FEMA Deceives Nation About Twin Towers Core

[slackjawed]

That is what the perpetrators would want people to think.

thats not a ******* answer, moron. blaming "perpetrators" is just you being a paranoid schizophrenic.

Panel 5 of the,

Title 18, part I, chapter 115, §2382

Shows the butt plate closer.

Butt plates were only used when guide rail support steel needed more sever alignment. Otherwise a single pass butt weld was used.

where are you getting this information from? are you just making it up as you go along again? where is your proof that the connections were not welded?

yep, actually this is a pretty common, and 'normal' type of construction for a building like this one. I don't think your cherry picking or 'making it up as you go'. There is nothing extraordinary about what your saying here.
Thanks for the close-up, it does make things clearer.
In the case you accused me of being a "perpetrator", notice I simply made observations based on my personal experience. i didn't, and still do not, make any claims about anything other than if the info your presenting meets the expectations I would have on the actual construction based on my own experiences. Even the portion of your post I put in bold is reasonable. I do not see where you are making any extraordinary claims here, and that is based soley on my own experiences as a civil engineer and field inspector.

I am not trying to feed into your other claims, as it still is a long way to go from construction techniques to conspiracy. But I am saying that based on my own experiences, you are making no extraordinary claims about the construction of this building.

 

[slackjawed]

oh... and i almost forgot....


WHERE IS YOUR ******* CONCRETE?!!!!!

In standard construction practices, as well as standard design criteria, the decking around the elevator shafts, as well as the walls around both the individual elevator shafts and the perimeter of the 'core', would indeed be concrete.

The photos actually do appear to support the idea that this structure would contain both horizontal and vertical concrete members.
Chris is actually not making any unreasonable claims about the buildings construction.

Scarey huh?

 

[Fizz]

does this look like a concrete core?

or this?

 

[slackjawed]

does this look like a concrete core?

or this?

not yet, but the construction is not complete and the scaffolding as well as the wooden forms in this pic seem to indicate that there WILL be concrete.
The wood shown in the picture apears to be forms to place concrete floors against. I say that because based on it's appearance, the wood is rough and not suitable for finish work.


It is easy enough to find nutty ways to torment the twoofers, they always provide ample opportunity for nuttiness. I don't see any reason to do so when they actually present something that is essentially reasonable.

That being said, it is a long ways from discussing the construction/design methods of the buildings and claiming a government conspiracy.

I still think they are nutters, but when they have something like this, a reasonable discussion of the construction of the buildings, I have to go with what is reasonable.

I will say I find it disturbing that one one hand chris can discuss the construction of the buildings in a very logical manner, while at the same time making other claims that are simply.....welll, nutty.

 

[slackjawed]

No fizz, I am curious to see where he strays from logical to zealot.
Give him time it will happen.
lol stadium, lol.

 

[CurveLight]

PBS is a lousy source when it comes to 9/11 and the kennedy assassination as I just proved. your not making any sense hear,you just admitted that your aware of how the msm is pro government but now you just said its a conspiracy theory about the msm.make up your mind,is the msm pro government or you going to be like the others and be ignorant and just say its a conspiracy theory?

One PBS program points out:


"...the 9/11 Commission never looked closely into NSA's role in the broad intelligence breakdown behind the World Trade Center and Pentagon attacks. If they had, they would have understood the full extent to which the agency had major pieces of the puzzle but never put them together or disclosed their entire body of knowledge to the CIA and the FBI."


And

"Former CIA analyst Michael Scheuer told PBS, "None of this information that we're speaking about this evening's in the 9/11 Commission report. They simply ignored all of it."
Http://www.rawstory.com/news/2008/PBS_NSA_tracked_911_hijackers_but_0127.html


Also, it was PBS that publicly aired the infamous Silverstein "pull it" comment in 2002. Your claims against pbs are not that strong.

well yeah they are definetely better than the mainstream media talking about those kinds of things at least .true you'll NEVER see fox news discuss anything like that.However,every single damn time they air anything about the kennedy assassination,its ALWAYS to propagate the lie that oswald was the lone assassian.I have never once in my entire life seen them talk about anything that questioned it like you just posted for 9/11.They never talk about the witnesses that saw a gunman behind the picket fence firing a rifle or anything like that that doesnt go along with the official version.

Unlike The History channel who USED to be objective at least about the kennedy assassination.they used to air specials like this one really good documentary they used to air quite a bit called THE MEN WHO KILLED KENNEDY which does talk about people who saw a gunman behind the picket fence.they arent objective anymore though like they used to be.Now they never air that special anymore,now they just propagate the lie that oswald was the lone assassian the same way PBS always has on the kennedy assassination.I have been fortunate enough over the years to have interviewed people that were there that day on nov 22nd 1963 to know the official version,the warren commission is pure bullshit just like the other fairy tale commission the 9/11 coverup commission.

The only special I ever seen aired by PBS on 9/11 was that propaganda piece WHY THE TOWERS FELL which was such a ******* joke of a program that documentary is pathetic and should be burned so Im just going by that piece of shit garbage that they aired before which ignores witness testimonys,evidence and facts.

I think it's reasonable to say your broadbrushing of pbs is outta bounds.

 

[Fizz]

you see signs of a concrete core here?

 

[Gamolon]

Everyone.

This concrete core theory can be solved with one easy detail. It is a conflict between where Chris locates his core and where the actual express elevators were REALLY located. Chris will go on and on about the towers having a different concrete core based on a redesign brought about by the inability to rent WTC1 because the elevators were INSIDE his concrete core and not easily accessible.

Chris' claim that WTC1's express elevators and local elevators could only be accessed from INSIDE his thick walled core at the lobby level is easily proven false. You don't need me to tell you that. All you need to do is find someone who worked there and ask them. I have done just that. They ALL say that the layouts of of both towers were the same. The express elevator were accessed from OUTSIDE the core at the lobby level.

Chris is just making stuff up. The REASON he argues against the access at the lobby level is that he KNOWS that his core displaces the REAL location of the express elevators. Here is the proof. Here is an early drawing Chris did of his core at the lobby level of WTC1. Notice the outside dimensions of the core. 104' x 154'

Per the above drawing and his descriptions, the location of the core is located as follows on this plan drawing of the lobby level. I have added his core in red.

Here is the same plan without the red core added. The red rectangle is one of the 23 express elevators located in between the outer ring of core columns and first inner ring of core columns. The blue rectangle is one of the 24 local elevators located in the middle of the core.

The problem for Chris' theory being totally false arose when there was proof provided that there was NO 12' concrete wall between the lobby proper and the express elevator doors supposedly inside the concrete core at the lobby level. The 23 express elevator doors are recessed a few feet into the marble covered walls, not 12'. This can be verified with pictures and why Chris argues that the cores were different. He already admitted that WTC2 had access to the express elevators as I had proven, but still says that WTC1 does not. This is why he developed his claim about the WTC2 being redesigned because of poor express elevator access in WTC1. A claim he makes WITHOUT proof.

Now if anyone has the balls to go and ask anyone who worked in the towers like I have told Chris and his followers, they would find the truth. That Chris is full of shit. Like I said. I actually WORK with someone who used to work in the towers and he confirmed that the BOTH towers had access to the express elevators from the lobby, OUTSIDE THE CORE. This directly refutes Chris' claim.

So don't believe me or Chris. Go find out for yourself.

The other side of this is if Chris' core displaces the 23 express elevators in WTC1 like I have shown, then where did they locate them? the core had 16016 square feet (per Chris' 154'x104'). His proposed concrete core walls took up 6416 square feet. His core walls effectively reduced the square footage of the actual core 40%!!!!

Where would they have put the 23 (and one freight elevator) express elevator located just inside the core's marble covered lobby walls? They would have had to move them inward more then 12' (Chris' supposed long core wall thickness) along the long axis and more than 17' (Chris' supposed short core wall thickness).

How did the engineers fit everything in inside the supposed concrete core walls with 40% LESS AREA?!?!

Anyone want to debate this evidence?

 

[Fizz]

here's another one from the 1993 bombing.

 

[slackjawed]

you see signs of a concrete core here?

I do see signs of what could be a concrete floor, and also what could be the remains of prefab wall panels.
One of what could be a prefab concrete wall panel is lying to the right of the column near the bottom of the pic. It looks like it could be a prefab wall panel because it is the right shape, and has what looks like the anchors attached to it, as well as a chunk of what it was anchored to.

The columns show what could be the remains of a concrete floor, based simply on the fact that there is small ledges of concrete all the way around the columns at what looks like an upper level.


Still, it is a big stretch from this to the building had a concrete core so "explosives must be the reason", or whatever.
In fact, the appearance of what could be the remains of prefabricated concrete wall panels does more to hurt a theory about a concrete core 'adding' structural strength, as that type of panel is seen as a facade, not a structural member. In other words, in the design phase, the structure itself must be sufficient strength to withstand the wieght of the wall panels, not the other way around. That type of member is commonly used around elevator shafts for fire protection, but actually adds a load to the structure instead of offering structural integrity.
Nice picture. If those are indeed prefab wall panels, then the claim of a concrete "core" is incorrect from a structural standpoint. The walls made of prefab panels would add a load, and therefore contribute to a failure rather than to add strength and help to withstand a failure.
The photo showing what looks like prefabricated wall panels around the 'core' does more in the argument against chris's claims than it does to help him. It looks pretty clear to me that is what is shown. In the bottom right, to the right of the column, note the rectangular fairly thin chunk of concrete. Note that there is two places near the crack in it where there are chunks 'stuck' to it. It looks like a prefab wall panel, and the 'chunks' stuck to it look like the anchors, where steel embed plates were welded to other steel embed plates in the floor.
Now that's what it looks like in the photos. I won't go out on a limb and say with certainty that is what it is, only that is what it looks like.

 

[LA RAM FAN]

One PBS program points out:


"...the 9/11 Commission never looked closely into NSA's role in the broad intelligence breakdown behind the World Trade Center and Pentagon attacks. If they had, they would have understood the full extent to which the agency had major pieces of the puzzle but never put them together or disclosed their entire body of knowledge to the CIA and the FBI."


And

"Former CIA analyst Michael Scheuer told PBS, "None of this information that we're speaking about this evening's in the 9/11 Commission report. They simply ignored all of it."
Http://www.rawstory.com/news/2008/PBS_NSA_tracked_911_hijackers_but_0127.html


Also, it was PBS that publicly aired the infamous Silverstein "pull it" comment in 2002. Your claims against pbs are not that strong.

well yeah they are definetely better than the mainstream media talking about those kinds of things at least .true you'll NEVER see fox news discuss anything like that.However,every single damn time they air anything about the kennedy assassination,its ALWAYS to propagate the lie that oswald was the lone assassian.I have never once in my entire life seen them talk about anything that questioned it like you just posted for 9/11.They never talk about the witnesses that saw a gunman behind the picket fence firing a rifle or anything like that that doesnt go along with the official version.

Unlike The History channel who USED to be objective at least about the kennedy assassination.they used to air specials like this one really good documentary they used to air quite a bit called THE MEN WHO KILLED KENNEDY which does talk about people who saw a gunman behind the picket fence.they arent objective anymore though like they used to be.Now they never air that special anymore,now they just propagate the lie that oswald was the lone assassian the same way PBS always has on the kennedy assassination.I have been fortunate enough over the years to have interviewed people that were there that day on nov 22nd 1963 to know the official version,the warren commission is pure bullshit just like the other fairy tale commission the 9/11 coverup commission.

The only special I ever seen aired by PBS on 9/11 was that propaganda piece WHY THE TOWERS FELL which was such a ******* joke of a program that documentary is pathetic and should be burned so Im just going by that piece of shit garbage that they aired before which ignores witness testimonys,evidence and facts.

I think it's reasonable to say your broadbrushing of pbs is outta bounds.

not when it comes to them talking about the kennedy assassination its not.

 

[slackjawed]

Everyone.

This concrete core theory can be solved with one easy detail. It is a conflict between where Chris locates his core and where the actual express elevators were REALLY located. Chris will go on and on about the towers having a different concrete core based on a redesign brought about by the inability to rent WTC1 because the elevators were INSIDE his concrete core and not easily accessible.

Chris' claim that WTC1's express elevators and local elevators could only be accessed from INSIDE his thick walled core at the lobby level is easily proven false. You don't need me to tell you that. All you need to do is find someone who worked there and ask them. I have done just that. They ALL say that the layouts of of both towers were the same. The express elevator were accessed from OUTSIDE the core at the lobby level.

Chris is just making stuff up. The REASON he argues against the access at the lobby level is that he KNOWS that his core displaces the REAL location of the express elevators. Here is the proof. Here is an early drawing Chris did of his core at the lobby level of WTC1. Notice the outside dimensions of the core. 104' x 154'

Per the above drawing and his descriptions, the location of the core is located as follows on this plan drawing of the lobby level. I have added his core in red.

Here is the same plan without the red core added. The red rectangle is one of the 23 express elevators located in between the outer ring of core columns and first inner ring of core columns. The blue rectangle is one of the 24 local elevators located in the middle of the core.

The problem for Chris' theory being totally false arose when there was proof provided that there was NO 12' concrete wall between the lobby proper and the express elevator doors supposedly inside the concrete core at the lobby level. The 23 express elevator doors are recessed a few feet into the marble covered walls, not 12'. This can be verified with pictures and why Chris argues that the cores were different. He already admitted that WTC2 had access to the express elevators as I had proven, but still says that WTC1 does not. This is why he developed his claim about the WTC2 being redesigned because of poor express elevator access in WTC1. A claim he makes WITHOUT proof.

Now if anyone has the balls to go and ask anyone who worked in the towers like I have told Chris and his followers, they would find the truth. That Chris is full of shit. Like I said. I actually WORK with someone who used to work in the towers and he confirmed that the BOTH towers had access to the express elevators from the lobby, OUTSIDE THE CORE. This directly refutes Chris' claim.

So don't believe me or Chris. Go find out for yourself.

The other side of this is if Chris' core displaces the 23 express elevators in WTC1 like I have shown, then where did they locate them? the core had 16016 square feet (per Chris' 154'x104'). His proposed concrete core walls took up 6416 square feet. His core walls effectively reduced the square footage of the actual core 40%!!!!

Where would they have put the 23 (and one freight elevator) express elevator located just inside the core's marble covered lobby walls? They would have had to move them inward more then 12' (Chris' supposed long core wall thickness) along the long axis and more than 17' (Chris' supposed short core wall thickness).

How did the engineers fit everything in inside the supposed concrete core walls with 40% LESS AREA?!?!

Anyone want to debate this evidence?

Nope, what your saying actually makes sense. In the other photos, the structure chris is claiming is the core is mostly made up of the assembly to support the tower cranes. While most high rise buildings contain elevator shafts in the center, most of the time these are designed mostly for construction purposes and do become part of the building. In some high-rise buildings, in LA for example, this becomes the area where the frequency damping pendulum is installed to keep the building from shaking itself to death. In one of the hospitals I worked on, that was 52 floors, the center area held 4 freight elevators that had been construction elevators during construction.

Nope, no argument from this end. What you are saying is also reasonabl;e and I have no issue with it.

 

[DiveCon]

here's another one from the 1993 bombing.

just concrete for the floor

 

[Gamolon]

Here is a good photo of the express elevator access at the lobby level. Chris will argue that it's WTC2. It doesn't matter.

As anyone can attest to, the interior layout of the towers was the same.

The photo shows the doors recessed just beyond the core columns which are inside the larger white columns in the picture. The smaller white columns in the photo are partitions between the two elevators in each bay.

 

[Christophera]

Everyone.

This concrete core theory can be solved with one easy detail.

Only after you ignore 8 or 9 details that are independently verified and consistent with all other independent information.

A detail about you that justifies ignoring everything you write is that you have been busted photoshopping WTC images because you have no evidence but DO have an agenda of concealing the methods of mass murder used to enable treason.

In the below image gamit took a WTC lobby image and photoshopped the WTC 1 exterior in outside the windows. The footbridge window frames and other exterior features can be seen through the perimeter walls.

This one done to try and prove that WTC 1 had elevators opening onto the lobby in an indirect approach to proving because that was so, the concrete core was too thick to allow it.

All because there is not one image of the supposed steel core columns standing inthe core area on 9-11. All that is seen is an empty core, and in this case rebar standing around the core.

gumjob has no credibility.

 

[slackjawed]

here's another one from the 1993 bombing.

The wrecked cars seem to show this was a parking structure, the finished columns seem to indicate this as well.
As dive already noted, this one seems to show only concrete on the floor, typical construction of a parking structure.

 

[Christophera]

Here is a good photo of the express elevator access at the lobby level. Chris will argue that it's WTC2. It doesn't matter.

As anyone can attest to, the interior layout of the towers was the same.

The photo shows the doors recessed just beyond the core columns which are inside the larger white columns in the picture. The smaller white columns in the photo are partitions between the two elevators in each bay.

This poster supports the infiltration of the US government and secret methods of mass murder.

No one who can attest to the elevator hallway layout will. gumjob lies. gumjob has no evidence of stel core columns so must resort to inept indirect methods to misrepresent the structure of the towers.

 

[Gamolon]

Here is a good photo of the express elevator access at the lobby level. Chris will argue that it's WTC2. It doesn't matter.

As anyone can attest to, the interior layout of the towers was the same.

The photo shows the doors recessed just beyond the core columns which are inside the larger white columns in the picture. The smaller white columns in the photo are partitions between the two elevators in each bay.

This poster supports the infiltration of the US government and secret methods of mass murder.

No one who can attest to the elevator hallway layout will. gumjob lies. gumjob has no evidence of stel core columns so must resort to inept indirect methods to misrepresent the structure of the towers.

I have already verified with people who had worked in the towers and they say you're full of shit.

I ask ANYONE to find people who worked in them and ask. That's all they need to do to prove your theory is nothing but bullshit and made up garbage.

 

[Gamolon]

Everyone.

This concrete core theory can be solved with one easy detail.

Only after you ignore 8 or 9 details that are independently verified and consistent with all other independent information.

The fact that you cannot prove my evidence against your core that I just posted proves you are full of shit.

The core could not have existed. This one fact proves all your other claims to be bullshit.

 

[Fizz]

the picture isnt photoshopped. even if it was photoshopped (and it wasnt) chris still fails to explain how a concrete core is possible given in light of your other points.

this entire "concealing mass murder" thing is ******* ridiculous. nobody is saying that 3000 people werent murdered. its simply a matter of who you think did it. most normal people that arent having psychotic episodes know its the 19 muslim hijacker that committed the murder.

chris blames this mysterious group called "the perpetrators" which he refuses identify (thereby committing treason by enabling "the perpetrators" to remain unidentified).