Cyprus-Forum.com

[Londonrake]

Same ole MO Mr Hood.

1. Confine the victim to an area limited to that which you want to "discuss". Such as to exclude all factors they believe pertain to the subject.

2. Drag the prey down into the long grass and there asphyxiate them with minutiea................................................................

[cyprusgrump]

Same ole MO Mr Hood.

1. Confine the victim to an area limited to that which you want to "discuss". Such as to exclude all factors they believe pertain to the subject.

2. Drag the prey down into the long grass and there asphyxiate them with minutiea................................................................

Oh, I hope I don't get asphyxiated!

It is hilarious how he has come to a decision on 'what happened' and is willing to post complete bollox to justify that outcome...

Plus, sarcasm scares him!

[Londonrake]

Same ole MO Mr Hood.

1. Confine the victim to an area limited to that which you want to "discuss". Such as to exclude all factors they believe pertain to the subject.

2. Drag the prey down into the long grass and there asphyxiate them with minutiea................................................................

Oh, I hope I don't get asphyxiated!

It is hilarious how he has come to a decision on 'what happened' and is willing to post complete bollox to justify that outcome...

Plus, sarcasm scares him!

His postulation that the WTC was an inside job is radical and was bound to attract challenges. Yet, the response to those is that the people doing so are just idiots that can't see the "real truth". The universal creed of all Conspiracy Theorists.

In his posts preceding my above there was no mention at all of Al-Queda or aircraft. Let alone the attack on the Pentagon or aborted attempt at the Capitol. It was as though they didn't exist. All instead was prattling on about Newton's Laws. As though that was final proof alone the buildings were blown up. You should accept that or, you're an idiot. Thin ice and blagging.

The idea "somebody" managed to wire up the buildings with explosives (was the Pentagon and Capitol wired up?) without anybody noticing or, 22 years after the event there hasn't been a word from anyone involved is ludicrous. But ludicrous is the currency the man deals in. He who brought us the Russian "death ray", the "secret" US and Israeli nuclear weapons used in Iraq, the 300 top Ukrainian military people killed in a bunker attack near Kyiv. Not forgetting the large number of NATO similar (NATO IS FINISHED! - Clayton "independent" Morris ) All total Alice-in-Wonderland fantasies.

So. Who did it?

Why? What was the motive?

They would clearly have had to coordinate with the attacks that were carried out. How would that have been achieved? What about Bin Laden boasting of his planning?

Why has there been total silence from what must have been many involved in the 22 years since? Credibility? All "inadmissible" of course.

He cites his long work experience. None of which is relevant. Yet, you try bringing up yours. This is a man who boasts that he knows more about money than a mutual colleague with over 50 years in the banking world who became one of the top men in Halifax. He talks to Paphitis - a current commercial pilot - with contempt on aviation matters. All based on PPL experience of decades ago. I have over 3500 hours on combat aircraft various - including Captaincy of a 13 man crewed Maritime Patrol aircraft - but am sneeringly referred to as a "button pusher". All from a guy who really doesn't have a real-world clue. But - wait for it - apparently I'm the "conceited" and "arrogant" one. You couldn't make it up (sorry Lordo )

Yes. Mr Hood doesn't like sarcasm. He's come across it a lot in his life, yet never seems to wonder why. Let me help. On this forum Lordo has a similar problem, and for the same reason.

[Robin Hood]

Thereafter your credibility is somewhat diminished... So trying to convince us that a 767 is made out of Papier-mâché and couldn't possibly have damaged the structure of the building doesn't hold much water... Sorry...

You think this ..........

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6kHXVJIUrOg

Having ploughed ...... at 500 mph .........through a solid wall made of these ......

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:WTC_-_Perimeter_column-spandrel_assembly_and_floor_structure.png

Could still have enough kinetic energy left to inflict any significant collective damage on these .......

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Construction_of_the_World_Trade_Center#:~:text=The%20core%20columns%20supported%20about,half%20of%20the%20core's%20loads.

Core

The building's core housed the elevator and utility shafts, restrooms, three stairwells, and other support spaces. The core of each tower was a rectangular area 87 by 135 feet (27 by 41 m), and contained 47 steel columns running from the bedrock to the top of the tower. The North Tower's structural core was oriented with the long axis east to west, while the South Tower's was oriented north to south.

The core columns supported about half the towers' weight. The core was surrounded by a girder to which were connected the inner ends of the floor trusses. The 16 columns which supported the long span trusses were particularly large, accounting for half of the core's loads. Of this, 40 percent came from the corner columns which supported the transfer trusses. Conversely, the seven innermost columns were quite small, carrying only about 3 percent.

The columns were made almost exclusively of 36ksi or 42ksi steel, and gradually switched from rectangular box sections to tapering box sections to wide flange sections at higher floors. Typical columns were box columns for most of their height. Box columns maintained a constant width of predominantly 22 in (560 mm), 16 in (410 mm), or 14 in (360 mm). In the lower third of the building, they also maintained a constant depth of predominantly 52 and 36 inches (1,320 and 910 mm). The smallest columns were wide flange sections for most of their height. Wide flange sections were mostly 14 inch, followed by 12 inch sections. 42ksi and higher steel grades were predominantly present in these columns.

....... and trigger a collapse where light concrete rubble, dust and fabricated lightweight floor trusses, crushed these ‘flimsy’ columns, at a rate near free fall acceleration ...... but with virtually no kinetic energy available to achieve it ......... and it didn’t even slow down until the collapse reached the ground level? Amazing !

Well your comments are good for a laugh if nothing else!

You stick to nit picking the trivia ......the Laws of Physics and engineering principals are obviously not your strong point.

One thing is for certain! All the physical evidence says neither the impact of the Boeings or the short lived Jet Fuel fires from a few thousand gallons of paraffin ............. collapsed the Twin Towers! It's just another NIST, first time (and only time) unexplainable phenomena.

As for WTC7 that was apparently brought down by a single office fire, that caused the failure of a single floor beam/column joint ...... and it all fell down at free fall acceleration ...... just like a controlled demolition ..... but it wasn’t !

[Robin Hood]

Same ole MO Mr Hood.

1. Confine the victim to an area limited to that which you want to "discuss". Such as to exclude all factors they believe pertain to the subject.

2. Drag the prey down into the long grass and there asphyxiate them with minutiea................................................................

Oh, I hope I don't get asphyxiated!

It is hilarious how he has come to a decision on 'what happened' and is willing to post complete bollox to justify that outcome...

Plus, sarcasm scares him!

His postulation that the WTC was an inside job is radical and was bound to attract challenges. Yet, the response to those is that the people doing so are just idiots that can't see the "real truth". The universal creed of all Conspiracy Theorists.

In his posts preceding my above there was no mention at all of Al-Queda or aircraft. Let alone the attack on the Pentagon or aborted attempt at the Capitol. It was as though they didn't exist. All instead was prattling on about Newton's Laws. As though that was final proof alone the buildings were blown up. You should accept that or, you're an idiot. Thin ice and blagging.

The idea "somebody" managed to wire up the buildings with explosives (was the Pentagon and Capitol wired up?) without anybody noticing or, 22 years after the event there hasn't been a word from anyone involved is ludicrous. But ludicrous is the currency the man deals in. He who brought us the Russian "death ray", the "secret" US and Israeli nuclear weapons used in Iraq, the 300 top Ukrainian military people killed in a bunker attack near Kyiv. Not forgetting the large number of NATO similar (NATO IS FINISHED! - Clayton "independent" Morris ) All total Alice-in-Wonderland fantasies.

So. Who did it?

Why? What was the motive?

They would clearly have had to coordinate with the attacks that were carried out. How would that have been achieved? What about Bin Laden boasting of his planning?

Why has there been total silence from what must have been many involved in the 22 years since? Credibility? All "inadmissible" of course.

He cites his long work experience. None of which is relevant. Yet, you try bringing up yours. This is a man who boasts that he knows more about money than a mutual colleague with over 50 years in the banking world who became one of the top men in Halifax. He talks to Paphitis - a current commercial pilot - with contempt on aviation matters. All based on PPL experience of decades ago. I have over 3500 hours on combat aircraft various - including Captaincy of a 13 man crewed Maritime Patrol aircraft - but am sneeringly referred to as a "button pusher". All from a guy who really doesn't have a real-world clue. But - wait for it - apparently I'm the "conceited" and "arrogant" one. You couldn't make it up (sorry Lordo )

Yes. Mr Hood doesn't like sarcasm. He's come across it a lot in his life, yet never seems to wonder why. Let me help. On this forum Lordo has a similar problem, and for the same reason.

Do you feel better for getting all that hatred and spite off your chest, launching your usual venomous and sarcasm fueled attack on me? I wondered how long it would be before you just had to have your usual say! Now how many times have you done this over the years? It is a repetitive scenario. Most of it .... in fact all of it .... is your bitterness coming out. What a sad case you are.

You have never flow an aircraft in your life ..... not that just flying one is that difficult! Do they have 'Captains' in the RAF? The Captaincy of a Maritime Patrol Aircraft with a crew of 13 ..... WOW! We didn't have Ranks, I just did a job I was considered to be good at! I was only a humble lead discipline engineer on a $1.3bn project, indirectly and also directly responsible for the work of over 400 field engineers and technicians! So I had to to have a fair knowledge of ALL their jobs. But they never called me 'SIR' or saluted me! I didn't even get a bloody medal when I retired ...... just a healthy bonus!

You are correct ..... I do despise sarcasm ..... something you excel at! It is the fall back for those that have no explanation to support their opinions. It is an 'attack' disguised by warped humor In fact that is all you ever have ..... your sarcasm and opinions. You are a nasty piece of work!

[Kikapu]

From all the videos we have seen of the collapsed buildings of the three World Trade Centers 1, 2 & 7, buildings 1 & 2 had collapsed top to bottom, indicating structural damage to the buildings where the aircrafts impacted the building by destroying the steel frames by the force of the impacting aircrafts and the intense fire following the explosions, regardless how much of the fuel from the planes went up in a ball of flames upon impact. There was enough fuel left to burn the several floors on each building to further weaken the remaining steel frames of the buildings.

The twin towers actually collapsed from the bottom up, above the impact point and THEN from the top down. It shows on the videos.
The impact would have had little effect on the core columns ..... they were fabricated from 25mm thick steel at the higher levels and 5" at the bottom levels.

An airframe is fabricated from 3mm thick aluminium and that had already been buckled and shredded going through the 1” steel outer columns. Only the engines and undercarriage units had any mass to speak of and any damage was most likely done by them ...... so the rest of the aircraft would have buckled and shredded like a Coke can!

The intense fire was outside the building .... not inside it. These aircraft fully loaded carried about 10,000 US Gallons of Jet A1 (Kerosine/paraffin) which is relatively slow burning and does not normally become an explosive mixture except when it is turned to a mist and ignited with plenty of air to burn, as we saw 80% of the fuel do with the towers.

Now look at the clouds of smoke belching from both of the towers? That indicates combustion with insufficient air to burn the fuel. The remaining 2000 gals of fuel ceased to have much effect from about two minutes after impact and most of that went down the lift shafts! The fires inside are ordinary office fires starved of oxygen. Not a lot of heat energy in that to heat up and weaken 1" thick steel plate!

I agree that normal heat generated by similar fires in other similar type of buildings would not have brought the buildings down, but this was not just a another fire in a building. These fires were way up the building where most of the floors hit by the planes were open to strong drafts blowing into the building, creating a furnace like heat where it would be very hot that would buckle steel frames, even if it weren’t hot enough to melt them. As most Cypriots know when preparing to start burning charcoal to make kebabs, we would first lay the charcoal and then place a large tin can that is open at both ends on top of the charcoal and fill is with more charcoal and light it. The tin can acts like a chimney that sucks the air from the bottom intensely which burns the charcoal fast and at a high temperature. This is how the fires got very intense in the Towers 1 & 2 to cause it to collapse.

Your BBQ tin can does not have a bottom in it or ‘floors’ at equal distances up to the top. The only way the air can get in is through the breaks caused by the impact. That is why the can in your BBQ does not belch smoke ....... it is open from bottom to top. The outer shells of the towers were virtually sealed tubes so there was little air from below and each floor was isolated from the floors above and below. The links between floors was through the central core. This I believe was shut off from each floor by a surrounding 2” thick fire resistant plaster board firewall mounted in a steel framework. So whether it was air going up or liquid fuel going down, it was very restrictive once you got past the immediate damaged levels.

There’s also the weight issue above the damaged areas of the buildings. North Tower was hit first by B-767 and the South Tower was hit second some 20 minutes later by B-757, and yet, the South Tower collapsed first considerable time before the North Tower despite being hit by a slightly smaller aircraft. The only difference between the two impact zones, is that the South Tower was hit at much lower part of the building than the North Tower, which meant that there was a greater weight above the impact area on the South Tower, which caused it to collapse first

That’s a fair description and explains the time difference between the two events.

The fire intensity and damaged steel frames from the planes hitting the buildings were more or less the same at the initial impact and the weight above the damaged areas falling onto the weakened structure below brought down the Towers one floor at a time from top to bottom at almost the speed of gravity.

If the spanning floors, which were mostly OUTSIDE the central core, collapsed in a pancake fashion floor upon floor, then it would not accelerate as all the kinetic energy is being used to destroy the floors and the massive steel columns below it and that would slow it down.

BUT ....... if the central core columns were severed say every two floors, because the floors were attached to both the outer tube and the central core, the descending columns would drag the outer walls in toward the center, shatter the light concrete floors ......but then BANG goes all that potential energy into thin air as light rubble and dust! Apparently, not one of the columns were found to be longer than two floor level spacing’s (36 ft).

But what is going to crush the central core which, as has been pointed out, supported half the weight of the mass of the building? You think that a cloud of crushed light concrete and some light floor trusses will crush something designed to proportionally hold up its share of the 250,000 tonnes of building above it. It wouldn’t ..... it would have to be removed to allow the free fall ACCELERATION ......... note, not speed.

World Trade Centre Tower 7 had collapsed from bottom to top, which meant that it was a controlled demolition and the fires in the 2-3 floors of the entire building at the higher floors of the building had nothing to do with the collapse of the building.

I agree with you. But, NIST says they ‘discovered’ a whole new phenomena that they could not explain, that would allow ordinary office fires to collapse a high rise steel framed building! Apparently an office fire around the 11th/12th NE corner floor area heated a floor truss and it expanded to push the supporting girder off its mount on the vertical common! And the whole building fell down ........ and for 2.5 secs. at free fall acceleration ...... yeah, of course that’s obvious ..... init?

Prof Hulsey and his team of scientists and engineers, carried out a scientific investigation using the most modern of software ....... and showed it didn’t work! Their conclusion was that every vertical column in WTC7 would have to have collapsed simultaneously to get the results seen in all the videos.

It’s a VERY long read ........
.
https://ine.uaf.edu/wtc7

Yes, it is true that for a seconds or two, the damaged part of the building collapsed bottom up until the rest of the topside of the building collapsed onto the base of the damaged building, which then the whole building came down top to bottom one floor at a time. That is what happened for both the building, just at different time, but each building had the same pattern in collapsing because the conditions and cause were almost identical.

Now, I also agree with you that the core of the building should have stood on it’s own after the rest of the building collapsed around it given the amount of steel and concrete was used to make it, but it did not. In order for the whole core to be destroyed by other causes (deliberately), then each floor had to be destroyed this way since the buildings came down from top to bottom. Had the building collapsed bottom up just like WTC 7, then conspiracy would have a better acceptance. With such conspiracies, then both the building should have collapsed immediately after being struck by the planes in a chain reaction, regardless whether the buildings came down top to bottom, bottom to up or just sideways. However, it did not happen that way, but in the exact same way for both the buildings 1 & 2 as seen in the videos. Unless of course, that the videos has been doctored!

[Londonrake]

I've known you for a very long time. You will be asleep now - or staring at the ceiling simmering. Reading this very early in the AM

Do you feel better for getting all that hatred and spite off your chest, launching your usual venomous and sarcasm fueled attack on me? I wondered how long it would be before you just had to have your usual say! Now how many times have you done this over the years? It is a repetitive scenario. Most of it .... in fact all of it .... is your bitterness coming out. What a sad case you are.

You have never flow an aircraft in your life ..... not that just flying one is that difficult! Do they have 'Captains' in the RAF? The Captaincy of a Maritime Patrol Aircraft with a crew of 13 ..... WOW! We didn't have Ranks, I just did a job I was considered to be good at! I was only a humble lead discipline engineer on a $1.3bn project, indirectly and also directly responsible for the work of over 400 field engineers and technicians! So I had to to have a fair knowledge of ALL their jobs. But they never called me 'SIR' or saluted me! I didn't even get a bloody medal when I retired ...... just a healthy bonus!

You are correct ..... I do despise sarcasm ..... something you excel at! It is the fall back for those that have no explanation to support their opinions. It is an 'attack' disguised by warped humor In fact that is all you ever have ..... your sarcasm and opinions. You are a nasty piece of work!

Firstly, regarding the OP. Which of course was a Lordo windup (and it worked!), latching on to a few passing comments I'd made.

You have done/are doing, exactly what I said. Based upon long experience. You're trying desperately to drag things down to a comfortable level. Attempting to keep it purely about Newton's laws and the melting point/weight of this or that and such. The long grass. You're almost completely ignoring the fundamental and important issues of your fantasy.

If what you say is true ( ):

Who did it?
Why?
How?
How was the obviously necessary coordination required between the Al-Qaeda attacks and blowing up of the WTC carried out?
Why does it conflict with Bin Laden's boast about his planning and the execution of the attacks?
How does it tie in with the attack on the Pentagon and the aborted one on the Capitol?
Clearly, a lot of people would have been involved or would have known about all this. What credibility do you attach to the fact that 22 years later not a soul has uttered a single word? It's all surfaced from Conspiracy Theory BS.

Obviously (it's like talking to a child) you've latched on to a dud one with this. There are no rational answers because it's all a load of total nonsense.

Hate you? Absolutely not. I actually think, and always have, given the many occasions we've met up, that you're a very nice and interesting person. And, lets face it, I've had a lot of experience. Unfortunately that didn't tie in with your forum persona, which I've always regarded as arrogant to the point of obnoxiousness. And of course to you forums are all important. Far more so than real-world relationships. You're a meek, mild mannered Clark Kent who sees himself as a superforumman. So that always takes precedence. A great pity.

I think:

"You have never flow an aircraft in your life ..... not that just flying one is that difficult! Do they have Captains in the RAF? The Captaincy of a Maritime Patrol Aircraft with a crew of 13 ..... WOW! We didn't have Ranks, I just did a job I was considered to be good at! I was only a humble lead discipline engineer on a $1.3bn project, indirectly and also directly responsible for the work of over 400 field engineers and technicians! So I had to to have a fair knowledge of ALL their jobs. But they never called me 'SIR' or saluted me! I didn't even get a bloody medal when I retired ...... just a healthy bonus!"

..........................sums up your mental problem quite well.

Clearly, when it comes to the Forces you have simmering grudge issues. And I know what you used to do. Another of our mutual friends was a Project Director of such in many countries and has expressed a view of your role. Nevertheless, I've never made derogatory comments about it. In contrast I have had to listen many times to your in essence calling Service wives loud-mouthed sluts, who should get out of your supermarket and Forces people as being universally robotically programmed automatons who can' t think for themselves. Well, apart from the ones like MacGregor and Ritter, who make a lot of money out of feeding your agenda that is. So, frankly, you can shove you faux-offended shite where the sun doesn't shine. You're a man who can dish it out but you can't take it and when it comes to your efforts I'm bludgeon and bullshit proof.

As far as "nasty piece of work" goes. Really? I 've always been of the view that what's said on a forum belongs there and have stuck to that. Conversely, you've tried on several occasions (and failed) to make my life difficult with cowardly
- actually quite disgusting - off-forum activities. We both know what I'm talking about and for those you've never expressed a scintilla of regret, let alone issued an apology (which, from the great man would be unthinkable of course). You're the perennial "victim". The shite you've experienced in your life is always somebody else's fault. You attract sarcasm like a fly to shit.

Repetition:

When you returned to this forum, after an long absence, I gave you a sincere welcome and extended the hand of friendship to you. Subsequently, I went out of my way to avoid areas of conflict. It didn't work because you simply can't resist playing the role of somebody who is never wrong about anything he posts. No matter how ridiculous it is. This is all down to you sunshine. So, suck it up.

[Robin Hood]

Mr RAKE:

You have done/are doing, exactly what I said. Based upon long experience. You're trying desperately to drag things down to a comfortable level. Attempting to keep it purely about Newton's laws and the melting point/weight of this or that and such. The long grass. You're almost completely ignoring the fundamental and important issues of your fantasy.

Who did it?
Why?
How?
How was the obviously necessary coordination required between the Al-Qaeda attacks and blowing up of the WTC carried out?
Why does it conflict with Bin Laden's boast about his planning and the execution of the attacks?
How does it tie in with the attack on the Pentagon and the aborted one on the Capitol?

Clearly, a lot of people would have been involved or would have known about all this. What credibility do you attach to the fact that 22 years later not a soul has uttered a single word? It's all surfaced from Conspiracy Theory BS.

Obviously (it's like talking to a child) you've latched on to a dud one with this. There are no rational answers because it's all a load of total nonsense.

That shows just how out of touch you are with the real world!

Anyone whose job includes analysis ...... a detective, a Lawyer, a doctor, an engineer would tell you that the very first consideration beyond ALL others is ..... WHAT HAPPENED? Until you have determined that, you cannot consider what you claim to be '.... the fundamental and important issues' ....... which to me are based on the conclusions of a factual (preferably independent) investigation of 'WHAT HAPPENED'.

That is just what I try to do and always have done = ‘Attempting to keep it purely about Newton's laws and the melting point/weight of this or that and such’. I realise that concept is alien to you as your post shows, but it is called ascertaining the facts and is the start point for any ‘crime’ scene investigation because it is based on available facts, The Universal Laws of Physics and other credible evidence to the greater probability.

The rest of your post is the same old diatribe .......... I won’t waste my time trying to refute it “ ......... because it's all a load of total (self opinionated) nonsense.”

[Londonrake]

You might recognise some of this. You should.

In fact 9/11 gets a mention later in, where it reflects what was clearly your view of that day’s events for many years. Now renounced of course with a contemptuous “Who me??”

I can’t see you logging off somehow. Far to an important aspect of your life.

https://www.theguardian.com/society/202 ... us-beliefs

.

[cyprusgrump]

a detective, a Lawyer, a doctor, an engineer would tell you that the very first consideration beyond ALL others is ..... WHAT HAPPENED?

We know what happened...

Amazingly, we all watched it on our TVs, some of it actually live!

Aeroplanes flew into the towers, exploded, started a fire, the towers fell down.