Terror Threat raised to Severe

[Babylon]

Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha that's all I have to say to the crack pots.

[Babylon]

At least we know why it was raised to severe now....

Terror!!!!!

[Guest Bilo]

At least we know why it was raised to severe now....

Terror!!!!!

No smoke without fire.

Send them to Guantanamo immediately. (Or Anna to my place, whatever)

NB: So I can point her in the direction of some good legal advice, no other reason.

[Zingari]

when will you people understand ?

marinus van der lubbe started the reichtag fire , it was proven in court by experts and everything

all this talk of conspiracy by the government is just plain silly

why would our beloved rulers do such a thing

[Daggers]

It wouldn't be like this if we weren't a home to terrorists.

It's people like Michael Hicks - utter terrorist bastard.

[hairy]

Is the God's Kingdom of Serbia involved in any way?

Of course not!

The USA is responsible for all evil! Every conspiracy theory has the US at the centre as any well educated Frenchman will tell you!

Serbia, get a grip!

[Zingari]

another conspiracy fruitcase speaks out

9/11 and the Twin Towers: Sudden Collapse Initiation was

Impossible

By Frank Legge, PhD (Chemistry) and Tony Szamboti, Mechanical Engineer

23 Dec 2007

Numerous arguments have been presented that the Twin Towers at the World Trade Centre

could not have collapsed in the observed manner due to the cause asserted in the NIST report,

namely damage from plane impact and fire. 1 The bases of these arguments include the rapidity

and symmetry of collapse, 2 the adequacy of the steel supports, 3 and the finding of incendiary

residues in the dust. 4 It has also been argued that the initiating event in the official explanation,

the sudden collapse of one storey, 1 could not have occurred because the steel was not hot

enough. 5 This argument is based on data set out in the NIST report itself.

There is another argument, as will be described here, that is based simply on the behaviour of

hot steel under load. No calculations are involved and no knowledge of the temperature of the

steel is required.

In the official explanation the collapse occurs in two stages. In the first stage one storey,

damaged by plane impact and fire, suddenly collapses. This allows the section of the tower

above to fall freely down and hit the lower section. In the second stage the energy of this

impact is said to be sufficient to cause the top of the lower section to disintegrate. This material

adds to the falling mass and further impacts cause disintegration to continue in a rapid sequence

all the way to the ground.6

Let us consider the situation just prior to the first stage. There are some damaged columns,

some fire, and a claimed lack of fireproofing. Given the substantial safety factor in the building

design, the number of damaged columns is far too few to put the buildings at risk without the

fire. This is elaborated on in the NIST report and elsewhere.1, 7 We will ignore the fact that

according to the physical evidence data within the body of the NIST report, and contrary to its

conclusion, the steel did not get very hot. We will assume the strongest case for the official

theory: the fire was uniform over the whole area and very hot.

The fire has to heat the steel, which takes time. Eventually the steel gets hot enough that it

cannot carry the load in the initiating storey. It starts to sag. At this point there has been no

disruption of the columns, other than that caused by the plane impact, hence most of the

columns are still attached to the floors above and below and are continuous, passing up and

down into other storeys, giving the columns rigidity. The length of the columns between

attachments is too short for buckling to occur. 8 Failure must therefore be by compression.

As the steel sags two things will happen: the columns, as they shorten, will become wider,

which is obvious; and the inherent strength of the steel will increase, which is not obvious. It is

well established however that the yield strength of steel increases as the degree of distortion

increases. This tendency increases with rising temperature and is pronounced at the

temperatures required for collapse, as can be seen in the graph below. 9 For both of these

reasons the initial sag cannot be catastrophic but will be very slow and the rate will depend on

the rate of heat input. A rising temperature will be needed to offset both the significant increase

in yield strength and the slight increase in cross-section area, if collapse is to progress.

It is clear therefore that the upper section should only have moved down slowly and only

continued to do so if additional heat was supplied. A slow, protracted, and sagging collapse was

not observed however with either tower. As observed in videos of both tower collapses, the

upper sections suddenly start to fall and disintegrate.10 In the case of the south tower, initially a

2

lean of the upper section developed but within the first second this turned into a rapid collapse

with upper section disintegration, just as was observed with the north tower.

It appears therefore that the official concept of a free fall collapse of the upper portion

through the initiation storey, due to heat effects from fire, is a fantasy. If the temperature

did become high enough for collapse to occur it could not have happened in the observed

manner. 9 In particular it could not have been sudden and thus could not have produced

the velocity, and hence the momentum and kinetic energy, upon which the official story

depends for the second stage of collapse. In contrast, all observations are in accord with

the use of explosives in a timed sequence.

The case that the NIST report must be corrected is confirmed. If this report is not corrected the

suspicion will remain that its purpose was not so much to inform as to deceive.

References:

1. NIST Report: http://wtc.nist.gov/reports_october05.htm

2. Rapidity and symmetry of collapse:

http://journalof911studies.com/articles/Jo...molition_20.pdf

3. G. Ross: http://journalof911studies.com/articles/Jo...ransferRoss.pdf

4. Prof. S. Jones, Explosive residues:

http://journalof911studies.com/volume/2007...11SciMethod.pdf

5. F. Legge, NIST shows steel was not hot enough for collapse initiation:

http://journalof911studies.com/articles/Ar...se_by_NIST_Worl

dTradeCenter.pdf

6. Z. Bazant and M. Verdure, Progressive collapse:

http://www.nistreview.org/WTC-PROGRESSIVE-...APSE-BAZANT.pdf

7. T. Szamboti, Safety factor:

http://www.journalof911studies.com/volume/...ityofControlled

DemolitionHypothesisForDestructionofTwinTowers.pdf

8. G. Ross, minimum buckle length, p 43:

http://journalof911studies.com/volume/2007...taneousFailure-

WTCCollapseAnalysis2.pdf

9. “The test results show that carbon steel begins to lose strength at temperatures above

300°C and reduces in strength at a steady rate up to 800°C. The well defined yield

plateau at 20°C is replaced by a gradual increase of strength with increasing strain (or

strain-hardening) at high temperatures.”

http://www.mace.manchester.ac.uk/project/r...lProperties.htm

[Guest DavidJCW]

Zeitgeist... has anyone else seen it? It's the most comprehensive case against the claims made by the government for 9/11 and many other events and beliefs.

In fact I even recall it putting forward a very convincing case for the 7/11 attacks here being government planned...

[AoWW]

I'm betting the same people are responsible for the Halifax radio advert, Spangles being withdrawn from sale and the fact that you can't find Cod Steak In Cheese Sauce (in a boiling bag) anymore.

Still - we beat them on Salad Cream and we made the bastards see the error of their ways with Cheese Crispy Pancakes.

Ahhhhhh, Spangles. They were the days.

And Birds Eye Rissoles - whoever engineered their demise was a cretin. They were ace.

[Zingari]

Zeitgeist... has anyone else seen it? It's the most comprehensive case against the claims made by the government for 9/11 and many other events and beliefs.

In fact I even recall it putting forward a very convincing case for the 7/11 attacks here being government planned...

quite enjoyed that but not too sure about mixing up modern conspiracies with the origins of religion theme , it's looks a bit new age hippy cultish , but yes still enjoyable .

i preferred "in plane sight" and "ripple effect" by dave von kliest and "painful deceptions" by eric hufschmidt, which concentrate more on the 911 events themselves , without trying to tie them into a grand scheme ( even if there may be truth in it )

[BoneDog]

In the same way that those who claim the Twin Towers were the first to collapse due to fire ignore the fact that they were also the first steel-framed skyscrapers to be hit by a fully laden 737 going at 500mph you mean?

A 737 made out of aluminium would not harm a building made out of 300 vertical steel columns very much at all. The aluminium plane would disappear before much damage was done to the steel columns. The planes engines would do a little bit of damage though.

The overall strength of the massive 300 steel columns that ran for hundreds of feet below impact would easily of held the building up.

1. The thing is that the science by PM and NIST explains why the Towers collapsed the way they did and shows the controlled demolition theory is bull.

2. The 'official story' is undoubtedly true in its most basic facts. Hijacked airplanes hit the Twin Towers and the resultant damage and fire so severely undermined the towers that they collapsed.

1. The only science involved in the PM and NIST reports is 'bunk' science as real scientists call it.

Popular Mechanics were taken over just after Sep 11th and have never been reliable since.

2. The only part of the official story that is true is that 2 planes hit the towers. The truth ends there. (although not even the plane bit might be true. Many witnesses in New York close up to the towers that day said they weren't normal planes.)

The temperature of the fire would have been high enough to reduce the integrity of the steel but not to melt it. This quote sums it up though.

"Load bearing steel pillars and frames were destroyed on impact and the surrounding ones were undermined by the high temperatures. It was the combination of these factors that caused the towers to collapse."

Whoever said that quote is having a laugh! Normal fires can get nowhere near hot enough to melt steel, that's a basic scientific fact.

Also, the load bearing steel pillars could not have been destroyed by an aeroplane. Steel is much, much stronger than aluminium. There were 300 steel pillars in the WTC's including over 40 columns in the core which are impossible for a plane to destroy.

The steel columns below impact would not of warmed up and thousands of feet of steel, 300 columns thick, was holding up everything above it with no stress whatsoever.

Those thousands of feet of 300 column thick steel could of held weight 500 times heavier than the top parts of the towers. Nothing would of crumbled them apart from nano-thermite or other explosives that are used in big demolition jobs.

And where did the Americans find 4 pilots willing to commit suicide?

Well those supposed 4 pilots were all working for the CIA for a long time before Sep 11th (so I'd say they didn't fly any plane, they were just used as pawns). I bet you they weren't the ones who flew the planes into towers. The guy who supposedly flew into the Pentagon only had 1 flying lesson in a small plane. I think the people at the flying school refused to go up with him again cos he was so crap. And many pilots have said that the manouvre involved in the run up to the Pentagon was almost impossible even for a pilot who had been flying big planes for years.

Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha that's all I have to say to the crack pots.

I know what you mean, it's quite hilarious

It really is funny how people rally behind their leaders when the leaders are obviously pulling one over our eyes.

[Zingari]

Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha that's all I have to say to the crack pots.

are you laughing at all the people that don't believe that al Qaeda was totally responsible ?

because across the world it looks to be quite a lot of crackpots , and maybe there are , but then again..........

http://www.alternet.org/world/98454/less_t...attacks/?page=1

http://www.worldpublicopinion.org/pipa/art...id=&pnt=535

Less Than Half the World Believes al Qaeda Was Behind 9/11 Attacks

A poll of 16,000 people in 17 countries reveals the damage done to the credibility of the United States by the Bush administration.

September 11, 2008 |

An international poll released this week by the Project on International Policy Attitudes (PIPA) found that outside the United States, many are skeptical that al Qaeda was really responsible for the Sept. 11 attacks.

[Ford Super Sunday]

Oh, I thought this thread would be light-hearted, instead it has descended into all this conspiracy crap

Shame

[Zingari]

Oh, I thought this thread would be light-hearted, instead it has descended into all this conspiracy crap

Shame

thread title

Terror Threat raised to Severe, Attack "highly Likely"

hardly likely to be a barrel of laughs is it ?

[Daggers]

Oh, I thought this thread would be light-hearted, instead it has descended into all this conspiracy crap

Shame

These three terrorists carrying weapons of mass destruction walk into a pub...

[Ford Super Sunday]

thread title

Terror Threat raised to Severe, Attack "highly Likely"

hardly likely to be a barrel of laughs is it ?

Well considering the terror threat level has passed, I thought folk would make light of it, rather than bring up an argument rumbling since 2001, dreamed up by Americans who refuse to acknowledge that their own security was at fault for the terror attack, and find a scapegoat in the Government, because nothing 'as small' as Al Qaeda can pentrate the great USA.

And anyone who believes 7/7 was an inside job is a fvcking igneramous, sorry.

[Ford Super Sunday]

These three terrorists carrying weapons of mass destruction walk into a pub...

Next time you're on your laptop on a plane, or sitting in a public place on your lappy, and someone annoys you, just pop this website open and WATCH THE CHAOS.

TERROR!

[Daggers]

These three terrorists carrying weapons of mass destruction walk into a pub...

...something devastating happened with hilarious consequences.

[Zingari]

These three terrorists carrying weapons of mass destruction walk into a pub...

the barman says " is that an AK47 under your Dishdashah..............

[Zingari]

Well considering the terror threat level has passed, I thought folk would make light of it, rather than bring up an argument rumbling since 2001, dreamed up by Americans who refuse to acknowledge that their own security was at fault for the terror attack, and find a scapegoat in the Government, because nothing 'as small' as Al Qaeda can pentrate the great USA.

And anyone who believes 7/7 was an inside job is a fvcking igneramous, sorry.

do you mean ignoramus ?

[Steven]

Oh, I thought this thread would be light-hearted, instead it has descended into all this conspiracy crap

Shame

So all Governments and their agencies tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth all the time? If Governments want to stop conspiracy theorists all they have to do is tell the truth. Simples.

[Zingari]

So all Governments and their agencies tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth all the time? If Governments want to stop conspiracy theorists all they have to do is tell the truth. Simples.

yes indeed

[Ford Super Sunday]

So all Governments and their agencies tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth all the time? If Governments want to stop conspiracy theorists all they have to do is tell the truth. Simples.

I have a large suspiscion that even if governments told the truth all the time, people would still doubt and not believe them, especially if they disagree with their ideology and just plain don't like them.

Not so simples

[Zingari]

I have a large suspiscion that even if governments told the truth all the time, people would still doubt and not believe them, especially if they disagree with their ideology and just plain don't like them.

Not so simples

ah well , at least you have got your wish and brought a bit of comedy into it

[Babylon]

Just because someone doesn't believe your crack pot ideas, doesn't mean they instantly believe everything a government says.