How could I possiibly reach any conclusion without being in on the meetings that were held in order to reach this decision ? Nasbe says it's race, I say ok, let's see the facts. So far, none have been forthcoming. I've read everthing posted here, and in the paper, looked at the statistics, and have a hard time believing that race in itself is the reason. At this point, it seems to me, it's all conjecture. I just want to know, now that WW has made the charge of racism, what facts are you bringing to bear to make the case ?
Here's an explanation for you, beezy - the workers cut it at that angle so it wouldn't fall on them when it came down.
You can see in the pic that it has been cut recently with a blowtorch, so a reasonable explanation would be that the workers cut it, yes ? Sort of the same way you cut down a tree - make a notch in the side where you want it to fall, then angle cut the other side. If you remember correctly, there were columns towering some 60 feet above the ground when all was said and done. They would have to have been dropped before any rescue work was attempted, in order to safeguard the lives of the workers.
The truth is that terrorists flew fully fuel-laden planes into those buildings at over 500 miles per hour.
The truth is that the fuel, along with all the normally combustible materials found in office buildings combined to heat the steel connections to such a degree that they failed. Once one floor came down, it brought the rest of them with it.
Look at the video and you will see that the top of the buildings stayed erect above the fire as they fell, which relegates your theory to the trash bin, where it belonged in the first place. If columns had been cut at 60 degree angles at basement level, as you claim, the collapse of the structure would have started at the bottom, which it did not.
By the way, busy, are you interested in buying a bridge over the Ohio ? I can sell it to you for a song.