You know what debate me 9/11 was not an inside job.

reply to post by FightLies


That's your OPINION. Have any facts to back it up for us "slow people" ???

That's the biggest problem I see with this whole "truther" movement. It's mostly about uneducated opinions as opposed to actual, factual evidence.

As example
Well the metal looks like it must have been cut so it must have been cut. Everything is always how it looks

[edit on 16-1-2009 by jfj123]

reply to post by jfj123


ok, the firefighters ass thing was not necessary, my apologies.

when the picture shown is combined with the way the towers fell, that they fell at all, speed of fall, molten steel for days, immense dust clouds and pulverization, hurried destruction and removal of possible evidence and so on, concluding this being someones well planned event becomes difficult to ignore.

the first thing i thought of was that these beams were cut during removal, but it looks not to be the case. steel workers use long cut bars for this type of work leaving the cuts less then symmetric and rather crude. they make mostly straight-ish cuts in small pieces like cutting a tree down from the top to the bottom. the beams in the photo are cut on angle exactly the way demo experts do when taking down large structures.

that question could have easily been addressed at the time, but if so, i've never heard it was? if these beams were this way before any work was done, how would you feel about the whole thing? my point is that those who think something is wrong with the official story see many things like this and want explanations. the law in most places says that hiding or destroying evidence is an admission of guilt. many things have been hidden or destroyed pertaining to this and that's enough proof to believe somethings crooked.

reply to post by jfj123


Ever watch stuff being cut up by torch or cut with explosives? I have, and those look like det cord cuts to me. I've done a lot of research on this ever since it occurred, and after awhile the "yeah, buts" got overwhelmed by the physical, political, and financial evidence. The evidence is there if you look.

So far, if anyone is parroting anything, that would have to be you: I and others have furnished legitimate links to legitimate experts in their fields, with real-world examples and transcripts t support our views and so far in rebuttal you've simply said "Yeah, but that's been disproven or is wrong" without citing anything that proves your assertions or offers a legitimate alternative explanation of not just individual items taken seperately, but the entire body of evidence taken collectively.

Disprove anything, but replace it with a series of facts that explain what occurred in an easier and more probable way, only then will you make your case.

I'll be happy then to look at your theory and see if it hangs together better than the one most of us have proven to ourselves actually occurred.

can someone enlarge and sharpen the end of any of these beams?


this looks prior to clean up, it shows cut beams and molten steel? neither of these belong at this site or can be explained. let's not forget, nor does the particle evidence and residue of explosives like thermite and thermate?

many scientists have confirmed the conditions needed to produce molten pools of steel and such effects found in the particle evidence. they agree that even minimum temps and forces capable of such things are impossible without the aid of anything but the most violent of chemical compounds we have. compounds so destructive, if anyone other than military has access to them, supply is surely guarded and easily traced.

reply to post by apacheman


Big planes hit buildings.
Buildings took physical damage from planes.
Big buildings took damage from fires.
Buildings fell.

Can you show me a similar instance where this occurred in which a building didn't fall?

Let's start with something simple like that and we'll go from there.

Also how familiar are you with building construction?
Who built the buildings in question?
How construction is done
How loads are determined ie dead/live
How loads transfer
etc...
Because these items may have had a lot to do with how/why they ultimately collapsed.

Originally posted by Zerbst


can someone enlarge and sharpen the end of any of these beams?

I'll see what I can do and post if I can get something decent.

this looks prior to clean up, it shows cut beams and molten steel?

How have you determined it was molten steel?
When was the photo taken?
Was the red hot metal just sitting on top the rubble or was it dug up?
If it was dug up, how long after it was dug up, was the photo taken?
If it was just sitting there exposed to the open air, how long was it exposed to the open air when the photo was taken?

neither of these belong at this site or can be explained.

Why not?
Haven't you ever seen the debris of a building fire with smoldering debris? If you lift the top layer of debris, it's like a furnace underneath that can keep metals heated red hot for quite some time.

produce molten pools of steel

Could you post a photo of the liquid metal you mentioned above.
Also, again, how do you know it was steel and not another metal?

So basically you're talking about a large squad of trained demolitions personnel somehow snuck into the buildings, prepped the buildings to fall the opposite way all other demolitions happen, without anyone seeing them.
Instead of just loading the jet with thousands of pounds of explosives and maybe park a delivery truck or two at the base of each building for good measure. Doing it this way, would cause even more terror as the conspiracy wouldn't involve just planes but now even trucks parked anywhere could be involved and even more mayhem would ensue.

Originally posted by jfj123
So basically you're talking about a large squad of trained demolitions personnel somehow snuck into the buildings, prepped the buildings to fall the opposite way all other demolitions happen, without anyone seeing them.

Everyone parrots this but I have yet to find one person who admits they actually go up and pester any maintenance people about what they are doing inside of buildings.

Nobody bothers them.

They can do it in broad daylight.

We are so naive, yes, they can do that.

If this bothers you to think about? ... Well, get over it, because they can still do it.

Originally posted by Zerbst

or can you explain?

Left to right-

1- I see no slag on the end of the core column. Rather, it looks clean, so I'd say a weld that held the column sections together broke. Looks like number 3, which clearly shows the end.

2- cut with an oxy-acetelyne torch.

3- broken weld again. No slag present anywhere.

4- no detail again, but no slag either. Looks like another broken weld.

Originally posted by Zerbst


1-this looks prior to clean up, it shows cut beams and molten steel?

2-neither of these belong at this site or can be explained.

1- it shows molten "something". The material at the very bottom left looks silvery, so I'd guess either aluminum, glass, or any number of other stuff.

2- I just gave an alternative explanation. Normal fire temps could be expected to melt these items, no inside job needed.

Originally posted by bsbray11

Originally posted by jfj123
So basically you're talking about a large squad of trained demolitions personnel somehow snuck into the buildings, prepped the buildings to fall the opposite way all other demolitions happen, without anyone seeing them.

Everyone parrots this but I have yet to find one person who admits they actually go up and pester any maintenance people about what they are doing inside of buildings.

Nobody bothers them.

They can do it in broad daylight.

We are so naive, yes, they can do that.

If this bothers you to think about? ... Well, get over it, because they can still do it.

Could you please explain to me what is required to wire buildings of that size? Please be as detailed as possible. Thanks.
Include:
equipment needed to prep area's prior to install of demolitions
minimum personnel and time needed based on personnel size
how demolitions would need to be installed
how much demolitions would need to be installed
types of assoc. equipment required for demolitions
when this could have taken place
cleanup needed after installation
Thank you for your input.

Originally posted by jfj123
Could you please explain to me what is required to wire buildings of that size? Please be as detailed as possible.

It's impossible for me to know this, because I have no idea what specifically brought those buildings down. It could have been any number of things as far as I'm concerned. Can you explain to me at what point I became required to know this, in order to believe those buildings received "extra help" in coming down from what else I have seen?

Having said that, I'm not naive enough to believe tons of TNT or C4 were just packed all over the building. But anyone with access to the elevators throughout the building would automatically have access to the core columns, for example. And no one can see inside those shafts. So it wouldn't be that hard to plant things.

[edit on 17-1-2009 by bsbray11]

Ok, so you don't believe it was detonated?

Can you provide evidence how the core columns of the buildings were pulverized until a few meters above the ground?

With a solid structure collapsing on itself the weight of the floors should just 'glide' along the columns and stick tens of meters in the air. Just like a water-ice cream with a wooden center. Concrete vs. metal...metal wins.

As for the planting in the buildings, easy. In the weeks before you just let some crews do some repairing to the building. Nobody will pay any attention cause this happens everywhere. It would only take a few days to put some detonation strips along every column with a small crew.

And another thing, releasing the pentagon footage...it could proof instantly that it indeed was an airplane. Guess something else shows up on the footage that makes it so hard to release it. It would instantly solve a lot of questions, wouldn't it? And..no debris from the airplane, windows intact, light poles intact etc.It just doesn't add up.

The insurance for the towers just days before it collapses, coincidence?...that's insulting the intelligence of people.

They needed a reason to go to war so they blew it up to shift the American opinion, just like Hitler did with the Reichstag. History repeats itself and since the average attention span of 80% of the people is 10 seconds it's easy to manipulate them.

As to when they had the opportunity to wire the building for collapse, how about every night after everyone went home? The custodial staff has lower social prestige than maintenance crews, so they might have noticed something but wouldn't have dared to question it: not their job, not their responsibility, none of their business. Even if they did, who argues with work orders?

Originally posted by jfj123
reply to post by apacheman

 

Big planes hit buildings.
Buildings took physical damage from planes.
Big buildings took damage from fires.
Buildings fell.

Can you show me a similar instance where this occurred in which a building didn't fall?

Actually... yes.

www.aerospaceweb.org...

At the last moment, Lt. Col. Smith must have seen the profile of the Empire State Building looming out of the fog. He tried to pull up while banking away, but the distance was too short and the bomber's velocity too great. At approximately 9:49 AM, the B-25 plunged into the 78th and 79th floors of the skyscraper some 975 ft (295 m) above ground level. The plane impacted at an estimated speed of 200 miles per hour (320 km/h) making the building shake under the force of the collision. The high-speed crash also caused the plane's fuel tanks to explode, sending a fireball 100 ft (30 m) high and releasing blazing gasoline down the facade of the building. Sheets of flame also raced through the maze of hallways and stairwells inside the building, reaching at least as far down as the 75th floor.

Sounds pretty analogous to me and the ESB is still standing.

[edit on 17-1-2009 by cogburn]

reply to post by jfj123


Controlled Demolition, Inc. posted an article on their website chock full of detailed statistics for what is required to destroy a building in a controlled demolition.

CDI’s 12 person loading crew took twenty four days to place 4,118 separate charges in 1,100 locations on columns on nine levels of the complex. Over 36,000 ft of detonating cord and 4,512 non-electric delay elements were installed in CDI’s implosion initiation system, some to create the 36 primary implosion sequence and another 216 micro-delays to keep down the detonation overpressure from the 2,728 lb of explosives which would be detonated during the demolition.

I'm sure you could extrapolate how much explosives, how many people would be required and how long it would take to wire one of the WTC towers.

If it helps to apply it to the WTC, Ace Elevator Comany performed a complete renovation of the elevator system in both towers that concluded within weeks prior to 9/11.

Even after the renovation was complete, AEC had 83 elevator technicians on site at the WTC on 9/11, all of which fled when the attacks began. This was 83 employees after the renovations had been completed. Feel free to contact Ace to see how many people they had working on the elevators during the renovation. Note that on the day of the attack, Ace had 7 times the number of employees CDI required to wire a building roughly half the size of one of the WTC towers in two months.

Here we have a large number of individuals with access to the core columns of every floor in both WTC towers just weeks prior to the attacks.

Too bad your research isn't as prolific as your torrent of questions.

Originally posted by bsbray11

Originally posted by jfj123
Could you please explain to me what is required to wire buildings of that size? Please be as detailed as possible.

It's impossible for me to know this, because I have no idea what specifically brought those buildings down. It could have been any number of things as far as I'm concerned.

Well you seemed to KNOW that they could do it based on your last post so I assumed you KNEW how they could have done it specifically. If you didn't know how they could have done it, then you couldn't have known IF they could even do it right?

Nobody bothers them.

They can do it in broad daylight.

We are so naive, yes, they can do that.

If this bothers you to think about? ... Well, get over it, because they can still do it.

Above is the quote showing that you've decided they could have done it.

Can you explain to me at what point I became required to know this, in order to believe those buildings received "extra help" in coming down from what else I have seen?

Based on your response, I asked you to back up your claim of knowledge. For you to KNOW that could "do that", you would have to have the required knowledge.

But anyone with access to the elevators throughout the building would automatically have access to the core columns, for example. And no one can see inside those shafts. So it wouldn't be that hard to plant things.

[edit on 17-1-2009 by bsbray11]

What would they plant that would be strong enough to drop the buildings? How would they plant those things?

The reason I ask is that if you don't know what they could/would have used or how they would have used it/them, you really can't make a statement saying that they could have done anything. It would all be pure, baseless speculation.

Originally posted by mortje
As for the planting in the buildings, easy. In the weeks before you just let some crews do some repairing to the building.

What would need to be planted and where in the building?
Also, do you know how long a professional demolition crew would take to properly set a building and the number of personnel required?

Nobody will pay any attention cause this happens everywhere.

Specifically WHAT happens everywhere?
What would they pretend to do and what would they really be doing? Please be specific.

It would only take a few days to put some detonation strips along every column with a small crew.

What is your source for this information? Explain how this would be done in detail along with what materials would be used.

They needed a reason to go to war so they blew it up to shift the American opinion, just like Hitler did with the Reichstag.

But Bush and Cheney have proven they don't care about public opinion.

History repeats itself and since the average attention span of 80% of the people is 10 seconds it's easy to manipulate them.

If it's that easy, why do most Americans think Bush is considered the worst president in the US' history? Since you've made it sound so simple, why couldn't the administration simply manipulate us into loving them?

reply to post by cogburn


I should have mentioned before not to include the Empire State Building as it really was not similar.
Compare the Empire State Building impact, building structure, plane, etc.. with the WTC's and you'll see they're not comparable.

The real problem I had with the controlled demolition theory is the time it normally takes a team to set it up and the absolute precision it takes to fall a building into its own foot print, how ever I believe we are possibly seeing the testing of some new DIME ( en.wikipedia.org... ) weapon were you could just put the weapon into the boot of a car/s and detonate in the foundations and literally melt the structure from within.

Might have been a combination of things such as Operation Northwoods going live and the testing of new 21st century building vaporization weaponry with a lot of loose ends that you would expect with such a big operation like Flight 91 having its Global Hawk disabled by an ingenious flight crew and having to be taken out. Civilians like Larry Silverstein letting slip vital clues when he shouldn't have and fire crews going in before they should of.

The Why ?

I can sort of imagine a team of top level officials all biding for the fulfillment of their own agendas ( Military/Political/Financial ) with the plan only going ahead with complying departments coming on board with compartmentalization to keep only the "need to knows" in the loop. The underlying reason why it went live ? I would suspect to usher in laws to restrict and limit the freedoms of Americans for things to come.

The things to come ? we are about to see it raise its ugly head in the coming months I'm afraid and I hope all the dots don't connect up as myself and others have seen but its looking more that way every day.



[edit on 17-1-2009 by mazzroth]

reply to post by jfj123


Then your argument is invalid on its face.

I challenge you to present two sky scrapers that consist of greater than 80 floors that do have a similar architecture that fits your arbitrary definition of similarity.

What inequalities prevent the analogy that exactly addresses your challenge?

[edit on 18-1-2009 by cogburn]