CNN Breaking: Madrid Building on Fire

[arcos]

No injuries reported right now, but there are big pieces of rubble falling down.
Building 32 stories high, it is located in downtown Madrid.

No link yet.

[wildflower]

2. Here's a link

http://abcnews.go.com/International/wireStory?id=494712

Parts of Madrid Office Building Collapse

Sections of Office Building in Madrid Collapse After Fire Rages Through Upper Floors

The Associated Press

MADRID, Spain Feb 12, 2005 — Sections of a 32-story landmark office building on Madrid's skyline collapsed Sunday morning hours after a fire raged through the upper floors.

The Windsor Building, built in 1973 and one of the most distinctive buildings in Madrid's business district, could be seen crumbing on live television broadcasts hours after the fire broke out Saturday evening. The cause of the blaze was not immediately determined.

Thirteen teams of firefighters and police on the scene evacuated nearby buildings and streets in anticipation of a total collapse of the Windsor Building, an AP reporter on the scene said.

An emergency service spokesman, Javier Ayuso, said three firefighters have been treated for smoke inhalation and exhaustion. Ayuso said the Windsor Building was empty, and that the cause of the fire was still unknown.

http://abcnews.go.com/International/wireStory?id=494712

[gottaB]

3. link

Fire ravages Madrid skyscraper, no injuries

http://www.reuters.com/newsArticle.jhtml?type=worldNews&storyID=7610700

[cal04]

4. They say no injuries thank goodness/Fire rips through skyscraper

An intense fire ravaged a sky scraper in central Madrid on Saturday, causing no injuries but sparking fear the blaze could spread to nearby buildings.


Madrid Mayor Alberto Ruiz Gallardon told reporters that with huge pieces of rubble falling off the structure, it was unclear whether the concrete skeleton of the office building would hold.



http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/common/story_page/0,5744,12234752%255E1702,00.html

[July]

29. If it looks like it will fall, they will have to evacuate the area.

Lots of buildings nearby.

[HeeBGBz]

5. I can't find any news

I hate turning to a news channel and finding little fluff stories.

If there's something going on, I want to know about it.

I wish there was a news channel that had some news on it.

[bahrbearian]

6. I don't respond to "Blind Quotes"

Link??

[arcos]

8. I was transcribing what they said live...

I said I had no link... plus, if you check the replies you'll see plenty.

[alcuno]

9. I think it was a joke. Fire looks very bad. 6 floors have collapsed.

[bvar22]

34. delete

*

[juliagoolia]

7. This is one big building

http://geo.ya.com/photomadrid/photos/chamartin/windsor_building.htm

[Liberal In Texas]

10. Pictures

[Victimerican]

11. Fire ravages Madrid skyscraper

http://today.reuters.co.uk/news/newsArticle.aspx?type=worldNews&storyID=2005-02-13T040423Z_01_CAS305478_RTRUKOC_0_SPAIN-FIRE.xml

MADRID (Reuters) - A raging fire has swept through a 32-storey skyscraper in the heart of Madrid's commercial district, causing no injuries but sparking fears the office building might collapse.

<snip>

"The fire is very big and we cannot save the building itself. Our focus is to prevent it from spreading," said Madrid Mayor Alberto Ruiz Gallardon, adding that a short-circuit was the likely cause of the blaze.

The well-known Madrid landmark -- which houses the offices of U.S. accounting firm Deloitte & Touche -- was believed to have been empty when the fire started at 10:30 p.m. British time on Saturday.

The blaze was still raging out of control in the early hours of Sunday, having apparently breached a fire wall on the 17th floor. Authorities cordoned off a zone 500-metres in diameter around the building in case it should collapse.

Gallardon told reporters that with huge pieces of debris falling off the 110-metre structure, it was unclear if the concrete skeleton of the building would hold.

[Make7]

Terrorist attack?

"TV footage showed bright orange flames shooting out the sides of the Windsor Building, believed to be empty and located near one of Madrid's main boulevards. Muffled explosions could be heard coming from the burning building.

The fire started around 11:30 p.m., local time, Saturday and was burning out of control more than two hours later.

About three hours after the fire started, the top floors of the building - at least six of them - collapsed in a shower of flaming metal debris."

"Thirteen teams of firefighters and police evacuated nearby buildings and streets in anticipation of a possible total collapse."

Source: Canadian Broadcasting Corporation

____________________________________

<sarcasm>
Since we all know that steel buildings will not lose their structural integrity from a fire and we know that there were explosions inside the building, I want to know who did this. (ETA? Al-Qaeda? Some new group?) And why.
</sarcasm>

-Make7

[LinuxInsurgent]

32. I sure hope not...

it's gonna fan the flames of "see...even when you make it your government policy to leave the Middle East alone...these terrorists will keep attacking. It's not the foreign policies...they truly hate the West and want to destroy it" rhetoric.

Please, oh please...let it NOT be Middle East terrorism...otherwise, the Freepers will have a field day constructing "why we need to ignore their "grievances" arguments.

[Make7]

82. Very doubtful.

"Madrid Mayor Alberto Ruiz Gallardon said the fire is believed to have been caused by a short-circuit on the 21st floor." - BBC
__________

And in the unlikely event it is terrorism, the fact that it happened in an empty building would point more in the direction of ETA than any Middle East affiliated organization. IMO.

-Make7

BTW - I haven't noticed Freepers letting facts get in the way of their choice of arguments up to this point - I doubt if that will change anytime soon. If ever.

[AndrewJacksonFaction]

55. What is with the post date? Dec 31 1969?

[Make7]

81. I'm not exactly sure.

They merged the thread I posted to with this one. That one starts here with post #11. Something weird must've happened during the merge. There is one other post here that has a pre-21st century date, but I'm the only one without a post number. Strange.

-Make7

Edit to add:

I just noticed that my post somehow was moved to be the first reply of the thread I posted to, but I was definitely not the first to respond. Maybe the date got messed up when the order got changed?!

I wonder if the rearrangement of the order was a computer glitch or if it was done on purpose.

[AndrewJacksonFaction]

86. LOL. Pre 21st century

[UL_Approved]

12. A CNN article talks about the same thing

We will see how this unfolds. No indications are given of the cause as of yet.

[98geoduck]

13. Bush's foreign policy did nothing but embolden seperatist groups.

[bpilgrim]

14. has it fallen in it's own FOOTPRINT, yet... like the TOWERS, on 911?

http://news.globalfreepress.com/movs/wtc7.swf
http://news.globalfreepress.com/movs/wtc-7_collapse.mpg

psst... pass the word ;->

peace

[ashmanonar]

15. that's my question.

i know that buildings have had major fires before, without collapsing perfectly...usually they're still standing, just gutted. look here for info on the buildings that have been gutted with worse fire than the 911 buildings and survived linky

interesting, huh? i'll bet this new building fire is more or less worse than the fires in wtc1 and 2.

[Dookus]

16. How many buildings

with construction similar to the WTC have been hit by jumbo jets?

[ashmanonar]

18. that's a disingenuous question, for at least one reason.

that being, the wtc buildings were of a fairly early and unique design for their time. i'm sure there are more like it in the world, but they were something new.

buildings HAVE been hit by jets before...and survived. the empire state building was hit by a bomber in 1945 and survived. no FAW DOWN AN GO BOOM, no "raging fires" which turn out to be not so "raging fires"...the first interstate bank fire was seemingly a worse fire than the wtc fires. the one meridian plaza fire was even worse. and the caracas fire was 26 floors of burnt out shell.

what does that tell you?

(besides, they weren't jumbo jets. a 747 is a jumbo jet, the 757/767 is just a widebody.)

[Dookus]

23. OK

not jumbo jets. Ya got me there.

Are you watching the Madrid fire? Do you see all the bent steel? They're afraid it's going to collapse, and there was no impact damage to that structure.

Yes, the Empire State building was hit by a B-25 bomber, with a cruising speed of 230 mph. Here's one:




Not quite a widebody passenger jet.

The fact is, people with actual expertise in this field understand very well that the WTC collapsed because of the impact and subsequent fire. A lot of people here seem to be experts in what happens when large planes hit large buildings, but I'll go with the REAL experts.

[Griffy]

31. Im a mechanical engineer, and I've seen both sides...

and it is HIGHLY likly the the planes caused the collapes. The fact that the fire required was super hot is not a problem since such superheated fire are now know to exist and are being studied. See University of MD at College Park has a Fire Engineering school, and I went to the ME school with these ppl. The pentagon damage is more suspect. Besides.. the evidence of planes hitting the towers is pretty conclusive!

[robertpaulsen]

53. Griffy, as a mechanical engineer, what do you think of WTC7 collapse?

There you have a 47 story structure that was not struck by either of the planes that struck the north and south towers yet collapsed 8 hours later. I believe there is another post on this thread with a link to that collapse. Do you think a superheated fire could have brought it down or is a deliberate detonation more likely?

[Griffy]

69. Not as much info... The studies I saw examined...

the wreckage of the WTC towers, this is were you can see the evidence if the mechanical failrure of the bolts holding the floors in place. Clear evidence that on the floors hit by the plane, the fireproofing insulation had been stripped from the metal. Now.. WTC7 could have been struck, could have had foundation comprimised when the 2 110 story bldgs collapsed across the street. It could have had explosives inside, but I fail to see why that would be the default choice... if you had the explosives to down buildings.. why the planes? just blow it up!.. or target the planes to other not rigged targets. Any building near by could have been damaged, after all.. gravity is just a theory! ;)

[robertpaulsen]

75. I'm curious about your "foundation compromised" idea.

Are you talking about the debris from the twin towers collapse hitting the first few floors of WTC7, causing it to collapse? Wouldn't that cause the building to collapse immediately? Would a compromised foundation result in a straight collapse?

I'm not an engineer, but one thing I've never understood is why the detonation of buildings takes weeks to plan as far as setting up the explosive charges in appropriate places. Do we have to worry about the building tipping over into other buildings or would the detonated building just collapse in its own footprint regardless of where the charges are set?

[NecessaryOnslaught]

87. They did not share the same foundation

The WTC foundation was located 80 ft below ground level, attached to the smooth bedrock underlying manhattan. WTC 7 was built on ground level.

[bpilgrim]

76. you can say that again...

the evidence was hauled off to china and india to make tin cans, forks and such.

so i would love to see the source material for your claims... so far they sound like regurgitations of the 'official' theory that has been shoot full of holes but maybe you have new evidence that hasn't been examined by the global INTERNET community?

that WTC7 was CD'd just demonstrates that our gov had contingency plans to "pull" (self destruct) a building in an emergency AND if they had them in WTC7 they very well could have had WTC 1 & 2 wired as well.

i noticed you still haven't commented on the CLEAN COLLAPSE vs DIRTY COLLAPSE issue which is a very important aspect of these collapses but if you ever do please provide sources.

thank you :hi:

peace

[ashmanonar]

40. ok, ya got me there

i'm NOT a structural engineer. but are you? i know griffy claims to be (no offense griffy) but quite honestly, this is an anonymous internet message board.

why, i could be the queen of england.

i've heard a lot of stories too, like the demolition experts who saw the news clip of the buildings falling and went "wow, that was a great job" (not bush seeing the video and saying "wow, that's a bad pilot"...O.o). face it, it's extremely difficult to make a buillding collapse into it's own footprint just as THREE buildings did on 911...one that wasn't hit by anything.

i'm sorry, the whole scenario just doesn't fit in. something (or many things) is out of place there. and since there was no actual investigation, i'll take any scenario i'm given with a grain of salt, even the "official" scenario.

(besides, what i'm concerned about isn't that planes hit the wtc towers, but rather that they took the buildings down. i've seen the "no planes" theory too, and i find it just a tad ludicrous. yes, there were planes, whether remote-controlled or piloted by "actual" terrorists...but why would the buildings fall bc of some airplanes hitting them near the top?)

and why do supermajorities of people around the globe believe that bush had something to do with the jets hitting the buildings, and only a minority in america do?

[bpilgrim]

24. here's an earlier building, only steel reinforced, that withstood MUCH

greater forces and temperatures yet didn't completely colapse...


and heres a modern one, with thick steel columns throughout that wasn't even struck by a plane that fell in it's own footprint...
http://news.globalfreepress.com/movs/wtc-7_collapse.mpg

peace

[bpilgrim]

21. a building that was only steel reinforced but stood up to much GREATER

FORCES





The dome was the Hiroshima Prefectural Industrial Promotion Hall, completed in April of 1915 under the design and supervision of Czech architect Jan Letzel, capturing the fancy of the citizens of Hiroshima with its characteristic green dome. The atomic bomb exploded at an altitude of 580 meters approximately 160 meters southeast of the Industrial Promotion Hall, instantly killing everyone inside the building which was seriously damaged and completely burned out. In December 1996 this structure was added to the UNESCO World Heritage List as a reminder to the entire world of horrors of the atomic bomb and a symbol of global peace.

source...
http://p-www.iwate-pu.ac.jp/~acro-ito/Japan_pics/Japan_HRS/imageidx.html


Standing a mere 160 meters northwest of the hypocenter, the building was heavily damaged by the blast, then burned from the ceiling down by fires ignited instantly by the heat rays. All occupants of the building perished. Because the force of the blast came from almost directly above, however, the section of the building under the central dome remained standing. The skeletal structure of the dome looming high above the ruins was a conspicuous landmark and became known locally as the A-bomb Dome.

source...
http://www.hiroshima-is.ac.jp/Hiroshima/historic1.htm

peace

[Joe the Revelator]

17. It wasn't the fire the brought down the WTC...

It was the big ass plane that smashed into its support structure that caused the building to fall down.

[ashmanonar]

19. the wtc was designed specifically to withstand a jet strike.

most buildings taller than a specific threshold are. hell, like i said in a post above, the empire state building was hit by a bomber in '45...and that's still standing.

if the crash had been lower, i might be more inclined to agree with you..but the hits were above the 3/4's mark of the buildings...that'd damage the outer structure and probably some of the beams, sure, but not damage the entire support structure.

[regnaD kciN]

22. It was designed to withstand a 707...

...in the days before widebody jets. The 767 is much larger.

And when they figured on a jet hitting the building, they were figuring a plane trying to land at JFK or LaGuardia, getting lost in bad weather. Such an airplane would be travelling at considerably lower speed, and carrying very little fuel.

Besides, if you research the attacks, you will find that the jets took out the entire central support column in WTC1 and about half of it in WTC2.

[bvar22]

37. The WTC was NOT centrally supported.

It was a new design. The support members were around the perimeter.

[ashmanonar]

42. well...

technically, it was both. an inner core of support columns, and outer support walls that kept it from swaying too much. a hollow square design, so to speak.

[Sterling]

45. Yes it was both and from what I understand

the central column was not destroyed by the initially strike. The official story claims it was caused by the heat.

[bpilgrim]

47. NONSENSE

it's CORE is were it derived most of it's vertical strength.

http://cooperativeresearch.org/phorum5/read.php?3,104,212

peace

[bvar22]

52. I think you are mistaken.

I'm not an engineer, but I have watched several documentaries on the WTC (and stayed at a Holiday Inn Express).

There were very few core members, and they mostly supported the elevator shafts and other mechanical equipment.

There were many closely spaced structural members around the perimeter of the building, and the floors were supported by truss beams running across the central spaces. The melting of these truss beams is what allowed the WTC to collapse inside its own footprint. This was a radical departure from the box like girder structures of the past.

[bpilgrim]

54. NO. the massive core was there and designed to hold several towers load

"it is clear that the core structures were designed to support several times the weight of each tower by themselves."


more...
http://911research.wtc7.net/mirrors/guardian/WTC/wtc-demolition.htm

peace

[bvar22]

63. Some of the material on that site is

very speculative, and constructed to support a pre-concieved conclusion.

He argues that steel beams,not trusses, MUST HAVE BEEN USED to support the floors and transmit lateral forces to the core supports.

This should be very easy to prove. As EVIL as the BFEE is, and as much as I distrust the Official Story of 911, the original blueprints, photographs taken during construction, testimony of the builders and construction workers could NOT have ALL been controlled and revised by the BFEE.

The argument that STEEL BEAMS MUST have been used to support the flooring lacks ANY support beyond some rather fuzzy math used on the web site.

[bpilgrim]

65. the TWIN TOWERS had MASSIVE steel cores

that was the point of my post in this thread... and as far as the steel beams goes for flooring support he backs it up with photos.

and WHY are the original blueprints SECRET and the known design elements distorted in official documents describing the collapse?

betcha we'll all know more about the ins-n-outs of the MJ trial and investigation than this.

face it we are being lied to.

peace

[bvar22]

66. I don't doubt that we are being LIED to.

LIHOP, and probably MIHOP.

BUT, The structure of the WTC was radically different from the standard box girder construction of almost all tall buildings like the one burning in Madrid. The differences are VISIBLE to the naked eye. The structure of the WTC WAS SUPPORTED BY CLOSELY SPACED SUPPORT BEAMS around the perimeter of the building, with some supporting beams in the core. Most of the interior was open space!

You keep claiming a massive steel core. There is certainly some support beams in the core, but it is far from massive. What percentage (from your own diagram (scale?)is the core support as opposed to the perimeter support? 15 %

THE STRUCTURE of WTC is DIFFERENT.
LOOK AT IT! Look at your own diagram.
Trust your own eyes, not the propaganda (from either side).

Use your own common sense, or build a model out of matchsticks. If this structure fails, it would collapse in upon itself, unlike the structure in Madrid.

My tin foil hat is well used.
I am not arguing AGAINST the possibility demo charges.

I AM saying that looking at the structure (and visible standing remains of the outer support shellafter the collapse, in my own judgement the WTC would probably collapse inward upon itself!

The WTC was a very different building, and cannot be compared to other more conventional structures.


{Tin Foil Hat ON}
This difference in itself may have made it a more attractive target to those in the know.

[bpilgrim]

67. at least i provide links...

where do you get your info and confidence?

sounds like the MSM meme but with no proof.

anyways... got a link?

peace

[ashmanonar]

71. build one out of matchsticks?

cuz yea, that's certainly as strong as riveted and welded steel...

:eyes:

but i think you may be partially right, considering that it is a fairly unique structure. if this was planned, all it would take is some (ok, a lot) of explosives in the inner core, and a plane strike up high...that would take it down easily.

the plane alone, no. it just wouldn't happen. unless the plane hit at the bottom, directly center...not up high (above the 3/4's mark, and off center)

but combination causes do make a lot of sense.

[regnaD kciN]

79. You are mistaken...

Read the new book 102 Minutes by Dwyer & Flynn. It gives a detailed account of the WTC attacks, including how the construction of the towers left them vulnerable.

[ashmanonar]

20. besides...

the bush story says that it was a jet-fuel fed fire that brought them down...do you hate freedom? ;)

[vpigrad]

25. Sigh

> the bush story says that it was a jet-fuel fed fire

(with sarcasm, for the people with the broken sarcasm detectors)No, we're not allowed to disagree with Bush, especially here.

WTF is up with so many people that want to prevent the investigation of what really happened on 9/11? We all saw how fast Bush literally put the scrap steel on a fast boat to China before it could be investigated. Ever ask yourself why? Ever ask you self why there's never been any evidence that a plane hit the Pentagon?

[Dookus]

1. No, I've never asked myself that

because there's plenty of evidence a plane hit the pentagon, including plenty of eye-witnesses and lots of plane debris, despite what the conspiracy theorists say.

[Joe the Revelator]

30. There is MORE then enough evidence that the pentagon was hit by a plane...

I choose to not focus on things outside the realm of possiablity, but to look at 9/11 in a rational way in order to see who really screwed it up.

[Sterling]

43. I don't have a decisive opinion on the DC attack. I do know

There should be some video footage of that attack, and there is none. I am still waiting for proof either way.


Looking at this situation rationally means considering all possibilities including the official story and requiring proof for all scenarios and assertions.

[ashmanonar]

46. indeed! n/t

[vpigrad]

64. More then?

Don't you mean more than?

Where is this evidence? I've never seen it. Why is it hidden? Some repukes used to claim there were people that saw it happened. They've never been interviewed on TV. If they exist, why aren't they allowed to speak? It's a much better guess that they don't exist at all.

[Joe the Revelator]

84. Do some research, there were plenty of eyewitness accounts

http://urbanlegends.about.com/library/blflight77w.htm


and a grammar slam? seriously?

[ashmanonar]

33. i ask myself every day.

ya know, it's part of my waking up. first i ask myself if bush is dictator, then i ask myself why there were no investigations...

[Sterling]

39. Too many people refuse to see the Bush gang for what they are.

It is as simple as that. We are not taught to look at our leaders like we look at the leaders of other nations throughout history.

It is basically the can't happen here stigma. Looking at our own leaders that critically is offensive to the average Americans mindset.

[ashmanonar]

44. it's kinda sad really.

america has gone down the road to factionalism, and sectarianism...jefferson and madison must be rolling in their graves right now. they tried to avoid this.

i think what would be best for america would be for political parties to be dissolved, and for candidates to run on their ideas and "political" character (not their personal character, although that could be useful)

having 2 parties just so they can snipe at each other or get folded in with each other (as the democratic party has been for a few years) is lunacy. it's asking for a one party gov't to arise.

[Sterling]

48. It's terrifying. We have given these monsters far more power than Hitler

ever dreamed of having.

[ashmanonar]

51. yep.

the only way to fight this is to expose them to the world for what they really are, and that means getting down to the bottom of the 911 "attacks". if we just assume that the official story is right, without studying it ourselves, we're complicit in letting them take power.

[bpilgrim]

26. no plane hit WTC7

and even if what you say is true...

why did they collapse so cleanly?

how many types collapses of steel buildings do you know that result in a CLEAN COLLAPSE in its own footprint?

i know of only TWO...

1. Design Flaw (usually occurs early in a buildings life, during construction or shortly after)
2. CD

http://news.globalfreepress.com/movs/wtc-7_collapse.mpg
http://news.globalfreepress.com/movs/wtc7.swf

peace

[DoYouEverWonder]

27. Madrid Skyscraper Fire Burns Into 2nd Day

February 13, 2005

MADRID, Spain (AP) -- Firefighters shot jets of water on one of Madrid's tallest office buildings for a second day Sunday, fighting to control a fiery orange blaze that began the night before and threatened to collapse the 32-story skyscraper.

The morning light exposed the damage from the spectacular fire that lit up the night and attracted thousands of onlookers. The top floors were little more than charred steel twisted into destroyed shapes. Everything else was burned away.

"We are battling Madrid's most important fire in its history," said mayor Alberto Ruiz-Gallardon, speaking from the scene Sunday morning. "The situation right now is still of high risk. It will take hours until this fire is declared under control."

A filmy soot covered nearby sidewalks and buildings, and the smell of burnt metal hung in the air. At its peak, temperatures reached 1,440 degrees Fahrenheit, said Javier Sanz, chief of Madrid's firefighters.


http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/international/AP-Spain-Building-Fire.html?

Amazing the building is still standing, despite the fact that the fire consumed most of the building and burnt longer and hotter than the WTC fires.

Now tell me again why WTC7 fell?

[ashmanonar]

35. EXACTLY!

according to bush-logic, the caracas building should be vaporized into tiny grains of dust, in a big pile on the ground.

[Sterling]

41. Don't forget this link as well:

http://shadowgov.info/video_wtc7.html

[bpilgrim]

49. agreed, MUST SEE VIDEO!

thanks for sharing :toast:

peace

[Sterling]

38. That is not what the 9-11 report says.

You should get familiar with the "official story" on it's face it's bullshit.

[AZCat]

80. The 9-11 report? How about the ongoing NIST investigation?

For reference, here's what the latest update to the NIST investigation says regarding the collapses of WTC 1 & 2.

Leading Hypothesis for Collapse of WTC 1

The following chronological sequence of major events led to the eventual collapse of WTC 1; specific load redistribution paths and damage scenarios are being refined to determine the probable collapse sequence:

Aircraft impact damage to perimeter columns, mainly on the North face, resulted in redistribution of column loads, mostly to the adjacent perimeter columns and to a lesser extent to the core columns.

After breaching the building’s perimeter, the aircraft continued to penetrate into the building, damaging floor framing, core columns, and fireproofing. Loads on the damaged columns were redistributed to other intact core and perimeter columns mostly via the floor systems and to a lesser extent via the hat truss.

The subsequent fires, influenced by the impact damaged fireproofing condition:
•Softened and buckled the core columns and caused them to shorten, resulting in a downward displacement of the core relative to the perimeter which led to the floors (1) pulling the perimeter columns inward, and (2) transferring vertical loads to the perimeter columns.
•Softened the perimeter columns on the South face and also caused perimeter column loads to increase significantly due to restrained thermal expansion.

Due to the combined effects of heating on the core and perimeter columns, the South perimeter wall bowed inwards, and highly stressed sections buckled.

The section of the building above the impact zone began tilting to the South as the bowed South perimeter columns buckled, and instability rapidly progressed horizontally across the entire South face and then across the adjacent East and West faces.

The change in potential energy due to downward movement of building mass above buckles columns exceeded the strain energy that could be absorbed by the structure.

Leading Hypothesis for Collapse of WTC 2

The following chronological sequence of major events led to the eventual collapse of WTC 2; specific load redistribution paths and damage scenarios are being refined to determine the probable collapse sequence:

Aircraft impact damage to perimeter columns mainly on the South face,
resulted in redistribution of column loads, mostly to the adjacent perimeter columns and to a lesser extent to the core columns.

After breaching the building’s perimeter, the aircraft continued to penetrate into the building, damaging floor framing, core columns, and fireproofing. Loads on the damaged columns were redistributed to other intact core and perimeter columns mostly via the floor systems and to a lesser extent via the hat truss.

The subsequent fires, influenced by the impact damaged fireproofing condition:
•Caused significant sagging of floors on the East side which induced the floors to pull the perimeter columns inward on the East face.
•Softened and buckled the core columns on the East side and caused them to shorten, which transferred significant additional load to the perimeter columns on the East face primarily through the floor system and to a lesser extent through the hat truss.
•Softened some of the perimeter columns that were exposed to high temperatures towards the northern half of the East face.

Due to the additional loads on the perimeter columns on the East face and the inward pulling of those perimeter columns, the East perimeter wall bowed inwards, and highly stressed sections buckled.

The section of the building above the impact zone began tilting to the East and South as both the East perimeter columns and the impact-
damaged South perimeter columns buckled, and instability rapidly
progressed horizontally across both faces and across the North face.

The change in potential energy due to downward movement of building mass above the buckled columns exceeded the strain energy that could be absorbed by the structure. Global collapse then ensued.
</quote>


Now what part of this are you claiming is bullshit? Please - be specific.

[leftchick]

28. Fears of collapse as fire ravages huge Madrid office block

http://www.abc.net.au/news/newsitems/200502/s1301828.htm

A pall of brown smoke dominated Madrid's skyline early on Sunday as officials said that a 31-floor office building in a central neighbourhood could collapse after the biggest fire in the Spanish capital's history.

With the exception of three firefighters who were affected by fumes, nobody was known to have been hurt in the fire at the Windsor Tower, which broke out around 11:00pm Saturday (local time) when the building was empty.

The fire was believed to have been started by a short circuit on the 21st floor.

"The situation is critical," said Mirardo Tudela, deputy chief of the Madrid fire department at a televised press conference. "The structure of the building is unstable."

Madrid Mayor Alberto Riuz Gallardon said it was "the biggest fire in Madrid's history."



People watch as Windsor building burns in downtown Madrid. Squadrons of firefighters battled a huge blaze which broke out at the office block in central Madrid, spreading through several floors and forcing the evacuation of dozens of families living nearby.

[bpilgrim]

36. will it be a CLEAN collapse

or a DIRTY collapse :shrug:

peace

[ashmanonar]

50. now THAT'S the kind of fire i see bringing down a building

not the tall columns of (black) smoke (and little visible fire) from the wtc towers, or the 3 or 4 spot areas that are burning in wtc7.

[bpilgrim]

56. and it's a DIRTY collapse vs a CLEAN collapse... ----------> PHOTO

http://images.globalfreepress.com

A fire described as the worst in Madrid's history ravaged a 32-story skyscraper in the Spanish capital's financial district on Sunday, causing no injuries, but the tower stayed upright despite fears of collapse.

More than 200 firefighters worked all night to quell the spectacular blaze in the Windsor building, the city's eighth largest tower that looms over the northern financial district.

"We have confronted the most extensive fire that this city has ever had," Madrid Mayor Alberto Ruiz Gallardon said.

Seven firefighters were treated for smoke inhalation. The flames had died down by Sunday afternoon but the fire was not declared under control.


discuss...
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=102x1234901


another dirty collapse, from a building that experienced more extreme heat and stress than any of the buildings on 911, that is only partially steel reinforced... japans first such building and the only one to remain standing after 8:15 a.m. Aug. 6th, 1945

psst... pass the word

peace

[ashmanonar]

62. they'll have to demolish that buliding themselves, so they don't have it

collapsing on other buildings in teh area. that is one fucked up office building.

[Moderator]

57. Kick

[Placebo]

58. Madrid's Biggest Fire Destroys Skyscraper

A fire described as the worst in Madrid's history ravaged a 32-story skyscraper in the Spanish capital's financial district on Sunday, causing no injuries, but the tower stayed upright despite fears of collapse.

More than 200 firefighters worked all night to quell the spectacular blaze in the Windsor building, the city's eighth largest tower that looms over the northern financial district.

"We have confronted the most extensive fire that this city has ever had," Madrid Mayor Alberto Ruiz Gallardon said.

Seven firefighters were treated for smoke inhalation. The flames had died down by Sunday afternoon but the fire was not declared under control.

More...

[bpilgrim]

59. Classic partial DIRTY COLLAPSE

why did our steel buldings fall in their OWN FOOTPRINTs?

http://news.globalfreepress.com/movs/wtc-7_collapse.mpg
http://news.globalfreepress.com/movs/wtc7.swf

MUST SEE short info-video on WTC7...
http://shadowgov.info/video_wtc7.html

peace

[Lautremont]

60. It's great that no one was injured.

These things usually happen to orphanages and old folks' homes - very glad it happened in a financial building if it had to happen at all.

[Warpy]

61. Yes, and on a weekend

Now for the conspriacy theorists to start working on it...

[DoYouEverWonder]

68. No conspiracy - Shit Happens

are should I say fires happen. Of course, in any fire arson needs to be ruled out and Spain certainly has their own problems with terrorism.

What is interesting with this fire is the fact that despite extensive structural damage and a very hot fire, that burnt for a long time, the friggin building is still standing.

Now tell me again, why did WTC7 collapse?

[ashmanonar]

70. yep.

i honestly think this is either an accident or an intentional arson (maybe basque?) but certainly not "middle-eastern" inspired terror.

as said before. shit happens. fires burn down buildings without having been set, and people are killed in the streets by simple crime or accident...more people die in cars than anything else in america, but nobody rails against cars as horrible killers...

[July]

83. Friends there told me the building was unoccupied.

El Mundo says they have been working on the building for over a year to renovate, add two floors, replace windows, etc.

[robertpaulsen]

72. My wife and I were talking about it this morning.

The Madrid fire, WTC7, and a conversation with my wife this morning.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=104x3105741

[Endangered Specie]

73. Must have been some good engineers who designed that...

and thank goodness no one was hurt, that is the most important thing.

Even if it does remain 'standing'... It will have to be demolished. :(

[Endangered Specie]

74. A lot of pictures here:

http://www.elmundo.es/documentos/2005/02/windsor/album1/index.html

[candy]

77. Breaking news? It was on the news last night for heaven's sake.

It broke 24 hours ago.

[bpilgrim]

78. it was posted here more than 24 hours ago

Feb-12-05 08:34 PM

chill

peace

[candy]

85. I have what is known as a quick posting problem----Thanks!

Do the mods ever remove a topic from Breaking News? Does it stay there as long as the posts keep coming?

Haven't been around here long,which I'm sure you figured out all by yourself. LOL