FEMA Deceives Nation About Twin Towers Core

[Fizz]

The pereptrators filtered the available construction photos before 9-11 that showed concrete work before 9-11.

yeah right...

hey, is that a squirrel staring at you through your window? maybe he is trying to hypnotize you.

....or maybe he thinks you are a nut.

They removed the documentary, "The Engineering and Construction of the Twin Towers".

Listen to this excerpt of Dr. Ron Larsens web radio show where he updates his search for the documentary. They found it listed i major libraries and a copy but it was intercepted, 3 times!

http://algoxy.com/psych/audio/rl-cb6-27-07pbs.doc_1-2.mp3

listen to your doctor when he tells you to take your medications. you are delusional.

The perps got guiliani to take the towers plans and hide them while the courts protect their hiding enabing the FEMA deception

the only other set of plans other than those inside the wtc when they collapsed were in robertsons office. he shared them with FEMA and NIST. guiliani didnt hide anything. he never had them.

Rebar on 9-11. More than you would ever see at construction and perfectly sihouetted like it would never be in construction because its all inside the steel exoskeleton then.

you cant see something 3 inches wide from over a mile away. it is physically impossible for that to be rebar.

shut of your computer. get a job. pay the child support you owe. stop trying to promote this wild delusion just so you can attempt to sell books and make a profit off this tragedy. you are a disgusting person.

 

[Christophera]

They removed the documentary, "The Engineering and Construction of the Twin Towers".

Listen to this excerpt of Dr. Ron Larsens web radio show where he updates his search for the documentary. They found it listed i major libraries and a copy but it was intercepted, 3 times!

http://algoxy.com/psych/audio/rl-cb6-27-07pbs.doc_1-2.mp3

you cant see something 3 inches wide from over a mile away. it is physically impossible for that to be rebar.
[/QUOTE]

You are the one the fails to recognize the violation of laws enabling the FEMA deception

It sure is not structural steel and there could be up to 50 of them and their might be some on the west wall as well.

When we see this, we know it is concrete,

But then the lead engineer told us through Newsweek,September 13, 2001 that it had a concrete core.

 

[Fizz]

When we see this, we know it is concrete,
.

why do you call yourself "we"??

you are the only person that believes the core was concrete. you keep lying and saying the lead engineer said something he did not. even Newsweek later published the correct info that it was a STEEL CORE.

you lose.

 

[Christophera]

When we see this, we know it is concrete,
.

why do you call yourself "we"??

you are the only person that believes the core was concrete. you keep lying

Who lies?

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X2MStxGeRdE[/ame]

Robertson
MSNBC - ‘Painful and Horrible’

Domel
http://www.ncsea.com/downloads/wtcseerp.pdf

Oxford encyclopedia of Technology and Innovation, published in 1992?

Eyes that will see truth?

The opposite of what agents say s is usually true.

 

[Gamolon]

Correct, and here it is for the second time. The elevator guide rail in the left of gumjogs image is seen on the other side of the stairway on the right side in this image.

WTC 1 north wall concrete core wall at its base

So you admit to that eh. Well then...

You or gumjob never have explained why the supposed steel core columns are never seen in the core area on 9-11.

This photo shows the same columns to the RIGHT of the outer core column. The red arrows are pointing at them as you seem to be blinded by stupidity. The same columns you just admitted to being INSIDE the core. It's even on 9/11. What a jackass. So know you have admitted to core columns existing on 9/11 INSIDE the core. Good job.

I see you ignored the evidence.

Proof of structural steel core columns on 9/11. You wanted proof of columns INSIDE the core? You got it. The red arrows point to columns INSIDE your supposed steel core. You even admitted that there was.

You have nothing left now.

 

[Fizz]

Who lies?

you do.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X2MStxGeRdE

your video is worthless. it shows your opinion with is worth absolutely nothing. when examined your opinion is in complete conflict with the facts.

Robertson
MSNBC - ‘Painful and Horrible’

robertson never says it was a concrete core. you can even email him and ask and he will reply to you as he has to me and say it was a STEEL CORE.

ok, maybe he wont reply to you anymore because you are a fucking stalker nutjob. but he will reply to normal people.

Domel
http://www.ncsea.com/downloads/wtcseerp.pdf

do you even comprehend what you read?
"This document was written as a resource for the preparation of an emergency response plan for mobilizing structural engineers for a search and rescue operation under extreme emergency conditions."

it says it was written under extreme emergency conditions. obviously it was not well researched.

Oxford encyclopedia of Technology and Innovation, published in 1992?

your link doesnt work.... but if you are referencing the statement "BUILDINGS LIKE the world trade center have steel and concrete cores" it does not say that the world trade center had a concrete core at all. you really need to learn to understand what you read.




steel core.

steel core.

steel core during cleanup efforts. notice the steel core is relatively intact at this point of the building and there is no concrete core.

no concrete core.

and then these pictures of the core under construction. no concrete. notice in the first one the floor above is already in place.

TV show that Robertson participates in on the collapse of the towers which states it was a STEEL CORE!!

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dB6xdCS9NJU[/ame]

another video documentary with robertson that says it was a STEEL CORE.
[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EqDTEZIdg7g&feature=PlayList&p=A6382FD1025BACE9&index=62[/ame]

New York Times says steel core. Comparing 2 Sets Of Twin Towers; Malaysian Buildings Offered as Model - NYTimes.com
Newsweek. steel core. High Time - Newsweek.com
Time Magazine. steel core. Twin Terrors - The Discovery Channel - TIME.com
engineering.com steel core. ENGINEERING.com > World Trade Center Disaster
skyscraper.org steel core. The World Trade Center: Statistics and History
University of Sydney steel core. World Trade Center - Some Engineering Aspects - Civil Engineering - The University of Sydney
Berkeley steel core. 04.17.2002 - World Trade Center remembered
and one of my favorites....
Time Magazine article from 1964!! Art: Onward & Upward - TIME[/QUOTE]

 

[Gamolon]

When we see this, we know it is concrete,
.

why do you call yourself "we"??

you are the only person that believes the core was concrete. you keep lying

Who lies?

You do.

Robertson
MSNBC - ‘Painful and Horrible’

Here is an excerpt taken from this site here. 04.17.2002 - World Trade Center remembered, where he spoke about the towers.

Like many high-rises built in the 1960s, the Twin Towers were constructed with their weight distributed between a hollow steel core (containing services like elevators) and steel columns around the perimeter, maximizing open floor space. Many believe the older high-rise design, in which steel columns are often encased in concrete, is more fire resistant.

“A lot of people have told me, ‘You should have used more concrete in the structure,’” said Robertson. However, his chart plotting the strength of steel vs. concrete at various temperatures showed that at the incendiary levels that raged in the towers, the two materials become similarly weak.

You lose again.

 

[Gamolon]

No concrete core per this site's article either. World Trade Center - Some Engineering Aspects - Civil Engineering - The University of Sydney

Faced with the difficulties of building to unprecedented heights, the engineers employed an innovative structural model: a rigid "hollow tube" of closely spaced steel columns with floor trusses extending across to a central core.

Also from this article.

The twin towers were the first supertall buildings designed without any masonry.

 

[Gamolon]

Quote from an email I have gotten from Mr. Robertson.

IT WOULD BE INTERESTING TO LEARN THE SOURCE OF THE MISINFORMATION PROVIDED BY
"SOMEONE".
WHY IS THIS OF IMPORTANCE TO YOU AND TO YOUR "SOMEONE"?
LITERALLY MILLIONS OF PEOPLE ACCESSED THE EXPRESS ELEVATORS FROM THE
LOBBY...NOT FROM WITHIN THE CORE.
THE CORES FOR THE TWO BUILDINGS DIFFERED IN ORIENTATION AND OTHER BECAUSE OF
STRUCTURAL CONSIDERATONS...HAVING NOTHING TO DO WITH NON-EXISTING CONCRETE
WALLS.
SEE COMMENTS (IN CAPS), BELOW.

 

[Gamolon]

Here Chris. Go find your core.

Guide to the Records of Leslie E. Robertson and Associates (LERA): World Trade Center Construction Images ca. 1969-1973 2004.02

Looks like an archive.

 

[Fizz]

Quote from an email I have gotten from Mr. Robertson.

IT WOULD BE INTERESTING TO LEARN THE SOURCE OF THE MISINFORMATION PROVIDED BY
"SOMEONE".
WHY IS THIS OF IMPORTANCE TO YOU AND TO YOUR "SOMEONE"?
LITERALLY MILLIONS OF PEOPLE ACCESSED THE EXPRESS ELEVATORS FROM THE
LOBBY...NOT FROM WITHIN THE CORE.
THE CORES FOR THE TWO BUILDINGS DIFFERED IN ORIENTATION AND OTHER BECAUSE OF
STRUCTURAL CONSIDERATONS...HAVING NOTHING TO DO WITH NON-EXISTING CONCRETE
WALLS.
SEE COMMENTS (IN CAPS), BELOW.

sounds like he is considering a lawsuit for libel. too bad chris has absolutely nothing to his name. he owes more than $30,000 in back child support and the deadbeat has even lost his drivers license.

 

[Gamolon]

Another quote from an email I received from Mr. Robertson.

THERE WAS NO CONCRETE CORE, RECTANGULAR
OR OTHERWISE, IN EITHER OF THE TWO TOWERS. AT THE TOP, THERE WAS A TWO-STORY
HIGH (?) REINFORCED CONCRETE BANK VAULT, THE FULL LENGTH OF THE CORE, WHICH
BANK VAULT HAD NOTHING TO DO WITH EXPRESS ELEVATORS.

 

[Fizz]

Here Chris. Go find your core.

Guide to the Records of Leslie E. Robertson and Associates (LERA): World Trade Center Construction Images ca. 1969-1973 2004.02

Looks like an archive.

good find!!

in that....

Item Title Date
11 Core steel construction, North Tower. Accession: 2004.02.0017 undated

 

[Gamolon]

Quote from an email I have gotten from Mr. Robertson.

IT WOULD BE INTERESTING TO LEARN THE SOURCE OF THE MISINFORMATION PROVIDED BY
"SOMEONE".
WHY IS THIS OF IMPORTANCE TO YOU AND TO YOUR "SOMEONE"?
LITERALLY MILLIONS OF PEOPLE ACCESSED THE EXPRESS ELEVATORS FROM THE
LOBBY...NOT FROM WITHIN THE CORE.
THE CORES FOR THE TWO BUILDINGS DIFFERED IN ORIENTATION AND OTHER BECAUSE OF
STRUCTURAL CONSIDERATONS...HAVING NOTHING TO DO WITH NON-EXISTING CONCRETE
WALLS.
SEE COMMENTS (IN CAPS), BELOW.

sounds like he is considering a lawsuit for libel. too bad chris has absolutely nothing to his name. he owes more than $30,000 in back child support and the deadbeat has even lost his drivers license.

What I find curious is why Chris never contacts the supposed originator of the quotes that he uses as proof. He never contacted Domel. He never contacted Robertson.

Here's a good one. He used to use a quote from Deborah Snoonian who also wrote an article and mentioned a concrete core. I wrote her and got this response.

Thanks for your note.

There is conflicting information out there as to whether the building had this concrete core. If memory serves me correctly, the info in my story did not come from an interview, because we went to press a few days after the attack and all the experts were too busy talking to TV news or the NYTimes to call us back at little old Arch Record. Instead, it came from some older news and magazine articles that had appeared around the time the buildings were being constructed and finished. The core was mentioned in some pubs but not all of them. After the story came out we were informed by the structural engineers (or somebody else?) that there was in fact no such core in the twin towers.

He no longer uses that quote. I wonder why.

 

[Gamolon]

They removed the documentary, "The Engineering and Construction of the Twin Towers".

Listen to this excerpt of Dr. Ron Larsens web radio show where he updates his search for the documentary. They found it listed i major libraries and a copy but it was intercepted, 3 times!

http://algoxy.com/psych/audio/rl-cb6-27-07pbs.doc_1-2.mp3

you cant see something 3 inches wide from over a mile away. it is physically impossible for that to be rebar.

You are the one the fails to recognize the violation of laws enabling the FEMA deception

It sure is not structural steel and there could be up to 50 of them and their might be some on the west wall as well.

What bullshit.



Here is a closeup and even BETTER photo of the same structure you claim contains "rebar".

That's why you use a distant, blurry photo. It's because you NEED that blurry, distant photo to perpetuate your lies. You can claim whatever you want as to what is in those photos. But when someone presents a better, clearer photo, one finds out that you are nothing but a lying asshole.

Clearly the "rebar" you seem to think is being shown is nothing more that a cloud of debris (gypsum planking dust perhaps? ) billowing to the right of the still standing columns.

Proven wrong once again.

 

[Christophera]

Clearly the "rebar" you seem to think is being shown is nothing more that a cloud of debris

The rebar is clearly too small to be structural steel. Your inadequate attempts to misrpresent are failures. They are obvious. You are an agent who has conducted photoshopping in attempts to misrepresent the lobby of WTC 2 as the WTC 1 lobby.

This page is about that failed attempt and your cointelpro buddies at breakfornews.com.

Breakfornews.com, Fintan Dunne

 

[Fizz]

Clearly the "rebar" you seem to think is being shown is nothing more that a cloud of debris

The rebar is clearly too small to be structural steel. Your inadequate attempts to misrpresent are failures. They are obvious. You are an agent who has conducted photoshopping in attempts to misrepresent the lobby of WTC 2 as the WTC 1 lobby.

This page is about that failed attempt and your cointelpro buddies at breakfornews.com.

Breakfornews.com, Fintan Dunne

your claim of a photo being photoshopped doesnt hold up to scrutiny. i have already shown you that if you blow up any digital image enough you will see lines that really arent there. i enlarged one of your images and it clearly shows the smoke not touching the building.

so either you are both guilty of photoshopping (which i dont believe) or YOU ARE A MORON THAT ONCE AGAIN DOESNT KNOW WHAT HE IS TALKING ABOUT which is infinitely more likely.

by the way... you still havent shown any pictures of a concrete core..... EVER!!

 

[Gamolon]

The rebar is clearly too small to be structural steel. Your inadequate attempts to misrpresent are failures.

Yeah, that made sense.



It's not rebar dopey. It's a cloud of debris that you want people to think is rebar.

 

[Gamolon]

Psssst. Hey Chris. Look what I found. The red arrows pointing to COLUMNS, STILL STANDING, INSIDE THE CORE, ON 9/11. Just like you requested.

 

[DiveCon]

Psssst. Hey Chris. Look what I found. The red arrows pointing to COLUMNS, STILL STANDING, INSIDE THE CORE, ON 9/11. Just like you requested.

and still no concrete