WHERE DID THE TOWERS GO? by Dr. Judy Wood, Ph.D

[Jeffrey Orling]

Of course I am aware that the steel was sold for salvage. Some of it was held here and examined. It's true we only have the images of the fallen debris to work with and a few saved samples... some of which I am about to examine personally.

However, in the images there is no sign of explosive damage to the columns as far as I can tell and aside from the infamous diagonal cut column... which turned out to be from the clean up... as it was a remaining floor one column which was braced by the rubble and was cut for removal... to conclude that the columns were exploded is rather a stretch from what we DO have in the visual record.

However, there is some evidence of enormous load redistribution onto some very distorted columns such as "the horse shoe" column which we can interpret as one the the few columns remaining as others were "taken out" at that level and it was apparently bent like a pretzel when it carried loads of perhaps 40 or more times its yield strength. While it shows no signs of unnatural tampering... only unexpected loading... it seems to suggest that the columns near by might have likely been "taken out" intentionally and no naturally. However, the load redistribution did not have to take out all the other 46 columns leaving this one to bend like a pretzel. The load redistribution could have progressed through the array of columns as their safety factor was exceeded.

The FOS study reveals that with an FOS of 1.54 a column will fail if it is carries more than 1.54 of its design load. A column designed for 1,000 tons can safely support 1,540 tons. So if you had 47 columns carrying their design loads (let's make it equal for the example)... and each carried 1,000 tons and 18 columns were destroyed... the remain 29 would see an additional 18,000 tons distributed amongst them adding 620 tons to each column increasing its load to 1,620 tons. This load is now over the yield strength including the safety factor. Those 29 columns would then begin to buckle and fail. So you can see how destroying slightly more than 1/3 of the columns in the example led to failure of all the columns.

In the twin towers this situation was perhaps even worse since not all the columns were designed to carry the same loads. The 24 perimeter core columns did the vast majority of the "heavy lifting" with the central ones carrying much less as there were few floor loads in the center of the core. And the 4 corners in the core carried the most loads in the towers on any given floor (except the tree columns on floors 1-6). With all columns not being equal attacking even fewer of the "big guys" would lead to a rapid over lading condition and stress redistribution to the smaller columns and so you could take out as few as 12 perimeter core columns and see a load redistribution which exceed the yield strength of the remaining 35 columns! This would then rapidly progress through them leading to buckling and loss of support for the entire mass they carried.

[James Lewis]

Ed, the responsibility for the collection of evidence should have been given to the NYPD. But instead, the federal government came in and started hauling the debris off and destroying it, with the full blessing of Rudy Giuliani. That steel should have been kept there until examination by the NYPD, because it was a crime scene. The fact that the feds came in immediately and hauled the debris off is suspicious, to say the least.

Who was responsible for the proper collection and protection of evidence? What processes or procedures were used or in place (or should have been)? Given the highly unusual nature of the event, what was the actual process involved in moving the steel?

[Jeffrey Orling]

Mr. Lewis,

I am sorry to have to point out that the World Trade Center site was NOT a crime scene. It should have neen treated as such, but GWBush took care of that by declaring almost immediately that we had been attacked... and attacked by Al Qaeda, a group of terrorists.

Attacks of war are not considered criminal matters under the jurisdiction of state or local authorities.

Terrorism had lived in a gray area in the law. Many terrorism cases were considered criminal acts and were investigated as such, with criminal trials and appropriate penalties which followed.

9/11 effectively changed that... the "war on terrorism" would not be dealt with as criminal activity. We've recently seen how supposedly (though many don't believe the account) OBL was simply killed, his body disposed of.. etc... with not even a need to bring him to trial, present evidence of his quilt for charges presented, or even evidence that he was assassinated.

You can't destroy evidence in a war from a local jurisdictional pov because these courts have no jurisdiction. Terrorism is an act of war not a crime!

We may not agree with this reasoning and it clearly has many troubling implications, but that is what we are up against, and perhaps why not case involving "evidence" of criminality has seen the light of day in a single city, state or federal court.

This appears clearly to be one of the national security state's tricks to use terrorism for their hidden agenda. All the extraordinary rendition, torture, drone strike, assassinations, warrantless spying, no fly lists, the USAPATRIOT Act, classification of people as enemy combatants with no legal rights and so forth a flow from declaring "terrorism" an act of war.

The notion of a war crime DOES exist and can be adjudicated in the ICC. And clearly the US is guilty of many war crimes. But no nation seems to want to take us on at the ICC and so we get away with murder... destroying evidence of crimes.... literally.

It's a brave new world.

[James Lewis]

Wait a minute...are you telling me that New York City had NO jurisdiction over an event that killed almost 3,000 of its citizens?? I'm sorry, sir, but that is complete and utter BULLSHIT. Terrorism or not, New York City had every right to declare the Twin Towers a crime scene, because that's exactly what it was, no ifs, ands, or buts. Let me remind you that after the first WTC attack in 1993, it was the NYPD, in addition with the FBI, that coordinated the scene, sealed it off, and treated it like the crime scene that it was. THAT is a big reason why Ramzi Yousef and his gang were found out and tried and convicted for their roles in that crime. I do NOT want to hear any bullshit about how "9/11 changed everything", because before 9/11, the WTC was New York City's major landmark...not the federal government's. 9/11 and pre-9/11, anything like that that happened in New York City was the jurisdiction of the city, not the federal government. Remember, before 9/11, the war on terrorism was in its beginning stages...not like it is now. I absolutely cannot believe that you made a statement that essentially ratifies the destruction of a crime scene before ANY meaningful forensic analysis was performed on the scene...the CRIME SCENE, I repeat. Let us not forget that this isn't the first time that the federal government has removed evidence in a crime scene that a state or city had every right to claim as their own and examine it as such. That day was November 22, 1963, when President John F. Kennedy's body was removed from Dallas, Texas before the city of Dallas and the state of Texas had a chance to formally examine the body in an autopsy. Remember, before then, the killing of a President was not a federal crime, that only happened after the assassination. And crime scene or not, the federal government had absolutely no right to remove any of that debris until it had been thoroughly looked at by competent experts.

I simply cannot believe you said that. My true disappointment goes even beyond what I just stated.

Mr. Lewis,

I am sorry to have to point out that the World Trade Center site was NOT a crime scene. It should have neen treated as such, but GWBush took care of that by declaring almost immediately that we had been attacked... and attacked by Al Qaeda, a group of terrorists.

Attacks of war are not considered criminal matters under the jurisdiction of state or local authorities.

Terrorism had lived in a gray area in the law. Many terrorism cases were considered criminal acts and were investigated as such, with criminal trials and appropriate penalties which followed.

9/11 effectively changed that... the "war on terrorism" would not be dealt with as criminal activity. We've recently seen how supposedly (though many don't believe the account) OBL was simply killed, his body disposed of.. etc... with not even a need to bring him to trial, present evidence of his quilt for charges presented, or even evidence that he was assassinated.

You can't destroy evidence in a war from a local jurisdictional pov because these courts have no jurisdiction. Terrorism is an act of war not a crime!

We may not agree with this reasoning and it clearly has many troubling implications, but that is what we are up against, and perhaps why not case involving "evidence" of criminality has seen the light of day in a single city, state or federal court.

This appears clearly to be one of the national security state's tricks to use terrorism for their hidden agenda. All the extraordinary rendition, torture, drone strike, assassinations, warrantless spying, no fly lists, the USAPATRIOT Act, classification of people as enemy combatants with no legal rights and so forth a flow from declaring "terrorism" an act of war.

The notion of a war crime DOES exist and can be adjudicated in the ICC. And clearly the US is guilty of many war crimes. But no nation seems to want to take us on at the ICC and so we get away with murder... destroying evidence of crimes.... literally.

It's a brave new world.

[Jeffrey Orling]

Mr. Lewis,

That is PRECISELY what I am saying... and I have personally lobbied NYC Council to get them to undertake an investigation. No court will take it. This is an outrage, but the reality we face.

Ask a lawyer. I have.

[Allison Hunt]

Not to revive on old thread without warrant but there are some researchers that make a pretty convincing case that many of the floors of the twin towers were non-exant. There are old photographs of the towers showing light coming through with no window blind effect you would expect from flooring. This theory could easily be de-bunked by witnesses who worked on said floors... but that hasn't happened. If true, the hollow tower theory could explain an ease of destruction and lack of debris. Can anyone conclusively debunk the partly floorless tower theory?

[Jeffrey Orling]

This hollow tower theory is on the Let's Roll Forum. The photo illustrates the effect of multiple slit diffraction which is effectively an optical illusion. It's more than likely that the date of the photo is just after topping off when no tenant build out had taken place and perhaps the shafts were not even enclosed in sheet rock on the upper floors. The light would *bounce*... reflect between the underside of the slab... metal deck.. and the slab itself and emerge out the other side of the towers. The slabs were only 4" thick and the space between them was 140"... so without any walls... there wasn't much to stop the light rays from going straight through the towers. In the another photo you can see 1 Liberty Plaze in a similar state of construction with light passing right through it.

But yes... the towers were *hollow*... they were about 96% are when completed and at that stage more like 98% air. Big boxes of thin floors and lots of air.

[Allison Hunt]

You're saying the bare concrete floor slabs were acting as mirrors, reflecting the setting sun?

[Jeffrey Orling]

yes... and the underside.. metal decking... did you every see how light at a very shallow angle can reflect off a surface?

[Allison Hunt]

Aside from theories of deffracting light, I would think the many millions of people who came and went through those towers would have a pretty good idea about its hollowness. Let's Roll is claiming as much as 2/3rds is missing. But I live in the far West and have no access to people who may have direct knowledge. It seems reasonable to me, if you work on the 99th floor and you need a key in order to get off on that floor (and no other floor), you could work in the tower your whole life and never know it is mostly hollow. But someone like a NYC bicycle courier should have excellent knowledge of what floors were being used. Someone like that could really put the theory to rest.