My thesis was about Midland novelist Robert Bage who was also a paper-mill owner. His eldest son Charles was a wine-merchant, surveyor and later a pioneer in structural iron. He designed the oldest iron-structured building in England which still stands today and is a listed building.
His father was a supporter of equal-rights, education for the poor, an end to the dowry system, an end to duelling, an end to slavery. He also took maths lessons and was close to people of the Lunar Society: Matthew Boulton, Erasmus Darwin (very close) and the Midland’s enlightenment in general. Charles Bage, a qualified surveyor, was aware of the dangers from fire which was quite commonplace at eighteenth century mills, especially paper mills, where a careless person could bring down the whole mill. Charles Bage has his place in the history of iron-framed buildings and communicated with Thomas Telford and William Strutt (who consulted Bage).
As a time-served toolmaker myself I know a little about the properties of metals although I am not a civil engineer. Nevertheless I think I know what would be architecturally sound and what would not, and whether a building is rigidly constructed or not. The twin towers and Building 7, which all collapsed on 11th September 2001, were rigidly constructed and very strong buildings. My contention has long been that they could not have fallen in a top-down collapse, one storey impacting on another in almost freefall, without the lower structures having been compromised.
I noticed during construction that the prefabricated floor sections (before concrete was poured onto them) were stacked on top of one another. Then they were raised by cranes that were standing on the floors of the inner core.
Each of the towers had supported the weight of these upper floors for 28 years without any problem. The undamaged structure below was just as rigid as it ever had been. The arrest was inevitable when the top of each tower failed. The only question to my mind is: when the arrest would have taken place.
Steel-framed buildings are structurally stronger than wood or reinforced concrete. Welded and bolted together they are very, very strong. You can of course bring down a steel-framed building with explosives. The easiest way is to topple it because it would be extremely unlikely to fall directly down due to its rigidity. It has never happened unless you believe it happened on 9/11. Here is the demolition of a steel-framed building.
Notice how the weaker materials have been removed at the base so they do not impede the demolition and it falls in the direction the demolition experts hope. If you stop the Pet Polymer building demolition at 1:20 just before the video ends it shows the aftermath of the demolition and may give you a clue as to why experts expected to see more steel debris in the 9/11 aftermath. The bridge disaster at Tacoma Narrows is another example of the properties of structural steel. It does not give way easily.
Inside Ditherington Flax Mill (courtesy: GooseyGoo)
Something very strange happened at the World Trade Centre on that fateful day. It is why almost 3,000 architects and engineers are calling for a proper investigation. Charles Bage’s iron-framed building at Ditherington still stands after more than 200 years. Steel is stronger than iron.
Today the recessional hymn, after the first Sunday service in Lent, turned out to be totally incongruous to Christian faith. It has almost no connection to Christian teaching with only one token verse tagged on at the end to make it appear Christian when it is actually Zionist. It begins:
Jerusalem the golden,
With milk and honey blest,
Beneath your contemplation
Sink heart and voice oppressed.
I know not, oh, I know not
What social joys lie there.
What radiancy of glory,
What bliss beyond compare.
It pays homage to the apartheid city of Jerusalem. This was the city from where Jesus was put to death on the cross outside of the city walls. Today thousands of Palestinians have been murdered in a genocide of mammoth proportion perpetrated by Israel. Jerusalem today is the city from where Palestinians have had their land and property stolen and their lives made unbearable.
As well as the unknown “social joys” of the first verse there is further tribute to the “. . . shout of those who triumph, the song of those who feast.” In reminding fellow-Christians that Lent has just started, a time of abstinence and fasting, this seems particularly out of place. How such hymns get on to our hymn-sheets is beyond my comprehension. But it does not stand alone.
It is said the Devil has all the best tunes. While that is only partly true it cannot be gainsaid that “The Battle Hymn of the Republic” is a rip-roaring tune. Here Whitney Houston waves the flag. It was allegedly written to support the Unionists in the American Civil War. Again it has a token Christian verse encouraging Christians to fight against and kill, or be killed by, fellow Americans. Quite clearly this has no place in Christianity and its title tells us why. Jesus is not on the side of any army. His message is one of peace and one of blessing the peacemakers. Nevertheless songs like this keep making their way into Christian services.
Another ‘hymn’ that disturbs me has a great tune too – Jerusalem. This gets touted out in church quite regularly and is another Zionist contribution that asks if a new Jerusalem can be built on England’s green and pleasant land. Although written by William Blake there is no excuse for bringing me a “bow of burning gold”, “arrows of desire”, “spear” or a “chariot of fire”. I realise it is based somewhat on Revelation and thus as symbolic as the story of the Garden of Eden. Nevertheless the nearest it gets in a series of unanswered questions to mentioning the name of Jesus is in the couplet:
“And was the holy Lamb of God
On England’s pleasant pastures seen?”
Nationalism, and the glorification of war and warriors never seem to be very far away from the lyrics of these rousing ‘hymns’. We see them ever more present in “I vow to thee my country” and who better to raise the heart and spirit than in putting lyrics to stirring music from “The Planets” by Gustav Holst. Soldiers and other sufferers of war are asked to be so patriotic that the “final sacrifice” is not too big a price to pay. This hymn does try to redeem itself in the final verse which describes another country “where all the paths are peace.” But here again there is no direct mention of Jesus.
So do these hymns belong in a Christian service?
I am attempting here to demonstrate simply why the Twin Towers and Building 7 could not have fallen in on themselves as they appeared to do without some kind of controlled demolition. The tragedy of that fateful day in September 2001 will never be forgotten and the families of victims should learn the truth so they can deal with their grief. There is a very good paper by Richard Gage which explains in engineering terms why the NIST (National Institute of Standards and Technology) version of events is not just suspect, but totally flawed. Here I try and explain using lay-engineering examples of why the twin towers could not have come down as they did using construction cranes and beer crates as examples.
There is a very good reason for making cranes out of steel. It is the same reason that the twin towers were made out of even stronger structural steel. Strength of materials matters in the construction industry. Sometimes cranes, much more often than buildings, fail. It is not usually the steel that fails. High winds can be responsible. So can the fact that they often have no foundations and have to be moved from place to place. I have watched dozens of videos of crane failures. Do you know what? Not one of them has collapsed in the way the twin towers did. This is a recent and fatal crane disaster not far from where the twin towers stood.
All crane failures I have seen have their steel structures very much intact afterwards. There are multiple reasons for failure, for example, lack of equilibrium or trying to hoist too heavy a weight. There are three big differences between the twin towers and a crane. The structural steel was much sturdier in the towers, its integral strength was vertical and its base was built on very strong foundations. There is no way any downward pressure from the floors above would destroy the structural steel beneath. You can understand that by what happens to much flimsier cranes.
They build stacking crates, milk and beer, usually out of plastic. They do not build skyscraper towers out of crate plastic though composites are used on some buildings. When you stack crates one on top of another they are quite strong because all the weight is borne in a vertical direction, one crate resting on top of another. I suspect that if the crates were full they could be stacked higher because of this vertical strength and the extra stability from the extra weight.
The vertical strength of buildings is always overdesigned to take much more load than it would ever be likely to experience. The pancake idea is absolute nonsense to an engineer. Take a look at this tower made out of beer crates.
It will give you some idea of the downward strength of crate on crate. And yet again Newton’s immutable third law can be seen. My estimate is that the crates at about 18 stacked together would be a similar height proportionally to the twin towers (give or take). What you should imagine is instead of somebody climbing on top of them that a person is hoisted above the tower who then drops a crate a crate’s height above the tower. If it landed square it would not push the other crates into the ground. If it landed awkwardly and the tower collapsed it would collapse lopsidedly like the cranes. You can fill it full of beer bottles if you like, full beer bottles even. You would never get it to collapse like either of the twin towers. Any engineer would tell you that. But if you doubt it try it for yourself.
Of course there is a big difference between beer crates and a solid structure, especially a steel structure, especially a steel structure which is bolted and riveted together, especially a steel structure which is anchored soundly at the base, with even stronger girders and wider support towards the base. The twin towers could not have fallen in the way they did without their structure having been compromised lower down. It is an engineering impossibility.
This video shows the construction of the twin towers. “Five years to construct, 15 seconds to demolish”.
The strength of these constructions is unquestionable. Hope this gets through all the nonsense of the official version of how the towers fell. Thanks for reading.
When we marched through London to Hyde Park in an effort to prevent Tony Blair’s War in Iraq we were totally ignored. Blair had no interest in the electorate. He just wanted to destabilise Iraq and see western companies installed to steal the oilfields. Clare Short summed his attitude up by saying that he never took notice of comments in cabinet. He just gave diktats. In essence Blair was an elected dictator.
Photo credit: Al Jazeera
Nothing has changed. Today it is Theresa May ignoring the electorate. Having just returned from a visit to Trump, in which she bent over to meet his every wish, she is ignoring a petition to parliament to prevent Trump coming to the UK on a state visit. Downing Street through a spokesperson has stated to the BBC:
“The invitation has been issued and accepted. . . To scrap the visit would undo everything following Mrs May’s visit. America is a huge and important ally we have to think long term.”
If anyone needed further proof that the United Kingdom was merely a colony of the United States it is now very clear for all to see. The petition, growing by the second, reached a million signatures in less than two days. Elected dictators can ignore such petitions and the will of the people.
Another petition which has doubly exceeded the target for which it is considered for parliamentary debate is one against the ‘Snoopers Charter‘ which allows the secret services to gather yet more information on all UK citizens. This just demonstrates how little respect the government has for the electorate: absolutely none. Parliamentary debate has been rejected on the grounds that it was fully debated before being issued and “underwent unprecedented scrutiny”. Unprecedented scrutiny just means that the scrutiny, which was minimal, was unique to this unique bill and only scrutinised by a few hand-picked servants of the crown who have no interest in people’s privacy. You can read the so-called debates here.
Earlier today I was reading a short piece by Luciana Bohne in which she states that the Obama administration brought about regime-change in Ukraine. I know this is true, not just because Obama has admitted it, but because I saw the video of a Ukrainian parliamentarian Oleg Tsaryov say that Geoffrey Pyatt was organising this coup from the American Embassy in Kiev through a private organisation “Techcamp” three months before the coup took place.
What caught my eye was a comment which included a video link from BBC Russian correspondent Olga Ivshina in which she interviewed residents in the area where passenger plane MH17 exploded. This is a screenshot of the link.
When I clicked on it the following message appeared:
I had seen this report at the time the BBC first broadcast it. However it was removed from later News reports. Caches of the report exist and I am indebted to a colleague who supplied me with this one.
Nevertheless the BBC, I believe, has some explaining to do. I have sent a freedom of information request to give the BBC the opportunity to respond to some pertinent questions. My request entitled MH17 Catastrophe reads:
“Can I respectfully ask under FOI why any link to the report by BBC Russian correspondent Olga Ivshina tells me that it is not available in my country due to copyright law. I live in the UK where the BBC has its headquarters.
The report by Olga Ivshina who was in the Donetsk region includes interviews with eye-witnesses who saw another plane alongside MH17 and reported that the passenger plane broke up in mid-air.
My requests therefore are:
Why is the BBC suppressing this report by a BBC foreign correspondent?
Is there an agenda regarding the shooting down of MH17 which prohibits reports that do not fit the agenda?
In this era when Fake News is getting so much media attention is the BBC, by sin of omission, putting a deliberate slant on news concerning MH17?
Has the BBC sent this report to the Joint Investigation Team?
I would appreciate answers to these questions.
Emma Stone is up for an Oscar for Best Actress as an award for her lacklustre performance in La La Land. She may well win it. It is the world we live in ― a world of lies and deceit.
Another nominee for an Oscar is a short documentary called White Helmets which follows the work of a paramilitary group purporting to be a first responder unit in the US-funded war in Syria. The director’s angle is focused on the first-responder aspect of this group, which itself was nominated for the Nobel Prize for Peace. It actually won the Right Livelihood Award.
Director, Orlando von Einsiedel, was nowhere near the shooting of film footage in Aleppo but safely on the border of Syria and Turkey. The White Helmets are US/UK-funded and set up by ex-military Sandhurst officer James Le Mesurier. Their reputation for impartial news is very low yet it has got many stories out broadcast on mainstream media later found to have been fake including the rescue of mannequins and the rescue of the same child on several occasions.
Those with power bestow honour on those who perform on their behalf. At the end of his term of office Nobel Peace Prize winner Obama awarded his sleazy vice president, Jo Biden, the Presidential Medal of Freedom. Between them this pair and their staffers turned Ukraine into a failed state with an ongoing civil-war for which there appears to be no end. To rub salt in the Donbas people’s wounds Jo Biden’s junkie son, Hunter, is director of Burisma Holdings which plans to frack the life out of Ukraine’s countryside. Hunter Biden was discharged from the Navy for Cocaine abuse the same year he became director of Burisma Holdings.
When the Nobel Peace Prize goes to people like Obama, Sadat and Begin it diminishes the value of the award. Perhaps all awards and medals should be scrapped. Except sometimes the recipient is worthy of decoration.
In a few hours Donald Trump will be inaugurated 45th President of the United States. He has made some outlandish statements regarding immigrants and women without even mentioning environmental issu…