Controlled demolition: disinfo?

by **Byrne** » Thu Oct 06, 2005 12:52 pm

Qutb, I reproduced the Physics.org post in its entirity. Aside from the exasperations, I belived it to be a genuine post from someone who knows their (jetfuel/temperature/metal) stuff and who provided his pragmatic viewpoint. By the way, did you know that the Official Theory which is cited for the collapse of the two WTC towers (Nope, it doesn't mention WTC-7) was The Paper 'Why Did the World Trade Center Collapse?—Simple Analysis’ by Zdenek P. Bazant & Yong Zhou, and it was published on 13th September 2001!! Wouldn't you have expected that an investigation, albeit 'simple', would have inspected the remaining steel columns etc. evidence at the site. Unfortunately the evidence was rapidly removed and destroyed as quickly as possible, preventing any rigorous analysis of this catastrophic event of the two largest (& only) failures of steel framed structures? Such an investigation should have taken months. Also, there is no follow up paper, i.e. WTC Collapses - a Complicated Analysis carried out by these two engineers, as far as I am aware. Doesn't that strike you as strange? Also the Truss Failure Theory, eagerly championed by Professor Thomas Eagar, (who now serves on a National Research Council committee on homeland security); this hypothesis relies on the theory of progressive total collapse or ‘Pancake Theory’. The only structures where this theory has been cited in relation to total collapse are as follows: The WTC North Tower The WTC South Tower WTC Building 7 If you haven't read the papesr, then where do you get your beliefs that CD is a vacuous argument from? Is it just your 'gut feel' that such an event couldn't be covered up? We know, as others have pointed out, that that is no reason to disbelieve any explanation. The crime was almost so vilely perfect in that any questioning by individuals leads to accusations of disloyalty etc. That applies to institutions as well, i.e. American Society of Civil Engineers, Firefighters Groups etc. It is so obvious to me (& I am an engineer). Slimmouse, the Madrid Tower was reinforced concrete (burned for 18 hours). But the point is there have been no, or very few (if any - I can't ne bothered to check now) buildings, either steel frmed or RC framed which have collapsed soley as a reult of fire (certainly never within 56 minutes or 2-3 hours). Usually, the fire is put out & then they are demolished because they are not econmically repairable.

by **maggrwaggr** » Thu Oct 06, 2005 2:41 pm

the people who planted the explosives were American. They most probably were not. <a href="http://archives.cnn.com/2002/LAW/02/15/inv.licenser.death/">archives.cnn.com/2002/LAW...ser.death/</a> WASHINGTON (CNN) -- The death of a Tennessee driver's license examiner accused of helping six illegal immigrants get false drivers' licenses was no accident, the FBI said Friday. Katherine Smith was found burned to death in her car early Sunday, a day before she was to be arraigned on federal charges she helped five Middle Eastern men and one juvenile get fake driver's licenses earlier this month. The five adults are under investigation for possible ties to the September 11 terrorist attacks, law enforcement officials said. Smith's car was on fire when it struck a utility pole on a rural highway about 30 miles from Memphis, FBI agent Suzanne Nash said Wednesday. Smith's clothing had been soaked with gasoline, leaving her burned beyond recognition, according to authorities. The FBI said Smith's death was either a homicide or a suicide. All six lived in New York and are illegal immigrants, according to law enforcement officials. One of the men, Sakhera Hammad, had a visitor's pass for the World Trade Center dated September 5, 2001. He told authorities he and his cousin, Abdelmuhsen Mahmid Hammad, also charged with trying to obtain a fake license, worked on the tower's sprinkler systems -- a claim authorities have not been able to corroborate.

by **Pants Elk** » Thu Oct 06, 2005 3:01 pm

Planes fly into massive buildings. Buildings designed to withstand over twice that impact. Big, motherfucking huge buildings. Buildings stand around for a while, not doing much blazing or anything, then fall right over. Su-ure. Nothing to see here folks. Move right along.

by **Qutb** » Thu Oct 06, 2005 3:17 pm

maggrwaggr, I think that case is extremely interesting and it hasn't received the attention it deserves. Still, it's two (?) guys working in the WTC one day - as far as we know. It takes a lot more than that to rig two/three towers with explosives for controlled demolition, so we have to assume they were part of a larger team if we are to believe that's what they did there. The question remains: is it possible to do that undetected? This is one of those cases which is just screaming for a good old-fashioned investigative journalist to dig up more information. Wouldn't that be nice, if we still had a few of those? I agree that it's unlikely to be a coincidence that this guy had a visitor's pass to the WTC, Sept 5 2001, and claims to have worked on the sprinkler system (maybe he did - disabling it?). It's a leap to go from there to say he was planting explosives though. I guess I'd like to know more about how CD is done. How much time it takes to rig a building, how meticulous preparation is required etc. Qutb means "axis," "pole," "the center," which contains the periphery or is present in it. The qutb is a spiritual being, or function, which can reside in a human being or several human beings or a moment. It is the elusive mystery of how the divine gets delegated into the manifest world and obviously cannot be defined.

by * » Thu Oct 06, 2005 3:51 pm

"I guess I'd like to know more about how CD is done. How much time it takes to rig a building, how meticulous preparation is required etc." <blockquote>Quote:<hr> Construction Failures Sheikh A. Alakl Residential and Commercial Center Jeddah, Saudia Ar Over the last 52 years, Controlled Demolition Incorporated has designed and used explosives to cause the controlled, progressive failure of thousands of brick, concrete and steel structures. It comes as no surprise that Controlled Demolition Incorporatedâ€™s database is highly useful in analyzing the condition of, and designing the implosion sequence for the demolition of structural systems damaged by construction failure, earthquakes, fires or explosions. Half of the 17-story Sheikh A. Alakl Apartment Building in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia collapsed when portions of the new reinforced concrete facility were overloaded during final stages of construction. At the request of Bechtel, Controlled Demolition Incorporatedâ€™s team mobilized to the site in less than 24 hours, prepared the central-core, flat slab, reinforced concrete structure in another 27 hours and put the balance of the building on the ground with absolute safety just 96 hours after the start of demolition preparations. The "armâ€™s-length" nature of Controlled Demolition Incorporatedâ€™s operations, combined with our in-house engineering, rapid response capabilities and international network of resources make Controlled Demolition Incorporated the natural choice in dealing with structural emergencies, worldwide. [/i]<hr></blockquote><a href="http://www.controlled-demolition.com/default.asp?reqLocId=11">link</a>

by **Qutb** » Thu Oct 06, 2005 4:33 pm

1 Tal, thanks. That's a 17-story, semi-collapsed building. The WTC had 110. I see that the <a href="http://www.controlled-demolition.com/default.asp?reqLocId=7&reqItemId=20030225133807" target="top">tallest</a> building ever demolished with explosives was a 33-story one. Here's how that happened: <blockquote>Quote:<hr>Under CDI direction, Homrich/NASDI’s 21 man crew needed three months to investigate the complex and four months to complete preparations for CDI’s implosion design. During that period, the lower two basements of the structure were filled with engineered fill and the perimeter basement walls bermed to 1st basement level with soil to support perimeter walls which would surely have failed under soil and hydrostatic loads once the horizontal support of the Hudson’s internal structure was removed by the implosion. Double column rows installed in the structure between vertical construction phases, internal brick shear walls, x-bracing, 70 elevators and 10 stairwells created an extremely stiff frame. Columns weighing over 500 lb/ft, having up to 7.25 inch thick laminated steel flanges and 6 inch thick webs, defied commercially available shaped charge technology. CDI analyzed each column, determined the actual load it carried and then used cutting torches to scarf-off steel plates in order to use smaller shaped charges to cut the remaining steel. CDI wanted to keep the charges as small as possible to reduce air over pressure that could break windows in adjacent properties. CDI’s 12 person loading crew took twenty four days to place 4,118 separate charges in 1,100 locations on columns on nine levels of the complex. Over 36,000 ft of detonating cord and 4,512 non-electric delay elements were installed in CDI’s implosion initiation system, some to create the 36 primary implosion sequence and another 216 micro-delays to keep down the detonation overpressure from the 2,728 lb of explosives which would be detonated during the demolition. Even with all the precautions to control overpressure, the age, existing cracks, and poor condition of glazing windows in vacant structures on the north, east and west sides of the J.L. Hudson complex, window breakage was a concern. CDI had seven glass company crews on standby to handle any problems. Although Homrich/NASDI has placed over 2,000 yards of soil over utilities in the four adjacent streets, emergency utility crews were also standby "just in case." When the button was pressed at 5:47 PM, assembled officials, contractors, former Hudson patrons and an estimated crowd of 20,000 watched the store begin to pivot at its southwest corner. The controlled collapse moved north and east through the structure, folding the walls inward. When the dust cleared, a debris pile averaging 35 ft tall and as high as 60 ft tall where the tower had stood was all that remained of the venerable Detroit department store. Woodward and Farmer Streets were clear of debris , while it would take a couple of days to clear the pile of debris hanging over narrow Grand River Ave.<hr></blockquote> Imagine how much preparation would be required to do this with the WTC - and at the same time, making sure no one notices anything! I know there were bomb dogs in the WTC, because they were reportedly not there one of the last days before 9/11. But all the other days, when they were there - surely they would detect all these explosives! I don't know if you'd need more than the 2,728 lb and 4,118 charges in 1,100 locations they used for the JL Hudson department store, if you wanted to demolish the WTC. Since the WTC towers were much larger, I would intuitively think you would need more, but maybe not. Still, that's a lot of explosives... I'll stick to the pancake theory, thank you. Qutb means "axis," "pole," "the center," which contains the periphery or is present in it. The qutb is a spiritual being, or function, which can reside in a human being or several human beings or a moment. It is the elusive mystery of how the divine gets delegated into the manifest world and obviously cannot be defined.

by **Dreams End** » Thu Oct 06, 2005 5:12 pm

You know it occurs to me, qutb. If it is SOOO difficult to rig explosives for such a high building because they must be done so precisely in order to minimize damage to the surroundings, isn't that an argument AGAINST the towers just happening to both go down so neatly? I guess it kinda cuts both ways.

by **Qutb** » Thu Oct 06, 2005 5:14 pm

Or to not make it look too obviously like a controlled demolition. Becuase it doesn't, to me at least. Check out some videos of cd, and perhaps you'll se what I mean. Qutb means "axis," "pole," "the center," which contains the periphery or is present in it. The qutb is a spiritual being, or function, which can reside in a human being or several human beings or a moment. It is the elusive mystery of how the divine gets delegated into the manifest world and obviously cannot be defined.

by **Dreams End** » Thu Oct 06, 2005 5:32 pm

Odd, I've looked at controlled demos and they seem very similar...in fact, CD's count on pancaking, don't they? They would blow supports along the way, of course, and not allow gravity to do all the work, but the idea of each floor collapsing upon the other. I would have expected...I don't know...less symmetry when one side is hit by a plane. I would have expected one side to be weakened earlier than another and not perfectly in unison. I mean, if the physics of this is so straight forward, I'm not sure why it wasn't anticipated when they built it to "withstand a hit" by a plane of similar size. It also looked to me like one of the towers was hit at more of an angle, with much fuel exploding instantaneously in a fireball and the rest not going toward the center to go down the elevator shaft the EXACT same way as the other building. and hey, why did the fuel burn so long when it was disbursed throughout the building...I would have expected the fuel to be consumed rather quickly as most of it "exploded". I also find it odd that the mechanism for downing the first two towers was NOT in play for the third tower and yet the EXACT same result occured. So these buildings are really not that hard to bring down in perfectly symmetrical fashion as two random plane hits and explosions and a slower burning basement fire (I guess that's the theory for wtc7) easily brought their respective buildings down in a perfect footprint. This could put a lot of demolition people out of a job when it gets out how easy it is to bring these things down in a symmetrical fashion.

by **maggrwaggr** » Thu Oct 06, 2005 7:19 pm

that is the fly in the ointment here. One could argue that the unique conditions of the Twin Towers that day resulted in an unprecedented occurrence -- both of them collapsing. However, WTC7 shared absolutely none of those unique conditions. Yet it collapsed in EXACTLY the same fashion. Perhaps the plane that went down in Pennsylvania was supposed to fly into WTC7? To me, WTC7 is the key to the mystery. And it's completely ignored in most arguments about CD, or even about 9/11 in general. The National Geographic show I watched didn't even mention it! Also -- can someone tell me how "they" now "know" that some of the hijackers shaved their bodies and some of them did not? Because I've seen people, even Jon Stewart, talk about that like it's plain simple fact. It's just silly, really.

by **michael meiring** » Thu Oct 06, 2005 7:43 pm

After blocking out world events for a couple of months. (no media of any sort for me) I have just had an urge to visit this site and lo and behold it seems the shills are still at it. How the perpetrators of this terrorist act must be chuckling to themselves to see everyone squabbling over a shills red herring. Why were no firefighters testimony regarding the ''fires are out and its under control, and theres no danger of collapse'' after about 30 mins after the planes hit the buildings. This testimony was blocked at the 'official' investigations....suprise, suprise......and firefighters have told how they were intimidated about talking about this....quite suprising really the MSM never seemed to pursue this line of investigation...lol....... add to this the testimony of Rodrigea... the janitor..anyone remember him..the one who has taken out the RICO against bush and co? the one who had the master key to the stairwells? he talks publicy about EXPLOSIONS coming from the BASEMENT AFTER THE PLANES HIT..... i forget his first name now..i think its william rodrigez. one has to ask why all evidence contradicting the official conspiracy theory regarding 19 saudi terrorists is left out of official conspiracy theory investigations...and everything supporting the official conspiracy theory is peddled like mad and fed to the people throught the msm for years afterwards........ By the way....notice how they pulled the NIST video clip from the internet after 3 hours, when nico haupt asked 5 questions to the official conspiracy theorists at the NIST 'investigation/whitewash..lol..... Im with you slimmouse on this one...... how can a woman stand in the hole where the plane went through and all the fuel jettisoned... and not be burnt? or is it like the fire fighters say... ''we have got the fire under control''..... ''only smoking, now the fire is out''? and THERES NO DANGER OF COLLAPSE. I have spoke to many engineers and they all say its typical of a CD.......i havant spoken to one engineer who is familiar with CD who says that the towers were not brought down by cd after watching the videos in slow motion etc. this is going the same way as the kennedy murder....people will be talking about this in 50 years and the perpetrators will have done another 50 wtc's 'terrorism' acts.

by **firstimer** » Thu Oct 06, 2005 7:52 pm

If I were charged to place explosives discreetly in the WTC for a covert CD mission I would implement wireless technology for detonation, and test connectivity before arming each charge. I think that could be done pretty quickly with experienced black baggers and a good cover. All of the elements are doable and there is preliminary evidence, closings power downs, days without sniffer dogs etc, that may be the case. Nobody has postulated wireless detonation that I have ever read anybody else seen that before. >Oh fer cryin' out loud. How about we have a moratorium on >"suspecting" fellow posters who don't agree with our pet theory >of being members of the "red team", paid disruptors etc. Say, >one week for starters? QTUB that paragraph wasn't referring specifically to you, but if you want to assume the role by defending yourself when not accused be my guest. And I won't ever stop talking about it because I know it to be true on some websites, please don't try to censor me, even if its a polite request. I did say you were polite and stuff as well, do you want to defend yourself from those accusations too? Firsttimer >By the way, as, indeed, a first-timer, you ought to be a little >more humble. At least you should register first, before you start >flinging accusations at the regular posters here. And didn't your >mama teach you that it's impolite to talk about people in the third >person when they're present? sorry for the 3rd person gaff, now how about shoring up your weak argument that I was referring to, or are we to waste more time arguing about petty insults (trolling alert) instead of facts and theories. As far as registration, my option, not yours, i'll do it if I please and contrary to your belief it doesn't weaken my case one bit. And if no-one is hiding anything then where is the concise argument that puts CD to bed for good, the engineers have it ? the scientists? Its time you deliver a little. I'm iggin you til I see some effort I'm not impressed even though you might be polite, your case stinks. regards firstimer

by **Qutb** » Thu Oct 06, 2005 8:31 pm

<blockquote>Quote:<hr>your case stinks.<hr></blockquote> I know it does, lol. I haven't even tried to make a case actually. You have to believe me when I say I'm fundamentally uncertain about this and I've been scratching my head a lot... but in the end, I concluded that the pancake theorists had the more believeable and more parsimonious explanation. I also think there are a lot of bogus arguments being used to support the CD theory (there are some not so bogus arguments too, I'll admit). But I don't think the pancake theory is a very good explanation. So to me it's a matter of "your case stinks even more than mine", more than being convinced of anything. Maybe the truth is something else, like microwaves or some exotic shit like that. In which case we're truly fucked. <blockquote>Quote:<hr>QTUB that paragraph wasn't referring specifically to you<hr></blockquote>Wasn't I the only one on this thread who didn't support the CD theory? It was thus natural to assume you were talking about me. It's Qutb by the way, not Qtub. Qutb means "axis," "pole," "the center," which contains the periphery or is present in it. The qutb is a spiritual being, or function, which can reside in a human being or several human beings or a moment. It is the elusive mystery of how the divine gets delegated into the manifest world and obviously cannot be defined.

by **maggrwaggr** » Fri Oct 07, 2005 2:08 am

Firsttimer, I was just realizing today that wireless would be the way to go. In still photography we have these "slave" flashes. You can set up a ton of flashes (strobes) that aren't connected to each other at all. The flash of the one that IS connected to the camera (and it doesn't even have to be either, the whole array can be set off wireless) sets off the others and there is absolutely no visible lag time between them. And that's old technology. One could easily do the same with modern wireless communication devices. What's so silly about this whole argument is that I was already a convinced MIHOPer before I ever even seriously considered CD. No kidding, I thought the CD theories were just plain silly until I went back and looked at the video of WTC7 falling .... and I did a little research into WTC7 ..... and realized There is just a godawful ton of evidence to support 100% MIHOP even if you believe the buildings fell of their own accord. Scott Peterson went to death row on less evidence.

by **Homeless Halo** » Fri Oct 07, 2005 2:32 am

maggrwaggr: We went to WAR on less evidence.

Controlled demolition: disinfo?

Here we go again.............

Qutb, you're assuming

holds weary head in hands

Re: Qutb, you're assuming

Re: Qutb, you're assuming

Re: Qutb, you're assuming

Re: Qutb, you're assuming

Re: Qutb, you're assuming

Re: Qutb, you're assuming

Yes, Dreams End, it's WTC7

why no fire fighter testimony reached 'investgation' level

wireless

Re: wireless

Re: wireless

indeed.

Who is online