The Boston Marathon Tragedy
By louisehartmann
Yesterday's horrific Boston Marathon bombing left three people dead and at least 154 injured. Eight-year-old Martin Richard was one of the fatalities. CNN reports that of the 154 people hospitalized yesterday, 41 were listed in serious condition and 17 were critical.
President Obama spoke just hours after the attack, and said, “make no mistake, we will get to the bottom of this and we will find out who did this, we'll find out why they did this. Any responsible individuals, any responsible groups will feel the full weight of justice.”
The hunt for clues of a motive and suspect are still on-going, and the FBI Boston Division is asking the public to check their cell phone cameras for any information or images that could provide clues. Conflicting news reports circulated quickly after yesterday's attack, and authorities say they are still speaking with witnesses, and reviewing evidence collected at the scene.
The Boston Marathon is the world's oldest annual marathon, dating back to 1897, and it's historically been a celebratory event for Massachusetts. Organizers say the marathon will take place again next year, but it will be forever changed after yesterday's tragedy.
One thing is for sure...we must find the person responsible, and bring them to justice. Until then, let's come together as a nation and support those who need us now. Our thoughts and prayers are with everyone impacted by yesterday's horrible events.
Comments
#2
Chuckles8: There are lots of civil engineers that question the official conspiracy theory here:
http://www2.ae911truth.org/signpetition.php
Most of the ones listed, at first, are architects and about 1/3 of the way down it starts to list the civil engineers. Just do a Find: civil and you will go right to them.
#3
Just a few comments by civil engineers at that web site:
http://www2.ae911truth.org/signpetition.php
---------------------------------
After viewing videos of the collapse of both the Twin Towers and Building 7 and after carefully studying the Official 911 Commission Report and the technical report prepared by FEMA and the Structural Division of the American Society of Civil Engineers, I am convinced that the airplane impacts did not by themselves cause the buildings to collapse -- particularly for Building 7, which was never impacted by an airplane. It appears that internal explosives must have caused the buildings' destruction, and the American People have the right to know who was responsible for this horrific act.--Frank E. Stratton Civil Engineering, Ph.D., Stanford Univ.
-----------------------------------------------------
By 9/12 I was convinced that there was something "fishy" about the "collapse" of the WTC. I learned about progressive collapse from my engineering professors at Columbia, and I found it hard to imagine that the twin towers could have failed in that way. They were specifically designed to resist impact and load applied by the collision of a Boeing 707 jet. The buildings appeared to have been destroyed by an engineered demolition. When I articulated my suspicions, however, I was met with derision. I have continued, however, in my conviction that the buildings were intentionally destroyed.--Nelson L. Johnson Architect & Civil Engineer
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
After watching the AE911Truth video and discussing it with colleagues, I am convinced there is credible evidence for re-opening the investigation of the World Trade Center towers and Building 7 collapse. I believe the evidence points strongly in the direction of the use of explosive charges placed on key structural elements to bring the buildings down, and that the actual collapse was not due to the impact of the planes and the subsequent jet fuel fires.-- Peter D. Stone M. Arch., B. Civil Engineering
-------------------------------------------------------
The Official story does not appear to be supported by the evidence. It would appear much more likely that demolition brought down the twin towers and building 7 than the burning jet fuel. The fact that the floors and columns came down so fast and in the same footprint along with the chemical analysis of the molten metal indicate the buildings were very likely brought down by controlled demolition. A through investigation by independent engineers, architects, and explosives experts is necessary for the truth to be known about what actually happened on 9/11/2001.--Clark W. Townsend Civil Engineer
-----------------------------------------------------
It is difficult for me to believe from a technical point of view that building 7 collapsed as the official report indicates from fire and debris damage. Portions of the building may have collapsed from damage however, the entire building collapsed symmetrically including the portions of the building which were in no way compromised as a result of the collapse of the twin towers.--It is difficult for me to believe from a technical point of view that building 7 collapsed as the official report indicates from fire and debris damage. Portions of the building may have collapsed from damage however, the entire building collapsed symmetrically including the portions of the building which were in no way compromised as a result of the collapse of the twin towers.--Dan S. Bolke M.S. Civil Engineering, Utah State
-----------------------------------------------------
Except by intentional use of controlled demolition explosives or other energy source, steel structures can not and do not collapse in the manner that WTC buildings 7, 1, and 2 did on 9/11/2001.-- Fred W. Schaejbe MS, Structural Eng, Univ of Illinois
------------
There's lots more by many more civil engineers and architects....if you care to read them.
#4
Many of these professionals are truly brave for coming out and expressing their views on the collapse of the WTC buildings. Some have actually been ostracized by others and have risked not getting contracts because of their views. Which is probably the reason why so many others have not spoken out and kept quiet. Some of these people are retired which might help to explain why they felt more freedom to speak out...they no longer need to worry about getting, or maintaining, a contract.
It reminds me of the few really intelligent kids in school who have to put up with the brunt of the non-sense and bullying of dummies that may have captured the minds of other dummies that think that football or other sports is the only thing that is important. Unless you are viewed as part of the numb-skull team you will be ostracized.
#5
The team studying the WTC collapses for the American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE) and the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) will later observe that the antenna on WTC 1 began to fall before the exterior of the building: “Review of videotape recordings of the collapse taken from various angles indicates that the transmission tower on top of the structure began to move downward and laterally slightly before movement was evident at the exterior wall. This suggests that collapse began with one or more failures in the central core area of the building.” [Federal Emergency Management Agency, 5/1/2002, pp. 2-27]
#6
Fourteen Points of Agreement-Article from The Open Civil Engineering Journal, 2008, 2, 35-40 3
Paper written by:
Steven E. Jones, Frank M. Legge, Kevin R. Ryan, Anthony F. Szamboti, and James R.Gourley
Excerpts from:
Fourteen Points of Agreement with Official Government Reports on the World Trade Center Destruction
1. WTC 7 Collapse Issue
FEMA analyzed the remarkable collapse of WTC building 7, the 47-story skyscraper that, even though it was not hit by a plane, collapsed about seven hours after the second Tower collapse. We certainly agree that FEMA’s best fire-based hypothesis “has only a low probability of occurrence.”
2. Withstanding Jet Impact
FEMA: “The WTC towers had been designed to withstand the accidental impact of a Boeing 707 seeking to land at a nearby airport...”
John Skilling, a leading structural engineer for the WTC Towers, was interviewed in 1993 just after a bomb in a truck went off in the North Tower: ...."Our analysis indicated the biggest problem would be the fact that all the fuel (from the airplane) would dump into the building. There would be a horrendous fire. A lot of people would be killed," he said. "The building structure would still be there."
"....The supporting columns are closely spaced and even if several were disabled, the others would carry the load."
"...Skilling’s team showed that a commercial jet would not bring down a WTC Tower..."
3. Pancake Theory Not Supported
NIST’s findings do not support the “pancake theory” of collapse, which is premised on a progressive failure of the floor systems in the WTC towers... Thus, the floors did not fail progressively to cause a pancaking phenomenon”
"This theory of collapse was proposed by the earlier FEMA report and promoted in the documentary “Why the Towers Fell” produced by NOVA [7]. The “pancake theory of collapse” is strongly promoted in a Popular Mechanics article along with a number of other discredited ideas [8, 9]. We, on the other hand, agree with NIST that the “pancake theory” is not scientifically tenable and ought to be set aside in serious discussions regarding the destruction of the WTC Towers and WTC 7."
4. Massive Column Cores
"...the WTC Towers included “massive” interconnected steel columns in the cores of the buildings, in addition to the columns in the outside walls. The central core columns bore much of the gravity loads so the Towers were clearly NOT hollow. Yet the false notion that the Towers were “hollow tubes” with the floors supported just by the perimeter columns seems to have gained wide acceptance. For example, an emeritus structural engineering professor asserted, “The structural design of the towers was unique in that the supporting steel structure consisted of closely spaced columns in the walls of all four sides. The resulting structure was similar to a tube...” [12]. The fact is the Towers were constructed with a substantial load-supporting core structure as well as perimeter columns – and on this point we agree with NIST in dispelling false popular notions."
5. Essentially Free Fall
"NIST evidently neglects a fundamental law of physics in glibly treating the remarkable “free fall” collapse of each Tower, namely, the Law of Conservation of Momentum. This law of physics means that the hundreds of
thousands of tons of material in the way must slow the upper part of the building because of its mass, independent of deformation which can only slow the fall even more. (Energy and Momentum must both be conserved.) "
"Published papers have argued that this negligence by NIST (leaving the near-free-fall speeds unexplained) is a major flaw in their analysis [13, 14]. NIST ignores the possibility of controlled demolitions, which achieve complete building collapses in near free-fall times by moving the material out of the way using explosives. So, there is an alternative explanation that fits the data without violating basic laws of physics."
6. Fire Endurance Tests, No Failures
"We agree that NIST had actual fire tests completed and that all four “trusses like those in the WTC towers” survived the fire-endurance testing “without collapsing.” We also agree that “the fires in the towers on September 11 ... were substantially different from the conditions in the test furnaces;” the test furnaces were hotter and burned longer."
"...these real-life tests indicate that the buildings should not have completely collapsed. In addition, we have hundreds of cases of fires in tall steel-frame buildings and complete collapse has never occurred. "
7. Fires of Short Duration
"NIST: “The initial jet fuel fires themselves lasted at most a few minutes” [4]. “At any given location, the duration of [air, not steel] temperatures near 1,000 °C was about 15 min to 20 min. The rest of the time, the calculated temperatures were near 500 °C or below” [4]."
"We agree. But then, given that the fires were brief and patchy, how did both towers experience sudden-onset failure of structural steel over a broad area in each tower and how could the collapses of all three WTC high-rises have been so symmetrical and complete?
------------------------
next: part 2
http://www.benthamscience.com/open/tociej/articles/V002/35TOCIEJ.pdf
#7
Part 2
----------------
8. WTC Fires Did Not Melt Steel
NIST: “In no instance did NIST report that steel in the WTC towers melted due to the fires. The melting point of steel is about 1,500 degrees Celsius (2,800 degrees Fahrenheit). Normal building fires and hydrocarbon (e.g., jet fuel) fires generate temperatures up to about 1,100 degrees Celsius (2,000 degrees Fahrenheit). NIST reported maximum upper layer air temperatures of about 1,000 degrees Celsius (1,800 degrees Fahrenheit) in the WTC towers."
" Agreed. We also find agreement with Prof. Thomas Eagar on this point: The fire is the most misunderstood part of the WTC collapse. Even today, the media report (and many scientists believe) that the steel melted. It is
argued that the jet fuel burns very hot, especially with so much fuel present. This is not true.... The temperature of the fire at the WTC was not unusual, and it was most definitely not capable of melting steel [18]. We are in remarkable agreement, then: the WTC fires were not capable of melting steel. Of course, NIST then may have trouble explaining the molten material flowing out of the South Tower just before its collapse, as well as evidence for temperatures much higher than NIST’s reported 1,100°C
9. Destruction of WTC Steel Evidence
"...only a tiny fraction of steel was analyzed from the WTC Towers, and none of the WTC 7 steel was analyzed by NIST. What happened to the rest of the steel from the crime scene?" It was cut up and shipped to China to be melted down. "Such destruction of evidence shows the astounding ignorance of government officials to the value of a thorough, scientific investigation of the largest fire-induced collapse in world history."
"...only a small fraction of the steel was saved for testing, it is clear that an “enormous amount” of the WTC steel was examined either for or by NIST, and the samples selected were chosen for their identified importance to the NIST investigation."
10. Unusually Bright Flame and Glowing Liquid(WTC2)
"We agree and congratulate NIST for including these observations of an “unusual flame... which is generating a plume of white smoke” [4] “followed by the flow of a glowing liquid” having “an orange glow” [3]. With regard to the “very bright flame... which is generating a plume of white smoke”, NIST effectively rules out burning aluminum, because “Aluminum is not expected to ignite at normal fire temperatures...”[3]
11. High-Temperature Steel Attack, Sulfidation
"We agree [with FEMA] that the physical evidence for “severe high temperature corrosion attack” involving sulfur is compelling. Here we have grounds for an interesting discussion: How were “severe high temperatures” reached in the WTC buildings? What is the source of the sulfur that attacked the steel in these buildings?"
"Their [NIST] failure to respond to this documented anomaly is a striking phenomenon in itself. Perhaps NIST will explain and correct this oversight by considering the high-temperature sulfidation data in their long overdue report on the collapse of WTC 7. The existence of severe high temperatures in the WTC destruction is by now very well established [22]."
12. Computer Modeling and Visualizations
"We agree that NIST resorted to complex computer simulations and no doubt “adjusted the input” to account for the Towers’ destruction, after the fire-endurance physical tests did not support their preordained collapse theory. But the end result of such tweaked computer models, which were provided without visualizations and without sufficient detail for others to validate them, is hardly compelling. An article in the journal New Civil Engineer states: World Trade Center disaster investigators [at NIST] are refusing to show computer visualisations of the collapse of the Twin Towers despite calls from leading structural and fire engineers, NCE has learned."
13. Total Collapse Explanation Lacking
NIST: “This letter is in response to your April 12, 2007 request for correction... we are unable to provide a full explanation of the total collapse”
"We agree that NIST so far has not provided a full explanation for the total collapse. Indeed they take care to explain that their report stops short of the collapse, only taking the investigation up to the point where each Tower “was poised for collapse”
14.Search For Explosive or Thermite Residues
"We agree; there is no evidence that NIST tested for residues of thermite or explosives. This is another remarkable admission. Probing for residues from pyrotechnic materials including thermite in particular, is specified in fire and explosion investigations by the NFPA 921 code:
Unusual residues might remain from the initial fuel. Those residues could arise from thermite, magnesium, or other pyrotechnic materials [26]. Traces of thermite in residues (solidified slag, dust, etc.) would tell us a great deal about the crime..."
"This is standard procedure for fire and explosion investigations. Perhaps NIST will explain why they have not looked for these residues? The code specifies that fire-scene investigators must be prepared to justify an exclusion [26].
"NIST has been asked about this important issue recently, by investigative reporter Jennifer Abel:
Abel: "..what about that letter where NIST said it didn't look for evidence of explosives?”
Neuman[spokesperson at NIST, listed on the WTC report]:
"Right, because there was no evidence of that."
Abel: But how can you know there's no evidence if you don't look for it first?
Neuman: "If you're looking for something that isn't there, you're wasting your time... and the taxpayers’ money.” [27].
"The evident evasiveness of this answer might be humorous if not for the fact that NIST’s approach here affects the lives of so many innocent people. We do not think that looking for thermite or other residues specified in the NFPA 921 code is “wasting your time.” We may be able to help out here as well, for we have looked for such residues in the WTC remains using state-of-the-art analytical methods, especially in the voluminous toxic dust that was produced as the buildings fell and killed thousands of people, and the evidence for thermite use is mounting."
http://www.benthamscience.com/open/tociej/articles/V002/35TOCIEJ.pdf
#8
The Open Chemical Physics Journal, 2009, 2, 7-31
Active Thermitic Material Discovered in Dust from the 9/11 World Trade Center Catastrophe
The paper is a rather lengthy pdf with many photos and descriptions of various scientific tests of the dust samples taken from the area around the WTC buildings. They give 10 basic observations (not listed here) that led to their conclusions :
"The red/gray chips we have discovered in the WTC dust is active, unreacted thermitic material, incorporating nanotechnology, and is a highly energetic pyrotechnic or explosive material."
------------
Here are a few excerpts relating to the safety of handling:
" Safe handling of the malleable sol-gel material (nano-thermite in wet form) allows easy coating of surfaces (such as steel), which the same group, in a subsequent report, says they have achieved.
“The sol-gel process is very amenable to dip, spin, and spray-coating technologies to coat surfaces. We have utilized this property to dip-
coat various substrates to make sol-gel Fe2O3/Al/Viton coatings. The energetic coating dries to give a nice adherent film.” “We have prepared fine powders, pressed pellets, cast monoliths, and thin films of the hybrid inorganic/organic energetic nanocomposite” [25].
Thus, the energetic nano-composite can be sprayed or even “painted” onto surfaces, effectively forming an energetic or even explosive paint. The red chips we found in the WTC dust conform to their description of “thin films” of “hybrid inorganic/organic energetic nanocomposite”
-----------------
"...under ambient conditions the hybrid inorganic/organic energetic
composite is very stable to impact, is spark insensitive, and only very slightly friction sensitive. As noted in the Experimental section of
this report, in our hands wet hybrid nanocomposites are safe to handle and difficult to thermal [sic] ignite. However, once dry the material burns very vigorously and rapidly with the evolution of significant amounts of gaseous species"
"The organic component contributes to the rapid gas evolution and explosive nature of these energetic super-thermites when dry [24].
-------------------
So how do they ignite super-thermite?
“Super-thermite electric matches” have been developed at Los Alamos National Laboratory for which “applications include triggering explosives for ... demolition” [30]. ....such matches, which are designed to be ignited by a simple electric pulse..."
"Super-Thermite electric matches produce no toxic lead smoke and are
safer to use because they resist friction, impact, heat, and static discharge through the composition, thereby minimizing accidental ignition. They can be designed to create various thermal-initiating outputs—simple sparks, hot slag, droplets, or flames—depending on the needs of different applications” [30].
---------------
"..conventional thermite is regarded as an incendiary whereas
super-thermite, which may include organic ingredients for rapid gas generation, is considered a pyrotechnic or explosive [6, 24]."
------------
The terms "nano-thermite" and "super-thermite" are referring to the same thing.
----------------
http://www.benthamscience.com/open/tocpj/articles/V002/7TOCPJ.pdf
#9
Thanks for all the info. A whole lot to analyze. I remember from my studies in 1960's that wood beams were better than steel beams in keeping a structure intact during a fire. Since wood burns at a much lower temp than 1000 F, I wonder why steel would fail first.
#10
There is only one reason why all of the firefighters and other first responders reported sounds of multiple explosions and then later...in the rubble...their rescue efforts, and clean up later, were hampered by the "molten pools of metal" in the basement levels. There were 7 basement levels and a lot of molten steel down there. And even satellite IRAS monitoring of the site weeks later showed a very, very hot area down there. The only reason for all that molten steel (since it is well established that the jet fuel, which burned out quickly and even that did not reach temperatures needed to melt or even sufficiently weaken the structural steel to cause a collapse, and the subsequent office fires were not hot enough either) would be lots of incendiary activity severing the central core beams ability to support the load. There is just no way to explain why there was all that molten steel, beams hurled hundreds of feet from the buildings, the collapse at near free-fall speed, the collapse in the building's own footprint, the evidence in the dust, the corrosion, the chemical fingerprints, and so much more unless you conclude that the buildings came down as a result of demolition.
Thom's Blog Is On the Move
By webmaster
Hello All
Thom's blog in this space and moving to a new home.
Please follow us across to hartmannreport.com - this will be the only place going forward to read Thom's blog posts and articles.
Images of Thom
With His Holiness The Dalai Lama, at His home in Dharamsala, India (Synthesis Dialogues - made into a movie narrated by Harrison Ford)
From Cracking the Code:
"No one communicates more thoughtfully or effectively on the radio airwaves than Thom Hartmann. He gets inside the arguments and helps people to think them through—to understand how to respond when they’re talking about public issues with coworkers, neighbors, and friends. This book explores some of the key perspectives behind his approach, teaching us not just how to find the facts, but to talk about what they mean in a way that people will hear."
From Cracking the Code:
"No one communicates more thoughtfully or effectively on the radio airwaves than Thom Hartmann. He gets inside the arguments and helps people to think them through—to understand how to respond when they’re talking about public issues with coworkers, neighbors, and friends. This book explores some of the key perspectives behind his approach, teaching us not just how to find the facts, but to talk about what they mean in a way that people will hear."
From Unequal Protection, 2nd Edition:
"Beneath the success and rise of American enterprise is an untold history that is antithetical to every value Americans hold dear. This is a seminal work, a godsend really, a clear message to every citizen about the need to reform our country, laws, and companies."
Reply to Ken Ware's NIST report description. KW do you know anythng about the credentials of Shyam Sunder? Sometimes he sounds like he is in way over his head. I would really like to hear the input of a civil engineer that has his professional engineer's certification.