Truck crash that melted steel support beams part of 9/11 conspiracy

[wonder cow]

Here 6 years after 9/11 and the government is still planting evidence in the media that the official story of 9/11 is correct.

Do you think it was a coincidence that this truck crashed on such a busy intersection and no one was killed? That's because it was timed to not hurt anyone. The probability otherwise is far too great.

source: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2007/04/29/BAGVOPHQU46.DTL

Huge leaping flames from an exploding gasoline tanker melted the steel underbelly of a highway overpass in the East Bay's MacArthur Maze early this morning, causing it to collapse onto the roadway below and virtually ensuring major traffic problems for weeks to come.

The elevated roadway that fell carried eastbound traffic from the Bay Bridge onto Interstates 580 and 980 and state Highway 24. It draped like a blanket over a roadway below, a connector from southbound I-80 to I-880 that also was severely damaged.

The single-vehicle crash occurred on the lower roadway when the tanker, loaded with 8,600 gallons of unleaded gasoline and heading from a refinery in Benicia to a gas station on Hegenberger Road in Oakland, hit a guardrail at 3:41 a.m.

Engineers said the green steel frame of the I-580 overpass and the bolts holding the frame together began to melt and bend in the intense heat

Notice the last sentence? The "investigators" made sure that that last sentence was prominent in all the medial reports and news releases.

Once again, they're feeding the mass media another story of steel melting and a structure collapsing.

This is so obvious to me. I hope the rest of you get it.

*cough*


What?

[jafar00]

It's an insult to our intelligence to suggest anyone would see any connection between this and 9/11.

[wonder cow]

http://www.democracyforums.com/showthread.php?tid=4860

[PatrickHenry]

This is so obvious to me. I hope the rest of you get it.

*cough*


What?

I sense your irony. :my:

Do you contend that uncoated steel beams on a freeway overpass, exposed to a gasoline fire with plenty of oxygen are the equivalent of a smoky kerosene fire inside of a building slowly cooking fireproofed four-inch thick columns from top to bottom? Kerosene burns at smoky temperatures of less than 800C unless exposed to forced air as in a jet engine. Not enough heat to deform fireproof coated steel in less than one hour...And certainly not enough heat to leave molten pools of steel in the basements weeks later.
http://img465.imageshack.us/img465/2169/moltensteelenclose5mt.jpg

The WTC towers were demolished with explosives and the fires were, well...a smokescreen.:D

Is there any other theory that explains freefall speed collapse, the conservation of momentum, a key concept of modern physics?

[preservanation]

Is exploding rocket fuel hot...?
or is it just you?

[ViolaLee]

So are you conspiracy theorists trying to say steel can't melt?

[PatrickHenry]

So are you conspiracy theorists trying to say steel can't melt?
Well, I posted an image of melted steel from the cleanup of the WTC site. So there was melted steel. I am just saying that smoky fires fueled by jet grade kerosene aren't hot enough to do the job. What did?

My theories? RDX and Thermate placed in strategic areas to bring down the towers at the proper moment.

The demolition crew? I think it was likely the "five dancing Israelis," maybe Mossad or other nefarious secret agencies of that nation that reaped great benefits from 9/11. http://www.the7thfire.com/9-11/Pastore_Investigation_of_%209-11/chapter_2--dancing_Israelis.htm

[Labrocca]

Have you ever been inside the WTC? Do you realize how much burning material is inside that place? The paper...the desks...the carpets. All up in flames. I saw the city smolder for DAYS...that wasn't the result of any explosive..that was just one hot fire fed by a lot of different debris.

If you could have seen the immense size of the smoke cloud (not on TV either) you would know for certain that it was a HUGE fire going on...I have ZERO doubt that intense heat weakened the top floors enough for a couple floors to begin collapsing and create the domino effect of one floor on top of another..until it was leveled. The assertion that this was an inside job has no grounds in reality and there is no evidence to support it.

[jafar00]

The Conspiracy Theory that the buildings were bought down by fires would have held more weight had there not been pools of molten metal at the base of the ruins for months after the demolitions.

[PatrickHenry]

So Labrocca, you think that paper, desks and carpet melt steel?

I guess the steel factories using coke and oxygen to do the job are just wasting their money, huh?

Actually a lot of smoke means that the fires are not all that hot. Hot fires are less smoky.

[Buck Laser]

So Labrocca, you think that paper, desks and carpet melt steel?

I guess the steel factories using coke and oxygen to do the job are just wasting their money, huh?

Actually a lot of smoke means that the fires are not all that hot. Hot fires are less smoky.

Patrick, I think it's perfectly OK for you to believe that 9/11 was an inside job. What I don't think is OK is for you to use the snide, challenging tone in questioning the views others hold. You're treating others who believe something different from what you think as if they were fools. I don't much care for that attitude.

[Labrocca]

So Labrocca, you think that paper, desks and carpet melt steel?

I guess the steel factories using coke and oxygen to do the job are just wasting their money, huh?

Actually a lot of smoke means that the fires are not all that hot. Hot fires are less smoky.


It's a better theory than yours. On one hand you swear the building had explosives...now how would that create the molten steel in the pit? Wouldn't explosives simply blow it up and bend it instead? Or do you think someone was inside the walls with a blowtorch?

http://www.tms.org/pubs/journals/JOM/0112/Eagar/fig1.gif

Look at that thick black smoke...it was a VIOLENT fire...you tell me what caused it then.

http://www.tms.org/pubs/journals/JOM/0112/Eagar/Eagar-0112.html
However, the building was not able to withstand the intense heat of the jet fuel fire. While it was impossible for the fuel-rich, diffuse-flame fire to burn at a temperature high enough to melt the steel, its quick ignition and intense heat caused the steel to lose at least half its strength and to deform, causing buckling or crippling. This weakening and deformation caused a few floors to fall, while the weight of the stories above them crushed the floors below, initiating a domino collapse.

Found this report..very informative.

It points out the fact that it's not the official report that says the steel was melted. Conspiracy theorists are placing words into others mouths. Find me any official reports that suggest the building melted and didn't instead collapse after buckling.

[Labrocca]

http://cms.firehouse.com/content/article/article.jsp?sectionId=46&id=25807

Sorry for double post but I want to make sure this gets read as well.


Dr. Frank Gayle, Metals Expert: "Your gut reaction would be the jet fuel is what made the fire so very intense, a lot of people figured that's what melted the steel. Indeed it didn't, the steel did not melt."

Dr. Shyam Sunder, Lead Investigator: "The jet fuel probably burned out in less than 10 minutes. And what did burn over the next hour, or hour and a half, was much of the contents of the buildings."

Investigators have rebuilt several WTC offices. Dissecting insulation, stress-testing computer models of the aircraft-battered girders. Many of which are still remarkably intact at their Maryland lab.

Dr. Frank Gayle: "This is a particularly valuable piece for us -- the upper part of the fuselage. ... Hit these three legs of this panel, and kicked them into the building."

They are simulating everything. For instance using a high-speed test ramrod to hit the steel as fast as the planes hit the buildings. They're discovering which parts of the buildings failed, so future towers don't.

Kevin McGrattan, Mathematician: "A common practice in fire-protection engineering is to separate different parts of the building using rated walls. A two-hour rating will keep a fire from penetrating it for roughly two hours. But this tower was designed so that each floor was fairly open."

The investigators have found that the windows between the columns blew out, fueling the fire and bringing so much oxygen in that it weakened the structure underneath, which then collapsed.

Dr. Shyam Sunder: "When we put the basic temperatures in this model we start to see sagging of the floor system, as well deflection of the (support) column."

[wonder cow]

Or do you think someone was inside the walls with a blowtorch?

HaHa! Good one.

The impression I get from 9/11 conspiracy folks is that they have all memorized these ridiculous arguments and start blabbing on about metallurgy and physics as if they actually know wtf they're talking about. It's amusing and annoying at the same time.

[Labrocca]

Yeah all the 9/11 conspiracy theories originate on YouTube pretty much. I guess if it's on a youtube video it must be true. :rolleyes:

[lily]

Patrick, I think it's perfectly OK for you to believe that 9/11 was an inside job. What I don't think is OK is for you to use the snide, challenging tone in questioning the views others hold. You're treating others who believe something different from what you think as if they were fools. I don't much care for that attitude.


Hey Buck........he without sin and all that.;)

It's a passionate subject, things are bound to get heated.

[PatrickHenry]

What I don't think is OK is for you to use the snide, challenging tone in questioning the views others hold. You're treating others who believe something different from what you think as if they were fools. I don't much care for that attitude.
Buck, you are my kind of a guy. Respectful and goodhearted. I guess I do get a bit snide when I get referred to as a nutjob for my views, though. But I repent, and I'll try to do better. :D

And wonder cow, some people actually STUDIED in school and can discern real physics from a fake...

Labrocca, there is a video of the molten steel pouring down the side of the South Tower prior to its collapse. I think there were both RDX and thermate in the building to bring it down. The thermate is similar to thermite with some sulfur enhancement. Highly exothermic and melts steel like it was candle wax. RDX does definitely melt steel, explosively, as a cutter-charge.

I certainly don't think that the materials in the towers, even enhanced by jet fuel, burned at steel-melting temperatures. Try melting some steel in your backyard sometime...See, a detective story has to account for ALL of the evidence, not just some of it...

There are numerous photos of high rise fires over the years. None have ever resulted in complete, catastrophic collapses.

I guess the ones that dropped the three Trade Center skyscrapers were special, Muslim fires...

[jafar00]

It's a better theory than yours. On one hand you swear the building had explosives...now how would that create the molten steel in the pit? Wouldn't explosives simply blow it up and bend it instead? Or do you think someone was inside the walls with a blowtorch?


http://i49.photobucket.com/albums/f290/pjs501/horseshoe2.jpg

Sorry I don't have a better pic, but this WTC steal beam was bent into a horseshoe shape by what could only be a blast.

[Labrocca]

Sorry I don't have a better pic, but this WTC steal beam was bent into a horseshoe shape by what could only be a blast.

So it couldn't have bent by a 110 story building falling on it? lol And your pic only proves that the heat could certainly have weakened the steel enough to make it pliable and reshape. That's why the towers collapsed.

Labrocca, there is a video of the molten steel pouring down the side of the South Tower prior to its collapse.

Are you sure it's steel and not some other metal? Could be part of filing cabinets or desks.

I certainly don't think that the materials in the towers, even enhanced by jet fuel, burned at steel-melting temperatures.

I also posted a rather good article confirming that the collapse wasn't based upong melted steel but instead it was the weakened structure that brought it on.

And this whole thread is based upon the presumption that some unrelated news article is a plant to help the government fight the 9/11 conspiracy theorists. From my understanding...the government has ignored the conspiracy entirely.

http://cdn.sfgate.com/c/pictures/2007/04/30/ba_freewaycollapse_201.jpg

Look at that pic from the story...I don't see melted steel. I see weakened steel.

[PatrickHenry]

I posted a photo of molten steel from the basement weeks later.

[Labrocca]

But I thought you said there was video of steel melting before the collapse? I have yet to see that. Also the fire did burn for DAYS...so weeks later it makes sense there would be some molten steel. I just don't believe that molten steel proves anything. 110 stories of a building don't burn and collapse without creating a LOT of damage. Have you ever been inside the WTC's? Do you have ANY idea of the scope of their size? I worked right next to the buildings for over 2 years. I was inside them EVERY SINGLE DAY during that time. Each floor is like it's own shopping mall, parking lot, football field, and more. It was IMMENSE. There was nearly 200 elevators between the 2 buildings.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/f/fd/National_Park_Service_9-11_Statue_of_Liberty_and_WTC_fire.jpg

I personally feel that people who were not there and especially those that have never visited NYC or the WTC do no understand the size of everything. In a picture it doesn't look all that big but imagine that plume of smoke could fill top-to-bottom dozens of football stadiums. That's one big fire.

[DANG]

But I thought you said there was video of steel melting before the collapse? I have yet to see that. Here you go: http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-2991254740145858863&q=cameraplanet%2B9/11

Also;
Heres an interesting video (http://www.plaguepuppy.net/public_html/collapse%20update/close-up_north_tower.mpg)that shows the North Tower antennae (attatched to the core) dropping first. The official story has the floor trusses dropping first (like wings)...but, this video shows the strongest support .... the massive core columns all severed catastrophically at once before the weaker outer walls dropped

[PatrickHenry]

And that's just a small part of the evidence that demolition devices were at work that day. http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=1951610169657809939

Pataki says, "The concrete was pulverized!" Do you really think that the kinetic energy of the collapse pulverized the concrete into microfine dust?

Some of the clearer videos show massive dust squibs many floors below the active collapse. That's the demo charges taking out the core columns...

[Labrocca]

Here you go: http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-2991254740145858863&q=cameraplanet%2B9/11

I was 2 blocks from where that video was shot. Also I see SOMETHING shooting out but you have NO evidence that it's metal or steel.

And isn't the conspiracy that the central support beams were cut? The outer part of the building wasn't nearly the support as the central beam.

And let's say that it is melting steel...well doesn't that prove then the fire was hot enough to bring the building down?


http://www.popularmechanics.com/technology/military_law/1227842.html?page=4
FACT: Jet fuel burns at 800° to 1500°F, not hot enough to melt steel (2750°F). However, experts agree that for the towers to collapse, their steel frames didn't need to melt, they just had to lose some of their structural strength--and that required exposure to much less heat. "I have never seen melted steel in a building fire," says retired New York deputy fire chief Vincent Dunn, author of The Collapse Of Burning Buildings: A Guide To Fireground Safety. "But I've seen a lot of twisted, warped, bent and sagging steel. What happens is that the steel tries to expand at both ends, but when it can no longer expand, it sags and the surrounding concrete cracks."

"Steel loses about 50 percent of its strength at 1100°F," notes senior engineer Farid Alfawak-hiri of the American Institute of Steel Construction. "And at 1800° it is probably at less than 10 percent." NIST also believes that a great deal of the spray-on fireproofing insulation was likely knocked off the steel beams that were in the path of the crashing jets, leaving the metal more vulnerable to the heat.

But jet fuel wasn't the only thing burning, notes Forman Williams, a professor of engineering at the University of California, San Diego, and one of seven structural engineers and fire experts that PM consulted. He says that while the jet fuel was the catalyst for the WTC fires, the resulting inferno was intensified by the combustible material inside the buildings, including rugs, curtains, furniture and paper. NIST reports that pockets of fire hit 1832°F.

"The jet fuel was the ignition source," Williams tells PM. "It burned for maybe 10 minutes, and [the towers] were still standing in 10 minutes. It was the rest of the stuff burning afterward that was responsible for the heat transfer that eventually brought them down."

Really that video does nothing to prove a conspiracy. If anything it proves that the fire WAS an inferno inside and that there was pockets of heat that melted steel.

[PatrickHenry]

Labrocca, please excuse me if I seem impertinent. I have argued these issues many times previously, but never with a forum owner. I respect your efforts and position here, so I don't want to offend you.

But office contents don't melt steel. That is a fact. Thermite will do so as also do the cutter charges, maybe RDX or C4. But you won't find office contents causing steel to melt in 56 minutes. It just wouldn't happen.

[Labrocca]

I have argued these issues many times previously, but never with a forum owner.

Don't sweat that...I can take it and dish it out just fine. Just follow the forum rules as best you can and all will be well. You certainly don't have to agree with me on issues.

As for the whole melted steel issue...what's your point? I already agreed that steel didn't melt. I pointed out numerous articles that actually agree with you. NO MELTED STEEL....ok fine. Now what.

[PatrickHenry]

Then how can we account for molten steel pouring from the building in the moments before the collapse? And how do we account for the large quantities of steel in the basements, still molten after six weeks?

And observe this image:


http://www.rumormillnews.com/pix3/pic87932.jpg

Observe the angle of the cut on the steel column in the center behind the fireman. This diagonal cut is the correct angle for implosion cutter charges. This is done so that the column will "kick out." It would not be the angle for an acetyline torch process for material removal, since the angle of the cut would result in a much longer cutting time.

http://science.howstuffworks.com/building-implosion1.htm
Demolishing steel columns is a bit more difficult, as the dense material is much stronger. For buildings with a steel support structure, blasters typically use the specialized explosive material cyclotrimethylenetrinitramine, called RDX for short. RDX-based explosive compounds expand at a very high rate of speed, up to 27,000 feet per second (8,230 meters per second). Instead of disintegrating the entire column, the concentrated, high-velocity pressure slices right through the steel, splitting it in half. Additionally, blasters may ignite dynamite on one side of the column to push it over in a particular direction.

[DANG]

Here you go: http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-2991254740145858863&q=cameraplanet%2B9/11

I was 2 blocks from where that video was shot. Also I see SOMETHING shooting out but you have NO evidence that it's metal or steel. True, but we do have forensic evidence of Thermate (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HZ2vAupmooU)(a combination of thermite and sulfer which burns hotter than just thermite) collected from the basement.
Watch this thermite experiment (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WrCWLpRc1yM&search=thermite) http://img503.imageshack.us/img503/569/thermiteexperimentqv8.jpg
and compare it to the material pouring from the window.

And isn't the conspiracy that the central support beams were cut? The outer part of the building wasn't nearly the support as the central beam. Just because the molten metal is pouring out the windows... doesnt mean it isnt coming from the core columns... most of the "lava" would go down the elevator shafts. Some of it obviously found a path to the window.
http://img503.imageshack.us/img503/9576/wtcthermitecm1.jpg
And let's say that it is melting steel...well doesn't that prove then the fire was hot enough to bring the building down? Not really. Ever done any welding? Then you would know how perfect that flame has to be to melt iron/steel. A bit too much gas and you get a yellow smoky flame. And the more starved for oxygen ... the worse (cooler) it gets. Thats what you had in there
So what DID melt the core columns?
Something that brings its own oxygen to the equation, maybe?

http://www.popularmechanics.com/technology/military_law/1227842.html?page=4
FACT: Jet fuel burns at 800° to 1500°F, not hot enough to melt steel (2750°F). However, experts agree that for the towers to collapse, their steel frames didn't need to melt, they just had to lose some of their structural strength--and that required exposure to much less heat. First of all, if its Pop Mechanix contention that it was jet fuel.... how does that explain WTC 7; which was not hit by a plane removing the conspiracy theory of asbestos knocked loose by plane AND wheres the jet fuel? Stop the Lie (http://stopthelie.com/fire_initiated_collapse.html#FireInitiatedCollapse )

To date, FEMA has only been able to come up with a "Diesel Fuel Theory" for building 7. Check the maximum burn temperature for diesel fuel and you'll run into the same problem we ran into with the two towers; it is no where near sufficient to cause the molten metal found at the site. Furthermore, when addressing how diesel fuel might have contributed to the collapse of WTC 7, FEMA is on the record as saying: "the best hypothesis has only a low probability of occurrence. Further research, investigation, and analysis are needed to resolve this issue." The attacks took place in 2001. How many more years will it take?

How do we allow for the freefall speed of all 3 collapses. "Soft metal" would still offer resistance (and we still have pools of molten metal... regardless of whether it was "necessary" or not) The towers fell as though there were nothing beneath them. For example: An object will take longer to hit the ground if it has branches of a tree to slow it down.... than an object with nothing to impede its path to the ground. Did ALL of the thousands of tons of iron beams "soften" simultaneously? The rectangular box beams were 5" thich on each side... burning carpet and plastic will have pretty much zero effect on these puppies. Are you aware of how heat is transferred through iron beams? Do you know what a heat sink is? The cool metal draws heat away from a focused heat source (like a torch). So even less heat than it required to melt these thick iron beams would still have to be considerably intense. (Which is why it has never happened before {nor has it happened yet})
Conserved momemtum. Things that hit things dont travel as fast as things that dont. Those towers fell as though there were nothing stopping them.

Really that video does nothing to prove a conspiracy. If anything it proves that the fire WAS an inferno inside and that there was pockets of heat that melted steel.Well, the jet fuel, under perfect conditions mixing oxygen and jet fuel may have been able to melt sheet aluminum of the plane (if it were not crumpled into a solid mass) but I doubt it. It was an oxigen starved fire (black smoke) ,,,, thermate provides its own oxygen source.
Besides the molten metal in the basement was not Aluminum. It was Iron, with traces of thermate.
And the metal flowing out of the window wasnt aluminum because aluminum cools the instant heat source is taken away.... as soon as it hit the air outside it would have turned black from oxidation.


How do you explain Thermate in the basement if it was not involved in the perfect demolition of the towers? It was found in all three WTC footprints.

[jafar00]

Really that video does nothing to prove a conspiracy. If anything it proves that the fire WAS an inferno inside and that there was pockets of heat that melted steel.


Apparently that footage shows Thermate(hard core Thermite) residue streaming out of the building.

Here is a an interesting thermite video which you may have seen already.
It's interesting not just for the molten thermite residue similar to what flowed out of the WTC, but for the fact that the main reason they destroyed this car is because it's French. :D

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FEmHJORTlqk

[preservanation]

Is it easier for to believe that Bush murdered 3000 American citizens on 911 than it is to believe that Radical Muslim terrorist were responsible???

Get me a sworn affidavit of One of the Thousands of people who must have had a hand in the slaughter, conspiracy and cover-up. on some level. Until then, these conspiracy theories, are just that, theories, and very hurtful ones.
This sort of speculation is in no way the proof you claim it is.

[Labrocca]

OK..I am officially out of this thread. This is no way gives you the win however. I just don't want to waste my breathe with people that have made up their minds no matter how much evidence I present.

Your responses have pretty much been that you don't know the answer so the answer is a conspiracy.

Me...I have shown you enough logic and evidence to support the reasons for the collapse.

Us...not agreeing.

Have fun.

[jafar00]

Is it easier for to believe that Bush murdered 3000 American citizens on 911 than it is to believe that Radical Muslim terrorist were responsible???


There are those in power who think they need a catastrophic event to get their own way. 9/11, pearl harbour, reichstag fire, the lavon affair, false terrorist transmissions from Tripoli that tricked Reagan into bombing, Operation Northwoods, Gulf of Tonkin, USS Liberty, all examples of false flag operations.
Even the Arkansas GOP head, Dennis Milligan said recently, "At the end of the day, I believe fully the president is doing the right thing, and I think all we need is some attacks on American soil like we had on [Sept. 11, 2001], and the naysayers will come around very quickly to appreciate not only the commitment for President Bush, but the sacrifice that has been made by men and women to protect this country." (http://rawstory.com/news/2007/Arkansas_GOP_head_We_need_more_0603.html)

Dennis Milligan seems to fully understand what a false flag operation is even though he probably didn't mean to say it.


Get me a sworn affidavit of One of the Thousands of people who must have had a hand in the slaughter, conspiracy and cover-up. on some level. Until then, these conspiracy theories, are just that, theories, and very hurtful ones.
This sort of speculation is in no way the proof you claim it is.


Confessions are hard to get from criminals. They tend to try and cover up their crimes. You have to accuse them of something and take them to court although if they are untouchables who act with impunity and control the courts anyway, you may find it a little difficult to do so.

[DANG]

I couldnt believe it when I heard Arkansas GOP head, Dennis Milligan say that.
OMG, its like an open invitation for terrorism. Isnt he giving comfort to our enemies? Like, we wont punish them if they carry out another 911.
We didnt really investigate that crime, you will get the same pass.... so have at it!
Do us a favor!

[PatrickHenry]

OK..I am officially out of this thread. This is no way gives you the win however. I just don't want to waste my breathe with people that have made up their minds no matter how much evidence I present.

Your responses have pretty much been that you don't know the answer so the answer is a conspiracy.

Me...I have shown you enough logic and evidence to support the reasons for the collapse.

Us...not agreeing.

Have fun.
OK, Labrocca. Thanks for your contributions and believe me, if I could make sense of this any other way I would love to believe that the insiders had nothing to do with 9/11. It is frightening to think that those in charge of our government disregard our lives (citizens lives) so casually. But nothing else makes any sense.

[preservanation]

Is it easier for to believe that Bush murdered 3000 American citizens on 911 than it is to believe that Radical Muslim terrorist were responsible???


There are those in power who think they need a catastrophic event to get their own way. 9/11, pearl harbour, reichstag fire, the lavon affair, false terrorist transmissions from Tripoli that tricked Reagan into bombing, Operation Northwoods, Gulf of Tonkin, USS Liberty, all examples of false flag operations.
Even the Arkansas GOP head, Dennis Milligan said recently, "At the end of the day, I believe fully the president is doing the right thing, and I think all we need is some attacks on American soil like we had on [Sept. 11, 2001], and the naysayers will come around very quickly to appreciate not only the commitment for President Bush, but the sacrifice that has been made by men and women to protect this country." (http://rawstory.com/news/2007/Arkansas_GOP_head_We_need_more_0603.html)

Dennis Milligan seems to fully understand what a false flag operation is even though he probably didn't mean to say it.


Get me a sworn affidavit of One of the Thousands of people who must have had a hand in the slaughter, conspiracy and cover-up. on some level. Until then, these conspiracy theories, are just that, theories, and very hurtful ones.
This sort of speculation is in no way the proof you claim it is.


Confessions are hard to get from criminals. They tend to try and cover up their crimes. You have to accuse them of something and take them to court although if they are untouchables who act with impunity and control the courts anyway, you may find it a little difficult to do so.


You are an America hater and a nut.
Since you trumpet this fact from the roof tops, it should not offend you.

[DANG]

Preserva;
"America hater and a nut"?
Are these insults necessary?

Lets try to stick to the facts.
Dont we all want to know who dunnit?

The official story doesnt hold water. The prime suspect (according to the white house) Usama bin Laden, is not even wanted by the FBI for the crimes of 911.
So the case is still open... who is the mastermind?
Who really hates America if not those who will imply that Saddam Hussein did it in order to justify a profiteering venture with our military? Isnt that armed robbery? (a crime in every nation in the world) But, we have a bigger stick, so that makes it ok? Is that the America you want to preserva? If they will abuse our military might for personal and corporate gain..... they will also take down a few towers without a permit.

The real perps of 911 are allowed to roam free. Why was Manhatten not deemed a crime scene. How would YOU account for the Thermate (whose only use is demolition) found in the footprints of ALL 3 WTC footprints? Is that why Rotten Rudy was in such a hurry to ship all those thousands of tons of scrap OVERSEAS? Does he not know anything at all about crime scene protocol? NIST determined (with the limited access granted) :
http://wtc.nist.gov/pubs/factsheets/faqs_8_2006.htm

Based on this comprehensive investigation, NIST concluded that the WTC towers collapsed because: (1) the impact of the planes severed and damaged support columns, dislodged fireproofing insulation coating the steel floor trusses and steel columns, and widely dispersed jet fuel over multiple floors; and (2) the subsequent unusually large jet-fuel ignited multi-floor fires (which reached temperatures as high as 1,000 degrees Celsius) significantly weakened the floors and columns with dislodged fireproofing to the point where floors sagged and pulled inward on the perimeter columns. This led to the inward bowing of the perimeter columns and failure of the south face of WTC 1 and the east face of WTC 2, initiating the collapse of each of the towers. Both photographic and video evidence—as well as accounts from the New York Police Department aviation unit during a half-hour period prior to collapse—support this sequence for each tower.Maybe somebody should have shown them the video I posted above (post #22 (http://www.democracyforums.com/showthread.php?tid=4849&pid=62043#pid62043)) Its very important that you view this short video. It is the smoking gun (http://www.plaguepuppy.net/public_html/collapse%20update/close-up_north_tower.mpg). It shows the Antennae dropping a split second before the outer wall. The Antennae is fastened to the CORE for strength in storms (make sense?)
You can replay that instant over and over by clicking your mouse cursor at the beginning of the scroll bar (progress indicator) (not the play/pause button) focus your eyes between the right corner of building and the base of antennae. North Tower Antenna Video (http://www.plaguepuppy.net/public_html/collapse%20update/close-up_north_tower.mpg)

Thats enough for now. I have one more clip from the NIST 911 factsheet. I will compose after lunch.

[Mayberry]

Candle flame: 760 °C (1400 °F)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fire. It was stated here that kerosene only burns at 800 degrees unless burned in a forced draft such as a jet engine. Ever heard of a chimney? Those airplanes made one hell of a chimney in those buildings, causing quite a forceful draft, and surely intensifying the blaze. And if a candle burns at 1400 degrees, imagine what tons and tons of wood, textiles, paper, paint, etc.... would burn at. Add the collapse of the buildings into the picture, and you've created a nice oven, capable of melting steel. The collapse was caused by loss of the steel's temper, as I stated in another thread. Here's an interesting read Due to these internal stress quenched steel is extremely hard but brittle, usually too brittle for practical purposes http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carbon_steel Hmmmm..... What happens in a fire? Uh, let's see. Steel is heated. Ummm, then it's hosed down with water. Hmmm.... Kinda like being quenched, isn't it?

[DANG]

Then you could, theoretically melt iron with 2 candles... interesting.

The Jet fuel was burned off in about 3 minutes

[PatrickHenry]

Candle flame: 760 °C (1400 °F)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fire. It was stated here that kerosene only burns at 800 degrees unless burned in a forced draft such as a jet engine. Ever heard of a chimney? Those airplanes made one hell of a chimney in those buildings, causing quite a forceful draft, and surely intensifying the blaze.
You are mistaken. The WTC towers were specifically designed to avoid a chimney effect. It functioned normally on September 11. And the fires were reportedly not out of control but could have been knocked down by a couple of hoses. (firefighter on the radio)

Most of the true believers in the Official Story approach the issue with blinders, and are incapable of conceiving that alternative explanations cover the evidence much better.

[DANG]

The tower that burned the coolest, because the fuel exploded outside the tower in a fireball..... the tower that was hit first but dropped last.... that may not have hit the core columns at all (or barely) because it went in one corner and out the same corner in a near-miss fashion.... that tower, the fire was nearly out. There was no raging inferno...like the Madrid tower:
http://img402.imageshack.us/img402/1938/madridwindsorfirexz4.gifhttp://img402.imageshack.us/img402/6903/madridjp0.jpg


Now, the WTC:

http://img402.imageshack.us/img402/2783/243lv4.jpg

Maybe Homeland Security should be arresting tourists with candles instead of nail clippers?

[manu1959]

The tower that burned the coolest, because the fuel exploded outside the tower in a fireball..... the tower that was hit first but dropped last.... that may not have hit the core columns at all (or barely) because it went in one corner and out the same corner in a near-miss fashion.... that tower, the fire was nearly out. There was no raging inferno...like the Madrid tower:
http://img402.imageshack.us/img402/1938/madridwindsorfirexz4.gifhttp://img402.imageshack.us/img402/6903/madridjp0.jpg


Now, the WTC:

http://img402.imageshack.us/img402/2783/243lv4.jpg

Maybe Homeland Security should be arresting tourists with candles instead of nail clippers?


the madrid towers structural design is nothing like wtc and the madrid towers structural system was not compromised by being hit by a jet plane......

[Mayberry]

The Jet fuel was burned off in about 3 minutes
Plenty of time to ignite other combustable materials. The WTC towers were specifically designed to avoid a chimney effect. It functioned normally on September 11. And the fires were reportedly not out of control but could have been knocked down by a couple of hoses. (firefighter on the radio)
Links? Most of the true believers in the Official Story approach the issue with blinders, and are incapable of conceiving that alternative explanations cover the evidence much better. And that seems to be a two way street with conspiracy theorists. :rolleyes: The tower that burned the coolest, because the fuel exploded outside the tower in a fireball..... the tower that was hit first but dropped last.... that may not have hit the core columns at all (or barely) because it went in one corner and out the same corner in a near-miss fashion.... that tower, the fire was nearly out. There was no raging inferno...like the Madrid tower:
That fireball probably accounts for 20% of the plane's fuel at the most. Fire was nearly out? Again, link?

[DANG]

the madrid towers structural design is nothing like wtc On the contrary. Nearly Identical. About the only difference was The Windsor Tower had Reinforced concrete core columns versus steel of the WTC. THICK Steel that sliced the aluminum plane to shreds like a cheese grater.
and the madrid towers structural system was not compromised by being hit by a jet plane......The WTC towers were designed to survive MULTIPLE Boeing 707 hits.
One 767 could not bring a tower down without some help.


Mayberry,
You have my quotes mixed with Patricks... I caught it but others may not ;)
Plenty of time to ignite other combustable materials.Yet, not nearly enough to melt (or soften) 5" thick steel "I" and Box beams. That would take a clean blue flame. The WTC towers were smoldering.
Thats why a fire has never collapsed a High rise before (nor will it ever, I suspect)
Do you have evidence to the contrary?

[Mayberry]

Yet, not nearly enough to melt (or soften) 5" thick steel "I" and Box beams. That would take a clean blue flame. Needs a clean blue flame to cut, just needs heat to melt. Sorry, try again! Besides, the melting was secondary, and not the cause of collapse. The loss of the steel's structural integrity is what caused the collapse. It was heated by fire, destroying it's temper, was undoubtedly quenched by severed water pipes, sprinkler systems, or what have you, causing it to become brittle and break under the load. Do you have evidence to the contrary? I've posted all kinds of evidence. You've apparently failed to read it. The WTC towers were designed to survive MULTIPLE Boeing 707 hits.
And designers are infallable, of course. Contractors never cut corners or compromise a little. And construction materials are always perfect. The QA guy NEVER misses anything. I like this thread, it's like a tennis match, or ping-pong. It's fun picking your little theories apart!

[DANG]

Needs a clean blue flame to cut, just needs heat to melt.Yeah, the kind of heat that comes from a clean blue flame. You wont find black smoke in a foundry. It would take the kind of heat to soften several tons of steel across whole floors, (several floors even?) simultaneously. Meaning EACH beam across the whole floor, 46 columns per floor... for it to collapse into its own footprint. (and this happened THREE TIMES that day) The 911 commission has tried to pass off the lie that it was the weaker perimeter columns that gave out first.... Nevermind these fat bastards whose walls are 5" thick on every surface!
http://img511.imageshack.us/img511/8392/corecolumnsvj1.th.jpg (http://img511.imageshack.us/my.php?image=corecolumnsvj1.jpg)(click to enlarge)
Thats 20 inches thickness per beam, of steel, that has to be heated evenly (while coated with asbestos) in synch with all the others across several feet linearly.....
Meanwhile the official story YOU are compelled (by who knows what) to defend denies the fact....smoking gun video (http://www.plaguepuppy.net/public_html/collapse%20update/close-up_north_tower.mpg) I offerred above establishes it was the CORE columns that were sliced, FIRST. You can see in this pic,
http://img402.imageshack.us/img402/2783/243lv4.jpg
that there was no raging inferno at the time of collapse...therefore the columns had help of Thermate (which forensic evidence WAS FOUND on site)
Sorry, try again! Besides, the melting was secondary, and not the cause of collapse. That sounds like a statement of fact... were you an eye witness, our did you have a video cam set up?

The loss of the steel's structural integrity is what caused the collapse. Yeah Thermate and cutter charges have that effect.

It was heated by fire, destroying it's temper, was undoubtedly quenched by severed water pipes, sprinkler systems, or what have you, causing it to become brittle and break under the load.As you can see from the above pic, the sprinkler systems also had done their job, doused the fire that supposedly melted those beams Do you have evidence to the contrary? The WTC towers were designed to survive MULTIPLE Boeing 707 hits.
And designers are infallable, of course. Contractors never cut corners or compromise a little. And construction materials are always perfect. The QA guy NEVER misses anything. Actually the whole WTC complex was condemned by the Port Authority. They were going to have to disassemble the whole damn thing piece by piece.... They could never get a controlled demo permit for a project this big. Shut down Manhatten? Asbestos! It would take years to demo these towers piece by piece... good thing for silverstein.... he was paid for the demo rather than paying out for it! Good thing his family was warned not to show up that morning. Good thing the jewish shipping company had cleared out an entire floor of operations two weeks before the controlled demo! Good way to set up demo charges across a whole floor with moving men having free use of service elevators an carting in boxes of anything.... since the WTC security (run by gwb's brother) had stopped using dogs just 5 days prior to 911 (New York Newsday article (http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/attack/preparation.html)). The odd coincidences never stop.

I like this thread, it's like a tennis match, or ping-pong. It's fun picking your little theories apart!Except I have the truth on my side, you are stuck with the official story.
Check.

I have more facts than theories on my side.... you have to defend theories. Or else they would have asked the hard questions at the 911 hearings. Too many ommissions. The firefighters were not called on.... smell that cover-up?

[Mayberry]

Except I have the truth on my side, Ha! That's a good one, thanks for the laugh. I've watched your video, and I saw nothing there that can't be reasonably explained away. You're going to have to do much better than that bud. Simple logic, common sense, and a little engineering knowledge are all it takes to see what really happened here, and that is, that 2 large aircraft with a lot of fuel on board for cross-country flights crashed into the towers, sparking large fires, causing structural damage, and causing the upper portions of the towers to collapse, the shock of which brought the rest down (as seen in your video, by the way). The shock of the towers coming down brought WTC 7 and the rest of the buildings down. Your "evidence" is all anecdotal and doesn't amount to a hill of beans.

[DANG]

Then you didnt see the core drop first, CONTRARY to the official story?

This video?
http://img522.imageshack.us/img522/2377/antennaefk5.jpg


The shock of the towers coming down brought WTC 7 and the rest of the buildings down.http://img413.imageshack.us/img413/9760/quizzicaldogjt1.gif
I didnt realize WTC 7 was so emotional, Come on, er, Bud.... you can do better.

Are you saying WTC 6 was so upset that it burst OUTWARD, leaving a crater?
http://img503.imageshack.us/img503/2831/wtc6cratercloseupuc3.jpg
It was SHOCKED, shocked..... he says!

Like I said before, the majority of the fuel was burned off immediately. Especially this one
http://img503.imageshack.us/img503/9005/wtccornerbh6.jpg
...which also barely hit the building and may NOT have hit ANY core columns at all ..... maybe just a hollow aluminum wing-tip....

No inferno in either tower means YOU have to do better. Not me.

My evidence is anecdotal? And yet your side of the argument would not allow the 911 families to submit questions to those who testified.
Would not allow the 1st responders to testify...Afraid of something?

And why all the reluctance (by the Bush Admin.) to testify to 911 Comission if there was nothing to hide?

Follow the money.
Who gained?

[DANG]

Remember how OPPOSED the bush admin was to even having any investigation at all?

Then someone figured out they could control the circus better , than if an independant investigation took over.

FIRST order of business was to destroy the evidence.

[Mayberry]

Like I said before, the majority of the fuel was burned off immediately. :rolleyes: Get a gallon of kerosene, put it in a bucket, touch it off, and see what happens. Oh, and don't stand too close. That fireball is only a small amount of the fuel on that plane. It had 10,000 gallons or more aboard. 1000 gallons makes an impressive fireball. Your video won't play, but I've watched it several times. I saw nothing unexpected. Are you saying WTC 6 was so upset that it burst OUTWARD, leaving a crater? Why not? That's what happens when a building is hit with falling debris. And I see no "crater", only a basement or underground parking. No inferno in either tower means YOU have to do better. Not me.
Lots of smoke coming out in that pic. I think smoke is usually caused by..... FIRE!!!! Flames are clearly visible in the lower right hand side. your side of the argument would not allow the 911 families to submit questions to those who testified.
Would not allow the 1st responders to testify...Afraid of something?
Apparently it was not deemed necessary. I've said it before, and I'll say it again. If anyone had ANY credible proof of any wrongdoing, it would have been plastered across every TV screen, newspaper, and radio station in the country in short order. There is no way in hell to pull off a coverup of this magnitude. No way, no how. It's just not possible. Would any force on this Earth keep you from coming forward with information like that? Not me. I'd be singing from the mountaintops. But no one has, because it's not true. Think about that. Think long and hard. Most humans are greedy by nature, and seem to seek fame and/ or fortune. Someone with difinitive proof of a 9/11 conspiracy would be foaming at the mouth to get the story out, because it'd be worth millions, and their picture would be everywhere. And this would have happened on 9/12, or shortly thereafter. Really think about that. A fortune, and guaranteed safety because of the media exposure. No one in their right mind would pass that up. That is the cold, hard reality that blows your theory out of the water.

[Mayberry]

Remember how OPPOSED the bush admin was to even having any investigation at all?

Then someone figured out they could control the circus better , than if an independant investigation took over.

FIRST order of business was to destroy the evidence.

Why don't we just ask the aliens in Roswell? Surely they know the truth, or can find it with their mind ray. :cool:

[DANG]

So the NYPD eyewitnesses are all a bunch of flakes?

Edit to add:
I didnt see the post above that.
I will have to return later to finish.
Gotta go see Mom.

Peace Out!

[Mayberry]

So the NYPD eyewitnesses are all a bunch of flakes?

Apparently! I've seen nothing from them on the mainstream.

[lily]

This doesn't have much to do with the discussion, but I never knew there was a Marvin Bush! Interesting.

[PatrickHenry]

So the NYPD eyewitnesses are all a bunch of flakes?

Apparently! I've seen nothing from them on the mainstream.
Precisely the point, amigo...

[Mayberry]

Precisely the point, amigo... Oh brother.

[DANG]

ooops, I meant FDNY.

But the same goes for all 1st responders. They were there. But their witness/testimony was unwelcome at the 911 Comission hearings.

gwb couldnt talk without his puppeteer cheney. Would not talk under oath (pretty damning, just like taking the 5th ammendment)

We have other witnesses who KNOW bombs went off in the North tower basement. A national hero William Rodriguez who saved many lives that day, he had the keys to the stairwells. Two of his co-workers also have made their statements "There were bombs in the basement". LINK (http://rinf.com/news/july-05/14a.html)

But if you dont want to believe something, denial gives temporary comfort. Good luck with that.

[Mayberry]

If you believe what you're reading on that kook website, good luck with that. OK, some guys in a basement heard explosions. DUH!!! An airplane hit the building. If there were bombs, remnants of those bombs would have been found. Workers in the buildings would have seen them. There's no way you could get enough explosives in those buildings to bring them down without people knowing about it, much less place them all, rig the detonators, and whatever else. There would have been wire strung all over the place, and anyone with half a squished pea for a brain would have put 2 and 2 together.

[DANG]

Heres Mr Rodriguez telling it in person:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nmOmWrgEJEQ
This is the short (1:42) version

There were two different events. The first one pushed the floor up. He though it was a generator on the next floor down (basement 3, I believe. There were 6 basement floors) then moments later he felt the plane hit up top. After being employed in the same building for 20 years he had a feel for the building.

Edit to add:
Check my blog for more:
http://investigate911.blogspot.com/

[Labrocca]

dammit...I wanted to stay out of this thread...

DANG...are you saying that a JANITOR in the basement is now a demolitions expert? And exactly HOW did he know a plane hit the building at that exact moment? Do you have ANY idea how many floors away this man was? Most likely what he heard was the ELEVATOR SHAFTS explosions.


Here is one of his quotes

Then when I got outside, the other plane hit the south tower. It looked and felt like a war

So were we at WAR?

Bomb-like explosions heard by a Janitor proves nothing. Exactly how many times has a plane hit the building where he has enough experience to have a "feel" for the building. It's ludicrous.

Again..9/11 conspiracy theorists are NOT interested in the truth or the obvious. Instead they want to believe in a world conspiracy and a "they". It's paranoia being fed on a mass scale. It's easier for some to point at a finger and blame people they can see and know (Bush, Rove or Cheney). It's not so easy to accept that a hidden enemy is out there that can get you at any minute. People also understand GREED...they are usually greedy people themselves. What they can't understand is the fanatical religious zealotry and hatred toward us by islamic terrorists. Yeah..it's just unfathomable to them that islamic jihad is real and we are the targets. That can't be it...it has to be that evil guy BUSH.

Ridiculous item of the day here.

[DANG]

dammit...I wanted to stay out of this thread...Welcome back! Come toward the light. :p

DANG...are you saying that a JANITOR in the basement is now a demolitions expert? Didnt have to be... anyone could figure out if they were pushed UP... that the force came from below.

And exactly HOW did he know a plane hit the building at that exact moment? Retrospect. First he felt a large explosion close by. From below. Then a moment later a distant crash Do you have ANY idea how many floors away this man was?About 110. Most likely what he heard was the ELEVATOR SHAFTS explosions. Yep. One close and one far away

Here is one of his quotes

Then when I got outside, the other plane hit the south tower. It looked and felt like a war

So were we at WAR? Yep. And that, with an unknown enemy. A still vague enemy. The FBI still has no hard evidence that OBL was in any way involved... but, thats who we have been told to hate on.

Bomb-like explosions heard by a Janitor proves nothing.The firefighters reported explosions. In fact heres one 30 second video of a firefighter saying "theres a bomb in the building, start clearing out" (http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-4574366633014832928&q=9%2F11%20bomb) Exactly how many times has a plane hit the building where he has enough experience to have a "feel" for the building. It's ludicrous.He didnt know at the time that it was a plane, but he did have a feel for what was right below him and what was way up top.
Again..9/11 conspiracy theorists are NOT interested in the truth or the obvious. Instead they want to believe in a world conspiracy and a "they". same could be said for the official theory.

It's paranoia being fed on a mass scale. You may not have noticed every other sentence of the bush admin has been filled with 911's and september 11ths? Terra terra terra! In fact, bush wanted all depts to interject the fear into all public addresses. Even the dept of Agri!

It's easier for some to point at a finger and blame people they can see and know (Bush, Rove or Cheney). It's not so easy to accept that a hidden enemy is out there that can get you at any minute.If its a hidden enemy, why assume its more complicated than it appears? Usually the simplest explanation is the obvious. OBL denied involvement. People also understand GREED...they are usually greedy people themselves. What they can't understand is the fanatical religious zealotry and hatred toward us by islamic terrorists. Yeah..it's just unfathomable to them that islamic jihad is real and we are the targets. That can't be it...it has to be that evil guy BUSH. Any convictions yet?

we have fanatics right here at home. They just dont have the oil.
Remember how bad bush wanted to go after Iraq FIRST?

Who dunnit doesnt really matter to our Imperialists, as long as they have idiots pounding the war drums for any fashionable scapegoat.

Any boogey man will do. Remeber the old mindset where the sheriff would bring in a black man as suspect, based on zero evidence ....he just wanted to appease the people. Give them a hangin so everything can get back to normal.

Got any evidence? I do.

[Mayberry]

In fact heres one 30 second video of a firefighter saying "theres a bomb in the building, start clearing out"
That video tells me nothing. It could have been taped at any time, anywhere. And it also appears to have been taped after the crashes, if it is from ground zero, due to the large number of emergency personnel seen. This was a time of great confusion, and anything could have been easily misconstrued. You're reading way too much into it. That video is not definitive proof of anything.

[Labrocca]

Oh why oh why did I have to post?

It's like arguing with someone that my dad is bigger than your dad.

Puerile is the only word I can use to describe conspiracy theorists that refuse to consider that maybe ...just maybe...they are completely out of their minds.

Bye. Once again I am out and this time I ain't even gonna read the thread.

[PatrickHenry]

Oh why oh why did I have to post?

It's like arguing with someone that my dad is bigger than your dad.

Puerile is the only word I can use to describe conspiracy theorists that refuse to consider that maybe ...just maybe...they are completely out of their minds.

Bye. Once again I am out and this time I ain't even gonna read the thread.
Ahhh, Labrocca, Labrocca...

Name-calling?

Just refute the evidence!

This thread is so limited, not taking into account all the other "anomalies" of that day that sent America on a 100 Year War

But for the time being, I guess we should just stick with the WTC and the molten steel, deceitfully compared to the twisted beams of a highway bridge...

[Mayberry]

This thread is so limited, not taking into account all the other "anomalies" of that day that sent America on a 100 Year War
Holy smokes, you've gone off the deep end. I'm with Labrocca, there's no point in trying to tell you anything. You've bought in to all the kook conspiracies hook, line, and sinker. Have fun. Later.

[PatrickHenry]

A couple of links for you Mayberry, from both the progressive and the antiprogressive POV:)
http://www.lewrockwell.com/anderson/anderson48.html
http://www.progressivedailybeacon.com/more.php?page=opinion&id=1564

Here's another one from the Pentagon: http://www.digitaljournal.com/article/72840

So don't run off in a huff! Stay and debate!

[Mayberry]

So don't run off in a huff! Stay and debate!
Why? Honestly, what good will it do me besides driving me nuts? If you really believe in this stuff, nothing I can say or show you is going to change your mind. It's a waste of my time. I'm run down, burnt out. There's no point in this. I've got more productive things to do. I've presented rational evidence do disprove this theory, and that's all I can do. So saianora (sp?). People who read this thread, and the others on the subject, can determine for themselves what is right or wrong. My job is done. Catch ya later.

[PatrickHenry]

Wait! Why did you say I've "gone off the deep end?"
Why did you say "all the kook conspiracies?"

I thought you were referring to my mention of the 100 year war, so I posted some stuff to show that others have seen that too.

If you were referring to my mention of the "other anomalies of that day," there were many. Perhaps some were explainable, but taken together, they add up to an inside job.

And I don't "really believe in this stuff, " I am certain...

Anyway, sorry to see you go, 'cause it is a hobby of mine interacting with the folks who have swallowed the Official Story, hook, line and sinker... :)

[manu1959]

[quote=manu1959]the madrid towers structural design is nothing like wtc On the contrary. Nearly Identical. About the only difference was The Windsor Tower had Reinforced concrete core columns versus steel of the WTC. THICK Steel that sliced the aluminum plane to shreds like a cheese grater.
and the madrid towers structural system was not compromised by being hit by a jet plane......The WTC towers were designed to survive MULTIPLE Boeing 707 hits.
One 767 could not bring a tower down without some help.

madrid was not a premiter structural skin and madrid was not compromised by a jet airplane..... impact blew fire proofing off the trusses....cut the sprinkler system and set fire to the ff+e.....

wtc core was steel and concrete....this was also compromised by the impact....

help was fire....casued the trusses to sag and pull away from the compromised bucklink skin.....panckae colapse....

question...if charges were set....which floor were they set on?....review of the video of the pancake colapse would tell you.....tell me which floor on wtc I and which floor on wtc II.....definition of potential energy?

[DANG]

Cognitive Dissonance comes to mind. Those who hold the coats of bullies actually encourage and empower them to do even more of the same. Just look the other way from a few iron clad facts... try to forget.

But if they have to admit to themselves that they have been so wrong for so long about something so HORRIBLY unthinkable.... it would destroy their world as they know it.

I did not want to believe this stuff when the evidence was first presented to me.

I only mentioned a couple of witnesses to the use of cutter charges and thermate on that black tuesday. Many more Firefighters gave their oral histories which were sealed from the public.

I spent the better part of the afternoon trying to find the 500 Firefighters oral history of 911 .... FINALLY here it is... at least parts of it:
http://www.mindfully.org/Reform/2006/911-WTC-Twin-Towers26jan06.htm

Explosive Testimony:
Revelations about the Twin Towers in the 9/11 Oral Histories
DAVID RAY GRIFFIN / 911truth.org 26jan2006
(More on David Ray Griffin (http://www.google.com/custom?q=%22DAVID+RAY+GRIFFIN%22&cof=T%3A%23000000%3BLW%3A522%3BBIMG%3Ahttp%3A%2F%2 Fwww.mindfully.org%2Fmindfully-body-search.jpg%3BL%3Ahttp%3A%2F%2Fwww.mindfully.org%2F mindfully_searchGray.GIF%3BLC%3A%23787878%3BLH%3A6 0%3BBGC%3A%23F7F7F7%3BAH%3Acenter%3BVLC%3A%2393930 0%3BGL%3A0%3BS%3Ahttp%3A%2F%2Fwww.mindfully.org%3B AWFID%3A90eb04944af8e231%3B&domains=www.mindfully.org&sitesearch=www.mindfully.org)| 911 )

Listen now to the author interviewed on on Guns and Butter (http://www.gunsandbutter.net/archives.php?si=121)10.2 Mb MP3 file

Also listen to his lecture as broadcast by on the evening of 30mar2006 in Oakland CA
Download MP3 (http://www.radio4all.net/pub/files/pauldivin@yahoo.com/2190-1-20060331-Griffin_WTC_30mar2006.mp3) file runtime: 01:07:27 32Kbps mp3 (15.44MB) Mono



“[T]here was just an explosion [in the south tower]. It seemed like on television [when] they blow up these buildings. It seemed like it was going all the way around like a belt, all these explosions.”--Firefighter Richard Banaciski

“I saw a flash flash flash [at] the lower level of the building. You know like when they demolish a building?”--Assistant Fire Commissioner Stephen Gregory

“[I]t was [like a] professional demolition where they set the charges on certain floors and then you hear 'Pop, pop, pop, pop, pop'."--Paramedic Daniel Rivera

__________________________________________________ __________________

The above quotations come from a collection of 9/11 oral histories that, although recorded by the Fire Department of New York (FDNY) at the end of 2001, were publicly released only on August 12, 2005. Prior to that date, very few Americans knew the content of these accounts or even the fact that they existed.

Why have we not known about them until recently? Part of the answer is that the city of New York would not release them until it was forced to do so. Early in 2002, the New York Times requested copies under the freedom of information act, but Mayor Michael Bloomberg’s administration refused. So the Times, joined by several families of 9/11 victims, filed suit. After a long process, the city was finally ordered by the New York Court of Appeals to release the records (with some exceptions and redactions allowed). Included were oral histories, in interview form, provided by 503 firefighters and medical workers.1 (Emergency Medical Services had become a division within the Fire Department.2) The Times then made these oral histories publicly available.3

Once the content of these testimonies is examined, it is easy to see why persons concerned to protect the official story about 9/11 would try to keep them hidden. By suggesting that explosions were occurring in the World Trade Center’s Twin Towers, they pose a challenge to the official account of 9/11, according to which the towers were caused to collapse solely by the impact of the airplanes and the resulting fires.

In any case, now that the oral histories have finally been released, it is time for Americans and the world in general to see what these brave men and women reported about that fateful day. If this information forces a reevaluation of the official story about 9/11, better now than later.

<snip>

Demolition Rings: At this point, Deshore’s account moved to another standard phenomenon seen by those who watch controlled demolitions: explosion rings, in which a series of explosions runs rapidly around a building. Deshore’s next words were: “Then this flash just kept popping all the way around the building and that building had started to explode. The popping sound, and with each popping sound it was initially an orange and then a red flash came out of the building and then it would just go all around the building on both sides as far as I could see. These popping sounds and the explosions were getting bigger, going both up and down and then all around the building."38

An explosion ring (or belt) was also described by firefighter Richard Banaciski. Speaking of the south tower, he said: “[T]here was just an explosion. It seemed like on television [when] they blow up these buildings. It seemed like it was going all the way around like a belt, all these explosions.”39

A description of what appeared to be a ring of explosions was also given by Deputy Commissioner Thomas Fitzpatrick, who said: "We looked up at the [south tower] . . . . All we saw was a puff of smoke coming from about 2 thirds of the way up . . . . It looked like sparkling around one specific layer of the building. . . . My initial reaction was that this was exactly the way it looks when they show you those implosions on TV."40

More, must see... (if you only click one link today, make it this one) (http://www.mindfully.org/Reform/2006/911-WTC-Twin-Towers26jan06.htm) Explosive eyewitness testimony of cutter charges. What more could it take?

[manu1959]

Cognitive Dissonance comes to mind. Those who hold the coats of bullies actually encourage and empower them to do even more of the same. Just look the other way from a few iron clad facts... try to forget.

But if they have to admit to themselves that they have been so wrong for so long about something so HORRIBLY unthinkable.... it would destroy their world as they know it.

I did not want to believe this stuff when the evidence was first presented to me.

I only mentioned a couple of witnesses to the use of cutter charges and thermate on that black tuesday. Many more Firefighters gave their oral histories which were sealed from the public.

I spent the better part of the afternoon trying to find the 500 Firefighters oral history of 911 .... FINALLY here it is... at least parts of it:
http://www.mindfully.org/Reform/2006/911-WTC-Twin-Towers26jan06.htm

Explosive Testimony:
Revelations about the Twin Towers in the 9/11 Oral Histories
DAVID RAY GRIFFIN / 911truth.org 26jan2006
[More on David Ray Griffin | 911 ]

Listen now to the author interviewed on on Guns and Butter 10.2 Mb MP3 file

Also listen to his lecture as broadcast by on the evening of 30mar2006 in Oakland CA
Download MP3 file runtime: 01:07:27 32Kbps mp3 (15.44MB) Mono



“[T]here was just an explosion [in the south tower]. It seemed like on television [when] they blow up these buildings. It seemed like it was going all the way around like a belt, all these explosions.”--Firefighter Richard Banaciski

“I saw a flash flash flash [at] the lower level of the building. You know like when they demolish a building?”--Assistant Fire Commissioner Stephen Gregory

“[I]t was [like a] professional demolition where they set the charges on certain floors and then you hear 'Pop, pop, pop, pop, pop'."--Paramedic Daniel Rivera

__________________________________________________ __________________

The above quotations come from a collection of 9/11 oral histories that, although recorded by the Fire Department of New York (FDNY) at the end of 2001, were publicly released only on August 12, 2005. Prior to that date, very few Americans knew the content of these accounts or even the fact that they existed.

Why have we not known about them until recently? Part of the answer is that the city of New York would not release them until it was forced to do so. Early in 2002, the New York Times requested copies under the freedom of information act, but Mayor Michael Bloomberg’s administration refused. So the Times, joined by several families of 9/11 victims, filed suit. After a long process, the city was finally ordered by the New York Court of Appeals to release the records (with some exceptions and redactions allowed). Included were oral histories, in interview form, provided by 503 firefighters and medical workers.1 (Emergency Medical Services had become a division within the Fire Department.2) The Times then made these oral histories publicly available.3

Once the content of these testimonies is examined, it is easy to see why persons concerned to protect the official story about 9/11 would try to keep them hidden. By suggesting that explosions were occurring in the World Trade Center’s Twin Towers, they pose a challenge to the official account of 9/11, according to which the towers were caused to collapse solely by the impact of the airplanes and the resulting fires.

In any case, now that the oral histories have finally been released, it is time for Americans and the world in general to see what these brave men and women reported about that fateful day. If this information forces a reevaluation of the official story about 9/11, better now than later.

<snip>

Demolition Rings: At this point, Deshore’s account moved to another standard phenomenon seen by those who watch controlled demolitions: explosion rings, in which a series of explosions runs rapidly around a building. Deshore’s next words were: “Then this flash just kept popping all the way around the building and that building had started to explode. The popping sound, and with each popping sound it was initially an orange and then a red flash came out of the building and then it would just go all around the building on both sides as far as I could see. These popping sounds and the explosions were getting bigger, going both up and down and then all around the building."38

An explosion ring (or belt) was also described by firefighter Richard Banaciski. Speaking of the south tower, he said: “[T]here was just an explosion. It seemed like on television [when] they blow up these buildings. It seemed like it was going all the way around like a belt, all these explosions.”39

A description of what appeared to be a ring of explosions was also given by Deputy Commissioner Thomas Fitzpatrick, who said: "We looked up at the [south tower] . . . . All we saw was a puff of smoke coming from about 2 thirds of the way up . . . . It looked like sparkling around one specific layer of the building. . . . My initial reaction was that this was exactly the way it looks when they show you those implosions on TV."40

More, must see... (if you only click one link today, make it this one) (http://www.mindfully.org/Reform/2006/911-WTC-Twin-Towers26jan06.htm) Explosive eyewitness testimony of cutter charges. What more could it take?


what floor did the fire fighters make it to?

when the building pancacked what floor does "the drop" start on?

when steel snaps due to a colapse.....what happens?

[DANG]

1) Why dont you tell me, I am not your errand boy
2) Pancake is not an accurate term, but the drop started in B2, B3, B4, B5 or B6
(Probably B2 where the 500 lb Press was destroyed by the explosion before the plane hit)
3) Why dont you just make your point?

[DANG]

Sorry so cranky. Its late. Gnite! Peace.