Thomas Kean: “Aftershocks” From Planes Responsible for WTC Building 7 Destruction (Video)

Via We Are Change:

On September 13th, 2011, Thomas Kean, chair of the 9/11 Commission and former governor of NJ, gave a lecture for the The Drew Forum, a series of public lectures at Drew University located in Madison, New Jersey. We Are Change was tipped off to the event by FreedumbFighter28. and attended. After the lecture, a question and answer session was opened up to the audience. When We Are Change asked Thomas Kean to address the collapse of WTC Building 7, which was not hit by a plane, and was not mentioned once in The 9/11 Commission Report, his answer was simply shocking.

Kean claims the Bureau of Standards Final Report on the collapse WTC Building 7 found that “aftershocks” from the planes hitting the twin towers caused the foundation of Building 7 to weaken and collapse. First, it is important to note that the National Bureau of Standards changed its name back in 1988 to the National Institute of Standards and Technology, or NIST. Second, no where in NIST’s final report does it say that aftershocks from the impact of the planes into the Twin Towers caused or even had a factor in the collapse of Building 7. In fact, NIST claims Building 7 was brought down by fire.

Read More: We Are Change

41 Comments on "Thomas Kean: “Aftershocks” From Planes Responsible for WTC Building 7 Destruction (Video)"

  1. That’s…that’s just fucking retarded.

  2. That’s…that’s just fucking retarded.

    • Yes.  It’s obvious Kean has no clue what he is talking about and as the cochair for the 9/11 omission report cover up it’s very telling the level of IGNOR ance those entrusted with getting to the bottom of things are capable of.  Also remember Building 7 is not mentioned at all in the entire 9/11 omission report.

  3. Anonymous | Dec 18, 2011 at 1:24 am |

    “Aftershocks” from those planes couldn’t knock ME down. And I have notoriously bad posture. I don’t claim to be an expert on the building 7 controversy, I think it fell down due to damage taken from debris of WTC 1 and 2 when they fell as well as the fires. http://www.911myths.com/html/wtc7_damage.html
    <—–that website gives a pretty convincing assessment of the damage WTC 7 suffered.

    However, it certainly does not help make the case that WTC 7 fell due to damage and fire when people like this moron are blabbering on about a field of science they apparently know nothing about. It is also a little weird that the chair of the 9/11 commission would have no real info on the cause of WTC 7 falling down. I still believe more in the incompetence of idiots like this rather than their ability to but together or help cover up any sort of grand conspiracy.

  4. pixelbrine2 | Dec 17, 2011 at 9:24 pm |

    “Aftershocks” from those planes couldn’t knock ME down. And I have notoriously bad posture. I don’t claim to be an expert on the building 7 controversy, I think it fell down due to damage taken from debris of WTC 1 and 2 when they fell as well as the fires. http://www.911myths.com/html/wtc7_damage.html
    <—–that website gives a pretty convincing assessment of the damage WTC 7 suffered.

    However, it certainly does not help make the case that WTC 7 fell due to damage and fire when people like this moron are blabbering on about a field of science they apparently know nothing about. It is also a little weird that the chair of the 9/11 commission would have no real info on the cause of WTC 7 falling down. I still believe more in the incompetence of idiots like this rather than their ability to but together or help cover up any sort of grand conspiracy.

    • Have you looked at the research offered by the Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth on Building 7’s destruction beforehand?  Please view the following primers.   If you are interested in getting more in depth I would be happy to provide more information.  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-r6xZyKlla0&feature=player_embedded

      and http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hZEvA8BCoBw  
      goes into greater depth.  I can provide a 2 hour presentation by structural engineer Tony Szamboti dealing only Building 7 if you are interested in understanding the implausibility of the complete destruction of building 7 due to asymetrical superficial impacts and random asymetrical fires on only 4/5 stories of the building.

  5. does anybody really think that that stooge
    is gonna spill the beans on his bosses?

    we’d love to see it
    but it ain’t gonna happen
    they’re gonna stonewall it to the bitter end
    just like all the other “truths” buried in the historical debris

  6. BuzzCoastin | Dec 17, 2011 at 9:34 pm |

    does anybody really think that that stooge
    is gonna spill the beans on his bosses?

    we’d love to see it
    but it ain’t gonna happen
    they’re gonna stonewall it to the bitter end
    just like all the other “truths” buried in the historical debris

  7. Camron Wiltshire | Dec 18, 2011 at 2:09 am |

    Have you looked at the research offered by the Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth on Building 7’s destruction beforehand?  Please view the following primers.   If you are interested in getting more in depth I would be happy to provide more information.  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-r6xZyKlla0&feature=player_embedded

    and http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hZEvA8BCoBw  
    goes into greater depth.  I can provide a 2 hour presentation by structural engineer Tony Szamboti dealing only Building 7 if you are interested in understanding the implausibility of the complete destruction of building 7 due to asymetrical superficial impacts and random asymetrical fires on only 4/5 stories of the building.

  8. Camron Wiltshire | Dec 18, 2011 at 2:10 am |

    Yes.  It’s obvious Kean has no clue what he is talking about and as the cochair for the 9/11 omission report cover up it’s very telling the level of IGNOR ance those entrusted with getting to the bottom of things are capable of.  Also remember Building 7 is not mentioned at all in the entire 9/11 omission report.

  9. I really like this band, Earth, but I can’t really get the point this douchebag is trying to make over the music; which is a good jam. Basically, all you need to know is that george w. bush is a faggot with daddy issues, who pretty much destroyed america as we know it with his ineptitude.  Try him, and his posse, of war crimes and be done with it already.

  10. I really like this band, Earth, but I can’t really get the point this douchebag is trying to make over the music; which is a good jam. Basically, all you need to know is that george w. bush is a faggot with daddy issues, who pretty much destroyed america as we know it with his ineptitude.  Try him, and his posse, of war crimes and be done with it already.

    • still listening to the music.  Goddamn, Earth rocks.  it is a shame the asshole who posted this doesn’t have his shit together.  like we needed a 9/ll.  republicans before the election were telling me that the only person that could take down osama bin laden was w. bush.  al gore was weak, too concerned with “global warming” to see a real threat.  american politics are such a fucking joke.  democracy my ass.

  11. still listening to the music.  Goddamn, Earth rocks.  it is a shame the asshole who posted this doesn’t have his shit together.  like we needed a 9/ll.  republicans before the election were telling me that the only person that could take down osama bin laden was w. bush.  al gore was weak, too concerned with “global warming” to see a real threat.  american politics are such a fucking joke.  democracy my ass.

  12. Allenqualls2 | Dec 18, 2011 at 10:24 am |

    the empire is dead.

  13. ok.  I accidentally hit my music button while watching this.  I still stand by my claims above, in spite of the rock and roll. 

  14. Mamagriff50 | Dec 18, 2011 at 11:19 am |

    9/11 was a tradgedy. But what I don’t understand is how the American public sat back and ate up the commissions report on it. It is so full of crap and gaping holes. I thought Americans were smarter than that. I was wrong….They’re either idiots or they just don’t care.

  15. Mamagriff50 | Dec 18, 2011 at 7:19 am |

    9/11 was a tradgedy. But what I don’t understand is how the American public sat back and ate up the commissions report on it. It is so full of crap and gaping holes. I thought Americans were smarter than that. I was wrong….They’re either idiots or they just don’t care.

    • If you don’t believe the official hypothesis (a terrorist attack that succeeded beyond even their wildest dreams), you run into two alternatives, both horrifying:

      1: The World Trade Center buildings were so crappily built that they would have fallen apart at some point without the planes running into it; they just forced the collapse ahead decades (if not years) ahead.

      2: The governments (in hand with corporations) did major work to bring down the buildings. The Airplane bombers were part of the plot – either intentionally or accidentally, but they gave the true destroyers cover.

      Now, Raging Neocons/Tea Party Partisans aside, most people believe that the Government has, if not their best interests at heart, at least an interest in keeping things peaceful and working well enough. The commission’s report, however flawed, allowed that belief to continue for another six years through scandal after scandal until even that belief was impossible.

  16. truth hurts | Dec 18, 2011 at 6:53 pm |

    everyone should go watch “September Clues”… an audio video engineer looked closely at the originally aired footage from 9/11… it’s a complete fraud…

  17. truth hurts | Dec 18, 2011 at 2:53 pm |

    everyone should go watch “September Clues”… an audio video engineer looked closely at the originally aired footage from 9/11… it’s a complete fraud…

    • September Clues is Disinformation
      http://arabesque911.blogspot.com/2007/11/september-clues-debunked.html

      Stick to the Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth’s material.  They don’t theorize as to who, they only deal with the physics and the evidence.  Building 7 was 47 stories, 300 feet wide and fell through itself into a neat little pile on the ground without being struck by a plane.  Suffice to say it is not mentioned in the 9/11 commission report.  Don’t let the trolls on here fool you.

      RememberBuilding7.org 
      Ae911Truth.org

        • Actually it’s not about “camron” but nice Red Herring!  I actually posted information from relevant experts such as John D. Martini  
          Here you go, so you don’t have to scroll up or anything.

          If you read the article you will see there are many who support Mr. Martini’s statement.  

          Frank Demartini’s Statement
          Frank A. Demartini, on-site construction manager for the World Trade Center, spoke of the resilience of the towers in an interview recorded on January 25, 2001.The building was designed to have a fully loaded 707 crash into it. That was the largest plane at the time. I believe that the building probably could sustain multiple impacts of jetliners because this structure is like the mosquito netting on your screen door — this intense grid — and the jet plane is just a pencil puncturing that screen netting. It really does nothing to the screen netting.Demartini, who had an office on the 88th floor of the North Tower, has been missing since the 9/11/01 attack, having remained in the North Tower to assist in the evacuation. 6   Demartini had first worked at World Trade Center when Leslie E. Robertson Associates hired him to assess damage from the truck bombing in 1993.http://911research.wtc7.net/wt

  18. If these folks understood what their explanations led to. I can’t tell you how many explanations of the Building 7 collapse that seemed to point to a building so shabbily built that one could argue that Al Qaida did us a favor.

  19. If these folks understood what their explanations led to. I can’t tell you how many explanations of the Building 7 collapse that seemed to point to a building so shabbily built that one could argue that Al Qaida did us a favor.

    • Shabbily built?  Yeah sure buddy, the worlds tallest buildings were shabbily built.  Oh and Building 7 too, even though it was built over a Con Ed Substation.  It was designed so that entire floors could be removed and still have plenty of reserve strength.
      Frank Demartini’s Statement
      Frank A. Demartini, on-site construction manager for the World Trade Center, spoke of the resilience of the towers in an interview recorded on January 25, 2001.
      The building was designed to have a fully loaded 707 crash into it. That was the largest plane at the time. I believe that the building probably could sustain multiple impacts of jetliners because this structure is like the mosquito netting on your screen door — this intense grid — and the jet plane is just a pencil puncturing that screen netting. It really does nothing to the screen netting.Demartini, who had an office on the 88th floor of the North Tower, has been missing since the 9/11/01 attack, having remained in the North Tower to assist in the evacuation. 6   Demartini had first worked at World Trade Center when Leslie E. Robertson Associates hired him to assess damage from the truck bombing in 1993.

      http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/analysis/design.html

  20. If you don’t believe the official hypothesis (a terrorist attack that succeeded beyond even their wildest dreams), you run into two alternatives, both horrifying:

    1: The World Trade Center buildings were so crappily built that they would have fallen apart at some point without the planes running into it; they just forced the collapse ahead decades (if not years) ahead.

    2: The governments (in hand with corporations) did major work to bring down the buildings. The Airplane bombers were part of the plot – either intentionally or accidentally, but they gave the true destroyers cover.

    Now, Raging Neocons/Tea Party Partisans aside, most people believe that the Government has, if not their best interests at heart, at least an interest in keeping things peaceful and working well enough. The commission’s report, however flawed, allowed that belief to continue for another six years through scandal after scandal until even that belief was impossible.

  21. Camron Wiltshire | Dec 19, 2011 at 2:39 am |

    RememberBuilding7.org  

  22. Camron Wiltshire | Dec 19, 2011 at 2:42 am |

    September Clues is Disinformation
    http://arabesque911.blogspot.com/2007/11/september-clues-debunked.html

    Stick to the Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth’s material.  They don’t theorize as to who, they only deal with the physics and the evidence.  Building 7 was 47 stories, 300 feet wide and fell through itself into a neat little pile on the ground without being struck by a plane.  Suffice to say it is not mentioned in the 9/11 commission report.  Don’t let the trolls on here fool you.

    RememberBuilding7.org 
    Ae911Truth.org

  23. Camron Wiltshire | Dec 19, 2011 at 2:43 am |

    RememberBuilding7.org
    Ae911Truth.org

    Best sites to get unadulterated non conspiracy information.  Just deals with the evidence and demandas a new investigation based on it, no conjecture.

  24. RememberBuilding7.org
    Ae911Truth.org

    Best sites to get unadulterated non conspiracy information.  Just deals with the evidence and demandas a new investigation based on it, no conjecture.

  25. Camron Wiltshire | Dec 19, 2011 at 6:27 pm |

    Shabbily built?  Yeah sure buddy, the worlds tallest buildings were shabbily built.  Oh and Building 7 too, even though it was built over a Con Ed Substation.  It was designed so that entire floors could be removed and still have plenty of reserve strength.
    Frank Demartini’s Statement
    Frank A. Demartini, on-site construction manager for the World Trade Center, spoke of the resilience of the towers in an interview recorded on January 25, 2001.
    The building was designed to have a fully loaded 707 crash into it. That was the largest plane at the time. I believe that the building probably could sustain multiple impacts of jetliners because this structure is like the mosquito netting on your screen door — this intense grid — and the jet plane is just a pencil puncturing that screen netting. It really does nothing to the screen netting.Demartini, who had an office on the 88th floor of the North Tower, has been missing since the 9/11/01 attack, having remained in the North Tower to assist in the evacuation. 6   Demartini had first worked at World Trade Center when Leslie E. Robertson Associates hired him to assess damage from the truck bombing in 1993.

    http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/analysis/design.html

  26. Camron Wiltshire | Dec 20, 2011 at 6:42 am |

    Actually it’s not about “camron” but nice Red Herring!  I actually posted information from relevant experts such as John D. Martini  
    Here you go, so you don’t have to scroll up or anything.

    If you read the article you will see there are many who support Mr. Martini’s statement.  

    Frank Demartini’s Statement
    Frank A. Demartini, on-site construction manager for the World Trade Center, spoke of the resilience of the towers in an interview recorded on January 25, 2001.The building was designed to have a fully loaded 707 crash into it. That was the largest plane at the time. I believe that the building probably could sustain multiple impacts of jetliners because this structure is like the mosquito netting on your screen door — this intense grid — and the jet plane is just a pencil puncturing that screen netting. It really does nothing to the screen netting.Demartini, who had an office on the 88th floor of the North Tower, has been missing since the 9/11/01 attack, having remained in the North Tower to assist in the evacuation. 6   Demartini had first worked at World Trade Center when Leslie E. Robertson Associates hired him to assess damage from the truck bombing in 1993.http://911research.wtc7.net/wt

  27. Does anybody still actually believe terrorists orchestrated this whole thing…

    Damn sheep.

  28. Does anybody still actually believe terrorists orchestrated this whole thing…

    Damn sheep.

Comments are closed.