See other 9/11 Articles
Title: View of a Military Expert: Why the Towers of the World Trade Center collapsed
Source:
www.serendipity
URL Source: http://www.serendipity.li/wot/finn/5/soldier5.htm
Published: Oct 22, 2006
Author: anonymous Finn
Post Date: 2006-10-22 12:30:26 by robin
Ping List: *9-11* Subscribe to *9-11*
Keywords: None
Views: 2924
Comments: 275
View of a Military Expert: Why the Towers of the World Trade Center collapsed The airplanes did not a have true effect on the destruction of towers; they were needed to give an excuse for odd Orwellian wars at the same time when the USA is turned into a police nation, like the German Third Reich, to some extent. The towers took the impacts of crushing Boeing 767's. The towers were originally built to take impacts of Boeing 707's, which are approximately of the same size and was widely used in the 1970's. Fires that kindled from the fuel in the planes were too shortlasting and weak to be able to severely damage the structure of the skyscrapers. Even in the extreme situation, the heat from a kerosene fire cannot threat the durability of a steel trunk. With the temperature of carbohydrate fires that reaches only 825 °C (approx. 1517 °F) steel weakens at 800 °C (approx. 1470 °F) and melts at 1585 °C (approx. 2890 °F). In the skyscrapers of the WTC the surroundings were not at all ideal as there were far too many steel columns and they led heat away from the burning area. WTC 1 burned for 102 minutes and WTC 2 for 56 minutes only. A fire burning much longer, from 10 to 20 hours, could slowly increase the burning temperature down to perhaps 1100 °C (approx. 2010 °F). Provided there is more substance to burn, such a fire will damage concrete and irons, but not severely heavy steel constructions. In mid-February in Madrid, the Windsor Tower (see above) burned for over 20 hours, which led to a fire stronger and hotter than that in the WTC, but even the collapses of the Windsor Tower caused by the very strong and long-enduring fire were minimal and limited to the upper floors. If either of the WTC tower had started to collapse because of fires the collapse would have been limited to only a few of the floors and then stopped. The impossibility of a gravitational collapse is closer seen in other documents. A collapse would produce large pieces, and does not explain reports of fine dust from concrete, huge amounts of dust and pieces of steel ejected outwards. Destruction of the towers by explosions is clear according to the photographs and reports of the eye witnesses. In the picture below, a range of cutting charges have just exploded in the down left sector and a typical white cloud is formed outwards from the wall. Down right, explosions are seen as well. Even a flame is seen. In video tapes taken of the so-called collapses of the WTC, more explosions of these cutting charges can be seen. The explosions advance quickly, with a gap of a couple of floors, cutting the strong steel pillars in the outer wall. The explosions are timed so that it appears that the tower collapses occur in the same timing as in a gravitational collapse. The explosions are not completely synchronized in timing, probably a few charges are triggered by radio, and other charges explode out of the impulses of one of these charges (infrared, pressure wave). More challenging problems to the demolition men, however, were the central cores of the buildings and the 47 steel pillars more robust than the ones on the outer rounds. The pillars of the central cores were made of steel even 100 + 100 mm thick, thicker than the side armours of a battle tank. Cutting those, even with explosives, is extremely difficult. One would need to surround the whole pillars, every single pillar on every floor intended to get blasted, with powerful cutting charges. These charges would have needed to be placed in such a way that the users of the skyscrapers could not notice these preparations. As seen in the following pictures, the cores of the towers were not distracted by thousands of powerful cutting charges but by a modern thermonuclear explosive, a small hydrogen bomb. In the picture below, a hydrogen bomb explosion, the bomb having been placed in the cellar and directed to the core, has reached the roof of the tower and the upper parts of the outer walls. On its way up the waves of fire pressure partially penetrated about 100 floors of concrete and steel. Over ten million degrees of heat caused by a hydrogen bomb sublimised all water within the concrete in a moment. Water exploded extremely quickly into 24-fold volume and totally pulverized the concrete. Even people and computers that were in the buildings disappeared turning into heat and light. That is why almost nothing of them was found in the ruins. Burning radiation is absorbed in steel so quickly that steel heats up immediately over its melting point 1585 °C (approx. 2890 °F) and above its boiling point around 3000 C (approx. 5430 °F). In the pictures down below, super hot groups of steel pillars and columns, torn from wall by pressure wave, are sublimized. They immediately turn into a vaporized form, binding heat as quickly as possible. Bursts upwards, even visible in the picture below, are not possible for a gravitational collapse or for cutting charges which are used horizontally. In the upper picture the explosion is in theory 100 times stronger than in the picture below, but in practice the difference is only four times due to the capability of direction of the small hydrogen bomb. In the picture at the right, the brown shades caused by a hydrogen bomb are seen, while the top of the tower that is already collapsing is breaking down and the posture straightens up as the hydrogen bomb pulverized the core and it lost all its resistance. The piles point the blasts of the cutting charges. (Gehue plate 12) Extremely hot, sublimating pieces are not created with many methods. For comparison, pictures of subterranean nuclear explosions where the explosion is blasting onto surface and into the air: Ess1.2 Kt WTC 2 Banberry 10 Kt underground Radioactivity in air creates shades of brown. (The subterranean nuke in the picture on the right is 10 times stronger than the small nuke on the left.) This is the reason why the FBI did not search the crime scene. Ground zeros of nuclear weapons are a health risk and belong to the FEMA. Poster Comment: For the rest of this: Writings of a Finnish Military Expert on 9/11 Writings of a Finnish Military Expert on 9/11 Written in spring 2005, a modestly language-corrected version Corrected by another person than the original author. The photographs attached in this non-profit distribution are for securing volatile, important evidence on 9/11 for discussion and education. Author hereby grants full permission to reproduce the drawing 'The Bombs in the WTC' and his writings. You are encouraged to mail, publish and mass produce these documents or your enhanced versions of them. Due to concerns for his personal safety, the author has chosen to remain anonymous. And a glance at some of what he's fighting for (to keep it fair and balanced): 
Storax Sedan 104 Kt shallow underground
Steel pillars are turned into dust. 
The author has chosen to remain anonymous so I'll post this photo of a Finnish soldier. Why? Well because I like looking at Finns, even with green faces.
/9_11/$FILE/9_11.jpg)
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
Comments (1-193) not displayed.
.
.
.
#194. To: RickyJ (#192)
CIA protecting shill. You American gave billions for Muslims to cut off my people's heads for snuff recruit videos and now you are trying to hide this association with the jihad your own money financed and your own govt protects.
"The desire to rule is the mother of heresies." -- St. John Chrysostom
You finally pushed destro over the top with this one.
So are you a Serb, Bosnian or Croatian? My money? Dude, the Federal Reserve, which is a private bank, prints that money. It is not even majority owned by Americans.
God is always good! From the University of Sydney, Australia - School of Civil Engineering: http://www.civil.usyd.edu.au/wtc.s html I value their judgment over your non-experts acting like experts. You would think a civil engineering school from overseas would see through this ruse you claim exists - but sadly for your fevered mind they do not - because your theory is scientific bull.
"The desire to rule is the mother of heresies." -- St. John Chrysostom
No.
"The desire to rule is the mother of heresies." -- St. John Chrysostom
No, more like they pushed me under - as in Down Under: From the University of Sydney, Australia - School of Civil Engineering: http://www.civil.usyd.edu.au/wtc.s html I value their judgment over your non-experts acting like experts. You would think a civil engineering school from overseas would see through this ruse you claim exists - but sadly for your fevered mind they do not - because your theory is scientific bull.
"The desire to rule is the mother of heresies." -- St. John Chrysostom
WTC7, WTC1 and WTC2 are the smoking guns of 9/11. They never saw Dr. Jones coming. Big mistake.
Funny, there's no mention of the Madrid fire. But there is this interesting note you might have missed at the end: This section added 14 January 2006 ************************ Why don't you quote from Michael Chertoff's cousin's article in Popular Mechanics? I have no problem with the statement in question. He is keeping an open mind if anyone has any new evidence - none has presented itself and it in no way supports your position. Try again - find an expert on that level from a different country no less - like I did.
"The desire to rule is the mother of heresies." -- St. John Chrysostom
On the previous thread I posted a link to the German engineers who studied 9/11.
When 'your side' can get people with the credentials in science and engineering like PM did and refute the PM article in a scientific peer reviewed manner then you guys graduate to the real world. Some guy studying the evidence based on what he sees on YouTube and then blogging about it don't cut it.
"The desire to rule is the mother of heresies." -- St. John Chrysostom
Some Aussie who quotes FEMA don't cut it here.' Chertoff's cousin tried to pretend he wasn't related to DHS Michael Chertoff at first. What does that tell you?
I can't believe FEMA said this. Steel is a very good conductor of heat, which would have made it very hard to heat up enough at any one point to lose half of its strength at that point. All of the steel supporting structures in that building were connected. If fire was heating one part of the building to the point of the steel losing half of its strength, then the rest of the steel on that floor would have been scorching hot, way too hot to touch as we see the woman in the photo clearly doing. Also the firemen reached the impact floor and reported only two small pockets of fire that they were sure they could knock out with only two hoses right before the South tower started to collapse.
God is always good! Excellent point Ricky, but you're not an Aussie expert who quotes from FEMA.
Thanks - I looked and could not find the German engineers' credentials. Can you please link? Thanks.
"The desire to rule is the mother of heresies." -- St. John Chrysostom
Why is someone whose jab is to be able to crunch such figures fooled - from another country no less - but you non experts know better than him?
"The desire to rule is the mother of heresies." -- St. John Chrysostom
All right that's it. You just outed yourself for everyone on this board that you are a shill beyond a doubt. PM has been debunked so thoroughly that they are considered a joke.
God is always good! We've given you Dr. Steven Jones as a credentialed professor at BYU ( or was until he got canned ). Not many people want to disagree with the Bush Crime Family and the NeoSheviks, so they post anonymously. That doesn't mean their facts are not straight. But you prefer to get your Enough said. We know who you're playing for. You won't spend a moment considering all the evidence presented on more than one thread. You just spew garbage from FEMA and the Chertoffs like all the other Rove minions. You have NO credibility. Goodbye!
All right that's it. You just outed yourself for everyone on this board that you are a shill beyond a doubt. PM has been debunked so thoroughly that they are considered a joke. Only a gov't shill or an absolute kool-aid swilling fool would quote that PM article or even bring it up as proof of anything. Popular Mechanics has long ago been exposed as a Zionist controlled and CIA sponsored propaganda outlet.
“The tendency of democracies is, in all things, to mediocrity, since the tastes, knowledge, and principles of the majority form the tribunal of appeal.” James Fenimore Cooper
Dr. Jones was not fired - he quit - will make a fortune on the lecture circuit and his field of study is not building engineering. But that is fine - he is your expert. Anyone else?
"The desire to rule is the mother of heresies." -- St. John Chrysostom
Some force, other than escaping air from the building collapse, propelled those huge sections of steel away from the building, in order to achieve an arching trajectory. What force is reponsible for that? Gravity pulls down, not sideways.
Do I hear a fat lady singing?
Force smashes down - inside floors get plasticized - resulting in the outer skin being pushed away from the tower - hence falling in an arc.
"The desire to rule is the mother of heresies." -- St. John Chrysostom
Yeah, except if he hadn't of scared the power elite, they wouldn't have made the noise that scared BYU officials unassigning him from his job in as 'uncontroversial' a way as possible. Dumb spin you have there, Poindexter.
You're too polite. Here's the latest comprehensive site: http://www.masternewmedia.org/news/2006/10/21/911_twin_towers_coll apse_independent.htm This should set their knees a quaking:
it's obvious that no matter what is presented, Destro's going to hold to the "steel turns to wet noodles" theory. unbelievable.
You work in the steel business? Do you think they fire proof steel beams for show?
"The desire to rule is the mother of heresies." -- St. John Chrysostom
He think that the discipline to ignore the obvious in order the uphold the more comforting original official story is a good thing. To him, the worst thing is for the truth to get out and see the people become cynical and completely disenchanted with the government in such a way they never fully trust it again. So he protects the power paradigm and it's original story as his goal is not the truth, but to maintain the people's confidence in the government. He thinks the cure of knowing and acknowledging the truth is worse then the disease of toxic government, so he is trying to protect them from a fall.
http://www.masternewmedia.org/news/2006/10/21/911_twin_towers_coll apse_independent.htm Thank you!
no, i don't work in the steel business. i don't have to to know that your "steel turns to wet noodles from fire" theory is a crock and totally absurd. NO STEEL STRUCTURED BUILDING LIKE THE TWIN TOWERS HAS EVER COLLAPSED FROM FIRE. NOT EVEN THE ONE IN SPAIN WHICH BURNED OVER 24 HOURS.
People in the steel business tested the steel, it did not melt at the very low burning temperatures of burning kerosene. The people who blew up the building with thermite and high explosives knew this, and they made it a priority to destroy the steel evidence as they knew there would be questions. They were caught by surprise at how the Internet helped people network and focus research faster and in a more comprehensive fashion. That is the only advantage we have had this time around, the next false flag operation, they will try to neutralize the Internet and minimize any viewing by the uncompromising eye of the camera that has done such damage to the official line. Which is why it is deadly important to get them this time around, we may never get another chance. They build redundancies in any design. For example, the structure was extremely innovative and strong. Do you think they designed it to take two aircraft impacts this size for nothing? You think that these buildings are going to be designed with structural redundancy and that will make no difference? It is inconceivable two buildings this strong would be taken out by half the impact they were designed to withstand so exactly close in time line. Looking at the differences of impact and impact point alone, there should have been a greater span of time between falls, or one should have remained standing. They were designed to withstand a jet crash, and they should not have fallen. Even if one building fell, it should have left the extremely strong center core in place. This is too pat, to convenient to have both fall, to have so much heat and atomization of the very buildings themselves, to have melted steel months later under all that rubble. What stinks is your ignoring of the properties of steel and the nature of the architectural design of the building. What stinks is your selective recognition of evidence picking and chosing only those facts help you excuse the criminality of these false flag operations. Your willful blindness is your problem, we do not chose to stay blind to the criminal actions of the government and owners of these buildings.
It's fire proofed because even small fires can compromise the integrity of the heat treating and the structure would have to be razed because it's not possible to replace or even shore up main beams in most locations. So, one critical member that is ten pounds below the rated tensile strength could result in the demolition of a multi million dollar structure simply because the beam although still safe, no longer exceeds the minimum rating standards for structural steel. Fire Proofing is to protect insurance company stock holders, not occupants of steel framed structures. If there is a fire and the fire proofing is still intact, it tells the inspectors that NDT is not necessary and the building can be renovated. Although steel can burn (fast oxidation as opposed to slow-rust) it requires blast furnace temperatures, and structural fires rarely approach the required heat or burn time for that.
Do you make stuff up by pulling them out of your arse because you don't want to be one upped without a comeback? The planes slamming into the building scrapped the sprayed on fireproofing off the beams or the building would have stood up. That plus the unique design of using the outer skin as a load bearing wall also helped wealen the structure - if the WTC had been built in the classic design of internal steel girders then the building may have stood up at least below the impact zone. The spray-on fireproofing to the steel structure (beams, columns and decking) prevented the collapse of this Los Angeles high-rise in 1988. A sprinkler system had recently been installed but was not yet activated. The spray-on fireproofing saved lives and property. The First Interstate Bank Building was back in use a few months after the incident. http://www.concretethinking.org/main.asp?page=827 The ability of structural steel to withstand major fires is under scrutiny. The latest findings of the US-based National Institute of Standards and Technology into the collapse of the World Trade Center couple with the recent collapse in fire of the perimeter steel columns of the Madrid Windsor Torre building question the performance of structural steel in fires in high rise buildings. And it is not just in high rise buildings. The avocation by the UK Chief Fire Officers' Association of a boycott of fire fighters entering burning steel framed superstores and warehouses is also raising questions about the use of steel for low rise buildings reports Anna Scothern, Head of Performance at The Concrete Centre. http://www.emporis.com/en/bu/nc/ne/?id=101283 Madrid: A fire of an unknown source has affected one of Madrid's most famous skyscraper. The fire began at the 21st floor at about 22.30 GMT Saturday 12th of February and rapedly extended along the building. Torre Windsor had been under renovation works for the past year and fortunately the building remained empty. Part of the facade has collapsed and firefighters had to abandoned the building due to the risk of collpasing of the structure.
"The desire to rule is the mother of heresies." -- St. John Chrysostom
You sure are a smat ass. Actually my little baby blue eyed bouncing baby of a magic fall down building bot, we were wondering much the same thing about you.
Your above re-posted citation is moot. It is about posturing AFTER the false flag operations and as cover to prop up the extremely weak official story. Naturally people are going to investigate or call for agencies to investigate the steel to try to fudge over the obvious fact that there was not enough fire damage or heat to bring those buildings down that way especially that quickly.
http://www.libertyforum.org/showprofile.php? Cat=&User=Destro&Board=consp_911&what=wwwthread s&page=0&view=collapsed&sb=5&o=21 Email Name James McCullen Destro XXIV Title agent provocateur Total Posts 4663 Fame 19 Homepage http://www.myuselessknowledge.com/joe/d estro.ht ml Occupation COBRA Hobbies Information Location Callander, Scotland Bio Formerly of FreeRepublic fame. ICQ Number Sponsor 1MDC Holding Registered on 08/02/05 06:36 PM Favorite Threads USS Cole attack mastermind escapes from prison by Destro Conspiracy theory was born in the Age of Enlightenment and has metastasized in the Age of Internet by Destro Lawyers in Moussaoui case grapple with FBI's role:Agent testifies it knew of al Qaeda pilot training by Destro A Half-Dozen Questions About 9/11 They Don't Want You to Ask by Destro The US May Have Delivered 200,000 AK-47s to Insurgents in Iraq by Destro Kill that Old [British] Hag! by Destro Spar was Threatened on http://FreeRepub lic.com by Spar 9/11: The "Catalyzing Event" by Destro
Mark The FBI, rather than trying to prevent a terrorist attack, was merely gathering intelligence so they would know who to arrest when a terrorist attack occurred.— Robert Wright - Former FBI agent "At temperatures above 800º C structural steel loses 90 percent of its strength. Yet even when steel structures are heated to those temperatures, they never disintegrate into piles of rubble, as did the Twin Towers and Building 7."— Esso-Freedom4um - 10/23/2006
Title agent provocateur Total Posts 4663 Thanks laddie, We'll add him to the Scottish Hall of Shame.
Well, Palo ain't here to do this, so here is some Scot's broom flowers to congratulate you on some kick as ferreting out of a scoundrel. ;-)
That bouquet is too tasteful for a palo bouquet.
Maybe so my dear, but Scot's Broom is an invasive horror story that crowds out native plants destroying the integrity of an ecosystem. We have a terrible time trying to control it here in Oregon. Actually I think the plant fits the planted operator well. ;-)
Care to comment about your bio my little self described agent provocateur? We know you are out there. Come in and amuse us by trying vainly to convince us you are not shitting a brick over that posting about you.
You may not agree with my sources but I post a source - you make stuff up - like fireproofing is only done for BS insurance purpuses.
"The desire to rule is the mother of heresies." -- St. John Chrysostom
Comments (235 - 275) not displayed.
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/LatestWTC7, WTC1 and WTC2 are the smoking guns of 9/11. No Arabs demolished those buildings.
#195. To: RickyJ, robin (#192)
#196. To: Destro (#194)
You American gave billions for Muslims to cut off my people's heads for snuff recruit videos and now you are trying to hide this association with the jihad your own money financed and your own govt protects.
"It was an interesting day." - President Bush, recalling 9/11 [White House, 1/5/02]
#197. To: robin (#193)
#198. To: RickyJ (#196)
So are you a Serb, Bosnian or Croatian?
#199. To: angle, RickyJ, robin (#195)
(Edited)
You finally pushed destro over the top with this one.
#200. To: RickyJ (#192)
WTC7, WTC1 and WTC2 are the smoking guns of 9/11.
#201. To: Destro (#197)
(Edited)
FEMA!!!!
This website generates many queries from people in response to some of the other theories that are put forward relating to the collapse - namely that it was a controlled explosion.
The initial impact/further weakening by fire reasoning is based on uncontestable knowledge about the behaviour of structures in general, and the weakening of steel under fire conditions, plus video footage of the events and examination of the steel afterwards. The official FEMA report written by engineering experts came to this conclusion based on the evidence.
However, should additional evidence come to light that supports a different theory, the author is willing to reassess his views.
The fire wasn't hot enough to melt the steel
There has never been a claim that the steel melted in the fire before the buildings collapsed, however the fire would have been very hot. Even though the steel didnt melt, the type of temperatures in the fire would have roughly halved its strength.
There would have been variations in the distribution of the temperature both in place in time. There are photos that show people in the areas opened up by the impact, so it obviously wasnt too hot when those photos were taken, but this is not to say that other parts of the building, further inside were not hotter. In addition, to make a reasonable conclusion from these photos, it would be important to know when they were taken. It might be possible that just after the impact the area wasnt very hot, but as the fire took hold the area got hotter.
The way the building collapsed must have been caused by explosions
One demolition expert on the day of the collapse said it looked like implosion but this is not very strong evidence. Implosion firstly requires a lot of explosives placed in strategic areas all around the building. When and how was this explosive placed in the building without anyone knowing about it. Second, implosion required more than just explosives. Demolition experts spend weeks inside a derelict building planning an event. Many of the beams are cut through by about 90% so that the explosion only has to break a small bit of steel. In this state the building is highly dangerous, and there is no way such a prepared building could still be running day to day like WTC was.
Why did the building fall so quickly?
The buildings did fall quickly - almost (but not exactly) at the same speed as if there was no resistance. Shouldn't the floors below have slowed it down? The huge dynamic loads due to the very large momentum of the upper floors falling were so great that they smashed through the lower floors very quickly. The columns were not designed to carry these huge loads and they provided little resistance.
What about World Trade Center 7?
I have not studied WTC in any great detail and cannot offer any theories on its collapse mechanism. In the chaos of the day, little attention was paid to WTC7, so there is less evidence available on the damage it sustained before it collapsed. However, some questions that you may want to ponder ...
* While it did not receive any direct impact form the planes, how much debris hit at as the main towers collapsed and what damage did it cause?
* To what extent (if any) did the shock or vibrations caused by the collapse of WTC1 & 2 affect the integrity of WTC7?
* Did any unseen damage to the WTC7 foundations occur in the collapse of WTC 1 & 2?
* Did any of the fire suppression systems in WTC7 function?
The author respect people's right to question theories, but at the present time the author does not believe there is enough evidence for him to change his views on this incident.
#202. To: robin (#201)
But there is this interesting note you might have missed at the end:
#203. To: Destro (#202)
#204. To: robin (#201)
Why don't you quote from Michael Chertoff's cousin's article in Popular Mechanics?
#205. To: Destro (#204)
#206. To: robin (#201)
There are photos that show people in the areas opened up by the impact, so it obviously wasnt too hot when those photos were taken, but this is not to say that other parts of the building, further inside were not hotter.
"It was an interesting day." - President Bush, recalling 9/11 [White House, 1/5/02]
#207. To: RickyJ (#206)
#208. To: robin (#203)
#209. To: robin, RickyJ (#207)
Excellent point Ricky, but you're not an Aussie expert who quotes from FEMA.
#210. To: Destro (#204)
(Edited)
When 'your side' can get people with the credentials in science and engineering like PM did and refute the PM article in a scientific peer reviewed manner then you guys graduate to the real world.
"It was an interesting day." - President Bush, recalling 9/11 [White House, 1/5/02]
#211. To: Destro (#209)
facts talking points and propaganda from the Chertoffs and FEMA.
#212. To: RickyJ, DisinfoDestro (#210)
(Edited)
When 'your side' can get people with the credentials in science and engineering like PM did and refute the PM article in a scientific peer reviewed manner then you guys graduate to the real world.
#213. To: robin (#211)
We've given you Dr. Steven Jones as a credentialed professor at BYU ( or was until he got canned ).
#214. To: Destro (#11)
no surprise that the building would fall like a peeling banana - down with an arc.
#215. To: Critter (#214)
Gravity pulls down, not sideways
#216. To: Destro (#213)
"Dr. Jones was not fired..."
#217. To: robin (#211)
#218. To: angle, Destro (#217)
#219. To: christine (#218)
it's obvious that no matter what is presented, Destro's going to hold to the "steel turns to wet noodles" theory. unbelievable.
#220. To: christine, Destro (#218)
"it's obvious that no matter what is presented, Destro's going to hold to the "steel turns to wet noodles" theory. unbelievable."
#221. To: angle (#217)
Here's the latest comprehensive site:
#222. To: Destro (#219)
#223. To: Destro (#219)
(Edited)
"You work in the steel business?"
"Do you think they fire proof steel beams for show?"
#224. To: Destro, christine (#219)
Do you think they fire proof steel beams for show?
#225. To: HOUNDDAWG (#224)
Fire Proofing is to protect insurance company stock holders, not occupants of steel framed structures.
#226. To: Destro (#225)
"Do you make stuff up by pulling them out of your arse because you don't want to be one upped without a comeback?"
#227. To: Destro (#225)
http://www.concretethinking.org/main.asp?page=827
#228. To: RickyJ, Robin, Christine, Angle, Ferret Mike, Red Jones, SCOTTISH MOLE ALERT!!!!! (#196)
He is a Scottish mole.
#229. To: Kamala (#228)
Name James McCullen Destro XXIV
#230. To: Kamala (#228)
#231. To: Ferret Mike (#230)
#232. To: robin (#231)
"That bouquet is too tasteful for a palo bouquet."
#233. To: Kamala, Destro (#228)
#234. To: Ferret Mike (#226)
You sure are a smat ass. Actually my little baby blue eyed bouncing baby of a magic fall down building bot, we were wondering much the same thing about you.
.
.
.