Victims' Families Want To Air New 9/11 Truth Ad

[Mr. Jones]

How do you know they did not?

How do I know? Because the damn penthouse collapsed FIRST you fucking idiot. What the hell do you think was supporting the penthouse? Toothpicks? The columns below the penthouse clearly failed for it to collapse into the building BEFORE the perimeter facade came down. That means that the interior columns DID not fail/get removed at the same time as the facade columns. Chandler is an idiot.

Jesus H. Christ are you a moron. The lengths you go to to TRY and look intelligent on this subject is just beyond words.

What's really funny about you is that it does not take someone with superior intellect to see with their own eyes the deception, and put together the fact that a building suffering displaced damage from office fires, should not collapse straight down at free fall speed. It's not rocket science.
Also they had foreknowledge that it would collapse either on its own "or it would be taken down" this statement is on video with a major news anchor.
So this clearly is a building that was taken down by CD, and your ridiculous explanations are so far fetched that you look like a fool in helping to cover up the obvious. Here you go stooge-

YouTube - DavidSChandler's Channel

Yeah right, column 79 caused a free fall collapse..fucking idiot..
A CD complete with explosions and for knowledge...built they couldn't tel us why it collapsed for years!! You are an agent of disinformation and you suck at it too.

The NIST report was not an honest scientific inquiry.

 

[SFC Ollie]

Again, the only thing that was free fall (for a whole 2.25 seconds) was the facade. and why it was able to obtain that speed was because the interior of the building fell 7 seconds prior.

 

[Mr. Jones]

* The NIST has not been able to investigate steel from the building because the crime scene was destroyed and all the steel was shipped off to China to be recycled.
This is very serious; how can you find out what really happened to a building if none of the building remains to be examined. Ho can you find out what caused this incredibly anomalous collapse if there is no way to determine if explosives have been used for example?

Ah. I love it! I specifically showed Mr. Jones YESTERDAY that all the steel wasn't shipped off, yet here he is parroting that all the steel was shipped off and there was none to test.

Anyone else need any evidence Mr. Jones is a blatant pathological liar and bullshit artist?

I just wonder why they keep insisting that 7WTC fell in only 7 seconds when we all know there was seven seconds between the beginning of the collapse and the first movement of the facade. I would say they are rather dishonest with themselves.

1% of the steel was all that was left, if even that. NIST did not do a proper inquiry, they guessed and fudged until they came up with a fantasy explanation that you dimwits swear is gospel

Looking at the video of 7s collapse, it is a prime example of a CD, with free fall speeds, and you stupid fucks live in denial of this, nitpicking at stupid tidbits of BS that only show how pathetically far you have to reach. Face it you were scammed and lied to, why do you bother to make yourselves look so foolish? Do you not want to stand up for your country and take it back from the criminals that hijacked it from you by lying to you?


Some 185,101 tons of structural steel have been hauled away from Ground Zero. Most of the steel has been recycled as per the city's decision to swiftly send the wreckage to salvage yards in New Jersey. The city's hasty move has outraged many victims' families who believe the steel should have been examined more thoroughly. Last month, fire experts told Congress that about 80% of the steel was scrapped without being examined because investigators did not have the authority to preserve the wreckage. 1

During the official investigation controlled by FEMA, one hundred fifty pieces of steel were saved for future study. 5 One hundred fifty pieces out of hundreds of thousands of pieces! Moreover it is not clear who made the decision to save these particular pieces. It is clear that the volunteer investigators were doing their work at the Fresh Kills dump, not at Ground Zero, so whatever steel they had access to was first picked over by the people running the cleanup operation.

Given that the people in charge considered the steel garbage, useless to any investigation in this age of computer simulations, they certainly took pains to make sure it didn't end up anywhere other than a smelting furnace. They installed GPS locater devices on each of the trucks that was carrying loads away from Ground Zero, at a cost of $1000 each. The securitysolutions.com website has an article on the tracking system with this passage.
Ninety-nine percent of the drivers were extremely driven to do their jobs. But there were big concerns, because the loads consisted of highly sensitive material. One driver, for example, took an extended lunch break of an hour and a half. There was nothing criminal about that, but he was dismissed. 6


Copyright 2003-2010,
911Research.WTC7.net site last updated:12/18/10
fair use notice

Background Attack Aftermath Evidence Misinformation Analysis Memorial
WTC Steel Removal
The Expeditious Destruction of the Evidence at Ground Zero

Steel was the structural material of the buildings. As such it was the most important evidence to preserve in order to puzzle out how the structures held up to the impacts and fires, but then disintegrated into rubble. Since no steel-framed buildings had ever collapsed due to fires, the steel should have been subjected to detailed analysis. So what did the authorities do with this key evidence of the vast crime and unprecedented engineering failure? They recycled it!
Some 185,101 tons of structural steel have been hauled away from Ground Zero. Most of the steel has been recycled as per the city's decision to swiftly send the wreckage to salvage yards in New Jersey. The city's hasty move has outraged many victims' families who believe the steel should have been examined more thoroughly. Last month, fire experts told Congress that about 80% of the steel was scrapped without being examined because investigators did not have the authority to preserve the wreckage. 1

The bulk of the steel was apparently shipped to China and India. The Chinese firm Baosteel purchased 50,000 tons at a rate of $120 per ton, compared to an average price of $160 paid by local mills in the previous year. 2

Mayor Bloomberg, a former engineering major, was not concerned about the destruction of the evidence:
If you want to take a look at the construction methods and the design, that's in this day and age what computers do. Just looking at a piece of metal generally doesn't tell you anything. 3

The pace of the steel's removal was very rapid, even in the first weeks after the attack. By September 29, 130,000 tons of debris -- most of it apparently steel -- had been removed. 4

During the official investigation controlled by FEMA, one hundred fifty pieces of steel were saved for future study. 5 One hundred fifty pieces out of hundreds of thousands of pieces! Moreover it is not clear who made the decision to save these particular pieces. It is clear that the volunteer investigators were doing their work at the Fresh Kills dump, not at Ground Zero, so whatever steel they had access to was first picked over by the people running the cleanup operation.
Highly Sensitive Garbage

Given that the people in charge considered the steel garbage, useless to any investigation in this age of computer simulations, they certainly took pains to make sure it didn't end up anywhere other than a smelting furnace. They installed GPS locater devices on each of the trucks that was carrying loads away from Ground Zero, at a cost of $1000 each. The securitysolutions.com website has an article on the tracking system with this passage.
Ninety-nine percent of the drivers were extremely driven to do their jobs. But there were big concerns, because the loads consisted of highly sensitive material. One driver, for example, took an extended lunch break of an hour and a half. There was nothing criminal about that, but he was dismissed. 6
Shielding Investigators From the Evidence

According to FEMA, more than 350,000 tons of steel were extracted from Ground Zero and barged or trucked to salvage yards where it was cut up for recycling. Four salvage yards were contracted to process the steel.

* Hugo Nue Schnitzer at Fresh Kills (FK) Landfill, Staten Island, NJ
* Hugo Nue Schnitzer's Claremont (CM) Terminal in Jersey City, NJ
* Metal Management in Newark (NW), NJ
* Blanford and Co. in Keasbey (KB), NJ

FEMA's BPAT, who wrote the WTC Building Performance Study, were not given access to Ground Zero. Apparently, they were not even allowed to collect steel samples from the salvage yards. According to Appendix D of the Study:

Collection and storage of steel members from the WTC site was not part of the BPS Team efforts sponsored by FEMA and the American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE).
Fate of Some Steel Revealed Years Later
base of core column stored in a JFK hanger
The base of one of the Twin Towers' massive core columns stored in a hanger at JFK Airport is shown in the film Up From Zero.

Given that the removal and recycling of World Trade Center steel continued over the objections of victims' families and others seeking a genuine investigation, revelations, years later, that some of Twin Towers' steel parts were preserved comes as something of a surprise. Many of the heaviest steel pieces from the Twin Towers are stored in an 80,000-square-foot hangar at John F. Kennedy International Airport. These include some of the base sections of the Towers' massive core columns and 13 of the 153 steel trees from the bases of the Towers' perimeter walls. 7 Some of these pieces are shown in the film Up From Zero.

The hangar, which reportedly holds one five-hundredth of the "total debris field", is off-limits to the public. 8

I suppose if only one nut or bolt was the only thing salvaged some asshole would be salivating over busting Mr. Jones for lying!

STFU and be a man and stand up for your country you POS. Instead of nitpicking and over stretching reality.

 

[eots]

again, the only thing that was free fall (for a whole 2.25 seconds) was the facade. And why it was able to obtain that speed was because the interior of the building fell 7 seconds prior.

and you know this how ?

 

[Mr. Jones]

again, the only thing that was free fall (for a whole 2.25 seconds) was the facade. And why it was able to obtain that speed was because the interior of the building fell 7 seconds prior.

and you know this how ?

So you're saying the inside of the building fell down.....??? There was no dustpile coming from the lobby if it did...it would have surely made some kind of deformation on the outside of the building that would have been visable...I again ask you, is it possible for a persons skull to disintegrate without seeing their face look strange?? I mean it's the same concept,...So many parts interconnected in that 47 story building and no visible deformities that suggest what you say is even the slightest bit possible.
Look at NISTS computer model...Looks nothing like the collapse with all the deformities in it does it? Come to reality Ollie, it sucks to have to face the country you served is in such peril, and run by international criminals...but all signs point to this.

9-11 Review: The Project For a New American Century

9-11 Review: The Gulf of Tonkin Incident

9-11 Review: Operation Northwoods

9-11 Review: Operation Gladio

9-11 Review: The Kuwaiti Incubator Baby Hoax

9-11 Review: Operation Ajax

9-11 Review: The Oklahoma City Bombing

Defenders of the World Trade Center collapse theory have dismissed the use of aluminothermics in the demolition of the skyscrapers with the argument that aluminothermic reactions are too slow to have been used used to cut the buildings' structural steel with the speed and precision necessary to bring the buildings down. There are several problems with this argument:
* It describes aluminothermic reactions as being too slow to have brought about the buildings' precipitous falls, while assuming that the far slower-acting and much more random building fires could have done so.
* It assumes that aluminothermic charges would have to work in the same way as conventional cutter charges, ignoring, for example, the ability of thermite to rapidly melt though thick steel members under the the influence of gravity.
* It ignores the cumulative effects of widespread attack of such large buildings by aluminothermic incindiaries. Even if the individual charges didn't cut through steel members, the overpressures generated by the confluence of hundreds of charges rapidly elevating temperatures and vaporizing moisture would be sufficient to literally blow the buildings apart -- such as we see in the mushrooming of the Twin Towers.
* It ignores the existence of "super-thermites" or energetic nano-composites, in which the aluminothermic preparation is engineered to accelerate the reaction rate such that they become just as explosive as conventional high-explosives.

9-11 Review: Energetic Nanocomposites

 

[Patriot911]

again, the only thing that was free fall (for a whole 2.25 seconds) was the facade. And why it was able to obtain that speed was because the interior of the building fell 7 seconds prior.

and you know this how ?

So you're saying the inside of the building fell down.....??? There was no dustpile coming from the lobby if it did...it would have surely made some kind of deformation on the outside of the building that would have been visable...I again ask you, is it possible for a persons skull to disintegrate without seeing their face look strange?? I mean it's the same concept,...So many parts interconnected in that 47 story building and no visible deformities that suggest what you say is even the slightest bit possible.
Look at NISTS computer model...Looks nothing like the collapse with all the deformities in it does it? Come to reality Ollie, it sucks to have to face the country you served is in such peril, and run by international criminals...but all signs point to this.

9-11 Review: The Project For a New American Century

9-11 Review: The Gulf of Tonkin Incident

9-11 Review: Operation Northwoods

9-11 Review: Operation Gladio

9-11 Review: The Kuwaiti Incubator Baby Hoax

9-11 Review: Operation Ajax

9-11 Review: The Oklahoma City Bombing

Defenders of the World Trade Center collapse theory have dismissed the use of aluminothermics in the demolition of the skyscrapers with the argument that aluminothermic reactions are too slow to have been used used to cut the buildings' structural steel with the speed and precision necessary to bring the buildings down. There are several problems with this argument:
* It describes aluminothermic reactions as being too slow to have brought about the buildings' precipitous falls, while assuming that the far slower-acting and much more random building fires could have done so.
* It assumes that aluminothermic charges would have to work in the same way as conventional cutter charges, ignoring, for example, the ability of thermite to rapidly melt though thick steel members under the the influence of gravity.
* It ignores the cumulative effects of widespread attack of such large buildings by aluminothermic incindiaries. Even if the individual charges didn't cut through steel members, the overpressures generated by the confluence of hundreds of charges rapidly elevating temperatures and vaporizing moisture would be sufficient to literally blow the buildings apart -- such as we see in the mushrooming of the Twin Towers.
* It ignores the existence of "super-thermites" or energetic nano-composites, in which the aluminothermic preparation is engineered to accelerate the reaction rate such that they become just as explosive as conventional high-explosives.

9-11 Review: Energetic Nanocomposites

Any one else find it hilarious that total waste of oxygen like Mr. Jones have to pretend all kinds of bullshit in order to justify their traitorous actions?

 

[eots]

and you know this how ?

So you're saying the inside of the building fell down.....??? There was no dustpile coming from the lobby if it did...it would have surely made some kind of deformation on the outside of the building that would have been visable...I again ask you, is it possible for a persons skull to disintegrate without seeing their face look strange?? I mean it's the same concept,...So many parts interconnected in that 47 story building and no visible deformities that suggest what you say is even the slightest bit possible.
Look at NISTS computer model...Looks nothing like the collapse with all the deformities in it does it? Come to reality Ollie, it sucks to have to face the country you served is in such peril, and run by international criminals...but all signs point to this.

9-11 Review: The Project For a New American Century

9-11 Review: The Gulf of Tonkin Incident

9-11 Review: Operation Northwoods

9-11 Review: Operation Gladio

9-11 Review: The Kuwaiti Incubator Baby Hoax

9-11 Review: Operation Ajax

9-11 Review: The Oklahoma City Bombing

Defenders of the World Trade Center collapse theory have dismissed the use of aluminothermics in the demolition of the skyscrapers with the argument that aluminothermic reactions are too slow to have been used used to cut the buildings' structural steel with the speed and precision necessary to bring the buildings down. There are several problems with this argument:
* It describes aluminothermic reactions as being too slow to have brought about the buildings' precipitous falls, while assuming that the far slower-acting and much more random building fires could have done so.
* It assumes that aluminothermic charges would have to work in the same way as conventional cutter charges, ignoring, for example, the ability of thermite to rapidly melt though thick steel members under the the influence of gravity.
* It ignores the cumulative effects of widespread attack of such large buildings by aluminothermic incindiaries. Even if the individual charges didn't cut through steel members, the overpressures generated by the confluence of hundreds of charges rapidly elevating temperatures and vaporizing moisture would be sufficient to literally blow the buildings apart -- such as we see in the mushrooming of the Twin Towers.
* It ignores the existence of "super-thermites" or energetic nano-composites, in which the aluminothermic preparation is engineered to accelerate the reaction rate such that they become just as explosive as conventional high-explosives.

9-11 Review: Energetic Nanocomposites

Any one else find it hilarious that total waste of oxygen like Mr. Jones have to pretend all kinds of bullshit in order to justify their traitorous actions?

No.but I find everything out of your mouth a joke...so why dont you try to answer the question put to you ?

 

[candycorn]

eots=garbage

 

[Patriot911]

Ah. I love it! I specifically showed Mr. Jones YESTERDAY that all the steel wasn't shipped off, yet here he is parroting that all the steel was shipped off and there was none to test.

Anyone else need any evidence Mr. Jones is a blatant pathological liar and bullshit artist?

1% of the steel was all that was left, if even that. NIST did not do a proper inquiry, they guessed and fudged until they came up with a fantasy explanation that you dimwits swear is gospel

Yet you just got done saying NO steel was left! Which is it? Come on you dishonest fuck! You've been caught in yet ANOTHER lie and all you do is lie there like a bitch and prove your lies to everyone!

Looking at the video of 7s collapse, it is a prime example of a CD, with free fall speeds, and you stupid fucks live in denial of this, nitpicking at stupid tidbits of BS that only show how pathetically far you have to reach.

It LOOKS like a CD. That's all you have? When pressed for details you waffle all over the place making excuse after excuse that nullifies the reasons you're claiming it was a CD in the FIRST place!

News flash. Your OPINON of how it LOOKS is NOT EVIDENCE! I've never seen a group of dumbfucks so full of themselves that they think their opinion is the only thing that matters.

Face it you were scammed and lied to, why do you bother to make yourselves look so foolish?

We're not the gullible twats swallowing everything AE911 and other sites say. We're the ones looking at the ACTUAL EVIDENCE to see what happened. You claim it was a CD. Video and audio of the event shows NO EXPLOSIONS! You know.... really loud bangs that can be heard for miles? The trademark of CDs? You pretend "oh, it was because it was thermite!", yet thermite can't be controlled down to the millisecond which is REQUIRED for a successful controlled demolition. Just one aspect of your lie that proves you're full of shit and have been lied to while ignoring the truth.

Do you not want to stand up for your country and take it back from the criminals that hijacked it from you by lying to you?

I am standing up against the traitorous fucks trying to rise people up against the government based on a pack of lies.

Some 185,101 tons of structural steel have been hauled away from Ground Zero. Most of the steel has been recycled as per the city's decision to swiftly send the wreckage to salvage yards in New Jersey. The city's hasty move has outraged many victims' families who believe the steel should have been examined more thoroughly. Last month, fire experts told Congress that about 80% of the steel was scrapped without being examined because investigators did not have the authority to preserve the wreckage.

It WAS examined at the salvage yards. This has been proven to you before, yet you still insist on lying about it. Where are the investigators saying they didn't have a chance to examine the steel to their content?

During the official investigation controlled by FEMA, one hundred fifty pieces of steel were saved for future study. 5 One hundred fifty pieces out of hundreds of thousands of pieces! Moreover it is not clear who made the decision to save these particular pieces. It is clear that the volunteer investigators were doing their work at the Fresh Kills dump, not at Ground Zero, so whatever steel they had access to was first picked over by the people running the cleanup operation.

But you said NO steel was saved. Do you see your lie yet or are you going to continue to flip flop and pretend no steel and 150 pieces of steel are the same?

Given that the people in charge considered the steel garbage, useless to any investigation in this age of computer simulations, they certainly took pains to make sure it didn't end up anywhere other than a smelting furnace.

A bullshit assumption on your part. Unless, of course, you have proof of what the people in charge were actually thinking instead of pretending you just somehow KNOW these things.

They installed GPS locater devices on each of the trucks that was carrying loads away from Ground Zero, at a cost of $1000 each. The securitysolutions.com website has an article on the tracking system with this passage. Ninety-nine percent of the drivers were extremely driven to do their jobs. But there were big concerns, because the loads consisted of highly sensitive material. One driver, for example, took an extended lunch break of an hour and a half. There was nothing criminal about that, but he was dismissed.

Wait.... I thought you said they thought it was all garbage! Why do you track stuff like this unless you KNOW it is evidence that needs to be gone over? You are so blind you can't even see the evidence right in front of your face!

I've skipped over the rest of your garbage as I'm tired of constantly debunking your cut and paste jobs.

I suppose if only one nut or bolt was the only thing salvaged some asshole would be salivating over busting Mr. Jones for lying!

It wasn't one nut or bolt, was it. Time to man up, you piece of lying shit!

STFU and be a man and stand up for your country you POS. Instead of nitpicking and over stretching reality.

I am defending my country. I am defending it from pieces of shit like you who are using a pack of lies you can't even show evidence is true while ignoring TONS of evidence because it destroys your theories. Your aim? Overthrowing the government. So how is standing up for assholes like you not standing up for my country? Or are we just suppose to believe lying pieces of shits like you and pretend all the lies and the ignoring of real evidence is OK? That might be OK for malcontents like you, but for normal citizens like me who demand evidence and not opinion, your bullshit just isn't anywhere near good enough. This is a fact you are going to have to live with along with the proven fact you are a liar.

 

[Gamolon]

again, the only thing that was free fall (for a whole 2.25 seconds) was the facade. And why it was able to obtain that speed was because the interior of the building fell 7 seconds prior.

and you know this how ?

So you're saying the inside of the building fell down.....??? There was no dustpile coming from the lobby if it did...it would have surely made some kind of deformation on the outside of the building that would have been visable...

Hey jackass. Watch this video.
[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kXbBSm8tMmk]YouTube - 9/11 - NIST FOIA WTC7 Collapse including Penthouse.(with audio)[/ame]

What happens at :03? Holy shit! The penthouse collapsed INSIDE the building? Holy fuck? I see windows break as the penthouse collapses INSIDE the building.

What a moron.

Yeah NOTHING collapsed inside the building.

 

[Gamolon]

I again ask you, is it possible for a persons skull to disintegrate without seeing their face look strange?? I mean it's the same concept,...

OMFG!!!!

First you fucking idiots compare the twin towers to a "muffler", now you are comparing WTC7 to a skull as having the same design?!?!?!!?

WAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA. This is friggin' PRICELESS!!!

Mr. Jones. You just earned a place in my signature for making the dumbest comment yet. You also earned a spot on my ignore list as you have completely lost what little credibility you had left when discussing structures. It is quite obvious you have NO clue what you are talking about.

Have fun!

A skull....

Jesus H. Christ!!!!!

 

[Mr. Jones]

I again ask you, is it possible for a persons skull to disintegrate without seeing their face look strange?? I mean it's the same concept,...

OMFG!!!!

First you fucking idiots compare the twin towers to a "muffler", now you are comparing WTC7 to a skull as having the same design?!?!?!!?

WAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA. This is friggin' PRICELESS!!!

Mr. Jones. You just earned a place in my signature for making the dumbest comment yet. You also earned a spot on my ignore list as you have completely lost what little credibility you had left when discussing structures. It is quite obvious you have NO clue what you are talking about.

Have fun!

A skull....

Jesus H. Christ!!!!!

Things have to be explained to you morons in a way a child could comprehend....besides this comparison makes more sense then you comparing the steel in the WTC to railroad tracks!!
If you're too stupid to understand that the inside skeleton of something does not just "fall down" while leaving the outer facade
motionless, you are truly one stupid SOB. I welcome your ignore list, as you aren't worth the time, as you have failed to answer even direct questions in many threads, and instead you focus on strawman arguments like you have just done, sidetrack discussions,
you are incredulous and indignant.
In fact you use all the tactics that you are trained to use on public forums that focus on the 9-11 or other subject that ridicules the government in any way.

As a warning to all others that might encounter you here or elsewhere I submit the following list of tactics you and your cohorts use to obfuscate all discussions.

1. Hear no evil, see no evil, speak no evil. Regardless of what you know, don't discuss it -- especially if you are a public figure, news anchor, etc. If it's not reported, it didn't happen, and you never have to deal with the issues.

2. Become incredulous and indignant. Avoid discussing key issues and instead focus on side issues which can be used show the topic as being critical of some otherwise sacrosanct group or theme. This is also known as the "How dare you!" gambit.

3. Create rumor mongers. Avoid discussing issues by describing all charges, regardless of venue or evidence, as mere rumors and wild accusations. Other derogatory terms mutually exclusive of truth may work as well. This method works especially well with a silent press, because the only way the public can learn of the facts are through such "arguable rumors". If you can associate the material with the Internet, use this fact to certify it a "wild rumor" which can have no basis in fact.

4. Use a straw man. Find or create a seeming element of your opponent's argument which you can easily knock down to make yourself look good and the opponent to look bad. Either make up an issue you may safely imply exists based on your interpretation of the opponent/opponent arguments/situation, or select the weakest aspect of the weakest charges. Amplify their significance and destroy them in a way which appears to debunk all the charges, real and fabricated alike, while actually avoiding discussion of the real issues.

5. Sidetrack opponents with name calling and ridicule. This is also known as the primary attack the messenger ploy, though other methods qualify as variants of that approach. Associate opponents with unpopular titles such as "kooks", "right-wing", "liberal", "left-wing", "terrorists", "conspiracy buffs", "radicals", "militia", "racists", "religious fanatics", "sexual deviates", and so forth. This makes others shrink from support out of fear of gaining the same label, and you avoid dealing with issues.

6. Hit and Run. In any public forum, make a brief attack of your opponent or the opponent position and then scamper off before an answer can be fielded, or simply ignore any answer. This works extremely well in Internet and letters-to-the-editor environments where a steady stream of new identities can be called upon without having to explain criticism reasoning -- simply make an accusation or other attack, never discussing issues, and never answering any subsequent response, for that would dignify the opponent's viewpoint.

7. Question motives. Twist or amplify any fact which could so taken to imply that the opponent operates out of a hidden personal agenda or other bias. This avoids discussing issues and forces the accuser on the defensive.

8. Invoke authority. Claim for yourself or associate yourself with authority and present your argument with enough "jargon" and "minutiae" to illustrate you are "one who knows", and simply say it isn't so without discussing issues or demonstrating concretely why or citing sources.

9. Play Dumb. No matter what evidence or logical argument is offered, avoid discussing issues with denial they have any credibility, make any sense, provide any proof, contain or make a point, have logic, or support a conclusion. Mix well for maximum effect.

10. Associate opponent charges with old news. A derivative of the straw man usually, in any large-scale matter of high visibility, someone will make charges early on which can be or were already easily dealt with. Where it can be foreseen, have your own side raise a straw man issue and have it dealt with early on as part of the initial contingency plans. Subsequent charges, regardless of validity or new ground uncovered, can usually them be associated with the original charge and dismissed as simply being a rehash without need to address current issues -- so much the better where the opponent is or was involved with the original source.

11. Establish and rely upon fall-back positions. Using a minor matter or element of the facts, take the "high road" and "confess" with candor that some innocent mistake, in hindsight, was made -- but that opponents have seized on the opportunity to blow it all out of proportion and imply greater criminalities which, "just isn't so." Others can reinforce this on your behalf, later. Done properly, this can garner sympathy and respect for "coming clean" and "owning up" to your mistakes without addressing more serious issues.

12. Enigmas have no solution. Drawing upon the overall umbrella of events surrounding the crime and the multitude of players and events, paint the entire affair as too complex to solve. This causes those otherwise following the matter to begin to loose interest more quickly without having to address the actual issues.

13. Alice in Wonderland Logic. Avoid discussion of the issues by reasoning backwards with an apparent deductive logic in a way that forbears any actual material fact.

14. Demand complete solutions. Avoid the issues by requiring opponents to solve the crime at hand completely, a ploy which works best for items qualifying for rule 10.

15. Fit the facts to alternate conclusions. This requires creative thinking unless the crime was planned with contingency conclusions in place.

16. Vanishing evidence and witnesses. If it does not exist, it is not fact, and you won't have to address the issue.

17. Change the subject. Usually in connection with one of the other ploys listed here, find a way to side-track the discussion with abrasive or controversial comments in hopes of turning attention to a new, more manageable topic. This works especially well with companions who can "argue" with you over the new topic and polarize the discussion arena in order to avoid discussing more key issues.

18. Emotionalize, Antagonize, and Goad Opponents. If you can't do anything else, chide and taunt your opponents and draw them into emotional responses which will tend to make them look foolish and overly motivated, and generally render their material somewhat less coherent. Not only will you avoid discussing the issues in the first instance, but even if their emotional response addresses the issue, you can further avoid the issues by then focusing on how "sensitive they are to criticism".

19. Ignore proof presented, demand impossible proofs. This is perhaps a variant of the "play dumb" rule. Regardless of what material may be presented by an opponent in public forums, claim the material irrelevant and demand proof that is impossible for the opponent to come by (it may exist, but not be at his disposal, or it may be something which is known to be safely destroyed or withheld, such as a murder weapon). In order to completely avoid discussing issues may require you to categorically deny and be critical of media or books as valid sources, deny that witnesses are acceptable, or even deny that statements made by government or other authorities have any meaning or relevance.

20. False evidence. Whenever possible, introduce new facts or clues designed and manufactured to conflict with opponent presentations as useful tools to neutralize sensitive issues or impede resolution. This works best when the crime was designed with contingencies for the purpose, and the facts cannot be easily separated from the fabrications.

21. Call a Grand Jury, Special Prosecutor, or other empowered investigative body. Subvert the (process) to your benefit and effectively neutralize all sensitive issues without open discussion. Once convened, the evidence and testimony are required to be secret when properly handled. For instance, if you own the prosecuting attorney, it can insure a Grand Jury hears no useful evidence and that the evidence is sealed an unavailable to subsequent investigators. Once a favorable verdict (usually, this technique is applied to find the guilty innocent, but it can also be used to obtain charges when seeking to frame a victim) is achieved, the matter can be considered officially closed.

22. Manufacture a new truth. Create your own expert(s), group(s), author(s), leader(s) or influence existing ones willing to forge new ground via scientific, investigative, or social research or testimony which concludes favorably. In this way, if you must actually address issues, you can do so authoritatively.

23. Create bigger distractions. If the above does not seem to be working to distract from sensitive issues, or to prevent unwanted media coverage of unstoppable events such as trials, create bigger news stories (or treat them as such) to distract the multitudes.

24. Silence critics. If the above methods do not prevail, consider removing opponents from circulation by some definitive solution so that the need to address issues is removed entirely. This can be by their death, arrest and detention, blackmail or destruction of their character by release of blackmail information, or merely by proper intimidation with blackmail or other threats.

25. Vanish. If you are a key holder of secrets or otherwise overly illuminated and you think the heat is getting too hot, to avoid the issues, vacate the kitchen.

http://svnlsenetter.wordpress.com/2008/02/29/twenty-five-rules-of-disinformation/

Welcome to MY ignore list asshole.

 

[SFC Ollie]

Gee, won't be long before we can close up the conspiracy forums. Everyone will be on everyone else ignore list. Ain't it grand?

 

[Gamolon]

Gee, won't be long before we can close up the conspiracy forums. Everyone will be on everyone else ignore list. Ain't it grand?

That explanation by Mr. Jones took the cake. When someone makes an asinine statement like that, there is no way I'm going to continue having a discussion as they are clearly clueless.

A skull.

What a moron. Almost a good as the twins designed like "mufflers".

I just can't get over the idiocy I've witnessed this past week. It really shows the level of intellect of some that believe this crap.

 

[Patriot911]

I again ask you, is it possible for a persons skull to disintegrate without seeing their face look strange?? I mean it's the same concept,...

OMFG!!!!

First you fucking idiots compare the twin towers to a "muffler", now you are comparing WTC7 to a skull as having the same design?!?!?!!?

WAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA. This is friggin' PRICELESS!!!

Mr. Jones. You just earned a place in my signature for making the dumbest comment yet. You also earned a spot on my ignore list as you have completely lost what little credibility you had left when discussing structures. It is quite obvious you have NO clue what you are talking about.

Have fun!

A skull....

Jesus H. Christ!!!!!

Things have to be explained to you morons in a way a child could comprehend....besides this comparison makes more sense then you comparing the steel in the WTC to railroad tracks!!
If you're too stupid to understand that the inside skeleton of something does not just "fall down" while leaving the outer facade
motionless, you are truly one stupid SOB. I welcome your ignore list, as you aren't worth the time, as you have failed to answer even direct questions in many threads, and instead you focus on strawman arguments like you have just done, sidetrack discussions,
you are incredulous and indignant.
In fact you use all the tactics that you are trained to use on public forums that focus on the 9-11 or other subject that ridicules the government in any way.

As a warning to all others that might encounter you here or elsewhere I submit the following list of tactics you and your cohorts use to obfuscate all discussions.

1. Hear no evil, see no evil, speak no evil. Regardless of what you know, don't discuss it -- especially if you are a public figure, news anchor, etc. If it's not reported, it didn't happen, and you never have to deal with the issues.

2. Become incredulous and indignant. Avoid discussing key issues and instead focus on side issues which can be used show the topic as being critical of some otherwise sacrosanct group or theme. This is also known as the "How dare you!" gambit.

3. Create rumor mongers. Avoid discussing issues by describing all charges, regardless of venue or evidence, as mere rumors and wild accusations. Other derogatory terms mutually exclusive of truth may work as well. This method works especially well with a silent press, because the only way the public can learn of the facts are through such "arguable rumors". If you can associate the material with the Internet, use this fact to certify it a "wild rumor" which can have no basis in fact.

4. Use a straw man. Find or create a seeming element of your opponent's argument which you can easily knock down to make yourself look good and the opponent to look bad. Either make up an issue you may safely imply exists based on your interpretation of the opponent/opponent arguments/situation, or select the weakest aspect of the weakest charges. Amplify their significance and destroy them in a way which appears to debunk all the charges, real and fabricated alike, while actually avoiding discussion of the real issues.

5. Sidetrack opponents with name calling and ridicule. This is also known as the primary attack the messenger ploy, though other methods qualify as variants of that approach. Associate opponents with unpopular titles such as "kooks", "right-wing", "liberal", "left-wing", "terrorists", "conspiracy buffs", "radicals", "militia", "racists", "religious fanatics", "sexual deviates", and so forth. This makes others shrink from support out of fear of gaining the same label, and you avoid dealing with issues.

6. Hit and Run. In any public forum, make a brief attack of your opponent or the opponent position and then scamper off before an answer can be fielded, or simply ignore any answer. This works extremely well in Internet and letters-to-the-editor environments where a steady stream of new identities can be called upon without having to explain criticism reasoning -- simply make an accusation or other attack, never discussing issues, and never answering any subsequent response, for that would dignify the opponent's viewpoint.

7. Question motives. Twist or amplify any fact which could so taken to imply that the opponent operates out of a hidden personal agenda or other bias. This avoids discussing issues and forces the accuser on the defensive.

8. Invoke authority. Claim for yourself or associate yourself with authority and present your argument with enough "jargon" and "minutiae" to illustrate you are "one who knows", and simply say it isn't so without discussing issues or demonstrating concretely why or citing sources.

9. Play Dumb. No matter what evidence or logical argument is offered, avoid discussing issues with denial they have any credibility, make any sense, provide any proof, contain or make a point, have logic, or support a conclusion. Mix well for maximum effect.

10. Associate opponent charges with old news. A derivative of the straw man usually, in any large-scale matter of high visibility, someone will make charges early on which can be or were already easily dealt with. Where it can be foreseen, have your own side raise a straw man issue and have it dealt with early on as part of the initial contingency plans. Subsequent charges, regardless of validity or new ground uncovered, can usually them be associated with the original charge and dismissed as simply being a rehash without need to address current issues -- so much the better where the opponent is or was involved with the original source.

11. Establish and rely upon fall-back positions. Using a minor matter or element of the facts, take the "high road" and "confess" with candor that some innocent mistake, in hindsight, was made -- but that opponents have seized on the opportunity to blow it all out of proportion and imply greater criminalities which, "just isn't so." Others can reinforce this on your behalf, later. Done properly, this can garner sympathy and respect for "coming clean" and "owning up" to your mistakes without addressing more serious issues.

12. Enigmas have no solution. Drawing upon the overall umbrella of events surrounding the crime and the multitude of players and events, paint the entire affair as too complex to solve. This causes those otherwise following the matter to begin to loose interest more quickly without having to address the actual issues.

13. Alice in Wonderland Logic. Avoid discussion of the issues by reasoning backwards with an apparent deductive logic in a way that forbears any actual material fact.

14. Demand complete solutions. Avoid the issues by requiring opponents to solve the crime at hand completely, a ploy which works best for items qualifying for rule 10.

15. Fit the facts to alternate conclusions. This requires creative thinking unless the crime was planned with contingency conclusions in place.

16. Vanishing evidence and witnesses. If it does not exist, it is not fact, and you won't have to address the issue.

17. Change the subject. Usually in connection with one of the other ploys listed here, find a way to side-track the discussion with abrasive or controversial comments in hopes of turning attention to a new, more manageable topic. This works especially well with companions who can "argue" with you over the new topic and polarize the discussion arena in order to avoid discussing more key issues.

18. Emotionalize, Antagonize, and Goad Opponents. If you can't do anything else, chide and taunt your opponents and draw them into emotional responses which will tend to make them look foolish and overly motivated, and generally render their material somewhat less coherent. Not only will you avoid discussing the issues in the first instance, but even if their emotional response addresses the issue, you can further avoid the issues by then focusing on how "sensitive they are to criticism".

19. Ignore proof presented, demand impossible proofs. This is perhaps a variant of the "play dumb" rule. Regardless of what material may be presented by an opponent in public forums, claim the material irrelevant and demand proof that is impossible for the opponent to come by (it may exist, but not be at his disposal, or it may be something which is known to be safely destroyed or withheld, such as a murder weapon). In order to completely avoid discussing issues may require you to categorically deny and be critical of media or books as valid sources, deny that witnesses are acceptable, or even deny that statements made by government or other authorities have any meaning or relevance.

20. False evidence. Whenever possible, introduce new facts or clues designed and manufactured to conflict with opponent presentations as useful tools to neutralize sensitive issues or impede resolution. This works best when the crime was designed with contingencies for the purpose, and the facts cannot be easily separated from the fabrications.

21. Call a Grand Jury, Special Prosecutor, or other empowered investigative body. Subvert the (process) to your benefit and effectively neutralize all sensitive issues without open discussion. Once convened, the evidence and testimony are required to be secret when properly handled. For instance, if you own the prosecuting attorney, it can insure a Grand Jury hears no useful evidence and that the evidence is sealed an unavailable to subsequent investigators. Once a favorable verdict (usually, this technique is applied to find the guilty innocent, but it can also be used to obtain charges when seeking to frame a victim) is achieved, the matter can be considered officially closed.

22. Manufacture a new truth. Create your own expert(s), group(s), author(s), leader(s) or influence existing ones willing to forge new ground via scientific, investigative, or social research or testimony which concludes favorably. In this way, if you must actually address issues, you can do so authoritatively.

23. Create bigger distractions. If the above does not seem to be working to distract from sensitive issues, or to prevent unwanted media coverage of unstoppable events such as trials, create bigger news stories (or treat them as such) to distract the multitudes.

24. Silence critics. If the above methods do not prevail, consider removing opponents from circulation by some definitive solution so that the need to address issues is removed entirely. This can be by their death, arrest and detention, blackmail or destruction of their character by release of blackmail information, or merely by proper intimidation with blackmail or other threats.

25. Vanish. If you are a key holder of secrets or otherwise overly illuminated and you think the heat is getting too hot, to avoid the issues, vacate the kitchen.

http://svnlsenetter.wordpress.com/2008/02/29/twenty-five-rules-of-disinformation/

Welcome to MY ignore list asshole.

So everyone is suppose to believe that this list is what Mr. Jones has personally seen from Gamolon.

Would it surprise anyone if the piece of shit liar Mr. Jones plagerized the list because he is too damn lazy to actually list his "complaints"?

One of many sites Mr. Jones plagerized his list from. Anyone else have any doubts at all about Mr. Jones incredible levels of dishonesty and all around disgusting behavior?

 

[Gamolon]

OMFG!!!!

First you fucking idiots compare the twin towers to a "muffler", now you are comparing WTC7 to a skull as having the same design?!?!?!!?

WAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA. This is friggin' PRICELESS!!!

Mr. Jones. You just earned a place in my signature for making the dumbest comment yet. You also earned a spot on my ignore list as you have completely lost what little credibility you had left when discussing structures. It is quite obvious you have NO clue what you are talking about.

Have fun!

A skull....

Jesus H. Christ!!!!!

Things have to be explained to you morons in a way a child could comprehend....besides this comparison makes more sense then you comparing the steel in the WTC to railroad tracks!!
If you're too stupid to understand that the inside skeleton of something does not just "fall down" while leaving the outer facade
motionless, you are truly one stupid SOB. I welcome your ignore list, as you aren't worth the time, as you have failed to answer even direct questions in many threads, and instead you focus on strawman arguments like you have just done, sidetrack discussions,
you are incredulous and indignant.
In fact you use all the tactics that you are trained to use on public forums that focus on the 9-11 or other subject that ridicules the government in any way.

As a warning to all others that might encounter you here or elsewhere I submit the following list of tactics you and your cohorts use to obfuscate all discussions.

1. Hear no evil, see no evil, speak no evil. Regardless of what you know, don't discuss it -- especially if you are a public figure, news anchor, etc. If it's not reported, it didn't happen, and you never have to deal with the issues.

2. Become incredulous and indignant. Avoid discussing key issues and instead focus on side issues which can be used show the topic as being critical of some otherwise sacrosanct group or theme. This is also known as the "How dare you!" gambit.

3. Create rumor mongers. Avoid discussing issues by describing all charges, regardless of venue or evidence, as mere rumors and wild accusations. Other derogatory terms mutually exclusive of truth may work as well. This method works especially well with a silent press, because the only way the public can learn of the facts are through such "arguable rumors". If you can associate the material with the Internet, use this fact to certify it a "wild rumor" which can have no basis in fact.

4. Use a straw man. Find or create a seeming element of your opponent's argument which you can easily knock down to make yourself look good and the opponent to look bad. Either make up an issue you may safely imply exists based on your interpretation of the opponent/opponent arguments/situation, or select the weakest aspect of the weakest charges. Amplify their significance and destroy them in a way which appears to debunk all the charges, real and fabricated alike, while actually avoiding discussion of the real issues.

5. Sidetrack opponents with name calling and ridicule. This is also known as the primary attack the messenger ploy, though other methods qualify as variants of that approach. Associate opponents with unpopular titles such as "kooks", "right-wing", "liberal", "left-wing", "terrorists", "conspiracy buffs", "radicals", "militia", "racists", "religious fanatics", "sexual deviates", and so forth. This makes others shrink from support out of fear of gaining the same label, and you avoid dealing with issues.

6. Hit and Run. In any public forum, make a brief attack of your opponent or the opponent position and then scamper off before an answer can be fielded, or simply ignore any answer. This works extremely well in Internet and letters-to-the-editor environments where a steady stream of new identities can be called upon without having to explain criticism reasoning -- simply make an accusation or other attack, never discussing issues, and never answering any subsequent response, for that would dignify the opponent's viewpoint.

7. Question motives. Twist or amplify any fact which could so taken to imply that the opponent operates out of a hidden personal agenda or other bias. This avoids discussing issues and forces the accuser on the defensive.

8. Invoke authority. Claim for yourself or associate yourself with authority and present your argument with enough "jargon" and "minutiae" to illustrate you are "one who knows", and simply say it isn't so without discussing issues or demonstrating concretely why or citing sources.

9. Play Dumb. No matter what evidence or logical argument is offered, avoid discussing issues with denial they have any credibility, make any sense, provide any proof, contain or make a point, have logic, or support a conclusion. Mix well for maximum effect.

10. Associate opponent charges with old news. A derivative of the straw man usually, in any large-scale matter of high visibility, someone will make charges early on which can be or were already easily dealt with. Where it can be foreseen, have your own side raise a straw man issue and have it dealt with early on as part of the initial contingency plans. Subsequent charges, regardless of validity or new ground uncovered, can usually them be associated with the original charge and dismissed as simply being a rehash without need to address current issues -- so much the better where the opponent is or was involved with the original source.

11. Establish and rely upon fall-back positions. Using a minor matter or element of the facts, take the "high road" and "confess" with candor that some innocent mistake, in hindsight, was made -- but that opponents have seized on the opportunity to blow it all out of proportion and imply greater criminalities which, "just isn't so." Others can reinforce this on your behalf, later. Done properly, this can garner sympathy and respect for "coming clean" and "owning up" to your mistakes without addressing more serious issues.

12. Enigmas have no solution. Drawing upon the overall umbrella of events surrounding the crime and the multitude of players and events, paint the entire affair as too complex to solve. This causes those otherwise following the matter to begin to loose interest more quickly without having to address the actual issues.

13. Alice in Wonderland Logic. Avoid discussion of the issues by reasoning backwards with an apparent deductive logic in a way that forbears any actual material fact.

14. Demand complete solutions. Avoid the issues by requiring opponents to solve the crime at hand completely, a ploy which works best for items qualifying for rule 10.

15. Fit the facts to alternate conclusions. This requires creative thinking unless the crime was planned with contingency conclusions in place.

16. Vanishing evidence and witnesses. If it does not exist, it is not fact, and you won't have to address the issue.

17. Change the subject. Usually in connection with one of the other ploys listed here, find a way to side-track the discussion with abrasive or controversial comments in hopes of turning attention to a new, more manageable topic. This works especially well with companions who can "argue" with you over the new topic and polarize the discussion arena in order to avoid discussing more key issues.

18. Emotionalize, Antagonize, and Goad Opponents. If you can't do anything else, chide and taunt your opponents and draw them into emotional responses which will tend to make them look foolish and overly motivated, and generally render their material somewhat less coherent. Not only will you avoid discussing the issues in the first instance, but even if their emotional response addresses the issue, you can further avoid the issues by then focusing on how "sensitive they are to criticism".

19. Ignore proof presented, demand impossible proofs. This is perhaps a variant of the "play dumb" rule. Regardless of what material may be presented by an opponent in public forums, claim the material irrelevant and demand proof that is impossible for the opponent to come by (it may exist, but not be at his disposal, or it may be something which is known to be safely destroyed or withheld, such as a murder weapon). In order to completely avoid discussing issues may require you to categorically deny and be critical of media or books as valid sources, deny that witnesses are acceptable, or even deny that statements made by government or other authorities have any meaning or relevance.

20. False evidence. Whenever possible, introduce new facts or clues designed and manufactured to conflict with opponent presentations as useful tools to neutralize sensitive issues or impede resolution. This works best when the crime was designed with contingencies for the purpose, and the facts cannot be easily separated from the fabrications.

21. Call a Grand Jury, Special Prosecutor, or other empowered investigative body. Subvert the (process) to your benefit and effectively neutralize all sensitive issues without open discussion. Once convened, the evidence and testimony are required to be secret when properly handled. For instance, if you own the prosecuting attorney, it can insure a Grand Jury hears no useful evidence and that the evidence is sealed an unavailable to subsequent investigators. Once a favorable verdict (usually, this technique is applied to find the guilty innocent, but it can also be used to obtain charges when seeking to frame a victim) is achieved, the matter can be considered officially closed.

22. Manufacture a new truth. Create your own expert(s), group(s), author(s), leader(s) or influence existing ones willing to forge new ground via scientific, investigative, or social research or testimony which concludes favorably. In this way, if you must actually address issues, you can do so authoritatively.

23. Create bigger distractions. If the above does not seem to be working to distract from sensitive issues, or to prevent unwanted media coverage of unstoppable events such as trials, create bigger news stories (or treat them as such) to distract the multitudes.

24. Silence critics. If the above methods do not prevail, consider removing opponents from circulation by some definitive solution so that the need to address issues is removed entirely. This can be by their death, arrest and detention, blackmail or destruction of their character by release of blackmail information, or merely by proper intimidation with blackmail or other threats.

25. Vanish. If you are a key holder of secrets or otherwise overly illuminated and you think the heat is getting too hot, to avoid the issues, vacate the kitchen.

http://svnlsenetter.wordpress.com/2008/02/29/twenty-five-rules-of-disinformation/

Welcome to MY ignore list asshole.

So everyone is suppose to believe that this list is what Mr. Jones has personally seen from Gamolon.

Would it surprise anyone if the piece of shit liar Mr. Jones plagerized the list because he is too damn lazy to actually list his "complaints"?

One of many sites Mr. Jones plagerized his list from. Anyone else have any doubts at all about Mr. Jones incredible levels of dishonesty and all around disgusting behavior?

Mr. Jones??? Did what??? I don't believe it!!!!

Actually, this is the third time this derelict has done this without giving proper due to the person or website the information was copied from.

All in the name of trying to make Mr. Jones look like he can think for himself.

What a loser.

 

[eots]

Gee, won't be long before we can close up the conspiracy forums. Everyone will be on everyone else ignore list. Ain't it grand?

That explanation by Mr. Jones took the cake. When someone makes an asinine statement like that, there is no way I'm going to continue having a discussion as they are clearly clueless.

A skull.

What a moron. Almost a good as the twins designed like "mufflers".

I just can't get over the idiocy I've witnessed this past week. It really shows the level of intellect of some that believe this crap.

I notice you use it as a way of avoiding the question of distortion to the facade or other disturbances from the entire inner structure collapsing...why is that ?

 

[eots]

Tell me something Mr. Jones.

You sit here bring up the fact that no building has ever globally collapsed do to fire and provide examples. You want to know WHY the steel performed differently in those buildings than in WTC7.

SO I am asking you yet again. Why did the steel perform differently in the buildings that showed NO signs of collapse as compared to the buildings that partially collapsed.

What is the difference?

where was the design of wtc 7 called into fault and what new building codes have been enacted as a result of the wtc 7 collapse ?

It wasn't a DESIGN FLAW dumbass. It's not like someone fucked up and designed it incorrectly. The fact that you don't get this is proven by your idiotic statement that engineers designed structures to compensate thermal expansion due to office fires.

Here is a quute from the following site.
NIST WTC 7 Investigation Finds Building Fires Caused Collapse, 08/21/08

According to the report, a key factor leading to the eventual collapse of WTC 7 was thermal expansion of long-span floor systems at temperatures “hundreds of degrees below those typically considered in current practice for fire resistance ratings." WTC 7 used a structural system design in widespread use.

According to the report, a key factor leading to the eventual collapse of WTC 7 was thermal expansion of long-span floor systems at temperatures “hundreds of degrees below those typically considered in current practice for fire resistance ratings." WTC 7 used a structural system design in widespread use.

Since thermal expansion due to office fires wasn't designed for, this is what happened. This is why they made the suggested code changes.


Now I ask you. Which of the buildings you guys bring up that had office fires had long span structural components like WTC7? Apples to apples right eots?

suggest ?...so what codes were actually changed ?

 

[Gamolon]

where was the design of wtc 7 called into fault and what new building codes have been enacted as a result of the wtc 7 collapse ?

It wasn't a DESIGN FLAW dumbass. It's not like someone fucked up and designed it incorrectly. The fact that you don't get this is proven by your idiotic statement that engineers designed structures to compensate thermal expansion due to office fires.

Here is a quute from the following site.
NIST WTC 7 Investigation Finds Building Fires Caused Collapse, 08/21/08

According to the report, a key factor leading to the eventual collapse of WTC 7 was thermal expansion of long-span floor systems at temperatures “hundreds of degrees below those typically considered in current practice for fire resistance ratings." WTC 7 used a structural system design in widespread use.

According to the report, a key factor leading to the eventual collapse of WTC 7 was thermal expansion of long-span floor systems at temperatures “hundreds of degrees below those typically considered in current practice for fire resistance ratings." WTC 7 used a structural system design in widespread use.

Since thermal expansion due to office fires wasn't designed for, this is what happened. This is why they made the suggested code changes.


Now I ask you. Which of the buildings you guys bring up that had office fires had long span structural components like WTC7? Apples to apples right eots?

suggest ?...so what codes were actually changed ?

Since you're too damn lazy to do your own research, here is a link.
Safer Buildings Are Goal of New Code Changes Based on  Recommendations from NIST World Trade Center Investigation

Here is a link to track the code changes' status.
NIST and the World Trade Center

I've shown you this before, but you obviously can't read and just want to argue and continue to push your bullshit around because hat's what you want. Face it. You hate the government and want nothing more than for it to fail in any way possible so you can rant and rave about it. So you quote mine, lie, and spread shit for YOUR cause.

Perfect example.

You made the statement that engineers designed steel structures to compensate for thermal expansion due to fires. I proved you wrong and you ignored it. I asked you where you got this information and you never responded.

Basically, you guessed.

You're no better than Terral and Christophera. Nothing more than a snake oil salesman.

 

[eots]

so after ten years you can not point to one code change