fireman: yea detonated yea
fireman: as if they had planned to take down a building,
boom-boom-boom-boom-boom-boom-boom-boom ...
Video: http://www.prisonplanet.tv/discussion_in_firehouse.mpg

Damage to

the south side of WTC7


re: Damage to the south side of WTC7

That photo doesn't show anywhere near the amount of damage that the government is claiming. It's been over five long years since 9/11. Where are the photos of this alleged damage? What are they hiding? The most damage I've seen is a photo of the southwest corner:


No one is disputing that there was *some* damage to the South face of WTC-7, but the official report contradicts what some have said regarding the amount of damage that was really there:

Former NYPD Officer & 9/11 First Responder Craig Bartmer...

"I was real close to Building 7 when it fell down... That didn't sound like just a building falling down to me while I was running away from it. There's a lot of eyewitness testimony down there of hearing explosions. I didn't see any reason for that building to fall down the way it did -- and a lot of guys should be saying the same thing. I don't know what the fear is coming out and talking about it? I don't know -- but it's the truth."


"I walked around it (Building 7). I saw a hole. I didn't see a hole bad enough to knock a building down, though. Yeah there was definitely fire in the building, but I didn't hear any... I didn't hear any creaking, or... I didn't hear any indication that it was going to come down. And all of a sudden the radios exploded and everyone started screaming 'get away, get away, get away from it!'... It was at that moment... I looked up, and it was nothing I would ever imagine seeing in my life. The thing started pealing in on itself... Somebody grabbed my shoulder and I started running, and the shit's hitting the ground behind me, and the whole time you're hearing "boom, boom, boom, boom, boom." I think I know an explosion when I hear it... Yeah it had some damage to it, but nothing like what they're saying... Nothing to account for what we saw... I am shocked at the story we've heard about it to be quite honest."

Besides, controlled demolition expert Danny Jowenko has looked at the government's claims of damage and he said the building should have remained standing. After studying this report of damage to wtc7's South face he said "On this, the building will stand. Guaranteed. Guaranteed."

Other experts agree:

Structural Experts Say:
"WTC-7 was with the greatest probability brought down by controlled demolition done by experts."
Link: http://911blogger.com/node/2925

Here are more statements concerning Building 7:

-Reporter Al Jones: "People started to run away from the scene [WTC7] and I turned in time to see what looked like a skyscraper implosion -- looked like it had been done by a demolition crew -- the whole thing just collapsing down on itself and another big huge plume of gray and white smoke shooting up into the air and then more of the smoke billowing up the street here... so that’s number one, number two, and now number seven that have come down from this explosion."

Live 9-11 Report from 1010 WINS NYC News Radio, presented in the documentary "911 Eyewitness" (Forward to 28:25)
Video: http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=65460757734339444&q=911+eyewitne...


-Emergency worker: "We were watching the building [WTC7] actually ‘cause it was on fire… the bottom floors of the building were on fire and… we heard this sound that sounded like a clap of thunder… turned around -- we were shocked to see that the building was ah well it looked like there was a shockwave ripping through the building and the windows all busted out… it was horrifying… about a second later the bottom floor caved out and the building followed after that… we saw the building crash down all the way to the ground… we were in shock."

Live 9-11 Report from 1010 WINS NYC News Radio, presented in the documentary "911 Eyewitness" (Forward to 31:30)
Video: http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=65460757734339444&q=911+eyewitne...


-Guns & Butter Radio interview - April 27th 2005:
Hosted by Bonnie Falkner
Guest: Indira Singh (Ground Zero Emergency Worker)

Bonnie: How long did you work as an emergency medical technician and exactly what is it that you were doing (at ground zero)?

Indira: ...when I got there we were setting up triage sites (at ground zero), close, very close to the area. The triage site that I was setting up was behind, well, to the east of Building 7 where Building 7 came down...
...we were setting up triages as close to the pile as possible… so what we were doing was setting up different kinds of stations… IV stations, cardiac stations, wound stations, burn stations ...just trying to have an organized space. What happened with that particular triage site is that pretty soon afternoon, after mid-day on 9/11 we had to evacuate that because they told us Building 7 was coming down... I do believe that they brought Building 7 down... By noon or one o'clock they told us we had to move from that triage site up to Pace University a little further away because Building 7 was going to come down or being brought down.

Bonnie: Did they actually use the word "brought down" and who was it that was telling you this?

Indira: The fire department... the fire department and they did use the word "we're going to have to bring it down."

Excerpt from above is heard approximately ten minutes into the interview.
Audio: http://www.gunsandbutter.net/archives.php?si=78


-Columbia Journalism Review – May/June 2003, by Thomas Franklin

Excerpt from an article written by award winning photographer, Thomas Franklin, who snapped the world famous photo of firemen raising the American flag at ground zero. In the article Franklin explains that all of ground zero was evacuated less than an hour before WTC 7 was demolished at approximately 5:20 pm on 9/11:

"Much of what happened to me on September 11 is a blur, but this moment I clearly remember: It was 4:45 p.m., and all the firemen and rescue workers were evacuating Ground Zero after word came that a third building -- WTC 7 -- was ready to fall. I had only a few frames left, and an entire day's worth of pictures to develop, so I prepared to head back to New Jersey."
Article: http://archives.cjr.org/year/02/2/franklin.asp


- CBS News Anchor, Dan Rather, makes comments after Building 7 falls down:

“Amazing, incredible pick your word. For the third time today, it’s reminiscent of those pictures we’ve all seen too much on television before, where a building was deliberately destroyed by well placed dynamite to knock it down.”

Video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tr6_WRPZjIM


-WTC lease holder Larry Silverstein's comments about Building 7 in the PBS documentary, America Rebuilds (2002):

“I remember getting a call from the, er, fire department commander, telling me that they were not sure they were gonna be able to contain the fire, and I said, 'We've had such terrible loss of life, maybe the smartest thing to do is pull it.' And they made that decision to pull and then we watched the building collapse.”

Video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CahEva8zQas

In the same documentary, America Rebuilds, a clean up worker at ground zero uses the term "pull" when preparing for the controlled demolition of Building 6: (Use of the word “pull” as slang for “demolish”)

Unidentified Construction Worker: "Hello? Oh, we're getting ready to pull building six."

Luis Mendes, NYC Dept of Design and Construction: "We had to be very careful how we demolished building six. We were worried about the building six coming down and then damaging the slurry walls, so we wanted that particular building to fall within a certain area.”

Video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FNEoiOP76QQ

Larry Silverstein Answers WTC Building 7 Charges: Says "pull it" meant to evacuate firefighters, but there were no firefighters in the building:
Article:: http://www.informationliberation.com/index.php?id=4718


"This is work of man. This is a hired job. [Larry Silverstein] said it himself. You hear him saying 'Pull it' down."

-Controlled Demolition Expert Danny Jowenko

Video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sep-HDZoEBM

Danny Jowenko owns a demolition firm called "Jowenko Exposieve Demolitie B.V.". Information about his company's qualifications can be found posted on their website:
Link: http://www.jowenko.com/index.php/1,3,2

He's also listed on ImplosionWorld.com's website as being one of their licensed blasters and associates":


Controlled Demo Expert Danny Jowenko confirms that Building 7 was brought down on purpose:


"Of course in some circles of the controlled demolition industry 'Pull' is used to mean that you actually demolish a building."

-Benjamin Chertoff, Researcher for Popular Mechanics, on Coast to Coast AM - March 5, 2005


Video clips of World Trade Center Building 7 being "pulled" on 9/11:


7 minute video presentation on the destruction of Building 7 on 9/11...