Former FDNY Firefighter, Rudy Dent: "Incontrovertible fact (WTC) buildings were brought down."

Good thread bonez! What I want to know about this whole obviuos facade is this

1. Why never another mention of the 2.3T even a few months after this event by anybody..

2. Why was no one investigated for not coming to work that day..

3. Who (people) and what companies pulled large amounts out of the stock market just
prior to the event..

4. Why did we use this to go in Iraq and Afghanistan when we knew the OBL/CIA boogeyman was in Pakistan..

These seem to be the questions a lot.of people can not answer even if they are amateur engineers

originally posted by: wmd_2008
a reply to: andr3w68

Well you have people called STRUCTURAL ENGINEERS many THOUSANDS of them worldwide yet you dont see them jumping to claim it was demolished.

I have very regular contact with people like that due to my job and have NEVER heard one back that theory.

en.wikipedia.org...

The organization continues to collect signatures for a petition that demands an independent investigation with subpoena power of the September 11 attacks, specifically the collapse of the World Trade Center towers and 7 WTC.[2][14] By December 2012, over 1,750 architectural and engineering professionals and 16,000 other supporters had signed the petition.

To prove that a jet plane alone could bring the towers down, a simple simulation is all that is required, either using scale models or FEA (Finite Element Analysis). No one has yet done that, despite it being a decade ago.

originally posted by: BubbaT
Nobody wants to believe it could happen because nobody wants to believe the people in our Govt. would ever kill their own citizens. These people don't think like you and I. They are bottom feeding parasitical rats that don't care one bit about any of us. They would kill 250 million of us if they knew the remaining 50 m wouldn't finish them off. This is one reason they want to disarm us. 9/11 was planned far in advance. Anyone that thinks otherwise is naive.

I agree.

I don't know if the twin towers fell by themselves or were lined with explosives/nukes/whatnot, but our gov definitely knew this was going to happen and most likely had a hand (or two) in it happening. I call it a prelude to NWO.

I dont get how people think that themite is some sort of magical substance that only the us govmt would have knowledge to make. ANYONE can make it from stuff in your own home even (pop cans and batteries) SO if we the plain old sheeple could make it why not anyone else in the world. Plus when thermite is used it doesnt explode...it burns an extreamly bright white sorta looks like welding. So I just dont get the thermite theory...or the small nukes?? Would there not be radiatoin left over even if the nukes were small? just my opinions ....

a reply to: mikegrouchy

I have never heard this sort of theory before...but I have wondered something similar

Things that never made sense to me is that those building all THREE together can hold upwards of 50,000 and as many as 150,000 used the In the World Trade Center as horrific as that day was I found it stunning there were not more causalities! Oddly the timing prevented the buildings being fully occupied!

If the building had not come down within their foot prints the devastation and loss of life would have been much, much worse!

Wouldn't that be a crazy scenario that the building were indeed demo'd to prevent something even more massive, they were purposefully destroyed in a no win situation for bringing down a building and left with little options...

The general public is not informed as who wants to work in a building that is retrofitted for demolition...No one would want that ownership either but it makes some sense.

So now you must wonder is this sort of "insurance" in many Skyscrapers?

a reply to: mikegrouchy

That is an interesting thought.
But then, how does one explain how quickly a controlled demolition was set up, in the midst of a burning building?
Controlled demolitions don't work like that, from everything I've ever seen. They require extensive prep.

originally posted by: meowningstar

originally posted by: signalfire
And, there's THIS: 9-11 Nuke Cancers

Were the twin towers not lined with asbestos?

Sure, but if you read the material, the cancers are of the type that's been associated with radiation exposure, not asbestos. Obviously there will be some overlap and unknowns, which is what they are depending on to hide causes. Same thing the pharmaceutical industry relies upon with regards to immunizationW and prescriptions - 'too much time has passed, you can't prove anything...' Then they get the government to hold them harmless.

What part of 'the air is safe to breathe' said by Christine Whitman, head of the EPA, do you not realize is the mother of all lies and shows utmost complicity in hiding the truth of the situation? Cuz, you know, the public might panic, the usual excuse they use for always lying to us, if not their own criminality?

originally posted by: charles1952
Again, I'm speaking as an outsider who has thought about 9/11, maybe twice in the last 10 years.

On one side, there is the government story. Apparently, people know pretty much what it is and the story has some supporters.

On the other side, we have "It was caused by nukes." It was caused by thermite." "It was caused by planes flown by remote control." "It was caused by the Jews." "It was caused by the United States under Bush to start a war for oil." "The planning went on for a long time, it was started under Clinton."

Before I try to figure out whether the government story is true, or the conspiracy story is true, would someone tell me, finally, what the conspiracy story actually is? In the meantime, I'll just go down to the beach and find a pile of sand I can stick my head into while I wait for you to sort this out a little better.

Charles, every one of your posts is the same thing... 'I never have looked into this much, I don't understand, someone please explain it to me'...

You really don't care or you'd do the research yourself. And yeah, it's a rabbit hole of massive proportions, thus the conflicting evidence, ideas, theories. We're all here trying to parse it out, except for those obvious debunker sorts you find everytime subjects like this come up. (They add nothing new to the discussion but are really good at obfuscating real information, and endlessly mentioning unimportant stuff).

Maybe stick to your beach, you'll be happier there. You seem like a good sort of chap but I wonder why you bother asking your questions, if you can't be bothered to look into it for yourself and come to your own conclusions?

originally posted by: abeverage
a reply to: mikegrouchy

I have never heard this sort of theory before...but I have wondered something similar

Things that never made sense to me is that those building all THREE together can hold upwards of 50,000 and as many as 150,000 used the In the World Trade Center as horrific as that day was I found it stunning there were not more causalities! Oddly the timing prevented the buildings being fully occupied!

If the building had not come down within their foot prints the devastation and loss of life would have been much, much worse!

I had no idea that the numbers could have been that high. I mean I somehow intuitively knew the towers could office a lot of people, I had just never seen numbers before. And how many souls were in the shadow that day... if the towers had actually been knocked over.


Mike Grouchy

originally posted by: pirhanna
a reply to: mikegrouchy

That is an interesting thought.
But then, how does one explain how quickly a controlled demolition was set up, in the midst of a burning building?
Controlled demolitions don't work like that, from everything I've ever seen. They require extensive prep.

The 1993 World Trade Center bombing was eight years before the planes hit. Plenty of months. 445 weeks to be exact.


Mike Grouchy

originally posted by: abeverage
a reply to: mikegrouchy

The general public is not informed as who wants to work in a building that is retrofitted for demolition...No one would want that ownership either but it makes some sense.

So now you must wonder is this sort of "insurance" in many Skyscrapers?

Many? Well.... how many have been "previously van bombed in one corner of the basement" ?

Mike Grouchy

good video. i think the guy's legit. i believe him.

a reply to: signalfire

Dear signalfire,

Thanks for writing, you are correct that in the 9/11 forum, I say that a lot.

In the immortal words of somebody or other, "Whoaaa, man. Chill out, dude."

Maybe stick to your beach, you'll be happier there. You seem like a good sort of chap but I wonder why you bother asking your questions, if you can't be bothered to look into it for yourself and come to your own conclusions?

I've got two reasons for denying personal knowledge of the subject and asking questions.

1.) I really don't know, and I'm looking for answers. I don't have infinite time and I'm not prepared to go down every "rabbit hole of massive proportions." If I followed that logic to it's extreme, I could study things until I was 90, then come to ATS and say "I've nothing to ask, I know everything."

Further, it occasionally points out an issue that had been neglected in the discussion, a fresh pair of eyes, so to speak.

2.) The people who have studied this at some length have formed their opinions. Posters can (and do) shout at each other all day long with no effect other than getting the whole forum shut down for a while.

I would have thought it would have dawned on people here, that you have to try to persuade the people who are undecided, and poorly informed on this issue. People, in short, like me.

I'm an ideal test subject, I'm starting with a very slight leaning towards the government story. Not that I agree with it, because I'm not completely sure what their story is, but because the marshaled a whole lot of people to look at it. But I could change my mind in a flash.

We're all here trying to parse it out,

Forgive me, but it seems the main occupation is to tell other posters that they're blind if they can't see it, it's obvious and incontrovertible, endlessly coming up with new bits of information and going back to the "it's incontrovertible " cycle.

You've persuaded me that this subject is still worth discussing. If the group's advice is that I go explore the issue on my own until I'm fully up to speed before I come back in, I can do that.

I can, but I won't.

With respect,
Charles1952

a reply to: _BoneZ_

Whats really weird is that Silverstein said that 'they/we decided to pull it" (or something like that, not an actual quote), which clearly states an intentional decision.

I don't know when that interview was taken but he was very casual in saying that.

- Isn't this like super top secret - why does he even know about it?

- What went through his head after he said that? 'Oops, thats right, they're not supposed to know.. It takes weeks to plant those detonators.. and months to plan a controlled demolition.. the cabal won't be happy about this.." But whats amazing is the calm casual attitude about the whole thing. He didn't look nervous at all. Only the biggest ... in history.

Also weird was the BBC reporting WTC7 coming down before it happened. Like 'oops, thats right .. it hasn't happened yet..' How are people so casual.. and negligent. It's comical. www.youtube.com...

Or how about that funny witness on Fox News who saw it all .. www.youtube.com...

He said it was due to "structural failure because the fire was too intense.." How does he know that? It just happened. He on the other hand, looks very unnatural for the situation and a little nervous. Not nervous that the buildings just came down (everyone else is in genuine shock still), apparently he is not (in genuine shock) and just a little nervous and unnatural performing in front of the camera.

Wow, how many people were in on this? Its unbelievable that so many people can be in on it and still stay relatively undercover. Guess it was not so super top secret..

"three weeks or more of preparation" to set up the controlled demolitions, he says. That is so wrong. Make that months and months and months of work to install the hundreds of explosive charges and the miles of cables that would've been needed. The man has no relevant expertise, he merely repeats the same misconceptions and errors.
Fact : no traces of nano-thermite were found. None. Read Stephen Jones pseudo-scientific paper and, just as important, understand it.

originally posted by: andr3w68
a reply to: ChiefD

Someone could debunk the ability of a plane to fly. "It's to heavy to get off the ground" they might say.

Well, no...they can't. All they can do is argue why they think it won't. There's a little thing called evidence & repetitive testing and observation.

That was a horrible analogy.

a reply to: havok

Sad to say I agree with you. Even when people find it suspicious, which I find more and more people do. In fact, the majority of people around my age don't buy the official story, but nothing is being done nor will be done likely. We need my generation to be diligent and active in the economic/political climate we find ourselves in. Alas, most people my age (later twenties) are either too self absorbed with their own lives in less meaningful ways or are too distracted by all the bull# around us to care. I actually find a surprising amount of people that don't buy the official story. Hell I even find a surprising number of people I talk to seem to agree that their is some sort of agenda by the hidden hands that rule the world, but no one can come up with a solution or they believe it is not obtainable either because of a lack of organization or a lack of motivation by their fellow countryman. They make us feel that way though....it's working....and as someone who sees all of this and recognizes the sea of bull# around us. I feel like I'm drowning trying to keep my head above the water while shouting "HELP! THE #ING SHIP IS SINKING!" but all the other passengers that are sinking with the ship are just sitting their playing with their cell phones or complaining about how the other passengers aren't going to help bail out the water. It doesn't matter though. The ship will sink, the people will drown, and I will simply hope that I can stay afloat amidst the bloated corpses.

originally posted by: kolyma
Fact : no traces of nano-thermite were found. None. Read Stephen Jones pseudo-scientific paper and, just as important, understand it.

What, are you insane?

The micro dust particles ('micro-spheres' that can only be produced by a thermite recation) blanketed the entire area in a thick layer. It was found in several independent tests including tests conducted by the USGS (U.S. Geological Survey).

This video includes the scientific testimony.

I've recorded a good song (demo) about 9/11. It's second from top on my SoundCloud page. Remember that I'm a songwriter-composer, NOT a singer, or definitely not a good one. Who else out there, with any at least minimal amount of popularity, has recorded a song about 9/11? Obvious answer is NO ONE, or that I know of. Songs are downloadable (free). Here are the link and lyrics:

soundcloud.com...

NINE-ELEVEN RECKONING

the Twin Towers fell like something from Hell, and it was not by jet fuel, let physics be damned, they’re forcing their sham hook, line and stinker, now where is the science?, where is the sanity?, where is the truth?, no jet at the Pentagon, it was hit by a missile-bomb, how in the “bleep” did they get away with that?

explosions were heard, yet never a word from the ignorant media, the heat was so felt, workboots they did melt some three months later, it’s controlled demolition in a clear field of vision for those who have eyes to see, so where did the logic fail being smacked with a fairy tale?, who can believe all the lies they have told?

make a stand for justice, time has come for reckoning, come alive and shine your Heavenly Light, let’s begin again, learn that things are not what they appear, try forgiveness and mercy for a change, there’s a way to get home from the brutal battlefield

a reply to: ChiefD

Too bad one of those "books," you refer to is NOT the NIST Report on Building 7.