New Corbett 911 Vid.

[Karl12]

Corbett made this extremely short vid on 911 many moons ago and he expands on some of the points in this new interview with Dore - very interesting stuff (I thought).













Now he's done a new video with some pretty fascinating factual info (I thought) - hope people who are interested in this subject actually give it a watch.




Video:

Who Had Access to the Twin Towers?

If you, like Ancap94, have been getting into 9/11 Truth lately, you might want to know who had demolition access to the Twin Towers before 9/11. If so, boy does Kevin Ryan have some answers for you! Join James for today’s edition as he shines the light on Kevin Ryan’s groundbreaking article on “Demolition Access to the World Trade Center Towers,” the pre-9/11 WTC power down, and other long-forgotten bits of 9/11 conspiracy reality.

Would be interested in any opinions, especially on the information presented in the new video.

[Karl12]

Interesting quote:

• "One thing that drew my attention in 2008 was a strange correlation between the fire proofing upgrades that were going on in the few years before 911 and where they occurred.

It turned out, and I drew a diagram of this showing where the fire proofing upgrades occurred, just happened to be exactly where the planes impacted and exactly where these weird fires were occurring and they matched up perfectly.

I mean in the north tower it was exact - floors 92 to 100 were upgraded for fire proofing and that's exactly where the plane hit the building."


Kevin Ryan, Board Director - Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth

See 26:20

[FlyingClayDisk]

Without making any particular comment on 9-11 directly, and/or rendering an opinion on any conspiracies, I can make a comment on a couple things based on my familiarity construction and engineering practices.

Installation of spray-on fireproofing products like Monokote (and similar) require access to the structural steel and steel decking on the underside of floors.  To upgrade fireproofing systems which were installed before many of these products were invented is a very disruptive process because it involves 'demolishing' all of the interior finishes (i.e. drywall, wall coverings, insullation...basically everything, right down to the structural skeleton).  Once the structural steel and structural members are exposed, any and all previous fireproofing materials must be removed (which creates a colossal mess, and in some cases hazmat).  Once the cleanup is complete, then the new fireproofing can be applied.  This is usually done by mixing water with the dry fireproofing materials in a large cement mixer-like drum with a turning auger.  The fireproofing slurry is then sprayed onto all of the structural surfaces to a desired thickness as specified by engineers.  Overall, it's a very slow and painful process.

Because this process is so disruptive, all occupants must be completely removed from all areas where the work is to be completed for an extended period of time.  This includes furnishings, floor coverings, ceilings, lights...everything.  And because this process requires such extensive demolition and relocation, and expense, areas to be completed must be prioritized based on various criteria.  One of these criteria are 'risk' of fire balanced against other factors like ease of performing the work (i.e. like during tenant changes or build outs) and cost.

So, a couple things here.  I would absolutely expect that there would be "demolition" personnel authorized to access the areas where fireproofing operations were to take place.  These demolition people aren't the type who implode buildings, but rather just contractors who do demo work to remove all of the obstacles to getting at the structural steel (i.e. drywall, ceilings, insulation, electrical, plumbing, mechanical, flooring, built-in furnishings, asbestos abatement, etc.).  They then load all of the refuse trucks to haul all this stuff off for disposal.

As far as the selection of where to perform these fireproofing upgrades first, they would select the highest priority areas balanced against the lowest cost areas first.

As to why the planes impacted these areas, and not other areas, I have no idea.

Hope this helps some.

[Karl12]

It does mate and thanks for the post - that full Kevin Ryan interview is well worth a watch.

Here's another very short relevant video sourced by Kwaka.






• This Is An Orange.

[Karl12]

Orange Bump

[FlyingClayDisk]

I realize there are a lot of horrific, distasteful and objectionable things surrounding the events of 9/11/01 and the WTC, and many theories (conspiracy and otherwise) about what happened.  I don't mean to make light of any of those.  But, I've also worked in engineering as an engineer for the past nearly 50 years.

I've said this many times both here and elsewhere.  For those looking for some conspiracy surrounding how the buildings fell...any of them...I can assure them of one thing.  Gravity is one helluva force.  Regardless of what destructive force is the cause of a tall building falling, it will always fall almost directly down vertically.  Unless a structure has the structural capacity to support the impact forces of the floors above, a building will almost always collapse directly downward, usually collapsing in on itself.  The forces in such a collapse are just too great to withstand.  Even in rare cases (like the grain elevator in Australia) where the structure does in fact withstand a partial collapse, the structure still won't topple over like a tree.  Yes, some things like tall smokestacks will, but not buildings.  There's just too much mass to get moving laterally.  Gravity instead accelerates this mass directly downward, like straight down.  You could chop the entire middle section out of a building with a Biblically large wrecking ball, and the top half wold still fall down directly on the bottom half.  There's really, honestly, no "smoking gun" here; it's just how large massive objects collapse and fall.  Yes, it does look like "controlled demolition"...and it should.  Controlled demolition takes advantage of these exact principles to bring down a building.  That's why they are able to do it at all. 

I've watched many controlled demolitions in person.  They all look the same.  Some are better than others, but they all follow the same basic sequence.  They use the mass of the building and the impact shock of collapsing floors to buckle and fracture the structural elements of the floors below.  And, it crashes down in one giant heap.

I personally believe there are no less than 10-15 very credible conspiracy theories about WTC-7, but not a single one of these involves some nefarious controlled demolition.  Same for any of the other WTC buildings.  Fire brought these buildings down, no question about it.  Fire weakened the structural members which then failed and the buildings collapsed in on themselves.  No doubt about it.  Now, we can speculate about what "caused" those fires, but the manner in which the buildings collapsed is just not an indicator of anything other than the fact the building collapsed. 

I harbor deep conspiracy related thoughts and feelings about WTC-7, but looking at the building collapse from the exterior doesn't add to, or take away from, any one of these.  I further believe there was a conscious effort to avoid preventing the building from falling, but that's another matter.  The fact it collapsed the way it did is no surprise at all.

[FlyingClayDisk]

Some people might argue that controlled demolitions don't always go as planned, and they'd be correct.  They might say things like...not all objects fall vertically...and, they'd be right again.

[Mod edit - snipped text] Hudson's HQ building in downtown Detroit.  I was there in person for this demolition (ironically with the Mayor of Detroit (Archer) among other Wayne County dignitaries).  In fact, this was the most recent controlled demolition I was present for.  I think it was 2000, or maybe 2001.  This demolition did not go as planned [Mod edit - snipped text].  We were on top of a large parking garage, a designated (but very close) viewing area for the media and public officials.

The Hudson's building was an absolutely gigantic facility.  It was hard to even view the whole thing from one place.  I wouldn't call it a "skyscraper" (maybe 15-20 floors), but it took up a huge amount of real estate for it's footprint.

We had a unique vantage point, right at the curve of the Detroit People Mover.  When the initial explosive charges went off nothing really happened; they sounded like fireworks mostly.  Then the more, bigger charges went off inside.  These explosive charges meant business!  They shook the ground and the surrounding structures setting off car alarms for miles.   The shock wave from the blasts broke windows in buildings all around.  Serious stuff.

From our vantage point we could see the top of much of the building, and it started to fall in on itself from the center (by design).  There were apparently tertiary charges placed if needed.  As the building fell in on itself, it was clear some parts weren't falling as they had hoped, so the secondary charges were set off.  These charges sent debris flying everywhere, even over where we were with chunks of concrete and debris flying.  We all had to duck for cover, but once the heavy stuff stopped falling I jumped up and looked.  There was one area where the People Mover went right around the side of the building.  When the secondaries went off, this corner of the building fell directly across the People Mover track.  I think it wound up taking the People Mover out of service for over a year to do the repairs.

But the point here is, most buildings fall directly in their footprint.  It's only weird situations like this which cause a portion of a structure to fall outside its footprint, and I just happened to witness one of these.

Note: If you ever get to witness a building demolition, bring a serous dust mask (even a respirator).  You cannot escape the dust cloud which rolls out after the blast and collapse.

[SurferSoul]

Right so building 7 collapsed due office fires, that were mostly distinguished? All the structural supports failed within seconds of each other? Is that what you’re saying FCD?