September 11 Hijackers are Alive And Well

[BDK]

In article <j4kkq35kb496ad7f87a7d5tlu67b2g987n@4ax.com>, DavidMorgan@m-
a-m-s.com says...
> On Wed, 06 Feb 2008 16:50:43 GMT, "David Morgan \(MAMS\)"
> <findme@m-a-m-s.comC/Odm> wrote:
>
> >
> >"Disneygeek" <edrhodes@hotmail.com> wrote in message...
> >
> >> Also, she
> >> mentions at several points that the area has been completely closed
> >> off,
> >
> >Of course the area was closed off... no one could be allowed to see and
> >photograph the cut steel beams that were piled up on the ground. The few
> >pictures that have gotten out have proven to be devastating for the pundits
> >of the government story.
>
> You're such an idiot, skypileit. There were no "cut steel beams that
> were piled up on the ground" from WTC7. If there were, I'm sure you
> would provide a citation to the photographs. But, of course, you
> won't.
>
> >> so she's obviously working from sketchy informaion at best.
> >
> >Of course she was working from 'sketchy' information... the building likely
> >was supposed to have come down earlier and the word had already been
> >passed among a few selects and spoon-fed to the remainder... and since
> >it hadn't been hit by a plane
>
> But it was hit by large pieces of steel from the collapse of WTC1.
> Just like the Verizon building that was next door to it.
>
> > and no steel building had EVER fallen from
> >fires, of course there was "confusion" on the part of anyone with a brain.
>
> Lots of steel buildings have collapsed due to fire. Or do you think
> that the fire retardent insulation that is required to be put on the
> steel is just for show?
>

Ahh, the mind of Sky Pile-It...does it even exist?

When I think of him, I think of a Hamster doing it's thing on the wheel.
Compulsively running on it, like Sky Pile-It dave compulsively spouts
claims that have been proven false over and over again.

Not meaning to insult any Hamsters out there.

BDK

 

[Disneygeek]

On Feb 6, 11:50

 

[Randy Belong]

<DavidMorgan@m-a-m-s.com> wrote in message
news:j4kkq35kb496ad7f87a7d5tlu67b2g987n@4ax.com...
> On Wed, 06 Feb 2008 16:50:43 GMT, "David Morgan \(MAMS\)"
> <findme@m-a-m-s.comC/Odm> wrote:
>
>>
>> and no steel building had EVER fallen from
>>fires, of course there was "confusion" on the part of anyone with a brain.
>
> Lots of steel buildings have collapsed due to fire.

Name one.

 

[Al Dykes]

In article <BUMOj.76690$rd2.47056@pd7urf3no>,
Randy Belong <rjbelong@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
><DavidMorgan@m-a-m-s.com> wrote in message
>news:j4kkq35kb496ad7f87a7d5tlu67b2g987n@4ax.com...
>> On Wed, 06 Feb 2008 16:50:43 GMT, "David Morgan \(MAMS\)"
>> <findme@m-a-m-s.comC/Odm> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> and no steel building had EVER fallen from
>>>fires, of course there was "confusion" on the part of anyone with a brain.
>>
>> Lots of steel buildings have collapsed due to fire.
>
>Name one.


The steel side of the Madrid towers, for one.

The concrete side survived.

There was no structural concrete in the WTC towers.


No other all-steel buildings in history was built with minimal
fire-proofing, doused with thousands of gallons of fuel, set afire and
allowed to burn for hours without any firefighting or sprinklers.
WTC1, 2, and 7 were unique in that way.

Nobody heard man-made demolition at WTC.

There is no evidence for man-made explosions at WTC.


--
Al Dykes
News is something someone wants to suppress, everything else is advertising.
- Lord Northcliffe, publisher of the Daily Mail

 

[Vandar]

Randy Belong wrote:

> <DavidMorgan@m-a-m-s.com> wrote in message
> news:j4kkq35kb496ad7f87a7d5tlu67b2g987n@4ax.com...
>
>>On Wed, 06 Feb 2008 16:50:43 GMT, "David Morgan \(MAMS\)"
>><findme@m-a-m-s.comC/Odm> wrote:
>>
>>
>>>and no steel building had EVER fallen from
>>>fires, of course there was "confusion" on the part of anyone with a brain.
>>
>>Lots of steel buildings have collapsed due to fire.
>
>
> Name one.

http://www.interfire.org/res_file/pdf/Tr-097.pdf

 

[BDK]

In article <BUMOj.76690$rd2.47056@pd7urf3no>, rjbelong@hotmail.com
says...
>
> <DavidMorgan@m-a-m-s.com> wrote in message
> news:j4kkq35kb496ad7f87a7d5tlu67b2g987n@4ax.com...
> > On Wed, 06 Feb 2008 16:50:43 GMT, "David Morgan \(MAMS\)"
> > <findme@m-a-m-s.comC/Odm> wrote:
> >
> >>
> >> and no steel building had EVER fallen from
> >>fires, of course there was "confusion" on the part of anyone with a brain.
> >
> > Lots of steel buildings have collapsed due to fire.
>
> Name one.
>
>
>

LOL, you can't figure google out either?

Of course, most of the links shown go back to kookpages, so you would be
lost, not being able to resist falling under the spell of them, right?

BDK

 

[John P.]

"Randy Belong" <rjbelong@hotmail.com> wrote in a message

>> Lots of steel buildings have collapsed due to fire.

> Name one.

The Manhattan Savings Bank (collapsed due to the heat from a fire in the
building next to it)
The Manhattan Athletic Association Building
The Minneapolis Tribune Building
The Sight & Sound Theater in PA
McCormick Place

In the Madrid Tower Fire (one kooks like to use as an example), the steel
portion of the structure collapsed to the 17th floor, due to the fire.

I'll go out on a limb here and ask you to think about something for a bit...
Why are the building codes which require fireproofing on steel structured
buildings?

For extra credit, ponder why they are rated in hours. What happens after
that time frame is up?

 

[SgtMinor]

Vandar wrote:
> Randy Belong wrote:
>
>> <DavidMorgan@m-a-m-s.com> wrote in message
>> news:j4kkq35kb496ad7f87a7d5tlu67b2g987n@4ax.com...
>>
>>> On Wed, 06 Feb 2008 16:50:43 GMT, "David Morgan \(MAMS\)"
>>> <findme@m-a-m-s.comC/Odm> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>> and no steel building had EVER fallen from
>>>> fires, of course there was "confusion" on the part of anyone with a
>>>> brain.
>>>
>>> Lots of steel buildings have collapsed due to fire.
>>
>>
>> Name one.
>
> http://www.interfire.org/res_file/pdf/Tr-097.pdf
>

That's a great way of saying "I got nothing."

 

[SgtMinor]

John P. wrote:
> "Randy Belong" <rjbelong@hotmail.com> wrote in a message
>
>>> Lots of steel buildings have collapsed due to fire.
>
>> Name one.
>
> The Manhattan Savings Bank (collapsed due to the heat from a fire in the
> building next to it)
> The Manhattan Athletic Association Building
> The Minneapolis Tribune Building
> The Sight & Sound Theater in PA
> McCormick Place

You have dragged this nonsense out before and seem to have conveniently
forgotten some of the facts I supplied you with nearly two years ago.
If you want to look like slightly less of an idiot you should do some
research.

First. The collapses of the Manhattan Savings Bank, the Athletic
Association Building, and the Minneapolis Tribune Building all occurred
OVER ONE HUNDRED YEARS AGO. These collapses were described in an
article published in "Stone Magazine," Vol. XII, No. I, December, 1895.
None of these buildings were constructed of fire-protected steel. And
certainly, design and construction techniques, not to mention
construction materials, had vastly improved during the seventy-five plus
years that elapsed between the collapse of these buildings and the
construction of the WTC. FEMA'S report on the WTC collapses state that
few if any fire-protected steel buildings ever collapsed.

Second. McCormick Place's roof collapse occurred prior to the
construction of the WTC complex, and the building was different from the
towers in many respects. The roof trusses which collapsed there do not
appear to have been fire-protected.

Third. If you read the story about the fire at the Sight & Sound
Theater you would know that there is no comparison between that event
and the WTC fires.

Now stop lying and start accepting some truths.

 

[John P.]

"SgtMinor" <Sarge@the.old.folks.home.invalid> wrote in a message

>>>> Lots of steel buildings have collapsed due to fire.

>>> Name one.

>> The Manhattan Savings Bank (collapsed due to the heat from a fire in the
>> building next to it)
>> The Manhattan Athletic Association Building
>> The Minneapolis Tribune Building
>> The Sight & Sound Theater in PA
>> McCormick Place

> You have dragged this nonsense out before...

You were too stupid to grasp it two years ago, and have, obviously, failed
to do anything to cure your poor education and ignorance since.

It's a very simple concept... either fire can cause structural steel to
fail, or it cannot. Some of these more famous incidents are exactly what
prompted the enactment of fire codes requiring fireproofing on structural
steel. If steel were not susceptible to failure due to fire, there would be
no need to protect it.

Even someone with the IQ of a wooden chair leg would be capable of grasping
something so simple and obvious.

> First. The collapses of the Manhattan Savings Bank, the Athletic
> Association Building, and the Minneapolis Tribune Building all occurred
> OVER ONE HUNDRED YEARS AGO.

Oh, yes. It was 100 year ago fire and 100 year ago steel. Nothing at all
like the fire and steel we have now.

> None of these buildings were constructed of fire-protected steel.

Correct. It was their collapses due to fire which prompted the Manhattan
building codes requiring fireproofing on steel.

> And certainly, design and construction techniques, not to mention
> construction materials, had vastly improved during the seventy-five plus
> years that elapsed between the collapse of these buildings and the
> construction of the WTC.

True enough. Those buildings were much more solid than the WTC towers. The
unique design of the towers created quite a bit of debate among the
structural engineering community when they were built. There was a small
group which claimed the design was unsafe and susceptible to collapse.

> FEMA'S report on the WTC collapses state that few if any fire-protected
> steel buildings ever collapsed.

That is correct. No building designed like the WTC towers has ever been hit
by a passenger jet fly in excess of 400 mph, burned and collapsed. No
building designed like WTC 7 has ever been damaged by a collapsing 110 story
building, burned and collapsed.

Such a comparison has zero relevance. April 23, 2008 has never happened
before. None the less, I can assure you, it will happen this year.

> Second. McCormick Place's roof collapse occurred prior to the
> construction of the WTC complex, and the building was different from the
> towers in many respects. The roof trusses which collapsed there do not
> appear to have been fire-protected.

Can fire cause the failure of structural steel? As evidence by the failure
of the structural steel in McCormick place due to fire, the answer is
clearly yes.

> Third. If you read the story about the fire at the Sight & Sound Theater
> you would know that there is no comparison between that event and the WTC
> fires.

Can fire cause the failure of structural steel? As evidence by the failure
of the structural steel in the Sight and Sound Theater due to fire, the
answer is clearly yes.

If you already proved your inability to apply logic and reason to facts and
evidence two years ago, why did you feel the need to do so again?

 

[Vandar]

SgtMinor wrote:

> Vandar wrote:
>
>> Randy Belong wrote:
>>
>>> <DavidMorgan@m-a-m-s.com> wrote in message
>>> news:j4kkq35kb496ad7f87a7d5tlu67b2g987n@4ax.com...
>>>
>>>> On Wed, 06 Feb 2008 16:50:43 GMT, "David Morgan \(MAMS\)"
>>>> <findme@m-a-m-s.comC/Odm> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> and no steel building had EVER fallen from
>>>>> fires, of course there was "confusion" on the part of anyone with a
>>>>> brain.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Lots of steel buildings have collapsed due to fire.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Name one.
>>
>>
>> http://www.interfire.org/res_file/pdf/Tr-097.pdf
>>
>
> That's a great way of saying "I got nothing."

Learn how to read and click the link.

 

[SgtMinor]

John P. wrote:
> "SgtMinor" <Sarge@the.old.folks.home.invalid> wrote in a message
>
>>>>> Lots of steel buildings have collapsed due to fire.
>
>>>> Name one.
>
>>> The Manhattan Savings Bank (collapsed due to the heat from a fire in the
>>> building next to it)
>>> The Manhattan Athletic Association Building
>>> The Minneapolis Tribune Building
>>> The Sight & Sound Theater in PA
>>> McCormick Place
>
>> You have dragged this nonsense out before...
>
> You were too stupid to grasp it two years ago, and have, obviously, failed
> to do anything to cure your poor education and ignorance since.
>
> It's a very simple concept... either fire can cause structural steel to
> fail, or it cannot. Some of these more famous incidents are exactly what
> prompted the enactment of fire codes requiring fireproofing on structural
> steel. If steel were not susceptible to failure due to fire, there would be
> no need to protect it.
>
> Even someone with the IQ of a wooden chair leg would be capable of grasping
> something so simple and obvious.
>
>> First. The collapses of the Manhattan Savings Bank, the Athletic
>> Association Building, and the Minneapolis Tribune Building all occurred
>> OVER ONE HUNDRED YEARS AGO.
>
> Oh, yes. It was 100 year ago fire and 100 year ago steel. Nothing at all
> like the fire and steel we have now.
>
>> None of these buildings were constructed of fire-protected steel.
>
> Correct. It was their collapses due to fire which prompted the Manhattan
> building codes requiring fireproofing on steel.
>
>> And certainly, design and construction techniques, not to mention
>> construction materials, had vastly improved during the seventy-five plus
>> years that elapsed between the collapse of these buildings and the
>> construction of the WTC.
>
> True enough. Those buildings were much more solid than the WTC towers. The
> unique design of the towers created quite a bit of debate among the
> structural engineering community when they were built. There was a small
> group which claimed the design was unsafe and susceptible to collapse.
>
>> FEMA'S report on the WTC collapses state that few if any fire-protected
>> steel buildings ever collapsed.
>
> That is correct. No building designed like the WTC towers has ever been hit
> by a passenger jet fly in excess of 400 mph, burned and collapsed. No
> building designed like WTC 7 has ever been damaged by a collapsing 110 story
> building, burned and collapsed.
>
> Such a comparison has zero relevance. April 23, 2008 has never happened
> before. None the less, I can assure you, it will happen this year.
>
>> Second. McCormick Place's roof collapse occurred prior to the
>> construction of the WTC complex, and the building was different from the
>> towers in many respects. The roof trusses which collapsed there do not
>> appear to have been fire-protected.
>
> Can fire cause the failure of structural steel? As evidence by the failure
> of the structural steel in McCormick place due to fire, the answer is
> clearly yes.
>
>> Third. If you read the story about the fire at the Sight & Sound Theater
>> you would know that there is no comparison between that event and the WTC
>> fires.
>
> Can fire cause the failure of structural steel? As evidence by the failure
> of the structural steel in the Sight and Sound Theater due to fire, the
> answer is clearly yes.
>
> If you already proved your inability to apply logic and reason to facts and
> evidence two years ago, why did you feel the need to do so again?
>
>

All your questioning of my intelligence doesn't detract from the fact
that you are totally disingenuous. None of the cases you cited have any
relevance to the collapse of the WTC buildings at all. When I pointed
out that the buildings you listed were destroyed over a century ago, you
responded by pointing out that they gave rise to the building codes that
should have prevented the collapse of the WTC buildings. Do you even
realize that your own words indict your claims?

Contrary to your statements, no large pieces of debris hit building 7.
A look at a map will tell you how improbable it would be for anything
larger than a relatively small piece of steel to fly across the space
from the towers to WTC7.

And the engineers who designed the WTC were all too aware of the plane
hitting the Empire State building not to take into account that
something like that could happen to their structures. Apparently they
did not consider that a building might collapse from being hit by a
piece of debris.
http://community.seattletimes.nwsource.com/archive/?date=19930227&slug=1687698

I'd rather be as dumb as a chair leg than be as dishonest as you.

 

[Iarnrod]

On Apr 20, 9:11

 

[SgtMinor]

Vandar wrote:
> SgtMinor wrote:
>
>> Vandar wrote:
>>
>>> Randy Belong wrote:
>>>
>>>> <DavidMorgan@m-a-m-s.com> wrote in message
>>>> news:j4kkq35kb496ad7f87a7d5tlu67b2g987n@4ax.com...
>>>>
>>>>> On Wed, 06 Feb 2008 16:50:43 GMT, "David Morgan \(MAMS\)"
>>>>> <findme@m-a-m-s.comC/Odm> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> and no steel building had EVER fallen from
>>>>>> fires, of course there was "confusion" on the part of anyone with
>>>>>> a brain.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Lots of steel buildings have collapsed due to fire.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Name one.
>>>
>>>
>>> http://www.interfire.org/res_file/pdf/Tr-097.pdf
>>>
>>
>> That's a great way of saying "I got nothing."
>
> Learn how to read and click the link.
>

Learn not to act like an idiot and read your own cites before posting
them. The Theater was a large span open space, constructed of flimsy -
compared to WTC construction - structural steel with fire protection
materials dislodged by a construction crew.

Its collapse has as much relevance to WTC as the collapse of my
neighbor's "steel" yard shed when his lawnmower caught fire.

 

[John P.]

"SgtMinor" <Sarge@the.old.folks.home.invalid> wrote in a message

>>>>>> Lots of steel buildings have collapsed due to fire.

>>>>> Name one.

>>>> The Manhattan Savings Bank (collapsed due to the heat from a fire in
>>>> the building next to it)
>>>> The Manhattan Athletic Association Building
>>>> The Minneapolis Tribune Building
>>>> The Sight & Sound Theater in PA
>>>> McCormick Place

> None of the cases you cited have any relevance to the
> collapse of the WTC buildings at all.

I was responding to the above quoted lines. Whether or not that has any
relevance to the WTC collapses is irrelevant.

I was asked to name a steel structured building which had collapsed due to
fire. Being an overachiever, I named five.

> When I pointed out that the buildings you listed were
> destroyed over a century ago, you responded by
> pointing out that they gave rise to the building codes
> that should have prevented the collapse of the WTC
> buildings. Do you even realize that your own words
> indict your claims?

Do I realize that when asked to name a steel structured building which has
collapsed due to fire and I name five, it indicts my claim that those five
buildings are examples of steel structured buildings which collapsed due to
fire?

No. Please explain.

> Contrary to your statements, no large pieces of debris hit building 7.

Contrary to your erroneous claim, huge pieces of the WTC tower hit building
7.
http://photos1.blogger.com/blogger/2116/144/1600/WTC7-1.0.jpg
http://photos1.blogger.com/blogger/2116/144/1600/WTC7AerialObliqueWTC1Collapse.jpg
http://photos1.blogger.com/blogger/2116/144/1600/WTCdamagedBuildings.gif

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kf8wR9PQSPc
(Building 7 is in the lower left)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IwdD6ERutEI
(It's a debunking video - turn the sound off and look at the collection of
pictures of the debris hitting building 7)

> A look at a map will tell you how improbable it would be for anything
> larger than a relatively small piece of steel to fly across the space from
> the towers to WTC7.

A look at the evidence will help you understand why using probability as an
investigative technique doesn't work well for you.

> And the engineers who designed the WTC were all too aware
> of the plane hitting the Empire State building not to take into
> account that something like that could happen to their structures.

What were the results of the modeling for their design (regarding it
withstanding a plane hit)?

> Apparently they did not consider that a building might collapse
> from being hit by a piece of debris.

As you said, a plane hit the Empire State Building, so, realizing the WTC
towers and the Empire State Building would have something in common (both
being very tall), they took that incident into consideration. Perhaps they
didn't consider a 110 story building collapsing onto building 7 simply
because no 110 story buildings had collapsed onto other buildings before.

> I'd rather be as dumb as a chair leg than be as dishonest as you.

Your wish has been granted. You are clearly as dumb as a chair leg, and you
are not as dishonest as I (0%).

 

[John P.]

"SgtMinor" <Sarge@the.old.folks.home.invalid> wrote in a message

> Learn not to act like an idiot and read your own cites before posting
> them. The Theater was a large span open space, constructed of flimsy -
> compared to WTC construction - structural steel with fire protection
> materials dislodged by a construction crew.
>
> Its collapse has as much relevance to WTC as the collapse of my neighbor's
> "steel" yard shed when his lawnmower caught fire.

Illiteracy rears its ugly head and causes you to look foolish once again.
The question asked nothing about relevance to the WTC collapses. It just
asked for a single example of a steel structured building which had
collapsed due to fire. That was related to the moronic claim that no steel
structured building has ever collapsed due to fire.

Funny that you mention relevance to the WTC collapses though. I almost spit
my coffee onto my monitor from laughter when I read this;

"The Theater was a large span open space, constructed of flimsy - compared
to WTC construction structural steel with fire protection materials
dislodged by a construction crew."

The design of the WTC towers was intended to provide the maximum leaseable
tenant space. There were columns at the perimeter and the cores columns,
with no columns between the two, leaving nearly an acre of open space per
floor. Two types of fireproofing were used in the construction of the
towers - SFRM and Gypsum drywall. There were some issues with the SFRM in
that it was not thick enough in places, and had a tendency to fall off.
Additionally, something about a large passenger jet crashing into the
building at over 400 mph, then exploding, might have played a role in
knocking off some additional fireproofing material (as is seen in the photo
and video evidence).

So, we have one building which has a large span, open space, with
fireproofing knocked off the structural steel as compared to a building
which has a large span, open space, with fireproofing knocked off the
structural steel. ... and you find they have nothing in common.

Please... if for no other reason than comedic relief, explain your thought
process on that one. :-D

Bottom line - can fire cause failure of structural steel?

Yes. Several examples prove it.

 

[Vandar]

SgtMinor wrote:
> Vandar wrote:
>
>> SgtMinor wrote:
>>
>>> Vandar wrote:
>>>
>>>> Randy Belong wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> <DavidMorgan@m-a-m-s.com> wrote in message
>>>>> news:j4kkq35kb496ad7f87a7d5tlu67b2g987n@4ax.com...
>>>>>
>>>>>> On Wed, 06 Feb 2008 16:50:43 GMT, "David Morgan \(MAMS\)"
>>>>>> <findme@m-a-m-s.comC/Odm> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> and no steel building had EVER fallen from
>>>>>>> fires, of course there was "confusion" on the part of anyone with
>>>>>>> a brain.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Lots of steel buildings have collapsed due to fire.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Name one.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> http://www.interfire.org/res_file/pdf/Tr-097.pdf
>>>>
>>>
>>> That's a great way of saying "I got nothing."
>>
>>
>> Learn how to read and click the link.
>>
>
> Learn not to act like an idiot and read your own cites before posting
> them. The Theater was a large span open space, constructed of flimsy -
> compared to WTC construction - structural steel with fire protection
> materials dislodged by a construction crew.
>
> Its collapse has as much relevance to WTC as the collapse of my
> neighbor's "steel" yard shed when his lawnmower caught fire.

The previous poster asked to name one "steel building that has collapsed
due to fire". The Sight & Sound Theater is one of dozens.
If you want to limit it to "relevance to the WTC", then EVERY skyscraper
constructed like the WTC that has been hit by a 767 has completely
collapsed due to fire and structural damage.