Building 7 collapse questions resurface as US firefighters seek inquiry
Iain Hoey
Share this content
Podcast raises new questions about Building 7 collapse in the United States
In a recent episode of the Redacted Conversation podcast, two retired firefighters want a fresh investigation into the collapse of World Trade Center Building 7.
Host Clayton Morris interviewed former Seattle Fire Department captain Raul Angula and Firefighters for 9/11 Truth founder Erik Lawyer in an hour-long programme released on YouTube.
The speakers said they have prepared a briefing for former US president Donald Trump calling for an independent commission without political appointees.
They told listeners that more than 150 first responders gave statements describing explosions before the 47-storey tower fell at 17:20 local time on 11 September 2001.
They added that National Institute of Standards and Technology modelling has been challenged by a University of Alaska Fairbanks study that reached a different conclusion.
READ: Did World Trade Center Building 7 really collapse due to an office fuel load fire?
Firefighters detail competing technical studies on the collapse
Angula said: “The only way in their modeling that they can get this building to come symmetrically straight down in free fall for a period of time is to remove all the supporting structures columns which are rated for three hours.”
He was referring to the University of Alaska Fairbanks report led by Professor Leroy Hulsey, which concluded fire alone could not replicate the observed motion.
NIST had earlier attributed the collapse to thermal expansion that caused a progressive failure beginning at column 79.
The podcast stated that the Alaska team modelled the structure and found that simultaneous failure of all core columns was required to match video records.
Both firefighters argued that the existence of two conflicting peer-reviewed studies justifies an impartial review.
Eyewitness testimony and investigation protocols
Lawyer said: “Silence is complicity.”
He told the programme that standard NFPA 921 guidance requires investigators to test for explosive residue when melted steel or blast reports are present.
The firefighters stated that NIST did not preserve representative steel from Building 7 and did not conduct chemical tests on debris.
They said independent researchers later reported iron-rich microspheres and red-grey chips in dust samples collected across lower Manhattan.
The speakers argued that these findings, while disputed, show the need for laboratory analysis under a new commission.
Emotional barriers within the fire service
Angula said: “If Building Seven happened in any other city on any other date as a fire, this would be the number one case study in the American fire service.”
He explained that many New York firefighters still view discussion of the collapse as disrespectful to the 343 colleagues who died on 11 September.
Lawyer described how he initially rejected alternative explanations but changed his view after reviewing structural data.
He said: “We have to be awake to it.”
Both guests told the podcast that younger firefighters, including those whose parents died in 2001, are starting to question the official account.
Campaigners seek a presidential commission to examine Building 7
Angula and Lawyer said their briefing has been delivered to Curt Weldon, a former congressman who is pressing Donald Trump to create a new 9/11 commission.
They added that Senator Ron Johnson has supported public hearings on Building 7.
Lawyer said his organisation’s website, 911firefighters.org, is collecting signatures from firefighters and bereaved families.
He told the podcast that a commission should exclude anyone with contracts linked to the original investigation.
The speakers said their aim is to establish a transparent process that can review physical evidence, model data and eyewitness accounts without political influence.
Read: Built to Last or Built to Fail? The contested causes of WTC 7’s collapse and implications for structural firefighting strategies
Building 7 collapse questions resurface as US firefighters seek inquiry: Summary
The Redacted Conversation podcast has reported that two retired Seattle firefighters are campaigning for a new investigation into the collapse of World Trade Center Building 7.
Raul Angula and Erik Lawyer told the programme that more than 150 first-responder statements mention explosions before the building fell.
They said a University of Alaska Fairbanks computer model disputes the National Institute of Standards and Technology explanation that fire alone caused the failure.
Angula stated that simultaneous loss of core columns would be required for the observed symmetrical collapse.
The firefighters said standard NFPA 921 procedures call for explosive residue testing, which was not carried out by NIST.
Independent laboratories later reported thermitic particles in World Trade Center dust samples.
The pair have sent a briefing to former US president Donald Trump requesting an independent commission with no political appointees.
Former congressman Curt Weldon and Senator Ron Johnson have publicly endorsed fresh hearings.
Lawyer’s group, Firefighters for 9/11 Truth, is gathering support through its website, 911firefighters.org.
The campaign argues that resolving technical differences is essential for future high-rise safety standards and public confidence.