Thermite...R-E-A-L-L-Y???

[InfoWarrior82]

Thermite, nano-thermate, molten steel, etc. all aside - I would love for durangout, infowarrior or speedy to post photographs of a building that does this owing to a natural, gravity-induced collapse =)) :

I can't =/

[Jason]

For me the big issues are the collapse itself, still havent seen a reasonable explanation for jet fuel fire causing the collapse, even if you give the top section 20 floors worth of free fall (in other words, if you vaporize 20 floors) then on the 21st floor and each successive floor you should see momentum decreases, without controlled demolition you should see the collapse moving to one side, and once it starts moving to one side it should accelerate the collapse on that side and pretty rapidly the whole mess should have gone to one side and left dozens of floors standing - again, the freefal speed ALL THE WAY DOWN, and also that many many floors were not left reasonably intact (barring controlled demolition) never have seen a reasonable explanation, and then of course all the problems with WTC 7 and the Pentagon...those who benefitted from both insurance, missing gold, and information destroyed...Cheney and Bush's reactions...I don't know the answers, but the official version doesn't add up. Many people it is just UNTHINKABLE that the government could be involved, I don;t know that they were involved but I know enough history to know that anyone that takes that as their "starting position" doesn't know much history. That's undeniable.

Amen and well said!!! The evidence is in Buildings 5 & 6 that had to be pulled after getting hit by massive amounts of debris and fire with partial collapse of various parts of the structures....but the whole buildings didn't come down at once until explosives were used.

[Col. Flagg]

http://www.911research.wtc7.net/faq/demolition.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

This site is fantastic... it goes into a lot of depth regarding the science, physics and scientific discoveries while refusing to promote some of the silly and absurd garbage being promoted by other so-called '9/11 truthers', such as no planes, space beams, etc. ) This is a good introductory lesson to how the buildings were demolished...

How could the Twin Towers, with so many tenants, and so many columns (240 perimeter columns, and 47 core columns) be wired for a controlled demolition without the operation being noticed?

This question assumes that the demolition of the Twin Towers would have to be set up like a conventional commercial one, with fuses and large numbers of cutting charges. First, note that the demolitions could have been controlled using wireless detonators, which have been commercially available for decades. Attack Scenario 404 describes how the charges could have been activated via radio signals in a precise fashion controlled by a computer.

Second, the demolitions may have been achieved without accessing the perimeter columns. The fact that the Twin Towers exploded into vast clouds of pulverized concrete, hurling steel assemblies up to 500 feet in all directions shows that they were destroyed with much more energy than a conventional demolition -- perhaps two orders of magnitude more. That gave the planners much more leeway in the placement of charges required to totally destroy the buildings. The core structures contained the building services such as elevators, and plumbing and cabling shafts. It would have been easy for people who controlled building security to surreptitiously install devices in hidden portions of the cores. Any such job would have been far simpler than the structural retrofit of the CitiCorp Tower in New York, carried out unbeknownst to the building's very tenants. 1

Third, explosive devices could have been disguised as or concealed within legitimate equipment, such as smoke alarms or ceiling tiles, and installed by workers oblivious to their surreptitious function. Numerous such possibilities are afforded by the properties of energetic materials.

How could charges have been pre-positioned in the Towers in such a way that the plane crashes and fires wouldn't have set them off?

There are several possible answers to this. First, some charges may indeed have been set off by the crashes but masked by the huge fireballs created by the combustion of aerosolized jet fuel. Second, explosives can be engineered so that heat alone will not detonate them. The high explosive RDX, for example, requires the simultaneous delivery of high heat and pressure to induce detonation. 2 Third, the charges could have been arranged so as to avoid the regions that the attack planners expected to take direct hits from the aircraft, given that the planes may have been flown by GPS-equipped autopilots providing targeting accuracy to within a few meters. Fourth, it is relatively easy to design casings for explosives that would allow them to survive even the most violent assaults. The casings of jetliners' black boxes protect their contents from impact accelerations of 3,400 Gs and from temperatures of 2,000ºF for up to 30 minutes.

The first and second possibilities are probably what happened. Prior to 2001, the national laboratories and Pentagon contractors had developed advanced energetic nanocomposites which, in addition to providing much higher energy densities than conventional high explosives, were engineered to be very stable and require highly specific conditions for detonation.

Supposing that Building 7 was brought down by controlled demolition. Doesn't the fact that the Twin Towers came down in such a different fashion prove that they were not destroyed by controlled demolition?

Controlled demolitions can be engineered in many different ways. Normally, the purpose of a controlled demolition is to remove a structure while avoiding damage to adjacent structures, and to do so economically. Typically, a tall building is demolished by placing thousands of cutter charges adjacent to columns throughout the building, then detonating them in a precise order, starting with interior structures, and progressing outward and upward. Destroying the interior columns allows unsupported weight to pull the exterior inward, and destroying the building from the ground up allows the weight of the building to be harnessed to do much of the destruction. The result is an implosion, producing a vertical collapse and a consolidated rubble pile.

The objective of controlled demolition applied to the Twin Towers was the decidedly different one of producing collapses that could be explained as having been caused by the aircraft crashes and fire damage. Hence, the destruction was started around the crash zones and then moved downward.

Even if the Twin Towers were destroyed by explosives, is it correct to call them controlled demolitions when they don't look anything like cases previously seen? And what was controlled about the Towers being exploded?

The "collapses" were, in some respects, very chaotic events which don't look very controlled. However, they must have been carefully engineered. In addition to having to determine the quantities and placement of explosives necessary to achieve the total destruction of the Towers, the planners had to plan the timing of their detonations with some precision. It is clear from photographs and videos of the Towers' destruction that the zones of destruction moved downward at about the same rates as the exploding rubble clouds descended, so that these zones remained concealed by the clouds. If these zones of destruction moved either too quickly or too slowly, they would have become visible below or above the rubble clouds, blatantly contradicting the official account of gravity-driven collapses.

Does the controlled demolition of the Twin Towers by insiders necessarily mean that the attack was an inside job? Is is possible that the Towers were prepared for demolition years in advance as part of a contingency plan to bring the towers down symmetrically should a terrorist attack threaten to topple them?

This theory is not even remotely plausible. First, such a plan would be highly illegal and require a level of secrecy on par with the engineering of the attack itself. Any leak of the plan to reporters, law enforcement, insurance companies, or tenants would empty the Trade Center and trigger an avalanche of lawsuits. Who would work in a skyscraper laced with bombs?

Second, there would be no rationale for such a plan, since no skyscraper had ever collapsed. The 1993 garage bombing did not even come close to threatening Towers' structural integrity. Third, whoever made the decision to trigger the demolitions did so knowing there were hundreds of firefighters, and perhaps thousands of civilians, still alive within the Towers. Since adjacent buildings had been evacuated, that decision was an act of mass homicide with no conceivable justification in lives or property saved. Fourth, any plan to destroy the Towers as a safety precaution would presumably have looked something like a conventional demolition, with charges starting at ground level -- not at specific points near the tops that happened to correspond to the plane crashes.

More on this topic can be found in the FAQ: Controlled Demolition With Aluminothermics, which is part of the essay Explosives Found in World Trade Center Dust -- an exposition describing the discovery of active thermitic materials in small chips in the dust.

[waking]

How about al-queda is on the CIA payroll excuse? What more do you need to know..
http://www.foxnews.com/us/2010/10/20/al ... on-months/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

sorry, i didn't embed the link, just google it. Why would they have dinner with a known terrorist leader, and then let him go? The gov. lies about everything else, what makes it so believable that they are not lying now? Just curious.

[linj2fly]

Don't forget the strict manner in which Bush said he would 'testify' to the 9/11 commission...

Under the White House conditions, the testimony was not recorded, nor was a stenographer present to make a formal transcript. Rather, commission members were allowed to take detailed notes during the meeting.
That is different from the commission's interviews with former President Clinton and former Vice President Al Gore, which a commission member said were recorded. http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/4862296/ns/us_news-security

Give me a break. Is he not accountable to us??

Also consider the Carlyle Group (Bush investment firm):

On 11 September, while Al-Qaeda's planes slammed into the World Trade Center and the Pentagon, the Carlyle Group hosted a conference at a Washington hotel. Among the guests of honour was a valued investor: Shafig bin Laden, brother to Osama. http://www.guardian.co.uk/theobserver/2 ... magazine57

Also, check the links at this site: http://www.historycommons.org/entity.js ... lyle_group

Also consider this:

But what sets Carlyle apart is the way it has exploited its political contacts. When Carlucci arrived there in 1989, he brought with him a phalanx of former subordinates from the CIA and the Pentagon, and an awareness of the scale of business a company like Carlyle could do in the corridors and steak-houses of Washington. In a decade and a half, the firm has been able to realise a 34% rate of return on its investments, and now claims to be the largest private equity firm in the world. Success brought more investors, including the international financier George Soros and, in 1995, the wealthy Saudi Binladin family, who insist they long ago severed all links with their notorious relative. The first president Bush is understood to have visited the Binladins in Saudi Arabia twice on the firm's behalf.

The Carlyle Group does not employ anyone at its Washington headquarters to deal with the press. Inquiries about the links with the Binladins (as most of the family choose to spell their name) are instead referred to someone outside the company, on condition he is referred to only as "a source familiar with the relationship". This source says: "I can confirm the fact that any Binladin Group investment in Carlyle has been terminated or is being terminated. It amounted to a $2m investment in the Carlyle II Fund, which was anyway a very small portion of a $1.3bn fund. In the scheme of the investments and in the scheme of the business of either party it was very small. We have to get this into perspective. But I think there was a sense that there were questions being raised and some controversy, and for such a small amount of money it was something that we wanted to put behind us. It was just a business decision." http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2001/oc ... ber11.usa4

Are all these relationships just COINCIDENCE? What's going on here? In a trial, questions regarding relationships would definitely be asked. Not gonna happen now....

Whether it was thermite or something else doesn't really matter in the grand scheme of things (although in our present world it can be the damning evidence that drives us to new investigations). The fact of the matter is, there are some serious holes in the 'official theory.' Like the Warren Commission, the 9/11 commission will not stand the test of time (there were at least three MORE subsequent inquiries after that).

[Col. Flagg]

Don't forget the strict manner in which Bush said he would 'testify' to the 9/11 commission...

Under the White House conditions, the testimony was not recorded, nor was a stenographer present to make a formal transcript. Rather, commission members were allowed to take detailed notes during the meeting.
That is different from the commission's interviews with former President Clinton and former Vice President Al Gore, which a commission member said were recorded. http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/4862296/ns/us_news-security

Give me a break. Is he not accountable to us??

Also consider the Carlyle Group (Bush investment firm):

On 11 September, while Al-Qaeda's planes slammed into the World Trade Center and the Pentagon, the Carlyle Group hosted a conference at a Washington hotel. Among the guests of honour was a valued investor: Shafig bin Laden, brother to Osama. http://www.guardian.co.uk/theobserver/2 ... magazine57

Also, check the links at this site: http://www.historycommons.org/entity.js ... lyle_group

Also consider this:

But what sets Carlyle apart is the way it has exploited its political contacts. When Carlucci arrived there in 1989, he brought with him a phalanx of former subordinates from the CIA and the Pentagon, and an awareness of the scale of business a company like Carlyle could do in the corridors and steak-houses of Washington. In a decade and a half, the firm has been able to realise a 34% rate of return on its investments, and now claims to be the largest private equity firm in the world. Success brought more investors, including the international financier George Soros and, in 1995, the wealthy Saudi Binladin family, who insist they long ago severed all links with their notorious relative. The first president Bush is understood to have visited the Binladins in Saudi Arabia twice on the firm's behalf.

The Carlyle Group does not employ anyone at its Washington headquarters to deal with the press. Inquiries about the links with the Binladins (as most of the family choose to spell their name) are instead referred to someone outside the company, on condition he is referred to only as "a source familiar with the relationship". This source says: "I can confirm the fact that any Binladin Group investment in Carlyle has been terminated or is being terminated. It amounted to a $2m investment in the Carlyle II Fund, which was anyway a very small portion of a $1.3bn fund. In the scheme of the investments and in the scheme of the business of either party it was very small. We have to get this into perspective. But I think there was a sense that there were questions being raised and some controversy, and for such a small amount of money it was something that we wanted to put behind us. It was just a business decision." http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2001/oc ... ber11.usa4

Are all these relationships just COINCIDENCE? What's going on here? In a trial, questions regarding relationships would definitely be asked. Not gonna happen now....

Whether it was thermite or something else doesn't really matter in the grand scheme of things (although in our present world it can be the damning evidence that drives us to new investigations). The fact of the matter is, there are some serious holes in the 'official theory.' Like the Warren Commission, the 9/11 commission will not stand the test of time (there were at least three MORE subsequent inquiries after that).

There's nothing to see here - go back to American Idol and a cold soda.

[moonwhim]

Below is a link to the new excellent critical article on dustification by the Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth:
http://ae911truth.org/en/news-section/4 ... l#continue" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

(ps - if someone could show me how to post the entire article here with pictures I would sure appreciate it)

[Col. Flagg]

Below is a link to the new excellent critical article on dustification by the Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth:
http://ae911truth.org/en/news-section/4 ... l#continue" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

(ps - if someone could show me how to post the entire article here with pictures I would sure appreciate it)

Posting pics is easy - all you have to do is drag your cursor over the picture, right click on it and select 'properties'. A little box will pop up with information and all you have to do is highlight the entire URL (web address) for the picture, select 'copy' and then paste that URL information where you want the pic to show, but you'll need to add 'img' in brackets at the beginning of the URL and then '/img' at the end (again in between brackets). Voila... your picture should then show up nice and easy.

[moonwhim]

Below is a link to the new excellent critical article on dustification by the Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth:
http://ae911truth.org/en/news-section/4 ... l#continue" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

(ps - if someone could show me how to post the entire article here with pictures I would sure appreciate it)

Posting pics is easy - all you have to do is drag your cursor over the picture, right click on it and select 'properties'. A little box will pop up with information and all you have to do is highlight the entire URL (web address) for the picture, select 'copy' and then paste that URL information where you want the pic to show, but you'll need to add 'img' in brackets at the beginning of the URL and then '/img' at the end (again in between brackets). Voila... your picture should then show up nice and easy.

Thanks Col I'll give it a try.

[Avery]

Hi durangout,
I have read both the articles. Count me in also.
Thanks for sharing these informative links with everyone.

[SempiternalHarbinger]

Doesn't that look like a dang mushroom cloud above the collapsing tower?





This picture reminds me of when I was growing up. I grew up in Las Vegas, anyone who has been there knows its a valley. But its more than a valley, its a bowl. So every time it rains, it floods, and all the water rushes to the bottom of the bowl. The Strip happens to be at the bottom of this bowl. So no matter where you live for the most part in Vegas, you are elevated from the strip and had a great view of it. On the 4th,Memorial Day weekend, New Years, whenever there we going to be firework show my family/friends would just go down to park and party & BBQ with thousands of others and have front row seats to the shows. But the best firework shows by far is when they would demolish old casinos. When you hear those explosions and when you see the Casino start coming down you would hear the Rumble follow it and it would be an Adrenaline rush. Even better, Every time this would happen during the school year they would bring in demolition experts to explain to us kids everything about it. Truth is I don't remember much, But when you see it in person you would have a general idea about certain things because you just heard an expert explain it to you the day before. ONE thing we understood was why the Casino would fall into their own foot print. That's because its carefully designed that way, it was because it had too because of all the other Casinos and people around. This is one principal that stuck with me and my friends from the demo experts as well as how it needed to be perfectly designed for the Casino to come down into its own foot print, and if they didn't plan it with perfection, and wasn't executed with perfection, lives would be in danger. Not hard for a Jr High or High School student to understand. I don't remember anything else but when we would witness these demolitions I still remember to this day the HUGE amounts of dust from the collapses. Always the same thing. We use to say to each other how it looked like an Atom bomb was dropped in the middle of Strip. Not kidding. In the summers the wind would die down and I swear the day after a demolition you would still see the dust around the casino and valley. In hindsight it looked like a mini version of ground zero.

An old friend of mine just graduated from law school and I went down last weekend to celebrate with him and his family. I set him up BIGTIME. In our first conversation I asked him, if his girlfriend were to be cheating on him if would he like to know truth or would he rather live a lie and not know. He said he would definitely want to know the truth. Two days later I pulled up an old casino demolition in Vegas we saw together. I made him watch it with me. He probably thought it was a little weird. Anyway as we were watching it I started making comments like, " Isn't it crazy how the demo crew designs those casinos to fall into its own footprint" My friend would say, "Crazy shi... man." Look how fast it comes down, do have a stop watch?" I pointed out the massive dust cloud after the collapse. He said "crazy how dynamite can turn it into a pile of dust." lol he even reminded me how we use to think it looked like an atom bomb being dropped on Vegas. It was funny because he was a little giddy about being able to remember that. Or it could have been the beers making him giddy. At this point my friend has no idea that I am about hit him over his head with a baseball bat. It might as well been a sledge hammer. I tell him i want to show him one more demolition and proceed to show him the collapse of building 7. :ymdevil: U see were I am going with this?? :-$ Now my friend has No idea whatsoever that I am a "truther." =)) So as we start watching this clip i start saying everything I did before, "Look how it falls into its own footprint,""look at the huge amounts of dust from the collapse" "Notice how the whole building collapses in 6 1/2 seconds" He soon figures out this is a building is not a casino and ask where this was. I ask him what he would think if I told him this was not a demolition? My friend wanted to know what the catch was, and said of course that's a demolition. I said there is no catch and no its not a demolition! So we watched it like ten times, the more we watched the more certain he was. I finally said your right Harley, It was a demolition and he wanted to know what the point was, I said the point is this building came down in New York City, on September 11, 2001 and our government says a fire did that, and no, a plane did not hit it.. @-) He didn't believe me at all because he had never heard of a third building coming down. So I finally showed him a 2 minute clip of all the different angels of the collapse and than figured out i was telling him truth. Anyway, I wish I new how to upload or transfer my text messages from my phone to my computer because you guys would laugh your butts off. He has told me I have turned his life upside down. He told me he feels like someone died, that he has felt like puking, and that he has lost much of his appetite. :ymsick: I told him i had already been there. He has looked more into demolitions and building 7, I told him once he was as sure about building 7 I would explain more if he wanted.

Also Col. Flagg. sent me his 9-11 documentary about a month and I gave it to my friend. Sorry Col. Flagg. I really appreciate Col.Flagg hard work on it and it shows. I thought the best way to thank him is give it someone who is new to the whole conspiracy. I think he will really like it. I tip my hat off to you. If you read this I could use another one. Thanks again. He has not watched it yet but says he is going to this week. I also sent him a link to "Loose Change" I talked to my friend yesterday for about an hour. He is a smart kid. Like i said he just graduated from Law School. But for an hour i talked to him about the fed, all the wars since WWI and all the lies we have been told by our government. I think he is more prepared to watch Col Flaggs Doc. It must have been destined because for his graduation i got him one of my favorite books, "Web of Debt" by Ellen Brown which is my favorite book about the Federal Reserve and the history of the country. Especially the Wizard of Oz chapter. He is not a member but does have a Book of Mormon. He ask who I thought did it? I told him I didn't know, but I did know our government has lies to us!

[SempiternalHarbinger]

[SempiternalHarbinger]

[SempiternalHarbinger]

Wonder why these building didn't collapse? And if they were to there is not a chance in hell it would be free fall and into its own foot print.

[firefighter007]

Durangout, you do realize that this person is just plain calling Dr. Jones a fraud without actually reproducing the experiment for himself with the samples that were originally used? He's basically saying "he's lying about there being a thermitic reaction! He must have added combustibles to fake the results!" This is far from a debunking. The scientific method wasn't even used.

Thermite, nano-thermate, molten steel, etc. all aside - I would love for durangout, infowarrior or speedy to post photographs of a building that does this owing to a natural, gravity-induced collapse =)) :

I'm a firefighter. I'll tell you one thing. There may be an argument that those towers came down on there own due to the massive amounts of jet fuel (although I don't buy it) but there is no reason on earth that building 7 should have come down! Building 7 is the key. Because building seven collapsed, in my opinion, the rest of it is a sham!

"Yea, why do ye build up your secret abominations to get gain, and cause that widows should mourn before the Lord, and also orphans to mourn before the Lord, and the blood of their fathers and their husbands to cry unto the Lord from the ground, for vengeance upon your heads?

Behold, the sword of vengeance hangeth over you, and the time soon cometh that he avengeth the blood of the saints upon you; for he will not suffer their cries any longer."

Mormon 8:40-41

Moroni saw our day. He saw the secret combinations in our day that were starting wars, killing our young men, leaving their wives and children at home alone. He saw that these combinations were set up to get gain. Our government did this thing. I'm convinced of it. And Moroni saw it.

"Ye hear of wars in far countries, and you say that there will soon be great wars in far countries, but ye know not the hearts of men in you own land"

D&C 38:29

[SpeedRacer]

The thermite tests are fun to watch over and over. Someone get me some jet fuel. I am going to try and mock up a building with an aluminum stove and see how hot I can get it.

[linj2fly]

The thermite tests are fun to watch over and over. Someone get me some jet fuel. I am going to try and mock up a building with an aluminum stove and see how hot I can get it.

Do you have a logical, scientific explanation for Building #7? Waiting.... :-w

[Col. Flagg]

The thermite tests are fun to watch over and over. Someone get me some jet fuel. I am going to try and mock up a building with an aluminum stove and see how hot I can get it.

Do you have a logical, scientific explanation for Building #7? Waiting.... :-w

Come on Lin, don't you know it was fire alone? =))

[SpeedRacer]

Who cares how the towers came down. I want to use the same dedication the guys in the video has to create a jet fuel furnace. I bet I would get a million hits. Lighten up.

I know we did not get the full truth, but I can still have fun with heat and fuel. It was disappointed when the guy had to make his own thermate and could not get the nano-thermite. I bet that would make a better show.

I like to be all serious about liberty and the gospel, but when all the truth is not known, I have to take a few steps back and enjoy. This is one of those times. No one can claim they have all the info on 9/11, and it was meant to be that way.

Is it legal to burn jet fuel in a matter not in accordance with the instructions on the container?

[Jason]

Who cares how the towers came down. I want to use the same dedication the guys in the video has to create a jet fuel furnace. I bet I would get a million hits. Lighten up.

I know we did not get the full truth, but I can still have fun with heat and fuel. It was disappointed when the guy had to make his own thermate and could not get the nano-thermite. I bet that would make a better show.

I like to be all serious about liberty and the gospel, but when all the truth is not known, I have to take a few steps back and enjoy. This is one of those times. No one can claim they have all the info on 9/11, and it was meant to be that way.

Is it legal to burn jet fuel in a matter not in accordance with the instructions on the container?

LOL....jet fuel isn't special. Go get yourself a can of diesel and have fun....

[linj2fly]

Who cares how the towers came down. I care. But I know I won't get a full answer until the trumpets are sounded to announce what occured in each seal. I want to use the same dedication the guys in the video has to create a jet fuel furnace. I bet I would get a million hits. Lighten up. Which video are you referring to? I must've missed something.

I know we did not get the full truth, but I can still have fun with heat and fuel. Fair enough. I like heat and fuel, too. Once me and my brothers blew up a large wasp nest after we siphoned gas into it! Fun times. It was disappointed when the guy had to make his own thermate and could not get the nano-thermite. I bet that would make a better show.

I like to be all serious about liberty and the gospel, but when all the truth is not known, I have to take a few steps back and enjoy. This is one of those times. No one can claim they have all the info on 9/11, and it was meant to be that way. I don't claim to know the whole story of 9/11. I, like you, know I'm not getting the whole truth, which is a serious deal to me since it was the precursor to invading other countries. I can hardly enjoy that. War, when based on untruths, or even partial truths, is a grievous national sin, IMO. My tax dollars are being used to kill and maim my brothers and sisters in other countries. My tax dollars and representative consent are being used to destroy countries on the basis of what happened on 9/11. It MATTERS TO ME. And I can hardly enjoy it. I'm not trying to rail on you--it's not my intention to offend, it just really is a big deal to me. On a 'lighter' note--why do you think 'it was meant to be that way?"

Is it legal to burn jet fuel in a matter not in accordance with the instructions on the container? Not gonna lie--this comment was completely over my head! I think I'm missing something, unless you're just saying you're a pyromaniac. If that's the case, then cheers!