Recent comments
ADHD: Hunter in a Farmer's World
Thom Hartmann has written a dozen books covering ADD / ADHD - Attention Deficit Hyperactive Disorder.
Join Thom for his new twice-weekly email newsletters on ADHD, whether it affects you or a member of your family.
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.
DAnnemarc: And, of course, the undemocratic forces who want to spy on us all are trying once again to unleash CISPA (Cyber Intelligence Sharing and Protect Act) on us again. It has passed the House and has to go through the Senate and the President before it is unleashed upon us. They keep trying and, eventually, they may get it passed.
"[CISPA] would allow companies to easily hand over users' private information to the government thanks to a liability clause. This, according to the Electronic Frontier Foundation, "essentially means CISPA would override the relevant provisions in all other laws—including privacy laws."
"According to the EFF, "CISPA is written broadly enough to permit your communications service providers to share your emails and text messages with the government, or your cloud storage company could share your stored files."
CISPA failed last year because a lot of opposition by the people and, mostly, by corporations that were against it. In this years attempt at getting CISPA approved they have slightly changed the wording so these corporations would not be against it...and even for it. Corporations like AT&T, Comcast, HP, IBM, Intel, Time Warner, and Verizon. But it will still take away privacy from the people!
And, possibly, the only reason why Obama was against it (maybe) was because the wording in last year's CISPA allowed some amount of privacy security when transferring personal data from the private sector to the government but not the other way around..privacy data would still leak out. This year's CISPA, Obama (and the Senate) may not find it so unattractive...especially if all these big corporations are behind it.
They are trying to use the threat of Cyber Warfare from countries like China and claim that CISPA would help protect us (rather, the corporations). They are trying to tell us that we can trust our government and corporations (the ones that have been screwing us) but not the Chinese.
And, of course, the recent BM bombing was very timely that tended to show how our wonderful security apparatus..the police..FBI..etc were able to use our blessed technology (surveillance cameras and facial recognition software) to rapidly identify "terrorists" which led to their rapid capture. It was as if they were doing a commercial to usher in a new era that would make our lives so much safer if only we approved CISPA.
I just watched the new movie, Oblivion, and I couldn't help but see some similarities to what is happening today.
"Are you an effective team?" And the automatons dutifully answer: "Yes, we are an effective team!"
It depends on the decision they made. They will discussing for it then before starting the progress. http://www.prweb.com/releases/2013/1/prweb10313286.htm
Yo konnen ke maketing se yon pati ki pi enpòtan nan biznis la. Kliyan ki ale soti nan biznis yo pral santi yo satisfè ak evantyèlman tounen ankò pandan y ap transmèt yo bay moun anpil sou eksperyans l 'yo. Biznis tankou sa a ki pral travay. http://www.prweb.com/releases/2013/1/prweb10313286.htm
I'm confused with the sentences of yours. Maybe you should write it in a clear words so we can easily understanding it. http://www.prweb.com/releases/2013/1/prweb10313286.htm
I think that can be happening. Maybe they have less power to make a ruin like men do. But they can do the same techniques too. http://www.prweb.com/releases/2013/1/prweb10313286.htm
I think that's a right answer. And they should knowing it too and do some changes on the system. So they can do a better thing then. structured settlement quotes
Palindromedary ~ Wow! Thanks for that most disturbing education. I suppose its not that big of a step to go from believing your leaders are complicit in a crime to trying to accept that they actually committed the crime. Yet it is difficult to accept. Yet the finding of that nano/super-thermite in the dust residue at ground zero is compelling evidence indeed.
It certainly goes to show that President Eisenhower was more than correct in warning us about the undue influence of the military industrial complex. I wonder if he could have possibly foresaw that influence go this far? Of course, the next question is how to determine how widespread that influence is; and, how to get rid of it?
That also explains this crusade to destroy our civil liberties. They are the only obstacle in the way of this influence total domination of our country. We must fight for our civil rights now more than ever. Thank you!
What evidence do you have that young Mr. Tsarnaev lied when taking the citizenship oath?
Security Against Freedom
We the Fools have bought a polished turd!!!
We the People are first hand victims to why "obedience" to government is fatal to our own Liberties, Independence and ability to self govern.
We the People have lost our faith and confidence in the ability to self govern; trading our freedoms for false securities.
Security against Freedom??? Is it really a question??? If it is...Ask yourself; Do I want to live in a Government that is Of, For, and By the People; One that acknowledges and respects, Independence and all of life, or do I want a Corporate Government that controls me and is built for profit by any means necessary, including disolving the principles stated in the Declaration of Independence, and ignors and twist the Laws stated in the U.S. Constitution and casts aside those who will not submit.
This is a distraction from all the covert operations that the CIA is doing throughout the world! They are trying to get British Petroleums ability to control the oil in Venezuela reinstated--foment unrest in Russia--N.Korea--Darfur and Yemen and latin America
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
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
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
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
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
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
The INALIENABLE RIGHTS recognized by our country's original documents exist no matter if there are national boundaries or no boundaries!
INALIENABLE RIGHTS apply to every human on Earth! It proved to be the role of our country's revolutionaries to RECOGNIZE them and quantify them.
And their work has been the basis of human rights in the modern civilized world -- until knuckle draggers like Bush and his minions like John Yoo et al began the destruction of the only thing Western Civilization created to make up for Europeans' propensity to exploit anyone and everyone for profit.
I think it should be acknowledged that the quest for realizing human rights comes directly as a response to the EXTREME exploitation of the European dominator culture with its economic chauvinism, resource theft, physical slavery, colonialism, imperialism and corporatism.
By means of today's NeoFascistic use of the Patriot Act and a security state that is sold by media propaganda constantly using fear (just as original propagandists Goebbels and Bernays refined it) -- we can end up with the continued loss of Modern Civilization and plunge back into the Dark Ages now made even darker with Surveillence Technology and security excuses used to dismantle our Human Rights protections.
I've hardly seen anyone refer to the younger brother as the "alleged" perpetrator. This is how fear can be ratchetted up and the accused found guilty by the mob before a trial.
It's awful watching the destruction of our country's greatest contribution to humankind.
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]
Your citizenship can be revoked if you lie. Americans never lie.
If you lie on your citizenship application it can be revoked.
A word can have many definitions. It varies for different purposes and applications of the word, among different segments of the population speaking the language and changes over time from one period to another. In actual fact, its definition is whatever people believe it to be. A language is a living thing, people don't speak according to how dictionaries are written, dictionaries are written according to how people speak.
Most people are unaware of the academic, "nerdy" definition of fascism, thus it has an irrelevance to anyone outside the theory bound circles. Most people define fascism as aggressive nationalistic chauvinism or supremecism coupled with anti democratic authoritarianism.
Anyway, the above desribed, commonly occurring, socio political phenomena deserves a name and "fascism" will do nicely for that.
Perhaps, if that were the true purpose of delaying them and not a ruse to effectively lynch or railroad someone. .
My point is that these rights are to protect the innocent from wrongful conviction and punishment thus they are all the MORE IMPORTANT the more shockingly horrible and emotion engendering that a crime is. Those rights are NOT, somehow, for the aiding of the guilty as some people seem to think. When they are denied someone accused and suspected of a crime we are ALL hurt by it.
Thom and Louise wrote ~ "When we deny one individual their civil rights - no matter how evil we may believe them to be - we chip away at the civil liberties that protect all of us. We must defend these rights at all costs....even when it means defending the rights of Dzhokhar Tsarnaev."
I agree 100%. Anytime We the People act together to diminish even the rights of the least amongst us, we act together to diminish the rights of all of us.
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.
If one lies taking the oath of citizenship con it be revoked?
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.