Former Bush Team Member - WTC Collapse Likely A Controlled Demolition "Inside Job" - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Free Your Mind > Free Your Mind Archive
Click Here to Login
 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 06-14-2005, 05:37 PM   #1
Blue Crack Addict
 
deep's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: A far distance down.
Posts: 28,501
Local Time: 07:05 PM
Former Bush Team Member - WTC Collapse Likely A Controlled Demolition "Inside Job"

Quote:
Monday 13th June 2005



Former Bush Team Member Says WTC Collapse Likely A Controlled Demolition And "Inside Job"

Greg Szymanski June 12, 2005

A former chief economist in the Labor Department during President Bush’s first term now believes the official story about the collapse of the WTC is ’bogus,’ saying it is more likely that a controlled demolition destroyed the Twin Towers and adjacent Building No. 7.

"If demolition destroyed three steel skyscrapers at the World Trade Center on 9/11, then the case for an ’inside job’ and a government attack on America would be compelling," said Morgan Reynolds, Ph.D, a former member of the Bush team who also served as director of the Criminal Justice Center at the National Center for Policy Analysis headquartered in Dallas, TX.

Reynolds, now a professor emeritus at Texas A&M University, also believes it’s ’next to impossible’ that 19 Arab Terrorists alone outfoxed the mighty U.S. military, adding the scientific conclusions about the WTC collapse may hold the key to the entire mysterious plot behind 9/11.

"It is hard to exaggerate the importance of a scientific debate over the cause(s) of the collapse of the twin towers and building 7," said Reynolds this week from his offices at Texas A&M. "If the official wisdom on the collapses is wrong, as I believe it is, then policy based on such erroneous engineering analysis is not likely to be correct either. The government’s collapse theory is highly vulnerable on its own terms. Only professional demolition appears to account for the full range of facts associated with the collapse of the three buildings.

"More importantly, momentous political and social consequences would follow if impartial observers concluded that professionals imploded the WTC. Meanwhile, the job of scientists, engineers and impartial researchers everywhere is to get the scientific and engineering analysis of 9/11 right."

However, Reynolds said "getting it right in today’s security state’ remains challenging because he claims explosives and structural experts have been intimidated in their analyses of the collapses of 9/11.

From the beginning, the Bush administration claimed that burning jet fuel caused the collapse of the towers. Although many independent investigators have disagreed, they have been hard pressed to disprove the government theory since most of the evidence was removed by FEMA prior to independent investigation.

Critics claim the Bush administration has tried to cover-up the evidence and the recent 9/11 Commission has failed to address the major evidence contradicting the official version of 9/11.

Some facts demonstrating the flaws in the government jet fuel theory include:

— Photos showing people walking around in the hole in the North Tower where 10,000 gallons of jet fuel supposedly was burning..

— When the South Tower was hit, most of the North Tower’s flames had already vanished, burning for only 16 minutes, making it relatively easy to contain and control without a total collapse.

— The fire did not grow over time, probably because it quickly ran out of fuel and was suffocating, indicating without added explosive devices the firs could have been easily controlled.

— FDNY fire fighters still remain under a tight government gag order to not discuss the explosions they heard, felt and saw. FAA personnel are also under a similar 9/11 gag order.

— Even the flawed 9/11 Commission Report acknowledges that "none of the [fire] chiefs present believed that a total collapse of either tower was possible."

— Fire had never before caused steel-frame buildings to collapse except for the three buildings on 9/11, nor has fire collapsed any steel high rise since 9/11.

— The fires, especially in the South Tower and WTC-7, were relatively small.

— WTC-7 was unharmed by an airplane and had only minor fires on the seventh and twelfth floors of this 47-story steel building yet it collapsed in less than 10 seconds.

— WTC-5 and WTC-6 had raging fires but did not collapse despite much thinner steel beams.

— In a PBS documentary, Larry Silverstein, the WTC leaseholder, told the fire department commander on 9/11 about WTC-7 that. "may be the smartest thing to do is pull it," slang for demolish it.

— It’s difficult if not impossible for hydrocarbon fires like those fed by jet fuel (kerosene) to raise the temperature of steel close to melting.

Despite the numerous holes in the government story, the Bush administration has brushed aside or basically ignored any and all critics. Mainstream experts, speaking for the administration, offer a theory essentially arguing that an airplane impact weakened each structure and an intense fire thermally weakened structural components, causing buckling failures while allowing the upper floors to pancake onto the floors below.

One who supports the official account is Thomas Eager, professor of materials engineering and engineering systems at MIT. He argues that the collapse occurred by the extreme heat from the fires, causing the loss of loading-bearing capacity on the structural frame.

Eagar points out the steel in the towers could have collapsed only if heated to the point where it "lost 80 percent of its strength," or around 1,300 degrees Fahrenheit. Critics claim his theory is flawed since the fires did not appear to be intense and widespread enough to reach such high temperatures.

Other experts supporting the official story claim the impact of the airplanes, not the heat, weakened the entire structural system of the towers, but critics contend the beams on floors 94-98 did not appear severely weakened, much less the entire structural system.

Further complicating the matter, hard evidence to fully substantiate either theory since evidence is lacking due to FEMA’s quick removal of the structural steel before it could be analyzed. Even though the criminal code requires that crime scene evidence be kept for forensic analysis, FEMA had it destroyed or shipped overseas before a serious investigation could take place.

And even more doubt is cast over why FEMA acted so swiftly since coincidentally officials had arrived the day before the 9/11 attacks at New York’s Pier 29 to conduct a war game exercise, named "Tripod II."

Besides FEMA’s quick removal of the debris, authorities considered the steel quite valuable as New York City officials had every debris truck tracked on GPS and even fired one truck driver who took an unauthorized lunch break.

In a detailed analysis just released supporting the controlled demolition theory, Reynolds presents a compelling case.

"First, no steel-framed skyscraper, even engulfed in flames hour after hour, had ever collapsed before. Suddenly, three stunning collapses occur within a few city blocks on the same day, two allegedly hit by aircraft, the third not," said Reynolds. "These extraordinary collapses after short-duration minor fires made it all the more important to preserve the evidence, mostly steel girders, to study what had happened.

"On fire intensity, consider this benchmark: A 1991 FEMA report on Philadelphia’s Meridian Plaza fire said that the fire was so energetic that ’beams and girders sagged and twisted, but despite this extraordinary exposure, the columns continued to support their loads without obvious damage.’ Such an intense fire with consequent sagging and twisting steel beams bears no resemblance to what we observed at the WTC."

After considering both sides of the 9/11 debate and after thoroughly sifting through all the available material, Reynolds concludes the government story regarding all four plane crashes on 9/11 remains highly suspect.

"In fact, the government has failed to produce significant wreckage from any of the four alleged airliners that fateful day. The familiar photo of the Flight 93 crash site in Pennsylvania shows no fuselage, engine or anything recognizable as a plane, just a smoking hole in the ground," said Reynolds. "Photographers reportedly were not allowed near the hole. Neither the FBI nor the National Transportation Safety Board have investigated or produced any report on the alleged airliner crashes."
__________________

__________________
deep is offline  
Old 06-14-2005, 05:49 PM   #2
Rock n' Roll Doggie
VIP PASS
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: London/Sydney
Posts: 6,608
Local Time: 04:05 AM
Pffft....

The only remotely plausible theory I've heard beyond the planes bringing them down, is that there was some kind of 'controlled collapse' system in those buildings that could be triggered. Not as part of an ugly conspiracy, but simply a response to the recognition, post 1993 bombing, that those buildings were a target, and should anything happen that makes those buildings look likely to fall, it's best to bring them down (as they did fall) demolition style into a pile, rather than collapse in any which way the explosion/collision/fire weakened them thus potentialy taking out half of lower Manhattan.
__________________

__________________
Earnie Shavers is offline  
Old 06-14-2005, 06:08 PM   #3
Rock n' Roll Doggie
VIP PASS
 
U2DMfan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: It's Inside A Black Hole
Posts: 6,637
Local Time: 09:05 PM
I am usually one of those on the skeptical side of the government's versions (JFK, Oklahoma City bombing, AREA 51, Roswell), however I have to say that the 9/11 conspiracies are so alarmingly full of shit, it would be hilarious if it weren't such a tragic event.
__________________
U2DMfan is offline  
Old 06-14-2005, 06:15 PM   #4
Blue Crack Addict
 
deep's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: A far distance down.
Posts: 28,501
Local Time: 07:05 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by Earnie Shavers
Pffft....

The only remotely plausible theory I've heard beyond the planes bringing them down, is that there was some kind of 'controlled collapse' system in those buildings that could be triggered. Not as part of an ugly conspiracy, but simply a response to the recognition, post 1993 bombing, that those buildings were a target, and should anything happen that makes those buildings look likely to fall, it's best to bring them down (as they did fall) demolition style into a pile, rather than collapse in any which way the explosion/collision/fire weakened them thus potentialy taking out half of lower Manhattan.
— FDNY fire fighters still remain under a tight government gag order to not discuss the explosions they heard, felt and saw. FAA personnel are also under a similar 9/11 gag order.

— In a PBS documentary, Larry Silverstein, the WTC leaseholder, told the fire department commander on 9/11 about WTC-7 that. "may be the smartest thing to do is pull it," slang for demolish it.


this supports your concept
__________________
deep is offline  
Old 06-14-2005, 06:15 PM   #5
Rock n' Roll Doggie
VIP PASS
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: London/Sydney
Posts: 6,608
Local Time: 04:05 AM
I agree.
__________________
Earnie Shavers is offline  
Old 06-14-2005, 06:57 PM   #6
Blue Crack Addict
 
nbcrusader's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Southern California
Posts: 22,071
Local Time: 07:05 PM
The things people will say to get their names in the press.....
__________________
nbcrusader is offline  
Old 06-14-2005, 07:10 PM   #7
Rock n' Roll Doggie
 
Se7en's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: all around in the dark - everywhere
Posts: 3,531
Local Time: 10:05 PM
this is really deja vu. i was involved in a similar discussion over at another message board lately about this very topic. look at this:

http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles...blecharges.htm

watch the video a few times and you can clearly make out what appear to be detonation charges going off. who's to say? there is a historical precedent of the gov't sabotaging or looking the other direction of possible attack (pearl harbor, uss maine). unfortunately, if 9/11 was known or orchestrated by the government, it brings it to a whole new scale.

afghanistan was going to get it in 2001 regardless.
__________________
Se7en is offline  
Old 06-14-2005, 08:27 PM   #8
Acrobat
 
Ft. Worth Frog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Fort Worth
Posts: 390
Local Time: 10:05 PM
WHat magazine or website is this from?
__________________
Ft. Worth Frog is offline  
Old 06-14-2005, 08:31 PM   #9
Rock n' Roll Doggie
 
Se7en's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: all around in the dark - everywhere
Posts: 3,531
Local Time: 10:05 PM
http://washingtontimes.com/upi-break...2755-6408r.htm

this is not the same article as deep's but it's the basic idea.
__________________
Se7en is offline  
Old 06-14-2005, 09:16 PM   #10
ONE
love, blood, life
 
melon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Toronto, Ontario
Posts: 11,781
Local Time: 10:05 PM
Interesting. Although you all do realize that any files that would possibly maybe even remotely support this theory are either:

1) Long destroyed.
2) Hopelessly labelled "classified" until the end of time.

Melon
__________________
melon is offline  
Old 06-14-2005, 09:34 PM   #11
ONE
love, blood, life
 
A_Wanderer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: The Wild West
Posts: 12,518
Local Time: 01:05 PM
I found the most information relevent here

http://www.popularmechanics.com/scie...e/1227842.html

Read it.
__________________
A_Wanderer is offline  
Old 06-15-2005, 10:38 AM   #12
Blue Crack Distributor
 
Headache in a Suitcase's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Stateless
Posts: 56,420
Local Time: 10:05 PM
i'm so sick of this bullshit...

first off, the steel from the WTC site was taken to Fresh Kills Landfill in Staten Island, where it was analyzed by the FBI, NYPD and anyone else who wanted to analyze it. They dug through the rubble brought there piece by piece, analyzing it, pulling potential DNA samples from it. it was not quickly rushed away and destroyed, as this article suggests.

second, i keep hearing about WTC 7... how there was no damage done to the building.

bullshit.



this is the north side of the building... facing uptown... the side that the news cameras could video tape. it's also the side that faced away from the towers.



that's the southside... downtown facing... the side that faced the towers. this wasn't on the news... the news cameras weren't allowed inside the trade center site day of for obvious reasons. there is an obvious chunk of building missing from the lower right side of the building in that picture.

anyone... ANYONE... who's been to the site themselves knows of the massive black shroud covering the gaping holes in the side of the duetsche bank building. the building stood, but it is unsafe, and will eventually be brought down as well.

and lastly, the twin towers were built with the steel in the core of the building. they were not built like any other skyscraper. the outer parts of the building was nothing more than junk, really. the core of the building was dead straight up the center of the building... that is where the fires would have needed to be, and that is what would have colapsed upon it's self... the outer parts of the building had nothing to do with wether or not it would colapse... thus why the first WTC attack failed to do anything but create a hole in the building... they placed the exlposives on the side of one building, hoping to bring it down into the other. didn't work, because unlike most skyscrapers, the strength of the twin towers was in it's core.

if the core steel was damaged on the upper floors, there would be no way to see it through the outer wreckage. when the steel colapsed, the weight of the upper levels is waaaay too much for the bottom levels to handle.




people tend to ignore all of this when htey come up with their bullshit conspiracy theories.
__________________
Headache in a Suitcase is online now  
Old 06-15-2005, 11:46 AM   #13
Rock n' Roll Doggie
VIP PASS
 
kobayashi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: the ether
Posts: 5,142
Local Time: 11:05 PM
those damn economists...
__________________
im the candyman. and the candyman is back.
kobayashi is offline  
Old 06-15-2005, 12:16 PM   #14
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
80sU2isBest's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Posts: 4,970
Local Time: 10:05 PM
Set `em staright, headache. Set `em straight.
__________________
80sU2isBest is offline  
Old 06-16-2005, 07:48 PM   #15
Refugee
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Winnipeg, Canada
Posts: 2,451
Local Time: 09:05 PM
It's funny how most of you people tend to shrug off any so called "conspiracy theories". Something happened that day that was diabolical in nature and I firmly believe involved certain individuals within the US Government. Ever heard of the Rieghtstag Fire??? It was proven that Hitler was behind it and someday we will know who was behind this. I had the sinking feeling of "conspiracy" on September 11, 2001 when the first building collapsed - it was just way too spectacular an image to ignore. Then the second tower and then (strangest of all) building 7???? Lee Harvey Oswald WAS NOT the "lone gunmen" and Osama Bin Laden was not 100 % responsible for 911. I'm not letting Bin Laden off the hook, just saying there was way more than meets the eye that day.
__________________

__________________
Harry Vest is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:05 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com