By Rady Ananda
Rather than judicially review significant evidence in the events of September 11, 2001, on April 27, the 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals upheld a lower court’s dismissal of an Army Specialist’s complaint against former Vice President Dick Cheney, former Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, and former Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Richard Myers.
One of Plaintiff April Gallop’s attorneys, William Veale, didn’t know whether to relate the decision to “Kafka, Orwell, Carroll, or Huxley,” referring to the absurdity and dearth of reason emanating from the court regarding the deadliest attack on U.S. soil the nation has ever faced.
“The Court’s decision, analogous to reviewing an Indictment in a liquor store hold-up without mentioning the guy walking in with a gun, refuses to acknowledge even the existence of the three defendants much less what they were doing that morning or saying about it afterwards,” Veale added.
Of the three judges on the panel, John Mercer Walker, Jr. is first cousin of former President George H.W. Bush and first cousin once removed of George W. Bush, who used 9/11 to manipulate public emotion to support passage of the unconstitutional PATRIOT Acts and waging illegal wars of aggression in the Middle East. According to Wikipedia, Walker shares a grandfather with the 41st president, George Herbert Walker, whose daughter married Prescott Bush. A motion to force Judge Walker’s removal from the case was denied, despite a clear conflict of interest.
The lawsuit, prepared by the Center for 9/11 Justice, accuses the defendants of conspiring to facilitate the terrorist attacks of 9/11 that killed 3000 Americans and which has resulted in the deaths of many more, due to the toxicity of the clean-up conditions at Ground Zero. The plaintiff and her son were both injured in the attack on the Pentagon, multiple videos of which the government has refused to release to the public.
Ignoring crucial evidence like the total collapse of WTC7 though not hit by a plane on September 11, the whereabouts of and statements made by the Defendants on 9/11, and the presence of thermitic material in the rubble of the Twin Towers, the court ludicrously affirmed the lower court’s finding that the case was “not plausible” and “the product of cynical delusion and fantasy.”
Additionally, the court filed an Order to Show Cause for Sanctions amounting to $15,000 for filing a “frivolous” suit, which the Center for 9/11 Justice plans to appeal.
Meanwhile, nearly 1,500 professional architects, engineers and scientists continue to assert the physical impossibility of all three World Trade Center buildings collapsing in near free fall as a result of burning jet fuel. Indeed, it is the government’s conspiracy version which is implausible, “fanciful, fantastic and delusional.”
The bravery of April Gallop in her attempt to expose the truth is as laudable as the obvious official corruption is contemptible. An unbiased judicial review of the events surrounding 9/11 will not be found in the United States. But refusal to do so only heightens global suspicion. The conspiracy and cover-up was so poorly executed that the vast majority of the planet’s population doubts the official version of events.
Background info on April Gallop’s case can be found here. Related documents are here. Kevin Barrett of No Lies Radio interviewed William Veale shortly after the April 5th hearing. 4-5-11 NoLiesRadio with William Veale
Also see this Alex Jones interview of April Gallop in 2008: Part 1. Part 2. Part 3. Part 4.
*4/29 updated April Gallop’s rank from “military officer” to “Army Specialist”.
Elizabeth Woodworth
betsylangert
bobkoehler
CasaZaza
coto2admin
cz85b
Denis Rancourt
geobear7
HeartThinks
jerseyg
laudyms
Mr. M
Michael Collins
ozspeaksup
Puddy Dunne
Rady
slindauer2010
Megan 'Verb' Kargher
tomdegan
volaar
COTO Report 
Pingback: Extraordinary Conflict of Interest: Bush Cousin Is Judge in Explosive 9/11 Case against Bush Officials | COTO Report
Pingback: Military officer’s 9/11 case against Bush officials to be heard April 5 | COTO Report
If only this issue received the same attention in the corporate media as Obama’s birth certificate. Sigh!
funny you should say that… I almost included a sentence to that effect.
Not likely they’re going to let this can of worms out. They’re deathly afraid of the townsfolk gathering at the gates of Dr. Frankensteins castle with their pitchforks, torches, clubs and battering rams to do with the monster what needs to be done.
Gallop is not an officer, she was a Specialist, a low ranking enlisted person.
I appreciate James’ comment, and corrected the article accordingly. Note of such correction is at the bottom of the article.
Funny about the pic – I wondered exactly that myself before using it. I’ll change the pic.
In response 2 James??? Who I am or my rank bares no greater significance to our survival. What is the relevance of your point?? Regardless of rank, all were trained 2 be soldiers. My rank didn’t take away from my experience. Nor did my rank mean that I don’t have the capability to read Army, Airforce, Navy and Marine Regulations. However, I will toot that I consistently completed task well above my pay grade. Something u know nothing about?? Or do u?? I hope u aren’t another coward hiding behind a blog with efforts to cause harm to my character. It is one thing to state your opinion. As mature adults we learn to agree 2 disagree.
Kevin Barrett of No Lies Radio interviewed William Veale shortly after the April 5th hearing. 4-5-11 NoLiesRadio with William Veale
you know it, brother
Amen. There are ample evidential photos of the thermitic materials to be found within the AE9/11.org files.
Don’t forget who else. 9/11 and Israel, here:
http://www.iuniverse.com/Bookstore/BookDetail.aspx?BookId=SKU-000190526
This is a comment sent to me by Dimitri Diamant
THE NANO THERMITE FACTOR
by: Dimitri Diamant
Briefly, as an introduction, this otherwise lengthy article deals with recent new developments as to the events of September 11, 2001. The nature of these developments is such that additional review in terms of Internet closely related and sometimes subtle topics is warranted; and so the discussion here is presented now in an outline format:
1. Earlier, prominent independent research as to 9/11 was conducted by Steven Earl Jones, Ph.D., Professor of Physics at Brigham Young University, Utah. Dr. Jones is an expert in an area of science known as muon cold fusion, and, from the point of view of physics, this is somewhat related to the various uses of thermite. Naturally, Dr. Jones was somewhat concerned about the presence of thermite residue afterwards at Ground Zero, suggesting the possibility of demolition. However, thermite can also be used when cutting steel, such as the large columns of steel remains that then had to gradually be removed from the scene. Thus, the concerns of Dr. Jones were confronted by his being placed on paid leave, and he then resigned his tenure at Brigham Young University.
2. A discussion as to the American Society for Quality, website address http://www.asq.org, can now be of interest. Their mission statement includes:
“Long-known as the American Society for Quality and established in 1946, ASQ has been the sole administrator of the Malcolm Baldrige National Quality Program Award since 1991. ASQ marks the 25th anniversary of its International Team Excellence Award at the World Conference on Quality and Improvement in 2010. ASQ’s participation and influence in international standards includes its role as the administrator of the U.S. Technical Advisory Group of the ISO 26000 standard on social responsibility, to be released in 2010.
“Headquartered in Milwaukee, Wis., ASQ supports membership services and business operations through ASQ Global, ASQ China, and ASQ Mexico; with ASQ WorldPartners® around the globe; and through its work with ANAB and RABQSA.”
The ASQ conducts periodic examinations leading to the award of the title Certified Quality Engineer. This is an area of expertise that can convey the aspects of one being an expert technician, although those with both BS and MS degrees are more recently entering the field.
3. Consequently, Congress has created a federal agency known as the National Institute of Standards and Technology, often known as the NIST. A few years ago, an Environmental Health Manager with Underwriters Laboratories, Kevin R. Ryan, CQE, became concerned with assigned 9/11 evaluation activities being conducted by the NIST, and so he communicated with them accordingly. It happens that the work of CQE’s exactly matches the work of the NIST. Similar, one could say, to the outcomes concerning Dr. Steven Jones, Kevin Ryan was then dismissed by Underwriters Laboratories.
4. Next, there is the question of peer review. All Ph.D. faculty members of major universities, especially in the sciences, are expected to conduct periodic research, and they then send papers, always with an introductory abstract, to professional journals, which then have confidential referees who conduct a peer review to see if the paper warrants publication.
By means of the Internet, one can find http://www.bentham.org. This is an organization that now sponsors a relatively large number of scientific journals, and their offices are located in the United Arab Emirates. This is the small country that has put up the Burj Tower, a building actually twice the height of the Sears Tower. After you arrive at their home page, you can then click Bentham Open Home, and then click Journals A-Z. After a bit of a search, you can then find the Open Chemical Physics Journal, and then click View Journal Articles, and then Volume 2, Year 2009. The following entry is then found:
Active Thermitic Material Discovered in Dust from the 9/11 World Trade Center Catastrophe
pp.7-31 (25) Authors: Niels H. Harrit, Jeffrey Farrer, Steven E. Jones, Kevin R. Ryan, Frank M. Legge, Daniel Farnsworth, Gregg Roberts, James R. Gourley, Bradley R. Larsen
Some have expressed concern that peer review activities have traditionally taken place in America and Europe; but the world is changing now, and an adequate review of http://www.bentham.org shows that responsible scientists from all over the world are, in fact, properly represented here.
5. Here, a certain digression is needed, in the interests of Internet verification. There is a company known as RealVNC, Ltd., with offices in Cambridge, England. VNC stands for Virtual Network Computing, and this appears to involve quite extensive communications, mutually agreeable, between a computer A and a computer B at two different locations. The Internet address for this company is http://www.realvnc.com, and they do make available, apparently as a starter, a free version known as vncviewer4. Of course, this company will be expanding this technology for use by the iPhones, etc.
6. Next, there is a website known as cipshare.com. The letters cip probably stand for (British) Columbia Internet Providers. All their website does is to make available a free download of vncviewer4.exe. At the upper left, if you click View and then Source, all their very brief html does is to exactly provide you with this free, and nothing more. This turns out to be satisfactory as to the legalities of RealVNC, Ltd., but one might ordinarily want to get this instead from the usual location, realvnc.com. Meanwhile, after consulting whois and internic, the owners of cipshare.com do what many do, and they maintain their privacy. Otherwise, their Registrar is Wild West Domains, Inc., website wildwestdomains.com.
7. Now, as what amounts to a conscientious gesture, cipshare.com has added a subpage (no need for reference within the html) known as:
/NielsHarrit_org
Notice the clever substitution of the underscore for the usual period. This is actually a reference to the lead author cited in 4. above, Niels Holger Harrit. What the sponsors of cipshare.com have done is to, in effect, relieve the additional burden otherwise necessitated here. It turns out that /nielsharrit_org provides a full description of the credentials and a full description of the work of Prof. Niels H. Harrit, Ph.D., Department of Chemistry, University of Copenhagen. After adding all of this up, we find that everything here is responsible and correct.
8. Now, the introductory Abstract to the relevant paper of Dr. Niels Harrit and colleagues is presented:
“We have discovered distinctive red/gray chips in all the samples we have studied of the dust produced by the destruction of the World Trade Center. Examination of four of these samples, collected from separate sites, is reported in this paper. These red/gray chips show marked similarities in all four samples. One sample was collected by a Manhattan resident about ten minutes after the collapse of the second WTC Tower, two the next day, and a fourth about a week later. The properties of these chips were analyzed using optical microscopy, scanning electron microscopy (SEM), X-ray energy dispersive spectroscopy (XEDS), and differential scanning calorimetry (DSC). The red material contains grains approximately 100 nm across which are largely iron oxide, while aluminum is contained in tiny plate-like structures. Separation of components using methyl ethyl ketone demonstrated that elemental aluminum is present. The iron oxide and aluminum are intimately mixed in the red material. When ignited in a DSC device the chips exhibit large but narrow exotherms occurring at approximately 430 °C, far below the normal ignition temperature for conventional thermite. Numerous iron-rich spheres are clearly observed in the residue following the ignition of these peculiar red/gray chips. The red portion of these chips is found to be an unreacted thermitic material and highly energetic.”
9. Further discussion of all of this is now warranted. Whereas Prof. Steven E. Jones is a physicist, Prof. Niels H. Harrit is a chemist. There is a German website known as http://www.gulli.com, and a search here (suche) can be made for wtc 9/11. A rigorous interview, also presented there in English, of Dr. Harrit can be found. During the interview, Dr. Harrit stated that the debris material that they collected was actually, in effect, weapons grade nano-thermite, aspects of which are classified information. In a colloquial sense, one could say that this is something that a Manhattan resident isn’t going to ordinarily find lying around, let us say, at the Bronx Zoo. The question then becomes, this being the case, how could Dr. Harrit have access to the specifics of this substance? The answer is that Dr. Harrit specializes in nano-chemistry. This means that whatever material you might present to someone with this background, he or she will know how to gradually diagnose just exactly what the substance amounts to, or, as turns out to be the conclusion, just how powerfully explosive the diagnosed substance at hand happens to be. During the interview, Dr. Harrit stated:
“Yes, the particles are much smaller. But it is prepared in a radically different way compared to ordinary thermite, where the small particles are made by making bigger particles smaller. In nanomaterials, the particles are prepared from atoms and molecules.”
Some have suggested that iron oxide and aluminum were naturally present within the collapsed structures, eventually scattered here and there with concrete, etc.; but this is totally different from weapons grade nano-thermite, prepared as a uniform powder, from atoms and molecules.
10. The interview also rigorously probed as to exactly how the debris material was collected for analysis. Dr. Harrit then referred the interviewer to his paper. Here is a detailed, and somewhat surprising explanation as to how this was done:
“It was learned that a number of people had saved samples of the copious, dense dust, which spread and settled across Manhattan. Several of these people sent portions of their samples to members of this research group. This paper discusses four separate dust samples collected on or shortly after 9/11/2001. Each sample was found to contain red/gray chips. All four samples were originally collected by private citizens who lived in New York City at the time of the tragedy. These citizens came forward and provided samples for analysis in the public interest, allowing study of the 9/11 dust for whatever facts about the day might be learned from the dust.
“The earliest-collected sample came from Mr. Frank Delessio who, according to his videotaped testimony [17], was on the Manhattan side of the Brooklyn Bridge about the time the second tower, the North Tower, fell to the ground. He saw the tower fall and was enveloped by the resulting thick dust which settled throughout the area. He swept a handful of the dust from a rail on the pedestrian walkway near the end of the bridge, about ten minutes after the fall of the North Tower. He then went to visit his friend, Mr. Tom Breidenbach, carrying the dust in his hand, and the two of them discussed the dust and decided to save it in a plastic bag. On 11/15/2007, Breidenbach sent a portion of this dust to Dr. Jones for analysis. Breidenbach has also recorded his testimony about the collection of this dust sample on videotape [17]. Thus, the Delessio/Breidenbach sample was collected about ten minutes after the second tower collapsed. It was, therefore, definitely not contaminated by the steelcutting or clean-up operations at Ground Zero, which began later. Furthermore, it is not mixed with dust from WTC 7, which fell hours later.
“On the morning of 9/12/2001, Mr. Stephen White of New York City entered a room in his apartment on the 8th floor of 1 Hudson Street, about five blocks from the WTC. He found a layer of dust about an inch thick on a stack of folded laundry near a window which was open about 4 inches (10 cm). Evidently the open window had allowed a significant amount of dust from the WTC destruction the day before to enter the room and cover the laundry. He saved some of the dust and, on 2/02/2008, sent a sample directly to Dr. Jones for analysis.
“Another sample was collected from the apartment building at 16 Hudson Street by Mr. Jody Intermont at about 2 pm on 9/12/2001. Two small samples of this dust were simultaneously sent to Dr. Jones and to Kevin Ryan on 2/02/2008 for analysis. Intermont sent a signed affidavit with each sample verifying that he had personally collected the (nowsplit) sample; he wrote:
“This dust, which came from the “collapsed” World Trade Center Towers, was collected from my loft at the corner of Reade Street and Hudson Street on September 12, 2001. I give permission to use my name in connection to this evidence’. [Signed 31 January 2008 in the presence of a witness who also signed his name].
“On the morning of 9/11/2001, Ms. Janette MacKinlay was in her fourth-floor apartment at 113 Cedar St./110 Liberty St. in New York City, across the street from the WTC plaza. As the South Tower collapsed, the flowing cloud of dust and debris caused windows of her apartment to break inward and dust filled her apartment. She escaped by quickly wrapping a wet towel around her head and exiting the building. The building was closed for entry for about a week. As soon as Ms. MacKinlay was allowed to re-enter her apartment, she did so and began cleaning up. There was a thick layer of dust on the floor. She collected some of it into a large sealable plastic bag for possible later use in an art piece. Ms. MacKinlay responded to the request in the 2006 paper by Dr. Jones by sending him a dust sample. In November 2006, Dr. Jones traveled to California to visit Ms. MacKinlay at her new location, and in the company of several witnesses collected a second sample of the WTC dust directly from her large plastic bag where the dust was stored. She has also sent samples directly to Dr. Jeffrey Farrer and Kevin Ryan. Results from their studies form part of this report.
“Another dust sample was collected by an individual from a window sill of a building on Potter Street in NYC. He has not given permission for his name to be disclosed, therefore his material is not included in this study. That sample, however, contained red/gray chips of the same general composition as the samples described here.”
11. We are now at a time when very large numbers of professionals in the United States and Europe, and in other parts of the world as well, are becoming increasingly aware that, to say the least, something is wrong here. Meanwhile, those who continue to push the Bush story on this are dwindling in number, they are becoming more desperate, and they are using more and more language that is crude.
For example, there is a Mr. Joseph Nobles who has changed the top level domain name of org to info, and, although he is neither an architect nor engineer, he has registered his domain name as ae911truth.info. Within his website, Mr. Nobles describes his background as follows:
“I am currently a live voice writer, which means I produce captions for live television using voice recognition software. I used to be a working actor with the various “day jobs” such a profession requires. I also graduated from International Bible College (now Heritage Christian University) with a BA in Bible, and attended Harding Graduate School of Religion for two years pursuing a Masters in Christian Theology. I am now an agnostic on all matters religious.”
Then, as an example or two of the language that Mr. Nobles uses, we find:
“They pretend to be spreading real and valuable information, but their website and presentations are filled with misinformation and lies.
“The Top 10 Boneheaded Mistakes made by Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth.” (available there for clicking)
12. At the website globalresearch.ca, can be found an excellent article by Elizabeth Woodworth that provides an ample anthology of how the responsible media that they still have throughout Europe are already reacting to the findings of Dr. Niels H. Harrit.
####
btw, Elizabeth is also a member of COTO Report and posted the article Mr Diamant referenced in #12 with us, as well. See https://coto2.wordpress.com/2011/01/28/why-the-fuss-the-call-to-arms-against-un-rapporteur-richard-falk-for-alluding-to-gaps-in-the-911-official-story/
Citizens’ arrest brigades per state for all Federal Reserve and Federal government. Elect from jury pool.
War vs Us is Treason – Terror, Drugs, Middle East, Middle Class, Women, Poor.
Read AND LEARN the comments at the end of Activist Post: Architects and Engineers Question… through a google or yahoo search. The Sears Tower is still loaded with thermi(a)te top to bottom. Apparently you mainlanders are literally stuck to your easy-chairs and can’t get up long enough to confirm this. The WTCs I and II were retriggered with hi-tech nano-material which was placed mainly at the impact levels to set off the original systems which were placed during construction to insure verticle collapse for whatever reason. This inefficient application is a factor in the presence of so much un ignited residue. The older thermite was directly and efficiently applied. Jet impact, earthquake, tsunami, etc.were considered factors. Once verticle load sensors detected the building falling over, the computerized set-up took over. This triggering is apparent from various videos and thousands of tight -lipped people have known of it since the 1960s. Most first-hand witnesses are dead and the rest don’t want to face the music. Find them and ask. They will lie at first but we all know how to get the truth without hurting them. I have known of this for over 41 years now. Most thought it was insane to do then. And now the sheeple can not even fathom that these pig sons-of -bitches actually did it. So they don’t ask. They just run around waving their arms and saying, “Oh, God!” in a panic. April Gallop has more class and more balls than most of the so called 9-11 researchers.
I’ll bet you turkeys did not know that the Fukushima plant was sited, licensed and commissioned by the U.S. government under Pres. Richard Nixon. And his boss was the old and ailing Prescott Bush and his ambassador to the U.N. was George H.W. Bush. And I’ll bet you did not know that these Bushs and Nixon used to go to Bavarian Grove every year for decades to discuss anti-social activities including the funding of Hitler and eugenics in general. Bushs, Kissinger,Rockefellers, skulduggery and buggary go WAY back. In the 1920s, the Bavaria Grove Summer Gathering programs had swastikas printed on the backs. Please read this and pass it on.
hey, apeman, can you comment with more civility? you’re not on MSM, you know. in the alternative media, most readers know the facts you raise, and we’re grown up enough to dispense info without insult.
unless you like to emulate Bill O’Reilly
Attention: Recall on Sept 10 2001 it was announced that $2.25 TRILLION could not be accounted.FBI had all the files inclusive of ENRON cases in WTC 7. Now to get to the point. This money was used as payment to Israel for the 911 attacks and media cover-up. Notice no politician dares to question that no Arabs did 911 attacks and now fearfull of Israel–yes yes master. But why? JuJu (Israel Firsters) are known to double cross and blackmail. You allow 911 exposure–we will tell–you paid us to do it–signed–We are not kidding :^/
And since I am on a directed rage, I will add that the Royal navies of Europe and the U.S. navy have been intimately aware that the prevailing wind currents in the North Pacific go west to east and have been carrying ships thusly from Japan to the mainland U.S. since day-one.
Therfore, anybody but a complete TV-idiot would anticipate a radioactive cloud from a tsunami destroyed reactor array with all the spent fuel on top of it in Japan being over the U.S. for months, starting in about one week. Thus destroying America and putting the U.N. and Britannia back at the Head of the Table. They killed Lady Di, and they funded Hitler. At first. The Dulles brothers wrote up the papers.
The fuel now is too hot to move or contain.
Would somebody please tell me how this even went forward? Were the plainiff’s attorneys so incompetent that they couldn’t get this judge recused for a blatant conflict of interest, or get the case transferred to another court?
Good f***ing grief.
Try to discuss this with one of the Bush faithful rightwingers.
“Bush knew!!”
“But Obama does not have a birth certificate.”
“9-11 was an inside job”
“We need to see Obama’s birth certificate!!”
“Bush and Cheney brought us the PATRIOT Act.”
“But Obama is the usurper. He needs to prove his citizenship!”
“Bush initiated so many Nazi-type intrusions into your life.”
“But Obama should not be the president!!!!! Praise Rush Limbaugh!!!!!!”
“George Bush’s buddy Michael Chertoff is profiting from the pornoscanners at the airports.”
“The ‘real” birth certificate is FAKE! Obama is a liar and a MUSLIM too!!!!!”
“Do not forget Homeland Security was formed through the Bush administration.”
“Never mind that! We need to see his birth certificate…NOW!!!!!”
It’s a universally excepted fact among most scientists there was a lot more energy involved in the collapse of the WTC towers than what was in the gravitational collapse. Where did it come from? The Harrit peer reviewed scientific study shows military grade nano thermate. The high levels of tritium suggest even more sinister sources.
Connecting the dots leads right back to Bush and his neo con administration. They are the guilty ones to 911 along with the military industrial security complex that have hijacked the nation and are stealing everything they can, while they still can.
Pingback: Bush court dismisses 9/11 suit against Bush officials, orders sanctions « THE INTERNET POST
Has anyone here actually read the Gallop lawsuit? Any judge who didn’t toss it out with prejudice should be removed from the bench. You couldn’t write anything more inconsistent, incoherent, unfounded, and completely absurd if you tried. She and her lawyers should spend some serious time in jail, be fined to the limit, and the plaintiff’s counsel should all be disbarred. This one even exceeds the bounds of the 9/11 “truth movement.”
Albury, thank u for all of your remarks. I hope the ability to make such statements help u in some therapeutic manner. Somehow, u r capable of promptly responding to various blog post so quickly. It makes me wonder? Again, who I am isn’t important. My rank isn’t significant at all. I still had to be trained as a soldier. What is important 2 remember ??? I was on the first floor, E ring less than 40 ft away from the alleged impact. The wingspan of the alleged plan is 124ft 10inches. Thanks Wikipedia. What is more important is that the Pentagon was attacked. It shouldn’t have been. What is most important is what the official story implies. When you look at the millions of dollars that go into Defense, CIA, FBI and such. It appears and alleged that a few men were capable of thwarting the intelligence, might and power of such agencies. What kinda statement do u think that makes to our enemies?? There are so many contradicting statements by officials. I didn’t make them state contradictions. It is time to learn the facts so real reform can take place. It is time for all those involved intentional or not to be held accountable. Maybe u can help explain how a plane is capable of vaporizing into a building and leaving dead bodies?? I don’t claim to be an Einstein. Maybe u can help explain the lack of burn injuries regardless the degree of heat from the alleged plane??? IF the official story is true?? Then they wouldn’t have any problems coming to court and testifying under oath to statements already provided. When you take a job, or start a business u should be accountable for your success as well as your failures.
right on, April!
yes, I have, Albury. gosh, it’s rare that fascists actually come right out and admit their psychopathy.
thanks for the laugh
In response to Albury’s “She and her lawyers should spend some serious time in jail, be fined to the limit, and the plaintiff’s counsel should all be disbarred.” Albury, I have kept to my integrity. Sept 11th 2001, was the one moment in our history to unite the nations. That was the time to be upfront and honest with the American people. At that moment, I believe the majority of Americans would have understand any acknowledgements of failures by our officials. Instead, alternate rash actions were taken. Albury, did you find the Weapons of Mass Destruction?? When your failures whether intentional or not result in the harm and deaths of thousands of people… those officials should be held accountable.
Have your esteemed and courageous legal counsel explain judicial estoppel to you, “April.” You’ve already won a judgment from American Airlines for the injuries you and your son suffered when their 757 crashed into the Pentagon, and have told a WaPo interviewer that you still have feelings of paranoia when you smell jet fuel or drive near airports. You were also quite outspokenly against illegal immigration right after 9/11 for reasons I’ll leave up to you to explain. If you still live in the DC area, please feel free to contact some of the local civilian first responders who came to your aid on 9/11, and ask them what the crash site looked like to them. There’s a list at this link to assist you, and almost every organization on it has a web site that’s very easy to find with an Internet search:
http://sites.google.com/site/wtc7lies/911pentagonflight77evidencesummary
You begin your new lawsuit by claiming that the defendants failed to evacuate a building they had no way of knowing was targeted in the al Qaeda suicide attacks of 9/11, and in ~17 minutes, when it’s unclear that any of them had even heard the FAA notification to our air defenses that AA 77 had been hijacked and was off course with its transponder turned off, and also claim that they were responsible for not shooting down the hijacked plane, which would have been the first shoot-down of a hijacked airliner over the US in history. You go on to allege, despite no evidence whatsoever and with no credible eyewitness corroboration, that a plane didn’t “really” crash into the Pentagon, and that your injuries were the result of planted explosives or a missile.
Have you returned American Airlines’ money to them, or are you content trying to profit from two or more mutually inconsistent claims, the second of which is replete with dishonesty, while being lauded by the 9/11 “truth movement” as a whistle blower? GeeDubya’s misguided, costly, and catastrophic Iraq blunder has nothing to do with the validity of your lawsuit, and no judge in his right mind would tolerate your absurdities in his courtroom, even a Bush cousin who I admit should have disqualified himself.
Your underlying case was already tossed out with prejudice more than a year ago, and this rehash of it should result in jail time and hefty fines for once again tying up a federal court with frivolous litigation. It might “help u in some therapeutic manner,” and it would certainly be a relief to those of us who pay taxes to fund the US legal process, as well as a vindication for the innocent passengers and crew on AA 77. You have no idea what it means to be “upfront and honest,” but you did manage to get a few things right in your response. The Pentagon shouldn’t have been attacked, and neither should the WTC (for the second time in ~8 years, and by some of the same people who committed the 9/11 atrocity), the 2 US embassies in Africa in 1998, and the USS Cole in Aden in 2000.
I was trained as a soldier too, and you’re a total disgrace to the US Army I served in.
Albury, thank you for your response. I did share I was no Einstein. I have done more research and reviewing regulations than you can imagine. I don’t need your links. And as I recall, you weren’t there with us. You didn’t lobby with us. Nor were you in the closed hearings or meetings. So you will never understand the issues I advocate. However, you can help assist with my unanswered questions that remain. Please explain for this audience how a plane vaporizes upon impact and leave dead bodies? You will help alot of people. I’ve had Scientist explain the process that causes evaporation. Yet noone could explain how a plane could vaporize upon impact and leave dead bodies. This is one of the official statements. U think I will engage 2 argue with U?? I won’t. Plane, Trains, or Automobiles. The events of 9/11 traumatized me in ways I will never be able to explain. This will disgrace you even more. I was left on the lawn with my child on my chest. I didn’t have enough rank for anyone walking around the Pentagon to be concerned. So u see my rank isn’t what’s important. I waited seemed like a long time 2 be taken to the Hospital. Guess what? I had a chance to look around at the devastation. Fortunately, a Good Samaritan stopped to help myself and child get to the Hospital. This will blow your mind. Later that night, my purse that was left inside the Pentagon was found. It was by no clear strategy left at our Hospital. It help provide identity for both myself and child. I was Jane Doe 1 and 2. My son was Baby John Doe 1. They didn’t bring him to me until identity was proven. Like I said, I am no Einstein. Please explain how the wallet remained intact with the money hanging out with no burns?? Would this situation be better for you? Is it more easy to swallow if I was in a 9 car pile up on the highway?? I am car number 7. My car was damaged and I got hurt. Would u understand the purpose of my claim in that situation?? Would u consider me a money hungry person after filing a claim?? No. Yet you try to scandalize my name. I didn’t cause 9/11. Why should I bear the burden of cost of recovery?? Furthermore, people should be accountable whether their actions were intentional or not. It isn’t honorable to evade accountability. You need to do more research on those who capitalized off our suffering to profit. As I stated, I didn’t walk out of there alone. Be mindful, there are other soldiers and civilians who will be viable witnesses when we reach that point. I guess you will become disgraced by them as well. I can assure you won’t like their statements at all. No doubt, our enemies hates us. I now understand the scope of Terrorist Cells in the United States of America. I take no pleasure in the death of Osama. However, he deserved whatever actions taken against him. As well as every other Terrorist. Regardless of who they are. The Bible teaches me not to rejoice when my enemies fall. Nevertheless, the United States had the capabilities to stop the events of Sept 11th. Osama Bin Laden wasn’t at Otis Air Force Base. Osama Bin Laden wasn’t sitting there remaining inactive while being told a plane was 5 mile out. Osama Bin Laden wasn’t a participant to manage security incidents in the lockout. Nor did he read the August 6th Presidential Daily Briefing. Oh yeah, Osama was the topic,”Presidential Daily Briefing
bin Ladin Determined to Strike in US
August 6, 2001.” Again, this isn’t about me. You are attacking me to cause others to lose focus on the real issues. However, you fail to realize you only make others more interested. Thank u! Who profit U stated ,” I was trained as a soldier too, and you’re a total disgrace to the US Army I served in.” My response is your thoughts of me don’t matter. You are free to contact my Attorney to discuss why legal briefs are drafted in the manner as you stated. I know you know how to reach them. My lawyers aren’t in hiding. Your thoughts of me are insignificant. I hope it helps you to slam me. You were a soldier than you understand my next statements. I received an Honorable Discharge in both the National Guard and Regular Army. I was Distinguished Honor Graduate, performing in the 90-100% range for APFT and above the standards in CIT. Consistently and successfully completing task well above my pay grade. It was a great honor to serve my Country as a woman. I would be a disgrace to any soldier who compromise for the wrong reasons. I have no regrets in my service. However, I have much to say about the poor services that Veterans receive. Unfortunately serving as a female was no easy task, during my service I spent most of time ducking and dodging men who only wanted to reduce me via sexual trauma. Not because they cared, or wanted to get to know me. For some because I was better than them. So it was their sick way to reduce me. Just as your attacks with clear attempts to cast doubts on my character is your sick attempt to reduce me.
Nevertheless, I have the certificates, letters to verify my statement. Who cares if I disgrace you?? The orders soldiers are to obey should be lawful. There were a number of regulatory violations on Sept 11th as well. Since you are soldier you should know that.
I will provide a link to my official website. I am updating to provide a slam board. It will give you and others like you the opportunity to post. It give those like yourself and opportunity to deal with your misplaced anger. The points you mention have already been hashed and rehashed. I attended the Commission hearings. And was able to provide my questions to the assigned Commissioner. It appears that those who share your feeling think along the same lines. This isn’t about me. Obviously you have some problem with me. Your responses cause me to conclude that you have been keeping track of me which is a little disturbing. U don’t have all the facts. U have bits and pieces thus formulating a jaded puzzle. My lawyers are well capable of handling themselves. They don’t need you to ascert certain points or facts. However, we realize you utilize and hide behind blogs, like a coward, for the purpose of smear tactics. As oppose to calling those lawyers and speaking with them on the matter. I hope the best for you. I hope u learn better techniques to deal with your misplaced anger. I know some great Neuropsychiatrist and psychologist who could help. All the best to you!
Response 2 Albury, “hahahahaha.” Even in your response you leave out information that has already been made public. I won’t rehash this matter in detail. I didn’t cause 9/11. Nor did I cause any official to make contradicting statements. So it appears they have a problem with being upfront and honest. I haven’t stated any contradictions that have caused harm or deaths to American by the thousand. IF I did, I am woman enough to admit when I am wrong or caused harm. I would have accepted accountability for my missteps like an adult. There is no shame in my game. I don’t have anything to hide. Find a way to cope with your misplaced anger. You stated,”were responsible for not shooting down the hijacked plane, which would have been the first shoot-down of a hijacked airliner over the US in history.” However, you fail to mention the longstanding protocol for shoot down. Why?Albury. This isn’t about me. Who is responsible for protecting the airspace?? Are you admitting for this audience that the truth of the matter. The monies were diverted and that the Department of Defense the symbol of security isn’t really protected?? You concerned about the Taxpayers dollars. Go find old Goverment Accountability Office Reports and justify the spending regarding the Department of Defense. Let’s not forget the strange announcement prior to Sept 11th. Money disappearing?? At the Pentagon?? Now that is absurd. Or is that incompetence gone wild?? Money doesn’t disappear unless all the Magicians want it to. Can you admit there existed some very skilled Magicians to lose that level of money?? Let me remind you of the following”,Mineta testified before the 9/11 Commission that Cheney was aware of special orders concerning a plane heading toward Washington. Mineta said: “During the time that the airplane was coming into the Pentagon, there was a young man who would come in and say to the Vice President the plane is 50 miles out,the plane is 30 miles out.and when it got down to the plane is 10 miles out, the young man also said to the vice president ‘do the orders still stand?’ And the Vice President turned and whipped his neck around and said “Of course the orders still stand, have you heard anything to the contrary?” Obviously they were tracking the plane. This would be the time to make history shoot the plane and save lives. Regardless of transponders being off. Read the regulations. The fighter jets were capable of stopping that plane 10 miles out. IF the order was 2 handle this in the final minutes that plane would have been shot down. Yet this statement along with others give ever implications that people were on standby not allowed 2 do anything. I provided some of the questions for my designated Commissioner. I was one of few others who got their questions asked during the 9-11 Commission Hearings. I know the response to very direct questions. You don’t. If there were exercises or games that day. It was very easy for those in place 2 go live and respond. Even in this moment there was an opportunity to protect. Need I remind you the following was made public,”It now appears that PDAS was used by Cheney to implement on the morning of 9/11 a new policy issued on June 1, 2001 that provided for a “stand down” protocol that replaced a long-standing shootdown order for hijacked and suspected hijacked planes. The new order transferred the authority to shoot down aircraft from Pentagon and NORAD military commanders to the President, Vice President, or Secretary of Defense.” Please tell this audience why would then VP Cheney change very long -standing shootdown polices in June 2001?? I mean months before the attack. We never really got a straight forward answer.
However, you stated, You have no idea what it means to be “upfront and honest.” This statement would imply that you know me. U don’t. Or do you?? Therefore I would appreciate that you would cease and desist from your attempts to mischaracterize. Make sure you don’t cross the line and commit slander, etc…. Stay tuned. My official website will address all the cases ever filed on my behalf. Look forward to your log in! Take care!
April,
I read your complaint, and the judge’s analysis and order dismissing it. I have an idea for a different approach, that takes into account what the judge said, and ought to be less vulnerable to that type of objection. (Common law nuisance/negligence, focused on your experience and a simple allegation that something hit the building and somebody is liable, to be determined in discovery, to be filed in Arlington County court.) I wrote to your lawyer, Mr. Ndanusa, about it; he says he likes it but it’s Mr. Veale’s decision. May I communicate with you more about this?
April,
If I were you, I would sue John Doe 1-99, and simply allege that SOMEBODY deliberately caused damage to the building and tortiously caused the plaintiff’s injuries, and leave it to discovery to establish exactly what happened and who caused it. Let’s see them dismiss THAT for being insufficiently factual or too delusional!
I think I might also include a list of the expected first round of discovery: security camera tapes now in possession of the FBI; depositions; etc. Start with the undeniable event that you witnessed and work outward; don’t start at the presumed top. Leave Cheney or anybody specific out of it, until discovery implicates them. Just get past the motion-to-dismiss stage and get into discovery!
Regarding whether the complaint should be long or short: I would argue that in a highly political case where the judge is biased, the complaint should say only what is legally impeccable, because the judge will pick on the weakest points and ignore the strongest points. I think hypertechnicality is what is needed at this stage. So everything should be, as obviously as possible, a “well-pleaded factual allegation” to get away from the accusation of being “mere conclusions”.
Sure. Pass me your number.
And Susan Lindauer, too!
https://coto2.wordpress.com/author/slindauer2010/
Rod if u can provide me with your contact info. I really do consider all feedback. Work is being done on the appeal. This isn’t about me. Albury, has misplaced anger and needs to deal with that in a positive way. I don’t say that lightly. As u know all types of responses will be thrown at us. Judicial Estoppel won’t be successful. Why? taking a position in a prior litigation isn’t sufficient 2 invoke judicial estoppel. The statement Albury reference was taken from my medical records. That isn’t me ascerting the official story or a position. Anyone should b concerned about the competence of the Airlines when such events take place like Sept 11th. There is no indication today they are any better. Again, I was on the inside of the building. I wouldn’t be the one to state or address a position on what or if anything hit the Pentagon. Be ever mindful, the Airlines should have been held accountable as well. This is based on a laundry list of reasons that have already been made public. They aren’t the only ones who should be held liable/accountable. I was inside the building on that day. I shared what happen after surviving and walking out and being left on the grass with my child on my chest. That statement Albury references was not the sole position the Judge placed reliance upon. I had a great deal of difficulty dealing with the event of 9/11, the treatment afterwards, and the contradictions from officials whom I placed my confidence. I wanted 2 believe what they stated. However, I only found contradictions. Things didn’t add up. I had a responsibility at that point based on what military knowledge I maintain along with regulations and policies for which I reviewed. Further, alot of information began to surface much later that wasn’t considered at the time of that case Albury references. Regardless, I signed up to sacrifice my life for this country. A large portion of my life was willingly sacrificed for my country. I expect them 2 do better in so many ways by those who were directly impacted by Sept 11th. Most importantly, they should be held accountable.
Hi April-
I needn’t remind you that your case was tossed out with prejudice on March 15 of last year in a US district court in New York presided over by Denny Chin, who’s most likely not a member of the Bush family and had no other reason to recuse himself. He ruled that your claims were “factually baseless…fanciful, fantastic, and delusional,” not because of any lack of interest in truth and justice, but because they’re contradictory, incoherent, irrational, and without merit or corroboration.
You’re correct in pointing out that I wasn’t there, but thousands of others were, and you wouldn’t be the only one blowing the whistle if there were any validity to your claims at all. 125 people inside the Pentagon were killed by the crash of AA 77, and the experience that you and little Elisha endured must have been extremely traumatic, but it doesn’t validate your claims against the defendants you’ve selected to target with your lawsuit, and I think it’s safe to assume that you weren’t there when the passenger remains were pulled from what was left of the airliner, nor are you a crash scene investigator, forensics expert, or otherwise qualified to assess what happened, especially when your claims are at odds with those of the overwhelming majority of the people who were there and have those qualifications.
You’ve brought up a number of issues in your reply to me that have nothing to do with the lawsuit we’re discussing, so please stick to the topic. A 3-judge panel issued the same opinion on 4/27/11 that was handed down by a different court in March of last year, and has given you 30 days from that date to provide written cause not to assess you and your attorneys $15,000 for which you’re jointly and severally liable, for filing a frivolous and vexatious lawsuit you can reasonably be assumed to have known with certainty that you had no chance of winning. Your response by 5/27/11 to that court order should be your foremost priority at this point, and I’ve previously cited some of the obvious inconsistencies in your claims that you and your attorneys will have to address in that response.
I’d be especially interested in knowing why you’re now claiming that a plane crash didn’t injure you and Elisha, but are blaming the defendants for not stopping a specific plane in ~17 minutes, or evacuating the Pentagon, one of many targets in the DC area that it might have hit. How would the people you’re accusing of not preventing your injuries have known what building Hani Hanjour was planning to hit, and how would they have intercepted a bomb or missile, since you’re also claiming that no plane, including AA 77, crashed there anyway? I’m sure that American Airlines would also be interested in your response, since you’ve already sued them and collected for something that was apparently not their fault.
Albury, no you don’t need to remind me. I’ve already reviewed a draft. Please know it will be submitted before the 30 day deadline. I am in no way avoiding you. I don’t want you or anyone like you to think I have backed down. Your agenda is very clear. You appear 2 be an individual that is very off. Please seek help. Your angry is very misplaced. U can go to the centerfor911justice.org. Stay tuned. A copy of our response will be posted. Please take time to review all information. As I shared, my lawyers aren’t hiding. U can contact them at anytime. Take care!
I wasn’t aware that Ms. Gallop’s lawsuit that’s being politely discussed here included or even mentioned the NIST investigations, Willy, or that she and her lawyers had presented any evidence to support contrary claims about the WTC collapses. Is there another April Gallop lawsuit against the NIST people that I haven’t seen? My comments may soon be blocked here in someone’s sincere interest in the truth and an intelligent discussion thereof, but I will probably still be able to get the link to it if you post it.
btw, kudos to whoever calls the shots here and hasn’t banned me.
It is not a “form of honor” to be blocked repeatedly from discussions on 9/11 truth movement “forums,” hybridrogue1, and it should be an embarrassment to the people who do it or condone it. I feel that I’ve conducted myself properly here and have done my best to stay on topic, so banning me shouldn’t even be an issue.
I haven’t gratuitously shown Ms. Gallop any disrespect, and she’s been quite cordial to me also, as well as being kind enough to provide a more personal explanation to us of the claims in her lawsuit, which we should all be free to evaluate here. It’s unfortunate that anyone would want to interfere with that process, which is an underlying right in a free society.
Great spam job, hybridrogue1. Could you at least start your portion of an intelligent, on-topic discussion? Once again, how does someone hold an airline accountable for injuries sustained by explosives secretly planted in her workplace, or missiles fired at it? Does American Airlines or a subsidiary plant bombs and shoot missiles, or are they pretty much in the commercial aviation field?
Hi April: My kudos also go out to you, takes real moxie to go straight on with ” THEM” . As far as what I’ve seen but please don’t hold me to it because I wasn’t there and at the time still pretty dumb about the whole affair so I’ve only been clueing in through DVD’s (several). My understanding is, all they found was some pieces of sheet metal scattered about and not much and the one intact turbine (Loose Change) they found was from a completely different aircraft. The consensus was, they found nothing of human remains in relationship to the aircraft and ended up burying the site under tons of gravel within days of the incident. If I stand to be corrected please do so, it’s just something in buddys bent that makes me ask the question.
You have as much evidence for your claim that American Airlines was “bowing” to anything but their own investigative findings and other perfectly honest and highly professional and competent ones by the NTSB and other agencies as Ms. Gallop has for her explosives and/or missile claim, but you’ve added some humor and variety to the personal attacks on me. If I have to explain to you why court cases are thrown out when a plaintiff collects on one claim and then completely contradicts the same winning allegation in another, you’re not bright enough to be in this conversation. Take up bowling or something.
With just about 1/3 of the people of the US highly suspicious of 9/11 and the rest of the world to a much higher percentage I doubt that Albury can be convinced that there might be something rotten in Rome here. I think maybe he’d better fasten his seatbelt because this is probably only the first round of legal issues coming at THEM. I’ve tried bowling, it’s OK, you should try it sometime. My main fascination is airplanes and aviation. 9/11’s the biggest story on subject. Maybe you need to do more homework.
Exactly like NIST, roggie, and you’re now avoiding any substantive and specific responses to the topic here, to the NIST WTC findings, the NTSB investigative findings of the AA 77 crash, American Airlines’ own investigative findings of the crash of one of their 757s, and all sorts of other much more important matters than what you think of me. If you’re questioning whether SEs with doctorates and PE certification, and several teams of seasoned crash scene investigators are competent and professional, why don’t you think they are? There was no evidence of a controlled demolition at the WTC, and a hijacked AA 77 crashed into the Pentagon on 9/11, so do you expect professionals to indulge your fantasies? Are these highly educated and very experienced people potato heads too?
Try doing your homework somewhere besides 9/11 “truth movement” web sites, verity. Reality beckons and you’re missing it.
Albury, u 2 r intentionally refusing 2 leave out information 2 look right. Based on your responses your job is 2 cast negative aspiration upon me due to the nature of my claims. It doesn’t compare 2 those who have capitalized off of 9/11. Along with the efforts to shortchange those victimized by these events. You are attempting 2 mislead as well. You stated” If I have to explain to you why court cases are thrown out when a plaintiff collects on one claim and then completely contradicts the same winning allegation in another, you’re not bright enough to be in this conversation.” U don’t know what u r saying when u make reference 2 this as a winning allegation. Who r u 2 identify any form of settlement on any case as a win?? Not rational. The issue of Judicial Estoppel was briefly addressed in a past post. Judicial Estoppel won’t be successful in this case or any other that could possible take place. Yet u state the same thing in different words expecting 2 get different responses. Signs of Insanity??? I don’t know? Please get help. Then you keep repeating about me collecting like this is more horrid then the capitalization off of the victimization of 9/11?? There are somethings I can’t discuss…at this time. It doesn’t mean I won’t find a way 2 address. I repeat I was inside the Pentagon on Sept 11th. I know what myself and others saw on the way out. We were told it was a plane. It is still hard for me and others 2 come to this conclusion based off our experience. Planes, Trains, Missiles, Automobiles. IF I saw different then I would say otherwise. The Pentagon should have never been hit. Period. There was a window of opportunity 2 prevent the fate of those at the Pentagon. If you or anyone experience a situation that results in harm. You have a right to make claims. Stay tuned to my official page. I plan on discussing these so called settlements etc. Of course, after I am briefed what I can or can’t reveal. Time passes. Information come forward changes everything.
Hi April-
You’re correct in your assertion that I’m intentionally refusing to leave out information, but I didn’t include all of it because I don’t have every detail of your two or more cases against various defendants, as you and the others involved on both sides of them do. If you do not feel that being awarded damages from American Airlines indicates a winning allegation from you and your attorneys, then I hope you didn’t sign the papers releasing them from further claims. If you plan to contest the terms of settlement however, I wouldn’t recommend using any of the material in the pending APRIL GALLOP, etc. vs. DICK CHENEY, et al. lawsuit. Hybridrogue1 obviously isn’t bright enough to be in this conversation, but you and counsel have enough problems already.
Best regards,
Albury
Did a “corrupt judicial system beholdin’ to the status quo” write Ms. Gallop’s complaint, roggie1, or force her to submit it, or did she and her attorneys do that on their own? Once again, how does someone hold an airline accountable for injuries sustained by explosives secretly planted in her workplace, or missiles fired at it? Does American Airlines or a subsidiary plant bombs and shoot missiles, or are they pretty much in the commercial aviation field?
“Myself” is wondering why “yourself” won’t answer simple, straightforward questions, roggie. How does someone hold an airline accountable for injuries sustained by explosives secretly planted in her workplace, or missiles fired at it? Does American Airlines or a subsidiary plant bombs and shoot missiles, or are they pretty much in the commercial aviation field?
Up yours Potato! er Albury
You and Ms. Gallop have adequately answered my questions by not answering them, roggie. Thanks.
Roggie rambles: “In mass media framing is a very well-researched subject. The technique refers to a technique of [blah, blah, blah…]”
Please try the technique of actually answering a direct question with a coherent and relevant answer, roggie. Gee, what a concept…
This is getting old. Where’s the off switch
Judge Denny Chin has already heard the Gallop v. Cheney case and ruled on it, roggie, and so have Judges Jose A. Cabranes, Ralph K. Winter, and John M. Walker, so my airline question has been answered, but since you have this wonderful grasp of legal concepts, have you filed an amicus brief on Ms. Gallop’s behalf? That’s at least 3 more stupid little kids who might benefit from your keen insight.
The Cabranes court has asked that someone explain why they shouldn’t impose the sanctions mentioned in their ruling, so instead of spinning your wheels on here ducking my questions, why don’t you try being helpful? You have ~3 weeks.
Reads to me, this person is having his 15 minutes of fame and they’re baiting you. Reminds me of my first encounter with a computer way back in the dinosaur age where PCs were never thought of as much more than a clever toy. This person was in a philosophical debate with some Commodore 64 software program. The computer was coming back at him the same way as our buddy is here. There’s no point in debating with this person, they’ll just keep coming back with crap. You’re trading gold or pewter.
Touche’ HR. Albury, go tilt at another windmill will you, you’ve gone way past the point of being annoying
Going way past the point of being annoying was just defined here, verity:
http://www.ca2.uscourts.gov/decisions/isysquery/89164008-5d27-4165-addf-881e4209b8bd/1/doc/10-1241_opn.pdf#xml=http://www.ca2.uscourts.gov/decisions/isysquery/89164008-5d27-4165-addf-881e4209b8bd/1/hilite/
thanks to Judge Jose A. Cabranes and his 2 associates.
Albury; Maybe you might want to check out Dr. Steve Pieczeniks interview with Alex Jones. It was posted 4 days ago and is very fresh but you being a denier I very much doubt will. If you’re annoyed, tough shit. It’s been my pleasure. Have a good life asshole.
You know, once we’ve ventured down this path, there’s no real knowing what the truth actually is. We are on a quest to keep looking. The only thing I’m relatively certain of is, that we live in a paradigm that we’ve been manipulated to grasp a reality that has been engineered to lead us away from our true selves and the potential that each of us possess, to be harnessed to the will of a cruel overlord that has no sympathy and is out of touch with the true nature of things. The only guiding light we each individually have is what our gut tells us to be true, that’s being in touch with our higher selves but too many discount their instincts. We live in a harmony and all there really is, is the moment. Lets change it from the sour note that it’s become. Our garden’s in the great symphony of the Cosmos, lets get in tune.
It’s Saturday night, this is a few beers later. sorry for the philosophical rant but the reality of it is no I’m not.
Win €1 000 000:-! (28 January 2011)
The Heiwa Challenge has been open for almost a year and there is no successful Challenger / structure ! Maybe €10 000:- was too little to fight for. So I raise the winnings to €1 000 000:-. Come on terrorists and salary slaves! Show that you can really destroy skyscrapers and similar structures by flying planes into the tops. Do not try to fool me with fake animations ‘live on TV’ !
Send your entry (description of structure verified result of test/video) to Anders Björkman, 6 rue Victor Hugo, F 06 240 Beausoleil, France, anders.bjorkman@wanadoo.fr
PS – No winner by March 8, 2011!
More info: http://heiwaco.tripod.com/chall.htm
Considering the fact that you have absolutely no intention of paying anyone anything, Anders, why not make it 100 times as much? Since 236 of the 283 columns in each WTC tower were in plain sight–a tough break for your “truth movement” for sure–most of the contributing factors in the tower collapse hypotheses put forth in NCSTAR 1 can easily be verified from videos and photos, as well as being described by numerous live eyewitnesses including NYPD aviation crews, but your “challenge” is for someone to convince you of anything.
If you think the live collapses seen by TV viewers on 9/11, and by thousands of eyewitnesses in NYC, Hoboken, and other nearby locations were animations, I’d suggest putting on another layer of Reynolds Wrap. It’s not just for baking cookies, yanno.
This whole posting has certainly taken on a life of it’s own. I’m certain Rady’s tickled pink by it. Despite all the name calling and other stuff that’s gone down, some pretty heady stuff has come from it. Cheers Rogie, you’re not just a sharp wit but a great orator. Albury has been a good devils advocate but keep an open mind as the rest of us should also. And April, go girl, stay at them, run them down until they’re cowered into a corner, we’re with you. PEACE
You understand the purposes of the NIST WTC collapse investigations about as well as you do legal concepts like judicial estoppel, roggie. The NIST engineers and other experts were not out to satisfy conspiracy theorists; their study was intended to look at the causes of the WTC collapses for the purpose of making building code recommendations that might prevent loss of life in collapses due to fires in other hi-rise buildings, and the recommendations made after NCSTAR 1 and 1A have resulted in some of the quickest code changes in history. They addressed the various alternative scenarios primarily in 2 FAQs released in 2006 and 2007, and also dealt with them somewhat in NCSTAR 1A, giving ample reasons for dismissing them. The fact that secretly planting explosives in busy office buildings and then secretly detonating them is impossible was one consideration, but the obvious fact that no evidence of this controlled demolition was found in the debris makes the entire theory asinine. While NIST didn’t address it, there was also no plausible motive for anyone your 9/11 “truth movement” is slandering and libeling with your paranoid nonsense to have done it.
My condolences for the recent loss of the sub-human who was really the cause of the WTC collapses. Have an OBL cocktail to salute him, i.e. two shots and a splash.
Have you figured out yet how a plaintiff can hold an airline legally accountable for injuries sustained by explosives secretly planted in her workplace or missiles fired at it, roggie?
That’s too bad, roggie. Since you’ve done all of that studying of legal stuff and everything, I was hoping you’d help me with the question about suing airlines for injuries caused by explosives and/or missiles. Maybe the Cabranes court ruling later this month will shed some light on it.
“If a victim is attacked in an alley by a group of an unknown number and one of the perpetrators is discovered and prosecuted for the attack, and later other perperators are found,” and the victim claims after all of them are prosecuted that she wasn’t attacked by that group, but was actually attacked either by Martians or by killer clowns from outer space, then judicial estoppel is usually invoked, roggie, regardless of what you think of the Martians or killer clowns named the second time around by the plaintiff. Sanctions follow if the victim appeals after the new case against entirely different defendants has been tossed out with prejudice.
You might find the system of jurisprudence in Pakistan more to your liking than the one here in the evil and corrupt US, roggie. Here’s a newly-listed upscale property near Abbottabad that may be of interest to you:
3-Story Compound Near Islamabad. Goat Friendly. Handyman Special, Needs Work. Helicopter Accessible. As Seen On TV. Maps/Pics Available at CIA.gov/SEAL
Please don’t let the door hit you in the ass on the way out.
The NIST report concluded that WTC7 collapsed because of Thermal Expansion. The thermal expansion coefficient of steel is lower than that of aluminum. http://www.engineeringtoolbox.com/thermal-expansion-metals-d_859.html
I love the way the 9/11 “truth movement” seamlessly worked President Obama into the yarn after GeeDubya didn’t fulfill your predictions and become dictator for life. You guys are priceless. 🙂
Albury,
to say that something is,
when it is not,
or to say that something is not,
when it is, is false.
And likewise, to say that something is,
when it is,
or to say that something is not,
when it is not, is true.
resistance is futile !
I wonder if this is the longest posting yet on Coto report. Longest I’ve seen. You guys have a nasty game of sandbox going here. Borgs and all. This is being entertaining and very creative.
Why waste your pins on groundless “shill” allegations and personal insults, roggie? Since your hero was recently offed by the US, here’s more research you could do with all of that legal knowledge you possess:
The claim’s been made that President Obama is the first Black man in US history who’s ever been asked to prove that he killed someone. T or F?
Complete idiots made that SNL (non-racist) quip happen, roggie. It takes a special kind of stoopid to claim that OBL’s a “straw man villain.”
Almost as fast as pinning it on him while the buildings were still standing. I wouldn’t trifle with this guy, he’s just baiting you. The best part of this person ran down their mothers leg.
You’re apparently an expert on DNA, a structural engineer, a legal expert, and all sorts of things, roggie:
http://www.thestreet.com/story/11101839/1/osama-bin-ladens-death-confirmed-by-dna-test.html?cm_ven=RSSFeed
Saddam’s DNA test took ~12 hours:
http://www.wired.com/science/discoveries/news/2003/12/61614
Multiple means were used to confirm OBL’s identity, including DNA testing, and the US didn’t have any other use for your hero’s carcass. Prolly great sharksnack.
btw, really classy remark about my mother from your sidekick. You truther dudes rock.
..then again, the story has changed multiple times since… so which version are we to believe.
The War They Wanted, the Lies They Needed
http://www.vanityfair.com/politics/features/2006/07/yellowcake200607
the destruction of videotapes in 2005 ?
Glad you liked it
PS. At least we can now surmise, your not an it.
President Obama doesn’t use the term “war on terror,” and has correctly shifted focus back to al Qaeda while trying to get us out of Bush’s Iraq blunder, something he clearly stated he wanted to do during the 2008 campaign, roggie. He also has never made the claim that the threat from Islamic extremism would end with the capture or death of OBL or anyone else, and there’s no motive for falsely reporting that your hero was offed in Pakistan on May 1. You and your 9/11 “truth movement” are content to fabricate and/or believe alternative “news” simply because it differs from the mainstream accounts.
Well, they’re not so embarrassed to have probably several hundred million people saying, “What a bunch of boobs” Problem is, they’re deadly boobs and it doesn’t seem to matter how much knowledge, logic or common sense is postulated. You are never going to be able to open some peoples eyes, they hang on desperately to their reality because the alternative explanation is scary and would strip them of their tenuously held onto beliefs.
It’s not a matter of us believing whatever comes along as opposed to what’s put out through mainstream, it’s a gut feeling that we’re being lied to and manipulated. It’s about having the guts to go against our fear of the unknown and going against our conditioning and spending the many many hours it takes to relearn a truer reality.
Once you start, the journey becomes never ending but gratifying as we reach these little epiphanies of understanding, it’s about becoming more conscious but when you believe a lie, you’re stuck in the reality you desperately hang onto.
Don’t quote me on this and correct me if you must but the Buddha said;
Don’t believe anything anyone tells you
Don’t even believe me
Believe what you absolutely believe in your heart to be true
” I have a special interest in discussing 9/11 conspiracy theories, and am still looking for one that makes the slightest bit of sense after objectively reading and evaluating them for several years now. I am familiar with most of the conspiracy web sites and what they have to say, as well as with NIST’s NCSTAR1, FEMA’s WTC Building Performance Study, and a number of 9/11 debunking web sites also. The latter tend to be far more logical than the conspiracy sites, and not only express opinions, but back them up with credible sources. The conspiracy theorists frequently make claims with no corroborating evidence at all.”
http://www.opednews.com/articles/WTC-7–A-New-Kind-of-Contr-by-albury-smith-080728-851.html
“The September 11, 2001 collapse of the Salomon Building, or WTC 7 was an atypical controlled demolition where the idea is to start by crossing your fingers and aiming a carefully measured amount of flaming debris from a much taller nearby collapsing hi-rise you’ve just bombed toward a smaller building with a precise quantity of directional charges so that you damage it just severely enough while starting major, uncontrolled fires on multiple floors as a cover for a later implosion of the lower building with high explosives or incendiaries. You evacuate everyone inside who hasn’t already left, establish a safety zone around the targeted building, and set up a transit to monitor its movement as it slowly degrades structurally for six hours or more from the fires. When you finally “pull it,” a catchy new demolition term coined by Larry Silverstein, the long-term lessee of the World Trade Center, and the FDNY to mean “blow up some guy’s modern, almost fully-occupied 15 year-old hi-rise so that he can confess publicly to it later and still collect $861 million in insurance from a dozen different companies to pay off his creditors and rebuild while receiving no income from it for years” the targeted building falls asymmetrically and leaves 12 stories on the north side standing, which, by sheer coincidence in this case, is the side that wasn’t hit by the falling debris you carefully aimed at it almost seven hours previously. You should always use very quiet high explosives that no one can hear from more than a block away, and randomly detonate them hours before the actual collapse, or you can use thermate, but whatever you choose, it must be the type which leaves no evidence on the column ends or any other piece of structural steel in the debris pile afterward, and is unaffected by the fires. This is a very unusual controlled demolition technique which has only recently been discovered by alert members of the 9/11 “truth” movement. It’s highly effective if the debris from the higher building falls exactly where you intended, which it has done every time so far.”
July 30, 2008 at 01:23:19 – by Albury Smith
http://t3.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcQa-XbkG6QMH3iUP-pBTfgx0wov_Qw_xYzcrsgTUwEL_HqxBs4Elw
Thanks Rogie; I figured I’d put it out there irregardless. I’ve known too many people that are too disconnected from their inner feelings and are only able to express anger or distain or have an EEORE complex, Oh well it’s only going to rain anyhow. Must be a bummer having no magic in their lives, life without those little moments of illumination that give us purpose.
If you two could actually debate, roggie, you wouldn’t make every post about me.
Kind of reminds me of the Black Knight in Monty Pythons “In Search of the
Holy Grail’ after getting his arms and legs chopped off hoping up on his balls and head butting our hero calling him a coward because he wouldn’t keep fighting him.
Looking forward to it. This has been very informative and fun. Obviously, Our buddy’s run out of ammo and has resorted from the sublime to the ridiculous. Later
Kudos to the moderator for not banning me, but judging from the lack of any substantive opposition here, it would probably have been the better option. I’m still trying to understand how a plaintiff can legally hold an airline responsible for injuries sustained by explosives secretly planted in her workplace, or missiles fired at it. Do you know whether she gave American Airlines back the money she collected in her previous lawsuit?
See what I mean?
If you or your equally enlightened colleague would be kind enough to explain it to me, roggie, I might have the capacity to understand how a plaintiff in a court of law can hold an airline responsible for injuries sustained by explosives secretly planted in her workplace or missiles fired at it. I’m also wondering if you know whether she gave American Airlines back the money she collected in her previous lawsuit, or whether the current defendants are principals in the airline or something.
Considering that ponderous legal background of yours, I’m sure you understand how important actual facts are.
I think he’s still trying to convince us that we’re deluded but his sense of reality has been shaken. He still hasn’t got it figured that if he’s looking for a definitive answer here, he’s not going to find it because nothing here is going to fit the order of things as he percieves it that he so desperately hangs onto. This has been a few weeks now on this one and he still asks the same question over and over and over again. Talk about being stuck in a rut.
If nothing else, our boy Donald is pretty happy about what went down here.
He no longer has to account for the missing 3.1 trillion dollars. All the records got fried along with anyone that could bring light to the where and why of it. Bullshit luck?
Naw
I can see, you’re having a lot of fun with this. I certainly am, this has provided some good laughs. Thanks Albury for being the straight guy
In addition to 58 of the 59 victims aboard AA 77 being identified through forensics, the hijackers have been DNA matched:
http://www.newsweek.com/2009/01/02/remains-of-the-day.html
Once again, roggie; how can a plaintiff in a court of law can hold an airline responsible for injuries sustained by explosives secretly planted in her workplace, or missiles fired at it? Was American Airlines just being a good sport when they paid Ms. Gallop for the injuries sustained by her and Elisha on 9/11? Were their own crash scene investigators all in on the plot?
Like Arther it’s time to ride off
If nothing else, this is certainly expanding my horizons. THEY invented the internet, I wonder if they considered that we’d use it to educate ourselves the way some of us have been. It does take a considerable expenditure of time and effort to get through the crap. I remember many years ago, I had a teacher that was a real prick wherein I mentioned “they” excruciatingly in forced interchange with him. He was all over me like a bad rash and set me straight that there was no such thing as they. Wish I could have that conversation now. I knew he was wrong then and have been looking ever since. Sorry Albury (not at all) it’s becoming apparent you’re being had. Whatever you are, what this is all about is bringing those of us that don’t buy into your status quo up to speed. You’re either clued out or your agenda’s not accomplishing what you set out to. On that note, keep coming back then, the rest of us have more to discuss.
Roberts, Bernays, and Whitten didn’t have much to say about plaintiffs who hold airlines legally accountable for planted explosives in their workplaces, or for missiles fired at them, roggie. Would you like to share your own thoughts on that?
So that’s how it works. It’s like arm wrestling, whoever is first on the wrist action wins the contest. The ploy here it seems, is who ends up with the posture of devils advocate. Reminds me of trying to have a conversation with a biblethumper. You may be right W, he’s either really dumb or they’re very determined to accomplish an end run around. Stay tuned kiddies, we’ll be right back after a brief message from our sponsors
Sounds like he doesn’t know who Roberts, Berneys and especially that Witten guy. Sounds like he’s a real bad ass
Sorry; Whitten
Looks like Dr. G the first responder really got the ball rolling here Eh?
It goes back a very long time, it seems to be in the dark soul of human nature. At the recent gala event put on by them in England on the 29th at a time when all this is going on, it all smells of being staged as a massive distraction that portends to some bad shit coming our way while the “Queen” is dressed in her cute little hand sewn yellow “RA” costume with the radiating sun beams around the collar and the all seeing eye suggestion of it. It took many generations of selective breeding to turn into blue eyes and fair complexion except they made many mistakes along the way what with hemophilia, “Deliverance” banjo players et al but they missed the one that doesn’t show, chronic sociopathy. I noticed, no one from Iraq was a contender, what, with depleted uranium and all that.I wonder what they have planned in the future, with Chernobyl and the real biggie, Fukushima. That’s what they have to do though is steer new blood out of the herd to keep their bloodlines from becoming more diffused. May be they may have to bring a geiger counter with them on dates. Talk about vampirism while giving legality to their parasite money changers. Iraq The fix is in folks. Stay tuned to the next episode of “As The World Turns”
Got it, I’ll get it. Agent Smith (can you prove bombs in the Pentagon) is missing a hell of an education here. No doubt, He’s probably still stuck in the episode of Alfred E Bush JR. and his sidekick Dickhead Cheney (or is it the other way around) having no complicity in any of this
“Sounds like he doesn’t know who Roberts, Berneys [sic] and especially that Witten [sic] guy. Sounds like he’s a real bad ass.”–verity2
Sounds like you got one spelling right out of three, verity, and you’re the ones who brought up these three irrelevant names. Priceless. 🙂
Sorry, I flunked spelling in grade 3. But I doubt you have a clue who any of them are anyhow
The greater necessity of our time is to cleanse the enormous mass of mental garbage in our consciousness which has turned public life into a mass disease,
without this domestic cleansing we will be unable to start seeing and if we can’t see, we can’t think
Thomas Merton
Abbey of Gethsemaine in Kentuckey
Who are Berneys and Witten?
it’s…alive
It’s. Alive
IT”S ALIVE
sob
I may have flunked grade three spelling Albury
But it was long and hard on you
unlike a part of your anatomy you dick
Keep it coming Albury
I know it’s unkind to pick on a mental midget
But this is being too much fun
As Maverick in “Top Gun” said
I crack me up
I heard it takes 4 days to ship the stuff from China on their FASTEST ship.
They must be psychic
All those potatos
nothing better to do
than sit at his keyboard
he hasn’t seen it in years
have another hostess twinkie
you dinkie
he has to squat to pee
Roggie, who reads about legal stuff a whole bunch, opines sagely with his idea of a complete sentence in English: “Even though there is nothing intelligent to say about plaintiffs who hold airlines legally accountable for planted explosives in their workplaces, or for missiles fired at them.”
Circuit Judge Jose A. Cabranes said something very intelligent about that exact topic on April 27, roggie:
http://www.ca2.uscourts.gov/decisions/isysquery/89164008-5d27-4165-addf-881e4209b8bd/1/doc/10-1241_opn.pdf#xml=http://www.ca2.uscourts.gov/decisions/isysquery/89164008-5d27-4165-addf-881e4209b8bd/1/hilite/
If an intelligent response to this ruling isn’t forthcoming in ~12 days, jail time may be offered in place of the $15,000. Stay tuned.
More from Shakespeare–The Tempest (Sea Dirge):
“Full fathom five thy father lies;
Of his bones are coral made;
Those are pearls that were his eyes;
Nothing of him that doth fade,
But doth suffer a sea-change
Into something rich and strange.
Sea-nymphs hourly ring his knell:
Hark! now I hear them, —-
Ding, dong, bell.”
US SEALs only rang your hero’s knell twice, roggie. Osama bin Swimmin’.
Sorry for further analogy but kind of reminds my of the scene in Rocky Horror Picture Show where Dr. Frankenstein (Tim Curry) beats down Eddy (Meatloaf)
with a shrug and sheepish grin
Well; You know it’ll go on for 12 more days anyhow as he reminded us until we see what April has up her sleeve or whether it dies on the vine then. With the former, he’ll carry it on into infinity, he’s got a pathological aversion to losing an argument it seems. If it doesn’t go any further, He’ll post see I told you, I was right but missing the picture all together or trying a bait and switch. I don’t think it matters anyhow, with this many posts, only a few are following and nobody new is coming on to follow the action anyhow. To change the subject, I watched the 60 Minutes clip on sovereign persons. They certainly have it down in the psy ops department. It appears to be a ploy to expand they’re description of labeling “terrorists”. That would be just about anyone that’s disgruntled with the current way things are going. When a person’s out on the street with no prospects, one does what they need to do to survive which is whatever it takes. They haven’t figured that conspiracy theory is where a person begins trying to understand how things got so FUBAR. Then the re-education begins for those that dig deeper. It appears to be a desperate measure to steer the paradigm that’s coming down shift away. A finger in the hole in the dyke won’t stop the flood. What’s your thoughts W
I’m with you there. I’ll look forward to carrying on the conversation somewhere else where we don’t have to deal with monkeybutt. You won shithead sayonara
Roggie gushes stupidly: “Your whole argumentation is based on ‘Appeal to Authority.'”
When someone presents an appeal in a court run by Judge Jose Cabranes, roggie, he’s the authority, as you should know from all of that reading you do about legal stuff and everything. If Ms. Gallop had wanted a different authority, she should have stuck with presenting her case to Kevin “Jihad” Barrett, Alex Jones, or someone more to her liking.
OBL has also bragged about his part in 9/11 on a number of occasions, roggie. If you were being falsely accused worldwide of a crime of that magnitude, would one alleged interview 9+ years ago be your only denial of it?
http://www.mideastweb.org/osamabinladen2.htm
http://www.fbi.gov/news/testimony/the-terrorist-threat-confronting-the-united-states
What I also read is that Al Qaeda besides being an Arabic slang phrase for the Toilet also means “the file” and was where the Mujahideen operatives used to co-ordinate through a computer file set up in Saudi Arabia. With the CIA having set up the Mujahideen in the first place was how they kept track of things. Can you put any more light to that?
Well considering that Brezinski’s handlers were of the order that instigated the Soviet republic into being in the first place, it was always in their power to take them down when it suited them and make a fortune in the process.
Sorry misspelled Brzezinski and misused republic but they did call it the USSR. Booking out for the night will take it up later. This is fascinating, you’ve got quite a knowledge base
The evil US must have convinced someone that they offed an al Qaeda leader named Osama bin Laden, roggie:
http://www.dawn.com/2011/05/17/death-toll-climbs-to-98-in-charsadda-suicide-attack.html
Take a break from all of your reading about legal stuff and everything and learn more about al Qaeda by reading The Looming Tower, a Pulitzer Prize-winning book by Lawrence Wright on the evolution of Islamic extremism since the ’40s.
According to Steven Hawkings most recent posting. There’s no heaven, it’s all a fairy tale pretty much makes this part of the discussion a moot point anyhow depending on what one buys into. My wishes to him is that he’d hasten to the point where he can realize whether he’s right or wrong. Now that we’re through Christian extremism and they’ve had their way with us, I guess it’s Islams turn to step up to the plate to hold our focus. Thing is, most people are secular, it’s just that some are more onto things than others. There’s many rabbit holes to go down. I just wonder if Islam bashing is nothing more than a big bait and switch to distract us from examining Zionism.
Who’s Islam-bashing, roggie, and what would you like to examine about Israel? Should they just simply accept the fact that “Palestinians” like to fire rockets into their civilian areas once in a while?
A firecracker against a hellfire missle is not my idea of a fair contest but after all, they did steal their land. Someone here needs to remove the blinders. I wonder who?
Just to add a PS to it. Wasn’t it Joe Bidden that said, you don’t have to be a Jew to be Zionist
Funny, everytime you see news footage of protesters in Isreal. Their signs are always anti zionism right up to Rabbis protesting. Now that speaks loud
I have nothing whatsoever against Islam or any other religion, roggie. Why do you think Israel was stolen from “Palestinians”?
Now that’s the first good question you’ve asked. I just hope this isn’t a vain attempt to do a lead off. A clue; follow the money
Should religious and secular Jews in the Middle East have the right to defend themselves, roggie, or would they be better off just converting to another religion or being killed?
That seems to be the issue. Everybody thinks they have the inside skinny. Unfortunately the slimeballs that currently run things have been wiping out whole cultures that they either can’t subjugate or figure are too genetically inferior, now the nazi’s are looking at us. Very creepy. I’ve read a bit of it so far, I’m still looking for the book itself. I think no one wants to carry it.
Whom are you calling nazi’s [sic], verity?
Not to worry, I wasn’t referring to you. You’re a typical blue pill taker trying to defend something you don’t have a clue about. You need to stop drinking flouridated water, eating McDonalds and other GMO processed jokes they pass off for food and eliminating toxins from yourself, you might be able to regain some of the 30 points on your IQ scale you lost sometime ago. There’s no guarantees but it might help you to start clueing in to the fact that you took the spin hook line and sinker. You don’t realize it but WW here has been providing you with an in to really seeing whats up. I’m getting there but you’re way out of your league here.
May I suggest that you two deep thinkers look up the definition of “anti-Semite,” roggie? Since you also appear to be geographically-challenged, please feel free to do at least a cursory study on the history of Judaism. Jewish people were in “Palestine” millenia before Muhammad, and stole land from no one. Israel has a significant Muslim population, and it’s under no pressure to convert to Judaism, nor is anyone else in the world.
I think if you go back millenia the population count planet wide was significantly less so there was lots of space for everyone and it’s not an issue of anti-semitism here because some of the greatest thinkers and dissidents among us are and have been Jewish. With 90% of Jews being Ashkenazi. Whos conversion was relatively recent in our history and not being recognized by those that consider themselves as being the pure ones. I think your arguement of who owns the lands is mute. I’d say the Palistinians were there when they came out of Egypt so the this is the second theft of their lands. By the way, who do you think perished in the holocaust? Maybe the whole issue there needs to be examined further
Took the time, which I should have done sometime ago to follow some leads from here and what I discovered led back to msnbc. This has raised a red flag with me. I’ll monitor a little longer but this is getting into dangerous territory. Time may be not to push this any further.
Old German saying;
Ve get too soon olt
And too late shmart
It reads to me, again they’ve been put there in harms way as the sacrificial lambs while the other hides behind anti semitism. I think the people themselves are clued into what their function is, the reason for dissent. When you discover that the Rothschilds held vast tracts of land in Palestine, there’s little wonder that it’s been in the works for quite some time. Pimplehead is something isn’t he.
When you go back and have a look at early Christianity and the fraud that’s based on where the whole new testament is a fairy tale and all the damage they did. Little wonder we’re where we are in the present. It appears that all this ties in to itself. We live in a totally engineered paradigm designed to feed off of our life energy when you take into consideration that the only true value is our toils. They’re very cleaver where they hold us in bondage through the current financial system, we’re totally manipulated, all so the evil greedy can hoard it all. No wonder other creatures that have had encounters with us run from us while they interact with each other, even predator and prey right up to the time the former gets hungry.
This is good. Butthead’s only an incidental here. I keep coming back because the questions I ask tie together things for me and direct me to where to go to do further research. This is about learning what’s really going on and it seems, the place to look as it’s been suggested here is in deep history. I took your suggestion and joined another link and will watch for awhile to get the feel of it. Obviously, the best way to find it out is to be able to quiz those that have already been down that road and been there were access to information has been open to them. Again, I thank you for your kind consideration, obviously you’re a skilled teacher. You put the point across clear and concise and easy to understand for a layperson such as myself.
Judaism obviously gives you 2 deep thinkers an ethnicity to hate, and a lame excuse to avoid discussing the topic here. Do you have any suggestions for Ms. Gallop and counsel prior to 5/27? If there’s an exception to judicial estoppel in her argument, I must have missed it.
Obviously leatherhead ain’t a chamois
Actually I hope he keeps it up. I’ve got lots of questions to ask. I managed to find Controversy of Zion and Political Ponerology and have them coming. That’ll take me awhile to read but should I be asked whether I’m a conspiracy theorist I’ll be able to say that I study deep history. The whole conspiracy theory thing now seems to me to be a gateway in but the other side of the coin from MSM in the fact that it poses the question. Now it’s time is to find the answer and to just be hung up on it as I know some are is arrested development. It’s obvious from our buddy, that once you’ve taken the blue pill that’s it, go back to sleep, everythings alright, it’s just the way things are nothing you can do about it, keep moving there’s nothing here for you to see.
You’re just a wealth of knowledge, roggie:
1eth·nic
adj \ˈeth-nik\
Definition of ETHNIC
a : of or relating to large groups of people classed according to common racial, national, tribal, religious, linguistic, or cultural origin or background
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/ethnic
This guy’s pathological. What’s the matter buddy? They have enough of you at the bowling alley and told you not to come back?
Just another redneck bigot too stupid to know any better
But he’s like a bad case of genital herpes
He keeps coming back
Is Merriam-Webster in on the evil conspiracies against you too, roggie?
1eth·nic
adj \ˈeth-nik\
Definition of ETHNIC
a : of or relating to large groups of people classed according to common racial, national, tribal, religious, linguistic, or cultural origin or background
[example (from me): JEWS]
Seems to me, you being so hung up on this you’re the antisemite here or maybe a bit of a provocateur?
and our buddy here, intellectually is bringing a set of nail clippers to a gunfight
Once more for the extra slow-witted:
1eth·nic
adj \ˈeth-nik\
Definition of ETHNIC
a : of or relating to large groups of people classed according to common racial, national, tribal, religious, linguistic, or cultural origin or background
[example (from me): JEWS]
btw, will one of you deep thinkers have a response to the Cabranes court by next Friday?
Maybe, maybe not
What you call candid and straightforward is actually petitio principii, roggie. Judicial estoppel is a legitimate legal argument regardless of your unsubstantiated opinion of the court itself.
Well my view of our buddy here is that he’s a Humpty Dumpty. He’s got to keep coming back with this crap because for him to admit that maybe there’s more to it would make the wall he’s sitting become rocky. He came on this site thinking that he has the intellectual capacity to bring us up short. He’s probably been trumping dissidents in his burb and he figures that he’d step up into a higher game and send us scurrying with our tails between our legs only to find out that he’s out of his league. He’ll drag this on into infinity rather than come to a compromise or admit that maybe he’s not clued into the bigger picture. All the kings horses and all the kings men wouldn’t be able to put him back together again after his great fall. It’d be my guess, he’d end up in a bug ward pumped up with prozac but then he’s been consuming it in its raw form so it’s not much of a journey for him. We’ll see what kind of psuedo cleverness he’ll dream up on his retort. I think I could write a comedy skit from what I think up to say to him. I’ve got your six
“and t’ say it iz, when it iz, dat da trooth” – Aris turtle
Should Judge Denny Walker Bush Chin have recused himself last March, roggie? “With prejudice” is a final adjudication, and the only issue before the Cabranes court at this point is sanctions. Humpty Dumpty has a week to respond, but has already fallen. C’est dommage
I’ll reiterate another one of Einsteins sayings;
“Great spirits are always violently opposed by mediocre minds.”
I’ve been in discussions with people that when I’ve tried to stress a point that rocks their grasp of what they believe to be true, they’ve turned nasty. It’s always the same with them. I’ve observed them becoming visibly shaken, then grasp for anything to re-establish their composure. I see the same here with our buddy. Deep thinking is also the result of deep research linked with deep insight. Some are so disconnected that they can never accept what’s obvious to others and to become open is painful to them, it strips them of their interpretation of reality that they so tenaciously cling to. Some of us come away with a new horizon, others just fall back into their familiar rut of arrested growth.
Now you’re having fun W. You don’t get it do you butthead. This is a test case to see how they’ll play their hand and what’s obvious from it, is that it’s from a stacked deck. You think you’re going to enlighten us wayward types? All you’ve managed to do is show yourself to be a fool. Best anyone from here can say to you is, have good life shut up in your little cocoon. Reality will flow around you but should you ever emerge, what are you going to be. Something to behold or just another blood sucking parasite feeding on the life blood of humanity. Time will tell, in nature there’s a purpose to everything.
“Wayward” must be newspeak for “completely out of touch with reality.” The Chin and Cabranes courts aren’t wayward. Stayed tuned. 🙂
I think the court of opinion here has judged many many posts here, who’s out of touch with reality and however the ruling comes back. It’s a known that it’s presided over by the bought and paid for.
I’m signing off here, I’m going to join W and have a weekend. It’ll give you lots of time to come back with lots of fanciful retorts. It’ll be fun bursting them.
Was Denny Chin bought and paid for, v2? The ruling came back on March 15, 2010, and this is just a routine hearing on sanctions for violating an appeals ban.
I hear the acid trip starts tomorrow we all peak in October. As the saying on the front of the bus said: “Furthur”
Von Trier sounds like someone I’d want to chill with. Gotta love someone that can cause an uproar even among the artsy fartsy
Well, most of us here know who sits on the board of directors, them being also the top share holders. Also, it’s set up under corporate law which is British Admiralty law which is presided over in the City of London. It’s language is the language of the sea. Walk into any courtroom and you’ll see, it’s set up like the quarterdeck of a sailing ship etc. etc. etc. No point in going further because most here already know this stuff. Obuma is nothing more than CEO of the Corporation of America and takes his orders from the shareholders and if you’re following COTO, you ain’t one. That also goes for the spooks on marching orders on this site.
P.S. hope nobody here gave away anything like your lifesavings, houses, valuables etc.. Because if you did, I hate to be the bearer of bad news but then you would have noticed, Armageddon didn’t happen today but give them time, they’ll reset the date. They’ve done it before. See what you stirred up butthead
Oh ya, I forgot to mention about all that cute Masonic architecture in Washington DC what with street layouts, statues, monuments, buildings, that type of thing. What’s with that?
And it looks like they’re ready to continue the sweep through Syria and tilted towards Iran all on the American peoples tab which is way over extended. In Canada, the Harper Government, as he chooses to call it has been put on notice regarding illegal and crony re-postings in cabinet and senate. They got in with 40% which is considered to be a majority and the headlong march will continue to allying with the US military industrial complex and completing the NAU loop. The NWO will be further ratified and will be able to add Canadian resources but with with Mexican drug cartel monies. Afterall, it looks like the latter kept the US financial infrastructure from going down the toilet completely in 07
Maybe it’s more than you and I on this post W but should anyone else be following. A good place to check out law is on ” thecrowhouse.com ” on Max Egans Articles Links a couple of my favourites are, John Harris “It’s an Illusion” , Mark McMurtrie and there’s more. It’s been a while since I viewed these but I think there’s a good explanation there about B.A.R. I discovered COTO on the crowhouse.com. It’s great
I think we’re the last ones left here W. Our buddy’s been awfully silent. Maybe whoever that person is has decided, we can’t be broken from the error of our thought processes and can’t be repatriated back into the matrix. Mercy on our souls and all that. I’m disappointed about the rapture though. I haven’t had a good buzz since the acid was good but then maybe I wasn’t going to get one anyhow. Jehovahs Witnesses don’t like talking to me either, they never come back and in fact cross the street just before my house. As Billy Joel says. I’d rather laugh with the sinners than cry with the saints.
They’ve got to hate Max Keiser. I think we’re on the same page in as I don’t want to be categorized as a conspiracy theorist. As far as I’m concerned, that’s only just a gateway into digging deeper to try to arrive at a truer picture of what’s really going on. It appears to have trapped some as much as MSM has. Is it a lack of intellectual capacity, being caught up midstream of an evolution or a reverse prejudice. Probably all is in play here and then some. VIA the recent Sixty Minutes episode on “Sovereign People” it wouldn’t be a good brand to have at this point in time but then, they also come after the “intellectuals” too. Does it pay to be on to it? Could be our individual human natures drive us to look. Is consciousness what drives the ether and shapes reality? If that’s true, Who has the greater effect? So far it’s them but with what’s coming down and the draconian measures they’re using. It definitely reads they’re not on quite solid footing yet. Nature has a way of sorting things out and our hope is for a synchronistic trait to be in play here but then dinosaurs evolved, not exactly a comforting thought.
Or the pattern of the fractal. Are you into Gregg Braden, Dr.Bruce Lipton and or Nassim Haramein?
In checking out real history and a throwback to a period of time in my life that changed my perceptions of everything that has been a factor on how I see things. There’s two books that stand out for me. The first being “Electric Koolaid Acid Test” by Tom Wolfe that is an absolute riot to read. It’s about Ken Kesey and the merry pranksters and Haight Ashberry in the mid sixties. That’s where the Magic Bus comes from that “The Who” and the “Beatles” composed songs about. Destination “FURTHUR”. The other more recent “The Harvard Psychedelic Club” subtitle ” How Timothy Leary, Ram Dass, Huston Smith, And Andrew Weil killed the fifties and ushered in a new age for America. by Don Lattin. The lead in was through Aldous Huxley and his book “Doors Of Perception” whos inspiration was a resultant of experimentation with mescaline. Timothy Leary especially made a huge impression. Richard Nixon labled him as the most dangerous man in America.
I figured as much. That’s why I brought it up. We’re definitely giving our ages away here. Some of us were stirred, others were along for the ride and many sold out. They were heady times and there was a feeling in the air. The best music comes from that period. It was a first large scale awakening of our era. This current one we’re experiencing has all the earmarkings of then without drugs being a key issue. There were the heads, then the straights, then the red necks. Funny thing about the latter, many of them became speed freaks. The establishment was easily able to discredit us because of drugs. What a switch though, we’re the ones that are straight except for maybe a little weed, their psychotic agenda runs on cocaine.
I forgot the bikers
great book!
Any thoughts on “Bush court dismisses 9/11 suit against Bush officials, orders sanctions,” or is this the “Short Attention Span Theater”?
No, this is a moved on to bigger fish to fry. You can stay hung up there in the gullible mind rooting section
No, I picked that book up many years ago but never did get into it. Your right, this posting has slowed down.
Are you and roggie attending Friday’s fish fry in New Haven? The “Bush” court may be imposing sanctions then, so bring along the checkbook if you’d like to help these courageous whistle blowers. 🙂
Nah, you go, you’re the one that’s hung up on all this. We’ve since gone on to bigger and better things
Hey W; On Brasschecks “Forbidden Knowledge” there’s a little 5 minute short you might be interested in checking out called “Fibonacci Fractals” that’s brilliantly done
What could be bigger and better than staying on topic, verity? If your Coalition of the Obtuse is so supportive of blatant abuse of our judicial system with frivolous legal actions, your help may be needed later this week.
I’ve had my fill of your topic and you dickhead. I have a suggestion for you that deals with sex and travel. You fill in the blanks.
Why are you calling the author of this article a dickhead?
So far so good. I watched one online today that was neat. Check out http://www.bill.inelia.com. I think this one would be up Radys alley. This lady has some stuff to say that I’m sure you’d find to be quite interesting with some interesting things to say about the elites and the paradigm shift we’re experiencing
okay, cool. I’ll watch it.
wow… yes, perfect timing. thank you, verity2.
Perfect misdirection too, verity2. Do you know how things went for the honest and courageous whistle blower and counsel in US district court up in New Haven last Friday?
Your windmill to tilt at not mine. Besides, who was talking to you anyhow but thanks for keeping this going. All we have to do to use this as a conduit for communication is ignore you but you are amusing. Has anybody told you, you really need to get a life you stunned fuck
Tell that the 3 circuit judges in the US Court of Appeals in New Haven, verity2, since they need a life too. Is it time to hide a hacksaw blade in a cake when you visit the intrepid whistle blower and counsel, or did they just pay the $15K this time?
Where’s Beavis been hidin’? You guys rock. 🙂
Is it time to hide a hacksaw blade in a cake when you visit the intrepid whistle blower and counsel, or did they just pay the $15K this time?
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-06-03/goldman-sachs-investigators-in-new-york-wield-laws-stronger-than-the-feds.html
Thanks, no name. Here’s something equally relevant to the topic:
http://heraldnews.suntimes.com/news/5764969-418/plainfield-mom-daughter-survive-tornadoes-years-apart.html
A fiduciary relationship encompasses the idea of faith and confidence and is generally established only when the confidence given by one person is actually accepted by the other person. Mere respect for another individual’s judgment or general trust in his or her character is ordinarily insufficient for the creation of a fiduciary relationship. The duties of a fiduciary include loyalty and reasonable care of the assets within custody. All of the fiduciary’s actions are performed for the advantage of the beneficiary.
Click to access FS_2004-04.pdf
Thanks for sharing, Mr. or Ms. No-name. Let’s hope plaintiffs in the above matter don’t win their cases and receive monetary compensation from one or more parties, and then sue someone else with a completely contradictory set of claims that are patently absurd. Even an alleged “Bush” court understand the principle of judicial estoppel.
btw, where’s Beavis?
Albury, is the UNITED STATES a corporation?
What’s your point, Mr. or Ms. No-name, assuming you have one that’s relevant to the April Gallop saga?
Alburys lies debunked in 10 minutes
Ryan’s simply showing why he’s not a structural engineer
Albury is showing he’s cracking under the pressure. Has no counter to anything anymore.
http://9-11cc.org/
http://dailycensored.com/2011/07/14/anti-muslim-bigotry-splc-intelligence-report/
How does foolishly attacking a report that you’re incapable of understanding make your C/D nonsense any more credible, Stan? NIST could be all wrong and you’d still have no evidence of explosives, incendiaries, nukes, space beams, etc.
just concentrate on the 2.25 seconds of free fall smith. 81 vertical columns, 47 storied steel framed high rise has to loose an eight story block all at the SAME moment to allow the forensic physical drop we ALL SAW. There is no other way than CD. Name another way if you know it . NIST has no evidence of ‘thermal expansion’. they made it up. they didn’t factor thermal conductivity into the model. Its a construct. A computer game made up by liars. Agnotology. To conclude “office furnishings fire” brought down behemoth number 7 establishes the idiot in the room. The space beams you refer to are between columns 79 and 44, where the model parameters had to be skewed out of all resemblance to reality to get the critical shear stud break. Then your whizz kid NIST scientists have us pretend beams and girders, heated by fires OUT at the time, that couldn’t last more than 30 minutes in any one place anyway; that these huge beams axially expanded, pushing a girder off its seat, which dropped onto floor 12, created a local ‘cascade collapse’ around 79 within 2 seconds + or- down 7 or so floors, ‘just like that’ and, with a wave of shyams fairy wand, then magically and IMMEDIATELY expanded over the ENTIRE area of plan, COMPLETELY disappearing a total 8 story block of the structure in an INSTANT to allow free fall the ‘upper 39 stories which it DID for 2.25 seconds, thereafter to neatly fold itself into a neat pile 4.5 seconds + or – later.
All concrete floors pulverized into nanothermate laced DUST, leaving molten steel the goose Gross never saw/heard bubbling in the piles for up to 13 weeks after date.
There is PLENTY of evidence of explosive. Forensic. Evaporated and Vaporized steel. Molybdeneum microspheres. 118 FDNY audio transcripts saying “EXPLOSIVE EVENTS” unrelated to aircraft impact and burning office chairs. Unignited thermitic material in the dust.
just concentrate on the 2.25 seconds of free fall smith. 81 vertical columns, 47 storied steel framed high rise has to loose an eight story block all at the SAME moment to allow the forensic physical drop we ALL SAW. There is no other way than CD. Name another way if you know it . NIST has no evidence of ‘thermal expansion’. they made it up. they didn’t factor thermal conductivity into the model. Its a construct. A computer game made up by liars. Agnotology. To conclude “office furnishings fire” brought down behemoth number 7 establishes the idiot in the room. The space beams you refer to are between columns 79 and 44, where the model parameters had to be skewed out of all resemblance to reality to get the critical shear stud break. Then your whizz kid NIST scientists have us pretend beams and girders, heated by fires OUT at the time, that couldn’t last more than 30 minutes in any one place anyway; that these huge beams axially expanded, pushing a girder off its seat, which dropped onto floor 12, created a local ‘cascade collapse’ around 79 within 2 seconds + or- down 7 or so floors, ‘just like that’ and, with a wave of shyams fairy wand, then magically and IMMEDIATELY expanded over the ENTIRE area of plan, COMPLETELY disappearing a total 8 story block of the structure in an INSTANT to allow free fall the ‘upper 39 stories which it DID for 2.25 seconds, thereafter to neatly fold itself into a neat pile 4.5 seconds + or – later.
All concrete floors pulverized into nanothermate laced DUST, leaving molten steel the goose Gross never saw/heard bubbling in the piles for up to 13 weeks after date.
There is PLENTY of evidence of explosive. Forensic. Evaporated and Vaporized steel. Molybdeneum microspheres. 118 FDNY audio transcripts saying “EXPLOSIVE EVENTS” unrelated to aircraft impact and burning office chairs. Unignited thermitic material in the dust.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
“Vertical columns” are the best kind, but how long would the WTC 7 facade collapse have taken if the Probable Collapse Sequence in NCSTAR 1A had occurred? NIST and ANSYS modeling only “made up” thermal expansion in twoofer legend, and steel loses almost 80% of its yield strength at 600 C, a very normal upper layer temperature in office fires. Shear stud failure occurs at much lower temperatures. According to numerous eyewitnesses, this miraculous self-extinguishing of the fires in WTC 7 never happened:
http://sites.google.com/site/wtc7lies/eyewitnessaccountsofwtc7fires
http://sites.google.com/site/wtc7lies/accountsofwtc7damage
http://sites.google.com/site/wtc7lies/eyewitnessaccountsofthewithdrawalfromwtc
If molten metal weeks later is evidence to you of a controlled demolition, what known explosives produce it, and in what known C/Ds has it been observed?
If 118 FDNY reported hearing demolition charges, and not just normal sounds of things exploding in major fires, why are so few of them in your 9/11 “truth movement”? What did your imaginary nanothermite do to the steel, since not one explosively-cut column was found in the debris?
“Vertical columns” are the best kind, but how long would the WTC 7 facade collapse have taken if the Probable Collapse Sequence in NCSTAR 1A had occurred? NIST and ANSYS modeling only “made up” thermal expansion in twoofer legend, and steel loses almost 80% of its yield strength at 600 C, a very normal upper layer temperature in office fires. Shear stud failure occurs at much lower temperatures. According to numerous eyewitnesses, this miraculous self-extinguishing of the fires in WTC 7 never happened:
http://sites.google.com/site/wtc7lies/eyewitnessaccountsofwtc7fires
http://sites.google.com/site/wtc7lies/accountsofwtc7damage
http://sites.google.com/site/wtc7lies/eyewitnessaccountsofthewithdrawalfromwtc
If molten metal weeks later is evidence to you of a controlled demolition, what known explosives produce it, and in what known C/Ds has it been observed?
If 118 FDNY reported hearing demolition charges, and not just normal sounds of things exploding in major fires, why are so few of them in your 9/11 “truth movement”? What did your imaginary nanothermite do to the steel, since not one explosively-cut column was found in the debris?
This post has been going since April. Looks like a new crew has taken on the task of going head on with Albury Smith. Good luck all in your quest to reason. I beg to differ in Smiths last statement that no cut columns were found in the debris. Seems there’s pictures online that beg to differ from that statement.
Since both you and your online pictures apparently “beg to differ,” please feel free to post links to the pictures. Columns cut with oxyacetylene torches don’t count, and explosives don’t leave gray slag around cuts.
You ever cut anything that big with an oxyacetylene torch? Oxyacetylene doesn’t leave a grey slag either, it burns clean. It’s not a matter of burning anything, it’s a rapid oxidative reaction. Obviously you’ve never done time in the pits. The cut columns I seen online don’t look like anything I’ve seen on the job.
stick to the point smith.
2.25 seconds of total freefall of a complex steel framed high rise IS EVIDENCE of controlled demolition. All by itself.
NIST reports WTC are the ONLY TIME known to man free-fall in complex steel framed high rise has occurred WITHOUT explosive demolitions. Why?
Because they wrote the script. And you are reading it.
Address the issue of FREE FALL smith.
If you’d like to see what an oxyacetylene torch cut looks like, there are photos of them on pg 32 here:
Click to access WhyIndeedDidtheWorldTradeCenterBuildingsCompletelyCollapse.pdf
Collapse times are only evidence of a controlled demolition to the 9/11 “truth movement,” Roger.
just hold yourself to the QUESTION.
EXPLAIN how NO RESISTANT FREE FALL for 2.25 seconds – equating to a 108ft or an 8 block section – of a complex 47 storied, 81 vertically columned steel framed high rise behemoth is attained WITHOUT explosive demolition smith.
Run us through that single moment, transferring a small localized office furnishings fire in ONE corner of this MASSIVE 81 columned structure, into an immediate total GLOBAL drop at free-fall acceleration. a single moment within which an 8 storied [108′] block of total structure disappears into NO resistance from ANYTHING at all – completely ceases to HOLD ANYTHING. All at once. Within a split-second + or – Removing completely an otherwise cold entirety of active secured structure, connection welds bolts shear-studs,
to LIE, after the 2.25sec free fall, 4.5 seconds later + or – in a perfectly arranged heap. Its outer walls neatly folded like wings on the dead bird of reason over its corpse.
All floors of concrete pulverized into DUST, evidence of evaporated VAPORIZED and molten high grade builders steel .
Because of Office Furnishings Fire.
Run us through it smith. Platitudes later.
Run us through your calculations for the collapse times under the Probable Collapse Sequence in NCSTAR 1A.
No. Sorry. We are not discussing PROBABLES.
We are discussing ACTUAL FREE FALL as forensic evidence, addressing
2.25 seconds of timed FREE FALL of WTC7 as stated by NIST.
YOU I am asking. Being a man so able to discuss and availed to all information regarding the WTC according to NIST : EXPLAIN or DESCRIBE how NO RESISTANT FREE FALL for 2.25 seconds – equating to TOTAL LOSS of load bearing capacity of a 108ft or 8 storied block section of a complex 47 storied, 81 vertically columned steel framed high rise – explain how gravitational acceleration is achieved in a SUDDEN TOTAL building mass DROP for 2.25 seconds free-fall,
WITHOUT explosive demolition .
address that question.
You’re the one making the claim that only a silent explosive demolition of all of the 81 columns could cause acceleration at or near g for that time period, despite the fact that no columns were pulled from the debris with explosively-severed ends on them, so please calculate dv/dt from t=1.75 to t=4 seconds under the Probable Collapse Sequence in NCSTAR 1A.
what ELSE could it be otherwise than explosive demolition sequencing of all 81 columns to accomplish free fall of building 7 as OBSERVED in FACT is the question Smith.
Proof and time of FREE FALL is already established.[NIST]
My calculations around ‘p r o b a b l e’ sequences are irrelevant to the FACT of 2.25 seconds free fall.
I am repeating my question you contend with actual FREE FALL in terms of total complete structural failure OVERALL.
How does a small localized fire create an instantaneous free fall over an ENTIRE 81 vertical column area of steel framed 47 storied high rise behemoth .?
AddressIng the instantaneous disappearance of all cold rigid sustaining interconnections over an 108ft x 330 ft x140 ft gridlocked BLOCK of 81 vertical columns beams and girders, hundreds of structural steel strong points. What force transfers all that energy to all those different places at ONE instant could be found in an office furnishings fire.
That is the issue here.
Whatever samples actually were removed and tested proved temperatures WAY in advance of “normal Office Furnishings Fire” in and of themselves. Vaporization, Sulfidation and Evaporation of high grade builders steel, Molybdenum and iron rich microspheres, which ALL add to the controlled demolition hypothesis .
How FREE FALL is achieved WITHOUT explosives is the question.
Despite the complete lack of evidence of explosives, you’re claiming that only a controlled demolition would explain free fall for a portion of a building collapse in which several hundred tons of material were put into motion with only buckled columns for resistance, so it’s perfectly logical to ask you to back it up with a calculation of the collapse times under NIST’s Probable Collapse Sequence for comparison. “Normal office furnishings fires” are taken very seriously by competent and qualified engineering professionals, and no honest person would ever refer to the ones in WTC 7 as “small localized fire.” Two small pieces of steel with unusual oxidation and sulfidation are only evidence of controlled demolition to your 9/11 “truth movement,” not to the WPI researchers who studied and wrote about them in Appendix C of FEMA 403.
NIST does agree with the ~2.25 seconds of free fall, but also very carefully timed the first 242′ in 5.4 seconds, so perhaps you can explain the 6.5 or 6.6 seconds that Gage, Jones, Ryan, and your other 9/11 “researchers” have claimed for the entire 610′ collapse. My explanation is that they’re lying, and it’s pretty obvious just from looking at collapse videos.
NIST “agrees” with 2.25 seconds free fall.
NIST was FORCED to agree on free fall by David Chandler.
Ask yourself why NIST failed to register ‘free fall’ for 9 years.
“free-fall” means “NO RESISTANT gravitational acceleration .
2.25 seconds of free fall of this 47 storied 81 vertically columned steel framed high rise equates to a section + or- 108ft x 330 ft x140 ft.
The fires were small localized office furnishings fire. They did not spread floor to floor and burned out as they progressed. We can see this. Any one of them would be dealt with by fire department easily under normal operating conditions. And of course normal office furnishings fires are taken seriously. That is not the question here.
The question is free fall.
Your sentence :”……..would explain free fall for a portion of a building collapse in which several hundred tons of material were put into motion with only buckled columns for resistance,” is disingenuous. disproportionate. Suggesting balance of healthy structure providing resistance is by magnitude less than the unhealthy structure trying to ‘collapse’ the total.
That is nonsense.
It is quite simple. NIST Probable collapse hypothesis,
a THEORY all by itself,
suggests ONE column, 79, buckled. ONE out of EIGHTY ONE.
To suggest that one column buckling compromised the other 80 into INSTANTANEOUS COLLAPSE in order to achieve FREE FALL is beyond any conceivable logic.
You’re not smarter than the NIST engineers, nor is your One-Trick Pony, and you really should read and try to understand the NCSTAR 1A Probable Collapse Sequence. They were not “FORCED to agree” with Chandler’s irrelevant over-analysis, and it has nothing at all to do with the cause of the collapse. NIST did time the visible top ~242′ in 5.4 seconds, so please explain how the bottom ~368′ fell in 1.1 or 1.2 seconds, or is it possible that your “researchers” are lying?
You’re also totally misrepresenting the severity of the fires in WTC 7:
http://sites.google.com/site/wtc7lies/eyewitnessaccountsofwtc7fires
http://sites.google.com/site/wtc7lies/accountsofwtc7damage
http://sites.google.com/site/wtc7lies/eyewitnessaccountsofthewithdrawalfromwtc
and the fact is that they weren’t easily dealt with by the FDNY because the North Tower collapse severed the water main feeding the sprinkler risers.
correction to previous comment:
the upper portion that fell represented several hundred THOUSAND tons of material, and I’ve yet to see Chandler’s calculations for the collapse time while it was supported by 7 or 8 stories of bowed and sideways columns.
No evidence for explosives?
You’re such a dick Albury – and everyone knows it.
http://www.darkpolitricks.com/2011/06/9-11-sceptics-versus-logic-reason-and-scientific-principles/
Hey Albury Smith. How’s it hanging. Still playing everyone for a rube I see. I wonder if this posting is a record for length with Coto. I swore at you lots, it was fun but it’s pointless. Hang onto that belief you have. Nobody here can rock away you from it. Maybe you can eventually start a fan club over it, something like the Flat Earth Society.
Do you high beams realize that no NIST collapse hypothesis involved the melting of steel, and that the 2 small oxidized pieces are not evidence of explosives or incendiaries, but were thought by the WPI researchers to have been produced in the debris fires? How many columns were found with melted ends, or with cutter charge signatures on their ends? Box Boy claims that thermite, nanothermite, or whatever “cuts through steel like a hot knife through butter,” so does it also produce factory ends on columns, complete with connection plates and bolt holes? What idiocy…
Yup, yo da man
That is what the new independent investigation is going to iron out.
Your ‘2 small pieces of oxidized steel thought by WPI researchers to have been produced in the debris fires’ will be able to TEST and HAVE TESTED the ORIGINS of ENERGY that EVAPORATED and VAPORIZED and sourced the eutectic attack at an intergranular level on the high grade builders steel in that ‘office furnishings’ debris fire, a fire that also had molten steel running ‘as in a foundry’ for weeks after the attack.
That investigation will also be asking why there was so little steel available for forensic study to corroborate or not your statement.
That independent supeona power investigation will also be testing and have tested by other that NIST engineers involved in the storyline so far, the unignited thermitic material and iron and molybdenum microspheres in the pulverized concrete DUST just as they will be ironing out the 6.5 second + or- FREE FALL [2.25s] drop of WTC 7. That independent truth seeking investigation will determine why proper criminal investigative procedure could not be carried out, and will doubtless follow the lines of inquiry as to who controlled the investigations, why proper due diligence wasn’t followed, and where those people are right now.
remember also, “the observed fire activity gleaned from the videos and photographs was not a model input, and thus one should not expect a perfect correspondence between predicted high temperatures and observed fire activity” NCSTAR1-9:378, which might explain to an egg why no NIST collapse hypothesis involved the melting of steel.
Gee, Roger; why don’t you start a “new independent investigation” by taking some sample steel pieces and duplicating the corrosion on those 2 samples with explosives or incendiaries, since you don’t trust the government’s engineers anyway? If these amazing substances also keep steel molten for months, and it wasn’t simply lead or aluminum kept molten by debris fires fueled with normal office contents, you may even be on the brink of discovering a solution to all of our energy needs.
There isn’t one shred of evidence of thermitic material in the WTC dust, and your “researchers” don’t even make that claim in their discredited Bentham farce. They do claim that sulfur, rust, aluminum, and silicon “remind” them of something, although they neglected to provide any exemplars for comparison. Perhaps you could also get some steel columns and paint explosives on them in your new investigation so we can see how that works.
I’d also recommend reading NCSTAR 1A and 1-9 instead of cherry picking and misrepresenting parts of them. The NISTdisclaimers associated with modeling input are not admissions that their work is inaccurate, and are simply presented as error analysis, which is something very common in scientific presentations. When was the last time Box Boy did it? I’m still awaiting his explanation for the 6.5 seconds he allegedly got for the entire WTC 7 collapse. X-ray vision?
[quote smith “There isn’t one shred of evidence of thermitic material in the WTC dust, and your “researchers” don’t even make that claim in their discredited Bentham farce” “They do claim that sulfur, rust, aluminum, and silicon “remind” them of something” ]
For the record.
For 31 pages the Bentham paper unambiguously establishes these ‘singular uncontrolled’ particles, as being MIXED on the nano scale, suspended in a complex industrialized matrix. Controlled particulate matter intimately mixed at a scale of approximately 100 nanometers[nm] or less[p25]. Described as Ultra Fine Grain “reminding us of nano-thermite fabricated at the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory and elsewhere”[p23].
Further, that these identified chips, according to the paper, under tests shown by it, ‘have properties of a pyrotechnic nanocomposite'[p26] .
Nano/composite/pyrotechnic. Which produce “iron rich micro-spheroids after ignition’, which by this papers investigation, as part of the chip experimentation, are identified as ‘having chemical signature of the spheroids produced by igniting commercial thermite, and also matches the signatures of many of the micro-spheres found in the WTC dust'[p23-24]
Thus linking experimentation of composites found in dust samples with commercial thermite residue.
But. Albury SMITH can find ‘no evidence’ in the paper to link the ‘something in dust form that explodes’, producing ‘spheroid signatures of commercial thermite’, to nano-thermite or ‘in original form’ composite particulate matter, that is explosive/incendiary?
Please also refer to the recent work by John COLE and Kevin RYAN with regard steel piece duplication/corrosive effects of explosive/incendiary devices and construction of nano composites.
your NCSTAR error analysis disclaimer is a very necessary legal proviso to understanding how ‘probables’ in NIST computer THEORY, when found by the new Independent criminal Investigation NOT to correlate with REALITY, are mitigated.
It will be used by NIST defense lawyers when conspirators are arraigned for high treason and just general bad storytelling.
Also. It is 6.5 seconds +plus or -minus from beginning of total global building drop. 2.25 seconds of it at gravitational acceleration, FREE FALL
I forget how freefall is accomplished over an 81 vertical columned plan area from one small localized office furnishings fire.
Perhaps you could run us over with that again.
The Bentham farce is a huge shaggy dog/snow job that provides no exemplars for what anyone was “reminded” of, and prompted the editor-in-chief to resign in disgust. The claim that something was painted on the columns and then migrated to one straight line and cut through them is asinine. Cole and Ryan have never duplicated the corrosion on the 2 pieces of steel found in the debris and analyzed by the WPI researchers, and it was clearly not related to the collapses. Cole’s contraptions to make an incendiary burn sideways are completely inapplicable in the real world, and produced a mess that a blind man would have seen in the debris.
Box Boy and his cohorts simply made up a collapse time for WTC 7, as even a cursory look at available videos will confirm. Claiming to have determined it to the nearest 1/10 second is an absolute absurdity, and it actually took ~9 seconds. Presenting collapse times as evidence of a cause is pure incompetence.
These are your “researchers,” not mine or any sane person’s.
Thats all? “Shaggy dog snow job editor in chief resigns” in response to
“‘particles being MIXED on the nano scale, suspended in a complex industrialized matrix. Controlled particulate matter intimately mixed at a scale of approximately 100 nanometers[nm] or less[p25]. Described as Ultra Fine Grain “reminding us of nano-thermite fabricated at the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory and elsewhere”[p23].
You ever worked for ‘News of the World’?
The claim that an office furnishings fire migrated in one second from one column /girder connect fail, to 80 other cold vertical columns, disintegrating them ALL over an 8 block section to allow the OBSERVABLE 2.25 second free fall drop is where I would be worried if I was on your bike Albury.
The Bentham paper stands as a peer reviewed study, proving complex engineered nano composite materials existed in the DUST.
Your 9 seconds comes from the penthouse core column sequences going off. You know, bring it down from the inside. its global/overall drop was 6.5 seconds + or – .
2.25 at free fall.
Why didn’t your “researchers” provide exemplars for whatever they were “reminded” of? The only “evidence” of what this alleged explosive actually did is some photos of columns cut with an oxyacetylene torch, so what did it really do? I’ve contacted several of them, including Harrit, and suggested painting it or a similar MIC on some sample steel columns and demonstrating it, but they won’t do it. Wouldn’t that be part of that “new independent investigation” that you want? Nanothermite’s an extremely high explosive, so I’d like to see how well it cuts vertical steel surfaces when painted on them, and how much loose gray slag it leaves near the cut.
My 9 seconds starts when the top of the main parapet wall on the north side begins falling, ~7 seconds after the east end of the penthouse collapses above column 79, but I can’t see the end of the collapse well enough to determine it to the nearest 1/10 second. It took considerably longer than 6.5 seconds, but unlike Box Boy, I don’t have X-ray vision.
I’d also suggest reading the Probable Collapse Sequence in NCSTAR 1A. 600 C “office furnishings fires”did not migrate in one second, and the partial collapses triggered by the buckling of column 79 occurred over a much longer period than one second.
NCSTAR is a comic projection. A Probable. A computer construct begun and ended to create a new phenomenon [thermal expansion total destruction due to office furnishings fire of major steel framed high-rises] to cover up a heinous crime without due regard to FACT on the GROUND.
It is a computer program that remains UNTESTED in any forum. Hides behind executive privilege. States secret shite. It has not been cross-examined under proper LAW. Its program parameters have not been peer reviewed.
Bentham, however, is a peer reviewed science paper. whether you and cronies like it or not. Until rebutted by the literature it remains sound. It has unambiguously established particles MIXED on the nano scale, suspended in a complex industrialized matrix. Controlled particulate matter intimately mixed at a scale of approximately 100 nanometers[nm] or less[p25]. Described as Ultra Fine Grain “reminding us of nano-thermite fabricated at the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory and elsewhere”[p23] in the DUST of 911.
You are arguing a COMIC. A flight around some agnotological FANCY where beams and girders mysteriously expand to walk and drop and cascade and totally destruct structures within seconds like dominoes without any apparent regard to reality, dissolve into neat little piles with no concrete floors left all because of ‘office furnishings fire’. Burning office fatuous furnishings. And then you talk about snow jobs. What a joke.
NIST is a blow job.
With regard your comments on beam slag ends. Please refer to this reply in the stream. He was talking to you:
1duupulay | July 29, 2011 at 9:02 pm | Reply
You ever cut anything that big with an oxyacetylene torch? Oxyacetylene doesn’t leave a grey slag either, it burns clean. It’s not a matter of burning anything, it’s a rapid oxidative reaction. Obviously you’ve never done time in the pits. The cut columns I seen online don’t look like anything I’ve seen on the job.
The NIST findings and recommendations have resulted in some of the most quickly adopted building code revisions in history, and numerous articles based on them have appeared on the ASCE site and have been discussed favorably by other qualified structural engineers. By contrast, the crap from Gage and his “engineers” can’t even be searched on the AIA, RIBA, and ASCE sites, and the only peer review of the Bentham farce I’ve ever seen is Dr. Pileni’s comments when she resigned as editor-in-chief because of it. I doubt whether any serious scientist cares what sulfur, rust, aluminum, and silicon “remind” someone of, especially with no exemplars presented, and the idea that explosives can be painted on steel to cut them is absurd.
NIST’s job was to find and explain the WTC collapses, not to debunk C/D “theories” for which there’s no evidence anyway, and they did that to the satisfaction of most knowledgeable people. You clearly don’t understand the science behind the reports, nor do you seem to realize that attacking them still provides no evidence for explosives, but beams did not “mysteriously expand to walk and drop…,” and thermal expansion of steel is an established scientific phenomenon that’s fully explained and documented in NCSTAR 1 A, 1-6, and 1-9. While you’re disparaging “office furnishings fires,” they’re taken very seriously by engineers who design and write codes for steel-framed hi-rises, since they’ve been responsible for several large-scale building collapses and could easily cause others with the unusual conditions present in WTC 7 if not for proper safeguards. One Meridian Plaza was so badly damaged by “office furnishings fires” that it had to be razed, and it had much shorter beam and girder spans, 100% moment connections, and sprinklers as well as firefighting efforts.
The columns shown by Dr. Jones in his “Why Indeed…” paper as evidence of his miraculous painted-on “nanothermite” were definitely cut with oxyacetylene torches. They ALWAYS leave gray slag, which is nothing more than the liquefied and oxidized steel that wasn’t directly in the stream of pressurized oxygen that comes out when the trigger is depressed on the torch head, and ran down the steel in the area of the cut before solidifying again. To claim that explosives would leave any of this fragile material in their blast areas is indicative of pure ignorance, as is your “expert’s” description of what he’s “seen on the job.” It’s very obvious that you’ve never used a cutting torch or probably even seen one in use, nor has the clown you quoted. Save your junk science for someone who hasn’t spent a career in commercial construction, and didn’t build hot rods and own a gas cutting and welding outfit for years.
Woopteedo; you own an oxyacetylene outfit and did some light cutting and you’ve worked in construction for years. All the big iron has to be prefabricated somewhere, none of that’s done onsite, that’s not construction, that’s fabrication. If you worked construction you erected that stuff and watched the welders do onsite repairs. You’re a putz if you think that qualifies your opinion as having any weight. Go back and hit the computer and see if you can come up with anything else that even remotely can debunk any of what these people are saying. Guys, unless you like arguing with Smith, just let him inherit this posting, it’s gone on for too long. You’re not going to sway this guy, I assume it’s a guy what with building hotrods and working construction, otherwise it’s a bull dyke 9/10ths through the transformation.
Are you also claiming that oxyacetylene torches don’t leave gray slag, and that demolition explosives do? No one who’s ever used a burning outfit or even seen one used would ever say something that stupid. They wouldn’t work if they didn’t produce slag, it’s always gray, and there would be no slag at all around steel cut with explosives. Duh…
I’m the one talking to someone who thinks oxyacetylene cutting torches don’t leave gray slag, and that demolition explosives do. Do you ever even bother to THINK?
Keep to the 2.25 second 108ft free fall of building 7 if you would please mister smith.
You were going to EXPLAIN just how a complex 81 vertically columned steel framed high rise drops for 100 feet with no resistance AT ALL, before getting side tracked on conspiracy theory NIST/NCSTAR report and some other nonsense about ‘other buildings having collapsed due to ‘office furnishings fire'[Qt:responsible for several large-scale building collapses].
Really? At FREE FALL speed? Total disintegration of entire steel framed structure into a neat pile, no ‘office furnishings’ left, no floors pancaked, in their own footprints in the case of 7 and radial eruptions for 1 and 2…..all concrete pulverized? With forensic evidence of high grade building steel evaporated, vaporized and molten steel ‘running down the channel rails’ with scientific paper finding active thermitic materials in the DUST. From scattered ‘office furnishings fire’…….
Where was that??
Here’s what a real controlled demolition of a hi-rise looks and sounds like, Roger:
http://www.break.com/index/landmark_tower_demolition.html
Portions of that collapse were undoubtedly at or very close to free fall acceleration, so are you claiming that every column in that building was cut with explosives? Why won’t your One-Trick Pony calculate the times for each stage of WTC 7’s collapse using the Probable Collapse Sequence in NCSTAR 1A, instead of begging the question and presenting a straw man argument? If 81 columns in WTC 7 were explosively cut, why did no one at GZ report finding even one of them with a melted or explosively-severed end, or do you also believe that cutter charges, incendiaries, or whatever leave factory ends with plates and bolt holes, or other evidence of mechanical breakage?
The tower floors were <4" thick, and 500,000-ton buildings collapsing from more than 1/4 mile in the air will tend to pulverize thin concrete sections like that. There were no "active thermitic materials in the DUST," and sufficient explosives to turn tens of thousands of yards of cured concrete to dust in seconds would have leveled NYC. You're really underestimating the ability of gravity to cause the extreme destruction of the 3 WTC hi-rises, and of "office furnishings fires" to weaken structural steel sufficiently to trigger a collapse.
Here’s what a real controlled demolition of a hi-rise looks and sounds like, Roger:
That’s what they sound like on videos with no audio. This paper explains what they look like:
http://www.uwgb.edu/dutchs/PSEUDOSC/911NutPhysics.HTM
Gravity does the same thing no matter how a collapse is triggered.
what does albury say here? that the two buildings in the video are NOT exhibiting the same process because of sound? that ‘lack of sound’ means the building on the left was NOT brought down by same process as building on right. That the building on the left fell NATURALLY as a result of office furnishings fires and gravity? while the one on the right was controlled demolition.
Even though Barry Jennings eye witnessed massive charges being exploded in the building from 9am, one trapping him there for almost three hours. Even though, from the very small amount of steel recovered and investigated and reported by ‘bona fide’ government agencies, evidence of Steel vaporized, Steel evaporated and Iron rich microspheres of the type found after thermitic reactions were discovered . From where the USGS data shows high levels of barium — a fact that is difficult to explain, barring pyrotechnics. Even though FEMA’s investigators found forensic evidence of a “liquid eutectic mixture containing primarily iron, oxygen, and sulfur” formed during a “hot corrosion attack on the steel.” The eutectic mixture (having the elements in such proportion as to have the lowest possible melting point) penetrated the steel down grain boundaries, making it “susceptible to erosion.”
Professor Dutch on the nutphysics/pseudoscience help site states:”We live in a universe of patterns. Once a pattern is established, the burden of proof is on people who claim the pattern does not hold.”
I would maintain, Albury, the controlled demolition on the right IS the pattern ACTUALLY established, globally and historically and obviously, and the ‘probable collapse office furnishings fire’ NIST THEORY on the left, is the quacking DUCK .
the burden of proof is on NIST .
But they won’t prove it and they can’t. They hide behind states secrets privilege the cowards they are. and many, sir, by virtue of fact, stand with them.
NIST has met its burden of proof. Since you apparently disagree with Dr. Dutch that gravity works pretty much the same way whether a collapse is triggered by explosives, even this new silent variety, or the Probable Collapse Sequence in NCSTAR 1A, please feel free to describe what WTC 7’s collapse would have looked like if the latter had occurred.
I’m also wondering why we’d need a Barry Jennings to tell us that demolition explosives went off if they were “massive,” since the explosives in controlled demolitions are heard for miles, and thousands of people were within a block or two of the WTC. I’m assuming that we can now put to rest the “pull it” canard, since it’s rather illogical that the FDNY and Silverstein would have been discussing at ~2:30 PM WHETHER to blow up WTC 7 if they’d already started doing it at ~9 AM.
FEMA’s investigators who wrote Appendix C believe that the unusual corrosion on two very small pieces of steel happened over several months in the debris fires, but the 9/11 “truth movement” is certainly welcome to duplicate the results with explosives, incendiaries, space beams, nukes, or anything else they can dream up. Since you’re citing the Bentham malarkey, what are the “researchers” of it hiding behind? They’ve yet to provide exemplars of anything for comparison, and their shocking discovery that rust, aluminum, sulfur, silicon, etc. were in the WTC dust has only prompted them to conclude that it “reminds” them of something. There’s much work to be done there, including proof that painting explosives on vertical steel surfaces is a way to cut through them. I’d also like to know how explosives or incendiaries produce ends on steel columns that look just like factory ends, complete with plates, bolt holes, and even bolts in some cases.
Dr. Dutch said the burden of proof is on the event OUT of pattern.
Concentrate on that.
The historic KNOWN pattern of free fall for complex steel framed high rises is controlled demolition. No steel framed high rise before or since 911 has done what occurred that day WITHOUT explosive sequencing. That IS the pattern. NIST must prove otherwise. In open court. Transparent reasoning. proper cross-examination of ALL evidence streams. NIST ‘office furnishings fire’ completely destroying number 7 as observed, is OUT of pattern. Towers one and two as well, but 7 is the kicker. NIST ‘probable’ theory must be tested.
Albury smith judges as conclusive free fall 7 not being C/D because no ‘sound’ to prove explosive events. Yet he judges observed [pattern] freefall drop of an 81 vertically columned 47 storied steel framed high-rise for 108′ + or – as ‘inconclusive’, even while ‘the pattern’ is of explosives to engineer observed behavior.
NIST have ‘proposed’ a theory with no contest .[there is no mystery:Sunder]
Against the pattern.
One could assume, counterpoint evidential weight would hold for [pattern of] FREE FALL as OBSERVED on one hand higher c/d proof, than absence of sound as PROPOSED evidence of it NOT, on the other. Especially when examining technologies surrounding high end Military Nanothermite R&D where sound and flash are being controlled.
One would also investigate under supeona power bona fide ‘revolving door’ associations between NIST and Nanothermite industry ,
given the absolute neglect to mention any conflicts of interest in any official reports.
http://911review.com/articles/ryan/nist_thermite_connection.html
Barry JENNINGS was IN the building. He was material eyewitness to internal explosive events taking out the stairwell and heard going off throughout WTC7 until the time of his rescue. never entered into the record. Just as Kenny Johanneman and Willie Rodriguez were material witness to pre-aircraft strike explosions in the sub basement levels of Towers one and two. Never entered the official record. The 118 FDNY testimonies recording explosive events? never entered the record. No independent examination cross-examination or peer review of the ‘science’ exercised by NIST modelers was entered into the record.
Forensic studies of metal, recorded evidence of temperatures and application of temperature at extremes to ‘normal office furnishings fire” become ‘unusual corrosion occurring in the pile’ with no further inquiry. Of the greatest crime on amercian soil. No further inquiry. Nothing suspicious in lala land,
but WHY are they unusual? Where is the investigation of UNUSUAL? WHY was there no investigation of sources of energy evaporating and vaporizing steel? Of melting it and having it ‘running down the channel rails’, like it was ‘in a foundry?
And of course, the clincher, the BENTHAM paper. A PROPERLY constituted science paper PROFOUNDLY identifying a complex/industrial/nano-thermitic energetic material in the DUST.
For the record once again, the paper concluded :”the red layer of the red/gray chips we have discovered in the WTC dust is ACTIVE, unreacted Thermitic material, incorporating nanotechnology, and is a highly energetic pyrotechnic or explosive material”.
Which, in an open honest terrorist MURDER court, would be examined alongside:
“the very small amount of steel recovered and investigated and reported by ‘bona fide’ government agencies, evidenced Steel vaporized, evaporated and Iron rich microspheres of the type found after thermitic reactions discovered . The USGS data shows high levels of barium — a fact that is difficult to explain, barring pyrotechnics.
Even though FEMA’s investigators found forensic evidence of a “liquid eutectic mixture containing primarily iron, oxygen, and sulfur” formed during a “hot corrosion attack on the steel.” The eutectic mixture (having the elements in such proportion as to have the lowest possible melting point) penetrated the steel down grain boundaries, making it “susceptible to erosion”, none of it investigated further. Yawn.
Back to WAR.
This was not an INVESTIGATION. NIST has NOT met the burden of proof. This was a cover-up.
A Zelikow/Sunder MYTH.
http://www.911-see-the-evidence.com/
How does NIST explain the rivers of molten metal?
They deny it.
You’re not fooling anyone Albury Troll. Give up.
http://georgewashington2.blogspot.com/2011/05/arguments-regarding-collapse-of-world.html
Here’s a paper of equal merit to the “Active Thermitic Material…” farce, roger:
Click to access Access+Points.pdf
More on it here:
http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn17288-crap-paper-accepted-by-journal.html
There’s a reason why your “researchers” didn’t provide any exemplars for comparison, and why they reject the idea of demonstrating how painting explosives on steel columns is a way to cut them. The only peer review of it is Dr. Pileni’s resignation as editor-in-chief:
http://screwloosechange.blogspot.com/2009/04/bentham-editor-resigns-over-steven.html
Dr. Harrit also claims that “a hundred tons” or more of conventional high explosives were planted:
http://ct911truth.org/911_movies/niels_harrit_interview_rt_i.html
and that’s roughly enough to fill 4 tri-axle truck beds. Hand grenades contain 8 ounces of explosives, and you wouldn’t want to be within 20 miles if a hundred tons were detonated.
You’re totally misrepresenting the NIST position on molten metal, which is clearly explained in item #13 here, Valli:
http://www.nist.gov/public_affairs/factsheet/wtc_faqs_082006.cfm
Dr. Gross was asked about molten STEEL, and replied that he’d like to see evidence of it. NIST has not denied that metal was kept molten in the debris fires for months, but the melting of steel is not part of their collapse hypotheses.
If you know of any explosives or incendiaries that keep metal of any kind molten for months, please feel free to list them here.
Its a curious dichotomy alright albright. how can we avoid molten steel running down the channel rails like in a foundry if all we got to fuel it is whats left of a couple of chairs .
lets just say there wasn’t any[TWA]
“All we got” is well-documented debris fires that burned for more than 3 months, fueled by ordinary combustibles in the WTC buildings. They were hot enough in some places to melt aluminum, and easily melted lead, both of which were in abundance in all 3 collapsed hi-rises. I don’t know why you think molten steel would have been “running down” non-molten steel channels, or where you think it came from, since no partially-melted columns or other structural members were found, but if that’s evidence to you of controlled demolition, what explosives keep steel molten for 3 months, and what known C/Ds have left molten steel or any other metal behind for even a minute?
http://911review.org/Wiki/DepletedUranium.shtml
Albury’s ordinary combustibles.org <— that's hilarious!
Albury’s ordinary combustibles.org
-Deutsche Bank hired the RJ Lee Group to do a study, showing WTC dusts’ unique signature. “Spherical iron . . . particles.” RJ Lee Group said, that iron had “MELTED during the WTC Event, producing spherical metallic particles.” The study also showed that, whereas iron particles constitute 0.04 percent of normal building dust, they constituted almost 6 percent of WTC Dust – almost 150 times normal. The RJ Lee study also found temperatures had been reached “at which lead would have undergone vaporization”– 1,749°C (3,180°F).
-Swiss-Cheese Steel:the piece of steel from WTC 7 that had been MELTED so severely that it looked like Swiss cheese. Explaining why it called this “the deepest mystery uncovered in the investigation,” James Glanz wrote: “The steel apparently MELTED away, but no fire in any of the buildings was believed to be hot enough to melt steel outright.”
– Another study, carried out by US Geological Survey, to aid the “identification of WTC dust components”, besides finding iron particles, found molybdenum had been MELTED. This metal does not melt until it reaches 2,623°C (4,753°F).25
– A report by Waste Age describes New York Sanitation Department workers moving “everything from MOLTEN steel beams to human remains.”
-A report on the Government Computer News website quotes Greg Fuchek, vice president of sales for LinksPoint Inc. as stating:
In the first few weeks, sometimes when a worker would pull a steel beam from the wreckage, the end of the beam would be dripping MOLTEN steel
– A Messenger-Inquirer report recounts the experiences of Bronx firefighter “Toolie” O’Toole, who stated that some of the beams lifted from deep within the catacombs of Ground Zero by cranes were “dripping from the MOLTEN steel.”
– A transcription of an audio interview of Ground Zero chaplain Herb Trimpe :The fires burned, up to 2,000 degrees, underground for quite a while before they actually got down to those areas and they cooled off. I talked to many contractors and they said they actually saw MOLTEN metal trapped, beams had just totally had been MELTED because of the heat. So this was the kind of heat that was going on when those airplanes hit the upper floors. It was just demolishing heat.
– A report in the Johns Hopkins Public Health Magazine about recovery work in late October quotes Alison Geyh, Ph.D., as stating:
Fires are still actively burning and the smoke is very intense. In some pockets now being uncovered, they are finding MOLTEN steel.
– A publication by the National Environmental Health Association quotes Ron Burger, a public health advisor at the National Center for Environmental Health, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, who arrived at Ground Zero on the evening of September 12th. Burger stated:
Feeling the heat, seeing the MOLTEN steel, the layers upon layers of ash, like lava, it reminded me of Mt. St. Helen’s and the thousands who fled that disaster.
– An article in The Newsletter of the Structural Engineers Association of Utah describing a speaking appearance by Leslie Robertson (structural engineer responsible for the design of the World Trade Center) contains this passage:As of 21 days after the attack, the fires were still burning and MOLTEN steel was still running.
– A member of the New York Air National Guard’s 109th Air Wing was at Ground Zero from September 22 to October 6. He kept a journal on which an article containing the following passage is based.
Smoke constantly poured from the peaks. One fireman told us that there was still MOLTEN steel at the heart of the towers’ remains.
– The book American Ground, which contains detailed descriptions of conditions at Ground Zero, contains this passage:… or, in the early days, the streams of MOLTEN metal that leaked from the hot cores and flowed down broken walls inside the foundation hole.
– A review of of the documentary Collateral Damage in the New York Post describes firemen at Ground Zero recalling “heat so intense they encountered rivers of MOLTEN steel.”
http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/evidence/moltensteel.html
quite a joker Albury is saying There Wasn’t Any There[TWAT]
Leslie Robertson isn’t in your “truth movement,” roger, and finds the controlled demolition “theory” totally asinine. Only a few who even claim to be FDNY are signatories to Erik Lawyer’s “firefighters” for 9/11 “truth” petition. No molten metal in the debris was ever conclusively proven to have been steel, and your eyewitness accounts describe metal running off recognizable steel shapes, indicating temperatures well below the melting point of steel. No temperatures in the debris high enough to melt steel were ever documented, and you’ve furnished no accounts of molten lead or aluminum, both of which would reasonably have been expected in the debris fires.
If all of this cherry-picked commentary is evidence to you of a controlled demolition, what known ones have ever left molten anything in the debris for even a minute, let alone for ~100 days? What explosives or incendiaries are capable of doing it?
RJ Lee study found temperatures reached “at which lead would have undergone vaporization”– 1,749°C (3,180°F).
US Geological Survey found molybdenum had been MELTED. This metal does not melt until it reaches 2,623°C (4,753°F).25
FEMA app C ‘evidence of a severe high temperature corrosion attack on the steel including oxidation and sulfidation with subsequent intergranular melting’
When are your “9/11 researchers” going to reproduce the effects found on those 2 small pieces of steel with explosives or incendiaries, roger? Drs. Barnett, Sisson, and Biederman are not in your “truth movement,” and have theorized that the unusual corrosion took place over months in the burning debris, not in seconds or minutes prior to a collapse:
Click to access fema403_apc.pdf
The RJ Lee Group isn’t claiming that they found evidence of explosives or incendiaries either, and didn’t even find any of that “nanothermite” that Harrit, et al. were “reminded” of in their Bentham fiasco. Molten steel is produced every time it’s arc welded or cut with a torch, so evidence of it is not all that unusual. Explosively-cut columns would have been very unusual, but no one found any during the nearly 8 months of cleanup.
“awbwee” ( his record speaks for itself )
how did your brain even learn human speech? im just curious.
Awwww… when are you going to stop denying the bleeding obvious?
poor “awbwee” ( his record speaks for itself )
how did your brain even learn human speech? im just curious.
Mr.Smith.
I never said anyone was part of anything.
I said all reports found forensic evidence of temperatures and actions outrageously inconsistent with office furnishings fires.
I said no further PROPER scientific or criminal investigative action was taken to explore findings inconsistent with office furnishings fires.
I said PROPER investigation of anomalies identified by reports cited would have established WHAT enabled molten steel seen running down channel rails ‘like they were in a foundry’.
Which would corroborate the extensive witness reports of explosive events in WTC complex before, during and after aircraft strike.
Which would corroborate the Independent Harrit/Jones paper finding active thermitic material in WTC dust.
“Why waste time commenting if you have nothing to say? Just curious…”
Nothing to say? hehe.. actually, what was said..
“poor “awbwee” ( his record speaks for itself )” – that link speaks volumes about your non existent integrity and credibility, your refusal to put your face to your absurd claims, your fear of an open investigation.. what more needs to be said, exept perhaps to wonder..
“how did your brain even learn human speech? im just curious.”
heres a tip for you too, youre not changing anyones mind, or convincing anyone that 9 11 was not properly investigated, so for the past few years where youve been trolling websites, in your pathetic effort to do just that, has been a monumental waste of time.
people would rather trust in experts and professionals, willing to risk their reputations, their livelihoods, their lives.. by going public, putting their names to their claims, and speaking out about the blindingly obvious inconsistencies that populate the 911 coincidence theory, to expose the lies and slander, of faceless, gormless ruminant shills like “Albury Smith”, regurtitating and thoughtlessly chewing their cud all over the internet..
if thats still not enough for you – despite your baseless claims, that “muslims did it” – the evidence to the contrary that does exist, that the FBI has, actually points elsewhere.
https://wikispooks.com/wiki/9/11:Israel_did_it
http://theintelhub.com/2011/08/22/the-official-2001-fbi-docs-on-urban-moving-systems-and-the-9-11-2001-dancing-israelis-incident/
youve invested a lot of time and effort on your mission to “debunk” legitimate questions surrounding 911, but your refusal to go public with all your fancy claims, shows you dont have the conviction, or the testicular fortitude, that those with truth on their side have. Truth fears no investigation. You couldnt be more scared.
how did your brain even learn human speech? im just curious.
I simply pointed out to you that the people you’re citing don’t agree with your conclusions and suspicions, roger. PROPER investigations were conducted by FEMA and NIST, and numerous articles on their findings can be found on the ASCE web site, among other places where legitimate engineers discuss serious issues. To my knowledge, only 1 profiteering nutjob who was in a North Tower sub-level has ever claimed to have witnessed “explosive events” before an aircraft strike, and he had no way of seeing the 96th floor from where he was. Other eyewitness accounts of explosions were from people within a block of a burning building, and the majority of them have enough sense to realize that they wouldn’t have been the only witnesses to demolition explosives, nor would those explosives have been going off when and where they were heard if they were related to the later collapses.
The Harrit/Jones farce conclusively proved that rust, aluminum, silicon, sulfur, etc. were in the WTC dust, and that it all “reminded” them of something for which they provided no exemplars for comparison. The authors also claimed that it was painted on the columns, but aren’t interested in demonstrating how that could possibly cut them. That may be science in your book, but it prompted the editor-in-chief to resign in disgust, and is generally ignored by the scientific community.
If you truly believe that molten metal of any kind months after 9/11 is evidence of a controlled demolition, what known ones have produced it, and what explosives or incendiaries burn that long? I’d also like to know if you’ve seen any accounts of molten lead or aluminum, and whether the molten “steel” was qualitatively analyzed, or just anecdotal.
That none of these people have engaged with 911truth advocacy is their business. Doubtless they will answer to that decision one day. However, blind obedience to NIST ‘not finding what they didn’t look for’ PROBABLE collapse THEORY begs the question of who the ‘profiteering nutjobs’ will really be after a DECENT court of LAW has done with them.. Either way, Your replies do NOT satisfy the questions, in fact the patterns of response
CONFIRM them.. Constant reference to Harrit/Jones finding singular elements of nanothermitic material in the dust ‘reminding’ them of something but never turning the ONE further page of the paper to its conclusion, identifying the elements bound together in a complex military grade industrialized form; plus their other studies http://www.springerlink.com/content/f67q6272583h86n4/ of unusual environmental data seen at WTC, seeking to ask and answer the very questions FEMA/NIST et al failed to address[barium/vanadium/1,3-DPP/spikes in VOCs detected by EPA more readily explained as result of short-lived violent fires caused by energetic materials] also identifies this conversation. The resignation of the Bentham editor might or might not be as you say, a likely career safety move, but one thing you most certainly have not dealt with, is 2.25s FREE FALL of WTC7, this vast 81 columned steel framed 47 storied High rise in its 6.5sec + or – global drop phase, a ‘controlled demolition like’ destruction, something not possible without explosive sequencing, and something not countered by the bizarre agnotology of NIST struggling to fabricate an entirely new building collapse hypothesis without peer review.
As I’ve explained numerous times, the Bentham fiasco does not provide any exemplars of anything it alleges, and simply says that common stuff “reminds” them of something. It’s nothing but a shaggy dog/straw man that the scientific community ignores. Harrit’s claim of “a hundred tons” of conventional high explosives should give you some idea of his sanity.
6.5 seconds for the whole WTC 7 collapse is a lie; it took >8 seconds, and there’s no way to time it to the nearest 1/10 with any available video. Using collapse times as evidence of the cause is just plain ignorance, and in that stage of the collapse, ~150,000 tons were falling with nothing but buckled columns underneath. If your one-trick pony really wanted to research it honestly, he’d time some real C/Ds. With only enough columns cut to get the collapse started, they still come down at nearly free-fall acceleration, so claiming that it takes zero resistance is junk science and sophistry.
Quit wasting time attacking NIST and find evidence for your own “theory.” You have none.
“falling with nothing but buckled columns underneath”…I forgot? HOW did it fall? don’t you mean with NO columns underneath for 108′ +or- at free fall? In 6.5sec +or- global collapse time…..47 stories..81 columns ……Burning office chairs ? carpet? fires already OUT by photo evidence in the very spot NISTs imagination heated the giant beams and girders on one floor, around ONE column out of 81 columns. Dropping it dead weight through air…. all of a sudden over all…. “in the manner of controlled demolition”. This wasn’t “nearly” free fall, this WAS freefall…..And you speak of sophistry……
The interior columns in WTC 7 were W14 X 730s, roger, i.e. 730#/lineal foot, and they had 4.9″ flanges. Twoofers are not only claiming that (fireproof)explosives could have cut them and not have been heard by millions of people, but that the ends wouldn’t have had cutter charge signatures on them. Office fires routinely burn at temperatures hot enough to reduce the yield strength of steel by >80%, and they don’t go out by themselves in minutes, especially w/o sprinklers or firefighting efforts. They were not “OUT” around Col. 79 on the 12th floor at ~5:20 PM, and partial floor collapses removed the lateral support around the column for ~100′ vertically.
Timing a collapse to show what caused it is pure junk science, and it takes a lot more than crumpled columns to slow ~150,000 tons measurably. There just aren’t that many ways a collapse is going to look regardless of what triggered it:
http://www.uwgb.edu/dutchs/PSEUDOSC/911NutPhysics.HTM
Your “researchers” are also lying about the total collapse time, but that doesn’t seem to bother you. Read NCSTAR 1A and 1-9 and learn something. There was nothing “massive” about the non-moment, 4-bolt connections that failed, and the NIST engineers weren’t in on the plot.
you really should study more.
http://911blogger.com/news/2011-09-02/how-nist-avoided-real-analysis-physical-evidence-wtc-steel
How does an amateurish critique of the work product of ~230 highly-qualified scientists and engineers provide the slightest bit of evidence for explosive demolition?
what? by avoiding proper analysis of the steel makes for highly qualified scientists? By not investigating forensics of Thermitic material in the dust makes for professional critique? By not answering the 2.25 seconds free fall as evidence of controlled demolition makes for highly qualified engineers???
When are your “researchers” going to time some other building collapses and prove their hypothesis? If every column has to be cut in order for a building to free fall, analyze known controlled demolition collapse times just as the One-Trick Pony did WTC 7’s, and find out from the contractors how many columns were cut, as well as on how many places vertically the explosives were placed. You’re simply presenting a straw man, since the ~150,000-ton upper floors of WTC 7 would not have been measurably slowed from t=1.75 to t=4 seconds under the Probable Collapse Sequence in NCSTAR 1A, and secretly knocking out 81 columns at multiple elevations is impossible. The claim is even sillier considering that your imaginary explosives allegedly went off in fires with perfect timing, and no one heard them at ~5:21 PM. Only in 9/11 “truth movement” legend.
Nothing as heavy as a W14 X 730 has probably ever been cut by explosives, but why don’t Gage’s “800 engineers” get some of them and some explosives and demonstrate how quiet and easy it is? The whole idea of using collapse times to determine the cause of a building collapse is asinine, and no “Thermitic material” was found in the dust. If you honestly think nanothermite caused any WTC collapse, what did it do? It very obviously didn’t sever any steel, or the explosively-severed ends would have been noticed and reported, unless you think ~40,000 different cleanup workers at various times for ~8 months at GZ were in on the plot.
I have to admit, Albury Smith. I need to think. This goes nowhere for a reason. The powerful psychology involved in the 911 false flag atrocity, the NIST reorganization of Newtonian physics and the processes or patterns of argument, the pattern established in this and other streams, the total mainstream collusion to commissionNIST theories, need real study. and I have to leave this here for now. I can’t say it has been fun.
Email Chandler and ask him why he hasn’t done the same analysis of a real C/D to prove his “theory” that collapsing buildings must have all supporting structure removed in order to free fall, roger. The W14 X 730 core columns in WTC 7 weighed much more than just 730#/lin. ft., since they were boxed with heavy steel plates welded across their 4.9″ flanges in the lower floor elevations, and for all practical purposes, it would have been impossible to cut 24 of them with explosives simultaneously without making a deafening sound and leaving loads of evidence in the debris. Those columns did not all instantly get out of the way, and the ~150,000 tons of upper floors were obviously not measurably slowed from t=1.75 to t=4 seconds. He’s simply using junk science to create a straw man, and soliciting donations for it.
Try and keep up fool. ( Albury Smith Lying Gormless Shill ) Your insidious bleatings are falling on deaf ears, as you shills are becoming even more insignificant and hilarious as each day passes.
http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2011/09/911-and-the-war-on-terror-polls-show-what-people-really-believe-10-years-later.html
Your lies are no match for the truth, loser.
Enough with WTC, already. Can someone tell me what happened with the lawsuit? Was $15,000 handed over or not?
Finally, a refreshing question. I wonder if April is still monitoring the traffic on this posting. It would be nice if she let us know.
Here’s her latest abuse of the US judicial system:
http://www.abajournal.com/news/article/9-11_survivor_who_claims_us_allowed_attack_has_sued_cheney_bin_laden_and_am
Try and keep up fool. ( Albury Smith Lying Gormless Shill ) Your insidious bleatings are falling on deaf ears, as you shills are becoming even more insignificant and hilarious as each day passes.
http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2011/09/911-and-the-war-on-terror-polls-show-what-people-really-believe-10-years-later.html
Your lies are no match for the truth, loser..
It is the wonder of all kant to argue already burnt out office furnishings fire in ONE specific area, on ONE floor of a MAJOR 47 storied steel framed high rise:that is >one join at point of THREE joins, on one Girder/column out of 81 COLUMNS >that this ONE core column and girder seat, ‘heated’ by already OUT office furnishings fires – could bring down this building ‘in the manner of Controlled Demolition’ [ 6.5secs + or -][2.25 sec FREE FALL]
while actually at the SAME MOMENT arguing the extraordinary challenge controlled demolition faces due to the STRUCTURAL STRENGTH of the building to do the exact same thing you argue ordinary office furnishings fire did?[“boxed with heavy steel plates welded across their 4.9″ flanges in the lower floor elevations”]
This is THE MOST stunningly stupid argument I have ever read.
The “obviously not measurably slowed ‘150,000 tonnes” of upper floors’ were at FREE FALL smith. They didn’t slow AT ALL. They fell at gravitational ACCELERATION for 2.25 sec with sudden complete onset. Which means 8 stories were not there at all. Classic Controlled Demolition.
You are due for promotion Albury.
Read the Probable Collapse Sequence in NCSTAR 1A, genius.
Let’s hope this is the last we hear from the “whistle blower” and her factually-challenged attorneys:
http://www.abajournal.com/news/article/lawyers_sanctioned_accusing_2nd_circuit_of_acquiescence_in_9_11_conspiracy/
debunk this assbury shilltroll
http://www.show-the-house.com/…
now why would the government need to lie like this do you think?
done and dusted, now go away.
“probable” collapse sequence lol – in otherwords, they cant/wont explain the obvious freefall acceleration – ie falling through thin air. genius.
I’m just wondering if doing the debunk thing pays well, by equal opportunity employer? Or maybe this person is lower than a bottom feeder and is just plain toxic pond scum.
Does American Airlines know that their 757 wasn’t really hijacked? Do Indianapolis, Cleveland, and Dulles ATC know about it? You really need to begin educating them, as well as the thousands of mostly civilian first responders who witnessed the wreckage of AA 77 inside the Pentagon.
http://sites.google.com/site/wtc7lies/911pentagonflight77evidencesummary
NIST explained the ~2 seconds of free fall in their modeling, so now it’s up to you to explain how 81 columns were all secretly cut with explosives, leaving no evidence on the ends of any of them.
No. Its up to YOU to explain HOW if they WEREN’T cut the ENTIRE 81 vertically columned structure achieved FREE FALL for its 2.25 second 108 ft free fall phase. You can reach into that crippled epistemology and explain to us WHERE in LSDYNA land the eight floors of this complex structure disappeared in order to achieve THE OBSERVED physical behaviour.
NIST explained nothing except how to corrupt a process. They spent 5 +or- years making up an hypothesis, a ‘best guess probable’ to describe 47 stories of major steel framed high rise dropping into its own footprint in 6.5 seconds + or – because of ‘normal office furnishings fire’ [never heard of before or since] built a computer program around it that didn’t factor thermal conductivity, the heating of the concrete to get the shear-studs to snap, nor ‘necessarily’ corresponding the input with existant video photographic evidence countering it. The program/archietcure of which is secret, has not been made available for expert peer-review nor cross examination in a decent court of criminal LAW.
Regardless of the lies and fabrications from your 9/11 “researchers,” WTC 7’s exterior didn’t drop in 6.5 seconds+/-; it actually took 8-9 seconds, and the modeling in NCSTAR 1A clearly shows why there was reduced acceleration for the initial ~1.75 seconds, followed by ~105′ at g, and then a slowing acceleration. The interior collapsed first, and the more closely spaced exterior columns below the 13th floor level buckled until they essentially all failed at the same time, as would be expected considering the moment connections between them. When ~150,000 tons gets moving, it takes more than a bunch of badly compromised columns to slow it measurably, but please feel free to run your own models and calcs to show what the various elapsed times “really” should have been. You’ve had a decade to do it, and the information is readily available.
Concrete slabs in a room temperature-to-600C range do not heat as quickly as the more exposed steel below them, and differential thermal expansion snaps shear studs at very low temperatures. NIST determined that the first ones failed at a beam temperature of 103C, and your “truth movement” has run no tests to disprove their findings, which are widely accepted by structural engineers, as a search of the publications at the ASCE web site will confirm. It’s just plain stupid to think that a concrete floor slab laterally restrained by its own in-plane stiffness is going to heat and expand in a fire at the rate of the steel framing under it, and that the forces produced in fires aren’t sufficient to shear off the welded connections between 3/4″ steel studs and top flanges. You’re also grossly uninformed if you think steel-framed structures haven’t collapsed before or since solely because of fires.
Your ignorance of these phenomena has you concluding that W14 X 500 exterior columns, and W14 X 730 interior columns, i.e. 500 and 730# per lineal foot respectively, were all secretly and miraculously cut by explosives in multiple places in unison, yet no suspicious-looking ends were noticed during the cleanup, and no massive explosions immediately preceded the collapse. Here’s what a typical WTC 7 interior column looks like:
The flanges on that column are 4.9″ thick, and you think secret explosives can quickly, quietly, and neatly do what took 7-8 minutes and loads of water for a big band saw to do, I’d suggest patenting your process. What complete idiocy…
The question remains.
HOW .
does a building ‘FAIL at the SAME TIME’ in global.total collapse.
We agree that it DID fail.
we agree that it FAILED at the SAME TIME.
We agree that an 81 columned 47 storied steel framed high rise structure dropped at free fall speed for 108′ + or – over its entire plan area with sudden rapid onset. with kink.
we disagree over the global drop time by 1.5 seconds.
You are telling us A column, as pictured above, failed after 20-40 minutes burn time of ‘normal office furnishings fire'[NIST], creating ‘Thermal Expansion™’ of the overhead beams but not the concrete sat direct atop, an original untested computer model ‘probable’ known to have factored heat OFF the concrete in the simulation – NCSTAR:1-9:352 ;
a model ‘probable’ theorizing one column/girder seat, on one floor at one join of three, failed, ‘pulling’ the entire 80 other equally formidable columns with attached beams/girders cold, un-heated, into a free falling cascade, an “essential “SAME TIME:FREE FALL disintegration of all 9000+ interconnections over a standing 47 stories, broken, into a pile of nanothermate ridden DUST[Bentham/Harrit/Jones] seconds later. That had MOLTEN steel ”running down the channel rails’ in the Pile for WEEKS afterwards, producing evidence of temperatures up to Molybdenum microspheres@4,753F. Producing evidence of its steel being vaporized and evaporation of LEAD.
ALL concrete Pulverized into pyrotechnic cloud.
without jet aircraft fuel,
without explosives/incendiaries?
Further, you are telling us that 3/4inch shear-studs spaced@1ft to 2ft centers[beams and girders] in complex steel framed high-rises are known in structural engineering circles to snap at the temperature it takes to boil an egg?
Have you run this past your supervisor?
There is a HOLE in the universe of your argument called FREE FALL .
There is no deviation. There is no ‘Buckling” or “would be considered expecting…” or “more than a bunch of badly compromised columns to slow it measurably” , no name calling. NOTHING R E S I S T E D the top block for 2.25 seconds MEASURABLY .
That is agreed by NIST.
FREE FALL.
all resistance bye-bye.
I strongly suggest you read Barry Jennings transcript or watch his interview in the minutes after rescue before you reply. The explosions he is talking about occurred in building 7 and had begun by 9:30 in the morning.. Also, refer to research fellow and director Centre for Environmental Safety and Risk Engineering Victoria University Melbourne David Proe and Ian Thomas wtc7 comments 08 regarding known expectations of shear-stud failure quote” The [NIST]assessment of WTC7 appears to conclude that composite beams[beams connected to floor slabs with shear studs] are extremely susceptible to failure due to thermal expansion. This is not our experience at all”
I strongly suggest that you read NCSTAR 1A and 1-9, and pay close attention to both the Probable Collapse Sequence and the WTC 7 framing details, especially the very long interior spans and simple gravity connections inside vs. the tight spacing and moment connections on the exterior. The top ~34 stories weighed ~150,000 tons, and at t=1.75 seconds there was not sufficient opposing structure to produce a measurable difference between g and the actual acceleration. Real controlled demolitions don’t remove all of the support, and buildings subjected to them also free fall as they crush un-severed columns and break connections apart, so timing a portion of a collapse as evidence of its cause is nothing but junk science. There just isn’t that much of a range in elapsed times when a building globally collapses, since the collapse stops when sufficient resistance is encountered.
Barry Jennings apparently heard loud noises inside WTC 7 around 9:30 AM, almost 8 hours before the building finally collapsed, but we wouldn’t need him to tell us if explosives powerful enough to make multiple cuts in 81 columns weighing 500 or 730 pounds per lineal foot went off nearly simultaneously, since even one charge that big would have been heard out on Long Island soon after the ~5:22 PM collapse, not at ~9:30 AM. Since the building sat right on top of a ConEd substation, it’s reasonable to assume that transformers exploded when their secondaries were shorted by plane crashes, fires, and partial collapses across Vesey Street around that time. It’s especially stupid to cite melted metal in the debris fires as C/D evidence, since no known explosive demolition has ever produced it, and no incendiaries or explosives are capable of keeping even lead and aluminum molten for “WEEKS.” The ridiculously high temps you cited were not measured or observed, and certainly aren’t required in explosive demolitions. The concrete was pulverized by gravity alone during the collapse, not by “pyrotechnic clouds,” and explosives intended to sever steel columns in demolitions don’t directly affect floor slabs. Most of the massive quantities of dust from all 3 collapses came from the drywall, not concrete.
I don’t have a “supervisor,” and you obviously know little to nothing about structural engineering, shear studs in composite floor construction, or differential thermal expansion. Heavy concrete slabs do not heat in fires anywhere nearly as rapidly as the steel framing underneath them, and are restrained from expanding equally in the same direction as the axial expansion of the beams. The engineers who determined this know a lot more about it than you or your “9/11 researchers,” have no reason to lie about it, and are fully supported by the ASCE and other real research. If you had any actual evidence of explosive demolition, it would have been seen and documented very soon after the attacks by many of the ~40,000 different people who were involved in the cleanup during the ~8 months it took to clear the site. It simply is not possible to cut even one W14 X 500 or 730 with explosives without generating extremely loud bangs that are heard for many miles, and without leaving very noticeable explosively-cut ends. In typical C/Ds, much lighter steel is pre-cut prior to the main demolition, and the sounds of the explosives still carry for miles.
1. “there was not sufficient opposing structure to produce a measurable difference” ……. “a portion of a collapse as evidence of its cause is nothing but junk science”
That “portion of collapse as evidence of cause” is 2.25 seconds uniform FREE FALL of a complex 81 columned 47 storied steel framed high rise, by historical precedence indicative of controlled demolition. The HOLE in the NIST sequential building probable hypothesis. Explosive charges of whatever sort including high grade nanothermates identified in the DUST, can be reasonably argued the MOST likely reason there was NOT SUFFICIENT OPPOSING STRUCTURE allowing freefall DROP with sudden uniform onset, characteristic KINK in ‘the manner of controlled demolition’ at speed of NO RESISTANCE.
2. “Barry Jennings apparently heard loud noises”. This is mealy mouthed stuff even for you albury.
Barry Jennings stated in plain simple English a ‘MASSIVE EXPLOSION’ blowing them back onto level 8. Completely destroyed the stairwell . Never recanted. a massive explosion at 9:30 + or -TRAPPED them in the building. He further reported numerous explosions going off throughout the building for the approx 2 hrs trapped in there. That is eyewitness evidence. EXPLOSIONS. Detonations. almost killing him and Hess. Not ‘supposed loud noises’. These words are not subject to change. That is not your right. In fact your denial of Mr Jennings original testimony is testament to your conspiracy theory projection. The refusal to acknowledge evidence streams counter your argument has been identified by Cass Sunstein as a ‘crippled epistemology”.
3.”you obviously know little to nothing about structural engineering, shear studs in composite floor construction differential thermal expansion”.
What I know matters little to what is KNOWN. NCSTAR1.9:490 : ‘steel and concrete have similar coefficients of thermal expansion”. and further, argues composite girder/beam flooring are designed to RESIST thermal expansion, that composite beam/girder construction is specific to resisting thermal expansion.They expand at ALMOST the SAME AMOUNT, steel being slightly more expansive[has linear expansion coefficient concrete@1.20 and steel@1.24(in the system of measurement used at this website), -pp313 #28.D>R>Griffin.Mysterious collapse WTC7] so I can only dimly imagine why you pursue that line of attack.
The shear-stud break was IN THE MODEL simulation, albury. It is an untested THEORY. a creation of NIST. Like boiling egg temperatures breaking 160 3/4inch shear studs on 4 major beams and girder attaching columns 44 to 79, which HAD to break to produce the narrative “probable’ critical in the model achieved by TURNING the HEAT OFF the concrete in the simulation- NCSTAR1.9:352.
And you accuse me of junk science.
Shear-stud break, as presented by NIST, is beyond UNUSUAL. According to David PROE in a letter to NIST in its draft for public comment, “We are particularly interested in the finding that the shear studs failed at low temperature. Having conducted numerous fire tests on composite beams, we have NEVER observed this. Was there any physical evidence obtained of this type of failure?” To which NIST never responded. These men [Proe/Thomas] are telling YOU, albury, they have CONDUCTED NUMEROUS TESTS. Have NEVER observed what NIST is presenting. They further state:”We do not agree with the calculations indicating shear stud failure. Under the theory presented the W24 beams try to expand, but this is ENTIRELY prevented by the slab producing very high forces at the shear connectors. In reality, the slab is also heated and expands”[Proe/Thomas comments NIST WTC7 report]
4.” if explosives powerful enough to make multiple cuts in 81 columns weighing 500 or 730 pounds per lineal foot went off nearly simultaneously, since even one charge that big would have been heard out on Long Island ”
Eyewitness of explosive events WERE recorded, including ‘from across the Hudson’ at Hoboken, Frank Sinatra Pier 1.8 miles away on camera by Rick Siegel. You can LISTEN to #7 go off. Buy the dvd. Everyone researching 911 knows full well the evidence streams confirming explosive events.
5.”The ridiculously high temps you cited were not measured or observed”
#RJ Lee study found temperatures reached “at which lead would have undergone vaporization”– 1,749°C (3,180°F). #US Geological Survey found molybdenum had been MELTED. This metal does not melt until it reaches 2,623°C (4,753°F).25 #FEMA app C ‘evidence of a severe high temperature corrosion attack on the steel including oxidation and sulfidation with subsequent intergranular melting’
1. Collapsing hi-rises have already overwhelmed their remaining support or they wouldn’t be falling, regardless of whether it was brought about by the Probable Collapse Sequence in NCSTAR 1A or by demolition explosives, which aren’t placed on all of the columns in controlled demolitions, and still cause free fall to occur. “9/11 researchers” who put videos of known C/Ds and WTC 7’s collapse side-by-side refute their own argument, since there’s still plenty of opposing structure in each, and they both free fall for at least part of the time. You might want to consider why Chandler doesn’t prove his absurd claim by doing the same overly-rigorous analysis of the Landmark Tower or other implosion, but the reason’s pretty obvious. The massive weight of the upper stories simply isn’t measurably slowed by what’s left, so columns buckle, cut columns puncture falling floors, and other destructive processes occur with a total impact on elapsed time that’s only in milliseconds.
2. Jennings would only be among the millions in NYC and beyond who heard demolition charges, and it wouldn’t have been 7 or 8 hours before the ~5:21 PM collapse. If they were powerful enough to cut a W14 X 730, all of the windows on a few nearby levels would have been blown out, and he and his colleague would most likely have been killed or at least deafened by them. Transformers in the ConEd substation undoubtedly shorted around that time, and were in the lower levels of WTC 7. They make a frightening noise when they blow up, and would have inflicted considerable damage to the building. Generally speaking, stairwells aren’t the target of controlled demolitions; columns are, and buildings don’t stand for hours after they’re severed.
3. Regardless of similar expansion coefficients, large concrete floor slabs in burning buildings would not move in unison with the supporting steel below, and would not heat at the same rate in fire conditions that go from room temperature to 600+C in a half hour or so. They’re also restrained by in-plane stiffness, and the stresses from differential lineal expansion of the beams subjected to fire would easily shear off the shear studs, as the NIST research clearly showed. Despite the name, shear studs are not intended to prevent shearing in fires, but to stiffen floors by making the steel composite with the concrete slabs under normal loading conditions. There is a very detailed and rigorous explanation of this in NCSTAR 1A and 1-9. It’s completely logical and warranted to consider the concrete as stationary, and very little differential movement will easily cause stud failure. The “truth movement” has not done the slightest thing to refute this scientifically, nor can they, and attacking the NIST findings does absolutely nothing to prove that explosives were used on 9/11.
4. Siegel’s video was embellished by Sophia “Clunkity-Clunk” Shafquat with fake audio:
Even the lighter steel in the towers would require charges that would have been heard for miles, and they also would have been seen, since 236 of the 283 columns in each one were more than halfway outside of the living areas and in plain view. The smoke from the fires wasn’t even disturbed prior to the collapses, and none of the aluminum cladding came off the columns until the tops started falling. Explosives also do not cause columns to bow inward slowly for a half hour or more before failing completely. The steel in WTC 7 was much heavier, and secretly cutting even one column at the 13th floor level, or even the top for that matter, would have been completely impossible to do with any known demolition technique.
5. The USGS survey [ http://pubs.usgs.gov/of/2001/ofr-01-0429/thermal.r09.html ] recorded maximum temperatures of less than 1400F in the debris fires, and controlled demolitions don’t leave molten metal in their debris. The WPI engineers who analyzed the 2 small pieces of steel reported in Appendix C of the FEMA report are not in your “truth movement,” and the corrosion characteristics they observed are not consistent with the effects of any C/D explosives, or any incendiaries, which aren’t used in C/Ds anyway, since they work too slowly and their effects on steel can’t be timed precisely enough. It’s absurd to cite debris fire temps weeks after a collapse as evidence of anything but long-burning fires fueled by normal building contents.
If Harrit, Jones, et al., along with Box Boy’s “800 engineers” and whatever other talent they could muster, were forced to demonstrate the asinine “theory” that explosives or incendiaries painted on in-place steel columns will sever them, they’d only succeed in making even bigger fools of themselves. Get back to me when they demonstrate on video the cutting of even one representative steel column with explosives, even in a cutter charge actually designed to sever steel. They certainly wouldn’t need someone within a few hundred feet of the column to tell them that he heard an explosion in the cutter charge scenario, and the paint job would just produce a blinding flash and leave the column unscathed. What lunacy…
Well, that’s one way of looking at it albright.
I thought John Coles’ illustration of box cutting and beam perforation pretty well explained itself. Just as the wealth of other eyewitness testimony to explosive and molten steel/concrete had.
Manufactured highly energetic Incendiary/explosives at this advanced nano-scale, as identified by Harrit/Jones, are OBSERVABLY designed to operate in any number of ways. 911proves that.
The contention this was a standard demolition is futile. It obviously, OBSERVABLY, was NOT your normal pit bull. This was a complex deception, HIGHLY organized, DESIGNED to fool us, playing on the susceptibility of the viewer to trust the message, the presidential messenger. Modern explosive technologies are very advanced. The 911 atrocity shows us TIMING and NOISE and MATERIAL is pretty much UNDER CONTROL at this black operational high end,
given the success of the operation.
The clip above is clearly a building EXPLODING from the top down. that’s what an EXPLODING building looks like.
You could do with being more skeptical.
I don’t know who “John Coles” (or “albright”) are, but if you’re referring to Jonathan Cole, he’s yet to produce even one cut end on a piece of steel that matches the corrosion on the 2 samples in FEMA appendix C, or any of the other steel pulled from the WTC debris. His methods would also be completely impossible to employ secretly in occupied office buildings, impossible to time accurately enough for controlled demolition, and he hasn’t tried them in the middle of major fires. Harrit, Jones, et al. have claimed that they’re “reminded” of nanothermite by the rust, sulfur, silicon, aluminum, etc. that they very understandably found in some NYC dust samples, but have provided no exemplars of anything for comparison. They’ve also concluded that their miracle substance was painted on the steel columns, and Jones has even shown photos of torch-cut columns at GZ as “evidence,” so their next step is to paint some on a steel column and show us that it not only cuts it, but also in a straight diagonal line, leaving gray slag around the ends. There’s been a “complex deception, HIGHLY organized, DESIGNED to fool us,” but you’ve failed to notice who’s doing it.
Since your 9/11 “truth movement” thinks it’s infinitely more knowledgeable than the rest of us, including 200+ NIST SEs and other experts with impeccable credentials, it simply is not good enough to make empty claims that “TIMING and NOISE and MATERIAL is pretty much UNDER CONTROL at this black operational high end,” so please feel free to at least cite the technology that you think was used. NIST has clearly shown that explosives would have been redundant in all 3 WTC hi-rise collapses, and no one has ever produced the slightest bit of real evidence for your “theory.” If you see anything in the Siegel video I posted other than a gravitational collapse triggered by a slow structural failure near the burning and plane-damaged 96th floor causing ~60,000 tons of upper floors to crash down on the intact ones below, you have an overactive imagination. I’ve already pointed out to you that the smoke didn’t scatter before the top started falling, nor was any of the aluminum cladding blown away, so do your secret explosives produce no blast waves?
Watch and learn:
http://www.911myths.com/index.php/WTC_Not_A_Demolition
Among the experts interviewed there who totally dismiss 9/11 truther crap are the engineer of record for both towers, and the one for WTC 7. You do have a guy who drops cardboard boxes on each other to simulate the collapse of a steel-framed hi-rise, and corrects none of his numerous and obvious lies, however. “You could do with being more skeptical” of him and his cohorts, and listening to people who are a lot more qualified and honest.
Everyone will be a truther when the truth comes out albury.
Jonathan Cole bought elements from ORDINARY SOURCE, mixed and constructed powerful rudimentary cutting devices to GREAT effect, showing methodology of ”debunk” plastic bag/ piles of thermate-on-beam ignitions to be exactly what they are : MSM game-play. disinformation.
Of course high end use is complicated. sophisticated. RESTRICTED. What else would it be? Dismembering complex 110 and 47 storied steel framed high rises at FREEFALL in lower Manhattan on a Tuesday and calling it ”collapse” is a RIGOROUS display of SKILL. That you don’t see it attests to delivery of another system altogether. . But in terms of ‘investigation’, neither the commission nor NIST disclosed conflicts of interest between nanothermite R/D industries and NIST members. That single lack of disclosure and investigation, considering the observed behavior of building destruction -Constant acceleration through path of greatest resistance – symmetry of debris distribution – rapid onset of destruction – over 100 1st responder reports explosions/flashes of light – Jennings and Rodrieguez reports of prestrike explosive events – multi ton steel sections ejected laterally 600′ at 50+mph – mid air pulverization of all concrete floors no ”pancaking” – massive volume of pyroclastic like clouds – tons of molten iron in the pile”running down the channel rails ‘like in a foundry” – active thermitic material found in dust analysis ttp://www.benthamscience.com/open/tocpj/articles/V002/7TOCPJ.htm -150x the normal amount of iron micro-spheres than usual ‘collapse’ dust LEE – temperatures ranging to 4,753 F [molybdenum microspheres] – FEMA evidence of sulfidation and intergranular melting – 6.5second + or – ‘in the manner of controlled demolition’ drop of 81 columned 47 storied steel framed high rise WTC7, 2.25 seconds at recorded FREE FALL–> that all of these terrible, observable REALITIES were systematically ignored in favor of an untested computer generated ‘probable’, an animated THEORY,
testifies to the sinister void of ‘truth’ we are IN.
http://911review.com/articles/ryan/nist_thermite_connection.html
Please read David Ray Griffins excellent study of the Commission report Omissions and Distortions.
Cole’s videos are hilarious, but going to extremes to get an incendiary to produce bright flashes and eventually melt through a W14 X 26(?) is a far cry from secretly planting it on W14 X 730s in similar contraptions in busy, occupied office buildings, detonating it with precise timing in raging fires, and not leaving any amorphous yellowish blobs of previously molten steel on the ends of W14 X 730 columns like these:
Since you’ve cited an eyewitness account of “tons of molten iron in the pile running down the channel rails ‘like in a foundry,’” please feel free to point out where all of the molten steel is after Cole’s experiment. Molten metal was reported in the WTC debris for months after the terrorist attacks of 9/11, so were these channels that conducted this alleged “molten iron” made of special heat-resistant ceramics? What known incendiaries or explosives continue producing heat for months after they’re detonated?
If you honestly believe that explosives or incendiaries can be painted on steel columns to cut them, why hasn’t anyone in your 9/11 “truth movement” demonstrated this amazing capability on video? If we need Barry Jennings to tell us about demolition explosives in WTC 7, let’s see even one steel column cut so quietly that no one a block away can hear it. When that’s done, show us an end that doesn’t look melted or explosively severed. Instead of spewing vague generalities about “another system altogether,” present a real-world example of one. Your “theory” is not only impossible, there’s no evidence to support it, and no plausible motive for doing it. There are also no “pyroclastic like clouds” that leave paper trails, active thermitic material wasn’t found in any dust samples from the WTC, and it’s pure nonsense to claim to know the cause of a collapse just from timing it, which you obviously haven’t done anyway. The visible portion of WTC 7’s collapse did not occur in 6.5 seconds; it took more than 8 seconds, and anyone claiming to know it to the nearest 1/10 second is lying.
Everyone is not going to be a “truther” in your sense of the word, since the truth is already out and most of us have better sense than to believe lies and unscientific nonsense from con artists like Griffin, Gage, Jones, Harrit, Ryan, and the Loose Change jerks.
You accept J Coles’ rudimentary incendiaries produced bright flashes and melted through steel. Very good. Many dozens of eyewitness reports bright flashes before during and after air-strike. Including explosive events in the super heated pile.
Incendiary/explosive reactions result in violent molten steel bursts into air, forming iron rich micro-spheres as known consequence of thermitic reaction. which could explain to open minds where the ‘150x’ more iron rich micro-spheres LEE group found ‘unusual’ in their dust analysis came from? And where ‘all the’ molten steel went after the experiment. Also where the micro-spheres recorded in the Harrit/jones DUST paper originated.
The heat of which can evaporate and vaporize steel, which would explain FEMA evidence of same.
You must ask honest john NIST Nanothermite experts, c/o their undisclosed ‘other job’ capacities in ‘paint-on’ R/D explosive technologies at Lawrence Livermore et al. what sol-gels are capable of. Unreported Conflicts of interest aside, they would well be able to offer valuable suggestions on what how and why the ‘chips’ analyzed by Harrit/Jones were to be effective in the overall. You could also ask them what HTA’s [high temperature accelerants] do when trapped in 7 storied deep heated PILES of steel for 13 or so weeks. The fact that unignited thermitic material was in the dust samples as analyzed by Harrit/Jones suggests a whole lot more of it captured in the piles, where eyewitnesses reported molten steel ‘running down the channel rails’ ‘like we was in a foundry’, emitting heat registered from space[NASA thermal imaging].
You would also ask them what ‘inter-granular melting’ and ‘eutectic attack with elemental SULFUR’ in the mix indicates, as NYT reported in their ‘ deepest mystery’ piece, and WHY further investigation was NOT forthcoming on any of these evidence streams.
Perhaps for the same reason all eyewitness reports and forensic evidence of explosions, flashes, molten steel and controlled demolition were systematically culled from the official report.
A real world example of ‘another delivery system’ for you albury.
I “accept” that if Mr. Cole worked hard enough at it, he could probably prove that it’s possible to copulate while standing up on a hammock too, but he’s a long way from secretly demolishing architectural enclosures and planting incendiaries and their necessary contraptions on steel columns in busy, occupied office buildings, getting them to cut through sections up to 5″ thick, doing it all with perfect timing in raging fires, and not leaving any evidence on the ends of the steel. Producing very bright flashes is what incendiaries do, so where were all of the ones immediately preceding the tower and WTC 7 collapses? In both towers combined, there were 472 columns that were substantially outside of the living spaces and in plain sight, so how many of those blinding flashes did you see before or during either collapse? What did these alleged “thermitic reactions” DO, since not one column pulled from the WTC debris had an end on it that was melted, explosively cut, or matched the ones from Coles’ experiments? Are 2 small corroded pieces of steel all that’s left as evidence when hundreds of columns are secretly and miraculously severed with explosives or incendiaries? The WPI researchers who examined the 2 pieces they described in FEMA’s Appendix C are not in your “truth movement,” and believe that the corrosion occurred over many months in the debris conditions.
The GZ debris fire temperatures recorded with NASA imaging equipment by the USGS (not NASA, and from 6500′, not “from space”):
http://pubs.usgs.gov/of/2001/ofr-01-0429/thermal.r09.html
did not exceed 1400 F, and the RJ Lee dust sample analysis for Deutsche Bank says nothing at all about nanothermite (or “HTAs”), despite the fact that it seems to be all that Jones and Harrit’s “research” found, or at least were “reminded of.” If the eyewitness accounts you cited were of molten steel, not the very abundant lead and aluminum, why didn’t the steel channels in the descriptions melt also? What explosives or incendiaries burn for months?
Steven Jones also thinks painting a MIC on a steel column will produce the same results as cutting one off with an oxyacetylene torch, since he used photos of torch-cut columns on page 32 here as “evidence”:
Click to access WhyIndeedDidtheWorldTradeCenterBuildingsCompletelyCollapse.pdf
Please note the tanks, cart, hoses, etc. in the photo on the right. You claim to want a “real investigation,” so why hasn’t your 9/11 “truth movement” painted some explosives on a steel column and made a video to show us how it works? His pal Harrit says that at least “a hundred tons” of conventional high explosives were planted at the WTC along with his alleged nanothermite:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oj0cAhqy6dQ (at 1:30)
For some perspective on how sane that is, a hundred tons of RDX would fill up at least 4 tri-axle truck beds. Fragmentation grenades contain ~8 oz of conventional high explosive, so he’s claiming that the equivalent of ~400,000 of them all went off secretly in NYC around the same time. Ever heard one go off?
The ASCE, RIBA, and AIA are in the real world, and there’s a good reason why crap from Gage, Harrit, Jones, Ryan, etc. is nowhere to be found on their web sites.
smut humor. all you offer are distractions. J.Cole proved beyond doubt elemental material properly arranged can do EXACTLY what BBC Pop Mechanics debunk HIT peices lied to prove it couldn’t. Cole illustrated by experimentation how outer columns of towers could have had internal connection bolts ‘pop-pop-pop” ‘like gunfire’ so black art conspirators wouldn’t need to show off big boom-boom for albury. And odds 10 to 1
Members of organizations cited will be completely uninformed/unaware/career sensitive of forensic facts 911 researchers have uncovered, never having been, nor perhaps wanting to be, scientifically confronted by 2.25 second free fall of WTC 7, let alone other facts of Tower destruction and zelikow commission cover-up. Any open minded academic study of 81 columned 47 storied steel framed high rise dropping at free fall for over 100ft then to dismember itself into fragmented pile from ‘normal office furnishings fires’ – where it burns for 13 +or- weeks with temperatures up to 4,753F is going to destroy NIST narrative.
None of cited groups have done due diligence on 911 if they don’t understand that.
Arguing an untested NIST animation, invented by secret computer program; a PROBABLE HYPOTHESES ‘fire induced collapse’ never seen before nor since in building science – a constructed THEORY specifically designed for the humorless, that proposes complete disintegration of steel framed building structures AT, and almost AT, free fall speed through paths of greatest resistance -WITHOUT explosive sequencing, completely pulverizing hundreds of acres of concrete floor into DUST, from which Markers of violent incendiary reactions have been found and analyzed is a presumption of sanity you would do well to address before pretending your next opinion.
Have you studied definition of ‘conflict of interest ‘ yet?
It appears to me that you don’t want to be “scientifically confronted” with anything that disturbs your fantasy that all of the columns in a building must be cut in order for free fall acceleration to occur. It happens routinely in real C/Ds, as your one-trick pony could easily prove with the same methodology he used for WTC 7, since only enough columns are explosively cut in them to trigger the collapse, allowing gravity to do almost all of the actual demolition. Acceleration rates are not indicative of the cause of a building collapse, and it’s junk science at its worst to present them as evidence. If you’d bother to look at the NCSTAR 1A modeling, you might notice that there’s little to nothing there from t=1.75 to t=4 seconds to slow the descent of that much mass, but you’d apparently rather succumb to the notion that a few hours of reading truther crap and watching misleading and grossly dishonest videos puts you on a par with SEs with doctorates and PE certification.
Once again, you’re doing nothing to further your absurd hypothesis by attacking the findings of NIST, probably the most experienced, credible, and respected group of forensic engineers in the world, and there’s nothing at all preventing your 9/11 “truth movement” from producing its own models. Box Boy claims to have “800 engineers,” so why haven’t they done any LS-DYNA and ANSYS modeling of their own? They could also paint some explosives on steel columns and show us all how that untested “theory” works, even on WFs that don’t weigh 500 or 730#/lineal foot. Secretly melting or blowing up connection bolts is inconsistent with turning massive amounts of concrete to fine dust with explosives, so you don’t even have a “PROBABLE HYPOTHESIS,” and what passes for one in your world seems to vacillate between imaginary explosives that leave no evidence behind and imaginary incendiaries that don’t either, unless you’re willing to add ~40,000 cleanup workers at GZ and the recycling centers to the plot, along with PopMech, NIST, Weidlinger Associates, Skidmore, Owings, Merrill, UL, Dr. Abolhassan Astaneh-Asl, Dr. Jonathan Barnett and his 2 colleagues at WPI, the SEs of record for the towers and WTC 7, 12 insurance companies that paid a total of ~$4.68 billion without questioning whether secret explosives were used, the “zelikow commission,” FEMA, FDNY, NFPA, etc.
Despite Cole’s absurdly inapplicable and irrelevant comedy act, what you’re alleging is completely impossible, and I’m wondering if you even have an imaginary perpetrator and a plausible motive for this lunacy. US troops were as good as in Afghanistan well before the South Tower collapsed, and if you think Silverstein profited from the 9/11 attacks, don’t go into the real estate business.
The lawyers in this blatant abuse of US courts can’t even keep their lies straight:
http://screwloosechange.blogspot.com/2011/12/lawyers-for-911-tru-oh-look-squirrel.html
I have been following the April Gallop lawsuit comedy for quite a while now, and thought it had died out, but it turns out one of the lawyers involved filed another appeal of his fines, along with a pseudo-apology. It would help his case though if he could keep a consistent train of thought for more than a few pages.
From page 6 of his response:
FAA flight controllers in Boston and elsewhere gave timely notice to military authorities that the four airliners were out of contact and possibly hijacked. According to normal protocol and practice USAF-NORAD jets would have been readily able to intercept all four planes, but launchings were inexplicably delayed and misdirected, and three of the planes got through to their targets.
OK, well three of the planes hit their targets, presumably the two which hit the World Trade Center and the one that hit the Pentagon, the fourth crashing in a field in Pennsylvania. Unfortunately for the lawyer Dennis Cunningham, later in the paper… OK, well the VERY NEXT PAGE, page 7, he writes:
The evidence of one’s own eyes also proves that no airliner crashed into the Pentagon, as claimed by authorities (and conspirators) in the aftermath of the bombing in which the plaintiff and her child were injured. In view of the plain evidence, photographic and physical, and the telling, wholly implausible lack of such evidence supporting the official version,the withholding of 85 Pentagon surveillance videotapes, and the first-hand testimony of the plaintiff and numerous others, the claim that no airliner hit is certainly far from conclusory. It is entitled to be taken as true.
How hard is it to keep a consistent narrative for 4 paragraphs? Geez, hire a secretary or something.
Whether or not “all of the columns in a building must be cut for FREE FALL acceleration to occur” is coincidental to the FACT that ALL or ENOUGH WERE cut on WTC7 to ACHIEVE it. For 2.25secs/108ft+or- and ALMOST free fall on the towers. Fact is, free fall OCCURRED, much as the riggers leaving number 7 said it would to camera as they left [keep your eyes on that building..Its comin’ down soon’etc.’the building is going to blow up’ etcetcetc] Free fall occurred. FACT. A complex 81 columned 47 storied steel framed structure turned to JELLY, and in 6.5 seconds+or- lay dismembered in its own plan area all concrete turned to DUST. LSDYNA/NIST animation does not correlate with observed behaviour. Does NOT EXPLAIN how the ‘mysterious’ magic bolt malaise spread across the entire 81 vertical columns in split seconds and then throughout the mass cold undamaged beam/girder structure to enable its observed destruction unless you take LSD to argue the YNA of the model.
If, at crime scene, you have evidence of explosive detonations [plenty], building destruct behavior ‘in the manner of controlled demolition'[stated and observed], Unusual spikes in temperatures, gasses, forensic evidence of intergranular attack on steel[as does], foreknowledge by owner to ‘pull it ‘[fcrissake] evidence in DUST of unignited[chips]and ignited [iron spheroids]thermitic material[which we DO], evidence of molten steel in the pile[which there is] ALL UN-INVESTIGATED in official narrative – while all aberrant behavior ‘explained’ by brand new un-peer reviewed un-tested by cross-examination computer model phenomena never seen before nor since in steel framed building science, the parameters of its design held SECRET by the Government who’s undisclosed conflict of interest agency created the program,
then the problem is the bigger one of truth and cover-up. Is the bigger one of justice.
“Fcrissake,” if Silverstein had any foreknowledge of or complicity in this alleged controlled demolition, and not simply the same concerns about WTC 7’s growing instability that these first responder/eyewitnesses had for hours before it finally collapsed:
http://sites.google.com/site/wtc7lies/eyewitnessaccountsofwtc7fires
http://sites.google.com/site/wtc7lies/accountsofwtc7damage
http://sites.google.com/site/wtc7lies/eyewitnessaccountsofthewithdrawalfromwtc
then:
-why would he have publicly admitted to it in a PBS interview for a documentary?
-what was Silverstein Properties’ (and the FDNY’s and whoever else you’re libeling) motive for secretly blowing up a perfectly good, 14 year-old building, losing hundreds of millions of dollars in cash flow from it for years, spending ~$700 million, or most of the $861 million insurance settlement, on the replacement of it, and paying ~$500 million back to lenders?
(note: it was built in 1986-1987, at least 15 years after asbestos was written out of all building codes, and it had no “asbestos problem” in its SFRM or elsewhere. There was some on the first 38 floors of the North Tower, most of which had been safely removed during various tenant fit-outs well before he won the lease by default when Vornado’s deal with the PA fell though, but none in the South Tower, which was built after the code change went into effect.)
-why would any insurance company have paid him a dime instead of the $4.68 BILLION total he received, but especially those based in Copenhagen, Zurich (2 of them), and London? (All 12 of the companies insuring the WTC properties contested his claim of two occurrences based on two separate plane crashes, and he won in court in a few instances based on individual contract wording, but there was never any question relating to the causes of any WTC collapse.)
-how did he or the FDNY know that flaming debris from a much taller collapsing hi-rise across the street would hit WTC 7, start multi-story fires in it, and break the water main to it, disabling the sprinklers and providing a cover story for this alleged controlled demolition?
-if the explosives were pre-planted, which would have taken months in a vacant building and have been completely impossible to do secretly in an occupied one, and Barry Jennings heard some of them go off around 10 AM, why was there any discussion at all in mid-afternoon about whether or not to demolish WTC 7 with the other apparently fireproof explosives allegedly planted a few stories higher?
-do controlled demolitions take seven or eight hours to collapse a building?
-do they leave no severed columns with melted ends, copper residue on the ends, or any other evidence in the debris?
-do they leave ~12 stories on one corner (the NW) standing?
-is the FDNY in the controlled demolition business? What other buildings, on fire or not, have they demolished before or since 9/11?
-please link me to a demolition contractor’s web site, and show me the use of “pull” or “pull it” to refer to building demolition using explosives, not one in which cables are used to pull a building over, as was done with the very badly damaged WTC 6.
-how does “such a terrible loss of life” in the WTC towers affect a later decision to demolish a nearby building with no one in it?
-a number of firefighters had been inside WTC 7 prior to the FDNY’s ~2:30 PM pullback order, presumably at risk from these alleged explosives, and most of the 343 FDNY fatalities resulted from the tower collapses, so why are there only a few FDNY in the 9/11 “truth movement”? You can count the number in this “truth” organization who even claim to be FDNY right here:
firefightersfor911truth.org/?page_id=469
Are they simply not as astute as you and your 9/11 “truth movement” are, or don’t they care what killed so many of their colleagues, including close relatives?
-there was a pre-existing ConEd substation at the Vesey Street site in 1986, and WTC 7 was built over it, requiring some of the very unusually long ~45′ girder and ~52′ beam spans inside that contributed to the 9/11 collapse. It was powered up and in full use on 9/11/01, and the collapse of a ~200,000-ton, 47-story building directly on top of it very likely destroyed it completely. Do you know whether ConEd, its insurers, and its shareholders just absorbed the tens of millions of dollars in loss of use, infrastructure damage, and restoration costs and then subrogated Industrial Risk Insurers, since Larry Silverstein’s firm was still the responsible party, especially if he deliberately caused the damage?
You have no motive, no evidence, and you’re alleging something that’s impossible, i.e. the SECRET demolition of a busy, occupied hi-rise, right in the middle of a major downtown area on a Tuesday afternoon. You also have not explained why your “researchers” haven’t done their own computer modeling, since the structural info, fire spread data, and other important input criteria are readily available, and you’re beating a dead horse with Chandler’s free fall bunk. Regardless of what causes the complete collapse of a structure, the time it takes is largely determined by gravity, and NIST’s modeling correlates very closely with the times determined by them and by your One-Trick Pony. The falling mass was simply too much to be measurably slowed by the columns in the condition they were in from t=1.75 to t=4 seconds. You’re also just plain lying about the 6.5 seconds, but truth doesn’t seem to matter much to you.
Its good ‘NIST modeling manages to correlate closely its own times as determined by them’. That must be hard to program. kinda like you asking yourself your own name and almost being able to spell it.
Which albury possibly can. But. Free fall is free fall. The NIST projection can program itself with the click of a mouse to present the ‘probable’ ‘thermal expansion’ theory on ONE of the 81 [eighty one] WTC7columns, on ONE floor out of 47 that was probably not even BURNING at the time[oops], but then has nowhere to go except up itself. Which it does. The one critical axial seat walk off column 79 does not transmit to the other 80 columns and 46 floors UNLESS by animation, explosion or by taking drugs. The latter likely necessary given the disgusting nature of Bush/obama administration cover-up and USE of such an atrocity. NIST computer modeling animation by no stretch of the imagination covers that gulf of structural discord between column 79 seat/critical moment in one corner of a major steel framed high-rise, and nanothermite in the DUST later found on the other.. even if you turn the heat off the concrete in the model and crank the numbers. The building, according to NIST, dismembers itself. drops jelly-like into a pile. Evaporating itself, flowing a river of connection releases without any seeming cause, pulverizing its concrete floor slabs into dust a ‘new phenomenon’ from uncle shyams magic pencil[the magic bolt]. The sudden drop over its entire building area for 108 ft free fall – 2.25seconds out of a 6.5 second+or-total drop time only ever known in history before and since by remote control explosive demolition. Consistently referred to in earliest reports as “in the manner of Controlled Demolition”
“The falling mass was simply too much to be measurably slowed by the columns in the condition they were in from t=1.75 to t=4 seconds” you say, but WHAT condition were the columns IN that you know about? WHAT CONDITION were the 81 columns IN to allow all 81 of them – at one moment- NOT TO BE THERE AT ALL for 2.25 seconds? free fall.
No.
Its the 108′ +or- free-fall drop that hangs NIST everytime. There is NO explanation for OBSERVED behaviour other than controlled demolition until NIST’s ‘office furnishings fire’ probable is PROPERLY TESTED in a court of LAW, cross-examined in accordance with the gravity of its contention in the face of all precedent.
Not surprisingly, you just ducked all of my very valid questions about your spin on the Silverstein PBS quote, and are simply repeating the same unsubstantiated nonsense about NIST, fall times, etc. Once again, attacking anything in NCSTAR 1A, 1-9, or any other NIST report does nothing whatsoever to further your absurd C/D hypothesis. I also stated that the NIST modeling correlates to the actual times, not simply those determined by them, so please try to keep it honest.
Secretly cutting steel columns–especially those as massive as the W14 X 500 or 730s in WTC 7– with explosives is completely impossible, and doing it without leaving any steel with explosively-cut ends on it is even beyond that. Free fall for a portion of the collapse, which took a total of ~8.5, not 6.5 seconds, is not evidence of what caused it, and that’s easily proven simply by timing real controlled demolitions, since all columns are not cut in them. The Landmark Tower:
http://www.break.com/index/landmark_tower_demolition.html (turn up the volume a little if you’d like even more proof of how truly asinine your “theory” is)
dropped like a rock, and only enough columns were cut to get it started and channel it all inward. Anyone working on the cleanup afterward could easily spot every column that was explosively cut, and your “truth movement” has to resort to misrepresenting photos of torch-cut columns at GZ. Go figure…
If you’d actually bother to look at the WTC 7 framing, and had any understanding at all of the collapse sequence, you’d see why it went down in such a contained manner. Long (45 to 52 foot) interior spans like that are extremely uncommon in hi-rises, and so are sprinkler mains severed prior to major fires. There was very good reason for the FDNY and others to expect it to collapse, so they don’t share your views on the severity and spread of the fires. They were also there, and you weren’t.
Here are some of the results of the NIST WTC collapse investigations:
http://www.nist.gov/el/disasterstudies/about.cfm
Please note “Impact on Codes, Standards, and Practices” there, and get back to me when Box Boy, Griffin, your One-Trick Pony, or any other 9/11 “truth” charlatan has any of his crap taken seriously by code agencies, the ASCE, RIBA, AIA, etc.
When you find the time, please feel free to address the Silverstein questions in my last post too.
Thanks.
Silverstein can answer for himself when american justice finds its courage and steps up. Bush et al at international war crimes in Hague for the hundreds of thousands murdered as result of this global military aggression riding the psychopathic/sociopathic criminal conspiracy false flag 911.
YOU can come back to your “falling mass was simply too much to be measurably slowed by the [eighty-one[81]] columns in the condition they were in” sophistry and EXPLAIN what allowed THE MASS to suddenly FREE-FALL? How did ‘the MASS’ become ‘the MASS’ from one small office furnishings fire at one isolated location [one floor/beam/girder/column connection] to eight stories and 81 columns in an INSTANT…..explain what you think the possible ‘condition’ the 81 columns were IN to have this complex structure become MASS and drop over its entire football field size plan area like a rock for 8 stories/2.25secs/108ft +or – during its 6.5second +or- global/total drop phase!
you CANNOT HAVE free fall with buckling.
Buckling IS RESISTANCE. Resistance IS MEASURABLE. Free Fall is NO Resistance. So there WAS NO RESISTANCE for 108’+or- as acknowledged by NIST . NO COLUMNS offered ANY buckling resistance over ENTIRE plan area for 2.25 secs 108′ +or-
.
Nothing you offer alters that 2.25 second gap in the narrative that allows the light in on a terrible and bitter TRUTH. WTC 7 was controlled demolition. We are being professionally LIED to.
Since you’re the one making the allegation against Silverstein, it’s your responsibility to provide a plausible motive, yet you refuse to answer any of my questions regarding one. WTC 7 and its owner have nothing to do with the “global military aggression riding the psychopathic/sociopathic criminal conspiracy false flag 911,” so you’ve just vaguely tossed together numerous motives and perpetrators in the hopes that something will stick. American justice requires a plausible motive, as well as EVIDENCE, and you’ve presented none of either.
It’s ironic that you claim to be “professionally LIED to,” when you continue to lie about the 6.5 seconds, and aren’t even interested in timing other building collapses to check your baseless assertion that every column must be cut in order for free fall to occur. Any kid with a semester of physics under his belt can do what your One-Trick Pony did, but no competent SE would ever claim that fall times indicate a cause. Buildings that lose enough support to collapse globally do it in a very narrow range of times, and it’s junk science to use that 2.25 seconds as evidence of anything.
In order to indict anyone for this motive-free alleged crime you’ve dreamed up out of thin air, you need to explain why not one explosively-severed column was pulled out of the WTC debris, and why no other evidence of a controlled demolition was found. After you’ve done that, be sure to indict the 230+ NIST engineers and scientists too, along with all of these people and many more:
http://sites.google.com/site/wtc7lies/someoftheagencies%2Corganizationsandindivi
Spoken as a true professional. albury.
Your ‘American justice requiring evidence’ allowed a mass murder crime scene cleared of all steel before proper NFPA 921 national standard fire investigations were conducted. Were not even going to investigate it until the Jersey Girls SHAMED them into a corrupt Commission[Press for Truth].
Officially, “The lack of WTC7 steel PRECLUDED tests on actual material from the structure” [Branovic:NCSTAR 1-3B] yet even so, from what LITTLE evidence was accessed of steel involved in these critical building failures [approx0.25% of all steel was retained] FEMA discovered anomalous [UNUSUAL]examples of high temp.intergranular attack, evaporation and vaporization of steel including vaporization of lead and Molybdenum microspheres requiring FURTHER investigation, with LEE reporting 150X more than ‘usual’ iron microspheres than in normal building ‘collapse’ DUST- both EVIDENCE of thermite reactions having taken place. Neither recorded evidence stream pursed by ‘American justice’ as EVIDENCE countering official ‘fire induced thermal expansion’, an untested NIST theory FEMA considered having a very low probability of occurring. Add the EVIDENCE of elemental sulfur [NYT:Perhaps the Greatest Mystery] which NISTS undisclosed conflicted of interest/nanothermite-scientists could have revealed, elemental sulfur added to thermite creates THERMATE-an even more powerful incendiary] and Harrit/Jones finding unignited thermitic material CHIPS in the DUST, are four clear EVIDENCE streams toward explosive demolition hypothesis as most likely.
Five when you add the ‘in the manner of controlled demolition’ 2.25 seconds free fall wtc7.
TO argue 2.25 seconds free fall – the global total and sudden drop of an 81 vertically columned football field sized steel framed building at free fall from one isolated column/girder seat failure-108ft freefall- to argue that is ‘baseless’ and ‘not evidence of anything at all’ is dogma.
FREE-FALL is evidence that WTC7 itself was BASELESS. for approx. 8 of its 47 stories. A complex structural block of steel interactions 108’x330’x140′ column/girder/beam/shear-stud connected floor slabs, all gone to nowhere in a split second to allow OBSERVED behavior. This is what you have to concentrate on Albury.
Spoken as a true amateur, Roger. You’ve made it very obvious why you’re not a forensic structural engineer and will remain mired in the 9/11 “truth movement” forever. In your little world, collapse times are evidence of a C/D, and 81 massive steel columns can all be secretly cut multiple times with explosives, accompanied by no deafening bangs and leaving no explosively-cut column ends in the debris. 2 small, nondescript pieces of corroded steel that the WPI engineers said were slowly degraded in the debris fires well after the collapses are enough evidence for you, despite the fact that no one in your “truth movement” has ever duplicated that effect with explosives, incendiaries, or anything else they can dream up.
You’ll also continue to libel people who had nothing to do with the WTC collapses, but you can’t even answer simple questions regarding an alleged motive.
Forever is a long long time Albury, and we are ALL mired in the LIE of 911. Until we confront it, it mires us. Many hundreds of thousands have been buried by it.
Addressing your two material questions, as said before NIST told us LACK OF STEEL PRECLUDES TESTS on ACTUAL material from the structure, so what you demand of ME, clear evidence of beam cut etc. in the face of NIST themselves telling you lack of steel precludes it, is impossible of anyone. It was all shipped out through the networks before due diligence. A great example of american justice at work.
You, on the other hand, dismiss actual forensic study of what little available steel there was, as nondescript and of no consequence, even though the steel actually found and studied by forensic experts in the field at the time, recorded extremely high temperature and chemical anomalies UNUSUAL to ‘normal’ office furnishings fires, requiring urgent further study. Slow degradation in debris fires is NOT a conclusion. It is an untested and isolated OPINION . Further, it opens the unusual nature of debris pile fires as another major part of the investigation. EVIDENCE of thermitic reaction HAS BEEN FOUND and INTRODUCED into the public records.
You are saying the 81 massive steel columns of WTC7 could not have been cut by present technologies in explosive/incendiary because accompanied ‘bangs’ would have what? Alerted the Police? Woken the whole wide world up to the STENCH of 911 inside job?
Accompanied ‘bangs’- Explosive events, WERE heard, recorded and reported over one hundred times throughout the day from the instant before plane strike as eye-witnessed by Barry Jennings and Willie Rodreguez, to McPaddon hearing WTC7 countdown at 5:20 pm. The fact that all this evidence has been on public record for ten years without resolution is testament to the power of fascism and the illiterate nature of our being. The ‘massive steel columns’ you contend would need mass amounts of explosives to cut, you are happy to accept come down at FREE FALL through path of greatest resistance by small OFFICE FURNISHINGS FIRES. SO, whereas you have clear investigative lines and eyewitness reports of explosive detonations, unusual fire events, eruptive ejections of heavy steel sections, forensic evidence by experts of high temperature inter-granular attack on steel INconsistent with NORMAL OFFICE FURNISHINGS FIRES, unignited thermitic material found in the dust samples, all concrete PULVERIZED, observed FREE FALL “in the manner of Controlled Demolition” occurring in an obvious terror attack killing thousands of people,
you, Albury, go with the untested computer model from a government department with undisclosed conflicts of interest in the very nanothermite industry ignored by them in their report, which presents an animation not looking anything like the observed event – in fact twists and turns every which way EXCEPT straight down in THE OBSERVED 6.5 seconds [plus or minus] global drop, 2.25 seconds of that at FREE FALL not shown, A ‘thermal expansion’ computer model THEORY with parameters NOT allowing ‘thermal conductivity? that had shear-studs breaking in tests that didn’t heat the concrete they were ENCASED in at the proposed critical break point of ONE girder/column seat, spread by click of the mouse to the 80 other undamaged columns ? Which by official standards has a ‘low probability of occurring’.
These are facts in the public arena. The official reports do NOT stack up. Your arguments do NOT counter the information out there.
A blind man would have seen evidence of explosives or incendiaries on the column ends from a mile away, Roger, and ~40,000 different people worked on the cleanup for ~8 months, including experienced demolition contractors, and engineers from SEAoNY, FEMA (BPAT), PANYNJ, NSF, ASCE, and other agencies. There was no justification whatsoever for the huge cost involved in moving several hundred thousand tons of steel more than once, and some of it is still in storage at JFK’s Hangar 17 and at the NIST facility in MD.
You clearly are not an SE, or in any way qualified to critique the work product of one of the most experienced and respected groups of forensic structural engineers in the world, nor do your amateurish attempts provide one shred of evidence for your groundless and motive-free C/D “theory,” but here are some clues:
-Differential thermal expansion in fires was found by NIST to have caused the first shear stud failures at extremely low temperatures (~103C), and required no heating of the shear studs per se. Concrete slabs have a similar coefficient of expansion to the steel framing supporting them, but were restrained by in-plane lateral stiffness and take longer to heat than the thinner and more exposed steel. These findings have not been countered by any other legitimate research.
-No deafening bangs comparable to demolition explosives were heard on 9/11, and what was heard did not immediately precede any main collapse, or even come from the areas where they originated. The FDNY who reported them are not in your “truth movement.”
-There’s no reason for a WTC 7 countdown in your imaginary C/D scenario, no bangs immediately followed it, and the FDNY and NYPD would have been pretty stupid to send one out over their frequencies, given the number of others nearby who’d have heard it.
-There was no nanothermite to “ignore,” and sulfur, rust, silicon, and aluminum can “remind” your “researchers” of anything they want it to, especially when they provided no exemplars of it for comparison.
-If the NIST modeling is “untested,” get Gage’s “800 engineers” to do their own. They’ve had a decade or so, and the info’s available.
-The WPI engineers actually analyzed the 2 small pieces of steel they reported in FEMA’s Appendix C, and found no connection between the condition it was in and events prior to any collapse.
-Your “researchers” haven’t duplicated the effects on those 2 pieces with any explosive or incendiary.
-Your obsession with the brief period of free fall acceleration is completely misguided, as the same analysis of collapse times in real C/Ds, in which only some of the columns are severed and entire intact floors are very quickly crushed by gravity alone, would clearly prove. Chandler’s whole premise is junk science.
Watch and learn:
http://www.911myths.com/index.php/WTC_Not_A_Demolition
After watching that link, I realize your confusion. The presentation is certainly among the most biased I have seen. Too much of that would give you cancer.
However, it helps explain why anyone could seriously accept shear-stud break in major steel framed high rises at the temperature it takes to boil water.
In NIST probable theory, the 4 beams axially expanding to ‘walk’ girder between columns 44 and 79 off seat, have about 112 3/4″shear studs between them. Plus the girder studs. plus all the studs holding the floor slabs to the beams and girders on the other side of the girder being hypothetically pushed. Plus the other TWO girders from the other side connected to the column at that same point All holding the girder and column79 in place. . NCSTAR does not explain to me and nor do you how normal office furnishings fires could possibly heat/stress snap the hundreds of high powered connection studs explicitly engineered for the purpose of containing differentials under heat in modern steel framed high rise construction.
UNLESS the differential/critical stress under heat is in a computer MODEL with heat turned OFF concrete in the Model allowing necessary STRESS to accumulate. With THERMAL CONDUCTIVITY turned OFF in the model so heat differentials can be maintained at a POINT. How do you have no thermal conductivity in a Thermal expansion hypothesis?? There is no physical evidence of shear stud break, and no eyewitnesses to it. It was ‘found by NIST’ because NIST put it there. constructed the model for that express purpose, with ‘lack of steel precluding test’ to prove it otherwise. NIST programed the computer.
Which findings HAVE been countered by legitimate research. [Proe/Thomas]
But we have said all this before, and you know it.
What WAS eyewitnessed, were explosive detonations INSIDE sub basement levels prior to air-strike and in WTC7 at 9:30am almost killing the witness and trapping him in the building. Barry Jennings went on to report explosive events occurring throughout the building during the almost three hours he was trapped in there. Also eye witnessed was a countdown to the 5.20pm demolition of the building by McPaddon.
WPI reported what they forensically FOUND. just as Lee did. No conclusions were offered except to call for further investigation of unusual anomalies recorded. Usual practice surely.
Sulfur Iron oxide silicon aluminum etc etc were elemental and pre-mixed on the nano scale set in an advanced industrial matrix. That IGNITE. not isolated particles floating about in the vortex. Which, after ignition left evidential iron microspheres in the DUST as direct result of thermitic reaction. Microspheres which LEE found in their dust analysis to be 150x more than in usual ‘collapse’ dust. Read the conclusion of the Harrit/Jones paper.
Jonathan COLE duplicated effects with ‘home sourced’ thermitic mix in stark illustration of effect.
Referral to free fall as OBSERVED and known control demolition building behavior, as opposed to NISTs ‘probable’ computer hypothesis ‘new phenomena, unproven, untested, never observed before nor since, secretively arrived at and politically motivated THEORY- is important balance to whatever insistence is that it be ‘misguided junk science’. Let decisions be made on proper presentation of ALL evidence.
I realize your confusion too, Roger, and you really should leave the structural engineering to SEs. Shear studs in composite floors are not “explicitly engineered” for lateral stresses from even a little differential thermal expansion, and in a normal office furnishings fire environment, W24 X 55 beams heat up much faster than a floor slab they’re supporting, expanding axially while the slab is restrained. There’s virtually no deformation of the shear stud/top beam flange welds before they fail, and that was found to have begun happening at ~103C beam temps. The interior beam and girder spans east and north of column 79 were MUCH longer than any I’ve ever seen or even heard of, the girder was asymmetrically loaded, only four 7/8″ bolts held the girder to the column, and that area was a disaster waiting to happen in fires left unchecked by sprinklers. The One Meridian Plaza hi-rise in Philadelphia was framed symmetrically, had no spans in the entire building over 30′, compared to ~52′ beam and ~45′ girder spans in WTC 7, had all moment connections (which make a huge difference), and it still nearly collapsed and later had to be razed, just because of the 2′ to 3′ deflections in the floor framing from plain old office fires, which occurred with sprinklers and firefighting efforts. You’re also repeatedly ignoring the obvious fact that even if the NIST findings aren’t 100% perfect, which you and your “researchers” aren’t qualified to judge anyway, you still have no evidence for your absurd motive-and evidence-free, delayed-reaction, fireproof explosives hypothesis, with a completely useless and inexplicable “countdown” that only one guy knows about, and charges that weren’t even heard a block away. You’re also ignoring numerous eyewitness accounts of the real reason WTC 7 finally collapsed:
sites.google.com/site/wtc7lies/eyewitnessaccountsofwtc7fires
sites.google.com/site/wtc7lies/accountsofwtc7damage
sites.google.com/site/wtc7lies/eyewitnessaccountsofthewithdrawalfromwtc
The 3 WPI engineers aren’t even suggesting that the 2 little pieces of corroded steel are C/D evidence, nor does RJ Lee connect their findings to explosive demolition, so you’re grasping at straws. The real evidence would have been very clearly seen on the ends of the steel in the debris and reported by thousands of people, and you simply don’t have any, unless you count Steven Jones’s photos of columns cut with oxyacetylene torches, copious gray slag and all. Willie Rodriguez is a nutjob who’s also claimed that UA 93 was shot down by a top secret high-powered microwave weapon firing a beam from a military C-130, and if he heard demolition explosives in the basement, so would everyone else in the building and within blocks. Actually, if they were powerful enough to cut the ~7″ thick steel column sections in the sub-basement levels of the towers, the concussions would have killed him and others, and permanently deafened many more, instead of burning a guy’s skin off with flaming jet fuel near an elevator door. The North Tower collapsed more than an hour and 42 minutes later, starting ~1200′ higher, and plenty of people witnessed explosions inside right after AA 11 hit; falling elevators, flaming debris, and exploding fuel vapors blew off elevator doors on both sky lobby levels and the basement, and killed people in the upper lobbies when the local cars bottomed out. Since he was inside and nearly 100 floors away, he had no way of knowing when the plane hit, and is simply making a buck on the lecture circuit with a ridiculous yarn about basement columns being blown up by explosives so quiet that we need him to tell us about them, and a building that keeps standing anyway. He has a web site begging for donations if you’re interested. Harrit, Jones, et al. aren’t playing with a full deck either, but their bunk did earn this peer review:
screwloosechange.blogspot.com/2009/04/bentham-editor-resigns-over-steven.html
Get back to me if they ever present exemplars of the stuff they’re “reminded” of by rust, aluminum, sulfur, silicon, etc. It’s pretty basic science to do that, yanno.
The video I linked to is “biased” toward reality and actual facts, not goofy tinfoil hat conspiracy nonsense, and I noticed that you had no specific objection to it, so try watching it with your eyes open and the volume turned on. I’d also like to hear one plausible motive for demolishing any of the 3 WTC hi-rises. Silverstein obviously lost billions and had none, or you’d have addressed my questions about your “pull it” nonsense by now, and at ~5:21 PM, we had enough reason to retaliate with troops for the 9/11 al Qaeda suicide attacks without secretly blowing up any NYC buildings, even if we thought we didn’t after the 2 US embassy suicide attacks in 1998, and the USS Cole suicide attack in 2000.
The bigger the LIE, albury……..
shear studs are DESIGNED to hold concrete floors to beams/girders under fire in steel frame construction.
to suggest 103 degree temperatures started to break this massive structure apart in observed manner is propaganda.
To stretch those ALREADY OUT fires on floor 12 supposed to be an inferno
around column 79 into global sudden collapse at FREE FALL?
Just computer graphics albury.
Agnotology.
neocon t v trickery . “We’re an empire now, and when we act, we create our own reality. And while you’re studying that reality—judiciously, as you will—we’ll act again, creating other new realities, which you can study too, and that’s how things will sort out. We’re history’s actors…and you, all of you, will be left to just study what we do.”[2]
I say it again. FREE FALL is the drop that hangs the NIST report , because FREE FALL corroborates destruction NOT fire induced building collapse. Collapse mechanism in times and across entire [say it again]football sized plan area by fire and gravity alone is impossible at speeds required to drop that building in observed fashion. WTC 1 and 2 the same.
IMMEDIATE and TOTAL FREE FALL acceleration over entire building area, attest directly to WTC7 as controlled demolition.
This probably won’t do any good, but I recommend that you read 8.7.1 through 8.7.4 at this link:
http://www.nist.gov/customcf/get_pdf.cfm?pub_id=861611
Shear studs are only “DESIGNED” to make concrete floors composite with the steel beams supporting them, and the result is increased load-bearing capacity in normal use, i.e. the steel beams are stiffened by their integration with the concrete floor through the studs; they are not specified by SEs to increase a building’s structural integrity in fires. On the east end of WTC 7, very obvious asymmetric loading existed, and extremely high lateral forces that the studs were not “DESIGNED” to withstand developed as the beams expanded axially and virtually unrestrained because of heat, while the concrete floor was restrained by unheated areas around it. If you or Box Boy’s “800 engineers” think otherwise, it’s rather odd that you’ve never run your own fire tests or even modeled it with ANSYS, innit?
To finish your opening sentence for you, “The bigger the LIE, [the longer it takes you to answer my questions about your mangling of Silverstein’s ‘pull it’ quote],” so please feel free to do that as soon as possible, since you’ve yet to establish a motive for your impossible, evidence-free malarkey. Your assessment of the severity of the WTC 7 fires is also rather questionable (to put it nicely), at least according to the numerous eyewitness accounts I’ve linked to on here several times, and surprisingly enough, office fires don’t generally self extinguish in a few hours without water, nor did the FDNY have any motive for lying about them to set up a ~600′ safety perimeter hours before 5:21 PM. Once again, “FREE FALL” confirms that gravity worked well on 9/11; it does not speak to the cause of a building collapse, although it’s understandable that someone who thinks shear studs are a passive fire protection system might believe that. While you’re setting up your ANSYS to model them at various temperatures, why not assign your One-Trick Pony the task of timing some real hi-rise C/Ds to prove his hypothesis that every column must be cut in order for “FREE FALL” to occur? Given the fact that timing the visible portion of the WTC 7 collapse (and getting the total time wrong by ~2 seconds) is the only “evidence” you have, let’s explore it fully.
You are arguing FIRE [HEAT] brought down a major 47 storied 81 vertically columned steel framed high rise in Manhattan in 6.5 seconds + or – WITHOUT HEATING the concrete flooring at critical collapse initiation point. Concrete floor slabs sat directly on top of the HEATED thermally expanding beams underneath.
At boiling water temperatures.
Whether specified or not, shear studs MUST increase structural integrity during fire by virtue of their FACT. They JOIN the steel to the concrete.
And whether or not ‘every’ column has to be cut to allow free fall is MOOT.
Because the FACT of WTC7 is, that ALL or ENOUGH of its 81 columns WERE cut to allow it…..were removed in ONE instant to ALLOW observed free fall.
And that is the paradigm. OBSERVED: building behaviour in the REAL, forensic and eyewitness and PRECEDENT/REALITY based evidence :testimony TESTED under oath – INCLUSIVE of ALL evidence streams
VS
NIST VIRTUAL REALITY A ‘new phenomenon’ never seen before nor since in REAL building physics. Total building disintegration in seconds from ‘normal office furnishings fires’ WITHOUT regard to ALL evidence streams, A hypothetical ‘probable’ Invented by secret computer model. Untested by peer review, not cross examined by independent experts under oath.
A program we are warned not to expect corresponds to observed behavior and boy, didn’t nist get THAT right! The animation looks NOTHING like observed behavior of WTC7. No global free fall in the model AT ALL because the only way to do that is to REMOVE lower 8 stories entirely .
A program hypothesizing thermal expansion we are told did NOT factor thermal conductivity into the model.
A program in which we are told Heat was turned OFF the concrete to elicit stresses enough to engineer critical break in shear stud to facilitate the ‘probable’ in the model, where ONE localized girder/column seat failure Leads to the completely GLOBAL “in the manner of controlled demolition” destruction of the entire 81 columned 47 storied structure – in SECONDS. Into a NEAT PILE.
With no further investigation of evidence gained from forensic study of metal parts or different evidence streams identifying extreme temperatures, ejections, EPA spikes, evaporation, vaporization inter-granular attack on steel, elemental sulfur, 150X normal iron microspheres – a known result of thermitic reactions – in the dust.
Nor proper investigations of numerous eyewitness testimony to MOLTEN steel in the pile INCLUDING the south tower pour, and over 100 explicit audio/video reports of explosive events occurring before during and after plane strikes on WTC complex, including specific eyewitness evidence of major pre-demolition explosions occurring IN THE BUILDING B4 the pull.
That the NIST report is exclusive of all evidence streams not pertaining their hypothesis.
Is NOT scientific.
Does not disclose conflicts of interest between NIST scientists and the Nanothermite industry.
WHEREAS:
Sudden FREE FALL symmetrical drop was observed over the entire 47 storied, football field sized building area of WTC7 for 2.25 seconds of its total 6.5 second + or – global drop time.
Its destruction began at the core, pulling the center, the known controlled demolition technique beginning, and ended completely folded into its own plan area within seconds, the known controlled demolition aim.
The building was 47 stories high. over 600 feet.
It had 81 vertical steel columns all restrained and restraining entire building into a single coherent unit designed explicitly to hold itself up. ALL had to be disengaged to allow free fall.
That 2.25 seconds of its drop by portion equates to 108ft + or – of its approx 600′ structure, which means an 8 storied lower section of this complex structure ALL failed AT ONE MOMENT to offer ANY RESISTANCE at all – to allow observed behavior. 81 columns, all at once.
That REMOVAL of all resistance allowing FREE FALL historically and by precedent only exists in steel framed high rise building destruction if all resistance removed is removed by controlled demolition in ONE instant.
That that is how free fall is initiated.
That there is NO OTHER method known to achieve observed behavior.
That the nature of the pile [temperatures, molten steel, explosions]; how the outer structure folded over the pile, and DUST cloud behavior created, are corroborative evidence of controlled demolition.
FREE FALL is inclusive of ALL evidence streams and utilizes the scientific method including the Harrit/Jones Thermitic materials found in the DUST paper, which would be properly tested in the same manner as all evidence presented .
Including criminal investigation of NIST with regard its behavior in the production of its building assessment reports.
You aren’t listening, Roger, nor did you bother to read 8.7.1 through 8.7.4 at this link:
http://www.nist.gov/customcf/get_pdf.cfm?pub_id=861611
Since you don’t even understand the purpose of shear studs, and most likely have never even seen one, it might not be a bad idea to read what real SEs have to say about them. Asymmetrically-positioned W24 X 55 steel beams under the floor slab were able to expand axially from the heat, while the concrete itself was restrained by in-plane stiffness, resulting in DIFFERENTIAL thermal expansion. The first shear stud failures were at “boiling water temperatures,” but the upper air temperatures near column 79 reached ~600C, which reduces the yield strength of steel by nearly 80%. Four 7/8″ bolts held the girder to column 79, and they sheared from the thermal expansion of the beams pushing the girder, starting a series of partial floor collapses. I don’t know how many times this needs to be explained to you, but even if the NIST scientists and engineers are not 100% correct, you still have no evidence for explosives, and your “researchers” haven’t even begun any fire tests, modeling, or anything else that might prove NIST wrong about anything. They also are not even mentioned on the ASCE, AIA, RIBA, or other serious professional web sites, so you may want to ask yourself why a search for Box Boy, Chandler, or any of the others results in no hits.
The NIST hypothesis produces the same visible result as explosives, so it’s just plain stupid to claim that you can look at the WTC 7 facade collapse or time it to determine what caused it, and putting video of it alongside a real C/D actually argues against your “theory.” Since both fall at roughly the same speed, and neither had all of its columns cut, gravity alone very obviously can crush remaining support without any measurable difference in the acceleration rate. I’ve also repeatedly explained to you why the WTC 7 collapse had to be symmetrical, given the close spacing and moment connections on the exterior, and if sudden onset is evidence of controlled demolition, then the Hyatt Regency walkway collapse in Kansas City:
http://ethics.tamu.edu/ethics/hyatt/hyatt1.htm
the 1995 Sampoong Department Store collapse in Seoul, South Korea, and many other spectacular building failures were also caused by secret explosives.
You obviously don’t have a plausible motive for this nonsense, or you’d have answered my questions about the Silverstein “pull it” quote by now, nor do you have any evidence, and what you’re suggesting is completely impossible, but instead of repeating the same junk science over and over, why not
-time some real C/D collapses to see how much slower than WTC 7’s they are, since all of the columns in them aren’t cut?
-answer my Silverstein “pull it” questions? They’ve been here since 10:24 am on December 17, 2011.
-duplicate the corrosion on the 2 steel samples in Appendix C with nanothermite or whatever else you think did it?
-get Box Boy and his “800 engineers” to at least START modeling WTC 7’s collapse, since there’s absolutely no excuse not to?
-get your “researchers” to demonstrate how painting nanothermite on steel columns cuts right through them, leaving gray slag around the ends?
-urge ask them to provide exemplars for something, since all they’ve done is claimed that they were “reminded” of it?
I really think you need to find another hobby…
Thank you for your advice, but I don’t find study of un-investigated false flag atrocity 911, nor the dreadful deaths of millions of innocent souls directly as result of global aggressive military power, a hobby.
Just so I understand. You contend these giant beams, found in uncounted hundreds of thousands of constructions the world wide over, in a reality/physics environment where compatibility of expanding materials, concrete and steel under fire chief among ’em, is very well understood;
that these beams, beginning at boiled water temperatures, explicitly in an area photographically proving fires already OUT at the time,
expanded axially,
in the EXACT MANNER of Pinocchio’s nose, how far?
How far did these giants GROW axially, do you say, while connected deep into 5″ concrete floors along their top centers by 3/4 inch studs at 22″ centers?
How far did these giants MOVE in their ‘walk’ to free the ‘asymmetrically loaded’ girder off its seat? 5 inches? six?
Snapping ALL shear studs in their wake? HOW did these awakening giants keep THEIR “In plane stiffness” under HEAT to axially expand, and not SAG under their own WEIGHT? once released? I mean, if they’d broken all the shear studs to concrete above them, they would SAG, surely, by their WEIGHT – by the very GRAVITY you and Shyam proclaim all impossibilities; their weight by gravity under HEAT would SAG them rather than punch them out straight infront into NISTs brave ‘new phenomena’?
But. YAWN. this is La La. This is erewhon. This is ‘The Failure of Imagination ‘probability’ thermal expansion La La.
The giant girder, between columns 44 and 79, its last restraints gasping, fatally flawed by its asymmetry, snapping bolts at seat, FREE at last of its welded and bolted beam connections, column seat, and free of its chain of Silversteinian shear studs holding it to the ‘in plane stiffness’ of concrete immediate above it, dropped FREE? an anvil blow to floor 12 beneath, twisting the 5 beams that axially free-ed it but not breaking any windows their outer joins would surely have expressed with the PULL in, no, but, dropping the powerful now FREE girder and beam assembly? unrestrained? to the floor beneath, creates a ‘cascade’ like water rushing ‘collapse’ sequence, breaking all RULES as well as all other holds on column 79 down 7 or 8 floors unheeded, smashing at lightening speed all unheated other ‘in plane stiffness-es’ and hundreds of connections including other direct girder assemblies, and, continuing therefore, now the giants, FREE to FLY at FREE FALL drop, adding their unhindered weights to the spirit of the de-construct,
whalloped their ways throughout the entire inner sleeping GIANT 24 CORE verticals over 47 undamaged stories of the building in 3 seconds???four??,Five? unseen from the streets, until global drop WITHIN was complete?? pulling all core columns into a single crashing FAILURE heap in its middle WITHOUT the outside showing any SIGN of the damage the great crashing and gnashing within causes, until, at last, freee[sic] of all internal restraints, column and girder and beam and shear stud and any relationship with reality,
wrecked and torn from its inner construction, the OUTER walls held FIRM like Gulliani and unbroken to the observers eye – due to its
” ‘close spacing and moment connections on the exterior'”,
now stood. an unbroken but empty unbroken glass case sentinel, a box without a center, a mere shell of unbroken glass and 67 external verticals pristine, standing to attention for the last BLOW, the final PULL,
To suddenly, “in the manner of controlled demolition” drop UNHINDERED by any restraint into its own plan area, the 47 storied outer walls folded neat upon the grave of pile, in 6.5 seconds + or -,
2.25 seconds at FREE FALL.
Did I get that right ablury?
You got it partly right, Roger, but you’re apparently still oblivious to the fact that your amateurish critiques of the NIST findings don’t provide you with one shred of evidence for your absurd explosives hypothesis. You’re also not engaged in the “study” of anything, but are regurgitating crap from liars and incompetents, and the WTC collapses are not “un-investigated,” nor were the al Qaeda suicide attacks of 9/11 a “‘false-flag’ atrocity.” Since you won’t answer any of my questions about Silverstein’s PBS quote, let’s leave him out of this too.
Despite my attempts to explain to you how shear studs work, you still have no idea what they actually do. W24 X 55 beams are not “giant,” but at ~52′, they were exceptionally long for office framing, but were necessary because of the pre-existing ConEd substation’s effect on the interior column spacing in WTC 7. The additional size made their total thermal elongation greater, and also made them prone to more sagging as the temperatures rose. The shear studs were not intended to prevent the steel from sagging at 500C or higher temperatures, and the simple, 4-bolt gravity connection at column 79 failed. The stresses that broke the shear stud welds were parallel to the top flanges of the beams, and concrete slabs do not keep weakened steel beams from sagging; they actually cause more deflection. You are hardly qualified to discuss structural engineering issues if you can’t even comprehend simple concepts like this.
Not being an authority like you and Box Boy, I can’t really say how many of WTC 7’s windows below the 13th floor were broken during the partial collapses preceding the main facade collapse, since I’m unaware of any videos showing floors at or below that level after ~5 PM on 9/11, but I’d once again suggest looking at the framing layout. 10-12′ exterior column spacing and 100% moment connections are much more resistant to movement than four 7/8″ diameter bolts connecting an interior beam to an exterior column, so if you saw unbroken windows on the east end at that level and time, that could explain why. It’s up to you to explain why no explosives were heard around that time, and why they didn’t blow out every window in the building, given the massive size of the W14 X 730 interior columns. You clearly have no idea how much explosive energy it would take to sever solid steel flanges that are 4.9″ thick, and prefer instead to live in your own little fantasy world.
Since you’re now into structural engineering “study,” I hope you’ll direct your ponderous expertise toward the recent collapse in Rio too. That 20-story building went down very suddenly, produced loads of those “pyroclastic” dust clouds that you find so reminiscent of explosives, and it looked just like a controlled demolition, so it meets most of your stringent controlled demolition criteria. If Harrit and Jones use the same rigorous scientific approach, they’ll also be “reminded” of nanothermite by any dust samples you get for them, and could also do it for a ham sandwich if you’d like one analyzed. No motive? No problem; you don’t have one for the WTC collapses either, so why not broaden your horizons? I’m sure you’ll impress the scientific community as much with your “study” of that collapse as you have with your work on the ones in NYC.
You do understand the NIST : WTC7 report is a theory, don’t you?
An Hypothetical “probable” produced by computer animation ?
You do understand that computer modeling was only part of the NIST WTC collapse investigations, don’t you? They actually do forensic structural and fire engineering, and based their models on fire tests and other provable methods, either from the WTC investigations or from others they’ve previously done. Unlike your 9/11 “truth movement,” they don’t have the luxury of inventing impossible and evidence-free “theories” involving new scientific phenomena like room-temperature pyroclastic dust clouds, collapse times that reveal the cause of one, secret explosives that turn 400,000 yards of concrete to fine dust in seconds, torch-cut columns that are “evidence” of C/D, or common stuff that “reminds” them of explosives. They also hire and subcontract to people with top credentials in the appropriate areas of expertise; they don’t just enlist every clown who comes along.
It apparently works, judging from the reactions of SEs and other serious professionals:
http://sites.google.com/site/wtc7lies/someoftheagencies%2Corganizationsandindivi
Click to access SF-WTC7-Gilsanz-Nov07.pdf
http://www.nist.gov/el/disasterstudies/about.cfm
What accolades have Box Boy and his “researchers” earned in the real world? Are they even mentioned on the ASCE, RIBA, or AIA web sites?
Revisionist agenda slipping through there Albury. It was Shyam Sunder first used the phrase “New Scientific Phenomena” when introducing NISTs ‘Thermal Expansion hypothesis probable’ in his 2007 media presentation “WTC7 No Mystery “.
However, with regard Claims of NIST due diligence and the invention of impossible theories. “The lack of WTC7 steel PRECLUDED tests on actual material from the structure” [Branovic:NCSTAR 1-3B], remember? Experts at the time were telling us that there was not enough material to properly forensically TEST.
Of the FEW samples studied, steel CLEARLY showed exposure to violent EXTREME and UNUSUAL temperature attacks in excess of and unrelated to ‘Normal office furnishings fires’ or jet fuel burns. Intergranular attack. Vaporization. Evaporation. of. STEEL. Lead. Molybdenum. Barium . Clear indicators of “exotic accelerants” which, Firemen for 911 truth tell us, the NIST investigation failed to apply NFPA (National Fire Protection Association) 921, “which states very clearly that the possibility of explosives should have been thoroughly investigated. Specifically in NFPA 921 18.3.2 “High Order Damage” [“High-order damage is characterized by shattering of the structure, producing small, pulverized debris. Walls, roofs, and structural members are splintered or shattered, with the building completely demolished. Debris is thrown great distances, possibly hundreds of feet. High-order damage is the result of rapid rates of pressure rise.” World Trade Centers 1, 2, and 7 all clearly met this definition; therefore they should have been thoroughly investigated and analyzed for explosives and the use of “exotic accelerants” NFPA 921 19.2.4 also should have been investigated”. ]) Professors Harrit and Jones found unignited aluminothermic nano-material mixed on an industrial scale, 0.06% per sample of DUST tested, which reminded the scientists of similar material produced at Lawrence Livermore Laboratories. That is their reference to “being reminded”. The LEE study found iron microspheres at 150x times normal building ‘collapse’ DUST. Harrit/Jones state clearly these microspheres are the explicit forensic result of thermitic ignitions.
Proe and Thomas clearly state in their questioning of NIST WTC7 report, that shear stud failure in the manner presented was Not in their Professional experience.
Other ‘parts’ not mentioned in the reports, are revolving door links between NIST members and nanothermite research and development industries left undisclosed, uninvestigated by NIST and the commission. That is collusion.
Reports of explosives are many and explicit and NOT factored into commission or NIST reports. That is CONTROL of the story.
Reports of molten steel in the piles are many and explicit and NOT factored into commission or NIST reports. That is CONTROL of the story.
As primary indicator, FREE FALL of a complex 47 storied 81 vertically columned steel framed high rise into its own plan area, in 6.5 seconds + or – ,described at the time ‘as in the manner of controlled demolition’, should have been investigated first and foremost as that, INSTEAD of an UNTESTED ‘new science phenomena’, an INVENTION never before nor seen again since.
In an open and honest democracy, this outrage of science and reason would long since have been resolved as controlled demolition. Instead of its use as revenge trigger for a CULTURAL hate war.
A false flag attack.
Please link me to the 2007 Sunder statement regarding thermal expansion and “New Scientific Phenomena.” In the NIST 2007 Technical Briefing on its Final Draft Report on WTC 7 for Public Comment, his only reference to any phenomenon is this: “…of course, the phenomenon that we saw on 9/11 that brought this particular building [WTC 7] down was really thermal expansion, which occurs at lower temperatures.” He also noted that “…this is the first known instance where fire-induced local damage led to the collapse of an entire tall building.”
I’m wondering who really has a “revisionist agenda.”
Presenting Sunders ‘new phenomena’ as fact, is your folly albury. Sensing your intended negative branding of it toward questioning NIST narrative, mine.
You are arguing untested THEORY: heat HOT enough to create differentials cracking 3/4inch shear studs at 22″ centers on a 52′ beam, but NOT heating the concrete sat atop it – a Failure, where beams, under heat HOT enough to critically crack shear studs, releasing beam/floor composites, magically expand across ‘beam top flange’ against the PULL of beam SAG back, and down; a theory producing a girder ‘walk’, or push off a bolted/welded column seat and into the infamous FREE FALL total destruction of a complex 47 storied 81 vertically columned steel framed high rise in 6.5 seconds + or – : due to small isolated ‘normal office furnishings fire’ :
is a NEW PHENOMENA as identified by shyam Sunder in 2008.
21st. August. 2008. Final report WTC7 News Conference broadcast live on noliesradio. archived.
I got the YEAR wrong. 2007. That was lazy of me.
But not the FACT. Sunder stated four times explicitly in this audio the ‘new phenomena’ discovered’ by NIST to solve ‘the problem’ posed by WTC7 having to be resolved WITHOUT reference to EXPLOSIVES. First in his opening statement “our study has identified thermal expansion™ [TE]as a new phenomenon that can cause collapse of the structure”. 2nd after the ridiculously pavRovian “take home messages”:”it fell because TE, a new phenomenon, not considered in current building design practice…”, 3rd in response to AP question “phenomenon not previously recognized” and top it off in reply to Bill JENKINS [Building Safety Journal- who asked very pertinent unanswered question re: shear studs] “The effect of TE played a dominant role causing its collapse..um…this does not necessarily..um…imply that the current methods are inappropriate…um… it simply sais we have identified a new phenomenon that previously has not been seen to have caused building collapse”.
But now we have. According to an untested NIST model. one that ‘does not necessarily imply current methods are inappropriate’. really? A 47 storied steel framed high rise, 81 vertical columns in 6.5 seconds+or-, into its own footprint, caused by one isolated fire, leading to total collapse AT FREE FALL and this does ‘not necessarily imply current methods of construction are inappropriate?’
Well AIA RIBA. ALBURY. I say it DOES.
Shyam Sunder, Chief investigator of NIST claimed a New Phenomena destroyed this building. This mysterious circumstance, never seen before nor since, applicable to countless structures around the world, NEEDs to be TESTED. Is a crisis of REASON needing proper scientific INVESTIGATION. Has to be opened up on the table of due diligence AND DISCOVERED. Cross-examined! Disclose your interests! PROVE IT ! show us the data ! There are 1500 registered Architects and Engineers saying these buildings were NOT fire induced sequential collapses.
And, this is NOT the ‘first known instance where fire induced local damage led to collapse of an entire tall building’ Albury. This is the first known instance we have been TOLD it was. Thats all.
This is also the ONLY instance. And it is result of unknown factors in a computer model, untested by peer review, with a pre-conceived outcome. The NIST hypothesis ‘fire induced sequential building collapse’ is a ‘new phenomenon not previously recognized’ because it has never happened before or since in the real world and it didn’t happen on 911 either.
All the evidence, properly considered, sais these buildings were controlled demolition.
Your folly is misrepresenting what Dr. Sunder said, Roger, just as you did when you deliberately distorted Silverstein’s PBS statement and then refused to answer any of my questions about it. Only in the factually-deficient fog of the 9/11 “truth movement” do SEs with doctorates from MIT claim that thermal expansion itself is a “new phenomenon,” when what was stated is that the phenomenon had not previously been considered by engineers as a factor in steel-framed building collapses. Since you really think you have “1500 registered architects and engineers,” instead of a bunch of paranoid and incompetent clowns puffing up their credentials on a friendly web site, why haven’t they even attempted to disprove the NIST findings with their own research? My explanation of shear stud strengths and weaknesses continues to fall on deaf ears here, but regardless of similar coefficients of thermal expansion for steel and concrete, the extreme beam lengths and asymmetrically-loaded girder permitted unrestrained expansion of the beams, and the concrete slabs were prevented from moving in unison with them by slower heat absorption rates, as well as by in-plane stiffness resulting from continuity with unheated slab areas around them. There is a very limited load/deformation curve for shear studs under stresses parallel to the top beam flanges, i.e. they have nowhere to go, and either remain exactly in place or the welds snap, which was found to have begun occurring with very minimal differential thermal expansion at ~103 C. I cited the NIST paragraphs explaining this in previous posts, but if you insist on disagreeing with sound science from what’s probably the most experienced and respected group of forensic SEs in the world, then at least counter it with some semblance of research, not with a mindless “nuh uh!”
It also apparently hasn’t sunk in yet, but even in the extremely unlikely event that your feeble and amateurish attempts to refute the NIST findings showed that they weren’t 100% correct, you’d still have produced no evidence at all for the absurd explosive demolition “theory,” and with all of those alleged engineers and architects, whining about peer review without even attempting to create competing models is inexcusable. Box Boy’s pretenders have the same data and programs as NIST; the NCST Act simply prevented the public release of NIST’s complete input and results FILES, which can be replicated with legitimate research. Most of the necessary information is in NCSTAR 1A and 1-9, and the rest is readily available, so what are you waiting for? The NIST findings have widespread acceptance in the professional community, and you don’t even have findings.
You’ve once again regurgitated the usual bunk about “FREE FALL” as some sort of magical indicator of explosives, along with the persistent and easily-disproved “6.5 seconds” lie about the total collapse time for WTC 7’s facade (it took roughly 8.5 seconds and is impossible to determine to the nearest 1/10 second from any available video), and then refer to “all of the evidence” as pointing to C/D. In reality, not one shred of evidence indicates that anything other than fires and gravity brought down WTC 7, despite your “researchers” who think sulfur, rust, silicon, and aluminum “reminded” them of something or other–no exemplars provided–and showed photos of columns cut with oxyacetylene torches as “proof.” When one of them claims that more than “a hundred tons” of conventional high explosives were also sneaked in and secretly detonated, reality is definitely not on your side.
Albury SMITH Reality.
Wherein any forensic evidence, or investigative procedure identifying Demolition as MOST LIKELY cause were systematically disappeared from ‘the record’ in favor of Dr Sunders magic bolt shear stud FREE FALL cascade computer THEORY.
Within which ‘EXPLOSION’ turns to ‘COLLAPSE’.
Whereas FREE FALL as indicator of EXPLOSIVE/INCENDIARY demolition of multi-storied multi-columned steel framed high rises into own plan areas at free fall speed as understood by historic precedent TO BE indicator of controlled demolition because that’s all its ever been, suddenly becomes ‘thermal expansion™. A ‘new science Phenomena’ DISCOVERED by conflicted of interest NIST, where complex 47 storied 81 vertically columned steel framed high rises can SUDDENLY self destruct at FREE FALL in 6.5 seconds+ or – into a PILE of nanothermate ridden DUST……..due to ONE isolated ‘office furnishings fire’ on ONE floor around ONE column seat .
I don’t know a lot of things albury, that is true;
but claiming an untested computer animation ‘new phenomena’ THEORY as REAL
over observed behaviour, Historic precedent, eye witness testimony and forensic evidence of thermitic reactions HAVING OCCURRED
is unhealthy psychology. A careless use of language.
.
You “don’t know a lot of things,” and the few things you do know are wrong, with your confusion about the function of shear studs being among the least of them. Despite your blatant dishonesty regarding Dr. Sunder’s “new phenomenon” statement, the NIST findings aren’t just “Dr. Sunder’s…….THEORY”; they’re the work product of an elite group of ~230 civilian and government SEs and other highly-qualified experts who investigated the WTC collapses thoroughly using all available data, and they’re accepted by the overwhelming majority of qualified professionals worldwide. By contrast, your argument consists of lying repeatedly about the WTC 7 collapse time, being oblivious to the fact that times have nothing to do with the underlying cause, and buying a colossal load of bunk from some crackpots who never even claimed that they found nanothermite, showed no exemplars of anything for comparison, use photos of torch-cut columns as “proof,” and think that more than “a hundred tons” of conventional high explosives were also secretly sneaked in and detonated. If you ever heard even ~1/2# of high explosives go off in a fragmentation grenade, the chasm between you and reality might narrow a bit.
Chandler’s quasi-scientific malarkey is probably the biggest reason for “truth movement” ignorance, and it’s easily refuted by your own propaganda. LOOK at a side-by-side comparison of C/D and WTC 7 collapse videos on a truther nut web site and try to THINK for a minute. C/Ds only need to weaken one lower level sufficiently to put the mass of the upper floors into motion, and gravity does almost all of the actual demolition, so it’s very obvious that his entire premise is wrong. There isn’t a whole gamut of measurably different ETs stretching from free fall time to infinity, depending on the number of supports left; the whole building either globally collapses or it doesn’t, and if it does, it happens very quickly. The NIST hypothesis had the same effect on the ~12th floor level as demolition explosives would have had, and did it without the bright flashes and deafening sounds immediately preceding the collapse, or any of the mountains of unmistakable evidence that explosives inevitably leave on the steel. There simply wasn’t any evidence to be “systematically disappeared” in the first place; if there had been, it would have been impossible to hide. By contrast, there’s ample evidence for the NIST version:
http://sites.google.com/site/wtc7lies/eyewitnessaccountsofwtc7fires
http://sites.google.com/site/wtc7lies/accountsofwtc7damage
http://sites.google.com/site/wtc7lies/eyewitnessaccountsofthewithdrawalfromwtc
despite the outright lies from Box Boy and others that the fires were minor.
Being REMINDED of something by rust, silicon, aluminum and sulfur in some dust samples does not equate to “nanothermate ridden DUST,” and real scientists don’t take the Bentham farce very seriously. If the clowns behind it really believe that painting something on steel columns is a means of severing them, let’s see it demonstrated.
You steadfastly refuse to answer any of my questions about your spin on the Silverstein PBS quote, leaving you with no plausible motive or perpetrator for this “theory,” you have no legitimate evidence at all for it, and secretly demolishing huge hi-rises in a major city is literally impossible, but it’s obvious that facts don’t deter you. Ironically, ignoring them is the hallmark of your 9/11 “truth movement.”
So show me the evidence. Corroborate NIST shear-stud break hypothesis with physical forensic evidence.
It’s fully explained and substantiated in 8.7.1 through 8.7.4 at this link:
http://www.nist.gov/customcf/get_pdf.cfm?pub_id=861611
and I also explained it to you in layman’s terms. Differential thermal expansion is inevitable in those conditions, and the forces produced are far greater than what a 3/4″ shear stud’s base weld can withstand. The fact that steel and concrete have similar coefficients of thermal expansion is only half of the story; they must also be equally heated and equally restrained, and that is not the case when steel beams can move freely beneath a portion of concrete slab that’s surrounded by thousands of square feet of unheated slab area.
What you’re also failing to realize is that the steel beams support the concrete, and whether composite with it or not, will weaken and sag in very typical office fire temperatures, leaving the slab unsupported and still exerting downward force on them. That sagging alone would also have induced failure at the column 79 connection, which was held together only by four 7/8″ bolts, but would have taken longer than the initial elongation of the beams and its pushing of the girder.
Box Boy claims to have hundreds of “engineers,” so if they disagree with these findings, they’re free to run their own models, do fire tests, cite different studies, or otherwise refute it scientifically, and they’ve done nothing. Once again, even if NIST is not 100% right, you still have no evidence for explosives.
I see.
You have NOTHING apart from NIST to corroborate NIST.
A NIST document “substantiating itself” is masturbatory.
That you cannot offer one substantive INDEPENDENT anything REAL
STANDING by itself, outside of NIST, against the enormous amounts of divergent forensic evidence and collateral information gathered out there saying controlled demolition.
Its embarrassing.
Now you go splashing through mud of “elongation happening in a ‘shorter time” than ‘unsupported beams sag’ like you thought of THAT yourself…..appalling statements ‘that sagging alone would also have induced failure at column 79 connection”.. you got any corroboration of that ? Apart from NIST because NO IT WOULDN’T. Not in Cardington experiments or FEMA or 1500 Architects and Engineers REALworld NO IT DOESN’T . And NO IT HASN’T. Show ONE test anywhere in the world corroborating NIST 103º 3/4″ shear stud break axial expansion total FREE FALL disintegration of major steel framed high rise into its own footprint ! Not in this world .
In THIS world you are arguing a series of ‘new phenomena’™ animations ‘DISCOVERED’ by UNTESTED computer model construct, while at the SAME TIME having real world access to information properly weighing the discussion, that you refuse to acknowledge,
REAL world CATEGORICAL forensic , eyewitness, audio visual EVIDENCE streams TOTALLY refuting NIST hypothesis.
I accuse you of propaganda.
Just those of us in the background glimpsing. The Rogue’man believes you should re-title your handle to ROGERMORRIS- shill-killer.What a circus with the shill asses on the one side and the directed energy beam types on the other. It’d make for good comedy theater if it wasn’t so deadly earnest.
Unlike you, Roger, I’ve actually read NCSTAR 1A, and in the sequence of events leading to the partial floor collapses, there was significant thermal elongation occurring well before the W24 beams were hot enough to sag, so I didn’t think of “THAT” very logical scenario myself. I’ve also read the June, 2000 Cardington report, and the framing in their fire test structure contained no spans longer than 9 meters, no asymmetrical conditions that could shear connection bolts and push girders off their seats, and used much more restrained connections between the beams and columns throughout. I’m sure that doesn’t matter to someone who thinks shear studs are a passive fire resistance system, but WTC 7’s ~17 meters between columns, 4-bolt gravity connections in the core, and asymmetry around the 44-79 girder make an enormous difference to people who know what they’re talking about.
You’re obviously totally unqualified to critique the NIST findings, and are also continuing to lie about Sunder’s “new phenomenon” statement, even after I fully explained it to you, but if you or Box Boy’s “engineers” really believe that the NIST experts are wrong, “show ONE test anywhere in the world” to back up your claim, or don’t you and all of those “engineers” have any after all this time? It’ll still leave you with no evidence at all for the impossible “theory” of secret explosive demolitions in NYC, but knock yourselves out. NIST’s “substantiating itself” includes fire tests, modeling, and other scientifically-accepted methods, and your 9/11 “truth movement” is still relying on no substantiation at all. That’s really embarrassing.
note: here’s the header for my post about the Silverstein PBS quote, Roger:
albury | December 17, 2011 at 10:24 am | Reply
Was your absurd “foreknowledge by owner to ‘pull it ‘[fcrissake]” accusation “substantiating itself,” or would you like to explain why 12 different insurance companies all paid him a total of $4.68 BILLION, and answer the rest of those questions?
What part of the scientific model don’t we understand albury? You cannot have the ONLY corroboration of a ‘new science phenomena’ being the very organization that ‘discovered’ it! Thats not how it works. The data, the paper, is released in the literature with full disclosure and PEER REVIEWED
As with the Harrit/Jones DUST analysis.
The data sets and sequences NIST refuse to publish, that have state secrets privilege,
I want that hypothesis model TESTED. INDEPENDENT of NIST.
In a court of LAW.
With supeona power and expert cross-examination under oath.
I want the program data and sequence notes NIST say brought down a complex 47 storied 81 vertically columned steel framed high rise in 6.5 seconds into its own footprint moments after the owner declared intention to ‘PULL it”.,
I want that PROGRAM DATA sent to Cardinton and Melbourne,
to the 1500 architects and engineers CALLING to PEER review it….
experts able to de-construct the computer program and PROVE IT
fair and square..
right or wrong.
There’s plenty here that you don’t understand, Roger. The “new science phenomena” (or phenomenon) is not thermal expansion in steel beams; it’s attributing a fire-induced collapse of a tall building to thermal expansion, and it was amply supported in NCSTAR 1A and 1-9. Your “1500 architects and engineers” are an odd assortment of hapless 9/11 truther nuts, not the legitimate researchers from the U. of Edinburgh who conducted the Cardington tests, so please leave them out of the discussion, unless you can find a Cardington researcher who supports your malarkey.
The NIST findings have been thoroughly peer reviewed:
Click to access SF-WTC7-Gilsanz-Nov07.pdf
http://www.nist.gov/el/disasterstudies/about.cfm
http://tax01.asce.org/asce/search?q=nist+wtc+7&mq=nist+wtc+7&t=any&rpp=10&p=1&max=100&fi=*&fa=&s=&c=includeOmitted%5Btrue%5D
http://tax01.asce.org/asce/search?q=nist+wtc+7&mq=nist+wtc+7&t=any&rpp=10&p=2&max=100&fi=*&fa=&s=&c=includeOmitted%5Btrue%5D
http://tax01.asce.org/asce/search?q=nist+wtc+7&mq=nist+wtc+7&t=any&rpp=10&p=3&max=100&fi=*&fa=&s=&c=includeOmitted%5Btrue%5D
http://tax01.asce.org/asce/search?q=nist+wtc+7&mq=nist+wtc+7&t=any&rpp=10&p=4&max=100&fi=*&fa=&s=&c=includeOmitted%5Btrue%5D
and if Gage’s “engineers” disagree with those findings, it’s their responsibility to produce competing ones, not simply to yammer about the provisions of the NCST Act. Real engineers and other construction professionals would not need NIST’s complete input and results file packages in order to check their results, and would certainly have done their own fire testing and modeling by now, so why have they done absolutely nothing with the tons of information that’s included in the NIST reports and available elsewhere?
There’s nothing even worth reading in the Bentham farce, but it was also peer reviewed, and the reviewer quit her position in disgust over it:
http://screwloosechange.blogspot.com/2009/04/bentham-editor-resigns-over-steven.html
Strangely enough, serious scientists aren’t interested in the fact that rust, silicon, sulfur, and aluminum “remind” someone of something, and a rational person would expect them to demonstrate their key hypothesis that painting explosives on steel columns will sever them, something else Gage’s “engineers” have failed to do.
You have no plausible motive or perpetrator for this absurd “theory,” no evidence at all, and secret controlled demolitions in major cities are impossible. Your Silverstein “pull it” crap went down in flames, the FDNY doesn’t agree with you, there were no explosively-severed columns even rumored to have been found in the WTC debris, let alone documented or photographed, and you’re stuck with liars who think “a hundred tons” or more of conventional high explosives secretly went off in the middle of a major city, along with some magical flash- and bang-free “nanothermite,” and left some gray slag-dripping torch-cut columns as “evidence.”
I realize that you’re infatuated with the idea that reading pure bunk on a few 9/11 “truth movement” web sites puts you on a par with SEs and other experts with doctorates, but you really need to find another hobby.
[Changing hyperlinks to post without “moderation” delay]
There’s plenty here that you don’t understand, Roger. The “new science phenomena” (or phenomenon) is not thermal expansion in steel beams; it’s attributing a fire-induced collapse of a tall building to thermal expansion, and it was amply supported in NCSTAR 1A and 1-9. Your “1500 architects and engineers” are an odd assortment of hapless 9/11 truther nuts, not the legitimate researchers from the U. of Edinburgh who conducted the Cardington tests, so please leave them out of the discussion, unless you can find a Cardington researcher who supports your malarkey.
The NIST findings have been thoroughly peer reviewed:
structuremag.org/Archives/2007-11/SF-WTC7-Gilsanz-Nov07.pdf
nist.gov/el/disasterstudies/about.cfm
tax01.asce.org/asce/search?q=nist+wtc+7&mq=nist+wtc+7&t=any&rpp=10&p=1&max=100&fi=*&fa=&s=&c=includeOmitted%5Btrue%5D
tax01.asce.org/asce/search?q=nist+wtc+7&mq=nist+wtc+7&t=any&rpp=10&p=2&max=100&fi=*&fa=&s=&c=includeOmitted%5Btrue%5D
tax01.asce.org/asce/search?q=nist+wtc+7&mq=nist+wtc+7&t=any&rpp=10&p=3&max=100&fi=*&fa=&s=&c=includeOmitted%5Btrue%5D
tax01.asce.org/asce/search?q=nist+wtc+7&mq=nist+wtc+7&t=any&rpp=10&p=4&max=100&fi=*&fa=&s=&c=includeOmitted%5Btrue%5D
and if Gage’s “engineers” disagree with those findings, it’s their responsibility to produce competing ones, not simply to yammer about the provisions of the NCST Act. Real engineers and other construction professionals would not need NIST’s complete input and results file packages in order to check their results, and would certainly have done their own fire testing and modeling by now, so why have they done absolutely nothing with the tons of information that’s included in the NIST reports and available elsewhere?
There’s nothing even worth reading in the Bentham farce, but it was also peer reviewed, and the reviewer quit her position in disgust over it:
screwloosechange.blogspot.com/2009/04/bentham-editor-resigns-over-steven.html
Strangely enough, serious scientists aren’t interested in the fact that rust, silicon, sulfur, and aluminum “remind” someone of something, and a rational person would expect them to demonstrate their key hypothesis that painting explosives on steel columns will sever them, something else Gage’s “engineers” have failed to do.
You have no plausible motive or perpetrator for this absurd “theory,” no evidence at all, and secret controlled demolitions in major cities are impossible. Your Silverstein “pull it” crap went down in flames, the FDNY doesn’t agree with you, there were no explosively-severed columns even rumored to have been found in the WTC debris, let alone documented or photographed, and you’re stuck with liars who think “a hundred tons” or more of conventional high explosives secretly went off in the middle of a major city, along with some magical flash- and bang-free “nanothermite,” and left some gray slag-dripping torch-cut columns as “evidence.”
I realize that you’re infatuated with the idea that reading pure bunk on a few 9/11 “truth movement” web sites puts you on a par with SEs and other experts with doctorates, but you really need to find another hobby.
Just back up.
You are saying longer WTC7beams, having differentials created at 103ºheat, break 3/4″ shear-studs @ 22″ centers , beams with MORE weight on them [“thousands of square feet of unheated slab area.”] were LESS likely to SAG before their ‘elongated walk’ along ‘top flange’;
than the shorter test piece by Cardington? Which all sagged and folded under many hours of intense heat. But didn’t break shear-stud.
“when steel beams can move freely beneath a portion of concrete slab that’s surrounded by thousands of square feet of unheated slab area.”
How can “there [be] significant thermal elongation occurring well before the W24 beams were hot enough to sag”?
How can there be thousands of square feet of unheated slab area right above, actually joined to a beam ‘axially expanding’ along its ‘top flange’ because of heat?
Jeezus; no one’s this freaking obtuse. The MUCH longer spans in WTC 7, coupled with the obvious asymmetry and simple 4-bolt gravity instead of the fin plate connections in the Cardington tests, produced conditions in which more thermal elongation occurred, more sagging followed, and connections were much more prone to failure. The concrete slabs in WTC 7 could not expand with the beams because they were surrounded by unheated areas of concrete, allowing the steel to move independently in the fire-affected areas, producing lateral stresses on the shear studs that were able to snap the base welds at very low (“boiling water”) temperatures, i.e. well below those needed to reduce yield strength sufficiently to cause sagging. If you can’t visualize and comprehend this, it’s fortunate that you’re not an SE, and I once again suggest that you find another hobby.
If I was you Roger, I’d find another hobby instead of tilting at Smith. He’s on other truth sites doing exactly the same as here but they throw him off them after a bit recognized as a shill. Can’t say what his connection is but this reads organised. This merry go round keeps going round and round and where she stops, no one knows. His argument will become nil and void on the next big false flag which by all indicators is soon except there’s millions of us now that will recognize it for what it is and anything less than 9/11 won’t have the same effect because the flouride heads are now jaded and the same old show won’t do anymore. We’re on two sides of the schism line with those on the other side desperately trying to hang onto the illusion as reality because to come about and question it would cast them into a nightmare of profound uncertainty. Those of us on this side have come to grips with our fear and can’t be manipulated by it anymore, it’s called being able to fathom through the bullshit
Roger at least attempts to discuss the WTC collapses intelligently, Don, and since you’d rather flame, you’d be much happier at one of those “truth movement” sites that ban everyone who disagrees with their nonsense.
Here’s a short list of more “shills” to vilify:
sites.google.com/site/wtc7lies/someoftheagencies%2Corganizationsandindivi
There are many more at the ASCE, RIBA, and AIA web sites, so please run along like a good little fellow and expose us “shills” somewhere else.
Thanks.
A greeting from the other side. You know who
“The 2 small pieces of corroded steel that the WPI engineers examined and wrote up in FEMA’s Appendix C are not C/D evidence, and were thought to have been degraded during months of exposure to the fires and other conditions in the debris.”~Agent Smith
That’s right, of course…NOTHING is actual evidence of C/D, because NIST claims C/D didn’t happen – so whatever caused this ‘non-evidential’ , piece of steel which was ‘evident’ in the wreckage and taken for study and found to be the “one of the greatest mystery of all” according to the NYTimes, is no longer ‘evidence’ but a matter of ritual handwaving in the aspect of – “thought to have been”, and ‘could be maybe’, but it’s not our concern to worry about it because it couldn’t POSSIBLY be ‘evidence’ of something NIST has proclaimed simply could not have happened as a matter of….of…
…of absolute POLITICAL NECESSITY.
Thus we see the concurrent necessity to deny not only the fact of this evidence, but the history of it’s importance as evidence. This is the Memory Hole game of propagandists, such as the infamous toady boy Agent Smith.
This of course only satisfies his own needs, to pretend he has addressed the problem. Like ‘gormless shill’ {Lol} notes, Smith isn’t fooling anyone but his pathetic self.
The report on debris theft concluded that — “many FBI agents took rubble as souvenirs from Fresh Kills.”
An interesting and seemingly ‘innocent’ term, “souvenirs”.
This characterization attempts to soften the fact that what was stolen was evidence – obviously the incriminating evidence. It is this continuous ‘benefit of the doubt’ structured into all of the official-story, even when characterizing clear and obvious crimes that is onerous to the lucid mind. And this is nothing less than authoritarian diktat. Evidence that is brought to light is hand-waved as irrelevant, clear cases of absolute criminal activities shrugged off as no big thing.
But the bottom line, as Fire Engineering Magazine cried out from the very beginning, the WTC complex aftermath site was a CRIME SCENE. It is illegal to remove evidence from a crime scene, regardless of political considerations. This was a deliberate corruption of the crime scene and the evidence therein. And it is the authorities themselves who are culpable for this blatant crime.
Had a wager going whether you’d respond. Thanks I won. Just wondering about the pay scale to shilling, you put a lot of effort in, is it a full time gig or just part time chump change? And thanks for cluing us in to where we can go to sign on should we decide to. Too bad about the distance of the ether, we could otherwise toast to a one year celebration of this posting on April 12/12 which has to be a record on Coto (There’s that numbers thing again, illuminati?) when this should have turned into mushrooms on the dung heap of past reality it should have been on a long time ago.
P.S. Now if the mushrooms were Cubensis, that would make for a good party. Worked for Terrence McKenna, Bill Hicks and others
I’d put the winnings toward some extra layers of Reynolds Wrap, Don. It’s not just for baking cookies, yanno…
Oh, you mean, let me see, Hmmm, cooking? no,,, well, you could make a little pipe to puff some crop in,,, no. Oh, wait a minute, oh I get it,,, I seen that once, a hat. You’re so clever. Go stand under a micro wave tower asshole, a tin foil hat would work there just fine. Don’t know about you Roger but this posting needs to fade away along with this jerk.
Why don’t you fade away, Don? Facts seem to disturb you too much.
An invitation to Roger to come pay us a visit to the older site to this one
http://cotocrew.wordpress.com/2012/02/19/dog-heaven/#comments
This is a diversion from the very root of the reality of the very act of 9/11.
A message to assbury from an old buddy of his , he’d send it to you personally but the administrator of this site and him ain’t friends. You’ll know who.
“To duck the truth means your conscience and self esteem have died to put such effort into denial of truth means you are compensating for such a lack of conscience in constructing a mask of self esteem but cracks with every expression you make.”
” This is obvious to all but yourself and the rest of the ignoramus warmongers and psycho- dupes in your cult of exceptionalist somnambulent bullshitters.
Follow that you might agent, the feeding frenzy should be quite a spectacle otherwise we bid you adieu
One more time on the wheel for Albury.
What I ‘can’t visualize’, besides FREE FALL of 81 columns 47 stories into own footprint in 6.5secs due to piddly little ‘Office Furnishings Fires’..,
what I can’t visualize is the FIRE burning HOT enough -EVENLY enough – LONG enough to THERMALLY EXPAND the Giant beams and Girders in UNISON, AGAINST the composite strength of the entire structure UNITED around them, breaking 3/4″ shear studs in axial walk BEFORE SAG.,
while NOT HEATING the concrete sat right on it.
.
Which is the ONLY way NIST got the critical shear stud to break. in the model. by turning the heat OFF the concrete. which is the only place this happened. NCSTAR 1-9:352
The CRITICAL moment in the hypothetical, Albury.
This quintessential question, the critical LINK in the chain of LIES presented as Pinocchios ‘new phenomenon’ is going to FAIL.
http://911blogger.com/news/2012-02-04/wtc7-and-nist-shear-ignorance
1.
http://911blogger.com/news/2012-02-04/wtc7-and-nist-shear-ignorance
2.
Silly NIST went by approved Frankel submittals, Roger, not ambiguous notes on S drawings, and the hundreds of “engineers” in your 9/11 “truth movement” have still not modeled anything, let alone the same framing with composite 44-79 girder. Once again, your amateurish attacking of the NIST findings is not producing evidence for your explosives nonsense, and you still have none.
Your FREE FALL bunk, 6.5 seconds canard, and “new phenomenon” spin are becoming onerous, and I give up trying to explain to you why the concrete slab couldn’t possibly have moved in concert with the W24 X 55s at and above 103C. You also refuse even to try to understand that the close-interval, moment-connected exterior fully accounts for the contained and orderly descent once the non-redundant and very vulnerable interior framing went to hell.
Try visualizing this, Roger:
http://sites.google.com/site/wtc7lies/eyewitnessaccountsofwtc7fires
http://sites.google.com/site/wtc7lies/accountsofwtc7damage
http://sites.google.com/site/wtc7lies/eyewitnessaccountsofthewithdrawalfromwtc
The FDNY is not in your “truth movement,” and they disagree with your “piddly little ‘Office Furnishings Fires’” crap, as do the videos and other eyewitness accounts. Are all of them in on the plot too, along with 200+ NIST engineers and countless others? You have no evidence except for a column cut with an oxyacetylene torch, no perp or plausible motive, so you resort to misrepresenting the owner’s PBS statement, and secretly blowing up hi-rises in Manhattan is so absurd that it’s beyond impossible.
“beyond imagination”…. from the room of one arguing TOTAL ‘in the manner of controlled demolition’ DESTRUCTION into own footprint of a 47 storied 81 vertically columned steel frame behemoth in 6.5 + seconds,
2.25 seconds at FREE FALL
because of “normal Office Furnishings Fires” on ONE floor, around ONE column seat.
A ‘New Phenomena’ discovered by NIST.
You are a trickster Albury. playing with words.
Next you will be telling me Afghanistan is a success.
No, Roger; you’ll try to change the topic to Afghanistan policy, which wasn’t affected in the slightest by a predicted, non-fatal ~5:21 PM collapse of a burning building on the day of the deadliest and most destructive terrorist attack in US history. You also refuse to accept the fact that hi-rises can FREE FALL without damage from explosives, as many floors in real C/Ds do, and you can’t explain why your “engineers” haven’t even modeled WTC 7 with only the loss of column 79. Only a “trickster…playing with words” would play down the seriousness of “normal Office Furnishings Fires,” and continue to lie about Dr. Sunder’s statement after it was fully explained to you. Once again, the new phenomenon was not thermal expansion of steel beams, but the factoring of that expansion into a structural engineering report on steel-framed building collapses in fires, although I’m sure you think it makes your case to impugn the academic credentials of a man with PE certification and a doctorate in structural engineering from MIT.
When your only debris evidence is a photo of a torch-cut column with gray slag around the cut, and you’re promoting nonsense that isn’t even possible, such extreme and persistent dishonesty isn’t all that surprising. It’s one of many reasons why your 9/11 “truth movement” is completely ignored on the ASCE, RIBA, and AIA web sites, and legitimate SEs respect the NIST findings. Read NCSTAR 1A and 1-9, and stop embarrassing yourself; judging from your comments here, it’s “beyond imagination” that you have.
Hey agent just thought I’d post this from you know who.
Smith this is, ARGUMENTUM AD VERECUNDIAM:
“[1] The FDNY is not in your “truth movement,” [2] and they disagree with your “piddly little ‘Office Furnishings Fires’” crap, as do the videos and other eyewitness accounts. [3] Are all of them in on the plot too, along with 200+ NIST engineers and countless others? [4] You have no evidence except for a column cut with an oxyacetylene torch, [5] no perp or plausible motive, so you resort to misrepresenting the owner’s PBS statement, [6] and secretly blowing up hi-rises in Manhattan is so absurd that it’s beyond impossible.”~Albury Smith, government stooge
Here we have a quick procession of 6 separate points in one single paragraph, mixing a blend of contexts and blurring it all together as if it actually makes sense as a whole.
To address these 6 points:
[1] The FDNY is not in your “truth movement,”
– What is the context for the use of the term, FDNY {New York Fire Department}?
Agent Smith seems to mean the official organ itself. But in a larger context the “fire department” is composed of thousands of individuals that may have such a variance of opinions as to make the assertion that they have no sympathies, spoken or reserved as to the veracity of the official story, that such an assertion becomes an example of a sub set of Argumentum ad Numerum. This fallacy occurs any time the sheer numbers of people who agree to something is used as a reason to get you to agree to it. As it is used here, these “sheer numbers” have no statistical proofs, and one is left to assume that all of the members of the fire department toe to the official story line. Thus the logical fallacy.
As to the FDNY itself as a department of the New York City government, there is a conflict of interest, as it cannot officially disagree with the employer due to complex and powerful political considerations. The FDNY then, is part of the structure of the system of authority being appealed to in Agent Smith’s argument. This argument is a proclamation that it is proper for an authority to police itself. As is shown and will be showing, there is evidence that destroys the official story, which means that at some higher level at the interface between the FDNY and the political apparatus of the city government there are indeed those willfully covering up the truth.
This then introduces us to the issue of “peer pressure” and the tacit ‘conspiracy of silence’ from the fear of loosing ones personal livelihood. It is well known that there were implicit gag orders put upon the members of the fire department and other first responders in the aftermath of the event.
But the peer pressure assumes itself in most instances simply do to the assumption of a ‘standard line’ being taken from the top authorities. Some testimonies taken of the first responders have such dialog as, “well, at first I thought I had heard a bomb go off. But now I realise it must have been other concussion sounds in the collapse…”
It is rare in such institutions for someone to insist on being the ‘odd-man-out’, or to speak up and become the dreaded ‘whistleblower’. Most people have a very well taught understanding of the personal troubles that can ensue if one does not ‘go along to get along’. Culturally this is one of the strongest lessons one learns in life.
[2] “and they disagree with your “piddly little ‘Office Furnishings Fires’” crap, as do the videos and other eyewitness accounts.”
– This is a mixed conundrum of assertions. As illustrated in the discussion of [1], the “they” who “disagree” are an unknown quantity. That the official stance of the NYFD would certainly qualify as “they” who “disagree”, their veracity is in question for the reasons stated above.
As for the “videos and other eyewitness accounts,” this is an assertion based on a cherry picked selection of videos and eyewitness accounts. Taken as a whole, all of the videos and eyewitness accounts shows there is a controversy presented, that when taken together shows evidence that overwhelms the accounts chosen by Agent Smith and the sources he relies upon.
[3] “Are all of them in on the plot too, along with 200+ NIST engineers and countless others?”
– This rhetorical question falls squarely into the class of ‘Argumentum ad Numerum’. Plus it asserts the false assumption that “all of them” have any knowledge beyondtheir particular job description that would give them the perspective of the higher authorities for whom they work. This is one of the attributes of a technological system based on compartmentalization of knowledge and access to it. This is very much the same sort of system of hierarchy used in the military and the system of “the need to know”. If it is outside of ones department there is no compelling ‘need to know’ and such knowledge is considered a ‘distraction’ from the subject’s job description. The same sorts of penalties are implied here as in the situation of not ‘going along to get along’. This is all well understood within a corporatist system, whether articulated within this context or not.
So, essentially Number 3 is a rhetorical trick of inserting cognitive dissonance into the argument.
[4] “You have no evidence except for a column cut with an oxyacetylene torch..”
– This assertion is directly contradicted by the prior FEMA report:
The FEMA report, in an appendix written by three professors at Worcester Polytechnic Institute. This appendix reported that a piece of steel from WTC 7 had melted so severely that it had gaping holes in it, making it look like a piece of Swiss cheese.
When asked whether it had carried out tests for explosives on 911, NIST said it had not. When a reporter asked NIST spokesman Michael Newman why not, he replied:
“Because there was no evidence of that.”
When the reporter asked the obvious follow-up question, “How can you know there’s no evidence if you don’t look for it first?”
Newman replied: “If you’re looking for something that isn’t there, you’re wasting your time . . . and the taxpayers’ money.”
This argument put forth by Newman is not only circular logical fallacy , it is obviously disingenuous and a willful lie. It is pure propaganda.
What explains the chemical evidence of thermite, an incendiary material found on the
ends of steel beams and in the leftover dust? FEMA documented in Appendix C of its
BPAT Report “evidence of a severe high temperature corrosion attack on the steel,
including oxidation and sulfidation with subsequent intergranular melting.” This is
clearly not a feature of gravitational collapse, or of hydrocarbon fuel or office fires.
NIST summarily dismissed this key evidence when they took over the investigation.
[5] “no perp or plausible motive, so you resort to misrepresenting the owner’s PBS statement,”
This is a reference to Larry Silverstein the owner of WTC 7 who declared intention to ‘PULL it” on an interview on PBS. The controversy over this statement has run deep, but the simple assertion that Agent Smith’s opponent in the debate this dialog is drawn from is a ‘misrepresentation’ is a bold one – which must ignore very clear common usages of syntax and twist them into strange forms to deny that Silverstein did say what he said in clear language. Claiming it has been ‘misrepresented’ is the actual stretch in interpretation.
Have you found other postings by him (or it) on other sites?
To my stalker/abuser concerning Washington’s blog drivel:
The question to Dr Gross regarded molten STEEL, and he simply asked the troofer if he had any evidence for it. He did not deny the existence of molten METAL, and Dr. Gross and NIST do not deny that even steel could have been found molten in the debris later on; they only stated that it was not part of any collapse scenario.
What’s especially stupid about your video is the fact that your 9/11 “truth movement” has never established that any known controlled demolition has ever left molten anything in the debris for months, nor given any examples of explosives or incendiaries that generate heat for more than a couple of minutes, but maybe you’ll be the first.
To veritable1:
-The 2 small pieces of corroded steel that the WPI engineers examined and wrote up in FEMA’s Appendix C are not C/D evidence, and were thought to have been degraded during months of exposure to the fires and other conditions in the debris. Ask your “researchers” to try duplicating that result with explosives or incendiaries. They can’t.
-The FDNY refers to itself as the FDNY, not the NYFD, and few to none of them are troofers; they’re simply better informed than that.
-If you’d like to explain your LS “pull it” malarkey, please address my comments posted here on December 17, 2011 at 10:24 am.
He squirms typically doesn’t he
From a buddy of yours;”The 2 small pieces of corroded steel that the WPI engineers examined and wrote up in FEMA’s Appendix C are not C/D evidence, and were thought to have been degraded during months of exposure to the fires and other conditions in the debris.”~Agent Smith
That’s right, of course…NOTHING is actual evidence of C/D, because NIST claims C/D didn’t happen – so whatever caused this ‘non-evidential’ , piece of steel which was ‘evident’ in the wreckage and taken for study and found to be the “one of the greatest mystery of all” according to the NYTimes, is no longer ‘evidence’ but a matter of ritual handwaving in the aspect of – “thought to have been”, and ‘could be maybe’, but it’s not our concern to worry about it because it couldn’t POSSIBLY be ‘evidence’ of something NIST has proclaimed simply could not have happened as a matter of….of…
…of absolute POLITICAL NECESSITY.
Thus we see the concurrent necessity to deny not only the fact of this evidence, but the history of it’s importance as evidence. This is the Memory Hole game of propagandists, such as the infamous toady boy Agent Smith.
This of course only satisfies his own needs, to pretend he has addressed the problem. Like ‘gormless shill’ {Lol} notes, Smith isn’t fooling anyone but his pathetic self.
Why don’t your 9/11 “researchers” try duplicating the corrosion on those 2 small pieces of steel with explosives or incendiaries, veritable1? The WPI engineers you cited don’t consider it C/D evidence, since explosives and incendiaries don’t slowly corrode steel over many months. Do you honestly believe that controlled demolitions of 3 huge hi-rises would only have left behind 2 little nondescript pieces of rusty, pitted steel? How sad…
Here’s moreMore Shill Slip and Slide:
[1]“-why would he have publicly admitted to it in a PBS interview for a documentary?
[2]-what was Silverstein Properties’ (and the FDNY’s and whoever else you’re libeling) motive for secretly blowing up a perfectly good, 14 year-old building, losing hundreds of millions of dollars in cash flow from it for years, spending ~$700 million, or most of the $861 million insurance settlement, on the replacement of it, and paying ~$500 million back to lenders?”~Agent Smith, December 17, 2011 at 10:24 am.
{1} Oft times the most simple and obvious answer is best; Silverstein fucked-up, he “misspoke” as the euphemism has it. Why does anyone make a mistake? Because of the old canard, “O’ what webs we weave..”
{2} The motive for 9/11 has been explained time and again – it is a known quantity. As it applies to each individual within the cabal behind it is a larger issue than each of these individuals seeming personal motivations. As usual Smith feigns this naïve posture, refusing to admit to the systemic issues by fragmenting it into arguments pertaining to individual appearances. And they are just appearances, public persona, masks and postures.
“Why would a man kill his own wife?” This is the sort of jejune question that Smith puts forth in his dissembling. It seems like a very mysterious thing to at first glance, if one is enchanted by surface reflections and never thinks beyond the moment. This is why Smith loads the question with rhetorical details, rather than leave the simple straight forward question naked and bear and hanging alone for some consideration.
The best answer to such rhetorical questions as, “why would a man kill his own wife,” is to point out that the first suspect in any killing of a married person is considered to be the spouse.
And in the insurance industry the first suspect in the destruction of an insured property is the holder of the insurance policy. Standard procedure, because that is the way the world really works, not this fairytale wonderland that Smith offers up.
Here’s one to put in your pipe and smoke assbury. Goes way beyond your little show.
http://theinfounderground.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=5367
Larry Silverstein’s exact quote, veritable1: “I remember getting a call from the fire department commander, telling me that they were not sure they were gonna be able to contain the fire, and I said, ‘We’ve had SUCH A TERRIBLE LOSS OF LIFE [in the tower collapses], maybe the smartest thing to do is pull it.’ And THEY [the FDNY] made that decision to pull and then we watched the building collapse.”
HE is not the one who “made that decision”; the FDNY was, and it was not to fight the fires because of the “terrible loss of life” in the tower collapses, but in your fairytale wonderland, why did 12 different insurance companies all pay him a total of $4.68 BILLION if he publicly admitted to defrauding them?
Please address that and my other questions posted here on December 17, 2011 at 10:24 am.
You obviously assume that we’re dealing with squeaky clean people here and not the reptiles they are.
More from a friend
Exact quotation:
“I remember getting a call from the, er, fire department commander, telling me that they were not sure they were gonna be able to contain the fire, and I said, ‘We’ve had such terrible loss of life, maybe the smartest thing to do is pull it.’ And they made that decision to pull and we watched the building collapse.”~Larry Silverstein
Agent Smith has made the argument {with myself personally} that the “they” in the last sentence of Silverstein’s statement is “obviously” the FDNY. I have already addressed the contextual problems of this argument in my previous remarks. But would further point out that the only people identified positively in this phone conversation is Mr. Silverstein himself, and the fire department commander. The fire department commander may indeed ‘represent’ the FDNY as a top official, but it does not identify who the “they” were who “made that decision to pull”. Who was involved in this decision other than the commander and Mr. Silverstein?
We surely aren’t being led to believe here that a consensus was drawn from all of the firefighters in FDNY. Surely there were merely key people making this decision, and the fact is they are not identified. We might suppose that the mayor and other political players were involved, perhaps even the technicians who planted the explosives used to “pull” the building.
It should be mentioned here that as a further ‘clarification’ Mr. Silverstein’s pubic relations spokesperson claimed that what Silverstein meant to be pulled was not the building itself, but the firemen in the building. The problem with this is that there were no firemen in the building for several hours before “we watched the building collapse.”
Further, if we look carefully at the linkage of, “they made that decision to pull and we watched the building collapse.” It is clear to any lucid mind that the “pull” had to do directly with “the building collapse.” Thus any dispute over the term “pull” as one used or not by demolition experts is based on rhetorical gamesmanship.
Clearly Mr. Silverstein inadvertently let the cat out of the bag in this PBS interview. What has followed has been an attempt to erase this admission by all manner of scurrilous techniques of language manipulation.
And more Smith as discussed on another site. You’re getting known, too bad it’s as a fool but many of us think “sellout”
BOOGALOO IN WONDERLAND IN PERPETUITY
“You also refuse to accept the fact that hi-rises can FREE FALL without damage from explosives, as many floors in real C/Ds do”~Agent Smith
>This statement is not even a form of argument, it is simple bullshit. Every single adjoinment in a highrise must be disjoined in an implosion-demolition. Anyone who has ever studied the blast sequence blueprints for a demolition knows this. FREE FALL is impossible without removing impeding structure. [Adjoined]
“No, Roger; you’ll try to change the topic to Afghanistan policy, which wasn’t affected in the slightest by a predicted, non-fatal ~5:21 PM collapse of a burning building…”~Agent Smith
>At this point Smith reached the point of utter lunacy. ‘Afghanistan policy’ is predicated on the pretext of 9/11. It is time to review the PNAC document again, as it lays out the whole strategy for the imperial invasion of the Middle East, and in fact implicitly calls for a pretext such as this “new Pearl Harbor” that 9/11 became.
The agent’s postings become increasingly unhinged from reality as he floats through the black empty space between his ears. This is an attempt to erase known history.
“Only a “trickster…playing with words” would play down the seriousness of “normal Office Furnishings Fires,” and continue to lie about Dr. Sunder’s statement after it was fully explained to you. Once again, the new phenomenon was not thermal expansion of steel beams, but the factoring of that expansion into a structural engineering report on steel-framed building collapses in fires.”~Agent Smith
>Smith says the “new phenomenon was not thermal expansion of steel beams, but the factoring of that expansion into a structural engineering report..”… BUT, it is the factoring in of that expansion which is the fantasy of the whole issue here – as it is understood that such expansion is impossible without concurrent expansion of the concrete. It is established by NIST’s own testimony that it did not “add heat” to the concrete in the software instructions, but only added heat to the steel. This is the crux of the matter right here – the fire that supposedly heated the steel, had to have heated the concrete it was attached to in any real life situation, as both materials are effected by heat to the same expansive degree.
No one is “playing down the seriousness of “normal Office Furnishings Fires,” What they are doing is pointing out the physical absurdities claimed by NIST.
Again we are faced with Agent Smith playing the part of the Mad Hatter at his table in Wonderland, setting out his arguing teacups.
\\][//
You’re trying to fit a square peg into a round hole. Please address all of my questions posted here on December 17, 2011 at 10:24 am.
Thank you. Mad hatter or mutt propagandist in ‘Tokyo Rose’ category, take our pick, but material to the fact is smith is promulgating an HYPOTHESIS.
‘Dr Pinocchio sunders magic bolt’ is an UNPROVEN THEORY no matter how he runs the rabbit . The CRITICAL moment in that hypothesis, is the skewing of data to create the MOMENT to hang the [creationist:new phenomena] animated narrative AROUND: Differential stresses to crack the shear studs by turning heat OFF the concrete in the model. NCSTAR1-9:352.
He continues to argue a theory as FACT.
Whereas, succinctly reported and recorded differing forensic evidence streams by EXPERT witnesses and researchers, and eyewitness testimony of EXPLOSIVE events and Molten Steel ‘running down the channel rails’ hold FREE FALL of complex 81 steel columned 47 storied steel framed high rises does NOT occur WITHOUT equally complex explosive sequences OF SOME KIND removing ALL RESISTANCE, so that free fall is by its very nature, evidence OF controlled demolition of the 3 WTC high rises.
That the entire wretched burned out toxic DUST moonscape of Lower Manhattan, with its sad wandering figures and blood splattered faces and stupid BUSH megaphone can be winnowed down to Albury smiths’ “proof of controlled demolition being the left behind 2 little nondescript pieces of rusty pitted steel…how sad…” is example of albright smiths ‘crippled epistemology’ as identified by Sunstein/Vermules awful ‘conspiracy theorist’ paper.
Here is a partial list of who THEY were – besides the fire dept commander, who decided to “pull” WTC7.
The Most Likely Suspects:
Rudy Giuliani
Richard Sheirer
Richard Rotanz
Bernard Kerik
Pasquale J. D’Amuro
John Odematt
P.S. consensus is, your December 17 2011 post is essentially just a filibuster of rhetorical bullshit. Nice try genius
The NIST hypothesis is backed up by a lengthy and detailed engineering report, Roger, and I know of no reputable structural engineering people or study that disproves the shear stud findings or anything else in it. Unlike you, SEs don’t think shear studs are a passive fire protection system, and realize that any differential thermal expansion between the beams and slabs will cause them to fail. Since Box Boy has all of those hundreds of “engineers,” would you please link me to the professional studies and papers they’ve produced on the topic?
I’d also like a link to any known C/D that left “Molten Steel ‘running down the channel rails,'” and a list of all of the explosives and incendiaries that produce any heat months after they’re detonated or ignited, let alone temperatures sufficient to melt steel. Molten metal (probably lead or aluminum) in debris fires is about as convincing an argument for C/D as the FREE FALL bunk you keep spewing, and NIST did not rule out the possibility of molten steel, although no temperatures hot enough were ever recorded. Does it seem even slightly implausible to you that molten steel would be “running down” recognizable steel shapes, or didn’t you give that any thought either?
“The NIST hypothesis is backed up by a lengthy and detailed engineering report..”~Assbury
It is not “backed up by”, it is NIST’s report. And what it ‘backs up’ is a hypothesis that is proven by it’s own description of the modelling input as utterly bogus.
It takes a special mind to dismiss the fact that NIST cheated in the input by heating the steel and not heating the concrete. If this blatant ‘fixing’ of the input doesn’t sink in to the magnitude deserved, it shows clearly that Agent Smith is being willfully obtuse.
Again, his whole argument is one of appeal to authority – and this authority is shown to be totally corrupt by it’s own contradictory testimony.
NIST fully explained its (not “it’s”) methodologies in NCSTAR 1A and 1-9, veritable1, and it isn’t their problem if someone with no knowledge of structural engineering can’t understand that the concrete was restrained by in-place stiffness, and that a fire east of column 79 doesn’t heat the entire ~1 acre floor area all at once. Box Boy has all those hundreds of “engineers,” and the NIST WTC 7 reports were released MORE THAN THREE YEARS AGO, so where’s the competing study? Do they need NIST’s complete ANSYS and LS-DYNA input and results packages to model 5 common WF steel beams and a girder in fire conditions, when they have the framing plan, full connection details, including bolt specifications, approved steel submittals showing shear stud sizes and their locations on the W24 X 55s, etc? How many of the Cardington researchers have disputed the findings?
Veritable1 blabbers ignorantly: “This statement is not even a form of argument, it is simple bullshit. Every single adjoinment in a highrise must be disjoined in an implosion-demolition. Anyone who has ever studied the blast sequence blueprints for a demolition knows this.”
You obviously have studied nothing, but you’ve certainly mastered “simple bullshit.” Read and learn:
http://science.howstuffworks.com/engineering/structural/building-implosion.htm
Almost all of the “adjoinments” are disjoined by gravity, not by explosives, and C/Ds also have periods of free fall. Duh…
Round and round the bullshit merry go round. Assbury the broken record. The only reason you haven’t been tossed from this site like you have from all the others is because since most of us abandoned this, you’re just about the only thing this administrator has left. Shill, paid or not or just someone that does this in lieu of a life, you’re still a loser.
Banning and ad hominem are the 2 top skills of your 9/11 “truth movement,” veritable1. Why is that?
btw, are the howstuffworks.com authors “shills” too?
The failure of the studs is because NIST turned the heat OFF the concrete in the model albright. And it must be a very IMPORTANT moment for the creatio[nist] scenario : critical break initiation sequence : otherwise the boffins wouldn’t have bothered doctoring the data to DO it. without stud break the whole nonsense is revealed as it is. Naked invention. Its actually just animation.
Curious how you run. You state there is no evidence of molten steel temperatures recorded one post after being told “FEMA documented in Appendix C of its BPAT Report “evidence of a severe high temperature corrosion attack on the steel,including oxidation and sulfidation with subsequent intergranular melting.” This is clearly not a feature of gravitational collapse, or of hydrocarbon fuel or office fires.” and will also clearly suffice as ONE record of melted steel temperature.
Your ‘probably lead or aluminium’ sunder bullet point…do you mean the EVAPORATED lead temperatures recorded ? or perhaps molybdenum microspheres at 4753º or maybe the 150x more than usual iron microspheres found in the dust by LEE group and Harrit/Jones? Spheroids explicitly and forensically the result of explosive thermitic reaction spraying molten iron into the air?
And ‘aluminum’? is that reference to the aluminothermics in reaction creating heat enough to form molten steel in the pile and reduce a 47 storied 81 vertical columned steel frame high rise to a steaming pile in 6.5 seconds +., 2.25 seconds at FREE FALL?
‘HowStuffWorks’ is elementary – beginners explanations for kids. Their page on ‘Explosive Demolition’ is typical of this. Assbury citing the page is typical to his jejune understanding of the process, and one can see the false assumptions he has made based on this simpleton explanation.
He obviously thinks that a charge at the bottom of a column simply unseats it, having no other effect on the structure than this. He obviously has no appreciation of the pressures involved in such a blast, that blowing the lower end of the column will send a strong shiver throughout the the entire structure, wanking the column at an angle at such force as to break connections to any cross members attached to it. These pressures effect the rest of the structure as well, shattering concrete and masonry, water pipes and electrical wiring grids.
At the end of the article on HowStuffWorks’, it is implied that the term ‘implosion’ is not the same as it is used in other scientific aspects. This is not true. The pressures created by these demolition blasts do create a vacuum inside the closed space of a building causing them to implode inwardly upon themselves.
Agent Smith does himself a great disservice in showing just how little he understands the basics of a subject in which he claims such expertise.
“Veritable1 blabbers ignorantly: “This statement is not even a form of argument, it is simple bullshit. Every single adjoinment in a highrise must be disjoined in an implosion-demolition. Anyone who has ever studied the blast sequence blueprints for a demolition knows this.”
You obviously have studied nothing, but you’ve certainly mastered “simple bullshit.” Read and learn:
http://science.howstuffworks.com/engineering/structural/building-implosion.htm
Almost all of the “adjoinments” are disjoined by gravity, not by explosives, and C/Ds also have periods of free fall. Duh…”
________________________________
The NIST WTC investigations prompted 40 revisions in the 2009 and 2012 I-codes, Roger, and Box Boy’s recent dog-and-pony show at the RIBA’s London HQ prompted a review and possible revision in their rental policies, but what else has your 9/11 “truth movement” accomplished? I’ve seen no engineering studies even questioning the NIST shear stud scenario, but why haven’t his hundreds of “engineers” modeled the framing north and east of column 79 by now? It won’t provide the slightest bit of evidence for explosives, but since they constantly attack the NIST findings, the least they could do is produce some competing ones that could also be discussed in papers on the ASCE and other professional web sites. LERA probably did the NIST models, so why not try to explain your problem to Leslie E. Robertson, the renowned SE who stamped the WTC tower structurals and submittals? Be sure to give him your resume first.
The top USGS AVIRIS temps were under 1400F, and conjecture over 2 small pieces of steel does not alter that fact. Box Boy’s “engineers” could also try producing the same corrosion effects with C/D substances, so the ball’s in your court, not NIST’s. The aluminum I mentioned was from the buildings and planes, not whatever Harrit, et al. were “reminded” of, and you still haven’t explained why all of the molten metal reports had to have been steel, given the huge quantities of lead and aluminum in all three collapsed hi-rises. I’m also wondering how the many “aluminothermic reactions” went unnoticed on the ends of the columns, or is that just blind faith, like the “more than a hundred tons” of conventional high explosives he knows about?
Don’t drink any Kool-Aid if he offers it to you.
Yes, veritable1; blast overpressures create vacuums, and controlled demolitions are nothing like what’s described in the howstuffworks.com article I posted. Protec Documentation Services and Controlled Demolition Group, Ltd. are just novices, but we’re fortunate to have you and your “truth movement” to enlighten us.
Here’s another “shill” for you:
http://www.911myths.com/index.php/WTC_Not_A_Demolition
All of those C/Ds were done the wrong way too.
Its funny you should say that, for here I was thinking the same thing
counter to the death
to the destruction being wrought in our names
by other fathers
in the valleys of the swat.
among the herders of afghanistan learning lessons from the skies
the predator drones
and hellfire missiles flown from Dorothy, kansas.
.
Here are 2 more shills for GeeDubya and the neocons:
Maher’s liberal panel members were really impressed with the screaming twoofers too. He’s as critical of the “war president” and his 2003 Iraq blunder as I am, but neither of us is stupid enough to claim that al Qaeda suicide hijackings and crashes were “inside jobs,” and that NYC hi-rise collapses were the reason for the nearly unanimous congressional resolution to invade Afghanistan in 2001, passed by many of the same people who did nothing at all about the al Qaeda suicide attack on the USS Cole in 2000, and berated President Clinton for “wagging the dog” after the 2 al Qaeda suicide bombings of US embassies in 1998.
Seriously, do you people ever THINK?
Shitstain on the underpants of humanity!? Hey can I use that? I hope jumafya pays well for you or or are you just bending over for them to get in? Oh wait a minute to let them in.
Gee, that was fact-filled, veritable1. I don’t know what “jumafya” means, but are you being paid well by al-Zawahiri and his Men of Allah? Probably not, since they don’t deny their hatred of the US, and their suicide attacks of 9/11.
Couldn’t figure the word out? Too bad, it wasn’t meant for you anyhow, it’s more than a little over your head. For the rest, enjoy.
“… neither of us is stupid enough to claim that al Qaeda suicide hijackings and crashes were “inside jobs,” and that NYC hi-rise collapses were the reason for the nearly unanimous congressional resolution to invade Afghanistan in 2001
Seriously, do you people ever THINK?”~Assbury
Wow…what planet??? What planet is this from?
……….And after the remarks he/it had just made…he/it is a totally programmed shitbot…and a prime example of the banality of evil.
Just crazy as a shithouse rat.
Really –
..how anybody can get things like that to fit together in their heads…and to think that some 70 % or more Amerikans have these cognizant issues…
I don’t know why I am still shocked everyday by this kind of thing…
Uh…gawbleslmerka
assbury is stupid enough though
What planet do Bill Clinton, Bill Maher, and all of these people live on, v1?
http://sites.google.com/site/wtc7lies/someoftheagencies%2Corganizationsandindivi
I think it’s the same one this guy lived on:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/asia/afghanistan/1362113/Bin-Laden-Yes-I-did-it.html
Uh Huh
The 9/11 Event has been a pivotal point in America’s history. It is a “jumping off” point, a crossing the Rubicon point, where the secret shadow government cabal of the ALL CAPS UNITED STATES OF AMERICA accomplished a coup against the American People and (as can readily be seen) Constitutional Law, Individual Rights, Accountability for Crimes of Politicians and their Cronies, etc. And this momentous Crime has spread it’s collateral damage through-out the world — to innocents and others abroad.
The Science of the “physical” crimes gets thrown around in the wash of truth and lies. The Liars like Albury use media, etc. to suffocate the victims whenever truth floats to the surface of the barrage and mountain of lies. The People, in America, and abroad, are the victims. The evidence for motive, for who profited is naked in front of everyone if they care to look at the hideous creature. The cover-up is blatantly Obvious, the misapplied forensics scream out “I’ve been abused!” The non-applied forensic methods and removal of evidence scream out, “Gross Tampering with a Crime Scene!” The paltry expense allocated for investigation and the NIST whitewash insult the integrity of our entire country, and the abilities of our vaunted, and highly expensive investigative agencies. Whitney Houston’s fete probably cost more than the shriveled dollars thrown at 9/11.
That Trillions have been made by theft, by war, by bloodshed based on this 9/11 Lie Pivot — requires humanity, not just Americans, to root out the “REAL” criminals who committed, and protected, and profited off The Lie!
Where WE the PEOPLE stand now with the ruins of America falling down around us, where WE the PEOPLE of foreign lands occupied, killed, and abandoned to the schemes of demons lie in their graves, attempt to stay alive in a world gone to Hell, contemplating their missing limbs, their missing loved ones, their missing culture, and their missing countries…WE the PEOPLE KNOW and can point to beginning of miseries. WE KNOW it is not US who is to blame. WE KNOW that death and destruction, torture and tyranny in a thousand forms, come from those whose hearts endorse these depraved and inhumane actions.
WE SEE who has and is profiting from “the sickness”. WE SEE who advocates in their political rhetoric on the camp-pain trail more of the same.
When WE LOOK into our hearts WE SEE empathy for our brothers and sisters, anger at the injustice, we FEEL their pain. With these observations, WE KNOW WE are not the Cause. Because inhumanity comes out of the black recesses of the inhumane heart, and WE can scarely understand that dark blackness. By NOW, WE KNOW that our ENEMY is not a country of families on the other side of the world whom we do not understand, yet we know they are hurting even worse than our pampered fannies in America. They are reeling from the blows. WE MUST KNOW that WE are being pitted against each other by “another”… the Enemy and Instigator of the inhumanity.
It will behoove US to not show up for the wars that are created for our undoing. No “thinking” American in their right mind can possibly be “for” more insane warring in the Middle East or anywhere else. Consider — if what we’ve just seen in the last few years, and this last spring and summer up to this very day, represents in any way, Democracy in action, Freedom and Liberty shared abroad, while we LOSE IT ALL BY DECREE here at home — then WE nor THOSE ABROAD can afford it.
For WE are ALL DYING for WHAT? AND FOR WHOM?
Here at COTO — WE KNOW the WHO! And WE KNOW THE WHAT! And the question of WHY? does not even matter, for it is epithet, and the perpetraitors wear the name with ignominy. I just hope humanity will take back their world from the demons, and hold accountable this class of treasonous traitors to humanity. May HELL rise to meet their FALL, and may it be SOON!
Good one as always Boomer, If you don’t mind, I’m posting this over for a buddy to read. He’s a little flustered right now and this should keep him in that state for awhile longer.
Edit Comment
By: veritable1 on February 25, 2012
at 3:22 pm
LEAVE A REPLY
Enter your comment here…
Larry Silverstein is Selling Willis (Sears) Tower…oh no
Another year of Illuminati mysteries comes and goes
9/11, The argument rages
Joo lies and “Me love You longtime”ME TO:
I’m sorry….is ablury actually contending ‘uncle bill cocaine-CLINTON’ of MENA, and Bill Mahers ‘liberal panel’, sat in STUNNED career saving silence, are indicative of ENQUIRY? Are evidence of Independent FREE THOUGHT – have researched FREE FALL by themselves FOR themselves??? Are proof of false flag 911 NOT being false flag because the home-base intellectual elites SAY so?
Is propaganda smith seriously suggesting false flag 911 NOT central and absolute fulcrum/pivot moment generating the miserably failed hate/revenge WAR in Afghanistan? Iraq? General Clarkes Neoconazion ‘Regime change list??
The machine shudders to halt…….More FICTION from the hand of Smith….sees the actor ‘megaphone’BUSH on the PILE defiling the dead of 911. Of Bandar-prince smoking cigar and odious ‘Rummy’ first aiding for camera…….of Hekmeyer and opium crops and ‘Al Qaeda’ “terrorists” being flown by NATO to Kosovo, Benghazi, Syria…..guantanamo…………cheney’s ugly sneer. ASSASSINATION.
At risk of repetition, anyone presenting dr Pinocchio Sunders magic bolt ‘new phenomenon’ hypothesis as FACT, should keep awful quiet about where the ‘real world’ and ‘sanity’ could be.
I think ablury is a trauma victim from first gulf war. or an office deep underground with revolving staff.
I thought you were a structural engineering expert who’s smarter than PEs with doctorates, Roger, not a political pundit, but your absurd “false flag” allegation needs evidence too, just as your imaginary explosive demolition bunk does. You have none for either one.
That shows a collapse, my clueless little ASGS stalker, but demolition explosions look and sound like this:
http://www.911myths.com/index.php/WTC_Not_A_Demolition
Here are more of them:
http://www.break.com/index/landmark_tower_demolition.html
Was that well enough documented for you?
No albury. Sorry. 911Myths site is called ‘myth’ for a very good reason.
Tower 1 antenna moves first. The hat truss on the top of that structure is reported as multi storied. binding inner 47 core columns to outer 232 or so columns.
for the antenna to fall as observed, all 47 cores had to be pulled all at once. Which they obviously were.
Or is that the ‘new phenomena’ of dr pinocchio ‘creatioNIST’ Sunder at work again? sudden catastrophic collapse at free fall speed of complex steel framed high rises due to airplane fuel/office furnishings fire?
You look ridiculous trying to use “pulled” to mean explosively cut, since it’s only a C/D industry term for pulling over a structure with cables, but if all of those core columns had been cut with your imaginary, fireproof, plane-proof explosives:
1) The smoke from the fires around the 96th floor would have been very noticeably disturbed well before the top ~14 floors began falling
2) The debris would have been drawn inward, not expelled
3) 47 explosively-cut core columns would have been found in the debris
What’s especially stupid about the explosives “theory” for the towers is that 236 of the 283 columns in each one were IN PLAIN SIGHT, and it’s very obvious what happened to them.
Yes, ASGS stalker; both airlines and the NTSB were in on the conspiracy too, or don’t know the difference between a 767 engine and one from another model. Fortunately, we have the 9/11 “truth movement” to enlighten us.
btw, great video, but wear a shirt for the camera next time:
You’re a rocket scientist IRL, aren’t you?
The most recent revision of the Wikipedia account of AA accidents and incidents is at this link, not in a 6 year-old editing job:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Airlines_accidents_and_incidents
It simply states:
“September 11, 2001 attacks: Two American Airlines aircraft were hijacked and crashed: American Airlines Flight 77 (a Boeing 757) was intentionally crashed into the Pentagon building in Washington D.C. and American Airlines Flight 11 (a Boeing 767) was intentionally crashed into the North tower of the World Trade Center in New York City.”
Why would you dig up an old and discredited “revision” that was undoubtedly planted by some dishonest 9/11 “researcher,” not American Airlines, instead of the current article, my little ASGS stalker? If you really believe that Flights 11 and 77 weren’t in service on 9/11, please post the BTS account cited in the “revision.” It should be great news for American Airlines, which may be able to get back some of the millions they’ve paid out to the victims, or were they all faked too? Maybe they’ll pay you a finder’s fee for your new information on their ~$200 million worth of airliners.
“No-planers” are the bottom of the heap, even by 9/11 “truth movement” standards.
Just while on subject of who is pulling who Albricht.
doctor Psunder and NIST also discovered, but didn’t highlight to Popular Mechanics or the ‘Press’,
another WTC7 ‘new phenomena’ :
The ‘Speed of Deceit’ was identified during tests gaining FREE FALL by turning HEAT off the CONCRETE in the model:
Speed of Deceit+ ™ ] 608[ft] by 6.5secs = 93.53846153846™
While we’re on the subject of deceit, Roger, please tell me which of these WTC 7 collapse videos you, Box Boy, Water Boy, Jones, etc. used to get your 6.5 seconds, right to the nearest 1/10 second, no less:
I can’t seem to find one that shows the end of the collapse at all, let alone clearly enough for that astounding degree of accuracy, but it looks like ~8.5 seconds to me, not that collapse times have anything to do with the cause.
btw, I’m still waiting for the results of the 9/11 “truth movement’s” ANSYS and LS-DYNA modeling of the column 79-area framing, and a scientific rebuttal of the NIST shear stud findings. Hundreds of those “engineers” and 3+ years should certainly be sufficient for that. If they’re too stupid to perform simple engineering tasks, maybe they could cite Cardington or other tests?
Just keep chasing that half second shave down uncle shyams rabbit hole albry. The engineers should be meeting you coming back up very soon.
6.5 + or 8.5 – will be established at trial by proper forensic cross examination and I doubt either of us will be called to testify.
But somewhere in those naked emperor seconds, after a day of ‘explosions’ reported in the building, a 47 storied, 81 or 82 vertically columned steel framed high rise behemoth came down into its own footprint ‘in the manner of controlled demolition’, laying for weeks in its pile molten steel. Creating DUST within which iron rich microspheres and unignited thermitic material CHIPS abounded.
2.25 seconds AT free fall. NO resistance from any ‘walking beams’ ‘in plane moments’ or PULL orders from management Albry , just free falling through space at 93.53846153846™ft.p.second. + or –
Please describe the “manner” in which WTC 7 would have fallen if the NIST collapse hypothesis had occurred, Roger. I also asked you to identify the video clip that enabled your “researchers” to get their 6.5 seconds, and I’d love to know why your absurd velocity figure is so important to you. Taking a wrong quantity to 11 decimal places and then adding a +/- to it’s hilarious, so keep up the good work. 🙂
If you’re going to continue citing the “PULL” quote, and claiming that “management” blows up its own burning buildings, or orders the fire department to do it, my questions are still here, and you still haven’t answered them. The day of “explosions” (which weren’t even loud enough to be heard a few blocks away, and didn’t occur anywhere near 5:21 PM) was also a day of fires, as these many eyewitness statements indicate:
http://sites.google.com/site/wtc7lies/eyewitnessaccountsofwtc7fires
http://sites.google.com/site/wtc7lies/accountsofwtc7damage
http://sites.google.com/site/wtc7lies/eyewitnessaccountsofthewithdrawalfromwtc
Were they all in on the plot too?
Pakistan recently bulldozed the Abbottabat compound where your hero was hiding, ASGS Stalker. Do you know why they did that instead of announcing last May that US SEALs killed an innocent patsy?
The only evidence you’ve presented here establishes your ability to find troofer nut web sites, and your inclination to believe them, in spite of the facts. Please encourage Roger to address the questions in my recent posts, and try doing the same yourself. Thanks.
If no one cares what I think, my little ASGS Stalker, why are you trying so hard to enlighten me? Have you sent a communique to the Pakistani government yet to inform them that your hero wasn’t living in Abbottabad last year, because he’d already croaked? Be sure to copy all of the other governments in the world, and all legitimate media.
Please note that your businessinsider.com link doesn’t question the fact that bin Laden was offed last May, only the disposition of the carcass, and the investigations into Saudi complicity say nothing about US government involvement in the al Qaeda suicide attacks of 9/11, your imaginary WTC explosives, faked planes, hijacker patsies, etc.
So the al Qaeda suicide attacks of 9/11 were a collaborative effort by Saudi Arabia and Israel? What other joint ventures have they worked on? Were they behind the two 1998 suicide bombings of US embassies in Africa, and the suicide bombing of the USS Cole in 2000?
The legitimate question of Saudi government involvement in 9/11 does not negate any of the NIST or 9/11 Commission findings, regardless of your inability to read and comprehend.
Fortunately, you aren’t the arbiter of what’s scientific. The NIST WTC reports were scientific enough to prompt 40 revisions to the 2009 and 2012 I-codes:
http://www.nist.gov/el/disasterstudies/about.cfm
while your “truth movement” has been completely ignored by everyone who matters.
And just to clarify, “noone” isn’t a word in my first language. Now get back to flipping burgers, parking cars, pumping gas, or whatever other activities you’re really qualified to do, my little ASGS Stalker. Your goofy video shows that you and whoever concocted it don’t even know the difference between beams and bar joists. Too funny. 🙂
Albright. your question “Please describe the “manner” in which WTC 7 would have fallen if NIST collapse hypothesis had occurred”
gives ‘In the manner of controlled demolition’ as observed FACT on the day – its DUE.
The ‘manner’ it ‘would have fallen’ c/o NIST would be in the ANIMATION as presented BY nist in their final report. THAT is what NIST hypothesis explicitly LOOKS like. Why didn’t you KNOW that?
a twisting blue net of disconnecting computer stick graphics sequentially folding and dropping without regard to observed behaviour, BULGING down entire flanks so totally uncorroborated by actual eyewitness that the animation had to finish BEFORE ‘final 6.5 + second collapse phase because the animation looked so LITTLE like the REAL THING ….
Much like every other part of the OFFICIAL 911 FALSE FLAG conspiracy theory. You included.
That’s why it’s so critically important for you and Box Boy’s hundreds of “engineers” to do your own modeling, Roger, so why haven’t you even STARTED it? Since the stupid NIST SEs with all of those doctorates and PEs didn’t include the non-structural facade elements in their data input, and didn’t even bother to look at their own results after spending months deriving them, we need to get some real talent involved.
I’m sure you’ve sent them loads of RFIs on this topic, but it seems rather obvious to me that they focused on the triggering mechanism around column 79, and that once the structural failure reached a certain point the visible portion would look the same regardless of whether internal column buckling and partial floor collapses started it, or your silent and evidence-free explosives did the deed, but that’s what we have top-notch experts like you for. Stupid NIST doesn’t even know about timing collapses to tell what caused them, so please get to work immediately.
Smith asserting ‘fire induced sequential building collapse’ and classic Demolition behaviour ‘look the same regardless” is part of perception control mechanism. The projection of THEORY as FACT is antiscience. AGNOTOLOGY.
NO steel framed high rise HAS EVER ‘collapsed’ due to fire. No steel framed high rise has EVER come STRAIGHT down into its own footprint AT FREE FALL speed due to ‘normal office furnishings fires’.
Until NISTs ‘new phenomenon™invention.
This is projection of an HYPOTHESIS as fact promulgated by acolyte statements like alblury smiths. A PROGRAM.
Historically “The triggering mechanism around column 79” was a series of incendiary/explosive events designed to pull the core structure split-seconds before initiated outer sequences to drop the entire 47 storied structure IN THE OBSERVED MANNER…..in 6.5 +seconds….
In WTC7 presentation the ANIMATION showing NIST hypothesis was turned off on screen because it bore NO RESEMBLANCE to final drop phase REALITY.
This does not make credible forensic argument.
That’s quite a panel of “experts” on structural engineering, ASGS Stalker. You missed the boat not getting the Reynolds Wrap concession in Toronto, but be sure to buy that worthless video they’re plugging. 🙂
That’s why I’m imploring you and your 9/11 “truth movement” to do your own ANSYS and LS-DYNA modeling, Roger. If you’ve already done it, please link me to the results you’ve published. If others have done studies and reached conclusions that differ from NIST’s, let’s see them too.
My little ASGS stalker is quite the deep thinker, so be sure to enlist his aid. Who needs PEs with doctorates in structural engineering when we have “several Emmys and a Pulitzer” guiding us?
TIA.
We’re everywhere, ASGS Stalker:
http://sites.google.com/site/wtc7lies/someoftheagencies%2Corganizationsandindivi
NORAD had 2 armed F-15s on standby at Otis AFB, MA, and 2 armed F-16s on standby at Langley AFB, VA, the usual number before 9/11, and they weren’t mindreaders, my little ASGS stalker:
http://cleartheskies.com/timeline.html
Since you’re a top 9/11 “researcher,” would you care to give me a rough count of other hijacked passenger airliners they’ve shot down over populated areas of the US, or even intercepted in the short time they had on 9/11?
Concerning ANSYS and LS-DYNA modeling.
IF anyone does have the capacity to model, alternative to and in confrontation with corruption at observed high end Amercian black operational level,
given the world wide war being instigated on the back of 911 false flag,
it would be necessary to access NIST data, IN FULL, from behind its state secrets ‘privilege’, given that it is a government department of the people doing the peoples work and has no right to refuse independent analysis of the model.
Also, at the same moment and with same vibrancy, a model on the OBSERVED behaviour of WTC7, AND the great towers, WILL be created,
factoring in Explosive demolition. Or, to say another way, a model ‘in the manner of controlled demolition’, utilizing proper investigative interactive military industrial intelligence expertize on ALL known and contemporary explosive/incendiary capabilities, and inclusive of ALL forensic evidence and eyewitness testimony and engineering knowledge from that terrible day, will be presented.
Just to give us an idea of what we have been missing these past 10 years.
NIST had ~200 engineers and no one’s complete ANSYS and LS-DYNA input and results packages when they began their investigation, Roger, and Box Boy alone has “800 engineers,” plus NCSTAR 1A, 1-9, access to all of NIST’s sources, and can also RFI NIST for whatever they can’t find. It’s been >3 years, so what’s the holdup?
Whoa up albright…. an ‘investigation’….?!
How can a ‘new phenomena’ FREE FALL total dismemberment of a complex 81 vertically columned 47 storied steel framed high rise in 6.5 seconds into its own plan area identified for the first time EVER by conflicted of interest government dept. NIST engineers secret computer program, claiming “sequential building collapse due to normal office furnishings fires” COMPLETELY disregarding numerous forensic evidence and eyewitness testimonies to EXPLOSIVE events, heat spikes way in excess of office furnishings fire capabilities, molten steel in the piles and 108feet of COMPLETE no resistant FREE FALL possibly be called an INVESTIGATION?
FREE FALL is no more a new phenomenon than thermal expansion is, Roger, and it appears that you’re not paying attention very well, since you’re still repeating the same lies over and over. As irrelevant as it is, the total collapse time for WTC 7’s facade was ~8.5, not 6.5 seconds, and NCSTAR 1A clearly explained why the collapse was so contained, at least to anyone who can read a structural drawing and apply some common sense. If molten steel in debris is indicative to you of a C/D, then please link me to known ones in which it was observed months later, and list some of the explosives or incendiaries capable of doing it.
The bottom line here is that NIST HAS a computer program and publicized results, and accomplished it with ~200 SEs, so it’s now time for at least FOUR TIMES THAT MANY “engineers” to derive their own modeling for comparison. There’s nothing “secret” about the software they used, and the input information is all readily available, so show us what a real investigation looks like. The ball’s now been in your court for >3 years, so time’s a-wastin’. My little ASGS stalker and you are much better qualified for structural engineering problems than the NIST dopes, so please get to work on it. You have NO EXCUSE not to.
Molten METAL is indicative of debris fires, my little ASGS Stalker, and no eyewitnesses ever qualitatively analyzed it, so how do you know what it was? Structural steel melts at ~2600F or greater, and no debris temperatures that high were ever documented at GZ, so it was more likely lead and/or aluminum. Does your miraculous “nanothermite” secretly collapse hi-rises and then burn for months at 2600+?
Please help Roger get started with the WTC 7 ANSYS and LS-DYNA modeling immediately. You guys are much smarter than the NIST engineers, and I want answers NOW. Post the links when your results are published.
Thanks in advance.
Yes, my little ASGS stalker; secret explosives turned all of the combustibles in 3 NYC hi-rises to microscopic dust in seconds, and then kept steel molten in the debris for more than 3 months. Major, multi-story office fires also self-extinguish in an hour or two.
Jeezus, I hope you’re not allowed out without competent adult supervision…
UA 175 hit the 81st floor of the South Tower, ASGS Stalker, Orio Palmer was in a stairwell on “FLOOR SEVENTY-EIGHT,” and the fires spread upward, not downward. Jeepers; could that be why he only observed two small fires THREE STORIES BELOW the centerline of the plane’s impact?
Here’s the petition at Lawyer’s “firefighters” for “truth” web site:
http://firefightersfor911truth.org/?page_id=469
How many signatories there even CLAIM to be FDNY?
Later in your absurd video, Box Boy shows us that he doesn’t understand the difference between molten METAL and molten STEEL. Dr. Gross didn’t lie; BOX BOY DID.
Now please feel free to list all of the known explosives that keep steel molten in debris piles for months, and all of the real C/Ds that have left molten steel.
the same tired old story (lies ) youve been telling for the last decade. weve heard it all before, hundreds of times, and thats just from you. it makes as much sense now as it did then.
none
i mean really.. a plane “crashes” at shanksville.. AND THEN TIDIES UP AFTER ITSELF!
………….shut up shill..
noone cares..
ask an adult to explain this to you.
http://tvnewslies.org/tvnl/index.php/911-facts/48/20647-why-you-can-not-believe-the-q911-conspiracy-theory-de-bunkersq.html
Ask some of the adults at these links to explain what happened at Shanksville, little stalker man:
http://sites.google.com/site/wtc7lies/flight93page1
http://sites.google.com/site/wtc7lies/flight93page2
http://sites.google.com/site/wtc7lies/flight93page3
“No-planers” are the bottom of the heap.
where did i say there was no plane idiot?
what i did say, was “a plane “crashes” at shanksville.. AND THEN TIDIES UP AFTER ITSELF! ”
weve see all your links before.. heard all your lies before, hundreds of times and it makes as much sense now as it did then.
none
noones asking you anything. noone cares what you think. my poor slow witted little shill..
ask an adult to explain this to you
http://tvnewslies.org/tvnl/index.php/911-facts/48/20647-why-you-can-not-believe-the-q911-conspiracy-theory-de-bunkersq.html
Tell me more about those multi-alarm hi-rise fires that go out by themselves in an hour or so, lil’ stalker.
stalking upsets you doest it? awww cry more sook.
get someone to explain this to you anonymous unqualified lying shill who stalks 911 blogs 24/7
http://tvnewslies.org/tvnl/index.php/911-facts/48/20647-why-you-can-not-believe-the-q911-conspiracy-theory-de-bunkersq.html
noone owes you any explanations. and noone cares what you think.
i know your pretty slow, but damn.. to not be able to comprehend that brings stupid to a whole new level.
91101 WYNW FOX Reporter Confirms The Fires In The South Tower almost out.
http://www.ebaumsworld.com/video/watch/81173558/
seems funny that the building hit second would “collapse” first, the fires were indeed subsiding, as is common knowledge and as anyone can see.. ( except the lying shill all blurry )
anyone who thinks this is a collapse
is certainly not the brightest bulb on the xmas tree.. but the lying skidmark has already proven that.
To think that this ERUPTING racing EXPLOSION of DUST and flying steel could be PACKAGED and SOLD as “gravitational collapse’ DEFINES the ‘Failure of IMAGINATION’.
The Crime of the century.
Luck Larry and the neoconazionist conspiracy.
And albright smith.
You can only shake your head in the wonder and shame of it.
236 of the 283 columns in each tower were in plain sight, ~ halfway outside of the living spaces, Roger, and most of the NIST hypothesis can actually be observed. One-Trick Chandler was very careful in his goofy video not to show the North Tower before the top began falling, since it’s obvious that nothing even disturbed the smoke until then. You and ASLS Stalker must really like liars, since Chandler and your other your 9/11 “researchers” claim that the towers free fell, despite the airborne debris that’s falling much faster. Watch an entire video here:
and note that some of the debris begins hitting the pavement before the collapse zone is even down to the 47-story height of WTC 7. What’s especially amusing is his “some of the jets [his imaginary explosive ejections] have been clocked at over a hundred miles an hour.” Explosives eject debris at ~25 times that velocity. Duh…
Since you’re still libeling Larry Silverstein with your C/D nonsense, Roger, please address the questions I posted here:
albury | December 17, 2011 at 10:24 am | Reply
Perhaps Little ASGS/ASLS Stalker could help?
When you complete your WTC 7 collapse modeling, or find other engineering studies that disagree with NIST’s, please post links to those results too.
TIA.
Albright has trouble understanding FREE FALL.
But, Emerging science and WTC7 research just presented
http://www.911blogger.com/news/2012-03-10/tangled-webs-nist-and-wtc7
studying the ‘walking beam’ of Pinocchio sunder, significantly adds to already known distortions utilized by NIST in their ‘new phenomena’ hypotheses.[Thermal conductivity NOT a factor in Thermal Expansion Model. Heat turned OFF concrete at Beam interface to crack shear studs]
– beam expansion equation given was for ‘unrestrained’ steel.
– Max. 4.6″ expansion if proper maths applied
That there are THREE identified add-ons to the girder seat connection at column 79 not included in NIST presentation.
[1] a 12″ wide plate . Not 11″ per NIST. below which is another plate @
[2] 14″ x 2″ x 1’6″ meaning the walk off distance required to ‘fail’, 9.4″. and
[3] 2 plates welded on either side of girder central vertical flange where it hits column, @5.1/2″ x 3/4″ x 1’6″ lock girder from sideways movement .
The ENTIRE hypothesis revolves around those beams walking that girder off its seat. And it CANNOT do that anymore than objects can fall faster than FREE FALL. The whole thing is cracked open and bleeding.