Effective Disinfo = Support For The Impossible
Ignorance of the obvious.
The obvious is; the backwards sequence of the towers fall. The first tower hit, hit hardest, burnt the worst falls last.
Backwards, particularly if fire was supposed to bring the towers down.
The obvious is; that a structure with perimeter bearing walls will fall in the direction of the damaged wall and the towers did not.
The obvious is; that IF remote control existed, it would be used to make sure the above 2 inconsistencies do not exist, but they do.
Have you ever heard those simple obvious factors put together before? Perhaps, ..... they are obvious. If you have not, then WHY?
That such a structure as FEMA claims stood had been there for 30 years when it could not survive the first 80 MPH wind.
This is an in depth engineering problem based in the flex, sway and torsion of steel in structures of the proportions of the towers, or the potential deformation and failures. I will not attempt to show how the towers could not have possibly stood as they did with engineering calculations. Leslie Robertson hired Minoru Yamasaki for that. The concrete core was rigid and absorbed all lateral movement making the tower fixed in a maximum load bearing position. Remember the Tacoma Narrows Bridge!
Remember William Rodriguez?
There were a total of fourteen people in the
office at this time. As he was talking with others, there
was a very loud massive explosion which seemed to emanate
from between sub-basement B2 and B3. There were twenty-two
people on B2 sub-basement who also felt and heard that first
At first he thought it was a generator that had exploded. But the cement walls in the office cracked from the explosion. "When I heard the sound of the explosion, the floor beneath my feet vibrated, the walls started cracking and everything started shaking." said Rodriguez, who was crowded together with fourteen other people in the office including Anthony Saltamachia, supervisor for the American Maintenance Company
Remember Phillip Morelli?
Construction worker in the WTC Phillip Morelli (37 years old on 9-11-1) describes being thrown to the ground by two explosions while in the fourth subbasement of the North Tower. The first, which threw him to the ground and seemed to coincide with the plane crash, was followed by a larger blast that again threw him to the ground and this time blew out walls. He then made his way to the South Tower and was in the subbasement there when the second plane hit, again associated with a powerful underground blast. This is one of a series of interviews with WTC survivors done by NY1 News: ny1.com/pages/RRR/911special_survivors.htmlRemember
Remember The Explosions In The Basement?
Mike told his co-worker to call upstairs to their Assistant Chief Engineer and find out if everything was all right. His co-worker made the call and reported back to Mike that he was told that the Assistant Chief did not know what happened but that the whole building seemed to shake and there was a loud explosion. They had been told to stay where they were and "sit tight" until the Assistant Chief got back to them.
The two decided to ascend the stairs to the C level, to a small machine shop where Vito Deleo and David Williams were supposed to be working. When the two arrived at the C level, they found the machine shop gone.
"There was nothing there but rubble" Mike said. "We're talking about a 50 ton hydraulic press - gone!" The two began yelling for their co-workers, but there was no answer. They saw a perfect line of smoke streaming through the air. "You could stand here," he said, "and two inches over you couldn't breathe. We couldn't see through the smoke so we started screaming." But there was still no answer.
Exploding walls are exploding walls, whether 500 feet off the ground or underground
One Of The First 9-11 Information Pages.
Jim Hoffmans dust analysis was what first made me really think with all that I know about high explosives, not a great deal but some basics, and the WTC construction in late 2002, whereupon I began to remember the 1990 PBS documentary called "The Construction of the Twin Towers."
There is a disclaimer on a page of the below site not labeled as such.
arrangement of the columns and how they were
cross-braced is not apparent from public
documents such as FEMA's World Trade Center
Building Performance Study. The arrangement of
box columns depicted in Figure 2-10 of Chapter
2 (pictured to the right) seems plausible,
even though it contradicts other illustrations
in the report showing a more random
arrangement. It depicts the top floors of a
tower and does not indicate the widths of the
columns on a typical floor.
The exact arrangement of the columns and how they were cross-braced is not apparent from public documents such as FEMA's World Trade Center Building Performance Study. The arrangement of box columns depicted in Figure 2-10 of Chapter 2 (pictured to the right) seems plausible, even though it contradicts other illustrations in the report showing a more random arrangement. It depicts the top floors of a tower and does not indicate the widths of the columns on a typical floor.
This one is so important I've made a page in this series just to deal with it. It is the widespread existence of the image of an interior box column which has a diagonal salvage cut across it. The impossible claim is that it was cut by thermite. I first encountered it on the Jeff Rense site. I wrote and made a comment about the image and analysis of it complaining and asking that it be taken down or my comment include on the page. No action as been taken.
Other 9-11 Web Sites
These sites are 9-11 sites but have no mention or question of the issue of the concrete core They accept without question the structure that FEMA presents. Consider, FEMA had an emergency center set up about 2 miles away from the WTC 2 days BEFORE 9-11. All 9-11 sites and groups assume FEMA is correct about the structure and all evidence is wrong.
Fundamentally, what can be so controversial about the noton of a concrete core? Concrete is the most common building material in the world and we saw masses of concrete particulate travelling through space on 9-11 as 2, 1,300 foot towers went identically to the ground. Concrete can be fractured to fall instantly, steel cannot. Do you think this justifies discussion and examination of the possibility of another, bigger lie hiding the possibilities? If so, then consider the psyops does what ever it can to steer people away from that thought.
A last word about internet forums and 9-11 disinformation.
Social structuring applies while the personal aspects of one on one are absent on the internet. Semiotics plays a huge role in this with mass media, then when the forum members discuss the issues, the factors below often are in control.
On forums the sensation seeking sometimes is gratified with impressive images and drawn off to study minutia. This approach within an environment of "impossibility" are far less likely to be restrained with the number of distractions obsessed upon for a time because everything is considered impossible. A form of generalization, a cognitive distortion. A small group can skew the perceptions of sincere communications by working secretly together with fraudulently evidenced notions and creating a "social environment" that then is allowed to dominate the message board by those starting it. This appears to happen within the "Delphi technique"
Back To The Scenario