latest false flag attack?

[jamesd at echeque.com (jamesd at echeque.com)]

On 2018-09-24 05:34, juan wrote:
> On Sun, 23 Sep 2018 21:13:36 +1000
> jamesd at echeque.com wrote:
> 
>> None of which changes the fact the building was designed to withstand
>> three hours of uncontrolled fire
> 
> 
> 	that is a fuckingly stupid lie that neither you nor agent fairbrother can provide a source for.

Liar:

I have repeatedly provided the source, and here it is yet again.

https://ws680.nist.gov/publication/get_pdf.cfm?pub_id=861610

     "For this construction category, columns were required to have a 2 
h rating as established by the Standard Fire Test (ASTM E 119); beams 
were required to have a 1½ h rating.  The instructions to the bidders 
for the WTC 7 job were to bid on a 3 h rating for the columns and a 2 h 
rating for the metal deck and floor support steel, which corresponded to 
the more stringent fire resistance requirements for Type 1B 
(unsprinklered) construction."

 > By confusing the rating of the fire protection with some "time to 
collapse" of a whole building you should be regarded as semi literate at 
best. Or as fuckingly dishonest.


If the columns holding up the building are only rated for three hours of 
exposure to fire, then some time not very long after three hours, they 
are going to stop holding up the building.