FEMA Deceives Nation About Twin Towers Core

[Christophera]

divot must have gotten terral to teach him how to post a link. However, it is the usual information that goes back to FEMA as a source. There is no independently verified evidence for steel core columns. So no one can post any.

Only the concrete core can be proven with evidence.

 

[DiveCon]

divot must have gotten terral to teach him how to post a link. However, it is the usual information that goes back to FEMA as a source. There is no independently verified evidence for steel core columns. So no one can post any.

Only the concrete core can be proven with evidence.

**** off asswipe
i have posted links for you before
you are the ******* idiot

 

[kyzr]

and that right there proves no massive concrete core

It proves concrete before it proves steel core columns. If this is not true, explain how it shows steel core columns.

I can explain how it shows concrete and do here where that image and others are explained reasonably.

World Trade Center Tower Silhouettes

Way to go Diver!! Those photos show exactly what was constructed. It shows the flexible "screen door netting" concept very clearly. It also shows the open lobby between the elevators and stairwells in the left tower, which you don't see in the right tower.

If one picture is worth 10,000 words, this one finishes the stupid nonsensical debate on this thread. There was no conspiracy. SNs flew jet liners into the towers which made them collapse.

Any other explanation is insane/delusional, especially when I posted that the tower designer specifically called his firewalls "shaftwalls". You can see them clearly only protecting stairwells and elevator shafts. The core had to consist of steel columns, because that photo shows the elevator shafts and stairwells changing locations. The original design had three elevator levels with a "sky lobby" at the top of each elevator. That photo proves that the steel columns were continuous, with "shaftwalls" around the elevators & stairwells. A concrete wall would have to be continuous from the foundation to to have any value.

There were no concrete walls. That photo absolutely confirms the FEMA/NIST floor plans. The SNs who flew jet liners into the towers was the only reason for the collapse. This conspiracy is moronic.

 

[kyzr]

Just noticed your "silhouettes" link. What a joke. It shows an outline of a concrete wall, and then tries to explain how what we see isn't there. Its a moronic page written by a moron. Better yet it shows other photos of the towers clearly showing the steel core columns.

Maybe your concrete walls were "see thru"??
Maybe they were imaginary, like the conspiracy theory.
These last few posts really should put an end to this nonsense, SNs flew planes into the WTC, and they collapsed. Read the "9/11 Commission Report" if you want to understand what happened. Otherwise you conspiracy nuts would have to believe that both republicans and democrats were involved with the conspiracy, not to mention the entire FBI, CIA, NSA, FEMA, Justice, etc. Its just crazy. Find a better conspiracy to debate.

 

[Christophera]

and that right there proves no massive concrete core

It proves concrete before it proves steel core columns. If this is not true, explain how it shows steel core columns.

I can explain how it shows concrete and do here where that image and others are explained reasonably.

World Trade Center Tower Silhouettes

Way to go Diver!! Those photos show exactly what was constructed. It shows the flexible "screen door netting" concept very clearly.

That effect "screen door netting" is seen with the steel exoskeleton, but not the core.

What is shown there, if you suggest there were steel core columns, is that the supposed core columns are not continuous, which disproves they existed.

 

[Christophera]

Just noticed your "silhouettes" link. What a joke. It shows an outline of a concrete wall, and then tries to explain how what we see isn't there.

Of course you cannot post an image from that page because your description is ludicrous, and not even coherent.

World Trade Center Tower Silhouettes

The core of WTC 2 was different than WTC 1 and that is obvious here.

 

[candycorn]

Just noticed your "silhouettes" link. What a joke. It shows an outline of a concrete wall, and then tries to explain how what we see isn't there.

Of course you cannot post an image from that page because your description is ludicrous, and not even coherent.

World Trade Center Tower Silhouettes

The core of WTC 2 was different than WTC 1 and that is obvious here.

I'm beginning to think the FEMA camps would be a good idea...keeps us from having to read your shit.

 

[Christophera]

Just noticed your "silhouettes" link. What a joke. It shows an outline of a concrete wall, and then tries to explain how what we see isn't there.

Of course you cannot post an image from that page because your description is ludicrous, and not even coherent.

World Trade Center Tower Silhouettes

The core of WTC 2 was different than WTC 1 and that is obvious here.

I'm beginning to think the FEMA camps would be a good idea...keeps us from having to read your shit.

The reading is one thing, but when I prove that divot and kyzzer are supporting the secret means of mass murder by proving them wrong with the posting images that show the concrete core, then agents of the perpetrators will feel they will be safer in FEMA camps.

 

[DiveCon]

Just noticed your "silhouettes" link. What a joke. It shows an outline of a concrete wall, and then tries to explain how what we see isn't there.

Of course you cannot post an image from that page because your description is ludicrous, and not even coherent.

World Trade Center Tower Silhouettes

The core of WTC 2 was different than WTC 1 and that is obvious here.

yes, they were different, slightly
but even your photo shows no concrete core

 

[DiveCon]

Of course you cannot post an image from that page because your description is ludicrous, and not even coherent.

World Trade Center Tower Silhouettes

The core of WTC 2 was different than WTC 1 and that is obvious here.

I'm beginning to think the FEMA camps would be a good idea...keeps us from having to read your shit.

The reading is one thing, but when I prove that divot and kyzzer are supporting the secret means of mass murder by posting images that show the concrete core, then agents of the perpetrators will feel they will be safer in FEMA camps.

except you show nothing of the sort, ******* moron

 

[Christophera]

I'm beginning to think the FEMA camps would be a good idea...keeps us from having to read your shit.

The reading is one thing, but when I prove that divot and kyzzer are supporting the secret means of mass murder by posting images that show the concrete core, then agents of the perpetrators will feel they will be safer in FEMA camps.

except you show nothing of the sort, ******* moron

All we see is concrete, no steel core columns. No structural steel whatsoever except for the spire in the background which is steel outside the core area.

 

[DiveCon]

The reading is one thing, but when I prove that divot and kyzzer are supporting the secret means of mass murder by posting images that show the concrete core, then agents of the perpetrators will feel they will be safer in FEMA camps.

except you show nothing of the sort, ******* moron

All we see is concrete, no steel core columns. No structural steel whatsoever except for the spire in the background which is steel outside the core area.

wrong again fucktard
we see steel and no concrete
you can not see what isnt there
show a single photo during construction of them putting in the rebar and pouring the concrete in the core above grade
just find ONE
and errant encyclopedia entries don't mean a pile of shit

 

[LA RAM FAN]

The building could sustain multiple impacts of jetliners, BECAUSE it had a concrete core. The "screen netting" he referes to is not the perimeter shear walls, it is the rebar grid of high tensile steel inside the concrete walls of the core. He was told to not mention the concrete core directly and so found the anology.

YouTube - Frank deMartini, World Trade Center 1973-2001

Since you can produce no images of the supposed steel core columns on 9-11 in the core, you have NO EVIDENCE. You have produced no plans showing the supposed steel core columns and their needed interconnections.

The lead engineer provided infomration to Newsweek identifying a concrete core. Leslie E. Robertson knew and information of the September 13, Newsweek article (it is not reasonable to suggest that when 3,000 are murdered, Newsweek would NOT make sure the information was good or that the engineering firm designing the building that collapsed would NOT demand, and recieve a correction)

that video is proof right there that the disinfo agents TRY desperately to get around that the planes and fires caused the towers to collapse but cant.

Yup, they can't oppose logic, reason and evidence with strong corroborations from the buildings engineers. It's all about ad hominum and working to fan the social fears.

They can't explain anything credibly, not even their own precense here.

No they sure cant alright.to accepe the governments ludicrous version that the towers collapsed due to the fires,you got to say that the laws of physics that scientists have gone by for CENTURYS now,no longer apply anymore and that sir Issac newton was an idiot. the more and more the agents defend the version,thats what their saying. as you have said before,you know they are psyche op agents cause the ones that are just living in denial,they dont come back and post when confronted with irrefutable evidence,the agents always come back like they have and post the most absurd fairy tales to try and get around what the experts say. "rolls of floor with laughter."

 

[Christophera]

except you show nothing of the sort, ******* moron

All we see is concrete, no steel core columns. No structural steel whatsoever except for the spire in the background which is steel outside the core area.

wrong again fucktard
we see steel and no concrete
you can not see what isnt there
show a single photo during construction of them putting in the rebar and pouring the concrete in the core above grade
just find ONE
and errant encyclopedia entries don't mean a pile of shit

Of course as an agent supporting the secret methods of mass murder you would say that.

The core was 60 feet from the perimeter walls so only photos taken by inspectors, engineers and contractors would show that, and all of those were consolidated under the control of infiltrating forces, so it is clear you are using their work and NOT evidence, because you have none.

All you can do is try to take advantage of the fact that I have no images of construction showing concrete, as you are doing to protect the infiltration of the US government. However, 9-11 images show massive concrete surrounding the core area.

 

[Christophera]

that video is proof right there that the disinfo agents TRY desperately to get around that the planes and fires caused the towers to collapse but cant.

Yup, they can't oppose logic, reason and evidence with strong corroborations from the buildings engineers. It's all about ad hominum and working to fan the social fears.

They can't explain anything credibly, not even their own precense here.

No they sure cant alright.to accepe the governments ludicrous version that the towers collapsed due to the fires,you got to say that the laws of physics that scientists have gone by for CENTURYS now,no longer apply anymore and that sir Issac newton was an idiot. the more and more the agents defend the version,thats what their saying. as you have said before,you know they are psyche op agents cause the ones that are just living in denial,they dont come back and post when confronted with irrefutable evidence,the agents always come back like they have and post the most absurd fairy tales to try and get around what the experts say. "rolls of floor with laughter."

Yup, it got really bad at JREF some years back. After I'd prove my points they would post a few pages of cat pictures, baking recipes and verses of "99 botteles of beer on the wall" just to bury them where people couldn't easily see them.

The expert, the lead engineer of the towers makes a statement on September 13, 2001 that identifies a concrete core and the psyops agents try to assert that Newsweek AND Robertson would fail to be sure the structural data is accurate when 3,000 are killed. Now that is absurd. In this litigious society? No way.

 

[kyzr]

Christo conveniently ignores the links to the structural engineer who actually designed the towers, and instead imagines seeing things in the collapsing videos. Here are a few facts:

1. the towers were designed and built to be flexible, without concrete shear walls. As proof we have the engineer's own words calling them "shaftwalls". Which are firewalls, not shearwalls that start at the base. The steel columns in the center hold only vertical load, the perimeter walls take all lateral load..
LERA | World Trade Center

2. Here is a good article on the WTC in wiki. Lots of details. OMG, No mention of concrete shear walls?? Because there were none.
Construction of the World Trade Center - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

3. Here is a typical floor layout. Look only steel columns, no concrete walls. WOW it looks just like the see-thru photos!! look at all those air ducts and elevators and stairwells. Looks like there is no room for concrete walls. Notice how the steel columns are continuous and go all the way from the base to the roof. Only the "shaftwall" locations change which are architectural firewalls.
File:Nistncstar1-1-fig2-4.png - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

4. This USC engineering article does not mention concrete walls, because there weren't any...
illumin : printable : Why The World Trade Center Towers Collapsed

5. If there were any concrete shear walls, the WTC would not have had to place 20,000 sway dampers to reduce the 6' sway that occurred after construction. A concrete wall could not sway 6' therefore there was no concrete wall. Also, the towers would not have been so lightweight:
World Trade Center - Devwiki
In addition, 10,000 dampers were included in the structure. With the large core and high load-bearing perimeter for structural integrity, Robertson created a tower that was extremely light for its size.

SNs flew huge jet liners into the towers at very high speed, which damaged the towers, and created fires that eventually led to the collapse.

The hijacked planes caused the WTC to collapse. There is no other realistic explanation.

 

[kyzr]

The expert, the lead engineer of the towers makes a statement on September 13, 2001 that identifies a concrete core and the psyops agents try to assert that Newsweek AND Robertson would fail to be sure the structural data is accurate when 3,000 are killed. Now that is absurd. In this litigious society? No way.

Thats a lie.

After whining that other posters bury your posts with bullshit, you post a straight-up lie. Please copy the direct quote from the engineer in the article about the concrete core. You can't because he didn't say it.

 

[DiveCon]

The expert, the lead engineer of the towers makes a statement on September 13, 2001 that identifies a concrete core and the psyops agents try to assert that Newsweek AND Robertson would fail to be sure the structural data is accurate when 3,000 are killed. Now that is absurd. In this litigious society? No way.

Thats a lie.

After whining that other posters bury your posts with bullshit, you post a straight-up lie. Please copy the direct quote from the engineer in the article about the concrete core. You can't because he didn't say it.

that's why i don't call them by their chosen name "truthers" because they lie more than anyone else i have ever known
i call em troofer
because the truth and them are not in the same universe

 

[DiveCon]

Christo conveniently ignores the links to the structural engineer who actually designed the towers, and instead imagines seeing things in the collapsing videos. Here are a few facts:

1. the towers were designed and built to be flexible, without concrete shear walls. As proof we have the engineer's own words calling them "shaftwalls". Which are firewalls, not shearwalls that start at the base. The steel columns in the center hold only vertical load, the perimeter walls take all lateral load..
LERA | World Trade Center

2. Here is a good article on the WTC in wiki. Lots of details. OMG, No mention of concrete shear walls?? Because there were none.
Construction of the World Trade Center - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

3. Here is a typical floor layout. Look only steel columns, no concrete walls. WOW it looks just like the see-thru photos!! look at all those air ducts and elevators and stairwells. Looks like there is no room for concrete walls. Notice how the steel columns are continuous and go all the way from the base to the roof. Only the "shaftwall" locations change which are architectural firewalls.
File:Nistncstar1-1-fig2-4.png - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

4. This USC engineering article does not mention concrete walls, because there weren't any...
illumin : printable : Why The World Trade Center Towers Collapsed

5. If there were any concrete shear walls, the WTC would not have had to place 20,000 sway dampers to reduce the 6' sway that occurred after construction. A concrete wall could not sway 6' therefore there was no concrete wall. Also, the towers would not have been so lightweight:
World Trade Center - Devwiki
In addition, 10,000 dampers were included in the structure. With the large core and high load-bearing perimeter for structural integrity, Robertson created a tower that was extremely light for its size.

SNs flew huge jet liners into the towers at very high speed, which damaged the towers, and created fires that eventually led to the collapse.

The hijacked planes caused the WTC to collapse. There is no other realistic explanation.

the truth confuses these morons

 

[Christophera]

The expert, the lead engineer of the towers makes a statement on September 13, 2001 that identifies a concrete core and the psyops agents try to assert that Newsweek AND Robertson would fail to be sure the structural data is accurate when 3,000 are killed. Now that is absurd. In this litigious society? No way.

Thats a lie.

After whining that other posters bury your posts with bullshit, you post a straight-up lie. Please copy the direct quote from the engineer in the article about the concrete core. You can't because he didn't say it.

Are you actually saying that IF Newsweek printed something he DID NOT say, and was erroneous, he would not try to correct it when 3,000 people were supposed to have been killed in the collapse of the building his engineering company was responsible for?

Or, ....... are you saying he would try to correct it but that Newsweek magazine would refuse to correct it after 3,000 were killed in the building.

BTW, you have yet to post plans for the supposed steel core columns from official sources that show the horizontal and diagonal connections between the core columns that need to be there for sway resistence.

And, you have not posted even one image from 9-11 showing these supposed steel core columns.

At least I have a good excuse for not being able to post an image of the concrete core during construction. Firstly, it was very difficult to photograph 60 feet back from the face, or inside where the exterior steel framework was up to 100 feet over it, perhaps with false flooring in to allow elevator guide rail alignment and welding.

Secondly the infiltrated government filtered all of the construction images before 9-11 so none would be there of the concrete.

Now, explain the issue with the Newsweek article and why Robertson would not demand a crorrection OR why Newsweek would not provide it.