Israel murders more civilians. Hamas vows to retaliate

Really? Cause only 3 steel buildings have ever done so before in the history of steel buildings.

WTC #1, #2 and #7

Read about the Windsor Tower

It is important to distinguish "normal" building fires from this extraordinary WTC experience, which involved the combination of severe structural damage, destruction of fire protection, suppression and egress systems, and simultaneous severe fires on several floors. ...

The consequences of damage to fire protection vary with the amount of damage and the nature and severity of the fire. At the extreme, both the WTC towers and the Pentagon
demonstrated that extensive structural damage and widespread destruction of fire protection (spray-applied materials on structural steel in the WTC towers; concrete cover on reinforcing steel in the Pentagon) can combine for catastrophe. ...

The catastrophic sequence (at the WTC) consisted of extensive impact damage to both the structural framing and the fire protection and life safety systems, followed by immense and
extensive steady-state fires. At the present time, no civilian building or system is designed to withstand such an extreme combination of events, nor even the full consequences of any one effect that occurred in New York City on September 11, 2001. It was concluded by the authors of FEMA 403 (FEMA, 2002) that rational risk-benefit evaluation does not support immediate imposition of any design provisions for such extreme loadings and combinations of extreme events. ...

These disasters demonstrate the possible outcomes from a combination of extreme events, in which both significant structural and fire protection system damage are present when a fire starts. In these cases, not only were the building structures weakened, their fire control, suppression, and protection measures and egress routes were also destroyed.

No clue. But it sure wasn't just the planes hitting them. My guess would be they were brought down by controlled demolition.

And if you eye rolling is meant to imply that I wasn't an eyewitness, that's ridiculous.

just curious what do you think brought down the towers? since you were an eyewtiness and all from what I saw on the program and my experience with explosives, I think they were fairly accurate. and what would have made the core any different than the rest of the building? hmm?

where do you think? Downtown Manhattan in view of WTC #7 before it fell.

No plane crashed into Building #7 --are you high?

No it couldn't. Steel structures don't collapse from a simple fire. Also the fire wasn't burning out of control. It was barely burning. I know because I WAS THERE.

It's on topic because it was asked how the building in Qana suddenly fell after 7 hours.

No clue. But it sure wasn't just the planes hitting them. My guess would be they were brought down by controlled demolition.

And if you eye rolling is meant to imply that I wasn't an eyewitness, that's ridiculous.

Because your argument supposes that the fires weakened the outside steel struts that supported the shell. Do you know how the Towers were constructed? I do --I've lived in NYC my whole life --I was a teenager when they were going up. They were built expressly to withstand impact of a commercial jet.

They were a hollow concrete shell supported by struts around a steel core. The fires were not hot enough to melt the core by itself, while it's possible (but not likely) that the fires could have softened the supporting struts all that would have happened in that case is the outside shell collapsing in a pancake.

the eye roll was meant that you are going to post some of your political conspiracy theory stuff like last time. I don't think they were brought down by explosives, based on fall pattern, and the lack of an explosion. When a controlled blast is set off the whole building goes off not just one section. Now why would you set off an explosive charge with people still trapped that could have gotten out? That doesn't make any sense to me.

You eat up propoganda with a spoon dontcha.

I do know how the buildings were put up. They were built to withstand a commercial jet true, but did you miss the part where the shock of the impact seperated the fire retardant foam on the steel beams from the actual steel?

Actually it's more likely they were demolished for insurance purposes. Larry Silverstein took out insurance against terrorist attacks 3 months before September 11 (never before had such a policy been issued)

Fireman on the scene have reported hearing explosives as have New Journalists on the streets and seismic data shows evidence of several blasts prior to the collapse.

as to your query about people in the building? I have always found it odd that "terrorists" would strike precisely at a time when the least amount of people would be there --prior to work hours on the day of the NYC primary elections. I also don't subscribe to the belief that people of money and power care about the lives of us plain ol' ordinary folk.

You will, of course, remember what is convenient to your world view.

I'm clear that I don't know the answer. Still. Two airliners worth of diesel fuel. Gotta count for something.

Hey! Since you know the answer, perhaps they will ask you to testify at the hearings. Can I tell people that I know you?

So now I am confused. Are you suggesting that Hezbollah had it rigged for controlled demolition?

No. Actually propoganda makes me retch. Like when Hezbollah says that the Israeli invasion had nothing to do with the Hezbollah raid. Right. So give the soldiers back and let's see what happens.

I'm curious. If Hamas asked you for advice, would you recommend that they warn people about suicide bomber attacks ahead of time, or that they keep it for a surprise for the last minute for maximum impact?

no but the one who pushes the plunger might, and I know I couldn't do it even if ordered to back in the day, so I think even if whoever did order bombs to be set off I don't think that order would be carried out until everyone was out. Also its my experience that most people don't get off work because of elections and primaries, I do because well I work in a polling place and schools are closed.

How do impoverished people evacuate a city anyways? The people of New Orleans had ample warning to evacuate --and yet they couldn't either. What does a leaflet drop warning accomplish other than widespread panic?

If the goal was to demolish the buildings when the fewest people were there, something like 3 a.m. would have been a better bet, don'tcha think?

That wouldn't generate much fear in the populace now would it?


The process of transformation, is likely to be a long one, absent some catastrophic and catalyzing event -- like a new Pearl Harbor."

From The Project For A New American Century.

How do impoverished people evacuate a city anyways? The people of New Orleans had ample warning to evacuate --and yet they couldn't either. What does a leaflet drop warning accomplish other than widespread panic?

*sigh* whatever. You make no sense to me, as usual.

hmm I wonder if this is what my drill instructor meant when he made us chant

"sicum pacaus parabellum" (sp)

Latin it means "to ensure peace, prepare for war"

Good God! Yes and you'd be even safer if you bombed every other house in the area just in case their terrorist under their beds too. If this an analogy to a technically advanced country who have precision-guided bombs, military intelligence and use of US sat pics it's nonsense.

To be serious for a moment in a thread that I don't feel like being serious in, I should state that descriptions of these individuals as terrorists is incorrect. They are in fact retaliating against oppression, which technically makes them rebels or freedom fighters. Only since the U.S. recast all those who oppose them (and their allies) as terrorists or supporters of terrorism has this euphemism found itself being invoked ad nauseam on forums. However, I understand if you need to cling to the euphemism as it obviates your need to consider that they might have a valid reason for their struggle.

*sigh* whatever. You make no sense to me, as usual.