100% FREE ONLINE DATING
sponsored links
Previous
| Topic: The search for what happened on 9/11 isn't over | |
|---|---|
|
Edited by
MiddleEarthling
on
Sun 09/05/10 07:59 AM
|
|
As the WTCs fell one at a time I sat in amazement that no one was asking if the terrorist had planted bombs in the buildings. There is absolutley no way that steel and concrete buildings would fall at near free-fall speed into their own footprints. No resistances to them falling what-so-ever. There had to be bombs in the building.
The WTC's cement turned to dust right in front of us all yet we ignore that the plane's damages cause could not do that. It's just impossible. 
For some, the search for what happened on 9/11 isn't over "Jesse Ventura's new book American Conspiracies questions the government's position on 9/11. He wrote about the same topic on The Huffington Post, but his article was banned. Read it here on RT. You didn't see anything about it in the mainstream media, but two weeks ago at a conference in San Francisco, more than one thousand architects and engineers signed a petition demanding that Congress begin a new investigation into the destruction of the World Trade Center skyscrapers on 9/11. That's right, these people put their reputations in potential jeopardy because they don't buy the government's version of events. They want to know how 200,000 tons of steel disintegrated and fell to the ground in 11 seconds. They question whether the hijacked planes were responsible – or whether it could have been a controlled demolition from inside that brought down the twin towers and Building 7. Richard Gage, a member of the American Institute of Architects and the founder of Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth, put it like this: "The official Federal Emergency Management [Agency] and National Institute of Standards and Technology reports provide insufficient, contradictory and fraudulent accounts of the circumstances of the towers' destruction." He's especially disturbed by Building 7, whose 47 stories came down in "pure free-fall acceleration" that afternoon – even though it was never hit by an aircraft. This is a subject I take up in my new book, American Conspiracies, published this week by Skyhorse. An excerpt follows: Some people have argued that the twin towers went down, within a half hour of one another, because of the way they were constructed. Well, those 425,000 cubic yards of concrete and 200,000 tons of steel were designed to hold up against a Boeing 707, the largest plane built at the time the towers were completed in 1973. Analysis had shown that a 707 traveling at 600 miles an hour (and those had four engines) would not cause major damage. The twin-engine Boeing 757s that hit on 9/11 were going 440 and 550 miles an hour. Still, we are told that a molten, highly intense fuel mixture from the planes brought down these two steel-framed skyscrapers. Keep in mind that no other such skyscraper in history had ever been known to collapse completely due to fire damage. So could it actually have been the result of a controlled demolition from inside the buildings? I don't claim expertise about this, but I did work four years as part of the Navy's underwater demolition teams, where we were trained to blow things to hell and high water. And my staff talked at some length with a prominent physicist, Steven E. Jones, who says that a "gravity driven collapse" without demolition charges defies the laws of physics. These buildings fell, at nearly the rate of free-fall, straight down into their own footprint, in approximately ten seconds. An object dropped from the roof of the 110-story-tall towers would reach the ground in about 9.2 seconds. Then there's the fact that steel beams that weighed as much as 200,000 pounds got tossed laterally as far as 500 feet. The National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) started its investigation on August 21, 2002. When their 10,000-page-long report came out three years later, the spokesman said there was no evidence to suggest a controlled demolition. But Steven E. Jones also says that molten metal found underground weeks later is proof that jet fuel couldn't have been all that was responsible. I visited the site about three weeks after 9/11, with Governor Pataki and my wife Terry. It didn't mean anything to me at the time, but they had to suspend digging that day because they were running into heat pockets of huge temperatures. These fires kept burning for more than three months, the longest-burning structure blaze ever. And this was all due to jet fuel? We're talking molten metal more than 2,000 degrees Fahrenheit. Probably the most conclusive evidence about a controlled demolition is a research paper (two years, nine authors) published in the peer-reviewed Open Chemical Physics Journal, in April 2009. In studying dust samples from the site, these scientists found chips of nano-thermite, which is a high-tech incendiary/explosive. Here's what the paper's lead author, Dr. Niels Harrit of the University of Copenhagen's chemistry department, had to say about the explosive that he's convinced brought down the Twin Towers and the nearby Building 7: "Thermite itself dates back to 1893. It is a mixture of aluminum and rust-powder, which react to create intense heat. The reaction produces iron, heated to 2500 degrees Centigrade. This can be used to do welding. It can also be used to melt other iron. So in nano-thermite, this powder from 1893 is reduced to tiny particles, perfectly mixed. When these react, the intense heat develops much more quickly. Nano-thermite can be mixed with additives to give off intense heat, or serve as a very effective explosive. It contains more energy than dynamite, and can be used as rocket fuel." Richard Gage is one of hundreds of credentialed architects and structural engineers who have put their careers on the line to point out the detailed anomalies and many implications of controlled demolition in the building collapses. As he puts it bluntly: "Once you get to the science, it's indisputable." If we do not get the truth this may well happen again and be done by the same criminals that still walk free today. http://rt.com/Politics/2010-03-10/jesse-ventura-911-truth.html?utm_source=2leep&utm_medium=2leep&utm_campaign=2leep |
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
Bestinshow
on
Sun 09/05/10 08:45 AM
|
|
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zv7BImVvEyk
A comparison between what we are told and what we can see, with our own eyes |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
MiddleEarthling
on
Sun 09/05/10 09:05 AM
|
|
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zv7BImVvEyk A comparison between what we are told and what we can see, with our own eyes Good one...man, it's so obvious... Richard Gage: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4dgJTR6ZR24&feature=related "What we find (at the base of the fallen building) is molten pools of iron" "The byproduct of thermite is molten iron" The thermite used was military grade nano-thermite....I wonder where OBL got that from? Assuming he had access....yeah right. BONUS video!...This one had been washed before but it's back!...for who knows how long...watch it now! Note they are talking about WTC7 collapsing....uh...yet, you can see it in the backgound on the video...it's over her left shoulder. This news report came shortly after Larry Silverstein ordered WTC7 building "pulled"...Larry got a huge payout on the insurance he bought a few months before the "attack"...follow the money right? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nVURcsa5BS0&feature=related |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The Holocaust never happened and two big freakin' Muslim hijacked jets didn't crash into the Twin Towers.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The Holocaust never happened and two big freakin' Muslim hijacked jets didn't crash into the Twin Towers.
Damn. You beat me to it ... |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As the WTCs fell one at a time I sat in amazement that no one was asking if the terrorist had planted bombs in the buildings. There is absolutley no way that steel and concrete buildings would fall at near free-fall speed into their own footprints. No resistances to them falling what-so-ever. There had to be bombs in the building. The WTC's cement turned to dust right in front of us all yet we ignore that the plane's damages cause could not do that. It's just impossible.
For some, the search for what happened on 9/11 isn't over "Jesse Ventura's new book American Conspiracies questions the government's position on 9/11. He wrote about the same topic on The Huffington Post, but his article was banned. Read it here on RT. You didn't see anything about it in the mainstream media, but two weeks ago at a conference in San Francisco, more than one thousand architects and engineers signed a petition demanding that Congress begin a new investigation into the destruction of the World Trade Center skyscrapers on 9/11. That's right, these people put their reputations in potential jeopardy because they don't buy the government's version of events. They want to know how 200,000 tons of steel disintegrated and fell to the ground in 11 seconds. They question whether the hijacked planes were responsible – or whether it could have been a controlled demolition from inside that brought down the twin towers and Building 7. Richard Gage, a member of the American Institute of Architects and the founder of Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth, put it like this: "The official Federal Emergency Management [Agency] and National Institute of Standards and Technology reports provide insufficient, contradictory and fraudulent accounts of the circumstances of the towers' destruction." He's especially disturbed by Building 7, whose 47 stories came down in "pure free-fall acceleration" that afternoon – even though it was never hit by an aircraft. This is a subject I take up in my new book, American Conspiracies, published this week by Skyhorse. An excerpt follows: Some people have argued that the twin towers went down, within a half hour of one another, because of the way they were constructed. Well, those 425,000 cubic yards of concrete and 200,000 tons of steel were designed to hold up against a Boeing 707, the largest plane built at the time the towers were completed in 1973. Analysis had shown that a 707 traveling at 600 miles an hour (and those had four engines) would not cause major damage. The twin-engine Boeing 757s that hit on 9/11 were going 440 and 550 miles an hour. Still, we are told that a molten, highly intense fuel mixture from the planes brought down these two steel-framed skyscrapers. Keep in mind that no other such skyscraper in history had ever been known to collapse completely due to fire damage. So could it actually have been the result of a controlled demolition from inside the buildings? I don't claim expertise about this, but I did work four years as part of the Navy's underwater demolition teams, where we were trained to blow things to hell and high water. And my staff talked at some length with a prominent physicist, Steven E. Jones, who says that a "gravity driven collapse" without demolition charges defies the laws of physics. These buildings fell, at nearly the rate of free-fall, straight down into their own footprint, in approximately ten seconds. An object dropped from the roof of the 110-story-tall towers would reach the ground in about 9.2 seconds. Then there's the fact that steel beams that weighed as much as 200,000 pounds got tossed laterally as far as 500 feet. The National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) started its investigation on August 21, 2002. When their 10,000-page-long report came out three years later, the spokesman said there was no evidence to suggest a controlled demolition. But Steven E. Jones also says that molten metal found underground weeks later is proof that jet fuel couldn't have been all that was responsible. I visited the site about three weeks after 9/11, with Governor Pataki and my wife Terry. It didn't mean anything to me at the time, but they had to suspend digging that day because they were running into heat pockets of huge temperatures. These fires kept burning for more than three months, the longest-burning structure blaze ever. And this was all due to jet fuel? We're talking molten metal more than 2,000 degrees Fahrenheit. Probably the most conclusive evidence about a controlled demolition is a research paper (two years, nine authors) published in the peer-reviewed Open Chemical Physics Journal, in April 2009. In studying dust samples from the site, these scientists found chips of nano-thermite, which is a high-tech incendiary/explosive. Here's what the paper's lead author, Dr. Niels Harrit of the University of Copenhagen's chemistry department, had to say about the explosive that he's convinced brought down the Twin Towers and the nearby Building 7: "Thermite itself dates back to 1893. It is a mixture of aluminum and rust-powder, which react to create intense heat. The reaction produces iron, heated to 2500 degrees Centigrade. This can be used to do welding. It can also be used to melt other iron. So in nano-thermite, this powder from 1893 is reduced to tiny particles, perfectly mixed. When these react, the intense heat develops much more quickly. Nano-thermite can be mixed with additives to give off intense heat, or serve as a very effective explosive. It contains more energy than dynamite, and can be used as rocket fuel." Richard Gage is one of hundreds of credentialed architects and structural engineers who have put their careers on the line to point out the detailed anomalies and many implications of controlled demolition in the building collapses. As he puts it bluntly: "Once you get to the science, it's indisputable." If we do not get the truth this may well happen again and be done by the same criminals that still walk free today. http://rt.com/Politics/2010-03-10/jesse-ventura-911-truth.html?utm_source=2leep&utm_medium=2leep&utm_campaign=2leep |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The Holocaust never happened and two big freakin' Muslim hijacked jets didn't crash into the Twin Towers.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I saw it happen on the news. I also am versed in a lot of the science behind what happened. You slam that much mass (a jet liner) into a building at 500+MPH I am surprised it didn't knock chunks out of the WTC! The forces of the impacts (PLURAL) and the resulting explosions and you get what we seen. The fact the buildings stayed up for as long as they did after having two jumbo jets each slam into them was amazing.
The heat of the fires the jets caused and the damage already done to the structure allowed the tops of the buildings to fall down simulating an Implosion except it was like a house of cards falling vertically on itself. I am so sick of all these BS conspiracy theorists trying to point the finger at someone else. Bin Laden didn't come on the air and say "I didn't do it." The people responsible did take credit for it. There are so many Arm Chair Experts out there but the real experts already did their studies and came to educated conclusions. Sorry to inform you but having a jet slam into a building and also resultant secondary explosions will powderize concrete. That dust was a lot more than just concrete. I have seen my share of building demolitions and typically explosives are set in the footings of a building and in sections up its heights to make it collapse on itself in a controlled fashion. the buildings fell top down like an Accordion. So what next, Aliens did it? Again I watched as the jets slammed into the buildings. The tops just fell down a while after the jets hit it. Do you have any idea how heavy a jumbo jet is and the damage they can do impacting things at speed? Prolly not! Unless you are a demolitions expert you really are barking up the wrong tree! I do know a couple. I also am familiar with physics and explosives and what they can and cannot do but I am no expert. I am not ignorant of the subject either. BTW there was no way the fire suppression systems could have done squat about the fires becasue of the amount of damage the planes did. It was a number of factors that took the buildings down, not just the fire. The structures were weakened severely by having two jets slam into each building. The fact they didn't outright fall over said a lot but they were doomed becasue jet fuel does burn very intensely. Had each building been hit with one more jet they would have fallen over. Too many people want to blame our government for everything bad going on in the world. Why not look to groups like the G-8 and G-20, the Bilderburg Society and other Illuminati groups. OH BUT WE ARE BEING ENGINEERED BY LITTLE GREEN MEN TOO?? 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Here's Larry Silverstein calling for WTC7 to be "pulled".
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j2q2mD2HaKA&feature=related |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
Bestinshow
on
Sun 09/05/10 09:11 AM
|
|
I saw it happen on the news. I also am versed in a lot of the science behind what happened. You slam that much mass (a jet liner) into a building at 500+MPH I am surprised it didn't knock chunks out of the WTC! The forces of the impacts (PLURAL) and the resulting explosions and you get what we seen. The fact the buildings stayed up for as long as they did after having two jumbo jets each slam into them was amazing. The heat of the fires the jets caused and the damage already done to the structure allowed the tops of the buildings to fall down simulating an Implosion except it was like a house of cards falling vertically on itself. I am so sick of all these BS conspiracy theorists trying to point the finger at someone else. Bin Laden didn't come on the air and say "I didn't do it." The people responsible did take credit for it. There are so many Arm Chair Experts out there but the real experts already did their studies and came to educated conclusions. Sorry to inform you but having a jet slam into a building and also resultant secondary explosions will powderize concrete. That dust was a lot more than just concrete. I have seen my share of building demolitions and typically explosives are set in the footings of a building and in sections up its heights to make it collapse on itself in a controlled fashion. the buildings fell top down like an Accordion. So what next, Aliens did it? Again I watched as the jets slammed into the buildings. The tops just fell down a while after the jets hit it. Do you have any idea how heavy a jumbo jet is and the damage they can do impacting things at speed? Prolly not! Unless you are a demolitions expert you really are barking up the wrong tree! I do know a couple. I also am familiar with physics and explosives and what they can and cannot do but I am no expert. I am not ignorant of the subject either. BTW there was no way the fire suppression systems could have done squat about the fires becasue of the amount of damage the planes did. It was a number of factors that took the buildings down, not just the fire. The structures were weakened severely by having two jets slam into each building. The fact they didn't outright fall over said a lot but they were doomed becasue jet fuel does burn very intensely. Had each building been hit with one more jet they would have fallen over. Too many people want to blame our government for everything bad going on in the world. Why not look to groups like the G-8 and G-20, the Bilderburg Society and other Illuminati groups. OH BUT WE ARE BEING ENGINEERED BY LITTLE GREEN MEN TOO??
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
And Obama is a Muslim Finally - a bit of reality starts to emerge ... |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I saw it happen on the news. I also am versed in a lot of the science behind what happened. You slam that much mass (a jet liner) into a building at 500+MPH I am surprised it didn't knock chunks out of the WTC! The forces of the impacts (PLURAL) and the resulting explosions and you get what we seen. The fact the buildings stayed up for as long as they did after having two jumbo jets each slam into them was amazing. The heat of the fires the jets caused and the damage already done to the structure allowed the tops of the buildings to fall down simulating an Implosion except it was like a house of cards falling vertically on itself. I am so sick of all these BS conspiracy theorists trying to point the finger at someone else. Bin Laden didn't come on the air and say "I didn't do it." The people responsible did take credit for it. There are so many Arm Chair Experts out there but the real experts already did their studies and came to educated conclusions. Sorry to inform you but having a jet slam into a building and also resultant secondary explosions will powderize concrete. That dust was a lot more than just concrete. I have seen my share of building demolitions and typically explosives are set in the footings of a building and in sections up its heights to make it collapse on itself in a controlled fashion. the buildings fell top down like an Accordion. So what next, Aliens did it? Again I watched as the jets slammed into the buildings. The tops just fell down a while after the jets hit it. Do you have any idea how heavy a jumbo jet is and the damage they can do impacting things at speed? Prolly not! Unless you are a demolitions expert you really are barking up the wrong tree! I do know a couple. I also am familiar with physics and explosives and what they can and cannot do but I am no expert. I am not ignorant of the subject either. BTW there was no way the fire suppression systems could have done squat about the fires becasue of the amount of damage the planes did. It was a number of factors that took the buildings down, not just the fire. The structures were weakened severely by having two jets slam into each building. The fact they didn't outright fall over said a lot but they were doomed becasue jet fuel does burn very intensely. Had each building been hit with one more jet they would have fallen over. Too many people want to blame our government for everything bad going on in the world. Why not look to groups like the G-8 and G-20, the Bilderburg Society and other Illuminati groups. OH BUT WE ARE BEING ENGINEERED BY LITTLE GREEN MEN TOO??
WTC7 was not hit by an airplane and only damaged on one corner from falling debris from WTC2...and the fires were put out, yet it fell straight down at free fall speed, so that's a totally immaterial argument being presented. The WTCs were designed to take a hit from an airliner. The impacts did not cause any of the buildings to fall, even WTC6 was smacked partially down but had to be demolished to finish it off. OBL never admitted to the attacks and the FBI does NOT have him wanted for the 9-11 attacks...why not? No evidence what-so-ever. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I saw it happen on the news. I also am versed in a lot of the science behind what happened. You slam that much mass (a jet liner) into a building at 500+MPH I am surprised it didn't knock chunks out of the WTC! The forces of the impacts (PLURAL) and the resulting explosions and you get what we seen. The fact the buildings stayed up for as long as they did after having two jumbo jets each slam into them was amazing. The heat of the fires the jets caused and the damage already done to the structure allowed the tops of the buildings to fall down simulating an Implosion except it was like a house of cards falling vertically on itself. I am so sick of all these BS conspiracy theorists trying to point the finger at someone else. Bin Laden didn't come on the air and say "I didn't do it." The people responsible did take credit for it. There are so many Arm Chair Experts out there but the real experts already did their studies and came to educated conclusions. Sorry to inform you but having a jet slam into a building and also resultant secondary explosions will powderize concrete. That dust was a lot more than just concrete. I have seen my share of building demolitions and typically explosives are set in the footings of a building and in sections up its heights to make it collapse on itself in a controlled fashion. the buildings fell top down like an Accordion. So what next, Aliens did it? Again I watched as the jets slammed into the buildings. The tops just fell down a while after the jets hit it. Do you have any idea how heavy a jumbo jet is and the damage they can do impacting things at speed? Prolly not! Unless you are a demolitions expert you really are barking up the wrong tree! I do know a couple. I also am familiar with physics and explosives and what they can and cannot do but I am no expert. I am not ignorant of the subject either. BTW there was no way the fire suppression systems could have done squat about the fires becasue of the amount of damage the planes did. It was a number of factors that took the buildings down, not just the fire. The structures were weakened severely by having two jets slam into each building. The fact they didn't outright fall over said a lot but they were doomed becasue jet fuel does burn very intensely. Had each building been hit with one more jet they would have fallen over. Too many people want to blame our government for everything bad going on in the world. Why not look to groups like the G-8 and G-20, the Bilderburg Society and other Illuminati groups. OH BUT WE ARE BEING ENGINEERED BY LITTLE GREEN MEN TOO??
Yeah, that's another part of it....more here: 
"Pilots for 9/11 Truth is an organization of aviation professionals and pilots throughout the globe who have gathered together for one purpose. We are committed to seeking the truth surrounding the events of the 11th of September 2001. Our main focus concentrates on the four flights, maneuvers performed and the reported pilots. We do not offer theory or point blame at this point in time. However, we are focused on determining the truth of that fateful day based on solid data and facts -- since 9/11/2001 is the catalyst for many of the events shaping our world today -- and the United States Government doesn't seem to be very forthcoming with answers or facts. We stand with the numerous other growing organizations of Firefighters, Medical Professionals, Lawyers, Scholars, Scientists, Architects and Engineers, Veterans, Religious and Political Leaders, along side family members of the victims -- family members of soldiers who have made the ultimate sacrifice -- including the many Ground Zero workers who are now ill or have passed away, when we ask for a true, new independent investigation into the events of 9/11. We do not accept the 9/11 Commission Report and/or "hypothesis" as a satisfactory explanation for the sacrifice every American has made and continues to make -- some more than others. Thank you for taking the time to inform yourself." http://pilotsfor911truth.org/ Let's see the Duhniers call these pilots CT nutjobs...lol. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As the WTCs fell one at a time I sat in amazement that no one was asking if the terrorist had planted bombs in the buildings. There is absolutley no way that steel and concrete buildings would fall at near free-fall speed into their own footprints. No resistances to them falling what-so-ever. There had to be bombs in the building. The WTC's cement turned to dust right in front of us all yet we ignore that the plane's damages cause could not do that. It's just impossible.
For some, the search for what happened on 9/11 isn't over "Jesse Ventura's new book American Conspiracies questions the government's position on 9/11. He wrote about the same topic on The Huffington Post, but his article was banned. Read it here on RT. You didn't see anything about it in the mainstream media, but two weeks ago at a conference in San Francisco, more than one thousand architects and engineers signed a petition demanding that Congress begin a new investigation into the destruction of the World Trade Center skyscrapers on 9/11. That's right, these people put their reputations in potential jeopardy because they don't buy the government's version of events. They want to know how 200,000 tons of steel disintegrated and fell to the ground in 11 seconds. They question whether the hijacked planes were responsible – or whether it could have been a controlled demolition from inside that brought down the twin towers and Building 7. Richard Gage, a member of the American Institute of Architects and the founder of Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth, put it like this: "The official Federal Emergency Management [Agency] and National Institute of Standards and Technology reports provide insufficient, contradictory and fraudulent accounts of the circumstances of the towers' destruction." He's especially disturbed by Building 7, whose 47 stories came down in "pure free-fall acceleration" that afternoon – even though it was never hit by an aircraft. This is a subject I take up in my new book, American Conspiracies, published this week by Skyhorse. An excerpt follows: Some people have argued that the twin towers went down, within a half hour of one another, because of the way they were constructed. Well, those 425,000 cubic yards of concrete and 200,000 tons of steel were designed to hold up against a Boeing 707, the largest plane built at the time the towers were completed in 1973. Analysis had shown that a 707 traveling at 600 miles an hour (and those had four engines) would not cause major damage. The twin-engine Boeing 757s that hit on 9/11 were going 440 and 550 miles an hour. Still, we are told that a molten, highly intense fuel mixture from the planes brought down these two steel-framed skyscrapers. Keep in mind that no other such skyscraper in history had ever been known to collapse completely due to fire damage. So could it actually have been the result of a controlled demolition from inside the buildings? I don't claim expertise about this, but I did work four years as part of the Navy's underwater demolition teams, where we were trained to blow things to hell and high water. And my staff talked at some length with a prominent physicist, Steven E. Jones, who says that a "gravity driven collapse" without demolition charges defies the laws of physics. These buildings fell, at nearly the rate of free-fall, straight down into their own footprint, in approximately ten seconds. An object dropped from the roof of the 110-story-tall towers would reach the ground in about 9.2 seconds. Then there's the fact that steel beams that weighed as much as 200,000 pounds got tossed laterally as far as 500 feet. The National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) started its investigation on August 21, 2002. When their 10,000-page-long report came out three years later, the spokesman said there was no evidence to suggest a controlled demolition. But Steven E. Jones also says that molten metal found underground weeks later is proof that jet fuel couldn't have been all that was responsible. I visited the site about three weeks after 9/11, with Governor Pataki and my wife Terry. It didn't mean anything to me at the time, but they had to suspend digging that day because they were running into heat pockets of huge temperatures. These fires kept burning for more than three months, the longest-burning structure blaze ever. And this was all due to jet fuel? We're talking molten metal more than 2,000 degrees Fahrenheit. Probably the most conclusive evidence about a controlled demolition is a research paper (two years, nine authors) published in the peer-reviewed Open Chemical Physics Journal, in April 2009. In studying dust samples from the site, these scientists found chips of nano-thermite, which is a high-tech incendiary/explosive. Here's what the paper's lead author, Dr. Niels Harrit of the University of Copenhagen's chemistry department, had to say about the explosive that he's convinced brought down the Twin Towers and the nearby Building 7: "Thermite itself dates back to 1893. It is a mixture of aluminum and rust-powder, which react to create intense heat. The reaction produces iron, heated to 2500 degrees Centigrade. This can be used to do welding. It can also be used to melt other iron. So in nano-thermite, this powder from 1893 is reduced to tiny particles, perfectly mixed. When these react, the intense heat develops much more quickly. Nano-thermite can be mixed with additives to give off intense heat, or serve as a very effective explosive. It contains more energy than dynamite, and can be used as rocket fuel." Richard Gage is one of hundreds of credentialed architects and structural engineers who have put their careers on the line to point out the detailed anomalies and many implications of controlled demolition in the building collapses. As he puts it bluntly: "Once you get to the science, it's indisputable." If we do not get the truth this may well happen again and be done by the same criminals that still walk free today. http://rt.com/Politics/2010-03-10/jesse-ventura-911-truth.html?utm_source=2leep&utm_medium=2leep&utm_campaign=2leep this stuff is ridiculous.. it makes people alot of money, but the theories are just that... theories.. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As the WTCs fell one at a time I sat in amazement that no one was asking if the terrorist had planted bombs in the buildings. There is absolutley no way that steel and concrete buildings would fall at near free-fall speed into their own footprints. No resistances to them falling what-so-ever. There had to be bombs in the building. The WTC's cement turned to dust right in front of us all yet we ignore that the plane's damages cause could not do that. It's just impossible.
For some, the search for what happened on 9/11 isn't over "Jesse Ventura's new book American Conspiracies questions the government's position on 9/11. He wrote about the same topic on The Huffington Post, but his article was banned. Read it here on RT. You didn't see anything about it in the mainstream media, but two weeks ago at a conference in San Francisco, more than one thousand architects and engineers signed a petition demanding that Congress begin a new investigation into the destruction of the World Trade Center skyscrapers on 9/11. That's right, these people put their reputations in potential jeopardy because they don't buy the government's version of events. They want to know how 200,000 tons of steel disintegrated and fell to the ground in 11 seconds. They question whether the hijacked planes were responsible – or whether it could have been a controlled demolition from inside that brought down the twin towers and Building 7. Richard Gage, a member of the American Institute of Architects and the founder of Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth, put it like this: "The official Federal Emergency Management [Agency] and National Institute of Standards and Technology reports provide insufficient, contradictory and fraudulent accounts of the circumstances of the towers' destruction." He's especially disturbed by Building 7, whose 47 stories came down in "pure free-fall acceleration" that afternoon – even though it was never hit by an aircraft. This is a subject I take up in my new book, American Conspiracies, published this week by Skyhorse. An excerpt follows: Some people have argued that the twin towers went down, within a half hour of one another, because of the way they were constructed. Well, those 425,000 cubic yards of concrete and 200,000 tons of steel were designed to hold up against a Boeing 707, the largest plane built at the time the towers were completed in 1973. Analysis had shown that a 707 traveling at 600 miles an hour (and those had four engines) would not cause major damage. The twin-engine Boeing 757s that hit on 9/11 were going 440 and 550 miles an hour. Still, we are told that a molten, highly intense fuel mixture from the planes brought down these two steel-framed skyscrapers. Keep in mind that no other such skyscraper in history had ever been known to collapse completely due to fire damage. So could it actually have been the result of a controlled demolition from inside the buildings? I don't claim expertise about this, but I did work four years as part of the Navy's underwater demolition teams, where we were trained to blow things to hell and high water. And my staff talked at some length with a prominent physicist, Steven E. Jones, who says that a "gravity driven collapse" without demolition charges defies the laws of physics. These buildings fell, at nearly the rate of free-fall, straight down into their own footprint, in approximately ten seconds. An object dropped from the roof of the 110-story-tall towers would reach the ground in about 9.2 seconds. Then there's the fact that steel beams that weighed as much as 200,000 pounds got tossed laterally as far as 500 feet. The National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) started its investigation on August 21, 2002. When their 10,000-page-long report came out three years later, the spokesman said there was no evidence to suggest a controlled demolition. But Steven E. Jones also says that molten metal found underground weeks later is proof that jet fuel couldn't have been all that was responsible. I visited the site about three weeks after 9/11, with Governor Pataki and my wife Terry. It didn't mean anything to me at the time, but they had to suspend digging that day because they were running into heat pockets of huge temperatures. These fires kept burning for more than three months, the longest-burning structure blaze ever. And this was all due to jet fuel? We're talking molten metal more than 2,000 degrees Fahrenheit. Probably the most conclusive evidence about a controlled demolition is a research paper (two years, nine authors) published in the peer-reviewed Open Chemical Physics Journal, in April 2009. In studying dust samples from the site, these scientists found chips of nano-thermite, which is a high-tech incendiary/explosive. Here's what the paper's lead author, Dr. Niels Harrit of the University of Copenhagen's chemistry department, had to say about the explosive that he's convinced brought down the Twin Towers and the nearby Building 7: "Thermite itself dates back to 1893. It is a mixture of aluminum and rust-powder, which react to create intense heat. The reaction produces iron, heated to 2500 degrees Centigrade. This can be used to do welding. It can also be used to melt other iron. So in nano-thermite, this powder from 1893 is reduced to tiny particles, perfectly mixed. When these react, the intense heat develops much more quickly. Nano-thermite can be mixed with additives to give off intense heat, or serve as a very effective explosive. It contains more energy than dynamite, and can be used as rocket fuel." Richard Gage is one of hundreds of credentialed architects and structural engineers who have put their careers on the line to point out the detailed anomalies and many implications of controlled demolition in the building collapses. As he puts it bluntly: "Once you get to the science, it's indisputable." If we do not get the truth this may well happen again and be done by the same criminals that still walk free today. http://rt.com/Politics/2010-03-10/jesse-ventura-911-truth.html?utm_source=2leep&utm_medium=2leep&utm_campaign=2leep this stuff is ridiculous.. it makes people alot of money, but the theories are just that... theories.. WHO is making money off this??? LOL...the MIC made the money off of this as well as the GOP who gained politically when they scared Americans into supporting illegal wars against people who did not attack us on 9-11...egads. Those who believe the 9-11 Commission's report are either suffering from cognitive dissonance or are just really really ignorant...oh, and those who refuse to give the red, white and blue a black eye. We deserve that black eye and should own it...so maybe it won't happen again. More here from yet another credible organization: 
http://cms.ae911truth.org/ |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As the WTCs fell one at a time I sat in amazement that no one was asking if the terrorist had planted bombs in the buildings. There is absolutley no way that steel and concrete buildings would fall at near free-fall speed into their own footprints. No resistances to them falling what-so-ever. There had to be bombs in the building. The WTC's cement turned to dust right in front of us all yet we ignore that the plane's damages cause could not do that. It's just impossible.
For some, the search for what happened on 9/11 isn't over "Jesse Ventura's new book American Conspiracies questions the government's position on 9/11. He wrote about the same topic on The Huffington Post, but his article was banned. Read it here on RT. You didn't see anything about it in the mainstream media, but two weeks ago at a conference in San Francisco, more than one thousand architects and engineers signed a petition demanding that Congress begin a new investigation into the destruction of the World Trade Center skyscrapers on 9/11. That's right, these people put their reputations in potential jeopardy because they don't buy the government's version of events. They want to know how 200,000 tons of steel disintegrated and fell to the ground in 11 seconds. They question whether the hijacked planes were responsible – or whether it could have been a controlled demolition from inside that brought down the twin towers and Building 7. Richard Gage, a member of the American Institute of Architects and the founder of Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth, put it like this: "The official Federal Emergency Management [Agency] and National Institute of Standards and Technology reports provide insufficient, contradictory and fraudulent accounts of the circumstances of the towers' destruction." He's especially disturbed by Building 7, whose 47 stories came down in "pure free-fall acceleration" that afternoon – even though it was never hit by an aircraft. This is a subject I take up in my new book, American Conspiracies, published this week by Skyhorse. An excerpt follows: Some people have argued that the twin towers went down, within a half hour of one another, because of the way they were constructed. Well, those 425,000 cubic yards of concrete and 200,000 tons of steel were designed to hold up against a Boeing 707, the largest plane built at the time the towers were completed in 1973. Analysis had shown that a 707 traveling at 600 miles an hour (and those had four engines) would not cause major damage. The twin-engine Boeing 757s that hit on 9/11 were going 440 and 550 miles an hour. Still, we are told that a molten, highly intense fuel mixture from the planes brought down these two steel-framed skyscrapers. Keep in mind that no other such skyscraper in history had ever been known to collapse completely due to fire damage. So could it actually have been the result of a controlled demolition from inside the buildings? I don't claim expertise about this, but I did work four years as part of the Navy's underwater demolition teams, where we were trained to blow things to hell and high water. And my staff talked at some length with a prominent physicist, Steven E. Jones, who says that a "gravity driven collapse" without demolition charges defies the laws of physics. These buildings fell, at nearly the rate of free-fall, straight down into their own footprint, in approximately ten seconds. An object dropped from the roof of the 110-story-tall towers would reach the ground in about 9.2 seconds. Then there's the fact that steel beams that weighed as much as 200,000 pounds got tossed laterally as far as 500 feet. The National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) started its investigation on August 21, 2002. When their 10,000-page-long report came out three years later, the spokesman said there was no evidence to suggest a controlled demolition. But Steven E. Jones also says that molten metal found underground weeks later is proof that jet fuel couldn't have been all that was responsible. I visited the site about three weeks after 9/11, with Governor Pataki and my wife Terry. It didn't mean anything to me at the time, but they had to suspend digging that day because they were running into heat pockets of huge temperatures. These fires kept burning for more than three months, the longest-burning structure blaze ever. And this was all due to jet fuel? We're talking molten metal more than 2,000 degrees Fahrenheit. Probably the most conclusive evidence about a controlled demolition is a research paper (two years, nine authors) published in the peer-reviewed Open Chemical Physics Journal, in April 2009. In studying dust samples from the site, these scientists found chips of nano-thermite, which is a high-tech incendiary/explosive. Here's what the paper's lead author, Dr. Niels Harrit of the University of Copenhagen's chemistry department, had to say about the explosive that he's convinced brought down the Twin Towers and the nearby Building 7: "Thermite itself dates back to 1893. It is a mixture of aluminum and rust-powder, which react to create intense heat. The reaction produces iron, heated to 2500 degrees Centigrade. This can be used to do welding. It can also be used to melt other iron. So in nano-thermite, this powder from 1893 is reduced to tiny particles, perfectly mixed. When these react, the intense heat develops much more quickly. Nano-thermite can be mixed with additives to give off intense heat, or serve as a very effective explosive. It contains more energy than dynamite, and can be used as rocket fuel." Richard Gage is one of hundreds of credentialed architects and structural engineers who have put their careers on the line to point out the detailed anomalies and many implications of controlled demolition in the building collapses. As he puts it bluntly: "Once you get to the science, it's indisputable." If we do not get the truth this may well happen again and be done by the same criminals that still walk free today. http://rt.com/Politics/2010-03-10/jesse-ventura-911-truth.html?utm_source=2leep&utm_medium=2leep&utm_campaign=2leep this stuff is ridiculous.. it makes people alot of money, but the theories are just that... theories.. WHO is making money off this??? LOL...the MIC made the money off of this as well as the GOP who gained politically when they scared Americans into supporting illegal wars against people who did not attack us on 9-11...egads. Those who believe the 9-11 Commission's report are either suffering from cognitive dissonance or are just really really ignorant...oh, and those who refuse to give the red, white and blue a black eye. We deserve that black eye and should own it...so maybe it won't happen again. More here from yet another credible organization:
http://cms.ae911truth.org/ People that write books and give speeches make money. I didn't realize that was a hard concept to grasp. I have spent hours looking over the AE website.. There is nothing there. I have read Harrit's report and I have to admit, it's pretty surprising that a so called credible scientist would use samples that were given to him after 6 years. In the real world, no one would accept such samples since there is no way to prove who actually acquired them, what type of environment they were stored in, and who has touched them. Random dust off peoples ledges.. I would stake my reputation on that..LMAO And.... In his conclusion he doesn't say that samples actually, incontrovertibly, or even remotely can be proven to be thermite, let alone the phantom NANO thermite. He says "These observations reminded us of nano-thermite fabricated at the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory and elsewhere." Doesn't say he can prove it or that it actually is.. It reminds him of it.. hardly a definitive work.. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I saw it happen on the news. I also am versed in a lot of the science behind what happened. You slam that much mass (a jet liner) into a building at 500+MPH I am surprised it didn't knock chunks out of the WTC! The forces of the impacts (PLURAL) and the resulting explosions and you get what we seen. The fact the buildings stayed up for as long as they did after having two jumbo jets each slam into them was amazing. The heat of the fires the jets caused and the damage already done to the structure allowed the tops of the buildings to fall down simulating an Implosion except it was like a house of cards falling vertically on itself. I am so sick of all these BS conspiracy theorists trying to point the finger at someone else. Bin Laden didn't come on the air and say "I didn't do it." The people responsible did take credit for it. There are so many Arm Chair Experts out there but the real experts already did their studies and came to educated conclusions. Sorry to inform you but having a jet slam into a building and also resultant secondary explosions will powderize concrete. That dust was a lot more than just concrete. I have seen my share of building demolitions and typically explosives are set in the footings of a building and in sections up its heights to make it collapse on itself in a controlled fashion. the buildings fell top down like an Accordion. So what next, Aliens did it? Again I watched as the jets slammed into the buildings. The tops just fell down a while after the jets hit it. Do you have any idea how heavy a jumbo jet is and the damage they can do impacting things at speed? Prolly not! Unless you are a demolitions expert you really are barking up the wrong tree! I do know a couple. I also am familiar with physics and explosives and what they can and cannot do but I am no expert. I am not ignorant of the subject either. BTW there was no way the fire suppression systems could have done squat about the fires becasue of the amount of damage the planes did. It was a number of factors that took the buildings down, not just the fire. The structures were weakened severely by having two jets slam into each building. The fact they didn't outright fall over said a lot but they were doomed becasue jet fuel does burn very intensely. Had each building been hit with one more jet they would have fallen over. Too many people want to blame our government for everything bad going on in the world. Why not look to groups like the G-8 and G-20, the Bilderburg Society and other Illuminati groups. OH BUT WE ARE BEING ENGINEERED BY LITTLE GREEN MEN TOO??
Ummmmmmmm, I have flown in the right seat before. I had my hands on the yolk of a plane. I also have flown a real flight simulator for a jumbo jet and managed to land it without crashing. Granted it was a simulator but it was a real one, not some PC game. I also am an avid gamer who loves flying fighter jet simulations and have taken laden F-16s that were smoking wrecks and kamakazied targets with the jet hitting the ejection seat. THAT IS RUSSIAN STYLE PILOTING! Flying a Jet at 500 MPH is nothing. Flying into controlled airspace is also nothing. Even if you refuse to answer the radio what are they going to do? Fire SAMs at you? Try flying over China Lake or White Sands without a flight plan and you will get a pair of Sidewinders up your six. Why? That is RESTRICTED air space. A pilot knows the difference. I was trained to be an Aircraft mechanic. I worked on an airport fixing planes. I also have been through Ground School. I love all these conspiracy experts who have all this training and education and they cannot even grasp simple physics and talk about subject matter they are not trained in. Now for a physics lesson so that you may understand how stupid this argument is. On one mission a space shuttle landed with a cracked windshield. After it was examined it was found a flake of paint, not a screw or meteorite or anything else, a flake of paint cracked the windshield of the space shuttle. At 25,000 MPH it does not matter if it is a spitball or a brick, something is going to get a hole punched in it. And that was just a flake of paint! Have any of you seen the result of two vehicles hitting head on at 50 MPH? I have seen the after math of a car hitting a jersey wall at 120 MPH head on. The Jersey wall was destroyed! The car was tiny bits scattered over a large area. Now here is another question. WHY would ANYONE WITH A BRAIN try to shoot don a jet over a populated area for flying off course? Until those attacks terrorists usually would land the jet and make demands. This was the first time they used suicide attacks with jets Kamakazi Style. Now for a fact, a Jet the size of a 737 fling at 500 MPH with a full load of passengers and just a partial tank of fuel hits with the same power as a MOAB going off. Had the jet struck the root of the building it would have fallen over but instead it speared into the building where most of the damage was absorbed by the open air space. It was just a matter of time before the building toppled. No George Bush Jr. Had anything to do with it. We are in a Jihad with Islam! |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
this stuff is ridiculous.. it makes people alot of money, but the theories are just that... theories.. I treat everything as theories. Like the official story, which is as much as a conspiracy theory as the others out there. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
this stuff is ridiculous.. it makes people alot of money, but the theories are just that... theories.. I treat everything as theories. Like the official story, which is as much as a conspiracy theory as the others out there. the official story is alot of theory mixed in with some obvious facts. atleast they made an attempt at proving their version. that doesn't mean it's 100% accurate, but that is more than it must have been NANO thermite planted in the buildings, because it just has to be, otherwise we can't sell books or get paid for giving speeches.. |
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
s1owhand
on
Sun 09/05/10 02:49 PM
|
|
|
|
