Bombshell: Silverstein Wanted To Demolish Building 7 On 9/11 *NEW INFO*

Don't get me wrong thoose three buildings were imploded beyound a doubt . I am just showing a combination factor that helped to destroy the aircraft's remains and help damage the steel structures in the buildings fire areas . Did you ever look up how much aircraft aluminum is in one of thoose aircraft (Tons). Grind some aircraft aluminum up real fine like dust and light it from a safe distance very enlightning wih a match for a source.

reply to post by circle 360


OK, so you're saying that the aluminum body of the plane melted and was somehow magnetically attracted to the many beams that make up the steel core of the building, at which point all those steel beams were melted through?

So what about the entire length of the beams UNDER the floors that were hit? Did the molten aluminum then migrate to other key structural points on the steel core? Because the lower you go in a steel core building, the more weight it's designed to carry. If the building was 'sliced' through then the lower structure should have stood strong while the upper portion slid off onto the street below.

Common sense is all that's needed, not elaborate excuses. You were totally discredited when it was pointed out that Bldg 7 wasn't even hit by a plane.

Originally posted by circle 360
Don't get me wrong those three buildings were imploded beyond a doubt . I am just showing a combination factor that helped to destroy the aircraft's remains and help damage the steel structures in the buildings fire areas . Did you ever look up how much aircraft aluminum is in one of those aircraft (Tons). Grind some aircraft aluminum up real fine like dust and light it from a safe distance very enlightning with a match for a source.

I am intrigued by your idea. I think that it is wrong, but I am still intrigued by it, and I applaud your lateral thinking, being that your status is that of a "truther".

I am confident, without a doubt, that the OS is incorrect, and I do not see your situation as being possible, because if it was, then the Pentagon would have sustained much, much, much more damage.

Because the OS on the Pentagon is that the plane did exactly what you are stating, it literally vaporized on impact.

But if one were to look at pictures from the Pentagon taken immediately after the attack, then it would be apparent that no temperature came close the fire point of magnesium inside of the Pentagon.

But like I said, I applaud you for being a truther thinking outside of the box.

reply to post by HimWhoHathAnEar


read just what I said don't add to or dream up more than the words said all 3 building were imploded two were damaged by the planes then imploded building seven was imploded and not damaged by the planes.

reply to post by Josephus23


the pentagon is a good example of thick refractorie . look how thick the walls are ( in a steel making furnace they use 3 to 4 foot thick iron clad fire brick in their wall construction.. it would make a nice fire place would'nt it the PENTAGON not some other building some where found on planet earth don't add to or pick at the statement like a hairless headed velture like some out there that get their joylys trying to say someone is discredited.. It would contain a intence fire from a huge aircraft. and when I was taking of the buildings I was refering to the twin towers . Sorry building 7 was not in my mind at all .

The aircraft pierced the building and struck the steel support beams and like a car hitting a large tree stopped. Dead stopped!!!!! I wonder if the aluminium was smashed on the support beams or did it magnetically go some place else . Got to go . I' ll let someone now make up or take away or discredit me the truth is the truth. 2 to 3% aluminum melts anything I know on this earth.

reply to post by circle 360


Please do not be offended.

I was honestly really liking the train of thought.

However, I do not believe that it could happen in the manner as you described in the Pentagon because if it were like a furnace then much more fire damage would have been apparent.

And if one was to look at the Pentagon pics right after the attack, then it is obvious that no fire was created that would reach the temperature of the fire point of magnesium.

If you are upset at my comments, then I don't know what to say.

I mean, does everyone have to be proven right on here?

The only time I leave a thread is when I am being attacked personally, and I have been nothing but complementary toward you personally.

Continue with the lateral thinking because it is much needed on these boards.

Ciao.

I want to believe the truthers, I want to believe there was a conspiracy, I can't explain certani things, but to believe it was a conspiracy makes even less sense to me. You create this false flag operation and blame Saudi Arabians so you can go after Iraq? And you pull off all of the complicated bits of blowing up WTC and crashing planes but then you don't plant even a single vial of nuclear or biological something in Iraq to justify the invasion and instead us look stupid to everyone like there was no justification? It makes no sense. If you were plotting this thing in advance you wouldn't be able to predict every reaction and response in advance, and you wouldn't stack the deck so badly against yourself. If your goal was Iraqw you'd plausibly implicate Iraq in the false flag, and then you'd discover some WMDs there after you invaded. You wouldn't think, "Ok, we'll blame this on Osama and Saudis then try very weakly link that to Iraq in a way no one believes, then invade Iraq claiming the CIA has poor proof they might have WMDs then to throw them off we'll find no WMDs and let the pointless war linger for many years such that popular opinion will turn against us."

I'll beleive the truthers when I am given an explaination as to how the masterminds were that simultaneously brilliant and stupid.

Paul

Originally posted by paulism
I want to believe the truthers, I want to believe there was a conspiracy, I can't explain certani things, but to believe it was a conspiracy makes even less sense to me. You create this false flag operation and blame Saudi Arabians so you can go after Iraq? And you pull off all of the complicated bits of blowing up WTC and crashing planes but then you don't plant even a single vial of nuclear or biological something in Iraq to justify the invasion and instead us look stupid to everyone like there was no justification? It makes no sense. If you were plotting this thing in advance you wouldn't be able to predict every reaction and response in advance, and you wouldn't stack the deck so badly against yourself. If your goal was Iraqw you'd plausibly implicate Iraq in the false flag, and then you'd discover some WMDs there after you invaded. You wouldn't think, "Ok, we'll blame this on Osama and Saudis then try very weakly link that to Iraq in a way no one believes, then invade Iraq claiming the CIA has poor proof they might have WMDs then to throw them off we'll find no WMDs and let the pointless war linger for many years such that popular opinion will turn against us."

I'll beleive the truthers when I am given an explaination as to how the masterminds were that simultaneously brilliant and stupid.

Paul

I too have pondered these thoughts and I will tell you what I think.

I think that TPTB know that a majority of individuals will buy the "official conspiracy theory", even in the face of a complete lie.

They want us to know that they did it, and that there is not one thing that we can do about it.

They want us to feel a sense of learned helplessness.

They want to rub our faces in the excrement of their sloppy work.

And all we can do is type on a computer here at ATS!

I hope that might clear up a reason for the anomalies.

reply to post by paulism


Have you considered that perhaps the idea was to make America the aggressive bully in the eyes of the world in order to bring it down?

reply to post by Josephus23


The dis informationers are here to protect (bs alias) or bho his new name. Joseph 23 no offence inccured. A furnace is a vessel or a containment area. I started on open hearth furnaces. Big hole on the ground bascically we used tar, coal , wood ,millions of dollars of us stamps once even with the fbi watching with machine guns, the process, (oil and as I stated air or high pressure oxygen and of course (WIND) Ha Ha .I Ended on water cooled electric induction furnaces ( the best*** ) except for magnetic field furnaces that I know of but have never used..The pentagon contained the extreme heat and fire and locallized it's intent. Thats why the fire did not spread so far (localizsed)the building was a (container). ( or furnace). The aluminum could not disperse over a large area like the twin towers. Say the towers had a stop factor of 2 the pentagon had a stop factor of 9 + supposedly same type planes or close stuck all the building. Only thing that does'nt jive is drag markes of aircraft at pentagon grounds.Their were none.' (Drag marks )My thoughts Big lieing cover up . Radar controled or satelite controled projectal (missile?) or smaller aircraft flown in by a brave man or woman even if they were just disgruntalled on our side trying to stop this murder of innocent men and woman( that is my inner feeling on this matter).

Originally posted by paulism
I want to believe the truthers, I want to believe there was a conspiracy, I can't explain certani things, but to believe it was a conspiracy makes even less sense to me. You create this false flag operation and blame Saudi Arabians so you can go after Iraq?

Try and remember more accurately. Bush and the Washington Neocons DID blame Saddam Hussein at first, claiming that the hijackers had trained in Iraq. Then, when that did not wash, they argued that Hussein had to be removed to stop Iraq becoming a haven for terrorists. That argument persuaded many.

Originally posted by paulism
And you pull off all of the complicated bits of blowing up WTC and crashing planes but then you don't plant even a single vial of nuclear or biological something in Iraq to justify the invasion and instead us look stupid to everyone like there was no justification? It makes no sense.

The Neocons did not need to plant actual nuclear devices. It was enough to provide phony photographic evidence of biological agent vehicles and satellite pics falsely interpreted as nuclear facilities.

Originally posted by paulism
If you were plotting this thing in advance you wouldn't be able to predict every reaction and response in advance, and you wouldn't stack the deck so badly against yourself. If your goal was Iraqw you'd plausibly implicate Iraq in the false flag,

For many unthinking people thirsting for revenge, they DID plausibly implicate Iraq. But it did not convince others who were more astute. But when you incite a wave of patriotism in your country, you don't need to be careful how you present your case for war. Careful thought goes out of the window. And disagreement gets regarded as unpatriotic.....

Originally posted by paulism
and then you'd discover some WMDs there after you invaded.

Too risky. The ruse could have been exposed. Besides. There was no need to because much of the world had already been convinced of the necessity to invade Iraq.

Originally posted by paulism
You wouldn't think, "Ok, we'll blame this on Osama and Saudis then try very weakly link that to Iraq in a way no one believes, then invade Iraq claiming the CIA has poor proof they might have WMDs then to throw them off we'll find no WMDs and let the pointless war linger for many years such that popular opinion will turn against us."

Bush & co did NOT blame the Saudis, who are allies of the USA. You are assuming that Bush and the Washington Neocons needed to create a water-tight case to justify invasion. They did not. All they needed to create was the anger of 9/11 that needed vengeance. Hell, if Washington had blamed Samoa, Americans would have backed invasion of Samao.

Originally posted by paulism
I'll beleive the truthers when I am given an explaination as to how the masterminds were that simultaneously brilliant and stupid.

Paul

Who says the masterminds were brilliant? In fact, they made many errors, as 9/11 truthers have exposed.

i have read a lot of opinions on the twin towers and it seems to me that the people that are debunking the idea that it was a black op operation
seem to be the most passionate in wanting to convince us otherwise.

i just wonder what they have to say about the report on the british tv news
program that told of one building collapsing 20 minutes before it did .

i would also like to advise all the demolition experts in america that spend weeks setting demolition charges in order to bring down old buildings.
that maybe you should learn from this and save yourselves a fortune
just set some fires going and it will come down perfectly..

and this has been going on for how long? and what are the people going to do about it?



If it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck.............

Originally posted by paulism
I want to believe the truthers, I want to believe there was a conspiracy, I can't explain certani things, but to believe it was a conspiracy makes even less sense to me. You create this false flag operation and blame Saudi Arabians so you can go after Iraq? And you pull off all of the complicated bits of blowing up WTC and crashing planes but then you don't plant even a single vial of nuclear or biological something in Iraq to justify the invasion and instead us look stupid to everyone like there was no justification? It makes no sense. If you were plotting this thing in advance you wouldn't be able to predict every reaction and response in advance, and you wouldn't stack the deck so badly against yourself. If your goal was Iraqw you'd plausibly implicate Iraq in the false flag, and then you'd discover some WMDs there after you invaded. You wouldn't think, "Ok, we'll blame this on Osama and Saudis then try very weakly link that to Iraq in a way no one believes, then invade Iraq claiming the CIA has poor proof they might have WMDs then to throw them off we'll find no WMDs and let the pointless war linger for many years such that popular opinion will turn against us."

I'll beleive the truthers when I am given an explaination as to how the masterminds were that simultaneously brilliant and stupid.

Paul

www.youtube.com...

I think the Israelis knew of this and helped out.

[edit on 25-4-2010 by dragnet53]

[edit on 25-4-2010 by dragnet53]

[edit on 25-4-2010 by dragnet53]

[edit on 25-4-2010 by dragnet53]

Originally posted by Gakus
i got a better theory on what happened on 9/11


Radical Muslims who hate the western world hijacked planes and flew them into the WTC, insane I know!

How about you simply ACCEPT the facts and stop clinging onto such frankly retarded and idiotic ideas.

You people honestly have no idea, how insane and simple minded you come off.

If that is accepted, then you have to accept that the trillions of dollars spent over the years on America's defences were WASTED and USELESS. Yes?

Originally posted by weedwhacker
reply to post by _BoneZ_

 

.... but let's say the fuel source for the fires was the office furnishings.

Because plastic veneer covered chipboard, foam and polyester burn really well right?

reply to post by circle 360


That was my point in referencing the Pentagon.

It is such a lie, and the OS is exactly what you are describing and it doesn't make sense.

I do think that what you are referring to with the magnesium and the fire is a definite possibility in 1 and 2.

It would not have made the buildings fall, because the supporting columns would have not been destroyed, but it would have destroyed any evidence of foul play found in the planes.

Thanks for not taking my comments as being insulting, because I really like the information. and I have never been presented with this idea before.

reply to post by tom.farnhill



Aren't you passionate about your job?

16-20 hour days against the ever increasing Truthers who outnumber them 100 to one is not easy work.

Originally posted by TroyB
All of it REEKS of conspiracy, WHO...tell me WHO takes out a HUGE insurance policy against *specific* events weeks before such events occur, the one who's aware of what could happen!

now add to that the 5 israeli's jumping around and celebrating the impacts------who also later on israeli tv admitted they were there to "document" the attacks




so a israeli intel agency knew ahead of time,,,, and so did larry apparently

hmm,,,,,,

and wasn't gwbush warned by his own intel a bunch of times

hmmm,,,,