FIVE QUESTIONS: The Twin Towers and a Controlled Demonlition: HOW?

Originally posted by Varemia
reply to post by nh_ee

 

Yes, but all that suggests is prior knowledge, something that has been proven a number of times. The government and others knew well ahead of time that attacks on the towers were imminent. They just didn't stop it, or even helped the attacks happen. This has no bearing on the usage of demolitions, however, as those must still be proven.

And they planted the thermite ...

The proof is already there ... residue of thermite.

As I said earlier, kerasin will burn up to 1000 degrees. It doesn't come close to the 60% construction requirement of steel in this case. Even if we made room for some error in the steel construction, kerasin doesn't go further than 30% ...

The official theory defies physics ... plain and simple.

But, if the government new in advanced and planted the thermite under those 6 months, where the buiildings were "closed". Then the fuel would burn hot enough to ignite the thermite, and then you have the answer for all the questions.

reply to post by lunarasparagus


Look up Dr. Judy Wood. She has a very interesting theory.

reply to post by bjarneorn


Thermite is not independently verified. Only Jones found it. Others who analyzed the dust and did more comprehensive elemental composition found everything that you would find in primer paint. Someone's being dishonest. Is it Jones, who put his paper in a journal that does not have a good peer review process? Or is it the guys who got their paper peer reviewed by other scientists, until the paper was satisfactory enough to be published?

Plus, in order for thermite to cut steel or weaken it significantly, it must be in the form of a shape charge, which makes a bang just like any other explosive. Plenty of other people have shown that if you simply have thermite on the steel or around it, it does not cause much damage aside from a nice scorch mark.

Why do you think the architech, of both tower's was seen with tears in his eye's,he was told bye the milatary to keep his mouth shut or suffer the actions of his mouth.and three week's later he was DEAD they say heart attack, I say attack on the NATION, now look at us NO MORE AMERICA! allmost everyone is afraid to protest wich is a god given right, afraid to speak there mind for fear of being sued by there nighber or family member. we got to 1.Stop the police state that is at hand , 2.investagate and make the Government crimanals pay Harsshly along with milatary cohort's,3. Give the government back to the hard working folk's of this country,:

reply to post by lunarasparagus


The OP is correct to question the "controlled demolition" explanation proposed by many 9-11 truthers, imo.

That BigGov had a hand in or executed 9-11 is obvious by the evidence. The method used is open to speculation, however.

My personal opinion is that the people who originally planted the seeds of "controlled demolition" into the mix, may have been interested in later discrediting the whole 9-11 truth movement by linking them to evidence they could not prove and thus placing doubt in the minds of others regarding the 9-11 truth movement's validity.

A more studied and logical approach to what caused the towers to fall on 9-11 is presented by Dr Judy Wood author of "Where Did the Towers Go?". She points out that what you really see IS NOT towers falling but towers, whilst in a downward motion, almost immediately turned to dust. The most logical explanation for this dustification of concrete and steel would be a charged partical beam weapon, possibly dispatched from a satellite in space. Consider...

Originally posted by TrickoftheShade

Originally posted by moondoggy2


Lets not forget this small point: EVERYONE HAS A PRICE!

Truthers always say this, as though it's some sort of sophisticated point about the world and the quality of people in it.

I suppose it may be true, but in my experience there are extraordinarily few people who will lie about the deaths of their family, say, for money. You might. I wouldn't.

You also have to think about the practicality of it. If you were the husband of a woman on the plane and soemone came to see you and said she was going to be killed, but you would get a secret million dollars, how do they know for sure that you wouldn't expose them? They couldn't.

Furthermore, assuming there are lots of people who will do anything for money, it seems odd that none of them have exposed the conspiracy - which would of course net them huge sums. I mean, why not? They are the kind of people who will do anything for cash. It's not as though you could trust them.

I cannot believe you seriously think there aren't people who can do nefarious deeds and keep their mouths shut. If one of the insiders came forward -- how long would they LIVE and which media organization would cover it?

I've seen plenty of evidence for conspiracy, and I've seen plenty of evidence that the MEDIA sits on stories. They didn't cover the Abu Ghraib scandal until it was on the internet for a good 6 months. The FBI agent who finally outed the pedophile Senator, did so after two newspapers in St. Petersburg Florida sat on it for 5 years.

Likely MOST of the people involved in 9.11 had no knowledge of it. NORAD was chasing shadows because they were running drills concerning planes flying into buildings. The head of the FAA security destroyed the RADAR tapes -- that didn't require some TEAM.

Most of the time, everybody was confused. And good people probably covered up their small part in the matter, because they would go from Hero to Zero for what they think was a small mistake.

Clean-up at the Pentagon, destroyed it as a Crime Scene. I don't think any "evil agents" did the clean up.

>> NO, it only would take a couple dozen people AT THE TOP of various government organizations to cary out the coverup. The media will act predictably and follow the status quo story -- because THAT'S how the Million Dollar anchors keep their jobs and why there is no more Dan Rather; they know how to stay within the lines.

And our Oligarchy weaned public, knows that nobody will promote them at work if they don't think "supply and demand" and nobody will be their friend if they adopt the "latest conspiracy theory." It's not a way to become popular.


9.11 would be the ONLY incident that the Bush administration did NOT lie about. They didn't tell the truth about the November 2008 financial collapse, they didn't tell the truth about WMDs, and with lots of evidence, the informed know that they rigged two elections. I could add to this list. Bush and Cheney are already guilty of war crimes that have killed a lot more people than 9.11 -- and they benefitted greatly.

>> With the Patriot Act II, and now a relatively hush-hush new bill to grant the military the right to arrest anywhere any time without evidence or charges -- and numerous other LEGAL atrocities in the works -- we are STILL on the road to Fascism.


Whether or NOT 9/11 was an inside job or not -- we are on the road to an absolute Oligarchy, and I consider Bush, Cheney, Hank Paulson and so many people in charge traitors to this country and humanity. The corruption of our country couldn't be any worse than if they attacked us on purpose, or finally there was blowback for the millions of deaths in the name of corporate profits. We commit atrocities on a monthly basis in Pakistan, Afghanistan and Iraq -- so WHAT IS THE BIG DEAL?

Saying the Bush/Cheney government would never do such a thing is laughable. And saying it's "impossible because someone would talk" -- kind of ignores all the stuff like rigged elections that you have to ignore. The press ignores the important stories on a daily basis. Would Pravda have reported accurately during the days of the USSR if their country had attacked another?

It's pretty naive of how corrupt our country has become.

Originally posted by UB2120
reply to post by lunarasparagus

 

Look up Dr. Judy Wood. She has a very interesting theory.

It is an interesting theory, yes, and Wood tries to do her research, but she falls for the process of having your answer and then choosing stuff to fit it. She thinks the spire after collapse "dustified," even though from other angles you can see that it simply fell straight down, and the settled dust on it went into the air. The burned cars were hit by burning debris, not hit by a beam of energy. That's why other cars weren't burned in the same areas, and that's why people were not burned by the cloud. There's nothing pyroclastic about the cloud if people survived being immersed in it.

Click here to learn more about this warning.

reply to post by VitriolAndAngst


Of course there are people who will keep their mouth shut, but there are also a large portion of people who will not. Many people do not care for their lives, and only care about the world around them. Other people just don't care about anything. What motivation do they have to keep their mouths shut? You can say that their families might be threatened, but now it's all excuses. There's no reason for there to be no whistle-blowers to knowing about the demolition or faking the plane crashes.

Originally posted by LogiosHermes27
reply to post by lunarasparagus

 

The only thing i saw when it happend was .

#1. One big airplane crashed into a big building.

#2. Another big airplane hit another big building.

#3.And because of the building designs of any structure in the life of humankind, no building can withstand 5 tons just sitting and chilling on a basic office floor burning and partying like its 1999!

4# Then I saw both buildings fall because of the …‘WEIGHT IN THE MIDDLE as well as the intense fire that ultimately caused the buildings fait.

It’s what every body else saw in the world with there own eyes. I honestly don’t understand or fathom into what people imagined they saw or how wild the imagination can be.

My teacher tells me that every human doesn’t think a like and that I have to respect it...so I just laugh and shake my head!

'eyes dont lie'

Eyes don't lie.

lol

Just lol.

reply to post by lunarasparagus


I would guess you dont work in construction, nor are a demolition expert.

I would suggest you go and speak with some people who do build things for a living and ask them about the temperature it would take to melt the steel supports. I would also suggest you watch as many youtube videos as you can and try and look at the big picture.

I know about structural integrity, but I have never had the pleasure of demo-ing a building with charged explosives. People who do have experience in such matters, Jesse Ventura for instance, call it like they see it when they say "that was a controlled demolition"

reply to post by WhiteDevil013


The steel didn't melt. Everybody knows this. Steel loses strength far below melting point. Losing load-bearing strength puts higher load on the intact columns.

Originally posted by lunarasparagus
I have an open mind. I believe there are unanswered questions regarding 9/11. But I can't yet seem to buy this notion of a "controlled demolition" of the WTC. When watching closely footage of either tower collapsing, it--to me--really does look like a collapse. I can see the top section begin to sag just above the glowing red heat:

Nice, Jedi mind trick you try.

I often wonder if God loves the dis-info agent and gross liars that curb the truth to serve evil. Most of them are lawyers (check my sig) and some are anarchists of another sort. Even others would do it for some shekels. While I'll agree more youth are becoming subjective in their thinking vs objective and news has become entertainment I'd hope that people actually care about the truth. I think God cares about truth. I do.

Originally posted by Varemia
reply to post by bjarneorn

 

Plus, in order for thermite to cut steel or weaken it significantly, it must be in the form of a shape charge, which makes a bang just like any other explosive. Plenty of other people have shown that if you simply have thermite on the steel or around it, it does not cause much damage aside from a nice scorch mark.

Which, of course, is not true.

You are basically, talking out of your behind here ... the failure of the twin towers, defies physics. It defies basic physics. If you wanna stick to miracles, go to church ... stop preaching to doubters.

The precense of thermite residue can be observed ... it can be observed in many ways. Although many of these ways are circumstancial, that still supports thermite presence. One of the ways you can see it, is by the molten steel ... you have no heat source to melt steel ... none, period. And if you continue to talk about kerasin fuel melting steel, then seriously go jump off a bridge or something ...

All of the explanations do not make sense ... if it was a "natural" failure, caused by the aeroplanes. Then there isn't a chance in trillion, that the towers would fall the way they did. Not a chance ... putting it simply, it's a symmetrical failure ... and such a failure, cannot be caused by an asymmetrical incident.

So, now go find some means that will cause a symmetrical failure ... and since it is symmetrical, you have to find symmetrical means. period.

And to be perfectly honest, that the government made preperations during these 6 months makes a whole lot of sence.

But go ahead, deny yourself to hell and back ... it's "almost" amusing to see people believe this idocy, and bow to mass murderers like GWB. Your just as bad as the muslims, with their jihad and allah.

reply to post by lunarasparagus


Most of your questions cannot be answered feasibly because there was not a proper investigation of the attacks to begin with. One thing I will point out is that you said nobody heard explosions; that is %100 false. There are hundreds of witnesses to explosions and bombs going off including visual evidence, audio and eyewitness testimony as well as dozens of phone calls to the FDNY and NYPD. Start here and see what the 9/11 first responders have to say about 'no explosions':
firefightersfor911truth.org...

Watch some of the videos on their site..here are two other very good videos, I may make a separate thread for these:
9/11truth VS. the BBC
www.youtube.com...

Niels Harrit VS. Mike Rudin-this is a debate about the nano thermite found in the dust which contrary to some people's beliefs, has not been refuted.
www.youtube.com...
Mr. Harrit has published his findings in peer reviewed scientific journals and they are yet to be 'debunked' and nobody has published anything in the journals that contradicts Professor Harrit's findings.

As far as your other questions, you will just be running in circles looking for those answers until there has been a proper investigation. Until then, we will never truly know.
ae911truth.org is another good site with great information. I would say just check these things out that I posted. Maybe it would answer some things for you, maybe not. Either way, good luck

to answer the ops questions none of us know (unless we were in on it)we just find an endless list of strange coincidences and extremely low probability events all taking place on the same day as extremley suspicious. combined with even a basic understanding of history and our governments track record on commiting acts of evil/lying around the globe. ill allways admire the lack of suspicion by the os crowd. to quote
james earl jones "now thats power"

some interesting points tho, thermite takes extreme heat like burning magnesium to set it off jet fuel or burning office furniture wouldnt do the trick even if it would, you could insulate the thermite and set it off remotely with a cell phone and a detonator designed to light thermite. an hour of fire wouldnt matter.

they couldnt find explosives evidence? didnt they also not find a huge amount of gold and 3 trillion doillars(the records to)?

wasnt george bushes brother was in charge of security for world trade center and there was i believe 6 mos of behind closed doors construction they could have worked at night as well?

jet fuel while an exciting sounding name is more similar to kerosene than to gasoline. the fuel used for propeller planes aviation fuel(blue fuel) is the stuff everyone runs in muscle cars to make them go fast. i doubt you could even get an internal combustion engine to run on jet fuel. point theres a reason why steel mills dont use gasoline or jet fuel or office furniture to melt steel, even if you could get a hot enuff tempeture you have to sustain said tempature for long enuff. X degrees for Y time to melt steel Z period. were talking about huge peices of steel. and while im no engineer the amount of energy to melt that much steel in one hour would probably be a lil more than a passenger airplane can carry. it would be like having a stove that could boil a huge pot water in less than 5 minutes. you could build one but its gonna leave a carbon footprint.

not trying to go off post just saying thermite is very possible there was ample time,ample opurtunity, ample motive. plus you cant discuss any of this without including building 7 and its nearly free fall speed as well. one incident two planes three buildings collapse in what appears to be a controled demolition is what i believe happened. who/what/when/how i dont know but to state/imply that it wasnt possible for a secret cabal of power to do all that right out in the open is incorect. if you want to argue chess/poker math imo the os is the least likely to be true. though that discussion would go way off topic and would also have to include the governments criminal record so to speak.

Sorry, but this is not 1950 anymore and you cannot cover something up as large as 9/11. With the invention of the internet it is impossible. You can find out when Lindsey Lohan is taking a dump and a person will sell their soul for anything. At least ONE person could have come forward and I do not think there is a long list of dead people who were involved with 9/11.

A conspiracy in government is s small group of people and a team or players. Like Cheney. Mineta and the air force guy in blue. These three and they alone wrap up that 93 could not have been bought down or disabled.Their testimoeny alone. One short burst from one of the planes that was in the air, dub a tape with Lets Roll and Allah Akabr and it is over. Make a movie...nothing to see here.

....but you argue for thermite? Really? WTC 7 was a refurbed building that was built on another building when it was bought by Silverstein at a time when the WTC was in decline in that area. He wanted to save it. It prospered again. It is not like the WTC was empty and there was no money to be made. They would still be there is US intelligence was allowed to do what it needed to do.

The questions posed by the OP are valid and I can also ask one...where is one piece of physical evidence of the use of explosives? Not red chips folks...if you bring down a 100 story building you need to prepare a way to ignite your substance and also receive a signal to set of that chain. Does it sound cool for a movie...yes...real world application...really?

Why is the only evidence of explosives used, physical, a small chip that no one can get ahold of. Next time I am in NYC why not go to the same building, go on the roof, and see if you can find something,Bet all you find is pigeon presents.

Originally posted by Varemia

Originally posted by UB2120
reply to post by lunarasparagus

 

Look up Dr. Judy Wood. She has a very interesting theory.

It is an interesting theory, yes, and Wood tries to do her research, but she falls for the process of having your answer and then choosing stuff to fit it. She thinks the spire after collapse "dustified," even though from other angles you can see that it simply fell straight down, and the settled dust on it went into the air. The burned cars were hit by burning debris, not hit by a beam of energy. That's why other cars weren't burned in the same areas, and that's why people were not burned by the cloud. There's nothing pyroclastic about the cloud if people survived being immersed in it.

The PEOPLE have high MEMORY fields about themselves, the flows will simply divert around them, but anything in their path as they seek to re-earth at their resonant signature will FORGET to be.
Thus the door handles FORGOT to be, and the engine blocks FORGOT to be as the flows were attuned to such materials.

This is about RESONANCE and the attunement of high intensity flows that cause whatever matchs the flows resonant signature to fall apart due to the magnetic attraction of one atom for another is cancelled temporarilly.

This is how the walls of Jerico were turned to dust by trumpets blowing and encircling the walls, or how a high pitched singer can shatter a glass, only all of this has been vastly upgraded into an advanced weapon of torsion wave physics.
www.youtube.com...

gravitor

I have the correct answer:
The twin towers got destroyed because of the two huge planes that hit them!

But of course the government planned the "air strikes" and they also couldn't be pleased with just the twin towers, they wanted to bring down building 7 also, but since they didn't have another plane, they used controlled demolition.

Actually this all seems really retarded to me, why don't people believe in the official record as to why building 7 was destroyed:
www.youtube.com...

This actually makes more sense than what the "thruthers" say.
To me they are the only ones brainwashing the people.

This image will give you a sense for the length of undamaged structure for the north tower (which was destroyed from top to bottom to within about three or four seconds of ABSOLUTE FREE FALL. 95 floors: one, two, three, four.)





Re: the south tower tipping point

South Tower Tipping and Disintegration:

If the North Tower's antenna drop was anomalous from the perspective of the official theory, the South Tower's collapse contained an even stranger anomaly. The uppermost floors--above the level struck by the airplane--began tipping toward the corner most damaged by the impact. According to conservation-of-momentum laws, this block of approximately 34 floors should have fallen to the ground far outside the building's footprint. "However," observe Paul and Hoffman, "as the top then began to fall, the rotation decelerated. Then it reversed direction [even though the law of conservation of angular momentum states that a solid object in rotation will continue to rotate at the same speed unless acted on by a torque" (Paul and Hoffman, 2004, p. 34).
And then, in the words of Steven Jones, a physics professor at BYU, "this block turned mostly to powder in mid-air!" This disintegration stopped the tipping and allowed the uppermost floors to fall straight down into, or at least close to, the building's footprint. As Jones notes, this extremely strange behavior was one of many things that NIST was able to ignore by virtue of the fact that its analysis, in its own words, "does not actually include the structural behavior of the tower after the conditions for collapse initiation were reached" (NIST 2005, p. 80, n. 12). This is VERY convenient because it means that NIST did not have to answer Jones's question: "How can we understand this strange behavior without explosives?" (Jones, 2006).

This behavior is, however, not strange to experts in controlled demolition. Mark Loizeaux, the head of Controlled Demolition, Inc., has said:

"By differentially controlling the velocity of failure in different parts of the structure, you can make it walk, you can make it spin, you can make it dance . . . . We'll have structures start facing north and end up going to the north-west." (Else, 2004)