The History of High Rise Collapses

This was one of the greatest poker games ever played.
One player stated I see your 3 buildings and raise you
a War in Iraq.
The other player responded with, He's Bluffing.
So in the game of 5 card stud
the cards turned over were.

3 Buildings
War in Iraq
War in Afghanistan

I think 3 of kind plus 2 pair equals a full house.
Time to turn in the chips and collect.
But the winner has not turned in the chips yet as he does not want anyone to know who won the pot with a bluff of that scale!

Originally posted by Varemia
reply to post by snapperski

 

I never understand this view. The argument is that "the building fell perfectly into its footprint, only possible in a demolition." It gets proven that the building didn't collapse into its footprint, and the argument on your side changes to "the building fell in that way because the demolishers were experts."

Am I the only one missing something here? It sounds to me like the view is that "if it looks the way I think then I'm right. If it doesn't look the way I think, then I'm still right."

Clearly trying to twist my words Varemia,and i've already explained,my other reasons for finding WT-7 highly suspicious,and you know this,why are you trying to get me to explain it to you again,like how the clean up was done.no one was allowed near WT-7 ...well i've already explained this in detail many times,and none of you have come up with answers..so please let's not make this repetitive.

reply to post by snapperski


I'm honestly not trying to twist your words. I'm just trying to understand how if the building didn't fall like a demolition (the most common truther argument being that it fell exactly like a common demolition, regardless of the lack of common demolition sounds and the asymmetrical nature of the collapse before global collapse) how you are supporting your argument. You say that you think the fire was not as intense as it should have been, but the fact of the matter is, the building had been burning for 7 hours. It is logical that all the office junk burned up in that time, and the damage had been done. It was just a matter of time, and I'll explain why I think so.

The firefighters were adamant that the building would collapse. They wouldn't even let anyone inside because they didn't trust the stability of the building. There were reports of bowing floors, major structural damage from the North tower collapse, and fires on multiple floors, the most notable being on a floor that housed generators.

Under those circumstances, I don't think they would have needed to use demolitions to take down the building. The firefighters (I remember) commented how the building was going to come down one way or another. If it didn't collapse on its own, they would have to take it down later.

Originally posted by thedman
reply to post by loveguy

 

"Notice how the four outer walls of WTC7 have neatly fallen/folded into and on top of the rest of the pile of ruins without significantly damaging any of the adjacent building."

WTC 7 damaged 30 West Broadway so badly it is being demolished. The debris from WTC 7 crossed a
4 lane highway, Barclay St, to smash it.



30 West Broadway



Also Verizon building (140 West)



Note pieces of WTC 7 sticking out of it

I guess this dont count as damage......

Thanks for the links. I'll study them.
Yes, the pieces that are cut straight rather than torn/sheared-off; In the verizon photo.

Originally posted by snapperski


can i refresh you with this infomation.

John Skilling,interview to the Seattle Times,Saturday,Feburary 27/1993

Skilling, based in Seattle, is among the world's top structural engineers. He is responsible for much of Seattle's downtown skyline and for several of the world's tallest structures, including the Trade Center. Concerned because of a case where an airplane hit the Empire State Building, Skilling's people did an analysis that showed the towers would withstand the impact of a Boeing 707. "Our analysis indicated the biggest problem would be the fact that all the fuel (from the airplane) would dump into the building. There would be a horrendous fire. A lot of people would be killed," he said. "The building structure would still be there." Skilling - a recognized expert in tall buildings - doesn't think a single 200-pound car bomb would topple or do major structural damage to a Trade Center tower. The supporting columns are closely spaced and even if several were disabled, the others would carry the load. "However," he added, "I'm not saying that properly applied explosives - shaped explosives - of that magnitude could not do a tremendous amount of damage

also clear from the video evidence that most of the fuel burned out side the building.

Can I REFRESH you with this information

What objects in an office fire would burn, desks,paperwork,plastics(computers etc) and a host of other things so the fires were not that bad? lets see

911research.wtc7.net...

Originally posted by wmd_2008

Originally posted by loveguy




"The WTC were supposed to be designed to withstand aircraft impact BUT would you have designed it when its was built against a suicide mission and a plane full of fuel. Most pilots when in a crash situation TRY TO AVOID bulit up areas and dont try to hit at a BUILDING at as high a speed as possible."

edit on 28-10-2010 by wmd_2008 because: format

This lesson in engineering is kinda fun and interesting. But if I was in charge of the design of a structure, I would still design it to out-last me. That's why I chose doing concrete. After I'm eaten by worms, everything I did will remain long after I'm gone. Except either by an act of G_d, or it got demolished on purpose, or something got built on top of it.

It wasn't an act of G_d that brought them down. They were too tall to build anything on top of them. Something else is being built in their place; because they got demolished on purpose.

Either the US government planned it to go down, or they were (are) severely incompetent as to providing a defense to inhibit any success by a warring party.

How many different "compartmentalized" intelligence agencies does it take to protect a Nation? If one did it's job, it should only take one. Now how many of these agencies did not do their job leading up to that day? Every last one of them, because they were and are still compartmentalized. So they can claim "plausible deniability?"

They (our fearless leaders) should be brought to trial for negligent homicide, in the least. You lost someone that day? We all lost someone that day. An American is an American?

(A hypothesis) If my kid ran in the street chasing a ball and got killed by a car driving too fast to stop, that's negligent homicide. He did everything in his power to bring the car to a stop; after the damage was done. He didn't obey the children at play street sign. He paid no mind to the warnings. He made one stupid mistake that ruined the rest of his life.

Yet, those creeps so high and mighty (because we build them up to be) can simply walk away because what reason(s) did they give?

You people who worship your leaders better wise-up. Your leaders can't protect you, they're incompetent. How many more "Terroristic Missions" will have success on our soil before you change your game plan?

ETA
This reads like it belongs in the rants forum, I apologize.

edit on (10/29/1010 by loveguy because: Read my ETA

Originally posted by wmd_2008

Originally posted by loveguy

Originally posted by wmd_2008
reply to post by laiguana

 

truth11.com...

edit on 28-10-2010 by wmd_2008 because: (no reason given)

Thanks for the link. It'll take me awhile to study it.

Originally posted by Varemia
reply to post by snapperski

 

The firefighters were adamant that the building would collapse. They wouldn't even let anyone inside because they didn't trust the stability of the building. There were reports of bowing floors, major structural damage from the North tower collapse, and fires on multiple floors, the most notable being on a floor that housed generators.

Hello,
During that day, up until the building actually collapsed, there were reports of a count-down being conducted? What were they counting down for? To "pull" either the fire fighters out,(who weren't even able to go inside) or to pull the building?

Originally posted by wmd_2008

Originally posted by snapperski


can i refresh you with this infomation.

What objects in an office fire would burn, desks,paperwork,plastics(computers etc) and a host of other things so the fires were not that bad? lets see

911research.wtc7.net...

edit on 29-10-2010 by wmd_2008 because: (no reason given)

edit on 29-10-2010 by wmd_2008 because: LAYOUT

Call me crazy, but isn't that molten metal dripping down the side of the building in the corner?

reply to post by loveguy


Prove its molten metal thats falling you cant, what other things could produce that in a burning office have a think about that.!

Originally posted by wmd_2008
reply to post by loveguy

 

Prove its molten metal thats falling you cant, what other things could produce that in a burning office have a think about that.!

How about a nano-thermite painted steel upright? Aren't the exterior walls in those buildings unusual-as they are load-bearing? And how better to get such a result than to apply the "thermitic" paint on the strongest points/joints? Isn't it in between floors, where concrete doesn't burn? How about the water issue? Were the tanks kept full and ready to be of service in case the need arises?

I'll tell you. The building where part of the fuselage exited out the other side of the building didn't take-out the water supply, because it missed the core/elevators. The other plane disintegrated when it hit the core/elevators (Pentagon). Water was cut-off, so as to not fight the intended fires. Either someone closed the valves, or charges went-off down at the source.

It's been proven earlier in this thread that steel structures don't burn down to the ground. Sure, they lose alot of their facade, but they remain standing, after long hours which equates to the same heat temperaments/tolerances as jet fuel, what was left-over from the main explosion(s).

What has that Jones fellow profited by publishing his findings? Seems if memory serves me correctly, he got canned. I guess he thought he was doing the right thing. No good deed goes unpunished.

reply to post by loveguy


Not to detract from your post's intended impact on people's ideas, but disintegrates wouldn't be the best word to use, because it implies that the plane was basically dispersed as a find dust of aluminum and passengers after it crashed. The fact of the matter is, that just doesn't happened. The metal was still moving, and as some notable physicist said, an object going at a high enough speed will penetrate any other object. Since the aluminum plane was supposedly going 500 (whatever unit. I honestly don't know it), then I think it was probably going fast enough to overcome the steel. Since the plane wasn't a solid block, it did get shredded apart as it entered the building, and pieces continued to go 500 (whatever unit). I think it would only stand to reason for that to make sense, and every time I hear someone talking about disintegration (the process of particles dis-integrating from themselves), it makes me cringe.

Originally posted by loveguy
It's been proven earlier in this thread that steel structures don't burn down to the ground. Sure, they lose alot of their facade, but they remain standing, after long hours which equates to the same heat temperaments/tolerances as jet fuel, what was left-over from the main explosion(s).

What has that Jones fellow profited by publishing his findings? Seems if memory serves me correctly, he got canned. I guess he thought he was doing the right thing. No good deed goes unpunished.

edit on (10/29/1010 by loveguy because: Edited a sentence for clarity.

First off, it has been proven that when steel structures are having serious fire issues, if all else is well, they will survive. It hasn't been proven that a steel structure will survive an impact taking out multiple floors and (possibly) damaging core columns, THEN to experience serious fire in those isolated areas, meaning some of the steel was hot and some was not. Also, I have no clue what fireproofing could survive an impact and explosion like that.

Then, the idea that Jones may have been right because he was fired... I understand the thinking, but I think until the circumstances surrounding his canning are outlined, it is pure speculation. For all we know, he may have dissed someone or something.

It all comes down to "who benefits"

-Bush's Approval ratings are low, needs a boost thinks an event that will shock the nation and make Bush the savior. People are starting to question how he won the Presidancy under very odd terms
-CIA Needs Access to the Poppy fields in Afghanistan to finance interior and exterior operations
-Cheney's company Halliburton wants access to the Lucrative contracts that will come with a war

After the shock of 9/11 wears off, the need another catalyzing event or reason to keep Bushie in the White House, so they start to build up a war agenda with Iraq, blatantly ignoring congress and the UN they come up with reasons, facts and intel on Saddam and his "WMDs". It all ties together everyone. Its a chain of events that started on 10 September 2001 with cheney and the 2.3 TRILLION missing and is ongoing til this very minute. If people cant see that then they are either so in denial its insane or they have bought the kool aid that TPTB are selling them. Event after event, to crimes, to mis leading the american public. Time after time. There will be another reason for them to keep up the act, i am a firm believer that as soon as things get worse than they are now they will come up with something else. Those who ignore history are doomed to repeat it. American Government is in the adolescent stage of its develpment right now, its getting arrogant, brash and audacious.....so ask yourself this, what do you to a teenager that oversteps thier bounds?

reply to post by itbenickp


I agree with you to a point. My view is just that the towers didn't need to be demolished. I know that the government is ridiculously uncontrolled and corrupt. Most wouldn't orchestrate 9/11, but a small interest group would. My father even read Bush's astrological chart at one point and determined that he was actually the power-hungry dictator type, but was disappointed with how little power he had in the presidency.

Originally posted by Varemia
reply to post by itbenickp

 

I agree with you to a point. My view is just that the towers didn't need to be demolished. I know that the government is ridiculously uncontrolled and corrupt. Most wouldn't orchestrate 9/11, but a small interest group would. My father even read Bush's astrological chart at one point and determined that he was actually the power-hungry dictator type, but was disappointed with how little power he had in the presidency.

At this point I'm still 75% sure it was an inside job, but not to the extent that i had previously thought. I am sure it was known about before it happened, but instead of stopping it, either they delibrately kept their hands off of it or they assissted in some way, and you can see that by how "perfect" of a day it was for it to happen, so much chaos going on with NORAD, FAA and all the wargames that were going on that day. "Terrorsts" do not have that kind of inside access unless it is given to them. At the VERY LEAST it was criminal negligience. i dont care what alphabet group knew what, but i can reasonably say if the FBI knew about it for example i dont think they wouldnt tell the CIA so that the CIA can get a black eye and the FBI will look good (does that make sense? I dont know if i worded it right). And you cant tell me with as omni-present as our intelligence and allies intelligience is that we werent smelling something in the air prior to it happening. To this day not a single government entities director or subordinate has been charged, lost thier job, or even been suspended. That makes me sick!

Analogy- I am a security guard at a high tech hardware factory, i fall asleep on my job and thieves get in and steal our latest gadget. Do you really think after the cops come in, do their investigation i would still have a job?

The people that were supposed to prevent this allowed it to happen. Believe it, because if you dont, if you deny that it can happen, i promise you it will happen again. These people in government do not care about you, they dont care about me. They care about amassing power and wealth. They will swim though a river of your blood and mine to get it. It dont matter if you are a democrat or a republican. Politcal parties mean nothing to them, they hold themselves accountable to no one. Please for your sake and mine, understand that. 9/11 should have been a wake up call for a totally different reason than for what it was. It should have been the american people waking up to TPTB's corruption. We let them do their own investigation and it was no surprise that no one got blamed for it. Want to know why nothing makes sense with what happened that day? Someone said it earlier,

"See what we just did? Ya, we got away with it too, we can do whatever we want and we dont even have to be that careful about it anymore......"

Ask your selves what magnitude of disaster would the country have needed to keep Bushie in office and allow him to start a couple of wars?

Did the supposed conspirators need to fly two planes into the largest buildings in NYC? Did they need to pile on another flight into the Pentagon?
Did they need to fake a fourth crash into a field?

Or

Would a smaller 737 into WTC7 been enough? They could have claimed the intended target was one of the towers but missed.
Even better a plane into Miss Liberty. The heart of our beliefs.


How much provocation did it take for us to invade Grenada?
What terrible thing did Noriega do to us for us to attack Panama?
How many buildings did Castro take out to deserve the Bay of Pigs?

History shows us it doesn’t take much to receive the wrath of the US military. Certainly not to the extent of 911. The truthers live in their disturbing fantasy world filled with paranoia.

Originally posted by samkent
Ask your selves what magnitude of disaster would the country have needed to keep Bushie in office and allow him to start a couple of wars?

Did the supposed conspirators need to fly two planes into the largest buildings in NYC? Did they need to pile on another flight into the Pentagon?
Did they need to fake a fourth crash into a field?

Or

Would a smaller 737 into WTC7 been enough? They could have claimed the intended target was one of the towers but missed.
Even better a plane into Miss Liberty. The heart of our beliefs.


How much provocation did it take for us to invade Grenada?
What terrible thing did Noriega do to us for us to attack Panama?
How many buildings did Castro take out to deserve the Bay of Pigs?

History shows us it doesn’t take much to receive the wrath of the US military. Certainly not to the extent of 911. The truthers live in their disturbing fantasy world filled with paranoia.

You forget that we are living in an age where people are so wrapped up in their own little worlds that they can hardly see the fly buzzing around their heads. Remember that Bigger is Always Better in America, those events you mentioned each had a different american mentality/culture. Do you really think we would have been as peeved as we were if the body count was low? (insensitive i know, their mentality not mine) They needed a very significant, very in your face, very bold action to stir the sleeping beast of america. Thats why it was so big, so many different loactions. They tried when they bombed the WTC, and it didnt rile the country up enough, then the USS Cole...nope we're still not wanting to go to war....4 planes, 4 targets 3000+/- killed, YAH, that gets our attention, and THAT gets TPTB what they need

Originally posted by Varemia
reply to post by loveguy

 

and every time I hear someone talking about disintegration (the process of particles dis-integrating from themselves), it makes me cringe.

i get the same though process when i hear the government story,of vaporization ??

which they claimed happen at the pentagon.

Originally posted by samkent

History shows us it doesn’t take much to receive the wrath of the US military. Certainly not to the extent of 911. The truthers live in their disturbing fantasy world filled with paranoia.

history also shows us,that it's not past the american government to do this aswell,as they have a record for these false flag events.

and as for "truthers live in their disturbing fantasy world filled with paranoia" i find that insulting of you to say were filled with paranoia and live in a fantasy world,because we dare to question the goverment story of events that day,when clearly they are hideing things from us,and said blatant lies..like the mobile calls in flight,which i have proven is impossible in other threads...just one of many examples,of blatant lies....so if they can lie about one thing then we have to question the other things were told,and were told to belive these,with no proof,IE: pentagon..the most controlled airspace in the world,with 100 of cctv footage that clearly would show what happen that day,but refuse to show the public...

so if i'm a paranoid person liveing in a fantasy for wanting answers for what killed my 2 school friends that day..then i guess its a sad world we live in....