Military Drills

[Peregrine]

But, how about addressing the 7/7 bombings? Or is that irrefutable due to the video evidence? It will take some time to address (your links), please be patient.

 

It's nowhere near as well-documented as the 9/11 conspiracy theories, and I don't feel like going hunting everywhere for evidence to disprove the coincidence.

 

Firefighters 1

 

Firefighters 2

 

http://fe.pennnet.com/Articles/Article_Dis...TICLE_ID=131225

 

http://www.thememoryhole.org/911/firefight...pe-excerpts.htm

 

http://www.firehouse.com/terrorist/wtcaudio/

 

http://st12.startlogic.com/~xenonpup/under..._explosions.htm

 

Could you actually post a summary of these tapes? What am I looking for here? If you're refering to comments like the video in your previous post, what makes firefighters experts on controlled demolition vs. structural failure?

 

Picture's of people alive in the hole's the plane left...

 

http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/wtc1_fire.html

 

Ever hear of a thing called momentum? The plane was flying at around 500 mph when it hit, what probably happened was the momentum carried the burning wreckage deeper into the tower, leaving the impact site relatively clear.

 

Further, the fire was at the top of the building...there's your location. How did molten steel show up in the basement, buried, 21 days after the incident...still molten!?

 

http://www.911myths.com/html/wtc_molten_steel.html

 

Read it.

 

The Madrid tower burned for 10 hours...and didn't collapse.....looking for verification only steel building in history to collapse...

 

http://www.911myths.com/html/madrid_windsor_tower.html

 

Read it. In short form, there was no structural damage to the Madrid tower, and it had a significantly different design. And notice that while the concrete sections survived, the steel parts did not, and failed the same way as the WTC buildings.

[Alanador]

The firefighters transcriptions were not the ones just played at the Massoui trail. These have been available for over two years now. In it there is a discussion with THE fireman who reaches the 78th floor, as he reaches it, and his description of the scene...totally contradictory from your site, but again...from the horses mouth. Sites will write anything, we both know that, I'm learning alot from your links. But this is testimony of individuals that were there. You sites right off claims to be 'not an authority'....but I will admit raises some more valid issues. But not on all counts. I'm doing more research of the drills, through your link and others. Please give my links the same courtesy.

 

And the madrid tower isn't the only example, the other link goes to a list of skyscraper fires since 1988, none fell. And the steel failed in Madrid, but after 10 hours, would it have failed in under 2?

 

I'll quote...

 

Battalion Seven Chief: "I'm still in boy stair 74th floor. No smoke or fire problems, walls are breached, so be careful."

 

Battalion Seven Chief: "I found a marshall on 75."

 

Battalion Seven Chief: "Battalion Seven ... Ladder 15, we've got two isolated pockets of fire. We should be able to knock it down with two lines. Radio that, 78th floor numerous 10-45 Code Ones."

 

these are just some excerpts..there is no graphic detail and these may have even been released shortly after incident. These are also available through the New York Times, but I think you need a subscription to access them.

 

BTW, not addressing the Larry Silverstein information? Interesting isn't it?

[Peregrine]

The firefighters transcriptions were not the ones just played at the Massoui trail. These have been available for over two years now. In it there is a discussion with THE fireman who reaches the 78th floor, as he reaches it, and his description of the scene...totally contradictory from you site, but again...from the horses mouth.

 

So how about posting the relevant section, instead of making me hunt through all your long articles for it? But anyway, four problems:

 

1) A firefighter is not an engineer, and is probably not qualified to judge how weakened a structural element is.

 

2) Even if the fire is completely over, the damage could easily have been done. Structural failure is not an all or nothing event, the weakened steel frames could take time to fail in enough places to start the chain reaction.

 

3) Did your firefighter survey the entire area? The fires might have been out in one place, but a fire elsewhere in the building could still be doing the last weakening to bring the building down.

 

4) Even if we assume that you're right, that the fires weren't enough to collapse the building, you still don't have a coherent theory. Now you're making the assumption that the government could hide months of setup work for the demolition, involving large numbers of people (all of which who have remained silent, and shown no guilt over murdering thousands of people), spread out over large sections of a busy office building.

 

And the madrid tower isn't the only example, the other link goes to a list of skyscraper fires since 1988, none fell. And the steel failed in Madrid, but after 10 hours, would it have failed in under 2?

 

Those other buildings also didn't have their structural supports damaged by plane impacts, shifting even more stress onto the surviving columns. Remember, we aren't talking about liquid steel here, just steel softened enough to fail under the heavy load. It's very possible that the WTC buildings would not have collapsed (or at least survived longer) if the fires had been the only damage.

 

And also, the other buildings didn't have their fireproofing insulation removed by the impacts. This makes a huge difference in how well the steel structure is going to survive.

 

Battalion Seven Chief: "I'm still in boy stair 74th floor. No smoke or fire problems, walls are breached, so be careful."

 

Battalion Seven Chief: "I found a marshall on 75."

 

Battalion Seven Chief: "Battalion Seven ... Ladder 15, we've got two isolated pockets of fire. We should be able to knock it down with two lines. Radio that, 78th floor numerous 10-45 Code Ones."

 

In other words, no specific details, no statements that they have surveyed the entire area. How does this prove that there has not been enough heat damage to cause the steel frame to fail?

[Alanador]

I just did, please read above. Let me tell you something, I wish I didn't feel like this...I really do Peregrine...I don't sleep well, and I think alot. This was not what got me into researching government. I'm not paranoid, after all I'm just a number...like you...and Loveme...and karkarinus. I'm not tryin to cause a hysteria...but s**t doesn't match up, no-ones story makes any sense. Thanks for the links.

 

But what about 7, I know it recieved damage but I have tonight seen burning skyscrapers fall apart, in big a** chunks...not collapse like 7. EVEN FEMA cannot say why it collapsed in it's official report (under further review...). Why did Silverstein say on Public Television that he gave the order to pull it. That is verbatum by the way, and I can provide a link to the video so you can hear the context. What about the warning Giuliani recieved...that the building was going to collapse, he had a 10 minute head start.

 

Also, the 78th floor was the impact zone, the lines I quoted do not occur in succession...I summarized for you.

 

Battalion Seven Operations Tower One: "Battalion Seven Operations Tower One to Battalion Nine, need you on floor above 79. We have access stairs going up to 79, kay."

 

I have got to sleep. It's been months like this Peregrine. I'll hang around for a few to see if you post m8. G'night.

[Peregrine]

BTW, not addressing the Larry Silverstein information? Interesting isn't it?

 

http://www.911myths.com/html/wtc7_profit.html

 

http://www.911myths.com/html/wtc_insurance.html

 

http://www.911myths.com/html/windfall.html

 

Oh hey, looks like he isn't getting such unbelievable profit after all...

I'm not tryin to cause a hysteria...but s**t doesn't match up, no-ones story makes any sense. Thanks for the links.

 

You're right, things aren't matching up, and stories aren't making sense... but it's yours I'm talking about. Even if I concede every single point you've made, you STILL haven't proposed any idea for why the US government would create an elaborate conspiracy involving the murder of thousands of its own citizens, and how it could keep the secret so completely.

 

And that's what the only alternative is... either I (and the entire engineering community) am right, and there's nothing impossible about the events, or the US government is guilty of mass murder. Call it gathering evidence if you want, but that's the exact accusation you are making.

 

But what about 7, I know it recieved damage but I have tonight seen burning skyscrapers fall apart, in big a** chunks...not collapse like 7.

 

http://www.911myths.com/html/wtc7_damage.html

 

Read it. There was plenty of damage, and they decided to simply evacuate and leave the building to burn.

 

http://www.911myths.com/html/progressive_collapse.html

 

Read it. Not only does it explain how the buildings could have collapsed that way, but it provides an example (with pictures) of a building collapsing like that completely by accident. No fires, no terrorists, just some poor work quality.

 

Why did Silverstein say on Public Television that he gave the order to pull it. That is verbatum by the way, and can provide a link to the video so you can hear the context.

 

http://www.911myths.com/html/wtc7_pulled.html

 

Read it. Then forget the idea that a building owner and firefighters would use some little-known demolition-industry slang (if it even is) to refer to demolishing the building. And then realize that rigging a building for controlled demolition is a task that takes weeks or months to complete, and involves lots of precise calculations. This is not something that could be done in less than a day. And then realize that it makes no sense for the fire department to set the explosives anyway, so there is no reason for him to give the order to a firefighter.

 

So what's the more likely explanation? He was saying "pull" in the sense of "pull out, evacuate", as the link suggests.

 

Also, the 78th floor was the impact zone, the lines I quoted do not occur in succession...I summarized for you.

 

And they also only refer to one small section of the building. The fact that one part of the building was intact does not mean the entire structure was intact.

[Alanador]

Sorry, i'd have to disagree with that sites take on Silverstein. Your site has many great explanations that make alot of sense...but not there. Pull "out" is the terminology for retreat...pull it is a demo term.

 

Adding link to speech so you can hear context...

 

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-7...pull+it&pl=true

 

Thank you for taking this time with me btw.

[Peregrine]

Sorry, i'd have to disagree with that sites take on Silverstein.

 

Fine, whatever. Now since you disagree, please explain how a mere building owner is capable of such a massive conspiracy. Even if he made a trillion dollars on the insurance, giving him a perfect motive to blow up his own buildings, how did he do it? How did a mere building owner arrange hijacked planes and a massive government coverup?

 

And don't say he didn't... if you're saying he profited from the disaster enough to create suspicion, then that's the inevitable conclusion. Either his profits are nothing suspicious, or you are claiming that he was responsible for the attacks.

 

And even I'm incredibly nice and concede that he did it... why the hell would he ADMIT to doing it in a public statement? Especially since he would forfiet the insurance claim by doing so, removing his supposed motive!

 

Your site has many great explanations that make alot of sense...but not there. Pull "out" is the terminology for retreat...pull it is a demo term.

 

http://www.google.com/search?as_q=demoliti...ights=&safe=off

 

No it isn't. Strange that such a common demolition term doesn't appear except in the context of that one remark.

 

But even if that's what he meant...

 

1) Why would he admit it in a public statement?

 

2) Why would he be giving the order to a firefighter instead of a demolitions expert?

 

3) How did they manage to plan and set all the explosives, a task normally taking weeks or months, in less than a day, and in complete secrecy?

[Alanador]

SEPTEMBER 8th, 9th

 

World Trade Center IT engineer reports security power down.

 

From "Scott Forbes"

Mon, 19 Apr 2004 12:35:13 +0000

 

I was pleased to read your article "The Official Version of 9/11 is a Hoax" ... Please note some other facts. My name is Scott Forbes and I still work for Fiduciary Trust. In 2001 we occupied floors 90 and 94-97 of the South Tower and lost 87 employees plus many contractors.

 

On the weekend of 9/8,9/9 there was a 'power down' condition in WTC tower 2, the south tower. This power down condition meant there was no electrical supply for approx 36hrs from floor 50 up. I am aware of this situation since I work in IT and had to work with many others that weekend to ensure that all systems were cleanly shutdown beforehand ... and then brough back up afterwards. The reason given by the WTC for the power down was that cabling in the tower was being upgraded ... Of course without power there were no security cameras, no security locks on doors and many, many 'engineers' coming in and out of the tower. I was at home on the morning of 9/11 on the shore of Jersey City, right opposite the Towers, and watching events unfold I was convinced immediately that something was happening related to the weekend work ...

 

I have mailed this information to many people and bodies, including the 9/11 Commission but no-one seems to be taking and registering these facts. Whats to hide? Can you help publicise them?

 

Please feel free to mail me.

Scott Forbes

 

SEPTEMBER 10th

 

Federal News Service announced that a 9:30 news conference was scheduled on 9/11 at Booker School.

 

Link to Scott Forbes Interview

 

http://killtown.blogspot.com/2005/12/scott...-interview.html

 

I also have testimony from Engineers, local 94, the engineers who were in the building at the time and describe massive devastation at the basement levels. The elevator shaft...lots of folks say that. I will look for the floor plan to the building, as someone that is not an engineer I cannot say for certain...but it would seem odd to have the elevator shaft run the entire height of the building, I belive they had to be staggered, but again, I'm looking for the floor plan (I am in construction and specialize in drywall, therefore I also have to know framing...well maybe every drywaller doesn't, but I do). The fireballs that reached the lobbies and basements would have had to travel down those shafts to reach it correct? The testimony of the engineers of Local 94 is extremely graphic and was hard to read. If you request it I can put the link up, or I can summarize what I think is important from that testimony...but that wouldn't be fair.

 

PS If I can get the floorplan, couldn't anyone, therefore..couldn't weeks in planning have been done in a very easy fashion?

 

As far as Silverstein, ever heard of a fruedian slip? IF he is invovled...I'm sure he's just part of something larger.

 

Here's a quick cross section of the building, I'm looking for more...

 

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/comm..._Arrangment.jpg

[Peregrine]

SEPTEMBER 8th, 9th

 

World Trade Center IT engineer reports security power down.

 

From "Scott Forbes"

Mon, 19 Apr 2004 12:35:13 +0000

 

I was pleased to read your article "The Official Version of 9/11 is a Hoax" ... Please note some other facts. My name is Scott Forbes and I still work for Fiduciary Trust. In 2001 we occupied floors 90 and 94-97 of the South Tower and lost 87 employees plus many contractors.

 

On the weekend of 9/8,9/9 there was a 'power down' condition in WTC tower 2, the south tower. This power down condition meant there was no electrical supply for approx 36hrs from floor 50 up. I am aware of this situation since I work in IT and had to work with many others that weekend to ensure that all systems were cleanly shutdown beforehand ... and then brough back up afterwards. The reason given by the WTC for the power down was that cabling in the tower was being upgraded ... Of course without power there were no security cameras, no security locks on doors and many, many 'engineers' coming in and out of the tower. I was at home on the morning of 9/11 on the shore of Jersey City, right opposite the Towers, and watching events unfold I was convinced immediately that something was happening related to the weekend work ...

 

I have mailed this information to many people and bodies, including the 9/11 Commission but no-one seems to be taking and registering these facts. Whats to hide? Can you help publicise them?

 

Please feel free to mail me.

Scott Forbes

 

Have you even bothered to read the links I've posted? This "interview" is likely fake, for two reasons:

 

1) There would be a huge number of offices suffering serious loss of productivity from this lack of power, but where are the other people supporting his statements about the loss of power? Why is he the only one making the claim?

 

2) No competent electrician would need to shut down such a huge part of the building for so long just to replace some wires. So it would be pretty obviously fake, and someone would've found it a bit unusual. But again, we have only a single statement.

 

But in any case, even a 36 hour loss of power isn't long enough to do anything. Two points:

 

1) Setting the demolition charges is a process that takes weeks or months, especially on such a large building. 36 hours is nowhere near long enough to do it.

 

2) The time would have to be much, much longer, because they would have to be completely hidden. Yes, your "evidence" is claiming that in 36 hours, the workers managed to not only set a huge number of demolition charges, but do it in the middle of an active office building, hiding the entire process from all witnesses. That means stripping away all covers on the structural supports, adding the charges, then putting it all back. And somehow they did it unbelievably quickly compared to cases where the charges can be put in plain sight.

The elevator shaft...lots of folks say that. I will look for the floor plan to the building, as someone that is not an engineer I cannot say for certain...but it would seem odd to have the elevator shaft run the entire height of the building, I belive they had to be staggered, but again, I'm looking for the floor plan

 

Why is it odd? And even if it's an unusual design feature, if they didn't run the entire height of the building, wouldn't somebody have pointed it out by now? Surely at least a few of the vast numbers of people who have been in the building would have made the claim, to be quickly proven by a look at the building plans.

(I am in construction and specialize in drywall, therefore I also have to know framing...well maybe every drywaller doesn't, but I do).

 

Your point? By framing and drywall, I suspect you're talking about wood frame houses. This is entirely different than a massive steel-frame building, so I doubt your experience is too relevant.

The fireballs that reached the lobbies and basements would have had to travel down those shafts to reach it correct? The testimony of the engineers of Local 94 is extremely graphic and was hard to read. If you request it I can put the link up, or I can summarize what I think is important from that testimony...but that wouldn't be fair.

 

Yes, please post it along with your summary of what is important. And then explain how the fact that there was damage from fireballs passing down the elevator shafts actually means anything.

PS If I can get the floorplan, couldn't anyone, therefore..couldn't weeks in planning have been done in a very easy fashion?

 

No. You don't need just the floorplan, you need plans for the entire structure. Floorplans don't usually show the details you'd need to precisely collapse a building. At most, you might get the horizontal locations of the columns, but you won't get the vertical data on the relevant joints.

 

And that still doesn't change the fact that besides the long planning times, it also takes a long time just to set and wire all the charges.

 

As far as Silverstein, ever heard of a fruedian slip? IF he is invovled...I'm sure he's just part of something larger.

 

Why? The entire argumeng against Silverstein is that he benefited from the insurance payments, so had motive to be involved. If he's just a pawn in someone else's conspiracy, why would they even bother involving him? And why would he be the one making the decision to collapse the building?

 

Here's a quick cross section of the building, I'm looking for more...

 

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/comm..._Arrangment.jpg

 

Thanks. Concession accepted on the elevator argument, since this clearly shows at least one shaft running the entire height of the building, and another set reaching 2/3s of the way (possibly close enough, depending on the exact internal damage from the crash).

 

=======================================================

 

And finally, two questions:

 

1) What is your point about the elevators and damage in the basement? The towers clearly collapsed from the top down, long after the basement damage was done. So how is it relevant?

 

2) Where is the motive? You STILL haven't answerd this question, and I will not let you ignore it. Post a reasonable motive for the conspiracy, or concede that there isn't one.

[Alanador]

Firstly, I do residential AND commercial drywall installation (I have run my own company for 6 years now), and I'm sure they had 2 layers of 5/8's" rock all over, with 2 layers of 1 inch core board for the elevator shaft (only 'fire-taped' which means one coat) but I can't say what the exact building codes are in NY or if they were followed...irrelevant anyway. I speak with 3 generations of drywall knowledge.

 

As far as Scott Forbes, we have a statement, and an interview, and I am looking to continue verification on that...but his email is included in the interview, you could contact him if you'd like. I'm sure you could ask the questions that would reveal his knowledge of engineering to say the least.

 

Yes, that's ALOT of cable to pull and replace. It could EASILY have taken longer if it wasn't well staffed, as shown in his interview.

 

And yes there was one elevator shaft, the cargo elevator. We'll come back to that.

 

The reason I didn't summarize is that it doesn't seem fair and I think you should be reading this material instead of trusting 'your sites' interpretation of it. As in any court, we can gather experts from both sides to display given opposing points (something I'll be illustrating in a moment with loads of engineer testimony, eyewitness testimony). I am trying to stick with video, pictures, audio, testimony and first hand accounts of the poeple that were there. You obviously didn't read the links I put up...here are more engineers describing the damage in the basement immediatley after the attack, pre-collapse. I am STILL reading through your sites...are you still reading through the first hand accounts I have provided to you?

 

All I was looking for from the floor plan was to determine elevator locations in perspective to the attacked areas...to track our fireball. I'll be quoting from the 9-11 commission report on a few things to show that even there hypothesis doesn't hold up. We have one shaft. More coming...I hate to not finish but I've got to leave for a few hours. I will address the issues as soon as I get in.