Saturday, October 11, 2014

Terrific Interview With Brett Blanchard

For a change, there has been some US  news involving the 9-11 nutbars, so I have been a little late in linking this excellent interview.  Our bad, not theirs.  Read:

Undicisettembre: Since you already mentioned thermite, let's proceed with this topic. What do you think of thermite? Is it even vaguely possible to demolish the Twin Towers and 7 World Trade Center with thermite?

Brent Blanchard: No. In explosive demolitions thermite is never used.

The thermite assertion first came out three or four years after the event; there was no talk of thermite until 2004 or 2005. All of a sudden this new theory came out because all other theories were very easily proved impractical or impossible.

There was a professor over here in States that decided back then that thermite was his new theory, but the more you look into thermite the more you understand that the way it causes the metal to fail is not consistent with what happened. Then he changed his theory into nano-thermite and now he might even come out with double-nano-thermite. There are always variations that pop up about how thermite might have been used.

In order for thermite to work you have to have a release of the chemical and the chemical has to actually cause the steel to deteriorate. I don't how they think it can be done to an H-beam, or to any very thick steel beam. Thermite doesn't work horizontally, it works vertically. You can't cause thermite to cut horizontally through steel. You can't attach thermite to a bunch of columns, dozens and dozens of columns, and expect it to start cutting clean through all those columns at a predetermined time or especially finish at the same time. I don't understand how it can even theoretically occur. And it's never been articulately explained by the theorists.

Thermite folks just tend to assert that a bunch of guys went in there, put thermite on columns that happened to already be exposed, them somehow triggered it all, and the thermite somehow cut horizontally through a bunch of columns at the same time and caused the building to fail. That makes no sense whatsoever.
Exactly.  We have heard a couple of kooks like Jon Cole claim they could cut one (one!) column with a thermite cutter charge.  But CD experts want to cut multiple columns simultaneously, for the exact reason we hear the idiots claim again and again--because the building must collapse into its own footprint.  If you have one column collapsing out of sequence it probably is a big deal, but if you have dozens going off randomly, who can tell what would happen? Charlie Sheen?

Tuesday, October 07, 2014

High Rise Safety Initiative Collapses at Freefall Speed

Once again, the ineptitude of the Truthers is revealed:

Accordingly, it is hereby,
ORDERED that petitioners' written application to reject in part and confirm in part the Report and Recommendation of Special Referee Lois Crespo, dated September 15, 2014 is denied and the Report and Recommendation is confirmed in its entirety, and it is further,
ORDERED that consisten with the Report and Recommendation of Special Referee Louis Crespo the Court declares that the petitioners Referendum Petition is invalid, void, and prohibited from the November 4, 2014 ballot....
No doubt they will make brave noises about learning from their mistakes on this one and attempt to get on the ballot yet again with a new petition, if people will just send them another $150,000.

Update: Ted Walter finally acknowledges defeat.

As it turned out, our financing plan was not bulletproof. While drafting the petition, we and our attorneys did not anticipate the problems that would eventually become clear – namely, that the .9% surcharge on construction permit fees could be construed as a “tax” that the City is not authorized to impose, rather than a “fee” (which the City can impose without state approval), and that having a fund to set aside moneys to be used in future years could be found to violate the balanced budget requirement of the Financial Emergency Act, which prohibits the City from rolling over unused funds from year to year.
 While holding out the hope that the next time around will be the charm:
In short, we believe the “merely advisory” issue is winnable on appeal. But, given the short timeframe for that appeal to take place (at most a few days) and the likelihood of losing on the issue of the financing plan, it is almost inevitable that the appellate division would simply affirm the lower court’s decision. This would have the consequence of cementing the court’s finding on the “merely advisory” issue, thus making it impossible to attempt another ballot initiative with a revised financing plan in the future. While we do not know at this time if we will pursue another ballot initiative, we do not want to make another attempt impossible by appealing now when we have virtually no chance of winning.

Sunday, October 05, 2014

Truthers Silent About Missing NYC Ballot

Because, hey, they could still get some donations!

Remember a few weeks ago, when the High Rise Safety Initiative was still hoping to get on the fall ballot?
We expect Justice Wooten to issue a decision by mid-week, leaving about 9 days before the October 3rd cutoff for either side to appeal.
 October 3rd, you say?  Passed already?  Why is there no update on their sad failure to get on the ballot?  Oh, I know!  Because there are still Truther Morons who have not yet sent all of their money to that nice bank auditor in Nigeria who informed them of their forgotten uncle's unfortunate demise in a plane crash.