FEMA Deceives Nation About Twin Towers Core

[Christophera]

Look, this thread is about the Twins, it is about a deception by FEMA of the appointed investigating committee into the cause of death of 3,000 innocent people which has been used to hijack the nation and seriously compromise the Constitution. If you cannot source any evidence proving that FEMA was correct, then do not impede those that have independently verified evidence showing that FEMA decieved NIST and sabotaged the investigation.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Have you read FEMA's May, 2002 WTC Building Performance Study, Chapter 2? If so, please point out the deception in it.

I've already done that. Have you read what I wrote?

 

[Albury Smith]

I didn't bring up WTC 7, Jay did.

 

[Christophera]

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Feel free to actually READ NCSTAR1 before you criticize it.

I've read it and it is a joke. Such a report must refer to structural details of the actual plans. What I found was that they had no plans to work with and because they did not they have this
which basically would remove their liability for using the sunday funnies for plans.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

The OP here is a joke, since it's so easily proved to be false. What do you find so amusing about NCSTAR 1?

You've told me to go to the liars and read the lie to see if its a lie and failed to acknowledge the independently verified evidence I've posted that proves it's a lie.

The infiltrators of the US government who have enabled mass murder really like your position.

I'm sick of your evasion.

 

[Christophera]

ok, you are INSANE
nothing more to do than to ridicule you

Meaning you can only make accusations and have no evidence and will not use it or reason to protect the US Constitution.

Great!

Are you an American?

 

[Albury Smith]

I've posted evidence, you've posted nothing except support for secrecy. Are you an American?

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
The NIST and FEMA publications I cited are available online. There's nothing secret about them.

I know that and they are used to try and keep a secret. Your job, if you choose to protect the Constitution is find INDEPENDENT EVIDENCE showing that the NIST report is correct in its structural basis.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Why don't you prove that anything in it is wrong? You're not doing too well so far.

 

[Albury Smith]

Wait what is he claiming the supports were made from?

I'm confused he said they weren't steel, what the heck were they?

Is this guy (the op) blaming shoddy construction?

I'm just lost i've really tried to read what he posted and understand his point, I'm just looking for some clarification on what the OP is getting at.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
I don't think he understands it either. His claim that NIST got faulty info from FEMA is just plain wrong, and construction documents for the WTC are just not that hard to come by.

You will find that there are no official plans. You will find that the truth movement uses plans from silverstein who made $6b. You will find that the NIST report referes to none. Read the They basically say they had no idea of how it was constructed other than what FEMA told them.

Consider the ex took the WTC docuements from the city to enable the deception, then a corrupt state court refused to compel a return of the public documents to the public offices. I have just linked to powerful circumstancial evidence showing a NYC official enabling the deception I assert has been done.

Are you helping to promote "the big lie"?

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Silverstein lost money on 9/11. He had creditors to repay, is contractually obligated to rebuild, and has lost all cash flow for almost eight years. Btw, if you think he confessed to blowing up his property, why did all of his insurers pay him?

 

[Christophera]

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
The NIST and FEMA publications I cited are available online. There's nothing secret about them.

I know that and they are used to try and keep a secret. Your job, if you choose to protect the Constitution is find INDEPENDENT EVIDENCE showing that the NIST report is correct in its structural basis.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Why don't you prove that anything in it is wrong? You're not doing too well so far.

I'm proving that every time it mentions "core column" it is wrong.

Here is an image showing the 3" high tensile steel rebar that was in the concrete core walls surrounding the core area.

This was revealed after the structural steel "spire" fell.

You can plainly see the arc of the fine vertical elements in the top photo. That is because they are so small. You can plainly see the size of the structural steel which was taken from the same camera seconds before. You can see that the top photo depicts something far too small to be structural steel.

That can only be rebar and it proves that there was concrete, PARTICULARLY when other images that can only show concrete are posted as well.

NOTE: The core area right of the rebar is EMPTY.

 

[Albury Smith]

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Have you read FEMA's May, 2002 WTC Building Performance Study, Chapter 2? If so, please point out the deception in it.

I've already done that. Have you read what I wrote?

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
So have I. Where's the deception?

 

[Christophera]

Silverstein lost money on 9/11. He had creditors to repay, is contractually obligated to rebuild, and has lost all cash flow for almost eight years. Btw, if you think he confessed to blowing up his property, why did all of his insurers pay him?

Maybe you don't get it. This thread is about the structural deception by FEMA of NIST. I don't give a damm about silverstein and his $.

I only care about our Constitution because I KNOW for absolutely certain that if we do not expose this deception and see justice done, we LOSE it and become slaves.

Maybe you are too comfortable to see that and that Americans are suffering, freaking out, because of what is being done to the economy that is completed related to the purposes of the deception.

 

[Albury Smith]

I've read it and it is a joke. Such a report must refer to structural details of the actual plans. What I found was that they had no plans to work with and because they did not they have this
which basically would remove their liability for using the sunday funnies for plans.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

The OP here is a joke, since it's so easily proved to be false. What do you find so amusing about NCSTAR 1?

You've told me to go to the liars and read the lie to see if its a lie and failed to acknowledge the independently verified evidence I've posted that proves it's a lie.

The infiltrators of the US government who have enabled mass murder really like your position.

I'm sick of your evasion.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
What evasion? I need 15 posts on here before I'm allowed to post URLs or links, but I gave you the FEMA publication that disproves the nonsense in your OP.

 

[Christophera]

I've already done that. Have you read what I wrote?

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
So have I. Where's the deception?

DUH!

This is what FEMA says existed.

And this is what actually was on the ground on 9-11.

If you have no structural expertise, construction experience and depend on experts, you can only impede those who do and are trying to protect the Constitution by showing evidence that proves the deception.

So far it appears you know nothing of construction and so cannot use the evidence I have.

 

[Albury Smith]

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
So have I. Where's the deception?

DUH!

This is what FEMA says existed.



And this is what actually was on the ground on 9-11.



If you have no structural expertise, construction experience and depend on experts, you can only impede those who do and are trying to protect the Constitution by showing evidence that proves the deception.

So far it appears you know nothing of construction and so cannot use the evidence I have.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
LOL. I'm not the one jabbering about concrete core walls with 3" rebar. Here's a clue for you, dude: Neither existed in either tower. The only concrete above grade in either one was the <4" floor slabs over corrugated metal decking.

 

[Christophera]

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
What evasion? I need 15 posts on here before I'm allowed to post URLs or links, but I gave you the FEMA publication that disproves the nonsense in your OP. [/QUOTE]

The report that is a lie cannot be used to disprove the lie.

Keep posting until you can post evidence.

 

[Christophera]

DUH!

This is what FEMA says existed.

And this is what actually was on the ground on 9-11.

If you have no structural expertise, construction experience and depend on experts, you can only impede those who do and are trying to protect the Constitution by showing evidence that proves the deception.

So far it appears you know nothing of construction and so cannot use the evidence I have.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
LOL. I'm not the one jabbering about concrete core walls with 3" rebar. Here's a clue for you, dude: Neither existed in either tower. The only concrete above grade in either one was the <4" floor slabs over corrugated metal decking.

You are the one repeating (jabbering) the lies of FEMA as parroted and erroneously used in the NIST report.

I am posting images of concrete walls surrounding the core area of The Twin Towers.

 

[Albury Smith]

I know that and they are used to try and keep a secret. Your job, if you choose to protect the Constitution is find INDEPENDENT EVIDENCE showing that the NIST report is correct in its structural basis.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Why don't you prove that anything in it is wrong? You're not doing too well so far.

I'm proving that every time it mentions "core column" it is wrong.

Here is an image showing the 3" high tensile steel rebar that was in the concrete core walls surrounding the core area.



This was revealed after the structural steel "spire" fell.



You can plainly see the arc of the fine vertical elements in the top photo. That is because they are so small. You can plainly see the size of the structural steel which was taken from the same camera seconds before. You can see that the top photo depicts something far too small to be structural steel.

That can only be rebar and it proves that there was concrete, PARTICULARLY when other images that can only show concrete are posted as well.

NOTE: The core area right of the rebar is EMPTY.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
There was no rebar in the tower cores above grade, and I've never even SEEN 3" rebar. Have you ever been on a construction site?

 

[PLYMCO_PILGRIM]

Wait what is he claiming the supports were made from?

I'm confused he said they weren't steel, what the heck were they?

Is this guy (the op) blaming shoddy construction?

I'm just lost i've really tried to read what he posted and understand his point, I'm just looking for some clarification on what the OP is getting at.

Maybe you can detect a difference in appearances between what FEMA says the core is.

and what is seen as the core of WTC 2 on 9-11.

If you cannot do that, then you cannot protect the US Constitution. All you can do is find an immigrant who has worked in construction to help you. They take an oath to protect the Constitution.

"I hereby declare, on oath, that I absolutely and entirely renounce and abjure all allegiance and fidelity to any foreign prince, potentate, state, or sovereignty of whom or which I have heretofore been a subject or citizen; that I will support and defend the Constitution and laws of the United States of America against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I will bear arms on behalf of the United States when required by the law; that I will perform noncombatant service in the Armed Forces of the United States when required by the law; that I will perform work of national importance under civilian direction when required by the law; and that I take this obligation freely without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; so help me God."

Maybe you don't care enough.

What? Seriously I asked you an honest question and you just tell me i dont care? WTF man I wouldn't have asked you anything if i didnt care.

Those pictures (the bottom one) didn't tell me any more information.

What are you saying that the steel structure couldn't have melted or that it wasn't there? Or are you claiming something different?

Please i'm not trying to insult you I am honestly trying to understand just what point you are trying to make, as i dont see it yet.

YOu say the NIST lied, and im not sure what the lie is...it seems to me you are saying the building wasn't supported by steel structures.

Just explain it in a short, concise manner without any frills/insults/defences...just post your facts/opinions.

 

[Albury Smith]

DUH!

This is what FEMA says existed.



And this is what actually was on the ground on 9-11.



If you have no structural expertise, construction experience and depend on experts, you can only impede those who do and are trying to protect the Constitution by showing evidence that proves the deception.

So far it appears you know nothing of construction and so cannot use the evidence I have.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
LOL. I'm not the one jabbering about concrete core walls with 3" rebar. Here's a clue for you, dude: Neither existed in either tower. The only concrete above grade in either one was the <4" floor slabs over corrugated metal decking.

You are the one repeating (jabbering) the lies of FEMA as parroted and erroneously used in the NIST report.

I am posting images of concrete walls surrounding the core area of The Twin Towers.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
You're hallucinating. There were none.

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

The Jews didn't do it?

Come on, they're behind EVERYTHING. Them and Halliburton that is.

 

[DiveCon]

DUH!

This is what FEMA says existed.

And this is what actually was on the ground on 9-11.

If you have no structural expertise, construction experience and depend on experts, you can only impede those who do and are trying to protect the Constitution by showing evidence that proves the deception.

So far it appears you know nothing of construction and so cannot use the evidence I have.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
LOL. I'm not the one jabbering about concrete core walls with 3" rebar. Here's a clue for you, dude: Neither existed in either tower. The only concrete above grade in either one was the <4" floor slabs over corrugated metal decking.

You are the one repeating (jabbering) the lies of FEMA as parroted and erroneously used in the NIST report.

I am posting images of concrete walls surrounding the core area of The Twin Towers.

dude, you are INSANE
nothing isd new in any of those photos
you cant even be sure if what you see there is the core or the outter shell

 

[Albury Smith]

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
What evasion? I need 15 posts on here before I'm allowed to post URLs or links, but I gave you the FEMA publication that disproves the nonsense in your OP.

The report that is a lie cannot be used to disprove the lie.

Keep posting until you can post evidence.[/QUOTE]
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
You can certainly figure out how to find FEMA's WTC Building Performance Study, Chapter 2 without a link or URL, and should have read it before posting the nonsense in your OP. Why don't you at least do it now instead of embarrassing yourself further?