LinuxQuestions.org

LinuxQuestions.org (/questions/)
-   General (https://www.linuxquestions.org/questions/general-10/)
-   -   On 9/11, what/who brought down the World Trade Center? (https://www.linuxquestions.org/questions/general-10/on-9-11-what-who-brought-down-the-world-trade-center-4175615189/)

TobiSGD 10-10-2017 06:18 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dogpatch (Post 5768103)
I believe the engineers who place the explosives must know the details of the building's structural design, so that the placement and timing may vary from building to building, depending upon the structural details.

The question then is: How do you take into account the alterations of structural design that occur by a large plane hitting the building, not only changing the structural design by just hitting it, but also by randomly weakening points in the metal skeleton of the building by burning jet fuel, before the plane actually hitting the building, so that you can plan where the explosives have to be placed?

brianL 10-10-2017 06:25 AM

C4 + thermite. ;)

sundialsvcs 10-10-2017 09:10 AM

It should be impossible to put yourself into the mind-set of anyone who would actually do something like this. (If it isn't, I don't want you to know where I live!)

This was three perfect demolition jobs – the work of a true master – using exotic materials. This is why I think that the US Government does know who must have done it: there aren't that many companies on this planet who have access to this sort of thing and the expertise to use them. And to be at the very top of their game. (If you can accomplish this, you're a master.)

What's fairly incomprehensible to me is just how the security of these buildings was so thoroughly compromised ... specifically including #7, with its supposedly-secret command center installation. Even this building "melted to the ground," perfectly.

But the actual government response is, I think, a very sensible and necessary one:
Quote:

##TOP SECRET##. "Knowledge Is Power.™" "Don't Ask, Don't Tell.™"
We are dealing with an enemy who not only had the technical capability to do such a thing, but who did it. This means that we are not dealing with an ordinary "enemy of war." It is crucial, therefore, both to understand exactly what did happen and how, and(!) to conceal that information from dissemination to, or by, the general public. The perpetrators would very much like to get a de-briefing. They must never be given one. This knowledge is dangerous.

Engineering investigators who have asked a few too many questions have obviously been ... "spoken to." Much as Governor Dewey was "spoken to" about what he should and should not say in his Presidential election campaign against FDR. I agree with this move. Some things need to be kept secret.

TobiSGD 10-10-2017 09:45 AM

My question still stands: If this would have been a demolition job, how did the perpetrators calculate the impact of the plane and the resulting alterations on the structural integrity of the building before the plane even hit the building?

Keep in mind that even for a highly skilled pilot (which the terrorists clearly were not) it is near to impossible to hit a building with such a large plane on an exact spot, with exact velocity, in a way that the impact of the plane and the burning fuel could be calculated. Even the slightest turbulence (which are quite common near large buildings) or the slightest changes in where and how hot the fuel burned would have caused all the calculations to be void.
Then look at these really very small chances to do such a thing and think about if it can be done twice in a very short period of time, since there were two buildings hit by two planes.

This might be different for building number seven, but just the impossibility of doing the calculations for the other buildings blows moon-sized holes in this hypothesis.

brianL 10-10-2017 10:18 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TobiSGD (Post 5768403)
My question still stands: If this would have been a demolition job, how did the perpetrators calculate the impact of the plane

Not an expert: but doesn't velocity * mass give you a clue?
If the 'planes hit: detonate the explosives.
If the 'planes miss: don't detonate the explosives.
As soon as I saw the towers collapse, I thought surely the 'planes hit too high up to bring down the towers like that.

dugan 10-10-2017 10:37 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by brianL (Post 5768420)
Not an expert: but doesn't velocity * mass give you a clue?
If the 'planes hit: detonate the explosives.
If the 'planes miss: don't detonate the explosives.
As soon as I saw the towers collapse, I thought surely the 'planes hit too high up to bring down the towers like that.

So you think the planes missed then. The collapse and the impact were separated by over an hour.

brianL 10-10-2017 11:17 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dugan (Post 5768426)
So you think the planes missed then. The collapse and the impact were separated by over an hour.

No, I'm convinced they hit. But I didn't mention hit and detonation being instantaneous - that might have looked even more suspicious.
Adopt the mindset of the "inside-job" conspirators. You know the terrorists plan. You want to escalate the "War On Terror". You devise a way to make an atrocity even more atrocious. It worked.

rokytnji 10-10-2017 11:33 AM

American made UFO's piloted by aliens of course.

brianL 10-10-2017 11:51 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rokytnji (Post 5768450)
American made UFO's piloted by aliens of course.

You know too much...exterminate...exterminate...exterminate!!!

sundialsvcs 10-10-2017 12:50 PM

Although I'm certainly not a demolition expert, I suspect that the airplane impacts did not do sufficient damage to the buildings to alter any demolition plan.   The buildings withstood the impacts, as they were designed to do.

Strange as it may seem, the entire airplane impact was a foil. Awful though it was, it was merely a distraction.

When confronted with barbarism of this magnitude, my mind switches off . . . I don't want to consider that human beings are capable of this.

ondoho 10-10-2017 01:28 PM

interestingly, i just found this in an old thread:
Quote:

Originally Posted by someone (Post 3698242)
Eyewitness FBI doesn't want you to hear: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DIC0Kl4TKoU
Security video FBI doesn't want you to see: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n4O4R0LWCQ4
This is either an orange or "thermal expansion": http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zv7BImVvEyk


jsbjsb001 10-10-2017 01:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ondoho (Post 5768494)
interestingly, i just found this in an old thread:

Sorry, still not convinced.

rokytnji 10-10-2017 04:02 PM

I'll just leave this here.

Pennsylvania field

I guess. Nobody here plays Jenga either.

sundialsvcs 10-10-2017 04:12 PM

Even though it seems inconceivable to "the non-psychopaths among us" that two (or more) planeloads of innocent passengers could be sent to their deaths "merely as a feint" ...

... to me this is(!) :eek: the icy-cold reality of the heinous crime Act of War that was committed on this day.

Our "battle fleets" were still out there in the ocean. Our "armies" were occupying another boring day. Meanwhile, our country was savagely attacked by a form of Enemy that neither "battle fleets" nor "armies" were ever conceived-of to oppose. In less than twelve hours, not only did they successfully execute a mind-boggling act of terrorism and of destruction, but they also successfully struck at ... and, "melted to the ground in its own footprint" ... the entirety(!) of our so-called "anti-terrorism response!"

:eek:

And therefore "the problem for you, tasked with 'keeping We, the People™ Safe™,'" is that absolutely everything has changed!

So, what can you do? The textbook response ... which seems entirely sensible to me, given the awful circumstances ... would be this:
  • "Throw out a cover story, and insist upon it!"
  • Then, in top(!) secret, start to develop actual defenses. Keep all details of these defenses, and/or of the development thereof, likewise "top secret."
  • If anyone of the public asks too-nosy questions, point them back to the Official Cover Story.™
  • ... and, if any of them "quite-logically, would see through this," take them aside.
When faced with "an enemy like this(!)" ... Knowledge is not merely Power, but it just might be your only Defense.

"Your sacred duty" is the effective defense of more than 300 million people, a significant number of which now occupy cities such as New York. And secrecy just might be a very-major component of your arsenal against this incomprehensibly-evil threat.

enorbet 10-10-2017 05:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sundialsvcs (Post 5768391)
It should be impossible to put yourself into the mind-set of anyone who would actually do something like this. (If it isn't, I don't want you to know where I live!)

This was three perfect demolition jobs – the work of a true master – using exotic materials. This is why I think that the US Government does know who must have done it: there aren't that many companies on this planet who have access to this sort of thing and the expertise to use them. And to be at the very top of their game. (If you can accomplish this, you're a master.)

What's fairly incomprehensible to me is just how the security of these buildings was so thoroughly compromised ... specifically including #7, with its supposedly-secret command center installation. Even this building "melted to the ground," perfectly.

But the actual government response is, I think, a very sensible and necessary one:


We are dealing with an enemy who not only had the technical capability to do such a thing, but who did it. This means that we are not dealing with an ordinary "enemy of war." It is crucial, therefore, both to understand exactly what did happen and how, and(!) to conceal that information from dissemination to, or by, the general public. The perpetrators would very much like to get a de-briefing. They must never be given one. This knowledge is dangerous.

Engineering investigators who have asked a few too many questions have obviously been ... "spoken to." Much as Governor Dewey was "spoken to" about what he should and should not say in his Presidential election campaign against FDR. I agree with this move. Some things need to be kept secret.

Well, old friend, while the tally is likely over 51% it is only technically true that I find "most of what (you) say highly unlikely" :D My problem with the above is that nobody was qualified to calculate how to bring down any building almost five (5) times the height of any ever actually accomplished.

Now I grant you that in some regards taller is easier since it is not an actual implosion but explosions cutting supports. The "implosion" effect is caused by gravity and in this sense "the bigger they are the harder they fall". Plus there is more margin for error when you don't care if it doesn't just melt in on itself and instead topples taking out adjoining structures. It would be a terrific challenge to cause, say, a double-wide trailer to collapse in on itself because there is so little mass. Attempts similar to this have created huge messes since the majority of the job still had to be done "by hand" after the little the explosives did. you may notic e if you view many "implosions" that shorter buildings concentrate the charges near the basement so that the greatest amount of "hammer effect" (not the dancer) can be utilized. On taller buildings there are a greater number (higher) choices which still leaves sufficient mass to come crashing down.

As this applies to WTC, once again it is just simpler, more sensible and more believable that an enemy just wanted to "hit back", make a statement and cause fear and got lucky, than some group was contracted to "do a hit".... over many months...involving large crews... in public, right under their noses, etc. and one that nobody had ever done before. Sure they would be Masters, but only a dozen or two people would know about it.... not exactly something you can put on your resume. So what's in it for them? now add versus the extreme beyond imagination risks? I'm betting there are many Muslims that think it was the Hand of Allah that crushed those buildings.

What we now know, after the fact, is that a fully fueled jetliner striking a 1400+ foot building anywhere roughly below the 3/4 height mark could and would (and did !) cause it's collapse since the degradation of structure by temperature is aided by gravity in an escalating manner finally resulting in a tipping point, "an avalanche".

As for WTC #7 at first glance it might seem harder to explain since it's height was in the 400-500 foot range, 1/5 the height of the two towers, a size that actually HAD been studied and experienced with controlled demolition. However there exists video footage from respected News TV, aired AT THE TIME, showing WTC 7 burning furiously and progressively worse until it, too, finally was structurally untenable. Here is just one account. Incidentally the embedded video didn't work for me so I had to Google it and found several.

-- News Footage of WTC 7 ---

The US Government, like all governments, is responsible for some truly heinous acts, and though I can't think like such people I have met a few and understand they exist, but one thing I know about sociopaths is they don't like risk. They enjoy extensive planning and preparation so they can prove they are superior AND get away with it. This requires control. No such level of control is anywhere near guaranteed for such an inside job, BUT the risks are quite manageable for an outside job.

Add to all this that any internal conspirators could have much more easily just placed a single massive bomb, say 10-20 times the power of Timothy'McVeigh's crude truck bomb and like him, done it all in one day with little to no exposure and accomplished sufficient outrage to enact War on Terror and Homeland Security. If you think that even too small to do the job then just imagine doing it simulataneously in 20 cities, STILL easier and safer. There was no need to build a Rube Goldberg device. Path of least resistance, Cuz.


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:25 AM.