99% Undeniable Conclusive Evidence That 9/11 Was An Inside Job

reply to post by -PLB-

That is why you wont see any truther making an estimate of the required amount of thermite that could be responsible for all that energy. It would make their pet theory look so completely absurd.

You wouldn't need all that much. The charge Coles demonstrated was probably not even half a kg.

Let's say (guesstimate) 100 tons was needed, that allows you to cut all the columns on four floors. That would require about four or five dumptruck loads. Let's say you had a construction crew of 25 people doing "refurbishment" over a period of say 1 month. In one day one person can easily move 1 ton on a trolley (say ten trips example), ten people can move 10 tons a day like this and the whole load over 10 days.

That leaves you with a further 15 people to do installation and whatnot.

It isn't THAT big of an operation.

Now consider a major refurbishment operation where you are looking at 20000 man hours and you can see that it isn't, in fact, a big problem at all, especially if you can make the work look fairly innocuous.

reply to post by -PLB-

And here you are talking about the spheres and "thermite" chips again. Forgot already that those "thermite" chips didn't even burn when put a blowtorch to it.

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/e962dc8ff6f5.jpg[/atsimg] Watch that video again, Sir Isaac Newton. Video of the chips combusting and producing a bright flash.

As for the spheres, so you reject perfectly reasonable explanation number one. Another perfectly reasonable explanation is residue from welding.

I reject that explanation because the spheres appeared after the reaction.

As for the reason the rubble was hot, it had little to do with plane crashes. The energy in the combustible materials that was already inside the buildings was much higher. The jet fuel was all burned up in the early stages of the fire on that very day.

Um, that's a lovely explanation you conjured up there, but you must be forgetting the dozens of witness testimonies that describe molten metal underneath both twin towers and WTC7. You've been shown more than enough evidence to prove the existence of molten metal in the debris, so what good does talking about combustable materials energy do?

Just as a side note, the idea that somehow thermite is responsible is another one of the loony theories. Thermite has a very low energy density.

That's why there was eutectic steel found in the debris, which thermite can create (backed by experiments), but of course you chose not to address that detail or the video that I asked you to watch in your post because it destroys your official story "loony theories". :down:

The amounts needed would just be absurd. That is why you wont see any truther making an estimate of the required amount of thermite that could be responsible for all that energy. It would make their pet theory look so completely absurd.

And the lame appeal to common sense argument surfaces, I never get tired of seeing those from your side of the story. Poor logical thinking does not trump evidence:
--Red chips in the dust that have a similar chemical composition to thermite, react at a high temperature like thermite, and produce the same by-products as thermite.
--Iron spheres were found both in the dust and in the chips after they were ignited.
--Eutectic steel was found in the rubble, and thermite can create eutectic steel.
--Molten metal was found underneath the towers, and thermite reacts hot enough to melt steel.

Your counter-arguments:
--That's just an extremely dangerous brand of highly reactive paint that has iron spheres in it.
--No those iron spheres didn't appear after the reation, Steven Jones and his colleagues are lying about that.
--Ignore completely and hope he doesn't notice.
--That's aluminum.....and with the, uh, combustable material energy....you know...stuff got hot down there.

So are you going to watch that eutectic steel video and tell me what's wrong with the experiments that the lie factory NIST didn't perform themselves? Or will you just ignore any convincing evidence that backs up what I'm saying and continue calling every legitimate piece of evidence "silly", "crazy", "loony", or any variation of those terms that you use a defense mechanism to tell yourself that anybody who speaks out against the governments official story is insane? Or will you take the usual route and come up with some BS explanation like the printer ink from floor 79 coated the hot steel beam during the fall and caused a chemical reaction, which resulted in the formation of eutectic steel?

If I had to imagine what a dis-info agent was, your style of posting would match it pretty nicely. Passionately backing up the government and mainstream media backed story of what happened, denying any evidence that goes against it, and calling those who question the official story "crazy" despite the evidence that is brought to the table. But do dis-info agents exist? Is it really a government agencys priority to sabotage internet forums in hopes to sway peoples opinions on the 9/11 inside job theory? I doubt it, you're probably just some guy that cannot accept the fact that your government would do something like that, so you find every "9/11 myths" and "truth debunkers" detail that exists so you can spew some of that garbage in here when you're getting slapped in the face time and time again by heaps of evidence that go agaainst the official story.

Originally posted by Darkwing01
Let's say (guesstimate) 100 tons was needed, that allows you to cut all the columns on four floors.

Funny how no one noticed all these workers cutting away at the fireproofing, bashing holes in the walls to get to the columns, nor the many km of wire to connect it all up.... must have been done by invisible ninjas!

Also the same invisible ninja's must have planted the explosives as well!

reply to post by spoor

Funny how no one noticed all these workers cutting away at the fireproofing, bashing holes in the walls to get to the columns, nor the many km of wire to connect it all up.... must have been done by invisible ninjas!

Also the same invisible ninja's must have planted the explosives as well!

And we see the lame appeal to common sense again, terrific. "In the scenario I envision, people would have noticed that, so it's impossible!" You crack me up spoor.

Originally posted by TupacShakur
You crack me up spoor.

Not as much as you crack people with your silly claims in this thread!

and you are unable to provide a answer...

reply to post by spoor

Not as much as you crack people with your silly claims in this thread!

Yeah, claims backed up by evidence, experiments, and facts are just so silly! Super silly OMGLOLROFL! Is that the only thing that you can think to say? Probably 2/3s of your posts that I've read mention how silly somebodys claims are with a complete lack of actual debunking. Why don't you actually contribute to the flow of the discussion instead of just calling everything that goes against your point of view silly?

There is nothing silly about looking at a situation from a different perspective based on the evidence that is available. NIST has no credibility for several reasons, mainly because they provide little experiments to back up what they say, they've been caught lying on several occasions, and they didn't even mention WTC7 in their report. You are seriously here defending that organization and calling me crazy for not hopping on the mainstream bandwagon? I trust the independent individuals with nothing to gain by the experiments that they perform in order to either prove or disprove NISTs theories.

and you are unable to provide a answer...

To what, your invisible ninja post? I don't know how they set it up, that is not important. The evidence of a thermitic based demolition is there, so why do I need to speculate on exactly how the building was wired? That's what you guys like to do, shift the conversation in a direction that requires speculation, and then you pick out that statement and call us "loony" for thinking that's possible. I'm not a demolition expert so I wouldn't know, but just because I can't answer exactly how many grams of thermite were placed on what columns, what detonators were used, how long the preparation took, how they kept it low-key enough so that nobody would notice, and so on doesn't mean that the theory is tossed out of the window. The evidence of thermite is there, so that's the important thing, not whether or not FBI agents dressed up as construction workers to sneak thermite in or something like that.

Hypothetical scenario (I try to avoid these but whatever): Your close friend is suspected by many of being a murderer. There is evidence that a bullet pulled from the body of the victim came from a weapon that he owns (Similar to the dust chips having a similar chemical composition to thermite). There is also evidence that his gun has been recently fired (similar to the iron spheres indicating that a reaction hot enough to melt steel occured). Whenever he or his family is confronted about it, they deny whatever evidence surfaces and support their son despite how irrational denying such evidence might seem (Sort of like how you and NIST denied the existence of molten steel or thermite).

reply to post by spoor

Funny how no one noticed all these workers cutting away at the fireproofing, bashing holes in the walls to get to the columns, nor the many km of wire to connect it all up.... must have been done by invisible ninjas!

When is the last time you went to a construction crew in YOUR building and checked exactly what they were doing?

Have you never lived or worked near a construction site?

reply to post by Darkwing01


After the bombing in 93 everything changed as far as getting in and out of the WTC. Do a little research and there were some 'families' who were not that happy about it either with the new presence and security. There were multiple projects including technical updates which included upgrading the infrastructure.

One way in and one way out.

reply to post by esdad71

This is interesting concerning the security in 1998:

www.nytimes.com...

The interesting parts of the article:

"The robbery came nearly five years after the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey tightened security at the complex in response to the terrorist bombing on Feb. 26, 1993, which killed 6 people and injured more than 1,000. Since then, all people entering the complex's elevators have had to show identification, though they do not have to pass through metal detectors.

Since the bombing, every one of the 40,000 employees who work at the Trade Center has had to show an identity card to security guards to get on elevators. Visitors are required to show a picture identification and to be buzzed upstairs by the company they are visiting.

But Scott Waldman, a 27-year-old lawyer who works in the complex, said that guards had waved him through on several occasions without checking his identification and that messengers often arrived at his office unannounced.

''I'm not shocked that this happened because there are plenty of days when you can wave an ID in front of them and they just let you in,'' he said. ''Often they are talking to each other and don't even look. You can give them anything.''

Security experts said that it would be hard for any system to stop the robbers who appeared yesterday morning, noting that they appeared to have compromised the complex's security system from the inside.

And CNN had this to add:

articles.cnn.com...:US

Security was heightened again last week after one of those implicated in the bombing, Ramzi Yousef, was sentenced to life in prison

reply to post by Wotcher

Great post though I was convinced even before I read this but now there is no shread of doubt in my mind that our government is capable of anything! It looks like we may be in for anything sooner then later . I can't get over how even with all the evidence we will still see large percentages of our population in denial . Ignorance and Denial is a damn hard obstacle to overcome and many of these individuals act as though our government is incapable of heinous acts! Like our government is made up of benevolent demigods incapable of evil or perhaps they just flat out refuse to believe they are! Because of this fact I feel as though we have no hope of stopping tyranny and oppression from coming! perhaps until we are all in FEMA camps or the proof for the deniers is so in their faces that they no longer can! I pray every day that when this day comes the damage wont be Irreparable to those of us willing to believe that people are capable of anything!

reply to post by NIcon


Like I said...families...look up the name Ralph Guarino. That is the only way anything of that size got done. Guiliani got rid of who he wanted.

reply to post by TupacShakur


That video is not proof. I mean, cmon...they did not have an HD camera. It looks like a camera phone. Also, who the freak in their right mind would attempt to set off a thermetic reaction like that? Sorry, but that is not proof.

I want to see a physical piece of evidence because there is no way in the world you could bring down 2 100 story buildings and have nothing left of what you used for the CD. NFW....

reply to post by esdad71

That video is not proof. I mean, cmon...they did not have an HD camera. It looks like a camera phone.

With that logic, the Pentagon security footage is not HD, therefore a plane did not hit the Pentagon. The low quality video shows a bright flash after it's ignited. Arguing that since we don't have a high resolution video of the thing that's clear as day in the video as it is is just stupid.

Also, who the freak in their right mind would attempt to set off a thermetic reaction like that?

Maybe somebody who is conducting an experiment to compare how the chips in the dust react when ignited by a blowtorch vs. the paint samples?

Sorry, but that is not proof.

Sorry, but that is proof. You can cover your eyes and say "LALALALA" all you want, but any rational person can clearly see a bright flash when the dust chip is ignited. Claiming that the video wasn't HD doesn't debunk the fact that the chip reacted energetically and created iron spheres in the process.

Let me put this in simple terms so you can understand.
Paint chips + blowtorch = ash.
Dust chips + blowtorch = very hot bright flash + iron spheres.

Very hot bright flash = energetically reactive material.
Iron spheres = temperatures hot enough to melt steel.

Thermite reaction = temperatures hot enough to melt steel + very hot bright flash + iron spheres.

Thermite reaction = dust chips + blowtorch

I want to see a physical piece of evidence because there is no way in the world you could bring down 2 100 story buildings and have nothing left of what you used for the CD. NFW....

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/206e0a1f3571.jpg[/atsimg] Why do you continue to embarass yourself with stupid statements like that? The typical appeal to common sense that is consistently used by official story believers does not trump physical evidence.

A piece of physical evidence: there was active, unreacted thermitic material found in the four dust samples.

More physical evidence: the eutectic steel that was found in the rubble: [atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/1a17aeae0e19.jpg[/atsimg]

More physical evidence: Iron spheres indicating a temperature hot enough to melt steel. These can be formed by the reaction of those leftover red chips found in the dust.

reply to post by TupacShakur


Tupac, you are blind. You are so driven by an agenda that you want to believe. You need to believe something. It is hard to admit you are wrong.




As far as the video, no, you cannot compare it to cheap cameras used for surv...If you were going to perform an experiment to show 9/11 was a fraud you would use decent quipment. These guys can afford a cheap ass FLip?

reply to post by esdad71

Tupac, you are blind. You are so driven by an agenda that you want to believe. You need to believe something. It is hard to admit you are wrong.

I am driven by facts and evidence.

As far as the video, no, you cannot compare it to cheap cameras used for surv...If you were going to perform an experiment to show 9/11 was a fraud you would use decent quipment. These guys can afford a cheap ass FLip?

If your only argument against the results of that experiment is the quality of the camera, than that really shows the extent of your intelligence and cognitive thinking ability.

reply to post by esdad71
And what drives you, esdad ? What brings you to this forum? What will it take for you to quit? Why would a new investigation bother you? As my old friend Rodney asked, "Can't we all get along?" And as far as tupac's vision, I think it's 20/20.

reply to post by dillweed


You can check any post and I am not against a new investigation. What I am against is the taxpayer paying for another investigation. If there are so many out there who feel it was the government then where are the donations or pro bono work?

If that is all it would take to stop the madness then why not? 911Truth has 10's of 1000's of people evidently who feel that 9/11 was pulled off by the government. Well, if they all contributed 20 bucks you would have a good start. Where does all that money that is raised by DVD and t-shirts sales go? Not to a new investigation....

I come to these forums to make sure people know all sides of the story. There is your side, my side and the truth.Full truth. Not partial arguments held together with paint chips and fuzzy physics.

Guess that factual thermite chips and real physics cant help either...

Stay under the rug, its all going to be fine and dandy.

reply to post by esdad71

What I am against is the taxpayer paying for another investigation.

Any criminal investigation is taxpayer funded.

Do you propose just dispensing with the rule of law because you want to save a couple of dollars. That is what this is really about, the rule of law.

If you haven't noticed the guys who are responsible for this (in my opinion) are the same ones bleeding the U.S. dry of every cent it has.

Penny wise, pound foolish.

Originally posted by esdad71
What I am against is the taxpayer paying for another investigation.

Really?

But you have no problem with the taxpayer funding wars in the Middle East that were started on the back of 911?

On the false flag op of 911?

Really?

Who would trust another government funded investigation anyway?