9-11 was Designed to be Unsolvable

although millions think it's been solved already, it never will be, because it was set up that way, just like JFK's murder.

It's unsolvED -- I don't see why it would be impossible to solve it.

why is everyone so goddamn obsessed with MIHOP?

Once you realize that the top leadership of the US stood down on that morning on purpose, then you will never see the world in the same way again.

You hit home with that statement. And some of the most dense mass media programed people alive are professionals.

officially sanctioned is, by definition, a conspiracy theory, no ideas, however reasonable, will be allowed into any open discourse.

racket and screwing our nation should be likened to the mafia and the RICO statutes would be the appropriate statutes to prosecute them under if they did not own the investigators, prosecutors and judges.

hours after the attack, from airline passenger lists. And of course bin Laden has acknowledged al Qaeda responsibility in a video statement. I personally strongly doubt MIHOP. But LIHOP isn't out of the question, though I doubt that too. (Bush and company are not the sharpest tools in the shed; the principle of not attributing to malice that which can be attributed to incompetence applies here.)

as a figurehead that seems too stupid for malice.

But if his "company aren't the sharpest tools in the shed", why have they been playing us like violins for years? Why do they always get what they want?

"Bush is stupid" is a bait, for their base (seems folksy) as well as for us (too stupid for malice). Don't swallow it.

Although Robert Bonner claimed under oath that within 45 minutes after the WTC collapsed he had the 19 names together this is simply not true. And unfortunately neither the Independent Commission nor the media followed up on this:
Till September 14 there were only 18 listed (and words were out that there had been between 12 and 24 hijackers).
Till September 12 Adnan and Ameer Bukhari, Abdul Rahman Al Omari and Ameer Kamfar were considered hijackers. But one is dead and the other three are alive. Saw they were dropped and substituted within minutes.
And stricty speaking we have no clue who was on the passenger manifest cause it was never published.

UBL first reaction was to claim innocence.
This is pretty surprising given the believe that this was the master coup of the master terrorist and he doesn't proudly tell the whole world with a big smile. No, in an interview with a Pakistanian Newspaper he insisted to be innocent and not to have anything to do with 911.
Btw he isn't even considered the 911 mastermind anymore. This is KSM now ....

The best read on the net not to get lost in the jungle of facts and legends:
www.cooperativeresearch.org and go for 911 Timeline or buy the "Terror Timeline" book. It's more up to date.

Bush is dumb, but I don't think anyone is suggesting that he was the mastermind of this. Same goes for most of the neo-cons - they're mostly morons, or ideological zealots. If one suspects MIHOP, one should look for the perpetrators deeper down in the para-political world, where intelligence agencies meet organized crime meets Wall Street meets fascist politics, connected in invisible trans-national networks.

There are reasons to suspect the implication of: Jerry Hauer, James Woolsey, Robert Mueller III, Porter Goss, Micheal Cherkasky, Micheal Chertoff, Dov Zakheim, Mahmood Ahmad, Mohammed Atta, Buzzy Krongard, Jeb Bush. And others, plus several private companies that function as fronts for covert operations and criminal activity.

About Bin Laden, in his first interview after the attack, in Pakistani newspaper Uumat, he denied any involvement in the attack (but praised it). He suggested intelligence agencies or a "hidden government" were behind it. Shortly afterwards, US forces "found" the "confession" tape, which shows a man that probably isn't Bin Laden. Then again, the latest Bin Laden tape is probably real IMO, but he is full of shit anyway. I wouldn't trust anything that comes out of his mouth.

Kevin Barrett, 12.04.2005 21:14


C-Span will challenge the official version of the 9/11 "terrorist attacks" with a nationwide delayed broadcast of a talk by David Ray Griffin at U.W.-Madison Monday 4/18/05, 7:30 p.m., in 272 Bascom Hall. The public is invited to attend, and admission is free.


Griffin's The New Pearl Harbor sparked the 9/11 Truth Movement


The nationwide news network C-span has broken the blackout on the 9/11 truth movement, raising hopes that other media outlets will follow, by deciding to broadcast a lecture by David Ray Griffin in Madison Monday night. An acclaimed philosopher-theologian and author of the 9/11 truth blockbusters The New Pearl Harbor and The 9/11 Commission Report: Omissions and Distortions, Dr. Griffin will be making a rare public appearance at the University of Wisconsin-Madison Monday night, April 18th. at 7:30 p.m. in 272 Bascom Hall. His brand-new talk, entitled "9/11 and the American Empire: How Should Religious People Respond?" will focus on the ethical and spiritual dimension of facing the overwhelming evidence that the Bush Administration was complicit in the attacks of September 11th, 2001. His Madison appearance celebrates the founding of the new group MUJCA-NET: Muslim-Jewish-Christian Alliance for 9/11 Truth: http://mujca.com .

Two related events will precede the Griffin talk: A discussion of David Griffin's 9/11 books will be held on Sunday, April 17th, 2-4 p.m.at Peregrine Forum, 616 S. Brearly St., Madison, WI (608) 442-4399; and a benefit dinner for the Griffin talk and MUJCA-NET will be held at Catacombs Coffee House, directly across from Memorial Library on the U.W.-Madison campus from 5 to 7 p.m. on Monday 4/18, right before the talk. Ten bucks buys all-you-can-eat cous-cous, falafel and baklava; David Griffin says he will be there, offering attendees the chance to shake the hand of the man political analyst Kevin Phillips says will take down the Bush Administration in flames.

http://milwaukee.indymedia.org/en/2005/04/203182.shtml

If you expect the government to admit the truth, well that is a different story. Researchers have uncovered the truth, but it will never be accepted by the gatekeepers of history. Beteen the "official" lies, and the red herrings, there may not be a way to distinguish truth from lies, but that doesn't mean that the truth is not available. It is, but it takes a discerning individual to seperate the truth from the shite.

It was a demolition. This is proven with simple photographs and eyewitness accounts

http://algoxy.com/psych/9-11scenario.html

Our unity or disunity is what was desgined more than anything.

The WTC was designed but it failed to be executed perfectly and this makes it fully solvable. The division in the people, those who DO NOT want to know the truth, are the problem.

So it's not unsolvable. It's unprovable, but not unsolvable.

The weakest point remains who the people are who are behind it.

It could be proven and the proof not accepted.

As long as the official story is unproven then some other story may be proven in that all parts of it are logical and it completely explains the major aspects of the event without inner conflict.

Perhaps the acceptable proof exists but is yet to be assembled and checked for consistency and comprehensiviness to the details of the event.

But they way it was set up, it will never be completely solved because it would destroy the US government if the complete truth came out.

I wish the thing could be solved, believe me, I wish people could be brought to justice, but I really worry that it will indeed be just like the JFK assassination. And certainly both JFK and 9/11 have many layers of complicity as well as false leads.

Therein lies the key and only the acceptance of the definition of what happened at the WTC, as a people, stands in our way.

In simple words, if this thing happened, it was caused by that. It is proof of the most fundamental kind.

We presently are the victims of exactly this kind of thinking used deceitfully. The WTC was termed a collapse (what happened) caused by fire (the cause). All that needed to happen was for the authority of media to repeat the official lie as if it was the truth then repeat the fiction describing how it happened and we had a model of the maxim to exercise;

Certain Things Must Happen In Certain Ways

while the flag abuse was conducted to create the social fear of questioning the lie.

We need to reverse that process to recognize the true event, a complex series of explosions caused by optimally placed and dsitributed high explosives because;

that is the only way to cause the concrete core to turn into sand and gravel and fall with all the steel surrounding at the rate of freefall.

It simply is not possible any other way. No single detonation of any kind could cause what we saw to happen.

The real problem is that people are comfortably ignorant and want to say that way. If they knew enough to accept the truth they might have to understand its meaning and do something.

that before you declare that the concrete core being turned to sand constitutes proof of a demolition, you might want to first establish there was a concrete core.

LARED


I saw it being built in a documentary, I show it in photos standing without the exterior steel tube framework, I show it inside the perimeter steel falling, I show its steel reinforcing bar standing momentarily. At the same time the official metal core columns you believe in are never seen as a part of the structure falling.

NEVER.

http://algoxy.com/psych/9-11scenario.html

Then, .......... there is the sand and the gravel filling the basement that you have never competently addressed.



There is a subtle cognitive distortion at play here in attempt to create a mental filter, that somehow you think you are entitled to ignore information, inference, conclusion and deduction unless it is spelled out and designated in its meaning by an authority. You do not want the truth.

3. Mental filter: Details in life (positive or negative) are amplified in importance while opposite is rejected..

12. Entitlement: Believing that you deserve things you have not earned.

I saw it being built in a documentary,

Apparently you are the only one that saw it. No one in this or many other 9/11 forums saw it.

I show it in photos standing without the exterior steel tube framework, I show it inside the perimeter steel falling, I show its steel reinforcing bar standing momentarily.

No you don't. Just because you think you see it, does not mean people
without the 'special' cognitive skills you believe you possess, see anything like you do.


At the same time the official metal core columns you believe in are never seen as a part of the structure falling.

No shit sherlock. Perhaps the cloud of debris is the cause. Of course the huge pile of steel had plenty of steel core column without any concrete on them. No photographs exist showing a concrete core during construction.

Then, .......... there is the sand and the gravel filling the basement that you have never competently addressed.

Whoa, stop the presses, get the militia over to the WH to arrest the mal-administration, you discovered a photo of sand and gravel in the clean up effort at the WTC. Why you think this is material to anything is beyound comprehension. Do you really think sand and gravel at the collapse site of a building proves anything? Really?

See your #3 and #12

I can't believe it. I'm actually with you on this one.

LARED


Perhaps not but I've met several who have. I have a declaration from a civil engineer that he saw it. Unfortunately the significance of what FEMA claims, in conflict, made him too afraid to declare any more than he saw the video.
There is one other that will complete a declaration who saw the video and the concrete core. I shall do that and get a scanner so that you do not have to use direct evidence and your mind.

LARED


You claim erroneously that I believe I have special cognitive skills. I do not need anything special, just something average because unlike you, I have evidence to support my claim. Here is 3 inch rebar viewed at 7500 feet.



LARED


Resorting to juvenile and insubstantial rebuttals huh? Meaning you are totally out of reasonable methods and now resort to childish ridicule. Predictable.
I alert the admin to every post of yours that denys without using evidence and reason and I encourage others to do the same. We WILL loose our rights, our freedoms and our democracy if your mentality is allowed to go unquestioned in this nation.

Consider:
Perhaps that cloud of debris IS the concrete core exploding with sand and cravel and you convienantly claim it obscures the full length steel core columns FEMA claims were inside the building.

If the steel cores existed they would be visable here.



What we see are interior box columns with floor beam joints visable.

You have no evidence showing what could be seen as full length steel columns. You absolutely have to produce some evidence to continue with denial and be seen as reasonable otherwise you can only be said to support the secrecy and the loss of all that Americans hold as sacred from the founding documnents of America.

Freefall is utterly impossible with full length steel columns unless we see them in the fall of the towers or in the debris. The photos you have shown have square ends, meaning they were not full length columns.

LARED


Apparently you do not comprehend that the towers had NO gravel in the above ground structure. In the photos of the demolition a large percentage of what is seen is gravel.
Cease with your petty distortions and mockery and think about protecting American lives or gaining accountability for those lost. Think about working reasonably with other Americans for a rightful and lawful government by using EVIDENCE!!!!

I consider you culpable for the psychological environment that is unable to face the causes of the loss of life in a straight forward, honest and open fashion using evidence in a reasonable fashion.

Consider if the people described in this eyewitness account were related to you. How would you feel if someone denied the only plausible explanation for freefall, the appearances of structural elements and materials remaining on the ground such as you do?

EYEWITNESS AT WTC

For me, there were many moving experiences... I will never forget the tens of thousands of bobbing heads stumbling across the East River bridges. Or, the dazzled tattered bleeding blackened crowd walking north from the scene up Broadway, Green, Mercer, 6th Avenue... - that was moving...But above and beyond everything, the one thing I will never forget to my dying day, is the view of the people on the roof and higher floors of the World Trade Center lined up in the windows and on railings. You cannot see their expressions, but it is amazing what a 40 power telescope reveals. They often huddled, probably talked about their chances, and sometimes went back into the building, or maybe, just laid on the floor. But then, some went to the edge, and jumped.

        Some jumped in pairs, holding hands. I doubt if they were married or lovers. I think it was just two people, alone, desperate, black, white, oriental, who cares - the telescope didn't allow me to distinguish age and race. They would just pair up and jump. I have thought all day about this. If I were on the roof, and I saw flames on all sides of the building, I would almost certainly jump rather than fry. And if I saw another trembling human alongside of me, I would be much happier holding their hand, and jumping as a pair. Somehow to jump as half of a pair, even if the other half is an ad hoc recent acquaintance, seems to me an infinitely more human way to pass on to the next step, than to take the next step alone.

A follow-up letter (full text here): I did not mention it in the first letter, but it seems to me relevant to something. When a person jumped alone, s/he went to the edge, stopped, looked over, and jumped like you would go into a pool. Those that went in pairs simply came out of a smoky nowhere inside of the building and walked over the edge with no pause, hesitation, or last second spring.

Ray Dougherty, Professor of Linguistics, New York University
Eyewitness

You claim erroneously that I believe I have special cognitive skills. I do not need anything special, just something average because unlike you, I have evidence to support my claim. Here is 3 inch rebar viewed at 7500 feet.

You can see 3" rebar from 7500'???????

:wow::wow::wow::wow:

You do realize 7500' is just under 1-1/2 miles???????

If you think what you're looking at is 3" rebar, you clearly believe you have special cognitive skills.

Those skills would be called "perceptional" skills not cognitive if they were special.

I am a surveyor. It is true a 3 inch diameter target is hard to see with the naked eye at 7500 feet. Only with a clean well lit silhouette can 1 target be seen. We actually have that in the photo. We also have perhaps 100, 3 inch silhouetted targets, which, by their faintness inform us that they are indeed very small. Making them totally unexplained within the official structure simultaneous with a total absence of the core columns of official fiction.
Obviously they must be very strong to be present at that height at this phase of the demolition. In the 1990 PBS documentary I saw the dimensions were mentioned a number of times as well as the fact that the rebar was special high tensile steel. Steel actually capable of standing exactly as we see.

Cut the distortions. What is the matter with you? Americans were killed by the thousands, laws violated, illegal wars waged, and you cannot use evidence. Where is your proportion and were is your EVIDENCE? How come you can't empathize with the family members that lost loved ones as we loose our rights and freedoms while their fathers, brothers, mother, sisters, daughters and sons are buried in a dump with the concrete you deny existed. SICK!!!!!

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2004/10/10/wnyc10.xml&sSheet=/news/2004/10/10/ixworld.html

Remains of 9/11 victims 'to spend eternity' in city rubbish dump
By Charles Laurence in New York
(Filed: 10/10/2004)

The remains of hundreds of victims of the September 11 attacks are to be permanently buried in the world's largest rubbish dump, to the consternation of their grieving relatives.


In the aftermath of 9/11, more than half a million tons of dust and ashes from the Twin Towers were taken to the sprawling Fresh Kills landfill site on Staten Island.

More than 100 years' worth of refuse from New York City had accumulated at the dump before it was finally closed just six months before the attacks. The rubble from the World Trade Center ended up covering some 48 acres.

Relatives were assured that ashes would be returned after they were sorted, but city authorities have since balked at the estimated $450 million cost of transferring them again. Instead they have promised to lay a 2,200-acre park on top of the dump, whose rotting contents smell strongly of methane, and to erect a memorial to the victims.

Relatives of 1,169 of the 3,000 who died have yet to receive any remains, and many are outraged at the authorities' decision.

No one has explained how and why all those bodies and everything else except steel was ground into shreds. I do and you do not want that. You are not not the person you pretend to be in this 9-11 forum.

Presumably, resonably, if you intend to make this argument competently in a responsible fashion, you must have construction or engineering experience to critic my information. Your comments are disinformation when you have no evidence and your argument is based on continuous errors and failures to use redundant evidence.

By looking at the images you posted, (taken from 7500 feet away according to you) you can tell that the structure is made up of 'bundles' of 3" rebar stripped of its concrete and not inner steel core columns?

Am I getting this right?

If true, I would call that "uber-perceptional" as you indeed have skills beyond the common.

BTW, how do you create a relation between having a lack of empathy of the victims and their families, and my failure to believe your CT tales? What logically fallacy number is that in your handy dandy list?

Also, regarding your notion of redundant evidence. How about you actually providing ANY evidence of the demolition, or 4 foot thick concrete cores, or any of the host of anedotal (at best) evidence you think you have, before you start asking me for redundant evidence. Which of course is abundent, but you choose to ignore.

LARED


You erroneously, intentionally, deceptively try to say I have used the word "bundles" when I have not. Many have died and you are lying to try and obscure the truth. You imply that others cannot see what I see.

Below are 14 inch interior box columns at 7500 feet.

< [br />
Below is rebar at 7500 feet. The difference is exactly what would be expected. The structural elements exists and you have never tried to explain what they are. Do not waste your time, you cannot explain them with the official story.



LARED


The relation exists because the evidence I present exists quite as I describe it and other evidence supports it. If you cared about the innocent Americans lost and protecting those living you would care about the finding the truth and any set of self corroborating evidence would be acceptable because the official story does not self corroborate with evidence. If you cared about living things that would not be acceptable. You do not care about living things and therefore accept the official story and manipulate, distort and lie to obscure the truth. You do not want to know the truth and do not want others to know the truth so you term this scenario I present as a "CT" hoping to marginalize my information. This is a description of a demolition not a conspiracy.

LARED


My evidence is here, it is redundant;

http://algoxy.com/psych/9-11scenario.html

I have addressed all evidence you have produced and done so adequately. You are inadequate in addressing all evidence or supporting your contentions in any way, for example; this photo bloe shows the core. Logic dictates that the "multiple steel core columns" if they existed would be seen here. They are not. This indicates that there was a cast concrete core because the sand and gravel in the basement must be explained. Therefore the tubular concrete core necessarily existed and the concept of a tapered exterior is consistent with engineering principles (alien to you). The core was around 15 foot thick at the base and 2 feet at the top. Somewhere in the middle it was 4 feet thick. These details are lost on you because you don't care about them, you care about obscuring them with deceptions.



Here is proof of a major explosion, as in "demolition"



and on my 9-11 page above you will find a link to firefighters describing multiple detonations.

Post your "abundant" evidence.

You believe this show the inner core box columns at 7500 feet


And this is rebar at 7500'



It's two pictures taken just moments apart. The second one is from a slightly different angle and perhaps back just a bit or with a different zoom.

The only other difference is the first one shows some box columns that have managed to remain standing for a few fleeting moments, and the second image show the same column just after they started to fall. Look at the shape and distance of the plume.

Watch this video taken of the spire from a different vantage point

http://www.plaguepuppy.net/public_html/spire/spire_1.mpg

BTW, give the title accusing me of lying a rest. It's pathetic and outside of the rules.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

First, where's your abundant evidence?? Totally missing, ..... again.

LARED


I watched what I'd seen long ago. The view seems to be the spire falling from the south but the dust and smoke clouds obscure the rebar seen from the shots across the river where the rebar is silhouetted from as the dust is lower. Notice the remnant is slightly lower also. The sloping tops, the absence of horizontal elements and the faintness denoting small diameters. The shot from the south is perhaps twice the distance.

You continually rephrase my statements inaccurately, intentionally. This is deceptive, again your term "lying" is your term.

LARED


The above is correct, however the "moments apart" has the spire structure which is comprised of interior box columns and floor beams and joint assembly plates not rendered to pieces by the concrete pushing massively out wards at a rate of 35,000 FPS. It did a little more than fracture then mostly fell away leaving the interior columns joined together in a line parallel to and perhaps 3 feet away. Perhaps the thermite initiating in the basement on the interior and exterior box columns cause the heavy steel structure to fall. At any rate the heavy steel fell and the still standing rebar was caught in an instant of aperture speed of a shutter.

The angle difference is slight but brings our view more from the northward side and perpendicular to the


LARED


Sorry, we do not see "parallelogram" structure, something always present when a rectangular grid work on a plane falls on that plane.

Clearly the loss of life, our Constitution and the rights and freedoms it guarantees held against the fact of the destruction of evidence then the hiding of evidence, all the WTC documents by Guiliani, and the recipricol FEMA core lie justifies your acceptance of this fact IF you care about life and the principles of our republic as it might be democrarically controlled by the people. Certainly IF you are not an agent of disinformation trying to keep the people in a dark, unknowing state, you can see that to have integrity to our human needs, you should cease attempting to deny the towers had concrete cores with high tensile steel rebar in them. The core is seen standing, the rebar silouetted and the sand and gravel inthe basement, all while there is not one photo of the steel core columns that bears scrutiny as to what FEMA presents.

If that is indeed a picture of the tubular concrete core, it must be somewhere between "around" 2ft and "around" 15ft thick. What seems interesting to me is that, when I compare the width of the core to the other buildings (of known width) in the picture, it looks considerably wider than 15ft even "somewhere in the middle". Perhaps I'm not estimating the size properly. How big should it be? And how big is it?

-Make7

The core footprint was 80 x 12, inside dimension as far as I can determine.

The core wall thickness was around 15 at the bottom and 2 foot at the top with the taper on the outside.

Are you describing the same exact object as interior box columns and as three inch rebar?

-Make7

Could we actually being seeing two separate "explosive" events here? The thick "pyroclastic" flows rolling at amazing speed through lower Manhattan and then the ascendency of a cloud formation with its golden glow coming from apparently the center of the building and rising quickly beyond the building's height into the horizon.

Here's a better shot to display what I am talking about. Something's going on here that's weird,man. :hippie:

Make7


It is possible that the darker, taller element on the left is an interior box column. I don't think so, the arc at the top of it matches the rest of the rebar and appears as the corner area of the rebar of the core. It also lacks any sign of the floor beams,



The rebar was just a few feet away from the interior box columns and cast inside the concrete. They are close enough to each other to be mistaken as the same except for their obvious dimensional differences.

The photo above was taken just after the one below, they are part of a series taken from basically the same place. The one below is zoomed a little. The heavy steel box columns have fallen away leaving just the rebar standing momentarily.
The documentary I saw in 1990 on the construction of the North tower explained that the "special plastic coating" had lost its "protective qualities" from exposure to the elements, meaning it didn't detonate properly and the horizontal rebar tied to it later removed the concrete to leave the 3 inch vertical bar standing.

Here are the pictures, cropped and resized, side by side:

(links: )

Matches the rest of what rebar? I don't see any rebar.

I don't really know what kind of detail you expect to see in these pictures, but positively identifying something as rebar does not seem possible to me. The picture on the right has obvious image compression artifacts (just look at the dome on WFC2), which makes accurately seeing small details next to impossible.

(links:
       )

I just don't see any rebar at all in these pictures.

-Make7

The process of elimination can be used to determine what is silouetted. If it were heavy structural steel as is seen in the earlier photo, there would be signs of horizontal joints at least somewhere. There are no horizontal beams or heavy box columns from this later image which shows the rebar slightly lower than the box column spire was.

I do see the compression artifacts and realize that the image is breaking down because the objects are SO SMALL, smaller than the box columns plainly seen in the other photos with matching horizontal beams, which actually helps my assertion.

The sloped aspect of the tops also lets me know exactly what it was. This will not help you to realize that the image shows rebar unless you have some construction engineering background.

In the documentary about the construction it was mentioned at least several times that the tops of the rebar were specified by the engineers to NOT be welded in a level line across the faces of the core. Nor were the concrete joints to be poured level. The slopes went opposite directions on opposite sides maximizing the strength of the core as an anti torsion element of the structure. This was noted in the narration.

The concrete was to be mounded in the forms roughly following and just below the joints of the vertical bars. It is actually very possible that I am seeing that rebar for the second time. I remember a shot looking up along a row of rebar from the inside of the core, cut on a slope protruding perhaps 4 feet up from the top of a rough aggregate concrete pour that had form wood on the outside only in the left part of the frame, looking through a floor space to the sky beyond on the right.

The cast concrete core was elusive for the videograpers and the narrator expressly identified that photo as one of the only ones that showed clearly the top of the concrete pour advancing. It was most often covered with form wood on the outside or only visible from inside under very poor light, or it was too far up to see well and the floors above were not completed to occupy as an alternate view.

The sand and gravel in the basement must be explained anyway, as well as free fall. The concrete core provides explanations and free fall possibilities. It explains why the steel building falling is totally obscured by clouds of brown grey fountains of particulate traveling with higher velocity hundreds of feet up and out.

The core is the key to 9-11. A choice by the secret perps of corporations and government to not trade anonymity for a perfect ruse; then given some lack of control over planes and targeting that leads to a gift of knowledge we can use to understand what the truth must be.

Let me ask you the following related questions about this picture:

• If you were to show that picture to people that do have some construction engineering background (but were unfamiliar with any part of the Twin Towers construction), do you think they would identify the spire as rebar?
  
  
• If you were to show that picture to people that do have some construction engineering background (but believed the Twin Towers had steel cores), do you think they would identify the spire as rebar?
  
  
• If you were to show that picture to people that do have some construction engineering background (but believed the Twin Towers had concrete cores), do you think they would identify the spire as rebar?
  

-Make7

Make7


Not the spire but the comb,



Yes.

Make7


The photo was brought to my attention by a Let's Roll poster who believed there were steel cores and read my posts about the cast concrete core and rebar, they posted the image with a query; "Is this the rebar?"


Make7


Yes and if they knew the concrete core was an anti torsion element they would recognize the sloped tops as an optimized joint arrangement.

Why the golden glow?

So he wasn't able to tell it was rebar from the photo.

-Make7

Edit to add:
I'm calling whatever structure that is still visible from the tower the spire.

They had seen the photo and wondered what it was as they only knew the official story and did not have much construction engineering experience, but some. They immediately recognized that it could be rebar and brought the image to my attention.

A number of others who believed the FEMA core diagram realized very quickly, once they had seen the image, that it must be rebar because the multiple steel core columns are no where to be seen. It is obvious that the fine vertical elements are of very high strength and therefore would be identified in the FEMA diagram if it was accurate.

Some realized that the concrete core was the only way to explain freefall and the sand and gravel in the basement. They already knew the rebar was there. When they saw the photo they knew it as rebar immediately.

Could you point out where the rebar, and/or concrete core is, in this photo?

Thanks

I am due a presentation of "abundant evidence" of the multiple steel core columns that FEMA says were inside the core area. They are not seen in the photo you provide. Only interior box columns are seen. The FEMA core must be a full length single element to have the needed torsional resistance. The concrete core was full length and constructed inside the advancing exterior steel tube framework.

Here the core is easily seen after the exterior steel framework has fallen away.



Notice that the FEMA steel core columns are not seen, ever. They were supposedly full length structural elements. This means that if they were steel they would be butt welded with 100% welds in sections. To cut them into segments either high explosives or thermite must be used and those segments must be short enough to make the pieces disappear in photos such as this.



There was no molten steel found anywhere except for the basement. the towers weredemolished from the top down so the cutting of the core elements would occur from the top down and molten steel would be found in the rubble not just inthe basement. If they were cut with high explosives the ends would be very ragged and shredded. No beam or column with a clean square cut end can qualify.

FEMA is saying there is a concrete core as you describe?????

Please provide some evidence of that.

BTW, according to you this picture supposedly shows the concrete core. How did they get dozens of elevators inside it? And what happened to the top section of it?

I do not describe the FEMA core as having concrete. You do not read well or at all. Or more likely, you enjoy trying to confuse and mislead readers.

I've said a number of times here and elsewhere, that the core was tubular in shape and constructed from steel reinforced cast concrete.

The top section probably detonated just as I describe at the link below and you know that.

http://algoxy.com/psych/9-11scenario.html

Oh, Where is your "abundant evidence" that the FEMA core is the core that stood inside the towers? It's about time to produce that (way late actually) can you do it?

So tell me, in this construction photo.





That shows the steel core as FEMA describes it, where is the concrete?

The image you post does not show the multiple steel core columns as FEMA describes it. Cease implying there are central cores columns shown in the photo. They are not shown.

Your reading problems is worsening

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=125&topic_id=37055&mesg_id=37169&page=

The photo I showed looks exactly like the structure FEMA tells us was there and is as seen in literally thousands of images available all over the Internet.

If you want to believe there is a concrete core column in the WTC, have fun.

In the aerial photo. It ONLY shows interior box columns and they are seen ringing the core.

Still no "abundant" evidence of the existence of the FEMA core, even when there are literally "thousands" of images available over the internet.

Typical.

You don't see columns inside the core structure???????



How can you not see them????

There are some vertical elements but by size comparison with the interior box columns ringing the core, they are far too small to be what FEMA shows.

Hey, I'm still answering your questions but you havn't come up with abundant evidence. Put up or shut up!

What are you calling "interior box columns"? And what is their purpose?
___________________________

Apparently a lot of people who have also researched the Twin Towers are under the impression that the inner core was steel:

-Make7

and were major load bearing elements transfering a load to the concrete core walls. They were spaced mostly at 20 feet apart, corners were tighter, and connected to each other horizontally across the cast concrete core face with "I" beams and to the exterior perimeter walls with "I" beams. The interior box columns comprised the inner wall of the exterior tube of the "tube in a tube" construction. There was diagonal bracing between interior box columns which stiffened them when the exterior framework was advanced a maximum of 7 floors above the top of the concrete pour. The kangaroo cranes were mounted on their own trussed framework fastening to the box columns that was lifted up with each floor of steel completed until 4 floors were completed then the core rebar was run, the interior breakdown form advanced by the kangaroo cranes and the exterior forms framed off the inside faces of the interior box columns and their diagonal braces.

I distinctly remember clips of the film that showed the heavy box columns joined with floor beams in 3 directions with men on ladders working to complete the joint between the box column and the completed face of the concrete core. The narrator said something like, "tolerances of 20 thousandths of an inch were required to transfer loads to the near vertical face of the core, and to keep the core serving its purpose of limiting the twisting of the tower in the New York winds".

None of the images we can find show what is diagrammed in the FEMA diagram.



and none of the descriptions of the core match each other OR the diagram.


http://people.howstuffworks.com/wtc5.htm
the steel framework of the inner core

http://people.howstuffworks.com/wtc5.htm
a hollow steel core.

http://www.yaleherald.com/archive/xxxii/09.14.01/ae/p11...
a central steel core

From http://web.mit.edu/civenv/wtc/PDFfiles/Chapter%20I%20Hi...
an interior steel frame

And, here is a diagram that people in the uk STILL think was the core.



Liars are easy to catch over time because they can't get their story straight. Not that the sources for the core descriptions you've posted are lying, they are being lied to and believing it then passing it on.

It all begins with cheney appointed to head FEMA right after w's selection in 2,000. Then to the mayor of New York 3.5 months after 9-11.


http://www.nyclu.org/g_archive020602.html

Our concern is based on the following facts, as we understand them. On or about December 24, 2001, Commissioner George Rios, on behalf of the City of New York and/or the Department of Records and Information Services of the City of New York, entered into a contract with the Rudolph W. Giuliani Center for Urban Affairs Inc., signed by Saul Cohen, President, concerning the records of the mayoralty of Rudolph Giuliani. The records are said to include appointment books, cabinet meeting audiotapes, e-mails, telephone logs, advance and briefing memos, correspondence, transition materials, and private schedules, as well as Mr. Giuliani’s departmental, travel, event, subject, and Gracie Mansion files. Giuliani's "World Trade Center files" and "Millennium Project files," together with 6000 files of photographs, 1000 audiotapes, and 15,000 videotapes, are also reported to be a part of the records covered by the contract. In addition, the records include those of his chief of staff and every deputy mayor, together with their chiefs of staff. Finally, gifts such as plaques, awards, personalized clothing, and other items presented to the mayor and deputy mayors, as well as World Trade Center-related materials are alleged to be included as part of the records. All of these items were reported to have been delivered from the control of the City to a warehouse storage facility in Long Island City at the end of December 2001.

Each of the floors were constructed of 4" thick concrete poured over a rebar mesh.

thats where all your concrete "sand and gravel" came from.

http://www.fema.gov/pdf/library/fema403_ch2.pdf

The volume of the floors ONLY fills the basement HALF way and.......


the concrete of the floors which has NO rock aggregate rock whatsoever, mostly vermiculite, flyash, a small amount of fine silica for a filler and Portland cement as a binder. NO GRAVEL was in the towers per the official structure above the ground.

The type concrete in the WTC floors.

http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/arch/floors.html

The composition of lightweight concrete.

http://www.boral.com.au/docs/glossary/boral_glossary.asp

I don't understand the purpose of having a group of steel vertical columns to transfer the load to a "concrete core" when they could just carry the load without a "concrete core". Wouldn't that be how it was done if there were no concrete core?

Are you sure the box columns were tied to the exterior perimeter walls with I beams? I thought most of the floors used trusses.



I think the picture LARED posted does match the diagram. It shows columns within the perimeter of the interior box columns. (?pic)

I don't see how these descriptions from my previous post don't agree with the diagram (or each other):

• steel frame
  
• the steel framework of the inner core
  
• a central steel core
  
• an interior steel frame
  

I think these descriptions are general enough to describe almost any steel core structure - including the one in the diagram.

-Make7

Make7


They weren't just a group, they ringed the rectangular tubular cast concrete core walls hugging the core tightly. Steel is very flexible and the deformations of loading AND wind would cause structural failures.

The interior box columns were load bearing and worked with the exterior box columns but also transferred some vertical load to the core but mostly lateral loads were the reason for precision. the major function of the concrete core was to resist twisting. Eagers floor analysis was based on the wrong floor. There were 3x1 "I" beams at each interior box column connecting to the perimeter wall. Several 9-11 web sites document the deficiency. There were trusses also.

If you look very carefully at the aerial picture what is seen that is vertical pieces inside the core are too small. The box columns ringing it give scale. Most of what you see is the crane platform.

There are other issues that must be resolved before one photo is allowed to rule. Basically, both the FEMA core and the concrete core would be built inside the exterior steel framework, if the FEMA core existed. Since the WTC plans have been hidden by the mayor of New York we do not have a clue as to what kind of framework they say existed. What is shown in the FEMA diagram, the ultimate official authority, is "multiple steel core columns" in the central area. No other description really suffices and framework can't apply either because officially we don't know what it looked like.

This is official vs. photographic evidence. The proponents of the official, if they accept a photo, they have to accept all the photos as evidence, and debate the merits of each one, Since no official framework is described, proponents to not get to invent one. Proponents of photographic evidence, from the perspective of their opposition, are inventing everything as it is so get to do so as long as it matches the photos, (plural) closely.

This proponent is not inventing architecture because I've seen a documentary and I'm using it to explain what we see structurally falling down and all of the photos I refer to agree with my assertions and with each other within my assertions and other evidence.

It is critical to realize that whatever explanation is utilized, it must make sense and conform to all photographic evidence and it must do so because the photos are raw documentation of events as opposed to contrivances or artifice of official source.

The other issues are;

The sand and gravel.
In order for the steel core columns to have existed proponents of them must come up with a competent source for the double volume of mineral based material and specifically WHERE did the gravel come from because the official structure had none above the ground level.

That above question must be competently answered before the aerial photo can be used as the ruling authority.

IF the welding of the multiple steel columns was going on inside the core area, out of sight of cameras, and that welding had to have taken place to have full length steel members as core columns, THEN we would see somewhere the pieces of them if they were cut, OR the entire column bent and sagging in the demolition photo. Those cut columns would show ragged shredded ends from the effects of high explosives cutting them.

The above basically rules out the multiple steel core columns because there were 47 of them and to get them into 40 foot long pieces you've got 1,000 plus cuts of heavy wall steel tubing to execute. Please believe me when I say that cutting steel with high explosives is very inefficient with a great deal of surplus reflected high pressure gases making a MAJOR explosion for each cut. We just do not see that in any of the photos. We see uniform

Proportionately, with consideration of the picture of WTC 2 core standing without the steel exterior while NO heavy steel columns protrude AND the rebar silhouetted AND the sand and gravel AND NO heavy columns laying around with obviously shredded and ragged ends, cut with high explosives, one photo that doesn't show enough either way cannot rule over the proportionate absolutes established. The sand and gravel surplus is about 200,000 cubic yards.

I know the box columns are all that is shown in the aerial photo. There are a few other vertical elements inside but they appear much smaller than the prominent interior box columns. The documentary had some of those aerial photos incorporated in it and ironically mentioned that the real structure was hidden inside the steel framework, the concrete core.

I won't be posting for a week or so. I've got to visit my Mother one last time, she's dying soon.

Sorry to hear about your Mom.

I'll still be around if and when you care to continue the debate.

Take care,
Make7

that one conclusively document that the towers actually fell at the rate of free fall if that is supposed be one of the principal reasons it can be proven that "a complex series of explosions caused by optimally placed and distributed high explosives" caused the towers to collapse.

-Make7

I'm one of those idealistic souls that always compares what is to what could be at its best.

At best the US government is the people. The structures of powers that are complicit in 9-11 ARE NOT the US government no matter what office. As soon as whatever intentional acts were committed or omitted, counter to the Constitution, all authority granted to them, was lost. This has happened, we are certain, all that remains is to find a method of unifying as a people with a common purpose and setting things right.

Perhaps what is really said is that the alliance between church and state would be destroyed, that is another discussion.

Your point, "particularly if we had honest government", is what is VERY important.

Because WE DO NOT have honest government, we must become the government. Making the national ballot initiative one of the most common sense things going.

Another important aspect is the difference in 9-11 related evidence of government performance. People expect neglect and unaccountability from government, they tolerate it and allow it, in this time and political environment, it is information that cannot be used because sources are not always trusted and authority does not act on the information. The actual relationship to other factors is not often clear, and no further clarity can be expected from a non accountable government. No investigation can be compelled. Meaning that stuff needs to be compiled and logged then indexed and set aside to be used as reference later after we change the environment.

The present needs a simple understanding of what the truth must be. It all did happen just ONE way, not 15 different ways and two towers of one specific design hit the ground at freefall.

Consider trying to segment 47 columns 1200 feet long apiece and do this with out us ever seeing those ragged shredded explosively cut steel columns pieces to create the free fall of a tower.

Now consider slamming concrete from the exact inside center with all the pressures required to propel gases to 30,000 FPS and a little more to create a wave of sand and aggregate pushing and ripping the exterior steel structure apart, grinding everything up but the steel in the process with detonations traveling downwards just faster than the rate of freefall.

We have a great deal of raw evidence that represents absolutes, not all of them, but many, particularly with eyewitness accounts that are consistent.

Just a rant on what kind of information has the ring of adequate truth to explain events and how we can just expose or confront levels of MIHOP that actually explain how the WTC happened. It is very solid but not very easy to understand. The more people involved with understanding the task on this level, the better.

Maybe you would better convince people of your ideas if you were open to dialogue with all who respond to your posts. I've asked you a number of questions,always to be ignored. Why?

I'm away from home and found a computer online and just noticed your post.

I've not noticed your posts before. This board format is harder to follow than most.

I'm glad to answer any questions but after tomorrow (4/23/05) I won't have access for a week.

Send specifics to argus1@earthlink.net (put 9-11 in subject) and I'll answer any Q's you have.

Chris

If there were no Osama bin Laden, someone should invent him. Why? Because searching for the "international terrorist number one" is a very profitable business!

Do you know that the U.S. Congress readily gives money to find Osama and actually keeps no record of it. No one will ever know what was the money given to catch him actually spent for. Today, Osama is like a high-yielding brand and he better be alive and in hiding than dead somewhere in Pentagon laboratories.

Actually, there is not only Osama alone who brings money to his seekers. The U.S. Congress allots a f**king lot of money to fight on terrorism in the Near East and deploy more military bases there. They only need to sustain terror threat in the human hearts and ride the gravy train.