GUYS, GUYS, GUYS! Lets just wait and see what Oliver Stone has to say about all this http://imdb.com/title/tt0469641/

I'm sure he will straighten this whole thing out for us.

 

That truss theory has long ago been proven false.


A few sentences in the FEMA report [Chapter 2] add to the 'mystery' of the collapse:

"The large quantity of jet fuel carried by each aircraft ignited upon impact into each building. A significant portion of this fuel was consumed immediately in the ensuing fireballs. The remaining fuel is believed either to have flowed down through the buildings or to have burned off within a few minutes of the aircraft impact. The heat produced by this burning jet fuel does not by itself appear to have been sufficient to initiate the structural collapses. However, as the burning jet fuel spread across several floors of the buildings, it ignited much of the buildings' contents, causing simultaneous fires across several floors of both buildings."


But I digress as your statement has nothing to do with WTC7.

Focusing in on WTC 7 for a moment, how would you explain the pools of molten steel found in the basement of the building when it was not struck by any aircrafts or significant debris? Try to imagine that the mechanical energy of the collapse could "melt and pool" any steel. Forget it! Bending steel with horrendous energy is one thing, melting it is another. Av-gas, even under optimum conditions, cannot melt steel because it is unable to reach that temperature. Steel melts at approximately 2,900 degrees (F). Thermite, either passive or dynamic, reaches approximately 5,400 degrees (F). That's almost twice the needed heat. All the pooled jet fuel in the world won't burn hot enough to produce molten steel - under any conditions.

But back to your statement, the imagery of the WTC does NOT reveal the aluminum siding of the WTC towers deforming. Thus, given the constant exposure - over time - to any escaping heat, it is difficult to imagine the fires being so hot as to cause either catastrophic or abrupt damage to the WTC vertical support structure. None of the images of the outer steel structure show the otherwise expected red-hot glow. All images show the outer shell mechanically destroyed, versus collapsing from thermal cause. Watch some live footage and you will see a majority of the smoke coming from 1 and 2 to be black, which indicates an oxygen starved fire. Yet another fact proving that jet fuel alone could NOT have melted steel.

Additionally, if the fires were hot enough to melt steel (an impossibility), how can you explain the blonde women (with long, undamaged hair and clean white pants) standing in the middle of the impact area in the North Tower ? This is not trick photography as the DVD's I previously mentioned contain archive footage from CNN and the Naudet brothers showing the women.

Here is a link to that photo, although Im sure some will say it is photshopped, it is not as the same picture exsist on the DVD's:

http://home.comcast.net/~skydrifter/collapse.htm
(scroll mid-way down)

 

Food for thought:

Here are some interesting FACTS

Photos show people walking around in the hole in the North Tower "where 10,000 gallons of jet fuel were supposedly burning. The women (p. 27) seem to (sic) looking down to the ground" (the NIST "Response" pdf, p. 62, also shows a similar photo of the same blond woman with light-colored slacks looking over the edge of the 94th floor).
* By the time the South Tower was hit, most of the North Tower’s flames had already vanished, burning for only 16 minutes.
* The fire did not grow over time, probably because it quickly ran out of fuel and was suffocating rather than the sprinkler system dousing the fires.
* FDNY fire fighters remain under a gag order (Rodriguezvs-1.Bush.pdf, p. 10) to not discuss the explosions they heard, felt and saw. FAA personnel are also under a 9/11 gag order.
* Even the 9/11 Commission (Kean-Zelikow) Report acknowledges that "none of the [fire] chiefs present believed that a total collapse of either tower was possible" (Ch. 9, p. 302). It shocked everyone that day, amateur and professional alike, although some firefighters realized that so-called secondary explosive devices were a risk.

1. Fire had never before caused steel-frame buildings to collapse except for the three buildings on 9/11, nor has fire collapsed any steel high rise since 9/11.
2. The fires, especially in the South Tower and WTC-7, were small.
3. WTC-7 was unharmed by an airplane and had only minor fires on the seventh and twelfth floors of this 47-story steel building yet it collapsed in less than 10 seconds.
4. WTC-5 and WTC-6 had raging fires but did not collapse despite much thinner steel beams (pp. 68–9).
5. In a PBS documentary, Larry Silverstein, the WTC lease-holder, recalled talking to the fire department commander on 9/11 about WTC-7 and said, "…maybe the smartest thing to do is pull it," slang for demolish it.
6. FEMA, given the uninviting task of explaining the collapse of Building 7 with mention of demolition verboten admitted that the best it could come up with had "only a low probability of occurrence."
7. It’s difficult if not impossible for hydrocarbon fires like those fed by jet fuel (kerosene) to raise the temperature of steel close to melting.

1. Each WTC building collapse occurred at virtually free-fall speed (approximately 10 seconds or less).
2. Each building collapsed, for the most part, into its own footprint.
3. Virtually all the concrete (an estimated 100,000 tons in each tower) on every floor was pulverized into a very fine dust, a phenomenon that requires enormous energy and could not be caused by gravity alone ("…workers can’t even find concrete. ‘It’s all dust,’ [the official] said").
4. Dust exploded horizontally for a couple hundred feet, as did debris, at the beginning of each tower’s collapse.
5. Collapses were total, leaving none of the massive core columns sticking up hundreds of feet into the air.
6. Salvage experts were amazed at how small the debris stacks were.
7. The steel beams and columns came down in sections under 30 feet long and had no signs of "softening"; there was little left but shorn sections of steel and a few bits of concrete.
8. Photos and videos of the collapses all show "demolition waves," meaning "confluent rows of small explosions" along floors (blast sequences).
9. According to many witnesses, explosions occurred within the buildings.
10. Each collapse had detectable seismic vibrations suggestive of underground explosions, similar to the 2.3 earthquake magnitude from a demolition like the Seattle Kingdome (p. 10.
11. Each collapse produced molten steel identical to that generated by explosives, resulting in "hot spots" that persisted for months (the two hottest spots at WTC-2 and WTC-7 were approximately 1,350o F five days after being continuously flooded with water, a temperature high enough to melt aluminum

 

I hope I do not come across as attacking anyone, as that is not my intention. This is not a Dems vs. Repubs issue either. This is about Truth, pure and simple.

 

The towers were designed to withstand the impact of a 747 aircraft.

 

It matters not if the frame was fireproofed or not, as it is impossible for jet fuel to melt steel.

As far as a "Blair Witch Project" documentary, are you saying you think CNN is a witch? Until you actually see the videos, I would wacth your comments as they come across as uninformed.

I dont wish to specualte as to WHY this was done as it clouds facts regarding the collapse of the buildings with theory.

 

Wow...intresting stuff guys.....Whats with the gag orders?

 

But it makes so much more sense than the theory the gov't is putting out there:
1. Each WTC building collapse occurred at virtually free-fall speed (approximately 10 seconds or less).
2. Each building collapsed, for the most part, into its own footprint.
3. Virtually all the concrete (an estimated 100,000 tons in each tower) on every floor was pulverized into a very fine dust, a phenomenon that requires enormous energy and could not be caused by gravity alone ("…workers can’t even find concrete. ‘It’s all dust,’ [the official] said").
4. Dust exploded horizontally for a couple hundred feet, as did debris, at the beginning of each tower’s collapse.
5. Collapses were total, leaving none of the massive core columns sticking up hundreds of feet into the air.
6. Salvage experts were amazed at how small the debris stacks were.
7. The steel beams and columns came down in sections under 30 feet long and had no signs of "softening"; there was little left but shorn sections of steel and a few bits of concrete.
8. Photos and videos of the collapses all show "demolition waves," meaning "confluent rows of small explosions" along floors (blast sequences).
9. According to many witnesses, explosions occurred within the buildings.
10. Each collapse had detectable seismic vibrations suggestive of underground explosions, similar to the 2.3 earthquake magnitude from a demolition like the Seattle Kingdome (p. 10.
11. Each collapse produced molten steel identical to that generated by explosives, resulting in "hot spots" that persisted for months (the two hottest spots at WTC-2 and WTC-7 were approximately 1,350o F five days after being continuously flooded with water, a temperature high enough to melt aluminum

 

Maybe this has been covered.. but here's a question. If the WTC were taken down using explosives, wouldn't that leave a residue that could be tested for? Theres a lot of debris that was just lying around afterwards.

 

My point to all of this is that there are HUNDREDS of unanswered questions, and I feel that is is every law-abiding citizens DUTY and OBLIGATION to find the Truth so 3000+ innocent deaths are not in vain.

 

The scrap metal was sold overseas before it could be examined. Very few pieces of scrap were kept (from memory, I believe it was under 5%).

http://fe.pennnet.com/Articles/Artic...33237&KEYWORD=

http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php...d_Trade_Center

 

WTF is wrong with you people who believe 9/11 was a set up by our government.........if you really believe that you are not only f*** stupid but even worst LIBERAL BASTARDS.....................is Ossama and Saddam the greates in your opionion if Bush isnt............even though I dont think mr bush is doing the greates job i will stick by our president for god sake be a good citizen or leave this great country.........

 

I would imagine the gag orders are so uninformed people don't go out spreading crap about things they know nothing about.. Not all NYfiremen are structural engineers, didn't you know?
But, I was earlier told to wacth my comments as they come across as uninformed.

Since I do not have time to chase the wild goose, I bid this thread a fond farewell.

 

Okay to allow that to happen is just stupid no matter what you believe occured. Just from a safety investigation standpoint alone. I guess you could do whatever you wanted in the days and months following. The media sure wasn't going to tread those waters.. heck, people have a tough enough time treading subjective waters with 9/11 even now apparently.

 

Too late oldmanatee, the NSA already seen you typing and calling our president a short bus rider.

NSA, if you guys are watching....me and oldmanatee think you guys are just swell. Nothin but love for ya.


Do you think they bought it?

 

Once again, this is not a Dem vs. Rep issue....it is a matter of Truth and Justice, two principals this country was founded on.

I AM being a good citizen by questioning my gov't, and am 10 times as Patriotic as sone who simply tows the line because it is "popular" and "accepted".

 

Yikes, I dont believe all this stuff, but there are holes in the story that need filling with real answers. Either from the govt or a true investigation.

To question something is to live in a democratic society. What you are asking is something akin to Germany in the early 40s. Especially the 'you're with us or against us' mentality. Calling people "stupid" for questioning something? "Be a good citizen"? A hundred years ago, you would have been called stupid for believing the use of a mold could cure infection. 50 years ago, you would have been called stupid to announce that the govt was deliberately infecting Black men with syphilis, or injected unknowing men women and children with radioactive material
to study the effects.

So should we all be good citizens and not question authority? If everyone who questioned the official word left, it would cease to be a democracy.

 

This is what my aim is....to get people to THINK about these things THEMSELVES. It is easier to simply turn on the tube and go along with what is being sold, but it is the sign of a higher mind to EXAMINE, CHALLANGE and TEST to see if what is being fed to us MAKES SENSE.

To destroy evidence of the event that led to the largest loss of American life on American soil (Im NOT an expert in history, so again, I go from memory) is a CRIME, pure and simple.

OPINION: You will always encounter resistance when you challange the beliefs of an individual (see religion for example) because people are afraid. Afraid to EXAMINE their lives and the life around them in a detached way.

 

People all over the world are coming to our country for opportunities and a chance at a better life...however the people who were born here dont think this country is all that great ( F****n) Liberal scum why then dont you leave this country if it so so corrupt stop talking and just leave........I am sick of all the liberals trash talking our country.....what are your opinions on the slaughters of saddam I dont here you talking about that or how in parts of the world people are either rich or poor no other classes of people that is why they decide o come to our country .........it seems liberals do not understand reality...............................again one more time LIBERALS SUCK.........

 

This is not a political issue no matter how much you want it to be.

I am different from you because I do not believe the Truth is something to fear. It may be scary or uneasy, but without Truth we have NOTHING.

I will try not to respond to off topic comments anymore and instead will focus in on the FACTS of the case.