Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Eric Lawyer-Firefighter-911 was a Criminal Coverup

page: 12
71
<< 9  10  11    13  14 >>

log in

join

posted on Mar, 7 2010 @ 02:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by Alfie1

Would you let us know which WTC building they were found in please ?


If only someone had told us where this exhibit was located so that you could have looked into this for yourself.


The label in the case above says: "Gun Encased in Concrete and Gun-Casing Remains The U.S. Customs House stored a large arsenal of firearms at its Six World Trade Center office. During recovery efforts, several handguns were found at Ground Zero, including these two cylindrical gun-casing remains and a revolver embedded in concrete. Fire temperatures were so intense that concrete melted like lava around anything in its path."


That took 48 seconds. Free of charge just for you.

edit to bold which building in case reading an entire paragraph to find it proves too much for anyone.

[edit on 7-3-2010 by K J Gunderson]




posted on Mar, 7 2010 @ 02:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by K J Gunderson

Originally posted by Alfie1

Would you let us know which WTC building they were found in please ?


If only someone had told us where this exhibit was located so that you could have looked into this for yourself.


The label in the case above says: "Gun Encased in Concrete and Gun-Casing Remains The U.S. Customs House stored a large arsenal of firearms at its Six World Trade Center office. During recovery efforts, several handguns were found at Ground Zero, including these two cylindrical gun-casing remains and a revolver embedded in concrete. Fire temperatures were so intense that concrete melted like lava around anything in its path."


That took 48 seconds. Free of charge just for you.

edit to bold which building in case reading an entire paragraph to find it proves too much for anyone.

[edit on 7-3-2010 by K J Gunderson]


Exactly, WTC 6, I felt dogdish was trying to be evasive.

So, nothing to do with the towers or WTC 7. Is it being alleged now that WTC 6 was attacked with thermite ?

Interesting exhibits though but as steel melts at 500 degrees f less than concrete one would have expected the guns to have melted. More likely concrete and gypsum dust baked on but I would be interested to hear any expert analysis.



posted on Mar, 7 2010 @ 02:38 PM
link   
reply to post by Alfie1
 


I saw no point in confusing the issue, or you. Obviously, your point was to confuse the issue.

The guns were found at ground zero, encased in melted concrete.

How did that happen?



posted on Mar, 7 2010 @ 04:08 PM
link   
reply to post by Alfie1
 
Hi Alfie,
There are quotes from several people about molton steel, there are also quotes from people who pulled out steel beams, the ends of which were dripping.

[A report in the Johns Hopkins Public Health Magazine about recovery work in late October quotes Alison Geyh, Ph.D., as stating:
Fires are still actively burning and the smoke is very intense. In some pockets now being uncovered, they are finding molten steel.]

This one is interesting as it also mentions some kind of caulk,

[A publication by the National Environmental Health Association quotes Ron Burger, a public health advisor at the National Center for Environmental Health, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, who arrived at Ground Zero on the evening of September 12th. Burger stated:
Feeling the heat, seeing the molten steel, the layers upon layers of ash, like lava, it reminded me of Mt. St. Helen’s and the thousands who fled that disaster.]

[An article in The Newsletter of the Structural Engineers Association of Utah describing a speaking appearance by Leslie Robertson (structural engineer responsible for the design of the World Trade Center) contains this passage: As of 21 days after the attack, the fires were still burning and molten steel was still running.]

[ Peter Tully of Tully Construction of Flushing, N.Y., and Mark Loizeaux of Controlled Demolition, Inc. of Phoenix, Md.Tully told AFP that he had seen pools of “literally molten steel” in the rubble.Loizeaux confirmed this: “Yes, hot spots of molten steel in the basements,” he said, “at the bottom of the elevator shafts of the main towers, down seven levels.” The molten steel was found “three, four, and five weeks later, when the rubble was being removed,” he said. He confirmed that molten steel was also found at WTC 7, which mysteriously collapsed in the late afternoon.]

You can make of the above what you will, but it is important that all the above are specific to describing what they saw as "Molten steel" something that even Steven Jones himself first related to as "molten metal" most of the workers whos' quotes I haven't used here, all mention "molten steel" and molten, or dripping steel girders.



posted on Mar, 7 2010 @ 04:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by Dogdish
reply to post by Alfie1
 


I saw no point in confusing the issue, or you. Obviously, your point was to confuse the issue.

The guns were found at ground zero, encased in melted concrete.

How did that happen?

Thank you for trying not to confuse me by being coy about where the exhibits were found, but it wasn't really necessary.

Anyway, we are all now agreed it was WTC 6 so it doesn't help at all with any issues over WTC 1,2 & 7.

As I said I doubt the weapons are actually encased in molten concrete because the guns have a considerably lower melting point than the concrete. I would guess hard-baked concrete dust and gypsum but I am quite ready to accept expert analysis.

That might be something practical that truthers could actually seek. Need to make your mind up as to whether WTC 6 was rigged with thermite though. I haven't seen that alleged so far. Another caution, if the exhibits are a literal "smoking gun" why are the wicked perps leaving them on display in a museum when they are allegedly knocking people off in plane and train crashes elsewhere in case they let anything slip ?



posted on Mar, 7 2010 @ 05:37 PM
link   
reply to post by smurfy
 


Thanks for that smurfy but NIST was not convinced about any molten steel at the WTC and I am not convinced otherwise.

For example, Leslie Robertson, who you refer to, has specifically denied referring to molten steel there. That is mentioned in this article which covers some other things as well :-

www.911myths.com...



posted on Mar, 7 2010 @ 06:16 PM
link   
Hell yeah, I definitely flagged this thread!

Eric Lawyer's speech at the press conference was very well done and very inspiring. He does a good job bringing up some primary concerns that resonate with common folks, and he presents his concerns in a brave and powerful way.

I look forward to hearing him speak more often because I think he does a much better job of getting the point across in comparison to Richard Gage. Erik Lawyer is a badass, especially for starting FireFighters For 9/11 Truth.

Glad to see more and more people joining the fight. Times are changing!


-Abe



posted on Mar, 7 2010 @ 07:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by Alfie1
reply to post by smurfy
 


Thanks for that smurfy but NIST was not convinced about any molten steel at the WTC and I am not convinced otherwise.

For example, Leslie Robertson, who you refer to, has specifically denied referring to molten steel there. That is mentioned in this article which covers some other things as well :-

www.911myths.com...

Leslie Robertson replied quickly by e-mail to that site, (not my source) and in it he says he has no RECOLLECTION of making that [2001] statement and would not be qualified to say that, so what did he originally say... nothing? a man with a Bsc degree, with surely some knowledge in metallurgy, and who was a chief engineer on the WTC project. As to the NIST are you referencing John Gross?



posted on Mar, 7 2010 @ 07:56 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Mar, 7 2010 @ 08:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by smurfy
... and in it he says he has no RECOLLECTION of making that [2001] statement and would not be qualified to say that...


Ah, a slight twist on the old "Reagan defense" (from the Iran Contra hearings: "I can't recall.")

www.fark.com...



posted on Mar, 7 2010 @ 09:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by Beancounter72
reply to post by GoodOlDave
 


The steel was NOT melted? So the pictures taken of molten metal dripping from the scene of the impact before the towers fell and the molten metal that was dripping from the rubble as it was being (illegally) cleaned up must then be hoaxes.


What proof do you have that this was actually steel, vs aluminum, copper, or whatever that would be in every skyscraper in the world? The only thing I've ever seen was a bunch of mediocre quality Youtube videos analyzed by self declared video experts who likewise happened to be self declared metallurgists. You can't even determine whether it was actually from the building and not from the airplane.


The towers did NOT fall into their basements? Okay so where did the towers fall? On their sides? (NO).


The only way you can say "the towers fell neatly into the basement" is if you consider "the basement" to be the entire WTC complex. When those towers collapsed wreckage was being thrown around everywhere, even into a church a block away.


The components of the aircraft that hit the pentagon did NOT evaporate? Then if that's true then those components ie. the titanium engine parts, the steel wings, must still be there, right? Oops that right, they're not there and have never been found so either they weren't there to begin with or they 'evaporated'.


Photographs of the aircraft wreckage I.E. landing gear, engine parts, fuselage components, etc have already been posted here many times already and I know you've seen them, not to mention the black box was recovered as well, so Lawyer and his bunch claiming that the "aircraft evaporated" is false, regardless of how much you want to insist to the contrary.


If there's any disinfo here it's from you. What cell of the Mossad do you belong to?


Sheesh, so now the 9/11 attack is an Israeli plot. It's getting to the point where I have to start writing down all the people responsible for the 9/11 attack, to keep track of them all. Apparently, the only people in the world who AREN'T responsible is Al Qaida.

[edit on 7-3-2010 by GoodOlDave]



posted on Mar, 7 2010 @ 11:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by Alfie1

Exactly, WTC 6, I felt dogdish was trying to be evasive.

So, nothing to do with the towers or WTC 7. Is it being alleged now that WTC 6 was attacked with thermite ?

Interesting exhibits though but as steel melts at 500 degrees f less than concrete one would have expected the guns to have melted. More likely concrete and gypsum dust baked on but I would be interested to hear any expert analysis.


Um...so what are you claiming happened at ground zero that was specific to building 6 and not related to the collapsing towers? What are you trying to say was happening at 6 to melt concrete that had nothing to do with what was happening with the other buildings? I do not understand what you are trying to say here at all.



posted on Mar, 8 2010 @ 07:43 AM
link   

Originally posted by GoodOlDave
What proof do you have that this was actually steel, vs aluminum, copper, or whatever that would be in every skyscraper in the world?


What proof do you have that it is not steel?


Photographs of the aircraft wreckage I.E. landing gear, engine parts, fuselage components, etc have already been posted here many times already and I know you've seen them, not to mention the black box was recovered as well,


There is no proof where or what plane these said parts came from. The black box was not matched to the plane by serial or part numbers.



posted on Mar, 8 2010 @ 08:00 AM
link   
Originally posted by REMISNE
Originally posted by GoodOlDave


What proof do you have that it is not steel?


Are you familiar with the logical problems involved in proving a negative?


There is no proof where or what plane these said parts came from. The black box was not matched to the plane by serial or part numbers.


No proof? If the DNA of the last known passengers of the plane are found at the crash site, that is pretty much infallible proof where the plane parts came from. In fact that is better than any serial number matching.



posted on Mar, 8 2010 @ 11:56 AM
link   

Originally posted by hooper
Are you familiar with the logical problems involved in proving a negative?


Such a sad, old excuse for people that cannot post evidnece.


No proof? If the DNA of the last known passengers of the plane are found at the crash site, that is pretty much infallible proof where the plane parts came from. In fact that is better than any serial number matching.


Too bad NIST had to come up with new DNA testing for 9/11. Testing that was not ready untill 2002. Plus the problem with proper chain of custody and if the bodies from the plane were actually in the building.

www.nist.gov...
Due to the nature of the World Trade Center disaster, it quickly became evident that traditional methods for performing DNA typing were not likely to be fully successful in identifying all of the recovered remains. Traditional DNA ID methods depend on the presence of long, intact segments of DNA in order to accurately type the sample. The DNA in many of the samples recovered in this situation were so fragmented that these standard methods were ineffective.

In early November 2001, Dr. Robert Shaler, the director of the WTC DNA identification effort, contacted me and asked if I would be willing to develop some new DNA tests to help in the identification effort. I agreed to fast track our research efforts over the next several months and produce some test materials for his laboratory to try by January 2002.



posted on Mar, 8 2010 @ 12:11 PM
link   
Originally posted by REMISNE
Originally posted by hooper


Such a sad, old excuse for people that cannot post evidnece.


You're right, I'll get right on changing that.


Too bad NIST had to come up with new DNA testing for 9/11. Testing that was not ready untill 2002. Plus the problem with proper chain of custody and if the bodies from the plane were actually in the building.


Relative to the WTC where there thousands of persons involved and tens of thousands, if not hundreds of thousands of samples.

Not relative to Flight 93 were there was a definitive passenger list and next of kin could be identified.

And what is the problem with the proper chain of custody? I say the chain of custody was properly adhered, prove that's not right. And don't tell me you can't prove a negative because that is just a sad old excuse.



posted on Mar, 8 2010 @ 12:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by hooper
Not relative to Flight 93 were there was a definitive passenger list and next of kin could be identified.


So your stating ther was no crash or fire? If the fire was hot enough to destroy the rest of the plane it would have been hot enough to destroy DNA evidence, same as with the Pentagon.


And what is the problem with the proper chain of custody? I say the chain of custody was properly adhered, prove that's not right. And don't tell me you can't prove a negative because that is just a sad old excuse.


Well since several FBI employees had already been charged with taking items from the crime scenes it causes a big problem with chain of custody of anything involving the crime scenes.

Please check out the FBI website for further information.

www.fbi.gov...
Following the 9/11/01 attacks against New York City's World Trade Center, the residue of the two towers, spread over 174 acres of land, was hand sifted by thousands of workers to recover remains, personal effects, and evidence. Over 17,000 tons of material were processed daily. Items were taken by workers as mementos of the tragedy and recovery effort, including by FBI employees. An investigation of the removals by FBI employees, undertaken by the Department of Justice Inspector General, has resulted in citations of misconduct and in policy recommendations governing crime scenes. Many of the items have been or are being turned over to museums and other collections; the Tiffany globe in particular has been turned over to the Inspector General.


[edit on 8-3-2010 by REMISNE]



posted on Mar, 8 2010 @ 01:00 PM
link   
reply to post by REMISNE
 



So your stating ther was no crash or fire?


Wow, really? That's what you got from that? Boy, talk about reading between the lines, that must be a new record.

At Shanksville all the human remains were limited to a very finite and knowable set of persons with the caveat (however unlikely in the remote location) that no one on the ground was killed.



posted on Mar, 8 2010 @ 01:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by hooper
At Shanksville all the human remains were limited to a very finite and knowable set of persons with the caveat (however unlikely in the remote location) that no one on the ground was killed.


If the fire was hot enough to destroy the rest of the plane it would have been hot enough to destroy DNA evidence, same as with the Pentagon.



posted on Mar, 8 2010 @ 03:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by REMISNE

Originally posted by hooper
At Shanksville all the human remains were limited to a very finite and knowable set of persons with the caveat (however unlikely in the remote location) that no one on the ground was killed.


If the fire was hot enough to destroy the rest of the plane it would have been hot enough to destroy DNA evidence, same as with the Pentagon.


Yes, if that were true.

However, it is not true on two levels.

First, the impact of both (really all four) planes would have caused the human remains of the passengers and the plane to part ways. So basically, after the impact the fate of the plane and the fate of the contents (human and otherwise) is not dependent.

Second, the fire was not of sufficient volume or intensity to completely vaporize the physicality of the plane. That claim is unique to the truth movement. No official has ever made that claim.





new topics

top topics



 
71
<< 9  10  11    13  14 >>

log in

join