New WTC 7 Investigation by AIA

[HallofFame]

http://m.digitaljournal.com/news/po...s-to-reconsider-wtc-7-collapse/article/432237

I like where this is going. Maybe someone will finally get to the bottom of this. Hope they vote to keep looking into what really happened that day.

 

[anon_snp6dc585nnj4]

J F C

 

[ANYCHawk]

http://m.digitaljournal.com/news/po...s-to-reconsider-wtc-7-collapse/article/432237

I like where this is going. Maybe someone will finally get to the bottom of this. Hope they vote to keep looking into what really happened that day.

Yeah like 19 religious fanatics hijacked a bunch of planes and flew them into buildings. Fire, hot; you know.

 

[HallofFame]

Yeah like 19 religious fanatics hijacked a bunch of planes and flew them into buildings. Fire, hot; you know.

Read the article.

 

[ANYCHawk]

Read the article.

don't need to. Fire hot yo!

 

[HallofFame]

Office equipment brought down 7.

 

[ANYCHawk]

Office equipment brought down 7.

cause Fire is hot. It amazes me how often people forget this. No you may not go back into that burning building. Fire hot yo!

 

[ANYCHawk]

Just to humor you.

Let's look at the author first.

Victoria N. Alexander is the author ofLocus Amoenus, a political satire/tragedy about a 9/11 widow, her son Hamlet, his conspiracy theorist friend Horatio and his new stepfather Claudius, an incompetent bureaucrat who works for NIST.

Now let's look at some of the things of the article:

Fifty-five AIA members who have proposed the resolution argue that, if office fires caused this kind of damage to a steel frame building, we need to be concerned about the safety of the people working and living in these kinds of buildings.

The AIA claims 83,000 members. 55 out of 83,000. We'll let you figure out the significance of that.

 

[Nat Algren]

Nothing to see here folks. Just keep moving along.

I've always been curious how a few scattered office fires could cause a bldg. to collapse into its own footprint in 6 seconds, all the while, turning to ashes the steel beams that support it. Never, NEVER has this been done in history. Might explain why the debris from this crime scene was whisked away immediately BEFORE an investigation could be conducted.

 

[strummingram]

Have any other skyscrapers ever collapsed due to fire?

 

[Thomas Barnes]

Nothing to see here folks. Just keep moving along.

I've always been curious how a few scattered office fires could cause a bldg. to collapse into its own footprint in 6 seconds, all the while, turning to ashes the steel beams that support it. Never, NEVER has this been done in history. Might explain why the debris from this crime scene was whisked away immediately BEFORE an investigation could be conducted.

So what happened to make it collapse?

 

[Nat Algren]

So what happened to make it collapse?

There were reports from people on site that they heard loud explosions.

 

[ANYCHawk]

Have any other skyscrapers ever collapsed due to fire?

Have any other skyscrapers been hit by giant planes acting as missiles?

 

[ANYCHawk]

I've always been curious how a few scattered office fires could cause a bldg. to collapse into its own footprint in 6 seconds, all the while, turning to ashes the steel beams that support it. Never, NEVER has this been done in history. Might explain why the debris from this crime scene was whisked away immediately BEFORE an investigation could be conducted.

It wasn't a few scattered office fires and why is it always ignored that this fire burned for hours while, you know, firefighters searched for their buddies who might still be alive underneath 2 100 story buildings.

 

[Nat Algren]

It wasn't a few scattered office fires and why is it always ignored that this fire burned for hours while, you know, firefighters searched for their buddies who might still be alive underneath 2 100 story buildings.

Can you offer a reason as to why the steel columns were complete dust and not standing erect? How is it the WHOLE bldg. came down in nano seconds from any kind of fire? Why was the debris quickly carted off before an investigation could be performed? It was a crime scene that demanded forensics. Also; IIRC, WTC was never mentioned in the 9/11 Commission Report...since you mentioned ignoring. The bldg was never hit.

 

[Nat Algren]

The 9/11 Commission Didn’t Believe the Government … So Why Should We?
Posted on March 12, 2015 by WashingtonsBlog
9/11 Commissioners Admit They Never Got the Full Story
The 9/11 Commissioners publicly expressed anger at cover ups and obstructions of justice by the government into a real 9/11 investigation:

• 9/11 Commission co-chair Lee Hamilton says “I don’t believe for a minute we got everything right”, that the Commission was set up to fail, that people should keep asking questions about 9/11, and that the 9/11 debate should continue

• The 9/11 Commission chair said the Commission was “set up to fail”

• The Commission’s co-chairs said that the CIA (and likely the White House) “obstructed our investigation”

• 9/11 Commissioner Bob Kerrey said that “There are ample reasons to suspect that there may be some alternative to what we outlined in our version . . . We didn’t have access . . . .”

• 9/11 Commissioner Timothy Roemer said “We were extremely frustrated with the false statements we were getting”

• 9/11 Commissioner Max Cleland resigned from the Commission, stating: “It is a national scandal”; “This investigation is now compromised”; and “One of these days we will have to get the full story because the 9-11 issue is so important to America. But this White House wants to cover it up”. When asked in 2009 if he thought there should be another 9/11 commission, Cleland responded: “There should be about fifteen 9/11 commissions”

• The Senior Counsel to the 9/11 Commission (John Farmer) – who led the 9/11 staff’s inquiry – said“At some level of the government, at some point in time…there was an agreement not to tell the truth about what happened“. He also said “I was shocked at how different the truth was from the way it was described …. The tapes told a radically different story from what had been told to us and the public for two years…. This is not spin. This is not true.”

No wonder the Co-Chair of the congressional investigation into 9/11 – Bob Graham – and 9/11 Commissioner and former Senator Bob Kerrey are calling for either a “PERMANENT 9/11 commission” or a new 9/11 investigation to get to the bottom of it.

Some examples of obstruction of justice into the 9/11 investigation include:

• An FBI informant hosted and rented a room to two hijackers in 2000. Specifically, investigators for the Congressional Joint Inquiry discovered that an FBI informant had hosted and even rented a room to two hijackers in 2000 and that, when the Inquiry sought to interview the informant, the FBI refused outright, and then hid him in an unknown location, and that a high-level FBI official stated these blocking maneuvers were undertaken under orders from the White House. As the New York Times notes:

Senator Bob Graham, the Florida Democrat who is a former chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee, accused the White House on Tuesday of covering up evidence ….The accusation stems from the Federal Bureau of Investigation’s refusal to allow investigators for a Congressional inquiry and the independent Sept. 11 commission to interview an informant, Abdussattar Shaikh, who had been the landlord in San Diego of two Sept. 11 hijackers.

• The chairs of both the 9/11 Commission and the Official Congressional Inquiry into 9/11 said that Soviet-style government “minders” obstructed the investigation into 9/11 by intimidating witnesses (and see this)

• The 9/11 Commissioners concluded that officials from the Pentagon lied to the Commission, and considered recommending criminal charges for such false statements

• The tape of interviews of air traffic controllers on-duty on 9/11 was intentionally destroyed by crushing the cassette by hand, cutting the tape into little pieces, and then dropping the pieces in different trash cans around the building as shown by this NY Times article (summary version is free; full version is pay-per-view) and by this article from the Chicago Sun-Times

• As reported by ACLU, FireDogLake, RawStory and many others, declassified documents shows that Senior Bush administration officials sternly cautioned the 9/11 Commission against probing too deeply into the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001

http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2015/03/911-commissioners-didnt-believe-government.html

 

[ANYCHawk]

How is it the WHOLE bldg. came down in nano seconds from any kind of fire?

Cause fire hot yo.

 

[ANYCHawk]

Also I like the idea the debris was quickly carted off...except it wasn't.

 

[dandh]

Can you offer a reason as to why the steel columns were complete dust and not standing erect? How is it the WHOLE bldg. came down in nano seconds from any kind of fire? Why was the debris quickly carted off before an investigation could be performed? It was a crime scene that demanded forensics. Also; IIRC, WTC was never mentioned in the 9/11 Commission Report...since you mentioned ignoring. The bldg was never hit.

Nat, in my first career I did lots of machining and tool making. Steel never turns to ash, it eventually melts. But, long before then, it loses its strength as heat is applied. So much so that I've been able to manually bend some pretty large pieces by heating it to around 1400-1500F with a torch. (Steel melts, btw, at around 2600-2700F depending on alloy). Simply put, it doesn't have to get as hot as most people think to fail structurally. I don't think the beams turned to dust, I think they just weakened enough to fail. And when there's that much weight relying on them, that's all it takes.

 

[strummingram]

Have any other skyscrapers been hit by giant planes acting as missiles?

WTC7 was not hit by a plane.

 

[Nat Algren]

Cause fire hot yo.

Ok. Let's tally up how many times you can say "fire hot yo" in 1 thread. Not only is your post implausible and lacking erudition...you didn't offer an explanation. PERIOD.

 

[Nat Algren]

Also I like the idea the debris was quickly carted off...except it wasn't.

Yeah it was.

 

[Lone Clone]

Not. Again.

This is hopeless. I was stalked the last couple of years I worked by a guy -- very normal in other respects, nice guy -- who was absolutely convinced it was a conspiracy. Traveled all over the country to attend conferences on the subject. You can't talk logically with these people. Everything you say, they just claim it's additional proof of a conspiracy. It's funny for awhile. Then it gets wierd.

 

[Nat Algren]

Nat, in my first career I did lots of machining and tool making. Steel never turns to ash, it eventually melts. But, long before then, it loses its strength as heat is applied. So much so that I've been able to manually bend some pretty large pieces by heating it to around 1400-1500F with a torch. (Steel melts, btw, at around 2600-2700F depending on alloy). Simply put, it doesn't have to get as hot as most people think to fail structurally. I don't think the beams turned to dust, I think they just weakened enough to fail. And when there's that much weight relying on them, that's all it takes.

Experts with over 25,000 of professional experience in the Architects and Engineers video dispute that.

 

[ANYCHawk]

Ok. Let's tally up how many times you can say "fire hot yo" in 1 thread. Not only is your post implausible and lacking erudition...you didn't offer an explanation. PERIOD.

CAUSE ALL THESE CONSPIRACY THEORY IGNORE THE FACT THAT FIRE IS HOT!


After 7 hours of uncontrolled fires, a steel girder on Floor 13 lost its connection to one of the 81 columns supporting the building. Floor 13 collapsed, beginning a cascade of floor failures to Floor 5. Column 79, no longer supported by a girder, buckled, triggering a rapid succession of structural failures that moved from east to west. All 23 central columns, followed by the exterior columns, failed in what's known as a "progressive collapse"--that is, local damage that spreads from one structural element to another, eventually resulting in the collapse of the entire structure.

http://www.popularmechanics.com/technology/design/a3524/4278874/

 

[ANYCHawk]

Experts with over 25,000 of professional experience in the Architects and Engineers video dispute that.

55...out of 83,000

 

[ANYCHawk]

WTC7 was not hit by a plane.

OK. Not sure what that has to do with anything, but OK.

 

[Nat Algren]

55...out of 83,000

2,100

 

[Nat Algren]

CAUSE ALL THESE CONSPIRACY THEORY IGNORE THE FACT THAT FIRE IS HOT!


After 7 hours of uncontrolled fires, a steel girder on Floor 13 lost its connection to one of the 81 columns supporting the building. Floor 13 collapsed, beginning a cascade of floor failures to Floor 5. Column 79, no longer supported by a girder, buckled, triggering a rapid succession of structural failures that moved from east to west. All 23 central columns, followed by the exterior columns, failed in what's known as a "progressive collapse"--that is, local damage that spreads from one structural element to another, eventually resulting in the collapse of the entire structure.

http://www.popularmechanics.com/technology/design/a3524/4278874/

Never ever in history has this happened.

 

[ANYCHawk]

2,100

I'll give you 2,100, that's 2.5 percent. That's really what you want to use to support your argument? 2.5 percent?

 

[Nat Algren]

And the New York Times wrote that partly EVAPORATED steel beams were found at WTC 7. But normal office and diesel fires are not NEARLY hot enough to evaporate steel. Hydrocarbon fires fueled by diesel (which was apparently stored at WTC 7) and normal office materials cannot evaporate steel. Steel does not evaporate unless it is heated to at least 5,000 degrees Fahrenheit. Everyone agrees that fires from conventional building fires are thousands of degrees cooler than that.

http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2008...-wtc-7-easy-as-shooting-fish-in-a-barrel.html

 

[ANYCHawk]

Never ever in history has this happened.

And this is the one argument that I don't get. So what it never happened before? Never before had 19 religious fanatics planned in a cave, hijacked planes and used them as living missiles to drive right into buildings and that happened. Never before had Wisconsin faked a punt in their own zone to beat us, but that happened to. Just because it hadn't happened doesn't mean its impossible.

8. Why did WTC 7 collapse, while no other known building in history has collapsed due to fires alone?

The collapse of WTC 7 is the first known instance of a tall building brought down primarily by uncontrolled fires. The fires in WTC 7 were similar to those that have occurred in several tall buildings where the automatic sprinklers did not function or were not present. These other buildings, including Philadelphia's One Meridian Plaza, a 38-story skyscraper that burned for 18 hours in 1991, did not collapse due to differences in the design of the structural system (see the answer to Question 9).

Factors contributing to WTC 7's collapse included: the thermal expansion of building elements such as floor beams and girders, which occurred at temperatures hundreds of degrees below those typically considered in current practice for fire-resistance ratings; significant magnification of thermal expansion effects due to the long-span floors in the building; connections between structural elements that were designed to resist the vertical forces of gravity, not the thermally induced horizontal or lateral loads; and an overall structural system not designed to prevent fire-induced progressive collapse.

http://www.nist.gov/el/disasterstudies/wtc/faqs_wtc7.cfm

 

[ANYCHawk]

And the New York Times wrote that partly EVAPORATED steel beams were found at WTC 7. But normal office and diesel fires are not NEARLY hot enough to evaporate steel. Hydrocarbon fires fueled by diesel (which was apparently stored at WTC 7) and normal office materials cannot evaporate steel. Steel does not evaporate unless it is heated to at least 5,000 degrees Fahrenheit. Everyone agrees that fires from conventional building fires are thousands of degrees cooler than that.

http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2008...-wtc-7-easy-as-shooting-fish-in-a-barrel.html

investigators couldn't determine what steel was from WTC 7 cause it didn't have identifying marks like the beams found in 1 and 2. So there goes that idea.

 

[Nat Algren]

Experts

And why didn’t NIST address what these experts say?:

• The former head of the Fire Science Division of the government agency which claims that the World Trade Centers collapsed due to fire (the National Institute of Standards and Technology), who is one of the world’s leading fire science researchers and safety engineers, a Ph.D. in mechanical engineering (Dr. James Quintiere), called for an independent review of the World Trade Center Twin Tower collapse investigation. “I wish that there would be a peer review of this,” he said, referring to the NIST investigation. “I think all the records that NIST has assembled should be archived. I would really like to see someone else take a look at what they’ve done; both structurally and from a fire point of view. … I think the official conclusion that NIST arrived at is questionable.

• Two professors of structural engineering at a prestigious Swiss university (Dr. Joerg Schneider and Dr. Hugo Bachmann) said that, on 9/11, World Trade Center 7 was brought down by controlled demolition (translation here).

• Kamal S. Obeid, structural engineer, with a masters degree in Engineering from UC Berkeley, of Fremont, California, says:

“Photos of the steel, evidence about how the buildings collapsed, the unexplainable collapse of WTC 7, evidence of thermite in the debris as well as several other red flags, are quite troubling indications of well planned and controlled demolition”

• Ronald H. Brookman, structural engineer, with a masters degree in Engineering from UC Davis, of Novato California, writes:

“Why would all 47 stories of WTC 7 fall straight down to the ground in about seven seconds… ? It was not struck by any aircraft or engulfed in any fire. An independent investigation is justified for all three collapses including the surviving steel samples and the composition of the dust.”

• Graham John Inman, structural engineer, of London, England, points out:

“WTC 7 Building could not have collapsed as a result of internal fire and external debris. NO plane hit this building. This is the only case of a steel frame building collapsing through fire in the world. The fire on this building was small & localized therefore what is the cause?”

• A Dutch demolition expert (Danny Jowenko) stated that WTC 7 was imploded

• A prominent physicist with 33 years of service for the Naval Research Laboratory in Washington, DC (Dr. David L. Griscom) said that the official theory for why the Twin Towers and world trade center building 7 collapsed “does not match the available facts” and supports the theory that the buildings were brought down by controlled demolition

http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2008...-wtc-7-easy-as-shooting-fish-in-a-barrel.html

 

[ANYCHawk]

Cause we don't need to waste our time with what one or two dudes have to say? Are you really this dense?

 

[Nat Algren]

Cause we don't need to waste our time with what one or two dudes have to say? Are you really this dense?

Dense huh? And I suppose all the members of Congress who called the Commission a sham, that you just happened to gloss over, were wrong as well. You're too obtuse to ask yourself cui bono. The same war criminals who lied us into war and are still benefitting decades later, used this as a pretext to rally Boobus Americanus into going over 'there' (finger pointing to Middle East). So, almost 3,000 died on 9/11. So, let's go into the ME and lose over 8,000 and kill over a million. With all the history of false flags, you just want to believe. Like every school girl who was told by their boyfriends they loved them just to get in their pants.

 

[ANYCHawk]

Dense huh? And I suppose all the members of Congress who called the Commission a sham, that you just happened to gloss over, were wrong as well. You're too obtuse to ask yourself cui bono. The same war criminals who lied us into war and are still benefitting decades later, used this as a pretext to rally Boobus Americanus into going over 'there' (finger pointing to Middle East). So, almost 3,000 died on 9/11. So, let's go into the ME and lose over 8,000 and kill over a million. With all the history of false flags, you just want to believe. Like every school girl who was told by their boyfriends they loved them just to get in their pants.

I know right. I mean we just listen to every member of congress the same guys you are blasting for leading into a war, but we should totally listen to what they say about the commission.

I know science can be difficult, but its there. It provides the explanations to what happened. I know you'll never accept it, but there it is.

Remember our government couldn't keep a secret over a break in at a two bit D.C. hotel. But, yet somehow they've kept this secret for a decade about what really happened in 9/11.

 

[lucas80]

Not. Again.

This is hopeless. I was stalked the last couple of years I worked by a guy -- very normal in other respects, nice guy -- who was absolutely convinced it was a conspiracy. Traveled all over the country to attend conferences on the subject. You can't talk logically with these people. Everything you say, they just claim it's additional proof of a conspiracy. It's funny for awhile. Then it gets wierd.

And, they never need a shred of actual proof. In many instances the absence of proof is all the proof they need validate their conspiracies. You just can't win an argument with these folks. They are the same ones who decry the ineptitude of the federal government, but when it suits them will tell you with a straight face that scores of feds came together to plan, coordinate, carry out, then cover up a complex event.
Plus, crap like this recycles because it sells on the conspiracy circuit. There have been times when I've thought I could make a good living writing conspiracy books.

 

[Lone Clone]

And, they never need a shred of actual proof. In many instances the absence of proof is all the proof they need validate their conspiracies. You just can't win an argument with these folks. They are the same ones who decry the ineptitude of the federal government, but when it suits them will tell you with a straight face that scores of feds came together to plan, coordinate, carry out, then cover up a complex event.
Plus, crap like this recycles because it sells on the conspiracy circuit. There have been times when I've thought I could make a good living writing conspiracy books.

You couldn't make a living writing a book at the level these people operate because it would be too outlandish for anybody to buy it. Seriously. They go beyond science fiction. They absolutely refuse to let logic or common sense enter into the discussion.

Just consider one of many points: That the WTC buildings were brought down by explosions, like those outdated casinos we see razed in Las Vegas every so often. Even the wackiest conspiracy theorist will concede that this is a matter of precision -- where the charges are set, what power they have, etc., etc., etc. It takes a team of experts to plan the destruction of a 10-story building; the amount of planning and preparation requires to successfully bring down not one, but both, the towers is mind-boggling.

But let's assume that somehow the government, or whoever was in charge (since we KNOW it wasn't Muslim terrorists) had this expertise. Simple question: When did they plant the charges, and how did they do it in secret?

Whoops. Time to change the subject.....

 

[Aegon_Targaryen]

cause Fire is hot. It amazes me how often people forget this. No you may not go back into that burning building. Fire hot yo!

There are many people, including engineers who have serious questions about this. You want to be ignorant and live under a rock then fine, but don't sit there and try to sound superior to someone smart enough to answer questions.