"Update: Seismisch rapport - ondergrondse explosies velden de Twin Towers"

[illwill]

Oorspronkelijk geplaatst door exodus

Hier nog een interessant stukje hoe terrorisme gebruikt wordt om de massa de manipuleren. Evenementen zoals 9/11 worden zelf gecreëerd en gebruikt om de mensen onder de knoet te houden:

The 'war on terrorism' targets almost 100% the fear of death and the desire for perceived safety and security for self and family. But before you can control people through such fears you have to make them fear m the first place. The 9/11 attacks make them fear and you exploit that fear consciously and subconsciously to justify the 'war on terrorism'. All the "terror alerts" and warnings that spew from the White House, the Pentagon and Downing Street are designd to continually underpin the sense of fear that can then be exploited to advance the agenda.

Various types of belief can be implanted in people after brain function has been deliberately disturbed by accidentally or deliberately induced fear, anger, or excitement. Of the results caused by such disturbances the most common one is temporarily impaired judgement and heightened suggestibility. Its various group manifestations are sometimes classed under the heading of 'herd instinct', and appear most spectacularly in wartime, during severe epidemics, and all similar periods of common danger, which increase anxiety and so individual and mass suggestibility. We would be advised not to underestimate the effect on the collective psyche in terms of fear and a desire for the authorities to 'protect people' from that fear.

[exodus]

Ik vind het toch straf dat men blijft geloven dat dit een exhuberante conspiracy theorie is, terwijl mensen zoals Stanley Hilton, Bush en Co ervoor vervolgen. Stanley Hilton is helemaal geen conspicary nutcase, die kerel is een succesvolle advocaat die nog met Wolfowitz en al op college heeft gezeten. Als er echt geen bewijzen zouden zijn , waarom zou hij dan zo'n rechtszaak beginnen, hij is toch geen debiel. En hij wordt daarinboven nog eens doodgezwegen door de media. Ik ben er zeker van dat niemand over Stanley Hilton heeft gehoord buiten via dit forum.

Het is toch zo gemakkelijk iets een conspiracy theorie te noemen. Bij vele mensen heeft dit woord als zo'n negatieve bijklank gekregen dat het nog maar vermelden van dit woord hun afstoot.

[democratsteve]

Oorspronkelijk geplaatst door exodus

Ik vind het toch straf dat men blijft geloven dat dit een exhuberante conspiracy theorie is, terwijl mensen zoals Stanley Hilton, Bush en Co ervoor vervolgen. Stanley Hilton is helemaal geen conspicary nutcase, die kerel is een succesvolle advocaat die nog met Wolfowitz en al op college heeft gezeten. Als er echt geen bewijzen zouden zijn , waarom zou hij dan zo'n rechtszaak beginnen, hij is toch geen debiel. En hij wordt daarinboven nog eens doodgezwegen door de media. Ik ben er zeker van dat niemand over Stanley Hilton heeft gehoord buiten via dit forum.

Het is toch zo gemakkelijk iets een conspiracy theorie te noemen. Bij vele mensen heeft dit woord als zo'n negatieve bijklank gekregen dat het nog maar vermelden van dit woord hun afstoot.

Weet je beste vriend, d�*t is nou net waar Bush en Co op aansturen.
Mijn goeie vriend Gore Vidal, één van 'swerelds vermaardste historici en een legende in de US, moet zich nu ook al tot het internet wenden omdat geen enkele belangrijke krant z'n kritische stukjes nog wil publiceren.
En 't is oh zo makkelijk om internetsites als hoaxsites te bestempelen (zie de posts van de tegenstanders) en er dus verder geen aandacht aan te besteden.
De Nation is at War en kritiek op het beleid in tijden van oorlog wordt simpelweg geklasseerd als anti-patriotisch. Zelfs een krant als de NYT is elke zin voor kritiek veloren na 9/11.
't Is erg gesteld met de media in the United States of Delusion.

[illwill]

Oorspronkelijk geplaatst door exodus

Ik vind het toch straf dat men blijft geloven dat dit een exhuberante conspiracy theorie is, terwijl mensen zoals Stanley Hilton, Bush en Co ervoor vervolgen. Stanley Hilton is helemaal geen conspicary nutcase, die kerel is een succesvolle advocaat die nog met Wolfowitz en al op college heeft gezeten. Als er echt geen bewijzen zouden zijn , waarom zou hij dan zo'n rechtszaak beginnen, hij is toch geen debiel. En hij wordt daarinboven nog eens doodgezwegen door de media. Ik ben er zeker van dat niemand over Stanley Hilton heeft gehoord buiten via dit forum.

Het is toch zo gemakkelijk iets een conspiracy theorie te noemen. Bij vele mensen heeft dit woord als zo'n negatieve bijklank gekregen dat het nog maar vermelden van dit woord hun afstoot.

Ik zal het nog eens zeggen é, als die man echt bestaat en echt bewijzen heeft en echt een rechtzaak is begonnen zal heel de wereld spoedig weten wie hij is. Normaal gezien had iedereen het al geweten maar dat terzijde.

[exodus]

Oorspronkelijk geplaatst door illwill

Ik zal het nog eens zeggen é, als die man echt bestaat en echt bewijzen heeft en echt een rechtzaak is begonnen zal heel de wereld spoedig weten wie hij is. Normaal gezien had iedereen het al geweten maar dat terzijde.

Denk dat eens hoe dat komt? Hij wordt doodgezwegen. Moest de media er een zaak van willen maken ze hadden het al lang gedaan. Nu zwijgen ze hem dood en is het grote publiek zelfs niet op de hoogte.

Hier enkele stukken uit een interview met Stanley Hilton:

[size=2] Yeah, we are suing Bush, Condoleezza Rice, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Mueller, etc. for complicity in personally not only allowing 9/11 to happen but in ordering it. The hijackers we retained and we had a witness who is married to one of them. The hijackers were U.S. undercover agents. They were double agents, paid by the FBI and the CIA to spy on Arab groups in this country. They were controlled. Their landlord was an FBI informant in San Diego and other places. And this was a direct, covert operation ordered, personally ordered by George W. Bush. Personally ordered. We have incriminating evidence, documents as well as witnesses, to this effect. It's not just incompetence - in spite of the fact that he is incompetent. The fact is he personally ordered this, knew about it. He, at one point, there were rehearsals of this. The reason why he appeared to be uninterested and nonchalant on September 11th - when those videos showed that Andrew Card whispered in his ear the words about this he listened to kids reading the pet goat story, is that he thought this was another rehearsal. These people had dress-rehearsed this many times. He had seen simulated videos of this. In fact, he even made a Freudian slip a few months later at a California press conference when he said he had, quote, "seen on television the first plane attack the first tower." And that could not be possible because there was no video. What it was was the simulated video that he had gone over. So this was a personally government-ordered thing. We are suing them under the Constitution for violating Americans' rights, as well as under the federal Fraudulent Claims Act, for presenting a fraudulent claim to Congress to justify the bogus Iraq boondoggle war, for political gains. And also, under the RICO statute, under the Racketeering Corrupt Organization Act, for being a corrupt entity. And I've been harassed personally by the chief judge of the federal court who is instructing me personally to drop this suit, threatened to kick me off the court, after 30 years on the court. I've been harassed by the FBI. My staff has been harassed and threatened. My office has been broken into and this is the kind of government we are dealing with.

[/size] [size=2]SH: I have interviewed individuals in NORAD and the Air Force. I personally toured NORAD many years ago around the time that I worked for Dole. I'm very familiar with the operations at Cheyenne Mountain at Colorado Springs, where NORAD is. Individuals that work in NORAD as well as the Air Force have stated this, off the record, but the point is, yes, this was not just five drills but at least 35 drills over at least two months before September 11th. Everything was planned, the exact location[/size] [size=2]

AJ: But five drills that day.[/size]

[size=2]SH: That day, that day, and Bush thought it was a drill. That's the only explanation for why he appeared nonchalant[/size]

[size=2]AJ: We also had NORAD officers and civilian air traffic controllers going, "Is this part of the exercise? Is this a drill?"[/size]

[size=2]SH: Yes.[/size] [size=2]

AJ: On the tapes and in TV interviews, they thought it was, quote, a drill.[/size] [size=2]

SH: That's right. That's exactly what I said long before it became public. I've known about this since earlier in March of '03, as I stated before. This was all planned. This was a government-ordered operation. Bush personally signed the order. He personally authorized the attacks. He is guilty of treason and mass murder. And now, obstruction of justice by attempting to use a federal judge and FBI agents to inhibit a legitimate civil lawsuit in this country, in federal court. Even a chief judge in this court tried to harass and threaten me personally for representing legitimate plaintiffs. And they got Clinton for allegedly lying under oath about Paula Jones and now - look what's happening now. And Ken Starr used to be across from me in Duke Law School in the early `70s and it´s interesting that he got away with trying to get Clinton impeached, so we have a far worse criminal sitting in the oval office today - somebody guilty of mass murder as well as obstruction of justice.

[/size][size=2]SH: My office was broken into about 6 months ago. The file cabinets - it was obvious they had been rifled through. Files were stolen. Files dealing with this particular case and particularly with the documents I had regarding the fact that the - some of these hijackers, at least some of them were on the payroll of the U.S. government as undercover FBI, CIA, double agents. They are spying on Arab groups in the U.S. And, in effect, all this led up to the effect that al Qaeda is a creation of the George Bush administration, basically. That the entity that he called al Qaeda is directly linked to George Bush. And all this stuff was stolen. Fortunately, I had copies. But this was just part of the harassment. The FBI has also been harassing some of my assistants and has planted a spy in our midst. And it is just outrageous that these Nazi tactics are being used - and the obstruction of justice, these people are criminals. And that's what's happening under the tremendous pressure here to just drop it. Or to shut up now and just go away.[/size]

[illwill]

Oorspronkelijk geplaatst door exodus

Denk dat eens hoe dat komt? Hij wordt doodgezwegen. Moest de media er een zaak van willen maken ze hadden het al lang gedaan. Nu zwijgen ze hem dood en is het grote publiek zelfs niet op de hoogte.

Hier enkele stukken uit een interview met Stanley Hilton:

[size=2]Yeah, we are suing Bush, Condoleezza Rice, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Mueller, etc. for complicity in personally not only allowing 9/11 to happen but in ordering it. The hijackers we retained and we had a witness who is married to one of them. The hijackers were U.S. undercover agents. They were double agents, paid by the FBI and the CIA to spy on Arab groups in this country. They were controlled. Their landlord was an FBI informant in San Diego and other places. And this was a direct, covert operation ordered, personally ordered by George W. Bush. Personally ordered. We have incriminating evidence, documents as well as witnesses, to this effect. It's not just incompetence - in spite of the fact that he is incompetent. The fact is he personally ordered this, knew about it. He, at one point, there were rehearsals of this. The reason why he appeared to be uninterested and nonchalant on September 11th - when those videos showed that Andrew Card whispered in his ear the words about this he listened to kids reading the pet goat story, is that he thought this was another rehearsal. These people had dress-rehearsed this many times. He had seen simulated videos of this. In fact, he even made a Freudian slip a few months later at a California press conference when he said he had, quote, "seen on television the first plane attack the first tower." And that could not be possible because there was no video. What it was was the simulated video that he had gone over. So this was a personally government-ordered thing. We are suing them under the Constitution for violating Americans' rights, as well as under the federal Fraudulent Claims Act, for presenting a fraudulent claim to Congress to justify the bogus Iraq boondoggle war, for political gains. And also, under the RICO statute, under the Racketeering Corrupt Organization Act, for being a corrupt entity. And I've been harassed personally by the chief judge of the federal court who is instructing me personally to drop this suit, threatened to kick me off the court, after 30 years on the court. I've been harassed by the FBI. My staff has been harassed and threatened. My office has been broken into and this is the kind of government we are dealing with.

[/size][size=2]SH: I have interviewed individuals in NORAD and the Air Force. I personally toured NORAD many years ago around the time that I worked for Dole. I'm very familiar with the operations at Cheyenne Mountain at Colorado Springs, where NORAD is. Individuals that work in NORAD as well as the Air Force have stated this, off the record, but the point is, yes, this was not just five drills but at least 35 drills over at least two months before September 11th. Everything was planned, the exact location[/size] [size=2]

AJ: But five drills that day.[/size]

[size=2]SH: That day, that day, and Bush thought it was a drill. That's the only explanation for why he appeared nonchalant[/size]

[size=2]AJ: We also had NORAD officers and civilian air traffic controllers going, "Is this part of the exercise? Is this a drill?"[/size]

[size=2]SH: Yes.[/size] [size=2]

AJ: On the tapes and in TV interviews, they thought it was, quote, a drill.[/size] [size=2]

SH: That's right. That's exactly what I said long before it became public. I've known about this since earlier in March of '03, as I stated before. This was all planned. This was a government-ordered operation. Bush personally signed the order. He personally authorized the attacks. He is guilty of treason and mass murder. And now, obstruction of justice by attempting to use a federal judge and FBI agents to inhibit a legitimate civil lawsuit in this country, in federal court. Even a chief judge in this court tried to harass and threaten me personally for representing legitimate plaintiffs. And they got Clinton for allegedly lying under oath about Paula Jones and now - look what's happening now. And Ken Starr used to be across from me in Duke Law School in the early `70s and it´s interesting that he got away with trying to get Clinton impeached, so we have a far worse criminal sitting in the oval office today - somebody guilty of mass murder as well as obstruction of justice.

[/size][size=2]SH: My office was broken into about 6 months ago. The file cabinets - it was obvious they had been rifled through. Files were stolen. Files dealing with this particular case and particularly with the documents I had regarding the fact that the - some of these hijackers, at least some of them were on the payroll of the U.S. government as undercover FBI, CIA, double agents. They are spying on Arab groups in the U.S. And, in effect, all this led up to the effect that al Qaeda is a creation of the George Bush administration, basically. That the entity that he called al Qaeda is directly linked to George Bush. And all this stuff was stolen. Fortunately, I had copies. But this was just part of the harassment. The FBI has also been harassing some of my assistants and has planted a spy in our midst. And it is just outrageous that these Nazi tactics are being used - and the obstruction of justice, these people are criminals. And that's what's happening under the tremendous pressure here to just drop it. Or to shut up now and just go away.[/size]

Komaan kerel, de media heeft niets liever gedaan dan Bush zwart maken langs alle kanten dus kom niet af dat ze dergelijk iets in de doofpot willen steken. Als er nieuws is waar de media rijk van word en liefst zoveel mogelijk van binnenkrijgt zijn het wel dingen zoals dit hoor.
En als je beweerd dat de president van amerika de hele media controleerd dan heb je nog steeds de buitenlandse media die hij zeker niet controleerd. En hij controleerd de hele media gewoonweg niet, indien dit wel het geval was geweest hadden we ook geen enkel negatief nieuws gehoord uit Irak, dan hadden we niets gehoord van de Clinton affaire...noem maar op.

Als deze kerel echt bestaat en indien hij bewijzen heeft hadden we het al lang gehoord en was er niets anders te lezen te horen of te zien dan dat in de media.

[exodus]

Oorspronkelijk geplaatst door illwill

Komaan kerel, de media heeft niets liever gedaan dan Bush zwart maken langs alle kanten dus kom niet af dat ze dergelijk iets in de doofpot willen steken. Als er nieuws is waar de media rijk van word en liefst zoveel mogelijk van binnenkrijgt zijn het wel dingen zoals dit hoor.
En als je beweerd dat de president van amerika de hele media controleerd dan heb je nog steeds de buitenlandse media die hij zeker niet controleerd. En hij controleerd de hele media gewoonweg niet, indien dit wel het geval was geweest hadden we ook geen enkel negatief nieuws gehoord uit Irak, dan hadden we niets gehoord van de Clinton affaire...noem maar op.

Als deze kerel echt bestaat en indien hij bewijzen heeft hadden we het al lang gehoord en was er niets anders te lezen te horen of te zien dan dat in de media.

Ga je nu al in vraag trekken of die man echt bestaat?? In de video Road to Tyranny zit er een stuk met hem erin.
Het zegt al genoeg dat jij de officiële versie zit te verdedigen zonder nog maar 1 film erover gezien te hebben die het tegendeel beweert.

http://www.archive.org/download/911t...dtotyranny.wmv

Kies doel opslaan als en het zullen 2 leerrijke uren zijn. Zeer goeie film met veel voorbeelden en fragmenten.

Jij zegt dat de media erop zou springen , en zeker de buitenlandse. Dit is gewoon niet mogelijk. Zou iemand bij de VRT of VTM het in zijn hoofd halen een documantaire te maken hierover? Insinueren dat de regering Bush 3000 van zijn eigen mensen heeft vermoord? Dat kan een mainstream station zich niet permiteren. Ik zeg niet dat Bush zelf de hele media controleert, het systeem controleert de media en controleert zichzelf. Alles wat te kritisch is in Amerika wordt geklasseerd als anti- patriotisch en gaat de vuilbak in. Dus niet de hand van Bush maar de druk van het systeem.

[illwill]

Ga je nu al in vraag trekken of die man echt bestaat?? In de video Road to Tyranny zit er een stuk met hem erin.
Het zegt al genoeg dat jij de officiële versie zit te verdedigen zonder nog maar 1 film erover gezien te hebben die het tegendeel beweert.



http://www.archive.org/download/911t...dtotyranny.wmv

Kies doel opslaan als en het zullen 2 leerrijke uren zijn. Zeer goeie film met veel voorbeelden en fragmenten.

Jij zegt dat de media erop zou springen , en zeker de buitenlandse. Dit is gewoon niet mogelijk. Zou iemand bij de VRT of VTM het in zijn hoofd halen een documantaire te maken hierover? Insinueren dat de regering Bush 3000 van zijn eigen mensen heeft vermoord? Dat kan een mainstream station zich niet permiteren. Ik zeg niet dat Bush zelf de hele media controleert, het systeem controleert de media en controleert zichzelf. Alles wat te kritisch is in Amerika wordt geklasseerd als anti- patriotisch en gaat de vuilbak in. Dus niet de hand van Bush maar de druk van het systeem.

[/quote]Ik zeg niet dat die man niet bestaat, ik weet niet of die man bestaat of niet. Wat ik wel weet is dat men dergelijke dingen niet kan en zal geheim houden vooral niet in amerika. Dus voor de laatste maal en ik zeg het niet nog een keer. Als die man bestaat en hij heeft bewijzen dan zullen we het snel te horen krijgen, en zeker omdat hij volgens jou een rechtzaak is begonnen. Wat gaan ze doen volgens jou? Alle rechters en advocaten vermoorden? En wees maar zeker dat de pers aanwezig is op deze plaatsen. Mijn mening hierover...als hij echt bestond dan hadden we al lang iets van hem gehoord.

Trouwens, je zegt dat de media dan alles in de doofpot zal steken, wat met de mensen die deze film hebben gemaakt? Die zwijgen dus tot nu toe ook allemaal tov de pers?

En dan nog een opmerking over je filmpjes é, al de films die in jou plaatje passen zijn voor jou waarheid maar documentaires die volledig uitleggen met deskundigen en experts hoe het kon gebeuren dat de WTC torens instorten geloof je gewoonweg niet. Hoe maak jij nu dit onderscheid?

[democratsteve]

Oorspronkelijk geplaatst door illwill

En dan nog een opmerking over je filmpjes é, al de films die in jou plaatje passen zijn voor jou waarheid maar documentaires die volledig uitleggen met deskundigen en experts hoe het kon gebeuren dat de WTC torens instorten geloof je gewoonweg niet. Hoe maak jij nu dit onderscheid?

Weet je, je zit hier maar oeverloos te lullen over die zogenaamde documantaires die jou versie moeten ondersteunen, maar waarom plaats je hier dan eens geen voorbeeld van? Wij moeten over van alles en nog wat bewijzen en links enz. plaatsen, maar waar bijven uw bewijzen?
Hier speciaal voor jou nog eens een uitreksel van een specialist over de instorting van de torens. Ben trouwens eens benieuwd wat ook Maddox hier van vind, want die heeft het steeds maar over "pure fysica" die wij zogezegd naast ons neer leggen.
Ik heb al gezegd dat ik zelf een leek ben in architectuur ed,(daarom dat je mij ook niet veel hebt gehoord in de discussie over het instorten van de torens) maar in dit document staan zelfs de wiskundige berekeningen bij.


Journal of Engineering Mechanics ASCE, in press
9/13/01, Expanded 9/22/01, Appendices 9/28/01)

Why Did the World Trade Center Collapse?—Simple Analysis
By Zdenek P. Bazant1, Fellow ASCE, and Yong Zhou2

Abstract: This paper3 presents a simplified approximate analysis of the overall collapse of the towers of World Trade Center in New York on September 11, 2001. The analysis shows that if prolonged heating caused the majority of columns of a single floor to lose their load carrying capacity, the whole tower was doomed. The structural resistance is found to be an order of magnitude less than necessary for survival, even though the most optimistic simplifying assumptions are introduced.

Introduction and Failure Scenario
The 110-story towers of the World Trade Center were designed to withstand as a whole the forces caused by a horizontal impact of a large commercial aircraft (Appendix I). So why did a total collapse occur? The cause was the dynamic consequence of the prolonged heating of the steel columns to very high temperature. The heating lowered the yield strength and caused viscoplastic (creep) buckling of the columns of the framed tube along the perimeter of the tower and of the columns in the building core. The likely scenario of failure is approximately as follows.

In stage 1 (Fig. 1), the conflagration caused by the aircraft fuel spilled into the structure causes the steel of the columns to be exposed to sustained temperatures apparently exceeding 800°C. This assumption is crucial to the entire analysis, and there is no basis for it. Actual tests of uninsulated steel structures exposed to gas and diesel fuel for sustained periods never exceeded 360°C. And widespread flames were no longer visible in either tower when it collapsed, only dark smoke. The heating is probably accelerated by a loss of the protective thermal insulation of steel during the initial blast. Blast? By implying that the impact fireballs were blasts, the authors confuse explosions, which produce very high pressures, with fireballs, which don't. A detonation wave can be generated by the sudden ignition of an unburned hydrocarbon-air mixture, but is not produced when ignition is continuous, as appeared to be the case with the dispersing fuel in the jet impacts. The fireballs took about two seconds to expand. Had they detonated, they would have appeared in milliseconds. At such temperatures, structural steel suffers a decrease of yield strength and exhibits significant viscoplastic deformation (i.e., creep—an increase of deformation under sustained load). This leads to creep buckling of columns (e.g., Bazant and Cedolin 1991, Sec. 9), which consequently lose their load carrying capacity (stage 2). Once more than about a half of the columns in the critical floor that is heated most suffer buckling (stage 3), the weight of the upper part of the structure above this floor can no longer be supported, and so the upper part starts falling down onto the lower part below the critical floor, gathering speed until it impacts the lower part. This flies in the face of engineering practice, which makes things at least four times as strong as they would have to be to sustain maximum anticipated loads. Actual load conditions were a fraction of those anticipated loads, since it was not a windy day, and the floors above the impacts were holding only a fraction of their rated capacities. So 90% would be a more realistic estimate of the needed column failure rate. At that moment, the upper part has acquired an enormous kinetic energy and a significant downward velocity. The vertical impact of the mass of the upper part onto the lower part (stage 4) applies enormous vertical dynamic load on the underlying structure, far exceeding its load capacity, even if it is not heated. This causes failure of an underlying multi-floor segment of the tower (stage 4), in which the failure of the connections of the floor-carrying trusses to the columns is either accompanied or quickly followed by buckling of the core columns and overall buckling of the framed tube, was it too fast to see on the videos, or was it behind the dust? with the buckles probably spanning the height of many floors (stage 5, at right), and the upper part possibly getting wedged inside an emptied lower part of the framed tube (stage 5, at left). The buckling is initially plastic but quickly leads to fracture in the plastic hinges. When will they learn to use metal instead of plastic hinges!? The part of building lying beneath is then impacted again by an even larger mass falling with a greater velocity, and the series of impacts and failures then proceeds all the way down (stage 5).

Elastic Dynamic Plastic Fantastic Analysis
The details of the failure process after the decisive initial trigger that sets the upper part in motion are of course very complicated and their clarification would require large computer simulations. For example, the upper part of one tower is tilting as it begins to fall (see Appendix II); the distribution of impact forces among the underlying columns of the framed tube and the core, and between the columns and the floor-supporting trusses, is highly nonuniform; etc. However, a computer is not necessary to conclude that the collapse of the majority of columns of one floor must have caused the whole tower to collapse. This may be demonstrated by the following elementary calculations, in which simplifying assumptions most optimistic in regard to survival are made. That's a preposterous claim, since it's not even clear that elastic dynamic analysis, whatever it is, is even remotely applicable.

For a short time after the vertical impact of the upper part, but after the elastic wave generated by the vertical impact has propagated to the ground, the lower part of the structure can be approximately considered to act as an elastic spring (Fig. 2a). What is its stiffness C? It can vary greatly with the distribution of the impact forces among the framed tube columns, between these columns and those in the core, and between the columns and the trusses supporting concrete floor slabs.

For our purpose, we may assume that all the impact forces go into the columns and are distributed among them equally. Unlikely though such a distribution may be, it is nevertheless the most optimistic hypothesis to make because the resistance of the building to the impact is, for such a distribution, the highest. If the building is found to fail under a uniform distribution of the impact forces, it would fail under any other distribution. They cleverly insert the idea of uniform symmetric collapse -- one of the most obvious problems with the gravity-collapse -- as an optimistic hypothesis. According to this hypothesis, one may estimate that C 71 GN/m (due to unavailability of precise data, an approximate design of column cross sections had to be carried out for this purpose).

The downward displacement from the initial equilibrium position to the point of maximum deflection of the lower part (considered to behave elastically) is h + (P/C) where P = maximum force applied by the upper part on the lower part and h = height of critical floor columns (= height of the initial fall of the upper part) 3.7 m. The energy dissipation, particularly that due to the inelastic deformation of columns during the initial drop of the upper part, may be neglected, i.e., the upper part may be assumed to move through distance h almost in a free fall (indeed, the energy dissipated in the columns during the fall is at most equal to 2πX the yield moment of columns, X the number of columns, which is found to be only about 12% of the gravitational potential energy release if the columns were cold, and much less than that at 800°C). What is the the yield moment of the columns, and how many columns are there? The confidence of the authors in their conclusions is strinking, given the lack of any clear details of the tower's structures. Well, this 12% isn't the only thing we have to take their word for. So the loss of the gravitational potential energy of the upper part may be approximately equated to the strain energy of the lower part at maximum elastic deflection. This gives the equation mg[h + (P/C)] = P2/2C in which m = mass of the upper part (of North Tower) 58·106 kg, and g = gravity acceleration. The solution P = Pdyn yields the following elastically calculated overload ratio due to impact of the upper part:



where P0 = mg = design load capacity. In spite of the approximate nature of this analysis, it is obvious that the elastically calculated forces in columns caused by the vertical impact of the upper part must have exceeded the load capacity of the lower part by at least an order of magnitude.

Another estimate, which gives the initial overload ratio that exists only for a small fraction of a second at the moment of impact, is



where A = cross section area of building, Eef= cross section stiffness of all columns divided by A, ρ = specific mass of building per unit volume. This estimate is calculated from the elastic wave equation which yields the intensity of the step front of the downward pressure wave caused by the impact if the velocity of the upper part at the moment of impact on the critical floor is considered as the boundary condition (e.g., Bazant and Cedolin, Sec. 13.1). After the wave propagates to the ground, the former estimate is appropriate.

An important hypothesis implied in this analysis is that the impacting upper part, many floors in height, is so stiff that it does not bend nor shear on vertical planes, and that the distribution of column displacements across the tower is almost linear, like for a rigid body. If, however, the upper part spanned only a few floors (say, 3 to 6), then it could be so flexible that different column groups of the upper part could move down separately at different times, producing a series of small impacts that would not be fatal (in theory, if people could have escaped from the upper part of the tower, the bottom part of the tower could have been saved if the upper part were bombed, exploded or weakened by some "smart" structure mechanism to collapse onto the lower part gradually as a pile of rubble, instead of impacting it instantly as an almost rigid body). Just what we need! Smart-collapsing buildings. You many want to wear a hardhat if you go to work in one of these buildings because that falling rubble can hurt!

Analysis of Inelastic Energy Dissipation Ideation
The inelastic deformation of the steel of the towers involves plasticity and fracture. Since we are not attempting to model the details of the real failure mechanism but seek only to prove that the towers must have collapsed and do so in the way seen (Engineering 2001, American 2001), we will here neglect fracture, even though the development of fractures is clearly discerned in the photographs of the collapse. I see a lot of fractured steel but no sign of fractures developing -- just a progression of explosions down the building fracturing the frame along the way. Assuming the steel to behave plastically, with unlimited ductility, we are making the most optimistic assumption with regard to the survival capacity of the towers (in reality, the plastic hinges, especially the hinges at column connections, must have fractured, and done so at relatively small rotation, causing the load capacity to drop drastically).

The basic question to answer is: Can the fall of the upper part be arrested by energy dissipation during plastic buckling which follows the initial elastic deformation? Many plastic failure mechanisms could be considered, for example: (a) the columns of the underlying floor buckle locally (Fig. 1, stage 2); (b) the floor-supporting trusses are sheared off at the connections to the framed tube and the core columns and fall down within the tube, depriving the core columns and the framed tube of lateral support, and thus promoting buckling of the core columns and the framed tube under vertical compression (Fig. 1, stage 4, Fig. 2c); and how long would those massive core columns remain standing after losing the lateral support of the perimeter wall? I think more than the one second they did. or (c) the upper part is partly wedged within the emptied framed tube of the lower part, pushing the walls of the framed tube apart (Fig. 1, stage 5). That would keep the cores of the falling and intact portions aligned, so the core columns would have been crushing themselves as they went down. Although each of these mechanism can be shown to lead to total collapse, (I wish I were as smart as these guys so I could see too.) a combination of the last two seems more realistic (the reason: multi-story pieces of the framed tube, with nearly straight boundaries apparently corresponding to plastic hinge lines causing buckles on the framed tube wall, were photographed falling down; see, e.g., Engineering 2001, American 2001).

Regardless of the precise failure mode, experience with buckling indicates that the while many elastic buckles simultaneously coexist in an axially compressed tube, the plastic deformation localizes (because of plastic bifurcation) into a single buckle at a time (Fig. 1, stage 4; Fig. 2c), and so the buckles must fold one after another. Thus, at least one plastic hinge, and no more than four plastic hinges, per column line are needed to operate simultaneously in order to allow the upper part to continue moving down (Fig. 2b, Bazant and Cedolin 1991) (this is also true if the columns of only one floor are buckling at a time). At the end, the sum of the rotation angles θi (i = 1, 2, . . ) of the hinges on one column line, Σθi, cannot exceed 2π (Fig. 2b). This upper-bound value, which is independent of the number of floors spanned by the buckle, is used in the present calculations since, in regard to survival, it represents the most optimistic hypothesis, maximizing the plastic energy dissipation.

Calculating the dissipation per column line of the framed tube as the plastic bending moment Mp of one column (Jirasek and Bazant 2002), times the combined rotation angle θi = 2π (Fig. 2b), and multiplying this by the number of columns, one concludes that the plastically dissipated energy Wp is, optimistically, of the order of 0.5 GN m (for lack of information, certain details such as the wall thickness of steel columns, were estimated by carrying out approximate design calculations for this building).

To attain the combined rotation angle Σθi = 2π of the plastic hinges on each column line, the upper part of the building must move down by the additional distance of one buckle, which is at least one floor below the floor where the collapse started. So the additional release of gravitational potential energy Wg ≥ mg · 2h 2 X 2:1 GN m = 4.2 GN m. To arrest the fall, the kinetic energy of the upper part, which is equal to the potential energy release for a fall through the height of at least two floors, would have to be absorbed by the plastic hinge rotations of one buckle, i.e., Wg=Wp would have to be less than 1. Rather,



if the energy dissipated by the columns of the critical heated floor is neglected. If the first buckle spans over n floors (3 to 10 seems likely), this ratio is about n times larger. So, even under by far the most optimistic assumptions, the plastic deformation can dissipate only a small part of the kinetic energy acquired by the upper part of building.

When the next buckle with its group of plastic hinges forms, the upper part has already traveled many floors down and has acquired a much higher kinetic energy; the percentage of the kinetic energy dissipated plastically is then of the order of 1%. This claim is probably ridiculous, but in any case I can't find an argument that the elastic dynamic analysis and its plastic hinges applies even remotely to those structures. The percentage continues to decrease further as the upper part moves down. If fracturing in the plastic hinges were considered, a still smaller (in fact much smaller) energy dissipation would be obtained. So the collapse of the tower must be an almost free fall. This conclusion is supported by the observation that the duration of the collapse of the tower, observed to be 9 s, was about the same as the duration of a free fall in a vacuum from the tower top (416 m above ground) to the top of the final heap of debris (about 25 m above ground), which is It further follows that the brunt of vertical impact must have gone directly into the columns of the framed tube and the core and that any delay Δt of the front of collapse of the framed tube behind the front of collapsing (‘pancaking’) floors must have been negligible, or else the duration of the total collapse of the tower, 9 s + Δt, would have been significantly longer than 9 s. However, even for a short delay Δt, the floors should have acted like a piston running down through an empty tube, which helps to explain the smoke and debris that was seen being expelled laterally from the collapsing tower. Huh? Is this supposed to explain how the towers' tops crushed a 1000-foot high pillar of resilient steel as if there was only air there?

Problems of Disaster Mitigation and Design
Designing tall buildings to withstand this sort of attack seems next to impossible. If by "this sort of attack" they mean explosive demolition, I would agree. It would require a much thicker insulation of steel, with blast-resistant protective cover. No, that's useless, because they could cut away the protective cover when they place the explosives. Replacing the rectangular framed tube by a hardened circular monolithic tube with tiny windows might help to deflect much of the debris and fuel from an impacting aircraft sideways, but regardless of cost, who would want to work in such a building? I think most people would settle for a collapse-proof building.

The problems appear to be equally severe for concrete columns because concrete heated to such temperatures undergoes explosive thermal spalling, thermal fracture and disintegration due to dehydration of hardened cement paste (e.g., Bazant and Kaplan 1996). These questions arise not only for buildings supported on many columns but also for the recent designs of tall buildings with a massive monolithic concrete core functioning as a tubular mast. These recent designs use high-strength concrete which, however, is even more susceptible to explosive thermal spalling and thermal fracture than normal concrete. The use of refractory concretes as the structural material invites many open questions (Bazant and Kaplan 1996). Special alloys or various refractory ceramic composites may of course function at such temperatures, but the cost would increase astronomically. It will nevertheless be appropriate to initiate research on materials and designs that would postpone the collapse of the building so as to extend the time available for evacuation, because even though multi-story steel structures have never "collapsed" before 9-11, now their collapse will be inevitable in the event of fire. provide a hardened and better insulated stairwell, or even prevent collapse in the case of a less severe attack such as an off-center impact or the impact of an aircraft containing little fuel. Lessons should be drawn for improving the safety of building design in the case of lesser disasters. For instance, in view of the progressive dynamic collapse of a stack of all the floors of the Ronan Point apartments in the U.K., caused by a gas explosion in one upper floor (Levy and Salvadori 1992), the following design principle, determining the appropriate ff of redundancy, should be adopted: If only a certain judiciously specified minority of the columns or column-floor connections at one floor are removed, the mass that might fall down from the superior structure must be so small that its impact on the underlying structure would not cause dynamic overload.

Closing Comments
Once accurate computer calculations are carried out, various details of the failure mechanism will doubtless be found to differ from the present simplifying hypotheses. Errors by a factor of 2 would not be terribly surprising, but that would hardly matter since the present analysis reveals order-of-magnitude differences between the dynamic loads and the structural resistance. There have been many interesting, but intuitive, competing explanations of the collapse. Theorists were very busy between September 11th and 13th! To decide their viability, however, it is important to do at least some crude calculations. For example, it has been suggested that the connections of the floor-supporting trusses to the framed tube columns were not strong enough. Maybe they were not, but even if they were it would have made no difference, as shown by the present simple analysis.

But stay tuned, because once that 800 Cº figure in this paper gets noticed, the trusses and their connectors will be heavily relied on in a more fine-tuned official explanation.
The main purpose of the present analysis is to prove that the whole tower must have collapsed if the fire destroyed the load capacity of the majority of columns of a single floor. This purpose justifies the optimistic simplifying assumptions regarding survival made at the outset, which include unlimited plastic ductility (i.e., absence of fracture), uniform distribution of impact forces among the columns, disregard of various complicating details (e.g., the possibility that the failures of floor-column connections and of core columns preceded the column and tube failure, or that the upper tube got wedged inside the lower tube), etc. If the tower is found to fail under these very optimistic assumptions, it will certainly be found to fail when all the detailed mechanisms are analyzed, especially since there are order-of-magnitude differences between the dynamic loads and the structural resistance.

An important puzzle at the moment is why the adjacent 46-story building, into which no significant amount of aircraft fuel could have been injected, collapsed as well. Despite the lack of data at present, the likely explanation seems to be that high temperatures (though possibly well below 800°C) persisted on at least one floor of that building for a much longer time than specified by the current fire code provisions.

Appendix I. Elastic Dynamic Response to Aircraft Impact
A simple estimate based on the preservation of the combined momentum of the impacting Boeing 767-200 ( 179,000 kg X 550 km/h) and the momentum of the equivalent mass Meq of the interacting upper part of the tower ( 141 ·106 X v0 ) indicates that the initial average velocity v0 imparted to the upper part of the tower was only about 0.7 km/h = 0.19 m/s. Mass Meq, which is imagined as a concentrated mass mounted at the height of the impacted floor on a massless free-standing cantilever with the same bending stiffness as the tower (Fig. 2d), has been calculated from the condition that its free vibration period be equal to the first vibration period of the tower, which has been roughly estimated as T1 = 14 s (Meq 44% of the mass of the whole tower). The dynamic response after impact may be assumed to be dominated by the first free vibration mode, of period T1. Therefore, the maximum horizontal deflection w0 = v0Ti/2π 0.4 m, which is well within the design range of wind-induced elastic deflections. So it is not surprising that the aircraft impact per se damaged the tower only locally.

The World Trade Center was designed for an impact of Boeing 707-320 rather than Boeing 767-320. But note that the maximum takeoff weight of that older, less effcient, aircraft is only 15% less than that of Boeing 767-200. Besides, the maximum fuel tank capacity of that aircraft is only 4% less. These differences are well within the safety margins of design. So the observed response of the towers proves the correctness of the original dynamic design. What was not considered in design was the temperature that can develop in the ensuing fire. Here the lulling experience from 1945 might have been deceptive; that year, a two-engine bomber (B-25), flying in low clouds to Newark at about 400 km/h, hit the Empire State Building (381 m tall, built in 1932) at the 79th floor (278 m above ground)—the steel columns (much heavier than in modern buildings) suffered no significant damage, and the fire remained confined essentially to two floors only (Levy and Salvadori 1992).

Appendix II. Why Didn’t the Upper Part Pivot About Its Base?
Since the top part of the South Tower tilted (Fig. 3a), many people wonder: Why didn’t the upper part of the tower fall to the side like a tree, pivoting about the center of the critical floor? Before wading into the following mumbo-jumbo it's worth noting that once the top of the tower started its vertical plunge, its rate of rotation slowed down. This can only be explained by the breakup of the top (the piston used above to "explain" the near free-fall rate of destruction) which would have destroyed its moment of inertia. (Fig. 3b) To demonstrate why, and thus to justify our previous neglect of tilting, is an elementary exercise in dynamics. Assume the center of the floor at the base of the upper part (Fig. 3b) to move for a while neither laterally nor vertically, i.e., act as a fixed pivot. Equating the kinetic energy of the upper part rotating as a rigid body about the pivot at its base (Fig. 3c) to the loss of the gravitational potential energy of that part (which is here simpler than using the Lagrange equations of motion), we have where x is the vertical coordinate (Fig. 3c). 5 This provides



where θ = rotation angle of the upper part, H1 = its height, and the superposed dots denote time derivatives (Fig. 3c). Considering the dynamic equilibrium of the upper part as a free body, acted upon by distributed inertia forces and a reaction with horizontal component F at base (Fig. 3d), one obtains . Evidently, the maximum horizontal reaction during pivoting occurs for θ = 45°, and so



where, for the upper part of South Tower, m 87 · 106 kg.

Could the combined plastic shear resistance Fp of the columns of one floor (Fig. 3f) sustain this horizontal reaction? For plastic shear, there would be yield hinges on top and bottom of each resisting column; Fig. 3e (again, aiming only at an optimistic upper bound on resistance, we neglect fracture). The moment equilibrium condition for the column as a free body shows that each column can at most sustain the shear force F1 = 2Mp/h1 where h1 2:5 m = effective height of column, and Mp 0:3 MN m = estimated yield bending moment of one column, if cold. Assuming that the resisting columns are only those at the sides of the framed tube normal to the axis of rotation, which number about 130, we get Fp 130F1 31 MN. So, the maximum horizontal reaction to pivoting would cause the overload ratio



if the resisting columns were cold. Since they are hot, the horizontal reaction to pivoting would exceed the shear capacity of the heated floor still much more (and far more if fracture were considered).

Since F is proportional to sin 2θ, its value becomes equal to the plastic limit when sin 2θ = 1/10.3. From this we further conclude that the reaction at the base of the upper part of South Tower must have begun shearing the columns plastically already at the inclination



The pivoting of the upper part must have started by an asymmetric failure of the columns on one side of building, but already at this very small angle the dynamic horizontal reaction at the base of the upper part must have reduced the vertical load capacity of the remaining columns of the critical floor (even if those were not heated). That must have started the downward motion of the top part of the South Tower, and afterwards its motion must have become predominantly vertical. Hence, a vertical impact of the upper part onto the lower part must have been the dominant mechanism.

Finally note that the horizontal reaction Fmax is proportional to the weight of the pivoting part. Therefore, if a pivoting motion about the center of some lower floor were considered, Fmax would be still larger.

Appendix III. Plastic Load-Shortening Diagram of Columns
Normal design deals only with initial bifurcation and small deflections, in which the diagram of load versus axial shortening of an elasto-plastic column exhibits hardening rather than softening. However, the columns of the towers suffered very large plastic deflections, for which this diagram exhibits pronounced softening. Fig. 5 shows this diagram as estimated for these towers. The diagram begins with axial shortening due to plastic yielding at load P10 = A1fi where A1 = crosssection area of one column and fy = yield limit of steel. At the axial shortening of about 3%, there is a plastic bifurcation (if imperfections are ignored). After that, undeflected states are unstable and three plastic hinges (Fig. 5) must form (if we assume, optimistically, the ends to be fixed). From 6 the condition of moment equilibrium of the half-column as a free body (Fig. 5), the axial load then is P1 = 4Mp/L sinθ, while, from the buckling geometry, the axial shortening is u = L(1 - cosθ), where L = distance between the end hinges. Eliminating plastic hinge rotation θ, we find that the plastic load-shortening diagram (including the pre- and post-bifurcation states) is given by



which defines the curve plotted in Fig. 5. This curve is an optimistic upper bound since, in reality, the plastic hinges develop fracture (e.g., Bazant and Planas 1998), and probably do so already at rather small rotations. The area under this curve represents the dissipated energy.

If it is assumed that one or several floor slabs above the critical heated floor collapsed first, then the L to be substituted in (8) is much longer than the height of columns of one floor. Consequently, P1(u) becomes much smaller (and the Euler elastic critical load for buckling may even become less than the plastic load capacity, which is far from true when L is the column height of a single floor).

It has been suggested that the inelastic deformation of columns might have ‘cushioned’ the initial descent of the upper part, making it almost static. However, this is impossible because, for gravity loading, a softening of the load-deflection diagram (Fig. 5) always causes instability and precludes static deformation (Bazant and Cedolin 1991, Chpt. 10 and 13). The downward acceleration of the upper part is ü = N[P10 - P1(u)]/m where N = number of columns and, necessarily, P10 = mg/N. This represents a differential equation for u as a function of time t, and its integration shows that the time that the upper part takes to fall through the height of one story is, for cold columns, only about 6% longer than the duration of a free fall from that height, which is 0.87 s. For hot columns, the difference is of course much less than 6%. So there is hardly any ‘cushioning’.

References
American Media Specials, Vol. II, No. 3, September 2001, J. Lynch, ed., Boca Raton, Florida.
Bazant, Z.P., and Cedolin, L. (1991). Stability of structures: Elastic, inelastic, fracture and damage theories. Oxford University Press, New York.
Bazant, Z.P., and Kaplan, M.F. (1996). Concrete at high temperatures. Longman – Addison-Wesley, London.
Bazant, Z.P., and Planas, J. (1998). Fracture and size effect of concrete and other quasibrittle materials. CRC Press, Boca Raton, Florida, and London.
Bazant, Z.P. (2001a). ”Why did the World Trade Center collapse?” SIAM News (Society for Industrial and Applied Mathematics, M.I.T., Cambridge), 34 (8), October (submitted Sept. 14).
Bazant, Z.P. (2001b). “Anatomy of Twin Towers Collapse.” Science and Technology (part of Hospodarske Noviny, Prague) No. 186, Sept. 25, p.1.
Jirasek, M., and Bazant, Z.P. (2002). Inelastic Analysis of Structures. J. Wiley and Sons, London and New York.
Levy, M., and Salvadori, M. (1992). Why buildings fall down. W.W. Norton and Co., New York.
“Massive assault doomed towers” (editorial), Engineering News Record 247 (12), September 17, 2001, pp. 10–13.
Footnotes

Walter P. Murphy Professor of Civil Engineering and Materials Science, Northwestern University, Evanston Illinois 60208; [email protected].
Graduate Research Assistant, Northwestern University.
The original version with equations (1) and (2) was originally submitted to ASCE on September 13, and an expanded version with equation (3) was submitted to ASCE on September 22. Appendix II was added on September 28, and I and III on October 5. The basic points of this paper, submitted to SIAM, M.I.T., on September 14, were incorporated in Bazant (2001a,b). Posted with updates since September 14 at http://www.civil.northwestern.edu/news, http://www3.tam.uiuc.edu/news/200109wtc/, and http://math.mit.edu/~bazant.

Captions:

Fig. 1 Stages of collapse of the building (floor height exaggerated).
Fig. 2 (a) Model for impact of upper part on lower part of building. (b) Plastic buckling mechanism on one column line. (c) Combination of plastic hinges creating a buckle in the tube wall. (d) Equivalent mass Meq on a massless column vibrating at the same frequency.
Fig. 3 Pivoting of upper part of tower about its base; (a,b) with and without horizontal shear at base; (c) model for simplified analysis; (d) free-body diagram with inertia forces; (d,e) plastic horizontal shearing of columns in critical floor at base.
Fig. 4 Scenario of tilting of upper part of building (South Tower).
Fig. 5 (a) Plastic buckling of columns; (b) plastic hinge mechanism; (b) free-body diagram; (d) dimensionless diagram of load P1 versus axial shortening u of columns of the towers if the effects of fracture and heating are ignored; and (e) the beginning of this diagrams in an expanded horizontal scale (imperfections neglected).

[Azal]

Oorspronkelijk geplaatst door lincoln

Ik zal nog eens de vraag herhaaaaaaaaaaaaallllleeeeuuuun [size=7]Waarom is binneke nog niet gepakt ???[/size]

[size=7]Omdat em in e muizenholleken gekropen is. [/size][size=2]De laffaard[/size]

[Superbelg]

En toevallig toen men de funderingen van het WTC aan het smelten was, vlogen daar plots toch wel 2 vliegtuigen in zeker!

[exodus]

Oorspronkelijk geplaatst door illwill

Ik zeg niet dat die man niet bestaat, ik weet niet of die man bestaat of niet. Wat ik wel weet is dat men dergelijke dingen niet kan en zal geheim houden vooral niet in amerika. Dus voor de laatste maal en ik zeg het niet nog een keer. Als die man bestaat en hij heeft bewijzen dan zullen we het snel te horen krijgen, en zeker omdat hij volgens jou een rechtzaak is begonnen. Wat gaan ze doen volgens jou? Alle rechters en advocaten vermoorden? En wees maar zeker dat de pers aanwezig is op deze plaatsen. Mijn mening hierover...als hij echt bestond dan hadden we al lang iets van hem gehoord.

Kijk , die man bestaat echt , het feit dat je daaraan twijfelt zegt al genoeg. Je kan het gewoonweg zelfs nog niet overwegen dat 9/11 een insidejob is. Je hebt hier een advocaat die een rechtszaak aanspant, hij is al verschillende keren op tv gekomen en hier

http://www.prisonplanet.tv/audio/091004hilton.mp3

kan je een interview met hem horen dat ik al eens gepost heb maar je hebt dus de moeite nog niet gedaan om daar naar te luisteren , en dan zit jij hier het officiële verhaal te verdedigen.

Oorspronkelijk geplaatst door illwill

Trouwens, je zegt dat de media dan alles in de doofpot zal steken, wat met de mensen die deze film hebben gemaakt? Die zwijgen dus tot nu toe ook allemaal tov de pers?

Die zwijgen natuurlijk niet, maar de pers wil ze niet horen. Ze maken dan maar zelf een film die ze gratis laten kopieren om de boodschap te verspreiden op het internet, want dat is de enige vrije spreekbuis.

[illwill]

Weet je, je zit hier maar oeverloos te lullen over die zogenaamde documantaires die jou versie moeten ondersteunen, maar waarom plaats je hier dan eens geen voorbeeld van? Wij moeten over van alles en nog wat bewijzen en links enz. plaatsen, maar waar bijven uw bewijzen?
Hier speciaal voor jou nog eens een uitreksel van een specialist over de instorting van de torens. Ben trouwens eens benieuwd wat ook Maddox hier van vind, want die heeft het steeds maar over "pure fysica" die wij zogezegd naast ons neer leggen.
Ik heb al gezegd dat ik zelf een leek ben in architectuur ed,(daarom dat je mij ook niet veel hebt gehoord in de discussie over het instorten van de torens) maar in dit document staan zelfs de wiskundige berekeningen bij.

Oeverloos lullen over documentaires? Ik heb dit 2x aangehaald meer niet. Hoe kan ik een voorbeeld posten? Ik ben niet degene die beweerd officiele informatie te hebben zonder de officiele rapporten é. Ik beweer nergens dat norad of weet ik veel wie beweringen doen é. Ik zeg nergens dat de torens vol explosieven zaten dus hoef ik het ook niet te bewijzen. Alhoewel is het bewijs dat ze geen resten van explosieven gevonden hebben. Ik heb geen bewijzen nodig, en zowiezo zijn jullie wel de laatste die mogen klagen over een gebrek aan bewijzen é, al jullie verhalen steunen op niets en bevat geen enkel bewijs.

[illwill]

Oorspronkelijk geplaatst door exodus

Kijk , die man bestaat echt , het feit dat je daaraan twijfelt zegt al genoeg. Je kan het gewoonweg zelfs nog niet overwegen dat 9/11 een insidejob is. Je hebt hier een advocaat die een rechtszaak aanspant, hij is al verschillende keren op tv gekomen en hier

http://www.prisonplanet.tv/audio/091004hilton.mp3

kan je een interview met hem horen dat ik al eens gepost heb maar je hebt dus de moeite nog niet gedaan om daar naar te luisteren , en dan zit jij hier het officiële verhaal te verdedigen.


Die zwijgen natuurlijk niet, maar de pers wil ze niet horen. Ze maken dan maar zelf een film die ze gratis laten kopieren om de boodschap te verspreiden op het internet, want dat is de enige vrije spreekbuis.

Ik twijfel niet aan het bestaan van die vent é, ik bedoel dat er iemand is die echte bewijzen heeft en daarmee naar de rechtbank is gestapt.
Ik heb dat interview al eens gehoord, dat je hier wederom zit te beweren dat ik het nog niet beluisterd heb terwijl je dit onmogelijk kunt weten is weer zeer typisch. Heel dat interview gaat gewoon over een man die Bush van alles en nog wat beschuldigd meer is het niet dus wat wil je dat ik daarmee doe? Dat ik daarom ook maar klakkeloos iemand zijn beweringen ga overnemen simpelweg omdat hij het verteld? Als er morgen iemand op de radio komt die beweerd dat koning albert erachter zit...moet ik het dan ook zomaar geloven?

De pers wil ze niet horen? Wat een onzin kerel. Is de pers ineens allemaal zo pro Bush geworden de laatste maanden?

Hoe ver staat het trouwens met het gerecht? Heb je hier geen link van ofzo? Heeft hij al enig bewijs vrijgegeven? Wanneer worden de eerste getuigen opgeroepen?

[illwill]

LOL! Grootste proces ooit ter wereld maar we horen er niets van zeker. Geloof je dat nu echt?

[exodus]

Oorspronkelijk geplaatst door illwill

LOL! Grootste proces ooit ter wereld maar we horen er niets van zeker. Geloof je dat nu echt?

Wel, het is zo, stel je dan eens de vraag waarom dat we er niets van horen?

Niet omdat deze zaak gebaseerd is op bullshit hoor, deze advocaat is geen debiel.

[illwill]

Oorspronkelijk geplaatst door exodus

Wel, het is zo, stel je dan eens de vraag waarom dat we er niets van horen?

Niet omdat deze zaak gebaseerd is op bullshit hoor, deze advocaat is geen debiel.

Hoe ver staan ze met de zaak? Heeft hij al bewijzen vrij gegeven?

Ik hoef mij die vraag niet te stellen omdat indien het echt zo zou zijn we er al lang iets over gehoord hadden. Dergelijk iets kan en word niet in de doofpot gestopt. Trouwens, deze man kan multimiljonair worden door naar alle media kanalen te stappen en er zijn verhaal te doen en de bewijzen te geven.

[exodus]

Hieronder een artikel over de bombing in Oklahoma city in 1995. Ook een inside job. Het officiële rapport zei altijd dat het maar 1 man was (Timothy McVeigh), terwijl ooggetuigen 2 mannen hebben gezien. Ook spraken ze maar van 1 bom (de truckbom van Mcveigh), terwijl er meerdere onontplofte bommen gevonden zijn, wat bevestigd is uit meerdere bronnen. Na deze aanlsag zijn de geldstromen voor het FBI, NSA, CIA meer dan verdubbeld, maar ze hebben het Amerikaanse volk blijkbaar niet kunnen beschermen tegen 9/11 (tiens , hoe zou dat komen.)
Ook is is na deze aanslag maatregelen genomen die burgerlijke vrijheden beperkten. Wat ondertussen al weer onnoemelijk overtroffen is door de patriot act 1 en 2. De weg naar de politiestaat.

Het bedrijf die de rommel opruimde van Oklahoma City was Controlled Demolition, en 6 jaar later vinden we ze terug om de rommel van 9/11 op te ruimen...

De aanslagen gaan erger en erger worden. Een dozijn mensen sterven bij de WTC bombing van 1993, 150 bij de Oklahoma bombing in 1995, 3000 bij 9/11.. gaan de FBI, de CIA en de NSA voor de zoveelste keer op rij "falen"?

OKC Bombshell Implicates Feds In Murrah Blast

After nearly a decade, shocking, suppressed evidence emerges

By Pat Shannan

Only moments after an enormous blast blew away most of the facade and a full quarter of the eastern end of the Alfred P. Murrah Federal Building in Oklahoma City in 1995, the FBI and Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms (BATF) began to release evidence implicating two men, and two men only, who they claimed were solely responsible. The evidence later showed that Timothy McVeigh and Terry Nichols had confessed to the impossible.

At first, several independent investigators came forward to complain that there was an obvious cover-up. Now they call it the “ongoing cover-up of the cover-up.” And now, even the new OKC museum contradicts the official theory of what happened on April 19.

Officials in charge at the time still refuse to discuss anything other than the manufactured spin: McVeigh and Nichols, as convicted by the courts, mixed up a large batch of ammonium nitrate fuel oil (ANFO—a mild explosive used by farmers to blow out stumps) and demolished several square blocks of downtown Oklahoma City with a devastating blast that could be heard miles away.

In reality, the ANFO story was born only 10 minutes after the blast when a high-ranking BATF official by the name of Harry Everhart witnessed the blast from nearby and called the BATF office in Dallas to excitedly announce, “Someone has just blown up the federal building in Oklahoma City with a truckload of ANFO!”

Some reporters and investigators, who have looked objectively at the bombing, now argue that neither Everhart nor anyone else could have correctly deduced in such a short time exactly what caused the explosion.

According to government documents released later, Ever hart was experienced in loading large amounts of ammonium nitrate fertilizer into a vehicle for use as a terrorist truck bomb, and his presence in the midst of the second worst terrorist attack in U.S. history looms suspicious to this day.

Records indicate that this ANFO explosives expert and his associates had destroyed at least eight vehicles in “test bombing experiments” at a secret range in the New Mexico desert in the 12 months prior to the OKC bombing.

Everhart and his fellow specialists even photographed and videotaped these truck bombs as they detonated.

Far from an anti government militia member, the vehicle bomb expert was Special Agent Everhart, an employee of the Bureau of Alcohol Tobacco and Firearms. And, according to federal government records obtained later, Everhart had been instrumental in obtaining the government funding to perform the ANFO bombing tests.

Everhart served on the National Response Team (NRT), a group of experienced bomb and arson investigators who respond to major bombing crime scenes throughout the United States.

He also served on a secret government project in 1994 that conducted tests using ANFO and C-4 to blow up cars and vans in a classified U.S. government experiment known as “Project Dipole Might.”

According to files, reports and photographs obtained from the Department of the Treasury through a Freedom of Information Act request, the U.S. government initiated a “comprehensive ANFO and C-4 vehicle bomb testing program” about a year before the OKC bombing. Records show the project was supervised and administered by the BATF, but was actually funded through a National Security Council (NSC) directive.

The Department of Treasury has confirmed the project was initiated under President Bill Clinton’s NSC staff shortly after he took office in 1993.

The intent of the Dipole Might experiments in 1994 includes making videos and computer models to “be displayed in a courtroom to aid in the prosecution of defendants” in vehicle bomb cases, according to government documents. The exact precedent and purpose of this activity is unclear. BATF agents started blowing up vans and cars in the spring of 1994 at the White Sands Missile Range in order to collect test data for post-blast forensics computer software packages to be issued out to National Response Team personnel when they respond to truck bombings.

Why the NSC would fund such a BATF project—despite the rarity of the crime—has not been explained.

Nor has it been explained as to what specific threat-assessment information the government had when it decided to engage in such a project, just a few months before officials claimed a Ryder truck laden with ammonium nitrate fertilizer exploded in front of the Murrah building.

The only major ANFO vehicle bombing in U.S. history, prior to OKC, occurred in August 1970 at the University of Wisconsin, in Madison, Wis.

Contrary to media reports, the World Trade Center bomb of February 1993 was composed of urea nitrate, not ANFO, according to the FBI.

Despite only one known case in almost 25 years, why did Clinton’s NSC anticipate a need for detailed information regarding ANFO vehicle bomb attacks a few months prior to the Oklahoma City blast?

Treasury’s own official documents reveal the intensity of interest. In fact, a brief summary of “Project Dipole Might” is featured in BATF’s 1994 Annual Report to Congress.

There were enough clandestine characters hanging around Oklahoma City to fill a James Bond movie during the days prior to the crime.

BATF’s paid informant Carol Howe had provided information that the Murrah building was one of three potential targets.

On April 6, Cary Gagan gave U.S. marshals in Denver the information that “a federal building would be blown up in either Denver or Oklahoma City within two weeks.” He had not only personally delivered timers and blasting caps to a Middle Eastern group, but had sat in on a meeting where the blueprints of the Murrah Building were on display.

Then, 38 minutes before the blasts on April 19, the Department of Justice in Washington received an anonymous telephone call warning that the Murrah Building was about to be blown up but took no action.

After a morning of reporting that “multiple bombs” had been found in the Murrah debris—a report publicly confirmed by the Gov. Frank Keating—and that rescue operations had been halted for two hours while these unexploded bombs were removed, news people suddenly began to spin the government yarn about an ANFO bomb being responsible for the enormous damage.

One of the problems with that theory was the fact that the columns remained standing directly across the sidewalk from the truck as opposed to those that had collapsed more than 50 feet away. A retired air force brigadier general with 30 years experience compiled an irrefutable report on this subject, which showed exactly where the charges were placed inside the building.

It was so irrefutable that the prosecution refused to allow him to testify at the Denver trial as it would have destroyed any ANFO theory that the government had already sold to the American people.

On May 23, 1995, only 34 days after the explosions, the federal government stonewalled all attempts to examine the building’s remaining structure and carried out an ordered demolition, destroying and burying forever what many believed contained the evidence of many explosions

[illwill]

Oorspronkelijk geplaatst door illwill

Hoe ver staan ze met de zaak? Heeft hij al bewijzen vrij gegeven?

Ik hoef mij die vraag niet te stellen omdat indien het echt zo zou zijn we er al lang iets over gehoord hadden. Dergelijk iets kan en word niet in de doofpot gestopt. Trouwens, deze man kan multimiljonair worden door naar alle media kanalen te stappen en er zijn verhaal te doen en de bewijzen te geven.

Gaan we over iets anders beginnen? Misschien kun je ook erbij zeggen wat er morgen op tv komt?

[praha]

Oorspronkelijk geplaatst door Herr Flick

als er zo'n paar honderduizend ton staal en beton naar beneden suist, zal de grond wel van minder gaan schudderen vrees ik...

Hoeveel °C heeft een ontlading van TNT, Nitro, Cemtex, ... Aluminiumpoeder , ?

En dan het belangrijkste hoe lang blijft dat die temperatuur afgeven, ...


Kan het niet zijn dat die hoge temperaturen bereikt werden doordat de temperatuur blijft oplopen in de kern van de puinhoop omdat deze niet wegkan, ?

hahahaha
je bedoelt door omzetting van massa in energie in een gesloten thermodynamisch systeem of iets dergelijks ?