I understand that many here are probably many very invested in the FEMA deception about the towers core or that there were multiple steel core columns inside the core area or other information describing that core. It is a bummer being deceived, but please don't be angry with me, be angry with FEMA or the quasi leadership of the truth movement because I've been telling them for years and they believe FEMA without question.

Here is the only official diagram of the core I know of which has any real detail. It is pure fiction.



Here is what the core of WTC 2 looks like at 1/2 the total height. All of the exterior steel framework has fallen away. There is no way what you see below represents the structure depicted above.



What is seen in the image of 9-11 is a steel reinforced, rectangular tubular, cast concrete core.

I've posted links to a video, in the VIDEO thread, I've produced that merges the 9-11 images with other information to show the core deception and illustrate the demolition methods. My background and the basic source for this information is also there.

http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum...opic=3940&st=15

The fact is that the images of the towers coming down on 9-11 DO NOT show any of the core features that FEMA states existed or what other sources show.

Realize the Guiliani took the plans from the NYC city offices in December of '01 for a reason. Realize that cheney was appointed as director of FEMA for a reason one week after gwb was selected in 2000.

Here is an independent and highly qualified source who has published a PDF which indicates a concrete core.

http://www.ncsea.com/downloads/wtcseerp.pdf
August Domel, Jr., Ph.D., S.E., P.E. November 2001

Groundbreaking for construction of the World Trade Center took place on August 5, 1966 Tower One, standing 1368 feet high, was completed in 1970, and Tower Two, at 1362 feet high, was completed in 1972. The structural design for the World Trade Center Towers was done by Skilling, Helle, Christiansen and Robertson. It was designed as a tube building that included a perimeter moment-resisting frame consisting of steel columns spaced on 39-inch centers. The load carrying system was designed so that the steel facade would resist lateral and gravity forces and the interior concrete core would carry only gravity loads.

Dr. Domel received a Ph.D. from the University of Illinois at Chicago in 1988 and a Law Degree from Loyola University in 1992. He is a licensed Structural Engineer and Attorney at Law in the .State of Illinois and a Professional Engineer in twelve states, including the State of New York. Dr. Domel is authorized by the Department of Labor (OSHA) as a 10 and 30 hour construction safety trainer.

Leslie E. Robertson was interviewed and provided information to Katherine Stroup of Newsweek stating there was a concrete core on September 13, '01.

http://web.archive.org/web/20040807085840/http://msnbc.msn.com/id/3069641/
Leslie Robertson, Architect Of The World Trade Center Towers

Still, Robertson, whose firm is responsible for three of the six tallest buildings in the world, feels a sense of pride that the massive towers, supported by a steel-tube exoskeleton and a reinforced concrete core, held up as well as they did—managing to stand for over an hour despite direct hits from two massive commercial jetliners.

The leaked plans of WTC 1 from Silverstein have been faked to appear as heavily reviewed construction drawings. The drawings were actually preliminary plans by Robertson which were given to Minoru Yamasaki who rejected the steel core columns because they have too much flex. He would not certify the structure as safe with steel core columns.
The faking was done by adding revision tables to the scans of blueprints. The resolution was also degraded so that dimensions would not be readable making it possible for the original ID of the core could be obliterated from common knowledge. The basic ID was 80x120 feet, from the 43rd up. Lower was a couple of extra feet for conduit and plumbing or ducts.
Here is what the altered revision tables show which proves the plans as fake. Does anyone recognize those character as of the alphabet? Do you realize that it is about impossible to have a pencil line resolve with that many pixels in a straight line from a scan? (from A-A-141.tif)



I have a page documenting this analysis.

http://algoxy.com/psych/whatis9-11Disinfo_fakeplan.html

Here is my 9-11 site.

http://algoxy.com/psych/9-11scenario.html

There are 3 hours of audio interviews downloadable here,

http://www.breakfornews.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=2854

Where there are images which have been coordinated with the edited interviews by Fintan Dunne of breakfornews.com

The method of demolition was that the towers were built with C4 plastic explosive cast into the concrete in 2 basic explosive circuits. The rebar of the concrete shear walls of the tubular cast concrete core was one circuit and each panel of every floor comprised the other circuit.

All that need to be done was the setting of detonators by digging our paraffin plugs sealing and preserving the C4 where blasting caps were placed. Digital counters were wired into redundant security telephone circuit that ran throughout the towers. One audio tone on that circuit set the digital counter counting and each floor was timed for 75 seconds more delay descending and every 40 foot of core followed the floors down at a rate of free fall.

The core detonation circuits were inside the core and protected by the blasts of the floors by the thick core walls.

The US government has been infiltrated since about 1950 and secret elements have controlled the intelligence agencies from shortly after that time.

Hi, Christophera.

How do you account for the vaporization of steel that took place? What about the thousands of filing cabinets missing from the rubble?

I have more questions but that should get us started.

Christophera, unless I'm mistaken, you were banned months ago.

Go away.

Locking

I'm moving all his threads to AT.

Just unlocking for a moment to ask Chris if he ever dropped
by at the Forum of Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth?

I bet you'll get all answers and responses over there and also
get a better insight into the WTC problematic.

As this is Pilots for 9/11 Truth, we certainly have a lot of members
with well half baked basic knowledge about building engeneering,
but I never found anyone here who claimed to know scientificly
what went on on 9/11 with he WTC. We just collect well backed
up facts from real experts on this subject and try to understand it
for ourself.

Don't worry about painter's reaction. I for one don't remember your
name or that you were banned, but painter isn't just an average joe
on this board and his word has a weight and value for all of us.

So: Good luck in seeking the truth... over at ae911truth.org


locking again: Carl

EDIT / not locking again after OF's move to AT: Carl

As I've said in the other thread. ae911truth.org has banned me. Prior to that the place was fairly dead. stj911 is the same way. They have no explanations for anything. It is all a giant mystery. All they do is repeat the same data and observations with a note of new sensation added in here and there to appear active.

There are explanations for these things but only with a concrete core in the built to demolish situation.

free fall
total pulverization
superfine, heated particulate
smooth, square cut column ends x the 1,000's
heavy steel assemblies heaved hundreds of feet

The last 50 years of America has been one big lie. If we are to have a future we are going to have to deal with the fact and assimilate the truth.

Notice the url to my web site.

http://algoxy.com/psych/9-11scenario.html

9-11scenario.html is in a directory titled /psych/ for a reason. America has a extremely deep psychological problem dealing with secrecy. I mean EXTREME, thousands have died and we are still not over it. Basically, we are ready to give up everything to avoid the truth about secrecy.

The concrete core is not the issue here. The issue is that IF we are to acknowledge the concrete core we have to acknowledge the built to demolish aspect, IF we do that we have to address the secrecy issue. Ooops, there's that psychological problem.

It is called DISSOCIATION. Another appropriate word is REPRESSION. America has spent so much time in a state of dissociation and been so involved with repression that the even the thought of undoing or reversing that causes us to have cognitive failures. Those faiures manifest in many ways, none of them functional if 9-11 truth is the goal.

The banning, locking, failures to acknowledge evidence and reports of disinterested authority are all about CONTINUING the dissociation and repression of information regarding the creation and maintenance of secrecy. It is unconscious with each and every one of YOU and it was with ME, until I fully realized what it was causing.

Repeating my questions which seem to have gone unanswered.

If the core was concrete and not steel, then where did all the girders in the rubble come from?

Would a concrete core be flexible enough to maintain the structural integrity of such a tall building?

The blueprints show girders, not concrete. What about the steel-framed core that we see in construction photos?

The core seems to have been constructed from steel AND concrete:


So, we are talking about the Towers being constructed with a vertical steel and concrete core.

This DOES seem to have been covered up which is of great interest.

Here's a possible reason for such a cover up, as an alternative/adjunctive to Christophera's C4 laced, self-destructing concrete theory:

No plane parts would pass through a massive reinforced concrete and steel core. There could be NO remotely feasible penetration of this vertical core, i.e. the perps could push the lie that the planes could have entirely penetrated the outer perimeter, thus accessing the (falsely described) hollow core interior of the building, but to extend this to the planes being able to penetrate a steel AND concrete core would have been pushing credibility too far.

In other words the "Concrete Core" evidence supports "No Plane Theory" (NPT). The notion that there was NO concrete aspect to the core can thus clearly be seen to be a very necessary lie and I suspect that it was introduced to support "Real Plane Theory" (RPT): at least in large part.

The towers were 2 systems. The exterior steel framework was the primary load bearing structure.

The steel reinforced cast concrete tubular core kep the exterior steel aligned so that it could bear maximum loads.

The Tacoma narrows bridge was a leeson in the flex of steel. The 6000 foot long span 40 feet wide began oscillating in a 42 MPH wind whic took it out. A bridge is fastened at both ends. the towers, with their dimensions werefastened at one end with 208 foot wide faces and winds of 120 MPH were what was designed for.

The documentary, "The Engineering and Construction of the Twin Towers" showed film of Yamasaki's scale model, tempered steel and everything, in a wind tunnel and made statements that Yamasaki's calculations showed the tower would not take the wind without oscillating torsions, the same thing that took out the bridge. The wind tunel test bore out the calc's and deformations that were excessive of tolerances began to show at 85 MPH wind.

Concrete flexes when reinforceing stel is added. High tensile steel rebar was Robertsons contribution after his preliminary design was shot down by Yamasaki. The high tensile steel reduced the thickness of the walls at the base to make the loss of floor space at lobby level acceptable.

The preliminary plans are what Silversteins employee "leaked".

http://www.infowars.com/articles/sept11/wt...istleblower.htm

And they were digitally altered after scanning by te addition of revision tables from another, unknown set. Here is a zoom of the revision table from AA.141.tiff. Note, the character seen are not of the alphbet and that the pixilations for the distnaces seen are not possible from a pencil scanned drawing.



They also had the resolution destroyed so that dimensions could not be read. This PROVES a conspriracy to decieve the truth movement.

About the core, then in my opinion it is pretty strange that officially (Fema, Nist etc) there was no concrete in the core. Nothing.

It have alway been difficult for me to buy that. But I am no expert... but for me it is not so hard to belive that there was some concrete in or around the core.

But about Christophers "concrete core" theory... I am open minded. In my opinion it is interesting theory. And c-4 ... um...I am more skeptical about that idea.

The right engine of flight 11 penetrated both sides of the towers core.



The left engine of flight 175 penetrated 2 walls of the concrete core.



In both cases the farside perimeter steel box columns stopped the engines from exiting the towers.

The WTC 2 animated .gif is in error, otherwise they are remarkably accurate.

The WTC 2 engines trajectory, in the horizontal and vertical planes matches with a dust explosion out of the east face of the tower which coincides with the timing of the fireball, just ahead of it. This factor was thought to be evidence of a missile on "Lets Roll" about 4 years ago. Using the preceding gifs and stills of the east face and impact elevations I was able to project the exit point of the engine, if it would have exited, and it coincides with the dust blast and debunked the nonsense missile "theory". Jayhan probably hasn't totally forgiven me for that. Stanrodd the mod is gatekeeping on the concrete core issue and I don't post there anymore.

Blame painter.

I was answering when I discovered that the thread was locked, but save it for you.

THE POST I WAS TRYING TO MAKE:
Greetings Factfinder,

As a welder for 35 years the smooth, square cut columns are one of the biggest mysteries of ground zero evidence. This image which shows the interior box columns of one side, they were fastened to the outside of the concrete shear wall wih an appropriate surchage loading schedule to account for the compression of steel.





The fact that they are all cut on a level plane and square, with a cut that appears like this in a closeup,



Indicates that some very high performance cutting charges were employed. The word "vaporization" perhaps goes too far. Particularization is fairly well proven. The term "microspheres" is appropriate. Dust analysis shows iron bonded to calcium, silica and other concrete based materials, chromium also shows up.

The precense of molten steel in the basement could produce many vapors, but since it was all shipped overseas, the line of research cannot be followed reasonably.

Given this image,



and the top image withit's curious striations in the dark particle cloud above and to the rear, and the fact that the interior box columns went far up into the tower coupled with the evidence showing columns cut on level lines, the only comprehensive conclusion is that he floors had optimized cutting charges built into the floors. There is also other evidence for this.

The containment possible in a plane, focusing a collapsing plane of high pressure gasses, which slice through the column walls and the exhaust out the open tops of columns not yet fallen, provides about the only explanation for all of the factors.

As far as pulverization. The maximum pressures possible by near perfect containment of high explosives that could be built into engineered concrete containers would do 2 things needed to shred sheet metal file cabinets and other objects inside the buildings. 1.) Break the concrete into its particulate components with a maximized shock wave. 2.)Accelerate the particulate to speeds of 7 miles per second for a short distance after reducing them to base components.

I'm done now.

I am totally persuaded by your evidence for a steel AND concrete core and I thank you for bringing this important piece of 9/11 evidence to my attention.

The official story depends on NO Concrete aspect to the core for this reason (and I suspect that it may be the MAIN reason for the "concrete core cover up"). The planes would categorically NOT have been able to explode inside the towers in the way depicted, if the core was concrete and steel.

Quite simply, your evidence completely and utterly proves that the videos of the event have been modified.

Firstly, look at the gifs you posted and note that the alleged plane material easily accesses and passes through the interior of the towers' central areas which are depicted as largely hollow and not as a massive steel and concrete tube.

Here's the official diagram of exiting building debris from the alleged planes following the impact and explosion.



Here's the official plan diagrams of the behavior of the alleged planes upon impact with the WTC towers:









Here's the Purdue simulation of the WTC2 impact event as based on the video evidence:

Purdue Simulation

From reviewing this material it should be evident that the official reports of (1) the behavior of the alleged planes and the resulting explosions and (2) the alleged damage these explosions caused to the Towers' interiors, are totally dependent on there being no concrete aspect to the core. Your evidence thoroughly debunks these official reports.

This is hugely significant, Christophera.

With the presentation of your evidence relating to the cores' concrete aspect, you have affirmed, in the strongest way, that the airplanes seen in the videos of the event are totally bogus! The alleged planes could not have caused the resultant explosions; even if the planes could have penetrated the outer perimeter (and they could NOT have - see my other threads) the massive vertical steel and concrete cores would have totally prevented the exit blasts (as evidenced in the videos) from occurring. These exit blasts can only have occurred in the manner depicted and in accordance with the official reports, if the alleged planes were able to penetrate through to the central area of the towers before exploding. Your evidence clearly renders this to be an impossibility!

Now moving on to the theoretical part of your presentation regarding the mechanisms behind the Towers' demolitions...

Once again. Look closely.



Transparent concrete. What will they think of next.

Do we see steel core columns? No.

That image does not look directly down the hallways of WTC 1 and what we see is reflected light off the inside of the concrete core. The inner forms were steel breakdown forms left a very smooth surface that will reflect obique light.

This image shows the taper between the interior box columns and the core of WTC 1 on the right.



with the single hallway crossing the narrow axis of the core. WTC 2 on the left shows it's 2 hallways. Note. No core columns. If there were columns the towers would be almost transparent in the core area.

WTC 2 was built quite different and parts of the core or single walls were cast independent of the entire core which provided resistence against torsion meaning the steel could be advanced further than WTC 1 which was limited to 7 floors of steel over the top of the concrete pour. WTC 2 had no taper from the 43rd floor up. It was a combined shearwall/cell design that used a third wall crossing the short axis in the middle where as WTC 1 was a simple rectangular tube with strict shear wall design and a taper to the outside wall of the core. Quite difficult to construct compared to WTC 2.

The most important and revealing thing is that an image such as this one shows nothing in the core whatsoever.



What is seen is rebar. That is about 50 pieces of 3 inch rebar which sat exposed to winter weather during constrcution and the explosive lost its viability. Before this was detected the concrete was cast. Fresh coated horizontal rebar was tied to it which detonated and removed the concrete leaving the heavy vertical bar to stand freely.

That rebar image is immediately after this one,



Which shows the spire which can be located as outside the core inthe northwest corner of the exterior steel framework.

From the evidence submitted, and I am most persuaded by the contempory reports of a concrete and steel core found within various journals, I am convinced there was a concrete aspect to the cores. This does seem to have been covered up.

Note: As I understand it, Christophera is not disputing the existence of steel core columns, just the fact that they comprised the whole of the core structure.

I believe this "vertical steel and concrete core" evidence to be of huge significance, though Christophera and I may have some difference of opinion as to the nature of this significance. (As I said before, I intend to fully discuss the theory of WTC self destructing concrete as things proceed here.)

Good thinking and uses of reasons and evidence.

We will find that all of the steel inside the core area was elevator guide rail support steel and had no structural qualities.

The key aspect is gaining more corroboraton of this so we can escalate our uses of the information to stop what is happening in and to our nation.

The video documentary "The Engineering and Construction of the Twin Towers" is critical to find. I'm quite certain that there are hundreds if not over a thousand copies of the 2 hour video in Americas closets and on the shelves of video collections. For 5 years I've been trying to get the truth movement to mount a search for it via its many websites and whatever publicity can be gained. What has happened is I have met with endless ridicule, message board bannings meaning that the movement has now been psychologically turned against this information.

This is the largest problem we confront.

I have found no less that 6 people who saw a video having images of the concrete core being constructed. At least 2 other productions used video clips in them. The problem is that NONE of those people was a part of the truth movement. And none knew that FEMA presents a tower with steel core columns. As soon as I tell them they are afraid to use what they know to help. It sucks.

Christophera, I have to sign off for a bit now, but I will continue with this issue. Thank you once again; it seems you have stuck with this matter against some powerful obstacles and this has obviously taken some courage. There appears to have been a deep and profound cover up going on regarding the business of concrete and the core. I intend to research and investigate this matter thoroughly.

Later, FfG.

RELOCATED POST

Hello Carl Bank,

Thanks for jumping in with your comment and input. Let me share with you some disturbing information.

Yesterday I had posted a thread in the North Tower forum here.

http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum...php?showforum=3

After a reply this morning I tried to answer and got this error message.

The error returned was:

Sorry, this topic has been locked


Post Data Saved!

The following post data has been saved. In some cases, using your browser's back button will empty out form fields which results in the loss of any typed and unsaved material. You may select all of the text area below and copy before hitting back.

I emailed painter, the moderator after finding a PM from them. Now the entire thread I posted is gone. I've not gotten a response. Now I realize that "painter" is the same usename of a mod at loose change where I was banned over a year ago for posting images of concrete, saying it was concrete and asking for images of steel in the core area. Here is the PM I received there before being banned.

http://s15.invisionfree.com/Loose_Change_Forum/index.php?showtopic=14889&st=30
painter
Posted: Oct 1 2006, 03:16 AM
Group: Admin

Thank you IVXX for your contributions to this thread.

Christophera, I and other Administrators have become weary of you using our forum to advance a position that appears to have little basis in verifiable fact. You have persisted in this now for just over a month and we have been overly tollerant. Your persistence in this borders on spamming.

As of now I am removing your posting privileges indefinitely, moving your threads to the "alt theories" section where they will be locked, pending further Administrative review. We strongly encourage you to find another forum to promulgate your largely unsubstantiated hypothesis.

Further disturbing information

I was banned from ae911truth.org for
calling Janice Matthews of Truthaction.org and talking to her about the concrete
core issue. She admitted that she did not know much about structural stuff and
asked what Richard Gage thought of it. I explained that I was a member of the ae911truth.org
message board and had posted threads there about the concrete core and that Gage
had never commented upon the concrete core or my assertions that FEMA had misrepresented
the core structure.

I explained to her that in searching for comments about my video, "Twin Towers,
Deception and Demolition" I had run across a post from someone who was familiar
with my contentions of a steel reinforced cast concrete core and had gotten a response
from Gage by email. I read the email to her. Here is the beginning of the post and email.





Just for the heck of it, I e-mailed Richard Gage yesterday, to get his opinion of the core issue. Here is his response:

From: "Richard Gage" <rgage@ae911truth.org> Add to Address Book
Add Mobile Alert
To: marklookingup@yahoo.com
Subject: RE: Core columns
Date: Wed, 8 Aug 2007 06:10:46 -0700

Mark,

Very few people in the 9/11 Truth movement, if any,
agree with Christopher
Brown. I believe his thesis is a dead end. The
construction photos are
clear that the core columns are steel all the way up.

Richard



Janice then called Richard Gage and asked him about the email message. I do not know
what was said between them but I received this email from Gage a day or 2 later.

From:rgage@ae911truth.org
Subject:Christopher Brown representing an AE911Truth.org "board" member
Date: September 23, 2007 9:25:51 PM PDT
To: Chris Brown, argus1@earthlink.net
Cc: janice.matthews@gmail.com, bgood@ae911truth.org, bdonxxxx@xxxxxx,
dplumb@ae911truth.org, groberts@ae911truth.org, johnpmarin@yahoo.com, jparkin@fastmail.us,
and 3 more?

Christopher,

We have removed you as a member of AE911Truth.org for having attempted to represent
yourself as an AE911Truth.org "board" member to Janice Mathews of 911Truth.org

Please let me know if you have any questions about this action.

Sincerely,

Richard Gage



I responded and explained that I told Janice that I was a "message board member".
No reply was received. I also searched the ae911truth.org site for the word "board'
and found that the only mention of it was "Board certified" as in board
certified architect and engineer.

Richard Gage never posted in that thread at ae911truth.org with "clear photos of steel core columns all the way up".

Perhaps this message will convey to you and others the size and scope of the problem
the truth movement has.
Let me add that Gage nor any of his associates have any
feasible explanation for these phenomena at the WTC on 9-11.

free fall
total pulverization
superfine, heated particulate
smooth, square cut column ends x the 1,000's
heavy steel assemblies heaved hundreds of feet


RELOCATED POST




Is it "solid evidence" that the engineer of the Twin Towers identifies a concrete core 2 days after 9-11?

I have always cited this ultimate authority. Is this "solid evidence"?

http://web.archive.org/web/20040807085840/http://msnbc.msn.com/id/3069641/
Leslie Robertson, Architect Of The World Trade Center Towers

Still, Robertson, whose firm is responsible for three of the six tallest buildings in the world, feels a sense of pride that the massive towers, supported by a steel-tube exoskeleton and a reinforced concrete core, held up as well as they did—managing to stand for over an hour despite direct hits from two massive commercial jetliners.

Says engineer Robertson, “If they had fallen down immediately, the death counts would have been unimaginable,” he says. “The World Trade Center has performed admirably, and everyone involved in the project should be proud.” The buildings were designed specifically to withstand the impact of a Boeing 707, the largest plane flying in 1966, the year they broke ground on the project.

I have always cited this report by a structural engineer certified in 12 states. Is this "solid evidence"?


http://www.ncsea.com/downloads/wtcseerp.pdf
August Domel, Jr., Ph.D., S.E., P.E. November 2001

Groundbreaking for construction of the World Trade Center took place on August 5, 1966 Tower One, standing 1368 feet high, was completed in 1970, and Tower Two, at 1362 feet high, was completed in 1972. The structural design for the World Trade Center Towers was done by Skilling, Helle, Christiansen and Robertson. It was designed as a tube building that included a perimeter moment-resisting frame consisting of steel columns spaced on 39-inch centers. The load carrying system was designed so that the steel facade would resist lateral and gravity forces and the interior concrete core would carry only gravity loads.

Dr. Domel received a Ph.D. from the University of Illinois at Chicago in 1988 and a Law Degree from Loyola University in 1992. He is a licensed Structural Engineer and Attorney at Law in the .State of Illinois and a Professional Engineer in twelve states, including the State of New York. Dr. Domel is authorized by the Department of Labor (OSHA) as a 10 and 30 hour construction safety trainer.

Bazant et al have revised their report as of May 27, 2007, again revised June 22, 2007. It now indicates concrete core walls in 2 places.

It is now shown that the default authority referred to by NIST to substantiate collapse has now changed their report to make it accurate and reflect the true structure while still (fearfully) confirming nothing but collapse. BTW, giving us a quantity of explosives needed to cause pulverization. Is this "solid evidence"?




How solid do you need? This is a 400 foot tall steel reinforced cast concrete tube and it IS THE CORE. I have always posted this image.



Is this "solid evidence"?

The concrete core has never been a theory for me. I have always known with absolute certainty of it. It has been the focus of a deception by the perpetrators. Stop enabling them and disabling the truth movement, please.

RELOCATED POST


The towers were 2 systems. The exterior steel framework was the primary load bearing structure.

The steel reinforced cast concrete tubular core kep the exterior steel aligned so that it could bear maximum loads.

The Tacoma narrows bridge was a leeson in the flex of steel. The 6000 foot long span 40 feet wide began oscillating in a 42 MPH wind whic took it out. A bridge is fastened at both ends. the towers, with their dimensions werefastened at one end with 208 foot wide faces and winds of 120 MPH were what was designed for.

The documentary, "The Engineering and Construction of the Twin Towers" showed film of Yamasaki's scale model, tempered steel and everything, in a wind tunnel and made statements that Yamasaki's calculations showed the tower would not take the wind without oscillating torsions, the same thing that took out the bridge. The wind tunel test bore out the calc's and deformations that were excessive of tolerances began to show at 85 MPH wind.

Concrete gains some flexe when reinforceing steel is added. High tensile steel rebar was Robertsons contribution after his preliminary design was shot down by Yamasaki. The high tensile steel reduced the thickness of the walls at the base to make the loss of floor space at lobby level acceptable.

The preliminary plans are what Silversteins employee "leaked".

http://www.infowars.com/articles/sept11/wt...istleblower.htm

And they were digitally altered after scanning by te addition of revision tables from another, unknown set. Here is a zoom of the revision table from AA.141.tiff. Note, the character seen are not of the alphbet and that the pixilations for the distnaces seen are not possible from a pencil scanned drawing.



They also had the resolution destroyed so that dimensions could not be read. This PROVES a conspriracy to decieve the truth movement.

RELOCATED POST


What about the evidence?

Per the rules I posted the video information in the video thread and the information specific to the north tower in the north tower thread.

The concrete core IS NOT a theory and it is a MAJOR disservice to the world to put the word "theory" in the title of this thread. History will show this to be true. The terming of it as a theory is being done by those not using evidence. I have always known it to be a fact, and many other Americans do as well, BUT, they are not in the truth movement and I cannot get them to take part. FEAR.

As far as being banned from ae, that was completely unjustified, as it was everywhere else.

Now, what about the evidence?

Correct, there were 24 columns that surrounded the steel reinforced cast concrete tubular core shown here. Note: No steel core columns protruding from the core.



Which resembles in no way what FEMA said existed in the core. BTW, the below diagram is the ONLY official depiction of the core.



Guiliani took the publically owned WTC documents from the city offices in December of 2001 and the NYCLU has used toe FOIA to compell the reutrn of the documents but hte courts will not uphold federal laws and see them returned to the public.

http://web.archive.org/web/20020224015919/...hive020602.html

Here is the west wall of the WTC 1 core (narrow end) standing to the left of the spire. Note: No stel core columns to the left inthe core area.




Below is an image which shows a piece of the very top of WTC 2 falling onto WTC 3. Inside the perimeter walls is a brownish cube. That is one corner of the top of the cast concrete core of WTC 2.



There was a pre disinformation operation which removed images fromteh construction photos from public access as well as the 2 hour documentary from PBS also wiping out all record of it.

Two statements regarding the concrete core. The architect himself and an engineer certified in 12 states.

http://www.mywire.com/pubs/Newsweek/2001/09/13/316095">article</a>
Leslie Robertson, Architect Of The World Trade Center Towers

Still, Robertson, whose firm is responsible for three of the six tallest buildings in the world, feels a sense of pride that the massive towers, supported by a steel-tube exoskeleton and a reinforced concrete core, held up as well as they did—managing to stand for over an hour despite direct hits from two massive commercial jetliners.

Says engineer Robertson, “If they had fallen down immediately, the death counts would have been unimaginable,” he says. “The World Trade Center has performed admirably, and everyone involved in the project should be proud.” The buildings were designed specifically to withstand the impact of a Boeing 707, the largest plane flying in 1966, the year they broke ground on the project.


http://www.ncsea.com/downloads/wtcseerp.pdf
August Domel, Jr., Ph.D., S.E., P.E. November 2001

Groundbreaking for construction of the World Trade Center took place on August 5, 1966 Tower One, standing 1368 feet high, was completed in 1970, and Tower Two, at 1362 feet high, was completed in 1972. The structural design for the World Trade Center Towers was done by Skilling, Helle, Christiansen and Robertson. It was designed as a tube building that included a perimeter moment-resisting frame consisting of steel columns spaced on 39-inch centers. The load carrying system was designed so that the steel facade would resist lateral and gravity forces and the interior concrete core would carry only gravity loads.

Dr. Domel received a Ph.D. from the University of Illinois at Chicago in 1988 and a Law Degree from Loyola University in 1992. He is a licensed Structural Engineer and Attorney at Law in the .State of Illinois and a Professional Engineer in twelve states, including the State of New York. Dr. Domel is authorized by the Department of Labor (OSHA) as a 10 and 30 hour construction safety trainer.

Hard to believe huh? Is it easier to believe that this nation actually embraced the MAD (mutually assured destruction) policy for a decade or so?

Cold war secrecy has gotten it all accomplished and we are in VERY deep trouble.

RELOCATED POST


The only thing that makes my information alternative is that it is not embraced by the truth movement. I've shown that in 5 years they have failed to produce one image of steel core columns in the core area at an elevation above the ground.
this theory of built to demolish actually provides a fully feasible explanation in all respects for these phenomena.

free fall
total pulverization
superfine, heated particulate
smooth, square cut column ends x the 1,000's
heavy steel assemblies heaved hundreds of feet

Such information as I bring, even though is only supported by photos from 9-11, statements of the architect and engineers widely certified SHOULD be mainstream and not "alternative" instead of the "quasi leadership" of the truth movement.

Consider the "quasi leadership" does not have explanations for the above phenomena associated with the Twin Towers demise and also promotes the uses of the leaked <a href="http://algoxy.com/psych/whatis9-11Disinfo_fakeplan.html">FAKE PLANS</a> from Silverstein while ALSO rejecting the verified information of the concrete core; now do we have a reason for the truth movements failure to get anywhere? Does the word "infiltration" mean much? How about the word "psyops".

By all means see if a mod can do the job of consolidating all these threads.

RELOCATED POST


Tha image is too far away to tell what the steel inside the core really is. One thing is sure. Steel core columns are 100% deep fillet welded and of the strongest elements of the towers. If the exterio steel framework falls away, the inner core of columns withtheir associated diagonal and horizontal brazing will be plan to see,

It is never seen

Here is an image of WTC 2 much closer and the steel in the core area can be seen in some detail. Observe on top of the 2 vertical pieces of steel to the left of the middle crane and to the right. What is called a "butt plate" is welded to the top of the elevator guide rail support steel. That plate facilitates rapid connection and alignment of the support steel but does not have adequate strength to stand on its own. It is supported by horizontal connection which connect to a row of heavier supprt steel that in turn has other horizontal connections that are cast into the core walls then welded to the interior box columns outside the core which support the inside floorbeams carrying the truss panels of the floors.



that elevator guide rail support steel fell imediately as soon as the concrete core walls detonated and so NOTHING is ever seen in the core area from images of 9-11.

RELOCATED POST


The concrete core is not a theory.

The built to demolish is a theory.

In 1974 I read an article in a mens magazine with information from a crew of Navy seal divers that detailed how they were building sub bases with C4 coated rebar as a self destruct measure. The article went on to describe how the DOD began building missile silos with the same self destruct technology.

Since 1999 the DOD has demoed 4000 silos built since 1965. The detailed from the demo contractors DO NOT MAKE sense. The contractors account of how many holes had to be drilled and how much explosive was used are way to little.

What is going on is that the DOD is getting rid of the evidence. Since the action is taken to conform to treaty agreements with the USSR, it shows complicity. I feel that the cold war was essentially a conspiracy to create maximum secrecy so that stuff like the WTC and other global actions could be undertaken. Other silos built before 1965 are being sold into private ownership.

RELOCATED POST


So you say and you are wrong. If you are not wrong then post where this has happened and how it was refuted.

Never has an image of the supposed steel core columns in the core area, at some elevation over the ground, from 9-11, been posted. In 5 years, not one.

All ofthe images of the concrete core should show steel core columns if they existed but do not, because the steel core columns did not exist.

If this is true--that there was a vertical concrete element, what does it really prove? That it was an inside job and the government has manipulated information? I already know that.

FFG seems to think it bolsters the NPT, but I fail to see that.

Looks like after NPT and NBBT we yet need to create
another acronym for that "No steal beams as we were told but concrete core instead therory"
Any ideas?

NSBAWWTBCCIT too long for: Carl

Got one!
What about "BST"?

if it's telling, it's: Carl

Christophera, I remember you (by another handle) from LC. You acted surprised that an administrator named "painter" here was the same "painter" that banned you at LC. Bullsh#t - you were not so ignorant or daft to not know that painter from here is painter from there when you decided to join P4T.

I'm willing to entertain (although I highly doubt) the theory that explosives were pre-planted in the WTC when it was built. The towers were nicknamed, after all, the Nelson and David (Rockefeller) towers. But, what's the shelf-life of C4 or other explosives? Do they really work after 30 years? How could this be tested, and why would they assume it would still work (assuming they pre-laid the tower when they built it - not to mention other red-flags that would probably have gone up while the tower was being built?) after 30-odd years? And, where is the proof? Where is the evidence that explosives were actually incorporated in the original building of the towers? Is it here in this thread somewhere, and I missed it? If it is, please post it and I'll take it all back - (evidence).

There are all kinds of theories - some of them, while being by their nature unprovable, have a lot of evidence backing them up. Some have none -they are no more than an idea. This is which?

But over and above all that, why are you still harping on this "concrete core" business? There were 47 steel columns that made up the supporting structure of each core - that's a fact. If some of them were enveloped in concrete, does that make them part of a "steel-reinforced concrete tubular core"?? Steel reinforced concrete normally pertains to concrete structures that are reinforced with steel re-bar. That's not the case here - is this a semantics game? Am I missing something???

It seems to me you are obsessed with this notion - my advice, for what it's worth(?), it's fine and noble to hold beliefs, but not good to get obsessed about one interpretation or another - it generally closes the mind to other interpretations, and good advice and opinions from others ...

After typing this, I think to myself, "nahhh, don't post this, it'll just piss him off". But that's not my intention - I'm just suggesting that you loosen up - try to take in the big picture a bit more.

Cheers.

There does seem to have been a concrete aspect to the WTC Towers' core: the documentary evidence provided here in this thread and elsewhere, supports that. This fact does seem to have been covered up in a concerted manner. The only conclusion one can draw from this, IMO, is that the perps have something to hide regarding this matter. This degree of cover up is always highly significant and obviously relevant to any investigation.

The theory of planes slicing into the towers, "in one side and out the other", "like a bad special effect", and releasing their payloads internally, relies on there having been no concrete aspect to the cores, with the cores being made up of widely spaced vertical beams, instead of them being steel and concrete tubes as they actually appear to have been.

Christophera may or may not be right about his assignment of motive: i.e. that the perps laced the concrete of the cores with C4 during the construction and used this in the demolition process somehow, there is no way to really prove it at this point IMO, but this would provide a need for cover up.

On the other hand, the presence of these vertical tubes of steel and reinforced concrete that are documented as having existed, completely and utterly disallows the alleged Boeing planes from behaving as depicted in accordance with the evidence and thus this it is proved conclusively that the evidence was thoroughly falsified.

Lets take the impact of the alleged Boeing upon the North Tower for example, which resulted in a near simultaneous four way explosion, i.e. blasts from out of all four walls. This is only consistent with the explosive force being released centrally and we now know that the center of the buildings was occupied by a massive steel and concrete core. A plane is totally excluded from being able to deliver an explosive force in this manner and under these circumstances. The ONLY object that can behave this way, that we know of, is a penetrator missile. There can be no credible argument to this position as far as I see it.

This fact provides ample motive for cover up with or without the issue of concrete having been laced with C4.

The Official Position states: Real Planes and No Concrete Core.

This is a grand deception; the actuality is Real Concrete Core and No Planes.

In my opinion, Christophera is to be applauded for almost single handedly holding on to an important 9/11 truth against powerful opposition.

I think it is important to clarify one last thing here:


Christophera is not saying No Internally Placed Vertical Steel Beams (NIPVSB) but rather that the core was not entirely and solely made up of vertical steel beams. This is an important distinction!

Building the WTC ~ Part 1



Building the WTC ~ Part 2

These vids demonstrate powerfully that No Planes would have been able to slice through those towers.

With regards to the topic in question: This is informative viewing, Oceans Flow, and thank you, but I would love to be able to see the full uncensored withheld documentary that mentions the steel and concrete core. However, given the resourcefulness of the perps, I guess that there is precious little chance of that.

You're like a dog with a bone.

This documentary was made in 1983.

And the bone has real substance, Oceans Flow.

There's meat on it too!

The concrete core shows that planes had nothing to do with the towers coming down as it makes possible the needed location of high explosives in the needed quantities with the needed distribution.

For you it doesn't matter, but for many out there, particulary those who cannot beleive that the US government ahs been infiltrated for decades, they will ask, "How was it done". It is a fact there IS NO WAY to get enough explosives placed inthe towers to create the effect seen. People do know about the excessive security sometimes imposed on governmet projects. That one fctor makes it possible for the Twins to be built with explosives in them. The concrete core becomes a perfect place to encapsulate and preserve explosives, and, ..... concrete can be fractured instantly to fall freely by a small amount of explosives.

So it might not matter to you, but it matters to the rest of the world a great deal. If the truth of 9-11 was all up to you, I wouldn't worry about the core. But it's not up to you. So, .... when people figure our FEMA misrepresented the core and Guiliani helped by taking the plans from the city offices, they will be much more ready to work for truth.

Also it is a simple deception, not a massive conspiracy to demolish. It is something an elected representative can ask to have corrected without suffering slings and arrows.

If one thinks that producing video fakery proves that video fakery was used to show no planes hit the Towers, well, they should think again. The planes were an important part of the ruse.

Christopher

We essentially agree that Boeings had precious little to do with the collapse of the towers. As far as I'm concerned, controlled demolition brought down the towers.

For some, the question is whether there were any Boeings at all.

I think the towers were rigged in the months preceding the event, maybe as much as a year or two. But that is speculation. I doubt the reliability of explosives placed more than 30 years earlier.

What is interesting to me is, that first after 9/11, then there were some reports saying that the core was steel and concrete... or at least that some concrete was in the core. Forexample here:

"The 24mX42m core was composed
of 44 box columns. The core comprises steel beams and columns with reinforced concrete
infill panels designed to share part of the gravity loads..." (page 90)
web.mit.edu/civenv/wtc/PDFfiles/Chapter%20VI%20Materials%20&%20Structures.pdf

But then Fema and Nist: Nothing. Not one pound.

But what about to try to contact the construction workers who were working in wtc ? They must know it.

I "know" it. It seems totally obvious to me that FEMA and NIST are lying and covering up again! It is also obvious to me what motivated the lie. The real core gets in the way of the lie about the planes!

Likw amazed, I find the 30 year old C4 scenario a little too unlikely.

If you believe you remember me by another username at LC you are mistaken. I only use Christophera no matter where I register.



I did not even know there was a painter here until after my thread was locked and I found I had PM from painter stating that it thought it had banned me some months earlier ad then said "Go Away". I would post that message but all of my PM's have been erased.



I pay not attention to who is registered or moderating a forum until they are a problem. I do structural and demolition issues with the Twin Towers and that is all I do. I often don't even read the rules at forums. If a forum is into 9-11 truth, great, if they are into (over) controlling the membership, environment and discussion, it sucks. I did read them here here and I also read the mission statement which I though was very much aligned with my own intents. I didn't really decide to join this forum. I found a link that lead here and impulsively joined. I had forgotten all about this place.
It was not until I posted the comment here with the error message stating the thread was locked that I even remembered that painter was the mod at LC who banned me.



If you knew what I knew about the towers and high explosives you would know that an engineered concrete explosive container is the only way to get this effect.



I sat and watched a 2 hour documentary about the design and construction of WTC 1 and about 1/2 of it was about the difficulty of building the steel reinforced tubular cast concrete core. There is massive concrete shown in the above image, far more than just floors would provide. There is also NO WAY to install explosive charges that would cut the supposed steel core columns. Do you realize that with the supposed steel core columns in the core there would be over 1,300 separate charges required? There is no evidence such charges were detonated on that day and there are no images of steel columns at ground zero showing that they were subjected to such impromptu explosive charges.
The events seen and heard on 9-11 were very- VERY - well contained explosions.



The shelf life of C4/RDX is ten years in the mylar package the manufacturer provides. Evaporation and oxidization are the only things that cause it's non viability. Do you think 2 feet of concrete provides a better, more long lasting barrier to evaporation?
There were failures along the floor edges I think. Some of the built in cutting charges which surrounded the columns which did exist surrounding the core failed to detonate. Some of those were exposed to freezing conditions during construction which I have learned causes the quickest deterioration.

This row of high tensile rebar, about 50 of them were exposed to an early freezing winter and the C4 failed to detonate. Fresh horizontal rebar tied to it in the springtime detonated caused the concrete to be removed but the 3 inch high tensile rebar remain standing. Note, no steel core columns in the core area.



The documentary, "The Engineering and Construction of the Twin Towers" shows there was massive security. The original contractor for the concrete core left because they wouldn't let him take the plans home. I'm not sure of this but I think the documentary stated that a Saudi concrete contractor took over, or the general contractor, the port authority did the work. Maybe both at different periods or towers.
Ask Phil Jayhan about his hearing of forced evacuations of the floors by workers. He remembers hearing that, but doesn't remember where he heard it. there were threatened lawsuits by the concrete contractor for those evacuations of workers from floors after the floors were sandblasted, before concrete was to be poured.
All this was part of the documentary.
As far as I can tell all of the opposition to the concrete core is about keeping the core from becoming an issue and the search for the documentary taking on a scope which will actually find it. It is called gatekeeping.
Concrete is, after all, the most common building material in the world, and after all, the Tacoma narrows bridge showed us how steel flexes in very long members and can be made to ocsillate destructively by high winds which completely justifies the use of concrete in a structure with twice the length (height) of the brige and 5 times the width, self supporting and load bearing while subjected to 120 MPH winds.



No theory has much detail relating to feasibility, and none explain anything really. Comprehensive explanation consistent with all evidence is the most important thing and all I need to do it is secrecy. These 5 factors which TOTALLY lack explanation within the rest of the non specific theories can be explained completely with the concrete core and the built to demolish scenario.

free fall
total pulverization
superfine, heated particulate
smooth, square cut column ends x the 1,000's
heavy steel assemblies heaved hundreds of feet



I said in 2002 that the movement would not get the truth without knowing the actual structure that stood. That is true so far. It is also true that if you decided that truth movement needed to know the actual structure and decided upon reading this message to make it part of your purpose to see that all of the mainstream truth movement was informed of the fact and was directed to seeking a copy of the video, that within 6 months the truth movement would have that video and the true design configuration of the towers and that the political leadership we have which DOES have integrity would have an issue they could take forward into Congress and the House to justifiably demand and receive authority for a new, limited investigation.
Any politician who takes a demolition conspiracy forwards is shut down before they start.

This fact is why the psychological operation which has infiltrated the truth movement focuses on destroying any credibility of the concrete core.



If it is a fact then you will be able to show images from 9-11 with the supposed steel core columns in the core area at some elevation above the ground. My insistence on that logical fact got me banned from Loose Change, meaning they refuse to use evidence and believe without question the word of FEMA. AN agency NOt created under the Constitution which cheney was appointed to be director of 1 week after gwb was selected in 2000. An agency that was in place in NYC 2 days before 9-11 for a massive exercise 2.5 miles from the WTC.

I can prove with one image that their was a concrete core and that there were no steel core columns with one image from 9-11 which shows the core without the steel exterior framework.



If you do not have the experience or integrity to admit the fact of what is shown there, then you are not an effective researcher into the structural issues supposedly surrounding collapse (sic), and, ....... we all have a problem.



Steel reinforced cast concrete IS rebar encapsulated in concrete where the rebar is centralized in the creation of a shear wall, generally speaking. The interior box columns, which were by virtue of 100% fillet welds butting the columns together, one continuous piece 1,350 feet tall, surrounded the concrete core and were fastened to it. Horizontal pieces went through the core walls, cast into the core walls that connected to the elevator guide rail support steel inside the core providing lateral support for the elevator guide rail systems.
The interior box columns were partially surrounded by concrete above ground and probably completely surrounded below ground.
The elevator guide rail support steel was heavy steel, but only designed for vertical loads which is why no photo from 9-11 shows any vertical steel in the core area. The elevators in the towers were the fastest in the world because of the perfect alignment and rigidity provided by the concrete core.



My information is not an interpretation. I am a virtual witness to the construction of WTC 1 as a person who viewed the documentary, "The Engineering and Construction of the Twin Towers" and my written testimony here with my presentation of evidence which exposes the core of the Twins on 9-11 are completely consistent with each other and feasible explanations for the phenomena associated with the demise of the Twin Towers.

If I know for certain that there was a concrete core is it an obsession? No, I am obsessed with informing the truth movement with the fact of the concrete core, and I am justifiably obsessed because I NEED to protect my children's futures, I NEED to to preserve the integrity of the US Constitution, I NEED to have the rights and freedoms I am accustomed to.

The only thing that pisses me off is this.



Justifiable because not one image of the steel core columnns from 9-11 in the core area at some elevation has been produced in the last 5 years on 20 different forums, hundreds of posters trying to oppose the concrete core over probably 30,000 posts.
To ask me to loosen up is to say "FORGET ABOUT 9-11 TUTH", because there is NO WAY, we will get it unless we can explain HOW, those towers did what they did and that explanation is not possible with steel core columns that no one can produce any evidence for their existence.

There is no bigger picture unless it is creating a limited investigation by congress into the deception by FEMA of the core structure.

If you knew what I know about high explosives you would realize there is no way to position enough explosives with the needed distrubtion to produce what is seen and heard.

If you don't believe me just try finding somebody describing a feasible method to place charges surrounding the supposed steel core columns that will actually cut them. Then try finding ONE image that shows a steel box column cut that way.

Then try to find an audio recording that shows such charges going off on 9-11.

See my video.

Twin Tower Deception and Demolition I

Twin Tower Deception and Demolition II

Christopher

You make a very persuasive argument. It's weird, that thought--that the buildings were "pre-wired" went through my mind maybe a year ago or so, after I fully accepted the idea that the government did it. Or whoever controls the government, did it.

Which is a fearful insight into how long these creeps have been around and in control.

The building had security phone lines and here is the connection which provided schematics for the detonations sytem distribution.

WTC Security Breach and airports.

http://www.commondreams.org/views03/0204-06.htm

Washington, D.C. WASHINGTON, Jan 19, 2003 -- A company that provided security at New York City's World Trade Center, Dulles International Airport in Washington, D.C., and to United Airlines between 1995 and 2001, was backed by a private Kuwaiti-American investment firm with ties to a brother of President Bush and the Bush family, according to records obtained by the American Reporter.

Marvin P. Bush, a younger brother of George W. Bush, was a principal in the company from 1993 to 2000, when most of the work on the big projects was done. But White House responses to 9/11 have not publicly disclosed the company's part in providing security to any of the named facilities, and many of the public records revealing the relationships are not public.

Nonetheless, public records reveal that the firm, formerly named Securacom, listed Bush on its board of directors and as a significant shareholder. The firm, now named Stratesec, Inc., is located in Sterling, Va., a suburb of Washington, D.C., and emphasizes federal clients. Bush is no longer on the board.

Marvin Bush has not responded to repeated telephoned and emailed requests for comment on this story.

Aside from the explosives were built in. This is literally the only way to achieve optimum placement and distribution, something absolutely required to gain the uniformity seen here and the Sand and gravel.

Frank Rich wrote today about Rudi's current problems, but reminded of the incident in which Rudi INSISTED that the NYC Emergency Operations Center be put in WTC 7.

I have felt all along that the big reason 7 was taken down was because it contained apparatus critical to the CD at the towers. :ph43r:

It is possible, but certainly not logical. The explosions in the basement at plane impact evidence systems in the towers that were there to distribute detonations in time that would reduce the over all seismic signature of the final dropping.

http://algoxy.com/psych/9-11scenario.html#anchor1205439

The folowing indicates exploding walls.

The two made their way to the parking garage, but found that it, too, was gone. ‘There were no walls, there was rubble on the floor, and you can't see anything’ he said

Rodrigiuz's story as well as that of Phillip Morelli indicate the same thing.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QlEXoY1HCWI

This eyewitness testimony indicate major detonations throughout the trade center coincident with airplane mpacts. Simple vibration detectors in the towers would create perfectly located and timed explosions which would have a built in distraction confusing the true nature of the event..

According to the video of Willie that I have seen, the subterranean explosions in the north tower happened moments, maybe as few as 2 or 3, prior to the airplane impact.

My theory, that cannot be proved, is that the "command detonated" portions of the action that day were commanded from Rudi's lair inside WTC 7. Maybe by Bernie Kerick. Who knows, I don't.

But it is interesting that Judith Regan and Bernie had their trysts as some location overlooking ground zero.

About the time the "Mutually Assured Destruction" policy became accepted, it was already a done deal. As far as I can tell the greatest purpose the cold war had for the infiltrators was to create a reason for a veil of secrecy. Then, behind that, ................................


JFK was really down with awarness and trying for us all. He probably did not know anything about this 911 conspiracy, but knew something very bad was brewing when he confronted a wall of secrecy and therein he could not penetrate and learn anything about long term intelligence plans.

Meanwile, and since, media has been treating us like mushrooms. Do you think P4T is serious about truth and using it?