Just spotted this GEM over at Pilots For 911 Truth Forum

There have been rumours lately that Danny Jowenko (controlled demolition expert) of http://www.jowenko.nl/ had changed his mind on WTC 7.....

So Jeff of http://www.pumpitout.com/ called him and asked him

Very intersting to say the least (call lasts just over 2 minutes)

Click link below to listen or right click and save target as to download:

Phone call to Danny Jowenko

Don't miss this !!!

Last night, Tuesday, February 13, 2007, at 7:30 p.m. central time, Dan Rather spoke at the University of Texas-Pan American Fine Arts Auditorium in Edinburg, TX. His presentation covered mostly his recent trip to Afghanistan and his view that a bloody conflict was soon to erupt there. He also gave the audience a glimpse into his evolution as a journalist over the last three decades or so. But he never mentioned anything about 9/11.

As far as I know, I was the only 9/11 Truth activist at the presentation. My father was with me, but my friends and fellow activists Leo K and Ron Avery were unable to attend, so basically I was on my own as far as 911 Truth was concerned and I was admittedly a little intimidated by this fact.

The appeal to authority via “trust the experts”

- exposed!

As I watched a docu on Controlled Demolition Inc. I noticed an “expert” cited in there,
Paul Nicholas Worsey, professor of mining engineering at University of Missouri at Rolla.

I wondered what his thoughts about the insights of the dutch controlled demolition expert Danny Jowenko
regarding WTC 7 were.

Remember, the one who was stunned as he saw the pictures of WTC 7 fell in 6.6 secs into its own footprint
on the afternoon on 911 and said: “This is controlled demolition”.

http://www.911blogger.com/node/3231

So I mailed him. This is my email exchange, read bottom to top, please!

(See appendix .pdf, about 130kb)

Now that’s interesting how he deals this info- he just got over it with saying: “Never heard of the guy” eventually to undermine Jowenkos science ground.

As one can only be an expert if he knew him. Instead of looking at the website of Jowenko,

http://www.jowenko.nl

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yoasZUbmwpo

In a CBS News report from about 6:30 in the evening of 9/11, correspondent Byron Pitts describes how police apparently had advance knowledge of the collapse of WTC 7. He says: "Back live we have had little relief here. Take a look at this. About an hour ago, World Trade Center building number 7 collapsed. A 42-story building, weakened by the devastation that had occurred earlier today. No word any casualties in the building. It was the one calamity that was not a surprise. Police had evacuated the area hours ago, fearful building number 7 would indeed fall down."

Since fire had never before caused a steel-framed building to collapse, why were they so afraid WTC 7 would fall that they had the foresight to evacuate the surrounding area?

I previously wrote about the apparent death of Craig Miller from the demolition of WTC 7. Because the link for the information no longer works, and so the info cannot be verified, I dug a little deeper to try to confirm or refute the story.

As reported by What Really Happened, a rescue worker said:

"...I'm on top of building 7 just pulling out rubbish. Pulled out a Port Authority cop at about 11 o'clock in the morning..."

Craig Miller was technically not a Port Authority police officer, but a Secret Service Officer. Therefore, either the rescue worker erroneously believed that Officer Miller was a Port Authority officer, or two people were killed by the demolition of WTC7.

Additionally, U.S. Congressman Otter believed that Officer Miller died when WTC7 collapsed:

From http://pnacitizens.org/

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-7180303712325092501&hl=en

WMV | MP4 Versions available at http://www.911podcasts.com/display.php?vid=195

Testimony of multiple rescue personnel that they were told Building 7 was going to be imploded means FEMA, NIST, Silverstein Properties and federal government all lied, revelations demand immediate grand jury inquiry into insurance fraud, vindicates call for new independent 9/11 investigation

Paul Joseph Watson & Alex Jones
Prison Planet
Friday, February 9, 2007

Two more ground zero emergency rescue personnel are on the record as stating they were told Building 7 was going to be brought down on 9/11 hours before its symmetrical implosion, completely contradicting the official explanation of accidental collapse.

The new revelations provoke urgent questions about how a building was rigged with explosives within hours when such a process normally takes weeks or months and why the decision was taken to demolish the building amidst the chaos of the situation on that day.

Yesterday we reported on the testimony of an anonymous EMT named Mike who told Loose Change producer Dylan Avery that hundreds of emergency rescue personnel were told over bullhorns that Building 7, a 47 story skyscraper adjacent the twin towers that was not hit by a plane yet imploded symmetrically later in the afternoon on 9/11, was about to be "pulled" and that a 20 second radio countdown preceded its collapse.

Shortly after this article was released we uncovered more astounding testimony of ground zero rescue workers who are fully public and on the record in repeating the same claims, that Building 7 was brought down deliberately and that its collapse was not accidental as the government claims.

Ground Zero EMT: We Were Told
Building 7 Was to Be "Pulled"

New Jersey Emergency Medical Technician asked "how could someone have rigged all these explosives?" before towers collapsed, support columns had been blown out

These graphics are easily copied and pasted into emails to send to unsuspecting recipients who've never seen WTC 7. Great tool to spread info around the Net. Old high school teachers, journalists, politicians, etc have all gotten this from me. Thought you'd like to have access to it. Just copy and paste.

World Trade Center Building 7 was NOT hit by an aircraft

WTC 7 collapsed at around 5:20pm on 9/11/01 !!!!

Graphic that is easily copied and pasted into emails to send to unsuspecting recipients who've never seen WTC 7.  Great tool to spread info around the net.  Old high school teachers, journalists, etc have gotten this from me.  thought you'd like to have access to it.

Just copy and paste. 

BBC program "The Conspiracy Files" is going to cover the collapse of WTC7. This is interesting but I'm reserving my judgment, especially after last week’s episode. Although I might be wrong, and besides any footage they show of its collapse on mainstream TV should be positive, even if the whole program's a hit-piece.

From the editors blog;  

"A number of you looked forward to the other programmes in the series, which continues in the New Year, especially the programme about 9/11. To answer questions about what we are covering in the 9/11 programme, we are covering all the key issues, including World Trade Centre 7, which was not hit by an aeroplane but which collapsed. And yes we did contact Professor Steven Jones, but he did not want to be interviewed for the programme and instead we interviewed the co-chair of Scholars for 9/11 Truth, Professor Jim Fetzer."

Five minute video comparing WTC 7 fire to other skyscraper fires, and also to controlled demolition. The video is set to The Blue Danube. A vivid example for just about anyone out of the blue who might be questioning 911. It's brief, easy to listen to, and for the coming holidays and the year ahead, it's a great way to send $20 bucks to everyone you know and love.

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=2364206678564389150&pr=goog-sl

911 Press for Truth
www.911pressfortruth.com

A nice little video comparison of a building which burned for some 15 hours and WTC7.

The video was made by Perry A. Thanks to Prison Planet for the catch.

what about this perspective to one of the events on sept 11th 2001:

How, if things went not exactly the way they were planned ? I'm allways a bit irritated by the collapse of WTC 7 - there is such an obvious problem for the official version to explain the collapse of buildg.7 . The problem is so h u g e because this is one of the most smoking guns in the whole 9-11-planecrash-binLaden-Story. How could this recently built tower collapse ? It's more than obvious that fires can not be the cause, which childish pretext can be used in case of tower 1 and 2, as there was kerosen in the planes.

The problem is so huge that Larry Silverstein had to invent the story of the FDNY calling him - so that (as he wants to tell us) he himself suggested to "pull it". (he goes on : "...and then we watched the building collapse" ) Eventhough now he's led to misinterprete his own phrases, saying that he meant the People to "pull". What a Nonsense, what a "dangerous" game for him and friend Giuliani and other 'networkers'...
this is a kind of grave accident in the whole official version. What had really been planned as a reason/coverup-reason for the collapse of WTC 7 ?? Was there a third plane "missing", or should the fires inside the building r a g e much more than they actually did ? (How - b t w - do the officials explain these fires - from fallen debris ?? nonsense..)