4um: The thread that's changed its focus from the original title. Carry on ;)

Status: Not Logged In; Sign In
Resistance
See other Resistance Articles
Title: The thread that's changed its focus from the original title. Carry on ;)
Source: [None]
URL Source: [None]
Published: Mar 21, 2009
Author: m e
Post Date: 2009-03-21 08:19:06 by Itistoolate
Keywords: None
Views: 11131
Comments: 2261

Officer Jack McLamb's shows:
arc.gcnlive.com/Archives2009/mar09/McLamb/030209.mp3
arc.gcnlive.com/Archives2009/mar09/McLamb/030309.mp3
arc.gcnlive.com/Archives2009/mar09/McLamb/030409.mp3
arc.gcnlive.com/Archives2009/mar09/McLamb/030509.mp3
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
Comments (1-1768) not displayed.
.
.
.

#1769. To: mininggold (#1756)
You MUST accept that the events and behavior of buildings on 911 were all anomalies, having never happened before and probably will never happen again. Too bad if they defied common sense. LIVE WITH IT.!!!!!!!!!!!!!/s

Feel free to take the challenge. Find me a building in thw worls that wasof the same hollow tube external support wall/truss support/inner core construction that a) was crashed into causing masive damage...b) suffered a massive internal explosion which rsulted in c) fires that burned out of control.
Or maybe you don;t know what the word "anamoly" means.
when there is a fire on one or two of the floors
You're claiming that fires in the WTC were limited to one or two floors?

war posted on 2009-03-30 13:39:30 ET Reply Trace Private Reply
#1770. To: war (#1766)
A friend xeroxed the pages from the book for me about ten days ago. With Posner being the source then I have my doubts. The Prince's love for horses and all things American also leads me to doubt the allegations.
But the three men that Posner allegedly fingered all died within 8 days of each other. That made me go Mmmmm??

Fred Mertz posted on 2009-03-30 13:39:59 ET Reply Trace Private Reply
#1771. To: war (#1765)
You rely upon .gov "facts, evidence, testimony, hearings, reports, and statements" and make the faulty presumption that all "evidence" presented was factual and true, all statements were made without suspect motivations and/or intent on the part of individuals or groups, and no omissions of facts or evidence in the dog and pony show hearings was beyond suspicion.
In summation: The fox has investigated the hen house.
The foxes have found for the foxes.
Ergo, .gov, .gov entities, .gov hearing participants, and .gov "facts", are taken as gospel by .gov, and, if you don't believe 'em, just ask 'em: they've "proven" to you "they're innocent."

That's just not how any kind of honorable or believable investigation can ever be made.

litus posted on 2009-03-30 13:47:35 ET Reply Trace Private Reply
#1772. To: litus (#1757)
Which proves what Moonbat? That some people thought WTC7 was going to collapse? You have FDNY on the records as pulling their guys out ofthe buildiomng because they were afraid it was going collpse.
FDNY Chief of Operations Daniel Nigro:
"The biggest decision we had to make was to clear the area and create a collapse zone around the severely damaged [WTC 7] building. A number of fire officers and companies assessed the damage to the building. The appraisals indicated that the building’s integrity was in serious doubt."[
Fire Engineering magazine, 10/2002]
"The most important operational decision to be made that afternoon was [that] the collapse [Of the WTC towers] had damaged 7 World Trade Center, which is about a 50 story building, at Vesey between West Broadway and Washington Street. It had very heavy fire on many floors and I ordered the evacuation of an area sufficient around to protect our members, so we had to give up some rescue operations that were going on at the time and back the people away far enough so that if 7 World Trade did collapse, we [wouldn't] lose any more people. We continued to operate on what we could from that distance and approximately an hour and a half after that order was [given], at 5:30 in the afternoon, 7 World Trade Center collapsed completely. http://tinyurl.com/g8c6y
1. We walked over by number Seven World Trade Center as it was burning and saw this 40-plus story building with fire on nearly all floors. –FDNY Lieutenant Robert Larocco
2. ...Just when you thought it was over, you're walking by this building and you're hearing this building creak and fully involved in flames. It's like, is it coming down next? Sure enough, about a half an hour later it came down. – FDNY Lieutenant James McGlynn
3. I walked out and I got to Vesey and West, where I reported to Frank [Cruthers]. He said, we’re moving the command post over this way, that building’s coming down. At this point, the fire was going virtually on every floor, heavy fire and smoke that really wasn’t bothering us when we were searching because it was being pushed southeast and we were a little bit west of that. I remember standing just where West and Vesey start to rise toward the entrance we were using in the World Financial Center. There were a couple of guys standing with me and a couple of guys right at the intersection, and we were trying to back them up – and here goes 7. It started to come down and now people were starting to run. –FDNY Deputy Chief Nick Visconti http://www.firehouse.com/terrorist/911/magazine/gz/visconti.html
4. All morning I was watching 7 World Trade burn, which we couldn't do anything about because it was so much chaos looking for missing members. –Firefighter Marcel Klaes
5. When the building came down it was completely involved in fire, all forty- seven stories. –FDNY Assistant Chief Harry Myers (Smith, Dennis, 2002. Report From Ground Zero: The Heroic Story of the Rescuers at the World Trade Center. New York: Penguin Putnam. p. 160)
6. The concern there again, it was later in the afternoon, 2, 2:30, like I said. The fear then was Seven. Seven was free burning. Search had been made of 7 already from what they said so they had us back up to that point where we were waiting for 7 to come down to operate from the north back down. –Captain Robert Sohmer http://graphics8.nytimes.com/packages/pdf/nyregion/20050812_WTC_GRAPHIC/9110472. PDF
7. Then we had to move because the Duane Reade, they said, wasn't safe because building 7 was really roaring. –FDNY Chief Medical Officer Kerry Kelly.
8. At this point Seven World Trade was going heavy, and they weren't letting anybody get too close. Everybody was expecting that to come down. –Firefighter Vincent Massa
9. Chief Cruthers told me that they had formed another command post up on Chambers Street. At this point there were a couple of floors burning on Seven World Trade Center. Chief McNally wanted to try and put that fire out, and he was trying to coordinate with the command post up on Chambers Street. This is after searching for a while. He had me running back and forth trying to get companies to go into Seven World Trade Center. His radio didn't seem to be working right either because he had me relaying information back and forth and Chief Cruthers had me --
Q. So everything was face-to-face? Nothing was by radio?
A. Yeah, and it was really in disarray. It really was in complete disarray. We never really got an operation going at Seven World Trade Center. –FDNY Captain Michael Donovan
10. Building #7 was still actively burning and at that time we were advised by a NYFD Chief that building #7 was burning out of control and imminent collapse was probable. –PAPD P.O. Edward McQuade http://www.thememoryhole.org/911/pa- transcripts/pa-police-reports02.pdf page 48.
11. At Vesey St. and West St., I could see that 7 WTC was ablaze and damaged, along with other buildings. –M. DeFilippis, PAPD P.O. http://www.thememoryhole.org/911/pa-transcripts/pa-police-reports03.pdf page 49
[Note: the fires in 7 were probably not mainly due to damage from the south tower, but from the north.] 12. So yeah then we just stayed on Vesey until building Seven came down. There was nothing we could do. The flames were coming out of every window of that building from the explosion of the south tower. So then building Seven came down. When that started coming down you heard that pancaking sound again everyone jumped up and starts.
Q: Why was building Seven on fire? Was that flaming debris from tower two, from tower two that fell onto that building and lit it on fire?
A: Correct. Because it really got going, that building Seven, saw it late in the day and like the first Seven floors were on fire. It looked like heavy fire on seven floors. It was fully engulfed, that whole building. There were pieces of tower two [sic: he probably means tower one] in building Seven and the corners of the building missing and what-not. But just looking up at it from ground level however many stories -- it was 40 some odd -- you could see the flames going straight through from one side of the building to the other, that’s an entire block. –Firefighter Tiernach Cassidy
13. "We were down about a block from the base of the World Trade Center towers about an hour ago. And there was a great deal of concern at that time, the firemen said building number 7 was going to collapse, building number five was in danger of collapsing. And there's so little they can do to try to fight the fires in these buildings, because the fires are so massive. And so much of the buildings continues to fall into the street. When you're down there, Dan, you hear smaller secondary explosions going off every 15 or 20 minutes, and so it's an extremely dangerous place to be." –CBS-TV News Reporter Vince DeMentri http://terrorize.dk/911/witnesses/911.wtc.secondary.explosions.wmv
14. Well, they said that's (7) fully involved at this time. This was a fully involved building. I said, all right, they're not coming for us for a while. Now you're trapped in this rubble, and you're trying to get a grasp of an idea of what's going on there. I heard on the handy talky that we are now fighting a 40-story building fully involved.
Now you're trapped in the rubble and the guys who are there are fighting the worst high-rise fire in the history of New York or history of the world, probably, I don't know, 40, story building fully involved, I guess that was probably the worst.
I was, needless to say, scared to death that something else was going to fall on us, that this building was going to come down and we were all going to die, after surviving the worst of it. [Note: I deleted the link this account, and searching the net for the text doesn’t turn up anything. This sounds like an account from north tower stairwell B survivor. Anyone who knows for sure, let me know.]
15. And 7 World Trade was burning up at the time. We could see it. ... the fire at 7 World Trade was working its way from the front of the building northbound to the back of the building. There was no way there could be water put on it, because there was no water in the area. –Firefighter Eugene Kelty Jr.
16. The time was approximately 11a.m. Both of the WTC towers were collapsed and the streets were covered with debris. Building #7 was still standing but burning. ...We spoke to with a FDNY Chief who has his men holed up in the US Post Office building. He informed us that the fires in building 7 were uncontrollable and that its collapse was imminent. There were no fires inside the loading dock (of 7) at this time but we could hear explosions deep inside. – PAPD P.O. William Connors http://www.thememoryhole.org/911/pa-transcripts/pa- police-reports04.pdf page 69
17. "There's number Seven World Trade. That's the OEM bunker." We had a snicker about that. We looked over, and it's engulfed in flames and starting to collapse.
We're kind of caught in traffic and people and things, and everything's going on. We hear over the fire portable, "Everybody evacuate the site. It's going to collapse." Mark Steffens starts yelling, "Get out of here! Get out of here! Get out of here! We've got to go! We've got to go! It's going to collapse." I turned around, and I piped up real loud and said, "Stay in the frigging car. Roll the windows up. It's pancake collapsing. We'll be fine. The debris will quit and the cloud will come through. Just stay in the car." We pulled the car over, turned around and just watched it pancake. We had a dust cloud but nothing like it was before. –Paramedic Louis Cook
(Building 7 fire makes rescuer of NT stairwell victim’s route impassable, just before collapse): I remember it was bad and I'm going to get to a point where we came back that way on the way up. We couldn't even go that way, that's how bad the fire was, but by the time I was coming back it was rolling, more than a couple of floors, just fully involved, rolling.
...So now it's us 4 and we are walking towards it and I remember it would have at one point been an easier path to go towards our right, but being building 7 - - that must have been building 7 I'm guessing with that fire, we decided to stay away from that because things were just crackling, falling and whatnot. So as I’m going back, that fire that was on my right is now on my left. I’m backtracking and that fire is really going and on the hike towards there, we put down our masks, which at this point started to realize maybe it would have been good thing if we had this mask on the way back, but then again between the fire and about halfway when I was on the way back, I got a radio call from the guys that we left and it was Johnny Colon the chauffeur of 43, who was effecting a different rescue. He was carrying somebody out.
He had called me and said “Hey Jerry don’t try and get back out the way you went in which was big heads up move because he said that building was rolling on top of the building that we were passing. That building was on fire and likely to collapse more too.
Between Picciotto asking me are you sure we can get out this way because it really didn’t look good with that fire and my guy telling me that you better not because of the area we crawled in was unattainable now too. ...we started going back the other way.
Q: Would that be towards West Street?
A: That would have been back towards what I know is the Winter Garden....[west] –Firefighter Gerard Suden
18. I remember Chief Hayden saying to me, "We have a six-story building over there, a seven-story building, fully involved." At that time he said, "7 has got fire on several floors." He said, "We've got a ten-story over there, another ten-story over there, a six-story over there, a 13-story over there." He just looked at me and said, "Fuck 'em all. Let 'em burn." He said, "Just tell the guys to keep looking for guys. Just keep looking for the brothers. We've got people trapped. We've got to get them out." –Lieutenant William Ryan
19. I walked around the building to get back to the command post and that's when they were waiting for 7 World Trade Center to come down. ...They had three floors of fire on three separate floors, probably 10, 11 and 15 it looked like, just burning merrily. It was pretty amazing, you know, it's the afternoon in lower Manhattan, a major high-rise is burning, and they said 'we know.' –FDNY Chief Thomas McCarthy
20. We were champing at the bit," says WCBS-TV reporter Vince DeMentri of his decision to sneak behind police barricades and report from 7 World Trade Center a half-hour before it collapsed. "I knew the story was in there." But after he and his cameraman slipped past officers, they lost all sense of direction. "From outside this zone, you could figure out where everything was," he says. "But inside, it was all destruction and blown-out buildings, and we had no clue. I walked into one building, but I had no idea where I was. The windows were all blown out. Computers, desks, furniture, and people's possessions were strewn all over." He found a picture of a little girl lying in the rubble. Then he realized that No. 7, aflame, was about fifteen to twenty feet ahead of him. "I looked up Barclay Street," he says. "There was nobody out. No bodies, no injured. Nobody. There were mounds of burning debris. It was like opening a broiler." http://nymag.com/nymetro/news/sept11/features/5183/index.html
21. They are worried that number 7 is burning and they are talking about not ceasing operations. –Deputy Commissioner Frank Gribbon
22. There were hundreds of firefighters waiting to -- they were waiting for 7 World Trade Center to come down as it was on fire. It was too dangerous to go in and fight the fire. –Assistant Commissioner James Drury
23. We assisted some FDNY personnel who were beginning to attempt to fight the fire at 7 WTC. We assisted in dragging hose they needed to bring water into the building. –Kenneth Kohlmann PAPD P.O. http://www.thememoryhole.org/911/pa- transcripts/pa-police-reports04.pdf page 26
24. My first thoughts when I came down a little further into the site, south of Chambers Street, was, "Where am I?" I didn't recognize it. Obviously, the towers were gone. The only thing that remained standing was a section of the Vista Hotel. Building 7 was on fire. That was ready to come down. –Charlie Vitchers, Ground Zero Superintendent http://www.pbs.org/americarebuilds/profiles/profiles_vitchers_t.html
25. The whole south side of Seven World Trade had been hit by the collapse of the second Tower, and there was fire on every floor." – Fire Captain Brenda Berkman (Susan Hagen and Mary Carouba, Women at Ground Zero, 2002, p. 213)
26. At that point, Seven World Trade had 12 stories of fire in it. They were afraid it was going to collapse on us, so they pulled everybody out. We couldn't do anything. – Firefighter Maureen McArdle-Schulman (Susan Hagen and Mary Carouba, Women at Ground Zero, 2002, p. 17)
27. The 7 World Trade Center was roaring. All we could think is we were an Engine Company, we have got to get them some water. We need some water you know. With that, we positioned the rig, I don't know, 3 quarters of a block away maybe. A fire boat was going to relay water to us. I don't know if I have things in the right order, whatever, if we were getting water out of a hydrant first. Jesus Christ -- Q. Captain said you were getting water. You were draining a vacuum? A. It was draining away from us. Right. We had to be augmented. I think that's when the fire boat came. I think the fire boats supplied us. Of course you don't see that. You just see the (inaudible) way and you know, we are hooking up and we wound up supplying the Tower Ladder there. I just remember feeling like helpless, like everybody there was doomed and there is -- I just felt like there was absolutely nothing we could do. I want to just go back a little bit.– Firefighter Kevin Howe
28. "When I got out and onto a clear pile, I see that 7 World Trade Center and the customs house have serious fire. Almost every window has fire. It is an amazing site. –Captain Jay Jonas, Ladder 6. (Dennis Smith. Report From Ground Zero. New York: Viking Penguin, 2002. P. 103)
29. Firefighter TJ Mundy: "The other building, #7, was fully involved, and he was worried about the next collapse." (Dennis Smith. Report From Ground Zero. New York: Viking Penguin, 2002.)
30. 7 World Trade was burning from the ground to the ceiling fully involved. It was unbelievable. –Firefighter Steve Modica http://www.firehouse.com/terrorist/911/magazine/gz/modica.html
31. So I attempted to get in through the Barkley Street ramp which is on Barkley (sic) and West Broadway, but I was being held back by the fire department, because 7 World Trade, which is above the ramp, was now fully engulfed. –PAPD K-9 Sergeant David Lim http://www.911report.com/media/davidlim.pdf
32. We could hear fires crackling. We didn’t know it at the time, but No. 7 World Trade Center and No. 5 World Trade Center were immediately adjacent to us and they were roaring, they were on fire. Those were the sounds that we were hearing. ...At the same time, No. 5 World Trade Center, No. 6 World Trade Center and No. 7 World Trade Center were roaring. They were on fire. And they were right next to us. So we have all that smoke that we’re dealing with. –FDNY Capt. Jay Jonas http://archive.recordonline.com/adayinseptember/jonas.htm

war posted on 2009-03-30 13:47:45 ET Reply Trace Private Reply
#1773. To: litus (#1771)
You rely upon .gov "facts, evidence, testimony, hearings, reports, and statements"

Nope and I challenge you to point to any conclusion that I have drawn as not being supported by a record independent of NIST - which, btw, is a very independent organization in and of itself.

war posted on 2009-03-30 13:49:56 ET Reply Trace Private Reply
#1774. To: war (#1769)
Or maybe you don;t know what the word "anamoly" means.

I still will use my common sense and not venture into tall US buildings that appear to be able to collapse in such a total fashion. Especially when, for all the tax money I pay, the gov couldn't even take out planes being piloted by amateurs. Afterall how many others are built similiarly and as a result are ticking time bombs waiting for the right circumstances.
I guess the overseas architects must be better at designing buildings that can withstand some stress, since non appeared to have collapsed in the same manner.

mininggold posted on 2009-03-30 13:50:06 ET Reply Trace Private Reply
#1775. To: litus (#1771)
In summation: The fox has investigated the hen house.
The foxes have found for the foxes.
Ergo, .gov, .gov entities, .gov hearing participants, and .gov "facts", are taken as gospel by .gov, and, if you don't believe 'em, just ask 'em: they've "proven" to you "they're innocent."

Dude...stay away from logic..it's so ill served in your hands...

war posted on 2009-03-30 13:50:36 ET Reply Trace Private Reply
#1776. To: mininggold (#1774)
I guess the overseas architects must be better at designing buildings that can withstand some stress, since non appeared to have collapsed in the same manner.

I'm sorry...the part where you provided a building of like constructon to WTC was deleted. Can you repost that please?
Thanks...

war posted on 2009-03-30 13:53:10 ET Reply Trace Private Reply
#1777. To: mininggold (#1774)
I guess the overseas architects

The designer of WTC was Japanese, moron.

war posted on 2009-03-30 13:55:22 ET Reply Trace Private Reply
#1778. To: litus (#1757)
Captain Chris Boyle Engine 94 - 18 years
Boyle: ...on the north and east side of 7 it didn’t look like there was any damage at all, but then you looked on the south side of 7 there had to be a hole 20 stories tall in the building, with fire on several floors. Debris was falling down on the building and it didn’t look good.
Firehouse: When you looked at the south side, how close were you to the base of that side?
Boyle: I was standing right next to the building, probably right next to it.
Firehouse: When you had fire on the 20 floors, was it in one window or many?
Boyle: There was a huge gaping hole and it was scattered throughout there. It was a huge hole. I would say it was probably about a third of it, right in the middle of it. And so after Visconti came down and said nobody goes in 7, we said all right, we’ll head back to the command post. We lost touch with him. I never saw him again that day. h ttp://www.firehouse.com/terrorist/911/magazine/gz/boyle.html

war posted on 2009-03-30 13:57:08 ET Reply Trace Private Reply
#1779. To: litus (#1757)
Deputy Chief Peter Hayden Division 1 - 33 years
...also we were pretty sure that 7 World Trade Center would collapse. Early on, we saw a bulge in the southwest corner between floors 10 and 13, and we had put a transit on that and we were pretty sure she was going to collapse. You actually could see there was a visible bulge, it ran up about three floors. It came down about 5 o’clock in the afternoon, but by about 2 o’clock in the afternoon we realized this thing was going to collapse.
Firehouse: Was there heavy fire in there right away?
Hayden: No, not right away, and that’s probably why it stood for so long because it took a while for that fire to develop. It was a heavy body of fire in there and then we didn’t make any attempt to fight it. That was just one of those wars we were just going to lose. We were concerned about the collapse of a 47-story building there. We were worried about additional collapse there of what was remaining standing of the towers and the Marriott, so we started pulling the people back after a couple of hours of surface removal and searches along the surface of the debris. We started to pull guys back because we were concerned for their safety.
http://www.firehouse.com/terrorist/911/magazine/gz/hayden.html

war posted on 2009-03-30 13:58:58 ET Reply Trace Private Reply
#1780. To: litus, TwentyTwelve, mininggold, FormerLurker, Original Inttent (#1757)
The photo you Moonbats will never post:

war posted on 2009-03-30 14:05:50 ET (1 image) Reply Trace Private Reply
#1781. To: war (#1772)
That some people thought WTC7 was going to collapse? You have FDNY on the records as pulling their guys out ofthe buildiomng [sic] because they were afraid it was going collpse. [sic]

I have heard the FDNY state, on video, they heard explosions.
That was ignored by .gov.

There was no reason to make bold claims that a building was going down one hour prior to it occurring, and acting AS IF, it had already happened.
They did not do this with the WTC 1 or 2. But did with WTC 7....a building that was shielded from WTC 1 and 2 by other buildings, which did not collapse on their feet.
Pulling people out of a building, "because they were afraid it was going to collapse", does also not negate .gov's complicity with causing that very building to become structurally unsound to begin with.

litus posted on 2009-03-30 14:09:45 ET Reply Trace Private Reply
#1782. To: litus (#1781)
I have heard the FDNY state, on video, they heard explosions.

Thermite doesn't explode, doof.
There was no reason to make bold claims that a building was going down one hour prior to it occurring,
There is NO WAY that you have read through what I have posted regardiong 7 otherwise you would have never psted that.

war posted on 2009-03-30 14:19:03 ET Reply Trace Private Reply
#1783. To: litus (#1781)
They did not do this with the WTC 1 or 2.

ACtually after 1 fell, they most certainly belived that 2 was in serious danger of doing so///

war posted on 2009-03-30 14:19:48 ET Reply Trace Private Reply
#1784. To: litus (#1781)
does also not negate .gov's complicity with causing that very building to become structurally unsound to begin with.

Way to go Mr. Circle...

war posted on 2009-03-30 14:24:10 ET Reply Trace Private Reply
#1785. To: litus (#1781)
I have heard the FDNY state, on video, they heard explosions.

Yea so? Any clue as to what "combustible" means?

war posted on 2009-03-30 14:27:29 ET Reply Trace Private Reply
#1786. To: war (#1777)
e designer of WTC was Japanese, moron.

Going by US/ NewYork structural and design standards? Or those from Japan? Really...... your name calling makes you look weak. Or are you saying the Japanese finally got back at us by being able to unload on us this obviously flawed designed? LOLOL

mininggold posted on 2009-03-30 14:29:48 ET Reply Trace Private Reply
#1787. To: war (#1784)
By your "logic," if bank robbers, who plan their deeds well ahead of time (complete with explosive devices which they have others plant for them), set off the bombs at the appropriate timing, "announce" the building is going to collapse, the fact that they "suspected" the building was going to collapse exonerates them from being suspects themselves with either knowledge about or the planting of explosive devices in a building (which they had intent to rob).

litus posted on 2009-03-30 14:33:13 ET Reply Trace Private Reply
#1788. To: war (#1783) (Edited)
they most certainly belived that 2 was in serious danger of doing so///

Really. So that explains why they "called spot on" for a building to fall an hour prior to it falling....while calling for no other buildings to do so that were closer to and/or less-well shielded from WTC 1 and 2, this despite the fact that it was HQ for CIA ops, Guilliani, who had enforced it for his own protection (who, for some "strange" reason, left a few hours prior to the strike)....and no other buildings fell onto their own footprints...oh, except the other WTC 1 and 2.
Amazing!!

litus posted on 2009-03-30 14:35:42 ET Reply Trace Private Reply
#1789. To: war (#1786)
Or are you saying the Japanese finally got back at us by being able to unload on us this obviously flawed designed? LOLOL

The Japanese did 911 to us?
You are totally crazy!

TwentyTwelve posted on 2009-03-30 14:36:30 ET Reply Trace Private Reply
#1790. To: litus, war (#1781)
Pulling people out of a building, "because they were afraid it was going to collapse", does also not negate .gov's complicity with causing that very building to become structurally unsound to begin with.

Come on, war personally inspected every structural member of all three of the collapsed and maybe more buildings. Nothing to see here. Who knows... they might have been designed to fall into their own footprint as a cost saving feature. /s

mininggold posted on 2009-03-30 14:42:12 ET Reply Trace Private Reply
#1791. To: mininggold (#1786)
Going by US/ NewYork structural and design standards?

Wha...huh? The "design" standards of the WTC were new and radical. Or are you ***thinking*** that you are using some sort of "official" terminology here when all you are really doing is futther underscoring your anemic knowledge base.
on us this obviously flawed designed
Where did I claim that the design was "flawed"...

war posted on 2009-03-30 14:43:05 ET Reply Trace Private Reply
#1792. To: litus (#1787)
Did I not tell you to stay away from logic or are you claiming that every single one of those quoted FDNY are in on the conspiracy?

war posted on 2009-03-30 14:44:45 ET Reply Trace Private Reply
#1793. To: litus (#1788)
So that explains why they "called spot on" for a building to fall an hour prior to it falling....

Why do keep you admitting to me that you have not read what I have posted?

war posted on 2009-03-30 14:45:33 ET Reply Trace Private Reply
#1794. To: war (#1791)
Where did I claim that the design was "flawed"...

Oh... Okay.... a design that doesn't perform up to it's architect's claims is not flawed... And new and radical are your words. Evidently New York, the high rise capital of the world, let these slip by. This is not looking good.

mininggold posted on 2009-03-30 14:47:19 ET Reply Trace Private Reply
#1795. To: litus (#1788)
who, for some "strange" reason, left a few hours prior to the strike

Wha...huh? Guiliani was right next door to where I am when the planes hit.
and no other buildings fell onto their own footprints...oh, except the other WTC 1 and 2.
Where did you expect the buildings to fall? In Jersey? This is one of those statEments that you Moonbats make that you ***think*** underscores the nefarious conspiracy, when, in fact, that is how buildings collapse because ***GASP*** that is HOW THEY ARE DESIGNED TO COLLAPSE.

war posted on 2009-03-30 14:48:31 ET Reply Trace Private Reply
#1796. To: war (#1792)
By your "logic," if bank robbers, who plan their deeds well ahead of time (complete with explosive devices which they have others plant for them), set off the bombs at the appropriate timing, "announce" the building is going to collapse, the fact that they "suspected" the building was going to collapse exonerates them from being suspects themselves with either prior knowledge of or involved with the planting of explosive devices in a building (which they had intent to rob).

litus posted on 2009-03-30 14:50:44 ET Reply Trace Private Reply
#1797. To: mininggold (#1794)
Okay.... a design that doesn't perform up to it's architect's claims is not flawed

It did perform as designed...it took the hit and stood. What it was not designed for was the massive explosion and subsequent fires...they also did not anticipate that the impact of the plane would damage the core...

war posted on 2009-03-30 14:53:06 ET Reply Trace Private Reply
#1798. To: mininggold (#1794)
And new and radical are your words.

I am paraphrasing the words of the artchitects.
But feel free to continue to display yoiur Zero KNowledge Base...
A list of the innovations incorporated into the World Trade Center would be very long. In the following pages, I describe just a few of the ideas and innovations conceived and developed by our team. Most, if not all, of this technology is now a part of the standard vocabulary of structural engineers.
The tubular framing system for the perimeter walls resisted all of the lateral forces imposed by wind and earthquake, as well as the impact loads imposed on September 11. Although we had used closely spaced columns in an earlier building, it was Minoru Yamasaki who proposed that we use narrow windows in the WTC towers to give people a sense of security as they looked down from on high. Our contribution was to make the closely spaced columns the fundamental lateral- force-resisting system for the two towers. The tubular framing system also precluded the need for the customary 30-foot column spacing in interior areas, making column-free, rentable space structurally desirable.
In support of Yamasaki’s design, during the construction, before the windows were installed, I noticed that people felt comfortable walking up to the outside wall, placing their hands on the columns to either side, and enjoying the wonderful view. If the wind was blowing toward them, they would walk right up to the outside wall; however, if they felt even a trace of pressure from a breeze from behind, they would at least hesitate before walking to within five feet of the wall . . . and many would not approach the wall at all.
Another structural innovation was the outrigger space frame, which structurally linked the outside wall to the services core. This system performed several functions. First, gravity-induced vertical deformations between the columns of the services core and the columns of the outside wall were made equal at the top of the building; at other levels, the differential deformations were ameliorated. Second, wind-induced overturning moments were resisted in part by the columns of the services core, thus providing additional lateral stiffness. Finally, the weight of, and the wind-induced overturning moment from the rooftop antenna (440 feet tall) was distributed to all columns in the building . . . adding additional redundancy and toughness to the design.
A viscoelastic damping system was invented and patented to ameliorate the wind- induced dynamic component of building motion by dissipating much of the energy of that motion . . . acting more or less like shock absorbers in an automobile. With these dampers, we could control the swaying motion without having to use large quantities of structural steel. This was the first time engineered dampers were used to resist the wind-induced swaying motion of a building.
A theory was developed for integrating the statistical strength of glass with the dynamic forces of the wind to predict the breakage rate of the glass of the exterior wall. Coupled with a testing program of actual glass samples, we were able to determine rationally the necessary thickness and grade of the glass. Another theory was developed to predict stack action and temperature-induced and wind-induced airflow within a high-rise building; an understanding of these airflows is crucial to controlling fire-generated smoke and reducing the energy consumption of the building. A theory to predict appropriate “parking floors” for elevators was developed to minimize the oscillation of elevator cables, which oscillation is stimulated by the wind-induced, swaying motion of a building. Figure 2 is a comparison of the wind-induced dynamic components of the structure response of the two towers and of the Empire State Building.
The two towers were the first structures outside of the military and nuclear industries designed to resist the impact of a jet airliner, the Boeing 707. It was assumed that the jetliner would be lost in the fog, seeking to land at JFK or at Newark. To the best of our knowledge, little was known about the effects of a fire from such an aircraft, and no designs were prepared for that circumstance. Indeed, at that time, no fireproofing systems were available to control the effects of such fires.

--Leslie Roberston, structural engineer WTC

war posted on 2009-03-30 14:56:40 ET Reply Trace Private Reply
#1799. To: war (#1797)
It did perform as designed...it took the hit and stood. What it was not designed for was the massive explosion and subsequent fires...they also did not anticipate that the impact of the plane would damage the core...

All design flaws. If the pictures of these buildings collapsing were shown to the building commission or whatever you have in NYC, prior to their construction, do you think they would have been still allowed to build them without reengineering? I doubt it.

mininggold posted on 2009-03-30 14:57:25 ET Reply Trace Private Reply
#1800. To: litus (#1796)
Saying it twice only made it twice as stupid.

war posted on 2009-03-30 14:57:44 ET Reply Trace Private Reply
#1801. To: war (#1798)
I do not need a degree in structural engineering to see that those buildings did NOT perform up to expectations.

mininggold posted on 2009-03-30 14:59:38 ET Reply Trace Private Reply
#1802. To: mininggold (#1799)
All design flaws.

Your claim is that every building ever built had to pass the 9/11 test even though 9/11 had yet to happen?
You're in over your head...fwiw, that point was reached when you first hit "Reply"...

war posted on 2009-03-30 14:59:47 ET Reply Trace Private Reply
#1803. To: mininggold (#1801)
I do not need a degree in structural engineering to see that those buildings did NOT perform up to expectations.

They did not expecty an airliner to impact it with 10000 gallons of fuel @ speeds in excess of 400 and 500 MPH nor did they anticipate that the fires would NOT be contained.

war posted on 2009-03-30 15:01:19 ET Reply Trace Private Reply
#1804. To: war (#1802)
Your claim is that every building ever built had to pass the 9/11 test even though 9/11 had yet to happen?

You are saying they weren't engineered to take a direct hit from an airliner in a city crisscrossed by air lanes? Oh my.... the negligence is mounting.

mininggold posted on 2009-03-30 15:02:47 ET Reply Trace Private Reply
#1805. To: war (#1803)
They did not expecty an airliner to impact it with 10000 gallons of fuel @ speeds in excess of 400 and 500 MPH nor did they anticipate that the fires would NOT be contained.

So airplanes don't take off from NYC airports they only land. Oh... Okay....

mininggold posted on 2009-03-30 15:04:12 ET Reply Trace Private Reply
#1806. To: mininggold (#1805)
So airplanes don't take off from NYC airports they only land.

check! Those "smart engineers" would never have accounted for this!

litus posted on 2009-03-30 15:05:46 ET Reply Trace Private Reply
#1807. To: mininggold (#1804)
The two towers were the first structures outside of the military and nuclear industries designed to resist the impact of a jet airliner, the Boeing 707. It was assumed that the jetliner would be lost in the fog, seeking to land at JFK or at Newark. To the best of our knowledge, little was known about the effects of a fire from such an aircraft, and no designs were prepared for that circumstance. Indeed, at that time, no fireproofing systems were available to control the effects of such fires.

--Leslie Roberston, structural engineer WTC
The landing speed for a 707 is ~115knots

war posted on 2009-03-30 15:07:07 ET Reply Trace Private Reply
#1808. To: mininggold (#1805)
So airplanes don't take off from NYC airports they only land. Oh... Okay....

Wha...huh?
Is it your claim that when planes take off in a heavy fog that they are routinely vectored directly toward a city full of skyscrapers?
That asked, the 707 scenario was based upon the fact of a B-25 crashing into the Empire State Building...

war posted on 2009-03-30 15:10:08 ET Reply Trace Private Reply
#1809. To: mininggold (#1804)
You are saying they weren't engineered to take a direct hit from an airliner in a city crisscrossed by air lanes?

What year was the building designed?

war posted on 2009-03-30 15:11:11 ET Reply Trace Private Reply

.
.
.
Comments (1810 - 2261) not displayed.
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest

Freedom4um