You are in Guest mode. If you want to post, you'll need to register (we promise it's painless).
Registered users should log in now. (Forgot your password?)

Guest-accessible forum This forum allows unregistered guests access to read. You must register to post in this forum.

Politics.523

Topic HomeTopicsForum HomeForumsHomeSearchSettingsHelpExit

9/11 is a Fraud Created by the Government

--------

{Politics.523.4105}: Jay Hoffman {resist} Fri, 11 Apr 2014 16:21:31 EDT (13 lines)

As long as you're appealing to authority, the WTC design certifier
Kevin Ryan said the following about the buildings' design to withstand
plane impact

WTC Construction Certifiers Say Towers Should Have Easily Withstood
Jet Fuel Temperatures


http://www.septembereleventh.org/newsarchive/2004-11-11-ryan.php

>>>…. any designer always has some inherent conformation bias.<<<

aparently

--------

{Politics.523.4106}: Tom Austin {taustin} Fri, 11 Apr 2014 16:45:31 EDT (3 lines)

I told you already, Liz.  I have an engineering degree and 30+ years
professional experience as a mechanical engineer.   I've done everything
from furnaces to hearing aids in that time.

--------

{Politics.523.4107}: Elizabeth Costello {lizcostello} Fri, 11 Apr 2014 20:27:27 EDT (6 lines)

You say that Tom, but it is certainly not evidenced in anything you
post.  How many buildings have you engineered?

Actually I assume none and I don't care.  I just love the fact that
all you guys are truthers.  That just makes my day.  It's the kind of
thing I expect from Richard, but the rest of you?  Amazing.

--------

{Politics.523.4108}: Jay Hoffman {resist} Fri, 11 Apr 2014 20:43:40 EDT (1 line)

If they are truthers Liz must be a liar. I'm fine with that.

--------

{Politics.523.4109}: Otis Dill {Otis99} Sat, 12 Apr 2014 09:38:41 EDT (8 lines)

You are the liar, Jay.

Jay Hoffman: <As long as you're appealing to authority, the WTC design
certifier Kevin Ryan...>

That's not true.  This gentleman is not what you claimed he was. Appealing
to authority is one thing, but lying in order to get there is something
else.

--------

{Politics.523.4110}: Jay Hoffman {resist} Sat, 12 Apr 2014 12:47:14 EDT (14 lines)

As long as you're appealing to authority, the WTC design certifier
of steel components,Kevin Ryan said the following about the buildings'
design to withstand
plane impact

WTC Construction Certifiers Say Towers Should Have Easily Withstood
Jet Fuel Temperatures


http://www.septembereleventh.org/newsarchive/2004-11-11-ryan.php

>>>…. any designer always has some inherent conformation bias.<<<

apparently

--------

{Politics.523.4111}: Otis Di {Otis99} Sat, 12 Apr 2014 23:43:53 EDT (27 lines)

Jay Hoffman: <Kevin Ryan said the following about the buildingss' design
to withstand impact:
WTC Construction Certifiers Say Towers Should Have Easily Withstood Jet
Fuel Temperatures>

That is a lie.  Ryan's employer, Underwriter Labs, said nothing of the
sort and were not the WTC certifiers:

From an e-mail to Kevin Ryan, dated 1st December 2003, from J. Thomas
Chapin, UL's General Manager, Fire and Construction:

"UL does not certify structural steel.

......The floor assembly in the World Trade Center was not a UL
tested assembly."

"https://630e7049-a-62cb3a1a-s-
sites.googlegroups.com/site/enigmanwoliaison/55-
5ExhibitCExcerptsfromemailcorresp.pdf?
attachauth=ANoY7crWC7MpxPfzyQVqXHyqGuXQMna-BOKbSScxBe-
q4EiCWOrfvyp017R8x3ykxi72uIwlEy0A_X2CVCqKIrKWU3FXaBL13cYgEZfmAuFN2_86zZowO
rGONj0k2CX_eg3jpxb5Cm9X9jYeEZmh4-ia_847wMlNGBTkJirJm5vjrc0-v7b0FdwD_acKs5-
_oqcwE7nFjvFfci580IAnJ8VHFX8hrJOM2CdW4trxFayCAa-6iVu20heSGKFCo-
HEGdXytbfF8oib&attredirects=0"

If you're going to appeal to authority, at least get the authority right.
How many wrong statements can you make in a single sentence, Jay?

--------

{Politics.523.4112}: {resist} Sun, 13 Apr 2014 01:29:59 EDT (0 lines)
{erased by resist Sun, 13 Apr 2014 01:30:29 EDT}

--------

{Politics.523.4113}: Jay Hoffman {resist} Sun, 13 Apr 2014 01:31:43 EDT (96 lines)

The appeal to authority in my case was the correct one.


Kevin Ryan tested the material assemblies which were given for test
samples which included the structural steel, the fireproofing and the
wallboard being used for the construction of the Twin Towers. Since he
was technically testing the entire assemblies you are technically
correct that he wasn't testing the structural steel minus the other
components. But that is a small point.

Your paper says the following:

Kevin Ryan is/was an underwriter who tests materials too see if they
meet certified requirements.  The Underwriter's Laboratory does not
directly test the structural steel, instead it tests the assemblies
that are constructed with the steel. The assemblies consist of the
steel with the fireproofing and wallboard. The results of the tests
are published in the Fire Resistance Directory. The architect in most
cases then specifies the design in the directory that meets the code
requirement.

"We tested the steel with all the required fireproofing on and it did
beautifully.

A lot was learned from the World Trade Center fire, which was in many
ways, the perfect storm, with extremely high temperatures reached
almost immediately and sustained for a very long time.

Yes, the building was designed to withstand the shock of being hit by
a 707.

______________________

That is what he wrote to his colleagues at Underwriter's Laboratory.
In it he mentions the quandary of unexpected very high and sustained
temperatures from the kerosene jet fuel fire.  He didn't confide
further questions to that particular colleague at that time.

However the URL that I posted gives his full response to o Frank Gayle
of the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST).

Instead of referring to the URL (which you did not critique - possibly
because you did not read it) I will list the important points.


There continues to be a number of "experts" making public claims about
how the WTC buildings fell. One such person, Dr. Hyman Brown from the
WTC construction crew, claims that the buildings collapsed due to
fires at 2000F melting the steel. He states "What caused the building
to collapse is the airplane fuelburning at 2,000 degrees Fahrenheit.
The steel in that five-floor area melts." Additionally, the newspaper
that quotes him says "Just-released preliminary findings from a
National Institute of Standards and Technology study of the World
Trade Center collapse support Browns theory."
We know that the steel components were certified to ASTM E119. The
time temperature curves for this standard require the samples to be
exposed to temperatures around 2000F for several hours. And as we all
agree, the steel applied met those specifications. Additionally, I
think we can all agree that even un-fireproofed steel will not melt
until reaching red-hot temperatures of nearly 3000F. Why Dr. Brown
would imply that 2000F would melt the high-grade steel used in those
buildings makes no sense at all.

The results of your recently published metallurgical tests seem to
clear things up, and support your team's August 2003 update as
detailed by the Associated Press, in which you were ready to "rule out
weak steel as a contributing factor in the collapse." The evaluation
of paint deformation and spheroidization seem very straightforward,
and you noted that the samples available were adequate for the
investigation. Your comments suggest that the steel was probably
exposed to temperatures of only about 500F (250C), which is what one
might expect from a thermodynamic analysis of the situation.

However the summary of the new NIST report seems to ignore your
findings, as it suggests that these low temperatures caused exposed
bits of the buildings steel core to "soften and buckle."  Additionally
this summary states that the perimeter columns softened, yet your
findings make clear that "most perimeter panels (157 of 160) saw no
temperature above 250C." To soften steel for the purposes of forging,
normally temperatures need to be above1100C. However, this new summary
report suggests that much lower temperatures were be able to not only
soften the steel in a matter of minutes, but lead to rapid structural
collapse.

This story just does not add up. If steel from those buildings did
soften or melt, Im sure we can all agree that this was certainly not
due to jet fuel fires of any kind, let alone the briefly burning fires
in those towers. That fact should be of great concern to all
Americans. Alternatively, the contention that this steel did fail at
temperatures around 250C suggests that the majority of deaths on 9/11
were due to a safety-related failure. That suggestion should be of
great concern to my company.

Please do what you can to quickly eliminate the confusion regarding
the ability of jet fuel fires to soften or melt structural steel.
http://www.septembereleventh.org/newsarchive/2004-11-11-ryan.php

--------

{Politics.523.4114}: Otis Dill {Otis99} Mon, 14 Apr 2014 11:46:24 EDT (2 lines)

Let me see if I can clear up your authority's confusion.  Fires And the
impact caused the towers to collapse.

--------

{Politics.523.4115}: Jay Hoffman {resist} Mon, 14 Apr 2014 12:30:04 EDT (2 lines)

Yes, Kevin Ryan - the authority says your story doesn't add up. So it's
clear you and your crew are confused.

--------

{Politics.523.4116}: Jay Hoffman {resist} Thu, 17 Apr 2014 21:13:00 EDT (7 lines)

Conversations with John Judge:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FpDUG2tYE9E

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D1VO_t9YCWk

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EkfEyY0KeCk

--------

{Politics.523.4117}: Otis Dill {Otis99} Thu, 17 Apr 2014 21:51:15 EDT (1 line)

Who da hell is that?

--------

{Politics.523.4118}: Richard Clark {cardo} Thu, 17 Apr 2014 22:08:54 EDT (1 line)

Google him for god sake.

--------

{Politics.523.4119}: Richard Clark {cardo} Thu, 17 Apr 2014 22:09:25 EDT (1 line)

Then watch the videos.  You might learn something.

--------

{Politics.523.4120}: Otis Dill {Otis99} Fri, 18 Apr 2014 17:12:13 EDT (3 lines)

I learned that there are many gullible idiots around with nothing better
to do than make talking head videos from mom"a basement for other idiots
in basements.

--------

{Politics.523.4121}: Richard Clark {cardo} Fri, 18 Apr 2014 18:23:37 EDT (HTML)

In other words you have absolutely nothing to say, of any substance, re: what was said in any of the videos.

Why am I not surprised?

--------

{Politics.523.4122}: Otis Dill {Otis99} Sat, 19 Apr 2014 08:08:39 EDT (1 line)

Maybe because your talking head had nothing substantive to say?

--------

{Politics.523.4123}: nothing substantive to say? {cardo} Sat, 19 Apr 2014 12:43:49 EDT (HTML)

. . at least not to those who choose blindness over sight.

--------

{Politics.523.4124}: Senator Lampoon {yesdeer} Sat, 19 Apr 2014 13:31:51 EDT (HTML)

neener

--------

{Politics.523.4125}: Richard Clark {cardo} Sat, 19 Apr 2014 14:46:41 EDT (1 line)

And so it is that our regression is complete.

--------

{Politics.523.4126}: Senator Lampoon {yesdeer} Sat, 19 Apr 2014 17:35:10 EDT (HTML)

It was before {4124}. You're the neener man, Richard. Half your posts are neeners.

--------

{Politics.523.4127}: Richard Clark {cardo} Sat, 19 Apr 2014 17:50:40 EDT (1 line)

I think you meant 'winners.'

--------

{Politics.523.4128}: Richard Clark {cardo} Sat, 19 Apr 2014 17:51:00 EDT (1 line)

. . or should have.

--------

{Politics.523.4129}: Otis Dill {Otis99} Sat, 19 Apr 2014 23:23:32 EDT (27 lines)

Covert Inquiry by F.B.I. Rattles 9/11 Tribunals
By MATT APUZZOAPRIL 18, 2014
C»
WASHINGTON — Two weeks ago, a pair of F.B.I. agents appeared unannounced
at the door of a member of the defense team for one of the men accused of
plotting the 9/11 terrorist attacks. As a contractor working with the
defense team at Guantánamo Bay, Cuba, the man was bound by the same
confidentiality rules as a lawyer. But the agents wanted to talk.

They asked questions, lawyers say, about the legal teams for Ramzi bin al-
Shibh, Khalid Shaikh Mohammed and other accused terrorists who will
eventually stand trial before a military tribunal at Guantánamo. Before
they left, the agents asked the contractor to sign an agreement promising
not to tell anyone about the conversation.

With that signature, Mr. bin al-Shibh’s lawyers say, the government turned
a member of their team into an F.B.I. informant.

The F.B.I.’s inquiry became the focus of the pretrial hearings at
Guantánamo this week, after the contractor disclosed it to the defense
team. It was a reminder that, no matter how much the proceedings at the
island military prison resemble a familiar American trial, the invisible
hand of the United States government is at work there in ways unlike
anything seen in typical courtrooms.

"http://www.nytimes.com/2014/04/19/us/politics/covert-inquiry-by-fbi-
rattles-9-11-tribunals.html?_r=0"

--------

Forum
Topic HomeTopicsForum HomeForumsHomeSearchSettingsHelpExit
Forum Guidelines
Guest-accessible forum This forum allows unregistered guests access to read. You must register to post in this forum.

You are in Guest mode. If you want to post, you'll need to register (we promise it's painless).
Registered users should log in now. (Forgot your password?)

The New Café  Home | Your Hotlist and Directory | Independent Partner Forums |
FAQ | User Guidelines | Privacy Policy