1. Mick West

    Mick West Administrator Staff Member

    On a smaller scale the Plasco building collapse in Iran reflects the tragedy of 9/11. A tall building collapsed due to fire, killing a large number of firefighters who were heroically trying to rescue people. The physical collapse of the building also reflected many aspects of the collapses both of the World Trade Center towers, and of Building 7. In particular we see the progressive collapse of floors stripping away the support from the walls which then collapse. This progressive collapse can be seen as a series of expulsions of smoke, fire and debris from the windows.

    Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_MgJTa7SDaY

    These and other similarities have placed the 9/11 Truth movement in a difficult position. They have long claimed that there are several visible indications of controlled demolition in the way the collapses of WTC1, WTC2 and WTC7 looked. Now those same indications have been duplicated in another building they are forced to either admit that those indications were just part of a regular collapse due to fire, or they have to double down and claim that this building also was demolished by explosives in some strange and implausible conspiracy.

    They chose conspiracy.

    Today they sent out a fund-raising letter asking people to chip in to cover the $1,850 they spend on a press release urging the Iranian government to look into hidden explosives causing the collapse.
    And they list the indicators that are part of the canon of evidence for their 9/11 theory that they think they also see in the Plasco collapse:

    This is, of course, nonsense. The building very clear collapsed due to a fire - the simplest refutation being that the floors that collapsed were the floors that were on fire, and no sounds of explosive demolition were heard. You can see the building progressively collapse. No explosives were needed. It's clear to just about everyone that this was just a fire.

    But for now AE911 is forced to make these increasingly ridiculous claims. While they say in their press release they are not jumping to conclusions, they should be fully aware that when it becomes clear to their supporters that the cause of the Plasco collapse was actually just fire, then significant parts of their claims of evidence for a 9/11 conspiracy will vanish in a puff of smoke.

    Let us look more closely at the points AE911 raise (most of which are factually correct), and why they are compelled to see them as suspicious.

    AE911: "The inferno was limited to the upper floors, yet the entire 17 stories came down in just a few seconds"

    Almost the entire AE911 case (and the Truther narrative in general) is built on an argument from incredulity. The collapse of the WTC towers looked weird. It seemed that it came down "too fast", "through the path of least resistance", and the official explanation "violated Newton's laws of motion". AE911 has gone to great lengths to press their belief that a building cannot collapse from the top down. And yet here we have an example of exactly that. Besides the collapse being due to fire, it was also due to fire at the top of a building and caused the entire building to rapidly collapse.

    AE911: "the fires were nearly extinguished"

    Partially true, and yet irrelevant. Just like in all three WTC buildings there were still substantial fires burning, and the fire here (and in WTC7) had been burning for hours, moving through the building, damaging and weakening connections and structural members as it went. In addition some damage can actually occur as the steel cools and contracts.

    AE911: "thick black smoke—signs of a low temperature, oxygen-starved fire"

    Thick black smoke is not a sign of an oxygen starved fire. In fact if you pour fuel into a pit and light it on fire, not only will you get thick black smoke, you will also get temperatures high enough to make steel sag and fall.

    AE911: "The building’s tumultuous fall is then accompanied by thick, energetic, rapidly forming plumes that are reminiscent of what we see in controlled demolitions."

    By this they mean the cloud of smoke and dust that is kicked up when the building collapse. AE911 used to refer to this as a "pyroclastic flow" and claimed that it was somehow evidence of demolition because they saw it in building that were demolished. But really it's just what happens when a building collapses. There's a lot of dust, and the falling building displaces a lot of air, creating swirling clouds.

    AE911: "videos we have compiled show what appear to be—and in some cases sound like—explosions emanating from the tower in sequential patterns as it began to crumble."


    In the 9/11 controlled demolition mythology, a core piece of "evidence" has been "squibs" - small ejections of debris that occurred several floors below the collapse of the exterior. The cause of these has long been obvious - the interior collapse of floors led to rapid compression of the air, and it blew stuff out of windows. That this is happening is readily apparent in the Plasco building, especially in video that AE911 chose to illustrate it.

    Again, these expulsions of debris are exactly what you would expect from a progressive top-down floor collapse inside the building. In this regard the Plasco collapse more closely resembles WTC1/2 than WTC7. WTC 1 & 2 were top down collapses, so you saw these exact same expulsions. WTC7 was a bottom up collapse, so the expulsions were largely confined to lower floors, not easily visible on the video.
    Last edited: Jan 22, 2017
    • Agree Agree x 11
    • Like Like x 4
    • Informative Informative x 2
  2. Whitebeard

    Whitebeard Senior Member

    Here's another compilation of footage of the fire and collapse, some of which haven't been posted here before.

    The two bits that stand out for me are at 7:00, where the expelled dust plumes can be seen rapidly running down the side of the building, starting from just below the visible fire to nearly ground level just before the walls start to fall - very indicative of progressive failure of the internal floors, and at 8:39 where you can see the external wall fails at a single point, just below the fire fighters platform in the shot, and propagates from there across the rest of the structure. Not something you see in footage of controlled demolitions / implosions.

    Also, every time I see the collapse I can't help but wonder how the two fire fighters on that platform escaped unharmed. The gods were smiling on them that day.
    • Agree Agree x 2
  3. jaydeehess

    jaydeehess Senior Member

    Iranian officials say there were 20-30 firefighters on the THIRD floor when it collapsed. If fire was limited to upper floors as AE911T claims, then why were all the FFs on the 3rd floor?
    Obvious answer would be they are wrong and that the fires had to be fought, in the interior, from lower floors involved first.
  4. jaydeehess

    jaydeehess Senior Member

    Whitebeard, there were two high buckets with a couple FFs each. One seemed to completely escape, the other swings back and forth, the truck must have been hit by debris. Very lucky that both did not collapse
  5. Mick West

    Mick West Administrator Staff Member

    Another piece of AE911 "evidence" duplicated here is the occasional "flash" caused by falling glass plates catching the sun for an instant.


    This one happens well after the collapse wave is several floors below. But most tellingly does not appear on any other video, as it's just a random alignment of sun, glass, and camera.

    Here's a more detailed frame taken at the same instant. No flash appears.


    AE911 says:
    Note in these videos we also see "flashes" as fire and/or smoke/steam is pushed out by the collapsing floors.
  6. Leifer

    Leifer Senior Member

    I think it's general practice for a high-rise fire, is to station a command area or staging area, on the accessible few floors below the fire. They don't expect a collapse, and a multi-story fire usually travels upward.
    Example: The "First Interstate" fire in Los Angeles,,,,,fire was on the 12th floor, and local command was staged on the 10th floor.
    Last edited: Jan 20, 2017
    • Agree Agree x 3
    • Like Like x 1
    • Informative Informative x 1
  7. Leifer

    Leifer Senior Member

    A high-rise fire includes the fact that facade glass is falling constantly and unpredictably, so much so, that firefighters need to find an 'safe route' just to enter the building, due to the danger of falling glass on the fire-side of the building.
    Last edited: Jan 20, 2017
    • Agree Agree x 1
  8. narseh

    narseh New Member

    According to local media, there were some uncooperative business owners who re-entered the evacuated building some time after the fire started to collect their valuables. The fire fighters were probably inspecting the lower floors to make sure no one was present at the time of the collapse.
  9. econ41

    econ41 Active Member

    Agreed..Given that it is "local command" of the active combat front line. The overall management, logistic and welfare support co-ordination would be off site. An issue of emergency management protocol which gets overlooked in discussions of the WTC7 evacuations of the OEM. The OEM was not the tactical combat front line command. I'm judging from the perspective of AU state and federal protocols but I don't see US as being different - nor Iranian.
  10. jaydeehess

    jaydeehess Senior Member

    Agreed, however AE911T states the fire was only on upper floors.
    Would fires on say the 12th and higher dictate a command from the 3rd?
    I realize we have incomplete info on this, but so too does AE911T, yet they confidently assume only upper floors on fire.

    Do we have any info on where or when this fire originated?
  11. jaydeehess

    jaydeehess Senior Member

    That would seem to dictate personnel being on the ground floor at entrances, and/or asking police to take that role.
  12. jaydeehess

    jaydeehess Senior Member

  13. Mick West

    Mick West Administrator Staff Member

    It's not just AE911 that have some dissonance problems here. The 9/11 Truth Reddit forum is currently a mixture of

    A) It's a controlled Demolition, like the World Trade Center
    B) It looks nothing like the World Trade Center collapses

    Examples A
    Examples B
    Reddit is probably tending towards B (the "so what?" response). AE911 on the other hand is stuck with their "these things are signs of controlled demolition".

    I'm quite hopeful that this will be the perspective that a lot of people need to finally realized that actually buildings can progressively and rapidly collapse due to fire. Of course the "true believers" generally will try to rationalize it, but there's plenty of people more on the fence.
    • Like Like x 3
    • Informative Informative x 1
  14. Redwood

    Redwood Active Member

    Mick, I think you meant to say "path of GREATEST resistance".
  15. Redwood

    Redwood Active Member

    It also bears repeating that just because a fire has gone out doesn't mean that the danger is over. A steel beam that has heat-expanded, warped and sagged will NOT go back to its "factory-issue" shape. There's a good chance that when it shrinks as it cools it will rip free from its connections, resulting in collapse.
  16. Thomas Green

    Thomas Green New Member

    Do we know if it was a steel framed building?
  17. Hierophant

    Hierophant Member

    Expect to see Niels Harrit give an interview on pressTV.ir explaining how he found iron microspheres and primer pai... military grade nanothermate... in Plasco Building dust, together with a report on how the building was built by a jewish plastics manufacturer who was wisely executed for zionism in 1979 and how 1/19 is 911 backwards.
  18. Mick West

    Mick West Administrator Staff Member

    Of course you can discuss it. AE911 are discussing it. You are discussing it. I think people should discuss it. It's going to help people understand the cause of the expulsions/ejections in the WTC1/2 collapse. So discussion is encouraged.
    • Like Like x 2
  19. Mick West

    Mick West Administrator Staff Member

    I made a video synchronizing the expulsions. They all happen around the south east corner

    Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=50eOzUHZkP8

    AE911 is really in a bind here. They pretty much have to claim this looks like a controlled demolition. It clearly isn't, but it remains to be seen if their supporters will all follow them down that road/
    • Agree Agree x 2
  20. Marvin Sannes

    Marvin Sannes New Member

    1) What is your source for the dust? 2) The suddenness is explosive, compressed air does not have this sudden signature, air compresses. And, 3) the distance from the burning floors to the explosive events. What is most certainly the signature of this as controlled demolition are the 4) same goofy arguments of plausible denial developed over many years
    [off topic content removed]
    Last edited by a moderator: Jan 22, 2017
    • Disagree Disagree x 6
    • Funny Funny x 2
  21. Hama Neggs

    Hama Neggs Senior Member

    That is quite an exaggeration and obviously not true. Also, we have previously noted here (though perhaps not cataloged) many dramatic events involving strong impacts, such as car or train crashes, etc, which leave people describing them as sounding like "explosions" when no actual explosives were present.
    • Agree Agree x 1
  22. Marvin Sannes

    Marvin Sannes New Member

    Perhaps I should have qualified it with everyone who commented. Listen to the several various TV reporters, and we have the recording of explosions, the FDNY written statement a couple month later. We will have testimony of explosion in the Plasco Buildings Demo, that will be discounted in the same way. Notice the pattern? Incidentally, my sister and niece were at E. 54th and heard explosions during the afternoon of 9/11. Could have been a wreck in Brooklyn, cans of hair spray, fire extinguishers, gas tanks, and lots of other stuff, in fact, everything is suggested except what we are watching - a pattern.
  23. Hama Neggs

    Hama Neggs Senior Member

    You mean... everyone who commented on hearing explosions said they heard explosions? Really? Certainly everyone who made comments that day didn't say they heard explosions.

    I doubt that.
    • Agree Agree x 1
  24. psikeyhackr

    psikeyhackr Member

  25. Mick West

    Mick West Administrator Staff Member

    They were very quick off the mark. I think they feel that they need to convince people as quickly as possible that the Placo collapse is a controlled demolition, as otherwise it takes away a lot of their "evidence"
    • Agree Agree x 2
  26. qed

    qed Senior Member

    Being forced into introducing a new controlled demolition conspiracy theory is game over for AE911. I think they are finished bar the shouting.
  27. Mick West

    Mick West Administrator Staff Member

    On the AE911 Facebook page it seems like many of their followers are going for the idea that it's a controlled demolition.
    https://www.facebook.com/ae911truth/videos/10154146170426269/# http://archive.is/AlNUn

    A few voices of reason:
    • Informative Informative x 1
  28. Nada Truther

    Nada Truther Active Member

    I wonder why they don't just raise money to contribute to the investigation. Maybe they could get someone in there to see if there are signs of foul play, instead of just drumming up propaganda to get other people to pay for their "demands". Get someone in there to test samples for Thermite, or whatever. Although, I would hope that it would be under some sort of non-biased supervision. That way the findings wouldn't get skewed in their direction. I am assuming that they will naturally be skewed in the direction of reality and find out that it was a fire induced collapse.

    Nah.....It is probably easier to just buy billboards.
    • Agree Agree x 1
  29. NobleOne

    NobleOne Member

    I personally do not see any sign of controlled demolition. There is no sign of the shock wave on the surrounding area and expulsions/ejections looks quite normal. Dust and debris coming out from the windows do not have neither speed nor outreach as it would have in case of explosion although looks spectacular.
    • Agree Agree x 2
  30. BombDr

    BombDr Senior Member

    Sorry to be pedantic, again, but demolitions take a long time to put in place, and most of the materials required have massive labels on them with words like "Flammable" and "No Smoking" etc, as well as the standard 'keep out the reach of children'.

    The explosive charges themselves would combust, the detonation cords would burn, the miles of firing cable would melt and snap, the connections are generally made of a polymer or simple tape, would again burn. The copper in the linear cutting charges would also at least change shape.

    What is the motive for such an elaborate hoax?
    • Like Like x 1
    • Agree Agree x 1
  31. Thomas Green

    Thomas Green New Member

    Attached Files:

    Last edited by a moderator: Feb 1, 2017
    • Disagree Disagree x 2
  32. deirdre

    deirdre Moderator Staff Member

    well safes are made of different things. but your video is uploaded january 27th (if my date converter is correct), a full week after the fire.

    • Like Like x 1
  33. Thomas Green

    Thomas Green New Member

    Wau. They explicite admits that the steel was melted down. I guess only thermite could explain that.
    • Funny Funny x 3
  34. Whitebeard

    Whitebeard Senior Member

    Why thermite? how do you think you forge steel in the first place? You need a lot of heat, you get heat from hot fires, like say from a big burning building full of fuel and accelerants? (remember a lot of this building was being used for industrial processes)

    Mankind has been melting iron and steel since 1200 BC (give or take a few years), thermite was discovered in 1893, thats a hell of a long time of molten metals with out thermite being involved.
    • Like Like x 2
    • Agree Agree x 2
  35. Thomas Green

    Thomas Green New Member

    Iron was never melted until the blast furnace was invented. Please don't make up things like that. You don't get temperatures above 1500 degrees celsius from office fires. Thermite could explain it. What else?
    • Funny Funny x 2
    • Disagree Disagree x 1
  36. deirdre

    deirdre Moderator Staff Member

    an office fire didnt melt the safes. They melted because of the furnace that was created by the collapsed building.
    Last edited: Jan 30, 2017
  37. Hierophant

    Hierophant Member

    The temperature that is achieved in office fire depends not only on what is burned, but on duration of the fire, amount and density of available fuel, and heat dissipation.

    When 17 stories are a rubble on the ground, it's not an office anymore. Long duration of the fire, fuel closer together (in a pile instead of spread over 17 stories upwards), and heat barriers (sand in the ground and cement) will create temperatures much higher than an office fires which is burned out in an hour. Chimney effects (air expanding and rising when it gets heated, sucking in more fresh oxygen rich air below) can create a stead draft.

    How does thermite explain a big chunk of heated metal? How much thermite would it take to heat that? How fast would it heat it? How would that be used to make the building collapse the way it did?
    • Agree Agree x 1
  38. Thomas Green

    Thomas Green New Member

    You are confusing the production of iron from iron ore with the melting of iron. Producing iron from iron ore dosen't require 1500 degrees c, since it is produced by carbothermal reduction http://opensourceecology.org/w/images/c/c3/Lvov.pdf

    Again iron was never melted until the blast furnace was inventet.

    I Agree office fires didn't melt the safe.
    • Disagree Disagree x 2
    • Agree Agree x 1
  39. deirdre

    deirdre Moderator Staff Member

    so how did they forge all those swords?
  40. Thomas Green

    Thomas Green New Member

    From the molten iron they got from producing iron by carbothermal reduction of iron ore. Iron and steel can be softend at temperatures lower than 1500 degrees C, but melting it requires 1538 degrees C.
    • Disagree Disagree x 1