Controlled Demolition for what reason??

Also to check SPreston's math.
He says that the velocity of the panels is 70 miles per hour.
The travel time of a bowling ball from the top of either WTC1-2 to eaarth is about ten seconds.
70 miles per hour is 70 x 1.5 = 105 feet per second.
ten seconds before gravity wins times 105 feet per second of horizontal velocity is calculated below.

10s X 105 feet per second = 1050 feet.

1050 feet is the distance from the outside wall you would expect to find 4 ton panels. However there are tall buildings that stopped both the horizontal and vertical velocity simultaneously. And seventy miles per hour might be a little too fast.

[edit on 27-11-2008 by fmcanarney]

reply to post by svtman


Jeb Bush(Georges brother) was head of the CIA at the time and the headquarters of the CIA was in building seven, so was all the information on the ENRON scandal. Building seven also was the "bomb shelter' for the mayor of New York, funny he didn't use it eh?

The towers were in need of repair and it would have costed a Billion dollars to remove the asbestos from the buildings.
The Towers were sold to a gentlemen who had them insured just six months before the incident for I believe 60 billion dollars.
All security cameras were shut off and workers were not allowed to enter the building for a few days because of "construction" and other security measures.
"Thermite" was used to destabilize the structure and burn through the beams to help the "free fall" speed of the collapse, quite uncanny that a building fall at "free fall speed".
In videos you can see the thermite coming from the building and falling like welding torch.
The buildings after the collapse burned for weeks after because thermite burns and does not need oxygen to burn at 3ooo degrees underground.

Well my friends. I think we have completely lost track of the subject in this thread. The subject is "Controlled Demolition, for what reason?"
So I think we should be answering that question. Do we see the reason for a controlled demolition of the WTC, disguissed behind a terrorist attack of crashing commercial jetliners into the buildings? (I don´t.)
These are two separate events. The hijacking and crashing of the jetliners into the buildings is one very large, tragic, shocking event.
And then, later on, we have a second very impressive, tragic, shocking event which is the collapse of the towers.
Now, we have to think for a moment. Who could think of having these two events come together? (Only conspiracy theorists.)
What is the purpose of having both things happen?
Is there any need for the airline hijackings and crashes? NO.
It´s very obvious you can have the buildings destroyed by "terrorists" if that´s what you want. A few car bombs in the basements and a few backpacks with explosives distributed throughout the building should do the job. (Of course you would also need to previously install all the necesary strategically placed explosives in the structure anyway.)
That could (IMO) bring about an agressive response by the U.S. against the perpetrators of this act, and this reaction as it happened in reality had the support of a majority of governments. There was no need for the ariliner crashes.
The other point is, if you do the airline crashes, and let´s suppose the buildings are able to take it and not collapse. What would happen? Would that not be enough for the U.S. to take agressive action against the perps?
Would the U.S. not have the support they got after 9/11? OF COURSE IT WOULD!!
Imagine the towers half standing, burning and smoking, endangering half of Manhattan because of the impending danger of collapse. Thousands of new yorkers not being able to return to work for a lot more time than it actually took. Burned bodies being brought out of the buildings, day after day, on live T.V. the dramma of all the families who had loved ones in the buildings shown on mass media (exploited) for a much much longer time. Wouldn´t this be a lot more effective?
So, to the question "for what reason?"
The answer would have to be: To go to war against Afghanistan of course, however, the logic, videos, photos and evidence at the site have shown no sign of controlled demolition whatsoever.

reply to post by rush969



You must be a great admirer of admiral Nelson it seems!
He also put the telescope in front of his blind eye, and squeezed the other shut.

Your points have been heatedly debated on many many forums, in many countries,
through several years.

Obviously the opposing points of view won the day, as we are still here and getting
stronger and stronger.

New evidence for demolitions and cover-ups has again and again been brought to light,
and this will certainly continue in days, weeks and months to come.

You got much background research to do, if you wanna catch up.

Unless, of course, such effort would be the last thing playing on your mind!

reply to post by rush969

however, the logic, videos, photos and evidence at the site have shown no sign of controlled demolition whatsoever.

Well, if you cannot see the WTC in all the videos exploding, then, you need to move on my friend; however, most people do see the explosions in all the videos. So there is really nothing to debate here with you is there.

Originally posted by fmcanarney
Also to check SPreston's math.
He says that the velocity of the panels is 70 miles per hour.

Without looking at any of the rest of the numbers, are you talking about an instantaneous velocity?

That velocity (70 mph) would change over time, as the steel lost kinetic energy to friction from the air resisting and pushing against the steel as the steel moved through the air. I didn't see what data 70 mph is based upon, but it's likely (or at least most logical) that he would use the earliest instantaneous velocity, which would give the maximum speed as the steel came away from the building and most accurately reflect the amount of energy that steel was originally imparted with.


Also, something else you have to consider: the debris was traveling in an arc, or at least at an angle to the ground. That angle has two "component" velocities in vector math or trigonometry: a velocity relative to the flat ground, along the "x axis," and a velocity relative to an imaginary vertical "y axis" going straight up and down. The debris may travel 1500 ft. from its starting position directly to its landing position, but that same spot may only be 500 ft. from its starting position if you measure everything from the ground and ignore how it fell through the air. Same with velocity: you can have debris flying diagonally at 70 mph, but that could work out to only being equivalent to running 30 or 40 mph along the ground and the rest of the velocity represents moving through the vertical axis at the same time. Also there would be an acceleration of 32 ft./s^2 in the y-axis, but the velocity in the x axis should remain fairly constant except for the energy lost to overcome air resistance.

Just thought I would through that out there for anyone concerned.

[edit on 27-11-2008 by bsbray11]

You are going to hear quite a few opinions, quite a bit of debate about what is or is not possible according to the laws of physics, who are trying to help you and who are disinformation agents so.... No opinion involved. There is one video that shows the 'first' plane hitting the tower. It is obvious the explosion from the tower occurs in front of the plane when the plane's shadow is still off to the right, meaning it has not reached the tower yet. So why the explosion?
No need for a degree in physics or engineering. Go outside in the sun and try to touch a wall before the shadow of your finger reaches you. It is impossible as any 8-year-old playing in the sun will realize after only a few minutes of attempting.
Assuming the sun itself in not part of the conspiracy, if the shadow of the plane had not reached the front of the plane, then the plane had not reached the tower. So what exploded? It was not from the crash as that had not occurred yet.
This does not explain who did it or why. It doesn't even explain how it was done. Missile or preset explosive in the building? But it does very clearly demonstrate that the story given to the public is not correct. It very clearly demonstrates that a conspiracy did exist, either in planting the explosives in the building or loading a missile complete with launcher onto the plane.
It does resolve the single most important issue surrounding this event. Are all the 911 truthers delusional? Are they just kidding themselves and nothing unusual happened? Is there actual reason to doubt the government version.
Be careful thought. As has been pointed out, a careful examination of that video just about guarentees you can never change your mind and go back to the old 'truthers are paranoid nuts' world again.

Sure, initial velocity of 70 mph slows down in accordance with air resistance.

I will give SPreston that.

Why controlled demolitions?

Why not, that is what Oklaahoma City was.

OKCity resulted in the bill being passed to put pressure on the militia movement.
WTC1-2 gutted the Constitution.
The next one will result in Martial Law.

Cognitive dissonance is a psychological phenomenon which refers to the discomfort felt at a discrepancy between what you already know or believe, and new information or interpretation. It therefore occurs when there is a need to accommodate new ideas, and it may be necessary for it to develop so that we become "open" to them. Neighbour (1992) makes the generation of appropriate dissonance into a major feature of tutorial (and other) teaching: he shows how to drive this kind of intellectual wedge between learners' current beliefs and "reality".

Description
This is the feeling of uncomfortable tension which comes from holding two conflicting thoughts in the mind at the same time.

Dissonance increases with:

The importance of the subject to us.
How strongly the dissonant thoughts conflict.
Our inability to rationalize and explain away the conflict.

COGNITIVE DISSONANCE

Bizarre as it sounds, our world is the product of a multi generational satanic conspiracy.
(Believe me I would give everything I own to be wrong.)
When we compare this disturbing conclusion with the comforting picture purveyed by Illuminati controlled-mass media and education, we experience "cognitive dissonance," or psychological stress. This is usually resolved by evading reality, dismissing it as "conspiracy theory."

One reader, stirring in his sleep, wrote: "You sir are T-TOTALLY the biggest story teller I have ever heard. If I ever get really bored I will read some of your concockions."

In fact, conspiracy is very plausible. People who control a grossly disproportionate share of the world's wealth will take measures to consolidate their position. They will destabilize the public by inciting a series of wars and other mind-boggling hoaxes (communism, lesbian feminism, multiculturalism). They will subvert faith in a loving God and promote violence and depravity (Satan) instead.
The government-inspired 9-11 atrocity proves Bush and his accomplices are criminals, traitors and impostors. www.serendipity.li... But don't look to the Democrats for salvation. Leading contender Sen. John Kerry is also "Skull and Bones" (Class of 1966.)

The "War on Terror" is obviously designed to forestall domestic opposition and condition people to further subjugation and new world order. What can we do?

I think Antony Sutton had it right when he said opposition should be individual in character. Let it "take ten thousand or a million forms."

Henry Makow Ph.D. is the inventor of the board game Scruples and the author of "A Long Way to go for a Date." His articles on feminism and the new world order appear on his web site www.savethemales.ca He enjoys receiving comments at [email protected]
www.rense.com...

[edit on 27-11-2008 by fmcanarney]

AGAIN: Loosing track of the subject matter.
Controlled demolition, for what reason?
In my coments I´ve been trying to show that it doesn´t make any sense to have a controlled demolition of the buildings, after hijacked arliners are crashed into them.
Besides, we should define "controlled demolition" I think, because if we look at this as a demolition of the buildings I don´t think it can be seen as "controlled".
And WHY NOT, I don´t think can be the reason really.

you are right I deviated off topic.
You ask why controlled demolition?
The buildings were a white elephant.
Bush and friends have a history of insurance fraud.
Bush and friends have a history of stock market fraud.
There is a preceedence for this type of acivity in the past.
With the commencement of the war on terror, Haliburton has made millions.

posted by SPreston
I also provided videos proving 70 mph ejections from the towers an a separate thread. People with open minds can arrive at their own conclusions without your help.

posted by fmcanarney
Also to check SPreston's math.
He says that the velocity of the panels is 70 miles per hour.
The travel time of a bowling ball from the top of either WTC1-2 to eaarth is about ten seconds.
70 miles per hour is 70 x 1.5 = 105 feet per second.
ten seconds before gravity wins times 105 feet per second of horizontal velocity is calculated below.

10s X 105 feet per second = 1050 feet.

1050 feet is the distance from the outside wall you would expect to find 4 ton panels. However there are tall buildings that stopped both the horizontal and vertical velocity simultaneously. And seventy miles per hour might be a little too fast.

Now wait a minute. That math is far beyond my expertise and the work of David Chandler. He has a Masters in mathematics. Let me provide those videos here.

High Speed Ejection from WTC1 - An Analysis - result over 70 mph
by David S Chandler - Physics-Mathematics Educator - BS-Physics (IPS); MS-Mathematics


High Speed Ejection from WTC1--Further Analysis - Result: over 70 mph
Further analysis identifies the origin of the ejection as about the 82nd floor


Another High Speed Ejection from WTC1 - Result: over 70 mph

posted by bsbray11
Without looking at any of the rest of the numbers, are you talking about an instantaneous velocity?

That velocity (70 mph) would change over time, as the steel lost kinetic energy to friction from the air resisting and pushing against the steel as the steel moved through the air. I didn't see what data 70 mph is based upon, but it's likely (or at least most logical) that he would use the earliest instantaneous velocity, which would give the maximum speed as the steel came away from the building and most accurately reflect the amount of energy that steel was originally imparted with.

View Chandler's videos and decide for yourself what he intends to convey.

reply to post by rush969

I don´t think can be the reason really.

Would you care to explain, why you do not feel it is “not” a controlled demolition?
You must have some proof, to come to this conclusion.

posted by rush969
AGAIN: Loosing track of the subject matter.
Controlled demolition, for what reason?
In my coments I´ve been trying to show that it doesn´t make any sense to have a controlled demolition of the buildings, after hijacked arliners are crashed into them.
Besides, we should define "controlled demolition" I think, because if we look at this as a demolition of the buildings I don´t think it can be seen as "controlled".
And WHY NOT, I don´t think can be the reason really.

Nobody has lost track of anything. We have to first detemine controlled demolition to ask for what reason.

1. Controlled Demolition? If the towers were destroyed with explosives instead of natural aircraft/fire induced gravity collapses, then it was a controlled demolition of both towers. Whether it was an ordinary demolition minimizing damage to surrounding buildings, or an extraordinary demolition displaying maximum damage with no concerns for loss of human life is immaterial. They still would be controlled demolitions.

2. For What Reason? To destroy the buildings. Why else? A Shock & Awe event was needed to frighten the American people and this is how they chose to do it. It is not possible that the 19 'hijackers' nor al Qaeda (The Toilet Seat) nor any other persons recruited by Usama bin Laden (Tim Osman) got into the towers and planted the necessary explosives to destroy the massive core and completely pulverize and disintegrate the floors in mid-air starting at the top. Therefore it was an Inside Job by highly traimed military demolition teams. There is no other possibility even if mini-nukes were used. Regardless, the demolition would be under military control.

We do not care if it makes sense or not. That is an argument from incredulity which is useless. We cannot see into the minds of the 9-11 perpetrators to determine why they did such a thing or why they did not do it differently. The WTC Towers and WTC 7 were condemned and had to be brought down. The innocent people and policemen and firemen trapped inside were expendable for GREED's sake.

If they wanted to destroy the towers, then it does make sense to destroy them with explosives. Aircraft could not have brought them down anyway; they had to use explosives. But they needed the aircraft to put the blame on the 'hijackers' so Dubya could wage his bloody wars in the Middle East.

Originally posted by SPreston


2. For What Reason? Therefore it was an Inside Job by highly traimed military demolition teams. There is no other possibility even if mini-nukes were used. Regardless, the demolition would be under military control.

Hi Spreston,

Have you been able to:

1. Calculate an approximate amount of explosives that would have been required to create this controlled demolition. (of all three buildings)

2. Determine how 3 rather large skyscrapers were able to be covertly wired for said demolition.

3. Determine the decibel readings for all these alleged explosives.




We do not care if it makes sense or not.

reply to post by cashlink


This usually happens with conspiracy theories. Now I HAVE TO PROVIDE PROOF THERE WAS NO CONTROLLED DEMOLITION ! ! !
Well, the proof is out there, all over the press, the media and all the official information like the 9/11 comision, the NIST report, etc...
But of course, none of that has any value to conspiracists. Well, to me it does mean something. I believe in NIST 100%. The 9/11 comision may have had some political problems in its work and results, but still, it´s much better than all kinds of improvised "experts" talking about things ranging from G.W.Bush being directly involved in something that I could only describe as "the sickest possible genocide concieved", to space age energy beams, or muffled mini nukes. I MEAN, COME ON ! ! !

posted by SPreston
2. For What Reason? To destroy the buildings. Why else? A Shock & Awe event was needed to frighten the American people and this is how they chose to do it. It is not possible that the 19 'hijackers' nor al Qaeda (The Toilet Seat) nor any other persons recruited by Usama bin Laden (Tim Osman) got into the towers and planted the necessary explosives to destroy the massive core and completely pulverize and disintegrate the floors in mid-air starting at the top. Therefore it was an Inside Job by highly traimed military demolition teams. There is no other possibility even if mini-nukes were used. Regardless, the demolition would be under military control.

We do not care if it makes sense or not. That is an argument from incredulity which is useless. We cannot see into the minds of the 9-11 perpetrators to determine why they did such a thing or why they did not do it differently. The WTC Towers and WTC 7 were condemned and had to be brought down. The innocent people and policemen and firemen trapped inside were expendable for GREED's sake.

If they wanted to destroy the towers, then it does make sense to destroy them with explosives. Aircraft could not have brought them down anyway; they had to use explosives. But they needed the aircraft to put the blame on the 'hijackers' so Dubya could wage his bloody wars in the Middle East.

posted by CameronFox
Hi Spreston,

Have you been able to:

1. Calculate an approximate amount of explosives that would have been required to create this controlled demolition. (of all three buildings)

2. Determine how 3 rather large skyscrapers were able to be covertly wired for said demolition.

3. Determine the decibel readings for all these alleged explosives.

Whyever would I need to do that? Since we do not know what type of explosives used (maybe even suitcase nukes?) we cannot possibly determine how much was necessary. Nor is it up to us to prove how they got inside to plant whatever they used. Different types of explosives exhibit different levels of sound. We also do not know if the US Military has invented a sound blanketing technology. Many videos seemed to have no sound at all.

We merely need to show how obvious the use of explosives was and how the effects could only have been achieved by some manner of explosives. We need only show that a gravity collapse could not initiate a collapse which was near freefall violating the natural law of resistence. We need only show that a gravity collapse could not hurl multi-tonned objects away from and horizantal to the earth for 600 feet. We have done so.

It is up to a official investigation team with the special protection of a Federal Grand Jury, with indictment power and subpoena power and the power to grant immunity from prosecution and witness protection, to determine who and why and how and what exactly was used and why they did it this way or not.



[edit on 11/28/08 by SPreston]

reply to post by rush969


Wow! Talk about being in Denial! Here is a prime example just what our Government is capable:

Operation Northwoods
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Operation Northwoods, or Northwoods, was a false-flag conspiracy plan, proposed within the United States government in 1962. The plan called for CIA or other operatives to kill innocent people and commit apparent acts of terrorism in U.S. cities to create public support for a war against Castro-led Cuba. One plan was to "develop a Communist Cuban terror campaign in the Miami area, in other Florida cities and even in Washington".
This operation is especially notable in that it included plans for hijackings and bombings followed by the use of phony evidence that would blame the terrorist acts on a foreign government, namely Cuba.
The plan states,
"The desired resultant from the execution of this plan would be to place the United States in the apparent position of suffering defensible grievances from a rash and irresponsible government of Cuba and to develop an international image of a Cuban threat to peace in the Western Hemisphere."
Operation Northwoods was drafted by the Joint Chiefs of Staff and signed by then-Chairman Lyman Lemnitzer, and sent to the Secretary of Defense.

en.wikipedia.org...


Northwoods Documents
www.retakingamerica.com...

from G.W.Bush being directly involved in something that I could only describe as "the sickest possible genocide concieved",

You are right, however can you disprove he had nothing to do with 911?

Well, the proof is out there, all over the press, the media and all the official information like the 9/11 comision, the NIST report, etc...

I hate to pop your bubble but NIST report is already a proven “lie”, and everyone knows the 911 commission was a joke! Full of “nothing” no real investiagaion was ever done on 911.
A full 911 cover up was the only thing done here.

Most people have already learned not to trust the media because all they do is spew lies ( a proven fact!)

Before you start jumping in on the side of disinfo experts, you need to do a little research about 911 because every person who has read and I mean, really read the 911 commission report can clearly see there is a lack of information on the evens of 911. However, no one has being held accountable for “not” doing their jobs that morning on 911.

reply to post by CameronFox

1. Calculate an approximate amount of explosives that would have been required to create this controlled demolition. (of all three buildings)

No one has that kind of information and you know that!

2. Determine how 3 rather large skyscrapers were able to be covertly wired for said demolition.

Who said they were wired? Furthermore no one know what kind of demolition was used or how it was installed in the WTC!

3. Determine the decibel readings for all these alleged explosives.

Why do you always ask questions that no one on ether side of the 911 story can answer? what is your point that you are trying to make?

Originally posted by rush969
Well, the proof is out there, all over the press, the media and all the official information like the 9/11 comision, the NIST report, etc...
But of course, none of that has any value to conspiracists.

There are actually lots of threads that discuss those very things.

Well, to me it does mean something. I believe in NIST 100%.

So, your belief is based on faith in official authorities. But more importantly, it's based on faith.

things ranging from G.W.Bush being directly involved in something that I could only describe as "the sickest possible genocide concieved"

Why would it be so much sicker if Americans were involved? I can understand the idea that it would be easier for foreigners to do it, but would it really be any less despicable based on who did it?

Also, the Nazis did worse.

And they also lied to their people about it through the media and b.s. reporting and investigations, loads of psychology, etc.

[edit on 28-11-2008 by bsbray11]

Why controlled demolitions?

To destroy the three buildings.

There is no other reason to execute a controlled demolition except to destroy what is being demolished.

To expect an answer as to WHY? You need to discover who orchestrated the CD for them to disclose that information to you.

No one CTER has that inside information, and we can only speculate.
Like SPreston said, we do not know why it was done, only the fact that it was done.

We have only speculative motives at best just guesses.

Was there an expolsive or demolition force that disintegrated these buildings? Yes.

They all three fell at the speed of gravity with no resistance underneath.

WTC1-2 disintegrated in mid air.

Multiple ton panels propelled in a parabola for 600 feet. (two football fields)

Eyewitness reports of explosions before the towers fell.

Audio of explosive booms before and during the collapse.

Molten steel three months after the day of 9-11.

Highest temperature is WTC1-2-7 was 250 C.

If gravity alone was responsible there are web sites that calculate the collapse to have had to occur between one to two minutes. NOT TEN SECONDS.

Take the JFK assassination. I never believed the OS on that.

Finally a senate committee reports there were four to seven gun shots that day. We still do not know why JFK was assassinated. We just know it was not Oswald.

So unless you have information that proves it was not imploded and demolished, please provide it, otherwise I think you will wait decades to discover why.