Great smoking gun evidence on the floors that were hit on 911!

rense.com...
Too much info to talk about here, so check out the link, it sounds like it explains a lot of what companies and who and what was done to the certain floors that were hit on 911. a lot of inconsistancies from the 9-11 commission, that this link explains in much detail. I like how they explain how floor 81 was outfitted with a rasied 3 foot floor covered in batteries that were never turned on , and that the severs were so tall that only certain appointed employees could access these locations in the towers. apparently the area that both towers were hit were secure computer rooms in each tower that somehow the terrorists hit exactly. Just read the link, they are on their mark!!!What happened to the 100 million in gold that went missing and never recovered from trade center basement?
www.orbwar.com...
Apparently a proper investigation hasn't been done on this matter and there are still too many unanswered questions and evidence pointing at certain figures and leaders.

reply to post by ATSGrunt

Apparently a proper investigation hasn't been done

Bingo.

Sorry...not much to add to this. We can all pick parts of this event that are unbelievable to each of us. I'm sure those who cling to OS version, will reject this info as irrelevant, or yet another coincidence.

I think hitting the buildings with such two perfect shots, and that both induced collapses, perfect collapses, with two planes, flown by persons that have never before flown a commercial jet...that just doesn't "fly" with me.

Details are a mere distraction from the truth. They keep you busy arguing over irrelevant things. The thing is...there will be no new evidence, so I doubt anything new will be really "proven".

Originally posted by ATSGrunt
What happened to the 100 million in gold that went missing and never recovered from trade center basement?

That claim is just another truther lie - it was all recovered....

www.rediff.com...

reply to post by spoor


No. It was just one of many things people speculate about. You are trying very hard to tie every rumor to "truther" cause.

The molten metal that poured out of the cracks in the wall of the South Tower shortly before it was blown up (note: blown up, not collapsed) was molten lead from the numerous racks of lead batteries used as a back-up power source by Fuji Bank. The plane that hit the tower impacted the 79th through 82nd floors in the area used by this bank. This was confirmed by Stanley Praimnath who worked as an executive of the bank pn the 81st floor. So Professor Steven E. Jones's radical interpretation that it was molten steel that needed thermate is redundant and it is NOT evidence of conspiracy. The office fires created by the plane blowing up inside the South Tower were quite hot enough to melt lead (Melting point: 327.5 degrees C ), Praimnath said:

"Fuji Bank had torn up the 81st floor, and stripped it down to the bare bone to reinforce the trusses so that the floor could hold more weight. Then they had built a raised floor and filled the entire floor with server-size Uninterrupted Power Supply (UPS) batteries.

These units were bolted to the raised floor which stood about 3 feet above the reinforced 81st floor. Beneath the raised floor ran the cables and power supply that connected the army of batteries. IT techies had to get down on all fours and crawl around beneath the raised floor to connect cables.

"The whole floor was batteries," he said, "huge battery-looking things." They were "all black" and "solid, very heavy" things that had been brought in during the night. They had been put in place during the summer prior to 9/11," he said.

But were they really batteries?

"It's weird," he said. "They were never turned on."

reply to post by ATSGrunt


If the computer room floors with numerous batteries is true, and if these suspicious batteries were not really batteries, then it would seem counter-productive then to just go and crash passenger jets into them. But if it is true and they weren't batteries, then if you didn't really want to disturb all that in a crazy way, then that just supports what I've been saying lately.

Would you crash a plane into a floor(s) loaded with explosives all willynilly? What would all that 'jet fuel' do to it all? There'd have to be 'jet fuel' right? If there was a 'plane'. Don't seem to me like the height of planning to crash a plane half full (or more) of jet fuel into a section of a tower with floors laced with batteries that may not be batteries. Now does it? No.

Actually, when I put it like that that sounds rather foolish now doesn't it? It sure does.

If I speculate about demolition I think there must have been 3 types of things. One to cut the exterior, another to blow the heavy bits into adjacent towers. (For many claim videos are fake but really a hunk of tower was found embedded in another building having been thrown there.) And a third thing would've taken out the core. So that's one thing to cut the exterior into sections, another thing to blow the floors and eject the cut sections and a third thing, probably located in the elevator shafts, to take out the core. Three things if it was controlled demolition. "IF".

Possible evidence for each:

1. The angled cut beams, and molten metal (possibly cutting action) at the corners.
2. The trajectories of the broken pieces landing outside the footprint and sometimes in other adjacent buildings.
3. The lack of standing and remaining significant core structure.

That's just a little speculation of mine on 3 different observed happenings, nothing too radical. I was just pondering it the other day.

But back to the floors in the North Tower.

Oh sure you can mention missing gold and it takes no time for someone to come in and 'debunk' that...

You know I really think you should've just stuck to the computer floors and not mentioned the Woolworth angle or the missing gold in this thread and saved those 2 things for their own threads etc. You know IMO.

I'm going to take the liberty now, to mention something about the North Tower that I want everybody to pay attention to, but, even more than that, I want to use as a litmus test of sorts. I want to, again, lay out my minute critical beef with the 'plane' that supposedly hit the North Tower as it pertains to the Naudet 'Fireman's Video' and I'd like everyone to take a few minutes to ponder it and then to come down on one side or the other on it.

Sound good? Ok.

Even in the article from Rense that you link they talk about 'the planes that impacted the floors of the two towers impacted floors that were computer rooms with batteries never turned on...' Right? Ok.

Also in a lot of threads on here about demolition there is a lot of talk about all the "jet fuel" from the plane's impact and how that either went down the elevators or exploded in air or started fires that progressively over a short time led to the destruction of the towers. Right? You know what I'm talking about.

It's like everything that gets put forth gets debunked. You mention gold, oh, there's an answer for that etc. etc. (That's just one example, I'm running out of letters, so.)

Here's the thing. I want everyone to look at this teeny tiny thing and come down on one side or the other about it.

Just One Thing.

Check out my avatar it basically says it all. The damage pattern shown on the face of the North Tower in the Naudet 'Fireman's Video' first strike hit does not match the pattern that would be, and should've been created, by a 767 aircraft, had that been what it actually was.

YES, I am saying that the Naudet clip, that Jules Naudet captured, and that made the news and their DVD and became synonymous with the official story attack of 9/11, clearly shows that there's no way that it was a 767 airliner. That's what I'm saying and anyone can watch the clip and decide for themselves, indeed, please do. Be my guest. I am asking you to. Everyone.

I don't care if I'm wrong but no one has stepped up yet to prove that I am with what I assert and I have been asserting it for weeks now in my different posts. Had I said something about gold I would've been debunked by now etc.

The reason why I call it a litmus test and that I want everyone to check it out and come to a conclusion about it is because I'm tired of hearing about a 'plane' and "jet fuel" as it concerns the North Tower. I'm tired of people continuing to talk about that like they've not yet come to any kind of conclusion about what I'm saying. I want everyone to come down on one side or the other.

Why would they crash a plane into delicate explosives? They wouldn't.


Cheers

I am a truther...and i am proud to be one...I have no fear from the negative connotations of the term....but I do not look at things blindly and i do my own work on issues...so i have done this....and i ask you...does this come close to fitting the pattern....just asking your opinion.





all is done to scale off the plans from the 80th floor...i did not do a complete rendition of the entire building as collapse initiation was above the 80th floor.

I ardently consider 9/11 to be treated as a crime scene...NOT a TERRORIST act.

there is no war on terror...there is only war.

reply to post by micpsi

The office fires created by the plane blowing up inside the South Tower were quite hot enough to melt lead (Melting point: 327.5 degrees C ), Praimnath said:

Office fires?????? How many offices in lower Manhattan include one commercial jet airplane??

But were they really batteries?
"It's weird," he said. "They were never turned on."

Exactly how do you "turn on" a battery? The batteries were part of a back up electrical system, they were constantly being charged, they were always "turned on".

reply to post by ATSGrunt

You know, I hardly give a thought to the 9-11 conspiracy anymore, having formed opinion a long time ago. However, this new evidence of Secure Computer Rooms being hit like a target....that speaks of computer guidance systems actually guiding the planes in like VFR. Makes a lot of sense.

reply to post by micpsi


Molten lead is silver in color, not bright yellow.
I've worked with metals for 30 years and melted all kinds of metals and alloys and I have never seen lead turn the color we can see in the videos.

reply to post by ATSGrunt



If there was such precise aiming involved how come this aircraft had such a degree of bank on it just to hit at all ?

www.dailymotion.com...#

Originally posted by MarioOnTheFly
reply to post by ATSGrunt

 

Apparently a proper investigation hasn't been done

Bingo.

That should read: A proper investigation has been deliberately avoided.
Let's call it like it is, shall we?

I don't buy the no-plane or the stupid hologram theories but what I do buy is the Laser Guided Light theory. Now if this was done to guide the planes to take out the computer rooms first, who knows?

Check out the 'laser-guided' light. It probably happened in the first hit too.

Oh yeah, these were NOT the passenger planes that they have us (wanting to) believe in.

Originally posted by Asktheanimals


Molten lead is silver in color, not bright yellow.
I've worked with metals for 30 years and melted all kinds of metals and alloys and I have never seen lead turn the color we can see in the videos.

Have you ever heated lead well beyond the point it becomes molten ? Most people have no reason to.

Originally posted by Human_Alien


Check out the 'laser-guided' light.

Your laser guided light is a piece of paper.

Watch from the 7:00 min. mark.



Can we do the moving bridge next ? We haven't done that one in a long time.

reply to post by ATSGrunt


No pancakeing floors here

reply to post by Human_Alien

this is excellent! I have never seen this...good job, Human Alien!

Originally posted by waypastvne

Originally posted by Asktheanimals


Molten lead is silver in color, not bright yellow.
I've worked with metals for 30 years and melted all kinds of metals and alloys and I have never seen lead turn the color we can see in the videos.

Have you ever heated lead well beyond the point it becomes molten ? Most people have no reason to.

I have done a little metal working as amature blacksmith.

A kind of odd thing about lead.

Not only does it melt at reasonably low temperatures @ 450 to 500 degrees. It will not get much hotter reguardless how much heat you put under it.

Another thing is the fact of it being a soft metal, it does not emit sparks, even a bullet which ricochets, does not produce a spark. I know you have seen this in movies, but it is just a movie not real.

Originally posted by waypastvne

Originally posted by Asktheanimals


Molten lead is silver in color, not bright yellow.
I've worked with metals for 30 years and melted all kinds of metals and alloys and I have never seen lead turn the color we can see in the videos.

Have you ever heated lead well beyond the point it becomes molten ? Most people have no reason to.

Textbook dis-info. The poster's comment lends insight into the discussion, while yours is worthless. Why is that?

Originally posted by hdutton

A kind of odd thing about lead.

Not only does it melt at reasonably low temperatures @ 450 to 500 degrees. It will not get much hotter reguardless how much heat you put under it.

The boiling point of lead is 1'750 C, Obviously this temperature can be obtained, otherwise we wouldn't know what it's boiling point is.

There was also a lot of copper connecting the batteries together. Copper defiantly glows when heated.

There was also carbon fiber fragments from the aircraft. Carbon fiber glows a very nice yellow when heated.