Newest 9/11 Documentary - Proof 9/11 was an inside Job

Any plane that has Autopilot (they did) is already rigged for remote control because even if auto pilot only keeps you on a straight course it does so by CONTROLING THE PLAIN!!!
A laptop and a few servo's could be fitted wihin a couple of hours. Job done.

Why would they use real passengers in planes if they were really military planes?
Because the media needs material to work with when it tells the sheeple what happened.

Body's incinerated on impact!!! What a load of BS.
Its simple to understand. Light a cup of aviation fuel and measure the temperature. Now light an entire lake of the fuel and measure the temperature and you'll find its the same as the cup, simply adding more fuel does NOT increase the temperature.
The heat from impact or the fires was not capable of instantly vaporising bodies. Go buy a dead pig and see how long it takes to burn it out of existance, you'll be there for many hours if you use aviation fuel.

Originally posted by TheLieWeLive
Just the other day a friend tried to sell me on the occult sacrifice side to the story.

What does ATS think?

1. The Pentagon, on impact, was a flaming pentagram.

2. The two WTC towers could also be symbology of the Solomon columns.


3. World Trade Center building 7 which later fell the same day is also known as the Salomon building.

Now was it some kind of religious sacrifice I don't claim to know. Just something I never put together before. Some weird similarities you have to admit.

edit on 13-2-2012 by TheLieWeLive because: corrected salomon building spelling. Thanks Alfie1.

WOW....I never put any of that stuff together but it all holds very true to the idea that this was some sort of Santanic sacrifice by the EVIL PTB to further their goals at the expense of anything in their way at the moment......

I don't doubt the validity of any of this knowing people like I do.....but good luck ever convincing anyone else of this being something to consider.....all very sad dont know what else to say

reply to post by ProudBird


Actually, I have doubts about that object now after reading this:

www.questionsquestions.net...

However back to my original statement, that this really has nothing to do with the fact the buildings were brought down via controlled demolition with thermite.


Thermite reaction:


WTC Thermite reaction:

Originally posted by Alfie1
reply to post by TheLieWeLive

 

Sorry to rain on your theory but WTC 7 was actually known as the Salomon building.

What is the differnece between Salomon and Solomon when speaking ENGLISH??

I don't know what you are knit picking about as far as it's name, but please explain...

reply to post by VoidHawk


This is so bad......it is utter nonsense....and only invented by someone who knows not of which they speak:

Any plane that has Autopilot (they did) is already rigged for remote control because even if auto pilot only keeps you on a straight course it does so by CONTROLING THE PLAIN!!!
A laptop and a few servo's could be fitted wihin a couple of hours. Job done.

Those who are not pilots make up the most incredible stories....

.....now, just to be absolutely clear.....there are things recorded on the FDRs (Flight Data Recorders) that are recovered and were readable, from American 77 and United 93. These are clearly showing certain items in the cockpit that can ONLY change by being manipulated by hand.

There are a lot of examples.....one being the simple re-tuning of a Nav radio frequency, for instance. There is "Auto-tuning", and there is a selection where you can manually change the frequencies.

Many more examples....and of course.....the AutoPilots show when they were connected, and more importantly, DISCONNECTED, also on the FDR.

These are the facts.

The rest is incredibly silly speculation that is far, far from reality.

reply to post by ProudBird


And completely pointless to focus in on, because it has nothing to do with the actual demolition of the buildings. It's like arguing about what the farmer looked like who slaughtered the chicken you're eating.

reply to post by L00kingGlass


No....no "thermite" either.

That is more bloody nonsense that just won't go away.

Look it up.....:"thermite" does not 'explode'....and as such, would be an extremely poor choice for a "demolition".

In any case, there is simply NO evidence for "thermite" at the WTC. Period. One very badly done "research" by a "Dr," Stephen Jones is what has led to this misconception.

Keeping in mind that a colleague of his (they had a falling out) proposed that the WTC Towers were destroyed by "Weapons from Low Earth Orbit".

The crazy, it is rampant......

reply to post by AlienStalker


This is exactly what It is I have done so much research into secret societies, governent, occult and witchcraft ties they have, and "ET's" what they really are, they are demons masquerading as such.

It was a ritual sacrafice to try literally open up gateways to what is and you would call, hell.

For anyone interested this is video that pretty much sums up exactly what is going on.

www.youtube.com...

reply to post by TheLieWeLive


Every start of every major attack in the 20th century has been a sacrifice. Just look at the dates of the beginnings of all of the wars. They usually start or end on the 11th day of whichever month. The Iraq war (both of them) started on the Jewish day of Purim, which is, I have been told, when bloody retribution is encouraged on ones enemies. Just look at the dates and years (even the times) of certain events, and you'll be surprised at all of the coincidences that pop up. Numerology is very important to the Illuminati. They consider massacres on certain days (11 seems to be a predominant number with them) to be sacrifices.

reply to post by ProudBird


Since you're resorting to attacks on my character to make a point, you are not helping yourself.

In any case, there is simply NO evidence for "thermite" at the WTC.

Run of the mill accelerant based fires don't burn white hot and form sparks, and which continue burning for weeks. There is only one substance that does this: thermite.

"Although the reactants are stable at room temperature, they burn with an extremely intense exothermic reaction when they are heated to ignition temperature. The products emerge as liquids due to the high temperatures reached (up to 2,500 °C (4,530 °F) with iron(III) oxide)—although the actual temperature reached depends on how quickly heat can escape to the surrounding environment. Thermite contains its own supply of oxygen and does not require any external source of air. Consequently, it cannot be smothered and may ignite in any environment, given sufficient initial heat. It will burn well while wet and cannot be easily extinguished with water, although enough water will remove heat and may stop the reaction."

"thermite" does not 'explode'....

WRONG.


"Thermite is a pyrotechnic composition of a metal powder and a metal oxide that produces an exothermic oxidation-reduction reaction known as a thermite reaction. If aluminium is the reducing agent it is called an aluminothermic reaction. Most varieties are not explosive, but can create short bursts of extremely high temperatures focused on a very small area for a short period of time."

and as such, would be an extremely poor choice for a "demolition".

WRONG AGAIN.


"The melting and boiling points of aluminium also make it ideal for thermite reactions. Its relatively low melting point (660 °C (1,220 °F)) means that it is easy to melt the metal, so that the reaction can occur mainly in the liquid phase and thus proceeds fairly quickly. At the same time, its high boiling point (2,519 °C (4,566 °F)) enables the reaction to reach very high temperatures, since several processes tend to limit the maximum temperature to just below the boiling point."

"Most steel has other metals added to tune its properties, like strength, corrosion resistance, or ease of fabrication. Steel is just the element iron that has been processed to control the amount of carbon. Iron, out of the ground, melts at around 1510 degrees C (2750°F). Steel often melts at around 1370 degrees C (2500°F)."

Note: Thermite boiling point: 4566 F, Steel melting Point: 2500 F -> 2750 F

Perfect for melting steel.

Fire doesn't melt steel. Proven.

reply to post by ProudBird



Whatever the true story may be and regardless of you being a pilot, or not; I have a hard time trusting anything you have to say due to your tone, ego, utter disdain with "truthers", repeated use of ridicule and veiled namecalling.

Back on topic: OP: Will watch the video soon....thanks for taking the time to question things in this time and age when doing draws unrelenting attaks from the same people, over and over again; who could be anyone... or working for anyone.

A fraction of a second after the cutting charge is ignited and the steel is LIQUEFIED, a small explosive (C-4 or Semtex) placed at the apex of the cut (left side of diagram) is detonated. This explosive DOES NOT have enough power to cut or bend the steel; its purpose is to "kick" the severed piece of I-beam or support structure away from the cut – in similar manner as a lumberjack would fell a large tree with a chain saw.

Forty-seven (one for each support column) such small explosions must happen simultaneously on each of the floors where the explosives are placed.

The separation of the cut section from the load-bearing column generates even more molten "slag", which could explain the molten steel seen pouring out of the side of the towers

reply to post by L00kingGlass


I said that "thermite" does not explode....you wrote "WRONG"...then show sources that confirm that "thermite" burns very hot.....which is well-known. But, does not explode.

The entire fantasy of a "thermite" conflagration, in the huge WTC Towers, is just devoid of any facts or evidence, whatsoever.

No way for it to have been "installed" or "planted"...undetected by the maintenance people, nor the tenants in the buildings.

It is a crack-pot idea that belongs solely on many misconceptions, and the flawed "research" of Steven Jones. Many have taken up this "idea" ever since, with any number of more outlandish claims.

The examples of molten metals are not steel, this has also been noted many times. There are many other metals associated with the buildings, to include a very large area of batteries that one tenant had as a back-up power supply. For their computers.

Of course, when I say "outlandish", it follows on from others' who use the fact of the impacts, and the UPS power supply batteries as more "evidence"....with ever more ridiculous speculation surrounding it. This is easy enough to find, on a 'Web search......read at one's own risk, but they are highly entertaining.

reply to post by L00kingGlass


Oh, dear.

You show the famous photo of beams that were cut as part of the clean-up?? Weeks later?

Sorry, but this is very well de-bunked, already.....and not "evidence" of a "thermite" charge of any sort. But now, we are jumping to C-4 or Semtex charges.....(also having NO evidence in the debris).....

....and of course, there is no sonic, nor visual evidence of these "C-4" or "Semtex" charges, either.

Originally posted by ProudBird
reply to post by andersensrm

 

What you are saying is, it is not only illogical it is impossible. This is where the problem lies because it is most certainly not impossible.

Let's be clear......from a technical standpoint it is not "impossible"....however, let's use some reason and clarity, here.

ANY such endeavor (to retro-fit not one, not two, but FOUR regular airliners) wold be a HUGE undertaking. This isn't something that could be done "unnoticed".

It is then, therefore, highly, highly improbable.....and it is pure fantasy, in light of ALL known information.

Yea but still you are talking about retro fitting a plane with the technology we have access to, not the technology that exists. So we can't really say how hard it would be to retrofit a plane with some type of remote control device, or even a preprogramed flight path, or how long it would take. Thats all I am saying, I am open to all the possiblities.

reply to post by ProudBird

I said that "thermite" does not explode....you wrote "WRONG"...then show sources that confirm that "thermite" burns very hot.....which is well-known.

The quote I provided stated CLEAR AS DAY, that some forms of thermite create a "pyrotechnic" effect.

The entire fantasy of a "thermite" conflagration, in the huge WTC Towers, is just devoid of any facts or evidence, whatsoever.

And all those facts I just presented complete with pictures displaying 45 degree thermite based angle cuts, and thermite reactions emanating from the towers at multiple points are... crackpot theories devoid of evidence?

YOU'RE LOOKING RIGHT AT THE EVIDENCE.

No way for it to have been "installed" or "planted"...undetected by the maintenance people, nor the tenants in the buildings.

People were seen entering the building at 3AM after the cleaning crews were leaving, in the weeks leading up to September 11th. What were they doing in there? Having a tea party?

reply to post by ProudBird


How is it that there is now way they could have gone undetected in planting the thermite, or explosives of some type? Personally I work for a phone company, and usually the people working in the office have no idea what we are doing, we get keys to every room in the building, most of the time we have to get inside of walls, and other stuff. I don't see it being that hard. People working aren't really paying attention to what any ones doing thats doing maintence or w/e. Its not like people were alert the few weeks before 9/11 making sure they were looking for terrorist activity.

reply to post by andersensrm


I will also point out that even if one wished to claim that the AutoPilots were used.....it is also easily proven false by observing the airplanes, just prior to impact.

United 175 especially.....the bank angle is estimated at about 38° at impact. The AutoFlight systems do not allow more than 30°......the systems also do not allow the excessive overspeeds.....this all has to be hand-flown, with intent.

One more thing.....there is a bank-angle limiter on the MCP (Mode Control Panel) .....most airlines by protocol usually set it to 25° maximum....and it is often changed to either 10° or 15° for operations at higher altitudes. (Some Company procedures have it left in 'AUTO' for all flight regimes....it is simply a matter choice and preference of the Flight Operations Departments, and how they write their procedures)....

Here is the photo of a typical MCP on a Boeing:




The outer knob (with the white line and arrow) is concentric with the heading select knob. It (the outer) has detents, as seen in the photo....'AUTO' (which uses the Air Data Computer input, and this never exceeds 30°)....then, you see the positions for 5°, and (inferred) 10°, then 15°, then 20°, and finally (marked) @25°.

reply to post by ProudBird


Your still talking about existing technology already in use for the public. Advance that technology 50 years and what do you think it could do? Take in mind moore's law.

Originally posted by ProudBird
reply to post by L00kingGlass

 

Oh, dear.

You show the famous photo of beams that were cut as part of the clean-up?? Weeks later?

Sorry, but this is very well de-bunked, already.....and not "evidence" of a "thermite" charge of any sort. But now, we are jumping to C-4 or Semtex charges.....(also having NO evidence in the debris).....

....and of course, there is no sonic, nor visual evidence of these "C-4" or "Semtex" charges, either.

edit on Tue 14 February 2012 by ProudBird because: (no reason given)

So they cut it with thermite or something like that WEEKS AFTER ?? You do not get metal dripping like that, not even from a plasma torch.