Reply #5: Insightful isn't the word for it [View All]

[Bolo Boffin]

Insipid is more like it. Okay, this is the first third of the video, along with my comments.

(Tasteless juxtaposition of 9/11 footage with inappropriate head banging song.)

SHOCK

AND

AWE

Slow down...

sit back...

prepare to think...

critically, logically...

not just believing what you've been told...

learn to spot inconsistent stories...

and outright lies.

Sounds good to me *cracks knuckles*

In memory of all the innocent victims of the events of September 11, 2001 ...victims both in the U.S. and overseas wars that were justified and rationalized by the "attacks" on that fateful day.

The official story:

1) Jef fuel fire caused WTC 1 & 2 to collapse due to weakened support beems

2) WTC 7 collapsed from fire on one side of the building

That's a gross oversimplification of what NIST engineers are working with:

WTC 1

* Aircraft impact damaged the perimeter columns, mainly on the north face, resulting in redistribution of column loads, mostly to the adjacent perimeter columns and to a lesser extent, the core columns.

* After breaching the building’s perimeter, the aircraft continued to penetrate into the building, damaging floor framing, core columns and fireproofing. Loads on the damaged columns were redistributed to other intact core and perimeter columns mostly via the floor systems and to a lesser extent, via the hat truss (the steel structure that supported the antenna atop the towers and was connected to the core and perimeter columns).

* The subsequent fires, influenced by the impact-damaged condition of the fireproofing:
o Softened and buckled the core columns and caused them to shorten, resulting in a downward displacement of the core relative to the perimeter. This led to the floors (1) pulling the perimeter columns inward, and (2) transferring vertical loads to the perimeter columns; and
o Softened the perimeter columns on the south face and also caused perimeter column loads to increase significantly due to restrained thermal expansion.
* Due to the combined effects of heating on the core and perimeter columns, the south perimeter wall bowed inward and highly stressed sections buckled.

* The section of the building above the impact zone began tilting to the south as the bowed south perimeter columns buckled. The instability rapidly progressed horizontally across the entire south face and then across the adjacent east and west faces.

* The change in potential energy due to the downward movement of the building mass above the buckled columns exceeded the strain energy that could be absorbed by the structure. Global collapse then ensued.

WTC 2

* Aircraft impact damaged the perimeter columns, mainly on the south face, resulting in redistribution of column loads, mostly to the adjacent perimeter columns and to a lesser extent, the core columns.

* After breaching the building’s perimeter, the aircraft continued to penetrate into the building, damaging floor framing, core columns and fireproofing. Loads on the damaged columns were redistributed to other intact core and perimeter columns mostly via the floor systems and to a lesser extent, via the hat truss.

* The subsequent fires, influenced by the impact-damaged condition of the fireproofing:
o Caused significant sagging of the floors on the east side that induced the floors to pull the perimeter columns inward on the east face;
o Softened and buckled the core columns on the east side and caused them to shorten, which transferred significant additional load to the perimeter columns on the east face primarily through the floor system and to a lesser extent, the hat truss; and
o Softened some of the perimeter columns that were exposed to high temperatures toward the northern half of the east face.
* Due to the additional loads on the perimeter columns on the east face and the inward pulling of those columns, the east perimeter wall bowed inward and highly stressed sections buckled.

* The section of the building above the impact zone began tilting to the east and south as both the east perimeter columns and the impact-damaged south perimeter columns buckled. The instability rapidly progressed horizontally across both faces and across the north face.

* The change in potential energy due to the downward movement of the building mass above the buckled columns exceeded the strain energy that could be absorbed by the structure. Global collapse then ensued.

WTC 7

The working hypothesis, for the collapse of the 47-story WTC 7, if it holds up upon further analysis, would suggest that it was a classic progressive collapse that included:

• An initial local failure due to fire and/or debris induced structural damage of a critical column, which supported a large span floor area of about 2,000 ft 2, at the lower floors (below Floor 14) of the building,

• Vertical progression of the initial local failure up to the east penthouse bringing down the interior structure under the east penthouse, and

• Horizontal progression of the failure across the lower floors (in the region of Floors 5 and 7 that were much thicker and more heavily reinforced than the rest of the floors), triggered by damage due to the vertical failure, resulting in disproportionate collapse of the entire structure.

But I understand that it's hard to fit all of that into one screen...

Chapter 1: The Weakest Link (shot: simulation of WTC 7 collapse from south)

WTC Building 7 (shot: WTC 7, from ground, shot from northeast)

This building has two small fires on it's side

Completely wrong. Just utterly wrong, wrong, wrong. Here's a list from the NIST interim report, back in June 2004, of what they knew even then:

L.2.2 Observed Fire Locations

Photographs and videos were used to determine fire locations and movement within WTC 7. Most of the available information is for the north and east faces of WTC 7. Information about fires in other areas of the building was obtained from interviews, and is summarized as follows:
From 11:30 a.m. to 2:30 p.m.:
• No diesel smells reported from the exterior, stairwells, or lobby areas
• No signs of fire or smoke were reported below the 6th Floor from the exterior, stairwells or lobby areas
• In the east stairwell, smoke was observed around Floors 19 or 20, and a signs of a fully involved fire on the south side of Floor 23 were heard/seen/smelled from Floor 22.
• Interviews place a fire on Floor 7 at the west wall, toward the south side, at approximately 12:15 p.m.
• From West and Vesey Streets near the Verizon Building, fires were observed in floors estimated to be numbered in the 20s and 30s.
Looking from the southwest corner at the south face:
• Fire was seen in the southwest corner near Floor 10 or 11
• Fire was seen on Floors 6, 7, 8, 21, and 30
• Heavy black smoke came out of a large, multi-story gash in the south face
Looking from the southeast corner of the south face:
• Fire seen on Floor 14 (reported floor number) on south face; the face above the fire was covered with smoke
• Fire on Floor 14 moved towards the east face
Looking at the east face:
• Fire on Floor 14 (reported floor) moved along east face toward the north side Photographs and videos were used with these interview accounts to document fire progression in the building. The fires seen in photographs and videos are summarized:
Before 2:00 p.m.
• Figures L–22a shows fires that had burned out by early afternoon on Floors 19, 21, 22, 29, and 30 along the west face near the southwest corner.
2:00 to 2:30 p.m.
• Figure L–24a shows fires on east face Floors 11 and 12 at the southeast corner. Several photos during this time show fires progressing north.
3:00 to 5:00 p.m.
• Around 3 p.m., fires were observed on Floors 7 and 12 along the north face. The fire on Floor 12 appeared to bypass the northeast corner and was first observed at a point approximately one third of the width from the northeast corner, and then spread both east and west across the north face.
• Some time later, fires were observed on Floors 8 and 13, with the fire on Floor 8 moving from west to east and the fire on Floor 13 moving from east to west. Figure L–24b shows fires on Floors 7 and 12.
• At this time, the fire on Floor 7 appeared to have stopped progressing near the middle of the north face.
• The fire on Floor 8 continued to move east on the north face, eventually reaching the northeast corner and moving to the east face.
• Around 4:45 p.m., a photograph showed fires Floors 7, 8, 9, and 11 near the middle of the north face; Floor 12 was burned out by this time.

Yeah. Just two small fires. This is what's known as an outright lie.

Overlay: shot of WTC from much earlier in day with two fires - it fades out)

,,,which offically causes the collapse...

(NE shot unfreezes and the building collapses - fade to black)

Would two small fires cause a steel structure to uniformly collapse in near perfect symetry? (fade in overlay picture beside text, then picture and text, text crumbling, slide offscreen)

...and fall exactly on its footprint? (fade in: overhead shot of collapsed WTC 7)

Shouldn't a failure on one side cause something like this....

(Clip: a controlled demolition of an eleven story steel structure - the structure falls over like a domino as planned)

Well, it didn't fail on one side. It failed inside the building. That's why it fell down inside of itself. When people say "two small fires on the side", this is a "straw man". That means they are using a complete misrepresentation of what's being claimed, exposing it as silly, then telling you to believe something even more ludicrious.

Instead, WTC 7 looked like this... (clip: a controlled demolition of a fifteen story hotel - one side falls asymmetrically, followed by second, then the top topples over like a domino)

Controlled Demo... (people observing the collapse start running from the cloud of dust)

Such as this (another clip of a demolition - again the collapse is asymmetrical, one corner followed by a second, and then the back end...)

Did you catch that? WTC 7 was a symmetrical collapse, so it had to be a controlled demolition, just like all of those other asymmetrical controlled demolitions. The forty seven story WTC 7 should have acted like the eleven story controlled demolition that fell over on its side as planned. Except, as noted above, the fires were all over, and the initial failure didn't happen on the side. It happened in the middle of the building. But still, WTC 7 should have looked like this controlled demolition, not those!

Ain't logic grand?

And lastly, from the owner's mouth. a man who stood to collect billions in terrorism insurance claims

admits in a PBS special "America Rebuilds" that they deliberately demolished WTC 7

(Clip: PBS Special, the famous quote from Silverstein we all know and love)

Be sure to catch the part of this clip showing copious amounts of smoke billowing up from those "two small fires"

What does "pull it" mean?

In demolition slang it means to bring the building down

And in firefighter slang it means to abandon any efforts of fighting a particularly dangerous fire. Who was Silverstein talking to, a demolition guy or a firefighting guy?

Listen to a worker speaking of the "offically" demolished WTC 6...*

*also from PBS "America Rebuilds" (another clip from PBS special - the worker says "We're getting ready to pull building six")

How about that? The demolition worker used the demolition meaning, and Silverstein talking to the fire commander used the firefighter meaning. Yay, context!

The offical line that building 7 collapsed because of fire is so ridiculously implausible...

oh my dear Lort, they're not just ripping off PBS, but Queen's Bohemian Rhapsody as well...

(fade in clip of Alex Jones: "because 7 wasn't hit by aircraft, caught fire later in the afternoon, and collapsed." Queen: Open your eyes... "Geometrically it imploded and collapsed on itself")

Immediate reaction by Dan Rather (clip of CBS News - Dan says it was just like "a building deliberately destroyed, destroyed by well-placed dynamite to knock it down" - it was so good, they repeated it)

So why the offical line that WTC 7 fell because of fire...

Alex Jones: "How did they get explosives in the building? When it takes days and weeks to do it, if they decided to destroy it on 9/11? (Pause) You can't do that. Even it takes hours to do that, the building was on fire on the 7th and 12th floors..."

But there were only two small fires, Alex. Oh, wait, you're saying they had to have put the explosives in beforehand, just like normal demolitions? So it was all planned. So Silverstein, in the very same statement in which he rock-solid admitted, God's honest gospel truth, that they demolished WTC 7, was also lying about making the decision on 9/11. So Silverstein, thus an untrustworthy witness, should have his entire testimony impeached, including the part where he admits to demolishing WTC 7...oh, darn. Logic can be so cruel.

Oh, yeah, and Alex? Fires also on floors 23, 29, 10, 11, 6, 8, 21, 30, 14, 22, 13, and 9. And those are just the ones we saw.

Well, that's the end of Chapter One. And it was the Weakest Link. That means that was their best case. It doesn't get any better from here. But spotting inconsistent stories and outright lies sure is fun!

By the way, all misspellings in the text of the video are verbatim.