On Sep 13, 2006, at 7:29 PM, Dan Minette wrote:
-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Gibson Jonathan
Sent: Wednesday, September 13, 2006 3:24 PM
To: Killer Bs Discussion
Subject: Re: What should we believe when there is no reliable
information?
Thanks Dan,
I guess I missed that message in the bustle of my life.
As another after word, every single one of my Archt schoolmates
contacted in no way buys the official story. Every one of them cited
the pile-up of those vertical support beams should have tipped the
building, any building, off to one side or another.
OK, then why did all the graduate school studies in structural
engineering
that I referenced get this wrong? Or, are they all part of the
conspiracy?
It would be helpful if one of your buddies did comparablel engineering
analysis...
None could think
of examples of a zero footprint implosion w/o demolition.
But, of course, there wasn't such a minute footprint. Recently, I
posted on
Brin-L a link to pictures that showed a footprint that shows a tower
having
a lateral component to it's footprint covering about 2 blocks.
http://www.spaceimaging.com/gallery/9-11/default.htm#
Hey, there was a lot of mass and volume to be those structures and it
is little wonder some of it spread out. The point we are all
scratching our heads over is how they didn't topple off to one side.
None of these buildings {though WTC7 was a shorter one} acted as any
other building has. Ever.
I have not looked into the reports themselves, but I have heard and
read that NIST inflated heat ranges and durations playing loose with
the raw inputs even before tweaking the behavior models interactively.
I certainly recall hearing about the paint chips tested showed the heat
was barely hot enough to reach the sagging point of some of the steel
members and that even this was an extremely short duration and nothing
like what would have been needed nor what is declared by the official
stories.
Confusion over the complete sell-off of all material that could be
studied was a mystery that baffles many
I quote from the head of the
<quote>
There has been some concern expressed by others that the work of the
team
has been hampered because debris was removed from the site and has
subsequently been processed for recycling. This is not the case. The
team
has had full access to the scrap yards and to the site and has been
able to
obtain numerous samples. At this point there is no indication that
having
access to each piece of steel from the World Trade Center would make a
significant difference to understanding the performance of the
structures.
<end quote>
I repeatedly hear that investigators NOT sanctioned by the Powers That
Be are refused any such access. You, know, those scientists who are
raising concerns, but have the wherewithal to do serious work on the
debris. Some of them show their request letters and the denials that
return.
Why not clear the air, make a PR showing of handing over verifiable
samples, following up with NOVA, Discovery Channel, CNN, to dispel the
growing clamor?
Or, release anything more than a single blurry digi-chunky frame of the
Pentagon strike either, for that matter. Even that took FOI requests
and was like pulling teeth. There were multiple cameras on that
building. Why not clear this up?
!
- as well as no regulatory body
issuing upgraded reqs in light of an unprecedented tripple-whammy
systemic failure occurring the same day.
Let me quote from the testimony of Dr. W. Gene Corley on behalf of the
American Society of Civil Engineers, before the Subcommittee on
Environment,
Technology and Standards & Subcommittee on Research Committee on
Science
U.S. House of Representatives.
It's available at
http://www.asce.org/pdf/3-6-02wtc_testimony.pdf
BTW, the team assembled to study this looks fairly impressive.
Oh, Corley, the "Cleaner" guy who gets called in when the government
wants to cover up?
Underwriters Labs {former} branch head Dr Ryan mentions meeting him as
part of the NIST process and paints Corley as laying out the scope and
limits of the investigation before it even began - because this is a
the scientific method, right? That man presided over the Oklahoma City
bombing review as well. I'd trust him as far as I could throw him at
this point.
All believe WTC 7 is the lynchpin that can reveal what/who benefits
from this canard.
All conspiracy theorists? I doubt there is such unanimity.
All of the colleagues I spoke with anyway - which is what I said
before. As we know theories ebb and flow in many directions and people
accept various ones or not. These are not residential designers but
commercial building architects. These professionals voiced a similar
feeling about this mystery. Others may not. I'm relaying what I can
as I find it.
Frankly, another aspect relayed to me is the ridicule some of these
architects have gotten when they bring up this issue and fear for their
livelihoods. It's akin to being tagged with the UFO & tinfoil hats as
a way to dismiss critical thought or review. Are you doing your part?
So much for the free exchange of ideas and all, heh?
I'd like to know more about this grad-school gal who thinks she knows
more than practicing architects about what should and shouldn't be
able
to stand.
What she probably thinks is that she had a chance to review multiple
studies
of the structural engineering, and had a fairly good idea of the type
of
analysis they did. For example, one would think that the professional
body
of civil engineers, who are responsible for massive building projects,
has
the responsibility to make a thorough investigation of this. Which
they
did. Their work is part of the understanding of the 9-11 commission.
There were, of course, many other groups that studied the collapse.
Some of
the websites are:
http://www.public-action.com/911/jmcm/sciam/
http://www.architectureweek.com/2001/1024/news_2-2.html
http://cee.mit.edu/index.pl?iid=3742&isa=Category
http://www.public-action.com/911/jmcm/sciam/
http://www.mscsoftware.com/success/details.cfm?Q=132&Z=181&sid=269
In addition, there is a list of abstracts that includes a number on
the WTC collapse at:
http://www.pubs.asce.org/WWWsrchkwx.cgi?Collapse
Personally, trusting groups like this sounds quite reasonable to me.
But, I take it that you are singularly unimpressed with 20-somethings
that
have important staff responsibility for investigations like the 9-11
commission. I guess we might wait 20 years and then maybe you can
downplay
her work as a member of the White House staff. :-)
Dan M.
I understand your acceptance.
Interesting that your friend is well-placed and perhaps well-heeled -
this actually fits a premise I'll go into later about people who know
where their bread gets buttered. I'd really like to know just how
these studies were funded, administered, who supplied their raw data
and coordinated the results before accepting this - given so much else
around the event is in question. It may well take serious scholarly
work a decade or two to sift this out. If I have to eat old crow that
is desiccated and moldy, so be it - are you equally prepared?
I left the field and don't have the schooling to follow this in the
depth I would like. Looking over the 9-11 Scholars for Truth web site
I see a great deal of intimate knowledge in material science areas by
scientists raising detailed questions about the raw data inputs and
models used. For instance, I noticed the Sci-Am article you list
{twice} cites the high temps of the fuel, when I've read the heat was
not that intense {granted, the article was relatively quickly out the
gate} nor burned as long as originally thought - and that a good deal
of it went out the window on impact. If you want to look over this
yourself and give us something to grasp there I would be grateful.
http://www.st911.org/
However, I can't simply take this as a science project and limit the
discussion horizon.
I look at the entire picture and see a great deal of collusion between
money and power as it is wielded in this ever-crueler empire we call
America - especially on this topic. I see stupendous gains by certain
interests around this event - especially around the institutions and
figures who were supposed to prevent such things. I see many nefarious
figures have participated around these events as we've discussed
before; Many of the supposed hijackers were under FBI/CIA observation
or working with them {even living with them}, Atta receiving flight
training at former military/CIA airports purchased by former biz
partners of GwB {James Bath + Salim bin Laden, later of Arbusto Oil
too}, Atta received $100K from the head of Pakistani ISI {who met with
CIA head Goss the morning of 9-11}, the BCCI connections to these
people, the BCCI funding of Pakistani scientist AQKahn's nuclear
bazzar, etc. Why isn't Osama named as responsible for the WTC
terrorist by the FBI on his Wanted page, because they cannot prove it.
I'll end this point by stating the 9-11 Commission looked into the
stock shorting that day which made many-many millions of dollars for
someone{s} on those airlines and concluded merely that it wasn't
foreign terrorist groups that made this heaping pile of cash, begging
the question of who really did. We ought to know this salient fact.
All this may make your head spin and eyes roll, but these are damn
curious items not easily dismissed.
If you don't think a big secret can be kept for long consider how much
of the 1960's high altitude plane and orbital spy sat programs were
only released a few short years ago where thousands of people had a
hand in projects such as that. Compartmentalization is especially
effective at obscuring government action, as it is designed to, for
otherwise good and obvious reasons. In the same light, 9-11 had the
largest number of simulated terrorism drills in the history of this
country... perfect cover for black and white hat teams to do their jobs
with only minor string pulling to corrupt the outcome. Why hasn't
anybody been fired/reprimanded/chastised for the lack of air cover for
the Eastern Seaboard, whereas I understand the officials in charge were
even promoted. Pentagon officials committed perjury to the 9-11
Commission regarding this topic as reported by Senator Keane last
month, the head of that committee. Numerous foreign intelligence
agencies warned of this plot, the Egyptians even had the number and
division of labor right, but this administration... well, it went
fishing didn't it?
Webster Tarply has the most cogent argument about these arrangements
I've seen,
http://www.formandfunction.com/word/wordbits/MalloyShow-(03-08-2006).mov
Please debunk and I'll revise my premises.
Personally, I believe in the One Big Property Class theory of how our
country is run. The rich and the powerful work together to rule this
country and as much of the world as they can muster - they care little
about Left -v- Right. It explains why so many Republican and
Democratic figures are on the same page {millionaires Kerry + Bush on
Iraq War during 2004 campaign} and the two parties have looked so
similar these last few decades. Add in a defense industry gasping for
breath after the Cold War ended, Peak Oil dwindling, and an economy
with dubious deficits and inflated dollars and there is plenty of
motivation for black hearted people to try getting away with any and
all manner of schema. Even our highly paid white collar class, the
backbone of enablers to this upper-crust segment, are mere chattel to
such folk and expendable. You don't need the WTC falling on Wall
Street types to see this: look at the outsourcing affect from brokers
to doctors to high tech developers who were thought immune to the blue
collar ails engineered by our flag-pin wearing Chamber of Commerce
types. Here's a good study of how the puppet strings get pulled,
http://www.projectcensored.org/downloads/Global_Dominance_Group.pdf
I've known a number of right-wing so-called Conservatives and so-called
Republicans who took absolute delight digging into Clinton shadows to
unearth CIA networks running drugs and arms in-out of Mena, Arkansas -
but who have been utterly uninterested in exploring where those links
lead to and who set them up long before those Little Rock politicians
pushed Poppy Bush out of the White House. The Milspec counterpunch to
the end of the Cold War is perfectly illustrated by the PNAC NeoCon
screed calling for a New Pearl Harbour to both rally their faithful and
cow critiques by short-circuiting logical thinking with blunt emotional
trauma. But, the lies are unravelling with every scandal laying bare
the craven crass cruelty of a House, Senate, Justice and White House
all run by Republican-flavored rulers who were sore losers in the 90's
and poor winners in the XXIst - ideal henchman for playing American
good-cop/bad-cop on the world stage. Following along the Vince Foster
murder trail was titilating when Rush and Liddy bellowed hot air at
their backs, but as the river of time flows Vince's body {especially
via Chertof} keeps floating to the surface leaving a toxic oily trail
to the docks of shadowy elite operations ... that are the black heart
of BushCo before heading out to sea and spanning the globe.
This last bit I derived from The Big Wedding by Sander Hicks. He
doesn't publish much in the way of excerpts, but here's a long 2-part
interview outlining his own damning research,
http://www.kpfa.org/cgi-bin/gen-mpegurl.m3u?
server=157.22.130.4&port=80&file=dummy.m3u&mount=/data/20051012-
Wed1300.mp3
http://www.kpfa.org/cgi-bin/gen-mpegurl.m3u?
server=157.22.130.4&port=80&file=dummy.m3u&mount=/data/20051005-
Wed1300.mp3
I think we are finally seeing the mechanisms & operators that
repeatedly propel Grade-B talent into the most prominant roles of the
worlds' most lethal country. The current people in power are clowns on
the stage for us to watch while the Producers hang in the stage-wings
and box seats as their Roadies of Death attune lighting, paint new
faces, mix their flash-pots and sharpen stagecraft for the next
production.
Your turn,
Jonathan Gibson
www.formandfunction.com/word
_______________________________________________
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
