ADVISORY: "Nova" to air "Why The Towers Fell" Tuesday, April 30

PBS ^ | April 29, 2002

[Timesink]

Just a note to let everyone know that Nova will be airing this program on the WTC and forensic engineering tomorrow evening. It's supposed to air at 8 pm Eastern, but PBS being what it is, your local station could run it at any time of the day or not.

In any event, the web site is already up and has some interesting information on it.

[Always Right]

Also, that 1 stairwell in the South Tower was apparently intact enough above the floors blasted out and on fire, so that if more people had known about it -- a communications problem -- they might have been able to get out.

The sad thing is there was a group of seven or so that could have got out, but a couple had convinced five of them to turn around and go up instead.

[carton253]

I watched the program last night, and I felt so sorry for the original engineer. He has put some much of the blame on himself. He still dreams of those trapped and not able to get out.

I was rather shocked at the arrogance of some of the engineers. As if, in 1967, the original engineer should have somehow planned for terrorists to fly airplanes into the towers. That's what brought them down. Not poor fire protection, not poor design. 2 - 767's, full of jet fuel, crashing into them.

The other engineers used a "could of, would of, should of" way of thinking as a sure thing. Monday morning quarterbacking at its worse.

Now, I do think that there are lessons to be learned for future buildings... and they were right to investigate the falls... but I was getting upset with the older white haired engineer because he had a "should have planned for" attitude.

[carton253]

I, too, found it to be Monday morning quarterbacking. I agree... the reason the buildings fell was because 2 planes flew into them.

[alrea]

But to suggest that there was any negligence in the design or construction of the towers mitigates the culpability of the evil men who perpetrated these attacks.

If anyone checks, our stock market is way down. Over half the companies in the Dow Jones Industrial Average have exposure to liability in asbestos lawsuits that are spreading to every company even remotely related. If asbestos was in your product, you have bounty hunter lawyers coming after you.

GM has asbestos in their brakes.

Asbestos is a critical concern for the WTC investigators. Some in the media may leave this out. If one more fireman could have escaped that structure because of asbestos, then at least there is a good reason for understanding what happened and why with the structure.

Our economy and way of life are being threatened by widespread lawsuits.

Congress investigates evil gas price increases agressively, looking at every hair left at the seen. Are they investigating the fact that every item we buy is being increased by the billions that are being redistributed to every sue puke that has lied their way to a law degree?

With Hillary Clinton and the Democratic Party trying to install Progressive Lawsuit Socialism in this great economy, our investigation into the mass murder that was 9/11 should be concerned with why every person died and why every business is being robbed by the legal system that protects terrorists and attorneys that seek to redirect and cripple our economy.

[Tymesup]

Libloather and PBS seem comfortable with the concept that the planes' impact disabled the sprinklers. If this was a likely outcome, why would it be necessary or even desirable for Hammad and company to go into the towers and play with the sprinklers? Do we have anything definitive that either Hammad or the planes (or both) knocked out the sprinklers?

[Tymesup]

Above the Impact: A WTC Survivor s Story has some interesting detail. Some snippets:

So Stanley and I went back to the stairs on the 81st floor, and we began down. The first five floors were difficult, because in certain areas dry wall had been blown off the wall and was lying propped up against the railing. We had to move it, shove it to the side. The sprinkler system had turned on and had started to do something, but it wasn't doing its job as it should, so there was water sloshing down the stairways. It was dark.

To: dead
Thomas Eagar does not agree with your analysis in any way. His analysis of the collapse never even mentions asbestos or the lack thereof.
The guys at my mother's company (destructive metals testing lab) said the same thing Eagar did. I specifically asked about asbestos, and they said it wouldn't have made any difference.
Maven
34 posted on 4/29/02 7:42 PM Eastern by Maven

"Any structure anywhere in the world, if you put it in these conditions, it will not stand. The buildings are not designed to be a torch." - Silvian Marcus, structural engineer
46 posted on 4/30/02 11:06 AM Eastern by dead

[honway]

Do we have anything definitive that either Hammad or the planes (or both) knocked out the sprinklers?

I do not. Call it a hunch.
In my opinion, the Hammad cousins are terrorists(that is the reason Smith was murdered)

IMHO, at least two terrorists (the Hammad cousins) have admitted they were working on the sprinkler systems days before 9-11.

The FEMA Report concludes the spinkler systems were disabled (the question as to if the crash disabled the system or something else is left open in the FEMA Report ).

For me this is not rocket science, but I might be biased.
Regardless, further investigation of the Hammad cousins is warranted.

[Tymesup]

Have you got a link to the FEMA report? I don't relish the thought of reading it, but sometimes ya gotta do what ya gotta do.

[missmanhattan]

My local hillbilly pbs station did not carry Nova April 30

[AtticusX]

FEMA WTC Analysis

[AtticusX]

Forgot to add it's a pdf file, so you'll need Acrobat Reader