12 Sep
2002
12 Sep
'02
6:22 a.m.
Please guys. With the exception of watching some of the memorials early
in the day, I spent all of yesterday mostly trying to avoid the September
11 talk. The last place I expect to get it is here.
I've watched/read the news, I've seen the documentaries on the WTC on The
History Channel and The Learning Channel, I know more about it than I need
to by now.
If you want to discuss it, please go find one of the gazillion discussion
groups on the web that are talking about it right now.
Let's get back to old computers ;)
On Thu, 12 Sep 2002, Russ Blakeman wrote:
Actually the plane damaged the structure but the
redundant supports held it
up, the heat of the fire is what killed the redundant supports and they
collapsed. It was the combination of the ramming/crash and the fire that did
what it did. I don't think the planners of the attack expected the collapse
to happen either.
-> -----Original Message-----
-> From: cctalk-admin(a)classiccmp.org [mailto:cctalk-admin@classiccmp.org]On
-> Behalf Of Ben Franchuk
-> Sent: Thursday, September 12, 2002 9:42 AM
-> To: cctalk(a)classiccmp.org
-> Subject: Re: IN BAD TASTE: Putting the blame where it belongs?
-> A few years ago I read that a supertanker like that would have the
-> power of a small nuke. It is the fire not the explosion that causes
-> damage in the cities. Remember that the FIRE not the plane crash
-> that damaged the WTC.
->
->
Sellam Ismail Vintage Computer Festival
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
International Man of Intrigue and Danger http://www.vintage.org
* Old computing resources for business and academia at www.VintageTech.com *