Building 7 CollapseThread

Email this topic to a friend Printer-friendly version of this topic Bookmark this topic (Registered users only)		Previous Topic | Next Topic
Lobby / Latest 9/11, Military Affairs, and Terrorism (Protected)
Original message

ewing2001 (3164 posts) Sep-17-02, 12:00 PM (ET) Building 7 CollapseThread LAST EDITED ON Sep-17-02 AT 12:45 PM (ET) Ok, it's time again for the Building 7. However everyone who thinks, he can disturb this thread with aggressive vibes, should be prepared to come to an ignore or ban list. This is an investigative topic only. I would advise every guest and supporter to inform the DU-administrators about every troll, who joins this thread. Thx To begin with: Evidence of cutter charges in Building 7? Email from a reader (*thx to WRH) "...I was looking at the video of the WTC7 "collapse" and found some interesting things in the pictures. Picture 1 is just when the collapse started...Pictures 2-4 show (highlighted) puffs of smoke coming out of the upper floors. The puffs appear to come out of the columns. My guess is the columns were kind enough to destroy themselves to prevent the building from falling outward towards the building across the street!!!! How nifty!!..." http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/wtc7.rm http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/wtc7big.rm (the collapse is also included in the CBS documentary by the french filmmakers) "...Take a close look at the manner in which it collapses straight down. For this building to collapse in this fashion, ALL of the load bearing supports would have had to fail (or be cut) at EXACTLY THE SAME TIME. Think this happens by chance? The claim that the collapse was the result of a fire requires the fire be equally distributed throughout the entire floor of the building, providing equal heat for an equal amount of time, so that all the load bearings members would fail at the exact same moment. (Shown under "fair use" for non-profit educational purposes.)..." Other sources: WTC Building 7 Mystery http://forums.delphiforums.com/n/mb/message.asp?webtag=ground_zero2001&msg=836.1 Approximately 7 hours after fires initiated in WTC 7, the building collapsed. The start of a timed collapse sequence was based on 17:20:33, the time registered by seismic recordings.." About the penthouse: From an inofficial study (there was never a testimony!) http://www.house.gov/science/hot/wtc/wtc-report/WTC_ch5.pdf ~5:21:03 p.m. Approximately 30 seconds later, Figure 5-21 shows the east mechanical penthouse disappearing into the building. It takes a few seconds for the east penthouse to “disappear” completely. ~5:21:08 p.m. Approximately 5 seconds later, the west mechanical penthouse disappears (Figure 5-22) or sinks into WTC 7. ~5:21:09 p.m. Approximately 1 or 2 seconds after the west penthouse sinks into WTC 7, the whole building starts to collapse. A north-south “kink” or fault line develops along the eastern side as the building begins to come down at what appears to be the location of the collapse initiation. ~5:21:10 p.m. WTC 7 collapses completely after burning for approximately 7 hours. The collapse appeared to initiate at the lower floors, allowing the upper portion of the structure to fall. From the study: (This report also implied, that the damage was not the reason for the collapse of B7) "...It does not appear that the collapse of WTC 1 affected the roof, or the east, west, and north elevations of WTC 7 in any significant way..." or this part: "...damage to the southwest corner of WTC 7 at approximately floors 8 to 20, 24, 25, and 39 to 46.." This doesn't matter, because there was no gas tank between 8 to 20, 24 and 25 and 39 to 46th floor (where the SSB was and they probably even didn't discharge diesel oil, as we learned- please read the report. It also includes a list of the tenants) At that time please "note the two mechanical penthouses of WTC 7 are intact..." For newbies and supporters of this topic: We are supported by CON EDISON, who just filed a lawsuit against Building 7. However they believe, that the diesel tanks had been reason for the destruction. http://www.nytimes.com/2002/09/11/nyregion//11BLAS.html Con Ed and Insurers Sue Port Authority Over 7 World Trade By JAMES GLANZ "...Consolidated Edison and five of its insurers have filed a $314.5 million lawsuit against the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey, asserting that huge diesel tanks in 7 World Trade Center, an office building that collapsed late in the day last Sept. 11, were improperly designed and maintained. The suit charges that fires fed by the fuel in those tanks played a major role in the collapse. A major Con Edison electrical substation that sat beneath 7 World Trade Center — a 47-story high-rise just north of the twin towers — was destroyed when the building collapsed. "The insurers are trying to recover what they paid to us and we're trying to recover some of our uninsured losses," said Chris Olert, a Con Edison spokesman. "There was negligent design, inspection, maintenance and operation of the diesel fuel tanks there. The diesel tanks caused the building to collapse." Building 7 was controlled by the military since end of 2000. http://homes.wsj.com/columnists_com/bricks/20020710-bricks.html "...But it's not clear whether Mr. Silverstein can use those proceeds to start building without first reaching an agreement with the mortgage holder on 7 World Trade Center, Blackstone Real Estate Advisors...." http://www.blackstone.com/news/press_releases%255C7_world_trade_oct_2000.pdf "New York, NY October 17, 2000: Blackstone Real Estate Advisors, the global real estate investment and management arm of The Blackstone Group, L.P., announced today that it has purchased, from Teachers Insurance and Annuity Association, the participating mortgage secured by 7 World Trade Center, a commercial office complex controlled by real estate developer Larry Silverstein" (CEO is currenltly sitting on a commission headed by Peterson at The Conference Board) http://burningbush.netfirms.com/TIAA-CREF.html info on tenants (which include CIA/DOD, 24th floor): http://burningbush.netfirms.com/7WTC.html (*thx to JohnHorne) Blackstone is owned by the TRW Group, who just mergered with Raytheon. They have ties with the Carlyle Group and Henry Kissinger. Kissinger-Blackstone Connection Blackstone is official partner von Kissinger Associates, Pete Peterson is "Foreign Affairs Bureau of New York". American International Group, Inc. 1. Henry Kissinger chairs both AIG's International Advisory Board and the advisory boards of several AIG-sponsored Infrastructure Funds 2. AIG has an ownership interest in Blackstone and is an investor in several of Blackstone's private equity funds 3. AIG and Blackstone have a joint venture, specializing in restructuring and M&A advisory services in selected Asian countries 4. The AIG-Blackstone-Kissinger Associates venture recently completed its first advisory assignment on behalf of a New York Stock Exchange listed U.S. company NOTE: Mystery remains about the reasons of the DoD in Building 7. In 2001 they tested a new microwave weapon system in Nevada, called thermobarics, later used in ToraBora. NOTE2: The OEM had it's "bunker" on the 23rd floor, which was constructed with the help of Jerome Hauer. He was responsible for organising a security job for former FBI-Top Anti-Terror specialiist John O'Neill. O'Neill died in the Twin Towers on Sep11th. Hauer is also a friend of current anthrax suspect Stephen Hatfill. Both worked together in 1999 at the SAIC and held a speech together in 1998 at the CFR about BioTerrorism. http://www.cfr.org/public/resource.cgi?meet!102 May 21, 1998 , New York, NY " Building a 'Biobomb': Terrorist Challenge and U.S. Response " http://www.saic.com/news/nov99/news11-30a-99.html Hauer was also managing director of the crisis and consequence group at Kroll Worldwide, a security consulting company based in New York. Kroll is the official security + bodyguard company for all american presidents since 1945. Hauer was also involved in a shady business deal about West Nile Vaccines in 1998. Oravax developed the vaccines. Mainly responsible for this decision: Hauer and (CDC) advisor Col. Thomas Monath (Ex-USAMRIID)/Oravax, who is another friend of Hatfill. Hauer started already to work as a National Security advisor to Health and Human Services Secretary Tommy Thompson on Sep10th. He's now leading the office. http://www.bayarea.com/mld/bayarea/living/health/3020501.hym http://www.lauriegarrett.com/wtc_day12.html Hauer was also a member of the John Hopkins Working Group on Civilian Bio Defense and later involved in the June 2001 BioTerror Exercise "DARK WINTER", produced by the CFR, CSIS, the Oklahoma Prevention Center for Terrorism and ANSER/Institute for Homeland Security (established in 1999) http://iml.dartmouth.edu/ists/hauer.html Hauer never explained the reasons for a Commando Center in B7. After Building 7 collapsed, a few weeks later the CIA confirmed, that they had an office in B7. Hauer once tried to blame the anthrax attack on Iraq: http://www.lauriegarrett.com/wtc_day12.html "...With intelligence pouring in that indicated the terrorist network is allied with Sadaam Hussein's bioweapons laboratory personnel, as well as missing Russian BW scientists, Hauer said they are scrambling in Washington to get ready.." On September 14th, FBI agent Barry Mawn, who resigned under unknown reasons in March 2002, classified a passpord in front of Building 7 on Vesey Street. Sunday, September 16, 2001 "...FBI Assistant Director Barry Mawn did not disclose the name on the passport or other details, but the discovery prompted an intensive search for evidence blocks from the towers that were brought down in Tuesday's terrorist attacks by two hijacked planes..." Passpord in the rubble of B7: http://abcnews.go.com/sections/us/DailyNews/WTC_suspects.html The name of the passpord was officially Satam Al Suqami. Barry Mawn was also the first FBI agent, who knew about John O'Neills stolen brief case: http://www.newyorker.com/FACT/?020114fa_FACT1 "...His briefcase, which contained classified material, was missing. O'Neill immediately called the local police, and they found the briefcase a couple of hours later, in another hotel. A Montblanc pen had been stolen, along with a silver cigar cutter and a lighter. The papers were intact; fingerprint analysis soon established that they had not been touched.... ...He phoned me and said, 'I gotta tell you something,' " Barry Mawn recalled. O'Neill told Mawn that the briefcase contained some classified E-mails and one highly sensitive document, the Annual Field Office Report, which is an overview of every counter-terrorist and counter-espionage case in New York..." GROUND ZERO Forum NYC http://www.ourDNA.org http://www.lebensaspekte.de http://forums.delphiforums.com/ground_zero2001 Supporter of the 911-Skepticism Movement NYC, Washington, San Francisco, Ohio, Portland etc... Support public LIHOP-evidence now, SETUP later! Please donate for GZ Forum NYC. Every $10 counts. (telephone bills, phone research, PR costs, media tools,video distribution, hardware upgrade, security solutions, provider costs, various investigations etc...) Info at http://www.lebensaspekte.de/groundzero/donation.html The last NYC- 911-skepticism forum was during the anniversary week of Sep11th in NYC at various events. Our files had been handled over to Martin Luther King III, Patti Smith, Spooky (Eric B. Miller), Nina Hagen and other VIPs who wished to remain anonymous. The first NYC-911Skeptic Event was in December 2001 in NYC at Joe's Gallery. The first biggest NYC-911Skeptic Event was on May 3rd to 5th in NYC, 135 west 42nd St. (bet. 6th & 7th Ave) at Chashama Theater, Times Square. It included also a panel on May 4th, streamed live over the net with panelists from DU, guerrillanews, GZ, Alex Jones.com and a live phone session with Oswald Le Winter (Portugal, Ex-USA). The last SF-911-skepticism forum was during the anniversary week of Sep11th. They started succesfully with a rally in front of the office of Diane Feinstein in January 2002. The last Washington-911 skepticism forum was on June 10th in National Press Center including Julie Sweeney (NYC), J. Michael Springmann (ex- Jeddah "CIA"-Consulate, where 10-15 visas for the 911 hijackers had been filed, Lorna Brett FAA/Airline Accountability, Mary Schiavo, Esq. FAA/Airline Accountability, Michael Ruppert (copvcia), Tom Flocco (911- insider trading story) and John Judge, Air Defenses/NORAD/Pentagon-Specialist etc..., organised by http://www.unansweredquestions.org The 911-skeptic contents: a) geopolitical background (Carlyle, Harken, UNOCAL, CentGas, DynCorp, ENRON Broadband/TSI/Taliban, Halliburton, BAe, Northrup etc..) b) investigative + scientific oddities, prior knowledge/early warnings, details for a set-up incl. LIHOP etc.. c) current political situation, historical comparisons Proj. Northwoods, Bushistory, Ashcrofts database/reading lists, threads of week, lies of war, yuppie fascism, civil liberties/arrestments etc.. d) political and media analysis plus current support for 911-investigation (US congress: McKinney, Stark, plus opinions Ron Paul etc.., AtlantaPoll, 911-petition with 12000 sigs, diff. books from Moore to Greg Palast), 911-website projects, independent media portals etc.. e) Insider-oddities +details, insider-infos, last minute topics, "breaking news"... NOTE: Any use of non-standard English words that are in quotes within this post should not be construed by any member of DU as prejudice against Southern people, African Americans, Asian people, Northern people, Arabic people, Jewish people, Christian people or any other group save one. These words are blatant prejudice against STUPID people.   Alert Edit | Reply | Top

Table of Contents

Subject     Author     Message Date     ID    Kissinger-Blackstone-AIG johnhorne Sep-17-02 1    very helpful, John! ewing2001 09/17/2002 2  Hi Ewing- Old and In the Way Sep-17-02 3    report ewing2001 09/17/2002 4  Cutter Charges LARED Sep-17-02 5    Another view of WTC-7 collapse Merdesquared 09/17/2002 6        addy ewing2001 09/17/2002 8            Oops... Merdesquared 09/17/2002 11    collection ewing2001 09/17/2002 7        all tenants ewing2001 09/17/2002 9        Trollfest???? LARED 09/17/2002 10            Oh boy, Trolls!Will I get to wear my Leiderhosen Ren? Merdesquared 09/17/2002 13        The mayor's bunker Merdesquared 09/17/2002 12    LARED, if I may be so bold. Old and In the Way 09/17/2002 14        Re: One Question LARED 09/20/2002 17            One established fact no one even is touching right here Mr_SmokesTooMuch 09/22/2002 25                AF stand-down plaguepuppy 09/28/2002 44    Smoke vs. squibs Merdesquared 09/18/2002 15        military vs oil(-tank) ewing2001 09/19/2002 16  Some uncommon Building 7 photos anablep Sep-21-02 18    omg...lol ewing2001 09/21/2002 19        Search for chemists! ewing2001 09/21/2002 20        It's no joke anablep 09/21/2002 21            You can take a diesel fuel tank out of the equation then Mr_SmokesTooMuch 09/22/2002 22                Question about diesel anablep 09/22/2002 23                    That's a good question, and not being an expert Mr_SmokesTooMuch 09/22/2002 24                    Diesel fuel LARED 09/22/2002 26                        "Easily ignite with a small spark"? Mr_SmokesTooMuch 09/22/2002 27                            diesel stuff LARED 09/22/2002 28                                Pushing it a bit 2muchbs 09/23/2002 32                                    Are you talking about WTC7 or the pentagon? LARED 09/24/2002 33                    My opinion (Pentagon/Diesel fuel) 2muchbs 09/23/2002 31                A little story 2muchbs 09/23/2002 30                    I'll tell you why the tank did not explode. LARED 09/24/2002 34                        Umm, not really... plaguepuppy 09/28/2002 45                            Do you even bother reading what was said LARED 09/28/2002 46                                Earth to annoying twit plaguepuppy 09/28/2002 47                                    Let me spell it out for you. LARED 09/28/2002 50                                        And the bile just keeps on flowing plaguepuppy 09/29/2002 52                                            Ok my turn to nitpick LARED 09/29/2002 55                                                Autoignition - does it matter plaguepuppy 10/01/2002 56    You are definitively right ! Endimion 09/23/2002 29        Let me be more accurate LARED 09/24/2002 35            WTC Photos -- Links spooked 09/24/2002 36                Welcome DulceDecorum 09/28/2002 49            It would be really nice, but Endimion 09/24/2002 37                But, LARED 09/24/2002 38                    Well, well, well... Endimion 09/25/2002 39                        Not much time, but LARED 09/25/2002 40                            ž Endimion 09/26/2002 41                                Thanks for the correction LARED 09/26/2002 42                        Collapse uniformity plaguepuppy 09/28/2002 43            "Let me be more accurate" - well, less would be dificult plaguepuppy 09/28/2002 48                Somehow I missed all that LARED 09/29/2002 51                    Squibs plaguepuppy 09/29/2002 53                        Clear as day, right. LARED 09/29/2002 54                            Takes one to know one plaguepuppy 10/02/2002 57                            Taking up a collection... plaguepuppy 10/02/2002 58                                B7 lawsuit now okayed! ewing2001 10/03/2002 59  One Meridien Plaza elephant_eater Oct-08-02 60    did you read it? vincent_vega 10/08/2002 61        Vastly different? elephant_eater 10/08/2002 62            Painful Questions ewing2001 10/10/2002 63            You're not going to make me dig this all up again. vincent_vega 10/10/2002 64                The facade was a facade 2muchbs 10/10/2002 65

Lobby | Latest | Topics | Previous Topic | Next Topic

Messages in this topic

johnhorne (841 posts) Sep-17-02, 12:23 PM (ET) 1. Kissinger-Blackstone-AIG (won't get into collapse debate, but here's info on the companies mentioned by ewing) AIG board: http://elitewatch.netfirms.com/AIG.html Blackstone & internal advisors: http://elitewatch.netfirms.com/Blackstone_Group.html Kissinger Associates: http://elitewatch.netfirms.com/Kissinger_Associates.html Salomon Smith Barney (subsiduary of Citigroup, held "administrative operations" in WTC7 - & connection to Worldcom via Jack Grubman http://elitewatch.netfirms.com/Salomon_Smith_Barney.html “Political satire became obsolete when Henry Kissinger was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize.” - Tom Lehrer   Remove | Alert Edit | Reply | Top

ewing2001 (3164 posts) Sep-17-02, 12:43 PM (ET) Reply to post #1 2. very helpful, John! This should be, if possible a crossover investigation anyway. Evert help to solve the case is to be appreciated. GROUND ZERO Forum NYC http://www.ourDNA.org http://www.lebensaspekte.de http://forums.delphiforums.com/ground_zero2001 Supporter of the 911-Skepticism Movement NYC, Washington, San Francisco, Ohio, Portland etc... Support public LIHOP-evidence now, SETUP later! Please donate for GZ Forum NYC. Every $10 counts. (telephone bills, phone research, PR costs, media tools,video distribution, hardware upgrade, security solutions, provider costs, various investigations etc...) Info at http://www.lebensaspekte.de/groundzero/donation.html The last NYC- 911-skepticism forum was during the anniversary week of Sep11th in NYC at various events. Our files had been handled over to Martin Luther King III, Patti Smith, Spooky (Eric B. Miller), Nina Hagen and other VIPs who wished to remain anonymous. The first NYC-911Skeptic Event was in December 2001 in NYC at Joe's Gallery. The first biggest NYC-911Skeptic Event was on May 3rd to 5th in NYC, 135 west 42nd St. (bet. 6th & 7th Ave) at Chashama Theater, Times Square. It included also a panel on May 4th, streamed live over the net with panelists from DU, guerrillanews, GZ, Alex Jones.com and a live phone session with Oswald Le Winter (Portugal, Ex-USA). The last SF-911-skepticism forum was during the anniversary week of Sep11th. They started succesfully with a rally in front of the office of Diane Feinstein in January 2002. The last Washington-911 skepticism forum was on June 10th in National Press Center including Julie Sweeney (NYC), J. Michael Springmann (ex- Jeddah "CIA"-Consulate, where 10-15 visas for the 911 hijackers had been filed, Lorna Brett FAA/Airline Accountability, Mary Schiavo, Esq. FAA/Airline Accountability, Michael Ruppert (copvcia), Tom Flocco (911- insider trading story) and John Judge, Air Defenses/NORAD/Pentagon-Specialist etc..., organised by http://www.unansweredquestions.org The 911-skeptic contents: a) geopolitical background (Carlyle, Harken, UNOCAL, CentGas, DynCorp, ENRON Broadband/TSI/Taliban, Halliburton, BAe, Northrup etc..) b) investigative + scientific oddities, prior knowledge/early warnings, details for a set-up incl. LIHOP etc.. c) current political situation, historical comparisons Proj. Northwoods, Bushistory, Ashcrofts database/reading lists, threads of week, lies of war, yuppie fascism, civil liberties/arrestments etc.. d) political and media analysis plus current support for 911-investigation (US congress: McKinney, Stark, plus opinions Ron Paul etc.., AtlantaPoll, 911-petition with 12000 sigs, diff. books from Moore to Greg Palast), 911-website projects, independent media portals etc.. e) Insider-oddities +details, insider-infos, last minute topics, "breaking news"... NOTE: Any use of non-standard English words that are in quotes within this post should not be construed by any member of DU as prejudice against Southern people, African Americans, Asian people, Northern people, Arabic people, Jewish people, Christian people or any other group save one. These words are blatant prejudice against STUPID people.   Remove | Alert Edit | Reply | Top

Old and In the Way (3019 posts) Sep-17-02, 12:43 PM (ET) 3. Hi Ewing- Where were the tanks located? What floor? Seems to me a 7 hour fire would lead to a structural failure of the building. Wouldn't a catastrophic failure on the lower floors start converting all the potential energy to kinetic on the floors above? I that point, I would expect that upper floor column failures would be happen simultaneously. http://www.democraticunderground.com/cgi-bin/duforum/duboard.cgi?az=show_thread&om=2574&forum=DCForumID22   Remove | Alert Edit | Reply | Top

ewing2001 (3164 posts) Sep-17-02, 12:53 PM (ET) Reply to post #3 4. report LAST EDITED ON Sep-17-02 AT 01:00 PM (ET) A partly destruction by fire would have made sense for me. However it was a collapse, which took only a few seconds and this time definetely no melting steel was involved- this is at least what the study said. About the gas inside the building. I hope these quotes will help. I've read the full report a long time ago. Here are the parts about gastanks and pipes, which had been not connected on every floor! http://www.house.gov/science/hot/wtc/wtc-report/WTC_ch5.pdf "At the east end of the 5th floor...the fuel oil distribution pipe ran above this door several feet to the north of the masonry wall. The type, quality, and hardware on the door set are unknown. The position of the door (i.e., open or closed) at the time of the incident is also unknown. Also, no information was available in regard to the size of the undercut on the door..." '"the degree of impact damage to the south façade could not be documented" "...Con Ed reported that “the feeders supplying power to WTC 7 were de-energized at 9:59 a.m.” It is believed that the emergency generators came on line immediately. It is also believed that some of them may have stopped operating because of the contamination of the intake air flowing into the carburetors and radiators..." "the SSB generators did not use day tanks." (SSB was on the 28th to 45th floor.) "...If the Silverstein pump had started pumping at 10 a.m., when Con Ed shut down power to the building immediately following the collapse of WTC 2, and continued pumping until the collapse of WTC 7 at 5:20 p.m., less than 2,000 gallons would have been used. The residual 20,000 gallons found in the two 12,000-gallon tanks, therefore, can not be used as an indicator of whether or not the Silverstein generator sets were on line and running..." Floor 2, most important part for me: "...Currently, there are no data available on the post-collapse condition of the OEM 6,000-gallon tank located between the 2nd and 3rd floors. Floor 7: "....The OEM system also included a 275-gallon day tank located on the 7th floor..." No pipes connected to... "...The 275-gallon tank associated with the American Express generator was located at the west end of the 8th floor. If full, the 275 gallons represent a potential of about 600 MegaJoules, which would be enough to cause a serious fire that could spread to other fuels, but not felt to be enough to threaten the stability of the building’s structural elements..." The bridge was mysteriously still standing: "...the collapse of WTC 2 did not significantly affect the roof, or the east, west, and north elevations of WTC 7. It is unknown if there was any damage to the south elevation after WTC 2 collapsed, but both the covered, tubular pedestrian bridge (see Figure 5-13) and the Plaza bridge were still standing after the collapse of WTC 2..." Which brings me to another question: Which phantom debris was able to hit b7, after both towers already collapsed? The last chance was at 10:29 "At 10:29 a.m., WTC 1 (the north tower) collapsed, sending its debris into the streets below. The extent and severity of the resulting damage to WTC 7 are currently unknown...." "....It is currently unclear what fuel may have been present to permit the fires to burn on these lower floors for approximately 7 hours...." Or this (color of smoke indicates different fuel!): "...The change in the color and buoyancy of the smoke as the day progressed may indicate a change in the behavior of the fires...." 5.6 Potential Collapse Mechanism "...There is no clear evidence of exactly where or on which floor the initiating failure occurred..." "...Fuel oil leakage from the 5th floor is also a possibility; however, no evidence of leakage paths in the east end of the second floor was reported...." Finally: "...Fuel oil was distributed through the 5th floor in a double-wall iron pipe. A portion of the piping ran in close proximity to Truss 1. However, there is no physical, photographic, or other evidence to substantiate or refute the discharge of fuel oil from the piping system...." PS: I try later to make a list of the Tenants. It's also in the study at Table 5.1 WTC 7 Tenants In this list is no mention of a gas tank on the 23rd floor. On the 7th floor: OEM Generators and day tank 1: fuel storage etc... 46-47: Mechanical floors GROUND ZERO Forum NYC http://www.ourDNA.org http://www.lebensaspekte.de http://forums.delphiforums.com/ground_zero2001 Supporter of the 911-Skepticism Movement NYC, Washington, San Francisco, Ohio, Portland etc... Support public LIHOP-evidence now, SETUP later! Please donate for GZ Forum NYC. Every $10 counts. (telephone bills, phone research, PR costs, media tools,video distribution, hardware upgrade, security solutions, provider costs, various investigations etc...) Info at http://www.lebensaspekte.de/groundzero/donation.html The last NYC- 911-skepticism forum was during the anniversary week of Sep11th in NYC at various events. Our files had been handled over to Martin Luther King III, Patti Smith, Spooky (Eric B. Miller), Nina Hagen and other VIPs who wished to remain anonymous. The first NYC-911Skeptic Event was in December 2001 in NYC at Joe's Gallery. The first biggest NYC-911Skeptic Event was on May 3rd to 5th in NYC, 135 west 42nd St. (bet. 6th & 7th Ave) at Chashama Theater, Times Square. It included also a panel on May 4th, streamed live over the net with panelists from DU, guerrillanews, GZ, Alex Jones.com and a live phone session with Oswald Le Winter (Portugal, Ex-USA). The last SF-911-skepticism forum was during the anniversary week of Sep11th. They started succesfully with a rally in front of the office of Diane Feinstein in January 2002. The last Washington-911 skepticism forum was on June 10th in National Press Center including Julie Sweeney (NYC), J. Michael Springmann (ex- Jeddah "CIA"-Consulate, where 10-15 visas for the 911 hijackers had been filed, Lorna Brett FAA/Airline Accountability, Mary Schiavo, Esq. FAA/Airline Accountability, Michael Ruppert (copvcia), Tom Flocco (911- insider trading story) and John Judge, Air Defenses/NORAD/Pentagon-Specialist etc..., organised by http://www.unansweredquestions.org The 911-skeptic contents: a) geopolitical background (Carlyle, Harken, UNOCAL, CentGas, DynCorp, ENRON Broadband/TSI/Taliban, Halliburton, BAe, Northrup etc..) b) investigative + scientific oddities, prior knowledge/early warnings, details for a set-up incl. LIHOP etc.. c) current political situation, historical comparisons Proj. Northwoods, Bushistory, Ashcrofts database/reading lists, threads of week, lies of war, yuppie fascism, civil liberties/arrestments etc.. d) political and media analysis plus current support for 911-investigation (US congress: McKinney, Stark, plus opinions Ron Paul etc.., AtlantaPoll, 911-petition with 12000 sigs, diff. books from Moore to Greg Palast), 911-website projects, independent media portals etc.. e) Insider-oddities +details, insider-infos, last minute topics, "breaking news"... NOTE: Any use of non-standard English words that are in quotes within this post should not be construed by any member of DU as prejudice against Southern people, African Americans, Asian people, Northern people, Arabic people, Jewish people, Christian people or any other group save one. These words are blatant prejudice against STUPID people.   Remove | Alert Edit | Reply | Top

LARED (401 posts) Sep-17-02, 04:00 PM (ET) 5. Cutter Charges At the risk of being called a troll, why do you believe that puffs of smoke exiting the building prove that cutter charges were used. It would seem to me that a very straight forward answer is that as the building collapsed any smokey, dusty, air inside is forced out of building via broken windows. You state Picture 1 is just when the collapse started...Pictures 2-4 show (highlighted) puffs of smoke coming out of the upper floors. The puffs appear to come out of the columns. How can anyone determine if the puffs are from a column with that video? It seems simple enough, the floors of the building collapse, forcing smokey air between the floors to exit the building. I'm not trying to be aggressive or a troll, but if you're interested in an investigation that is established on genuine facts rather than speculation some dialectic dialogue is important. If your only interested in a conspiracy convention I'll stay out of it.   Remove | Alert Edit | Reply | Top

Merdesquared (27 posts) Sep-17-02, 04:31 PM (ET) Reply to post #5 6. Another view of WTC-7 collapse Here's a different angle that shows the whole roof line. All the smoke and dust seems to come from near the bottom: (to avoid slowing the thread I put the 'x' an the beginning - just cut and paste to view the animation) xhttp://thewebfairy.com/whatzit/wtc-7<1>.gif "Nothing is more annoying in the ordinary intercourse of life than this irritable patriotism of the Americans. A foreigner will gladly agree to praise much in their country, but he would like to be allowed to criticize something, and that is absolutely refused." -- Alexis de Tocqueville   Remove | Alert Edit | Reply | Top

ewing2001 (3164 posts) Sep-17-02, 04:47 PM (ET) Reply to post #6 8. addy xhttp://thewebfairy.com/whatzit/wtc-71.gif what's the exact addy (without x)? I had no luck open it. GROUND ZERO Forum NYC http://www.ourDNA.org http://www.lebensaspekte.de http://forums.delphiforums.com/ground_zero2001 Supporter of the 911-Skepticism Movement NYC, Washington, San Francisco, Ohio, Portland etc... Support public LIHOP-evidence now, SETUP later! Please donate for GZ Forum NYC. Every $10 counts. (telephone bills, phone research, PR costs, media tools,video distribution, hardware upgrade, security solutions, provider costs, various investigations etc...) Info at http://www.lebensaspekte.de/groundzero/donation.html The last NYC- 911-skepticism forum was during the anniversary week of Sep11th in NYC at various events. Our files had been handled over to Martin Luther King III, Patti Smith, Spooky (Eric B. Miller), Nina Hagen and other VIPs who wished to remain anonymous. The first NYC-911Skeptic Event was in December 2001 in NYC at Joe's Gallery. The first biggest NYC-911Skeptic Event was on May 3rd to 5th in NYC, 135 west 42nd St. (bet. 6th & 7th Ave) at Chashama Theater, Times Square. It included also a panel on May 4th, streamed live over the net with panelists from DU, guerrillanews, GZ, Alex Jones.com and a live phone session with Oswald Le Winter (Portugal, Ex-USA). The last SF-911-skepticism forum was during the anniversary week of Sep11th. They started succesfully with a rally in front of the office of Diane Feinstein in January 2002. The last Washington-911 skepticism forum was on June 10th in National Press Center including Julie Sweeney (NYC), J. Michael Springmann (ex- Jeddah "CIA"-Consulate, where 10-15 visas for the 911 hijackers had been filed, Lorna Brett FAA/Airline Accountability, Mary Schiavo, Esq. FAA/Airline Accountability, Michael Ruppert (copvcia), Tom Flocco (911- insider trading story) and John Judge, Air Defenses/NORAD/Pentagon-Specialist etc..., organised by http://www.unansweredquestions.org The 911-skeptic contents: a) geopolitical background (Carlyle, Harken, UNOCAL, CentGas, DynCorp, ENRON Broadband/TSI/Taliban, Halliburton, BAe, Northrup etc..) b) investigative + scientific oddities, prior knowledge/early warnings, details for a set-up incl. LIHOP etc.. c) current political situation, historical comparisons Proj. Northwoods, Bushistory, Ashcrofts database/reading lists, threads of week, lies of war, yuppie fascism, civil liberties/arrestments etc.. d) political and media analysis plus current support for 911-investigation (US congress: McKinney, Stark, plus opinions Ron Paul etc.., AtlantaPoll, 911-petition with 12000 sigs, diff. books from Moore to Greg Palast), 911-website projects, independent media portals etc.. e) Insider-oddities +details, insider-infos, last minute topics, "breaking news"... NOTE: Any use of non-standard English words that are in quotes within this post should not be construed by any member of DU as prejudice against Southern people, African Americans, Asian people, Northern people, Arabic people, Jewish people, Christian people or any other group save one. These words are blatant prejudice against STUPID people.   Remove | Alert Edit | Reply | Top

Merdesquared (27 posts) Sep-17-02, 09:16 PM (ET) Reply to post #8 11. Oops... There should be square brackets around the '1' at the end. The DU software deletes them. It's a 3.8MB file, but as an animated GIF it's easy to extract frames. "Nothing is more annoying in the ordinary intercourse of life than this irritable patriotism of the Americans. A foreigner will gladly agree to praise much in their country, but he would like to be allowed to criticize something, and that is absolutely refused." -- Alexis de Tocqueville   Remove | Alert Edit | Reply | Top

ewing2001 (3164 posts) Sep-17-02, 04:37 PM (ET) Reply to post #5 7. collection LAST EDITED ON Sep-17-02 AT 04:40 PM (ET) LARED, this was just a collection of the latest facts on Building 7. I'm not interested in the smoke analysis, someone else might. I try to prove, that Building 7, the DoD and CIA destroyed the Twin Towers (probably with the help of thermobarics) and later itself. This might take a while, but maybe not, when i finished with the official emission statistics, which i already have on my desk. I think, B7 was a controlled collapse and it's easier to prove than at the Twin Towers. And yes, if this thread turns into a trollfest i will personally send all DU-Administrators warnings about these incidents. GROUND ZERO Forum NYC http://www.ourDNA.org http://www.lebensaspekte.de http://forums.delphiforums.com/ground_zero2001 Supporter of the 911-Skepticism Movement NYC, Washington, San Francisco, Ohio, Portland etc... Support public LIHOP-evidence now, SETUP later! Please donate for GZ Forum NYC. Every $10 counts. (telephone bills, phone research, PR costs, media tools,video distribution, hardware upgrade, security solutions, provider costs, various investigations etc...) Info at http://www.lebensaspekte.de/groundzero/donation.html The last NYC- 911-skepticism forum was during the anniversary week of Sep11th in NYC at various events. Our files had been handled over to Martin Luther King III, Patti Smith, Spooky (Eric B. Miller), Nina Hagen and other VIPs who wished to remain anonymous. The first NYC-911Skeptic Event was in December 2001 in NYC at Joe's Gallery. The first biggest NYC-911Skeptic Event was on May 3rd to 5th in NYC, 135 west 42nd St. (bet. 6th & 7th Ave) at Chashama Theater, Times Square. It included also a panel on May 4th, streamed live over the net with panelists from DU, guerrillanews, GZ, Alex Jones.com and a live phone session with Oswald Le Winter (Portugal, Ex-USA). The last SF-911-skepticism forum was during the anniversary week of Sep11th. They started succesfully with a rally in front of the office of Diane Feinstein in January 2002. The last Washington-911 skepticism forum was on June 10th in National Press Center including Julie Sweeney (NYC), J. Michael Springmann (ex- Jeddah "CIA"-Consulate, where 10-15 visas for the 911 hijackers had been filed, Lorna Brett FAA/Airline Accountability, Mary Schiavo, Esq. FAA/Airline Accountability, Michael Ruppert (copvcia), Tom Flocco (911- insider trading story) and John Judge, Air Defenses/NORAD/Pentagon-Specialist etc..., organised by http://www.unansweredquestions.org The 911-skeptic contents: a) geopolitical background (Carlyle, Harken, UNOCAL, CentGas, DynCorp, ENRON Broadband/TSI/Taliban, Halliburton, BAe, Northrup etc..) b) investigative + scientific oddities, prior knowledge/early warnings, details for a set-up incl. LIHOP etc.. c) current political situation, historical comparisons Proj. Northwoods, Bushistory, Ashcrofts database/reading lists, threads of week, lies of war, yuppie fascism, civil liberties/arrestments etc.. d) political and media analysis plus current support for 911-investigation (US congress: McKinney, Stark, plus opinions Ron Paul etc.., AtlantaPoll, 911-petition with 12000 sigs, diff. books from Moore to Greg Palast), 911-website projects, independent media portals etc.. e) Insider-oddities +details, insider-infos, last minute topics, "breaking news"... NOTE: Any use of non-standard English words that are in quotes within this post should not be construed by any member of DU as prejudice against Southern people, African Americans, Asian people, Northern people, Arabic people, Jewish people, Christian people or any other group save one. These words are blatant prejudice against STUPID people.   Remove | Alert Edit | Reply | Top

ewing2001 (3164 posts) Sep-17-02, 04:58 PM (ET) Reply to post #7 9. all tenants Source: http://www.house.gov/science/hot/wtc/wtc-report/WTC_ch5.pdf Table 5.1 WTC 7 Tenants 46-47 Mechanical Floors 28-45 Salomon Smith Barney (SSB) 26-27 Standard Chartered Bank 26 Internal Revenue Service (IRS) Department of Defense (DoD) Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) 24 Internal Revenue Service (IRS) 23 Office of Emergency Management (OEM) 22 Federal Home Loan Bank of New York 21 First State Management Group 19-21 First State Management Group 19-21 ITT Hartford Insurance Group 19 National Association of Insurance Commissioners (NAIC) Securities Vacation Office 18 Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) 14-17 Vacant 13 Provident Financial Management 11-13 Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) 9-10 US Secret Service 7-8 American Express Bank International 7 part OEM generators and day tank 6 Switchgear, storage 5 Switchgear, generators, transformers 4 Upper level of 3rd floor lobby, switchgear 3 Lobby, SSB Conference Center, rentable space, management offices 2 Open to 1st floor lobby, transformer vault upper level, upper level switchgear 1 Lobby, loading docks, existing Con Ed transformer vaults, fuel storage, lower level switchgear (The list didn't include infos about 25th floor) GROUND ZERO Forum NYC http://www.ourDNA.org http://www.lebensaspekte.de http://forums.delphiforums.com/ground_zero2001 Supporter of the 911-Skepticism Movement NYC, Washington, San Francisco, Ohio, Portland etc... Support public LIHOP-evidence now, SETUP later! Please donate for GZ Forum NYC. Every $10 counts. (telephone bills, phone research, PR costs, media tools,video distribution, hardware upgrade, security solutions, provider costs, various investigations etc...) Info at http://www.lebensaspekte.de/groundzero/donation.html The last NYC- 911-skepticism forum was during the anniversary week of Sep11th in NYC at various events. Our files had been handled over to Martin Luther King III, Patti Smith, Spooky (Eric B. Miller), Nina Hagen and other VIPs who wished to remain anonymous. The first NYC-911Skeptic Event was in December 2001 in NYC at Joe's Gallery. The first biggest NYC-911Skeptic Event was on May 3rd to 5th in NYC, 135 west 42nd St. (bet. 6th & 7th Ave) at Chashama Theater, Times Square. It included also a panel on May 4th, streamed live over the net with panelists from DU, guerrillanews, GZ, Alex Jones.com and a live phone session with Oswald Le Winter (Portugal, Ex-USA). The last SF-911-skepticism forum was during the anniversary week of Sep11th. They started succesfully with a rally in front of the office of Diane Feinstein in January 2002. The last Washington-911 skepticism forum was on June 10th in National Press Center including Julie Sweeney (NYC), J. Michael Springmann (ex- Jeddah "CIA"-Consulate, where 10-15 visas for the 911 hijackers had been filed, Lorna Brett FAA/Airline Accountability, Mary Schiavo, Esq. FAA/Airline Accountability, Michael Ruppert (copvcia), Tom Flocco (911- insider trading story) and John Judge, Air Defenses/NORAD/Pentagon-Specialist etc..., organised by http://www.unansweredquestions.org The 911-skeptic contents: a) geopolitical background (Carlyle, Harken, UNOCAL, CentGas, DynCorp, ENRON Broadband/TSI/Taliban, Halliburton, BAe, Northrup etc..) b) investigative + scientific oddities, prior knowledge/early warnings, details for a set-up incl. LIHOP etc.. c) current political situation, historical comparisons Proj. Northwoods, Bushistory, Ashcrofts database/reading lists, threads of week, lies of war, yuppie fascism, civil liberties/arrestments etc.. d) political and media analysis plus current support for 911-investigation (US congress: McKinney, Stark, plus opinions Ron Paul etc.., AtlantaPoll, 911-petition with 12000 sigs, diff. books from Moore to Greg Palast), 911-website projects, independent media portals etc.. e) Insider-oddities +details, insider-infos, last minute topics, "breaking news"... NOTE: Any use of non-standard English words that are in quotes within this post should not be construed by any member of DU as prejudice against Southern people, African Americans, Asian people, Northern people, Arabic people, Jewish people, Christian people or any other group save one. These words are blatant prejudice against STUPID people.   Remove | Alert Edit | Reply | Top

LARED (401 posts) Sep-17-02, 06:12 PM (ET) Reply to post #7 10. Trollfest???? I'm not interested in the smoke analysis, someone else might. I'm not either. I was wondering why you think puffs of smoke were caused by cutter charges when a simple and IMO self-evident answer will suffice. official emission statistics What are those? Link? And yes, if this thread turns into a trollfest i will personally send all DU-Administrators warnings about these incidents. I guess I've been duly warned. Feel free to warn anyone you like, as I'm confident my conduct has been well within the rules of this board. BTW, a threat to try and remove a dissenting opinion doesn't do much to strengthen your position   Remove | Alert Edit | Reply | Top

Merdesquared (27 posts) Sep-17-02, 10:54 PM (ET) Reply to post #10 13. Oh boy, Trolls!Will I get to wear my Leiderhosen Ren? "I do hereby promise only to watch the Ren & Stimpy show, to make under-leg noises during the good scenes, to wear unwashed lederhosen every single day of the rest of my life." "Nothing is more annoying in the ordinary intercourse of life than this irritable patriotism of the Americans. A foreigner will gladly agree to praise much in their country, but he would like to be allowed to criticize something, and that is absolutely refused." -- Alexis de Tocqueville   Remove | Alert Edit | Reply | Top

Merdesquared (27 posts) Sep-17-02, 09:28 PM (ET) Reply to post #7 12. The mayor's bunker That 23rd floor "bunker" certainly raises some questions - just what kind of emergency did hizzhonor envision that would call for blast proof windows, self-contained air, water, power, etc.? And is it true that he just happened to "abandon" the bunker in favor of a new location a few weeks before 9/11? If he did want something that was blast-proof (as in nuclear attack, tsunami, etc.) why put it on the 23rd floor rather than underground? "Nothing is more annoying in the ordinary intercourse of life than this irritable patriotism of the Americans. A foreigner will gladly agree to praise much in their country, but he would like to be allowed to criticize something, and that is absolutely refused." -- Alexis de Tocqueville   Remove | Alert Edit | Reply | Top

Old and In the Way (3019 posts) Sep-17-02, 10:57 PM (ET) Reply to post #5 14. LARED, if I may be so bold. I'm inclined to agree on your point of the smoky puffs. The 7 hours of fire/heat would certainly weaken the concrete columns given enough time. While it went down nice and straight, I think the released energy would find the columns the "blow point". I think it would be like traces on a PCB that are designed to handle 10 watts. Applying 1,000 watts simultaneously to all traces would cause them to "blow" at the same time. Not sure if this is a good analogy, but it works for me. Anyway, I don't define counter-ideas/arguments as "trolling", particularly when we have had no open and impartial investigation of all events before, during, and after 9-11-01. Personally, I think we need to hear all theories and then use common sense, reasoning, and honesty to draw informed conclusions. Ridiculous theories are exposed and disposed rather quickly here. There certainly are technical minds here that have contributed to our understanding of the events. True some spread mis/dis inform for ulterior purposes and some are wedded to their theories. I hope we can all debate these questions keeping an open mind and strive to discover the truth of what really happened on that horrible day. "If your only interested in a conspiracy convention I'll stay out of it. " One question: Do you believe the facts as presented by the administration today? If not, welome to the conspiracy convention! Care to check your tinfoil hat? http://www.democraticunderground.com/cgi-bin/duforum/duboard.cgi?az=show_thread&om=2574&forum=DCForumID22   Remove | Alert Edit | Reply | Top

LARED (401 posts) Sep-20-02, 12:56 PM (ET) Reply to post #14 17. Re: One Question One question: Do you believe the facts as presented by the administration today? I have never gotten a very clear meaning of what folks mean when they say things like "facts as presented by the administration." Are you referring to the FEMA reports? A press release of some sort? What does that mean exactly? The facts presented in the FEMA reports are, as far I can tell reflect an honest assessment of what the writers beleive happened. Is it flawless? Hardly given the lack of information available and the incomplete investigation. Do I agree with every conclusion they draw? No. They tell you right out front that a lot of it is conjecture. Do I think there is a purposeful coverup to protect the administration? No. Regardless of the disdain for Bush, I see no convincing evidence that this was a conspiracy. Having said all that, I certainly believe the government can be corrupt, make grievous errors, etc, etc, (no matter what party holds power). Does the governement engage is covert operation? Of course. Do these sometimes have bad outcomes. Sure. Does the government lie somethimes. Yep. To decide when to put on my tin foil hat I look at the basics like who, what, why, when and where. Also known as evidence. IMO, there ain't no evidence, ie established facts, that tell me there was a government conspiracy to take down the towers, destroy the pentagon, etc. There's no real motive to do such a thing. Why would the government do that even if it could. The motives assigned by the conspiracy buffs; taking over the world, oil, war, a Bush dicatorship, ad nauseam are based on political ideology not reality. Something to think about; The US is the largest consummer of oil and gas in the world. Being the largest consumer it wields preat power to influence the global markets. One of the reason oil is so cheap is that even with our appetite for oil, there is a glut in the market. For most oil producing countries, oil is their primary source of revenue. The economic and political stabilty of the US and the oil producing countries are linked together. Couple that with a unmatched military might that can get any oil it wants (if required) If you connect those dots together and you wanted to control the world oil supply, would you need to destroy one of the financial centers of the world? No, because in large measure you already control the market. If we didn't oil would already be $5.00 a gallon.   Remove | Alert Edit | Reply | Top

Mr_SmokesTooMuch (2458 posts) Sep-22-02, 05:58 PM (ET) Reply to post #17 25. One established fact no one even is touching right here The mighiest air force in the world couldnt even get to the Pentagon quick enough to stop that attack? Sorry, I don't buy it. I was in the USAF for 8 years, I have alot more respect for them and what they can do than that. This "had to wait for orders from the CIC" is bullshit too, no way around that. If I could get over that, maybe I'd buy the official story, but if that tells me it's a conspiracy, then EVERYTHING else becomes questionable in my mind. Thats a standard that judges use every day in evaluating evidence clear across this country. Its a valid technique. No real motive? I think you're forgetting a little thing called The Patriot Act, a new little branch of govt called Dept of Homeland Security and a pipeline IS going to be built across Afghanistan now. If that isn't motive I'll kiss my own ass.   Remove | Alert Edit | Reply | Top

plaguepuppy (322 posts) Sep-28-02, 01:37 PM (ET) Reply to post #25 44. AF stand-down I know it's a little off-topic, but this is a question that isn't going to go away despite all the sophistry and hand-waving that has been flung at it. A good friend whose son is retired AF (and who has no interest whatsoever in politics, conspiracies, etc.) came to me rather shaken and told me that his son was told by friends still on active duty that stand-down orders were given after planes had been scrambled. I have since heard the same thing from another friend whose brother flies for Evergreen (a CIA proprietary as I recall) and still has AF connections. These are real people that I trust implicitly, not just anonymous posters with snappy screen names. Too many people must be aware of this for it to be kept quiet forever. PlaguePuppy's Café   Remove | Alert Edit | Reply | Top

Merdesquared (27 posts) Sep-18-02, 01:35 AM (ET) Reply to post #5 15. Smoke vs. squibs There are certain characteristic "puffs" that people in the demolition field sometimes refer to as squibs (I know, 'squib' has other meanings, some even relating to explosives). These squibs are not always clearly delineated from other kinds of smoke coming from a collapsing building, and in the case of WTC-7 most of the dust and smoke seem to be originating close to ground level where they can't be seen clearly because of other buildings. In general though squibs tend to be highly localized and high velocity flows in their early stages, and if the charges are close to the outside wall of the structure they tend to be roughly spherical or hemispherical (unless highly directional shaped charges are used). As they expand they of course slow down and become less organized, but in real time or a good quality video that shows the point of origin they have a very characteristic look. I can't say that I see anything that looks squib-like about the smoke from WTC-7, but the inability to see the base and the fact that the smoke comes from ground level makes it impossible to tell for sure. The fact that it collapsed so uniformly does raise questions though, given the assymmetry of damage and fires. Unlike the fuse analogy, once a single point fails it tends to shunt more of the load to "ground". Rather than naturally tending to balance loads across the weight-bearing structures, any assymmetry in the initial conditions tends to grow as the collapse progresses. Also odd that the collapse seems to go at a constant rate, as opposed to the accelerating collapses of the towers. If the mechanism is the same, why are the collapse dynamics so different? "Nothing is more annoying in the ordinary intercourse of life than this irritable patriotism of the Americans. A foreigner will gladly agree to praise much in their country, but he would like to be allowed to criticize something, and that is absolutely refused." -- Alexis de Tocqueville   Remove | Alert Edit | Reply | Top

ewing2001 (3164 posts) Sep-19-02, 11:26 AM (ET) Reply to post #15 16. military vs oil(-tank) http://www.cooperativeresearch.org/completetimeline/update3.html September 10, 2002: Right before a one year deadline, the Port Authority, the governmental owner of the WTC complex, is sued by 5 insurance companies, 1 utility and 700 relatives of the WTC victims. The insurance companies and utility are suing for safety violations connected to the installation of diesel fuel tanks in 1999 that many blame for the collapse of WTC Building 7. http://www.cooperativeresearch.org/completetimeline/2002/dowjones091002.html The relatives' lawsuit is much more encompassing, and even blames the Port Authority for the Flight 93 hijacking (the Port Authority owns Newark airport, where the flight took off). GROUND ZERO Forum NYC http://www.ourDNA.org http://www.lebensaspekte.de http://forums.delphiforums.com/ground_zero2001 Supporter of the 911-Skepticism Movement NYC, Washington, San Francisco, Ohio, Portland etc... Support public LIHOP-evidence now, SETUP later! Please donate for GZ Forum NYC. Every $10 counts. (telephone bills, phone research, PR costs, media tools,video distribution, hardware upgrade, security solutions, provider costs, various investigations etc...) Info at http://www.lebensaspekte.de/groundzero/donation.html The last NYC- 911-skepticism forum was during the anniversary week of Sep11th in NYC at various events. Our files had been handled over to Martin Luther King III, Patti Smith, Spooky (Eric B. Miller), Nina Hagen and other VIPs who wished to remain anonymous. The first NYC-911Skeptic Event was in December 2001 in NYC at Joe's Gallery. The first biggest NYC-911Skeptic Event was on May 3rd to 5th in NYC, 135 west 42nd St. (bet. 6th & 7th Ave) at Chashama Theater, Times Square. It included also a panel on May 4th, streamed live over the net with panelists from DU, guerrillanews, GZ, Alex Jones.com and a live phone session with Oswald Le Winter (Portugal, Ex-USA). The last SF-911-skepticism forum was during the anniversary week of Sep11th. They started succesfully with a rally in front of the office of Diane Feinstein in January 2002. The last Washington-911 skepticism forum was on June 10th in National Press Center including Julie Sweeney (NYC), J. Michael Springmann (ex- Jeddah "CIA"-Consulate, where 10-15 visas for the 911 hijackers had been filed, Lorna Brett FAA/Airline Accountability, Mary Schiavo, Esq. FAA/Airline Accountability, Michael Ruppert (copvcia), Tom Flocco (911- insider trading story) and John Judge, Air Defenses/NORAD/Pentagon-Specialist etc..., organised by http://www.unansweredquestions.org The 911-skeptic contents: a) geopolitical background (Carlyle, Harken, UNOCAL, CentGas, DynCorp, ENRON Broadband/TSI/Taliban, Halliburton, BAe, Northrup etc..) b) investigative + scientific oddities, prior knowledge/early warnings, details for a set-up incl. LIHOP etc.. c) current political situation, historical comparisons Proj. Northwoods, Bushistory, Ashcrofts database/reading lists, threads of week, lies of war, yuppie fascism, civil liberties/arrestments etc.. d) political and media analysis plus current support for 911-investigation (US congress: McKinney, Stark, plus opinions Ron Paul etc.., AtlantaPoll, 911-petition with 12000 sigs, diff. books from Moore to Greg Palast), 911-website projects, independent media portals etc.. e) Insider-oddities +details, insider-infos, last minute topics, "breaking news"... NOTE: Any use of non-standard English words that are in quotes within this post should not be construed by any member of DU as prejudice against Southern people, African Americans, Asian people, Northern people, Arabic people, Jewish people, Christian people or any other group save one. These words are blatant prejudice against STUPID people.   Remove | Alert Edit | Reply | Top

anablep (83 posts) Sep-21-02, 01:12 AM (ET) 18. Some uncommon Building 7 photos I'm new to this thread, but I have some photos which might add to the debate. I've scooped up these photos during my frequent wanderings on the web to find 9/11 photos. 1. Building 7 as seen from the 80th floor of the WTC North Tower, photographed on September 5, 2001. 2. Fires burning in the lower floors of Building 7 (source: http://ken.ipl31.net/piks/wtc/) 3. Similar view of the fires (source: http://ken.ipl31.net/piks/wtc/) 4. This is looking straight up Building 7. I can't seem to find the webpage where I got this from -- the photographer was named O'Sullivan and he went directly into the North Tower collapse zone immediately after that tower collapsed. I really wish I could find that page because it has some interesting info about Building 7. O'Sullivan said he took this photo around 3:20pm, I believe it was, and he said the firefighters were worried about the structure, and I can't remember exactly what he said but I think he said it was visibly bowing or making strange sounds. I'll try to find the original link so I can find out for sure what he said. 5. The inferno raging on the side of Building 7 (Steve Spak -- http://ziggy.dreamland.net/wtc/wtc10048nyc.free.fr/095.html) 6. Another view of the fire from the side of the building. 7. The only still photo I have seen of the collapse of Building 7 (source: http://www.hereisnewyork.org) I know of two videos that show the fire in Building 7: the one sold by Fireline Video (http://firehousebooks.com/firvidwtc09.html) and the one sold by Steve Spak (http://www.fire-police-ems.com/videos/vw9005.htm). And I also have the five videos of Building 7's collapse which everyone has seen (only two digitized). I hope these pictures add something to the discussion. anablep   Remove | Alert Edit | Reply | Top

ewing2001 (3164 posts) Sep-21-02, 03:02 PM (ET) Reply to post #18 19. omg...lol This is a joke, isn't it? First time i see these kind of photos!! This lousy fire should have forced the collapse?? Definetely no way! Are there any photos around between 4:00 and 5:20PM, which maybe showed a stronger fire? Then, from which time are the photos above? If they had been taken after the collapse of the Twin Towers, there was no chance, that B7 was destroyed by new debris. Great job, anablep GROUND ZERO Forum NYC http://www.ourDNA.org http://www.lebensaspekte.de http://forums.delphiforums.com/ground_zero2001 Supporter of the 911-Skepticism Movement NYC, Washington, San Francisco, Ohio, Portland etc... Support public LIHOP-evidence now, SETUP later! Please donate for GZ Forum NYC. Every $10 counts. (telephone bills, phone research, PR costs, media tools,video distribution, hardware upgrade, security solutions, provider costs, various investigations etc...) Info at http://www.lebensaspekte.de/groundzero/donation.html The last NYC- 911-skepticism forum was during the anniversary week of Sep11th in NYC at various events. Our files had been handled over to Martin Luther King III, Patti Smith, Spooky (Eric B. Miller), Nina Hagen and other VIPs who wished to remain anonymous. The first NYC-911Skeptic Event was in December 2001 in NYC at Joe's Gallery. The first biggest NYC-911Skeptic Event was on May 3rd to 5th in NYC, 135 west 42nd St. (bet. 6th & 7th Ave) at Chashama Theater, Times Square. It included also a panel on May 4th, streamed live over the net with panelists from DU, guerrillanews, GZ, Alex Jones.com and a live phone session with Oswald Le Winter (Portugal, Ex-USA). The last SF-911-skepticism forum was during the anniversary week of Sep11th. They started succesfully with a rally in front of the office of Diane Feinstein in January 2002. The last Washington-911 skepticism forum was on June 10th in National Press Center including Julie Sweeney (NYC), J. Michael Springmann (ex- Jeddah "CIA"-Consulate, where 10-15 visas for the 911 hijackers had been filed, Lorna Brett FAA/Airline Accountability, Mary Schiavo, Esq. FAA/Airline Accountability, Michael Ruppert (copvcia), Tom Flocco (911- insider trading story) and John Judge, Air Defenses/NORAD/Pentagon-Specialist etc..., organised by http://www.unansweredquestions.org The 911-skeptic contents: a) geopolitical background (Carlyle, Harken, UNOCAL, CentGas, DynCorp, ENRON Broadband/TSI/Taliban, Halliburton, BAe, Northrup etc..) b) investigative + scientific oddities, prior knowledge/early warnings, details for a set-up incl. LIHOP etc.. c) current political situation, historical comparisons Proj. Northwoods, Bushistory, Ashcrofts database/reading lists, threads of week, lies of war, yuppie fascism, civil liberties/arrestments etc.. d) political and media analysis plus current support for 911-investigation (US congress: McKinney, Stark, plus opinions Ron Paul etc.., AtlantaPoll, 911-petition with 12000 sigs, diff. books from Moore to Greg Palast), 911-website projects, independent media portals etc.. e) Insider-oddities +details, insider-infos, last minute topics, "breaking news"... NOTE: Any use of non-standard English words that are in quotes within this post should not be construed by any member of DU as prejudice against Southern people, African Americans, Asian people, Northern people, Arabic people, Jewish people, Christian people or any other group save one. These words are blatant prejudice against STUPID people.   Remove | Alert Edit | Reply | Top

ewing2001 (3164 posts) Sep-21-02, 06:33 PM (ET) Reply to post #19 20. Search for chemists! LAST EDITED ON Sep-21-02 AT 06:40 PM (ET) I found this report, which was basically established with the help of "Dan, the toxic guy": http://www.nyenvirolaw.org/ My goal is to find out, if the toxic chemicals, who had been around from the "explosion" or "collapse" in the Twin Towers are from similar structure like from a thermobaric microwave system. My first clues, still rather speculative, i have to confess, can be find on this report at Jerrold Nadler’s White Papers: i.e.: http://www.nyenvirolaw.org/PDF/RepJerroldNadler-2-11-02-SenateHearingsOn9-11disaster.pdf The original white papers: http://216.239.51.100/search?q=cache:mvjyPLh7LOUC:www.nycosh.org/WTCcatastrophe/EPA%2520White%2520Paper%2520Final%25204_12.pdf+Jerrold+Nadler+white+paper+asbestos&hl=en&ie=UTF-8 "toxic mix of asbestos, fiberglass, concrete,human remains, heavy metals and the vague "particulates" (I'm still analysing the whole report and NY Envirolaw) In the meantime, here are more summaries about the thermobarics: http://www.news.navy.mil/search/print.asp?story_id=1110&VIRIN=946 By Lt. David Gai, Defense Threat Reduction Agency Public Affairs Thermobarics belong to a class of fuel-rich compositions that release energy over a longer period of time than standard explosives, thereby creating a long-duration pressure pulse when detonated in confined spaces. When detonated, thermobarics generate higher sustained blast pressures in confined spaces, such as tunnels and underground facilities. The name comes from the Greek words for "heat" and "pressure." The munition has a primary explosion which releases the fuel for a secondary explosion. The secondary causes extremely high pressure wave. NOTE: The thermobaric bomb releases and then detonates a fine cloud of high-explosive chemicals, creating devastating shock waves that destroy everything -- and everyone -- inside a cave, bunker or building. Using a device called a Viper -- a portable laser range finder, digital map display and Global Positioning System receiver they can point on many different positions. http://www.flakmag.com/opinion/thermo.html "...The BLU-82 uses an aqueous mixture of ammonium nitrate, aluminum powder and polystyrene soap as a binder simple materials that are fairly stable until put through an atomizer and ignited..." The Soviets used them in their own disastrous foray into the region 15 years ago Sri Lanka already used thermobarics as well: http://www.sangam.org/ANALYSIS/schmelLauncher8_22_01.htm "...The story first broke when a Sri Lankan newspaper reported, A multi-million dollar arms deal for a weapon banned by the Americans and now manufactured and sold only by the Russians has been negotiated by the Sri Lanka Army via a third party and has resulted in senior army officers and weapons agents crying foul... ...Infantry rocket flame-thrower is also known as ‘Schmel Launcher’, ‘Thermobaric Weapon’, ‘Fuel-air weapon’ or ‘Vacuum-Bomb’. It is a shoulder-fired, single-shot, disposable weapon with a range of about 1,000 meters. It detonates volatile Chemicals in its warhead, with the resultant indiscriminate devastation of people, livestock, vegetation and buildings. The round is 93 mm in diameter. It has three types of projectiles: thermobaric (RPO-A), incendiary (RPO-Z) and smoke (RPO-D). What does it do? A US army publication, Marine Corps Gazette http://www.ichkeria.org/a/2000/9/com1609-en132823.html , called it a weapon that can have the effect of a tactical nuclear weapon without residual radiation. Its effects, when launched, were described by the same magazine as follows: Fuel-air weapons work by initially detonating a scattering charge within a bomb, rocket or grenade warhead. The warhead contents, which are composed of either volatile gases, liquids, or finely powdered explosives, form an aerosol cloud. This cloud is then ignited and the subsequent fireball sears the surrounding area while consuming the oxygen in this area. The lack of oxygen creates an enormous overpressure. This overpressure, or blast wave, is the primary casualty-producing force. In several dozen microseconds, the pressure at the center of the explosion can reach 30 kilograms per square centimeter (427 pounds per square inch) normal atmospheric pressure at sea level is 14.7 pounds per square inch with a temperature between 2,500-3,000 degrees Centigrade <4,532-5,432 degrees Fahrenheit>. This is 1.5 to 2 times greater than the overpressure caused by conventional explosives. Personnel under the cloud are literally crushed to death. Outside the cloud area, the blast wave travels at some 3,000 meters per second <9843 feet per second>. The resultant vacuum pulls in loose objects to fill the void. If a fuel-air charge is fired inside a building or bunker, the cloud is contained and this amplifies the destruction of the load-bearing components of the structure. Fuel-air can be an effective weapon against exposed enemy personnel, combat equipment, fortified areas and individual fighting positions. ************************************* Was the gas tank in Building 7 supposed to be the tank for the weapons? Compare the reports: http://www.ichkeria.org/a/2000/9/com1609-en132823.html Military Studies Office Lester & Grau 16-09-2000 "...The "Buratino" was the main thermobaric delivery system that the Russians used against Grozny. It was first combat-tested in Afghanistan's Panjshir valley in the early 1980s during the Soviet- Afghan War. Built by the Omsk Transmash design bureau, Buratino is a 30-barrel 220mm multiple rocket launcher system mounted on a T-72 tank chassis.... ...The thermobaric warhead is filled with a combustible liquid. The liquid is most likely filled with powdered tetranite.12 When the warhead explodes, the liquid is vaporized creating an aerosol cloud. When the cloud mixes with oxygen, it detonates, first creating a high temperature cloud of flame followed by a crushing overpressure. The Buratino fire control system consists of a sight, laser range finder, ballistic computer and roll sensors.... http://www.nytimes.com/2002/03/02/nyregion/02TOWE.html?pagewanted=1 "...275-gallon diesel tanks sat on the fifth, seventh and eighth floors and were fed through pipes from the larger tanks near ground level... ...Jerome M. Hauer, who was the director of Mayor Giuliani's Office of Emergency Management at the time the command center was opened at 7 World Trade.. http://www.baltech.org/lederman/giuliani-wtc-collapse-3-01-02.html "...The 6,000-gallon tank was positioned about 15 feet above the ground floor and near several lobby elevators and was meant to fuel generators that would supply electricity to the 23rd-floor bunker in the event of a power failure..." CON EDISON sues B7: http://www.nytimes.com/2002/09/11/nyregion//11BLAS.html The tanks contained more than 40,000 gallons of fuel to provide backup power for the city's emergency command center, a Secret Service office and other tenants. A 6,000-gallon tank for the command center, which was on the 23rd floor, was mounted 15 feet off the ground near an elevator bank. GROUND ZERO Forum NYC http://www.ourDNA.org http://www.lebensaspekte.de http://forums.delphiforums.com/ground_zero2001 Supporter of the 911-Skepticism Movement NYC, Washington, San Francisco, Ohio, Portland etc... Support public LIHOP-evidence now, SETUP later! Please donate for GZ Forum NYC. Every $10 counts. (telephone bills, phone research, PR costs, media tools,video distribution, hardware upgrade, security solutions, provider costs, various investigations etc...) Info at http://www.lebensaspekte.de/groundzero/donation.html The last NYC- 911-skepticism forum was during the anniversary week of Sep11th in NYC at various events. Our files had been handled over to Martin Luther King III, Patti Smith, Spooky (Eric B. Miller), Nina Hagen and other VIPs who wished to remain anonymous. The first NYC-911Skeptic Event was in December 2001 in NYC at Joe's Gallery. The first biggest NYC-911Skeptic Event was on May 3rd to 5th in NYC, 135 west 42nd St. (bet. 6th & 7th Ave) at Chashama Theater, Times Square. It included also a panel on May 4th, streamed live over the net with panelists from DU, guerrillanews, GZ, Alex Jones.com and a live phone session with Oswald Le Winter (Portugal, Ex-USA). The last SF-911-skepticism forum was during the anniversary week of Sep11th. They started succesfully with a rally in front of the office of Diane Feinstein in January 2002. The last Washington-911 skepticism forum was on June 10th in National Press Center including Julie Sweeney (NYC), J. Michael Springmann (ex- Jeddah "CIA"-Consulate, where 10-15 visas for the 911 hijackers had been filed, Lorna Brett FAA/Airline Accountability, Mary Schiavo, Esq. FAA/Airline Accountability, Michael Ruppert (copvcia), Tom Flocco (911- insider trading story) and John Judge, Air Defenses/NORAD/Pentagon-Specialist etc..., organised by http://www.unansweredquestions.org The 911-skeptic contents: a) geopolitical background (Carlyle, Harken, UNOCAL, CentGas, DynCorp, ENRON Broadband/TSI/Taliban, Halliburton, BAe, Northrup etc..) b) investigative + scientific oddities, prior knowledge/early warnings, details for a set-up incl. LIHOP etc.. c) current political situation, historical comparisons Proj. Northwoods, Bushistory, Ashcrofts database/reading lists, threads of week, lies of war, yuppie fascism, civil liberties/arrestments etc.. d) political and media analysis plus current support for 911-investigation (US congress: McKinney, Stark, plus opinions Ron Paul etc.., AtlantaPoll, 911-petition with 12000 sigs, diff. books from Moore to Greg Palast), 911-website projects, independent media portals etc.. e) Insider-oddities +details, insider-infos, last minute topics, "breaking news"... NOTE: Any use of non-standard English words that are in quotes within this post should not be construed by any member of DU as prejudice against Southern people, African Americans, Asian people, Northern people, Arabic people, Jewish people, Christian people or any other group save one. These words are blatant prejudice against STUPID people.   Remove | Alert Edit | Reply | Top

anablep (83 posts) Sep-21-02, 09:03 PM (ET) Reply to post #19 21. It's no joke I figured most ppl have not seen them. These photos have been out there on the web for months and months, but one has to really spend SERIOUS time researching to find them, as they're often in rather obscure personal websites. That's the thing about 9/11 -- it happened in the midst of a lot of ordinary ppl who carry their own cameras and so TONS and TONS of photos are available out there on the web; finding them is the hard part. > This lousy fire should have forced the collapse?? > Definetely no way! I regard the Building 7 collapse as one of the REAL mysteries of 9/11 (along with the crash of Flight 93, the inepitude of air defense, and why Gee Dubya sat on his ass in a photo op when all hell was breaking loose). It baffles and disturbs even the experts. It demands a full investigation. I know each building has its own idiosyncracies and vulnerabilities and one cannot simply compare Building 7 with Building 5. Still....when I look at a photo like this -- one has got to wonder how Building 5 got so utterly consumed with fire yet did not collapse: > Are there any photos around between 4:00 and 5:20PM, > which maybe showed a stronger fire? I believe the two photos showing the fire from the side were possibly taken around 4pm. I suspect this on the basis of the FireLine video which shows the same fire burning like that after mid-afternoon and the footage of the aftermath of the collapse followed shortly afterward. But that is just a guess. > If they had been taken after the collapse of the Twin Towers, > there was no chance, that B7 was destroyed by new debris. Well, Building 7 *was* damaged by falling debris from the North Tower, I've got photos taken very soon after the collapse that show this. But frankly so was the Deutsche Bank Building, the various WFC towers, the Millenium Hotel, One Liberty, and so on, and none of them suffered horrific fires, much less any sort of collapse. So the issue is whether the falling debris in the case of Building 7 was lucky enough to hit a critical point that would have started a fire that led to a collapse. In one of the photos I posted, the fire looks rather well-fed as it is very sooty, but as I said, whether it was so bad as to lead to a structural collapse (and collapse in the manner it did) is unknown. It could be the case that Building 7 was an astonishingly poorly constructed building. It would not be alone in that respect, recall how engineers screwed up on the John Hancock Tower and need last minute shoring up of the structure. It would TRULY be disturbing if this was the case, as it would make me wonder how safe any of our zillion high rises are from fire. That would be enough to almost make me WANT TO BELIEVE that the collapse was due to something other than structural failure. anablep   Remove | Alert Edit | Reply | Top

Mr_SmokesTooMuch (2458 posts) Sep-22-02, 02:29 PM (ET) Reply to post #21 22. You can take a diesel fuel tank out of the equation then Diesel fuel is not like gasoline, a tank that contains diesel fuel doesnt explode when punctured. I have personally welded cracks on diesel tanks full of diesel fuel that even had diesel dripping out of it. Diesel engines don't have spark plugs because diesel will only ignite under extreme pressures, like those manufactured by a diesel engine. A race car engine has compression ratios of 12:1, diesel engines have compression ratios of 20:1 and still do not burn the fuel efficiently without mechanical aids such as turbochargers to increase the compression. If someone is suggesting that a building completely crumbled to the ground like that from a diesel fire, it would be the most ridiculous argument I have ever heard made. And that is ignoring the fact of what caused the fire to begin with! A diesel tank getting damaged and leaking is not going to spontaneously burst into flame if I can WELD on the things and they don't catch fire or blow up.   Remove | Alert Edit | Reply | Top

anablep (83 posts) Sep-22-02, 05:23 PM (ET) Reply to post #22 23. Question about diesel Your remark about the diesel fuel then raises a question I have about the Pentagon crash. There was an electric generator trailer parked in front of the building for emergency use, and it was reportedly fueled by diesel. It can be seen burning furiously immediately after the crash. There are several reports that the right wing engine or wing tip smashed directly into the trailer an instant before the crash. Would an impact of a turbofan engine going 300-400 mph create enough psi for combustion, in your opinion? Also, if a plane did not crash into the Pentagon and the trailer was instead caught up in a nearby explosion, in your opinion would that have exerted the kind of pressures necessary? anablep   Remove | Alert Edit | Reply | Top

Mr_SmokesTooMuch (2458 posts) Sep-22-02, 05:45 PM (ET) Reply to post #23 24. That's a good question, and not being an expert all I can say is; I don't know. It seems like it, that would have to be an awful lot of energy being expended there both mechanically and thermally. But as it applies to WTC 7 it still would need some explaining, ie, nothing hit that tank with the force equivalent of what hit the Pentagon. Even if the tank were punctured and fuel was leaking out, something like a pilot light clicking on somewhere wouldn't have caused it to catch on fire. It would basically make a mess and stink to high heaven.   Remove | Alert Edit | Reply | Top

LARED (401 posts) Sep-22-02, 06:19 PM (ET) Reply to post #23 26. Diesel fuel There is a difference between diesel auto-igniting in a combustion chamber and igniting it with a spark or flame in as a vapor. The auto-ignition temperature is 494 deg F. This is the temp one needs to ignite it without a spark. The flash point is about 100 deg F. Once diesel is exposed to air and is in the proper flammable limits ( 5% - 0.7%) it will easily ignite with a small spark. The FEMA report provide tons of good information regarding the diesel distributionn systems and possible senarios to explain the fires in WTC7 FEMA   Remove | Alert Edit | Reply | Top

Mr_SmokesTooMuch (2458 posts) Sep-22-02, 06:46 PM (ET) Reply to post #26 27. "Easily ignite with a small spark"? Not the diesel fuel I've been exposed to. If welding on the tank its contained in won't set it off, I can't imagine a small spark would set off a puddle of it on the ground. There are no vapors coming off of it like a puddle of gasoline has. The only way it's vaporized is when it is forced out of a fuel injector, there wouldnt be any positive pressure in the tank to vaporize the diesel fuel as it came out of the ruptured tank. Have you ever put diesel in a gasoline engine? It don't work, and it even has spark plugs. Even gasoline itself is not explosive, you can put a match out in a bucket of gas, I've seen it done with my own eyes. But gas does evaporate easily, and that evaporation is highly explosive and is what blows up. I get the idea tho, only "possible scenarios" thrown out by FEMA bear any consideration.   Remove | Alert Edit | Reply | Top

LARED (401 posts) Sep-22-02, 07:16 PM (ET) Reply to post #27 28. diesel stuff LAST EDITED ON Sep-22-02 AT 08:04 PM (ET) If welding on the tank its contained in won't set it off, That is because the diesel vapors need to be within a specific fuel to air percentage to be flammable. (5% to 0.7%) In a tank the percentage of fuel is close to 100% so it is not flammable. I can't imagine a small spark would set off a puddle of it on the ground. I can, I've done it. It all a matter of the fuel to air mixture. There are no vapors coming off of it like a puddle of gasoline has. The only way it's vaporized is when it is forced out of a fuel injector, there wouldnt be any positive pressure in the tank to vaporize the diesel fuel as it came out of the ruptured tank. True gasoline does have a higher vapor pressure than diesel, but it still has one that is not all that low. And it can ignite given the right conditions. Remember the higher the temp the higher the vapor pressure. The easier vapors are generatedb. Have you ever put diesel in a gasoline engine? It don't work, and it even has spark plugs. Again it the flammable limits thingy. You need to be under 5% to ignite. Even gasoline itself is not explosive, you can put a match out in a bucket of gas, I've seen it done with my own eyes. Me too. I caught my pant on fire when I was about 10 years old trying that trick. The first two matches snuffed right out, the last one scared the hell out of me rolling on the grass trying to put out the flames Mom was not amused. See this link for data in fuels http://www.afdc.doe.gov/pdfs/fueltable.pdf The bottom line is that diesel is flammable. Its harder to ignite than gas but it will ignite with a spark.   Remove | Alert Edit | Reply | Top

2muchbs (1186 posts) Sep-23-02, 05:46 PM (ET) Reply to post #28 32. Pushing it a bit Of course its flammable. I dont think anybody is claiming it isn't. The quesion is what set of circumstances could have been provided to cause it to burn well. From what I have seen its not so easy to create a lot of heat with it in the open atmosphere, let alone in an environment where there is some restriction for oxygen. The welding scenario has some merit in that the diesel was contained. If there is little chance for proper mixing with 02, there is also little chance for heat production. Bill   Remove | Alert Edit | Reply | Top

LARED (401 posts) Sep-24-02, 09:49 AM (ET) Reply to post #32 33. Are you talking about WTC7 or the pentagon? Also what do you mean by burn well. I assume you mean WTC7. The building was on fire for something like 7 hours. Are you trying to say that in those 7 hours there is little chance for heat production? Your air argument is the same one used for WTC 1&2 (how surprizing), I asked it then and I'll ask it again; why do you think air was not available? I have seen its not so easy to create a lot of heat with it in the open atmosphere Please share what you have seen. At issue here is what was the temperture, not how much heat there is, because in a large fire there is always plenty of heat. Heat is one of the byproducts of combustion. Large fire, large amount of heat, it ain't rocket science. The structural integrity of the steel is what temperature affects. As dicussed at length in the WTC 1 & 2 threads the temperature of the burning fuels in a building are clearly high enough to effect the steel given enough time.   Remove | Alert Edit | Reply | Top

2muchbs (1186 posts) Sep-23-02, 05:39 PM (ET) Reply to post #23 31. My opinion (Pentagon/Diesel fuel) If it means anything anymore, is that once the jet fuel fire propagated, diesel fuel would join in, if it was indeed near the fireball vicintiy. The result would be a smokey, fuel rich fire, but of course you would burn some off. There is no doubt about that. The residue that unburned diesel would leave on the grass would show up in pics I would think. We could test some of these thoughts if you like. Its not all that hard to setup. Bill   Remove | Alert Edit | Reply | Top

2muchbs (1186 posts) Sep-23-02, 05:30 PM (ET) Reply to post #22 30. A little story I told Ewing in an email. A few years back at a racetrack I was at, the tracks diesel powered generator had pushed a connecting rod out the side. A 200 gallon fuel tank was directly above the engine. The generator ran everything at the racetrack. The generator ran (on fire) for nearly an hour and a half after the fatigue failure. The thing had caught on fire in a big way and burned intensely for what felt like an eternity. The cap from the tank was sent flying about 200 feet in the air from pressure. The top of the tank was burning a little fuel off, and it was quite obvious that the tank was very hot. We waited for it to kill itself, as everybody was sure it was going to explode in a huge fireball. It didn't happen. Nearly an hour and a half later the fire dept. showed up and quenched enough of the fire as to let someone pull a compression release. End of story. I am with Mr. smokes. This is quite ridiculous. Diesel fuel fire bringing down a building, I think not. Of course if there is added oxidant... Bill   Remove | Alert Edit | Reply | Top

LARED (401 posts) Sep-24-02, 10:00 AM (ET) Reply to post #30 34. I'll tell you why the tank did not explode. 1. The cap blew off the tank allowing the diesel to boil at atm pressure. This boiling maintains the temp of the diesel below the autoignition temp. So while it appeared the tanks had to be hot because it was in a fire it was really at the boiling point temp for diesel. 2. The tank did not catch fire internally because the amount of air in the tank was limited It had to be close to 0 because the diesel ful was boiling. So, because you need air in the tank at significant levels the diesel could not ignite.   Remove | Alert Edit | Reply | Top

plaguepuppy (322 posts) Sep-28-02, 01:45 PM (ET) Reply to post #34 45. Umm, not really... " This boiling maintains the temp of the diesel below the autoignition temp" Do you mean to imply that if the whole volume of fluid in the tank were heated to the autoignition temperature that it would somehow explode even though it's a liquid in a sealed tank with no oxidizer? As Bill has repeatedly mentioned, in liquid fuel fires proper mixing with air is everything, and puddles of flammable liquids, especially less-volatile ones like kerosene or diesel, do not really like to burn. (non-flammable) home.attbi.com/~jmking | PlaguePuppy's Café]   Remove | Alert Edit | Reply | Top

LARED (401 posts) Sep-28-02, 06:05 PM (ET) Reply to post #45 46. Do you even bother reading what was said or do you just spout off. Do you mean to imply that if the whole volume of fluid in the tank were heated to the autoignition temperature that it would somehow explode even though it's a liquid in a sealed tank with no oxidizer? As stated the tank was not sealed. The cap blew off. Are you trying to tell me a tank of boiling diesel will get hotter than it's boiling point? As Bill has repeatedly mentioned, in liquid fuel fires proper mixing with air is everything, Actually I think I pointed that out a number of times? Please take a few moments reading the threads prior to posting. Regards   Remove | Alert Edit | Reply | Top

plaguepuppy (322 posts) Sep-28-02, 10:45 PM (ET) Reply to post #46 47. Earth to annoying twit LAST EDITED ON Sep-28-02 AT 10:47 PM (ET) LAST EDITED ON Sep-28-02 AT 10:46 PM (ET) Geez, you can't drop the condescending contempt-spewing pose even for a moment can you? You're so quick with the putdowns that you don't read what I wrote here: You are clearly implying that if the cap had not blown off, the fuel in it would have heated beyond the boiling point, to the "autoignition temperature". Is'nt that what you just said in your friggin' post? " 1. The cap blew off the tank allowing the diesel to boil at atm pressure. This boiling maintains the temp of the diesel below the autoignition temp." So what exactly are you saying would have happened if the cap hadn't blown off? To us native english speakers it sure sounds like you are implying that the fuel will explode at the "autoignition temperature", even though it is enclosed in an airless tank. Or were you just typing to hear yourself talk? If not, WTF are you trying to say? Your insults are more effective if they have some factual content, not just your pathetic bile-filled insults. Wipe the spittle off your screen and try again. "Find out just what the people will submit to, and you have found out the exact amount of injustice and wrong which will be imposed upon them; and these will continue until they are resisted with either words or blows, or with both. The limits of tyrants are prescribed by the endurance of those whom they oppress." -- Frederick Douglas (1857) PlaguePuppy's Café   Remove | Alert Edit | Reply | Top

LARED (401 posts) Sep-28-02, 11:57 PM (ET) Reply to post #47 50. Let me spell it out for you. 2muchBS said The cap from the tank was sent flying about 200 feet in the air from pressure. The top of the tank was burning a little fuel off, and it was quite obvious that the tank was very hot. We waited for it to kill itself as everybody was sure it was going to explode in a huge fireball. It didn't happen. My response was 1. The cap blew off the tank allowing the diesel to boil at atm pressure. This boiling maintains the temp of the diesel below the autoignition temp. So while it appeared the tanks had to be hot because it was in a fire it was really at the boiling point temp for diesel. 2. The tank did not catch fire internally because the amount of air in the tank was limited It had to be close to 0 because the diesel ful was boiling. So, because you need air in the tank at significant levels the diesel could not ignite. You said Do you mean to imply that if the whole volume of fluid in the tank were heated to the autoignition temperature that it would somehow explode even though it's a liquid in a sealed tank with no oxidizer? What is so hard to follow here? I said it could not be heated to the autoignition temperature as long as it was boiling at atm pressure. Do you disagree with this? The only one talking about a sealed tank is YOU. Why? What is your point. You keep posting inane comments that are trying to accomplish - what?? I simply tried to explain to 2muchBS why the tank did not catch fire or explode. So what exactly are you saying would have happened if the cap hadn't blown off? To us native english speakers it sure sounds like you are implying that the fuel will explode at the "autoignition temperature", even though it is enclosed in an airless tank. Or were you just typing to hear yourself talk? I was not addressing that issue. Why would I? I also did not mean to imply the tanks would explode because it reached the autoignition temperature. I only mentioned it because in my thiking about why the tanks did not explode or catch fire I realized that if the tanks had stayed sealed the autoignition temperature becomes an important property in what could happen. Nothing more. Why nitpick so? In 2muchBS's story he said The top of the tank was burning a little fuel off, and it was quite obvious that the tank was very hot. We waited for it to kill itself, as everybody was sure it was going to explode in a huge fireball. I attemping to point out there was no reason for it to explode as it was likley much cooler than it appeared and air was unavailable in the tank. To answer your question. The consequence of a sealed tank with no pressure relief would result in something between nothing happening all the way to a BLEVE. Without more information it is not possible to tell.   Remove | Alert Edit | Reply | Top

plaguepuppy (322 posts) Sep-29-02, 00:12 AM (ET) Reply to post #50 52. And the bile just keeps on flowing Give it a rest dude - it's a good thing people don't usually die from simple nastiness. OK, so the cap pops off, or the tank bursts, but either way this "autoignition" business is irrelevant. Didn't mean to interrupt your tete-a-tete with 2muchbs, but your pompous blathering was just too much to resist. "Find out just what the people will submit to, and you have found out the exact amount of injustice and wrong which will be imposed upon them; and these will continue until they are resisted with either words or blows, or with both. The limits of tyrants are prescribed by the endurance of those whom they oppress." -- Frederick Douglas (1857) PlaguePuppy's Café   Remove | Alert Edit | Reply | Top

LARED (401 posts) Sep-29-02, 08:12 AM (ET) Reply to post #52 55. Ok my turn to nitpick OK, so the cap pops off, or the tank bursts, but either way this "autoignition" business is irrelevant The autoignition temperature is not irrelevent if the tank fails. The type of hazard is very different if the contents of a tanks are above or below the autoignition temperature. I can see where my using the word autoignition in my initial response could have caused some confusion. But I'm sure it only "confused" you because rather than just agree with my assessment as to why the tank did not explode in 2muchBS story, you feel a need to discredit me in order to boost your theories. So you picked up on a imprecise use of autoignition temperature and tried to make something of it.   Remove | Alert Edit | Reply | Top

plaguepuppy (322 posts) Oct-01-02, 09:39 PM (ET) Reply to post #55 56. Autoignition - does it matter I guess the question that still bugs me is what happens if/when the tank bursts: even if the fuel in the tanks is heated to above the self-ignite temp, when the tank bursts and decompresses the vavor escaping will cool off quickly as it escapes and by the time it mixes with air will probably be too cool to ignite. Unless there is an open flame to ignite it of course, but then how does the tank get heated if not by a fire? Where would this fire come from - did debris from the towers somehow ignite other materials near the tanks? A tank leaking from debris damage could start a small fire that would heat the tank and create a self accelerating fire. I had that happen to a motorcycle that I had just put back together. A little gas on the outside caught fire, just enough to heat the tank, then melt the fuel line. Made quite an impressive little fireball just after I bailed out. "Find out just what the people will submit to, and you have found out the exact amount of injustice and wrong which will be imposed upon them; and these will continue until they are resisted with either words or blows, or with both. The limits of tyrants are prescribed by the endurance of those whom they oppress." -- Frederick Douglas (1857) PlaguePuppy's Café   Remove | Alert Edit | Reply | Top

Endimion (43 posts) Sep-23-02, 04:25 PM (ET) Reply to post #18 29. You are definitively right ! There are literally gigabytes of material all over the Net, but remain hidden under common personal web pages. I was searching videos of B7 collapse, but I found only one (7WTC_Falls.mpeg). If you need it, ask Plaguepuppy (I once send it to him); my time on internet has been reduced ($ money $ money $) to occational e-mail checking so uploading from me over Kazaa etc. is really forbidden. Regarding to the "squibs": I saw how strange they were. Important --> They were not puffs of smoke. Those bursts were heavy and were falling down like lead dust. So, Lared, smoke coming out of broken windows = no way. I sincerely think the S facade was seriously affected by N tower's debris, but I believe the destruction just messed the appearance of it (Just those fancy things like windows, exterior metallic foil,... There were probably <5 floors structurally destroyed (their southern sides). That was my pesimistic view. The VERY important thing is its physical view of collapse. It was almost PERFECT FREE FALL (~0.05 s of delay) -->even more perfect than tops of towers sinking in ! I think that when we combine this with seismographic graphs, melted steel, and other strange facts, we MUST ask ourselves: HOW THE HECK FEDERAL ENGINEERS DIDN'T SEE THIS??? ARE THEY STUPID, OR WHAT? Or, they did, but "DIDN'T".......... Evil piggies are everywhere...BEWARE   Remove | Alert Edit | Reply | Top

LARED (401 posts) Sep-24-02, 12:11 PM (ET) Reply to post #29 35. Let me be more accurate Regarding to the "squibs": I saw how strange they were. Important --> They were not puffs of smoke. Those bursts were heavy and were falling down like lead dust. So, Lared, smoke coming out of broken windows = no way. I did not intend to convey the idea I think it is just smoke coming out of a window. I think that as the building started to collaspe the floors must be collapsing at the same time and any smokey air, or debris will be pushed forcefully out of the easiest available opening between the floors as this air is compressed. The same phenomena is clearly evident on the videos of the the north tower collapse. You see the antenna start to move down as the core fails and at the same time you see smoke get blown out of some windows at different location in the upper section. With two fairly monolithic structures (the floors) moving toward each other the air has to go somewhere. It goes out the windows. I don't understand why so many have a hard time getting a handle on this idea.   Remove | Alert Edit | Reply | Top

spooked (7 posts) Sep-24-02, 01:51 PM (ET) Reply to post #35 36. WTC Photos -- Links Here are some sites with personal photos of the WTC. My computer is too slow to go through them all, but I thought someone here might find something... http://stute.stevens-tech.edu/WTCPictures/ http://shnool.lamtec.com/worldtradecenter.htm http://fdnyphoto.com/fires/manhattan/wtc2.html (1st photos at this site shows 7WTC 2 hours before collapse) http://www.dentontaylor.com/wtc/towers_with_7wtc.htm (Great photo of 7WTC with towers before 911) http://september11.natca.org/Galleries/Gallery13.htm (A HUGE collection of photo galleries of 911)   Remove | Alert Edit | Reply | Top

DulceDecorum (258 posts) Sep-28-02, 11:33 PM (ET) Reply to post #36 49. Welcome to the Democratic Underground, Spooked. Thanks for the links.   Remove | Alert Edit | Reply | Top

Endimion (43 posts) Sep-24-02, 05:11 PM (ET) Reply to post #35 37. It would be really nice, but it was not what really happened. Here we have a highrise sinking in a way that is remarkable common in controlled demolitions: -almost undisturbed free fall (~0.05 s of difference) -NO buckling of upper floors (so, why are there squibs?) -falling almost perfect in its own footprint -->did you see its affect on nearby Verizon and US Post office? No, cause there were not any. It barely touched their lobbies, and the only thing in mess was the street about <20 m away from its outline. Natural collapses are not done like that. There should have been LARGE tilting to the south, cause its trapezium shape, and MUCH longer collapse. Why do you think there should have been such violant air pressure that could brake the windows? Skyscrapers are porous objects. Reasonable pressure had to appear when B7 was 50-60 m tall (while collapsing) in manner to blew the windows. Air is not like water, unpressurable. There were openings on the S side caused be WTC2 (but not structuraly significant). Just like WTC2. There we have gigantic explosions where only extending is available. Air does not pressure anything here. Only people in the lobbies 3-4 sec before "touchdown". P.S.: I think the majority of the plane that struck the N tower was grinded when colliding with outer support, so the core lost max. of 5-6 big columns. Why? Because when S tower was hit, the only things coming out of it were 1 engine, 1 landing gear, and a fuselage section. These things could only affect the outer support. I suppose there were max. of 3-4 columns on the N side curved by this pieces. So it means (when we know the path of 2nd plane) that it was grinded! What to say else. The core was hard to "land down". But is sure landed. Most of it went straight down. The theory about basement-set explosives (plus additional on every floor) is probably right. It would provide an explanation for not seing pancaking of the floors (Yes, Lared, the press invented it). I never was any pancaking. Evil piggies are everywhere...BEWARE   Remove | Alert Edit | Reply | Top

LARED (401 posts) Sep-24-02, 07:01 PM (ET) Reply to post #37 38. But, how do you know NO upper floors buckled. The video does not provide that detail of information. It is counter intuitive to believe that no upper floors collasped. How could the building collapse without any upper floors giving way? The penthouse clearly starts to fall first. The penthouse does not float in the building structure it MUST be connected to the upper structure. The same structure that is part of the floors. The penthouse starts to fall because the inner upper structure has started to fall. One must then conclude that the floors are collasping was well. -almost undisturbed free fall (~0.05 s of difference) I heard the same stuff about WTC 1 & 2. It was false. Can you provide any evidence the "within 0.05 sec" is valid? -falling almost perfect in its own footprint Let me engage is wild speculation. The building collapsed on the inside first. This is clear based on the penthouse starting down first. Everything inside is pulled down working it way to the outside structure which then gets pulled down and slighlty inward. Hence you wind up with a big pile of rubble. Natural collapses are not done like that. What is natural about a huge fire induced collapse of a building? There should have been LARGE tilting to the south, cause its trapezium shape, Based on what? Why do you think there should have been such violant air pressure that could brake the windows? Windows may have been already broken from the heat of the fire. The impact of the internals may have broken them, the force of the air and denris may have been enough. It's GLASS after all not steel.   Remove | Alert Edit | Reply | Top

Endimion (43 posts) Sep-25-02, 03:39 PM (ET) Reply to post #38 39. Well, well, well... How could the building collapse without any upper floors giving way? Well, look at it like this. If you are thinking about its collapse as the core (in fact, there was not a core in its traditional way, but we can call it like that) started to buckle at the floors where fire was burning (5, 7, and 10, I think, but it doesn't matter now), then the collapsing floors should pull the facade inwards. After all, it wasn't so strong like the outer support in WTC1&2. But we saw no bending and curving of it. It remained almost perfect flat, except that slim "fault line". I heard the same stuff about WTC 1 & 2. It was false. Can you provide any evidence the "within 0.05 sec" is valid? I mesaured it. If you look at the video called 7WTC_Falls.mpeg, you can take a stop watch, or simply look at the timer, mesaure it ~10 times (but you have to be very precise) and then take an average value. You know that its height was 174 m, so please, do calculate it. I did about 20 times, and it is correct. I don't get it how can't you understand that it is stupid to fall undisturbed. It is a steel highrise, not tower made of cards (even that doesn't fall in a free fall). You say the towers were not free falling. You are partly right. Their collapsing tops were almost free falling. That is weird. So are many other facts, but I will not let you start one more quarrel about them, cause you prooved that you,... Ooops, again ME attacking. Sorry, Ewing. Hence you wind up with a big pile of rubble. No. It is not correct. It simply can't do a perfect imploding without charges being set at proper places on every floor. Don't ask me to proove it, cause it is like you are trying to explain an axiom. What is natural about a huge fire induced collapse of a building? Did you ever imagined how normal it would be for one part to slip apart from the rest (the "core" for example)? Then some buckling, bla, bla, bla, ... But no, we have the whole damn steel 3D net falling undisturbed cause of some lousy diesel fire. So what if it was burning for 7 hrs.? Petroleum lamp can heat a steel knife, and I there we have no melting. I will repeat: >When I read your posts, a little fairy of ignorance appears and starts singing: "Towers made of rubber, towers made of rubber... Glue tape instead steel, la, la, la, la, la..." Windows may have been already broken from the heat of the fire. The impact of the internals may have broken them, the force of the air and denris may have been enough. It's GLASS after all not steel. But we have squibs where was no fire, and not any debris impacts. As I said, the collapsing building was unnaturally straight. So there wasn't available any significant squeezing, like when those skyscrapers in Chicago/or Boston lost windows cause of strong winds. And if you saw a video on CNN showing a close-up. It remained its shiny facade, except those bursts. p.s.: This wind-windows-bending thing reminded me on something. What was it about Hancock Building? When did it act strange? I am interested in it cause I like highrises and everything tall man made. Evil piggies are everywhere...BEWARE   Remove | Alert Edit | Reply | Top

LARED (401 posts) Sep-25-02, 11:58 PM (ET) Reply to post #39 40. Not much time, but the I'm pretty sure the height of WTC7 was 187.5 meters or 615 feet, not 174 meters. I think you need to check your calculations.   Remove | Alert Edit | Reply | Top

Endimion (43 posts) Sep-26-02, 08:46 AM (ET) Reply to post #40 41. ž LAST EDITED ON Sep-26-02 AT 08:50 AM (ET) Sorry for Ž it is error. chech out this: www.skyscrapers.com/english/worldmap/building/0.9/114932/index.html These are correct informations. It is 174 m, not >180m. gotta go Evil piggies are everywhere...BEWARE   Remove | Alert Edit | Reply | Top

LARED (401 posts) Sep-26-02, 06:12 PM (ET) Reply to post #41 42. Thanks for the correction The only reference I could find was an article about the new WTC7 that gave the old height as 615 feet.   Remove | Alert Edit | Reply | Top

plaguepuppy (322 posts) Sep-28-02, 01:26 PM (ET) Reply to post #39 43. Collapse uniformity The roof line as seen in the better video of the WTC-7 collapse ("http://thewebfairy.com/whatzit/wtc-7<1>.gif" - cut and paste, change '>' to ']' around the '1' to view) does sag just slightly in the middle at the moment the collapse starts, though at that point there is no visible external damage to the upper part of the building. What strikes me as very implausible is the fact that the building maintains its shape after this slight initial sag in the roofline, while all the structural failure is occurring at the base. Remember that WTC-7 was built over an existing electrical substation that stood ~3 stories high with a transfer truss bridging over the transformers. With a big (as in extending across the entire length and width of the building)structural failure taking place at ground level one would expect to see the building slump inward as the transfer truss fails. Instead we see the framework retain its overall rectangular shape (again, except for that slight sag in the roof line that appears early on and remains constant) as it sinks straight down. Again it comes back to the problem of assymetric causes creating symmetrical effects, something that simply does not tend to occur in the real world. The collapse begins at cround level, which means that the "bridge" over the substation would be one of the first things to fail, yet the building continues to settle in a very level and uniform fashion, with the sides remaining almost perfectly vertical. The overall appearance is very typical for a "standard-type" controlled demolition, with all of the destruction taking place at the bottom, allowing the building to settle straight down into its own footprint. This can only happen if the ground level structure, across it's entire cross-section, is being broken up in a uniform manner to allow the building to settle straight down. Localized fires and damage from debris were highly assymmetrical and could never produce this kind of complete and uniform "removal" of the ground floor. "The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed and hence, clamorous to be led to safety - by menacing it with an endless series of hobgoblins, all of them imaginary" ~ H.L. Mencken\ PlaguePuppy's Café   Remove | Alert Edit | Reply | Top

plaguepuppy (322 posts) Sep-28-02, 10:53 PM (ET) Reply to post #35 48. "Let me be more accurate" - well, less would be dificult Sure, floors just starting to move at the start of the collapse just bitch-slap the shit out of each other at incredible speeds, sending high-speed slurries of dust and debris flying out at hundreds of feet a second, happens all the time (in the Hell-world of Lared's mind).   Remove | Alert Edit | Reply | Top

LARED (401 posts) Sep-29-02, 00:06 AM (ET) Reply to post #48 51. Somehow I missed all that Assuming you're speaking about WTC7. sending high-speed slurries of dust and debris flying out at hundreds of feet a second Is there ANY evidence of that? Slurries of high speed dust moving at hundreds of feet per second. I think I watched the same video(s) that you have, and I seem to have missed that part.   Remove | Alert Edit | Reply | Top

plaguepuppy (322 posts) Sep-29-02, 00:21 AM (ET) Reply to post #51 53. Squibs No, actually I was talking about the squibs that are visible in the tower collapses, which in fact are quite visible and clearly too energetic to be explained by floors slapping together. You have claimed that these too are just smoke and/or dust being pushed out by the collapse. http://ontario.indymedia.org/local/webcast/uploads/close_demolition.avi PlaguePuppy's Café   Remove | Alert Edit | Reply | Top

LARED (401 posts) Sep-29-02, 08:02 AM (ET) Reply to post #53 54. Clear as day, right. clearly too energetic to be explained by floors slapping together Clearly huh??? So says a pompous blatherer. Please I'm begging, put me on your ignore list. It's tiresome addressing your flare for technical hyperbole. But you love to put words in peoples months which requires a response. Is it your ignorance of mechanics or just trying to hard to convince people you actually have clue? I vote for both. Try and stay on topic. This thread was about the "squibs" from WTC7. A special off topic note to you. On the other thread about WTC 1 & 2 I noticed you finally figured out about half of why the top section of the south tower collasped rather than fall over like a box. Good job, keep thinking about it and you may figure out the rest. As I said a while ago, you should stick to biology.   Remove | Alert Edit | Reply | Top

plaguepuppy (322 posts) Oct-02-02, 00:23 AM (ET) Reply to post #54 57. Takes one to know one Speaking of blather that is - so you think I have agreed that it's quite normal for the top of WTC-2 to just "auto-disintegrate"? Guess your reading comprehension skills are on a par with your imaginary technical expertise. What I was saying was just the opposite, and for clear reasons that you refuse to address. But it's silly to expect a straight answer from you, when you won't even admit the total falsity of your claim that "every piece of steel was examined before being removed". Being LA_RED means never admitting you're wrong, even with such obvious howlers as this. But then your real talent has always been insults and putdowns. So the question of squibs from WTC-7 is totally unrelated to what went on in the towers, of course, silly to think there might be any relation. You seem to think you own threads after spewing a requisite amount of your own brand of blather. No Biology majors allowed of course. And which crackerbox exactly did your alleged engineering degree come from? "Find out just what the people will submit to, and you have found out the exact amount of injustice and wrong which will be imposed upon them; and these will continue until they are resisted with either words or blows, or with both. The limits of tyrants are prescribed by the endurance of those whom they oppress." -- Frederick Douglas (1857) PlaguePuppy's Café   Remove | Alert Edit | Reply | Top

plaguepuppy (322 posts) Oct-02-02, 01:29 AM (ET) Reply to post #54 58. Taking up a collection... to add a little Paxil to LARED's crack supply. That will save our time reading his self-righteous flames, and save him from wiping all the spittle off his monitor. By the way, can anyone explain his claim that I was "putting words in Tom Eagar's mouth" (a reflection of an unhealthy oral fixation perhaps?) (http://www.democraticunderground.com/cgi-bin/duforum/duboard.cgi?az=show_thread&om=4945&forum=DCForumID43&omm=183) I stand by my analysis of Eagar's statements, and would like to know if I have somehow misquoted him. (see also http://www.democraticunderground.com/cgi-bin/duforum/duboard.cgi?az=show_thread&om=4945&forum=DCForumID43&omm=186)   Remove | Alert Edit | Reply | Top

ewing2001 (3164 posts) Oct-03-02, 04:36 PM (ET) Reply to post #58 59. B7 lawsuit now okayed! http://www.nypost.com/news/regionalnews/58794.htm WTC SUIT VS. CITY GETS OK October 3, 2002 -- "...A legal action that charges the city's negligence is partially to blame for the collapse of 7 World Trade Center can go forward, a judge said yesterday. The action by Con Edison and its insurers charges that one of the reasons the building collapsed after the attacks on the Twin Towers was that the city had stored a large amount of diesel fuel inside the building..." GROUND ZERO Forum NYC http://forums.delphiforums.com/ground_zero2001 http://www.ourDNA.org http://www.lebensaspekte.de 911Skeptics worldwide unite! Supporter of the 911-Skepticism Movement NYC, Washington, San Francisco, Connecticut, Ohio, Portland etc... Support public LIHOP-evidence now, SETUP later! http://www.scoop.co.nz/mason/stories/HL0208/S00068.htm http://www.lihop.net Martin Luther King III, Nina Hagen, Spooky, Patti Smith got our files! Support the 911-Truth Commission: http://www.911nationalnetwork.org/petition/ Ed Asner, Harry Belafonte, Howard Zinn etc... http://www.petitiononline.com/11601TFS/petition.html http://www.ctnow.com/features/lifestyle/hc-profile0929.artsep29,0,5020067.story?coll=hc%2Dheadlines%2Dlife Support the No.1 911-Bookmark-List: http://globalfreepress.com Support the No.1 911-Timeline Center: http://cooperativeresearch.org/completetimeline/ How the 911-Lie started: Bush at Booker Elementary http://ewing2001.kulturserver-berlin.de/Bush_Booker_SGTV.mov http://burningbush.myip.org/DUTV-BUSHWTC.zip http://burningbush.myip.org/DUTV-BUSHWTC.small.mov Please donate for GZ Forum NYC. Every $10 counts. (telephone bills, phone research, PR costs, media tools,video distribution, hardware upgrade, security solutions, provider costs, various investigations etc...) Info at http://www.lebensaspekte.de/groundzero/donation.html 911Skeptics in the media: http://www.examiner.com/news/default.jsp?story=n.conspiracy.0912w NOTE: Any use of non-standard English words that are in quotes within this post should not be construed by any member of DU as prejudice against Southern people, African Americans, Asian people, Northern people, Arabic people, Jewish people, Christian people or any other group save one. These words are blatant prejudice against STUPID people.   Remove | Alert Edit | Reply | Top

elephant_eater (12 posts) Oct-08-02, 12:34 PM (ET) 60. One Meridien Plaza Here's an interesting investigative report on a 38 story building that had a twelve-alarm fire rage for 18 hours; the worst high rise fire in U.S. history. Key points: OMP lacked sprinklers up to the 30th floor OMP burned more than twice as long as WTC7 OMP had major structural damage resulting from the fire (buckling floors, sagging structural beams, etc.) OMP was built to much worse standards than WTC7 And the kicker? IT DIDN'T COLLAPSE http://www.sgh.com/expertise/hazardsconsulting/meridian/meridian.htm Makes you wanna go "Hmmmmmmmm...." How do I like my Elephant? With fried onions and ketchup of course.   Remove | Alert Edit | Reply | Top

vincent_vega (196 posts) Oct-08-02, 01:51 PM (ET) Reply to post #60 61. did you read it? The twelve-alarm fire burned for 18 hours. The extreme heat caused window glass and frames to melt and concrete floor slabs and steel beams to buckle and sag dramatically. Large shards of window glass fell from the facade, cutting through fire hoses on the ground around the building. Three firefighters were trapped on a fully engulfed floor, and efforts to rescue them failed. The fire would not yield and there were increasing concerns about the stability of the structure. Fire officials called off the attack and allowed the fire to "free burn," concentrating their efforts on containing the fire to this building. When the fire reached the 30th floor, a tenant-installed fire-sprinkler system was activated, and the worst high-rise fire in U.S. history was finally brought under control. Efforts to stabilize the structure and the facade began immediately and continued for six months. Over 2,000 steel poles were installed to shore the burned-out floors and to brace the steel girders supporting the concrete slab. During the night of the fire, one granite panel had fallen from the facade of the damaged middle section and other panels were suspect. Emergency belting was installed to lash the granite to the building until it could be safely detached and lifted down. Fabric netting covered the building to prevent debris from raining down on City Hall Plaza, the heart of Philadelphia's business and tourist activity. Vastly different construction as well if you care to check. The Path of the righteous man is beset on all sides, by the inequities of the selfish, and the tyranny of evil men.   Remove | Alert Edit | Reply | Top

elephant_eater (12 posts) Oct-08-02, 02:31 PM (ET) Reply to post #61 62. Vastly different? Since when does a facade determine whether a building collapses because of a fire or not? How do I like my Elephant? With fried onions and ketchup of course.   Remove | Alert Edit | Reply | Top

ewing2001 (3164 posts) Oct-10-02, 12:02 PM (ET) Reply to post #62 63. Painful Questions from the excellent booklet "painful questions" by Eric Hufschmid http://www.erichufschmid.net/ http://www.erichufschmid.net/PainfulQuestions_1.pdf "...Unless we investigate, we learn nothing Most people blame fire for the collapse of the two towers, not the airplane crashes. Building 7 collapsed also, but it was not hit by an airplane so it collapsed entirely due to fire. No fire had ever caused a steel building to crumble, but on that day a fire did to three buildings what no fire had ever done before. How did fire cause those buildings to collapse? Are there other office buildings, apartment buildings, or shopping malls that could also collapse from a fire? How should we design future buildings to resist fires? NIST is one of the government agencies investigating the collapse of the towers. However, Dr. Bement, the director of NIST, did not seem interested in investigating Building 7. As he explained to the Committee on Science: ì... would possibly consider examining WTC Building 7, which collapsed later in the day.î Notice that Bement did not say he would possibly investigate; rather, he said he would possibly consider investigating.... ...Furthermore, Bement made this remark at a meeting in March of 2002. This was nearly six months after the building had collapsed, and most of the rubble had already been removed.... ...By January, 2002 the editor-in-chief of Fire Engineering magazine reached his limit of tolerance and published an article that month accusing the investigation of being îa half baked farceî. He also demanded: îThe destruction and removal of evidence must stop immediately.” In support, other firemen wrote an article in which they pleaded with readers to send e-mails to our government to hold a real investigation. “Grounds for Impeachment”..." NOTE: From my conversations with some firemen i know, that many are very frustrated and even depressed. 2 weeks ago one fireman committed suicide. On the same day the Uniformed Fire Officers Association and the Uniformed Firefighters Association released an ad in the NY POST: "The FDNY is in crisis", describing a "mass exodus" and 288 superior officers who have retired since Sep11th 2001. GROUND ZERO Forum NYC http://forums.delphiforums.com/ground_zero2001 http://www.ourDNA.org http://www.lebensaspekte.de 911Skeptics worldwide unite! Supporter of the 911-Skepticism Movement NYC, Washington, San Francisco, Connecticut, Ohio, Portland etc... Support public LIHOP-evidence now, SETUP later! http://www.scoop.co.nz/mason/stories/HL0208/S00068.htm http://www.lihop.net Martin Luther King III, Nina Hagen, Spooky, Patti Smith, Ralph Nader got our 911-files! How Cynthia McKinney got our 911-files + Bush-Booker-Video (SGTV) http://www.democraticunderground.com/cgi-bin/duforum/duboard.cgi?az=show_thread&om=9053&forum=DCForumID60 Support the 911-Truth Commission: http://www.911nationalnetwork.org/petition/ Ed Asner, Harry Belafonte, Howard Zinn etc... http://www.petitiononline.com/11601TFS/petition.html http://www.ctnow.com/features/lifestyle/hc-profile0929.artsep29,0,5020067.story?coll=hc%2Dheadlines%2Dlife Support the No.1 911-Bookmark-List: http://globalfreepress.com Support the No.1 911-Timeline Center: http://cooperativeresearch.org/completetimeline/ How the 911-Lie started: Bush at Booker Elementary http://ewing2001.kulturserver-berlin.de/Bush_Booker_SGTV.mov http://burningbush.myip.org/DUTV-BUSHWTC.zip http://burningbush.myip.org/DUTV-BUSHWTC.small.mov Please donate for GZ Forum NYC. Every $10 counts. (telephone bills, phone research, PR costs, media tools,video distribution, hardware upgrade, security solutions, provider costs, various investigations etc...) Info at http://www.lebensaspekte.de/groundzero/donation.html 911Skeptics in the media: http://www.examiner.com/news/default.jsp?story=n.conspiracy.0912w NOTE: Any use of non-standard English words that are in quotes within this post should not be construed by any member of DU as prejudice against Southern people, African Americans, Asian people, Northern people, Arabic people, Jewish people, Christian people or any other group save one. These words are blatant prejudice against STUPID people.   Remove | Alert Edit | Reply | Top

vincent_vega (196 posts) Oct-10-02, 02:01 PM (ET) Reply to post #62 64. You're not going to make me dig this all up again. Do some research. Building 7 was pretty unique and unusual construction for a high rise. The facade had nothing to do with anything. The Path of the righteous man is beset on all sides, by the inequities of the selfish, and the tyranny of evil men.   Remove | Alert Edit | Reply | Top

2muchbs (1186 posts) Oct-10-02, 07:50 PM (ET) Reply to post #64 65. The facade was a facade Funny stuff Vega. Yep, it was a rager. And the facade had nothing to do with anything. Now this was a rager. 18 hours it burned, but no collapse. http://www.sgh.com/expertise/hazardsconsulting/meridian/meridian.htm I continue to think New York has a branch of science all to its own. Bill   Remove | Alert Edit | Reply | Top

Lock | Archive | Remove | Unlink

Lobby | Latest | Topics | Previous Topic | Next Topic

Select another forum Lobby Latest Threads Announcements (Conference)   |--Announcements (Protected) Top of the Page (Conference)   |--Latest Breaking News (Protected)   |--Editorials and Other Articles (Protected)   |--General Discussion Forum (Protected)   |--The DU Lounge (Protected)   |--Activism/Events (Protected) Hot Topics (Conference)   |--Politics and Campaigns (Protected)   |--The Media (Protected)   |--Bush, Conservatives, and Conservatism (Protected)   |--9/11, Military Affairs, and Terrorism (Protected)   |--The Meeting Room (Protected) Issues (Conference)   |--Civil Rights/Equality/Privacy (Protected)   |--Economic Issues (Protected)   |--Environment/Energy (Protected)   |--Foreign Affairs/National Security (Protected)   |--Health/Education/Social Policy (Protected)   |--Justice/Public Safety (Protected) Member Feedback (Conference)   |--Comments and Questions (Protected)   |--Mark Crispin Miller Online Discussion (Protected) Overflow Archives (Conference)   |--Latest Breaking News Archives (Protected)   |--General Discussion Archives (Protected)   |--Lounge Archives (Protected)