WTC6 and the respective damage that caused the crater.

Yet again the *Nothing to see here* evidence disinformation process rears it`s ugly head, nothing shows this aspect of protecting the OS better than September Clues, here we have a film with hundreds of theories regarding nigh on every aspect of 9/11, then it gets debunked for some obvious signs of editing and falsifying facts, and boom the whole video becomes nothing more than a blot on the landscape, and is avoided like the plague and a huge no-no for a researching source.

After a while it will have drifted into obscurity taking with it a lot of solid facts, that, if anyone ever picks up on, will be scorned upon for using similar explanations as those that were truly depicted in the film, as all have been tarred with the same brush.

There are those that hold their breath for proof of Thermite, or a flyover at the Pentagon or whatever, whereas my approach is aspects that can still be proved by pictures, videos, maths etc, it does not matter how big a point can be proved, any point that proves a different side than that of the OS - proves they have lied, prove this, over just one relevant aspect of 9/11, and ears will prick and heads will turn, the rest will follow suit.

Now when I see something like that bird scenario I question it, compare the two films - case closed, TLC tape shows so many signs of editing including out of sync audio/video for added frames, way to many captures of the object, different shape, different point of entry, a lot slower movement speed and over 3.1 seconds longer capturing time.

That my dear friends/enemies is exactly how I see it .

Another thread ends, with many unanswered questions......

1). The hole in WTC6 was present pre WTC1 collapse, a huge hole with just 2-3 storeys above it, and obviously the weakest part of the building, we are led to believe that 10 storeys were decimated by the collapse debris, yet this flimsy part of the building survived.

2). 10 storeys decimated, yet remarkably - The rest of WTC6 and it`s 8 above and 2 below storeys remained pretty much in tact (hugely buckled but standing), enough downward force to punch that crater but not enough to destroy a few storeys here and there or bring down the wall above the hole.

3). Such was the randomness of this downward force it made a huge hole in WTC6 left a small part near the exterior wall, jumped across the road and made a crater in WTC5.

4). The debris that caused this and the debris it caused managed to fill roughly one storey (12 feet in depth).

5). No one has explained how those steels where bent in that fashion.

6). Nor how that hole was caused.


The governments theory is based on debris from WTC1 being found in the crater, bearing in mind the kinetic energy on show when both towers collapsed, it is suffice to say that a building basically at it`s feet would be in a safe-ish zone, it would obviously get hit by some exterior steels and the dust flood, which imo is exactly what only 12 feet of debris in the crater depicts.

If the hole was not there before WTC1 collapse - How would the debris flood have enough force to travel horizontally and punch a hole through the steels, that it just failed to damage from a vertical and gravitational aspect?.

On a footnote I managed to point out that the TLC bird video has 100% been very poorly edited.

Originally posted by ThaLoccster

Me bad, my apologies I did not reply to your replies, here goes .

Starting with the below picture, I do not see anything that would make me think that building had been a victim of an explosion. The shattered windows make no more of a point than the lower windows of the towers'.

I hear what you`re saying, and again a good point, the whole emphasis here is - What caused the obvious signs of heat damage to WTC6, the guy who took some of the pictures clearly depicts some of what was going on in relation to the pictures, Bill Biggart......

www.stagedterror.com...

The building was already a black color, to say its burnt or charred I can't see any evidence of in that picture. And any exterior burn marks could be easily attributed to falling debris, considering its proximity to the North Tower.

As above, Bill Biggart explains it well.

In the following photos you can see a plethora of debris. Like another poster pointed out, those beams are massive and any one could punch through a few floors on its own. I'm not familiar with 6 or its structural make-up so its anyones guess why the crater formed the way it did without that knowledge.

Look carefully, all I see here is a retaining wall that is part of WTC6 and a part section of an exterior steel section, we know it is not a full section due to the absence of ratchet access holes for tightening the bolts.

This photo I cropped from a high res photo of the site, the whole photo was too larger for me to upload. Note the amount of debris

Awesome photo, it shows the whole area and many towers covered in the same debris - But are still standing.

This building here was severely damaged by what seems like just this one section of debris. If that one piece could cause this amount of damage its safe to say the amount visible in the above photos could do the same to 6.

That particular piece was blasted 400 feet and weighed around 400,000 lbs, as shown by the roughly one storey of the crater filled with debris - 12 foot it`s a clear indicator that no such pieces hit WTC6.

And this photo I'm not sure of a time frame, but judging from the debris I think its after the South Tower was hit and surely after the North. I see no damage to building 6.

The pictures of WTC6 that show the hole all show it to be in the face that is opposite WTC7 so you would not see it from this perspective.



/cheers.

reply to post by Seventh


Before I start I feel I must confess that I am a neutral sort of guy regarding the whole aspects of 9/11, I was puzzled somewhat and intrigued at how a guy like you, that spends a lot of time doing research, and posts some very intricate and time consuming replies, threads, etcetera, could make these very simple mistakes, so I had a good trawl around some of your threads and noticed a similar pattern.

Sorry if I am about to spill the beans, but it seems fairly obvious to me that you lure in the opposition with some easy to prove otherwise bait, then bam!!, hit them with a haymaker, which in turn does wonders for some of your threads, as I have noticed that the $64,000 dollar question you keep in reserve, remains in most cases, unanswered, which of course reaps greater returns than constructing threads based purely on those questions, guys are not going to rush forward and reply to something they have no answers for.

I could have course got this horribly wrong, but it does not add up correctly that someone whom puts as much time into all this could make these very common simple mistakes.

Just my $2.

Originally posted by Cupcake

Before I start I feel I must confess that I am a neutral sort of guy regarding the whole aspects of 9/11, I was puzzled somewhat and intrigued at how a guy like you, that spends a lot of time doing research, and posts some very intricate and time consuming replies, threads, etcetera, could make these very simple mistakes, so I had a good trawl around some of your threads and noticed a similar pattern.

Sorry if I am about to spill the beans, but it seems fairly obvious to me that you lure in the opposition with some easy to prove otherwise bait, then bam!!, hit them with a haymaker, which in turn does wonders for some of your threads, as I have noticed that the $64,000 dollar question you keep in reserve, remains in most cases, unanswered, which of course reaps greater returns than constructing threads based purely on those questions, guys are not going to rush forward and reply to something they have no answers for.

I could have course got this horribly wrong, but it does not add up correctly that someone whom puts as much time into all this could make these very common simple mistakes.

Just my $2

.

Mmmm, not sure where you are going with this, as to my MO, I keep my cards close to my chest, I do not approach this whole scenario as a game, I do not keep all my eggs in one basket.

As far as unanswered questions go, then yes, there are several aspects I have noticed that remain a mystery still....

1). The different explosions from the exit holes in WTC2.

2). The straight cuts in the exterior steel sections.

3). No signs of oxy-acetylene cutting on steels that have been cut.

4). Erratic and out of sequence lengths of the alloy Facade.

That is all I can think of atm, there are other aspects of course, but these are points that have had very little if any at all... attention. This thread is producing some points of interest also.

/cheers.

There is also some interesting seismic data which could be related to wtc6 'explosion' alleged to be pre collapse.

letsrollforums.com...

Another thing which has been of interest to me is the wtc2 'pre impact flash'. Myself being a commercial pilot trainee and having toured air new zealands world-class engineering complex, I can confidently say that radomes being constructed of composite is infact true. I have seen the construction process with my own eyes. This is also backed by the fact that radar waves have a tough time with metal...

Initial news reports Sunday indicated that a collision with a bird may have caused the damage to the radome, which covers the radar antenna in the nose of the aircraft. It is made of composite material to allow radar signals to pass through.

www2.tbo.com...

News article about a suspicious possible bird strike on a 757 radome.

Now this information leads to this question: How in the world does a composite nose cone or radome make a flash when striking a building? Accounts from millitary vets on radio have stated the flash looks identical to a tomahawk booster stage... why? Well 'they' needed a very impressive fireball to sell the story perhaps? Check out the shadow on wtc1 illustrated by videos in this thread, where you see the 'white smoke trail' emerge from the tip of the fireball which happens to travel further than anything else... I wonder what the thick white smoke was from in an office or jet..? Phosphorous? Tracer bullets are coated with phosphor and can be used to ignite things also.

Here's a youtube vid of a 50cal tracer hitting some jp8 in a barrel.



www.youtube.com... if it ain't playing ball..

But of course, perpetual motion-esque wtc7 collapses are easier to prove but this just adds more fuel to the 4000+ degree office fire

reply to post by GhostR1der


Thanks for your input GR, I made a thread a few weeks ago regarding the plane impact explosions, it`s in here somewhere....

www.abovetopsecret.com...

34 cubic metres of aviation fuel (less the amount needed to weaken 100,000 tons of steel, and reduce 110 acres of concrete - to dust).

I really cannot understand our beloved forum plane experts here, they know damn well that grade A jet fuel does not explode with a sheer force, identical to high explosives.

/cheers.