Some Misunderstandings Related to WTC Collapse Analysis

[Tony Szamboti]

In Orwell we see the type of doublethink which allows one to not be influenced by his distrust of his government.

(will the veiled sister pray over the split infinitive)

Tony, in your 101 above you write:

Of course, Jeffrey simply says something along the lines he said to you here

I think you are neither familiar with the design nor understanding where the possible failures may have been. First, there were no columns which were melted or even heated hot enough to bend them. Heat weakens steel and if it weakens it below the service load it buckles and bends from BUCKLING not from plastic deformation. Second the failures in the frame were more likely the CONNECTIONS and they were not as strong as the sections themselves.

and I have asked him many times on other forums to explain how the rapid constant acceleration through the first story would be possible with heat weakening caused buckling of columns or the column connections breaking. He just goes into a "we can't see inside" mode and never tries to provide a technically plausible explanation. I have to believe that is because there isn't one, but that doesn't give him reason to pause and possibly re-evaluate his position. No, he keeps on repeating the same unsupported points about heat weakening being the cause. Bottom line is Jeffrey can't explain the details of the collapse in natural cause terms, but he will tell you he is sure it was a naturally caused event due to the effects of impact damage and fire with a poor design (he never explains the poor design either), and that those with the motive to take advantage of the event (the oil cabal with operatives like Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld etc.) just waited for it to happen. Given the natural cause problems and the aftermath, that position is at the very least naïve in the most extreme sense, and all of the time Jeffrey seems to have to post long winded replies all over the Internet on this issue (he is on several 911 related forums) along with his problems with NYC CAN and AE911Truth make me wonder about his motives.

In Chomsky we see one insisting a conspiracy was impossible, and that it presupposes a marked departure by Kennedy.

We here in DPF understand that there was/is a conspiracy, and that Kennedy was a marked departure.

In my view Tony has cogently stated the impossibility of the official explanation, and the repeated denial of intentional agency in the collapse by the prolific poster.

Could we save bandwidth by, instead of saying some variation of "I don't see anyone making it happen" simply typing "ibid" or "see above" or "ditto."

And all this pasting entire posts simply to add a line or a paragraph--all the bytes over the Niagara in vain.

With Dallas we have a crossfire resulting from a conspiracy resulting in a coverup and an effective coup.

It put the security state in firm control, publicly, dramatically, inyourfacedly.

Now comes another "tragedy" and another "commission" and another "explanation" and the bodyguard is the ubiquitous Mr. Nothing-To-See-Here.

Not since the mimeograph has technology had such a smell, that perfume from the principal's office announcing another school fair with a goldfish toss.

Tony, you're on the verge of saying a contrived initiation regarding columnar collapse.

I suggest it's not so impossible.

Consider a replication of the 1978 midnight elevator shaft activity utilizing state of the art nanothermite and wireless detonators.

We have a loitering E4.

And molten steel.

Business is business.

JFK could not leave the Plaza. The towers could not remain standing.

The show (war) must go on.

Or we go to sleep to the lullaby of the Chomsky symphony of no conspiracy.

Fireman! Put out the fire on XYZ Forum! Stat!

Brass poles, black holes, and on to Damascus

It can't be stated much better than you do here. JFK could not leave the plaza alive and the towers could not remain standing.

Anyone who doesn't get it at this point is either a very confused soul or an intentional deluder. There is no in between because it really isn't all that hard to see what happened at this point. Seeing the collapse of WTC 7 and remembering one was told it fell due to fire is just like when one finally saw the previously suppressed Zapruder film and remembers they had been told John Kennedy was shot from the right rear. These were major league conspiracies in every sense of the word, which ultimately proved impossible to cover-up. But brute force politics and a good set of shill infiltrators, to keep the masses paralyzed, is all that seems necessary to get away with it if you have enough money and power.

The charges were most likely set in WTC 7 when Rudy Giuliani's OEM bunker on the 23rd floor was built as the AMEC company had access to the entire building for ventilation and back-up power. This is why Rudy insisted on putting his bunker there.

The charges in the towers would have been placed during the elevator renovation project occurring for eight months prior to Sept. 11, 2001. ACE Elevator was a front company with the towers being 90% of their business. It is hard to understand how they could ever beat out Otis Elevator for the maintenance contract and be considered competent enough to do the elevator renovation project. In 2011 the Empire State Building let a contract to Otis to do its elevator renovation on its 67 elevator system and they only considered three companies competent enough to bid on it (Otis, Schindler, and Thyssen-Krupp). The Twin Towers had 99 elevators each.

[Jeffrey Orling]

It can't be stated much better than you do here. JFK could not leave the plaza alive and the towers could not remain standing.

People like Jeffrey and Albert Doyle are either confused souls or intentional deluders. There is no in between because it really isn't all that hard to see what happened at this point. Seeing the collapse of WTC 7 and remembering one was told it fell due to fire is just like when one finally sees the Zapruder film and remembers they had been told John Kennedy was shot from the right rear.

You call that logic?

Why did someone decide that the towers had to come down?
And why 7? And why not during the day time... why why wait 7 hrs?

It didn't fall because of fire... it fell because heat and perhaps some electrical explosions... we don't know the precise cause... likely weakened the connections of the transfer trusses which failed and because a progressive failure through the core at flrs 5, 6 &7... which led to the inside dropping onto the sub station, destroying the braced frames on on perimeter extending to floor 8 and then the curtain wall and perimeter columns just inside them came down 8 stories at free fall until it began to crush up at the ground level. Whatever it was that destroyed the truss connections took the entire afternoon to do it. The FDNY reported the building was of questionable stability and had everyone evacuate because they expect it to collapse.

But of course you think the FDNY as in on the conspiracy to take it down.

I'm not intending to delude anyone. I am presenting what makes sense to me based on the limited evidence, building movements, witness reports and the structural design itself, plus the testimony before congress in 2002 where it was suggested that the connections might have failed.

Could devices have destroyed those connections? Sure. Where's the proof?

[Tony Szamboti]

It can't be stated much better than you do here. JFK could not leave the plaza alive and the towers could not remain standing.

People like Jeffrey and Albert Doyle are either confused souls or intentional deluders. There is no in between because it really isn't all that hard to see what happened at this point. Seeing the collapse of WTC 7 and remembering one was told it fell due to fire is just like when one finally sees the Zapruder film and remembers they had been told John Kennedy was shot from the right rear.

You call that logic?

Why did someone decide that the towers had to come down?
And why 7? And why not during the day time... why why wait 7 hrs?

It didn't fall because of fire... it fell because heat and perhaps some electrical explosions... we don't know the precise cause... likely weakened the connections of the transfer trusses which failed and because a progressive failure through the core at flrs 5, 6 &7... which led to the inside dropping onto the sub station, destroying the braced frames on on perimeter extending to floor 8 and then the curtain wall and perimeter columns just inside them came down 8 stories at free fall until it began to crush up at the ground level. Whatever it was that destroyed the truss connections took the entire afternoon to do it. The FDNY reported the building was of questionable stability and had everyone evacuate because they expect it to collapse.

But of course you think the FDNY as in on the conspiracy to take it down.

I'm not intending to delude anyone. I am presenting what makes sense to me based on the limited evidence, building movements, witness reports and the structural design itself, plus the testimony before congress in 2002 where it was suggested that the connections might have failed.

Could devices have destroyed those connections? Sure. Where's the proof?

Blah, blah, blah. It gets old talking to you and listening to your nonsense. WTC 7 was a controlled demolition if there ever was one. There is simply no chance for any other explanation when symmetric free fall through eight stories at the beginning of the collapse is understood. You might as well tell people JFK's head went backwards and to the left because of neuromuscular spasm. You might as well also ask for proof that Kennedy was shot from the front.

I don't think the FDNY was in on it to take it down and I have never said that. I think they were played by Rudy Giuliani's office about Bldg. 7 being lost, that it was going to collapse, and not to risk anymore lives. After what happened earlier that morning and hearing Giuliani's office's proclamations, who can blame the firemen for not going in there and setting up a safe zone away from it?

[Tony Szamboti]

This sounds to me like what is called LIHOP and very much the way I presently conceive of what happened from JFK forward.

I think the nasties establish themselves within the NSS for the purpose of covertly as well as overtly pushing the world hegemony agenda... of course personal wealth a la nepotism and corrupt practices... drugs, weapons and so forth. It's all good on the inside and the revolving door is so much fun!

When you leave the gate open to the fortress on purpose that is MIHOP by any definition.

Albert, if you believe that 911 was perpetrated by insiders and there was a lot more to it than 19 hijackers and four airplanes I owe you an apology.

[Albert Doyle]

Albert, if you believe that 911 was perpetrated by insiders and there was a lot more to it than 19 hijackers and four airplanes I owe you an apology.

I don't believe it - I know it. However I think the apology should be made for not answering how no firefighters in the stairwell reported thermite fires around them just before the tower fell. I remain agnostic on the controlled demolition. Certainly there's enough premeditation to make placed charges very possible. I just don't think they were necessarily the cause of the collapses.


The South Tower could have come down first because there was more weight above the damage area. Your controlled demolition claim has trouble there because that is a basic indicator of weakness/stress-based initiation of the collapse.

[Lauren Johnson]

Your controlled demolition claim has trouble there because that is a basic indicator of weakness/stress-based initiation of the collapse.

Are you an engineer or did you get this from somewhere reputable? Or did you just make something up just now?

[Phil Dragoo]

Tony, your observation of anomalies in the elevator renovation and the construction of the emergency center in 7 parallel the motorcade route, the ownership of the Depository, the witnesses citing evidence of men moving into position:

The charges were most likely set in WTC 7 when Rudy Giuliani's OEM bunker on the 23rd floor was built as the AMEC company had access to the entire building for ventilation and back-up power. This is why Rudy insisted on putting his bunker there.

The charges in the towers would have been placed during the elevator renovation project occurring for eight months prior to Sept. 11, 2001. ACE Elevator was a front company with the towers being 90% of their business. It is hard to understand how they could ever beat out Otis Elevator for the maintenance contract and be considered competent enough to do the elevator renovation project. In 2011 the Empire State Building let a contract to Otis to do its elevator renovation on its 67 elevator system and they only considered three companies competent enough to bid on it (Otis, Schindler, and Thyssen-Krupp). The Twin Towers had 99 elevators each.

Regarding 7, this article has several items of interest:

[URL="http://www.911hardfacts.com/report_07.htm"]http://www.911hardfacts.com/report_07.htm

[/URL] At 5:20 p.m., the massive 47-story steel frame Building 7, untouched by the hijacked airplanes, imploded in the exact manner of a professionally engineered demolition - at near free-fall speed, straight down, and with scientific precision into a compact pile of rubble, barely damaging any of the surrounding buildings. Watch Video

The official explanation for the collapse is fire - as in fire weakened the building's structural support steel to the point where it could no longer hold its own weight upright. The magazine Popular Mechanics has tried to posit the theory of lethal structural damage caused by the falling debris of the North Tower as reason for Building 7's collapse. But no existing public photographs, nor videos, show anything near their claim that 1/3 of Building 7's façade was gouged out. Furthermore, even if structural damage was significant, this would not account for Building 7's eventual symmetrical, box-like collapse, where all four corners, and all four facades of the building fell simultaneously straight to the ground. And most significantly, the official government explanation is still fire. So this essay will stay with fire as the stated cause.
Flames were visible on 3-4 floors of the building, having been apparently ignited by falling debris and ruptured diesel tanks at the base of the structure. And while relatively minor in severity, these fires were apparently responsible for the building's demise. But fire as the cause for collapse poses a number of significant problems - problems that break fundamental laws of nature. Firstly, fire from diesel fuel and building debris does not remotely approach the necessary temperature required to weaken and melt steel. Steel is melted and forged in sophisticated blast furnaces at incredibly high temperatures. Secondly, even if fire did cause the necessary weakening of the buildings steel support beams, each of those more than 50 beams would have had to weaken and fail at the exact same time to account for the symmetrical downward trajectory of the collapse. A wildly contentious scenario.

~~~

Another, and perhaps stronger, piece of evidence for controlled demolition of Building 7 is the speed at which the structure fell. It was a 576-foot tall building, and a conservative estimate of available video evidence shows that it fell in 6.5 seconds. A marble, with nothing but wind resistance in its path, would fall to the ground from the same height in roughly 6 seconds. Somehow, the top of this building fell to the ground in a perfectly symmetrical downward trajectory, with 47 floors of steel, concrete, and thousands of tons of upright standing debris in its path providing huge amounts of vertical resistance, at virtually free-fall speed. Allegedly because of random fires on a few floors. This is a physical and mathematical impossibility, violating laws in the conservation of momentum covered at length in this paper by Dr. Kenneth Kuttler here. Or go to the June 2006, Volume 1 edition of this online journal here.

~~~

Because all available evidence points to this controlled demolition as the most logical reason for Building 7's particular collapse pattern, serious questions now need answering. To wire a building of that size for implosion requires weeks of careful study and planning. Which means whoever wired the explosives knew far in advance of the September 11 plot. So who? And why? Perhaps Larry Silverstein has an answer. In July of 2001, 2 months before the attack, the new leaseholder of the Twin Towers and Building 7 took out a huge insurance policy on his buildings. In it, there was a special clause 'in case of terrorist attack'. As a result of the collapse of Building 7, Larry Silverstein pocketed almost $1 Billion, $500 million of it in profits. For the collapse of the Twin Towers, which he also owned, Silverstein argued in court that he should be compensated twice because two separate airplanes flew into his two separate buildings. And this, according to his argument, constituted two terrorist attacks. He won this argument, and was awarded $7 Billion for the Towers' collapse, quite a return for his initial investment.

~~~

Perhaps a government official from the CIA, Department of Defense, the IRS, the SEC branch investigating the infamous Wall Street corporate fraud cases, the Secret Service, or New York City's Office of Emergency Management (OEM) knows something about Building 7's odd collapse. All of those agencies strangely had offices in Building 7. The presence of OEM is particularly disturbing. They occupied a recently reinforced bunker-like space on the 23rd floor. Equipped with bulletproof windows, bomb-proof walls, and hurricane resistant windows, the office housed a sophisticated command center with top of the line military communication and logistical equipment. Perhaps Building 7 was a command center of a different kind, used as the true Ground Zero for the operation carried out on 9/11. A command center that became a crime scene after 8:46 a.m. that morning. A command center that needed to be destroyed.
Perhaps this OEM department could also explain the miraculously coincidental fact that on September 10, FEMA officials, in conjunction with NYC authorities, had arrived in the city and set up a command post near the World Trade Center for an extensive simulated terrorist attack operation to be carried out on September 12. Perhaps Mayor Rudolph Giuliani could shed some light on this subject. He confirmed this miraculous coincidence in his own testimony to the 9/11 Commission, all of which, unsurprisingly, never made it into their 'official' Report. "... the reason Pier 92 was selected as a command center was because on the next day, on September 12, Pier 92 was going to have a drill, it had hundreds of people here, from FEMA, from the Federal Government, from the State, from the State Emergency Management Office, and they were getting ready for a drill for biochemical attack. So that was gonna be the place they were going to have the drill. The equipment was already there, so we were able to establish a command center there, within three days, that was two and a half to three times bigger than the command center that we had lost at 7 World Trade Center. And it was from there that the rest of the search and rescue effort was completed."

~~~

Phil's note: We see a "drill" conducted at the scene of a covert operation, as per that said to be in progress in Dealey, at Murrah where ATF heros broke open elevator doors--oh, that's right, they lied.

Speaking of elevators:

An introductory query is made here:


Ace Elevator had basically 1 customer, the WTC.
How could it get the most lucrative contract in elevator history
without a track record of many customers?

Why did Ace Elevator workers disappear on 9/11?
Why were they never questioned or mentioned by the 9/11 Commission?

[URL="http://aneta.org/911experiments_com/AceElevator/"]http://aneta.org/911experiments_com/AceElevator/


[/URL]To which I will add Peter's fascinating mystery, the elevator renovation massive in scope until the very day of collapse for which no record can be found:

https://deeppoliticsforum.com/forums/sho...tion-work!

And an insight regarding Ace access to core columns:

The architectural drawings of the WTC North Tower have been leaked from an individual associated with the Silverstein-Weidlinger Report. They reveal that the large box columns of the core maintain their 30"x16" and 52"x22" dimensions at least up through the 66th floor. They also indicate that most of the core columns would be easily accessed from the elevator shafts in order to plant explosives. We know that the elevators were being modernized by Ace Elevator during the 9 months prior to 9/11.

Available with more at: http://www2.ae911truth.org/twintowers.php including the video described here:


[URL="http://www.ae911truth.net/videos/gallery/MoltenMetalFlowsatGrPFC.wmv"]
[/URL] In addition to the FDNY witnessing the molten metal, Leslie Robertson, the structural engineer of the WTC noted: "As of 21 days after the attack, the fires were still burning and molten steel was still running," at the National Conference of Structural Engineers on October 5, 2001.


Of course what does he know; what does he think he is, the structural engineer for the towers? Oh, wait a minute. . . .

Means, motive, opportunity. And no discernible scruples. War and its profits. America, Hell yeah.

Now do tell us a fairy tale that there be no dragons. . . .

[Tony Szamboti]

Albert, if you believe that 911 was perpetrated by insiders and there was a lot more to it than 19 hijackers and four airplanes I owe you an apology.

I don't believe it - I know it. However I think the apology should be made for not answering how no firefighters in the stairwell reported thermite fires around them just before the tower fell.

I don't think I saw your observation that no firefighters reported thermite in the stairwells.

There was only one radio transmission from firefighters who were near fires, and that from the South Tower three minutes before it fell, when chief Orio Palmer said they had reached the fire on the 78th floor and said they could knock it down with two lines. Thermite very likely would have been used on critical joints and wouldn't have been anywhere near the stairwells.

I remain agnostic on the controlled demolition. Certainly there's enough premeditation to make placed charges very possible. I just don't think they were necessarily the cause of the collapses.

The columns were certainly not involved in the collapses and the only plausible explanation I can think of is controlled demolition with devices eliminating their ability to provide structural resistance. In addition to the lack of column involvement and no deceleration problems for a natural collapse in the North Tower there is also video evidence of focused and concentrated blowouts which can only be from squibs. See this short video http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hSApOavkHg8

The South Tower could have come down first because there was more weight above the damage area. Your controlled demolition claim has trouble there because that is a basic indicator of weakness/stress-based initiation of the collapse.

Don't you understand that the building got stronger as you moved down the tower? It was a virtual pyramid strength wise. The columns under the 28 story load on the South Tower were built to withstand an average of four times the load above them, just like the columns under the 12 story load on the North Tower were built to withstand an average of four times the load above them. The further down you went the bigger the columns got to handle the bigger load above them.

[Albert Rossi]

[URL="http://www.911hardfacts.com/report_07.htm"]

[/URL] ...

Phil's note: We see a "drill" conducted at the scene of a covert operation, as per that said to be in progress in Dealey, at Murrah where ATF heros broke open elevator doors--oh, that's right, they lied.

...
[URL="http://www.ae911truth.net/videos/gallery/MoltenMetalFlowsatGrPFC.wmv"]
[/URL]In addition to the FDNY witnessing the molten metal, Leslie Robertson, the structural engineer of the WTC noted: "As of 21 days after the attack, the fires were still burning and molten steel was still running," at the National Conference of Structural Engineers on October 5, 2001.


Of course what does he know; what does he think he is, the structural engineer for the towers? Oh, wait a minute. . . .

Phil, this is all very intriguing material. And thanks for reporting the statement from Robertson. I wonder what must really be going through his mind.

[Jeffrey Orling]

Thermite very likely would have been used on critical joints and wouldn't have been anywhere near the stairwells.

Location of initial structure failure correctly identified. Cause pure speculation and not evidence to support this... other than your political beliefs. The stairs being in the cure were adjacent to core columns... but all the vertical shafts very what was defined by core columns.

The columns were certainly not involved in the collapses and the only plausible explanation I can think of is controlled demolition with devices eliminating their ability to provide structural resistance. In addition to the lack of column involvement and no deceleration problems for a natural collapse in the North Tower there is also video evidence of focused and concentrated blowouts which can only be from squibs. See this short video http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hSApOavkHg8

Squibs... you don't know what caused the material to be ejected other than over pressure and there are many things ASIDE from bombs which cause over pressure.

Don't you understand that the building got stronger as you moved down the tower? It was a virtual pyramid strength wise. The columns under the 28 story load on the South Tower were built to withstand an average of four times the load above them, just like the columns under the 12 story load on the North Tower were built to withstand an average of four times the load above them. The further down you went the bigger the columns got to handle the bigger load above them.

Column strength had not to do with resisting the collapse. You know it was the floors which broke free, where shattered and flowed down inside the tower with no column involvement. The facade columns fell away after losing bracing and the core collapsed from Euler caused instability.

So why didn't the perps just burn all those SEC files with a few cans of gasoline? They chose the simple operation to dismantle (according to AE911T) a floors of 81 columns?.... or more likely the joints / connections of the massive transfer structures which supported the 40 stories of the core over the Con Ed sub stations.

Take of your blinders and be intellectual honest about the observations and learn to distinguish between your speculation driven by your bias and the actual observations and data. Yes CD could produce the observations... but there is no evidence for it and the heat was weakening those connections leading to the global failures. You refuse to accept this causality as possible. I think you are incorrect. False certainty on your part.

And no need to call someone who disagrees with you a plant or agent of the fascists. That, Tony, is very telling. Attack the character of those who disagree with you. A cheap shot and rather unconvincing... especially without a smidgen of evidence.