Reasonable doubt...All truthers(and whoever esle) please read

[tmd2_1]

No, I was asking YOU to address it. You presented it as evidence of our bull **** claim. I proved beyond any and all doubt, that your claim, and the evidence you presented, is absolutely false.

Would you care to address that?

(I've emailed them a few times. They ignore it. )

I'm not even sure what you're talking about.

This is the quote from the site "FEMA's BPAT, who wrote the WTC Building Performance Study, were not given access to Ground Zero. Apparently, they were not even allowed to collect steel samples from the salvage yards. According to Appendix D of the Study: "
What is in accurate about that?

 

[Edx]

I'm not even sure what you're talking about.

This is the quote from the site "FEMA's BPAT, who wrote the WTC Building Performance Study, were not given access to Ground Zero. Apparently, they were not even allowed to collect steel samples from the salvage yards. According to Appendix D of the Study: "
What is in accurate about that?

Uuhh, I dont see what is so hard to understand about Tri's post.

Simply put, 911Research claims that investigators were not ALLOWED at the site. This is a complete and total lie, the fact they even quoted a paragraph that showed it was a lie if they had quoted the whole thing. In fact the line they do quote doesnt even support what they claim it means, even out of context, but if you read the line in context you find out why.

Why are you so intentionally difficult?

 

[triforcharity]

I'm not even sure what you're talking about.

This is the quote from the site "FEMA's BPAT, who wrote the WTC Building Performance Study, were not given access to Ground Zero. Apparently, they were not even allowed to collect steel samples from the salvage yards. According to Appendix D of the Study: "
What is in accurate about that?

Yes, and it's a lie. Here is why that statement is a blatent lie.

DIRECTLY from their OWN SOURCE.

Collection and storage of steel members from the WTC site was not part of the BPS Team efforts sponsored by FEMA and the American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE). SEAoNY offered to organize a volunteer team of SEAoNY engineers to collect certain WTC steel pieces for future building performance studies. Visiting Ground Zero in early October 2001, SEAoNY engineers, with the assistance from the New York City Department of Design and Construction (DDC), identified and set aside some steel pieces for further study

I've hilited the parts where it shows that FEMA, along with ASCE and SEAoNY were in fact, at Ground Zero, and in fact, were allowed to inspect the steel.

You site is based on LIES.

 

[Edx]

Lets put this another way TMD.

In what way were investigators "shielded" from the evidence?

Even ignoring 911Research's blatent quote-mine, can this be supported at all in any way?

 

[tmd2_1]

Yes, and it's a lie. Here is why that statement is a blatent lie.

DIRECTLY from their OWN SOURCE.



I've hilited the parts where it shows that FEMA, along with ASCE and SEAoNY were in fact, at Ground Zero, and in fact, were allowed to inspect the steel.

You site is based on LIES.

Lets put this another way TMD.

In what way were investigators "shielded" from the evidence?

Even ignoring 911Research's blatent quote-mine, can this be supported at all in any way?

Sure it can just go here http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/groundzero/restrictions.html#ref1

They clear up what they are saying.

Here's an article from the NY times which 911 research links to. I'll link it directly for you,

http://911research.wtc7.net/cache/wtc/groundzero/nyt_mismanagementmuddle.html

 

[Edx]

Sure it can just go here http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/groundzero/restrictions.html#ref1

They clear up what they are saying.

Here's an article from the NY times which 911 research links to. I'll link it directly for you,

http://911research.wtc7.net/cache/wtc/groundzero/nyt_mismanagementmuddle.html

Oh my, now I remember why I stopped debating you.

Neither of those sources support your claim, but as usual you are in too much denial to understand why.

The first is talking about reporters and tourists taking pictures at ground zero. Reporters and tourists are not investigators. They do not know anything about engineering or buildings.

The article also says:

Officer Michael DiFrancisco, standing guard at a barricade, said the photo ban also was "out of respect for the families and all those concerned."

Yea, that officer is such a liar! He clearly has been told to keep people away or else they'll take pictures of all the glowing molten steel everywhere /sarcasm. You really are reaching aren't you?

The second link is about the investigation being mismanaged and slow. Nowhere does it say or imply that investigators were "shielded" from investigating the evidence or were not allowed on the site to inspect and save pieces of steel. Did you read the previous two posts? 911 Research lied about what FEMA said. And it is a lie, because he would have had to had read the quote in context before he posted it.

The answer is obvious. Investigators were not shielded from the evidence like Hoffman claims, the worst you could say is that it was slow to start and they past the National Construction Safety Team Act in 2002 to make sure things were faster in the future, which gave investigators early site access, subpoena power and up to $25 million per year".

The funny thing is 911Research actually debunks itself once you know the quote in context. If it was a coverup you'd think FEMA would be the only ones to be allowed on the site. However read the quote in context and you see that its the opposite with SEAoNY (Structural Engineers Association of New York) organizing a volunteer team with the assistance from the New York City Department of Design and Construction. If FEMA really cared about anyone finding any evidence of anything suspicious, why did they allow them to go?

As always the truth movement are wrong back to front.

 

[tmd2_1]

Oh my, now I remember why I stopped debating you.

Neither of those sources support your claim, but as usual you are in too much denial to understand why.

The first is talking about reporters and tourists taking pictures at ground zero. Reporters and tourists are not investigators. They do not know anything about engineering or buildings.

The article also says:


You really are reaching aren't you?

The second link is about the investigation being mismanaged and slow. Nowhere does it say or imply that investigators were "shielded" from investigating the evidence. Did you read the previous two posts? 911 Research lied about what FEMA said. And it is alie, because he would have had to had read the quote in context before he posted it.

The answer is obvious. Investigators were not shielded from the evidence like Hoffman claims, the worst you could say is that it was slow to start and they past the National Construction Safety Team Act in 2002 to make sure things were faster in the future, which gave investigators early site access, subpoena power and up to $25 million per year".

The funny thing is 911Reasearch actually debunks itself once you know the quote in context. If it was a coverup you'd think FEMA would be the only ones to be allowed on the site. However read the quote in context and you see that its the opposite with SEAoNY (Structural Engineers Assication of New York) organizing a volunteer team with the assistance from the New York City Department of Design and Construction. If FEMA didnt really care about anyone finding any evidence, why did they allow them to go?

As always the truth movement are wrong back to front.

The 11th paragraph down in the NY times article

"The lack of clear authority has had unfortunate consequences, the House members said. The Giuliani administration started to send World Trade Center steel off to recycling yards before investigators could examine it to determine whether it might hold crucial clues as to why the buildings fell. The full investigative team set up by FEMA was not allowed to enter ground zero to collect other potentially critical evidence in the weeks after the attack, and it did not get a copy of the World Trade Center blueprints until early January, a delay House members found infuriating. "

 

[dafydd]

The 11th paragraph down in the NY times article

"The lack of clear authority has had unfortunate consequences, the House members said. The Giuliani administration started to send World Trade Center steel off to recycling yards before investigators could examine it to determine whether it might hold crucial clues as to why the buildings fell. The full investigative team set up by FEMA was not allowed to enter ground zero to collect other potentially critical evidence in the weeks after the attack, and it did not get a copy of the World Trade Center blueprints until early January, a delay House members found infuriating. "

Any other proof? A newspaper article is not proof. What was the source of the story and was it checked?

 

[Edx]

The 11th paragraph down in the NY times article

"The lack of clear authority has had unfortunate consequences, the House members said. The Giuliani administration started to send World Trade Center steel off to recycling yards before investigators could examine it to determine whether it might hold crucial clues as to why the buildings fell. The full investigative team set up by FEMA was not allowed to enter ground zero to collect other potentially critical evidence in the weeks after the attack, and it did not get a copy of the World Trade Center blueprints until early January, a delay House members found infuriating. "

This talks about a hold up, not that anyone was shielded. I already said there was a hold up. Why doesn't Hoffman tell you that they were not only allowed to investigate the site but that a team made up of expert volunteers were allowed to into the site along with other independant expert Abolhassan Astaneh-Asl who was there on 911 and started his investigation straight away?

There were ASCE at the site in October:

The Sept. 11 terrorist attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon caused significant damage and destruction to buildings and infrastructure in the vicinity of both complexes. In the aftermath of these attacks, civil engineers have assumed a prominent role and are leading the effort to evaluate not only the performance of the affected buildings but also the vulnerability of buildings and infrastructure in general to future attacks.

The American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE), together with the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), has established a team of experts, the Building Performance Assessment Team (BPAT), to investigate the factors that led to the collapse of and damage to the World Trade Center towers and other buildings around them (see box below). The team will also identify and make recommendations on further research that needs to be done as a consequence of the terrorist attacks.

The BPAT team is made up of experts in tall buildings, steel structures, connections, fire engineering, blast effects, and structural investigations.
Dr. Venkatesh Kodur, a research officer at NRC's Institute for Research in Construction and a leading world expert on the fire resistance of building materials, is the only expert from outside the United States invited to join the team.

At the beginning of October, the team visited the collapsed and damaged buildings at Ground Zero and over a period of six days collected a significant amount of data on building performance under extreme conditions. It is now in the process of analyzing this data to determine which parts of the buildings and, specifically, which columns were destroyed on initial impact, and how the fire grew and contributed to the collapse of the towers and the surrounding buildings.

http://web.archive.org/web/20041122063735/http://irc.nrc-cnrc.gc.ca/newsletter/v7no1/collapse_e.html

Abolhassan Astaneh-Asl was an investigator who we know was at the site right after 911 and various times after that.

So far, I have made three trips to NYC and spent a total of about 25 days there conducting field investigation and collecting data. Upon arrival to NYC on September 19, and after visiting Ground Zero...I started my reconnaissance and collection of the perishable data. I have collected some data on design and construction of the WTC and have met and discussed the case with the structural engineers who have designed the WTC Buildings.

He even says that the recycling plant was even helpful in allowing him longer time to study the steel

Thanks to cooperation of the HSNE recycling plant, I have been able to study the steel from the WTC before recycling.

He says he identified and saved various structural componants he felt were critical to the investigation.

I have identified and saved some components of the structures that appear to have been subjected to intense fire or impact of fast moving objects. Figures 1 through 4 show examples of inspected structures. These critical pieces are saved as perishable data and can be used in future research.

He was asked what problems he encountered, and of course he said that it was removed too quickly but that he still feels he and the other teams were able to do a sufficiant job.

Q: Please describe the impediments that you encountered during the investigation of the collapse of the WTC buildings, such as the loss of material from the WTC site and any effects of such impediments on your work.

I wish I had more time to inspect steel structure and save more pieces before the steel was recycled. However, given the fact that other teams such as NIST, SEAONY and FEMA-BPAT have also done inspection and have collected the perishable data, it seems to me that collectively we may have been able to collect sufficient data. The main impediments to my work were and still are:

Not having a copy of the engineering drawings and design and construction documents.
Not having copies of the photographs and videotapes that various agencies might have taken during and immediately after the collapse.

http://thewebfairy.com/nerdcities/WTC/astaneh-wtc.htm

 

[triforcharity]

TMD is ok putting his faith in liars apparently.

 

[Edx]

TMD is ok putting his faith in liars apparently.

If Hoffman says it, it must be true.... somehow!!!

 

[tmd2_1]

This talks about a hold up, not that anyone was shielded. I already said there was a hold up. Why doesn't Hoffman tell you that they were not only allowed to investigate the site but that a team made up of expert volunteers were allowed to into the site along with other independant expert Abolhassan Astaneh-Asl who was there on 911 and started his investigation straight away?

There were ASCE at the site in October:



http://web.archive.org/web/20041122063735/http://irc.nrc-cnrc.gc.ca/newsletter/v7no1/collapse_e.html

Abolhassan Astaneh-Asl was an investigator who we know was at the site right after 911 and various times after that.



He even says that the recycling plant was even helpful in allowing him longer time to study the steel



He says he identified and saved various structural componants he felt were critical to the investigation.



He was asked what problems he encountered, and of course he said that it was removed too quickly but that he still feels he and the other teams were able to do a sufficiant job.



http://thewebfairy.com/nerdcities/WTC/astaneh-wtc.htm

I find it hard to believe at one point you were ever a "truther" Why do you work so hard to defend the official story? This post is a perfect example. You know everything is contained in those articles, that FEMA's investigation was greatly hampered. Yet you write things like this. There is more than enough information in this thread alone that anyone with an open mind would have questions about the official story. Not saying be a full fledged "truther" but have questions. Yet you who claims to at one point have been a truther, work so hard, jump through so many hoops to defend your dogma. I really don't understand it.

 

[dafydd]

I find it hard to believe at one point you were ever a "truther" Why do you work so hard to defend the official story? This post is a perfect example. You know everything is contained in those articles, that FEMA's investigation was greatly hampered. Yet you write things like this. There is more than enough information in this thread alone that anyone with an open would have questions about the official story. Not saying be a full fledged "truther" but have questions. Yet you who claims to at one point have been a truther, work so hard, jump through so many hoops to defend your dogma. I really don't understand it.

No. Fantasies are not information.

 

[Edx]

I find it hard to believe at one point you were ever a "truther"

Feel free to use the search function if you don't believe me. My early posts were on the tail end of my trutherism. Quite embarrasing to me now, but knock yourself out.

Why do you work so hard to defend the official story?

Why do you work so hard to defend someone like Hoffman that is so easily shown to be lying to you?

This post is a perfect example. You know everything is contained in those articles, that FEMA's investigation was greatly hampered. Yet you write things like this.

You miss the point as bloody usual.

No one says the investigation was perfect, but as truthers would twist things the steel was wisked away and no one had any time to study it and investigators were not even allowed to inspect any at the site. That is the implication is it not?

This however is nonsense. There is a huge difference between what truthers claim happened and bureaucracy and mismanagement. Dr Astaneh-Asl was there ON THE DAY IT HAPPENED and said he started right then.

• 
  None of the investigators that studied the steel says that they were shielded in any nefarious way (that truthers imply) by the powers that be. Why is that? They all have to be in on it again.

• Why didnt they find any evidence you claim they were so worried would be found?

• Why would it matter if FEMA had trouble early on if you also believe they are the ones that are covering everything up with their fraudulent unscientific report?

• Why, if they are the ones covering everything up, were independent experts from SEAoNY, ASCE and Dr Astaneh-Asl allowed on the site at all?

And why did Hoffman feel the need to quote FEMA out of context to make out that no one actually saved and studied the steel? You claimed it was the best source for information, so how can you read that and come away knowing any of this? You'll come away deceived by misrepresentation and deliberate omissions.

There is more than enough information in this thread alone that anyone with an open would have questions about the official story.

Dont start this again, we take your claims one at a time. All you do is come back to the massive list of your claims. Well I am sorry, but even if 911 was an inside job of some kind, even if it was a demolition, you would still be wrong about the clean up and Hoffman would still be lying through his teeth.

Yet you who claims to at one point have been a truther, work so hard, jump through so many hoops to defend your dogma. I really don't understand it.

You're stubborn, and intentionally difficult. I was also, but not as much as you, which is why I realised I was wrong.

 

[Sam.I.Am]

Let's see... Why might FEMA be kept off of a rescue site to conduct an investigation... Might it be that it was still a rescue site where an investigation might be of secondary importance compared to trying to save lives and it could hamper rescue efforts?

Amazingly enough right about when it changed over from rescue to recovery of remains is when they were allowed on site to start the investigation. Just like every other crime scene I've ever heard of where the priorities are to save lives first and then to investigate the crime. Funny that...

 

[tmd2_1]

Feel free to use the search function if you don't believe me. My early posts were on the tail end of my trutherism. Quite embarrasing to me now, but knock yourself out.



Why do you work so hard to defend someone like Hoffman that is so easily shown to be lying to you?



You miss the point as bloody usual.

No one says the investigation was perfect, but as truthers would twist things the steel was wisked away and no one had any time to study it and investigators were not even allowed to inspect any at the site. That is the implication is it not?

This however is nonsense. There is a huge difference between what truthers claim happened and bureaucracy and mismanagement. Dr Astaneh-Asl was there ON THE DAY IT HAPPENED and said he started right then.

• 
  None of the investigators that studied the steel says that they were shielded in any nefarious way (that truthers imply) by the powers that be. Why is that? They all have to be in on it again.

• Why didnt they find any evidence you claim they were so worried would be found?

• Why would it matter if FEMA had trouble early on if you also believe they are the ones that are covering everything up with their fraudulent unscientific report?

• Why, if they are the ones covering everything up, were independent experts from SEAoNY, ASCE and Dr Astaneh-Asl allowed on the site at all?

And why did Hoffman feel the need to quote FEMA out of context to make out that no one actually saved and studied the steel? You claimed it was the best source for information, so how can you read that and come away knowing any of this? You'll come away deceived by misrepresentation and deliberate omissions.




Dont start this again, we take your claims one at a time. All you do is come back to the massive list of your claims. Well I am sorry, but even if 911 was an inside job of some kind, even if it was a demolition, you would still be wrong about the clean up and Hoffman would still be lying through his teeth.



You're stubborn, and intentionally difficult. I was also, but not as much as you, which is why I realised I was wrong.

.

Here's a quote from 911Myths "However, it’s been recognised that even in circumstances like those at the WTC, access should be provided more quickly, and in 2002 the National Construction Safety Team Act was introduced."

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

Yes accuse me of quote mining all you want. But for a site like that to admit this you know there is something to it.

 

[Edx]

.

Here's a quote from 911Myths "However, it’s been recognised that even in circumstances like those at the WTC, access should be provided more quickly, and in 2002 the National Construction Safety Team Act was introduced."

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

Yes accuse me of quote mining all you want. But for a site like that to admit this you know there is something to it.

This shows me you don't read my posts which is why I get so pissed off with you.

In post #2286 I told you this:

...the worst you could say is that it was slow to start and they past the National Construction Safety Team Act in 2002 to make sure things were faster in the future, which gave investigators early site access, subpoena power and up to $25 million per year"

I already told you this yet now you tell me exactly what I told you earlier as if I never knew about it. /facepalm. This is a great example of why you are so infuriating.

All I have to say is what I said before, something else you probaby didn't read: Bureaucracy and mismanagement does not = inside job. You cannot prove a nafarious conspiracy by proving bureaucracy and mismanagement


Here's some critical points and questions you have ignored.

• Why didn't any of the investigators that studied the steel say that they were shielded in some nefarious way by the powers that be?

• Why did Hoffman (911 Research) quote FEMA out of context to make out that no one was allowed to study the steel or even collect samples?

• How could you come away reading the 911Research page and know about all the investigators studying and saving critcal pieces of the steel before it was recycled?

 

[tmd2_1]

This shows me you don't read my posts which is why I get so pissed off with you.

In post #2286 I told you this:



I already told you this yet now you tell me exactly what I told you earlier as if I never knew about it. /facepalm. This is a great example of why you are so infuriating.

All I have to say is what I said before, something else you probaby didn't read: Bureaucracy and mismanagement does not = inside job. You cannot prove a nafarious conspiracy by proving bureaucracy and mismanagement


Here's some critical points and questions you have ignored.

• Why didn't any of the investigators that studied the steel say that they were shielded in some nefarious way by the powers that be?

• Why did Hoffman (911 Research) quote FEMA out of context to make out that no one was allowed to study the steel or even collect samples?

• How could you come away reading the 911Research page and know about all the investigators studying and saving critcal pieces of the steel before it was recycled?

I apologize I may have missed that. But do you have any idea how many times I have to repeat myself here? How many different people write posts, and I try to answer all of them, at least the ones worth answering. I mean I'm not a machine I miss things.

To answer some of your questions, what are we suppose to think of things like this? "Gene Corley complained to the Committee that the Port Authority refused to give his investigators copies of the Towers' blueprints until he signed a wavier that the plans would not be used in a lawsuit against the agency." Sounds a bit like someone complaining about being denied access, and questioning the reason why.

I fail to see what Hoffman did as wrong. If you really believe it, e-mail him, present your case. Maybe he will change it.

Your last question, well he does state this here "Given that the removal and recycling of World Trade Center seel continued over the objections of victims' families and others seeking a genuine investigation, revelations, years later, that some of Twin Towers' steel parts were preserved comes as something of a surprise. Many of the heaviest steel pieces from the Twin Towers are stored in an 80,000-square-foot hangar at John F. Kennedy International Airport. These include some of the base sections of the Towers' massive core columns and 13 of the 153 steel trees from the bases of the Towers' perimeter walls. 7 Some of these pieces are shown in the film Up From Zero. " So I'm not sure that applies.

Oh I don't think the reason you get angry with me, has anything to do with me not reading posts, or anything of the sort. You know what I say has a great deal of merit. If you really were a "truther" try opening yourself up again.

Also I know in a previous post, you said you were "ashamed" at having been a truther. Do you really hear what you are saying? I'm not saying that in the sense that you should really be a truther. But you are ashamed for having asked questions? You are ashamed for demanding answers? Evidently you have found what you believe is the answer to those questions, and have accepted the official story. Don't be ashamed of something like that. I'm not sure why you would do that. There's people here that may want you to feel that way, but don't let them.

 

[Sam.I.Am]

The only people "Somewhat surprised" were the ones who didn't bother to even try and find out about it in the first place. I know that I knew that they were saving important pieces of steel (at least from a historical point of view) almost from day one for memorials and such. Mostly it was the really bent up ones that showed the amount of forces involved but there were also some more pristine pieces that were saved as examples of what they looked like before the collapses. It also comes as no surprise to me that pieces were saved by investigators for forensic examination later on. I believe that one of the first 9/11 documentaries (Frontline?) discussed this at some point although I don't recall them dwelling upon it for long.

 

[triforcharity]

.

Here's a quote from 911Myths "However, it’s been recognised that even in circumstances like those at the WTC, access should be provided more quickly, and in 2002 the National Construction Safety Team Act was introduced."

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

Yes accuse me of quote mining all you want. But for a site like that to admit this you know there is something to it.

I love the way you COMPLETLY IGNORE the quote DIRECTLY ABOVE THAT.

Does that quote claim that access was NOT given? No, it does not. Delayed, yes. Denied? No. Not at all.

Here is a quote DIRECTLY from FEMA itself.

Because of the importance of the rescue effort at the World Trade Center complex, it was clear that information would have to be gathered without interfering with response and rescue activities. Based on this fact, the FEMA-ASCE team first visited the site on October 6, but gathered information from others who had been on-site before this date. This information included plans, photographs, videotapes, eyewitness accounts from rescue workers and reports from the New York City Department of Design and Construction. In additiondifficulty in finding material such as steel, the Structural Engineers Association of New York, in support of the City and as a formal member of the BPAT, located and identified specimens of steel for use in future studies. FEMA is coordinating with NIST to make sure that these specimens are properly stored and available for future testing. Also, it is important to note that there are, literally, thousands of plans, specifications and other documents for the World Trade Center. Although it took some weeks to obtain the plans, the owner’s were fully cooperative with our requests.
http://www.house.gov/science/full02/mar06/shea.htm

Yeah, here is all you need to say.

"Yes Tri and Edx were right. I was putting my trust in someone who obviously was not honest in his acessment. I will, in the future, try harder not to be duped by liars, and will do my OWN reasearch. "

It's really not hard to admit that you're wrong. It's ok. You're human.