Reichstag Fire: 102 minutes that changed America

[alexander.keys1]

On Tue, 8 Sep 2009 08:34:57 +0100, "Light of Aria"

> > wrote: > >This film was absolutely stunning to see. That fireman's reaction. The s= hock > >and horror. The doom. The dozens of people hanging from the windows and = then > >jumping. The scale of the collapse and devastation. The confusion. The c= loud > >of totally safe non poisonous fatal toxic debris. The sheer gallantry an= d > >heroism of the rescue workers. > > >How fatal was that announcement telling people to "remain calm stay at y= our > >desks." Many who survived did because they ignored that order. > > > She genuinely had no idea that people, caught between burning or > suffocating to death or jumping to their deaths had jumped and that it > was all caught on film.

That situation would not have occurred if the architects and engineers had done their job properly. High-rise buildings, where escape by stairs is impractical, are required to have segregation to prevent the spread of fire, and fire lifts, emergency lighting and other services which will continue working no matter what, to allow escape.

Of course these won't help if the building suffers catastrophic structural failure, but that had never happened before to a skyscraper, and short of a nuclear explosion, is only going to happen with the planned use of demolition charges throughout the structure...

There are a lot of unanswered questions about the 11th September "attacks", look up the 'Reichstag Fire', we've been there before.

[1LVN]

There's a simpler explanation, they are usually right.

[Sofa - Spud]

Speak for yourself, buffoon

[Jimbo ...]

The higher above GL you build the more dangerous it becomes ....

[Roger]

That situation would not have occurred if the architects and engineers had done their job properly. High-rise buildings, where escape by stairs is impractical, are required to have segregation to prevent the spread of fire, and fire lifts, emergency lighting and other services which will continue working no matter what, to allow escape.

Of course these won't help if the building suffers catastrophic structural failure, but that had never happened before to a skyscraper, and short of a nuclear explosion, is only going to happen with the planned use of demolition charges throughout the structure...

There are a lot of unanswered questions about the 11th September "attacks", look up the 'Reichstag Fire', we've been there before.

It doesn't help when there is a controlled demolition as with 119. A missile ht the Pentagon, one plane was shot down and another building dealing with emergencies was surrounded in mystery. Why would the Government deliberately kill so many people? Did they really need this as an excuse to continue with a war?

I thought the film was rubbish.

[Jeff Lawrence]

Maybe, maybe not, who can really say as there is no precedent to compare it to. But what they say still makes a hell of a lot more sense than some of the crackpot conspiracy theories that are out there. Cheers Jeff

[Spike]

It is now widely accepted that the attack on Pearl Harbour was engineered by the Americans, by placing the Japanese in a position with only one outcome, and ensuring the non-discovery of the progress of their attack fleet by the 'vacant seas'order, which ordered all US and allied shipping out of those waters.

IIRC a message saying something like "An attack may be expected at about 8am your time" sat in the Commanader's in tray, which he fiddled about with for an hour until the attack started.

[Yeti]

Granted - but here's the basics:

No steel framed building has EVER collapsed due to fire before 9/11, or since. Yet we're expected to believe that at least THREE did that day.

No plane crash has ever left as little wreckage as any of these four crashes that day.

Something definately doesn't add up somewhere.

[JohnB]

Compared to what? The last time an airliner full of fuel flew into a skyscraper?

... which may just be that too many people are trying to make 2 + 2 equal 5.

[Halmyre]

Let me see - two 90 ton airliners into two 500,000 ton buildings...yes, that wreckage would be pretty easy to find...

-- Halmyre

[Jeff Lawrence]

So what? At least two of the planes were clearly seen to hit each of the towers by many millions of people, that just cannot be denied. Plenty of plane parts were found in the WTC rubble. Just as much wreckage as was found in all the other similar instances. Although there haven't been any other similar instances of course. Plane parts matching the type of plane said to have hit the Pentagon were certainly found inside that building. And the other plane almost certainly crashed into that field. What exactly is your point? Cheers Jeff

[Yeti]

i wasn't referring to the WTC - there's thousands of witnesses, hundreds of TV cameras there - that was clearly a pair of planes. And there was wreckage in there.

I was referring to the field in Pennsylvania, specifially, and the "much smaller than 757 fuselage size" hole in the side of the pentagon - with not a single peice of plane outside.

[Jeff Lawrence]

Well, there were plenty of pieces found outside, all of which match those found on a 757 apparently.

of course most of the pieces would be inside, that's where the plane broke up. Cheers Jeff

[Jeff Lawrence]

It's hard to take these conspiracists seriously when they keep coming up with arguments like this one about the plane wreckage. Arguments that have been easily been shown to be ridiculous time and time again. Even now this Yeti is trying to make out that there were no parts found outside the Pentagon when there are many photos disproving this, which have been around since just after the incident happened. Or that certain things shouldn't have happened the way they did when there is no way of knowing exactly what should or shouldn't have happened because such things have never happened before. The only way to know for sure would be to build an exact replica of the towers, crash an exact replica of the plane into them in exact the same way and see what happens. Cheers Jeff

[Yeti]

What parts were found outside the pentagon?

Given the size of the hole - how did the other parts make it INSIDE?

Actually - there is some evidence (anecdotal, like most on both sides of this case) that the WTC was suceptable to fire damage - firstly, it was built with central beams with concrete covered trusses in between them and the outer sides (firefighter's motto - never trust a truss).

Secondly, there is video footage of an inspection of the trusses in the towers from years before - showing several areas where the fire retardant on them was either inadequate or non existant.

Like I said - I don't have the answers - just there's plenty of things that don't add up.

[larkim]

ROFLMAO!

Matt

[Mike Plowman]

Sssh, Someone at the BBC might read that and comission a second seriesw of The Big Bang Theory.

[Yeti]

I hope you're joking.

The Big Bang Theory was on channel 4, and there's already been a second series - the third's coming soon.

[Nomen Publicus]

How many were first filled with JetA? How many had a fully loaded passenger jet flown into a spot about 2/3 the way up, damaging structure and stripping fire insulation from the steel supports?

Ever seen the film of a test where a jet fighter was driven into a concrete block at 600 MPH? Nothing bigger than 5in across remained at the end.

[Nomen Publicus]

A plane in a powered vertical dive will be almost totally destroyed and buried when it hits the ground; the bits most likely to remain above ground are from the rear, the rudder for example. Even a plane as small as a spitfire was found to create a hole up to 30 ft deep. If the ground is soft or waterlogged, the hole will just fill up in a few hours.