WTC building 7. Let's revisit history.

Revoltingest · Feb 24, 2020

Stevicus said:
Well, we're talking about large buildings with thousands of people going in and out every day. I suspect it had a large administrative and maintenance staff. The larger the organization, the more likely one will see new and unfamiliar workers, and it might be easier for someone to infiltrate. When I visited the WTC, I don't recall that security was all that tight.

Here's a possible scenario: Government agents could approach the building management and say they suspect the drug cartels have a money laundering operation, and one of their offices is located in the WTC (disguised as an apparently "legitimate" company). So, they could say they need to put in some undercover operatives posing as maintenance personnel, as well as install some "surveillance equipment." Now, of course, it's all top secret and hush-hush, so as far as the rest of the staff and tenants are concerned, they're just some ordinary work crew which has been given the okay by the boss (who himself would not even know what was really going on).

As has been pointed out by many, there aren't that many people who actually have expertise or professional knowledge about engineering or architecture or even really understand how buildings are blown up. If this is true, then very few people would have been able to recognize or notice someone engaging in demolition work, and if their top boss tells them "don't worry about it, they know what they're doing," they would probably just leave it alone.

Not even remotely plausible to me.
The materials & procedures used in demolition are so
different from what's normal in a commercial building that
management & staff would have to be in on the conspiracy.

Stevicus · Feb 24, 2020

Revoltingest said:
Not even remotely plausible to me.
The materials & procedures used in demolition are so
different from what's normal in a commercial building that
management & staff would have to be in on the conspiracy.

You're presuming that they would all be on heightened alert and investigating everything that's going on and examining anything and everything coming in to the building. It wasn't the Pentagon or CIA Headquarters, so it wouldn't have very tight security like that.

Prior to 9/11, no one could have imagined such a scenario anyway, so your view that "someone would have noticed" depends on the possibility that such a scenario was even on anyone's radar at that point, which it wasn't.

If the Las Vegas shooter can sneak into a hotel with as much firepower as he did, even past surveillance cameras and other security measures in place, then I don't see how this can be viewed as so implausible.

9-10ths_Penguin · Feb 24, 2020

exchemist said:
Quite.

I see here that softening of steel starts to set in above about 500C: Can Steel Buildings Collapse Due To Fire | Coast To Coast Carports

No problem getting that sort of temperature in a burning column, I'd have thought, due to the ideal setup for convection. This link indicates it can easily be 1000C : Engineers test effects of fire on steel structures

Move along, ladies and gents, there's nothing to see here......

I'll always remember how my metallurgy prof described steel at its eutectoid temperature (723 C): "like licorice."

Mychael · Feb 24, 2020

We Never Know said:
That's another thing. When they told Bush what happened, he nodded and kept right on reading that book.

All the actor in a play must follow the script. In my opinion George W. may not of agreed to it but remained in character for the part he played. Its just politics like he said when questioned about the advents of that day and some of the things that unfolded later.

Heyo · Feb 24, 2020

Stevicus said:
Well, we're talking about large buildings with thousands of people going in and out every day. I suspect it had a large administrative and maintenance staff. The larger the organization, the more likely one will see new and unfamiliar workers, and it might be easier for someone to infiltrate. When I visited the WTC, I don't recall that security was all that tight.

Here's a possible scenario: Government agents could approach the building management and say they suspect the drug cartels have a money laundering operation, and one of their offices is located in the WTC (disguised as an apparently "legitimate" company). So, they could say they need to put in some undercover operatives posing as maintenance personnel, as well as install some "surveillance equipment." Now, of course, it's all top secret and hush-hush, so as far as the rest of the staff and tenants are concerned, they're just some ordinary work crew which has been given the okay by the boss (who himself would not even know what was really going on).

As has been pointed out by many, there aren't that many people who actually have expertise or professional knowledge about engineering or architecture or even really understand how buildings are blown up. If this is true, then very few people would have been able to recognize or notice someone engaging in demolition work, and if their top boss tells them "don't worry about it, they know what they're doing," they would probably just leave it alone.

I don't know about WTC7 but iirc there was busy construction going on in WTC 1 & 2 for half a year before 9/11.

Revoltingest · Feb 24, 2020

Stevicus said:
You're presuming that they would all be on heightened alert and investigating everything that's going on and examining anything and everything coming in to the building. It wasn't the Pentagon or CIA Headquarters, so it wouldn't have very tight security like that.

Nope.
I assume ordinary people in their professions.

Prior to 9/11, no one could have imagined such a scenario anyway, so your view that "someone would have noticed" depends on the possibility that such a scenario was even on anyone's radar at that point, which it wasn't.

No one would need to have an expectation of rigging for controlled demolition.
It would look bizarrely out of place, & therefore be questioned & challenged.

If the Las Vegas shooter can sneak into a hotel with as much firepower as he did, even past surveillance cameras and other security measures in place, then I don't see how this can be viewed as so implausible.

Sneaking into a hotel with big containers isn't comparable
to opening up a buildings structure in multiple locations,
placing explosives, & running the wires.
Btw, it's never convincing to argue that if one thing has been
shown possible, then anything is possible. Were that a
cromulent method, we could argue that no buildings were
destroyed....it was all done on a Hollywood set, & the NYC
authorities & workers were in on the conspiracy....you know,
like the faked moon landings.

I'm just going by my experience managing, maintaining &
renovating commercial buildings. If your experience differs,
I can't argue with that.

shmogie · Feb 24, 2020

We Never Know said:
Anyone here that has architecture/engineering background I want your opinion. Do you think a 52 floor, all steel framed(I-beam and connectors) and concrete building that was damaged on one side, maybe two sides by scattered fires would free fall all at once, equal all over, at the exact same time?(Incidentally, this made WTC 7 the only steel skyscraper to have collapsed from fire.)
This has nothing to do with conspiracy theories or anything else.
I'm simply seeking opinions.
Video is of WTC 7 building falling.

I am not an engineer, but I have an interest in forging steel for knives.

I know that heated enough, steel becomes malleable to the point of becoming a liquid.

I know from doing a little building that structural integrity of a building is interlocking. Every kid in my generation who played with Lincoln logs or tinkertoys knows this.

So, in a steel framed building, assaulted by a huge amount of burning jet fuel, it will weaken the steel that is heated .When it can no longer function as designed, the entire interlocking system fails, at the same time.

For those who do believe the "conspiracy theory's" , they are bozo's.

Mychael · Feb 24, 2020

Stevicus said:
You're presuming that they would all be on heightened alert and investigating everything that's going on and examining anything and everything coming in to the building. It wasn't the Pentagon or CIA Headquarters, so it wouldn't have very tight security like that.

Prior to 9/11, no one could have imagined such a scenario anyway, so your view that "someone would have noticed" depends on the possibility that such a scenario was even on anyone's radar at that point, which it wasn't.

If the Las Vegas shooter can sneak into a hotel with as much firepower as he did, even past surveillance cameras and other security measures in place, then I don't see how this can be viewed as so implausible.

Take time to watch the first episode of the "Lone Gun" TV series 1997.
It was a spin off of the X Files series. It showed a chip was introduced into an airliner computer system allowing the hijacking of the plane remotely and aimed at a trade center building I believe it was.

Mychael · Feb 24, 2020

Revoltingest said:
Nope.
I assume ordinary people in their professions.

No one would need to have an expectation of rigging for controlled demolition.
It would look bizarrely out of place, & therefore be questioned & challenged.

Sneaking into a hotel with big containers isn't comparable
to opening up a buildings structure in multiple locations,
placing explosives, & running the wires.

I'm just going by my experience managing, maintaining &
renovating commercial buildings. If your experience differs,
I can't argue with that.

Sometimes the changes can be decades in advance or at night if they lock down a floor. The possibilities are endless. it was a Bush family member who was the owner or operator of the company that was in charge of security for the buildings leading up to that day.

9-10ths_Penguin · Feb 24, 2020

Stevicus said:
You're presuming that they would all be on heightened alert and investigating everything that's going on and examining anything and everything coming in to the building. It wasn't the Pentagon or CIA Headquarters, so it wouldn't have very tight security like that.

Prior to 9/11, no one could have imagined such a scenario anyway, so your view that "someone would have noticed" depends on the possibility that such a scenario was even on anyone's radar at that point, which it wasn't.

Are you serious?

You actually believe that nobody could have imagined that a building that was bombed in 1993 could be bombed in 2001?

Revoltingest · Feb 24, 2020

Mychael said:
Sometimes the changes can be decades in advance or at night if they lock down a floor. The possibilities are endless. it was a Bush family member who was the owner or operator of the company that was in charge of security for the buildings leading up to that day.

I'm familiar with the work culture in NYC. Office buildings are
busy even into the wee hours. And no one could rig one for
controlled demolition overnite.
You can go to youtube, & likely find documentaries on the
preparation involved. It's pretty extensive. It wouldn't be
sneaked past those who run & work on the building.

Are you claiming that GW Bush was competent enuf to
have managed what would be the most brilliant &
flawlessly executed conspiracy in history?

exchemist · Feb 24, 2020

74x12 said:
Many architects have spoken out against the official narrative.

This will be a creationst type factoid with no substance, but I have not the energy to argue it with you. This issue is dead. See @Revoltingest and @9-10ths_Penguin 's comments.

Heyo · Feb 24, 2020

9-10ths_Penguin said:
I'll always remember how my metallurgy prof described steel at its eutectoid temperature (723 C): "like licorice."

That would be very helpful. You can't forge at temperatures below 900° C - but I admit that you can bend (mild) steel at that low temperatures.

Mychael · Feb 24, 2020

Heyo said:
I don't know about WTC7 but iirc there was busy construction going on in WTC 1 & 2 for half a year before 9/11.

In my opinion building 7 was there for monitoring and manipulation of the stock trade mainly by Government agencies. After they fell building 7 was no longer needed. Making funds available for a Beast of a system that has become so big and complicated and you can't ask the public for secret agendas funding you then have to develop methods to create that wealth is a deep rabbit hole no one wants to or have the time in the most part.
and they have bet you won't want to lose any of rights and possessions so you go a long with it. Like if you sold your (soldier) rights to your identity then you agreed to have to follow the script and can't talk about it without persecution.

Mychael · Feb 24, 2020

Revoltingest said:
I'm familiar with the work culture in NYC. Office buildings are
busy even into the wee hours. And no one could rig one for
controlled demolition overnite.
You can go to youtube, & likely find documentaries on the
preparation involved. It's pretty extensive. It wouldn't be
sneaked past those who run & work on the building.

Are you claiming that GW Bush was competent enuf to
have managed what would be the most brilliant &
flawlessly executed conspiracy in history?

He wasn't the brains, he was the puppet we watched

Heyo · Feb 24, 2020

Revoltingest said:
Are you claiming that GW Bush was competent enuf to
have managed what would be the most brilliant &
flawlessly executed conspiracy in history?

Or as Bill Maher once expressed it: "The theory that Bush had prior knowledge of 9/11 is ridiculous - because it contains the words "Bush" and "knowledge"".
No, dobya is not the man for a conspiracy. But there is Cheney and there is Blackwater.

Revoltingest · Feb 24, 2020

Mychael said:
He wasn't the brains, he was the puppet we watched

The conspiracy expands.
Bush was a puppet run by the Jewish Illuminati Masons.

Hey, what do you think of my idea that 9/11 never even happened?
It was all Hollywood smoke & mirrors...just like the faked moon landings.

Revoltingest · Feb 24, 2020

Heyo said:
Or as Bill Maher once expressed it: "The theory that Bush had prior knowledge of 9/11 is ridiculous - because it contains the words "Bush" and "knowledge"".
No, dobya is not the man for a conspiracy. But there is Cheney and there is Blackwater.

Anything is possible.
More likely than Cheney would be Mossad having orchestrated the whole thing.

Mock Turtle · Feb 24, 2020

I suspect that most engineering types (I was in aircraft engineering) would go with the official version, given how buildings do have limits to what damage they can sustain before catastrophic collapse, and we seem to have seen this in action in 2001. I saw it as it happened on TV and was quite surprised how successful the terrorists actually were, just as the authorities no doubt were. There are always a few who will attempt to put a different spin on events for some reason or other.

exchemist · Feb 24, 2020

Mock Turtle said:
I suspect that most engineering types (I was in aircraft engineering) would go with the official version, given how buildings do have limits to what damage they can sustain before catastrophic collapse, and we seem to have seen this in action in 2001. I saw it as it happened on TV and was quite surprised how successful the terrorists actually were, just as the authorities no doubt were. There are always a few who will attempt to put a different spin on events for some reason or other.

Yes. You can do a lot of damage with 20 tonnes or so of burning aviation kerosene.

WTC building 7. Let's revisit history.

Pragmatic Libertarian

Veteran Member

1/10 Subway Stalinist

Member

Veteran Member

Pragmatic Libertarian

Well-Known Member

Member

Member

1/10 Subway Stalinist

Pragmatic Libertarian

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Member

Member

Veteran Member

Pragmatic Libertarian

Pragmatic Libertarian

Oh my, did I say that!

Veteran Member