[Merged] Tehran high-rise collapse due to fire / Explosion causes collapse of the Plasco bldg?

McHrozni · 19th January 2017, 04:19 AM

A fire in a 17-storey mall in Tehran caused the building to collapse about an hour ago. It was carried on live TV.

YouTube Video This video is not hosted by the ISF. The ISF can not be held responsible for the suitability or legality of this material. By clicking the link below you agree to view content from an external website.

I AGREE

It was designed by a Jewish-Iranian in 1960s, who was executed in 1980s. I suspect the usual suspects will pin the blame on Israel as a result.

It will be rather funny to watch Richard Gage trying to explain it away

McHrozni

Crazy Chainsaw · 19th January 2017, 04:57 AM

Originally Posted by McHrozni

A fire in a 17-storey mall in Tehran caused the building to collapse about an hour ago. It was carried on live TV.

YouTube Video This video is not hosted by the ISF. The ISF can not be held responsible for the suitability or legality of this material. By clicking the link below you agree to view content from an external website.

I AGREE

It was designed by a Jewish-Iranian in 1960s, who was executed in 1980s. I suspect the usual suspects will pin the blame on Israel as a result.

It will be rather funny to watch Richard Gage trying to explain it away

McHrozni

They had to do it, to keep Tony and Ziggi from exposing that it was impossible, obviously it is a cover up.

funk de fino · 19th January 2017, 04:59 AM

Looks steel framed to me......

Dave Rogers · 19th January 2017, 05:05 AM

Looks like a top-down progressive collapse initiating from a failure of one wall, from the information available at the moment, though I haven't seen the video footage. Pictures of the fire show flames from some windows but none from most, and reports say that the fire was fought for hours and then the building collapsed in seconds. It all sounds horribly familiar.

Dave

Crazy Chainsaw · 19th January 2017, 05:11 AM

Originally Posted by Dave Rogers

Looks like a top-down progressive collapse initiating from a failure of one wall, from the information available at the moment, though I haven't seen the video footage. Pictures of the fire show flames from some windows but none from most, and reports say that the fire was fought for hours and then the building collapsed in seconds. It all sounds horribly familiar.

Dave

You know they will sweep the investigation under the rug, they will not look for explosives or thermite.

No way a giant stack effect fire causes this type of destruction to a steel framed sky scraper, had to be metal munching thermite powered moon mice.

I feel for the people of Tehran, sorry this happened to them.

MikeG · 19th January 2017, 05:29 AM

Originally Posted by Crazy Chainsaw

...I feel for the people of Tehran, sorry this happened to them.

Indeed.

I also feel sorry for those ****wits whose brains are so addled that they see conspiracy where-ever they look, but more so for those tireless individuals who counter this stupidity on a daily basis.

Damn, that's an enormous building, and will have taken a few others out with it as it collapsed outside of its footprint.

Crazy Chainsaw · 19th January 2017, 05:45 AM

Originally Posted by MikeG

Indeed.

I also feel sorry for those ****wits whose brains are so addled that they see conspiracy where-ever they look, but more so for those tireless individuals who counter this stupidity on a daily basis.

Damn, that's an enormous building, and will have taken a few others out with it as it collapsed outside of its footprint.

Check the Huffington post, and Guardian articles 70 people injured or killed including 45 fire fighters.

Oh the EPA, was involved so you know it was a false flag.

Caption from the photo reads,

Quote:

The building came down within seconds. Photograph: Abedin Taherkenareh/EPA

benthamitemetric · 19th January 2017, 06:56 AM

Some good pics from Reuters here. It does appear it was a steel framed building based on the structural elements visible in the debris pile.

And here's a much better video view. It looks like floors collapsed internally, ejecting air from one side, before the total collapse initiated in earnest.

Crazy Chainsaw · 19th January 2017, 07:33 AM

Originally Posted by benthamitemetric

Some good pics from Reuters here. It does appear it was a steel framed building based on the structural elements visible in the debris pile.

And here's a much better video view. It looks like floors collapsed internally, ejecting air from one side, before the total collapse initiated in earnest.

The building was a shopping complex, and was involved in garment manufacturing, Gage will use that to indicate the building had an unusually high fuel load, and Tony's, Gage's and Ziggi's fantasy will continue!

That is my prediction from looking at what specifics I can find.

PS. Don't tell Gage I snuck the thermite into the building!.

Could we have a moment a moment of contemplating for the victim and there families, at 12 eastern time today, as a show of respect please?

jaydeehess · 19th January 2017, 08:08 AM

Originally Posted by benthamitemetric

Some good pics from Reuters here. It does appear it was a steel framed building based on the structural elements visible in the debris pile.

And here's a much better video view. It looks like floors collapsed internally, ejecting air from one side, before the total collapse initiated in earnest.

Note also that most floors had burned out, at least near the windows well before the collapse. Also, floor failure led collapse would be indicated due to several columns remaining to fail after the building had come down.
AND
It collapsed into itself mostly in it's own foot print!

But, but, but, <<sputter, choke>> THAT can't happen without 'splosives.

Chorduroy · 19th January 2017, 08:13 AM

There are multiple videos on line now, and it's very clearly similar to the WTC collapses, in one you can even see "squibs" as the floors progressively fail. Obviously, this is case closed to all arguments that fire alone couldn't bring down a building, but naturally, the conspiracy types will hand wave/ignore it.

Fire-fighting in a high rise has to be one of the most terrifying experiences for a firefighter. I can't imagine. My condolences to those families who lost loved ones.

Crazy Chainsaw · 19th January 2017, 08:34 AM

This is what I had feared for so long people not learning from 9/11/2001, these lives need not have been lost evacuate the building and let it burn out, or collapse.
You can tell by how the fire burns if the building is likely to be compromised.
This building was doomed to collapse before it ever fell.

jaydeehess · 19th January 2017, 08:37 AM

Originally Posted by Chorduroy

There are multiple videos on line now, and it's very clearly similar to the WTC collapses, in one you can even see "squibs" as the floors progressively fail. Obviously, this is case closed to all arguments that fire alone couldn't bring down a building, but naturally, the conspiracy types will hand wave/ignore it.

Fire-fighting in a high rise has to be one of the most terrifying experiences for a firefighter. I can't imagine. My condolences to those families who lost loved ones.

30 FF's killed.
The guy in that bucket is the luckiest man on the scene.

Crazy Chainsaw · 19th January 2017, 08:41 AM

Originally Posted by jaydeehess

30 FF's killed.
The guy in that bucket is the luckiest man on the scene.

That's what so sad Jay they didn't have to die, respecting these type of fires, and understanding them saves lives.

If the building is evacuated, don't risk your life for property, when you can't save anyone get out of the way.

jaydeehess · 19th January 2017, 08:42 AM

http://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/te...-state-n708721

Has a pic that seems to show diagonal bracing of the exterior frame. That would possibly make it stronger in one plane, than the WTC tower's or #7's exterior frame.

Quote:

It remains unclear how the fire began but Reuters said Iran's Tasnim News Agency reported it started on the ninth floor.

Police had previously blocked off streets around the 17-story structure, which was among the first high-rises built in the Iranian capital.

NBC News initially reported that the building was an apartment block but it later emerged that it is actually mostly commercial.

Blocked off streets!!!! How did they know it was going to collapse??? Huh, huh, think about it.......

Whip · 19th January 2017, 08:44 AM

it's a shame the guy was talking over the CD explosions. gonna make it harder for the trolls to prove again.

MikeG · 19th January 2017, 08:48 AM

Originally Posted by jaydeehess

.......Has a pic that seems to show diagonal bracing of the exterior frame. That would make it stronger than the WTC tower's or #7's exterior frame.......

Steady on. Be careful to make sustainable claims. Diagonal bracing is for racking resistance. In the WTC that function was provided by continuous plate steel and so diagonal bracing wasn't necessary.

jaydeehess · 19th January 2017, 08:49 AM

"Suicide Iranian Fire fighters plant explosives to prove 9/11 WTC collapses were due to fire" pushed on DIF in 3..2..1.......

jaydeehess · 19th January 2017, 08:51 AM

Originally Posted by MikeG

Steady on. Be careful to make sustainable claims. Diagonal bracing is for racking resistance. In the WTC that function was provided by continuous plate steel and so diagonal bracing wasn't necessary.

Added modifiers to the post.

MikeG · 19th January 2017, 08:56 AM

Originally Posted by jaydeehess

Added modifiers to the post.

Hmm, I can't see that being so either, I'm afraid. They are both strong only in their plane, and dependent on their fittings for whatever strength they have outside that plane.

benthamitemetric · 19th January 2017, 09:11 AM

Here's a picture of the building frame during construction. Looks like a pretty standard steel framed building.

jaydeehess · 19th January 2017, 09:46 AM

Originally Posted by MikeG

Hmm, I can't see that being so either, I'm afraid. They are both strong only in their plane, and dependent on their fittings for whatever strength they have outside that plane.

yeah possibly stronger in one plane.
The first exterior failure I see is perpendicular to that plane.

Mark F · 19th January 2017, 10:03 AM

What you guys all fail to realize is that this building in Iran was only 17 stories tall. Obviously fire knows how tall a building is and can look at this one and say you're short enough, I'll bring you down, where a building like 7 WTC is toooooo tall so fire will just say I'm not even gonna try.

pgimeno · 19th January 2017, 10:08 AM

Originally Posted by jaydeehess

http://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/te...-state-n708721

Has a pic that seems to show diagonal bracing of the exterior frame. That would possibly make it stronger in one plane, than the WTC tower's or #7's exterior frame.

Hmmm...

pgimeno · 19th January 2017, 10:09 AM

Originally Posted by benthamitemetric

Here's a picture of the building frame during construction. Looks like a pretty standard steel framed building.

The perimeter, no doubt. I'm still wondering about the core (e.g. Windsor had a steel perimeter and a concrete core). But you're probably right.

CORed · 19th January 2017, 10:26 AM

Originally Posted by Crazy Chainsaw

You know they will sweep the investigation under the rug, they will not look for explosives or thermite.

No way a giant stack effect fire causes this type of destruction to a steel framed sky scraper, had to be metal munching thermite powered moon mice.

I feel for the people of Tehran, sorry this happened to them.

I think it was "dustified" by directed energy weapons powered by a nearby hurricane. Either that or mini-nukes.

benthamitemetric · 19th January 2017, 10:42 AM

Originally Posted by pgimeno

The perimeter, no doubt. I'm still wondering about the core (e.g. Windsor had a steel perimeter and a concrete core). But you're probably right.

I think it would be highly atypical to use reinforced concrete to make such slender columns as can be seen internally through the frame. Also, as I understand it, reinforced concrete cores have only come into use in high rise buildings in the last 20-30 years due to drastic improvements in concrete strength. I don't think a concrete core would be expected in a building as old as this one, though it is not quite a high rise per se, so perhaps even older concrete methods allowed for it. Ultimately, I'd wager the internal beams are steel as well, but, as you say, we don't know for sure.

jaydeehess · 19th January 2017, 10:43 AM

Originally Posted by CORed

I think it was "dustified" by directed energy weapons powered by a nearby hurricane. Either that or mini-nukes.

Where were the Iranian F-14's?

jaydeehess · 19th January 2017, 10:45 AM

Originally Posted by pgimeno

Hmmm...

Yeah, but that was only on a few floors though wasn't it?

pgimeno · 19th January 2017, 11:29 AM

Originally Posted by jaydeehess

Yeah, but that was only on a few floors though wasn't it?

Yes, I think so. Still, WTC7 was about three times taller, and it was made to resist stronger wind loads. WTC7's façade looks sturdier to me.

MileHighMadness · 19th January 2017, 11:44 AM

I blame the CIA...

sts60 · 19th January 2017, 11:51 AM

Originally Posted by benthamitemetric

Some good pics from Reuters here. It does appear it was a steel framed building based on the structural elements visible in the debris pile...

Those pictures were hard to look at. The grief and shock on the faces of those FFs who lost their brothers is profound.

cjnewson88 · 19th January 2017, 11:56 AM

Well it looks like a controlled demolition, so I'm convinced it was thermite.

funk de fino · 19th January 2017, 11:56 AM

Where's Szamboti? Will he claim he saw a video where some Jew said he ordered it demolished?

applecorped · 19th January 2017, 12:04 PM

I look forward to Loose Change part 5

bytewizard · 19th January 2017, 12:13 PM

But this fire is different. It wasn't started by a hologram of a plane crashing into it. Surely it was demolished using invisible thermite for insurance money that will be paid to all known members of the Bilderberg group.

benthamitemetric · 19th January 2017, 12:15 PM

Truthers are already hypothesizing that this 50+ year old steel framed building that burned for 3 hours before collapsing was a controlled demolition. They think so because "squibs" and at least one flash could be seen as it collapsed. The poor fools are so epistemologically crippled that it never occurs to them that such "squibs" and flashes are, and have always been, characteristics of a large building that is collapsing, and not exclusively of a large building being intentionally demolished. Just amazing how powerfully people will distort reality to reach their preferred conclusion.

Mark F · 19th January 2017, 12:41 PM

Originally Posted by jaydeehess

Where were the Iranian F-14's?

Both of them?

marplots · 19th January 2017, 12:58 PM

I don't speak Arabic, but if you listen closely, just before it comes down, you can hear someone in the background say, "Pull it."

MicahJava · 19th January 2017, 01:36 PM

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sPGr4D1-zDI

This is a much better angle. It shows ejections of dust or smoke coming out of the building looking very similar to the ones from the WTC.

Here is an alledgedly original piece of footage with very clear sound of the collapse and a very clear view of the ejections of material: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sPGr4D1-zDI

A compilation with several interesting views of the collapse: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ov9Q9RME4PM

19th January 2017, 04:59 AM	#3
funk de fino Dreaming of unicorns Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: UAE Posts: 11,938	Looks steel framed to me......
	__________________ Stundie - Avoided like the plaque, its a scottish turn of phrase.

19th January 2017, 05:05 AM	#4
Dave Rogers Bandaged ice that stampedes inexpensively through a scribbled morning waving necessary ankles Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: Cair Paravel, according to XKCD Posts: 26,397	Looks like a top-down progressive collapse initiating from a failure of one wall, from the information available at the moment, though I haven't seen the video footage. Pictures of the fire show flames from some windows but none from most, and reports say that the fire was fought for hours and then the building collapsed in seconds. It all sounds horribly familiar. Dave
	__________________ Me: So what you're saying is that, if the load carrying ability of the lower structure is reduced to the point where it can no longer support the load above it, it will collapse without a jolt, right? Tony Szamboti: That is right

19th January 2017, 05:29 AM	#6
MikeG Now. Do it now. Join Date: Sep 2012 Location: UK Posts: 22,778	Originally Posted by Crazy Chainsaw ...I feel for the people of Tehran, sorry this happened to them. Indeed. I also feel sorry for those ****wits whose brains are so addled that they see conspiracy where-ever they look, but more so for those tireless individuals who counter this stupidity on a daily basis. Damn, that's an enormous building, and will have taken a few others out with it as it collapsed outside of its footprint.
	__________________ "The Conservatives want to keep wogs out and march boldly back to the 1950s when Britain still had an Empire and blacks, women, poofs and Irish knew their place." The Don That's what we've sunk to here.

19th January 2017, 06:56 AM	#8
benthamitemetric Muse Join Date: Dec 2015 Posts: 511	Some good pics from Reuters here. It does appear it was a steel framed building based on the structural elements visible in the debris pile. And here's a much better video view. It looks like floors collapsed internally, ejecting air from one side, before the total collapse initiated in earnest.
benthamitemetric Muse Join Date: Dec 2015 Posts: 511	Last edited by benthamitemetric; 19th January 2017 at 07:04 AM.

19th January 2017, 08:13 AM	#11
Chorduroy Scholar Join Date: May 2009 Posts: 51	There are multiple videos on line now, and it's very clearly similar to the WTC collapses, in one you can even see "squibs" as the floors progressively fail. Obviously, this is case closed to all arguments that fire alone couldn't bring down a building, but naturally, the conspiracy types will hand wave/ignore it. Fire-fighting in a high rise has to be one of the most terrifying experiences for a firefighter. I can't imagine. My condolences to those families who lost loved ones.
Chorduroy Scholar Join Date: May 2009 Posts: 51

19th January 2017, 05:11 AM	#5
Crazy Chainsaw Illuminator Join Date: Aug 2006 Posts: 4,829	Originally Posted by Dave Rogers Looks like a top-down progressive collapse initiating from a failure of one wall, from the information available at the moment, though I haven't seen the video footage. Pictures of the fire show flames from some windows but none from most, and reports say that the fire was fought for hours and then the building collapsed in seconds. It all sounds horribly familiar. Dave You know they will sweep the investigation under the rug, they will not look for explosives or thermite. No way a giant stack effect fire causes this type of destruction to a steel framed sky scraper, had to be metal munching thermite powered moon mice. I feel for the people of Tehran, sorry this happened to them.

19th January 2017, 05:45 AM	#7
Crazy Chainsaw Illuminator Join Date: Aug 2006 Posts: 4,829	Originally Posted by MikeG Indeed. I also feel sorry for those ****wits whose brains are so addled that they see conspiracy where-ever they look, but more so for those tireless individuals who counter this stupidity on a daily basis. Damn, that's an enormous building, and will have taken a few others out with it as it collapsed outside of its footprint. Check the Huffington post, and Guardian articles 70 people injured or killed including 45 fire fighters. Oh the EPA, was involved so you know it was a false flag. Caption from the photo reads, Quote: The building came down within seconds. Photograph: Abedin Taherkenareh/EPA

19th January 2017, 07:33 AM	#9
Crazy Chainsaw Illuminator Join Date: Aug 2006 Posts: 4,829	Originally Posted by benthamitemetric Some good pics from Reuters here. It does appear it was a steel framed building based on the structural elements visible in the debris pile. And here's a much better video view. It looks like floors collapsed internally, ejecting air from one side, before the total collapse initiated in earnest. The building was a shopping complex, and was involved in garment manufacturing, Gage will use that to indicate the building had an unusually high fuel load, and Tony's, Gage's and Ziggi's fantasy will continue! That is my prediction from looking at what specifics I can find. PS. Don't tell Gage I snuck the thermite into the building!. Could we have a moment a moment of contemplating for the victim and there families, at 12 eastern time today, as a show of respect please?

19th January 2017, 08:08 AM	#10
jaydeehess Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: 40 miles north of the border Posts: 20,816	Originally Posted by benthamitemetric Some good pics from Reuters here. It does appear it was a steel framed building based on the structural elements visible in the debris pile. And here's a much better video view. It looks like floors collapsed internally, ejecting air from one side, before the total collapse initiated in earnest. Note also that most floors had burned out, at least near the windows well before the collapse. Also, floor failure led collapse would be indicated due to several columns remaining to fail after the building had come down. AND It collapsed into itself mostly in it's own foot print! But, but, but, <<sputter, choke>> THAT can't happen without 'splosives.

19th January 2017, 08:34 AM	#12
Crazy Chainsaw Illuminator Join Date: Aug 2006 Posts: 4,829	This is what I had feared for so long people not learning from 9/11/2001, these lives need not have been lost evacuate the building and let it burn out, or collapse. You can tell by how the fire burns if the building is likely to be compromised. This building was doomed to collapse before it ever fell.

19th January 2017, 08:37 AM	#13
jaydeehess Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: 40 miles north of the border Posts: 20,816	Originally Posted by Chorduroy There are multiple videos on line now, and it's very clearly similar to the WTC collapses, in one you can even see "squibs" as the floors progressively fail. Obviously, this is case closed to all arguments that fire alone couldn't bring down a building, but naturally, the conspiracy types will hand wave/ignore it. Fire-fighting in a high rise has to be one of the most terrifying experiences for a firefighter. I can't imagine. My condolences to those families who lost loved ones. 30 FF's killed. The guy in that bucket is the luckiest man on the scene.

19th January 2017, 08:41 AM	#14
Crazy Chainsaw Illuminator Join Date: Aug 2006 Posts: 4,829	Originally Posted by jaydeehess 30 FF's killed. The guy in that bucket is the luckiest man on the scene. That's what so sad Jay they didn't have to die, respecting these type of fires, and understanding them saves lives. If the building is evacuated, don't risk your life for property, when you can't save anyone get out of the way.

19th January 2017, 08:42 AM	#15
jaydeehess Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: 40 miles north of the border Posts: 20,816	http://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/te...-state-n708721 Has a pic that seems to show diagonal bracing of the exterior frame. That would possibly make it stronger in one plane, than the WTC tower's or #7's exterior frame. Quote: It remains unclear how the fire began but Reuters said Iran's Tasnim News Agency reported it started on the ninth floor. Police had previously blocked off streets around the 17-story structure, which was among the first high-rises built in the Iranian capital. NBC News initially reported that the building was an apartment block but it later emerged that it is actually mostly commercial. Blocked off streets!!!! How did they know it was going to collapse??? Huh, huh, think about it.......
	Last edited by jaydeehess; 19th January 2017 at 08:50 AM.

19th January 2017, 08:44 AM	#16
Whip Muse Join Date: Feb 2015 Posts: 717	it's a shame the guy was talking over the CD explosions. gonna make it harder for the trolls to prove again.
Whip Muse Join Date: Feb 2015 Posts: 717

19th January 2017, 08:48 AM	#17
MikeG Now. Do it now. Join Date: Sep 2012 Location: UK Posts: 22,778	Originally Posted by jaydeehess .......Has a pic that seems to show diagonal bracing of the exterior frame. That would make it stronger than the WTC tower's or #7's exterior frame....... Steady on. Be careful to make sustainable claims. Diagonal bracing is for racking resistance. In the WTC that function was provided by continuous plate steel and so diagonal bracing wasn't necessary.
	__________________ "The Conservatives want to keep wogs out and march boldly back to the 1950s when Britain still had an Empire and blacks, women, poofs and Irish knew their place." The Don That's what we've sunk to here.

19th January 2017, 08:49 AM	#18
jaydeehess Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: 40 miles north of the border Posts: 20,816	"Suicide Iranian Fire fighters plant explosives to prove 9/11 WTC collapses were due to fire" pushed on DIF in 3..2..1.......

19th January 2017, 08:51 AM	#19
jaydeehess Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: 40 miles north of the border Posts: 20,816	Originally Posted by MikeG Steady on. Be careful to make sustainable claims. Diagonal bracing is for racking resistance. In the WTC that function was provided by continuous plate steel and so diagonal bracing wasn't necessary. Added modifiers to the post.

19th January 2017, 08:56 AM	#20
MikeG Now. Do it now. Join Date: Sep 2012 Location: UK Posts: 22,778	Originally Posted by jaydeehess Added modifiers to the post. Hmm, I can't see that being so either, I'm afraid. They are both strong only in their plane, and dependent on their fittings for whatever strength they have outside that plane.
	__________________ "The Conservatives want to keep wogs out and march boldly back to the 1950s when Britain still had an Empire and blacks, women, poofs and Irish knew their place." The Don That's what we've sunk to here.

19th January 2017, 09:11 AM	#21
benthamitemetric Muse Join Date: Dec 2015 Posts: 511	Here's a picture of the building frame during construction. Looks like a pretty standard steel framed building.
benthamitemetric Muse Join Date: Dec 2015 Posts: 511

19th January 2017, 09:46 AM	#22
jaydeehess Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: 40 miles north of the border Posts: 20,816	Originally Posted by MikeG Hmm, I can't see that being so either, I'm afraid. They are both strong only in their plane, and dependent on their fittings for whatever strength they have outside that plane. yeah possibly stronger in one plane. The first exterior failure I see is perpendicular to that plane.

19th January 2017, 10:03 AM	#23
Mark F Graduate Poster Join Date: Aug 2012 Posts: 1,392	What you guys all fail to realize is that this building in Iran was only 17 stories tall. Obviously fire knows how tall a building is and can look at this one and say you're short enough, I'll bring you down, where a building like 7 WTC is toooooo tall so fire will just say I'm not even gonna try.
Mark F Graduate Poster Join Date: Aug 2012 Posts: 1,392	__________________ So I'm going to tell you what the facts are, and the facts are the facts, but then we know the truth. That always overcomes facts.

19th January 2017, 10:08 AM	#24
pgimeno Illuminator Join Date: Feb 2009 Location: Spain Posts: 3,303	Originally Posted by jaydeehess http://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/te...-state-n708721 Has a pic that seems to show diagonal bracing of the exterior frame. That would possibly make it stronger in one plane, than the WTC tower's or #7's exterior frame. Hmmm...
	__________________ Ask questions. Demand answers. But be prepared to accept the answers, or don't ask questions in the first place.

19th January 2017, 10:09 AM	#25
pgimeno Illuminator Join Date: Feb 2009 Location: Spain Posts: 3,303	Originally Posted by benthamitemetric Here's a picture of the building frame during construction. Looks like a pretty standard steel framed building. The perimeter, no doubt. I'm still wondering about the core (e.g. Windsor had a steel perimeter and a concrete core). But you're probably right.
	__________________ Ask questions. Demand answers. But be prepared to accept the answers, or don't ask questions in the first place.

19th January 2017, 10:26 AM	#26
CORed Philosopher Join Date: Dec 2008 Location: Central City, Colorado, USA Posts: 7,856	Originally Posted by Crazy Chainsaw You know they will sweep the investigation under the rug, they will not look for explosives or thermite. No way a giant stack effect fire causes this type of destruction to a steel framed sky scraper, had to be metal munching thermite powered moon mice. I feel for the people of Tehran, sorry this happened to them. I think it was "dustified" by directed energy weapons powered by a nearby hurricane. Either that or mini-nukes.

19th January 2017, 10:42 AM	#27
benthamitemetric Muse Join Date: Dec 2015 Posts: 511	Originally Posted by pgimeno The perimeter, no doubt. I'm still wondering about the core (e.g. Windsor had a steel perimeter and a concrete core). But you're probably right. I think it would be highly atypical to use reinforced concrete to make such slender columns as can be seen internally through the frame. Also, as I understand it, reinforced concrete cores have only come into use in high rise buildings in the last 20-30 years due to drastic improvements in concrete strength. I don't think a concrete core would be expected in a building as old as this one, though it is not quite a high rise per se, so perhaps even older concrete methods allowed for it. Ultimately, I'd wager the internal beams are steel as well, but, as you say, we don't know for sure.
benthamitemetric Muse Join Date: Dec 2015 Posts: 511

19th January 2017, 10:43 AM	#28
jaydeehess Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: 40 miles north of the border Posts: 20,816	Originally Posted by CORed I think it was "dustified" by directed energy weapons powered by a nearby hurricane. Either that or mini-nukes. Where were the Iranian F-14's?

19th January 2017, 10:45 AM	#29
jaydeehess Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: 40 miles north of the border Posts: 20,816	Originally Posted by pgimeno Hmmm... Yeah, but that was only on a few floors though wasn't it?

19th January 2017, 11:29 AM	#30
pgimeno Illuminator Join Date: Feb 2009 Location: Spain Posts: 3,303	Originally Posted by jaydeehess Yeah, but that was only on a few floors though wasn't it? Yes, I think so. Still, WTC7 was about three times taller, and it was made to resist stronger wind loads. WTC7's façade looks sturdier to me.
	__________________ Ask questions. Demand answers. But be prepared to accept the answers, or don't ask questions in the first place.

19th January 2017, 11:44 AM	#31
MileHighMadness Muse Join Date: Jul 2012 Location: Just Southeast of Hell Posts: 642	I blame the CIA...
	__________________ “I don’t look forward to heaven, it sounds as boring as hell.” Lord Postsettle

19th January 2017, 11:51 AM	#32
sts60 Master Poster Join Date: Jul 2007 Posts: 2,815	Originally Posted by benthamitemetric Some good pics from Reuters here. It does appear it was a steel framed building based on the structural elements visible in the debris pile... Those pictures were hard to look at. The grief and shock on the faces of those FFs who lost their brothers is profound.
sts60 Master Poster Join Date: Jul 2007 Posts: 2,815

19th January 2017, 11:56 AM	#33
cjnewson88 Graduate Poster Join Date: Oct 2011 Posts: 1,691	Well it looks like a controlled demolition, so I'm convinced it was thermite.
	__________________ Common sense has clearly been snuck up on from behind beaten several times on the head and left to bleed. Over 140 pieces of evidence showing American 77 hit the Pentagon http://therightbloggerbastard.blogspot.co.nz/ http://www.youtube.com/user/cjnewson88

19th January 2017, 12:04 PM	#35
applecorped Rotten to the Core Join Date: Mar 2008 Posts: 17,953	I look forward to Loose Change part 5
	__________________ All You Need Is Love.

19th January 2017, 12:13 PM	#36
bytewizard Graduate Poster Join Date: Jan 2016 Location: In the woods Posts: 1,797	But this fire is different. It wasn't started by a hologram of a plane crashing into it. Surely it was demolished using invisible thermite for insurance money that will be paid to all known members of the Bilderberg group.

19th January 2017, 12:15 PM	#37
benthamitemetric Muse Join Date: Dec 2015 Posts: 511	Truthers are already hypothesizing that this 50+ year old steel framed building that burned for 3 hours before collapsing was a controlled demolition. They think so because "squibs" and at least one flash could be seen as it collapsed. The poor fools are so epistemologically crippled that it never occurs to them that such "squibs" and flashes are, and have always been, characteristics of a large building that is collapsing, and not exclusively of a large building being intentionally demolished. Just amazing how powerfully people will distort reality to reach their preferred conclusion.
benthamitemetric Muse Join Date: Dec 2015 Posts: 511	Last edited by benthamitemetric; 19th January 2017 at 12:19 PM.

19th January 2017, 12:41 PM	#38
Mark F Graduate Poster Join Date: Aug 2012 Posts: 1,392	Originally Posted by jaydeehess Where were the Iranian F-14's? Both of them?
Mark F Graduate Poster Join Date: Aug 2012 Posts: 1,392	__________________ So I'm going to tell you what the facts are, and the facts are the facts, but then we know the truth. That always overcomes facts.