to all the people that say demolition brought down these towers, explain to me why the building fell from the point of the planes entrance? theres no way the explosives would still have worked from that close to the fire they either would of exploded just after impact or just been destroyed
When I died in 1990-1993, i went to ehll. It's in Bible Codes Software as the first event under my real name. HUD Buffalo or fbi should be able to verify 4 people.
@azar783402 Hey, I'm just answering the questions you ask me. I am confused that you are now accusing me of harassment, when I am just answering these questions that you keep claiming are going un-answered.
Start acting mature? I am acting as mature as possible, but I am not the one typing in capitals telling people to ''stfu nigga'' e.g. Hotters.
@Hotters70603EX At high enough temperatures, molten aluminium can turn yellow. Also, when cooled molten steel turns black, as it fell and cooled it did not turn black, in fact it has a sort of silverish tint to it.
The more plausible explanation for the molten aluminium is simply friction from the impact.
@Hotters70603EX This is audio of Kevin Cosgrove trapped on the 105th floor. He is all of about 220 feet from the impact areas. The recording picks up not only Kevin but his offices friends speaking NORMALLY. Not only do we not hear any explosions but Kevin doesn't even react to any.. "Bang...What was that?..etc). And he most certainly would given his alarmed state.
Its just quiet until the building drops out from below him.
@Hotters70603EX Nobody has ever said the steel melted. So i don't know why you keep referring to it? One column dripping... (ahem) "THERMITE" does not collapse the building. Nor would one blasted by explosives. So i don't know who you think you're fooling here? Except maybe YOU!!
@Hotters70603EX That was thermite!. It was was it? And you really think it dripping from ONE column is going to cause the building to collapse. You're pretty dumb.
And can we please decide? You guys all get together and reach some consensus on thermite OK..
Is it A. Back yard thermite like in Jonathon Coles videos? Spewing sparks and plasma in every direction for 30 feet and brighter than ultra violet. (Which it is)
@Hotters70603EX Take a look at the molten metal dripping from the south tower just minutes before demolition and than come and talk to me!!
Off of one column? WOW. What a smoking gun (Not).
First you guys post all of these stupid Jonathon Cole Thermite videos with his ridiculous Wile Coyote terrorist contraptions. Back Yard thermite reactions with plasma brighter than a welding torch.
Then its some nice, drippy molten "Sparks" no where near Ultraviolet.
@Hotters70603EX A striking feature of the Twin Towers' destruction was the pulverization of most of the concrete into gravel and dust before it hit the ground
Yeah so!!.
What kind of resistance do you honestly think a 4 inch thick slab of concrete and an elevator bank of drywall is going to offer 31 stories? Its not even remotely a contest.
The floors don't carry vertical loads. They are HUNG between the columns
You don't seem to understand the design of the building
@Hotters70603EX Explosives turn buildings into dust so don't take me like I am stupid!!
Hey if the shoe fits!!. Thermite does not "Powderize" concrete. Singe it here and there but it doesn't turn it in to pyroclastic flows of talc.
Think about it dude. What produces a powdered form of something?
Grinding!!! Take a box of chalk (Pretty much the same as drywall) and put it in a 50 ton hydraulic press. Now compress it. Same thing going on at the WTC.
@azar783402 The upper 31 stories rotates 25 degrees over and puts the load on the floors. The exterior columns fail. You can see it easily. There is no floor system going to hold 31 stories. Good luck.
And the building does not fall at free fall. That's a myth. It falls fast but not at free fall.
@Hotters70603EX I have never said that they don't turn to dust. But explosives don't convert concrete slab floors to talcum powder. That comes from huge massive grinding force. Not explosives. I really don't get why all you dudes have such a hard time understanding that. And thermite isn't going to do it either and you all know that already.
So what's left? Time to get a little more reasonable and RATIONAL?
@MrGman8161 These buildings collapsed and turned to dust before our very eyes and you don't call that a demolition?
NO. The structures would behave entirely differently with explosives. Call up a company and ask them. But you're not really interested in finding out truth are you? Same old bullshit
Explosives do not turn concrete to powder. Thermite doesn't either.
So what does that leave us with? If you're smart enough you can connect the dots yourself.
look at this video and be honest with what you see happening. as the top section of the tower falls you can see floors collapsing well ahead. the leading edge of the collapse begins as the top part is just beginning to fall over. controlled demo
@azar783402 Who says its hard to understand? I have never had a hard time understanding any of this. And you people constantly want it both ways. First you say the building is blown up because steel is hurled half a block. The next minute you are saying its Thermite. An incendiary is incapable of hurling steel half a block. And any explosive able to do so and at the levels you guys purport to be there..
@azar783402 The building collapses and fails at the impact floor of each crash zone. There is close up video of this event taking place. There is absolutely no sign of anything happening to the exterior columns other than bending, warping and eventual failure. Thermite produces plasma in the ultra violet spectrum. In fact brighter than a welders torch.
Would you care to point that out to me on any of the exterior columns.??
@Hotters70604sl Show me one video of the WTC's or B7 with this going on.
You keep screaming about CD. Well this is what it sounds like and there is no wiggling out and explaining this away. If it was a CD this kind of sound MUST occur.
Show me one video of the WTC or 7 like this. You won't
@Hotters70604sl Explosives don't turn concrete to powder. Think about it dude!! If you put a cinder block like people have around your BBQ's beside a stick of dynamite what's it going to do to it? Blow it up for sure. Its going to fly in chunks all over. Put that same cinder block under a 50 ton hydraulic press and compress all the way. I guarantee you will end up with powder.
Same process going on at the WTC only on a far larger scale and much more weight.
@Hotters70604sl Everyone and their dog were entirely aware that 7 was coming down. You really need to read the firemen oral histories. If you were truly interested in TRUTH you would do these things. But you're not. You're interested in jerk off conspiracy crap fueled by all of you buddies sending you the same idiotic videos you all watch day after day. If you were TRULY interested in truth you would read the oral histories. Find out REAL facts.
@Hotters70604sl Watch this video. Pause it at the 06 second mark. See that thing falling toward you? That is the ENTIRE East exterior wall of the building. Being peeled off like a slice of cheese or a slab of roast beef at Sunday dinner. Its rotation point is about the 48th floor. Guess what is running its self down behind that like a giant knife slicing it off? The top 31 stories of the building. Examine this video closely. It tells allot!!
@Hotters70604sl Too bad you don't have a better understanding of this topic.
What do you think is going to result when 31 stories rotates off of its columns (Which it did) and on to the floors. The floors are not engineered to carry a load like this. They provide tension and bracing to the columns but they don't carry the up and down load of the building.
They have load limit and its about 1500 tons. Now we will drop 180,000 tons in MOTION on it.
@Hotters70604sl Wow!! incredible. The fact that 155 feet of aluminum just plowed in to the building and came to rest EXACTLY in that area had absolutely nothing to do with it!!! eh? What does your REAL LIVE PRACTICAL brain tell you?? It tells me that we see the remnants of the plane burning, or the exterior cladding of the building...
AND!!!
One molten stream of "STUFF" does not bring down a building. You're an idiot if you think so.
@Hotters5562 Who's the dumb fuck here? Yes they were designed for airplane impacts. But not at 560 MPH. Nor would they EVER be. Because no commercial plane would ever be flying that fast over Manhattan. It is illegal by the FAA. So why would any SE ever calculate a plane impacting that fast? They wouldn't. And the fuel load was never a consideration. Not because Les Robertson is an idiot or a shitty SE. Because NOTHING existed in 1968 to enable them to do that.
@Hotters5562 Bullshit. Robertson has said the 707 scenario was planned on a LANDING APPROACH!!! lost in the fog etc. There is no plane that would be doing 600 mph over Manhattan its illegal. So why would you plan for it? No commercial jet would be going that fast.
Unless it was hijacked by crazed suicidal terrorists. Not something on the radar scope in 1968.
@Hotters5562 Oh I am sorry!! How rude and ignorant of me!!! and the precedent of a 767 smoking through 2 skyscrapers was when? You're the dumb one here studmuffin.
@roquefortfiles I wish you would give up with that bullshit. I seriously doubt that you have experince with Cd. If you did, you'd wake up and smell the coffee. Thermite was found explosions were heard. Wtf else do you want
Thermite does not create an explosive sound, you have to choose between the two theories.
But besides that, they can both be explained.
The supposed thermite that was found was actually sulphur from burning plastic computers, and the sounds of explosions could of been anything, floors slamming into each other, transformers etc.
Most people assume any sudden loud noise is an explosion or bomb.
@puppetmaster195 So which is it? Thermite or explosives? Richard Gage even employs this complete lack of logical thinking. Thermite does not hurl steel columns 500 feet. Explosives make one hell of allot of noise.
@azar783402 These buildings fell in on the themselves and that right there is a demolition!! (No its a failure collapse) These buildings came straight down symmetrically and you know it!!
No. They were laid out for a block in every direction. And every floor below the failure point was entirely intact until the upper falling portion reached it. The pulverized material has no where to go but get ejected out of the way, out the side.
@MrGman8161 SACRIFICED THE LIVES OF OVER 2000 AMERICAN SOLDIERS
I get a little sick and tired of this battle cry from the "TM" and implied notion that people who disagree with your nonsense theories are George Bush lovers and big evil unpatriotic scum bags. This "Discussion" here has ABSOLUTELY nothing to do with that.
So stop using the Unpatriotic card or the "YOU SUPPORT GEORGE BUSH AND HIS MURDERS" card. Or the.. "It was part of the official story" card.
@MrGman8161 Wait wait wait. You are saying the American government was responsible for the attacks on Pearl Harbor? Well this gets better and better. It just goes to show how people like you suspect everything as a government conspiracy.
What makes me think they did not sacrifice 3000 total strangers? Lack of credible evidence.
(Half truths and misunderstandings do not count as evidence)
@azar783402 What about the Fucking molten metal that was seen at ground zero weeks after the attacks? And what the molten metal seen pouring out of the South Tower just minutes before it collapse?
What about it? The buildings fail and collapse at the 90th and 78th floors. Not in the basements. There is no chemical in existence that continues to react and heat for 6 weeks. If there was we would solve the energy crisis. Great real dude.
I have modeled WTC's collapse on my 3d Computer Graphics program. Up to the point the building becomes overly obscured by the dust. There is a great deal one can discern from what is taking place here. The floors below about 78 are sheered off from the exterior wall at the onset of collapse. The exterior wall is peeled off like a slab of roast beef. Its rotation point is about floor 48. The floors are VERY MUCH being removed rapidly.
If this is your level of research and knowledge you're scraping the bottom of the barrel. I have seen videos produced by this company before. Same chick doing the narration. They a laughably inaccurate.
And once again. The building collapse at the impact floors. They don't collapse in the basements.
Stay on target and on message. Otherwise you're just pulling shit out of thin air.
@Hotters70603XL There is no chemical in existence that reacts for 6 weeks at a time. So of what consequence is this "MOLTEN" metal? And nobody ever tested this stuff or established a chain of command for it. So who the fuck KNOWS its "METAL?" a more logical explanation is simply Aluminum which melts at a VERY low temperature and which the ENTIRE exterior skin of the WTC was comprised of. Lightweight aluminum.
The buildings collapse on the impact floors anyway. NOT THE BASEMENTS
@azar783402 I know what a demolition looks like. I know what is involved in a demolition. I know what it does to a building. I have first hand experience in this department.
These buildings were laid out for a block in every direction.
That's some pretty lousy CD techs they got for that job let me tell you!!
@MrGman8161 I am not American and I am not a George Bush lover. That is the mistake you guys all make here in thinking that anyone who opposes this nonsense conspiracy crap is some kind of GWB lover. It is not the case.
the official story told by the media is a mountain of outright lies.
Such as what? I am still waiting. Don't talk the talk dude.
Examples. Points.. Facts!! Or moreover what you THINK those are.
The problem with most of the "TM" is that too many people have no idea what they are talking about or no understanding of aircraft and aviation.
And the amount of "CREDIBLE" people that need to be tossed under the back wheels of the bus in order for these stories to have validity is not RATIONAL or logical.
Up till now i have not had a discussion with ONE "Truther" who does NOT do this
@MrGman8161 Still aiming for this media brainwashed excuse? Well I guess I can't convince you on the fact that my sources are not the media or the government. I'm not even American.
I don't do research for myself? Wow are you serious? That is just what I have been trying to tell you in the past dozen comments. I am having thoughts that it is you who is trolling now.
I have looked at your so called ''facts'' but they are not facts, they are just half truths and mis-understandings, as well as BS
@MrGman8161 Oh ok. So the airport security guy? He's lying is he? The transmissions from the plane to the ground identifying the hijackers seats corroborated by each airlines ground operations (All of them have been interviewed on this subject btw)... They're all lying are they?
I just think guys like you are stupid and dumb. You are willing to throw a hell of allot of people under the bus just so your beliefs have something to stand on.
@azar783402 the footage clearly shows building 7 was a controlled demolition.
Umm Dude? There was a team of Controlled Demolition techs already at B7. They watched it come down. You don't need to be Stephen Hawking to understand the implications of what that means. Unless you're an idiot.
And yes I am smarter. Much smarter. And far more informed.
@MrGman8161 What truth? your version of the continued, ill informed ramblings of this endless conspiracy nonsense? If any of you people stop and REALLY examine the stuff you talk about and take these things to logical conclusions this material implodes all on its own. But you don't. You just keep spouting the same nonsense over and over.... "CONSPIRACY.. CONSPIRACY ...INSIDE JOB".. What is the start point for this stuff? If the hijackers are ON the planes..
No. there is respect when there is intelligence. There is very little of that displayed with the whole "TM". When intelligence starts entering in to the posts....
I watched a Doc on the secret service men assigned to Kennedy that day. One of them who was posted at the back of the Limo said. "I am a country boy, i grew up around rifles. I know what they sound like. Every single shot came from behind me and above me".
@MrGman8161 Take a statistics course my friend. One event does not CAUSE another. The Kennedy Assn has NOTHING to do with Sept 11th. So stop trying to make connections where none exist. I get a little tired of all you conspiracy freaks trying to link up every damn event in world history like there is some grand design to it all. Don't be ridiculous.
@MrGman8161 If you got the hijackers on the planes (and that is verifiable on multiple levels) THEY are in control of things. The next stop is the WTC.
WHERE?? in that equation does George Bush fit? He's in coach pushing the drink cart?
@MrGman8161 I better watch what I am saying to you? Are you threatening me over the internet? Well at least we know you are mature about things.
And why assume where my sources are from? There is alot more providers of information than just the media and the government. You have got to learn that.
And sorry to say, I have not ignored you, I have looked at your argument but discovered it to be wrong and possible for it to be disproven.
@MrGman8161 You are an idiot. Why do you always assume I have gotten my information from the media? News for you, I haven't. I have done the research and discovered that these arguments about an inside job are supported only by half truths and misunderstandings, as well as pure BS.
You never did prove to me your belief, you just spoke alot of theories that can easily be proven wrong.
@MrGman8161 Use your common sense. Do you think the global intelligence powers failed this badly
YES!! The military is geared to EXTERNAL threats. Not internal one's. There is a reason Logan airport was chosen as the start point. Its 30 mins from Manhattan. When the hijackings occurred NORAD was not even alerted until about 20 mins in to it. The fighter pilots had no idea where the planes even were. When A 11 hit the WTC the fighter pilots were looking for them on radar still.
@MrGman8161 Dude. Its called visual flight rules. Why do you think it was a blazing sunny day that day? So the hijackers could fly visually. That means they don't have to use instruments. Logan airport is 30 minutes from Manhattan. A friend of mine with ZERO flight training took off and landed a 737 on a flight simulator. Every brain hijacker took and passed commercial flight training.
Pull your head out of your ignorant ass my friend.
@MrGman8161 Oh. ok. So you are willing to toss about 4 or 5 or more people who have already been interviewed on this under the train just so your little story has a leg to stand on?
Id call that being pretty damn stupid and ignorant. (Not a surprise)
@MrGman8161 Oh really? Care to explain the chain of VERIFIABLE witnesses who confirmed all of the hijackers on the planes? Starting from the customs agent who allowed them to board. To the on board flight crew who ID'd their seat numbers. Then down to ground ops at EACH airline who cross reffed this info to database booking info. They knew who the hijackers were while it was in progress. every single one of these people have been interviewed about it.
@STFU1238 All you need to do is look at it. There are sections of the exterior wall (Especially visible with the North tower). That are basically floating through the air. You can see them clearly. They are absolutely free falling. But they are BELOW the rest of the structure that is collapsing. Which is like 5 or 10 stories above that. Its not possible to have material in the air and the building still above that. There are two different speeds happening here.
@STFU1238 Well considering the failure point of the South tower is about floor 78 that cuts out quite a bit of your.."1400 foot tower" now don't it? And it doesn't fall at free fall speed. The material being ejected is most definitely falling at free fall. The collapsing building inside all that dust is falling much slower.
The floors? They are being converted to powder. 4 inches of concrete VS 31 stories falling on it?
@STFU1238 You might also like to notice that this building has a rotational fulcrum which is exactly the back point of the building opposite the plane impact area. This point is not descending initially. It is rotating around a point. The failure point is exactly where the plane hit it. This rotates the upper 31 stories down on to the floors and also INSIDE the exterior columns. We now have some 180,000 tons IN MOTION on a floor rated for to carry 1500 tons
@azar783402 I'm just answering your questions. Why ask them if you don't want an answer?
Also learn what a troll is. A troll is someone who posts in order to get an emotional response from others, which I am not trying to do. You just appear to have a short fuse.
@azar783402 So you have suddenly moved from 9/11 CD to NWO? I suppose you are one of those people that believe Illuminati, a European organization from the 1700's for free thinkers and philosophers who were against the Roman Catholic Church, suddenly reside in modern day America and control everything? Probably, it wouldn't suprise me if you do. But whatever, are you going to stick to the subject or are you going to go completely off track again?
What are you talking about now? Thermite can produce what?
As for tower 7, it WAS hit by derbis and large perimeter columns, as well as bad fires. Described by fire fighters as Tremendous. Since Building 7 was built like WTC1/2 (Steel pieces put together) it fell in a similar fashion.
There is no credible evidence that it was CD, didn't free fall, large debris radius, no evidence of explosives, nothing.
@azar783402 Of course, trolling. Of course I don't see how, I think you need to learn the definition of a troll and don't over-use the phrase on people who don't agree with your belief.
@azar783402 Nuclear weapons were used? Now this is getting ridiculous. I think I do not need to bother proving that wrong because common sense can disprove it alone.
And again, what makes you think I believe everything the media says? I did the research for myself and found out that the evidence leads to one story, the offical story. Unlike the hypothesis of an inside job, supported only by half truths and misunderstandings.
@azar783402 Hey that's great. But it doesn't exactly prove 9/11 was an inside job. You have yet again just changed the conversation from the tower collapse to an irrelevant paragraph that has no effect on the conversation we have just been having.
Are you going to stick with the main subject or are you just going to write something that is completely irrelevant everytime you have nothing else to say?
@azar783402 That is because it focused only on the events that lead to the collapse, it didn't bother about the structual conditions after that collapse. But why should it? Every paper which passed peer review by respected scientific journals on the collapse of the towers calculates the massive weight of the top sections would crush the buildings as seen.
@azar783402 If you're going to get information from a website at least put it into your own words rather than just copying and pasting it.
When the floors of the tower began to pancake, the immense weight basically crushed what was underneath and the concrete floors smashed into pieces. Hence why the white smoke.
As for the bit about the smoke rising, what are you trying to say exactly? Because we all know smoke rises and is blown in the wind.
@azar783402 Well I'm afraid that is only his word, it doesn't exactly prove anything does it? And it's not like he is someone to be trusted as reliable for information. He's not exactly good mates with America, so it's hardly shocking.
@MrGman8161 He denied it at first, but you fail to mention when he eventually did take credit for the attacks. There is masses of evidence that point him as the suspect, including video footage of him talking about the attack.
debunking911.co m/osama.htm (I think you know now to remove the space in the links)
@azar783402 Pay close attention to his quote. He says it LOOKED LIKE a bomb went off, he was just describing the scene. What actually happened was the jet fuel made its way down the elevator shafts and burst out in the lobby as witnesses said. Do a bit of research and you will find out these things have been explained.
@azar783402 Like I said, explosions don't always mean bombs. More probable explanations are floors collapsing, transoformers, electrical equipment, bodies falling, steel bolts snapping etc Besides if it was a CD, these explosions would of gone off one after an other very rapidly, and would of been heard blocks away. Look at a real controlled demolition and listen to how loud the detonations are. Alot louder than anything heard on that day and go off rapidly in succession, not one every so often.
Clearly I am arguing with an idiot who is just going to keep on repeating the same things which I have already explained COUNTLESS times, while at the same time blaming I have been brainwashed by the media despite the fact I do not use them as a source of information.
But, you can continue believing such nonsense claims about inside jobs, despite lack of credibal evidence (half truths/misunderstanding do not count as evidence I am afraid).
@azar783402 The site of the towers say otherwise. If the building collapsed into its own footprint, there would not be such a large radius of debris about 3-5 blocks in diameter.
Well documented facts show they were destroyed by explosives? Well the only thing you have shown in your arguments and mis-understandings and half truths as well as just plain old BS.
I do not believe everything the media tells me. How is that a solid argument? I don't even get my information from the media.
I cannot believe your idiocy. Are you so arrogant that you completely ignore my comments? I think it is you who is trolling now. Like I said in my previous comments, which you should of just read. Bomb sniffing dogs were NOT removed, one even died in the collapse.
I am not sure if you are stupid or you are just trolling. But I guess that you are a fine example of the stupidity in the ‘’truth’’ movement.
@azar783402 I'm afraid you are getting information mixed up again with truth and BS. Thermite was not found, it was Suplhur which was found. Sulphur from the thousands of burning plastic computers and even rubber. I can't stress that enough, you are just making me repeat myself now.
The towers did NOT free fall, they fell in about 15-20 seconds. That is not free fall speed. If you watch the collapse, you can clearly see the debris which IS free falling, is falling faster than the main tower.
One of the dogs, name been Sirius, died in the collapse of Tower 2, after been locked in the basement levels while the dogs partner, David Lim, helped with the rescue effort. He did not return to Sirius in time.
@MrGman8161 The last quote makes no sense. Anyone who suspects Building 7 was brought down using explosives means explosives were used? Is that what he was saying? It makes no sense, I don't think explosives were used, therefore I have come to the conclusion that no explosives were used.
Neither one of us were at the site, but fire and rescue workers were, they knew the true condition of the building. Even they could see it wasn't going to stand for long, and who would know better than them?
@azar783402 I guess you just ignored my last comment? Like I said, bomb sniffing dogs were not removed, they were at their usual posts at the basement level.
And like I said again, explosions don't always mean bombs. There are more probable explanations.
debunking911.co m/explosions.htm (Remove space)
I haven't looked into the OKC bombing, but your belief that is was also an inside job is an open window to your paranoia.
@MrGman8161 Yes, but it was hit by perimeter columns from WTC1 collapse. Fires that were described as tremendous by fire fighters. There is a reason they pulled from the area, because they could see the unstable condition the building was in, and they know more about building collapses than you or I.
They were never in the building so they could not of been ordered out of it.
debunking911.co m/moltensteel.htm (As usual, remove the space in the Com)
@azar783402 Removal of Bomb sniffing dogs? There was never any removal of bomb sniffing dogs. They were at there regular posts down at the entrance to the basement car parks. They were at a fixed post and did not wander the building.
Also you claim the firemen heard bombs, what they heard were explosions, but of course explosions do not always mean a bomb do they?
More plausible explanations are steel bolts snapping under pressure, debris falling outside, electrical equipment, transformers etc
htt p://i.imgur.co m/1EBCt.jpg (Remove the spaces)
Look at that photo of the site after the collapse, notice how widespread the debris is. Controlled demolitions will not create a debris field so large in diameter.
Also I don't suppose you watched that video I sent you before? You could clearly see a portiong of the tower still standing for a short time after the rest of the building collapse. A CD demolition would not leave part of the building standing.
@chaosproduction The twin Towers were hit designed to take the 707. The 767 plane used , isn't that bigger. Never in history has a steel building ever collapsed due to fires. On 911, World Trade Center 1, 2 and 7 did. In World Trade Center 7, thousands of papers related to wall street corruption, and stocks, vanished forever.
@puppetmaster195 Yes but it did survive the impact didn't it? The tests that were done never took into account the initial damage and fires aka the disorting or steel columns due to fire and heat of the sagging floors or the failing trusses.
Leslie Robertson, lead structural engineer for WTC believed the towers performed better than expected. Standing long enough for countless people to escape.
I can't stess enough, fires just played a small role in the collapse, don't underestimate the cause.
@chaosproduction Do you actually believe that the Once Worlds Tallest Buildings could actually survive less than 2 hours of fire, the impact of a plane? I fail to believe that. Azar is right. Two days before 911, there was the removal of bomb sniffing dogs, cameras turned off, and doors were left open. This occured at the top 50 floors of the South Tower. Who was in charge of all this? Bush's brother
@puppetmaster195 Like I said to Azar, bomb sniffing dogs were never removed. They were at their usual posts at the entrance to the basements. I don't know where that story came from.
Well learn the physics and how the collapse occured, then yes it will become believable. Like Leslie Robertson, who was the lead structural engineer of the Towers, they performed BETTER than expected. It was the COMBINATION of fire and damages that caused collapse. They were not invincible.
That is not how fire fighters described the fires. The fires were described by Richard Banaciski as tremendous. There is a reason why they were pulled from the area, they know more about building collapses more than you or me and from the condition the building was in, they knew it wasn't going to last.
I suppose the fire and rescue teams were just part of the cover up too weren't they? 300 brothers lost and no motive, but they lied? No they did not.
I have said this before, if we kept the steel to investigate it would have taken years and cost the country millions. And why bother? The only people wanting an investigation were the paranoid like yourself. Everyone else was more concerned about investigating how Al Queda pulled off the attacks.
@MrGman8161 Free Fall speed? The towers did not fall at free fall speed. WTC 1 and 2 collapsed in about 15-20 seconds, free fall speed is 9 seconds. Also just watch the debris fall, it is clearly ahead of the main tower, more proof the main tower did not free fall. WTC 7 is mistaken to have falling in 7 seconds, that was just the North Side however, the South side began to collapse well before, the total time for WTC7 to collapse was about 15-18 seconds.
@azar783402 Look up a real controlled demolition, you will notice it is completely different to the WTC Collapse. First of all is the noticable loudness of the explosions, nothing on that magnitude would of been heard. The second is how the explosives go off straight after one another, nothing like that was heard.
Fires do these things, they expand and distort the columns until the point they can no longer hold the weight above. There is nothing unusual about that.
Watch that video of the collapse of the tower. At around 40 seconds you can see through the smoke a portion of the building still remains, standing very tall before it collapses. More proof that the collapse was not controlled demolition.
@chaosproduction The Entire 911 story is bullshit man. The Twin Towers, in my opinion, were not taken down by planes. World Trade Center 7 was obviously a controlled demoltion. World Trade Center 1, and 2 , turned to dust. Explosions were heard at floors 20-30. Far below the impact zones. Firemen also new that secondary devices were in the towers. It's pretty obvious that 911 was planned
htt p://i.imgur.co m/1EBCt.jpg (Remove the spaces)
Look at that photo of the site after the collapse, notice how widespread the debris is. Controlled demolitions will not create a debris field so large in diameter.
Also I don't suppose you watched that video I sent you before? You could clearly see a portiong of the tower still standing for a short time after the rest of the building collapse. A CD demolition would not leave part of the building standing.
@MrGman8161 Hey what irony, MrGman complaing that I am repeating myself.
I assume you are talking about the supposed thermite found in the dust? From what I know it was Alex Jones who created that story.
In fact it was actually Sulphur that was found in the dust. Sulphur more than likely from the thousands of burned plastic computers and rubber items etc.
The amount of Thermite that would be required to take down two 110 storey buildings is enough to render that hypothesis nonsense.
But of course you can always accuse it all as lies (An easy thing to do) but it just sounds like an excuse. The evidence is not on your side, all that you have to support your argument with is mis-understood information, quotes taking out of context and mis-leading information.
@azar783402 And invisible explosives which seem to be quieter than ones of a real controlled demolition can?
The WTC was built to withstand the impact of a Boeing 707, it was a 767 that hit. Not much difference between the 2 aircraft, but it doesn't matter, because the towers did survive the initial impact. Like I keep repeating, it was the COMBINATION of many things that caused the collapse, damage, failing trusses, sagging floors, fires missing columns. You are still underestimating the cause
@MrGman8161 There was no automated method for the FAA to contact NORAD until after 9/11. Another thing is NORAD interceptions were only limited to offshore ADIZ, there was no Domestic ADIZ until after 9/11. It was not until after the attacks that the FAA and NORAD increased cooperation, including setting up hotlines and NORAD increasing their fighter coverage.
The only other story of a hijacked passanger plane in America was in the 90's. Which took them 1 hour 20 minutes to intercept.
@azar783402 You are again only half right. The weakened trussed caused the floors to sag, which in turn caused the weak perimeter columns to bow inwards, this meant the weight above was no long stable and tilted putting it all onto one side, bending the core columns and eventually giving way, this then caused a pancake effect with the rest of the floors. Remember the pancaking was a result of the collapse, not the cause. Read it in more depth here.
@azar783402 Why do you always underestimate the cause of the collapse? Like I keep saying, fire was only one role in the collapse of the towers. Combination of the fire, missing columns, weakened columns, heat expanded the trusses which also expanded the columns causing them and the floors to sag and do you also forget a plane had smashed into the tower causing a giant hole?
When you speak only half truths, the story isn't going to make sense obviously. Don't underestimate the causes and damage
@azar783402 Why did you just copy and paste MrGmans comment? Can't think of your own argument now?
I suppose if what you are saying is true (although the lack of evidence suggests otherwise) what are all those soilders fighting over there in the Middle East? Actors I suppose? What about those Navy Seals? Also actors with no motive to lie? It's easy to condemn something as lies, but harder to prove it, which you haven't.
@chaosproduction your carrying on like this is your job, are you what is known as a 'troll'? i'll tell you who our soldiers were fighting for, the elite, who want to secure oil supplies to be sold in dollars, to continue subsidizing your greedy economy, they don't care if there are cleaner alternatives to burning fossil fuels, all they care about is $ and power, they are scum, do you work for the filthy rich scum or are you just a normal human being like everyone else?
@MrOllie86 No I am just replying to someone trying to knock some sense into him. I am not sure how that makes me a troll? Learn the definition of a troll.
And what you just mentioned there is a completely un-related topic from what I am talking about with Azar. So I would be wasting my time starting to talking about war for oil.
@azar783402 Again, you have just repeated another comment. And don't speak such hypocrisies, aren't you also replying to my comments, despite thinking I am an idiot? I've also witnessed you across many videos typing in capitals and screaming abuse at people. What does that say about your life?
Now about Fema Appendix C.
911myths.c om/Sulfur.pdf
Check out that article (Remove the space) it explains the cause of the corrosion of the steel.
@azar783402 Hey nice paragraph. I was however, expecting you to combat my argument and further try and defend your hypothesis with whatever ''evidence'' you can find.
Instead you write that? Looks like you're running out of sound arguments that haven't been disproved as mis-understandings of simply just nonsense..
@azar783402 Blindly follow? Ha not really. I have done much research to realise this inside job hypothesis is nonsense.
You have asked alot of questions that have already been answered, your paranoia makes you refuse to accept the answers. Now you have to resorted to the old 'you have been brainwashed and you are a sheep' excuse.
Actually, they did not find residues of thermite. I believe it was Alex Jones who said that? Yeah he's fun when he draws lines around the truth like a childs drawing.
What was found was Sulphur, more than likely from the hundreds of burned plastic computers and even vulcanised rubber.
There was enough fire there to expand the steel and weaken it, it wasn't erosion. Don't forget the other causes of the collapse to, failing trusses, missing columns, sagging floors etc.
It is visually obvious how towers came down due to compromise of failed structural integrity. In the video "9/11: North Tower "collapse" (Sauret)" (Just COPY-PASTE'-WATCH please.) it is even possible to see how the floors start to collapse first and take down the remaining support columns on the outside. There is no demolition, no bombs going off what so ever. In democracies the leaders do not make plans including the massacre of it' s own citizens.
Such an obvious visual (Not scientific, no therotical, pure visual!) evidence that the towers came down due to structural failure. Also obviously seen in the video: "9/11: North Tower "collapse" (Sauret)" (just COPY/PASTE'n WATCH!). These comment was meant for the other video however the comments were not allowed in that one. (Probably due to the ongoing paranoid-conspiracy insanity.) I believe the people who favor conspiracy theories on this one are more destructive than Al-Qaeda itself.
would it been better if there no airplanes, but instead bombes inside both wtc towers? and bomb in pentagon? and of course the Oklahoma City bombing on this date instead of April 19? And that Timothy James Mcveigh And Terry Nichols after detonating the bombs in the tower's, went to Liberty Island and started to shoot people? please reply thanks :)
@azar783402 In every scientific experiment there is always things that go un-explained, it is normal. Be thankful of how much has actually been explained and proven. Enough to render the official story the truth.
It's just paranoia thinking there is some sort of ''goverment cover up''.
All these explosions have been explained, sounds of explosions have been either electrical equipment, floor slabs crashing into each other, debris falling etc. Just research and find the answers have been giving
@azar783402 No, but I used to be. I used to think something wasn't right about these attacks, but I actually did more in depth research and found out there wasn't any big goverment conspiracy or inside job. It was all nonsense.
@azar783402 Right your comment isn't appearing, but about the FEMA report.
I shall send you a link to a very interesting article explaining the molten metal found at the site.
Also, after seeing your comments on other videos of you typing in caps and screaming abusive at people, I am not sure whether or not to take you seriously.
@azar783402 (Contiued Quote) Steel bridge girders are bent to conform to the curved roadway by spot heating flanges between 800 and 1000 degrees Fahrenheit. It is easy to comprehend the loss of carrying capacity of all the structural steel due to the raging fires fed by the jet's fuel as well as aircraft and building contents.
Quickly copied quote (I'm in a rush atm) from D. Allan Firmage, Professor Emeritus, Civil Engineering, BYU.
When the aircraft impacted the towers at speeds of about 500 plus mph, many steel columns were immediately severed and others rendered weak by the following fires. The fires critically damaged the floors systems. Structural steel will begin to lose strength when heated to temperatures above 1000 degrees Fahrenheit.
Thermite is more fallacy. Are you aware how much thermite it would take to collapse two 110 storey towers? Alot, believe me. It takes about 5 pounds of the stuff just to burn a small hole in an aluminium car engine, never mind core steel columns 110 storeys high.
As for the passport, I don't know what your getting at but it isn't impossible for items to survive crashes. There was many items that survived, photos, cards etc. It's hardly anything un-usual.
@azar783402 For the last time, fire didn't melt the steel, it weakened the supporting columns and trusses. These structures which also had a fire, were they built like WTC 1, 2 and 7? Were they hit by jets/large perimeter columns? Did they have large holes in the side, several missing floors and core columns? Immense weight supported only by weakened and many missing columns? No I don't believe they did, so it is fallacious to even compare them to this scenario.
@azar783402 First, explain what you are on about when you mentioned something about material.
Second, the hypothesis of the fire metling steel is old. It didn't melt it, it weakened the steel and the trusses.
If you mean the molten metal that was found, that has already been explained.
If you want I can send you a link to my source that explains scientifically the molten metal. Youtube won't allow me to post links in comments and there is too much to explain, so it will be easier.
@azar783402 Fire is always going to have an effect on steel, it is going to expand and weaken it. There was enough fire to do so. The trusses, which expanded and then cooled, pulling the weakened columns in, causing the collapse. The lack of fire-proofing on the trusses and many columns is why it took only an hour for this to happen. There is also the loss of core columns due to the impact that aided the collapse. Rather than the assembly of the tower failing, it was the components.
@azar783402 This was not the cause of the collapse. The weakened columns around the impact zone bowed due to the weight above, and the sagging floors pulling them in, tilting the tower above and putting the weight on one side and the columns were deformed. They gave way. You can see this in the video above.
The pancaking of the floors was a result of this, not the actual cause of the collapse.
Also all 3 towers had similar damage. All 3 buildings had fire, all 3 buildings had weakened columns because of fire, all 3 buildings were tall and had immense weight supported only by these weakened columns, and all 3 buildings had large holes in the side of the building.
None of these buildings fell at free fall speed, (WTC1 15-20 sec, WTC2 15-20 sec, WTC 7 15-18 sec) which also renders controlled demolition claims im-probable and fallacious.
@azar783402 If you do abit more research you will find out that there is no ''violatiion of the laws of physics''.
All 3 buildings collapsed in a similar fashion because they were constructed in a similar way, steel pieces that were placed together, not one solid, re-inforced structure. A controlled demolition is impossible. There would of had to of been weeks of prep, including the removal of many interior walls and columns manualy and many wires rigging up explosives, none of which were seen.
@azar783402 Free fall speed is about 9 seconds, WTC 7 took about 18 seconds to collapse completely. With fires weakening the columns, a huge tear in the side caused by Perimeter columns from WTC1 and the weight above, collapse was inevitable.
WTC 7 was a constructed with pieces of steel put together, rather than a large solid, re-inforced block
I hate to say it but there is certain flashes that goes off up and down the building as the tower begins to collapse... The flashes are similar to the flashes spotted when the planes first hit the towers. Bombs or no bombs that can't be determined however those Flashes are undeniable & unidentifiable.
What happens when skyscraper begins to collapse like twin towers did? Floors fall on each other which causes massive pressure on each floor. Pressure caused flames to burst out and so it appeared as an explosion. Simple as that.
@UnderstandingAll Breaking windows. The glass reflects the sun as it tumbles to the earth, creating a quick reflection. As for the bombs? That's been determined. Barium Nitrate was absent at the site when multiple air samples were taken. Sulfur? It was 220 stories of drywall, you're going to have sulfur. Besides, you have to wire explosives. What you saw at the top was in the same area the plane would have disabled the wiring, therefore the bombs are dead. It's not hard science
to all the people that say demolition brought down these towers, explain to me why the building fell from the point of the planes entrance? theres no way the explosives would still have worked from that close to the fire they either would of exploded just after impact or just been destroyed
infinity7231 1 month ago 6
@infinity7231 perfect argument
dhahranksa 2 days ago
@dhahranksa i posted this a month ago and still nobody has tried to answer me lol
infinity7231 1 day ago
@infinity7231 why are we still in afghanistan if osamas ded
worldwide11000 2 hours ago
@worldwide11000 i wonder the same thing bro i dont know
infinity7231 2 hours ago
@azar783402 It's like one long, surreal comedy/drama with you lot.
chaosproduction 1 month ago
Hell !
JoseCleveland 1 month ago
When I died in 1990-1993, i went to ehll. It's in Bible Codes Software as the first event under my real name. HUD Buffalo or fbi should be able to verify 4 people.
JoseCleveland 1 month ago
@azar783402 Hey, I'm just answering the questions you ask me. I am confused that you are now accusing me of harassment, when I am just answering these questions that you keep claiming are going un-answered.
Start acting mature? I am acting as mature as possible, but I am not the one typing in capitals telling people to ''stfu nigga'' e.g. Hotters.
chaosproduction 1 month ago
@Hotters70603EX At high enough temperatures, molten aluminium can turn yellow. Also, when cooled molten steel turns black, as it fell and cooled it did not turn black, in fact it has a sort of silverish tint to it.
The more plausible explanation for the molten aluminium is simply friction from the impact.
chaosproduction 1 month ago
@Hotters70603EX This is audio of Kevin Cosgrove trapped on the 105th floor. He is all of about 220 feet from the impact areas. The recording picks up not only Kevin but his offices friends speaking NORMALLY. Not only do we not hear any explosions but Kevin doesn't even react to any.. "Bang...What was that?..etc). And he most certainly would given his alarmed state.
Its just quiet until the building drops out from below him.
watch?v=BEwY8uZ4BAI&feature=related
Hmm!!
roquefortfiles 1 month ago
@Hotters70603EX Nobody has ever said the steel melted. So i don't know why you keep referring to it? One column dripping... (ahem) "THERMITE" does not collapse the building. Nor would one blasted by explosives. So i don't know who you think you're fooling here? Except maybe YOU!!
roquefortfiles 1 month ago
@Hotters70603EX That was thermite!. It was was it? And you really think it dripping from ONE column is going to cause the building to collapse. You're pretty dumb.
And can we please decide? You guys all get together and reach some consensus on thermite OK..
Is it A. Back yard thermite like in Jonathon Coles videos? Spewing sparks and plasma in every direction for 30 feet and brighter than ultra violet. (Which it is)
Or is it some lame O sparks dripping sadly?
roquefortfiles 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Hotters70603EX Take a look at the molten metal dripping from the south tower just minutes before demolition and than come and talk to me!!
Off of one column? WOW. What a smoking gun (Not).
First you guys post all of these stupid Jonathon Cole Thermite videos with his ridiculous Wile Coyote terrorist contraptions. Back Yard thermite reactions with plasma brighter than a welding torch.
Then its some nice, drippy molten "Sparks" no where near Ultraviolet.
Please decide!
roquefortfiles 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Hotters70603EX A striking feature of the Twin Towers' destruction was the pulverization of most of the concrete into gravel and dust before it hit the ground
Yeah so!!.
What kind of resistance do you honestly think a 4 inch thick slab of concrete and an elevator bank of drywall is going to offer 31 stories? Its not even remotely a contest.
The floors don't carry vertical loads. They are HUNG between the columns
You don't seem to understand the design of the building
roquefortfiles 1 month ago
@Hotters70603EX Explosives turn buildings into dust so don't take me like I am stupid!!
Hey if the shoe fits!!. Thermite does not "Powderize" concrete. Singe it here and there but it doesn't turn it in to pyroclastic flows of talc.
Think about it dude. What produces a powdered form of something?
Grinding!!! Take a box of chalk (Pretty much the same as drywall) and put it in a 50 ton hydraulic press. Now compress it. Same thing going on at the WTC.
roquefortfiles 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Hotters70603EX you are stupid.
roquefortfiles 1 month ago
@Hotters70603EX So what? Thermite doesn't do this nor do explosives.
Any SANE person knows this.
roquefortfiles 1 month ago
@azar783402 The upper 31 stories rotates 25 degrees over and puts the load on the floors. The exterior columns fail. You can see it easily. There is no floor system going to hold 31 stories. Good luck.
And the building does not fall at free fall. That's a myth. It falls fast but not at free fall.
roquefortfiles 1 month ago
@Hotters70603EX I have never said that they don't turn to dust. But explosives don't convert concrete slab floors to talcum powder. That comes from huge massive grinding force. Not explosives. I really don't get why all you dudes have such a hard time understanding that. And thermite isn't going to do it either and you all know that already.
So what's left? Time to get a little more reasonable and RATIONAL?
How bout 31 stories being set free?
Hm?
roquefortfiles 1 month ago
@MrGman8161 These buildings collapsed and turned to dust before our very eyes and you don't call that a demolition?
NO. The structures would behave entirely differently with explosives. Call up a company and ask them. But you're not really interested in finding out truth are you? Same old bullshit
Explosives do not turn concrete to powder. Thermite doesn't either.
So what does that leave us with? If you're smart enough you can connect the dots yourself.
I'll leave that to you.
roquefortfiles 2 months ago
@azar783402 What is this re run week?
you sent me that one a week ago. Come on!! Write some new episodes.
roquefortfiles 2 months ago
look at this video and be honest with what you see happening. as the top section of the tower falls you can see floors collapsing well ahead. the leading edge of the collapse begins as the top part is just beginning to fall over. controlled demo
sdsvfgs9 2 months ago
@azar783402 hence the ability to install explosives?
No one because there isn't an explosive going off in any of the buildings.
Who had access to the types of nano-engineered explosives
They are not used for a controlled demolition.
why has its WTC team acted as though such materials don't exist?
Because they don't care about them they are not used in CD. One day you and all the rest of your idiot buddies will understand that.
Until then it will just be the same endless nonsense.
roquefortfiles 2 months ago
@azar783402 Who says its hard to understand? I have never had a hard time understanding any of this. And you people constantly want it both ways. First you say the building is blown up because steel is hurled half a block. The next minute you are saying its Thermite. An incendiary is incapable of hurling steel half a block. And any explosive able to do so and at the levels you guys purport to be there..
WOULD BE HEARD!!!!
Don't be an idiot.
roquefortfiles 2 months ago
@azar783402 The building collapses and fails at the impact floor of each crash zone. There is close up video of this event taking place. There is absolutely no sign of anything happening to the exterior columns other than bending, warping and eventual failure. Thermite produces plasma in the ultra violet spectrum. In fact brighter than a welders torch.
Would you care to point that out to me on any of the exterior columns.??
You're on crack if you think there is.
roquefortfiles 2 months ago
@Hotters70604sl Show me one video of the WTC's or B7 with this going on.
You keep screaming about CD. Well this is what it sounds like and there is no wiggling out and explaining this away. If it was a CD this kind of sound MUST occur.
Show me one video of the WTC or 7 like this. You won't
watch?v=SaBQ3AkRetI
roquefortfiles 2 months ago
@Hotters70604sl Explosives don't turn concrete to powder. Think about it dude!! If you put a cinder block like people have around your BBQ's beside a stick of dynamite what's it going to do to it? Blow it up for sure. Its going to fly in chunks all over. Put that same cinder block under a 50 ton hydraulic press and compress all the way. I guarantee you will end up with powder.
Same process going on at the WTC only on a far larger scale and much more weight.
roquefortfiles 2 months ago
@Hotters70604sl Everyone and their dog were entirely aware that 7 was coming down. You really need to read the firemen oral histories. If you were truly interested in TRUTH you would do these things. But you're not. You're interested in jerk off conspiracy crap fueled by all of you buddies sending you the same idiotic videos you all watch day after day. If you were TRULY interested in truth you would read the oral histories. Find out REAL facts.
But you're not!! are you?
roquefortfiles 2 months ago
@Hotters70604sl Watch this video. Pause it at the 06 second mark. See that thing falling toward you? That is the ENTIRE East exterior wall of the building. Being peeled off like a slice of cheese or a slab of roast beef at Sunday dinner. Its rotation point is about the 48th floor. Guess what is running its self down behind that like a giant knife slicing it off? The top 31 stories of the building. Examine this video closely. It tells allot!!
watch?v=LFy534VgOYw&feature=related
roquefortfiles 2 months ago
@Hotters70604sl Bin Laden refers to a book by Michael Scheuyer (Headed the Bin Laden unit at the CIA) in a video in 2005
roquefortfiles 2 months ago
@Hotters70604sl A whole lot more informed. Ignorance is stupidity!! Education is knowledge, insight.
roquefortfiles 2 months ago
@Hotters70604sl Too bad you don't have a better understanding of this topic.
What do you think is going to result when 31 stories rotates off of its columns (Which it did) and on to the floors. The floors are not engineered to carry a load like this. They provide tension and bracing to the columns but they don't carry the up and down load of the building.
They have load limit and its about 1500 tons. Now we will drop 180,000 tons in MOTION on it.
Its 120X over its Max load.
roquefortfiles 2 months ago
Comment removed
chaosproduction 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Hotters5562 ''Then ask yourself this question''
You say it as if what you just said correlates with my comment, which it does not.
It doesn't even make much sense, please learn to word your comments better.
chaosproduction 2 months ago
@azar783402 I know I am right. You know I am right. Anyone with COMMON SENSE would know this.
You're not a brain washed sheep. And nor am I. You're just really really uninformed.
You don't need disinfo agents. You just need to get better information and understand much more than you do.
roquefortfiles 2 months ago
@Hotters70604sl Wow!! incredible. The fact that 155 feet of aluminum just plowed in to the building and came to rest EXACTLY in that area had absolutely nothing to do with it!!! eh? What does your REAL LIVE PRACTICAL brain tell you?? It tells me that we see the remnants of the plane burning, or the exterior cladding of the building...
AND!!!
One molten stream of "STUFF" does not bring down a building. You're an idiot if you think so.
You're nonsense is never ending ain't it?
roquefortfiles 2 months ago
@Hotters5562 Who's the dumb fuck here? Yes they were designed for airplane impacts. But not at 560 MPH. Nor would they EVER be. Because no commercial plane would ever be flying that fast over Manhattan. It is illegal by the FAA. So why would any SE ever calculate a plane impacting that fast? They wouldn't. And the fuel load was never a consideration. Not because Les Robertson is an idiot or a shitty SE. Because NOTHING existed in 1968 to enable them to do that.
roquefortfiles 2 months ago
@Hotters5562 Bullshit. Robertson has said the 707 scenario was planned on a LANDING APPROACH!!! lost in the fog etc. There is no plane that would be doing 600 mph over Manhattan its illegal. So why would you plan for it? No commercial jet would be going that fast.
Unless it was hijacked by crazed suicidal terrorists. Not something on the radar scope in 1968.
roquefortfiles 2 months ago
@Hotters5562 No, two 300,000 IBS aircraft hitting at 500MPH. I mean who would believe that?
roquefortfiles 2 months ago
@Hotters5562 Oh I am sorry!! How rude and ignorant of me!!! and the precedent of a 767 smoking through 2 skyscrapers was when? You're the dumb one here studmuffin.
roquefortfiles 2 months ago
@Hotters5562 Hit it with a 767 at 560mph then come talk to me.
roquefortfiles 2 months ago
@MrGman8161 You think I am full of it? You think.. "This crazy fucking idiot knows nothing". I have experience with CD and so do these guys.
Listen to what this guy has to say. Read what is written as well. Learn a few things.
watch?v=MusSulcJwSk&feature=related
roquefortfiles 2 months ago
@roquefortfiles I wish you would give up with that bullshit. I seriously doubt that you have experince with Cd. If you did, you'd wake up and smell the coffee. Thermite was found explosions were heard. Wtf else do you want
puppetmaster195 2 months ago
@puppetmaster195 You contradict yourself.
''Thermite was found and explosions were heard''.
Thermite does not create an explosive sound, you have to choose between the two theories.
But besides that, they can both be explained.
The supposed thermite that was found was actually sulphur from burning plastic computers, and the sounds of explosions could of been anything, floors slamming into each other, transformers etc.
Most people assume any sudden loud noise is an explosion or bomb.
chaosproduction 2 months ago
@puppetmaster195 So which is it? Thermite or explosives? Richard Gage even employs this complete lack of logical thinking. Thermite does not hurl steel columns 500 feet. Explosives make one hell of allot of noise.
You can't have it both ways!!
roquefortfiles 2 months ago
@azar783402 These buildings fell in on the themselves and that right there is a demolition!! (No its a failure collapse) These buildings came straight down symmetrically and you know it!!
No. They were laid out for a block in every direction. And every floor below the failure point was entirely intact until the upper falling portion reached it. The pulverized material has no where to go but get ejected out of the way, out the side.
There is a big big difference.
roquefortfiles 2 months ago
@MrGman8161 SACRIFICED THE LIVES OF OVER 2000 AMERICAN SOLDIERS
I get a little sick and tired of this battle cry from the "TM" and implied notion that people who disagree with your nonsense theories are George Bush lovers and big evil unpatriotic scum bags. This "Discussion" here has ABSOLUTELY nothing to do with that.
So stop using the Unpatriotic card or the "YOU SUPPORT GEORGE BUSH AND HIS MURDERS" card. Or the.. "It was part of the official story" card.
Its a tired bore.
roquefortfiles 2 months ago
@MrGman8161 Wait wait wait. You are saying the American government was responsible for the attacks on Pearl Harbor? Well this gets better and better. It just goes to show how people like you suspect everything as a government conspiracy.
What makes me think they did not sacrifice 3000 total strangers? Lack of credible evidence.
(Half truths and misunderstandings do not count as evidence)
chaosproduction 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@chaosproduction (Half truths and misunderstandings do not count as evidence)
You can add sheer stupidity and lack of education to that as well.
roquefortfiles 2 months ago
@azar783402 What about the Fucking molten metal that was seen at ground zero weeks after the attacks? And what the molten metal seen pouring out of the South Tower just minutes before it collapse?
What about it? The buildings fail and collapse at the 90th and 78th floors. Not in the basements. There is no chemical in existence that continues to react and heat for 6 weeks. If there was we would solve the energy crisis. Great real dude.
The collapses look NOTHING like a CD.
roquefortfiles 2 months ago
@azar783402 Physical evidence you say?
I have modeled WTC's collapse on my 3d Computer Graphics program. Up to the point the building becomes overly obscured by the dust. There is a great deal one can discern from what is taking place here. The floors below about 78 are sheered off from the exterior wall at the onset of collapse. The exterior wall is peeled off like a slab of roast beef. Its rotation point is about floor 48. The floors are VERY MUCH being removed rapidly.
roquefortfiles 2 months ago
@MrGman8161 I think you are going off track again. We are talking about 9/11, not Pearl Harbor...
That isn't evidence supporting your Hypothesis, it is just an irrelevant paragraph about what you believe happened.
chaosproduction 2 months ago
@azar783402 but it was only the upper floors that were damaged and not the rest of the building
Go back to school and learn a few things.
You have NO common sense
roquefortfiles 2 months ago
@Hotters70603XL BTW. The video you posted for me to watch?
If this is your level of research and knowledge you're scraping the bottom of the barrel. I have seen videos produced by this company before. Same chick doing the narration. They a laughably inaccurate.
And once again. The building collapse at the impact floors. They don't collapse in the basements.
Stay on target and on message. Otherwise you're just pulling shit out of thin air.
Like most of you goofs do!!
roquefortfiles 2 months ago
@Hotters70603XL There is no chemical in existence that reacts for 6 weeks at a time. So of what consequence is this "MOLTEN" metal? And nobody ever tested this stuff or established a chain of command for it. So who the fuck KNOWS its "METAL?" a more logical explanation is simply Aluminum which melts at a VERY low temperature and which the ENTIRE exterior skin of the WTC was comprised of. Lightweight aluminum.
The buildings collapse on the impact floors anyway. NOT THE BASEMENTS
roquefortfiles 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@azar783402 I know what a demolition looks like. I know what is involved in a demolition. I know what it does to a building. I have first hand experience in this department.
These buildings were laid out for a block in every direction.
That's some pretty lousy CD techs they got for that job let me tell you!!
You just cant get good help these days!!
roquefortfiles 2 months ago
Comment removed
roquefortfiles 2 months ago
@MrGman8161 I am not American and I am not a George Bush lover. That is the mistake you guys all make here in thinking that anyone who opposes this nonsense conspiracy crap is some kind of GWB lover. It is not the case.
the official story told by the media is a mountain of outright lies.
Such as what? I am still waiting. Don't talk the talk dude.
Examples. Points.. Facts!! Or moreover what you THINK those are.
roquefortfiles 2 months ago
@MrGman8161 discrepancies of flights 11 & 77
And what would those be??
The problem with most of the "TM" is that too many people have no idea what they are talking about or no understanding of aircraft and aviation.
And the amount of "CREDIBLE" people that need to be tossed under the back wheels of the bus in order for these stories to have validity is not RATIONAL or logical.
Up till now i have not had a discussion with ONE "Truther" who does NOT do this
Simply ridiculous.
roquefortfiles 2 months ago
@MrGman8161 Still aiming for this media brainwashed excuse? Well I guess I can't convince you on the fact that my sources are not the media or the government. I'm not even American.
I don't do research for myself? Wow are you serious? That is just what I have been trying to tell you in the past dozen comments. I am having thoughts that it is you who is trolling now.
I have looked at your so called ''facts'' but they are not facts, they are just half truths and mis-understandings, as well as BS
chaosproduction 2 months ago
@MrGman8161 Oh ok. So the airport security guy? He's lying is he? The transmissions from the plane to the ground identifying the hijackers seats corroborated by each airlines ground operations (All of them have been interviewed on this subject btw)... They're all lying are they?
I just think guys like you are stupid and dumb. You are willing to throw a hell of allot of people under the bus just so your beliefs have something to stand on.
That you don't see this simply amazes me.
roquefortfiles 2 months ago
@azar783402 the footage clearly shows building 7 was a controlled demolition.
Umm Dude? There was a team of Controlled Demolition techs already at B7. They watched it come down. You don't need to be Stephen Hawking to understand the implications of what that means. Unless you're an idiot.
And yes I am smarter. Much smarter. And far more informed.
roquefortfiles 2 months ago
@MrGman8161 What truth? your version of the continued, ill informed ramblings of this endless conspiracy nonsense? If any of you people stop and REALLY examine the stuff you talk about and take these things to logical conclusions this material implodes all on its own. But you don't. You just keep spouting the same nonsense over and over.... "CONSPIRACY.. CONSPIRACY ...INSIDE JOB".. What is the start point for this stuff? If the hijackers are ON the planes..
Its starts? WHERE?
roquefortfiles 2 months ago
@MrGman8161 Oh go on. Mess around with him!!
Everybody doing the mess around.
No. there is respect when there is intelligence. There is very little of that displayed with the whole "TM". When intelligence starts entering in to the posts....
Then the respect comes. Until then..
roquefortfiles 2 months ago
@MrGman8161 I guess you are threatening me. And there is me thinking I am having a mature discussion.
It's got nothing to do with dis-respecting, it's just trying to get rid of ignorance.
Now, are we going to discuss the actual subject at hand or are you just going to keep trying to threaten me like some pre-pubescent with a keyboard?
chaosproduction 2 months ago
@MrGman8161 Oswald did not kill Kennedy.
I watched a Doc on the secret service men assigned to Kennedy that day. One of them who was posted at the back of the Limo said. "I am a country boy, i grew up around rifles. I know what they sound like. Every single shot came from behind me and above me".
roquefortfiles 2 months ago
@MrGman8161 Take a statistics course my friend. One event does not CAUSE another. The Kennedy Assn has NOTHING to do with Sept 11th. So stop trying to make connections where none exist. I get a little tired of all you conspiracy freaks trying to link up every damn event in world history like there is some grand design to it all. Don't be ridiculous.
roquefortfiles 2 months ago
@MrGman8161 If you got the hijackers on the planes (and that is verifiable on multiple levels) THEY are in control of things. The next stop is the WTC.
WHERE?? in that equation does George Bush fit? He's in coach pushing the drink cart?
He's in the airport lounge at the sports bar?
Sorry, i don't see the involvement.
roquefortfiles 2 months ago
@MrGman8161 I better watch what I am saying to you? Are you threatening me over the internet? Well at least we know you are mature about things.
And why assume where my sources are from? There is alot more providers of information than just the media and the government. You have got to learn that.
And sorry to say, I have not ignored you, I have looked at your argument but discovered it to be wrong and possible for it to be disproven.
chaosproduction 2 months ago
@MrGman8161 You are an idiot. Why do you always assume I have gotten my information from the media? News for you, I haven't. I have done the research and discovered that these arguments about an inside job are supported only by half truths and misunderstandings, as well as pure BS.
You never did prove to me your belief, you just spoke alot of theories that can easily be proven wrong.
chaosproduction 2 months ago
@MrGman8161 Use your common sense. Do you think the global intelligence powers failed this badly
YES!! The military is geared to EXTERNAL threats. Not internal one's. There is a reason Logan airport was chosen as the start point. Its 30 mins from Manhattan. When the hijackings occurred NORAD was not even alerted until about 20 mins in to it. The fighter pilots had no idea where the planes even were. When A 11 hit the WTC the fighter pilots were looking for them on radar still.
roquefortfiles 2 months ago
@MrGman8161 Dude. Its called visual flight rules. Why do you think it was a blazing sunny day that day? So the hijackers could fly visually. That means they don't have to use instruments. Logan airport is 30 minutes from Manhattan. A friend of mine with ZERO flight training took off and landed a 737 on a flight simulator. Every brain hijacker took and passed commercial flight training.
Pull your head out of your ignorant ass my friend.
roquefortfiles 2 months ago
@MrGman8161 Oh. ok. So you are willing to toss about 4 or 5 or more people who have already been interviewed on this under the train just so your little story has a leg to stand on?
Id call that being pretty damn stupid and ignorant. (Not a surprise)
What do i think you are stupid or something?
Hey man if the shoe fits.
roquefortfiles 2 months ago
@STFU1238 I just did. Look it up. Every single one of these people i mentioned have been interviewed. (I've seen it and its likely on YT somewhere).
So if you want to make statements like you did you need to be hurling a hell of allot of people under the bus.
I get a little tired of the whole inside job crap as you can probably tell.
roquefortfiles 2 months ago
@MrGman8161 Oh really? Care to explain the chain of VERIFIABLE witnesses who confirmed all of the hijackers on the planes? Starting from the customs agent who allowed them to board. To the on board flight crew who ID'd their seat numbers. Then down to ground ops at EACH airline who cross reffed this info to database booking info. They knew who the hijackers were while it was in progress. every single one of these people have been interviewed about it.
What the fuck is wrong with U
roquefortfiles 2 months ago
@azar783402 Little problem with that. Nobody found anything.
roquefortfiles 2 months ago
@STFU1238 All you need to do is look at it. There are sections of the exterior wall (Especially visible with the North tower). That are basically floating through the air. You can see them clearly. They are absolutely free falling. But they are BELOW the rest of the structure that is collapsing. Which is like 5 or 10 stories above that. Its not possible to have material in the air and the building still above that. There are two different speeds happening here.
roquefortfiles 2 months ago
@STFU1238 Well considering the failure point of the South tower is about floor 78 that cuts out quite a bit of your.."1400 foot tower" now don't it? And it doesn't fall at free fall speed. The material being ejected is most definitely falling at free fall. The collapsing building inside all that dust is falling much slower.
The floors? They are being converted to powder. 4 inches of concrete VS 31 stories falling on it?
Not even a contest.
roquefortfiles 2 months ago
@STFU1238 Two days before 911, a power down occured in this tower, all cameras off, dogs doors left opened.
Plenty of time to rig up an entire floor of explosives i guess you're going to say. Completely ridiculous.
So nice of our hijacker pilot to manage to hit the exact floor the explosives are on. (Wow what are the chances?!!).
And so nice of the hijackers to not dislodge or damage any of those explosives with a 767 doing 560MPH. That takes out 4 floors.
Give your head shake
roquefortfiles 2 months ago
@STFU1238 You might also like to notice that this building has a rotational fulcrum which is exactly the back point of the building opposite the plane impact area. This point is not descending initially. It is rotating around a point. The failure point is exactly where the plane hit it. This rotates the upper 31 stories down on to the floors and also INSIDE the exterior columns. We now have some 180,000 tons IN MOTION on a floor rated for to carry 1500 tons
Do the math!!
roquefortfiles 2 months ago
@STFU1238 I have inboxed you to avoid the character limit and the ability to post useful links to you.
chaosproduction 2 months ago
@azar783402 I'm just answering your questions. Why ask them if you don't want an answer?
Also learn what a troll is. A troll is someone who posts in order to get an emotional response from others, which I am not trying to do. You just appear to have a short fuse.
chaosproduction 2 months ago
@azar783402 So you have suddenly moved from 9/11 CD to NWO? I suppose you are one of those people that believe Illuminati, a European organization from the 1700's for free thinkers and philosophers who were against the Roman Catholic Church, suddenly reside in modern day America and control everything? Probably, it wouldn't suprise me if you do. But whatever, are you going to stick to the subject or are you going to go completely off track again?
chaosproduction 2 months ago
@azar783402 ''What can produce it, Thermite!!!''
What are you talking about now? Thermite can produce what?
As for tower 7, it WAS hit by derbis and large perimeter columns, as well as bad fires. Described by fire fighters as Tremendous. Since Building 7 was built like WTC1/2 (Steel pieces put together) it fell in a similar fashion.
There is no credible evidence that it was CD, didn't free fall, large debris radius, no evidence of explosives, nothing.
chaosproduction 2 months ago
@azar783402
(Continued)
And have you really just gone and asked for help from someone on youtube?
chaosproduction 2 months ago
@azar783402 Of course, trolling. Of course I don't see how, I think you need to learn the definition of a troll and don't over-use the phrase on people who don't agree with your belief.
chaosproduction 2 months ago
@azar783402 Nuclear weapons were used? Now this is getting ridiculous. I think I do not need to bother proving that wrong because common sense can disprove it alone.
And again, what makes you think I believe everything the media says? I did the research for myself and found out that the evidence leads to one story, the offical story. Unlike the hypothesis of an inside job, supported only by half truths and misunderstandings.
chaosproduction 2 months ago
@azar783402 Hey that's great. But it doesn't exactly prove 9/11 was an inside job. You have yet again just changed the conversation from the tower collapse to an irrelevant paragraph that has no effect on the conversation we have just been having.
Are you going to stick with the main subject or are you just going to write something that is completely irrelevant everytime you have nothing else to say?
chaosproduction 2 months ago
@azar783402 That is because it focused only on the events that lead to the collapse, it didn't bother about the structual conditions after that collapse. But why should it? Every paper which passed peer review by respected scientific journals on the collapse of the towers calculates the massive weight of the top sections would crush the buildings as seen.
chaosproduction 2 months ago
@azar783402 If you're going to get information from a website at least put it into your own words rather than just copying and pasting it.
When the floors of the tower began to pancake, the immense weight basically crushed what was underneath and the concrete floors smashed into pieces. Hence why the white smoke.
As for the bit about the smoke rising, what are you trying to say exactly? Because we all know smoke rises and is blown in the wind.
chaosproduction 2 months ago
@azar783402 Well I'm afraid that is only his word, it doesn't exactly prove anything does it? And it's not like he is someone to be trusted as reliable for information. He's not exactly good mates with America, so it's hardly shocking.
chaosproduction 2 months ago
@MrGman8161 He denied it at first, but you fail to mention when he eventually did take credit for the attacks. There is masses of evidence that point him as the suspect, including video footage of him talking about the attack.
debunking911.co m/osama.htm (I think you know now to remove the space in the links)
chaosproduction 2 months ago
@azar783402 Pay close attention to his quote. He says it LOOKED LIKE a bomb went off, he was just describing the scene. What actually happened was the jet fuel made its way down the elevator shafts and burst out in the lobby as witnesses said. Do a bit of research and you will find out these things have been explained.
chaosproduction 2 months ago
@azar783402 Like I said, explosions don't always mean bombs. More probable explanations are floors collapsing, transoformers, electrical equipment, bodies falling, steel bolts snapping etc Besides if it was a CD, these explosions would of gone off one after an other very rapidly, and would of been heard blocks away. Look at a real controlled demolition and listen to how loud the detonations are. Alot louder than anything heard on that day and go off rapidly in succession, not one every so often.
chaosproduction 2 months ago
@azar783402
(Continued)
Clearly I am arguing with an idiot who is just going to keep on repeating the same things which I have already explained COUNTLESS times, while at the same time blaming I have been brainwashed by the media despite the fact I do not use them as a source of information.
But, you can continue believing such nonsense claims about inside jobs, despite lack of credibal evidence (half truths/misunderstanding do not count as evidence I am afraid).
chaosproduction 2 months ago
@azar783402 The site of the towers say otherwise. If the building collapsed into its own footprint, there would not be such a large radius of debris about 3-5 blocks in diameter.
Well documented facts show they were destroyed by explosives? Well the only thing you have shown in your arguments and mis-understandings and half truths as well as just plain old BS.
I do not believe everything the media tells me. How is that a solid argument? I don't even get my information from the media.
chaosproduction 2 months ago
@azar783402 (Continued)
Also, the buildings did NOT collapse into their own footprints.
i.imgur.c om/K0fN9.jpg (remove space)
An image showing that large radius of debris from the tower. Does that look like it collapsed into its footprint? No it does not.
i.imgur.co m/UE76v.jpg (again, remove space)
A portion of Building 7 that collapsed and crossed the street. Not into its own footprint.
chaosproduction 2 months ago
@azar783402 (Continued)
I cannot believe your idiocy. Are you so arrogant that you completely ignore my comments? I think it is you who is trolling now. Like I said in my previous comments, which you should of just read. Bomb sniffing dogs were NOT removed, one even died in the collapse.
I am not sure if you are stupid or you are just trolling. But I guess that you are a fine example of the stupidity in the ‘’truth’’ movement.
chaosproduction 2 months ago
@azar783402 I'm afraid you are getting information mixed up again with truth and BS. Thermite was not found, it was Suplhur which was found. Sulphur from the thousands of burning plastic computers and even rubber. I can't stress that enough, you are just making me repeat myself now.
The towers did NOT free fall, they fell in about 15-20 seconds. That is not free fall speed. If you watch the collapse, you can clearly see the debris which IS free falling, is falling faster than the main tower.
chaosproduction 2 months ago
@azar783402 Who exactly says that? And what proof do you have?
There was only one change in security, and that was the levels of security returning back to normal. Previously they had heightened security.
911myths.c om/html/wtc_bomb_sniffing_dogs.html (Remove space)
One of the dogs, name been Sirius, died in the collapse of Tower 2, after been locked in the basement levels while the dogs partner, David Lim, helped with the rescue effort. He did not return to Sirius in time.
chaosproduction 2 months ago
@MrGman8161
(continued)
I shall message you an article by Stucture Magazine which explains a possible, more logical and probable explanation of the collapse.
chaosproduction 2 months ago
@MrGman8161 The last quote makes no sense. Anyone who suspects Building 7 was brought down using explosives means explosives were used? Is that what he was saying? It makes no sense, I don't think explosives were used, therefore I have come to the conclusion that no explosives were used.
Neither one of us were at the site, but fire and rescue workers were, they knew the true condition of the building. Even they could see it wasn't going to stand for long, and who would know better than them?
chaosproduction 2 months ago
@azar783402 I guess you just ignored my last comment? Like I said, bomb sniffing dogs were not removed, they were at their usual posts at the basement level.
And like I said again, explosions don't always mean bombs. There are more probable explanations.
debunking911.co m/explosions.htm (Remove space)
I haven't looked into the OKC bombing, but your belief that is was also an inside job is an open window to your paranoia.
chaosproduction 2 months ago
@MrGman8161 Yes, but it was hit by perimeter columns from WTC1 collapse. Fires that were described as tremendous by fire fighters. There is a reason they pulled from the area, because they could see the unstable condition the building was in, and they know more about building collapses than you or I.
They were never in the building so they could not of been ordered out of it.
debunking911.co m/moltensteel.htm (As usual, remove the space in the Com)
Explains the molten metal.
chaosproduction 2 months ago
@MrGman8161 I guess with you the only thing I am going to get is copy and pasted comments.
Check the link I sent you countless times, it explains what I believe you are looking for.
911myths.co m/html/stand_down.html (Remove the space in the Com)
chaosproduction 2 months ago
@azar783402 Removal of Bomb sniffing dogs? There was never any removal of bomb sniffing dogs. They were at there regular posts down at the entrance to the basement car parks. They were at a fixed post and did not wander the building.
Also you claim the firemen heard bombs, what they heard were explosions, but of course explosions do not always mean a bomb do they?
More plausible explanations are steel bolts snapping under pressure, debris falling outside, electrical equipment, transformers etc
chaosproduction 2 months ago
@azar783402
(Continued)
htt p://i.imgur.co m/1EBCt.jpg (Remove the spaces)
Look at that photo of the site after the collapse, notice how widespread the debris is. Controlled demolitions will not create a debris field so large in diameter.
Also I don't suppose you watched that video I sent you before? You could clearly see a portiong of the tower still standing for a short time after the rest of the building collapse. A CD demolition would not leave part of the building standing.
chaosproduction 2 months ago
@chaosproduction The twin Towers were hit designed to take the 707. The 767 plane used , isn't that bigger. Never in history has a steel building ever collapsed due to fires. On 911, World Trade Center 1, 2 and 7 did. In World Trade Center 7, thousands of papers related to wall street corruption, and stocks, vanished forever.
puppetmaster195 2 months ago
@puppetmaster195 Yes but it did survive the impact didn't it? The tests that were done never took into account the initial damage and fires aka the disorting or steel columns due to fire and heat of the sagging floors or the failing trusses.
Leslie Robertson, lead structural engineer for WTC believed the towers performed better than expected. Standing long enough for countless people to escape.
I can't stess enough, fires just played a small role in the collapse, don't underestimate the cause.
chaosproduction 2 months ago
@chaosproduction Do you actually believe that the Once Worlds Tallest Buildings could actually survive less than 2 hours of fire, the impact of a plane? I fail to believe that. Azar is right. Two days before 911, there was the removal of bomb sniffing dogs, cameras turned off, and doors were left open. This occured at the top 50 floors of the South Tower. Who was in charge of all this? Bush's brother
puppetmaster195 2 months ago
@puppetmaster195 Like I said to Azar, bomb sniffing dogs were never removed. They were at their usual posts at the entrance to the basements. I don't know where that story came from.
Well learn the physics and how the collapse occured, then yes it will become believable. Like Leslie Robertson, who was the lead structural engineer of the Towers, they performed BETTER than expected. It was the COMBINATION of fire and damages that caused collapse. They were not invincible.
chaosproduction 2 months ago
@MrGman8161
(continued)
A few fires?
That is not how fire fighters described the fires. The fires were described by Richard Banaciski as tremendous. There is a reason why they were pulled from the area, they know more about building collapses more than you or me and from the condition the building was in, they knew it wasn't going to last.
I suppose the fire and rescue teams were just part of the cover up too weren't they? 300 brothers lost and no motive, but they lied? No they did not.
chaosproduction 2 months ago
@MrGman8161
(Continued)
I have said this before, if we kept the steel to investigate it would have taken years and cost the country millions. And why bother? The only people wanting an investigation were the paranoid like yourself. Everyone else was more concerned about investigating how Al Queda pulled off the attacks.
chaosproduction 2 months ago
@MrGman8161 Free Fall speed? The towers did not fall at free fall speed. WTC 1 and 2 collapsed in about 15-20 seconds, free fall speed is 9 seconds. Also just watch the debris fall, it is clearly ahead of the main tower, more proof the main tower did not free fall. WTC 7 is mistaken to have falling in 7 seconds, that was just the North Side however, the South side began to collapse well before, the total time for WTC7 to collapse was about 15-18 seconds.
chaosproduction 2 months ago
@azar783402 Look up a real controlled demolition, you will notice it is completely different to the WTC Collapse. First of all is the noticable loudness of the explosions, nothing on that magnitude would of been heard. The second is how the explosives go off straight after one another, nothing like that was heard.
Fires do these things, they expand and distort the columns until the point they can no longer hold the weight above. There is nothing unusual about that.
chaosproduction 2 months ago
@azar783402
(Continued)
/watch?v=K33s99I2dcU&feature=feedlik
Watch that video of the collapse of the tower. At around 40 seconds you can see through the smoke a portion of the building still remains, standing very tall before it collapses. More proof that the collapse was not controlled demolition.
chaosproduction 2 months ago
@chaosproduction The Entire 911 story is bullshit man. The Twin Towers, in my opinion, were not taken down by planes. World Trade Center 7 was obviously a controlled demoltion. World Trade Center 1, and 2 , turned to dust. Explosions were heard at floors 20-30. Far below the impact zones. Firemen also new that secondary devices were in the towers. It's pretty obvious that 911 was planned
puppetmaster195 2 months ago
@puppetmaster195
(Continued)
htt p://i.imgur.co m/1EBCt.jpg (Remove the spaces)
Look at that photo of the site after the collapse, notice how widespread the debris is. Controlled demolitions will not create a debris field so large in diameter.
Also I don't suppose you watched that video I sent you before? You could clearly see a portiong of the tower still standing for a short time after the rest of the building collapse. A CD demolition would not leave part of the building standing.
chaosproduction 2 months ago
@MrGman8161 Hey what irony, MrGman complaing that I am repeating myself.
I assume you are talking about the supposed thermite found in the dust? From what I know it was Alex Jones who created that story.
In fact it was actually Sulphur that was found in the dust. Sulphur more than likely from the thousands of burned plastic computers and rubber items etc.
The amount of Thermite that would be required to take down two 110 storey buildings is enough to render that hypothesis nonsense.
chaosproduction 2 months ago
@azar783402
(Continued)
But of course you can always accuse it all as lies (An easy thing to do) but it just sounds like an excuse. The evidence is not on your side, all that you have to support your argument with is mis-understood information, quotes taking out of context and mis-leading information.
chaosproduction 2 months ago
@azar783402 And invisible explosives which seem to be quieter than ones of a real controlled demolition can?
The WTC was built to withstand the impact of a Boeing 707, it was a 767 that hit. Not much difference between the 2 aircraft, but it doesn't matter, because the towers did survive the initial impact. Like I keep repeating, it was the COMBINATION of many things that caused the collapse, damage, failing trusses, sagging floors, fires missing columns. You are still underestimating the cause
chaosproduction 2 months ago
@MrGman8161 There was no automated method for the FAA to contact NORAD until after 9/11. Another thing is NORAD interceptions were only limited to offshore ADIZ, there was no Domestic ADIZ until after 9/11. It was not until after the attacks that the FAA and NORAD increased cooperation, including setting up hotlines and NORAD increasing their fighter coverage.
The only other story of a hijacked passanger plane in America was in the 90's. Which took them 1 hour 20 minutes to intercept.
chaosproduction 2 months ago
@azar783402 You are again only half right. The weakened trussed caused the floors to sag, which in turn caused the weak perimeter columns to bow inwards, this meant the weight above was no long stable and tilted putting it all onto one side, bending the core columns and eventually giving way, this then caused a pancake effect with the rest of the floors. Remember the pancaking was a result of the collapse, not the cause. Read it in more depth here.
debunking911.co m/collapse.htm (Remove space)
chaosproduction 2 months ago
@azar783402 Why do you always underestimate the cause of the collapse? Like I keep saying, fire was only one role in the collapse of the towers. Combination of the fire, missing columns, weakened columns, heat expanded the trusses which also expanded the columns causing them and the floors to sag and do you also forget a plane had smashed into the tower causing a giant hole?
When you speak only half truths, the story isn't going to make sense obviously. Don't underestimate the causes and damage
chaosproduction 2 months ago
@azar783402 I'm afraid not. You can accuse everything as ''lies'' all you want. It is just an excuse.
The evidence is against you and so is common sense.
Do you have any idea how many people would have to be involved in the inside job hypothesis in order to pull it off? Enough to render it im-plausible.
debunking911.co m/massivect.htm
chaosproduction 2 months ago
@azar783402 Are we going to wrap this up soon? I feel like you are leading us in circles.
Here is an article by Popular Mechanics.
popularmechanics.co m/technology/military/news/debunking-911-myths-world-trade-center
(Remove the space in the 'com')
chaosproduction 2 months ago
@azar783402 Why did you just copy and paste MrGmans comment? Can't think of your own argument now?
I suppose if what you are saying is true (although the lack of evidence suggests otherwise) what are all those soilders fighting over there in the Middle East? Actors I suppose? What about those Navy Seals? Also actors with no motive to lie? It's easy to condemn something as lies, but harder to prove it, which you haven't.
chaosproduction 2 months ago
@chaosproduction your carrying on like this is your job, are you what is known as a 'troll'? i'll tell you who our soldiers were fighting for, the elite, who want to secure oil supplies to be sold in dollars, to continue subsidizing your greedy economy, they don't care if there are cleaner alternatives to burning fossil fuels, all they care about is $ and power, they are scum, do you work for the filthy rich scum or are you just a normal human being like everyone else?
MrOllie86 2 months ago
@MrOllie86 No I am just replying to someone trying to knock some sense into him. I am not sure how that makes me a troll? Learn the definition of a troll.
And what you just mentioned there is a completely un-related topic from what I am talking about with Azar. So I would be wasting my time starting to talking about war for oil.
chaosproduction 2 months ago
@azar783402
debunking911.c om/
911myths.co m/html/wtc__demolition_.html
Check out those websites (remove the spaces) you will find much of your answers there, it is getting boring repeating myself now.
chaosproduction 2 months ago
@azar783402 Again, you have just repeated another comment. And don't speak such hypocrisies, aren't you also replying to my comments, despite thinking I am an idiot? I've also witnessed you across many videos typing in capitals and screaming abuse at people. What does that say about your life?
Now about Fema Appendix C.
911myths.c om/Sulfur.pdf
Check out that article (Remove the space) it explains the cause of the corrosion of the steel.
chaosproduction 2 months ago
@azar783402 Hey nice paragraph. I was however, expecting you to combat my argument and further try and defend your hypothesis with whatever ''evidence'' you can find.
Instead you write that? Looks like you're running out of sound arguments that haven't been disproved as mis-understandings of simply just nonsense..
chaosproduction 2 months ago
@azar783402 That comment sounds familar, it seems your little gang of inside job believers have a habit of repeating yourselves.
debunking911.c om/towers.htm
(Remove the space)
Articles explaining the structure of the tower and it's collapse. Save me repeating myself.
chaosproduction 2 months ago
@azar783402 Blindly follow? Ha not really. I have done much research to realise this inside job hypothesis is nonsense.
You have asked alot of questions that have already been answered, your paranoia makes you refuse to accept the answers. Now you have to resorted to the old 'you have been brainwashed and you are a sheep' excuse.
What more 'questions' do you have to ask?
chaosproduction 2 months ago
@azar783402 The burning jet fuel and fires, again, was simply a factor in the collapse of the towers.
debunking911.c om/fires.htm
debunking911.c om/collapse.htm
Check out those links (remove the spaces) for information on the fires and the collapse.
chaosproduction 2 months ago
@azar783402 Welcome back.
Actually, they did not find residues of thermite. I believe it was Alex Jones who said that? Yeah he's fun when he draws lines around the truth like a childs drawing.
What was found was Sulphur, more than likely from the hundreds of burned plastic computers and even vulcanised rubber.
There was enough fire there to expand the steel and weaken it, it wasn't erosion. Don't forget the other causes of the collapse to, failing trusses, missing columns, sagging floors etc.
chaosproduction 2 months ago
It is visually obvious how towers came down due to compromise of failed structural integrity. In the video "9/11: North Tower "collapse" (Sauret)" (Just COPY-PASTE'-WATCH please.) it is even possible to see how the floors start to collapse first and take down the remaining support columns on the outside. There is no demolition, no bombs going off what so ever. In democracies the leaders do not make plans including the massacre of it' s own citizens.
9/11 conspiricator damage more than Al-Queda.
serhanogan 3 months ago
Such an obvious visual (Not scientific, no therotical, pure visual!) evidence that the towers came down due to structural failure. Also obviously seen in the video: "9/11: North Tower "collapse" (Sauret)" (just COPY/PASTE'n WATCH!). These comment was meant for the other video however the comments were not allowed in that one. (Probably due to the ongoing paranoid-conspiracy insanity.) I believe the people who favor conspiracy theories on this one are more destructive than Al-Qaeda itself.
serhanogan 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
would it been better if there no airplanes, but instead bombes inside both wtc towers? and bomb in pentagon? and of course the Oklahoma City bombing on this date instead of April 19? And that Timothy James Mcveigh And Terry Nichols after detonating the bombs in the tower's, went to Liberty Island and started to shoot people? please reply thanks :)
TheLionelmessi94 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
'Tuesday Morning in September'. Available on DVD. Runtime 130 minutes.
Pure, unfiltered, authentic, and being released in such a way to keep its integrity.
Project is not affiliated and or connected to, working for any organization,
putting forth propaganda and or slant perspectives of the events on 9/11.
It is the most complete chronicle in real time of the wtc attacks.
tusmorninginsept 3 months ago
@azar783402 In every scientific experiment there is always things that go un-explained, it is normal. Be thankful of how much has actually been explained and proven. Enough to render the official story the truth.
It's just paranoia thinking there is some sort of ''goverment cover up''.
All these explosions have been explained, sounds of explosions have been either electrical equipment, floor slabs crashing into each other, debris falling etc. Just research and find the answers have been giving
chaosproduction 3 months ago
@azar783402 No, but I used to be. I used to think something wasn't right about these attacks, but I actually did more in depth research and found out there wasn't any big goverment conspiracy or inside job. It was all nonsense.
chaosproduction 3 months ago
if this didnt happen we would have had 200 deaths max. the collapse really made this attack absolutely horrid.
YUGIOHbuyANDsell 3 months ago
@azar783402 How am I a troll? I am simply attempting to show you the problems with the Inside Job hypothesis.
chaosproduction 3 months ago
@azar783402 Right your comment isn't appearing, but about the FEMA report.
I shall send you a link to a very interesting article explaining the molten metal found at the site.
Also, after seeing your comments on other videos of you typing in caps and screaming abusive at people, I am not sure whether or not to take you seriously.
chaosproduction 3 months ago
Comment removed
chaosproduction 3 months ago
@azar783402 (Contiued Quote) Steel bridge girders are bent to conform to the curved roadway by spot heating flanges between 800 and 1000 degrees Fahrenheit. It is easy to comprehend the loss of carrying capacity of all the structural steel due to the raging fires fed by the jet's fuel as well as aircraft and building contents.
Quickly copied quote (I'm in a rush atm) from D. Allan Firmage, Professor Emeritus, Civil Engineering, BYU.
chaosproduction 3 months ago
@azar783402 A quote.
When the aircraft impacted the towers at speeds of about 500 plus mph, many steel columns were immediately severed and others rendered weak by the following fires. The fires critically damaged the floors systems. Structural steel will begin to lose strength when heated to temperatures above 1000 degrees Fahrenheit.
chaosproduction 3 months ago
@azar783402 (Continued)
Thermite is more fallacy. Are you aware how much thermite it would take to collapse two 110 storey towers? Alot, believe me. It takes about 5 pounds of the stuff just to burn a small hole in an aluminium car engine, never mind core steel columns 110 storeys high.
As for the passport, I don't know what your getting at but it isn't impossible for items to survive crashes. There was many items that survived, photos, cards etc. It's hardly anything un-usual.
chaosproduction 3 months ago
@azar783402 For the last time, fire didn't melt the steel, it weakened the supporting columns and trusses. These structures which also had a fire, were they built like WTC 1, 2 and 7? Were they hit by jets/large perimeter columns? Did they have large holes in the side, several missing floors and core columns? Immense weight supported only by weakened and many missing columns? No I don't believe they did, so it is fallacious to even compare them to this scenario.
chaosproduction 3 months ago
@azar783402 First, explain what you are on about when you mentioned something about material.
Second, the hypothesis of the fire metling steel is old. It didn't melt it, it weakened the steel and the trusses.
If you mean the molten metal that was found, that has already been explained.
If you want I can send you a link to my source that explains scientifically the molten metal. Youtube won't allow me to post links in comments and there is too much to explain, so it will be easier.
chaosproduction 3 months ago
@azar783402 Fire is always going to have an effect on steel, it is going to expand and weaken it. There was enough fire to do so. The trusses, which expanded and then cooled, pulling the weakened columns in, causing the collapse. The lack of fire-proofing on the trusses and many columns is why it took only an hour for this to happen. There is also the loss of core columns due to the impact that aided the collapse. Rather than the assembly of the tower failing, it was the components.
chaosproduction 3 months ago
@azar783402 This was not the cause of the collapse. The weakened columns around the impact zone bowed due to the weight above, and the sagging floors pulling them in, tilting the tower above and putting the weight on one side and the columns were deformed. They gave way. You can see this in the video above.
The pancaking of the floors was a result of this, not the actual cause of the collapse.
/watch?v=bMZ-nkYr46w
chaosproduction 3 months ago
@azar783402 (continued)
Also all 3 towers had similar damage. All 3 buildings had fire, all 3 buildings had weakened columns because of fire, all 3 buildings were tall and had immense weight supported only by these weakened columns, and all 3 buildings had large holes in the side of the building.
None of these buildings fell at free fall speed, (WTC1 15-20 sec, WTC2 15-20 sec, WTC 7 15-18 sec) which also renders controlled demolition claims im-probable and fallacious.
chaosproduction 3 months ago
@azar783402 If you do abit more research you will find out that there is no ''violatiion of the laws of physics''.
All 3 buildings collapsed in a similar fashion because they were constructed in a similar way, steel pieces that were placed together, not one solid, re-inforced structure. A controlled demolition is impossible. There would of had to of been weeks of prep, including the removal of many interior walls and columns manualy and many wires rigging up explosives, none of which were seen.
chaosproduction 3 months ago
@azar783402 Free fall speed is about 9 seconds, WTC 7 took about 18 seconds to collapse completely. With fires weakening the columns, a huge tear in the side caused by Perimeter columns from WTC1 and the weight above, collapse was inevitable.
WTC 7 was a constructed with pieces of steel put together, rather than a large solid, re-inforced block
chaosproduction 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
You have to watch this!
The Nuclear Demolition of the WTC. Pulverisation and Vaporisation.
youtube.com/watch?v=RKxifBt3pss
ddetectivee 3 months ago
Comment removed
ddetectivee 3 months ago
I hate to say it but there is certain flashes that goes off up and down the building as the tower begins to collapse... The flashes are similar to the flashes spotted when the planes first hit the towers. Bombs or no bombs that can't be determined however those Flashes are undeniable & unidentifiable.
UnderstandingAll 4 months ago
@UnderstandingAll
Undeniable? Yes. Unidentifiable? No.
What happens when skyscraper begins to collapse like twin towers did? Floors fall on each other which causes massive pressure on each floor. Pressure caused flames to burst out and so it appeared as an explosion. Simple as that.
Estonian4 4 months ago
@Estonian4
Never!
ddetectivee 3 months ago
@UnderstandingAll Breaking windows. The glass reflects the sun as it tumbles to the earth, creating a quick reflection. As for the bombs? That's been determined. Barium Nitrate was absent at the site when multiple air samples were taken. Sulfur? It was 220 stories of drywall, you're going to have sulfur. Besides, you have to wire explosives. What you saw at the top was in the same area the plane would have disabled the wiring, therefore the bombs are dead. It's not hard science
halftimesportscards 4 months ago