Loose Change - Part II

[CptColumbo]

The White Sox win them all, of course.

No man the robots, then the robots, and then the robots.

Called them all.

 

[delphi_ote]

There's an interesting interview with Stacey Loizeaux of Controlled Demolitions, Inc. on NOVA's website. They have an upcoming program about explosives called "Kaboom."
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/kaboom/loizeaux.html

Note the use of the term "Pull," which is used in demolitions, but not in the way the CTs think.

ETA: the interview is from 1996.

Fantastic, Gravy. This is why I love JREF. I'm always learning new stuff.

I think these quote is very interesting in context of 9/11 supposedly being a demolition job:

We will then ask them to perform preparatory operations, including non-load bearing partition removal—meaning, the dry wall that separates the rooms. It's not carrying the weight of the building. It's just there as a divider. But what happens—you know, if you have a case of beer—all the little cardboard reinforcements inside? If you have all those little cardboard reinforcements, then you can jump up and down on the case. But if you take them out, the case will crush under your weight. Those little partitions actually add up and act as stiffeners.

The second thing we do is drilling. Depending on the height of the structure, we'll work on a couple of different floors—usually anywhere from two to six. The taller the building, the higher up we work. We only really need to work on the first two floors, because—you can make the building come down that way.

How would all that work have been done in secret?!

 

[steve s]

How would all that work have been done in secret?!

It couldn't. But the Loosers always say "They would have done it at night when no one is there." What I'd like to find out is how many people worked in the WTC at night. I've been Googling but haven't been able to find out much of anything. The cleaning and maintenance staff must have been at least a couple hundred people. Add to that a couple dozen security guards. Then there's all the bankers and brokers who are there late at night doing business with people in Hong Kong and Tokyo. There must have been at least a few hundred people in each tower. Funny how none of them noticed the demo crews runnnig miles of det cord all over the place.

Steve S.

 

[delphi_ote]

It couldn't. But the Loosers always say "They would have done it at night when no one is there." What I'd like to find out is how many people worked in the WTC at night. I've been Googling but haven't been able to find out much of anything. The cleaning and maintenance staff must have been at least a couple hundred people. Add to a couple dozen security guards. Then there's all the bankers and brokers who are there late at night doing business with people in Hong Kong and Tokyo. There must have been at least a few hundred people in each tower. Funny how none of them noticed the demo crews runnnig miles of det cord all over the place.

Steve S.

And nobody pondered, "Hey. I wonder where all the walls went?"

 

[steve s]

I recently saw a program where they showed the prep work that went into a CD. They had guys with torches cutting notches into the steel beams to weaken them. Sparks were flying everywhere. That would have made a nice mess on the carpet, huh? Plus they had to have access directly to the beams. It boggles the mind that the Loosers think this could have been done.

Steve S.

 

[Kage]

Even if CD could be done with no one noticing beforehand or after, it STILL makes no sense. If I wanted to stage something on this scale why would I use a plane? I'd just put a small bomb in the basement and blame it on that. It would explain the trace amounts of explosives that WOULD be presents, as well as the primer caps and everything else. Of course, such items were not found, but I'm chunking up to show how this idea is really stupid.

I don't get why the buildings would be rigged to fall within their own footprints either. If the secondary explosives were set to achive maximum damage, why not have the buildings fall onto lower Manhattan? THAT would be maximum damage. In explaining why the buildings needed to fall within their own foundations, some sort of cogent motive needs to be explained as to why this was to the advantage of the "conspirators."

Instead of arguing with these people about CD, why not ask them to motivate their arguments? The conspirators would have to have both superhuman foresight and planning abilities, as well as be total morons. The resources used on 9/11 on the attacks would have been better deployed had the terrorists not wanted to make a symbolic statement. I'm not going to outline better uses for such resourses, but anyone with any understanding of American phsychology or American industry could do better. The idea of plane-into-building, CD-makes building-fall-perfectly-to-ground, and this-was-done-by-western-conspirators is way too Rube Goldberg.

 

[60hzxtl]

It couldn't. But the Loosers always say "They would have done it at night when no one is there." What I'd like to find out is how many people worked in the WTC at night. I've been Googling but haven't been able to find out much of anything. The cleaning and maintenance staff must have been at least a couple hundred people. Add to that a couple dozen security guards. Then there's all the bankers and brokers who are there late at night doing business with people in Hong Kong and Tokyo. There must have been at least a few hundred people in each tower. Funny how none of them noticed the demo crews runnnig miles of det cord all over the place.

Steve S.

I worked in the North tower on the 74th floor in the summer of 1975. The place was just about open, not fully occupied, and it was NEVER empty.

There was a bar on the 44th floor, the sky lobby where you changed elevators, called the Skydive, and in the South Tower there was Windows on the World, the classier restaurant. It's not like the last guy out every night pulled the door shut and handed the key to the night watchman. It was ALWAYS occupied.

The garbage in LC, about the marble coming off the walls? Well, since the elevators with severed cables had plummeted to the bottom of the shaft, blowing dirt and debris out, what 'like, hey, man Dylan' says is the 'signature of high explosives' is just dust, and the concussion of those HUGE elevator cars -- could that have been the reason the marble panels, mounted with construction glue fell off? Nah, musta been the bombs man!

 

[60hzxtl]

Lots of magical thinking going on over there and 'like, hey man Dylan' leads the way:

"if i'm compromising my integrity by respecting the wishes of both the Naudet Brothers AND the firefighters involved in their documentary, and by showing clear intention that my purpose in this movement is to help, not cause trouble, then i suppose i'm guilty."

http://s15.invisionfree.com/Loose_Change_Forum/index.php?showtopic=5091&st=390

Respecting the wishes? How about, 'that's mine you stole it Dylan.' ?

They still don't have a clue over there about ownership and rights, and the stuff about "but, like, its educational man."

But they know all about CT, flying, and missiles. And Bush watching live from the Naudet's camera.


Prediction is that the Naudet's will present 'like, hey man Dylan' with a bill, plus legal charges, and he'll be screaming that's its censorship and blackmail - time to pile on FOX, CNN, etc. your stuff is up there too.


Yup, it ain't all limos and sunglasses Dylan.

 

[Gravy]

Lots of magical thinking going on over there and 'like, hey man Dylan' leads the way:
"if i'm compromising my integrity by respecting the wishes of both the Naudet Brothers AND the firefighters involved in their documentary, and by showing clear intention that my purpose in this movement is to help, not cause trouble, then i suppose i'm guilty."

Here's an interesting question. Since the copyright issue came up, about 20 people on the LC forum, including TheQuest, have accused the Naudets of being involved in a conspiracy. What are they going to do now that their hero Avery has surrendered to conspirators after a single warning shot across his bow?

 

[TjW]

Here's an interesting question. Since the copyright issue came up, about 20 people on the LC forum, including TheQuest, have accused the Naudets of being involved in a conspiracy. What are they going to do now that their hero Avery has surrendered to conspirators after a single warning shot across his bow?

I predict one of two things:
(a) the grapes will become very sour.
(b) It never happened, and will never be commented on again.

My initial reaction was that it would be (a), but now I'm leaning toward the close encounter of a lawyer kind pushing it toward (b).

 

[Gravy]

There's a fire vs. steel test that is referred to in FEMA's Building Performance Study and gets used a lot by CTs as a "gotcha!" factoid. It came up again in SBrown's "Jet Fuel" dump-and-run:

"In the mid-1990s British Steel and the Building Research Establishment performed a series of six experiments at Cardington to investigate the behavior of steel frame buildings. These experiments were conducted in a simulated, eight-story building. Secondary steel beams were not protected. Despite the temperature of the steel beams reaching 800-900° C (1,500-1,700° F) in three of the tests (well above the traditionally assumed critical temperature of 600° C (1,100° F), no collapse was observed in any of the six experiments."
Quote from the FEMA report (Appendix A).

Well, JREFer Dave_46 happens to know a great deal about those tests:

I was working in the Cardington laboratory for part of the time these tests were done, and was present at at least one of them.

Man, I love this place. Thanks, Dave.

 

[Brainster]

Even if CD could be done with no one noticing beforehand or after, it STILL makes no sense. If I wanted to stage something on this scale why would I use a plane? I'd just put a small bomb in the basement and blame it on that. It would explain the trace amounts of explosives that WOULD be presents, as well as the primer caps and everything else. Of course, such items were not found, but I'm chunking up to show how this idea is really stupid.

I don't get why the buildings would be rigged to fall within their own footprints either. If the secondary explosives were set to achive maximum damage, why not have the buildings fall onto lower Manhattan? THAT would be maximum damage. In explaining why the buildings needed to fall within their own foundations, some sort of cogent motive needs to be explained as to why this was to the advantage of the "conspirators."

Instead of arguing with these people about CD, why not ask them to motivate their arguments? The conspirators would have to have both superhuman foresight and planning abilities, as well as be total morons. The resources used on 9/11 on the attacks would have been better deployed had the terrorists not wanted to make a symbolic statement. I'm not going to outline better uses for such resourses, but anyone with any understanding of American phsychology or American industry could do better. The idea of plane-into-building, CD-makes building-fall-perfectly-to-ground, and this-was-done-by-western-conspirators is way too Rube Goldberg.

Your mistake is looking at this logically and not backwards. CTers always reverse engineer the story, which is why it makes little sense looking at it straight on. The CT has to include the planes at the WTC because they were caught on tape, but they can't explain why the pilots would crash into them (hint: because they were Muslim fanatic hijackers), or even why a military team that might have taken the planes over would commit murder/suicide like that.

So they fall back on the drone planes theory. Same problem with the Pentagon; must have been a missile. But now we've got to bring the WTC down because the fake planes will eventually be discovered. Oh, and the cellphones had to be faked because if they weren't then there were actual hijackers.

See? All these things seem goofy when looked at directly, but if you understand the problems the CT encountered when exposed to the harsh light of day, you'd realize that this is the way these things evolve.

 

[Kage]

I totally understand. I only wish it was the way they describe. There is this inexplicable desire to see everything as part of a larger conspiracy. I don't know why this is. I was just suggesting a new tactic for countering these fools. Mabe I am optimistic, but one whould hope that after a saturation of facts someone will come around.

 

[sleahead]

The Avery moron gets it wrong again:

if i'm compromising my integrity by respecting the wishes of both the Naudet Brothers AND the firefighters involved in their documentary, and by showing clear intention that my purpose in this movement is to help, not cause trouble, then i suppose i'm guilty.

How can he compromise his integrity if he did not does not have any integrity to compromise? Copyright infringement, guilty. Loss of integrity, not guilty.

 

[Belz...]

Ballsy and stupid of these folks to send threats to an ATTORNEY.

This appears to be the crumbling of the house for Avery. All I need is a tub of popcorn, and I'll be set to watch this downward spiral...

Oh! I first read "house OF Avery".

I can see him fighting for Dune right now.

 

[60hzxtl]

The Avery moron gets it wrong again:



How can he compromise his integrity if he did not does not have any integrity to compromise? Copyright infringement, guilty. Loss of integrity, not guilty.

Because they are clueless over there - they think that you cannot copyright newsfootage - because, well, everybody saw it.

I bet it would come as a complete surprise to them if I tried to explain that as a writer of history, I cannot copyright a fact; e.g. Rudy Guliani was mayor of New York. But if I write the sentence, "Rudy Guliani came close to death on 9/11 when his entourage made a rapid exit from 7 WTC; part of his party took one path, and died, but the mayor, guided by his bodyguard, lived."

I can copyright that. If I do not protect and defend that copyright, I can lose it. The Naudet bros. are protecting their copyright, so as not to lose it.

"Like, man those guys are mean and stuff, why did they hafta get lawyers, why didn't they just ask us nice."

 

[Belz...]

I totally understand. I only wish it was the way they describe. There is this inexplicable desire to see everything as part of a larger conspiracy. I don't know why this is. I was just suggesting a new tactic for countering these fools. Mabe I am optimistic, but one whould hope that after a saturation of facts someone will come around.

Religious belief, plain and simple.

To them, it gives a purpose to their lives, I suppose.

 

[chipmunk stew]

Within 5 posts or so, one of the Admins had banned me for refusing to respond to his challenge, which concerned some weird article from the Washington Times in 1989 about a boy pedophile ring in the Reagan/Bush White House. It was classic trolling behavior--don't comment on the subject at hand, demand comment on a completely unrelated topic--and I told the guy to focus on Loose Change.

Calls himself "TheQuest", right? This guy apparently went off the deep end years ago and never found his way back to shore.

 

[kookbreaker]

Calls himself "TheQuest", right? This guy apparently went off the deep end years ago and never found his way back to shore.

I don't think there was any water in that pool to begin with.

 

[aggle-rithm]

And nobody pondered, "Hey. I wonder where all the walls went?"

!!!!

So THAT'S why all the offices have been replaced by cubicle farms in the last ten years!

JUST IN CASE they want to fake a terrorist attack!

I'm taking the rest of the day off.