New aerial NYPD photos of 9/11 attack released

[MacCruiskeen]

One of the many things that disgusts me about the attitude of 'lenin' is the way he spouts bullshit that he knows has been comprehensively discredited elsewhere. He knows it because I posted him the evidence. He claimed Khalid Sheikh Mohammed was a reliable witness to the truth, until I pointed out the ballsachingly obvious, namely 1) that he had been tortured, and 2) that we had never had any independent confirmation of his identity anyway. (This sent him into a rage.)

'lenin' also had no response to 9/11: Press for Truth, except to ignore it completely. He has had no response to Cynthia McKinney, or Colleen Rowley, or Lynn Margulis, except to ignore them, completely. (It's no accident that so many of the bravest and most rational opponents of the Official Yarn have been women.) So, whenever he does condescend to notice the defining event of the 21st century, it's not surprising that he prefers to focus exclusively on controlled demolition (and even then, dishonestly).

He's a smart little lad with a big but fragile ego, and it's no accident - nor is it irrelevant - that barely any woman ever posts a comment at his website.

Lenin's Tomb? He should rename his site Boys' Town.

[DoYouEverWonder]

The complete failure of 3 structural steel buildings on the same day is not important? Of course not.

I never said that, nor anything like it, so please spare me your straw man and then spare me your eye-rolling smiley.

My apologizes for being over sensitive, but over the years I've heard people say don't look at this or don't look at that, there's nothing you can do about, something else is more important.... When that happens, it's always made me want to look even more.

Nor do I think focusing on the buildings' collapse is, or ever has been, the best way to address the whole topic.

No one else said it was either, it is just one aspect of the events of 9/11 and the history leading up to that day. But the WTC attack, was one of the most photographed events in history and certainly the most photographed terrorist attack ever. How many terrorists attacks get broadcast live to the whole world? In this case the visual evidence is important and if people would bother to actually look at the pictures, it's hard to deny that 3 buildings were deliberately demolished that day, killing almost 3000 people. I believe murder is still a crime and there is no statute of limitations on that one.

[Nordic]

^That building looks like it's about to collapse.

Uh, no, not really.

I think you might feel that way (if in fact you feel that way and are not being facetious) because you KNOW it DID fall down not soon thereafter.

Plenty of buildings have burned, far worse than that, without collapsing. That should be needless to say here. Or should I dredge up the pictures again?

[nathan28]

I'd be happy to read a fellow pinko's response, Mac. My essential beef is that 9/11 is a contextualizing issue but it's not the issue. I meant to state more clearly that I think the flippant dismissal of the basic breach of good faith that 9/11/01's OCT is problematic, but it's not the issue. Much the same with Iran-Contra--ultimately, there's much to be derived from that particular series of scandals, but in my final evaluation all I know is that the people behind Iran-Contra also don't want me to have health care, hate public education and hate public infrastructure, which they did before Iran-Contra and still do, much the same as 9/11/01. But getting back to the radical left's too-frequent dismissal of any possible historical issue w/ 9/11, IMO that dismissal represents a fairly obvious attempt at status-seeking by attacking paper tigers built by the people who fight them based on the design they saw through someone's trailer park window. Because it's not the same as not having patience for something, which I meant to say--there's a certain bad faith involved in the eyeball rolling.

[DoYouEverWonder]

Very interesting. Just off the bat, I bet this one will be the subject of a lot of discussion. I'd like to see a higher-rez version of this:

Anyway back to the pictures -

Here's another one that's a bit closer, that was taken just before the one you posted:



This one is close to the one you posted above:



Then the pics jump to the collapse of WTC 1 in progress, so it's hard to judge from this series alone what time it was when these fire were observed and if they were getting worse or burning out when the building collapsed.

[Iroquois]

nathan28, the problem I see with the authoritarian Left accepting alternative inquiry into the events of 09/11 is that this crosses a line with the degree that the State, particularly some of its highest officers, may be implicated in such a crime. Those who have so much vested in the State as a solution to ethical social dilemmas have great difficulty see even what they would regard as a flawed government structure acting as host to such a profoundly unethical act. Just my take.

[nathan28]

nathan28, the problem I see with the authoritarian Left accepting alternative inquiry into the events of 09/11 is that this crosses a line with the degree that the State, particularly some of its highest officers, may be implicated in such a crime. Those who have so much vested in the State as a solution to ethical social dilemmas have great difficulty see even what they would regard as a flawed government structure acting as host to such a profoundly unethical act. Just my take.

I think that's a big part of it, actually. Acknowledging that any state is going to tend towards a greater or lesser degree of corruption could be upsetting, b/c you'd have to concede a point, but, um, that's just sort of how things work in large-scale societies where there's contraband and inefficiences, be they capitalist or communist. And barring that, then you turn state-sponsored crime entirely into a question of violence--which is far thornier than any economic mode of production. Again I may be naive in assuming that others aren't holding naive perspectives.

[Hugh Manatee Wins]

DECOY.

Coming this week is a big event by Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth which just got their 1000th professional to call for an honest examination of the three destroyed World Trade Center buildings since the NIST is obviously lying and defying the laws of physics.

[82_28]

Wassahappenin' tomorrow?

http://digitaljournal.com/article/287275

S'pose we wait and see eh?

transfixated on the big blue screen,
it's your window to the outside,
a melancholy dream,
a medium upon which you build reality,
this episodic currency,
that everybody needs
somebody's delivery lulls you to sleep,
the man behind the weather map,
the editor in chief,
they control two worlds,
power and disease,
and you cannot suppress your curiosity
but see it's only entertainment,
superficial urgency,
posterboard mentality,
only entertainment,
tightly constrained,
the buzz that remains,
is the story of how we run our lives
many are the people poor and suffering,
from the lack of coverage,
from the transmission beam,
and if it ever gets here,
you'll be offended too,
'cause you cannot distinguish,
chicanery from truth,
see it's only entertainment,
a superficial episode,
as life continues to unfold,
only entertainment,
controlled an copied,
they've planted the seed,
that sprouts into your picture of the world,
can't someone protect me (turn away, turn away),
from this electron beam,
hey you, Mr.FCC,
have you no advice for me?

Bad Religion -- Only Entertainment

[nathan28]

Wassahappenin' tomorrow?

http://digitaljournal.com/article/287275

Jesus, Khamenei must be in his early hundreds by now. Sounds like senility to me.

[MacCruiskeen]

nathan28, the problem I see with the authoritarian Left accepting alternative inquiry into the events of 09/11 is that this crosses a line with the degree that the State, particularly some of its highest officers, may be implicated in such a crime. Those who have so much vested in the State as a solution to ethical social dilemmas have great difficulty see even what they would regard as a flawed government structure acting as host to such a profoundly unethical act. Just my take.

I think that's a big part of it, actually. Acknowledging that any state is going to tend towards a greater or lesser degree of corruption could be upsetting, b/c you'd have to concede a point

Agreed. Thanks, Iroquois, you really hit a nail on the head there. That's it exactly. The SWP and all the tiny leninettes in it prefer to defend the most obvious lies of the most secretive regime in US history because they fear that any exposure of those lies might endanger the legitimacy of the state per se. For the leninettes are themselves nothing if not frustrated authoritarians. They're statesmen-in-waiting, in their dreams. They're statesboys. When they finally grow up, they want to be the ones doing the lying (for weighty and legitimate reasons of state, but of course, of course).

Hence all that shabbily disingenuous scaremongering about "9/11 Truth" being mainly the preserve of lunatic right-wing libertarians. Hence the incessant waffle about "mobilising the working class", coupled with a supercilious contempt for the only thing close to a spontaneous mass movement of the working class in recent decades. And hence 'lenin's' truly rabid defence of the Bush Gang's Official Yarn - and by god, that's what it is, a defence.

He really managed to write this, and to mean it, only yesterday:

the 'official theory' - the one that the vast majority of experts in every relevant field agree upon - is backed up by substantive evidence, the fundamentals of which have withstood repeated attempts to pick holes in every aspect of them.

http://www.medialens.org/board/

In February 2010, there is simply no excuse for that. None. Ignorance would not be an excuse, and in any case he is not as ignorant as he pretends to be.

[MacCruiskeen]

My essential beef is that 9/11 is a contextualizing issue but it's not the issue. I meant to state more clearly that I think the flippant dismissal of the basic breach of good faith that 9/11/01's OCT is problematic, but it's not the issue.

Well, there's no such thing as "the issue" per se, nathan - unless the issue is a fundamental respect for the truth, which is the same thing as an orientation towards reality. I mean, how would you react if someone said, "Well, we could all unite and Fight the Power effectively if you tinfoil-hatters would only learn some history and accept the basic and undeniable premise that the Eskimos were responsible for WWII." - ?

I'd say: Nope, sorry, you're not on. Reality is not optional, least of all for those of us who aren't millionaires. And the point about 9/11 is that it's still going strong. I was neither joking nor exaggerating when I called it "the defining event of the 21st century". Both Blair and Obama have name-checked it for their own nefarious purposes in the last month alone. It's still doing sterling service, both as a universal casus belli and as an excuse for domestic repression and fiscal robbery.

And if any one thing is preventing the emergence of a strong grass-roots opposition, then it's the stubborn (indeed rabid) refusal of both* liberals and authoritarian leftists to address the reality of 9/11 with anything approaching honesty. Reality is not optional. You get punished if you try to ignore it. QED.

*Cockburn. Taibbi. Monbiot. Rushkoff. (Anyone who wants to can extend this list of prominent left/liberal opinion-leaders.)

[dbcooper41]

to me the most striking feature of the burning tower pic is the clean delineation of the fire.
does anyone know which floors are on fire in this picture? it appears to be several floors below impact. and it looks like the fire is burning evenly on several sides of the building. hhmmm.
so did the magic jet fuel flow all the way down or puddle up on that floor and start burning or what?

[nathan28]

to me the most striking feature of the burning tower pic is the clean delineation of the fire.
does anyone know which floors are on fire in this picture? it appears to be several floors below impact. and it looks like the fire is burning evenly on several sides of the building. hhmmm.
so did the magic jet fuel flow all the way down or puddle up on that floor and start burning or what?

Rutgers (?) did an in-depth simulation and largely found that the jet fuel would have pretty much sprayed throughout the entire floor, which I see no reason to disbelieve, considering you had metal traveling at hundreds of MPH. Titanium > drywall. The plane was moving several hundred miles an hour, so the naphtha (that's what fuels jets, right?) would have been, too, and the engine was already firing. IOW: it's a giant molotov cocktail. This by no means confirms the OCT.

[DoYouEverWonder]

to me the most striking feature of the burning tower pic is the clean delineation of the fire.
does anyone know which floors are on fire in this picture? it appears to be several floors below impact. and it looks like the fire is burning evenly on several sides of the building. hhmmm.
so did the magic jet fuel flow all the way down or puddle up on that floor and start burning or what?

This is some info about the fires that I collected from public record sources a long time ago. It is not necessarily complete, but it includes everything I could find.

WTC 1 – Fires

90th Floor Fire
91st Floor Fire
92nd Floor 9:02 Large Fire – east side
10:05 and 10:25, videos show, fire spread westward across the 92nd floor's north face
10:18 Smoke jets
93rd Floor 8:49 Fire, North side


Impact Zone – Fires:

94th Floor 8:49 Fire, North side, east side, fire intensifies,
10:18 Smoke jets
95th Floor 8:49 Extensive Damage, Fire – North side,
10:18 Smoke jets
96th Floor 8:49 Extensive Damage, Fire – North side, south side
9:02 Large Fire
10:18 Smoke jets
10:18 Fire raging south side
97th Floor 8:49 Fire, North side, fire intensifies, 10:18 smoke jets
10:18 Fire raging south side
98th Floor 9:15 Fire – full perimeter
9:30 Vigorous fire – full perimeter
10:18 Smoke jets
10:18 Fire raging south side
99th Floor 9:30 Almost no fire
10:18 Fire raging south side

104th Floor 8:49 Smoke
10:01 Large fire starts – south side of west face

10:26 Transmission Tower starts to move downward

WTC 2 – Fires


Impact Zone – Fires:


78th Floor
79th Floor 9:03 Jet fuel erupts - East Face
80th Floor 9:04 Vigorous fires -East Face – sustained fires from impact
81st Floor 9:03 Jet fuel erupts
9:04 Vigorous fires -East Face – sustained fires from impact
82nd Floor 9:03 Jet fuel erupts
9:04 Vigorous fires -East Face – sustained fires from impact
83rd Floor 9:04 Vigorous fires -East Face – sustained fires from impact
84th Floor



9:30 – 9:58 Fires continued to burn on east side
9:58 Collapse begins

You make a good point about the the clean delineation of the fire. Based on the videos and images, even the large fires that broke out did not spread and some of them were already burning themselves out. The concrete slabs and steel pans, that the floors were made of, make for very good fire walls. That's why structural steel buildings don't collapse from fire, especially ones that have only been burning for less then an hour. The fire will run out of combustibles before it makes a dent in steel or concrete.