*Please refer to the video links I have made available earlier in which Larry Silverstein (the owner of building seven) admits on camera that he told firefighters to pull the bulding.* - also Dan Rather corroborated this story live as the building fell.
The article makes no mention of the most cited evidence of the fact that building number seven was destroyed via controlled demolition.
The building colapsed precisely in vertical fashion.
The building had the classic crimp as it was falling that any demolition engineer will tell you is part of a controlled demolition.
The building colapsed at almost the rate of free fall.
The building colapsed into a tiny pile of rubble.
No other steel building has fallen due to fire. Some have even burned for weeks.
The fires were minimal at the time of the colapase - as seen by any footage of the event(again watch links provided)* - and what Dan Rather had to say about the colpase as it happened when he said the building was "deliberately destroyed" live on air. all found in the links on the first post
The article also lets NIST's Shyam Sunder sell the "progressive collapse" of Building 7:
"What our preliminary analysis has shown is that if you take out just one column on one of the lower floors, it could cause a vertical progression of collapse so that the entire section comes down." Note the guarded language Sunder uses to describe the extent of the collapse.
The reader is led to believe that the collapse of a "section" could lead to the total collapse of the building, when in fact there are no examples of total progressive collapse of steel frame buildings outside of the alleged cases of the Twin Towers and Building 7.
The independent research (not a cousin to Secretary Chertoff, and posts all testing data and procedure) of
www.physics911.net of course shows that the building was much more durable than Chertoff states and that the only thing that could have brought down the building would have been well placed explosives.
Which of course is exactly what the Building's owners said took it down, as well as Dan Rather as the Building fell - granted probably a slip of the tounge, but nonetheless I can understand why he would say building seven was deliberately destroyed as that is the most logical explaination for watching a steel building plummit to the groung like no other steel building ever has in the history of the world (except by well placed explosives).
this article is a total whitewash
Oh yeah ... and the mastermind behind this peice of propaganda, Mr. Chertoff, is none other than the cousin of the Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security, a department that rests on the legitimacy of the "official story"
Threaded Mode