Good grief. There was nothing 'dodgy' about it. The structure failed, putting pressure on both ends of the bridge. That's the way they are built. And thank god for that, as it fell flat to the water...pancaked....instead of crumbling. Or there would have been a lot more injuries/deaths.
There is footage of the bridge, because everyone these days has a cell phone that records. The bridge is in a very visible area...visible from a lot of homes and apartments on the river banks.
And NO...this is NOT A TERRORIST/GOVERNMENT/BUSH CONSPIRACY.
The bridge collapsed due to corrosion. Plain and simple.
2007-08-04 06:05:44
·
answer #1
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
0⤋
I don't think it was dodgy. The bridge has had troubles for years. The DOT (Dept. of Transportation) had rated it a 4 out of 9 in safety but didn't do anything about it. You can go on CNN.com (or whatever news organization you want) and watch a diagram about how the bridge fell. The witnesses have said that they felt the bridge vibrate, as in an earthquake, then begin to swing back and forth and then parts started falling. There is no evidence it was anything more than a tragic accident caused by the disrepair of the bridge itself.
As far as the video tapes, everyone has cell phones these days which are capable of making videos of any situation at hand. It doesn't surprise me that there are photos and videos of the entire scene. There was also a surveillance camera near the bridge that caught the whole thing.
2007-08-04 06:07:36
·
answer #2
·
answered by QWERTY 6
·
1⤊
0⤋
That bridge came down because it was old, had metal fatigue, and the repairs needed were not forthcoming in time. I certainly believe it was an accident.
The engineers that were hired to test and inspect the bridge made two recommendations: to add more support beams to strengthen it (but on the other hand, drilling more holes into the existing metal would further weaken it) or to close it down and rebuild the entire structure. The one suggestion still placed a question on its ability to hold up over time, and the other suggestion was a matter of cost to the city or state.
There was no video of the bridge collapsing because no one knew it was going to happen. The videos and photos started after the fact.
Investigators revealed that this was not an act of terrorism.
2007-08-04 06:16:53
·
answer #3
·
answered by Ambassador Z 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
The footage of the bridge collapsing was from businesses and buildings located by the bridge. I guess Minneapolis is that much more advanced, or are you people stupid? There's nothing "dodgy" about this, it was just an accident waiting to happen, just like numerous bridges around the country.
2007-08-04 10:49:02
·
answer #4
·
answered by Cheerios 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
I think it is strange and suspicious if there were actual footage of the bridge or any other catastrophic event, but someone could be innocently taking footage of something entirely different when the fateful moment does present itself with gravity . Accident? Ask the engineers about their design and the possibility of an accident just waiting to happen.
2007-08-04 06:13:47
·
answer #5
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
What did they mean by dodgy? It was an accident waiting to happen. The bridge needed structural repair.
2007-08-04 08:42:37
·
answer #6
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
From professional engineers who have seen multiple angles of the bridge as it collapsed they have ruled it non-terrorism> Now I think the only question is whether current work on the bridge caused its collapse or the fact that it was not well maintained.
2007-08-04 06:55:31
·
answer #7
·
answered by ALASPADA 6
·
1⤊
0⤋
It's a criminal negligence case now! How come they aren't putting any control barriers on the rivers surface to catch all the gas and oil that's reaching the surface from all those crushed vehicles. They're just allowing it to flow down river to all the communities south of the site. This is a criminal pollution matter now!
2007-08-04 09:34:52
·
answer #8
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
in case you're coming from united statesa. you will locate London slightly frightening and overwhelming i think of. in case you're finding for the city existence, Birmingham, Newcastle and Manchester and useful Northern cities. in my opinion, i think of Southern England is lots nicer so try Plymouth or Southampton, or Canterbury interior the South East would be appropriate for beginning a e book shop as its somewhat an old city, with very attractive shape and old sense. in case you're finding for something rural, Somerset is attractive and the Lake District is outstanding. x
2016-10-13 23:03:00
·
answer #9
·
answered by ? 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
It's being investigated. Have you seen the picture of the river? It is the biggest river in the US (Mississippi) and therefore a very long bridge. A camera was on at least one nearby building for security reasons, you have cameras in the UK on every corner on important areas in London, don't you? I've seen reports of them.
We are spending all our money on a senseless war, not on our infrastructure at home.
2007-08-04 06:17:53
·
answer #10
·
answered by marie 7
·
0⤊
1⤋