India Vs Newzeland WTC Final Important news

 ===========================================================================

Glyn Jennings, the well known writer and journalist on India and the latest news on the building, has written a useful commentary on the latest news for him. Some of it you will have seen elsewhere as some of the leaders of the Australian delegation have stated publicly that WTC 7 was the cause of the damage and destruction of the WTC on 9/11. He writes:

 Not only was building 7 not destroyed by the collapsing of the towers, not by the collapsing of the adjacent structure, but building 7 did not collapse either. The collapsing of the neighbouring building had a great deal to do with the failure of WTC 7.

The aftermath of the 9/11 attacks was relatively predictable. The World Trade Center complex suffered structural damage. However, only after more than 90 minutes had passed, following which the second tower fell, did the collapses of building 7 and the one adjoining the north tower begin. Although building 7 was subsequently located by investigative teams, the fact that its collapse was not witnessed – even by many of the rescue workers – makes it even less likely that the possibility of a controlled demolition is being aired to influence international opinion. Building 7 was clearly destroyed by the collapse of the north tower, the failure of the adjacent north tower and an apparent severe fire, rather than a few well placed explosives.

Whereas building 7 was mostly intact on 9/11, it did sustain fire damage at one point, in early August 2001. This does not confirm that it had been deliberately destroyed, but it does suggest that much of the fire damage and fire damage was not fire-related. More likely, as concluded by building experts such as Ewarz and Goyder, the fires were more likely to have been started by overheated material in the basement or the building above. Whatever happened to building 7, the fact is that it is still there and the collapse of the north tower has had a great deal to do with that remaining.

The question about WTC 7 remains open as to its cause, but that was an accident. Building 7 was obviously not being destroyed by explosives or an airliner crashing through it. The theory of a controlled demolition seems to have lost its credibility. The simple fact is that only two buildings collapsed after the 9/11 attacks – both with fire-related damage. Building 7 was not one of them. What happened to it was an accident and that is more important than who did it.”

http://www.wetrack.net/articles/paxbooks/%28papers/Zweifelstellung_ACR_yorkup_99_(2005)%29.pdf

===========================

Final comments:

The latest news coming from the now infamous commission of inquiry into the fire in the basement of the WTC, the one that is supposed to have begun in the early hours of the morning of September 11th, 2001, is that New York has found “no evidence of explosive material in the basement of the WTC building seven“.

So what is this supposed to mean? Was there an explosion, just on the other side of the sea from New Zealand, which sent the steel beams falling to the ground?

How is it that there is now absolute silence about the release of “missing” reports and reports concerning suspicious events that happened just a few days after the collapse of WTC 1, 2 and possibly WTC 7, which is a lot earlier than when the twin towers collapsed? If that’s not suspicious, then what is?

Does this also mean that Newzeland has just released a report from another committee of investigators, just a few days before this new one? If the government of Newzeland had indeed released the missing reports from the same committee of investigators – which has supposedly been to the WTC site a number of times since 2001, what are the odds that the investigation into the collapse of the towers