Are Americans dumb?

[Phantasmal]

How has the military lied to us regarding 9/11?

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/08/01/AR2006080101300.html

The whole 9/11 commission was a sham, but they got this right.

 

[cancel2 2022]

When falling mass encounters equal or greater mass IT ALWAYS SLOWS DOWN. Objects that only encounter air resistance fall faster than objects that encounter mass resistance .. thus the term, free-fall speed.

I think this is as good an explanation as any as to why they collapsed the way they did. The towers were actually 95% air and the floors relied on angle clips mating to the vertical columns, when the steel became sufficiently weakened there was nothing to support the floors.

Nearly every large building has a redundant design that allows for loss of one primary structural member, such as a column. However, when multiple members fail, the shifting loads eventually overstress the adjacent members and the collapse occurs like a row of dominoes falling down.

The perimeter tube design of the WTC was highly redundant. It survived the loss of several exterior columns due to aircraft impact, but the ensuing fire led to other steel failures. Many structural engineers believe that the weak points—the limiting factors on design allowables—were the angle clips that held the floor joists between the columns on the perimeter wall and the core structure (see Figure 5). With a 700 Pa floor design allowable, each floor should have been able to support approximately 1,300 t beyond its own weight. The total weight of each tower was about 500,000 t.

As the joists on one or two of the most heavily burned floors gave way and the outer box columns began to bow outward, the floors above them also fell. The floor below (with its 1,300 t design capacity) could not support the roughly 45,000 t of ten floors (or more) above crashing down on these angle clips. This started the domino effect that caused the buildings to collapse within ten seconds, hitting bottom with an estimated speed of 200 km per hour. If it had been free fall, with no restraint, the collapse would have only taken eight seconds and would have impacted at 300 km/h.[SUP][SIZE=-1]1[/SIZE][/SUP] It has been suggested that it was fortunate that the WTC did not tip over onto other buildings surrounding the area. There are several points that should be made. First, the building is not solid; it is 95 percent air and, hence, can implode onto itself. Second, there is no lateral load, even the impact of a speeding aircraft, which is sufficient to move the center of gravity one hundred feet to the side such that it is not within the base footprint of the structure. Third, given the near free-fall collapse, there was insufficient time for portions to attain significant lateral velocity. To summarize all of these points, a 500,000 t structure has too much inertia to fall in any direction other than nearly straight down.

http://www.tms.org/pubs/journals/JOM/0112/Eagar/Eagar-0112.html

http://www.tms.org/pubs/journals/JOM/0711/banovic-0711.html

 

[Phantasmal]

You mean with scenarios like Operation Bojinka? That is correct. That is what they focused on.

So, you are saying that before 9/11 NORAD did not have a plan to intercept errant domestic aircraft and never had to do such?

 

[blackascoal]

I think this is as good an explanation as any as to why they collapsed the way they did. The towers were actually 95% air and the floors relied on angle clips mating to the vertical columns, when the steel became sufficiently weakened there was nothing to support the floors.

http://www.tms.org/pubs/journals/JOM/0112/Eagar/Eagar-0112.html

I'm sorry .. that's ridiculous.

The floors were not made out of air no did they weigh the same as air.

Demonstrate ANY event that looks like a controlled demolition but isn't one.

You can't do it. It defies physics.

 

[Cancel 2016.2]

So, you are saying that before 9/11 NORAD did not have a plan to intercept errant domestic aircraft and never had to do such?

No, I am saying they didn't consider it a priority because the job of the military is protecting our borders from attack/invasion (however unlikely those are). We have the FBI, State police, local police, airport security etc... to handle the internal side. But they did not track the commercial domestic flights. Obviously that has changed given what happened. As far as never having to do such, no, they never had to intercept commercial planes. On the rare occasion, they have done so for private planes. But even so, it was not a part of their mission.

 

[cancel2 2022]

I'm sorry .. that's ridiculous.

The floors were not made out of air no did they weigh the same as air.

95% of the volume of the towers was air, each tower weighed around 450,000,000 kg.

 

[Cancel 2016.2]

I'm sorry .. that's ridiculous.

The floors were not made out of air no did they weigh the same as air.

and the mass that was falling was not less than that which it was impacting upon. It was more. It slowed down from free fall speed as he stated. You just continue to pretend it didn't.

 

[blackascoal]

95% of the volume of the towers was air, the towers themselves weighed around 500,000 tonnes

Again, ridiculous.

I suppose you have the same excuse for WTC 7.

Demonstrate ANY event that looks like a controlled demolition but isn't one. You can start from the beginning of time.

 

[blackascoal]

and the mass that was falling was not less than that which it was impacting upon. It was more. It slowed down from free fall speed as he stated. You just continue to pretend it didn't.

Not sure why you're still talking to me about this brother. You can't even answer obvious questions. At least he is trying to come up with an excuse for what you ran away from.

 

[cancel2 2022]

Again, ridiculous.

I suppose you have the same excuse for WTC 7.

Demonstrate ANY event that looks like a controlled demolition but isn't one. You can start from the beginning of time.

I quote from the Journal of Metallurgy article.

First, the building is not solid; it is 95 percent air and, hence, can implode onto itself. Second, there is no lateral load, even the impact of a speeding aircraft, which is sufficient to move the center of gravity one hundred feet to the side such that it is not within the base footprint of the structure. Third, given the near free-fall collapse, there was insufficient time for portions to attain significant lateral velocity. To summarize all of these points, a 500,000 t structure has too much inertia to fall in any direction other than nearly straight down.

As for WT7, I had my doubts about that as well, but the NIST report is very comprehensive and explains that collapse as well. WT7 was built over a subway station and needed a special design which placed a huge amount of emphasis on certain horizontal beams. The fires within theb building caused by the 9000 gallon diesel tanks weakened them to the point where they failed under load.

 

[Phantasmal]

No, I am saying they didn't consider it a priority because the job of the military is protecting our borders from attack/invasion (however unlikely those are). We have the FBI, State police, local police, airport security etc... to handle the internal side. But they did not track the commercial domestic flights. Obviously that has changed given what happened. As far as never having to do such, no, they never had to intercept commercial planes. On the rare occasion, they have done so for private planes. But even so, it was not a part of their mission.

I disagree about what their mission was/is. What do You consider rare? If it is not part of their mission, then whose mission should it be?

 

[Phantasmal]

No, I am saying they didn't consider it a priority because the job of the military is protecting our borders from attack/invasion (however unlikely those are). We have the FBI, State police, local police, airport security etc... to handle the internal side. But they did not track the commercial domestic flights. Obviously that has changed given what happened. As far as never having to do such, no, they never had to intercept commercial planes. On the rare occasion, they have done so for private planes. But even so, it was not a part of their mission.

https://sites.google.com/site/deanjackson60/airamerica

 

[Airstrip One]

Seriously, they didn't track commerial airlines? That is just stupid, what about hijackings! I just can't believe NORAD didn't track commercial airlines before 9/11. There was still the risk of hijacking. Sounds ridiculous to me.

Well, if we worked with the FAA anything like we do in 2012, there's two ways we could have tracked commercial airliners:

1) A plane crosses into a new ATC region and doesn't check-in on his radio. After a few minutes, the control centre reports the aircraft as out of communications. Nowadays we immediately start tracking it. Not sure about 2001. (this scenareo is actually not relevant to 9/11, but it's an example).

2) Pilots roll their transponder code to 7500, the official code for Hijack, and hopefully we see it before the hijackers bust in and turn the transponder off. Nowadays, it is a certainty that we see it (and at least one pilot did roll his code on 9/11) - back then, it's possible NEADS didn't see it, because their equipment was antique. Either way, the 9/11 NORAD could not have tracked a plane into the interior of the US without getting an AWACS plane airborne and in close proximity (unlikely).

Hopefully you start to get a picture of how bad the Northeast Air Defense Sector had it that day.

 

[Cancel 2016.2]

Not sure why you're still talking to me about this brother. You can't even answer obvious questions. At least he is trying to come up with an excuse for what you ran away from.

Once again you accuse me of 'running away' from some question. I have asked you repeatedly WHAT the question is that you continue to refer to. You are the one who continues to run away from answering THAT question. Until you do, I repeat... I don't know what question it is you are referring to. So I cannot answer until you tell me what it is you are referring to. I hope this finally clears it up for you.

 

[Cancel 2016.2]

I disagree about what their mission was/is. What do You consider rare? If it is not part of their mission, then whose mission should it be?

How can you disagree? It is what it is. It was what it was. You may not like what they mission was or you may think it should have included more. But the fact of the matter is that prior to 9/11 they did not track commercial planes because they did not view them as a threat.

The mission is typically that of the FBI.

 

[Damocles]

They relied on domestic ATC centres but you don't find it strange that they didn't have direct comms links? They put them in PDQ after 9/11.

You mean they actually had to dial a phone number?!!shiftplusone!11

 

[Damocles]

Basically we have a weird conversation going on about private line connections being installed after 9/11...

Pre 9/11 they had phones with pre-programmed keys. They picked it up, and hit the button, it dialed for them. Lines for emergencies were on a separate system than lines for regular business, as well for lines that are scrambled for classified business (on a separate system from the regular business phone lines).

 

[Cancel 2016.2]

https://sites.google.com/site/deanjackson60/airamerica

Again, read your own site... it confirms yet again that their mission was to track and cover any flight that enters US air space. Key word Rana... enters. It is tracking those flights that originate outside of the US. Also... we have NORAD's own site telling us that they did not track commercial airlines who originate and land within the US. We have your site saying:

However, the 9/11 Truth Movement has been negligent in producing any documents that would confirm their suspicion that NORAD was tasked with watching over and intercepting errant aircraft in American skies before 9/11; that NORAD’s mission was more robust than "looking outward".

"The NORAD mission is threefold. NORAD's first responsibility is to provide SURVEILLANCE AND CONTROL [emphasis mine] of the airspace covering North America, specifically the airspace of Canada and the United States. This mission is based on agreements between the two governments.

The second part of NORAD's mission is to provide the NCAs with tactical warning and attack assessment of an aerospace attack against North America. This information is essential to providing those in command with information to aid them in making decisions on how to respond to an attack against North America.
NORAD's third responsibility is to provide an appropriate response TO ANY FORM OF AN AIR ATTACK [emphasis mine]. NORAD was created to provide a defense against the threat from air-breathing aircraft, specifically the threat from long-range bombers. However, over the years the threat has changed. Now NORAD must provide an appropriate response to a multitude of threats, to include the air-launched cruise missile (ALCM) and the sea-launched cruise missile (SLCM)." -- NORAD AIR DEFENSE OVERVIEW; Northeast Parallel

None of which discusses domestic commercial flights...

"One ongoing mission of the Battle Management Center is to coordinate "air sovereignty" efforts, MONITORING EVERY AIRCRAFT THAT ENTERS [emphasis mine] U.S. or Canadian airspace -- some 2.5 million a year. NORAD is asked to INVESTIGATE [emphasis mine] aircraft that do not file flight plans, contact ground controllers or identify themselves with TRANSPONDERS [emphasis mine]." -- Cheyenne Mountain: America's underground watchtower; CNN Cold War, 1999.

Key word: ENTERS. Second Key: track 2.5 million per year.... there are about 80,000 domestic flights per day in the US today... that is over 25 million flights per year.

Yet this is the conclusion of the author:

As is plainly obvious from the pre-9/11 literature quoted above on the capabilities of NORAD (for both the United States and Canada), the official accounts of NORAD’s capabilities on 9/11 were a lie; a monstrous story concocted by the Pentagon and its controllers in the White House to explain away the non-response of NORAD on 9/11.

He clearly doesn't even comprehend the quotes he is giving. He just takes quotes and tries to piece together a narrative.

 

[cancel2 2022]

You mean they actually had to dial a phone number?!!shiftplusone!11

Yes, it was such a wonderful system but yet they felt compelled to install direct comms links including data and voice plus have somebody from the FAA there on a permanent basis after the horse had bolted.

 

[Cancel 2016.2]

Yes, it was such a wonderful system but yet they felt compelled to install direct comms links including data and voice plus have somebody from the FAA there on a permanent basis after the horse had bolted.

In other words: they adapted to a new threat?