WTC Structural Failure Hearings

[Matrixxx]

Lets see, you want me to articulate a reason why a conspiracy theory is not a conspiracy theory? Isn’t that onus supposed to be levied onto the person attempting to sell it as fact? Listen, I appreciate that you and he ( and the others who this may apply to ) believe this stuff, and that is all fine and well…I suppose…. But….then again…you are the ones who are insisting on DEBATE…

IE: This is your belief, all of whom do not believe it and know it is malarkey that will never, has not ever seen the light of day in the REAL WORLD either need to shove off or provide articulation to bolster an already laughable, paranoid anti US sanctimonious screed or be considered defeated by the lack of response which will be dismissed as “silence”.

The world just isn’t on the same page as you are, look around you….look at the votes in the last two elections….look at those whom you are apologists for and ask yourself..gee, why isn’t the room I am in filled with those who agree with me?

Or….you may sit there and tell people to shove off, unless they can prove why fish can’t juggle, bounce a basketball and sing kum bay ya in e- minor.

I just haven’t seen any real content to debate here, you think these allegations are fact because YOU believe it….it just doesn’t work that way.

Telling people that demolition contractors should use jet fuel for demolition is cherry picking rhetoric and completely takes the ball sack out his entire argument. It is foolish, and from where I sit, asinine. He doesn’t want to be wrong, he LIVES for hating our own country, for believing ANYTHING anti American. The whole thing is just asinine.

[gr8fuldaniel]

Speaking of rhetoric, you have yet to address any of the questions I have put out.Spin spin spin. Too bad, you seem to be fairly intelligent, you just have trouble with exactly what the official story really is, and why it is just that, a story. You just abide by the few little crumbs of info they brush off the table and dont even see the real meat of factual military/industrial/corporate/political complex meat on the plates that are just above eye level. You are content with the crumbs even though they dont really satisfy those of us who are hungry for the truth and dont really want to rule the world with an iron fist.
I am not OK with turning the WTC tragedy into the Reichstag artificial right to declare war on anyone in the world they choose. It hasnt worked in the past, it wont work now.
You mention the "Real World", everything in the real world is solid, even the spiritual is finding a place in science on a quantum level. But the "Real World" of 911 doesnt add up and the cover-up is failing. Condi Rice Lied to us under oath. GWB, tried to connect Saddam Hussein to 911. Another Boogeyman was OBL. The Idiot in Chief is just plain clumsy when it comes to diplomacy. He would rather shoot 1st and ask questions later. He is bringing a war upon us, this America that I love, is now guilty of shedding innocent blood. We have no business declaring all these profiteering wars in the guise of a war on terrorism. GWBush is a terrorist.
As for this:

Quote by: Matrixxx, The world just isn’t on the same page as you are, look around you….look at the votes in the last two elections….look at those whom you are apologists for and ask yourself..gee, why isn’t the room I am in filled with those who agree with me?

A lot of people realy really want to believe their President and will put aside legitimate doubt out of fear and peer pressure. Are you aware that 90% of Washington DC voted for Kerry? Do you think the reason for that might be that they are afraid Bushs war mongering is going to bring the first attacks of a major onslaught to their neighborhood? I am not convinced Bush won the election. So dont point to that as proof of the "Heart of America".Election Fraud really had its day and the American populace was disenfranchised, again.
Back on Topic: The room I am in is filled with plenty of people who want to know What Really Happened
This is from www.911truth.org

An August 31st Zogby poll that found nearly 50% of New Yorkers believe the government had foreknowledge and "consciously failed to act," with 66% wanting a new 9/11 investigation.

I like the room I am in. The room you are in is full of liars and mass murderers and torturers and poisoners and schemers and such. No Thanx.

[gr8fuldaniel]

Quote by: Matrixx, Lets see, you want me to articulate a reason why a conspiracy theory is not a conspiracy theory? Isn’t that onus supposed to be levied onto the person attempting to sell it as fact?

It is not a conspiracy "THEORY" because the lack of answers to simple questions actually incriminate, by virtue of the lack of answers. They have been caught red handed in an act of terrorism. The 5th amendment right to not respond to these questions does not place them above the law. They are damned, it is only a matter of time before justice is served.

911 Truth We want truthful answers to questions such as: 1) Why were standard operating procedures for dealing with hijacked airliners not followed that day? 2) Why were the extensive missile batteries and air defenses reportedly deployed around the Pentagon not activated during the attack? 3) Why did the Secret Service allow Bush to complete his elementary school visit, apparently unconcerned about his safety or that of the schoolchildren? 4) Why hasn't a single person been fired, penalized, or reprimanded for the gross incompetence we witnessed that day? 5) Why haven't authorities in the U.S. and abroad published the results of multiple investigations into trading that strongly suggested foreknowledge of specific details of the 9/11 attacks, resulting in tens of millions of dollars of traceable gains? 6) Why has Sibel Edmonds, a former FBI translator who claims to have knowledge of advance warnings, been publicly silenced with a gag order requested by Attorney General Ashcroft and granted by a Bush-appointed judge? 7) How could Flight 77, which reportedly hit the Pentagon, have flown back towards Washington D.C. for 40 minutes without being detected by the FAA's radar or the even superior radar possessed by the US military? 8) How were the FBI and CIA able to release the names and photos of the alleged hijackers within hours, as well as to visit houses, restaurants, and flight schools they were known to frequent? 9) What happened to the over 20 documented warnings given our government by 14 foreign intelligence agencies or heads of state? 10) Why did the Bush administration cover up the fact that the head of the Pakistani intelligence agency was in Washington the week of 9/11 and reportedly had $100,000 wired to Mohamed Atta, considered the ringleader of the hijackers? 11) Why did the 911 Commission fail to address most of the questions posed by the families of the victims, in addition to almost all of the questions posed here? 12) Why was Philip Zelikow chosen to be the Executive Director of the ostensibly independent 911 Commission although he had co-authored a book with Condoleezza Rice?

A law suit has been filed to dismantle PNAC which has been warmly recieved by the White House:

DOUG WALLACE “To announce that there must be no criticism of the President, or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public." Theodore Roosevelt, 1912 As we begin 2005, the most prominent and urgent need is to disassemble the fascist government that has taken over the United States in the past four years. To that end I have filed a lawsuit in Reno Nevada on January 14, 2005 against George W. Bush and Dick Cheney in order to let Americans have a chance of assisting a court ordered dismantling of the PNAC which has been adopted by the White House. Don't know what PNAC is? Most Americans don't! It is the agenda being followed by the Bush Administration since 9/11 under cover of the War on Terrorism. You can check it out on the internet by typing PNAC in your browser. Or look up Project for the New American Century. You'll be disgusted and filled with despair. If you voted for Bush you'll feel like you have been violated! Try this link to connect to a primer on PNAC http://www.crisispapers.org/Editorials/PNAC-Primer.htm

[Matrixxx]

Quote by: gr8fuldaniel Speaking of rhetoric, you have yet to address any of the questions I have put out.Spin spin spin. Too bad, you seem to be fairly intelligent, you just have trouble with exactly what the official story really is, and why it is just that, a story. You just abide by the few little crumbs of info they brush off the table and dont even see the real meat of factual military/industrial/corporate/political complex meat on the plates that are just above eye level. You are content with the crumbs even though they dont really satisfy those of us who are hungry for the truth and dont really want to rule the world with an iron fist. I am not OK with turning the WTC tragedy into the Reichstag artificial right to declare war on anyone in the world they choose. It hasnt worked in the past, it wont work now. You mention the "Real World", everything in the real world is solid, even the spiritual is finding a place in science on a quantum level. But the "Real World" of 911 doesnt add up and the cover-up is failing. Condi Rice Lied to us under oath. GWB, tried to connect Saddam Hussein to 911. Another Boogeyman was OBL. The Idiot in Chief is just plain clumsy when it comes to diplomacy. He would rather shoot 1st and ask questions later. He is bringing a war upon us, this America that I love, is now guilty of shedding innocent blood. We have no business declaring all these profiteering wars in the guise of a war on terrorism. GWBush is a terrorist. As for this: A lot of people realy really want to believe their President and will put aside legitimate doubt out of fear and peer pressure. Are you aware that 90% of Washington DC voted for Kerry? Do you think the reason for that might be that they are afraid Bushs war mongering is going to bring the first attacks of a major onslaught to their neighborhood? I am not convinced Bush won the election. So dont point to that as proof of the "Heart of America".Election Fraud really had its day and the American populace was disenfranchised, again. Back on Topic: The room I am in is filled with plenty of people who want to know What Really Happened This is from www.911truth.orgI like the room I am in. The room you are in is full of liars and mass murderers and torturers and poisoners and schemers and such. No Thanx.

I haven't really emphasized what exactly I believe, have I? I have thrown legitmate doubt to believing something that is so far into the wind of undeniable propaganda that you pigeonhole me as a supporter or war mongering etc etc etc. You have made up your mind that anything, even if in of itself cannot be dead set PROVEN as FACT is acceptable evidence because you CHOOSE to believe it. Can't you see that? I know there is a lot of greed, a lot of wanking going on in our big government. But the level of wanking you're talking about would be easily proven and prosecuted if it were in fact so easy and so obvious...even a very small headed chicken could argue Bush into a court marshall and impeachment if this were even anything more than propaganda. Not everyone who doesn't cherry pick Bush into these allegations are towel boys for the man, just not as gullible and are simply patient to see if what you say has any creedence BEFORE shouting any doubters off and assert they are "in a room full of mass murderers".

A wise man said once, " Ti's better to say nothing and be thought a fool then to open your mouth and remove all doubt".......

Think about it.

[dotcoma]

This topic is horrible. The idea here that the WTC falling was an inside job-despite the amazing amount of video footage, personal accounts, etc is hilarious. What more do you guys want? Here I'll post some accounts from engineers from MIT and so forth. Let's see if they can explain to you how and why the WTC fell. Are any of you engineers....or are all of you just gullible-hoping for some sort of mass conspiracy to make your life more interesting and your purpose more worthy? Sorry to be so cold, but it's just hilarious. You are spoon-fed this garbage. You actually give the government more credit than it deserves.

Note my links end with .edu, or are from accredited sources (apparently that does not mean anything to some people)


http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/wtc/collapse.html

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/1540044.stm

http://www.civil.usyd.edu.au/latest/wtc.php

http://www.construction.com/NewsCent.../20021025b.asp

I can go on...

[gr8fuldaniel]

Too bad they didnt consider it a crime scene. They shipped the evidence (unmelted) steel beams overseas. The crooks who committed this crime of the century were in charge of cordoning off and destroying evidence that would incriminate them. Thats OK, we have plenty of other proof.

[dotcoma]

haha...wow

did you just pull that out of nowhere? Not all of the steel melted. Did you bother reading any of those links, or are you just lying when you say you want to see counter-evidence to this conspiracy bs?

Here is some more stuff to debunk this garbage.
http://www.popularmechanics.com/scie...tml?page=1&c=y

"Melted" Steel CLAIM: "We have been lied to," announces the Web site AttackOnAmerica.net. "The first lie was that the load of fuel from the aircraft was the cause of structural failure. No kerosene fire can burn hot enough to melt steel." The posting is entitled "Proof Of Controlled Demolition At The WTC." FACT:Jet fuel burns at 800° to 1500°F, not hot enough to melt steel (2750°F). However, experts agree that for the towers to collapse, their steel frames didn't need to melt, they just had to lose some of their structural strength--and that required exposure to much less heat. "I have never seen melted steel in a building fire," says retired New York deputy fire chief Vincent Dunn, author of The Collapse Of Burning Buildings: A Guide To Fireground Safety. "But I've seen a lot of twisted, warped, bent and sagging steel. What happens is that the steel tries to expand at both ends, but when it can no longer expand, it sags and the surrounding concrete cracks." "Steel loses about 50 percent of its strength at 1100°F," notes senior engineer Farid Alfawak-hiri of the American Institute of Steel Construction. "And at 1800° it is probably at less than 10 percent." NIST also believes that a great deal of the spray-on fireproofing insulation was likely knocked off the steel beams that were in the path of the crashing jets, leaving the metal more vulnerable to the heat. But jet fuel wasn't the only thing burning, notes Forman Williams, a professor of engineering at the University of California, San Diego, and one of seven structural engineers and fire experts that PM consulted. He says that while the jet fuel was the catalyst for the WTC fires, the resulting inferno was intensified by the combustible material inside the buildings, including rugs, curtains, furniture and paper. NIST reports that pockets of fire hit 1832°F. "The jet fuel was the ignition source," Williams tells PM. "It burned for maybe 10 minutes, and [the towers] were still standing in 10 minutes. It was the rest of the stuff burning afterward that was responsible for the heat transfer that eventually brought them down."

http://www.popularmechanics.com/scie...tml?page=1&c=y

[gr8fuldaniel]

Yes, I checked your links.
In the first link, Eagar was rewarded with a job on Bushs cabinet, a position with DHS. I dont know if youve noticed but Bush only hires fellow criminals. I dont value that as a credential.

LINK The clean-up of the World Trade Center will take many months. But it was accomplished in only half the time predicted. Controlled Demolition Inc. was so efficient that it recycled the steel before it could be examined for clues to the greatest structural failure in history. But with experts like Eagar and Musso to explain the "collapse" for us, who needs to examine the evidence?!

In the 2nd link, this graphic is absurd:


The WTC towers were extremely beefy at the core. Your graphic makes it look like a cheesy house of cards.
There were over 100 elevators in each tower. Very dense with fireproofed Steel Beams.

We know that the steel components were certified to ASTM E119. The time temperature curves for this standard require the samples to be exposed to temperatures around 2000F for several hours. And as we all agree, the steel applied met those specifications. Additionally, I think we can all agree that even un-fireproofed steel will not melt until reaching red-hot temperatures of nearly 3000F (2). Why Dr. Brown would imply that 2000F would melt the high-grade steel used in those buildings makes no sense at all.

These beams WERE fireproofed making them even stronger yet.

More on the WTC steel removal
Enough for now.

[dotcoma]

wow you just ignored that whole thing that talked about why the steel did not have to be melted at all. This obsession you have with being anti-bush is clouding your sense entirely. The image you labled as bogus was from the BBC- not a conervative site, and far more credible than the crap you have been posting.

You sound so sure even with so much evidence to debunk.

[gr8fuldaniel]

Quote by: dotcoma wow you just ignored that whole thing that talked about why the steel did not have to be melted at all.

You dont see how absurd it is to believe a majority of massive beams to be even WEAKENED by kerosene type flames, especially after the fire was nearly extinguished.We are talking about TONS of High Grade (ASTM E119) steel that has to be simultaneously heated here. Didnt happen, never will.
I didnt think I had to go over that again.

The image you labled as bogus was from the BBC- not a conervative site, and far more credible than the crap you have been posting.

The BBC cartoon is more accurate than an actual photograph?
I will cut them a little slack, they threw that together after only 2 days. Article date is Thursday, 13 September, 2001. It could have been worse. They could have posted a straw house.

I spent a long time looking for another picture that I thought I had already posted in this thread, but cant find it anywhere now. It shows the footprint at the beginnining of construction.

You sound so sure even with so much evidence to debunk.

I will work on your Popular Science article if you will explain what happened to WTC 7.

[gr8fuldaniel]

This is interesting. I found this on your BBC link.
Looks like the top has gone past the center of gravity.
It should topple over. An explosive charge must have taken the near side corner out.

[dotcoma]

May I ask what your education is in engineering? Do you have any education at all (just curious)?

After reading your last post here stating "an explosive charge MUST have taken the near side corner out" I am officially done talking about this with you. You are the definition of tin-foil. I have to wonder how many people you have steered away from this site at the expense of the owner.

I mean hell, how can you have reasonable debate with people like you who say dumb things like "looks like the top has gone past the center of gravity". Hate to burst your little foil bubble, but the plane hit at that point of the building (not the top), and that is where the steel was weakened by an immense amount of jet fuel.

Unless you have education outside of your conspiracy pages I would suggest you ask some people who know something about architecture and engineering. You can find various articles (like the one's I have posted) that could potentially knock a little sense into your mind.

I am sorry to come off so cold, but you need to realize that your blind hope in your anti-establishment conspiracies are infectious, and an be easily debunked for the average person with common sense, but you’ll continue on anyway (so we get a little pissed).

[gr8fuldaniel]

I typed a full response that wouldnt post for some reason.
It got erased. What a waste of time. I will respond to your little fit later.

[PatrickHenry]

Any comments on the unanswered questions, dotcoma? Didn't think so...

[dotcoma]

Hey Patrick, I have to ask; don't you get tired of holding up those pom pom's for team conspiracy?

By pom poms of course I mean one-liners and insults. You tag team people in these topics like it’s your job. Of course your contributions are always along the same lines as this lovely new installment.

I have provided information that conflicts with one of the subjects of this topic, and am hoping for a logical response.

[Rainbow]

I have to admit, guys :
- I did set up all the explosives under WTC and surrounding buildings.
Bush paid me in 2 free coupons to "McDonalds" for "subway-sandwich" :
- 1 coupon for myself
- 2 coupon for a psychiatrist
You got me.

[gr8fuldaniel]

Quote by: dotcoma, I have provided information that conflicts with one of the subjects of this topic, and am hoping for a logical response.

I have responded with logic. I guess you refuse common sense. I dont have a degree in engineering, but I do know something about High-rise construction from hands on work. I have had to attatch plumbing to these thick steel beams covered with this sprayed on fireproof flocking. I know they had to stop using asbestos when they got to the top 1/3 of one tower because they outlawed it (1971?). But I am sure they had an acceptable substitute.
When will you respond to some of my questions? Start with these two:
1) What happened to WTC 7?
2) Why were "highjackers" allowed free, unchallenged rule of American airspace
for about 2 hours? They would have been allowed even MORE time if they needed it (Since Rick Gibney wasnt involved, officially).
POTUSA = AWOL
Secretary of Defense = AWOL
National Security Advisor = AWOL...........WHY?
Who was GHW Bush having breakfast with at 9:00 AM on 9/11/01? It was the ISI Chief of Pakistan

From The Wilderness Pakistani ISI Chief Gen. Ahmad (see above) orders an aide to wire transfer $100,000 to Mohammed Atta who was, according to the FBI, the lead terrorist in the suicide hijackings. Ahmad recently resigned after the transfer was disclosed in India and confirmed by the FBI. The individual who makes the wire transfer at Ahmad's direction is Ahmad Umar Sheik, the lead suspect in the kidnapping and murder of Wall Street Journal reporter Daniel Pearl. [Source: The Times of India, Oct.11, 2001.]

Fried Rice

LINK (Federal News Service) MS. RICE: Yes? Q Are you aware of the reports at the time that ISI chief was in Washington on September 11th, and on September 10th, $ 100,000 was wired from Pakistan to these groups here in this area? And why he was here? Was he meeting with you or anybody in the administration? MS. RICE: I have not seen that report, and he was certainly not meeting with me.

She gets promoted for ignorance. Er, I should say cover-up.

[gr8fuldaniel]

Rummy should get credit for his honesty "I dont do intelligent work"

PBS News Feb 16, 2005 DONALD RUMSFELD: The intelligence community looks at that -- CIA does, DIA does, others do-- and they have differing assessments over -- at different times. And as you know, they're made up of former regime elements, Baathists, and they're made up of Zarqawi-type Jihadists and terrorists. And they also include a varying number of criminals who are paid to do these things. And it's that aggregation that constitutes the insurgents. I am not going to give you a number for it because it's not my business to do intelligent work.

[gr8fuldaniel]

Here it is. Doesnt look so flimsy now, does it?

[dotcoma]

You know, it is quite rude to post this many times before anyone else speaks-especially when it is garbage. Thank you for admitting that you have no knowledge of engineering. Oh and the frame of that building does not look like it could withstand a jetliner full of fuel flying at it.

Time to debunk your fanciful thinking based on no engineering background.

Many conspiracy theorists point to FEMA's preliminary report, which said there was relatively light damage to WTC 7 prior to its collapse. With the benefit of more time and resources, NIST researchers now support the working hypothesis that WTC 7 was far more compromised by falling debris than the FEMA report indicated. "The most important thing we found was that there was, in fact, physical damage to the south face of building 7," NIST's Sunder tells PM. "On about a third of the face to the center and to the bottom--approximately 10 stories--about 25 percent of the depth of the building was scooped out." NIST also discovered previously undocumented damage to WTC 7's upper stories and its southwest corner. NIST investigators believe a combination of intense fire and severe structural damage contributed to the collapse, though assigning the exact proportion requires more research. But NIST's analysis suggests the fall of WTC 7 was an example of "progressive collapse," a process in which the failure of parts of a structure ultimately creates strains that cause the entire building to come down. Videos of the fall of WTC 7 show cracks, or "kinks," in the building's facade just before the two penthouses disappeared into the structure, one after the other. The entire building fell in on itself, with the slumping east side of the structure pulling down the west side in a diagonal collapse. According to NIST, there was one primary reason for the building's failure: In an unusual design, the columns near the visible kinks were carrying exceptionally large loads, roughly 2000 sq. ft. of floor area for each floor. "What our preliminary analysis has shown is that if you take out just one column on one of the lower floors," Sunder notes, "it could cause a vertical progression of collapse so that the entire section comes down." There are two other possible contributing factors still under investigation: First, trusses on the fifth and seventh floors were designed to transfer loads from one set of columns to another. With columns on the south face apparently damaged, high stresses would likely have been communicated to columns on the building's other faces, thereby exceeding their load-bearing capacities. Second, a fifth-floor fire bu