Those Darn French

Back in 2003, when France was disinclined to join the U.S.-led "coalition" in an invasion of Iraq, an anti-French political movement immediately evolved in the United States as what seemed to be a grass-roots phenomenon. "French" fries, a favor-ite food item on almost every American's normal menu, went out of favor overnight, and
Americans, full of self-sacrifice, grudgingly resigned themselves to the consumption of, not French but Freedom fries. 

The indisputable fact that the first three letters of both words were identical seems to have escaped media attention at the time, so I am mentioning it now, nine years and some months later, to point out that this consonance did not harm national sales of fried potatoes very much. As soon as the mouth makes the "Fr" position, the message is across already, to an alert observer, and the rest is just noise, whether it is Gallic or Y'Allic. 

I remember feeling a bit proud of myself, at the time, for being able to hold a superior attitude about the fries debate as it took place on that horrible monstrous thing now called the National Stage- a hell of a vaudeville show on a regular basis, that one, and you want them to all go the the islands and take a break; that show is always a bit too much now, that National Stage. 

The National Stage shouldn't be hosting a full-time freak show, or it should be called something else, perhaps the Not Ready for National Stage, until all the people on it learn to stop throwing feces at each other like monkeys on Xanax, or just get it over with and drown each other all with it, and then the National Stage could be hosed down with one of those police water cannons, sterilized  and purified with a mixture of ancient and modern Native American and European-based remedies-  soap, cedar, pine resin, smudge sticks, incense, Lysol, whatever gets it clean at last- and finally a lot of spring water that has been blessed by someone with a good heart. 

And then fill the National Stage up with scientists, benefactors, artists, philosophers, inventors, poets, balladeers, fiddle players, cheerful givers and receivers, guys who know how to fix a chain saw, and one small wise child who can be held in reserve to provide the answer when some great calamity befalls the land and the king and his court are baffled and about to lose it. 

Keep that kid in reserve, but let him play with his friends and all, and send him to school, and all the rest of that stuff, in the meanwhile. 

But one of these days, as in all good stories, the little hero has to do his number, and save the king's outfit, and all that could happen on the National Stage instead of things like state-sponsored shooting of people in the head and drinking in the halls of congress or whatever they were really up to. 

It's disgraceful. They are up on the National Stage just throwing monkey poo, and this is what we now accept as normal. 

Watch out. They'll test it further. If a herd of idiots can throw monkey poo on each other, and receive great pay and benefits, what is to prevent them from really pushing the envelope?

 Why not - I know, they can drone each other. 

"The honorable gentleman will yield.... the honorable gentleman will...  BOOM!!

Minni-drone attack, and the honorable gentleman who chose to drone instead of to yield symbolically blows a wisp of imaginary smoke off the hot barrel of his invisible revolver, and continues his filibuster about the rights of unborn GMO patented milo kernels.  

Later on, in the nightly news, it would be  "This is the news with  your host Joe Schmoe " and Joe would be saying something like
  "Today... in the Senate chambers, a senior opposition leader, Senator Unconventional-Counter-Droid Ydoncha Biteme, was killed by a mini-drone strike.  

"A victorious survivor of the mini-drone attack was Senator Conventional-Droid Biteme Ydoncha, who, acting as a spokesperson for a spokesperson for the mini-drone House and Senate Handy Assassination Program, said that  in-House insurgents were being eliminated. 

   "Senator Conventional-Droid Biteme Ydoncha went on to say that to eventually ensure complete conformity among the conventionalist and unconventionalist wings, to solidify the liquidity of their disfavor and recalcitrance,  and to gel the remaining cells of disagreements among them regarding points of view among the remaining Droids of all types, the Assassination subcommittee  had its bloody hands full, and would continue their work, having ensured continuing funding through the use of today's mini-drone strike on Senator Unconventional-Counter-Droid Ydoncha Biteme. 

"Later, another unnamed government spokesman said that the assassination of the Senator was a magnificent sacrifice and and excellent demonstration of cutting-edge in-House drone strike technology."
"And that's the news. Later, the Kardashians. What are they going to think of next!"
(break)

But that's not what I meant to talk about. I swear, sometimes I just feel like a little ole channel. I just tell it like it comes, and we'll let the scholars of the future decide whether it is garbage or prophecy. 

I don't know what channel it is, though. The Weird Channel, maybe. 

No what I meant to say had to do with French fries, and the anti-French thing. 

People got over it after a while, but a whole sub-generation of American children will hate the French all their lives and won't know why until they have years of therapy and various courses of experimental drugs, and then they will understand, it was what their parents said about the freedom fries, way  back in '02 when they were babies, and they never could stand a French person after that. 

Look around you, friends and neighbors. You know this is true. And it's not over yet. Nor is this piece.

 Anyway, I never accepted the anti-French thing. I mean, I accepted it as something I couldn't seem to do anything to prevent, because I am a lot like Saint Francis, but I never embraced it. 

Come to think of it, when I was a kid, embracing the French was really what every American boy thought about, especially at night under the covers. 

 Or so I heard. But I was a bit too young for that at the time, and instead my whole view of the French came from three places. No, four. 

 First, Emile LeBeque and his half-breed singing children. 

Second, Maurice Chevalier. Who could hate the French after hearing Maurice Chevalier and Hermione Gingold- the original Hermione-  sing "I Remember It Well"? I know, she was actually English, but he was as French as it gets.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sISWPzEqHLQ


 Third, "La Vie en Rose",  sung by Edith Piaf. No words can do it justice, so I won't try.

 And fourth, my mother and grandmother actually travelling to (and safely returning from) France on the "France" herself, and me getting to see the ship off at the pier in New York in the days when the super-liners were still with us. 

That day there was a beautiful dark-haired girl in the crowd. I was probably twelve and she ten or eleven. I don't know. We never met.She was looking at me. There were thousands of people. And the big side of the impossibly huge ship, and the great black wooden roof above the pier shading us all. 

I would get a glimpse of her. She would be looking at me. I'd look back, then she would be gone. This happened a few times. It felt really wonderful. We didn't smile. It was just there. I have no idea of anything. I just thought, that is someone I know.  

Here's a bit of a new idea to try and find the answer to the question of the Twin 

Towers pulverization.

In my 1969 Brittannica is a nice little article on Thermite *. The last paragraph states:

!!

"One of the greatest hazards of the thermite reaction is contamination with moisture. During the reaction  water is reduced and hydrogen evolved, which can produce an explosive mixture with the surrounding air."

!!

(It's talking about regular old plain vanilla "aluminum plus rust" thermite, which was patented back in 1897).)

==========

Note, this is not the same as putting a rock from a stream into a campfire and getting a steam explosion from inside the rock.

 It's not a steam pressure explosion, but a hydrogen-air combustion explosion. 

 If a whole lot of water-contaminated thermite was set off together in a closed space the right size, it could in effect produce a wide-area thermobaric device. 

Large amounts of hydrogen would be quickly produced as the moisture-contaminated  thermite reaction breaks down its contained water into  pure hydrogen and pure oxygen ( the oxygen probably being immediately taken up by the aluminum as part of the creation of the white aluminum oxide vapor a thermite reaction produces). 

What is happening here is rather like the electrolysis of water into its component gases. Thermite can do the same thing. 

Then the heat recombines the liberated hydrogen with either the liberated (from water) oxygen, or more likely, as the encyclopedia says, with surrounding air.

1 So one reaction would be the aluminum powder with magnetite, (rust or iron oxide) and the products are pure iron and aluminum oxide with the evolution of great amounts of heat at temperatures at or above the melting point of steel or iron, i.e. 2400 degrees C. 

2 The second reaction would be the reduction of water into hydrogen and oxygen. 

3 The third reaction would be the explosive recombination of hydrogen with the oxygen in surrounding air.  If there was enough hydrogen evolved for a given volume, an immensely powerful blast, just like the blast made by a  fuel-air or a thermobaric bomb, could be produced.

 Fuel-air devices, also called thermobarics,** are the most powerful blast weapons before nuclear weapons. 

So suppose there was enough thermite in, say, around or under one floor somewhere.

 It has a volume of 12 x 208 x 208, of about half a million cubic feet of air space. 

Thus the wet thermite, or apparently dry  thermite which is formulated with some kind of bound water, is set off and the reaction proceeds. 

The moisture is reduced by the reaction as in electrolysis, into oxygen and hydrogen. 

 The oxygen reacts with the aluminum to make aluminum oxide, as in the thermite reaction itself, but the hydrogen reacts  explosively with the air in the room. 

If the right few percent of hydrogen was in that air, it would turn the room into a giant explosion waiting to happen. I don't know the proper mix ration. With gasoline in air, the explosive range in air is about 3 to 5 percent. Hydrogen would be somewhat different.

 There are other ways hydrogen or other gases could have been released, from pipes or hidden tanks, if the timing was right, to create this same effect; maybe wet thermite was not the method. 

 In either case, the thermite reaction heat  and flame would instantly ignite the fuel-air reaction and make a big, perhaps a "soft" but powerful, kaboom sufficient enough to break the floors up and with enough heat to melt or disintegrate the trusses***. 

As the concrete is pulverized it acts as a high-velocity sandblaster which perforates and shreds everything in its path. The desks and computers and everything are blown to bits and the people are liquefied by a rain of sand and rock travelling about five miles per second close to the source of the explosions.

Such blasts going off next to each other in quick sequence could shatter the floors from a giant double handed kind of both-ears slap. 

The debris- concrete, pulverized trusses and pans, and everything and everyone else-  tries to escape the force, but there is nowhere to go except outward and over the edge, since the forces are above, below, and and behind: there is another blast or blasts  emanating from points in the core-  presuming shaped charges on columns, which I would say are probable or even essentially confirmed at this stage of the game.

Appendix stuff: 

Thermite reaction: Al + FeO = AlO + Fe

Formula: Reduction of water by thermite reaction:  [ 2 H2O ]  =  [H2 + (2 O2) ]

Recombination with oxygen in air: 2H2  + O2 = 2 H2O

=================================

 *NOTE  Just a few pages before Thermometry, in which Sosman and Day are mentioned and it is said that for a generation optical methods (optical pyrometry) depended upon interpolation from their scale. 

NOTE ** As I understand it a fuel-air means a fuel dispersed into a volume of air an then ignited when the percentage is is right so it burns almost all at once with an explosive effect. Just like blowing up aunt Nancy's kitchen with the gas stove, only a lot, lot bigger.

   A thermobaric means something a bit different; it may (I am not positive yet) denote a a device like a fuel air but instead of using air it provides oxygen some other way. 

That oxidizer could be LOX (liquid oxygen), or  certain compounds like hydrogen peroxide or potassium permanganate.  

This is related to basic solid-fuel and  liquid-fuel rocket system technology, in which the rocket engine must carry its own air, so to speak, in the form of one of these chemicals, in order to maintain the necessary rate of combustion or, in outer space, to maintain any combustion.

Different mixes and compounds can be used for oxidizers in a propellant or explosive. It's basically giving the fuel a pre-packed charge of air or oxygen in a concentrated form, rather than have is use ambient atmospheric air as the simplest fuel-air devices do.

NOTE  ***The trusses themselves could also have had detonating cord [detcord] on them but that would likely have left identifiable pieces. Perhaps that was the case, and the pieces in the great totla mas of rubble and dust were overlooked as having originally been part of the  trusses, but that is a whole other explosives theory).

Webster G. Tarpley at 2013 DC 9/11 Truth Conference - 2013-09-14

Webster G. Tarpley at 2013 DC 9/11 Truth Conference - 2013-09-14

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T2rGO9HrMsY

One reason why I keep harping about September 11

"I no longer love blue skies. In fact, I now prefer grey skies. Drones don't fly when sky is grey." –Zubair Rehman, 13-year-old drone victim

Despite being heralded as the first time in history that U.S. lawmakers would hear directly from the survivors of a U.S. drone strike, only five elected officials chose to attend the congressional briefing that took place Tuesday.

http://www.commondreams.org/headline/2013/10/29-3

110 Percent

Today while out driving in the rain I was thinking the usual kind of irritated thoughts that seem to happen while driving. 

Like, "dammit it is time to renew the license, and will my eyes pass?". And "Look at that asshole in his fancy car", and "Back off, buddy", and "I should really clean all the crap out of this car" and "Oh great, now I have to put in the zip code every time?!"- that last while putting a few gallons in the tank.  

Actually, this time I picked a pump which didn't care about my zip code, or more likely, already had it on a chip somewhere behind the front panel. I don't care. Everyone knows my zip code, who would want to know it. 

But it made me think about some stuff. Like, for example,. how when I was a kid, after walking five miles through the blizzard which I couldn't do until the cows had been herded out, herded back,  milked, and spoken to softly hoping they would do something magic- I bought a full box  of Hershey's with Almonds bars, all for myself.  

I saved up enough of those pennies no one picks up to buy a whole box of Hershey bars. With almonds. The old style. The domed top, copious quantities of almonds, and a wrapper that fit like a thousand-dollar silk suit. 

Of course, I was a kid. Those things wouldn't mean so much now; now it is just glom down the chocolate until nothing hurts any more. 

But back then,  Hershey bars and idealistic youth seemed to pose no conflict of interest to each other, or would even squabble, if found together side by side on two Schwinn 3-speeds and unable to escape each other. 

They would get along fine, back in those days. 

Nowadays, chocolate- well, it is too expensive for ordinary people. 

See, back then, after I got in from the blizzard with all my books borrowed from teachers, I got a ride to the store with Mother, and I had $1.20 saved up, and got a box of twenty-four (24) Hershey's with Almonds bars. 

Don't ask me how many ounces. This was in the time of black phones, and like the phones, all Hershey bars were the same.  Now some are more equal than others, and that is the sort of thing I wanted to talk about.  Not only that, now the chocolate bars are heavier than telephones. In the old days, we couldn't have imagined that. Civilization marches on.

But first, the Hershey bar story- it's almost done; your suffering will soon be over. 

I had that box of 24. It was the kind of box you could use for other stuff. Not that it was so durable or thick, it was just well-made. The top slid over the bottom part. You could have put a small shirt and some crinkly paper in it and it would have been a gift for a small person, but I didn't do that. 

I ate those Hershey bars. I don't recall giving any away, but maybe I did. No, probably not. 

In those days, a box of 24 Hershey bars was something to have. It was like money in the bank. It made me not mind the blizzard, and the weight of all those advanced books in my freezing hands.  I knew that at home was that box. That shiny, slick, well-made box, with the most well-designed arrangement of stacked Hershey bars inside of it- it was so nice, I almost didn't like to take any out. 

Of course, it wasn't perfect. Here's why. The tops were round, but the bottoms were flat. So you really needed that box, to stop the sliding. I know, I know. The kinds without almonds will stack up just like crackers. But they aren't the same. The domed top, for all its inconvenience, was a necessary feature of the totality of the elegance of that full box of Hershey bars. Arcs always add class to flat things.

Think of it. One dollar and twenty cents. There was no tax on food, either. Really. Yes, it was in this country. 

It was full price- five cents apiece- because the store guy didn't care about the box. All the box was for, to that guy,  was to hold five-cent bars in so they didn't slip out and fall on the floor. So, me buying 24 of them off the shelf, or buying a box of 24, it was all the same to him. 

But look at it this way. I didn't get a discount, but I did get a free box, and the enjoyment of keeping the 24 Hershey bars in it, so nicely stacked, and so helpful to the rocking problem caused by the rounded tops. 

It was worth it. But what can you get for a dollar-twenty today? Let us examine this issue a little bit. 


Last week, simply because all the stores are over where all the people with money live and so all we have is kwik-marts around this neighborhood, I went to the gas station to buy something to eat.

 I decided to get one of those large Hershey bars they have now. It actually is pretty big, about the size of maybe three or four of the classics like those I had in that box fifty years ago- I ate them all within 4 days,  by the way. 

So I wanted one, and bought this big one. 

It was a flattie. Almonds get stuck in my teeth now. So I got the big flattie Hershey bar. 

In a normal universe it would be, say, fifty cents. After all, it is pretty big, and times have changed, and money ain't what it used to be any more than the old gray mare is. 

I thought it would maybe even be $1.29. I hoped no more than that.

 Well, of course, in some stores, some of the time, they try to fool you into buying stuff at the wrong price, and so sometimes it will say something like "Buy two, get one free!" on items, but they won't tell you what it costs to buy the first one of them. They tell you that at checkout. 
So then, you're at checkout, wondering what the price is on the damn candy bar, and there is that guy with a skinhead, and wearing a camo jacket waiting to buy his RedMan, and having left his diesel 4x4 deer-hunting truck running, he is in a hurry, and he took his steroids too late this morning or something, and has already harassed me at the coffee counter on a previous trip to that local kwik-mart, and so, not wanting to delay  this Bluto, it is tempting to just pay the- what?- did you say two seventy-one? For a Hershey bar??" 

I realize it isn't her fault. I pay and smile through closed lips. 

She says "Have a good one"- they always do now. 

Sometimes they say, right after handing you the receipt "come back!" and you want to say, "But I'm still here! What should I do!". But then, she is liable to think you are a present danger simply because you have a few gray hairs and smiled at her.

 No matter, one knows how to behave in such situations; one takes one's candy bar  and leaves and goes home and enjoys it like Gollum eating a raw fish behind a dripping rock. And one doesn't worry about having to share it with the dog, because it's chocolate,  so get off me, dog.


But that's not what I wanted to talk about today. I wanted to talk about how bored I am with people saying they are giving one hundred and ten percent. 

Obviously they didn't give it, in the form of attention paid in arithmetic class. 

Now, there is even a website with 110% quotes. I mean a dedicated web page. 

That's what has happened while you all were asleep. That, and candy bars getting out of control, so an old fellow can barely have one on a depressing, rainy day.
Oh well, chocolate is bad anyway. I didn't really want it. People who want it are just not strong.


Now these people who say 'I give 110%"- sometimes it is 120, 150, often 200 per cent, and up to a thousand per cent. 

This is what people give these days, or say they do. One hundred percent is no good any more.  Even 99 percent is a failure. You are a loser at 99 percent. In fact, 110 per cent is now a mandatory minimum, and has been embraced by our spiritual and secular as well as favorite business leaders, all over this great land of ours, despite the shortage of reasonably-priced chocolate.


The idea is that you can give more than one hundred per cent. I write it per cent and not percent to show my faithful, blizzard-hiking readers the difference. 

"Percent" now means almost nothing. 

   I looked up 110 percent on Google. First entry, it tells me 110% = 1.1. 
Well, yes, I understand, in a manner of speaking it does. 

But how you can get 110 somethings out of 100, without breeding them first, I don't know. 
Percent, or per cent,  it, is based on a concept, long-established, that 100 percent means the full amount of something. 

The total.

 Whatever it is, as a quantity of something, 100% represents all of it, no more and no less. 

Back when candy bars were still a nickel, this is what percent, or per cent,  meant. 

If you got a perfect score on a test, it was 100 percent. You couldn't get a higher score. 100% meant, every single thing was right.  There were no mistakes and no omissions. It was perfect. 100 meant perfect. 

"Cent" comes from the Latin word for one hundred. "Per" means "through".  You could say in this case it means "of" or "from" or "out of". 
Anything less than a total quantity is less than one hundred percent, and anything over one hundred percent can't exist except as a figure of speech. 

The trouble is that the figure of speech- that is, 110% as a figure of speech implying "going above the call of duty" or "giving more than anyone else" or "giving more than usual"- has been embraced as reality that even applies to common solid, liquid, and gaseous objects with which we are all familiar. A hundred percent, now, is really just lame. 100%. Ha! You gotta do better than that, Sparky. 

Beyond this misconception is something deeper. It is the belief, fostered by advertising and perhaps too much good living, that something can be had from nothing, or that if you have one of something, you can make it into one and a tenth of the same thing, and that is 110%. 

But you can't. 100% is the whole thing. There is total, and there is less than total. Total is 100, and less than 100 is less than total. That's how it used to be.  Back when we even had blizzards to walk through.

Now everyone says "I give 110%, buddy!" and thinks he is a hotshot. 
Until the next guy says "Well, Skippy, I give 120%!". 

Then it  is a pissing contest, and they never do learn their arithmetic.

But it gets worse than that, and I  don't just mean my writing. It gets to where people believe that if they wish hard enough, they can make the modern version of loaves and fishes all by their own selves. 

If they pray hard enough, they can cause something that is 100 to divinely increase to 110, 120, 150, 200, or 1000 "per cent". That's like saying, I have one dollar, and prayer will make it worth $1.20. No. Inflation does that, and the worth is only nominal.

The worst manifestation so far of the 110% involves the 1000% contingent, mostly, I think.

 This is the group which believes that with wishing and with prayer, 100 percent of available destructive energy blowing up skyscrapers is increased to 1000%. They just think that it is supposed to be that way. 

And so it is easy for them to believe that something that requires 1000 pieces of energy can be had for 100 pieces of energy. 

Well, it isn't true, and I'm here to say so, for those who can understand a little bit of satire and irony  and arithmetic, and who know anything about the destruction of those buildings. 

The energy it took was not available, except from explosives, see?  Not in gravity and kerosene fires. The energy just wasn't there big enough, see? It had to be added. A LOT had to be added. That's what was done. 

That is what I mean about the 110 percenters. They think that there is more in 100 percent than there really is. So they go to die in wars and kill people who haven't gotten old enough to even read a book yet, because of the god-damned stupid "I give 110%" concept, which lets them believe the Big Lie of 9/11 and all the lies that followed it. 

Wars, Drones, Suicides, NSA, Economy, What Are We Gonna Do?

Who knows? But here is a program that could be tried. Just some suggestions.


1. The World Trade Center was blown up

2. It's 100% certain; don't waste any more time on the angels on pins issues.

3 The mass of the American people don't know it yet, so, because it is very important, ergo
4 They need to know.

5 Then they will realize or start to realize that the whole GWOT was a setup from the first day and the drone program is part of the same nasty thing.

6 If people realize that, there will be calls for more investigation and charges filed. Power players in many areas, notably the media forces, will finally begin step in on the right side of justice when it looks like they have a chance to show off.

7 This can begin to happen only if the American people care enough to take the time to look at the evidence. Start with five hours. A small amount of time, compared to years of war. See the new, top-notch, highly revealing five hour story of 9/11. People should really find out about it.

8 As long as the American people think the official story and the whole pack of lies that followed it are true, we have no choice but to continue to put up with the drones, war, suicides, murdering foreign children for no reason but profit, and other awful things. The key is getting Sept. 11 straightened out in the American brain. That is the sine qua non of national recovery in any area, drones and everything else. Sine qua non means without it you've got nothing.

9 So tell everyone you know that the Trade Center was definitely blown up and that this has been scientifically proven. Because that is the truth. It has been proven. Be prepared to back it up with some facts. You don't need to know all the facts, no one does. Get some good ones though. But remember, don't get in arguments. You can't win a 9/11 argument. But a some readiness is easy if you spend a little prep time. Don't argue with them. Just let people know. Tell them about the new documentary. Seriously, people will watch it and it will reach them. It is made to reach them. Try it.

10 Everything else tried for 12 years has not worked. Consider that.

11 This method might. The other choice is to go on as we are.

12 Good luck. Be confident, if what you say is true.

Energetic Debris at World Trade Center Tower Collapse

The question is, why is the piece of debris falling on the left side not falling in an arc as normally seen in a thrown object, but acting like a bullet or a rocket, with a very flat trajectory?

(Click photos to enlarge)

9/11 Demolition: How They Did It Part 1

Working Draft 1 Not yet Complete 

How They Did It.

(faint, hesitant applause, and two people coughing a little too often... "Ahem. Thanks to that movie- you know the one I mean!-  and many others. I will accept the first, though I hope it is not the last, 2013 Howdunit Award now....

" Ladies and gentlemen-....

(Wakes up with a start "What a crazy dream!")  

=================================================

Here's basically what happened.  Many thanks to all the researchers whose prior work enabled me to come to these conclusions.This is a working hypothesis and brand new, to me anyway, and a first draft, so be patient, it's not all figured out yet.

1.  V cuts on the vertical steel in the core columns. Stable until hit by side force. Also use of shaped charges for 45% cuts where desired.

 2  45% cuts on any horizontal beams (WTC 7 anyway; this would  not work on the bar trusses in the Towers the same way)

         Either or both techniques or similar ones could have been used to prepare the hat truss, which was reportedly never found in recognizable form.

3 Remove the four bolts holding the column/spandrel units together at their every third story junctions, which are five or six feet off the floor and have access panels. Remove four bolts each such joint, leave some, leave corners for now.

4 Everything- you could do the whole building-  is stable if you do it correctly, until the floors are blown up. Then it all comes down in a big powder puff.

     

5. Towers: the reports of heavy equipment, like steel-wheeled very heavy dumpsters. Think pre-op. Think bug hydraulic jacks for stability when making cuts through big steel. (followed by judicious use of shims or steel wedges)

=======================

random notes and conclusions

Pre-cuts.

If you have a box or I-beam column-0 that is vertical- and make a V-cut, all the way through, it can go nowhere unless it first is moved sideways far enough to fall out of its V notch. A horizontal I-beam can be cut with a 45% cut all the way through and stay in place, secure as long as nothing pushes it sideways, and additionally, if nothing pulls on it. 

Now, as for the bar trusses, they may well have been needed to , when the core columns are pushed off their seats as part of the finale, pull the outside columns in to initiate the collapse at the "seam" where the worst damage was up high.  The documentary shows an animation of this possibility.

Somehow those trusses were destroyed. 

I can't find them in any rubble pictures. 

The fireproofing could very well have been a high tech explosive.  It would melt and fragment the trusses perfectly in fact, and were  they ever found? 

Or the ceiling tiles could have been explosive sheet.  It is possible. 

But I still lean towards all high explosives, most in the core,and more or less standard techniques of demolition. 

Now DEW, not nukes, but certainly some kind of thermite and a lot  of it- the site was so hot for so long something very serious was happening most likely a compacted unquenchable collection of ongoing thermitic reaction in a matrix of molten and almost molten steel, as so often reported, except there ware no reports of underground thermite reaction per se,  However it could have been something similar. 

I believe there had to have been an ongoing chemical reaction to provide all that heat since most of what was in the towers was fireproof or fire resistant anyway, so an explanation is needed about all that heat. 

 Maybe the filmmaker is making a sequel about this whole subject. It's the next step. This is journalism of the highest caliber, this movie is.

note: Why didn't we see a lot of explosions, or relatively few, on the outside, if it was a controlled demolition?

 Because the 4 bolts of many of them had already been removed and there was not need to blast them. 

    The perimeter walls as a whole were a kit before, and would be a kit again, when those bolts were lost long before the dreadful day. "Got to check the phone wires inside this panel, just take a minute"

     But I think the V cuts and 45 cuts are the key.   But LOTS of them. Think about it. You could cut the whole building up into a thousand piece that way,  and NOTHING whatsoever goes wrong until you blow the floors. Get it?

 It's elegant as hell.  And I mean that literally.

This is how they did it. 

You just have to be familiar with remodeling, and how to place a few little wedges, and understand that gravity works down, but explosives work outward from the point of detonation, and you will do fine.

Oh and at the exterior walls, every three stories they go around the room and pull off the panels and take out the four bolts, almost everywhere, and put the covr back on and nothing would happen. But when the floors get blown, it comes down like pick up sticks. I think I've got something here.

"It's a frame!"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OmM4Tra-rg0

9/11

Let's Row!

Reviews for September 11: The New Pearl Harbor at Amazon

5.0 out of 5 stars Best Picture, October 27, 2013

http://www.amazon.com/September-11-The-Pearl-Harbor/product-reviews/B00F12IRSO/ref=cm_cr_pr_top_recent?ie=UTF8&showViewpoints=0&sortBy=bySubmissionDateDescending

Mister O'Malley

Something about Gus reminds me of Donald Rumsfeld

That Last Full Moon Made Me Crazy

Now I'm only half-crazy.

Only In America: "September 11 - The New Pearl Harbor" Physics Over Fiction

Only In America: "September 11 - The New Pearl Harbor" Physics Over Fiction

THIS BLOG IS DEDICATED TO ROBERT B. SOSMAN

Dedicated to Robert Browning Sosman

Chillicothe, Ohio High School Class of 1898

University of Ohio  Bachelor of Science, Class of 1902

Massachusetts Institute of Technology: PhD. Chemistry  1907

United States Steel, Kearny, New Jersey Facililty:  Assistant Research Director

Arthur D. Little Laboratory, Boston, Massachusetts, c. 1907-8

United States Geophysical Labs, Carnegie Institution, Washington, D.C. c. 1908- 1922
         Acting Director, about 1922

United States Defense Department: Consultant on Strategic Minerals

Professor Emeritus: Rutgers University

Co-author:  High-Temperature Gas Thermometry, (With Arthur L. Day and E.T. Allen) 1911

Author: The Properties of Silica
            The Phases of Silica
            Gustavademecum  (Restauant Guide for New York City, Series by Year, 1940's)

Encyclopedia Britannica: 
   
             Author:  SILICA
                        SILICON



Bleninger Award:  American Ceramic Society: Highest Award in Basic Science Award: Recipient

John Jeppson Medal Recipient

Seventh Person to Complete the Appalachian Trail  (Appalachian Mountain Club)

Consultant and Member:
    Washington Academy of Sciences, (Briefly, Acting President, about 1923)
     American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM)
     American Society of Civil Engineers

Member:
       The Cosmos Club
         Washington D.C.



Camper,  Hiker, Rattlesnake Skinner

Cool Train Riding Dude

Handsome Young Scientist Dude

Receiving Bleninger Award

Smiling Grandfather

============================================================

September 11: The New Pearl Harbor 3 DVD 5 Hours

September 11: The New Pearl Harbor

by Massimo Mazzucco

 

WEB PAGES ABOUT September 11: The New Pearl Harbor
by Massimo Mazzucco

3 DVD

5 Hours

http://www.luogocomune.net/site/modules/sections/index.php?op=viewarticle&artid=167

http://www.amazon.com/September-11-The-Pearl-Harbor/dp/B00F12IRSO

Steel-reinforced Concrete Highway Construction, Iowa Street, Lawrence, Kansas, 10/22/2013

Building a Steel-reinforced Concrete Road

Project: Replacement of pavement along Iowa St Between University Ave and 15th St in Lawrence, Kansas.

Reinforcing steel and its use today in highway construction: a photographic sampler.

Images from October 22, 2013.

------------

Carpenter and Concrete Worker for 9/11 Truth

(There's only one of us so far)

Post #1

As a lifetime construction worker who has had many occasions to cut or demolish concrete, masonry, steel, and steel-reinforced concrete, using hand and light power tools I've long held an intense interest in the mechanism by which thousands of tons of such materials could be turned to a fine dust and grit at all, let alone how they could be turned to dust and grit in a matter of fifteen seconds, as the actually werein New York City's Twin Towers on September 11, 2001.  

Such a process can be seen happening in the archival video records of the destruction of the World Trade Center Twin Towers on September 11, 2001. 

-------------------------

These photos are of essentially the same kind of Portland Cement concrete as was destroyed so quickly on 9/11.  This concrete is slighly denser as it is not designated lightweight as the floors were. This concrete is likely air-entrained; I don't know if such a process was also used on the WTC floors or if their mix contained vermiculite or other additive to cut down density, and therefore weight, a few percent. 

This concrete is not as thoroughly reinforced by steel as the world Trade center Twin Towers floors were. 

However, it is about twice as thick, but without the supporting corrugated steel pans and bar trusses and other steel members  which reinforced and supported the WTC floors.

Thus, while a comparison may be useful for visulaization and general knowledge, ny comparisons  between this highway concrete and the WTC concrete must be limited by these considerations others not listed here.

--------------------------

The photo with the car mirror in the way shows a row of green bars, (which you can also see, in some of the other photos, held by a wire frames or "chairs" in their relative positions) at an expansion joint. 

As is evident in the photograph with the mirror in the way, the pins comprise a mechanical key at seams between adjoining slabs of the approximately 8" thick concrete pavement.  

The green rods emerging from the longitudinal edges of the pavements are of different surface pattern, a smaller diameter, and a greater length than the transverse smooth pins,  

 The smooth pins are about  1 1/4 inch in diameter, while the transverse bars are about 5/8". 

These 5/8" tensile members are corrugated, and meant to hold fast withing the concrete, unlike the pins, which must be allowed to slip under sufficient force in order to provide relief due to possible frost heave, settling of the road as a whole, sideways pressure trying to move the pavement laterally (a hillside, for example, against a road exerts a lot of pressure and will sometimes try to flow and push a road downhill), or any other forces threatening to mis-align the individual large panels or slabs of concrete. 

The 5/8" corrugated reinforcing bars comprise a similar key along the other axis of the slabs at the edges, as can be seen below. 

The longitudinal joint is not meant to slip.  The corrugations will not allow it.

The transverse joint is meant to slip. The smooth surface and parallel alignment of the pins allow it.

I had never seen this particular keying method before , and thought it interesting, so here it is for anyone who wants to learn about this method. 

The photos showing black plastic are of completed, but still "green" or not fully set, pavement sections. 

The plastic keeps the necessary water from evaporating, and results in a harder and well set concrete. 

On the homeowner driveway scale, this used to be done just by sprinkling with a wet broom or other device,to keep the surface damp without washing it off, during the set-up time demanded by conditions. If the surface dries out at all before the whole mass sets, the surface will be weak and powdery - so the plastic is used for both total strength and for surface wear resistance and durability.

10/24/2013