8 more to go and then I am gold star. Nice, when that happens I am going to be a member for a month and get a t shirt, if I can afford it.

I dont really care if it needs it or not, I am going to do it just as a project it might not support it to much just for looks more so eh, like I see it as art.

the plant is growing and the scaffolding is what you do when a building is in development, much as the plant is, its got a message .

Doctor.

I am going to harvest some of the bambo peices from the window covering and make a scaffolding for my off center aloe plant, its going to snap its base as it is growing at a 60 degree angle from its base. I just need some wire from a hobby shop like "Michaels" thin thin wire.. Or lurn me some Thatching skills. Should look great when I am done.

Been working at West Edmonton mall the past week, I like it because of the view when on break and outside the work area, Lots and I mean LOTS of sexy sexy girls. Nummy nummy I got naughty thoughts near my tummy.

have a good weekend

- me

It's crappy engineering like this that effectively killed one of the most brilliant concept in aviation. Blimps are without question, -the- most efficient design for heavy airlifting. No fuel wasted on lift makes them remarkably cost-effective. But letting designers do idiotic things like use hydrogen as the lifting gas (instead of the non-flammable helium, and/or paint the body with thermite, or build some ridiculous scaffold to hold four partial helicopters has made it so nobody will ever seriously consider them again.

My mother told me a story, when she was about 20, circa 1960, her and her sister would have to walk home from work past a building site and all the lads would whistle and cat call etc. So they mentioned this at home and my grandmother had a word with the foreman.

Next day, as they walked past the site, 40 or 50 guys were all positioned on the scaffolding waiting to sing "I'll tell my ma, when I go home....". My mam said they had a hard time keeping a straight face until they were out of sight!

I always think of that story when I hear that song

Haha, that's a great story. You should put it in the video's comments.

In reply to this comment by moodonia:
Hey Kp! That turned out to be great timing, I arrived in time to be vote number 10!

My mother told me a story, when she was about 20, circa 1960, her and her sister would have to walk home from work past a building site and all the lads would whistle and cat call etc. So they mentioned this at home and my grandmother had a word with the foreman.

Next day, as they walked past the site, 40 or 50 guys were all positioned on the scaffolding waiting to sing "I'll tell my ma, when I go home....". My mam said they had a hard time keeping a straight face until they were out of sight!

I always think of that story when I hear that song

Hey Kp! That turned out to be great timing, I arrived in time to be vote number 10!

My mother told me a story, when she was about 20, circa 1960, her and her sister would have to walk home from work past a building site and all the lads would whistle and cat call etc. So they mentioned this at home and my grandmother had a word with the foreman.

Next day, as they walked past the site, 40 or 50 guys were all positioned on the scaffolding waiting to sing "I'll tell my ma, when I go home....". My mam said they had a hard time keeping a straight face until they were out of sight!

I always think of that story when I hear that song

>> ^westy:
The next day they acidently drove into scaffolding and both brothers died instantly.


You're a prick Westy

The next day they acidently drove into scaffolding and both brothers died instantly.

Some things to consider:

The towers had asbestos issues.

The insurance companies were held not liable in a prior to 911 court case for the asbestos removal, people don't realize sections of those towers were to become uninhabitable very shortly for being uninsurable.

Can you imagine the symbol of power to the world in NYC being a uninhabitable empty building?

The office that got hit in the Pentagon was the same office where they were conducting the investigation into the 2.3 trillion missing from the defense department that Rumsfeld announced on Sept 10... no more investigation.

Cheney had bought Dresser Industries in 1998 and that made Halliburton responsible for their asbestos abatement.

Halliburton Pays Dearly but Finally Escapes Cheney's Asbestos Mess

The World Trade Center was also a huge asbestos liability and realistically held very little value due to the overwhelming costs associated with the removal of said asbestos. It's funny how it all ties together, isn't it? http://tpmmuckraker.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/003500.php

It was well-known by the city of New York that the WTC was an asbestos bombshell. For years, the Port Authority treated the building like an aging dinosaur, attempting on several occasions to get permits to demolish the building for liability reasons, but being turned down due the known asbestos problem. Further, it was well-known the only reason the building was still standing until 9/11 was because it was too costly to disassemble the twin towers floor by floor since the Port Authority was prohibited legally from demolishing the buildings.

The projected cost to disassemble the towers: $15 Billion. Just the scaffolding for the operation was estimated at $2.4 Billion!

In other words, the Twin Towers were condemned structures. How convenient that an unexpected “terrorist” attack demolished the buildings completely.

WTC Building 7 was a part of the WTC complex, and covered under the same insurance policy. This 47-storey steel-framed structure, which was NOT struck by an aircraft, mysteriously collapsed 8 hours later that same day into its own footprint at freefall speed — exactly in the manner of the Twin Towers.

Halliburton was legally responsible for the WTC's asbestos problems. It would have been fought out in court but Halliburton might lose. They couldn't do a controlled demolition because of the asbestos. Of all the buildings in NYC, this one was the one whose demolition would be most advantageous for the vice president of the United States. And the first responders paid the price, on 911 and later.

To add to the convenience, Silverstein had the towers insured against terrorist attacks so that not only would he get to stop paying for the lease, he would even get most of his down payment back.

He also claimed entitlement to be paid the 3.6 billion insurance sum twice, arguing that the towers were destroyed in two separate attacks. This resulted in a long court battle and resulted in him eventually collecting his billions.

In short, privatizing the lease of the property and making sure all physical evidence was quickly destroyed by recycling the steel allowed Silverstein to collect on the insurance policy instead of having to go through lengthy forensic analysis over who or what really knocked down the towers.

It doesn't prove a conspiracy but is again one of those important coincidences to take place for the whole thing to play out plausibly.

As for building 7, lets keep in mind that all paperwork for SEC investigation of ENRON and WorldCom were destroyed in its collapse, and the cases had to be abandoned. How much that was worth personally or in cold hard cash is up to anyone's guess.

http://whatreallyhappened.com/WRHARTICLES/wtc_payment.html http://www.freewebs.com/inside-man/

If you set all the liberal/socialist/statist nonsense ruining America next to the Constitution, little to none of it matches the original spirit, intent and meaning of the Law.

Do the same with classical liberalism (now modern libertarianism) or conservative principles, and most of it matches.

How odd that in America things always worked out, until now. The federal leviathan has mightily grown these past 5 months and the people that the statist pretends to love have lost 1.3 trillion dollars in stocks and property. Unemployment is at Depression-Era levels--not the height of the Depression's jobless rate, but certainly in that spectrum. Do ya think maybe if this train wreck occurred on Bush's watch the media might try--I don't know--tying his incompetence to these disasters?

We've got a loyal Obamedia that might as well be State run propaganda. The numerous crimes and fallacies of this Administration are not being reported loudly or at all. In a sense I welcome it because the very scum that have betrayed the Constitution on both sides of the aisle are building scaffolds of silence on which they will certainly hang.

The preponderence of the evidence suggests that consciousness is the action of the brain. You only need to study the psychological effects of various physical circumstances, drugs, and brain damages to see so. A corrolary of this is that when the brain decomposes, the last remnant and hope of regaining consciousness is destroyed, unless the data constituting the hardware and software of the brain has been preserved by some other means. Since no such means are yet known, there is probably no afterlife.

Perhaps one of the reasons Islam forbids the use of alcohol is that the knowledge of any mind-altering substance undermines dualism, and dualism is a scaffold for belief in an afterlife.

Brings up a good point. Why exactly is it so important to call a spade a spade? Since there's no proof for God, and also no proof of God's absence, why would nuclear arms control be more important than religious exercise. Since religion has existed for thousands of years, and nuclear arms control has existed for mere decades, society as a whole has no essential attachment to it, and therefore no inclination to expend significant resources into its management. Also, since religion, unlike astrology, exists in an active way, guiding the beliefs, feelings, and actions of most of the world, then any culture would be expected to utilize its resources in defining, over and over again if need be, just how its own developing nuances can and should be viewed through the prism of the scaffolding upon which it is based.
Indeed, it is the religious' moral obligation to argue against what it considers ignorance. In this case, it would be the atheist. The atheist is never thwarted because his own denunciation is based upon the religious' ability to disprove the atheist in the atheist's terms. The religious argues that God exists because I believe he exists. The atheist argues that he isn't satisfied because he doesn't believe that belief as sufficient. His argument is circular, as is the religious'. Circular and parallel and non-intersecting.
So then, why is it a moral and intellectual necessity for Sam Harris to continue an activity which he by definition cannot succeed in? And HE'S commenting about how to expend and prioritize resources. A good example of why he could never ascend to high office.

I used to live in south Florida, and I know this bridge. There are three scaffold-like things up the side of the tallest pylon that we all used to jump off of when we were teenagers.

I've seen people jump of the highest scaffold (about 3/4 of the way up) and I remember at least one guy who broke some ribs, so I assume this guy could have been hurt as well. I only knew one guy who jumped from the top. He wasn't hurt, but his sandles were ripped off of his feet.

Not that it made it safe, but we always had a boat waiting under the bridge; this guy (presumably) had to swim to shore - which is a /long/ way if you're hurt.

No, I'm saying that no photographic evidence of the interior columns being cut seem to exist (to the public).. specifically the one that is most known that we're referring to, it leaves one to wonder about it.

Par:
"Also, I would have thought that the "other halves" of the columns are not still in the pictures because they have been transported away. That was the reason for them having been cut, after all."
Then where is the crane that would have lifted the other piece... it's now shown and there was no sign of any scaffolding material or other equipment near the center column that the welders would have used because there was still too much debris all around that column when the photo was taken.

Par:
"Further, you seem to be implying that the photograph in question was supposed to have been officially repressed but has somehow slipped though the net In fact, it's been taken from a publically-available collection of photographs which document the clean-up operation."

Well that's your interpretation, not what I said. The photo in question does not clearly indicate that it was cut by welders after the fact or by thermate since they would look similar.. what I said is that they DID have to approve such photos from hitting the public. It's no secret that that specific photo and the other close up photos were taken by a limited number of photographers and the photo's WERE screened before their release.

While the steel was being removed from the site of the three largest and most mysterious structural failures in history, even the team FEMA had assembled to investigate the failures -- the Building Performance Assessment Team (BPAT) -- was denied access to the evidence. The Science Committee of the House of Representatives later identified several aspects of the FEMA-controlled operation that prevented the conduct of an adquate investigation:

The BPAT did not control the steel. "The lack of authority of investigators to impound pieces of steel for investigation before they were recycled led to the loss of important pieces of evidence."
FEMA required BPAT members to sign confidentiality agreements that "frustrated the efforts of independent researchers to understand the collapse."
The BPAT was not granted access to "pertinent building documents."
"The BPAT team does not plan, nor does it have sufficient funding, to fully analyze the structural data it collected to determine the reasons for the collapse of the WTC buildings."
Gene Corley complained to the Committee that the Port Authority refused to give his investigators copies of the Towers' blueprints until he signed a wavier that the plans would not be used in a lawsuit against the agency.

There SHOULD have been more photographs and immediate investigation of 9/11 - one of the most profound events in our history is my main point here. I don't know for certain one way or the other if the official story is true yet. The government has a known history in maintaining secrets from the public, blocking investigations, censoring information, subversion, intimidation and gag-ordering whistleblowers. With all of this going on it's no wonder that the evidence that does exist yet neither proves anything one way or the other becomes controversial.

Man the Japanese are decades ahead of us on giant scaffold climbing technology!