Mystery Solved about building collapse, what do you think?

The WTC building 1/2/3 were basically battleship frames/chassis built up right. There is no way on earth it would collapse into its own footprint due to a localized impact and fires. It would be like comparing it to a ship being hit by a torpedo, the flooding was stopped, then collapsing onto the surface of the water due to a fire 'melting the steel' !?!?!?!??!?!?!?!??!

a reply to: gazzerman

It may be a bit "off topic" to ask a question but have you never heard of a "flash furnace".

These are handy little devices which don't take up much space so they are easily placed in any office.
When documents are to be disposed of, one would simply place them into the drawer and push a bottom.
A heating device inside raises the temperature to aproximately 1000 degrees and everything turns to ashes.
Then a little fan comes on and blows the burn gasses and any ashes which are left out a vent, usually through a window.
It is very hard to piece together ashes in an attempt to recover documents.

This is much cheaper and less dangerous than explosives.

a reply to: firerescue

I'm not saying that hurricane Erin had anything to do with the event,I'm just saying that there was a hurricane the day before and not to believe everything that wikipedia says.

a reply to: gazzerman

Horse hockey.

originally posted by: mrscary3721
They all [a] fell at near free-fall speed into their own footprint

Why post such easily disproven silly stories?

a/ Only WTC 7 fell at free fall speed for a short time due to the way it was constructed, as for WTC 1 & 2 just watch the collapse, you can clearly see the debris falling at free fall speed, the building collapse being much slower

b/ If the buildings collapsed into their "own footprint" how do you explain the severe damaged caused to WTC 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, the World Financial Center buildings, 90 West Street, and 130 Cedar Street suffered fires. The Deutsche Bank Building, the Verizon Building, and World Financial Center 3 suffered impact damage from the towers' collapse, as did 90 West Street. One Liberty Plaza survived structurally intact but sustained surface damage including shattered windows. 30 West Broadway was damaged by the collapse of 7 WTC

(I won't even mention the extra equipment obviously attached to the underside),

Oh look, the return of the pod people! Obviously you have never looked under a 767

911review.com...

a reply to: hellobruce

Why post such easily disproven silly stories?

a/ Only WTC 7 fell at free fall speed for a short time due to the way it was constructed, as for WTC 1 & 2 just watch the collapse, you can clearly see the debris falling at free fall speed, the building collapse being much slower

Your wrong.

The fact is, WTC 1 & 2 was blasted up and outward over 600 feet in every direction it's in all the real News videos filmed that day.

Our eyes don't lie to us.

originally posted by: Informer1958
The fact is, WTC 1 & 2 was blasted up and outward over 600 feet in every direction.

Good grief, the silly stories that some people come out with! Now they think some WTC buildings were blown up and outward!

a reply to: hellobruce

Good grief, the silly stories that some people come out with! Now they think some WTC buildings were blown up and outward!

29 Structural/Civil Engineers
Cite Evidence for Controlled
Explosive Demolition in
Destruction of All 3 WTC
High-Rises on 9/11

New York Fire Department (FDNY) personnel,
trained to assess fires’structural hazards, had no
reason to expect total collapse, Brookman writes.
Scott notes that several steel-framed towers have
burned longer, hotter – and much more intensely
without collapse. “As engineers we know what fire
can do to steel and what it can’t.”
“Over 100 recorded witnesses reported hearing
and seeing multiple explosions,” Rice wrote.9
Brookman cites “numerous eyewitness accounts,
including the FDNY oral histories, of secondary
explosions ... well below the impact floors.” His letter
to Congressional representatives describes “explosive
clouds of dust and debris moving horizontally and
vertically.” Brookman added: “That does not look
anything like a heat-induced, gravitational collapse
mechanism.” Rice notes that “perimeter columns
weighing several tons each were ejected laterally up to
[600] feet.” His conclusion: “Not possible without
explosives.”

www2.ae911truth.org...

I did not make up that thousands of tons of WTC support beams were blasted up and outward to over 600 feet.

It is in all the actual News videos filmed on the morning of 911.

I suggest you to watch the videos again. Our eyes don't lie to us.

originally posted by: Informer1958
I did not make up that thousands of tons of WTC support beams were blasted up and outward to over 600 feet.

Yes you did actually!

www.metabunk.org...

a reply to: hellobruce

Thank you for posting that source.

Now lets look at the thousands of tons of steel beams being BLASTED upward over 600 feet.

originally posted by: MotherMayEye
a reply to: gazzerman

Neither of the things in your mind are correct.

I wondered why someone could just leave a snarky response wondering why your OP was worthy of S&Fs, when that is clearly not the topic of your OP, after I saw two comments disappear for being 'off-topic' that were actually discussing the subject.

Geez. Talk about paranoid.

nonsense, Christosterone made a post with a video as we spoke about before and I made a post asking him to remove it, both were then removed by the mods as they should be.

originally posted by: tinymind
a reply to: gazzerman

It may be a bit "off topic" to ask a question but have you never heard of a "flash furnace".

These are handy little devices which don't take up much space so they are easily placed in any office.
When documents are to be disposed of, one would simply place them into the drawer and push a bottom.
A heating device inside raises the temperature to aproximately 1000 degrees and everything turns to ashes.
Then a little fan comes on and blows the burn gasses and any ashes which are left out a vent, usually through a window.
It is very hard to piece together ashes in an attempt to recover documents.

This is much cheaper and less dangerous than explosives.

Sure, but what happens in the instance when the staff dont have time to do all that work and whole place is compromised?

I said in my OP "So was the building covered in some sort of explosive fail safe materials?" It does not have to be taken that literal like the building is rigged with cartoon style TNT. My suggestion is that it would surprise me if the building did not have a way of ensuring its contents was not compromised on an event level the size of 9/11

Having been in areas where there were lots of classified materials most of my late youth to the present, I can tell you without fear of error that you do not protect those materials from fire by filling the building with explosives.

I can't even grasp how you thought that. Seriously. I mean, a better OP might have been to ask how that's done; that's valid. But blowing up a building with other non-gubmental offices in to save your files is just out there.

So, let me answer the actual question. How do you protect classified material and systems?

Well, there's just lots of answers, because everything's different. But, in general, if you're in a building with a SCIF, all your classified docs will be in the SCIF.

SCIFs are fire rated. And mechanically quite secure. You will typically (especially in an essentially clerical environment like an agency office) only have a few secure docs out of storage, and if the SCIF was intact after the plane strike, the first thing you'd do would be to return the papers to their fire-safe storage, pull your hard drives and place THEM in a safe. At this point, you've essentially got a safe inside a safe, both fire rated and quite strong.

If you're in a building WITHOUT a SCIF, you will not be handling SCI class materials anyway, it'll be TS at worst. And you'll return THEM to their safes, and you vamoose.

The safes and fire-safe cabinets are pretty damned tough. If it gets hot enough to compromise them, the paper and/or drives are toast anyway. You might get some crush damage that might open a secure cabinet, anything can happen I suppose. But the government considers that unlikely. And the recovery/demolition crew will include observers to make sure if they're found, the material will be recovered. But if you've got a big fire and the cabinet opens, it's going to burn anyway.

Now, if you have really hot SCI stuff, especially in a military environment, you have magic ways to take care of your stuff in the event of impending doom or capture. We've designed computers that, as part of their use, would have some fairly hot data in there, and might be at risk for being obtained by other people who would like to have that data. In those designs, the equipment has a mystic way of knowing if it's an authorized person who is operating it, and there's some fallback secondary ways to 'inform' the equipment you're under duress, in which case the thing will pretend to be working whilst it totally destroys the SSD, once that's done it burns any firmware, and then for the piece de resistance it throws the main battery bus onto all the low voltage supply lines, and goes up in a smoky foof.

A capturable file cabinet typically has a handy built-in thermite charge at the top, as does some electronic equipment. But even if not, in my day you just popped a thermite grenade and tossed it in the top drawer, closed and locked the cabinet. Fireproof goes both ways. Inside, it gets more than hot enough to put an end to any paperwork, but typically doesn't cause any external damage. Much. I don't suspect that's changed.

Same thing with random bits of electronics or personal possessions you don't want sailing away - you pile it up and pop some thermite on it.

In the olden days before SSDs, you could get a hard drive from one of the major drive guys that had a special command that would trigger a small chemical charge inside the drive that would peel the coating off the platters.

The community's got standards for emergent disposal of sensitive materials and equipment that aren't nearly as dramatic as blowing up the entire block, most of them pretty common sense and straight forward that were put into place after the Pueblo incident.

originally posted by: Informer1958
Now lets look at the thousands of tons of steel beams being BLASTED upward over 600 feet.

None being blasted upwards in that picture!

a reply to: gazzerman

Just in the interests of being argumentative, let us say you have less than twenty minutes to dispose of a vault full of files and letters.
The flash furnaces with which I am familiar will handle approximately 4000 sheets per flash almost as quickly as you can open and close the drawer. You do understand that this much like putting toilet paper into an arc welder. So how many times can a person open and close a drawer in twenty minutes? Oh, and there are likely more than one furnace in whatever office which is being compremised.

So, now my question to you is; why go to all the trouble of "pulling" a whole building just to protect the contents of a few offices of documents. Would it be more prudent to dispose of the files this way or blow up a building, with people inside?

I think this is the crux of your line of thought as proposed in your OP.
The route you propose may reflect and play well with the "cowboy style" and "the my way or the highway crowd" and even looks good in movies, but does not reflect much in the way of reality.

originally posted by: hellobruce

originally posted by: Informer1958
Now lets look at the thousands of tons of steel beams being BLASTED upward over 600 feet.

None being blasted upwards in that picture!

You must be blind or in need of new glasses. Pieces flying are easy to see.

a reply to: tinymind

But that is exactly why this forum is great, I asked a question with an idea in my head that with no knowledge of this technology and I got two very informative and personally educating responses from bedlam and yourself.

Although you said one thing that I was not aware of

Would it be more prudent to dispose of the files this way or blow up a building, with people inside?

There were people inside WTC-7 when it went down? I was not aware of that.

originally posted by: babybunnies
What happened to the investigation into the $2 TRILLION in missing funds from the Pentagon budget?

originally posted by: hellobruce
What missing $2b trillion? Only silly truthers claim that money was missing.

I don't think anyone's saying it went missing, as in 'disappeared into thin air'. $2.3 trillion in transactions were unaccounted for, meaning it disappeared from public scrutiny, because we cannot know how it was spent.

Whether or not it had anything to do with 9/11, Rumsfeld's announcing it the day before the attack ensured it got little attention.

Department of Defense Analyst Franklin C. Spinney: "The books are cooked routinely year after year."
Retired Vice Admiral Jack Shanahan: "With good financial oversight we could find $48 billion in loose change in that building, without having to hit the taxpayers."