NYC World Premiere. Firefighters, Architects & Engineers: Expose the Myths of 9/11

a reply to: skyeagle409
Why?

a reply to: Kapusta

You will have noticed that those buildings were not struck by largeaircraft and in some cases, their steel beams were encased in concrete, unlike the WTC buildings whose fire protection was dislodged from their steel structures.

For an example, the photo of the Windsor building you've posted, the outer steel structure of that building had fully collapsed due to fire and all that is left is the concrete structure of that building. That is why new changes were made in regard to fire protection and the new WTC buildings because fire protection of the WTC buildings failed due to impact damage which left their steel structure exposed the the temperatures of the fires which was well at the level needed to weaken steel to the point of collapse.

a reply to: Nova937

It is already known after 14 years, that no demo explosives were involved and that the explosions people heard had nothing to do with explosives. Even seismic monitors in the area did not detect demo explosions and that is very significant because you can't hide demo explosions and yet, none of the monitors picked up demo explosions. In addition, explosions continued even after the WTC buildings collapsed, which simply means that explosions had nothing to do with demo explosives.

In addition, no demo explosions are seen nor heard on video as the WTC buildings collapsed and that is very significant in light of the fact that no evidence of demo explosions was captured by the seismic monitors nor found in the rubble of the WTC buildings at ground zero and you can't hide such evidence either.

It all explains why after 14 years, not one shred of evidence of demo explosives has ever been found.

a reply to: Nova937

Just another flawed video.

a reply to: Informer1958

500 first responders explosions or bombs/911

The sound of explosions is not automatic evidence that explosives were responsible. Explosions were still going off long after the WTC buildings collapse, but it was determined that the explosions had nothing to wit explosives.

Manhole explosions are common in New York City and there were even explosions at the WTC on prior occasions as well, but as in the case of 9/11, those explosions had nothing to do with explosives either.

Exploding gas lines, as reported by firefighters, and exploding gas tanks from vehicle fires could have been expected as well. Since no evidence of demo explosives were detected by seismic monitors, nor heard on video as WTC1, WTC2, and WTC7 collapse and the fact that no demo explosive hardware was ever found, is why after 14 years, no such evidence was ever found.

a reply to: skyeagle409

It is already known after 14 years, that no demo explosives were involved and that the explosions people heard had nothing to do with explosives.

BS.

Even seismic monitors in the area did not detect demo explosions and that is very significant because you can't hide demo explosions and yet, none of the monitors picked up demo explosions.

Are you saying that nohing was picked up, or can you prove that what was picked up were not demo explosions?


www.journalof911studies.com...

The seis mic signals propagating from New York on September 11, 2001, recorded at Palisades (34 km) and published by the Lamont - Doherty Earth Observatory of Columbia University (LDEO), have here been subjected to a new critical study concerning their sources. The a im of this paper is to demonstrate that the nature of the waves, their velocities, frequencies, and magnitudes invalidate the official explanations which imply as sources the percussion of the twin towers by planes and the collapses of the three buildings, WTC1, WTC2 and WTC7

In addition, explosions continued even after the WTC buildings collapsed, which simply means that explosions had nothing to do with demo explosives.

No it doesn't mean that at all.

In addition, no demo explosions are seen nor heard on video as the WTC buildings collapsed

Can you prove that the videos in question did not have their audio altered?

nor found in the rubble of the WTC buildings at ground zero and you can't hide such evidence either.

The rubble was hauled away and shipped overseas without it being investigated. You know this.

i cant believe this , i mean really ????



you've got to be kidding me



this really means

a reply to: RogueWave

The rubble was hauled away and shipped overseas without it being investigated. You know this.

Important pieces of WTC steel were inspected at ground zero and at the Fresh Kills landfill. Only certain pieces of the steel structures were examined because you don't inspect every single piece of steel of their structures, only the steel that is important in an investigation.

I even posed with a piece of WTC steel at the Rio Vista Airport in California a couple of years ago. Other pieces of WTC steel were used in the construction of the USS New York.

Are you saying that nohing was picked up, or can you prove that what was picked up were not demo explosions?

No, because the seismic monitors detected the aircraft impacts and the collapse of the WTC buildings, but detected no demo explosions at ground zero. We can take a look here and notice that the aircraft impacts and building collapses were detected, but no demo explosions.

WTC Seismic Data 1

WTC Seismic Data 2

Add to the fact that no demo explosions are heard as WTC1, WTC2, and WTC7 collapsed, which does much to explain why no demo explosions were detected by the seismic monitors, not to mention no evidence of demo explosives was ever found at ground zero.

a reply to: skyeagle409

Important pieces of WTC steel were inspected at ground zero and at the Fresh Kills landfill. Only certain pieces of the steel structures were examined because you don't inspect every single piece of steel of their structures, only the steel that is important in an investigation.

BS. There has been no official investigation into the rubble and only a very small fraction was preserved.

I even posed with a piece of WTC steel at the Rio Vista Airport in California a couple of years ago. Other pieces of WTC steel were used in the construction of the USS New York.

Yeah you like to pose for pictures. Are you denying that the bulk of it was shipped overseas without it being investigated?

No, because the seismic monitors detected the aircraft impacts and the collapse of the WTC buildings, but detected no demo explosions at ground zero. We can take a look here and notice that the aircraft impacts and building collapses were detected, but no demo explosions.

I just posted a paper that refutes these lies.

www.journalof911studies.com...

. The new interpretation presented here renders the assertions of the seismic analysis of the events at the WTC, as presented by the government in the NIST and other reports, null and void. On the co ntrary, all the documented evidence points to explosions as the source of the recorded seismic signals

Add to the fact that no demo explosions are heard as WTC1, WTC2, and WTC7 collapsed,

What fact? If you base this on video footage, then prove that you are refering to unaltered, original videos.

Same old, same old.

Gage still conning the suckers into donating their cash so he doesn't have to work and can enjoy the limelight. He is otherwise unimportant until the crowd cheers and pays him to talk about his idiotic explanations. The conspiracists still want to believe that the government planned the entire thing. Ask yourself if the incompetent Bush administration could have even planned this event much less executed it. The Bush appointees couldn't find their own a$$es if they were on fire.

So far, this has been going on for 14 years and there is absolutely no evidence of anything but airplanes flown by maniacs striking the WTC. Like the JFK assassination, this will go on forever. The videos will abate only when the gullible stop sending these clowns money and see if they really seek "the truth" or if they were in it for the cash.

[Who did shoot JFK from the grassy knoll?]

a reply to: Dr UAE

Now, research what the FBI spent (excess of $40 million), NSA, CIA, NYPD, FDNY et cetera. It is a hell of a lot more than 15 million.

a reply to: RogueWave

For someone who writes lengthy posts that say "BS", "Lies" and "No it doesn't", you don't offer a shred of proof for the claims you make.

Conveniently.

a reply to: intrptr

Maybe there is a substance in your eyes.

Point out any claim that I should back up, and I will.

originally posted by: RogueWave
a reply to: intrptr

Maybe there is a substance in your eyes.

Point out any claim that I should back up, and I will.

Further up the page…

Can you prove that the videos in question did not have their audio altered?

Can you prove they were altered?

And this…

BS. There has been no official investigation into the rubble and only a very small fraction was preserved.

Prove there was no official investigation, and then lament about the Official Story.

Make it nice and long, include links to articles you have written (offsite) and then reverse my questions back at me.

a reply to: intrptr

Can you prove they were altered?

First of this was not a claim I made, this was a question. Is it very confusing to you? Second, I am not using a video to prove a point. If he wants to make claims based on a certain source, then he should prove that the source is original and unaltered. Can you grasp this concept? Third, yes, I think I can with some videos.

Prove there was no official investigation,

I said no official investigation into the rubble. So you want me to prove a negative.

Why don't you make mr airbird prove that there was such an investigation, since he is making such claims, and since this would be possible to prove if it happened.

Btw, I use words like BS, your words are BS.

a reply to: RogueWave You are kidding right? There were about a dozen different agencies on both the debris pile and at the landfills looking at things. This mistaken idea that no one looked at the rubble needs to go away.

a reply to: cardinalfan0596

Can you link me to the analysis, papers and such?

9-11 from the perspective of a statist & supporter of the official story/lie

On the morning of 9/11, 19 men armed with box-cutters led by a man on dialysis in a cave half way around the world using a satellite phone and a laptop, directed the most sophisticated penetration of the most guarded air space on the planet.
Overpowering the passengers and the combat trained pilots of 4 commercial aircraft before flying them wildly off course for over an hour without them being Chased or followed by a single fighter interceptor.

These 19 terrorists, devoted Muslims, who liked drinking and snorting coc aine managed to knock down 3 buildings with two planes in NY, and in Washington a pilot who wasn't able to handle a single engine Cessna was able to fly a 757 in an 8000 ft descent hitting the Pentagon in the very same office where DOD staff was working on the mystery of the 2.3 trillion taxpayer dollars the defense secretary Donald Rumsfeld had announced missing the day before.

Luckily the news anchors knew who did it within minutes, and the administration knew within hours. The evidence literally fell from the sky.
They didn't bother to look who funded the attack because that question was "of little practical significance" The DIA, FCS and the CIA destroyed all their records on the case, as part of "standard record keeping".

Osama kept running for 10 years, finally he was found unarmed and not resisting, the only man who could tell what really happened, and they shot him....Then they dropped his body into the ocean, "in accordance to Islamic traditions", first of it's kind in 1400 years, then a couple dozen of the seal team that were involved in the operation died in a helicopter crash in Afghanistan a few months later.

This is the story of 9/11. If you have any questions about it, you are a bat# paranoid tinfoil, dog-abusing, baby hater. If you love your country and or freedom, rock and roll, puppy dogs and apple pie you will never, ever express doubts about this story, to anyone, ever. Enjoy your fascism.

a reply to: RogueWave

Nope. Its not public domain information, other than no evidence of bombs was discovered. Why is there this persistent idea that all investigative summaries are for public consumption?

a reply to: DarthFazer And therein lies the problem. The majority of your post is utter hogwash, long ago shown to be inaccurate or flat out wrong. And yet, people still believe it.