Amanda Angelika wrote:

In news:g1v1a29vqhvsmv00tu3n63hg131mcl8i32@4ax.com,
The Kat <newskat@katxyzkave.net> typed:

On Tue, 27 Jun 2006 05:10:35 +0000 (UTC), you@somehost.somedomain.aus
(Your Name Here=Harvey) wrote:

The way the Towers fell, was just like a controlled demolition.

Bullshit.,  Anyone who has watched TV in the last 10 years
has seen MANY examples of controlled demolition, and the WTC
tower collapses looked NOTHING like controlled demolition,
STARTING with the fact that the collapsed FROM THE TOP!

Well WTC 1 an 2 appear to have collapsed from the top, the collapse doesn't
appear to have started from the bottom. A collapse from the bottom wouldn't
make sense in any case because they had been attempting to fight the fires
in which case one would logically assume any potential softening of the
steel beams caused by heat above should have been cooled by falling water
from the fire fighting effort and sprinkler systems. There are eye witness
reports from people who managed to escape that the sprinkler systems were in
operation and there was water cascading down the stairwells.

I have commented already on the ineffectiveness of the sprinkler
system. As to the firefighting effort, it was severely hampered by
the elevator's being non available for fierfighting operations in
both towers. See:

http://fe.pennnet.com/Articles/Article_Display.cfm?Section=ARCHI&ARTICLE_ID=158382&VERSION_NUM=1

"Commanders recognized early on that extinguishing multiple
floors fully involved in fire so high up in the building was next
to impossible. That, combined with scores of reports coming
in for trapped occupants and others needing assistance, led
them very early on to rescue and evacuation as their primary
strategy. Incoming units were given orders to support this
strategy. And although some first-arriving engine companies
brought hose loads into the building, commanders never called
for an attack on the fires."

The fact that WTC7 does appear to have collapsed from the bottom and so soon
after the fire people withdrew is somewhat puzzling though, the lower floors
should have been water logged which should have cooled the steel framework.

Not at all. Those firefighters that were evacuated from the area
of WTC7 weren't combating fires. They were searching for survivors
in the rubbles following the collapse of the two towers.

>From the same source referenced above:

"Of all the adjacent buildings, 7 World Trade Center, a 47-story
building to the north of the North Tower, across Vesey Street,
presented the greatest threat of collapse. It hovered over the
debris field on which hundreds of firefighters searched. It was
heavily damaged and involved in fire. It is believed these fires
occurred in part because the Port Authority, against the
recommendations of the fire department, had placed aboveground
tanks of diesel fuel-a 42,000-gallon tank at ground level and
three 275-gallon tanks on the fifth, seventh, and eight floors-
inside the building, underneath transfer beams that allowed the
high-rise to be constructed above an electrical substation. Given
the limited water supply and the first strategic priority, which
was to search for survivors in the rubble, FDNY did not fight the
fires, which were on the lower floors and burned for hours.
In interviews, several FDNY officers on the scene said they
were not aware of combustible liquid pool fires in the building."

See? They did not fight the fires at all in WTC7.