It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Are the 9-11 I-beams cut in sharp angles?

page: 15
7
<< 12  13  14    16  17  18 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 20 2007 @ 05:26 PM
link   
MODS, FORGIVE ME, I HAVE TO REPLY TO THIS IN SELF DEFENSE.


Originally posted by whiterabbit
Congratulations. You just gave me CONCRETE PROOF that you're lying!

You want to know how I know you're lying?

You said earlier you checked for cached versions of that website. You said that.

Well... Mr. Search Engine Wizard, if it was a members-only forum that no search engine could index anyway, why did you say you checked for cached versions of that website? You wouldn't have checked, because there wouldn't BE ANY.

You're lying. I am happy that I can now say for sure that you're lying.


Concrete Proof lol... Thats what YOU call concrete proof huh? No wonder you believe the official story of 911.

When I said I searched for cached versions of the website, I was searching for DUPLICATE INFORMATION THAT MIGHT HAVE LEAKED AND TRAVELED OUT OF THAT FORUM ONTO OTHER WEBSITES. Even though the forums were private, lots of the information discussed can easy make it to other places, like ATS for example. I searched for phrases that I have memorized from the thread/forum and nothing came up..

Please.. give up! You won't win! I am not lying!

NO FOR THE 1000000000000 TIME IN A ROW--- GET BACK ON TOPIC!


This following picture was taken 9/23/01:



Please tell me why they would rush to that ONE BEAM, and cut a 2 to 4 foot section off of it on 9/12, yet leave the rest there leaning against the building for 11 more days? An entire week and a half passes, and the steel beams are still up against the Verizon building...

Does that make sense? Does that fall into whiterabbits theory of the beam being cut for absolutly no reason by firefighters? Put simply, NO.

---

Geez so predictable a debunker will try fog tactics, to take the thread off subject when they are loosing a debate.







[edit on 20-3-2007 by Connected]




posted on Mar, 20 2007 @ 05:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by intrepid
You might want to check the staff that are in charge of this forum. NB82 has recently been give the dubious honour of modding this forum.


Yeah, didn't mean to disrespect NB82. I didn't realize he was a mod when I wrote that. Sorry about that. I thought it was just somebody busting my chops.



posted on Mar, 20 2007 @ 05:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by Connected
When I said I searched for cached versions of the website, I was searching for DUPLICATE INFORMATION THAT MIGHT HAVE LEAKED AND TRAVELED OUT OF THAT FORUM ONTO OTHER WEBSITES. Even though the forums were private, lots of the information discussed can easy make it to other places, like ATS for example. I searched for phrases that I have memorized from the thread/forum and nothing came up..


That's not what you said earlier, about looking for leaked pages. You said you were looking for cached pages.

You're changing your story again.


Please tell me why they would rush to that ONE BEAM, and cut a 2 to 4 foot section off of it on 9/12, yet leave the rest there leaning against the building for 11 more days? An entire week and a half passes, and the steel beams are still up against the Verizon building...


1. You don't know that they cut only that beam. They may have cut several. Unless there's pictures, we just don't know.

2. I can think of a million reasons for cutting those beams. Maybe they were laying half-inside the building and they needed to get to the communications equipment, since they were trying to restore all that.

3. You can see in the picture they posted that neither side of the building was cleared of debris. So why did they bother cutting those beams on the side of the building that we know for a fact they cut them on? They obviously had some reason there, as well.



posted on Mar, 20 2007 @ 06:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by whiterabbit
That's not what you said earlier, about looking for leaked pages. You said you were looking for cached pages.
You're changing your story again.


No I'm not, I just didn't clarify what I searched for. I searched for "versions of the website". Do you understand that it doesnt mean "THE WEBISTE", it means "VERSIONS OF THE WEBSITE" meaning "VERSIONS OF THE INFORMATION ON THE WEBSITE". Do I really have to explain this to you?? REALLY? WHAT IS THE PURPOUS? I AM NOT LYING. YOU JUST DON'T UNDERSTAND A WORD ANYONE SAYS.


Originally posted by whiterabbit
1. You don't know that they cut only that beam. They may have cut several. Unless there's pictures, we just don't know.


Thats the only beam cut in that picture.. Thats not knowning?? Wow you are an odd one.


Originally posted by whiterabbit
2. I can think of a million reasons for cutting those beams. Maybe they were laying half-inside the building and they needed to get to the communications equipment, since they were trying to restore all that.


A million? Really? Should I be gullable and believe that, like you would? Should I hold you to it? Ok, I think I will, why don't you tell me ONE MILLION reasons for cutting those beams.

Wait.. NEVERMIND... YOUR OPINION DOES NOT MATTER. B.T.W. they didn't have to restore anything that was in that window. Thanks for jumping to conclusions.



Originally posted by whiterabbit
3. You can see in the picture they posted that neither side of the building was cleared of debris. So why did they bother cutting those beams on the side of the building that we know for a fact they cut them on? They obviously had some reason there, as well.


Thats a good question.. maybe because they DIDNT cut those beams, and they were like that since the collapse. Has that ever crossed your mind?



posted on Mar, 20 2007 @ 06:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by Connected
No I'm not, I just didn't clarify what I searched for. I searched for "versions of the website". Do you understand that it doesnt mean "THE WEBISTE", it means "VERSIONS OF THE WEBSITE" meaning "VERSIONS OF THE INFORMATION ON THE WEBSITE". Do I really have to explain this to you?? REALLY? WHAT IS THE PURPOUS? I AM NOT LYING. YOU JUST DON'T UNDERSTAND A WORD ANYONE SAYS.


You would've said that if that's what you meant. You would've been searching for other websites, not cached pages.

You said cached pages. You clearly meant cached pages. There wouldn't have been any cached pages to search for if it was a members only site.


Thats the only beam cut in that picture.. Thats not knowning?? Wow you are an odd one.


Yeah... It's the only cut beam in that picture. But you keep saying it's the only beam they cut. How do you know they didn't cut any of the other beams? You can't. There's no pictures to tell by.


B.T.W. they didn't have to restore anything that was in that window. Thanks for jumping to conclusions.


How do you know there was nothing to restore in that room? There's clearly communications equipment in there.

And since they started restoring telecommunications on September 12th at the Verizon building, it's reasonable to assume they had SOME reason for cutting the beam.



Thats a good question.. maybe because they DIDNT cut those beams, and they were like that since the collapse. Has that ever crossed your mind?


Of course it has.

But in at least one of those pictures you posted, the beam is cut all the way across with a cutting torch. If that had been done before it collapsed, the building would've fallen on their heads.

Plus, there were people cutting beams on September 12th around the corner of the building. That's an established fact.

If they had some reason for cutting those beams, why is it hard to believe they had some reason for cutting those on the other side as well?



posted on Mar, 20 2007 @ 06:35 PM
link   
Connected, you should've never brought up that photographer dude. Your claims can't be verified there and now you've left poor whiterabbit foaming at the mouth because of it. Shame on you.

Seriously though, you could help shed some needed light on quite possibly the biggest crime scene in history. You should try to find a way to dig up this Mike guy and get him to post here.

[edit on 20-3-2007 by massexodus]

[edit on 20-3-2007 by massexodus]



posted on Mar, 20 2007 @ 07:16 PM
link   
Guys are you talking about a beam on the Verizon buliding? If so I have somthing to add..

[edit on 20-3-2007 by 22250]



posted on Mar, 20 2007 @ 09:18 PM
link   
whiterabbit, as promised, here is another argument, since you don't understand the others and I have to keep repeating myself.

A Firefighter once said, "safety is always first in the fire service."

It's their way of life. Don't you agree?

IF in fact they DID cut the very large heavy metal beam on 9/12 like you claim they did, do you think they would just let the cut piece fall 4 to 5 floors down, potentially hurting or killing someone? No they wouldn't. They would use a crane to support it as they cut it, and to help lower it onto a truck, so that the fireman doesn't have to carry that thing down the ladder. Don't you think?

Look at this picture below.:




The beam is cut, but there is only a fire fighter who is interested in stopping the fire. All we can see in this photo with the guy, is a fire engine, and no cranes. He is not trying to clean up. Why would anyone try to clean up while the fires are still going? Why would they try to cut a steel beam when everything is soaking wet?

Now look at this picture below.:



The fires are out now, and THIS is the clean up crew. These people are actually trying to take the steel out. One of the main reasons to cut the steel on 911, was so that the mini cranes that first arrived at ground zero could lift them. Later in the week, when the big cranes arrived, they cut them only to fit them in trucks.

Don't you think the firefighters would first put out the flames, before trying to cut any steel near their position? After all, with all the reports of bombs and explosions, you would think they would try to put out fires as soon as possible so it does not ignite something else and explode.


Then, don't you think the firefighters would wait for a crane to help them support the piece they are cutting?

Isn't it ILLOGICAL to move a crane next to the WTC 7 fires to support the beam, just to cut it, then load it on a truck. Then, have the crane tuck in its legs and move out so that a firetruck can come in, and put out the fires. Then after the fires are out, move the crane and clean up crew back in?

Doesn't make sense to do it that way. I am 100% certain they would first put out the fires, THEN try to cut beams. Even if they didn't use a crane to support the heavy piece, they STILL should have put the fires out first. The picture above shows the beam is cut, and a firefighter putting out flames. Please tell me why they would cut the beams before putting out the flames? They wouldn't.







[edit on 20-3-2007 by Connected]



posted on Mar, 20 2007 @ 11:23 PM
link   
I'm not sure what u are saying either. But that makes sense what the person above me rotw. Nice work. I agree! thanx
peace



posted on Mar, 21 2007 @ 08:25 AM
link   

Originally posted by Connected
Don't you think the firefighters would first put out the flames, before trying to cut any steel near their position? After all, with all the reports of bombs and explosions, you would think they would try to put out fires as soon as possible so it does not ignite something else and explode.


1. You don't know that they didn't put out the flames first. They could've cut it September 13th, 14th, 15th, etc. Basically any time before the Verizon photographers went in.

2. Who ever said it HAD to have been firefighters? I certainly didn't. There were utility workers in the Verizon building as early as September 12th, as well as Verizon employees. All were trying to get telecommunications restored. It could've been firefighters, employees, utility workers, etc. Perhaps they needed to unblock that window for some reason. Perhaps half the steel beam was laying through the hole in the wall. There's lots of potential reasons.

3. No Verizon employees or firefighters ever reported that those steel beams were cut right after the collapse. They never reported any explosives damage on them either. With all the people we've established were tromping around that building, you don't think one of them might have thought to mention it or take a picture?

4. We know they were cutting steal beams in general as early as September 11th. We know they were cutting steel beams around the corner of the Verizon building starting September 12th. What reason did they have to cut THOSE beams? I can't tell you, because it obviously didn't help them remove the debris from there, since it was laying there over a week later. But since we know for sure they cut those, they obviously had SOME reason to do it. Just like they doubtless had SOME reason to cut the ones on the other side of the building.

[edit on 21-3-2007 by whiterabbit]



posted on Mar, 21 2007 @ 09:49 AM
link   
You are absolutly getting rediculous now.. its so damn funny.



Originally posted by whiterabbit
1. You don't know that they didn't put out the flames first.


I just showed you a photo of a firefighter putting out fires right in front of the cut beam we are talking about... So I do know.


Originally posted by whiterabbit
2. Who ever said it HAD to have been firefighters? I certainly didn't. There were utility workers in the Verizon building as early as September 12th, as well as Verizon employees. All were trying to get telecommunications restored. It could've been firefighters, employees, utility workers, etc. Perhaps they needed to unblock that window for some reason. Perhaps half the steel beam was laying through the hole in the wall. There's lots of potential reasons.


So now you are changing YOUR story. This whole time, your only evidence was that a few figherfighters were on the other side of the building cutting steel on 9/12. So now you are abandoning your evidence and saying that it might have been someone else that cut it? Please show me proof, once again all I see is opinion.. opinion opinion opinion.


Originally posted by whiterabbit
3. No Verizon employees or firefighters ever reported that those steel beams were cut right after the collapse.


THANK YOU for supporting my theory.


Originally posted by whiterabbit
They never reported any explosives damage on them either. With all the people we've established were tromping around that building, you don't think one of them might have thought to mention it or take a picture?


THEY DID TAKE A PICTURE!!!! Where have you been??? This is the reason they took the picture of the beam.





Originally posted by whiterabbit
4. We know they were cutting steal beams in general as early as September 11th.


Yes to help save lives, and clear STREETS for passages. Not to cut some random steel piece with no significance.


Originally posted by whiterabbit
We know they were cutting steel beams around the corner of the Verizon building starting September 12th.


They FIREFIGHTERS were cutting steel beams on Vesey Street in front of WTC 6, TO CLEAR THE STREET.


Originally posted by whiterabbit
What reason did they have to cut THOSE beams? I can't tell you, because it obviously didn't help them remove the debris from there, since it was laying there over a week later.


You are finaly begining to see the light! Thanks for supporting my origonal thoughts.


Originally posted by whiterabbit
But since we know for sure they cut those, they obviously had SOME reason to do it.


No, we do not "KNOW FOR SURE THEY CUT THOSE". Where do you get such an idea that we do?? We don't know who cut those, what so ever, don't pretend like you do.



Originally posted by whiterabbit
Just like they doubtless had SOME reason to cut the ones on the other side of the building.


They were clearing Vesey Street so they can reach WTC 5 and 6! Didn't you read your own evidence?!?!


---You agree with me on these things---

1: The beam obviously was artificaly cut.

Originally posted by whiterabbit
But since we know for sure they cut those



2: the firefighters had no reason to cut it.

Originally posted by whiterabbit
What reason did they have to cut THOSE beams? I can't tell you



3: they would put out fires before cutting.

Originally posted by whiterabbit
You don't know that they didn't put out the flames first.



Now, all we need to find out, is EXACTLY the date and time this following picture was taken. If it was ON 911, then I have found the blow-the-lid-off evidence of Controlled Demolition of WTC 7.




posted on Mar, 21 2007 @ 10:24 AM
link   
Just a thought.

Even if somehow you could prove that those columns were not cut by cutting torches, where is your positive evidence that they were cut by bombs, and or, bombs and cutting torches?

You can prove the official story wrong as much as you'd like, but if you have no real evidence backing your own theories then they aren't any better.



posted on Mar, 21 2007 @ 10:37 AM
link   

Originally posted by Connected
I just showed you a photo of a firefighter putting out fires right in front of the cut beam we are talking about... So I do know.


You're not getting what I meant. I'm saying, they probably did put the flames out first. But they still had a huge window of days to cut that beam before the photographers went in, as those Verizon photographs were clearly not taken on September 11th.


So now you are changing YOUR story. This whole time, your only evidence was that a few figherfighters were on the other side of the building cutting steel on 9/12.


And that firefighters were cutting beams in other parts of the city.

And I'm not changing my story. I never said I knew who cut those beams. How could I?

But they're obviously cut with a cutting torch. So someone obviously came through and cut them after the collapse. Firefighters, utility workers, Verizon employees--someone.


Please show me proof, once again all I see is opinion.. opinion opinion opinion.


And you think the other side of those columns shows explosive damage based on what?

Opinion opinion opinion.

At least my "opinion opinion opinion" has circumstancial and physical evidence to back it up:

1. Both columns show signs of a cutting torch.
2. One column is clearly cut all the way through by a cutting torch.
3. Firefighters were cutting columns with torches as early as September 11.
4. Firefighters were outside the Verizon building cutting columns as early as September 12th.
5. Utility workers and employees were clearing debris around the Verizon building as early as September 12th.


THEY DID TAKE A PICTURE!!!!


Once again, that's a picture of a column cut by a cutting torch.

No Verizon employee, utility workers, or firefighters ever said there was anything unusual or suspicious about those columns. And I'm assuming they got a much better look at them than you did.


Where have you been??? This is the reason they took the picture of the beam.


No. That is the reason you claim they took the picture in the story you made up that I've already established is probably fiction.

And since you brought it up, I'll debunk it again:

You claim to have talked to the photographer and heard him claim that he took pictures of those beams because they looked suspicious. In other words, you claim to have had smoking gun evidence of the 9/11 conspiracy, yet you did nothing with it--didn't take it to the media, didn't report it, nothing.

As if that wasn't unbelievable enough, when I ask you repeatedly to provide this evidence once again you:

1. Ignore my intial requests for information (even though you respond to everything else immediately).

2. Tell me to do my own research (even though providing this information could prove your conspiracy).

3. Claim you lost it.

4. Claim you want to protect the photographer's privacy.

5. Claim you can't remember his real name.

6. Provide an email that doesn't work.

7. Claim the website doesn't exist any more.

8. Claim you looked for cached pages of the website and couldn't find them.

9. Claim all evidence of the website has been magically erased from the internet.

10. Claim that the website was members-only visible and wouldn't have had any cached pages (contradicting #8).

11. Claim that giving up the website would compromise your identity (contradicting #7, #8, and #9, since if the website was really gone, nobody could link you to it anyway) and which doesn't make sense since clearly proving the 9/11 conspiracy would be more important than your identity anyway.



To put it extremely mildly, your story sounds a like a big piece of fiction.

And if you keep trying to use it as evidence of the beams being cut before the collapse, I'm going to keep putting up this debunking so that everyone knows you made it up.




Originally posted by whiterabbit
4. We know they were cutting steal beams in general as early as September 11th.


Yes to help save lives, and clear STREETS for passages. Not to cut some random steel piece with no significance.


Some beams were to clear streets--others weren't.

They cut beams on Vesey Street on September 12th. As you can see from the aerial picture you posted taken September 23--11 days later--Vesey Street was still not clear.

So why did they cut the beams? By your logic, since the street wasn't clear, they had no reason to cut the beams and it must've been explosives.

Yet, we know they cut those beams. We know it for a fact. So obviously they had a reason.

Just like they probably had a reason to cut the beams around the corner on the adjacent street.


They FIREFIGHTERS were cutting steel beams on Vesey Street in front of WTC 6, TO CLEAR THE STREET.


Read the above. The street wasn't clear 11 days later. So why'd they cut them? By your logic, they shouldn't have.


No, we do not "KNOW FOR SURE THEY CUT THOSE". Where do you get such an idea that we do?? We don't know who cut those, what so ever, don't pretend like you do.


They're cut with a cutting torch. One of them is cut all the way through.

People were using cutting torches all over after 9/11 to remove stuff.

The logical conclusion would be someone cut with with a cutting torch.

The illogical conclusion, based on nother, would be that it must've been explosives.



They were clearing Vesey Street so they can reach WTC 5 and 6! Didn't you read your own evidence?!?!


Sure. But Vesey Street wasn't clear even after a week.

By your repeated logic, they shouldn't have cut any beams there then. Yet they did. They obviously had a reason.


Now, all we need to find out, is EXACTLY the date and time this following picture was taken. If it was ON 911, then I have found the blow-the-lid-off evidence of Controlled Demolition of WTC 7.




Uh, no. You haven't. Not even evidence of anything.

Because you can't even see the ends of the beams in that pictures. You can't even see if they're cut, how high they are in those pictures, etc.

All it proves is they were putting out a fire at the Verizon building shortly after the attack.


You REALLY need to let this one go, dude. It couldn't be more obvious that, based on the physical and circumstancial evidence, they probably cut those columns.

There will be other evidence for you to champion. This one is a loser for your cause.



posted on Mar, 21 2007 @ 10:39 AM
link   

Originally posted by LeftBehind
Even if somehow you could prove that those columns were not cut by cutting torches, where is your positive evidence that they were cut by bombs, and or, bombs and cutting torches?


Well its quite clear they were cut with cutting torches on one side. Also, PHOTOGRAPHIC EVIDENCE shows signs of possible liner shaped charges being used. I already showed pictures, labeled even.



Originally posted by LeftBehind
You can prove the official story wrong as much as you'd like, but if you have no real evidence backing your own theories then they aren't any better.



UGGGHHH Leave it to LeftBehind to say something like this....

I have PHOTOGRAPHIC EVIDENCE of a CUT BEAM on WTC7. This PHOTOGRAPHIC EVIDENCE was taken during the effort to put out the fires at WTC 7. If I can prove that the beam was cut BEFORE the collapse, then I can prove a controlled demolition.

So far, I have proven that the beam was cut BEFORE the real clean up crew arrived. I have also proven that the beam was cut BEFORE they put out the fires at the WTC7 debris.

So whats next? If this beam was cut before the fires were put out, and before the clean up crew arrived, then why is it so hard to believe it was cut before or during the collapse?



posted on Mar, 21 2007 @ 10:41 AM
link   

Originally posted by LeftBehind
Even if somehow you could prove that those columns were not cut by cutting torches, where is your positive evidence that they were cut by bombs, and or, bombs and cutting torches?


That's the thing. There is none. He claims that the other side of those columns would probably show bomb damage, but oddly enough the photographer decided to photograph the boring side.


You can prove the official story wrong as much as you'd like, but if you have no real evidence backing your own theories then they aren't any better.


And that's the thing. The official story on those beams can't even be proved wrong. The sum of his argument is, "Why would they cut those columns?"

Well, I have no idea why they'd cut them. I could speculate a ton of plausible reasons, but without asking the guys who actually cut it, we'll never know.

But to think, just because you don't know the actual reason they did, that it must be explosives just doesn't make any sense. All the other evidence points to them being cut by cutting torches for some reason. There is NO evidence they were cut by anything else.

I don't know how else to argue this. As 9/11 conspiracy claims go, this one is a huge loser. It has no merit.



posted on Mar, 21 2007 @ 10:52 AM
link   

Originally posted by Connected
Well its quite clear they were cut with cutting torches on one side.


Wrong.

One picture shows cutting torch evidence on one side.

Another picture of another column shows cutting torch evidence through the entire thing.


Also, PHOTOGRAPHIC EVIDENCE shows signs of possible liner shaped charges being used. I already showed pictures, labeled even.


Wrong.

The picture shows no evidence of a LSC--no serrated edges, no breakage, no fractured metal. Just a melted slaggy cut like you'd expect from a cutting torch.

You posted a picture of 1/8" thick steel (maybe even thinner) getting blown by an LSC. The damage to metal that you can cut with an axe, would of course be minimal.

The picture you posted earlier of LSC damage to thicker steel (probably 1/4" or ½") showed clear serrated edges and broken metal.

Steel the thickness of the columns would have even clearer damage from an LSC. And the pictures show none.


I have PHOTOGRAPHIC EVIDENCE of a CUT BEAM on WTC7. This PHOTOGRAPHIC EVIDENCE was taken during the effort to put out the fires at WTC 7.


You don't know that the Verizon pictures were taken then at all.


If I can prove that the beam was cut BEFORE the collapse, then I can prove a controlled demolition.


And you can't prove that, because the only pictures we have of cut beams were taken, at the earliest, a couple days after the attack when they had already started removing debris from around the Verizon building and started restoring telecommunications.


So far, I have proven that the beam was cut BEFORE the real clean up crew arrived.


Wrong. You haven't.

The first picture we have of a cut beam is after they'd already started clearing debris from around the Verizon building.



I have also proven that the beam was cut BEFORE they put out the fires at the WTC7 debris.


Wrong. You haven't. Read above.

The first picture we have of a cut beam is taken sometime after they started clearing debris around the Verizon building.

[edit on 21-3-2007 by whiterabbit]



posted on Mar, 21 2007 @ 11:06 AM
link   

Originally posted by whiterabbit
You're not getting what I meant. I'm saying, they probably did put the flames out first.
.


No YOU aren't getting what I am saying.. there is a mother frikken picture right here of a firefighter still putting out fires, and the beam is already cut... that means they did NOT put the flames out first.. get it?




Originally posted by whiterabbit
But they still had a huge window of days to cut that beam before the photographers went in, as those Verizon photographs were clearly not taken on September 11th.
.


Obviously not taken on 9/11???? Please show me how you came up with that information? You see, these pictures are historical. These pictures are the close up evidence of WTC 7's nearly symmetrical collapse. The debris fell exactly how you see them in the picture above, nobody touched them during when the picture was taken. We can clearly see that no clean up crews touched the debris for even a week and a half later.



Originally posted by whiterabbit
And that firefighters were cutting beams in other parts of the city.

And I'm not changing my story. I never said I knew who cut those beams. How could I?
.


Did you forget your post when you said "debunked" because you found a stupid link saying firefighters were cutting beams on Vesey Street?

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Please don't pretend like you didn't think the fire fighters did it. The past 6 pages that was your only argument. Now I shot it down with the "safety" aspect of having to cut something like that...


Originally posted by whiterabbit
But they're obviously cut with a cutting torch. So someone obviously came through and cut them after the collapse. Firefighters, utility workers, Verizon employees--someone.
.


Let me tell you something... The thickness of these beams can not be cut by some ordinary torch that some firefighters, utility workers, or Verizon employees have...

GASOLINE-OXYGEN CUTTING TORCH


Unfortunately for many Urban Search and Rescue (USAR) teams, the steel-cutting equipment we brought could not handle this large cutting task. The exothermic cutting system that is part of the USAR cache was suitable in Oklahoma for burning off pieces of rebar but not feasible for a job of the World Trade Center's (WTC) magnitude. It also made it difficult to control the slag, which can cause auxiliary fires that tend to exacerbate the already poor air quality. The oxyacetylene torch in most USAR teams' cache is so small that it would be more suitable for making jewelry than cutting large beams and columns.


Sound's like they needed to wait for the REAL clean up crew to arrive for the big stuff.


Originally posted by whiterabbit
And you think the other side of those columns shows explosive damage based on what?


PHOTOGRAPHIC EVIDENCE.




Originally posted by whiterabbit
At least my "opinion opinion opinion" has circumstancial and physical evidence to back it up:
1. Both columns show signs of a cutting torch.


Both columns?? There is only one. Even then, this is supporting my theory, I know they show signed of a cutting toch. LSC's too!


Originally posted by whiterabbit
2. One column is clearly cut all the way through by a cutting torch.


All the way through?? I don't see your so called cirumstancil and physical evidence of that!!! SHOW ME!


Originally posted by whiterabbit
3. Firefighters were cutting columns with torches as early as September 11.


Now you are going to say the firefighters cut it? Just a bit ago you said they didn't. If they did cut it, they would use safety first and get a crane, I already explained this part, and you know it..


Originally posted by whiterabbit
4. Firefighters were outside the Verizon building cutting columns as early as September 12th.


Again.. for the 1000000000000001 time they were cleaning Vesey Street, not WTC 7.



Originally posted by whiterabbit
5. Utility workers and employees were clearing debris around the Verizon building as early as September 12th.


Cleaning debris, that is their job?? No, their job was to restore service, you have no "cirumstancil and physical evidence" of them cutting steel beams.


Originally posted by whiterabbit
Once again, that's a picture of a column cut by a cutting torch.


Yes AND it was cut BEFORE CLEANUP. Meaning it was cut BEFORE COLLAPSE.



posted on Mar, 21 2007 @ 11:16 AM
link   

Originally posted by whiterabbit

I have also proven that the beam was cut BEFORE they put out the fires at the WTC7 debris.


Wrong. You haven't. Read above.

The first picture we have of a cut beam is taken sometime after they started clearing debris around the Verizon building.


*SNIP*






The pictures clearly show the debris, untouched, while they put out the fires in the WTC 7 debris...


*SNIP*

[edit on 21-3-2007 by Connected]

Mod Edit: Terms & Conditions Of Use – Please Review This Link.

[edit on 21/3/2007 by Mirthful Me]



posted on Mar, 21 2007 @ 11:29 AM
link   
Your insults are not allowed on these forums.



posted on Mar, 21 2007 @ 11:32 AM
link   

Originally posted by Connected
No YOU aren't getting what I am saying.. there is a mother frikken picture right here of a firefighter still putting out fires, and the beam is already cut... that means they did NOT put the flames out first.. get it?



You cannot see the columns in that picture clearly enough to see if they've been cut yet. Please don't pretend that you can.


Obviously not taken on 9/11???? Please show me how you came up with that information? You see, these pictures are historical. These pictures are the close up evidence of WTC 7's nearly symmetrical collapse. The debris fell exactly how you see them in the picture above, nobody touched them during when the picture was taken. We can clearly see that no clean up crews touched the debris for even a week and a half later.


The pictures were taken by Verizon employees.

The Verizon employees didn't go into the building until at least September 12th to start working.

Deductive reasoning.



Did you forget your post when you said "debunked" because you found a stupid link saying firefighters were cutting beams on Vesey Street?

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Please don't pretend like you didn't think the fire fighters did it. The past 6 pages that was your only argument. Now I shot it down with the "safety" aspect of having to cut something like that...


I think firefighters were probably responsible. But it could have just as easily been utility workers or employees.


Let me tell you something... The thickness of these beams can not be cut by some ordinary torch that some firefighters, utility workers, or Verizon employees have...


Wrong!

Let me say it again: Wrong! In fact, you are as wrong as wrong can be on that one, my friend.

You know how I know?

I've cut steel as thick as that with one! Probably thicker. With a plain old oxy-acetylene torch.

You could not be more wrong on that one.

And read your own article, it even backs me up. It NEVER said they couldn't cut the beams with those torches, because they can! It said they couldn't handle that large of a task, which is true.

Because cutting steel that thick with an oxy-acetylene torch takes forever. The thicker the metal, the longer it takes to heat it up to melting and blow it out.

But you are 100% wrong that it will not cut those columns. It's not the most efficient way to do it if you have to cut hundreds of columns.

Not to mention, we have pictures all over the place of people actually using oxy-acetylene torches on 9/11 to cut beams. We actually have pictures of the workers standing beside the frickin' bottles.

You are 100% wrong on this one.


PHOTOGRAPHIC EVIDENCE.


That is, entirely, a cutting torch cut.

There is no broken metal. There is no serrated edges.

An LSC would not have shattered a piece of steel that thick without leaving those traces.

That is slaggy, melted cutting torch cut--all the way through.


Now you are going to say the firefighters cut it? Just a bit ago you said they didn't.


Wrong.

I specifically said I don't know who cut it. I said it was likely the firefighters, but could've also been utility workers or Verizon employees.


Again.. for the 1000000000000001 time they were cleaning Vesey Street, not WTC 7.


And for the 100000000000001 time, if they were cleaning Vesey Street, why is it impossible they began cleaning the OTHER street?

Because you say so?



Cleaning debris, that is their job?? No, their job was to restore service, you have no "cirumstancil and physical evidence" of them cutting steel beams.


Verizon's own site says they began clearing debris on September 12th. Read it yourself.



Yes AND it was cut BEFORE CLEANUP.


It was not cut before the collapse. There is absolutely no evidence to support that claim whatsoever.

There is physical and circumstancial evidence to support the claim that it was cut shortly after the collapse--within 1-5 days most likely.



new topics

top topics



 
7
<< 12  13  14    16  17  18 >>

log in

join