nt (Krztalizer) wrote in message ...

The towers didn't collapse from a bomb, idiot. Fifteen minutes before the
collapse, I started to get sick to my stomach and I told my wife that the first
tower was going to fall - I pointed at the structural distortion at the point
of the fire and could visualize the coming event with clarity.

Don't be so sure, Gordon. Maybe some people had the same thought long
before you and long before 911, maybe after 1991 or 1993. Maybe it was
not a bomb but a charge placed there in advance.

Is it true that the contract to clean up the site was awarded to a
Controlled demolitions Inc. company or a company with a name like
that?

I know you hate conspiracy theories but here is one for your
consideration.

Keith in this thread wrote that prior to Sept 11 2001 there had been
no perceived danger from a hijacked airliner.

There was time before some date in 40-ies no none percieved a danger
from an enemy plane that could make a suicidal attack. But on some
date it became a reality and later the name became known: that was
kamikaze.

I read somewhere that in 1991 there was a danger of a suicide plane
attack in Spain to prevent Israeli-Palestinian negotiations there.

In I believe 1994 terrorists threatened to drop an Airbus on Paris.

In 1995 on of prominent Chechen 'freedom-fighters' threatened the same
thing would fall upon Kremlin, publicly.

These are case know to the public, I mean that part of it that is my
humble self. I do believe in conspiracy theories, at any rate some of
them and I think that there have been more attempts and threats then
these.

So Keith seems to be mistaken here. A suicidal attack could be real
and it was not unknown to those who knew the situation.

Again, before 911 the WTC had alredy been atatcked, in 1993, in a
different manner though, but the attack had really taken place.

The WTC was a tempting target. It was big enough to leave many dead
behind, great material damage, it was of sorts a symbol and so on you
name it when considering the queistion: why was the WTC attacked? But
there was an additional reason for attacking the WTC - its internal
structure.

Maybe some people began to think, at first maybe on just a qualitative
level, maybe later they quantified and even modelled it. The question
was: what would happen if an airliner crashed into one or both of the
towers? Beside the immediate damage what would come next? A fire of
course. How big? Planes after take-offs have lots of fuel that would
go down while burning while flames and suffocating smoke would go up.
For a regular concrete/brick/stone building the danger would have been
that the impact, fire and smoke would kill people both up and down
there, but if the building could stand without collapsing after the
impact it was unlikely that it would fall later.

The WTC was a different case because of its steel framework. Bringing
steel to melting point was not needed because steel loses its strength
at lower temperatures. Jet fuel could develop such temperatures. So
the towers probably could not survive such an attack and could not be
saved.

Another question: if it was to fall, then how? Namely if different
parts of the frame got damaged to different degrees due to asymmetric
impact or uneven fire spreading then... the tower or its parts could
fall ASIDE, onto a much wider area and with much greater damage. These
were HIGH towers after all.

What do the specialist who do the job the company's name denotes to
prevent such things (remember, the building itself was unsavable)?

They make the building COLLAPSE, collapse onto itself.

I needn't explain how they do that you know the place the charges in
certain places and so on. In the WTC case it could be something like
welding thermite instead of expolosives to make the steel melt, but at
the same pace in several crucial places.

After the events take place it's a 'well done, nice job' situation.
Guys here is your contract. You'll do the cleaning job clean, won't
you? Some things should remain hidden from the public and these crazy
conspiracy theorists. The secrecy is justified. In this case many
lives could not be saved, but many have really been saved. Maybe in
the future (God save but who knows) it will help again.

Incredible? I dont' know. Also I don't know who was to make such
decisions in the USA and NYC if there was (were)such (a)person(s).

Now imagine, Gordon, it's you, or you are one of those who are to
decide say batween 1991 and 1995. You know an attack is possible
anytime and maybe pretty soon and they explain to you that if only a
part of the building falls aside it will lead to such and such
results, so and so many deaths (avoidable!)and the only thing you can
do of course except airport and flight security is damage control
thorough some preventive steps. Some things must be placed in right
spots IN ADVANCE. There are people who can determine, where, what and
how much is to be placed. There are other things to discuss with them,
too. They are damn experienced, that's their job they've been doing
for years.

Aren't you grasping the phone receiver yet, to call the guys?

Regards

VV