Pictures

Beijing CCTV Building On Fire, News Censored

99 comments by Fauna on Tuesday, February 10, 2009

beijing-cctv-building-fire-firefighters

Around 9:00pm on February 9th, the CCTV building in Beijing caught on fire. Chinese netizens quickly reported the news on the internet, with many pictures and videos. Soon, netizens began wondering why there were no television news reports about the fire, and then many websites like Sina and NetEase began removing pictures or locking disussion topics about the CCTV fire.

beijing-cctv-building-fire-01

beijing-cctv-building-fire-02

beijing-cctv-building-fire-03

beijing-cctv-building-fire-04

beijing-cctv-building-fire-11

beijing-cctv-building-fire-10

beijing-cctv-building-fire-09

beijing-cctv-building-fire-05

beijing-cctv-building-fire-07

beijing-cctv-building-fire-08

Some netizens said witnesses originally could see some flashlights shining out of the windows of the CCTV building trying to get help. However, as the fire burned, there were fewer and fewer flashlights. In the end, there were no more flashlights.

A Hong Kong news report (Chinese Cantonese):

A collection of CCTV Fire videos on NetEase. Some videos also show fireworks celebrating Lantern Festival and the last day of Chinese New Year.

A collection of live reports and pictures by Z0la/Zu0la is on Google (Chinese).

Some more pictures on Wonitata.

On KDS is this notice that is supposedly from the government telling website moderators to stop reporting of the CCTV Fire on news websites, BBS, and blogs. This includes no more posting pictures, videos, and to only use the Xinhua report:

beijing-cctv-building-fire-government-censorship-notice

The building that was on fire was not the main CCTV building with the interesting shape that many Chinese have nicknamed “The Big Underpants” although many netizens thought so during early reports. However, this building had the Mandarin Oriental Hotel.

Comments on Tianya:

No way? I am currently watching the CCTV Lantern Festival Show! Is the signal going to get cut off?
It cannot be that 冏 [coincidental], could it? OMG!

The Big Underpants is on fire~
What is the little chicken [penis] going to do??

Cut it off, it is all burnt…

It is a bit crispy, but better crispy than none at all~

So many things happening…could it be yet another eventful year?

No big deal, tomorrow CCAV [a nickname for "CCTV"] will PS [Photoshop] some pictures to clear up the rumors.
The picture will only have a few performers simply smoking on the roof.

It is good that it is burning, it would be best if CCAV was burned completely.

Although it is not the Big Underpants…
the intensity of the fire is really big. Hopefully there are no casualties.

This is the fastest growing topic I have ever seen…

So fireworks really do have advantages and disadvantages~~~

Still, there are no television channels broadcasting live.
Can fireworks actually cause this big of a fire?
I am looking forward to the truth.
Of course, I know there will not be the truth.
I hope there is no one inside.
New year’s
blessing.

Why are there so many people who cannot control their excitement that this is burning?

If it is about CCTV, it will arouse people’s attention.

When I first glanced at the picture on the first page, I thought of 9/11.
Such a large fire with such a tall building, it is very difficult to save.

Oh my, so scary, praying praying, if it is going to burn before the new year, then it will burn, as long as everyone is safe.

Those above gloating at other’s misfortunes can all go to hell. With such a large fire, I bet there will be some firefighters who will sacrifice their lives.

So terrible, there are probably a lot of people inside, what can they do? So high. If the power was cut off, they cannot even use the elevators.
My prayers are with them.

The fire has been extinguished now. Here are some pictures posted on KDS:

beijing-cctv-building-fire-extinguished-01

beijing-cctv-building-fire-extinguished-02 beijing-cctv-building-fire-extinguished-05

beijing-cctv-building-fire-extinguished-03 beijing-cctv-building-fire-extinguished-04

Some netizens have discovered the cause of the fire:

beijing-cctv-building-fire-caused-by-ultraman

More news about CCTV Fire from other English China blogs:

See Also:

99 Comments

  1. Batman
    Tuesday, February 10, 2009 at 3:30 am

    Allow people to use more firecrackers and there’ll be more fire around!!

    Reply
  2. Andy
    Tuesday, February 10, 2009 at 3:33 am

    That looks really bad, seeing a building of that size go up in flames. Hopefully there weren’t any people in the building at the time. Just some questions tho, Is that a new building? My canto isn’t that great but it seemed like the news reporter on that youtube video said that construction was finished but there’s no ones working there at the moment? That would be good news then.
    My regards to those whom might have perished.

    Reply
  3. Andy
    Tuesday, February 10, 2009 at 3:42 am

    oh my, I just read some more, was it a Hotel that was burning? Now i really hope it wasn’t occupied yet.

    Reply
  4. Dan Dan
    Tuesday, February 10, 2009 at 4:14 am

    That must be a shock to all Beijingers, possibly to the whole nation. I hope no people got hurt.
    No disrespect, but an accident on that scale shouldn’t happen to an economic superpower like China anymore. Seems savety is still not taken seriously there.

    Reply
  5. too yellow
    Tuesday, February 10, 2009 at 4:27 am

    Seems like the censorship is lifted now, censorship is really random is China sometimes. The consensus seems to be this is cause by fireworks.

    Reply
  6. janosch
    Tuesday, February 10, 2009 at 5:20 am

    @andy

    yes, it was the mandarin oriental. it was supposed to be opened this year.

    people should really take more care with those fireworks.

    Reply
  7. Matt
    Tuesday, February 10, 2009 at 5:35 am

    Thanks a lot Ultraman….jerk.

    Reply
  8. Joe #2
    Tuesday, February 10, 2009 at 5:36 am

    I hope that everyone evacuated safely. They probably didn’t save everyone, but hopefully at least most of the people inside were okay.

    I feel bad for anyone who was trapped inside. And I’m confused as to why the government would even try to censor that? Did they think that people wouldn’t notice a huge, burning building? I don’t think that even David Copperfield could hide something like that…

    Reply
  9. The Grudge
    Tuesday, February 10, 2009 at 5:57 am

    They censor simply because they don’t want the Netizens to start wild rumors about terrorism and such, until they know actually what’s the cause behind it.

    Reply
  10. BBSguy
    Tuesday, February 10, 2009 at 6:06 am

    Every thread seems to be accessible and nothing has been deleted even the kds one on censorship. Could be someone decided against it or someone’s messing around.

    Reply
  11. Truth Hurtz
    Tuesday, February 10, 2009 at 7:03 am

    Now that is one impressive lantern. That being said, I heard a lot of explosions on the video and if there were plenty of things that can combust it be very difficult to contain that fire. It’s a good thing the building wasn’t opened yet to the public for the sake of casualties. Hopefully this doesn’t become an event which changes the fireworks policy but I am thinking it will be in the talks.

    Reply
  12. mark
    Tuesday, February 10, 2009 at 7:21 am

    Could this be designed to “hedge” against falling property values and tourism by collecting the insurance money?

    Reply
  13. Peteryang
    Tuesday, February 10, 2009 at 8:51 am

    the censor is back, as of 8:42am I see absolutely no reports on major news sites, no words, no photos, I haven’t checked forums but I suspect they will be the same.

    this MIGHT be a terrorist attack, disguised by surrounding fireworks, flame of this magnitude simply cannot be set off from the outside, it must have come from inside the compound. yesterday was the last day of chinese lunar new year, perfect timing if you ask me.

    and since this hotel is not yet in operation, I believe only security and management team live in there, I hope no one got hurt, and a comprehensive investigation is imminent.

    Reply
  14. Name
    Tuesday, February 10, 2009 at 8:59 am

    It doesn’t make sense. How can fireworks set concrete, glass, and metal on fire like that. In order for fireworks to stick to, I’m assuming, a mostly concrete and glass building it’d have to be mixed with some kind of an adhesive.

    Reply
  15. Peteryang
    Tuesday, February 10, 2009 at 9:03 am

    OMG THE LAST PHOTO OWNS THE CRAP OUT OF EVERYTHING I ACTUALLY SHAT MY PANTS.

    Reply
  16. I am reading this
    Tuesday, February 10, 2009 at 10:33 am

    If there is censorship we aren’t doing too great a job as I am viewing this website and also youtube reports. Anybody know who the insurers are???? Ouch!!

    Reply
  17. Kai
    Tuesday, February 10, 2009 at 11:08 am

    Like The Grudge said and like the Wen Jiabao shoe incident, the government actually bothers trying to lock down information while they figure out their official position and strategy. Their reasons aren’t necessarily nefarious, but it does make them look suspicious if not stupid, especially since the government already has a bad reputation with covering up things in most people’s eyes.

    I personally think they’d do better if they allowed reporting and quickly provided an official spokeperson who would respond honestly with:

    “Yes, this is happening, and we are still investigating what happened. As you can see, we have mobilized all these firefighters and ambulances and we’re working hard trying to fight and stop this fire. But as you can see, it is extremely large. We hope to have more information for you as soon as possible.”

    instead of some propaganda department head issuing some decree that reads:

    “Shut up, do not report this, stop the internet, wait for our official story.”

    The government needs to adapt to the modern era where information can spread easily and rapidly because of the internet or cell phones. It isn’t just about finding new ways to control these mediums in the old way, but learning how to respond and work effectively through them, with transparency instead of subterfuge.

    A lot of the government’s old tactics are premised on them looking down on the people as children they have to manage, instead of equals they have to work with, much less the citizens they are supposed to serve.

    Reply
  18. Kai
    Tuesday, February 10, 2009 at 11:16 am

    @ mark:

    LoL, I thought that too. Maybe it is one big Mandarin Oriental insurance scam.

    @ Peteryang & Name:

    I’m curious as well. Even with fireworks exploding near the outside of a building (as they often do here in China), the sparks alone aren’t likely to cause a fire. Maybe if you shoot a firework with enough force to break through the glass and detonate inside to light up something combustible inside, yes, but I don’t think the glass on those buildings are that easily broken.

    I’m afraid to speculate but it would really suck if it was terrorism. I imagine one day I’ll be watching some fire disaster program on Discovery (probably while visiting Hong Kong) where a team of experts explains just how everything happened.

    Reply
  19. tibetman
    Tuesday, February 10, 2009 at 11:22 am

    I am sure the building is insured. So there is no problem for the builders. The workers will be hired again. But one can only hope there are no casaulties in lives.

    I am still baffled, why would the government censor this?

    Reply
  20. will
    Tuesday, February 10, 2009 at 11:30 am

    saw the fires live. it was pretty awesome.

    Reply
  21. chingchong
    Tuesday, February 10, 2009 at 11:37 am

    burn china, burn!

    Reply
  22. fcuk da lu ren
    Tuesday, February 10, 2009 at 11:38 am

    I think it was it was a group of peasants playing ba shi fen got drunk on bai jiu and tried to light their farts on fire.

    See kids, don’t try that at home

    Reply
  23. Jfemmefatale
    Tuesday, February 10, 2009 at 11:39 am

    One of the pictures of person at fault for attack looks like catwoman.

    I explain that cat kill viciously before being killed.

    I work in chinese media, hoping to end complaints of cesorship.

    Bloody Mary’s back to steal my birthright. I.E. a very pricey watch.

    Firworks, chemistry. Adhesive love.

    Explosion of jealousy.

    Yet defenders of the kitten remain. Sick, sick people. Mal a la tete

    The Kat can’t fight with words. Stop idolizering and stone the real villian who is up to no good. Tell her to go back to the kitchen and cheerleading like she belongs.

    Reply
  24. Truth Hurtz
    Tuesday, February 10, 2009 at 11:50 am

    The censorship:
    It’s complete unnecessary and very backward method of handling these things. My question is why does the government still perpetuate this form of method. Do they not understand that there is such devices as the internet, media, cell phones and its only going to get harder to ‘hide’ pink elephants when the world is getting more and more ‘connected’. I mean who do they think they are fooling…and trying to spoon feed the citizen information after its been ‘euphoniously worded’ only lowers its credibility and ignites avoidable suspicions. It’s frustrating to see improvements made by the government here and there and then something like this happens and they shoot themselves in the foot. Stop this insecurity and just man up to the truth please.

    Reply
  25. Mike
    Tuesday, February 10, 2009 at 11:50 am

    Sina has the report on home page, very easy to find.

    Reply
  26. Bibi
    Tuesday, February 10, 2009 at 11:57 am

    A new hotel that’s gonna open this year, and now it’s gone! Too bad!

    My friend in Beijing told me about the news throught Skype. Even Twitter is faster than any mainstream media, and it seems it got the news before emergency services! No news on TV last night either. We are in China, censorship is common. :)

    Reply
  27. Jesse
    Tuesday, February 10, 2009 at 12:08 pm

    Ironically, fireworks (the rumored cause of fire) are normally used for a celebration. Now they are the cause of attack?

    The picture at the above link shows a catwoman claiming responsibility for the actions.

    The date of the attack, much like 9/11 is quite symobolic with current chinese/american cryptology.

    2/9/09

    Nostradamus speaks of three “great ones” who are entities that act like (but not as gods). It’s rumored that two of these “one’s” clubs are currently more radical traditionalist and the third is more proscience atheistic. The two traditionalist are attempting to annihilate the third one’s club. The one’s club is likened to be as god status, thus the letter 9, the great I AM.

    I cracked encrypted messages in my line of work at home (JH by the way) and the codes suggest that the ones clubs often revolve around the shakledment to a person’s simplistic faith in a “holy” book of war and violence and a god that kicked eve out of a garden for eating an apple from the tree of knowledge.

    Reply
  28. JH
    Tuesday, February 10, 2009 at 12:25 pm

    China, do not lose skepticism of religion, nor hope!

    The rest of the world is full of socialists, atheists, and pro women’s rights workers!

    Reply
  29. Dominique
    Tuesday, February 10, 2009 at 12:27 pm

    where those filthy letters of the alphabet be?

    Reply
  30. Name
    Tuesday, February 10, 2009 at 12:43 pm

    But the fire doesn’t look to be coming from the inside though

    Reply
  31. Peteryang
    Tuesday, February 10, 2009 at 12:55 pm

    @Kai

    thats right, at this point the government doesn’t want people asking questions and pointing fingers, because this is one SERIOUS incident.

    by “serious” I mean few people realize exactly how. from all the evidences available, it is a premediated attack, thus it raises two huge questions:

    1. how can the security allow this to happen in the very heart of chinese capital, at this very important date?
    2. how would the security prevent similar things from happening in the future?

    until the government has figured out the answers, the censor is to stay. I guess they’re having emergency meetings up in 中南海 as we speak, and relaxing censor is not even on their schedule yet.

    every way you look at this, the government will have to answer to the public VERY SOON, and immediately begin an open investigation, with media scrutiny, otherwise it will have catastrophic impact on people’s daily lives and commercial activities, increasing insecurity in this city, and demoralizing the whole society.

    from a global point of view, china has moved to the frontline of war-on-terror.

    Reply
  32. Name
    Tuesday, February 10, 2009 at 1:01 pm

    According to this it only took 20 minutes for the fire to spread http://www.nytimes.com/2009/02/10/world/asia/10beijing.html

    Reply
  33. Adam
    Tuesday, February 10, 2009 at 1:16 pm

    I wanted to be upset with all the comments taking it so lightly but i remember how it feels when you are young and see some sensational that’s real for the first time.

    Reply
  34. Terry
    Tuesday, February 10, 2009 at 1:24 pm

    @USTcer

    The building has a 20 story atrium in the inside which creates a great whooshing tunnel effect (my speculation here)… and as the building wasn’t finished, there was most likely flammable construction materials on the roof which the fireworks ignited (according to one source). Danwei has some good links to eyewitness accounts etc, and also to a great article I had read before on the architecture of the building. Concrete and Steel does burn too, learned that 30 some years ago while training to be a property/fire insurance underwriter. I do hope the structure is recoverable.

    On the censorship… what else is new!! Excellent comments by Kai and Grudge above on that matter. Drove by in a taxi this morning and the taxi driver hadn’t heard the news – imagine a lao wai clueing in a BJ Taxi driver on what is going on in his city!!! (well he is a Shunyi driver and I was his first fare of the day… but still!!)

    Reply
  35. Name
    Tuesday, February 10, 2009 at 1:40 pm

    Extremely high temperatures can damage/destroy anything but concrete is nonflammable (it does not burn), it just decomposes and crumbles at extremely high temperatures. Steel burns, but the temperatures required would have brought the entire building down just like the World Trade Towers.

    Reply
  36. Rick in China
    Tuesday, February 10, 2009 at 2:07 pm

    I don’t know why there are so many claims about the “censorship” – I mean – uh, read CCTV in Chinese, and find the datestamp on this

    http://news.cctv.com/china/20090209/110166.shtml

    Censorship?

    Reply
  37. Watchoutfortheagents
    Tuesday, February 10, 2009 at 2:25 pm

    I’m glad it didn’t collapse like WT*.

    Reply
  38. A
    Tuesday, February 10, 2009 at 2:31 pm

    I am puzzled – CCTV was on fire or unfinished Mandarin oriental

    Reply
  39. BBSguy
    Tuesday, February 10, 2009 at 2:32 pm

    This thread has gone off the deep end. Nostradamus? 9/11 truthsayers?

    Here’s a full account https://docs.google.com/View?docid=dggh5mp6_0cmqqrrdb (in Chinese)

    Reply
  40. Dominique
    Tuesday, February 10, 2009 at 2:40 pm

    your link is censored on my computer. However, censors change all the time.

    Censorship happens in America, too.

    Reply
  41. Ms. Smith
    Tuesday, February 10, 2009 at 2:55 pm

    Some filthy bastard was fondling some fireworks on this very site. Incidentally, at the time, I thought they were of a another variety. Tad bit of a chemistry lesson. :(

    Reply
  42. D
    Tuesday, February 10, 2009 at 3:10 pm

    What was on fire ? Here you write CCTV building. New write Mandarin oriental hotel.

    Reply
  43. mahesh
    Tuesday, February 10, 2009 at 3:11 pm

    iam sooooooooooo worry about that burninggggggggggggg

    Reply
  44. Kai
    Tuesday, February 10, 2009 at 3:30 pm

    @ Rick in China:

    The censorship claims are echoed on other websites. It isn’t a full censorship but rather the government wanting to control information and telling websites to report their official story while locking down/deleting a lot of other conversations/pictures/videos on the internet. What you see on CCTV will definitely be government approved.

    @ D:

    The Mandarin Oriental Hotel is inside the CCTV building complex.

    Reply
  45. Max
    Tuesday, February 10, 2009 at 3:45 pm

    Look like another insurance company is going to ask for financial bailout soon…what a start to the “year of the ox”
    Good luck to all of us…

    Reply
  46. Jim
    Tuesday, February 10, 2009 at 5:26 pm

    Reporting that a firefighter, 张建勇 Zhang Jianyong, died as a result of smoke inhalation :(:
    http://news.sohu.com/20090210/n262146958.shtml

    Reply
  47. janosch
    Tuesday, February 10, 2009 at 6:48 pm

    looks like it was cctv’s fault:

    http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/2009-02-10-beijing-hotel-fire_N.htm

    Reply
  48. krdr
    Tuesday, February 10, 2009 at 6:51 pm

    I liked TVCC building more than CCTV tower. I was looking forward to visit it on my next tript to China. Sigh!

    Reply
  49. dace
    Tuesday, February 10, 2009 at 9:46 pm

    I saw the news on the main CCTV1 bulletin tonight, but they didn’t show any really dramatic footage – just the last bit of place still on fire and the burnt-out shell afterwards. I saw the link here (chinasmack) and sent the youtube link to all my colleagues at work today and no one knew anything about it. They immediately all said it must’ve been a terror attack, and no one believe the fireworks reason.

    Reply
  50. Nathan C
    Tuesday, February 10, 2009 at 10:02 pm

    Reported from CNN

    “Central China Television (CCTV) said in its apology that staffers who were overseeing the construction of a new television complex in central Beijing hired people to set off large firecrackers outside the building without prior approval”

    CCTV going to pay dearly for this… whoever give the order to set off the firecrackers must be in hiding now….

    Reply
  51. Cherriiiba
    Tuesday, February 10, 2009 at 10:05 pm

    The CCT building didn’t collapse at near free fall speed, like the 47 story tall “Building 7″ at the World Trade Center complex on 9-11, because controlled demolition wasn’t used. Jet fuel, office equipment, furniture, etc. doesn’t burn hot enough to liquify steel. Thermite does, and the fact that scientists found evidence of it at the World Trade Center is being covered up. Maybe the Chinese government censored this story because they too do not want us to see that, despite being fully engulfed in flames for many hours, the CCT Building didn’t collapsed.

    Reply
  52. Nathan C
    Tuesday, February 10, 2009 at 10:13 pm

    @Cherriiiba
    WTC conspiracy theory is always there, some believe, other don’t… its common for Chinese gov to first censored the news until the fact is known before releasing it out to the public…
    Well, this show chinese construction is good… see better than WTC… :)

    Reply
  53. Peteryang
    Tuesday, February 10, 2009 at 10:40 pm

    I refuse to believe it’s fireworks.

    It was an obvious ATTACK, how can fireworks ignite anything inside the building from outside??????????? DOES NOT MAKE SENSE. the whole complex was basically empty, concrete and steel do NOT burn even a kid knows this, and construction materials deposited in the building should have insulation coating as a no-brainer requirement, this is a freaking iconic thing for China, it doesn’t just go down by accidents, no fucking way, it must be CALCULATED.

    and what proves my suspicion the most is that they claimed the cause only half a day after the incident, it just doesn’t work like that, they were so flurried that they didn’t even make a fancy report!!!

    Reply
  54. Watchoutfortheagents
    Tuesday, February 10, 2009 at 11:32 pm

    Remember WTC7?

    You just seen exactly what happens to a building engulfed in fire. Did it collapse into it’s own footprint? NO?

    Did it fracture upward and explode upward? No.

    Did office fires on 8 floors cause a “new phenomenon” of thermal expansion to initiate “global collapse?” NO! (versus complete sagging of steel by 50 inches in WTC 1,2, the complete opposite)

    Sure, STEEL CAN BE significantly weakened starting 1000c. However, as you just witnessed, a building engulfed in fire cannot sustain the temepeture needed for global, near free-fall collapse, ala WTC towers. So you really believe that:

    1.) Jet fuel can sustain and raise tempeture to cause massive steel buckling of up to 50”; experiements shows steel in fire can buckle up to 5”, but only after sustained fire which occurs after significant fire retardant has been striped (I suppose you can argue that the jet striped away the fire retardant. But is it still enough to cause near free-fall collapse? Molten steel? Dust particles? Obvious upward and lateral ejection of materials?)

    2.) A 47 story building can be collapsed at free-fall speed initiated by office fire ONLY on merely 8 floors, and at the time of collapse these fires have mostly been out.

    3.) Complete and total collapse of THREE STEEL buildings ON THE SAME DAY, all within 5 hours of each other. With distinct contracdictions in the offical explanation of collapse amongst these buildings, that: 1.) Two buildings’ steel weakened and buckled downward, whiile 2.) The I beams in the other building expanded laterally to initiate global collapse. All on the same day.

    Haha! Must all be the shitty engineering and the retarded fire codes. LOL.

    .Now you may go: hmm, but did CCTV sustain heavy debris damage? No. However, we still know that even with heavy damage WTC (WTC 7 AT LEAST) still should not collapse the way it did, ala controlled demolition. Now something is just not right here.

    *Interest side note (obviously circumstantial evidences):

    - A few month before 9/11 it was reported workers have been working non-stop on something. The company responsible is an industry experts in new DEMOLITION tech.

    - Just so happens the entire elevator system in WTC 1,2 was “refurbished” before 9/11.

    -A new “fire retardant” was put in place before 9/11.

    Reply
  55. Gnah
    Wednesday, February 11, 2009 at 1:27 am

    Of course, it did not collapse, just like no other building in flames ever did, apart from the WTC.

    *stroking chin*

    Reply
  56. richard
    Wednesday, February 11, 2009 at 8:52 am

    Did Yang Rui, host of CCTV “Dialogue”, get burned up in his office?

    No.

    Damn!

    Reply
  57. Howard
    Wednesday, February 11, 2009 at 10:02 am

    Facts: Sina or Sohu did not censor the news about CCTV complex fire.

    http://news.sina.com.cn/c/2009-02-10/151517185640.shtml

    Reply
  58. Miou
    Wednesday, February 11, 2009 at 10:52 am

    Hey, guys.
    I’m not saying that burning on that huge building is a good thing. I hope there were no one got hurt from that accident. But I still remember few weeks ago, when I walked by that huge building, I felt bad and shameful about poor people who live far away from Beijing. CCTV spent lot of money on that luxury building but who would care about the poor people? How about the children of poor people? Some of them dont even have chance to get education. On the streets of most cities, I can see there are so many young begger who should go to school instead. China is trying hard to make it looks beautiful, but actually ugry. I’m Chinese..But I have to say, China needs more improve.

    Reply
  59. TheOrz
    Wednesday, February 11, 2009 at 12:02 pm

    @Watchoutfortheagents

    I’m totally with you at how ridiculously suspicious it all is, however, there is one huge piece missing to the idea of 9/11 as an inside-job. Not a single person has leaked anything at all! With so many people involved in setting up such a thing, how is it possible that we don’t get a single leak!!! There are leaks all the time of all sorts of shit the gov. doesn’t want to get out, but not on 9/11.

    Reply
  60. Watchoutforagent
    Wednesday, February 11, 2009 at 12:33 pm

    Haha. Yep. That is the one I have to use a bunch of shit (basically it all eventually lead to aliens or evil gods) to explain…

    Then again… false flag terror have occurred before. And these people have been historically fucking shit up (human nature?) So who knows WTF is really going on.

    Still… I’m pretty convinced about the you know what.

    Reply
  61. Tom2
    Wednesday, February 11, 2009 at 2:05 pm

    All of these comments and no thank you for Peter Yang for breaking the story on ChinaSMACK – has it been done before where a contributor to a thread has broken the news on the next ChinaSMACK story – Fauna is not an award in order?

    Who done it? If it was really a bad decision of a CCTV cadre that caused a 5 billion Yuan building to burn down; surely his head will roll? If a senior offical is shown to be responsible and gets some serious time for his error, then perhaps the story can come to rest?

    I like the sentiment of Miou’s comment. I don’t see how a fancy CCTV building does anything for the real-real population of north China. Was the farmer going to get a better picture on his 42” flat screen?

    Reply
  62. Fauna
    Wednesday, February 11, 2009 at 2:16 pm

    Hi Tom2,

    I was busy finding finding information to prepare this post when Peteryang made a comment with a link to Youku video. I was also busy reading the fighting comments in the Xidan Girl post. But you are right.

    Thank you, Peteryang.

    Reply
  63. jayman
    Wednesday, February 11, 2009 at 2:22 pm

    I agree that the initial censorship was probably to allow the party to get a handle on the situation, and decide how to present the matter. I’m sure it didn’t help that firefighter’s equipment couldn’t reach past the 14th floor.

    from all the evidences available, it is a premediated attack

    I thought it was said to be an accident? Is there any evidence that this is terrorism, domestic or otherwise? Insurance fraud is a definite possibility, especially since the owner of the building claims to be involved in setting the fire.

    But really if terrorists were able to set up an attack wouldn’t opening night be a better time to pull the trigger? Or any time when there were people inside? Empty buildings aren’t very demoralizing, really, though I mean no disrespect to the firefighter who lost his life.

    Jet fuel, office equipment, furniture, etc. doesn’t burn hot enough to liquify steel. Thermite does, and the fact that scientists found evidence of it at the World Trade Center is being covered up

    Former BYU professor Steven E. Jones, the originator of the thermite theory, has been interviewed by mainstream news sources and has made quite a number of (paid) public appearances. His ideas have been given ample and widely recognized consideration. The reason no one takes him seriously is because he’s wrong.

    His evidence rests on a photograph which he claims shows evidence of beams cut during the attack to cause a collapse. But earlier pictures of the same area taken by Joel Meyerowitz, the first photographer allowed on Ground Zero, show those beams were cut later by clean up crews, for removal.

    Jones also refuses to submit his “research” for independent peer review, and his theory ignores basic facts about the way thermite works.

    they too do not want us to see that, despite being fully engulfed in flames for many hours, the CCT Building didn’t collapsed

    Only three steel frame high rise structures have collapsed after a fire, ever. Two were hit with jumbo jets, one was hit with a falling building. The fire at the Mandarin Oriental Hotel would have collapsed the building if it support beams had been damaged.

    WTC conspiracy theory is always there, some believe, other don’t

    There are serious problems with the official story of the events of 9/11. No one can deny that. The most glaring example is how the BBC reported the collapse of Building 7 when it was still clearly visible in the sky over their reporter’s shoulder.

    But most conspiracy theorists are more concerned with selling books and videos and appearances, and asking for donations on their websites. Meanwhile you can find those same ideas debunked for free on youtube and on the websites for peer reviewed journals. How can you trust a man who’s telling you a story for his dinner?

    construction materials deposited in the building should have insulation coating as a no-brainer requirement

    Like the nightclub that dropped molten soundproofing materials out of the ceiling after a fireworks display?

    A few month before 9/11 it was reported workers have been working non-stop on something.

    Who reported?

    There are leaks all the time of all sorts of shit the gov. doesn’t want to get out, but not on 9/11.

    I also wonder that. If it’s truly a conspiracy, why hasn’t there been a reporter getting a phone call to meet someone in a shadowy garage? America has a long and glorified tradition of whistle blowers. Maybe there are a ton of extremely interesting deathbed confessions waiting for us in half a century or so.

    Reply
  64. Peteryang
    Wednesday, February 11, 2009 at 5:18 pm

    I thought it was said to be an accident? Is there any evidence that this is terrorism, domestic or otherwise? Insurance fraud is a definite possibility, especially since the owner of the building claims to be involved in setting the fire.

    But really if terrorists were able to set up an attack wouldn’t opening night be a better time to pull the trigger? Or any time when there were people inside? Empty buildings aren’t very demoralizing, really, though I mean no disrespect to the firefighter who lost his life.

    —————————————————

    opening night?? you kidding me, I am a beijinger, I have first hand experiences in the kind of security we had in place for olympics, if the government didn’t want a bee to fly into beijing, it just could not, let alone an attack.

    and they could have made a very promising report on this incident, I mean they have a REPUTATION of bulling to the public, but this time they only offered a couple of words, which leaves a huge room for rumors to fly around.

    Reply
  65. Yabo
    Wednesday, February 11, 2009 at 5:27 pm

    @ people who think 9/11 was an inside job: You’re stupid.

    Reply
  66. Watchoutfortheagents
    Wednesday, February 11, 2009 at 11:14 pm

    jayman:

    Steve Jones claims that he found evidence of thermite (sorry, not sure which one exactly. I’m not a physics nor engineer) in the dust particles.

    How exactly do you explain the molten steel found underneath WTC 1,2,3.

    As for the collapse itself. All some people want is independent review of all the simulation results. The simulations which a lot of the so called theories are not 100% and needs to be PEER-REVIEWED themselves.

    This is the same counter arguments seen everywhere else. I don’t feel that you have debunked anything. You debunked nothing.

    [quote]
    But most conspiracy theorists are more concerned with selling books and videos and appearances, and asking for donations on their websites. Meanwhile you can find those same ideas debunked for free on youtube and on the websites for peer reviewed journals. How can you trust a man who’s telling you a story for his dinner?
    [/quote]
    I’m sure. But then I know quite a few engineering (student) types who believes in this shit. Plus, there are a growing number of credible professionals in the so called truth movement. I’m sure a few are in it for the money, but others feels incredulous about the whole thing just as I.

    Let’s NOT EVEN talk about WTC1,2. Just explain to me how WTC 7 can collapse at near free fall speed in under 7 sec.

    Explain to me the numerous (recent too) report regarding admission along the line that they “planned to bring it down, no matter what. If it falls by it’self, then the better. And incredibily it actually fell).

    …

    I will have to dig the WTC1,2 construction thing later.

    Not everyone is stupid just because they want to find out the truth for themselves.

    Reply
  67. John Doe
    Thursday, February 12, 2009 at 2:50 pm

    How can a building like this burn so fast???? What were the windows made of? Highly combustible polymer??? One has to wonder if this accident is really a blessing in disguise. What if this building caught fire like this when full of people? Then what?

    Reply
  68. fireworks
    Friday, February 13, 2009 at 2:53 pm

    the “big underpants” has his pants on fire. its embarrassing for the owners because they spent huge somes of money to build it and having it go up in smokes because of careless sparklers or what have ya, its just don’t give a good image of people in charge.

    Reply
  69. Peteryang
    Sunday, February 15, 2009 at 11:22 am

    READ THIS CRITICAL UPDATE!

    I think I have reliable info on the cause. the fireworks that ignited the building was military type transported directly from Lanzhou military base to beijing using service vehicles (presumably with the consent of some top leader), and apparently the local police chief weren’t powerful enough to stop them because CCTV is a ministerial authority.

    according to this piece of information, the prime responsibly lies in CCTV itsef, instead of some “unapproved persons” as state media claimed.

    two responsible people have fled from beijing, and CCTV has succeeded in finding scapegoats, that is also why the news were briefly censored.

    Reply
  70. Peteryang
    Sunday, February 15, 2009 at 11:24 am

    and do not ask me where I got this, not going to tell ya.

    Reply
  71. Name
    Sunday, February 15, 2009 at 2:33 pm

    Still doesn’t explain how the fire got so big so quickly though. High explosive fireworks (I’m guessing used for simulation/training purposes) could have broken the windows but since it was an unfinished unfurnished concrete, steel, and glass building the fireworks should have just burned themselves out.

    Reply
  72. Peteryang
    Monday, February 16, 2009 at 9:04 am

    they say some blazing pieces slipped into the building and set off the stuff inside, god knows how.

    Reply
  73. Terrance
    Monday, February 16, 2009 at 4:20 pm

    There’s always a good possibility that a couple sneaked in on a romantic evening with candles to have sex in the soon to be opened to public building, and accidentally kicked candles in sleep, waking up too late, to flames already spread.

    Reply
  74. Perrot-Bothuan
    Wednesday, February 18, 2009 at 8:34 pm

    FREE TIBET
    FREE TIBET
    FREE TIBET
    FREE TIBET
    FREE TIBET
    FREE TIBET………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….

    Reply
  75. El Chino
    Friday, April 10, 2009 at 1:38 am

    The Chinese Government is run by an inept bunch of total idiots! They make the Three Stooges look like geniuses! hah!

    They come from a backward mentality, totally out of touch with reality.
    How stupid, their foolish attempts at cover-ups and deception; it insults everyone’s intelligence that they think they can pull the wool over everyone’s eyes!
    It only goes to show how they themselves are so stupid!

    We should never have had the Olympics in China. Period!

    Reply
  76. Hally
    Wednesday, October 21, 2009 at 3:47 pm

    Does nobody in China think these buildings are beautiful? I think these buildings are masterpieces designed by one of the best architects in the world. Most new buildings in China are so boring, but these are different, so wonderful. It is a shame that China does not take care very well about the work of Rem Koolhaas.

    Reply
  77. dingo
    Wednesday, January 27, 2010 at 2:39 pm

    Further proof that the 9/11 WTC collapse from fires near the top were pre-planned controlled demolition! Cheney should swing! Hey, Bush too…

    Reply
  78. fl1999
    Friday, April 10, 2009 at 2:00 am

    sorry for typos its late:

    military-type fireworks? did the party goers weare military-type red clown noses?

    Reply
chinaSMACK | personals - Meet people, make friends, find lovers? Don't be so serious!»