USG psy-ops expert's "secret weapon,RIDICULE"+9/11

[Hugh Manatee Wins]

(cross-posting this from the 'Fisk on 9/11' thread because it deserves its own)

Four links to read in this thread:

1) A psy-ops paper by J. Michael Waller of the Institute of World Politics.
2) A disinfo paper by Manuel Garcia of Livermore Labs
3) A 9/11 science webpage
4) A 1993 interview with the WTC's chief structural engineer, John Skilling

A U.S. government psy-ops think tank called The Institute of World Politics has geniuses like J. Michael Waller advising that an immediate response to everyone hating Uncle Sam is black propaganda (lies) and *ridicule* of the opposition.

Yes, the 'experts' advise a school yard bully response to opponents of US policies of ineptly waged atrocity. And it is deployed against Robert Fisk and everyone else who knows the World Trade Center was blown up, not a 'pancake collapse' due to fire.

Note that the WTC was designed to withstand both a jet collision AND dumping of jet fuel inside the buildings as the WTC's head structural engineer, John Skilling, reminded us in 1993. But he also admitted that experts probably could bring them down with controlled demolition.

http://archives.seattletimes.nwsource.com/cgi-bin/texis.cgi/web/vortex/display?slug=1687698&date=19930227

Saturday, February 27, 1993

Twin Towers Engineered To Withstand Jet Collision

Eric Nalder

Engineers had to consider every peril they could imagine when they designed the World Trade Center three decades ago because, at the time, the twin towers were of unprecedented size for structures made of steel and glass.

"We looked at every possible thing we could think of that could happen to the buildings, even to the extent of an airplane hitting the side," said John Skilling, head structural engineer. "However, back in those days people didn't think about terrorists very much."

Skilling, based in Seattle, is among the world's top structural engineers. He is responsible for much of Seattle's downtown skyline and for several of the world's tallest structures, including the Trade Center.

Concerned because of a case where an airplane hit the Empire State Building, Skilling's people did an analysis that showed the towers would withstand the impact of a Boeing 707.

"Our analysis indicated the biggest problem would be the fact that all the fuel (from the airplane) would dump into the building. There would be a horrendous fire. A lot of people would be killed," he said. "The building structure would still be there."

Skilling - a recognized expert in tall buildings - doesn't think a single 200-pound car bomb would topple or do major structural damage to a Trade Center tower. The supporting columns are closely spaced and even if several were disabled, the others would carry the load.

"However," he added, "I'm not saying that properly applied explosives - shaped explosives - of that magnitude could not do a tremendous amount of damage."

He took note of the fact that smoke and fire spread throughout the building yesterday. He said that is possibly because the pressurizing system that stops the spread of smoke didn't work when the electric power went off. Skilling, 72, was not involved in the design of the building mechanics.

Although Skilling is not an explosives expert, he says there are people who do know enough about building demolition to bring a structure like the Trade Center down.

"I would imagine that if you took the top expert in that type of work and gave him the assignment of bringing these buildings down with explosives, I would bet that he could do it."

Sorry for the Counterpunch.org excerpt.
They've been shoveling 9/11 disinfo like the latest comments below by Manuel Garcia, a Livermore Labs nuclear bomb scientist and USG shill scorning Robert Fisk's 'even I question 9/11' article.

Previously Garcia has written a paper telling us that the plane's impacts with the World Trade Center towers sent a shock wave through the buildings breaking every single joint and that's why the buildings *shattered and fell to the ground all at once* like a plate glass window. No, I'm not kidding. That's Garcia's attempt to dismiss controlled demolition and still comply with two laws of Newtonian physics:
>Conservation of Momentum - dictates how fast the buildings can come down
>Conservation of Angular Momentum - dictates how the top of WTC2 tips over

He must be much better at making nuclear bombs since he tried to tell us that the top 30 stories of WTC2 which began to tip over (rotate) and then suddenly stopped and disintegrated...merely shattered due to natural "elastic waves rippling," like on...a pond.

From his series of disinfo papers at Counterpunch.org-

http://www.counterpunch.org/physic11282006.html

All these wave effects occur in the upper block as well, from the moment of first impact. The upper block will quickly fill with elastic waves, which will rupture internal joints; the block shatters, as is vividly seen in the video recordings of the WTC collapses. The shorter length of the upper block, and its lack of firm connection (like a foundation), will contribute to the speed of its disintegration. In a very real sense the upper block was "blown up," but naturally by elastic waves rippling a destructive compression through it rather than artificially by intentional controlled demolition.

Rediculous, Mr. Garcia. And thus worthy of the USG-sanctioned secret weapon, ridicule.

Here's a rational explanation from one of the best science-based 9/11 sites-

http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/analysis/proofs/rotation.html

Breakup of WTC 2's Top
Shattering of South Tower's Top Proves Demolition

There are several pieces of evidence that show the structure of the 30 stories of the South Tower above the impact zone was shattered before it started its precipitous plunge. How could the steel frame of many stories above the impact zone have broken up even before it started to fall? The proponents of gravity-driven collapse maintain that the tops of the towers crushed the floors below the impact zones as they fell. The tops functioned as pistons, according to Bazant and Zhou, crushing the stories one by one. What one actually sees in the case of the South Tower is that their piston disintegrated even before it started to fall. A gravity-driven collapse cannot account for that disintegration, nor for how a cloud of rubble could crush the intact structure below the impact zone.
.....
(photo series omitted, see at link - HMW)
.....
These frames from a South Tower collapse video are separated by equal time intervals. Examining the the middle edge of the falling portion of the tower shows that its angle of tilt from vertical remains about the same between the second and third frames, and therefore the top has stopped rotating. But unless the top had already been shattered, it should have continued to rotate in accordance with the law of conservation of angular momentum.

Obviously, Garcia is a USG disinformationist hiding controlled demolition which is proven by adding together how fast the buildings came down to Newtonian physics called the Law of Conservation of Momentum. They can't come down as fast as they did without being blown up. Period. 'End of debate.'

Plus the top 30 stories of WTC2 should've kept rotating and fallen into the street like King Kong off the Empire State Building.
It didn't.

So there's also PROOF in another physics law, the law of angular momentum covered below.
These simple PROOFS (plural) scare the crap out of the USG which is coasting on this hoax.

And that's why USG physics shill Garcia is fantasizing about ripples shattering buildings built like battleships and then strategically withdrawing into the "secret weapon" of *ridicule* about "conspiracy ju-ju" in his latest article below.

Keep in mind that recent papers by U.S. Information Agency-type psy-ops advisors to the USG like J. Michael Waller have recommended using "the secret weapon of *Ridicule*" against both Iraq insurgents and 9/11 truthers.

Waller advises the Senate Foreign Relations Committee and other fascist war orgs represented at this psy-ops thinktank called The Insitute for World Politics loaded with people from CIA, DARPA, Voice of America, American Enterprise Institute, etc.-
http://www.iwp.edu/faculty/default.asp

Here's Waller's paper based on his book of the same title, 'Fighting the War of Ideas Like a Real War,' wherein he points out that the Pentagon is not restrained from using black propaganda (lies) on the American people by the 1948 Smith-Mundt Act, just the State Department is. So he advises the Pentagon's psy-ops special forces to start dropping mind bombs immediately, especially *RIDICULE.*

pdf file Waller paper-
http://ics.leeds.ac.uk/papers/vp01.cfm?outfit=pmt&folder=2027&paper=2843

Here's Waller on that website for a leading USG psy-ops group called The Institute of World Politics-
http://www.iwp.edu/news/bookID.49/book_detail.asp




See *the secret weapon of ridicule* deployed by Garcia below.
He's following USG orders based on psy-ops warlords like Waller.

Now here's Garcia's dig at Fisk and all conspiracy theorists as superstitious lovers of "ju-ju."--

http://www.counterpunch.org/garcia08272007.html

August 27 2007
You Are Now Entering a Black Hole
911 Emergency! Calling Robert Fisk!

By MANUEL GARCIA, Jr.

Correspondence between Carmelita McQuillan and Manuel Garcia, Jr.; shared with CounterPunch in the hopes it helps Robert Fisk "de-ju-ju-ize."
.....
A succinct way of putting Fisk's "questions" in this matter is simply: "I am ignorant on the subject, I don't know how the mechanics unfolded." if he were to apply his formidable investigative skills to this subject, then he might answer his own questions.

"It is better to remain silent and let people think you are a fool, than to open your mouth and remove all doubt." -- Oscar Wilde (from memory, could be off a bit)

What I have come to realize from my entire 9/11 experience, and also from the tepid reception of my "physics explanation" articles (like New Orleans dikes) is that the public is basically irrational.
.....
It has to be this way, because people are fully in the grip of fantasies they would rather die to preserve than become aware of factual reality.
.....
But, people live for their superstitions. We are no better than the caricatures of natives in 1930s jungle movies, hopping about in crazed deadly frenzy because of our "ju-ju". That is what 9/11 conspiracies are, our ju-ju. As crazy a ju-ju as any of our fundamentalist religions (the non-fundamentalist ones are just clubs). So, it is pointless for me to engage in any 9/11 talk, because there is no other mind there to engage, just a ju-ju crazed being. I could make a lot more money writing ju-ju channeling flak for some neo-con outfit -- but I hate those kind of people. Still, they'll win, because ju-ju is better than sex.

Oh, "ju-ju is better than sex," ay?
You should know, Mr. Garcia. Because that's exactly what you've given us instead of basic high school laws of physics.

And everybody ELSE knows the law's the law.

[nomo]

Redicule?

Is that even a word?



(Yup, I'm applying ridicule!)

[theeKultleeder]

That Garcia diatribe is ugly on many levels. Foremost is the contempt held for the "public." Seeing that it is from a personal correspondence is even more telling. Elitist.

[Hugh Manatee Wins]

Redicule?

Is that even a word?

I was distracted by Waller's rEdiculous paper.

[Hugh Manatee Wins]

(Here's a page with plenty of info on how the WTC was invulnerable to plane impacts AND fires- hmw)

http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/analysis/design.html#engineers
Towers' Design Parameters
Twin Towers' Designers Anticipated Jet Impacts Like September 11th's

Structural engineers who designed the Twin Towers carried out studies in the mid-1960s to determine how the buildings would fare if hit by large jetliners. In all cases the studies concluded that the Towers would survive the impacts and fires caused by the jetliners.

Evidence of these studies includes interviews with and papers and press releases issued by engineers who designed and oversaw construction of the World Trade Center.
1960s-era Jetliners Compared to Boeing 767s

Contrary to widely promoted misconceptions, the Boeing 767-200s used on 9/11/01 were only slightly larger than 707s and DC 8s, the types of jetliners whose impacts the World Trade Center's designers anticipated.

(diagram comparing 707 to 767)

The above graphic from Chapter 1 of FEMA's Report shows the sizes of a 707 and a 767 relative to the footprint of a WTC tower. 1 Flight 11 and Flight 175 were Boeing 767-200s. Although a 767-200 has a slightly wider body than a 707, the two models are very similar in overall size, weight and fuel capacity.

Given the differences in cruise speeds, a 707 in normal flight would actually have more kinetic energy than a 767, despite the slightly smaller size. Note the similar fuel capacities of both aircraft. The 767s used on September 11th were estimated to be carrying about 10,000 gallons of fuel each at the time of impact, only about 40% of the capacity of a 707.
Statements by Engineers

Engineers who participated in the design of the World Trade Center have stated, since the attack, that the Towers were designed to withstand jetliner collisions. For example, Leslie Robertson, who is featured on many documentaries about the attack, said he "designed it for a (Boeing) 707 to hit it." 2 Statements and documents predating the attack indicate that engineers considered the effects of not only of jetliner impacts, but also of ensuing fires.

John Skilling

John Skilling was the head structural engineer for the World Trade Center. In a 1993 interview, Skilling stated that the Towers were designed to withstand the impact and fires resulting from the collision of a large jetliner such as Boeing 707 or McDonald Douglas DC-8.
"Our analysis indicated the biggest problem would be the fact that all the fuel (from the airplane) would dump into the building. There would be a horrendous fire. A lot of people would be killed, ... The building structure would still be there." 3

A white paper released on February 3, 1964 states that the Towers could have withstood impacts of jetliners travelling 600 mph -- a speed greater than the impact speed of either jetliner used on 9/11/01.

The buildings have been investigated and found to be safe in an assumed collision with a large jet airliner (Boeing 707—DC 8) traveling at 600 miles per hour. Analysis indicates that such collision would result in only local damage which could not cause collapse or substantial damage to the building and would not endanger the lives and safety of occupants not in the immediate area of impact. 4
The Richard Roth Telegram

On Feburary 13, 1965, real estate baron Lawrence Wien called reporters to his office to charge that the design of the Twin Towers was structurally unsound. Many suspected that his allegation was motivated by a desire to derail the planned World Trade Center skyscrapers to protect the value of his extensive holdings, which included the Empire State Building. In response to the charge, Richard Roth, partner at Emery Roth & Sons, the architectural firm that was designing the Twin Towers, fired back with a three-page telegram containing the following details. 5
THE STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS CARRIED OUT BY THE FIRM OF WORTHINGTON, SKILLING, HELLE & JACKSON IS THE MOST COMPLETE AND DETAILED OF ANY EVER MADE FOR ANY BUILDING STRUCTURE. THE PRELIMINARY CALCULATIONS ALONE COVER 1,200 PAGES AND INVOLVE OVER 100 DETAILED DRAWINGS.
...
4. BECAUSE OF ITS CONFIGURATION, WHICH IS ESSENTIALLY THAT OF A STEEL BEAM 209' DEEP, THE TOWERS ARE ACTUALLY FAR LESS DARING STRUCTURALLY THAN A CONVENTIONAL BUILDING SUCH AS THE EMPIRE STATE BUILDING WHERE THE SPINE OR BRACED AREA OF THE BUILDING IS FAR SMALLER IN RELATION TO ITS HEIGHT.
...
5. THE BUILDING AS DESIGNED IS SIXTEEN TIMES STIFFER THAN A CONVENTIONAL STRUCTURE. THE DESIGN CONCEPT IS SO SOUND THAT THE STRUCTURAL ENGINEER HAS BEEN ABLE TO BE ULTRA-CONSERVATIVE IN HIS DESIGN WITHOUT ADVERSELY AFFECTING THE ECONOMICS OF THE STRUCTURE. ...

At the time the Twin Towers were built, the design approach of moving the support columns to the perimeter and the core, thereby creating large expanses of unobstructed floor space, was relatively new, and unique for a skyscraper. However, that approach is commonplace in contemporary skyscrapers.

Frank Demartini's Statement

Frank A. Demartini, on-site construction manager for the World Trade Center, spoke of the resilience of the towers in an interview recorded on January 25, 2001.
The building was designed to have a fully loaded 707 crash into it. That was the largest plane at the time. I believe that the building probably could sustain multiple impacts of jetliners because this structure is like the mosquito netting on your screen door -- this intense grid -- and the jet plane is just a pencil puncturing that screen netting. It really does nothing to the screen netting.

Demartini, who had an office on the 88th floor of the North Tower, has been missing since the 9/11/01 attack, having remained in the North Tower to assist in the evacuation. 6 Demartini had first worked at World Trade Center when Leslie E. Robertson Associates hired him to assess damage from the truck bombing in 1993.
Like All Skyscrapers, the Twin Towers Were Over-Engineered

One aspect of engineering that is not widely understood is that structures are over-engineered as a matter of standard practice. Steel structures like bridges and buildings are typically designed to withstand five times anticipated static loads and 3 times anticipated dynamic loads. The anticipated loads are the largest ones expected during the life of the structure, like the worst hurricane or earthquake occurring while the floors are packed with standing-room-only crowds. Given that September 11th was not a windy day, and that there were not throngs of people in the upper floors, the critical load ratio was probably well over 10, meaning that more than nine-tenths of the columns at the same level would have to fail before the weight of the top could have overcome the support capacity of the remaining columns.

There is evidence that the Twin Towers were designed with an even greater measure of reserve strength than typical large buildings. According to the 1964 white paper cited above, a Tower would still be able to withstand a 100-mile-per-hour wind after all the perimeter columns on one face and some of the columns on each adjacent face had been cut. 7 Also, John Skilling is cited by the Engineering News Record for the claim that "live loads on these [perimeter] columns can be increased more than 2000% before failure occurs." 8
References

1. Chapter 1: Introduction, WTC Building Performance Study,
2. Towers collapse shocks engineers, MedServ, 9/11/01 [cached]
3. Twin Towers Engineered To Withstand Jet Collision, The Seattle Times, 2/27/93 [cached]
4. City in the Sky, Times Books, Henry Hold and Company, LLC, 2003, page 131
5. City in the Sky, Times Books ..., , page 134-136
6. Painful Losses Mount In the Construction 'Family', construction.com, 10/1/01 [cached]
7. City in the Sky, Times Books ..., , page 133
8. How Columns Will Be Designed for 110-Story Buildings, ENR, 4/2/1964

page last modified: 2007-08-21

[Hugh Manatee Wins]

Since orz just took the time and our bandwith to start a thread to ridicule me, just as Professor Pan did, I was reminded of this.

[orz]

I didn't start it to ridicule you, I started it to point out why you're wrong.

[slow_dazzle]

The movement, if that term is apposite, makes a fool of itself without external intervention by the "deep parapolitical networks". The latter is a term used by tKl in a response to one of my posts earlier today and one I'm going to adopt from now on. Sorry tKl...I always steal good ideas

Hugh, I hope your post isn't a response to my pushing the concept of debating 9/11 within a wider context. I say that because I know with reasonable certainty that the collapse of WTC7, in particular, is mystifying. Don't ask me why I hold that view... I have my reasons.

As we move into a situation that might develop into an attack on Iran we desperately need to understand and analyse WTF is going on. No amount of structural analyses of the WTC buildings is going to help us understand why Iran might be attacked. We need to understand WHY because the debate needs to take place within the context of NOW. Debating 9/11 within a context that is six years old isn't going to make much difference once the missiles are launched.

I also hope you don't think I'm having a go at you. I'm not.

[Hugh Manatee Wins]

I also hope you don't think I'm having a go at you. I'm not.

I appreciate your thoughtful comments and keeping larger context in mind.

Consider the parallel of JFK and 9/11.

Both crimes, Dealey Plaza and the WTC, were committed to keep a war system going.
So the crimes themselves need to be exposed AND the war system, too.

Culturally, certainty about the one day's crime supports certainty about the system.
So it is not an energy sink or a rabbit hole or a divisive diversion as some fear.
That reflects 'either/or' thinking instead of a wholistic 'and' thinking.

[NavnDansk]

On of the eight Generals who were speaking out against bush before the 2006 elections gave an interview where he said he was commenting on the beginning of the war on Iraq for CNN or MBC (one of the big names) and he quit because he realized that the station was using PSY-OPS on the American people which he said was ILLEGAL.

Does anyone know what the law really says?

[theeKultleeder]

yeah. Psychological Operations are a military tactic, and used to subdue enemy forces in times of war. As such, they are forbidden to be used in times of peace, and forbidden to be used by domestic forces on its own population.

This is just me, though. I don't know what the courts say. It can't really matter, anyway, because posse comitatus and habeus corpus are dead and buried in this Republic of Law.

[Hugh Manatee Wins]

Bill Clinton just used this generic ridicule as a deflection of 9/11 truthers in St. Paul.

"...you're going to give Minnesota a bad name."

[theeKultleeder]

Redicule?

Is that even a word?



(Yup, I'm applying ridicule!)

Whoa. Deja Vu. He has done that before - and haven't you pulled the exact same gag before?

I think it's a meme he's trying to spread, like me and thee - maybe he should do it my way, "reedicule."

Oh damn - this is an old thread. No wonder I had deja vu!!!!

[§ê¢rꆧ]

Consider the parallel of JFK and 9/11.

Both crimes, Dealey Plaza and the WTC, were committed to keep a war system going.So the crimes themselves need to be exposed AND the war system, too.

Culturally, certainty about the one day's crime supports certainty about the system.So it is not an energy sink or a rabbit hole or a divisive diversion as some fear. That reflects 'either/or' thinking instead of a wholistic 'and' thinking.

I'm with you here, and thanks for the crosspost, being a newb I hadn't seen it before

[MinM]

He's baaack.

Manuel Garcia, Jr. explains the disappearance of Air France flight 447

The Physics of a Disappearance
What Happened to Air France Flight 447?

By MANUEL GARCIA, Jr.

Air France Flight 447 from Rio de Janeiro to Paris crashed into the Atlantic Ocean about 725 km (450 miles) northeast of Brazil at about 2:30 a.m. local time, Monday, June 1. The accident occurred three hours into the 11 hour flight; 228 people were aboard the twin-engine Airbus A330-200 jet. While flying at 521 mph (839 kph) at 35,000 feet (10,671 m) at 2:15 a.m., the plane encountered heavy turbulence. An automated communications system in the airplane began an exchange of data with Air France maintenance computers on the ground that totaled four minutes and indicated that multiple electrical and pressurization failures had occurred. The last contact was at 2:33 a.m. There was no distress call from the pilots...
http://www.counterpunch.org/garcia06032009.html