Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Please explain why the WTC blasts have such contrast in coloration.

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » September 11 Donate to DU
 
demodewd Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-27-03 04:18 PM
Original message
Please explain why the WTC blasts have such contrast in coloration.
Why is there such a difference in coloration between the two WTC tower explosions? WTC1-North Tower WTC2-South Tower
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
mikehiggins Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-27-03 04:23 PM
Response to Original message
1. One is a fireball of exploding jet fuel
The other is smoke and debris being forced outward by an explosion within the building. If you look at the greyish one, which I think is tower 2, you can see reddish patches that are the concealed flames of that explosion.

I could honestly do without seeing anymore of those photos, thank you.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
beyurslf Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-27-03 04:29 PM
Response to Reply #1
2. Then maybe you shouldn't go into a thread that says
"Please explain why the WTC blasts have such contrast in coloration"

in the title. One could assume it may have grahic pictures of Sept 11 just by reading that.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
GAspnes Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-27-03 04:29 PM
Response to Original message
3. impossible to say
are they pictures of the same moment in time?

Digital or film camera? If film, what type and speed? If digital, what make and model, how many pixels, what smoothing algorithm?

Was one taken with a UV filter, or a blue filter? What shutter speeds? What lenses? (Was one a zoom?)

You can easily get this kind of color-balance variation in two photos of identical subjects under identical conditions, depending on the equipment and film used.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
demodewd Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-27-03 04:44 PM
Response to Reply #3
5. Yellow color
I seen video of the WTC plane impact and the yellowish color of the explosion is observable immediately as it penetrates through the second wall.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JailForBush Donating Member (753 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-27-03 04:38 PM
Response to Original message
4. Also, there was a giant face hiding in one of the explosions! N/T
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LARED Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-27-03 05:10 PM
Response to Original message
6. Why should they be the same coloration? n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
demodewd Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-27-03 05:50 PM
Response to Reply #6
7. Because...
Because both planes would be rich in fuel volume and both would have had similar quantities of fuel..hitting structures of equal physical properties.The North Towwer explosion lacks the characteristic color of a kerosene rich explosion.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LARED Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-27-03 06:17 PM
Response to Reply #7
8. And you should consider that
The towers were hit at different angles. The north tower was hit nearly dead center so likely most of the fuel stayed in the building whereas the south tower was stuck at an angle and a lot of fuel was blown out of the side.

Also when you watch the video of the north tower impact if you snap an image just a few moment after the one you have posted, it looks a lot more like the south tower as there is much more red. It also appears that a lot more dust and debris from the north tower was blown out of the tower in the fire ball verses the south tower.

The constraints that effect the shape and color of the fireballs work both ways. Some cause them to look similar and some cause them to be different. I see nothing compelling that tells me they must look the same. I would guess if you're looking for a smoking gun to rationalize some CT, you ran out of ammo.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
demodewd Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-27-03 07:40 PM
Response to Reply #8
9. If
... you analyze the South Tower crash you realize that there is never a split second where the coloration of the expolsion deviates from that seen instantaneously on the footage.Refer to the ghostplane video on Serendipity. It is characteristic of a charge or bomb induced explosion to observe the type of coloration exhibited by the North Tower impact followed by a darkened and yellow color quality when the fuel is secondarily ignited. If the explosion is exclusively induced by fuel,the fuel would expand from all angles and certainly would expand to the gaping hole created by impact.But the possibility of a pure fuel induced explosion in the North Tower is obviously preempted by charges. Considering the accountable weight of fuel load of your "alleged" airliners a lot of fuel load would have spilled out into the open no matter what angle the plane hit the building.And there certainly was a lot exploding fuel spilling out of the entry wound of the South Tower hit...wasn't there???
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LARED Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-28-03 07:49 AM
Response to Reply #9
17. HUH?
you analyze the South Tower crash you realize that there is never a split second where the coloration of the expolsion deviates from that seen instantaneously on the footage.

I've looked at it many times and it changes color. It'd different than the south tower, but it changes color.

Refer to the ghostplane video on Serendipity. It is characteristic of a charge or bomb induced explosion to observe the type of coloration exhibited by the North Tower impact followed by a darkened and yellow color quality when the fuel is secondarily ignited.

It is characteristic of a charge or bomb induced explosion????

Really, how do you know that. Secondarily ignited??????? What?


If the explosion is exclusively induced by fuel,the fuel would expand from all angles and certainly would expand to the gaping hole created by impact.

Is there something in those images that makes you think this didn't happen?

But the possibility of a pure fuel induced explosion in the North Tower is obviously preempted by charges.

Obviously preempted by charges? Huh? What charges?

Considering the accountable weight of fuel load of your "alleged" airliners a lot of fuel load would have spilled out into the open no matter what angle the plane hit the building.And there certainly was a lot exploding fuel spilling out of the entry wound of the South Tower hit...wasn't there???

Alleged airliners?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
zbdent Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-27-03 10:54 PM
Response to Original message
10. No expert here, but this might be of value
I recall that there were plenty of cameras on the two towers after the first was hit.

There is very little footage of the 1st tower getting hit.

I think that the first plane going in was centered more on the tower than the second plane.

I recall seeing the footage of the second one hitting, and I thought that I saw the nose of the plane coming out of the side of the building. I thought that this happened because the second plane hit the building at the corner, not straight on.

I would then believe that the first (grayer) explosion was that way because the fireball would have pushed out a lot of debris in the initial explosion, while the second (yellower) explosion had less impediment to the explosive jet fuel, and therefore created a more spectacular fireball.

Like I said, no expert. But a line of thinking to consider.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
OudeVanDagen Donating Member (256 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-27-03 11:31 PM
Response to Original message
11. What it is NOT
is explosives.

In 1940, for over 12 non-stop hours, the Nazis bombed Coventry England and leveled The Cathedral of St. Michael. Explosive residue is still .... 60 plus years later ... is still easily found in the area and on recovered religious items. Same holds true for areas of London and Berlin. In the 60s, the Atlantic City NJ landmark Deauville Hotel was brought down by controlled demolition and trucked away to landfills ... where explosive residue is still detectable. Soil, recovered structural components and other residues from these areas are even used to test detection methods and appliances. While the investigation still remains open .... many tons to recheck and recheck again ... absolutley no traces of explosives have been found in WTC rubble.

What it is not is explosives.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
plaguepuppy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-28-03 12:23 AM
Response to Reply #11
12. Same old song
Edited on Sun Dec-28-03 12:23 AM by plaguepuppy
"While the investigation still remains open .... many tons to recheck and recheck again ..."

No, that's not actually true. You have some supporting documentation to suggest that any of the debis was checked for explosive residue, anything at all other than your own repeated assertions? How about just one little link, rather than your usual pattern of repeating the same unsubstantiated claims in progressively more angry and insulting terms?


“Some 185,101 tons of structural steel have been hauled away from Ground Zero. Most of the steel has been recycled as per the city's decision to swiftly send the wreckage to salvage yards in New Jersey. The city's hasty move has outraged many victims' families who believe the steel should have been examined more thoroughly. Last month, fire experts told Congress that about 80% of the steel was scrapped without being examined because investigators did not have the authority to preserve the wreckage.”

N.Y. Daily News, 4/16/02

So 80% of the wreckage went directly to scrap without so much as a cursory inspection, and of the rest only ~120 pieces (out of how many thousand?) were actually preserved for further study.


New York authorities' decision to ship the twin towers' scrap to recyclers has raised the anger of victims' families and some engineers who believe the massive girders should be further examined to help determine how the towers collapsed. But New York Mayor Mike Bloomberg insisted there are better ways to study the tragedy of September 11. "If you want to take a look at the construction methods and the design, that's in this day and age what computers do," said Bloomberg, a former engineering major. "Just looking at a piece of metal generally doesn't tell you anything."

From Eastday.com, 1/24/02 http://www.china.org.cn/english/2002/Jan/25776.htm

I know, let's test the computer simulation for explosive residue!

More on the site "cleanup": http://members.aol.com/erichuf/PainfulQuestions_1.pdf
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
OudeVanDagen Donating Member (256 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-28-03 01:12 AM
Response to Reply #12
13. You trust your "links" .....
..... if you want to PP ....but I'll trust my eyesight.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DulceDecorum Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-28-03 02:50 PM
Response to Reply #13
18. Were you THERE?
And how good is your eyesight?
And why should anyone in their right mind believe YOU?

How do you know that there were no EXPLOSIVES?
The last time the WTC had a problem it was because EXPLOSIVES had been rigged.
I am ABSOLUTELY CERTAIN that ten minutes before the 1993 blast,
WTC security would have sworn affidavits and passed lie detector tests
declaring that there were no explosives in thw WTC and yet it then had a huge crater which PROVED that there WERE explosives in the WTC.

The only way YOU can be so adamant about explosives is if you were
A) personally involved or
B) know about other ways to bring the structure down.

And you still haven't told us what you meant when you used the term "elastomeric temperatures."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
OudeVanDagen Donating Member (256 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-28-03 05:48 PM
Response to Reply #18
19. FYI: The 93
blast .... in the public parking garage under the Vista Hotel .... was in a parked yellow Ryder rental van ... not "rigged" to the buildings in any manner that you are suggesting.

Now as to 9-11: As stated before ... several of us responded .... and as stated numerous times before ... there have been absolutley NO traces of any explosive compounds found.

Anyone making a statement that there WERE explosives bears the burden of proof. Where is it? Where is the residue? If explosive residue has lasted since WW2 in bustling cities ... it will then still be on WTC structural members and rubble. It is not. Don't give the excuse that WTC evidence was destroyed. That is utter nonsense initiated by photo-op publicity seekers adding fuel to fire.

Also: Elastomeric temps WERE defined by me .... but isn't it really something anyone with an elementary school level of science would know?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Abe Linkman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-29-03 12:16 PM
Response to Reply #19
29. Oude: May I ask a favor of you? It'll only take a minute of your time.
Elastomeric temps WERE defined by me .... but isn't it really something anyone with an elementary school level of science would know?

Would you kindly define it once more. I've been unable to locate the message where you say you defined it. Thank you.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
OudeVanDagen Donating Member (256 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-29-03 03:12 PM
Response to Reply #29
33. Post #135 ...
... in thread "Why cell phones blah blah " .... will have ET defined for you.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RH Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-30-03 06:53 AM
Response to Reply #33
39. i.e.
ET is the where a structural member transitions from a rigid state.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=125&topic_id=4244&mesg_id=4561&page=

Even without that rough definition the intended meaning was clear enough to me from the start as a humble observer with no pertinent academic or professional expertise to profess.

So not for the first time then would the tedium superimposed by sundry hecklers perhaps allow some insight into their own inadequacy while adding nothing at all to my understanding of the reality of the subject.

Regardless of the embarassment do they never fear to be wasting their own time, let alone anybody else's?

"The single biggest problem in communication is the illusion that it has taken place" (George Bernard Shaw)

:toast:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Abe Linkman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-30-03 11:58 AM
Response to Reply #39
41. Your words help explain why certain messages seem oddly obtuse.
"no pertinent academic or professional expertise to profess."

Thanks for the warning.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RH Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-31-03 02:35 PM
Response to Reply #41
44. and your qualification is
...?

:shrug:

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-02-04 12:37 PM
Response to Reply #39
47. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-02-04 12:56 PM
Response to Reply #47
48. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-02-04 07:37 PM
Response to Reply #48
52. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
LARED Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-02-04 08:48 PM
Response to Reply #52
53. Well, it's really quite simple
Edited on Fri Jan-02-04 08:49 PM by LARED
I never passed a specific structural engineering class because I never took one. In a mechanical engineering program it is not typically a required class.

Now back to my inquiry. I must again tell you my knowledge of HAC is non-existent. You on the other hand you seem to have the inside scoop. Please fill me in on it's properties.

And again what does it have to do with the WTC? I also have to admit that I was unaware there were any concrete structural members in the towers above ground.

Please enlighten me.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-29-03 01:19 PM
Response to Reply #19
32. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
OudeVanDagen Donating Member (256 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-29-03 03:17 PM
Response to Reply #32
34. You got it wrong ...
Your quote : "And what do you mean buy asking for proof and then turning around and claiming that the fact that structure was destroyed should not be used as an excuse?" is NOT what I said. I'm not turning anything around.

What I said was do not the use "evidence was destroyed" excuse. Show me where explosive residue was found in the WTC rubble of 9-11. You have the burden of proof. Not me. Prove it. You can't. I know it, you know it. Unless you hide behind your nonsense "evidence was destroyed" excuse.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
plaguepuppy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-02-04 07:17 PM
Response to Reply #34
51. For the umpteenth time
To the best of my knowledge none of the debris has been tested for explosive residue - certainly nothing about this appeared in the FEMA/ASCE report, and I have not run across it in my perusal of the NIST reports. If the testing hasn't been done, why would the "burden of proof" fall on me for somehow failing to do that testing? If you claim such testing was done then it is up to you to show that it had negative results. Is there a way to prove that secret testing with negative results wasn't done? That's the kind of negative that's impossible to prove by definition, so I'll leave it to you to find a counter-example.

And if it was crucial to do this testing, as I certainly believe, how is it not relevant that almost all the wreckage has already been recycled? They managed to preserve about 130 pieces of steel for further study, a small fraction of 1%, so I use "almost all" in utmost seriousness. This is more than just an excuse, it is the deliberate scrubbing of a crime scene.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
OudeVanDagen Donating Member (256 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-29-03 11:40 AM
Response to Reply #18
28. Also for DulceDecorum ...
... be aware that explosive residue is very easily detected ... it is, for example on the ore from mining operations ... in the water runoff from mining operations ... and in the tissues of plants and animals near mining operations. The amount of explosives used in mining ... or in quarries ... is small compared to the quanities of ore harvested ... yet the explosive reisdue is easily detectable.

Numerous air and dust samples of lower Manhattan were taken ... are being taken ... and results have been well published ... even appearing here at DU ... results were from private and government testing .... so where are the explosive residues?

Honestly, no offense but the problem I'm seeing is that some have chosen to believe a conspiracy no matter what ... even by rewriting history ... specifically the 1993 event.

In 1993 the driver entered the parking level ramp, obtained a ticket from an automated gate, parked the van and left the scene. What security? The only persons in the area were other drivers and a lone cashier at the exit gate.

Can't rewrite history and change facts to suit a theory. Situational ethics is a nasty republican trait.

Rigged? Not then ... not now.

Yeah I'm old ... but the eyesight's real good ... good enough to know a history rewrite when I see one.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
markses Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-04-04 04:08 AM
Response to Reply #18
59. I was there
There was a jet fuel explosion outside the North Tower - immediately after the moment captured in that photograph. It was certainly much smaller than the South Tower explosion, but it sure as shit happened and it was most certainly the same "color." I'll trust my lying eyes on this one.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
plaguepuppy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-28-03 10:31 PM
Response to Reply #13
23. ....but I'll trust my eyesight.
Edited on Sun Dec-28-03 11:23 PM by plaguepuppy
So your claim that all the WTC debris was tested for explosive residue was based on your own personal observation? Please tell us more.

Otherwise it might be interesting to know of some published source of information (and yes, these days that usually translates into a link ) that substantiates your claim. If, as I believe, that testing has never been done then your repeated assertions of negative findings becomes something of a joke.

And in that case the problem of so many pictures of what look very much like explosions becomes more problematic. Here's a page of pictures I've put together to show why the concept of an explosion might come to mind:

http://www.plaguepuppy.net/public_html/gallery/Explosions.htm

And a video of what look remarkably, how shall I say "explosive" events:

http://www.plaguepuppy.net/public_html/collapse%20update/so_tower_slow-mo.mpeg

After all, if there were even a hint that explosives were involved, why on earth wouldn't every scrap of the debris be tested for explosive residue, and the results duly announced?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
OudeVanDagen Donating Member (256 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-29-03 08:41 AM
Response to Reply #23
27. Choices
As previously stated by me, standard protocols include the testing for explosives. It's SOP .... and it IS public. Daily press confrences and press releases were offered. C-SPAN and ALL the major news networks filmed and televised the efforts on Staten Island. Several news outlets televised the evaulations at JFK, Holland Hook, and Gravesend. They were allowed unlimited access as some select pieces were trucked from NJ to JFK for further evaluation. One major cable news agency just televised a story where they followed a structural member from NJ storage to it's erection at a memorial site. The story included how the pieces in storage were evaluated for imact damage, stress related collapse damages, and for explosives and asbestos. I don't know how it can get anymore public than it has been. Obviously some people have chosen to ignore these news items.

Choices ... it's all about choices ... what people chose to see .. choose to read .. choose to ignore .. choose to believe.

No doubt honest logistical mistakes made very early during the recovery efforts resulted in the misdirection of debris, and no doubt some chose to make these human errors steps appear as a cover-up. No doubt some untrained and inexperienced persons with media access chose to say the cutting and removal of debris during search and rescue efforts were destruction of evidence. And there's no doubt someone will choose to make these minor insignificant honest molehill sized mistakes and choose to turn them into a mountain sized conspiracy. A conspiracy that, if you choose to belive in conspiracy, happened while thousands of volunteers and professional participants chose to watch in silence.

As stated before, every protocol used for structural collapse was implemented ... and is still in use. There were no choices here. It was SOP. Initial size-up, establishment of evidence grids, marking recovered items, storage, itdentification, testing, and so on. No doubt there were command and control issues between the agencies, but despite these well publicized battles between those agency heads, every effort was made by the ground troops to do their jobs right. Time was needed to iron out these problems, but those problems and delays don't make a conspiracy. Unless someone chooses to do so.

Many political leaders were forced to make statements. They were provided the best up-to-the-minute information; but what came out of their mouths was clearly filtered, summarized, and always overly simplified for the public ... by someone other than who provided it. Someone handling the politician chose to do that. Errors and misunderstandings abound from these simplfications, but it is not conspiracy.

Every possible protocol is still being followed. Attention is being given to every detail. A hair, for example affixed to a small piece of burned cloth is checked to see if it's human or animal. Cross checked if human .. even checked for matches to family pets of lost ones if animal. No stone is being left unturned .. unless you choose to believe otherwise.

There has been absolutley no evidence of explosives. I'll choose to believe the published reports, the news articles, the news shows, and my eyes. You believe your conspirarcy links if you choose to.






Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TrogL Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-03-04 02:47 PM
Response to Reply #27
55. At last, a voice of sanity
Welcome to DU and conspiracy central
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DulceDecorum Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-28-03 05:52 PM
Response to Reply #11
20. Been there, done that.
Just in case you have forgotten,
the FBI has problems.
http://www.karisable.com/crlebcfbi.htm

Robert Mueller, the current head operator of the FBI has been linked to the Boston mob via one Sammy the Bull Gravano.
http://www.azcentral.com/news/specials/bull/
The FBI scandal was investigated for two years by the House Government Reform Committee, then under the chairmanship of Congressman Dan Burton (R-IN), who introduced legislation to remove Hoover’s name from FBI headquarters as a result of what he learned.
But the scandal gets worse than that. When Burton tried to acquire official records on the case from the Justice Department, he was stonewalled, and Attorney General John Ashcroft persuaded President George W. Bush to invoke “executive privilege” to block the committee’s subpoenas. This was President Bush’s first, and thus far only, use of executive privilege to withhold information from the Congress. Some think Bush is trying to protect current FBI Director Robert Mueller, who was in the U.S. Attorney’s office in Boston during part of the relevant time period. The confrontation with Burton prompted columns on the controversy by William Safire and Robert Novak.
http://www.aim.org/publications/aim_report/2003/7.html

Sammy was involved in many rackets.
http://www.thesmokinggun.com/gravano/gravano.html

Sammy was professionally
http://www.laborers.org/Gravano.html
and he was also personally involved in the demolition business in New York city.

The last two murders Gravano was involved in came in 1990. The first was Eddie Garofalo not to be confused with Gravano's brother-in-law Edward Garafola. A demolition contractor known as "Cousin Eddie," in 1985 he illegally demolished four buildings in Times Square in the middle of the night. On August 9 Garofalo was shot to death by Gravano crewmembers in front of his Brooklyn home.
http://www.crimelibrary.com/gangsters_outlaws/mob_bosses/gravano/notches_16.html?sect=15

Eventually Sammy broke out of the New England small time and into the international BIG LEAGUE.

Gravano was transferred under heavy guard to the United States Marine base in Quantico, Virginia. There he signed his witness deal and spent weeks working with the government preparing his testimony for the trial.
http://www.crimelibrary.com/gangsters_outlaws/mob_bosses/gravano/rat_19.html?sect=15

After ratting out John Gotti, Sammy went of to Phoenix AZ where he re-opened his construction company called Marathon Development. This was used as a from for many and several illegal operations, presumably with the blessings of those in high office.
The Phoenix cops working outside the authority of the FBI collected evidence and busted Sammy once and for all. The news of this particular trifecta has not been well recieved in certain quarters.
http://www.commondreams.org/headlines01/1214-01.htm

Burton has subpoenaed more FBI documents, but Attorney General John Ashcroft has refused to supply them, and President Bush has backed Ashcroft up with an order of executive privilege. The White House maintains that airing the documents “would be contrary to the national interest.”
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2002/01/25/60minutes/main325595.shtml

Which brings us right back to September 11.
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=28501
http://www.commondreams.org/headlines02/0921-01.htm
Finally, the United States will use this moment of opportunity to extend the benefits of freedom across the globe.We will actively work to bring the hope of democracy, development, free markets, and free trade to every corner of the world. The events of September 11, 2001, taught us that weak states, like Afghanistan, can pose as great a danger to our national interests as strong states. Poverty does not make poor people into terrorists and murderers. Yet poverty, weak institutions, and corruption can make weak states vulnerable to terrorist networks and drug cartels within their borders.
http://usinfo.state.gov/topical/pol/terror/secstrat.htm

Gravano views his homicidal history in a cultural context, like the moral relativism of war.
"I watched a guy (on TV) who dropped a bomb on Hiroshima," he says. "Killed 100,000 people in one day. What's that about?"
http://www.azcentral.com/news/specials/bull/071899sammy1.html

OudeVanDagen,
you keep bringin up the Fresh Kills landfill, which is where much of the WTC rubble was taken.
Mob labour is known to have been used in the WTC cleanup.
Whatever those boys hauled off
will remained buried in that toxic dump and
nobody, as long as the perpetrators and the associates are in power, will ever be granted access to investigate that rubble.

Citing alleged mob ties, the city has sacked a construction firm owned by two former Staten Islanders and hired to help close the Fresh Kills landfill, but City Hall maintains the departure of Interstate Industrial Corp. should not delay the dump's closing.
<snip>
A Sanitation Department source said Interstate, which has a subsidiary in Rossville that had been supplying some of the materials for work at Fresh Kills, was bounced after the city Department of Investigation (DOI) disclosed the $100 million company has indirect ties to the Gambino crime family.
<snip>
Since May, he said, the DiTommasos have been cooperating with the New York City Trade Waste Commission on the operation of the company since the firm acquired Metropolitan Stone Corp., a transfer station for dirt and debris.
"They've provided detailed information on everything right down to checks issued for as little as $50," Ruvoldt said. "Clearly the Department of Sanitation's decision is unjustified."
Metropolitan was owned by a reputed member of the Gambino crime family, Mario Garafola, and controlled by his father, Edward Garafola, a fixture in the construction industry for more than two decades.
Edward Garafola is the brother-in-law of Mafia snitch Salvatore (Sammy the Bull) Gravano, the Graniteville mobster whose testimony put Gambino boss John Gotti away for life.
http://www.americanmafia.com/News/9-6-00_Landfill_Closing.html

Now everybody knows that the NYSE was in deep doo just before September 11, 2001 and anyone who doesn't agree with that still has to admit that the stock market has pretty much collapsed since then.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stock_market_downturn_of_2002

However almost nobody recalls that a certain bunch saw whole thing coming.
I believe we can blame Bush (or his cronies) for the stock market drop.
July 20th 2001, I got an e-mail, sent by an old friend, from my RW days.
This person is on the staff of a Republican Senator.
"Sell all stocks by fall. They are going to harvest that middle class money."
http://www.democraticunderground.com/forum_archive_html/DCForumID27/1564.html#11

And almost nobody recalls that on September 13, 2000, the SEC was hearing testimony concerning the forays of organized crime into the affairs of Wall Street.

Mob involvement on Wall Street is not new. As organized crime advanced into the white-collar arena, the stock market became one of its targets.2 Indeed, there is evidence that organized crime had made inroads on Wall Street back in the 1970's. (WTC buildings constructed in the 70s)
<snip>
Mob activity on Wall Street reportedly increased in the 1990's. On February 10, 1997, The New York Times reported that "Mafia crime families are switching increasingly to white-collar crimes" with a focus on "small Wall Street brokerage houses."13 According to The New York Times story, the Mafia's entry into the securities markets was spurred by its reported loss of $500 million a year in profits from the dissolution of its garbage-hauling cartels, and its reported loss of $50 million a year in profits following its eviction from the Fulton Fish Market.14
<snip>
The stock that was the subject of the manipulation was Transun International Airways, Inc. ("TSUN"), which traded on the Nasdaq OTC electronic bulletin board stock market. According to the indictment, TSUN purported to be a chartered airline; however, it never owned or operated any planes, never conducted any airline business, and never generated any revenues. The defendants were charged with gaining control of the company's stock at minimal cost, artificially inflating its price by touting it aggressively at Capital Planning and issuing spurious claims about the health of the fly-by-night company, and then unloading over $8 million worth of stock on unsuspecting customers. Froncillo, as well as four other defendants, plead guilty to the charges.
<snip>
Another major strike against organized crime in the securities markets came on March 3, 2000 when the U.S. Attorney for the Eastern District of New York indicted 19 people, including six with alleged ties to organized crime. The indictment alleged that a broker-dealer, White Rock Partners (later renamed State Street Capital Markets), working with brokers at several notorious boiler rooms, including J.W. Barclay & Co., A.R. Baron & Co., and D.H. Blair, engaged in microcap "pump and dump" manipulations. The indictment also alleged that the defendants most frequently relied on fraudulent Regulation S offerings to obtain their inventory of stock to manipulate. The six alleged organized crime members in the criminal enterprise are as follows:

Name Position Organized Crime Family

Frank Coppa Sr. Captain Bonanno
Edward Garafola Soldier Gambino (*****SAMMY's COUSIN EDDIE)
Eugene Lombardo Associate Bonanno
Ernest Montevecchi Soldier Genovese
Daniel Persico Associate Colombo
Joseph Polito Sr. Associate Gambino

The indictment alleges that the organized crime defendants, among other things, (i) resolved disputes relating to the hiring and retention of brokers, (ii) halted attempts by other members of organized crime to extort members of the criminal enterprise, and (iii) halted efforts to reduce the price of securities underwritten by White Rock and State Street through such techniques as short selling.
http://www.sec.gov/news/testimony/ts142000.htm

And this leads us right back to Phoenix AZ by way of Florida.

In the world of multimedia components, Phoenix-based SC&T International Inc. has carved out a small but significant niche. SC&T's products have won raves in the trade press, but working capital has not always been easy to come by. So in December, 1995, the company brought in Sovereign Equity Management Corp., a Boca Raton (Fla.) brokerage, to manage an initial public offering. ''We thought they were a solid second- or third-tier investment bank,'' says SC&T Chief Executive James L. Copeland.
http://www.businessweek.com/1996/51/b35061.htm
And if you are looking for a Texas connection, you are in luck.
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2000/06/21/national/main208009.shtml
http://www.azcentral.com/news/specials/bull/0807sammy07.html

We could say a whole lot more about the drug scene and Sammy Gravano, but we do not want to be called anti-semitic.

"There are a lot of Israeli criminals in the three major hubs, New York, Miami and Los Angeles, so they didn't have to reinvent the wheel," Mr. Abramovsky said. The Israelis also had good connections to Russian criminal gangs, which often serve as the Israelis' partners in the ecstasy business.
American officials started noticing the growing presence of Israelis on the ecstasy scene in the late 1990s. In July 1999, after a 21-month investigation, a joint federal-state organized crime-drug enforcement task force uncovered a smuggling operation that relied mostly on carriers of an unexpected nature in the drug business: young chasidic men. Some of them, dressed in the traditional long coats and hats, thought they were carrying diamonds, according to authorities. But others knew, or at least suspected, what their cargo was. Task force officials reported that more than one million pills had been brought into the country that way, with dealers racking up huge profits.
The young chasidim, most hailing from Williamsburg, Brooklyn, and Monsey, N.Y., were promised a free round trip to Europe and $1,500 for bringing back the pills, the authorities said. Some got $200 recruitment fees for bringing a friend into the ring.
<snip>
....It is too early to tell which group will dominate it in the long run.
If so, then the fact that names like Gravano are now allegedly involved may signal a new trend. The question, Mr. Abramovsky said, is whether Israeli criminals, who have a reputation for ruthlessness in the cities where they have been active, will prove forceful enough to maintain their market share.
http://www.forward.com/issues/2001/01.01.19/news3.html

Which brings us back full circle to the FBI and the problems of one Robert S. Mueller III.

Sammy Gravano’s state trial on 181 counts of conspiracy, drug distribution, and running a criminal enterprise is scheduled to begin June 4. This winter new federal charges were piled on Sammy, Gerard, and Mike Papa in New York, based on the investigation of the drug network of Ilan Zarger and Koki Orgad.
The federal government is paying in full for Sammy Gravano’s defense. “I think the Feds are going to offer Sammy a deal,” former Gotti defense attorney John Mitchell told Court TV. “Sammy knows a great deal of information that was never disclosed…I don’t think want that to come to light, and they’re going to step in and take care of their boy.”
http://www.maximonline.com/grit/articles/article_4010.html

Now, there are many and several who visit this forum and argue vociferously against the fact that the FBI routinely engages in coverups.
To them I say, that Sammy Gravano's current underwear is every bit as pink as that of Edgar J. and if they have further comments on the "incompentence" of the FBI, they should take a closer look at this document.
http://www.time.com/time/covers/1101020603/memo.html

And then perhaps they will be so kind as to explain this to the rest of us.

Sunday June 2, 2002
Nor is it certain that Bulger does not maintain an absentee role in the Boston-Irish underground. What is certain is that the FBI has never made it a priority to catch him, despite his figuring on its '10 Most Wanted List' for nearly eight years. The task force assigned to catch him is comprised of just one federal agent, one Boston police officer, and one state parole officer.
The Connolly-Bulger case places the FBI in a conflicted position. When the scale of the corruption first came to light, the then Attorney General Janet Reno issued new rules to limit the relationship between agents and criminal informers. Many of those restrictions, including having FBI-informant relationships reviewed by government prosecutors, were lifted last week (May 2002) by Reno's successor, John Ashcroft.
Last week, (May 2002) FBI director Robert Mueller, head of the Boston FBI in the Nineties, sought to reassure critics that overturning Reno's reforms was not at odds with the lessons of the Connolly case. 'Even before Agent Connolly's conviction, we at the bureau understood its need to reform its handling of confidential informants to make sure that this doesn't happen again,' he said.
http://observer.guardian.co.uk/international/story/0,6903,726367,00.html

And perhaps they can remind again, us of why we do not need an investigation into 9:11 since Robet S. Mueller III has already given us the business.

The idea of four innocent men going to prison for life for a murder they didn't commit is horrifying enough by any standards. But the fact that Boston FBI agents knew of their innocence, set up the conviction, and allowed the injustice to roll on for more than 30 years, has horrified America.
http://www.prisonplanet.com/120603fbiframe.html
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Abe Linkman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-28-03 06:45 PM
Response to Reply #20
21. Some say it's an injustice to frame OBL. Others say it's merely SOP.
"the fact that Boston FBI agents knew of their innocence, set up the conviction, and allowed the injustice to roll on for more than 30 years, has horrified America."

Only a very tee ninee tiny percentage of Americans even have a clue about how much injustice there is in America.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
OudeVanDagen Donating Member (256 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-28-03 08:06 PM
Response to Reply #20
22. Anytime ...
.... you want to see the Kills ... let me know.

By the way ... (you must be very young or bad at history) ... but if you're going to talk NYC & construction crime you can't leave out 1954 & Prescott Bush & Title 1. Now those were the days .....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DulceDecorum Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-29-03 01:05 PM
Response to Reply #22
31. I want to see the Fresh Kills landfill
RIGHT NOW.
PM me forthwith.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
OudeVanDagen Donating Member (256 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-29-03 03:20 PM
Response to Reply #31
35. No problem
PM SSN and we'll do our backgrounds on ya ....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DulceDecorum Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-31-03 07:48 PM
Response to Reply #35
45. I always wondered WHY
Alice had all that trash lying around in the first place.

Today my question was answered.
Either she did not want to part with her Social Security Number
or
she did not pass the stringent background check needed to enter the town dump.
http://www.fortunecity.com/tinpan/parton/2/alice.html

HEY OSAMA,
what the hell kind of freedom do you hate us for?

Important questions about the future of the commercial waste stream have not yet been resolved. Nonetheless, in a victory for Staten Island environmental goals, the landfill is today closed to new deposits (however, the site was reopened in September 2001 to accept rubble from the remains of the World Trade Center). Under the closure plan, the City’s Department of Sanitation will continue to operate and maintain the landfill for at least 30 years after deactivation. Future costs of this reuse cannot yet be estimated.
In December 2001, the finalists of the Department of City Planning’s design competition for Fresh Kill’s reuse were announced. The winning plan will serve as a guide for the future.
http://www.nylcv.org/Programs/WPC/blueprint/boroughs/staten_island/pages/5_fresh_kills/index.htm

The Landfill will likely become a more tranquil and pastoral area, one with rolling green hills and marshlands. A place that teems with birds, animals and water life. A place that Staten Islanders, indeed all New Yorkers will one day visit in large numbers. In short, Fresh Kills will likely evolve into the one of the most attractive areas in this region and a jewel in the City’s crown of world-class parks.
http://www.nyc.gov/html/dos/html/fklf/fklf_01.html

But if you want to go there you will have to PM OudeVanDagen your personal information because ....
WHY???
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
demodewd Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-28-03 01:28 AM
Response to Original message
14. fuel loads
And the fuel loads of the two crashes was about the same?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
demodewd Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-28-03 01:42 AM
Response to Reply #14
15. white flash
a white flash is visable just before plane's entry into WTC1... a missile? http://www.serendipity.li/wot/north_tower/nt_frame2.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LARED Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-28-03 07:40 AM
Response to Reply #15
16. This image?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
plaguepuppy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-28-03 10:37 PM
Response to Reply #16
24. A more interesting flash
Actually this flash at the moment of impact of the second plane interests me more:

http://thewebfairy.com/911/ghostplane2/
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Abe Linkman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-28-03 10:47 PM
Response to Reply #24
25. Very interesting. What is the red area?
If there isn't common agreement among those you know of who've studied it, what is the best speculation?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
plaguepuppy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-28-03 11:27 PM
Response to Reply #25
26. The red area
I think it's a kind of penumbra artifact from the video camera: just as small bright white areas on videos will have a black surround, I think one edge (deeper in shade?) of the bright yellow area is creating a reddish shadow. The brightness of one color kind of saturates the receptor and creates a complementary color shadow.

My new "pictures of explosions" page:

http://www.plaguepuppy.net/public_html/gallery/Explosions.htm
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Abe Linkman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-29-03 12:21 PM
Response to Reply #26
30. Another question, please.
I'm fairly sure you've thought about this one, so may I ask you:
What, in your opinion, would look different (in the great photos you've posted here & on your web site) if there had NOT been any explosive charges set off in the WTC buildings?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
plaguepuppy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-29-03 10:55 PM
Response to Reply #30
36. What would look different if...
Well, the first big difference is that the buildings wouldn't have fallen at all...

but let's try to stretch the conventional model to the breaking point and imagine what the collapse would look like. The big problem is the lack of heat output from the fires: not much fuel (computers? modern desks? rugs glued to concrete floors?) and lousy ventilation. But if we goose up the fire intensity 5 or 10 times something like the needed temperatures could be reached.

To the extent that there is a clear conventional collapse model, it goes something like this: the heat from the office fires weakens and soften the floor trusses, trusses slip off their brackets and fall, allowing floors to drop. This floor then hit the floor below and knocks it down, and so on. So far this is not visible from the outside; floors are sliding down but the 14" box columns of the outer walls are still intact, as is the building's core.

This is where things get dicey: what is supposed to happen next is that the big expanses of outer wall, no longer connected to the floors, get unstable and buckle outward. This buckling should be obvious and would have to involve a height of several floors. It would also be a plastic deformation, not the sudden rupture we see in the towers.

But we actually don't see any such bulge in either tower. The walls don't bow out at all, they start blowing out unbent pieces of steel and pulverized concrete. All that thick dust wouldn't be there at the beginning of an unassisted collapse - there's not enough energy with the floors moving slowly to pulverize all that concrete and gypsum.

The other thing we would definitely see with the south tower in this model is that once the top section began to topple it would have continued to topple. Once the proposed bowing of the outer walls begins there is nothing to keep it symmetrical, and once the top starts to lean in one direction the lean will naturally accelerate. It would behave just like a tree with a section that suddenly turns to mush. It would have toppled in one piece, pivoting on the lower portion of the tower and fallen far off to the south. The core of the lower section should have survived (2'x3' box columns of 4" thick steel) with floors falling down around it, leaving an ~60 story tall stump.

What happens instead is that the top section disintegrates as it falls, and the bottom of the building obligingly collapses out from underneath it, allowing it to fall almost straight down. The official model doesn't even try to explain any of this freaky stuff, it just pretends that it doesn't exist. It's a closed system: you can't find what you refuse to look for.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Abe Linkman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-30-03 12:26 AM
Response to Reply #36
37. Very educational and enlightening. Thank you very much.
You approached the answer to my question exactly the way I hoped you would and made your points understandable to me. It is clear to me that you have given this a lot of study and thought.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LARED Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-30-03 05:57 AM
Response to Reply #36
38. You can't find what you refuse to look for.
Edited on Tue Dec-30-03 06:21 AM by LARED
Very true. Let me add that you can't find what isn't there.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RH Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-30-03 08:19 AM
Response to Reply #36
40. ... demonstrated?

The method is always pretty much the same:

1. With next to nothing by way of substantiation in terms of data, experience or other demonstrable expertise, assert that something should or would have happened.

2. Appear to intelligently demonstrate that it did not in fact happen as it supposedly "should" or "would" do.

3. Assert as if it were some sort of victory that the World at large has therefore perpetrated some sort of grossly deliberate deceit while consumately neglecting an explanation much more obvious according to common sense: the moot presumption was mistaken to begin with.


What please is therefore supposed to prove the "needed temperatures"? Where is the calculation? Where is the data?

And what then is supposed to prove that the "buckling should be obvious"? According to common sense an all but invisible fracture would incapacitate a structure. Was that not indeed, on many previous occasions, exactly so?



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
plaguepuppy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-31-03 01:03 PM
Response to Reply #40
42. "buckling should be obvious"?
Well, this is what the "proof by computer animation" are claiming, not me. The claim is that multiple floors fall away, leaving long "unsupported" stretches of outer wall that become unstable and start buckling outward. A >30 foot stretch of wall bowing outward is not a microscopic event - and conversely a microscopic event will not cause sudden total failure of the structure.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RH Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-31-03 02:26 PM
Response to Reply #42
43. Please answer properly.

Where does the "30 foot" come from?

If the 30 feet buckling came after the fall of floors, thus after spread of the dust you'd not see it anyway. A gap is a gap; one millimeter or thirty feet, it aint going to hold any more than the empty talk will.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DS1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-03-04 04:02 PM
Response to Reply #24
57. The "Web Fairy" is pretty dense
Case in point, home page. Complaining about a peak in the look of the plane hitting the tower. No plane other than a 747 has that type of peak, yet it's a 767 etc etc. Anyone with a pair of operational eyeballs can see that it's the port engine that's obscuring the front of the plane.

The 767 is banking but not turning. No, within a quarter of a mile, it would be hard to detect a turn at that angle, but it would be turning nonetheless. In fact it was banking into the towers. Not a particularly difficult thing to do with a joystick and 30 minutes behind Flight Similator 2000.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TheWebFairy Donating Member (3 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-04-04 03:46 PM
Response to Reply #57
60. I've been called worse.
http://thewebfairy.com/911/krash


It is my contention that this famous "beauty shot" footage is an animation, a cartoon.
The wispyness of the wings and tail show better in the swf version:
http://thewebfairy.com/911/krash/krashflashclose.swf
This wispyness is characteristic of film bleed, and hints that this "plane" is of film origin, not digital.

This footage showing the "plane" is made of half the frames of a full motion video. Some are shown three times as the "plane" hippity-hops across the frame.
You can see this for yourself. Download
http://niftythings.org/usattack/videos/krash.avi
and bust it into frames with Virtualdub, which is free.
http://www.virtualdub.org

Real planes have perspective. Notice the "plane" retains the same size and the same aspect throughout. Cartoons don't have to bother with perspective.


"Live" digital insertion technology is already commercially available.
A "Plane" can be added to footage just the same as a blimp hovering over the superbowl can be added.

http://www.pvi-inc.com/pvi/index.html

http://www.imakenews.com/techreview/e_article000005211.cfm
says
"So far, real-time video manipulation has been within the grasp only of technologically sophisticated organizations such as TV networks and the military. But developers of the technology say it’s becoming simple and cheap enough to spread everywhere. And that has some observers wondering whether real-time video manipulation will erode public confidence in live television images, even when aired by news outlets. “Seeing may no longer be believing,” says Norman Winarsky, corporate vice president for information technology at Sarnoff. “You may not know what to trust.”

Deleting people or objects from live video, or inserting prerecorded people or objects into live scenes, is only the beginning of the deceptions becoming possible. Pretty much any piece of video that has ever been recorded is becoming clip art that producers can digitally sculpt into the story they want to tell, according to Eric Haseltine, senior vice president for R&D at Walt Disney Imagineering in Glendale, Calif. "

http://911hoax.com shares my view.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Rainbows Donating Member (158 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-31-03 10:29 PM
Response to Original message
46. Different everything ....
different angles, different film, different cameras and apertures, different processing, possibly different accelerants; nothing can be determined of the original question without a whole bunch more detail of the above points and many other considerations. And I'm on your side, I think the towers fell, quite unnaturally.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
plaguepuppy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-02-04 05:15 PM
Response to Reply #46
49. Thanks for the input - what I was actually trying to describe...
Edited on Fri Jan-02-04 06:06 PM by plaguepuppy
...was what the collapses would have looked like if the collapse had happened as described in the quasi-official explanation for the collapses (which by the way is presented in the FEMA report as a tentative theory subject to further study - the only place it is treated as definitive has been in the TV documentaries). I'm not "assuming" anything, just taking the OCT (official CT) at face value and trying to give an accurate description of what such a collapse would look like.

Here's a some still from the TLC documentary to illustrate:



To repeat, the mechanism they postulate is a falling-away of the floors on the inside, which removes some of the lateral support from the 14" box columns of the outer wall. Since the wall is stable for unsupported heights of at least one floor, at least one floor would have to drop, leaving a span of at least 22'.

The outer walls do not support most of the weight of the building, so it is not clear how many floors would have to fall away before it would become unstable. But in any case the OCT postulates a macroscopic buckling of the walls, not some invisible micro-crack. And notice too that it doesn't explain the explosive ejections of dust and debris at the beginning of the collapse:



Given that things are moving slowly at this point, it's very difficult to explain how so much material is being pulverized, and where the high pressure is coming from that is pushing it out at high speed.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
plaguepuppy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-02-04 06:59 PM
Response to Reply #49
50. And a video clip of the simulation

http://www.plaguepuppy.net/public_html/video%20archive/TLC_WTC-2_sim.mpg

Excerpt from TLC WTC documentary showing proposed mechanism of collapse, followed by shots of the actual collapse. Notice contrast between the buckling in the simulation vs. the explosive collapse of the real tower.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TrogL Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-03-04 02:41 PM
Response to Reply #50
54. They didn't have the CPU power
to show individual dust particles. The detailed clouds and explosions you see in CGI effects in big budget movies are done on huge Beowulf computer matrices (among other things) costing millions of dollars. It just can't be done on a typical PC.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
plaguepuppy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-04-04 05:09 PM
Response to Reply #54
61. CPU power isn't the problem
It's not a question of failing to model dust particles in the simulation, the problem is that there really is no mechanism to create high-velocity dust jets in this kind of collapse model: nothing is going on inside the building to create large amounts of fine dust, and there is no way to propel the dust at high speed out of the tower. The floors are only moving in the tens-of-mph range early in the collapse, which means that there will be no violent collisions, and with the floors shattered as the simulation assumes there is no piston effect to create high-speed jets.

And it is not just "a little smoke" that is blowing out in those collapses, it is a very dense suspension of concrete and gypsum dust that carries a lot of momentum as it falls. This is the same cloud the we see chasing people for blocks around as it raced along the surrounding streets.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LARED Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-04-04 05:41 PM
Response to Reply #61
62. Sorry, been down this road already
the problem is that there really is no mechanism to create high-velocity dust jets in this kind of collapse model:

Actually there is. In fact, I and a poster named Dr. Mike, among some other I think, pointed out that high velocity jets would be expected.

nothing is going on inside the building to create large amounts of fine dust,

If I recall the theory is that as the floors collapsed onto one another a lot of dust was created by ceiling tiles, drywalls, fireproofing, concrete, paper; all of the easily friable materials that are found in a normal office building. The force that created this fine materials was the floors falling on to one another. This of course assume that some of the floors are 'trapped' in the outside columns, until the force blows the outer walls out.

and there is no way to propel the dust at high speed out of the tower.

As I recall the calculations shows that under the right conditions air velocities could reach the transonic values. Far more velocity than needed to create the so called squibs or jets seen.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
plaguepuppy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-04-04 06:07 PM
Response to Reply #62
63. Nostalgia road
You and Reagan are a lot alike, living in the warm glow of your imagined recollections. Just convince yourself of something once and for you it's true forever. It helps explain why you genuinely believe that there is ABSOLUTELY NO EVIDENCE WHATSOEVER for anything that contradicts your views. Just "debunk" something once to your satisfaction (which obviously doesn't take much) and it's as if it doesn't exist.

The floors are broken - this is part of the model we are discussing. They are falling at less-than-free-fall rates, since it takes energy to crumple those perimeter columns. We see high-speed dust jets within the first few floors of the start of the collapse, which means there can only be low speed impacts between floors. If you can get hypersonic velocities from that please show me the numbers. As I recall Dr. Mike's estimate was based on treating air as an incompressible fluid, and then claiming that this didn't really matter, and assuming the floors worked as perfect pistons despite the big hole in the middle (where the core is) and the fact that both floors and windows are breaking as the collapse proceeds. And even then his high velocity jets would only appear after several hundred feet of free-fall.

And the pulverization problem is as much of a mystery as ever: how does a 4" thick layer of concrete bonded to corrugated steel, under rugs, tile, furnishings, suddenly get spit out the windows because the floor above it hits it at 20 mph?

I'm afraid your "proof by tales of past glory with Dr. Mike" is less than convincing.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LARED Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-04-04 06:29 PM
Response to Reply #63
64. PP
Please keep in mind I'm not trying to convince you. That is a monumental waste of time. What the goal is, is to expose the fanciful notions about the collapse you put forth.


As I recall Dr. Mike's estimate was based on treating air as an incompressible fluid,

Neither his nor mine was based on that.

and assuming the floors worked as perfect pistons despite the big hole in the middle (where the core is)

No we both assumed that only a percentage of the floor acted as a piston, and the core area was accounted for.

and the fact that both floors and windows are breaking as the collapse proceeds.

I would hope so.

And even then his high velocity jets would only appear after several hundred feet of free-fall.

No wrong again. High velocity flows were calculated after about 10 floors fell.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
plaguepuppy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-04-04 07:43 PM
Response to Reply #64
65. Put up or shut up...
Hypersonic velocities in he first 10 feet? Wow, this gets better and better. And you of course have a copy of this wonderful proof that we can actually look at? 'Cause if you don't I'm quickly losing interest in your fantasy monologue.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LARED Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-04-04 10:23 PM
Response to Reply #65
66. If you're going to make a demand, at least get it right
Hypersonic velocities in ten feet?

Who said that. Not me.

Wonderful proofs

Talk about stretching it. No one have ever claimed to present proofs. What was presented was some back of the envelope type engineering calculations based on the fundamentals. Nothing fancy was done by me or anyone else. Just the basic application of engineering principles were applied to establish that the collapse did not require the suspension of the law of physics.

Let me remind you that you have never to my recollection provided any type of calculations to back up your claims.


Just talk.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
plaguepuppy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-05-04 02:16 AM
Response to Reply #66
67. "Just talk" vs. a dim memory of numbers
Calculations are only as good as the information they are based on.

Sorry, not hypersonic - just very fast. But that's still clearly wrong when talking about the first 10 feet. There just are not going to be high-speed jets of dust and debris early in the collapse coming out in anything resembling the collapse model we are discussing. Look at the animation again:
http://www.plaguepuppy.net/public_html/video%20archive/TLC_WTC-2_sim.mpg

They portray the collapse as starting with a plastic deformation of columns, not a sudden catastrophic drop in free-fall. And accurate or not the animation shows irregular floor damage, not a piston-like dropping of intact floors. Where do those high pressures and flow rates come from?

Yet when you look at the actual collapse immediately following the animation there is no flexing or bowing of the perimeter columns visible where the collapse first starts, though smoke does partially mask this area. What is seen instead is a ring of these mysterious "high-velocity" dust puffs appearing exactly at the start of the collapse, before there has been any visible movement of the upper portion, and perhaps a little below the actual level of failure. It helps to step through frame by frame at the very beginning.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RH Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-03-04 03:05 PM
Response to Reply #50
56. 30 feet buckling?

The lateral buckling as suggested by the .mpg appears to be about equivalent to the height of one floor of the building, maybe 15 or 20 feet at the most.

The main difference between the illustration and the real time version is the smoke that obscures the buckling.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
markses Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-04-04 04:03 AM
Response to Original message
58. Having seen the plane hit the north tower in person
from approximately 300 yards to the north, I can very well assure you that the explosion that came out of that building had very much the same "coloration" as the explosion that came out of the south tower. The views we have *on film* of the north tower are not as clear as those of the south, and jet fuel explosion was smaller on the outside of the tower, but I see it in my mind as if it were yesterday - there was a jet fuel explosion outside the north tower, and its coloration was just the same as the south tower graphic you've posted here.

I expect that I'm in a small minority of the world's population that had a clear *live* view of the north tower explosion. You certainly didn't capture it with your picture there.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
plaguepuppy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-05-04 02:27 AM
Response to Reply #58
68. had a clear *live* view of the north tower explosion
Did you see or hear the plane? Were you outdoors at the time? Were you anywhere nearby when the collapses took place?

The Naudet brothers' film does show a fuel-air type fireball on the north tower, albeit a rather brief one. The oblique hit on the south tower let more of the fuel come flying out through the wall, but in the north tower much of it was certainly pushed into the core.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
markses Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-05-04 11:08 AM
Response to Reply #68
69. I heard and saw the plane
Edited on Mon Jan-05-04 11:21 AM by markses
I can't quite make out where the Naudet brothers were (looks like Soho), but I was definitely closer than they were (Chambers and Broadway). And yes, I was outside, preparing to hand out leaflets for the primary election. The plane was going so fast at that point that I heard it at the same time that I saw it. It was loud.

The fuel air explosion was much briefer and smaller than the South Tower explosion, and seemed to travel directly up the building. However, I do not think the Naudet brothers' film does it justice because of their distance. It seemed huge at the time; a man watching directly behind me definitely said "That shit was like Diehard," immediately after the explosion.

I was also around for the collapses. I was at Wall Street and Broadway when the second plane hit (about two blocks from the South Tower), South Street and Old Slip when the South Tower collapsed (I couldn't see it from there, but certainly saw thousands of people running on to South Street, and was enveloped by the smoke cloud), and on the far west turn of the Brooklyn Bridge on-ramp when the North Tower collapsed. The final collapse I watched distinctly, in other words, from about 600 yards (?) to the east.

You can check my coordinates at this site:

http://www.downtownny.com/gettingaround_map.asp

When I say the "far west turn" of the Brooklyn Bridge on ramp, I'm referring to the Brooklyn-bound ramp off the FDR drive, which takes you due west well into the island before making a 180 and turning east onto the bridge.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Thu Dec 26th 2024, 10:21 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » September 11 Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC