I
think someone should be talking about the diesel oil reserves that were held in
one of the towers. A back up to be used in time of emergency. The mayor
was warned against storing this material on that site. He voted against
the advice.
Likely
that the oil contributed to the melt down of one of the
towers.
Competent terrorists would both fly planes into the towers
and set off a controlled demolition.
After
all in 1993 a bomb set off in the parking garage did little to bring down the
tower.
They
were determined to do the job this time around.
arthur
more and more
scary.
Former Bush Team Member Says WTC Collapse
Likely A Controlled Demolition And 'Inside Job'
Highly recognized former chief economist in
Labor Department now doubts official 9/11 story, claiming suspicious facts and
evidence cover-up indicate government foul play and possible criminal
implications. June 12, 2005
By Greg Szymanski
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."
For more informative articles, go to
www.arcticbeacon.com.
Greg
Szymanski
John
Verdon Sr. Strategic HR
Analyst D Strat HR voice: 992-6246 FAX: 995-5785 email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] "Searching for the pattern which
connects.... and to know the difference that makes a difference"
|