MIKE KING writes at The Anti-New York Times:

Throughout a very windy New Year’s Eve, a gigantic fire raged throughout the middle and upper floors of [a] 63-story luxury hotel in Dubai. The images of the skyscraper torch are truly stunning. But unlike the 110 stories-tall World Trade Center # 1 (said by the government’s “experts” to have been pancaked and pulverized due to “fire melting/buckling steel”) — and unlike the 110 stories-tall World Trade Center # 2 (said by the government’s “experts” to have been pancaked and pulverized due to “fire melting/buckling steel”) — and unlike the 47 stories-tall World Trade Center # 7 (said by the government’s “experts” to have been pancaked and pulverized due to “fire melting/buckling steel”) — the basic structure of the ‘Address Downtown Dubai’ Hotel remained intact.

It’s a miracle!

But the Dubai Hotel, although suffering a much bigger (and we do mean MUCH bigger) fire than any of the three World Trade Center Buildings, remained standing as strong as ever and ready for restoration. If the 9/11 Omission Report is to be believed, this was not supposed to happen. As Dr. Albert D. Pastore sarcastically observed in his 2003 epic, ‘Stranger Than Fiction: An Independent Investigation of 9/11 and the War on Terrorism’ (here) :

“Now that we know that all one has to do to bring a skyscraper straight down is set a fuel fire in it, the well trained experts who work for demolition companies should all be out of a job by now.”

[cont.]

— Comments —

Jeff writes:

I’m a 33-year veteran firefighter, currently district chief in a high-rise district in a large American city. I inspect and command firefighting operations in high rise buildings for a living.

The Dubai fire was a façade fire, not a fire that affected the structure of the building. Simply a case of shoddy building materials. This has been the case with other recent spectacular high rise fires–i.e. a lot of fire on the façade but (thankfully) mostly stopped from spreading into interior by sprinkler systems.

I’ve been a fan of your blog for a long time, but I think your assumptions regarding the Dubai fire, and its relation to the World Trade Center collapse, are mistaken.

P.S. This article addresses the issue on the Dubai New Year’s Fire:

Money quote:

“The fire spread quickly on the outside of the building, possibly due to cladding made of white paint, aluminum, and insulation—the slick patina that’s come to define Dubai architecture, which is also highly combustible in dry, desert air.

“These cladding panels contain a potentially dangerous mix of aluminum and polyurethane,” the website Gulf Business wrote last March, when another Dubai high-rise, the unfortunately named Torch tower, caught fire. “The flammable material is sandwiched between layers of aluminum, and when exposed to flame or even extreme heat, will ignite.””

Laura writes:

Thank you.

I do not know much about the details of the Dubai fire. But Mike King’s point that the demolition business should have come to an end after 9/11 is a good one. There is no need for expensive, controlled demolitions if all it takes to bring a 47-story office building down is a few fires on a couple of floors, as happened with World Trade Center 7.

Perhaps Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth will be analyzing the Dubai fire.

Please follow and like us: